.... .-...". .-.... 3OL BOOKS, PUBLISHED BY Roman Geography. Edited by Dr. William Smith. In Quarterly Parts. Part VI mice 4s was Published April 1, 1853. | This work is written by the principal contributors to the Dictionaries of I eek and Roman Antiquities, and Biography and Mythology, and will complete the series of Classical Dictionaries. The three works will then form an Encyclopaedia of Classical Antiquity. Although, for the sake of uni- forrmty, ,t ,s called a Dict.onary of Greek and Roman Geography, it will be "reality a Dictionary of Ancient Geography including even Scriptural names Ihe work will, of course, not be confined to a barren description of the geogra- phy of. countries and of the sites of places; but it will also include an Account [ of the political history, both of countries and of cities. An attempt will like wise be made to trace, as far as possible, the history of the more important! buddings of the cities, and to give an account of their present condition wher- ever they exist The Illustrations will consist of plans of cities, districts, bat- I es &c and of corns of the more important places. It is intended to publish, will t, n 10 ' ' ^torrcal Atlas of Ancient Geography," which . so called, on account of its containing, in many cases, several maps of - came countrv* in nrnpr tn mva n W A AI. J._ A - ? ., j-n- or it at different Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, by various Writers ^- This work written by the editor in conjunction with seventeen other gentle te^jasSSSffiSSS I" , /G T"' 'f R "" "" U ?*' "' f '" M lifc . ""<> "- P S , So , I ESSS^.J 1 S=!CSSS5 sSS^.asrttfflliaS*? BMltmg a large number of costly or untranslated works ! -^.su" s,^;i f ;; ; = - ; r TS,^: ^ ^^T.^y-j^^^^^, S$Ss$s;3sz >m " " igl "" - >' : i to the use of junior pupils, the results of i -11 , , .", * " buo .iiLicies as are been .Hustrated by wood-cuts from ancient works of art. WALTON AND MABERLY. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Edited by William Smith, LL.D. Medium 8vo. 3 vols. 51. 15s. tid. Each volume may be had separately. The period comprehended ill this history of remarkable individuals, real or ideal, is from the earliest times to the fall of the Eastern Empire, in 1453. The work is the result of the joint labours of twenty-nine writers, whose names are attached to their respective articles, the divisions of subjects having been severally allotted to such of the contributors as had made them more or less their peculiar study. Copious accounts are given of the writings of mathematicians, jurists, physicians, historians, poets, philosophers, and orators. The Latin and Greek Christian fathers also occupy considerable space ; and the lives of painters, sculptors, and architects, contain details, useful to the artist, of all their works still extant, or of which there is any record in ancient writers. In fact, the work exhibits a view of the whole circle of ancient history and literature for upwards of two thousand years. It is embellished, whenever possible, by wood-cuts, taken from ancient coins. Extensive chro- nological tables of Greek and Roman history are added ; and a table exhibiting at a glance the years B.C. or A.D. corresponding to any given A.U.C. or olym- piad. A Smaller Classical Dictionary of Biography, Mythology and Geography. Abridged from the larger Dictionary. By William Smith, LL.D. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. cloth. In this work all names have been inserted which a young person would be likely to meet with at the commencement of his classical studies. Tl: quantities have been carefully marked, and the genitive cases inserted. Care has been taken not to presume too much on the knowledge of the reader; the work may therefore be used with advantage by persons unacquainted with the classics. The mythological articles are illustrated by drawings from ancient works of art. A New Classical Dictionary of Ancient Biography, Mythology, and Geography, Edited by Dr. William Smith. One vol. 8vo. 15s. This work comprises the same subjects as are contained in the well-known Dictionary of Lemprifere, avoiding its errors, supplying its deficiencies, and exhibiting in a concise form the residts of the labours of modern scholars. In addition to the names mentioned in Classical writers, the most distinguished Greek and Latin Fathers are noticed, and accounts are given of many places referred to in Scripture. It thus forms a most useful help both for the junior student and the general reader." Lexicon to Aeschylus, containing a Critical Explanation of the more difficult Passages in the Seven Tragedies. By the Rev. W. Linwood, A.M. 8vo. 12s. cloth. The object of this work, besides furnishing an interpretation of the words and ordinary phraseology of the author, is to explain the difficulties of the text. ' A A T O N APOLOGY OF SOCRATES CR1TO ETC LONDON: PRINTED BT J. WERTHEIMEK AND CO., F1NSBPRY CIRCCS. HAAT12N THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES THE CRITO AND PART OF THE PH^EDO WITH NOTES FROM STALLBAUJI SCHLEIERMACHEK'S INTRODUCTIONS A LIFE OF SOCRATES AND SCHLEIERMACHER'S ESSAY ON THE WORTH OF SOCRATES AS A PHILOSOPHER Secant) EUttion HcbtscD LONDON TAYLOR WALTON AND MABERLY UPPER COWER STREET AND IVY LANE PATERNOSTER ROW. MDCCCLII AfWMX 5 3SS CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION TO THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES . . xi THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE CRITO ...... 59 THE CRITO 65 NOTES ON THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES . . . .95 NOTES ON THE CRITO ....... 147 PART OF THE PH^IDO 183 ISOTES OX THE PH^EDO 193 PREFACE. THE text of the following edition of the Apology of Socrates, the Crito, and part of the Phsedo, is a reprint from that of Stallbaum's. The whole of his notes, which have been translated for this edition by Mr. Gillespie, A.M. of Trinity College, Dublin, are given with a few unimportant ex- ceptions. The notes on the various readings are placed at the foot of the page, and those of an explanatory nature at the end of the volume. The Latin abbreviations used to denote the MSS. are those of Bekker's edition. It has been justly considered by many scholars that the Apology of Socrates and the Crito might be read with great advantage in the higher classes of our schools, and it has been partly with the view of supplying a suitable edition for such a purpose that I have been induced to edit the following pages. The Apology and the Crito are written in an easy style, and are almost entirely Vlll PREFACE. free from those philosophical discussions, which render the greater part of Plato's writings un- suitable for the use of schools. They also form the best introduction to the study of Plato, from the information they convey respecting the life and character of Socrates, of which it is necessary to have some knowledge in order to understand many parts of Plato's writings The extracts from the Phsedo, which contain an account of the death of Socrates, are inserted at the suggestion of Professor Maiden, in order to give a complete account of the last days of Socrates. I have to express my obligations to the Eev. Connop Thirlwall for his kindness in allowing me to make use of his translation of Schleiermacher's Introduction to the Apology, which was originally published in the Philological Museum. WILLIAM SMITH. London, April "2nd, 1840. IIAATftNOS SOKPATOYS AIIOAOriA, SCHLEIERMACHER'S INTRODUCTION APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 1 HAVE already observed, in the general Introduc- tion of this translation of Plato, that the reader is not to conclude, because certain works are placed in an appendix, that by this I mean to deny or to call in question with regard to all of them, that they are writings of Plato. My only reason for assigning such a place to the following work which has been at all times loved and admired for the spirit that breathes through it, and the image it presents of calm moral dignity and beauty, was in the first instance that it contents itself with its particular object, and makes no pretensions to the title of a scientific work. It is true that the Eu- thyphron likewise has unquestionably an apolo- getic reference to the charge brought against So- crates; but on the other hand its connection with the notions started in the Protagoras, clearly en- titled it to be subjoined to that dialogue. But the xii INTRODUCTION TO THE Apology is so purely an occasional piece, tliat it can find no place in the series of its author's phi- losophical productions. Yet there is certainly one sense, in which, let not the reader be startled, one might perhaps say that it is not a work of Plato's. I mean that it can scarcely be a work of his thoughts, a thing which he invented and fabri- cated. For if we attribute to Plato the intention of defending Socrates, we must first of all distin- guish the times at which he might have done it, either during his process, or subsequently, no matter how soon or how late, to his execution. Now in the latter case Plato could only have pro- posed to vindicate the principles and sentiments of his friend and master. But this vindication he, who was so fond of combining several ends in one work, might easily have coupled with his scientific views: and accordingly we not only find detached intimations of this kind scattered over his later writings, but we shall soon be introduced to an important work, one which cannot be denied to be closely enough interwoven with his scientific spe- culations, in which a collateral object, but one made distinctly prominent, is to place the conduct and virtue of Socrates as an Athenian citizen in a clear light. Now this is intelligible enough : but Plato could scarcely have found any inducement at a later period to compose a work which merelv confronts Socrates with his actual accusers. It must have been then during the process that he APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. xiii wrote this speech. But for what purpose? It is manifest that he could have rendered his master no worse service, than if, before he had defended himself in court, he had published a defence under his name, just as if to help the prosecutors to the arguments which it would be their business to parry or to elude, and to place the defendant in the difficult situation of being reduced either to repeat much that had been said before, or to say something less forcible. Hence the more excel- lent and the better suited to the character of So- crates the defence might be, the more harm it would have done to him. But this is a supposi- tion which will scarcely be maintained. After the decision of the cause there were two purposes which Plato might have had, either that of making the course of the proceedings more generally known at the time, and of framing a memorial of them for posterity, or that of setting the different parties and their mode of proceeding in a proper light. Now if we inquire about the only rational means to the latter of these ends : all will agree that the speech should have been put into the mouth, not of Socrates, but of some other person defending him. For the advocate might have brought forward many things, which the character -of Socrates rendered improper for him to urge, and might have shown by the work that, if the defendant's cause had only been pleaded by a person who had no need to disdain a 3 xiv INTRODUCTION TO THE resources which many men of honour did not think beneath them, it would have had a very different issue. Now if there were any foundation for an anecdote, not indeed a very probable one, which Diogenes Laertius has preserved from an insignificant writer, Plato's most natural course would have been, to publish the speech which he would himself have made on the same occasion if he had not been hindered.* He would then have had an opportunity of exemplifying those great precepts and expedients of rhetoric, the force of which he had himself first disclosed ; and un- doubtedly he might have applied them with great truth and art to the charges concerning the new deities and the corruption of youth. And so it would have been far better for him to have used any other person's name for the purpose of retort- ing on the accusers of Socrates, and to have spoken of his merits in a different tone. Whereas in a speech put into the mouth of Socrates him- self, yet different from that which he really de- livered, he can have had no other object than to show what Socrates voluntarily neglected or in- voluntarily let slip, and how his defence should have been framed so as to produce a better effect. * " See Diog. Laert. II. 41. where it is related that Plato was prepared to defend Socrates, but in the first sentence of his speech was interrupted by the petulance of the jurors, and com- pelled to descend from the bema. But this anecdote is too little attested and too improbable in itself to build upon." SCHLEIERMACHER. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. xv Now not to mention that this would have been scarcely possible without departing from the cha- racter of Socrates, it is evident that the defence we now have was not framed with this view. For how could such a speech have been followed by the address after the verdict, which implies an issue not more favourable than the real one ? The only supposition then that remains is, that this work was designed simply to exhibit and record in substance the real proceedings of the case, for those Athenians who were not able to be hearers, and for the other Greeks, and posterity. Now are we to believe that, in such a case and under such circumstances, Plato was unable to resist the temptation of fathering upon Socrates a work of his own art, which in all but the outline was perhaps entirely foreign to him, like a boy who has a theme set him to declaim on. This we cannot believe, but must presume that in this case, where nothing of his own was wanted, and he had entirely devoted himself to his friend, es- pecially so short a time before or after the death of Socrates, as this work was undoubtedly com- posed, he considered his departing friend too sa- cred to be disguised even with the most beautiful of ornaments, and his whole form as so faultless and majestic, that it was not right to exhibit it in any dress, but, like the statue of a god, naked, and wrapt only in its own beauty. And so in fact we find he has done. For a critic who should xvi INTRODUCTION TO THE undertake the task of mending this speech would find a great deal in it to alter. Thus the charge of misleading the young is not repelled with argu- ments by any means so cogent as it might have been, nor is sufficient stress by a great deal laid on the fact, that Socrates had done every thing in the service of Apollo, for defending him against the charge of disbelief of the antient gods: and any one with his eyes only half open may discover other weak points of the like kind, which are not so grounded in the character of Socrates that Plato should have been compelled to copy them. Nothing therefore is more probable, than that in this speech we possess as faithful a transcript of Socrates' real defence, as Plato's practised memory enabled him to make, allowing for the necessary difference between a written speech and one care- lessly spoken. But perhaps some one may say: If Piato, supposing him to be the author of this woi*k, did nothing in ore than record what he had heard : what reason is there for insisting on this fact, or how can it be known, that it was he, and not some other among the friends of Socrates who were present at the trial ? Such an objector, if he is familiar with the style of Plato, need only be referred to the whole aspect of the Apology, which distinctly shows that it can have proceeded from no pen but Plato's. For in it Socrates speaks exactly as Plato makes him speak, a man- ner in which, so far as we can judge from all we APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. xvr have left, he was not made to speak by any of his other scholars. And this resemblance is so indis- putable, that it may serve as a foundation for a remark of some importance. For it suggests the question : Whether certain peculiarities of the Platonic dialogue, particularly the imaginary ques- tions and answers inserted in a sentence, and the accumulation of several sentences comprehended under one, and often expanded much too amply for this subordinate place, together with the inter- ruption almost inevitably arising from this cause in the original structure of the period: whether these peculiarities, seeing that we find them so predominant here, ought not properly to be re- ferred to Socrates? They occur in Plato most frequently where he is imitating Socrates closest; but nowhere so frequently, and so little clear of their accompanying negligences, as here and in the following dialogue (the Crito), which is pro- bably of like origin. All this together renders it a very natural conjecture, that these forms of speech were originally copied from Socrates, and are therefore to be numbered among the speci- mens of the mimic art of Plato, who endeavoured in a certain degree to copy the style of the per- sons whom he introduces, if it had peculiarities which justified him in so doing. And any one who tries this observation by applying it to Plato's different works, especially in the order in which I have arranged them, will find it very strongly xviii INTRODUCTION TO THE confirmed by the trial. The cause why such an imitation was not attempted by other disciples of Socrates, was probably this: that on the one hand it really required no little art to bend these pecu- liarities of a careless colloquial style under the laws of written discourse, and to amalgamate them with the regular beauty of expression, and on the other hand, it called for more courage to meet the censure of minute critics than Xenophon probably possessed. But this is not the place for entering further into this question. One circumstance, however, must still be no- ticed, which might be alleged against the genuine- ness of this work, and with more plausibility in- deed than any other: that it wants the dress of the dialogue, in which Plato presents all his other works, and which he has given even to the Me- nexenus, though in other respects that, like this, consists of nothing more than a speech. Why therefore it may be asked, should the Apology, which so easily admitted of this ornament, be the only work of Plato that is destitute of it? Con- vincing as this sounds, the weight of all other arguments is too strong not to counter-balance this scruple, and we reply to the objection as fol- lows. In the first place, it is possible that the dialogic form had not then become so indispen- sable with Plato as it afterwards was: which may serve as an answer for those who are inclined to set a great value on the dress of the Menexenus; APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. xix or Plato himself distinguished this work from his other writings too much to think of subjecting it to the same law. Besides, it would in general be very unworthy of Plato, to consider the dialogue, even in those works where it is not very inti- mately blended with the main mass of the com- position, as nothing more than an ornament arbi- trarily appended to them : it always has its meaning, and contributes to the conformation and effect of the whole. Now if this would not have been the case in the present instance, why should Plato have brought it violently in? Especially as in all likelihood he wished to hasten the publica- tion of this speech as much as possible, and might not think it advisable at that time to hazard a public declaration of his sentiments on the issue of the cause, which, if he had clothed the speech in the form of a dialogue, it would have been difficult to avoid, without rendering the form ut- terly empty and unmeaning. UAATfLNOS 2QKPATOYS AHOAOriA. Cap. I. "O Tt, fJiev u/iet?, & av&pes ^ A6i]vaZoi, A -rreirovdare VTTO rwv e/twv KaTrjv, OVK ol$a' eye* 8' ovv Kal avros VTT avTwv 6\ijov efj,avTov eVe- \a66/jir)V' b ovrco TTiOavws e\eyov. Kai roi aXrjdes 9 e?ro9 et7retv, c ouSev elprj/caa-i. /xttXtcrra Se avrcov ev e0av/j,acra d TWV TroXXwv cov e'-v/reucravro, TOI)TO, ev w eXe/ov, co? X/ 3 *? 1 ' Wf*as evXa/Sftcr^at, //,?) ' e^aTrarr]dr]re^ &>? SetvoO O'VTO? \eyeiv. TO yap ala"xyvOr)vai, on avTLfca vir e/j.ov e Cap. I. p. 17. ^i 5' oSv al ouTbs.] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Commonly 7017' ovv. So, 8* o2c after ju^, C. XXIII. Theaet. p. 197. B. Compare Hermann. ad Lucian. De hist, conscr. p. 255. oAfyou f/j,avrov eireAa&Jjnji'.] Sew, commonly put after o\iyov, is omitted in Bodl. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 3. 4. 6. Flor. b. e. g. h. i. Coisl. Ven. A. Par. D E H S T. Ang. prim. m. Vind. 2. : nor does Plato anywhere, to my knowledge, use it in connection with the Indicative preterite ; see Eep. VIII. p. 563. B. Menexen, p. 236. B. Yet ^schines adv. Ctesiphont. p. 428. o\iyou Selr |U0ei<7T^/Cl. H\l cu.] So Bodl. Parr. D S T. Vind. 1. Ven. b. a. pr. m. Flor. d. g. h. The rest injudiciously omit ^ TJ ^. 8' f/*ov is Bekker's correction for the common reading 5<= /uou. nal tv ay opS M T. rp.~] So Vind. 1. 2. 3. 6. Flor. b. e. i. Coisl. Par. B. and others. Commonly teal eV ayopa Kal eirl rp. See note. . ol Tro\\ol amjKo'am.] ol is wanting in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Flor. d. g. h. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Par. DS. Compare TOVS tro\\obs irapi- XM', C. III. erri yeyovws 7rA.eiw f^'j^Kovra.'] Bodl. Vind. 1. 4. Flor. d. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 7rXet&> epSo/jitf/covTa'P are^vw? ovv evddo'e Xee&)9. o^irep ovv civ, el T ru> ovn e ervj-^avov wv, ^vveyiyvuxr/cere SI^TTOU av poi el eV e/ceivy rfj vr) re fcal T&> rpoTTO) eXeyov, ev ol Te6pd/j,/j,7]v, s real S?) KOI vOv TOUTO i)yLtcoy Seo//.at SiK <9 y e/iol So/cw, rov pev rpoTrov r?}? Xe^e&)9 edv 7ft>9 IJLGV j 7' e>oJ 5o/i.] So Vind. 1. 6. Ven. b. Par. D S. Old editions 76 JJ.QI. nlv -yap TI x f ' l P cav -~\ Most books with Bodl. omit rt, which is found in Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. SiKaarrov /JL. 7. avrri aper^.] a&Vij ^ aperi], Vat. Ven. b. II. al TOUS Trp. (00x177.] So almost all MSS. instead of the common reading ical irpbs robs irp. K. Immediately afterwards irpbs TO vffrepa is restored from Bodl. Ven. b. b. Vat. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. instead of the common reading irpbs TO, va- TfpOV. f/jiov ouSev aA.?j96s.] Bodl. and some others ^uou juaAAoc ovSet/ aA., wrongly. PLATO. , &>9 ecrTi TIS 2(0Kparr)9 dvijp, rd re fj,erea>pa (frpovrLo-rrjsf /cat TO. VTTO 7779 arcavra dvety)- T?7/Ca>9, /Cat rOV r/TT(W \OJOV KpeiTTO) TTOltoJ'/ OVTOl, 0) avopes 'Adyvctioi, ravrrjv rrjv rj/j,r)v Karaa-KeSdcrav- re9, g 01 Setvot etcrt /zou Kanfyopot' ol Ta, found in Bodl. Ven. b. Flor. d. g. h. Vind. 6. Par. D S., the common reading was iravra. Kal iroXvv xp6vov f)57j.] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 3. 4. G. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S. Old editions with Bekker Kal iro\vv ^877 xp6vov, although the latter is the usual collocation of the words, as iro\\& ^5r; STTJ a few lines above, and in C. XVIII. TotravTa tfSri try, yet I did not wish to reject the reading of the MSS., especially since it may be justified by the consideration that TTO\W xp6vv forms a single notion, the words signifying ' for a long time.' iraTSes ov-Tts, tvtoi 8 1 vfj.G>v.~\ So Bodl. Ven. b. Flor. h. Parr. D S. 8' was commonly omitted. elf TIS Ka-juySoTToibs T.] Commonly Ku>fi. Xey&>, Strroy? /xo erepovs /iev rov9 aprt tcaTvj'yoprja-avTa 1 ?, erepov 9 Se TOU9 TraXat, 01*9 e'yft) Xe'yw. /cat olrfdrjTe &eiv vrpo9 t : /cetVou9 Trpwrov //.e cnroXoyrja-acrOai,' Kal v Trporepov rjKovaare tcarrj'yopovvTaJV, Kal TTO\V 7 rwvSe rwi' vcrrepov. Elev. a7ro\ojrjreov Sijv w aVfy)69 'AOrjvaloi, Kal eTri^eiprjTeov vpwv e^eXeadai rrjv S^a e'v TToXXw xpova) ecr^ere, ravrrfv eV our&)9 oXr/w v&). /3ov\otfj,r)v per ovv av rovro ovrco nti'ov, is wanting in Vat. Flor. d. Par. C. It has been erased in Par. B. Flor. a. But there is no need of change. v TTO\\CJ> xp6 v V eo"X Te -] Commonly extrt, which is corrected from Ven. b. Par. D S. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. g. h. Afterwards, old editions, eV ouriaal o\iy t'Aov, rc5 8e yo/xw Treiareov /cat aTro- \OjrjT60V. III. ' 'AvaXdfitofJLev ovv e'f a/a%^9, TI? r) Kartj- yopta e'o-TtV, f ^9 ^ e'/i?? Sta/SoAr/ yeyovev, fj 8rj fcal Trtarewov MeA^ro? fie eypd^aro rrjv jpa(f)r)V ravrrjv.^ Elev. TI Srj \eyovres $ie/3a\\ov ol Bia- (3d\\ovTes ; W97rep ovv Karrjyopwv rr/v Bel avayvwvai auTwv. b ^wtcpdrr)*; aSt/cet /cat yd^eraL c tyjTwv rd re VTTO 7*}? /cal ra eirovpavia, /cat TOV ^TTO) \6yov Kpelrrw TTOIWV, KOI aXXoi9 raura raura SiBd<7fca)V. Toiavrr) rt? eo-rf raura 7a/> ewpare at ai/rot ev TJ} ' 'Apia-rotydvovs /c&)/iw8t'a, d ^cofcpdrr) nva e'/cet Treptfapofievov, (frdaKovrd re depoftareiv Kai a\\r)v TroXX^v v.~] Commonly 'yap pot rcav Toiointnv, which I have changed from Bodl. Par. D S. In Yat. Flor. d. Vind. 1. 4. 6. is written, a\\a yap TOVTUV fyoi. fj.dprvpas 5' OUTOUJ.] Commonly o3, for which, avroiis is found in Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S. not tK Toinotv yvdiffee9, oto9 r eVriv ia)V et9 e/racrTr;v TWV TroXewv TOi/9 veot>9 049 eecrTt T TI fjioa^a) eyevea-drjv, el-^p^ev av avrolv e Xa/3etv /cal /ito-^ajcracr^at, 1 09 e/ieXXev aura) /caXa> re Ka/yadw TTOir)aew rrjv Trpo^Kovcrav dperrjV' rjV 8' av OUT09 57 TWV ITTTTt/CWV T49 ^ T}9, TV}? dv6pw- 7TIV779 re /cat 7roXm/e?}9, eTrtcrr^/ifuv ecrrt'v ; oZyaat 7p ^v 70), ^ ow; Haw 76, ^ 8' 09. Ti9, ^v 8' 706, /cat 7ro8a7ro9 ; /cat TTOCTOV StSaV/eet ; Evrjvos, (f>T], &> Coislin. KTos, as Rep. X. p. 600. C. Protagor. p. 314. C. Ari- stoph. Ran. 997. oi X?oy aXAa Ki'os. Yet the inscriptions in Broensted. Itiner. N. 7. and 10. plainly have KEIOI; and Theocrit. Id. XVI. 44. calls Simonides aoiSbv TOV Kijlov: whence the form KTos ought not to be admitted. See Ast's Comment, ad Protag. p. 44. It may be added, that the old grammarians and the copyists by 1 long understood , according to Bastius on Gregor. Corinth. p. 892.; the diphthong, besides, is pronounced something like i. ? aco? e^et 1 ravrrjv rrjv re- yyiqv Kal OUTGO? e'/u./ieXft)? BtBdcrKei. eyw dvBpe<$ ^ V. 'TTrdXdjBoi ovv av rt? v/^wv tcra)?, 2<(f>KpaTe<;, TO crov rt ecrrt Trpajf^a ; TroOev al Sia- /3oXat croi avrai jeyovacriv ; ov jap B^TTOV crov 76, oy5ev a rcov aXXwv TreptTrorepov^ Trpay/juarevo/jievov, CTretra rocravrrj (f)^^ re Kal \6yo$ s 8i8dffKfi, instead of the common reading e/*M- StSdffKoi is found in Bodl, Ven. H. b. Vind. .3. Flor. e. g. h. Zitt. Par. D S. V. 'TwoAa/Joi ovv &v TJS.] Commonly &v our omitting after- wards vuiav. The pronoun is found in Bodl. Vat. Ven. a. b. E. Vindobb. all, Flor. a. b. e. g. h. Zitt. Parr. B C D S. g.; but olv &v, Vind. 6. Ven. b. On the other hand some have omitted either olv or &i/. tva fj.7) quits ire pi (Toy.] Commonly 'Lva /j.}) Kal rifj.s'ts, against all the MSS. ^ OVK 4701, Ti Aeyco.] Commonly o TJ h4yr]a-i fyev'Bfrai re Kal eni oiaftoXfj rfj e/jiy \eyet." Kal pot, & avSpes 'Adrjvatot, fj,rj OopvB^jcrrjre, fj,T)oe av Sofa rt vfuv fieya \eyeiv h ov yap e/iov epw rov \6yov, ov av \eyco, aXV ei? a^io^peutv 1 vfuv rov \eyovra avolaa). T?}? yap e'/A?}?, el S)j Ti? ecm la Kal oia, k p,uprvpa v/uv Trape^o/nai rov 6eov rov e'v .JeXt^ot?. Xatpetywvra yap 1 tare TTOV. oSro? e/io? re eraipos fjv CK veoy, Kat vfjiwv rw rr\r]6eL eraipos re teal %vveoopb on OjO/i^crete. Kal Br) rrore Kal ei? ^eX^>ou9 eXdatv eroX/A^cre rovro /j,avrevcra(T0ai, n /cat, OTrep \eyco, fjbrj dopvftelre, & avSpe?. ijpero yap 8^, e? Ttu>repov elvai. Kal rovrcav rrepl o a8e\(f)b<; vpZv avrov' 1 ovroal fiaprvpijcrei, eTreior] eKeivos rereXevrrjKe. VI. SKe-^raa-de oe, &v eveKa ravra \eyo). yu,eXX&> yap vfjbds oiodgew, o6ev poi 77 8ia3o\rj yeyove. rav- ra yap yto aKovcras ev0v/j,ovfj,r)v ovroxri, Tl rrore \tyet o ^eo9, Kal ri rrore alvtrrerai ; eyco yap Brj from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Both may be correctly said. See Poppo ad Cyrop. I. 2. 10. nil eopv&fanrf, W S< &v S<5|o>.] Commonly ^ 0. ^r/StV, &V 8o{(, which is corrected from Bodl. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Par. D S T. Ven. b. Flor. g. h. yap Iffrt TOW.] Commonly S^irou, against the authority of tin-. MSS. nt ev a TL ovv TTore \eyei faio-Kcov ep,e aofycoTaTov eivai ; ov yap oiJTTOv tyevSerai ye~ ov yap $e/tu9 avra>. b KOI TTO\VV jjiev %povov r/TTOpovv, rl Trore \eyei, c ejreiTa fto- yis Trdvv eVi fyJTijcnv avrov ToiavTyv TLVO, erpaTro/ji'rjv. rj\6ov 67rl TWO, TCOV SotcovvTcav o-otytov eivai, co aKOTrwv roiovrov ri e7ra6ov, c5 ai/Spe? 'AOrjvaloi teal Sia\ey6fj,6vos avT(jj, eSo^e [A0i d o5ro9 o avr;p SoKeiv fJiev eivai (roc^o? a\\ois re TroXXoi? a Kal /AaXtcrra eaurw, eivai 8' ov. KaTreira eT avTq> 8eiKvvvai, ori OIOITO fj^ev eivai, cro<6?, e'lr] 8' ov. evrevOev ovv rovra) re a7r^^66/j,r/v Kal TroAAot? TCOV irapovTwv. irpos e/Jtavrbv 8' ovv aTTiwv e o/u/?7V, c OTL TOVTOV fj,ev rov avOpcaTrov 670) /309 elfjui' KivSvvevei yu,ev yap rjptav ov^erepo^ ovoev fca\bv KayaOov elSevai, aXX' o5T09 f^iev oHerai re ei- Sevai OVK et'Sft)9, eya) 8e, wsirep ovv OVK ol8a, ovoe eoi/ca yovv TOVTOV ye o-fAiKpa> TIVI Commonly fj.6\is. Mo'yiy is foimd in all the best and most numerous MSS., and I have no doubt that it ought to be everywhere restored to Plato; see Dorvill. ad Charit. p. 345. The distinction instituted by Thorn. Mag. p. 619. is trifling. on Ouroffl 6/ioC a>Te/D09 etmt/ on a ^ ol&a ov&e eiSevai. evrevBev eV a\\ov ya rwv e'/cetVou &OKOVV- V c-oe^>}9 $, aladavb- Kal \vrrovfjievof Kal SeSt9, on 0.7777- o/i&)9 8e dvajKalov e'So/cet etvat TO TOU 6eov Trepl Tr\ei9 evravda CTT' avTO(j>a>- pw /caTaXr7-v|ro/ievo9 e'/Ltairrov d/j.aOea'Tepov e/cetv&)v ov- Ta. avaXa/i,/3ava)v o5v aurwv TO, Trotr^/iaTa, a yttot av auroi/9 TI Xeyoiev, tv' a/aa Tt /cat Trap avTwv. ala"xyvofjt.ai ovv vfjblv etvretv, w avSpe9, Ta\Tjuiy o/i&>9 oe prjTeov. v, 1 a OUK rjcrav. drrfja ovv teal IvrevOev, T&> avr'/&iv ovSev e7rtcrTa//,ev&), a>9 eTro? , TOVTOVS Se 7' ^Seiv on evptjcroi/At 7To\\a teal tca\a 7Ti(7Taievou9. teal rovrov ,ev OUK e-revaOriv^ ?/7rtcrrav7O a 760 OVK vrtcrra/xT/v tea fJiov rav- TTI ao(f)(t)Tepot rjcrav. aXX', w avSpe? 'AOrjvaloi,, rav- TOV /ioi eSo^av e%eiv d/j.dpr'rj/uia^ OTrep teal ol TTOi^rat teal ol dyadol 8rj}j,iovpyoi fb Bid TO rr]V Te^vrjv /caXeo? ted in Bodl. 'Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor. d. e. g. h. Par. D S T g. Bekker, from one MS. alone, Par. S. pr., has given irfiroiriKeiTav, without the argument. Koioiev & iroio?ev[ & irotoiev in ed. Steph. is omitted by mistake. T^J auTfS oto/j.evos irept^.] Bekk. T(^ a\ntf O.VT&V old/Afros, ex Par. H. g. Angel., which we have been unwilling to adopt. In the preceding word, evTtv6fv, there is a latent pronominal signifi- cation which renders avruv unnecessary. VIII. lucTj'Setf ov&v ySetv 2rj ] All the MSS.. as well as the old editions have ^wfi^etv and rjSew. so that we are ig- norant from whence Bekker adopted IUVT/ST; and p5rj. Unless, perhaps, he followed Pametius de Platone testimonium in Eustath. ad Odyss. p. 1946. Eom. T. II. p. 305. ed. Lips. Compare Etym. Magn. p. 419. 13. Dawesii Miscell. p. 427 sq. e. Kidd. Schneider. Fractal, ad Kemp. XLII. sqq. We have thought some respect due to the numerous and valuable MSS. which we have collated for this edition. c 14 PLATO. eZepyd&a-Oai e/eao-ro? ijjflov real TaXXa ra peyiara o-o09 wv T^V IKELVWV cro- d>iav, /i;Te afjuidf]^ TTJV apaOlav* rj a^orepa a eicelvoi e%ov ovrt, 6 6eof <70 TOVTO> TOVTO Xeyetv, ort r) dvdpcoTrlvrj cro. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. others, &ST* ne (/*.. Bodl. has preserved the true reading. 8ri fioi Xua-jTfAoT] Commonly Xvo-irfXeT. The optative is found in Bodl. Ven. & b. H. Vind. 1. 2. 5. Flor. 1. Par. B. H. Angel., which we have followed. IX. 'Ec ravr-nffl 8); rrjs ^f.] Commonly in ravrris fjSrj, which arose from incorrect pronunciation. The true reading is given in BodL Ven. b. Vind. 4. Par. T. A little further, 'AOrtvaw is omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 6., and others. a(fTai ToDr' ou \fytw.] Commonly rovrov. Most MSS., and those of the best authority, have rovrov. Wolf has correctly given roDr' ou \tytiv, with the approbation of Hermann, Mus. Antiquit. Stndior. p. 149, but Sclwefer disapproves of this reading in Lamb. Bos. 705. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 15 TOV 6/xe TrapdSeijfjia iroiov/Aevos, &$irep av el efirot/ art Ouro9 vfjiwv, a) avOpcoTTOi, crocfxtiTaros ecrrtv, o9Tt9 eo97T6p ^WKpdrrjs eyvaitcev, OTL ovSevbs afi09 ecrrt 777 d\7)9eia 7T/309 cro(f)iav. ravr ovv eya> p,ev en /cat vvv Treptitov fyyrti) KOL epevvw Kara rov deov, Kal rwv daTwv Kal Twv j~evo)v dv Tiva otcoftat, ao4>ov elvai' Kal evretSav yLtoi /i^ So/c^, TOO ^e&) ftorjQwv ev8eiKvv/j,ai, h on OVK ean cro009. Kal VTTO ravrrjs r/j? 9 oyre rt TWV T>j9 7roXeo)9 rrrpa^ai JJLOI a^o\r) d^iov Kaffov ovre rwv ot/ce/tuv, aXX' ev Treviq fjbvpia elfM 1 Bid TTJV rov Oeov \arpelav. X. IT/309 Se rouroi9 ot veot Oi9 /jbaXiara cr^oXr; ecrrtv, o/ rwv avr6fj.aroi, ^alpovcnv aKovovres e^era^ofjievcov rwv , KO\ avrol 7ro\Xat9 e/ie yLtt/ioOvrat, etra d\\ovv aariav Kal tvui>. X. aKOvovres e'^Tafo/teVaiv] Commonly l\efxl j -* vv av8puircav. the article is rejected in Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1.4.6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. 0X170 2) ovSev] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Editt. ^ o\iy<* $ ouStV, which Bekker also has re- tained. 1C PLATO. aXX' 011% ca>TOt9, a Kal X^youcra-, a>9 5WpaT7?9 r/9 fiiapwraros /ecu Sia&Oelpei rovs veov 9. /cat eTret- Tt9 avrovs epcara, o TL TTOIGOV rcai b TL oioa- eyovcn /iev ouSev etVetv, aXX' aryyooOcrtv, KCi)V Be VTTep TO)V pTJTOpCOV. W9T6, ojrep dpxofjLevo? 70) e\yov, Oavftd^oifj,' av, el 0409 T' et^v eja) vjj,x auroTs] Commonly opyi^ovrat, OVK auro?j. The reading in the text has been preserved in Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. e. g. Par. T. In others it is opyifrvrat, oi>x aurois. &n TO /WTtpa - ] Steph. OTJ ri /t. cal TO wrb >^j fr)T? /cal eouj ^1 "o^(fi Kal T. ^. A. /cp. iroif?. But fijTe? is omitted in Aid. Bas. 1.2. BodL Vat. Nen. a. b. H. the six Vindobb. all the Florentine, Coisl. Parr., and others, so that it is impossible to trace its origin. The infinitives are given in almost all the MSS. The common reading is doubtless due to those who did not accurately observe the structure of the words. Kal ucTTa7ft6Vo>j] Some MSS., ui/T<=TajueVa!S. Kol weUai al <7$>o5p., contrary to the authority of the best MSS. In Bodl. the reading is KOIVVV ff<>o5s. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 17 oimy? oX/y&) xpovq), ovrco TroXX^j/ yeyovviav. Tavr 1 ovre fjieya ovre cr/u/cpov a,7roKpv^fdpevo Xeyoj ovS" uTTOcrretXa/Aevo?. 1 Kal rot olSa cr^eSov, OTI, rol77cri, Kal rovs vcrrepou? pera ravra ireipdao- fjiat a7ToXoyeto-#at. avdis 0elpovra. e'yw e ye, ta avSpe9 'A0?ivaloi, dSiKelv (fa/jit, MeXrjrov, on CTTTOV- Sfj &TI raA.7j^ Ae'7w.] Commonly o.\t\Qrt. The true reading is found in Coisl. Ven. A 2. Vind. 6. Par. B O H. Angel. Zitt. Florr. a. b. c. d. e. i. with Bas. 2. In Vat. Flor. d. is read 8r Kal a\i]6Jj \. , XL auTr) earca 'iKavt] air.] Commonly 'ucavr] rj air., which is corrected from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. a. e. g. h* Par. B C D 8 T. rbv ayaQ6v re.] Te is added from the best MSS. TretpiiiTOju.ai airo\oyf'icr6ai.~\ Commonly airo\oyfi9 Se.ToDro oyra>? '%, Treipda-opcu Kal vfuv eVtSet^at. XII. Kal pot oevpo, & Me'X^re, elire, a "A\\o TI Trepl TroXXoi) iroiei, b 07T&>9 &>9 fieXriaToi ol ve6elpovra e^evpcov, tw? ^779, e/ie 4907649 ToyTot(7t d Kal /carr}yopi<;' TOV Se S^ /9eXT/ot9 Troiovvra IQi eiVe /cat prjvva-ov avrots, Ti9 eanv. opa<;, & MeXrjre^ OTI C ov TOVTO eptTw, a) /SeXrto-re, d\\a ri9 aVP/JO)7T09, 09T49 TTp&TOV Kal aVTO TOVTO OiSe, TOU? vo/ioi/9. Ouroi, w Z&KpaTes, ol SiKae- T4 Sal &;, otfie ot a/cpoarat Ko.\ {>IMV ^ir.Sellai.] Commonly wro5:|aj, probably against all SII. "AAAo T. repl iroXAoD ir.] Commonly vf , rarj- to the authority of the best MSS., that is, Bodl. Vat. Yen. b. Tind. 1, 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Commonly before p' was inserted ft which is omitted in the Florentine and outers. T{ SaJ 8^.] Commonly T l 8^ STJ ; the former is found in Coisl. Flor.e., and also from a correction in Bodl. Vat. See Fcwon. ad. Med. 1008. Hermann, ad Vig. p. 848. Further on o. A, I have adopted from Flor.g.h. Virid. 3. 6. Coisl., and APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 19 TTOIOVCTLV, r) ov ; Kal ovroi. Tloal ol (3ov\evral ; h Kal 01 /3ov\evTal. '^4XX' dpa, & MeX??Te, pr) ol ev rfj e/CKXijala, ol eKK\T]} /cd/celvoi /3eXr/Of? Troiovaiv aTravres; Kdicel- voi. Havre? apa, &>? eotfcev, ' A6r\valoi /caXoti? KOL- \eyei,? ; Haw (T MeXrjre, KCU Trepl iTnrcM teal rwv aXXcoV 7ravrcov ^cocov ; irdv- Ttw? 77 TTOf, eav re cru Kal"Avvros ov e\ovanv. d\\a yap, & MeX^re, IKCLVWS ev i, ort ovSeTTWTrore e^povnaaf TWV veav, K lvet<; rrjv cravrov irepl &v e/j,e XIII. "En 8e rifjiiv eiVe, 9 Sia(j)0elpovTa rou? vewrepovs Kal irovrjporepov^ TTOL- ovvra e/covra ^ aKOVTa ; 'Etcovra eywye. Ti S^ra, el Ttpuicov- rov b S' XIII. 3 7rp!>s Aiby MeA.7jT] Ven. a. Vind. 5. 6., and others, xpbj A. 3 MsXijTe. But compare C. XIV. Sophist, p. 221. D. of Me? ToiTjpol KOK&V TI] dei is commonly inserted after irovripol, which we .have omitted with Bodl. Vind. b. Vat. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. In others it is placed after Ka.it6v. na\ -rovnporepovs woioiWa] Commonly Kal rovrovs vov. ir., against almost all the MSS. For the common reading veuvs, \ve find vfarrtpovs in Bodl. Ven.b. Vat. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor d " h Par. D ST. Ti S^ro, M.'J Commonly -rl 817 irore, which is changed from BodL Vat. Ven.b. Par. C D S T. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d. g.h. and others. Srr at/ ft.lv tyvuiKas] Commonly SOT' f {, p., which is corrected APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 21 fjt,ev Kdfcol KCIKOV Ti epyd^ovrdt del Toi>9 fjiaXiara 7r\rj- criov eavrcov, ol Se dyadol dya66v lyu> 8e Srj elv, KivSvvev- cro) KO.KOV n \aftelv air avrov, (W9re rovro TO TO- (TOVTOV KdKOV KO)V TTOiW, ft>9 ^5 (TV ,' .TttUTa e r /(t) croi ov TreLdofMai, 6) Me\7/Te, oifj,ai, Se ov&e a'XXov ov8eva' f aXX,' T? ou Siatfideipco, ;, ei Sta.- cry avSpe? 'Adyvaloi, rovro pev SfjXov ijSr) eariv, 6 eyco e\eyov, ort Me\ijra) rov- ro)V ovre j^eya ovre a-/j,iKpov' A rrutrrore epeX.rja'ev. a fromBodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. I. 2. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Zitt. Par. DST. ol 5f 07060! d^od^i'] Commonly ayaOov n : but TI is omitted ' in the best MSS.' \a.Bf"iv OTT' auToC] Commonly fir' ouroD, which is corrected from Bodl. Ven. b. Parr. DST. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Zitt. and others. Tof-To rb TOO-OVTOV"] rb is added from Par. D. and Flor. h, ou5e &\\ov ai>6p!air. IIpos avrwv rolvvv, w M\TJ- TC, rovTtov rwv Qewv, wv vvv o \6yos eo-T/v, e etVe' ert crao-Tepov teal e/iol KOI rot? dvSpdcri, TOVToiat. eya) yap ov Swapac /j,adelv, Trorepov Xeyet? SiSacr/cetv' /u.e vo/ii^etv elval nvas 6eovs, Kal auro? apa vo/u- ftu elvai deovs Kal OUK elul TO TrapaTrav adeos ouSe Taurr) aSt/cw, ov pevrot ovsirep ye rj TroXt?, a ere/301/9, ^al TOI)T' ea"riv o /not ey/caXet?, ort >7 iravrcnraal pe <^^? oure auroj/ vopi^eiv Beovs re a\Xoy? f raOra StSatr/ceiV. Tavra Xeya), 009 TO ?ra- paTrav oy vo/At^ei? Oeovs. '/2 dav^acrie Me\r)re, 'iva ri ravra \eyets ; g ouSe rjAtov ouSe creX^v?7v a/aa vo/it- a> ^eou? elvai, w^jrep ol aXXoi avdpwiroi; Ma Ai\ h - KpaTovs KarayeXav, eav TrposTroifjrat, eavrov etvat, aXXw? TC /cat OUTCD? aroTra ovra, aXX' MeXT/re, /cat raina fjuevTot,, &>r)V ravT^v vfipei Tivl real a/coXacrta. teal veorrjn 1 " ypdifraadac,. eot/ce yap wsirep atviy/Aa ^vvrtdevn evft), n 'Apa yvcoaeTai SaiKpdrTjs 6 CTCK^OS 8t) iVOv Kal evavrl' ep,avru> \6yovros, rj avrov KOI rou? aXXovs rovs dtfovovras ; yap e'yu,ol ^atVerat ra evavria Xeyetv auro? eavrm ev rfj ypafifj, wcnrep av et etVoi '^48i/cet ^co- Kpdr^ 6eov<$ ov vof^lt^cov, aXXa Oeovs vo/ua>i>. /cat rot TO{)TO ecrrt Tra/^ovro?. XV. Hfve7Ticre'v|rao-^e 8^, w avSpe?, r; yu,ot (fratve- rat a raura Xe'7eiV cry Se T;//,?!/ dTro/cpivai, o) Me\r]re. v/jieis 8e, OTrep /car' p%a? yyu,a? Trap^rrja-d^v^ pe- fjivr}(T0e poL /jirj 6opv/3eiv, eav ev TO> elc TOI)? \6a.i] tlvai is added from Bodl. Coisl. Par. D. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 3. 4. 6. Flor. d. e. h. 24 PLATO. aXXoi9 TOvroicrL aXXa, TO eVt rovro) ye d ea& 09Tt9 BaifAOVia /lev vo/uet TT pay par' elvau, 8ai/79 /tie m vo/Mi^ei ouv Kaiva eire TraXaid' aXV o5v aifjt,ovid ye Kara rov crov \6yov, KOI ravra Kal Sifu/Ltocr&j ev rrj dv- TiypcHpfjJ el Be SaifAcvia vopityt), KOL Sai'/iova 7ro\\T) dvdy/CT) vo/jil^eiv e/ie eanv, ov% OVTCOS e^et 8>j' TiQrj/jii ydp ere op,o\oyovvTa, eVeiS?) OVK UTTO- tcpivet. TOW 8e Salpovas ovj(l r/rot deovs ye rjyovf^eOa 77 dewv TraZSa? ; g ^9 ^ 01;; Ildvv ye. OVKOVV ecirep va9 rjyovpai, a>9 /u,evo9 r)/j,a)V eypdfyw TTJV ypacfrrjv aTropwv 6 TI ey/raXoi9 epol d\r)0e<> d%i- O7r&)9 8e crv riva Tret^ot? av Kal cr/jiiKpbv vovv dvOpMTrcov, &>9 ov rov avrov [ai^Spo?] ecrrt real KOI Oela rj f ye2(rdai, teal av TOV avrov fi^TeSal- fjiovas fJ,rjT Oeovs fMJre tfpwas, ovSe/Aia ^yawr] ecmv.* XVI. 'AX\.a yap, a) avSpes* 'Adyvaloi,, $6Vo9. c a 8)7 TroXXow /cat aXXou? /cal dyaOovs avSpa9 r/pyKev, ol^at, oe Kal aipijcreiv ovSev oe Seivov, fir) v ejmol o-rfj. d av o5v elVot rt9, tr' ou/c aurvyvet* w TOiovrov errcT^evaa eTrir^Beva-a^, e ou KtvBvvevei 1 ? vvvl diroOaveiv ; 'Eyco Se TOVT&) av Sixaiov ~\.6yov dvTi7roifj(,i, ort Ov raXco9 \eyeR, e5 avdpwjre, el ot'et Seit 1 /ctVSwov V7ro~\.o f ylea'dai f TOV tfjv 77 redvdvat avSpa, orov TI Kal crpiKpbv 0^)6X09 ecrrtv, g aXX' ou/c e/cetvo jjibvov cr/coTretv, orav irpdrrr] ri, Trorepov ScHeierm. in thinking that ^ ought to be left out. For it gives a wrong meaning, since it is plain that fmdvovs are TrcuSas h-jrwv Kul wwv, not I'TTTTCOC ^) Kai ovtav. us ov TOV avrov (ay5p<5s) ] ov, which was generally wanting, is restored from Bodl. Ven. a. b. Vat. Coisl. the six Vindb^, Flor. a, d. h. i. Par. C D E H T. Ang. and others. But we have put av5p6s in brackets because it is wanting in most MSS. XVI. 'drav irpdrrri TI] Ti has been added from Paris S. alone, D 26 PLATO. fj aSt/oz Trpdrrei, Kal dv$pb$ dyadov epya, r) KaKov. (fravXoi yap av ru> ye cry \6ya) elev rwv rjfAi- dewv ocrot ev Tpola rere\evrrjKao~iv, oi re a\\oi Kal 6 T7/9 @eri8o9 y/o9, h 09 roaovrov rov KIV&VVOV Kare- v KO. ] ,rj rifj,o)petv, AvriKa, (pycri, redvalrjv 1 TO) dSiKOvvn , "va pr) evddSe pevw Trapa vrjvo-l Kopwvlcnv, a%6os dpovprjs. fj,r) avrbv oiei m (frpovrlcrai davdrov Kal KtvSvvov ; ovrco yap e%ei, S) avSpe? 'A6r)valoi, rrj d\,r)dela' ov av Tt9 eavrbv rd^rj rj r)yr)crd/ji,evos n /SeXriov elvat rj vir ap^ovros ra%df), evravda Set, &>9 epol So/cet, pevovra KIV&V- veveiv, fj,r)$ev V7ro\pyi6/Ji,evov firjre ddvarov firjre d\\o fArjoev rrpo rov alcrypov. 'XVII. '70* ovv Seivd av ehjv elpyacrjjLevo^^ a) av8pe9 'Adrjvaloi, el, ore fj,ev /ie b ot ap'xpvres Forster conjectured 3 TI a.v irp., with the approbation of Wolf. Updrrdv, placed absolutely in this manner, was not in use. ttQva(i\v $litr]i> ^irtfl.] Commonly rfy SIKIJI-. The article is correctly omitted in* Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. and others of a higher character. T{{?J ^ fiyrtffdfj.tvos'] We have added ^ from Bodl. Ven. b. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor.g.h. Par. ST. ufaf \Xo M'jSti'] Commonly rfre &\\d TI /urjSeV : but Bodl. Coisl. Vat. Ven. A b. Par. D E S T. Vind. 1. 4. 6. JFlor. a. c. d. g. h. correctly omit TI. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 27 era-Troy, ovs ty/,et? ei\eo-0e ap%iv /iou, /ecu ev JTort- Sata /cat eV '-4//^>t7roXet /cal eVt Arfklapf Tore [Aev ov e/ceivot, erarrov epevov &$7rep Kal aXXo9 rt9 at eKivSvvevov diroOavelv, rov Se 0eoO rarrovro9, &>9 e'7&> a>7J07]v re Kal V7re\a/3ov, (f)L\oa-o? a\r)- 0 cro avdpcairw Trdvrwv /-te- 7tcrrov ov rcov dyadwv, SeStacrt S' c9 eu et'S6re9, ort /jLejta-rov ro)V KaKwv ecrrt. /cal rovro 7TC09 ou/c dfjiadla* ecrrlv avrrj f) e7roveiStcrro9, 77 rou o'cecrdat, elSevat a OVK olSev ; eyoo Se, & av&pes, rovra> Kal evravda rcro9 8t,a(j)epa) rwv TroXXcov avOpayjrwv, Kal el Srj rm opr)cro/j.ai, which 9, el euot/i77V, r/S?; av u/iwv cu inefc eTrtr^e^ovre^ a ^wKpaTf]^ SiSdcrKei iravr^ TravraTracri Bia(f)dapr)cfov- rcu, ei fJLOi ?rpo9 ravra eiTrotre '/2 ^GiKpare^^ vvv fiev '^ivi/rft) ou TreicrofieQa, aXX' a^le/juev ere, eVt rou- T&> /ACVTOi, e^>' wre ^Kert ev rainy rrj fyjrricrei Sta- e (f)i\oaro(j)elv. 1 eav Se aX&>9 eVi roOro aTToOavel' el ovv yu-e, ovrep et?rov, tTrt TOI>- T0i9 a(j>toiT, eiTTOifji av u/itv, ort '70) u/ia9, co av- 'AOyvaloi, acnrd^ofjiai, yu-ev /cal ^>i\co, e /iaXXov TO) ^e&5 ^ u/xtv, /cat ewrrep av 'Ari/rij) airi(rT'fjffavres~\ Steph. aTretfl^ffoi/rey. Aid. Bas. 1. airtBriaavres. Bas. 2. with BodL Vat. Ven.b. Vmd. 1. 3. 4. 6. The Florentine and almost all the others, airtffT-li6apri0ap^(roHTo. But .the indicative is preserved in Bodl. Vat Ven.b. CoisL Vind. 1.3.4.6. all the Florentine, and also Bekker's MSS., except Ven. E and Vind. T 2. We have therefore preserved the reading which all the better MSS. supplied. Yet it must not be supposed that ta> can be joined in such sentences with the future. In Plato, indeed, as far as we are aware, only two more examples of this construction are to be found, Rep. X. p. 6 1 5. 1). and Phaedo. p. 61.D; in one place &v is joined with 6rrcasnovv, in the other with ou5e. And it appears that &v is not even in this place to be connected with Sia,- ffovrai, having changed the construction of the sentence, used the participle. Of &v, construed with the future, Hermann has treated, De Part. &p Libr. I. c. 8. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 29 Kal oto9 re <5, ov /mr) TraixrcDf^ai, <$>i\ocro(f)wv KCU V/JLLV TrapaKe\ev6fji,ev66a, ort, '/2 dpicrre dv$p(ov, 'AOrjvalos eov, TroXetw? rfjs fjueyla-rr)*; Kal eu- SoKi/ji(L>rdrr]9 TrXetcrra, AcatSo^^/catrt/^?}?, fypovrjaews Be KoldX'rjdeias Kal T!J<; , 6?r&)9 a>9 /SeXrtcTTT; carat. OVK e7rt//,eXet oySe ; Kal edv Ti.~] Commonly Tra.vaoiJ.aL, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Yen. a. b. H, Vind. 1. 2. 5. Par. B C H T g. Flor. a. i. Angel. For Dawes's canon respecting the propriety of always rejecting the 1st aorist in constructions of this kind, hus long been exploded. A little further, eiri^eAo^evos, Bodl. Ven. b. Flor. e. g. h. Vind. 1. 4. 6, Zitt. Par. S T g., which is not approved by Atticists. But se'e the observations of Buttm. Au&fiihrl. griech. Sprachlehre .114. tinder ^'\w ; compare Protag. p. 326. A. Phsedo p. 115. B., and elsewhere. The common reading was T(- oarca fj.ov fjymepw eVrg yfvfi.~\ Commonly /uoj, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Ven.b. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d. h. Par. D ST. For the construction ought to be either pot ^77. t. yivovs, or ftou ^77. e. yevei : the common reading is opposed to custom. Hipp. maj. p. 304. D. fj.01 Tvyx&vsi tyyvrara. yevovs >v. Laches, p. 187. E. D3 30 PLATO. eyo) oioaai ouSev TT&) vp.lv iieltpv ayadbv yevecrdai ev rfi TroXet f) rrjv earjv r&> dew vTrypevlavJ ov&ev jap aXXo irpdrrwv eja) Trepiepftouai TI TreiOwv vpwy Kal vea>Te/?ot9 ical "trpea-flvTepovs aijre (rcoadrcov eTTipe- Xel&Oat, pyre xprj/AUTcov irporepov fMrjSe ovrw a(po- 8pa, s j>, ort 01)^ e'/c .^T/^artav aperrj ryiyvercu, aXX' e^ aperr)? %pijfj,aTa Kal ra/VXa a/yada rot9 avdpawrois airavra 1 Kal ISiq Kal Syaocrlq. el /iev o5f raOra Xey&>v 8ia- fydeipw" roi)9 veoi9, raur' av ew; /3A,a./3epa - et 8e T/9 ytte (f)r)(Ttv oXXa Xeyav ^ ravra, ov8ev \e aVSpe9 'Adrjvaloi, 77 7rel6ecrOe 'Avv-Tfa, r) p,rj* Kal rj a^iere, r] yJr] ai^tere, &)9 eyitoi) OL/K av 7rot^crovT09 y aXXa, ou8' et ^.eXXw 7roXXa/ci9 reOvdvai. 