OLA PA 4a\F C7 |E1O% CORNELL UNIVERSITY ul WOM i 3 1924 091 176 812 In compliance with current copyright law, Cornell University Library produced this replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1992 to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. 2001 Cornell Muiversity Library BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME wt. FROM THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF Henry W. Sage x189I Ne COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS EDITED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF JOHN WILLIAMS WHITE anp THOMAS D. SEYMOUR. PLATO GORGIAS EDITED ON THE BASIS OF DEUSCHLE-CRON’S EDITION BY GONZALEZ LODGE PROFESSOR IN BRYN MAwhk COLLEGE Boston, U.S.A., AND Lonpon PUBLISHED BY GINN & COMPANY 1896 Ss ENTERED aT STATIONERS’ HALL. CoPpYRIGHT, 1890, BY JoHN WILLIAMS WHITE AND THomas D. SEYMOUR. ALL Ricats RESERVED. ae Typoarapuy By J. 8. Cusine & Co., Boston, U.S.A. PRESSWORK BY GINN & Co., Boston, U.S.A. Special Notice.— Text Editions of the College Series of Greek Authors can be had separately at forty cents each. Any professor can have free as many copies of the text as his class is using of the text and notes, these to be the property of the college and to be retained in the custody of the professor. The stock will be replenished from time to time as copies are worn out, the understanding being, of course, that no more copies of the text will be called for than are used of the text and notes. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE COLLEGE SERIES abs. = absolute, absolutely. acc. = accusative. acc. to = according to. act. = active, actively. adj. = adjective, adjectively. adv. = adverb, adverbial, adverbially. Aeol. = Aeolic. antec. = antecedent. aor. = aorist. apod. = apodosis. App. = Appendix. appos. = apposition, appositive. art. = article. Att. = Attic. attrib. = attributive. aug. = augment. c., cc. = chapter, chapters (when nu- merals follow). of. = confer (in referring to a parallel passage). chap. = chapter. comp. = comparative. cond. = condition, conditional. conj. = conjunction. const. = construe, construction. contr. = contraction, contracted. co-ord. = co-ordinate. dat. = dative. decl. = declension. OF GREEK AUTHORS. def. = definite. dem. = demonstrative. dep. = deponent. dim. = diminutive. dir. = direct. disc. = discourse. Dor. = Doric. - edit. = edition, editor. editt. = editions, editors. €.g.= for example. encl. = enclitic. Eng. = English. Ep. = Epic. epith. = epithet. equiv. = equivalent. esp. = especial, especially. etc. = and so forth. excl. = exclamation. f., ff.=following (after numerical statements). fem. = feminine. Jin. = sub fine. freq. = frequently. fut. = future. G. = Goodwin’s Greek Grammar. gen. = genitive. GMT.=Goodwin’'s Moods and Tenses. H. = Hadley’s Greek Grammar. hist. pres. = historical present. ibid. = in the same place. id. = the same. t.e. = that is. impers. = impersonal, impersonally. impf. = imperfect. imv. = imperative. tn. = ad initium. indef. = indefinite. indic. = indicative. indir. = indirect. inf. = infinitive. interr. = interrogative, interrogatively. intr. = intransitive, intransitively. Introd. = Introduction. Ion. = Ionic. Kr. Spr. = Kriiger’s Sprachlehre, Erster Theil. Kr. Dial = Kriiger’s Sprachlehre, Zwei- ter Theil. KTé. = kal Ta ébfjs. KTA. = kal T& Aourd. Kiihn. = Kihner’s Ausfiihrliche Gram- matik. Lat. = Latin. L.& S.= Liddell and Scott's Lexicon. l.c.=loco citato. lit. = literal, literally. masc. = masculine. mid. = middle. Ms., Mss. = manuscript, manuscripts. N. = note. neg. = negative. neut. = neuter. nom. = nominative. obj. = object. obs. = observe, observation. opp. to = opposed to. opt. = optative. P., pp. = page, pages. part. gen. = partitive genitive. partic. = participle. pass. = passive, passively. pers. = person, personal, personally. pf. = perfect. pl. = plural. plpf. = pluperfect. pred. = predicate. prep. = preposition. pres. = present. priv. = privative. prob. = probable, probably. pron. = pronoun. prop. = proper, properly. prot. = protasis. quot. = quoted, quotation. qg.v.= which see. refl. = reflexive, reflexively. rel. = relative, relatively. Rem. = remark. S.=Schmidt’s Rhythmic and Metric. 8c. = scilicet. Schol. = scholiast. sent. = sentence. sing. = singular. subj. = subject. subjv. = subjunctive. subord. = subordinate. subst. = substantive, substantively. sup. = superlative. $.0. = sub voce. trans. = transitive, transitively. viz. = namely. v.l. = varia lectio. voc. = vocative. §, §§ = section, sections. Plurals are formed generally by add- ing s. Generally small Roman numerals (ower-case letters) are used in referring to the books of an author ; but A, B, I, etc. in refer- ring to the books of the Iliad, and a, A, y, etc. in referring to the books of the Odyssey. In abbreviating the names of Greek authors and of their works, Lid- dell and Scott’s List is generally followed. PREFACE. Tris edition is based on Deuschle-Cron’s fourth edition, Leip- zig, 1886, but the original has been treated with considerable freedom. In more than sixty cases, where the text varies from that of Cron, the readings of Schanz have been adopted. A few con- jectures have been introduced, but the editor has endeavored to follow a middle course between those who do not allow emenda- tions, and those who, like Schanz, employ them too freely. The introduction is a free rendering of the original, with additions. The commentary will be found to differ materially from the German, especially in grammatical matters. The editor has not thought it advisable to deviate from the line of literary interpre- tation adopted by the German editor, but the exact study, which has been bestowed of later years in the United States upon the subject of Greek Syntax, has rendered it possible to make this part of the book to a certain extent American. The appendix, which is much more extensive than that of the German edition, will be found to contain, in addition to the regis- ter of textual variations, much matter which could not be inserted in a commentary, but which students should know. Much assistance has been drawn from other editions, especially those of Hirschig and Thompson. Woolsey’s edition also has been in the hands of the editor. The editor is under great obligations to Professor Gildersleeve, who examined the commentary in manuscript and made many iii iv PREFACE. valuable suggestions. Those who may use the book will share the editor’s regret, that owing to delay in the printing he was unable to avail himself fully of Professor Gildersleeve’s kind offer to read and criticise the proof-sheets. The edition owes much also to Professor Seymour, who has read all the proof, and has cheerfully given the editor the bene- fit of his scholarship and editorial experience. Reference is made throughout to Riddell’s Digest of Platonic Idioms (Rid.), printed with his edition of the Apology (Oxford, 1877). Occasional references are made to Madvig’s Grriechische Syntax, and to Meisterhans’ Grammatik der Attischen Inscriften. Bryn Mawr CoLueeGe, October, 1890. INTRODUCTION. 1. Tue Becinnines or RHETORIC.) Tue mighty impulse which the Hellenic spirit, throughout the 1 whole extent of the Hellenic nationality, received from the suc- cessful result of the great conflict waged by the might of the peo- ple against the overwhelming power of the Barbarians, had made Athens, the city which had distinguished itself beyond all others by the sagacity and self-sacrificing courage of its citizens, the centre of all the intellectual effort and life of Greece. Poetry, which in conjunction with its sister arts had not become merely inseparably associated with all religious and national feasts, but had acquired also a recognized position in every-day life, obtained by the new and especially brilliant productions of this period a much wider influence upon the culture and public life of the people. Meanwhile the political activity and progress of the time was pushing forward with rapid and irresistible strides to the development of Prose, to which up to this time the artistic genius of the Greeks had been less directed than to Poetry. With the fortunes of this new medium of human thought were inseparably connected those of a new department of Literature, —History,—which had its real beginning, artistically consid- ered, in that maguificent work whose worthy subject was the famous struggle between the Greeks and the Barbarians, so re- mote in its origin, so long in its duration, so momentous in its character, so fortunate in its result. An inexhaustible opportu- nity for practice in the art of public speaking was afforded by the assemblies of the people and the courts of law. From these 1 Principal source: Zuvaywyh tex- in Griechenland und Rom. Leipzig, vay sive artium scriptores ab initiis us- que ad editos Aristotelis de rhetorica libros. Composuit L. Spengel, Stutt- gartiae, 1828.—In addition: Wes- termann, Geschichte der Beredsamkeit 1833. — Volkmann, Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Rémer in systematischer Vebersicht, 2d ed. Leipzig, 1885, — and especially Blass, Die Attische Bered- samkeit, 12, Leipzig, 1887. 1 INTRODUCTION. were derived two varieties of political oratory, the Forensic (76 oupBovdrcutixdy OF 7d Syunyopixdvy) and the Judicial (7d decayed yévos). Very soon it became the duty of those most noted for their talents in speaking, to deliver speeches in honor of those citizens who had fallen in battle for their country. Hence Aristotle in his Theory adds to the two varieties already men- tioned a third, — 16 éiextixdy yevos. 2 But it was not in accordance with the intellectual character of the Greek people to rest content with a merely practical skill in the employment of language. They rather, by virtue of their disposition towards investigation and science, turned their atten- tion to the discovery of the means through which speech might attain its greatest power, and thereby be the more likely to bring about any desired result. The unprejudiced mind could not but see that this oratorical success was not always due to a deeper insight and more thorough knowledge of the question at issue. Consequently their attention was directed to the formal side of the art, and thus the first rude beginnings, naturally empirical, were made of a Theory, ze. of a scientific conception, which claimed for itself the ability to communicate to others the skill and knowledge which had been acquired, or in other words, to teach to others this new art, so useful, nay, almost indispensable for practical life. 3 That such an art should find ready acceptance and cultivation in Athens is but natural. We need only refer to the orator Antiphon, who both as the founder of a school of oratory and as a composer of written speeches, as well as from his political activity, exercised a wide influence there. But Athens was not the earliest home of this art. That honor belongs to Sicily. Under similar circumstances the beginnings of oratory would probably have been made simultaneously in Attica and Sicily. But in the latter country the conditions were somewhat different. The population was very composite, given to disputation, and less fully organized than that of Athens. Besides, the severe measures of the tottering tyrants to preserve their power had caused many changes in the ownership of land and the rights of property. Consequently the overthrow of the tyranny was INTRODUCTION. followed by a perfect tempest of litigation out of which oratory emerged as a fully established art. Its invention is ascribed to Corax, —a man who had taken a leading part in the political upheavals and governmental changes of his country, but who in the new order of things devoted himself to the teaching of Rhetoric — especially that in use in the courts —of which he composed also a short ‘techne.’ His pupil and successor was Tisias, who, according to the story,’ used his newly acquired skill in speaking to defeat his teacher in a lawsuit, —a course of action which could not but show the tendency of the new art, and which drew down a scathing rebuke from the judge.’ Tisias had many pupils who afterwards became famous; among them Lysias and Isocrates, as well as Gorgias, after whom this dialogue is named. 2. Gorgias’ Lire anp Activity.* Gorgias was the son of Charmantides* of Leontini. The year 4 of his birth as well as that of his death is uncertain. Apollodo- rus and Quintilian state that he lived to the age of 109, while others allow him only 105 years. Quintilian also says that he outlived Socrates, a statement which may or may not be con- firmed by Apol. 19e.° With these data alone to build on, it is not strange that authorities have been unable to agree on the dates to be assigned for his birth and death. We may assume that he was born between 492 and 483 3.c. and died between 384 and 375.7 Of his family and early life and training we have very scanty notices. We hear of a sister married to a cer- tain Deicrates and of a brother Herodicus. It is likely that he early became acquainted with the teachings as well as the dia- 2 Spengel, p. 26. 3 The indignant exclamation karod képakos kaka gd. * See Foss, De Gorgia Leontino, Hallae, 1828. Frei, Quaestiones Pro- tagoreae, Bonnae, 1845. 5 The inscription on a statue of Gorgias at Olympia reads Xappavridou Topylas Aeovtivos. Suidas and Pau- sanias give it wrongly as Kapyaytidou. 6 Sittl, Gesch. d. Gr. Lit. ii. 36 n. thinks that Quintilian’s statement may be based on Socrates’ words. 7 Foss gives the dates 496-388 ; Deuschle, 492-384; Frei, 483-375, which is agreed to by Zeller, Diels, and Susemihl1; Friinkel, 487-379; Un- ger, 507-500. Blass thinks Gorgias was born probably before 480. Att. Bered. i. p. 47 n. INTRODUCTION. lectic of the Eleatic school, as we may judge from the fact that he employed their arguments in his philosophic work. It was reported in antiquity that he had been a pupil of Empedocles, and it is probable that he wrote a philosophic treatise in the spirit of the Empedoclean theory. His natural gifts, however, as well as the spirit of the times, inclined him to the newly invented art of speech. And if Empedocles was really the inventor, as Aristotle declares, it is probable that he gained some light from him. Tradition made him also the pupil of Tisias as already mentioned, but Blass does not believe in the truth of the story. It is certain that he soon became a formidable rival of Tisias. He gained a great reputation in his native city as an orator and teacher of rhetoric, and many students flocked to his lectures. Among these was his truest follower Polus, who accom- panied him on his travels afterwards. Soon came an opportu- nity for him to make his art felt and his name famous outside of his country. The inhabitants of Leontini were hard pressed by the Syracusans, and in their distress sent Gorgias as embassador to Athens in 427 B.c. to plead the claims of kinship and to beg assistance. Gorgias was eminently successful in his mission.’ The Athenians—the most loquacious people of Greece — were charmed by the magic of his graceful eloquence. Never before had they heard an orator who was such a master of form as Gorgias, or whose words fell so sweetly and melodiously upon the ear. Consequently he was soon able to return to Leontini and announce the prosperous issue of his mission. But he did not stay. The poison of Athenian life had penetrated, and he was drawn back. He had recognized also that the field was more favorable there for the practice of his profession than in Sicily. The Athenians were seized with enthusiasm for him. Crowds of young men and older men also of the best families in the state 8 Hippias Mai. 282 b Topylas re yap otros 5 Acoytivos cogpirths Setpo aplkero Syuoola otxobev mpecBevwy, as feavéraros dv Acovtivwy ta Kowd mpdr- rev, Kal @y Te TH Shu Cotey kpiora elmeiv, wal idla emidelters wovot'nevos Ka) cuvdy trois véos xphuata ToAAd eipyd- caro kal fdaBev éx Thode THs méAews. Thucydides does not mention the name of Gorgias in his account of the matter (iii. 86), but Diodorus does (xii. 53). INTRODUCTION. 5 crowded around him and paid gladly extraordinary sums for the privilege of hearing his instructions. The days on which he lectured they called festivals. His phrases were compared to gleaming torches, and Plato® himself goes so far as to compare him with the Homeric Nestor, the jdverjs Avyis TvAdwv é&yopyrys. Gorgias was especially happy in the discourses he delivered 5 for display, or on festive occasions, called émideffas, and found many occasions to show his ability. But he also came forward as a teacher of oratory and found a ready body of pupils among the higher classes. See Apol. 19e, Gorg. 449b. He does not, however, appear to have remained very long at Athens despite his success. This may have been due to the fact that Athens soon became the resort of a numerous company of Sophists, whose mutual relations were not always pleasant, and the bustle and instability of Athenian life may have become somewhat irk- some to a man now well advanced in years. He therefore soon left Athens,— though he must have returned thither several times. He travelled considerably, but when or where, we can- not with certainty state. We only know that he discussed in Olympia, before the concourse of assembled Greeks, with great applause, a purely national theme,—afterwards treated by many others, —the ‘Eastern question’ The most of his time, however, he spent in Thessaly, for which he seems to have conceived a great fondness. There the tyrants, especially those of Larissa, honored him, and the rich young nobles became infatuated" with him and flocked in great crowds to hear his teaching.” Among his pupils were Meno, one of Cyrus’ generals 9 Phaedr. 261 b. It is likely also that the fact that Gorgias, like Nestor, ‘saw three generations of men,’ had something to do with this comparison. 10 Philostr. Epis. 73, ii. p. 257 K. Blass, i. § 54. 11 The expression yopy:d(ew, which we find applied to this infatuation, is probably of later origin, and has some allusion to the story of the charmed Gorgon head, 12 Meno 70 b rottov 8 spiv alrids éoriv Topytas (t.e. that the Thessalians, especially those of Larissa, are so noted for their wisdom). dgixduevos yap cis thy wédaw épactas ert copia etAndev ’Adevaddv Te robs mpdrous, av 6 ods epaorhs ear ’Aptorurmos, kal Tav BAAwv @etradrav. al 3h Kal rovro Td os spas cfOiKev, apdBws te Kai meyadorper@s amoxpiverOa, édv tis Tr &pnrat, &owep ecixds tovs eiddtas, are INTRODUCTION. in the march of the Ten Thousand, Proxenus, another of these generals, and Aristippus, an Aleuad, and of noted Athenians, at least Philostratus, Thucydides, Critias, and Alcibiades, besides the celebrated teachers Isocrates and Antisthenes. Gorgias was not a cheap teacher; his charge was 100 mine for each pupil. It seems, therefore, strange that he should have left only 1000 staters, or 200 mine, behind him when he died; that too, when he had neither wife nor family to spend his money for him. But although he lived simply, he loved parade and to make an imposing display in public. In imitation of the priestly garb of his old master, Empedocles, he used to wear a purple mantle and golden sandals.% It is said also that he had a golden statue of himself set up at Delphi, at the dedication of which he delivered a great oration." Otherwise even his enemies could find nothing in his manner of life to criticise, and were obliged to feel the highest respect for him. ‘To his simple manner of life is attrib- uted the fact that he not only reached a very great old age, but retained his bodily freshness and vigor until the end. Anecdotes are related of him to show his preference for old age instead of a disgust at it.% When finally his death was approaching, —a death which was without sickness and rather like a falling asleep, — he is said to have murmured, ‘Now Sleep is beginning to conduct me to his brother Death.’ Gorgias left behind him various writings, six speeches —he seems not to have written a work on rhetoric —and a philosophi- cal treatise rept Pioews 7 wept Tov wy dvros. It is not certain that any of these have come down to us. It is true that we possess two declamations which pass under Gorgias’ name, the Encomium of Helen and the Defence of Palamedes ; but the genuineness of these speeches cannot yet be said to be beyond question.“ We kal abros mapéxwy abtoy epwrav trav ‘EMAhvey T@ Bovdomévyp Sti bv tis Bov- Anta. 13 Aclian, V. 7. xii. 32. 14 Whether Gorgias had it set up, or it was set up in his honor by friends, and whether it was solid gold or only gilt, are questions not yet set- tled. Cf Blass, i.2 58, n. 1, where the authorities are given. 15 Blass, i.2 51, ns. 6, 7. 16 In his first edition Blass re- stricted himself to the view that these specches were cither genuine, or had been designedly counterfeited, inclin- ing rather to the latter alternative. INTRODUCTION. also know the contents and arguments of the philosophical trea- tise from two sources.” Gorgias tries to prove: 1, that nothing exists; 2, if anything exists, it cannot be recognized or known; 3, even if it could be known, it cannot be communicated by words. To prove these statements he employs two modes of proof, —one of his own invention, and the other an adaptation of the argu- ments of the Eleatics.% If one considers the result desired only, there appears to be a contradiction between the theory of Gorgias and his actual practice. How, we may ask, can a man come forward as an orator and profess to teach the art of speaking (or communication) who denies the possibility of communicating knowledge? On closer examination, however, the inconsistency disappears. What Gorgias attempted to prove was, in the first place, the impossibility of objective existence or of a knowledge of such existence; in the second place, granted that there was such a thing as existence and a knowledge of it, the impossibility of bringing this fact by means of speech to the knowledge of others. He was not, however, bound by this view to deny the appearance of existence, or the possibility of conception and opinion. On the contrary, he rests the proof of his second point just on this argument, that the existent is of itself not a matter of thought, because otherwise what every one thinks must exist, and this would do away with the possibility of a false conception. He denied, therefore, that there was any connexion between human thought and conception, and existence, but he by no means denied the existence of conceptions. Hence the use of the art of speech must be on the supposition that the art of speech is designed to inspire in the hearers, without any reference to the In his second edition, p. 79, n. 1, he distinctly abandons his earlier posi- tion, saying he was too much influ- enced by the spirit of the times, and comes out squarely on the side of the genuineness of the speeches. Diels had done the same in 1884, Ber. d. Ber. Akad. 17 Pseudo-Aristoteles de Gorgia, c. 5.6, and Sextus Empiricus, adv. Math. vii.65-87. These two versions do not agree in all respects, and have been made the subject of careful study lately by O. Apelt in Rhein. Mus. 43. 202-219. Apelt shows that the ac- count of Aristotle must be held as more accurately giving the mode of argument of Gorgias than that of Sextus Empiricus. 18 Apelt, p. 204 f. INTRODUCTION. actual existence, simply those conceptions which will be useful to the design of the speaker. In addition, however, the speaker is at liberty so thoroughly to acquire the power of expression that he may be able, by the perfection of form, to awaken in his hearers feelings of pleasure and assent. 7 Such, then, was Gorgias’ view of Rhetoric. The contents, or subject of the speech, were a matter of indifference to him; the form was the great object. Hence he undertook to speak on any subject whatever, no matter whether he was acquainted with it or not. He challenged his hearers to put to him any question they pleased, and pledged himself to speak concerning it better and more elegantly ® than any one else, and at whatever length might be desired.” Through the art of speech he undertook to make the great appear small, the small great, the old new, the new old; in short, to make anything appear its exact opposite. He cared nothing for the real nature of anything, but only sought to make it assume some particular appearance. His pupils were to acquire the same skill in the use of form, and to this end he imparted to them certain rules and artistic conceptions, or a technique of speech. Of course the most of his directions applied to the outward form merely; and his great merit lies in the fact that he was the first to direct attention to this side of oratory. He was the first to recognize the importance of figures of speech, and is said to have invented the names ‘antithesis,’ ‘paronoma- sia,’ ‘parisosis’ (or repetition of the same expression in different connexions), etc. He loved to give a poetic coloring to his ideas, and he laid especial weight on the symmetrical balancing (icoxwAfa) and rhythmical swing of his clauses. Probably, how- ever, because he was a pioneer, he did not reach the degree of perfection in his treatment of form, which either himself, or the laws of symmetry and beauty demanded. His metaphors were 19 Gorg. 447 ve, Cic. de Or. i. 22. 103 (Gorgias) permagnum tiaret. Cf. also iii. 32. 129, de Fin. ii. 1.1. quiddam suscipere ac profi- teri videbatur cum se ad om- nia de quibus quisque audire vellet, esse paratum denun- 20 Gorg. 449 ce, Phaedr. 267 b (Te:- clas Topylas re) ovvroplay te Adywv kal &mreipa phen wept mdvtwv dved- pov. INTRODUCTION. often harsh and bald, and his affectation of distinctly poetic words and phrases drew upon him the ridicule of later critics.” He could not get beyond a certain uniformity; for example, he seems to have considered the mere division into two correspond- ing or opposing halves to be entirely sufficient for symmetry. In short, the means at the command of Rhetoric were still too lim- ited for perfection. But Gorgias nevertheless exercised an im- mense influence upon the later Attic literature, and his merit cannot be over-estimated, in awakening in the Greek mind the consciousness that the laws of beauty should prevail in every literary effort, in prose as well as in the domain of poetry. His example was followed by many men of high literary impor- tance. Besides those already mentioned, the influence of Gor- gias can be traced in Antiphon, Thucydides, Critias, the drama- tist Agathon, Aeschines, and others. 3. AIM AND PRINCIPLE OF THE DIALOGUE. The culture of the time in which the activity of Gorgias fell 8 is called the Sophistical. Its peculiar characteristic lies in the fact that it denied the reality of knowledge, morality, and jus- tice, and admitted only an appearance of knowledge, morality, and justice, or rather, declared to be true, moral, and just only that which appeared so subjectively, to this person or that, — and this, of course, was different with every different individual. Gorgias, it is true, looked down upon the Sophists with scorn, and refused to be classed with them;” but this scorn was not directed against the immoral view of life which the Sophists held, in looking towards the appearance, and not the reality; for, as we have seen from the sketch just given of his teaching, he agreed with them in this; what he found ridiculous was that the others who called themselves Sophists should claim to teach wisdom and virtue, or human culture, while imparting knowledge of every variety. For him there was but one art, which was the 21 See references in Blass, p. 64. oxXvoupévov, GAAG Kal Tov GAAGY KaTa- 22 Meno 95 c kal Topylov pddicra = -yeag, Stay dxovon brisxvoupevwy: aNd TavTa &yauae Sri ovK by wote avTov Aéyew olerat Seiv wotety Setvods. The Toro (dpethy diddonew) axovgas tri feeling is shared by Callicles, 10 INTRODUCTION. essence of all arts, and made all knowledge unnecessary, the acquisition of the so-called virtue needless; namely, the art of speech or Rhetoric. But the Sophists also were well aware of the great value of a ready command of language, for it was this on which their mental superiority over others rested; and the most important of them, e.g. Protagoras and Prodicus, had paid great attention to linguistic investigation. Hence Gorgias, in point of fact, came to their assistance with his art of speaking; for it was just in so far as he declared the contents of the speech a matter of indifference, and laid the greatest emphasis on the development and perfection of form, that the art of speaking became the means of commending to the minds of others, accord- ing to the pleasure of the speaker, an appearance of truth, mor- ality, and justice. Thus behind Rhetoric, so defined, lay hidden the worst and most dangerous form of Sophistic. For it not only urged the man who employed it to the practical accomplishment of any design, no matter how arbitrary, but provided him with the means best suited to it. Under the constitutional govern- ment of the majority of Hellenic states, a man’s success in poli- tics depended largely upon his ability to address an audience with readiness and force. This ability Gorgias professed to give by his new art of speaking. But when thus equipped what else could his pupils expect or strive for by means of their new weapon but the highest possible power in the state? And by power, what else could they understand but the power of doing whatever they pleased and of managing affairs according to their own caprice? And only then would the orator have achieved his object most completely when he had succeeded in raising himself to a tyranny and putting his fellow-citizens under his feet. Such was in reality the necessary aim of this rhetorical training; for it recognized beside itself no other knowledge as legitimate, and not only offered itself no moral view of state rela- tions, but even declared the knowledge of justice to be useless, inasmuch as it was the office of the orator to decide first for him- self what justice was, and then to make use of the art of speak- ing to compel from others the acknowledgment and acceptance of his view. INTRODUCTION. 11 Now of course Gorgias did not recognize these necessary con- 9 sequences of his principles, much less did he declare them. He did not even seem to see the close relationship of his efforts with those of the other Sophists. And this was one reason, perhaps, why so many of the cultured men of the period who were seeking certain practical ends in politics —that is, the rising statesmen —flocked so eagerly to hear him. Behind their praise of Rhetoric they concealed their sympathy with Sophistic. It was not long, however, before they ventured to proclaim their designs openly. For the moral sense of the period was declining so rapidly that but few, at least in Athens, its home, were disposed to object to the new culture. Plato therefore rendered the Athenian state a great service when he drew off the mask from this influen- tial art of appearances, and showed it in jts true nature as a form of Sophistic, and the worst form, too, because the emptiest. He had inherited likewise from his master Socrates the calling of scientifically destroying Sophistic in all its forms, and the founding and defence of a moral view of life in opposition to it. His theory of Ethics, as can be abundantly recognized from the dialogue before us, was already fully developed in its essential characteristics, and was quite strong enough to carry through this struggle successfully. If, however, the opposition in which Ethics stood to this so-called Rhetoric and its results was to be entirely understood, and if it was to be brought out a victor over its opponent, then it was necessary to lay quite bare the immoral principles on which Rhetoric rested, whether any one of his rhetorically trained contemporaries was acquainted with the real bearing of those principles or not. The aim of that method of training was seen to be the domination of the individual’s ca- price, wantonness, or arbitrary will. This assumes as the true principle of action, since it denies the validity of the existing laws of the state, the so-called law of nature, so widely defended by the Sophists, which is nothing more nor less than the law of the stronger. But this principle also can be traced to a far deeper-lying spring, the source of all immoral views of life; namely, the idea that the guide of a man’s action should be not his mental but his sensual nature, and the therefrom resulting 12 10 INTRODUCTION. impulses and passions. Satisfaction of these, therefore, or in other words, sensual enjoyment, is obedience to this law of na- ture, which was synonymous with happiness according to the spirit of the times. The idea of happiness is common to both the moral and immoral views of life; but they look at it in dif- ferent lights, and define it differently in consequence. Plato con- ceived happiness to lie in the absolute freedom of the mental and spiritual nature of man from the domination of sense. His oppo- nents, on the other hand, looked upon this Platonic freedom as a matter of no consequence, and held that happiness could be reached only when the sensual nature was as free as possi- ble, and could hurry without restraint from pleasure to pleas- ure. This opposition was the chief motive which led Plato to the composition of this dialogue, with which he may be said to have entered the lists in his contest with the tendency of the age. To this motive for the composition of the dialogue must be added certain external causes which are of value for its correct understanding. The trial and condemnation of Socrates in open court had really been a contest between the old and dominant system and the new ethical theory. In this conflict Ethics expe- rienced a defeat at the hands of its enemy, which showed that it must not extend its operations too far into the domain of politi- cal life. If it was to conquer, it must be in the domain of scien- tific and philosophical investigation and criticism. The Socratic theory of Ethics was confined to the teaching of virtue to the individual. Plato widens the circle of investigation. He starts the question, What relation does the Socratic ethical theory hold to the state, and has the dominant political principle any real justification in opposing it? If, as is to be supposed, the death of Socrates gave a mighty impulse to these investigations of the young philosopher, it must have led him to a sharper limitation and deeper conception of the department of science which he had entered. Another probable supposition may be added. Plato must have undergone much unfavorable criticism for holding himself aloof from all political activity, and making philosophy his calling; for the cultured men of his time looked upon politics INTRODUCTION. 1é as the only worthy pursuit for a free man. And Plato may have wished to defend himself against such attacks. Plato was led, therefore, both by sincere differences of opinion 11 as well as by external circumstances, to make the question of the false and true theories of life—the former claimed and taught by the rhetorical culture of the time, the latter by philosophy — the subject of discussion for a public treatise. We should not, accordingly, expect in the Gorgias a full criticism of Rhetoric from all sides, for the various rules which it laid down for the correct arrangement of a speech have no place here; but we must also not lose sight of the fact that the discussion of the moral ques- tion already mentioned necessarily involves also the question as to the real nature and principles of Rhetoric. We cannot, therefore, consider Rhetoric as the general subject of the dialogue, as the wept pytopixijs Which the manuscripts affix to the title would indi- cate. Rhetoric enters into the discussion only as far as its rela- tion to actual life is concerned; that is, so far as it was the means through which the business of the state was conducted. Now because, according to the general view, the duties of the citi- zen began, continued, and ended in politics, Rhetoric soon claimed and was admitted to be the real art of life. In this way, then, the consideration of Rhetoric may easily and naturally be made the occasion for a consideration, also, of the more general ques- tion of the true principle of life. This hand-in-hand considera- tion can, however, only continue to a certain degree, for the opposition of the two questions soon becomes evident as the dis- cussion proceeds. The proper opposite to Rhetoric is Philoso- phy; but just as the former is represented by politics, the latter also appears in the form of ethics. Plato shows first, that real, genuine politics can only be founded upon the same ethics which prescribes the rules of life for the individual man; secondly, that the individual is only justified in turning his attention to poli- tics, when he has made himself ethically perfect; and thirdly, that he must enter politics only in order to discharge his duty to his fellow-citizens, —in a word, only to make them better. In this way, philosophy becomes also the true art of life, not merely for the individual, but also for the association of individuals 14 12 13 INTRODUCTION. which is called a state. The aim of the false art of life is to satisfy the caprices of an ever-changing passion; that of the true, is to bring about the supremacy of the good. Hence Plato undertook in this dialogue to set forth scientifically the distinc- tion that exists between the good and the pleasant.* 4. ScENERY oF THE DIALOGUE. A. Persons. In the artistic development and arrangement of a dialogue in which alone, as an artistic form of prose, it can be opposed to the poetic drama, a matter of the utmost importance is the choice of the characters which are to carry on the conversation. That it is not those who give their names to the dialogues who are to be considered as the chief characters, is shown by a cursory glance over the various works of Plato. None of these works bears the name of Socrates, although (or rather because) not in one only, but in the majority of them, he is the leading character, #.e. the one whom the author makes the exponent of his own opinions, feelings, and efforts. Thus in our dialogue, likewise, Plato has assigned this role to his beloved teacher. He is throughout the leader of the conversation, for even the sections which seem to form exceptions to this rule serve only to show the inability of any one else to fill this position. In the most intimate con- nexion with this skill of Socrates stands the moral feeling, which he defends with especial emphasis and earnestness against a very different method. He shows himself here, as in other dialogues, to be a man in whom reason and will, thought and action, have been blended, by conscientious effort, into an almost ideal har- mony. According to 461 c¢, we must suppose him to be already well advanced in life. Compared with Socrates, all the other characters who take part in the dialogue fall somewhat into the background, because no single one has been chosen to bear alone the role of respondent, 28 The various opinions of modern ally, with the view expressed by Cron. commentators are well discussed in Cope bases his opinion on 527 b, ec, the introduction to Cope’s translation which seems to be an explicit state- of the Gorgias. They agree, gener- ment of the results of the dialogue. INTRODUCTION. which is divided, but unequally, between three persons. Hence it is that Gorgias cannot be called the leading character next to Socrates, as may be said of Protagoras in the like-named dialogue, but he rather has a position analogous to that of Laches in the dialogue which bears his name. The fact, however, that he is less prominent in this dialogue than his importance would seem to require, is more than balanced by the marked respect which all parties to the discussion show him, as a man of upright aims and high attainments. For even though his theory did con- tain the germ of that immoral view of life which Plato made it his business to combat, yet it was only an undeveloped germ, and his whole life had been so honorable, and had borne testimony to such a high degree of moral feeling, according to the general Greek conception, that he could scarcely be held responsible for the results which were first drawn by his pupils and followers. As far as he was himself concerned, he only desired to be a mas- ter of language and of speaking, with skill to communicate to others also the art which he had practised with so much success. It was his fault that he had no clear insight into the nature of this art, and did not notice the inconsistency in which it involved him as regards his own moral feelings and opinions. The im- moral principles which naturally corresponded to the art which he practised were championed not by him, but by his followers. He himself, the aged master, retires with unimpaired dignity from the discussion, in which he has shown no dialectical skill, it is true, but still a certain appreciation of dialectical methods. With him, Socrates reaches his aim without difficulty. But even when he has been defeated he does not take offence, but still shows a lively interest in the investigation, and when the excitement or sensitiveness of his pupils threatens to put an end to it, he comes to the rescue, and by his personal dignity causes its continuance. Polus is one of the pupils of Gorgias, and assumes immediately after him his position as respondent in the discussion. As regards the facts of his life, we know that he was born in Acragas, a Sicilian city of great wealth and power, and was therefore a countryman of the celebrated philosopher and statesman Empe- docles. He became a disciple of the new school of rhetoric, and 15 14 INTRODUCTION. attached himself to Gorgias, whom he also accompanied on his travels, partly still to profit from his instruction, partly to obtain some reputation for himself by his dexterity in the handling of words. In this way he had now come with him to Athens. He is still young, as Plato emphasizes, but doubtless, according to 462 b, had already composed his treatise on Rhetoric.* But we must not look upon this so-called réyvy as a theory based upon acknowledged principles. For such a work Polus was much more incapable than Gorgias. He had only learned from him the means of dazzling the minds of his hearers, a species of word- jugglery * in the practice of which he had obtained considerable readiness. The picture which Plato draws of him shows him to be an immature young man, not yet beyond the phrases of his student life, the height of whose self-conceit is only to be meas- ured by the shallowness of his performances. He has absolutely no appreciation of dialectical methods; hence he has to be in- structed in them repeatedly by Socrates, only to make the same mistakes again. In moral questions he displays weakness and uncertainty.” He cannot deny a certain innate feeling for a moral standard in human actions (76 xaddv); and yet all his efforts are directed to the acquisition and possession of external power. Whenever this comes before his vision in all its glitter, he is filled with admiration for it, and overlooks entirely the immoral means which are employed in the attainment of his end. The examples of good and bad rulers, of well-ordered and lawless government, which his own country furnished, have taught him nothing. Nay, rather, his own case serves to show most clearly how small a foundation of truth lies in the admission wrung from Gorgias, that some knowledge of the principles of right and mor- ality was an indispensable necessity for his instruction in rhetoric. % Chronological accuracy is hardly to be demanded. 25 In Phaedr. 267 b he is said to be the inventor of such devices of evéreia as durdaciodroyla, yvwpodoyia, elxovorc- yla, and artistic word-coinage after the fashion of Licymnius. See Thomp- son’s note on this passage. 26 What Socrates says with unmis- takable irony of the pupils of Gor- gias in Meno 70 b, applies excellently to Polus: «al 5} kal rodro 7d COos buas eWOixev (Topylas), apdBws re kad peya- Aomperas aroxplvecba, édv tls te Lpy- tat, Sowep eixds tors clddtas xré. 27 Of, 470 ¢, INTRODUCTION. The small formative power of this instruction is well shown by the case of the trained disciple himself, while the opposition of its pretended aims to all moral principles is clearly brought out by the inconsistency and self-contradiction displayed in the views which he advances. For a refutation of these false views, noth- ing further is necessary than the exposition of the few remnants of truth still remaining in them. From what has been said, we can easily appreciate the importance of the character of Polus for the artistic development of the dialogue. Next in importance to Polus is Callicles, who, however, stands in a different and much freer relation to Gorgias, although he may also in a certain sense be looked upon as his pupil. Of the cir- cumstances of his life we know nothing more than can be gath- ered from this dialogue. He must have been of noble rank and rich, else Gorgias would hardly have been staying at his house. He seems to be abreast of the culture and spirit of his age, is versed in the poets, and wholly devoted to politics. From 515 a, we judge that he must have entered practical life not long be- fore; and we may accordingly consider him as a man in the early prime of life. He is no theorist, like the other two, but a practi- cal politician; not a teacher, but a statesman, who from his past life has drawn much useful experience, and now prosecutes his designs with definite purpose. - For him the art of speech is only that for which it was intended, ~ namely, the means of acquir- ing a high position in public life. Since he was already fully in possession of the training of the period, he was well adapted to disclose all the principles on which his view of life was founded, and in accordance with which he was now pursuing his public career. Hence he represents the materialistic tendency, which recognizes profit only in enjoyment, only in the sensual pleasures, and scorns as an antiquated prejudice all acting in conformity with moral principles. But his materialism is by no means either coarse or effeminate; it is joined with a delicate culture and an energetic spirit; at least, he would wish it so. Hence he appears as an aristocrat (xaAds xéya0ds in its political sense) and despiser of the ignoble crowd, while at the same time he holds himself aloof from philosophy, because it makes men unpractical 17 16 18 16 INTRODUCTION. and unfits them for great efforts and designs. As a practical ora- tor, he possesses a perfect mastery of form, and knows not only how to utter his sentiments with rhetorical swing and force, but also how to defend them with spirit, wit, and (what Polus could not do) with arguments of logical sequence. Socrates is able to defeat him only by contrasting with the false view the better and true one, and supporting the latter by all the means of positive dialectic at’his command. Of course Callicles’ point of view does not permit him to acknowledge his defeat by dialectic; for he despises its methods from the outset, believes that he has ad- vanced far beyond it, and professes to find the position occupied by Socrates one which has been long abandoned by thinking men. He is complete in himself, and entirely self-sufficient, and therefore becomes annoyed that Socrates should wish to awaken him out of his security or abase his self-confidence. This is the reason that he continually (482 c, 491 a, 499 b) speaks as if he were vastly beyond Socrates; that he makes really unreasonable objections to Socrates’ method of argument (497 a, 511 a); that in his irritation he trys to withdraw from the discussion, or declares that he continues it only out of courtesy (501 ¢, 505 ce, 510 a, 516) ; and that while he finally (513) admits the cor- rectness of Socrates’ teachings, he refuses to accept it for himself. With this, at the same time, the personal good will which he expresses (486 a) for Socrates agrees. But this is due really to his courteous disposition or to circumstances, rather than to gen- uine respect and appreciation. How much it is worth, is clearly shown by what Socrates says in 487 c. On Socrates’ side we find Chaerephon. Xenophon (Mem. I. 2. 48) numbers him among those friends of Socrates who in their in- tercourse with him had none but the purest motives and designs. In his nature there was something enthusiastic, even flighty, and this caused the surname pavxdés to be applied to him as well as to Apollodorus.¥ In Apol. 21a Socrates himself relates the story 2 Charm. 153 b Xapepav 5é, dre eal | where, in a description of his charac- pavnds dv, avarndjoas éx wécwy Me ter, we find these words, kal érddev apés pe. For the application of the oré ratrnv thy erwvuplay ZAaBes 7d name to Apollodorus, of Sym.173 d, wavixds xadrciaOat, odt olda %ywye. INTRODUCTION. that Chaerephon had the boldness to demand of the oracle at Delphi whether any man were wiser than Socrates. In the same passage, it is mentioned that he was among those banished under the government of the Thirty. Soon after his return he died, not living to see the trial of his master. He is made an object of ridicule by Aristophanes,” along with Socrates, inasmuch as he was looked upon as his master’s model pupil. Hence it is fitting that he should appear here with Socrates. He is, even though he has only an unimportant part to play, the representative of Socrates’ followers and friends, and thus far serves to offset Polus. He understands the Socratic method and knows how to employ it skilfully, while Polus was but a clumsy imitator of the external features of his master’s style. Hence while Polus places himself if not above his master, at least on an equal plane, Chaerephon shows throughout a heart-felt love and subordination to Socrates. B. Place. 19 As regards the place® where we are to assume that this dia- 17 logue took place, Plato does not give us any such definite infor- mation as he does in other dialogues, for example, in the Crito, Phaedo, or Protagoras. Only certain expressions in the intro- ductory conversation between Callicles, Socrates, and Chaerephon show clearly the negative fact, that we are not to look upon the house of Callicles as the scene of the Gorgias. This fol- lows first of all from the words of Callicles in which he invites Socrates and Chaerephon to come to his house to listen to a lecture similar to the one which Gorgias has just held. Since, however, the preceding words of Socrates and Chaerephon show that they have come to the spot where the festal exhibition has just taken place, and that the lecture promised by Callicles can only be intended for some later time, and is so understood and courteously put aside by Socrates, and since, on the other hand, 29 Ar. Nub. 104, 503 et al. Schleiermacher was the first to op- 80 The view advocated here by pose this, and he was followed by Cron is discussed at great length in Woolsey, Cron, and later by Kratz. the Beitrége, pp. 25-35. The view In addition to the German critics, the formerly received is that the dialogue house of Callicles is assumed also by was held in the house of Callicles. Thompson (?) and Cope. 20 18 INTRODUCTION. the discussion is immediately opened in the name of Socrates by Chaerephon, without any intimation of a pause or change of place, which would hardly be consistent with the simple setting of the dialogue, therefore it follows of necessity that the whole discussion takes place in the very spot where Gorgias had just held his splendid harangue. But since the house of Callicles, where Gorgias is staying as a guest, cannot be the scene of this harangue, we must lay aside any idea of a private dwelling, such as is the scene of the Protagoras, and imagine the scene of the Gorgias to be, perhaps, one of the gymnasiums so often men- tioned in Plato’s writings, which owing to its size and arrange- ment, was well adapted for such exhibitions before a large number of hearers, with the view of drawing pupils. Other persons, beside those already named, must also have been present at this discussion as silent listeners, as we can assume from several pas- sages ;*" and the use of @dpyBos in 458¢ seems to indicate that their number was considerable. C. Time. The time” at which the dialogue is to be conceived as taking place must be determined by the different allusions which occur in the course of it. These unfortunately refer to events so various that their dates mutually exclude each other; and the author seems to have allowed himself almost a poet’s license. We must, therefore, from all these different allusions, try to select that especial circumstance which would be likely to have made the deepest impression upon the minds of contemporaries; and having decided upon this, we have a good basis from which to assume a date for the dialogue. The most important event alluded to is the death of Pericles (503), which compels us in any case to assume a time different from that which the mention in the Pro- tagoras of Pericles and his sons as living, causes us to assume for 81 447 c, 455 c, 458 c, 473 e, 490 e. See note on 455 c. 82 A complete discussion of the va- rious views regarding the supposed date of the Gorgias is given in Cron’s Beitrége, pp. 35-47. Since that time (1870) there has been but little dis- cussion. Hirschig (1873) does not agree with Cron, — nay, does not even mention his view; Thompson (1871) and Schmelzer (1883) do not touch the question. INTRODUCTION. that dialogue. At first sight the addition of the adverb vewori, “lately,” seems to go far towards fixing the date, but the indefi- niteness of vewor{ (see the note) and its entirely relative meaning forbid us to trust to it as a backward limit of time. ‘The fact that Gorgias came from Leontini to Athens as ambassador in 427, Ol. 88. 1, also gives us no certain help, for we have no reason to suppose that he was only once at Athens—rather the contrary — and in the passage there is no definite allusion to that especial period. Still, the assumption that we have to imagine the period of this apparently first acquaintanceship of the Athenians with Gorgias as the time of our dialogue, would harmonize well enough with the above-mentioned allusion to Pericles’s death, and also with the circumstance, that in 472 a, Nicias and Aristocrates are referred to as living, of whom we know that the former perished in the expedition against Syracuse, and the latter was one of the condemned * after the battle of Arginusae. This allusion prevents us from setting the date of the dialogue later than 413, and at the same time weakens the value of the otherwise especially note- worthy passage in 473e, where Socrates speaks of his unskilful- ness in political matters as shown by his conduct in the assembly. The mention of his office as senator and the duty of émwydiLer reminds us strikingly of the chronologically exact account of this same occurrence in the Apology. But Plato has avoided an express reference to the historical event mentioned there, perhaps designedly, in order not to give any too definite chronological background to his story. Hence we may possibly, if not prob- ably, consider that he is alluding to some other event than the celebrated trial of the impeached generals, and need not be compelled to hold to the year 405 as the supposed time of our dialogue. The citations from the Antiope of Euripides, which was brought out in 410, need not cause us any trouble either, since it is just in such matters that Plato allows himself the greatest liberties, as is shown by the celebrated anachronism in the Protagoras, the mention of the *Aypio: of Pherecrates.* 83 Apol. 32 b. Protagoras is put at 432 or 433 by % This play was brought out in’ most editors. See Towle-Sauppe’s 420, while the supposed time of the Introd. pp. 6 f. 21 22 INTRODUCTION. 19 The important references seem therefore to point to a period of time included between the years 427 and 413.¥ Other allu- sions to circumstances and events also agree with this assump- tion. Thus in 481 4, Alcibiades, who was born in 450, and Demus, son of Pyrilampes, are contrasted, — the former as the sweetheart of Socrates, the latter as that of Callicles. Again, in 519 a, there is an allusion to the political activity of Alcibiades. Finally in 470 4 we find a reference to Archelaus, who seized the kingdom of Macedon in 414, as a ruler who was now at the height of his fortune, the admiration and envy of the world. To fix the date more definitely within this period seems to be a matter of impos- sibility. If we assume it to be nearer to 413, we do not attach so much weight to the reference to the death of Pericles as it apparently deserves. If from other grounds we desire to keep the year 427 for the visit of Gorgias to Athens which we are now discussing, the reference to Archelaus adds another anachronism to the one already mentioned of the Antiope of Euripides. Such an anachronism, it is true, would not be more strange than the well-known one in the Symposion, where the violence shown the Mantineans by Sparta, fifteen years after the death of Socrates, is mentioned at a banquet, at which Socrates is represented as being a guest; but the rise of the kingdom of Macedon could not but have a very important bearing on the politics of Greece, and it is likely that the Athenians regarded, even at this early day, the intrusion of a new force into the political arena as more momentous than even the death of Pericles. This reference would then be a clear indication for the time when the star of the Macedonian king was already in the ascendant. 20 Certain other references to persons and facts are also found, such as the mention of the painters Polygnotus and Zeuxis in 448 p, 453, and of the dithyrambic poet Cinesias in 501, but these are not definite enough to be exactly dated, and therefore need not be taken into consideration in the present question. 85 Zeller, in an article Uber die Anachronismen in den Platonischen Ge- sprichen (Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, 1873), places the assumed date before 420, and Susemihl seems now (Bursian’s Jahresbericht, i.5) to hold the same view. Cf. his Kleine Beitriige zur Literaturgeschichte in Fleckeisen’s J.J. cxv. pp. 793 ff., and Bursian’s Jahresbericht, xix. p. 144. INTRODUCTION. 5. Puan or THE DiALrocur.* The plan of the dialogue would depend of course on the object which the author had in mind. The third section of this Intro- duction has already shown that that object was to make clear and emphasize the opposition from the moral point of view between Rhetoric, as the generally recognized medium of political activity and ambition, and Philosophy, the true calling and aim of a man’s life, as claimed by Socrates. This contrast is, however, not made prominent at once, but is the subject of the discussion with Callicles, which must therefore be considered as the most impor- tant part of the dialogue. This is preceded by the conversation of Socrates with Gorgias and Polus, which although it is divided between the two persons, is still shown clearly to be practically a single discussion. For not only are the discussions with these two persons outwardly united by the forwardness of Polus, whose pushing egotism is only equalled by his dialectical inca- pacity, but they betray also an internal connexion in their subject-matter, inasmuch as they both treat the question as to the nature and value of rhetoric, and both likewise are marked by vagueness of idea and uncertainty of moral feeling in the answers given it. This vagueness and uncertainty is in striking contrast to the reckless decision with which Callicles announces and defends his principles, —a contrast, too, which must be the more mortifying to Gorgias and Polus, since they, as theorists and teachers, are opposed to the mere practical statesman, who, however, of himself more than overbalances both the’ others together. In like manner, the discussion with Callicles, as its subject is more important, has a much wider compass than both the preceding together. A certain parallelism with the previous double discussion is also very apparent, in the fact that the dis- cussion with Callicles is broken nearly in the middle by the 86 Bonitz (Platonische Studien,Wien, Philosophy in the Platonic sense, or 1858, i. p. 33) well says: “It can is political Rhetoric, in the condition hardly be doubted any longer that in which it at that time actually was, the substance and object of the whole a worthy calling for life?’” See Cron, dialogue is given in the question, ‘Is Beitrdge, 47-65. 23 21 24 INTRODUCTION. interruption caused by Callicles’ refusal to take part further in the discussion ;, owing to which refusal and because no one else is willing to enter the lists,” Socrates is compelled to answer his own questions in Callicles’ place, until he succeeds in drawing him again into the conversation. With this section the dialec- tical development reaches its highest point; now begins that change (uerdBacts) which in the poetical drama is denoted by the term repuréreo, — the catastrophe; for up to this point the oppo- nents of Socrates’ view of life and its duties, in the case both of the individual in private and of the public aggregations of individuals into a state, have been continually increasing their efforts, partly owing to the growing heat of argument, partly also because they have had to call all their resources to their aid; now, however, a relaxation takes place —they have failed in the opposition —and it only remains for Socrates to expound more fully the theory which he has defended so successfully. Very effectively as far as the chief object of the dialogue is concerned, and also with admirable artistic feeling, the author makes Socrates begin this final section with a resumé of the results obtained in the conversation with Callicles. But inasmuch as the latter, in accordance with his deeply rooted manner of thinking and living, even at the last moment obstinately clings to his view of what the true man ought to do, Socrates finds it necessary to show the universal and eternal application of his theory, the inevitable and decisive victory of truth over error, in an independent section. In striking contrast with the dialectical sharpness and accuracy of the previous discussions, this conclusion appears couched in the guise of a mythical story. There is, however, a special fitness in this, for its religious coloring causes the whole exposition to appeal with convincing power to the feelings of the reader, and goes far to prepare him for the earnest and solemn warning with which the dialogue closes. This conclusion, short in compass, in contents and form intensely oratorical, serves also to preserve the due artistic proportions of the work; for it corresponds to the short introductory conversation between Callicles, Socrates, and 87 505 d 0. rls ody BAAos ebeAEL; Sc. dwoxplvecOat OF SiaréyeoOat. INTRODUCTION. Chaerephon. And just as this introduction, through the medium of the question which Chaerephon propounds to Gorgias, and which Polus presses forward to answer, leads naturally and grad- ually to the progressively developing scientific discussion, — so this discussion through the medium of this mythologically colored Adsyos is led over to the concluding exhortation in which we, whose eyes are opened, can see clearly the power and warmth of deep moral conviction. Simple as is the setting of the Gorgias, it yet belongs among the greatest, from the point of view of artistic perfection, of the dialogues of Plato.* For, aside from the absorbing interest of the question discussed, one can hardly fail to notice as he reads, both in the choice and characterization of persons (400s), and also in the progressive development of the discussion, how completely all the requirements of art are satisfied, thus making the Gorgias as a prose work fit to challenge comparison with any of the works of the poetical drama. 6. SUMMARY OF THE D1ALOGuE.” Introduction. Preliminary conversation on the scene of Gorgias’ just concluded speech. Socrates desires to have some conver- sation with Gorgias. purpose. fesses to be. 88 In the Introd. to Apol. § 52, Dyer- Cron divides the dialogues of Plato into three classes, according to their setting: (1) the simplest form, which ‘has no introduction or preamble, but is «a dialogue, with occasional inter- ruptions from interested bystanders, in which one of the ‘parts is taken throughout by the same speaker, usu- ally Socrates, while the other may be successively assumed by various per- sons.’ Then the narrated dialogues : (2) those ‘without preface, and with no account of the persons to whom Callicles invites him to his house for the Socrates bids Chaerephon ask Gorgias what he pro- the narrative or reading is made, or . (8) those introduced by a short dia- logue between the narrator and his friends, who soon become his atten- tive listeners.’ Typical examples are Gorgias, Republic, and Phaedo. 89 This summary, which is not found in Cron’s edition, is drawn from Deuschle’s Dispositionen der Apologie und des Gorgias von Platon (2d ed. by Cron, Leipzig, 1867), and adapted to the short skeleton of the dialogue which is given by Cron in his Bevtrage (Leipzig, 1870), pp. 78 ff. 25 22 26 INTRODUCTION. Discussion. 447 4-527 a. I. 4474-481. Dialogue between Socrates and Gorgias and Polus. What is Rhetoric, and what is its power? Introduction. 4474-4484. Chaerephon puts the question to Gorgias. Polus pushes forward and attempts to answer the question, of what art Gorgias is master, by praising the art. A. 448d46le. Dialogue between Socrates and Gorgias. Attempt to define the nature of Rhetoric and its relation to moral principles, — with self-contradictory results. Introduction. 4484-4494. Socrates shows the error into which Polus has fallen. Definition of his art, Rhetoric, by Gorgias. Socrates insists upon a discussion according to dialectical methods. 1. 4494457 c. Attempt to obtain a definition of Rhetoric. a. 449 a-453a. Determination of the specific class to which Rhetoric must be assigned. vu. 4494451 a. First attempt at definition. But the characteristic is too general and only external. B. 451a-453a. Second attempt at definition. Rhetoric (with its varieties) is classed under the specific idea we. b. 453a-457c. An examination of the definition just obtained. a. 453a-455 a. Its meaning. aa. up to 454e. Determination of the object to which the wes is directed, — right and wrong. BB. up to 455a. Determination of the nature of the res, — pretence without knowledge. B. 455b-457 ¢. Its compass. aa. up to 456¢. Indefinite extension of the field of Rhetoric. BB. up to 457¢. Admission of the possibility of a misuse of the power Rhetoric gives. 2. 457c-461c¢. Proof of the contradiction between Gor- gias’ conception and presentation. Transition. 457c-458e. Question as to the continu- ation of the discussion. INTRODUCTION. a, 458 e-4604. A definite statement of Gorgias’ view. wu. up to 459ce. In general, the orator need have no knowledge of the matters on which he speaks. f. up to 4604. In the special case of right, however, he must be able as well as desirous to know it. (This involves an inner contradiction.) b. 460d-461¢. Proof of the (external) contradiction between this definitely stated view and the admission made above of the possibility of a misuse of Rhetoric. B. 461 c481c. Dialogue between Socrates and Polus. Value of Rhetoric according to the standard of moral principle. Transition. 461c-462b. Polus objects to Socrates’ method. Socrates exacts a condition in regard to the manner of conducting the discussion. 1. 462b468e. Exposition of the real nature, and little value of Rhetoric (in general). a. 462b-466 a. The real nature of Rhetoric. u. 462 b-463.d. Vain attempt of Polus to lead the discussion by propounding the questions himself. General characterization of Rhetoric. B. 463 e466 a. Complete presentation and exposition of Socrates’ view of the nature of Rhetoric. 6. 466a—468e. From this determination of the nature of Rhetoric is deduced the result that it is of little value. u. 466 a—467¢. Polus questions unskilfully. Socrates declares as a consequence of the definition the entire weakness of Rhetoric. B. 467 c-468e. Socrates takes control of the discus- sion and proves this consequence from the difference between BovrAcoOar and Soxety. 2. 468e479e. Declaration of the moral principles which serve as the standard for this judgment. Transition. 468e470¢. > A > ¥ € a“ nw €V ayope avayKacas Has Suarpupar. Xawesan. Oddev mpayywa, @ Yaxpares: eya yap Kat 10 idvopar. giros yap pou Topyias, dar’ émidei€erau nui, el ev Soxel, viv, eav S€ Bovdy, cicat As. Kaa. Ti dé, & Xawpedav; éembupet Swxparns axovoat Topyiov ; > > > , , la 4 Xai. Eq auto y€ tou tovto wapecpev. 15 Kaa. Ov«otv drav Bovhyobe wap’ eve yew otkade, > o> A \ , hd N93 5 s eon Tap €(L0L yap Topytas KQATQAVEL, KQL €E7TL et£erar Up. 447 9%. rovrev: the pl. refers to the ® fact and its consequences. — é8e: is deictic.—év dyopg: the omission of the art. shows that this was a phrase like ‘in town,’ ‘on change.’ By this time, d&yopé had come in Athens to mean simply the exchange, or market- place, where people assembled not for public debate (that was in the Pnyx), but for business. It was a favorite resort of Socrates, since there the concourse of people offered him the best opportunity for prosecuting his god-given vocation (cf. Introd. to Apol. § 25, and Apol. 33 a ff.). Of Xen. Mem. i. 1. 10 Gadd phy eretvds ye del piv Fv ev TE pavepo- mpul re yap eis rods mepimdrous Kal Ta ‘yuuvaora Hee Kal wAnBotons ayopas éxet pavepds iv, xré.—dvayxdoas: the literal meaning is not to be pressed. Chacre- phon as the constant companion of Socrates took the liveliest interest in all his actions. b 9. ovS€v mpdypa: shows the asyn- deton of ordinary conversation. — éyd ydp kal Idcopat: prob. contains some allusion to the story of Tele- phus, who when wounded by Achilles received from the oracle the assur- ance 4 tpdcas (kal) idgetax. The myth was made the subject of a noted tragedy by Euripides. 10. dor-re émBelEerau: Sore, when com- bined with the ind., can for all prac- tical purposes be treated as if it were compounded of ofrws and ré. Cf. Lat. itaque. See on 458 d.— émBelterar: here used absolutely in the same sense as above. The fut. has two sides, one corresponding to each condition; thus it is equiv. to (1) €0Aec emidelevucbar ef Soxe?, and (2) éwidelzerat édv Botan. Cf. a different case in 502 b, with note. 12. +l 8é: the question shows that Chaerephon had not anticipated any great eagerness on Socrates’ part. 14. éw aird: the pronoun is em- phatic. See on 458 a. The empha- sis is heightened by yé. 15. drav PovAnobe xré.: contains an invitation, the basis of which is given by the clause with yap. The original conclusion of the condition was to be émideiterai, but in the course of the ydp clause the speaker lost sight of this and continued with the co-ordinate construction. — map épeé qxev olkade: this shows that the speakers are neither in nor before the house of Callicles. On the place of meeting, see Introd. § 17. ve a 25 a TIAATOQNOS TOPLAS. Xo. Bb déyers, @ Kaddikhets. new SiarexOnvar; Bovrdopar yap wvbécOa. rap’ avrod, tis 4 Svvapis THs TéxvNS TOD avOpds, Kal Ti eoTw b émay- 20 yédXerai te kal SiddoKer* THY O€ AAAny ewidacéw eioadOs, gy X a 4 woTep od héyets, ToLnT do Ow. Kaa. Ovdev ofov 7d adrov epwrav, @ LoK«pares. yap ait@ &v rovr Av THs emideiEews exéheve yoov vuvdr) 2 2 , a» 5 ¥ \ ed EPWTAV OTL TLS BovdotTo TMV EVOOV OVT@Y, KAL Tpos ATAVTA epyn aroxpweta bar. Xa. "H Kadds éyes. 7O Xarpedar, epov avrov. “17. @edAtjoeev dv: Socrates uses the opt. with & a great deal, esp. when he first meets a person. It is the mood of courtesy, but not of argument. In this dialogue the opt. preponderates at the beginning, but the subjv. over- takes it in the argumentative passage 471, 472; while in the whole dialogue the proportion of subjs. to opt. is 3 to 2. 18. SadexOqvar: emphasized in or- der to contrast Socrates’ method with the éridectis of Gorgias. 19. SUvapis (vis): ze. the power and inner meaning of the art, with which the érdéyyeAua should corre- spond, —the scope or compass. — éq- ayyéAderou xré.: cf. Apol. 33 b ay phte treoxdunv wdOnua phre édidata. érayyéAAeoOu is the regular word in Greek for ‘advertise,’ ‘ profess.’ 20. trv Sé dAAnv ériSeréw: it does not follow from this that Socrates considered the d:arexOjva as a kind of éwidectis. It is only an example of the idiomatic Greek usage of &Ados, which does not include but excludes the word with which it is connected. Cf. 4713 © wodiréy Kal BAdwv kévwy, Apol. 36 b. See G. 142, 2, n.3; H. 705. Wemust use a circumlocution, 35 Bt. L. p. 447. > 2 ee ad’ dpa eOetnoevey av c ‘ KQaL or another word, in English. In Cal- 447 c licles’ answer, however, the attribu- tive force is regained. 21. domep od d€yers: const. closely with eicad6is, as referring to the in- vitation of Callicles to come to his home. 22. ovSv oloy td avrov épwrav: there is nothing like asking the man himself. The articular infinitive is a favorite with Plato. He uses it most commonly in the acc. The nom. comes next in frequency, with the gen. aclose third. The dat. is much less frequent. The pr. tense occurs nine times oftener than the aor., show- ing a great advance on Pindar. See Am. Jour. Phil. TIT. 193-201. 23. aird: on account of its mean- ing (“the master,” Kr. 51. 5, 4; H. 681 c) is placed in this emphatic position. On the matter itself see Introd. § 7, and the passage from Meno quoted Introd. n.12. Auditors are present also at the following dia- logue (cf Introd. § 17 jin.). — éxédeve : imperf., because the same bidding or invitation was given to the different members of the group. He bade us all. 26. Kadas A€yas: expresses more satisfaction than ed A¢yes just before. 36 30 ae PLATO’S GORGIAS. Xai. Té epapar; Xa. “Oars éaottv. Xa. [lds déyets ; 8t. I. p. 447. d Xa. “Qomep av ci ervyyavev dv brodnudtwv Syp.ovp- x» ¢ x yos, amexpivato av Symov cot ore oKUTOTOMOS* F oO pav- , « 2 S Pavers ws heya; II. Xar MavOdvw kat épyoopar. Eimé pou, & Topyia, adnOy Aéyer Kaddtkdis Ode, Ore éerayyéhder arroxpiver Bau y »¥ , 2 a OTL AVY TLS GE E€poTe ; Torrtax. “AdnO4, @ Xatpepav: Kal yap vuvdn avra 44s a 2 , \ s ” 2Q 7 , > + TAVTA eTnyye\rAouyy, Kat eyo OTL OvodELS BE 7H NPWTNKE Kawvov ovoev To\N@v ETaV. 3 ¥ € , > aA aT , Xa. “H ov apa padias azvoxpwvet, o Topyia. Tor. Idpeote rovrov metpav, & Xaipepav, Law Pave. TInaoz. Ny Aia: dv 5€ ye BovdAn, & Xarpedav, €pod. 27. ci epwpar: deliberative sub- junctive. 28. dots éoriv: doris is regularly used to ask the question ‘who’ after a neg. (of. 524 e, 526 b); but in all cases it may be used to express the idea of quality. See on 453 b. 30. domep dv. . daexplvaro dv: éomep &v ei is phraseological, and the second &y comes in unconsciously with the conditional apodosis. The use of the aor. with & in the apodo- sis, following an imperf. with ei in the protasis, where both refer to the present sphere of time, is not com- mon, and according to GMT. 414, occurs chiefly in Plato and in such phrases as elrov &y, dmexpivduny by. Similar constructions in the past sphere are found with other verbs im Dem., Aristcph., Soph., Eur., Xen., etc. Cf. Dem. xix. 162, Ar. Eq. 507. — Syprovpyds : see on 452 a, II. 1. pavOdve : one example suffices 447 to make the idea of Socrates clear to Chaerephon; two are not enough for Polus. This is, however, due to the fact that Chaerephon is familiar with Socrates’ methods, while they are new and strange to Polus. 2. dawoxplverOar «ré.: this is the ti of Socrates’ question above in c. The tense shows that it is a general standing announcement. 7. q mov dpa xté.: spoken in a 448 wondering, admiring tone which ex- # pects an answer. “Surely, then, you must have but little difficulty in re- plying, Gorgias.” The irony lies in (the inferential) &pa as well as in fgdiws. On the pushing nature and insolence of Polus, see Introd. § 14. What is said generally in Afeno 70 b (see Introd. xn. 12) of the pupils of Gorgias applies excellently to him. 9. éwov: by a very natural shift, TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 37 ; ee es : : St. I. p. 448, 10Topyias pev yap Kat amepnKévar por Soxet* woANa yap dptu Suehydvbev. Xa. Ti dé ® lade; ote. od Kddduov av Topyiov atoxpivac Oat ; Ilona. Ti 8€ rodro, édv vol ye tkavas ; b 15 Xar Oddev: GAN Ezrerd7) od Bovren, dmoKpivov. Ilona. "Epoira. Xar “Epword 87. et érvyyave Topyias émorjpov dv THs TéeXINS HomEep 6 adeddds adrTod “HpddiKos, tiva av avtov avopalopey Sixatus ; ovy GreEp eketvor ; 20 Ina. avy ye. Xa. “latpdv dpa gddoKovres aitov elvar Karas dv edéyopev. Tloa. Nai. Xa. Ei 6€ ye Homep "Apiatopav 6 ’Aydaopartos 7} 6 > Xx > a» Bs , s x 2X 2 a 25 ddEAPos avrov eumerpos Hu Téxvys, tiva av adtov dpbds exahouper ; IIoa. Ajdov dru Cwypddov. c Xa Nov 8° éreud7 tivos téyvns emiathpwv. eatiy, tive dv Kadovvtes avrov dpOds Kadotpen ; 30 IIna. 70 Xawpedav, toddral réyvar &v avOparois cioiv 448 after rovrov.— ‘Gor. You may try the 18. ‘HpdStkos: this brother of Gor- 448 * experiment if you please, Chaerephon. gias (see Introd. § 4) must not be P Pol. Yes, ’egad, and upon me too, if confounded with another physician you like, Chaerephon.’ Cope. of the same name who came from 10. nal depyxévar: gives the Selymbria (Rep. iii. 406a, Phaedr, ground of Polus’ offer. Possibly he 227d, Prot. 316d), and was famed as may also wish to intimate that Gorgias the first to insist upon the value of may now fairly retire, and yield the gymnastics for health. field to another. 19. dwep: after riva by an easy b 14.'rl &€ rotro: sc. diapeper. “What transfer to the actual idea, — ‘name.’ difference does this make?” Cf 24. Aristophon’s brother was thecel- 497 e. Polus does not wish to slight ebrated painter Polygnotus of Thasus. his master, but only to win admira- 30. Polus speaks as from a book — e tion for himself. perhaps from his own book (462 b). 38 35 448 o PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 448. €k TOV euTreipL@v euTreipws NUpnucvar ewmeipia pev yap TOLL TOV aiGva Huav mopever Oar kara Téxvyy, aarerpia Se \ , eo \ , “O7 » Kata TUXynV. EéxdoTwy O€ TovTwY peTadapBavovaw aAdoL » »” a 2 a adhiwv ahdws, TOY S€ aploTwy ot dpirto.: av Kai Topyias en pees , a , a n €ativ ode, Kal peréyer THS KaANoTNS TOV TEXVar. III. Xo. Kadds ye, & Topyia, daiverar Tlddos wape- oxevaobat eis AMdyous: adda yap 6 imdoyxeTo Xarpepavre > aA OU TOLEL. ’ > Tor. Ti padiota, & Lwxpares ; Xo. obat. TO €pwrayevov ov wavy por dhaiverar aoxpive- Tor. “AAAa ov, ef Bovre, epod adrov. > Ov ? 9: UN. \ B x , > ‘ > , 2. UK, €b auT@ YE got ou OLEV@ €OTlV amoKpt- veo Oat, adda Todd Gv HOvov oe. He overdoes the use of those figures, with which Gorgias also was accus- tomed to amuse himself, e.g. ‘ parono- masia’ (kata réxynv... KkaT& TYXNV) and other phonetic figures in regard to the names of which theorists them- selves were not at one. He uses the poetic aidva instead of Biov. His statements are indefinite and cloudy, and finally he brings forward a wholly general attribute — as Socrates proves in e by the distinction between rola and ris—of the matter in question, instead of its name. To speak of rhetoric as KadAictn Tay TeExvav is furthermore dialectically inappropri- ate, although it well agrees with the artistic design by drawing attention thus early to this idea. For other examples of similar mannerisms, see the speeches which go under the name of Gorgias (e.g. in the appendix to Blass’ edition of Antiphon), and which, whether genuine or not, show SnAros ydp pro Taos admirably the peculiarities of the 448 Gorgianic school. £ TIL. 1. wapeckevdo Oar els: equipped a jor. The phrase is a military one; hence Adyous is almost equiv. to the later Aoyouaxiay, ‘disputation.’ The reference is to the readiness with which Polus begins his harangue. 4. rl pddtora: how so, pray? To Gorgias’ view the question has been well answered. 8f. otk ... dAAd: the construc- tion is colloquial. ov« is to be trans- lated no! The following clause with vé serves to give the reason for odx, “that is, if.’ The negative color of the whole complex causes the speaker to ground his position by &AAd where one would more naturally find ydép. It is not necessary to fill out the ellipsis with &y #d:ov oé either in Greek or English. 9. BSyAos ydp por: on the personal construction, see on 449 b. TAATONOS TOPTIAs. 39 copa at . ’ Bt. I. p. 448. 10 Kal é& dy eipyKer, OTe THY Kadovperny pPyTopLKVY “addov pepedernKey 7 Siaréyer Oar. e Ilona. Ti 54, & Yaxpares ; Zo. “Or, & Made, épopévov Xaipepdvtos tivos Topyias emioTHpav TéxVNS, eyKopialers prev avdTod THY TéxvyV 15 waomep Tivds WeyovTos, ATLs 5€ €aTw obK aTEKPO. IIna. Od yap drexpwapny dr etn 7) KahdoTN ; da. Kai pada ye. add’ ovdeis Hpdta toia tus etn 7 Topyiov réyvy, adda Tis Kat Ovtwa déou Kaheiv tov Top- yiav: womep Ta euTrpoc0e cou Urereivato Xaipepav Kat 20 atT@ Kah@s Kat dia Bpayéwy dmexpiva, kal viv ovtws eime449 tis 9 TéxVN Kal Tiva Topyiay Kade ypr Huds. paddov 86 & Topyia, airés july eizé, tiva oe xp?) Kade ws Tivos ETLOTHMOVA TEXVNS. Top. Ths pytopixys, @ TéKpares. 25 Soa. “Pyropa apa ypy oe Kadew; Top. "Ayabdv ye, & Ldxpares, ed S1 6 ye evyopar iva, as edn “Ounpos, Bovr\e pe Kaew. Xo. “Ada BovrAopan. 448 Thy yunvactixny, cal ov bh ody obrws 448 évravda ri pis; € 21. Socrates accepts tentatively 449 the statement which has been so con- ® tinually advanced, that pyropiny is a 11. Btar , 3 x EHédycov Kara Bpayd 76 épwrdmevoy atoxpiver Oat. Tor. Kicty pé&, ® YeKpares, Ear TOY amoKpioew avayKata, dud makpav Tods Adyous ToietoOar: od pHY * X # 7 ce X X Ni i? ~ GANG Tepdoopat ye as Sua, BpayuTdérev. Kal yap ad Kal ToUTO &v eoTw av Py, undéva av ev Bpaxyurépots Enov Ta, > \ 92 A QUTGM E€L7TEW. 32. dAdobt: on these travels, see Introd. § 5. The vagueness of the adverb stamps the whole statement as somewhat boastful. 35. 1d 8€ pyjkos Tav Adyev: Socrates does not mean that the answers should be restricted to acertain length; but he wishes to exclude those answers which, instead of keeping strictly to the ques- tion under discussion, branch off and lose themselves in different trains of thought. By using xaf before MéAos, Socrates gives us to understand that he fears something similar from Gorgias. 36. elraifis drobdcbar: put off till another time. — dmwep tmoxvel: with reference to 447 e. 38. elolv «ré.: though Gorgias speaks like a master, with the air of authority, he would still like to leave a way of escape open for himself, —which unfortunately his boastful érdyyeawa has rendered impossible, although he had not yet distinctly promised to speak with brevity. 39. dvaykaiat . .. moveiobar: the personal construction proceeds from the ‘prolepsis’ of the subject of the inf..—a common occurrence with Sixatos and dfA0s. The real subject of the infinitive is then évias réy drro- xpicewv. Of this construction Plato affords other examples. Cf. Meno79d amdxpiow thy dia Tav ere Cnroupévev « . « érixetpodoav amoxplvecOa, Phaedo 92d rots Sid ra eixérwy Tas awodeltes movoupevors Adyos. In translation the adj. must be made neuter, or a cir- cumlocution must be used. “There are certain answers in which it is nec- essary for one to deliver himself more at length.” See H.944a; Rid. § 230. 40. 8&0 Bpaxvrdrev: simply a cir- cumlocution for the superlative adv., and accordingly const. with &s acc. to the usual rule. Kr. 49, 10, 1; H. 651 a. In the next sent., év seems to have much the same force as da here. 41. pndSéva dv... elev: the use of “7 here is not to be considered as due b 449 5 10 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. s ’ a TEpov AkKOvo aL. 41 St. I. p. 449. Xa. Tovrou pry det, d Topyia* Kai pou ériSeréw cored TovTou Toinca:, THs Bpaxvdroyias, paxpodoyias 8€ eio- 45 adOus. Tor. "AMG toujow, Kal obderds dycas Bpayvoyw- IV. Xo. Dépe df pyroperds yap dys emoripov réx- > \ ns eat Kal moupoas av Kal dddov pPyTopa: 7 PyTopLK?) 4 o nan > Y Tepl Ti TOY OvTwY TYyXavEL Cd—-A ; @oTreEp 7 VpavTiKH TEpt » a > THY TOV iwatioy épyaciay: 7 yap; Top. Nai. > a Ne \ VouA a an , do. Ovkovuv Kat Y OVO LKY) Tepe THY TV ped@v TOLNOLW ; Tor. Nat. Za. Ny Hv “Hpav, Topyia, ayapal ye tas dmoxpi- 9 > s e ar . , OE€ls, OTL ATTOKPLWEL @S OLOV TE dua Bpaxurarav. , be > = “A n Tor. avy yap oipar, & YoéKpares, EmveKas TovTO qTovewv. Xo. Eb héyers. ¥ , > , Y XN ‘ Ou dy4 pow amdxpwat ovtws, Kal epi “~ e “A N - “ my > x > 7 THS PHTOPLKYS, TWEPL TL TMV OVTWY EOTLY ETLOTYILY 5 Tor. Ilept \dyous. 449 to indir. disc. which would require od, © but as being in an inf. clause which is in apposition with év. IV. 1. fytopicys yop xré.: yap in- troduces the reason for the question which is announced in the challeng- ing phrase, ope 5y. Hence the posi- tion of the causal clause. dad 3. wept rl: ‘epi with acc., ordi- narily of action; rept with gen., ordi- narily of thought or speech; but thought or speech may be considered as action, and shifts are not uncommon.’ B.L.G. Cf. mept THs pntopixis below (12). 8. vy tyv “Hpav: Socrates rarely uses the same oath twice in the same dialogue. Of. vh bv wbva 466 ¢, nd rov— 466 e, AP 470 e, 516 d, roy Kiva tov Aiyutriay Gedy 482 b, ray ZHOov 489 e. See on 463 d. 9. Ste daoxpive: the explanatory clause freq. borders on the causal, as here. 10. wdvu émekds: fairly well. In this self-laudation, Gorgias has in view only the form of his answers without reference to their connexion with the subject-matter. He only wants to show that he is a master of brachylogy, and therefore answers in the shortest formulae of affirmation and negation. 13. émorrpy: not really different from téxv7y, inasmuch as the orator is émothuwr pyropicis Téxv7s. d 449 42 15 20 25 30 449 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 449. Xa. Hotovs rovrous, & Topyia; dpa ot Sydovar Tovs e KapvorTas, as av Siaitopevor vyratvorev ; Top. Ov. : > ¥ » * X ¥ e e 4 Xa. OvK dpa wept mévras ye Tovs Adyous 4 PyTopiKy €oTw. Tor. Ov dra. Xa. “Aa pv héyew ye wove Suvarovs. Tor. Nai. > nw ge - XN n Xa. OvKovy wept avrep éyew, kat ppovety ; Tor. Tlas yap ov; Xa. "Ap ovv, Hv vuvdn éhéyomev, 7 latpiky Tept Tar 450 / \ > A XN Z kapvovtav Suvatovs eivar ppovetv Kat héyeuw ; Tor. *Avayky. s €¢ 3 % ¥ e ¥ x , > a Xo. Kat 7 tarpixn apa, ws €ouxev, rept Noyous €aTiv. Tor. Nat. , XN X\ / Xa. Tovs ye wept Ta voonpata ; Tor. MaXtora. > an A e XN ‘N , > XN ‘ Ya. OvKovy Kat N yupvactiKn mept Kdyous Eat TOUS ‘ > 7 “ , \ ov TEpL evebiav TE TOV OMLATwV Kat kaxefiav 4 15. wolovs rovrous: the acc. instead of the nom. on account of the proxim- ity of Adyous. The const. of the pre- vious clause is continued.—rovs kdp- vovras: an example of one of the most common kinds of anticipation, where the subj. of the dependent sent. is drawn forward under the government of the leading verb. 18. ovK dpa mepl mdvras Kré.: ac- cordingly the definition of Gorgias is too wide. Cf. Prot. 312 d tows &y, jv BF eyd, GAnd@ Agyomer, od pévrot ixavas ye: epwrhoews yap ert h drdkpiots hiv Setrat rept brov 6 copiorhs Sewdy rovet Aéyerv. 23. ovkotv mwepl dvrep Adyev, Kal poveiv: sc. rote? Suvatovs with each 449 clause. Apparently Socrates makes © no immediate use of this point, so that it might appear unnecessary. But by contrasting thought with speech he thus at the beginning of the discus- sion emphasizes the importance of the contents as opposed to the form, a distinction on which he subsequently bases his refutation of Gorgias. 26. BSvvarovs etvar (sc. more? from 450 449 e): on the difference between dpa ® and dpa ov, where an affirmative an- swer is expected, see on 479 ¢. 33. eveflav te . . . Kal Kaxeflav: opposites are regularly connected by te... Kal. 35 40 45 450 TIAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. Top. Havu ye. 48 St. I. p. 450, Xa. Kai pry cat at addrdo téxvat, ® Topyia, ovrws ¥ a \ , \ EXovow* ExdoTn avTav TEpt oyous €aTly ToUTOVS, ot TUy- b , » a @ Xavovaow OvTeEs TEPL TO TPAyLA, OF ExdaTH €oTiv y TExVY. Tor. Batvera. Xa. Td ody 8% more tas aAdas Téxvas od PyTopuKds a ¥ \ s ¥ , ¢€ \ a Kanets, ovaoas Tepe hoyous, E€LTTEp TAUTYV PYTOPLKYV KaAets, A KR > x / . Gv y Tept oyous ; Tor. “Ori, @ Ydkpares, Tov pev_aAhwv texvGv epi eee \ , ay na n xeElpoupyias Te Kal TovavTas mpadkes ws eros elrety acd 3 e = - Lai \ c ad > id > a“ COTW 1 ETLOTHUN, THS oe pytopixyns ovd& é€atw TovodTov , * ‘ “a ¢ oe Ne , x # XEtpovpynua, adhAa Taca yn Tpakis Kal y KUpwars bua dd- © yovéot. Sia tabr éyw THY PyTopiKny Téxvyv aELO civat mept Adyous, dpOds éywr, as eyo dyut. V. Xa. *Ap’ odv pavOdavw otavy aitny Bovrdke Kaew; p ow p o) 36. éxdoty: when the second clause explains the first, the asyndeton is but little felt. 37. 1 téxvy: const., in spite of the article, not with é«dorn, but with od. This is the pred. while éxdorn is sub- ject. “Of which each (art) is the art.” 41. 4 dv q: the indef. rel. sentence is necessary, owing to the very gen- eral character of Gorgias’ statements hitherto. — ravryv: as referring to &v 7 is also indefinite. “If this you call rhetoric— any art which has to do with discourses.” 43. ds Eos elretv: this phrase oc- curs in Plato 77 times (GMT. 777, 1). The &s is not to be considered as final, as in the Eng. ‘so to speak,’ but is rather comparative, in the meaning ‘in a word,’ though it is often con- venient to translate by ‘so to speak.’ It is closely connected with the fol- lowing raga, as in 456 a with drdoas, 450 d with ovddevds, Phaedo 78 e with ovdauas. Cf. Kr. 55, 1, 2. Its force is shown by its opposition to dkpiBei Ady@ in Rep. i. 341 b wordpws Aéyers Tov &pxovta, Tov ws eos elmeivy roy axpiBei Adyw, and its employment here shows the inability of Gorgias to give a clear and sharp definition of his art. 45. kupwots: accomplishment, con- sequently effect, power. This unusual word, which Thucydides vi. 103 uses in the meaning decision, resolution, de- termination, is replaced below in e by the equally unusual képos. More com- mon is the verb kupoty confirm and Kupovo@a bring to pass, 451 b,¢. Cf. also &xupos void, inoperative, Crito 50b, Prot. 356 d. 47. dp0ds A€ywv us eys hype: this addition is also characteristic of his self-confidence. V. 1. dp otv pavOdvew «ré.: this question is put without any expecta- 44 10 15 450 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 450. e oe ¥ , ? s 5s 4 + e a Taxa O€ ELoomar GapéaTepov. GAN’ amdKpwat> eioly Hu Téxvar. 4 yap; Top. Nat. ~ x ID A a a \ > , x Xo. Tacav 8é, oiwar, Trav TEXVOV TOV pev epyacia TO OAV adda ypadixy Kal avdpavtoroiia Kal dda wodAat. Tas ToL- > ‘\ or , a »¥ XN > / é€atw Kal Adyou Bpayxéos déovrat, eras 5€ ovdevds, To THS TéExVNS TEpaivotto av Kal did ovyNs, olov 4 a Z ‘oa > ‘ ‘ € ‘\ avras pow Soxels héyew, wept Gs od dys THY PNTopLKHY elvau* 7) ov; Tor. Hdvu pev obv Kada@s vrrohapBaveis, & LdKpares. 9 , , 9 a a a \ , a Xo. “Erepar dé yé elou Tay texvav at dia Adyou wav mepaivovar, Kal Epyou ws eos eimely } ovdevds Tpoc- £ a - ¥ @ € > x ®% X Sdovrar 7 Bpayéos Tavv, oiov 7 apiOunriKy Kal NoytoTiKy) ‘\ x 7 - “‘ » x , Kal YEWMETPLK Kal TETTEVTLKH ye Kal addat 7roAAat Téy- vat, av eviat TXEdSY TL taoUS TOUS dyous EYovaL Tals ze ¢ 4 X ac * + v an € apafeow, at d€ modal meious, kal 75 Tapadmav Taca 7 tion of an answer. ofay is used, and not tiva, because there is no inquiry after the name of the art (which for the moment is considered satisfac- tory), but after its nature or kind, which must now be more clearly defined. In the following methodi- cal discussion Socrates makes clear what was present, but in a confused form, in Gorgias’ mind. The ques- tion now is as to the means of the xipwots. The ground of distinction is formed by the contrast so famil- iar to the Greeks between Adyos and pyor (Aéyew and mpdrrev). Cf Apol. 32 a. 5. rov péev: in part. apposition with macav. See H. 624d. The correla- tive is rep: 3€ (12), while gma 8€ is to be connected with déovra: as one division of the rév ev, and as cor- relative with the implied subject (ai bev) of Sova. Below we find 4... % instead. 7. td THs TexVTS : the business, func- tion of the art. See H. 730 b. d 450 c 9. od dys: on the adhaerescent ot d see GMT. 384; H. 1028. 14, yf dpOpnriky Kal AoytorriKy : arithmetic is the theoretical science of numbers; logistic, the practical art of reckoning. See the following chapter. On the omission of the arti- cle, see Kr. 58, 2,1; H.660a; and note on 469 d. 15. werrevtiky: seems to be a gen- eral name for various games which were played on a board with pieces, whether dice or checkers. The addi- tion of yé indicates that the member of the series is not usually classed with the others; cf Crito 47 b ratty &pa aitrgG mpaxréov nal yuuvacréoy rat édeordoy ye kal roréov Kré. 20 25 450 451 a TWAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. eX: ‘ ‘ “NS > a x / > 7 mpakis Kal TO Kupos QUTQLS dua oyav €OTLV. 45 St. I. p. 450. T@V TOLOU- e Tov TWa pot SoKeEts éyew THY PHTOpLKYD. Top. "An Or déyets. Xa. “AAN ovror TovTwy ye ovdepiay otpai oe Bovre- cba. pytopixny Kadeiv, oby OTL TO PHpaTe ovTWS Eres, i “ww 8 » 4 x nw ¥. c , > ” x ojTl 1 la Aoyou TO KuUposS €Xovoa PHTOPLKY €OTL, KQL brodaBou av Tis, eb BovdouTo Svtxepaivew ev Tots hdyo.s, “ony apOpnri«ny apa pytopixyv, @ Topyia, héyes;” > > 9 > , ¥ \ > \ ¥ \ aAXr OUK Ol“at DE OUTE THV aprOuntexny OUTE TYV YEO ET- piay pytopixny deyeuw. Top. "Opbas yap vet, ap Pavers. VI. So. "10e viv Kat ‘ \ > a > + ov TV ATOKPLOLV HY NPpoeynv diarépavov. eTel Yap PyTopLKy TuyX aver Lev OTA TOUTWY Tis TOV TEXVOV TMV TO TOAD MOyw KpOpLEever, TYYXAVOVAL XN \ » n > A > a ¢ \ 4 9 d€ Kat adda ToLtadTar ovoat, TELP@ ELTTELY, Y EPL TL EV 18. avrais ... early: cf below in @ 4 51a Adyou 7d Kipos Exouea. 