2 XVIII. M?) 6opv/3eiTe, & w avSpes 'AOqvatoi,, aXX' eaaelvare aoi 049 ^erj6rjv uyuwv /it^ 6opv/3elv e9 700 oluai, ovrjaevde aKOVovres. /u-eXXa) 7p ovi/ arra epetv al a'XXa, e'^>' 049 t'cr&>9 ftoriaeaOe- aXXa /AW9 TTOietTe roOro. Eu 7ap tare, e'a Mn'e OUTCO tr^iiSpa] Commonly /U^TS XP- Vpfofpov ufae &\\ov nvbs OVTU a6$pa, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Yen. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. ical reUAa avaerf] So almost all the MSS., except Par. E., wliicli has with Steph. KCU rSAAo Ta7a0. Instead of the common reading ^ dp T ^ 7i'7-. I have written, omitting the article, aptr^ yly., as in BodL Vat. Ven.b. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor.d. g.h. Par. DST. tlfyifrt, t) ^ a^fere] Commonly \a\ i) a^t'ere ju, ^ ^, &s ^MoC K. T. \. But /xe is omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. f br. d. g. h. Par. DST. and the same repeat tylcrc. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 31 TOIOVTOV o'vra, olov lyw Xeyto, ov/c eyu-e jj,eia> 77 u/ia? avTovs. e/ie fiev yap ov8ev dv /3Xd\|reiej> ovT6 MeXijTO? ovre "Avvros. ov&e yap av SvvaiTO' ov yap oiOftai Oe^iTov elvai b dpeivovt dvSpl VTTO (SXaTTTecrdai,. aTTO/creiVete /ievr' av tcrw?, rj , f) dri/jLaaetev. aXXa ravTa euro? /u-ev t'crw? ot'erat /cat aXA.09 TI? Troy /i^aXa /ca/ca, 70) S' ou/c. o2o/MMj aXXa TroXu //.aXXov c Trote^ a oyro? vuvt t, avbpa dSi/ccos eTn^eipeiv aTrotCTivvvvat. vvv ovv, Spe? 'Adijvaioi, TroXXoi) Sew 70) d u?rep epavrov oyela-dai, w? Ti? av oi'otro, aXX' wTrep VJJLWV, fj,ij ri e^afj,dprr)Te Trepl rrjv rov Oeov 86cnv V/MV e/ioO /cara^^i^tcra/ievot. 6 eav 7 fj,ev Kal yevvaiq), VTTO Se vwOecrrepa) Kal 8eojj,evq> eyeipeaOat VTTO Ttvo?" otov 8?; /xot So/cei 6 ^eo? efte TT? TroXei 7rpo9- Tedeiicevat TOIOVTOV Tivaf 09 u/>ta9 eyeipwv Kal Treldcov Kal oveio'l&v eVa e/facrrov o^Sej/ Travopai TTJV rjpepav XVIII. ouSef av /3\ai|/6tei'] So the best MSS. The common reading is ouSec AaiJ>ei. ow ^ip ofbjttat] Commonly o?Aai, against the best MSS. OUTOS (U6v fcrctj] Commonly p.fv was wanting, but it is uni- fonnly retained by the best MSS. fji-fi TI f^a^TriTf'] Commonly n was wanting, but it has been restored from the best MSS., as Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 4. lav yap <=>6 awo/cre/V^Tf] So the better MSS. correctly read for pe. vwBfffrepef'] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4 6. Flor. d. g. h. Parr. D S T. Commonly via6p6-rep aVSpe?, aXX' e'av e'/iot , faia-eade JJLOV. vpels 6 tcr&>? ra^;' av i, &y%dv(i) wv rotovro?, 0409 UTTO roO ^eov r^ TroXei SeS6cr$ai, 1 IvOevSe av /cara- vorja'aiTe. ov yap avOpwTrivo) eoi/ce k TO e/ie Tov irpecrfivrepov, TreidovTa eVi/ieXeto-^ai dpe- T?}?. KOI el /LtevTOt Tt aTTO rovrwv direkavov Kal /Aiadov Xa/iySavov TaOra Trape/ceXeuoyu-7/v, el^ov ay Ttva XOYOV n)v Se opdre Brj /cat avroi, on ol Karijyopoi TaXXo TraVTa avaia^yvT&)9 ovrco Karr)jopovvre<; rovro 76 ou^ olot re eyevovro d7ravaia'xyvTf)trai,, Trapaa^ofievoi p,apTvpa, &>9 eyco irore riva rj eTrpa^d^v ^icrQov rj yrriaa. iicavov yap, ot/iat, eya) Trape%p/j,ai rov fj,dp- rvpa, 1 a>9 d\,r)df) Xeyw, rrjv Treviav. XIX. v ls, which is changed from Bodl. Ven.b. Vind.1.4.6. Flor.g.h. Par. D ST. o.* certainly is the emphatic word. APOLOGY OF SOCEATES. 33 eya) t'oYa jj,ev ravra %vfjLJ3ov\evu> Trepiiaiv Kal TTO\V- Trpay/Aovb), Brjf^oa-La Be ov roX/ico avaftawwv et? TO 7rA,?7#o iraXau eTre^elprjcra Trpdrretv ra iro\iTLK.d 7rpa ovn fjia%ov/j,evov XIX. KO! itoXvitpa.yiJ.ovla] So Bodl. Vintl.1.4. 6. Flor. g. h., and some others; the rest have iro\vTrpay/jiOfcav. yiyvfTcu (tpaivii) ] This (fitavfj, although retained by all MSS., is nevertheless so needless, that it has been deservedly considered as a gloss. irayKd\oj/ c , IBwreveiV, d\\a pij Brjfjiocrteveiv. XX. MeyaXa ' eyoxye vplv reKpripia . ov \6yovs, aXX' o vp,dopTitcd /iV Kal Sueavi/cd,* d\r)6fj Be. 'E rovf OVK aveXo/tevoi"? TOU? etc rr)<> vavpu- ^ta9 /3ov\ea-6e dOpoovs icpiveiv, A Trttpavc/ico?, &>V j>.~\ Commonly {nrdyeiv, which is corrected from Bodl. Vat.a.b. six Vradobb., all the Florentine, and most others. See in.tc. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 35 VfMWV K.e\eVOVrU>V KOi /3oCi)VT(0V, fJLra TOV VOfJLOV KCtl rov Bt/caiov wjJbTjv /xaXXov yu-e oelv SiaKivSvveveiv rj /te#' yeveadat, /itr) Sl/caia {3ov\evofieva>v, 9 7rA,etcrToi9 dvaTrXfjaat alriwv.^ rore ov \6ytp, aXX' epya> av eveSei^d/JirjV^ on epol davdrov fj>ev fj.e\ei,, el ///?) dypoiKorepov rjv etVeiv, ovS" oriovv, rov 8e /JurjSev aSi/cov jjt,rj8' dvocriov epyd^eo-dai, rovrov 8e TO irav /zeXei. 1 e/^e yap eKelvtj rj dp%f] OVK e^err)^]- %ev oi/rco? lo-^vpa ovcra, e5?re aSitcov ri ep) e/c T% 66\ov e^TJ\do/^ev } ol fj,ev rerrapes e/9 ^aXafuva KOI rj^wyov Aeovra,- ejo) Se aTTtcbv o'ifcaSe. ical t'crw? av Sta ravr aTredavov, el fjurf 77 dp-^rj 8ia ra%ea)V KareXvdr). /cat rovrwv vfuv ecrovrai TroXXot fjidprvpes. XXI. !4p' ovv av fie olecrOe road&e err) Siayeveadai, el errparrov ra S^/zocrta, Kal rrpdrrwv d%iwv ouSet?. aXX' eyco Sia Travro? TOV /3/of Srjf^oala re elirov TI eVpa^a, T0fotm>9 - Trore v r yywpr)(ras ovSev Trapa TO St/catoi/ oine aXXro cure Toura)V ovSevl, o&5 ot 8ia./3aXXovTe9 /ie <>ao-iv e//,oi9 /ia^ra? elvat. c 670) 8e SiSacr/eaXo9 t aev ot>8evo? TTCOTTOT' eyevo/Aijv el 8e TI9 T^V air lav L7re^oi/Ltt, c /u-rfre virecr'^o^v pTjSevl [AijSev TrcoTrore uddrj/MZ yre eBlBa^a. el Be T/9 ^Tycrt Trap' e//.oO TrtuTrore Tt 77 dfcovcrai ISiq o Tt fir) /cal 01 aXXot 7raVT69, ey tWe, ort ou/c d\rjdfj \ejei. XXII. '^4XXa Sta rt 8?; TTOTe /LteT' eytxou %alpovcrt ots ol Sta/SaAAojres] Commonly ots 5^ ol 8. But 8^ is omitted in Bodl. Ven. b. Parr. D S T. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. In Ven.b. Flor. h. and others, otts SiaSaAAovres. imevnei&Kohtv.'] So Bodl. CoisL Ven. a. b. Par. A B C D E S T. six Vindobb. Flor. a. b. e. g. h. Zitt. Commonly 4-irtevfwl, which Bekker has retained. Socrates speaks as referring all those things to the present time; whence he proceeds, further on, ov5e \u.p.&a.vu>v ajtovtiv 3>v fa A.] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. a b. Vindd. Florr., and most others. Old editions, d*cot5ei. *?7/u, TrposTzraKTai a ^TTO roO Trpdrreiv Kal e/c fMavreiwv KOL e evvrrviwv Kal rpoTra), (pTrep rt? TTOTC ~ai aAA,?; ^e/a, p.olpa dvdpa)7ra) ical QTLOVV Trpo^erafe Trpdrretv. Tavra, (o civ&pes 'Adijvaioi, Kal d\,7]drj eart Kal eve\eyKTa. b el yap Sr) 70)76 TWV vea)V row /xev Sta(j)depa), TOU? Se Sie(f)6apKa, Xprjv S/^TTOI;, el're rtve? avrwv Trpecrftvrepoi yevoftevoi fyvaMr.av, ore veow ovcriv avrols eya) KaKov TrcoTTore Ti i;vve/3ov\6vcra, vvvl avrovs dvaflaivovras fj,ov KaTrjyopelv Kal Tip,u>pei(r9ai' el Se pr) avrol ?'^eXov, c ro)v ol/cetwv rtva? r6 TWI* vW] So Bodl. Vat. Ven.b. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor. d. g h. Par. D S T. Commonly tyu TU>V rfoirepaiv. Bekker also lias retained veooTfpwv. f/mov TI Kaicbv tir.] Commonly KO.K&V n, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Coisl. Vind. 1. 3. 4. 6. Flor. d. e. g. h. Par. J) S T. A little further, old editions, of a-iruv oiVe?ot, which we have also changed from all the best JI SS. vvv /ue^vr)(T9oi.] Commonly Kal TtpaiptTtrOai is added, which does not appear in Vind. 2. 3. Flor. a. b. c. e. i. Zitt. Par. BCEH. g. Coisl. Aug. Ven. A. TroAAo! ecTaufloTJ Some MSS. incorrectly have eVraCeo. 33 PLATO. eTreiTd Avvaviatf 6 S^-rao?, Alcr^ivov rov ert, 'AvTityuv 6 Kyfyicnevc; OUTGO-/, 'Evriyevovs rolvvv o5rot, g &v ol doe\(f)ol ev ravrrj ry f) yeyovaai, NiKocrTparo^, h 6 eosftoriSov, eooorov teal 6 pev OeoSoro? TereXevTrjicev, &>9Te ovtc av eicetvos ' 6'Se re 'Abe t/iavro?, 6 'ApiaTowos, ov aSeX6o9 ovTOcrl ITXaTcov, /cat AlavToStopos, ov 'ATroXXoSwpos o&e aBe\.6 vpJiv eiTrelv, wv Tiva eftpfiv fidXiara ftev ev rq> eavrov \6j(o Tra- pa(r%a6ai MeXijrov fidpTvpa' el 8e rore CTreXa^ero, vvv Trapaa^ea-da), e Trapa^wpa), 1 Kal \eyerco, et ri e^et TOIOVTOV. aXXa TOVTOV TTOV rovvavriov eupr/crere, tx* 6fJv eiVtTv] Commonly tyoryf ex, against the au- thority of Bodl. Vat. Ven.b, Vind. 1. Flor.'d.g.h. Par. D ST. \6y v irapao-xtVea.] So Bodl. Coisl. Ven.b. Vind 1 4 6 Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Commonly Tap^e^a.. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 39 8e d8ide?' a /xev eya) e^otyu.' av d7ro\oyeiadai,, cr^eSov e'crrt raOra, teal a\\a tcrco? roiavra. Td^a 8' av rt9 y/iwv dyava/crijareiev* dva- /jLVrjaOels eavrov, el 6 pev eXarra) rovrovi TOV dy&vos djwva d')wvi%6fjt,evo<; b e8ei]6rj re KOI iKerevcre row 8z/ca<7ra5 /iiera TroXXcov 8a/cpv&)V, 7rai8la re avrov dva/3i/3acrd/j,evo<;, tVa.o rt /xaXtcrraeXe^^etT;, /cat aX- Xou? TWV ol/celcov Kal (f>i\o)V TroXXoy?, 7^ ^^ ouSev apa Toyrcov TrotJ/aco, /cat raOra /ctvSuveutov, a>9 av 86^ai/u,t, TOV e'cr^arov /c/v8uvov. ra^;' av oSv Tt9 ravra e'vvo7;cra9 avOa^karepov av 7rpo9 fte o-^olrj^ 6el<> aurot9 roi;Tot9 ^etro af ytier' opyrjs et 8*) Tt9 V/ACOV oi;Ta)9 e^et, ou/c a^iw /xev yap on ^vviaaai] So with Bas. 2. is read in BodL Ven. b. Vat. Vind. b. Flor. g. h. Par. S T. and marg. Flor. a. c. Commonly i/ 1. which Bekker retained. f >9l 5 aA7j0ei5ovTi] SoBodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1.4.6.. Flor. g. h. Par. D S T. Old editions, fyiol 5e dA?j9^ \fyovri, which is a gloss. XXIII. (rxtSJy fcrrj TOUTCC] Commonly o-xeSJv T( eVrt, against the best MSS. fdrhdri re Kal 'iKerfvfff'] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Par. B C D H S T. Ang Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. g. h. with Bas. 2. Com- monly SeSe'rjTot re K. IK., which is in vain defended by Schsefer, Demosth. Ap]>ar T. II. p. 652. jraiSia re CU'TOV] Stcph. wrote avrov, which is unnecessary in this narration. KOL 'O^pov, 6 ov& 3U09 ou8' drco 7reTp779 TTfxfrvKa, aXX eg C09T6 L^6^evo^, co a9 ari/ia^cov aXX' el p,ev avarov rj /*?;, aXXo9 Xo709, 7T/009 UI/ S6av ral e//,ot Kal vpJiv Kal o\rj rfj TroXet ov &o/cel KO\,OV elvai epe rovrwv ov&ev irately Kal ovra teal TOVTO rovvofta ep^ovTa/ elV ovv a\,i)6e9 Beivov 71 olopevovs Tre/crecr&u, el aTToOavovvrai, &<$7rep ddavd-rwv e'cro/iei/cov, eav vpels avTot"? pi] aTroKTelvrjTe' o'i e/zot SOKOVCTIV ni9 7 re yap, a> aV8/3e? 'Adrjvalot, ft)? OLiSei? TMV e/acov Karvjyopcov, /cat al T&> ^e&> Kplvai irepl fj,ov Te'apuna elvai Kal vpJiv. XXV. To /AW prj cvyavaKTelv,* w avSpes 'Adrjvaioi, 7rl TOVTM ru> yeyovoTi, on fj,ov tcare-^rrjcpla-aa-de, a\\a re pot, 7ro\\a ^uyu-ySaXXerat, Kal OVK dve\,7rio-r6v /AOI eKarepwv rwv -^ri^wv rov yeyovora dpidfiov. ov yap eycoye ovrca 'Trap' 6\lyov ecreaOai, aXXa irapa XXIV. oijKow xtfi] Commonly OVKOW, which is correctel from Par. D T. Yen. h. Vind. 1. 4. 6. jixciAKTTa juevrot Kal at vy. The MSS. disagree. I have given what Bekker has collected from them. v, aTTOTre^evyrj dv. MeX-rjrov fj.ev o5v, &>evya aXXa Travrl 8rj\ov rovro , ov neraXaftav TO irep.Trrov XXVI. TipaTat 8' ovv fj,oi 6 dvT]p Oavdrov* Elev. eyo> 8e Br) rtVo? vfuv dvTiTtf^rjcrof^ai,, & avSpes lA.6r)vai- 01 ; YI Sr)\ov, OTI r^9 f ta? ; b TL ovv ; ri ai6<; elfjii Tradeiv rj dTrorlaaif o TI p,a6a)V eV TW /Siw ov% riav^iav rjyov, aXV aytteX^cra? MVTrep ol 7roAAo/, a re / ro)v a\Xa>v dwv teal fv&)/.ocrteov Kai crracretwv TCOV ev r evai rj w?re et? ravr ovra evravOa ptv OVK 7}a, e ot eX0cbv /iTjre v e/ieXXov jj,r)$ev 6'^>eXo? eli'at, eVt Se TO tSta etcaa-rov lo>v evepjereiv rrjv ^e^icnrjv evepyealav, el T-ptis n6vai] Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1.6. Flor. a. c. g. h. i. Par. B C D S with ed. Bas. 2. et -rpiaKovra (n6vai. cnroireQfvyn Sv.] Commonly oTreTre^eu^en' &v. The Attic form is preserved in Bodl., in which the common termination is inter- lined. Instances are not rare in Plato of the omission'of the augment of the pluperfect. Compare Hep. II. 374. B. Gorg. p. 5 1 5. E. Symp. p. 215. E. Matth. . 165. Fischer, ad Weller. II. p. 317. Hemsterh. ad Lucian. T. I. p. 308. Further on, the common read- ing was a\\a KOI iravTl S. The best MSS. correctly reject Kai. How a\\a is put after ov /j.6vov without oJ is shown by Hermann. ad Viger. p. 837. XXVI. ^ SrjAov] Commonly ^ S^oy, against the MSS. fvravda /jLff OVK ya] Commonly ijta. Bodl. Ven. b. $ia. Vat. $a. Compare Buttmann. Ausfuhrl. griech. Sprachlehre T. I. p. 554 et 558. ed. 1. 44 PLATO. evravda $a, f eVt^etpaV etcaaTov vfjiwv ireiQetv JJLIJ trpo- repov piJTe rwv eavTOv /ArjBevos eVi/AeXeZcr&u, irplv eavTov e7TtyieX?7$e/?7, OTTW? o>9 /SeXTto-ro? Kal 9, Trpti/ avrr>s rrjs TToXetw? TWV re aXXcov oyrco /cara rov avrov rpoTrov g 7rifjL6\eicrdcu. TI ovv etyttt a'^to? iraOeiv TOIOVTOS wv ; aryaOov rt, &) avfipes 'AOqvaloi, el Bel f)<> ovBev 8etrai, ey&) 8e 8eo//.at. et o5v Set u.e KCITO, TO Sl/caiov rr9 ata TOUTOU Tifjuwftai,, ev irpvTavew (TiTi(rea><;. XXVII. "Jcr&>9 ouv v/citv /azl ravxl Xe^cov TrapaTrXij- crt&>9 8o/cco Xe7etv &S7rep irepl TOV OCKTOV TO 70) e/cwv etrat b /^-rjoeva dSiiceiv dvdpwTrwv, aXXa /u,as.] Commonly Tiju/tai, T^S ^j/ irp. ffirfatias. The article is omitted in Bodl. Vaf. Coisl. Ven. A a. b. Ang. Par. C E H. Vind. 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. Flor. a. b. c. d. g. h. Zitt. Further on, the old editions again have oTrauflaSiafo^ej/os, which is changed from many MSS. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 45 fj,e6a' c eTret, 009 eyu>fj,ai, el r/v vfuv v6yuo9, co97rep /cat aXXo9 dvdpcoTTOis, Trepl Oavdrov /J,r) piav r)/J,epavfJ*6vov Kpivew, aXXa 7roXXa9, eTreladrfTe dv vvv S' ou paSiov ev ^povw oXt/yw fj,eyd\as Sta/3oXa9 aTroXvecrdat,. Tre- Treicr/jLevos Srj eyo) firj^kva dSifcelv TroXXoO Sea) efta 9 a Tt Se/cra?; ^ yu-^7 7rdda) e rovro, ov MeX^ro? /*ot Tt/zarat, o (/>?7/u ou/c elSevat, OUT' et dya66v OUT' et KCLKQV eanv ; dvrl TOVTOV 8r) eX&)yU,at 9 d\6yicrT6s el/ju,, 1 W9T6 /u,r) crdai OTI XXVII. SsTrep KO.} &\\ois~\ Commonly Sffirtp, against all the MSS. /xiar liufpav it.6vov~] Commonly n'lav /j.6vov ^/ue'p., which is changed from Bodl. Vat. a. b. Vindobb., the Florentine, and most others. Bekker from Par. D S. has given ulav rifntpav \>Avi\v. ireirfiffntvos 5?j 701] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1.6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S. Commonly irfirfiff/j.evos 5' tyca. &io's eipi TOV /co/coD] The MSS. rov K. See note. TI SeiVor; ^ /^ ir.] The MSS. ri SeiVas, ^ ^ ?ra0a>. See note. e\ca/j.cu uiv tv old' on] Commonly f\w/j.ai n i> K. r. A. But TI is omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. a, b., six Vindobb., Flor. a. b. c. d. e. g. i. Par. B C D H S. Ang. Zitt., and, indeed, appears to have been inserted by grammarians. oTrsp vvv 6fy lAe^ov] Commonly Si) vvv, against the MSS. Further on, Bodl. (p. Ti^tfai^cu. 46 PLATO. > T / t r /1J \ 5 \ /iou OI/Y otot re eyevecrue eveytcew ra? e/ia? /3a9 /cat TOV9 Xo7ot>9, aXX' t)/uv /Sapvrepcu yeyovaai /Cat 7Tl(f)00V(t)Tepai, W9T6 fyjTetT dVTWV VVVl ttTTaX- \ayrjvai' aXXot Be apa k avras olcrovai, paS/tu?. iro\\ov ye Bel, w avSpe? 'Adijvalot. aXo? ovv av pot, 6 /3/o? ), Xe^ovro? e/to; aKpodcrov- rai ol veoi w?7rep eV^aSe. rav //.ev TOVTOVS aire- \avv(0, m ovrot e'/^e at>rol efeXcocrt, Tre/^ovre? TOU? vrpeafivTepovs' eav Be ^ a-7re\avva), ol TOVTCOV Trare- pes re /cat oliceioi Si' avrovs TOVTOVS. XXVIII. ".To-&)>? out/ av T4? etTTOt, J!tya)v Be /cat r)(rv%lav aywv, w ^tu/cpare?, ou^ oto9 T' e'cret ^e\0cbv %?)V ; Tovrl Brf eVrt Trdvrwv %a\e7rcoT Tretcrat Ttra? V^JLWV. edv re yap Xeyeo, 6'rt rco aireidelv rovr earl /cat Sta TOVT' ttSyvaro ayetv, ov Trelcrea-de p,oi to? elpa)vevofj,ev(t)' edv T o.v Xe7 TTOI- etcrBat /cat rwv aXXwv, Trept cov u/iet9 e/ioy aKouere Bia\eyo/jievov /cal efiavrbv /cat aXXou9 e^erd^ovTos, 6 Be dveeraa-rof /3to9 oy 8tcoT09 avd7ra>, b raOra S' 8?rot &v A0a>] Commonly oirrj, against the best MSS. XXVIIL "Siyum Sc] Commonly re, which is corrected from Bodl. Vcn.b. Vat. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d.g.h. Par.DS. ^T'auA7&>] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1.6. Flor. d.g.h. Par. D S T. The common reading was tdv T' o30tr. Many MSS. with Bas. 2. have edv ravra \. neyia-rov ayadbv Sv] *Oi> has been lately added from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. f/j.ov a/coiWe.] Commonly ijKoveTf, which is changed from Bodl., and most others. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 47 en YITTOV ireicreo-de p.oi \eyovrt. TO, Se e%et fiev o{/r&>9, a>9 eya> i,ei,v. el ovv Trepie/jLelvare 6\iyov xpovov, UTTO rov avro/j,drov av vfj.iv TOVTO ov j>a$iov~] Commonly o'5ia, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Ven.b. Vind. 1.4.6. Flor.g^h. Par. D S T. XXIX. oTreKT^are] So Bodl. Yen. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. a. c. d. g. h. Par. D. The common reading \vas avticrovTi- KOT6, on which form, see Bast. Epist. Crit. p. 242. ed. Lips. ovv irepieju.] Commonly yovv, which is corrected from Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Bekker re- tained the common reading. vfjuv TOVTO 7tVfTo]. Commonly, the words tjitf "reOvdvat 5-t], are added, which gloss is correctly omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Par. D S T., and the Florentine MSS. 48 PLATO. eyeVero" b -opdre yap Brj Trjv rj\iKiav, ort TTOppw rjBr) eVrt TOV {Biovf Oavdrov 8e cyyvs. \eya} Be TOVTO ov ia?, aXXa Trpbs TOI)? efj,ov Kara^rrj(picr- ddvarov. \eyo> Se Kal roSe TT^O? TOV? aurou? "Iacov, aXXa roX//,?;? /cat avatcr^uvr/a? /cat roO eOe\eiv \eyeiv irpos v/ia? rotaOra, ot' av u/itv /iet' ^Stcrr' T^V a/covetv, Oprjvovvros re /ioy /ea^ oSvpopevov Kal aXXa TTOLOVVTOS Kal Xe^yovTO'? TroXXa /cat dvd^ta e/itoO, . {>a.ov is omitted in Ven. b. Vind. 3. 6. Flor. a. b. c. e. g. h. i. Coisl. Ang. Par. B C D E H S T. Yet it is preserved in Bodl. which has /5(jioi>. Further on, for the common reading rparels, we APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 49 d(j>els fcal eft iKereiav rparr6p,evos Oavdrov Sl/c^v 6'0\a)V, 1 ouTOi 8' UTTO T-y9 aXfrjOeias fur)(6i)pfav teal dBcteiav. Kal ey&yye TO? rifj,tffj,ari, e//,/^ev&), /cat ovroi. Tavra /iev ouv TTOU t'crco? oimo /cat e'Set cr^etv, /cat ot/iat XXX. To Se 8^ /u,Ta TOUT Srycrat, co Kara'^n f )(f)ia'd/j,ei>ol fj,ov Kal p.d\i(rr av drroOavelcrdai. ?7/u e, ripcopiav vplv ij^eiv evOits pera rov ef.tov have substituted rpav6^fvos from Bodl. Coisl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 3. 4. 6. Flor. d. e. h. Par. D S T., and others. MXaval iroAAai] So the best MSS. for the common reading iroAAol /j.r)xa.val. of 5' Vol Kariryopoi] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. Commonly of Se /uou K. Kal vvv 4y& &*.~\ So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind 1. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par D S T. Old editions, KOI vvv S^j fy' v/j.u>v, which is changed from Basil. 2. and Vat. Vind. 1.4. 6. Flor. a. c. d. g. h. Par. CD. and from (an alteration) in B. Ven. b. (from a correction.) KOI 7&>7 T< Ti/xr^cm] Bekker gives as a correction KO\ tyta re T, T., against all the MSS. So Ficinus's translation : atque ego quidem prenae acqiiiesco, ct isti. XXX. Ipe aireKT^are] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. 50 PLATO. Odvarov rro\v ^aXeTrcorepav vrj AC f) oiav e/j,e dfreKro- vare. b vvv yap rovro eipyacrOe oto/ievot a7raXXa- e9 eya) /caret^ov, u/xet? Be OVK Tjcrddveade' teal ^aXeTrcorepot eaovrai oaw vew- tepoi ei'crt, teal v/iet? yu-aXXov cvyavaKTijcreTe. el yap oiea-Oe aTTo/creiVovre? dvdpwTrovf eTTKT^creLV rov Tiva v}uv, on, OVK opdcof ^}re, OVK opdws ov yap ecrd' avrrj rj d7ra\\ayrj ovre Trdvv Bvvarr) ovre Ka\,rj, d\\* eKelvtj Kal KaXkicrrf] /cat /j,r) TOU? aXXou? Ko\oveiv, d a\V eav rov rrapa- eiv, 6V&>9 ecrrai to? /SeXTtcrro?. Tavra /j,ev ovv v/jitv rot? XXXI. Tot? Se d7ro^rr](f)icrafjievoLs SiavofivBf] Commonly ov KO.XUS S'., which I have not hesitated to change from Bodl. Coisl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. a. c. d. g. h. Par. B C D H S T. Aug. The repetition of opflis makes the sentence more emphatic. Bekker retained the common reading. ou ydp fcrQ' aSrij] Commonly ai/re, which is corrected from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. a. g. h. Par. D S T. and an alteration in B. eavrbv TrapatrK.] Commonly avr6v wliich is corrected from the best MSS. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 51 e\66vra fie Set redvdvai. d\\d ^tot, o> av8pe9, irapa- /Melvare rocrourov ypovov ovoev yap KwXveu Biaftv- 0o\oy?](rai Trpos aX\,rj\ovs, eW e^ea-nv. vfuv yap &>Qri TO rov 0eov arjfj,iov, ovre rjvltca dvefiaivov evravdol eVt TO Sifcacrrripiov, our ev TO) \6ya) ovSa/j,ov peXX.ovrL TL epeiv Kai TOI ev aXXot? \6yois TToXXa^oO Brj fj,e eVecr^e \eyovra pera^vf vvv 8e ovSa/jiov Trepl avrrjv rrjv Trpd^iv ovr ev epya> ovBevl ovr ev \6yw rjvavriwrai poi. ri ovv afoiov elvai VTTO- ; d eyoi VJMV epw' tfivSwevet, yap pot TO TOUTO dyaOov yeyovevai, fcal OVK eaG" OTTO)? reel's op6wsv7ro\.afj,(3dvofAev,ocroi, olo/J,e0a /ca/cov elvac TO reOvdvai. peya fM)t Te/cfjujpiovrovrov yeyovev XXXI. rl irore yoeT] Commonly rl ITOT' tvvofi, against the usage of the language, and the authority of all the best MSS. ov8au.ov fj.t\\ovri TL tpfiv^\ Commonly oi/re iv rTOU] 'Commonly TOVTO, which is changed from Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 4. Flor. d. g. Par. D S T. 52 PLATO. ov yap 6(70' 07rro9 OVK r/vavricad-rj dv /iot TO arjpeiov, el pr) n e/u-eXXov eyw dyadbv Trpd^e XXXII. 'Evvotf(Tci)fj,ev Se KOI r^Se, a o>9 \7Tt9 e rvy^avei ovaa icai jjuero itc^a is rfj ilrvxf) c TOV TOTTOV evdev&e et9 ak\ov TOTTOV. /cat Sr) fj,r}8efjila A atcrOrjcris ecrriv, aXX' olov {/7TV09, tcaOevSoov /Mr/S" ovap f^rjBev opa, davp-dcnov av irj 6 Odvaros. y(i> ydp av ot/iat, e ei nva K\J*d[j,evov Sect ravrrjv rrjv vv/cra, ev $ ovrco tcare- Sapdev, W9T6 fM;S' ovap iSeZv, KO\ Ta9 a\\a$ vvrcTas re Kal rj/j,pa}9 VVKTOS (3ej3ia>- Kev ev To5 eaurov /3/ft), ot/iat av /J,rj ori I8i(orrjv f rivd, d\\a rbv peyav ftacrikea evapidfjujrovs av evpeiv avrbv ravras 5 7rpo9 T9 a\X9 ripepas Kal vvKras. el ovv roiovrov 6 Odvaros ecrri, Kep$o<$ eywye \eya>' Kal yap ovSev 7rXewv h o 7T9 ^povo9 (^aiverat OVTO> Br) elvai rj fjila vv. el 8' av olov dTro^rjfjb^aal eariv 6 6dvaros evdevSe et9 aXhov TOTTOV, Kal d\i]dij eart, ra \ey6fieva, &>9 apa eKel elcrlv aTravres ol reOvewres, TI jj,el%ov XXXII. fifro'iKijffis vfj i//yx??] So Bod. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par S. Commonly TT/S fyvxys, wliich Bekker also has retained. "We have preferred the dative, because this construction was less known to the grammarians, and, therefore, might easily have been changed into the other. Further on, 8); is omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. d. h: Par. D S T. Wcras &/j.eivov] Commonly 6ir6ffas, against the best MSS. SiracTes ol T0i/.] Commonly irotvres, which is changed from all the best MSS. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 53 dyadov rovrov elrj av, w -dv8pe<; SiKaaral ; el yap TI9 a a9, oitrep teal Xeyovrat e/cet St/caetv, re Kal 'Pa8duavdvs l Kal Ala/cos Kal teal a'XXot, oaoi rwv rifiiOecov Si'/catot ejevovTO ev ra> eaurcov /3i'w, apa $>av\ri av eir) rj aTroSij/jtla ; rj av 'Op(f)i gvyyeveadai Kal Movcraia) Kal 'HcrioSa) Kal 7TOC7&) av Ti9 Se^atr' av vuwv ; k ejai uev 9 eya) o?//,at, OVK av d^Se^ eiij. Kal Srj TO fieyicrTOV, TOVS e/cet e^erd^ovra Kal epevvwvra w$Trep TOU? evravda Sidryeiv, Tt9 avrwv cro^>o9 ecrrt /cat r/9 ot'era/ //.ev, ecm S' oi/. eVt TTOCT&) 8' aV Tt9, co aVSpe9 BiKaaral, Be^airo e^erdcrai rov TOVTQIV ruv . ITaAa^Sei] Commonly naAa^r ( Sjj, which is not more in use than 2,ctiKpdrri. The true reading is given by almost all the MSS. Kal Sri T b fityurrov'] Commonly Kal S$i Kal rb (it., which is preserved by Bekker. nal is correctly omitted in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 6. Flor. d. g. h. Par. D S T. TI'S ainwv ffo elvai jrpb? rbv Odvarov, KOI ev ri rovro Sia- voelcrdai d\rj6e<>, b on OVK eariv dvSpl d that has been hitherto produced, shall prove that it is not his work. Two things, chiefly, induce me to maintain this opinion; in the first place, the language, against which Ast makes no parti- cular objection, which unites all the peculiarities of the first period of the Platonic writings just as clearly as the language of the Apology ; and secondly, the great strictness with which the author keeps to the individual case which is the subject of the conversation abstaining from introducing any kind of enquiry concerning first principles an act of moderation, which such inferior men as the other Socratic philosophers, were certainly in- capable of; and by which Plato at the same time clearly distinguishes this work from his other writings. Hence the strong emphasis, which is laid on the assertion, that all deliberation in com- mon is impossible for those who start from dif- ferent moral principles an emphasis, which must rather be ascribed to Plato, who thereby intended to explain the nature and the tenor of the conver- sation, than to Socrates, who would hardly have made use of it towards his friend Crito, since he could only differ from him in his inferences. CRITO. (jy Little importance, perhaps, is to be attached to the statement of Diogenes, that the conversation actually occurred between Socrates and ./Eschines, and that Plato, from dislike towards the latter, substituted Crito in his place. However, it is possible that Plato in this respect may have made some alteration, and chosen Crito, who was most secure by his station and age from unpleasant con- sequences, and who probably died soon after the death of Socrates. The desire, at least, of not compromising any of the Athenian friends of So- crates is evident from the fact, that Plato only mentions strangers as having partaken in the plan of saving Socrates by his escape from prison. So that the fact itself is not improbable, but the motive seems to be fictitious, but whose invention it is we do not know. IIAATflNOS K P I T Q N. Chap. I. Ti TrjviKaSe d(j)lai, co Kptrwv ; ?'} ov 7rpa> rri ecrrtV; KP. Haw fj,ev ovv. ^f2. HrjviKa //.aXiora;* KP. "OpOpos /3a#y?. b S&. @avfjidoL>, O7TU9 Tj^eX^crt crot 6 roO Sea-fj,a>TrjpLov ^(aicpare^, SLO, TO Sevpo oiTav, KCLI n Kal evepyerr]Tai d VTT e/j.ov. "Apri> Be ^ei? ?) Trakal; KP. Chap. I. fj ov vpy eri] All MSS. read vptai. But riacher, on the autliority of the old grammarians, rightly judged that irp$ ought to be restored. See Tim. Gloss, under this word. Hermann De em. rat. Gr. Gr. L 8. p. 36 sqq. The metre in Aristophanes everywhere requires irpcf to be a monosyllable, as Brunck observes ad Lysistr. v. 613., although the MSS. have irpwt in that passage also. The ancient copyists, instead of subscribing the i to the long vowels, used to put it after them, which we know to have been constantly done in the Bodleian MS. But Buttman was deceived in recom- mending the rejection of t by an appeal to the authority of the Etym. M. which speaks only of pronouns of the dual number, Compare Matthias Gr. Grammar, vol. i. p. 118. oTra's T/0e'Arjcre aot] Ven. a. Coisl. Vind. 2. 3. 5. and pr. Ang. TJ8f\e, which Buttmann ought not to have omitted. KOI TI Kal tvepyeri]Tai~\ Aid. with Par. E. Flor. b. g. i. KCU. roi KM. Aid. Bas. 2. Steph. eiiepytrelrni, which we have changed from Bodl. Ven. b. Vind. 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7. f lor. a. c. d. e. h. i. Tub. Zitt. Huet. Ang. Par. H. S. In several other MSS., ei/i) l >yerriT9 TjSeftK Kadev8ei evSaiftovicra rov rpoirov, 1 TTO\V 8e yua- XtaraeV TJ; vwiTrapeo-raia-r) gvpfopa, co? pa&iu>savrr]V /cat Tr/jaco? c/>epet9. 5"/2. Kat 7ap ai/, GO KptVwv, 7r\r)/j,- ayavaKrelv rrf\iKovrov ovra, el Set r/Sy; re- j'. KP. Kat aXXot, a> Hfotcpares, r^Xt/courot eV rotayrat? ^v^opal 1 ? aXtcr/covTaf, k dXX' ouSev aurou? eVtXuerat 17 j^Xt/c/a TO /i^ oyp^t aryavatcreiv rrj Trapovar) Tv^rj. 5"/2. "E9 e/iot , eV rot9 (Sapvrar n av eveytcaipi . 5"/2. TtW ravryv ; rjrb TrXoiov dc/)t/CTat p e'/c ArjKov, ov 8et dc/>t- Ko/jievov redvdvai //,e ; KP. Ou rot S?) dtyitcrat, dXXa So/cet /*ev /u,ot ?7^etv q njfj,epov % &v dTrayyeXXovo'iv lv roffavrtj re i7/>.] So Bodl. Vind. 2. 4. 5. 6. Tub. Ven. a, b. Flor. a. b. c. f. h. i. Aug. Huet. Zitt. Par. B C D E H S. Ang. with Bas. 2. In the common editions re was wanting; it is put after d7pu;m' 9 in Vat. Vind. 1. 3. 6. Flor. d. g. OUTOUJ (?7n\u6Tai] So Bodl. Vind. 1. 6. 7. Flor.d.f.g. Huet. Par. D S. and pr. Vat. b. Commonly OUTO?S. w" XO^TTJ"] Bodl. with some others: x a * E *V * a * - pslav, ou . T. A., which arose from .what follows. The error may be detected from some MSS. having Kal.papftav marked with points. a\\a 5o? /ie'i> pot fyeiv] Bodl. Tub. Flor. h. Par. D. Ven. b. CEITO. 67 es rtve? CUTTO Soutrfav KOI Kara\i7r6vre^ e/cet Sfj\ov ovv K TOVTWV TUV dyye\a)V, ore r/ei Tij/j,epov, /cal dvdjKij Srj ei9 avpiov eKpaTes, TOV (Biov ere re\evrdv. II. %fl, ' AXfC, w Kpmwv, TV^T] dyadrj.* el ravrr] Tot9 deois ydp TTOV varepala Bel pe a 77 rj av e\6rj b TO TfXolov. KP. ^acri ye rot j) ot' rovTcav tcvpiot. c %fl. Ov TOLVVV T?}? eTTiovar)^ rjfjiepas ol/j,ai avro ij^eiv, u\\a rr}? erepa?. re/cyu,at- pofj,at 8e etc TWOS evvTrvlov, o ewpatca uXiyovTrporepov ravrrj^ T% VVKTOV Kal KivSvveveis Iv /caipqj TIVL^ OVK eyetpal p.e. KP. *Hv 8e &rj ri TO evvTrviov ; 'JESo/cet T/9 /ioi yvvr] r rrpose\6ova'a? ?^9, \evKa Qii)v epi/3(t)\ov ro evvirviov, (W9 7' e'//,ot 8o/cet, w III. KP. ylt'av 76, 009 eoiKev. d\\\ u> (Jt)KpaTe<>, eVfc /cat vOv e^ol ireidov Kal aoodrni. a> eav crv cnToOdvrjS, ov pia vfj,s ye /uot 5. But correctly, Tub. Flor. d. Sis y' >ol 8. III. ov n'ta |ujti!p.] Commonly ov$e/j.ia, which is corrected from Coisl. Ven. H. Vind. 2.3. Par. B E H. Ang. Flor.i. Zitt. Im- mediately afterwards, (trrtv a\\a x- is from Bodl. Coisl. Ven. E. Ang. Par. B E II. Vind. 2. 3. Zitt., for the common reading lanv 68 PLATO. X9 oto? T' , et T7#eXov ava\i(TKeiv ^pijf^ara^ dfj,e\rj(rai. b Kal rot, rt9 av ala"%i(i)v e'iij ravrrj^ 86^a c rj Sotceiv xpifaaTa rrepl TrXetbvo? Troieiadat, r) eVtet/cecrTaTOi, wr //.aXXov a^iovtypovTi^ew, ifyijcrovTai avra ovrco TreTrpd^dcu, W97rep a^ TTpa^jdrj. KP. ^4XX' 6pa9 c>?7, ort dvcvyfcrj, c5 2a)KpaTe<>, Kal r?}9 rwv TroXXwi' SO^TJS /jbeXeiv. avrd 8e &ij\a rd 7rap6vra d vvvi, on, oloi r elcrlv ot TtciXXoi ov ra a^bLKporara rwv KaK&v e'ep- ydeeXoj>, co Kpirwv, oloL re elvai ol TroXXot ra fAeyicrra icaica e^ Ufa olol re rjcrav* av Kal dyadd rd fMeyicrra' Kal ay ei^e. vvv Be ovSerepa oloi re ovre pova Svvarol Troifja-ai, 7roiov a'XXojv e7rtrr)8el(av, pr), eav ait ev9ev8e e'eX07/-dvra<> { a>? eyreXet?, Kal ov8ev av Seat, 7r aurou9 g TroXXov dpyvplov ; crol Se inrdp^ei /juev ra e/jia ^pTJfjuara, h co? eyw/jiai, iKavd' eTreira Kal el ri ejAov KqSo/jievos OVK o'lei Belv dvdXicrKeiv ra/za, evoi ovroi evddSe 1 eroifj-Oi dvaXicrKew. el? Se /ce/co/it/cev erf avro rovro dpyvpiov iKavov, % ipfjilas 6 Qrjftalos' erot/io? 8e Kal Kefir/? Kal aXXot TroXXol rrdvv. v o ri %/oft>o cravra). /u,ev jap Kal aXXocre oVot av dcf)iKr) n IV. M^Tg ToiVuf T. <.] Commonly /i^ which is changed from Bodl. Yen. b. Tub. Vind. 7. Flor. f. h. Huet. Par. D S. efs 5e KeK9 view row cravrov e//,ofye 8o/cei9 TrpoSt&ovai, ou9 crot eov ral eKdpetyai /cal etcTraiSevcrai ol^rjcret Kara\t7TK>v, b fcal TO o-ov yu.ep09, o rt av Tv^wcri, TOVTO Trpd^ovcr^ rev^ov- rai Se, co9 TO et/co9, TOioUTCov, oldirep eiwOe ev Tat9 opfavlais "Trepl TOW9 opfyavovs. r) 9 eyevero, /cal TO TeXeuTatov 8?) Y. Totavru \0es] Bodl. Ven. b. Flor. d. f. eh^KQev : in Bodl. liowever, els^\0j is interlined. The third person can scarcely be admitted consistently with what follows, t$>v ^ tlstKdtiv. CRITO. 71 TOVTI, wsTrep Kard rr?9 Trpd^ecos, 1 KaKia rivl Kal dvavSpla rf) ri/Aerepa BiaTrecfrevyevai ?;yua? So/cetv, k di- uve? ere ov%l eVcocra/tev, ovBe ov aavrov? olov re ov Kal Svvarov, et ri Kal o~/MKpbv rjfiwv oceXo9 rjv. ravra ovv, & Stotcpares, opa, fir) a/ua raj KCUCM /cal ala-^pa y crot re KOI rjfiiv, d\\a /3ov\evov, /j,a\Xov 8e ovSe ert &pa, d\\a Be/3ov\evcr6ai. fjiia Be /' T?}9 aXXas? Trolei. VI. 5"/2. ? /2 <^/Xe Kpirwv, rj Ttpodv^ia aov TroXXoi) a^/a, el /jierd rtvo9 opdorrjros eiy* el Seyu-?;, ocr&) yu,et- ^9 70) ov (JLOVOV vvv, aXXa al alel rocovros, olo9 TWV e/iwv b fivjo'evl aXXto TreiOeaOai ?} ro3 Xo7w, 09 aV /xot Xoyi^o^evw ySeXTtcrro9 (f)alvr)rai. roi9 8e \6yovs, 01)9 ev TW e^Trpocrdev e'Xe- 70^, ou o~vvafAai vvv eVySaXetv, eVeiS?; yu,ot 767ovev,aXXa cr^eSov rt o/j,oioi alv<)VTal fwi, avrovs 7rpea~/3eva) Kal Tt//a>, d ovsirep Kal Trporepov &v eav pr) fteXria) e-^wfiev Xe^etv eV TOO Trapovrt, ev icrOi, ori ov [MJ O-QL ^vi/, irorepov /caX&>9 e\eyero efcdcrrore rj ou, on rat? pev Bel -rwv 8o%a)v 7rpo?e^eiv TOV vovv, rat? Se ov' r) Trpiv /j,ev e/^e Beiv aTrodvrja-KeLV /ca-Xw? eXe^ero, vvv Se /car eyevero, 1 ort, aXXa>? eVe/ca Xofyou eXeyero, t , ^ 6 ayro9, ai ea9 e7wyu,at, e/cacrroTe wSe WTTO rwv olo^ievwv n \eyeiv, W97rep vi)v Sr/ e^w eXeyov, ort T Kpircav, ov So/cet /caX&)9 crot \eyeadai ; row dv, aXXa ra9 A*eV, ra9 S" ov ; ov8e nrav- , aXXa TWV yttev, TCOV 8' ov ; Ti (j)r/s ; Tavra ouyt i; KP. KaXw9. 5*/2. OVKOVV ra? yu,ev a9 rifjidv, ra9 Se Trovijpds JJLI] ; KP. Nat. ^fl. Xprjaral Be ov% at TWV ^povi/JLwv, Trovrjpal Se al rwv dffrpwwv ; KP. U&)9 S' 01;; VII. %fl. 3>epe &ij, 7rco9 ay rd rotavra eXeyero ; riai' Solav] Euseb. TOV irepl Te w5e ex*", against the MSS. TOS S6frs -rtav a.v6p.~\ Vind. 1. 6. Vat. Flor. d. with Euseb. TOS 8d|as TOJ TcSv av6p. unnecessarily. A little further ouSe trdvTw rwv 8' oC, are wanting in Bodl. Ven. b. Flor. h. Huct. Par. D S., yet they are found in the margin of Bodl. CEITO. 73 7iyxrao/ievo9 dvrjp teal TOVTO TrpaTTcov^rroTepovTravTo^ dvSpo? eVatV&> /cal ^ojti) Kal 86r) TOV vovv 7rpose%ei, rj evo9 fJiovov e/cetVou, 05 av Tvy%dvr) larpbs 77 7rai8o- &v ; b K.P. ' Evos fjuovov. 2fl.OiiK.ovv (frofietcrdat TOU? i/wyow /cat acnrd^eadai T0t>9 eVaiVov? TOU evl SO/CT} TW eTrtcTTaT?? /cat eTraiovn fJ,aX\.ov rj y ^v^Tracn rot9 aX- X,ot9- KP. "EcrTL ravra. ^fl. Elev. aTreidijcras Se TW evl /cat art//.acra9 avrov rrjv 86av /cat -7-01)9 eTratVoL'9, Ti/j,rjcra<; Be rovs rwv 7roXX,wv /cat /AqSev evratovrewv apa oySev fcafcbv Tretcrerat; KP. JTT&)9, 'iva //.r) rrdvra 6V&>//.ev. Kal Srj teal Trepl rwv BiKaicov fcal d8iKa>v Kal alcr^pwv Kal KaXwv Kal aryadwv Kal KaKWV, Trepl /??7<7o/u,e#a, o TW /xev Si/ca/w /SeXriov eyuyveTO, TOO 8e aSi'/cw aTrcoXXvTO. ^ ouSev ecrrt TOUTO ; KP. Gl^ai 670)76, /3aTat, c TO 8e SLKOIOV ovlvrja-iv ; rj av- \OTepop d rjjovfjieda elvai rov creoyLtaTO? eKelvo, o rt TTOT' ecrTt TWV rjfjierepwv, Trepl or/ re aBucla Kal r) StKaiocrvvr) ecrriv ; KP. OuSa/ico?. 5*/2. '^4XXa rifiiwrepov ; KP. IToXu 76. 5*/2. Ou/c apa, w {3e\ricrre, rravv al <^o/3e?(reaj ratJrTjr] So Vat. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Flor. a. c. d. f. Par. B C. Huet for the common reading avr^v. VITL roCro rb o-w^xa] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. 7 Vindb. Tub. Flor. d. h. and others. Commonly rb was wanting, with the ap- probation of Buttmann. er' eKeiVou ipa] Old editions' after &pa insert *a'i7i yap &i> ] Steph. STjAoS^J Kal ravra airj 7' &v TIS, see note. ol-r6s re 6 A^os] So Coisl. Vat. Ven. b. Paris. D E S. Huet. Angel. Tubing. Flor. a. b. c. h. i. and from a correction in Bodl. Tke common reading was 7*. 5oK? eriS^uoios] Irt is added from Ven. b. Huet. Par. D. Flor.h. Further on the common reading was tip irporfpcp, which is changed from Bodl. Ven. b. Huet. Par. D S. Vind. 4. Flor. h. into r$ Kal Kal rJ/'Ss a3 ffit6iTfi] Commonly r6vSe Se av CTK. But in Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Tub. Flor. d. Vind. b. Huet. 8e is correctly omitted. 76 PLATO. Se ffv \eyeis ra? a-Ke-^re^ Trepl re avaX&>o-eei>9 TO)V C teal S6^9 d teal 7ral8o)V rpoffis,* fjirj a>9 aX7?#a>9 ravra, &> Kpirwv, , TOVT(i)V TWV 7TO\\ft)V. r]fUV 8', 7ret,Sr) 6 \0709 oi/T&)9 aipel, h /J,r) ovSev a\\o afceTrreov y rj oirep vvv Br) eXeyo/^ev, irorepov Sl/caia 7rpa%op,ev KOI 'Xp'f]- fjt,ara Te\ovvre<; TOVTOIS rols eyue evdev8e e^d^ovai Kal %apiTaaivoi)fji0a aSixa avra epya^d/jievoi, yu,^ ov Bey VTTO\O- yi^ecrdai ovr el aTroQvrjcrKew Set Trapa/Aevovras Kal a7ovra9, oirre aXXo onovv Trdcr^eiv Trpb rov KP. opa e r Kotvfj, Kal ei TT-TJ e^;et9 dvTi\e9 %pr^ ev6ev8e aKovrwv 'Adrjvaicav e/ne aTTtevaf &>9 700 Tre/ot TroXXov TTOioufjLai Tretcrai ere ravra TrpdrreiV, aXXa /M^ aovro9. k opa Se Sr/ 7^9 afj,ev eKovras dStKTjreov DC irp( re acaAti(rea>j xp 7 IM ( ^ Tft " / ] So Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Tub. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. d.h. Huet. Par. D S. The common reading was Ttfpt T xpiiyjiTtav a.va\d'ffttas, which Bekker also retained. oXA^ /*)j &KOVTOS~\ &Kovra, Vind. 6. TrsipoJ a7roicpij'fjLo\oyijdij ; OTrep Koi apri e\e aZiKOvvri KOL tca/cov ical alcr%pov rvy%d- vei ov Travrl rpoTrw ; (papev, rj ov ; KP. ^a^ev. 5*/2. apa Set dSitceiv. KP. Ov Srjra. ^/2. OvSe apa avTaSt/cetv, ^.o\oyrid'rj, arap Kai apn t\eyero. Par. B C E. Ang. Flor. a. b. c. f. i. have tyevero interlined. The common reading has this sense: which was also said a little time ago. For Socrates, in what goes before, has several tunes referred to this precept, as in c. 8. towards the end. ] Commonly Tvyx^ f ' v > which is corrected from Bodl. Yen. H. a. b. Vat. Tub., 7 Vind Florent. Par. B C D E S. Zitt. and edit. Aid. Bas. 1. 2. TJ Se 5ij ;] Commonly rl Sol 8^ ; which is changed from Ven. b. Vat. Vind. 1.6.7. Flor.d.h. Huet. Par. D S. H3 78 PLATO. BiKaiov; KP. OySa/iiw?. /2. To yap rrovKaK dv6pci)7rov<;. rov aSifceiv ovBev Biaffrepet,. KP. ' \eyeif. ^fl. Ovre apa dvraBiKelv Bel ovre /oz/c ncrl ravra Kal So/cei Kal 86^ei. 049 ovv ovro) SeSoKrai KOI ols /i?;, rourot? OVK ecrri Koivrj ftovXij, aXX' avdyKij TOVTOVS aX\.ri\wv Karafypovelv, opwvra.? ra a\\rf\a)V ySot/Xeu/ttara. tr/coTret Srj ovv Kal (TV ev yu,a\a, g Trorepov /coiv&)vet9 Kal ^vv8oKt croc Kal ap^Mfjueffa evrevOev /3ov\v6fjievoi, &)? ovoeTTore opOws e%ovro<; h ovre TOV dSiKelv ovre rov avra&iKelv ovre KaKO)i>, which is changed on the authority of Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Huet. Par. DS. Vind. 1. 4. 6. Tub. Flor. d. ols olv OUTW 8.] Commonly ols 5' ovrat S. The correct reading is found in Bodl. Coisl. Ven.b. Vat. Tub. all the Vindobb. Huet Par. B C D E H S. Ang. Flor. b. c. d. f. h. i. Zitt. and others. dpwras ri dA^Xwy /3.] So Bodl. Ven.b. Vat. Tub. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. d. h. Huet. Par. D S. Old editions aMfauv rh. 0. Immediately after, the same have 8^ o5v for the common read- ing olv 8^. avriSpuvTo.'] So Bodl. Vat. Ven. b.. Tub. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. a. d. f. h. Zitt. Huet. Par. B C D S. Commonly &vrt- SpeSxTos. Kal vvv ?T 5o/rj Huet. Par. D S. Flor. h. Kal vvv oSru 8. CRITO. 79 TTorepov a av Tt9 o/jioXoytfa-rj rw St/eata ovra Trottjreov rj ^aTrarr)Tov ; KP. Hoi^reov. XL .72. *E/c TOVTWV Srj ad pei* aTTiovres evBevSe r/fieis ^ Tretcravre? rr)v 7r6\iV b irorepov /ca/c9 Ttva9 7rotot)/iev, Kal ravra 07)9 rj KIOTO, Set, rj ov ; teal e/ji/^e- vo/j,ev ol Tt9 e^ot, aXXo)9 Te /cat pr/rcap, etTretv V7TC/3 TOVTOV TOV VOfJUOV aTToXXvyLteVOf, 09 T9 6Y/Ca9 Ta9 St/cacr^etcra9 Trpo^rdrret KVploQ elvai. r) epovfiev Trpbs at>TOU9, 6Vt 'H&tfcei, yapryjids rj 7roXt9 k teal OVK opd&s rrjv Sitcyv eKpwe ; Tavra rj TI epovpev ; l KP. Tavra vrj Ai\ w ^utKpare^. XII. 5^/2. Ti ovv, dv eiTrwcriv ol voyitot, ^fl XI. eV ^ &v at yev6fj.evai 8.] YiY^^evot, Vat. Ven. b. Vind. 6. Flor. d. and others, but the common reading is preferable. Some omitting &v , have ytyvov-rai ica.1 SiaQBeipovrai, which is also found in Bodl. and Ven. b. XII. Ti olv, &y ftircoffiv'] The comma was commonly omitted. Immediately afterwards, Steph. ^ Kal T. and 5j/cdf ot, against all the MSS. and the meaning of the passage. 80 PLATO. $, 97 Kal ravra a)/j,o\o r yr)ro -TJ/MV re /cal cro/, rj e/j,/j,eveiv rais 6Y/cat9 at9 av r\ 7rcXt9 Sucdfy ; a et ouv oifJ,ev Xe7ovr9 av etTrotev, ort '/2 , fir) davpa^e ra \ey6peva, aXX' aTro/cptvou, r) Kal elwdas ^pr/aBai rro epwrav re /cat aTTOKpi- vecrdat. epe 9 ov /caXw? JfyowTlV ; Ov /ie/z^o/xai, (f>alr]v av. MXXa rot9 Trepl rr)v rov yevopevov rpotyrjv re Kal TraiSelav, 6 ev rj Kal cry eVaiSev^9 ; ^ ov /caXw9 e rrposerarrov rf^wv 01 eVt rovrot9 rerayfievoi vofioi, 7rapayye\\ovre<; TW Trarpl raxrwcre evfiova-tKrj Kal 9, (fralrjv av. Elev. eVetS^ Se e9 ou^t r}fjierepo09, W9re \e\r)6e ere, ort ^777/369 re /cat 7rarpo9 /cat TWV aXXwv irpcr/ovatv dirdvrwv rt/jiKarepov Hern 7rarpi9 m /cat a-epvorepov Kal dyiwrepov /cateV /jLel^ovt polpq? Kal Trapd ^eot9 /cat Trap' avdpurrrois rot9 vouv e%oucrt, /cat cre/3ecr$at Set /cat /LtaXXov uTret/cetv /cat OwTreveivrrarpi- Sa ^a\e7raiVotcrav ^ jrarepa, Kal rj Treldetv, i] iroielv a av Ke\evrj, Kal Tracr^etv, eaV rt Trpo^rdrrrj iraOeiv, rjcrvyiav ayovTa, edv re TUTrrecr^at e'av re Setcr^at, eav Tub. Zittav., which we think the true reading. Bodl. CoisL Ven. Hh. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. a. b. c. d. f. h. i. Huet. Ang. Par. C D H S. Kal (rot Tavro. Old editions, rayro ai K pares, (fralevav tcr&)9 ol vonoi, el ^/iei9 Tairra d\^6ij \eyo/j,ev, on ov Sl/caia 7;/ia9 eTTixeipels 8pav a vvv eTTi^etpetf. ?;/ie49 yap ere jew^cravTes, efcdpe-^ravre^, rrai&evcravres, pe- raSovres arrdvrwv wv oloL r fjftev /ca\wv crol /cat Tot9 aXXot9 rcacn 7roX/Tat9, oyu.&>9 7rpcfayopevo/j,v TO> eov- criav "TreTroiij/cevai*- 'A&ijwUav Tw/3oi;Xo/tevco, eVetSav So/ctfjiacrdfj /cat t'S?7 b Ta ev rfj TroXet Trpdy/mara /cat rjficis TOU9 vo//.of9, w av /i,?; dpecncoifAev 77/^et9, e^elvat Xa- fiovra ra avrov amkvai orroi av /SowX^Tat. /cat Toura] Commonly irotjjTeo, against Bodl. Vat. Ven. b. Tub. Vind. 1. 4. 5. 6. Flor. a. b. c. d. f. li. i. Huet. Par. B. C D E S. A little further ol/xl for oi>x is supplied by nearly the same MSS. Kf\fvri % TT^AJS] Commonly /ceXeiot, against all the MSS. ex- cept Paris. E. The old editions also have ^ ir6\is re xa.1 TJ irarp., but re is omitted by the best MSS. XIII. & vvv firixetpe'is'] vvv formerly omitted, is found in most MSS. Also in Bas. 2. ffol Ka.1 ro7s &\\.~] Editions have aoi re K. r. oAX. I have re- jected re on the authority of BodL Vat. Ven. b. Tub. Vind. 1.3. 4.6.7. Flor.d.h. Huet. Par.DS. firei5h.v JWjjucwWJ] Commonly SoKi/juiari, which Ven. E. alone appears to have. CEITO. 83 - vS' a TWV VOJJLWV ef^Trocov ecTTtv ov aTTojopevei, ev re Ti9 j3ov\r]Tai vfiwv els diroiKLav levai, el ^ dpear- KOi/jbev rj/jiels re real r) 7roXi9, edv re f^eroiKelv aXXocre TTOI C eX&ov, levai e/ceicre, OTTOL av (3ov\^rai, e^ovra rd avrov. 09 S' av vfjiwv irapa^eivrj^ opwv ov rporrov r)/j,elfjbev Troujcreiv raura, teal TOV pr/ Treido- rpixfj (J3a/j,ev aSi/cetv, 6Vt re yewr/rais ovcriv ov Treiderai,, teal ort rpo^evcrt, Kal OTL 6fj,oXoy^- cra? r) /j,r]v 7rei6ecr6ai A ovre TrelOerai ovre irelQet r/fia^^ el /JLT) /caXw9 TI TTCMOu/iev, Trportdevrwv T^/XWV, teal OVK dypicos eTTirarrovTcav Troielv a av Ke\evwfj,ev, dXXa ev ov8erepa nroiel. XIV. Tavrais 8r/ vcre, aXX' evrot9 f^d\i(TTa. b El ovv eya) , Sid TI Stf ; tcrft)9 av pov SiKalcos &\\ocre iroi f\0tai>'] Steph. TTTJ, and further on STTTJ, which is in very few MSS. Kxov-ra ra avrov'] Commonly ex&>v. Although this reading might be defended, it was right to change it on the authority of Bodl. Vat. Ven.b. Vind. 1.3. 4. 6. 7. Flor. a. b. d. f. h. i. Coisl. Par.BCDHS. Angel. Huet. ^ /iV ireidfffBai] So Coisl. Par. B. C. Flor. a. b. c. f. i. and Ang. for the common reading fjfj.lv ireiO. In Bodl. above f]/j.lv is written ^/u, that is, 1 think ^ ^v. Buttmann conjectured that irela-(r6ai ought to be read. iroioCjU.ej', irpoTjOeVrtoc] Vat. Flor. d. Kal irponQivToiv. But see note. a\\a fv eyeo aurot? Q)fjLO\o<; nry^dvco ravrijv rr/v 6/jLO\ojlav. (jxuev yap av on Y2 Scatcpares, fj,eyd\a r^iiv rovrcov TeKp,rj- pid ecrrtv, ori, aoi teal rjpets rjpe, el prf croi Siafapovro}? ijpecrKe, Kal OUT' eirl 6eo)plav e TTcoTrore e/cr?}? TroXetw? or* //-^ a7ra et9 'Jcr$/zov, o{5re aXXotre ovBa- , el prf Trot o-Tpar6fcr6/ief09, f oure a\\r)V aTro- e7rotrj(ra> TrcoTrore, co97rep o aXXoi avdpwiroi, ou8' eTnQvjJiia ere a'XX^9 7roXe&)9 ovS' aXX&>v v6(j,a>v eXa/3ev el8evai, s aXXa ?7/iet9 crot l/cavol r)p,ev Kal rj rjperepa 7roXt9' OUT&J cr<})6Spari[j,d<; ypov, Kal 0)^0X07669 /ca^' 97/^09 7roXiT6ueo-0at h ra re aXXa /cat 7ratSa9 ev avr^ eTrotJ/cra), a>9 dpecrKova-rjf croi rrjf 7roXe&)9' ert TOIVVV ev avrr) rf} SLK-TJ e^rjv croi, fyvyrjs n^cracrdai * et rore Kovcri]$ Troifjcrai. crij Se Tore yitev e/caXX&)7Tt^ou 9 etyrjaOa, irpo r?}9 (frvyfy Odvarov vvv 8e OUT' e/cetVoi9 Toi/9 Xo7oi9 alcrxyvei, oijre TJ/AWV r&v VOJJLWV evrpeirei, XIV. Sri /i); aira| 6is > I(T0yu(Ji'] These words are wanting in Tub. Ven. b. Vind. 6. 7. Flor. h. Huet. Par. D S. But they were read by Athenaeus, as Fischer rightly observed. In Bodl. they are written in the margin. airoSniilav tirorfia-ca] This order is given iv. Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Tub. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. d. h. Huet. Editions have eiroiV airoS. Kaff fip.as fl-oA.rretW0ai] Stephens, against all the MSS. has given the conjectural reading wo\iTev0-e ^yrpVei] Vind. 6. r)>v v6/j.ov. injudiciously. CRITO. 85 Staifideipai, Trpdrreis re airep av d^eiev, aTroSiSpdaiceiv eVr^eip&V Trapa TO9 %vvdt]Ka<> re KOL ra? 6/^,0X07/09, naff 09 f]fiiv v- veOov 7ro\iTevecrdat. Trpwrov pev ovv rjp.iv TOUT' atTo aTTO/cpivai, el d\rjdrj X^yo/iev, (frdcrKov /cevai TroXiTeveadai Ka& 77/4.09 epy, aXX' ov OVK d\rjdfj. TL ^xw/iev 7rpo9 TaOra, ft) Kpircav ; aXXo Tt ^ oyu,oXo7. vlXXo Tt o5v av ^>aiev k ?} %vv6r)ica<$ ras 7T/309 ?7/ auTOU9 /cat 0/^0X07/0.9 7rapa/3atVet9, 0/^0X077/0-09, ouSe a.7TOT7/^ei9, ouSe ev oX/yw dvayKa after Trpwrov, omitted in old editions, is inserted from Venet. b. Vat. Tub. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Flor. d. h. Par. D S. &fi.o\oyT)Kei'ai iro\iTti>fff0ai] Old editions have which, following Bekker, we have changed from Coisl. Ven. b. Vat. all the Vindobb. Flor. d. f. h. Zitt. Huet. Par. D S. "A\Ao TI olv &v (paiey] Stephens omitted T and &v. Bas. 2. left out &V only. The true reading is supplied by almost all the MSS. ?79 evvo/jita-6ai, 1 ovre aXXrjv ovce/jiiav rwv 'EXh.rjvl&toV TToXecov, ovSe rwv fiapftapiK&v aXX' ekdrrw e avTrjs dTreS^prjcra^ 77 ol ^w\oi re Kal rv- \ol ical ol d\\ot dvaTrrjpoi' ovrw croi 8ta9 rwv a\\(v 'AOljvahov fjpeaicev 77 7roXi9 re Kal 7/yu,et9 ol vo'/ioi ofj\ov ort' n rivi, 7]n"iv 7 irei6ri, S> 2., with which it is plain that enfj.fvels is to be understood. Stephens inserted it before eav, writing fnnevtls Sf, fav K. T. A. XV. e'lujuaprcii/ TJ To{irtev\ f^afna.pTa.va>v, Bodl. Ven. b. Tub. Vind. 7. Fior. h. Huet. Par. D S. In Ven. b., the true reading is added in the margin. ^ M7opa5c] Commonly MfydpaSf. The former is found in CRITO. 87 yap d/j,(f)drepai TroXe/uo 1 ? r/^et?, & ^(o/cpare?, rfi rovrcov 7roXiTet rrjv SIKVJV Btfcdcrat,' ocrrt? yap vo/u-wv 8ia? 77 dperr) Kal TJ SiKaioa-vvr) TrXelarov d^iov rot? dv9pdt)7roi<> Kal ra vofJUjAa Kal ol vopoi ; Kal OVK oiei d9 yeXoMOf e'/c TOU Secr/jKorrjplov aTreSt'Spacr/ce?, (TK.evr)V re riva Coisl. Vind. 2. Huet. Par. D S. And we write also o?K(fr5e, iro- AejUiij'Se, K. T. A. ftlKi!/ croi %r)v eo-Tot;] So Bodl. Ven. b. Tub. Vind. 7. Mor. h. Huet. Par. D S. for the common reading e. In others ffoi ?iv (TTIV, which confirms the reading of the text. rlvas Affyous] So Ven. b. Huet. Par. D S. The common reading was rii/cU. foxri/jLov &v - Qaaiv evaKevd^eadat ol aTroBiSpdcrKovres, Kal TO a"xfj- yu,a h TO cravrov fjLeraX\.da<>. ore Be yepoov dvrjp cr/j,iKpov rq> /i XotTro T09, 009 TO ds, ovSels 09 e/?et ; i'o-&)9, av pr) nva \wjrfir el 8e /4?;, k dtcovaei, w ScoKpares, 7ro\\a KOI dvd^ia aavrov. v r jrep')(piJ,evos Sr) ftiaxTei iravras dv6p(i>7rov<$ teal Sov\,va>v l TiTTOiwv rj ey&)^ouyu,evo9 eV erTakla, W97rep 67rlSei7rvov d7roBe8r)pr)K(0<; et9 0Tra\lav ; Xo- 701 Se Kivot ol trepl Sitcaiocrvvrjs re /cat T?}9 a\X7j(rri, which is changed from Bodl. Ven. b. Vat. Huet. Par. D S. Vind. 1. 4. 6. 7. Tub. Further on Vat. Flor. d. JovXetW KM. ri iroiiav. Vind. 6. for V f- -aAi' fls err.] Editt. have ir6repov tav fj.tv ei's 0. CEITO. 89 ;7<7779, eTTifj,e\ijcrovTai,' eav Be els AiBov CLTTO- 877/^770-779, ov%l eTTi/JLeXrjcrovTai, ; eiTrep ye TI o7- XVI. ^4XX' a> ^coKpares, ireiOopevos rjfjuv rot? TTOIOV pyre TO %rjv fj,rjre a\\o prj&ev Trpb rov 8iKalov, a tva et9 AiBov e\6a)v 6^779 Tavra Trdvra aTrd^oy^a-acrdat TO49 eicei ap-^ovcnv oisre yap ev6d$e b aot alverai ravra TrpaT- rovrf afjieivov elvai? ovBe Bi/caiorepov ovSe ocrwuTepov, ovBe aXXco rwv crwv ovBevi, oisre e/cetcre d rjpwv rwv vo/wwv dX\' VTT avdpanrw eav Be ee\.0rjs o/ra)9 alcr^pws dvraBiKijcras re /cat , ra9 crairrov 6/^0X07/0.9 Te /cal ra-9 7rpo9 ?7/ia9 7rapa/3a<> Kal Katca epyacrd- TOI/TOV9, ou9 77/acrTa. eSet, craurov re al /cat TrarpiSa Kal 77/^09, 77/ieiS re crot ^covrt, #at e/cet oirj pi-repot dBe\(f>ol ol ev A'iBov vop,ot OVK evpevw*; ere uTroSe^ovrat, et86re9, ort /cat 77/11019 Tre%elpr)cras aTroXecrat TO crov yu,ep09. aXXa /i77 ere ireia-rj KpiTwv iroielv a \eyei /LtaXXov ^ ripels. XVII. Tavra, w Tat, and a note of interrogation after 'iriT7j5eiW tlvai, which, following Buttmann, we have changed. XVI. TOt/ra Ttavra 0*0X07.] Bodl. Tub. wdiTa ravra. 13 90 PLATO. \6ycav f3o[i/3ei Kal iroiei ^ d\\cov aKovew aXXa icrdi, ocra 76 TO, vvv epoi SOKOVVTO,, edv ri XeKpaT6v Kal avrbs erreA.ctflojUTji'] / have nearly forgotten myself that is, been brought to think that I am not the man that I really am; which is said ironically. The same expression is used in Phoedr. p. 228. A. et tyta 4>aT5pov ayvooa, Kal e^iaujoC effiAfAijcr- jj.a.1. Menexen. p. 235. C. fj.Ayis avafiifivi]crKOfj.a,i f/j.avrov. vir av-riav is " in consequence of their oration," as the Greeks say tiro 6/3ov, inrb L\ia.s, vnb piaovs, virb txdpas, etc. c us en-os etTre?!'] that is, " I should almost say." It refers to ovSev elpi]K.a.(Jiv. Compare cc. VII. and VIII. d ainuv fv tdavftaaa] On the genitive avrSiv, see Matth. Gr. . 317. The meaning is, "one thing in those persons;" for avr&v is masculine. TO>V iro\\~] This is added to illustrate the word 94 NOTES ON THE epytf. The word dircasriovif is said by Phavorinus and Thorn. Mag. to have been used by the Attics for 6-n-casovv. 6irv rSiv Trtpiftrr-riKortov % riva fj ovSeva olSa. JElian de Nat. Anhn. VI. 50. itramv AiyvirrMi' 1\ ris tf ovSels. VII. 8. Bavfid^ei TIS fj ovtieis. See Matth. Gr. . 487. 8. itaaav rty a^Qfiav has been correctly rendered by Fischer in Latin omnem rem. 1 KeKa\\teinrin4vovs ye \6yovs "] KaA.Aie7r?j', on which word see Valckenaer Diatrib. p. 291, is to speak gracefully and ele- gantly. Therefore \6yoi /ce/coA.Aiemj/ue'i'Oi ffiftcuri re Kul ov6fjia.cn are speeches composed both of graceful sentences and elegant words. For piifjuira. and oi/o'/iaTo differ in this, that the latter are words, but the former, sentiments expressed by words. See Theaetet, 1 90. E. and there, Heimlorf. p. 449. Moreover, Socrates mentions \6yovs KfKotTfi.rinfvovs, that is, speeches ornamented with tropes, figures, &c. -ei/q?, extemporaneously. ruts firirvxavtriv ov6fj.ci.ffi, that is, with- out any set selection of words. For ret firirvxovra ayop< Kal etrl TU>V rpaire^uv was not correct, be- cause at Tpdirffrai were in the market place. See Salmatius de Usur. p. 510. The words eirl rut> -rpaire^wv are added for the purpose of explanation. So in Hippias min. p. 368. B. ev ayopa firl rals rpaTrefois. We are here to understand the tables of the bankers, which elsewhere, as in Demosthen. Vol. II. p. 470. p. 472. p. 946. Isocrat. p. 449. p. 450. p. 704. ed. Reisk. are called simply at Tpcbrefai; and thence the bankers are called ol Tpairetfrai. n Kal &\Xo0t] That is, in the shops and gymnasia. Compare Aristid. Orat. Platon. II. p. 223. Vol. II. ed. leb. on irXt'iara. 'Afhji'atco]' firl TWV rpairt^Siv Kal riav epyatTTrjpiiav Stf\fyfro. fti)T 6upvfa~tv'] The verb Qopvfifiv is said of bustle and con- fusion of every kind, as when the judges murmur to one another, and speak loud enough to be heard. M^ Oopv^elre is an established formula of the orators, when they are about to say any thing which may be displeasing to their auditors. See Chap. V. in two places. P erij ytyovks -n\fita ejSSojurJKoi'Ta. There is no necessity that ^ should be added after irAeico. See Matth. Gr. .455. 4. Sen-anus translates " more than sixty years old ;" so that he appears to have read 7rA.ei'o> e^Kovra. 1 ei>cas ex*"] On this use of the genitive see Matth. . 337. ft evBdSe Ae'|iy, style of speaking customary in courts of justice. r Sisirtp ovv av, el ] So Gorg. p. 447. E. p. 451. A. Protag. p. 311. B. In these passages &/ must not be referred to the opening, but to the conclusion of the proposition. It is, however, rightly repeated at the conclusion. In such passages the reader is prepared in the beginning of a sentence pronounced with some emphasis, for what the construction is to be, so that, a complete clause being interposed, &i> is repeated anew. This passage is, therefore, to be understood, as if it were written: Sisirtp olv kv 96 NOTES ON THE 8 lv ^itelvri T?7 Qcovfj f-rf0pdn{j.T)v~\ That is, the vernacular language, which differed from the style of speaking customary in courts of justice. TOVTO SiKaiov is the same as TOVTO us $iil "AWTOV] That is, Anytus and his associates, Meletus and Lycon. See Matth. . 272. Anytus, in particular, is mentioned, because he was the most formidable enemy of Socrates ; for he had acquired great popularity by his conduct during the time of the Thirty Tyrants. See Xenoph. Hellen. II. 3, 42. d oAA' ^Ktivot Seiv6Ttpoi ] Socrates appears to refer to the ac- cusations which Aristophanes and the other comic poets, as Eu- polis, &c., had brought against him. e rd re fuertupa (ppovricrTrjs K. r. A.] povr IITT^JS having the same signification as fyrrw \6yov Kptir-rta iroiwr] See Aristoph. Nubb. v. 99 foil. Cicero in Brutus, c. 8. docere, quemadmodum causa APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 97 inferior dicendo fieri superior possit. Gcll. N. A. V. c 3. docere, quanam verborum industria causa infirmior fiat fortior. 8 ravri]v rty (p-f]fj.riv Ka.TacrKffidffa.vTfs] Heindorf thought that it ought to be written : of Tavr-qv r. . K. But there is no need of the article, since the participle expresses the reason why that class of accusers was most dangerous to Socrates. " Those persons," he says, " because they hare spread abroad that report, are formidable and dangerous accusers. h ovSf Oeovs i/o/iff e] That is, not even believe that there are gods. 1 ev y &v fj.a.\i Kvpiav OVK 68rjvcu or /*}/ airavTrjaai. Therefore tp-finriv KUT-qyopf'tt' is to accuse an absent defendant, when he has forfeited his recognisance. See Petitus ad Legg. Attic, p. 317. 1 l**voi] ' That is, QOovovvrts Kal Sia/3d\- \ovres. A little further follows of Se, as if of fj.fi> had been in- " sorted after ocroi 8e. m airopuTaToi iV] The most impracticable, that is, such as cannot be convinced. n aval3i&d. airo\oyo6- (ttvov are in immediate connection, so that re is correctly sub- joined to them; and the corresponding clause is f\eyx*u' firiSevbs airoKpivofj.tt'nv. In exactly the same manner, Rep. V. p. 470. C. iro\eneiv /xa^o/ne'vous re 07Jcro^ec /cat iroAfjuious (pvffft ftfai. a^itaa-are ovv Kal v/ueTjj That is, do you also then consider. The word a^iovv has been ably illustrated by Buttmann, Demosth. Or Midian, p. 165. P Eier, a.iro\oyr]Tov Srj] The Attics use the word elev to sig- nify that they do not wish to say more on what has preceded, but to pass to other things. Sometimes also, it simply indicates a transition, as in Chap. III. 1 ee\e' is to be observed the emphasis of the sentence, which is partly in the pronoun ^aim)v, partly in the opposition of the words & irpAA< xp^ vc f am l *" OVTVS o\ly