22. ox dtu: not but that, although. —To# prpate: as far as actual words are concerned; “but you could not have earnestly meant it.” 24, vaodaBou dv tis: regular for- mula for introducing an objection; cf Apol. 20 ¢. The opt. is potential. — Suoxepatvev: in the proper sense of bvaxephs, hard to manage, i.e. to make difficulties. Cf 483 a kakoupyeis év tois Adyos. Remark the delicate irony of the words GA’ obk xKré., which consists in this, that Socrates apparently passes very gently over the contradiction which exists be- tween the words and the actual mean- ing of the teacher of oratory. 28. dpOds vdo ole: acknowledges and accepts the suggestion made by Socrates. Note the oratorical swing in the addition of Sinalws broAauBd- vecs, Which serves also to preserve the dignity of the master who is ever ready to encourage good work in the pupil. VI. 1. t6.: is simply an encourag- ing interjection like pépe 54 449 c.— kal ov: acknowledges the courtesy of Gorgias’ preceding words. — tiv aaro- Kpiow av qpownv: is brachylogic for Thy ardkpiow Tod epwrhuatos & hpdunv. 2. Svamepalvew: denotes the suita- ble conclusion which Gorgias ought to make to his answer, by establish- ing some distinction characteristic of rhetoric. Socrates assumes then a little ironically that this object has already been almost attained. Since, however, he wishes in what follows to make clear that two or more arts can belong to the same species and yet be entirely distinct from one an- @ YoKpartes, Kal dukaiws vzo- 451 451 a 46 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 451. , * om ». < 2 9 a ¥ - 5 Adyous TO KUpos EXoVTA PyTOpLKy EoTW. WOaTEP Gy El TIS @ \ ~ 5 a pe epoito ay vuvdn edeyov Tepi HoTWooow TaY TEexVaV* “ae , 9 e° 4 , ” ¥ >» @ Yoxpares, Tis EoTw y apiOuntiKy TéxvN ;” ElTrouL’ av A y XN ¥ - a avT@, WaTEP GV apt, OTL THY Sia AdyoU TIS TO KUPOS b . a a x Exovo@v* Kal el we Emavépoito: “Tav wept Ti;” Eloy av y i 10 OTL TOY TEpL TO apTidV TE Kal TEpITTOV, Goa av ExaTEpa , +, > 8 > »¥ “ %, oe X ‘ , Tuyxavyn ovTa. el 8 ad epoito: “tHv d€ hoyrotuKny Tiva * / ” ¥” 7k ov N i s X\ nw , * Kadets Téxvny ;” Etro’ av oT Kal avrn éaTt TAY Ady TO a XN , ¥ > Tay Kupoupevay: Kal el emavepoito: “7 mepi TL;” Etzrouw n 7 € o> a / , y ‘ Q ¥ av aoTep ot €v TO OHuw ovyypaddpmevon, OTL TA pev aANa 15 kabdmep 7H apiOuntiKy 7 NoyoTiK ExEL* TEpl TO adTO ec yap €oT1, 70 TE ApTiov Kai TO wepiTToV* Siadeper S€ TOTOd- Tov, OTL Kab pds aUTA Kal Tpds aAnda TAS EXEL TANBOUS > om %. %, *% %, ” e , ETLOKOTEL TO TEPLTTOV Kat TO QpTlov n oyoTiKy. . oo» KQaU €b 451 other, it is necessary for him to give communicated to the assembly, at 451 @ and compare several examples. the command of the president, by the 6. dv viv 8x édeyov: logically fol- herald. If there was a previous mo- lows texva@v. tion either of the senate or an orator b 9. trav mepi ti: the sentence would on the same subject before the body, be correctly filled out thus: 7éyv wep! instead of recording and reading the tt 5a Adyou .7d Kvpos éxovcav. The common preamble of both motions, use of réy, both here and in the fol- the words ra wév &AAa Kadarep Bovan lowing answer, shows that the in- (or whatever the name of the pro- quiry is directed to the function of a poser was) were employed, followed class. On the other hand 7 wep! ri; by the modification or amendment. just below inquires after the function This corresponds in a general way to of the individual art. As an exam-_ our ‘amend after the words,’ etc. ple of Plato's mouuAtia, notice the va- 17. mpds avta Kal mpds GAAnAG & riety in the expressions év Adyous 7d Kipos €xovea, Sid Adywv 7d Kiipos Exovga and Ady@ xupoupévwy. 10 f. doa dy tuyxdvy : however great each happen to be, i.e. to any magni- tude you please. 14. domep of ev Stipw cvyypadope- vot. Socrates refers to those who bring forward motions in the assem- bly of the people or have them re- corded by the ypaupareds to be then xré.: ‘the relative as well as the absolute properties” Cope. The reckoning can only be made with odd and even num- bers; hence mpds airad means even to even, etc.; mpds &AAnAa, even to odd, etc. The definition of Aoyioreeh runs thus in Charmides 166 a 4 Aoywrinh éori mov Tov aptlov kal mepirrov emothun, mAnGous Smws exe mpds abTa Kal mpds &Anda. The pl. must be construed according to the sense, not the form. TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 47 St. I. p. 451. 4 = c 3 na Y Tis THY AOTPovopiay avEepotTo, Euovd N€yovTos STL Kal AUTH / a“ & 7 A 20 Adyw KupovTar Ta TavTa, “ot dé Adyou ot THS doTpovo- 25 30 e e #4 , ae ee > potas,” €l pain, “mept ti ciow, & Ldkpares;” elmouw’ av 4 * ‘ nw ¥ OTL TEplL THY TOV aoTpwY dopay Kal HAriov Kal wedyvys, TOS TPOS adAnha TAXOUS EXEL. Tor. "OpOas ye héywv ot, & Yaxpares. Ya. "1A 89 kal ov, & Topyia. Tuyxaver pev yap 57 7 € \ > a pyTopiKy ovaa TaV M6yw Ta TavTa SiaTpaTTopeay TE Kal KUpoupLevav TLS * 4 yap 3 Top. "Eore tavra. 2 ms a“ » , , > an ss »* Da, Aéye 67) TOV mept TL; (TL) EOTL TOVTO TwY OVTWY, \ 2 @ ° a TEpt Oo ovTOL Ot Adyou Eioiv, ots H PNTOPLKH XpPTTaL; Tor. Ta péyrota tev avOpwreiav mpaypatwv, @ Lo- Kpares, Kal ap.ora. VII. So. *AAN’, & Topyia, audio Bytiapwov Kai TodTo héyas kal ode Ta cadés. yw OlomaL yap oe akynKoevat ev a / > / iS: ¢ An + I, > TOLS DVUULTOCLOLS godvTwy avO paar TOVUTO TO oKOALOD, eV 19. dvépowro: sc. rls éoriv, the sub- ject of which is given in the proleptic accusative. Cf. Prot. 351 e thy jdovhv adtyy épwray ef odk ayabdy eori. 25. ov: the rest of the sentence is to be supplied from the preceding words of Gorgias. The clause with ydp gives the basis of the following question. Cf 449 ¢, d. 30. wept ob: according to analogy we should expect wept 6. But cf. a similar shift in 453 b and e with mweide. See also 491 a and note on 449 d. 831. td péyora. Gorgias, like Po- lus, finds it extremely hard to come out of the rut into which he has fallen, and give a scientific definition of his art. VII. 3. The scolion was a pecu- liar kind of drinking-songs, rapoima, sung at banquets. The one here al- luded to is mentioned by Plato in Euthyd. 279 a, Phileb. 48 a, Legg. 631 c, 661 a. It probably was com- posed by Simonides, although accord- ing to some it was by Epicharmus. After Bergk’s (Poet. Lyr. Gr. iii. 645) rhythmical changes the words acc. to the Scholiast read as follows: ‘Yytatve pev &pioroy avdpl Ovare, Sedrepoy 5¢ pray Kadrdy yevecba, 7d tTplrov 5& mAouTety addArws, kal Td Téraproy HBav weTa TOY pirwv. The last line of the scolion is omitted by Socrates, because, for his argu- ment, only those advantages can be cited which involve the practice of some art. 451 48 10 15 & Of PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 451. @ Q a 5 9 € , \ »¥ s 2 Q@ KaTaptL MOUVTQL Q OVTES, OTL vylatvew bev apltoTov €OTLy, To 5€ Sevrepov Kahdv yevéobat, Tpitov Sé, as dynow 6 NX nw nn XN nn > , TOUNTHS TOV TKOALOV, TO TAOUTELY Gdddus. Tor. "AkyKoa yap: ada mpos ti TovTo héyets ; y af - a € \ 4 Xa. “Ore coe attix’ av mapactatey ot Syprouvpyot Tov- 452 @ eee € x x , > , \ TOV WV eT VET EV Oo TO oKoALOV TOLYoas, LaTpos TE Kal \ ¥ A travooTpiBys Kau XpN-aTLaTHS, Kat €UTTOL TT P@Tov pev 6 > x 9 ao , > a / > , > LaTpos OTL @ LdKpares, eEarata OE Topytas: ou yap €OTW € 4 sf * * £ > *% a > , q ToUTOU TEXYN TEPL TO péeytaToY ayaboy Tots dvOparo.s, ahh’ 7H eu.” > > 2X 2 N39 , “oS Se ry # €l OVY QAUTOV eyw EPOLULNV * OV O€ TLS WV a , ” »¥ ed oo 6.9 Gre ® s TAVTA héyens ; ELTTOL AY LOWS OTL ltaTpos. Tl OVV d€yecs ; Pv UA a s ¥ , sg > so” TOTNS ONS TEXVYS epyov HEYLoTov E€oTL ayabdr ; “TOS N ¥ >) , x ¥ oD , e 7 , 8 > Ss yap ov,” dain av tows, “@ Yé«pares, vyiea; TL oO éotiv 4. xarapOpovvrat: the advantages are arranged according to their value in the enumeration. Instead of an object the clause with 67 follows, introducing the dir. discourse. 8. Syptovpyol: the word is found as early as Homer and denotes all who carry on a business which is public and useful to the people; as, physi- cians, soothsayers, singers, goldsmiths. Later, the expression was extended to free manual laborers, without, how- ever, losing any of its respectability. Hence it corresponds to our use of the word ‘master’ (master-workman, master-mason). Cf. 455 b. It is noteworthy that only such things are enumerated as, like the assumed re- sult of rhetoric, were reckoned among external advantages; for rhetoric, according to the view of Gorgias, should procure in the state either high office or honors. Ilfence the scolion is very applicable. Socrates brings forward the physician, the body- trainer, and the banker, in order to contrast with the subjective judgment of Gorgias the subjective opinions of others, and thus, to show the subjec- tivity of the answer. 10. watSorpiBys : the lody-trainer for boys taught in the gymnastic schools (madatorpa). He is often con- founded with the yupvacrhs, whose proper oflice was the scientific treat- ment of the whole subject of bodily exercises, and whose field was the public yupvdow, where he instructed grown men in general and also those who were training for the games (a0Anrat). Both the ra:dorpiBys and the yuuvacrhs are often mentioned alongside of the physician, since the nurture and care of the body was their common aim. Cf. Crito 47 b. —edwo. wparov: the &y before wapa- oraiev is felt as extending over the whole sentence. 16. vyiea: if the word is sound, it must be taken as an absolute addi- tion to the proper question which Bdéupares. The diffuse- ends with & b TAATQNOS TOPLAS. 49 8t. I. p. 452. a > 66 > 0 a, e i. ” > 8 > ‘ aA c petlov ayabov avOparrois vyseias ;” ct 8° ad pera TodTov 6 8 , ¥” oy “ 0 , »¥ 5 > , ‘ mavdoTpiBns etmou ore “Oavpdloun Tav, @ LHKpares, Kat > 7f ¥ ¥ , a > x 2 an & aitdés, eb cou exou Topyias petlov dyalov émdeiEar THs e a x A a > a 20 avrov TExVns 7) ya THS Euns:” Eloy’ av avd Kal mpds TOU- MS Ss 5) > Dp 60 Sores \ ¥ ” tov: “ov 0€ 87 Tis €l, @ avOpwre, Kat Ti TO TOV Epyor ; , “qadorpiBns,” pain av, “7s 8 epyov ov éotiw Kadovs TE No & ~ Kat ixxupovs tote Tovs avOparous Ta oHpata.” pera dé . ¥ x > Tov TaLdoTpiBny Etro. av 6 ypnuaTiaTys, as ey@pat, Tavy 25 KaTappovarv andvrav: “oKdre: SnTa, @ LHKpares, €av Tor c , a a 2 \ a ‘ , + > mrovTou gary Tu petlov dyabdr dv 7) Tapa Topyia } wap ¥ e a a x 5 > aw Stwodv.” daipev av odv mpds adrov: “ti dé dy; 7 . , 5 ro” yo» wit. OY ov TovTou Sypuoupyds;” hain av. “tis dv;” “ypynpatio- 7-9 Le ® , x. , > , > \ THs.” “ti otv; Kpivers od péyiotov avOparros ayalov oe a ” , “wa A ¥ ”y 2 OA “ \ 30 eivat tAOUTOV;” dyooper. “mas yap ovK;” epel. “Kat XN > a - y x 3 ¢ a“ 4 pny apdioByret ye Topyias 68 tHyv wap avt@ téxyvnv , > n >? 5 a \ so a a € a peilovos ayabod airiav civar 7 THY oNV,” haipev dy jets. Snrov ovv ore TO peTa TOvTO EepoT av: “Kal Ti éoTW a ep! x 2 / > , , ” ¥ > , TovTo 70 ayabdv; amoxpwacbw Topyias.” tO obv vopt- 35 oas, ® Topyia, épwracbar Kal um éxeivwy Kal vm euov, 452 ness of the whole passage favors the recognition more urgent than the sim- 452 » view that the construction must not ple 64. Kr. 69, 20; H. 1037, 6.— © be rigidly pressed here. é€av: whether, introducing the indir. 18. rdv: for ro. dv, as we frequently question. But Goodwin (GMT. 493, find pevray for pévra ay. Cf. Apol. 680) denies that édy can ever mean 29 a Bewdy thy efn. ‘whether,’ insisting that every ex- 18f. kat airos: like et ipse, pression like the present is condi- “likewise,” while recognizing the tional. The side-thrust at Gorgias is claims of the physician, shows also a very appropriate, as he himself re- consciousness of his own importance ceived much money from his teach- as compared with Gorgias. Thiscalls ing and lived magnificently upon forth in the reply the address @ &- it. Opwre, which indicates some degree 31. dudioByret: affirms (in contra- of contempt and surprise. diction of his opponent), “disputes © 25. The very mode of speaking this and says.” declares the pride of wealth. — 8yra: 33. to pera Touro: adverbial acc. d with the imv. makes the claim for H.600a; 719 b. 50 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 452. 2 , ,o3 a a \ ‘ Z > Q > : ATOKPLWOaL TL EOTLY TOUTO O oys OU PEYLOTOV ayabov E€lLVQl tots avOpadrois Kai o€ Snpoupyov €ivar avdrov. y > am Tor. “Ovep €otiv, ® Laéxkpates, TH adyOeia péyrotov > XN ‘\ ¥ Y 5: > s >’ a a > , ayabov KQL QLTLOV ALG PY edevlepias QuTOLs TOLS avépoa- 9 XN a »* ” > n € wn 4 < , 40 Trous, aa dé TOU GAAwy apyxew ev TH avToU TOE ExdoTY. 45 doTis av modutuKds EVAOYos yiyvyTat. 452 d Xa. Ti ody 8%) rovTo héyess ; ‘\ 7 x > er > > wn , \ = Top. Td wetOew eywy olov T €tvaL TOLS Aoyos KQL €V duxaornpio Sicacras Kal ev Bovdeuvtnpiw Bovdeutas Kat év éxkdyaia éexxynowworas Kal év addw Evdddyw tarTi, KaiToL €v TAUTY TH Svvdper SovdrAov pev e€ers Tov iatpdv, SovAov dé Tov 37. adrov: shift from the rel. to the leading clause. G. 156; H. 1005. 39 f. avroits rots dvOputros: the pronoun emphasizes personal freedom as opposed to power over others. In thus stating the aim and purpose of all the sophists’ efforts, Gorgias (acc. to Plato) fails completely to notice the mutual contradiction of the two members. 40. rot GAd\wv dpxav: Heindorf desires trav &%AAwy, which would bet- ter accord with the ordinary usage. Still the indefiniteness of the expres- sion may not be without object in showing the inexactness of thought which naturally prevailed at a time when the art of speaking was just being brought within the reach of all. 42. Construe Zywye (Aéyw) 7d ofdy re elvat welOew xré.—olov te: eX- presses ‘position,’ ofos ‘disposition.’ Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. vii. 165. 44. wal év dAdw EvAAdyw (sc. Trav moAir@v) : is paraphrased with a limi- tation in the following clause. In this division of the various kinds of bodies in which the orator would have occasion to display his powers we see the basis of the three chief varieties of oratory (yévn, genera) which are generally recognized by later critics. The first, 7d dnunyopicdy (cupBovrevticdy, Aeliberativum), was employed év re rots BovAevrnpios «al rats éxxkAnotas. The second, 7d dicavixdy (iudiciale), was employed éy tots Sixagtnpias. The germ of the third, 7d érdeccrixdv, which was not distinguished by Anaximenes, can be discerned in the words kal év &AAw tudrdyw «té. This last was first de- fined by Aristotle, who used as the basis of his division the oratorical characteristics of the several varie- ties, not the place of their delivery, as Gorgias does here. 45. év Suvdpe xré.: “the posses- sion of this power will involve the servitude of the physician,” etc. 46. S0tdov. This expression seems to be Gorgias’ own, as is to be gath- ered from the passage in Philebus 58 a, cited by Heindorf. Protarchus says there: fkovoy pev %ywye, & Sd- kpates, Exdotore Topylov woAAdnis, &s A Tov melOew (dvvauts) word diapépor Tacav TeXvav* mdvTa yap bp adiTit 452 TIAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 51 St. L. p. 452. mavooTpiBnv: 6 dé ypnmatiaTis ovToS dhAw avadaryce- Tat xpyuarilduevos Kal ovy avT@, adda ool TO Suvaperw héeyew Kal reiMew Ta TyxOn. VIIT. Sa. Nov poe doxets Snraca, @ Topyia, éyyv- ‘ \ ” a 4 TATA THY pYHTopiKHY HvTwa TEXVHVY yee Eivat, Kal El TL453 > ‘ = * oy a / > € c eyo cuvinut, éyers Ore TEMoUS Snucoupyds éoTW 7 PNTO- ‘\ an gy piky, Kal» Tpaypateia avTyns amtaca Kal Td Kepadatov eis an wn a < yy , % € % TouTO TeAeuTa* 7 EXELS TL Néyew Ent Téov THY pHTopLKHY SivacIar 7 TELOa Tots dKovovow &v TH WuyT Torey ; Tor. Ovdapes, &@ Sdkpares, GdAd pou SoKets ixavds € - ¥ bs a XN , >» in opiler Oar: Ext yap ToUTO TO Kebaddatov avTys. Xo. "Akovaov 6%, @ Topyia. SovAa SC ExdvtTwy GAN od 8d Blas mol- otro, Kal pakpe apiotn wacav etn TaY texvav.— The Gorgianic balancing SovAoy pev . . . SovAov dé gives a cer- tain dignity to the words. 47. otros: is scornful, as in Crito 45 a.— The thought is expressed first positively, then negatively, then again (by a kind of apostrophe — since coi cannot be considered as addressed to Socrates) positively. Gorgias can- not refrain from again declaring more distinctly what he has already indi- cated by GAAw. Cf. 464 © i Kodakev- Tih alicboudvyn, ob yvodoa Aéyw GAAL oroxacauévn, where, however, the same device is of value in giving more clearness to the statement. 49. ra wdxOy: sc. in the different assemblies. VIIL. 1. éyytrara: more definitely. The answer given comes nearer to being an answer indeed. 453 3. aebovs Snprovpyds m pPyTopiKT: a this definition which Socrates has gathered from Gorgias’ verbiage, was not invented by Plato, but was ap- parently well known in Athens at the > XN XN > 7 9 & eyo yap €u ea) OTL, WS time. — weBots: to be understood in a passive sense, as med moety below shows. 4 f. els rotro teXsvtG: instead of the regular eis, occasionally év and mods are used with but little differ- ence of meaning. 5. rl: is not the object of Aéyew, but is probably to be construed with éxew somewhat as follows, have you any reason to say. ‘The object of Aé- yew is contained in the following ém mwAéov... dvvacda (“its power extends further than”), with which indeed Hirschig construes cl. 9. ev to’ Ste: is occasionally found construed with the inf. like an ordi- nary verb of perception, even in cases where there is no intervening clause as here to attract a following inf. Cf. Xen. Hell. ii. 2. 2 Atcavdpos robs ppoupods Bish . . . eldhs Ste Gow dv wAelous cvAAE- yaouw eis 7d Boru, Gattoy Tév émitn- deiwy %vderav %cecOa. Owing to the shift in the construction, éyé is left absolute at the beginning of the sen- tence. améweurev eis Tas "AOhvas 52 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. IL. p. 453. 10 €wavrov TreiOw, elrep tis aAos GAXw Siaréyerar Bovdcpe- b io , * XX a XN ov c , > x \ 3 x. vos €idévar avTd TodTO TEpt Grov 6 Adyos eoTiv, Kal Ewe > 4 Y > “ 4 \ ¥ elvat ToUTwY eva a&ia dé Kal oe. * 4 > > , Tor. Ti ody 8%, & Sdbxpares ; > > 2 0A a 2A XN 27 VX A a 6 , a. Eyo Epw vuv, €yw@ TNV A710 TNS PHTOPLKNS TTELUW, y > a a 15 QTLS WOT éotiv Hv ov d€yers Kab Tept WVTLYWV TpayLaTov 20 453 Cc an ed > éoTly Tedd, capas prev ev tof Gre ovK otda, Od pV GAN’ UVToTTEvH ye Tv olwat oe héyew Kal TEpt y+ ovdev pevToL HTTov épnoopai oe, tiva Tore héyers THY TEOw THY amd THS PYTOpLKNS Kat Tept Tivwy avTHY Elva. Tov evexa Sy = %, e 4 x. 3 - 2 > iz > % 4 > QUTOS VITOTTEVWY TE EPHTop-at, ALA’ OVK avTOS éyw; OV nan ¢ 3 \ a , Y ” A € , 24 gov evexa, GAG TOV oyou, Wa OUTW TpoOin, WS wadtaT av Hew Katapaves To.ot Tept Grou éyeTar. OKOTE yap EL cot Sox diKaiws dvepwrav oe. woTep av el eTUyyavov an A a » > o€ épwrav Tis éote THY Cwypdadwy Levéss, et roe eles ore 10. efwep xré.: the leading idea of the pred. lies in the participle. 13. ri ovv Sy: inquires what is to follow from the admission of the statement. 14. ryv weOds: proleptic. 15. arts wor éorw: but hv olua: is used below, according to the rule that écris is required after a negative, while it may occur — though és is regular — with a positive. Cf. 4474, and see Morris on Thue. i. 136. 4. — av od A€yeas: indispensable addition to Aris. On rept Svtiwwy, see on 451 d. 19. rot évexa Sy: an example of the ‘rhetorical question’ which De- mosthenes uses to great advantage. Rid. § 325 cites also from Gorgias 457 e, 458 a, 487 b. 20 f. ov cod évexa: in this answer we have mercly an indefinite contrast between person and thing; which is much more clearly defined below in 457 d kata POdvov otovrar rdy éaut@yv Aéyev and e@ ov mpds Td Tpayua pirovekovvTa Adyew. . GAAG pus oé. Socrates guards him- self against any suspicion that he may be influenced by personal feelings in his criticism of Gorgias. Cf. 454 ¢. 21. ds: not to be joined with ud- Awora as a superlative phrase, but correlative with ofrw. 23. domep av el: introduces fre- quently, as an illustration of a gen- eral principle, a supposed case sim- ilar to it. Itis easy to add a second hypothetical clause, not coordinated with the first, but which, combined with the apod., has the first as a com- mon protasis. Cf. below, 468 d, and Apol. 27 d. 24. Zeuxis, the celebrated painter and contemporary of Socrates, was a native of Heraclea in Lower Italy. Tle was the pupil of Apollodorus, 453 256 Ta loa ypddav, ap’ ovk dv dixaiws oe Hpopyy 30 TIAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. € _N oTa A a , , \ a Tova Tav Chav ypadwr Kat Tod ; Top. Idvv ye. 53 St. I. p. 453. Za. "Apa Sud Toro, dre Kal ardor eioi Cwypddor ypa- a govtes adda ToddG Coa; Top. Nat. 453 who, by a more delicate appreciation © and application of the principles of light and shade in painting, greatly furthered the development of the art, and obtained for himself the sur- name of ‘Sciagraph.’ ‘The paintings of Zeuxis, who belonged to the Ionic school, were noted for their delicacy and fine coloring. Besides the Hel- ena which he painted for the Crotoni- ates (Cic. de Inv. ii. 1. 1), his most celebrated picture was the Penelope, wherein he depicted with great suc- cess pure matronly modesty. The story of his contest with his rival Parrhasius is well known. 25. {@a: a general expression for every kind of pictures. 26. «kal mov: Socrates wishes here to make clear that if we wish to de- fine an object exactly, 7c. so as to make it easily recognizable, it is not sufficient to give the characteristic which it has in common with other objects, but rather it is necessary to mention that characteristic which be- longs to it alone and distinguishes it from all other objects. So, for ex- ample, it is not sufficient to say that Zeuxis is a painter, 7.c. one who either paints or has painted pictures; but in order to distinguish him from other painters, who also paint or have painted pictures, we must state more nearly the kind of pictures which he has painted (wotx), as ‘he who painted the Helena or the Penelope. But even this is not entirely sufficient, for there are still other painters who haye painted these same objects; but when we say, ‘he who painted the Helena in Croton (mod),’ we have definitely defined Zeuxis. mov could also, and more naturally, refer to the scene of his labors, — where he had his studio. We must note (1) that 6 ra (ga ypd- gor is only the common designation of all painters, by which they are distinguished from the Adyous or vé6- fous OF auyypdupata ypdaporres, (2) that 6 ypdpwy can and must be under- stood in the same way in which we so often understand 6 abdicayv, 6 kpatav, etc., 7c. as a generic word, not limited in time (H. 827), (8) that motos is often scarcely to be distinguished from ris (cf. Xen. Anab. iii. 1. 14 eye ovv roy é« woias wédews oTpaTnydy mpocdona Tavita mpatew; molay 8 HA kiav éuavte éAGetvy dvauévw;). With these points understood, we see that the present example suffices to show that to define rhetoric as weiovs dn- puoupyds, te. ] Thy weOe arepyaCouern téxvn is insufficient, so long as the weds wrought by it is not more ex- actly specified in order to distinguish it from that wrought by other arts which come under the same general definition. Cf moreover the answer of Gorgias, below, 454 b, which cor- responds to the example before us exactly, even as far as the od is concerned. 453 c 54 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 453. Xa. Ei b€ ye pndeis dddos 7 Led€is eypade, kahas av go. ameKeKpito ; Top. Ilas yap ov ; So. "16. 8% Kat wept rHs pytopiKys eiwé- mérepdv cor 35 OoKel TEI Tovey 4 PNTOpLKH povn 7 Kal addae rEéyvae ; 40 45 50 453 d Aéyw 5€é 7d Toudvde* doris SiddoKer StTLOvY TpPaypLa, TOTE- pov 6 SiddoKe Treifer, 7 ov; Tor. Ov djra, @ YéKpares, adda wavtwy pahvora qreiOer. , % > * * > an , ae So. Tidhw 67 €7TL TMV AVTWY TEXVWV é€yopev @VTTEP vpuvoyn: 7» apiOuntixn ov didacKer Huas, Ooa ETT TA TOD 4° Hy apiOpnriKr b L Nas, doa eotiv Ta TOU > a N e€ 93 xX ¥ ap.O.ov, KQaLO aprOuntiKos avdpwros ; Tor. Ildvu ye. > nn 7 £ 5 Sa. Odxodv kai etbea ; Top. Nat. Za. TleBots dpa Syprovpyds eotw Kai 9 apiOuntiny. Tor. Paiverae. > rn 37 2 im e im , an ‘\ Xo. Ovkovv €av TLS EpwTa Has, TOLaAS areOovs Kal ‘\ , > , , > oe a an Tepe Tl, amoxpwovpeba TOV QUTW@ OTL TYS SidacKahiKns A ¥ x . * ¢ fa THS Tepl TO apTLov TE Kal TO TEpLTTOY GaoY EoTI. Kal Tas 454 31. Fypahe: were a painter. 38. od Sxra (sc. ob mele) dAAG «ré.: chiastic with the question pre- ceding. The affirmative of the first member of the question is made much more emphatic by the previous ex- press denial of the second member, which must therefore itself be em- phatically uttered. Usually the an- swer does not follow so closely the words of the question; cf. below, 501 c, and Parm. 128 a ofrw A€éyers # yh obk dp0Gs xatapavOdva; Ovk, GAAX Kad@s cuviKas SAov Td ypduur 0 Bovrc- Different, however, are 454 a,b, Cf. Rid. § 305. Ta. and 496 d, below. 40. dvaep: on the omission of the. 453 prep. see Kr. 51, 11,1; H. 1007. of © below, 517 ¢ év ravtl T@ xpdve dv die- Aeyéucba, Apol. 27d. So in Lat., eg. Nep. Cim. 3. 41 f. rd tov dpiWpov: the properties of number. Cf. ra tis pixns, Ta TOD Biov. See on 450 c. 50. +o wepirtov: in such combina- tions the article is usually omitted with the second member, and only in- serted when the two members are to be looked upon as more distinct. Cf above, 451 b with c, and 454 e, 455 a; see Kr. 58, 2, 1. — deaov:. sing. because each antecedent is of equal value. MAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 55 St. I. p. 454. ¥ c a GAdas &s vuvdy édéyouev réxvas atacas opev arrodetEa mevBovds Snusoupyovs ovoas Kal Ratios Kal wept TL- 4 od; Top. Nai. > * c \ , a > sf Za. OdK apa pytopixn pdvyn tweOovs eotw Snuroupyds. Top. "An On Aéyers. TX. Yo. "Eveidy rou ob povn dmepyalerar tovto To » > \ XN »¥ , : Y x a 4 epyov, adda Kal GdrXaL, Suxaiws woTEp TEpt Tod Cwypadov HETa TOUTO erravepoiel av Tov héyovta, “molas 51 7eL- 55 ~ XN “A XN - ee e © x > f ” Pots Kat THs wept ti weBovs H pyTopiKyA éotw Téxv7 ; 5} ov SoKel cou SikaLov eivar emavepéc bar; Top. “Epouye. Xa. "Amdxpwat 64, & Topyia, émedy ye kat cot Soxet oUTw. Tor. Tavrys totvuy trys teBovs éyw, @ Véxpares, THs 3 n , Vo ee 2 ¥ 9 \ 10 €v Tots SuKaaTypiors Kal €v Tots ahdous OxhoLs, WOTEP Kal m” ¥ my. ‘ i. 9 3 7 , % »” apte €deyov, Kat TEept TovTwY a é€oTe Sikaid TE Kal adiKa. » 3 a ¢ ¢ 4 XN % Xa. Kat éyd rou vra@mrevov tavtyy oe héyew THY TELOw ~ XN - > 4 = > ¢ XN , aN Kal mept TovTwy, ® Topyia: add’ iva wn Oavpdlys, éav The definition answers the qofoy as far as the external matters of persons (speakers) and place are concerned, and is used by Socrates (¢) in order 453 Neither 8cov éoriy, nor dca eariv, above, © conflict with the passage 451 b, e. 454 3 f. molas meovs kal trys tepl tl: ® of. above, molas wei@ods kal rep) rh. 4. réxvy: no one need be dis- turbed by the substitution of réyv7 for dyusovpyés, as the two words have kindred ideas. There is also no appre- ciable difference between roias here and forwos a few lines above. Cf. 4538 e, and see on 453 c. 6. éporye: the form of the ques- tion shows that an affirmative answer is expected. 9. ravrns: draws attention to the earlier explanation in 452 e, from which is drawn (rofvuy) the following definition, which in form follows as an epexegesis to tatrns Tis meiGois. to obtain a definition that character- izes the nature of the red. Gorgias does not use éxAos with the dispar- aging feeling which it sometimes has, but as a general word for assemblies. 11. wep\ tovtwy «ré.. answers the question wep) ri 4, above. On the change of case, cf. 449 d. 13. GAN tva xré.: this sentence is a good example of those curious ana- colutha which occur so often in the conversation of ordinary life, where a slight emphasis on a single word may perhaps change the whole construc- tion, and cause the speaker to lose 56 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 454. 2\ 7 ? as co > a aA N otyov voTEpoy TovwvTov Ti oe dvépwpat, 6 SoKed pev c 15 djov eivar, eyo 8 eravepwra: Omep yap héyw, Tov é&Hs Y ee %. , > “a > os. yy 3 > eveka, tepaiver Oat Tov Adyov epwT@, ov cov Evera, aA - Ln > , c > 4 > / * iva py €Olduea vrovootvres mpoapralev addrjov Ta heydpeva, GAG od TA GavTOdD KaTa THY UTdMETW OTWS av BovAn Tepaivys. 20 Top. Kat dp0as yé jot Soxets movetv, &@ SHKpares. Xo. "10. by Kai Tdde emoxepouela. Karets Te pewa- Onkévan. Tor. Kaho. Zo. Ti dé; mwemorevedvar; 25 Tor. "Eywye. / Ss 7 As 7 > , Xo. [Idrepov oty radrév Soxet cou eivar pepabynkévar a * Fi “ 4 A er xn ” KQl TETLOTEVKEAL, Kat waOynows Kal Tiotis, 7) AAXO TL; Top. Otopat perv eywye, & Ywxpares, addo. nw XN ” * * 3 sf 7 a, i Za. Kadds yap ole, yudoer 6€ evdévde. ei ydp tis oe 454 himself in a network of clauses, of for his repeated questioning, and at 454 which, while the idea is clear enough, the same time to reiterate one of the b the grammatical construction is hope- fundamental principles of dialectic. less. The idea here is this: “I 15. dep yap Adyw: refers to 453 b. thought you meant that, but still I 17. vmovoeiv: “to form a pre-opin- ¢ asked; and you must not be sur- ion of what another is likely to think prised if I again ask something on a subject without his having ex- which seems to be evident enough; pressed himself,” to impute to him for it is absolutely essential for our certain views, and thereby to fore- argument that we proceed upon defi- _ stall his explaining himself. nitely expressed statements, and not 18. vrobeow: is a plan or princi- upon mere suspicions, which may ple which Gorgias has laid down for prove to be misunderstandings.” In himself, and which conditions the the construction the speaker proceeds direction in which («ard) the thesis well enough until he is thrown off the is to be developed until the end is track by éyd 8 émavepwrd. The use reached (epalyys). of this seemingly independent clause 21. Ur Bq a7ré.: see on radrns, in b, (it is really, together with Boxe? pév, above. in dependence on 8) causes him to 29. Kadds ydp ole: sce on 451 a. d branch off, in the clause grep yap Note the difference in tone of Gor- Aéyw, in order to explain the reason — gias’ answer, as compared with 450 c. 35 40 45 aoikwv ; 454 TIAATONOS LVOPIIAs. 57 St. 1. p. 454 ¥ o>» > 30 Epoito “ap €otw ts, & Topyia, mioris pevdys Kal ady- Ons; gains dv, as éyw olpar. Top. Nai. Ya. TOS; emorypn eoriv pevdis kai adyOrs; Top. Ovdapas. Xo. Ajdov yap ad or. ov Tabrdv éeorTw. Tor. “AdnOn déeyess. 2 oe X y = - 4 > x Xo. “ANAG pny ot TE ye wewaOykdres TweTELTpHEVaL cial QA KQL OL TETLOTEUKOTES. y 4 Top. “Eovt tavta. Xa. Bovdre otv dvo cidy Odpev wEOods, 76 wev miotw 4 » wn io # a 3 > ¥ TApPEeKX OMEVOV QVEU TOV ELOEVAL, TO 5 ETLOTH NV ; Tor. Havu YE. , > € ¢ X\ ‘ ~ > Za. Ilorépav OUV 17) PYNTOPLKYH mevOa TWOvueL EV duxaorn- ptous TE e€ Hs TO elOevat; \ aA » »” XN nw ao x Kal Tots addots oyAous TEpL TOV Sukatwy Te Kat 2 a m3 , co m” n 2 7 a e€ HS TO TLOTEVEW ylyvEeTaL avev TOD elogvat, q Top. Andov Siov, @ Léxpares, Ore €€ Hs TO TurTEveu. 31. dalys av: has the force of an affirmative. You would say ‘ yes’; so ov nut often means I say ‘no,’ I deny. See Kr. 64, 5, 4. 33. émorypy: from éxicracda to understand, i.e. properly, correct un- derstanding, knowledge. This takes the place of yud@nois, which strictly denotes the process of learning, whose result is émiothun, because this idea better suits the above opposition be- tween peuadnnéva: and memiorevnévat. 35. SyAov ydp av: confirms the dis- tinctness of the two ideas which Soc- rates had already affirmed much more positively than Gorgias. 37. wemeopévor: so far as the in- ward conviction is concerned, ud@nots and rlotis agree; objectively, how- ever, they are very different, for ud6n- ots involves the acquisition of knowl- edge, while ignorance is the necessary concomitant of riorts. 40. BovAe ovv «ré.: Socrates now proceeds to analyze (d:alpeois, divi- sio) the general definition in order to obtain that special definition (épic- ués, definitio) which, according to the requirements of logic, must in- clude, together with the statement of genus (7d yévos, genus proxi- mum) also the addition of the char- acteristic (diapopa cidorads, differ- entia specifica) which separates it from other species of the same genus. 454 ¢ PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. L. p. 455. Xa. “H pytopiky apa, ws eouxer, weovs Sypwoupyds 455 EOTW TLATEVTLKNS GAN ov SidacKahiKs TeEpt Td Sikacov TE Kat @Oukov. Tor. Nat. Xa. Ob8 dpa dibacrkadikds 6 pitwp eotiv Suxacrypiov 50 Te kal TOV GdAwy bydwr Sikaiwy Te Tépt Kal adikwy, adda ‘\ ¥ > x # ” > * 4 TEOTUKOS LOVOV. ov yap Onmov dyAov y’ av S¥vatto To- 55 wouTov év OAiyw ypovw dLdaEar ov a t Yo xpove ddaEar ovrw peyaha mpdyparta. Tor. Ov dra. X. Yo. Pepe 57, Swpev ti more kat léyower wept THs pytopikns: eyw péev yap To. ovd avdrdés tw S¥vayar KaTa- b 455 48. a pytopiKy «ré.: the first defi- as the speeches were limited to a 458 nition which had its origin in the technic of the rhetorical schools (see on 453 a) has now acquired a more exact and complete expression by the help of this dialectical investiga- tion. Note the change from wep) tév Sialwy to wept 7d Sixasov. Cf. 454 b, e. 54. weorikos: able to persuade. Equiv. to ixavds reidew, as biSacKkade- xés to SiSacKxadiay wapéxwy or ixavds biidoxev. Neither this nor motevti- «és used above can properly be con- strued with the genitive. With d.da- oxadikds, however, we find examples, as Euthyph. 3 © ’A@nvatois ob apddpa pera, av twa dSewdy olwvtar elvar wh pévtoar Sidackadmwdy THs abToU codias. See Kr. 47, 26,9; H. 754, b. In the addition of uédvoy lies a gentle intima- tion of some defect, the result of which for the estimation of rhetoric appears more plainly later. 55. év dAlyw xpovw: draws attention to a great defect of the Athenian judicial system. It was often impos- sible to present before the court a clear exposition of the points at issue, certain length, which was carefully measured by the kAépudpa, —a prac- tice which Socrates also complains of in Apol. 19 a éwiyeipntéov tuay étere- cOa thy SiaBordhy hy suets ev worAAG xpéym ~xxere, TavTyy ev otTws OAlyw xpdvm, and 37 a suas TovTo ov Teibw: OAlyov yap xpdvoy Sierheypueba. X. 1. bépe 84 «ré.: introduces a new discussion designed to test the definition just obtained, which, al- though from the point of view of form it satisfies excellently the double requirement made above in 454 a, still leaves some uncertainty as to the exuct meaning of Gorgias. Hence the question, ‘What do we really mean thereby?’ Socrates pro- fesses to be not yet quite certain himself (008? adrdés), notwithstanding that he has contributed the most to the more close definition of the wozov. His doubts are directed especially to the wep) ri as it has been just defined according to the specifications made by Gorgias. This discussion forms the transition to the examination of the true value and ethical tendency 455 of rhetoric. MAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. a y , vonoat oTe heya. 59 Bt. I. p. 455. ¢ \ > a © + a A s OoTav TEpt LaTPwV ALpET EWS T) TOAEL av\oyos 7) wept vavTnyav 7 TEpt GAdov Tivds Syrovp- 5 yKov EOvous, d\No TL 7} TéTE 6 PyTOpLKds Ov TUUBovred- on Mr: 9 > € , ¢ , % # O€l; AOV yap o7Tl ev EKaOTYH QALPEOEL TOV TEXVLKWTATOV Set aipetoOa. 20> a XN > , a ovo OTQaV TELN@V TEpl olkodopyoews 1 é “A a ¢ > > et / 2»Q> Aevav KatarKkeuns 7) vewpiav, add’ ot dpyiTéxToves + od s & a es , a , , ‘ Qu OTav OTPaTyyov A’LPETEWS Tept n Takes TWoOSs Tpos 10 Todenious 7) xXwpiwy Katahybews supBovdi 7, GAN’ ot A # , = © N i ¥ OTpaT tKOL TOTE COV, ovAevoovow ou TOPLKOL re ou" ” ip ; * ie he > , N a > 87 \ 2 7 n TWS eyels, @ Topyia, TA TOLAVTA; ETTEL ” yap QuTOS TE XN SF 7? \ » “A c , = »¥ ‘ dys pytwp eivar Kat addovs ToLety pyTopiKovs, ED exe TA THS ONS TEXVNS Tapa Gov TUVOdver Oat. N39 A a s KQL EME VUV VO- % A x , ¥ \ \ , 15 floov Kat TO GOV omevoew * tows Y2p Kat TUYXQVEL TL a y¥ 4 , a / ¢ Tov evdov ovtav pabytns cov Bovrdsmevos yevérOat, as > 4 XN \ ‘ * , ay > 4 eye twas oxXed0v Kai cvyvors aicAdvomat, ot Laws aiayv- On the use of xaf in 4 questions, cf. Xen. Hell. iii. 3.11 réros abroy (roy Kivddwva) fpovto (0 popor) ti kal Buvadsuevos taita mpdtro, what purpose he actually had in so doing. 3. dtav amepl xré.: on the whole passage, cf. Prot. 319 b. — tatpav aipéoews: during the rise of philos- ophy in Greece, a science of medi- cine also gradually developed, which became hereditary among the priests of Aesculapius. Among these va- rious schools arose; as in Cos, Cnidus, Rhodes, and in several cities of Magna Graecia. After a while it became customary for a state to take a noted physician into the public ser- vice; as Democedes, who was hired one year by the Aeginetans, the sec- ond by the Athenians, and the third by Polycrates of Samos (Hat. iii. 131). 5. vous (from the same root as 260s, €%wa): denotes a class of people drawn into association either for the purposes of habitation or from force of custom (calling, trade). For dSnusovpyol see on 452 a. In such formulae as &%AAo vt % and ovdéy AAO H the copula is frequently omitted. See H. 1015 b. 7. o¥8’ drav: is in close connexion with &Ao te } rére 6 fpnropicds ob oupBovaetoet. 12. W mwas Ayes xrTé.: intimates that possibly Gorgias will not accept this limitation of rhetoric. 7 13. eb €xeu: itis proper, it is in order. Cf. Phaedo 107 a ei 8 Tt Semplas.. . exer Adyeiv, eb Eyer ph Karacryjoa. — 7a (not 7d) THs TéXvNs: because the question 1s no longer as to the nature of the art, but as to its claims and effects, one by one. 15. rd cov omevSev: consult your interest. 17. twas cXeSov Kal cvxvovs: Cron would take this in its entirety as almost 60 PLATO'S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 455, > » > ¥ ¢ 3 wn > > Zz , E VOLYT AV JE avepéc Oar ° Um €(LOU OUV AVEPWTWILEVOS VvOMt- d N £ 3 5. 4 > ae “ ee wn > ¥ Gov KQL UT EKELYWY avepwrac bar - Tl HW, w Topyia, ¥ 4 A * “A / 20 €oTat, €av vot OVUWLEV ; EPL Tivev ™ TOXEL oupBov- , eed > / f ‘N s , ‘ Aevew OLOL TE eodopcba ; TOTEPOv Tepe duxatov POVOV Kat 297 aA S \ @ \ ¥ x ” oN adixov Kal wept ay vuvdr Yoxparys €deyev;” TEipa@ > > A , OVV QUTOLS atroKpiver Bas. Top. ’AAN eyed cou TEpdcopar, @ YoKpares, cadas Poeoope ) > , N oO ¢ ee , oe 2X 25 atokahvwar THY THS pPYTOPLKNS dvvapiv amacav: avros 30 455 da yap Kaas wdnyjow. > \ , 9 \ , olaba yap Symov ote Ta vEedpia a Vs , > , Le oa s TAVTA KAL TA TELKY TA AOnvaiwr Kal 1) TWV Aywevov KaTQ- oKevt) €k THS Ocurrrokhéovs cupBovhys yéeyover, Ta 8 ex THs Tepixdéous, adX’ ob éx TeV Snuroupyav. Sa. Aéyerat tadra, ® Topyia, rept Beporordéous - \ ‘ ¥ a Ilepuxdéovs S€ Kai avros yKovov ore ouveBovdevev nut ‘XN Cn ® -. - qept Tov did p.€rou TELXouSs. Tor. Kat orav yé TU apes 7 av oy) ov edeyes, @ 456 equivalent to “quite 4 number”; but it seems better to give each word its rights, some, I had almost said many. In Phaedo 58d wapijody tives al roAdol ye, we have almost the reverse of the pres- ent case; thatis, the higher estimate is asserted, while in the present passage itisdenied. The hope of obtaining pu- pils is the greatest spur to the Sophist to continue a discussion which cannot but be unpleasant to him. It serves also to draw out his true sentiments. 24. GAN eye xré.: Gorgias allows himself to be led on by the exam- ples which Socrates has brought for- ward, and which seem to him excel- lently adapted (hence xadds ipnyhow) to make clear the efficacy of his art. He therefore tries to prove for it as great as possible a scope, and thereby entirely loses sight of his former definition of the wept ri. 28. +a &€: without a preceding ra nev, to complete and correct the state- ment. See Kr. 50, 1, 12. 29. éx rev Syproupyav: “in accord- ance with the architects,” instead of the advice of the architects, Other striking examples of such compres- sion are Prot. 358 ¢ 08 %o7 rovro év dvOpérou pice, em & oferat Kaka elva €OéAew idvar avtl trav ayabav, Xen. Cyr. iii. 3. 41 xepav exere obdév Artov @vtimov tev npwrogtatey for ris TOV TPwWTOTTATOV. 30. A€yerat Tatra xré.; this ad- mission of Socrates seems to Gorgias to confirm his assumption, and to im- ply that Socrates was not in earnest in his opposition. At the death of Themistocles, Socrates was about four years old. See App. 33. dv... édeyes: sc. at 455 b. So- crates makes for the moment no ob- 455 e TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 61 St. I. p. 456. , ela y e er , > € , : Laxp ATES, opaes OTL OU PNTOpPES €lLoOlV Ol ovpBovdevovTes A € “ ‘ , a , 35 KQL OL VLKWYTES TAS YVOLAS TEPL TOUTWY. 456 a. Tatra kat Oavpdlov, & Topyia, mada épwrd, y \ ¢ , , > a e A NTS WOTE y Svvapis E€OTW TNS PYTOPLKYS. Saypovia yap ¥ a Tis Emorye KaTapaiverat TO weyeOos ovTw TKOTODITL. XI. Top. Ei wdvra ye eideins, &@ XaKpares, OTt ws eros > OA 7 a a elmely amrdoas Tas Suvdwes cv\d\aBodoa bp’ aiTH exer. péya Sé€ cou Texprpiov épO: TodAdKis yap yon eywye META TOD AdeEAGOD Kal pera TOY ardwY LaTpav cicehOar jection to Gorgias’ course, thus stim- ulating him to the detailed statements which follow. 35. viKavres tds yvapas: the verb vay is construed with various ac- cusatives which belong to the ‘cog- nate’ class, as ’OAuuridda, maryKxpdriov, Whgiopa, etc. G. 159 R.; H. 716 a. 36. adda épwra: for the pres. with maAat, see H. 826; G. 200, n. 4, and cf. the similar Lat. use of jam diu with the present (Gildersleeve, Gr. § 221). 37. Sapovia: has become by this time so weakened as to mean simply wonderful, extraordinary. Cf. the sim- ilar weakening of strong words in English; e.g. ‘awful.’ —-rls: by add- ing to the vagueness, enhances the vastness of the power, like the Lat. quidam. 1 idque contigit meritorum tuorum in rem publicam ex- imia quadam magnitudine, owing to the rather exceptional great- ness, etc. XI. 1. el wdvra ye elSelns: Socra- tes’ object is finally attained, and Gorgias, lulled completely by this ironical expression of admiration, bursts forth into an eloquent lauda- tion of his art, and a defence of it Cf. Cic. ad Fam. x. 12. against all censure. The omission of the apodosis gives to the sentence the effect of an exclamation. Such a usage is also.common in Eng- lish. 2. drdoas tas Suvdpes: may be a compression of amac@y Trav Texvav ras duvdues. Of course gvAdrafoica is only a figure of speech, though Gorgias claims his rhetoric to be the art of all arts. In his exposition he contents himself with a pair of ex- amples only. That this view is really due to Gorgias is shown by the pas- sage in Philebus, quoted on 452 e. 4. rov d\dXwv: with whom he was on like terms of intimacy. The fol- lowing passage gives the two leading departments of the physician’s pro- fession — pharmacy, ¢dpuakov meiv, and surgery, reueir }} katoo wapacxeiv —which in ancient times, as is also the case to a large degree at present, were frequently united by the same practitioner. The knife and the cau- tery, as the two leading instruments of the surgeon’s profession, are often mentioned together. Cf 480 ¢, 521e; Prot. 354 a; Aeschy. Ag. 848 8rw dé kal bet dapudkwy rawrler,|Hrot kéavtes } réuovtes eippdvws|retpacduecOa rh drootpepar vécou. b b 62 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 456. , a , > \ 997 x 2 o 5 Tapa TWA TWY KQLLVOVT@V ouxe eOédovra 7] pappakov TWLEW » no Rk a n n> a > s A YQ TELEW YY KAVT OL TAPAaTK EW Tw Lay po, OU Suvap.évov TOU > a aA 3 Se 5 ¥ # a nee na taTpou TELO AL, eyo €TELO A, OVUK ahhy TEXYN n ™ PYNTOPLKY). ‘ ‘\ gynpt dé Kat eis todw dry Bovree eAOdvTa PyTopiKdy av- Spa kal iarpdy, ei S€or Aéyw Staywvilerbar ev éexxryola 10 4 é€v dd Twi cvddyea, Srdrepor Set aipeOnvar iatpdr, Wy) a *K ay Ss. > / > > € oe a ‘ ovdanovd &v davnvar tov tarpdv, aN atpeOnvar av Tov ciety Suvatdy, ei Bovdourto. kat el mpos adAdov ye o7- pLoupyov dvtwaovv adywvilotro, meiceey av avrov éhéo bar © € X * x + € ~ > a ¥ O pytopiKos adhdov 7 addos doTLTOUY: ov yap E€aTW \ > R , ¥ € e \ a ¥ 15 TEpt OTOU OVK GV mudavarepov €L7TOL O PyTOpLKOS n adXos 456 c ¢€ nw “ acl > /, Oaticouy TaY Syptoupyav ev ANGEL. 6. waparxeiv: of. Apol. 33 b kal mAoucio kal wévati mapéxw euauTdy épw- rvav. As here 475d, Prot. 348 a. See Kr. 55, 3, 21. 8. day BovAa: more exactly we should expect 670, and some of the inferior Mss. have it here. But the ideas of ‘where’ and ‘whither’ are often confounded in Greek, while in Eng. ‘where’ has become the rule for ‘whither’ in ordinary conversa- tion. The remark here is very fitting in the mouth of Gorgias, in view of his extensive travels. Cf Introd. §§ 4, 5. 11. ovSapov dv davyvar: cf Xen. Mem. i. 2.52 dvareiBavra otv tovs véous ws abtds en copmraros, kal %AAous ika- vdéraros wojoat coors, obtw diaTiWéevar tTovs éaut@ cuvdvtas, doTe undapov map’ abrots BAAous elvat mpds éavtdv. Also Phaedo 72 ¢. Similarly in Latin. Cf. Cic. de Fin. v. 30. 90 tantam vim esse virtutis ut omnia, si ex altera parte ponantur, ne ap- pareant quidem and ii. 28. 90 Socrates voluptatem nullo ¢ XN > , NH EV OUV Svvapis loco numerat. Compare also the exactly similar Eng. colloquialisms, ‘to be nowhere,’ and ‘to be left quite out of sight.’ 11 f. tov elwety Svvarov: Aye is more usual; but the same difference which exists between eye and @dcte or ele exists also between their in- finitives. So here eire7y means to make or deliver a speech. Cf. Prot. 329 a tax’ by nal rowdtrous Adyous dkovoetey 4 TepixAdous 2 BAAOv Tivds Tay ixavay elmer. 16. év mA: though properly much more general in its meaning than éxxAnola or cvAAdyw used above, is probably employed only for the sake of variety. The distinct and definite statement with which Gorgias closes his characterization (4 pév ob «ré.) brings up to his mind the thought that perhaps some might object to the indiscriminate employ- ment of such an art. He is thus led to a defence of it which is so injudi- cious that it affords the adversary the very best weapons for attack. 456 c TIAATONOS TOPIIAs. 63 Bt. I. p. 456. , > \ \ s a , A , > Hs =O ToTaUTY EaTlY Kal TOLAUTH THS TéExYNS* Sel pévToL, @ Lo- ne n a y a Kpares, TH pyTopiKH XpHnoOae WoTep TH ahrAN Tao dyo- 4 x hy ae ¥ > # Y 4 via. Kal yap Ty GAN aywvia ov TovTou evexa Set pds a ¢ an > 9 20 amavras xpnobar avOparovs, dru euable muKreve TE Kal * * mayKpatialew Kat & Omhors pdyerOa, wore KpEiTTwY > ‘ , \ 2 a > , 7 ‘ , evar Kal pilwy Kati €yOpav~ ov TovTou &eKa Tovs didous det TUTTE ode KevTElY TE Kal dToKTeWIvaL. OSE ye Ma a a > a, < a »¥ ‘ “ Ata éav ts els mahatotpay doirjoas, eb exwv Td TOpa ‘N 25 KQL TUKTLKOS YEVvOuLEVOS, ETELTA TOV TaTépa TUTTN Kal THY , a ¥ ‘ a“ > , a a i > a LyTépa 7H addov Tia TOY oikeiwy H TaV diay, od ToUTOU gy a“ % / XN * > i 7 , eveca Set TOvs TaooTpiBas Kal Tovs ev Tots OmroLs Sida- , A“ A * , 2 a, , oKovtas payerOar pice TE Kat exBaddrew ék THY Trew. > “A A x / + & a oe mS , Exeivor pev yap Tapedocay éml To Sixalws ypnobar Tov- 30 To“s Tpds TOvS TOAEULLoUS Kal TOUS aOLKOUVTAS, auvVOME- 456 18. ry GAAy ayovla: carried away mor (drAouaxia) was not followed as 456 a by the excitement of hisown thoughts, a profession until after the Pelopon- Gorgias forgets the caution which he _ nesian War. As in all these exer- had hitherto exercised in his conver- __cises, so in rhetoric the great ob- sation with Socrates, as well as the ject was not public, but private, not definition of rhetoric which the two advantage to the community, but ad- had agreed upon above, and is led to vancement for the individual. set forth his art quite in the manner 20. épade: the unexpressed sub- of the Sophists (the Eristics), as a ject, as of ypia@a:, is the indefinite means of defence and offence; a ‘one.’ weapon which, though it required the 23. dmoxtewivat: if one gets as use of the mind instead of the body, far as the «evrety, it is but a short the lips instead of the arms, was no _ step to the amoxrewdivat. less 4 department of the science of 24. dhorycas: goray is the regu- fighting than boxing or the other exer- lar word for attendance at a school; cises of the soldier. Some Sophists hence goirnrss, a ‘scholar.’ — ed éxav —e.g. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus +é capa: not merely by the gift of —were at the same time teachers of nature, but also, as wuxrucds yersuevos, fencing. Boxing, ruereve, which, in by education. connexion with maAaiew, or wrestling, 29. mapéSocav: used like tradere e formed the wayxparid(ev, went be- yond the range of ordinary gymnas- tics, and belonged to the peculiar art of the athletes. Fighting in full ar- in the sense ‘impart, or transmit by teaching.” The object (afterwards taken up in rovras) is to be supplied from the sense of what precedes. 64 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p, 457. Noe , € XV , a “ vous, ) UTapyxovTas: of 5é peractpepavTes KpOvras Ty 457 > 4 ‘\ “ , a, << “ ¥ ¢ 8 8 - iaxve Kal TH TéexVN ovK dpOds. ovKovy ot SiddEavTES Tovynpoi, ovde y Téyvyn ovre aitia ovTe Tovnpa TovTOU 9 f= > 2 € x # & 3 an € od eveka €oTW, GAN’ ol wy Xpdpevot, oipat, 6pIas. 6 avTos x , XN « a € a XX \ x XN 35 07) Adyos Kal wept THS PyTopiKHs. Suvards pev yap Tpds dmavras €oTw 6 pytwp Kal wept mavTds éyew, woTE , - > 2 a , ¥ Ny a miPavarepos civar év Tots tAAOeow euBpaxy Tept orov ay BovdAynrar: add’ oddSéy TL paddov TovTov evexa Set OUTE b tovs latpods THY dd€av adarpeta bar, dr. Svvaito av ToUTO n x 40 Tounoat, OUTE TOUS GANoUS SnmLoupyous, GAG SiKaiws Kat are ce A nw 9 A “a 3 ie. aN 8 , TN) PYTOPLKY XP” aban, WOTEP Kat T™) aywvide. E€av €, 457 31. pr imdpxovras: an integral 35 f. apos Gmravras: as above, 47 456 d. 37. éuBpaxv: denotes what is other- 4 part of the subst. inf. clause; hence the yw. trdpyev has here its primitive meaning, to be the first cause, to be there to begin with, as opposed to dpuiverdar Cf. Leg. ix. 879 d pate yap Srdpywy pire apmuyd- pevos 7) Tapdway ToAuaTW TANYyais TOY TowvTov vovdetetv. Hpxeww is also simi- larly used in Leg. ix. 869 ¢ duuvdpevos &pxovTa xeipav wpérepov, but with a different feeling. The asyndeton of two opposites is not unfrequent. — petractpépavres: which is regularly transitive (e.g. Rep. ii. 367 a perta- otpéporres avroiy thy Sivamuw, Utrius- que vim pervertentes) is used here absolutely in the sense revers- ing the matter. Cf. Hom. £ 67 bear & brodeloate pRuvy,| uh Te weracTpépwou (cause a reverse) dyacoduevot KaKd epya. 32, ry loxw: corresponds to ed éxwv rd odua, as réxvn to muKtinds vyevduevos, So that both are considered dependent upon training. —ovk dpOds : a case of litotes. 34. of 1 xpupevor: equiv. to of by wH xpGvra dp0Gs. Hence the pi. wise expressed by &s év Bpaxe? (cur- eAdvrt) efretv, and shows that the fol- lowing wep) Orov by BovAnra: is abso- lutely without limitation. 38. odSey «ré.: the dangerousness of the art is to be offset by the natu- ral feeling of equity which will com- pel each of the two aspirants to leave uninjured the public position which both desire, as well as the 5éta, which is the orator’s continual and chief aim. — ov&Sév tu: strengthens the negation. Cf. the Eng. ‘none the more.’ The acc. of this neg. is used, but never the dat. with the compara- tive. 39. ot: is correlative with rovrou For the following double «af, see on 457 e. 41. édv 8€ «ré.: shows again the opposition of practice to theory. Gor- gias continually recurs to the same thoughts, as if the rolling swell (Syxos) of words could conceal the poverty of ideas. This belongs to the mimetic element of the dialogue. ¢ €veKa. b TIAATONO® TOPTIAS. 65 . : ; 7 St. I. p, 457. Otpwat, PyTOpLKds yevomevds TUS KGTa TavTy TH Suvdpe Kal TH TEXYN GOiKH, od Tov SiddEavra Set pucely re Kal exBar- > an , 2A Xx XN 2 NX , Z ew €K TWV TONEwDY. EKELVYOS BEV yap €7l duxaia Xpeia a> € ey 5} 7 a XV > > > nx 45 Tapedw@KE, O Oo évavtins XPYTAaL. TOY OUY OUK opGas c , rt / % ». ¢ ~ > / XPOPEVOV Loe dikavoy KQL ex Bdadrew KQL Q7TOKTELVUVQL, GAN ov Tov dida€avra. XII. Xo. Ota, d Topyia, cal oe EMTELpov Elva TOd- hav Adyar Kat Kafewpakévar ev adTots Td ToLVdE, GTL Ov podias Sivavrat wept av av éemyapnowow S.aréyeobau t , x > ¢ XN / ‘N , Stopirdpevor TPOs adhydous KQL pabovres Kal dvdaEavres € ‘ 9 4 x. - > 3 aN # 5 €auTovs ovTw dtatver Gar Tas Guvovcias, add’ eav Tepi a tov auqisByTyowow Kat py PH O ErEepos Tov ETEpov > an ih x * aA 3 ¥ f ‘N ‘ 6pOas héyew 7H py) cadas, yaremaivovot te Kal Kata 457 42. kdra: as well as kameira, is xeiphowow. The ofrw sums up and 457 » often used after a partic. as if it were re-emphasizes the preceding partici- © following a finite verb. ples, on which lies the chief weight. ec XIL. 1. otpat: the asyndeton shows 4. S.optrdwevor mpds ddArAous : that Socrates himself is not over- “after having, by mutually giving pleased. — épaeipov: sc. by having and receiving information, defined to taken part in them cither as speaker cach other’s satisfaction the nature or listener. of the question under discussion.” — 2. Adywv: employed here as the paovres and &Sdgavres: stand to each general word including both the pub- other as active and passive; they de- lic speech as well as the private con- note the means by which the dispu- versation, which is more properly tants have been enabled to define the Siddoyos. Cf. Prot. 385 d éav ob question at issue (diopicduevor), and ekeAGns, odx dSuolws Ecovrac juiv of are hence subordinate to the preced- SiddAoyot with 337 a yxph tos ev ing participle. Plato rather likes totoiaie Adyots mapayryvonéveuvs such collocations of active and pas- Kowwous wey elvat dupoty Tov diareyoué- sive ideas. Cf. d below, eirdvres kal vow a&kpoatds. The word ouvovaia is adkotoavtes, and 462 a. similarly used in 461 b. — xaSewpaké- 7. 4 py cadds: an afterthought. d vat: the compound verb, as compared with the simple, shows that the opin- ion has been gained by a considera- tion of a number of cases. Cf 465d. 3. Suvavrat: sc. of Aéyovres or of diadreyouevor, from the preceding Ad- yor. —Biaréyer8ar: belongs to ém- Had it been present originally in Socrates’ mind, he would have said wh 6pOas 4 Kré.; but not being pres- ent, the negative was attracted to the verb of saying, by the regular Greek rule. Looking at it in this light, it is not necessary (with Cron) to supply a 66 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 457. , ¥ . € a , a > 2 P POdvov otovrar Tov éavTav héyewv, dirovixouvTas aN’ ov a ‘ , ~ ee: e N ¥ 4 (nrovvtas TO mpokeipevoy ev TO LKOyYW* Kat Eriol ye TEEv- 10 T@YTES aloyioTa amadhatrovTat, owWopyOerTes TE Kal 15 457 . , A 3 , ‘ a 2 AN a a N €LITOVTES KAL AKOVOQVTES Tept opav QUTWVY TOLAVTA, OLA KAL \ , ¥ en a 7 A 9 , TOUS TAPOVTAS ay ber bau uTrep opav QUTWV, OTL TOLOUTWY > 4 > ie > ~~ S avd pata n&iwooav QAKPOaTat yeveo Bat. an x. yo Tov 8 evexa gy XN héyw TavTa; TL viv enol SoKets OV ov Tavy aKddovla héyew ode otpdwva ois second 7 from the preceding ph of, which would hardly come under the head of the simple following the com- pound. — xaderralvouor: the pl. oc- curs here as it did with dugicBnthow- ow above, because from 6 repos rv érepov we naturally draw the idea “both.” Cf in Latin, Cic. de Fin. iii. 2. 8 quod cum accidisset, ut al- ter alterum necopinato vide- remus, etc., and the expression for ‘both’ in the Romance languages. — The use of the pronouns throughout this long sentence is both interesting and instructive; repos, Erepov, éavtayv, apayv adTav (bis). The distinction between re- ciprocal and reflexive is sometimes very narrow. 8. didovikotvras «7é.: when both reproach each other thus, they place themselves on the same level as par- ticipants in a disputatious contest, where each seeks his own honor, not the truth, as Socrates shows in Phaedo 91 a, where he contrasts the giAood- gos and gidovinws Exovres, and says of the latter, drav wept rov audi BynTa- ow, ban pev Exee wep dv bv 5 Adyos 7, ob ppovtiCovary, Saws 5é & adtol MevTo GAANAous, EéavTods, tavta ddter tots mapovaw rTodTo mpo- Oupoivrat. Cf. e, below, on mpds 7d mpaypa. They bear it hardly, and think x A »” \ A TO TPWTOVv eheyes TEpl TNS that out of envy, envy of themselves, the a opponent said it, actuated by a factious spirit, and not by a desire to search into the matter before them in the discussion. 10. Aov8opyPevtes xré.: the two fol- lowing participles, though logically co-ordinate with AoidopnOévres, really give its two sides. 11 f. ota . dxPecOar. varép: the use of the acc. with the infin. after forms of ofos is very rare, and seems to be an extension of the use of the simple infin. with ofos. See GMT. 759; Madv. 166 c, and note on 452 e. Cf. Apol. 23 e MéAnros ev intp Tov mointav &xOduevos, “Avutos dé batp Tov Snusoupyav «ré. We soon feel anger and indignation for one whom we consider abused. 14. oF mdvu dxodovba: ‘not quite consistent. Cope.—dakodova: denotes the naturally following result; odp- gwva, the inner agreement of two statements standing in juxtaposition. Cf. Xen. Anab. ii. 4.19 vedvionos 3é Tis ... elrev, ds ox axddovda ely 7d ériOh- cecbat kal Adoew thy yépupav, Lach. 193 @ ra Epya od cuugwre? Tois Adyats. Plato delights in applying musical terms to logical conditions; hence the frequency of cuugwveiv and dia- gwvetv, as also of cuvddewv, curpdds. Cf. 461 a, 482 b. 20 25 TOD peyioTou 7 addov amahha€at. 457 e TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. yevéoOa, ad\rAa pds oe. 67 St. I. p. 457. pytopicns. poBovtpar ody diehéyyew oe, py pe bToAdBys > X\ me; an a , A + ov 7pos TO Tpaypa didoviKovvTa éyey TOU KaTapaves 2 AN > > \ ‘ \ > a eyw OvUY, €b pevy Kal OU El TwWV > 0 es, @ \ 2.7 Se » 8 , 2 Se aVvU PWT wV WVTTEP KQL EYW, POEWS AV GE LEP@T@NV * €t O€ 458 ry oF »” 2A \ LY, ew@yv Qv. eyo dé , TF n ¢ , x a» > TW@VY ELL; THMV d€us ev av €hey- XOévtav, et Te py adnOes éya, NS€ws 8 av eheyEdvrwy, et Tis Te un AdNOEs éyou, odK dndéorepoy pevTav éheyxIev- x» > / a x > > XN € a TOV eheyEavTwr * poecCov yap QaUTO ayabov nYyovpat, yy ~ > 06 > > % > Ar oN “A CoO @wTeEp peeclov ayavov €OTW QAUTOV ATA ayyval KAKOU 16. oPotpar: has here a double reference, (1) to an action to be per- formed (inf.) ; (2) to an effect to be avoided (u} with subjv.). Cf Xen. An. i. 3.17 éya& yap dxvoiny pev by eis Ta wAota euBaiverw & juiv Soin, wh quas Tais Tpthpert Karadvan, poBoiuny 5 by Te Hyeudu @ Soin ExrecOu, wy Huas aydyn dOev ode ora €terGetv. In the first we have the will-side of the fear; in the second, the apprelien- sion. 17. o¥ wpds To wpdypa: the neg. ov is regular with the inf. of the in- dir. discourse.— mpos: denotes the end which the subject has in view. In the present case this is paralleled by rov with the infin.,— one of the many Greck modes of expressing finality (H. 960; GMT. 798). With apds o¢ also the main idea of the mpds is that of hostile purpose; the hostility, how- ever, does not lie in the mpds, but in the general tone. Ina certain sense gidovixety might also be applied to Socrates, as his search for truth was a continual struggle throughout his whole life. 18 f. kalovd... Kal éyd: when the second member of a comparison is contained in a relative clause with 2QX ‘ » ovdev yep OlLae TO- 8omep or &omep, the Greek idiom re- quires xa) in both members. 21. Sdws av edeyEdvrov .. . A€you: of these two conditional clauses the first is logical, the second ideal. The present conversation is a practical example of Socrates’ view; hence the logical conditional form is used for the practical present case. The rest of the sentence follows naturally in the opt. as being rather theoretical, and applicable to some other time than the present. The participles repre- sent the same tenses of the optatives. 22. otk andéorepov Kré.: cf. 506 ¢ kal we day ébeAdyxns, odk ax Occ Onoopual cot, dorep ob euol, GAAG péyirros evep- yérns map’ éuol dvaryeypawer. 23. petLov ydp aire: the correla- tive to éowmep is wanting, as is often the case. atrd is always emphatic; the unemphatic pronoun is rotro. 25. obS€év «ré.: Socrates was con- vinced that correct views determine the will and actions, and that sin and error are due to lack of knowledge. Ilence instruction, if it carry convic- tion with regard to what is good and true, must also bring about moral improvement. Cf what he says in Apol. 26 a d%dov yap btu, édy pdbw, wad- 68 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 458. covrov Kakov elvar avOpadrw, doov Sd€a Yevdhs Tept av b , a a y > TUyXaver viv Huy O Adyos wv. Ei pev ov Kal av O7s hay > 5 , > \ \ a a“ 25 TovovTos Elva, Oiareywpela. ei dé Kal SoKxet ypnvar ear, €@ a , XN 3 X s XN Xr / ape non xatpew Kat dvalvaper Tov NOyov. 2 > 30 Top. “AANa Pyui pev éywye, @ LaKpares, Kal avTdos ToLovTOS Elvat oloy od bdyyel: tows pevToL XpHv evvoewv *% an wn kal To TOV TapovTwr. Tddrat yap ToL, mply Kal vas > 0 is > A a a ‘ > , ‘ x ede, €y@ Tots wapovour mohha éreder€apyv, Kal vuv tows Toppw amotevovpe, HY Siareyopcba. okoTEiv odv 35 yp) Kal Td TOUTMY, Ly TWas adTav KaTéxouev Bovdope- vous Tt Kat &ANo mparrew. XIII. Xai Tod pev PopvBov, & Topyia te kat Yo- > XN > - 4 “a > a“ f KP@TES, QUTOL AKOVETE TOUT@MV TWV avdpar, Bovdopévav 458 Goua: 8 ye BKwv moi, and the cele- 34. dwotevotpev: to be completed 458 brated phrase ascribed to him, ovde)s Exwy apapTaves. 26. Seta Wevdrs: the force of ofuat extends over the whole sentence, and we should therefore logically expect ddtav Wevdj. But by the use of the nom. Socrates holds the object up to view like an image. 28. el S€ wai: the contrast would rather be given by the harsh e? é¢ uf, but Socrates modifies it with his usual courtesy. 29. tov Adyov: in the same sense as in 457 d, above. 31. udbnyet: indicate, sc. by your words and example. Gorgias recon- siders his assent by the expression Xpiiv évvoeiv. With xpiv and ge the opposition is to the inf., not to the obligation. By giving his reason, Gorgias stimulates himself to change from ‘we ought to have’ to ‘we must’ (cxoweiv ody xpi). 32. kal vas: as contrasted with the others, who had come earlier. according to 465 e cuxvbv Adyov aro- © zéraxa and 466 a. So frequently, e.g. Prot. 335 ¢, 336 ¢, 361 a. 35. prj tivas: is connected, in a loose kind of epexegesis, with 7d rov- twv, and hence also depends on cxo- For the ind., cf Lach. 196 ¢, bpGpev ph Nixtas oferat ti Aéyew, Ly- sis 216 © @rt 5& Kad Tdde cKepoueba ph Hpas AavOdver 7d pidrov ws GANOGs ovdev qeiv. roUTwy by. XIII. 1. rot pev OopvBov: here we recognize the importance of the silent listeners, whose presence we infer from such remarks as this, and who serve at this juncture to keep the discussion going. Next to them is Chaerephon, who here acts as their spokesman, and answers the BovAoué- vous Ti Kal HAAO mpdtrew. The OdpuBos simply denotes a rather loud expres- sion of protest against the apparent purpose of Gorgias, and of pleas- ure in the continuation of the dia- logue. WAATONOS TOPTIAS. 69 8t. I. p. 458. > , 27 x / ~ 2 \ Ss > \ > A x 2 e QKOVELV, EQAV TL EYNTE EOL OUVV Kal auTw@ BY YE&VOLTO # > , o 4 4 XN y To~avTn agxoNia, waTE ToLovTwY Néywv Kal ovTW heyo- , > 5 pear apenevw mpoipyairepdv te yevéoOar ado mpar- TEL. Kaa. Ny tovs Oeovs, & Kawpedav. N \ ‘ ‘\ Kat pev on Kal an ¥” > autos Tohdots 45n Adyous Tapayerdpevos od O18’ El TA- Y 0 Y y , y > » x \ MOTE Yo HY OVUTWS wWoTrEp VUVYL* WOT EMOLyYE, KQV TH)V 10 nu€pav odnv eHéedryte Siaréyer Oar, yapretabe. Xa. “AMAa pyv, d Kaddikdews, 76 y’ €wov obdev Kwdver, elmep €0édeu Topyias. Tor. Aiaypov 8% 7d dourdv, & SHxpares, yiyverar eve ye wn Cédew, adrov érayyedpevov epwrav dru tus Bov- 3. pr yévouro xré.: a most em- © phatic denial in the form of a wish. The sentiment is similar to that of Pindar (Jsth. i. 1 f.), alluded to in Phaedr, 227 b ovd« by ote: pe card Miy- dapov Kal aoxoAtas bméprepoy mparyua momoac0a Td ohy Te Kad Avolov Siarpi- Bhy akovoa. d_ 7. Callicles is very eager to get the conversation directed to his own more especial field — politics. Hence his support of Chaerephon’s protest, which he emphasizes by the addi- tion of the expression «al péy 3) Kal avrdés, where the «al uév approximates closely in force to cal why. 8. ovK off’ ef: commonly equiv. to haud scio an, sometimes, as here, to haud scio an non. On ei in this double meaning, see Kr. 65, 1, 8. Of. dore . . . xapreto Oe: compare with dore . . . rpdrrew, a few lines above. 1l. to y¥ épov: has almost the same force as éy#, only less personal. Like the phrases with wepi and éudi, it became very common in later Greek. Cf. Rep. vii. 533 a éwel 7d éudy obdév by mpobuulas amoAlro. with Symp. 210 a épa wey ody eya, kad mpoduutas ovdty amodrcipw. Kr. 43, 4, 26. 13. aloxpdv: note that Gorgias is impelled to a continuation of the dia- logue only by regard for his own honor. This motive was especially strong with the Sophists; ¢f Prot. 352 d aicxpdy eat enol copiay ph odx! mdvtwy Kpdticroy gdva. With aicxpdy and similar words which im ply a negation, it is more usual to find yw} ob. GMT. 817. It is also more common to employ the dat. of reference, instead of the acc. with the infinitive. Rid. § 183.—7¢ dourov: not ‘furthermore,’ with Kr. 46, 3, 2, but “ finally,” “in conclusion,” after those present have expressed their desires. 14. émayyeAdpevov: for the mean- ing, see on 447 c. Here it acquires almost the force of “challenge,” since the subject of the inf. must be sup- plied out of the following ér: Tis Bou- AeTau. 458 d 70 15 20 25 30 PLATO’S GORGTAS. eran. Bovnreu. St. I. p. 458. Za. "Axove 57, & Topyia, & Oavpalw év Tots heyopevors e oN a ¥ , n~ 3 “ Z 2 ON > UTO Gov Lows yap Tor aod dpOas éyovTos éya ovK 6p0as vrokapBavu. € XN \ a esr > > PNTOPLKOV oys Wovew OLOS T EWAL, 27 , ‘ a , €QV TLS Bovdynrat Tapa aoov pavOdvew. Top. Nat. > a \ , y > 9 ¥ x > Xo. Ovkovv TEept TWAVTWVY WOT EV oxAw aOavov E€lLVQL ov dvddoKovTa adda wetGovTa; ce Top. Tavu prev ovv. Xo. "Eheyés tow vuvdr dru Kat wept tov GN’ ei Soxet Tovto.ci, Suadéyou Te Kal epwra rt e 459 ¢€ wn vyLewov TOU Zz i” ff ¥ € esr LaTpOU mulavarepos €OTAL O PYTwP.- Tor. Kai yap éheyov, &v ye dxho. > a“ *% > ” n~ - a > “A x > , Xa. Ovxovy 76 év ox TOUTO €OTLY EV TOLS LN elddow ; > , , x” bay > , an? a , Ov y@p Snmou €V YE TOLS elddae TOU LATPOU muavarepos éoTau. Top. “An On déyeus. > n »” na? a , ¥ n Sa. Ovkovv elTep TOU taT pou midavatepos €OTAL, TOV > F # ¢ elodTos mUOavarepos yiyverat ; Tor. Havu YE. > + , ¥ Sa. OvK LATPOS ‘YE wy. 23. ob SiSdoKovra: the regular neg. with dore is wy. The od here may be due to the gs above, which throws an indir. disc. coloring over the whole. See Gildersleeve, Am. Jour, Phil. vii. 174. 459 27. tv ye dxdw: Gorgias wishes a to protect himself by a restriction which, while it defers, for a brief in- terval, his defeat, shows plainly the weakness of his professions. Sce the criticism of Socrates which fol- lows. 28. év trois py el8dor: the reason n yap; for a change of neg. such as occurs in this and the following clauses is often hard to perceive. Here it seems to be the oscillation from gen- eric to particular, which is going on continually in Socrates’ mind. Hav- ing made his general point with yf, he recurs to the case under discus- sion with od. So 6 3& wh iarpds . avemothuwy (cf. before, év rots ph e(5dor), but 5 obK« cidas, ev orn eiddor. It would be possible, but not so good, to take the latter cases as examples of adhaerescent ov. 40 TAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. Tor. Nat. 71 Bt. I. p. 459. Za. ‘O S€ py iarpds ye Sirov dverioTypov dv 6 iatpos ETLO THILO. Top. Ajdov ore. Da. ‘O otk €tdas dpa TOV ElddTOS €v OvK ELOdGoL TUB A- VaTEPOS ETTAL, OTAY 6 pryTwp TOD latpod muBaverteEpos 7. TovTO cupPBaiver 7) aGAXo TL; a a f Tor. Totro evravda ye cup Baiver. > a \ \ x » e+ , e , da. Ovkovuv Kat TeEpl Tas adXas aATATAS TEXVAS @WOQvU- ¥ eer Ne ¢ , 2 N \ \ , 45 TWS EXEL O pPyuTwP Kat 1) PYTOPLKY 5 QAvTQa LEV TAH TPay—pLarTa IQA a > 207 9 ¥ \ , ovoev det QuTynV cloevat OTWMS EXEL, BPYNXaVYV dé TWQ TEL- Bods nipnkéva, wore paiverOar Tots ovK €iddo. paddov ioe) - 29Q7 E€LOEVAL TWV ELOOTWD ; XIV. Tor. Ovxovy wohdy pactdvn, @ YéKpares, a * / x » x > X e , yiyverat, wy paldvra tas addas réyvas, dAAA play Tav- Tv, pndev ehatroda bar Tav Syprovpyav ; > x > a x ‘ > a ¢ er a do. Ht pev eharrovras 7 py €AattovTas 6 pyTwp TeV 5 dd\wy dia TO ovTwS EXEL, aUTiKa emirKeopEla, Edy TE 459 b 42. rotro oupBalver | GAA TL: ac- cording to the position of &AAo 7 be- fore or after the 4% is the latter to be translated “than” or “or.” 43. évravt0d ye: Gorgias notices the danger of such a concession, but still thinks he can limit the force of the argument to the single case. Per- ceiving this, Socrates immediately extends his statement to make it ap- Ply nad wep) ras HAAGS amdoas Téxvas. 45 f. mpdypara... pyxavy meBots : Socrates never lets slip an occasion to emphasize the essential opposition of the aim of rhetoric to the truth of facts, an opposition admitted, indeed, by the Sophists themselves. Cf. the statement of Tisias in Phaedr. 272 d Bre obdév GAnOclas petéxev Séor... roy pédAovTa, ixaves pytopicdy elvat. XIV. 1. wodAq facrdvyn: Gor- gias is continually wandering away from the discussion of the nature of rhetoric to the praise of it, and be- ing set right again by Socrates, who, while he brings back the discussion to the subjects which Gorgias had declared to be the proper province of rhetoric, is at the same time paving the way for an examination of its moral value. 5. Std To ovTws exe: sc. uy pa- Odvra KTé.—avtlka emoKepopea: a formula for getting rid of a side issue like eicat@is cxeWoueba Prot. 357 b. — ti: is adverbial. b 459 b Cc 72 10 15 20 25 499 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 459. ¢ a X x > “ de 50 / a > Huw wpos oyou 4+ voy de 7dd€ tpdTEpoy oKeopeDa, dpa TUyXaver Tept TO dikavov Kat TO AdtKOV Kal TO ato pov YON . ery \ \ . 9 ¥ eae Kat TO Kahov Kat ayafoy Kat KaKov ovTws Exwy 6 pNTOpL- x € \ Noe . XQ \ . »¥ ® © » KOS @S TEPL TO VyLEWOV Kau TEpL TA GANA @Y at addae , > N \ > > , , 9 X a , / ? x TéxXvat, AUTA pev OvK Eid0s, TL ayabdr H Ti KaKOY EoTW 7 7 XN na ac > X. a at a 4 ‘ % XN Ti Kadov 7 Ti aiaypov 7} Sikatoy 7 adiKov, TELOw dé rept avTav pmeunxavnpevos, wate Soke eidévar ovK EidwsS €V > io , a an iS , a > , O07 ‘\ } a ovK Elddau wahdov Tov EiddT0s; 7 avayKy Eidévat, Kat Set MpoeTLOTAmEvoy TavTa adikerOar Tapa oe TOV péANoVTA pabynoerOar Thy pyntopiKyy; Ei Sé py, TV 6 THS PNTopLKNS } } “ ¢ x > \ / XN > , LodokKahos TovTwY pev OvdEeY SiddEeLs TOV adiKVOU[LEVOY > x XN ¥ dt 8 > a“ aA 8 ~ — ov yap aor epyov — toujoets 0 ev Tots TOdXOtS OoKELy 2 4 b} ‘X ~ we: > > / sy “A > XN eld&ar avtov Ta ToLadTa ovK €iddTa Kal SoKely ayabov Elva oVK OVTA; 7 TO Taparav ovx olds TE EoeL avTOV , XX € 7 a % 7 “a XN ¢ + SiddEau THY PyTopiKyy, €ay py TpoELdn TEpt TovTwY THY d anOaav; 7 THs TA TOLAUTA EXEL, ® Topyia; kat mpos 460 Ads, @oTEp apTt Eimes, aroKkahtipas THS pyTopiKyS Ele tis TOP 7 Stvapis éorw ; Top. "AAN eye pev olpat, @ LHKpates, €av TUYN p7 cld@s, Kal TaUTA Tap €ov pabyoeras. Xo. "Exe dy- Kahas yap héyes. édvirep pytopiKoyv ov 6. mpds Aoyou: to the advantage of tinge, which is rendered more appar- our discourse. But little different ent by the doubtful ofa of Gorgias’ from mpds Adyov. Cf. Prot. 351 e@ éav answer. —dpa: see on 476 a. mpos Adyou don elvac 7d oKéupa. — 14. wpoemordpevov: the partic. is robe: draws the attention in advance again the most important part of the to the series of closely interconnected — statement, as in 457 ¢, 453 b. questions, introduced by dpa, which, 22. tHs PyTopuys: this passage by their very intimate relation one to differs from 455 d only in arrange- another, oppose, with a certain impor- ment. tunity, Gorgias’ continual wandering 26. exe Sy: a request to pause, and vagueness, and also, by their whereby the point reached is de- delicate allusion to the somewhat — clared to be an important one, which extravagant expression used above merits further consideration. Cf. (455 d), have a decidedly ironical Prot. 8349 d &ye 5h... Bktov ydp toe 459 30 TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 73 8t. I. p. 460. , > i Sa » 4 XN * \ r Twa Toons, avayKn avrov eidd&var ta Sixawa Kal Ta 19 ¥ , , a , ‘ Le} QOLKa TOL TpOTEpov YE y va TEpov paldvra Tapa aoov. Tor. Hdvv ye. > TM > eos x 0 \ , RY 2. tb OUV; OTA TEKTOVLKA Pepa YKWS TEKTOVLKOS, y ov; b Tor. Nai. > a Noe UN \ , da. Ovkovy Kat 0 Ta Povo tkKa [ovotKos ; Top. Nat. A. € \ 3 \ 3 , ‘ > y N a. Kat o ta taTpLKa LaTPLKOS, KQt TaAXa OUTW KATA x 2X , € ‘ ys (eeend 2 e 35 TOV GUTOV doyor, oO penabnkas EKAOTA TOLOUTOS EOTLY OLOV 40 460 a b q EmLoTH UN EKaoTOV amepyalerat ; Top. Tavu ye. > nn NX “A * - ‘\ € & - xa. Ovkouvv Kata TOUTOY TOV doyov Kat O TQ dikara pepabynkas dikatos ; Tor. Idvrws Syzov. So. ‘O 8€ Sixatos Séxara mov TPaTTel ; Tor. Nat. > a > , \ c XN s > x So. OvkKovupv avayKy TOV [ pnTopuKov dtkavoy €wWat, TOV d€] Sikatoy Bovdrdeo Oar (det) Sikava mparre ; émonépacdar 6 Aéyers. When thus used, éyew is of course intransitive. H. 810. 28. yro . . . q: or at least. In English we should naturally use y+ with the second member. Cf. Apol. 27 d robs daiuovas Ho Oeots ye Hyot- pba Gedy raidas.— rapa cov: const. with dorepoy pabdyra alone; mpdrepoy with eidévar. 30. ta Textovikad: “the principles of building.” 34 f. Katd tov avtov Acyov: accord- ing to the same principle (analogy). ‘The argument which follows is to our notions sophistical enough. Not so, however, from the Socratic point of view, according to which every virtue is a form of knowledge, and every vice the result of ignorance.’ Thompson. See on 458 a. 43. ovkotv dvdykn cré.. a few lines below is found a repetition of the first clause of this sentence, in almost the same language, where, too, the state- ment is natural, and is used as a basis for a further deduction; here, on the contrary, it is out of place, and besides, is not followed up at all in the next sentence. These reasons have led to the omission of the bracketed words, by which we get a clearly logical ar- gument, as follows: “The just man performs justactions.” “Yes.” “Must he not therefore wish always to per- form just actions?” “ Apparently.” «The just man will never, then, wish to perform unjust actions,” etc. 460 c 74 45 50 10 460 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Tor. Baiverai ye. 8t. I. p. Xo. Ovddrore dpa Bovhjoerar 6 ye Sixatos aduKetv. Top. *Avaykn. > To oe € ‘ > , 2 a , OL 2. OV O€ PNTOPLKOV avaykyn €K TOU oyou LKQLOV eivau. Top. Nat. La. Ovdérore apa Bovdyjoerar 6 PyntopiKds aduKely. Top. Ov daiverai ye. , > ’ 2\7 , y > XV. Xo. Méuvnoa obv éywv ddlyw mpdrepor, OTe ov Set rots mawWorpiBais eyKadety od’ exBahdew €x THY Toewy, EAV O TUKTHS TH TUKTLKH XpHTai TE Kal aOLKT ; ¢ 4 \ y % 2X c oF “ e dig > ¥ aoavttws O€ ovTas Kal éav 6 PYTwP TH PNTOpLKH adiKws a X a 8 8 , 2 a de > , 2 “A Xprrat, wy TO SiddEavre eyKahety pynde eEedavvew ex THS # > BS a > n + > ? a 4 a Toews, AMMA TH GOtKodvTL Kal ovK dpOas ypwméevw TH pytopicn; é€ppyOn tava 7 ov; Tor. "Eppy On. nw , ¢ + ee a t c < 4 > Lo. Nouv dé YE 0 QvUTOS OUTOS paiverat, O PNTOPLKOS, OVK ” ° , x x QV TTOTE aouKyoas. y OU; Top. Paiverau. Xa. Kal & rots mpdro.s ye, & Topyia, \éyous éhéyero, ov € € N NX z ¥ > X “ > ¥. \ oTl y PHTOPLKY) Tepe Adyous €ly) OV TOUS TOU apTLou Kat a XO . na 5 , \ 38¢ ae , TIEPLTTOV, QAAQ TOUS TOV OLKQALOV KAL QAOLKOU 1 yap; XV. 1. A€ywv: equiv. to ori ee- yes, that you were saying. 2. ov8 éxBodAew: when two verbs which govern different cases are con- strucd with but one object, it is custo- mary to construe this object with the nearer verb. Cf. below (5). 3. xprtat re kal aScxy : the co-ordi- nation of the two ideas by re... kai brings into greater prominence the im- propriety of thus misapplying other- wise useful skill, than the more usual a5ixws xpira: of the following clause. 6. GAAd tod aStkovvTt: the punds éfeAatvew is a result which may or may not follow the éyxadezv, accord- ing to circumstances. The real op- position is between ro d.d5dtav7s and 7T@ adicovvri, hence the second is put in the same case as the first, although the acc. would be required by éfeAad- Cf. Prot. 327 a nas mdvra éai- dacke kal émémAntre toy ph Kadds avAovvra. 10. dv wore dStkroras: represents the same tense of the optative. vei. 460. e 15 460 e 461 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. Top. Nai. 75 St. I. p. 460. ’ \ s n , an , e , Xa. “Eye roivvy cov tore tavta héyovtos uUmé\aBor, € 2O7 22 ¥ e ¢ ed a 9 > rN @S ovdéror av €ly 1 PHTOPLKYH GO.uKov Tpayi.a, oO Y wee mept Suxacocvys Tovs Adyous rovetrau- érerdy dé ddiyov UaTepov Edeyes, OTL O PyTwpP TH pyTopiky Kay adikws heydueva Exeivous elov Tovs Adyous, dri, eb pev Képdos € a > . on 7 9 > 4» ¥ , nyoto evar TO éhéyxerOan waorep eyd, aE.ov ety dvadéye- > + , 30 x y % * 3 aba, ei dé py, Cav yalpew* VoTEepor dé Hudv emirKoTOV- a ‘ 9 > a Leva dpas 87) Kal avTos GTL ad Gpodoyetrar TOY PyTOpLKOY GOuKEw. via, ovK daca. XVI. 25 advvaTov eivas ddikws ypnoOa. TH PyTopuKH Kat eOér\ew > 4 o 3 ‘ Y £ nn , dhiyns Tvvovaias eat wate ikavds diackeé- > y aN Va IIo. Ti 6 & Yékpares; ovTw Kal od wept THs ¢ a , o a Z x ¥” ¢ 7 pytopixns So€dles wamep viv héyes; 7 ote, dre Topyias 17. 6 ye: gives the basis of the statement. The neuter may be due to the rpayua immediately preceding (H. 631 a), or it may simply be used ad sensum. Cf. 465d. 20. otrw: under these circumstances. ® See on 503 d.—ovvdSew: a musical term. See on 457 e. 24. opas 8 Kal avrds: properly the following clause should be in- dependent, stating the conclusions reached in the investigation; but by bringing it under the government of the inserted dpds xré. an appeal is again made to the fairness of the opponent. Cf. Apol. 24 d dpds, & MéAnre, bri oeygs, 1b. 31D viv 58 dpare 5h wal adrol, iri of KatHyopa Kré. b 26. pa tov Kiva: cf 466 c, 482 b, Apol. 22 a. Socrates is rather fond of this formula of asseveration, pos- sibly out of aversion to any light 20 xp@ro, oVTw Javpdoas Kal yynodmEvos Ov TUVddeW TA 461 a = Y . oO» N X , > TaUTA OVY OT TOTE EXEL, Wa TOV KUVa, @ Top- b handling, even of the Greek divini- 7 ties. See on 463 d. 27. otk dAlyns cvvovelas: a deli- cate allusion to 458 ¢, which shows Socrates’ fine feeling in not insisting on a discussion which must be un- pleasant and also humiliating to Gor- gias. The word ouvvovoia is elsewhere employed so as to include the dis- courses (diddoyo), e.g. Prot. 310 a ri ovv ov dinyhow huiv Thy kvvovoiay; i.e. in the sense of the Eng. “ meeting.” XVI. 1. On Polus, who here again thrusts himself into the discussion, see note to 448 a, and Introd. § 14. —tal: belongs, according to the sense, with doéd¢es. Is what you say also really your opinion? We should expect a second «af with domep, ac- cording to usage. See on 457 e. Others construe «af with ov. 2. 4 oles: or do you think. The 76 or 10 461 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 461. > n NTXWVIn cor pi) TpocTomohoyHaa Tov PNTopLKdY avdpa. ‘\ TON ‘ ‘\ , 29s X XN \ A x? , fen odxt Kat Ta Stkata eidévar Kal Ta Kaha Kal Ta ayabd, N93 \ »¥ 6 a ise 2 > 7 2 ON 3 3 , Kal €av pn €Oy Tadta cidas wap avrdv, avtos diddtew, ereita €K TAUTNS Lows THS 6podoyias evartiov TL cuvEBN ev tots Adyous, TodTO 6 87) ayamas, av’ros ayayav emt ToLwdTa €potypmara— émret tiva ole. atapyyoerOau pur) ovxt Kal avtov ériotacOa ta Sikava Kat adAous didakev; add’ > ‘ wn » X > ¥ a bt %. , els TA TOLAUTA ayelw ToAAH aypo.Kia ExT TOUS hoyous. Xa. 70 Kddduore ade, adda Tou e€emirydes KTdpcOa € -, % = oe y 5 x > XN ¥ ff éraipous Kal vets, wa, éredav avrot mperBirepou yuyve- fev. oparrapcfa, TmapdvTes tpets of vedtepor emavop- a“ € an XN 7 XN > ¥ 4 > , Gare yev tov Biov Kat év epyous Kai &v dédyors. second question repeats the first in a varied form. Both questions are ‘rhetorical,’ expecting no answer, and express a protest against the idea that the art of rhetoric has anything to do with a knowledge of what is right. 4. prt otxl .. . elB€vat xré.: two negs. after joxuvOn wh mporoporoyiaa, on account of the negative force of the expression. Cf Prot. 352 c, d. See H. 1034 b, and on 458 d. The construction is the same as that after arapvicecGat below, which is followed by a double neg. because the question riva ote: veils the assertion ovdeis. ovx? is merely more emphatic than ov. 5. dv pr €Aby tavra elds: more logically, éav @\@n Tatra ph cidds. — §Sdtew: depends upon some verb of saying to be supplied from mpocopo- Aoyfjoa. The asyndeton with éreira instead of k&mrera (cf. Apol. 23 c) is not uncommon, and the clause is to be construed in dependence on 61 (because). By this time, however, Polus’ flow of words has run away ‘ KQL with him; he has only energy enough left to hurl at Socrates the words Tou? & 5) ayands, before he abandons his struggling sentence altogether and starts afresh. Such passages as this show Plato to have been no mean dramatist. 6. tows: gives expression in pass- ing to the hint that perhaps the con- tradiction was not so clearly deduced from Gorgias’ words as Socrates sup- posed. The whole sentence, however, shows Polus’ complete inability to grasp the real point at issue. 10. dypotkla: is the reverse of ma:- deta. By this very criticism, Polus betrays that he is himself just as lacking in the polish of a gentleman, which he denies to Socrates, as in sci- entific knowledge. 11. 6 kddAdtore: the epithet suits the pompous rhetor excellently. 12. veis: the addition of the word “sons,” though not strictly necessary, is quite natural, especially among people where the support of the par- ent by the son was so strictly enjoined as among the Greeks. 15 20 25 461 TIAATONOS TOPLAS. 77 St. I p. 461. aA ¥ N A vov el Te éyo Kat Topyias év tots Adyous ohaddAdpcOa, . . > , , ry > S tw 7 ov Tapav éravdpfov: Sixatos 8 ef: Kal éyw €Oédrw TGV @poroynuévwy Et TL Tou SoKEt py) KAA@S wpohoy’- > , ov xn N 4 3s ¢ a a vOut, avabécba, orv av od Boddy, édv por & pdvov gpudarrys. IIna. Ti totro eyes ; Xo. THv paxpodoyiav, & ade, qv Kabep&ns, H 7d Tp@tov €rrexeipnaoas xpnoba. IIna, Tt 5€; ov é&€orar pou déyew omdaa av Bov- wpa ; : So. Aewa pevrav tafos, @ Bédrore, ei “AOjvale adikopevos, 08 THS ‘EANaSos Theiotyn eotly é€ovcia Tov heya, emerra ov e€vtavda TovTov pdvos atvyjoats. > XN > wt ca XX - * ‘\ > ff adda avrifes Tor’ Tov paKpa héyovTos Kat pH €OédovTOs 15. éyd cal Topyias: besides being the Greek idiom, the initial position of éyé softens the supposition for Gorgias. The Latin has the same position. 16. Sixatos 8’ ef: the sense is to be supplied from what precedes. Cf Lach. 180 d ef 11 fers THSE THE cavroi Snudtn ayabdy cuuBovacioat, xpy cup- BovAevew: Sixacos 5° ef. The regular neg. of the inf. after doce? would be uy is here duce to the conditional color. For the personal const. see on 449 c. 18. avabécGa: the figure is drawn from the draughts-board; it is the regular word for ‘taking back’ a move. Similarly, Prot. 354 e aan’ gre kal viv dvabécbat eteotiv, ef rn ExeTe BAAO Tt pdvat. 20. ri rovro Néyets : equiv. to Ti éore rovro 6 Aéyers. Kr. 57,3,6; H. 1012 a. 21. édv xabéptys: as it were, by a dam or a fence. > ov. 22. xprjc@ar: because in paxpodo- via the orator has at his disposal all the devices of his art. 25. ’AOrjvate: Athens was noted as a mdérus piddroyos (Leg. I. 641 e), and freedom of spéech (aappnoia) was held to be the fundamental principle of a democratically governed state. Cf. Dem. Phil. iii. 3 suets thy mappn- clay én) piv trav BAdAwy obrw Kowhy oleae Seiv elvat mace Tots év tH mwdAet ore nal rots tévors kal tots SovAas avrijs peradedduate. 26. tis “EAAdSos: is the part. gen. dependent upon os The Eng. would find év with the dat. more natural. — €meita: after all. GMT. 856. 28. dvribes: equiv. to but consider on the other hand ; lit. put in opposition. — cov pakpa Adyovtos «ré.: Socrates makes a similar remark in Prot. 335 ¢, when he really prepares to leave the gathering rather than waste his time in words. 461 d e 78 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 461. x 9 , > , > ars > 2 ON , TO EPWTWLEVOV amrokpives Fan, ou dewa av av eyo madout, . ‘ ¥ 30 ei py CE€orar por amievar Kal py akovew cov; GAN Et TL 462 we A / an > 4 A 93 a, 2 XN KydEL TOU Adyou TOD Eipypevov Kai énavopOdcacba avdTov , * \ ¥ > , y ~ 2 Bovde, Govep vevd7 edeyov, avab€uevos ote cou Soxel, &v nw wn ‘ T@ pepe Epwtav Te Kal epwrapevos, womep eyo TE Kat T , er. , \ 2h. Z ‘ ‘ 8 , ‘ ‘\ opytas, edeyxé TE Kal ehéyxov. 7s yap Symov Kat ov > 7 y , a ¥ 35 émiotacOar amep Topyias: 4 ov; IIo. "Eywye. > a. \ ‘ , X > iad ¢ 7S Xa. OvKovy Kal od Kehevers GavTdov Epwrav ExdoToTE oe ¥ , ¢€ > # > z oe av Tis BovAnTaL, ws emiaTapevos aroKpived Bax ; loa. Idvv pev otv. 40 Xo. Kal viv 61 rovtwy émérepov Bovrer tole, épdta 7 amroKpivov. XVII. Toa. "AANA rorjow TadTa. Kai pou aroKpwat, ® Yoxpates* emewdy Topyias amopety cou Soxet mept THs pytopixns, od adrny riva dys €ivat ; > 2 a ’ \ 4 Xo. "Apa €pwras nvtiwa Téxvyv pyut eivar ; 5 Ilona. "Eywye. Xo. Ovdeuia euovye Soxet, @ Tldde, ws ye pds oe > nn * wn TadnOn cipno Bae. 462 31. xrSeco.: implies personal in- 4 terest in the matter. 376 ff., HA. bép’ eixé 5) 7d dewdy... XP. GAN efep& Tor wav cov narod’ eyw. 32. domep viv 8 eAdeyov: is to be taken with the following clause, ava- O€uevos. 34. dys yap Sy:rov: by quoting his own vaunting words against him, Socrates compels Polus also to adopt the dialectic form.— Sy7ov: throws a tinge of irony into the question. b XVII. 1. tatra: is simply the proposition which Socrates makes, and the words aAA& roinow Taito, is a formula of acceptance. — adda: well then, is often thus used in answers. After an imv., as here in Soph. £/. 3. tlva rs elvac: though assum- ing it as self-evident that rhetoric is a réxvn, Polus is compelled, in com- mencing, to put his question quite gen- erally. Socrates, in his answer, con- fines himself simply to deducing the consequences of Gorgias’ admissions. The substitution of #vyrwa for riva is according to the strict rule, which, however, is not rigorously adhered to. 6 f. ds... elpyjcbar: cf Rep. x. 595 b as mpds bas cipcOa. The ac- tive ciety is more common. See Mady. 151; H. 956; GMT. 777. 2. 462 TMAATONOS TOPTIAS. 79 St. I. p. 462. > . 7 Toa. "AAA ri coe SoKxel PyTopiKy eivar; > 0 @ a a $ ‘\ ‘\ A / 3 ee 4 a. P ‘Y oO nS OV TOLYO AL TEXYYV eV T@ TVYVY PAL- a 10 pare 6 €yd® evayyos avéyvav. c TIoa. Ti rovro héyets ; > 4 ¥ , Xo. “Eurepiay éywyé twa. > ¥ “a > Tloa. *"Eusrerpia apa vou Soxet 9 pyTopicy Elva; ¥ > * * ¥ s Xo. "Ewouye, et py te od GO eyes. 15 loa. Tivos éurreipia; , ¥ Ne A > # Lo. Xapiros TLOS KQL noovns aTEpyaoLas. TIoa. OdKov dO doxet 1H p y €u i UVKOVVY KQAOQV OOLt OKEL 1) PYTOPLKY €wWwatl, —— xapiler Oar ofdv re civar dvO parrots ; SWF ¥ Xa. Ti dé, 4 lade; Sn wérvoa wap’ euod, dre dypt 20 adTHp Eival, WOTE TO PETA TOUTO EpwTas, EL OV Kay pot d Soxee etvas ; Ilona. Od yap wérvcpat OTL eurrerpiay Tia avTyY dys Y Bb B mv Pn elva; Za. BovrAe ody, érerd7 Tysas TO xapilerOar, opixpdv 25 Ti wor xapioacOat ; 462 9. & dys od wojoat Téexvqv: isto hearer .is inspired by his speech. 462 be explained according to 448 c woA- Quintilian (Jnst. or. ii. 15. 24) trans- © Aad réxvar ev avOpdwos eicly éx trav lates the expression by the words eureipiv eurelpws nipnuevar, accord- peritia gratiae ac voluptatis. ing to which an art arises from expe- Polus has not yet heard the specific rience. Polus, however, has by this difference which distinguishes rhetoric time forgotten his own words.—év from other éurepia of the same class. To cvyypdppart: see on 448 ec and Hence he again falls into the same Introd. § 14. error in his question as he did in his c 13. éuwepta: here not anempirical answer above, 448 c. In this way, science, but merely a dexterity ac- however, the conversation is again quired by much practice. Cf. 463 b. turned to the consideration of the The following question is no advance _ value of rhetoric. on his first one, and seems to show 20. ro pera rovro: see on 452 vc. d that Polus has no definite plan. —el ov xré.: od because Polus ex- 16. xdpis: is the grace which pects an affirmative answer. — él: causes pleasure, and depends princi- _—_ whether. pally on the person of the orator; 24. tysds: equiv. to Kardy ois elvat hSovh, the pleasure with which the or wep! woAAod rucet, as in Crito 47 a. 80 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 462. Ion. "Eywye. Za. “Epod viv pe, dpororia yris pou Soxet Téyvy elvan. Toa. "Epwrd 81, tis téxvn dyporouia ; Xo. Ovddepia, d Wade. Ina. "AAG ti; Pd. Lo. Pyui 5%, euserpia tes. Ilona. Tivos; pati. Xa. Dnt dy, xdpitos kal Hdovfns dwepyacias, @ Wade. e 30 TIoa. Tavrov & éoriv dyorouia Kat PNTOpLKy ; 25 Xo. Ovdapas ye, dAAA THS adTAS pev emiTNSedoews Opto. IIoa. Tivos Néyess tavrys ; Xo. M1 aypoucdtepov 7 7d adnOes eizety: dxve Top- yiov &vexa éyew, wy otnTrat pe Staxwpwdety Td EavTod 2 - > wy. , 3 x a“ - bJ € € he a 40 émuTndeupa* eyo O€, Eb ev TOUTS eoTW H PNTOPLKT Hv 463 , > £ > > XN ~ ” 2 n / Topyias émurndever, ov oida+ Kai yap aptu éx Tod Adyou ovdery ypiv Katapaves eyévero, Ti ToTE OUTOS WyEtTaL: 6S éya Kad THY pyTopLKnY, TpdypaTds TwWds €aTL pdpLoV ovdevos TaV Kahav. 45 Tor. Tivos, @ Xdékpares; eid, under eve aicyuvbeds. form here is an attempt to concili- 462 462 +o xapl{erOar: pres. for the habit. a ate. In 486 c¢, 509 a kal ci adypomnd- © —yaplracba: aor. for the single example. 34. tairoy 8 éorly: with surprise and disgust. Polus overlooks the fact that there can be two orders belonging to the same species. 37. rivos...Tavrys: in close con- nexion with what precedes. See on 461 d and 449 e. 38. pr dypoukorepov q: it is not necessary to supply a verb of appre- hension, though that is the idea sug- gested by uf with the subjv. GMT. 309; H.867. The employment of the tepdv Tt eimety eat, Socrates has laid aside all idea of conciliation, and speaks the truth with boldness. &ypo- «os is opposed to doretos, and means rude (see on 447a). It is to be taken in connexion with the reproof admin- istered by Polus in 46le. Truth often incurs the reproach of aypocla. Note that Socrates still preserves towards Gorgias his courtesy and respect. 44. ovSevos: explanatory of tivds. 463 45. pnSev épe aloxuvbels: cf Hom. ¥ 96 wndd ri we aidduevos peace. 10 463 IIAATQNOS, TOPIIAS. 81 St. I. p. 463, XVIII. Yo. Aoxet roww por, & Topyia, etvai te ém- ‘\ ~ wn THSEvpa TEexviKoY Mev ov, Puyxns 5 aToyacTLKAs Kal av- N a A a dpeias Kai gioe Sewys mpocopireiy rots avOpdzois: a de > A 2 NX x / , , Kad@ O€ avTov €y@ TO Kepadaov Kodakeiay. TavTns por Soke THS emity dev AAG pe i ddda pdopia et oKkel THS EmiTHdEVoEWS TOAMA pev Kal ara pdpLa Elva, \ \ ig é&v 6€ kal 7 dyorouKxy: 6 SoKet per eivar Téxvy, ws SE 6 2 nN f - ¥ , > 3 3 , ‘\ 4 €40s Aoyos, ovK eat TéxvN, GAN Ewrrerpia Kai TPL. TaUTNS MOpLoY Kal THY pPyTOpLKHY eyo KANG Kal THY ye \ % ‘ an KOMMOTLKHY Kal THY CopLoTLKHDY, TETTAPA TAUTA pOpLa emt , , > > , a , TérTApoW Tpaypnacw. ev ovv Bovderat Il@dos ruvOave- cOa, tuvbavécbw. ov yap mw TérvaoTat, Srotev dye > A A , , 5 \ ec , 3 > 7. €y@ THs Kohakeias pdptov eva THY PyTopLKHY, GAN avTov A€ANIa ovTH atroKxekpyrevos, 6 S€ Emavepwra, et ov Kahdv Hyoupar eivas. XVIII. 2. uxys §€ croxactiucys «ré.: in this characterization, Socra- tes includes all the good that can be said of the art of rhetoric. It re- quires cleverness in perceiving and distinguishing between various rela- tions, hardihood to work before the eyes of the world, and skill in deal- ing with men. — oroxaotiuys: is originally connected with shooting and throwing, but is often metaphori- cally used. With this definition, cf. Isoc. c. Soph. 294 d raira 5& wordqs émmeAcias SetcOar wal puxis avdpuchs kat Sokactinfs épyoy eiva. In regard to courage in speaking, cf. Cic. de Or. i. 26. 121. 4. xodakelay: the Greek word means more than the English “ flat- tery.” Under it is included every- thing whose aim is the agreeable rather than the good. 5. émurnSevoews : notice the va- riety in the use of the words émrj- Sevors and éemirydevpa, which are to be 2 A VY .9 nm > an ‘ eyw de QUT@ OUK GATOK PLVOVLLAL TpOTEpop, distinguished as pags and mpayua, the one being a concrete manifesta- tion of the other. 7. éureipla kal tpcBy: these words are but little distinguished. The first denotes, as has already been said (on 462 c), the result obtained by prac- tice ; the latter is more especially that which is derived from work without any definite object or clear conscious- ness. So rhetoric is called in Phae- drus 260 e &rexvos tpiBy, and in 270 b TpiBh Kal eureipia. See on 462 c. 9. koppotiy: is not only finery in dress, but also hair-curling, oint- ments, cosmetics, etc. Cf. Quint. ii. 15. 25 mangonum artificium, qui colorem fuco et verumrobur inani sagina mentiuntur. The addition of ye emphasizes the exam- ples newly thought of. 13. «lov: see on 462 d. 14 ff. amoxpwovpat... ply dv dtro- kpivopat: after the model of the an- ticipatory conditional. mpiv, “before,” 463 b 82 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 463. ¥ XN ¥ > X\ € an > \ € , \ 15 eve Kaho ElTE alaypov nyoUmat EivaL THY PNTOPLKHY, TpW x “ 5 dy mp@tov amoKkpivwpar ore éotiv. ov yap Sixaov, @ nn ¥ lad Tld\e: add’ etrep Bovren rvPc bai, épdta, drotov pdp.ov THS KohaKelas Gyut eivar THY PNTOPLKHD. Toa. “Epwre 5%, kal drdkpwar, drrotov poptov. 20 Xo. "Ap ovv av pddows amoxpwapevov; eoTw yap 7 4 € XN ‘ x 2 8 4 A , to PNTOpiKH KaTa TOY e“ov Adyov TOdLTLKHS wopiou ELdwdov. , > \ * > XY s 90% > loa. Ti otv; Kadov 7 atoypov héyers adrny civas ; 2 ‘XN »” *, & ‘\ > 7. “a Xo. Aioypov eywye* Ta yap Kaka aloxypa Kado: > X o% > z ¢ ¥ 3 /, a 3 XN f €rreidn) Set Gor aTroKpivacbat ws Non ciddT & eyw éyw. 25 Top. Ma tov Ala, @ Sdxpares, add’ eyo od5€ adrds ouvinpe ore héyess. Xa. Eixdrws ye, & Topyia: ovdév yap mw cages heya, e Tl@Xos 5€ 60€ véos Eat Kat dvs. 463 takes the inf.; “until,” the indic. © subjy. or opt., according to the sphere feat by confessing to his own inability 463 to catch Socrates’ meaning as it is at of time. See Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. ii. 465 ff. d 20. dp’ otv «ré.: the question im- plies doubt, and is intended to stimu- late Polus’ attention; but for some cause, probably dulness, he merely renews his previous question.— The meaning of ef3wAov is made clear by Theaet. 150 e€ Wevd} Kal efSwra epl mwAelovos Tornoduevae TOU aAnOods. 23. ta ydp Kaka «ré.: that which according to its nature can be char- acterized as a@ya0év, must be esteemed caddy. If, however, it is xaxdy, then it must be esteemed aiaxpdv. 24. ds 75n clSort: is a stinging re- buke to Polus. 