yevfaOai] The words ovrta ywirtmt are more accurately denned by the following words: nal it\iov rl /u.e iroifjcrai diroAoyuu/xej'of, that I might do something more, that is, to cause you to throw aside your bad opinion efme and conceive a good one. On the formula &iJ.eiv6v icmv, see observations on Crito, C. XVI., note ( d ). III. a Me'AijrA pe typdfyaro rty ypatyyv Taimjj'] See Euthyphro, p. 5. where is found ypatyijv : also to say ypdtyeaQai TWO. : and hence, by the union of both constructions, has arisen ypd- v auTwi/] The sense is: their accusa- tion, as the information of accusers properly so called, ought to be recited. 'Arrwjuocrfa is properly the oath, either of the plaintiff, when he swears that he brings the accusation for just causes and without calumny; or of the accused, when he swears that he is innocent. Further, this term is applied to the written declaration of the accusation, which is given in to the judge by the plaintiff: in which, signification it is also found in C. XL c itfpif^yd^ ercti] irtpifpya efffiai is properly to treat any subject minutely, and hence to bestow too much attention on any thing. Hence it signifies, as in this passage, to attend to those things which do not in any way belong to you ; to attend to frivolous, vain, and useless things. d iv TTJ 'A.pi(rroivovs KaijUySi^] " The Clouds" of Aristophanes was acted B. c. 423; but was unsuccessful notwithstanding . its great merit as a work of art. The poet not only failed in ob- taining the first prize, but was placed below Ameipsias as well as Cratinus. He appears to have brought it forward again in the following year, with some alterations; but this fact has been dis- puted by many critics. e ouStv otfre pfya oSre x &s a.TLfjia.^5e TOVTOIV, nor with Bekker, ov T 7* ? TIVOS K. r. A. b KO! xP^J uara Tpdrrojuat] Is the same as (iiaffbv -rrjs avvovaias irpdrreffBai in Xenoph. Mem, I. 2, 60., in which passage Xenophon bears witness that Socrates never received any remuneration from his pupils. c eiret Kal rovr6 ye' pot ] In would not have been necessary to remark that this is said in order to stigmatise and ridicule the avarice of the Sophists; if there had not been some persons who have supposed that it was said seriously. d eirts oUs r' efrj] On this construction, Matth, . 524. Obs. 3. Gorgias, (B. c. 459.) a disciple of Empedocles and preceptor of Isocrates, was a native of Leontini, a town in Sicily. He did much to raise the study of rhetoric by his discoveries ; according to Suidas, he first reduced it into the form of a science. He was so much distinguished by his eloqiience in extemporaneous speaking, that he received great honours from all Greece, but particularly from Athens, where he resided for many years. He is said, after 100 NOTES ON THE the example of Protagoras, to have exacted a hundred minis from each of his pupils. SeeDiog.Laert. 9. 52. Cic. de Orat. 1.22. III. 32. Brut. 8. de Fin. n. 1. Paus. VI. 17. Philostr. 1. 1. Vit. Sophist. p. 487. ed Morell. Dorvilli Sic. c. 9. p. 169. and especially the dialogue of Plato, inscribed Gorgias. Pr odious [B. c. 435.) was a native of Ceos, one of the' Cyclades. He bestowed much labour on distinguishing and explaining the signification of words. Hippias was a native of Elis, a city in the Peloponnesus ; Cicero has given some particulars concerning him in the De Orat. III. c. 32 . and Brut. c. 8. Compare also Plato's dialogue inscribed with the name of Hippias. e rovrovs ireidouoi] These words afford a remarkable instance of avaico\ov8ia. For as ol6s r' tariv goes before, an infinitive ought now to follow. But ireiOouffi is placed as if ol6s r' eartv did not go before, fweu'at and vvovala refer to learning and instruction, as is frequently the case : whence disciples are con- stantly called of IwoVres. f aviip fffTi ndpios] Namely, Evenus, of the Isle of Paros. The subsequent words, t>v lyk yTe /ii/wf] An Attic mina consisted of 100 Attic drachmae, see Pollux, EX. 59. 86. Evenus, therefore, demanded a very small remuneration for his wisdom, since it is recorded that Protagoras, Gorgias, and others, received 100 minx. ft &s a\r)0ias f^et] Concerning the construction, see Matth. . 529. 3. The words /cal OVTOOS f/j.fj.e\Sis seem to have reference to the moderate price rs, so cheaply, lie would have too openly laughed at Evenus and Callias. m aAA' oil yap eiriffTa.ft.ai] That is, a\\' ov Svvaftai Ka\Xvvfo~6ai Kal a/SpvveffOai' ov yap firlffra/jiat. V. a oil yap S-tjirov jit'] aurotrxeSiafeti/, properly said of those who say or do any thing suddenly and on the impulse of the moment, is here applied to judges who form a hasty judgment. 11 ireTrotrjKe T& re wopa Kal T^V SiajSoA.rji'] rb ovop.a. refers to the fame of Socrates for wisdom, as is said a little further on, TOUTO rb ovojj.0. ecrxTjKa : and ?j 5toj3o\^ refers to the calumnies and accu- sations of his adversaries. Muretus Varr. Lectt. VII. 16. has compared the form noie'iv avo^a with the Latin 'famam conficere.' e ev /jLevTot tare, iraffav ^/>w] Crito, C. XVII. 'A.\\a icrOi, 'oaa. ye TO vvv f/j.ol SoKovvra, ea.v rt Ae'yjjj irapa ravra, /Ltarrji' 4pf?s. Apol. C. XVII. rapTa 7ap ne\evei ev lare. { /uei'JVu rivet t/ KOT' avdptuirov] That is, may have a greater wisdom than falls to the lot of man. Compare Matth. Gr. Gr. . 449. The words ^ OVK ex 10 ! T ' Aeyw are said ironically: the Sophists have either divine wisdom, or none. There is, therefore, no occasion for Forster's correction V OVK ex&> o TI \ey. Plat. Gorg. p. 476. evvoiq TT} ay. See JMatth. . 466. Sallust Jug. c. 14. Vos in mca injuria despecti estis. And likewise K 3 102 NOTES ON THE Livius II. 1. has used regium metum for mctu regis; and III. 16. terrorem servilem for terrore servorum. h p4ya \-yeiv'] That is, to say something to be wondered at. ' dfidxpew] Which is properly said of one who is solvent, and, therefore, worthy to have money intrusted to him. In the same manner locuples in Latin is used of a witness worthy of credit. Hesych.: a^idxpfws, a.i6irtaros. Suid. : k TT)S yhp ffiajs Kal o'la] That is, irape^ofjiai yap i/fuv r~bv Qfbv rbc tv AeA0o?s [idprvpa rrjs /ur?s ffo(pias, fl Si] ils f' o n 6pfj.r)fffif is said more emphatically for ei tirl TI 6p/j.^ffete. " rdA;u?7(re roOro /ucwrewrao-flai] navreveaQai here is, to require an oracle to be delivered to him, that is, to consult, to inquire, as in Xenoph. Memor. 1. 1, 6, wept Se riav aSfawv, Strois av a-jro fipero yap Sfy, e)f TJ] Respecting this act of Chaerephon, see Xenoph. Apolog. 14. and Laert. II. 37. P avft\ev olv r) UvQia] The words of the Pythian priestess were, according to Laert. II. 37. 'AvSpuv airdvrtaf SwKparTjs ffo- diaTaros. In Schol. Aristoph. Nubb. v. 144. they appear thus: 2os 2ooi5a ffiavrf sirep ovv OVK ofoo, See Matthias Gr. . 625. f o"/j.iKp

v TroXXd dSiKa Kai Trapavofta iv ry TroXet h 3 xc LIFE OF SOCRATES. which had been proposed by Archinus, and was es- tablished after the banishment of the Thirty. 1 And yet Xenophon, the most trustworthy of all the writers who has transmitted to us accounts of Socrates, says 2 that the ridicule of Socrates on the election of magistrates by lot, his having instructed Critias, and quoted passages from the most eminent poets, which bestowed praise on tyranny, were the principal articles in the second charge which accused Socrates of seducing the young. 3 The account of Xenophon strongly confirms the supposition, that the connection between Socrates and Critias, w-hose cruelties were still well remembered by the democratical party, must have contributed to his accusation, and is indeed very probable, when we only consider the state of affairs. A passage of .ZEschines, the orator, might also be adduced to confirm this opinion, but we have reason to doubt the veracity of ./Eschines, whenever it is his object to bring charges against his adversary, Demos- thenes. This passage occurs in the speech against Ti- marchus, 4 which jEschines delivered before the assembly of the people. " You who have put to death Socrates, the sophist, whom you knew to have educated Critias, one of the Thirty Tyrants who abolished your demo- cracy, will you allow yourselves to be moved by the 1 Plat. Menexen. p. 234. B. 2 Memorab. I. 2. 3 Xenophon clearly seeing that he could not refute the first of these facts, namely, the ridicule on the Kva/j.tvroi, wisely avoids mentioning it. 4 In the third volume of Reiske's edition of the " Oratores Grseci," p. 168. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xci private interest of an orator like Demosthenes ?" The name of sophist, which ^Eschines must surely have known not to have belonged to Socrates, but which orators frequently applied to philosophers to express their contempt of them, and the mention of Critias, are sufficient to prove the intention of ./Eschines, who wished by these sentiments to hurt the feelings of Demos- thenes, a disciple of Plato, and a kinsman of Critias. QTnE CLOUDS OF ARISTOPHANES. Ix the Clouds of Aristophanes, which was exhibited B. c. 423, Socrates is introduced as the great master of the school of the Sophists. A plain, simple citizen of Athens, named Strepsia- des, engaged in husbandry, having married into a family of distinction, and having contracted debts through the extra- vagance of his wife (v. 49. sq. 437. sq. ed. Dindorf) and his son's (Pheidippides) fashionable love of horses, in order to defeat the impending suits of his creditors, wishes to place his son in a school of philosophy and rhetoric, where he may learn the arts of oratory, and of turning right into wrong, in order thereby to repair the ills which he had chiefly brought upon himself. On the son's refusal, the father applies in per- son to the master of the school, who is named Socrates : by him he is solemnly initiated, instructed, and examined, but being found too old and stupid to learn, he is dismissed ; upon which, after he has given his son some samples of the new philosophy, he forces him much against his will into the school : here the young man makes such great and rapid progress in learning, that he is able to teach his father, who exults at his brilliant success, the most extraordinary tricks for the attainment of his object ; but as he is now himself enlightened, and has raised himself above con- xcii LIFE OF SOCRATES. siderations of right and duty, he denies and scorns in the coarsest manner the relation in which he stands both to his father and mother ; he defends his new opinions with the refinements of sophistry, and retorting upon bis father the good lessons he had before received from him, pays him in the same coin. Upon this the father, cured of his error, in wishing to get rid of his em- barrassments by dishonesty and sophistical chicanery, returns to take revenge upon the school of that pernicious science and upon its master, who is obliged to receive back all the subtle arguments and high-flown words, which he had himself made use of, and the old man levels the establishment to the ground. From this connected view of the story, we see that it is through- out directed against that propensity of the Athenians to contro- versies and law-suits, which was eminently promoted by their practice of getting into debt ; and against the pernicious, sophisti- cal and wrangling oratory, which was ever at the service of this disposition, in the courts of justice, and particularly in the dis- cussion of all public transactions ; and Aristophanes never loses an opportunity of combating these two vices. Moreover, as the story is set in action by the perverse purpose awakened in Strepsiades, as it comes to an end when he is cured, and as this change arises from the unexpected and extravagant result of the experiment upon Pheidippides, who is to be the instru- ment of the father's design ; the school of sophistry in which the youth is to be formed, is clearly the hinge on which the whole action turns ; for its influence on Pheidippides decides the success or failure of the views of Strepsiades, and consequently the issue of the story of the drama. This, therefore, is the view which we must take of the relation of the several parts to each other; namely, that the principal character to which the whole refers, is not Socrates, who has generally been considered to be so, in consequence of the story lingering so long at his shop, and of his being the sufferer at the conclusion, but Strepsiades himself ; whereas Socrates is the intermediate party who is to instruct Pheidippides for the vicious purposes of the father ; and this he executes so perfectly, that the old gentleman is at first deceived ; but he soon reaps fruits, the nature of which opens his eyes to his own folly, and to the de- structive tendency of this system of education. In " The Clouds" the poet introduces us to the original source LIFE OF SOCRATES. xciii whence, according to his view, the new-fangled and pernicious system of education took its rise, namely, the school of sophis- tical eloquence. He represents the Phrontisterion or subtlety shop, as its seat and centre of union, this being necessary in a dramatic point of view ; and he concentrates in the schoolmaster those essential properties of the school, which are to explain his purpose, interwoven as they are with others, which belong to the real Socrates, under whose name and mask he clothed the dra- matic personage. This individual centralization was indispensably requisite for the conduct of the drama ; and this is the poet's only excuse for representing Socrates within the walls of a school, as the philosopher himself was continually moving about in public, a contradiction, which has been considered as a convincing proof that the whole exhibition, as we have it, could not have been in- tended really for him. Aristophanes lays open to us, with the colouring, indeed, of a caricature, the whole interior sayings and doings of the school ; he draws a sketch of the methods and means of instruction peculiar to it ; and he shews the extent to which the mischief has already gone, since the Xoyog Siicaiog is unable to defend himself ; he points out likewise, what results we are to expect from the school, what immediate calamities threaten not merely the parents themselves, who were blind enough to en- courage such a system of education, but the common-weal also ; and finally, what the people ought to do, to annihilate the evil at its source. The Socrates in " The Clouds" must not, therefore, be con- sidered as an individual, or as the copy of an individual; but as the principal personages in Aristophanes are for the most part symbolical, he too must be viewed as symbolical, that is, as the representative of the school and of its principle. And as we see in him a good deal, which answers to the individual, whose name and mask he bears, and much too, which is heterogeneal to him, although by means of certain allusions, and the ingenuity of dramatic combi- nation, these two are amalgamated together ; so also in the charac- ters of Strepsiades and Pheidippides, many traits which are perfectly apposite to the objects which they are intended to typify, are com- bined with many which are extravagantly caricatured, and the crea- tures of poetic fiction. Strepsiades for example, whose name is explained by his tendency to evil (v. 1455 comp. v. 88), and by the pleasure he takes in distorting right (v. 434) , is the representative of xciv LIFE OF SOCRATES. the good old time, working out its own destruction by the abandon- ment of the laborious, frugal, peasant's life, by illustrious mar- riages, and female influence, by the extravagant life which his son leads in consequence of it, and by the debts and lawsuits which this occasions, all of which open the door to sophistical eloquence ; or if you will, he is the representative of the elder portion of the Athenian people, in this dangerous crisis of their affairs. As in some other characters of the comedies of Aristophanes, which present the people under different aspects, for example, the Demos himself in "The Knights," and Philocleon in " The Wasps," there is always a groundwork of truth and honesty, but which is alloyed with falsehood, and led into error, and whose cure and restoration to a healthy and vigorous state and a right view of things, form the end and aim of the dramas ; so likewise in " The Clouds," a sickly disposition of the people, the nature and bent of which are pourtrayed under the character of Strepsiades, in the most lively colours of caricature, is represented as the school, in which that personage seeks the means of obtaining the object of his desires, but is cured the moment that the full operation of those means is unexpectedly brought to light. Pheidippides, on the other hand, is the picture of the new or modern times, in the young men of fashion just coming out into the world, whose struggle with the older generation is pointed out by words of de- rision and raillery. The fashionable and chevaleresque passion for horses and carriages in the young men of the time, was ac- companied by XoXid (loquaciousness) and her whole train of vicious propensities ; and yet how much better would it be, as Aristophanes implies, to leave the youth to these pursuits, and honourably bear up against the lesser evil of the debts, which had grown out of them, than that from selfish and dis- honest motives encouragement should be given to what was calculated to poison the youths in their hearts' core, and there- by to bring disorder into all domestic and political relations ! In this sense, when Pheidippides expresses his delight and satis- faction with what he had gained from the art of oratory, as it put him in a situation to prove that it was right for a son to correct his father, Strepsiades retorts upon him in these words : " Ride on and drive away, 'fore Jove ! I'd rather keep a coach and four, than be thus beat and mauled." This, then, is the lesson, which Aristophanes would give to his LIFE OF SOCRATES. xcv contemporaries in Athens, by " The Clouds." If one of the two must have its way, let the young men indulge themselves in their horses and carriages, however it may distress you ; but check the influence of these schools, unless you wish to make a scourge for yourself and for the state ; exterminate in yourselves that dis- honest propensity which entangles you in lawsuits, and which, by means of those schools, will make your sons the instruments of your ruin ! The younger population he strives to deter from the same fate by a display of the manners of the school, and of the pale faces and enervated limbs which come out of it (v. 102, 504, 1012, 1171). We cannot, therefore, say that the play of " The Clouds" is pointed at any one definite individual ; but it reproves one general and dangerous symptom of the times, in the whole habits and life, political and domestic, of the Athenians, developing it in its source, in every thing which fostered it, and made it attractive, in the instruments by which it was established, and which gave to it its pernicious efficiency ; and thus whilst he strictly and logically deduces real effects from real causes, as far as this developement is concerned, the personages which bear a part in the action, are consequently one and all historical. Hence we can very well understand the striking references in particular characters to cer- tain individuals ; and I think it more than probable, that such reference is intended, not merely in the personage which bears the name of Socrates, but also in that of Pheidippides ; whilst in the character of Strepsiades the poet only meant to point to the people in general. The excessive love of horses exhibited in Pheidippides, and the extravagance consequent upon it, the rapid strides too, which he makes in readiness of speech, in debauchery, and in selfish arro- gance, and the relation in which he stands to Socrates, evidently point, without further search, to Alcibiades, in whom we find all these features united, on whom all the young men of the higher classes of his time pinned their faith, and whom they assisted a few years afterwards, in carrying through his political projects. In "The Clouds," Aristophanes introduces Alcibiades as a ready orator and a debauchee, as the fruit of that school, from which, as the favourite pupil of Socrates, he seems to have issued, in short, as the type of Pheidippides ; although all the traits at- tributed to the latter are not to be looked for individually in xcvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. Alcibiades, and although his name does not occur in the course of the drama. Moreover, the supposed lineage of Pheidippides, whose mother (v. 46) was the niece of a Megacles, the frequent mention of that uncle (v. 70, 124, 825), and that of his descent from a celebrated ancient lady of the name of Koiffvpa,* dis- tinctly point to Alcibiades, whose mother, Deinomache, was herself a daughter of Megacles, 2 and from whose family the Alcmseonidse, to which Kotavpa belonged, he had inherited his strong passion for a well-furnished stable. 3 This passion is, in- deed, brought forward in the care taken by Pheidippides' mother, that the word V'TTTTOC should be introduced somehow or other into his name ; as in truth it did occur also in 'iTTirapirr],* the daugh- ter of Hipponicus, and wife of Alcibiades. With all these cir- cumstances to point it out, the part of Pheidippides in the play could not have failed to remind the Athenians of Alcibiades, who, about this time, or somewhat ealier, began to neglect, as Isocrates says, 5 the contests of the gymnasia (and this is an important matter in reference to the play of " The Clouds"), and to devote himself to those equestrian and charioteering pursuits, to which he was indebted for his victory at the Olympic games. The very name of Pheidippides, is not a pure invention of Aristophanes ; but forms at once a connecting link between the youth himself, and that Pheidippus, son of Thessalus, 6 who was one of the ancestors of the Thessalian Aleuadse, famous for their breed of horses ; and, at the same time, by its final syllables, it keeps up the allusion to Alcibiades, who had likewise learned the science of the manege, both in riding and driving, in Thessaly ; and the same com- parison with the Aleuadae is implied, which we find also in Saty- rus, 7 who tells us that Alcibiades spent his time in Thessaly, 1 V. 48 and 800. 3 Pint. Alcib. c. 1. 3 Herodot. VI. 121. 4 Plut. Alcib. c. 8. Isocr. Or. de Bigis, p. 509, ed. Bekker. * L. c. compare Plut. Alcib. c. 11. Homer II. II. 678. 7 In Athenseus XII. c. 9, p. 5346. 'Ev QtrraXiq. Si iir- icctt qvto^oiv, rwv 'AXtvattiv ' LIFE OF SOCRATES. xcvii breeding horses, and driving cars, with more fondness for horse- flesh even than the Aleuadte. An allusion, also, to the well known infantine rpawXtffjuoc of Alcibiades, or his defect in the articulation of certain letters, 1 could not fail to fix the attention of the Athenian public to this remarkable personage. If then, the actor, who represented Pheidippides, did but imitate slightly this rpavXifffibg, in appropriate passages, and if he bore in his mask and conduct any resemblance to Alcibiades, there was no further occasion whatever for his name ; and we need not have recourse to the supposition, that his not being mentioned by name in the play was owing to any fear of Alcibiades, who did not understand such raillery on the part of the comic poets ; since the other characteristics by which he was designated were sufficiently complete and intelligible for comic representation ; and the whole was affected with much more freedom and arch roguery, than if, in addition to that of Socrates, the name like- wise of Alcibiades had crudely destroyed the whole riddle, it being already quite piquant enough for a contemporary audience. The proof of an allusion in " The Clouds" to Alcibiades, and to the youths who shared in his pursuits and disposition, is confirmed also by the second argument prefixed to the play, and by the notice it contains, that Alcibiades and his party had prevented the first prize being awarded to Aristophanes ; from which it is evi- dent, even were the fact not probable in itself, that a tendency hostile to Alcibiades and his friends was perceived even by the antients in this drama. It was also about this time that the intimacy between Alcibiades and Socrates was at its height, as the flight from Delion took place in the winter of the first year of the 89th Olympiad, that is, in the year in which "The Clouds'" was represented; and the share they both had in this engagement, and the assistance which Alcibiades gave to Socrates, were manifest proofs of that intimacy. Alcibiades also aboxit this time must have been deeply engaged in public affairs. But the question arises : why did Aristophanes, when he gave a name and mask to the master of the school of subtlety, which, was so foreign to the real Socrates, select the name and mask of that very individual ? 1 Plutarch, Alcib. c. 1. i xcviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. Aristophanes selected Socrates, not only because his whole ex- terior, and his mode of life offered a most appropriate mask for comic representation ; but also (and this was his chief reason) because in these circumstances, as well as in many other points, the occupations of Socrates, and his mode of instruction bore a great resemblance to those of the natural philosophers and of the sophists. The poet thus found abundance of subject-matter, which composed a picture suited to his views ; namely, to exhibit to the public, a master of the school, whence the mischief he strove to put down, was working its way into the hearts of the Athenian youths. We must also take into our consideration the important fact, that several individuals, such as Euripides, Pericles, Alcibiades, Theramenes, and Critias, who supported the modern system of education, were in close habits of intimacy with Socra- tes, and in part, too, with the natural philosophers and sophists : and this helped to give additional relief and light to the portrait of the man, who was the centre around which they moved. It should be recollected that it was not the object of Aristopha- nes to represent Socrates as he appeared to his confidential pupils, to Xenophon, to Plato, to Phsedo, to Cebes, and others ; but how he might be represented to the great mass of the Athenian people, that is, how they comprehended and judged him from his outward and visible signs ; and how they understood and appreciated the usual extravagancies of the comic poets ; in short, how it was to be managed, that whilst his name, and his mask, caricatured to the utmost, were kept together by fundamental affinities, the former might appear sufficiently justified, and be not improperly placed in connection with individuals, who were displaying before the eyes of the public the germs which were developed in Alci- biades, and the early results to which they had given birth. But as the people saw Socrates for ever and deeply employed, either in meditations, like the natural philosophers, QpovriZfiv, or like the sophists in instructive intercourse with the youth, aoitaQai, as Pericles called it, and as Socrates was frequently engaged in con- versation with those sophists, (besides many palpable points of resemblance, calculated to mislead even those who observed him more closely) , it would necessarily follow, that they reckoned him one of that community, as ^Eschines himself does when ' he calls 1 In Timarch. p. 346, ed. Bekker. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xcix him a sophist ; judging then as they did from outward appear- ances, they placed him in the same category with those of his associates, whom they knew to be most engaged on the theatre of public life. Aristophanes himself seems to have had no other notion of Socrates ; at least the whole range of his comedy fur- nishes us with many characteristic traits perfectly similar to the picture we have of him in " The Clouds." In " The Birds" (v. 1282) the poet expresses by iuuKparovv the ideal of a hardy mode of life, and neglect of outward appearances ; and in v. 1554 he represents Socrates, who is there called the unwashed (aXouroc,) as fyvafwyo, conductor of souls, maker of images, conjurer-up of spirits, who is obeyed by the shadowy forms of his scholars, amongst whom Chserephon is particularly designated, the same who is assailed also in "The Clouds," and on various other occasions by the comic poets, as the confidential friend of his youth. And not only in " The Clouds," but in " The Frogs'' also, near the end, the Socratic dialogues are ridiculed, as solemn twaddle, and empty nonsense. Although therefore the chief purpose of Socra- tes' appearance in " The Clouds" is on account of Alcibiades, who is principally aimed at in the character of Pheidippides, and though this motive for introducing him necessarily influenced the formation of that character, yet it is evident that the picture of Socrates and his school, as portrayed in " The Clouds," was not created by Aristophanes merely for the purposes of this comedy, but that he had for his groundwork a definite and decided model. Abridged from Silvern s essay on " The Clotids," translated by Mr. W. R. Hamilton. " There are two points with regard to the conduct of Aristo- phanes, which appear to have been placed by recent investigations beyond doubt. It may be considered as certain, that he was not animated by any personal malevolence towards Socrates, but only attacked him as an enemy and corrupter of religion and morals ; but on the other hand it is equally well established, that he did not merely borrow the name of Socrates for the representative of the sophistical school, but designed to point the attention, and to ex- cite the feelings of his audience against the real individual. The only question which seems to be still open to controversy on this subject, concerns the degree in which Aristophanes was acquainted with the real character and aims of Socrates, as they are known to us from the uniform testimony of his intimate friends and dis- c LIFE OF SOCRATES. ciples. We find it difficult to adopt the opinion of some modern writers who contend that Aristophanes, notwithstanding a perfect knowledge of the difference between Socrates and the sophists, might still have looked upon him as standing so completely on the same ground with them, that one description was applicable to them and him. It is true, as we have already observed, that the poet would have willingly suppressed all reflection and enquiry on many of the subjects, which were discussed both by the sophists and by Socrates, as a presumptuous encroachment on the province of authority. But it seems incredible, that if he had known all that makes Socrates so admirable and amiable in our eyes, he would have assailed him with such vehement bitterness, and that he should never have qualified his satire by a single word indica- tive of the respect which he must then have felt to be due at least to his character and his intentions. But if we suppose what is in itself much more consistent with the opinions and pursuits of the comic poet, that he observed the philosopher attentively indeed, but from a distance which permitted no more than a superficial acquaintance, we are tl.3n at no loss to understand how he might have confounded him with a class of men, with which he had so little in common, and why he singled him out to represent them. He probably first formed his judgment of Socrates by the society in which he usually saw him. He may have known that his early studies had been directed by Archelaus, the disciple of Anaxagoras ; that he had both himself received the instruction of the most em- inent sophists, and had induced others to become their hearers : that Euripides, who had introduced the sophistical spirit into the drama, and Alcibiades who illustrated it most completely in his life, were in the number of his most intimate friends. Socrates, who never willingly stirred beyond the walls of the city, lived almost wholly in public places, which he seldom entered without forming a circle round him, and opening some discussion connected with the object of his philosophical researches ; he readily ac- cepted the invitations of his friends, especially when he expected to meet learned and inquisitive guests, and probably never failed to give a speculative turn to the conversation. Aristophanes himself may have been more than once present, as Plato re- presents him, on such occasions. But it was universally noto- rious, that, whenever Socrates appeared, some subtle disputation was likely to ensue ; the method by which he drew out and LIFE OF SOCRATES. ci tried the opinions of others, without directly delivering his own, and even his professions, for he commonly described himself as a seeker, who had not yet discovered the truth, might easily be mistaken for the sophistical scepticism, which denied the possibility of finding it. Aristophanes might also, either imme- diately, or through hearsay, have become acquainted with ex- pressions and arguments of Socrates, apparently contrary to the established religion." Thirlwall's " History of Greece," vol. IV. p. 267. 268. ED.] i 3 cii LIFE OF SOCRATES. CHAPTER VIII. THESE causes sufficiently account for the accusation of Socrates ; but why was it delayed till he had reached his seventieth year ? The hatred against Socrates, as an enemy of the de- mocracy, did not dare to display itself previous to the banishment of Alcibiades, the powerful friend of Socra- tes, who still remained his friend even after he had given up his intimate acquaintance. Besides this, during the Peloponnesian war the attention of the people was en- gaged by more important affairs than the accusation of Socrates, and his enemies who belonged for the most part to the democratical party, had not sufficient in- fluence during the government of the Thirty, to at- tempt anything against him. On the other hand, the Thirty in spite of their own corruption, could not deny him their esteem, and they also probably dreaded his friends, whose number was not small, and therefore en- deavoured, but unsuccessfully, to gain him over to their interest, as we have seen in the affair of Leon of Salamis. But there was hardly a moment more favourable to the accusation of a man suspected of anti-democratic senti- LIFE OF SOCRATES. ciii merits, 1 than that which the accusers of Socrates actually chose. After the recovery of democratical liberty, the Athenians still feeling the consequences of the unfortu- nate issue of the Peloponnesian war, which their super- stition ascribed to the profanation of the mysteries and the mutilation of the Hermes-busts by Alcibiades, and remembering the horrors with which the government of the Thirty Tyrants was branded, became more jealous of their constitution than ever, and more inclined to punish persons against whom such plausible charges could be brought, as those against Socrates, the teacher of Critias and Alcibiades. But the old charge, so often repeated against philo- sophers, 2 that they introduced new gods and corrupted the young, and which was also employed against Socra- tes, was not followed by his immediate condemnation. We know from the Apology of Plato, 3 that Meletus 1 That Socrates was not considered as a friend of the people according to the notions of the multitude, we also see from the Apology ascribed to Xenophon, in which great pains are taken to represent him as a SrjuoriKOQ. Compare the Apology of Liba- nius, p. 17 : " Socrates hated democracy, and would have liked to have seen a tyrant at the head of the republic, &c." " He is an enemy of the people, and persuades his friends to despise democracy. He praised Pisistratus, admired Hippias. honoured Hipparchus, and called that period the happiest of the Athenians," &c. These are the charges against which Socrates is defended by Libanius. 2 The accusation of impiety was so comprehensive, that the greatest and best men, on whom not a shadow of any other crime could fall, were charged with it. The tribunal before which they were tried, was not the same at all times, as the cause might be pleaded before the Areopagus, the senate, or the Helisea. 3 C. XXV. civ LIFE OF SOCRATES. requested the assistance of the party of Anytus and Lycon, in order to induce the judges to pronounce the preliminary 1 sentence of guilty. Had Meietus not been supported by them, he would, as Socrates himself says, have failed in his accusation, and been fined one thou- sand drachmas ; for an accuser who failed in obtaining 1 A preliminary sentence ; for a proper condemnation in mat- ters, which were not considered criminal, only took place after a counter-estimate had been made by the defendant ; and wherever a punishment was stated by the law, it was inflicted according to the law, and not left to the discretion of the judges. We find one irregularity in the trial of Socrates, for which we can only account by supposing that some expressions of Socrates were considered by the judges as personally insulting to themselves. But although the accuser thought the matter criminal (ri'ju;/ia Oavdrov, he added, according to Diog. II. 40.), yet it was not treated as such by the judges. The first estimate of the punishment was made by the plaintiff, and this kind of estimating was called ri/jiav ; the counter-estimate was made by the defendant, and the terms for it were avrinnav, avrtTi^aaQai (Plat. Apol. C. XXVI. Compare Pollux, VIII. 150.), or viroTinaaQai (Xenoph. Apol. 23.). The positive decision of the punishment was the privilege of the judges, and to fix the punishment was called Trpocri^tav. The calculation of votes which Fischer has made, in a remark on the passage of Plato, is too artificial ; a more simple interpretation, which is adopted by Schleiermacher and others, is that the union of the party of Anytus and Lycon was required in order to obtain, in combination with that of Melttus, a fifth part of the votes. The number of the judges in the trial of Socrates is said to have been 556. 281 voted against him, 275 for him. If Socrates had had three votes more in his favour, the numbers would have been equal on both sides, and in this case he would have been acquit- ted. Tychsen, by correcting Diogenes, endeavours to reconcile him with Plato, for they contradict each other with regard to the number of votes. He accordingly increases the number of judges to 559, of whom 281 condemned, and 278 acquitted him. [For an account of the number of judges who were present at the trial of Socrates, see note ( c ) on C. XXV of the Apology, p. 134 ED.] LIFE OF SOCRATES. cv less than the fifth part of the votes, 1 was fined this sum. But even after the preliminary sentence had been pro- nounced, it would have been easy for Socrates to have given his trial a turn favourable to himself, if he had chosen to condescend to those practices, which other defendants had recourse to in such cases, and which men of the highest character employed. In cases which were not criminal, as stated above, a counter -es- timate 2 took place ; that is, the defendant was allowed to fix on any punishment for himself which he con- sidered proper. It was left to Socrates to choose between imprisonment for life, exile, 3 or a fine. He might have escaped with a small fine, which his friends had declared themselves willing to collect for him ; but he rejected this offer, as well as a speech composed by Lysias in his defence. "My whole life," he said, " forms a defence against the present accusation." When Meletus had accused him of a crime against 1 Meursius, Lect. Att. V. 13. Sometimes banishment was in- flicted, as we see from the case of ^Eschines. 2 Cic. de Orat. I. 54 : Erat Athenis, reo damnato, si fraus capitalis non esset, quasi pcense sestimatio : et sententia quum judicibus daretur, interrogabatur reus, quam quasi sestimationem commeruisset. 3 In the Crito of Plato, C. XIV. the laws are introduced speak- ing thus : " Even during thy trial thou wast at liberty to declare thyself deserving exile, if thou hadst wished to do so, and with the consent of the state thou mightest have done what thou art now undertaking against her will. But thou didst even boast, as if thou wert not thyself alarmed, thou even didst say that thou wouldst prefer death to exile." It was the privilege of every Athenian citizen to avoid the severity of the laws by a voluntary exile. Pollux, VIII. 10. 117. cvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. the republic," says Xenophon 1 , " he refused doing the slightest thing contrary to the laws, although others, in opposition to the law, were accustomed to implore the compassion of the judges, and to flatter and entreat them, which frequently procured their acquittal. On the contrary, however easy it might have been for him to have been acquitted by the judges, if he had chosen to act in the usual manner, he preferred death in conso- nance with the laws, to a life maintained by their vio- lation." Instead of trying to make a favourable impression upon the judges, he pronounced these proud words. " If I must estimate myself according to my desert, I estimate myself as deserving to be maintained in the prytaneum at the public expense." 