25. pa tov Ala, GAN éyd xré.: Socrates’ words implied that Polus was either too dull or too careless to understand him. Gorgias, while tacitly admitting Polus’ incompe- tency, tries to smooth over his de- present stated. If the master, airds, cannot understand, the pupil may be pardoned for the same fault. Polus, though defeated in his attempt to rout Socrates (461 b ff.), only re- tires to recover breath before making a final effort (466 a).—pa tov Ala: is areal asseveration, used designedly by Gorgias, who is too much of a gentleman to indulge in oaths, — this being the only instance in this dia- logue. It is significant that Polus, in spite of his heat, is likewise only once (473 a) betrayed into the com- mon val ua Ala. Callicles uses oaths roundly enough, but restricts himself to v} Tobs Beods, val wa Ala, and pa Ala. On Socrates’ habit, see on 449 d, 461 b. 28. Tlados S€ .. . dus: in this re- mark Socrates both apologizes for and explains the reason of the ob- scurity of his statements; but it is, at the same time, an excellent char- TIAATONOS POPTIAS. St. I. p. ¥ ‘ nw XN ¥ % > n Tor. “AAXa rovrov pev €a, emo 8 eid, mas héyes 30 ToduTiKNS opiou Eldwhov eivar THY PyTop_KHY. Xa. “AN eyo trepdcopar dpdoa, 6 yé pou haiverat > ee , > Or A , d a ~ 9 civa 9 pyTopiKy: ei d€ pu) TUyyadver dv TOdTO, T1Odos dde€ ehéyEet. Top. Ila@s yap ov; A“ - a“ % oe copa Tov Kahels TL Kal puxyD ; > an XN wv y ‘ > . # % , Xa. OvKoty Kal TovTwv ole Tid. eva Exatépou eveEtav ; Tor. "Eywye. Xo. Ti d€; Soxotoay pev edeEiav, odcav §& ov; ofov , , \ a > »% \ , a TOLOVOE éyw . qwo\Aot dSokovow cu €XELY TA TWLMATA, OUS > x e s ¥ , 9 > > » ¥ a ouK av padiws ataOourd Tis OTe OvK ED €xovtw addos 7 Top. ’AAn On déyets. > # XX “~ nw 40 LATPOS TE KAL THY YUMLVAOTLKWY TLS. XN nw 7 X93 , > N93 “ Xa. To tovovroy héyw Kat €v compare €ivat Kal ev wuyn, y nA a > »% x A Yous , ¥ OTL TTOLEL [LEV doKeuv €u eXelv TO OWULA KAL THV Wuyny, EXEL 5€ ovdev paddov. 463 acterization of the impetuosity and © heat of Polus, whether he be the questioner or the respondent. It also contains an allusion to the name it- self (aaAos a colt, filly). 464 35. The division of xoAakela given above was made without specifying the standard of division, and only enumerates the different varieties. Socrates now, at Gorgias’ instance, reduces the whole subject to a regu- lar system, by referring xoAaketa back to a higher species, @epameia, on the basis of a distinction according to reality and appearance. Now, since Ocparweia has for its object the evetia Tov avOperou, we get two more points of view: (1) that of the object (avépé- mov), as composed of body and soul; and (2) that of the treatment, as being either positive or negative. 37. olov roovSe Adyw: is a formula for introducing an example or a spe- cial case in illustration of a general statement. 38. eb éxew Ta owpata: 7a oduata here, as well as 7b cpa Kal thy Wuxhy below, is acc. of specification. H. 718 a. 42. 10 tovovroy: the article is used on account of its reference to what has just been described. This is more definitely given in the dr (rela- tive) clause which follows. 43. éxa 8€ xré.: in this change of subject lies no ambiguity either to the Greek mind or to us. It was, be- sides, a regular way in Greek of ex- pressing “although.” The subject is the same indefinite one which must be supplied as the object of the pre- ceding moet. See on 456 d. 83 463. 464 84 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 464. 45 Top. "Eote tavra. b XIX. Yo. bépe 84 cor, eav S¥vopa, capearepov ém- deiEw 5 dé dvow 6 a { dvo dé ei 6 héyw. vow ovrow Tow mpayudrow dvo héyw , \ N 2 AN “A io \ a \ NN Téxvas: THY pev ent TH Wuxy ToditiKny KahG, THY dé emt TOHpaTL piay pev ovTws dvoudoa ovK exw cot, pias Se 5 ovons THS TOV adwatos Hepareias SV0 pdpia éyw, THY pev yupvactiyy, THY dé iatpiKyY: THs S€ wohutKNS avTi- oTpopoy pev TH yupvaotiKyn THY vomobeTiKHY, dvTiatpopov dé 7H latpixn TH Sukavoowny. €miKowwvodor pev Oy © > ¥ Y x XN | S € / , y addndais, ATE TEPL TO AVTO OVTAL, ExaTEPaL TOUTWY, 7 TE 10 taTpiKy TH yupvactiKn Kal 9 SiKatoowvy TH vopoberiKn, o XN 4 ¥ > na 4 ® - opws dé diadepovoiv te GAAHwv. TeTTdpwv OH TovTwY x OA Noo UN x x s a a Q OVO@Y, KQL GAEL TPoOs TO Bédriorov Jeparrevove av TOV pV 464 XIX. 2. Svoiv «ré.: the dual in restore the normal condition. Ac- 464 b plato’s time is fast fading out, and cording to their object, therefore, b he uses it as an artistic feature. It medicine and gymnastic, as well as disappears entirely before the close the making and administration of of the fourth century B.c. Notice the law, all belong to the same class, asyndeton. émixowvwvodat ev 5) GAANAaIS. 4. play ovopdoot: like él dvduare 8. Stkatoovvy: is used here in the c kadeiv, Tpocayopevery. — opts: is idio- matically used, “thus briefly” or “thus at the moment.” See on 503 d. —ov« éxw: I am not in position, regu- larly takes the aor. infinitive. 6 f. dvtlotpodov pev .. . dvtiotpo- gov S€: an example of ‘ anaphora.’ — dvtiorpodov: denotes a part corre- sponding to a similar part on the op- posite side of the symmetrical whole. The function of gymnastic and no- mothetic is to lay down, each in its own department, certain positive direc- tions whereby the constitution of the subject under treatment is preserved and improved. The arts of healing and the administration of justice seek in practice to put a stop to the dis- regard of these directions, and to same sense as ducactixh 520 b below; why, it is hard to understand. It may have been chosen in view of the earlier definition of the object of rhetoric in 454 b, 455 a. The iarpich is beyond cavil good; on the con- trary, d:cacrixh is susceptible of a bad construction, whereas here there was need of no doubtful word. Though not customary, there is no reason why 8xcatocdvn should not be under- stood as the practical exercise of that character of the 8icaios, which for an Athenian was naturally to be found in the dcacriey. The word, then, means here “administration of justice.” That the word is genuine is shown by Quintilian’s translation iustitia in ii. 15. 28, TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 85 St. I. p. 464, \ n A oe \ , € XN > , : TO OOLA, TOY € THY WuynY, 1) KOhaKEUTLKT aio bopevn, ov a , > \ s s € \ , yvovoa d€ya, ahha OTOXAO AfLEVY), TETPAKA EQUTYV Stavei- e A y a a 15 paca, vTrodvca vTro €KACTOV TWY popiwn, TT POO TOLELTQAL > an Y \ an €WaL TOUTO O7TEp wrédu, Kal TOU pev Bedrrictov ovdev ppovriler, T@ S€ del YdioTw Onpeverar THy dvovay Kai 2 a a s 7 ee > é€aTrara, @aTe SoKel wAEiaTOU agia eivat. ey x > Vi7TO ev OUV . > \ € > \ , \ a \ Ty LaTPLKYNV 1 opoTrouKkn UTOOEOUKEV Kal TI POO TOLELTAL Ta , , a , 2Q7 y > > ‘ 20 Bédrvata oitia TO OHpare cidévar, WaT Ei Sou ev TaLot 25 464 d § , 6 > s \ > XS a 2 > 5 , taywviler at Opomrovoy TE Kae taTpov yn EV ay paow y > , y “ , > h NLA OUTWS QAVvOYTOLS WOTTEP ot TaLoEes, TOTEPOS ET OLEL TEpt TWV XpyoTaV citiwy Kal TovNpar, 6 LaTpds 7 6 diporrotds, lupo x > a X > / av amobavety TOV LaT pov. , \ > > XN n Ko\aKketav ev OUVV QUTO Kaho, Kat aicxpov dnt elvat 76 TorovTov, @ lake — TovTO yap 465 XN \ ¥ y a € 7 , » nw mpos a€ héyw — ote TOV Hd€os GToydLlerar avev Tod Bed- et 'é ‘\ >» ON ¥ io * > 2 4 tistov: téxvynv dé adTHy ov dys Elva GAN eurrerpiay, 13 f. alc@opevn and yvovca: are distinguished both as regards the ob- ject and the manner of their activity. yveors is directed to the nature, which is only comprehended by thought; aic@nois is merely the visual percep- tion of the outward form or effects, the cause of which, lying in the na- ture of the object, is not compre- hended. By é@Ada& oroxacapérn the idea of aic@ouévn is not merely re- peated, but also more exactly defined. Similarly, 452 e, and in a different or- der 521 d,e. On the heaping up of participles and their subordination, see Kr. 06, 15 with notes. 15. vaodtoca: as it were under a cloak or mask by which its real na- ture is concealed. The usage is bor- rowed from the stage; cf Luc. Pisc. 383. The simple acc. with this verb is not uncommon. 17. Onpeverar tiv dvovay: the ap- plication of the figure of the hunt to 464 those arts which seek only the appear. ance, is frequent in Plato, and most developed in the Sophistes. With the same employment of abstract for concrete Demosthenes expresses him- self, Ol. ii. 7 rhy yap éxdotwy avo del Trav ayvootyTwy aitoy ékanaTay Ka) TpocrauBdvev oftw nvéndn. 22. aomep of waiSes (sc. efow): in such comparisons the nom. is as com- mon as the attracted case. Madv. Syn. 20, 38.—éaale mepl «ré.. this otherwise poetic verb is used several times by Plato. Cf. 518 ¢; Apol. 19 ce; Crit. 47 b, 48 a; Lach. 186 e. It also takes the acc. Kr. 68, 31, 2. 25f. rotro yap mpos oé Adyw: brings up again Polus’ persistent ef- forts to make Socrates say that rheto- ric was caddy (462 c, 468 d, e). 26. croxadterar: here equiv. to aim at; above 464 ¢ in the derived mean- 465 a 86 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 465, 9 > ¥ , 207 e , € ESP A \ OTL OUK exel Adoyov ovoeva @V Tpoo pepe, OTOL ATTA THV ua > , 9 \ > 7 e , XN * > en pvow eat, woTE THY aiTiay ExdoToU py EXEL EtrrELY. 2 AN \ f > a fA OK > »* Le , 30 €ya dé réyvyv od Kah, 6 dv 4 dhoyov mpaypa: TovTwY Sé wépt ed duguaByrets, Céd\w trocyeww hdyov. XX. Ty pev obv iarpicn, domwep éyo, 7 dyorouKy A \ an ‘ . x Kohakela vmdKeras’ TH O€ yumvacTiKH KaTa TOY avTov 4 a , sx \ 3 TPOTOV TOVTOY 7 KOUPwTLKH, KAKOUPYOS TE OVTG Kal atra- Ty) Kal ayevvys Kat avededOepos, oxHpaow Kal xpa- \ An y rn 5B pacw Kal dedrnT Kal éoOyoe aTaTwoa, WOTE Toe addérprov KadANos epedKopevous Tov oikelov Tov dia THS YULVATTLKHS Genel. 97> ‘ nA ne iv obv pn pakpodroya, édw cou > A C4 € 7 ¥ \ xa »” > , ELTTEW WOoTEp ou yeopérpar — oy yop av tows aKxohovOy- 465 ing guess at.— dvev tov BedAtlorov: is @ prachylogic. Without regard to what is best. 28. dv mpoodeper: denotes the means which each employs, and whereby it works upon others. 29. dore . .. py éxav: the uA could very well be omitted, but Greek usage sanctions the redundancy. 31. wrooyxetv Aoyov: to render ac- count. Cf. Prot, 338 d rddw obtos éuol Adyou brocxéTw. b XX. 1. dorouky: is not attribu- tive to xoAaxela, but the latter is predi- cate with brdéce:tar, as flattery. Hence the point of the following xard& Adyov. 2. imcxeatrat (equiv. to drordbe- rat): is not used in the sense which we elsewhere find, lie at the foundation of, as in Prot. 349 b éxdorw raév dvoud- tev brécerral tis 1510s ovcia, but like brodé5uxev above, 464 d. 3. kakotpyos xré.; these four ad- jectives go in pairs. The two first describing the nature of xoAakefa per se, contain the «axdv of it; the first is more general, the second adds the special (Kr. 69, 32, 2), at the same time emphasizing the result for the 465 world at large. The second pair con- b tains the aicypdy, the verdict on the value of such skill. The following participle, with its datives, defines more narrowly amarnaAh. 8. ot yewnérpar: the word denotes “mathematicians” in general. So e.g. Theodorus of Cyrene is continu- ally called -yewuérpns in the Theae- tetus. Higher arithmetic also is in- cluded under geometry, because the Greeks employed geometrical meth- ods to represent the higher relations of numbers. In the following pro- portion, we are reminded at once of an arithmetical formula; while the Greeks were reminded of the due proportion of lines and figures, in accordance with the development of mathematical science among them. The relations of the ideas can, by means of this threefold division into pairs, be brought into a simple but complete scheme. See on 464 a above. — 78y ydp «ré.: mathematics was looked upon by Plato as a prepa- ration for ‘dialectic.’ 10 15 465 TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 87 St. I. p. 465. y a an Tas — OTe 6 KOppaTLKH TPdS YUpLVaTTLKYD, TOUTO dxpo- x A > , aX be 8 y a ‘\ TOUKY) TPOS LATPLKYV* PAAAOV OE WOE, OTL O KOMUWTLKY s n TpOs yupvacrtiKny, TOVTO TopiaTiKn pos vopoberiKyD, , ¢ a 2 ‘\ X 2 , n c S. \ Kal OTL O OoTOLLKH TPOS LATPLKHY, TOUTO pNTOPLKY TPOS Sukaroovvynp. o / # / y 4 omep pevtor éyw, du€aTyKev otTw fice i: 2 3 XN ¥ , > a a> EN \ x > AN QaTEe 5 EYYUS OVTOV pvpovTat cy TM AVT@ KA TEPL TAVTA \ Noes \ > x y , oodiotat Kat PNTOPES, Kat OUK EKOUVOLY OTL KPNOWVYTAL + > ve nr ¥ ec -” ¥ , OUTE avTOL EavTOLs OUTE OL aAdow avOpwrot TovTOLS. 9. 6 Koppotikry mpds yupvacTiKTy : in this formula éori is always want- ing. 10. paddov &: introduces a com- parison equally true, but more to the point of the argument (cf 449 a), by the completion of the proportions al- ready worked out, and by their ex- tension to the whole system of ideas thus far developed. — It might seem strange that sophistic is paired with nomothetic, and not with philosophy. Philosophy, however, is the science of principles in general, while in this dia- logue only ethical and political princi- ples are discussed. These latter, how- ever, the law-giver must make use of, —i.e. must be a philosopher, as is proved in the much more comprehen- sive and thorough discussion in the Republic. 13. dep Aeyw: refers, as it always does, to a previous statement; here to 464 ¢, where the close relationship of the réxvar, which have to do with the same object (body and soul) was spoken of. This idea is here ex- pressed by the words are 3 &yyus dv- twv, which recall at once the expres- sion above, dre wept 7d adtd otca. The subject of didorneev is not ex- pressed, but is a general one, to be - taken out of the preceding propor- tions, which embrace all réxvo: and \ KQUL éumepia, and the same subject must be thought of with dv7wy. On account of the position of dre @yyus tvtwy the 3¢ is drawn away from the sec- ond member of the contrast, gvpov- Tat. — muvee: means the essential pe- culiarity, actual nature, of the ideas. Instead of these, however, with gv- povrat we have the persons introduced who employ and practise the réyvas and éueipiat, and who from ignorance of their true nature bring them into activity at the same time, and thus mix together matters which, properly considered, are quite distinct. 14. év ro atta: probably denotes the soul as the place of action, and wep) Tavré the moral questions treated, both of which are reckoned together above (464 c) in the expression rep) 7 avd. Socrates restricts himself to the two éumeipia: to which pyropuch belongs, inasmuch as the object of the whole investigation is only an exact understanding of the nature of rhetoric. This passage is referred to below, in 520 a.— Plato can explain more accurately the relation of so- phistic and rhetoric to each other, because he was the first to explain the difference scientifically, whereas Gorgias, though he was unwilling to be reckoned among the sophists, could give no reason therefor. 465 88 20 25 465 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 465. ‘ *” > X € XN a , 2 / > > a . yap av, & pn 1 Wyn TH OapaTe erecTare, AAA’ avTO a ea \ Nie ON , 6 a \ 8 s v avuTq@, KGL (LY) VITO TAUTNS KATE EWPELTO Kat LEK PLVETO yn TE 2 \ NN ¢€ 9 la) > 2 ON X an ¥ ooTrouKy Kal 1 LAT PLKY), GAN QavuTO TO TWA EKPLVE oral. [@pevov Tats xapioe Tats Tpds avTd, TO TOU “Ava€aydpov » > > na dv odd Hv, @ hile Oke — od yap rovtwv eumerpos, — € aA x / , 3 , > ee 7 on > s » O[LOU QV TTAVTA XPYLaATA epupero ev TM QuUT@, QAKPLT@V ov- “ > wn *% € “A ‘XN = nw TMV TWV TE LAT PLK@V KQL VYLELY@VY KOL ooTrouKav. a XN O pev > 3. % ‘ € \ z > , > s obv €yd dyut THY pyTopiKny Eivat, AKyKOaS* avTioTpopov > a 2 a“ c > a 3, , oWorroiias Ev Wuyy, WS EKEWWO EV THmaTL. ¥ \ > LOWS LEY OUV ¥ ‘ + 5, a: X , 4 aTOTOY TETOLNKA, OTL TE OVK EMV pakpous hoyous héyew 7X x , > Z » \ RP 2 ON QVvUTOS OuKVOV Adyov ATOTETAKA. agévov HEV OVY EOL OVY- 17. émeordre.: we have to imagine 4 such émistdra as, like the cuBepyqrns, madorpiBns, wolunv, are at the same time émisrjpoves. Cf. Prot. 312 a, where the sophist is defined as ém- otdtns Too roiRra Sewdy Aé€yeiy, i.e. émotdmevos mojoat Kré., a definition which furnishes, at the same time, an example for the gvpovra év TO aiT@ kal wept rait& copicrhs kal pyrwp above. 18. kareBewpetro: cf 457 c. Here is meant a thorough critical exami- nation from a higher point of view. 20. to rov “Avataydpov: see on 450 ec, 453 e, and Kr. 47, 5,10. Anaxa- goras, the friend of Pericles, agreed with the Atomic school and Empedo- cles, in holding that, in their original condition, the elements or atoms (ac- cording to him, unlimited in number, but of a certain definite quality) were mixed all together, without any defi- nite arrangement. Into this confu- sion order was introduced by voids, or the thinking spirit; or at least, this spirit gave the impulse towards it. His thesis describing the primitive condition of matter was this: dod wdvta xphuata jv. Cf. Dyer-Cron, Introd. to Apol. § 10. 21. rovtwv: perhaps with an inten- tional ambiguity. — Gorgias himself was not entirely without philosophi- cal culture. See Introd.§6. Butas to Polus, we have no information. 23. Trav te larpikav Kal vyewav: both expressions are frequently con- nected to denote the same idea, both subjectively and objectively. Now, since tyewdy is that which tyler éumowe? (Rep. iv. 444 ¢) and iatpiry is emathun Tov byervod, the latter must perforce be the art whose object is to restore the body to a healthy con- dition. 23 f. & pév odv xré.: with this the discussion returns to the point which had given occasion to the above di- gressions (S7ep pévtor). 25. éxeivo: refers to dWoroila. The employment of a neuter demonstra- tive or relative referring to an ante- cedent in the masculine or feminine adds to the generalness of the con- ception. Cf. 463 b, 460 e. But év o@pati may have had some influence. 27. pév ovy: here, as also in tows TAATQNOS, TOPLAS. 89 St. I. p. 465, # »¥ > - , , o * 3 £ - yrapnv éxew éotiv. éyovtos yap ov Bpaxéa ovK ewav- Oaves, ovdé ypyobar TH aroKpioe, WY cou aTeKpwapny, 30 ovdev olds T Hoa, aAN’ ed€ou Sunyyoews. av ev ody Kat 5 10 465 e an Y €y@ Tov aToKpwopevov py EXW OTL YPHTwpaL, amdoTELvE kat od déyor, éay S€é exw, ea pe ypnoOar- Sixasov yap. 466 Kal vov TavTn TH atroKpioes Et TL ExeLs yYpHTOaL, YpO. XXI. Toa. Té otv dys; Kodakeia Soke cou evar 7 pnropux , \ a »¥ > , Ya. Kodaxeias ev Ovv eywye €L7TOV LOpLov. add’ ov pvynpovevers THALKOUTOS WY, ® wre; Th raya Spaces; TIoa. *Ap’ ody Sokodat cou ws Kddakes ev Tals TddECt na we - * foe haddror vouiler bar ot ayalot pyropes ; 2 , a 2 es x , x > ‘ , Xo. “Epdtnwa tovt €pwras 7 Adyou Twos apynv dé- yes ; Ilona. "Epwre éywrye. Za. Ovde vopiler Oar enovye Soxovew. wey obv and 4 wey ody just preceding, ody does not denote sequence, but adds force to the statement about to be made in view of what has already been said. — épol: hints a contrast. 466 XXI. 1. rl otv gys: Polus braces a himself, and assumes again the office of questioner; but shows, by the vagueness (cf. above, 462 ¢ with note) and inappropriateness of his question, that he is either singularly inatten- tive or stupid. Hence he receives a sharp rap over the knuckles with the admonition that his question had been some time settled (465 d). 4. rl tdéxa Spdoas: is taken by Cron to mean “what can you possi- bly (rdéxya) bring forward?” we. in the course of the discussion. The scholiast understood it as meaning “what will you do presently,” when you get old, as we see by the addition mperBitns yevduevos. Probably it is but an exclamation of wonder and surprise ; our colloquial “ What’ll you do next?” 5. év rais modect: is to be con- nected with gadroc voul(ecba. Inspite of his qualification, Polus proceeds to put as bada color on his assumed view of Socrates as possible, by adding aya- Oot (cf. 449 a) to prropes. Cf. 469 a. He does not aim at a refutation of Socrates; with him the question is still not the true nature of Rhetoric, but its value and power in the state. 7. épdrnpa xré.: probably Socrates only wishes to show that, from the point of view of dialectic, the preced- ing question is so inappropriate that he is obliged to look upon it as a merely rhetorical one, by which Polus only states his own sentiments. Cf. belowce. 10. o¥8é voulferBar: much more 466 a b 90 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 466. TIoa. Ts od vopilerOar; ob péyiorov Sivavtar év Tats mToh\eow ; . 5 x Xa. Ovx, ei 7d Sivacbai ye héyers dyaov Tu civar TO # duvapevy. > * 15 TIoa. "ANG pev 57) A€yw ye. > , - = a > ~ / Xa. “EXdytotov toivyy pou Soxovaw Tav ev TH TOdEL Svvacbar ot pyTopes. ¢ - > yy ¢ 4 ~ 4 a TIon. Ti dé; OVX, WOTEP Ol TUPAVVOL, ATOKTEWVATW TE c a xn , XN > a , ‘\ > , ov av Bovdr\wrrat, Kat apatpovvTat ypypata Kat éxBad- 20 Novow ex To Tew bv Gy SoKH adrots ; Xo. Ny Tov Kiva, auduyvow pévro., @ Toke, éf’ Exa- atov ay héyeus, wéTEpov adTos TavTA éyeLs Kal yuounNy TAVTOU aTopaive, 7) ewe Epwras. TIna. “AAN eywye a épwrd. > > a 25 Xo. Elev, & dire: erara dvo apa pe Epwras; IIna. Ids dvo; > ¥ 9 4 y > 4 e Xo. OvK apt. ovTw Tws EdEyEs, OTL ATOKTELVYaTLY Ol 4 eer A x , o, ¢ , XN c pyTopes ods av BovdwrTat, omTEp ot TUpavvoL, Kat xp7- > a XN 4 2 ™ / a x para dadaipovvrar Kal é€ehavvovow €x ToV TOEwY Sv ay 30 oxy avrots. ¥. TIna. “Eywye. the fact that he thereby detracts 466 from its moral value. He employs 466 crushing than gaido vopilecba. “hey are not considered at all,” “they have no value whatever.” On voulCecOa, cf. Ar. Nub. 962 dr’ éyd (6 Sixatos Adyos) Ta Sixaa Aeywv HvOovy Kal cwppootyy ‘vevduioro (“was in high repute ”’). 15. pév: almost equiv. to pry, indeed. —8y: equiv. to just. “But that is indeed just what I do (ye) say.” 18. domep of trvpavvor: by this com- parison Polus endeavors to emphasize the importance of his art, careless of his strongest expression of power ac- tually used (droxrewdacw), not even using the circumlocution ofof 7 eicty. In spite of his following reassertion, however, the question is really only a rhetorical one, in which he voices his own statements. See on a above. 21. vi tov Kiva: see on 461 b.— Gpdiyvoo .. . A€yers: ‘I am in doubt at every word you say. Cope. 25. elev: “very well,” accepts the issue. TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 91 St. 1. p. 466. XX. Lo. Aéyw roivuy cou, dtu Sv0 tar’ eoriv épw- / NS a , Z % > , \ THPATA, KAL ATOKpPWoUpal ye Go Tpos auddrepa. Pypt , 7 an yap, & Wade, éy® Kat Tovs pyTopas Kai Tods TUpavvous 5 , 6 \ 2 a aN s y 8 \ UVATUAL LEV EV TALS TTOAETLV OpPLKpoTaTor, woTrEep VuvoYn » x @ a 5 eheyov: ovdev yap Tovey Gv BovArovtra ws eos Eimety: 10 15 466 Tovew pevtor Te av avtots Sd&y BédticTov Eivar. Ilona. OvKovy tovrd éorw 7d péya Sivacbars Xa. Ovy, ds ye Pnow Ilados. Ilona. “Ey ob dnp; pypt pev ov eywye. Xo. Ma trov—ovd ov ye, éret 7d péya Sivacba dys > x > a s ayabov Eat TH duvapeve. Ilona. Pyyt yap odv. > x > ¥ > 27 a a aA oA da. Ayabov OvV OlEL EWAL, CAV TLS TOL) TAVTA, A QV § a 2A Bér > a \ ¥ \ a x a OKYN) QuT@ EATLOTO EWAL, VOUV YY EX WV, KQL TOUTO KQAELS peéeya Sivac bar; Ilona. Ovx eywye. > a > s ‘ es a ¥ ‘ Sa. Ovkovv aTrooEtEEts TOUS PYTOPAaAS VOUV €XOVTAS Kat XXII. 4. SuvacOa. pév: the cor- relative has pévro., which is much stronger than dé. 5. dv BovAovrat: is a circumlocution for the part. gen.; hence the indica- tive. — ds eros elmeiv: see on 450 b. 7. ovkxovv «ré.: Polus is surprised that Socrates should see any differ- ence in the two phrases. * 9. ob dype (nego): repeats ov x, és ono. Polus does not understand Socrates, who has in mind the results of the admission that the possession of power is « good. The question is merely rhetorical, with an accent of astonishment. 10. pa tov: the omission of the divinity occurs not infrequently. Cf. Ar. Ran. 1374 pa rév, eyo pév ov8 av, ef tis ZrAeyé por THY emituxdvTwy, émiOd- pny xré. H., 723 a, says that the deity is omitted with humorous effect; but it is much more likely here that So- crates is a little vexed, but stops at once any exhibition of it. The Scho- liast’s note, edAaBelas yap, may be interpreted as indicating this motive, or the motive assigned to Socrates on - 461 b.— ys: with a clear reference to Polus’ previous statements in b, which he is thus led to reiterate. 12. ydp otv: is frequently found thus in phrases of acquiescence. 17. ovdKotv amoSeites xré.: the fut. in neg. questions forms a lively ex- pression for urgent demand. Kr. 53, 7,4; H.844a.—The pred. noun with the supplementary partic. follows the same rule of agreement, as with the supplementary infinitive. 466 e 92 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 467. TEXYNY THY PyTopiKHy GANG pu7) Kodaxeiav, cue eLehéyEas ; 467 el O€ pe doers avédeyKTOV, oF PyTopeEs ot ToLoUYTES Ev Tats 4 a zs *. a hy € v > A > x 20 réhkeow & SoKet avrots Kal ot T¥pavvor ovdev adyabdv a s ¢ \ A 7 2 € XN , > ToUTO KEKTHTOVTAL. 7 S€ Sivapis €oTW, WS OV is, aya- dv, 75 8€ Trovety dvev vod & Soxel kal od dpodoyeis KaKdv 25 30 5 a YY E€wal* % OU; TIna. "Eywye. ”™ x» > ees 2 id s a e , Xa. lds ay ovv ot prfropes péya S¥vawto 7 ot TUpav- > wn ¢ 4 X ¥ > a € X A vou €v Tats Toheow, av pn LwKparys eEereyyOy bro Td- Nov ott Tovovaw & Bovdovrat; IIoa. Odros avyp — / Xa. OV dy rovety adrovs & Bovdovta: adda pw’ eheyyxe. Tlon. OvK dpte apoddyers moveiy & Soxet avrots Béd- TiaTa eval, ToUTOU TpdaOev ; \ x n c eer Xa. Kat yap viv opodoya. n a Ilona. OvKovy wovovow a BovdovTat ; Xo. Ov dye. 467 18. éfedéyEas: the refutation con- 28. otros dvip —: ‘aposiopesis.’ 467 4 sists in the proof, and the proof is Polus is so astonished that he does at the same time a refutation. We must not insist on the priority of the aorist participle (H. 856 b); but the complex is to be considered, and from that point of view it would make no difference whether we had dmobeize:s éferdytas or drodeitas eteddyters. 21. ¥ € Sivapis «7é.: contains one of the propositions on which Socra- tes bases the statement made above (466 e) and afterwards repeated, ras by... wéya Suvavto. The other pro- position is that the possession by the orators of the power of doing what they please is not a good possession. 26. éfeXeyxOq* in the pregnant sense. “If by a refutation of the position taken he be not convinced.” Cf. 482 b. not know what to say. The com- plete exclamation (always ‘without the article) occurs 489 b. Cf. 505 e. Polus’ astonishment, as well as stupid- ity, are still more evident in the words which follow, oyérAva A€yers kal Sep- gua. oxérdws is taken from Homer, where, however, it is only used of persons (except rarely in the Odys- sey); tmreppuys is not unknown in Attic, but occurs in Plato (except here and 477 d) only in the adverbial form. 31. rovrov mpdobev: can, of course, be considered as a gloss on &pr:, but it heightens the effect, from a mimetic point of view, as well by its meaning, “a moment ago,” as by its position at the end of the sentence. 35 40 5 10 467 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 93 Bt. I. p. 467. TIna. Ilovotvres d€ & SoKet avrots ; cs Lo. Dypi. Tloa. Sxérrua €eyers Kat vrepPva, @ YoKpares. * e > a on oe a Xo. M1) Karyyope, & Amore IlWAc, va Tpoceitw cE XN s 3 > > Q ¥ 2 N > a 2 7 gy Kata o€: Gd’ et pev exers ewe epwrav, emiderEov dre se > XN , 3. 5 > 4 : Wevdouar, et 5€ wy, adtds dmoKpivov. TIoa. "AAN €0édw arroxpiver Oat, wa Kal €id@ dru hé- yes. XXII. Yo. Wdrepov ody cor Soxodow of avOpwrror an , aoa’ 4 € , a3 a «a tovTo BovdkecOat, 6 dv mpatrwow éExdaToTe, 7 eKEivo, ov eveka TpatTovaw TOVO 6 mpaTTovew; olov ot TA Hap- paKka mivovTes Tapa TaV iatpav mdoTepsy Go. SoKovoLW a : , y a - X\ , ‘ tovTo BovAco Oat, dep Towwvaow, Tivew Td Pdppakov Kat adyetv, ) ékeivo, TO Vytaivew, 08 Evexa Tivovow ; IIoa. Andov Ore 76 byvaivew. > “ XN c a, , \ * »* Xo. OvKovy Kat ot md€éovTés TE Kat TOV ahdov Kpyua- \ , > aA_s 3 a , a TLFPLOV Xpnwatilopevor ov TOUTS Eat 6 BovAovTaL, 6 TroL- “ € o c ‘XN e “A XN ovow éxdototre: Tis yap Bovderar mrely Te Kal Kwvdv- , \ , > ¥ > 2 x A > a9 vevew Kal Tpaywat exew; GAN’ ExELVO, Oiwat, OD EveKa , ~ ac X y , mr€ovew, TAovTEW* TAOUTOU yap Evexa 7h€ovTW. 35. 8€: almost equiv. to “although.” It is often used in the second of clauses thus connected to emphasize the opposition. 38. d Adore Tla\e: ‘paronomasia’ in Polus’ style. See on 448 c. 41. Wa kal ela: expresses curi- osity, rather than a desire for infor- mation. Socrates, as leader of the discussion, makes at once an ad- vance, by fixing a very important distinction. XXIII. 2 f. 6 dv mpdrrwcw, 6 apdrrovowv: the former is generic, the latter is a circumlocution. A few lines below Sep owovow is the special case, TOUTO. 4. mlvovres wapd xré.: the preposi- tion is personal; “from the hands of.” 8. of wAdovres : the merchants (Zu- mopat) who engage in transmarine trade. Notice the confusion of the order, in which we can see the natu- ral freedom of conversation. The subject of éoriv is ob rovro 8 motovow, the predicate 8 BovAovra:r. The sub- ject of rAdovres floats until the plural verb appears. The neg. in ovxoty is not felt here. H. 1048 a (8). 11. wpdypar éxew: is passive to mpaypwara mapéxey, explanatory of 94 PLATO’S GORGIAS. IIoa. Tldvvu ye. St. I. p. 467. ¥ » y XN X , 27 , da. “AhAo Te otv ovTw Kal Tept wavTwr, éav Tis TL 15 mpattTy evekd Tov, ov TovTo Bovdera, 6 mpaTTe, aAN 20 25 30 467 2 , EKEWO, OU EVEKA TPATTE; TIoa. Nai. > > 3 » nx» a 2 N O¥ > , > da. “Ap obvy €otw Ti Tv OvTwY, 6 ody Hror dyabdv y 2 Nw x a \ , ¥ > x » s €OTLW 1) KQAKOV peta€éd TOUTWV OUTE ayabov OUTE KQKOV ; Ilona. Todd) avayKn, @ SdéKpares. Xo. OdK«ouv éyers eivar ayabdy pev codiay te Kal co 7 \ n Ni > \ A X N > VYLELAV KQL aAovToV Kat TaANa TA TOLAVTA, KAKA de Tavav- Tia TOUTWY ; ¥. TIna. “Eywye. Xa. Ta d€ pre dyaba pyre kaka dpa Todde déyets, & * ~ / “ 3 nn 5. % nw i. ee EVLOTE [LEY JLETEXEL TOU ayaod, eviote d€ TOD KQKOU, EVLOTE 468 dé ovderepov, otoyv Kabyabat Kai Badilew kal tpéyew Kal me, Kat otov av Movs Kal Evra Kal Tada Ta TOLAdTA; > a , a» »* > 7 an ‘ / > X , ov Tava héyets; 7) GAN arra Kahels Ta UYTE ayaa prTE KOKG ; Tloa. OvK, adda Tada. , > \ \ a y a > a Zo. Tlorepov OUvVV Ta petraéd TAUVUTA EVEKA TWV ayabav , 9 , x $ 6 XN an & 7 TpPaTTOVOL, oTay TPaTT@o, y Taya QaTWVY UETA ; Toa. Tad pera€éd dyov trav dyafar. 14, dAdo tu: ‘HAAO 7: f Challenges an affirmation with respect to some special portion of the sentence; &AAo a challenges an affirmation with respect to the whole sentence which follows it.’ Riddell, § 22. 18. dp’ ody orw Kré.: see amore detailed investigation of this theory in Lysis. Cf. 216 d Sone? or darrepel tpl tra elvar yevn, Td pev ayaddv, 7) 5& waxdy, 7) 8 ob’ ayadv otre Kandy. 20. wodAq avayky: the answer is not according to the form of the pre- ceding question, but according to the sense, as if ovdéy ort ray byTwy had preceded. 21f. codplay, vylevav, rhovrov: types of the three great classes of property, —mental, physical, and material. 25. dpa: for position, see on 472 d. 28. ad: on the other hand. To actions are opposed things, which, how- ever, belong to a similar category. 467 e 468 TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 95 ig 8t. I. p. 468. 35 Xo. Td ayafdv dpa dSiaKovres Kat Badiloper, drav Ba- b Ou a7 fy > N Xx 2 7 7 iLaper, oiduevor BEdriovy eivar, Kal TO evavTiov eoTaper, OTay ETTAMEV, TOV AUTOU EveKa, TOV ayalod: 7 Ov; TIoa. Nai. ° > a No , ¥ : , \ Xo. OvdKovy kat aroxteivuper, et Tiva amoKTeivuper, Kat 2 ’ \ 29 , , 2° : ¥ 40 €xBaddopev Kau adatpovpea XPNATA, OLOMEVOL ApEWoV civar Hui TATA TOLELY 7 [LY ; IIoa. dv ye. Ld 3 ¥ a“ > a“ oy wn na e Xo. “Ever” dpa tov dyalod dmavra tadra movovaw ot TOLOUVTES. 45 TIoa. Dypi. XXIV. Ya. OdKovyv apooyyoaper, & evexd Tov ToLod- + 2 n~ £ > > > * e yY “ pev, pr exetva Bovr\eoOa, add’ exelvo, ob evexa TavTa TOLODLED 5 Tlea. Mdduora. : 5 Xa. Ovw apa oddrrew Bovdducba odd’ exBaddrdew ek an 7 > \ 7 2 A ¢ n yo 2 3 TOV TOMEWY OSE YPHpaTa apaiperrbar aTOS OUTWS, dAX eav pev adgedipa 7 Tada, BovrspeOa mpatrev ara, Bra- Bepa dé ovra od Bovdiducha. ta yap dyafa Bovdrdcueba, « * o NX be 4 > ‘XN - X > , as ons ov, Ta O€ pyTE ayafa pryjte Kaka ov Bovdrdcpefa, 19 468 2QA A , ovee Ta KAKA. x + , > > , ) OU; TL OUK ATTOKPLVEL ; 36. BéAriov: sc. than its opposite. When the comparison is self-evident, the Greek, like the English, fre- quently omits the second member. XXIV. 2. é€ketva, éxeivo: the im- mediate repetition of the same pro- noun with different reference is re- markable.—tatra: refers back to 4. 5. oddrrav: is purposely substi- tuted as a harsher word for dmo«re- viva. It implies that the person killed is defenseless: “to slaughter Hh yap; a&dyOy4 cor Soxd éyav, & Tldde, like an ox.’ — darAds ows. thus sim- ply, “without limitation,” as one would have to assume if the view of Polus is to stand. Cf. Prot. 351 ¢ ov« ofda ard@s otrw, ws ab epwras, ef enol amo- kpiréov éorly, Gs 7a Hdéa Te ayabd éorw xré. Cf. 464 b. 11. ri otK daoxpive: a challenge in the form of a question, because Polus hesitates to answer. He is beginning to feel concerned for his fondly cherished view and bold state- 468 96 PLATO’S GORGIAS. TIoa. "AANO7. 8t. I. p. > er ¥ wn e wn ¥ ¥ a, Loa. OvKovr elrep TadTa 6poroyovper, eb Tis amoKTEiVEL Twa H eKBdadder ex Tddews 7) ahaipetrar xpHwata, Eire TU- a ¥ ee 27 » > 7 4 , 15 Pavvos wv €lTE PNTP, OLOMEVOS GALELWOV EWAL AUTH, TUyXa- 20 25 468 ¢ oe a» , e 8 zt aa 8 a Lent Caer Oe VEL O€ OV KAKLOV, OVTOS ONTFOV TOLEL A OOKEL AUTW* 7) yop; TIoa. Nai. > 7s Na , ” , a ‘ da. “Ap ovv kat a Bovderan, Evirep TUYXaVEL TAVTA KAKA ” , 3 > eZ OVTa; Ti OUK aTroKpLEL; IIna. ’AAN’ ov poe Soxet movety & Bovderau. ¥ 3 9 e a Z , > om Da. Eorw ovv OTWS O TOLOUVTOS heya Svvarau €V ™M 4 4 ¥” = N XN , 4 > sf ‘ mone TavTy, elmep €oTt 7d péya SWvacbar dyaldv TL Kata. % X € x 4 THY onV dpodoyiar ; TIaa. OvK €orw. Xa. "AdnOn dpa éyw edeyov, héywr ore €or avOpwrov v 2y TodEL & OoKEL aiT@ pry péeya SUWvacd dé mo.ovvta ev TOAEL & OoKEL a’T@ py péya divacAaL uy move & Bovderat. TIoa. ‘Os 8%) ov, @ Sexkpares, ovK ay SéEao éeivai vou ments. The same form recurs a few lines below, where Polus is just clearly recognizing his defeat. These arti- fices belong to the dramatic side of the dialogue, and take the place of the tedious repetitions which weary us in the narrative form; eg., in Prot. 360 c, @ cuvégn — erévevcev — kal évtav0a ere emévevoeyv —mavu pdyis évravda érévevoey — obkér évtaiOa ott’ émwvedoa HOéAnocev ealya Te. 13. elwep taita opodoyotpev: is the general premiss, while what fol- lows up to od kdkiov is the special ap- plication of this to tyrants and ora- tors. For the structure, see on the similar case in 453 e¢. 15. adr: is said from the stand- point of the critic, although referring to the subject of oiduevos. The Greek does not cling to the reflexive. Kr. 51, 2,5; H. 684 a. 15f. rvyxdve $€ «7ré.: is connected with the participle as an independ- ent clause,—a usage common after relatives. Kr. 59, 2, 6.9; H. 10085. The Eng. idiom requires ‘ although’ or ‘whereas.’ Q21f. ev ry woda Tavry: in this undefined city of which they were speaking, the abode of the tyrant or orator under criticism (6 roiodros). 25. otu Eotw: that it is possible. There need not be in all cases a conflict between what one wishes and what seems best, but the possibility of a single case is enough for Socra- tes’ argument. 28. ws By od Kré.: is quite ironic; as if you would not! Itis really a com- 468. a 468 TAATONOS TOPIIAS. 97 St. I. p. 468. “A y wn nw a “A movev ore SoKel cou ev TH TOAEL AAAOV 7 47}, OBSE Lydots 9 wy! NOR - e a ¥ eX 30 Grav iSys twa 7 drroKteivavta bv edokev ato 4 adedope- vov xpjpara 7 Syoavra. Xo. Aukatws héyers } adiKws ; e , 7h an > Ion. “Ororep’ av oun, obk apdorépws (nrwrdv eat ; 469 ; ea Lo. Evdyper, @ Wade. 35 loa. Ti dy; y > + ¥ be > = nn yy ‘ Xo. “Ore ov xp7 ovre Tovs alnrGrous Lydovy ovTE TOS aOXious, add’ édeeiv. TIoa. Ti 8€; ovrw cou Soxet exe Tept av éya héyw Tav avOpdmuv ; 40 Lo. las yap ov; TIoa. "Ooris oty atroxreivvow bv av ddéy abTa, Suxatws 3 4 10 8 an > N93 , amoxtewts, aPdrLos OoKet wou eivar Kat EXEEWOS ; > ¥ > XN , , Xa. OvK euorye, ovd€ p&rou Lyhurds. TIoa. OvK adpte abduov epyoGa eivar; 45 Xo. Tov ddixws ye, ETaipe, AToKTEiVavTa, Kal EdeEWOv b < x A 4 > 7 ye Tpos* Tov dé Sixaiws alyrwrTov. IIoa. *H wou 6 ye droOvijoKwy adixws édeewds Te Kal ¥ oe > aOduds eotw. Xa. “Hrrov 7} 6 amoxrewvs, @ Wade, kal Frrov 7H 6 50 OuKkaiws amobyycKwy. Iloa. las O47a, & LawKpares ; 468 parison, “itis just as true as the fact moral principles implied in the words 469 © that,” etc. By this fling Polus seeks of Polus seems to him like a sin a to evade confession of his defeat. against divinity. Cf Prot. 330 d. 31. 8yoavra: equiv. to cis Td dec- 39. rav: the art. with incorporated pwrhpioy ayaydvTa. antec. is Platonic. Kr. 51, 12, n. 33. {nrwrov: enviable. By an easy 41. Suxalws: is slipped in unfairly 469 shift, the personal idea is transferred by Polus. Cf. 466 a. ® to the action itself. 46. «wpds: is the only preposition b 34. elbype (fave lingua): says that occurs at all frequently in Attic Socrates, because the denial of all prose as an adverb, 98 55 60 65 469 PLATO’S GORGIAS. GOuKELy. 8t. I. p. 469. ° € , a a , a v Xo. Ovtws, OS PEYLOTOV THY KAKWV TUYXKAVEL ov TO IIo. °"H yap tovTo péyurrov; od Td dduceto Oat petlor ; Xo. “Hora, ye. Tan. 3d dpa Bovdouo dv adixetoOar padrov } aduxety ; Xa. Bovdoiuny pev av éywye oddérepa: ei 8 advayxatov ely ddixety H ddixeto Oar, Ehoiuny av paddov ddixctobar H GQOLKELD. Ilona. 3b dpa tupavvety odk av S€Eauo ; ¥ > ON a s ¢ 2 Lo. Ouk, €l TO TUPavVvEewW YE déyers OTTEp CY. Ilona. ’AAN’ eywye TodTO héyw Omep api, eEetvar ev TH s a RK : 95 a a ‘ > , TONEL, Oo av Sox auTw, TOLEW TOVUTO, KAL ATOKTELWUVTL N92 , \ , , \ ‘ eon KQaUL éxBahdovte Kal TAVTA TPATTOVTL KaTQ THY AVTOV dd€av. XXV. So. 70 pakdpre, nod 579 €yovTos TO Adyw émthaBov. 52. ovrws xré.: ‘Life is not the highest good, but guilt is certainly the greatest evil.’ This was one of the life principles of Socrates. Cf. the beautiful exposition in Apol. 28 b ff., especially 29 b and 380 d, Crito 48 b. “BT. Bovdoipyy av ovderepa: F would wisu neither; because also to suffer wrong is not a good thing. With Polus wish and preference coincide. —This quibble of Socrates is inter- esting, as showing the difficulties by which early thinkers were beset. For an accurate statement of principles, an accurate use of synonyms was in- dispensable; and this was not yet possible, even with the cultured. 60. od dpa «ré.: Polus cannot tear himself away from his fast-rooted ideas. Hence all teaching is vain. XXV. 1. what of an ironical coloring. The @ paxdpie: has some- > a 2 NX > > i it % ¢ X ei yap eyo é&v ayopa mAnbovoyn haBov v7 a nearest English equivalent is the half 469 serious “Oh, you awful fellow!” — é€pov 84 A€yovros: as an offset to Polus’ words Gar’ éywye totTo A€yw. “Tet us have, then, argument for argument.” The gen. may depend on émiAaBot, as in 506 b, but it is more likely gen. abs. See on dvr AauBaverda:, 506 a, and Symp. 214e edy Te wh GANGES Adyw, meTatd émAaBod, dy BovaAn, wad ete Sti TotTO Wevdouat. The original meaning is made clear by Prot. 3829 a ra yadrneia wAnyévta pakpoy hxeEt Kal dmorelver, eav wy emiAd- Bntal tis (unless one takes hold of it). —rw dhoyw: instrumental dat., “with your argument.” 2. év dyopg wANPovcy: is not tem- poral, as in Nen. An. i. S. 1 H5y 6E Hv aut ayopiv wANGovear, ?.e. towards noon. It simply indicates the pres- ence of a multitude. c d 10 15 469 MAATONOS TOPIIAS. 99 St. L. p. 469. padys eyxepiduiov éyouus mpds oe dre “@ aXe, ewot dvva- pis Tis Kal tupavvis Oavpacia apt. mpooyéyovey: éav \ ¥ 2 \ 4 <é ‘\ ‘N an > , ae \ yop apa €jL0u d6€n TWQA TOUVUTWVL TWV avOpdtrav @Vv Ou opas avtixa para Sew reOvavar, teOvyifer obtos bv av , ¥ , an A 7 An , 86€n+ Kav twa S6En por THS Kehadijs adrav Kareayévar detv, kateayas €orat adrixa para, Kav Ooipariov Siecyi- ‘ / ” 9 / 3 * 4 > cAa, Suecyicpevov extar* ovTw péya eyo Sdvapar é&v socan main’ se Oty emierouee ae be cuue aa e ™ € TY TOAEL €l OVV ATLOTOVYTL GOL OEL ALLL TO eEyXEL- is ¥ a » iog y we 2 s y x pl lov, LOWS GV ELTTOLS LOWY OTL @ LoKpares, OUTW ev , » s 8 , > \ a > Z > 7 , TAVTES QV peya UVAWTO, ETEL KAV eutpyno bein OLKLaO TOUT@ A , 4 > 3 8 Cn \ ¥ "AO s ?, T@ TPOT@ QVTLVY AV GOL OOKY, KAaL TA YE YNVAL@V VEWPLA \ s NEN a , X \ , JS Kal TPLNpeELs Kal TQ mote TAVTA KAL TA dnpdova Kat TQ idta”- GN ovk apa Tour €aTw Td péya Stvacbat, Td na a § A 3 x § a TOLELY A OOKEL AVTW* OKEtL GOL; Iona. Ov Sy7a ovTw ye. Za. "Exes obv eimety Ov Ore péeudher THY ToLavrny Ov- 470 VapLw ; 3. éyxeplitov: is not a “dagger,” 4 but a short sword for striking and thrusting; the former is shown by Kateayevar THs Keparys. Cf. Xen. Hell. ii. 3.23 wapayyelAavres veavioxos . tipidia bd pddans Exovras maparyevéc Oar. 6. reOvrger: one of the two Greek verbs with fut. perf. active. See H. 467. The fut. perfect expresses the certainty as well as the immediate- ness of the result; cf kareayds eorat avtixa udda, and sce GMT. 79. 7. THs Kehadns: is a gen. of the part affected. H. 738b. Cf Ar. Ach. 1180 Ths Kepadrys Karéaye wep) Albov recav. The acc. could have been used; cf. 515 e 74 ta. — adrav: follows rivd, —a case of ‘hyperbaton.’ 14. The art. is omitted before rp:f- pes, although it has a different gender from that of the preceding substan- tive. HAwv nal cednvnv nal kotpa dpacOa ba’ avta@y ofa Tuyxdver dvra. Omission of the art. where both substantives are of the same gender is not un- common. The two kindred ideas are thereby brought together into one conception. In the present passage, by this means we have tlhe objects enumerated divided into classes: (1) the navy-yard, with the war-vessels therein contained; (2) the remain- ing vessels, whether they be public or private property. Similarly, Dem. Ol. ii. 9 7G 1rd xwpla Kad Amévas Kal Td ToLAvTA mpoeiAnpevac. 17. otrw ye: limits the answer, as if Polus still wished to save something from his earlier statement. Cf. Phaedo 111 © kad rév ye © 100 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 470. 20 loa. “"Eywye. Xo. Tidy; déye. TIoa. “Ore dvaykatoy tov ovtw mpatrovta Cypiovo bai €oTw. Za. Td dé CypsotcOar od Kaxdv; 25 TIoa. Mayu ye. > a > , Q , , 4 > Xa. OvKovv, & Oavpdore, 75 péya Sivacbar wary ad , aN X ¢ a ag + 7 as got paiverat, ay wev mparrovts & SoKet emyntat TO wpedt- pws Tparrew, ayabdr Te eivat Kat TOUTO, ws EoLKer, €oTiV x f 8 , > 6e , ‘ N XN , TO péya Svvacbar: et dé joy, KaKdv Kal opiKpov dvva- 30 cAau: oKepdueba dé Kai Td5€- GAXO TL dporoyodmev evioTE b » > a a pev Gwewov eivat TadTa Tovey & vuvdn eléyomev, aroKTEL- 4 » > 4 = a XN > ~ re vivat Te Kat Eedatvvew avOpadrovs Kai adaipetobar ypy- para, €vioTe dé ov; Ilona. Havu ye. = XN f ¢ ¥ A = an 5. > 35 Soa. Touro pe on, @S E€OLKE, KAL TAPA TOU Kal TAP €“oU OModoyEtTau. IIoa. Nat. , > ‘ \ ¥ > a ta} 3S Xo. dre oty od ys apewvov eivar Tatra qovety; ime Twa opov opite. who does what seems good to him 470 proves to be doing what is profita- ® 410 26. ovxovv «ré.: the sentence is @ merely a statement in the form of an interrogation, and assumes an assent by the opponent, provided no express demurrer is raised. Socrates gives opportunity for this after dtvacda (29), but as none is made, he proceeds again with crepdbyeba cré.— wadw av: because in this new conception is contained a correction of the former view held by Polus. 27. alverat: has its subject in 7d péya SivacGai, and its predicate in ayabdy re elvat. “Does not then this great power of yours (mdéAw ad) ap- pear to you (only provided the one ble) to be both a good thing, —and that, as it seems, is the real (7d) great power; otherwise it is an evil thing and small power.” The sen- tence begins with a question which is lost in an affirmation. 29. el S€ py: is phraseological, “oth- erwise.” The contrast is with rodro, and through this with éav wey «ré. The subject of kaxdv (éort) wal opi- xpbv dtvacba is, of course, the phrase 7d mpdtrev & Soxez, to be supplied from the context. H. 904, 906 a, b. 30. dAdo t: see on 467 d. b 40 10 470 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 101 St. I. p. 470. ‘ Q > > 7 > 7 n Ilona. 2v prev obv, & Ldxpares, droKpwat TadTd TovTO. ‘ * , > A a Xa. “Eyo pev tow dnp, & Wade, et cor Tap €“ov ec "8 , 2 > , y \ , a a YOLOVv EOTW AKOVEW, OTAV bev dixaiws TLS TAVTA TOLn, ¥ > ¢ L297 , apewov eval, OTay O€ AdiKws, KAKLOV. XXVI. Toa. Xaderov yé oe éhéya1, & Saxpares: GAN’ odXi Kav Tats oe édéyEeev, dru od GANA dEyets ; Zo. TloAdjy apa eyo T@ madi ydpw ew, tony Sé Kal col, édv pe edeyEns Kal admadda€ns ddvapias. ada pH Kays pirov avdpa evepyeTav, add’ eheyye. TIoa. ’AAAG pv, & LoKpares, ovd& yé ae Set tahatots mpaypacw éhéyyew* Ta yap €xOes Kat Tpanv yeyovora TavTa ixava oe é€ehéyEar eoriv Kal amodetEat, ws oAdol > a » > , t > aouKoUVTES avOpwrrou evdaipoves €lowU. eee & Xa. Ta wota tavra; 3 t , 4 ‘ # a ¥ TIna. Apxédaov Sytrov TOUTOV TOV Tlepdixxou Opas ap- XovTa Maxedovias ; 40. ov pev otv xré.: Polus evades D the answer and forces it upon So- crates, partly because he is not able to give it, for the distinction de- manded lies equally remote from the circle of his thoughts and his feel- ings; partly because he does not wish it, for he has a suspicion that it will contradict all the views which he has thus far expressed. The less, however, he is in position to confute Socrates by arguments, the greater is his confi- dence in his ability to do so by facts. XXVI. 1. xaderov: is ironic; but in &AX’ odx{ the irony turns to sober earn- est. Not so with the irony of Socrates. 5. pr] kduys, dAN’ deyxe: note the difference between positive and neg. imperative. — evepyerav: is to be ex- plained according to 458 a. On the supplementary partic., see G. 279, 1; H. 983. 7. Ta yap €x@és kal mpwyv: means “recent events.” Homer also uses the phrase y@(a Te kal mpdica, B 308. The Greek idiom requires kai where the Eng. uses “or.” 8f. mwoddAol dSikotvres dvOpwrror: in most cases when the participle is used as an attribute, we can still feel the participial plus as compared with the adjective. Here, however, that has almost completely disappeared, and the participle is as much an adj. as Tpronkwy, mpenwy, etc. 10. td rota: it is a matter of indi- vidual preference whether the art. be used or not; cf. 449 e. When used, the article limits the attention to what has been already alluded to; here, ra éxGes ... tatra. In Eng. one also occasionally hears the art. with the interrogative. 11. ’ApxéAaov: Archelaus, an ille- 470 d 102 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 470. 2 + Za. Ei 6€ py, GAN dkovw ve. Ilona. Evdainwv obv cor doxet etvar } OXL0s ; 15 Lo. Ov« oida, d ade: od yap Tw cvyyéyova TO avdpi. Ilona. Ti d€; ovyyevdpevos av yvoins, dddws 8€ aird- e Bev ob yryveokers ort Evdapovel ; Xo. Ma Ai’, od dyra. Toa. Andov. 84, & YéKpares, dtu ovde Tov péyav Ba- f , , > # »” 20 orléa yryvwoKew gyoes evoaipova OvTa. as Xa. Kat adynOn ye épa: ob yap oida raidetas dmws ¥ \ , Exel KQL dukaoovrns. a ¢ > e in ac Tlon. Ti dé; ev TOUT@ 1) TATA evdatpovia éoTw ; Xa. “As ye eyo éyw, & @de- Tov pev yap Kaddv + ‘Ss »¥ % a > , od < * \ Kayabov avopa KQaL Yvvaka evoatpova Ewa ones, TOV be dduKov Kat tovnpov a&Ouov. gitimate son of Perdiccas, seized the throne in n.c. 414, after his father’s death, and reigned until 399, when he was murdered by Craterus or Cra- teuas (name and motive are alike un- certain). The facts brought forward by Polus in their darkest colors are probably correct; but Archelaus laid the foundation for the later impor- tance of Macedonia by introducing Greek culture. He invited famous artists, among others Euripides, to his court. There is also a tradition that he invited Socrates, but that is hardly credible. — pds: well expresses the lively interest which Polus, as well as many other Greeks, took in that admired ruler, whose apparent suc- cess was doubtless envied by many an aspiring and ambitious man. The answer of Socrates sounds somewhat pedantic, but it is probably jesting, and designed to cool the extravagant ardor of Polus, while at the saine a time it prepares the way for otrw ovyyéyova TG &vdpt below. 13. dAAd...-ye: nevertheless, at least. H. 1046, 2, a. 15-26. This passage is translated by Cicero, Tusc. Disp. v. 12. 16. avrobev: “instinctively,” “of yourself.” This is not translated by Cicero, but it forms a good contrast to ovyyevsuevos. Polus thinks the very fact of Archelaus being a ruler im- plies that he is fortunate. That the Persian king was generally esteemed the personification of happiness is shown by Apol. 40 e. 21 f. waSela and &katorvvy: to- gether denote moral cultivation. — Otwws éxe: construed with the part. gen. See G. 168, n.3; H. 757 a. 25. dv8pa kal yuvatka: virtue, and hence also the foundation of eddar wovia, is, according to Socrates, one and the same for all, while the pupils of Gorgias recognized different varie- MAATQNOS TOPITIAS. * ¥ aov doyor ; 103 St. Lp. STL. x ” @ € TIoa. "AO\uos apa obtés €orw 6 ’Apyédaos Kata Tov 471 Xa. Elep ye, & ide, adiKos. 30 IIoa. “Adda ev 5%) mais ob ASixos; @ ye TOT HKE ev a >? an ExNB a a ¥ »” > ‘ a > / TNS apxns ovoey nV Vuv EXEL, OVTL EK Yvvatkos yn nV eovdAy 2 nm es Ahkérov Tov Tepdixxov ddedfod, kal kara ev 7d Sikaov SovAos Hv "Adxérov, kat ef éBovdeTo TA Sikara over, na > \ 49> edovAevev dv Alkérn Kat nv evdaiwyv Kata Tov cov dé- 35 you: viv S€ Oavpaciws ws dOdos yéyover, evel Ta pé- 9 an a yora noiknKkev* Os ye TpOTov pev TovTov adbrov Toy } , x ~ , e > [a XN eomoTny Kat Oeiov perareprpapevos ws aroddrav THY apynv qv Iepdixkas abrov adeidero, Evi. i pxnv 7 p S avTov adetrero, Eevioas Kal Kata- peBicas abrév te kal Tov voy adrod *“AéEavSpor, averuov 40 avTov, ayedov HiKvérny, EuBarov eis apatar, VUKTWP > ‘ > = oe : \ a , > , ‘N eLayayav anéopaly re Kal hpavicer apporépous* Kat a > , ¥ € x > , , \ TAVTA aducnoas éhadev €QUTOV aOd\.wraros YEvopeEevos Kat 470 ties for different classes. Cf. Meno © Te mparov uty ef BotrAcr dvdpds dperiy, ef 5& BovAce yuvaikds aperhy xré. On the omission of the art. with yuvatka, see on 469 e. 471 27. otros ... 6 Apxédaos: the po- @ sition emphasizes the name; ‘this man — Archelaus!’ 30. amas otk Adtkos: sc. éoriv. This admission, coupled with the opinion that Archelaus is an enviable and happy man, which is very evident from the ironical narrative which fol- lows, shows most plainly the utter opposition between Polus’ view and the moral principle which Socrates champions.—« ye: introduces the authority of indisputable facts. Sce on 460 e. 32 ff. Kal, kal, kal: is in sense al- most equiv. to “and therefore.” The construction begun in the clause ¢ ye . eApou is naturally varied in ka} . . ’AAxérov by being made personal. 33. el éBovAcro, qv evSaipwv: is an unreal conditional sentence, with op- position to the present. The close proximity of the two clauses in the apodosis explains the omission of the second ay. 37. Sermorny Kal Oeiov: denotes two kinds of moral obligation to which Archelaus paid no attention; tevicas adds a third, the violation of which was considered among Greeks the worst of crimes, a sin against Zevs téuos. Cf Hom. N 624, Xen. An. iii. 2.4. The heaping up of the words katauebvoas, éufadrdy (like a thing), etayayér, ardrpaterv, ipdvicev makes the impression of the repeated | acts of violence very vivid. 471 104 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 471. ov peteuednoey adt@, ddd’ ddiyov varepov Tov addedfdr, X\ , a , er “ € ¢ , e ¢ Tov yuyovoy Tov Ilepdixkov vdv, maida ws Emréry, OU 7H © > \ 2 7 \ XN , > 2 , > , 45 apxn eyiyvero Kara 7d Sikawov, ovK eBovdnOn evdainwv , ’ 2 s ey ‘ \ 3 S32 yevéer Oar Sixains exOpéepas Kal drodods THy apyny exeive, 3 ? a = + ‘\ ‘ 2% , ‘XN a Zz add’ eis dpéap euBarav kat dromvigas mpos THY pyTEpa avtov KXecordrpav yjqva épy Siudkovra eumece Kal dro- Oavety. tovydpto. viv, dre péyvota HOoucnKkas Tay év 50 Makedovia, aOdudratds éotw mavtwy Maxeddvav, ard’ x > f : XN x» 4 yo > 4 ovK evdamovérratos, Kal tows e€oTw dotis *“AOnvaiwy amd cov ap&dpevos d€Eair’ av adddos 6aTicovv Makeddvav yevér Oat padrov 7 "Apxédaos. XXVIII. Yo. Kai kar’ apyas trav Adywrv, & Wade, eywy€ oe eryvera GTL mot SoKels ED POS THY PYTOpLKTY a a % 4 a - \ an memadevabat, Tov dé diaréyerOar HwednKevar: Kal vov ¥ @ 19 e , a ae nr) , ado Tt ovTds eaTW 6 Adyos, @ pe Kal ay Tats eEehéyE«re, 5 KaL €ym ume D vov, ws ov ote, EEeAHrAEymaL TOU @ at €y@ vmTd Gov VUY, WS oteL, Hreypat TOUTH TE ? wn 5 Moyo, pdokwy TOV aoiKovWTA OVK EVOatpova Eivar; mdOeEv, > , \ ‘\ »Q 7 s , c oN x , ayabé; Kat why obdév yé cou TovTav épodoy@ dv ad dis. 471 43. tov adeAdov: is emphasized by its position in advance of its govern- ing verb (partic.). 44. Tlep8ixxov: Perdiccas II. reigned from s.c. 454(%) until 414 or 413, after having dispossessed his brother Alcetas. During the Peloponnesian war he pursued a very prudent but faithless policy. — The extraordinary number of participles employed by Polus has an artistic value in showing 51. Kal tows €or dotis xré.: in these words, in spite of their sarcastic “orm, lies the only attempt at proof hich Polus makes, z.e. an appeal to “2 opinion of others; he of course unks that no one will own himself s*y be such a man. XXVIII. 1. kal kar’ dpxds: leads us to expect in the following ka viv a confirmation and climax of praise, —which, however, is changed instead the tumultuousness of his feelings. to blame by rod... Apeannévar. Note 45. otk éBovdrOn (he did not choose) the zeugma in combining roid... que- evdalnov yeverOat: is very sarcastic. Ankéva: with érfveca. See on 520 b The conclusion introduced by rorydpro’ =} rH adtgG. The praise was bestowed is equally emphatic. Polus admires in Archelaus the strength of will which hesitates at nothing to accomplish its aim; regret with him is weakness. in 448 d. 6. wo0ev: is a question with a negative force, to which the affirma- tive kal why corresponds. 471 d 10 domep ot év ToUs Sucaorpplons 7 Wyovpevor eMey et. 15 471 TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 105 St. I. p. 471. TIoa. OD yap eOédeus, émret SoKet ye wou ws eye deyo. Za. 70 paxapie, PNTOPLKaS yap ae ETLYELPELS eheyxew, Kau yap eet ot €repou Tovs Erépous Soxodaw édéyyew, érerdav Tov Aéyav av av héywou pwaptupas TodAovs TapeXwvTat \ oo , ¢ \ > , s y \ s KQL evooKipous, oO dé TAVAVTLA héyav Eva TLVAaA TAPENNTAL Q pyndeva. THY adyOevav: éviore yap av Kat Katarpevsopaprupn bein € ‘ “ X a » , TUS VITO TOAAOY Kal SoKOvYTWY Elvat TI. \ a \ @ KQL VUV TEpt @V N - > 7 F £ ey > av héyes ddiyou cou mavTes TUudycovow TavtTa *AOn- vator Kat ot E€vor, éav Bovdy Kat’ ewov paptupas Tapa- ¢ ¢ > > Bad 4 4 me a= oxéobat, as ovK adnOn héyw: paptupyaovai cou, éav 8. éael Soxet: in such phrases the éwef has the force of “although,” “whereas.” Cf. Prot. 335 ¢ copds yap el: éy® 5€ Tad paxpa Tavita aduvatos ere) €BovaAduny bv ofds 7 elva:. -Apol. 19 e. The conj. merely indicates a relation between the two ideas. If these two ideas harmonize, the rela- tion becomes causal; if not, it he- comes adversative. 9. & paxdpre (cf 469 c): the reproof which follov 10. év rots Stxacryplo ner of argument practised the implies Got - quently incurs Plato’s disappro!’” Cf. Apol. 34 b ff. The emphasis laid on jyovmevor and Soxovcw. 13. éva twd: the indef. pron. em- phasizes the number, “a paltry one.” 472 15f. KarapevSopaprupybein tis: the a Greek idiom does not require intr. verbs to be used impersonally in the passive. Cf. Xen. Apol. 24 xarawpev- Souaptupety éuod with Dem. in MMeid. 136 KarapevdSopaprupovmat. 16. Soxovvrwv elvar tl: equal to Cf. the English colloquial- ism ‘he pretends to be something.’ evdoxinwr. 17. oAlyouv: almost; the remnant of the phrase éAfyou deity. H. 743 b. 19. paprupioover xré.: Nicias, the celebrated general in the Pelopon- nesian war, who met his death in the Sicilian expedition (n.c. 413), was leader of the moderate wing of the aristocratic party. Aristocrates, the son of Scellias or Scellius, belonged, as we can judge from Ar. Av. 125 and Thue. viii. 89, to the extreme or oli- garchical order. He was one of the generals condemned to death for neg- ligence at the battle of Arginusae. Xen. Hell.i. 7. Socrates here speaks of both as if they were still living. (See Introd. § 18.) Next to them, Socrates mentions the house of Peri- cles; he could not name the states- man himself because he was already dead when Gorgias visited Athens for the first time; but he, with his house, was a champion of the Athenian dem- ocracy. So we have here representa- tives of the chief political parties as witnesses for Polus. They agreed with each other in that they esteemed power in the state,—even tyranny, e otros S€ 6 edeyyxos ovderds adbids eoTw pds 472 472 a 106 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 472. 20 pev Bovdy, Nuxias 6 Nuxnpadrov Kat of ddehdpot per’ avrod, « e s e 3 A € nas 2 2 n , av ob Tpimodes of efeEns Extarés clow &v TH Atovucia, édv 5é Bothy, ’Apioroxparys 6 Sxeddiov, 06 ab éorw ev IIvOiov rovro 76 Kadov avdOnyua, eav S€ Bovdy, 7 Tleps- d , y > 7 4. = / Y a 4 al K€ous Ody Oikia, 7 GAAn ovyyeéveca HvTWa av BovrAn Tov evade éxdéEao bar. ov ydp pe od avaykdles, dda Pevdopdprupas ToANOds KAT 400 Tapacxdpuevos Emiyerpets EexBadrNew pe EK TIS 25 ahd’ éyd cou eis dv ovx podoya - > 7 \ a > an 2A XK \ ‘\ > NX a i”: ovoias Kal Tou aAnOovs. eyw dé av py oé adTov eva dvTa [edptTupa Tapadcxwpa duoroyodvtTa wept Gv héyw, ovdev > ¥ , , \ @ 3 eon ¢ 30 ota a€vov Aoyou pow merepavOar wept Gv av yuly 6 472 — though purchased at the price of itself. The tripods were arranged 472 a a wrong-doing, to be the highest good. 20 ff. edv pév BovAy, édv S€ BovAy: are not pleonastic after dav BovAn, but are due partly to courtesy (cf. Prot. 353 b ef 3€ ph BotaAc, ef cor pido), and serve also by specifying to em- phasize the possibility of a free choice among all parties. 21. dv ot rplroSes: in this way these men show that they were doroiy- ves elvai ti. They also, by the magnif- icence of their offerings, proved their piety, and their ‘ testimony ’ would be apparently épet#s with a kind of os- tentation. 22 f. év TIvOlov: sc. iepg. The of- fering of Aristocrates must have been, according to the words of So- crates, also costly and well-known. 26. dvaykdtes: sc. to agreement by convincing reasons; often fol- lowed by éuodoyetv, but without it in Theaet. 196 b rotrw arg jvayKndo- pev mh elvar evdH Sdtav. 27 f. éekBddAdXav é« tis otolas Kal tov dAnPots: this is ambiguous, for therefore the more weighty. Nicias ovcio aote property, material was, according to all accounts, anhon- pos vus as well as physical ex- orable man. Thucydides says (vii. istence. Accordingly Polus appears 86) of him, in referring to his mourn- ful death: feora 5) Bis dy ray ye én’ éuod ‘EAAjvwv és totto Sugtuxias adixécbat id Thy wacav és aperhy vevo- picpevny erithdevow. By Dionysion is to be understood not a temple, but a spot sacred to Dionysus, —a sacred precinct. Nicias built there a kind of shrine, which possessed, among other treasures, some very costly tripods which he had dedicated to Dionysus after he had discharged the office of Choregus —a very costly liturgy in here in the investigation as a tyrant, who drives others from house and home. But it is this same power which the orator wishes to obtain (be- fore a court) by his speech. 28 f. oe airdv . . . pdptupa: the dialectical proof is a course of logic, a process of reasoning, which So- crates carries through, with the help of his adversary, by question and an- swer. Hence by his enforced agree- ment a man becomes a witness against himself. b TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 107 St. I. p. 472. / Ss > x XN ‘\ o @ Adyos H+ olwar Sé oddE Gol, éay pH eyd oor papTupG ets x» ‘ “\ 8 LAX , x ¥. 32a @v p.dvos, TOUS adXous mavtas TovTovs yaipew ds. cat pév ov obTds Tis TpdrOS eh€yyou, ws OU TE OlEL Kal Gow moddoi: eatw S€ Kal dddos, bv eyd ad ofpat. 35 mapaBadovres ovv tap addxjhous cKepoucOa, ef Te Sdioi- > 4 ‘\ ‘\ 7 * La - govow addyjhov. Kal yap tvyxdve wept dv apdioBy- ToUmEY ov TaVY OuLKpa VTA, GAMA oyYEddV TL TATA, TeEpt «& > F / ‘ > if ¥” * N av eidévat Te KaAACTOV pH Eid&vau Te alaxioTOV: TO yap Kepdhavoy aitav éotw H yuyvdoKey 7 dyvoew, datis TE 40 evdaipwr eatly Kal ootis py. adtixa Tp@Tov, Tept ov a vov 6 déyos €oriv, od yyet ody Te civar paKkdpiov avdpa > a , \» ¥ ¥ > , ¥ . adixovvTd Te kal ad.Koy dvta, eimep “Apyéhaov adiKov pev € core) 58 , 8 / ¥ c y 7 Hye evar, evdaipova 5€- Addo TL WS OVTW Gov VouilovTos Siavodpeba. ; 45 TIoa. Ildvv ye. XXVIII. Yo. "Eya 5€ hype adwvarov. apprsByrodpev. av tTvyxavyn Sikns TE Kat Tyrwpias ; a ‘\ ‘N ey MEV TOUTL > na x \ > , ¥ s ) ELEY * QOLK@V dé 57 evdaipev €OTQAL ap d 33. gorw «ré.: Socrates does not hereby recognize this adducing of ‘tes- timony’ to be « correct tpdios éAdy- xou, but rather implies by the words as ob te ota Kxré. (of. 471 d, 473 b) that it is only a pretended one, which cannot stand against the true one. 37. cxedov tu: does not weaken the idea, but merely softens the expres- sion. The question under discussion is really the cardinal one of life ‘ How can I be happy ?’ 40. avrika: is one of the ways of introducing an example in Greek. Cf. Prot. 359 e wav robvavrioy early émt & of re Bedol epxovrac Kad of avdpeio. airina eis Tov méAeuov of ev éOéAoveWw i€vat, of 5& ovK eBédAovow. The addi- tion of zpérov shows that there are still other conflicts between their views ; e.g. in reference to the nature and value of punishment. 41. elvac: is thrown forward for the sake of emphasis, as Zar: above. After nyotua, vouifw, and similar verbs the pred. is often found without acopula. Cf. 473 a. XXVIII. 1. év: with this are con- nected other points of difference. 472 2. elev: sce on 466 c.—dpa: the - position here is still more remarkable than in 467 e and 476 a. — The whole weight of the question falls on & tuyxden Slens cat tiuwpias. The for- mer, dixn, usually denotes simply the carrying out of the law, the inflic- tion of justice; the latter, rimwpia, the fine or penalty which falls to the 108 5 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. 7. p. y \ 9 ¥ Ilona. "Havorad ye, éret ovtw y’ av aOdudtaros ely. 472. Xa. “ANN édy apa jx) Tvyxdvy Sikyns 6 ddiuKdy, Kata e x \ , > , ¥ TOV OOV Adyov evdatpov €OTaL ; Ion. Pyypi. da. Kara dé ye rHv euny dd€av, & Wade, 6 adicav Te x e ¥ - 5 »¥ 2 , 7 aN Kat 6 ddukos mavrws pev aOdtos, GOALwTEpos pevToL, eav 10 7) 6100 Stkynv pndé tvyydvy Tinwpias dduKav, ATTov Sé uy 886 Sieqy pnd rryxdvy Tywpias dducdy, F GOs, édv Sidq@ Siknv Kal rvyyavyn Sixns b1d Oedv Te V2 , KQL avO patrav. Ilona. “Atoma ye, & SaKpares, emiyerpets héyew. , , \ \ a RR ¢ on > do. Tlepacopar dé YE Kal OE TOLNOAL, W ETQLpE, TAVTA 15 €wot héyew didov ydp oe Hyodpar. voy pev ovv & Siade- 472 injured person or the state. e ov ~ s 2 4 £ ‘A ‘ 4 3S > * > popeba TAUT E€OTLW* OKOTTEL de Kal OU* €ELTTOV eyo TOU €&V a» \ 2 a a) n , > TOL eumpoo bev TO GQOLKeLy TOU aouKeto Oar KQKLOV EWA. These are both external demands on the criminal, called forth by his crime,’ and by which an expiation of it is to be effected. On the other hand, «é- Aagts is the discipline which the guilty party himself undergoes, designed to prevent further transgression ; while (nuta (470 a) is only the injury or damage which he sustains in expi- ating his crime. From the outset Socrates shows that, even according _ to the view of his opponent, wrong- doing does not give happiness under all conditions. This point is not “Nmade superfluous by the discussion of 469 c-470 c; for there the ques- tion concerns ddvayis, not evdarpovia. 11. kal rvyxdvy Sikyns: seems a strange addition after d:d@ dicny, with which it appears to be almost synony- mous. But the two phrases are prob- ably intended to be but the subjective and objective, the active and passive expression of the same idea; as the tré with the gen. would indicate. 15. idtov yap ce tyotpar: there- fore Socrates does not allow himself to be deterred by the trouble it will involve to bring Polus to the same opinion. rabra Adyew (Kal ppovetv) is held as a sign of friendship, just as StapépecOa: of enmity. See on 510¢ and Sall. Cat. 20 nam idem velle atque idem nolle, ea demum firmaamicitiaest. At the same time the words contain a delicate reply to Polus’ discourteous exclama- tion. Socrates will soon bring him to say what is in his own view &ro- TOV. 16 f. év rots eparpooev: cf. 469 b. 17. to dStketv . . . elvat: is cited as an example of rather uncommon use of the indir. disc. inf. after efrov (GMT. 753, 3), but the clause is to be looked at rather as the object of elroy in the sense of “ declare.” 473 20 25 30 Tas Oikny HrTov. 35 473 a b MAATONOS TOPLAS. Ilona. Idvu ye. Lo. Bd dé 7rd aduxeto Oar. TIaa. Nat. 109 St. L. p. 473. ‘\ n > Xo. Kat tovs ddicodvtas a@dlous épyy elvan eyad, Kal e&nréyyxOnv bad cod. TIoa. Nai pa Ata. Xa. ‘As od ola, & T1dXE. TIoa. “Ay O7 ye oidpevos tows. x # > #. > ‘ 3 oe aN ‘ Yo. Yd S€ ye evdaiwovas ad Tods adikodvTas, éay p17) Sidacu SiKny. Toa. Tavu peev ou. Xa. “Eya 8€ avrods abdwwrdrous dni, rods dé diddv- , ‘\ A > Zz Bovder Kai TovTo édéyyxew ; nan , TIoa. "ANN €re TovT éxeivov yaherdrepdv éeoTw, @ Ldxpares, e€ehéyEar. Xa. Od dra, @ ade, add’ advvatov: 7d yap adyOes > - i ¢ ovoeroreE eheyxeTat, TIoa. Ids héyets ; éayv GOLKOV avOpwos Andy tupav- vide emuBouhedav, Kat AnpOeis orpeBarat kal exréuvytrar 22. Kal éfndréyxOqv vmod cot: of course the addition of Socrates after Polus’ reply throws a quite different coloring over this sentence. Polus’ self-assurance is apparent in val pa Ala, his positiveness in aAn69 ye oldue- vos. Yows shows no uncertainty, but is only the conscious under-statement which is common in English. See on 480 a. . 31. GAN Ett TovTo xré.: refers to 470 ¢ and is just as ironical. In sharp contrast with the false assur- ance which trusts its own cleverness is Socrates’ faith in the immutability of truth, 7d yap dAnbés oddémore éA€y- XETAL. 35. AndOg: pictures vividly the actual scene. In compound verbs the metaphorical meaning often pre- dominates, and leaves the actual in the background (cf. én’ adropdpy xa- tarapBdveo@a). In what follows, no- tice the rhetorical heaping up of the most frightful punishments; which reminds us of Aesch. Zum. 186 ff. ka- pavioriipes dpbarpwpixor | Sika opayat te omneppards 7° dropCopal | raldwy, ka- kov Te xAoDMS HD akpwria, | Aevouds TE kal pdCovor oixrispdy roAdby | bird pax nmayévtes. Cf. Rep. ii. 361 e€ paot- yaoera, orpeBradoera, SedhoeTat, éx- Kavqjoera: THPOarAud, TeAeUTaY wdyTa Kaka mabay avacxiwdvdev0joeTat. 473 110 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 473. Kat tovs dPOadpovs éexkadntat, Kal adddas ToAAas Kal peydhas Kal mavtodamas AdBas airdés Te hwoByOeis Kat TOUS QUTOD ETLOMY TALOAS TE KAaL yuvaika TO ex xaTov ava- 40 On x On & 56 / »¥ otavpwhh 7 KatamittwOp, obros eddaypovéotepos earat, H €av Suadvyav tipavvos KaTacTh Kal dpywv év TH WodeL a an 9 *» s x Ka ‘ > Sia Bid mrovay dru av Bovdytat, Cyrords dv kai ebSatporre- 4 € bs nw nm ‘ n~ * , a“ Copevos Ud TeV TodITaY Kal Tov drdd\ov E€vav; TadTa héyers advvatov civar e€ehéyxew ; XXIX. Zo. Moppodirrer at, & yevvaie Wade, kat ouK €déyyers: apt. dé euaptupov. ov XN € 4 OfLWS de UTOLVY) - , / «oN LOU > r , to ” Oov BE OpALKpov - cay AOLKWS émBou €UWV TUPAVVL l, eles ; Tloa. "Eywye. > , XN , 204 ¥ 297 So. Evdaipovéarepos fev TOLWUV ovodemoreE €OTQAL ovoe- TEPOS AUTOY, OUTE O KaTELPyaopEevoS THY TUpavVida AdiKws ovTe 6 Sid0ds Siknv: Svoly yap aOAlow evdaypovéorrepos 473 37. kal dAAas «ré.: notice the duo oréAcuTa. 39. émBav: sc. AwAnOevras. 40. karamrrw$y : an especially severe manner of punishment. The criminal was put into a sack smeared with pitch,—the so-called tunica molesta,—which was then set on fire. 41. Siabvydv: “if he succeed”; opposed to Anpéy. 42. dt. av BovAnrar: Polus has again forgotten the explanation of the difference between doxeivy and BovaAc- o8a1.— evSatpovitopevos: to be thought evdaiuwy by the multitude is to be so, in Polus’ estimation. 43. kal trav dddav Evav: cf Hom. B 191 aan adbrds te xaOnoo Kal &AAous Wpve Aaovs, 480 d, Phaedo 110 ec Al- Bois Kar yi Kal Tots KAAS Cyos Te Kal gutois. ‘The same idiom is found in Latin, as equites et aliud vul- gus. See on 447 ¢. 43 f. ratra Aéyeas: Polus is trium- phant, as if Socrates’ position (Tatra) were now overthrown. XXIX. 1. poppodvrre: the ex- pression for terrifying with ghost stories. The ‘mormo’ was the ‘bad man’ with which children were fright- ened. Cf. Crito 46 c.— & yewvaie: is probably designedly used because the means employed are unfair, being only a pretended, not a real proof. Cf. 471 e. 2. dpws 8€: although in reality no point has been made, yet Socrates is ready to assume one and proceed upon that. 3. édv dSlkws émPovdevav: can be completed from c. The change in the expression is due to the colloca- tion of the two words. 473 a TIAATOQNOS TOPIIAs. 111 St. I. p. 473. QA 3 Kz ¥ iO , Z € , \ P pev obK ay etn: GOATEpos pévTor 6 Stadevywy Kai TU- e 10 pavvevoas. ti TovTo, @ Ila\e; yedas; dAdo ad TovTO 48 aN - 3 7 a 5 , , y NG 2 4 eldos E€yxou €oTiy, Emeday Tis TL €trn, KaTayeday, éey- yew O€ py; ¥ s > 2 a TIoa. Ovx oter €€ednr€yx Gar, @ Lwxpares, dtav Tovadra héeyyns, & oddeis av Gyoee dvOpdrav; eel épod twa 15 TOUT@VI. Xo. "0, Wade, od« eipi Trav TodutiKay, Kat mépvot Bov- 4 e: > ‘ . A - , x » Aevew ayy, ered) 7 Pvdr) EmpuTdveve Kai eder pe erufnpileayv, yéhota wapetyov Kal ovK HmoTapny erufy-474— * pilew. py oby pnde viv pe Kédeve erubyndilew tovs 473, 9. 6 Stadhevywv: “whoever remains for not employing rhetorical methods. 473 e © unpunished.”—rupavvevoas : “he who attains to the tyranny.” The more important idea precedes. 10. rl rovro: what can this mean? The inappropriate laughter of Polus is probably in accordance with the pre- cept of Gorgias that in serious things one must draw the audience to his own side by laughing. Arist. Rhet. iii. 18 (Rhet. Gr. ed. Sp. i. 160): dety Zon Lopylas thy pty orovdhy diapbelpew tev évavtiwy yéAwrt, Toy 3& yéAwTa grovd;j. 11. Kxarayeddv: fo laugh it down. _Socrates’ opinion of the &AAo eldos édéyxou is shown by the addition, erdyxew 5é uh. 14 f. épot twa rovtavl: by again having recourse unto the opinion of others, Polus again reverts, though in a different manner, to his ‘ witnesses’ (469 e), and shows that the rhetorical method of proof is alone comprehen- sible to him. By inviting Socrates to put the question to those present, he reminds him of the analogous practice of érupngi(ew (rogare po- pulum), and gives him a chance to plead his own inaptitude as an excuse Socrates in his reply also shows that to accept the opinion of the majority —the method which the state had settled upon as the best way of estab- lishing the truth — was as unsatisfac- tory, when employed by the individ- ual, as the rhetorical methods. The fact to which Socrates alludes is the well-known trial of the generals who had won the battle of Arginusae and afterwards fell victims to political intrigue. The full proceedings are detailed by Xen. Hell. i. 6. 33 ff. and 7. Socrates was senator this year (OL. 98. 3, 406 B.c.), and in the mem- orable assembly émiordrns rev mpv- tavewv. As such, he opposed the unlawful proceeding with an intrepid courage which he here humorously calls inaptitude in érubnpl(ew. So- crates mentions the circumstance also in Apo/. 32 b, but in a different man- ner. On the chronological difficulty, see Introd. § 18. 17. 4 pvdy: of course that to which Socrates belonged, 7 ’Avtioxts. 18. yédwra wapeixov Kal «ré.: a 474 See Rid. § 308. @ ‘hysteron proteron,’ 112 20 25 30 35 40 474 PLATO’S GORGIAS. / > mapovtas, GAN’ el py Exes TovTwv Bedtiw edeyxov, O7EP on; SN ed > \ 2 “ / Lo \ o vuvon eyo eheyov, emo év TO peper Tapddos, Kal Teipa- gat Tov ehéyyxou, olov éyw oipas Seiv eivar. eyo yap av av héyw eva pev Tapacyxéa bat peaprupa enloTapal, avTov, XN a ” € / S ‘ ‘ ‘ 3A , \ Tpos dv av por 6 Abyos 7H, TOds S€ ToANOVs EO Yalpew, Kal eva érubnpilew emiotapa, Tors dé ToAdots ovde Suahéyo- pear. # ATOKPWomLEvos TA epwTopeva. SS > > 9 , 2 ”~ , / ¥ Opa ov, ei edjoes ev TO péper Siddvan ELeyyov €ya yap 51) ota Kal ewe x x ‘ ‘ ¥ > , XN > a a > Kat oé Kat Tovs adddous avOpadaous 7d ddiKEety TOD ab- nn ac + a“ ‘\ % \ , a ~ Ketabar Kakioy yyetoOar Kat TO pr Siddvar Sikny Tov drddvau. Toa. "Ey dé ye ovr ene ovr’ adddov avOparrwy ovd€éva. émet ov dear Gv padXdov adixetoOar H aduKeiv. So. Kat ov y dv Kat ot addou Tavres. Ilona. IloAdod ye Set, add’ ovr’ eyw ovTE Gd ov7 aAdos , ovoets. b] an a aA Xa. OvKovv amoxpwei ; Ilona. Tlavy pev obv: Kat yap emiOupe €idévar ort mor’ épets. Xa. Aéye Sy pou, Ww eidns, dowep av ei EE apyns oe > , , 5 a > an , > \ HPwTwv* TOTEpov OOKEL Gol, w Tl Xe, KQKLOV €lWal, TO aduxety } Td adiKeto Ban ; 20. rovrwy: i.e. the various means with which Polus had hitherto at- tempted to confute Socrates. — émep vuviy: 472 ¢. 21. wapddos: viz. roy reyxov. Cf. below, diddvac zreyxov “to give a chance for refutation.” 25. ob8é Siaddéyopor: because sci- entific investigation by means of con- versation is naturally confined to individuals. 32. éwel.. dStxetv: this is not meant in earnest, but isa reductio ad absurdum of the preceding words of Socrates, which are so op- posed to Polus’ view. On émel cf 471 e, and see GMT. 718, where this clause is cited as interrogative. 37. kal ydp émOupa: implies a doubt whether Socrates can really advance anything in support of his view. On the following answers of Polus, see Introd. § 14. 39. domep xré.: as an actual fact, the discussion has been concerning the question whether ddicezy or aducez- St. I. p. 474. c 45 10 474 c TWAATOQNOS TOPIIA’. TIoa. Td ddixetoOar eporye. Xo. Ti d€ 84; atcyrov worepov 7d aOuKety 7 TO adiKeEl- > c oOat; droxpivov. Tloa. TO dduxety. XXX. Ya. OdKobty kat kdxwov, eitep atoxvov ; a IIoa. “Havora ye. , > oe € a s ¢ ¥ = Lo. Mavéavea-: OU TQAUTOV nyet OV, WS E€OLKaS, Kahov TE \ > XS \ \ \ 9 , KQL ayabov KQL KQKOV KQt alto V pov. Tloa. Ov Syra. , Oe 58 XN x , @ \ , XN Sa. Tt dé rode; Ta Kaha-wavtTa, otov Kat TWMLATA Kat XN Xpopara kal oyypara Kat dwvas Kal émirndedmara, eis IO\ > , ne , a a . oveev amoB\érwy Kadets ExadoToTe KaNa; olov TP@Tov TA , S \ >. Y¥ \ XS , s \ CWPLaATA TA Kaha OvuXt YTOL KATA THV XPELav déyers Kaha > \ a XR oy , 5S XN a na xX E€lval, Tpos O QV EKAOTOV XPNFLfLOV WM Tpos TOUTO, Y KATA £5 , aN 3 a 0 a 6 , a \ yoovynv Twa, €av €&V T@ EWPELD Qt Xatpew TOLY TOUS ao@a: were the greater evil, since the middle of ch. XXIV. 43. rl 8€ 814; how so, then? —The predicate is thrown forward in the following clause, because the chief weight of the contrast falls upon it. XXX. 1. odxotw «ré.:- the xarddv is here the species under which the dyad and the #6¥ are subordinated. 8. as douxas: logically, in such cases as this, an inf. is to be sup- plied; but it is doubtful if any such ellipses were felt by the Greeks. — kadov te kal dyaloy,—kakov Kal aloxpov: ‘chiasmus.’ 6. roSe: is probably an acc. with Aéyeis understood. Cf Phaedo 65 4 rl 5& 5) ra rode and Xen. Mem. iii. 1.10 ri 3& rods Kivduvedew péAdrovTas. On the other hand, Phil. 27 e ri 88 6 obs Bios and Soph. Aj. 101 ri yap 5h mais 6 rou Aaeptiou make for the nom. The context must be the guide. 8. els ovSev droPddrav: with regard 474 unto nothing, that is, without searching for some characteristic common to all these things, in accordance with which you would be justified in call- ing them xcadd. The word édrofaérw is used also when reference is made to an idea or principle, which condi- tions a person’s action or the manner of appearance of any phenomenon. 9. kara: is used of the scale ac- cording to which a thing is to be measured. 10. wpds rotro: points emphati- cally back to pds 6 xré., in a way more remarkable here than in 469 c. The relative clause itself is an exten- sion of xara thy ypelav, laying espe- cial stress on the relativity of the KaAddv. 11. év rw Oewpeio bar: notice the use of the passive to denote the point of view from which cya is kadrdv. 113 St. I. p. 474. 114 PLATO’S GORGIAS. _ StL. p. 474, Oewpotvras; exers TL ExTds TovTWY eye TEPL THpaTOS e KadXous ; Ion. OvK exo. > a \ > , 9 \ , ‘\ Xo. OvKovy Kat Ta\Aa TavTA OVTW Kal OYXYMATA Kat Xpopara 7H Sia ydovyv twa 7 Sia wperiav 7 Sv duddrepa. KadG Tpomayopevets ; Ilona. "Eywye. > * b] X hS ‘ x‘ ‘\ 5. Xo. OV Kat Tas dwvas Kat Ta KaTa THY povaLKHY 20 TAaVTAa WOAVTWS; TIoa. Na‘. & * 7 ‘ “\ 4 A ‘ > & Sa. Kal pj ta ye Kara tovs vdosovs Kal Ta emitndev- > 5 # > < 4 3 ao XN Xr 4 x > aN -aTa ov OnTTOU EKTOS TOUTMY EOTLY, TA KAAQ, 7) ape UfLQ civa } ndéa H apporepa. Tlon. OvdK euouye Soxet. > a ‘N ‘ nn , , € , Loa. Odxodv kai 76 TGV pabypdtav Kaddos WaavTus ; Ion. Wavy ye: kat Karas ye viv opile, & Ldxpares, ndovy Te Kai dyad@ dpildpuevos Td Kahov. ui & > a \ > XN na 3 , , Q A Ya. OvKovy To aloypov Tw EvavTiy, horn TE KQL KAK® ; 12. ékrés trovrwv: ze. the points © of view mentioned in}... #. 17. wpocayopeve : i.e. to designate by the addition of a characteristic, as if one were addressing a person by name. 22. «al prv: introduces us to a new variety of the beautiful, i.e. the results of mental activity. The véuo, émirndevpara, and padquara are, with reference to the subject of investiga- tion, fittingly introduced as represen- tatives of this class.—td ye kata Tovs vopous xré.: it must be confessed that we could do very well without ra xadd. If kept, it must be consid- ered as a repetition and restriction of Td ye KaTd Kré., and ro’rwy must be explained by 4 adda xré. in appo- 474 sition. See H.950. But Rid. §271b © seems to have a different view of the sentence, which he holds to be a case of inversion of government, and with this Cope seems to agree in his translation: **And moreover, in all that belongs to laws and habits of life, their beauty, I presume, is to be found nowhere beyond these limits; that is to say, either the utility or the pleasure that is in them, or both.” 27. wal Kaas «ré.: this lively as- 475 sent of Polus shows that he thinks ® that Socrates is at last veering round to his position. The manner in which he is gradually undeceived is inter- esting. 475 TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 115 Bt. I. p. 475. 30 Toa. “Avayry. Xa. "Orav dpa dvow Karow Odrepov Kadduov 7, ) TO «7 , a > , € , , , 2 ETEPW TOUTOW 7 apdoTéepoats UiepBadrdov KaAdLOV EoTLY, ¥ € a A DO , a» 9 / Ato Ndovn H adpedia | apdporépors. Ilona. Iavy ye. 35 Xo. Kal drav dé 81) Svow aicypow 7d éerepov atoy.ov > ¥ Xx 4 az *. c , ¥ yy a > H To. AVI 7 KaK@ UmepBdddov alay.ov EoTaL* 7H OVK b avayKn; * TIoa. Nai. Xa. bépe 87, was €déyero vuvdy wept ToU ddiKety Kai > A > ¥ XN XN > nn ed > 40 dduxetabar; ov eheyes TO pev ddiKetoOar KaKLoV iva, TO O€ AOLKELY ala XLOP ; IIoa. "EXeyov. > nw ¥ ¥ xX 3 A aA > wn La. Ovxovv eitep aloxiov Td adicety TOD adiKeto Oar, ¥ a, c 3 XN ta « , X ¥ a qroe Aumnpdrepdv eat Kat ian VTepBadXdov atox.ov av 45 ein 7) KAKO 7) auhorepos; ov Kal TOUTO avayky ; Tloa. Ids yap ov; XXXI. Yo. Mpadrov péev 67 crebdpefa, dpa van brepBadrrer 7d dduKety Tov adiKetoOar, Kai ahyovar pGAXov of ddukovvTEs 7) ob GdiKovpevor ; TIoa. Ovdapas, & LHKpares, TodTS +e. 5 Yo. Ov dpa urn ye vrepéxet. Toa. Ov Syra. > an > 4 , > , x > > .»¥ Xa. OdKovv ei pr AUT, apdhorepors pev ovK ay ETL umepBadrXou. Ilona. Ob datveran. 475 36. qrou «ré.. if the text is sound, XXXI. 1. Avayg: here denotes, as 475 Socrates here speaks with less exact- the following dAyoto. explains, only ness than above, omitting what can physical pain. No reference can be be easily supplied. meant to the gnawings of conscience. 39. dépe Sy: the result obtained is 2. vdaepBadAe: here construed with applied to the case under discussion. _gen. like brepéxer (5). Of. Leg. v. 734a. ¢ 116 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 475. 10 Xa. OvKotv To érépw deimera; TIoa. Nat. Xo. Te Kak@; ¥ TIoa. “Eouxev. Xa. OdKxovv Kax@ vrepBdddov 7d ddiKely Kaxvov av Ein 15 Tov aouketo Gan; 20 25 475 ad TIoa. Axjdov dy Ore. Soa. "AMAo te obv bmd pev TOV TOY aVOpadTeY Kal es ne a € nan» any» , ¥ UvTO OOU @LONOYELTO HAW EV TH eum poo bev XPov@ ato x Lov > NS 9 a a 15 a E€Wal TO GQOuKely TOV a uxeta Bau ; TIoa. Nat. Xa. Nov O€ ye kaxvov épavy. - TIoa. “Eouxev. , a > ‘ a x , XN \ »” Xo. AéEano av OvV OU peaddov TO KQKLOV KQL TO ALOK LOV avTL TOU HTTOV; py OKVEL atroKpivacOal, @ IId@AE+ ovdev % # > », = ~“ ¥ y - “A yap BraByoe: adda yervaiws T@ AOYW woTEP LaTpa , > s NX , x» XN a 9 A Tmapexov atokpivor, Kat y Pabe } py & épwrd. Tloa. “AAN ovk dv SeEaiunv, @ LdéKpares. Zo. “Addos 8€ Tis avOpaTrav ; Tlon. OU pot Soxet Kara ye ToUToy Tov Néyov. 17. &\do tt: see on 467d. Polus had several times given as an author- ity the opinion of the masses, and had even, in 474 b, by the words of? &AAos oddels spoken in their name. He thus appears, like Protagoras in Prot. 353 a, as their representative. Gmodoyeiro properly applies to tmd god, and the present is to be supplied to tnd Trav TOAAGY avOperwr. 23. Sao dv: pays back for Po- lus’ remark in 474b. The construc- tion is varied by the substitution of avr) with gen. instead of # after uaa- Aov. 24. dvtl rod qrrov: sc. Kako Ka} 475 aisxpov. d 25. yevwvalws: bravely ; scorning the pain. The comparison is the same as in 480 ¢ mapéxew ... Somep Téuvew kal xdew iatpg, and scems to be a Socratic one. Cf Xen. Mem. i. 2. 54. For the construction, see on 456 b. 26. abr a py (sc. PhO): affirm or deny. See on 454 d. 29. kard ye Tovrov tov Adyov: a conditional admission, implying that with a different treatment possibly a different result might be obtained. MAATONOS TOPTIAS. 117 St. I. p. 475. 30 Xa. “AANA dpa eye eheyov, dre ovr’ av eyw ovr dv ad ovr’ adhdos ovdels avOpdmav SéEair’ av paddov dduceiy 7 adixetoOar* KaKvov yap Tuyxaver dv. TIea. Patverat. € a > > a Xa. “Opds ovv, & ade, 6 eheyxos Tapa tov €heyyxov 35 mapaBadd\Smevos ore ovderv €orkev, GANA Gol pev ot 4 nw A aA ado Tavres Gwortoyovow mhiy 40d, euol dé od eEapxets eis @y pdvos Kat duohoyav Kal paptupar, Kal eyo oeé476 , > ¢ XN ¥ an ¢ A A \ povov éerufydpilav tovs addous €@ yalpew. Kal TOdTO bev Hew ovtws éxérw: peta TodTo dé wept ob 7d Sevrepov 40 nude BytHcapev cKepanela, TS adiKodvTa Siddvar Sikny dpa péytotov Tay KaKav €oT, as ov wou, peilov Td XN } 8 , ¢ QS 2 N ¥ , oe a SN pn diddvat, as ad eyo @pynv. oKxordpucla dé THd€- Td diddvar Siknv Kat 7d Kohalec Oar Sixaiws adiKkodvra dpa TO avTo Kadets ; 45 IIoa. “Eywye. ¥ > s ¢ 2 A ’ , , , Xo. "Exes obv héyew, WS od! TA ye Sikata TavTa Kahd Db 2 2 9 , \ , > + 5 éatt, Kal? doov Sikaia; Kal duacKepadpevos eité. - TIoa. "AAAA prow SoKel, ® VaHxpares. Phaedo 70 d tiwpev ap’ oitwol ylyverar 476 dravra. H. 1016. In the sentence ® 30 f. ot? dv «ré.: ay draws attention to the emphatic words. On the posi- oO: 476 a tion and repetition, see H. 862, 864; GMT. 223, 226. 34. opds otv, 6 deyXos xTé.: we might also have had épzs ody roy Zreyxov Ste wap xré. But the form chosen by Plato greatly heightens the contrast. Socrates, moreover, is referring to his own words in 472 ¢ mapaBaddyres ody wap GAAHAOIS cKEepd- bmeOa, ef Tt Stolcovow GAAHAwY. Hence also the addition of the expressions Maptupay and érupngicwy to the more general éuodoyav. 41. dpa péyorov: the more usual particle for “whether” is ¢?, but cf following, we have dpa introducing a direct question previously announced by tHde as in 459 d. 43. Koddlerbat Stkalws dStkotvra: the adverb is necessary, because upon it rests the main point in the proof. 43 f. dpa to aire KkaXeis: the posi- tion makes the question more pointed. 47. «al Stackeapevos ela : the ex- b hortation to Polus to think well be- fore he speaks is at the same time an intimation to the revder that the principle touched on in the question is ‘of the greatest importance, as indic- ative of a man’s moral views, and 118 PLATO'S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 476. XXXII. Lo. Eadrer 89 Kal rdde* dpa et ris Te Tove, o ¢ > \ avayKn TL €ivat Kal TATXOV UT TOUTOU TOD TOLOUYTOS ; “Tloa. "Enouye Soxet. 9S a , a. a a \ a Do. Apa TOUTO TACKXOV, O TO TOLOVY TFOLEL, KAL TOLOUTOP, ae A A a“ , QA ‘ , ¥” , 5 OLOVY TOLEL TO TOLOUY ; éyw de TO TOLOVOE * €l TLS TUTTEL, 10 15 20 25 476 c > ¥ e , avayKn Te TUTTEc Oat; Ilona. ’Avady«n. XN > , 4 aA X € , y \ Da. Kae ev opddpa TUNMTEL 1) TAXU O TUTTWY, OUTW KAL ¥ TO TUTTOMEoY TUTTETOaL ; TIoa. Nai. A » , a , 2 , @ x =o. Totovrov apa ara0os To TUTTOLEV@ €OTLVY, OLOV AV X vw - TO TUTTOV TOLy ; Ilona. Havv ye. > a \ > , 2 7 , Yo. OvKxovuv Kat el KaeEL TL; avayKy Tt kaceo Gas ; Tloa. Ids yap ov; Xo. Kat ef opddpa ye kdeu } adyewas, ovtws Kdeo Oar x XN iw m co TO KadmEvov ws Gv TO KaoY Kay ; IIo. Ildvy ye. 3 a \ > 2 € 2 ON , , Xo. OvKovyv Kat El TEMVEL TLS, O AUTOS hoyos ; TELVETAL yap TL. TIan. Nat. ‘ > , a ‘ XN re x - , Xo. Kat ei péya ye 7 Bald 7d Tuna 7 adyevdr, TOLOVTOY THHpA TéwveTar TO TEUVOMEOY, OLoV TO TéLVOV TEUVEL ; ao Ilona. Patverat. hence is not to be accepted without earnest investigation. How neces- sary this exhortation is, can be per- ceived from a question of Polus in 477 ¢. XXXII. 14. «dev: the examples are chosen from cauterizing and sur- gery, because the healing art is in general for the body what the puni- tive administration of justice is for the soul. See on 456b. The second example is an advance on the first, in so far as the result of the treatment — corresponding to the general idea md8o0s —can be expressed in the sub- stantival form tpujjua. TAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 119 St. I. p. 476. Xa. LvdAyPSnv 57 dpa ei dpodoyels, 6 dpr edeyor, mept TdvTwv, otov Gv Touy TS ToLOdy, ToLOUTOY 73 maaXOV TAO KEL. TIoa. ’ANN’ 6podoya. 30 Xa. Tovrwy 81 dpodroyouperwr, 7d Siknv SiSdvar awére- , es a a pov maayew Ti €otw 7 Tove} TIoa. “Avadynn, & LaKpares, tacyew. La. OvKobvy Ud Twos ToLodYTOSs ; IIo. Tas yap ov; wid ye Tod KoddLovtos. 35 Xa. ‘O dé d6pOds Koddlwy Sixaiws Kohale; e TIoa. Nai. Xo. Alkara mow 7 ov; TIoa. Aikaua. Xo. OvKodv 6 Kodaldpevos Sixnv did0ds Sika wa- 40 oXEL; Ilona. Patverau. Xa. Ta dé Sikad mov Kaha apoddynra ; TIoa. Iavv ye. Xa. Tovtwy dpa 6 pev movet Kadd, 6 dé macyet, 6 Koha- 45 Copevos. Toa. Nai. XXXII. Yo. Ovxotv ecivep Kadd, ayaba; H yap 47 dea 7 apedAipa. Tloa. “Avayny. Za. "Ayaba dpa mace 6 Sixyny S.Sovs ; 476 26. cvAAyBSyv: turns from the proper or appropriate exercise of any 476 particular to the generic, and extends _ function, and thus leads up to d:calws, © to all cases the law which has been which is specially ethical. noticed in special cases. It belongs, XXXII. 1. edwep kadd «ré.: the 477 of course, to the last clause ofoy «ré. argument, made according to the ® 30. ro Slkynv SSevar: the article modus tollendo ponens with determines the subject. GMT. 790. natural abbreviations, rests on the e 35. dpOds: denotes in general the exposition made in 474 d f. 120 10 na # 15 G\Anv twa evopas } Teviar ; 20 477 a lan. "Eocxev. Xa. “Adedetrar apa ; TIoa. Nae. PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. L. p. 477. Zo. "Apa HvTep éy® vrodauBdve tiv dpedriav; Bed- 4 hs ¥ a ¥ 4 ve tia THY yyy yiyveTat, EimEep Sikaiws KodaleTaL; IIoa. Eixés ye. Xa. Kaxias apa wuyns dmahddrrerae 6 Sikynv Sidovs ; TIoa. Nai. > > a ’ > , nw we Yo. Apa ovv Tov pmeyiotou amad\arreTat KaKOU ; QE dé oxdTmer: év xpynudrav KatacKevy avOpéTov Kakiav < TIna. OvK, GAAG Teviav. w a) , i f. x s Xo. Ti 8 & coépatos KatacKkevn; Kakiay av dyoats > , x XN , \ > \ ‘ a ao Géveray €wWwalt KAL VOOOV Kat atonxvos KQL TQ TOLAVTA ; Ilona. "Eywye. > a N93 a , € a 5 So. Ovkovp Kat €v wuxn TOV) PLav nyel TWQ ELWALS IIoa. las yap ov; , > > > , a \ 9 , \ So. Tavrnv OUVV OUK aouKiay KaNets Kal opabiay Kat c XN ‘A wn Settiav Kat TA TOLAVTA; 8. tyv aedlav: cognate accusa- tive. After brokapBavw we must sup- ply &peretodu. The asyndeton which follows is of the very common ex- planatory class. 13. dpa otv: introduces a new sec- tion of the argument, regarding the statement advanced by Socrates in 469 b. 14. karackevy: is distinguished from zapackevy in that it denotes a preparation designed to endure ; mapa- oxevh is for the emergency. Conse- quently the constitution of the body, so far as it is the result of physical culture, is naturally a raracKevh. 20. rovyplav: not xaxlay. The lat- ter word, according to the prevailing usage, denotes, as applied to the soul, moral depravity only, as above (a). The former denotes a bad condition in general, which may or may not be due to moral depravity. But as the bad condition usually involves bad constitution, wovnpia comes to mean much the same as xaxla. The use of the words depends upon katackevy. 23. nalrta trowaira: shows that the enumeration is not complete. The omitted member is given below in d (andAacrov)ande dkodacla,and thereby the number of rovnpla: (7.c. varieties of tovnpta) is made to correspond with the number of cardinal virtues (dperaf). 25 30 35 hoynuevwy év TO eutrpoober. 40 45 417 c d TAATONOS TOPTIAS. Tloa. avy pev ovr. 121 St. I. p. 477. Xo. OdKoty xpyudrov Kat cepatos Kai uyins, TpLov ” ‘\ ¥ f OVTWY, TPLTTAS ElpNKAaS TOVNpias, TEviay, VdTOV, AOLKiaY ; TIoa. Nat. Xa. Tis oty rovrwy tay Tovnpidy aicyiatn; ovy F adixia Kal cvAAABSnv H THs Wuyjs Tovnpia ; TIoa. Tlodv ye. 2 Qy > , \ s da. Eu 87 ALT XKLOTY, KAL KAKLOTY 5; Ilona. las, & Sa@xpares, héyes ; € yA a MM ¥ »” z * So. Ooi aet To ALO KLOTOV TOL AVIV BeyloTyny Tap- dt a ¥ xn 3 ¢ ¥ 4 > > a e éxov 7 BraBynv 7 aupotepa atoxiorov éotw ek TOV wpo- Tlna. Maduora. ¥ \ 2 , \ , a , Xo. Atoytortov de aouKta Kal OULTATA wux7s TOVY) Pla vuvdn apohdyytat Hut ; Ilona. ‘Opoddynrae yap. > na x > , / 3 a 2 f e , Ya. OvKovy 7 aviapoTaTov €oTt Kat avia vaEepBahdov ¥ #: > ® x . x > / aioyirtov TovTav oT } BraBn 7) apddrepa ; Toa. *Avaynn. > > 5 > , / 2 a s X s da. Ap OUV adyewdrepov €OTLY TOU meer Oat Kat KApL- * ” > XN 9 ¥ NX » + 2 “ vew TO AdtiKOV Elvat Kal aKdAaGTOV Kal Serhdv Kal apay ; IIoa. OvK emovye Soxet, & YHxpares, awd TovTwy ye. 32. «was, d Dokpares; Polus shows by the question that he has not yet completely grasped the relationship of the ideas, good and beautiful, bad and ugly (cf. 477 a), although it has been twice expounded by Socrates. 40. davvapos and avila: like dayeds and aAyndev, characterize the Adan from its physical side, 7.c. the pain caused by the punishment. Cf. also Prot. 355 e and Gory. 499 a, where aviacba: is opposed to xaipew. With BaAdBy sc. iwepBaddov, and also with c d éugpdrepa, which is the adverbial acc. 477 like rodvarrfoy and the like. See G. 4 160,2; H.719b. The words avapéra- tév éott do not indeed harmonize with the rest of the sentence and may with- out injury be cut out, but still they are not unnatural in this careless form of conversational speaking and do fit the following question ap’ &Ayewdrepov. 41. rovrwv: is of course to be un- derstood in the partitive sense. 45. dao rovtwv ye: ‘ex his quidem quae disputata sunt.’ Stallbaum. 122 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 477. Lo. “Treppuet run dpa as peyddy BdaBy cai Kako Oav- , e , 5 e a an , ¥ pacity vmepBdddovea Tada H THS WuyAs Tovynpia aioyr- / >? , 2 x. > > F. € ¢ * 7 OTOY €oTL TAVTUD, ETE} OUK adyndduu ye, Ws 6 ads hoyos. e 50 55 5 10 ally 478 a TIaa. Baiverar. Xa. "AANA pyV Tov TO ye peyiorn BAABn brepBaddov x ¥ A péytorov ay Kaxov ely TOY GVTaV. Tloa. Nai. Xa. “H ddicia dpa kal 4} dkokacia Kal 4 dAAn Woyys , , an ¥ ‘ TOVHPLA LEYLOTOV TOV OVTWV KAKOV ETL ; Tloa. Baiverar. XXXIV. Xo. Tis otv réyvn wevias daadddrra; ov XPNLATLTTUKY ; Toa. Nai. , \ , > > - Xa. Tis 5€ vdcov; od« iarpiKy ; Tloa. “AvayKn. doa. Tis 5€ wzovyptas Kat ddukias; ef pt) OUTwWS EvTO- 478 1 P BY) a 55 , 4 a» \ . , x , pees, WOE OKOTFEL WOu ayojLev Kat Tapa TWAS TOUS KapL- 4 VOVTAS TA TOHLATA, ; IIoa. Tapa tovs iarpovs, & Saéxpares. ww A * 3 nm X XN > ac Sn. Hot 5€ rovs aduxovvras Kat Tovs akKoNacTaivorTas. Polus has a suspicion of what is com- ing and so expresses himself guard- edly, as if he wished to leave a door open behind him. On the contrary, Socrates speaks with great decision, and probably has in mind Polus’ words in 471 a @avuaciws ws &OAtos yéyover. 46. vmepdvet ds peydAy BAGBY: a case of what was originally attraction, but which by long usage has become phra- seological. See H.1003b; Rid. § 197. XXXIV. 2. xpynpatoticy: this and the jarpixj appear already in 452 w ff., where they are associated with yupractinn. 6 f. evtropeis: is used in a trans- ferred sense, as is more frequently 478 the case with dwopeitv. “If you are not at once (ofrws) prepared with an answer.” We must imagine a short pause as occurring before «i. Such halts and explanations by means of examples, analogies, suggestive ques- tions, and the like, are of course in accordance with the artistic design of the dialogue, but also serve to keep the attention of the reader. Note the interrogative form of one of Polus’ answers. On ofrws see on 503 d. 10. dxoAacralvovras: appears again in Rep. 555 d, but otherwise seems to be restricted to comedy. MAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 123 St. I. p. 478. . a Toa. Tapa rods dicacras héyes ; oa. OvKody Siknv Sacortas ; TIoa. Dypi. Xa. "Ap obv ob dixavoovvyn Twi ypepevor Koddlovow eo3 a 4 = 15 ot d6pOas Koddlovtes ; Ilona. Ajdov dy. x A + a > o > ‘\ 2a. Xpypariotixy wev apa wevias daddarret, larpery x , 4 XS ¢ x. > # Sé vécou, Sixyn d€ akohacias Kai adixias. b Tloa. Baiverar. 20 Yo. Tl tovTwv Kaddordv eorw; IIoa. Tivwy déyets ; Lo. Xpyparariys, tarpuxys, Sixys. TIna. Tlodd Siapéper, ® Yékpares, 7H Siky. é Xo. OvKovv ad yTou Hoorijy wreloTyV Tove agediay 25 7) auddrepa, etmep KddNordv eotw ; TIoa. Nai. Xa. “Ap” ody 76 iarpever Oar HSU éorw, Kal yalpovow Ot taTpevdpevot ; Ilona. Ovx eworye Soxet, 30 Xo. "AAN aPedysdv ye. 4 yap; TIoa. Nai. c Xa. Meyddou yap KaKkov amahharrerat, woTe AvowTEder Uropevar THY adyyndova Kal YyiH eivan. Tloa. as yap ov; > > > y x ‘ oy > G 35 Xo. Ap otv ovrws av tepl capa eddamovéatatos avOpwros ein, tatpevdmevos, 7) pndé Kapvev apy ; 478 23. aodd Staddepe: this utterance Socrates (ap’ ody... larpevduevor). The 478 P comes from Polus’ heart because he trans. use of iarpevecy is not common. © still continues to regard the practice 33. dyiy: on the form, sce H. 231 b. of law as the proper field for the 35. dp’ ovv xré.. Socrates proceeds exercise of the art which he teaches. now to fulfil the promise made in c 32. dwadddrrerat: the subj.istobe 473 a.