2 This was the highest honour and was conferred on the prytanes, i. e. the fifty senators belonging to the presiding tribe, on the conquerors of the Olympian games, on youths whose fathers had died in defence of their country, on foreign ambassadors, &c., and at the end of his speech he ironi- cally adds : " If I had had money, I would have esti- mated myself at as high a sum as I should have been able to pay, for that would not have injured me ; but now I cannot do so, for I have nothing, unless you will fine me in such a sum, as I can pay. But perhaps I might be able to pay a mina of silver : that shall there- fore be my estimate. But Plato here, men of Athens, and Crito, and Critobulus, and Apollodorus are persuad- ing me to fine myself thirty minse, and they themselves 1 Memorab. IV. 4. 4. 2 Plato Apolog. C. XXVI. LIFE OF SOCRATES. cvii are ready to answer for me : that therefore shall be my estimate, and they will be satisfactory guarantees for this sum." 1 Such a proud answer, and the language in general which Socrates used, 2 inflamed all the judges against him, and eighty of those who at first had been favourably disposed towards him, now voted for his death. 3 The real cause of his condemnation was there- fore the noble pride, the "libera contumacia," as Cicero 4 1 Apolog. C. XXVIII. The account in the Apology ascribed to Xenophon ( 23.), that Socrates did not fine himself, nor allow his friends to do so, because this would have been acknowledging his crimes, may be reconciled with the statement of Plato quoted above ; for the estimate mentioned by the latter, as appears from the whole context, is pronounced in quite an ironical tone ; it is in reality no estimate. Tychsen doubts the authority of Plato, thinking that it was only the intention of Plato to immortalise the offer which he and his friends had made to Socrates. But for this supposition we have no reason whatever. Tychsen in his account of this affair follows Diogenes, who differs from Plato, in as much as he states that the estimate of the thirty minse preceded the proud assertion that he deserved to be maintained in the Pryta- neum. But the authority of Plato is surely more important. The source from which Diogenes derived his account, is un- known. 2 Cic. de Orat. I. 54 : Socrates in judicio capitis pro se ipse dixit, ut non supplex aut reus, sed magister aut dominus videretur esse judicum. 3 Cic. Ibid: Cujus response sic judices exarserunt ut capitis hominem innocentissimum condemnarent. 4 Cic. Tuscul. I. 24 : Socrates nee patronum qusesivit ad judi- cium capitis, nee judicibus supplex fuit, adhibuitque liberam contumaciam, a magnitudine animi ductam, non a superbia. This lilera contumacia is expressed by the author of the Apology as- cribed to Xenophon by /zya\?/yopia. Diog. II. 24. also says of him : ijv e iffxvpoyvwfiwv (contumax). We see from the Apo- logy of Plato (see also Xenoph. Apol. 14.) that the judges had cviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. calls it, which he displayed during his trial. He fell, properly speaking, as a voluntary victim. It would, however, be improper to suppose that the proud lan- guage, which he made use of hefore his judges, pro- ceeded wholly and alone from a consciousness of his own worth. The reason, for which Socrates did not wish to defend himself, and rather did every thing to dispose the judges for his condemnation, was of a religious nature, as appears from several passages of the Socratic philoso- phers. 1 He was not restrained by his daemon this was the reason to which he referred the calmness of his mind and the omission of all that he might have done for his defence. Socrates considered himself as a man destined taken it very ill of Socrates that he mentioned the declaration of the Delphic god, and that he spoke of a genius by whom he was guided. But they were most bitterly enraged by the manner in which he estimated his punishment. The author of the Xenoph. Apology attributes to Socrates one other expression, which must have excited the indignation of the Athenians. Socrates there tells them, that Apollo had expressed himself still more strongly in favour of Lycurgus, the legislator of the Lacedaemonians (who were so much detested by the Athenians), and had declared him to be the noblest, justest, and most moral of men. See 15 and 16. 1 Plat. Apol. C. XVII : " Whatever you may think of my con- duct and my instructions, I shall change the one as little as the other, and I will rather obey the commands of the god who sent me as your teacher, than those of men." Xenoph. Memorab. IV. 8. 5 : " Dost thou not know," Hermogenes says to Socrates, " that the judges at Athens, when offended by one word, have often condemned innocent men to death, and acquitted many criminals?" " Yes, indeed, they have ; but, by Zeus, dear Her- mogenes," he answered, "when I was thinking of my defence before the judges, my genius opposed and warned me." Compare Xenoph. Apol. 4. LIFE OF SOCRATES. cix by the deity to be a general instructor of the people, and regarded his death as a sacrifice which was demanded by the same deity. This is undoubtedly an interesting point, but at the same time one that has too frequently been overlooked in the life of Socrates. Respecting the immediate cause of the condemnation of Socrates, we must come to the conclusion, that he did not so much fall a victim to the hatred of his enemies, as to his religious mode of thinking, combined with a strong feeling of his own worth. The indirect causes of his death were certainly his accusers, who were actuated in a great measure by very ignoble motives ; but the conduct of the judges, however unjustifiable, is yet ex- cusable in many respects. Socrates had certainly ex- pressed himself too freely on the constitution ; and he must have appeared to the democratic Athenians to have seduced the young by such an open avowal of his opi- nions. The second point, however, with which Socrates was charged, that he did not believe in the gods worship- ped by the state, and on which even the hypothesis of Anaxagoras concerning the sun and the moon was brought to bear, was perfectly unfounded, and is satis- factorily refuted by Socrates in his Apology, and by Xenophon in the Memorabilia. On the other hand, however, even the calmest judge could not help being prejudiced against him by his pride. He appeared as a man who was in no way willing to own his errors, and who was consequently incapable of improvement. Death is indeed a very severe punishment according to our ideas, but it was not so amongst the Athenians, with k ex LIFE OF SOCRATES. whom it was considered equal to perpetual exile, and was inflicted for crimes of a less serious nature. 1 Socrates was thus condemned to drink the poisoned cup. A guarantee was demanded that he might not escape from punishment by flight; and Crito became answerable for him. According to the form then cus- tomary, as it is expressed in Plutarch's life of Antiphon, the sentence must have run thus : " Socrates, the son of Sophroniscus, of the tribe of Antiochis and the deme of Alopece, has been condemned to be surrendered to the Eleven." To be surrendered to the Eleven was an euphemism of the Attic language instead of, to le con- demned to death; since the Athenians wished to avoid the word death, which was considered ominous. The Eleven formed a commission, which consisted of the executioner and ten individuals, named respectively by each of the ten tribes. The superintendence of the prisons was in- trusted to them, and they carried into execution the sentence of the courts. After the sentence had been pronounced and made publickly known by the herald, they seized the condemned person ; and after putting him in fetters, accompanied him to his prison. We must 1 The Athenian laws in this respect were very much like the English. Xenoph. Mem- I. 2. 62. says : " If a man proves to be a thief, to have stolen clothings from a bath, to be a pickpocket, to have broken through a wall, to have enslaved free citizens, or robbed a temple, he is punished with death according to the laws." If the value of things stolen in a bath exceeded ten drachmas, death was inflicted, as is observed by Hindenburg on this passage from Demosthenes in Timocrat. LIFE OF SOCRATES. cxi suppose that these formalities were likewise observed with regard to Socrates. After the sentence had been pronounced, Socrates once more addressed the judges who had condemned him, and with great resignation and intrepidity, spoke of the evil which they inflicted upon themselves by his punishment ; and to those;, who had voted for his acquittal, he spoke upon subjects, which at that moment were of the greatest interest death and immortality. The last words of this address are particularly beautiful, and have found in Cicero 1 an enthusiastic admirer. " However, it is tune for us to go, for me to die, for you to live ; which is the better, is unknown to all except to God." When Socrates had spoken these words, he went with cheerfulness to the prison, where death awaited him. " Magno animo et vultu," says Seneca, 2 " carcerem in- travit." He consoled his weeping friends, who followed him ; and gently reproached Apollodorus, who uttered loud complaints respecting the unjust condemnation of his master, 3 1 Tuscul. I. 41. 2 Consol. ad Helviam, c. XIV. 8 The author of the so-called Apology of Xenophnn perfectly agrees with Plato on these facts, which are in themselves credible enough. See Plat. Phsedo. The former however adds ( 29 foil.) that Socrates said, whilst Anytus passed by : " That man is perhaps very proud, as if he had performed something very great and sublime by having caused my death. Oh, the unhappy man, who does not seem to know that he is the conqueror who has been active for all futurity in the best and most useful manner ! Homer has ascribed to some, who were near the end of their life, cxii LIFE OF SOCRATES. The next day Socrates would have been executed, had not a particular festival, which was then celebrated at Athens, postponed it for thirty days. It was the time when the Athenians sent to Delos a vessel with presents for the oracle of Apollo, as a grateful acknow- ledgment for the successful expedition of Theseus against the Minotaurus. This great festival was solemnized at Athens every year, and from the moment when the vessel was adorned with a garland of laurel for its de- parture till the moment of its return, no criminal was allowed to be executed. The festival itself called 6ewpia, was a kind of propitiation, during which the city was purified. The vessel in which the presents were con- veyed to Delos, was called deojpis. As the vessel had been crowned the day before the condemnation of Socra- tes, the whole interval between this and the return of the vessel was at the disposal of Socrates to prepare himself for his death. This interval lasted, as we have said, thirty days. 1 Although he was confined in irons, Socrates passed these thirty days with his usual cheerfulness, in conver- sation with his friends, in meditations on his future ex- the power of foreseeing the future. Therefore I will also prophecy. For a short time I had intercourse with the son of Anytus, and he appeared to me to be of rather a strong mind : I therefore say that he will not long remain in that servile occupation which his father has chosen for him ; hut as he has no honest guide, he will be led away by some evil propensity, and carry his wickedness to a great extent." A malicious prophecy, and contrary to the well- known character of Socrates. 1 The passages upon which these statements rest, may be found in the Crito of Plato, and in Xenoph. Mem. IV. 8. 2, LIFE OF SOCRATES. cxiii istence, and on the history of his past life, as well as in attempts at composing verses. "During this time also," says Xenophon, 1 " he lived before the eyes of all his friends, in the same manner as in former days ; but now his past life was most admired on account of his present calmness and cheerfulness of mind." Among the conversations with his friends two are particularly interesting, which are preserved by Plato in his Crito and Phsedo in the latter not without a considerable addition of Plato's own thoughts. In the Crito he treats of the duties of a citizen. Crito, a wealthy Athenian and powerful friend of Socrates, came to him early one morning ; but finding him asleep, he waited till he awoke. When he awoke, Crito discovered to him a plan of escaping from prison, which he had formed in common with his other friends; and informed him that every thing was prepared for his escape, and that an asylum was provided for him in Thessaly. A lively conversation then arose between them, in which Socrates proved to Crito that a citizen is not justified, under any circumstances, in escaping from prison. On the day of his death, Socrates had a conversation with his friends on the immortality of the soul. The arguments adduced in the Phsedo of Plato, are for the most part invented by Plato; but the real arguments of Socrates are probably preserved by Xenophon in the Cyropsedia, in the dying speech of Cyrus. The exercises which Socrates made in poetry, were versifications of a hymn to Apollo, and of some fables of 1 Mem. IV. 8. 2. k 3 cxiv LIFE OF SOCRATES. jEsop. Socrates undertook these on account of an admonition given him in a dream. But the reason for his choosing fables of ^Esop, was probably that this kind of poetry which has such a decided moral tendency, particularly agreed with his own inclinations. 1 The vessel returned from Delos ; the Eleven an- nounced to Socrates the hour of his death, and one of their executioners was ready to prepare the poisoned cup which Socrates was obliged to empty after the sun had set. At a very early hour of the day his friends had assembled around him in great numbers, and Xanthippe with her children was also present. His friends were in the deepest distress ; which, according to their different characters, was more or less loudly expressed. Apollodorus wept aloud, and moved all to tears except Socrates. Xanthippe, the violent and passionate woman, was inconsolable at the prospect of the death of her husband. Without fortune, without support, without any consolation, she saw herself and her children, of whom two were still at a tender age, fiot ipOiToJv TO avTO tvinrviov, he says (Phffido, p. 60. E. foil.), iv r, dX\or' iv aXXy o^ti (jtaivoftevov, TO. avra Si Xsyov, T Q 2a>(cparf, tipr], fiovaiKfiv Troifi Kai pyaou. Kai eya tv ye Ttf TrooaBtv %pov<>, cnrtp tTrpaTTOV, TOVTO i/7T\a/i/3avov aiiro /xoi irapaKtXtvtffQal rt Kai tTructXtvEtv, ol role Okovffi diaiceXtvofjitvoi, Kai t/xoi ovria ro IVVTTVIOV, tTrparrov, TOVTO etrticfXtveiv, p.ovffiK>jv iroulv, wf ^1X0- ffo(j>iac fiev ovffrje fj,eyi " "f )(I TroXXaKi? fioi irvirviov ravTH\v rrjV dt]/jni>St) p,ovTf, dXXd Troitlv, K, r. X. LIFE OF SOCRATES. cxv left in want and misery. Socrates, probably with the intention of sparing her the distressing sight of her dying husband, requested Crito to send her home. The executioner entered the prison, and offered the poisoned cup to Socrates : he took and emptied it with the intrepidity of a sage who is conscious of his virtuous life ; and even at the moment when he held it in his hand, he spoke, according to Cicero's expression, 1 in such a manner that he appeared not to die, but to ascend into heaven. " The lower part of his body had already grown cold, he then uncovered himself, (for he had before been covered) and spoke his last words : " Crito," said he, " I owe a cock to ./Esculapius. Offer one to him as a sacrifice ; do not forget it." Socrates alluded in these words to the happiness he should enjoy after being delivered from the chains of his body. Crito asked, whether he wished anything else to be done. To this question Socrates made no reply, and a short time afterwards became convulsed. His eyes became dim and he expired. 2 He died in the year 400, or 1 Tuscul. I. 29. 2 All this is more circumstantially related in the Phsedo of Plato. The above interpretation of the words at the end of the Phsedo : " Crito, I owe a cock to ^Esculapius," &c., which is also adopted by Olyrnpiodorus, appears to be the most suitable. It is well known, how many underserved reproaches have been inflicted upon Socrates for this expression. The ecclesiastical fathers Origen, Eusebius, Chrysostom and others pretended to dis- cover in it the real belief of Socrates in polytheism. [" It is ex- tremely difficult to determine the precise relation in which the opinions of Socrates stood to the Greek polytheism. He not only spoke of the gods with reverence, and conformed to the rites of cxvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. according to others 399, B. c. under the Archon Laches, 1 or Aristocrates. the national worship, but testified his respect for the oracles in a manner which seems to imply that he believed their pretensions to have some real ground. On the other hand he acknowledged one Supreme Being, as the framer and preserver of the universe ;* used the singular and the plural number indiscriminately, con- cerning the object of his adoration ,f and when he endeavoured to reclaim one of his friends, who scoffed at sacrifices and divination, it was according to Xenophon, by an argumenc drawn exclusively from the works of the one Creator.* We are thus tempted to imagine, that he treated many points to which the vulgar attached great importance, as matters of indifference, on which it was neither possible, nor very desirable, to arrive at any certain con- clusion : that he was only careful to exclude from his notion of the Gods, all attributes which were inconsistent with the moral qualities of the Supreme Being ; and that, with this restriction, he considered the popular mythology as so harmless, that its language and rites might be innocently adopted. The observation attributed to him in one of Plato's early works, seems to throw great light on the nature and extent of his conformity to the state religion. Being asked whether he believes the Attic legend of * Mem. IV. 3. 13. 6 rbv o\ov KOfffjtov avvraTTW rt ical OVVf.\lt>V. f oi 9tot, b Oebg, TO Oelov, TO SUI/JLOVIOV. J Mem. I. 4. If the conversation has been faithfully reported by Xenophon, Aristodemus shifted his ground in the course of the argument. But he suggests no objection to the inference drawn by Socrates, from the being and providence of God, as to the pro- priety of conforming to the rites of the state religion, and Xeno- phon himself seems not to have been aware that it might be dis- puted. He thinks that he has sufficiently refuted the indictment which charged Socrates with disbelieving the existence of the gods acknowledged by the state, when he has proved that he believed in a deity. Phsedrus, p. 229. LIFE OF SOCRATES. cxvii Boreas and Orithuia, he replies, that he should indeed only be following the example of many ingenious men, if he rejected it, and attempted to explain it away ;* but that such speculations, however fine, appeared to him to betoken a mind not very happily constituted ; for the subjects furnished for them by the marvellous beings of the Greek mythology were endless, and to reduce all such stories to a probable form, was a task which required much leisure. This he could not give to it ; for he was fully occupied with the study of his own nature. He therefore let those stories alone, and acquiesced in the common belief about them." Thirl- wall's " History of Greece," vol. iv. p. 268, foil. ED.] 1 Diog. II. 55 and 56. Marmor. Oxon. 57. Sachse places his death in Ol. 95, 1 ; Fabricius and Hamberger, Ol. 94, 2. [According to Diogenes II. 43. (c. xxiii.) the Athenians imme- diately repented of the death of Socrates ; and manifested their sorrow by closing the palsestras and gymnasia. They are said to have condemned Meletus to death ; and to have banished the other accusers ; and also to have erected a bronze statue of Socra- tes. It is also said, in the lives of the Ten Orators, that Isocrates appeared in mourning for Socrates the day after his execution. ED.] * I should say that she had been carried by the north wind over the cliffs, near which she had been playing with Pharmacea. CX1X AIOFENOTS AAEPTIOT S&KPATOY2 BIOS. I. (18.) SwKparjje Sw0povi p.iv r\v viog \i9ovpyov, KOI &aivapirt)<; pa'tag (aig Kal HXdrwv ev Qtairrir^ i}alv} 'AGrjv- alog, TOV drjpov 'A\WTTiKr)Qtv. II. 'ESoicei Si ffv/Jiiroitlv 'Evpiiridy. "OQtv ovrw iffri Kaivbv Spapa TOVT' 'EiipnriSov, T Qi Kat ra Qpvyava viroTiOriai icai irakiv, ical KaXXt'ac ireSriraig, "H8r) ), (c *E|e(TTi yap poi. 2wKparje yap a'irio. ft 6 TUQ rpayy^i'af TTOIWV Ta irepiXaXovaac ovrog tan rag ffofyag. III. (19-) ' Aicoi>yv eictivov icara- SrijKovfftv 'ApxtXaow row ^wtrncov' ou icai Trai&ica ytvetr- IV. Aoi5pic 5e Kai SovXtvffai avrbv Kal IpydaaoOai \i6ovc. EJvai re avrov Kal Tag sv aicpoTroXst Xaptrac tvioi Qaffiv, iv$e- ovffag. "OQtv /cat TI'/JWVO iv roig StXXoie t'nrt Iv, cxx LIFE OF SOCRATES. S' apa TWV aTTtKXive Xi9o6og, i v tTraoiSbg, dicptjSoXoyove a.7rorjai KM 'iSopt- vevQ. 'AXXd Kal 01 rpiaKovra avrbv iKwXvaav rl%vae StSdffKtiv Xoytov, we a/3wpTvoe iv -jravTOCair-g tcrroptp) p.era TOV p,a- Qf]rov Aiax'ivov pqropivuv idiSa%t. Alytt Si TOVTO Kal 'iSofjie- roig trepl TWV Swicparticwv. Kat Trpwroj iripl /3iou Su- ^' avTov ' ApiffTo%evo o 'EicivBapov Kal xpijpaTiaaaOai' TiQ'tvra yovv TO f3a\\6pivov Kippa a6poi&iv' sir' avaX&aavra, TrdXiv TiQevai. Kpirwva 5* avaaTjjaai avrov cnrb TOV ipyacrTTjpiov, Kal iraiSivcrai, Trjg Kara ^v\fiv ^ap'roe tpaadevra, Atj/jirjTpioQ Qrjffiv 6 BudvriO. VI. (21.) Ffovra 5 TT/V vfftKt}v Sfwpiav firiSev flvat Trpbg rjfidg, TO. rjQiKa ^iXocro^tiv ipeiv aviiKa.Kw<;. "QQtv Kal XaKTioOevra, rivkff\f.TO, Tivbg SavfiaaavTog, tiirtiv, Ei SB fit OVOQ e, SIKTJV av avr(f i\dy^avov ; Kai ravra p.iv o Arjfi'ijrpioe. VII. (22.) 'ATroSrjutag Si OVK iStrjdt), KaOcnrtp ol irXeiovg, TrXjyv el (ir) arpaTcveadai tStt, To Si \onrbv avrodi fisvuv, i\ovtiK- oTtpov ffvvt'r)Tei roig Trpoe^taXsyo/ievoie, ovx wfrt at\kaf>ai Tt)v 56%av avToi), dXX' w r6 dXrjQis tK^iaQtlv TriipdQai. 3>aol S' EvpnrlSrjv avTtf SOVTU TOV 'HpaicXarov ffvi'^ica, yvi/ara* oijuat Si, Kal 8. /J.TJ avviJKa' 7r\ijv ArjXiov ye Tivog Stlrai KoXvp./3r)Tov. 'EirtntXtiTO Si Kal awjjiaffKiae, Kal ijv fvtKTrjs. 'EffTpaTfvvaTO yovv etc 'A/i^i7roXiv' cai Efvo^wyra d^' ITTTTOW TTfffovra ev rj^ Kara ArjXiov payy, SuffWfftv viroXa^uv. (23.) ore Kal TTCLVTUV 'A0jjvaiwv, avrbg ripifta avt^wptt, irapiiri.arpi$6[j.ivo(; t Ttjpdtv dfjivvaaQai, fi TIC ' 1 *7TtX0ot. 'EffTpaTtvaaro BY DIOGENES LAERTIUS. cxxi Si ical tig HoriSaiav Sid Sa\drTT]g' TTt^y yap oi>K Ij/ijv, rov iro- \efjLOV K(ii\vovrog. 'Ore Kal [itivai WKrbg o\rjg i(j>' ivbg ff^rjfjia- rog avrov aai, Kal dpiartvaavra avroQi n - apaxa>pfjc rif Trpairy rwv a7ro/nv^/tovv^drwv. VIII. (24) T Hv Si Kal tVxvpoyvw/iwv Kal Sij\ov tK re rov /*} fl%ai rots in pi Kptriav, Kt\tvovai Aiovra rov SaXa/i/vtov, Tr\ovaiov avSpa, dyaytiv irpog avroi'S, i]Oi YS.ap.i\T) iv r rStv viro[ivr]fidrii)v) i?6vro<; avropwv tig rd ir\r)Q>] rSiv iriirpaffKO- fjuvdtv, t\tye Trpbg avrbv, TLoffwv eyti \pdav OVK x w > ^ a ' iKtiva dvi6ovQ ^i](Sifi.' , OVK tig rov Si Kal 'Ap^sXdov TOV MaKtEovog, Kal ^Kuira rov Kpavaifiov, cai EupwXo^ov rov Aapicraaiov, piirt \pfiiJiaTa vpoo- ipivog ai/ruJv, \ii\Tf. Trap' avrovg dirt\0wv. EvraKrog re j/v rfjv ciairav ovrtag, laart TroXXaicje 'AQrivgai, Xot/xtDr ytvoftkvuv fiovog OVK iv6ffT)jjacri yap, ftovXrjQivrag 'Adt]valovg, Sid rb XiiiravSptlv, ffvvav- 1 cxxii LIFE OF SOCRATES, 1 rb 7r\r/0og, -j/rjtyiffaadai, Tafjtiiv fiiv dffTijv piav, iraiSo- iroitiaQai Si Kai t% trepac' oOtv rovro 7roti}erai Kai ^wKpdrrjv. XI. T Hv S' iKavog Kai rwv OKUtTTTovTwv ai>Tov virtpopav. (27) Kai tatfivvvtro iirl ry tvrtXfia. Mtcr06v Tt ovSiva fiQ- firpaZaTO. Kai tXiyiv, ijdiara kaQiw, ijtciara ovpou TrpocrfaffOai' cai ijSiara. icivutv, i)Kiara TO fit) irapbv TTOTOV ava^kvuv' Kai tXa^icrrtav Stofitvos, lyyiffra tlvai StiOtv. ToDro ' IviGTai Kai Trapa Ttav Kti)p.8o7roiire, 'Qg ivSaiptiiv irap' 'A9rjvaioi icai roTf aXXoifft flTU, Kai tppovTiaTij^, Kai TO raXacVwpov tvtffnv Ev ry yvwfMy, KOVK tTi Kapviic;, ovd' iq, ovre (Sa OVT av piy&v a^% Xtav, ovr' dpiorav iTriOvfitiz, Olvov r cnrij^y Kai dd$T)v a (23) 'A[jii\l/ia S' tv Tpi/Swrt Trapaywv auTov fyrjaiv OVT, f, avSa&v /SeXrttrr' oXiyaiv, iroXXaJv Sk t]Ktl Kai ffii Trof ^uaf, wareiKoc T' t2. noQfj/ av v ourwf, "Ori flptvQvy r* sv rate odoig, Kai TUI 6(j>9a\fiu> Trapaf3d\\ci, s, KUKO. TroXX' dvlx^j Kai v j/xTv at Kai rot evt'ors Trpof rovf Kaipovc dp//orro/ivoc, ai Xa/*7rpa ' KaQdntp iv T TlXaTtavos ffVfj,7rooi Trap' 'A XII. (29) 'IKOVOS 5' d/i06rtpa ijv Kai Trporps^/at Kai aTro- rpsi^ai. "QffTTfp TOV Gtairjjrov, TTtpi S7riS)V "X.app,iST)v Si roiivavriov fTrt olntiuf IXOVTO.. (30) 'Enyps Si ical tig 0p6vjju.a 'I0tKpar>jv T'OV ffrparrjybv, dii%a<; avrif TOV Kovptuc; NiSov aXtKravovae avriov TWV KaXXiou TTTipv^afisvovt;. Kai avrbv T\avKb)vir]g r)i'ou Ty" TroXei TTtonroitiv, Ka.Qa.7ffp a f>'Xoue S' OVK av ovojuatrai OTTOGOVQ K6/crjraf OVTOJQ oXiyaipwg t\nv 7Tpi avTovg. 'Opwv 5' TivKXiiSrjv iffTrovdciKOTa TTtai Tove tptu- roit; e ovSa/jLuJ^. "A%pr] x t'iXtTO' Kai KaXXoQ vTreptiStv 'AXuifiutdov, Kara TIVOQ. XIV. Kai 1-jryvt.i ff%oXr]v, wg KaXXiarov Krr\\i.a.Tu>v, Ka9a /cat Stvo^Siv iv ffVjjLTroa'nj) cj)T]aiv. 'EXeyg St Kai tv /JLOVOV djaQbv tlvai, Trjv S7TIOTJ7JUJJV' /cat iv JJLOVOV KUKOV, TI)V dpaOiav. TLXov- TOV 5e Kai tvytveiav ovfiev atfivbv t%uv' Trav Ss Toiivavriov naicbv. EITTOVTOC yovv TIVOQ avrcf we tirf 'AvriaBivrjs fi^rpbg 0parr;e, 2ii S <#ov, ti], OVTUQ av yevvalov SK Svolv 'AOrjvaiwv ytvkaQai ; QaLSwva Si Si' ai%p,aXii>(riav ITT' oi'/cj/*aro<; K 7rpoiTra? KpiVwvt Xwrpwcracr^ai, Kai 0iXocro0ov aTTft XV. (32) 'AXXd Kai Xvpi^tiv kfiavQaviv, ort jcatpog' prjijiv Xtywv O.TOTTOV tlvai, li TIQ p,r) oldtv LKjiavQavnv, "Ert Tt aip- \tiTO ffvvt\i<;, ry TOV [iaro tvt^la XvaiTiXeli' t'ljovfitvos rr\v TOiavTrjv yvfivaaiav, <1>Q /cat Stvotywv tv avnTro r)affKe Tt Sslv ytufiirptiv, /xpi av Tig fiiTO^ SvvrjTai cxxiv LIFE OF SOCRATES, yijv TE irapaXafit'iv Kai irapaSovvai. (33) EvpuriSov S' iv ry A.vyy tiTTOvrog TTtpl dptrtjg, KpariffTOV tlicg ravr' iav d(j>ujj,kva, dvaffTag i%rj\9i' r}> iav diro\d)Xivai. 'EpTt)9tlg, TTorepov yrjfjiai fj \nir\ ; tt], "O av avrwv iroiqayg, (JitTayvuffy. *EXye Tt SavfidZtiv T&V Tag Xi9ivov tiKOvag Kara- ffKtva^o[j,iv(i}v, TOV fiiv Xi9ov irpovoiiv, wf ojuoiorarog torai' nvTuv 5' dfitXtiv, wg firj b/jioiovg ry Xi9aivia9ai' tfiiov Si Kai Tovg veovg ffvvfx& Karo7rTpi&ff9ai, 'iv' ti piv KaXoi tltv, d'Zioi yiyvoivTO' ti S' a/cr^pot, TraiStia TIJV SvgtiStiav i; Toitv. (34) KaXiffag iiri SeiTrvov nXovmovg, Kai Trjg aiSovfj,ivi)g, t(f>rj, Qdppti' tl piv yap tltv /itrptot, ffi , Qtitv av' tl Si QavXoi, ijfuv avriav ovSiv fjitXrjfftt. "EXtyt, TOV /jiiv aXXovg dv9pa}Trovg t,r\v, 'iv' iuQioitv' ai>Tov Si iff9itiv, 'iva %y. Hpbg TO OV'K d%i6Xoyov vXrj9og ttftaoKtv, ofioiov ti Ti Te- TpdSpaxpov 'iv diroSoKifj.d'^(i)v, TOV tK TWV TOIOVTWV ffupbv djg CoKipov drfoSixoiTO. Aicr%ivo Si t'nrovTog, Ilsvrjg tlfii KUI dXXo piv ovSiv t\t>>, SiSwfii Ss trot Ijuavrov. 'Ap ovv, ilirtv, OVK aia9dvy TO. ftiyiaTa fioi SiSovg ; IIp6e TOV aTroSvairtTOvvTa iiri T(f Trapopaff9ai > oTrort iiraveffTrjeav 01 TpiaKovra, Apa, t^f], \ii] TI ffoi fjLiTafjiiXti ; (35) Hpbg TOV tiirovTa, Qdvarov oov KaTt- yvuxTav 'A9r)va'ioi, K^KSIVWV, Qrjffiv, r) fyvffiQ. Ol Si TOVT' ' Av- a^ayopav Qaviv tiTrtiv. Ttjg yvvaiKog tiirovaiK;, AStKs diro- 9vT]aKtts t 2 Si t $9irjv ipifiwXov 'IKOIO' Trpbg Aiffxivtjv ft), Elg Tpirrjv dTro9avovfiai. MeXXovri Tt avTif TO Kti>viiov iritaQai, 'AiroXXoStapog ifidriov iSiSov KaXbv, 'iv' iv tKt ivy ivmro9dvy' Kai og, Ti S', ityr\, TO tfibv ifiaTtov ifi- fiiwi'ai [jiiv iiriTriStiov, ivairoQaviiv Si ou^t ; Hpbg TOV tlirovTa, KaK&g 6 Stivd at XsytC KaX&g yap, ti], Xiytiv OVK ipaQt . (36) Srps'^/aj/roc 'AvTiaQkvovg TO Sitppuybg TOV TpljScovog fig Toi'iKpavig, 'Opu aov, i(j>t], Sid TOV rpi/3wvoc T>}V KtvoSoZiav. Hpbg TOV tlirovTa, Oil ffol \oiSoptlrat b Stlva ; Qt>xh iT)Gi, SavQiTTirr) TraiSia yivvif. Ilorl tv ciyopa" /cat Soipanov TrfpuXo^vrj^, avvej3ov\evov at noi %epalv a/jivvaadai' N?) At', tiTTtv, 'iv' rifiiav TrvKrev- , sKaffrog vfiStv Xeyoi, tv ^wKpartQ, tv Sav0t7T7Tjj. *EXye ffvvfivai rpa-^tiq. yvvaiK\, Kaddrrep 01 iinriKol Svfioudsviv iTTTrotf . 'AXX' ac tKtivoi, ^JJffr]S fKtlvo Si} TO iripi- ep6fj.evov, (38) 'Aty' ov Srj Kai i6ovfiQij /xdXtcrra. Kai Si) Kai on Si TOVQ [itya\opovovvTas 0* taurolf, wg avorjTovg, KaQairep Mt- Xtrov Kat "AVVTOV iltg Kai iv Tip nXdratvof eurt Msvatvt. Oiiroff yap ov Qtpuiv TOV inrb Sw/cpdroug -xXivaanbv, Trp&rov /j,iv kvrj- \ct\^ev avT< TOVG irtpi 'ApiffTotj>avi]v' tirtiTa Kai MeXirov avve- TTEKTIV cnriveyKauQat icar avrov ypatprjv datfStiai; Kai rSiv v'ttav ia9opag. 'AirrjveyKaTO fitv ovv Trjv ypaiprjv 6 MeXiroc' five ck rrjv S'iKt]v Tlo\vtvKTO, aic T)ffi a/3wpTvoc iv TravToSaTTij iffro- pea. 2ui/ypa- 0jjv Srjutovpyuv Kai TWV iro\iTiKwv bpyi^ofntvov' TOV Si AVKOIVO, virip TUV pjjropwv Kai TOV MiXtrov virip TWV TTOIIJT&V ovg airavras b Swicpdrjjc Siirrvps. QafiutplvoQ Se ^r/ffiv iv Tif TTpairy TUJV dTro/xvjj/iovtv/idrwv, /*} tlvai d\r)9fj TOV \6yov TOV IIoXu- 1 3 cxxvi LIFE OF SOCRATES, KOO.TOVQ. 'Ev avrif yap, tyrjai, fivrmovivft TWV viro Tti\ijtv dvaffTaBivTuv, a ytyovtv iv tTtffiv t'5 rtjs reXfvrJJc vartpov. Kai IGTIV oura> t%ov. XIX (40.) 'H 5' dvraifioffia TTJS SiKt](; TOVTOV sl^e rbv TDOTTOV. 'Aj/diceirai yap tn icai vvv (^>r\ffl QafiuplvoG iv Ti TdSe lypo^aro Kai av^wjuoXoy^uaro MsXiroc MtXfrou fjiiv / TroXic vojut' SIOVQ oil vofj.it>iv, trepa t naiva fiGriyov/itvoc;' ddiKti Be /cai rove vkovq Siav. Sdvarog. XX. 'O 5' av 0iX6(To0of, Avffiov ypd^avros aToXoyiav avrif, dtayvovg, tr), KaXoc )uev 6 Xoyof, , tl jcaXof tcrrtv 6 Xoyoe, OVK av ffoi upfioTTOi. ; ttyr), Ov yap Kai ifidna Ka\d Kai vrroSrjfiaTa tlr} av Ifiol dvdpp.oijaiv 'lovffroQ o T/3epiV iv ry erre/ijuan, nXdrwr a dva(3rjvai STTI ro |8f//ia, ai t'nriiv, Nfwraroe a/v, (L ai/5pf 'AQrfvdloi, rSiv lirl TO fiijua iK/3oijffai, Kara/3ai/rajv, rovrian XXI. "Or" ovv KaTtSiKuaBr), SiaKOffiaig oydorjKOVTafitf ir\f.ioai ^/^oif TWV diro\vovaHjv' Kai ripm \ikvwv TWV StuaffTwv, ri ^p) jraOfiv avrov ?j aTroriffai; TTSVTS icai i)cocriv 0?; paxp,dc; ctTro- Tifftiv. Evftov\lSi]Q fiiv yap iptjffiv, IKUTOV 6fio\oyrj(rai. (42) 0opv/3()(Tavrw/ 5f rail' SiKUffTwv, "EvtKa fiiv, tint, rwv /uoi ciaTrnrpayn't.viy. BY DIOGENES LAERTIUS. cxxvii XXIII. (43) 'O fiiv ovv i dv9pii>irii)v f)V. 'Adijvaioi 5' tv9v p-fTfjrVWffav, UJCTTE (cXsitrai (cat TraXat'arpac Kai jvfivaaia., Kai rot'c fuv tQvydSfvaav' MsXirou Si Sa.va.rov Kartyvuxrav. 2w- Kpart] Si xaXKTJs tiKovog irifit^ffavTO, i}v tQtaav iv r'j(Tavra av- 9r]}i.ep6v t^eKj'jpv^av 'HpajcXeairai. Ov fiovov Sf. TTI SwK-parovc 'AOrjvalot TrtTfovOafft rovro, dXXa Kai 7ri TrXei'ffrwv oawv. Kai yap ' Ofiqpov (icaOa t]ffiv 'HpaK\tiSr]^) irevrriKovra cpaxfJ-9i, wf fiaivofjitvov, fTifir)(rav' Kai Tvpralov TrapctKOTTTtiv iXtyov, KOI AKparov- 'Eytvvt]9ri fit (Kadd rjatv ' Airo\\6Sjc tj3S6[i.T] 'OXv/nridSog, Qapyt)\iwvo^ sVry, ore ica- 9aipovv KWVUOV air\w fiiv iSt AVTOI 8' ieiriov TOVTO ri XXV. Tovry Tig, KaQd (prjaiv 'AptcrroreXjje tv rpi'ry irtpi TTOir]TiKtJ, ttyiXovtiKft ' AvrioXo^os Ai'jpviog, (cat 'AvnQwv o Tt- g, wg Hv9ay6p

Z,SIVTI, TiXevTriaavn Si 6 Trpoeiprjfievog Eivo- dvr]' (cat Tltv5d(i(f> 'A/i0tjuV?jc o K]G, (cat Biaim SaXapog Hpiqvtvg' HirraKvidy TtjiiOKpewv. XXVI. (-17) Twv de ia8t%a.fie.vv avrbv, r&v Xgyojuevwi/ , 01 (copu^atorarot ^u.i/ nXarwv, &tvov t 'Avriff- Twv Se. Qtpo/Jiivuv dtica ol ^taaiwv, EvK\tiSrig, 'AptoriTTTrof. AIKTSOV Si Trpwrov TTfpt SEVO^WJ/TOC' ftra Trtpt ' AvTiff9kvov iv roig KVVIKOIQ' tirtira Trept TWV Sw/cparucwv, (0' ovro> Trspt TlXdrtovoQ' tnti (carap^tt r<3v 5JKa aipkatw, icai T-^V TrpwTtjv ' 'Aica^/a'av avrbq avvtffrtjcraTO. 'H jusv ovv d(coXot/0ia rovrov xsrai rov rpoTrov. XXVII. rlyov ^ 2wfcpar;e (cat !rpC, isroptKOC, Trspt- "Apyovg ytypa^we' icat aXXof, 7repi7rarjriK:6f, BiOuvof SCHLEIERMACHER WORTH OF SOCRATES AS A PHILOSOPHER. THAT very different and even entirely opposite judge- ments should be formed by different men, and according to the spirit of different times, on minds of a leading and peculiar order, and that it should be late, if ever, before opinions agree as to their worth, is a phenomenon of everyday occurrence. But it is less natural, indeed it seems almost surprising, that at any one time a judge- ment should be generally received with regard to any such mind, which is in glaring contradiction with itself. Yet, if I am not mistaken, it is actually the case with Socrates, that the portrait usually drawn of him, and the historical importance which is almost unanimously at- tributed to him, are at irreconcileable variance. With Socrates most writers make a new period to begin in the history of Greek philosophy ; which at all events mani- festly implies that he breathed a new spirit and character into those intellectual exertions of his countrymen, which we comprehend under the name of philosophy, so that they cxxx WORTH OF SOCRATES assumed a new form under his hands, or at least that he materially widened their range. But if we enquire how the same writers describe Socrates as an individual, we find nothing that can serve as a foundation for the influ- ence they assign to him. "We are informed, that he did not at all busy himself with the physical investigations which constituted a main part even of Greek philosophy, but rather withheld others from them, and that even with regard to moral inquiries, which were those in which he engaged the deepest, he did not by any means aim at re- ducing them into a scientific shape, and that he estab- lished no fixed principle for this, any more than for any other branch of human knowledge. The base of his intellectual constitution, we are told, was rather religious than speculative, his exertions rather those of a good citizen, directed to the improvement of the people, and especially of the young, than those of a philosopher ; in short, he is represented as a virtuoso in the exercise of sound common sense, and of that strict integrity and mild philanthropy, with which it is always associated in an uncorrupted mind ; all this, however, tinged with a slight air of enthusiasm. These are no doubt excellent qualities ; but yet they are not such as fit a man to play a brilliant part in history, but rather, unless where peculiar circumstances intervene, to lead a life of enviable tranquillity, so that it would be necessary to ascribe the general reputation of Socrates, and the almost unex- ampled homage which has been paid to him, by so many generations, less to himself than to such peculiar circumstances. But least of all are these qualities which AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxxxi could have produced conspicuous and permanent effects on the philosophical exertions of a people already far advanced in intellectual culture. And this is confirmed, when we consider what sort of doctrines and opinions are at- tributed to Socrates in conformity with this view. For in spite of the pains taken to trick them out with a show of philosophy, it is impossible after all to give them any scientific solidity whatever : the farthest point we come to is, that they are thoughts well suited to warm the hearts of men in favour of goodness, but such as a healthy understanding, fully awakened to reflexion can- not fail to light upon of itself. What effect then can they have wrought on the progress, or the transforma- tion of philosophy ? If we would confine ourselves to the well -known statement, that Socrates called philosophy down from heaven to earth, that is, to houses and market- places, in other words, that he proposed social life as the object of research in the room of nature : still the influ- ence thus ascribed to him is far from salutary in itself, for philosophy consists not in a partial cultivation either of morals or physics, but in the co-existence and inter- communion of both, and there is moreover no his- torical evidence that he really exerted it. The founda- tiops of ethical philosophy had been laid before the time of Socrates, in the doctrines of the Pythagoreans, and after him it only kept its place by the side of physics, in the philosophical systems of the Greeks. In those of Plato, of Aristotle, and of the Stoics, that is, of all the genuine Socratic schools of any importance, we again meet with physical investigations, and ethics were ex- cxxxii WORTH OF SOCRATES clusively cultivated only by those followers of Socrates who themselves never attained to any eminence in philo- sophy. And if we consider the general tendency of the above-named schools, and review the whole range'of their tenets, nothing can be pointed out, that could have pro- ceeded from a Socrates, endowed with such qualities of mind and character as the one described to us, unless it be where their theories have been reduced to a familiar practical application. And even with regard to the elder Socratics, we find more satisfaction in tracing their strictly philosophical speculations to any other source rather than to this Socrates ; not only may Aristippus, who was unlike his master in his spirit as well as his doctrines, be more easily derived from Protagoras, with whom he has so much in common, but Euclid, with his dialectic bias, from the Eleatics. And we find ourselves compelled to conclude, that the stem of Socrates, as he is at present represented to us, can have produced no other shoot than the Cynical philosophy, and that, not the cynism of Antisthenes, which still retains many fea- tures which we should rather refer to his earlier master, Gorgias, but the purer form, which exhibits only a peculiar mode of life, not a doctrine, much less a science : that of Diogenes, the mad Socrates^ as he has been called, though in truth the highest epithet due to him is that of Socrates caricatured. For his is a copy in which we find nothing but features of such an original : its approximation to the self-contentedness of the deity in the retrenchment of artificial wants, its rejection of mere theoretical knowledge, its unassuming course of going AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxxxiii about in the service of the god to expose the follies of mankind. But how foreign all this is to the domain of philosophy, and how little can be there effected with such means, is evident enough. The only rational course then that seems to be left, is to give up one or other of these contradictory assump- tions. Either let Socrates still stand at the head of the Athenian philosophy, but then let those who place him there undertake to establish a different notion of him from that which has been long prevalent : or let us retain the conception of the wise and amiable man, who was made not for the school but wholly for the world : but then let him be transferred from the history of philosophy to that of the general progress of society at Athens, if he can claim any place there. The latter of these ex- pedients is not very far removed from that which has been adopted by Krug 1 ! For as in his system Socrates stands at the end of the one period, and not at the begin- ning of the next, he appears not as the germ of a new age, but as a product and aftergrowth of an earlier one ; he sinks, as an insulated phenomenon, into the same rank with the sophists, and other late fruits of the period, and loses a great part of his philosophical importance. Only it is but a half measure that this author adopts, when he begins his new period with the immediate disciples of Socrates as such ; for at its head he places the genuine Socratics, as they are commonly called, and above all Xenophon, men of whom he himself says, that their only merit was that of having propagated and 1 Gesch. der Philos. alter Zeit. cxxxiv WORTH OF SOCRATES diffused Socratic doctrines, while the doctrines them- selves do not appear to him worth making the begin- ning of a new period. Ast had previously arrived at the same result by a road in some respects opposite.* With him Plato is the full bloom of that which he terms the Athenian form of philosophy, and as no plant begins with its bloom, he feels himself constrained to place Socrates at the head of this philosophy, but yet not strictly as a philosopher. He says, that the opera- tion of philosophy in Socrates was confined to the exer- cise of qualities that may belong to any virtuous man, that is to say, it was properly no philosophy at all ; and makes the essence of his character to consist in enthu- siasm and irony. Now he feels that he cannot place a man endowed with no other qualities than these at the head of a new period, and therefore he ranges the so- phists by his side, not indeed without some inconsis- tency, for he himself sees in them the perverse tendency which was to be counteracted by the spirit of the new age; but yet he prefers this to recognizing the germ of a new gradation in Socrates alone, whose highest philosophical worth he makes to consist in his martyr- dom, which however cannot by any means be deemed of equal moment in the sphere of science, as in that of religion or politics. Though in form this course of Ast's is opposite to Krug's, in substance it is the same : its result is likewise to begin a new period of philosophy with Plato. For Ast perceives nothing new or peculiar in the struggle Socrates made against the Sophists, only * Grundriss einer Gesch. der Philos. AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxxxv virtue and the thirst after truth, which had undoubtedly animated all the preceding philosophers; what he re- presents as characteristic in the Athenian philosophy, is the union of the elements which had been previously separate and opposed to each other ; and since he does not in fact show the existence of this union in Socrates himself, and distinctly recognizes their separation in his immediate disciples, Plato is after all the point at which according to him that union begins. But if we choose really to consider Plato as the true beginner of a new period, not to mention that he is far too perfect for a first beginning, we fall into two diffi- culties. First as to his relation to Aristotle. In all that is most peculiar to Plato, Aristotle appears as di- rently opposite to him as possible; but the main division of philosophy, notwithstanding the wide differ- ence between their modes of treating it, he has in com- mon with Plato, and the Stoics with both; it fits as closely and sits as easily on one as the other, so that one can scarcely help believing that it was derived from some common origin, which was the root of Plato's philosophy as well as theirs. The second difficulty is to conceive what Plato's relation to Socrates could really have been, if Socrates was not in any way his master in philosophy. If we should suppose that Plato's character was formed by the example of So- crates, and that reverence for his master's virtue, and love of truth, was the tie that bound him, still this merely moral relation is not a sufficient solution of the difficulty. The mode in which Plato introduces So- cxxxvi WORTH OF SOCRATES crates, even in works which contain profound philo- sophical investigations, must be regarded as the wildest caprice, and would necessarily have appeared merely ridiculous and absurd to all his contemporaries, if he was not in some way or other indebted to him for his philosophical life. Hence we are forced to abide by the conclusion, that if a great pause is to be made in Greek philosophy, to separate the scattered tenets of the earlier schools from the later systems, this must be made with Socrates; but then we must also ascribe to him some element of a more strictly philosophical kind than most writers do, though as a mere beginning it needs not to have been carried very far toward maturity. Such a pause as this, however, we cannot avoid making : the earlier philosophy which we designate by the names of Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Em- pedocles, &c. has evidently a common type, and the later, in which Plato, Aristotle, and Zeno are the con- spicuous names, has likewise one of its own, which is very different from the other. Nothing can have been lost between them, which could have formed a gradual transition : much less is it possible so to connect any of the later forms with any of the earlier, as to regard them as a continuous whole. This being so, nothing remains to be done, but to subject the case of Socrates to a new revision, in order to see whether the judges he has met with among posterity have not been as unjust, in deny- ing his philosophical worth, and his merits in the cause of philosophy, as his contemporaries were in denying his worth as a citizen, and imputing to him imaginary AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxxxvii offences against the commonwealth. But this would render it necessary to ascertain somewhat more dis- tinctly, wherein his philosophical merit consists. But this new inquiry naturally leads us back in the first instance to the old question, whether we are to be- lieve Plato or Xenophon in their accounts of what Socrates was ; a question, however, which only deserves to be proposed at all, so far as these two authors are really at variance with each other, and which therefore only admits of a rational answer, after it has been de- cided whether such a variance exists, and where it lies. Plato nowhere professes himself the historian of So- crates ; with the exception perhaps of the Apology, and of insulated passages, such as the speech of Alcibiades in the Banquet. For it would certainly have been in bad taste, if here, where Plato is making contemporaries of Socrates speak of him in his presence, he had ex- hibited him in a manner that was not substantially faithful, though even here many of the details may have been introduced for the sake of playful exaggeration. On the other hand, Plato himself does not warrant any one to consider all that he makes Socrates say in his dialogues, as his real thoughts and language; and it would be rendering him but a poor service to confine his merit to that of having given a correct and skilful report of the doctrines of Socrates. On the contrary, he un- doubtedly means his philosophy to be considered as his own, and not Socrates'. And accordingly every intelli- gent reader is probably convinced by his own reflections, that none but original thoughts can appear in such a m 3 cxxxviii WORTH OF SOCRATES dress ; whereas a work of mere narrative and such these dialogues would be, if the whole of the matter belonged to Socrates would necessarily show a fainter tone of colouring, such as Xenophon's conversations really present. But as on the one hand it would be too much to assert that Socrates actually thought and knew all that Plato makes him say : so on the other hand it would certainly be too little to say of him, that he was nothing more than the Socrates whom Xenophon repre- sents. Xenophon, it is true, in the Memorabilia, pro- fesses himself a narrator ; but, in the first place, a man of sense can only relate what he understands, and a dis- ciple of Socrates, who must have been well acquainted with his master's habit of disclaiming knowledge, would of all men adhere most strictly to this rule. We know, however, and this may be admitted without being harshly pressed, that Xenophon was a statesman, but no philosopher, and that beside the purity of his cha- racter, and the good sense of his political principles, beside his admirable power of rousing the intellect, and checking presumption, which Xenophon loved and re- spected in Socrates, the latter may have possessed some really philosophical elements which Xenophon was un- able to appropriate to himself, and which he suffered to pass unnoticed ; which indeed he can have felt no temptation to exhibit, for fear of betraying defects such as those which his Socrates was wont to expose. On the other hand, Xenophon was an apologetic narrator, and had no doubt selected this form for the very pur- pose, that his readers might not expect him to exhibit AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxxxix Socrates entire, but only that part of his character which belonged to the sphere of the affections and of social life, and which bore upon the charges brought against him ; every thing else he excludes, contenting himself with showing, that it cannot have been any- thing of so dangerous a tendency as was imputed to Socrates. And not only may Socrates, he must have been more, and there must have been more in the back- ground of his speeches, than Xenophon represents. For if the contemporaries of Socrates had heard nothing from him but such discourses, how would Plato have marred the effect of his works on his immediate public, which had not forgotten the character of Socrates, if the part which Socrates plays there stood in direct con- tradiction with the image which his real life left in the reader's mind ? And if we believe Xenophon, and in this respect we cannot doubt the accuracy of the con- temporary apologist, that Socrates spent the whole of his time in public places, and suppose that he was always engaged in discourses which, though they may have been more beautiful, varied, and dazzling, were still in substance the same with these, and moved in the same sphere to which the Memorabilia are confined : one is at a loss to understand, how it was that, in the course of so many years, Socrates did not clear the market-place, and the work-shops, the walks, and the wrestling-schools, by the dread of his presence, and how H is that, in Xenophon's native Flemish style of paint- ing, the weariness of the interlocutors is not still more strongly expressed, than we here and there actually find cxl WORTH OF SOCRATES it. And still less should we be able to comprehend, why men of such abilities as Critias and Alcibiades, and others formed by nature for speculation, as Plato and Euclid, set so high a value on their intercourse with Socrates, and found satisfaction in it so long. Nor can it be supposed, that Socrates held discourses in public such as Xenophon puts into his mouth, but that he delivered lessons of a different kind elsewhere, and in private; for this, considering the apologetic form of Xenophon's book, to which he rigidly confines himself, he would probably not have passed over in silence. Socrates must have disclosed the philosophical element of his character in the same social circle of which Xenophon gives us specimens. And is not this just the impression which Xenophon's conversations make ? philosophical matter, translated into the unphilosophical style of the common understanding, an operation in which the philosophical base is lost; just as some critics have proposed, by way of test for the produc- tions of the loftiest poetry, to resolve them into prose, and evaporate their spirit, which can leave nothing but an extremely sober kind of beauty remaining. And as after such an experiment the greatest of poets would scarcely be able exactly to restore the lost poetry, but yet a reader of moderate capacity soon observes what has been done, and can even point it out in several passages, where the decomposing hand has grown tired of its work : so it is in the other case with the philoso- phical basis. One finds some parallels with Plato, other fragments are detected in other ways : and the AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxli only inference to be drawn from the scarcity of these passages is, that Xenophon understood his business ; unless we choose to say, that as Aristotle is supposed to have held his philosophical discourses in the fore- noon, and the exoteric in the afternoon (Gellius N. A. xx. 5), Socrates reversed this order, and in the morning held conversations in the market-place with the arti- sans, and others who were less familiar with him, which Xenophon found it easier to divest of their philosophical aspect : but that of an evening, in the walks, and wrestling- schools, he engaged in those subtler, deeper, and wittier dialogues with his favou- rites, which it was reserved for Plato to imitate, em- bellish, and expand, while he connected his own investi- gations with them. And thus, to fill up the blank which Xenophon has manifestly left, we are still driven back to the Socrates of Plato, and the shortest way of releasing ourselves from the difficulty, would be to find a rule by which we could determine, what is the reflex, and the pro- perty, of Socrates in Plato, and what his own invention and addition. Only the problem is not to be solved by a process such as that adopted by Meiners, whose critical talent is of a kind to which this subject in general was not very well suited. For if in all that Plato has left we are to select only what is least speculative, least artificial, least poetical, and hence, for so we are taught, least enthusiastic, we shall in- deed still retain much matter for this more refined and pregnant species of dialogues, to season Xenophon '3 cxlii WORTH OF SOCRATES tediousness, but it will be impossible in this way to discover any properly philosophical basis in the con- stitution of Socrates. For if we exclude all depth of speculation, nothing is left but results, without the grounds and methodical principles on which they de- pend, and which therefore Socrates can only have pos- sessed instinctively, that is without the aid of phi- losophy. The only safe method seems to be, to in- quire : What may Socrates have been, over and above what Xenophon has described, without however con- tradicting the strokes of character, and the practical maxims, which Xenophon distinctly delivers as those of Socrates : and what must he have been, to give Plato a right, and an inducement, to exhibit him as he has done in his dialogues ? Now the latter branch of this question inevitably leads us back to the his- torical position from which we started; that Socrates must have had a strictly philosophical basis in his composition, so far as he is virtually recognized by Plato as the author of his philosophical life, and is therefore to be regarded as the first vital movement of Greek philosophy in its more advanced stage ; and that he can only be entitled to this place by an element, which, though properly philosophical, was foreign to the preceding period. Here however we must for the present be content to say, that the property which is peculiar to the post-Socratic philosophy, begin- ning with Plato, and which henceforward is common to all the genuine Socratic schools, is the co-existence and inter-communion of the three branches of know- AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxliii ledge, dialectics, physics, ethics. This distinction se- parates the two periods very definitely. For hefore Socrates either these branches were kept entirely apart, or their subjects were blended together without due discrimination, and without any definite proportion : as for instance ethics and physics among the Pythago- reans, physics and dialectics among the Eleatics ; the lonians alone, though their tendency was wholly to physics, made occasional excursions, though quite at random, into the region both of dialectics and of ethics. But when some writers refuse Plato himself the honour of having distinguished and combined these sciences, and ascribe this step to Xenocrates, and think that even Aristotle abandoned it again ; this in my opinion is grounded on a misunderstanding, which however it would here lead us too far to explain. Now it is true we cannot assert, that Socrates was the first who combined the characters of a physical, ethical, and dialectic philosopher in one person, especially as Plato and Xenophon agree in taking physics out of his range ; nor can it be positively said that Socrates was at least the author of this distribution of Science, though its germ may certainly be found from the Memorabilia. But we may surely inquire whether this phenomenon has not some simpler and more internal cause, and whether this may not be found in Socrates. The following observation will, I conceive, be admitted without much dispute. So long as inquirers are apt to step unwittingly across the boundaries that sepa- rate one province of knowledge from another, so long, cxliv WORTH OF SOCRATES and in the same degree, does the whole course of their intellectual operations depend on outward cir- cumstances : for it is only a systematic distribution of the whole field that can lead to a regular and con- nected cultivation of it. In the same way, so long as the several sciences are pursued singly, and their re- spective votaries contentedly acquiesce in this insula- tion, so long, and in the same degree, is the specific instinct for the object of each science predominant in the whole sphere of intellectual exertion. But as soon as the need of the connexion and co-ordinate growth of all the branches of knowledge has become so dis- tinctly felt, as to express itself by the form in which they are treated and described, in a manner which can never again be lost ; so far as this is the case, it is no longer particular talents and instincts, but the general scientific talent of speculation, that has the ascendant. In the former of these cases it must be confessed, that the idea of science as such is not yet matured, perhaps has not even become the subject of consciousness, for science as such can only be con- ceived as a whole, in which every division is merely subordinate, just as the real world to which it ought to correspond. In the latter case, on the contrary, this idea has become a subject of consciousness ; for it can have been only by its force that the particular inclinations which confine each thinker to a certain object, and split science into insulated parts, have been mastered. And this is unquestionably a simpler cri- terion to distinguish the two periods of Greek phi- AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxlv losophy. In the earlier period, the idea of science as such was not the governing idea, and had not even become a distinct subject of consciousness : and this it is that gives rise to the obscurity which we perceive in all the philosophical productions of that period, through the appearance of caprice which results from the want of consciousness, and through the imper- fection of the scientific language, which is gradually forming itself out of the poetical and historical vo- cabulary. In the second period, on the other hand, the idea of science has become a subject of con- sciousness. Hence the main business everywhere is to distinguish knowledge from opinion, hence the pre- cision of scientific language, hence the peculiar pro- minence of dialectics, which have no other object than the idea of science; things which were not compre- hended even by the Eleatics in the same way as by the Socratic schools, since the former still make the idea of being their starting-point, rather than that of know- ledge. Now this waking of the idea of science, and its earli- est manifestations, must have been, in the first instance, what constituted the philosophical basis in Socrates ; and for this reason he is justly regarded as the founder of that later Greek philosophy, which in its whole essential form, together with its several variations, was determined by that idea. This is proved clearly enough by the historical statements in Plato, and this too is what must be supplied in Xenophon's conversations, in order to make them worthy of Socrates, and Socrates of cxlvi WORTH OF SOCRATES his admirers. For if he went about in the service of the god, to justify the celebrated oracle, it was impos- sible that the utmost point he reached could have been simply to know that he knew nothing; there was a step beyond this which he must have taken, that of knowing what knowledge was. For by what other means could he have been enabled to declare that which others believed themselves to know, to be no know- ledge, than by a more correct conception of knowledge, and by a more correct method founded upon that con- ception ? And every where, when he is explaining the nature of non-science (dveTrtorjy/ioo-uvTj), one sees that he sets out from two tests : one, that science is the same in all true thoughts, and consequently must mani- fest its peculiar form in every such thought : the other, that all science forms one whole. For his proofs al- ways hinge on this assumption : that it is impossible to start from one true thought, and to be entangled in a contradiction with any other, and also that know- ledge derived from any one point, and obtained by correct combination, cannot contradict that which has been deduced in like manner from any other point ; and while he exposed such contradictions in the current conceptions of mankind, he strove to rouse those leading ideas in all who were capable of understanding, or even of divining his meaning. Most of what Xenophon has preserved for us may be referred to this object, and the same endeavour is indicated clearly enough in all that Socrates says of himself in Plato's Apology, and what Alcibiades says of him in his eulogy. So that if w AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxlvii conceive this to have been the central point in the cha- racter of Socrates, we may reconcile Plato and Xeno- phon, and can understand the historical position of Socrates. When Xenophon says (Mem. IY. 6. 15.) : that as often as Socrates did not merely refute the errors of others, but attempted to demonstrate something him- self, he took his road through propositions which were most generally admitted : we can perfectly understand this mode of proceeding, as the result of the design just described ; he wished to find as few hindrances and diversions as possible in his way, that he might illustrate his method clearly and simply; and propo- sitions, if there were such, which all held to be certain, must have appeared to him the most eligible, in order that he might show in their case, that the conviction with which they were embraced was not knowledge; since this would render men more keenly sensible of the necessity of getting at the foundation of knowledge, and of taking their stand upon it, in order to give a new shape to all human things. Hence too we may ex- plain the preponderance of the subjects connected with civil and domestic life in most of these conversations. For this was the field that supplied the most generally admitted conceptions and propositions, the fate of which interested all men alike. But this mode of proceeding becomes inexplicable, if it is supposed that Socrates at- tached the chief importance to the subject of these con- versations. That must have been quite a secondary point. For when the object is to elucidate any subject, cxlviii WORTH OF SOCRATES it is necessary to pay attention to the less familiar and more disputed views of it, and how meagre most of those discussions in Xenophon are in this respect, is evident enough. From the same point of view we must also consider the controversy of Socrates with the Sophists. So far as it was directed against their maxims, it does not belong to our present question ; it is merely the opposition of a good citizen to the cor- rupters of government and of youth. But even looking at it from the purely theoretical side, it would be idle to represent this contrast as the germ of a new period of philosophy, if Socrates had only impugned opinions which were the monstrous shapes into which the doc- trines of an earlier school had degenerated, without having established any in their stead, which nobody supposes him to have done. But for the purpose of awakening the true idea of science, the sophists must have been the most welcome of all disputants to him, since they had reduced their opinions into the most perfect form ; and hence were proud of them them- selves, and were peculiarly admired by others. If, therefore, he could succeed in exposing their weakness, the value of a principle so triumphantly applied would be rendered most conspicuous. But in order to show the imperfection of the current conceptions both in the theories of the Sophists, and in common life, if the issue was not to be left to chance, some certain method was requisite. For it was often necessary in the course of the process to lay down in- termediate notions, which it was necessary to define to AS A PHILOSOPHER. cxlix the satisfaction of both parties ; otherwise, all that was done would afterwards have looked like a paltry sur- prise ; and the contradiction between the proposition in question, and one that was admitted, could never be detected without ascertaining what notions might or might not be connected with a given one. Now this method is laid down in the two problems which Plato states in the Phsedrus, as the two main elements in the art of dialectics, that is, to first know how correctly to combine multiplicity in unity, and again to divide a complex unity according to its nature into a multi- plicity, and next to know what notions may or may not be connected together. It is by this means that Socrates became the real founder of dialectics, which continued to be the soul of all the great edifices reared in later times by Greek philosophy, and by its decided prominence constitutes the chief distinction between the later period and the earlier ; so that one cannot but commend the historical instinct which has assigned so high a station to him. At the same time this is not meant to deny, that Euclid and Plato carried this science, as well as the rest, farther toward maturity; but it is manifest that in its first principles, Socrates possessed it as a science, and practised it as an art, in a manner peculiar to himself. For the construction of all Socratic dialogues, as well of those doubtfully as- cribed to Plato, and of those attributed with any degree of probability to other original disciples of Socrates, as of all those reported in the Memorabilia, hinges without any exception on this point. The same inference re- n 3 cl WORTH OF SOCRATES suits from the testimony of Aristotle (Metaph. I. 6. XIII. 4.) : that what may be justly ascribed to So- crates, is that he introduced induction and general defi- nitions; a testimony which bears every mark of im- partiality and truth. Hence there is no reason to doubt that Socrates taught this art of framing and connecting notions correctly. Since however it is an art, abstract teaching was not sufficient, and therefore no doubt Socrates never so taught it : it was an art that required to be witnessed and practised in the most manifold applications, and one who was not firmly grounded in it, and left the school too early, lost it again, and with it almost all that was to be learned from Socrates, as indeed is observed in Plato's dialogues. Now that this exercise and illustration was the main object of con- versations held by Socrates even on general moral sub- jects, is expressly admitted by Xenophon himself, when, under the head What Socrates did to render his friends more expert in dialectics, he introduces a great many such discourses and inquiries, which so closely resemble the rest, that all might just as well have been put in the same class. It was with a view therefore to become masters in this art, and thereby to keep the faster hold of the idea of science, that men of vigorous and speculative minds formed a circle round Socrates as long as circumstances allowed, those who were able to the end of his life, and in the meanwhile chose to tread closely in their master's steps, and to refrain for a time from making a sys- tematic application of his art in the different depart- AS A PHILOSOPHER, cli ments of knowledge, for the more elaborate cultivation of all the sciences. But when after his death the most eminent among them, first of all at Megara, began a strictly scientific train of speculation, and thus philoso- phy gradually ripened into the shape which, with slight variations, it ever after retained among the Greeks : what now took place was not indeed what Socrates did, or perhaps could have done, but yet it was undoubtedly his will. To this it may indeed be objected, that Xeno- phon expressly says (Mem. I. 1. 11.) : that Socrates in his riper years not only himself gave up all application to natural philosophy, but endeavoured to withhold all others from it, and directed them to the consideration of human affairs ; and hence many hold those only to be genuine Socratics, who did not include physics in their system. But this statement must manifestly be taken in a sense much less general, and quite different from that which is usually given to it. This is clearly evinced by the reasons which Socrates alleges. For how could he have said so generally, that the things which depend on God ought not to be made the siabject of inquiry, before those which depend on man have been despatched, since not only are the latter connected in a variety of ways with the former, but even among things human there must be some of greater moment, others of less, some of nearer, others of more remote concern, and the proposition would lead to the conclusion that before one was brought to its completion, not even the investi- gation of another ought to be begun. This might have been not unfairly turned by a sophist against Socrate clii WORTH OF SOCRATES himself, if he had dragged in a notion apparently less familiar, in order to illustrate another ; and certainly this proposition, taken in a general sense, would not only have endangered the conduct of life, but would also have altogether destroyed the Socratic idea of science, that nothing can be known except together with the rest, and along with its relation to all things beside. The real case is simply this. It is clear that Socrates had no peculiar talent for any single science, and least of all for that of physics. Now it is true that a merely metaphysical thinker may feel himself attracted toward all sciences, as was the case with Kant; but then this happens under different circumstances, and a different mental constitution from that of Socrates. He on the contrary made no excursions to points remote from his centre, but devoted his whole life to the task of exciting his leading idea as extensively and as vividly as possible in others ; his whole aim was, that whatever form man's wishes and hopes might take, according to individual character and accidental circumstances, this foundation might be securely laid, before he proceeded further. But till then his advice was, not to accu- mulate fresh masses of opinions ; this he for his part would permit only so far as it was demanded by the wants of active life, and for this reason he might say, that if those who investigated meteoric phenomena had any hope of producing them at their pleasure, he should be more ready to admit their researches : language, which in any other sense but this would have been ab- surd. We cannot therefore conclude from this that AS A PHILOSOPHER cliii Socrates did not wish that physics should be cultivated, any more than we are authorised to suppose, that he fancied it possible to form ethics into a science by suffi- ciently multiplying those fragmentary investigations into which he was drawn in discussing the received opinions on the subject. The same law of progression was involuntarily retained in his school. For Plato, though he descends into all the sciences, still lays the principal stress on the establishment of principles, and expatiates in details only so far as they are necessary, and so much the less as he has to draw them from with- out : it is Aristotle who first revels in their multi- plicity. This appears to me as much as can be said with cer- tainty of the worth of Socrates as a philosopher. But should any one proceed to ask, how far he elaborated the idea of science in his lessons, or in what degree he pro- moted the discovery of real knowledge in any other pro- vince by his controversial discussions, and his dialectic assays, there would perhaps be little to say on this head, and least of all should I be able to extricate any thing to serve this purpose from the works of Plato taken by themselves. For there in all that belongs to Plato there is something of Socrates, and in all that belongs to Socrates something of P.lato. Only if any one is desirous of describing doctrines peculiar to So- crates, let him not, as many do in histories of philoso- phy for the sake of at least filling up some space with Socrates, string together detached moral theses, which, as they arose out of occasional discussions, can never cliv WORTH OF SOCRATES make up a whole, and as to other subjects, let him not lose sight of the above quoted passage of Aristotle, who confines Socrates' philosophical speculations to princi- ples. The first point therefore to examine would be, whether some profound speculative doctrines may not have originally belonged to Socrates, which are gene- rally considered as most foreign to him, for instance, the thought which is unfolded by Plato in his peculiar manner, but is exhibited in the germ by Xenophon himself (Mem. I. 4. 8.), and is intimately connected with the great dialectic question as to the agreement between thought and being : that of the general diffu- sion of intelligence throughout the whole of nature. With this one might connect the assertion of Aristocles (Euseb. Preep. XI. 3.), that Socrates began the investi- gation of the doctrine of ideas. But the testimony of this late Peripatetic is suspicious, and may have had no other foundation than the language of Socrates in the Parmenides. But whether much or little of this and other doctrines belonged to Socrates himself, the general idea already described cannot fail to suggest a more correct mode of conceiving, in what light it is that Plato brings forward his master in his works, and in what sense his Socrates is to be termed a real, or a fictitious personage. Fic- titious, in the proper sense, I hold, he is not, and his reality is not a merely mimic one, nor is Socrates in those works merely a convenient person who affords room for much mimic art, and much cheerful pleasantry, in order to temper the abstruse investigations with this AS A PHILOSOPHER. civ agreeable addition. It is because the spirit and the method of Socrates are everywhere predominant, and because it is not merely a subordinate point with Plato to adopt the manner of Socrates, but is as truly his highest aim, that Plato has not hesitated to put into his mouth what he believed to be no more than deductions from his fun- damental ideas. The only material exceptions we find to this (passing over several more minute which come under the same head with the anachronisms) occur in later works, as the Statesman and the Republic ; I mean doctrines of Plato foreign to the real views of Socrates, perhaps indeed virtually contradicting them, and which are nevertheless put into his mouth. On this head we must let Plato appeal to the privilege con- ferred by custom. But on the whole we are forced to say, that in giving Socrates a living share in the propa- gation of that philosophical movement which took its rise from him, Plato has immortalized him in the noblest manner, that a disciple can perpetuate the glory of his master ; in a manner not only more beautiful, but more just, than he could have done it by a literal narrative. Civ INDEX TO THE LIFE OF SOCRATES. A. Academica ratio disputandi, what, xxxix. Academicians, imitate the Socratic method of disputing, xxxii, note ; their misrepresentation of the irony of Socrates, ib. Accoucheur of the mind, Socrates so called by himself in allusion to his mother's profession, xxxiv. Accusation of Socrates may be classed under four divisions, Ixx. Accusers of Socrates described, Ixv, note foil. ; banished, cxvii, note, ^schines, his remark on the condemnation of Socrates, xc. Alcibiades, the favourite of Socrates, xli ; saved by Socrates in battle, xlviii ; attacked by Aristophanes in the "Clouds.'' xcv, note foil. Allegories much used by Socrates, xl. Alopece, the deme to which Socrates belonged, iii. Amipsias brings Socrates on the stage, Ixxxiii. Amnesty established afier the exclusion of the Thirly, xc. Amphipohs, third military service of Socrates at, xlix. Anaxagoras, a teacher of Socrates, vi ; cosmological system of, studied by Socrates, vii ; reasons which induced Socrates to think little of this system, viii; compelled to leave Athens on account of his religious opinions, Ixx, note ; astronomical hypo- theses of, used in defence of free thinking, Ixxv. clvi INDEX TO THE Anecdotes of Socrates, xlviii ; Ixxxiii, note. AvQpwTTtia, what is meant by, xii. Antiochis, the tribe to which Socrates belonged, iii. 1 AvriafjiOffia, Ixiii. Anyti reus, Socrates so called by Horace, Ixvii. Anytus, accuser of Socrates, Ixiii ; in behalf of the demagogues, Ixiv; most powerful of the accusers of Socrates, Ixvi; his trade, ib. ; whence his influence, Ixvii ; an ambitious enthusiast, Ixix ; the first who bribed the judges at Athens, ib. ; assisted Thrasybulus in delivering the country from the Thirty, ib. ; whence his per- sonal hatred of Socrates, ib. 'AvaTovpia explained, liv, and note. Apollodorus, his extreme grief at the death of Socrates, cxi. Apophthegms, much used by Socrates, xl. Archelaus, Socrates a disciple of, vi. Archon, title and office of the Second, Ixv ; mode of election of, Ixxxviii, note. Areopagus, Ixiii, note ; its extensive power, Ixxiii, note. Arginusae, battle of, Hi. Aristippus, a hearer of Socrates, xxx. Aristocracy, original sense of the word, Ixxxvii. Aristophanes, represents Socrates in an odious light, Ixxxii; not bribed by the enemies of Socrates, ib. ; not the personal enemy of Socrates, ib. ; does not distinguish Socrates from the sophists, Ixxxv, note. Aspasia, Socrates said to have been instructed in the art of speaking by, x ; her great influence, Ixxiv ; diffuses a taste for the fine arts, ib. ; ascendancy of vice during her sway, ib. Astronomy not valued highly by Socrates, vii. Atheist, Athenian idea of an, Ixxxiv. Athenaeus affirms the military services of Socrates to be a fiction, xlvii, note. Athenians, fond of irony, xxxii ; their character, Ixxiii, and Ixxv, note; drawn by the author of "Axiochus," Ixxiii, note; by Parrhasius, ib. ; constitution of, connected with their religion, Ixxix ; repentance for the death of Socrates, cxvii, note. B. Burial of the dead, regarded as a sacred duty by the Athenians, Iii. LIFE OF SOCRATES. civil C. Caanonus, law of, lv. Cebes, a hearer of Socrates, xxx. Cicero, his opinion of the philosophy of Socrates, xiii ; blames So- crates for having first separated philosophy and eloquence, xxxiii, note ; his account of the demeanour of Socrates before the judges, cvii. Chasrephon, Socrates pursued philosophical studies in common with, xvi, note; consults the oracle on the wisdom of Socrates, xvii ; a friend and disciple of Socrates, xviii ; his character, ib. Cleisthenes, his changes in the constitution of Solon, Ixvii. " Clouds" of Aristophanes, when performed, Ixxxii, note; does not obtain the prize, Ixxxvi ; considered by Aristophanes as the most perfect of his comedies, Ixxxvi, note ; full account of, xci, note. Cock sacrificed to ^Esculapius, undeserved reproaches againt So- crates in consequence of, cxv, note. Comic poets despised by Socrates, Ixxx. Condemnation of Socrates, two kinds of causes led to the, Ixiv; form of, ex. Conscience, the scrupulous attention of Socrates to the emotions and suggestions of, xxvii, note. Consciousness, moral, established by Socrates, xlii. Cosmological researches the chief object of the philosophers befoie Socrates, xiii. Cosmologists, Socrates dissatisfied with the pretended wisdom of the, xii. Country life, Socrates reason for not liking a, 1. Cramp-fish, Socrates compared to a, xxxviii. Critias, one of the Thirty Tyrants, Ivii ; behaviour to Socrates, ib. ; the most cruel of the Thirty, Ixi ; his character, it. ; a cruel tyrant, Ixxxix. Crito, a friend and disciple of Socrates, v ; induces Socrates to give up the profession of his father, ib. ; the first who raised Socrates into a higher sphere, vi; wealthy and powerful, cxiii. Cynics, violated laws of taste and propriety, xlw. D. Daemon or dajmonium of Socrates, its office to restrain him in doubt- clviii INDEX TO THE ful cases, xx ; Socrates gives no answer to an inquiry of Sim- mias respecting it, xxi : opinion of Socrates respecting it, ib. ; declared to be the Devil by the ecclesiastical fathers, ib. ; by others to be a guardian angel, ib.; Aristotle's definition of, xxii ; Plessing's opinion of, ih. ; said by Plutarch and M. Morin to be a mere divination from sneezing, ib. ; probably nothing more than a presentiment, ib. ; a divine voice restraining him from unpropitious undertakings, xxiii ; principal passages referring to, ib. ; disagreement of Plato and Xenophon respecting it, ib. ; reconciled, xxiv, note ; Ritter's idea respecting, xxvi, note ; related merely to things the consequence of which was uncer- tain, xxvii. Aoi/ioWa, what is meant by, xii. Death inflicted by the Athenians for minor offences, ex, and note. Deity, direct influence of the, on man believed in by the antients, xxvi. Delbriick, quoted, xix, note. Delium, flight of Socrates after the battle of, xxv ; second campaign of Socrates at, xlviii. Delos, annual presents of the Athenians to Apollo at, cxii. Delphi, inscription on the temple of, xvii. Delphic oracle, declaration of the, respecting Socrates, xvii. Democratical form of government not favoured by Socrates, Ixxxvii. Diagoras proscribed on account of his impiety, Ixx, note. AtKaerrat, Ixiii, note. Diotima of Mantinea, Socrates said to have been taught love by, x ; not to be reckoned among the fratpai, xi. Discourses of Socrates delivered as suggested by the occasion, xxxi. Disciples of Socrates, xxx. Divination recommended by Socrates, xxvi, note. Dramalic representations, origin of, Ixxxi, note. Dieams, paid attention to by Socrates, xxvi, note. E. Education of an Athenian youth, iv. Eipwi'eia, of Socrates, Cicero's translation of the word, xxxi; Quinc- tilian's explanation, xxxi, note ; difference between the Socratic and Platonic, xxxii. Eleven, the, ex. LIFE OF SOCRATES. clix Epicurus never accused on account of his religious opinions, Ixx. ' Escape from prison not justifiable, cxiii. Euphemism, Attic, ex. Eupolis brings Socrates on the stage, Ixxxiii, note. EtiTrpaljfa, meaning of, xxxviii. Euripides, Socrates a great friend of, Ixv; Socrates went to the theatre whenever his pieces were performed, ib. Example of the Socratic method of disputing, where found, xxxiv. Execution of Socrates delayed in consequence of a religious cere- mony, cxii. Exile, voluntary, the privilege of every Athenian, cv. F. Fables much used by Socrates, xl. " Frogs" of Aristophanes, a satire on Euripides and ^Eschylus, Ixxxiii, note. G. Gods, Socrates dissuades Euthydemus from idle attempts to deter- mine the forms of the, xxvii, note ; of the state, believed in by Socrates, cix. Gorgias, his researches into the nature of language, xlii. Greek language, alleged want of precision in the, xxxvii; contro- verted, xxxvii, note. Guardian spirits, universally believed in by the Greeks and Romans, xxiii ; supposed to accompany men from their birth, xxvi. H. Heliaca, what, liii. Heliasta?, how elected, Ixiii, note ; received pay, ib. ; etymology of the word, ib. Hercules at the cross-way, an allegory of Prodicus, Ixxviii, note. I. Immortality of the soul, Socrates' conversation on the, cxiii. clx INDEX TO THE Individual cases, Socrates refers his arguments to, xl. Inductive mode of reasoning a peculiarity of the Socratic method, xl. Induction, Socratic, examples of, where found, xl. Involuntary thoughts and feelings referred by Socrates to a divine source, xxvii, note. Isocrates appears in mourning for Socrates, cxvii, note. K. KaXoc, meaning of, xxxviii. K66opvog, a nick-name expressing fickleness of character, Ix, note. Kva/uvroi apxovreg, Ixxxviii. L. Lamprocles, eldest son of Socrates, xlvi. Leon of Salamis, conduct of Socrates respecting, lix. Libanius, his " Apology of Socrates" a mere exercise in rhetoric, Ixix. Ai0o?6o, a term contemptuously applied to Socrates, v, note. Love, not to be understood as a transient pleasure, xi. Lycon, an accuser of Socrates, Ixiii; in behalf of the orators, Ixiv; a public orator, Ixvi. Lysander, defeat of the Athenians by, Ivi. M. Mathematics not valued highly by Socrates, vii. Mechanical arts held in contempt by Socrates, Ixxx. Meletus, accuser of Socrates, Ixiii ; in behalf of the poets, Ixiv ; a tragic poet, Ixv ; ridiculed as such by Aristophanes, ib. ; causes of his enmity to Socrates, ib. ; a venal accuser, Ixvi ; repeats the charge brought against Socrates in the " Clouds" of Aristo- phanes, Ixxxiv ; said to have been subsequently condemned to death, cxvii, note. Morality, the greatest shock given by the sophists to, xiii. Morals, the science of, neglected before Socrates, xiii. Moral superiority dangerous, principally in democratical states, Ixxi. Music, Greek sense of the word, iv. Myrto, doubtful whether wife of Socrates, xlvi. Mystic, Socrates a, xix, note. LIFE OF SOCRATES. clxi N. Niebuhr, his eloquent defence of the Athenian character, Ixxv, note. o. Oracles, not consulted by Socrates in matters within the compass ot human powers, xxvii, note ; nor respecting things imposed on us as duties, xxviii. Orators, elected by a law of Solon, Ixvi ; duty of, ib. Oratory, principal way to authority and wealth among the Atheni- ans, Ixviii. P. Parmenides, a teacher of Socrates, vi. Peloponnesian war, not. to be attributed to the intrigues of Pericles, Ixxiii, note ; unfortunate issue of, to what ascribed, ciii. Pericles, government of, injurious to the Athenians, Ixxiii, note. Phaenarete, mother of Socrates, iii. Philosophers, most of the distinguished Greek, disciples of Socrates, XXX. Philosophy, Socrates never received any direct instruction in, vii, note ; brought into disrepute by the sophists, xv ; true spirit of, xlii. Physics, the first study that engaged the attention of Socrates, vi ; not valued highly by him, vii. Plague, Socrates said to have been the only person who escaped the infection of the, xlviii. Plato, a hearer of Socrates, xxx ; condemned by Niebuhr for want of patriotism, Ixxvii, note. Plutarch's " Essay on the Daemon of Socrates," xxii. Polytheism, the opinions of Socrates respecting the Greek, cxv, note. Populace, uneducated, ought to be excluded from power according to Socrates, Ixxxvii. Potidaea, Socrates performs military service at the siege of, xlvii. Practical philosophy the great object of Socrates' investigations, xxxix. Prize of bravery allotted to Socrates, xlviii. clxii INDEX TO THE Prodicus, a teacher of Socrates, vi. IIp6<5poi, lii. Protagoras first adopts the name of tro^ior^c, xiv, note ; combines the Socratic method with that of the sophists, xxxviii, note; his researches into the nature of language, xlii ; accused and con- demned to death at Athens for having attacked the popular religion, Ixx, note. Prytanes, lii. Prytaneum, maintenance in the, cvi. Pythagorean institution, a moral and politico- religious order, xiii. R. Reason maintained by Socrates to be the only unerring principle for determining right and wrong, xxviii. Rectitude of an action not decided by the daemon, xxvii. Refutation of the opinions of others, a characteristic of the Socratic method, xxxviii. Religious subjects, why more freely handled by the poets than by the philosophers, Ixxxi. Rhetoricians, their character by Niebuhr, Ixxvi, note. Sacrifices constantly offered by Socrates, xx, note. Sayings of wise men much quoted by Socrates, xl. Scepticism, Socrates not the founder of, xxxii, note; Socrates not in favour of philosophical scepticism, xxxix. School, Socrates never founded any particular, xxx. Self-knowledge the only path of true wisdom, xv. Senate of Five Hundred, how elected, li. Senator, Socrates a, li. Seneca, his account of the demeanour of Socrates after his condem- nation, cxi. Sicily, the Athenian expedition to, opposed by Socrates, xxv. Similes, much used by Socrates, xl ; whence generally taken by him, xli. Socrates, parentage, iii ; time and place of birth, ib. ; personal ap- pearance, ib. ; compared to Marsyas and the Sileni, ib, ; edu- LIFE OF SOCRATES. cliii cation, iv; instructed in the art of his father, i. e. sculpture, ib. ; abandons speculative subjects, and devotes himself to hu- man affairs, xii ; at the age of thirty makes it his sacred duty to counteract the sophists, xv ; meets his higher destination in his seventieth year, xvi ; by some supposed to have been about forty at his first appearance as a teacher, ib., note ; directs at- tention to the operations of the mind, xvii ; pronounced the wisest of men by the oracle, ib.; considers himself as a peculiar messenger of the deity, xviii ; turns his inquiries from divine to human affairs, xxix ; gives instruction gratis contrary to the practice of the sophists, xxxi ; mode of living, xliv ; despised sensual enjoyments, ib. ; poverty of, ib., note j at his death leaves three sons, xlvi ; performs military service in the Pelo- ponnesian war, xlvii ; fought in three battles, ib. note ; endea- voured to harden his body by his military services, xlviii ; par- tiality for Athens, 1; refuses the invitations of Archelaus, Scopas and Eurylochus, ib. ; defies the popular clamour when he was epistates, lv ; a declared enemy of the Thirty, Iviii ; condemned by the Heliastae, Ixiii, note ; his occupation during the thirty days previous to his execution, Ixv, and cxii ; born to enlighten mankind, Ixxii ; accused of seducing the young and introducing new gods, Ixxix ; condemned by a small majority of votes, xciv, note ; not considered a friend of the people, ciii, note ; a voluntary victim, cviii ; considered himself a man des- tined by the deity to instruct the people and to be sacrificed, cix ; particulars of his death, cxv ; bronze statue erected to, cxvii, note. Socratic method of disputation, examples of, where to be found, xxxiii ; peculiarity of, xxxi : by means of, Socrates avoided .expressing his own opinion, xxxix ; in what it consisted, xxxv ; characteristic feature of, ib.; not altogether free from sophistry, xxxvi ; second peculiarity of, xxxviii ;, third peculiarity of, xl ; fourth peculiarity, . ib 2o$ioTirJ, variations in the meaning of the word, xiii, note. Sophists, Socrates dissatisfied with the pretended wisdom of the, xii ; descendants of the Eleatic school, xiv ; exercised a paralyzing power over the moral feelings, ib. ; substituted one idea for another or confounded similar ideas, xxxvi ; delighted in gene- ral propositions, xii ; two classes of, xlii ; their hatred to So- crates contributed to his accusation, Ixvi ; their moral doctrines cliv INDEX TO THE founded on egotism and selfishness, Ixxviii ; deprived of much of their influence by Socrates, Ixxix. Sophroniscus, father of Socrates, iii ; warned not to compel his son to follow any particular pursuit, vi. Soul generally supposed to cease to exist after death, Ixxiv. Speaking, opinion of Socrates on public, Ixxxviii. Speculation, Socrates unconcerned about, xxxix. State affairs not to be managed by ignorant persons, Ixvi. T. iaiivnicr) of Socrates, xxxiv. , cxii. cxii. " Theramenes, defence of, said to have been undertaken by Socrates, Ix ; his courage at his execution, ib., note; ranked with So- crates by Cicero, ib. ; his real character, ib. ; the first to pro- pose changing the democracy into an oligarchy, Ixi ; names ten of the Thirty, ib. Theseus, annual presents sent to Delos to commemorate the deliver- ance of, cxii. Thirty Tyrants established by Lysander, Ivi ; attacked by Socrates, Iviii ; their tyrannical government, lix. Tholus, the, Iviii. Thrasybulus, oligarchy abolished by, Ixiii. Thucydides the impartial adversary of Pericles, Ixxiv, note. Trial, forms of an Athenian, civ, note. Trophonius, oracle of, consulted respecting the daemon of Socrates, V. Virtue, Socrates only shows what it is not, xxxviii ; disinterested, de- clared folly by the sophists, Ixxvii. w. Wisdom of Socrates called by Plato " a human wisdom," xiii. Women of talent, their society courted by Socrates, x. LIFE OF SOCRATES. clr X. Xanthippe, character of, xliv ; possessed many good qualities, ib. ; Socrates' reason for marrying her, ib. ; excessive grief of, at the death of Socrates, cxiv. Xenophon advised by Socrates to consult the oracle as to his Asiatic expedition, xxvi, note, xxviii, note ; a hearer of Socrates, xxx. Y. Year, Athenian, li. z. Zeno, a teacher of Socrates, vi. FINIS. :x:c<)oo :XX>CX>OK:X:CX::CX:X>OCK> GREEK SCHOOL BOOKS, PUBLISHED BY With this view, no passage presenting any obscurity has been passed over without discussion, either an elucidation being given, or the precise nature of the difficulty stated. At the end of the volume is an index of the more remarkable various readings. An index is also given, with references to the texts of Wellauer and Dindorf, of those passages on which the student is most likely to require assistance ; and, by consulting the lexicon at each of these references, it may be used as a running commentary on the text. Constructive Exercises for teaching Greek from the commence- ment by Writing. By John Robson, B.A., Assistant Master in University College School. Nearly ready. New Greek Delectus; being Sentences for Translation from Greek into English, and English into Greek ; arranged in a systematic Progression. By Dr. Raphael Kuhner. Translated and Edited from the German, by Dr. Alexander Allen. 12mo. 4s. cloth. This exercise book consists of sentences for translation, both from Greek into English, and from English into Greek, arranged in progressive sections, under the several classes of inflexions ; thus forming a praxis, both by analysis and synthesis, of all the forms of Greek etvmologv. The work does not imply a previous knowledge of the Greek grammar, but is intended to be used simul- taneously, 'and in conjunction with it ; the pupil, on learning a small portion of the grammar, proceeding at once to the section of the Delectus which treats of the s^me inflexions. A sufficient number of examples, both analytical and synthetical, is given under each inflexion, to enable the learner to become master of it before proceeding to a second variety ; and he is thus conducted from the beginning of the grammar to the end, without the danger of forgetting the early parts by the time he has arrived at the conclusion. Each section is accompanied by a vocabulary, to be learned before translating the sentences. Greek Testament. Griesbach's Text, with the various readings of Mill and Scholz. Fcap. 8vo. 6s. 6d. cloth. The selection of various readings contained in this edition of the Greek Testa- ment embraces such only as, if admitted into the text, would in some mea- sure affect the construction, alter the narrative, or modify the meaning of the original. References to parallels are placed at the side of each page to assist the student in a theological view of the subject. The introductory matter consists of: 1. A history of the received text and its version? in ancient languages, with an account of the most important MSS., and of the critical labours of celebrated editors: 2. A chronological harmony of the four gospels, followed by the chronology of the apostolic history. WALTON AND MABERLY. ^-fc#S Locke's system of Classic Instruction. " TTi . University of California SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY This r Return this material to the library th e ch from which it was borrowed. sequel ': semin! ' terliiu - geners differe . thus a forwar : 1. P 2. 3. V 4. PJ 5. C. 1. L . 2. T 3. H 4. P. . 5. X 6. H Plate id EC / The t presen The view, but, fr They Schlei Crito and t necess ss ''i'i 'V 1 i'i V *li. >; *% '::' ! ':: -! -.- '.- .* .* ".* *.