—otrws: is explained by the supplied from the previous question of — partic. which follows. 124 40 45 50 55 478 Cc d PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 478. e Ina. Andov ore nde kdpvev. > X n> > > , e ¥ nA 3 Xa. OD yap TovT’ Fv EvOopovia, ws EoLKE, KAKOD aah- TIaa. "Eore tatra. ayy, dda THY apynv pynde KTHOLS. Xo. Ti d€; dOPduwrepos worepos Svow éydvrow Kakov yo > 4 v3 9 aA € 5 ‘ ae) €lLT €V THLATL €lT €V Wx, oO LAT PEVOLLEVOS Kal amTahvat- 4 an a x »* , TOMEVOS TOD KaKOD, } 6 py iarpevdpevos, Exwv Sé; so # < X39 / Toa. Daiverai wou o py Latpevopevos. > n XN , ie , Ae 3 \ Xa. OdKodv 76 Sikyny Siddvat peyiorou kakovd amahhayy HY, Tovy pias ; Tloa. "Hy yap. Xa. Ywppovile. ydp mov Kal Sixarorépovs moved Kal tarpuxy yiyverar Tovnpias 7 dikn. Toa. Nai. 38 : x ¥ ¢ . » , 2 So. Ev QLLOVETTATOS ev apa oO LY) EX OV KQKLOQV €VY e Woy, emevd7) TOUTO PéyLoTOY TOY KaKoV Epavy. Ion. Ajdov Sy. Xa. Aedvtepos dimou 6 dmahhatromevos. Toa. “Eouxev. «& > > € £ / ‘\ > f Xe. Otros & Av 6 vovberovperds TE Kat EruTANTTOMEVOS Kat dicny didovs. 38. tour’ qv «ré.: on the gender, see H. 617; G. 138, n.2c. The impf. of ‘awakening’ is often employed with dpa or its equivalents (as Zoe). See H. 833. 39. tiv dpxyy pySe Kryots: is the substantival, hence: the general ex- pression for the previous particular partic. clause. rhv apyfy is construed with «rfois, which thus far retains its verbal nature. 49. larpucy ylyverar: carries out the analogy already so far developed. cwppovitew in the soul corresponds to iarpevew (xdew cal Téuvew) in the a body. 52. rovto: ie. 7rd Exew Kaxlay ev e€ céuati, to be supplied from the pre- ceding clause. 54. Sevrepos: cf. the Eng. colloquial “second best.’ 56. 6 vovOerovpevos: contains an intimation that the improving punish- ment need not necessarily be the in- fliction of physical pain, but may be perceptible only by its effect on the soul. Cf. Apol. 26 a r&y dkovclwy auap- Thudtwv od dedpo vduos ecicdyewv eoriv, 60 65 478 479 a TAATONOS TOPTLIAS. IIoa. Nai. 125 St. I. p. 478. da. Kdnuora apa Cy 6 éxwv ddixtay Kal pr) amadQXar- TOMEVOS. Toa. Baiverac. Za. Ovxodv obros tuyxdver dv bs dy Ta peywora adu- a \ , ’ > / , y , KV KQt XPeOPREVOS PEYLOTYH aduKia diampaénrar WOTE [LYTE vovbereto Bau pyte Kohdleaban pyre Sikyy Siddvar, daTeEp 479 ‘\ 2 ov dys “ApxXédaov raperxevda Oar kal Tovs adous TUpav- \ vous Kat pyTopas Kal Suvaoras ; Ion. "Eouxe. XXXV. Yo. Lyeddv yap ov otro, & dpiote, 7d aid Suatrempaypévor eiciv, woTep av et Tis Tols peyiorous , / - NX / / voojpacw cuvicxdnevos Siatpd€aito py Siddvar Sikynv z ‘ s ¥ A TOV TEPL TO TOUG auapTnUaTwY ToLs LaTpots wHdE iarpeEv- cca, poBovpevos wamepavel tats TO KdecOar Kal Td # oY = ee Téuver Oar, ore adyewdy. GAN ila AaBdvra SiddoKnev Kal vovde- reiv. The following expressions can be conceived as denoting progressively severer modes of punishment without going into details. — émumAntTopevos: the act. usually governs the dative. See on 472 a, 59. dSulav: in accordance with the general purpose of the discussion this word is used as a general repre- sentative of the various varieties of xaxia of the soul. 62. otros: is pred. and is explained by the preceding clause. The subject is the following rel. clause. 63. Svampdtnrar: cf. 473 v.— The three expressions for the idea of pun- ishment correspond to those above used, since road(ew dvelSeow (Leg. viii. 847 a) is but little different from émurAnrrev. XXXV. 2. dowep dy & tis: a x > An & Q yY 7 OU doKet Kat GO OVUTW; case of very natural ellipsis. Cf the analogous Lat. use of tanquam si, ut si. When used by itself this expression becomes a relative phrase, equivalent to the Lat. tanguam sicut. In this sense it is written as one word. GMT. 227,868. The com- parison to a child occurs in Homer, and is found also elsewhere in Plato, e.g. Phaedo 17d. ded:évar 7d Toy Taldwy and e tows ém Tis al ev quiv mais bots Ta TolatTa pofetra. Cf. above, 470c. 3. pry StB0ven Siknv: cf 478 e just above, where the same verb is used with Sore uh, and below, b, ec, where wav mo.ovar is used like dcampdéacro in this passage without &cre. 5 f. ro deo Oa kal to Tépver Gar: the repetition of the art. is unusual, and serves to keep the two ideas separate. 6. ore dAyewvov: on the causal gre after verbs of fearing, see GMT. 377. 479 b 126 Ilona. “Epouye. PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. > a e ¥ @r 2 e er \ do. Ayvoowv YS @S €OLKEVY, OLOVY EOTL n vylela KQL apETH TaLarTos. o a nw KwWOuVEvoVat yap €k Tov voy Hut w@po- , as a Se , , 10 Loynpevwv TOLOUTOY TL ToOLELY KaL OL THY diknv pevyovrTes, @ Iade, 70 adyewor adbrod Kafopav, mpos S¢ 7d aPeAyLov pr ¥ at > mn gy LONE , * > XN ¢€ n Tu WS EXEL K ayvoew, oow a L@TEPOV EOTL [LY) vytous , \ € a an aA * XV a“ x > , THpaTos wy Vyret Wuyn guvorKely, ddA Tabpa Kal ddixw V9 , Kal AVOO LW. lev Kal wav Toovow wore Sikyny pn 5.d6- 15 vat pnd amadd\drrecOar ToU peyiorov Kakov, Kal xp7- 20 479 *% , 9 x» > ec para tapacKevaldpevor Kat didous Kal oTws av Bow ws # - mibaverarou déyew. el Se ycts ahyn In GpohoyyKaper, @ Tldde, ap’ aicOdve. Ta oupBatvovta ek Tov Adyov; 7 BovreE cvdAdoyto dbucba ara ; TIoa. Ei py cot ye addws Soret. 8. dyvoav ye: Plato frequently employs participial clauses as a kind of addendum to sentences which are either interrupted by the answer of the respondent or already complete in themselves. — oloy: what sort of a thing. 2 11f. xaOopav ... dyvoeiv: is epexe- getical to rowodrdy t1, and corresponds to cumoxduevos . . . poBovpevos and a&yvoav in the comparison above. 12 f. py vyrots owparos: a harsh use of the comparative gen. equiv. to }) wh bye? oduart. See Madv. Syn. § 90. 13. ovvoueiv: divorces the human personality from the soul and body, by a union of which it exists. With xadopav xré., Plato thinks especially of the vois to which he opposes that part which, in its subserviency to the lusts and appetites, willingly withdraws from the control of reason. — ca@pq: is used of injuries and defects of all kinds, whether of material things, as jars (493 e), or of the body (Dem. Ol. ii. 21 «hy piyua (fracture) civ orpéupe (dislocation) kiv KAAO Te Tov bnapxdv- twv cabpby 7). From this meaning comes its transferred use in applica- tion to the soul or the state. Notice that the unhealthy soul is designated as ga@pad from a physical point of view, &3:kos in its dealings with its neighbors, and dvdovos in its attitude towards the divine. 15 f. kal xpypara rapackevafdpe- vou: epexegetic partic. to may mowod- ou. 16. dias dy dow «ré.: is a circum- locution for a third substantive. 18. td cvpBalvovra: “the results” obtained. 19. cvddoylcacbat: “to sum up what has been proved.” See on 478a above, in regard to the answers of Polus. 20. el py xré.: affirms and admits; but because nothing else can be done. 479, 25 TIAATOQNOS TPOPIIAS. > > oF , , BN € > , ‘ So. Ap OUV ovpBaiver PEyLoTov KQKOV 1 aoukia KQaL A > a TO GOLKELW ; TIoa. Baiverai ye. 127 8t. I. p. 479. * % > - > se 4 n a ‘\ do. Kat unv arahrayy ye é€fdvyn Tovrov Tov Kakov Td a dikny diddvar; Tlon. Kuvduvever. Xo. Td O€ ye py Siddvar eupovy Tod Kakov; TIna. Nat. 9 » 3 \ n a 4 . 9 A Da. Aeutepov apa EOTLY TMV KAKWY peyeDe TO aouKkety* 30 Td S€ ddixodvTa py SiWdvan Sikny TdvTaV peytoTOV TE Kat Tp@TOV KAKaV TEPUKEV. Ion. “Eouxev. Xa. *Ap’ ody epi Tovrou, @ pire, nudes Byntycaper, od X x > , io 7 N X / LO pev tov “Apyédaov evdaovilwy tov Ta péyrota ade- 35 Kouvra Sikny ovdepiav Siddvta, éya dé TovvayTioy oidpe- vos, eit *Apyédaos ett ahdos avOpdtav daticody py diSwor Sixny adikGv, ToUTH TpooHKey aOhio civar Siade- ‘\ povtws Tov ahdov dvOparwv, kal del Tov adiKOvYTA TOU adikoupevov aOdidtepov ecivar Kal Tov py SwddvTa Sikny a , > n> \ © > 9 a s 40 Tov dvddvTos ; OV TQUT VU TA UIT EMOU heyoueva. ; 479 Cc da TIna. Nat. 21. dp otv: regularly introduces a conjecture, which is expected to be confirmed by the other party; apa alone is also often so used; apa ov expects distinctly an affirmative an- swer. Often dp’ od» approximates to ap’ od. Cf. 450 a.— péyrorov Kakov: cupBatvew has (in addition to the inf.) the constr. of tuyxdvw. Hence the omission of the partic. is allowable. GMT. 890. 24. «al pay «ré.. in this and in the following utterance of Socrates, the question is denoted merely by the tone. 29. Sevrepov xré.: cf. the similar usage above in 478e. If the reading is sound, we must infer from the follow- ing clause that 7d dduceZv has the same force as 7d adicodvra Siddvau Sian. 34. rov’Apxédaov ... Tov «ré.: the main force of the example lies in the predicate, roy... 5:5dvra, as the art. shows. Constr. révy with SiddvTa, to which 4d:cofyra is subordinate. 37 f. Siadepdvrws : is construed like the corresponding verb. Cf. Apol.29b éyh toiTe tows Siapépw Tay ToAdAGY avOpoTav. 128 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 479. Xa. loa. Daiveras. XXXVI. Yo. Bev: ci ody 84 Tadra adnOy, & ade, 480 tis ) meyady xpela €otiy THs pyTopixys; Set pev yap 57 €x TOV VOY wpohoynuevwr adrov éavTov paioTra pudat- Ovxoby dmodédexrar d7i ad\nOH édéyero ; gy \ 39 , € € N v yx, > , TE OTWS PH GOLKHOEL, OS ikavov KaKov EEovTa. ov yap; 5 Ilona. Heavy ye. > ‘ , > , x 2 ON x »” ig: a Xa. Kav O€ ye aduxyjon 7 avros 7} addos Tis Ov ay oe > XN e f 77 > nw ? e o 4 KHoyTat, avTov éxdvra iévas exetoe, OTOU as TaytoTa da- Ly Sf oev Siknv, mapa Tov SikaoTHy woTEp Tapa Tov iarpdr, omevoovTa oTas py eyyporiabev 73 vdonua THS GOLKias b 10 i ‘\ ‘\ Ps SY 2 oF x nw ¥. vmovdov THY WuxTY ToLnTEL Kal aviatov: 7 Tas héywper, 15 480 X\ ® Il@Xe, etrep Ta ovK avayKyn TavTa dé wy; MpOTEpov pevEer Nuty Omoroyypara ; 2 7 y \ A ¥ EKElvols OUTW fev TUE, a\wS Ilona. Ti yap dn dope, ® YoKpares ; 3 *. A: ” XN 3 “ e % - ¥ ee Sa. Ewe Ev apa TO amrohoyeta Bat VTEp TS aoukias a ¢ aK / aC ’ * / a , > THS avToU H yovéwy 7 étaipwyv } Taidwy % marpidos abu- XXXVI. 2. Wy peydAn «ré.: the use of the adj. is a slightly sarcastic allusion to Polus’ extravagant enco- miums on rhetoric. The rhetorical question has the force of a neg. Hence the following causal clause. 3. avrov éavrov «ré.: the prefixing of avrévy emphasizes the reflexive. H. 688. The subj. of puAdrrev is indefi- nite; cf. 456 d. 4. ikavev: the use of this word is an example of pefwors, or understate- ment, the peculiar characteristic of American humor. A similar case is Ant. Tetral. A. B 2 éuol 8& (av Te &vOpwros avatpomeds Tov olkou . ieavas Ad@as.. ree eyeveTo arobavev Te. . BéBAnkev. . Tpog- 10. trovdov: is stronger than ca- 6pdv. The disease leaves the sur- face, and fastens on the innermost kernel of the soul. We are re- minded of the Ovidian Princi- piis obsta. sero medicina pa- ratur,|cum mala per longas convaluere moras (Rem. Am. 91 f.). 14. +l ydp 84 «ré.; the rhetorical question has the force of an emphatic affirmation, 7f being almost equiv. to Tt &ARXo. 16 f. marplSos d&tkovons: the speeches in the assembly are hereby put in the same category with the judicial. —d$tkovens: is a colloquial repetition of adieclas. TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 129 St. I. p. 480. KovaNS ov YpyouLos ovdey | PNTOpiKT Huiv, Tladr«, ei ‘N ¥ € r , > , a 8 aA , PY €& TLS UTO aBou TOVVQVTLOY, KATYYVOPEL EL padtora X € »¥ \ x a > , \ x ¥ pev EavTov, emeita S€ Kal TaY olkelwy Kal TOY aAXwD, OS xX Be a e , > “a % ‘\ > , 20 av ae Tw pirov TVYXaYN QOLKaY, Kat BY arroxpuTTec Gan, GAN’ eis TO Havepdv ayew Td adiknpa, Wa S@ Siknv Kat € 8 , > , \ \ ey \ XN » vyins YUyTat, avayKatew be KQL QUTOV KQaAL TOUS a\dous \ > § nN a rd , , \ > 8 , LN QATOOELALOY, a a TO PEK EW PuUTaVvTa Kat ay PELws 9 , \ , > a x > x \ x WOoTTEp TELVELY KAL KQELV taTpw, TO ayaboy Kal Kahov 25 Sudkovra 1 Vrodoyilouevov Td adyewvdy, €av pmev ye TAN- a »” 25 ‘ > , , aN be 8 rn yov aéva n LK KOS My TUTNTEW TAPENOVTO, €av O€ €O [LOVU, dety, édv 5€ Cyuias, drorivovta, éav 5é dvyys, fevyovta, 2s Se , ’ s 2 XN a 5 , €av O€ Javarov, aro OvyijaKovta, QuTOV TpPWTOV OVTQa KATY)- \ nw XX ” in OV KaL AUTOD Kat TOV AANWY OLKELWY Kal ETL TOUTO Ypw- Opov Ar € noe a 9 Xd s, an > , 30 EVOY TH PYTOPLKH, OTwS av KaTAadyhov TOV dduKnWATOV 480 b yeryvopevev arad\atTovrat ToU peyioTov KaKov, ddukias. papev oUTMS 9 HA paper, @ Ide; TIoa. "Aroma pév, ® LwKpares, ewovye Soxel, Tots pév- » ¥ € TOL eum poo ev tows Oot omodoyetTat. 17 f. et py et: cf Lach. 196 a otre yap pdvtw obre iarpdy .. A€yee Toy avSpeioy ef ph ef Oedv tiva A€yer avTdy elvat. Cf. Lat. nisi si; eg. Cic. ad Fam. xiv. 2.1 noli putare me ad quemquam scribere, nisi si quis ad me scripsit. 18. el daoddBor tovvavriov: except in case one should assume, on the con- trary, that, etc. “19 f. 6s dv xré.; follows a pl. on account of its generic signification, and governs ray pidwyr as a part. gen. Examples in Kr. 58, 4, 5. 23. piocavra: to go into danger blindly, z.e. with closed eyes,—to be blind to the existence of danger, as such, was apparently thought to be a mark of great courage and determi- nation; hence pigarvra is paired here with dvdpelws. Why one should act so, is explained by 7d. . dtdKovra. One of the functions of the partici- ple is to express manner; hence it is quite natural to find it side by side with an adverb. 29. rav dAdwv olkelwv xTé.. see on 473 ¢. 30. Saws dv «ré.: is correlative with ém) rovro. Notice that here the drws is a purely final particle, as it was not in a, b above. 34. tows cor cpodoyetrat: the per- sonal dat. col seems strange, since it can neither be understood as 482 b below, of cot épodroyhoe: KadAikajs, da 130 35 40 480 VEW ; PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 480, > “A x > a“ 5a a - = , 7 Xa. OvKovv 7 Kaxeiva Autéov } Tdde avdyKn TUpBai- a / y Ilona. Nai, rovro ye ovtws eeu. Xa. Totvavriov dé ye abd preraBaddvra, et dpa Set twa a a v3 >? ‘ ” € a 2X / N KQK@S TOLELW, ELT exOpov €LTE OVTLWOVVY, EQV POVOV [LY avTos dBuctiras ¥ v0 TOU éxOpod - TobTo peey yap eviaBn- Téov: é€av d€ adXov aducy 6 oO €xOpés, mavtt apane Tapa- oKEevacTéov Kat TpatTovTa Kal déyorra, 6 OTWS BY do Sinv 481 nor as 477 d above, atoyiocroy adinia . GporSynrat huiv, for duoroye?rat (conveniunt, consentanea sunt) has its dat. in rots gumpocdev. But it is not superfluous; its force seems to be this: “but perhaps you can make it agree with what precedes.” Thus the dat., as well as tows, would serve the author’s purpose in deline- ating Polus’ character, who by such shallow artifices seeks to weaken his admissions, and, as far as possible, re- lieve himself from any responsibility in the results, —a design which So- crates balks by his following ques- tion. See on 477 d, 478 a, and H. 770, 771. 35. kdketva: kal assumes ei tdde &rora doxe?, thus noticing Polus’ obser- vation. —Avréov: a metaphor drawn from such usage as Avew yépupav. Cf. Prot. 332 e, Xen. An. ii. 4.19. A dif- ferent meaning appears in d:aAvew roy Adyov, 458 b, after Siadvew thy cuvov- ciay in 457 c. 38. rodvavriov: the heaping up of such kindred ideas as ad, ad@is, wad is not uncommon (see examples in Kr. 69, 12); rotvavriov means “on the contrary”; ad, “on the other hand”; peraBaddvra (intransitive), “vice versa.” —el dpa: if, assuming the ordi- nary view to be the correct one (&pa).— nwa: is object, and with it ere... évrwody is in apposition. éyépds is a personal enemy, as distinguished from 7oAduios, a national enemy. 39. édv povov pr attds «ré.: be- cause experiencing injury might be held as a kind of substitute for the punishment due for inflicting it. 40. avros: refers to the subject of Kkax@s awoeivy which is indefinite. — rovro «ré.: the insertion of this clause, which is due to the preceding éay po- voy xré., defers the completion of the sentence to mavtl tpdr@ KTé. 42. mpdrrovta Kal Ad€yovra : the two species of activity do not exclude each other, for the effect of apdrrew may be more thoroughly completed by Aéyew, and vice versa. — The acc. case is in agreement with the unex- pressed indefinite agent of wapackev- agtéov. On the case of the agent with verbal adjs., see G. 281, 2; H. 991 a.— dros pry 80 «ré.: this sen- tence is remarkable on account of the variety of the constructions found after érws,—three out of the perhaps eight varieties being found, viz. subjv., av with subjv., fut. indic. We should not attempt to make any sharp distinctions here, for Plato is capable of changing the construction for the sake of variety. We may, however, say this much. mrws ph 5¢ is purely final, the conjunction not 480 e 481 a 131 St. I. p. 481. pd €EOy Tapa tov Sixacryy: eav dé €On, unyavyréor, TIAATQNOS YTOPTIAS. Oras av Siadvyyn Kai wy d@ Sikny 6 exOpds, dd eay Te 45 ypvotov (7) npmakas ‘Todd, “1 ar0bLd@ TOdTO GAN’ Exwv avahioxn Kal eis EauTov Kal eis Tovs EavTOd adixws Kal dbéws, édy te Oavdrov afia HoiunKas 7, OTwS pi aToOa- vetrat, wadioTa ev wNoemoTE, GAN AOdvatos eorat ToVN- 1B pev pe Os WY: EL O€ LH, OWS WS TAELTTOV ypovoy BLdceETat TOL- b pe 50 odTos My. emi Ta ToLadra emouye Soxel, & Wade, y pyto- PLKN KPH mos eivar, evel TO ye py méANOVTL adiKELy Ov , , nae , 2A 5 *> \ \ ¥ peyahy tls pou Soxel y ypela avris eivas, el 5) Kal eorw Tis xpela, ws &v ye Tots TpdaOev ovdapy epavyn ovoa. XXXVIT. Kaa. Eiwé por, & Xawpedov, omovdaler TAaUTA Loxparys H mailer ; Xar. "Emot pev dSoxet, @ KadXtkdeus, vrephuas omovea- ol pe ¢ ’ ) 481 “ Hoe ” te ow ® XN 2 NN > a ” lev: “oddev” pévrou “otov 76 avrov épwrav. differing from ta. When the delin- quent is brought before the judge, there is some doubt as to his escape, and émws &y (equiv. to édy mws) gives expression to this doubt. In the long sentence following the ay gradually fades away, and the most common relative construction with the fut. indic. closes the series. On ei 5€ wh after édv, see on 502 b. 43. édv S€ €d@y: in thus stating the opposite alternative, Socrates takes for the moment the standpoint of the orators. That it is only for the moment is seen from Crito 49 ¢ ovre avradicety Sef otTE KaKG@s mover obdéva avOpsrwv, ob8 by érioiv mdoxn tw a’rav. 46. avadlicxy: to make the state- ment of the wrong complete, the way in which the money is wasted is added. XXXVII. 1. On the role assigned to Callicles here, see Introd. § 15. After Polus has shown himself in- capable of maintaining his views of rhetoric against the superior dialecti- cal skill of Socrates, Callicles enters the discussion with a thought quite similar to the one with which Polus had entered it in 461 b. The view of life on which all of Socrates’ de- ductions rest is so abhorrent to his innermost nature and all his hitherto cherished ideas that he cannot be brought to look upon the principles here advocated as the earnest convic- tions of a reasonable man. He does not, however, rush into the lists so roughly as Polus, but, being a more polished man of the world, turns first to Chaerephon, who is thoroughly acquainted with Socrates’ views. He, however, wittily refers him to the master, in the same words with which Callicles himself had in 447 ¢ re- ferred Socrates to Gorgias. 5 10 15 481 Kan. N7 Tovs Geods add’ eribupa. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 481. > @ LwoKpa- - / ELITE 01, / / an XN 4 x / TES, TOTEpOY TE homey vt amovddlovTa 7 Tatlovta; > N » , N , an > na» €t bev Y=p otovoalets TE KQL TUYXOVEL TAVTA ann OVTa a 2 » aA COA ¢ s > , x x. a Néyes, GAAO TL Huav O Bios avaTeTpappevos av Ely a > , \ , 9 , , « » TOV av para KOL TAVTA TA EVAVTLA TIPATTOLEYV, WS €OLKEV, y &@ Set; Xa. 70, KadXikdes, ef py te Qv Tots avOparois aos, Tots pev Addo TL, Tots S€ AAXO TL, TO avTd, GAG TLS UaV idudy TL emacyxe Ta0s 4 ot GAOL, ovk ay Hy pad.ov évdei- oe o *& € an 4 €ac bar T@ ETEPW TO EQAUTOU 7 dOnpa. c e héyw 8 evvoroas, a , s t ort eyo TE Kal ov VuvVv TVY KX QAVOPEV TAUTOV TL memrovOores, 5. wi tous Ocods GAN émbupa: aAAd is used after an expression of asseveration, as in 463d. The words of Chaerephon contain the challenge, “Why don’t you rather turn to So- crates himself?” to which Callicles replies, “But that is just what I do desire.” In Callicles’ manner of ex- pression we discern his excitable na- ture as well as his strong faith in his own views, which he is the more sur- prised to find opposed, not only by Socrates, but also by Chaerephon. Artistically also his words form the text for the discussion which follows. 6. papev ... walfowra: this is a very unusual construction for pnt. G. 260, 2, w. 1. 8. dvarerpappevos: cf. dvarpérew 7a mpdyuata, Atv, oixiay. For if you be both in earnest, and the thing which you say prove to be (ruyxdve:) true, would not the only (&AdAo 1 4) conclu- sion be that the manner of life of us men has been entirely upside down ? — av dvOpdrwv: is emphatically added be- cause Callicles does not intend that under jay only a limited circle shall be understood. Cf. Ar. Plut. 500 as pev yap viv juiv 6 Blos rots dvOpdémas dideertau. 9. awdvra td évavria: like ray rov- vavtiov, quite the contrary. 11. el py te xré.: Socrates recog- nizes indeed the opposition in their views of life, but refers it to the dif- ferent exercise of a common feeling, —love,— which varies according to the difference in the objects to which it is directed. The comparison of love of wisdom with other varieties of human love is often found in Plato, e.g. Phaedo 68 a.— waQos: denotes a state of mind brought about by ex- ternal influences. According to cause and circumstances it may be love, hate, admiration, or scorn. But no variety is peculiar to any single man; this is made clear by the explanatory clause inserted between md@os and 7d avrd, 13. (8tov: contains in itself an idea of comparison, like &AAo Erepov, and hence takes #. 15. tavrov tu: the mddos experi- enced by each one, is first roughly characterized as “about the same thing,” and later clearly defined by c da 481 da 481 the explanatory épavre xré. TIAATOQNOS TOPIIAS. Sypov Kal Tov Ilvpidprrovs. 133 . St. I. p. 481. €pavte duo avte Sv0iw Exdrepos, eyo péev “AdKiBiadov TE Tov KiXewiov kat dirocodias, od dé Tov te “APnvaiwv 3 , 95 € t aicbdvopat OvV OOU EKQ- , » a 9 x a \ ‘ x OTOTE, KQLTEp OVTOS dewod, OTL av on gov TO TALOLKG Kat y n 20 Orws av by exew, ov Svvapevou dvtidéyew, aAN’ avw Kal s , x et G9) 7 27 a Kato petaBaddouéevov: & TE TH exkAnola, edv TL GOV rf ~ 2 nw y Aéyovtos 6 SHuos 6 “APnvaiwy ph oh ovTws eyew, pera- / 4 a > om ¥ \ XN ~~ Badddpevos héyers & exetvos Bovderat, Kal pds Tov Iupt- , 7 x a a Aaptrous VEavLav TOV KaNOv TOUTOV TOLAUTA eTEpa WwéTrov- 25 Bas: tots yap Tv travdikGv Bovredpact te Kal Adyous The variation from the pl. to the dual is interesting. The lack of a first per- son dual compels the first pl., with its accompanying partic. rerovOéres, while the following dual emphasizes the exact similarity of the two ex- periences. 16. ’AdKtBidSov: the mental and moral training of the rising youth was largely directed by prominent older men with whom they associated, usually according to individual pref- erence. One of these prominent teachers, and one who made it the business of his life, was Socrates, and among the young men who clustered around him and followed his conver- sations was Alcibiades, whom Socra- tes greatly loved for his mental gifts. Owing to his great beauty he was jestingly called Socrates’ sweetheart (ra watdicd). Cf. Prot. init. 1é0ev, & Zaxpares, patvec; dHAa 3h Gre aad kuvyyeciou tov mep) Thy "AAKiBiddov épav. This is the point of the allu- sion here. 18. Srjpov: has two allusions. The son of Pyrilampes, a rich Athenian and friend of Pericles, was called Demus. Like his father, he is re- ported to have been especially beau- tiful, and is also mentioned by Ar. Vesp. 97 ff. as a much admired sweetheart. This fact Socrates skil- fully uses to characterize Callicles’ relation to the Athenian demus. This people needed, like a boy, a leader and guide; but the orators, instead of governing it, regulated their actions according to its whims. —rov IIvpiAdprovs: is of course to be understood in the usual way, like Tod KAewlou. Cf. rov TMupiAdurous be- low, and 513 b. 18 f. ale Odvopar... ov Suvapevou: on the gen. partic. construction see GMT. 884-6; H. 742, 982.— Seavov: is often joined with Aéyec, in order to describe a skilful orator, but can also be used without this addition, in the sense of “skilful,” “clever.” 20 f. dvw kal kdrw: like Lat. sur- sum deorsum, with peracrpépey, otpépery (511 a), meraBddAAaw, pera- mwirtew (493 a) denotes a changea- ble and uncertain course of action. Variations of the phrase are &rw re xal «dtw, and more often &rvw Karo. 25. Bovrevpaot: we. the fanciful plans and designs of boys. e 134 PLATO’S GORGIAS. . St. I. p. 481. > er > 9 > an Y ¥” / Z € - ovyx olds 7 et evavtiovabat, Wore, El Tis Tov €yovTOS EKa- a XN 4 es 4 € ¥ t > atote, & dua TovTous héyets, Oavpalor ws drord éorw, af ¥ x 7 7 > , > a , Y > , tows elrrots av avTa@, eb Bovdowo TahynOn hEyew, OTL, EL pT , x S ‘\ és an ¢ > XN ‘ TiS Tavoe. TA TA TALLKA TOUTwY THY héywr, ovdE TV482 4 XN nw , , , \ > > 4 30 mavoe. Tore TAUTA héywy. voile Toivuy Kal Tap €u“ov Xphvar erepa TowadrTa aKovew, kal py Oavpale ore eyo TavTa héyw, GANA THY hiiocodiay, TA Eud TaLdiKd, TAD- a s , , > , eon a a gov Tavita héyovcav. éye yap, @ dire Eratpe, & vuv €uov akovels, Kal pot e€oTw TOV EéTépwy TaLoLKaY TOD 35 HrTov eumdnkros: 6 pev yap Kdewieos obtos addoreE dddwv eott Adyar, 7 S€ diiocopia (del) TOV avTrav: héyer yA XN an , a A \ x ON s ® dé & od viv Oavpdles, Tapjoba dé Kai ards Neyomevois. b x > 2 , 2! 9 ¥ ¥ ¢ > XN > h oov exeivny é&édeyEov, dep aptu €heyov, @S ov TO adu- nn 93 eer) a , \ , co? ¥ Kely €ott Kal GouKouvTa Stikyy pH Suddvat aTavrwy €oya- 40 TOV Kak@v: % ef TOUTO édoels avédeyKTOV, wa TOY Kiva Tov Aiyumtiov Oedv, od cor dporoyyoe. Kadduxhis, & 481 28. el BovAovo: which probably was © hardly to be expected. 482 31. drepa trovatta: cf. above (24), ® Foire €repa. 34. trav érépwv maéikav: in the poral partic. equiv. to dre éAdyero. 482 We might translate 3é “ although.” 38. “éfédeyEov us xré.: see on 467 a. Here, to “prove by confuting her.” — > , \ X\ , a > eywye OWLal, @ Béarore, KQaL THY Avpay pot KPEelTTOV ELL «& , @ Xopyyorny, ‘ , a. sf: ‘ € n > 7 » 4 Kat mhetoTous avOpétovs m1 Opmodoyetv pou ddd’ evayTia c dvapphootew Te Kal Stadpwvetv, Kat yopov 45 héyew paddrdov } eva ovta eve euavT@ dovudwvor evar Kat évavtia héyeuw. XXXVITI. Kaa. 70 Sédxpares, Soxets vearreverOar ev Tots Adyots ws GANOGs Syunydpos av: Kal viv Tatra Snunyopets Tavtov mafdvros IIddov wafos, dep Topyiou KaTnyoper Tpos oe Tabet. epy yap Tov Topyiav épwta- 482 possible the inner conflict which tive veavixds (so in our dialogue, 508 d, 482 D must continue to rage in Callicles’ 509 a), which, however, is sometimes © soul, so long as one opinion has not used only of the freshness and the decisively vanquished the other. vigor of youth, as below, 485e. The 44. dvappooreiy: applies especially | verb applies especially to the training to imperfection in the general har- of the youth by the Sophists, which mony, while d:apwvety is used of the leads them to light and idle speeches discord between single tones. Two and to a defense of the most conflict- different principles exert their effects ing principles without having regard upon the soul. — xopyyotmv: this lit- unto the higher and earnest problems urgy, which has been already men- of life. Cf. Phaedrus 235 a ka) épal- tioned in note on 472 a, was of course vero 37 por veanedecOar émiderxvipevos not possible for Socrates, and could as ois te dv rabra érdpws te Kal éré- be only for the rich. But in propor- pws Aéywy auporépws eiwety kpiora. tion as a victory in this kind of musi- 2 £. Sypnycpos, Syunyopetv: indi- cal competition was looked upon asa cate dissatisfaction, sometimes with great honor, so a failure was a great the length of the speeches, as op- humiliation. The opt. is ideal, and posed to diaréyecOu, eg. 519 d, e, to be translated “which I might con- Prot. 329a,336b; sometimes, as here duct.” and in 494 d, with the means em- c 46. paddov: frequently follows a ployed by those who, unconcerned for comp. to reiterate the idea with a slight modification (rather than). Cf. below, 487 b, Phaedo 79 e, and see for other examples, Rid. § 166. XXXVIIT. 1. veaveverOar: “to act like a wild young man.” Calli- eles has in mind especially the inso- lent, bold, and reckless conduct of the rich and proud Athenian youth. This is usually the meaning of the adjec- the truth, seek only the approbation of the multitude. In the mouth of Calli- cles, who is the real dnunyépos, this re- proach sounds very strange, especially with the addition &s dAnéds. Itisa kind of unconscious self-criticism. 4. mpos od: cf. 485 b below, and Apol. 21 © mpos bv éyh rowdrdy tH éxaoy, “at whose hands I had some such experience.” 136 : PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 482. eon A aN 2747 > x 8 \ > , . 5 evov UTO GOV, €ay adikntar Tap avTov pr emLTTaLEVvos Ta Sikaca 6 THY pyTopiKHY Bovddpevos pabeiy, ci SiddEou a 2 ON e v > A aN 4 ¢ , avrov 6 Topyias, aisyurOjvar abrov Kai ddvar diddFeuw d.a 7d Hos Tov avOpdrav, dt dyavaxtotey av El TLS pH ' X % 4 ‘\ e a, > a: > pain: dia dy tavrnv TH dporoyiay dvayxacOnvar évav- 10 Tia avrov avTe@ eime, oe 5é adTd ToUTO dyamay. Kal wou , ” , A 2 A , A A , KaTeyéha, ws yé mor Soxely, dp0as tore: vov dé maw avTos TavTov TovTO éraber, Kal eywye KaT’ avTO TOUTO OK dyapat T@dov, ort wor oweydpnoe TO adiKEly ato-xLov elvar TOU ddicetoOar: ex TavTns yap ad THs dpodoyias e 15 avTds Td God aupToOdLaOels ev ToLs Adyous erectopia Oy, aicyuvdets & evde civewv. od yap TO ovTL, & YHKpares, els TovadTa ayes hoptica Kat Snuynyopucd, PacKkwv THY 482 6. SSdfo.: the fut. opt. is only found in indir. disc. as a representa- tive of the fut. indicative. It is post- Homeric, the first example occurring in Pindar. 7. avrov: repeats with emphasis the subject Topyiay, which is already expressed. Cf. Xen. Cyr. i. 3. 15 we pdcowat TE ndnry ayaa imméwy Kpdti- otros dy inmebs cuppaxety aitg. The clause with 67: is causal, and is ex- planatory of 51a 7d 00s Tay avOporwr, which is to be connected with pdva, not with ddaterw. 10. dyawav: cf 461 ¢ d 34 ayards. 11. ds yé pot Soxetv: as it seemed to me, The phrase is found sometimes with ws as here and Hat. ii. 124; sometimes without, as Jfeno 81 a; Euovye Soxetv Soph. El. 410. 15. cuprofiicbels erertopleOy : a combination of two metaphors, both of which refer to a horse which has been caught by a noose, and then guided according to a strange will by a bridle which has been forced into its mouth. In the same way Polus, by that unlucky admission, allowed himself to be noosed, and was thus compelled to follow the lead of So- crates, wherever that might take him. 16. r@ dvtu: affirms the justice of the accusation made against Socrates by Polus. 17. hoprika: a word not uncom- mon in Plato, is used in Euthyd. 287 a of insidious catch-questions. See on Apol. 32 a, where combined with d:«a- vied it is used of the tediousness of those detailed discussions from which Socrates, after the manner of an ora- tor before a court, seeks to draw his proofs. Here Callicles probably wants to indicate the vulgarity of such il- lustrations and talks, as being fit only for the uncultured multitude. The rel. sentence & dice xré. is con- nected epexegetically with rowira, and thereby the conclusion from the special case is made of general appli- cation. It was indeed from the idea of the «addy that Socrates drew the 482 20 25 482 - the 483 WAATONOS TOPLAS. 137 St. I. p. 482. a A ahybeaav Sidkev, & dice. pev ovK eoTw Kadd, vow é. € ‘ ‘ an ws Ta TOG S€ TadTa évavTi’ dddAyAots eoriv, Y TE PUGIS N¢ / 2\ > 2 , ‘ N im Z KGL O VOOS. Eady OvY TLS alaXUYNTOL Kat py TOAUA EyeELY 483 9 a? ia > s , a ‘ \ N a a7Trep VOEL, avayKalerat EVAVTLA héyew. oO 87 Kat OU TOVTO XN * ® a > A“ 4 XN TO aopov KATQAVEVON} KWS KQAKOUPYELS €V TOLS Adyots, cav , an ‘\ bev Tis Kata voor héyy, KaTa dvow vTEpwTdr, eay Sé Ta ~ , Me A / THS PVTEWS, TA TOV VdmLoV. y A aoTep avtixa €v TOUTOLS, TH > A \ A a aducety TE Kal TH adiKetcOa, TldAov 7d KaTa vopov ¥ , ‘ XX , > , X 4 atox.ov héyovtos, od Tov vopov edidKabes Kata pvow. N ‘. os ” * , gvoe pev yap way atoyiov éotw oTEp Kal KaKLOV, TO whole argument with which he re- futed Polus. 18. dicet péev, vopw S€: the oppo- sition of natural right to conventional right (law) was first definitely main- tained by Hippias of Elis. Cf. Prot. 337 cd, Xen. Mem. iv. 4.14. After him this principle was accepted and made a commonplace by all the Sophists. It is probable that Gorgias himself did not defend it, but his teaching can be traced back to it. This principle Callicles now proceeds to unfold. Of kindred import is also discussion between Alcibiades and Pericles, related by Xen. Mem. i. 2. 40 ff. 21 £. 5 8 Kal od totTo Td codov Th cody (artifice, trick) is used somewhat scornfully in the sense in which the sophistical Eristics em- ployed it, with whom Callicles puts Socrates on a level. Hence he also employs towards him the word ka- xoupyetv, which was used among the Eristics to denote crafty tripping in discussion. Cf. Rep.i. 341 a otre yap &y pe AdOos kaxoupyav, by which Thra- symachus declares his ability to de- fend himself against such unfair treat- © KTE.: ment; so i). 338 d. The same feel- ing determines the choice of the com- pound drepwrav “to slip artfully into the question,” “ask slily ”.— totro To copov: is epexegetic to é. 23. édv &€ xré.: supply the same verbs as are found in the first mem- ber of the sentence. 24. domep aitixa: as, for example. See on 472 d. 26. eBtdkabes Kata iow: ‘you followed up what he meant “conven- tionally” by arguing upon it in the “natural” sense.’ Cope. Le. Socrates had treated the concession of Polus, and drawn his results from it, as if Polus had therein conceded that to do wrong was by nature, ve. of itself, more ugly than to suffer wrong. “For —so runs the argument of Callicles —that which is by nature ugly coin- cides with what is evil, which latter, however, is the suffering of wrong. But we must not conclude from this that what is by law the more ugly is also the greater evil.” 27 £. 1d d&tkeio Oar: as the passage stands, must be considered as explan- atory of the preceding, without close construction. 483 a 138 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 483. adiucetoOar, vou S€ 7d adiety. ovdSé yap dvdpds TovTd VY éotlv 76 rdO nya, Td ddixetcOat, dd dvdpamddov Tuvés, 30 ® a , > 0 , 2X» oH 9 1S ua ‘ @ KPELTTOV €oTW TEVVaAVAaL 1 GYNVY, OOTLS a LKOUJLEVOS KaUL Xr , \ er 43 \ oS eon a -T poy akilouevos -”) OLOS TE EOTLW AUTOS auTw BonOety pende ahho ov dv KNONTaL. 3 x GAN’, oipas, ob TUPGuevou TOUS , <3 ~ ¥ ¥ - ‘\ € ¥ » vopous ot aabevets avOpwrot ciow Kal ot roddol. mpods € x 3 Noy eon , , t / QuTOUS OVY KQAL TO AUTOLS ouudpepov TOUS TE VO}LousS ridev- \ N > co > a \ X é x 35 TAL KQAL TOUS ETAWOUS ETALVOUTLY KAL TOUS woyous weyou- > n x a oe na 2, , ow, expoBovvres TOUS EPPp@pLEeveaTEpous T@MV avo padre \ \ » , ¥ y x 2A , x Kat duvarous OVTAS a €ov Exe, Wa LY AUTWY TA€OV EX w- , c > ~ * »” \ nn ® ou, éyovow Ws ata V\ pov Kal ao.Kov TO INEOVEKTEL, KQaL bie FS Me > “a XN i: nn ¥ ce ¥ TOUTO E€OTLY TO QOLKELD, TO a€éov TOV a\\ov Cnrew EXEL - 483 28. ovSé yap: leads over to a criti- cism of Socrates’ view per se, the question thus far having been his man- ner of procedure in the case of Polus. 30. kpeitrov «ré.: in the opinion of the masses, the same is true of all who are without the enjoyments of life. Cf Phaedo 65 a. The regular relative after an indefinite (riés) is goers, which frequently has a condi- tional idea, and then takes the cond. neg. pf. H. 699 a. 31 f. atrds ... «ySyrac: the same ideas were presented in 480 a. Here every man is expressly thrown upon his own resources and the state abol- ished. 32. GAN’, otwat xré.: this exposition of the origin of conventional right is designed by Callicles to show the su- perior authority of the natural right which he advocates. —ot riOépevor: “the law-makers.” ‘The active is used of the law-giver. On the force of the article with the predicate, sce H. 669 a; G. 141, N. 8. 33. kal of moddol: it is just this addition which contains the most im- portant point, according to Callicles’ real view, though he keeps it in the background, because for him the con- trast between stronger and weaker is of more value for his argument. It is this begging of the question to which Socrates first turns his atten- tion in 488 ¢ ff.—mpds avrovs: usu- ally we find BAdrovtes, but the prepo- sition itself is sufficient. Kr. 68, 39, 5. 35. éwalvous, oyous: the people - not only makes laws, — ?.e. commands and prohibitions, the transgression of which is punished by penalties, — but also expresses in manifold ways, by offices, honors, etc., its judgment on the value of men and actions. , 36. Another case of explanatory asyndeton. — éppwpevertépovs : how completely this word has become an adjective is shown by the fact that it is the only partic. which admits comparison. . : 38. weovectetv: is an expression for every effort of self-aggrandize- ment, and was often used as a politi- cal watchword in opposition to icovo- pla. Cf. 7d Yoov, two lines below. b TIAATONOS YTOPILIAS. ¥ OVTeES. 139 St. I. p. 483. > om , 5 > ar \, » ¥. / y 40 ayaTrwot yap, Olpat, AVTOL AY TO LOOV Exwow gav)drepou XXXIX. Acad radra 81) vopw pev tod’to ddikov Kai > X / XN / in »¥ a n X ato-ypov héyerat, TO wéov Cyrew exew THY TOdO?, Kat 15 a 2 a € O€ > , > \ 29 QOLKELY AUTO KaXovo ww Fi . € Ys Ola, gvots QuTy amro- , 2 4 ¢ , , 2 S 2 , a , gaiver QuTO, OTL Otkavov COTW TOV ApLELY@ TOU XELpOvos 5 mhéov éxew Kat Tov Suvatdrepov Tod advvatwrépov. Sydov ‘N nn ag og ¥ % + an ¥ £ dé radra Trohhaxod dri ovTws Eyxel, Kal &v Tots aANous Ce- ‘\ “A 2 s 3 y “~ 4 NX bia ¥ ous Kal T@V avOparrav €v Odais Tas 7oAETL Kat TOLS YEevE- 9 Y x -. nan oF Ow, OTL ovTW Td Sikatov KéKpiTaL, TOY KpEiTTwW TOU HTTOVOS 4” X # ¥ apxyew Kat mréov éeyeuy. 40. dyamdov: in mockery, because © satisfaction is a sign of weakness. Cf. what Adimantus says in Rep. ii. 366 © oldey Sri mAgY ef Ts Ocla poe Svoxepalvwy 7d adixciv 4} emiothunv Aa- Bov aréxeta: aitod, taév ye bAAwy oddels Exdy Sixatos, GAA’ bd dvavdplas A yhpws F rivos BAANS dodevelas Péeyer Td GdiKeiv, Aduvatav ard dpav.— to Yoov: Callicles is thinking of the fundamental principle of democratic states, the icovouia and iodrys of all. a XXXIX. 4. airo: draws especial attention to the following clause, which it introduces. By its proxim- ity to air4 this emphasis is still more increased. —dyelvw: is here probably used purposely instead of xpeirtw, as Callicles had in mind also the mental superiority of the rhetorically educated over the great multitude. Hence, too, duvardrepov. 5. Sydot: can be taken in construc- tion with gvois, or, which is better, as an impersonal verb equiv. to d9Ady (879A) éotev. The subj. is the fol- lowing gr: clause, whose own subj., tatra, has been attracted to the gov- ernment of the leading verb. > N - } 4 x ETEL TOW OLKAiw \paLEvos 6. woddaxov: introduces facts in support of the general statement. — kal év tots dAdots {wous: the law of nature is the principle which is at the basis of national law. Here is, more- over, an indication of the moral char- acter of those who hold this view, in that they put the &@pwros on the plane of the {dov. 7. ddAats tats moAcor: in inter- national relations this natural law (‘might makes right’) has preserved its force longer than in the inter- course of individual men; hence yé- vos is equiv. to gens. The clause following, év: . . . xe, is explana- tory of raira br: obrws exer. 8. kékptrat: in 520 © vevduiorat is the word. 9. dpxew: is the legal, radov Exew the natural expression of the same idea. — émel rolw Stkalw «ré.: is not purely neg., but has somewhat the sense: “ What other right had Xerxes than that of nature?” The choice of examples shows that with this self- ish, immoral view of life is connected also a lack of national feeling. Cal- licles himself feels the impropriety 140 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 483. 10 BépEns emt tiv “EdAdda eotparevoev }) 6 ratip avrov emi e SKvVOas 7 dra pupia av tis Exo Toadra héyeww: GAN, GS © \ ‘ a a , otpat, oUTOL KaTa Pvow THY TOD SiKaiov TadTa TpaTTOVEY, ‘\ ‘N X 4 * iad bh A a > ¥ Kat vat wa Aia Kata vomov ye Tov THS PYTEwS, OV MEVTOL ¥ *. wn a € “A , - ‘ tows KaTa ToUTOY, by Hwets [TeueOa] wAdTTOVTES TODS , XN 3 , € n 3 eS > / 15 Bedtiotrovs KQL EPPWLLEVEOTATOVUS HL@V AUTWV, €K VEWV ff y i 4 # ‘N , hap Bavovres, @amep éovtas KaremdoovTés TE Kal yonTev- ovres Karadovhovpela déyovTes, ws TO ioov yp7) exew Kal 484 nr x \ NN , TOUVTO €OTLW TO kahov Kat TO dtkavov. 483 of declaring Xerxes to be ayelywy and Suvarérepos TH ‘EAAvwy, and there- fore hastily seeks another example which will not arouse personal feeling. 11. dAdo pupia: is simply rhetori- cal exaggeration. The concluding summarizing clause deviates from the regular construction of the sen- tence, as also in a similar passage in Apol. 41 ¢ émt récm 8 by ris dékatro éterdoat }) "Odvocda } Sicudoy, ® BA- Aous uuplous &y Tis efrot KTE. 12. ofpat: as well as Yows, a couple of lines below, merely softens the ex- pression, without diminishing its posi- tiveness. Cf. 473 a.—rv rod Sikalov: if these words, which we would rather miss, are genuine, we have a case of word-play, which may be justified on the ground of the proposition above, 7 5€ ye. . . advvatwrépov. The same force must be assigned to tov dS:xalov goa below (484 ¢), though the form is different. 13. val pa Ala kara «ré.: a clever play upon the word véuos. “ Nature, too, has its law, —right and custom.” 14. pets: contains, by the implied contrast, a rebuke. Notice the heap- ing up of the participles, which, though connected with one verb, are subordinated one to another, quite after the Greek habit. See Kr. 56, aN , > €av dé YS Ola, 15, with notes. — wAdrrovtes : side-idea of artificiality and amateur- ishness easily attaches itself to this verb. Cf. Apol. 17 © petpakio wddr- tovtt Adyous. It is applied to laws, as here, also Leg. iv. 712 b reipoéueba Kaddmep maides mpecBiTta wAGTTEW TT Adyw robs vduous. 15 f. é« véwv AapBdvovres: cf. Apol. 18 b ék watdwy mapadraBdvres. The usual word for ‘receiving into school’ is the compound. Cf.516b. The use of the simple verb here implies a forci- ble compulsory manner of treatment. 16. dowep A€ovTras KateraSovtes: the comparison describes with bitter- ness the suppression of the so-called natural freedom, in that it compares education to the taming of wild beasts (karadovAovmeba). xatewddev applies to soothing by certain formulae, or charms; yontevew to the employment of forms of magic and witchcraft. Meno uses the same expression re- garding the dialectic proof of Socra- tes, 80 a kal viv, ds Y euol doxers, yon- Teves me kal papudtres Kal arexvas In a jesting way, with- out feeling, érddew is used in Phaedo 77 e, émwdh in Charm. 155 e. 18 f. édv . . . yévnrat: Callicles does not doubt that this future abso- lute ruler will come..- karemades. the 483 e 484 a TMAATONOS TOPIIAS. 141 8t. I. p. 484. ae ¢€ x + ¥ > f 4 n~ ¥ - giow tkavyy yérntas Exov avip, TavTa TavTAa aTOTELTE- 20 pevos Kal SuappyEas kal Suadvydy, karararioas Ta npLe- , \ , N93 \ \ s+ TEpa VPEPPIATA KQL PayyavevpLata KQL eTwOoas KQL VOJLOUS ‘\ ‘\ , oe > ‘\ > c - TOUS Tapa diow aTavTas, ETavacTAs avepavn Seomorns nuetepos 6 Sovdos, kat evradfa e€éhappev 7d THS PioEews Sikatov. Soxet dé pou Kai [livdapos amep éya héyw évdeix- 2 a 2 ae , 9 25 put bar &v TH Gopate ev @ Eyer OTL e € - as vopos 6 ravrav Bactheds nw X b s Ovarav te Kat adavarwv 19. vow ikavyv: “a nature which is equal to all difficulties.” There is no understatement, as in 480 a. — All the following expressions are chosen so as to be appropriate to the much- loved comparison with wild beasts. amocciecOat can apply both to the shaking off of any bond or yoke and to the throwing of his rider by a horse ; diapphéas is used more of break- ing a hedge or an enclosure than a halter, etc. dmopphtas would be more natural for the latter; cf. Hom. Z 507 decoy aropphtas, which passage quite suits the view of Callicles. 20. Stadvydv: calls to mind what has been previously said by Polus (473 ¢).— katamwatyoas: depicts the insolence of the victor to the van- quished. In A 157 Homer makes Agamemnon say of the perjured Trojans xara 8 bpxia mora mato. 21. ypdppara «ré.: the ypdupara denote, in contradistinction to the unwritten laws implanted in man by nature, the “written laws” which limit and regulate the exercise of the will; payyavetuara “works of deceit and witchcraft,” which fetter the reason; éerwbai “incantations” which palsy the feelings. These ideas correspond in the reverse order to the preceding participles, carerg¢dovres, yontevovres, Aéyorres, and the participles just in advance droceoduevos . . . diapuydy are probably chosen with reference to them. All three ideas serve, more- over, to show from the various sides what objections can be made to, the laws which are opposed to nature, and are hence crowded together for greater emphasis. 22. éwavacrds: is used of one who has lain prostrate for a time and now unexpectedly shows his strength. — dvepdavy : is ‘gnomic aorist.’ The single past example (aor.) serves as a norm for the general statement (pres.). H. 840; GMT. 155. 23. 6 Sotdos: asa result of Kxara- SovrAovucba above, 483 e, “the one whom we brought up as a slave.” — éfAapie: shone forth in splendor, a poetical word also employed in Rep. iv. 435 a. 24. Soxet & por: introduces a new element, —the authority of Pindar. Knowledge of the poets was a require- ment of the culture of the period. Cf. Prot. 338 e. The last words of the fragment are restored by Bergk (Poet. Lyr. Gr. p. 344, ed. 3) from the citation of the Scholiast as fol- lows : — b 142 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 484. & ovTos O€ 4, dno, ayer Suxaov TO Brardtarov 30 UTEpTaTA XELpt* TEKHalpopaL ¥ € , 2 \ 23 , epyouow “Hpakdéos, émet ampiatas — , & \ Si; > > > 7 Z 7” héyer ovTw Tas* 73 yap dopa ovK eriotapar: éyer 8 Ore ¥ , a ovTE Tpidpevos ovTE SdévTos ToD I'npvdvov HAdoaTo Tas Bods, as tovrov dvTos Tod Sixaiov dice, kat Bovs Kal > od * A XN - 35 TaANa KTYyLaTa Elva. TavTa Tov Bedriovds TE Kal KpEiT- . TOVOS TA TOV XELPOVEY TE Kal HTTOVYD. XL. Td pev ody adybes ovras exer, yodoe dé, dv emt Ta peilw EhOns éedoas 4dn dirocodiar. Epyourw ‘HpaxAdos ére) Inpudva Bdas KuxdAwriwy ex) mpobipwr Etpuabéos avairhras Te Kal dmpidras HAacev. Since we do not know the context in which these verses stand, Pindar’s views cannot be determined from them with certainty; but they were probably based on the principles of religious belief. In this yduos 6 may- twv Bactdevs Pindar may be thinking of the power of that fate which is superior even to the gods themselves. — Geryones, son of Chrysaor (“light- ning”) and the Oceanid Callirhoe (“beautiful stream”), was a giant with three bodies and three heads. He lived with his dog Orthros, or Or- thos, on the fertile island Erytheia, and possessed great herds of cattle. These were stolen from him by Her- cules in the expedition celebrated in the story. Cf Preller, Afythol.? ii. 202-216. — évBerxvivar: is used of all kinds of practical proof; dmodemvivat, of demonstration. 32. ovx éwlorapat: says Callicles, because the exact words of the poem pirocopia yap are not at his command. The verb has the same meaning in Prot. 339 b, Phaedo 61 b. After ampidras Calli- cles breaks off, intending to give the sense of what follows, and resumes the idea with ote rpiduevos. 33. yAdcaro: the use of the mid- dle instead of the active is normal, but is well suited to Callicles’ con- ception. 34. ds rovrouv dvtos: the use of ds ascribes this view to Hercules, as his basis of action. sodvrou is explained by the clause «a Bots xré. 36. Ta TGV Xapdvev Kré.: notice the rhetorical position. XL. 1. to péev otv dAnbes: intro- duces a new topic, that of the value of philosophy. Its connexion with the preceding lies in the fact that Callicles looks upon philosophy as the hindrance which prevents Socrates from recognizing the truth of what he says. — éw\ rd pelfw: is indefinite, and is employed only to depreciate philosophy and relegate it to a lower plane, as is evident from Callicles’ further exposition. ¢ 143 St. I. p. 484. anln- > aA e # aN XN / a 8 ¥ > o Tat ev TH nruKkia E€av de TEPALTEpw TOV O€OVTOS EVOLa- TIAATONOS TOPITIAS. 43 S , , ¥ > a , Tol €oTW, @ LHKpares, Kapiev, av TLS AVTOU pETPLWS a \ 5 Tpily, Svadfopa trav avOpaTav. édv yap Kal mavu aA a 4 evpuns 7 Kal Toppa THS Hukias dilocody, avayKn wav- Twv areipov yeyovevar eoriv, OY ypy eumeipov eivar Tov / ‘ 2 %, \ io if ¥ 6 y 5 PédovTa Kaddv Kayabdy Kat edddKipov ececOar avdpa. Kal yap Tov Vomwv arreipo. yiyvovTat TOV Kata THY TOW, LV oA , e a , € A ’ A 10 Kat ToV Adyar, ois Sel ypadpevov dpirely ev Tors TupPo- Aaiows Tols avOpdaois Kat idia Kai dnuooia, Kal Tav Hoover Te Kal emOupiay Tv avOpwreiwr, Kat cvAdyBSnv tov Oey mavrdmacw dmepor yiyvovra. émevddav ovv ¥ ¥ 207 a x‘ a f EMwow ets twa idlav } woditiKhy mpakw, KatayédacTou 484 84 c d 3. xaplev: with a pleasing conde- scension, recognizing its merit, — but what a poor merit! Cf 485 b. 4. év ry WAuk(q: “in the time of life suitable for it.’ What period this is can be gathered from the expres- sions méppw rijs hAikias and meparrépw tod ddovros. The words petpiws and anra are also designedly chosen. 5. StapOopa: Callicles assumes al- most the tone of an oracle. 7. dareipov yeyovévar: “a man can- not practise philosophy and at the same time fulfil the requirements of his civil position.” 8. The adds xé-yaGds, according to the idea of Callicles, is shown by the addition of edddéxiuos, to be the man who, through practical activity, ob- tains reputation and honor. With peAAw we find the pres. and fut. almost equally common, the aor. ex- ceptional. 9. trav vopev: that Callicles is laying great stress on the knowledge of the laws in this passage, seems at first sight inconsistent with the view which he has already expressed; but in reality he has shifted his point of view but little, since he advocates the study of the laws, not for the pur- pose of following them, but as being necessary for the work of the practi- cal statesman, whether he be in the senate or assembly, or hold any pub- lic position. The force, therefore, of véuor is much that of our “constitu- tion.” The adyor ofs de? xpduevov nré. belong to the department of jurispru- dence in both its divisions, individual and national. fup8ddAaa is character- ized in Rep. i. 333 a, as the variety of kowwrhuara (i.e. mutual intercourse, trade, and commerce) in which d:car- octvn is of especial value. It de- notes, accordingly, treaties and the law-business connected with them. 11 f. trav ySovav «ré.: the enjoy- ment of life consists, according to Callicles, in satisfying the appetites. 12. trav Wav: can be considered as a general comprehensive term, in so far as we understand by it the peculiar traits of mind and charac- ter which impart individuality to a man. as 144 20 PLATO’S GORGIAS. ‘ St. I. p. 484. Z 7 a € aa) \ a Pg 15 ylyvovTat, WOTTED YE, Olat, OL TOXLTLKOL, éreroav av eis Ne , 4 \ XN t Tas UPETEPaS diarpiBas EMwow KQL TOUS Adyous, KaTQ- yédacroi Elo. ovpBaiver yap Td Tod Evpimidov: dap- / x 3 ‘N 9 2 , N 33 N a> 3 Z Tpos T €OTLW EKAOTOS EV TOUTW, KQU €7t TOUT ETTELYET AL, véwav TO ThetaTOV Hu€pas TOUTW [LEpoS, 7 > oN € an , , ¥ WwW GUTOS AUTOUV TUYKYavEL Bé\rcros ov: e drov & av havdos 7H, evredbev devyer Kal howWopeEl TodTO, 485 XN ° of 2 “A > f ey ig a ¢ , LA TO €TEpovV ETTQALVEL, EVVOLO ™ €QauToOD, NYOvpLEvos OUTWS 2 NX ¢ ‘ 3 om QUTOS E€QUTOV ETQALVELY. > > > X92 , , 2 Gadd’, ola, 76 dpOdrardyv éeotw * £ “ # A y , dpdotépav petacyetv: iiocopias pev ocov TaLo€cias 25 ydpw Kaddv peeve, Kal ovK aloypdy peipakiw ovTt 484 e priocopeiy: émedav dé dy mpecBurepos &v advOpwros ert dilocopy, Katayé\actov, ® Loxpates, TO ypHmwa 15. domep ye: makes a concession, in order to anticipate the retort which could easily be made here. 16. StatpiBds: is used especially of philosophical discussions. Cf Apol. 837 © odx ofol Te eyévecbe eveyKety Tas éuds SiarpiBas kal tovs Adyous, Charm. 153 a fa én) ras tvvfOets SiarpeBas. 17. cupBalver: is in point.—ro Tot Evptr($ov: inasmuch as his works abounded in gnomes and senténtious sayings, and he himself was not far removed from the sophistic way of looking at things, Euripides was fre- quently quoted by sophists and ora- tors, and also by Socrates (Plato). The present passage is from the lost tragedy Antiope. See below, 485 e. 18. é€y rovtw kal emt «ré.: the demonstratives are antecedent to the adverbial rel. clause with ta, “in which each one is most successful.” The words Aaumpés .. . éwelyerai, by omitting what would not be missed, and reading kami for kal emi, form a trimeter. Cf. Ar. Vesp. 1431 épda: ris hy exaoros eideln téxvyv. 20. iva ruyxdve: is to be com- pared with dS:rov dy 7 to show the dif- ference between definite and indefinite antecedent. —aitds avtou BéAtic Tos: the gen. with sups. may be an exten- sion of the gen. with comparatives. See H. 644 a. 24. dpdhorépev: i.e. philosophy and politics. — dcrov ratSelas xdpww : as far as it serves the purpose of education. Cf. Rep. iii. 403 e cov robs tumous, Luthyd. 273 a thy picw scov. See H. 719 b; G. 160, 1. The opposite is ém) réxvy, or something similar, as seen from Prot. 312 b rovtay ob éxd- orny ov« éml réxvn Euabes, ds Snuuoup- yes éaduevos, GAN él madela, as tov iidrnv Kad tov eAevOcpoy mpémet. Culture was the watchword of the time. 25. kal ovk aloypdv: change from the «addy to the karayéAactov. 484 e 145 8t. I. p. 485. ylyverat, Kai eywye Guowdtarov TaTXw TPOs TOUS Piogo- b powras @oTep Tpds Tods Wehhilouévous Kat Tailovras. TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. & @ t 30 dray pev yap tratdioy tdw, @ ere mpoonker Siaréyeo Oar Va - XN a , ~ # ovTea, pehdiLdpuevov Kat tailor, yaipw Te Kal yapiev por ao \ 3 v. Q a, “ a - € 4 paiverat kat éhevOéprov Kai mpérov TH Tod Tmadiov HiKia, g Q “ 4 , > - , Grav € capas Siareyopevov tadapiov dKkovow, TiKpdov Ti pou SoKet xpHwa €ivar Kal dvig pov Ta @Ta Kai pot a s > Kg a, x 2 . 35 Ooxet Sovdomperés tu elvar: dray dé avdpds aKovon Ts Werdlopevov H wail 50a ayéha gpaiverar kat pevou 7H mailovra épa, Katayéhacrov daiverat Kal c dvavopov Kat mAnyav dior. TavTov ov eywye TodTO TATXH Kal Tpds Tors driocopodvras. Tapa véw pev yap a, € a FF ¥ X - A petpakia dpav drocodiay ayapat, Kat mpémew pou Soxel, 40 kal yyovpar €hevOepdv Tiva elvat TodTOY Tov avOpwror, Tov dé py piiocogodvra avehedOepor Kai ovdérore obdEVdS a€vdoovTa éavTov ovTE Kadov oUTE Yyevvaiov mpdyparos ° 6tav S€ 57 mperBirepov idw er. diiocododvTa Kai pr) a stammering thus, as contrasted with 485 485 28. mdoxw mpds: as 482 c. The the restraint which the child must b comparison, however sensible the thought therein expressed may be, still is not in place here. For it de- scribes only the subjective impression which philosophizing at different pe- riods of life makes on Callicles. It is therefore only a rhetorical reaffir- mation of the statement that philoso- phy is not appropriate for a mature man. In his mind, however, Callicles has still a tertium compara- tionis which he does not express, viz. the objects of philosophical re- search afford no real interest, hence resemble wadia. Further, so much trouble about single ideas is like Wea- AlCecGar (stammering). On the con- trary, capas diaréyecbo: (Aéyew) is the business of orators. 32. éXevOeprov: Callicles speaks of exercise in order to learn to speak clearly, which latter seems to him to be dovAomperés. Note also the contrast in xaptev and aucpdv. es Fe : 38. wapd véw xré.: the companion of ¢ (wapd) a youth. The duplication of the idea is also found in Prot. 315 4 véov T1 rt pweipdkioy. 40. édevBepov: is amplified and il- lustrated by the following clause, odde- vos akiwoovra xré. Philosophy gives the youth an opportunity for the practice in mental gymnastics, which is as yet denied him in public life, and thus prepares him for his future career as a speaker in the assembly. 43. 84: deictic. This is just the case about which Callicles raises the question. 146 a c = - 45 KPaTEs, OUVTOS O avyp. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 485. amahdatronevov, TANYaV pow SoKel 7Sn SeicOar, & Yo- & yap vuvdy edeyov, vrdpxe tovTw To avOpa dv 3a VHUNS Hy AVAVO fo Bat yw TO avOpoTM, Kav Tay edpuTs H, avavdpw yevér Oa 4 x , a 4 ‘ x > , > & 2» evyovTt Ta wera THS TOEWS Kal Tas ayopds, ev ais Eby ¢c b X ¥ > A # O TOLYTNS TOUS avdpas APLTTPETELS yiyver ba, KaTaoeou- 4 \ x * , ~ ‘\ 4 > , Kote O€ TOV Aowrov Biov Bidvar pera pelpakiov ev yovia 50 TpLav 7 TeTTApwy WOupilovra, eedOepov Sé Kal péya Kal veavixov pndérote P0éyEac bau. XLI. *Eya 8€, & Ydxpares, tpds we emerkds exw Pidt- Kas* Kwouvedw obtv werovOevar viv omep 6 ZHOos mpds 44. SetoOat: is still stronger than # &fvov, and declares that it is to the man’s own interest to be so dealt with. 47. ta péoa THs TWOAEws: is empha- sized together with the dyopd, in op- position with the following év ywvig. Cf. Cic. de Or. i. 13. 57 quibus (philosophis) ego ut de his rebus in angulis consumendi otii causa disserant cum con- cessero, illud tamen oratori tribuam, etc. 48. 6 wowntrs: the poet, of course, is Homer. He says, 1 440, vjruiop, otrw €i568 duoitoo mroAduo.o | 00d’ ayo- péwr, va 7 &vdpes apimperées TedCOov- ow. —karadeSuxott: “in retirement,” as contrasted with the brilliant life of the public man. The word is used somewhat differently in Rep. ix. 579 b, where it is said of a tyrant ob’ drodnujoau tear (ata) ovdaudce otre Oewpiaa: sowv 5h nal of BAA eAcvOepar emiOuunrai eciot, Karadeduces 58 ev rH oikia TA TOAAG ws yurh CF. 49. perd petpaxlwy: “as contrasted with association with men and with the whole people. It is evident that, in spite of Callicles’ exaggeration, he is striking continually at Socra- tes’ (and Plato’s) occupation. Quite naturally and conversationally ydv- pifovra suggests again its opposite, which is added in éAev@cpoyv pOéy- EaoOat. 51. veavucov: for the meaning, see on 482 ¢ above. Cf. Dem. O1. iii. 32 Zot: 8 obdéro7’, oluat, wéya kal veavixdy gpdynua AaBeiv pixpda Kal pavdAa mpdr- TOYTGaS. XLI. 1. After this general pre- sentation of his views of philosophy, Callicles now proceeds to make a special application to Socrates’ case, with apparent personal good-will, it is true, but still with the condescend- ing mien of the superior man of the world. 2 f. dmep 6 ZnOos wpds tov "Ap- glova: the omission of mpds oé is hardly felt. Callicles cleverly illus- trates his exposition of the opposition between the principles of practical life and this theoretical philosophiz- ing by reference again to the already cited Antiope of Euripides. Antiope had borne to Zeus twin sons, Amphion and Zethus, but was afterwards taken by her uncle Lycus to Thebes, where she suffered for a long time the most cruel treatment at the hands of Ly- TIAATQNOS, TOPIIAS. Tov *Audiova 6 Evpuidov, obrep euvyoOnv. 147 St. I. p. 485. \ \ Kat Y2p > % a > ¥ > , % X Z ar > isle EfLOl TOLAVT ATTA ETTEPKETAL TPOS TOE déeyew, OLATEP EKELVOS 5 Tpds Tov adehpor, Gru ‘ ‘dmedets, @ LdKpares, Gv Set ce ermeheio Oar, Kat duow puxns (eExwv) Ode yervatay pe- pakidde. twit Svampéres popdapati, kal ovr av Sixys 486 Bovdraior mpoobet’ dv dp0as Adyov, ovr’ eEikds Gv Kal mudavev AdKors OVP brép addov vearikdv Bovrevja Bov- 10 Aevoato.” KaiTor, @ pire LHxpares—Kai por pnd ayGe- aOns: eivoia yap ép@ TH on —ovK aicypdy SoKel aot 485 cus’ wife, Dirce. Meanwhile, her sons were being brought up by a herdsman in the forest. Amphion devoted him- self entirely to music, while the active and restless Zethus spent his time in hunting and the care of his herds. Finally Antiope escapes from her prison, and hurries to her sons. Dirce pursues, overtakes her, and is just in the act of having her bound to a wild steer, when the sons, who had been informed of their parentage by the herdsman, appear on the scene, rescue their mother from the hands of Dirce, and bind her to the steer instead. Dirce was then changed into a foun- tain. Amphion and Zethus attain the sovereignty in Thebes, and fortify it with walls. In this work Zethus contributed his great bodily strength, while Amphion’s lyre drew after him the stones. This difference in charac- ter as related in the myth (Apollod. iii. 5.5 ZH@0s pev obv ewepedciro Bov- gpopBiay, ’Audiov b& KiBappdiav Foxe) suggested to Euripides a dialogue between the brothers, wherein each praises his own calling to the dispar- agement of the other’s. Callicles applies Euripides’ words to the op- position between political and philo- sophical activity. 5f. The words of Euripides are 485 given by Nauck. ur. frag.? 185, as follows : — « « « Gwerels, Gv ce ppovTicey éxpiv: Wuxiis exw yap &5e yervalay prow quvakouinw Siampéres poppduate: « Kobr” by domtdos Kure 6p0Gs durrjoetas ob7 &AAwY Urep veavixdy BovrAeuua Bovdevoatd Tt. Yet these lines do not contain all that seems poetical in this passage. In place of yuvaicoufum Callicles natur- ally, from his point of view, uses meipaxi@de:, which is quite different from veavixds in its meaning (boyish). 7 £. Slkyns PovAaio. mpocbe’’ dy 486 Adyov: would give an opinion in coun- sels of justice. 9. Jmrép dAdov: is in the mouth of Callicles a very natural change of the word of the poet. The sing. of &AAos, Erepos, and of rls is easily used in a generic sense. 10. xalrov: would naturally lead us to expect some qualification of his se- vere criticism ; instead of this he glides over to the rhetorical question, which, while reaffirming his opinion, sum- mons Socrates to decide. Cf. b below. 11. of: equiv. to cot. Cf 485 a evvola th éavrod, Apol. 20 e ém) diaBorAq e a 148 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 486. > yY ¥ e 2 N \ 3 »¥. ‘ N oy: EVAL OUTWS EXEW, WS EY GE Oipwat EXEL Kal TOUS aAdoUS NX - 7 4 > s n + »” Tovs Toppw act diiocodias éMatvovtas; viv yap El TUS nw , a ¥ ¢€ a nm * > * cov haBdopevos 7} dAXov Grovotv Tov ToLovTaY Eis TO SeE- , > , , > a \ > a > > 15 TpwTHprov amdyou., ddoKwy adie pyndev adikovvTa, oi A y > x» ¥ go , a bY > > , a» OTL OVK Gy EXOLS OTL YpHoaLO GavTG, aN Eilvyy@ys av b % wn Kal YATU@O OvK EXwY OTL ElTOLS, Kal Eis TO OLKATTHPLOV > , ae , x , , \ a avaBds, Katnydpov tuyav wavy gdavdov kat poyOnpod, > Ff ¥ > # ar na o amobdvous av, eb BovdotTo Oavarou cou Tysacbar. KaiTor 20 THS Topo TOUTS EoTLV, ® LwKpares, et Tis evpva AaBodou 486 rp éufi, Hom. T 321 of 700A, Soph. 2 0. CO. 332 o7 mpoundig. See H. 694; G. 147, nN. 1. a recognition of the truth of the 486 observation. e 16 f. elAvyysyns, xaopodo: vividly b 13. tots méppw del dirocodplas éX\avvovras: has a poetic coloring, but also occurs in’ Xen. and in Crat.. 410 e réppw H5n palvoua codias édav- vev. Luthyp.4b. The gen. is parti- tive. See H. 757; G. 168. — del: when used with the art. and partic. has a distributive sense. In the present case its position between aéppw and giAocodias is also to be noted. 15. dwdyou: this was the summary process called araywy, in which the guilty person, when caught in the act, was immediately arrested and brought before the Eleven. Cf. Apol. 32 b. The expression here is simply a rhetorical hyperbola, but it sounds prophetic in view of Socrates’ trial later on, and was probably written designedly by the author. See In- trod. § 10. — dSuxeiy: the pres. is the customary tense in accusations. Apol. 19 b, 24 b. — oto @ ore: parenthetical, with no effect on the construction, much in the same way as the Eng- lish phraseological ‘you know.’ The Greek expression is, however, not so colorless as the English, but assumes portray the confusion and terror of the prisoner. 17. dtu elwous: this opt. and the preceding xphoouo both represent de- liberative subjvs. GMT. 186. 18. dvaBds: the regular expression for appearing before a court. Its origin may have been from the loca- tion of the court; cf Lat. descend- ere in forum and Apol. 17 d, 33 d. —karnydpov tuxdv: “if chance so willed it.” The words wdvu gavdou kal woxOnpod are again designedly given to Callicles by Plato. Socrates’ accuser would of necessity be such a man. 19. Oavarot tisacbar: if the crime had no definite punishment fixed by law (aydv atiuntos), the accuser pro- posed some special punishment, for which the accused was at liberty to offer a substitute, and the court had to accept one or the other. Cf. Apol. 36 b ff. and for the gen. see H. 746 b. 20. According to Nauck, Fr. 186, the following citation from the Anti- ope runs thus : — ms yap copy ror’ ~ariv, ef Tis ebpua Pe? AaBoica téxvn pat’ One XeElpova. 25 486 MAATONOS TOPTIAS. 149 St. I. p. 486. 4 aA », ¢ x s % € a. , Téxyn pata eOnke yelpova, pHTE adTov avT@ Suvdpevov Boney pnd éxodoa ex Tov peyiotav Kwdvvev pire €avTov pte dddov pndeva, Ud 5é av €xOpav TEpiavAG- a \ > 7 > a . 7 a : a aba TACAV THY OVOLAV, ATEXVWS de QT L{LOV Chv ev TY , x XN a ¥ \ 3 s 2A TONEL | TOV de TOLOUTOY, EL TL KQL aypPpOLKOTEpoV eipna Gan, ¥ 20N a , \ , , efeoTw €77t KOppyns TUMTOVTA j[L7) dvddvat dikny. aan’, > 4 > N “ nn > > / 4 > ayaéé, €uot miOov, mavoat 3 EMyXov, TpAyLaTwv ) evpovotay doke, Kal acker d7dbev Sd€eas ppovev, dddous NX XN nm 2 & , ¥ e N , > * Ta Koppa TAUT adets, ete ANpHwata Xpy pavas eivat eiTe 23. meptovAdo at: implies that the one robbed is vanquished or defence- less, and contains the side-idea of in- sult added. This inf. as well as (jv is used freely after €0nxe to define in what respects the man who follows philosophy becomes xeipwv. 24. drwov: ‘atimia’ in various de- grees of completeness was «a punish- ment attached to transgressions against the state. Complete ‘atimia’ involved deprivation of all civil rights. See Busolt, Gr. Alter. § 158, and cf. Andoc. i. 78-76. According to Callicles, Socrates will bring himself virtually into this condition by his continual philosophizing. 25. el . .. dypoikoTepov: see on 462e. Cf. Lys. in Andoc. 24 mpoce- Wnpicacbe ipets adtody (sc. roy Uripmov) elpyerOa: ris ayopas Kal ray lepav ore ph abicodpevoy tnd Trav exOpav SbvacOat Sixny AaBeiv. 26. éwl Képpys TUTTovta: a blow on the head was considered especially dishonorable. — «éppy (old Attic xédp- on), «dpn, dépn, and a@dpy are the sole exceptions to the rule which requires a after p in Attic. 27. Callicles closes with a further citation from the Antiope, which Nauck, Fr. 188, gives thus: — BAN enol 1800 madoat peAwdav, Todeulwy 9° edpovotay toners tTowadr’ dede cad ddters ppovety, oKdrtwy, apav yhv, womvins émiotaTav, hAAas Ta Koma Tair’ apels coplopara, et dv Kevotow eyxatounoers Sduos. — édéyxev: is probably, like the cor- responding word in the quotation, to be considered as a verb, since the contrast lies not in a single word, but in the whole following clause. Simi- larly Thrasymachus says, Rep. i. 336 ¢, unde pirorimod eddyxwv. The verb, used absolutely, designates the kind of philosophical activity which Socrates has just practised against Polus. Cf. 472 b. 28. evpovolay: was appropriate in Zethus’ speech, as he wished to show his brother wherein the edpovcia, which he sought in «:@apwdia; was really to be found; less so in Calli- cles’, who probably is thinking rather of edBovaia. The contrast to gpovety would be Anpety or pAvapeiv. Hence Callicles substitutes Anpfuara and gavaplas (trifling and prattling) for ooplopara. 29. Kopipd: witty, subtle, often used with an unfavorable connotation, both of persons and things; but it 486 150 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 486. 30 prvapias, e€ dv Kevoiow eyxarouyoes Sdopois, Cyrav ovK » 7 ¥ . \ a > > a ¥ \ éhéyxovras avdpas Ta pikpa tadra, aN’ ois é€oTw Kal (Bios Kat d6€a kai dda oda dyabd. XLIT. Yo. Ei xpvojy exav ervyyavov rv uyyy, & , xX ¥ ‘ KadXikdeus, otk dy ole. pe aopevov evpety TovTwY Twa. @ a , , X 4 XN 3 / my 8 Tav iar, 7 Bacavilovow tov xpuody, THY apiaTnY, TPdS HvTwa euedov Tpocayayav avTyy, Eb por dpooyyoreey 5 exelvyn KahOs TEHEparedoOa THY Wuy%y, ED eivécOaL StL 10 486 ¢ d ikavas exo Kal ovdey prow Set ahdns Bacdvov; Kaa. Ilpds ti 8 rovr’ epwras, & Sdkpares ; Xa. "Eyd cot épa- viv ola éy@ col evretuxynKas ToL- , € a) , OUT@ EpHatm@ EVTETUKT KEVOL. Kaa. Ti 57; > 02 9 ¥ Ne , \ @ eos N Da. Ev oid OTL, AV {LOL av opmodoynaons TEpt @Vv N E71) is applied especially to the quibbles of the Sophists: and Eristics. Cf kopeverOoe in Lach. 197 d. 31. td pixpa Tatra: 7.c. those subtle distinctions of words and ideas which in Callicles’ view yield no advantage; while political activity and its results — these are ra wel(w (484 ¢ above). 32. Blos: as opposed to kevotor Sduots means “ means of livelihood,” an abundance of the good things of life. —8d§a: contrasted with &rimov Civ. XLIL. 1. The delicate irony which characterizes the reply of Socrates is in striking contrast with the rudeness with which Callicles began, in 482 ¢ above, the exposition of his view of life. —xpuoyv: is pred. of rhy puxhy. “If the soul which I have were of gold.” 2. odK dv ole. pe dopevov: the main idea lies in &ruevor. 2f. twa trav AlOwy : equiv. to the more common Bdcavos alone. 3. q: after Aléwy instead of ais. Cf. 521 d. 4. &weAdov xré.; ‘The relative fut. after an unreal conditional is ZueAAov with the infinitive.’ Gildersleeve. Cf Isae. ii. 25.—dporoyroeev: the choice of this expression in the comparison is due to the nature of the discussion. The testing which Socrates is under- going at the hands of Callicles must end in dpuodoyeiv (cf. € &y wor od duo- Aoyhons)- 5. kadds teOcpamevoOat: leads back to the idea of Oeparela ris Wuxijs al- ready discussed in 464 b above, and thus immediately prepares the way for making progress in the investiga- tion. Of 487 a.—The subject of teOeparevoGa: must be supplied from pol. 9. éppalw: all unexpected gains (xép595 ampocddéenrov) were supposed to come from Hermes, who had among other surnames that of cepdFos. 11. dv pot «ré.: we miss the less da 486 d e 151 St. I. p. 486. n 4 evvod yap, TIAATQNOZ TOPTIAS. Woy? So€dley, radr’ 7Sy éoriv adira Tad On. ore TOV pédrovTa Bacaniety ixavas Yuyns Tepe d6pOas Te 487 loons Kat py Tpla dpa det eyew, & od mdvTa exeLs, eme- 15 OTHUNY TE Kal EVOLaY Kal Tappnaiav. eyw yap TodXots ? , a2 \ 9 e+ _ F 23 , 4 ® x evTVyXavw, ot ee ody oloi Té ciow Bacavilew, Sia 7d wT) . 3 y , y- \ \ ’ > > cool civas damwep av: erepor S€ Topol pév eiow, ovK ePédovow dé pow Néye THY ayaa, da 7d wy KASecOai s a, ‘ Oe £ 58 , A ~ LOU WaTTEP TU" Tw OE &évw THOSE, Topyias te Kat II@dos, x XN XN , > * > , > , ‘\ # 20 copa pev kal dilw éorov ud, evdeertépw Sé Tappyoias b Kal aioyurTnpotépw paddov Tod déovros: Tas yap ov; oy > nw ? 4 > 4 y ‘ X\ @ ye els TooodToy aicxvvys éAndOaTov, ware Sia Td alcxvverBar Tohua ExdteEpos avTa@v avTos avT@ evavTia héye evavtiov Tohhav avOpdrwv, Kal TavTa Tepl Tov , \ XN a , » a c 7» > ¥ 25 peyiotwv. od S€ ravra TavTa Exes, & ob ado OdK ExXOU- s a ‘ € wn « NR ¥ ow: Teraiievoal Te yap tkavas, WS TodAoL av dycarey pronoun. The irony from here on is 487 quite distinct, and no longer veiled. 486 an object to duodoyfons since the idea © is made especially prominent by the following ratra. Cf. 487 e édy m1 ob év Trois Adyots duodroynans (ot. 12. Sofdfer: is a vox media. The same activity of the soul may, according to circumstances, lead to error or to truth. Cf. also Sdfa aan- Ofs and pevdjs.— Hy: at once (jam), without need of further discussion. 487 14. rpla dpa Set exeaw: must of necessity possess three qualities. The particle &pa shows that this lies in the nature of the matter. 15 f. woddois évtvyxave «ré.: So- crates gives examples in Apol. 21 b ff. 19. 1d 8€ Eévw xré.: Socrates says what follows with an irony which applies especially to Polus; but at the same time it is a significant criticism of the rappnoia of Callicles. b 21. paddov: see on 482 ¢. 22. & ye: the yé emphasizes the —bia to aloxvverOor ToAugd: an ex- ample of ‘oxymoron.’ Timidity and shame are not usually the basis of boldness. The opposite of road is implied. The reference to 483 a is unmistakable: day ody tis aioydvnras kal wh ToAUG Aéyew Erep voet, avaryKd- (erat évavria Aéyerw. 23. alrav avtés atta: the posi-_ tion makes the contradiction beat heavily upon the ear. 24 f. wept tov peylorwv: in con- trast with 486 d ra pupa tatra. Of. 484 c rd pel lw. 26. awemalSevcar: see On madelas, 485 a. The addition of és woAdo) by phoaev "A@nvalwy implies, of course, the usual opposition of the many ignorant to the few capable, and this makes the tone of ixavés almost bitter. 152 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 487- TL TEKUNPiY KXpPOpLat ; oida vuas éyd, @ KadXikdes, rérrapas ec > , , o> N RY» AOnvaiwv, kai euot ef evvovs. é€yd cou €pa. ” 4. /, 4 - * , ovTas KoWwvoUS yeyovdTas Godias, o€ Te Kal Teta avdpov 30 Tov “Aduovatov Kai “Avopwva tov "AvSpotiwvos Kat Navot- 4 XN z - c ~ > ‘ > e KvOnv Tov Xohapyéa* Kat ToTE duav eyw erynkovaa Bov- Aevopevoy, mEeXpt OTL THY Godiay aoKnTéov Ein, Kal oida go > # el € ae - 4 ‘XN oS > ore evixa & tpiv Toidde Tis dd€a, wy TpoOvpetoOar «is TH axpiBeav piriocodey, dha evhaBetoOar mapeKedev- 4 > 4 9 ‘ A n~ f f. e 35 eoOe ddArjows, O7rws pr) TEpa TOU S€ovTos TopsTepo. yevd- z Ol 0 , > 87 > + , a & pevot Aynoere SiadOapervtes. €mrerd7) OV Gov akovw TaiTa €u0t oupBovdrevortos, amep Tots ceavToU éTatpoTdro.s, ikavov pot TEKUApLoV EaTW, OTL WS AANOas pou EvVOUS Ei. Kal py ote ye olos mappnordler Oat Kat pi aicydver Oar, 487 29f. Of the three companions of with the éAed@epov and veavexdy which 487 © Callicles we know but little. Tisan- Callicles defends in 485 ¢, d. c der is mentioned only here. Andron 35f. draws py... Stadbapévres: the d appears in Prot. 315 ¢ as a defender of Hippias. Nausicydes had, accord- ing to Xen. JMem. ii. 7. 6, acquired wealth from his business of é&AguTo- mwouta. The deme Cholargus belonged to the tribe Acamantis, Aphidnae to Aiantis. 32. péxpe Siow: the use of wéxpe with an adverb is unusual. Cf Crat. 412 e, Symp. 217 e, and Kr. 66, 1, n. 4. 33. évika: has a somewhat comic effect, inasmuch as it brings before the mind the image of an earnest and thorough deliberation engaged in by some public body (e.g. the senate), followed by the putting of the ques- tion. These young men, however, judge philosophy without understand- ing it.— wpoOupeto Bar: epexegetic inf. to roddSe Tis SdEa. 33 f. els tHv dxpiPeaav: recalls the ra& pips ratra above. This cau- tious decision contrasts remarkably same state of mind is shown in the ac- cusation brought later against Socra- tes, the second part of which ran thus: Gdixe? 5& Kal rods véous diapOeipwr. That this was Callicles’ judgment is shown by his words in 484 ¢ ff. above. 37. ératpordrots: is found also in Phaedo 89 d. 39 f. dtu... atrds te bys xré.: this must not be considered as a valid ex- ample of ér: after @nuf, which regu- larly takes the infinitive. The 8m clause precedes, and may have escaped the speaker’s mind when he was about to make the collocation of atrés and Adyos. The occurrence of two forms of Aéyw in the same clause would likewise have been awkward.— olos wappyctd- LerOat: you are disposed to free speech. See on 452e. The omission of the first and second persons of the copula is rare. When é7? is omitted, ov is gener- ally found. On the inf. see on 457 d. 153 St. I. p. 487. 40 avTds Te Hys Kat 6 Adyos dy dAiyov mpdreEpov eheyes Spo- TAATONOS TOPIIAS. hoyel cor. Eyer 87) odTwat Sydov bru TovTwY wépe vuvi- in « LY > aA / ¥ 4 s €dv TL ov ev TOLS Adyots Guoroyyons or, BeBacavicpevov e “~ ¥ A A a Toor On €oTar ikavas va’ eo TE Kal God, Kal ovKETL + Xx / > 3 » £ * ff > X ¥ avtd Sejoe em addnv Bdoavov avapépeav. ob yap av De 7 ‘ »¥ - 2 , ¥ > 45 TOTE avTd Guvexdpnoas ov ovTe codias evdeia ovT aicxvvys tapovoia, ovd ad araTay ewe cvyyxwpyoais ¥ , / > © \ 2 ON , na 4» > £ av: didos yap jot el, ws Kal adrds ys. TH ovTL ody 7H > ‘N + ¢€ ‘ € ft e ¥ gy, Leas > , €un Kat y on Gporoyia Téd\os Hon e€er THS adnOeias. mavroy S€ Kaddiorn éotiy 4 oKépis, ® Kaddikdes, epi 50 TovTaY Gv od OH mou ererinynoas, Totdy TWA Ypy Elva TOV dvdpa Kat ti émirndevew Kai péxpe Tod, Kal mpeo BUTEpor 488 Kai VedTEpoy OvTa. eya yap et TL py d6p0ds TpatTwW KaTa x , x 2 “A 3S ¥ a Y 3 c X 3 tov Biov Tov ewavTov, ev ioOt ToUTO OTL Ody Exav é€apap- ww arr’ auabia TH eun: ov odv, waTED NOEw vovberety Tdvo apabia TH eun: od ov», pnp C 487 e 488 a 41. éxeu 8 «ré.: with this Socrates recurs to what was said in 486 e. 44 ff. dv cvvexdpyoas, cvyxopr- owas dv: the time is pushed into the fut. pf. by the previous BeBacano- pévoy cra, and standing on this as- sumed plane, Socrates uses naturally the unreal past. The second clause is, as the ad shows, a second thought, and being of general application, is put into the ideal (potential) opta- tive. The whole sentence shows the narrow line that separates between unreality and ideality. 48. rédos THs dAnfelas efer: the gen., as in the Homeric phrases rédos yao, Oavdro.o. Every effort must be directed to a terminus or comple- tion. Here the end is perfect truth. 49. «ahXlory: refers to its value. It yields a rich return. 51. rl xpy émrmSevev: is the ques- tion about which the following dis- cussion revolves. Cf. 492 d, 500 ¢, 512 e, 515 a, 521 a, 527 b, e. 52 f. kard tov Biov: refers, not to the period of life, but to the manner of living. 53. rovro: Heindorf, followed by Cron, construes this word with the following verb. But it is more nat- ural to look upon it as antecedent to the following sentence, know well this fact, ete. — odx éxav: sc. according to the Socratic view as to the cause of wrong doing. 54. vovOerety: according to the rule, when apxeo@u is used with the inf. the inf. is emphasized; when with the partic. the ‘beginning’ is emphasized. So Theaet. 187 a inpxydueba diareydue- vot, “we commenced the discussion on which we are still engaged.” — Here, as in 458 a, Socrates looks upon the correction of any erroneous views as a favor. 154 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 488. XN 9 a > xe a ¥ om” a BB MLE, LY) ATOTTHS, GAN’ ikavas pou evdeEar, TL EoTW ToUTO \ 6 éemirndevTéov pol, Kal Tiva TpdTOY KTnTAl~nY av avTo, N27 € AaB VU fs ¢ Xx / 2 oe os Kat éay pe ns vov pév cor duoroyyoavra, ev b€ TO XN votépw xpovwy py TATA TpaTTovTa amEp wpoddynoa, mavu pe Qyov Bdaxa, elvar Kal pnxére more pe vouderHons b y e ‘ ” ¥ ; > A , > , 60 VaTEpor, @s pndevos aEvov dvra. && dpyns S€é pou émava- haBe TO $7 ‘\ 8b ¥ N ‘ ~*~ Ta 8 ‘ , TOS Pys TO dixavoy €xew Kat od Kat Tivdapos 76 Kata piow; ayew Bia TO ( % TOY yITOVeY Kat ; ayew Bia tov Kpeittw Ta TOY yTTOVeV ¥ hy. , wn , \ / ¥ s apyew tov Bedrtiw Tav xepdvav Kal méov Exew TOV > # a , a, ¥ i ‘ ¥ Gpeiva Tod pavhorépov; py TL dAdo Aéyets 7d Sixacoy 65 elvan, 7) d6p0Gs weurnpa ; : XLII. Kaa. ’AdANa ratra [€deyov] kat té7e Kat vov héyo. Xa. [drepov dé tov adrév Berti kahets od Kal KpEitTo ; 3 XN , 4 @r 3 > A - / ovde ydp Tor TéTE ois T H pabeiy Gov Ti Tote hE- 5 yeus. métepov Tovs iaxuporépous Kpeitrous Kahets Kat Set aKpoacba, tov iayupotépov Tovs aabeveatépous, otdv jor a ‘ , 2 , e € , , 2S x Soxets Kal Tore evdeiKvuT Oat, ws ai peydhat woes emt Tas opiKpas KaTa TO dice. Sixavoy epxovTat, OTL KpEtTTOUS eisiy Kal ioyupdrepat, ws TO KpEtTToy Kat Loxupdrepov \ , 2X * a» »¥ ? x > 9 X 10 kat BéAriov Tavrov ov, 7) eat. Bertio peév eivat, yTTw Se Kal aobevéorrepov, Kat KpeitTw pev eivat, woxOnpdrepov ‘38° 59. BAd«ka: ‘implies feebleness negative answer, as is also to be ab b both of mind and character, u dolt.’ gathered from the dada of Callicles’ Thompson. answer. 60 f. émravdAaBe: we find dvada- XLII. 4. tore: refers to what was ¢ Beiv in this sense in 506c and Apol. said in 483 d, e, and évdelkvucOa: is 19 b. accordingly imperfect infinitive. — 7: 61. od kal IIlvSapos: see on 484b. appears to be the old Attic form. 62. dyew Bla: is a freer expression 9f. ds tavtov dv: on the assump- of the sense of Pindar’s words. tion that, ete. See on 491 a. 64. prj A€yets: in spite of the ad- 10. ¥ gor: begins the second dition of 4 6p0as uéuvnuat, the ten- member of the double question intro- dency of the question is towards a duced by wérepoy. TIAATONOS TOPIIAS. 155 Bt. I. p. 488. s r~A 2X ” 2 \ a , XN ~ r 5é+ 4 6 adros dpos éotiv tod Bedriovos Kal Tov Kpelt- 4 Tovos; TOvTS jor adTd Gapas Sidpicov, TadTov H Erepdv 3 XN n XN *. , % +. 2 4 €aTw 76 Kpetrrov Kat To BéAtLov Kal 7d ioyupédrepov ; 15 Kaa. “AN eyo vor cadas héya, ore TadTov eatw. x a“ ¢ XN ~*~ eX 4 a2 \ bs Xa. OvKody ot wohdol Tod Eds KpEiTTOUs ‘cic KaTa , a N ‘ N / , 2 \ “Cc AF gvow; ot 8% Kati Tovs vdpmous TiMevras emt TO Evi, GaTEP kal od apr eheyes. aA ¥ Kaa. Ilas yap ou; a a * A “ 20 Yo. Ta Tav TOAAGY apa VouyLa TA TOY KpELTTOVaV eoTiv. » Kaa. Idvv ye. Xa. OvKovy ta Tov Behtidvav; ot yap Kpeitrous Bed- ¥ tlovs Tov KaTa TOY Gov oyor. Kaa. Nai. 25 La. OvKovy Ta TOVTMWY vopwima Kata Pvow Kadd, KpeLT- TOVOV YE OVTWY ; - Kaa. Pn. > 5 5 » Xa. "Ap oty ot woddot vouilovow ovtws, as apt ab XN »¥ , > \ ” ¥ \ »” ‘ ov édeyes, Sixarov eivar Td toov Exew Kal aloyiov Td nw n a »” an xn» »¥ \ y 30 aoLKEly TOD aduceco Ga ; €CTW TAVTA Y OV; KAL. OTWS 489 . ey 7 2 an \ > , , a ¥ HH aGddoe evtavba ov aiayuvopevos: vouilovow, 7 ov, e X . ¥ ¥ > > > N s , : > ot moAdol Td toov Exew GAN od Td TAdov Sikaov eivat, ‘ wy; x LO a a LO a 0 S. , Kal aloxLov TO adLKEW TOD adiKEetoOar; un POdvEL prot 488 12. 6 adres dpos: cf. 470 b. The a question is, whether the range of each idea is the same. A clear dis- tinction (capés Sidpicov) would obvi- ate any false application. 14. +6 kpeitrov xré.: the position of the three terms is arbitrary ; but Socrates seems to put first the two on which he lays most stress. 17 f. dowep .. . éXeyes: this appeal to the statement of Callicles reveals a contradiction between his statements, inasmuch as he had said above, 483 b, 488 that the moAdAoi were the dcdeveis. 28 f. ds dptt av ov Edeyes: the ad e draws attention again to the above &orep kal ob ptt édXeyes. See 483 a-d. 30 f. diws px ddAdoet: an ironical 489 allusion to Callicles’ reproaches of 4 Gorgias and Polus in 482 e. 33. pr bOcve: « formula for en- treaty and urging, still more frequent in the form ui peorvnons. Regularly ph with pres. imy. prescribes a neg. 156 35 40 489 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 489. aokpivacOat TovTo, KadNikdes, tv’, edv pou opodoyy- 4 ¥ % a“ -. € iw s * ons, BeBardowpar 4dn Tapa cov, are ixavod avdpos Siayvavat apodoynkdros. Kaa. ’AXQ’ of ye ToAXot vo ilovew ovTus. > / »” , > ‘ ¥ XN > a An Xa. OV véuw apa pdvov éotly aicxioy Td aduKety TOU adixeiaat, odd€ Sikaov 7d toov eyew, adda Kal pice: y Zz > > ~ # 3 a“ f > * ote Kwouveders odk ahynOn héyew ev Tots Tpdcbev ovdE 6pOas Euod Karnyopetv héywv, dtu evavTiov éativ 6 vdpos x , a *. so» XN ‘ ~ > ” i Katy pvous, & d7 Kal éya yvods Kakoupy@ ev Tots hdyoss, as # X 4 , 5 »% * ¥ ¥ aN , éay wey tus Kara dvow éyn, emt Tov vdéuov dywr, éav dé TUS KATA TOV Vomov, ert THY pvow. XLIV. Kaa. Ovroot avip od mavoerar pdrvapav. e€imré fot, @ LoKpates, ovK aloyxvver, THALKODTOS wy, dvdLaTa Onpedwr, kat édy Tis pHwate audpTy, Epatov ToUTO ToL- , > 4 \ ¥ » , x , > ovpevos; ee yap ole, ado Tu N€yew TO KpeitTous eivat course of action, with an aor. subjv. negatives a course of action. Socra- tes wishes at the outset to obviate any tendency to a refusal to answer, or hesitancy. 34. KadAlkdAets: the 4 is unusual. 35. BeBarota Oar: to become strength- ened in one’s opinion. It is used with mapz to designate the quarter from which the influence comes; direct agency would require t2é.—tkavov Stayvavar: competent to decide, with reference to 487 e. 40 f. Adyev, karnyopeiv: indir. disc. for impf. indicative. The xatnyopia proper begins with & 87. The use of 67 implies a fact beyond controversy. XLIV. 1. ovrool dyip: Callicles with this turns to the surrounding listeners to give vent to his indigna- tion. Cf. 467 b, 505 c. — ov mavcerar ¢Avapav: Callicles, who looks upon the omission of all philosophical activity as @Avapia, objects to having dialectical treat- ment applied to him. — elwé rou: the asyndeton renders the question espe- cially incisive, and hence is a meas- ure of excitement. The question ov« aicxtve: is a rhetorical imperative. 2 f. dvopatra Onpevww: the same image is employed in Zheaet. 166 ec, with the substantive dvoudrwy Oper ois to denote logomachy, where the matter at issue has been quite for- gotten. 3. Arpare: in an expression. on 450 e. 4. Callicles takes his stand on the identity, which he had maintained, of BeaAriwy and kpelrtwy, but reverses the relation of these words to each other; for while above he considered BeAtiwy to be synonymous with xpefr- twy, now he wishes kpelttwy to be un- derstood in the sense of Béariwv. See b TAATOQNOS TOPIIAS. 157 St. I. p. 489. a , oe 5 70 Bedriovs; ov wahat cou heya, Ore TadTov dye etvar 76 Bédruov Kal TO KpetTTOv; 7 ole pe éyew, eav cupde- TOs ovANEyH SovAwWY Kal TavTodaTay avOpadTwY pndevds 27 \ ¥ a , >’ , N a a€twv TrYV lows TH THpate taxupicacbat, Kai ovrou x oe poow, avTa Tavra evar vopysa ; Xa. Elev, & coporare Kadhixhes+ ovtw héyeus ; Kaa. Iavu pev ovv. da. “AAN eya we, & Saydnie, Kal adds mada Tordlw TovouTdr Ti oe héyew TO KpELTTOY, Kal avEepwTO yy dpevos capes eidévar ore héyeus. > \ 3x , \ Su ov yap OnTOU OU YE Tovs Ovo 15 BeAtious Wet TOV Evds, OVSE TOUS Gods SovAovs BeXrious a 9Y > t , 9 x , oov, OTt LO\YUPOTEPOL €LOLV YY Ov. adda mahw €€ apxns > 4 # - * bs = \ = NX 3 €LTTE, TL TOTE hE€yeus TOUS BeXriovs, TEL) OU TOUS to yupo- 4 ‘\ > , /, , 7 oy tépouvs; Kal @ Oavydore mpadrepdv pe Tmpodidacke, iva * > , % i“ LN aropoityow Tapa cov. 5. ov modat cot Adyw: he adds, in © order to cover this change of concep- tion. See on 456 a. 6. Wy ole «ré.: Callicles allows himself to be clearly recognized as a member of that political party which applied to itself by preference the name oi Kado) xdyaol, and which both during the latter part and after the conclusion of the Peloponnesian war obtained for a brief period the ascen- dency in Athens.— ovpderos: from atpw, sweep. Cf. the English colloquial words ‘ off-scourings’ and ‘scum.’ 8. délov wAqv: without a follow- ing gen., instead of which we find ra cépart isxupicacda by means of their bodily strength. Others construe 7¢ with odpar:, making the inf. depend upon some word of ability to be taken from ééiwy, but this is harsh. 9. atta ratra evar vopia: con- strue with A¢yew as an indignant dis- claimer in the shape of a question. “Or think you I mean that if a rabble be got together, of slaves and all sorts of wretches, good for noth- ing unless perhaps for feats of physi- cal strength, and these people say this or that, that these their mere dicta are to have the force of law?” Thompson. 12. atrés mddkat tromd{a: why So- erates does not express his conjecture, he has already explained in 453 b, ec. 14. ov ye: you, at least, for your part. Cf. what has just preceded in c. 16. adda wadw: in what precedes Callicles has really succeeded merely in eluding the expression of any posi- tive view. 18. mpoSiSacke: the mpd in composi- tion indicates the progress or going for- ward, which ought to attend teaching. 19. dwopoityow mapa cov: run away from your school. Cf. 456 d. 489 a 158 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 489. 20 Kaa. Eipaveve, & Yoxpares. Xa. Ma tov Zndov, & KaddJkrtas, @ od xpdpevos, TOANG vuvdr eipwvevov mpds pe: GAN’ (Ot eizé, Tivas E- yes Tovs Bedriovs eivar; Kaa. Tovs dpetvous éywye. 25 oa. “Opas dpa, dru od adros dvdpuara héyes, Syrots dé > , > > oN ‘ o N - 4 ovd&; ovK €pets, Tods Bedtiovs Kal KpeitTous mOTEpoV ‘\ 4 Z a» » , Tovs ppovyswtépous héyes dAdous Twas ; Kaa. “AANA val pa Ata TovTous héyw, Kal oPddpa ye. e Xa. TloAAdKis dpa els Ppovarv pvpioy py PpovovvTwy 490 S > x ‘ ‘\ ‘\ e \ n ” nw 30 Kpeirrav éeotlv Kata TOV aov Adyov, Kal TOUTOY apyeL Set, XN > 4 XN , ¥ \ »” “ > tovs 8 apxecOat, Kal mhéov e€xew Tov apxovta T&V apxXo- , a , A , Z ‘ > pevov—Todto yap pou Soxeis Bove Oar héyew — kat od pypara Onpedw —ei 6 es TOV pupiwv KpeitTor. Kaa. ’AdXa ratr’ €orw & héyw. TovTo yap oto eyw 35 TO Oikauov eivar pio, TO Bertiw ovTa Kal Ppovy.wTEpov . » , , ¥ a , Kal apyew Kal mhéov Exe TOV pavroTépwr. XLV. So. "Eye 59 adrod. ti wore ad viv héyets; éay > Ts > “ eH 7 we x € 4 Ca €v TO avT@ Gpev, GoTEP Viv, TOA BOpdoL avOpwro1, t & ge s > & ‘ , N 4 > A Kal Hiv 7H ev Kow®@ ToAAG outia Kal ToTd, Gev S€ Tav- 8 a ¢ a > , € Se 3 6 oy - be ¢ Aw a Todarol, ol pev iayupol, ot dé adoberets, cis SE Hua 7 26. ov« épeis: again asyndetic, as b 489 489 21. pd tov ZyOov: with pd we © always infer the negative. The allu- sion to Zethus, whom Callicles had brought forward as an authority, has a very comic effect. 22. GAN WO: see on 451 a. 25. dpds «ré.: alludes to 489 ec, where BéAriov and xpeirrovy were said by Callicles to be identical. Here he characterizes the BeArious as dpelvous, showing, as Socrates declares in 8n- Aots ovdév, that at this time there was no distinction of consequence between these two words. above in b. = 27. hpovipwrépovs: excludes the ambiguity which was still possible with icxupdrepos. 29. px ppovotvTwy: the neg.is con- 490 ditional. * 33. @ypara: a clear reference to 489 b,c. ffua has rather the force of “phrase.” XLV. 1. éxe 84: see on 460a. bd 3. év Kowa: ie. so that, as being public property, it must be distributed. 4. oi pév loxvpol xré.: added be- 159 Bt. I. p. 490. \ a > ae es 5 ppovipnarepos trepi TavTa, iarpos av, 7 Sé, otoy eiKds, TOV \ > , a XS , a a « pev ioxuporepos, Tov b€ dobevéctepos, ado TL 7 ObTOS, ppovmadrepos Nav ov, Bedtiov Kal Kpeitray eorau eis TQUTG ; MAATOQNOS TOPTIAs. Kaa. Ilavv ye. 10 Xa. °H oby rovTwv Tav outiwy Théov Hav Exréov adTe, ¢ y a, = ao a a XN » * 4s A“ om tf ort Bedtiov €otiv, } TO wey apxew Tavta exewov Set vé- pew, év S€ 7@ avadionew Te aita Kal katayphabai eis 76 £ nw a = # > % tt ww E4VTOV Tua ov TeovexTyTEory, et wy éAEL CyprcovaAat, > x wn x , “A > »¥ € £ 3% \ 4 GANG TOV ev Téov, TOV S Ehatrov ExTéov’ cay dé TUYN 4 > , ¥ , > , “ ao 15 wavrwv acbevéctatos wv, TAVTwWY ehayicrov TH BedtioTa, @ Kaddixhes; ody otras, dyale; Kaa. Tlept ouria déyers Kat word Kal iarpovs Kai pdva- wf a A XN > “ - plas: éyw dé od TavTa déya. a Xa. drepov ody Tov ppordrepov Bedrtiw déyes ; Pade x , 20 7} p41. 490 cause it is just in the distribution of 14. rov pev... tov S€: with refer- 490 D food that one would expect bodily ence to b. € strength to form the standard. 5. wept tavta: the acc. implies some mental activity. 10. éxréov: the verbal of éxw, which is quite rare, shows two forms, this and the more normal one cyxeréos, also used by Plato. (in composition). 11. +o pév dpxew: this comes to him according to 490 a, because he is ppoviudrepos. The dat. is one of cause. véuwey is an action for which are neces- sary wisdom, justice, and self-control. 12. karaxpryobar: not misuse, but use up. «ard frequently has the force of “completely ” in composition. Kr. 68, 46, 10. 13. {Hprotc bar: used metaphori- eally, of the natural result which follows the over-engorgement of the stomach with food. « 15. r@ BeArlorw: used instead of the pron. for the sake of the contrast with éAdxuoror. 5 17. wept ciria: this is a very un- usual construction. The gen. is the rule with wep! after Aéyw. Cron thinks it is calculated to define the region in which the speeches of Socra- tes move. The word gAvapias serves also to characterize all that precedes. Cf. 519 a Aiuévwv Kal vewplwy Kal ree- xav Kal pdpwr kal ro.dtwy ddrvapidy, the companion passage to this one. Cf. also Dem. Ol. iii. 29 ras d50bs &s érioxevd omer, kal kphvas, kal Ahpous. 19. wdérepov: the second member is to be supplicd from the following question. 20. Wf py (sc. gab): to be under- stood like of oyu (nego). a 160 30 35 490 Kaa. "Eywye. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 490. > 3 ~ Xa. “AN od Tov Bedtiw mréov Setv EXE ; Kaa. OU otriwv ye odd mora. 4 Xa. MavOdva, aX tows twariwr, cat Set roy vpavTiKa- , € ’ ¥ \ a XN , 25 TATOV MEyLOTOV LuaTLoy EXE Kal TAELTTA Kal KaALOTA / GpTEXOMEVOY TEPLLEVAL ; - Kaa. Tlotwy tation ; Xa. "AN eis brodjpara SyHrov ore Set wAeoverrery Tov ppovima@ratov eis TavTa Kai BédticTov. \ TOV OKUTOTOMOV ” 2 am ¢ , N a ¢ , tows péyiora det vrodjmara Kal wAElaTa trodedeunevov TEPLTATELW. Kaa. Ilota trodypara; pdvapeis evar. Do. “ANN et 7) TA ToLadra Eyes, tows TA TOLddSE* oloY yewpyixov avdpa rept ynv dpdrvdv te Kat Kahdv Kal > s a . »¥ a a a , ayabov, TOUTOV 8&7 tows dec WAEOVEKTELY TOV OTEPLAT@V XN € 4 , “a S X c a i“ Kal ws mheloTw oTéppate ypnoOar eis THY avTOU yHV. Kaa. ‘Os det radra déyers, @ YoKpares. Xo. OU pdvov ye, @ KadAtkhes, adda Kal wept tov 2 on QuUTOV. 24. pavOdve: ironic; as if Socra- tes could by any means judge what Callicles did mean from a general statement of what he did not mean. —vdavricdrarov: a sup. coined for the occasion. 26. mepuévat: sc. in order to show off in them; still stronger is the follow- ing (51) wepirareiv (“strut about”). 27. wolwv tpariwy: expresses in- dignant contempt. Cf. Charm. 174 b dpa ye (olde) 7d werrevtixdy; motoy weT- TeuTiKde ; 32. ddAvapeits Exov: a manner of speech taken from the common life, and hence especially frequent in the comic poets. Cf ri éxwv Anpeis; (497 a), tl dita exw otpeper; (Phaedr. 236 e), wl dfra SiatplBes Exwv; (Ar. Eccles. 1151). yw» seems to imply a kind of continual persistence. You still persist in talking nonsense. 33. rovatra, ToudSe: correspond in usage to ovros and éde. The article divides the examples into classes. 37. ds del xré.: an exclamation im- plying a taunt, which was so often directed against Socrates e.g. (ac- cording to Xen. Jfem. iv. 4. 