v Kvva nearly answered to 'the Latin medius fidius. But, on this obscure subject, I am inclined to agree with those who think that Socrates swore by the dog, the goose, and also the oak (see Cyrill. Alexandr. c. Julian. 6. p. 190. A.), be- cause he was unwilling to swear by the gods themselves. See Porphyr. de Abstinent. IIL 16. d fvaBov n TOIOVTOV ol pen /j.d\icrra ] Those sentences, wliich are subjoined to others for the purpose of explanation, are often added without connective particles. Gorg. p. 450. A. ita.1 /j.rjv Kal at &\\ai Ttx vai i & Fopyia, ovrcas fx ovffl ' fKaarr] avrwv irtpl \6yovs tffrl Tovrotiy, ot Tvyxdvovviv VVTCS K. r. \. Ibid. p. 465. D. rb rov 'A.vaay6pov tiv woA.i> ^v, Si tp't\e n&j\e, 6/j.ov &i/ irdvra. XP^MOTO e(pvpfro. Compare Pbaedo p. 68. E. TI 8' ot K6afj.ioi aitTQiv; oil Tavrbv rovro ireir6vQoujiv' a.Ko\a- Qpovfs elcn; Legg. I. p. 635. D. eVe/ca T^J yAvKv6vfj.ias rr/s irpbs ras fiSovds ravrbv ireiVovTai rols -^TTwjueVois riav i\ovs t\etr6ai, TOVS Kaiciovas \dfjris. Eurip. Iphig. Aul. v. 366. Compare Heindorf on Phaedo p. 57. Matth. on Eurip. Hecub. v. 777. e iva. fjioi Kal ave\fyKTos fi fj.avrtia yevoi-ro] Socrates says, that he did all things in order to refute the oracle; but, that after much trouble on his part, he even confirmed its truth so completely, that it was dve'Ve-yKTos, that is, incapable of being convicted of error. f a ftai tSijKfi trfirpayfjiaTevcrBai at>T, denotes the repetition of the action. See Matth. . 599. 1. f ol vap6vTfs &v f3e\Tiov e\eyov irepl Sav o.vro\ eireirorfiKecrav^ All who were present used to think best of those poems which they themselves had composed. The imperfect I '\tyov with ttv denotes in this passage also the repetition of the action. h 8>sirtp ol 6eofi.dvTfis Kal ol xP r > v tirSiv woiTjral ot ayadol ovtt e/c Te'xvrjy, d\\' evOfoi ovrts Kal Karexofifvot irdrra. TO, Ka\a \tyovcri iroiT}- fia-ra, Kal ol fieXoiroiol ol ayaQol wsavrus. Kal ov irporepov oUs re iroif'iv (6 WOITJT^S), irplv ta> 6v6e6$ re ytvrjTai Kal tKtypiav APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 105 Kal 6 vovs jUTj/ceVi ev avry evfj. eois 8' &J> TOVTO exj) TO a$vva,T6s e'trn iroielv Kal '^prjtjfiLif^e'iv. ' rjaQopriv airoJj' ?j>ot di'0pc67r'] On the construction see Matth. . 349. 1. Compare . 549. 4. and . 536. & owe faav, that is, ffixpoi. VIII. a TOVTOV fi.fv OVK f^evcrOriv] See Matth. . 338. b oirep Kal oi iroirjTal ical ol ayadol Srj/j.iovpyol] Demosth. Midian. p. 514. ed. Reisk. eyw 8' ovep &i> Kal vfj.wi> e/caoros vfipiaBels TrpoeiAero irpa^at, TOVTO Kal aiirbs tVoiTjtra. Phsedo p. 64. C. anfi^/ai Sri, & Q-yaOe, eac apa Kal col vv8oKTJ airep Kal ifU*. c Kal -ra\\a ra /jLtyurra aotytararos e!vai~\ That is, to take a part in the management of the affairs of the state. A fKelvyv rV aofyiav a.TitKpvirTev'] That is, the error and foPy of these men obscured their real knowledge. e aveptarav {nrtp roO xPWM "!! That is, on behalf of the oracle. Further on, the word Se'xeffflot signifies to prefer, to choose, as often elsewhere. f a(j.a9ris T^V a/xa0i'ai'] i. e. avrOov. a^t^rfrepa, understand !av and afJLadiai>. IX. a Kal olai xaA.TWTaTat] That is, by far the most grievous and severe. Fqr before ofa is to be understood rotavrai. Xenoph. Mem. IV. 8, 11. 8oKfi rotovros fivat, olos &< ?rj SpjorJs ye avrjp Kal euSa^oveVTOTOJ. .See Matth. . 461. Compare .Viger. de Idiot, p. 120. b ovo/j.a 8e TOVTO \eyecr6ai, aotybs flvai] The words trotybs elvai are added by way of explanation to the preceding. It is usual to put elfai after a verb of naming; see Heindorf on Theaetet. p. 160. Sore eJre TIS flvai TI ovcijudfet. - rb Se Kivbvvevet - juan OVTQIS, on 6 larpbs e^napre Kal 6 7pajUjuaTmrjs* TO 8 s , oT/uai, fKaarSs TOVTOIV, /ca9' o'ffoi' TOVT' taTiVj o irposayopevofnev avr6v, oiiSeVore ajuaprayej. Menon. p. 97. D. \eyovrfs, OTI p6v-ri(ris fj.6vot> rfttiTai TOV bpQSis irpdrTfiv. TO Se apa Kal $6a ?iv d\rj9^y. Theaetet. p. 157. A. Ssre ^| airdvrwv TOVTUV ovSev flvat ft' avrb *ca9' avr6, a\\d TIVI del yiyvetrBai rb 8' ou Se? K. T. A. , on which see Heindorf. For TO Se the fuller ex- pression rb Se a\r]Q(s is sometimes given. Rep. IV. p. 443. D. TO Se' ye aA.T)0e's, TOIOVTOV fj.ev TI -fy> 7] SiKaioavvj], Tim. p. 86. D. TO 8e a\r)8es -f] irepl T a Tiva on, &s, el avrSs, as \eyeiv nva. OTI f06\6s fan. 1 &sirfp kv j eifjroi] On the construction of the words Ssn-ep &v fl, see C. I. note ( r ). In this passage the complete sentence would be Ssirep &v iroiolro, ft tltroi. Therefore I have no doubt that Stephens, Heindorf, and Bekker have correctly inserted et. s Kal TWV a.v nal TUO> %ev ecSeiKi/v/tcu] Tliat is, acting in such a man- ner that the response of Apollo may appear to be true. The word a.ffXo\la, Thorn. Mag., interprets: ij Trept Tt avatrrpotpi], that is, attention bestowed on any thing. 1 dAA' 4v iff via nvpttf. dpi ] Hevia differs in the same man- ner from Trreoxeia, as Lat. pauper tan from egestas. Therefore itfvia is applied to artisans and other men of that description, who live by the labour of their hands; but Trrar^efa to beggars. See Aristoph. Plut.v. 552 sqq. and the commentators on the passage, /xupio irfvia. is the greatest poverty : which expression has been illustrated by Valckenaer on Thoeniss. v. 1480. The extreme poverty of So- crates is spoken of by himself, in Xenoph. (Econom. II. 3., where APOLOGY OF SOCEATES. 107 he says that he would sell his hou>e and all his other property for 5 Attic minsB. Whence he was also commonly called Trevrjs, as we learn from Xenoph. CEcon. II. 3. X. a ol TUV TrAouo-iwraToij'] This is added by Socrates, that the cause of the odium against himself may more clearly appear. Protagor. p. 328. C. xal ravTa fj,d\iara irotovfftv oi /udAiirrci Swd- fievui, (i. e. take care that their sons should be instructed,) /taAioro 8e Suvavrat ol 'ir\ovfftiararoi. b e'jue (Ufunhrrm, elra injCHfeSftf] It is well known that itra and eireira. are often put for Kal tlra, and Kal eireiTo after a finite verb. See Thesetet. p. 151. C. Euthyd. p. 295. C. D. Phasdr. 63, C., in which passage it signifies then, afterwards. The con- struction in this passage is a little different, in which eTro is and then, Kal r6rf. It is used in the same manner, Cratyl. p. 411. B., on which Heindorf, besides this passage, has compared Rep. p. 336. B. Fischer, therefore, has badly corrected it pifj.ovfj.ei'oi. c fiSoTiw 5e 6\iya ^ ouSeV] This is more emphatic than the common reading ^ o\iya % ouSev. For ^ used in this manner, signifies or rather; "which is not the case in the form ^ 0X170 /) ouStV. Plat. Phaidr. p. 224. B. /3pax* ft ovStv. Alciphron. III. 4. o\iya tf ovdtv Siatpepovat. d aA\' oi>x ayrols] This is said ironically. They are enraged, he says, with me, when they ought rather to be angry with themselves for allowing themselves to be refuted by those lads. The common reading OVK avro'is, has much less of ironical elegance, and would probably have been rather OVK ttctivois. e 2-n TCI fjLfrtoapu Kal ra inrb yrjs] These words depend upon SiStio-Kiav, which must be repeated at the end of the sentence. f '6n Kard5ri\ui irposiroiov^fvot] On the construction see Matth. . 296. compared with 549. ? Kal atyoo'pol Kal iro\\ol, Kal vvT(Tayu.fva>s Kal irtOavuis. A.] This is a metaphor taken from soldiers arrayed in line of battle ; who are said to attack the enemy ^wrera.ypt.4vu>s, when they assault them in regular line. Therefore, the calumniators of Socrates are here said ^uvreTay/jLvoiis \tytiv, since they assailed him with ca- lumnies as it were in regular array ; that is, in such a manner as it appeared that they had come to an agreement amony themse ves as to the best and most efficacious mode of calumniating, irtflcwois, that is, in a manner adapted to persuade. h ffj.ireir\-l)Ka(rii> v/j.tav ra d'Ta] Compare Plat. Lysis, p. 204. C. fjp,Kas TCL SJTO. ' MeATjTos p.fv virep raiv iroirjTaji'] MELETUS, who brought the cause of Socrates, by a regular form of accusation, before the Archon , as appears from Euthyphr. p. 2. B. and other passages, was a tragic poet, who was not very celebrated or successful in his art. See the scholiast on Aristoph. Kan. v. 1337., and ThirlwalPs ' History of Greece,' vol. 4. p. 274, note 5. At the time he accused Socrates, he was very young, but puffed up with pride and arrogance, as may be understood from Euthyphr. p. 2. B. C. Meletus is said to have been one of the Four, who by order of the Thirty Tyrants, brought Leon of Salamis to Athens. The affair is related by Andocides De Myster. p. 46. Orat. T. IV. ed. Reisk. Compare c. XX. ANTTUS, son of Authemion, a t3up &vSp. 'A0., TO\TJ^] That is, these are the things which I before said that I would relate to you with truth. He refers to the words, C. I., fyieTs 5' fp.ov aKovato-Se iratrac rty iA^0eia'. 1 ou5' inrocrrei\d.fnfvos~\ inrocrT{\\f(rdai is properly to withdraw one's self, to depart privately : hence to dissimulate, as in this APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 109 passage. The use of this word has been learnedly explained by Wyttenbach on Julian, p. 149 sq. ed. Lips. m tdi> re a30is] That is, hereafter, as Phosdo p. 115. A. Rep. V. p. 466. A. Gorg. p. 447. B. C. p. 449. C. D. Xenoph. Sympos. I. 16. and elsewhere. Idv re tdv re, whether or, differs in the same manner from el re ell re, whether or, as tdv from . XL a avrri eoTco inavri a.Tro\oyia] The old editions errone- ously add the article. For avrri is the subject : Let this be suffi- cient defence. Compare c. I. note ('). b rov aya66v re Kal iX6irarpis means a lover of Greece; but rp6irov avaKirai yap en Kal vvv, rj/j.o\oyriiTaTO Vle\iros MeXirou, Tlirdevs, 'SwKpdrti iLutypoviaKov, t A\caireKr]dfV 'A8i(ce7 2a>KpaT7)S ovs ,ue;' ?; TT^AIS co/it'fet Beovs ov vofj.i$tav, trepa 5e Kaiva Satju^cia ftSTjyov/j.fvos' dSi/cs? Se Kal rovs veous Sutpdftpcav. rtfj.r]/j.a ddvaros." Therefore the accusation which is here put first, is there mentioned in the second place. e tfri (TirovSfi xapiej/Tiferat] x a P ifVT '^ fff ^ a h which is derived from xapi'eiy, witty, cheerful, is properly to joke or banter in a cheer- ful and witty manner, in the same sense as euTpa7rAiW0ai; hence, absolutely, to joke, to sport, as here and c. XIV. Therefore SfJ x a P' 6 * /T 'T eTai is> as we sa J i n English, to joke in earnest. L 110 NOTES ON THE For Meletus, in casting such an unfounded imputation on Socrates, and pretending that he himself cared for the education of youth, appeared x a pi fvr>t ((J Q ai > that is, to sport and joke ; but, because he accused Socrates of corrupting youth, and prosecuted that accusa- tion seriously and zealously, he is said a-n-ovSrj x a P tf " r ' t ^ fa ^ cu - Further on, pqSius rashly. See Heindorf on Channid. . 44. an d therefore are added without connective particles. Gorg. p. 479. B. Kiv5wfvov Hu\c rb a.\ytivbi> avrov na.6opav, irpbs tit rb u rv\us fX flv Ka ' ayvotiv. m fdv re ou tyrjre'] Grammarians commonly say that after el, 4av, Iva, o6eifKi] C. XXVIL iroXXTj nevr' &v fat * ourcas aKoyunos tlfju. C. XVII* fitv ovv ravra \tyav 5ia] On this construction see Matth. .341. Compare 504. 1. 2. f ol/iiai Se ovSe &\\ov ovSeva] That is, TretffeffOai ffoi, hy a usual ellipsis after ol/ucu 6e KO.L, Euthyphro p. 3. E. a\\a av re Kara vovv ayoiv(t7 TTJV S'tKnv, o?juai 5e ical fjj.e "r^v eyAjv. s mrfnpMu 6' ye &Ktav woiia] The participle iroiGiv must be understood. For it is not correct to say na&fcrQa.i TI. Heindorf. conjectured that voiav ought to be restored to the text. XIV. a ofc-f fj.eya oihe aniKp6v~\ Compare C. VI. o#re /xe'~a afire fffniKpbv ^vvofia t/jLavriS ffo 6 \6yos eartv~\ The genitive uv is governed by \6yos, and we are not to understand the preposition irepi, wliich has been done by some. For as we can say not only \eyfiv irtpt rtvos, but also sometimes \eyeiv nvd, (on which construction some remarks have been made on C. IX. note ( e ) ) we may also correctly say both \6yos irepl nvos and \6yos riv6s. For he might have said ots vvv \tyonev, which would have been more in accordance with the meaning than the other construction irepi uv vvv \eyapev. The same construction is found in Charmid. p. 156. A. ov ydp rl 0ovep6s -re ^KICTT' &v avOpuirtnv. Charmid. p. 169. C. D. Politic, p. 266. D. & Iva. rl ravra Ae'yeis] Hermann, on Viger. p. 849., says that Jva T'I involves an ellipsis, and that the full construction in the present tense would be "va. rl yevifrai; in the past Iva. T'I. yt- VOLTO, h MctAf, evel T. f}\.] With ^ A/a we are to understand from what has gone before ov vop.l%ei Beats. For Budaeus has truly observed that /tick A/a is not a negation by itself, but that we must often supply the negation from the preceding part of the sentence. See Viger.. p. 450. ' 'Ava^ay6pov ofei ] Anaxagoras of Clazomense, according to Laertius II. 8., taught that the sun was /j.vSpov $iairupoi>, which some understood to be an ignited mass of iron, others of stone, as Socrates himself, in Xenoph. Mem. IV. 7. 7., where he endeavours to refute this opinion of Anaxagoras. The same philosopher said that the moon had olicfii> and Btav ayopdfii>. The seats were let by the farmers or lessees of the theatres, who were called either 6tarpcavai, or 6farpoiru\at, or apxiTtKroves, as in Demosth. de corona p. 234, 23. Vol. I. Compare Casaubon on Theophrast. Char. 2.; and two oboli was the general price paid by each person, according to Demosthenes in the passage referred to; sometimes a drachma, according to Casaubon in the passage referred to. Com- pare Bceckh ' On the Public Economy of Athens,' Vol. I. p. 293 foil. Engl. Transl. But since, according to Harpocration and Sui- das, under the word eewpixd, and Schol. on Lucian's Timon. Vol. I p. 6., a drahma was the greatest sum that could ever be demanded by the lessee, it is evident why Socrates said & fl-earni/, el -naw 7ro\Aou, 8paxi?s irplaffdai. But how could these doctrines of the philosopher be learned in the theatre? It is certain that the dramatic poets often inserted the opinions of .the philosophers in their plays; either to praise them, as Euripides, who frequently alluded in his tragedies to the opinions of Anaxagoras, as is shown by Valcken. Diatribe in Fragm. Eurip. p. 29 foil., or to con- demn and ridicule them, which we know to have been done by Aristophanes. That Socrates principally alludes to Euripides in this passage, appears from the circumstance that he was the first who introduced on the stage the doctrine of Anaxagoras concerning the sun and moon. See what has been said on this by Valcken. in the work above cited, p. 31., and Person on Eurip. Orest. v.971. p. 192. ed. Lips. sec. The sense of the whole passage is this : Meletus de- clares that I affirm the sun to be a stone, and the moon earth. But surely the judges know that this is the doctrine of Anaxagoras ; and if I were to pretend that I introduced this opinion, the young men could discover, even from the plays of the dramatic poets, my vanity in appropriating it to myself, and would justly ridicule me. m ttai vecJTrjTi] He alludes to the youth of Meletus. See C. XIII. " &sir(p alviyna ^wrtOffri SiaTretpca/ji.tvif']. Ficinus hag correctly interpreted this: videtur enim ceu enigma guoddam cqmpohere, teutons, an Socrates, ffc. There is no need of no.), which is com- monly inserted before Siairftpunevtf. Gorg. p. 464. C. and p. 479. D. Apx\aov fiifia.tfj.oviV ra. /jLtyia-ra aOiKovvra, Si'myc ovSfn'iav 5t$6vTa., where ical is commonly inserted after dSiicoiWa, APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 115 Rcpubl. IV. 440. D. Politic, p. 273. D. Phsedr. p. 251. D. and Pliileb. p. 53. Euthyphr. p. 27. On the use of the word oncer joined with a participle, see Phasdon p. 87. E. eomev airroij.fi/cf. o yviUxrerai e fj.ou x a P lfl ' ri -] The. construction has been ex- plained by Matthise . 349. 1. 6 (ro Sainovid ye vo^ui} These words are to be referred to what goes.before, elr' ovv Kaiva efre TraAaja. f Si(afj.6aoa fv . rfj avriypatpfj^ 'Avnypaipr) is here the same as avroi/jioo-la, in C. III. (note b ) that is the bill of accusation. The plaintiff; on delivering the bill of accusation to the judges, .was obliged to swear that he did not bring the accusation through malice. Meletus had taken this oath. f tfrot Beovs ye fiyovfj.e6a ^ Beiav TraTSos] Phasdo p. 76. A. ^TOI tirto'Td/j.evoi ye avra yeydvafj.evi) varepov avafj.iwfio~KovTai. Gorg. p. 4 60. A. f)Toi rrp6repov ye t) vaTepov fJ,a86i"ra trapa aov, Ibid. p. 476. E.- h uv 87? Kal \tyovrai] Gorg. p. 453. E. ird\tv 8' el inl rSiv avriav TCXVWV \eyofj.ev } tavitep vvv 8)7 K. r. \. Phaid. p. 76. A. 116 NOTES ON THE a.ir6\\vf*.(v. ifirep Kal Aajctj8aco/Mv. Laches p. 192. B. See Matth. Gr. . 595. ' usvv TOV aiiTov ovofpia /uijx'ai'^ &"] The sense is: you will in no wise be able to persuade any one, that one and the same man believes in spiritual and divine things, and at the same time disbelieves in the existence of spirits, gods, and heroes. It is evident from the preceding argument that the adjectives arc- opposed to the nouns substantive. XVI. a 'A.\\d ydp, avSpes'] Socrates, having concluded the material part of his defence, now commences the discussion of other points which bear upon the subject. He first complains of the danger of his being sacrificed to the hatred of the multitude ; but, at the same time maintains, a good man ought to consider virtue and justice as of more importance than life itself. b 6 ^ue a and alpflv Tii'd TWOS signify to gain a suit against a party. Whence of f\6vres and ol eaAoxcorej, are opposed in Demosthen. in Midiam. p. 518. ed. Reisk. p. 15. ed. Buttm. c a\\' fj StajSoAjj re Kal Tas oijre &\\o 6n- ovv irdffx*iv irpb TOV aSiKeiv. Compare the conclusion of this character. 8 OTOK TI Kal fffjLiKpuv op6vt]atv, &srf aicovffas ravra w\iycaprjo-f. This is, therefore, an anacoluthia. Similar passages are given by Matthias Gr. . 626. 1 avriKa rfBvai-rjv'] Iliad, a', v. 98. and 104. m fj.^i avrbv oiti ] Heusdius Specirn. Grit. p. 12. thought the reading ought to be oiov, of which there is no need. For /u^j has often the force of an interrogation where a denial is expected or wished for. See Hermann on Viger. p. 789. Gregor. Corinth, p. 162 et 824. ed. Schaef. " ^ Tiynadfj.fvos^ In order that ^ may not appear to he intro- duced improperly, it is to be observed that the same construction is not observed in the subsequent part of the sentence, since the words ft vir j &PXOVTOS raxOfj are added, when we should have ex- pected ft inr' &PXOVTOS Ke\fva6fis. For a similar construction see Demosthen. De Rhodior. libert. p. 197. ed. Reisk. j ydp rl irov KCU KtKpd-njKf TTJS irJ\o>s f3a.cri\evs, t) TOVS Trovripordrovs Ttav ' vu>v jreiVaj ^ ouSa/uaJs &\\cas KfKpdri\Kfv. irpb rov aiVxpoD] Phffido p. 99. A. et ^ St/catrfrepo^ Kal Kd\\iov eTfai trpb rov {pfvyeiv. CritO C. 16. fJ^re iraTSos wtpl ir\*'iovos TTOIOV /uTJre rb fiji/ fj^re &\\o /urjS^ irpb rov SiKaiuv. See C. XVII. irpb olv riav KO.K&V. On the sentiment compare Crito c. 12. at the end, where the question is respecting the obedience to be paid to the laws of our country. XVII. a Setva &v tti)v /j.ris rv)(ilv, IvravOa 5' ^rHjAour yiyvfaQai TOS /ca/co?j0eias. Observe the difference of moods, tpfvov Kal tKivbvvevov, and AITTOJ/K. The indicative refers to a matter which really happened; the optative to one which may possibly happen. c Kal tv FIoTiSaio A7jAi'a>] On the campaigns of Socrates see Laert. II. 22 foil. Athenseus IV. 15. -/Elian. III. 17. Cicero de Divin. I. 54. d aireiBuv rrj /uoirfia] That is, TOV Otov. e SoKtiv yap tlSevai o'tSfv] The phrase at full length would be: tern yap tKtivo (namely, rb 6a.va.rov SeSteVai) 8o/ce?v fi'SeVai & OVK oiSfv. On the third person, olStv, put indefinitely, see Hermann on Viger. p. 725. Schaefer on Lambert. Bos. p. 476. Porson on Eurip. Orest. v. 308. and Matth. .294.2. Charmid. p. 167. B. el Swar6v (atriv elvui or eirjc may be understood. Further on, ovrta is used, because OVK eiSojy has the same signification as ftsirep OVK olSo. h irpo ovv T&V KUKUV oi>Sf tvofj.ai'] This construction is remarkable. For tyofitlaQai and (pei/yew irpb rwv KaKcav & ^ aiiSa, are used instead of Qo&fiaQat u.aX\ov TO Ka/ca & o!5a OTJ KO.KO. Icmv ^ raDro a JUTJ ailSa tl ayada Sv-ra Tvyxdvti. On this use of the preposition irpb see C. XVI. note (). ' &sre ouS' ft fit vvv d^t'ere T^V a.px^'} 'P^px^v is at all. See Hermann on Viger. p. 723. A little further on, avoKre'tvai, as in C. XVIII., is to condemn to death by their votes : in which sense a-iroKTtivftv is also used by Xenoph. Mem. IV. 8, 5., where it is opposed to a-iro\vtiv. The structure of the sentence is re- markable, d a acfn'orre, the particle ovi> indicating that the speaker returns to what he has been saying APOLOGY .OF SOCRATES. 119 before, on which use of the word, see Sturz. Lexic. Xenoph. III. p. 358. Schweigh. Lexic. Polyb. p. 416. k 'Avvrcf OTncrHjo'ai'Tes] 'ATria-reTi', a-mcrrcs, airiffrla, are said not only of those who do not believe, who have no faith in others, but also of those who refuse to comply with the demands of other s because they disbelieve them. 1 e'<' f'ii>] On this construction see Matthias . 479. m a.ffird^ofj.ai fj.fi> Kal (fxAco] 'AcrtrdfreaQai is to salute with an embrace, (pi\e7v to salute with a kiss. In this passage these words signify: with grateful and joyful mind I salute and reverence your kindness and clemency. Lysid. p. 217. B. avayKd^erai fit ye aoi/j.a Sta i>6crov lurpiK^v dcrirafeo-flaj Kal v is used here not in the sense of power, but of greatness and strength of mind. For the subse- quent words show that Icrxw is opposed to a desire of riches, honours, and praise. P Kal vfaiTfpcp iroi^crco] On this rather uncommon construc- tion, see Matth. . 415. obs. 1. Buttm. . 120. 2. 3. Compare Viger. p. 259. 1 fj.a.\\ov tie rots duToIy, Svcp fj.ov 77.] Compare C. XXX. about the middle, Kal xaXsirdirtpoi etroi/roi, oaif vetarfpoi fl \tyns, ^TTOI> a TI/JLOOV, where before ?ITTOV we must understand ro- ffovrcf. The same construction is used by the Latin writers. Liv. II. 51. Quo plures erant, major ctedes fuit. Ovid's Epist. IV. 19. Venit amor gravius, quo scrius. r T(f 6ttp innjptaiav^ See C. IX. 5to T^V rov Qtov \arpfiav, which might also have been Sta r-^v rip 6etf \arpfiav, since verbal nouns are frequently constructed with the same case as the verb from which they are derived. See Matthise, . 367. 1. * /injSe OVTW cr(/j6(ipo> , Tavr' b.v et?j A.] See C. XII. note ( n ). 1 {) wfl6fff6e ft n*i] Gorg. p. 476. D. 3) $0.61 t) pr] & tpurrw. Ibid. p. 475. E. Rep. V. p. 475. B. roCro fy S' ei nf\\a> iroAAo/cis TtOvdvai] That is, not even if I were to be several times dead. It is worthy of remark that the Greeks, when they wish to lay stress on the bitterness of death, use the state and condition of death itself for the pains which precede it. CritO, C. I. fl T)> irXdiov d^)?KTOt e/c ATJAou, oti 8eT a /u.6. CritO, C. XIV. ws OVK a.yavcf.Krcav, fl Seoi TeQvdvai. fff. Apol. C. XXIX. TroAu na\\ov aipovjj.a.1 tS>5f a.iroho"yT)O'd/j.evos TfBvdvai $ eKfivais f^f. C. XXXI. odirca tp^o^ai of t\Q6vra. jue 5e7 TfQva.- vai. C. XXXII. tyit> fA.lv yap iroAAa/cis 0eAw reOvdvat, el TOUT' la-r\v a\r]6fi. Compare Demosth. Philipp. IV. p. 138. De rebus Chersones. p. 102. De Coron. p. 301. Trias OVK cbroAwAeVai iroA- AUKIS (TT SlKOlOS. XVIII. a fj.^) Oopu/Seire] Socrates now enters upon another subject. He proceeds to show that his condemnation and death will be a great loss and injury to the Athenian state. b oi> yap otofj.ai fle^rbc eZvoi] That is, / do not think it consistent with the laws of divine wisdom. a/j.fivovi avSpl is used instead of the common construction a^tivca &v5pa, because these words are closely joined with .df/j.nbv tlvat. airoKTfiveiv is to cause a person to be condemned and executed: eeAatWzi/ to cause a person to be punished with exile: arindfciv to cause a person to lose either the whole, or at least, the most important, rights and privileges of citizenship . There were three kinds or degrees of an^ta, as is shown by Ed. Meier de Bonis Dainnat. p. 101 sqq. 137 sqq. c ~] On this construction of Sea, see Heind. ou Theict. p. 364. e fi-fi n e|a/x. aara^rjipiffd^evoi^ That is, lest ye rashly reject this benefit granted to you by Apollo, who ordered me to rebuke your errors and vices, and to exhort you to the pursuit of virtue. The dative vu.7 v depends on the noun $A have the same signification as Sieurvpeiv, aKumfiv, '%Xfva%fiv. See Pollux IX. 148. The reason is, that in the old comedy the vices of men were marked out, and the men as it were, stigmatised. h iraXaj ~av airoK. O#T' Uv v/j.. w oSr' &v ifuarrff'] Socrates gives a similar account of his Saifj.6vtov in Theag. p. 128. Com- pare Apol. C. XXXI. Xenophon Mem. 1. 1. Cicero de Divin. 1.54. Hocnimirum est illud,quodde Socrate accepimus, quodque ab ips ~S.tiiKpa.rfs, &s utirt rjSovT; yiyvoir* &v V T fvSaifiovf7v. '" /cat fi juAXei oA. XP-] Henn. on Viger. p. 832. has shown a distinction between al and el KO.!. He says that " nal ft is even if; the ical refers to the condition, which is thus indicated to be un- certain : even then, if. Therefore no! el is used of what we suppose true, not of what we declare to be true, for in the latter case fi Kal is used. On the other hand, el KOI is although ; and KO!, being put after the conditional particle, is not referred to it and does not in- dicate that the condition itself is uncertain. Therefore KO! sig- nifies that the thing exists actually, and is not merely supposed. But ci Kal is also taken, not as although, but as if even, in which case (taJ ought not to be joined with ej, but with some of the fol- lowing words. The Latin etiam si is used in a similar manner." XX. a (popTiicd filv Kal SiKaviKa] QopTiicd properly signifies heavy and troublesome : hence things spoken ivith arrogance. Hesy- chius: QopriKa- ra yt\ola. Aucaviicbs is interpreted by antient glossaries, a speaker in courts of justice, a pleader. But since ad- vocates usually exaggerate, embellish, and even speak presumptu- ou.>ly, 5i/ccwa was applied to what was disagreeable, troublesome, APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 123 presumptuous, absurd, as Theaet. p. 128. E. Lueian. Somn. 17. us fnaKpbv rb evinrviov KOI StKaviKdv. The common translation, foren- sic, judicial, is without meaning. b cipxV uvSen'tav ^p|a] Tliat is, 1 never filled any public office. Pov\fvfiv signifies, as in many other passages, to be a member of the senate office hundred. Fifty members were chosen from these five hundred to preside over the senate for thirty-five days, under the name of irpvrdvfis. Ten of these fifty were chosen by lot to preside over the senate for a week. These were called Trpoe'5poi, and their chief either eVtcrTaTTjs or fir KTT arris ruv TtpofSptav, as in ./Eschines against Ctesiph. p 380. Vol. II. or eir v ~\ Th e words evUeiKfvvai and cnrdyeiv signify to denounce to the magistrates (fatifucvvvai ), and lead away (avdyfiv), a person caught in the act of committing an offence, in order that he may be immediately punished: which acts are called fi>8fiis and airayceyf]. That the reading b.-rrdyftv is to be preferred to the common reading v-nd-ytiv, which Fischer endeavoured to defend, appears by those passages in which ev8eiis and avaycayii are joined. Demosthen. against Leptin. p. 04. 24. ed. Reisk. elvai 8f Kal fvStt^ets KO! airayuyds. Against Timocrat. p. 745. oii5' oa. Against Theocrin. p. 13'25. 9. edv ns iroifj TO TWV crvKotpav- rovyriav, fvSfi^if airriav elvcu KO\ airaywyfif. h ol rpiaKovra /t6Tair;xiJ/ojue'ol f*e irf^irrov avr6i>~\ When the Athenians were conquered by Lysander at ^Egospotami, and the city seized on, in the first year of the 94th Olympiad (B.C. 404), he appointed thirty tyrants, who are sometimes called ol rpiaKovra, as here, and in Xenoph. Mem. IV. 4. 3.; sometimes TpiaKovra irdvTuv &PXovres airroKpdrnpes, as in Plato ep. VII.; sometimes of irepl Kpiriav, as in Laert. II. 24. vt^vrov avr6v, that is, me with four others. Xen. Hellen. 2. 17. ypfBri SeWros avr6s, tliat is, he himself with nine others. Thucyd. 1.46. ireVirros avr6s, where the scholiast says : avrl TOV avrbs per' 1 &\\wi> Teaaa.pa>v. Meletus was among the number, according to Andocid. De Clyster. p. 46. ed. Reisk. The circumstance is spoken of by Lysias adv. Agorat. p. 106. Brem. fore fj.\v yhp TOVS */c "S,a\ap.1vos ruv iro\tTuv Komo-BtvTas oiiot tfffav Kal 8(roi, Kal olcp 6\e8pc/> inrb rSiv rpiaKovra avta\ovTo. Also c. Eratosthen. p. 77. 6 5e t\0&v nrra TWV ff\jvap\6v7a>v eh 2aAa^?va Kal 'EAewa'a 5e TpiaKoviovs T>V iroXnwv els rb Sfff/Marlipiov Kal /wqi tyhfyte avruv airdvruv ddvarov ' els r^v edAov] The 06\os was a public building near rb &ov- \tvriipiov TMV wfVTOKOffiuv, according to Pausan. L 5., in which the Prytanes dined and sacrificed every day. It derived its name irom its resemblance to a tortoise. See Harpocration and Hesych. under the word, and Pollux. On. VIII. 155. Leon, born at APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 125 Salamis, but a citizen of Athens, had gone into voluntary exile to Salamis, to avoid falling a victim to the Tyrants, who coveted his wealth. See Xenoph. Hellen. III. 3, 39. k avair\riffu alrtuv] That is, to stain with guilt and crimes ; in order that as many citizens as possible might appear to have betrayed the cause of liberty by taking part with the Tyrants. On the word acaTn/uirAdfcu in the sense of polluting and staining, see Ruhnken on Tim. Glossar. p. 30. 1 rb irav juA] That is, is altogether, by all means, a care to me. So Xenoph. Cyrop. I. 6, 13. rb irav Sicupeptf. e'/cTrA^TTeic, to strike and move one so that he becomes, as it were, beside himself. 01 ifx^^v airiiav ofaaSe] That is, / went straightway. See Matth. . 559. c. XXI. a et firpvrTov TO. Synovia eVoiov/wjJ'] The aorist Sta/ye- vea-dat av, having preceded, one might have expected ct eirpaa eVoiTjo-ct/urjj/. But the imperfect is correctly used, since he speaks not only of past time but also of the present ; that is, of a past action continuing to the present time. In English, we should say : Do you think that I could have lived through so many years, if I had continued to take a part in public affairs, and as an honest man stood by the side of justice, and, as it was my duty to do, regarded this above all other considerations? ovSt yap kv &AAos av8p. ovotis. Understand Hitytvero. b TOIOVTOS <$>avoi>iMi\ The pronoun TOIOVTOS is explained by the words which follow it a little further on : ovSevl Trdnrore |f 7X & >P i 7- v~\ An allusion to the avarice of the sophists. See notes on C. IV. f jrope'xw f/navrbv tp(aTai>~\ That is, / give an opportunity of interrogating me. The subsequent words, Kal lav ns jBouAercH air. o.Kui/fii', are to be explained Kal iratnl, Ssns Uv f}ov\r)rai UK. For edv TIS is put elegantly for Ssris av. s OVK av 5i/cai'a>j -r^v a'niav inre'xo, but is used in such a manner as if two sen- tences were joined together; that is, it signifies to come to a place and be engaged there ; so eVTu0o7 by itself is not put for eVraCfla but irapfivai lvra.v&ol signifies to come hither and be present here. Examples of this construction are given by Valcken. on Herod. I. 21. Heind. on Phosd. p. 4. Protagor. p. 310. A. ri oSv ov Sirjyriffw rjfjuv rV vvovffiai>, e /u^ r)rTbs, which was SfJ/uoy tf>v\T)s 'Aco- See Harpocrat. Hesych. Stephan. under that word. Antipho is called KTjcpiffieus, from STJ/IOS K^^KTOS, which was 'EpexSr/tSos. See Harpocrat. under Kr^Knevj. K &AAOI Tuivvv ovrot ] Heindorf remarks that TO'IVVV, there- fore, makes the sentence unintelligible. He conjectures that the better reading would be &\\oi re ivravOol. There is no occasion for any change, for -rolvvv, as the Latin jam vero, is often used, not ffv\\oyiffriK&s, but Kara^arnews. b NucdffTpaTos] Respecting this person and Theodottis nothing has been recorded, as far as we are aware. Respecting Demodocus, APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 127 father of Theages, see Theages, p. 127 . E. Of Paralus, who is not to be confounded with his namesake, the son of Pericles, nothing is known. Adimantus is the brother of Plato, often mentioned in the Rep. See II. p. 357368. VIII. p. 548. D. E. and elsewhere. Of .^Eantodorus nothing is known. Apollodorus is known to have been most devoted to Socrates. See Phsedo p. 59. A. p. 117. D. Xenoph. Mem. III. 11, 17. KaraSflaBai is to overcome and per- suade any one by entreaties. For the sense is this : Theodotus cannot beseech his brother Nicostratus, not to accuse me and bear, testimony against me. 1 e-ycb irapaxcopw] That is, / yield to him the privilege of doing this. For no one was permitted to interrupt the accused while defending himself, and by irrelevant matters to abridge the time granted for his defence ; which was measured by the clepsydra. The accuser was bound to go through all that had reference to his side of the question, before the defendant commenced his answer to the charge. k T< Sia^flei'poj/Ti] The apposition here marks the ironical tone of the speaker, C. XII. Crito : KO.\ av (pyfffis ravra iroiwv SiKaia irpdrTtiv, 6 rrj a\r)9eiq rrjs aperr^s firtfJ.f\6fJ.evos; Euthypr. p. 3. A. MA.?Tos icras irp&Tov fj.ev r]fj.as fKKa.0a.ipei rovs rwv vtcav ras f)\dffTas Sia.(fjdfipovra.s, 8>s rjcrt. More examples are given by Valcken on Phoeniss. p. 752. I \Ayov fX lV jSoTjflotWes] That is, would have some object to attain in defending me : namely, that they might not appear to have been intimate with an impious and depraved man, and that they might not be accounted wicked themselves. m 01 TOVTWV irpos^Kovres] A participle joined with a genitive like a substantive : on which construction see Lobeck on Ajac. v. 358. Schsefer on Gregor. Corinth, p. 139. II a\\' ^ rbt> op66v re Kal $'iKaiov~] The form a\\' % is well known to be used in the sense of unless, generally when a negative goes before. See Bergler on Aristophan. Equitt. v. 777. An excellent explanation of this construction is given by Herm. on Viger. p. 812. XXIII. a rdxa 5' &v ns a.yava.KTrjo-eifi''] Socrates now proceeds to give his judges an explanation of the grounds of his firmness and fortitude ; and he shows why he will not follow the example of others by attempting to move their pity. For, first, he says that such a course would be unworthy of the estimation in which lie is held by men; secondly, that it would be against the laws. 128 NOTES ON THE b sXoTTw aytava. dyainfo'ufos] That is, engaged in a trial attended with less danger. So Euthyphro p. 3. E. oywj/i'f ecrflai 5/K771'. It was the custom at Athens for the defendants to bring into court their children, and even their wives, to excite the pity of the judges; as is also evident from Aristophan. Plut. v. 383. Vesp. v. 566 sq. c y& 5e ovStv &pa r. tr.~\ 5e apa in such passages indicates that to do contrary to what has been already mentioned is absurd, and by no means to be approved of. The expression involves what logicians call the reductio ad absurdum, whether the speaker enun- tiates his own opinion or that of another person. Examples have been collected by Heindorf on Phsed. p. 68. A., to which the fol- lowing may be added: Crito c. 12. ^ irpbs fj.fi> &pa trot rbv irartpa OVK | tauv fy TO OLKO.IUV /cat irpbs SecnrdTrjv, elf aoi iiv fTvyxavfv, &STf airtp TrdffX ^ TaOra Kal a.i>Tnraieiv. irpbs 5e TTjf irarpiSa apa Kal rovs venous ee'68pa t\otivrai , *Ofj.r)pov 8" &pa ol V ^Kflvov ^ 'KffloSov fta^cfStlv a.v irfpil6vras fitav; Apol. C. XXVII. WO\\T) fj.fvr' &v /j,e ^Aa^ntjfitl ex' 6 * otirtas a\6ji(rTos elfu &\\oi Se &pa auras oiaovcn paSias. d av8a.8f irpds ^e o-xo'*?] This is said of judges who should refuse to acquit a defendant, although they might be ex- pected to do so from the goodness and justice of his cause, because he would not implore and supplicate their mercy. Further on, after el S' olv understand ris i^Siv OVTWS ?x ei - ' e TO ToG 'Ojufyw] Odyss. XIX. v. 162., where Penelope asks Ulysses, whom she had not recognised, to relate from what race he is sprung, adding to her request the words ou yap diro Spvbs fcrcrt TaAot^aroi; ou5" dirb it(rpT]s. /ral vita ye. In enumerating several things, it is customary to add yt to that noun to which the most weight and emphasis is attached : of which, examples have been collected by Heindorf on Hipp. Mai. . 47. Buttmann on Crito . 7. n. 2. It is, therefore, incorrectly omitted by some MSS. in this passage. The three sons of Socrates were Lamprocles, Sophro- niscus, Menexeuus. The eldest was Lamprocles, who is here called fuipaKiov, a youth, but, in Phaedo 65., ntyas. See Xenophon, Mem. IL 2, 1. ; but the other two, whom their father here calls rcuSia, are called by Plato also (Phaedo 65.), tr/xt/cpoJ. Compare Valcken. on Theocrit. Adon. p. 349., who says that TOP iralSa was commonly called APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 129 { Kal TOVTO TovfofjLa e%oi/To] That is, having such a reputation for wisdom. Lest this should appear to be spoken arrogantly, he adds, fir' ovv ^e?5os. In which it must not be supposed that i^evSes ought to be written, for to the adjective a\r]6es is often opposed the noun fyevSos. Cratyl. p. 430. A. 3) ri> /u" TI avruv aA.770e'y, rb 5e tfeOSos; Euthydem, in the beginning, te\eyxeiv rb del \ey6fj.evov 6fj.olcet, fdv re ^eDSos fdv re a\r)6fs 77 ; which sen- tences have been pointed out by Heindorf. Aristoph. Ran. v. 628. X&TUJS fpils tvravda juTjSf v tyfvSos. ? T&v TTO\\S>V av6pcair(iiv~] That is, to excel the multitude. h 8oKovvras [ifv TI elvai] That is, who appeared to be endowed with I know not what wisdom. See Matthia? . 487. 5. ws 5eiv6v TI oloufvovs TTfia-effdat. I do not think that Heindorf was correct in connecting &s with 5fiv6v, making is signify very ; of which signification the examples collected by him, on Cratyl. p. 41. and Phaedo p. 152., are inconclusive. In this passage &s is rather to be referred to oloufvovs, in this sense: as if in truth thinking that they will suffer something dreadful. For ins often indicates the cause and reason. We cannot therefore see, why Heindorf should say that, ifwsbe connected with -the participle, are ought to have been written. These words are connected closely with the words immediately preceding, 0avu.dffta tie (pyafrnevovs, in this sense: yet acting in a marvellous manner, as if they thought, Sfc. On the genitives &sirtp aOavdruv fffo/j.fvcav, see Matth. Gr. . 568. 2. ' ovroi yvvaiKcav ovSev 8.] On this use of the demonstrative pronoun after participles joined with the article, which makes the sense very emphatic, see Matthias, . 468. h. k ofce r)/j.as XP^I ToieTv] The common reading fyias XP- v - i g bad since these words immediately follow : our', Uv rivets iroi.Sifi.fii, upas firiTptireiv. This sense is : neither does it become us to do such things, nor, if we were to do them, u-ould it become you to permit or tolerate them. Similarly C. XXIV. ovre ij,uas tQifew vpas tirtop- Ktlv, oi/9' v/j.as fdiea-8ai. Kal unovv elvai, that is, who appear to ourselves to possess even a little wisdom. So ^Eschin. against Ctesiph. . 5. ruv Kal oirtasovv irpbs fa KOivol irpose\-ri\v6&Ta>v, that is, even in any manner. Xenoph. Cyrop. I. 6, 12. ou8' driovv eVe/t- vfjcrOT), that is, not even a little. Aristoph. Plut. v. 385. KOV Sioi- ffovr' ou5' &TIOVV rS>v na/j.tpi\ov. Phajdo, p. 78. D. /jL-fiirore /j.eraf3o\}]v Kal fynvovv eVSexeraj ; Phileb. p. 59. C. p. 60. E. Hip]). Mai. p. 291. D. Legg. I. p. 639. A. In exactly the same manner as in this passage. Rep. IV. p. 422. E. kav 6rwvv f. 130 NOTES ON THE Ibid. VII. p. 538. D. robs Kal dirriovv juerpioi/s. The common reading KOI diryriuw tlvai is bad, since ri thus does not belong to the verb tlvai, but is placed as in uirwsriovv. 1 TO. t\fetva ravra. Spayuara flsa.yovTos'] 'EAeeii/a Spd/xaTa means tragedies in which the pity of the spectators is excited, fisdytiv, to bring forward into the court, that is, when the accused intro- duces his wife, children, and relations, in tears, to dispose the minds of the judges to mercy. XXIV. a Xoipls 5e rijs 5e \eiaQai virfptyvias cos x a 'P">- Ibid. 184. B. Herodot. I. 93. X M -rip KaTaxapi'feerflai T. 5.] Gorg. p. 474. E. ou 8r)irov ticrlis TOVTWV fff-rl T& Ka\d, rov ^ w((if\ifJ.a flvai ^ ^8eo dju^repa. Lysid. p. 219. E. Compare Matth. . 468. b. /cara- Xapifeffeat rb SLKCUOV is to sacrifice justice to favour, to neglect justice in order to bestow a favour on another. c KO.} 6fj.unoKfi>'] Dcmosth. against Timocrat. p. 747. ed. Eeisk. tyijv VOJAOI. tlffi, Kara TOVS v6/Movs fyrjfyif'tffOai' irepl Sf a>v fj.i\ eifft, ffiiv yvw/jiri SiKaiordrrj. d fify olv aiovre] That is, do not then think. A little further on the collocation of the words is worthy of remark: & /i^re fjyov- uai Ka\a elvat. The common order would be : & rjyovnat p-^re Ka\a cZrai. e &\\u>s T Trdvrws fj.d\urra ptvroi Kal ] That is, both at other time.s by all means, and most particularly now, when I am accused of impiety by Meletus. ' d ire'tfoifii /3iofbi' i u77'] Understand xap(%ea6a.i (JLOI ra SiKaia. In the following clause the words should be connected thus, 5iSdaKoi/j.i &j' upas ,u)j iiyfTvOai deovs elvai. XXV. a T6 fi.lv fj.71 JeftHHurrtir] The preceding part of the ' Apology ' is supposed to have been spoken before the judges gave their first votes concerning him; the remaining part after he was found guilty of the crime imputed to him by Meletus. For now the APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 131 question of the punishment due to his offence was to be determined. There were two kinds of causes, the one an'/xTjTos, in which the punishment was already appointed by the laws; the other TI^IT^, in which the judges were allowed by the laws a discretionary power as to the punishment. We must always, therefore, when we read of causes in antient writers, be careful to distinguish to which of these two kinds the case belongs. There is no doubt that the cause of Socrates ought to be referred to the kind called TIJUIJT);. In a cause of this kind, the following mode of proceeding appears to have been adopted in the courts of justice. After the accuser and the defendant had made their speeches, the Judges determined, by their first votes, whether they condemned or acquitted the accused. Then if the crime was not capital, and the punishment was not fixed by law, they proceeded to determine the punishment; that is, the defendant was asked what punishment he considered himself to deserve, whe- ther that which the prosecutor wished, or another more just. This 5 was said, avTiTifiaffBai. See Meier and Schoemann " Der At- tischc Process" p. 724 foil. This having been done, the judges again gave their votes, and decided the cause. On these two kinds of causes, arlfjajrot, and TIJUTJT^, see Meier and Schoemann Att. Proc. p. 171 193. But since Socrates was accused of impiety, as is indicated by his own words: ^ otiv aiovTf /ue roiavra Sf'iv Tfpbs v/j.as irparrtiv afftfitias ^ifvyovra virb MeA^rou rovrovt, it is naturally asked whether that accusation belonged to the causes called TifjLf}r6v, or not. For one would naturally suppose that a capital punishment would be awarded by law against those who attacked tiie religion of the country ; especially since we know that several had already suffered death who had been accused of im- piety. But that this was not the case, is evident, not only from this Apology of Socrates, but also from Demosth. Timocr. p. 702. 5 : d(]>\e X'Afas. '' Kal OVK avfKiritnov yeyove] That is, has not happened to me contrary to my expectation. For eA.wi's, iAvffiW, and their deri- vatives, are used either in the sense of hope or of fear. See com- mentators on Thorn. Mag p. 299. Observe the brevity of the expression. At full length, it would be: al S^ /cal rovro, '6n OVK a.ve\iriv &\\ui> apxtov. A-r^rjyopia in this passage means the occupation of him who makes speeches in the assemblies of the people. Although this was not one of the magistracies, yet it is not APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 135 incorrect to add rwv &\\V iro\iTiav Kal rcav &\\o>v e'fc0i/, that is, Kal rSiv &\\cav, ^tvtav ovrtav. Where see Heindorf. Therefore the sense of the words is this: because I have cared nothing for gain, domestic affairs, military commatuls, influence with the people, and moreover also public offices, and conspiracies, and seditions. Fischer therefore is wrong in defending the other reading 3r;/uiot>p- yiSiv, especially since he has by no means proved, that STj/uopx 01 were also called at Athens by the name Sriptovpyol. The factions and seditions which arose after the Peloponnesian war through- out all Greece, and particularly at Athens, are well known. 'EiridK^s is frequently opposed to . Ibid. C. eVeiS^; 4vrav8a, ava&t/3r)Ka!J.fv rov \6yov. Menexen. p. 248. C. evravOa rbv vovv TptirovTfs. Xenoph. Anab. I. 10, 13. eirei Se Kal evravO' fx^P ovtr ol "E\\r]Vfs. Sophocl. Philoctet. v. 377. 6 5' tvddS' '^KU>V, Kaitrtp ov Suaopyos &v, 8i)x8e\s irpby & tffanvfn* w5' Tjucfyaro. Gorg. p. 494. E. Ammonius p. 51. eVrauflo? /cal fvravQa KO.} IvBdoe Sicupfpei. e'cTouSoI ntt> yap r^v fv r6irip (leg. fls T^irov) Kal fpyu Qanapraveiv. Eryx. p. 392. C. inrb Se TUV fffiiKpuv TOVTUV kv juoAAoJ' opyifroivTO ovrus, us kv /iaAierra k fv Trpuravfiy aneiaOai] The Prytaneum was a place in the citadel where the laws of Solon were kept, seePausan. I. 18. : and a daily allowance of provisions was given to the citizens who had deserved well of the republic, called ffire'tirOau: which was ac- counted among the Greeks a very great honour. See Cic. Orat. I. 54. Demosthen. de falsa leg. p. 231. Aeschin. de f. leg. p. 267. T. II. Tayl. Pollux. IX. 40. Gruter Inscrip. p. 460. I. and Schol. Aristoph. Equitt. p. 199. Bas. "ITTJTOS is the same as Ke'ATjs, a single horse, guided by one driver, see Scheffer. de re vehic. I. 8. p. 85. siuvupis is a chariot with two horses, and f eiiyos one with three or four horses. See Suidas, Hesychius, Phavorinus under these words. vfviKriKev 'OAu/uirm is generally used for vevintiittv 'O\v/j.ir 10,71 But the same construction is also used bylsocrat. de Big. p. 351. C. and p. 357. 'O\u(j.ind(rtv tviKrjcrev. XXVII. a usirfp irepl rov of/crov Kal TTJS avn^o^fffus^ He refers to his saying, in C. XXIII., that he would not follow the example of other accused persons, who tried to move the pity (oiKi-or) of the judges, and that he would not implore the judges as a suppliant. This is the a.vTtf}6\-na-is or a.vTi@o\ta which he speaks of. For as cb'Tt^oAeiV is the same as 'iKertveiv, so avrifto- AT?v el oTS' or* KOLKUIV OCTOIV] The regular construction would be, either e'Awjuai T Tovrtav & e5 olSa tin KO.KO. f TO TraiSiKa Kal tiirtas &v 1^17 X e "'> ov 5vva./j.fvov avriKeyeiv, aAA' Hvw KO.I Kara /ifTa/^oAAo/tefou, where see Heindorf. s rots eVSe/fo;] The Eleven were magistrates, to whom persons condemned by public trial were delivered for punishment. Some regarded these words as a gloss, and recommended their omission ; an opinion embraced by Heindorf, Schleiermacher, and Bekker. I think they may very well be retained, as exhibiting more emphatically the disagreeable and odious condition on which he would then hold his life. h Kal SeSfffdat etas kv eVri;] AtSeffGai, to be in the public prison. This passage alone is sufficient to show that persons who were fined, were imprisoned until the fine was paid. Demosth. c . Timocr. p. 721.1. fay apyvplov rifj^Brj SeSeadat ecas Uv eVnV??. Adv. Mid. p. 529. 26. See the commentators on Nep. Miltiad. 7. ; and also Cimon. 1. Meier and Schomann " Attische Process" p. 517. 138 NOTES ON THE 1 fl OVTWS a\6yiffr6s eiV] On this use of the indicative see C. XII. note ( n ). A little further on %-n-rtlv is to wish, to desire. k &\\ot tie &pa.~\ On this expression see C. XXIII. note ( c ). These words do not depend on the preceding Srt, but the sentence begins anew. 1 Ka\bs olv &v noi 6 /3i'os ttrj rjv'] This is said ironically. The verb Igcpxea-deu, not (pfvyeiv, is said of going into exile, as has been well observed by Fischer. &\\7]i> t &\\-ns ir6\iv ir6\eircp~\ These words also depend on the preceding 8rt, and are not introduced as a parenthesis, as was thought by Fr. A. Wolf. On the particle 8e in the words ravra 8' en Tfrrov ireiffeffQf, which contain the apodosis expressed with emphasis, see Hermann on Viger. p. 784 and 845. On the ex- pression i'o$ (Starts, a life having the properties of life, see Crito, C. VIII. note (). c vvv 5e ov yap <0Tiv~\ After vvv 8e understand ov Swa/uat /not Tip.T)ffatTdai xpriiJ.aT(av. Some supposed that the words ought to be read without a pause : vvv Se ov yap facri, which is contained in the preceding word Ke\euot;v, by want of .words, or as Cicero calls it, Orat. I. 54., inscientia dicendi. e TfOvdvai ^ fitfivws nv~\ With tue'ivus understand a.Tro\oyri~ adfj-evos. On the use of the word rtOvdvai, see C. XVII. note ( z ). A little before, rdre is before you condemned me. irdvra Toitlv, airavra Troielv, irav troifiv, means to leave no stone unturned, to leave nothing untried. Euthyphron. p. 8. C. f edv ns ro\/j.q] That is, if any one can prevail on himself to do this, if any one goes to so great a pitch of impudence, that Xenoph. Mem. II. 1, 3. ris kv (ft typovtav rov orov Otdaov roXfjifofiev elvai ; Plat. Grit. C. XV. irA\fj.j]o-as ovrTai {,/j.as- of ^tyxovrts. c Kal Ka\tiru>rtpot] On the omission of roaovria, see C. XVII., note (/j.fi> ; ?) irfpl avTtav TOVTOIV Pov\ti 5iafj.v6o\oyti e ^ Te vd\i Legg. I. p. 632. E. . a ^ 7ap fluOvId U.QI /uavTiKfy / TOU 5ai/j.oviov~\ I cannot agree with Schleiermacher, who considers the words rj TOV Satfwviov a gloss, because Plato elsewhere is accustomed to call the thing itself rb 5ai/n6viov, and because when he expresses the same thing by a sub- stantive, as fj.avTiK-fi, fiov, namely, that which I owe to that spirit wfiich I have before mentioned. For ^ fj.avriKri does not de- note the thing itself, which Socrates meant, when he spoke of his 5ai/j.6vLov, but rather the effect of the daimonion. A little further on, observe the collocation irdvv eirl a-fjuKpins for eirf irdvu cr/LUKpoIs. The reason is, that Trdw is the emphatic word. So Euthyd. p. 305. C. irdvv iraph vo\\o7s. Phaedo, p. 110. C. Kal iro\v en fK \afj.wpoTtpttji'. Rep. IX. p. 509. B. iro\v firl StivoTtpcp o\t6pca. Euthyphr. p. 14. E. iroAi/ Sia, PpaxvTepiav. Cratyl. p. 413. C. TroAu iv Tt\eioi>i airopiy. More examples are given by Bornemann on Xcnoph. Sympos. p. 46. e? TI ^e'A.Aoj/xj, that is, as often as I was about, fyc. b a 76 8^ ol?]d(ii] &v TIS Kal vo/iiferai] That is, and are really regarded as the worst of evils ; for we ought to interpret the word i>u/j.iea()ai in this manner. c \eyovTa yuTa|u] That is, at the very moment of my speaking ; in the middle of my speaking. T.ieag. p. 128. E. \4yovros crov nera^v yeyoi/f poi fj e/j.ia ] To the particle fire correspond, after a long interval, the words further on : et 8' oS. On e* 8e after elre see C. IV., note ( a ). e ^ii yap kv oT^at] *A.v belongs to the infinitive fvptiv. It is repeated on account of the long parenthesis; on which usage, see Hermann on Viger. p. 780. For the same reason, the words Se'ot and ofjutw are subsequently repeated. Heindorf wished also the word 6t to be repeated before the words Se'oi aKt^dfievov, for the sake of perspicuity. It is written so in Eusebius. But as the construction of the sentence is not altered from the beginning, this repetition does not appear to be necessary. f fify on ioi(i>rnv~\ That is, not to say any private man. See Hermann on Viger. p. 804. APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 143 s fvapi9/j.-firovs &v evpe'iv avrbv T.] The pronoun avrbv is to be connected with T^V /j.eyav a<7iAf'a, and increase the force : the great king himself. EvapiOnrrrot rj^fpai, that is, days which may be easily counted, here means very few, and trpbs indicates com- parison : if they be compared with other days and nights. So, a little further on : TO. ^avrov irddr) irpos TO. fKfivwv. h teal yap ovSev irAeiW] Fischer, from Eusebius, has written jfKflov. But the more correct reading is ir\t'uv, meaning longer, ov5fi> being used for ov, as is frequently the case. Cicero has thus translated these words: perpetuitas consequentis temporis similis futura est uni nocti. Compare Eurip. Med. v. 25. TOV irdi/ra avvT7]Kovaa SaKpvois xp6vov. Ibid. 1096. rpv^o^ffovs rbv TTO.VTO. Xpovov. Hep. X. p. 618. B. 6 TTOS Kivtiuvos. Gorg. p. 470. E. 1 MtVcus re Koi 'Pa8d/j.ai>0v$, K. r. A.] These words are placed in apposition in the same case as the relative pronoun; whereas the first part of the sentence requires them to be in the accusative. So Phaedo, p. 66. E. xal r6rt TJ/JUV ftnai ov firi6vfj.ovnei>, pnvi]aftas, where Fischer ought not to have preferred (pp6vr]iris. Hipp. Mai. p. 28 J. C. T'I irore rb airiof } STI o ira\atol etce'tvoi, Siv offSyuaro /j.eyd\a. \tyfrai. firl aotyia, IIITTO.KOV re Kal "Biavros, (paivovrai aTrex '^" ' r ""' iroXniKiav irpdfa>v. More examples of this kind have been collected by Wolf, on Demosthen. Lept. . 15. Heindorf, on Hipp. Mai. . 2. on Phaedo, . 30. Similarly Sulpicius in Cicer. Epp. IV. 5. genus hoc consolationis miserum est, quia, per quos ea confieri debet, propinquos ac familiares, ipsi pari molestia afficiuntur. Respecting the judges of the infernal regions, and their duties, there is a remarkable passage in Gorg. p. 523. E. sqq. It appears to have been the opinion of the common people in Attica, probably derived, by rumour, from the Eleusinian mysteries, that Triptolemus, and other heroes who had lived a just and pious life, became judges in the infernal regions. For Tri- ptolemus was said not only to have taught the Athenians agricul- ture, but also to have given them very wise laws, whence he was called 0fcr^o] Cicero: quanti tandem jestimatis? Xenoph. Mem. II. 2, 8. oAAa v^i Aio \tyei, & OVK &v ns eirl TC? flicf iravrl ^uuAoiro flvai. Compare Matthiaj, . 585. B. 1 fy&> ntv yap iroAAaicis rtdvavai] On this use of the verb TtOi'dvai see C. XVII. note ( z ). Eusebius has : 701 t^v 144 NOTES ON THE Kal n-oAActais: \vhenceHeinclorf suspected that Plato wrote-. 6701 /j.tv yap Kal 7roAAci/ay, etc. But there is no need of change. On this use of the word yap, by which reference is made to a sentence easily understood from what goes before, see Buttmaun on Sophocl. Philoctet. v. 756., who thinks that it ought to be translated, truly, indeed. m fj SiaTpiffi auT<50i] Wolf has well rendered this: delightful conversation, if I may converse with P., etc. Respecting Pala- niedes, who was stoned by the Greek army, having been suspected of treason through the arts of Ulysses, see Heyn. Excurs. ad Virgil ^Eneid. II. 81. Valckenar. Diatrib. de fragm. Eurip. p. 190 sq. Ajax Telamonius, the bravest of all the Greeks after Achilles, became mad. and killed himself, from having been deprived of the arms of Achilles by the unjust judgment which conferred them on Ulysses. See Homer Odyss. A', v. 545 sqq. n avTiirapal3d\\ovTi dijSes efy] I think these words added for the purpose of explanation to the foregoing : Qavpainr] Siarpi^ K. T. A., and therefore there is no reason why we should read, after Viger, on Eusebius in the place cited, Kal avwrap. or alter the passage in any other manner. This view has also been taken by Fischer. Some may prefer thinking, with A. Mattbite, . 636. that, through negligence, .the apodosis is repeated. For we might safely omit the words . ws eyk oT/uai, OVK fcy aijSfs efrj. rbv 4ir\ Tpoiav a.yay6vra] That is, Agamemnon. i' ^ &AAous fj-vptovs OLV TIS efrroi] Stephens preferred J) &\\ovs fjLvpiovs, ots &v ris etiroi, not paying attention to that brevity by which several sentences are sometimes united in one clause. See Gorg. p. 483. D. eirel itoicp SiKa'itp -^pdi^vos Ef'pjTjs e'ir! ryv 'EAAciSa fcrTpd.Ttvati> ; t) 6 iraTrip avrob eVl TOVS 2itv6as ; ^ &\\a /j.vpia &v rty e^ot roiavra \ty(u>. Phado, p. 94. B. \tyta Sf rJ> TOiAvfif, us (I Kavfiaros tvovros Kdl Styovs firl rovvavrlov t\K(iv, firl rb fi$i irivfiv' Kal irfivrif fvovaijs ewl rb (ify faBieiv. Kal &AAa fivpla TTOV 6pwfj.fv fvai'Tiovfj.fVTjv r^v if/vx^v TO?J Kara rb ffufjia. Sophist, p. 226. B. Legg. XII. p. 944. A. Demosth. Mid. c. 7. 1 a/j.-fix avov & v e ^ e&Sai/toi/fas] Similarly Thcsetet. p. 175. A. aroira avT$ Kmafyalvrrai TTJS afjuKpoXoyias, monstrous degree of stupidity. Compare Erfurdt on Sophocl. Antigen, v. 1194. XXXIII. a "AAAo Kal 11/j.cis xpti] Cicero: vos, judices, qui me absolvistis. Correctly. b Kal ev n rovro SiavotlaBat aAijSe's] The circumstance that APOLOGY OF SOCRATES. 145 TL is used here before ruvro arises from the usage of the Greeks, first to express what they mean generally by the pronoun n, and then to limit or define the meaning more accurately. So we should say, one thing, namely this, is to be regarded as true. ciirb TOV av- rofj.a.Tov: that is, by chance, fortuitously, not by the design and will of the gods. onr^XA. -n-pay/jLaruv, that is, human affairs, the idea of labour and toils being added. ov irdvv x a ^-> n t much; not greatly. Others have incorrectly translated it by no means, a sig- nification which the words no where have. A little further on, Heindorf conjectured that the reading ought to be: rot/0' t> avrois &iov fjitpQeffOai. Injudiciously, .as it weakens the force of the sentiment. c ravra. ravra AwTroDj/res] That is, exhorting them to virtue, making trial of their wisdom, convincing them of folly. elrof n, that is, to be endowed with great wisdom. d 'AAAoi yap ] Cicero Tusc. I. 41. Sed tempus est jam hinc abire, me, ut moriar; vos, ut vitam agatis. Utrum autem sit melius, dii immortales sciunt : hominem qnidem scire arbitror neminem. In the same manner Theaet. p. 145. B. &pa rotvw aol fj.tv eiriSfiKvvvat, efj.ol 8e ffKoiriiaQat. On the forcible form of apposition in the words: avr6s re ol ol vlfls, see Rep. III. p. 414. D. Crito, C. XII. Sympos. p. 221. D. NOTES ON THE CRITO. 1. a Urtv'iKa ,u.d\iffTa;~\ What hour is it at most? For juaAterra is here to be taken as if put after numbers ; on which usage see Bastius Epist. Grit. p. 37 sq. b opBpos /3a0ys] Crito defines the time more accurately in these words, for vpy and SpOpos differ from one another, as in Latin mane and diluculum, of which the former is the part of the day extending from twilight to about the third hour, according to the antient division of the day; but the latter is the twilight itself, when nox abiit, nee tamen orta dies, according to Ovid. Amat. I. 5, 6. Phrynichus : op9pos -rb irpb apxontvris rjfjLtpas, iv 5> frt \vxvw tivvavai TIS xpi5(T0ai. The adjective jSoflus is used by the Greeks in refe- rence to time as the word " depth" is used in the phrase "the depth of winter.'' Protagor. p. 310. A. rijs Trape\6ovv, SITUS irore iret- ffQi\(rav ol 'AByvoiOi, Eurip. Med. v. 51. irias KeiirtaQai 6f\ei; Qn this construction, which is frequent, see Coraius on Isocrat. II. p. 23. "So a little further on : ir>s OVK en-fiyeipas jue evQvs ; Socrates wonders that Crito was admitted so soon by the jailor, because oi> irdw irp$ avetpyfro, Phaedo C. III. 'YiraKoveiv, which is properly said of a porter who hears persons knocking (rcns Kpov- ovaiv), is also used in the signification of opening the door and letting a person in. d Katri Kal 6uep7eTrjToi] The reading KOI rot Kai, and indeed also, which some have preferred, appears inconsistent with the modesty of Crito, who does not wish to boast of benefits conferred on the man, but merely to state the cause of his being admitted. Therefore at TI al, is preferable, not only from the authority of MSS., but also from the whole scope of the passage. For Crito 148 NOTES ON THE speaks with modesty, and with a careful regard to the feelings of his high-minded friend, when he says that he was accustomed to give a trifle to the jailer. Ti is connected with evepyer-rjrai; on which construction, see Matth. . 415. Buttmann, . 118.4.5. The ac- cusative separated from its verb is usual, the common construction being: ical TIS ical, itai rives Kal, Kai n Kai. See Ducker. on Thucyd. p. 309. Poppo Observ. Critt. in Thucyd. p. 196. Buttmann and others preferred evepyereirai, the present tense, as indicating that Crito, frequently coming to the prison, usually gives a gratuity to the keeper. But Crito is reciting the causes which procured his admission at a, former time; and therefore rightly uses the perfect, by which he indicates both that the man formerly received benefits from him, and was still mindful of them. On the form evepytriirai see Matth. . 169. note ; compare . 167. n. 6. The omission of the augment gave rise to the reading evepyertlrai and rjvepyerr]- rat. e 'EirteiKais ird\ai] That is, pretty Jong since, or, a good while ago. Theaet. near the beginning, "Apn, 5 Teptyiwv, % ird\ai e' aypov; Terps. 'EirietKws ird\cu. Phaedo, p. 80. C. eirieiKws cvx- vbv e'-irifj.evei xp6 v v - Grammarians interpret eirietKcas, when so placed, by irdvv, \iav. See Eustath. on //. d., p. 547. Hesych. under the word. Immediately afterwards, the interrogative elra indicates wonder and annoyance. See Apolog. Socr. C. XVI. f oi>S' &i/ avrbs tf6e\ov ] / should not myself have liked to be in such a state of watchfulness and grief, if I were in your place ; for since so grievous a calamity threatens you, it would have been wrong to disturb your rest. The particle &v used with the imperfect indi- cates the supposition of a case contrary to that which in reality exists. See Hermann on Viger. p. 820. For eV roffavry re ay- pinrviq Kal \virri the ordinary construction would be iv roaafny aypvirviq re Kal \vitrj, which is found in some MSS. But-the other reading is explained by understanding roaavrri again after Kal. For re is put immediately after roaavrri to show that that word be- longs to XUTTJJ as well as to aypvirviif. Phaed. p. 94. D. rd re Kara yv/j-vaarrtK^v /col r^v larpiicf)>>, i.e. rd rejc. y. Kal TO Kara r. I. Legg. VII. p. 796. D. 5fs re iroAtTei'ai/ Kal iSiovs OIKOVS, i. e. Kal (Is IS. otx. Herodot. VII. 106. O?TE s rbv Kuyov cwre8{aTo. Compare Schaefer on Lamb. Bos. Ellips. p. 252. and Matth. . . 489. 3. h 'Iva. cos rJSdTTo 8101777$] The Greeks nse the subjunctive mood after conjunctions indicating the final cause, when a preterite has gone before, if the object sought is not yet completely finished, but is contemplated as still continuing, as in this passage: on this point see Hermann, De emendanda ratione Gr. Gr. p. 212 sq. on Viger, p. 850. Compare Matth. . 518. I. Buttm. . 126. i. With the verb Stajys is to be understood rbv (Hov, on which ellipsis see Lambert. Bos. p. 59 sqq. ed. Schaefer. ' evtiaipovicra TOV Tpdirou] On the construction see Matth. .367. a. TpoTros here means the mode of thinking and acting exhibited by a man's life, his disposition. Phaedo, p. 58. E. ev5ai/j.wv t>/ KaKO?s. See on Phileb. p. 137. The common reading ouToTy is consistent with the construction of the verb tinXveaQai, which properly signifies to render any thing free for any one, and hence to grant. Yet it was desirable to follow the better MSS., especially since eiri\vetr8al TIVO. appears to be used correctly in the sense of rendering any one free Jrom something. The sense of the words is this : But old age, how- ever, does not set them free from the fear of death. The article Tb is to be referred to ayavanTetv, forming an accusative absolute. ^ ov retains its proper force ne non, when it is used after a negative o 3 150 NOTES ON THE particle. Therefore the words may be thus translated : But old age, however, does not render them free as regards this, namely that they should not be troubled at death. It may be also understood from this, how rb ^ ov may generally be rendered by the Latin quominus. On the accusative see Eurip. Hippolyt. v. 48. TO y&p TTJS 8' oil TrpOTtfj.ri(rci> KO.K&V, rb /uj? ov trapcurxf'ii' TOVS e/tous exBpovs f/j.o\ SiKtjv Toaravrriv, where some MSS. have rov ^UTJ ou. jEschyl. Prometh. v. 243. fepvfptis, i. e. -rls ecrnv avrri rj ayyf\ia, fy (peptis. See Matth. . 264. So Euthyphro, p. 14. D. Ti'y TJ a might be expected, see Apolog. Socrat. C. XVII, note ( z ). The Athenians, in gratitude for Apollo's sending Theseus and his companions back in safety from Crete, sent annually a public embassy to Delos, to offer sacrifice to Apollo, and celebrate his praises in hymnfi. These ambassadors were called Btcapol, or eewpi'o, from the verb wptiv, i. e. v, on 7}|ei Trififpov, it must be evident that something very different is required by the sense, and even that the words Soxel fj.4v poi %eiv rfnepov are used with the delicacy of Attic speech to signify f}ei rri/j.fpov, which use of the verb SoKetV , very common among the Socratic speakers, has been illustrated with examples by Bergler, on Aristoph. Plut. v. 422. Ruhnken, on Tim. p. 281. In the same manner Phsedo, p. 61. C. Hveifj.1 8e, is KOIKE, vf)/jiepot>. This being the case, I think that the sentence to which ^tv is referred is contained in the preceding words 06 roi S^i cuplicTai, so that it might have been written thus: rb tr\oiov T^et fj.lv rri/j.fpoi>, oij TOI 8e a.(j>iKTai. Immediately afterwards ^| 3>v airayyf\\ovffiv is the same as e TovTtav & a.Trayye\\ov is a verb used respecting dreams and visions. Euripid. Iphig. Taur. v. 44. f'8o|' eV virvy. Orest. v. 402. e5o' iSf'iv rpfis vvtcrl irpostyeptls K6pas. Aristoph. Vesp. p. 31. 5o|e juot irtpl irpGnov vitvov ft> TTJ irvitvl ^K/cA.7jir(ofej^, K. r. A. As persons appearing in dreams were believed to be divine, they are generally represented as more beautiful, large and august than human beings. Hence the woman, who appeared to Socrates, is called KoA.^ nal fveiSrjs, beautiful and well formed, and she is also spoken of as AeuKcii t/xarja exoucra, having white garments, since the antients thought that spectres were arrayed in white ap- parel, on which see Commentators on Pliny's Epist. VIII. 27. *evK, as the word is correctly interpreted by Thomas M., CRITO. 153 Phavorinus, and others. Phredo, p. 60. B. &s &roic6v TI eoi/ce flvai TOVTO, u Ka\ovffiv ol &v6pcawoi f]5v. He calls this dream fvapyes, i. e. so clear and evident, that there' is no need of conjec- turing or interpreting. The particles ftev ovv have the force of increasing and correcting: nay, nay indeed, as Gorg. p. 466. A. E. Legg. II. p. 655. Euthydem. p. 304. E. Hipp. mai. p. 283. B. Xenoph. Mem. III. 8, 4. Aristoph. Equitt. v. 13. 910. and else- where. HI. a oAA.', 5 Sai/xrfiae ] By the words en /col vvv, even now, now at least, he indicates that Crito had before made vain attempts to persuade Socrates to consult his safety by flight. b ov fiia v/*vias us Xai'pw. Ibid. p. 184. B. ovStv yap 5o/ceT -rovrcnv ovre fifpaiov oi/re /j.ovifj.ui' elvai ~)(iap\s TOV /ur)8e irffftvKfvai air' avrtov yevvaiav v fftpya.7fj.tva tffTiv, he suddenly changed the construc- tion, and expresses his idea much more emphatically, saying : OTI dial re elffiv ol iroAAoi, K. T. A. tvtt ofoi re ^ow] On this kind of construction, see note on Sympos. p. 181. B. Hermann on Viger. p. 850. The sense of the words is this: in order that they might also effect the greatest good, which is not in their power. f TOVTO, o TI &v Tux w(r O That is, tJiey do not follow reason, but a certain blind impulse of. their mind. Further on, C. V. o TI av Tvywai, TOVTO irpdovo~i. Protagor. p. 353. A. r^v TUV iro\\ 8o|aj/ avOptinrcuv, ot o TI &f Tv'xoxn, TOVTO \eyovcri. Sympos. p. 181. B. oQev S^i v/j./3aii>ti avTois, "6 TI &v Tvx^ff', TOVTO irpaTTftv. IV. a apd 76 /u^ t/jiov irpofj..~] These particles ask a question, with a kind of suspicion of what we are unwilling should be the case : surely you are not concerned, etc. See Hermann .on Viger. p. 842. Compare Schaefer. Melett. Critt. p. 66. irpdynaTa Trapexetv, to give trouble, or create annoyance to any one. This is often said of persons who annoy by accusations. For the word irpa.yfjia.Ta. is sometimes used simply in the sense of law-suits and quarrels. See Commentators on Aristoph. Plut. v. 20. b ^ Kal iraaav T^V ovffiav atro&aXfiv, $ x& XP-] That is, to lose either even all our property, or at least a great part of our wealth. It is easy to see why KOI is put in the first member of the sentence, and omitted in the second. In the third it is again added, because a new kind of danger is mentioned : for SAAO TI iraQeiv is : lest we should ourselves be thrown into chains, punished by exile, or put to death. c taaov aurb x a O>'] That is, dismiss this fear. This con- struction has been illustrated by Valckenar on Herodot. IX. 41. on CRITO. 155 Eurip. Hippolyt. v. 113. and Heindorf on Thesetet. p. 441. Re- specting the construction of the words ^/ue?s ydp irov Siitcuoi eV^ey KivSweveiv, see Matth. . 296. Buttmann, . 138. 5. d teal HT) &\\6f$ov'] The thread of discourse, which is here broken, is resumed a little further on with the words : Ssre ju^re TOVTO. (pof3ov. It may be understood from this, why the copyists changed jtffrre into /j.ri. f rovrovs TOIIS ffVKotydvTas] This is said contemptuously. Further on C. IX. rovrwv TUV iro\\ afy'iKri] The ordinary construction would require oXAaxoO. But since Sirot follows, that which has been 156 NOTES ON THE called attraction, by the later grammarians, produces &\\otre. On which subject see Buttm. . 138. 1. 4. I have therefore removed the comma from between &\\offe and otroi. V. a ffbv a&Qrjvai] When you have it in your power to escape. See Matth. . 264. b ol\^\(rti KtrraAMrctfj'] The word otxeaOM indicates, I think, the quickness of the action, and the eagerness of the agent. It might be rendered in Latin by confestim deseres. Other examples have been collected by Matthise, . 559. c. c -rb ffbv ;ue'pos] As far as in you lies, as far as you are con- cerned, as C. XL and XVI. d '6 Tt &v irpd^ovfft] That is, they will undergo that lot which the will of fortune may assign to them; whatever may happen to them. For the word irpdrreiv is taken in the sense of having good or ill fortune, as in the phrases fv irpd-rretv and KO.KUS irpdrTeiv. Remark the use of the pronoun TOVTO, for which, according to the usual construction, some adverb would be substituted. But in the same manner Eurip. Troad. v. 700. irpdeu> rt Ketiv6v, where Seidler says, that phrase is employed for ev irpdfiv. Eurip. Iphig. Aul. v. 345. irpdffcreiv fnfy&Ka. the same as /ia\' evrvxelv. e ret pa9vp.6rara inrep rjfu.ui'. s Kal i] ttsoSos TTJJ Si'/crjj els rb StKao-T'fiptov. Forster and others, observing that the words rijs S/KT/S, were not translated by Fici- nus, suspected that they were a gloss. But since 77 S/KTJ is very frequently said elsievai or elsepxtaOai, on which point see Casaubon on Theophrast. p. 157. also Buttm. index ad Demosthen. oral. Midian, under this word, why should it not be correct to say fi efroSos TTJS 8f(ojs? Fischer, Schleiermacher, and Buttmann defend the common reading in the same manner. The words et's rb Si/co- ffrfipiov, which Schleiermacher thought ought to be rejected, are sometimes added when the cause itself is said, elsitvai or tlsfpx fff ~ 601. Demosthen. adv. Phormion. T. II. p. 912. 27. fj.(\\ovaris TTJS Starjs elsieVoi els rb StKoar^pioi/. The phrase rj ttsoSos rrjs 5f/cijs, is used when the prosecutor and the accused are admitted to plead the cause before the judge. See Schomann and Meier's CRITO. 157 " Attische Process" p. 705 foil. Therefore the words &s ei'sTJ ebv /XT; (iif\9e~iv are added for the purpose of interpretation. It may, however, be doubted whether it ought not to be written a>s fhri\dev, which was preferred by Wolf, especially since that learned commentator found it in some good MSS. The word Q6v seems to favour the reading ej'sr)A0es. Qbv n% ej'seASetf. The commen- tators differ in their explanation of these words. Some suspect that reference is made to that law which Lysias, p. 354. ed. Eeisk. mentions, and according to which it was permitted : 55is] " The whole transaction re- sembles a comic or tragic drama, which has three parts, irpSrcurts, . For the infini- tive SLcnreQevytvai SoKeiv is added by epexegesis, as the gramma- rians call it, to the words rb rf\fvraiov 5$i TOUT/, according to a common construction. Gorg. p. 469. C. dAA' tyeaye -rovro \iyw, p 158 NOTES ON THE brffp&pn, e^etvat eV TTJ v6\fi, '6 av SOKTJ avr$, itoifiv rovro, where Heindorf incorrectly suggests the reading rb f^lvat. Phzedo, p. 78. C. 8,p' ofiv Tip /J.tv ffvyreBfvri re Kal avvQtrtf ovrt (pvafi irpositKfi TOVTO ird. xP^M aTa nfpl ir\eioi>os Tro(e?ff0at ^ ^lAous; but, considering the matter more closely, it appears that the word 8oKe?i' could not well be omitted in this passage. For if Crito said : Siairectifuyfval fjnas, he might appear to admit the truth of the reproach which, he says, will be iirged against him- self and the other friends of Socrates ; especially since he has been enumerating circumstances which were really true. For it was true that Socrates had appeared before the tribunal, and also that he had made his defence, which is called 6 ay&v TTJS SI'KTJS. Hence it appears that the passage needs no emendation, and that there is no anacoluthia in it, as some have supposed. 1 ouSe av aa\rr6v\ These words at first seem to destroy the sense. For Crito is now speaking, not of the carelessness of So- crates himself respecting his safety, but of the apparent careless- ness and apathy of his friends, who would seem to have deserted their master, and consulted nothing but their own safety. But these words contain an excuse or defence against the view which will be taken of the conduct of the friends of Socrates; and this defence consists of a gentle reproach of Socrates, of whom Crito complains, with generous indignation, for not availing himself of the means of escape provided by his friends. The passage may be thus rendered : who have not saved you (nor would you save yourself), when it might have been done. m ft n Kal ynwv oe\os ?iv~\ See Apolog. Socrat. C. XVI. note (s). Compare Hemsterhus. on Lucian's Tim. c. 55. A little further on a/xa T< KaKtp is used in the same manner as irpbs Tia n /j.a\\ov 8e ou5e f3ov\ ] MaAAov 8^ is, or rather, nay indeed' It is no longer the season to deliberate, but to have already deliber- ated, i. e. to have come to a resolution. VI. a ^ irpaQvpla ] That I certainly will not yield to you. f ou5' &v ir\eia> riav vvv irapAvrtav ] According to Buttmann, the order of the words is: ou5' &v f] riav TTO\\a/j.is /j.opiio\vr- TIJTOI Tinas Ss?rep TroTSas, ^Tmrffj.irov(ra TrAeico, Seffftovs, K. r. \. This I do not agree with. For TrAeta is to be connected with fiopfJLo\vrrriTai, and is an accusative absohite put for an adverb : the collocation of the words confirms this view. So further on, C. XIV. near the end, ^ACITTOI a.irfo-f)fi.rjffa.s. Rep. III. p. 396. C. Mopno\vr~f(r6a.L is to frighten children by gestures and by pro- nouncing the word Mopfj-ca, as is correctly remarked by Gesner, on Claudian. Carm. XXXI. v. 111. Hence it means to terrify or frighten a person by objects calculated to inspire fear; or generally, to terrify, to intimidate, but the terror meant is generally ground- less. The active /io^oAvrTeu/ is only found in the works of grammarians : the Attic writers always say /j.op/jio\iirrtcT6ai. The word eiriTepireiv, like the Latin immittere, is said of what is suddenly and forcibly presented before a person, as is remarked by Hemsterhus. on Lucian. T. I. p. 208. Kal Qa.va.rovs Kal diJmipeVeis] The plural number is used for the sake of greater emphasis. Nouns of this kind, when violence and cruelty are indicated, are often put in the plural. Compare Seidler on Eurip. Electr. v. 479. Achilles Tat. VIII. 8. /col 160 NOTES ON THE 6a.vd.Tois Kal $TfJ.ois irapaSoBevras. Plat. Laches, p. 191. D. 8a\dl3oi/j.fv ] The word a.va\anfid.i'tiv is to treat anew, to resume the investigation. Fischer is wrong in translating it simply to inquire, to examine, to investigate. For reference is made to what had been previously said by Socrates on the same subject ; which investigation he now proposes to renew. For the words ir6Tfp(jv na\ias f\fjero eKdarore i) ov, are to be understood thus : Whether on the several occasions when we formerly argued this point, was it correctly said, or not, that " some opinions of men are to be regar ded, others not." k ttt> ait A7is] That is, which you mention, namely in C. III. andV. 1 vvv 5e KardSrj\os &pa. iytvero] On this construction see Matth. . 296. Buttmann, . 135. 5. On the use of the particles Se &pa, see Apology, C. XXIII. note ( e ). m &\\s, i. e. rashly, without reason, is explained by the phrase fKKa \6-yov, for form's sake. On which see Heindorf, on Thetetet. p. 4'i2. eireiSr) oJ5e t\a>, Since the danger of death threatens me, after I have come to be in danger of my life. The form rl \t~yfiv is opposed to Te'xjrji' r-f)v& fyv tx " tfvoK-r6vov, TipiJaff', vdatvov avrbv ois 6a.voviJ.fvov K\dov(ra. Plat. Gorg. p. 462. T). )3ovAei otii>, eVeiS-J) Tijuoj TO x a P^ ea ^ at j fffJ-iKpdv fi ftoi x a p' l fff @ al > So further on, C. VII. VII. a Kal TOUTO irpdrrtev] And doing this attentively or zea- lously. In the same manner Xenoph. Hellen. IV. 8. 22. dei', irpbs if eft? fpjy, TOVTO tirpamv. The preceding words, irias av TO rotavTo. eAt'yero ; are to be thus understood : Whether were they said rightly or wrongly ? The imperfect tense indicates that reference is made to the discourses of a former period on the same subject. b &s &v Tvyx&vy I'wpbs ^ iraiSoTpl&rjs &v{\ The sense is this : Or will he only regard the opinion of the person who presides over the exercises, and prescribes the regimen, whoever he may be ? It appears therefore that the word ought to be written Fischer attempts to defend the common reading, &s Uv which is entirely contrary to grammatical usage. It is also erro- neous to use the optative TW7x", which would give this sense : Or will he regard the opinion of him only who would be master of the exercises and physician, that is, if some other circumstances took place. For the optative with &v signifies that the sense is to be taken hypothetically. Icnp&s, in this passage, is the same person who is also called yvjiv acrr^s : his office was to prescribe the diet and regimen to future athletes, and to all persons who put them- selves under his care to be trained in corporeal exercises (ro?y 7u/x'aojueVois), as may be seen from Xenoph. Mem. II. 1, 26. and other passages. To this person reference is made in the words t'Seo-reW 76 xal iroTtov. iraiSoTpiftrjs is the master of the exercises who used to teach wrestling to the young men in the palaestra. The words rt vpaKT^ov Kal yvfj.va SiKaicp f}f\Ttov direiMtro ;] I am surprised at Buttmann's finding so much difficulty in accounting for the imper- fects in this passage. He quotes Theodoret, who has copied this passage, Curr. Affect. Gra3C. II. p. 27., as an authority for reading eyevfTo airu>\fTo, so that the aorist may indicate customary acts. But this mode of using the aorist does not apply to this passage, and moreover Theodoret does not write cto-oJAeTo, but av6\\vrai, which has been violently changed by Buttmann. I think that the imperfect may be easily accounted for ; since Socrates before used the imperfect when he opened the present disquisition, saying irws o5 TO. Totavra e\fyero ; why should he not here also use the same tense, to indicate that he was referring to the remarks which he had formerly made on the same topic with his friends? The common reading may therefore be thus paraphrased : t> T<$ fj.tv SiKaitf $f\Tiov yiyvto-Bai, rep 5 aS'iKca a.ir6\\vff6ai eXfytro eicdffTore {><(>' Tjptav irepl T&V TOIO^TOIV 8ia\tyofi.ei>evTiet>, ypaQas wrrparfias ftvai irpbs TOVS iroAe/uiKous Hpxovras, '6rav f\6u>triv ctTrb ffTpaTOTteSov. Phaedo, p. 77. E. pa\\ov 5e /xfy us r^uav SeSi6ro>v. S,pa &tw- r6v. That is, whether life is worth living for, i. e. agreeable and pleasant. b 'AAAA H*T' ^Kfivov &pa] Here a\\d &pa is used in the same manner as Se &pa in C. VI. CRITO. 163 c $ rb &$IKOV /tiev AtujSaroi] In conformity with all the best MSS. I have retained $, which all the more recent editors, except Bekker, have changed into 8, as it is written in Eusebius. For the verb \oi0affdai may also be joined to a dative, as appears from Phrynich. in Bekker's Anecdot. T. I. p. 50. who writes : hteftaaQai r6f5e Kal Tv Se otfre TTOITJTTJS 7To> $6av d|i'of AajSoif ex*', T( re tcrrlv ev juv^ore/a. Sympos. p. 201. B. w/j.o\Ayrirai, ov fvdf-fjs eerri Kal ^ %x el > TOVTOV tpav. Compare Matth. . 428. 2. d fj av\ov by eurfAe's. For it is here opposed to Ttfuulnfpov. See Ruhnken on Tim. p. 268. e s ei'sTj-ye?] Ei's7j7e?(T0at is said of those who propose and urge any law or condition; hence, those who are advisers of any thing. See Sturtz's Lexicon. Xenophont. under this word. e ArjAa S^j Kal ravra- (pair) yap &v, Si 2. The MSS. vary much in this passage. The principal doubt is whether the words 1G4 NOTES ON THE $r)\a Sr) Kal Tavra belong to the speech of Socrates, or to Crito's answer. The former opinion, on the authority of Aid. Bas. 1.2 , is held by Buttmann ; the latter by Cornarius and Stephanus, who think that the words ought to be written : A^\aSrj Kal ravra Qaiij y' &v ris, & 2. The first reading is objected to from the want of force, which would certainly be felt, if Socrates first were to affirm that the thing was manifest; then Crito to confirm this assertion; and Socrates finally again to express his approbation of the same opinion. But the reading suggested by Cornarius and Stephanus is inadmissible, since all the MSS. have yap, and SrjAaS^ docs not suit well with the remainder of the sentence. Wherefore we prefer the reading already restored by Im. Bekker, by which all difficulty is removed. For after Socrates has said that some may urge that the opinion of the vulgar is to be regarded on account of their power being so great as to enable them even to deprive of life whomsoever they please; Crito eagerly answers that this is mani- fest, for that certainly it might occur that some person would offer this objection. To this Socrates answers : ' AA7J07J \eyets, that is, you are very right in saying that this is evident, but ; and he proceeds to show the groundlessness of the objection. h oAA" (1/j.mos elvai Ttf Kal trp6rfpov] That is, what we before said, that all opinions of men are not to be regarded and followed, but only the opinions of persons deservedly reputed wise, still remains certain, and has not been shaken by any argument. For what So- crates had affirmed (C. VI. near the beginning), before entering on the discussion, respecting the opinions of men, namely, that even under his present circumstances he ought to be guided by the same principles which had actuated him during the former part of his life, he now repeats and confirms in a few words at the close of the dis- cussion. Therefore ovros 6 \6yos, t>v SieAijAuflayuev means the discourse on the opinions of the vulgar, which discourse, he says, ert '6/j.oiov flvat rip Kal irpSrepov, i. e. differs not from the sentiments to wlu'ch he had formerly given utterance in conversation with his friends on the same subject, before he was prosecuted and con- demned. For there can be no doubt that 6 Kal irp6Tfpov Aex#e!s \6yos refers to a discussion he had formerly had with his friends on the same topic. Since this is the case, it is easy to see how the words, Kal rdcSe a3 s. IX. a K TUV (5 / uo\07otijueW>i'] That is, from the principles in which we agree. There is no need of the correction a>no\oyrn*.fvoiv. See Sympos. p. 200. B. and compare Heindorf s remarks on Hipp. maj. p. 180. ^Eschin. adv. Ctesiph. . 13. rb SoKelv /j.ft> a\ri6fi \iyei)>, apxa'ia 5e Kal \iav 6fj.u\oyovp.fva, where Markland preferred u>/j.n\oyrj^eva. b p)] atytevTtav 'Aflrji'ai'aij'] That is, the Athenians not permiting me to be freed Jrom punishment. Therefore there is no necessity for writing tyitvrw, which appears in the Tubing. MS., and one of Paris. The word is used in the same manner in Eurip. Med. v. 374. TVS' ariK6i> ^fpav /Mewai fie, i. e. permitted me to remain, mitigating the former severity. c iff pi ai>a\itifftws XPW* T&)J/ ] That is, that you and others ought to give money, to rescue me from prison. See C. IV. d Kal 5<5|ijs] That is, lest you should appear to have failed in your duty tmvards your friend. See C. III. e al iralSuv rpotpijs~] That is, that I ought to bring up and educate my sons. See C. V. Before pfi, here and a little further on, understand Spa, which word is expressed in C. X. Compare Matth. . 632. 2. f aKfu/j-ara"] Reasons, considerations, principles, before called e rwv p"s a-rroKTivvvvTwv'] That is, by their votes. The verb ai>api(affKx &pTas. b 6 \6yos OVTCHS alpti] Since reason so dictates. See Heindorf, on Euthydem. p. 232. Gataker, on Anton. IV. 24. Dorvill, on Charit. p. 645. A little further on, with xdpiras, which properly depends on re^ovvrts, we must understand e\ovrts or elSores, on which construction see Wesseling on Diodor. IV. p. 270. Dorvill on Chariton. p. 440 foil. Ernesti on Xenoph. Mem. II. 1. * ft)] ov 5e?? viroKoyi^fffOai irpb rov a8iK6?i'] Apolog. C. XVI. i>iro\oyi^6fjLfvov /UTJTC 6d.va.Tov jurJTe \Ao /MjSer TTfio TOV v. The sense is this : See whether it is not improper to con- sider whether death or other calamities may result from our remain- ing here, previously to considering whether we shall do right or not. Tlapa^veiv is to remain in custody, and not to escape : it is used principally of faithful slaves, irapanovoi, to whom are opposed 01 airoSiSpdo-Kovres, fugitives. See Xenoph. Oec. III. 4. k &s eyk irepl TroAAoi" a\\a (n)} &KOVTOS Various attempts have been made to explain this passage ; but none of them appear perfectly satisfactory. The principal point in dispute is whether Socrates or Crito is the subject of the infinitive it flam. If we take Socrates as the subject, TO.VTO, trpdrreiv must signify iruveaBai \tyovra TTO\\O.KIS r~bv avrbv \6yov, and to &KOVTOS we must supply ffov. The sense would then be: / am very desirous to persuade you (Crito) not to repeat again and again the same thing, provided this be not done against your will. But although this interpretation is approved of by Buttmann and Wernsdorf, it appears to me very objectionable. For, besides the fact that no example of such a use of the verb irpdrrfiv has been produced, it appears inconsistent with the character of Socrates to wish to press his opinion on Crito in so urgent a manner. If Crito be considered the subject, we must understand /ioi'/ with &KOVTOS. The meaning will then be: I esteem it a great favour that you again and again attempt to persuade me to do this (i. e. to escape'), only do not do so against my will. This, if carefully considered, means: I indeed prize highly your generous friendship, which prompts you to urge this counsel on me repeatedly (for the aorist indicates this repetition); but do not leave out of consideration my own will and opinion, since 1 am accustomed to be influenced not by motives, derived from external things, but solely by considerations of truth and virtue. This interpretation is CRITO. 167 confirmed by what goes before, tt ity %x fts avTi\fyfu> e/j.ov \tyovros, K. T. A.; for what, is said there, ej Se /UT;, -Kuvaai tfSri TroAAo/cts Hoi \*y or xp^"^ so that aSiK-rtreov flvai is the same as dSi/ceii/ Self. See Matth. Gr. . 447. a. b /f/cex u M e/I/at e*ff] Have been poured out, i. e. thrown away. Jacobs appropriately compares the expression with tKXflv TTAOLTO', tKXfiv xP^M aTa - The words ytpovres avSpes, which might have been omitted, are inserted in consequence of the strong opposition to iraiSaiv. c if) iravrbs /uaAAov] riafroj /xaAAoi', instead of which travrtxi' fj.a\\ov, is also used. It means; most of all, beyond all dispute. See Hemster. on Lucian. I. p. 173. d Q/JUHS r6 ye a^inftv ] Compare Gorgias, p. 469., where being asked, aii &pa /3ov\oto ttv aStKelirOai fj.a\\ov TJ a8ie?r, he gave this most excellent answer: ^ov\oi^v iitv &v tytaye ovStrtpa' el 5' avaynaiov 6(77 aSiitelv 3) aSiKfladai, IAO//UTJJ' a.v fj.a\\ov aouff'tcrBai f) aoiKflv. e is 01 TroAAol otoinai] Archilochus in Theophil. ad Autolyc. II. 37. If S' ^iritrrajuai fj.eya. rb KaK&s n Spuivra Sfivuis av-rapti- fif(r8ai /cao?s : Solon in Brunck's Poet. Gnom. p. 73. flvai 6 y\vK.vv u5f fylfots, ex0po?affi. Theast. p. 148. A. rfs 8$j ofiv, 3 Trot, \fiirfTat \6yos. Men. p. 92. A. On the other hand, olv 8ij is found in Protag. p. 333. A. Sophist, p. 261. D. and elsewhere. h wj ouSeiroTe opO&s fx vros ~\ That is, taking it never to be right. Rep. IV. p. 437. A. ii-n-oQe^fvoi &is rovrov OVTOOS fx ov ~ TOS. Protagor. p. 323. E. evdev Se was iravrl Ov^ovTai Kal vovQrrfi $ri\ov '6n dij t{ eTri/nfAeiay Kal /j.adr)fffcas KTTJT^S ofays. A little further on ap\-fj is the principle of the discussion, on which everything else is based. This is a very common use of the word. To fifra. TUVTO, i. e. the conclusions drawn from that principle, as Euthyphro, p. 12. D. Cratyl. p. 402. D. ^n^ivfiv here means to abide by and retain your former opinion. Phanlo, 92. A. eyoi fiiev Kal T(5re Oai/^iaerrujs is eirfiaByv VIT' avTou Kal vvv tp.fj.ivca us ovStvl \6ycf. XL a 'E/c TOUTWV JWj Hepfi'] That is, if this is true, that it is wrong to injure any one in any manner, see what follows from it. b fri) Tttltravres trjv ir6\iv~\ That is, a.K6vr$e ] Since the verb airoSiOpda-Kftv is generally used of run-away slaves, he adds, in order to soften the expression, fid' tin-cos Sfi 6vofj.dcrai rovro, i. e. or by whatever other name we are to call it. Legg. L p. 633. A. efre pfpivv eW eiTTO auret Ka\fiv xpeiav (ffriv. e rb Koivbv TI)S irdAews] The community of the state. Cicero uses the same construction, Verrin. II. 46, 63. commune Siciliae. So rb noivltv TTJS wrfAeccs, is said in Protag. p. 319. D. Rep. VII. p. 519. E. Lysias, Apol. Manth. p. 158. Accus. Philon. p. 161. CRITO. 169 cd. Brem. Observe the accumulation of participles \0 eAae KOU ^vrevcre are, contain the explanation of the preceding words : ov irpuTov fj.iv 6 irdvra \fv, the opposition is more emphatic ; and, besides, the perspicuity of the passage would be injured, if we were to write: Kal ere ravra avrtir. Protagor. p. 316. C. TOUT' olv ^7877 <5s, 77), ir6\is, ayp6s, and others, when not used in reference to a certain and definite individual, but to a whole class, are usually put without the article. See Schaefer. Melett. crit. p. 45. p. 62 foil. p. 1 16. on SophocL CEd. Tyr. v. 630. Butt- mann, on Meno. . 7. So, further on: Kal o-e'/Seo-flat 5e? Kal (i.a\\ov Trarpi'Sa xaAeTraiVoutrov ?) Trare'pa. There is also an example in the preceding words: /urjrprfs re Kal irorprfj. II Kal (v /*eifoci j^oi'po] 'E^ /jid^ovi f^-oipa elvat is said of that 172 NOTES ON THE which is estimated more highly, which is in greater estimation and honour. Compare Valcken. on Herodot. III. 172. avrbv eV ouSe/uio /j.tyd\r) n-olpri tfyov. o Kal 4} irt'iQfiv, $ iroieTv] Wolf translates it, aut persuadendo nontendere oportere. For irfiQtiv is to conciliate by speaking, repre- senting how the matter stands ; to show a better way of proceeding. See Apolog. C. XXIV., where SiSdaKfif KM. iniOfiv are joined. A little further on: ireidfiv y rb S'utaiov irtyvKf. P fj irfideiv avrfy y rb 5. ire'<.] The infinitive irttOetv is used as if it had heen preceded by iroit'iv 5tl, which construction is very frequent. Gorg. p. 492. D. ras ptv firi6v/.das (prji ov Ko\aarfov, fl fit\\fi TIS olov 5e? fivai, fuvTa, 8e avras a>s (ney'iaras nX-^fxaariv &\\odtv ye iro6fv eroijuaf tiv. On which Heindorf remarks : " We are to supply $fti>, the force of which is contained in Ko\acrrtuv." Rep. IV. p. 424. B. Xenoph. Mem. I. 5. 5. f/tol /*fv Soice? f\(vdfptf avSpl evKTfov flvai pi] rvxtlv Sov\ov roiovrov, $ov\fv- oat'] Stephan. erroneously con- jectures r6. For, as Fischer remarks, the verb Trpoayopfvo/j.tv is connected with the infinitive f^vat, and the words rf t^ovcriav irfiroiiriKfvai signify by what means the laws proclaim that they allow any citizen, who chooses, to emigrate, namely, by means of having made an enactment to that effect. Hence it is plain why the perfect tense is employed, and why irpoa.yopfvo/*fi> is used, which some have translated : we proclaim, we order. b tvf iShv SoKtjuao-ej; Kal %] This is the reading of all the MSS., with one exception ; and there is no reason why it should be changed into 5oKi(j.dffri, which is approved of by all the editors. For the sense is this: After he has become his own master, has arrived at years of discretion, and has become acquainted with public affairs ; that is, when he has arrived at that age, in which he is most capa- ble of judging about matters relating to the commonwealth. This passage is illustrated by ^Eschin. adv. Timarch. p. 26. ed. Bremi. firfitiav 8e tyypcupfj TIS ti'y rb \v)iapxiKbr ypafj.fj.arfiov, Kal TOVS v6(j.ov5 5p TOVS T)S T^Aeois, Kal ijSrj Svyrjrai t>ia\oyiftr9ai TO oAa Kal ra /urj, OVK ?Tt trtptf Sia\eyerai (6 vofj.oBerris). We are now to consider what was the SoKifnaaia fls avtipas. The names of CRITO, 173 those persons who wished to have the full and perfect rights of Athenian citizens, and to attain to public honours, were enrolled in the \riiapxiK.6>>. Before this could be done, the young men under- \vent an examination as to their parentage, whether they were legally adopted, and other particulars of a similar kind. See Demosthen. in Midiam, c. 43'., and the Commentary of Ulpian. Further on, observe the accusative A.aj86 700 iruaiv a^Opdnrois V/J.VOVVTO.S. c fls a-jrotKiav UvaifUfroiKtiv &\\ocr( irot] Ei$ airoiKtav Uvat, is to go to an Athenian colony : but /xeroiKelj/ is to go to a place belonging to a foreign power, Greek or Barbarian, as has been correctly remarked by Fischer. d KO.\ on 6fjLo\oyrjyas i} j*V iretdeffOai, K. r. A.] The common reading for ^ fxtfv was fipiv, which has been corrected from the best MSS. See Buttmann, . 149. e otfre irfidfi ^/ias] Understand, that we act unjustly: as ap- pears from the words tl ^ Ka\ces rt iroiovfiev. But after saying: o&re Treifleroi ovre irei'Oei f)/j.as, there was no need to add: roincav ovSfTfpa, iroifi. However, since by the words: irpoTi6tvTui> fifj.uiv 5i/e?j/ 6&Tpa, the principal idea intended to be conveyed is in some measure thrown out of view, there is no impropriety in the repetition, rovrcat> ovtierepa. woie?; especially, since another member of the sentence may appear to commence with aAAct eQievruv. A similar negligence of construction has been noticed by Heindorf, on Theast. . 73. The laws are in this passage said irporiQfvai, those things which they order to be done ; because all edicts are publicly set forth, in order that they may be read and judged of by all ; which is necessary to enable any one to suggest any improvement. Therefore the passage may be thus translated: Whereas we give every one the opportunity of learning and judging of what is enacted by us, and do not compel any one by arbitrary severity to do what we wish to be done ; nnd moreover give a choice of two things, either to convince us of error, or, if he is unable to do so, to obey us ; nevertheless, this man does neither of these things. XIV. a Tatfrajs STJ (p. eWfea-0ai] Hesychius : eVe'xeffflai" (yKa\e7ff9ai, Kparf'ttrdat, v eiSeVot] That is, Sisre tlSfvai avrofc. We are informed by Seneca, Laertius, Libanius, and others, that Socrates resisted the inducements of Archelaus, king of Macedonia, and other princes, who invited him to settle in their dominions. h wfno\6yt is KO.Q' finas Tro\iTfv(ffdai~\ The infinitive which is here put in the present tense, was changed by Stephens, against the MSS., into iroAiTttfffeffflai. In the same manner, C. XIII. near the end: Kal 3ri dfj.o\oyriv 3 MV MeWic Karaer-firry : where Ast, with Stephens, wrote ntveiv. Herodot. IX. 106. V'HTTI re Kara\a&6v- res Kal bpnioiai f/j./j.fvfiv re Kal /u)j awoffrrifffcOcu : where Wesse- ling, against the MSS., substituted ^ujueVfip. Xenophon. Cyrop. VL 2, 39. ifi.o\ irposayayuv tyywrirks ?i /*V iropeveaQai : where Stephens preferred iropfveeffOcu. Anaba?. II. 3, 27. 0^600.1 ?j H^it> Tropf /caret TOWS i>6/j.ovs iro\iT(vcrf(r6ai; or^^v6p.o\oyiaKaTa rovs v6/j.ovs iro\iT(ve(r9ai? It appears to me, that the second form of the oath is preferable; since it indicates that from the moment of taking it he will obey the laws. It cannot then be wrong to use the same law of construction in obliqua oratione (i. e. in reciting a speech in the third person), as is used in directa oratione (i. e. in the speech as it comes from the speaker). Therefore, in all the pas- sages before quoted, to which many others might be added, I think the reading of the MSS. ought to be preserved, as being singu- larly adapted to the meaning. For as to the addition of ical jtt^ airoffrfiffea-Bat, the passage may be easily understood, without changing ^u/utVetv into f/j./j.fvfiv. For the sense of the word is: Affirming that they both now are willing to abide by their promises, and will never violate them at a future time. The next words: rd re &\\a Kal iraiSas iv avrrj eVonjo-w, are added as if they were preceded by Kal firoKnevov, i. e. and you conducted yourself as a citizen as well in other things, as also in this, that, fyc. This con- struction arises from the free formation of sentences often employed by the Greeks, who paid in such cases more regard to the sense, than to the grammatical construction. 1 Itfiv vyris nuiiaaaQa.i] When the judges gave their first votes on his case. For, as we have mentioned in a note on Apolog. Socrat. C. XXV. the accuser always fixed the punishment in the indictment, if no punishment was already fixed by the laws. This was called Ti/xoV, which governs a dative of the person, and a geni- tive of the punishment. After the pleadings had been gone through, and the judges had by the first vote found the accused person guilty, he was asked what punishment he thought that he had deserved : ri &ws fit] iradflv ^ airoriffai. This was np-'fiffaaOai or avnTiju^- Apolog. Socr. C. XXVI. and XXVII., or vir 176 NOTES ON THE as in Xenophon, Apolog. Soc. C. XXIII. Therefore Socrates, on this question being put, might have answered that he had deserved exile. Ka\\uiri(ar6ai, according to Hesychius, is pro- perly KOffpeiaQai, to adorn, or deckone's-self: whence KaAAaiin' k "AAAo T olv ttv a?ev] The particle &t> was commonly omitted; but it is by no means improperly inserted in this sentence. Aristoph. Pac. v. 137. dAA' 5 yue'Ae &v /JLOI triricai> Snr\eav eSei. Demosth. p. 1445. 14. ed. Reisk. rl o5v ftp efaoi ns v tiv Se ra>v fraoBapiKtov'] This is the correct reading, being opposed to ir6\fcav 'E\\T)viSa>v. If ftappdptav were read, r&v 'EAA^i/av ir6\wv would have been used. TJripoi and avdirypoi are applied to those who are deficient in any part or member of the body, or at least deprived of its use, as is correctly observed by Fischer on this passage. II ol v6p.oi Sri\ov STJ-] These words appeared to Stephens to have arisen from a gloss. But Fischer has correctly observed that, if they were removed, what follows would lose almost all its force: rivi yap av ir&\is ape ff KOI &vev v6pcav; Besides Srj\ov STI or, as it was commonly written, Sfi\ov6rt, refers not only to of v6poi, but to the whole of the foregoing sentence, as if the passage stood thus: SfjAov Sri oijTta SicKpepdvrais aoi tfpeffKev fj ir^Ais re Kal of v6fj.oi. eav TJIJ.IV yt i'0p] In these words the laws answer them- selves. At the close of the sentence we are to understand : oAA' fHUfvt'is, being a repetition of the expression, which was employed in asking the question. CRITO. 177 XV. a TTJ Tuintav woAtTei'ot] Understand, of the citizens of those states. vwof3\e\l/ovTai ae. Hesychius : {nro/3\eir6fj.ei'os' \rno- voiav, ixP a ' lvai 2., fi ovsirtp evdaSf. The interrogative pronoun, vivas, is found in the best MSS. e atrx r >H v &" a>'erT0ai] The particle &v with a future in- finitive is not unusual. See Apol. C. XVII. note (?). T& rov Scc/fparous irp3.y[i.a, the business, or affair of Socrates, is to be un- derstood as meaning Socrates himself. So rb irpayna is said of the people, Gorg. p. 520. B. The expression oieffOat ye xrf ' 1S often used in this manner. See C. XVI. ^af 5e tis"A.i$ov airoSfinrjirris, ovxl (irifji.f\ricrovTai ; ottaQai ye XP^I- Phaed. p. 68. A. OVK &v is by no means without a distinct signification; it expres- ses the meaning more forcibly than the preceding inrfpx^ fvos - For the meaning is: You will live indeed studying how to insinuate yourself into the favour and companionship of others, and even behig a slave to them. The second reproach, therefore, is much stronger than the first, especially when directed against a man, who had so utter an aversion to every thing servile. It does not appear neces- sary to insert KCU before ri iroiwv, as Schleiermacher has done. For these words are not closely connected with what goes before, although the interrogation only begins here. I have therefore con- sidered it sufficient to put a shorter stop after SouAeiW than the common full point. The sense of the whole passage is: You will therefore live the flatterer, and even the slave of other men : how else employed, pray, than bunquetting in Thessaly, as if you had gone to CKITO. 170 Thessaly from your own country to some feast? The repetition of Thessaly is not without force. On what follows, compare Axioch. p. 124. 'A|ioxe,, fi ravra ; irov ^a irpoadtv avxrifiara,; Soph. (Ed. T. V. 940. 3> Qeiav fj.avTevfj.ar a, 'lv tffTt; Ibid. 946. TO atpv' lv' fjjcet TOV 6fov fj.avTfv/i.aTa; Eurip. Supplic. v. 127. rb 8' "Apyos i/fuv irov 'ffriv, t) V^UTret p.d.Ti]v; m 'AAAa Sii ruv iraiScav eVeica ] Here aAAa 5^, like the Latin at enim, may be translated: But perhaps you will say that. It is used for the purpose of refuting an objection by anticipation. Republ. X. p. 600. A. a\\a 5% el ^ STj/uorr/ct, iSia nalv fiyepuii' TraiSfias avrbs >v A^erat tf O/urjpo$ yevevBai. Protag. p. 338. C. dAAo 8$i BeXriova ^iav aipT}T(ai>. Mercur. 2icaira, 81 "HAie, juij n Kanbi> OTroAauaps TUV \6ycaf. oiroO] That is, At Athens. Immediately afterwards Bpe- tyovrai Kal Traioevaovrai are to be taken ira6r)TiKcas. Compare Matth. . 496. note 4. Buttm. . 123. 3. P irdrtpov tav els .] Lest the reader might find a difficulty in the want of a conjunction to connect this sentence with the pre- ceding, it may be remarked that sentences placed in strong oppo- sition are often without any particle. Therefore there is no reason for reading with Eusebius, iru-rtpov Se fdv. On the words ei TI o(f>e\os, see C. V. note ( m ). XVI. a irpb rov Siitaiov] See C. IX. note ('). b otfre yap eVflaSe] That is, m this life. Tavra irpdrTovTi'] Which Crito has proposed to you. d aueivov fivai] &p.fivov flvai is constantly used instead of ayaGbv dvai. Compare Apolog. Socr. C. II., near the end. Phsedo, p. 115. A. Gorg. p. 468. B. D. Eepubl. III. p. 410. D. But since the comparative Sjueivof is frequently used in this manner, ovSe StKai6rfpoj/ ou5e dviantpov are also added by a kind of attrac- tion. In the same manner Phado, p. 98. E. The sense is : Neither you, nor any of your friends will be, or be considered, happier, juster, or holier, if you make your escape. 180 NOTES ON THE e dAAa vvv VL*V~\ That is, But if you do not comply with the suggestions of Crito, you ivill depart, -c. XVII. a on tyu SOK& dc.] The Corybantes were priests of the Mother of the Gods in Phrygia, and they leaped or danced under the influence of the divinity. See Strabo. X. p. 725. Almelov. Whence Kopv^amav is, to be affected with the disease called nopv- ftavTia.ffiJ.6s, in which the person imagines he hears the sound of flutes in his ears : which disease was supposed to come from the Corybantes. See Scaliger on Catull. XLII. 8. and Langbaen. on Longin. p. 209. Toll. Compare also Ruhnken on Tim. p. 163. 7>X^> f r "fiX s i is an Attic word. See Mceris and Thomas M. under the word. fronfrtiv, to buzz, is here said of the voice of the laws resounding in his ears. Synesius Epist. 123. f/j.pufj.&f't /J.QV rats a/coa?s rj 6a.vua.ffTT] /zeVrot ("(7T6, ira ifapa ravra &\\o TI \eyftv. Phaedo, p. 80. B. tTi*pa ravra. &\\o \fytiv. APPENDIX. IIAATflNOS <$> A I A O N, Chap. I. EXEKPATH2. Avros, w $ai'So>v, ira- peyevoii* Smtcpdrei exeivy ry rjpepq, y TO (pdpfjuiKov eiriev ev TO> &eo-/j,a)rr)pi(t), rj aXXou rov i]Kov\tacri(0v c ovBels Trdvv n eTri^copid^si rd vvv 'A0TJvae, ovre Ti? ^evo? atyitcrai xpovov cruyyov eiceidev, o?Tt? dv rjjuv <7a^>e? rt, a^etXat oto? T' 17 v d Trepl Toi/rtov, TrX^v fye S^ ort (frdpfjuiKOV irifov diroddvot' TCOV Be d\\6)V ovSev et^e v. rt ouv TK ToOro, h w yap TTJ jrpoTepaia rfjs St'/cjy? 77 irpvfiva 1 eWe/tyu-eV?; k ToO TrXo/ou, o et? AJJ\OV Adrjvatot irefnrovaiv. 1 EX. Tovro Se B)j ri ecrriv ; <&AIA. TOVTO eVri TO TrXotov, a>9 (pacrtv Adrjvcuot, ev a> B?;Tey9 ra Trore et? Kpyrrji' Toi/9 Si? CTTra e'/cetVouv /cat ecraxre re fcai aj/ro? eawdr}. rro o5v ^vroXXtuvt ey^avro, a>9 Xeyerat, 184 PLATO. Tore, el (TwOelev, eKacrrov erovs Oewpiav aTrd^eiv* et? Af)\ov fjv Srj del /cat vvv ert e e/cewov /car' evtavTov TU> dew TreuTrovcrtv. 7rei8dv ovv ap(ovTai, p TIJ<; 6ew- pia?, vo/io? ecrrlv aurot9 ev TW ^povw TOVTW KaOa- peveiv rrjv TroXtv real Brj/jioala ^Seva aTTOKTivvvvat, Trplv av ei? ^77X0^ re afyitcrfrai TO 7r\olov Kal Trakiv Sevpo' TOVTO S' evlore ev TroXXw ^oovw yvyverai, orav fioi a,7ro\a/36vT9 ayrou?. q ap%r) 8' ecr-u dewpias, eTreiSav o lepevs rov lA.7r6X\,a>vo$ irpv/Jivav TOV TrXolov TOVTO 8" eTv^ev, ft), r Ty irpoTepaia TTJ? Si/c?;? 7670^69. S^a, raura pwo? eyeveTO ro5 ^wKparei ev rcS Secr/ito- 6 fjiera^v TTJS 8t:^9 re ral TO{) davdrov. II. JEX. Tt Se 6^ TO, Trepl avTov TOV OdvaTov, & $al&a)V ; TL rjv TO, \e^OeVTa teal 7rpa^$tVra, /cal Tive9 oi irapayevofievoi TWV eVtT^Seicov TCO dvπ r) ovrc ia) v 61 ap^ovre9 3 Trapeivai, dXX' 6/377/^09 TroXXoi 7e. b EX. TavTa 8r) Travra 7rpodvjJ,r)dr)Tt ct>9 tra^ecrrara 77/1 tv aTrayye'iXai, el fj,rj r/9 croi atr^oX/a Tvyxdvei oixra. 