6) by.the sophist Hippias, who receives about the same answer that Callicles does here, with the ironical addition: ot 3° tows did Td ToAvVUaGs elvar ep) TY ad- Tay ovdérote Ta alta A€yes. Cf. 482 a. 40 45 50 TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 161 St. I. p. 491. Kaa. Ni tods Oeovs, arexvas ye det oKutéas TE Kal 491 , N 7 , See :3) SN 2Qs , ¢ Kvadéas KaL payetpous héyoor Kat taTpous ovoey TTQAVEL, WS 4 , ¢€n » x , Tepe TOUTOMVY NLL OVTA TOV Adyov. La. OdKody od épets wept Tivwr 6 Kpeittwy Te Kal ppo- , oN , », 3 , Xr “A x 2, > a ) VULWTEPOS TAEOV EXKWV OLKALWS TAEOVEKTEL 5 Y OVTE €fLOU broBaddovtos aveEe. ov7 adros épets ; Kaa. “AA éywye kat madav eyo. ~“ N Bt TPWTOV [LEV TOUS Z ar) > , , Se , KPELTTOUS Ol ELOLY OV ADKUTOTOLOUS héyo OVOE payetpous, 2 > an > ‘ a , , , 5 ah’ ot ay els TA THS TOEWS TPdypaTa Ppdvimor Gow, y a , 5S > a XN ‘\ , , > ‘ OVTLWQa QV Tpomrov €U OLKOLTO, KQL HY {ovov ppovyros, adda No A € \ 4 a xX F 2 a N XN KQaL av6petot, LKAVOL OVTES A AY VONTWOLV ET LTE ELD, Kat RYN °° , \ , a a amoKkduvodt dua parakiay THs puy7ns. XLVI. Xo. ‘Opas, & Bédriore Kahdikdets, os od TadTa ov T €“od Katyyopels Kal €ya god; ov pev yap ene dis 2 > , ‘ s 2 \ \ a > s QEel TAVTA héyew, Kat pepe Mol’ eyo de GOV TOVVAQVTLOY, 491 40. del oxutéas xré.: Charicles, one a of the thirty, irritated by some keen remark of Socrates, expresses himself similarly in Xen. Afem. i. z. 87 obxoiy, epn 6 Swxpdrys, cal tev Eropevwy. rov- Tots Tov Te Sixaiov Kal Tov éciov Kal TeV bAAwy tav TootTwy. val pa Al’, pn 6 Xapixarfs, kal rév BovndarAwy ye. 41 f. ds dvra tov Adyov: the acc. abs. is rare, except with impers. verbs. GMT. 853; G.278, 2; H.974. The infer- ence here is that the assumption intro- duced by the #s is untenable; in which case we more commonly have éderep. 43. wepl tlvwv: due to assimilation after wep! rotrwy, for, acc. to the usage, we should expect wep) tlva after mAcoverre?. Cf. Lach. 182 e ofs ovdév BAA péAee TovTO CnTety, Ste by paddvres mAeoventotey Tay HAAwY Tep) Tov wédeuov. The éepets may also have had some effect. See on 449 d. For odxody épets, see on 489 e. 46. GAN tywye Kal mdidar Adyw: see on 456 a and 489 c. Callicles’ irritation shows itself again in the side-thrust, ob cxutorduous Kré. 46 f. tovs kpelrrous ot elow: equiv. to rovrous of xpeitrous ciciv. See Kr. 61,6,2; H.878. Such prolepsis usu- ally occurs after verbs which express recognition or make declarations. Here the relative clause is almost pleonastic, but this is the more in harmony with the excited feelings of Callicles. 48. els... mpdypara: denotes the object, as wep) traira (above 490 b) denotes the field, to which the ¢pé- vnots is directed; and from it we must take the subject of olxotro. 50. ixavol dvres xré.. is to be con- sidered as explanatory of avdpeto. and ppdvipotr Gow. XLVI. 3. é€yad 8€ cov rodvavrlov: this use of cov, with which we must b 491 a b 162 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 491. gy > , > NX , \ “ A > X X - Ort ovdérTOTE TaUTA eyes TEpt TOV avTa@v, adda TOTE pev x , X 7 \ 2 , e + 5 Tous BeATious TE Kal KpEiTTOUS TOdS LaXUPOTEpOUS WpiloL, ¢ > A ‘ , n > > ¢ , y avOis d€ Tovs ppoviwtépous, vov So av ETEPOV TL HKELS ¥ > s , ey a s € , eX ev * dvd pevdrepot TWES VITO JOU héyovrat Ol Kpé€lTTOUS Kat ot Bedtiovs. GAN’, ayalé, cirav arahdtdynf, Tivas XN , XN , \ 2 9 TOTE déyets TOUS Bedrious TE KAL KPELTTOUS KQL €LS OTL. Kaa. *AAN’ eipnka ye eywye Tovs Ppovipous eis TA THS , , ae) , TOAEWS TpPaywhaTa Kat avdpeious. TOUTOUS Yap TMpooyKEL an , ¥ Yo. ge an? 9 , , ¥ T@V TONEwV apxel, Kal TO dtkavov TOUT €OTL, aéov exe , an x \ » a 3 s - TOUTOUS TWV adhuwv, Tovs AapKXOVTAaAS TOV apKOPLEevav. Xa. Ti dé avrav, & éraipe; Kaa. Ids Aéyets ; Si or / > N € i XK “A Yo. Eva exactov déyw QUTOV €QAUTOU AaPXOVTA.* YN TOVTO pev ovdey Set, avrov éavTod apxew, THY O€ ddrdwv; 491 supply xarnyopé, is somewhat harsh after éud, with which it contrasts, and leads Cron to prefer to consider gov as dependent upon rodvayrioy, in the sense “the opposite of you,” —i.e. of what you say,—and the clause with 67: as epexegetic to rovvayriov, —a harsh and doubtful construction. 5. tods toxupotépovs: the art. is employed, because isyuporépous is not merely a pred. to rots BeAtious Kré., but both ideas are considered as iden- tical. 6 f. aes Exov: as 518 a. In Eng- lish also we often say, ‘here you are with,’ etc. 7. twés: ‘rls may express indefi- niteness of nature: “a sort of.”’ H. 702. 8. elway dradkddyndt: relieve your mind by saying, tell and be done with it. Cf. below, e & éyé oot viv mappn- cra¢duevos Aéyw. The use of the aor- ist tense of the partic. may be simply a case of attraction; it certainly loses its connotation of past time, being practically identical with the time of the leading verb, as in Phaedo 60 ¢ ev ¥ éroinoas dvauvqoas we. See GMT. 150, 845; I. 856 b. 12. rotr’ éoriv: does not refer to G&pxew, but simply, as often, intro- duces the following clause. 14. ri 8€ avtdv: the indefiniteness of the question shows that it is only designed to draw Callicles’ attention to the necessity of some rule govern- ing the actions of the xpefrrous to one another. According to the connex- ion we may supply either &pyew or mAéov éxew to govern the gen., or we may consider it as a free genitive. The idea of a man’s governing him- self is so entirely new to Callicles that he is unable to catch Socrates’ meaning at first. 16. éva éxacrov: the single con- crete case to explain the principle, 491 TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 163 St. I. p. 491. Kaa. Ids éavtot dpxovra héyets ; Xa. Ovdev Toikidov, GAN @omeEp ot Todo, cappova ” ae A s % € A a € an XN 2 “A 20 OVTA KQL EYKPATY) AUTOV EAUTOV, TWY nOovav Kat emOupi@v » n e a ApXovTa TAY Ev EAUTO. Kaa. ‘Os dds ef: Tods HAGiovs éyes, TOUS TaAdpo- vas. A ‘ ¥ 0 XN y > *» s y Y La. Ilws yap ov; ov €ls OOTLS OUK GV YVOLY), OTL OUTw 25 héyw. Kaa. Ilavu ye ofpddpa, ® Xoxpares. 2 ON a a ETEL TWS AV evdaipwv yevo.to avOpwros Sovievwv 6twodv; AANA TOUT 3 \ XN X 4 X ® , a 3 # a €otiy To Kata iow Kaddv Kat Sikacov, 6 é€yo cou vov Trappnovalonevos héya, ore Se Tov 6pOGs Biwodpevov TA ppnovalspevos déya, pas ys s 19. ovSév wockiAov: means that the question is about a simple matter, whereas the person addressed imag- ines something else behind the words. —domep ot woddol: with this, So- crates calls in the authority of common usage to determine the meaning of éavtod &pxew, which he defines by ocdppav and éeyxparhs éav- tov, with rav jdovay xré. explana- tory. 22. ws Svs el: is often used ironi- cally.—1$vs: corresponds best to our naive. Callicles means that So- crates still keeps the point of view of a naive—hence interesting (but cf 485 b, c)—child, inasmuch as he has not yet laid aside his childish prejudice in favor of cwpoctrn. Hence the words rots 7AcOious xré. are a criticism of Socrates’ view: “you mean those simple-minded fellows, — the temperate.” This passage shows that Callicles erases cwpoodvn, as he did dccaoodvyn, from the list of the virtues. 24. ottw: we should naturally ex- pect rovrous, Of course there is a tinge of irony in the allusion to Cal- licles’ words. 26. wavy ye opddpa: sc. ofrw Ac- vets. Callicles, of course, means rots qjAcdious, and makes an effort in what follows to defend his words. For this purpose he unfolds his view of life more completely, and shows es- pecially wherein he finds happiness. The beginning of his discourse bears a rhetorical stamp. 27. Sovrevwv: not to be conceived literally of human servitude, but rather equiv. to apxyduevos and that too adtds bp’ éavrod, which Callicles considers just as bad as if the slavery were to sonie one else, drgovrv. The lot of thraldom is considered so unhappy that Callicles conceives dovAcdwy, even in the sense which it has here, as the exact opposite to evdaiuwv. That self- control is not consistent with the gen- erally held idea of freedom is spoken plainly in Meno 86 d éreid) 3& ob cavrod pev od8 emixepets Upxeww Iva 5h éAevGepos 7s, and is at the present day a principle of the opponents of the temperance movement. 491 164 35 40 Oixatoowvny Sia THY avTov avavdpiav. PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 491. \ > a ‘ e A 2” € , » x XN 30 fev émOupias TAS EAUTOU EAY WS PEYLOTAS ELVAL KAL [LY 4 Ae XN e ia ae € \ > Koddlew, tavras 5é€ as peylorais ovaais ikavoyv €ivar4g2 € a > > o x , NX > , UTTY) PETELV du avdpeiav Kal ppovyncw, Kal ATOTYLTAAVAL © x 2 \ e€ 9 , , @Vv av ae y érr.Oupia VYoyvyrae. “9 x a.) > a adda TOUT, Olwat, TOLS qodXots ov Suvatov: bev Weyovaw Tos TowovTovs Ov > > \ a > , . atoxvvny, ATOK PUTTOLEVOL THY auT@v advvapiav, KQL > \ , ‘ > \ 9 , y 2 ay , aicxpov 84 daciv civar THY dkohactay, Omep ev Tots Tpd- abev eye Edeyov, Sovrovpevoe Tods Bedtiovs THy diow 3 , N, > N > , 2 , a avOparovs, Kat adrot od Suvdpevor exrropilerOar Tats € a , 2 a \ , \ XN ndovats TAYPOow ETALVOVOLW THV owppootvny Kal TYV > , e 2 €7TEL YE ols e€ > aA eon x , er > x > \ a , apxyns banp&ev n Baovéav VEOW EWAL Y AUTOUS TH pu- € ‘ > , 0 > , x is x Gel tKaVOUS EKTOPLOaCVUaL APKynVY TWa 1) TUPQVvVUL Qa Suvactetav, (ri) TH adynOeta atoyiov Kat Kakvov (av) ein , , i ae) , @ 2eN > , oudhpoowns TOUTOLS TOLS avO padtros * ols é€ov amroNaveww 492 31. koAdfew: in the sense of “ disci- a pline” is quite in place here. At the same time its use forms a link be- tween this and the earlier discussion between Polus and Socrates. is the proper opposite to cwopoctvn, and as such is praised by Callicles. 32. vanpereiv : Callicles says this, without noticing that thereby the ser- vitude (SouvAefa) in which man stands to his appetites is recognized. 34. rots tovovtous: viz. Tods duva- Tous dromimmAdvae KTE. 36. alexpov 57: with ironical ref- erence to aioxtvny. — dmep: intro- duces what follows. The reference is to 483 ¢ ff. 41. ols varnptev: whose fortune it was. The original meaning of émdpyeiv, “to be as a foundation,” “to begin with,” becomes gradually weaker as time goes on. The dat.in the pred. here passes over into the acc. as subj. of the axordacia inf. (ikavods and elvat) as is frequently the case, especially in long periods. Kr. 55, 2,5, 7. The cause here lies in the necessary addition of atrous. 42. dpxyv twa «ré.: the word &px can be applied to any position of power, whether in a democracy or not. Thuc. ii. 65.9 says of Athens eylyverd te Ady wey Synuoxpatia, epyw 5 wd rot mpdrou advipds (i.e. Pericles) apxh. The idea of rupavvls is well known; cf. Nepos, Afilt. 8. 3. orefa combined with tupayvls is not infrequently (479 a, Thue. iti. 62. 3) used of oligarchs, but it is also a des- ignation of princes, both smaller and greater (524 e, 525 d). 43. aloxvov kal kdkiov: declare as strongly as possible the inappropri- ateness of the practice of virtue for such men; it becomes for them really a shame and an evil. 44. rovtcis tots dvOpumos: pur- duva- of 92 45 50 55 492 MAATONOS TOPTIAS. 165 Bt. I. p. 492. a >’ A ‘\ *. > + ” > XN € a Tov ayabav Kat pndevds éeutrodav dvtos, avdtot Eéavrois Seomdrny énaydyouwto Tov TaY To\dOV avOpdrwV VvopoV NX , XA ¥ a wn 3 * *¥ t TE Kal hoyov Kal Woyov; 7 Tas odK dv aO\LOL yeyovdTes elev UTO TOV KaAOD TOD THS SikatoovyNs Kal THS Twdppo- 4 XN # # nA v a e n a wn ovvns, wndev wA€ov VewovTEs Tots Pirots Tots avTaY 7} TOLS > a X n ¥ + nw e a , a x €xO pots, Kal TAUTA apxovTEs Ev TH EavT@v Tore; aAXaG. i“ > , S c aA My XN , @Q> ¥ TH adyOeia, & Ldkpares, Hv Ps ad SidKew, GS exer’ X X\ > as XN > vc *% 3 - ¥ Tpvoy Kat akoacia Kal édevepia, €av émixoupiay €yn, n> > XN > c XN > f x * »” a3 TOUT €OTWW GApETH TE Kal evdaipovia, Ta d€ adda TADT 3 N q a ‘ * ¥ c = €or Ta Kahhomiopata, TA Tapa dvow ouvOypwata av- a , N > % 4 Oparav, prvapia kal oddevds ava. XLVI. So. Otw dyevvds ye, d KadNikdes, eme&épyer posely placed at the end of the clause (as above di thy abtadyv avavdpiav), and to emphasize the contrast, av@pd- mwv, which is usually wanting, is added in the next clause after ray modAav.— ols é€ov xré.; such connex- ion of the subordinate to the princi- pal clause is idiomatic in Greek and Latin. Cf. Symp.174e of uev yap edOds maida Tia Tey eydov anavrhcavTa a&yew of xaréxewto of GAAo. Nep. Thrasy. 4.1 huic...corona a populo data est; quam quod .non vis expresserat nullam ha- buit invidiam. Notice the neces- sary shift in efdy and pydevds .. . dvtos due to the change from impersonal to personal. The participles are both practically concessive, the neg. pa being due to the conditional coloring. 46. trav woddav xré.: notice the assonance (rapicwois) in vduoy, Adyor, Wdoyor. 48. rot kadov: is said with bitter irony. Callicles shows here, as well as in 486 b above, the code of morals prevalent at that time and which Xen. expresses in the praise awarded to Cyrus, Anab. i. 9. 11 pdvepos Fv ef tls Te ayabdy 4 Kandy wormoeey adtoy, VuKay TEIpmmevos. 51. wv dys od Stdkeav: as above 482 © pdokwy Thy ddAnOeay Sidketv. 52. émovplav: capacity to help (one’s self); i.e. to provide means for pleasure and to ward off hind- rances. So also émoupety and ézi- xoupos. Cf. below, the recapitulation of Socrates. 53. ra S€ dAAa xré.: the subject, which at first is only inferred as the opposite of the three qualities speci- fied, is nearer specified first by the characteristic addition ra kaAAwnio- pata (affectations) and then by a definite expression which at the same time shows Callicles’ opinion. 53. ddvapla «ré.: is predicate. XLVIL. 1. ovw dyewvais: like yer vatws 475 d, 521 a, transferred from its original application to the free independent conduct proper for a man of noble birth; hence equiv. to “spirited,” “brave.” — éqefépxeu: an image from war. Cf. émyepopev 495 ¢. d 492 da 166 5 KaTddndov yernta. Tas Buwréov. 10 492 d PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 492. T@ Ady tappyo.aldpevos: cadds yap ov viv héyess, a € »¥ n &@ ol dAdou Stavootvrar pe, éyew Se od eOédrovow. Oe S > 7 8 \ , > a y a ECOMLaL OvV eyo oouv LY) €Vvt TpoTm@ avewal, Wa TQ OVTt i ef ‘ x Kat pou héye* Tas pev > 4, 5 a > erBupias dys ob Kohaaréov, ei pédder Tis ofov Set clvar, 32m ‘ a eavra S€ ards as peyiotas TAHpwow avtais apdbev yé 6 € , ‘ an 5 \ 2 / TOUEV erouralew, KQlt TOUTO EWat Ty QpEeTyV ; Kaa. Pypt radra €yo. Xa. Oi« dpa dp0ds Aéyovrar of pndevds Sedpevor > , > evdaipoves €wat. Kaa. Ot dior yap 8%) ovTw ye Kal of vexpot evdaipove- oTaroi ciow. Xa. "AAAa pev 87 Kal as ye ov héyeis Sewds 6 Bios. 2. to Aoyw: refers “to the view just stated, the position defended. Cf. Prot. 345 d, where Socrates says of Simonides 8? dAou rot doparos én- eképxerat 19 Tob Mirraxov pyyatt. We may, however, consider éretépxe: as used absolutely and rq@ Ady as dat. of accompaniment. 6. el péddreu tis (sc. rowodres elvac) olov Set (adrdv sc. roy &vOpwrov) elvar: the absence of the inf. after éévra is strange ; cf. 491 e above. 7 f. dpodey ye wodev: Socrates wishes to settle beyond all cavil that Callicles sanctions the employment of all means, without limitation and in the broadest sense, to satisfy his desires. As éromd(ew is in the same construction with coAacréov, we must conceive an idea of obligation con- nected with it. Cf Crito 51 ¢ ron- téov .. . h welder. 8. tiv dperrv: the sole true vir- tue (manliness), which is recognized also by Callicles. 10. dpa: “it appears,” “according to your view.” — oi pySevds Sedpevor «ré.: the fundamental principle of the Cynic school (of Antisthenes), which also derived its origin from Socrates. Cf. Xen. Mem. i. 6.10, where to the sophist Antiphon, who maintains sim- ilar principles to those of Callicles here, Socrates says goixas thy eddar- poviay oionévy tpuphy nal rodvTéAciay elvat- eye 8& vouilw 7d pev pndevds Seta@at Ostov elvat, rd F ws eAdxicrov eyyutdtw Tov Belov. 12. of vexpol xré.: Socrates men- tions the prevalence of this view in Phaedo 65 a ka done? yé wou Tots roA- Aois avOpdmas ... eyyts tt relvew Tod teOvdvar 5 pndev ppovtiCwy tev fdovav al 8a Tod oduatds cic. Sophocles, however, makes the sorely afflicted Ajax say (Ai. 554 f.) ev tq gpovety yap pndty HSicros Blos, | €ws 7d xalpew kal rd AuTeicOa pabfis. 14. Now that Callicles has stated exactly the manner in which he looks at life, Socrates proceeds to contrast that view with his own, not directly 492 TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS déyet, Néywv 167 St. I. p. 492. 15 od ydp Tot Oavpdlouw’ av, et Eipumidys adynOy &v totade 2 9 > ~~ nw A tis 8 otder, ei 75 Cov pev eote xarOavetr, To KaTOavetv dé Lyv ; & ¢€ A A ¥ ¥ P, ¥ A v A Kal qmels TH ovtTe tows Tévayev: On Tod Eeywye Kat 493 » a a € an € “~ / XN XQ ‘\ 20 YKovTa TOV Topav, ws VUY Hues TEOVapEV, Kal TO peV 492 a ws: €. oS a ~ oe an a > @ 3 COLA EOTLY NUL ONMA, THS OE WuyNs TOUTO, Ev w émuOv- , a @ > / ‘\ pias eit, Tuyxaver dv otoy avaretPec Oar Kat peraminrew indeed, but by a series of compari- sons and similes, which serve the double purpose of calming the feel- ings of the listeners and readers after the impassioned speech of Callicles and, by presenting these pictures to the fancy, of preparing their minds for the following dialectical argu- ment. 15. Evpuriiyns: the same poet to whom Callicles has several times ap- pealed. Socrates also can quote for his own purpose. The passage is from the Polyidus, and has the sec- ond line completed by the words karw voulCera. Quite similar is a passage which has come down to us from an- other lost tragedy, the Phrixus, tis oldev ef Civ Tov0’ d KéxAnrat Oavetv, | 7d Civ 5¢ Ovxfonew éori. See Nauck, Fr. 639, 830. 493 19 f. eywye kal qKovod tov: the a following comparisons are probably taken from the book of Philolaus, a Pythagorean who, after having been driven from Italy, wandered to Thebes, and there engaged in teaching and writing. Socrates was acquainted with the Pythagorean teaching prob- ably only orally, from association with his Theban friends Simmias and Cebes. For this reason Plato implies by the manner of expression that this knowledge, which Socrates himself in- nowise valued, was as general as pos- sible. See Thompson. 20 f. 1d pev capd dom ovpa: this comparison, though ascribed to the Pythagoreans, is connected also with the Orphic saying that the body is the custodian of the soul. Plato combines both in the same manner in Crat. 400 b kal yap ofjud tewés pacw avrd (sc. 7d c&ua) elvar ris uxfs. Cf. Phaedo 62 b. 21. tys 8€ Wuxys Touro: in order to continue the discussion, a distinc- tion between the separate parts of the soul is necessary. This could not be given here scientifically; but as much as is needful is stated by the comparison. Elsewhere Plato distin- guishes three parts of the soul,—rd oytarixdy, Td Oupoedés (Ouuds), and 7d émiOuuntixdy. For his present pur- pose two are sufficient, — the really spiritual, the reason, and that part which clings greedily to the body; for the question to be decided is: Shall life be directed according to the nature of the soul or of the body ? 22. peramlarrev : the active is found in 481 d, e. Cf 517 b peraBiBacew tas émbuplas. 168 25 493 ¥ , aVvW KAT. PLATO’S GORGIAS. ‘ &. I. p. 493. 4 a ¥ A % > 4 Kat ToUTO apa Tis pvfodoyay Komapos avyp, ¥ a ‘ x iaws SuKehds Tis } “Iradixds, Tapdywv TO dvdpare Sua Td 4 \ x > 7 , ‘ ae , miOavov Te Kal TEoTLKOY Gvdpace TOY, TOds SE avoyToUS > , “ 2 9 s a A ‘ A a e929 6 ApLUNnTOUS ° TMV 8 QALUYNTWVY TOUTO TS Wuyns, OV Qt ETLUV- pias eiol, TO akddacTOV abToU Kal Ov OTEyaVdr, WS TETPN- b 23. pvdodoyav: “ speaking in mythi- cal (here allegorical) form,” in con- tradistinction with the dialectical method. Cf Phaedo 61e Siackoreiv te Kal pudodAoyetv.— Komrpos: of deli- cate perceptions. Often with irony, but not here. See on 486 ¢. Xixe- Ads refers to Empedocles, *IraAinds to Philolaus. Neither was able, in the infancy of the science, to clothe his profound thoughts in philosophical form. (Qf. Cron-Dyer Introd. to Apol. §§ Band 8. Suceads, and not Buceare «és, may be due to the old love song of Timocreon Rhodius, which began: Bucedds Koupds avhp | worl trav parép Epa. 24. wapdyov to dvopate: by a slight variation of the word. rapayewv is other- wise used of etymologies which are effected by small variations in the sound.— 8a to m@avov re kal aet- otiucov: Philolaus was very fond of such tricks of derivation (cf. Boeckh, Philolaos, p. 188). Both words are obviously, as was shown above by dvamel@ecOar and petaninrey, to be considered as passive, and applying to something that can be easily per- suaded. In form mOavéy approaches closest to ri@ov, and hence stands first. It is usually active, yet it occurs also as a passive, eg. Xen. Cyr. ii. 2. 10 widuvol & oftws eiol twes, Bore, wply eldévat 7d mpocrartépmevoy, mpdrepoy mel- Oovrat. — meacrikov: adapted and in- clined to belief, presupposes also some persuasion. 25. dvorrous: is chosen here as the opposite of SPRUE, on account of iy its assonance with a@uvjrous, and de- ® notes those who are under the control, not of the voids, but of the éridupla. &udnro:, according to the regular us- age, denotes those who are not initi- ated into the mysteries. Hence Plato applies it also, in Phaedo 69 e and Theaet. 155 e, to those who have not been initiated into wisdom, or Philo- sophy, which causes —as the mys- teries were also designed to do —an actual inner purification of the soul. But here is also probably, at the same time, an allusion to the actual untransferred meaning of pew, close, —i.e. the “unconfined.” With this agrees the following explanation, od oreyavdy and tetpnuévos miBos. The a&uinro: stand open to all the charms of sense and the outer world. 27. to dxddaorov: an allusion to the expression of Callicles. — o¥ ore- yavov: which does not cover and pre- serve its contents, gives cause and in- troduction for the image of the jar. It is noteworthy that this greedy part of the soul is designated entirely by neg. expressions. 27 f. ds rerpypevos ety alOos: de- pends on an éAeye, which is implied in avéuace. It is true, however, that after a verb of naming we find occa- sionally a relative clause, as Soph. O. R. 780 nade? (we) wAactds ds elnv warpt. The comparison reminds one of the myth of the Danaidae. With the image of the mf@os and xédcxivov Thompson compares Shaks. Cym. i. 7 b TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. s y tO 8 ‘ \ > , > , Pévos ely Tos, Ova THY amnoTiay amEeLKaoas. 169 8t. I. p. 493. TOUvaV- , N ae » an” tiov 89 otros col, & KadXikdes, evdeixvuTar ws TOV ev 30 "Audou — 76 dewdés 5%) Aéyor — obror GOMdTaTo. dv elev € > he * a > * 4 = go Ol apvyToL, Kat Popotev Eis Tov TeTpHLEvoy TiMov Vdwp ETepw TOLOVTH TETPNMEVO KOTKIVO. x \ , » To 6€ KéoKWoV apa héyet, as Edy 6 mpds ewe éyar, THY Woyxyy elvar: tHY Se ‘ i > * ‘N “A > # c / Yuxny KooKivy amyjKacey THY TOV avorTaV ws TETPHLE- 35 vyv, ate od Swaperny aréyew Sv dmtiav Te Kal AYOnv. A> 3 a“ id 2 oe / ¥” a ‘\ a > Ns TAUT ETLELKaS PEV EoTW Ud TL aTOTA, Snot pny 6 ey 4 2 > # a ¢ @r > ~ Bovopat cou evderEapevos, edv ws olds TE &, TELOaL oe ‘The cloyed will, That satiate yet unsatisfied desire, That tub both filled and running,’ and All’s Well i. 3. 193 ‘Yet in this captious and untenable sieve, I still pour in the waters of my love, And lack not to lose still.’ 28. dmekdoas: the necessary ob- jects in the acc. and dat. are to be supplied from the context. — rovvay- tiov: construe with gol. 29 f. éy “AvSou: the following ety- mological explanation is found also elsewhere. It draws attention to a consideration of the beyond and the life after death, which plays an im- portant part in the close of the dia- logue. Cf. Phaedo 80 d, 81¢,d4 30. ovrot: points back, but is at the same time fixed by the addition of dudyrot. 32. érépw rovovtw: “likewise.” The objects are different, but their defects are similar. 33. 6 mpds ene Adywv: Socrates again refers to his authority, because he is still engaged with the details of the simile. 34. ryv Trav dpvirev: emphati- cally added, because what follows ap- plies only to of aéudnro. The soul is here, as a whole, compared to a per- forated sieve, whereas, just before, only a part of it was compared with the jar, because thereby was meant only the part attached to the body. But the other part, the soul proper, is brought into service to this bodily part, so that it affords material for it, and even assumes its nature. Cf Phaedo 66 d dovacdovres TH Tov cdéua- tos Oepareia. 35. dmortlav: no contradiction to the above meitixdy, which was said only of the ém@uunrixdy of the soul. By yielding to the sensual, the soul loses its power of reception and re- tention, of belief and knowledge. 36. émvetkads: reasonably, fairly, and then very likely, indeed. — tno tv: somewhat, like iré in broduovoos Rep. viii. 548 e, belongs to &romov. Rid. § 131 cites Phaedr. 242 @ ird doeBH (Adyov). Cf. in Lat. subab- surdus, subrusticus, etc.— pry: yet, moreover, like the more usual pév- TO. 37. ool: in Greek, when a pron. has been expressed once with one of the verbs of a series, it is not neces- sary to express it a second time, even though the second verb would require a different case, as here. 493 c 170 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 493. , > \ wn > 4 \ > , »¥ P perabécOa, dvti tod dmhyjatws Kal adKoddoTws €xovTos Biov tov Koopias Kat Tois del Tapodow ixavds Kal é€ap- 40 KovvTws exovta Biov éhéoOar. adda Torepov TEiOw Ti ve kat petatiferar evdaovertépous eivat Tos Kogpious 4 TaV dkoldaTav, H ovd av dANa TOAAG ToLadTa pvOodoya, oveey Ts pwaddov petabyoes ; Kaa. Todr’ adnOéorepor eipnxas, & Léxpares. XLVI. Xo. bépe 87, d\Anv cou cixdva Neyo ek TOU avrov yupvaciov TH viv. oKdre yap ed Toudvde éyets NX nn ie € , an # x nw 3 t wept Tov Biov Exarépov, Tov TE THPpovos Kal TOU akoa- a > a 3 ne , , . 4 x oTOov, oiov ei Svow avdpoty Exatépw Trios woot ciev, Kat 5 TO \ cs € “A ‘ X , € x yy e oe fy. @ pev érépw vyets Kal mypets, 6 pev olvov, 6 dé pédi- e tos, 6 6€ yddaxros, Kal ado wohAOl TOANG?, Vadpata dé 493 38. peradécOar: denotes the change c other version of the first one, as the of an opinion or statement. Cf. Rep. 1. 334 © GAAG perabducda: Kivduvedouer yap ovk dpbds .. . Oéc8at. 38 f. dvrl...éd€aOat: epexegetic, instead of dare éAéoOa. 39. xooplws: chiastically contrasted with dxoAdorws. 40. worepov welQw: the question shows that Socrates himself attaches no especial cogency to the compari- son. Cf. below, puodr0ya. 41. perarl@ecar: here equiv. to pe- tabcuevos nyeis Mutasne ita sen- tentiam ut statuas feliciores scholiast suggests: jv 5& exeivo pey t&v TvOayopelwy oikeiov, ToT BE Sw- Kpdrous, &s sapéotepdy te Kal mAnKTi- K@TEpor. 2. yupvaclov: it is not necessary to refer this strictly to the philosophi- cal school already mentioned. It rather has the meaning of “place of general exercise,” the domain of im- agination and fancy from which So- crates (Plato) draws his new image. On the ‘brachylogy’ in 74 viv (“where we obtained the one just given’), see Kr. 48, 13, 9. esse modestos libidinosis? 4. qwi®ot woddol: by these are to Heindorf. be understood only the separate de- 44. rovro: refers to the second sires. Pleasures are the materials part of the double question. XLVIII. 1. épe 54: the employ- ment of another simile after the pre- ceding one is strange; but possibly the second contains an advance on the first, inasmuch as it extends the consideration from the nature to the life. It may, however, be only an- with which the jars are filled. 5. vyets: in the physical sense, “undamaged,” but with a pre-under- standing of the moral judgment in regard to them; hence the contrast is formed by capa, as in 479 b. 6. wodkAav: viz. To.otTwy xpnudTov or vaudrwy. The common manner of TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 171 8t. I. p. 493. ‘4 ‘N No ¢ , ‘ ¥ ‘\ ‘ a oTavia Kat YaheTa EKAOTOU TOUTMWY Ely Kal ETA TOAAY , \ a 2 , € A > ¢ movev Kal xaderav exmopilopeva* 0 ev ovv ETEpos TY- , > 9 s , , > 7 ¢ poodpevos pyr emoxeTevor ute TL Ppovrilor, aAN evera 4 € , ma a ° eo OF ‘ A 4 9 10 TOUTwY NOVXLaV EXOL’ THO ETEPW TA pEV VapaTa, WoTEp kal éxeiv, SvvaTa pev mopiler Oar, xadera Sé, 7a 8 ay- “A , ‘ 0 ¥ > iC S aN ‘XN - Yea TETPYPEVaA Kal GaUpa, avaykKaCoLTo ael KAL VUKTA . ¢ s+ , > 4 oR . > , A , Kal Nuépay TiytrAaval avTa, ) Tas EoxaTas NuTotTO Av- 494 5 , € , ” a , , N a Tas: apa TowovTou Exatépov ovtos Tov Biou, héyers TOY TOU > , > x A 15 dko\doTou evdayoveaTepov eivat 7 Tov TOU KoopLLov; - # a f " + = eS meiOw Ti oe TadTa héywv cvyxapyoas TOV KdcpLOV Biov a > , 2 / > x > , TOU akoddaTou apeiva eivat, } ov TeiOw ; > , > , a \ ‘ Kaa. Ov weiets, & LHKpates: TO pev yap wAnpwca- Ft - e > >» 48 XN bo , > % a> »¥ LEev@ Exeiv@ OVKET ETTW NOOVH OVdELLA, aLAG TOUT EOTLY, 20 6 vuvdn éyw edeyov, TO womep iMov Chv, éredav ay- , , , ¥ , x , arr’ 2 , peony, BYTE XaLpovTa €Tl BYTE UTOU{LEVOV. €V TOUT® b > 7 XN ¢€ , “a > “~ ce “A > ~ €OTW TO 9 €ws Chv, €V T@ WS TWAELo TOV ETL pew. 493 expression would be &AAa BAAwY ToA- © vay or BAAoL EAAwY TOAAO) TOAAGY. 7. XaXerd: used absolutely and explained by the addition of «al... éxropiCdueva. Cf. below (11), where the supplement is self-evident. 8. 6 peév erepos: i.e. 6 céppar. 9f. évexa rovtTwy: “so far as it de- pends upon the filling of the casks or desires.” Cf. Theaet. 148 d poOuuias bev Evera paveirat. 11. wopl{erOat: probably middle. Kr. 55, 3, 8; H. 813. 494 13. a: te. ef O& uh (aryutraln). @ 14. dpa rovovrov xré.: comprehen- sive resumption of the protasis begin- ning with ef dvozv. 16. qwelOw ri: the adverbial acc. of the indef. neut. pron. is frequent. See H.719b; G.160,2. The repetition of welOw shows that Socrates attaches no value to the comparison as a proof, for one simile can be offset by an- 494 other, but it helps to clarify the idea. ® 20. To domep AlWov tyv: epexegeti- cal to rovro . . . 8 «ré., in order to draw attention again to the earlier re- mark.— We must supply naturally the same subject to wAnpdéon as to Civ. 22. émppetv: Callicles takes up b the simile of Socrates; but at the same time, in this treatment of it there may be some traces of the teaching of Gorgias, if, as is sup- posed, he accepted Empedocles’ ideas of efflux and afflux in his views of physics. Cf Meno 76 © BotAa ody oot kata Topyiav aroxpivwyat ;—OvKooy Adyere dmwoppods twas Tay byTwY Kat’ *"Eumedoxrdéa; Kal mépous eis obs Kal 5° Gy ai droppoat mopevoytat. In this light the word mopi(ec@a: gains especial im- portance. 172 25 30 494 c PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 494. Xa. OvKow avadykn y', dv todd émippén, TOAD Kal 7d > > \ ‘\> »¥ \ , > a QTLOV EWOAL, KAL peyad aTTa Ta TPHPATA €wat Tacs 2 nw éxpoats ; , » Kaa. Ildvu peév ovv. Xa. Xapadp.od twa ad od Biov déyes, GAN od veKpov ovee AiBov. XN nm > t Kat mewavTa eo bie ; Kaa. "Eywye. , ig xX , Z @ A Kat proc N€ye* TO TOLOVOE héyers otov mewyv Xa. Kat dupqv ye cai Subavra aivew ; Kaa. Aéyw, kat tas adAdas éemifupias amaoas €xovTa \ , a , > , a Kat Suvdpevov mn povy XatLpovTa EVOayLovas Cv. XLIX. Xo. Eiye, & BéAtiote: Suatéhen yap waoTep ¥ yy . 2 a npka, KQL OTTWS }47) ATALO\KUVEL. det dé, as Eorxe, pnd 2 \ 29 a \ a \ 9 F339 \ n epee arraco yy Onva. KQL 7 PWTOV BEV ELTTE, EL KAL WopovtTa XN aA a - ¥ wn“ Py # kat KynovavtTa, adOdvws exovta Tov KvnocOat, KYopevov duatedobvTa Tov Biov eddatpoves ears Cyv. 25. éxpoais: this compound with éx is very unusual, but also here very exact. 27. xapaSptod: according to Arist. Anim. Hist. ix. 11, the xapadpids was a bird of ugly voice and color, which lived in chasms and clefts of the rock, and came forth only at night. Others describe it as a very greedy bird, 6s Gua ta éoOiew éxxpive. It is this peculiarity which explains the reference here. The duck has that reputation with us.—aAN ov: we might also have simple ov (456 e), or kal ob (Kr. 59, 1, 10). 28. ro TovovSe A€yes: viz. as the above (aAA’ ... émppeiv) used expres- sions. The following answer of Cal- licles, Aéyw «7é., saves Socrates the trouble of enumeration. — To Tovovée: see on 490 e. XLIX. 1. evye: the verb is reg- ularly omitted with this exclamation, which is usually ironic. By the words Tas BAdas émiOupias andoas, Callicles gives Socrates an open field for at- tack. Hence the ironical praise. Callicles need only continue to make such rash statements to be soon si- lenced. 2. ds owe: by this expression Socrates reminds Callicles of the principle he had laid down in 482 e (ef. 489 a), in order, by this ironical praise of his determination which shrinks from no consequence, to make acceptable the diversion of the dis- cussion to less pleasant subjects. At the same time, he shows that he feels himself compelled, by the results of Callicles’ moral view, to carry the in- vestigation into this field. 4. ddOovws exovra rod Kvyobat: the gen., on account of the meaning 494 WAATONOX TOPIIAS. 173 St. I. p. 494. e » > > \ A Kaa. ‘Qs aromos ei, @ LéKpares, kat atexyvas Snuy- a - yopos. Ya. Tovydprot, @ Kaddixdes, [adov pev cat Topyiav \ 267 ‘ > , 3 7 ‘ XN > ‘\ kat é&érrnfa Kai aicyvverbar éroinoa, od dé ov pi) 10 €xAayns ovde pn aicxwvOns: avdpetos yap «i. GAN aToKpivou jLovop. N , ‘ ‘ , € , a nw Kaa. @npl rowuy Kat Tov Kvepevov nod€ws av Brdvar. > na ¥ ¢ , \ > / Xa. OdKodv eirep 7S€ws, Kal evdayidovus ; ‘, Kaa. Ilavu ye. 15 do. IIdrepov ei rH Kepadrnv povov Kvnoidn, 7 ETL TE OE © > wn ov oy # , > nw 27 4 x EpwT@; opa, @ KadXtkhes, Te amoxpwel, €av Tis cE Ta n or wn [éxdueva] rovrous éfeEjs aravta épwra: Kal rovTwv Tot- 4 ” £ £ a w s ® > ovTwy ovTwy Kepddaov, 6 TOY KWwaidwy Bios, obTOS ov * \ > ‘\ \ »” xa # F s dewos kal aioypods Kal dOdvos; 7 TovTous ToAuyces hé- 58 , > aN > 06 ¥ «& Oe 20 Yel EVOALLOVAS ELVaL, EaV ad OVWS EXWOLVY WY OEOYTAL ; Kaa. OvK aicytve eis TovatTa aywv, @ Lad«pares, Tovs hoyous ; 5 \ >. » 3 n > nk OLA a Xo."H yap eyo ayw évtavda, & yervate, 7 Exelvos, ds 494 494 of the adverb (cf. pOovety Tiwi twos). 16 f. ta éxopeva: used absolutely —kvyo0at: contracted like (Av, piv, etc. Cf. wewiv in b above. 6. ws dromos ef xré.: rudeness in- stead of response.— 8npnydpos: see on 482 c. 8. rotydpro.: this strong inferen- tial particle (cf 471 ¢) serves to com- pel Callicles, who would gladly have evaded the answer by the general re- proach ws &romos el, to a definite an- swer, by reference to 487 a, b. 10. av8petos: with an allusion to 491 b. It is contrasted with éxmda- yiivat, because, besides ppdynats, bray- ery is the only virtue recognized by Callicles as necessary for a states- man. He must, therefore, display this quality himself. would not indeed be unexampled (cf Isoc. vi. 29 ek r&v éxouevwy ywdceode), but in connection with rodras epetiis is pleonastic. Otherwise Plato’s usage is either 7a rovtwy éxdueva (Rep. iii. 389 e) or ra TovTAs epetiis (Tim. 30 ¢, Phileb. 34 d). 18. kepddAatov: without the article is rather uncommon (cf. 453 a, 472 ¢), but does occasionally occur. Cf Dem. ii. 31.— otros: points emphati- cally back to 6 tév kiwaldwy Bios, which has already received especial stress through the preceding word KepaAauov. 21. els Towatra dywv: is the same reproach which was made above, 482 e. 174 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 494. x a 3 ¢ y . , 9 a , av on avednv OUT®@ TOUS XatpovTas, OTWMS AV Xatpworr, 25 evdaipovas Elva, kal py Siopilnrar trav ydovev dzrota 495 > ‘ ‘ , > > ¥ ‘ an , , \ ayafat Kat kaka; aAd’ ére Kat vov héye, rorepoy pys > x > V\ €Qr A 9 , a > , A eQgz a > elvat TO avTd NOV Kai dyaldv, } eivai Te TAY YSewy, 6 OdK eotw ayabdp ; Kaa. "Iva 8 # XN ¥ X + > « x 4 3N s fou wy avopodoyovpevos 7) O dyos, eav y a > % > # > 30 ETEpov Pyow eivat, TO avTs dye €ivar. Lo. Avadbeipes, & Kaddikhets, Tovs mparovs ddyous, X > xR »¥ > 3 ne a XN ¥ 2 4 ¥ kal ovk ay ere per euov ikavas Ta ovta e€eralois, eimep Tapa Ta SoKodyTa TavT@ epets. Kaa. Kat yap ov, ® Xa@Kpares. > - > wn ~ y > 3 4 ¥ A nw 35 Yo. Ov towvy 6p0as TOLW OUT EYW, ELTEP TOLW TOUTO, » a > > > , x ‘\ > a > ‘\ > , ovTe OV. GAN’, @ pakdpre, dO pet, 4.7) OV TOUTO 7 TO ayabor, 7) wavTws xalpew TadTd Te yap TA vuvd) aivxBévTa ‘* XN > ‘ ac as > a 9 ToAAG Kal aicypa patverar cupBatvovra, El TovTO OvTwS 494 e e€xet, Kal GANa, modhd. 24, aveSyv: without limitation, from the same root as avinui.—ovrw: see on 468 ¢ amas otrws. 495 26. GAN’ Ere kal vow: the last at- a tempt to come to an understanding. Cf. Crito 44.b. The answer of Calli- cles tends to bring into the foreground the question of the identity or oppo- sition of the agreeable and the good. 29. dvopodoyoupevos: is not to be connected with dvoyoroyetaba:, “ to re- peat an admission already made and to come to an agreement,” but is from duoroyovuevos in composition with a- privative. By this expression Calli- cles makes plain the recklessness of his thinking and the obstinacy of his disposition. The sentence is con- densed by the omission of a self- evident clause: “in order that I may not make my statement inconsistent, (which I will do) if I say,” etc. 31. Stapbelpas tods mpdrovs Ad- yous: of. Prot. 360 a SiapPepotmey Tas io €umpoobev duodoyias. Callicles’ words in 491 e and elsewhere gave reason to expect that he would speak his sentiments roundly without any hesi- tation. Cf. 492 d. 32. ixavas ... é€erdfois: has refer- ence to 487 e édy m1 ob ev rots Adyos dmodroyhons pot, BeBacavicpévoy rodr’ H5n Fora ixavas.—elmep .. €peis: “if you will persist in speaking,” with a decidedly unfavorable color. 33. cavrw: rather stronger than cof. 34. kal ydp ov: complete the sen- tence from what precedes. 36. dOpe: like cxorety and similar verbs has the construction of verbs of fear. 37. alvix@évra: denotes the conse- quences previously intimated, though not definitely stated, by Socrates. b 40 5 10 15 495 b MAATOQNOS TOPIIAS. x Kaa. ‘Os ov ye ole, & 175 8t. I. p. 495. LoKpares. da. Xd dé 7@ ovtt, @ Kaddkheus, Tatra toyupices ; Kaa. "Eywye. L. Xa. "Emyxepopev apa tO d\6yw ws gov omovdd- ¢ Covros ; Kaa. Ildvu ye opddpa. Xa. "1Oe 8H por, ered ovtw Soxel, Svehod Tdde* ézt- OTHuNY Tov Kahets TL; Kaa. “Eywye. | > \ 9 , \ »¥ : > . do. Ov Kat dvdpeiav vuvon eheyés TWA EWAL [ETA orHpens ; Kaa. "EXeyov yap. 2 E77 L- Xa. "AXo Te odY ws ETEpOY THY avdpEiay THs emLaTHENS co nw »¥ dvo TravTa edeyes ; Kaa. Xpddpa ye. / , e ‘ XN 9 , ees a & Xa. Té dé; ydovnv Kai éemiarypny tavrov 7) €repov ; yY . - # Kaa. “Erepov Sy70v, & coparate ov. Sa. 7H kal avdpeiay érépav ndovys ; Kaa. Ilds yap ov; Xo. Bépe 57 das peuvynodpela tavra, Gre Kadduxdyjs 40. ds ov ye ola: evasive, as 473 b. The following question inquires whether Callicles still holds to his previous statement, while accepting the consequences of it. L. 1. émyxepapev: see on 492 d émetépxet. Notice the determination and assurance of the answers of Cal- licles. 4. SeXov: because it is a question of distinction between ideas. 7. vuv8y éAeyes: inasmuch as Cal- licles had in 491 a, b classed together aySperoe and ppdvipo. 10. ds €repov (sc. dv): the omis- sion of the partic. in the acc. abs. with an adj. and as is very rare; e.g. 495 Prot. 323 D ds dvayxatoy ovdéva bvtw But obx) auwoyérws petéxew alts. Heindorf supplies dv. ¢ 14. & copoirare ov: a humorously d ironical intimation that Socrates was asking something quite self-evident. But Callicles should not recognize an ériotHun and an avdpeia, in addition to “the good,” if this is to find its real- ization in 7d50vn. The argument which begins 497 d is based upon this contradiction. 17. daws pepvyoopeba: this use of érws with the fut. is distinctively a colloquialism, the majority of exam- 176 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 495. »¥ > X e \ x \ > \ + 4% > > , edn “Axyapveds 780 pev Kal ayabdv tabrov elvat, émioTy- oe ~ > } ¥ XN > a ‘ nw > ™ pny 0€ Kal avdpeiay Kal addywy Kal Tod ayabov ErEpov. 20 Kaa. Swkpdrys O€ ye july 6 Adwrexnbev ody dpodo- yet ravra; 7 dpodroye ; Xa. Ody opmoroyet: ofuar dé ye ovdé Kadduxdyjs, oray avTos avrov Dedontar dpOds. «ime yap pot, Tovs €d MPATTOVTAS TOS KAKaS TpaTToVoW ov TovVarTioy yet 25 waos werov0eva; Kaa. "Eywye. > > = *; 2 , 2 ‘ a > , Xo. “Ap ovv, eiep evavtia éotly tavta ahdydots, dvdykyn Tept avtav eyew womep Tept vyreias exer Kat vooou; ov yap apa Snov vylaiver TE Kal vooe 6 avOpa- > X | > , € , ‘\ Fr 30 Tos, ode aja amrahdarreras Vyreias TE Kal VdcoV. Kaa. Ids Aéyets ; Xa. Ofov wept orov Bovder Tov oadpatos amo\aBav okoTe. vooet tov avOpwros 6¢0ahpovs, 4 pla ; 495 ples being found in Aristophanes. 4 For statistics, see GMT. 274. 17 f. Kadduxdrs pn "Axapveds: a humorous imitation of the custom which prevailed in the public assem- bly, according to which any one who introduced a motion or resolution had to add to his own name the name of the deme to which he belonged ; cf the famous line which used to afford Philip of Macedon so much amuse- ment, Anpoabévns Anuocbévous TMata- Callicles falls in with the humor immediately. ’Axap- vai belonged to the gua} Oivnls, *AAw- mexh to the puay ’Avrioxls. 19. rot dya8ot: does not properly belong in this summing up (érws p-pynodurcOa) of the foregoing steps, which define expressly the fact that ; S vets Tad” elev. & @ t ovop.a OpOan- 496 ériothun and dvdpefa on the one hand 495 are quite distinct from 7dovy (7d 76v) on the other. Still, by reason of the identity of 430 and ay yaédy main- tained by Callicles, the aya@év would be very easily substituted for the 7v. 23. avrds aitov: “himself,” ze. his own mind. 27. évavria: 7.e. logically contrary and contradictory ideas, between which a mean is not to be thought of. 32. darodaBdy - used absolutely equiv. to “separately.” Of. Rep. iii. 392 @ Sorep obv of addvaror A€yevy, ob kara bdov, GAN’ amokaBdv pépos Tt Tet pdcoual cor ev rodte 8nrAdaat. The gen. rod odyatos depends on ep drov (udoous) Ravirer. 33. dv@pwros: the same as 6 &vOpw- mos above. TAATONOS TOPIIAS. 177 Bt. I. p. 496. 35 Kaa. Ilds yap ov; Xa. Od Saou Kal byraive ye aa Tovs adbrovs ; Kaa. O08’ érwat.ov. Xa. Ti S€; orav rys dpOadpias daahddrrntas, dpa , XN “A ¢ - > # “ > n ™ TOTE Kal THS vyleias amaddarreTar TGV dPOahpav Kat 40 TeMEVTaV aya aupotépwry amnddaKTas ; Kaa. “Hxtora, ye. Xa. Oavpdoroy ydp, oipar, Kat ddoyov yiyverar: 7 yap ; Kaa. dpa. ve. b 45 Yo. ANN’ & pepe, oipat, Exdrepoy Kat hapBaver Kai aro\dvet ; Kaa. By. > n \ 93 a XN > 4 € 4 Xo. OdKxody Kal ioydy Kai dvb&eayv aoavrus ; Kaa. Nat. £0 So. Kal rayos kat Bpadurnra ; Kaa. Ildvv ye. as \ > ‘\ ‘NX XN 3 sf ‘ > 7 Sa."H Kal tadyaba Kat thy eddapoviay kal rdvavtia , , ee , 3 , , \ 9 TovTov, Kaka Te Kal aOALOTHTA, ev péper NapBdaver Kal év peper aradharreran Exatépov ; 55 = Kaa. Ilavrws dymov. > % y » ¥ ea gy >? , Xo. "Eav evpwpev dpa attra, ov aya te amaddarrerat c 9 . ¢& ¥ a y n , $ * ¥ , avOpwros Kat apa exe, pov Ore Tara ye ovdK dv etn Td Te dyafov Kat Td KaKdv. dmooyodmev TadTa; Kal ev para oKepdpevos atroxpivov. 496 37. 008 érwotiotv: by the addi- whereas Eng. would prefer the ideal 496 4 tion of odv, the relative seems to ac- ‘would be.’ a quire the force of an indefinite. See 58 f. kal eb pdda «ré.: with this ¢ Kr. 51, 15, 3; H. 285, 1002 a. formula Socrates warns Callicles of 42. Bavpdcoioy . ylyverar: “the the importance of being careful in result (yiyvera:) so stated is unrea- his response,—a warning which the sonable.” Note that the Greek uses latter ignores in the reckless assur- the ind. of the necessary conclusion, ance of his answer. 178 60 LI. So. "10. 84 emi ta eumpoobea apodroynpeva. PLATO’S GORGIAS. &t. I. p. 496. Kaa. *AAXN’ vrreppvds as Gpodoys. x TO A zy , eo a 2 x > > Xs s TEWYHY EAEVES TOTEPOV NOU 1 AVLapoV €wat; auto heyw TO TEWHD. 3 Kaa. "Aviapdv éywye* 7d petou Tewovra éobiew Ov. 5 a. Kat éyd: pavOdva: add’ oty 76 ye mewnv adro H ovxé; Kaa. Oni. > , avLapov. Xa. OdKodv kal 7d Subqv ; Kaa. 2ddpa. ve. 10 £ Ss »” ¥ 2 a x a Y Xa. drepov ody ert mietw EpwTd, 7 OMoAoyEls aTTacav ¥ N93 , > x > evoerav Kat ériOupiav aVLa pov E€wat; Kaa. ‘Opodoya, dda py €paira. Zo. Elev: Susavta de 67) mivew ado Te H dD dys €lvat ; 15 Kaa. "Eywye. Sa. Odxody TovTov ov héyers TS pev SupovTa NuTrOovpe- , > 4 vov Oymov €oTiv ; , Kaa. Nat. Sa. Td Sé wivew mAjpacis Te THs evdelas Kat HSovy ; 496 LI. 1f. ro wewny edeyes worepov: © the question, by coming late in the sentence, gains in animation. Cf. Rid. §§ 309, 310. 2 f. atto A€yw tO Tevyv: added by Socrates that Callicles may not think at the same time of the satis- faction of the hunger. How close that idea lay is shown by Callicles’ answer, in which he tries to guard himself by adding this idea. d_ 5. kal éya: pavdvw: the asyndetic union of two such expressions, one expressing assent, the other compre- hension, is quite isolated and contrary to usage. Cf 474 c, 490 d.—arnv ovv: but in any case, frequently asso- ciated with yé Cf 506 b and Apol. 27 © GAN’ obv Sammdvid ye voul(w Kata Tov adv Adyov, 34 e, Prot. 327 ¢ aaa’ ody avAntal y bv mdvtes Hoa ixa- vot. 9. opdSpa ye: sce on wddicra in © below. 12. dAAd pr épdra: further ques- tions are superfiuous. 16. rovrov ov Adyes x7é.: the con- crete example daérra tive Socrates uses to distinguish and characterize the two ideas clearly. The generaliz- 20 25 35 40 TIAATQNOS, TOPTIAS. Kaa. Nai. 179 St. I. p. 496, 3 nan ‘. a > 4 4 So. OvKodv kata 7d tive Xaipew Leyes ; Kaa. Medora. Xo. Aupavra ye; Kaa. ®npt. Xo. Avaovpevov ; Kaa. Nat. > ’ > x a y , , Za. AioOaver OvV TO oupBatvor, OTL AvTrovpevov XaLpew , ? ” a , s n > CA a déyers apa, oTav dupavra miwew éyys; 7 OVX AU“a TOVTO , < oN , \ , ¥ a ¥ yiyvetas kata Tov adr TOToV Kal ypdvor Eire WuyNs Etre 30 cdpatos Bovrer; ovdey yap, oiwat, Siap€pe. ore TadrTa A ¥ H Ov; Kaa. "Eorw. 2 ‘ ‘ > , n , y Xa. “AAG pny eb ye wparTovTa KaKas mpatTew apa advvatov pys €ivar. Kaa. Pnpi yap. Za. “Avidpevoy O€ ye yaipew Suvardv apoddoyykas. Kaa. Paiverat. > ¥ XQ , > ‘ x , IQrv ‘ Xo. OK dpa 7d xaipew éortiv ed mpdtrew ovde 7d 3 aw “a La y # \ e s. nw > nw dviacbar KaKas, WoTE ETEpov yiyverat TS HOV TOU dyabod. Kaa. Ovk oi0" arta codile, & Laéxpares. 496 ation that pain and pleasure can both e be present in the same act follows later. 22. pddiora: like opddpa ye in d above, gives emphatic assent. pddiora has become the general word for “yes” in modern Greek, almost to the exclusion of vai. 29 f. elre ipuxijs etre owparos: for Socrates’ argument it is immaterial whether pleasure and pain are looked upon as something bodily or some- thing psychical; for psychology, not so. But here the question is only of the nature of the ideas them- selves, the peculiarity of their asso- ciation at the same place and time, which distinguishes them from that other class of mutually exclusive ideas. 34. ys: with reference to 495 e. The answer of Callicles shows that he still maintains his statement. 40. ovx of8’ drra codite: Callicles avoids admitting his defeat by com- plaining of Socrates’ methods. Cf 51l a. codgi¢ec@a: is much the same as “subtilize,” “ quibble.” 497 496 e 497 180 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 497. Xa. OicOa, ddra die, @ Kaddixhes: Kat mpoli ye » > . ¥ ETL is TO ETTpoT Dey — Kaa. Ti exwv Anpets; Xa. “Iva eidps,.as codds dv pe vovbereis. > 9 OvX Apa ‘ae wn o 45 Supav TE EKACTOS pov TeTavTaL Kat apa Odpevos dua 50 55 497 a on 4 TOU TLVEW ; Kaa. Ov« oda ore déyets. Tor. Mydapas, & Kaddixhes, ddN’ droxpivoy Kat nav y y A € , EVEKA, Wa TepavOacw ou Adyou. Kaa. “AN det to.ovrés eat Lwxpdrns, & Topyia. XN N97 » > 5 V2 s OpLKpa KQt oXtyou aéta AVEPWTE Kau éfehéyyen. Top. "AAG Ti col diaddper; Tavrws ov at) avTn F Tyuy, @ KadXdixders: add’ vrdcxes Ywxpdra e€eréyEar orws av Bovdntat. > 4 on 5 N 4 % ‘X nw Kaa. Epwra 0n ov Ta OpiKpa TE Kal OTEVa TavTA, > e o } nw Y €TTELTTEP Topyia OKEL OUTWS. 41. dxxl{ec Oar: ‘this word and its derivative dxxiouds are used to de- note any kind of mock modesty or prudery, especially, though not ex- clusively, on the part of women.’ Thompson. To Socrates’ words of encouragement Callicles angrily re- plies, “What nonsense are you still talking?” whereby, however, Socra- tes is not deterred from continuing his talk in the courtly manner which is characteristic of him. On _ the phrase éxwv Anpets see on 490 e. AT. ov ola drt Adyes: Callicles sees that from this new turn Socrates will draw the same conclusion which he has drawn above (érepoy yiyverat 7d 460 Tod ayaov). Hence he repeat- edly refuses to answer, and so shows plainly that he wishes to break off the conversation. This leads to the deprecatory remark of Gorgias. 48. pnBSapas: don’t! pleted by some such general phrase as oftw morons. The omission of the verb is common. Cf. Symp. 175 b pndapas, AN eare avtdv.— That Gor- gias here enters as mediator is quite in keeping with the role assigned him in this dialogue, in accordance with which he is distinguished from his companions by his personal dignity. See Introd. § 18. 53. tuys: in a judicial sense, “the penalty decreed by the court.” Hence the words od oh x7é. are equivalent to “this is no fault of yours,” “the blame cannot be laid upon you.” — Umorxes: equiv. to tm ceavtdv. See on wapacyxetv 456 b and 475 d. 55. Callicles allows himself to be persuaded by Gorgias to continue the conversation, but not without re- peated expression of his disinclina- To be com- 497 10 15 497 TAATONOS TOPYIAS. 181 St. I. p. 497. LII. So. EiSaiuev ci, d Kaddixdes, ore Ta peyddra 4 \ . eS 3 > ¥ 0 x PeEpuyno a TT pw Ta Op-tKkpa eyo OUK MEV EMLTOV eivat . Y > > > , > > y s obev OvVV amré\LrrEs, aTOKpPLVOV, €t Ovx Aa TWAVETAL a ¢ on Vege Supav EKACOTOS UV KAL Odpevos. Kaa. Oni. > an ‘\ an XN nw 4 * an Ss Xo. OvKovy Kat Tewayv Kal Tov adhov émOuutav Kal ¢ “nw YY 4 dover Aa TAVETAL; »¥. an Kaa. Eovrt tavta. > a ‘ ie “ XN nw € a 9 da. Ovxovv Kat Tov utra@v Kat TWY dover ana TAVETAL ; Kaa. Nai. 3 % ba “ > A ‘\ nw > 7 s Xo. "AANA pV Tov ayabar Kal KAKW@V OVY GLa TAv- € a € - “~ * a € ~ ETAL, WS TV wpohoyes* VOV dé ovx ofodoyets ; Kaa. "Eywye: ti obv 87 ; Xo. “Ore ov TabTa yiyvera, & hire, rayaba rors ndéow 2QA UN \ an 2? a ovse TH KAKA TOLS AVLAPOLS. tion. — ereva: mean, paltry, is in keeping with the view expressed by Callicles in 485 d of the relative provinces of philosophy and poli- tics. LIL. 1f. td peydra pepunoat «re. : two kinds of Eleusinian mysteries were distinguished, the greater and the lesser. In the great procession which on the 20th of Boedromion (September) conducted JIacchus to Eleusis, no one could take part who had not received previously at Athens the less and preparatory consecration (uunots, KdBapots, mporéAcia) in the month Anthesterion (February). By this he became eligible to initiation into the Greater Mysteries; and after initiation, as an initiated member (yv- arns), to the éromreia or view of the mysterious sacred relics and partici- pation in the holy rites which were A 4 \ y TOV pev yap awa Tavera, connected with the arrival of the pro- cession at Eleusis and took place in the so-called teAeorhpiov.— Socrates meets with most cutting irony the disdainful contempt with which Cal- licles regards dialectical methods. A different simile for the same matter is found in 514 e. 3. d0ev amdAures: the interrupted argument is resumed again by Socra- tes at the point where it had been broken off by Callicles’ refusal to answer. 7. WSovav: corresponding with what precedes we might expect 7dduevos. The noun is used owing to érOupiar, which stands on the same plane as mwewav and as a kind of évSea (496 d) is an dviapdy. Hence the employment of Auréy below. 14. +l odv 84: well! what then? See on 453 b and 515 e. 497 da 182 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 497. a Q »” e cs ¥ an > > NO OR ” \ Tov Sé ov, as Erépwv dvTwv. Tas odv TabTa dy ein TA 90€a Tots dyaHois } Ta dviapa Tots KaKois; éav Sé Bovdy, ‘\ im , “ Kat THd érickepar: ofwat yap oor obdé TavTn dpohoyet- © 20 aba. ¥ , X > N > XN 9 n s ab per dé: TOUS ayabods ouxXt ayabav TAPOVO LE ayabovs Kaheis, @omEep Tovs Kahovs ols dv KaNOS TAPT ; Kaa. "Eywye. Xa. Ti d€; dyabods dvdpas kareis ddpovas Kat Set- Aovs; ov yap apt ye, dAAG TOvs avdpeious Kai Ppovipous 25 €heyes: 7) od TovTOUs ayabovs Kaheis ; 30 Kaa. Otuar €ywye* adda Ti TovTO; Xa. Oddy: add’ arroxpivov. Kaa. Etdov. 497 17. ds érépwy dvtwy: this seems we arrive at these ideas of distinction 497 Kaa. Iavu pev odv. Xa. Ti d€; watda avdnrov xaipovra yon «ides ; Kaa. "Eywye. Xa. “Avdpa b€ ovzrw cides avdnrov yatpovra ; otiose after the preceding sentence. If genuine, it must be considered as mere conversational fulness. 19. rySe: refers naturally, accord- ing to the regular usage, to the argu- ment begun in rots ayafovs xré. The introduction of this argument is, how- ever, delayed by the parenthetical clause ofua ... &@pe dé. In this clause tavry, though in sense also applicable to the argument which follows, is in form to be connected with ride. The subject of duoro- yeto@a: is general, and can be supplied from the clause més ody Kré. 20 f. rods adyabovs, Tots Kakovs: the art. as in 490 e collects the indi- viduals into a class or species. aya- day is used on account of its nearness to d&yafovs, otherwise we should expect aperav asin 506d. The way in which between species is shown by the same expressions which are employed in other places to explain the relation of the ideas to the things themselves. So besides apoveia (wapeiva:) we find xowwvia and of things also peréxew employed. 23 f. ddppovas kal Sedovs: “ un- reasoning and cowardly creatures.” The absence of the art. does not cause obscurity, because the connex- ion shows éyaGovs to be the predicate. In the words dvdpelous «ré. Socrates is referring to 489 e and 491 b. 30. rl tovro: see on 448 b above. 32. elSov: the tense is due to the preceding question. English would require ‘I have seen.’ This would be permissible also in Greek. The aor. of verbs of perception states the fact; the pf. retains the image. The e TIAATOQNOS POPTIAS. 183 St. L. p. 498. Za. Ti dé; voov eyovra \uTovpevov Kat Xatpovra ; 498 Kaa. By. 35 Xo. IIdrepor 5€ paddov yaipovor kal Avmodvtat, ot ppdvipor 7 ot adpoves ; Kaa. Oiwar eywye od todd tu Siadépew. Xa. "AAN dpket Kal rovTo. év Todduw dé 7dn €ldes avopa Sedov ; 40 Kaa. Ids yap ov; La. Ti otv; admidvtav Tov TOELiwy TéTEpOL Gor €dd- Kovv padhov yatpeuw, ot Secdot 7 of avdpetor ; Kaa. “Auddrepou emouvye paddov: ef O€ fur}, Tapamhy- b aiws ye. 45 Xa. Ovdev diad€per. yalpovaw & odv kal oi Sedol ; Kaa. Xhddpa ye. Xa. Kai of ddpoves, ws eouKxev. Kaa. Nat. Xa. Hpocidvrav dé ot Sedot pdvov uTodvTas 7) Kai ot 50 avopetor ; Kaa. ’Apdorepor. Xa. "Apa dpotus ; Kaa. Ma@Adov tows ot Setdot. Loa. ’Amidvtwy 8 od pahdov xatpovor ; 497 negation of the fact involves the ne- tries to return such answers as will 495 © gation of the image; hence theneg.is not afford Socrates any chance for usually followed by the aorist. The argument. Such action borders on pf. with the neg. is, however, also rudeness, and is almost equivalent to found; cf. Prot.310e. But the dif- a refusal to answer. The addition ference in the force is evident. In that he makes, however, gives Socra- 38, below, the tense may be due to tesa hold. The answers which fol- the desire for consistency, or to #8n. low show that Callicles is not stating 498 38. dpxet kal tovro: gives us to his real sentiments. The artistic de- ® understand that Socrates was expect- sign of the author is therefore now ing a more definite answer. to make his defeat seem all the more b 43. dudorepor paddov: Callicles decisive. 184 55 60 65 498 d Kaa. “Iows. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 498. > “A a“ ‘A \ a, ‘\ cm” da. OvKoby AuTovvran ev Kal yaipovoew Kal ot appoves X ¢ , N e \ XN ¢ > a“ kat ot dpdvimor Kai ot Sevdot Kal ot avdpetor mapamdn- olws, as ov Pys, Uaov SE of Serhol TAY avdpeiwr ; Kaa. Pnpi. da. “ANAG pny ot ye dpdvygsor Kai of advdpetor a&yaGoi, € X . 5 \ »¥ ¥ ot dé Sedo Kat appoves Kakot ; Kaa. Nat. 4 ” co %. ~ £ Xo. Tlapam\ynotws apa Xalpovow Kat urovvTar ot > ‘ \ oe , ayabot Kat OL KAKOL; Kaa. Pypt. > > 5 , 2S > \ \ \ € do. Ap OUV Tapat\noiws E€LoO lV ayaot KQtL KQAKOL OL ayabot Te Kat of Kakol; 7) Kal ere paddov ayaboi [ot > ‘N “ , > ¢ / ayabot] Kat Kakot elow ot Kakol; LITT. Kaa. “AAG pa Al? od« 088° rt Nevers. > > > 4 xX > & 5 oe « ¢ Xa. OvdK ota ori Tovs ayabovs dyalav dys Tapovoia s 3 , \ XN a XN QA ? XN > X EWat ayabous, KQKOUS be KQKWY; TQ be ayaba E€Wal TAS ¢€ a AY XN * 3 , qdovas, Kaka S€ Tas avias; 66. dp ovv «ré.: this conclusion comes from the fact that Socrates, on the basis of the view set forth by Callicles in 491 e ff., uses in the predi- cate a@yaof in place of xalpovo:, and xaxot in place of AumotvtTa, whereas these same words in the subject have an entirely different meaning, which is to be seen from the explanation of Callicles in 491 c d. The two predi- cates are to be conceived as belong- ing to two different sentences, thus: of dya0ol te Kal of Kako) rapamAnciws cioly dyadol and of ayabol re Kal of kako) mapamAnatws cia) Kakol. LIII. 1. dAAd Adyas: this state- ment of Callicles may be meant in earnest, inasmuch as the previous words of Socrates are really some- what confusing, although they are simply a paradoxical conclusion from Callicles’ paradoxical propositions. But by confessing his inability to comprehend, Callicles gives Socrates the opportunity of supplying a proof of his previous exposition, and sct- ting forth the principles upon which it rests. The distinction made in 497 e now becomes of value. 3. Kakous S€ kaxav: both the subj. as well as the subst. on which the gen. depends are to be supplied from the context. Note the chiasmus of the arrangement. — td 8€ dyad «ré.: the preds. are ras jdovds, Tas vias, the art. defining a class. The art. with éyabd refers back to dayaéév. We should also expect one with «aka. 10 15 20 25 30 498 e TIAATONOS, TOPTIAS. 185 St. I. p. 498. Kaa. "Eywye. ° wn A c co > a ¢ @€ # 2a. OvKobv Tots xaipovow mdpectw Tdyabd, ai Hdovat, elmep Xaipovow ; Kaa. Il@s yap ov; > nw 3 nw c > a > ec a Xa. Oixodv ayabav rapdvtwr ayaboi ciow ot xaipovtes; Kaa. Nat. > co 8 s “A > , 3 - % - e o. TUd€; Tots aviwévois ob mapectw Ta KaKd, ai NUTaL; a Kaa. Hapeortuv. Xa. Kaxav o€ ye tapovoia dis od ef VS TOV . ye twapovoia dys ov eivar Kakovs TOUS e a KQKOUS* 7 OVKETL ys; Kaa. "Eywye. Xa. "Ayaboi dpa ot av yaipwou, kakol d€ of av dviav- TAL; Kaa. Idvv ye. Xa. Ot pe ye padhov paddov, ot & Hrrov Hrrov, ot dé Tapamhn oiws TapamrAnoiws ; Kaa. Nat. Xa. Odkow dys TapatAnolws yaipew Kat huretobar XN - / X 4 + % s. . TOUS Ppovipwovs Kal ToVS adppovas Kal TOUS detdovs Kat XN 2 # a A a ” x , Tovs avdpeious, } Kal waddov Ere TOUS SeLdOUSs ; ¥ Kaa. “Eywye. La. LvAACyroar by KowyH per Euod, TE uty cupBaiver ek TOV @pohoynpevwv: Kal dis yap Tor Kal Tpis dacw *, > XN x - { § an > \ Kadov eivat Ta Kaha héyewy TE Kat emo Korero Oat. ayabov 499 * > * a, XN > 5 ar > e pev elvar TOV Ppdvipov Kal avdpetdv dayev. 7 yap; 20. of pév ye paddAov xré.: is tobe read: 7d dis kal tpls 7d ye Karas exov 498 completed from the context thus: émravamodciv 7G Adyp. Cf. Soph. Phil. © ot pev (av) paddov (xalpwor) maddrov 1238 dls taba BovAe: kal Tpls dvamodeiv (aya8ol) «ré. w enn. The first caf means also, and its 28. Sls ydp kal rpis: this proverb force extends over both members, as is ascribed to Empedocles. Plato Phaedo 63e éviore avayndtecOa kal dls employs it also in Phil. 59e,where we kal tpls wivecy rovs Ti ToWwdTOv To.WdyTas. 186 35 40 499 Kaa. Nat. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 499. Xa. Kaxov b€ tov adpova kat deddv; Kaa. Idvvu ye. Xa. "Ayabdv dé ad rov Xaipovra ; Kaa. Nat. \ yo > , Xo. Kaxov 6€ Tov dvidpevov ; Kaa. *Avdynn. Xo. "AnacGar dé Kal xalpew Tov dyabdy Kai KaKdv € , ” XN ‘ a x , Gpoiws, tows dé Kal PadXdov TOV KaKOv ; Kaa. Nai. > an € - 7 * ‘\ > x‘ bet Zo. OvKovy opoiws yiyverar Kakds Kai dyafds Te > aR \ A > \ € , > a ¢ ayabea 7 Kai wadAov ayabds 6 Kakds; ov TadTa cupBai- ‘\ XN / 2 ied 27 >. mand - , \ ver kal TA TpOTEpa EexElva, Edy Tis TATA HH NO€a TE Kal ayala eivar; ov TadtTa avayKn, @ Kaddikhes ; LIV. Kaa. TIddat tot cov dkpodpat, ® YoHxKpares, a 2 , 9 a s , 2 an Kafoporoyar, vOvpovpevos ott, Kav Tailwy Tis coe evd@ an y x 9 , OTLOVY, TOUTOV GO MEVOS EXEL WOTEP TA [ELPAKLA. as 67) AY ” 2 AR \ 7 c an 2 , > € a OV OLEL EME 1) KAL adov OVTLVOUV avOparrav ovx nyeto Bau x A x € x * XQ / tas pev Bedrious ydovds, Tas S€ xElpous. 43. rd mporepa éxetva: refer proba- bly to the discussion of 494 a-495 a, where Socrates had urged Callicles to reflect whether he was determined to abide by his statement that 7d and ayaédv are the same. LIV. 1. adda to «ré.: like all who try only to gain their point, not to arrive at the truth, Callicles seeks to evade the now inevitable confession of his error by represent- ing his previous statement as a mere joke. But cf. 495 a-c. 3. rovtou: ZxecOat, to hold fast, takes the gen. See G. 171, 1; H. 788.— Gomep Ta peipakia: boys easily re- ceive as genuine what one tries to im- pose upon them. Farther than this, the comparison is not to be pressed. — ds S71 od ole.: see on 468. Calli- cles tries to heighten the probability that he was only joking, by himself characterizing his first statement as nonsensical. 5. qSovds: the natural position would be ras pév Hdovas BeAtlous wré. The reason for the post-position is that the word is an afterthought of Callicles, added from the sudden con- sciousness that ras uév was not suffi- ciently definite. Just as if you suppose that I, ete., do not believe that some are better, — pleasures, I mean, — others worse. 187 St. I. p. 499. yy ND > , a > Xa. “lov tov, @ KadXikders, @s mavovpyos el, Kai pou ec MAATQNOS TPOPTIAS. ’ 3 a \ \ 5 , y ¥ \ WOTEP TALOL Xp, TOTE eV ad hagKwy ovUTwWS EXEL, TOTE Ns a d€ érépas, eEararav pe. Kaitou odk Gunv ye kar apyas e xX nw i. & 3 x c e ” ¥ UT Gov ExdvTos eivar eEatrarnOyjaecOat, as dvtos dirov: *y 6e t A * ¥ ¥ 3 , ‘\ * 10 voy dé epedaOnv, Kat as oixey dvdyKyn frou KaTa TOV * c ‘\ x > “ § a“ , X Tahatov Aéyov TO Tapov EU Toe Kal TOUTO déyeo Oat TO } } / X & ¥ oe 5 ad « ¥ a nn # LOdMEVOY Tapa Dov. EaTW dE Oy, WS EoLKEY, 5 VUV héyets, y 15 , - ‘ - XN 3 0 Pr e be we > , OTL NOovat TiWEes Elow ai pev ayaa, ai dé KaKal: 7 yap; Kaa. Nat. 15 Yo."Ap ovv ayalal pe at aPédywor, kaxal dé ai a BraBepai ; Kaa. Ilavu ye. Lo. “Adédpor b€ ye at ayabdv tu movodoa, kaxal dé ai KOKOV TL; 499 6. lod tov: exclamation of sur- 8. Kalrou «ré.: in 495 a Socrates’ 499 © prise and wonder, usually with a side- faith in Callicles’ rappyoia is shaken ; g idea of ill-treatment (cxetAiacrudy in 497 a, that in his copia, and now, éxfppnua), as Ar. Nub. 1 tod tot, & that in his etvoa. Zed Bacrrev, 7d xphua Tay vuntav boov 9. éxdvros elvar: on the use of eivar arépavrov, but it also expresses pleas- in phrases, see GMT. 780 and H. 956 a. ure, as e.g. Rep. iv. 432 d nad eye cate 10 f. kata tov mddatov Adyov: a dav, lod tod, elrov, & TAavcwv: «ivdu- common way of introducing a prov- vedouéev te exew tyvos (trace) kal por erb; ef. Symp. 195 b. Sonei ov wavy Tt exgevieioba: Huas. Ev 11. 10 wapov ev movety xré.: a mix- ayyéAAets, } 8 8s. —mwavovpyos: some- ture of two proverbs. The first one times associated with Sevds, denotes means literally, to “treat well what a rather excessive adroitness, border- is at hand,” ze. ‘to make the best of ing on rascality, as “artful,” “sly”; what one has,’ according to the Eng- also “knavish.” lish saying. In almost the same 7. domep mast: by a delicate use sense we use the more colloquial of his own comparison, Socrates char- ‘grin and bear it? The second prov- acterizes Callicles’ conduct in acting rb, d¢yer@ar 1rd diSduevov, applies as if he were dealing with boys, not more exactly to the case in point, the men, as improper and unworthy.— 8.dduevov being naturally 7d Aeyduevov. tore pev av: it must be confessed An English proverb which has much that ad in this position gives trouble. the same force is, ‘do not look a gift- Cron thinks that it recalls a similar horse in the mouth.’ After rodro, rd allegation in 491b; but thatis rather d:5duevov serves for a relative clause. far-fetched. 18. xaxal: we should naturally ex- d 188 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 20 8t. I. p. 499. Kaa. ®npi. > > 3 x , s @ ‘ Q A a Xa. "Ap’ ovv Tas Toudode héyets, olov KaTa TO TOpa as oy 2» 7 > n°» , N , € s > vuvdy eléyome ev To eobiew Kat Tivew ndovds; dpa \ na n TovTwy ai pev Vyicay ToLovoaL ev TO THpat. H ioxdy 7 ¥ N° \ A , a \ ’ , e Q GAANY Twa apETHY TOD THpmaTos, adTar pev ayabai, at dé > # 4 , 25 TAVAVTLA TOUTWY KAKQL; 30 35 Kaa. Ildvv ye. 3 a w n e as e 7 a > Zo. OvKovy kat uta woatTws at pev xpNnoTat Elowy, e at dé movypai; a . ¥ Kaa. Tas yap ov; > aA ‘\ X x \ ¢ X A 4 x Xa. OvdKodv Tas pev ypyoras Kal nOovas Kat Avmas Kal XN aipetéov é€ativ Kal TpaKkTéov ; Kaa. Iavv ye. . Q x ¥ Xa. Tas dé wovnpas ov; Kaa. Ajdov Oy. 7 4 nan = an Y . wn ¥' Xa. "Evexa ydp mov tev ayabav aravra nuiv édofey mpakréov e€ivat, el pvynpovevers, wot Te Kai Tlédw. dpa Kal Gol cuvdoKel ovTw, Téos Eivas aTacaVv TaY mpakewy \. 2° , No 7 y a , 5 7 TO ayadr, Kat €xelvou evexa Sew mavra Tarra T PatTE- Oat, add’ odk exeivo Tav addwv; otvpmdos Nut et Kat500 X 40 oD €K TpiTwr ; Kaa. "Eywye. Xa. Tév dyabar dpa évexa det kal Tada Kal Ta Hd€a vf * > * x ‘\ an a 4 mparrew, add’ ov tTayada Tov noewvr. 499 pect BrAaBepal, but xards is elsewhere the formal vote, and hence sounds 500 e also used in this sense. somewhat solemn. Cf. 501 ¢ and ® 24. ajro. pév: resumes af uty... 473 ef. Tou gobuartos. 40. é« tplrwv: “of the third part.” 37 f. rédos . . . TO ayabov: cf Thompson. Cf Symp, 213 b troavere, 468 a ff. The subst. embraces in one matdes, "AAKiBiddnv, iva éx tpltwr (Ze. idea what has been said, and thus with Agathon and Socrates) raraxén- 500 Bives ita form of general application. ca. In Tim. 54 a é« zplrov is used a 39. ocvpipndos: reminds again of in much the same sense. 45 TMAATQNOS TOPIIAS. Kaa. Ildvvu ye. 189 8t. I. p. 500. Xa. "Ap’ obv mavTds avdpds éeotw éxréEacbar, tota > , nw OE >? ‘\ Noe a oR an ayaa — Tav NOCwy — COTW KQaL OT7TOLA Kaka, nN TEXVLKOU det eis ExacTov. Kaa. Teyverov. LV. Xo. “Avapvyobape 8% dv ad eyo mpds Tddov \ , 27 Z KQL Topyiav EeTUY XAaVOV eyo. €heyov yap, ef pvnpo- ‘ ‘ Z vevers, OTL Eley TapacKeval ai pev péxpt HOdovys, avTd an , a > « ‘\ 7 7 TovTO dvoy TapacKevalovaat, Ayvoovaa d€ TO BéATLOV xy XN “A € A o y > i. iS 5 Kal TO YELpOP, at b€ yryydoKovTat OTL TE ayabdv Kal ort 500 a b KaKov. \ 27 a \ \ x € \ . Kat éeriOnu TOV [LEV TEpt Tas ndovas Ty payee- XN > , > > > 4 A A a, xX > X\ peKnY Eeutrerplay, add’ ov TEXYNV, TOV de TEpl TO ayabov THY laTpiKny TéxVnV. Kat mpos gidiov, @ Kaddikhess, , 2X ¥” a X 2 XN , 77 x , Lente avtos oto Sew mpos ewe mailew pnd ote av tvyys 45. wavros avbpos: possessive gen. in pred. See H. 732 a, c. 45 f. wota ... trav WSdwv: the posi- tion of the gen. shows that it is an example of émipopd, based on the con- clusion drawn in 499 b. The use of éroia after wota may be due to eu- phonic reasons, or to its distance from the beginning of the question. 46. rexvixod: ie. of a man who understands the matter thoroughly, who is a master of his profession (whether art or science). Only this man can decide what is to be done and what not. The same point is made in Crito 47 a. LV. 1. dv av: the ad belongs to the dem. included in the relative. The arguments which Socrates again calls to mind were set forth in 464 b ff. 3. tapackeval: contrivances. This word, which is not found in the pas- sage referred to, is used generally instead of émirndedoes, Oepameta, as drawing more attention to the end in view (expt Hdovys). The prep. shows that the contrivances are not claimed to reach #d0v4, but must be varied and directed until the object is com- passed; hence mapackeva(ovoa is con- ative. —adto tovro: i.e. the general idea, 7507. 6 f. trav pév, tov S: take up ai pev, af 8é€. On the part. gen. with rié vai, see G. 169, 2; H. 782 a. 8. mpos pirlov: so 519 e. Cf Phaedr, 234 e eixé pds Ards giAlov. This adjuration is designed to remind Callicles of his ostentatious profes- sion of e%voia, which he had so quickly forgotten. 9. prte atrds: finds its correla- tive in pj’ ad 7a map’ éuod, while pndd serves only to connect the two sec- tions of the first member.—or. dv Tuxys KTé.. implies perverseness in addition to chance. Cf. 495 a, b, and 499 ¢. 190 15 20 500 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 500. \ x } a > ¢ 9 > ‘ > 3 a o 10 Tapa TQ OOKOVITA aTroKpLvou, YT avuTa Tap €fou OUTWS 2 o¢ € é € a - y XN , C4 a“ amod€exouv ws matilovtos: pas yap, OTL Tept TovTOV Huw > e , ork n , , \ elow ot Aoyot, ob Ti av pahdov crovddce€ Tis Kal TpL- Kpov voy éxwv avOpwros, ToUTO, OvTWa py TPOTOV a: / 2 Na ‘ Xr PN. > / x a 3 } N O77, Cyv, woTepov emt ov ov Tapakadeis ewe, TA TOV avdpos On Tata mparrovra, héyovra Te ev TO SHuw Kal pyTopLKnY aoKOUVTAa Kal TOALTEVdMEVOY TOVTOY TOV TPdTFOV, OY UBLELS vov TwohiteveoOe, 7 ert TéVvde Tov Biov Tov ev dirogodia, ‘ , a 3 \ a > a / »” > , Kat Tt mor é€atiy obros éxetvou Siadépwv. tows ody Béd- , > co 2 \ 9 , 8 a 0 } r TLOTOY EOTW, WS apTL eyw ETrEXEipyoa, StatpEeto Oar, dLEdo- a x X € 7 > 4 > ¥” 4 pevous S€ Kal duoroyyaavtas addydous, eb Eat TOUT dute® TH Bio, oxéepacOar, Ti Te Siadeperov aGdAAHAOW Kat € # £ > ~ omdtepov Biwtéov avrow. Kaa. Od dyra. 12. ov: depends upon paAdroyv and is explained in 4 totro. Cf. Crito 44 ¢ ris by alcxylay etn taitns beta 3) doxetv Xphuata wep) wAclovos moceicOat h pidous. See Kr. 47, 27, 8.— oov- Sdoreve: in reference to an investiga- tion which one should seriously pros- ecute. 12 f. cpixpov vovv éxev: indicates that the question is important for every one, not merely for statesmen and philosophers. 14. rot dvBpes 57: ironically added as a matter already decided, because Callicles had so defined the sphere of the “real man.” 17. ém\ rovSe: anacoluthic, as if éml aétepov xph Blov mapakadety had preceded, whereas with wérepoy we must supply rodrov, i.e. roy tpdmov Civ xph- 18. Staepwv: on the pred. use of the partic., see GMT. 830. 19. os dpte érexelpnoa: we think at first of the question raised in 491d ” 3 ¥ > , 4 LOWS OVVY OUTW ota ba Tt eyo. ff. as to the nature of self-control, which leads naturally to a distinction between what is good and what is pleasant, but we are also reminded of the earlier conversation with Polus and Gorgias (464 b) in which a dis- tinction was drawn between true arts and various tricks of dexterity, which are designed only to cajole. 20. el dorw «ré.; to be conceived, not as an interr. clause depending upon éuoAoyjoavtas, but as the prota- sis of a logical conditional sentence, the apodosis of which is formed by Béatictév eoTw ... oxevacdu. The further investigation as to rl diapé- peroy can only take place in case the existence of these two views of life is definitely settled. — dpodroyyoavras : as well as d:eAouévous and diaipetobai, whose meaning is defined by its refer- ence to 495 ¢, are used absolutely. 22. dmotepov Biwréov: sc. Blov. Cf. 485 d and Apol. 38 a 6 dvetéracros Blos ob Biwtds avOpdry. d 500 d TAATONOS TOPILIAS. Xo. "AN eyd cor capéatepov Epa. 191 St. I. p. 500. ered) @podoy7- > # ‘\ ‘ - z= > / i. / © 4 25 KapLEev eyw TE KAL OU EVOL LEV TL ayaldr, EWat dé Tt Ov, 30 500 dl ‘ * ¢ bY nn > * = * * Fa a 4 eTepov O€ TO HOU TOU dyaHod, Exatépov 5é adroiv perérnv * > XN ~ rn TUG EWAL KAL TAPATKEVYV THS KTYTEWS, THY [LEV TOD NOEOS a XN aA > a 2s Fa an an nx Oypav, Thy 5é Tod dyaod —aitd dé ror TovTO TP@TOV 7 ovppabe } p> ovpdys; Kaa. Ovras dypi. LVI. Xn. "I. 87, & Kat mpds tovode eya devon, Siopordynoai pot, ei dpa cou eo€a tére ahnOy déyew. »” # oy et \ > \ + “ 4 €heyov dé TOV, OTL Y LEV owoTrouKy OU fol doKel TEXVYY i; > > 3 , ¢ ae £ 4 y € + a eivat aA’ eurrerpia, 9 O iarpixy, A\éywr ore WY pev ToUTOV 501 a , SA , x \ \ 27 e Ov Jeparrever Kal TYHV pow E€OKETTAL KAL TYV ALTLAY WY , ‘\ , ¥ , € / a ¢ > , TParTret, Kat Adyov Exel TOUTWV EKAOTOVU dovvat, n taT PLKY) : € 2 © 7 a ¢ a x a € , 2 nA 3 n é eTEpa TNS ndov"ns, Tpos yV Oeparreia auTy) €OTW 27. rH pev xré.: explains éxardpov «ré. by substituting for the somewhat philosophical phrase (wedérny . . . kthoews) one less technical (@fpar). But before Socrates proceeds further he deems it necessary to have these assumptions definitely agreed to, since, although they are indeed the result of the preceding investigations, Callicles has not expressly acceded to them. LVI. 1. awpds roves: the dis- tinctions between various ideas which have been drawn in ch. XVIIL-XX. serve for Polus as well as Gorgias, inasmuch as the latter entered the discussion again in 463 e of his own accord. 2. Stopordyyoo: the dd implies ‘finally,’ ‘definitely.’ We should be more apt to use the «ai in the demon- strative instead of the relative clause. — €$0fa: Cron thinks the use of the aor. instead of the pres. implies that Callicles must have already at the time come to a decision, though he had not expressed one. But while such was doubtless the case, it is not easy to draw such a conclusion from the tense, for the Greeks in such an expression looked rather to the idea of the whole complex. 4. 4 8 latpuxy: the clause is to be completed from the first member. The following 7 wey... 4 5& xré, are arranged chiastically. 5. alrlay: cf 465 a, where the ref- erence was especially to the means employed (dy mpoopéper); here it is more general (av mpdrret). 6. 748 tarpucy: the addition of the substantive at the end of the first member was not necessary for clear- ness, but very conducive to it. Simi- larly Prot. 351 a. 7. W 8 érépa tis aSovns xré.: an- other case of anacoluthon. If the speaker had followed the line of construction begun in the previous clause, we should have had some 500 501 ='N se G 4 192 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 501, yg “~ 3 / - + > ‘\ »” ¥ P atraca, Koon aréyvas én’ adbtny epyeTat, OUTE TL THY A n 2 diow oKepapen THs Novas ovTE THy airiav, dddyws TE 10 mavTamacw ws eros eizew ovdev SiapiOunoapern, TprBH a , Kal éurepia pvypnv povov cwlouery Tov eiwOdtos yryve- cba, @ 5% Kal mopileras Tas ySovds. TadT oby mpaToV b oKore el SoKel cou ikavds éyer Oar, Kal elvai TwWeES Kal TEepl wuyynpy ToradTat dat TpaypaTetat, aL pev TEXVLKAL, 15 tpopnOiav twa exovoa Tod Bedtiorov TEpt THY Wy, ai 8€ rovrov pev ddiywpodoa, Eoxempevar 8 ad, domeEp Exel, THY NOovyy povov THS Wuxys, Twa av avTH Tpdmov , 9 XN KR , x , A 5d a ¥ ylyvoiro, Aris bé 4H Bedtiov 7 xelpwv Tov Hdovar, ovTeE , ¥ f > *. ¥ x 4 ¥ oKoTOvpevar oUTE peAoY avTats ado 7 yapiler Oar pdvor, 20 etre BéATiov Eire xEtpov. emot pev ydp, @ KadXikdes, ¢ Soxovoly TE elvat, Kai eywy€ ypu TO ToLovTOY KodaKeiav > \ \ n \ \ \ \ \ oo» ” civat Kal TEpl TOua Kat Tepl WuxnY Kal wept aro dToV 501 such phrase as otre rhy puow Kré., On 12. § 8: refers to the whole pre- 501 ®@ which rs #5ov7%s would depend, asin ceding clause, i.e. equiv. to Te od Ce- the case of rovrov above. In true ofa pvjuny ré. conversational style, however, he is 14, rovatrar ddAdar: ‘according to diverted from his line of thought by their nature similar, but different in the relative clause, and proceeds toa their application.” Supply doxotow detailed account of the method of out of the preceding doxe?. the eurespia which xomidq aréxvws én 15. wpopndiav row BeAticrov: de- airhy tpxerat. The result is that rjs signed to be in sharp contrast with the ASovqs is left without government, prnuny tov eiwOdros ylyvec@a: above. and that too without the speaker or 16 f. do-wep éxet: ie. in the case of hearers noticing it. the body. 9. ddoyws: as 465 a 8 by Ff Ayo 18. aris S€ 4 BeAtiov Kré.: is a cir- mpayua, because the distinctive feature cumlocutory reference to vos, as of a réxvn consists in its ability doivac ofre pédAov in the following member Adyov. This must not be conceivedas is to airfa. The abs. partic. pédov closely modifying d:api0unoapévyn, but is likewise combined with an appos. as being a general criticism on oddéy partic. in Phaedr. 235 a ws ob mavu SiapOunoapévn (“ quite foolishly”). eUmopay Tov moAAa A€yew wept Tod 10. us eros elaretv: probably be- airod } Yows oddty arg péAov Tod ToI- longs to the following negation. C/. — ovroy. Apol. 17 a aanOés ye ws eros elmetv 22. wal wept dAdo: indefinite and ¢ ovdey eiphiaciv. See on 450 b. merely preparatory. MAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 193 6t. I. p, 501. » \ oe \ , : s ¥ a> Os : av TLS THV ndovny Oeparrevn, QACKETTTWS EX@V TOU ALELWOVOS \ a ' XN 4 \ s , TE KQAL TOV XELPOVOS * av de 57) TTOTEPOV ovyKatariberat 25 Nuly wept rovtwy THY adbrnv SdEav 7H avtibys ; 30 501 Kaa. Ovx eywye, adda ovyywp, iva cou Kat mepavn 6 Adyos Kai Topyia rade yapiowpar. , X ‘\ X , ‘N ¥ an \ Za. Idrepov S€ repi pev pia uxjv éotw rovTo, TEpt d€ d¥o Kat woAdas OvK CoTW; Kaa. Ovx, dddd Kal wept S¥o0 Kal wept woddas. Xa. Odxovv Kat aOpdats apa yxapilerOar eori, pyde € X /, oKotovpevoy TO BédtioTov ; Kaa. Otpou eywye. LVII. Xo. "Eyes obv elzety, aires eiow at émurndev- X ” gels ai TODTO TovovcaL; paddov S¢ ci Bove, euod epw- a a . » 8 a , > ‘0 a > x , TWVTOS, H EV av aoou OKY) TOUTMY EWAL, goa lt, av -), pH bab. mpatov S€ oKepaueba tiv add\nTUKYD. > Ou a > > / SoKel cou TowavTn Tis Elvat, @ Kaddtkhes, rHv WSovnv nuav povov didKew, dAdo 8° ovdev PpovTilew ; 23. dokémrws éxov: like dyedav or 6Arywpav. Cf. above, b. 24, evykatarideoat: reminds again of voting (as above, 500 a ciubngos). It is regularly used without an obj. Here we must consider ddtayv as tak- ing the place of the word pidov, to be construed with this verb after the analogy of the regular phrase 0éc0a Wigov. See Thompson. cuykatatide- 0a: has also the meaning “lay aside for future use.” 26. otk eywye xré.: an emphatic assent (see on 453 d). But Callicles weakens it by the addition of fa... xaplowua, referring to 497 b, c. 28 f. mwepl 8€ Svo «ré.: this exten- sion to several souls was necessary in order that the investigation might be directed to political activity. 31. pydé: “ without.” LVII. 4. tiv atdnrirv: Socrates so chooses his examples that he passes from species to species in an ascend ing scale, and at the same time grad- ually approaches nearer to rhetoric. Playing the flute passed for the low- est species of music. Cf. the boyish words of Alcibiades in Plut. Alc. 2 abrelrwaay OnBalwy aides: od yap Yoaot diaréyecda. In Athens it was left mostly to such as made a busi- ness of it. Female flute-players were accustomed to appear at banquets. The instrument was probably more like a clarionet than a flute. 6. SudKkewv, dpovrifery: these infini- tives, while in sense epexegetic to ro:- avTn civat, are syntactically dependent on Boxez, See on 487 c. a 501 194 Kaa. "Epouye Soxet. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 501. > a \ € , y @ € x So. Ovkovuv Kat at ToLALoE aTATAaAL, OLOV y KiOapiotiKy H €&V TOS ayaow ; Kaa. Nat. Xa. Ti d€; 7 Tv xopav Sidackadia Kal 7 TaV d.Ov- , 4 > , 7 ee a “A papBov TOLNALS OV TOLAUTY TLS TOL KaTapatveras ; n NYyee Te ppovTiley Kwyotay tov Médyros, Orws epet Tu ToLov- 9. 4 év tots dydow: Plato con- © siders as a species of flattery only that kind of cithara-playing which was practised in the musical contests at the public festivals. On the other hand, he recognizes a variety of this music which may be helpful to the proper cultivation of the soul of the individual who practises it, and in- deed may elevate his moral feeling. This he himself recommends in Rep. iii. 399 d f. Cithara-playing was a part of the education of all young Athenians. 11. Wray Xopay SiSarkartla: dida- oxadta denotes the drill of the chorus for orchestral exhibition as well as for singing. It was the business of the poet. Hdt. i. 23 says of Arion édvta Kibappddy Tav TéTe edvTwy odde- vos Sedtepov Kal 5:OdpayBov wpGtov dy- Opirwy Tav jets TOuev mwoinoavTa Te kal dvoudoayta Kal diddtavra év Ko- pivém. What is to be understood here by choruses is explained by the addi- tion 4 SdidupduBwy wolnas. It is not all choric lyric which is condemned, but only that part of it which from its connexion with the Dionysus cult had found entrance into Athens and had there been much fostered by the state, which entrusted both native and foreign musicians with the arrange- ment and production of the dithyramb at the Dionysiac festivals, where con- tests (dyaéves) took place in it. The founder of dithyrambic melic was the just-named Arion of Methymne (n.c. 600), who resided at the court of Periander of Corinth. He was said to have introduced the strophic ar- rangement, and the so-called cyclic chorus (consisting of fifty members), which was thus named because the chorus was arranged in a circle around the altar. The second period of the dithyramb begins with the settling in Athens of Lasus of Her- mione, a contemporary of the Pisis- tratidae and a teacher of Pindar. But it soon degenerated in Athens by ex- cessive over-refinement and fantas- tic cultivation, until it received a new impulse towards the end of the Peloponnesian war by the more ar- tistic cultivation of the dramatic and musical elements by Philoxenus of Cythera. 13. Kwyolas: a very popular dithyrambic poet about the middle of the Peloponnesian war, who de- serves a great deal of censure for having helped to debase dithyrambic poetry. He tried to produce a strik- ing effect by fantastic, misty, and often immoral subjects, combined with a pompous diction, excess of imagery, and shallow figures of speech. And he succeeded in a way, for he was ridiculed by the comic 501 TIAATONOS TPOPIIAS. 195 St. L. p. 501. tov, bev av ot adkovovtes Bedtiovs yiyvowTo, 7} dT wédder 15 xapreto bau T@ OxAwW TOV Deaton ; 502 Kaa. Andov 81) tTot7Td ye, & Yoxpares, Kuwyaiov ye Tépt. Xa. Tt d€; 6 warjp abrov Mehys 7 mpds 76 BéATicTov Brérav ddxer cor KOapwdeiv; 7 exetvos perv ovdé mpods 20 7 HOworov: yvia yap adwy Tods Heards: adda dy oKO- Te ovyt TE KiMapwdicy SoKel gor Taga Kal H TOV SiOvpapBav Troinots ndovns xapw nopyoba; Kaa. "Epouye. Xo. Ti dé 84 9 cemvt avrTy Kal Oavpacty, 7 THS Tpa- b 25 ywoias toinats ef’ G €omovoaker ; TdoTEpdy EoTLY avTHS 501 poets Strattis (who composed acom- 533 b), are here interchanged in ac- 502 ® edy upon him), Plato Comicus, and cordance with colloquial usage. To ® also Aristophanes in the Clouds and the Frogs, as w sinner against art and taste,—one of those who are called in Nub. 333 xuxrltwy yopav dopa- roxdunrat. Of his father Meles we know less; he was certainly less im- portant than Cinesias, though he also is ridiculed by the comic poets. 502 15. trav Gearay: just as in English ® the general designation for the peo- ple who fill the theatre is ‘audience,’ whether the performance be an opera or a drama, so the Grecks used @ea- ral, “the spectators,” as a general designation for the crowds who thronged the Dionysiac theatre, no matter what sort of a performance was given. So, just below (20), we find jvia yap ddwy tobs Oeatas. 21. otxl Wy te KWapwdtky: this conclusion we must suppose to be permitted because at the moment Callicles can cite no example to the contrary. «idapiorixh (above, 501 e) and xidap@dien, which are properly distinct (cf. «@ipiois and KiBappdia Io fix the meaning of Ki@dpiots, the adj. wan was added. Cf Legg. 669 e. 24. q oepvr: viewed in the light b of the result which Socrates deduces, this word as well as davyaorh may be considered ironic. But tragedy was regularly designated ceuvy, “ vener- ated,” as being the most noble pre- sentation of poetry before the public mind, both from its sage maxims and from the moral effect which was as- cribed to it. Socrates’ actual view of poetry is well stated in Apol. 22 b,c éyveav oby Kal wep) Tov moinTady ToiTO, bre ob copia mowotey & movotev, AAAG gioe til Kal evOovord(ovtes Homwep of Ocouavrers kad of xpnop@dol. 25. éd’ b érrovSaxe: the order of the whole sentence is involved; ri 3é bn (éoTw exetvo) ef? G eomoddaner. After giving the general question, Socrates follows it by a disjunctive special one. The repetition of the art. % is illustrated by Stallbaum from Symp. 213 e@ thy tovtov ravtnyl thy Oavpacriy Kepadjy. Itis not common. 196 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 602. 7 3 o \ * , y a 4 p TO €miyeipnua Kal 7} TVs}, ws cou Soxel, xapiler Oar a a , x x , 27 > oy eQnr tois Dearats pdvor, } Kat SuapdyerOa, ed Te avrots Hod XN > \ an Pev 7) Kal Kexaptopévov, movnpov Sé, Omws TOUTO meV [7) > a > , , > XN \ > s n ‘ €pet, eb O€ Te Tuyxdve andes Kal apédAysov, ToT Se XN ¥ 30 kai é€er kal doerar, édy Te yalpwow edy TE py; motépws cot SoKet taperkevdcbar 7» TaV Tpaywdiov Toinans ; Kaa. Andov 87 rotré ye, &@ LwKpares, OTL mpos THY c ¢€ XN a ys ‘\ * * bat noovny paddov apuntar Kal 7d xapilerOar Tots Oea- 35 502 Tats. Xo. OdKotv 76 Towdrov, @ Kaddikhas, ehapey vuvdy 4 9. KoNaketay €ivat; Kaa. Ilavu ye. f ¥ ~~ , La - 4 / Xa. Bépe 57, & Tis wepredoiro THS ToLfoEwWs TAGHS TO For the construction éxé ri, cf. Lach. 183 a ékxeivor pddicra Tey ‘EAAHvwr arovdaQovaw ért tots rouovros, Xen. Mem. i. 3. 11 omovddgew . . . eg’ ofs odd &y pawduevos srovddceer. We find wepi rs in Phaedo 64 d gatverai cot prroadpov avdpds elvar eomovdaneva wept ras fSovas. For the pf. equiv. toa pres., cf. the passage from Phaedo just quoted. 251. mworepov éoti... ds cor SoKel: the more usual idiom would require wérepov Boxer gor elvat. 27 ff. édv pév, el S€: this varia- tion in the employment of the cond. particles has come to be a rule; ve. the negative of an édy pév clause is introduced by ef 5é¢ If the condi- tion is particular, we find ei with the fut. indic.; if generic, ef with the pres. indic., which latter is frequently omitted. In the earlier usage the custom was to give the favorable condition first; hence ef d€ wh comes to have an unpleasant or unfavorable connotation, as here. Cf also 481 b. The omission of uév after édy is prob- ably due to its employment with 7av. On the repetition of uév and 8é with both clauses, see on 512 a. 29. dndés kal dpeAtpov : the connex- ion of these two words with «af seems somewhat strange, when one con- siders both the relation of the ideas themselves and the fact that they are preceded by 3 pév . . . movnpdy 5é. The design is probably to emphasize the co-existence of the two ideas, and not their distinctness. There is no contradiction to andés in the follow- ing édy te xalpwow xré.; it refers to the manner in which the spectators will receive his words, concerning which the poet has no reason to trouble himself, provided what he says is correct. —On the omission of bv, see GMT. 902; H. 984 a. 30. AcE Kal doeror: viz. in the dialogue and choruses. on 39. mepteAovro: Socrates conceives ¢ IAATONOS, TOPTIAS. 197 St. I. p. 502. 40 Te pédos Kal Tov pvOmov Kal Td peTpoV, GAO Te H Adyou . ylyvovrat TO Nevrdpevov ; Kaa. ’Avayxy. 2a. OtKodv mpds zodvv dxhov Kat SHwov obrou héyov- Tat ot Adyou; Kaa. ®ypi. Xa. Anunyopia dpa tis éorw 4 TountiKn. a 45 Kaa. Paiverar. > na € \ , x» y” x > € Za. OvKodv pytopixn Synunyopia ay etn: 7 ov pyto- pevew Soxovot oor ot Tmowntai ev Tots Bedr pois ; 50 ~=s- Kaa. "Epovye. TS ¥ € “A € ¥ e - XN xa. Nov dpa nets nupykayey pytopikny tiva mpods Sypov Towtrov oiov taiswy Te Suod Kal yuvaikey Kai = nn *. 4 x 2 , A > ie > 7 avdpav, kat Sovhav Kal édevOepar, Hv od mavu ayapea - * *. > , > Kolakikny yap avTyv dae civar. 55 Kaa. Ilavv ye. LVIII. So. Eiev- ri dé 4 mpds tov “APnvaiwy Sypov 502 the difference between prose and _ artists were very prone to extol the d poetry to lie simply in the dress, which in the case of poetry sur- rounds the thought as the shell does the kernel, and is only so far of value. 40. pédos: ze. the musical element, the melody, which is especially promi- nent in lyric productions. — pvOpoyv: i.e. the regular movement, at the basis of which lies the pérpoy, syllable and verse measure. 41. ylyvovrat: prove to be. 46. 8yunyopla: here employed with- out any unpleasant connotation. It might seem somewhat strange that Callicles so readily admits that d5yu7- yopla is pyropixn,— an admission on which the whole deduction rests. The reason may be that these word- universality of their art, without re- gard to consequences. See Socrates’ conversation with Gorgias (especially ch. XI.). 52. olov... yuvatkav: one is cer- tainly justified in assuming according to this passage that women were ad- mitted to the tragedies ; whether they also had the right to attend the com- edies remains doubtful. The admis- sion of slaves to the theatre was always restricted. LVIII. 1. elev: marks the conclu- sion of one part of the argument, viz. the premises from which the conclu- sion is to be drawn. Its employment here, however, also draws especial emphasis to the fact that these prem- ises are definitely settled. 502 198 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 502. BY a pytopixn Kat Tods addous Tos ev Tals Toke Sypous e ba ey 7 # > a“ ¢ € a y > ie TOUS TWY édevPepav avdpav, TL TOTE YMW AVTY €oTw ; , , ipa & XN # > * ¥ ¢ morepov aor SoKxovaw mpos To BédticTov adel éyew ot £ # a, / gy € n € , 5 pyTopEs, TOUTOV aTOXalopeEvoL, OWS of modtTrat ws BEN- ¥ } ‘ x ea ‘ x \ & ‘ TLOTOL EDOVTAL ta TOUS QAUTWV hoyous, Y KQL OUTOL Tpos x , a Z € , \ ¢ a TO xapiler Oar TOU: qohirats DPPN LEVOL, Kat EVEKQA TOV 29Q7 an “A wn a a y = idiov Tod avTav ddtywpodvTes TOD KoWOU, WoTEP TaLot Tpogopidovar Tots Srpos, yapilerOar avdtots TEipapevor 10 povoy, et dé ye Bedtiovs ecovrar H yelpovs Sia Tavra, 15 502 ovdey ppovrilovew ; 503 K Ov € nN an ¥ an 3 ox . 2% \ X a AA. UX Q7TAOVV €TL TOUTO EPpwTas ELOL fLEV yap ou € “a om e a Fa > ‘ = ‘N KNOdopevot TV TOALTaV héyovow & héyovow, eioly Sé Kat y ‘\ s ovouvs ov héyens. Xa. “E€apket. 2. év tais modcoww: in the politi- cal sense of the word. Cf. Soph. Ant. 737 wéAcs yap ovK e080 Hrs avdpds éo& évds. 3. tos Tay édevOepwv: is ironic. They consider themselves to be free men, although they are really, even according to the true opinion of Cal- licles (cf. 489 ¢ above), slaves. Cf. Dem. Ol. iii. 30 7d pév apdérepov otpa- Tevetbat ToAuay avtds 6 Siuos Seowdtns TY ToALTEVOMEevwY Hy Kal KUpios adTds amdvtwy Tay wyabav, — viv 5¢ Todvav- tiov KUpiot mev of moArTeuduevos TOY a&ya- Ov Kal did rovTwy amavra mparteral, bueis & 5 Sijuos ev banpérov kal mpoaOy- ans méper yeyevnobe. 6. WF Kal ovroe Kré.: testimony to the correctness of this statement is found in the very numerous refer- ences and complaints found in the orators, notably Demosthenes. Of course, Plato meant by 7d BéAtioroy something a little different from the orators. Of. Isoc. de Pace § 5 kal > \ . af 3 a . . €t y2p Kat TOUTO E€OTL Sumdoor, TO pe yep To. meTworhKaTe ToUs pHTopas pEerE- Tay Kal pirocogeiv ov Ta wéAAOVTA TH mérAet auvoicey, GAN’ Srws apéeckortas tuiv Adyous épodow. The apparent pleonasm arising from the recurrence of the same idea in but slightly va- ried form is artistic in showing that this thought lay uppermost in the speaker’s mind. 8. domep wari: reminds of 464 d. 12. ov« dAotv: the word has its fundamental meaning. The question requires a double answer. Cf. Lach. 188 © awAotv Td YY eudy wep) Adyov éotiv, ef 5& BovAE, odX amAOvY, GAAG Simdovv. kal yap kv Sdtaul tw Pird- Aoyos elvat kal ad uicddoyos. Cf. also 468 ¢ ardds oftas. 15. el ydp kal: cai does not belong to rotro, but to ef. Socrates expresses himself as satisfied with the division made by Callicles, but recognizes even under this condition at least the possibility of a good, commendable rhetoric. 199 8t. I. p. 503. 9 , ‘, ¥ a ¥ * > XN 4 €TEPOV TOV TOUVTOU KoNaKeia Gv €ly KaL ALO \V pa Snunyopia, TAATONOS TOPTIAS. %. 7, ¢ # % , + « t To 8 €repov Kaddv, 76 Tapackevalew omws ws Bédricrac » a a € , \ , ’ EvovTa. TOY TOMTaY at Wuxal, Kal SiapdyerOar héyovra \ , ¥ € 7 »¥ > - »¥ mn = 4 Ta Bédriota, cite NOiw Eire dnd€éoTepa EaTat Tots aKOvoU- Hb ¥ a , a > , \ N X El TIE EXELS TOV PHTOPwY ToOLOUTOY EitrEtY, Ti OVXL Kal Euol > > > eA ‘ 4 ™ XN € , ow. Gd’ od mdrore od TavTny cides THY PyTOpLKHY. * ¥ # > auTov Eeppacas Tis EoTW; Kaa. "AAG pa Aia odk exw eywyé cou cimeiy Tov ye vov pyTopav ovdeva. -, , nw nw ¥ ‘\ > ~ 3 9 Xo. Ti 8€; rev wahav eyes Twa eirew, dV ovtwa 2. # ¥ > nw v 4 > XN > nw aitiay éxovow "AOPnvator Bedtious yeyovévas, ererdn éxet- vos yp&ato Snunyopew, év To tpdcbev ypdvw xElpous ovTes; ym pev yap ovK oda Tis oT odTOS. c Kaa. Ti d€; @epiorokdéa ov axovers avdpa ayabov 19. elre ySiw etre dndéorepa: De- mosthenes, who in many speeches combats the pds ndovny and mpbs xdpev Snunyopety, says in Ol. iii. 18, in harmony with Plato’s teaching, dAaa def rad BéATIoTA avr! Tov Hdéwy, by ph cvvappdrepa et, AauBaver. 21. rovotrov elwetv: speak of as such. 21 f. rl ovxl... &ppacas: in pas- sionate questions ti ov is usually con- strued with the aorist. The question marks impatience that 4 thing which is future is not past. The idea is usually modal, ‘why will you not?” Cf. Phaedo 864 ef tis Suav edropd- Tepos uot Ti ovK amexpivato. Differ- ent in 468 ¢. 26. alrlay @xovow: a piua péoov (vox media). Originally “to bear the blame,” it was gradually worn down until it became merely a cir- cumlocution for Aéyer@a, as Theaet. 169 a dy 5h ob wep airiay Exes dia- gpepew, or Rep. iv. 485 e of 5& Kad Exover ravtny thy aitlay (sc. Oupoeders . elvat). Usually, however, it retains its bad sense, e.g. Apol. 88 ¢ dvoua efere kal aitiay — os Swxpdrn awexrdvare. 28. otk olfa tls éotiw: when cis instead of the more regular dems is used after a neg., it should be con- ceived rather as a direct question. See on 447 d. 29. Oepirrokrda xré.: it is note- worthy that Callicles passes over Aristides, whom Socrates mentions later with respect, and whom also Demosthenes in O/. iii. 21 speaks of among the statesmen who were still honored down to his time. But Cal- licles was probably hardly able to appreciate the uprightness and unscelf- ishness of Aristides, which was dis- played so prominently in the forma- tion of the Delian League. — dxovets: Greek, like the Eng., often uses the pres. of the verhs of perception where the pf. would be more exact. See GMT. 28; H. 827. 200 35 503 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 503, N A 30 yeyovdra Kat Kiwwva kat Midrriddyv cat Mepuxhéa tovtovi X bs / «@ TOV VEWOTL TETEAEVTNKOTA, OU Kal OD akYKOAS ; doa. Ei €orw ye, @ Kaddixders, Hv mpdorepov od edeyes > , % / ‘\ ‘ 3 , > , XN ~ apeTyv, adynOys, TO Tas EmOuptas amoTyTAdvaL Kal Tas € an ‘\ ‘ “A » 2 * x a“ 2 7g” > fe avTod Kal Tas TOV dAdwy* Ei Se ur) TOUTO, AN’ OTEp ev TO € , / > , € a € a y a ‘ VvoTEp@ oy@ nvayKac One NPLELS opodoyetr, OTL QL PeEV A 98 na , , A ‘ »” Tov ériOup.iav mrAnpotvpevas Bedtiw Trovover Tov avOpwror, , \ 9 a aga , , a Ys TQAUTAS [LEV aTroTe\ ety, at be XElLpw, 1 * TOVTO oe TEXVY TLS > n yy * > ~ eWat* ToLovTOY avdpa TovTaY TWA yeyovevaL ExELS ElirELD ; Kaa. Ovn éxyo eywye Tas €itro. LIX. Yo. "ANN éav Cntys Karas, eipyoes: Dope 57 XN ¥ n OUTWOL ATPEULA TKOTOVMEVOL, EL TLS TOUTWY TOLOUTOS yéyo- 30 f. Ilepuxdda rouvrovl tov vewort TereAeuTHKOTA: We must guard against drawing the conclusion from this pas- sage that this dialogue was intended to be understood as held soon after Pericles’ death. See Introd. § 18. For vewori simply means “ lately” as compared with the other statesmen mentioned, and the interval between that and the date of the dialogue may still have been a great one. Cf. Hadt. vi. 40. See also on 523b. The same is true of the Lat. nuper, as we see from Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 50. 126 Quid ea, quae nuper, id est paucis ante seculis, medicorum ingeniis reperta sunt. 31. oF dkyKoas: sc. A¢yovTos. possible reference to 455 e. 32. eléortw ye xré.: “yes, if, etc.” The answer is so closely connected with the preceding question that there is no need of supplying an apod. In the second member, ef 5¢ uh «ré., for which we must supply a pred. from the first, instead of the expected criti- cism of the men mentioned we have A a question based on the principle just proved. 34. rotro: viz.7d ... drompmAdvat. As a pred. supply dpeth aAn@js €or. We should expect after arr’ dmep... dmodoyeiv some expression correspond- ing to 7d... dmormumAdvat, instead of which we find é7: «ré., due to dpoAo- yetv, with which we must again sup- ply dper} AnOjs éorw to govern azote- Aety. 34 f. év Td vorépw Adyw: refers to 499 e. rovro 5€ continues the re- capitulation, and refers to 500 a. Instead of téxvnvy tivd, which we should expect, we find by an anaco- luthon the nom. as if &moAvy46n pre- ceded. On the neglect of the assimi- lation in rodro, see Kr. 61, 7, 4. 39. ovk éxw: Callicles does not understand the standard of judgment, to the exposition of which Socrates now turns. LIX. 2. otrwol drpdpa: quietly, just as we are. oftws is frequently used by itself to denote “under the conditions or circumstances in which we are at present,” and often with dad 10 as TAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. vey. 201 St. I. p. 503. , 4 € > 06 3 ‘ » ae s ie pepe yap, 6 ayalos avnp Kat ért 7 BédrizTOV ¥ a a héeywr, & dv éyy, Addo TL OvK EiKy epet, AAN awoBdérav , 9 \ ue rN. . , 8 ‘ z Tpos TL; woTrEp KQ@L Ol AAAOL TAVTES HeLoupyou Bdérov- e A yo a TES TpOS TO AUT@V Epyov EKaaTOS ovK EiKkN eKeyopeEvoS , a , ~ x x” Xx e a arn’ Tpoorpéper & mpoopeper mpos TO Epyov Td avrov, a 9 Rn 507 2A n a a9 , Grws av €ldds TL adT@ aX ToUTO 6 epydlerat. ® > OLOV El , 3 ~ + - N. > t x. Botde ise Tots lwypddous, rods oikodSdmous, Tovs vav- , * ¥ 4 é go 4 myyous, Tovs addous TavTas Syptoupyovs, ovrwa Bovdeu aA € > , \ ¢ y , aA x QUTWV, WS ELS Taéw TWA EKAOTOS EKACOTOV TiOnow Oo av io ‘\ / x Y ef: / TO, Kae mpocavayKaler TO ETEPOV TH eTEpw Ti PeTov TE > ~ yy x * 7 civar Kal GpPLoTTEW, EWS av TO ATaY GVaTHONTAL TETAypE- 504 \ : a \ 9 , » VOV TE Kat KEKOO [LY LEVOV TpPaylLa ° KQLt OL TE 57) addou an adverb when it is to be translated separately. Sometimes it follows the adverb, and sometimes it has itself an explanatory addition, as Prot. 351 © awAds obtw, ds ob epwras. Cf. 460 e, 464 b, 468 c, 478 a, 494 d. 4 f. dwoBAdrov mpos mu: with a view to something, which must, in con- trast with efx#, be a definite object, as is afterwards more clearly shown. See on 474 d. 5 ff. of Garou . . . mporddpa: a case of part. apposition. See G. 137, n. 2; H. 624 d. Cf. 450 d. The thought with xpoopépe is of the sin- gle articles out of which the object is to be made.—8nprovpyol : see on 452a. 8. domes dv... oxy: a general rel. sentence, giving the opposite to eixf, “that it may acquire for itself some form.” The second aor. of éxew is the only second aor. which seems to have an ingressive force. See Gildersleeve’s note to Morris’ Thuc. i. 12.3.— et80s: i.e. the outward appearance which an object displays, its figure and form, an image of which the artist of course carries in his mind and gazes upon with the 503 eye of fancy. 8 f. ef BovrAc tSetv: with such con- versational expressions we should re- frain from supplying any definite apod., as doubtless none was felt. The force of this phrase approaches that of a mild imv., oxéwe, after which the objective clause follows naturally with as. The subject éxa- otros distributes the robs (wypdpous which has been appropriated as the obj. of iSeiv. 13. ovorrontat: is applicable to 504 a the form as a whole, because it is only by the harmony of its several parts (7d Erepov Te érépy apudrrew) that it exists. Cf. Phaedr. 269 ¢ 7) 8 Exacta wo. Aéyery Te Kal Td GAOv Guvicracbat. 14. kekoopnpévov: this word, as well as xéopos below (19), has, of course, no reference to any exter- nal adornment, but only to an en- dowment with such qualities as are requisite for the aperf of the whole. See on e below. 14 f. ot re 81) GAAoL Syprovpyol: would require properly some such e 202 20 25 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p, 504, 5 \ Noa \ 9) 7 € Soy a - 15 npLoupyot KQt OUS vuven ed€eyouer, ou TEpt TO OWUA, TAL- , XN? an an ‘ SorpiBau te Kat iarpoi, Koopodoi mov 7d cdma Kal ovv- TAaTTOVOW. Kaa. "Ear tovro ovTa. e a 9 n>» a ¥ Opohoyovpev oUTw TOUT ExXELY 7) OU; , ¥ “ , aA 2 7 NOK So. Ta€&ews apa KaL KOO [LOU TuvXovoa OLKLO XPNITH av ein, atatias 5€ woyOnpa ; Kaa. ®ypi. > nn AY “ ¢ # Yo. OdKodvv kai mrotov waav’rus ; Kaa. Nat. Kaa. Ilavu ye. , , ‘ a / / TAeEDS TE KAL TOV KOD[LOU TLVOS ; So. f ‘ a 4 a 30 Takeas TE KAL TOV KOO[LOV YLYVOLEVO 5 Sa. "Eywye. ‘\ “N X *. - ¥ * € , da. Kat PHY Kal TA OOpaTa Pape TA NueTEpa. ; 2 en. - a xo. Ti § Hy Wuyy; darakias ruyovca é€ora ypnoty, 7 > 4 > a # x an a Kaa. Avaykn €x Tov Tpoabe KQL TOUTO ovuvomodoyet. , > » , 3 > A , nA 3 A Tt otv ovoua €otw &v TH THmaTL TW EK THS % ‘\ ¥ Kaa. “Tyievav Kat toyvv tows éyes. , oe > mm a om 2 , 3 Ti O€ aU TH EV TH WUXN EyyLyvoperm Ex tant part of the argument. Here 504 pred. as koopotow Exactos Td éavTot a b Zpyov. But the general thought is here, as often, to be completed by a kind of zeugma from the special one to which the discussion hurries. 15. ods vuvdy édéyopev: sc. in 500 e, which in turn refers to 464 b ff. —The body serves in general as an analogy for the soul. 18. éorw: the imv. indicates only a tentative concession, which Calli- cles reserves the privilege of recall- ing if he chooses. The same feeling is felt in dvd-yxn cuvomoroyeiv below. 24. «al priv «ré.: is to be com- pleted with necessary changes from the preceding question of Socrates (ratews apa Kré.). By kal why (and indeed) we pass to the more impor- also the general ideas rdtis and kécpos receive special limitations. 29 f. tS yryvopévw: belongs to bvoud éoriw, while év rd océmari, in looser relation to the whole, denotes the range to which the question ex- tends. 31. tows Adyers: in the answer of Callicles shows that, while indeed according to his feclings he would regard such a relation as false and impossible, his reason compels him to admit its truth. 32. éyytyvopevw: the use of the compound verb here, in place of the simple one in the other member of the comparison, is probably due to its close connexion with év 7H Puxf. 504 35 40 45 504 MAATONOS TOPTIAs. 203 St. I. p. 504. THs Tafews Kal TOU Kdopov; TELPa evpElv Kal ciety my” aoTep exeiv@ TO ovoma. Kaa. Ti d€ ovk adres héyess, @ LéxKpares ; y a Xa. "ANN el cou Hdidv eat, éya épa: aod bé dv per cot Sox ey Kahds héyew, Padi: ei Se uy, Cdeyyxe Kat XN 7 a a a py éitpere. noi yap Soxel Tats prev ToD Twpartos TA€e- » > i es ow ovopa, eivar vyrevov, €€ ob ev ait@ 1 vyiea yiyverat s *< ¥ 3 X an a ¥ a a > ¥ Kal 7 addy apETH TOV Taparos. EaTW TATA 7) OVK EaTLW ; ¥ Kaa. “Eovwv. Lead * A ox , \ £ , Xa. Tats d€ tHs Wuyns tTafeow Kal Koopyoeow vop- pov TE Kal vdpos, dOev Kai vdpipor yiyvovTat Kal KdopLOL* A > ¥ ao m. - A a » tavta 8 €aoTw dixatocvvyn Te Kal cwhpoo’vn. 7s 7) OV; ¥ Kaa. “Eovrw. LX. Yo. Odvcodv mpos ratra Brétav 6 pryTwp Exelvos, 6 TexViKds TE Kal dyads, Kal TOUS AOyous TpOToiaE Tats 35. rl S€ odk avrds Adyets: on the meaning of the interr. form, see on 503 b. The question is of the nature of an evasion of the answer, which Callicles pushes upon Socrates to escape responsibility. Cf 470 b. 37. dc: see on 475 e.—el 8 py: see on 502 b.— édeyxe: with this and éritpene (yield) the neuter object (“what I say”) is understood. In a similar way émitpérew is used abso- lutely, Apol. 35 b and elsewhere. 40. dpery: used at first in the gen- eral sense of “proper function or condi- tion,” so that it can afterwards appear in its moral force without thereby the standard of judgment being changed. 42 f. vopiov te Kal vopos: sc. bvoua elvat. Both expressions are found elsewhere associated in order to express the idea as fully and com- pletely as possible, e.g. Crito 53 ¢. Here there is the more reason to add vduos because Callicles had previously used this word in the passage where he first gave expression to his scorn of right and law (ch. XXX VIII. ff.). The corresponding disposition is also elsewhere called kécpuos. Cf. the pas- sage in Crito rds re evvououpévas md- Aes kal rev avdpay Tobs Kocuiwrtdrous. Apropos is Phaedo 114e koounoas thy Wuxhy odx aAAoTply GAA TH EaurHs kéopm cwppootyyn Te Kal Bixaoodyy Kad avbpeig kal édrevOepia Kal arnbelg. 44. ratra: with free reference to what precedes and without assimila- tion to the predicate, denotes the qual- ities expressed by voummoe and kéopcot. 45. derw: see on a above. LX. 1. apos ravra BAérwv: in the choice of words Socrates goes back to what was said in 503 e. 2. wpocoloe Kré.: cf. above, 5038 e. Although it is by the Adyo especially that the soul will be shaped, yet 204 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. L p. 504. aA aA * 4 ‘\ XN 4 € ¥ \ an ? Wuyxais, obs av heyy, Kal Tas mpd&es amacas, Kal S@pov - ¥ “ - A a7 s nw > * édy te 6100, Sacer, Kal edv Tr addaipyrar, dpaipyoerat, 5 mpos TOTO dél TOY VOUY EXwY, OTwsS av adTOd Tots TON. © , A 2 A A , > , XN Tas Sikarorvyyn pev ev tats uyals ylyyytat, ddixia dé dmadhdrrntrat, Kal cwppooiwy pev eyylyrvytat, dxkodacia. oe 3 , ad 4” > be ? 4 , be € amadharryTat, Katy addy apeTn eyyiyvntat, KaKia dE arin. cvyxwpets 7) ov; 10 Kaa. Svyyapa. Xa. Ti yap ddedos, & KadXikhes, copari ye Kdpvovte ‘ an } & # XN , ~% BY Kat poxOnpas Siakeyevw oitia Todda Siddvar Kal Ta Ho x NOR ¥ x» ¢ a a \ 9 , > \ »*¥ 0 7 yovoTra 7 ToTa 7H GAN’ GTLOUY, 6 pH dvicEL avTO €of OTE , a 3 4 , XN s 4 * ¥ wh€ov, 7) TOvvavTioy KaTa ye TOV OtKatov Aoyov Kat €dar- 15 TOV; e€oTL TAUTA; Kaa. "Eoto. > a 5 A *. vo a, Xo. Od ydp, otwar, AvouTEAE? pera poyOnpias TapaTOS inv avOpar@. avaykn yap ovTw Kat Cnv pwoxOnpas. R ovXY OUTS; Kaa. Nat. > idiggl ‘ & 3 s > # a Lo. Odkovv Kal tas ériOupias amomytAdvat, otov me- 20 an “ ov , KH a a e 7, VOVTa payew OO OV Bovderat y Supavra TvEW, VYLALVOVTa 50 5. adrov: poss. gen., to be closely 504 connected with rots moAltas (“his Jfellow-citizens ”). 13. 6 pi ovice: the generic idea causes the negative uf. 14. rotvavrlov: is certainly adver- bial, and to be attached to édarrov other influences may be brought to bear, just as the orator or statesman (a good specimen of such an orator was Demosthenes) has power to cause gifts to be made to the people —as, for example, the @ewpixdy, the dicarti- «dv, the orpatiwrixdy, and the Bovdev- ag rudy, and the division of booty, pub- lic spectacles, etc.—and also to be taken away from them, for example, by taxes (eiospopai) or the abolition of the gifts mentioned. — The connex- ion forbids us to think of any rougher kind of deprivation, which seemed to Polus (466 c) so enviable a privilege of power. (evjce:). The sense of this difficult passage seems to be something like this: “ What advantage is there in giv- ing to a sick man anything which can- not profit him, more or less”; literally, “sometimes more, or on the contrary, at least rightly considered, less.” 22 f. vyatvovra . ToAAG.: added to make the contrast stronger. is 505 a 25 NAATOQNOS TOPLAS. 2 St. I. p. 505. ~ e 2: 4 e e pev dow ot iatpot ws Ta ToAXG, Kdpvovta Sé ws eros > es > , > 2° > ¥. = > a cimew ovdén0T eoow euTriumracbar dv émOvpet; ovy- WPELS TOUTS ye KaL OV; x Y Kaa. "Eywye. \ Qy , > ¥ Zo. epi dé Yuxyv, & dprore, ody 6 abrds Tpdz0s ; N x > > fev Gy Tovnpa 7, avontds TE ovca Kal axddAaaTOS » A a an Gdikos Kal avdoros, eipyew adtiy Set Tov émOumLav Y EWS » KQL \ Kal 30.444) EmiTpéemew GAN atta Tove 7H ad’ dv Bedtiov éorat: 35 40 Teg prs 7 ov - Kaa. Pypi. yo 7 > & A a Xo. Oita yap Tov airy awewov TH Wry7 ; Kaa. Ilavy ye. Xo. OdKovy 7d elpyew early ad’ dv emiOupet Koralew ; Kaa. Nat. Xa. TO KortdlecOa dpa tH Wyn apewsy eorw 4} H akodacia, woTEp GV vUVd) wov. Kaa. Ovx 018 arta héyeus, @ YwKpares, GAN addov 2 7 TWa epwTa. ea ». ‘\ > ge a 2 4 x s Xa. Odros avip ody vropéva wPehovpevos Kal adTos TovTO TAT YwY TEpL OU 6 hdyos EaTi, KoaldmEVos. 23 f. ds €aros elaretv: see on 450 b. 28. dydyros xré.: see in the discus- sion with Polus the remark at 477 b, where the wovypia of the soul is de- scribed in the same way. 29. dvoctos: Plato prefers to use only two endings with this adj., which usually, especially in later Greek, has three. The common collocation, as in the present passage, with several other adjs. of only two endings, may perhaps explain his usage. 33. otrw ... dpewov: sc. than if it were differently dealt with. Cf 468 b. 38. domep od vuvdy gov: refers naturally to the second member, for which a predicate is to be supplied from the first. Socrates has in mind 491 eff. The contradiction between this admission and the statement made at the first (vuvdn), Callicles seeks, in his accustomed manner, to evade. 41 f. aitdés totro mdcxav: Calli- cles has given in the investigation also a practical example of that é&koAa- ata which he had defended in theory. For him the investigation is only a trial of wits. In otros avyp «ré. we may have a reminiscence of the ex- pression used by Callicles of Socrates in 489 b. 05 505 206 45 50 505 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 505. > / , a a Kaa. Od0€ yé pou pede obdev Sv od déyes, Kal TavTa cot Topyiov xapw amrexpuwapyp. da. Kiev: ti oty by mowjoopev; petagd Tov ddyov - KaTadvoper ; Kaa. Adros yudoet. Xa. “ANN oddE Tods pUOovs dact perasd Oduis civar Kataneirew, GAN émévras kepahyy, va py avev Kepadys Teputy. Kepadny Ad By. LXI. Kaa. ‘Os Biatos ef, & Yoéxpares. > 2 > \ A ,¢ conan e , aToKpwat ovv Kat Ta howd, Wa Huw Oo dyos aN \ > A €av d€ épuol , 27 , a x 7 a Ae meiOyn, edoers Yaipey TovTOV Tov dyov, H Kat aG\AwW Tw Suaréfec. Xa. Tis ovv addos eOéd\er; 7) ydp Tou arekn ye Tov Adyov KaTadeiTwpe. Kaa. Atros 6€ ovk dv Svvato duedOety Tov Adyov, 7 Xx J ae mm x» > Fa ~ EVV KATA OQavToOvV 7 AT OK PLVOJLEVOS OQAUTW ; 46. karaAvopev: this idiomatic use of the pres. instead of the fut. of a course of action to be immediately taken is also idiomatic in Latin and English. See Kr. 58, 1,9. In a somewhat simi- lar manner the pres. is used of the im- mediate consequence by Dem. de Falsa Leg. 32 ei 8€ gnow obtos, Seikdrw Kad mapacx ecw, Kaya KataBalvw. Of. 513 ¢. 47. aitds yvdoe: refuses to an- swer. “You will have to decide that.” 48. ov8é rods pvOous: to say noth- ing of a Adyos which is directed to a definite object. The proverb, which Socrates quotes, seems to rest upon a religious feeling, in accordance with which myths had to be completely narrated in order not to draw upon the narrator the anger of the deity. Cf. Phileb. 66 A 7d pera rai uty ovdty Aowwdy wAty dowep kepadry amo- dodvac Tots eipyuevas, Luthyd. 301e roy - Koropava émirOévar.— Opis: “right 505 acc. to sacred law.” a 50. aeptly: the change from the pl. (rods pdOous) to the sing. is explained by the freedom of conversation. Cf Prot. 319 @ rodtrois oddels tobTo éemt- mAnTTE Sowep trois mpdrepoy, Ste ovdapd- Oev paddy... cupBovrcvew emyeiper. LXI. 1. ds Blawos ef: cf 491 e as nous ef.—Biaos: usually in con- trast with ei@ew, eg. Polit. 304 d elre 5:a weiovs efre Sid Tivos Blas is applied here by Callicles to Socrates’ persistent argument; cf. Apol. 35d ef melOome Guas Kal TH SetcOar BraCoiunv. 4. rls otv xré.: since the question assumes the necessity that some one take the role of respondent, a causal clause follows. 4f. py... karadelrwmev: for let us no longer leave, etc. 6. avros S€ xré.; the question has 10 15 505 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 207 St. I. p. 505. 9 XN a? , 2 aA XN na - da. “Iva poe 76 Tod “Eniydppov yévntat, & mpd Tov Svo e »¥ ¥ e a e x , 2 AN , avdpes €deyor, €lLS WY LKAVOS YEYUOUAL; aTap Kuvduvever > , > 9 QAVaAYKQALOTATOV eat OUTWS. : i El LeVTOL ToLnTopeEV, Otpar ¥ aA , econ , ¥ . ‘ 207 EYwYE XPHVa TavTas Nuas Pidrovikws eyew Tpos Td Etde- y 4 X\ if > Nye. 4 ‘ vo an vat To Gdnbes ti éotw epi dv éyopev Kai Ti Weddos - . \ > x y x / > 7 , KOLOV yap ayabov aATATL avepov yevér bar auTo. Sieuue XN »” nm fev ov TO éyw ey ws adv por Soy exew: av dé TH 56 eon \ . » ne aA 3 a XN 3 UPL@V [L1) TA OVTA do0Ka opodoyety ELQAUTO, XP avTidap- atone of reproof. airdés is opposed to &AA@ Siadrcyduevos. The require- ments of the question can be fulfilled in two ways, — either in continuous discourse, as 464 b—466 a, or in the form of a dialogue, which Socrates employs later (ch. LXITI.). 8. ro tov "Emixdppov: Epichar- mus was a native of Cos, but early went to Sicily (Megara) and devoted himself there to the study of medicine and philosophy, especially the Pytha- gorean and Empedoclean. But his claim to fame rests on his comedies. He stands at the head of the Sicilian comic poets, being noted for the ethi- cal nature of his poetry. It was full of sententious sayings, and thereby aroused Plato’s interest to the highest degree. He flourished during the Persian war, under the government of Gelo. The verse here cited reads, according to Athenaeus: Ta mpd Tod BV kvdpes Ercyov els éyay droxpéw (i.e. droxpdw, I am sufficient. Socrates means that he is himself assuming a burden which according to the nature of the matter requires two. The answer is in construction connected with the question of Calli- cles in order to disclose for the others’ consideration the doubtful side, as it were, of such a demand. With this the following ardp (however) agrees. 11. drovlkws exew: see on 457 d. Socrates wishes to direct ambition only to proper objects. 12. rl PevSos: Petdos is frequently found opposed to aanéés. Cf. Apol. 34 © elre oty GAnbes, elre obv Weddos, Euthyd. 272 a édv te eddos édy re aandés 7. The article with aandés is due to its position. We should also have in like manner 7d eddos, did it precede ti éotu. Cron thinks it de- notes that truth is single, while error has many forms. : 14 f. édv... 80xd, xp x7é.: is an anticipatory cond. sentence, xpf with the inf. having the force of an imv. Of. értAau8dvov in b below. 15. dpodoyetv épavrw: Socrates is about to combine the two roles of questioner and respondent, and hence will have to assent to his own state- ments. 15 f. dvtiAapBdverGar : with the gen., means to “break in upon a discourse for the purpose of contest- ing a point,” as in Rep. i. 336 b Kal 6 Opactpayos TordrdKis Kad Siadreyoudvw quay petaty dpyua avtirauBdveoOa: rod Aéyov. On the other hand ér:AauBd- veoOa, used below in b, means simply “to arrest the discussion.” See on 469 c. 505 506 208 25 30 506 a , ‘\ > 7 BavecOar kat éréyyew. PLATO'S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 506. ovde ydp Tou éywye eidas Méyw & héya, dda Cyto kown pel bpav, wore, dy Ti daivytar héywv 6 audioBytav ewoi, eyo mpaTos ovyxwpycopat. héyw peévror tavra, ef SoKed xpnvar SiarepavOyvar Tov 20 Adyov: ei dé py) Bovreo Ge, Eder 57 xaipew Kal ariwper. Top. "AAX’ ewot pév od Soxet, d Ldikpares, xpyvat mw 3 a amvevat, adda dueEehOe oe Tov Adyov: daiverar SE por kal Tots addots Soke. , \ ” \ 2 XN Bovrdopat y2p eywye Kat QUTOS > n , > an / \ 39.7 QKOUVUOQL OOVU AVTOU SudvTos Ta émtAouTra. Xo. "AAAA pev 54, & Topyia, kat adros noéws pev ay Kad\txdet rovTw ere dueheyouny, €ws adT@ THY TOU *Apdi- > 5 can > \ bi os “4 > oy be 4, ovos amédaxa pnow avi THs TOV ZyPov: eredy Oe ov, KalXikres, ovk eOédeas cvvdiaTrepavar Tov hoyov, aN obv io @ > > a“ > 4 > = af , ~ XN eS €.0d ye akover émdapBavov, édv ti cor SoKa pr) Kadas héyew. 17. av rl dalyyrat xré.; the em- phasis is on the indefinite, as in 472 a. 21. GAN épol aré.: on the assump- tion by Gorgias of the role of media- tor, and the justice of his claim to speak in the name of all, see Introd. § 13 fin. Cf 497 b. His request to proceed is a part of the artistic ma- chinery of the dialogue, in that it affords an opportunity for a general summary of what has been already learned in the discussion, which was necessary in order to proceed intelli- gently. —ov...mw: a rather unusual ‘tmesis,’ of which another example is “found in Jfeno 72 d od pévroe as Bov- Aopat yé mw xatéxw Td epwrepevor. 23. BovAopor ydp «ré.: with these words Gorgias expresses his approba- tion of Callicles’ opinion that a re- spondent is not necessary. ‘The chestnuts are good,—but just as good without the intervention of the , 28 2 , > > , , Kat PE E€QaV e€eheyxyns, OUK ay ber Oyjoopat oot cat. Hence -ydp to give a reason for the continuance of the discussion, kal aitds to show his agreement with Callicles, and airod to exclude the idea of co-operation. ‘The following kal adrds in the answer of Socrates corresponds to the similar expression of Gorgias. 26 f. ’Audiovos: Socrates answers with a pleasant allusion to 485 e. He will really assume the character of Amphion, which had been imputed to him, and as Amphion had in the plays of Euripides defended his call- ing, so will he prove that the claim of philosophy to be followed as a calling in life is a just and weighty one. 27. amé8wxa: the indic. is due to assimilation with the preceding indic. with & of the unfulfilled condition. 28 f. GAN odv ... émiAapBavou: see on 496 d and a above. TAATONOS TOPLAS. 209 St. I. p. 506. y ‘\ > , 3 XN s > / * % N 2 e WOTEP OU EMol, GAG peyLoTOS EvEpyETNS Tap E“ol ava- yeyparpes. Kaa. Aéye, @ dyalé, atros Kat répauve. LXII. Xo. "Axove 89 €& dpyts uot dvahaBdvtos Tov Adyov. "Apa 7d 7d Kal 76 dyafdy 76 airé éorw; OD > , ec > N XN A ec # # TAUVTOV, WS eya Kal Kaddikdys @poroyyoamev. TIdrepov oe > HOU oy ee SD. 0 a 4 x » > A6 ¥ € TO Nov eveka Tov ayalod mpaKtéov, 7 TO ayaor EeveKa € X /, 3 H8v o€ éorw TapOvTos d 5 TOU Hdeos; Td dv Evexa Tod ayafod. A @ s € , > XN N «& TOUTO, OU Tapayevopnevov NOdmeOa, aya Sé of ayabot éopev; Idvu ye. “Adda pny ayaboi yé éopev ~~ © a“ XN is , y 3 8 * 3 2 an Kat Hers Kal TANNA TaVTA, 07 ayabd éoTL, apeTns TWos # ” mm: n > S vo mapayevouerns; "Eumovye SoKxet avayKatov eivat, @ KadXi- Y' ’ 10 kAers. "AAAA prev Sy H ye apeTH ExdoTov, Kal oKEvouS 506 31 f. evepyérns dvayeypdier: this words may have been designedly 506 c c phrase is found in Hat. viii. 85, and was doubtless technical, the fut. pf. expressing like the legal pf. the final- ity and fixity of the action. It was quite common for Greek states to confer the title of evepyérns on citi- zens or strangers, especially foreign statesmen or princes, for services ren- dered them. The decree conferring the honor was engraved on stone and preserved. In Apol. 36 d Socrates claims the title for himself. The greatest benefit consists, according to 458 a, in freeing a man from error. 33. & dya0é: a friendly manner of address, which frequently, however, has an ironical coloring, or a tone of condescension, depreciation, or cor- rection. So in Lat., 0 bone, ¢f Hor. Sat. ii. 3. 81; or bone vir in comedy. LXII. 3. ds é€yd wal KadArkArjs Gporoyroapev: sc. in 495 ¢ ff. Cf especially 500 d. 6. tapayevouevov, wapovros: the chosen with reference to the nature of the ideas 750 and dyaddv, the for- mer being only a condition, the latter an actuality. 5. 480 8€ e€otiw xré.: on the 7u, cf. what Callicles has himself re- marked in 494 a, b, above, and espe- cially Phileb. 58 ¢ dpa rept Hdovqs ovx axnkdapev, ws ael yéveols éoriw, odcla 8 ove ot: Td wapdray Hdovfs. On the ayabdy, cf. above 468 b évex’ kpa rot aya0o0 amavra mowtow of mowouvres and Phileb. 54 ¢ odxoiv Hdovq ye, etrep yéveols éorw, Everd twos ovclas e avdynns ylyvoir’ tv—Ts ye why ob Evera 7d vend Tou yryvdpevoy del yiyvorr’ ay, év tH Tod Gyabot polpa exeivd ore. This distinction, however, even if intended, is not preserved, as can be seen from the following (8) dperis Tivos wapayevouerns. See on 497 e. 10. dperr: the subst. to denote the form in which the Good manifests itself in persons and things. Accord- ing to its real nature the Good re- a 210 20 25 506 507 a PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. T. p. 506. \ , XN a S ‘ , , > nA 3A Kal TWPLATOS Kal Wuxns ad Kat Cov TavTds, OV TH ELKY Kadota mapaytyverat, adda tae Kal dpOdrnt. Kat Z 9 ev > , 2A > ¥ A TEXIY, TUS ExdoTw aTodédoTaL a’Tav: dpa éoTw TavTa; > N XN # 4 5S Fd ‘\ Eyo pev yap dy. Taker dpa teraypevov Kat Kexoomn- 15 , 2 \ ar) Nc es . ® , z ¥ K , pevov EoTL H apeTH ExacTov; Painy av é€ywye. Koopos e » > , 2 ¢ + ees 2A > . TLS apa EVYEVOMLEVOS €V EKACOTM O EKAODTOVU OLKELOS ayabov , 9 a ¥ "HR 8 a TAPEKEL €KAOTOV TWY OVTWV ;s fLOLYE OKEL, Kat poy ¥ nw a“ apa Kdopov €xovea Tov éEauTHS apeivov THS akKoTpPyTOV; *Avaykn. “Adda pn 7 ye Koopov exovoa Koopia; Tas yap ov pédde; “H 6€ ye koopia cadpav; avaykn. “H dpa oddpav Wy ayaby. eya pev ovK exw qapa Tatra aha davar, @ pie Kaddirrtas: od 8 et EXELS, dvdacke. Kaa. Aéy’, oyallé. Z \ & > ¢ , > a € > Xo. Aéyw 57 O71, et coppav ayaly éorw, n Tovvay- # “Aw & i“ 7 > S ‘ yY ¢ TLOV TY oappove metrovOuca KaKY) E€OTW* TV be QauTy 1 mains one and the same, but its manifestation (the dperq) assumes various names according to circum- stances. 11. + elxq: on the use of the art. with adverbs, see Kr. 50, 5,10. The dat. is in the same construction as those following. 12 f. rage kal dpOdryTe kal rex vy: the two latter words simply complete the first. We might translate them as adjs. The addition of «dAdora scems to admit the possibility of a kind of aperq being brought about by other means than rdte: Kré. 16. 6 éxdorov olkeios: the nature of each thing conditions the peculiar- ity of its «éouos. Hence this may receive different names, according to the conditions. 22f. cv... SlSacke: Socrates turns now again to Callicles and tries to TIoAA7) 507 draw him into the conversation, be- 507 cause the argument has now been brought just to the point where Callicles broke it off before. 24, déye: go on with your exposi- tion. This answer is a refusal to co- operate and at the same time a neg. answer to ef éyeis. 25 ff. The idea of cwppootrn is de- fined in the most general way by the expression 1a mpoothkovra mpdrrecv. We attain to the idea of righteous- ness and piety by restricting the mpoonkovra to definite domains, ac- cording to the personages (men and gods) towards whom we have du- ties to perform. We attain to the idea of bravery by distinguishing between especial divisions of the idea Accordingly, we have on the one side didnew cal pevyev, on the other drouévovta Kaprepeiv, 4 TWPAaTTELY, a TAATONOS TOPTIAS. ¥ » > , appar TE Kat akohaaTos. Ildvv ve. 211 St. I. p. 507. Kal py 6 ye oo- dpev Ta TpocHKovTa parrot av Kal wept Geods Kal wept avOpamovs* ov yap av cwadpovot Ta py TpooyKovTa 30 Tparrwv. > , a> 4 Y Avayky TaUT EivaL OUT. Kat pay rept pev > ¥ x. # 4 , > x*# , avOpatrous TA TPOOYKOVTA TPATT@vV dikau av TpaTTot, ‘ 7 N gy 3 \ & # \. 9 4 Tept de Beovs OOLa* TOV de Ta Oikava KQL OOLA TPATTOVTA > + , 2 > avaykKyn dikacov KQLt OOLOV EWA. ¥ ion \ Eore tavta. Kat pev x. x Ss ar > + > x XN , > ¢ 87 Kai dvdpetsv ye dvdyKn: ov yap 8 oddpovos avdpds 3 ¥” , » 4 a aa , 3 27a 35 €oTW ovTEe SiwKew ovTE hevyew G fit) TpoorKeEl, GAN a det kal tpdypata Kat avOpdmous Kat ydovas Kal humas pevyey kat Sudkev, Kat ViromévovTa Kaptepew Orrov Set: @oTe TOMAH aveyKyn, ® KaddXjikders, TOV odppova, aomTEp / ¢ ” ‘N > n , g& ? XN dund\Ooper, Sixacov ovta Kal dvdpetov Kai dovov ayabov ¥ > , XN . 2? x S ‘ ox s 40 avdpa. EWOt TEAEWS, Tov O€ ayabov €U TE KaL KaAMS TI par- Tew &@ dv mpdtty, Tov 8 ev mpaTTovTa paKkdpidy TE Kal evdaipova eivat, Tov S€ movnpdy Kal KaK@s TparrovTa 36. 1Sovds Kal Avmas: added by > Socrates in his enumeration because it is just in these spheres that cwopo- ovvn is usually exercised. The point at which bravery necessarily coin- cides with it comes out in this way most emphatically. The exhibition of bravery under such conditions is also discussed in Lach. ch. xviii. 39 f. dyalov ... reAdws: ‘the per- fection of goodness.’ Cope. All the virtues combined make the dyaédv &y5pa. Wisdom is omitted, probably because Socrates has in mind only the earlier discussion, and besides he is taking for the moment the popular point of view; hence the collocation of gcvov with Sixaov, as in Protagoras. Besides, as Socrates’ view was that all evil-acting springs from ignorance, the fact that a man was Bdixaios, av- Speios, and dois would presuppose the possession of wisdom. 41. rov 8 e§ mpdrrovta Kré.: not in the sense “he who is fortunate,” so often found, but in the sense of the clause ed nal nad@s mpdrrew & by mpattn preceding ; otherwise it would be equivalent to paxdpioy cad ebdal- pova, and the syllogism would gain nothing. Plato therefore conceives ed mpdtrew & ky mpdtty the necessary basis for pardpioy evar, and the latter as the natural result of the former. Hence there is no case of a falla- cia secundum dictionem (by the use of homonyms or auqiBorla), but the conclusion 6 &kéAacros &OAt0s is correctly and legitimately obtained by a combination of the second state- ment with the first and without any fallacious or sophistical reasoning. 507 c 212 g eg dad PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 507. ¥ @ 2 oR ¥ c > , ¥ a , e aO\tov - OvTOS 5 av ely O EVAVTLWS EX@V TH cappon, oO a a Ni. 33) , akoAacTOS, Ov TV ETHVELS. LXIII. *Eya pev otv ratra ottw Tidewar Kai Pye tavta adynOyn civar: ef S€ eaotw adyOn, Tov Bovdrdsmevor, e x > / > , A , \ WS €OLKEV, evOaipova E€Wat cwdpoownv fev SuwKTéov Kat > ¢ > - % er e yy as oy AOKYTEOY, akoAaciav dé evKTeov WS Exel TOO@Y €KAOTOS eon \ , , \ \ a HOV, Kat TAPACKEVAOTEOV padiora pev pendev deta Oar tov Koddleoba, cov dé SenOn 4} aitds } GANS Tis TOY > , a > , x / > s , s Z olkeiwr, ) iduoTns 7 modus, emberéov Siknv Kai KokacTéor, ei pede evdaipwr eivar. e a x ovTos e“ouye SoKet 6 oKOTOS x S a Z a n \ , > a x E€wat, Tpos OV Bdérovra det inv, KQL TAVTA ELS TOUTO TA LXIII. 1 f. kal pype ratra: the repetition of taira causes these prin- ciples to appear especially weighty. 2f. tov Bovdcpevov . . Stwxréov: the verbal is equivalent here to de with the inf. The regular case for the agent is the dat.; the acc. is rare. See H. 991 a, and cf 480 e. The po- sition of ws goiwev, which belongs to the whole clause, is noteworthy. 4. ds exe wodav: i.e. to the full extent of his power, a phrase whose origin can be readily seen. Cf Hdt. vi. 116 ofroe pev 8h mepeéwAcoy Zovviov. "AOnvaio. 5é ws wodav elyov TdxioTa éBohbeov és To Batu Kat EpOy- cov darixduevor ply % robs BapBdpous fee, and Thue. ii. 90. 4 MeAorovyn- aio... Ewdeov ws efxe TdXous EkagTos én) rovs "AOnvatovs. On the use of the gen. with such adverbs as as, &pira, and fkavés, and éyew, see G. 168, 3; H. 757 a. 5. wapackevacréov: in «a middle sense, as is frequently the case with verbals, but only when used imper- sonally. 7. q Wudtys 7 wodts: disjunctive apposition to &AAos tes TOY oikelwy. Contrasted with wéaus, idudrns denotes 507 the individual; with apywy, the com- mon man who holds no office; with Snutoupydss and similar words, one who is not versed in a certain thing. — émGerdov Sixnv: Socrates deduces from the principles proven exactly the conclusions which, in his argu- ment with Polus, had so offended Callicles. Cf. 480, 481. 9 f. wdvra tad adrou: “all the powers of the body and soul.” Cf the passage quoted below (10), and Crito 46 b ra éud. The construction of kal mdyvta xté. shows another ex- ample of the common Greek idiom of following a rel. by a demonstrative. See on 452 d.—els rovro: takes up again otros 6 cxords for the purpose of recapitulating in its correlative clause, Srws «ré., the substance of what has been explained ; oftw again reiterates in one word the whole pre- vious participial clause, and connects it with mpdrrew, which has the same construction as (jv. The positive di- rections summarized in ofrw are still further fixed (after Plato’s habit) by the following negative direction 15 506 d TMAATOQNOS TOPIIAS. 213 8t. I. p. 507. e A 2 ? ‘ XN A / gy , B 10 a@uTOV OUYTELVOVTA KAL TA TYS Toews, OTWS Suxaoovvn / XN cS / fvX. ¥ 0 TapéoTa, Kal cwppoorwy THO pakapiw wédAdovte exec Oa, y s > > s 2A > , 5 XV OUTW TPaTTe, OUK em Oupias EWVTA aKOAGOTOUS €wat KAL e TavTas emiyepovvTa adynpovr, avyvuToy Kakdv, hyoTod Biov Cavra. ovTe yap av addr\w avOparw mpoadidys av ye a ¥ a a \ 207 y XN Ely) O TOLOUTOS OUTE beg: KOLV@VELV Y2p aovvaros * OT@ oe x ¥ , no > x ¥ BLY €Vl KOLV@VLa, gu t@ OUK QV Et”. gat & ot codoi, & KadXirdes, Kat odpavov Kat ynv Kai Beods Kal avOparovs 508 , , \ , \ \ THY KOLWOWVLAV OUVEX ELV KQaL gudiav Kat KOOMLOTYHTA Kau in the epexegetical participial clause ove eriOuulas e@vta...mAnpody. Af- ter wAnpodv we find the parenthetical criticism avjvutoy xaxdv, while the life of the man who attempts what is deprecated in the participial clause, is characterized very emphatically by the appositional tag which completes this rambling, intensely conversa- tional sentence. 10. ovvtelvoyra: the image is that of drawing the bow and aiming, to the employment of which, oxéros has led the way. We find in Rep. ix. 591 c the same image in a similar connexion, 3 ye vody éxwv mavra Ta adrov eis todTo tuvtelvas Biwoerat. 13. dyfvurov Kakov: “an evil to which there is no end.” The striving to satisfy the desires is also called an avivutoy épyov in Phaedo 84 a, and comipared with the web of Penelope, which was begun every day anew. On the apposition, see G. 137, 3; H. 626. 13 f. Ayorod Blov {avra: for the appositional partic. see Kr. 56, 15, 3. 15. dSuvaros: in an active sense. 16. Kxowwvia: in passing, Socrates shows that the only foundation for an all-embracing view of the world is found in correct morai principle. Both in nature and in the universe the harmony of the parts with each other and with the whole is essential for existence. The state, and, pro- ceeding further, the moral condition of the individual soul, should there- fore be modelled on the principle of general order which pervades the world.— ot cool: those especially meant are the Pythagoreans, to whose views Plato had had recourse before. Cf. 493 a. Pythagoras is said first to have applied to the world the name kécyos. He was followed by Empedocles with his scientific sys- tem, according to which there are two principles in the world, — love, gerstns (oropyn, “Agpodirn, apuovin), and hate, vetxos. The former is the cause of association and union, the latter of separation and disunion. Cf. Emped. 94, Karst. “AAAote pey gurdrnte ouvepxduer’ eis tv arava, | "AAdotre 8 ad ax’ Exacta popedueva velkeos &x@et. 18. cvvéxeav: the subj. of the inf. is ryy xowwviavy, as is shown by the art. as well as the connexion. Cf. Soph. 242 e rd dv... 2x Opa wad pirla ovvéxerat. The omission of the art. in enumerations is common. See on 450 d. 507 e 214 20 25 508 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 508. cadpootvnv Kat SiukaoTnTa, Kat TO GAOV TOUTO Oia TATA 9 , a 3 € a > > if 2Qv 2 KOO [LOV Kadovow, @ ETQLpE, OUK QAKOOPLLav ovoe akoka- , ou. \ yd 8 a“ > s x a , Gu O€ {OL OOKELS OU T POTEKELV TOV VOVV TOUTOLS, Kat tadta codods av, ahd\d EANOW ce ore y iodrys 7 * ‘\ > n x > + a / - l YEOMETPLKY) KL EV deo S KQL EV avO perros peya Svvarat: \ Qy , » a > a , \ 2 ou de meovettav OvEL dety QOKELW * YEMMETPLAS yop a jLe- ets. 19. Stkaernra: an unusual word for justice, formed like xooyedrys and igérns. It was probably chosen here on account of the assonance. Simi- larly Prot. 331 b radrdy éore Sixaidrys éoidtnTt. Xenophon also uses the word. 22. «al ravra: the regular Greek expression for “and that too.” See H. 612 a. 22 f. a -yewperptxy: adds a limi- tation to the iodrns, that absolute equality, which is impossible in any government. igdérns alone is purely arithmetical equality (a=); isdrns yewuetpixh is ratio or proportion (a:b::e:d). Plato distinguishes be- tween two kinds of iodrns in Leg. vi. 757 b, the one rhy pérpp Yonv kai orabug kad apiOus, the arithmetical; the second, tiv adnOecrarny kal dpl- orny iodtyta, the geometric, which is not comprehensible by every man, and which is dependent upon the judgment and decision of the gods. Of this he says (ib.): 7@ pev pelCom mAcia, TET erAdtrrou opyinpdrepa veuel, pérpia 3id0tca mpds Thy adtay iow éxatépy, kal 5) Kal Tyuds pelCoor pev mpos aperhy del pelCous, Tots dé Todvav- tlov éxovow dperis re kal maidelas 7d mpérov éxatépois amoveuer kata Adyor. On this isdrns, which is here opposed to rdcovetia, is founded the adminis- tration of justice in the state (ib. 7d elev 7 e€eheyKréos 87 ovTos 6 Adyos Hu €oTU, moditucdy Tour’ abt) Td Sikaov). Aris- totle also (Mic. Eth. v. 6, 7, Bekk.) refers 7d év diavouq dSixacov back to avadoyla, t.e. to icdrns Adywy, and adds, kadovar S¢ Thy To1adTHY avadoyiay yew- perpixhy of wanuatixol. Isocrates ex- presses himself to the same effect in Areop. (vii.) 20 ff., where he says of Solon and Cleisthenes, néyiorov abrots cuveBdAeTo mpds Td KaA@s oikeivy Thy méaw, bre duo isorhrow vopifopevaw elvat, kal THs méy Tab’Toy Gmacw amove- povons, Tis 5& 7d mpoohKov Exdoros, ov Hyvdouy Thy xpnoywrepay Kré. Thompson also quotes Plut. Mor. 719 b, according to which Lycurgus ‘expelled from Lacedaemon arith- metical equality, holding it to be democratic and levelling in princi- ple, and introduced the geometric, as better suited to a temperate oligarchy and monarchy.’ 24. yeopetpias ydp dpedeis: Plato considered mathematics as a nec- essary preliminary to philosophy. Hence the well-known pndels dyewpe- Tpntos eicitw pov Thy oréyny upon his house. 25. elev: sce on 466 c. Cf. 472 d, 480 a. — q éfeXeyxréos 81) xré.: the al- ternative appears as the obvious and necessary result of what precedes. The meaning and construction are similar to 482 b (as 0d xré). See on 467 a. 508 a TAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 2 , , ‘ Z 2 €oTw, oKentéov Ti TA oUpPBaivovta. 215 St. I. p. 508, « > , ‘N 4 , > sf 2 @s ov Sukacoavvns Kal Twdpocivys KTHTEL EvSaiwoveEs oF b evdaipoves, Kakias 5€ ot aOALoL (AOALOL), H El OUTOS aANOYs ‘\ ¢ 2 a Ta mpoobey éxetva, @ Kadvikdes, cupBaver rdvra, ed’ ots ot pe ypou, el , , , y , ¥ \ 30 orovddlav héyount, A€yovTa STL KaTnyopyTéov ein Kal eon a 2 Ves 27 > a Vina e a QUTOU KL VEOS KAL ETALPOV, EGY TL aduKy, KL TY) PYTOPLKY > a # Xa ay 3 4 ¥ €7L TOUTO XPNATEOV °* KQL a TIl@Xov alta Kuy mou OvyKX@- 7 > na» > x 5 ‘ 5 A a 35 a pew, ann apa WV, TO Eval TO GOLKELY TOV a ixeto Oar, y ¥ , , Nous , 2 oowTep ato KXLov, TOOOUT@ KQAKLOV* KAL TOV péddovTa op- e n c XN ¥ ¢ ¥ a 4 a 5 , 35 Jas pytopiKdv ecco Oar Sikaov apa Set evar Kal émuory- 508 c prova Tav Sikaiwr, 6 ad Topyiay én Iados ov’ aioyvvnv dpohoynoan. LXIV. Tovrwy dé otras eydvtwv oxepdpea, ti Tor’ > A a NX > XN > # Ss “ f a ¥ e €oTly & od epor dvediles, dpa Kakas héyerat 7 Ov, ws ¥ > X > er > * & a ¥ | n ¥ A apa éyw ovx olds T eit BonOnoa ovte EuavT@ ovTEe TOV y > ‘ QA a > , 20> 9 a 2 a , ditwy ovderi ovb€ Tav oikeiwy, OVS Exo@oaL EK TOV peEyt- , 7 N XN 3 N A / v ey OTWV KLVOUVOY, ELLE dé €7Tb T@ Bovdopéva WOTTEP Ol ATL- a » pot [Tod eBédovtos], dv te TUmTEw Bovdytat, TO vEariKoy 27. ot dOdAvtot dOAvtot: if the emen- dation is correct, we have an example of chiasmus, as in 498 d. 28. rh rd cvupPalvovra: the sing. ri inquires for the general result, which may include various details. See Kr. 61, 8, 2. 32. a IIddov aloxuivyg xré.: with this Socrates avoids the accusation that he may have defended those prin- ciples only for the sake of confuting his adversary. They are seen now to be quite necessarily bound together with a moral view of life. Note the difference in the tenses, cuyxwpeiv (equiv. to cvvexéper) and below (87) bporoyiioa (equiv. to duordsynce). LXIV. 3. ds odx olds 7 elpl aré.: this objection Callicles had only brought forward as a possibility, not as an actual fact (486 a, b). Socra- tes treats it as the latter, but even thus it does not misrepresent Calli- cles’ sentiments. 5 f. dorwep of dripor: see on 486 c. As the reading stands, rot é@éAovTos must be considered as a variant for én) r@ Bovdopevy. In spite of Plato’s fondness for momaAlfa, it is hardly likely that he would use BotAcecOu and 6éAew as identical in meaning. 6 f. to veavexoy Sy TovTo: in appo- sition to the whole clause, but more especially to the words which follow. See on 447 a. For the meaning, see on 482 ¢. a 508 da 216 10 15 20 508 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 508. 57) TovTo Tov Gov Adyou, emt Kdppys, eav TE ypHuara 3 = 7% > - 2 Pe / oF ‘\ apaipeto Oar, €dv te exBadrrew ex THs Toews, dv TE, TO ETXaToV, amoKTewat' Kal ovTw SiaKxeloOar ravrwv 87 ¥” / > ¢ c x e c - + Bo gy aicx.rtov €otiv, ws 6 ods dyos. 6 S€ Ox) Eds GoTLs TOd- , . ¥ Adis pev On etpytat, ovdev S€ KwAver Kal eT. héyer Oa: ov dnt, ® Kaddikdeus, 7d TUrTec Oar ext Kdppys adixws ¥ 5 a atoxurtov elvat, oddé ye TO TéuverOat ovTE TS TOA TO 2 4 »” XN , > x x , No 3 N ‘ euov ovte TO Badddyriov, ddAAa 7b TUTTE Kal Eue Kal ‘N TA Cua ddikws Kal Téuvew Kal aioxiov Kal KadKLOV, Kal Khéntew ye dua Kat avdparodiler Oar Kal Torywpuxelv Kat ovddnBonv dtiovy dduKety Kal eue Kal Ta eua TH NON be Has ddukobyte Kal KaKLoy Kal alayLov civar 7 e0l TH adiKoV- / an con * > aA 3 fad / / a He@. TavTa nuiv avw éxet év Tots mpdaUe hoyots ovTw x € 3 XN , £ X. a 7 > > gaverra, as €ya déya, KQTEXETQL KL déderar, Kat et aypot- 509 hi f > a. > mm \ 9? 4 s KOTEpov TL eimely eoTW, TLONpols Kal ddapnavTivors hdyoss, 10. doris: viz. éoriv, The omis- sion of the verb in the dependent question is very uncommon. 11. étu: almost equivalent to é: wAeovaKs. : 13. répverOar To capa: may be a delicate allusion to 473 ¢ (é«réuynra) as Td BadAdyrioy and KAérrev to 486¢ (ind 38 rev ex Opav wepitvAacOa Tacay Thy obclav), but it is more probable, owing to its common association with Badddyriov, that réuvecOa: is used generally like the Lat. secari. In view of Socrates’ poverty, this savors of humor. 2 14. Badddvriov: a leathern purse for carrying money, which was fas- tened to the girdle. The BaddAavrio- tduot (cut-purses) were men who made a business of slipping off such purses in the market-places and the baths, and against whom it was difficult to protect one’s self. This sentence is ous results of the principle defended by Callicles, which was sure to intro- duce the most outrageous kinds of a5icia. Apropos of this, cf also the view of Thrasymachus in Rep. i. 344, especially b ral yap fepdovaor kal dvdpa- mwodioral Kré., of kata pépn adikovvres TGV ToLOUTwY KaKoUpynudTwy KaAOUYTAL* éreidav 8€ Tis mpds Tots TaY ToAITeY Xphuact Kal adrods avdpamodicduevos Sovrdontra, avtl tovTwy Tov aloxpav dvoudtwy eddaluoves kal pakdpror Ké- KAnVTaL. 20 £. Kal el dypoixorepov tu elarety: see on 462 e. The «ad ef shows that the word used is correct, though harsh. See crit. note on 503 a. The definite indic. is used in order to ex- cuse the unusual comparison of argu- ments to iron and steel fetters. The simile is well chosen, and is a good retort on Callicles, who in 484 a had also a commentary on the mischiev- 598 e 509 a TIAATONO® YPOPYIAS. 217 8t. I. p. 509. € a x 8 / € s a X > ‘ , a oS _ as your av dd€eev ottwai, ods od ei pi) NVoELS 7) GOD Tis , > er 2 F: x € > NX a“ vEeaviKdTEpos, OVX oldv Te GAdAwS EyovTa 7) aS eyw VoV Z ~ , > N » Aéyw Kahas héyew Exel Ewovye 6 avtds ddyos éortiv dei, y > % nn 2 ) 9 * y x @ > \ > 25 OTL EYW TAUTA OVK OLOM OTWS EXEL, OTL [JLEVTOL WY EYa) EVTE- , : Y a 29 N er >> NO» s \ TUX KA, BETEP VUV, OVOELS oids T eoTiV ahdws héywr pH ov Katayédacros civar. eyo pev ody ad TiOnur Tadra y n Qn ouTws eyew: ef b€ ovTws ever Kal péyioToV TOV KaK@V b €oTw 4 adikia T@ adiKodYTL Kal ere ToUToU petlov peyt- m” > er \ 18 a ‘ ¢ , o 30 OTOU GVTOS, Ei OldY TE, TO AOLKOUYTA py SiddvaL Sikny, Tiva a , \ , ” Os. 8 a av Bornbevav pur) Suvapevos avOpwros Bonfetv éavt@ kara- Z Kn ‘es , x > > , vy > yéhaoros av TH adybeia ein; apa ov ravrny, ATLs arro- XN an Tpéper THY peyioTnyv nav BaBynv; add ohh} avayKy a > ® > « # X 4 Tavrny eivar THY aicxiorny BoyPaav py Sivacbar Bon- 509 characterized the laws and moral rules as bonds which the true man must break through (d:apphtas). 22. oitwot: “as matters stand,” i.e. so far as these principles have been tested. They may be attacked with new arguments, in which case new defences would have to be made. — él px] Avoets: the stern minatory con- ditional form. See on 502 b. 23. veavikdtepos: i.e. who is more powerful and courageous, just as Cal- licles surpassed Polus, and Polus Gor- gias.—6 ards Adyos: cf. 506 a obdé yap tywye cidus Adyw & A€yw. 25 f. av... évrervxyka: on this unusual kind of attraction, see G. 153, 2; H.996a. We miss a mention of the persons with doep viv. 26 f. px od: after a negatived lead- ing verb, the negative of the inf. is generally made by yw} od. See Madv. Syn. § 211; GMT. 815. 27. av riOnpe: sc. as against the op- posing opinions of all others. This statement now, taken as a basis (ei 5& otrws éxer) leads to a conclusion which is given in the form of a question. 7Onu is frequently used of the laying down of a principle or assumption. Cf. Rep. ii. 8361 b rowitroy Oévtes Tov Sixasov, Theaet. 191 ce. 509 29 f. rovrov peitov peylorou dvros: D notice the comparison of the superla- tive. 33. dAAd: introduces a more defi- nite and detailed statement of a thought involved in the previous question. 34. ravtny elvor tyy aloxloryy «ré.: a noteworthy instance of the employment of a very common con- struction, which is as old as Homer (Kr. Di. 55, 3, 8). Logically we should expect rabtyy Thy Bohbeay ph Sivacbac Bonbety atoxioroy elvai. But Bondeav, being uppermost in the speaker’s mind, is made the subject, instead of cognate accusative, drawing also the predicate after it (see on 449 b,c). In this way ph dtvacOa Bonbetv is characterized as a species, and the 218 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 609. “ 4 ~ in 35 Dew pare ait@ pyre Tots avtov didow re Kal oixetots, , XN * an an a Seurépay S€ tiv rod Sevrépov Kakov Kai Tpirny Ti TOD c - % S 9 c ¢ 4 = Ca - Tpitov Kal TadAG oUTWS, WS ExdoTOV KaKOU méycos Tépv- y \ A > KEV, OUTW Kal KaNOS TOD SuLaTdy Elva ef’ Exacta Boy- 6 = ‘ > , a , > ¥ Xx y ¥ x ew Kal ataxuvn TOU py. apa addws 7 oUTWS EXEL, @ 40 KahXikhets ; Kaa. Ov dhdas. LXV. Xo. Avoty ody ovrow, rod dducety Te Kai aduKel- ’ 6 beg ¥. ‘ X > a ¥ ‘ * oa, petlov pe dapev Kakdyv TO ddixetv, Ehatrov dé 7d 25 a Q oR O*R , ¥ Q aduetobar. Ti ody dv TapacKevacdpevos avOpwros Bon- e ¢ ~ a 2 / ‘ a * # ¥. Onoeev avT@, wate audotepas Tas @Pedias TavTas eyeu, a, > & nw ‘\ > om ‘ % > % aA *, 3 “ 5 THY TE ATO TOD py GOLKELY Kal THY aT TOD pH adiKetaOaL; A ve 4 x - «@ \ - , 3% Totepa Svvayw } Bovlnow; Bde dé hé€yw: aérEpov eav « , LO “ 0 3 iO , x 2s , py Bovrntar adicetoOar, odk adixyoerat, ) cay Sdvapw f wn \ mn TAparkevaoynTat TOU py AdiKetaOat, OvK adiKHOETAL ; Kaa. Ajdov 81 rotré ye, ore éay Svvapw. Xo. Tt d€ 89 Tov adicely; méorepov éay py BovrAnTau 509 most shameful species, of onde, b which was pretty exactly Plato’s opinion of the assistance which the orators were in the habit of rendering to themselves and their friends before acourt. This assimilation is extended to the following clauses, Sevrépay etc., for the sake of consistency. 38. éf exacta: viz. Kaxd, which are conceived as the enemy to be fought. Instead of aisxuvn we should have expected aicxdvnv. 41. ov dAAws: it is remarkable that after his utterances in 505 d Cal- licles allows himself to be again drawn into the discussion. ‘Exay aéxovri ye 6uu@; For that the answer slips from him unconsciously, instead of being a willing admission, seems to follow from éorw oa Tovro (510 a), where his earlier disposition again becomes plain. LXV. 1. rov dStketv xré.: in appo- sition to the duozv. 4. dydordpas: the following inves- tigation takes up each of the two cases separately. 6. BUvapiv 7 BovAnow: what has been determined in 466 d regarding SvvacGar and BovaAccOa still holds good, but is expanded in what follows. 7. dSukroerat: the fut. middle as a passive occurs more commonly with pure verbs. See Kr. 39, 11; H. 496. 9. SyAov &r x7ré.: the form of the answer shows very willing agreement, which applies, however, only to this particular point. 10. rl &€ &y rod Kré.: of. Phaedo 78 d rl 5 Tav TOAAGY Kady, ofov 509 d TIAATONOS POPIIAs. 219 St. I. p. 509. > Aw - ‘ n> > 4 > X io £ a x QouKely, tKaVOVY TOUT €OTLY— OU yap QOLKYHOEL — 1) Kat 2\ a a , , Ns , €77l TOVTO det dvvapiv TW KAL TEXVHV TapacKkevacacbat, e € 2s \ ‘0. > XN \ 2 , 35 , , 9 @S, €AV [LN PAUY AVTA KAL ATKYHOY, AOLKYOEL; TL OUK > / a > / x , , / avTd yé po TOTO amreKpivw, ® Kaddixdets, woTepov cou 15 Soxovpe 6pOas avayxacOynvas Gporoye év Tots eumpo- 20 509 obev doyous eyed Te Kat I1@Xos H ov, Hvika apohoyyoapev pndéva Bovddpevov adduxetv, aN’ dkovtas Tos douKovVTaAs - 2 a“ TAVTAS QouKew ; Kaa. "Eotw oot tovto, & YéKpares, ovtws, wa Siame- 510 pavys tov héyov. ee an ¥ ec ¥ 4 > Xo. Kat émi rovro dpa, ws €ouxev, TapacKevacréov €ore \ gy XN > Svvapiv Twa Kal TéxvyY, OTaS py AOdiKHOOMED. Kaa. Ilavv ye. Xa. Tis od mor éativ téxvn THS TapacKerys TOD pyndev > A xa « > 4 a a XN an yy 25 ddiucetoOar ws ddiyoTa; oKepar ei Tot SoKel Hep 2 7 €L01. 3 \ \ x A HO a oN ” 8 a 2 EOL ev yep Soxet n €* y QUTOV apXew ew €eV = , Xx \ a x ie € , 7 TH Toe 7 Kal Tuparvew, HY THS UTapxXoveNns ToXLTELas ¢ A i €TQLPOV €wat. avOpdrav ) inmwv...; dpa kara Tava zxer xré. It is not necessary to sup- ply wep! or some other word; when put thus freely at the beginning of the sentence, the genitive is held up to view and the case lost sight of. See Rid. § 27. The ace. also is occasion- ally thus ‘freely’ used. Cf Lyc. 28 kal TavTa éuod Oewphoare, ws dikalav Thy ékéracw rotounevov wep) TOUTwY. 12. Svvapiv Kal réxvqv . . . podly kal doko: an example of chiasmus. Knowledge is preserved and strength- ened by practice. 13. ds... d&ukyoer: the causal use of as is not common. See Kr. 65, 8; H. 925.—avurd: for the neut. pl. referring to two preceding fem. sings. see Kr. 58, 3,5; H. 630, 633. 13 f. rl otk... dmexplvw: see on 503 b. 17. Bovdcpevov: for the usual éxdvra, in order not to diminish the contrast between duvauis and BovAn- ois. Besides, it has just been shown to Polus that he who does wrong does only what seems to him good, not what he wishes, because the wish is always for the good. 22. adSikyoopev: according to (the amended) Dawes’ canon ézws in ob- ject clauses cannot be construed with the first aor. subjv. either act. or mid- dle. See GMT. 363, 364. 28. éraipov: the common word to express party affiliation (hence also éraipeta, “clubs”’), as in Apol. 21 a ipay TE WANE: Eraipos. 509 510 220 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 510. “A > ci ~ v 7 > “ Kaa. ‘Opas, ® Sdékpares, ws €y@ ETOULOs Ele Emawely, b n in n ac n > 30 dv Te Kaha@s éyns; ToUTd por SoKeEts wavy Kahds eipy- Kevar. LXVI. Sa. Uadaree 87) Kat rdd€ edv cou SoKw ed héyew. an > @ % didos pot SoKel ExacTos ExdaTw elvat ws oldv TE wahtoTa, y e , \ \ , «we € a a OvTEp Ol Tadaot TE KaL Topot A€éyougw, “Oo Opmotos TH 6potw.” ov Kal coi; » 5 Kaa. Epovye. ? nn y s ¥ 3 ¥ 4 x Xo. OvKodyv mov TUpavyds EoTW apywy ayplos Kat > s ” 4 >? oN , ‘ , dmatdevtos, el Tis TovTOv év TH ModE Todv BedTiny ¥ a , xa > ‘\ c a, X\ 4 ein, poBotro Symov av avTov 6 TUpavvos Kat TOUT 3 Y a a ° ¥ 4 v , é& dmavtos Tov vod ovK av Tote Svvaito dihos yevé- ec 10 Bau i ¥ nan Kaa. Eovrt Tavra. es 29. dépds x7é.: expression of joy 2. éxarros éxdorw: does not de- 510 that Socrates, with whom Callicles has had so often to agree unwill- ingly and under protest, now speaks quite to his liking. ‘This view is the one thought of his life. Cf 475 a. LXVI. 1. okome « édy cot Soke «ré.: for the construction with oxére: see H. 1016 c, and on 452 c. Cf. above ina. ‘What is worth no- ticing upon this usage is that éay gives a different shade of meaning from the more usual ¢7. The ques- tion submitted is represented by it as a perfectly open one; whereas ei would limit the speaker’s foregone conclusion, and give a certain ap- pearance of positiveness. édv is therefore chosen for the sake of ex- pressing more perfect courtesy, in contexts such as this, which relate to the conduct of a dialogue.’ Rid. § 64. note an unlimited reciprocality, but a restricted one, as is shown by the following 6 dpuotos Ta bpoly. 3. Ovmep . . A€youvow: which the wise men of old mean when they say (Aéyovowv). The following proverb occurs very early,e.g. in Homer p 218 @s aiel roy duotov tye: Beds ws Toy éuotov. Plato often employs it, e.g. Prot. 337 d 7d yap dpuotov TH dpol pice avyyevés eotiv, Symp. 195 b 6 yap madaids Adyos ed Exel, ws Suotov duotw del weAdCe, Lys. 214 b 7d dpotov TH Suoig avaynn adel pidrov elva. Of kindred import is the well-known verse fA Hawa Tépte, yépwv 5é Te tépre yépovra, alluded to in Phaedr. 240 c. 6. dmov tipavvos Kré.: ‘where a savage and illiterate ruer is lord and master. Cope. In what follows, rov- vou refers to tépavvos, TovTw through aurdy to the ris. 15 20 510 da TAATQNOS YPOPTIAS. Xa. OddE ye €¢ Ts TOAD HavddreEpos Ein, OVD GV OUTWS* a \ a n \ ¥ KaTappovot yap Gv avTov 6 TUpavVos Kal OVK GY TOTE WS Tpos pirov crovddcetev. Kaa. Kat ratr’ addy 67. 7 ‘ 2 a , » / , ot Xa. Aciaerar 57) exetvos pdvos akios Adyou dihos TO 4 a xa e 1) »” >» \ , ‘ 2 an TOLOUTM, OS av OmonONS wr, TavTa Weywv Kal Emaar, 7 » Noe A ae EOén apxerOar Kal vroKetcOar TH apyxovTt. oUTOS méya. > - led ¥ , ~ > ‘ ¢ > 4 €v TavTn TH TOhEL SvVYTETAL, TODTOY OVSEls Yaipwr adLK%- TEL. OVX OUTS EXEL; Kaa. Nat. >» 2 , : , a t a , Ya. Ec apa TLS EVVONTELEVY EV TAUTY ™7) TOAEL TWV VEW), 4 a , 2 N s , ‘ s > , TWQa av Tpomov eyo eyo duvaiunu KQaU pndets BE adukoln, y « ¥ > a 586 2 »Q% 2 / 2Q7 avTn, @S EoiKer, avT@ ddds éoTW, EvODS Ex véou eOilew 12. 08 dv otras: is to be com- pleted according to the previous remark of Socrates. 16. dftos Adyou dldos: pred. after Aeiwerat. According to the nature of the case none other could come under consideration as lasting friends of the tyrant, even if they should show themselves friendly for a time. 17. rata péeyev Kat ématvetv: like Tos abtois xalpew Kal axbecOx is the external sign of a similarity of dispo- sition and friendliness. See on 473 a. 18. vmoxciobar: in the elsewhere not uncommon meaning, “to be sub- ject to.” Its use here is to emphasize the degradation in the eyes of a free man. Cf.also Crito 53 e bmepyduevos 5h Bidce: wdvtas avOpdmous Kal SovActwy. 19. xalpwy d&tkqoe: the partic. denotes the result of the verb. “He will have no reason to rejoice,” z.c. he will not injure him with impunity. Cf. Soph. O. R. 863 aan of ti xalpwv dis ye mnuovas épets. 22. el dpa tis: the case which So- crates here assumes in illustration ot serves not only to enliven the dis- course, but also to show (as opposed to the objections of ch. XL.) how un- worthy and debased an object would have to be set before educators if the possession of power in the state is to be the leading aim of mankind. — Noteworthy is the use of the direct question after the introductory prot- asis, and furthermore the omission of some apodosis corresponding to the protasis, like yvoin &y 671, in place of which we find és @ow«ev. Kr. gives other similar examples in 65, 6, 14. Similar cases occur in Latin.— év ravTy tH moder: see on 468e. The position is noteworthy. 23. pnSels pe ddtkoly: wh was the negative of the wish, underlying the question, and is thus retained. It is therefore not necessary, with GMT. 292, 2, to suppose an idea of preven- tion to be involved. How could I ob- tain great power and no one do (prevent any one from doing, GMT.) me wrong ? 221 St. L. p. 510. 222 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 610. eon a > a , NO» a / ‘ 25 avTov Tots avTois xaipeny Kal axecIar 7H SeomdTy, Kat , ” 9 A Tapackevalew Omws OTL padtoTa dpotos eoTar exeivey. ovx ovTwS; ; Kaa. Nai. Sa OvK A , x ‘ ‘ LO a 0 ‘ 4 8v . OdKody TovTm Td pev py adiKetoOar Kat péya Ov- e 30 vacOat, ws 6 vuwerepos Adyos, &v TH mdAEL StamrempakeTar ’ Perey FO Ee} Pp : Kaa. Idvv ye. > > a n na» Zo. Ap’ obv Kal TO py ddicetv; 7 ToAdoD Sel, Elzrep a ¥ Gpotos ota T@ ApKovTt OvTL ddikw Kai Tapa TOVTw Méya. Suvyjoerar; GAN otpar eywye, TaY TobvarTioy ovTwWot 7 35 TapacKeun eoTar avT@ emt 7d olw TE elvar ws mAEloTA > a ‘ 18 a X 00 / > , dduKely Kal ddiKodvTa un Siddvan Siknv: A yap; Kan. Baiverau. 2 “ X\ 4 > ~ XN ¢ o pd Sa. OdKody 75 péyioroy aiT@ Kaxov Urdp&e. poxOnpe@ sil ¥ x ‘ ‘ Xx Xr , 3 x ‘ , a ove Thy Wuxyy Kat ehkaBynuevw dua THY piwnow Tod 4 \ 8 ¢ 40 Seomdtov Kat VV aLLY. > 9 Kaa. Ovx 000” orn otpépers Exdarore Tos Méyous avw ‘\ 4 > vd x > > y @ € at Kal KdTw, @ LHKpates: H ovK oiaHa dre otros 6 pmov- Pevos TOV 7) LyLovpevoy Exelvov arroKTeveEl, Eav BovAynTal, kal apaipyoeras Ta OvTO.; 510 30. Sawempdgerat: the fut. pf. is 41. diy otpédeas: the last conclu- 511 © employed to express finality or fixed- sion of Socrates is not agreeable to ness. Cope translates, “he will es- Callicles, who therefore declares it an tablish for himself a lasting immun- arbitrary perversion of the argument. ity from,” etc. See on 469 d. The otpépew &vw kdtw (see on 481 e), 35. éwl to olw re elvar: this is the twisting this way and that of considered by Callicles and Polus as words and ideas so that their sense an end to be desired.—On the change was reversed, was an important de- of case, of» and ddicotyra, see on partment of Eristic. 492 b. 43. éav BovAnrat: the use of Bov- 511 40, kal Svvapiw: the way to be- AccGau again shows that the detailed ® come powerful, says Socrates above, explanation by Socrates of the differ- js to imitate the deamdrns. Hence nal ence between BotdAccOar and doxeiv Sbvauy is the power (7d peya ddvacdar) (ch. XXIII. f.) was in vain. Hence obtained by this ulunois (drws 87 wd- Socrates himself ceases to regard it Ara dpotos egrat). in his answer. 45 50 55 511 223 8t. I. p. 511. Xa. Otda, dyahé Kaddixheus, eb py Kwodds y cipi, kal bd gov axovwv Kat IaXou aptt mohdaKis Kal TOY add\wy TIAATONOS TOPYIAS. 2 7 , “a 2 me , > * * ~*~ = a »* dXtyou TavTav THY ev TH TWOhEL* GAG Kal OV Eu“oU akoveE, 4 > Lied - xX £ 3 ‘XN % a ‘\ OTe atroxtevet pév, av BovAntat, ddA Tovnpds dv Kahov Kayabdv ovra. Kaa. Ovdxody tovT0 67 Kat 76 dyavakrtyTor ; > a ¥ € € , , a ¥ Xo. OF vou ye ExovTt, @s 6 Adyos Onpaiver. 7 ole nan »¥ an detv TodTO TapacKevaler Oar advOpwror, ws metoTov xpo- vov Cyv, kai pederav tas Téxvas Tavras, at Has det ex wn 4 , or . om ‘ , : | tav kwovvev adlovow, woTep Kal Hv od Kedevers ene c pederav THY pyTopiKny THY év Tots SikacTypios Siacd- Covaap. Kaa. Nat pa Aia dp0as yé cou cup Bovdrevor. LXVII. So. Ti 8€, & Bédrvore; 7H Kal y Tov vety éme- OTHPYN TEuvy Tis cot SoKel Elva; 45. el py kodds y ell: “ otherwise I would have to be deaf.” Cf. Prot. 349 @ ndAAtoTOv... ei wh palvoual ye. 46. mwodAdkis: 486 b, 466 ¢, et al. 48. droxrevet pev xré.: of. Plut. Agis 20 6 pev obv Avis em) Thy orpayydAnv mopevdpevos, as eldé Tiva TaY SrnpeTav daxptovra kal mepimadodvra, “ watcal Tes, XaAerdTata pepw Sri dpO ce adl- kws droOvijcxovra. roy dé A€yerat Kata- Phoavra avrod Thy Kepadyy elretv, Sb 3d, & pidtate "AwoAAddwpe, maAAov by éBovaAou pe épav Sixaiws amoOvijcnovta ; 51. ds 6 Adyos onpalve.: assumes that the statement has already been proved by the course of the argu- pe” elrev,“& kvOpwre, kAaiwy. xalyap ment. Cf 527 ¢. ottws mapavdéuws Kal adixws dmroAAvpe- 52 f. Setv... {yv: against such an vos kpeirtay eiul Tv avaipovvTwr.” 50. kal to dyavaktyntov: xal is climactic and the art.emphatic. “So far from this circumstance mitigating the outrage, is it not just the revolt- ing part of it,” i.e. especially revolt- ing? Callicles puts himself in the place of the one who suffers the wrong, but with a feeling quite the reverse to that of Agis, quoted in the preceding note. In a similar manner Apollodorus says in [Xen.] Apol. 28 ’AAAG TobTo eywye, & Séxpa- over-valuation of life Socrates de- clares himself also in Apol. 28, 29; Crito 48 b. 55. trv pyropicyv: the position is very emphatic. For examples of the rel. clause preceding the antecedent, see Kr. 51, 11. 57. ovpBovrAevwv : connected in construction with the last words of Socrates, as is frequently the case in answers. Cf. 451 d dpOas ye Adyov ot, 473 b aAndi ye oiduevos tows. See Kr. 56, 8, 7. c 224 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. S11. ‘ ” » Kaa. Ma At’ ov« euwovye. > K \ x 14 * 9 > 0 - x. > 6 # s. Kat pny ole: ye kat avrn éx Oavdrov Tovs avipw- Y > a a n n > 5 Tous, OTav Els TOLOUTOY euTéeTwo, Ov Sel TAVTYHS THS ETL- / OTHLNS. i. 2. #M XN - a 2 ra *, x Cova TavTyns Epo, THY KUBEpryTLKyD, ) od pdvoy Tas Puxas » 99 Y a . 45 2 7 , €u 8 QvuTy Tob doKet OplKpa e€wal, eyw OOl fLel- d iC LANG Ay ‘\ 7 ‘ * ¥ > Let ole, aida Kal TA TOMaTA Kal TA XpHmaTa, EK TOV éox ator KWovver, @oTEp Y pNTopiKy * Kal avTn [ev 10 mpoceotadpey éativ Kal Koopia, Kal od cepyiverat 3 co € € ¥ £ # > *. ETXNMATLOUEVN WS UTEpHpavoey TL duatpatromern, adda > ‘ ¥ a a 2X \ > + 7 TavTa Svampatromern TH SukamKy, avy pev e€€ Alyivyns 8 n , > 8 ” > 8 2 , 34 oe 2 eipo adon, oa dv dBorods éempa€ato, éay dé e€ > , XK > an / oN , a Atyvatov 7 €« tov Ilovtov, eav Taptodv, TAVTHS THS iv > # - a % » * s .& 15 peyadns Eevepyeotas, CwoOacga a vuven €heyor, KQL QUTOV e 511 LXVII. 5. rovotrov: has its cor- as dyvoe? radra & mpds rods &AXous - Cc d relative in 0, which, like other rel- ative adverbs, often stands for a prepositional phrase, as here equiv. to év ¢. Frequently we find 7) added to rowtrov. The sense of roiodroy is made clear by the context. 8. ra ocopata Kal td Xprpara: probably this phrase was a common one, and we must therefore not press a contrast between 7a odpara and ras wuxds, which latter refers espe- cially to their lives. Thompson sup- poses, with some probability, that cépata refers to the other members of the passenger’s family, who may be conceived as belonging to him. Perhaps “goods and chattels” may be as good a rendering as any. 10. mpooerradpevy: “retired,” ie. unpretending. Still stronger is cuve- oradpuévos, as eg. in Isoc. Panath. 230 amfer gpovtmdrepos -yeyernuévos kal guvecradpévny Exwy thy didvo.ay (“with a fecling of humility”). 11. xy npariopevy : cf Soph, 268 a ds €id@s éoxnudriotat (“ which he has pretended to know”). 12. ry Sixavexyg: used by Socrates instead of 77 pnropicp because this species of the art affords the most room for comparison. 13. $v’ dBoAous: z.e. about six cents. The price was accordingly very low, if, as is shown by what follows, the fare from Egypt or Pontus (a dan- gerous voyage besides) for 4 whole family, including baggage, was only two drachmae, or about thirty-five cents. — érpdgaro: ‘gnomic’ or ‘em- piric’ aorist. 15. avrov: the regular designation for the master of the house, who is frequently opposed to the rest of the family as here. See on 447¢. The order of enumeration is noteworthy as showing the low estimation in which the women were held. The pl. may be due to assimilation to matdas, as we say “wife and child,” or it may be collective, “women folks.” 20 25 511 512 a 9 “ ITAATONOS TOPYLIAS. 25 St. I. p. 511. ‘ key XN , ‘ a > , > > Kal Taldas Kal YpHpaTa Kal yuvatkas, atoBiBdoao’ eis &. , e x > - XN . 6 ” % Tov Ayséva Svo Spaypas érpa£ato, kal adtds 6 Exar THY , \ n , > Q . \ , Téxynv Kal TadTa Svampagkdpevos exBas Tapa THY Odhar- Tav Kal THY vady TepuTaTel ev peTpiv oyrpati. doyile- oOo yap, oiwat, érioratat, ore adyddov eoTw, ovaTWas TE apérnkey TOV cupTedvrwy ovK éaoas KaTaToVvTwOnVaL kal ovotwas eBrarev, cidas Tu ovdev attovs PBedtious 512 2 , a a > 7s + X , »” ‘ e€eBiBacev 7 ot evéByoav, ovTe TA GHpata ovTE Tas puxds. ? S x a s x QvLaTos vooymac KATH TO DWHA TDUVEXOMEVOS 47) Noyilerat ovv, OTL OVK, EL LEY TIS peyadots Kal Y > > id fg > , a \ ” , 2 y > > + \ aTrEeTTVLYYN, OUTOS bev aO\t6s E€OTW OTL OUK amébavev, KQU > X\ € > Ss n * ¥ > 8 ee ” > an “A 7 oveey UT QAuUTOU apéedrnrat * €lb O€ TLS apa €V TO TOU CWULa- 18. rapa tiv Oddarrav: also effec- tive in the portrayal of the seaman’s unpretending nature. 19. év perplw oxTpare: with unas- suming carriage, has nothing to do with the dress, but merely with the deportment (cf. above, mpoceorad- pwevn). Perhaps there is a slight hit at Gorgias’ pompous manner. See Introd. § 5 fin. 19 f. Aoyltec Oat... erlorarar: nat- urally not meant in full earnest, and not without some color of irony. The change of tense in apéAne and @Barawe is probably due merely to the fre- quency of the form. 20 f. otorivas wheAnke Kré.: re- minds us of Matt. xviii. 6, where of those who offend it is said: cuppéeper alte va... KkaTamovtic6i ev TH TeAd- yet Tis Gaddoons. 23. qf of avéBynoav: it is a Greek peculiarity to compare different states by employing the gen. of the re- flexive. Here a clause takes its place. 24. Aoyilerar ote ovK: the force of the neg. extends over the whole sentence, which is developed antithet- ically. Since both leading clauses are hypothetical, we have a double employment of wéy and éé. ‘The first “member of the antithesis is given first only for the sake of the contrast; we should use a subordinate clause in English, and lay the most stress on the second member, and, too, on its conclusion. Cf. Apol. 28 e éya otv dewd hy env cipyaopévos, ei Ste pév pe of Upxovres erarrov, ods tpets elrAcabe Bpxew pou, tére pev ov exeivor erar- Tov tuevov— Tov dé Beod tdtToVTOS, ds éyo @HOny te Kal tméraBov, pidoco- gpovvTd pe Setv Cy — évravéa S¢ poBn- Gels 4} Odvaroy % BAAO étiody Tpayya Almout Thy taéiv. See on 502 b and 499 d. 26. dOAros Ste ovk délavev: some such idea as this frequently occurs in Plato; for example, in the Republic and Laws. Cf. Crito 47 d,e éav d10- A€owpey (sc. 7) gGua) apa Biwrdy juiv éore Stepbappévov aditod; Ovdauds. So- crates makes there a similar esti- mate of the relationship of soul to body. 226 512 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 51% , a an ‘ , ¥ XN o> 7 P TOS TYLLWTEPY, TH WU), TOAAG vooypaTa EXEL Kal aviara, , Oe / > \ XN a FH ¥ 2 tovTm de Buwréov éotw Kal todrov dvyce, av TE €k + »” nw 30 Oadarrns av te éx Suxacrypiou édv Te ddAdoOev SrroHevodv , « grr’ 03 9 > »¥ pois in * Bice owon: add’ oider, ort ovK dpevdv éotw Civ TO poxOnpw > , a * > F 2 « “ avOpaTr@: KaKas yap avdyKn éotiv Liv. LXVIII. Aca ratra od vopos €oTt oepviver ban Tov , , , eon 2Q7 x 4 KuBepyytny, Kaimep o@lovra nas: ovdé ye, @ Oavpdore, ‘\ n TOV pNXavoTOLEY, Os OvTE OTPaTYYOU, p47 OTL KUBEpYT}TOU, ¥ ¥ ouTe ahdov oddevds éAdtTw eviore SUvaTar o@Lew* mTddELS \ ¥ y y , , a \ oN Yap €OTLW OTE oAas ole. HY oot Soxet KQTQ TOV Sukan- = 5 yy kov eivat; Kaitou et Bovdotro héyew, @ Kaddixdes, arep € na , A a eon a UpELS, TELVUVOV TO Tpaypyd, KaTAX OO ELEY apy upas TOUS Adyous, Néywr Kal wapakadav emt 7d Set yiyverOar pun- Xavotro.ovs, ws ovdey TaAAG EoTW: ikavds yap adT@ 6 LXVIII. 1. vépos: usage, custom. b Cf. r& vopiCdueva. 3. -pynXxavorowv: Socrates has in mind the constructors of great ma- chines which were used in the de- fence of beleaguered cities, and of which the second Punic war offers a celebrated example. The military engineer saves at the same time the lives of many men, — the orator only one life at a time. — pr (odx) Ori: see on 450 e. 4. &drrw Sivara: cwfev: this use of the neut. acc. is extended from the cognate. Cf. Apol. 30 ¢ éué pet(w Badwere. On the pl., of the adverbial use of the neut. pl. by Thucydides. ‘A chance is represented as the sum of so many contingencies; a quantity as the sum of so many smaller units.’ Rid. § 43. 5. pr cou Soxet: the answer as- sumed in the following «afro. would run as above: wa A’? ob« Fuovye. For the interrogative uh, see G. 282, 2.— kata... elvat: to be comparable to, t.e. worthy to be put upon the same plane with. Cf. Apol. 17 b époaroyoiny by Zywye ov Kata TovTous elvar pyrwp. 7. td wpdypa: “his business.” — kaTax doetev : would cover under a mass, eg. of arrows, like obruere. Cf Hat. vii. 225 ev rovrw opdas TH xdbpw GAckouévous . . . Katéxwoar of BdpBa- pot BadddAovtes. The use of this word brings up the image of war and the hurling machines of the pnyavorouol, whose weapons, however, in this case are to be Adyo instead of AflOoc. 8. A€ywov: the omission of an ob- ject clause is accounted for by the addition of rapaxadéy, which at the same time extends and defines A¢ywv. The use of deiv is rather strange; it would go better with Aéywy. Perhaps there is a mixture of two construc- tions. For the matter, cf. 486 c. 9. ds kré.: see on 509 o. 9f. ikavds ydp aire 6 Aoyos: for his case is strong enough, c IIAATONOS, TOPTIAS. 227 St. I. p. 512. 10 \dyos. dda od odd€v Hrrov avrov Katadpovets Kal THs Z a > , XN € 2 > >) > / x TEXYNS THS €keivov, Kal ws év Oveider aToKaEeTaLs Gv wn a n ¥ n ENxavorro.dy, Kal TH Vet avtod ovr av dovvar Ovyarépa 20) aN yrTHR > aA an x “A ‘A 3 - 4 €Gédous, oT av ad T@ GavrTov haBetv THv exeivov. KaiTot €€ Gv Ta cavrov erawels, Tie SiKaiw Adyw TOD pHXavo- 15 ToLod KaTappoveis Kat TOY dANwy Gv vuvdy Edeyov; oid 4 7d 88 Bed. > x ¥” a > X iv. > ? ss. % ~ ¥ > oi Tov El wy EoTW 6 eyw éyw, GAN avTO TOUTO EoTW apeETy, ore dains av Bedtiwv eivar Kat éx Bedtidver. x FF. 2 & XN +. < nw ¥ € oe »¥ To odlew avTov Kat Ta EavTOD dvTAa Smotds TLS ETUXED, katayéhacrds wou 6 Woyos ylyverar Kal pnyavorro.ov Kat 20 iarpov Kat Tay add\Awy TeXvar, Goat TOV o@lew evEeKa ‘TE- ’ > 3 , ¢ . » . A ahd’, @ paKapLle, Opa pn aAAO TL TO yevvatov pa yep Toinvras. x. * > i > HK x Zz ‘ 4 Kal To ayabdy 7 TO odlew TE Kai odlerOa. 512 11. dwoxaddorats: call slightingly. Cf. Soph. At. 726 rdy tod pavévtos Kam tBovAeuTod otpatod Evvaimoy amoKa- Aotvres. The displacement of the first o#re from its normal position is common enough. 14. é€ dv: stands either for ék rov- tay é ay (“for the reasons for which you praise your art”) or é« tobrwy & (“from that which you say in praise of your art”), more likely the latter. See H. 996 a. 16. BeArlov kal dk BeAriovev: such combinations are common. Cf. Phaedr. 246 a Gedy pév ody Irma Te Kal qvioxor abvroil te ayabol Kad é& dyabdv, Lys. in Agor. 18 SotAov kal éx SovAwy dvra, Soph. Phil. 384 mpds rod kakiorou Kak kakGy "Odvacéws, 874 ebyevhs yap % potas Kak edyevav, Paul ad Phil. iii. 6 ‘EBpatos et ‘EBpaiwy. — In this passage, moreover, we see in its worst colors the opposition between the theory championed by Callicles and his ac- tual practices. The former is a kind of sophigtical latitudinarianism ; the latter, the narrow-mindedness of a Greek tradition. 17. py éorw: the regular accentu- ation of éor: after uh and rovTo. 18. évra: constr. with the understood subject of o@ (ew.—omotds Tis ETUX EV: “without regard to moral qualities.” 22 f. pr ydp rovro péev, ro Lav KrE.: the change from the subjv. to the indic. ésrf may be due to forgetful- ness on the part of the speaker, who, after giving the keynote to the sen- tence with the uy ydp at the beginning, shifts to the independent, straightfor- ward indic. construction. If the éori is to be construed rigidly with ua, un- derstanding again gpa, then we must consider that Socrates rejected the subjv., which may refer either to the present or the future, for the indic., which leaves no ambiguity as to its time sphere. That Socrates is aware of the grammatically uncertain struc- ture of his sentence is shown by the Tov? 8pa below. But see Goodwin’s view, GMT. 269, 228 25 30 512 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. L. p. 512. a , XN a € oy , / ¢ iX. 06 TovTo pév, TO Cyv otocovdyn ypédvov, Tov ye ws adynOas e avdpa é€aréov éati Kal od dudopvynréov, adda éruTpe- N n a wn 4 Wavra wept TovTwr To Oe@ Kai muctrevoarta Tats yuvarkiy, yy . € , »9Q> a @ > , x Ss & 4 OTL THY Eiappernv ovd av eis expvyou, TO emt TOUT 4 7>KR / a“ a / # a OKEeTTEOY, Ti’ av TPOTOV TOUTOY OY pweAdOL ypovoy BLavat € » , = 2 a CaN a , , WS aAplaTa Brotn, apa efopovwy QuTOV TY) ToXLTELa TQAUTY) HR nao a €v 4 av oiky, Kal vov dé dpa Set oe Gpowdrarov yiyverOar513 T@ SHuw TO AOnvaiay, ei wéddeus TOUTW Tpoagudys Eivat XN id , > n , ay? 4% > x Kat péya Sivacbat ev TH TddEL* TODO’ dpa Ei Got AvaLTE- 23 f. tév ye ds dAnOds dvSpa: has reference to the lengthy exposition of Callicles in ch. XXXVIIL. ff., espe- cially 485 c, d, where the activity of Socrates is characterized as unmanly. Wherein true manliness consists, So- crates shows in his defence, Apol. ch. XVI. f. and XXIX.—éardov: cf 484 ¢ édoas pidocogiay. For the construc- tion, see on 507 c. 24f. émirpeavra ... To ew: this feeling of submission to God’s decrees Socrates preserved even to his death. Cf. Apol. 41 di ob« ~orw avipl &yadG kaxdy ovdéev obre (avTt ote TeAEUTH- cayrt, ov5é ducretrar bad Gedy Ta Tod- Tov mpdypata: ode ra Cua viv ard Tou adroudrou yéyover, GAAd wor BHAdY éore ToUTO Sr Hin TeOvavac Kal aanAdd- xOat mpayudrwr BéAriov iy pot. 25. wept tovtwv: for emphasis, in- stead of the simple acc. tatvra. But see Rid. § 106.—rais yuvattly: be- cause these hold more firmly to what is old and time-honored, both in dialect (ef. Crat. 418 ¢ af yuvaikes uddtora Thy dpxatav gwvhv og Coucr, Cic. de Or. iii. 12. 45) and in belief. This same old belief is expressed by Hector Z 488, poipay (i.e. Thy eluappévnv) 8 of rwd gnu mepuypévoy Eupevar avdpav. It is ridiculed as an old wives’ tale by the Epicurean Velleius in Cic. de Nat. 512 Deor. i. 20. 55 as follows: Hinc vyobis exstitit primum illa fatalis necessitas quam eipap- bévny dicitis, ut, quidquid ac- cidat,id ex aeterna veritate causarumque continuatione fluxisse dicatis. Quanti au- tem haec philosophia aesti- manda est cui tamquam ani- culis et iis quidem indoctis, fato fieri videantur omnia? By the words émrpépavra «ré., Socra- tes declares in a delicate way that this belief of the women harmonizes with the principles of true manliness better than the view of the highly cultured Callicles. 26. ovS’ av els: oddels is separated for the sake of emphasis. See G.77, 1,2; H. 290 a.—-ro éml rovtw: see on 452 c. éi denotes the immediate succession. 27. péddou: is optative by assimi- lation to the potential &» Biotin. 29. kal viv $€ dpa: introduces the application to Callicles and his rela- tion to the Athenian state. In sense the clause depends on oxerréoy above, but loosely. 31. rov8’ dpa : returns to the be- ginning, since the sense has become e 513 a 35 40 513 TAATOQNOS TOPTIAs. 229 St. I. p. 513. > \ het kal ewol, 67ws py, @ Saipdre, wercducha omep fact ‘ X a, 4 ‘ sy ‘ 7%, Tas THY TEAnINY Kafatpovcas, TAS BeTTadidas* dV Tots 9 n a A irtarous 7 aiperis Huw eotar TavTns THS Suvapews THS 3 “A , > # ¥ c nn > £ , & Tp wore. eb SE cou oie. dvTwodv avOpdmav Tapada- y cew TéxvnY Twa ToLavTNY, NTS TE Tojo peya Svva- > nw ¢ nw § a, my” “A ao vd cba. &v TH TOE THSE avdpoLov dvTa TH TodiTEia Ett aN XN , yo 2 N X A € 2 N a > emt to Bédrtiov elt’ emi Td xXElpov, ws Epol SoKeEl, ovK 6pOas Bovdreda, & Kaddikhes: ob yap piuntyy Set > > > > na e a , > ‘ , eivat add’ avropua@s Gpotov rovrois, ei péeAdeLS TL YY- o.ov amepyalerOar cis didtav 7H “APnvaiwy Sypw Kat vat wa Aia to Ilvpthdyrous ye mpos. TOUTOLS somewhat obscured by the interven- ing additions. The use of co} xa) éuol resumes the previous unemphatic cé, inasmuch as each one wishes to ob- tain the others’ acceptance of his own view of life. 33. tds OerradlSas : the Thessalian women were very skilful in sorcery and poisoning. They stood in close relation to the night-goddess Hecate ; hence people ascribed to them the power to draw the moon from the heavens. Strepsiades says in Ar. Nub. 749 yuvatra pappartd’ ef mpidpevos @erraddy | nabdraouu vintwp Thy ceAn- vnv xté. Of. Hor. Epod. 5.45 quae sidera excantata voce Thes- sala|lunamque caelo deripit. For this, however, the goddess ex- acted punishment, for Suidas says af Thy cedqvav Kabatpodoa @erTadldes Adyovrat T&y 6POadruay nal Tay waldwy (v. 1. wodav) oreplaxerOat. elpnra: éri Tay éavTois Ta Kaka émiorwpévav 7 rapomla. Cf. also Plin. N. H. xxx. 1. 2 (6). Aristophanes’ designation of them under the name d¢appakis, while it implies that their art consisted in ¥ > OOTLS OUVV GE , > , as , Opovdratov ATEPYACETaL, OvTOS O€ TOLYNOEL, the manipulation of drugs, does not limit us to that view, because Herod- otus, vii. 114, uses the verb pappaxedew in speaking of the sacrifice of white horses by the Magi to the river Stry- mon. 33f. cv rots piAtdrots : at the risk of our dearest interests. For the asyn deton, see on 450 b.—rd piArara: denotes the soul and its dper7, as in Prot. 314 a dpa, & paxdpie, wh wep) rots piatdros KxuBedys kal Kivdvvedns. In alpeots lies a play on Ka@atpetv. 35. dvtwotv dvOpwrwy: recalls the promises made for rhetoric by Gorgias. 513 a 39. pipnryv: imitation is not to be b thought of, for immoral action with a correct moral feeling is impossible. Hence the similarity must be original (abropuds). 41. pirlav ro Spm: substantives involving action, either physical or mental, sometimes take the construc- tion of their corresponding adjs. or verbs. Cf. 522 d Bonfera éavtg, Apol. 30 a Thy 75 O68 bwnpeciavy. H. 765 a. 42. kalval pa Ala ro TLupidprrovus : see on 481 d. 230 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 613. ¢ > é a x > \ \ oe os as emuluwets modutiKos eval, moduTLKOVY Kat pyTOpLKOV: ¢ 4570 avtav yap Oe eyouévwy tay éywy ExacTot , a . 92 , »” > , . » xXaipovar, T@ S€ addoTpio ayOovtar: ei py 7 ad ado héyers, ® hityn Kedahy. Nikdeus ; héyouev Te pos TadTa, @ Kad- LXIX. Kaa. Ov« o0f8 Gvtwa pou tpdmov Soxets € déyewv, @ Loxpares: wémovOa S€ 7d Tav Tohd@Y Taos: ov Tavu oot TeiMopat. Xa. “O dxpouv yap épas, @ Kaddikhes, évav ev TH Wuyy “a a 2 A > > 9N Z. ¥” ‘ A 57) ON avtiotaret or GAN Eady Tohddxus tows Kal Béd- Tiov TavTa Tavta SiacKkoTepela, TwecOnoe. davapvy- 4 > 45 y 2 5 Q x 5 ow Ont. 8 obv, dtu S¥0 edapev civar Tas TapacKevas Et TO exacTov Jepareve Kal copa Kal puyyy, play ev pos 513 44. wodituxds elvat = since these words would be understood if not present, the special insertion of them can only serve to emphasize the identity of wish and result. 45. td aitav ydp 7G Acyopevav: as an illustration of the sentiment, of. Dem. Ol. iii. 19 GAN oluar péya Tots tootros timdpye (“comes to the aid of”) Adyous wap’ Exdotov BodaAnais. 47. & by Kehadry: a humorously pathetic mode of address, borrowed from the Homeric usage (@ 281 et al.). Cf. also Soph. O. R. 950 & pirtaroy yuvads “loxdorns «dpa etc. Our use of the word ‘heart’ in ten- der address is analogous. Cf. Shaks. Love’s Labor Lost, v. 3: ‘Good heart, what grace hast thou thus to re- prove?’ etc. LXIX. 2. td rdv wodddv tados: namely that they listen gladly only to that which harmonizes with their opinions, and are very loath to offer on the altar of more perfect knowl- edge the views they have come to cherish; hence they remain unde- cided, as Meno says, Meno 95 c Sep oi mwohAol wémovOa’ ToTe pev por SoKxover, tore 5¢ of The candor of Callicles here as compared with his earlier obstinacy is quite remarkable. For the asyndeton, see on 450 b. 5. Yows: this addition shows that the fulfilment of the condition is still very doubtful. Cf Socrates’ remarks on the necessity of time to convince, in Apol. 19 a, 37 a, b, quoted on 455 a. 7. 8 ovv: but then, emphasizes, in contrast to the uncertain hope just expressed, what must happen in any case. Cf. Apol. 17 a. The Latin equivalent is certe. Socrates has in mind at the moment ch. LV. f., where, however, reference was made to the conversation with Gorgias and Polus in ch. XIX. f. 8. kartov: subject to Gepareverv. 8 f. wpos ySovnv optdeiv: epexe- getic to play (sc. mapackevhy). ph kataxapeCsuevoy limits dpiAety which belongs also to rpds 7d BéATiarov, and 513 da 231 : < St. I. p. 513. £ ~ x € , Hooviy sure, THY érépay Se mpds 7d BédroTor, pH TMAATONOS TOPTIAS. cs ~ 10 karaxapilopevov adda Stapayouevov. ov tavTa FW & Tote wpilopueba ; Kaa. IIdvv ye. 3 aA e€ QA e A e . e a > *, N Xa. OvKodyv y pev Eérépa, mpds HSovy», ayers Kat bOe »¥ a , Ss > /, ovdev addo 7) Kohakeia Tuyyaver ovoa* 7 yap ; Kaa. "Eoto eit Bovder cou ovTws. e e Sé ce -? y € , ¥ A »¥ Lo. “H b€ ye érépa Orws ws BéAtictTov eras ToUTO, EiTE 15 “A co x ¥ oa , oopa tuyyaver dv etre Woy, 6 Oeparrevoper ; 4 Kaa. Ilavu ye. 4S > > y > / Lea > os , Xa. "Ap obv ovtwas emiyepytéoy juw éeotw TH mode XV aA , , e , ’ \ ‘ 20 Kal Tots ToNiTats Depamevdew, ws BedticToVs abTovs TOUS moXiras towouvTas ; avev yap 51) TovTou, ws ev Tots ewTpo- 0 C2 joe ¥ me > 7 > ole nipicxope, ovdev dpehos aAnv evepyeriav ovde- , s aN AN \ > \ oe , s a [lay Tpoo pepe, €av YN Kady Kayabr n didvoua H Tov 514 513 requires the supplying of anindefinite inf. here is an afterthought, after the 513 e subject. See on 512 d dvta. 10. kataxapifopevov : used in Apol. 35 c with the acc. (7a Sikaia). dia- pdxecGa: frequently takes repi twos. See also on 502 b, 503 a. 15. el BovAkes: added by Callicles here, as ef cor Hdiov in 514 a, ta oo xapicwuat 516 b, to avoid responsi- bility. It is almost parenthetical. 16. 4... érépa: there is no need of an explanatory appositional clause corresponding to 7 aps 7dovhy, since the inference from d is sufficient. The lacking verb (ruyxydver odca) on account of the parallelism must be taken from the preceding words of Socrates. Smws ... totro is added to correspond to ayevvis ... nela, thus, “is directed to that end, viz.” etc. The connexion is a loose one. 20. Ocparevew: the addition of the KoAa- object which in sense belongs to it has been already proleptically con- nected with the preceding verb. Cf. Crito 52.¢ émiBupla ce... bAAwY vouwv ZraBev eidévar. See Kr.61, 6,8; Rid. § 180. 20f. ds ... movovvras: connected (as a correlative) epexegetically with oitws. Cf. Phaedo 59 a cyeddv re oitw diekelucOa, STE pev yedavres, éviore 5€ Saxptiovres. The position of the ofrws, which in sense is to be construed with @eparevev, is due to the form of the sentence. The par- tics. agree in case with the unex- pressed subj. of Gepamevery, viz. tas. 23. édv pr xré.: explains &vev 34 tovrov. — Scavora: ze. the inner activ- ity of the soul itself, its reasoning, thinking; hence it is often used for the mode of thought, the disposition, and even for the soul itself. 514 232 25 adAnv Svvapw yvTivodv. ¥ y Kaa. Ildvu ye, et cou nd.0v. PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 514. peddASvTOV 7} XpHmara TOMA Nap Bavew 7} dpxyyy Two 7 Pape ovrws exe ; Zo. Et otv mapexahodpev addArjdous, @ KaddXixdess, Snpooia mpdfovres TOV TohiTiKav Tpaypdrwy emt Ta > , oH a Xx , a ¢ a 2 N \ Z olkodopuKd, 7 TELN OV 7] VEWPLWV n Lepa@v €7l TAH peyloTa 30 oikodopypata, métepov eden av Hnuas oxdpacOar juas 35 > XX ‘\ > a, wn XN > > , A a, avTovs Kal e€erdoat, mpOrov pev ei emiorapefa THY TEX- x > > , 0 XN > 8 , XN x‘ a vyv 1 OUVK ETLOTALEUA, THY OLKOOOMLLKYV, KAL Tapa TOU 2 , » Xd» Xx + eudbopev; der av 7H ov; Kaa. Ilavu ye. Xa. OvKodv Sevrepov ad 7dd«, et TL THTOTE OiKOdduNwa > 8 , int KH ka Or NOR ¢ , 2. oes @kodopnkapey loia } TaV hilwy Tt 7 HuEeTEpOV avTar, N an XN > , X a > / > ‘\ 2 KQt TOUVTO TO oikoddpnpa Kkadov n atoV pov €OTLW* KQL EL fev nuplokopev oKoTovpevor SudacKdAous Te Huav aya- Bods Kat éddoyiwous yeyovdtas Kal olkodounpata Tokha 40 pev Kal kaha peta Tov SidacKkdhwy GKodopnueva HEL, 514 a 27. el odv rwapexadovpev xré.: by a series of analogies Socrates tries to show that the profession of statecraft implies various preliminary qualifica- tions, and that the incipient states- man ought to be subjected to an examination as to his education and previous habits, instead of following the Athenian practice. Cf. Prot.319d éreiday 5é re wept Tov THs méAEws dui01- khoews dén Bovdetdoacba, cupBovrcve airois auotduevos wept tovtwy duolws py récrwy, duolws 5& XaAKeds cKuTOTO- Hos, Europos vaiKAnpos, mAovaLOS év7s, yevvaios a&yevyts, kat rovrots ovSels em- mwarhrres Bre ovdauddev pwabdy ov5t byTos Sidackddrou odderds aire, recta cup Bov- Aedew éxtyepet, Xen. Mem. iv. 2. 1-7. 28. Sypooclg mpdtovres : almost equivalent to dnpoctedoyres. — Tay twpaypdrev: must be considered as part. gen. after dyuocia mpdtoytes, and is not to be construed with the fol- lowing clause, with Cron. 29. q Texav q vewplov i lepav: these are themselves the greatest public works, but the addition of péytora serves to emphasize the im- portance of the matter and the re- sponsibility of the person. 30. mworepov: the second member of the double question is found in the # of which follows the repeated er &y below.—éSa dv: instead of €e:, shows that the whole condition is purely fictitious and unreal. The simple ge: would have drawn atten- tion only to the inf. GMT. 423. 35. Sevtepov ad tobe: to be com- pleted from the preceding rorepoy xré. 514 b TAATQNOS TOPILIAs. 233 St. I. p. 514. TOANA S€ Kat idia Sia judy ered) Tav SidacKdov aryd- Adynuev, ovTw péev Siaxepevav vovv exdvtwy hv av iévar s. -% ‘ - » 2 x. * , ¥ émi Ta Sypdora epya: ei Sé pyre SiSdoKadov cixouer € a 3 > } a > 5 , , x \ x x Hpav abrav érderEar oikodopnpata te 7 pndev } wodda \ x ¥ y Lo 7 x » : a 45 kat pndevds afia, ovrw Sé dvdnrov jv dv mov émyerpe aN / »¥ ‘\ an > / 29? > , Tots Symociors epyous Kal mapakadetv aGddAYAous er avdrd. pape tavta dpbas héyerOar 7} ov; a Kaa. Ildvv ye. LXX. Sa. Ovcodtyv ovrw mavra, Ta TE ad\a Kav el > 4 , a > f ¢ emixepyoavtes Snuooreve Tapexahotpey adrnous ws e x 9 & ¥ > , / na > 7 XN ixavot larpot dvres, éreoxeapela Symov av éyd Te oe 4 \ 3. 7 & , \ A aN Sa , an Kat ov ene, “h€pe mpos Gedy, adrds 5€ 6 Swxparyns was 514 2. Sypooteverv: the general word 514 dad 41. Slq Sia pov: would lead us to expect as a contrast nowy pera Tov didackdrwy. But xowF is omitted as self-evident, while id{¢ gives a certain definiteness to da quar. 42. Svakepevay (viz. judy) : is used absolutely ; voiy éxdvrwy is to be con- nected with jv» as above, 500 a mayrds avdpés. 45. otrw 8: correlative with ofrw nev. See on 512 a.—dvonrov yy dv: cf. below, € xatayéAacrov by jv and avénrov ky elva LXX. 1. ovkotv ottw amdvra: these words would seem to indicate the conclusion of the induction and the transition to its application to the question under discussion. Mean- while, however, Socrates cites another example which is still closer to his idea. Hence td re HAAa kai, which at the same time sums up and em- phasizes.—xdv: is to be resolved into «al &y, the «af being correlative with rd, and not going with e? in the sense “even.” For the repetition of the ay, two lines below, see 465 ¢, d, and on 475 e. to denote the public practice of any . profession or business which is for the benefit of the community. See on 452 a Syuoupyss. In the case of physicians, are included not merely those who are in the service of the government, but also private practi- tioners. See on 455 b. 3. ds... Ovtes: expresses in a different form what is found above, a, in the phrase én) ra olxodopuind, viz. the department of activity to which attention is drawn. 4. hépe «ré.: change to direct quo- tation occurs frequently as here, with- out the employment of a definite verb of saying. —8é: often employed in lively questions which are closely con- nected with the words of another. So here. Socrates offers himself to the state as a physician, but in what state of health is his own body? Cf Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 26 (in the myth of Prodicus, after Kakia had praised her gifts) xal 5 ‘HpakaAfs akotcas tata, "2 yiva, pn, dvoua 3€ gor ci éoTt; 234 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 614. 5 exe TO THpa Tpds vyicav; 7 Yn Tis addos Sia Lwxpa- THY anndddyn vdcor, 7 Soddos 7 edeUOepos;” Kav eyd, > \ a ¢ a , Ola, TEpt @ou EeTEpa TOLQUTA é€o KOT OU) f Kat ei BY nupi- oxope Sv ypas pydéva Bedtiw yeyovdra 7d cpa, pyTE ae * A a ss tav &vav pyte Tov doTav, pHTE avdpa pyTe yuvaixa, 10 mpos Atos, & Kaddixders, od Katayéhacrov ay nv TH ady- vw > a“ %. Z ¥ ~ > 4 y X Geta, €lLS TOGDOVTOV AVOLAS éd\Oety avOparrovs, WOTE T pw > , XN ~ 9 27 a ™ oe iovwrevovTas 7TOANG EV OTTWS ETVYOMEY TOLno AL, Tova O€ Katopb@ca. Kat yupvacacba ixaves THY TéxVNY, TO Xx e 87) a 2 oo (A ‘\ , 2 a EYOHEVOV 1 TOUTO EV T@ TLD TY KEpapLeLav ETTLYELPELY , ‘\ > , , a a 4 »¥ 15 pavOdvew, KQL QUTOUS TE Snpocrevery ETTLYELDELY KQL an- 514 a > > 7 , ~ x ous TOLOUTOUS TApaKade ; OUVK QaVONTOV GOL SoKet av a Y , EVAL OUTW TPATTEW ; »” Kaa. “Epovye. 6. a SotAos 7 eAcUOepos: of. 502 and 515 a. The distinction between slaves and freemen, which was al- ways present to the mind of a Greek, is emphasized here because it was common for slaves to be treated by less skilled physicians, who might themselves be slaves, as we learn from Legg. iv.720 ¢ ap’ oby Kal Evvvoeis bre SovAwv Kal eAcvOepwv bvTwy Tay kapvdvrwy év Tats wédeot TOUS wey Sov- Rous cx eddy Te of BoDAGL TA TOAAG iarped- ovat. Of. Herm. Gr. Alt. iv? § 38. 11. dv@perrovus: from the particular to the general, which also includes the particular. We should say “ peo- ple” in the same way. It is remark- able, however, how quickly Socrates returns to the first person in the next clause. One must have in mind an indi- vidual before he can give particulars. 12. Saws érvxopev moijoat: is the contrast to Katop@aca. When one is beginning in a profession much is necessarily, from inexperience, done at a risk, and may or may not suc- ceed. For the phrase dmws ériyoper, of. 521 «, Crito 45 d 7d odv pépos, Ett dy tixXwot, TOTO mpdkoucr, “the suc- cess of your sons is left as far as you are concerned to the caprice of chance.” Prot. 353 b drt by thxwot, tovTo Ad€yous, qui quidquid in buccam venit dicunt. The usual inference is unfavorable. The partic. is to be supplied from the following verb. 14. el rd wid tHv Kepapelav: the proverb denotes, “to begin with the large instead of with the small.” Cf. Lach, 187 a ef yap viv, mparov ptecbe mabevew, cxoweiy Xph ph olk ev rE Kap) ity 6 klvduvos Kivduvednrat, adr’ év rots béow Te Kal év Tois Tav plrwy mal, kal arexvas Td Acyduevoy Kara Thy napoiulay suiv cupBalvy ev wide 4 kepauela yryvouevn. A proverb from the potter’s art was natural among the Athenians, where the art flour- ished (Kepapeucds). 514 ITTAATONOS TOPTIAS. 5 Za. Nov 66 6 235 St. IL. p. 515. ¥ ¥ , x a , , 2 \ 20 apTt apKee TT PATTEW TA TYS TONEWS TpPAaypLara, Ee be Xr a ‘92 Ou 9 > / > 2 / TAPAaKA €LS KQAL OVEL ileus OTL OV TPAaTTw, OUK emo KEpo- peda adrAxous, “fépe, Kadduxdyjs 489 twa Berti reroinke A a ¥ y , ‘ »” ” s TMV ToNTav ; E€OTW OOTLS T POTEpov TOV POS QV, GOuK6s Te Kat axddacTos Kal adpwr, dia Kadhikdéa Kadds Te 25 Kayablos yeyover, } E€vos 7 doTds,7 Sovdos 7 edevOepos ; ” 30 515 héye prot, Edy tis oe tadra e&erdly, & Kaddixdes, Te 2 a tf - , , » “A epets; tiva gdyces Pedtio teromKévar avOpwrov TH , a a. 8 a > , 6p ¥ ¥ GVVOVO LO TT) OF; OKVELS aTOKPWao at, elTrep €OTW Tt ¥ XN ¥ io , \ 5 , > a epyov GOV €TlL LOLWTEVOVTOS, T ply 1 [LOO LEVELY ETTLY ELPEW | Kaa. @iddvuxos el, @ Ldxpares. LXXI. 2a. *AAN od didomkia ye epwrd, adr as adnbas Bovdopevos cidévat, dvtwd mote tpdmov ole Sew ie zs ¢ “~ mokitever Oar ev jp. } Gddov Tod dpa emmelyoe Hu > X 2 \ a , , a 9 9 , Edy eri TA THS TOAEWS TPdypara, 7) OTs OTe BEdATLCTOL a > x > , ¥ e , a ToNtrat Gpev; 7 ov Toddakis On wpohoyyKapey TovTO a , XN x ¥ ¢ , a ¥ dely Tpatrew TOV TOALTLKOY avopa.; a@modoynKapev } ov ; 19. & BeAtiote dvbpav: a pathetic address. See on 513 ¢. 20. dpr. dpxe: on the age of Cal- licles at the time of this dialogue, see Introd. § 15.— On the matter, cf. Apol. 36 © émxeipay Exacroy buay welOew ph mpdrepov wre Tov EavTod pndevds eme- peAciaOa, mply EavTod emimedndeln, d7ws &s BéAriotos Kab ppovudtatos ecaro, phte tTav Tis wéAews, ply adtis ris woAews. 22. hépe xré.: see on 514 d. 23 f. d&uxds te «ré.: various kinds of wovnpia, as contrasted with the corresponding virtues. Cf. 491 e ff. 28. elwep xré.; Socrates’ opinion can be readily perceived. Between these repeated questions we must assume short pauses. On the pos- sessive pronoun followed by the gen., see H. 691; G. 137, n. 1. 30. diAcvikos ef: the accusation is a confession of weakness, having much the same force as Crito’s an- swer (Crito 54 d) aaa’, & Sexpares, otk yw Aye. See on 457 d. LXXI. 3. év qpiv: cf. ev rots moal- tas, €v To Shuw. In spite of the ad- dition of Sei, no subject for woAcred- eo6a: is expressed. But we should not feel the ellipsis in English, and often make such without noticing it. —7piv: seems to be a kind of ethical dat. See G. 184, 3, n. 6; H. 770. Cope translates the clause, ‘whether we shall find you concern- ing yourself about anything else,’ etc, Bédruore avdparv, éredy ov pev adros 515 236 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 515. aroKpivov. wporoyyKapev: eyw brep cod droKpwodpat. 3 7 wn a XN > X ¥ 4 Lad €l TOLWVUY TOUVTO dec TOV ayabov avdpa TapacKevalew ™7 c an 4 “~ > x > Q XN > #. “ €avTov odeL, viv mot avayynobets eimée wept éxeivav TOV > 8 -~ a® > 4 a »¥ > ¥ nw 10 avdpav av ddiyw mpdrepov edeyes, ei Err dou SoKodow ayafot modtrat yeyovévat, Mepuxdys kal Kipwv cat Mid- TUdONS Kal Oepicrokhys. Kaa. "Epouye. > a » > , a Y y 2A Yo. OvKovr, eElTEp dyaboi, dnAov OTL EKADTOS aUTWY , > 7 AY , ’ A ‘ > ? a ¥ 15 BeATiovs Emote: TOUS TohiTas aVvTL XElpovev ; Emrolel 7 OV; 515 d Kaa. Nat. Xa. OvKovy, dre Tlepuchyjs ypyxero éyew & TO SrHpuo, xelpous naoav ot “APnvator, 7) dre Ta TeAEvTAla Eheyer ; Kaa. "Iows. 7. Umép aot: cf. Apol. 22 e &cre be éuaurdy dvepwrav imtp Tod xpnopo, so that I asked myself in the name of the oracle, 11. wodtrat: the idea of this word (as also of modcrever6a:) approaches so near that of “statesmen” that it is frequently used in that sense; e.g. in the speech of Diodotus against Cleon (Thuc. iii. 42.5) yp} toy ayabdy moAitny wh éxpoBovvta robs avtepody- tas GAN’ ard Tod Yoou palvecOat kuewov Adyovta. Cf. below, e. Above we find roAitixds avqjp and also dvfp sim- ply, used in the same sense; cf 517 a. 15. éarolev: sc. in the course of his activity as a statesman. — dvtl xetpo- vey: the brachylogy is here harder than in the case where the relation is reversed; ¢.g. Polit. 308 a dvr’ ércude- pwy vyevduevor SovAn, We might have expected éx. 17. apxeto A€yev : here denotes not so much Pericles’ first appear- ance before the people as the first period of his political life. This began even before the death of Ephi- 515 altes, who, owing to the machina- d tions of his enemies, was murdered shortly after the banishment of Cimon (460 B.c.). The height of Pericles’ power was reached after the death of Cimon and the banishment of Thu- cydides, son of Melesias (443 B.c.).— On the construction of &pxeca, see on 488 a. 18. td redXevtaia éXeyev: Socrates is referring again, not so much to Pericles’ last oratorical efforts, but to the last period of his political activ- ity, which fell within the first years of the Peloponnesian war. On the result of his last speech (480 B.c.) Thucydides (ii. 65) remarks: To.aira 6 Tepixats Aéywy ereipato Tous *AOn- vatous Tis Te ér’ avrdy dpyis mapadvew kal ard tay wapdvrwv dewey amdyev thy yvounv. of 8& Snuocla pev rors Adyats dverelOovto ... ov wévrot mpdte- pdv ye of Euumavres eratcavto ev opyh exovres adtoy mply eCnulwoay xphuaoty. —On the neut. pl., see on 612 b and Kr. 46, 3, 2. 20 25 30 515 WAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 237 St. 1. p. 515. ¥ > a Xo. OK tows dy, & Bédticre, AN avayKn €k TOV e , »¥ > , >> 2 A , apohoynpevar, elrep ayalds y’ Hv éxevos todirns. Kaa. Ti ovv dy; do. OdSev: dda 7d5€ pou ei ext Tovrea, Ei AéyovTaL "AOnvator did, Tepuxhéa Bedrious yeyovévat, } wav todvav- Tlov Sia bapyvar um éxetvou. \ \ ¥ > , TQAUTL yap eywye aKOUW, Tlepuxhéa merounkéevat "APnvaious dpyovs kat Sevhovs Kat AdAous Kal Pirapyvpous, eis prcfodopiay mpOrov Kata- OTHTAVTA. a , 3 ? a > Kaa. Tov ta @ta Kateaydtwy axkovers TadTa, @ Lo- KparTes. 20. dvoyky: is adverbial dat. cor- responding to the adverb tows. 22. rl ovv 84: see on 453 b and 497 d. The reply of Socrates shows that he intends Callicles himself to draw the necessary inference from what he proceeds to bring forward. 26. dpyots «xré.: this accusation is based upon a suspicion that Pericles, in order to bring about certain de- sirable measures in the government, employed bribery disguised under the names of pucdds orpatiwtikds, Sikagri- «és, éxxAnoiacricds, and Gewpixds, of which, however, only the first two can be ascribed to Pericles. On this dole the Athenian citizens could live in a poor way at the expense of the state, and they lost perhaps some of that energy which was characteristic of them in earlier times. — SetAovus: the Athenians became timid, as a natural consequence of their inactiv- ity, in that they (much later how- ever) withdrew from personal war service, and depended on mercenaries exclusively. 27. AdAovs: to activity in the real service of the state, principally of course in the assembly, was soon joined a desire to seek entertainment in public. For here their curiosity, a natural failing, was nourished by continual gossip and talk. This was the case in the time of Demosthenes (Phil. i. 10), of Paul (Acts xvii. 18), and is the case at the present day. See on 461 e.— dtdapyupous: the de- sire to obtain money from the public treasury became continually stronger and more universal, and wrought great damage to the government. At the time of Demosthenes the contin- uance of the @ewpicdy was especially injurious, because the means for mili- tary purposes were thereby greatly curtailed. Plato’s criticism of Peri- cles was always unfavorable, which, however, is not to be wondered at, since his youth fell during the years of Athenian depression, which the oligarchy ascribed to the mistakes of the great democratical leader. — ptoSodoplav: on the growth and ef- fects of this policy at Athens and elsewhere, see Grote, Hist. xi. 281 (c. Ixxxvii.). 29. trav Td dra KaTeayoTwv: the Laconian imitators (Aakwvi(ovres, Aa- kwvouavoovtes) in Athens were thus 515 238 35 515 516 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 515. Xa. "AANA rade odKéTs dkovw, add’ oida cadds Kai eyw \ sy x \ a > , a KS Kat OV, OTL TO [LEV TPwWTov nvdokiper Tlepuxdns KQL ovoe- pilav aicypay dixny katelmpicavto abtod AOnvator, qvixa Xelpous Hoav: emedy dé Kahot Kayalot éyeyoveray Ui 516 > n ee a an Fad nw # NX > Cag! avTov, €7t TeNeEUTH TOU Biov Tov IlepiKéous, KAoTHY adTov kareynpicarto, ddiyou dé Kal Oavdrov ériunoav, dndrov ? a» OTL WS TOVNPOV OVTOS. LXXIT. Kaa. Ti ot; rtovrov evexa kaxds Hv Tlepu- KANS ; a a a > \ , ‘ a Do. Ovev youv av ETYLEANTYS KQL LTTWVY KAL Boav x x X a 286 > > \ \ TOLOUTOS WY KQKOS GV EOOKEL EWOL, EL TapahaBav BN named from having their ears often broken in the wuyuy by the straps with which the hands were covered (see Herm. Gr. Alter. iv.3 § 37, p. 347). They formed a party, hostile to the democracy, which saw in Lacedae- mon the model of a noble state, and looked to her for help. They prac- tised Lacedaemonian severity in all external matters; hence they wore mustaches, short mantles, etc., and practised gymnastics very diligently. To harden the body, they even en- gaged in boxing, which was for- bidden in Sparta. They became naturally, therefore, butts for ridi- cule. Cf. Prot. 342 b.— By this re- mark Callicles here accuses Socrates of partisanship. 34. éqedy 5€ Kadol Kkdyalol: with bitter irony. If they were really good, the righteousness of the judg- ment of Pericles would have been recognized; but if this judgment was unrighteous, then Pericles did not make them good. — tm avrov: ylyvo- at, as passive of moi, requires bd for the agent. 35 f. KAomjiv avrod «7é.: in the second year of the Peloponnesian war, when Pericles returned from an expedition against the Spartan coast, the slumbering discontent of the peo- ple, caused by the devastation of At- tica by the Spartans and the ravages of the plague in Athens, broke out against him in the form of an accu- sation as a result of which he was fined a sum of money, the amount of which (15, 50, 80 talents) is not cer- tain. Thuc.ii.59; 65. See on 515 d. That the ostensible charge was em- bezzlement of the public funds is supported by this passage alone, but that various rumors were current of his dishonesty can be gathered from the story of Alcibiades’ advice to him in Plut. Alcib. vii. Mepiucdc? 5& BovAduevos evtuxeiv em) Oupas HAGev airod. muOduevos 3¢ ph cxodrdlev, GAAG oKoTety Kad’ éauTdy, Onws amodd- cet Adyov *APnvatois, amidv 5 *AAKiBid- Ons: “elta” &pn “ BéAtiov ovx Fy oKore’y adrdv, Omws ovK arodmce: Ad-yov "AOnvalais ;” LXXII. 4. el wapadraBuv: not de- signed as an epexegesis to to:otros év, which merely gives the general 516 TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 239 St. I. p. 516. 5 Laxtilovras [éavrdv ] pn de KupitTovTas pede ddkvovtas x > yn Ov 8 e x > 3 Xv \ € a c a , OKEL OOL KAKOS EWaL ETLILE TNS OOTLOOVY OTOVOVY Ceou, > BS a y a > > , QTE ev€e TAUTA ATAVTA WTOLOVYTAS du aypLloTyTa. Os av mapahaBav juepdrepa arodeiEn aypiditepa 7 Tape. b 10 15 haBe; Soxel 7 ov; Kaa. Iau YS iva oot Xapiowpar. > ‘\ sO fe 4 2 # , a. Kat trode Towvy Ol Xapltoat QATTOK PLVA/LEVOS * IWOTE- ov Kal 6 avO ev trav Cdwv eat } ov; p vOpwros év Tov Cdwr éativ } ov; Kaa. Tas yap ov; La. Ovxovy avOpdrwv Tepuxdys érepedero ; Kaa. Nat. > / > > go > 4 € * e a o. Tt ovv; ovuK €d€L avTovs, ws apTt a@modoyouper, / 4 > * > 4 ¢ > > , ¥ dixarorépous YEVOVEVaL avTt aOLKwT Epa UT EKELVOU, el7TEep > nw > a > wn > XN a + ¥ €KEWOS EMTEWENELTO QAUT@V ayalds @V TA TOALTUKG ; Kaa. [Lavy ye. e 20 Ya. Ovxody of ye Sikaror jyepot, ws Epn “Opypos. ad dé ri Phys; ovxX ovTws ; Kaa. Nai. 3 * % > a 3 XN > , x + Xo. “AANA nv adypiwrépovs ye avtous anépynver 7 otovs / ‘\ a> > € / a > KH td A mapédaBe, Kat TavT eis avTdv, bv nKLoT av €Bovdero. 516 idea which runs through all the pre- 513e. The reply of Socrates is full 516 * ceding thought, but added to give of irony. b those details to the simile which 11. daoxpwwapevos: for the tense, seem to be requisite.— mwapadaBdv: sce on 491 c. receiving for training. See on 483 e. 16. Se: without av. See on 514 a. —The position of the words Aakri- 17. avril d&ukwrépwv: see on 515d. (ovras, kupirrovtas, and Bddxvovtas is 20. ot ye Sikaror tpepor as ey probably merely a chance one. “Opnpos: there is no such direct as- ¢ b 6. dwréSage: the word means “to show or prove as the result of a process,” often in mathematical rea- soning; here as the result of training. Cf. below ¢ amépnvev. Hence also the expression dmodecevivar tid oTpa- tnyév. See on 484 b. 10. iva cor Xxapicwpat: see on sertion in any passage of Homer, but the same sense is seen in ¢ 120, 1 175 hp of ¥ bBpiotal te Kal Uypror odd dixator. Here, moreover, the leading thought is the utter exclusion of any idea of dacacocdvy from the &yprou. 24. dv qkurr dv éBovAovto: cf. Apol, 25 d Zotw oby boris BobrActat 240 25 30 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 516, Kaa. Bovdeu vou dpotoyyow ; Za. Ei dox@ yé cou adn OH héyew. ¥ \ a Kaa. "Eotw 6% radra. > an »” > , > , \ Da. Ovkovv el7TEp ayplLwTEepous, aduKw@TEepous TE KAL XElpous ; Kaa. "Eoro. Za. OvK ap’ dyabds Ta wodutiKa Hepuxdys Av ex TovTOU Tov hoyou. Kaa. Ov ov ye djs. Xa. Ma At? odd€ ye od &€ dv apoddoyas. madw oe dé XN , > 2 , 2X & 35 A€ye pou TEpt Kiuwvos OUK eEwotpaKkicay QUTOV OUTOL a 2 4 Y > a , 2A N > 4 al OuUS €Jeparever, wa AvTOU déKa ET@V LYN AKOVOELAV TNS oe ‘N 4 x % nn * s Xx -~ govns; Kat @euorowréa Tata TadTa emoinoay Kal duyH mpooelnpiwcay; Muidrriddny dé tov év Mapadavi eis 76 516 9d Tov tuvdvtwy BrAdrrecbat padrdov c d } a@percioba. For dv, see on 453 e. The ellipsis is to be supplied from what precedes. 33. od... ys: see on 450 d. 35. éfwotpdxicay adrdv: Cimon was a supporter of the Lacedae- monian league, and also caused the Athenians to send aid to the Spartans in the third Messenian war. But when the Athenians were dismissed in so humiliating a manner at Ithome, his opponent, Pericles, turning to ac- count the indignation of the people, succeeded in effecting his banishment in n.c. 461. The term of banishment by ostracism was limited by law to ten years. But Cimon was recalled about B.c. 457, also at the instance of Pericles. Since ostracism (Herm. Gr. Alter. i. § 130) was properly not a punishment, Socrates, in the words iva abrot déka ern wh akodoeiav, is merely making a point against the influence of Cimon in the state. 37. Themistocles was banished in B.c. 471, and went to Argos. Here he was accused by the Spartans of par- ticipation in the treason of Pausanias, or pydicuds, and to escape investiga- tions fled to the Persian king, a step which was followed by the confisca- tion of his magnificent property at Athens. 38. apocetnplwucayv: and in addi- tion they punished, etc. Cf. Apol. 20a cplow tuveivar xpyuata diddvtas Kal xpi mpocedévai.— tov év Mapabav: this short adverbial expression seems to have been used simply as a distin- guishing epithet, and it is not likely that the Greeks supplied or felt any ellipsis such as is suggested by Cron, viz. Toy év MapadGui (Mapadau alone) mapatatduevov (uaxerduevov) Or viKh- cavta. The epithet is the more em- phatic as the victors at Marathon (Mapadwvoudya: Ar. Nub. 986) were unusually revered by posterity. In consequence of the unfortunate expe- as 16 40 45 50 516 TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 241 St. I. p. 516, a Badpabpov éuBarety endicarto, kai et pn Sia Tov mpv- »* 5 Tay, evémecev av; KaiToL ovTOL, Ei Hoav avdpes ayabol, @s ov ys, ovK av ToTE TadTAa ETaTXoV. OvKOUY Ol ye ‘ dyabot qvioxyo. Kat dpyas péev ovK exmimtovew eK TOV a 2 ‘ Q , N y XN > ‘ Cevyav, éredav S5€ Oeparedowaw Tods trmous Kal avbrot dmevous yévwrta, yvioxo., Tor exmimtovaw* ovK eott a? y > 3 e a ¥y¥ > 9 ¥ ¥ > , cy a TavT our ev HYioxeia ovT ev GArAwW Epyw ovderi: 7 SoKeEt go; Kaa. Ovx euouye. Ya. "Ady Gets dpa, ws eorKxer, of Eumpoobev Aoyou Hoar, y > # € a ¥ ¥ > XN t ‘ OTL ovdeva HILELS to fev avopa ayabov YEyovoTa Ta ToAt- 517 ‘ > oy “ 4 “ A « t *; las Tua ev THE TH TOrEL. GD SE apoddyers TaV ye Viv ovdéva, TaV pevTor euTpoobe, Kal mpoeihov TovTous TOUS »¥ @ . 2 , 2 ¥ a a » avdpas: obto. S€ avepdvycav é€ icov Tots viv ovTes, aot, eb ovTOL PHTOpEs Hoay, ovTEe TH adnOuH PyTopiKH 2 ig! > s a 2¢/4 ¥ a a expavro — ov yap av é&érerov — ovte TH KoNaKiKT. dition against Paros, Miltiades was, on the prosecution of Xanthippus, declared guilty of aardrnots Tov Shpov, and fined fifty talents. According to Hdt. vi. 136, his adversary de- manded the penalty of death, which was averted by the intercession of friends. 39. el py Sia: “if it had not been for.” The prytanis probably exerted his influence before the division, though this whole story seems to be much overdrawn. 40 f. elaoav... éracxov: opposi- tion to generic present. Cf. 471 a. Goodwin (GMT. 410) considers this as a case of real opposition to the past. 41. ovKovv xré.: the neg. contained in ovcouvy (Kr. 69, 51, 2) applies not to the second member alone, but to the two members together; the co- existence of the two clauses is denied. This form sharply emphasizes the self-contradiction which is fundamen- tal in Callicles’ view. — The results of the whole argument are now summed up as briefly as possible. 50. od 8€ «ré.: with dpordyess must be supplied the participial clause of the preceding sentence. From this also we must take a verb of saying to govern a tivds also to be supplied from ovdéva of the clause TaVv... fumpocber. 52. éf trov: has almost the force of an adj. See Kr. 48, 4,5; H. 798 f. 54. ov ydp éfaeoov: we find addi- tions, such as éx ris mwarplios, apxijs, rupavvidos, and the like; also ddéqs, otalas (é« Trav édvrwy, Hdt. iii, 14). The verb éxwirrew serves thus as a passive to éxBdAAew, though the im- age is that of a chariot driver who is 516 e 517 242 10 15 eo PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 617. LXXIII. Kaa. “AMAa pe&vrou woddov ye det, @ Yo- KpaTEs, MY TOTE Tis TOY VUY Epya ToLaTA épydonrat, ota Tovtwy Os Bovre eipyaorat. Xo. 70, Sapdue, ob8 eyw péyw tovTous as ye Siaxdvous civay TOAEws, adda prot SoKovat TAY YE VUY SiaKoVLKaTEPOL / \ [a et 2 , kon, / ® 2 yeyovévar kat adXov otoi Te exropilew TH TdheEL BY ErrE- 4 i ‘ XN , XN > i * +. Ovper: ahha yap petaBiBalew tas émiBvuias Kat pr) 3 4 ’ ‘N , 2 AN a Y ¥ émitpérewv, weiGovtes Kat Braldouevos ert TovTo, dOev Ewed- Lov dapetvous eoeabar ot modtrat, ws eros eimey ovdev , , > A 9 , x 2 N > 0 a TovTav dvéPepov exetvou* OTEp pdvoy epyov éatly ayabou moXtrov. a \ 3 , e = , > 2 s ToavTa Kal éya cor duortoy@ Seworépovs eiva éxeivous Tpayp.a ovv yehotoy Tovovpev eya TE vavs b€ kal Tetyn Kal vewpia Kal adda Tohha ToUTwY eKxmropilety. \ % 3 a x v . > N bg _ 4 A 5 X Kat ov ev TOLs Adyous: EV TaVTL yap TH ypdve, bv Sdiade- , % 4 , > XN * s * / \ yopeba, ovdev ravdpcba eis 76 avTd det mepipepdpevor Kat thrown out. Cf the English phrase ‘fall through,’ as applied to a design or project.—otre ry KoAakuKy: sc. with which they might have saved themselves, according to Callicles’ view (511 c, 486 b), but which Peri- cles despised. LXXIII. 1. dAdd pévrou . . . pq ote: “But yet, the men of the pres- ent day are at least far from being able to,” etc. 3. ds (Goris) BovAe: used like the Lat. quivis, by a looseness of con- struction. Cf. Phileb. 43 d rpiav obv bvrev jyiv Gvtwwv BotrAU, Crat. 432 a doris BovrAer HAdros apiOuds. Rid. § 189. 4 f. d&s ye Staxovovs elvar: as far, that is, as their being servants of the city ts concerned. See Madv. Syn. § 151, GMT. 781, for examples. The dis- tinction here drawn rests also, as is quickly shown, on what has been demonstrated in ch. XIX. ff. But it is more extensive. 7. peraBiBdtav: “to give another direction to.” See on 493 a. This verb and émitpéwey are resumed by ovdéy rovrwy, and depend on d:égepor. A similar passage (without the inter- vening acc.) is Prot. 828 a aaaa khy ei dAlyoy Fors Tis batts Biapepa fuav mpofiBdoat eis dpethy, ayarnrdy. 8. émirpémev: we must supply a dat. from the preceding acc. See on 460 d. The verb has a slightly dif- ferent sense in 504 c. 10. rovrwy: note the variety in the use of the pronouns; rovrtwy is the same as tay viv above, and hence éxetvor is required to take the place of rotrous above. 11. vats cré.: of. 455 d. 12. elvar: equiv. to 87 Foar. 15. els 7d avro wepiepopevor: simi- lar in form, but not in meaning, to b TIAATONOS, TOPTIAS. ayvoodvres aAyAwY dT Léyomer. 243 8t. I. p. 517. €y@ ov oe ToAAdKis 5 £ # S 3 4 € »¥ * oy OuULat apohoynKevat KQL EYV@KEVAL, @s apa dirt auTy Tt ¢€ * > ‘\ XN ‘ x nw ‘\ ‘\ XN sf Y TPayParea €oTW Kal TEPLTO TOMA Kal TEPL THY puyNY, N € XN ef , 2 a Xx > > , Kal 9 pev érépa SuakoviKy eoTw, H duvarov eivar €xtropt- aN XN o ‘ , € an 7 oN ‘ te 20 Ceuv, €av MEV TEWY) TA TWMATA YUWY, OLTLA, EaV dé dubn, - a3 X\ e * € , , ec , x 7 @ motd, €ay € pry@, iparia, oTpapara, Urodypata, AAN av 4 , > > x \ > c , XN epxeTar oapata eis émiOupiav: Kal é€eritndés oor Sia n 2A > 2 Z y en , TMV AUTWVY ECLKOVOMV heya, wa Pq@ov KaTapabns. TOUTWY X ‘ > PA ” a» »¥ a yap TopioriKoy eivat } KdyAov ovTa 7 Ewtropov 7 Snue- z > * 7 ‘\ x = X A € ” 25 ovpyov Tov avT@Y TOUTWY, TLTOTTOLOY 7 OYorroLoY 7} Udav- x , x 5 , Oe 6 / 2 THY HY TKUTOTOPLOY 7 oKUTOOEpOY, OVdEY DavpacToY EaTLV ” a , ‘\ € es XN a x” ‘\ 6vTa ToLovToy dd€at Kal avT@ Kal Tots ahdots OepamevTny 517 the English phrase “argument in a circle,” te. a coming back again to the point of departure. Cf. Rep. v. 456 b jjxouey eis Ta mpdrepa mepi- pepdpevor. 16. dd\AqAwv: is to be connected, asa kind of subjective or possessive gen., with the following indirect ques- tion. See H. 738; Kr. 47, 10, 8. “Fach other’s language.” 17. Sirry xré.: notice the posi- tion of the rls, which belongs to birth, “a kind of doubled.” See on 491 c. 19. 1 péev érépa: the second mem- ber of the correlation is divided into two parts of which the first is indi- cated by dé @orw tis xré. (below, e), and the other by thy 8¢.. . deamoivas elvac todrwy (518 a).—7. . . elvac: the shift from the regular indir. disc. indic. to an inf. is not uncommon. Cf. Rep. x. 616 b eon dpucvetcba teTap- talous Sev Kabopav tywOev xré. Rid. § 281; GMT. 755. 21 f. GAN’ dv epxerat cré.: anything else, that the body comes to want. 24. wopiotixov elvat «ré.: in what follows, three varieties are distin- guished. The xamndos is the small dealer, hawker or shopkeeper, who deals properly with products of the land (among which are included wines in 518 b); the €uopos is the regular merchant and wholesale dealer. Cf Prot. 313 c. The Snmovpyds is the one who prepares from the raw mate- ria) the various articles demanded by the needs of the body 26. ckutodefov: is unusual for Bup- codépns (tanner). 27. dvta rovovrov: includes under one expression all the divisions and subdivisions of the mopiorixdy efvar, but owing to the introduction of @avyue- orév eotv the construction is changed and the partic. takes the place of the inf. What Socrates wishes to ex- plain is that one who attends to the needs of the body, even though he may understand nothing of either gymnastics or medicine, may very easily himself become possessed of the idea that he is the genuine con- server of the body, as well as inspire the same belief in others. 517 e 244 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 517. > , XN a civar OMpatos, TavTL TH py EOdTL, OTL COTW TLS Tapa < # a TavTas amrdoas TEXVN YuLVacTiKY TE Kal iaTpLKy, H 57) TO » 30 ovre €oTiy aoparos Oepareia, nvTep Kal TpoorjKer TOUTWY »” a a - \ A A apXew TAG TOV TEXVOV Kal xpHoOaL Tols TOVTWY Epyols > 9 an a dud 76 cidévar, 67. 7d XpnoTov Kal wovnpoy TaY otTiwY 7 ToT@y €oTw els apeTHY Tdpatos, Tas 8 addas Tadcas , 2 a XN XN N 4 ‘\ = tavras ayvoew: 810 57) Kal ravras pev Sovdromperets TE 518 35 Kal SuakoviKas Kat avedevOepous eivar repli capa Tpay- » pareias, Tas GAAas Téxvas, THY O€ yupvacTiKHY Kal iaTpt- Kn KaTa TO Sikatov Sermoivas eivar TovTwY. TavTa odV TavTa OTe €oTW Kal wept puyny, Tore WEY pou SoKels pav- , 9 i % “A ¢ aga y | , Odvew dre héyw, Kat duodoyets ws cidas GTL eyo héyw: 9 4 3 - 9 , y ¥ A 2 40 NKELS de Odtyov vaoTEepov héywr, OTL av parrot Kahou Kaya- oi yeydvarw toNtrar &v TH TdheL, Kal ereday éyw Epwrd b olrives, SoKets pot Gpovoratous mpoteiverOar avOparrous Tepl TA TONTUKA, WOTEP Gv EL TEpL Ta YuYATTLKa e00 a XN x \ EpwT@vTos, olrwes ayalot yeyovacw 7H cicly copdtav ¥ ¥ 4 , 4 , € > 45 Jeparevrai, edeyes pol TavU orovedlwv, Ocapiwor 0 apTo- ¢ x * i. = > 4 Q + Komos Kat Midaikos 6 THY dporoway cvyyeypadas THY 517 e naeus xii. 12 cites as authors of works 518 on cookery (ra éwapruricd). The b title of his work can be surmised from this passage. That the art of cookery, especially in rich and proud Syracuse, was early developed, Plato testifies in Rep. ili. 404 d Supakogiay 28. wavti ro py elSort: added as a restrictive explanation to the pre- ceding rots &AAas, which is far too general a statement for Socrates. 28 f. wapd ravtas ddcas: see on Tas &AAas KTé. below, 518 a. 518 34. SovAompemeis: plays on 485 b a and similar expressions in the earlier conversation with Callicles, e.g. 485 d. The attributes of rhetoric and phil- osophy are just reversed. 36. tds dAdas réxvas: “arts ordi- narily designated as such.” 45. @eaplwy: and the following- named persons are sometimes nien- tioned by later authors, Mi@axos for example, among those whom Athe- tpdme(ay Kal Siceduchy moinirlay vou. Cf. Hor. Od. iii. 1.18 Siculae da- pes. The dproxdmos is at the same time a cake-baker. The &pros made from wheat meal was a festival dainty, as is to be judged from Athe- naeus iv. 14 SéAwv 5 rots ev mputa- velw orroupevors paCav mapéxev Kedevet, &prov 8& rais éoprais mpoomapariOévat. Sarambus probably had a wine-shop. TWAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 245 St. I. p. 518. \ \ , ¢ , y a , Z uKeducyy Kat YapauBos 6 Kamndos, ote obro. Oavydoros # yeyovacw copatov Oeparevtai, 6 ev aptous Oavpacrovs ec 4 ¢ \ c N > TapacKkevalav, 6 S€ dysov, 6 dé oivov. LXXIV. "Iows av obv jyavdxtess, et cou EXeyov eya ¢ ay 0 3 h hoe ‘ a } , ore “avOpwre, erates obdev Tept yupvacrikns: Suaxdvous \ an jot Néyers Kat eriPuprav tapacKevactas avOpdrovs, ovK 2 ah x > x 2Qv XN 2A Yo oR 7 €matovras Kadov Kayalov ovdeyv wept avrar, ol, av ovTw 5 TUYwWoW, éuTrHoarTes Kal TayvvavTes TA THpaTa TOV avOpdrav, érawovpevor UT alTav, TpoTAaTOAOVTW avTaV 4 * ‘ > - , e > bs > & ¥ > A. Kal Tas apyalas odpKas: ot 0 ad Ov dareipiay ov Tovs EOTLOVTAS aiTIdcOVTAaL TOY VoowY aiTious Eivat Kal THS 3 A a“ > Zs io > > aK > “A , amtoBohys Tav apyaiwy capKav, aN ot ay adrots TUywot 10 TOTE TapovTEs Kal TupBovrctorTés TL, GTav d7) aUTOLS HK p ye $7, i} adrots HKp e sf N - re. Oe 9 T6TE TANT POVH Vdcov dEepovdga TUXY@ VaTEpoY ypdve, y x an an a GTE avEev TOU VyvEoU yeyovuta, ToVTOUS aiTidaovTaL Kal 518 LXXIV. 1. tows dv ovv qya- va«rets: as Callicles really did when Socrates proved to him that he un- derstood nothing at all of statecraft. 2. dtu: see on 521 b. 3. wapackevartds dvOpdous: the addition of avépdmous (“fellows”) is contemptuous. 4. kadov kdyady: is used by Plato regularly of persons. Schanz, ii. 2 proll. 1, has collected only sixteen cases where it is not so used. Three such examples are found in the Gor- gias, viz. 514 a, 526 a, in addition to the present passage. — ep avrav: refers according to sense to yupva- oruhs, but is made general in view of b above. 4f. dvotre tvxwow: see on 514 e. by a somewhat different simile in Ol. i. 15 Bowep of SaverCduevor padiws ém) rots peydAos TéKo1s puxpdy edmoph- cavtes xpévov borepoy Kal Trav dpxalav amréotncay. Also with the following GAN’ of ky adrots tuxwow wapdvtes cf. Dem. Ol. i. 16 éye 3& odk ayvo0d pty, & &vdpes "A@nvaiot, Tove Gre woAAdKLS buets od tovs aitious, dAAG Tovs bora- tous wep) Tay mpaypdtwy eimdytas év épyn mocetcoOe Sy Tt wy Kata yrdpny éx Bi, Phil. ii. 34 ép@ yap Ss Ta woAAG évious obK eis TOUS aitious, GAA’ eis TOUS ind xXepa pddicra Thy dpyhy adiev- Tas. 7. ot 8 av: the construction is loose, but the context prevents am- biguity. 10 f. aq de€povea: gives a pic- Here, “if they so chance,” 7.e. per- ture, —“‘it is actually at hand, bring- haps. ing disease with it,’—for the more d 6f. wpooamodotow .. . cdpxas: prosaic “has brought about disease.” Demosthenes expresses tle same idea See on 491 ¢. 518 246 15 20 25 30 518 519 20. ddpwv a PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 518. , \ , , x ri» ‘ \ Wéovow KQt KQAKOV TL TOLYTOVOL, av OLOLT WOOL, TOUS be , 2 4 ey a a , ” TPOTEPOVS EKELVOUS KQL aittous TMV KAKWV eYKopLacovow. kal od vov, ® KadXixdes, duourarov tovrw épydle: e > , > 6 , a , ¢ , > nw eyKapralers av PpoemTous, Ol TOUTOUS ELOTLAKACW €U@\OvuV- & >? , ¢ ¥ * / , Tes av éereOipour, Kai dace peyadny THY TOW TeToUNKE- > , y \ 204 \ 9 o 3 > 2 7 VQL GAUTOVS* OTL de oidet KQL vimovhos €OTLW ou EKELVOUS x # 3s 3 ¥ TOUS tTaha.ovs, OUK aio Odvovrat. ‘\ 4 ¥ = s XN an ‘ / kat Suxkaoovwys Mpevwv Kal vewpiwy Kal Teryav Kal pd- XN e “ 3 ¢ ‘\ o 4 pov Kat TowovTav pdvapiav euteTAHKaAGL THY TOMY: OTAY ovv €On 7» KataBodrr avtn THs aobeveias, Tovs TOTE / > , 4 4 ‘\ % TapovTas aitidcovTar ocupBovdovs, Beprotokhéa dé Kat +. ‘ e > a X s £ “ Kipwva kat Ilepuxtéa eykwptacovaw, Tovs airiovs TeV om A NN > 4 7% ‘ > bila ‘ “A Kakav: ood &€ lows emidypovrat, eav 7) evAaBy, Kal TOD > m £ , ? 4 ov XN ‘N ‘4 “~ €“OU ETALPOU AdkiBiddov, drav Kal TO apxXaia mpooamon- » 4 XN ® > , > .. #£ ¥ an a VwOL Tpos OUS EKTNOAVTO, OUK ALTLWY OVTWY TWVY KAKWY b : GAN tows ovvaitiov. Kaito. €ywye avontov mpaypya Kal an € n £ re > ¢ 7 Lael > a“ , VUV Opw VY -yvopevov KQL QAKOUW TWY TOANQLOY avdpav TEpL. > , , y c s N A a > a ais Odvopat YP, OTaV 1 moNus TWA TWVY TOALTLK@V avdpar 16. rovrous: is defined by the fol- lowing thy wéAw. With kai pace the subject changes, so that airovs refers to the same as of, while tov- tous furnishes the subject for kai pact. 18. olSet kal taovrdds éotr: the first term denotes an external swell- ing or bloated condition, which may, however, for the time have all the appearance of health; the latter, the internal and hence invisible seat of disease. duties and imposts which the Athenians imposed upon other states, but expended only for their own interests. 21. Kal rorovtwv prvapiav: with a side hit at 490 ¢ and a more definite reference to 455 e. 29, quoted on 490 ec. 22 f. rods ToOTE wapovTas KTé.: again the same thought as in d above. 25. cov... émArnWovra: contains an allusion to 486 a. For the parti- tive gen., see H. 7388 a, and on 469 ¢. —kal rot énov éraipov “AdKiBid- Sov: on the value of this prophecy of Socrates for determining the date of this discussion, see Introd. § 19. For the reader, the life of Alcibiades will serve as a most convincing proof of the soundness of Socrates’ state- ments. 29. dpw, dxovw: Socrates desires b to emphasize that in the past as well as the present the same thing has been repeating itself. Cf. Dem. Ol. iii, 519 a avev yap cwppoovvys 519 TIAATONOS TOPYTIAS. 247 St. I. p. 619. petayepilntar as dd.KodvTa, dyavaKTowTaV Kat oxeThua- Covrwy as dewa macyovor: Tohha Kal ayaba thy wédw , »¥ LOL € > > an > , c € , TETOLNKOTES Apa GOLKWS UT AaUTHS amroddUVTAL, WS O TOVTWY Adyos: 7d S€é Grov Wevdsds eorw. , N 4 Tpootatns yap Toews 72 @ a a @ 35 ovd ay els ToTE Adikws aTOhOLTO UT avTHS THS TOEWS HS mpootater* Kiwwduvever yap TavTov civat, boot TE TOLTLKOL nw > \ TpooTovovvTat Eivar Kal CoOL GopiaTat. Kal yap ot codt- - 3 x # Qn * > , a otai, Tada Topol ovTes, TOVTO aToTrov EpyalovTaL Tpaypya.* £ ‘\ > nw a 3 co dacKovTes yap aperns SidaoKador elvat TwoANaKLS KarT- A a a € > a 5 3 , , 40 nNyopovow TOV pabnrar, WS aoiKovat aopas QUTOUS, TOUS TE 45 519 pcbods atroarepovrtes Kal ahdnVv yapw ovK aTodLOOVTES > , € > 9 A \ , a\s yR 9 , €u aadovres UT AUTWVY* KAL TOUTOVU TOU Adyou Tl av aroyo- oy, a 3 , > ‘\ x o , TEpoy ein Tpaypa, avVOpaTovS ayaods Kal Sukaious yevoye- vous, e€aipeHevtas prev adikiav v7d TOD SidacKdhov, T\6v- \ , > “ , a > ¥ > ba Tas de Scxacoovny, QOuKety TOUT®@ O OUK EKOVOLD ; ou SoKet 31. dyavaxrovvrwy: depends upon aicOdvouat with the omission of aitav. The pl. is due to the plural idea, and to the dvdpév. The statement holds good for all, though the action affects the individual only. 33. dpa: postpositive, as in Prot. 355 b as 3& tavTa yeAotd éott Kkatd- dnAov ~rrar av ph woAdAois dvduact xpomeba tpa. Here it serves to char- acterize the assumption as a result that follows of itself. 35. ov8 dv els: see on 512 ¢. 36. dcov «xré.: loose connexion. The same case, “as well in regard to those who, etc... as, etc.” 37. wpocmootvra:: Socrates is thinking of the task which each class assumes, viz. to make the sub- ject of their treatment better, to endow him with virtue. The pre- tended statesman promises this re- sult to the whole body of citizens ; the sophist, to the individual. Isocr. xiii. 5 f. 40. odas atrods: themselves indeed, with more emphasis than the simple opas, which is more usual as the in- dir. reflexive. Cf. 520 b. 42. xal: but little different from kal to: (and yet) in rejoinders, espe- pecially to statements made by the speaker. Cf. Apol.29 b kal rodro mas ovk auabla éativ; Dem.vi. 16 Kad ris dy tatra moretoeey; 43. dvOpurrous dyabods «ré.: sc.as one must assume, according to the state- ment of the sophists. The addition of etarpedévras Gdiclay ... (just here lies the aducia) 8 od« exou- ow serves to bring out very strongly the want of consistency in the theory. 44. cyxovtas: after they had gotten. See on 503e. Cf. Apol. 19a, Soph. #. 1256 pdrs yap eoxov viv ercdOepor ordua. Cf. aducety tore 519 248 PLATO'S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 519. a » > > a A be Got TOUTO aToTov Eivat, @ Eraipe; ws adnOas Snunyopel He HdyKacas, @ Kaddixdes, od €Oéhwv amoxpiver Oa. LXXV. Kaa. 3d & ov« dy olds 7 Eins héyew, Eb WH ac > £ TLS DOL ATOKPWOLTO ; me: , a nw te st nw ¢ Xa. "Eoucd ye: vov yowvw avyvovs teivw Tav hoywr, émevdy pow ovK eOédes aroKpiver Oat. ad’ wyablé, eimé 5 Tpos Pidiov, ov SoKet wou dhoyov eivar dyafov pacKorvTa = * = ¥ ov = +. “a * X meToinkevar Ta peuper Oar TovTe, d7L Up’ EavTOD ayabds yeyoves Te Kal Oy Ereita Tovynpds EoTw; Kaa. “Emovye doxet. > nw > a las / = , do. Ovkovv QKOVELS TOLQAUTA heyovtwy TMV pac KovTwr , > £ 2s - - 10 mrawdever avOpaTrous Eis apETHp ; 15 519 Kaa. "Eywye: adda Ti ay Néyous dvOpdrav mépt 006-520 %. > ra evos afiwv ; Xa. Ti & ay rept éxeivwy déyous, ot pdoKovres mpo- , “ - ~ > a + c 7 ecTdvar THS ToAEwS Kal emipehetoOat, Ows ws BedtioTy nan an ov €oTal, TaAW GAUTHS KAaTYYOpOvGL, OTaY TUYWOW, WS TOVN- potarys; ote tu Suvapépew 46. ds dAnOas Snpnyopetv: here de- 4 notes the delivery of a long, connected discourse as opposed to dialectic in- vestigation. It is also a reply to Cal- licles’ accusation in 482 ¢ ds aAndds Snunydpos av. LXXV. 38. ound ye (sc. ofds 7 elva: xré.): is a partial assent to the assertion implied in Callicles’ ques- tion, “You would doubtless be quite capable,” etc. — The following clause with ody seems to be urged in proof, but it is really more of a complaint. —ovxvois...Tav Adyav: cf 465 € auxvov Adyou amoréraxa. The part. gen. emphasizes the distinctness of the arguments. — For the agreement of the adjective in gender and num- ber with the subst., cf Xen. Cyr, iii. > TovTOUS eKElYwY; TavTOV, @ 2. 2 moaahy ths xdpas, iv. 5.4 Tov iptwv rovs juices. 5. apds tAlov: see on 500 b. 10. maSevew els dperyy: cf Xen. Cyn. 13.3 én’ aperqv. 11. ddA tl dv A€yous: what would one have to say? “One need not waste words over such people.” Callicles, al- though at bottom himself a sophist, af- fects to despise the class in accordance with Gorgias’ view concerning them. See Introd. § 8, especially note 22. 15. dtav t¥Xxwow: has here much the force of “occasionally.” See on 518 ¢. 16. rairdv : emphatic asyndeton, which as an answer to the question immediately preceding has the effect of a negation. 519 on 20 a TAATONOS TOPTIA. z > > ‘\ x x ic. » 2 - \ Pakapl, EOTLY coguatys Kat PNTwP, nH EyyUS Te Kat Tapa- mhyaiov, woTep eyo €deyov mpos Lddov: ov dé OV ¥ > A ayvouay TO wey ma&yKaNovy Tu ole eivat, THY PNTOPLKYY, TOD 20 d€ katradpoveis. PYTOpPLKNS GowmeEp VopobeTLKy SiKacTiKNS Kal yuLracTLKh iarpuns. pdvors 8 eywye Kal pny Tots Snunyopors TE \ a > > a , , a , KQL coguatais OUK EV KwWPELV peudher Oar TOUTW@ TW Tpay- a \ an part, 6 adtot mawWevovow, ws Twovnpdv éaoTw eis ohas, a oS > a x , , oy ‘\ € nq a 257 TO GuT@M AOyYwW TOUT® Gua Kal EQuTWY KaTHYyopELW, OTL ovdevy wpedAHKacW ovs haow wdedetv. EXEL ; Kaa. Idvv ye. ‘ , , \ > , ¥ Xa. Kat mpoéobar ye Simrov thy eepyeciav dvev pu- A e XN > / / , > , ¥ > a 30 cov, ws Td €iKds, fovots TOUTOLS EVEXWPEL, ELTTED ahnOn eeyov. ahdnv pev yap evepyeciavy tis evepyernbeis, ae \ : , \ , ¥ x > OLOV TAXUS yevopevos dua ma.ooTpiBny, toWS AV ATrO- 17. q éyyts «ré.: on the use of 4 the adverb, see Kr. 62, 2,4. 7) goes with it as rls with the adj., “pretty nearly.” See on 491 c¢. b =. 20. rq S€ dAnOela xré.: of. 464 b ff. 22. wal dpunv: the position of «af here, which would properly be con- nected with pdvois, is due to the de- sire to emphasize this latter word by putting it at the head of the sen- tence. 23. rovtw To mpdypare: that which receives their training, whether it be a whole commonwealth or an indi- vidual. The abstract neut. general- izes, as in Prot. 312 ec, where of the sophists themselves it is said: nalta ei rovr’ (i.e. what a sophist is) d&yvoets ovde Stw wapadidws thy puxhy olcAa, ott ef dyab@ ov’ €i KaKG mpdypuari. 25. To atte Aoyw KTé.: without, at the same time. Cf. Phaedr. 245d Touro dé ob amdAAvaGat obre yiyverOau duvatéy, } wdvta Te ovpavdy macdy Te yéverw cuumesotoay orjva. Cron sup- plies from ov« éyxwpeiv the words avdyeny elvat, but it is very doubtful whether the Greeks felt the ellipsis. Cf. 471 a. e 29. mpodcBar tiv evepyerlay: every piece of instruction given the scholar by the teacher is looked upon as a benefit, and the pay is simply a com- pensation for benefit received. To mpoéobai, which of itself denotes a freewill gift, is added avev wood in order to make more plain the con- trast with the practice of the soph- ists, which ran so counter to the customary ideas of the Greeks (cf. Apo. 19 ef., 31 b, 33 a). The prac- tice of Protagoras, as it is told us in Prot. 328 b, c, is noteworthy in this connexion. 249 Bt. I. p. 520. b gd ‘\ Th Sé adnOeia Kady Eat copiaTiKy > 9 ovxX OUTwS 250 PLATO’S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 520. , \ , > , > A ¢ s ® oTEepyn oeve THV Xap, €l TpoolTo auT@ O qra.doT pins ‘\ % - > na A yy / 9 Kat pn ouOeuevos atta pucbdy dru pddiota apa 35 weTadiOovs TOU Taxous AapPdvor TS apyvpiov: ov yap 4 Bpadurnri, olpat, adixodow ot avOpwro, adn’ aducia- yep ; Kaa. Nai. > A ¥ > os a > a ‘ > , BOE Xa. OvKovr Et Tis adTd TOUTO adaipel, THY AdiKiay, OddEY 40 dewdv adt@ pymote aduKnOy, adda pdvy adagpares TavTyHv 5 10 520 Cc \ > 7 , ¥ a »* 8 , / > TH evepyeciay mpoeoOat, elrep TO OvTL OVVaLTO TIS aya- ‘N a bY oy Oovs wove. odx OvTw; Kaa. Bypi. LXXVI. Xo. Aca tav7’ dpa, ws eouxe, Tas pev adrdas ovpBovrtas aupBovrevew apBavovta apyvpiov, otov 2 , , a A »” a ey > , olkodop.las TEPlL Y TOV aw TEXVOV, OU ev alo VvpoVv. Kaa. “Eouré ye. \ a, c nw a, y > »¥ ¢ Ya. Tlepe dé ye TavTns THS mpatews, OvTW ay TLS TpPO- ce f ¥ No» N, € A > 2 8 n MOV WS Bédruoros ely) Kat aploTa TYHV AVTOV OLKLAV OLOLKOL x / >? X a XN i“ 4 aN TOY, aicypov verdproTar py pavar oupPBovdevew, Eav by Tus avT@ apyupiov did9. Kaa. Nai. Xa. Ajdov yap dre TovTo 34. dru padtrta: to be connected with the partic. clause dua peradi5ous, simul atque tradit.—dpa: on the adv. with the partic., see H. 976; GMT. 858. 39 f. otSev Savov «ré.: see on 517a, and of. Apol. 28 b odSéy Sevdy ph ev éuol orf. It has much the force of the English, ‘there is no danger that,’ etc. See Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. iii. 204. LXXVI. 1f. tds pév Gddas cup- BovAds: almost equiv. to ras ep BdAwy cupBovads. > , q yep ; »¥ , a y = gy QUTtOVY EOTLY, OTL ov7n QuTy 5 f. dvtw dv tis tpdtov Kré.: epex- egetic to raurns Tis mpdtews, “this matter.” The éper} rodrrixh which the sophists professed to teach included both sides, — management of one’s own household and of the state. Cf. Prot. 318 @ 7d 5& pdOnud éorw evBov- Ala wepl re T&v oikelwy, Smws by Bpiota Thy abrod oixlay SioiKot, kal wep) Tov ris wéAews, Orws TA THS wéAEwS Suva- téraros by elm kal mpdtrew Kal Aéyew. 7. wy ddva . . . édv py: generic conditional of the present. The first ui is due to the infinitive. 15 20 520 521 a TIAATQNOS TOPTIAS. 251 8t. I. p. 520. S > a x > , 2 a nA 3 9 ie TwvV EVEPYEOL@V TOV €U mabovra émuOupetv TOLEL AVT EU a 9 x § aA LN a > > > , TOLEW* WOTE Kadov OKEL TO ONLELOV €lal, €L €U TOLNTAS , ‘ > , > > Ss 7 2 Q , x TAUTYY THV evepyceo Lav QUT €U TWELOETAL* Eb de -), OV. ¥ a 9 »¥ EOTL TAUTA OUTWS EYOTA; ¥. Kaa. Eovrw. > Q / S A Q ’ A 2a. "Emi rorépay obv we wapakahets tiv Oeparetav THs e ¥ 4 ‘ n P. > 4 modews, Sidpiody prot, THY TOD SiapdyerOar "AOnvaiois, 9 ¢ , ¥ ¢ > ie x c 4 omws as BédtioToL EvovTat, ws iaTpov, } ws SiaKkovycovTa Kat mpos xapw duidryoovra; TahynOy pou etre, KadXi- ’ \ > ¢ ¥ , x Kheis + Sixavos yap €, womep NpEw mappynoidlea bar mpds €ué, Suatedeiy & voeis Aéyav: Kal vov ed Kal yervaiws D / EL7r€. 11 f. dvr’ ev wovetv: the old way of writing was dyrevroetv; but a verb can retain its original form only when compounded with a preposi- tion. See H.581. Gratitude is only a kind of justice. 12. dore Kadrcv Soxet To onpetov elvat: sc. as testimony to the fact that the teacher has really made him bet- ter. The common form of the condi- tional, where the second member is the converse of the first, is éay wey... ei 5¢ wh. See on 502 b. The use of ei with fut. indic. also in the first mem- ber emphasizes the rarity of the case. The subject of ed mavjoas is indefi- nite, ‘any one,’ as of uh pava above. 16 f. tiv Oeparelav trys médews: denotes political activity in the sense shown in ch. LVI. above, and in ac- cordance with the principles deduced in ch. XIX. ff. The correct answer to the question propounded would be: “As matters are, I invite you to neither mode; for the one is immoral, the other (as Socrates also makes plain in Apol. 31d f.), for the present impossible.” Hence, also, Socrates intimates that the only way of engag- 521 ing in true politics is at present lim- ited in Athens to the improvement of individuals in private intercourse. The use of the article with @epameciay implies that both kinds have been previously mentioned,— as is more definitely stated in the following ex- planation. Cf. Crat. 439 a ef oty forw mev Ore pddiota Be dvopdtwy Ta mpdy- pata pavOdvew, fore 5¢ Kad Se aitar, morépa by etn nadAlwv 7 udOnors. 17. tHv Tot StapdxerBar: ef. Apol. 29 b aftn 4 érovelSicros (auabla) 4 Tod otecOai eidévac & ove oldev. According to Madv. Syn. 49 a, the epexegetic gen. is usually found only with the inf. 18. ds tarpdv: see on 514 d.—q ds Staxovyicovra: the two words és iarpév have caused a shift in the con- struction where we should have ex- pected (cf. 513 d) something like 4 Thy Tov KaraxapiCecOat xré. In the answer of Callicles we have a simple verbal quotation of Socrates’ words, without the speaker’s troubling him- self to observe any fixed construc- tion. One might supply rapaxaa@ ce. 621 a 252 25 30 521 PLATO’S GORGIAS. Bt. I. p. 521, 4 - 9 ¢€ , Kaa. Aéyw toivur ort ws SvakovycovtTa. Xa. Kodaxevcovta dpa pe, ® yervardraTe, Tapakadets. Kaa. Ei cow Muody ye div Kade, @ LoKpares: ws ei p22) TAVTA ye ToLyoeLs — ‘ ¥ a , ¥ y 3 a € Xa. My elarns 0 tmoddaKis ElpynKas, OTL ATOKTEVEL ME O , y ‘ > Noo AN ¥ y , a Bovdopevos, va py av Kal eyw Elm, OTL TOVNpOS ye wY > ‘ »¥ > 9 > # +7 ¥ y ‘\ ayabov dvra: pnd ote dpaipyoerar dv Te exo, Wa py av éya etw ote “add? adedopevos ody eer Ore xpHoeTar avrots, GAN womep pe ddikws adetdero, ovTws Kat LaBwv a , - > s > , > ~ > XN > wn adikws XPHTETAL, Eb dé ddikws, ala Xpus, €b de aLoX pas, al” KQKQMS. LXXVII. Kaa. "Os pot doxets, & Yadxpares, murrevew ° xa a , 6 A e a, A 3 oa + > a BY QV EV TOUTWV TQAVEW, WS OLKWV EKTIOO@VY KQAL OUK QV 24. xodkakevoovra: pronounces such a judgment upon diaxovqoovta that its opposition to the idea -yevvatos (yervadrate, yevvaiws eiré) is strongly emphasized. 25. & cor Mvodv ye «ré.: when two conditional clauses are contrasted by ci wey... ef 5& uh, we not infre- quently find the conclusion of the first condition omitted. GMT. 482; H. 904. The sense of this passage seems to be: “Yes! if you prefer to use the vilest name for it.” The Mysians were so despised that even slaves brought from Mysia were as little thought of as the Sardi ve- nales at Rome. Hence Muay %rxatos was a proverb (Theaet. 209 b 7d Acyduevoy Mucay thy Zrxarov), meaning “the vilest of the vile.” Cic. pro Flacc. 27 Quid porro in Graeco sermone tam tritum atque celebratum est, quam si quis despicatui ducitur, ut Mysorum ultimus esse di- catur? soAakevew was an unpleas- ant word to the Greek ear, and doubtless offended the euphemistic taste of Callicles. Cf. the English proverb, ‘to call a spade a spade.’ — ds: see on 509 e.— This passage has troubled the editors. 27. 6 mwodAdkis etpykas: 486 a, b, 511 b. Polus, however, had already said the same. 29. édv 1. éxw: to be compared with xphoetat avrois in the line below. 30. StLGAN dheAcpevos: O17: is often used to introduce a direct quotation. For examples, see Spieker, Am. Jour. Phil. v. 220. LXXVII. 1. ds prot Soxets: to be understood as a sportive exclamation. Cf. 490 e. 2. pnd’ av év: see on 512 e.—ds olkav éxroSev: “as if you dwelt out- side the world,” where no one could reach you. 2f. dv eloaybels: see on 458 a, and cf. Xen. An. i. 1. 10 aire? eis SirxiAlous tévous kal tpidy unvav picOdy, ds obtws mepryevduevos by tay avricraciwray. b 258 St. I. p. 521. > N > 4, c XN F ¥” an ? eioay Geis els dukacTH pLov UTO TAaVU LOWS pox On pov av- TIAATONOS TOPIIAS. , \ £ Oparov Kat pavdov. » > a 5 a. “Avdntos dpa eiut, @ KadXixdes, as alndas, et py olopar év THdE TH mddEL dvTWOUY ay, OTL TUYOL, TOUTO A , , > 9Q>2 37 3 , ¥ mabety. Tdde pevror ev 010 GT, Edvirep Ecioiw eis SuKa- 4 OTH ploy tept TovTwy TwWds Kwduvedwv 6 ad déyeus, TOVN- , # > »¥ € > at > N ‘\ a % ‘\ pos tis p’ €otat 6 elaaywv: oddels yap &v ypynortos pi > a > ¥ > , ‘N > , ¥ > 10 ddixovvr’ avOpwrov eiaaydyou: Kat ovdéy ye aromov «i > , , ¥ 29 a A droPdvoynw. BovdrEr cor eiw Ov Ore TadTa TpoGSoKe ; Kaa. Ildvu ye. Xa. Ota: per’ ddtywr ’AOnvaiwy, iva py eitw pdvos, a wn > ~ ~ emixerpely TH WS AhNOGs ToutiKH TExV Kal mpatTew Ta, a A 9 > 16 TokuTiKa p.ovos TOV VUY: aTE ov Ov Tpds yapw héywr ‘ - a , € a, > ‘ *~ \ / Tous Adyous ods héyw Exdorote, aha mpds 76 BEATLOTOV, e > Xx \. & N > >? /, es a x = ov mpds TO NOLoTOY, Kal ovK EHédwy Tole & OV Tapawets, 521 The difference in the participles is the same as it would be in direct dis- (pasv) éorw KaxGs moreiv avOpdrous } 521 eb év rHde 5E Kal wdvv. Apol. 31 d, © course: oik@ éxwoday kal obx by eica- X9einv. Cf. 486 b. 5. dvoyntos dpa elul: the particle &pa has the force, “as it seems,” as frequently. Socrates is not to be understood as saying that he is avdn- tos, but only that according to Calli- cles’ view he would be. 6. ovrwotv av, ét. tUXoL: “ any one may experience anything.” The more usual mood would be subjv. é7: &y rixn, instead of optative. But the opt. is not uncommonly found by attraction in relative sentences which are dependent on clauses with &» (either opt. or indic.). GMT. 558. On the subject-matter, cf Meno 94 e éy® (Anytus is introduced as speak- ing) peév ody &y cou cupBovacioatus, ef €0érAes euol welOecOa, evAaBetoOar. ws Yows pev cal év BAAN WdArc pddidy e, and Dem. Ol. iii. 11 ff. also agree with this. 7 ff. rd8e . . . mpocSoxa: these words sound like a prophecy in the mouth of Socrates, but were probably intended by Plato as a severe criti- cism on his accusers. 8. wept tovTwy Tivos KivSuvedov: referring to the nature of the punish- ment to be undergone. Cf. above, b. —6é: where we should more natur- ally have éy, but see on 486 d. 13. ta pr elo povos: this limita- tion is intended to be exact, as the repetition of pudévos shows. On the matter, see Apol. 30 d ff. 16. o¥ mpds Td wStorov: the repe- tition in a changed form of the idea already expressed serves to heighten the contrast. See on ofros 452 e. d 254 20 25 521 ° PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 521. ‘\ XN n > y 9 , > nw a : Ta Kopipa Tadra, ody e€w ort héyw ev TO SikacTnpiv. 6 abtos S€é pou HKEL Adyos, GvTEp pds T1@dov edeyov: Kpt- voupa yap ws €v ta.diou iarpos av Kpivoiro Katnyopour- . mi TOS oor7roLov. a aA an oKome. yap, Ti Gv arohoyotro 6 ToLwodvTOS »” > 4 , > > fed wn 4 avOpwros év TovTo.s AnPOeis, EL avTov Karnyopot Tis hé- 9 aw D to N ¢ A ‘ , 9 ¥ yov OTL @ TQLoES, Toa Upas KQL KOK 60€ ELpYACTat > AN ar) , \ . , eon 7 , avy” p KQL QAUTOUS, KAL TOUS VEWTATOUS UpL@yY diadpBeipe TEp- \ , \ > , . , > a - V@V TE KAL KAWY, KQL LO XVQALVOV KQL TVLY@V A7TrOpEew TOLEL, 522 / , ‘\ \ a x a > , TWLKPOTATa TOLATA dLd0vs KQL TEWYVY KQL Subjv avayKa- > ¥ 3 xX ‘ > e if XN = 4 ae Cov, OUX WOTEpP EYw TOAAG Kat ndéa Kal mayTodama Nua- 18. tad kopd tavra: this employ- ment of Callicles’ epithet (cf 486 c) is probably not without design on Socrates’ part, according to whose view it applies better to rhetoric than to philosophy. 19. 6 avrds . . . Adyos: in the pas- sage referred to (464 d) Socrates is actually speaking to Gorgias, who has taken Polus’ place for the time, but what he says applies just as well to Polus, as is seen by reference to 463 e and 466 a. 19 f. kptvotpat: probably passive ; but if so, it is the only example in At- tic prose (see Kr. 39,11, A). On the other hand, the fut. middle of ddicéw is regularly used for fut. passive. Cf. 509 d, and sce H. 496 a. 22. év rovtos Anplels: cf 486 a ec Tis cov AaBduevos. How év rodrais is to be understood, is shown by rods towtrous dixactas below. 23. & waiSes: what follows as far as eddxouv suas is a parody on the accusation made against Socrates, es- pecially in so far as he was declared to be a corrupter of the young. 24. dvyip: without the art. because it is disparaging. But see II. 674. — rovs vewtarous: instead of robs véous, because the supposed judge himself is a child. 24 f. StahOelper kal diropety srovet : are loosely connected with kakd elpyactat aS denoting two species of the evils complained of, — d:apGelper the more severe treatment by réuvwy te Kal Kdwy,—admopety moet, the less severe by isxvatvwy cal mviywr. The latter is explained by mwixpérara xré, and wewfy .. . dvayxa wy in chiastic position. It denotes, therefore, the condition of wretchedness and dis- comfort brought about by fasting and nauseating medicines. While d:a- Oeiper reminds one of the accusa- tion before the court, dmopeiy woe? applies especially to the customary criticisms which were made against Socrates. See on 522 b below. 27. ovx damep eyo: a compressed expression, in which ot, though really without a verb, is connected with the following clause as equiv. to od« edwxav, Grrep xté. Cf Symp. 179 d, e@ (@c0) érolnaay tov Odvarov abrod (Oppéws) brd yuvarnav yevérOar ody dawep “AythAda. . érlunoay Kal eis urkdpwv vhoovs amémeupav. Cf. Dem. Phil. i.34. Translate obx Somep by “whereas.” 522 TIAATONOS TOPLAS. 255 Bt. I. p. 522. ¢ A ” sok ¥ > 4 eX o~ > s 7 Nouv was” Th ay ole ev TOVT@W THO KaK@ aTolnPlerta > x. ¥ 2A a > OY» \ 2) 7 y “ a taT pov EX ew ELTEW 5; YY El ELTTOL THV ahyGevav, OTL TAaUTA 4 > * a , > a € a. 9 , ¥” a 30 TaVTAa EyW ETTOLOVY, w TALoEs, VYLELVWS, TOTOV OLEL aV 35 a > fad % # - > v dvaBojoa. Tovs TovovTous SiKacTds; ov péya; Kaa. “Iows: otexOai ye ypy. es. ¥ ? , > 9 aX ¥ 9 La. Ovkovuv oveu Ev Ta07N aTOpLa QV QuUTOV exer Iau, OTL Xpy €lrrew ; Kaa. Ilavu ye. LXXVIII. Ya. Tovodroyv perro. kai eye of’ ori maBos a. * > 4 > , ¥ \ ¢ \ madorps av eicehOav ets SixacrTypiov. ovTE yap Hdovas a 2 , Y, 2 A Z a a > , \ as EKTETIOPLKA €€w QuTOUus déyeuy, as OUTOL EVEPYETLAS Kat adpehias vouilovow, éya S€ ovre Tods mopilovtas Lnrha@ _ ¥ a ’ 2” + 2 , a 7 ovTe ols tmopilerar: éav Té Tis pe ] vewTépous Hy SiaPOei- pev dmropety TovodyTa, } Tos mpeaButépous Kaknyopelw 30. awocov: not ri, because the up- roar would be characterized by vol- ume rather than by distinctness. 31. avaBoroat: sc. as the judges of Socrates really did. Hence the re- peated entreaty of Socrates, wy Gopu- Beire. Cf Apol. 30 c é@ ois tows BohoeoOe. 32. tows xré.: is, according to the sense, a decisive affirmation, though it is given unwillingly and grudgingly. —oterbal ye xpy: is not very appro- priate here; it is frequently em- ployed where the speaker answers himself, e.g. Crito 53 © xat od« ofet Boxnpov by palvecOat 7d Too Swxpdrous mpaypa; oterOat ye xph, Prot. 325 ¢. 33. é€v wdoy daropla xré.: cf. Hat. ix. 98 év dropin efxovro Sti moréwor. LXXVIII. 2. otre yap: the cor- responding member to this is édy ré tis we Kré. 4f. éyd 8 (while I)... woplterar: is outside of the regular construc- tion. 5. aq vewrépous: in view of robs mpeaBurépouvs we might expect gods vewrépous. If the reading is sound, we must look upon vewrédpous as en- tirely indefinite in the sense of “young people,” and tots apecBu- tépous as “the older” as compared with them, e.g. their fathers, etc. 6. dtopeiv wovotvta: this accusa- tion was actually made against Socra- tes, as we see from Jeno 79 e, where Meno says, @ Zéxpares, Hrovoy peév eywye amply Kal cuyyevécba oo, Ett od ovdey GAAO ® abtds awopets Kal Tods BAAous moves awoperv, and Socrates himself says in Theaet. 149 a Aéyoust aept euod Ort drommratds clus wad roid tovs avOpdmous amopelv.— Tovs mTpeo- Burdépous xré.: an example is afforded by Apol. 29 d ff., where Socrates rep- resents himself as saying to any one he meets, & &purte avdpGv KTE., XpT- udrov pev odk aicxtver émimedovpevos brws cor ota Bs TrEloTa, Ppovngews Se al GAnOetas cal THs puxis Srws os 256 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 522 , \ , A207) , »” . 9 A héyovra muxpovs Adyous 7H idia 7 Sypocia, ovre 75 adnOes y > a 9 “§ s , a 2 A Z XN /, e€w €LTELW, OTL LKQALWS TTAVTA TAVTA eyo heya, KQt TPaTT@ TO UmerEpov 5% ToUTO, @ avOpes Sukacrai,” ovre dAdo ovdey* ” ¥ 9 x , a , 10 wWoTE toO@S, OTL AV TUX®, TOUTO TELO OMLAL. Kaa. Aoxet ody oot, @ Saxpares, kadas eyew avOpo- > , y s . 9297 na € a WOos ev TONEL OUTWS Suaketpevos Kab aowatos @VY E€AUT@ Bon Oetv ; Xa. Ki éxetvd ye & ait@ badpyou, ® Kaddixhes, 6 od 15 ToAAaKis wpordyynaas: eb BeBonOynkas ein atta, pyTE wept avOpadmous pyre wept Peods adikov pundev pujre eipy- KOS pte elpyaopevos. , ecoa e , , > moddaKis Huly wpoddynta, Kpatiotn eivat. 9 if , € aA avuTn yap tis BoyPaa éavT@ et pev Ovv 2 + > s , . , 207 ¥ EE TLS éfehéyxou TavTyV THV Bornbaav aovvarov ovTa 20 €uavT@ Kal a\r\w BonOetv, aioxuvoiny av Kat év qohdots N39 2\ 7 > / ‘N , €. % , ‘ > KQ@L EV odtyous efeheyy op.evos KQL £LOVOS VITO [KLOVOUV, Kat cb 522 Beariorn Error ode emmedc? ov5e ppov- ti¢es; Cf. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 49 ff. 7. A€yovra mukpods Acyous: corre- sponds to mxpétata mepata didovs in the comparison. 8. dre Stkalws «ré.: Socrates really speaks in this vein in Apol. 30 e ff. 10. dtu dv TUxXw: see on 521 ¢. 12. kal dSvvaros av: in form co- ordinate with, but in sense explana- tory of, ofrws d.axelwevos, which refers to what precedes. 14. el éxeivo ye xré.; the apod. is to be sought in the implied affirma- tion to the question Soxe? cor Karas txew. Cf. 508 c. The addition of éy to the pron. makes it very em- phatic, as in Rep. vii. 537 b (though here the order is different) pla kal aitn Tov Bacdvwy ov édaxiorn. 15. BeBonOykas ety: not to be con- sidered as a circumlocutory perfect; but the partic. denotes a condition brought about by a course of action (eipnxas phre eipyacuévos) which, be- gun in the past, still continues. 17. airy ydp tis BorPaa: the use of rls instead of the art. shows that Socrates feels he is stretching lan- guage a little. The dat. is after the analogy of the preceding dat. with the partic.; but see on 513 b. 19. éfeAdyxou: should confute me by showing. Hence the partic. follows the analogy of verbs of showing. 20 f. Kal év rodAois Kal év dAlyots : “whether... or.” 21. povos dare povov: the disgrace, to the mind of Socrates, consists, not in the fact that one suffers a defeat at the hands of his adversary évaytloy moAA@y, but in the unsuspected weak- ness which is thus laid bare. Hence, so far as the purpose in hand is con- cerned, ravtny thy aduvaulay would be equivalent to ddi«lay. c d 522 d TIAATONOS TOPIIAs. oda drt padiws ious av pe fépovta Tov Odvarov. 257 St. I. p. 522. % 4 * > + 2 , > 7. * P Sid Tavryy THY advvapiay aroOvyjoKoyn, dyavaKtoiny av: ei 5é€ KodakuKns pytopicys évdeia TedevTanv eywye, ed 2h avuToO ‘\ ‘ X > # 10 N aA gy % , 25 pev yap 7d amoOvicKew ovdels poBetrat, dates pq) TavTa- 30 522 \ 7 , \ Ly / 2 ‘\ \ > Lad Tacw addyotdés Te Kal avavdpds éotw, Td Sé ddiKev a nw ‘\ > , # ‘\ ‘\ oPeira: tohhav yap dducnudrav yewovra thy Wuxny 7 9 > , , » A > Els Audov adpixéo Oar TAVT@V EOXKATOV KAKWV EOTLV. et oe Bovre, cot éyd, ws TovTo otTws Exe, €Oéhw Adyov Eat. Kaa. AN’ éretrep ye Kal Tadda érépavas, kal TodTo Tépavov. LXXIX. Xo. “"Axove 7,” daci, “dha kahod Adyov,” 523 a . ee 56 ¢ 2. 9 2 A Se s € OV OV pevV NYNTEL LVUVOV, WS EYW OlLal, EYW OE Adyov * @S 23. el 8€ KodaKtkys xré.: so Socra- 4 tes also declares after his sentence, Apol. 38 d amopia pév éddwna, od pévrot Adywr, GAAG TéAuns Kal avarcxuvtlas kar eOdAcw Aeye mpds suas roaidra, of by Suiv dict’ Fv axovev, and in 38 e, after he has given a characterization of that rhetoric to the use of which he would not lower himself, ore viv por perapérc oftws a&modoynoapévy, GAG bGAXOv aipoduar &Se amodoynoduevos TeOvavat } exelvos Civ. 24 f. avro pév ydp x7é.: the fear of death Socrates declares also in the Apology to be due to the worst kind of ignorance,—that which thinks it knows what it does not know. “Death is commonly considered an evil, although no one knows but that it is the greatest good (Apol. 29 a, 37 b). On the other hand, evil is to be greatly feared for its conse- quences, both here and _ hereafter.” 7d anobvifcxew is the “act of dying,” 7d reOvdva, the resulting condition, death, which latter Socrates discusses in Apol. 40 ec. Tou ToAY 26. ddoyorros: cf. Apol. 37 ¢ oftws addyictos .. . GerOau. 29. Adyov: denotes here, not a dialectical proof, but a “story,” a “tale.” Of. Aoyoypdpos. kara T& Ac- yéueva is used in the same way in Apol. 40 c. LXXIX. 1. dkove 81: a solemn be- ginning, in order to stimulate inter- est. Similarly Tim. 20 d dove 5h, & Zwupares, Aéyou pdda pev arémou, ray- tanacl ye phy adndovs, Theaet. 201 a &kove 5) dvap dvt) dvelparos. The gen. with dxodw gives the Adyos almost the authority of a person. See G. 171, 2, n. 1; H. 742 ¢. 2. The distinction between Adyos and piéos, which are often contrasted, is that Adyos is said of the true and the actual; pidos, of the fictitious. By this distinction Socrates wishes to call attention to the fact that a truth lies at the basis of the following myth, while the dress of it is a mat- ter of indifference, — not that he ac- tually believes the story as it stands. In this light we must also consider 522 dare ph diva Aoyt- © 258 ahnOn yap ovTa cor ew a péddw héyew. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 523. aoTep yap "Opnpos réyet, Sueveiuavto THY dpxnv 6 Zevs kai 6 Tovet- 5 dav Kal 6 Ildovrwr, ered) Tapa Tod Tarpds wapédaPov. 523 & x x i 50 \ > , 2 N , SN ‘ Hv OuV vojLos OO€E TEpt avOpdmav €7Tt Kpovov, Kal Qél KQL a ¥ 2 a an > , . y , x VuV €TL EOTLY EV Beots, TMV avOpdrav TOV [LEV dukatws TOV , 8 , N¢ , > ‘ / > cs Biov diehOdvra Kati dciws, éredav TelevTHCN, Els HaKdpwv his statement ds dAn@9 «ré., looking to his explanation in Phaedo 114 d 7) pev obv TatTa Sucxupicacba oftws Zxew ws éyd SeAHAvOa, ob mpémer vowv Zyovre avdpl, Fre wevtot ® taidr’ eorly A Toair arta wep) Tas puxds huav Kad tas oixhoes, éwel wep GOdvatéy ye 7 Wuxh palvetat odoa, TodTo Kal mrpéwe pot Sore? Kal &kiov Kivduvetoat olopevp oftws Zxev. See Thompson’s note. 3 f. dowep “Opnpos Aéyer: Socrates refers to O 187 ff., where Poseidon says :— Tpeis yap 7 é« Kpdvou eivev ddeAgpeot obs TéxeTo ‘Péa, Zebs kal éyé, tpitatos 8 *AlSns évépor- ow avdcowr. Tpix0a d€ mdvra SédacTa, Exagros 3° Eupope Tynts + H ro éyav Zdaxov worthy GAa vareuey aiel mahAopéevwov, “Aldns 38 hepéevta, Leds 3 grax’ odpavdy ebpby év aidép kal vepéearnow yata 8 ere Evy mdvtwv nal paxpds “Odupmos. x Zraxe (Spor Socrates commences with this pas- sage so as to be able to assume there- from an empire of the dead, or the existence of the soul after death, as an admitted fact which requires no proof. 5. mapa tot matpds mapéAafov: by making thus the sway over the world a matter of inheritance simply, Socrates avoids the common story of hostile relations between Cronus and his sons. 6 f. av otv vopos érl Kpovov .. . €or év Oeois: that is, the fundamen- tal distinction between good and evil is also an eternal one. The addition of éy @cois is appropriate, inasmuch as the law which was in force during the reign of Cronus is made perpetual by being adopted by his successors, the gods. — kal del kal viv: from that time to the present. 8 f. els pakdpwv vious: according to Homer, 3 564, Zeus transferred his favorites (Rhadamanthys and Mene- laus, the latter a son-in-law of Zeus, are especially mentioned) alive to the *HAdvowov wediov, where they pass a blissful existence. The first mention of the Jslands of the Blessed is found in Hesiod (épya x. 7. 170), who makes them the place to which the men of the fourth race, the heroes and chief- tains of the Trojan war are sent after death as their reward. The punish- ment, on the other hand, of the men of the second and third races is that after death they must wander in Ha- des (7b. 152 es eipdevta Sduov xpvepod *AlSao). The myth is then further de- veloped, and the Isles of the Blessed become gradually in the common be- lief, largely through Pindar’s influ- ence, the abode of all the righteous after death. Cf. Pind. Ol. 1. 75 ff. (Gildersleeve). b 523 TAATONOS TOPLAS. 259 8t. I. p. 523. / > , > A 4 a vycous amidvTa olkel év radon evdaipovia exTds KaKGY, XN * 2Q7 * > / > XN nA f 7 ‘ , 10 Tov d€ ddikws Kat afews eis TO THS Ticeds TE Kal diKns 8 , a 8 * , nC a 4 5 Eopwryptov, 6 On Taprapov Kkadovow, iar. Todtwr dé 8 ae * / \ ¥»¥ s nw X \ > \ ukagTat emt Kpovov kat ett vewott Tov Aros THv apyny ¥ A > , a exovtos Cavres Hoav Cavrav, éxeivn TH Nuépa Suxalovtes ae , n a > e , 3 , y H péedNovev TedevTAv. KaKas odv ai Sikar ExpivovTo: 6 TE > , \ € 3 \ ¢€ 9 , , 27 15 obv Tova Kat ot émmedytat ot €x pakdpwv vycar idr- ¥ XN ‘\ , Y an , ¥ tes €deyov mpos Tov Ala, ore poautwev odiow avOpwrot Exatépwce avagiot. elmev ov 6 Leds: “dd éyd,” én, “qavow TOUTO ylyvopmevov. viv pev yap KaK@s at Sikar 523 801 5 erdApacay éatpls 13. {avres yoav {avrev: this pres- 523 b éxarépwOt pelvavtes amd maumay entation is quite in harmony with the GBliwy Exew mythical form which Socrates adopts. puxdy, @re:Aav Aids 63dv mapa Kpdvou The object is to show the contrast tipaw: %y0a pardpwv between a judgment which is human, vacos @eavides uncertain, and based on external ap- abpat mepimvéoiow, Kré. pearances, and the true one, which is based on accurate inspection of the Tartarus was originally, according to unveiled truth. For this purpose the Homer, the prison of the Titans; cf human tribunal is supposed in the © 18, 478. Plato alone makes it the myth to have existed first; the sec- prison of all wrong-doers. The term ond tribunal is then made by Plato Haxdpwy vicous became stereotyped to arise as a substitute for the first, very early; hence we never find the although naturally it must be con- prose word pakapiwy used in it. ceived as existent ever since the cre- 9. év mdoy etSapovig: on the ation of man. The first tribunal omission of the art., see G. 142, 4, admits of the same criticism as the n. 5; H. 672 b. one in use among men deserves. 11f. rovTwyv &€ Sixkacrat: the repre- 15. of émwpeAnral: who these are sentation of a court of the dead, with remains uncertain. The addition of other judges besides Pluto himself, é« paxdpwy vaowy shows that they and before the souls enter Hades, is abode there, though their functions first found in the Platonic version of probably extended also to Tartarus. the myth. On the attraction of the preposition, 12. ert veworri: (still more recently, see G. 191, n.6; H. 788 a. when, etc.) is contrasted with ém) Kpé- 17. éxarépwoe: i.e. as well to Tar- vou, so that rod Ads... @xovros forms tarus as to the Isles of the Blessed ; the explanation of it. Heindorf con- hence dvdiio: refers both to reward nects ér vewori with %yovros, and and punishment. translates: recente adhuc Iovis 18. vuv pév yop «ré.: note the re- ¢ imperio. See on 503 c. peated employment of ydp, which cor- 260 30 Gavarov. 20 rau: Cavres yap Kpivovrau. PLATO'S GORGIAS. 8t. I. p. 523. } , > , , ny aw ¢ / s ¥ uxalovTa.. aptreyopevor yap,” epy, “ot Kpwdpevot Kpivov- ToAXOl otv,” 7 0’ Os, “puxas ‘ ¥. > , 27 ON , , ‘ ‘\ TOVH Pas EXOVTES Huprec pevor €lou TWULATA TE Kata KQU , ‘\ r < o >’ 8a e , 3 ¥ yern Kat TAOUTOVS, Kal, ETTELOaY KplLols 7%, EpXOVTat > nw XN 4 # © - £ avTots Todo papTupes, wapTupHaovTeEs ws Sixaiws BeBiw- € > x , , 2 / \ KQaOUlV* Ol OUV dtkacrat UTmTO TE TOUTWY EKTAYTTOVTAL, Kat gy ‘ > \ 3 , , XN a a an 25 AUG KAL AUTOL ALTEXOMEVOL duxalovat, Tpo TNS puxns THS € an > * xX 5 * Y \ a QUT@Y 6p0adpovs Kal @TA Kal Ohov TO THA TpoKEKa- 4 n *% 3 a 4 a #. * vp pevor. TAVUTA 57) QUTOLS TAVTA érimpoobev yryveTat, N ‘ eon > / ‘ XN a , KQL TQ QUTWY apprér para KaL TA TMV KPLWOMEeVvov. Tpo- \ a 9» »¥ «“ s > ON S , > ‘ x TOV [LEV OVD, epy, WAVOTEOV EOTLVY TT Poet OTAS AuTOVS TOV »¥ a a¢ x , 2A ELpy Tar T@ TIpounfet OTWS QV TaVOY QUTWV. 523 responds well to the strongly marked © (repeated %pn) direct speech. 21. tpdrerpevor: the ‘clothing’ is to be understood in the wider sense, as everything external which would affect the estimation of a man, —e.g. beauty of person, noble origin, wealth, etc. Cf. 451 e, and Prot. 319 ¢ kay mdvu kadds ff Kal mwAovawos Kal Tay ‘yer- valov. 22 f. Epxovrar xré.: here the Attic court is visible behind the myth. a 25. «wpo trys uxys: sense-percep- tion is, according to Plato, always un- trustworthy, and hence the knowledge gained through it is always uncer- tain, often untrue. With that, Socra- tes contrasts the knowledge which is gained by the immediate and thought- ful action of the soul itself, which he represents here as soul-perception. 27. émlaporbey ylyverar: “comes before them,” “puts itself in their way.” Their wrappings become a hin- drance to perception of the truth. 28 f. mparov pév ovv: introduces vov yap mpoltoacr. a \ > \ 8 X TOUVUTO MEV OUVVY Kat n emeiTa YUR- the preliminaries which must first be settled. 30. rotro: is the condition of mpo- el8yo1s mentioned in the previous clause. Closely connected with it is atrév as a gen. of possession, such as we see occurring with @avud(ew, e.g. Phaedo 89 a %ywye pddiora eOatpaca abrod (in him) mp@rov wey rovro xré., Apol.17 a pdrtora abréy tv Catuaca. The regular const. with both verbs is an acc. of the person with a gen. of the thing. 31. ro TLpopnet: in the Attic cult, Prometheus was honored next to Hephaestus and Athena as a bene. factor of mankind. As such he bore the surname zup¢dpos, undet which name Sophocles celebrates him in Oedipus Coloneus, where he says of the neighborhood which Oedipus en- ters (0. C. 54 ff.) : xapos pev iepds ras bP ear’, exer 3é viv | cepvds Mooesdav 75° 5 muppdpos Oeds | Titay TMpoundeds. Of his enmity with Zeus, which Aes- chylus, following Hesiod, made the da 523 d 35 52 ar) MAATONOS TOPTIAS. aba. 261 St. I. p. 523. \ , ef , a XN a , ? Vous KPLTEOV ATAVTWY TOUTWY ° TreOvedtas yap det Kplve- e ‘ X a 5 an a a Kal TOV KpiTHY Set yupvor eivat, TeOVEdTA, a’TH TH “ > % XN ‘\ na > 4 > st Wuxn avtny tHv Woynv Oewpodvra eEaidvys arobavdvtos EKAOTOV, EpHLOV TAVYTAV TOV ovyyevov kat Katahimovra s 4 a a“ , n y ETL TNS YNS TavTa Exelvoy TOV KdapMoY, iva Sikaia 7 Kpi- ous 7. \ 4 > a “i eyo pev ov TatTa éyvaxas mpdtepos 7 vets > 4 ‘ £2 2: mee - x > A * ¥ ETOLNO ALYY OukacTas VELS ELQAUTOV, dvo BEV €K TNS Agtas, 4 € , A Miva te kat “PaddmavOur, eva é éx THs Eipdrns, Aiaxév central point of his magnificent poem, there is no mention either in Sopho- cles or in Plato, who also, in the Prot. 320 d, in the myth of the Gods re- lated by the sophist, says: mporératay TIpopnbet kat ’EminOe? xoopijical re Kal vetwat Ouvduers éxdotos ws mpére. AS a Titan he is called the son of Iapetus. —Not to be mistaken is the allusion to Aeschylus P. V. 248-251, though with a modification of the tone: Tip. Ovnrobs éravoa wh mpoddprecOat pépov. Xop. Td notov eipoy triode pdpparoy véaou; Tp. Tupads év abrots éAridas narg- Ktoa. XOP. Méy apéanua Tov7’ édwphow Bpo- Tots. — aA om: 40 ovTOL obY éTELOaY TEMEVTHTOCL, Oucacovorw €v TO AEywovt, 524 2 pe 58 > « , ‘ e soe Q > f év TH Tpidda, €€ hs héperov Ta 680, 7) pev eis paxdpwr ¥ € 2 > x ‘\ ‘ + 3 “ > - vyicous, 4 8 eis Tdprapov. Kal Tors pev ek THS Acias € , * x x, 3 A > a, > / PaddpavOus Kpuvet, Tods Sé€ ex THs Evpéans Aiakds: Mivw 8€ mpeoBeta Sdow eridiaxpivey, éav dopHnTdy Te To éTépa, va ws SukaroTarn 1H Kpiows 4 wept THS Topeias Tots avOparro.s.” LXXX. Tatr éorw, & Kaddikhes, & eyo axynkows , > na ® ar) s n , , murteva adynOn civar: Kat éx TovTwy THY éywr ToLdVOE TL NoyiLopar ovpBaivew. 6 Odvatos tvyxdver ay, ws epot “A aQX »” x a , / a a Soxel, ovdev Addo 7) Svoty tpayparow Sidhvors, THS Pux7S Kal TOD Oapatos, adm addydow: éredav Sé diadvOynTov ¥ 2 99 , > La er 5m ‘ apa am addjdow, ov TOV HTTOV ExadTEpov avToLW EXEL THY mentioned by Dem. de Cor. (xviii.) 127, the Attic hero Triptolemus is added in Apol. 41 a. 40. ev tod Aco: Socrates thinking of the ‘asphodel meadow of Hom. a 539, 5738. According to Homer, it seems to have stretched through the whole of Hades, and to have been the abiding place of the shades. Cf. w 18 alpa ® tkovro kar’ aapoderdy Aciaova | @vOa re valovor Wu- xal, efSwra kapdvrwy. Plato places it at the entrance of Hades. 41. év rd tpioSw: epexegetical ap- position according to the cxjua Kal? Srov wal wépos. For the matter, cf. Verg. Aen. vi. 540 hic locus est, partis ubi se via findit in ambas:|dextera quae Ditis magni sub moenia tendit, | hac iter Elysium nobis; ac laeva malorum|exercet poe- nas et ad impia Tartara mit- tit.— rod 68d: the fem. dual of the art. does not occur in Attic. See IH. 272 a, Meisterhans,? 46, 17 e. is a 44, émSiaxplvew: “to give the final verdict.” ‘I'he office here assigned to Minos is not the same which Homer (A 568) makes him fill. Cf. 526 d. 45. qwepl tis wopeias: not concern- ing their course on earth, but as to whether they shall take the road to Tartarus or that to the Isles of the Blessed. Cf. Phaedo 107 d év apxf THs exetoe wopelas. LXXX. 2ff. The conclusions which are drawn from the story here nar- rated do not begin until d_ below, The intervening state- ments contain supplementary matter, which is drawn by very easy deduc- tions, partly from philosophy, partly from experience. 3. 6 Odvaros «ré.: of. Phaedo 64¢ elva: TobTO Td TeOvdvat, xwpls ev amd THs WuxFs amadrAayev abTd Kad’ abrd Td odua yeyovevat, xwpls 38 Thy Wuxhy ard Tov odpatos amadAayeloay althy Ka? abthy elvac. 6. od woAdd yrrov: would lead us to expect something like 4 ére &(y. émedav ov. b 524 b TTAATONOS TOPITAS. 263 Bt. I. p. 624. yY, §,. e “ y \ o& ¥ £ yy t oe P bes EE THY avrod, nvTEp Kat OTE ely 6 avOpwTos, TO TE THpa ‘ 4 ‘ € n XN + c i ‘ e THY pvow THY avTOV Kat Ta DEparedpata Kal Ta Taby- »¥ , @ ¥ > a para edna mavta. otov ev Twos péya Hv Td Tapa c , x OK > / a , ae x pvoe } Tpody } auddtepa Cavtos, TovTov Kal émedav , \ aTobavy 6 vexpdos péyas, Kal el Tayv, Tayds Kal azo- 10 , ‘\ Ss YY N > > 3» , A Oavérvros, Kat Ta\AA OvTWS* Kal EL ad ereTHSeve KOpay, KOMYATHS TOUTOU Kal 6 vEeKpds. pLactiyias avd Et TLS HY KaL ¥ ¥ a a a ixyn elye TOV TANYGY ovhas Ev TO THpaTL } UTd pacti- » a rn a 16 yov 7 ad\d\wyv tpavpatwv Cov, Kat teOvedtos TO Toma ¥ io A an ¥ N J, ¥ > * a €oTw Loe Ta’Ta EYoV: (Kal) KaTEeayora EL TOU HY “EAN 7 Sueotpappeva Cavros, Kat TeOvedTos Tadra evdnra, via 6e , ® > , \ a a ¥ é Ady, otos elvar waperkedacto 7d capa Cav, dna ~ ‘N ¥ a , a» ‘ « > , TAaUTA Kat TEAEVTYTAYTOS 7 TavTA 7 TA TONG ETL TWA 524 The transition to the rel. clause is caused by the expression éye: thy €fiv. 7. uw: by éfs is to be understood the general appearance and condition which a body assumes in virtue of its inner nature, not that nature itself, and not a condition due solely to ex- ternal agencies. Cf. Theaet. 153 b. — vrep xré.: on the omission of the verb, see Kr. 62, 4,1; H.613.—rd te oopa «té.; the correlative member follows in a different form in d rav- cov 54 wot xré. The reason for the change lies in the long-drawn-out viay clause, through which the speaker loses the construction. 8. Ocparevpara, wa0ypara: the marks borne by the body are divided into two classes from the point of view of subject and object. See on radquatain d below. On the -ua ter- mination, sce G. 129, 4; H. 558, 1. 10. dpdorepa: see on 477 d. 12. kopay: to wear the hair long, somewhat after the fashion of the Spartans, was customary at Athens only up to the age of the Ephebus, with the exception of such men as from their rank (in7meis), or love of display, chose thus to adorn them- selves. Hair cut quite short, how- ever, was considered ardparodadns Optt. See Herm. Gr. Alter. iv.8 § 23. 14. ovAds: as the explanation tyv7n . wAnyav shows, this word denotes not the fresh wounds (a#reAal), but the scars which remained after they had healed. 17 f. évi 8 Ady: sc. eirety, like as cuveddvrt eimetv. See on 462 b. 18. 1d capa: in regard to body. Constr. with ofos efva:, which depends upon apecketacto (he had formed himself). So also the middle with the inf. in 507 d, 511 b. 19 ravra: though referring gen- erally to the preceding clause, is used according to the constructio ad sensum, inasmuch as the traces are meant; so that # mwdavra «ré. very readily follows it. 19 f. él twa xpovov: more indefi- 524 264 20 ypovov. PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 524. aN 8 , 5 a al? ¥ \ \ ‘\ TOAVUTOV 1 pou OKEL TOUT apa Kau TEpl THV > > a wuxnv evar, @ KadXikdes: &Onha wavra éotiy & TH “ > ‘\ a nw , , a 4 Woy}, emedav yupvaly tod cdpartos, Ta TE THS PUTEWS ‘\ \ , a XN ‘\ > , € , , Kal TQ ma0jpwara, a Ova THV emiTpoevo E€KAOTOU Tpay- patos eoxey ev TH Wux7 6 dvOpeTos. emertoav ow adi- ‘\ XN , e XN > a? , \ x 25 KwvTaL Tapa TOV SiKacTHY, ol wey eK THS Acias Tapa TOV ‘PaddpavOuv, 6 “PaddpavOus exeivous emiatncas Oearar ExdoTOU THY WuyYyV, oVK Eldws OTov eoTiv, GANA TohdaKes Tov peyddov Bacttéws émikaBdopevos 7 aro dérovowy , x , a OQ € AN « A Bacitéws 7 Suvdorou Kareidev ovdev tyres dv THs Wry7s, 524 nite than Phaedo 80 ¢, where Socrates says of the same thing émemds cvx- vov éripéver xpdvov. 20. ratrov 87 «ré.: the analogy of the soul with the body is discussed first in a general way, and then as far as possible worked out in details. 22. Ta THs picews: see on 450 c, 453 e. 23. ra rabrjpara: in stating (above, b) the condition of the body, when separated from the soul, Socrates (Plato) uses the expression @€¢pa- wmevpata kal mwa0juara. Here, re- ferring to the soul, he uses za@7- wara alone. At the basis of this variation seems to lie some such the- ory as the following: The human body is susceptible of improvement, by care and training; this care must be exerted by the man himself; hence Oepareduara are the results of this care. On the other hand, a lack of care will subject the body to the evil effect of outside evil influences, and thereby to deterioration; ma0nuare are the results of this outside influ- ence. The soul is not susceptible of improvement, being perfect at the outset; but lack of care will, just as in the case of the body, subject the soul to the influence of outside forces. There is therefore no place for 6epa- mevuara when speaking of the soul. 24. doyev: see on 503 e, 519 d.— émedav ovv: Socrates resumes his story where he had broken off at the conclusion of ch. LX XIX. 25. ot pev ek trys “Aclas: an ex- ample of distributive apposition. See on 450 ec, 503 d. The correlative second member is simply indicated in 526 ¢ by the words ravraé 5¢ tadra Kré, 26. émoryras: “he halts them.” They would probably otherwise go their own way. 27. drov éotw: see on 447 d. 28. rou peyddovu Bactdkeds: why just this example is chosen, is seen from what is said in 470 e.—émaAa- Bopevos: see on 519 a. 29. kareiSev: another case of ‘gnomic aorist,’ which gives a cer- tain degree of liveliness to the re- cital. So elder, awéreupev. See on 484 a, — ov8ev dyes ov xré.: the fol- lowing passage can be traced in Tac. Ann. vi. 6 neque frustra prae- stantissimus sapientiae fir- mare solitus est, si recludan- tur tyrannorum mentes, posse aspici laniatus et ictus, quando e WAATOQNOS POPITIAS. 265 Bt. I. p. 524. > x , ‘\ 2," ‘ a aes ae 30 GANG Siapewactiywperyny Kal OVAGY pETTHY Vd ETLOPKLaV N29 , ac ys ¢ a > A 9 , > . Kat GOLKLas, @ €KAOTY) 1 mpagis auTOu eEwpdpEaro els THY 525 / ‘\ , Xr \ 2 4) X iA. / ‘\ Wuyxyy, Kal wavtTa oKodLa VTO Wevdous Kat adalovetas Kal ovdev evOd did Td avev ahyGeias reblpapBas: Kat vmod é€ovcias Kal TpUPTS kat UBpews Kat axparias TOV Tpa- 35 feuw o Ao UpLET pias TE Kal ae KPT Os yémovc ay THY vs 524ut corpora verberibus, e 525 31. a xnv eidev: dav dé driwws tavrnv dréreppev edOd THs ppovpas, of péhrer €MOodoa avarhjvar Ta wpooyKovTa 7aOn. LXXXI. HMpoorjke d€ ravti to év tiypwpia ovr, ba’ addov dpOds Tyrwpovpera, 7 Bedrion yiyverBar Kat dvi- vacOar 4H mwapadelyparte Tots addots yiyverOau, iva addow ita saevitia, libidine, malis con- sultis animus dilaceretur. 30. Stapepacrriyopevyy: after the analogy of the body, which belongs to a paotiylas (cf. above inc). Like- wise oxoAd Kal oddév ey Corresponds to dieorpappéva, and kal... eldev may also have some connexion with raxvs above c. a: refers to both the previously named conditions; see on raita above, d. Socrates shows us the immoral condition of the soul under three as- pects: 1. The vital principle of mo- rality is dcxatoctvy, hence ddixia is placed first. Beside this, as its worst form, stands perjury, the punishment of which after death was assumed even in the Homeric age; cf. Fr 278, T 259 "Epuwies, al @ iad yatay | avOps- mous tivuvrat & Tis «° erlopkoy dudcon. aducia accordingly corrupts the very nature itself of the soul. 2. The nat- ural development of the soul depends upon its knowledge of the truth. Lies restrict that development, and hence warp and twist the soul. This image at the same time corresponds to the familiar view of the nature of truth. 3. Since the activity of the soul is from within outwards, there is need of fixed, definite limits. If this quality —owppoctvn—is lacking, or rather if it lapses into &koAacia, which ac- cording to its surrounding conditions appears as éfovoia, tpuph, and wBpis (a&xparia is a general term, applicable to all forms), then the proper relation between the separate parts of the soul is destroyed, and its form as a whole becomes unsymmetrical and ugly. One naturally thinks of the extension which the éiduuiou strive for. 36. dripws: corresponds to the ariuta imposed by earthly judges. — €v00 tis dpovpas: for the gen., see G. 182, 2, and on 486 a. LXXXI. 1. apoorer «ré.: the purpose of the punishment deter- mines also its measure. To the con- sideration of this point, Socrates now turns. 2. tyswpovpevw: the passive of the middle. See H. 499 a; Kr. 52, 10, 11. 3. ij wapadelypare xré.: in this 525 266 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 525. OpavTes tacxovTa & av mdoyn PoBovpevor Bedtious 4 2 ON N e ‘ > , , ‘ 7 5 ylyvevta. etoty dé of péev w@dpehovpevol te Kal Sdikny 5 8 , eon a 2 , ry aa OF wovtTes UTd Gedy te Kal avOpémav odToL, ot av idoua € , € , y Q > 93 / \ 92 apapTypata audpTwow: suws dé dv ddynddvev Kai ddv- “A 4 > a ce > 4 4A > - X > gy vov yiyverat avtots 7 adedia Kal evade Kat év “Ardov- ot 8 ay ec 10 15 525 ov yap oldv Te dAdws ddiKias dtahddrTeo Oau. , ¥ > , \ \ a ? , 2 + Ta €OXaTA ASiKHT WL KQUL Ova TOLAVTA GSiKy Lara. QVLATOL a * ¢ 4 *\ yévavtat, €k ToUTwY TA Tapadeiypata yiyveTat, Kal > * \ > - 5b / * - o > £ 4 aUTOL pev OvKETL dvivarTaL OVS, GTE aviaToL OVTES, OUTOL adXou XN 3 ¢ ¢ Fa c “~ ‘\ a. c ¢ = / be OVLWaAVTQAL OL TOUTOUS Op@VTES bua TAS ALAPTLAS TO pe- ylota Kal dduvynpdrata Kai hoBepdtata 7AOn mado xovTas Tov del xpovoy, aTExVas Tapadeiypata avnpTnmevous eKkEt also, as is shown by what follows, the object is improvement, but of others rather than the one punished. The terror-theory is put in the mouth of the Sophist in the Protagoras, who says Prot. 324b 6 wera Adyou émixeipav KoAd(ev ov Tod mapeAnavOdtos Evexa Qiehuaros Timwpetrai, AAAG TOU weAdov- tos xdpi, tva ph atis adinhon phre avrds outros unre BAAos 6 TovToy i8dv xodacOévra. Plato’s theory concern- ing the punishments of the lower world implies, though it does not expressly mention, the doctrine of the wandering habits of souls which he expounds in other treatises. For the dat., cf. 479 e, and see G. 136, n. 3; H. 941. 4. doBovpevor: because fear leads to reflection, reflection to more cor- rect views, which result in avoid- ance of evil and corrupt moral hab- its. 5. dedovpevol re kal Slknv Si8dv- tes: the second partic. is logically subordinate to the first (“by under- going”), though formally co-ordi- nate. See on 460 d. The correla- tive to of péy xré.is of & &y xré., in 625 ec, which assumes that form on ac- count of his proximity to ot &v idoma KTE. 10. dvlaro. : since wrong-doing strikes at the very nature of the soul, the soul becomes more or less injured with every new evil deed. And in- deed it may go so far in the path of wickedness as to be at last incapable of turning back; that is, it may be- come incurable. Cf. Phaedo 113 e of ® by Sdtwow avidrws yew Sia Ta pe- yeOn Tey émaprnudtey Kré. We must note, however, that the punishment is not determined according to the evil acts as such, — these the judge may not even know,—but by the condition of the soul as brought about by them. 11. td wapaSelypara: the art. is employed on account of the previous mention of this in b, as a result to be gained. 15. wapaSe(ypata avyptypevous: as we are accustomed to hang up warn- ings that the passer-by may think over them carefully. TIAATONOS TOPTIAS. 267 Bt. I. p. 625. 27 Y 3 a f a“ 2N a“ 397 ? 7 & “Avdov év Te Seopwrnpia, Tots det Tov ddikwv adikvov- / @ , XN 0 , ® 2 7 Y s pevos Pedwara Kat vovOerypata. Gv eyo dnut va Kal 4 > a nn Apxédaov ececbar, ci adyOn dNéyeu Tddos, Kat addov yg a an > > Gattis Gy TOLOUTOS TUPavVoSs 7° omar Sé Kal TOUS 7OANOUS 20 elvar ToUTwY TOY TapaderypdTwy ek Tupavvwv Kal Bact- héwy kal Svvactav Kal Ta Tv TOMEwY TpakdvTwY yeyovd- Tas: ovTo. yap dua THY eEovolay péyiota Kal dvoow- TATA GUapTHmata aapTdvovor paptuper dé TovToLs Kal 9 , \ \ , 2A , Opnpos: Baoiéas yap Kai Suvdoras éxeivos wemotnkev i > y * aN f 4 ¥ 25 ToUs év “Audou Tov del Xpovov TyULwWpoUpEvous, TavTadov e Kat Xtovpov Kal Tirvdv: @epairny 8, Kal et tus aAdos TOVNPOS Hv idvdrys, ovdels meTOinKEY peyddrats TYLwpiats TVVEXOMEVOY WS aviaTov: ov yap, olpLaL, EEHvy avT@: 51d 525 ¢ d AS , DP 2 @ Ee" Kat evdatpmoveaTepos nv ous €&nv. 16. év “AvSouv év To Seopwryplo: both expressions are placed side by side by the oxfua Ka SAov Kal pépos. 17. Occpara Kal vouvleripara: the second substantive gives the design of the first. 18. ’Apxédaov: cf. 470 d-471 d. 20 f. elvar . . . yeyovdras: parti- cipial periphrasis. See Kr. 56, 3, 3, and crit. note on 510 b. 21. Svvacrav: men possessed of power, not merely in monarchical and oligarchical, but also in demo- cratical states; hence the addition of the explanation with «af. Cf. 479 a, 524 e, 526 b and see on 492 b. Be- low (30) in the same sense we find ex Tov Suvapevwr. 22. 8d rH éEovelav: cf above, 525 a. The expression very forcibly reminds us of the representations of Polus and Callicles, when praising what they con- ceived to be the highest happiness. 23. rovros: “to these statements,” “to this view of the matter.” ahha yap, @ KadnXi- 25 f. Toavradov, Llovov, Tirvdv: cf. Hom. a 576-600. All three were rulers: Tantalus, the founder of the house of the Pelopidae, was king in Sipylus; Sisyphus, in Corinth; Ti- tyus, in Euboea. Thersites was a bad and despicable man, but his sphere of action was limited and he experi- enced rough treatment even during his lifetime; B 211-277. 28. dfqv: sc. 7a péeyiora Kad dvooid- Tata Guapthuara auaprdveyr. This was the reason why Thersites was not held to be aviatos. 29. eSapoverrepos: Socrates here expresses himself with less exact- ness than in 473 c.—dAAd ydp: for, you see. The clause thus introduced serves a two-fold purpose. It ex- presses more plainly and definitely what had already been implied above, and it paves the way, by the words kal of opddpa movnpol, for the new thought which begins with ovd¢ pny. 525 268 525 e 526 , »” > XX x a N > 4 yryvopevou avOpwrot - ovoev pny KwAvVEL Kal €v TOUTOLS 526 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 525. 30 Kets, EK TOV Suvapevwy cioi Kal of aPddpa TroVNpot > ‘ ¥ > # XN ee ¥ ¥ dyabovs advdpas éeyytyverOa1, kal opddpa ye afvov dya- cba Tdv yryvopévwv: yaderdv ydp, ® KadQikdews, Kat Toddod éraivov afvov év peyddn efovaoia Tov ddiKety yevd- ao A e > a A 7 e nw 35 pevov Oikaiws SiaBidvar. ddiyou O€ yiyvovTat of ToLodTOL* 2 A ar) 668 SG 6 , 5 Se ~ ¥ éemet kat evOdde Kai addof yeydvacw, oipar dé Kat eoov- ‘ > \ , \ > \ \ a , TOL Kado Kayadot TAUTNV Ty AapEeTHV TyV TOU SuKkatas 8 , a 2 , < @ be ‘ , rr , vaxerpilew & av Tis émiTpémy~ els 6€ Kal Tavy EAAGyLLOS yéyove kat eis Tovs aANovs “EhAnvas, ’Apioteidys 6 Avot- 40 pdxov: ot dé TodXoi, & dpiote, Kakol yiyvovtat Tov Suva- OTov. LXXXII. “Omep otv édeyov, émerdav 6 “PaddpavOus > an rf - »” = ‘N > a > x e€xeivos TovouTov Twa AGB, GAO pev TEpl adTOU ovK otdeEV > , ¥y? ¥yp & y \ , XN ovder, ov datis ovM Gvtwwv, dtu S€ Tovnpds Tiss Kal 80. kal: “also.” Is closely con- nected with tay duvapevwr. 32 f. dyacOa. tav yryvopevev: of. 482 d ov« &yauo: Tlédov. The acc. is rare and states simply the obj.; the gen. gives the cause, and may be a person or a thing. With the person is generally found either a participial or an adverbial clause. See H. 784. 33. yryvopevav: after éyylyvecba, as Crito 44d épyd(eo@a after éetepyd- (ec8at, is quite in accordance with the customary usage. — yaderdv ydp: in our admiration for the ‘self-made’ man we forget that he has had every incentive to rise, while we withhold our sympathy from fallen greatness, which has had every temptation to fall. 35. odlyou: as also of apd3pa movn- pot. The most stand in the mean, according to Phaedo 90 a, b ofec t orandrepov elvan } opddpa péyav A opddpa cpuixpdy ekeupeiy &vOpwrov 7 kiva ® BAAO ériotv; 4 ad ainxpy } Kaddy «7é. 3 37 f. tiv Tov Staxeplfav: notice the epexegetic gen. See on 521 a. 38. d .. . éwurpémy: sc. power or property, or whatever it be. Plato is probably thinking of Aristides’ posi- tion as general of the confederate army during the war against the Persians and as one of the founders of the Delian league, by which espe- cially he gained his reputation for probity. Cf. Plut. Arist. especially ch. XXTIL-XXV. The «al before eis has almost the force of “and that, too.” LXXXII. 1. dep otv goes back to 524 e. 3. 088’ dotis xré.: sc. as was the case in life, when the name of the man was followed by the name of his father to indicate his family. éXeyov: b 526 b TAATONOS TOPTIAS. 269 t. I. p. . aw ) \ > , > 4 >? ff Bee . _ TOUTO KATLOWV amremreupev €ls Taprapoyr, ETLOYLNVA[LEVOS, 7 27 a7 7 7 a > € Xo 2: me 5 €av TE LaTLLOS EAVY TE AVLATOS Soxy €lyal* oO be EKELOE adixdpevos Ta TpornKovta macxe.. eviote 8 adAnp eio- Wav dciws BeBuoxviay Kal per’ ddnbetas, dvdpds iS.drov, ] Gov twe6s, pddiota per, eywyé dy, & KadXikdets, / 2 € nw y A > ¢ fpriocdpov 7a avtod mpd£avros Kal od TwoduTpaypovy- 10 oa 2 an Bi 2 7 0 No: , , VTOS EV T@ Lo, NYLo yn TE Kal ES LaKapav VvyTOUS > - a7reTrepape. A QA n ‘N TavTa d€ TavTa Kat 6 Aiakés: ExaTEpos Oe Tovtwy paBdov exav Sixdler- 6 S€ Mivas émicKxoray 7 , ¥ n a 7 > KdOnTat, udvos Exwy ypvcouy oKHTTpoY, ws Pnow 'Odvc- oevs 6 ‘Ourpov idety abrov f hnpP Xpvocov oKHATTpov ExovTa, OewrorevorTa véxvaoow. "Eyo pev ovv, & KaddXixders, 07d TovTwy Tav héoyov , ‘N a“ 9 > A a an TETELO MAL, KAL OKOTO OTWS aTopavovpat TM KPLTH ws 4. émonpnvapevos: in accordance with the results of his scrutiny, the judge puts upon him a mark and thus decides his fate. Cf Rep. x. 614¢ oneta repidWavras Tay dedixacuéevwr, —also of the judges of the dead. 6 f. GAAnV «ré.: the omission of quxhv is so harsh that Heindorf in- serts it — but unnecessarily — after } &AAov twds. These latter words form with what follows (udAiora wév instead of #, “whether philosopher or not, but especially,” etc.) an explanatory apposition to the general idea, ididérov. 7. per’ ddrnOelas: cf. the opposite description in 525 a above. 9. td atrot mpdtavros: ‘to attend to one’s own business,’ was for a Greek to be both cd¢pwy and dixaios. That this did not, however, exclude him from taking interest in other people’s lives is shown by Socrates’ words in Apol.33 a 7& éuavtod mpdtrovtos. The contrary of this phrase is moAumpay- povew, “to meddle officiously with, and to attack unreasonably the rights of others.” Cf. Apol. 31 c. 12. fdBbSov éxwv: the staff was the badge of public authority, and was borne by heralds, seers, priests, gen- erals, and others, but especially by judges. Cf Dem. de Cor. (xviii.) 210 kal mapardauBdvew ye Gua TH Baxrnpla kal tT@ cuuBdrw 7d ppdynua 7d THs 1d- Aews voulCew Exacrov tuay dei. Also oxintpoyv (from cxnrtecba, to lean on, p 199) had originally this value; e.g. A 234 ff., 8 37, but became later the name for the badge of a ruler alone. 15. The quotation is from Hom. A 569. 17. drodhavotpar: the simple ga- vovua is always middle, in the sense “appear”; the compound dmo- is almost always transitive or active in sense, “ present,” “show.” 526 d 270 20 25 30 5 526 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 526. € 4 * - FA > 27 X x b vyLeaTaTyY THY WuxyVY: yaipew ovv édoas TAs TYLaS TAS Tav To\dOV avOpdrar, Thy ddyPeayv oKoTaV TELPdoopaL nan * e x 6u , a ‘N a s 3 oa T@ OVTL WS Gy OVVwpat BédAtTiaTOS GY Kat Chv Kat émeday > 4 3 , ~ + XN x »* amoOvyicKkw atobvycKew. Tapakadd dé Kai Tovs aAous - 3 , > y ee x * x ‘ mavtas avOparous, kal’ dcov Svvapat, Kal dy Kal oe QVTUTApAakahG@ €mt TovToy Tov Biov Kat Tov dyGva TOUTOD, a > mM 2 ‘\ , a 2 , > , > ‘ ov eyo dyut avtt mavtwv tov évOdde dydvey Elva, Kat dvedilw Gol, OTL ovy olds 7 eve. cavT@ BonOnaat, drav ? X c | q > € , > Xe , a \ 2 ON ¥ ? \ » Sikn cor 4 Kal 4 Kpiows HY vuvd) eyo edeyov, dda av mapa tov Sucacriy Tov THs Aiywyns bov, emeday 527 > f + 4 x > oe > X gov émidaBdpuevos ayy, xaopyoe Kal eiduyyudoers ovdey HITov Heya evOdde od Exel, Kai oe Lows TUTTHGTEL TIs Kal €mt KOppns atimws kal rwavTws TpoTnaktet. LXXXIII. Taya & obv ratra pdds cou Soxet déye- oOat doTep ypads Kat Katappovets adTav, kat ovdey dv jv Oavpacrov Katadpovey tovTwy, et ay Cyrodvtes yy > a 4 XN > 4 ¢ a“ a“ a * etxopev attav Bertin kat ahyOéotepa evpe: viv dé Spas, 9 lal aA < “ 7 o e3 a aad € * OTL TPELS OVTES LPELS, OLED ToPaTaTol EaTE THY VU “EAAH- 23. dvtimapakadd: with reference to 521 a and 485 e ff.—rov dyava: brings up before us at once the public games, at which a prize was awarded. The name is quite applicable to the progress of human life, which is really a contest between different systems as practised by different men. Cf the passage from Phaedo quoted on 527 e. But a judicial trial was also called ayév, and such a one awaits every man at the last judgment. Cf. Apol. 34 © ef 6 wey Kal éAdrtw Tovrouvl rod ayavos ayava aywriCspuevos edehOn. 25. dtu odx olos 1 Eo Kré.: Cor- responds closely to the objections urged by Callicles in 486 a, b, viv yap ef tis god AaBduevos eré. In what fol- lows, the words kal éml «éppys ex- press even an augmentation of the insult. LXXXIII. 2. domep ypacs: cf. the-proverb 6 Aeyduevos ypady %OAos Theaet. 176 b. So also in Latin, Ger- man,and English. Cf. Hor. Sat. ii. 6. 77 Cervius haec inter vicinus garrit anilis|ex re fabellas. 4. odnbéorepa: of course in com- parison with other views which can show less claim to truth. Cf. 493 d. Grades of truth are conceivable as steps in that approximation to the perfect truth which abides with God. This approximation is nothing more or less than knowledge, which has the stronger claim to be considered truth the better foundation it has. 5. copwrarol éore: such (ironi- 526 527 TMAATOQNOS TOPTIAS. 271 St. I. p. 27. \ n vav, ob Te Kat Il@dos Kat Topyias, ovk éyete dtodetEa, b e ~ Hy a sf na az n gy » 2 n ws Set dddov rive Biov Lav 7 rotrov, domep Kal éxeice daiverar cuipépwv. add & Toaovrous hdyous TGV aAd\wY 2 s s & ? aA ¢ s ¢ > , edeyxopevav pdvos ovTos HpEeyEer O dyos, ws edLaByTéov > om % > nw nw na * > a x XX an 10 €otiy 7d dducety waddov 7 7d ddiketo Oat, Kal TavTos pad- Nov avdpi pedernréov ov Td Soxety etvar dyabdv adda 7d > ‘ 2Q7 XN #, aN # £ x evar, Kal idia Kal Sypooia: éav dé Tus Kara TL KaKds ylyrytat, Kohactéos éoti, Kat ToUTO SevTEpov dyafov pera ‘\ > ¥ % # N s / TO e€lvat Sikaov, TO yiyverOar Kat Koraldpevov SiSdvar ec 15 Sikyv: Kal wacay Kohakelav Kal THY wept EavToV Kal THY ‘\ hb. »¥ ‘\ ‘\ > a x ‘\ ¢ mept Tous adXous, Kat wept dXiyous Kat meEpt moddovs, devetéov: Kal TH pyTopiKH ovTw ypnatéor emt Td Sikasov > ‘ a »¥ / ¥ dei, Kal TH GAN Thon Tpaker. > A > , > “ 3 one @ > , Epot ovv mePduevos axodovOnoor évtavda, of adukd- be 1 » - NX A NX a ¢ € / 20 pevos EVOALLOVYT ELS kat Cav Kat TENEUTY TAS, @s oO hoyos 527 , OY LAWEL. \ »¥ ¥ wn e = Kat €aodv TWA Gov KaTappovnaat ws avoyTouv * , as 4 % N *, - as Ka TpoTnrakioan, €av Bovrnran, Kat vat pa Ata ov ye cal) flattery was submitted to by the Sophists the more easily since mod- esty did not prevent them from ap- plying this epithet to themselves. Cf. Prot. 337 d, where Hippias says Tuas obv aicxpdy Thy pev piaw Trav mpayudrov eiSévat, copwrdrous 6& dvras TOY ‘EAAhvwy Kré. 7. éketoe: like éxe?, of life beyond the grave; opposed to évéade 525 b. The terminus in quem is used, inasmuch as the effect is meant, which reaches even to the beyond. 9. apepet: “stands fast and im- movable against all attacks.” 11. ov To Soxety xré.: as Aeschylus makes the messenger of Amphiaraus say in Sept. c. Theb. 592 od yap doxeiv ipioros GAN’ eivat OéAet. These words, as is well known, were applied by the Athenians to Aristides. Plut. Arist. iii. fin. discussed admit of distinction accord- ing to appearance and reality. 14. ro ylyverOar: sc. dirasor. 17. é\ to Sikatov: epexegetic to otra. 19. epol ovv aeBopevos: begins the conclusion, which is peculiarly pa- thetic. — évrav@a: “in the direction of the attainment of our own perfec- tion.” See on éxeise above in b. Cf. Apol. 36¢ évratda obk fa, of €rAOay phre tutv unre euavr@ Euedrov pndév bpedos elvar. For the adverb of ‘place where’ with a verb of motion, see on 456 b. 20 f. ds... onpatver: of 511 db. 22 f. ov ye Sappoy: thrown in with emphasis, because what follows in- da The two modes of life > da 272 PLATO’S GORGIAS. St. I. p. 627. 0 a , ‘ ¥ , 4 Hoe = appav watd&at tiv atywoy tadTny myyyv: ovdev yap Seworv weice, €av TH dvTL Hs KadOS Kayabds, doKaV dpeE- »¥ 9 A a 2 THY. KATETA OUTW KO ATKHOAVTES, TOTE HON, cay SoKN A > 6 4 0 a a aA A ¥ cw XpHvat, ercOnodpuea Tots woditiKOls, d7rolov av TL Hut a * Soy, Tore BovrevoducOa, Bedtiovs dvres BovreverOar 7 wn > nn vor. aloxpov yap exovtds ye as viv dawdpeba exe, ¥ , g ” a 27 28 a ereita veavever Oat ws Tt OVTAas, is OVSeTOTE TaUTA SoKEL ba a an an an nw 30 TEpt TOV AUTO, Kal TATA TEpt TOV mEyioTwY* Eis TOTOU- e - s Tov Hkopey atraWevolas: waTEp ov WyeLdVe TO dyw n n y Xpyncépela To viv wapadavérti, ds Huw onpaiver, OTe ovTos 6 Tpdmos apiotos Tov Biov, THY Sixaoovrny Kal Ne * > %. > wn b “ % a 4 THY GAnY aperny aoKovvtas Kal Chv Kal TeOvdvar. TovT@ 35 527 > < , \ \ » a XN > s ouy eraopeOa, Kal TOUS adAXouS TApaKahamer, PN EKew@ @ @ t ® KadXikdets. flicts the deepest disgrace, mardta. With rardéa the repetition in thought of Zacdyv rwa is the easiest construc- tion. On the common object of the three infs., see on 493 ¢ col. 23. tiv dtipov tavryv xré.: says Socrates, with reference to 527 a and 486 c. 23 f. obS€v ydp Sevov meloer: exter- nal rough treatment will not affect the real man. 25. xdwera: refers to acca, but it is more exactly defined by ofrw . doxhoavtes. — Tore Won: em- phatic position. The addition éay Soxq xpivac indicates that they may then find something more important to do. 26. émiOynoopeda xré.: cf 521 d. This is the answer to Callicles’ ad- vice in 484 ¢ ff. On the other hand, XX ¥. 3 * “~ ¥ X > X »” OV TLOTEVMY EME TAPAKaEets* ETTL yap ovdevos a€tos, drotov &y tt butv SoxG can serve for Polus. Cf 466 ¢ ff. 27. tore: explained by BeArious xré. 28. ds ... éxew: a polite expres- sion which can hardly be misunder- stood by those present. 31. dratSevorlas: in contrast to the maideia on which Callicles and Polus prided themselves. Sce on 461 b, c. —dormep ovv tyepou: the Adyos is treated as a living being, to whose guidance one can trust himself. It is the principle from which all other moral regulations proceed. 33. ovros: finds its explanation in kal... Te@vdvat. 34 f. For the conclusion, cf Phaedo 114 © Gadd rodtwy 5H Evexa xp). dv SieAnAVGanev wav moetv, bore aperijs kal ppovicews ev tH Bip peracyerv: Kaddy yap 7d GOAov Kal 4 éAms weydAn. CRITICAL APPENDIX. EDITIONS. a. COMPLETE EDITIONS OF PLATO. The following are the most important : — Platonis Opera quae extant omnia ex nova Ioannis Serrani interpretatione. Henrici Stephani de quorundam locorum interpretatione iudicium, et multorum contextus Graeci eméndatio. 3 voll. Folio. Paris, 1578. (The pages of this edition, divided into paragraphs (a, b, c, d, e), have been adopted as a standard of reference in later editions.) Platonis Dialogi (Gr. et Lat.) ex recensione Imm. Bekker. 8 voll. Bero- lini, 1816-1823. (This edition contains the first systematic collation of Mss.) Platonis Opera Omnia rec., prolegg. et comm. illustr. Godofredus Stall- baum. 10 voll. Lipsiae, 1827-1877. Platonis Dialogi secundum Thrasylli tetralogias dispositi. Ex rec. C. F. Hermann. 6 voll. Lipsiae, 1851-53. Platonis Opera quae feruntur omnia ad codices denuo collatos ed. Marti- nus Schanz. Lipsiae, 1875-. b. SEPARATE EDITIONS OF THE GORGIAS. The following are the principal more recent editions of the Gorgias alone : — Platons Gorgias. E'rklért von Heinrich Kratz. Stuttgart, 1864. The Gorgias of Plato, with notes by Theodore D. Woolsey. Revised edi- tion. Hartford, 1869 (reprint of the ed. of 1848). The Gorgias of Plato, with English Notes, Introduction, and Appendix. By W. H. Thompson. London, 1871. Platonis Gorgias, emendatus atque illustratus nec non prolegomenis et in- dice instructus. Edidit R. B. Hirschig. Traiecti ad Rhenum, 1873. Platos Ausgewiihite Dialoge. Erklirt von C. Schmelzer. Zweiter Band, Gorgias. Berlin, 1883. Platons Gorgias. Erklart von Julius Deuschle. Vierte Aujlage, bearbeitet von C. W. J. Cron. Leipzig, 1886. (This edition is the basis of the present work.) 273 274 APPENDIX. In addition to the complete translation by Jowett may be mentioned the scholarly work — Plato's Gorgias, literally translated. By E. M. Cope. London, 18838. CRITICAL NOTES. In the notes which follow, the first reading is that of the present edi- tion ; the second, the variant, — usually the reading of Schanz in his edi- tion of 1881 (Platonis Opera, vol. viii., Lipsiae), or of the Mss. which his investigations have shown to have the most weight, viz. the Bodleianus or Clarkianus B (‘second hand,’ b), or the Venetian T (‘second hand,’ t). Other manuscripts sometimes cited are classed generally as cod. or codd., including those designated by Schanz as ‘ apographa.’ Titte. In the Mss. we find the following addition: i mepl pyropiKys. dvatpertikos. Schanz brackets the last word. 447 a. kal iortepotpev: is bracketed by S, following Cobet. Hirschig also ad loc. gives weighty reasons for the omission of the words. They may readily have crept in from a marginal gloss on kardérw ... Homer, but a little fulness at the opening of the dialogue is not out of place. 447 b. «al: before éideiterac is bracketed by S, to make the connexion close with drav BovAnobe, —a case of unnecessary accuracy. 447d. dwoxplver@ar: BT. amoxpiveicba: S after cod. and Cordes. But the customary tense in advertisements is the present. 448 b. tl &€ rovro: Cron, Kr. (62, 3, 11), and others supply éo7i»y instead of diapépes. 448 b. tlva: BT. ci Cron following S, Buttmann, and Olympiodorus. It is true that the shift from tiva to érep is harsh; but in view of the employ- ment of riva with éxadAotuev and kadoimey it is better to retain the masculine. A more obvious emendation would be évrep for dep. 448 c. nipnpevar: S. cdpnudva: BT. But in 514 d, B shows nipicnouer. See on nipnxéva: 459 c below. — On the Gorgianic peculiarities of this passage, cf. Volkmann, Rhetorik der Griechen u. Rémer, c. 38; Blass, Att. Bered.? i. 68 ff. ; Rhet. Graeci ed. Spengel, especially vol. iii. In later times it became com- mon to ascribe all kinds of rhetorical figures to the invention of Gorgias. Cf. Suid. Lopylas: odtos mparos tH pnropic@ elder THs madelas Sivauly re ppacti- khy kal réxvnv Ewxe, tpomais te kal petapopais kal &AAnyoplas Kal SradAayais kal xataxphoeot kal dvadimAdoeo: Kal éravadhWeot kal arogtpopais kal rapiowoeoww éexphoaro. 448 e. pada ye: theeds. wdédacS (BT ?). 448 e. xapuwra: S following Bekker. ¢pwr¢ BT. APPENDIX. 275 449 b. GAN’ dmep Umioxvel (Smurxver b): S. Smep bmicxvGi BT. If there is no gap after dro0écGa, we should naturally expect dmep dy imioxvG — a reading which is advocated by Morstadt. In any case, however, such an admonition to Gorgias, before he has had time to answer the question ap’ otv éeAjous by «ré., is extremely harsh, and renders it probable that a reply of Gorgias has fallen out. For this reason, S supposes a gap before dep, and adopts the reading of b as given in the text. Cron reads émoyvei without the gap. 449 c. dv pnp: Cron, Hirschig, etc. “dv ¢nuf S, Thompson, etc. 449 c. pySeva dv...elmeiv: the usé of uf with the inf. even after verbs of saying was probably original, but the od drove u# almost completely out. Examples are given in GMT. 685 jin., and the whole subject is discussed by Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. i. 48 ff. In addition to this passage, cited on p. 49, u. 3, Professor Gildersleeve would now add Rep. vi. 497 b. 449 d. otras: I'S. ofrw B Cron. 450 a. édAdyonev: cod. Heindorf, S. Aéyouer B T. 450 d. werrevtexy: BT. raideutinh (or morevtich) Richter. — Olympio- dorus explains the equality of pyov and Adyoy in the werreia as follows: Gua yep TE plrrew tas Whpous (prob. equiv. to «cdBos or werrds) Kal emidéyoual twa olov s’ & 8} tpiéxra He 11 TowodTov. This would seem to indicate a game similar to our ‘backgammon.’ But that the Adyos element goes beyond this is seen from Rep. ii. 374 © werreuvrixds KuBevtixds ixavGs ovd' by cis yévorro wh abrd Tovro é« maidds emirndedwv GAAA wapépy~ xpdpevos, Polit. 292 © touev yap ors x'Alwy avipav &kpou werrevtal rocovTo: (50) mpds robs ev rois KAAS “EAA obK &v yévowrd wore. In view of this and other considerations, Kleist, JJ. cxxxix. 477 (1889), thinks the reference here is to a definite theory of the werrela. See also Cron, Beitr. 83 ff., and for a discussion of the details of the game, Herm. Gr. Alter. iv. § 55. 450 e. ctx dri: The examples cited for this rare and exclusively Platonic construction are, besides this, Prot. 336 d Swxpdry éyyu@uat ph emAhoecOa, ovx bri waller cal pnow emaAhouev elvat, Lys. 220 a ody Sri woAAdKis A€youer, ws mepl moAAOD To.odueOa Xpuatoy Kal apytpiov: GAA ph ovdey v1 pGAdAOv obrw Td ye GAndes xn, Theaet. 157 b 7d 8 clvar mavtaydbev etaiperéov ovx Bri Hucis TOAAG kal Bort hvayxdopeba xphoGa airg. It is to be noticed that in Lys. 220 a alone the ovx dr: clause precedes. The sense, and also the feeling, is very closely given by the English, “not but that”; the other rendering, “ although,” fails to give the color. The common explanation is to supply some verb of saying, but that will not account for the second negative required. The question has been touched upon by Kratz in the appendix to his edition, by Miinscher (J/,, 1870), to whom Cron replies in Beitrdge, 198 ff., and by Kiihner, ii. 525, 4b, who also recognizes the difficulty. Other scholars are inclined to look for the solution in the use of od as a ‘free negative.’ The speaker anticipates the question, “Do you judge so, from the statements the party in question has made?” “No! because he actually said the contrary, in so many words.” 276 APPENDIX. 450 e. év rots Adyous: cod. Heindorf, S. rots Adyos B T. 451 b. «epirrdv: the word yvaors, which follows in the Mss., is bracketed by S after Bekker. 451b. docadv...tvyxdvg: BT. goa... rvyxdver S after Ast. But no specific combination of odd and even is thought of, but merely their general relations up to any magnitude. But see Kleist, JJ. cxxxix. 479, and critical note to 453 e. 451d. tis: codd.S. rwév BT. 451d. riéom: S after Heindorf. éor: BT: a case of ‘haplography.’ 451d. ot: BT. 6S after Hirschig. 451 e. to okodktwv: the name was derived from oxodcés, crooked, bent, but variously explained. Some refer it to the order of succession of the singers, who alternated either around the table or in a zigzag across it; others, either to the air as compared with the solemn yduos dpéios, or to the verse- measure of the song, which, as the oldest kind of the especially logaoedic uédos, was thus named to distinguish it from the hexameter. Cf Engelbrecht, De Scoliorum Poesi, and Gildersleeve, Pindar, I. E. xvi. 452 a. maSorp(Bys: for the manner in which the distinction between maidotpiBns and yuuvacrns gradually faded out, as well as the particulars of training of Greek youth, see Herm. Gr. Alter. iv.3 § 36, p. 335 ff.; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht im klass. Alterthum, i. p. 265 ff. 452 a. Kalelmour: BTS. «al efzo: &v Hirschig. But see note. 452 a. wvylaa: is omitted by S following Hirschig. As the text stands, it is impossible to construe byfea. But even with it omitted we are troubled by the following 5é, for which we should expect ydp. Perhaps the true solution has not been reached. It might be possible to read @ Séxpares; bylea; 452 b. Savpdtoun trav: BTS. @avudomt r&év Cron. 452¢. aitd: B. aitrg TS. 452 e. For Anaximenes’ views of oratory, cf his Ars Rhetorica, ed. Spengel, ce. 1, 453 a. mevbots Syprovpyds: the originator of this definition cannot be definitely fixed. Thompson quotes Prolegomena ad Hermogenem, where it is ascribed to Corax and Tisias, and Quint. ii. 15.4, where Isocrates is credited with it. 453 b. éotly (e105): 8S. eorw T. éor) B, Cron. 453c. «al wot: BT. 4 0% S after Deuschle. (Woolsey had previously made the same emendation in his edition of 1842.) These two words have given endless trouble to the editors, and occasioned numerous emendations, for which see Schanz’s note. They seem genuine. In the first place, it is hard to explain how they got in, if they are not genuine. Then, they are read by one of the scholiasts, who makes an attempt to explain them with the words éy 7H momiAy arog. With the Greeks especially, everything with naine had to have local habitation. The way of fixing an individual was to APPENDIX. 277 give his own name, his father’s, and the place of abode. Socrates is here simply (unconsciously, it may be) following out this Greek habit. The ré mova corresponds to the genitive, and wot marks the scene of his labors. That Socrates does not follow up his comparison in the following question is not remarkable, nor is it necessary that he should follow it up, as Thompson thinks; and the omission of the words by Olympiodorus cannot be placed against the concurrent testimony of B and T. Apply the method to Simoni- des (Semonides) of Amorgus and Simonides of Ceus. Packard, Transactions Am. Phil. Assoc. 1877, p. 11, defends the conjecture 4 ov. 453 e. dAdyouev: TS. Adyouer B. 453 e. dcov éorlv: BTS. Rejected by Kratz. Kleist, JJ. cxxxix. 479, wishes to translate éca in dca dv rvyxdvn, in 451 b above, by quotcumque, and not quantacumque, ‘wie viele arten es auf beiden seiten geben mag.’ For the sake of consistency, he would also substitute éca for dcov in this passage. See Cron, Beitrdge, p. 91 ff. But see note. 454a. éorw: B. éori T. éorly S. 454 a. pyropixy dori: B. pyropich éorly 8. 454 c. dep ydp A€yw: on the use of ydp to resume an interrupted thought, see Shilleto’s crit. note to Dem. de Falsa Leg. 107 (96), quoted by Thompson. 454d. 8: S(BT?). 38 eds. 454d. ad: BT. 6758. 455 a. mweaortids: tS. miricds B T Cron. 455 b. larpav aipécews: cf. also Gorg. 514 d, and for details of treatment, etc., see Herm. Gr. Alter. iv § 38. 455 d. td vedpia xré.: to Themistocles was due the fortification of Athens itself (Thuc. i. 90-93), as well as the erection and fortification of the Piraeus, with its commercial-harbor, éumépiov, and its war-harbor, kav@dpou or KavOdpou Av, for both of which the Athenians formerly used the open bay of Phale- rum. The dockyards were built to hold four hundred ships. The so-called Long Walls, whose erection had probably been suggested by Themistocles, connected with the city the whole coast, from the southeastern end of the bay of Phalerum to the northwestern end of the peninsula of Piraeus, together with its three harbors (in addition to the chief harbor just mentioned, also Zéa and Movvuxia on the southeastern side). They consisted of the shorter Phalerian wall of thirty-five stades, and the longer Piraean (Thuc. i. 107) wall of forty stades. To the latter was afterwards added about the time of the tpiaxovTovres omovdal, for greater security, a second wall, parallel and six hundred feet distant. These two are often distinguished as 7d Bépeoy and 7d vériov retxos, and are called by late authors 7& waxpa oxéAn. For details of location, see Bursian, Geographie von Griechenland, i. p. 265 ff., and Lol- ling’s Hellenische Landeskunde (Miller’s Handb. der Klass. Altertumsw. iii.) pp. 118, 299 ff. 455e. rav: BT. ris S after Buttmann. 1s ray Schaefer, Hirschig. 278 APPENDIX. 456 a. el: BT. ri, ef S after Madvig. 456 b. omy: BT. é2o: S after codd. and Heindorf. 456 d. dywvig ov Trovrov évexa: the last two words are bracketed by S after Findeisen, who puts a colon before 87: and a comma after éx@pav. With either reading an easy asyndeton is involved; and while rovrou évexa is rather redundant, it conflicts neither with sense nor construction. — On the omAopaxla cf. Lach. init. reOéacbe wey tov bvdpa paxduevoy ev Smras «ré., Huthyd. 273 ec. For the development of this practice, see Herm. Gr. Alter. iv.2 § 35. 456 d. dmoxravivar: BS. droxrivvivac T. Schanz, vol. viii. proll. p. vi f. shows from the Mss. that the form dmoxrewtivai: is better attested for the Gor- gias, though in other dialogues the weight of evidence seems to be in favor of the second form. 456 e. jr iwdpxovras: for the different varieties of asyndeton and their effect on the style, see Rehdantz, Dem. Phil. Reden Index, under the word ‘asyndeton,’ and Volkmann, Rhetorik d. Gr. u. Rim. § 48. 457 c. Adyov: BT. pirordsywr S. Aoyiwy Madvig. dvOpéxwv Cobet. Any of these emendations would make the text more exact, it is true, but would not give any other advantage than that of formal exactness, there being no ambiguity of meaning as the passage stands. 457 d. diWovikotvras: S (vol. vii. prolegg.). gptAoveccodvras B T. 457 d. Aodopnbevtes re kal: is bracketed by S after Hirschig. 457 e. ov mavv dxoAovda: Cobet maintains that od rdvv is an unqualified negation in classic Greek, although the sense “not entirely” is common in later authors. Cope and Riddell demand the weaker force here; and this corresponds much better with Socrates’s whole bearing. See the discussion in App. to Cope’s translation. 458 b. xpyv: BT. xpi S with codd. See the note. The context, as well as @e: in the margin, b t, makes for the impf. 458 b. wapotow: TS. apoio: B. 458 ¢. pry twas: Madv. Syn. § 124,1, and Kr. 54, 8, 12, consider the uf in this case to have an interrogative force, “whether.” It is better to look at the indic. as an attempt to avoid any ambiguity, since the subjv. may have two sides, the indic. but one. See GMT. 369, 1. 458 c. xaréxopev: BtS. xaréyauer T. 458d. date xapuetobe: on Sore with the inf. to express tendency, ‘so as to,’ without specifying as to the reality of the occurrence, and with the indic. to express actual result, see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. vii. 161 ff. 458d. épwrdy...BovAerau: is bracketed by S after Badham, perhaps rightly. 459 c. nipynkévar: S. etpyxévar BT. Cf 448 c. The evidence of inscrip- tions shows that after the middle of the fourth century, verbs in ed- were not augmented; the latest inscription containing )- dates from 321 n.c. See Reinach, Traité a’ Epiqraphie Greequc, 285, Meisterhans, Grammatik der At- tischen Inschriften,? § 64, 14. APPENDIX. 279 459. Adyou: BT. déyor S after Hermann. See Thompson’s note. 460 c. The reading here adopted is that of Thompson, which differs from Hirschig’s only in the position of dei. Schanz, followed by Cron, brackets obxobv ... paiveral ye; but, as Thompson points out, the words oddérore dpa Bovajoera 3 ye Slkaos adicciv seem to require an intermediate step in the argument, while to retain the words rdv jnropuxdy . . . roy 5é in their present position is to disturb badly the otherwise plain course of reasoning. See the notes of Thompson and Hirschig ad loc. 461 b. 7 ota: S with the eds. 4 BT Cron. Packard, Transactions Am. Phil. Assoc. 1877, p. 12, defends the explanation given in the note, which is now generally accepted. 461 c. éralpous kal veis (uiets): t and eds. éralpous viets BT. éralpous S. Ihave adopted the first reading with a slight change in the spelling (‘vids est un forme ionienne et vulgaire,’ Reinach, Epig. p. 270; cf Meisterhans, § 17, 4), though it must be confessed that veis is decidedly suspicious. 462d. ovdeula xré.: S, following Hirschig, divides the words as follows: EQ. OdSeula— Pal. MQ. Syul dh. BQ. "Eurepla tis. tlvos padi. 10. Sypi 67. 30. Xdpiros...MGAe. But one can hardly conceive how Polus could have failed to catch the spirit of the play, after Socrates had shown the way. 463 e. 1 pytopuy: T Aristides S. pnropixi B Cron. In 451 a, 454 a, the article is omitted in both Mss., though it might stand as well there as here. 464 b. dytlctpodpov pév Ty yupvacrriny: Aristides, S after Heindorf. ay7) Bev Tis yuuvaorenis BT. 464d. dep: b Aristides. drouv BT. 7d 8. 465 b. otoakal: codd. xa BTS. 465 b. éoOrjoa: S after Coraes. aicéjoa BT. éo6ir: Aristides, — which would correspond better to usage than éc@qjce. See Schanz’s note for the many emendations. 465 c. Sornxev: BTS. dieornee wey cod., the editions. 465 c. xprowvrar: TS after Bekker. xphoovta BCron. Cf. 465e. 466 a. dp: S. ap B. ap’ T Cron. 466 b. Soxotow: TS. doxotc1 B Cron. 466d. 6m: cod.Seds. ef 87: BT. ef odx cod., Hermann, Cron. 466 d. épwrypara: codd.S. ra épwrfuara BT. 466 e. ovxotv: od ody S after Hermann, who defends this reading in the words: ‘negativa responsio disiungi particulas postulat.’ But, as Cron justly observes, Polus anticipated no such negative reply, but rather the contrary. He fails to see any difference in the two expressions used by Socrates; which makes the case for ovxotv overwhelming. 466 e. ys: S after Baiter. %pys BT, Cron,eds. The passages in which this anomalous form occurs are as follows: Xen. Cyr. iv. 1,23; Pl. Gorg. 466, 496 (gis Baiter, S), Huthyd. 293 (-no@a Baiter); Aeschines, ii. 86 (-no6a Franke, Weidner); Aeschy. Ag. 1613 (¢7s Dindorf, Hermann) and five pas- 280 APPENDIX. sages from Lucian. The only passage remaining unchanged apparently is Xen. Cyr. iv. 1. 23, where it is true, as Cron says, that gs cannot be read; but a change to ép706a is not difficult, and then, as the word is put into the mouth of a foreigner, Cyrus, it might have been designed. Phrynichus (ed. Rutherford, p. 225) says épns: forte wey mapa rots apxators, GAA’ GAlyoy: 7d dé wAciorov épnoba. Lobeck questions the truth of this statement, and Ruther- ford denies flatly that @pnys is Attic. Almost all modern editors agree with Rutherford. 466 e. dodelfas... éfeAdyEas: BT. dmodeitas éterdytes S after Hirschig. It is true that Hirschig’s reading makes the thought a little more exact, for strictly speaking the refutation consists in the proof. But, at the same time, the best proof of Polus’s position would be the refutation of Socrates; so that in either case the general result is much the same. 467 a. KextTycovTar. qi KexThcovra, HS. 467 b. tovrov mpdcbev: is bracketed by S after Schleiermacher. Its genuineness had been already questioned by Heindorf. 467 b. reppva: S. éreppv7 BT Cron. Meisterhans, § 58, 11, says: ‘In the acc. sing. the ending a instead of 4 is found when a vowel precedes. In the case of éyia, we find a variation in the use of a and 7 after 360 B.c.” The same seems to hold true for the neut. pl. Cf. 486 b. 467 d. wdovrou ydp évexa mAcovow: is bracketed by S after Cobet. 468 a. éveca: SS. éevexey BT Cron and eds. Meisterhans, § 83, 26: ‘The forms in -ev (évexer, elvexey, ofverev) are entirely foreign to Attic.’ The earliest example of évexev is after 550 B.c. 468 e. os 84 00 «ré.: Cron considers the construction here to be causal at bottom. Others regard it as exclamatory. 469 a. {ndotov: BT. (nawrds cod. S after Ast, who remarks (Tom. xi. p. 169 f.): ‘Quod conieceram (Praef. p. vi. T.1) (nAwrés id con- firmatum nunc video a Flor. d.,idque tam praegressa quam sequentia videntur flagitare.’ But the reading of the codex itself rests probably upon an emendation, and the neuter is merely a case of collo- quial inexactness. Cf. a similar case in Legg. v. 730 c, where it is said that ‘who would be happy, must be truthful,’ miards yap, 6 5¢ &miatos, @ pldov Weddos Exodaiov: Btw be dxotoior, avous. dv oddérepov (nAwrdv. Here probably no one will employ an emendation, although the author continues: &@iAos yap by was 8 re briotos Kal duadhs. 469 b. édeewov ye: S after Stobaeus. ércewdy 5¢ BT. 469 e. ivrw av cor Sony: codd. S. déeo. BT. 470 a. mparreyv, dyaQov te: S. mpdrrew dyaddy re Cron. ayabdy 7: Hein- dorf. Although the idea is plain enough, the arrangement of the words has caused great difficulty. Schleiermacher, followed by Cron, construes éya0dv ve ely Closely with apedtuws mpdétrew, under the article, thus making ré a ‘postscript’ ré. To do this, he has to take palvera: as a complete predicate, in APPENDIX. 281 the sense, “seem good or correct.” Ast wrenches the construction so as to supply a predicate, wéya divacGau, to palvera:, and follows it by &yaOdy re elvat, making the contrast randy (sc. elvar) kal ouixpdy duvac@a in chiastic position. But as Cron observes, it is quite out of the question to connect a ré clause with a supplied predicate. Thompson uses the heroic treatment of bracket- ing the first 7d wéya SdvacGa: and the last ddvacba: after cuixpdy. Most of the eds. — and this is best — put a comma after mpdrreiv, and construe ayaddy te elvat and xa) rodro xré. together. This is not without difficulties, as Cron shows. The second clause deviates from the construction, but of this Plato shows several examples in this same dialogue. Socrates changes his expres- sion to bring out with greater emphasis the éay pév clause: “and that (kat Tovto), it seems, is the real uéya divacba:.” This translation obviates the objection to retro. Cron does not like the 7d with the second péya dbvacOu, but the 7é seems to have much the force of the English emphatic the, and that force can be brought out by adding the word ‘real.’ By thus making rovro a reiteration of édy pév xré., we have the contrast «i 5¢ wh coming regu- larly with éoriv to be supplied after randy. 470 a. Sivacbar* oKepadpeda: S. ddvacdat, ocxepeueba Cron after Her- mann. 470 b. ratro: is bracketed as a dittograph by S, who refers to a similar case in Theaet. 186 d. This is not unlikely; but at the same time we can explain the word as it stands as showing a trace of sophistical quibbling. 470d. éx@és: on the form, Rutherford, New Phrynichus, § 295, says: ‘éx6és was the regular Attic form, the old Ionic y@é¢s being naturally retained in phrases like x6és te kal mpwyy and occasionally, as in Ar. Nub. 353, Vesp. 242, to help the metre. After a word ending in a vowel, éx@és yielded to its older rival even in prose.’ : 470d. ovK ol8a —afixos (471 a): is translated by Cic. Tusc. Disp. v. 12 as follows: Haud scio, nunquam enim cum eo collocatus sum.— Ain’ tu? an aliter id scire non potes?—Nullo modo—Tu igitur ne de Persarum quidem rege magno potes dicere, be- atusne sit?—An ego possim, quum ignorem quam sit doctus, quam vir bonus?—Quid? tuineo sitam vitam beatam putas? —Ita prorsus existimo: bonos beatos, improbos miseros— Miser ergo Archelaus?—Certe, si iniustus. 470 e. kdyabov: S. Kal dyabby BT. Schanz, vol. ii. 2, Prolegg. § 1, shows that we find regularly caAds x&ya0ds, more rarely, kadds Te Kayadds, but not KaAds Kal ayabds, or Kadds Te kal ayabds. 471 b. tov: S. viiy BT Cron. See critical note on 461 c. 471 b. On the general stylistic effect of the partic. see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. Phil. ix. 136 ff., who discusses this passage, showing that we should naturally expect such an outburst.from Polus, ‘TI@Aos by name and wados by nature.’ 282 APPENDIX. 471 c. rov Tlepilkkov: cod. S. dv Mepdixxou BT. Cron, Beitrage, p.118, thinks that perhaps it would be better to join rdy ywhowov with roy adeApdy, in which case roy Mepdixcov béy would be a gloss by a later hand. 471c. éwréry: S after Ast. érraer? B T. But Heindorf had already observed, before Ast, with the approval of Lobeck, Phryn. 407, ‘Atticum magis esse ex grammaticorum praeceptis éxré ry.’ 471d. ényveca: BT. erifvecat S after Cobet. 471d. tov 8€ ... qpeAnxevar: Thompson construes this clause under érjveca in its full sense, considering that Socrates ironically calls his remark in 448 d (dfA0s ydp wor TlGAos . . . Ott Thy KaAoUpevny pyTopiKhYy uaAAOY pEemeEA€- thkev } SiadreyerOac) a compliment. This view has found a supporter in Pack- ard, Transactions Am. Phil. Assoc. 1877,14. But the passage seems to be rather playful than ironic; and it is not uncommon in Greek to supply a colorless verb of saying from a preceding verb which involves it. 471d. ayabd: dyad BT. & *yabd S. 472a. elvactl: S. eivaf rs BT Cron. S is right in thinking the greater emphasis to be upon ri. This understatement implies much more impor- tance, actual or pretended, in the persons mentioned than would be felt if elvat had the emphasis. 472d. é€orw: S after Hermann. éorw BT. 472d. év T[v@lov: cod. S. év Mv@o? BT. Heindorf recommends év Nuvéig, referring to the note of Suidas: Mv@iov iepdy *"AréAAwvos *AOHynow bird Meit- orpdrov yeyovds, eis 8 Tods Tplrodas érideray of TG KUKAlw Xope viKkhoavTes TA @apyfaia. But we find also in Thue. vi. 54. 7 év Mv6iov. In C.I.A. i. 422, we have a dedication by Aristocrates, son of Scellius, which may have belonged to this offering. See Roberts, Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, i. p. 97. 472. amdvtas...pévror: S after Stobaeus. ardvrwy... uev rolvwy BT. 473 b. tows: is bracketed by S, following a suspicion of Heindorf, who, however, afterwards recalled his suspicion by referring to Phaedrus 233 e. 473 b. adiuav: is bracketed by S after Dobree. But Socrates’ words in d, éay adixws ér:BovAetwy, seem to favor the retention of ad:«cév here. 473 ¢. karamirtw$y: such punishments were but rarely inflicted in the Hellenic states, and were never sanctioned by law. When inflicted, they were dictated only by the fury of the moment, as we learn from Ath. xii. 26, p. 524 mpdrov pév xparhoas 6 dios Kad robs rAovalous éxBaddy kal cuvayayov 7a, Téxva Ta pvydvTwy eis GAwvias, Bovs cuvayaysytes cuvnAolncay Kal Tapavouw- Tarp Oavarw diepOeipav: rovydptor mdAw of wAovot Kpathoavres Gmavtas, ov Kbpto KaTéoTnoay, peta TOV Téxvwv KaTenitrwoav. Routh identified the punish- ment here mentioned with the Latin tunica molesta, alluded to by Juv. viii. 235, on which Mayor gives references; among others Plut. de ser. num. vind.9 ‘some men are just like children, who often when they behold malefac- tors in the theatres in tunics of gold and purple shawls, crowned and dancing the pyrrich, admire and envy them as happy; until they are seen goaded and APPENDIX. 283 scourged and discharging fire from that flowered and costly attire’ (wip aviévres ex Tis avOwis exelyns Kal woAvredods éaOjros). Cf. Herm. Gr. Alter. ii. 1,3 § 18. 473 c. edSapoverrepos: cod. S. edSamovécraros BT. 473 d. Si80vs Siknv: cod. dixny dovs S after Schmidt. 830bs B T. The pres. is better than the aor. because the punishment is kept up. 473 e. Siahevyov: BT. diapvydv cod. S. Socrates is speaking generally. 473 e. épot twa: Stallbaum. %pov7wi BT. pod rd S. 474 b. o&tkeiv.: S as Heindorf and Ast, following Ficinus, demanded. adicety; the eds. 474. edvat, ro: elva:td Sand eds. Cron regards rérepoy as an adj. with 7d adicety kré. in apposition. 474 ¢. +l &é Sy; atcxvov: Heindorf. ri 5& 54 alcxiov S after Aldus. 474c¢. alcxwov;: eds. alrxuoy. 8. 474. ta Koda, W: BS. 1a ward rod T. 7d omitted, cod. kara roo Thompson. 475 a. Qdrepov: is said to be a Doric form, adopted into Attic, but this is doubtful. Attic inscriptions always have érepos. Reinach, Epig. p. 249, thinks that originally in Attic érepov may have been pronounced drepov. But Smyth, The Vowel System of the Ionic Dialects (Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 1889), p. 20, claims Grepos itself for Attic. This claim, if true, would imply that old Attic has two forms, arepos and repos, the former of which became fixed in the form 6drepov, dying out otherwise. Others hold the very reasonable view that 6&repa was a familiar form and 6&repoy carelessly taken for the singular. 475 b. kako: BT. kang 4 auporépus S after Hirschig. Perhaps it is easier to bear with the inexactness than to explain the omission. 475d. xpove: BT. Cron would either omit this word as not agreeing with the connexion, or change it to Ady after Findeisen. But the usage is phraseological, and for that reason defensible. 476 c. xder...xderOar: codd.S. xalec...kalecda: B T. So also in the following examples; but in 479 a, B T both have kdec@ar. The spelling of this verb is still an open question. Only two inscriptions contain present forms, and they are both before 400 B.c., and both show the diphthong. Meisterhans, § 63, 24. 477 a. Se: Seds. de B Cron. 477d. cpdorepa: Rid., § 17, classes this with such expressions as kal tavra, under the head of acc. in apposition. See another example in 524 ec. 478 b. rl: BStobaeus 8S. rlodv T. dy Adyets, which follows éorw in B T, is bracketed by S after Bekker and Ficinus. 478 c. kal vyiy elvar: is bracketed by S after Morstadt. It is true that the addition is unnecessary, and even illogical, but it serves to emphasize the result of the endurance. 478 ¢. gouxe: B. ouwev TS. 284 APPENDIX. 479 a. pr SiSdvar Slenv «ré.; this passage shows well the narrow line which sometimes separates the tendential from the substantival acc. with the inf. and may help to explain the way in which éore, which with the inf. is post-Homeric, came to be introduced to fix the idea of tendency. See Gilder- sleeve, The Consecutive Sentence in Greek, Am. Jour. Phil. vii. 161 ff. 479 b. ottw: BT. oftws S and eds. 479 c. el prj col ye dANws: codd.eds. «i col ye HAAws B T. ci cot ye §, who compares Hipp. ii. 367 d ef ye ob BovAc:t. But the interpolation of &AAws is hard to explain, while «4 could easily have dropped out, under the influ- ence of itacism. 479d. dSuketv: BT. ddccotvra dddvar Sieny S after Hirschig. 480 a. ahkrjoet: S after Heindorf. adiuméon BT. 480 b. mowjoe: S after Heindorf. moron BT. 480 b. Adyopev: BT. Adyouer codd. 8. 480 c. rovvayriov: Deuschle. ém) rodvayridy B T S Cron. Cron, follow- ing Heindorf, thinks that we must supply xpfowmoy elvai, which would make én) rodvaytioy correspond to ém) 7d drodoyeiobar. But this would leave deiv unaccounted for. Thompson supposes én} roivayriov to be a phrase equivalent to eis rotvavriov Soph. 221 a, or xara todvaytlov Tim. 36 d, or é& évavtias, which is common enough. And if the én) is kept, this is the only way of regarding it. But it is the sole example in such a phrase, and Deuschle bracketed it for that reason. 480 c. 8: BT. reS with codd. and Heindorf. 480 e. i Kdxetva (cxaxetva BT). 4 xetva § after Hirschig. 48la. qYrprakds: S. qpracds BT. fpraxas 7 cod. 481 a. dvadloxy: S after L, Dindorf, and Coraes. avadfcxnta BT. 48lc. dopev: BT. @duev S after Madvig, who declares (Adversaria, i. 410) the connexion of a participle with gdva: not to be Greek. But adyew can be so construed, and we find g¢dva followed by uf as if it were a verb of asseveration, which latter could take a participle. 481d. ‘wv: according to Rid. § 173, Plato combines with # the fol- lowing: dirAods, rodAamAdcwos, Siapepdytws (Stapepe), dvouotos, évavtios, tls. 481d. or (i 7:) dv by: S with cod. and Ast. 87: drws by OF B. 871 dws by dyripn T. Sri dado’ kv py eds. after Bekker. It is a good example to show how variations might arise. 482 a. dvwv: Cron, who claims the authority of B T for the omission of def. But S (with the eds.) reads def without noting any change in B T, and it is perhaps better to restore it to the text here before & viv. 482 a. épmdynkros: is explained by the scholiasts and grammarians by &otaros, evuerdBodos (inconstans), with which agrees Lysis 214 ¢ undérore dpolous abtovs abrots elvat, GAN eumAnnrous Te kal doTabunrous. 482 a. de trav attayv: cod. S. ray airay BT. APPENDIX. 285 482 b. Alyurriov: BT. Ailyirriov § after Stallbaum, following Olympio- dorus, to obviate the omission of the art.; but see Reinach, Epig. p. 275: ‘Jusqu’au IV° siécle et meme jusqu’au III* on ne trouve que rarement le nom d’un peuple, d’un déme etc. précédé de Varticle.’ 482 b. kpeitrov elvar dvappoorety re: S after Van Heusde. xpetrroy elvac avdppoordy re BT. xpetrrov avdppoordy re elvas Ast after Heindorf. 482d. SSdfo.: BT. ddate codd. 482 e. évavri’: S on the basis of the reading of B, which according to S is évayvtt. éevaytia T. 483 a. rovto to codpov: Rid., § 15, considers this and similar cases as acc. in apposition to the sentence. Cf. Theaet. 167 b & 34 tTwes 7a pavrdo- pata td dmrepias aAnOH Kadodow, and other examples, Prot. 852 e, Theaet. 158 b. 483 a. «aktov, TO adtketoOat: B T. xkdewv .. . ddiketoGa S after H. Stephanus, — perhaps correctly. 483 c. to tcov: on the principles of democratic government as conceived by the Greeks, the equality of the individuals as well as their subservience to law, see Busolt, Gr. Alter. i. § 45 (Miiller’s Handbuch, iv.). 483 e. rv tov Skalov: is bracketed by S after Schleiermacher. 483 e. rov trys bicews: eds. rdy dicews S (BT 72). 483 e. 1iOdye8a: is bracketed by S after Hermann. 484 a. Siabvydv: is bracketed by S after Naber, xa) diapuvydv by Mor- stadt. Cron prefers the latter, but karararfjoas would continue the meta- phor of the escaping beast much better as a co-ordinate participle than it could as a subordinate. 484 c¢. SadOopd: the speech of Callicles affords a good example of the ceuvdtns Which Aristides (Rhet. Gr. ed. Spengel, ii. 468) says is caused by the employment of dvouartixal Actes dvr) pnuarinav. 484e. xaléml: BTS. «dam eds. 484 e. tvyxdve: TS. ruyxdvn B. 485 b. kal waltovras: is bracketed by S after Morstadt. 485 b. wWedAtLopevov kal waifov: is bracketed by S after Cobet. 485 c. 7 walfovra dpa: is bracketed by Morstadt. 485 e. Woxrs €xov: Nauck. ypuyfs BT S. 485 e. Stampéwes: BT. diatpéres S after Grotius. It can hardly be said that the emendation of Schanz is any more satisfactory than the text. I have followed Nauck in inserting ¢ywy to make the construction better Greek. But most likely the correct reading of the passage is beyond the efforts of the eds. The trouble with diampéreis is that while not unknown to Euripides’ vocabulary, it is never used transitively ; hence Nauck’s insertion, for which Cron suggests Aaydv, which would serve as well. In this way dcarpérew would be used just as we find it in Eur. Alc. 602, where Admetus says to his father, with bitter irony, } répa rdvrwy dianpérers ayuxig. 286 APPENDIX. 485 e. ovr’ dv... Adyov: these words are shown by the metre, ofr’ &v dlkns BovAaioi, as well ds by the form Bovaaic., to have belonged in some form to Euripides. This has led Hartung to add them to the fg. with slight changes, though Nauck and Schanz do not feel justified in so doing. 486 a. Adkos: S after Bonitz. Adfos BT. Adkos is not a prose word, but is very common in Euripides. 486 b. etAtyyiays: BTS. iacyyigdys b t Cron. Schanz, vis. Prolegg. § 1, compares all the passages, and refers to the note of Suidas: ciAvyyiO- 7d wey bijua bid SipOdyyou, avr) rod cxorodinad — 7d 5& Bvoua trcyyos Sid roo i. 486 b. edhva: S. cipv9# BT. Cf. crit. note on 467 b. 486 c. keppys: the retention of » after the p in the words given in the note is explained as due to the fact that the older forms were xépon, dépo7, etc., and that afterwards assimilation took place, as in the case of Odpaos to Odppos. Curt. Stud. i. a 248. 486 c. mov: S after Cobet. wef6ov B T Cron. 486 c. rair ddels: eds. raira dpels S (BT 2). 486d. dopevov: BS. &cpevor eds. 486d. 4: BT. aisS after Stallbaum. afcod. This deviation from the more rigid construction is quite comprehensible in the freedom of conversa- tion. Cf. 521 b. 486e. dv: BT. & S after Bekker. 486 e. taitr WS: eds. raira 48n S (BT 2). 487 c. Telcavipov: S with inscriptions. Ticavdpoy B T Cron. 487 d. raird: S after Ficinus. raita BT. Cron remarks that éuoi makes for the first reading, for with raira we would more usually find raird po. 487 e. yoy: BTS. ot eds. 488 a. gorw: S Thompson. éorwB Cron. éor T. 488 a. raird: BS. raira T eds. 488 b. mdéov: S after Heindorf. adciov B T. 488 b. édeyov: is omitted by 8, following common Greek usage. Both the position and the sense make for the omission. 489 a. rovro, KadAXlkAas: BT. rotr’ & KadAixAers S after Heindorf. 489 c. éppatov: BS. epuaor T. 489 c. ovddeyq: TbS. avardyn B. 489 c. daow «ré.: the omission of an object to ¢éow has caused a great deal of trouble, and it is certainly harsh to consider the word as used abso- lutely in the sense “ declare,” ‘‘speak”; but such must be done as yet, for the emendations and other explanations are not satisfactory. Schanz changes aird to &rta. Cron construes atta... vduima with gaow, and translates: ‘Or do you think I mean (by the statement that 7d BéAriov and 7d Kpetrroy are the same) that (i.e. the case) when... and these say that this and nothing else is lawful,’ viz. & dy paow. But this is too trying a species of mental gymnastics for conversation. APPENDIX. 287 489 c. atird: BT. &rra S after Heindorf, possibly with right. Some eds. insert comma after aird. Cron omits comma both after ga@ow and atta. 489d. ri: BTeds. rivas S after Routh. 490 a. frpara: cod. fnuat: (defended by Winckelmann) B T. pid te Deuschle. fnudria S after Badham. 490 a. éorw: Sandeds. éorwB. éorly T Cron. 490 b. dOpoor: TS. &6poo1 B Cron. 490 c. év&é te: codd. év 7g 5: B TS, referring to Kr. 68, 5, 1. 490 c. wept otrla: B T. Thompson follows Hirschig in bracketing the words, which certainly are here a violation of usage. Cf. his note ad loc. 491la. ds: BTS. déorep Baiter. 491d. éraipe;: cod. Bekker S. ératpe rif rl dpxopuévous B. éraipe ti} tt &pxovtas 3) apxouevouvs T. Many attempts have been made to emend this pas- sage. Schanz gives the emendations of Stephanus, Cron, Bernardakes, Ast, Hermann, Stallbaum, Schuster, Madvig, Kratz, Kleanthes, Heindorf, Beck, E. Jahn, Findeisen, Baiter. 492 b. elev: S. efyoav B T Cron. 492 ¢. rair éorlv: B. rair éor! T. rair’ pa S. 492d. dyodev: S after Bekker. &ddodéy B T. 492e. 6: BTS. 7 5) Hermann, Cron. érep #5n cod. Thompson. 493 a. waortuov: Iamblichus, 8. morikdy BT Stobaeus. Cf. 455 a. 493 a. trav 8 duuirav: BT. rév duvqrwy § after Madvig. But the pas- sage offers an additional difficulty in airod where we desire airijs. If ai’rod is genuine, we must conceive the clause 7d... creyavdy as in part. opposition to rotro. This would make avroi partitive genitive instead of possessive, which Cron insists upon calling it. 493 c. dmyxace: T (in the margin) 8. dmeixace BT. 493 c. petarlOeoar: cod. eds. petaridecda: B TS. Ast attempts to de- fend the reading of the Mss. by translating, ‘Do I also persuade you to change your opinion to this, that,’ etc. But, as Cron remarks, this gives an utterly impossible construction for «ai, and besides there is no meaning in “also.” 494 ¢. wAnpotv: S after Stephanus. aAnpodtvra BT. wAnpoty, rAnpodyta kal xatpovra Heindorf. 494e. kvyoiwy: S after Heindorf. xvqowt BT. «vqowg Bekker, Cron. xvnog Coraés, 494e. éxcpeva: is bracketed by S. 495 a. dyaal: codd.S. af dyaba! BT. Heindorf appeals to 501 b; but since Bekker that has been read 4 SeAtiwy, instead of 4 BeAriov. 495d. dyodot: BT. #5éos H. Schmidt, to make the clause correspond more accurately with the previous discussion. See the discussion in Cron, Beitrige, p. 156, 209. 496 a. dv@pwmes: S after Bekker. &@pwros B T Cron. 288 APPENDIX. 496 b. darodAve: B according to Gaisford. dréaavar S after Cobet’s dic- tum that forms in -Jw are not Attic. Thompson quotes Porson on Eur. Me- dea, 744: ‘Observandum est hac forma, ea nempe ubi tw pro uu in fine verbi ponitur nunquam uti Tragicos; rarissime veteres Comicos; saepius mediae, saepissime novae Comoe- diae poetas. Paullatim et parce adhiberi coepta est sub mediam fere Aristophanis aetatem; tantum enim occurrit éuvin Av. 1610, cuprapamryrioy in ultima eius fabula Pluto 719. Cetera loca, ubi usurpari videtur, aut emendata sunt aut emendanda.’ The evidence of the inscriptions seems to substantiate this. Meisterhans, § 74, 14, says: ‘ Regarding the transition of verbs in -yvum to the -w conjugation, we find in 5th cent. B.c. duvitw, duvivtwy, duvivar. The 4th cent. still shows duvivar, but also @urvov (336 B.c.). Only after the 2d cent. does the inf. take the -w ending ; orpwvytew, duvdew.’ 496 c. dv@pwros: S after Bekker. &v6pwros B T Cron. 496d. «al éyd* pavOdve: Hermann. kal éye pavOdvw BT. Mavédve S after Ast. 496 e. ys: S after Baiter and Deuschle. épys B T Cron. Cf critical note on 466 e. 497 a. dxx(fe: the scholiasts connect the word with a certain woman named ’Ax«é, who was so foolish that she took from the loom a half-finished garment, and, clad in it, conversed with her own image in a mirror. The story is varied in the different accounts, and the connexion between ’Akké and this verb is very uncertain. We learn from Plutarch that ’Akcé was used like Mopud, etc., as a bugbear to terrify children, and we find its em- ployment as early as Pindar, fg. 127, which makes the loom story highly improbable. i 497 a. éprpocbeyv—: Cron. Zumpocdev; S. The interrogation after the imv. is difficult to account for. : 497 a. rl gxwv Anpeis;: S after Badham. 81: Zywv Anpe’s B T, without any division of persons. 497 4d. ds érépwv dvtwv: is bracketed by S after Deuschle. 497 e. ddbpovas: BT. robs &ppovas cod. S after Heindorf, who holds, however, the addition of the article to be unnecessary. 498 b. éporye paddov: BT. Zuorye, waddov 8 tows of Sedoi S after a con- jecture of Hermann. This addition would, however, make superfluous the following questions, aridvrwy & ob waddov xré. 498 c. dyadol: Routh. dya6ol of dyaGo! B T. S brackets the words éyaGol oi dyaGo) Kat Karol elo. 499 b. lovtov: T. iot ot BS. According to Cron, the authority seems to be on the side of the first accentuation, even when the expression is a joyful one. 499d. dpa: S with Hermann after Heindorf. ef pa BT. 499 e. évexa: S. €vexey B T Cron. See critical note on 468 a. APPENDIX. 289 500 a. dyad — av WSeov — éorly: this reading follows a suggestion of Professor Gildersleeve in regard to the recitation of the passage. aya0a Tay Hdéwy éorly BT eds. 500 a. avapvycOdpev: S. dvauvyncOduer B eds. 500 c. él: is bracketed by S after Findeisen. 500 d. et €orw «ré.; an example of the Schema Pindaricum, on which see Thompson ad loc. Gildersleeve on Pindar, Ol. xi(x) 61, and R. S. Haydon, Am. Jour. Phil. xi. No. 2. 501 a. 48 érdpa trys aSovrs xré.: it is impossible to look upon rs 45ov%s as a “free gen.,” because the rovrov of the preceding clause has given the key to this, neither can Cron’s explanation of it as ‘gen. of belonging’ (‘angehorigkeit connexion’), with the translation “that which is directed to,” be deemed satisfactory. Hirschig inserts 4 before ris, supplying, and, as it seems, necessarily, réxv7, in which case there would be a tacit acknowl- edgment of a téxvy ris 750v7%s—an admission the very opposite of what Socrates intends, for he emphatically insists that the wapackev) tis jdovqs rests on éurecpia only. 501 c. va cor kal wepavOy 6 Acdyos Kal «ré.; Cron, referring to Kr. 69, 32, 16. 17, considers this 4 case of the use of «ai in clauses of purpose to add emphasis in the sense ‘ja,’ ‘doch.’ But while this use of «af is undoubted (cf. Rep. i. 346 a wh rapa ddtav droxplvov, va Tt kal wepatvwuev) it seems much more natural here to make it correlative with the following «ai, “both .-. and.” 501d. dépoas: TS Cron. aépéas B eds. 502 a. yipyoba: S. edpicda BT. 502 b. rl 8 Sy y oepvy .. . €f w eorovSaxev; morepov: S places the mark of interrogation after 54, construes with Hermann, 7 ceuv) .. . with aérepov and brackets é¢ ¢ écnovdaxev after Cobet. The remedy is violent and perhaps needless. 502 b. écaovSaxévat: Curtius, Verb. ii. p. 154 ff., distinguishes five classes of perfects which are used originally as presents, viz. perfects of sound («é- kpaya), of sight and smell (ddwda), of gesture (de5¢xara:, y 72), of emotion (Sé50xa), and intensive perfects. Under the same categories fall all those perfects which, though originally full perfects, have acquired a present mean- ing; e.g. éyphyopa, réOvnka, mepdBnpuat, eomovdaka, wépuca, etc. 502 b. ds cow (ds col T) Soxet: BT. &s por Soret, bs oor Soxeiv, Kratz. 502 ¢. ool: S. oo: Cron and eds. 502 d. pyropicy: codd. § after Heindorf. 7 pnropix} BT. 502 d. niuprkapev: S. eiphxayer BT. 503 a. el ydp «ai: according to Kr. 65, 5, 15, xa ei implies that the state- ment of the leading clause is absolutely unassailable, even in the extreme case which xa) ef introduces; with ei xaf the realization of the condition, which may easily happen, is still 2 matter of no importance, as far as the statement of the leading clause is concerned. Cf. also Madv. Syn. § 194 d. 290 APPENDIX. 503 a. rotro: codd. Aristides, Heindorf, S. rodro$ BT. 503 d. elvoar- rovotrov: B T. S marks a gap after elva:, and omits the weakly attested %ye:s eiweiv after yeyovéva:. Heindorf thinks that some word like épdvn, dpordynta is to be added, or elva: changed into ef &y. See the numerous conjectures in S. 503 e. «wporddpea a mpoodépa: this reading of cod. has been adopted by the eds. since Heindorf. It is not certainly Plato’s, of course, but it fills the space and makes sense. npoopépec B T. S marks a gap after this word. 503 e. avrov: codd.S. aitéy B. airay T. 504 c¢. éxelvw: S after Heindorf. éxcivo BT. 504¢e. avrov: B T. airg Deuschle. 3’ adrod conjectured, but not adopted by S. 504 e. qwddov, 7 totvavriov kard ye: BT. aAdoy 4 rodvartiov, card ye S after Schleiermacher’s first edition. This passage has given a good deal of trouble, and the explanation given in the note is only the lesser of two evils. The second construction, that of §., Schleiermacher, and others, is thus para- phrased by Thompson: “ What is the use of administering to a diseased body a variety of dishes when these will frequently be of no more service to it than abstinence and mortification (rotvayriov roAA@v oitiwy Kré.), nay, rightly con- sidered will do it even less good than abstinence?” This view makes excel- lent sense, but is open to several objections. 1. The use of rotvavtioy is harsh and probably unexampled. 2. There is a case of asyndeton before xatd which Woolsey, a good critic, pronounced intolerable, and which Hein- dorf was moved to avoid by the insertion of #, an impossible remedy owing to the preceding # (than). 3. This view involves the supplying of the posi- tive dvjce: from the preceding u} dvqce. No complete collection of examples of this usage seems to have been made. Kiihner, ii, § 597 n., cites the follow- ing cases where a positive verb is supplied from a negative. Hom. E 819 o# mw elas paxapéoot Oeots avtixpy pdxeoOa, atap (sc. éxéAeves), Eur. Ph. 1217 ri Ww odk elacas €& edaryyéAou piuns awedGely GAAG (sc. éxeAeves), Soph. O. R. 236 Tov kvdp amavda Toray... &Oeiy 8 adm’ olkwy (sc. addG), Eur. Supp. 467 eye 3d dnavde “Adpacrov cis yay THvde wh mapiéva ei S Eorw xKré. (sc. addo), Soph. E.71 f. nal wh wo &riopov riod amoortelAnte yijs, GAN’ (sc. oréAdere), Hdt. vir. 104 6 vduos. . ov av evyew GAAG (Sc. KeAEUwY), IX. 2 OSE Cov idvar GAAG (sc. kededwr), Pl. Apol. 36 b dueatoas, Gv of woAdot (sc. émmedodvta:). Add Soph. O. R. 818 Sy wh ekeott . .. BOeiv B an’ olkwy (sc. xp), Hdt. v. 82 4 5e MvOin odSérepa tovrwy fa GAAG (sc. exéAeve), VII. 143 of od Ewy... GAA (sc. éxéAevoy). It will be noticed that the range in these passages is limited, and in every case (except Apol. 36 b) the positive is to be supplied after a dis- junctive conjunction. A few cases are cited where adjs. are involved, but here also we find the conjunction. The peculiar passage Eur. O. 717 is different. No example, accordingly, is cited to support the usage of the text (according to Thompson’s view). On the other hand the interpretation APPENDIX. 291 advocated in the text is not free from objections. todvavrioy seems an un- necessarily strong adversative. Perhaps it would be better to consider the passage as a case of colloquial inexactness. 505 a. épmlprdacbar: TS. dumiraacda: B. See Schanz, vol. xii. praef. § 15. 505 c. Kkaradvopev: BT. karaddcouey S after Stephanus. 506 a. dvri: S. a7 BT Cron. See note on 472 a. 506 b. éws .. . dwéSwxa: the construction employed here must be care- fully distinguished from the common use of the aor. indic. after éws of a definite past fact. See GMT. 613, 2 and Am. Jour. Phil. iv. 416 n. 506 c. axPcobycopar: B T eds. ax@écoua: Thompson after Hirschig, on the ground that the longer form is not Attic. 506 ¢. a@dyabd: B. dyad T. ayadd S. 506d. ov to elky: BT. otro cixfj cod. Sauppe S. That etx can be used with an article is proven by the passages quoted by Stallbaum: Phileb. 28 di thy Tod GAdyou Kal cixi ddvayw, Tim. 34 c¢ peréxovtes tod mpootuxdvros te kal eixj. A kindred expression is found Phileb. 45 d jdovds ... 7G opddpa kal rq waAAov brepexovcas. 506 d. xdAXtora: is bracketed by S after Coraés. We could very easily do without it. 508 b. of dOArot GOAvot: S after Heindorf. of &OA101 BT. &OAtoe of BOALK Bekker. Ast and Vahlen both defend the Mss. reading, but unsuccessfully. 508 c. éwi ro Bovdopevw: is bracketed by § after Morstadt, rod é@éAovros by Hirschig. On the ground of meaning and usage the latter is to be pre- ferred. 508 d. daokreitval: BT. droxrewiva S, to avoid change of tense. 509 a. éorw: BT. écrwS after Hermann (éo7:). 509 a. dowep viv: BT. Somep viv byiv Coraés. 509 b. rivadv: BT. riva 5) S after Hirschig. 509 b. tH alexlornv Borfaav: BT. thy aicxiorny t BonGeay S. Mor- stadt brackets rijv aicxicrny — oixelois, Cobet even more. 509 c. rot ddcetv x7é.: on the gen. abs. with the articular inf. see Am. Jour. Phil. iii. 201, where Crito 44 d, Polit. 310 e, Euthyd. 285 d, are cited as being, in addition to the present passages, the only cases in Plato. 510 a. éori: B. éorly TS. 510 a. d&tkroopev: S after Heindorf. aduchowner BT. 510 b. érotpos: S according to the rule of Herodian and other gram- marians. éromds B T. 510 b. éorv dpxwv: Cron seems to consider this a case of participial periphrasis for the verb; but Alexander, in his article, Am. Jour. Phil. iv. 291, does not so regard, or at least does not mention it, and it is more likely from the following adjs. that &pywv is substantival. 510 b. cpotos: S. duos BT. See on érotuos above. 292 APPENDIX. 510 c. ottws: S. ofros B T eds. 510d. ravty: cod. S. air BT, defended by Ast. 510d. d&tkotn, atrq: S with the second Basle ed. &8:xot 9 adr} BT. 5llc¢. cvpPovdrevwv: cod. S after Wyttenbach and Heindorf. guuBovrcdw BT. 511d. tdcdpara «al td xprpara: Packard (Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 1877) considers cdéuara an emphatic repetition of wvxds, the variation in the words being due to the frequency of the phrase cduara al ypiuara. He translates: “The art of navigation, which saves not only lives, but both lives and property.” 5lle. yvvaikas: BT. yuvaika S after Naber. Morstadt brackets «at maidas and xa) yuvaicas, and it must be said that & vuvdy eAeyov, which refers back to cduara in d above, seems to favor this course. 512 a. otf: BTS with Ast and Winckelmann. ofa t codd. 512 a. dvyoe: S after Deuschle. érviceerv BT. dviceev &» Heindorf. 512 ¢. ad tS cavtot: aitds rH cavtod codd. Cron. airs B T. ad S. But there seems to be some need of an antithesis to r@ det abrov. 512d. éorw: TS andeds. écrw B Cron. Cron defends his manner of accentuation on the ground that the emphasis is on 6 éy& Adyw. 512d. yard: Safter Heindorf. 4775B. 7 7dT. 7 rod eds. 512d. py yap: BT. 7% yap S following a suspicion of Ast. «al yap Butt- mann. 75% yap Hermann. fy yap Madvig. 512 e. omwocovdy (érécov 3)): codd. Antoninus 8. éardoov de BT. 512e. Proty: 8. Bin BT Cron. 513 a. ov trois hiAtdrows: the prep. vy is intensely personal, and always involves in the action of the verb the case it governs. In the classic Attic there seems to be no difference in meaning, only one in frequency, between it and werd. It is regularly retained in legal phrases and in old formulae, as here, where the personal idea was originally predominant. Cf. Gildersleeve, pera and ovv, Am. Jour. Phil. viii. 218; Meisterhans,? § 83, 35. 47. 48. 513 b. aodurukds: is bracketed by S after Heindorf and Ast, probably rightly. 513 c. Te adtav ydp Oe: this dat. (equiv. to ‘according to,’) is probably an extension of the dat. of interest ; though Cron, following Kr. 48, 15, 4, looks at it as developed from the side of means. 513 ¢. amodAdkis tows: is bracketed by S; tcws, Schaefer. Ast conjectures that Yows is to be put before reiOqce:. 513d. dvapvycOynri: S. avayv7{o6n7: B Cron. 513 d. @epamevew kal: Oepareverv, xa) S after Stallbaum. This would make éxacrov the object to Oepawevew, and kal odua «ré. in apposition with it,—a view which is held by Schleiermacher and Ast. On the other hand, Kratz agrees with Cron in making €«aqrov the subj. of Oepaweverv. 513 e. co: BT. ool S and eds. with comma before and after ef Bove. APPENDIX. 293 513 e. Oepawevopev: BT. Oepamedouey...S, on the basis of a free ren- dering of Aristides which adds ‘omovdatoy nal raddv. 5l4a. Ompev: BT. gauev S after Madvig. Cf. 481. 514.a. mpdfovres: b S with eds. apdtavres B T Stallbaum, Cron. rdéavres Madvig. This passage has given a great deal of trouble. The Mss. reading seems to be utterly indefensible. Stallbaum, followed by Cron, regards the aor. as ingressive and equiv. to érixephoartes mpatar, but it is very doubtful whether the aor. of wpdrresy can be thus used. No example is cited for it. On the other hand the fut. is not free from criticism. 514 b. ry téexvqv Tf ovK Emordpcba: is omitted by S, being only found on the margin of B T. Heindorf reads jmordueda in both cases, while Cobet omits 4 od« émiorducda. 514 ¢. Sila Sid yov: S after Madvig (5¢ judr). ida quav BT (defended by Ast). da fay Voemel. 81a Auav Heindorf. 514 ¢. dvaov: S. 347r0uv B T Cron. 515 c. wodtrat: S after Hirschig. of woAtras B T. The apposition seems too harsh to be natural. 515 d. val: BTS after Stallbaum. érole: the eds. after Aldus. 515d. dvdyxy: S. avdyxn B T Cron, eds. 516 a. €avrov: is bracketed by S after cod. and Ast, but retained by Cron. 516 b. éaepedero: so B T eds. This is the only passage cited for Plato where this form of the imperf. is found. The evidence of the inscriptions is not conclusive. Meisterhans,? § 63, 4, says that after 380 3.c. the form ém- perctoOat is almost universal (émiéActOq: émmeAcioda:: 4: 84); in regard to the usage before this time, owing to the uncertainty of the orthography, no certain conclusion can be reached. It scems likely, however, that Plato would hardly have varied his usage within six lines (cf. éweuedciro 18 below). In any case, L. Dindorf’s claim that forms of émiméAecOae should be every- where written in Plato is not borne out by inscriptions. 516d. mpoce{npiwrav: BT. mpds eCnutwoay S after Hermann. Cf. Prot. 311 d kal ra Tay hidwy mpocavadrlcxortes. 516 e. év Mapa@ow: BT. Mapadav 8. 517 b. py: BT. od wy S after Madvig. But Schanz repudiates this emendation in Grammatische Bemerkungen Fhein. Mus. xi 152 ff., and now agrees with Ast, who (p. 482) regards woAAod Se? wh as equivalent to od ph with the subjunctive. The similar case in Epist. vii. 344 ¢ he regards as an imitation, and therefore a confirmation, of a manner of expression not found elsewhere in Plato. Rid. § 60 also regards woAAod ye det as a substi- tute for od, giving (in § 259) other examples where moAAod ye de? fill the place of a negative. Cron in his latest edition accedes to this view although in his third edition he looked upon uf with the subjv. as an unusual const. for the simple inf. after 5e7, de? taking the place of a negatived verb of fear. Kiihner § 589, 1, n. 1, says the passage is elliptical, “aber wahrlich es fehlt 294 APPENDIX. viel daran, dasz man besorgt sein sollte, ob nicht Hiner der jetzt Lebenden solche Werke ausfiihren werde.” Goodwin does not treat the question. In spite of the agreement of later editions, Cron seems to have been on the right track in his earlier edition. In the first place the position is against the explana- tion that woAdod ye de? is equivalent to od. Then there is no occasion here for the strong od uy construction. Callicles wants merely to say, “But at least you will admit that the men of the present day are far from being able to accomplish such acts.” The usual const. (itself very rare) after de? in this sense is the infinitive; but the inf. denies the fact, while Callicles would deny the likelihood merely. We have then a shift from the object construc- tion to the final. Similar but not entirely parallel are passages like Phaedo 70 a 7a wep) Tis Wuxts TOAAHY amiotiay mapéxet ToIs avOpdmois, wh ereidav amar- Aayh Tod cdparos, oddapod er: 7, and the use of &nAov wh in Phaedo 91 d. 517d. éorlv: BT. égorw S after Voégelin. 517d. dAN av: codd.S. wAdAwy dv B T (defended by Ast). 7&AAa Hein- dorf after Ficinus. 518 a. wepl capa moayparelas: S after Cobet. wep) coparos mpaypatelay BT Cron. Cron admits that the change is desirable, but contends that it is not necessary. If the traditional reading is kept, oduaros must depend on tmpauaretav, the whole clause meaning, “as regards the treatment of the body.” 518 a. tore: BTS. sroré the eds. 518 a. ore: S after Madvig (Heindorf had already suggested it). 67. BT. 518d. 8y: S after Heindorf. 8 BT. 519d. «al: BT. xairo: S after Heindorf. The zo: might easily have fallen out before tovtou. 52la. KadAlkkas: BT. & KadAtcAers § after codd. and Bekker. 521 b. ef cor Mucov ye WStov Kadeiv xré.. since Bekker, this passage has been explained as in the text. Before him, the editors vexed themselves greatly over it. Heindorf remarks: Locum mendosissimum ‘veri- simillima, opinor, emendatione sanavit Cornarius, cor- rigens, Ei um oo: Mvody yiyvecOa Hdiov Aciay. . Unus tamen in hac lectione verborum ordo non satis placet, propiusque etiam videtur ad veritatem accessisse magnus ille Casaubonus, cuius ex notulis hance correctionem protulit Routhius: Ei wh cow Mucay ye Hdiov elvar Aciav. . . Aela inter Platonicas voces laudatus a Timaeo Lex. p. 174, ubi hance vocem in Platone reperisse se negat Ruhnkenius. Huie igitur sedem suam inventam putamus.’ The sense would then be: “If you do not prefer to fall a prey to the worst of mankind.” 521 b. xproerar: BT. xphonra S. 521 c¢. Soxets, 6 Dwxpares: Stephanus. doxe7 Sdupates BT. Sone? Swepd- tas 5. Bonets, & Séupares, miarevers (for morevew) Heindorf with Aldus and the two Basle editions. : APPENDIX. 295 521d. 6: BT. dy» S with cod. and Heindorf. Cf 486 d. 521 e. dvip: BT. avnp S after Bekker. 521e. Kalatrods ... StadOelpea: is bracketed by S after Cobet. 522 a. davopeiv woret: is bracketed by S after Madvig and Cobet. By means of these omissions the connexion is made more exact, but there is also a loss to the description of several points which could hardly have been added by an interpolator. Madvig declares dopetv rote? to be an idea entirely for- eign to medical theory; but while this may be technically true, the phrase is well adapted to describe that state of feeling into which the patient comes after taking nauseous medicines, the result of which is often choking and gasping. Cy. Rep. viii. 556 d &oOuards re cal dropias peordy. As opposed to this, d:apMeipe: applies to heroic treatment which leaves traces or scars be- hind. The addition of these two varieties to kaka elpyacra certainly gives color to the picture. 522 a. qwopara: S after Bekker. awéuara BT. In his collection of ex- amples, vol. xii. praef. § 2, Schanz shows that rdépuara is found everywhere except in Phaedo 117 b, Gorg. 522 a. 522 a. yidxovv: S. eddxouv B T Cron. 522 a. elelwou: S after codd. Stephanus. efro. BT. 522 a. wocov: S after codd. Dobree. érécov B T Cron. Schanz conjec- tures ri. 522 a. olerOai ye xpyj: has been transferred perhaps to the wrong place in the course of the tradition. It would suit much better at the close of the preceding words of Socrates, but is hardly appropriate in the mouth of Cal- licles after tows. Hence Heindorf and Ast unite it closely with tows. Hir- schig and Cobet omit it. 522 c. év: S after Heindorf and Coraés. é& BT. 522d. ydptis: BT. yap 7S after Cobet. 523 b. of ék paxdpwv: S after Plutarch. é« paxdpwy BT. 523 b. odiow: S after Stobaeus, Plutarch. oply B. cow T. 523 e. éprywov: S. gpnuov B T. See 510 b. 524 ¢. ovAds: is bracketed by S after Heindorf. 524c. Kalxareayora: S. xareaydta BT. xateaydéra re Cron, Thompson. 524 e. ‘PaSdpavOuv: ‘PadduavOuy, of 8 ex tis Eiporns mapa roy Aiaxdy cod. 524. otdav perry vid émopkiay kal dduclas: Lucian probably had this passage in mind in Cataplus c. 24 éxéoa ay tis Suadv wovnpa epydonrar mapa top Biov, Kal Exacrov abrav apavh otlyyara én) ris Wuxis wepipéper. See Kit- tredge, Am. Jour. Phil. vi. 165, and Gildersleeve, Essays and Studies, p. 344. The idea that after death the soul retains marks and scars resulting from evil deeds done in the body is said by Josephus to have been common among the Jews in his day. 525 b. mapaSelypare: S after cod. and Forster. mapdderyud 74 BT. rrapd- Sevyua Eusebius, approved by Cobet. 296 APPENDIX. 525 d. rovrwv tav wapaSetyparwv: Eusebius, Thompson. obs rovtwy Trav mapaderyudtwy B. robs raév wapaderypdtwy T. rodrwy S after Heindorf. témous Tév mapaderypdtwy Madvig. 525 e. ovydp... ols éfqv: is bracketed by S after Morstadt. In favor of the omission is the rather difficult ellipsis, as well as the disagreement of the remark with 473 di duoty a0Alow eddamovertepos otk ky etn, according to which we should have jrrov &6Aws instead of eddapmoverrepos. 526 b. dperyv tiv: cod. S. dperyy BT. 527 a. eldtyytdoets: BS. iadcyyidoers T Cron. See on 486 b. 527 a. «al él koppys dripws: BT. és! «dppns S after Cobet. 527 c. o Adyos: cod. S. 6 ods Adyos B T. 527 d. ward: B T eds. The insertion od ye @appay has caused the editors some trouble in the construction of mardtau. It is easiest and most natural to supply €acev tiva. Stephanus, however, wrote rdrata:. This was objected to by Routh and championed by Van Heusde. It is doubtful whether there is any authority for using the middle in the sense “allow yourself to be,” etc. Cobet also feeling some difficulty proposes to insert mdpexe. But the explanation offered in the note, renders emendations unnecessary. 527d. ds tidvras: S. &s 71 dvtas Cron andeds, Cf. 472 a. GREEK INDEX. [References in brackets are to the Appendix.] GyacGat constructions with 526 a. dyopa 447 a. ayopa ArPouvca local 469 d. aypouxla 461 c. aywv of the human life 526 e. aduxla 478 c. aSvvaros 507 e. acl distributive 486 a. aOpetv construction with 495 b. alo@dveoOar distin- guished from y- yoowev 464 ¢c; with gen. of partic. 481 d. aloxpdv with uf 458 d. alrla 503 b. axk (feoBar 497 a. dxodacralvey rare 478 a. dxoAov8os 477 e. adda, well, then 462 b; where ydp is ex- pected 448 d; in asseverations 481 b. GANG ye 470 d. GAAG ovv 496 d. GAXos excludes 447 ¢, 473 c; generic in sing. 486 a. GAdAo TH, 467 d. dpa with partic. 520 c. auvytos 493 a. audio Byreiv 452 c. dy repeated 447 d, 475 e, 514 d; omitted 452 a, 471 a. dvaBalvew legal 486 b. dvaykatey 472 b. dvaykatos personal constr. 449 c. dvadaPeiv, éravahaPety 488 b. dvappooreiv 482 b. avabéobat ‘take back’ 461 d. avSpetos 494 d. dveSnv 494 e. dvia, dviapos 477 d. dvopodoyoupevas 495 a. ayoovos form 505 b. avr ev Twovety 520 e. dvri for # after paddov 475 d. avTAapBaver Oar 506 a. avrlorpodos 464 b. avtirBévar 461 d. dAdo m™ H dvw kal kdtw 481 e. araywyr 486 a. droits 503 a. aids ottas 468 c. drroBAérrewv els 474 A. ampos 503 d. aaroxadety 512 c. Gmroxaduvrrey of rhe- torical treatment 455 d. Gmoktewvvat form [456 d]. drohapBadve 495 e. Garopety, edrropetv 478 a. Gropeiv qovet charge against Socrates 521 e. arocever Oar 484 a. aropaveio Oa. deponent 526 d. drodotray 489 d. apa inferential 448 a, 487 a, 492 e; post- position, 519 b. apa ‘whether’ 476 a; position 467 e, 472 d. dpa, dpa ov, ap’ otv 450 a, 479 ¢. apety, 492 d, 504 c, 506 d. apOpntiky 450 d. apxew and mdéov éxew 483 d; construc- tions with 488 a. apx7 492 b. aortetos 447 a, 462 e. aripla, dtipos 486 c. av 468 a, 480 e, 500 a. avdynriky 501 d. 297 298 airlka ‘for example’ 472 d, 483 a. avtos ‘the master’ 447 c, 511 e; Kal attos ‘et ipse’ 452 b; gives em- phasis 452 b; re- peats the subj. 482 d; avro neut. emphatic 447 b, 458 a. avrd0ev 470 e. BadAdvrvov 508 e. BaddAavriordpor 508 e. BeBarotc bar 489 a. Biaros 505 d. Blos 486 d. yap gives basis for a following question 449 ©; resumes an interrupted thought [454 ec]. yé position in #...4 clauses 460 a; em- phasizes pronoun 487 b. yévos gens 483 d, yewpérpys ‘mathemati- cian’ 465 b. yeoperpia 508 a. ylyverOar passive of rotety 515 e. ytyveokev — distin- guished from ai- obdverOat 464 c. yontevay 483 e. Yyedppara ‘written laws’ 484 a. ywpvoorov 493 d. Satpovos 456 a. 8€ ‘although ’ 467 d. GREEK INDEX. 8 otv ‘but then’ 513 d. ea, Ce av 458 b, 514 a, 516 b. Sevos 481 d, 499 b. ovSév Sevov py 520 d. Sevtepos ‘second best’ 478 e. Sy ‘just’ 466 b, 485 c. SyAotv = dfaov— elvar 483 d. SyAos personal constr. with 449 ¢. Sqenyopetv, Syunydpos 482 ¢. Snproupyos 447 d, 452 a, 517 d. Sypoorevery 514 d. Syra with imv. 452 ¢. 8a forms adv. phrase 449 «. SraréyerOar 447, 448d, 457 ¢. Sradvewv, Avery 480 € Stapdxer Oar 513 d. Sidvora 514 a. Stamepatvev 451 a. Stappyyvuvar 484 a. StarpiBy 484 e. Stadepovrws construc- tion with 479 e. Stadevyev 473 c, 484 a. SraGeipery 521 e. Stadwveiy 482 b. &SacKaria 501 e. SiSacrKkadtkes with gen. 455 a. Bikalws, dpOas 476 e. Suxatocvvy for otixh 464 c. Sikadrys 508 a. Bikartiky 464 c. Bucy, Tinwpla, 472 d. Otka- typla Sroporoyeio bar 500 e. Sroplteo Bar 457 c. Sotdtev 486 e. Sovdevev 491 e. SotAos used by Gorgias 452 e. Suvapis vis 447 ¢. Suvacrrela, Ttupavvls 492 b. Suvacrrys 525 d. Svoxepalvery 450 e. éav ‘whether ’ 452 ¢. and el after oxdre 510 b. éyxeplBrov 469 d. €Ovos 455 b. el 8€ py phraseological 470a; reg. follows éay pév 502 b. el 84 ‘if really 449 a. el al, kal el [503 a], 509 a. el pr Sid 516 e. elpryelnisi si 480b. el px, elep with fut. indic. 495 a, 509 a. ov oS el haud scio an non 4658 d. otc @’ Sr. parentheti- cal 486 a. elSos 503 e. elS8wdov 463 d. elvat in phrases 499 c. elev ‘very well’ 466 c. q Attic form 488 b. lO, dépe Sy 451 a. elweiv for Adyew 456 ¢; inf. with 473 a. els with watSevew 519 e; with teXeurdy 453 a. é« of origin 523 e. ék tplrev ‘of the third part’ 500 a. éxPodrav, — éxwlarrev 517 a. éxetoe of life beyond the grave, 527 b. é«Adprev poetic 484 a. éxpor rare 494 b. €déyxerv 486 c. épBpaxy 457 a. épreipla, tpiBry 462 c, 463 b. éprdnkros [482 a]. éparopos, karyAos 517 d. év with reAeuray 453 a. év IIvOiov [472 d]. évSecxvivat, aroSeukve- var 484 b, évexa ‘so far as’ 493 e; forms [468 a]. évOaSe of life here 527 b. é€yrav0a with verb of motion 527 c. éfalpvys with partic. 523 e. éfeA€yxew pregnant use of 467 a; with par- tic. 522 d. ts 524 b. émayyeANer Oat ‘adver- tise’ 447 ¢, 458 d. ératew poetic 464 d. évavahaPeiv, dvadaPBetv 488 b. é€ravarryvat 484 a. émel ‘whereas’ 471 d. éwera 461 d. éweEepxer Oar 492 d. éxt of immediate suc- cession, 512 e; with madevew 519 e. é€miSelkvurOar 447 a, b. émdvakplvey 524 a. émekds 493 c. €mtkovupeiv, éartkoupia, 5 émlkoupos 492 ¢. GREEK INDEX. e€murapPaver Oar, avTe- AapPaver Gar 506 a, émumAytrey with dat, 478 e. émuppetv 494 b. érleracbat 484 b. émotypy equiv. to réxvn 449 d; for panos 454 d. émurmSevpa, emiriSevots 463 b. émrpéerey 504 ¢, 517 b. émtxetpety 492 d, 495 c. éredy ‘incantation ’ 484 a. éppatoy 486 e. €ppwpevws compared 483 ¢. ératpela ‘club’ 510 a. ératpos 510 a; com- pared 487 d. étepos generic in sing. 486 a. €v- augmented to nv- [448 c], [459 c]. ev ye 494 c. ed éxeu ‘it is in order’ 455 ¢. ev to6’ ote with inf. 453 a. evepyérys 506 ce. edpovo-la 486 c. evaropeiv, drropetv 478 a. evoypet fave lingua 469 a. €xe 8x 460 a, 490 b. €oxov ingressive 503 e, 519 d. éxovin phrases 490 e. éxréov, oxeTéov 490 c. éxerOar with gen. 499 b. ra. €xopeva 494 d. €x0és, xOés [470 d]. 299 éws constructions with 506 b. {npla, ruyswpla, Slky 472 d. (yprotca. for over- eating 490 ¢. {ov 453 c. 75y ‘at once,” jam 486 e. ySovn, xapts 462 c. 15s ‘naive’ 491 e. 700s 484 d. qkes €xwv 491 c. dépovora 518 d. qAtkla for philosophy 484 c. Odrepov form [475 a]. Ocaral ‘audience’ 502 a. Ogpis 505 d. Ocparreta 464 a. Oepdrevpa, modOnpa 524 b, d. Onpever Oar 464 d. larpevew transitive 478 ¢. larpixy 465 d. t&os followed by 4 481 d. WSudrns 507 4. ixavos 480 a, 484 a. lod lo¥ 499 b. loorns,yeoperpiky 508a. Vows of understatement 473 a. xalopav, dpdv 457 c. «al in questions 455 a; doubled in com- parison 457 e; cli- mactic 511 b; ‘and therefore’ 471 a, 300 kal el, el kal [503 a], 509 a. kal ravra ‘and that too’ 508 a, 526 b. equiv. to xalro. 519 Gc kala, tovnpla 477 b. Kakoupyetv 483 a. kadAwriopata 492 c. Kaddos kayalos [484 d], 518 ¢. kdarmAos, epropos 517 d. kata of the scale 474 d, 512 b. kara with partic. 457 b. karaduvew 485 d. katalewpeto Oar 465 d. katatatety 484 a. karamttouv [478 c]. katapuOpety 451 e. Katackeuy, Tapackeur 477 b. kataxapl{erOor 513 d. karaxpryoGo. ‘use up’ 490 c. KATAXOVVUVaL, ere 512 ¢. kareradSev 483 ec. kepdAaoy without art. 494 d. xrdeoOar 462 a. kapiotixy 502 a. xbapwdla 486 c. kOapwSiky 502 a. kowovrpara 484 d. kotvwvia 507 e. koAafe ‘ discipline ’ 491 e. xodakela 463 b. divisions of 464 a. koAaocts, (npla 472 d. kopav 524 c. obru- koppoticy 468 c. koppos 486 c, 493 a. GREEK INDEX. koppy [486 c]. koopetv, koopos 504 a. KUpos, KUpOUY, Kpwots 450 b. AapBaverv, maparapBa- vey 483 c. Aoytorrixy 450 d. Aoyos in general 457 c; ‘story’ 522 e. Adyos, pv00s 523 a. v0 dowTrov 458 d. Avew, Starvev 480 e. Avery 475 c. -pa termination 524 b. pa 489 e. payyavedipara 484 a. padnots, emiotiy 454 d. alors 454 e. padxap, paxdptos 523 b. & paxdpre 469 c. podtora ‘yes’ 496 d. poddov after comp. 482 ¢. pecpdxrov 485 c, d. pedAdXav tenses with 484 d. épedAov after unreal cond. 486 d. pédos, puOpcs 502 c. pev almost equiv. to pry 466 b. pev ovv 465 ¢. peraBBafew 517 b. peradayxavey rare 447 a. peramlrreyv 493 a. peractpepew absolute 457 a. perarlOerBat 493 c. pexpe 487 c. py with inf. in appos, [449 c]; with subs. inf. 456 e; ‘whether ’ [458 c]; generic 459 a; ab- solute with subjv. 462 e; redundant with &cre 465 a; with pres. indic. 458 c, 512 d; with opt. in question 510 d; with imyv. 489 a. pr ov after aloxvve- oOa 461 b; after neg. 509 a. Hyv equiv. to pévrou 493 ¢. ENXavorotes 512 b. proPodopla 515 e. poppodvrrewv, popped 473 d. pvOoroyeiv 493 a. p000s, Adyos 523 a. picavra 480 c. veavrever Oar 482 c. veavixds 482 c, 485 e. vewortl 503 ¢, 523 b. vukay with acc. 456 a. vopifer Oar 466 b. vopller Oar, xplverbar 483 d. Vopios, vopos 504 d. vopos ‘usage 512d. vopot ‘constitution ’ 484 d. EvpBodrara 484 d. 68 deictic 447 a. olSety 518 e. olpat softens 483 e. olos with inf. 457 d. olos, olos te 452 e. oAlyou ‘almost’ 472 a. omy for sor 456 b. owAopaxla [456 d]. Stas constructions with 481 a; with fut. in- dic. 495 d ; Dawes’ canon 510 a. Sas exe. with part. gen. 470 e. opbas, Stxalws 476 e. GpOais ydp ole. force of 451 a. 6s (dots) BovAa qui- vis 517 b. Soov... xaptv 485 a. Owep for dviep 448 b. Garep A€yw 465 c. dois, os after neg. 447 d, 453 b; condi- tional 483 b. doris BovAa quivis 517 b. 6tu introduces direct speech 521 b. otc” or 486 e. ovx om ‘not but that’ [450 e]. ov adhaerescent 450 d, 459 a; instead of py after dore with inf. 458 e; shifts to pr 459 a. ov of’ ef haud scio an non 458 d. ov wavy [457 e]. ov dup nego 466 e. ovx oT ‘not but that’ [450 e]. ovSapou dy davavar 456 c. ovSels separated 512 e, 519 b, 521 ¢. ovKouy, ovx ov [466 e]. GREEK INDEX. ovAy, wTery 524 c. ovros scornful 452 e, 489 b ; art. omitted with 467 b; posi- tion gives empha- sis 471 a. ovrws ‘under the circumstances’ 461 a, 464 b, 503 d. 6x os ‘ assembly ’ 454 b. twaykpatidtey 456 d. Tabara, Oeparevpara 524 b, d. maQos 481 c. arardela, 470 e. qatSeve els, €rrl 519 e. arar8orplBys, yunvacrys [452 a]. wok. jam diu with pres. 456 a. modaley 456 d. Tmavoupyos 499 b. ov wavu [457 e]. arapa ‘at the hands of’ 467 c; ‘the com- panion of’ 485 ¢; with BeBarotoOat 489 a. mapadiSovar tradere 456 e. mapodapBdavery 483 e, 516 a. mapackevater Oar with inf. 524 d. Taper kevar Bar els 448 d. wapackevacreov mid- dle 507 d. TAPATKET, KATACKEUT 477 b. mavew construction with 523 d. weOw passive 453 a. 301 meaotuKkes 455 a, 493 a; construction with, 455 a. wepl with gen. and acc. 449 d; with acc. after a verb not of action 490 c; with gen. instead of acc. 451 d, 491 a. mrepueva 490 d. mrepirarety 490 d. mreptovaacbatr 486 c. trepipe per Oar els TauTo 517 ¢. mwerrevtixr 450 d; the Adyos element in [450 dj. alotis, pobnots 454 e. amdarrew 483 e. awcoventetv 483 c. of «mdéovres ‘ mer- chants’ 467 d. adnOos equiv. to éxxAn- ola 456 ¢c. wAqv with q instead of gen. 489 c. motkiAla of Plato 451 b. arotos contemptuous 490 d; equiv. to tls 453 ¢. wodlrns ‘statesman’ 515 ¢. moAdov ye Set followed by py [517 a]. movypla, kakla 477 b. mropl{er a1 middle 493 e. wpaypo. ‘business’ 512 c. Tpdypara Xe, wa- pexew 467 d. TA avTOU mpdrre 526 c. awply constructions with 463 ¢. mpodibacrkev 489 d. tmpoec Pat 520 c. 302 wpos final 457 e; ‘to the advantage of’ 459 c; adverbial, 469 b; ‘at the hands of’ 482 ¢c; pregnant 483 b; with redXevray 453 a. mpoverradpevy 511 d. muxtevey 456 d. (dB50s, oKyTTpov 526 c. Pypa 489 b, 490 a. PyTopixy a species of * art 449 a; wedodts Snprovpyos[453 a]; a more complete definition of 455 a; a kind of dywvla 456 d. puvOpos, peAos 502 c. oabpos 479 b. cepvos 502 a. oKyTTpov, PaBSos 526 c. okodtov [451 e]. okore with el, éav 510 b. oxvtodepos 517 e. coditer Oar 497 a. cwodov 483 a. omovdafeyv pf. equiv. to pres. [502 b]; érl rive 502 b. oreyaves 493 b. oteva 497 c. orox adler Par 465 a. oroxactiKky 463 a. ovykatarlGer Bat 501 c. ovAdoylLer Gar 479 c. oupBalvev 484 e. Ta cupBalvovra ‘the results ’ 479 c. ovpnos 500 a. GREEK INDEX. ovv ‘at the risk of’ 513 a. cuvade 461 a. ouvleracbat 504 a. ovvoikeiv 479 b. ovvovcla ‘meeting’ 461 b. ovvrelvey 507 d. aupdetos 489 c. odds atrods indir. ref. 519 ¢. oparrey, droKkrevivat 468 c. adoSpa ye 496 d. oxedov tt softens 472 c. twas axeSdv kal awuxvovs 455 c. oxetrtos 467 b. oxypa Kad’ Sdov Kal pépos 524 a, 525 c. éoxnpariopéevy O11 d. cwdpovitew 478 d. cwdpooivy 507 b. ocudpwv 526 c. Trav equiv. to To. av 452 b. vé postscript [470 a]. te... kal connect opposites 450 a. redevtav els, ev, mpds 453 a. vépver Gar 508 e. téxvy for Snprovpyos 454 a. texvixos 500 a. secari rBecbar, Teva vopov 483 b. ryt 497 b. tipwpla, Slkn 472 d. tls ‘a sort of’ 491 c, 520 a. tiadv. acc. 453 a, 459 c. tls, motos 453 c. wl 8 robe 474 d. tl S€ tovro [448 b]. tl rotto 473 e. tl ov with aor. 503 b. tlhraxa Spdrets 466 a. 70, Ta With gen. 450 c, 453 e. Tovydapror 494 d. tpiBy, épretpla 463 b. tupavls, Suvacrela 492 b. vyyjs 495 e; form [467 b]. vcs forms of [461 b]. umdpxew 456 e, 492 b. vmép ‘in the name of’ 615 ¢. Umeppurs 467 b; form [467 b]. Uweppuns os 477 d. Umepwrav 483 a. Urooxetv Adyov 465 a. Uanperetv 492 a. tro with = yiyveo Oar 515 e. vu ‘somewhat’ 493 c. trodtoa 464 c. vrobects 454 c. vmoxeio Bar 465 b. urovoeiv 454 c. vmorelver Oar 448 e. trovdos 480 b, 518 e. Ybayrikararos 490 d. unyetobar 458 pb. davetobar, drrodavei- oar 526 a. dypl with or 487 d; with partic. [481 c]; &pys, epyoba [466 e]. ov py nego 466 e. gappaxls, cdappakeverv 518 a. hépe 84 449 c, 451 a. drovixety 457 d. by Kehadry 515 c. drvapeis eExwv 490 d. oPeio Gar constructions with 457 e. dourdy ‘to go to school’ 456 d. dopo 519 a. doptikds 482 e. dpovipos 489 e. dvors 465 c. XapaSpids 494 b. xapts, 7Sov7 462 c. GREEK INDEX. Xpryv, €See construction with 458 b. edArl{eoOar 485 b. WevSos 505 e. & ayabé 506 c. BéAtiote avSpav 515 a. kdddore 461 c. pardpre 469 c. coddrate o¥ 495 d. by Kepadry 515 c. ws causal 509 e, 521 b; with gen. abs, 484 ¢; with acc. abs. 488 c; 491 a. 303 ds ye... elvat 517 b. ds yé por Soxety 482 d. ds 8 cd ovK dv 8€- favo [468 e]. dis Eros elrretv 450 D. ds... elpijo Oar 462 b. domep dv el 453 c, 479 a; with nom. instead of oblique case 464 d. ovx domep condensed 522 a. dore with indic. 447 b, [458 d]; omitted 479 a; with inf. [479 a]. oredr, OVA 524 c. ENGLISH INDEX. Accusative, adverbial 452 c, 459 c, 477 d, 494 a; absolute 491 a; agent with verbals 481 a, 507 c; in apposition [477 d]; cognate with vucav 456 a; specifi- cation, 464 a; ‘free’ 509d; for gen. after wept 490 c, 521 d; with inf. substan- tival, tendential [479 a]. Active and passive des- ' ignations of the same idea 457 ec, 524 d. Adjective, personal con- str. of with inf. 449 c; agrees with a following gen. in gender 519 e. Adverb, place where for place whither 456 b, 527¢; as adj. 520a; of time (dpa) with partic. 520 c, 528 e; with art. 506 d. Adverbial acc. 452 vu, 459 c, 477 d, 494 a. Aeacus 5238 e. Afterthought 5138 e. Alcibiades 481 d. Amendment to a bill 451 b. 304 499 b, Amphion 485 e, 506 b. Anacoluthon454b,470a, 500 ¢, 501 a, 503 c. Anaphora 464 b. Anaxagoras 465 d. Andron 487 ce. Anticipation of the subj. 449 e, 453 b. Antisthenes 492 e. Aorist and imperf. of same sphere of time 447d; gnomic 484a, 511 d, 524 e; and pf. in verbs of per- ception 497 e; par- tic. not antecedent, 491 ¢. Apodosis omitted 456 a, 510 d. Aposiopesis 467 b. Apposition to sentence 447 a, 507 e; parti- tive 450 ¢, 503 d, 524 d. Archelaus, life 470 d; disregard of moral obligations 471 b; strength of will 471 ¢. Arion 501 e. Aristides 503 ¢, 526 b Aristocrates 472 a. Aristophon 448 b, Article, omission of 452 d, 453 e, 469 e, 470 e, [482 b]; in enumerations 450d, 508 a; _ inserted, 464 a, 470 d; re- peated 479 a; with otros 502 b; with incorporated antec. 469 a; classifies 490 e, 497 e; de- fines subj. 476 d; with adv. 506 d; neut. with gen.450c, 453 e; dual form, 524 a. Asphodel meadow 524 a. Assimilation,case 491 a; neglect of 503 ec. Assonance 492 b. Asyndeton [456e],496d, 520 a; explanatory 450 b, 477 a, 513 a; of opposites 456 e; in question 489 b, e; with érera 461 b; with do-amep 448 e. Athenian judicial sys- tem 451 a, 471e. Athenians, lazy, timid, loquacious, merce- nary 515 e. Athens, wodts dtAcAo- yos 461 e; walls and navy - yards [455 a]. Attraction of case 464 d, 477 d, 509 a; of subj. 483 4d; of mood 621 ¢. Brachylogy 465 a, 493 d, 515 d. Callicles, character 481 b; irritation 491 a; irony 492c; rudeness 497 b, 498 b. Case, same with differ- ent verbs 493 ¢, 527 d; assimilation 491 a; attraction 464 d, 477 d, 509 a. Chiasmus, 453 d, 474 e, 493 c, 498 d, 508 b, 509 e. Choregia 472 a, 482 b. Chorus 501 e. Cimon 516 d. Cinesias 501 e. Cithara-playing 501 e. Cognate acc. with v«dy 456 a. Comparison with domep 464 d; with mpds, copula omitted 465 b; omission of second member 468 b; to a child 479 a, 485 b, 499 b; to a wild beast 483 e; body to tomb 493 a, to a jar 493 b, to a sieve 493 c; Adyos to a guide 527 e. Compression 455e, 456 a, 522 a. See Bra- chylogy. Conditional, variation in 458 a; doubling of one member 453 c, 468 d; un- real 471 a; mina- ENGLISH INDEX. tory 509 a; nega- tive 490 a. Construction, ad sen- sum 451 c¢, 460 e, 467 e; shift in 483 e. Cookery 518 b. Co-ordination for subor- dination 460d,525b. Copula omitted 465 b, 472 d, 502 b; in first and second person 487 d. Cynic school 492 e. Dative with nouns 513b; instrumental 469 c; cause 490 c; ac- companiment 492d; ethical 480 e, 515c¢; predicate 525 b. Dawes’ canon 510 a. Dead, judgmentof 523b. Death 522 e, 524 b. Demonstrative for rel. 468 d. Demus 481 d. Dionysion 472 a. Dithyrambic 501 e. Double expressions, gen- eral precedes spe- cial 447 a; adjec- tives 465 b; nega- tives 461 b. Dual, artistic use of 464 b; forms of art. 524 a. poetry Earth, two parts 523 e. Eleusinian Mysteries 497 c. Empedocles 493 a, 507 e. Epicharmus 505 e. Epiphora 500 a. 805 Euripides quoted 484 e, 485 e, 492 e. Explanatory equiv. to causal 449 d. Fate, belief in 512 e. Figure of the hunt 464d. Flute-playing 501 d. Future, two sides of 447 b; in neg. ques- tions 466 e; middle as passive 509 d, 521 e; optative 482 d. Future perfect, 469 d, 510 e. Genitive comparative 479 b; characteris- tic 482 a; epexe- getic 521 a, 526 a; free 509 d; of part affected 469 d; par- titive with phrases 470 e, 480 c, 507 d; with wéppw 486 a, ev0y 525 a; with riOévat 500 b; pos- sessive 500 a, 504 e; terminal 487e; with adverbs 507 d; with verbs of perception 519 b; with ém- AapBdver Oar 469 c, 519 a; with Oavpd- few 523 d. Gorgias, boastfulness 449 b; mannerisms [448c]; oaths463d; as mediator 497 b, 506 a. Herodicus 448 b. Hippias of Elis 482 e. 306 Homer quoted 485 d, 516 c, 623 a, 526 d. Homoioteleuton 473 c. Hoplomachia [456 d]. Hyperbaton 469 d. Hysteron proteron 474a. Imperative, positive, negative470c,489a. Imperfect, distributes 447 c; of awaken- ing 478 ¢c; resolved 453 d. Indicative after cxoreiv 458 c; absolute with py 512 d. Infinitive with row 457 e; epexegetic 486 c, 493 ec; articular 447 c; after ev to dr 453 a. Interrogative veils state- ment 470 a; lost in affirmation, 470 a. Intransitive used pas- sively 472 a. Isles of the Blessed 5238 b. Law, natural, conven- tional 482 e. Litotes 457 a. Marathon, victors at 616 d. Mathematics 465 b. Medicine 455 b. Meles 501 e. Menelaus 523 b. Metaphor of a horse 482 e; hunt 489b; mysteries 497 c; bow 507 d; bank- ruptey 618 4d; games 526 e. ENGLISH INDEX. Middle for active, 484 b. Miltiades 516 d. Minos 523 e. Mithaecus 518 b. Musical terms 457 e. Mysian slaves 521 b. Nausicydes 487 c. Neuter for masc. fem. 448 b, 465 d, 478 ¢; plural for two fems. 509 e; generalizes 520 b. Nicias 472 a. Oaths of Socrates 449 d, 461 b, 463 d; Gorgias, Polus, Cal- licles 463 d. Odd and even numbers 451 ¢. Optative 447 c; in em- phatic denial 458 c; by attraction 521 c. Oratory, three divisions of 452 e. Ostracism 516 d. Oxymoron 487 b. Participial clause as addendum 479 b; periphrases 525 d. Participle contains lead- ing idea 453 b, 459 e, 486 d; a real adj. 470 d; apposi- tional 507 d; acc. abs. in apposition 501 b; omitted in acc. abs. 495 ¢; epexegetic 613 e; predicate 500 c¢; connected with verb of preceding clause 511 c; supplement- ary 470 c; heaping up of [471 b], 483 e; gives result of the verb 510 d; with verbs of per- ception 519 b. Perdiccas 471 ¢. Perfect for pres. 502 b; and aor. of verbs of perception 497 e. Pericles 472 a, 503 ¢, 515 e, 516 a. Personal, shift to ma- terial 469 a, 482 b. Personal constr. of adj. 448 d, 449 c. Personal pronoun for reflexive 468 4d; emphasizes reflex- ive 480 a. Philolaus 493 a. Philosophy deals with principles 465 c. Phrase el 8€ px 470 a; €xO€s te kal mpanv 470 d; varepdbuts os 4717 d; dvw «al kdro 481 e; kes éxwv 491 c; ed tod’ én 453 a; ocodpara kal xprpara 511 d. Physicians [455 bj], 456 b. Pindar quoted 484 b. Plural follows sing. 457 d; followed by sing. 480 c; by dual 481 d; indefinite, 484 ¢; of neuter adj. 512 b. Polus, book of, 448 ¢c; desires admiration 448 b; pushing na- ture of, 448 a, 461 b; name 463 e, [471 b]; oaths 463 d; laughter 473 e; attempts proof 471 c; self-assurance 473 a; evades an- swer 470 b; cham- pion of the masses 475 d. Position, 484 c. Possessive pron. for per- sonal gen. 486 a. Preposition omitted with rel. 453 e. Present, habit, aor., case 462 d; in accusa- tions 486 a; with verbs of perception 503 ¢; for fut. 505 c. Prolepsis 449 e, 453 b, 491 a, 513 e. Prometheus 523 d. Pronoun, same with different references 468 c; need not be repeated with a se- ries of verbs, 493 ¢, 527 d; neut. pos- sessive with art. equiv. to pers. 458 d; possessive fol- lowed by gen. 515 b; personal for refi. 468 4d; _ personal emphasizes refl. 480 @; possessive equiv. to pers. gen. 486 a; indef. with numeral 471 e. Protagoras 520 c. Proverbs, xatomv éop- rhetorical ENGLISH INDEX. tys 447 a; Sls Kal tpls 498 e€; To Ta- pov ev trovety 499 c ; Béxer0ar to 8180- pevov 499 c; 6 Opotos TH spolw 510 b; tov Kodo- dava émuTbévar 505 d; 6 Aeydpevos ypaav vOAos 527 a; Moc av éoxaros 521 b; év to wl8w trv kepapeiay 514 e. Punishments [473 ce]; terror theory of 525 b. Pythagoras 507 e, 525 b. Question, rhetorical 453 b, 480 b; gives challenge 468 c; has neg. force 471 d; postponed for emphasis 496 c. Relative, shift to dem. 452 d, 482 b, 507 d; dors after indef. 483 b; as aconnec- tive 492 b; clause precedes _antece- dent 511 c. Rhadamanthys 523 b. Right, positive, conven- tional 482 e. Sarambus 518 b. Scolion [451 e]. Shift from rel. to dem. 452 d, 482 b, 507 d; from impersonal to pers. 492 b; from masc. to neut. 448 b, 469 a, 482 b; 307 from indic. to inf. (indir. disc.) 517 d; from inf. to partic. 521 a. Singular verb after pl. subj. 480 c¢; of GAXos, « étepos, tis used _— generically 486 a; for pl. 486 d, 508 b. Sisyphus 625 e. Slaves, treatment of sick 514 d. Socrates’ life principle 469 b; faith in truth 473 b; oaths 449 d, 461 b, 463 4; story of senatorship 473 e; courtesy, 447 c, 462 e; irony 486 d, 487 a, 490d, 497 c. Sophists claim wisdom, 527 a. Soul, three parts 493 a; immoral condition, 525 a; incurable 525 ¢. Spartan party at Athens 515 e. Subject, change of 464 a; unexpressed 465 ¢. Superlative compared, 509 a; with gen. 484 e. Surgery 456 b; analo- gous to justice 476 ¢. Tacitus quotes 524 e. Tantalus 525 e. Thearion 518 b. 308 Themistocles [455 d], 603 c, 516 d. Theodorus 465 b. Theogony of Socrates 523 a. Thessalian soothsayers 5138 a. Tisander 487 c. Tityus 525 e. Tmesis 506 a. ENGLISH INDEX. Understatement [472 a], 473 a, 480 a. Verb, intr. with pers. pass. 472 a; com- pound often meta- phorical, 473 c; simple follows com- pound 6526 a; omitted 524 b. Verbal in mid. 607 d. Voyage, cost of 511 d. sense Women, conservatism of 512 e; in theatre 502 d. Zeugma 471 d, 504 a, 520 b. Zeuxis 453 c. ADVERTISEMENTS COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS. EDITED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF Joun WiLiiaMs WuitE, Professor of Greek in Harvard University, and Tuomas D. Seymour, Hillhouse Professor of the Greek Language and Literature in Yale College. With the codperation of eminent scholars, each of whom is re- sponsible for the details of the work in the volume which he edits. HIS series is intended to include the works either entire or selected of all the Greek authors suitable to be read in American colleges. The volumes contain an Introduction, Text, Notes, Rhythmical Schemes where necessary, an Appendix including a brief bibliography and critical notes, and a full Index. In accordance with the prevailing desire of teachers, the notes are placed below the text; but in order to accom- modate all, and, in particular, to provide for examinations, the text is printed and bound separately. In form the volumes are a square 12mo. Large Porson type and clear diacritical marks emphasize distinctions and minimize the strain upon the student’s eyes. Special Notice. —Text Editions of the College Series of Greek Authors can be had separately at forty cents each. Any professor can have free as many copies of the text as his class is using of the text and notes, these to be the property of the college and to be retained in the custody of the professor. The stock will be replenished from time to time as copies are worn out, the understanding being, of course, that no more copies of the text will be called for than are used of the text and notes. The following volumes are ready: Aeschines against Ctesiphon (‘‘0n the Crown’’). Edited on the basis of Weidner’s edition, by Professor Rurus B. Ricnarpson, for- merly of Dartmouth College. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 279 pages. $1.40. Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound, and the Fragments of Prometheus Loosed. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by N. Wecxretn, Rector of Maximilian Gymnasium in Munich. Translated by Professor F. D. Auten, of Harvard University. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 178 pages. $1.40. Aristophanes, Clouds. Edited on the basis of Kock’s edition by Professor M. W. Humrureys, of the University of Virginia. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 252 pages. $1.40. COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS. Euripides, Bacchantes. Edited on the basis of Wecklein’s edition, by Professor I. T. Becxwiru, of Trinity College. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 146 pages. $1.25. Euripides, /phigenia among the Taurians. Edited by Professor Isaac Frace, of the University of California. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 197 pages. $1.40. Homer. /ntroduction to the Language and Verse of Homer. By Professor Seymour, of Yale College. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 104 pages. 75 cents. Homer, //iad, Books /.-///. Edited on the basis of the Ameis-Hentze edition, by Professor Seymour, of Yale College. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 235 pages. $1.40. Homer, //iad, Books /V.-VI. Edited on the basis of the Ameis-Hentze edition, by Professor Seymour, of Yale College. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 213 pages. $1.40. Homer, Odyssey, Books /.-1V. Edited on the basis of the Ameis-Hentze edition, by Professor B. Perrin, of Yale College. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 229 pages. $1.40. Homer, Odyssey, Books V.-Vi//. Edited on the basis of the Ameis-Hentze edition, by Professor B. Perrin. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 186 pages. $1.40. Lysias. Eight Orations. Edited by Assistant Professor Morris H. Morean, of Harvard University. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. liii+223 pages. $1.40. Plato, Apology and Crito. Edited on the basis of Cron’s edition, by Professor Louis Dyer, of Cornell University. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 204 pages. $1.40. Plato, Gorgias. Edited on the basis of the Deuschle-Cron edition, by GonzaLez Lovee, Associate Professor in Bryn Mawr College. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 308 pages. $1.65. Plato, Protagoras. The commentary of Sauppe translated with additions, by Professor J. A. Towe, formerly of Iowa College. Sq.12mo. Cloth. 179 pages. $1.25. Sophocles, Antigone. Edited on the basis of Wolff's edition, by Professor M. L. D’Oocer, of the University of Michigan. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 196 pages. $1.40. COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS. Thucydides, Book /. Edited on the basis of Classen’s edition, by the late Professor C. D. Morris, formerly of Johns Hopkins University. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 349 pages. $1.65. Thucydides, Book ///. Edited on the basis of Classen’s edition, by Professor Caartes Forster Smitu, of the University of Wisconsin. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 320 pages. $1.65. Thucydides, Book V. Edited on the basis of Classen’s edition, by Professor Harotp Norru Fow er, of Western Reserve University. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 213 pages. $1.40. Thucydides, Book Vil. Edited on the basis of Classen’s edition, by Professor CuarLes Forster Smitu. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 202 pages. $1.40. Xenophon, Hellenica /.-/V. Edited on the basis of Biichsenschiitz’s edition, by Professor J. Irvinc Manatt, of Brown University. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. xxiiit 286 pages. $1.65. Xenophon, dHellenica V.-Vil. Edited on the basis of Biichsenschiitz’s edition, by Professor Cuartes E. Bennett, of Cornell University. Sq. 12mo. Cloth. 240 pages. $1.40. The following volumes are in preparation: Aeschylus, Persians; Andocides; Aristophanes, Birds and Knights; Demos- thenes, Private Orations ; Euripides, Alcestis ; Herodotus; Homer, /liad and Odyssey ; Lucian, Selected Dialogues; Lycurgus; Plato, Laches and Euthyphro; Plutarch, Selected Lives ; Theocritus; Thucydides; Xenophon, Memorabilia ; New Testament, The Gospel of John and Acts of the Apostles. GINN & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS, Boston. New York. Chicago. Atlanta. Allen: Medea of Euripides. Baird: Greek-English AWord-List 3 Collar and Daniell: Beginner’s Greek Composition s Flagg: Hellenic Orations of Demosthenes Goodwin: Greek Grammar (Rev. Ed.) Goodwin & White: New Anabasis, 1 with Mustrated Vocabulary Greek School Classics Series : Bain’s Odyssey, Book VI. , Ho: Jeb Lei Misi New Greek Lessons . Liddell & Scott: Greek English Lexicon, ‘$9. 40; Abridged Parsons: Cebes’ Tablet . GREEK TEXT-BOOKS. INTROD. PRICE. a as BL Seven against Thebes, $1.00; Anacreontics . Greek Moods and Tenses (Rev. Ed. y Greek Reader WORE oo bbe akSes SRSSSSSRSERS Selections from Xenophon and Herodotus Gleason’s Gate to the Anabasis Sewall’s Timon of Lucian . . The Irregular Verbs of Attic Greek Introduction to the Study of Homer Bt ee Seymour : Homer’s Iliad (School Edition) with Vocabulary, Sid Greek Prose Composition Tarbell: Philippics of Demosthenes . ‘ Tyler : Selections from Greek Lyric Poets |. ‘i White: Beginner’s Greek Book, $1.50; First Lessons 4 White & Morgan: Whiton: Orations of Lysias . College Series. Books I.-III., $1.25; Books I.-V Language and Verse of Homer. Pace 60 cts. ; “Cloth Homeric Vocabulary, 75 cts. ; pelected Were of Pindar Oedipus Tyrannus of Sophocles <8 ae for Translation at Sn, Part IV. nabasis Dictionary . . ‘ SRSESSSE8as Allen: Wecklein’s Prometheus Bound of t Aeschylus, ‘1. 40. Beckwith: Bacchantes of Euripides, $1.25 Bennett: Xenophon’s Hellenica, Books V. -VIL., $1.40. D’Ooge: Antigone of Sophocles, $1.40. Dyer: Plato’s Apology and Crito, $1.40. Flagg: Euripides’ Iphigenia amnene | the Taurians, $1.40. Fowler: Thucydides, Book V., Humphreys: Clouds of cies $1.40. Lodge: Gorgias of Plato, $1.65. Manatt: Xenophon’s Hellenica, Books I.-IV., $1.65. Morgan: Eight Orations of Lysias, $1.40. Morris: Thucydides, Book I., $1.65. era: Homer’s Odyssey, Books I. -IV., $1.40; Books V.-VIIL., p1.40. Richardson: Aeschines against Ctesiphon, $1.40. Seymour: Homer’s Iliad, Books I.-III., $1.40; Books IV.-VI., $1.40. Smith: Thucydides, Book TII., $1.65; Book VIL, $1.40. Towle: Protagoras of Plato, $1.25. Editions of the Text are issued separately. Each, 40 cents. Copies sent to Teachers for Examination, with a view to Introduction, on receipt of Introductory Price. The above list is not quite complete. CINN & COMPANY, Publishers, Boston. New York. Chicago. Atlanta,