3>AIA. ^4XXa cr^oXtt^cy 76, /cat Trei- pacro/iat y/itv Swyria-acrdai' Kal yap TO fiefj,vfjo-6ai StoKpaTOvs Kal avTov Xeyovra /cat aXXoy fjLocAIA. Kal fj,r)V eycoye Oavpdcna Trapayevoftevos. ovre yap <09 6avdr(f> TrapovTa fj,e dv- 8^69 eTTiTrjoetov e'Xeo9 et9/7ef d evoalfiwv yap /xot e av?)/3 itfxtiveTOf w '^e/cpare9, /cat TOU Tpbirov Kal TWV Xo- 7a)v, eo9 dSew9 /cat yevvaiws* ereXei/ra, W9r' e/j e/cetvov PELEDO. 185 /noi/?a9 g ievai, aXXa tea/eelae a9 et/co9 av Sofetev Trapovrt, 7revdei- h ovre av ^ovrj co? eV 77/icor ovrcov, 1 &J97rep elwdetfAev teal yap ol Xojoc TOI- ovrol Ttve? k ^(rav aXX' are%vw9 aroTroi/ rl pot Traprjv /cat -n.9 ar)6r)p09 TCOV eTTi^wplwv rrapr)v teal Kpiro(3ov\os m /cat 6 Trarrjp avrov Kplrcov, teal ert 'Eppoyevr]? teal /cat Alcr^ivr]^ teal Avricrdevr]<;. TJV Be teal o Ilaiavievs teal Meve^ei/09 /cat aXXot reov eTTt^coptcov LTXarwv Se, ot/iat, ?;cr#ej/a. n . HeVot 8e TtJ/9 Trap^craj/ ; $AIA. JVat, %ipp,ia<; re 76 o @?7^3at09 /cat Ke/3rj? teal $ai8(i)vBr}<;, teal Me- yapodev Eu/cXet8i;? re /cat Tep^riwv. EX. Ti 8at; ^Apio-rimros teal KXeo/>t/3/30T09 vrapeyevovro ; Ov Srjra' ev Aljlvrj yap eXeyovro etvat. EX. !/ 8e r<9 rraprfv ; 3>AIA. ^^eSov Tt ot/zat Toyrou9 Trapa- yevecrdai. EX. Ttovv&rj; rives, ^9, ^AIA. 'Eyco croi tffapxffi rrdvra rreipavopai Sir]- Kpdrrj, o~v\\ey6/j,evoi ewdev et9 TO 8t/ca R 3 186 PLATO. teal r) BLKI] eyeveTO" TrXycriov yap r?v a rov 7repteyuevo/x.ev ovv e/cacrrore, ea) 9 dvoi^deir) b TO T?7ptov, Star/3 t/3ovTe9 /ACT' dX\.t]\wv c aveaxyeTO jap ov Trpa/ e-TretS?) 8e dvoL^Oelr], el^/mev Trapd rov ^WKpdrrj Kal ra 7ro\\a Birj^epevof^ev /ACT' avrov. Kal Sr) ical Tore Trpaiiairepov ^vveXeyrjpev. rfi 9 TrpwlaLTaTa 49 TO elcodos. Kal fjrcopev, Kal rjjuv e^e\0o)v 6 Qvpwpos, o97re/3 eltadei v7raKoveiv, d etTre irepi^eveLV Kal fj,rj 'jrpo- Tepov irapievai, ea)9 av ayro9 tce\,eva-rf Avovai er), 01 evSe/ca HwKpaTr) Kal 7rapayye\\ov(riv, av TrjBe Trj rj^epq T6\evrijcrr]. ov TTO\VV S' ovv %povov e7Ttcr^a)v e ^/ce Kal Ke\,evcrev rj/jLas elsievai. ei9tovre9 ovv KaTeXajm/Sdvofiev TOV fiev SajKpaTr) a/art XeXu/xe- vov/ Trjv Se HavdiTTTrrjv, yiyvaxTKeis yap, )(ovadv re TO TraiBlov avTov Kal 7rapaKadr)/j,vr)v. 009 ovv elSev r) '&,avQ LTCTCI] , dvev(prifj,r)cre 5 T6 Kal TOiavr , ota Brj elaiOaaiv al 7i/vat/ce9, 6Vt VO~TO;TOV Bij o~e Trposepovcri vvv ol eTTiTtfieioi Kal KpdTr)vo9 h /Sowcrav T /cal KOTTTOfievijv 6 Be ^wKpaTys dvaKaOity eVt T^V K\Lvr)V l cvveKap-fy-e Te TO o-/ceXo9 /cal ege Ty %etpt, /cat Tpt/3a)V a / tta k f /29 aroTrov, 1 6(^77, w av- Spe9, eot/ce Tt etvat TOUTO, o aXo)o-tv ot avdpwTroi r)8v' a>9 6av/j,acrui)<; 7reKpare eprcpocrdev ^pbvw %rjv, ovo' eav 7ro\\a ev rw rrapovrt Kal o-^>6Spa, ovoev TrXeov J Tavra aev roivvv TrpodvprjOrjcro/AeQa, e9, eVetSav TTWU TO 188 PLATO. rapa/jievh), dXX' ofyrjcrofAai diriwv et9 Srj vivas 1 ev8aijjbovla<$, ravrd /iot BoKti) avT(a >' efiavTov. eyyvrjcracrOe 1 ovv /J,e Trpos Kplrcova, ?}, rrjv evavTiav eyjvrjv rj rjv ovros irpos rou? r/yyvaTo. o5ro? /xev yap r) firjv irapa^evelv 8e rj fj,rjv fir) Trapapevelv eyyvrjcrao'de, eVetSav UTTO- Odvct), a\~\a ofytfcrea-dat, aTTibvra, wa Kpirwv paov 9 Xoucro//,evo9, /cat 6 Kpirwv eiTrero avrut, 8' e/ceXeve irepi^eveiv. TrepLep.evop.ev ovv avTovs Bt,a\eKpares, 6^17, ou Karayvuxiopai ye crov d oVe/o TO>V aXX yjpova yevvawTctrov Kal Trpao- rarov Kal apicrrov av8pa ovra ra)V TrcoTrore 8eO/3o di,icofj,eva)V, Kal 8rj Kal vvv ev olS" ore OVK epol %aXe- , yiyvcacTKets yap rou9 atnoi;?, dXX e/ceivot? paara (frepeiv ra dvayKala. Kal afta Sa- fjLerao-rpe(j)6aevocrT09, Kal vvv a9 yevvauot fj,e aTroBaKpvei. aXX' aye Srj, a> K/9tT&)v, 7reid(a/j.eda avra>, Kal eveyKara) rt9 TO (f)dpfj,a- KOV, el Terpnrrat' el Se aij, rpt-^dra) 6 avQpu>rros. h Kal 6 Kplrcav, MXX' oluai, e^, eyuye, &> 2a)Kpares, ert T^Xtov elvat e?rl rot9 opecrt Kal ovrrw SeSvKevat,. KCU, apa eyu> olSa Kal aXXou9 Trdvv oi/re 7rtVovra9, eVetSaj' 7rapayye\0fj avrols, 8et7TV7?craj/Ta9 re /cat 7Tto^Ta9 ev ytiaXa, /cat gvyyevopevovs 1 y eviovs &v av rv^axriv eTTidvfjiovvres. aXXa /i^Sev eireiyov ert 7a/5 ey)(Q>pei. Kal 6 5'&)/cpttT779, -Ewc6V9 7', e^, w Kplrcov, eKel- voi re ravra TTOIOVCTIV, 01)9 a~y \eyew, ocovrat yap KepSaveiv ravra Troirja-avres, Kal eyojye ravra el- /cor&)9 ov Troirjcro)' ovSev yap olaat KepSaivew oXtyov varepov mdpuaKov, ev Kv\iKt (frepovra rerpifA/juevov. i&wv Se 6 ^(i)Kpdrr}^ TTOietv ; OvSfiv aXXo, , ?; TTiovra Trepuevat, ea)9 av tevo9 s /cat yu-a /cat T^/icov ot TroXXot Te&)9 /xev e TO /i^ $aKpveiv, h &)9 8e aSo/^ev irlvovrd re Kal TreirwKcra, ovKeri, dXX' e/Ltof) 76 ^Sia /cat avrov daraKrl e^capei, ra SaKpva, W9 T e^Ka\v^rdfjievo^ 1 aTre/cXaov efjiavrov ov yap Brj e/cetvov 76, %VXa TT)V epavrov rv-xyv, o'lov dvSpb^ eratpov ecrrepr)/j,evos efyv. 6 Be Kpirajv ert, irporepos efj,ov, 7rei8r) ov-y oto9 T' }v Kare%eiv ra SaKpva, e^avearr). ^7roXXoS&)/309 Se /cat ev TO) eprcpoa-dev %pov&> ouSev eTravero BaKpvcov, Kal Br) Kal rore ava/3pu^7/o-a/ievo9, /cXawv /cat djavaKrwv PILEDO. 191 ovoeva ovnva ov Kare/fXacre ' r&v Trapovraiv, irXr^v ye avrov 2o)Kpdrov<>. e/cetvo? Se, Ola, e'(j)r), 7rotetre, m o> dav^acrLOi. eya) /ievrot o^ iJKicrra rovrov eVe/ca ra? yvvaiKas aTreTre/jb-^ra, wa pr) rotavra ir\r]p.^e\oLev' real jap a/tiJKoa, OTL eV evfafdtf %prj reXevrdv. aXX' r)r) ra ovceX?/, ovTO) v eKivijdrj re Kal 6 avQpwJros e^eKakv^rev avrov, Kal 09 ra ofj,/jiara ea-rrjcrev" I8a)v Se 6 Kpircov ^vv\aj3e TO aropa" re Kal rovs o(f>0a\/jiov<;. LXVII. "H8e rj rekevrrj, w 'EfteKpares, rov erai- pov r)iuv eyevero, dvopos, &>? 77^49 (frai/Aev av, TCOV T.OTC wv e7reipd0'r)/j,ev a ' dpiarov Kal a'XXw? QaiScov, TT.] This was Phgedo the Elean, so called from his birth-place Elis, a city of Elis, in Peloponnesus. He was the intimate friend of Socrates and Plato, whence he is called by Cicer. de N. D. I. 33. and by Socrat. Synes. p. 23. 6 QatSaiv 6 TOV UXdrtavos. He afterwards became the founder of the Elean sect, and wrote many dialogues, none of which are extant. See Diog. Laert. II. 105. Gellius II. 18. Hesychius Milesius irf pi (Totyiav, p. 39 foil. Meurs. Suidas, in QalStav. Plato affixed his name to this dialogue, because he introduces him relating to Echecrates the discourse of Socrates on the immortality of the soul, which he delivered before drinking the hemlock. Echecrates, as appears from what follows, was a Phliasian, so called from Phlius, a town of Sicyonia. Echecrates the Phliasian is mentioned among the Pythagoreans by Diog. Laert. VIII. 46. and lamblich. in the Life of Pythagor. I. 35. This appears to be the same person as is here represented conversing with Phsedo. The connection be- tween the Pythagoreans and the town of Phlius, appears from Pausanias, II. 14., where we read that Hippasus the Phliasian, great-grandfather of Pythagoras, removed from his native place to Samos. Compare Diog. Laert. VIII. 1., and the commentators on the passage. b Ti ol>v Si) ecrnv STTO e.] So C. II. rt fa Ta \tx6* vra Kal TrpaxOeVra. Gorg. p. 508. C. (rKfirTtov, ti TO. avp.&a.lvovTa. ; Euthyphro, p. 15. A. a\\a ri 5^ TTOT' tiv efij TOUTO; In a similar manner Terence, Hecyr. I. 2, 22. Sed quid hoc negoti est modo qucB narravit mihi Bacchis? c oijTf tS>v iroKvr&v &\iacfia>v~\ This is a remarkable colloca- tion. The usual construction would be TU>C fcAiaa-iW iro\irS>v or 194 NOTES ON THE TUV vo\nMa- fficav is not omitted in a single MS., it seems proper to resort to another explanation. It appears to me that proper names, being in themselves sufficiently definite, and forming only a single notion with their substantives, do not require the article. Apolog. Socrat. C. XX. Kal trvxfv rj/j.uv fj tpv\r] 'Avnoxls nptnavevovaa, where no MS. has the article. In Meno, init. Kal ovx ^Kiora ol TOV to sojourn, is joined with 'AQ^va^e, to Athens ; since the Greeks frequently join verbs of rest to words signifying motion to a place; so as to unite two sentences in a single clause. Therefore the sense is this : for none of the Phliasian citizens now goes to Athens and sojourns there. Xenoph. Anab. I. 2, 2. irapTJa-av els 2a/>8eis, i. e. went to Sardis, and were there. Stephens therefore is wrong in interpreting 4irix<>>pi6fu' by the word " ventitare " go frequently. d osrts ta> T)fuv o16s r' 3jv~\ The sense being that no one was able to give us any certain information on that subject, Hein- dorf appears to have been correct in reading olas r' fa. Reisi- gius commentat. de &v particula, p. 113., considered osrts tu> f,v less elegant on account of the preceding perfect, a.iKo/j.fvci>v, '6sns oi6s r' rjt>. In the same manner, Euripid. Medea, v. 1306. OVK tcrnv fins rovr' &/ 'EA- Arjfls ywri erATj trod'. The words immediately following seem to confirm this construction : wA^y ye 5)] on Qa.pfj.aKoi' iriiav a.Tro6dfot. e Oi>8e TO irepl TTJJ S//(rjs &pa fn-.] Instead of T^ irtpl rrjv 8fKi7c, because, as Fischer has rightly observed, irepl with a genitive case is used, on account of the verb firvOfirBf. See note ( b ) on Apolog. Socrat. C. XX. Compare Matthiae, . 595. 5. a.b. f ravra /J.tv fiiuv fjyyetXe TIS] n*v is used without 5e following, because the idea, which would be contained in the corresponding clause of the sentence, is already expressed by the preceding words. See Crito, C. I. note 0), on the words : a\\a 5o/ce? /ueV /uo PHyEDO. 196 s iro\A< va-Ttpov'] Thirty days afterwards. This also appears from Xenoph. Mem. IV. 8, 2. h ri olv ^v TOVTO] That is, why was this so ? ' ty irpvuva fffT. T. Tr\oiov Tre'yuirotKTi] See CritO, C. I. k fffTe/j.fj.fvij'] That is, ornamented with laurel, which was sacred to Apollo. 1 irffj.Trovffi'] Send with solemnity. The word is peculiarly ap- plied to this ceremony. See Spanh. on Callimach. Hymn to Del. v. 279. m Iv $ 07jovs roffavras, Plutarch. irapOtvous eTrrct Kal iratSas fcrous, Pausan.), to be devoured by the Minotaur, in the Labyrinth. These are, ol Sis eirra e/celvoi. Theseus, being among the number of victims at the third period of tribute, killed the Minotaur, and returned safe with his companions, that is, Kal ecre re KOI avrbs tatiiQi}. See Plutarch's Life of Theseus, p. 6 foil. Pausan. I. 27. p. 67. Meur- sius Thes. 16. Compare Catullus Epithal. Pelei et Thetid. v. 76. Virgil JEn. VI. 20. Ovid. Metamorph. VIII. 170. n -Ofwpiav dird|esvfp \fyu~] This expression is frequently used respecting any thing already mentioned. We say : As I said before. See Apology, C. V. Zirfp \eyw. IL " ol apxovres That is, ol ecSe/co. See Apolog. Socr. C. XXVIL note (K). At the beginning of C. XXXI. of the Apo- logy, they are also called ol apxov-rts. b rives Kal Tro\\oi ye Xenoph. Hellen. I. 5, 22. Kal nvas atreKTeivav ov iroXXous. Plat. Gorg. p. 455. C. o>s 4yia nvas TU fj.e eJj/] The verbs elsievai and elsepxfffBat, like the Latin subire, are used of hope, joy, sorrow, pity, etc., taking possession of the mind. Eurip. Med. 931. elsrj\0e fj.' O?/CTOJ. Iphig. Aul. 491. IJL e\tos eijrjA.06. A little further on, a different construction is used: ovSev irdvv not l\teiv}>v elsyti, on which see Matth. .401. C. e evSainaiv yap fj.oi~\ Compare with this passage, Crito, C. I. note (s) on the words, us TjSfccs xadtvSfis. { ytvvalas~] With intrepidity. Plutarch Cimon, C. XIII. Taiv Se rut' Tlepnriav Kal 8ta/j.4i>a>v OVK ayevvus, Kparepa veffTij. The verb icaplaraaQai is often used in speaking of thoughts suggested by the circumstances in which a person may be placed. See, on this subject, Hemsterh. on Lucian. Contempl. . 13. Dorvill, Charit. p. 438. ed. Lips. Taylor, on Lysias, p. 83. ed. Reisk. = p. 42. edit, pr., who has collected several P1LEDO. 197 passages in which neither 8<5a, nor vpuyfta, nor any other word of the kind, is added. s &vev 9fias /uoipos] Without the design and will of the gods in his favour. For the words are followed by a\\a Kaxeicrf a.. e5 irpdfu>. Plutarch. An. Pravitas Sufficiat ad Infelicitatem, p. 499. B. a.irodvi]tTKovTa 5e avrbv (SoiKpctTTj) tfjLa.Kdpioi> ol &VTfs is ovS' ei> "AtSov deias &vev /j.oipas eff6fj.evov. h &s flicks civ 5d|eiev e?cc *. TT.] Heindorf was wrong in re- ferring irap6vTi to fj.oi. For the participle involves an indefinite person, which makes the sentence general. For the same reason, TO; TrtvQfi is not used, which Heindorf conjectured to be the true reading. The meaning is: as would appear natural to any one present on a sad and mournful occasion. The dative irapAv-n de- pends on Kbs, as in Eurip. Hippolyt. 1433. ai/Optairota-i Se ios is fv vrfs, K. T. A.] In this sentence the participle, agreeing in number and person with the verb, is added to explain the word ovrcas. Compare Sophocl. (Ed. Tyr. 10. rivi rp6irc l > KaOfO-Tare ; Seiffavres ^ TfS ; Xenoph. Anab. IV. I, 4. TTJV Se f^0o\^v 5e -Koiovvrai, a/ta ptv AaOe?!/ Treipc6- pevoi, a.fi.0. Se ^9aTrjs O.VTOV \6yos ia-rl (pvffiv, dr)poQo\owTa 7TTrj(/o?s lots ffTvyfpbv ffrvyepws, ovSe riv' avry iraiuva. KO.K&V emvcafjiav. On the words (5re /J.ei> More tie, see Hermann on Vigor, p. 792. Apollodorus was an attached friend and eager disciple of Socrates, emQvwr^s l^xvpus ainov, as is said by the author of the Apolog. Xenoph. . 28. Memorab. III. II. 17. He was of a fervid temperament, prone to sadness, and having his mind always fixed on serious concerns. At length he became still more gloomy, and even lost the power of preserving a s 3 . 198 NOTES ON THE manly steadiness and fortitude. Therefore he received the sur- name TOV HO.VIK.OV. See Sympos. p. 173. D. On the occasion of the death of Socrates, he not only wept much, but loudly wailed and cried out. See C. LXVI. It is related by ^Elian, V. H. 1. 16., that he brought to the prison a tunic and cloak, to array Socrates for death. m Kal KpmJjSouAos ] Crito, of whom an account is given in the notes on that dialogue, is said to have had four sons, Critobulus, Hennogenes, Epigenes, Ctesippus. See Laert. II. 121. But the Hermogenes here mentioned appears to have been the son of Hippo- nicus, and brother of Callias. Respecting him, see Heindorf on Cratyl. . 3., and the remarks of Schneider on Xenoph. Memor. IV. 8, 4. on Sympos. I. 3. Compare also Proclus, Schol. on Cratyl. p. 10. ed. Lips. Neither is Epigenes here to be understood as Crito's son, as there is no doubt of his being the same person as is mentioned in Apolog. Socrat. C. XXII. and Xenoph. Mem. III. 12, 2., and whose father was Antiphon the Cephisian. Respecting ^Eschines. the disciple of Socrates, see Diogen. Laert. II. 60 64. Antis- thenes is well known as adistinguished imitator of Socrates' fortitude and contempt of pleasure, and as the Founder of the sect of Cynics. Respecting him, see Laert. VI. 119. ^Elian, V. H. IX. 35. and elsewhere. Ctesippus the Pseanian, i. e. belonging Ha.ta.viq S-finy rris TlafSioviSos Se, ol^ai, yaOevfi'] The conjecture of Forster is not improbable, that by these words Plato meant to signify the sorrow which overwhelmed him at the approaching death of his illustrious master. The circumstance of Xenophon's name not being men- tioned here, is enumerated by Athenaeus, XL 15., among the ar- guments to prove that Plato and Xenophon were not on good terms. There is a learned discussion on this point by A. Bosckh, in commentat. academ. De simultate, quae Platoni cum Xenophonte intercessisse fertur. Berol. a. 1821. It has been rightly observed by Fischer that Xenophon could not with propriety have been mentioned here, since he had gone to Asia the year before the death PH/EDO. 199 of Socrates, and was still there. For fy Se xal K.Tf] ir&ov; and many similar passages have been collected by Elmsley on Eurip. Medea, v. 1219. Nearly similar is Eurip. Orest. 1100. Pyl. irieov viv, avd- 5e Qaaydvov rofids. Orest. nevia, -r^v txOpbv ft TI Tijuwp;j- . Plat. Phaedr. p. 248. A. Zinnias re ye ] Simmias and Cebes, the Thebans, are said to have been disciples of Philolaus, a celebrated Pythagorean, who is mentioned by Plato further on in this dialogue, as well as in many other places. They were familiar associates of Socrates (see Crito, C. IV.). It is therefore evident why Plato introduces them in a discussion with Socrates on the immortality of the soul. Com- pare Diogen. Laert. II. 124. 125. Phaedo appears to have been a Theban, not a Cyrenean. See Euhnken. on Xenoph. Mem. I. 2, 48. Euclides was the founder of the School of the Megareans, also called Eristici and Dialectici. See Laert. II. 106 110. He relates to Terpsion, of whom no particulars have been handed down, the conversation of Socrates with Thesetetus, in the dialogue of Plato, which is known by the name of the latter. Aristippus, the founder of the Cyrenaic sect, is too well known to require any mention here. The name of Cleombrotus the Ambraciot, is also well known. It is said that, on reading this dialogue, he threw himself into the sea; on which subject there is extant an elegant epigram of Callimachus, n. 24., which is also mentioned by Cicero, Tuscul. L 34. For, even from what follows, it may correctly be doubted whether another Cleombrotus is referred to in this passage. For the suspicion of some antient writers seems not groundless, that a reflection is here intended to be cast on Aristippus and Cleombrotus, for being so forgetful of Socrates through self-indulgence and luxury, as not to be present on this occasion ; although the island of ^Egina was only about 200 stadia from Athens, to which city they might easily have crossed over. See Diogen. Laert. II. 65. III. 36. Athenaeus, XII. p. 544. D. Demetrius Rhetor, de Elocut. . 306. Compare Mueller's JEginetica. p. 186. 200 NOTES ON THE III. a ir\i)o-tov yap 9jv ] The prison was near the market- place, where the Court of the Heliastee was held. Compare Plat. Legg. X. p. 908. A. b eus avoixdeln'] On this optative, which indicates a thing frequently repeated, see Matth. . 521. Buttm. . 126. 14. In the same manner, a little further on: eVeiS?; 5e avoixQf'ni'- every time, as soon as it was opened : which words Fischer misunderstood. c SiaTpif$ovTfs /xer' oAA^Aeoj'] That is, Sia\ey6/Jievoi irpbs riu.as avrovs, as he says in C. LXV. On the word aveifo-tro, see Scho- liast on Lucian ad Solcec. T. II. p. 54. -rb weepy* f}ov\ovrat ^ \afj./3dvfs rovro. Xprjrai yap nera Kal a\\a>v iroAAaij/ 6 H\dro>v 7eaQi}TiK.G>s ev <&ai$(avt, avfcpyfro, Keywv, y 6vpa oil TTO.VV irpcai, whence Fischer wrote, ov iriivv irptai, against all the MSS., and without the sense requiring it. For the words ou irptp are to be pronounced emphatically. On the form of this imperfect, see Matth. . 168. On the form irpia'ia'iTfpov, Thorn. Mag. Trptatrfpov /cat irpcvtTaTOi" a^orfpa yap Qou/cuSi'SijS" Kpe'iTrta yap ravra TOV irpca'Catrepov Kal Trpta'iairaTov. But this opinion is successfully controverted by Eiihnken on Timseus. Glossar. p. 227. Compare Buttmann. Ausfiihr. Griech. Grammatik. T. I. p. 264. d osirfp eludei vtraKotifiv'] On the signification and use of the verb inraKovfiv, see Crito, C. I. note ( c ). Immediately afterwards, instead of the common reading, eVijue'i/eu', we have restored irepi- Hfi>fit> from the best MSS. The meaning of both words has been examined by Bekker, Lectionn. Philostratt. p. 89., and is thus ex- plained, by FT. A. Wolf, on this passage : " ^Trifitveiv is to wait, to await patiently the result of any thing ; irepi^4vfiv is generally to stay waiting for a person, to await the arrival of a person. Hence the latter is commonly used absolutely, whereas the former is much more frequently joined with ecus Uv." I am therefore sur- prised that this commentator approved of fwtfj.fveiv, and rejected irepilj.fv(iv, which seems to be used here with singular propriety. Further on, C. LXV. r)/j.as 8' ev. A little before: TrepifiJ.fvofj.ev olv ecus avoixdfirj rb Sey/jincrripiov. Sympos. in. ou irfptij.evf'is ; Kayk eiruTras irfpiefj.ftva. Rep. I. at the beginning, &ceAew rbv Tra?5a trfpi^fivai e /ceAeCtrai. Xenoph. Cyropaed. IV. 2, 9. Kal rovs "fpicaviovs irept^vftv tufKtvfff, Iva. afta loitv. Ibid. VII. 5, 39. avSpfs $i\oi, irept- (ifVfTf, fees "r"bv 6x\ov Siuff xptvov eTrtffx^c] That is, he returned not long afterwards. Charmid. p. 160. E. Kal fcs tirurx&v e<>7j. Alci- biad. II. p. 142. D. Phsedo, p. 95. E. avxvbv \p6vov eiri(rx, is bad, since ?e. Xenoph. Anab. III. 3. 7. tptvyovrfs SfJ.a erirpoiffKOV. Republ. VII. p. 521. C. r6Se evvoia \tyoiv Spa. 1 'ns &TOTTOV ] Thorn. Mag. &TOTTUV ov fj.6voi> rb &\oyov, a\\a Kal rb Qaufj.aaTbv Kal TrapdSo^ov. Tl\aTuKe Trpbs T. 8.] How wonderful is the rela- tion between pleasure and pain in this, that they will not be present with a man at once, etc. For rip, with an infinitive, is in this that, or because that, as in Rep. V. p. 471. D. II. p. 361. C. IV. p. 429. C. n &sirep olv Kal avrcp fjioi eoiKfv, irei5)i inrb T. 8.] The colon, commonly put after soitcfv, is erroneous, as is well remarked by Heindorf, Sophist, p. 306. For eot/ce /uoi is never used instead of (paivfTai /JLOI, SoKt? not. Even after these words : avry /uo foiKev, (paiverai is added by a kind of negligence in the construction. Sophist, p. 225. D. SOKW itfyv T. 7. 8. Ka\eicr6ai Kara yv^-^v r^v efJL^v ox erepov a8o\etrxiKov. Laches, p. 192. C. TOVTO TO'IVW ffioiye (paiverai, OTI ov iraffa ye, us eyif/Jiai, Kap-repia avSpia aoi ~\ Xenoph. GEcon. VIIL 10. on? 6^ 5e'?; tv X 'yadt, fj.-f]-r' ffj.f, y\.6pKp. 6 vwl 8ta\.~] The words are to he construed thus: is ovros 6 ~S.u3Kp6.rtis o vvvl 5ta\. Kal 5. eK. r. A. eyitt eifii. " I cannot persuade Crito," he says, " that the Socrates who is now conversing with him and you, and who arranges and deter- mines what is said, i. e. who is endued with spirit and intellect, is myself." This passage is spoken of by Cicero, Tuscul. I. 43. h epeara, S-fj, irais fj.e Gairrrj] If the common reading, irus Set /te edirreiv, was found in any MSS. by Stephanus, there can be no doubt that it arose from an interpretation of what is called the deliberative subjunctive, of which the use in the third person is rather uncommon. Crito had before asked Socrates : 6a.Trrwii.ev Se pd^r) re Kal <=tca.irfi\i]ffas r)]i> fofj.lai' eir J iAAoj- TpctirijTat vofUfi Trapa/j.v0ias 8e Kal TttiGovs /uj)8e ev irposStticp ; Sophist, p. 225. A. rf 5e Aifyois irpbs \6yovs ri ris, 3> Qeairrire &\\o ftirri ; Meno, p. 92. E. aAAi . Protag. p. 348. D. irepuitiv f^reT, ory eTtiSfi^rai Kal pet)' '6rov ftf/Battaffrirai. Rep. I. p. 348. E. ovKert paSiov ^X eit> '6 ri ns etirri. Aristoph. Nubb. 438. iro? ris vyri ; Sophocl. CEd. Col. 170. Bvyartp, irol rls tppovrioos eAflp; Compare Matthias Gr. .516. 3. ' els fj.a.Kaptav Si) ripas] Compare p. 107. D. ovros &yeiv firi- X'pe^ s 8^ riva rowov. k &\\cas A67-] i. e. fxciTTji'. 1 eyyuriiracrde olv fj,e irp. Kp.~\ 'Eyyvatrdai riva is to undertake to deliver up a person to another, to become bail for a person, to pledge one's-selffor another. Demosthen. p. 609. ed. Reisk. ravd" 1 inrb TTJS eavrov yvvaticbs 6pa>ro iroiS,v, %v Sis e\ev9epovs eyyvrio-aro. Ibid. 899. [idprvpas v/juv irapaffx^ffOfj.ai, u>s OVK r\yyvri(TaiJ,T)v eyw rbv napu-evovra. Ibid. p. 1349. tyyvtavra rets erepaiv Ovyarepas 204 NOTES ON THE &s eawrov otia-as. As the Greeks use the phrases / ex^os e'x0aip e "'> an( i others of the kind, so we here find iyyvaadai eyyvriv. And since eyyvucrBai takes an accusative of the person, it is also correct to say tyyvvv eyyvacrOai nva, in a similar manner as fx^os fx^ a ' l P eiv Ttvd, fiiffos niasiv riva, and other expressions of the same nature are used. m OVTOS juej> yap $ juV aapa.fjieve'iv] Understand yyyvljffaro. ayavaKrrj, be indignant, troubled, or grieved. Further on, C. LXVL 'Airo\\68a>pos 5e Kal iv T<$ eftirpoaQev XP^"V oi>$ep eiraveTo SaKpvtav, Kal 5$7 Kal rJre K\dcai> Kal ayavaKTuv ovOtva ovTiva ov KaTtK\afff. n &s ?; irporiBfTai Karopvrrfi] The verbs eK^e'peic, Karopvr- rfiv and irporiBeffOat are here used in their proper sense as applied to funerals. See Kirchmann, de Funerib. Roman, lib. II. c. 1. and I. 12. The middle verb is accounted for by referring it to Crito himself as conducting the arrangements of the funeral, which he had undertaken to do. See Etirip. Alcest, 378, where Admetns, being about to die, reproaches in these words his father, who refuses to die in his stead : rotyap 6dvois, ot 77)/Jo/3o ^ov\ij-rat. Liiician. de I/uctu. . 27. fttra Tavra Se \ovaavrts avrbv Kal i*.vpu> Ttp Ka.\XiffT&> xplffavrfs rb aufta Kal ff-re^avuxravres roTs wpaiots avdeffi TrpuTiOfvTai. oil n&vov els avrb TOVTO~\ Not only in that respect, that is, in respect rov (ify /foAais \eyeiv. With irMj/u/u eA.es imderstand Imr. LXV. a aviffTaro els olK-ripd TI] That is, he rose and went into a certain chamber. Aristoph. Plut. 683. 4irl -rty x^fpav -ryv TTJX addpris aviffTa.fi.cn. Eurip. Heraclid. 59. aviffrcurOai (re XPV ct 's "Apyos. These words are to be explained in the same manner as we explained iirixu>pideiv 'AB^va^e, C. I. On the word ofajyia, which is used for separate parts of a building according to circum- stances, see Valckenar on Ammon. III. 4. and Dorvill. on Charit. p. 87. Further on, the fuller construction would have been: irfpiffievonev ofiv wore fj.fv irpbs fi/j.as avrovs S. Tore Se . But Tore n*v is often omitted before rare Se, in the same manner as 6 fiev is sometimes omitted before 6 tie. See Hermann Viger. p. 768. b Svo yap ai>T(p we?*] Compare note on Apol. Socr. C. XXIII. PH^EDO. 205 c Kal al oliteiai ywa?Kes 0.$.] Nothing can be more fabulous than the assertion that Socrates had two wives at one time. This passage has, however, been so far abused as to be urged in proof of that position, among others by Tiber. Hcmster: who, in his note on Lucian. Halcyon. T. I. p. 184., and in the Preface, p. xxxiii., affirms that it is clear from these words of Plato, that both the wives of Socrates, Xanthippe and Myrto, survived their husband. To prove this, he argues that ywcuiccs ought to be translated wives. This is fully refuted by lo. Luzac in Lect. Att. p. 38 foil., where he has investigated the subject thoroughly, and proved the futility of such a supposition. Luzac translates oltcf7at ywalitfs women of the house and family, female relations or domestics ; for if Plato intended to speak of wives, he would have merely said, at ywattcfs. not at o'lKflai ywcuKfs. Almost the same arguments have been employed against the opinion of Hcmsterh. by Heindorf, on this passage. d ov tca.ra'yt'dlxro/j.a.t ye yap fKflv6 7^ KaTa.yvieffOfj.ai, &s ov yt srtpov. Tim. p. 19. D. Alcibiad. 2. p. 143. C. Demosth., Mid. c. 2. ov yap av Karayvoiiiv vpiav ovSet>6s. K rS>v apx^vrcav'] Understand ruv eVSffca. ' a 3\6oi> 77e'A.\a>v] What I have come announcing. This reading is preferable to &yye\>v. See Bernhardy Synt. p. 370. Hermann and Elmsley on Eurip. Med. 1024. Bornemann on Xenoph. Anab. VII. 7, 17. s KOI irapa. iravra juoi rov xp& vov ~\ The preposition irapa is often thus used to signify duration of time. Xenoph. Mem. II. 1, 2. Trapa rrjv eiceivov apx^v, under his government, while he governed. The sense is : throughout the whole thirty days which I have passed in prison, he visited me, and sometimes talked with me. h -rpityarw 6 a.v6pepwrros is generally thus used in speaking of a common and mean person : as here of the attendant and minister of the Eleven, and further on of the executioner. The seed of the hemlock was bruised, in order to extract the juice. See Plin. H. N. XXV. 13. 1 KCU |i<77.] Stcphanus has correctly rendered this: et quidem nonnullos suis atuoribus potitos. k ov5e^ yap olfjiai /cepSaiveii'] On this use of the Present Infini- tive, see note on Crito, C. XIV. ; and on the circumstance itself; see Antonin. IV. 47., and the note of Gataker. A little further on, the words Trap' floury are not superfluous, but are added to define T 206 NOTES ON THE more accurately the meaning of o 8', &TOIJC- Tt'ipto ydp, ov 6i'fjiciffOfj.ai. Sympos. p. 175. C. "rbv ovv 'AydSwa, rirvxavav yap taxastov KaraKei/jievov, /j.6vov, eTp' f elirov, fUv 8^, 5 lev??, Ka\ws yap \eytis' rotovros &>v 6 "Epcas riva XP*' lal ' *X ft T0 ^ s w6pitois; b ews 6,v ffov Odpos.l Sou is not to be changed here into aoi. See note on Crito, C. XV. Kep. VII. p. 518. C. Symp. p. 215. E. c Kal OVTUS avrb iroi^cret] "And thus, while you are walking, it will operate of itself, so as to require nothing else." floKlv, like the Latin facere, is used respecting the operation of medicines. See Dioscorides, C. 1. 95. iroifi irpbs (papfjiaita, is efficacious against poisons. d Kal fj.d\a ?A.ea>s] Very cheerfully. This use of Kal /uaAa is frequent, Kal having an intensive force. A little further on, Kal e ravpr)8bv wro^Ae^as] That is, looking at him with firm coun- tenance, fixing his eyes steadily on him. See Wyttenb. Epist. Crit. p. 46. The sense of the subsequent words is : Is it lawful to pout- forth to any God a libation from this potion ? f fj.erptov flvai IT.] That is, to be sufficient. B 3iritrx6nf'-'os~\ Having put the cup to his lips, which is the force of the middle voice. For tirexfi" iivl iridv is to offer, or present a potion to anyone, as Arist. Nubb. 1385. Apoll. Khod. I. PH/EDO. 207 472. i? Ka ^ tTitTX^t* evos wAfov SfcVas a/j-iporfpr/ffi trivf. Stesichor. in Athcn. XL p. 499. B. v irlfv tiriff^^tvos. '' Kare\fLv rb fify 5aKp.] Scarcely could we refrain jrom weep- ing. Soph. Philoctet. 349. ov iro\i>v yj>6vov /.i ttrea-xpv JU.TJ [*( vaua"ro\fn> raxi''. See Hermann on Viger. p. 810 foil. 1 ey/caAmJ/ajUefos] Covering my face with my cloak. See Dor- vill on Cliarit. p. 274. k u'iov avSpos] That is, ori TOiovrov. 1 ouSfi'a ovrva ov KaTKAa, where see Jacobs, and in Addit. ad Athen. p. 277. m ofa iroifire] This is an expression of wonder and displeasure. Euthyphr. p. 15. E. ofa irate?*, Si IroTpe, air' e'ATri'Sos jue (cara/8o- Aai/'. Charmid. p. 166. C. Alcibiad. I. p. 113. E. n OVTOS 6 Sous rb (?>.] These woi'ds are thought by some critics to be a gloss, but without sufficient reason. For in familiar dis- course, such a repetition, when consistent with perspicuity, is not inadmissible. Besides, if these words were omitted, the colloca- tion would be: /cat a,aa OVTOS ftyawri/jifvos avrov. SiaAnraij'] Leaving some interval, he now and then looked at. Further on, oAiyof xpfivov 8ia\nri> e/afi]87j. The word oia\nra:v is also used simply, see Bast. Epist. Grit. p. 178. P tiravi&v o#r&)s] Advancing his hand higher and higher to- wards the vital parts. 'i aurbs 5}irT6To] Socrates himself also touched his limbs as they were becoming cold, and said that he should die when, etc. For so these words are to be understood with Fischer. Others refer them to the attendant, but incorrectly; at least Forstcr's conjecture, a&dis, must be adopted in that case. On the euphemism r6re oi'xVeTai, see Bergler on Alciphr. I. 232. r wepl rb 7)Tpoy] Moeris: ?irpov. rbv inrb rbv o/jLa\l)i' ro-nuv 208 NOTES ON THE "ArriKws" viroydffrpiov 'E\\riviKws. Timseus : -//rpov 6 /j.erav 6/u- v firetpad.] This passage is considered corrupt by Wyttenbach and Heindorf. The former suggested the reading rS>v ircairore. The latter thought that the whole passage ought to be remodelled thus: avdpds, us ijfj.e7s Qalfieir &v, Travruv, r6re us firftpd.6rifj.ev, aplarov Kal &\\ r6re, in which words there must be some corruption. Perhaps we ought to write. oi>5pds, us (pat/iff av, r6rt 6' wv firftpd9ri/j.fv apiarov, Kal &\\(as tbp. a man both then, when he was dying, the best of all, and through his whole life the wisest and most just. Thus the praise of courage and endurance, which were most conspicuous towards the end of his life is giveii to Socrates: for apurros is well known to be peculiarly applicable to a man of courage and fortitude. Wisdom and justice are also attributed to him as virtues which he cultivated through his whole life-time. In which words an animated picture is placed before the eyes of the reader, of all the virtues for which this illustrious sage was distinguished. Therefore Kal &\\ws is re- ferred to the foregoing r6re ff, as in C. LXV. Xojuai iroiijaat avrrjv, 3 That his father was by no means a wealthy man is evident, from the fact that Socrates, though very economical, was always poor. 4 Plat. Crito, c. XII. 5 Pans. I. 22, and IX. 35. Compare Diog. II. 19. and the LIFE OF SOCRATES. v Crito, a wealthy Athenian, who subsequently became an intimate friend and disciple of our philosopher, having discovered the eminent talents of Socrates, in- duced him to give up the profession of his father. 1 Various anecdotes preserved in Plutarch and Porphyry rest on too feeble historical evidence to throw any light on the history of Socrates. To this class belongs pro- bably the following story in Porphyry, 2 who being attached to the new Platonic system which formed such a contrast to the sobriety of the Attic sage, was an adversary of the latter. Socrates, we are told by him, was in his youth compelled by his father to follow the art of a sculptor against his inclination, was very dis- obedient, and often withdrew himself from the paternal scholiast to the Clouds of Aristoph. p. 170. Timon, therefore, in Diogenes calls him with a sneer of contempt \i3roK6oQ. 1 Diog. II. 20. " Demetrius of Byzantium says that Crito, at- tracted by the charms of his mind, withdrew him from the work- shop and instructed him." Suidas, Tom. II. under Crito, p. 377. 1 do not think that there is any reason for disbelieving this account. Meiners, indeed, (Geschickte der Wissenschaften, &c. Vol. II. p. 354.) considers this to be a mere calumny of Aristoxenus ; but it is Demetrius and not Aristoxenus, who is mentioned by Diogenes as his authority. 2 His charges against Socrates he derived from Aristoxenus, a disciple of Aristotle. Aristoxenus himself could not deny that Socrates had been obedient to the laws, and had always been just, yet he accuses our philosopher of being guilty of violent anger and shameful dissoluteness. The most unobjectionable evidence of the most credible contemporaries sufficiently refutes such calum- nies. A detailed examination and refutation of the charges of Aristoxenus will be found in Luzac's Lectt.Att. edited by Sluiter, Leyden 1809. p. 27. foil. But why Aristoxenus brought these charges against Socrates, will be seen from our subsequent de- scription of the character of the latter. a 3 vi LIFE OF SOCRATEb. roof. In the same manner Plutarch, 1 among other things, relates, that the father of Socrates had been warned not to compel his son to follow any particular pursuit, as he had a guardian spirit who would lead him in the right way. Thus Crito was the first who raised Socrates into a higher sphere. Whether he had before this time en- joyed the instructions of Archelaus, a disciple of Anaxa- goras, cannot be decided by historical evidence, although it is asserted by Porphyry that he was a disciple of Archelaus as early as his seventeenth year. The first study that engaged the attention of Socrates, and to which he applied with great zeal, was that of physics. " When I was young," says he in Plato's Phaedo, 8 " I had an astonishing longing for that kind of know- ledge which they call physics." He sought after wisdom where his fellow-citizens sought it ; in the schools of the vaunting sophists, and of the most celebrated philosophers of his age, as well as in the writings and songs of former sages. Parmenides, Zeno, Anaxa- goras and Archelaus among the philosophers, Evenus of Paros, Prodicus and others among the sophists, are recorded as his teachers. 3 1 De genio Socratis. Francfort, Ed. 1620. Tom. II. p. 889. 2 Page 96. A. 3 Zeno of Elea, about the year 460. B. c., at the age of about 40, undertook with his teacher Parmenides, a journey to Athens, for the purpose of meeting Socrates. Whether Socrates ever heard Anaxagoras himself, or only studied his writings, cannot be asserted with historical certainty. That he heard Archelaus is attested by Cicero, Tuscul. V. 10. Evenus of Paros instructed Socrates in .poesy. Compare Fischer's remark on the 5th chap- LIFE OF SOCRATES. vii Assisted by these masters he made considerable pro- gress in mathematics, physics, and astronomy; the value of which he afterwards confined to very narrow limits. 1 Some of his opinions in natural philosophy, which Aristophanes distorts to suit his purpose, must perhaps be referred to this early period of his life. In the instance in which the comic poet 2 makes him say, that the sky is a furnace, and men the coals in it, the real assertion probably was, that the sky was a vault cover- ing the earth quite in accordance with the spirit of the cosmological systems of the time ; and that he had studied the cosmological system of Anaxagoras with particular attention, is evident ; for he himself 3 tells us, that he hoped to find in it information concerning the origin of things. As Socrates himself gives us ter of Plato's Apology. He had also read the writings of Herac- litus. "What I did understand, was excellent; I believe also that to be excellent which I did not understand." Diog. Laert. II. 22. Plato, Cratylus, p. 402. A. foil. Prodicus taught him the art of speaking. Plat. Meno, p. 96. D. Aeschines III. C. : icai Tavra t a Xsyw UpoSiicov trrri rov ffo<}>ov aTrrjxrjfiara (reminis- cences). A long register of teachers of Socrates which, however, must not be taken strictly, occurs in Maxim. Tyr. Diss. XXII. [It would appear, however, from a statement in Xenophon's Symposium, that Socrates never received any direct instruction in philosophy ; since Socrates is introduced as saying to Callias, who was a great friend and patron of the sophists, ail av tTriaicw- Trrac, -i^aQKara^poviav, on ffv p.iv HpuTayopq. Tt TTO\V apyvpiov ficwKac; iiri ffoQiif. KO.I Fopyi^ jcai HpolllOp icai aXXoig TroXXoTf, r'maQ c' op^tc, avrovpyovQ nvag rrjg 0i\0(To0iac ovrac. Symp. I. 5 ED.] 1 Xenoph. Mem. IV. 7. 2 Clouds, v. 94. 3 Plat. Phaedo, p. 97. B. foil. viii LIFE OF SOCRATES. in this passage an explanation of the reasons, which afterwards induced him to think so little of this system, he shall speak for himself. " I once heard a person reading in a book which he said was written by Anaxa- goras, and saying that reason arranged all things, and was the cause of them. With this cause I was much delighted, and in some manner it appeared to me quite correct, that reason should be the cause of all things. If it be true, I thought, that reason arranges all things, it arranges and places every thing in the place where it is best. Now if any body wanted to find the cause by which every thing arises, perishes, or exists, he must find the manner in which a thing exists, suffers or acts best. For this reason I thought only that investigation the object of which is the most excellent and the best, to be adapted for man both for himself as well as other things; and he who succeeded in this, must at the same time know that which is bad, for both are objects of the same science. Reflecting upon this subject I was delighted, as I thought I had found in Anaxagoras a teacher after my own heart, who could open my eyes to the causes of things. Now he will first tell thee, I thought, whether the earth is flat or round ; and after he has done this, he will also show thee the cause and the necessity of it, and whichever is the better, he will prove that this quality is the better one for the earth. If he tell thee the earth is in the centre, he will at the same time show thee that it is better for it to be in the centre. I was willing, if he would show me this, not to suppose any other kind of causes, and hoped LIFE OF SOCRATES. ix soon to receive information about the sun, the moon, and other stars, pointing out the mutual relation of their rapidity, their rotation and other changes ; and how it was better that each should act as it acts, and suffer as it suffers. For as he said that they were arranged by reason, I did not think that he would assign any other cause to things than that their actual qualities were the best. As he assigned to all things their causes, and ascertained them in all things in the same manner, I thought he would represent that which is the best for each, as the good common to all. I would not have given up my hopes for any thing ; with great avidity I took up his books, and read them as soon as I found it possible, in order that I might quickly learn the good and the bad. But, my friend, 1 I was soon disappointed in this hope ; for in the progress of my reading, I dis- covered that the man no longer applied his principle of reason, and mentioned no causes by which to classify things ; but declared air, ether, water, and many other strange things to be causes. This appeared to me just as absurd, as if somebody should say, Socrates does every thing which he does, with reason; and afterwards endeavouring to point out the motive of every single action, he should say in the first place that I am now sitting here because my body is composed of bones and of sinews, 2 &c. I should have liked very much to have 1 He is speaking to Cebes. 2 TXtvpa with Plato does not mean nerves, which signification it only received through Galenus. x LIFE OF SOCRATES. obtained some instruction, from whomsoever it might have proceeded, concerning the nature of this cause. But as I did not succeed, and as I was unable to find it out by myself, or to learn it . from any one else, I set out on a second voyage in search of the cause." The rest are Plato's own thoughts. Besides this, Socrates was greatly attracted by the intercourse of women of talent, and courted their society for the higher cultivation of his own mind and heart. He, like that powerful demagogue on whom his con- temporaries bestowed the highest admiration for the power of his eloquence, was instructed in the art of speaking by Aspasia ; x and Diotima of Mantinea taught 1 Plat. Menex. p. 235. E. She is also said to have written a poem to Socrates. Athen. V. p. 219. [It is douhtful whether any historical weight can be attached to the passage in the Menexemus. The whole may probably be looked upon as a fiction ; although it can hardly be supposed ac- cording to Ast, that Plato meant to deride Pericles and Aspasia. Plato's real object appears to be to ridicule those demagogues, who think themselves equal to Pericles, although they cannot compose a speech for themselves, and are obliged to learn by heart such as have been composed for them by others. All the other passages of the antients, in which Socrates is said to have learnt the art of speaking from Aspasia, are probably taken from this passage of the Menexemus, and therefore prove nothing. Reiske, on Xenophon's Memorabilia, II. 6. 36, likewise con- siders the statement in the Menexemus to be made ironically ; in which opinion he is supported by Stallbaum and Loers, the late editor of the Menexemus. As for the influence Diotima is said to have had over Socrates, it seems just as uncertain. It is only mentioned by Pkto, and those who copied from him, and is probably of the same nature as the story about Aspasia. ED.] LIFE OF SOCRATES. xi him love ; l by which as Fr. Schlegel justly observes, 2 we must not understand transient pleasures, but the pure kindness of an accomplished mind; a circumstance which is of importance in forming a proper estimate of many peculiarities in the doctrine and method of Socrates. 1 Plat. Syrnpos. p. 201. D. That Diotima is not to be ranked among the iraipai, has been shown by Fr. Schlegel Griechen itnd Romer. 2 Griechen und Romer, p. 254. LIFE OF SOCRATES. CHAPTER II. SOCRATES, however, was unable to obtain any satisfac- tory knowledge from the philosophers and teachers of his time. Dissatisfied with the pretended wisdom of the cosmologists and sophists, he entirely abandoned all speculative subjects, 1 and devoted his attention to human affairs, according to his own expression, 2 i. e. to researches in practical philosophy. He, therefore, in 1 Diog. II. 21. "When he saw that the science of physics (QvffiKi) fcwpia) was not adapted for us, he began to philosophize on moral subjects in the workshops and in the markets, and said he was seeking "Orri TOI tv jutyapoicri KO.KOV r ayaOov rt rkrvKrai.'' The latter is a verse of Homer (Od. IV. 392), which, as we are told by Sextus Empiricus contra Mathemat. VII. 21., Socrates was constantly in the habit of quoting. 2 'AvOfHiJTrtia, res humance, are here opposed to Saiftovioic, rebus divinis (Xenoph. Mem. I. 1. 12 and 16), which he also calls ovpavia (Mem. IV. 7. 6.) 'AvdpttiTrsia are things which directly relate to man as such, as questions on the destination of man, his duties, hopes, and in short all moral subjects ; Saifjiovia, resdivincB, are of a speculative nature, and comprehend either phy- sical or metaphysical questions, and have no direct relation to man as such. This distinction must be well borne in mind, as other- wise many assertions of Socrates might appear very paradoxical. Cicero Acad. I. 15. " ut coelestia vel procul esse a nostra cog- nitione censeret, vel si maxime cognita essent, nihil tamen ad bene (morally) vivendum conferre." LIFE OF SOCRATES. xiii Plato, calls his wisdom a human wisdom. 1 Socrates, according to Cicero's expression, 2 called philosophy down from heaven to the earth, i. e. he gave it a practical tendency, whereas before, it had taken a direction com- pletely speculative. Previous to Socrates, philosophers were for the most part occupied in cosmological re- searches : morals were entirely uncultivated ; and al- though the Pythagorean institution, a moral and politico- religious order, had devoted very great care to morals, yet its doctrines had already fallen very much into oblivion ; and besides as an order it had a direct influence only on its own members. But the greatest shock that morality had received, came from the sophists, a class of men who flourished shortly before and at the time of Socrates, and who boasted of being in the possession of every kind of knowledge ; but were, however, not con- cerned about truth, but merely about the appearance of it, who by their eloquence knew how to give to a bad cause the appearance of a good one, 3 and from a love of money gave instruction to every one in this art. 4 ivT) )e vetav TrXovffiaiv 6vS6KOK\rje, ffcxjiwrtpoc ci Evpnri^Tjt:, dvcpiav ct irav- Suidas, see ffo6^. b 3 xviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. and that the Pythia replied, that there was none wiser. It is, indeed, surprising that Chasrephon, a friend and disciple of our philospher, who besides is described both by him and by Plato in the Charmides 1 as a violent and passionate man, should have received this answer to his question. Plessing, 2 therefore, ventures the bold con- jecture, that Socrates himself had contributed to this imposition, in order thereby to gain authority, and to prepare his plan for changing the form of government in Athens : for this was, according to him, the end for which Socrates was constantly and deliberately striving. This hypothesis, however, is too derogatory to the cha- racter of Socrates to be admitted without further reasons. The passionate nature of Chserephon renders it more probable that he was guilty of an untimely and extra- vagant zeal to raise the fame of his master. But on the other hand, it is also possible, that Socrates, even at that time had acquired so great a reputation, that his favour was no longer a matter of indifference to the crafty Pythia. This declaration of the god of Delphi, together with the application which Socrates made of it, is unques- tionably the most important fact in the history of his life, as it gives us a clew to his whole subsequent conduct and mode of thinking. From this time Socrates considered himself as a messenger peculiarly favoured by the Deity, standing under its immediate guidance, and J p. 153. B. 2 In his Osiris und Sokrates, p. 186, foil. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xix sent to the Athenians, as he expresses himself in the Apology of Plato, to instruct and improve them. 1 " But that I was sent," says he, 2 " as a divine messenger to the state, you may see from what I will tell you. Assuredly it is not a human feature in me that I have neglected all my own interests, and for a great number of years, have not concerned myself about my domestic 1 [Delbriick, in his Sokrates laments that there should be many even among the admirers of Socrates in the present day, who, like some of his contemporaries and his judges, take the oracle for a fiction, and his appeal to it for irony. With as much reason, Mr. D. thinks, might Thomas a Kempis, or Pascal, or Fenelon, be suspected of an affectation of humility, when they confirm their convictions on sacred subjects by quotations from the Bible. Like them, Socrates was in the best sense of the word a mystic ; and the answers of the Delphic oracle exercised an influence on the weal and woe of Greece, similar to that which the Bible exerts on the destinies and proceedings of Christendom. But Mr. Thirlwall remarks in the sixth number of the " Philolo- gical Museum" (p. 587), from which the preceding quotations from Delbriick's work have been taken, " that it may be readily conceived, and seems to be confirmed by several authentic ac- counts, that Socrates really considered himself as fulfilling a divine mission by his life and labours. But that this idea was first suggested to him by the Delphic oracle is, to say the least, extremely improbable, though such an accidental occurrence (for who but a sincere Pagan can believe it to have been more) may have contributed to confirm the impression, and may have given it a definite form in his mind. But surely his character and pursuits had been already fixed, before Chserephon could have ventured to inquire whether any man better deserved the title of wise. No additional dignity is imparted to his self-devo- tion, by considering it as the effect of such a casual inspiration. It was the spontaneous, necessary, result of his moral and intel- lectual constitution, and needed not to be connected with the eternal order of Providence by a tie so frail as a perishable super- stition." ED.] 2 Plato, Apolog, c. xviii. xx LIFE OF SOCRATES. affairs, and am only anxious for your welfare, going to every one of you and admonishing you, like a father or elder brother, to follow the path of virtue." 1 The same oracle had, perhaps, some influence on his belief in a daemon, which restrained him in doubtful cases; of the existence of which, he himself, as well as his friends, were firmly convinced, and whose nature we shall now proceed to examine more closely. 1 Compare Plat. Alcib. II. and de Re pub I. VI. LIFE OF SOCRATES, CHAPTER III. THE daemon of Socrates has at all times caused great trouble to the commentators; at which we cannot be astonished, since even the friends and disciples of Socrates were ignorant of its real nature. Timarchus, having consulted the oracle of Trophonius about it, received no satisfactory answer. Simmias asked Socrates about the nature of his daemon, but received no answer at all; perhaps because Socrates himself thought it something quite incomprehensible. From that time he did not propose any other question on this subject. 1 The explanations of the more antient commentators are al- most all of a supernatural kind. The greater number of the ecclesiastical fathers declared it to be the devil ; 2 Andrew Dacier, 3 to be a guardian angel. It has also been attempted to explain this mental phenomenon in a 1 Plutarch de Deemonio Socratis, p. 583. Cams observes very much to the point (Geschichte der Psychologic, p. 236) : " There are many things of which Socrates would not form any clear idea, such as dreams ; others of which he could not, such as his daemon." 2 Tertullian de anima, I. Aiunt Daemonium illi a puero ad- haesisse, pessimum ve vera psedagogum. 3 In the preface to his French translation of some dialogues of Plato. xxii LIFE OF SOCRATES. natural way ; and can it be wondered at, if the results were mere absurdities ? Such an hypothesis is preserved by Plutarch in his essay on the daemon of Socrates, in which it is said to have been a mere divination from sneezing ; an hypothesis which even in modern times has found an advocate in M. Morin. 1 Socrates himself certainly did not understand by it a mere prudence acquired by experience, as has been asserted by others, for the very name of daemon, which, according to the definition of Aristotle, 2 means either the Deity itself, or a work of the Deity, suggests to us something beyond the sphere of common experience. To suppose with Plessing, 3 that the daemon of Socrates was a fiction, which would enable him, by the high opinion he would thereby acquire, to realise his plan of changing the form of government in Athens, is an hypothesis which rests on too arbitrary grounds, and is too contrary to the veracious character of Socrates, ever to be adopted by any intelligent scholar. But notwithstanding these opposite modes of expla- nation, it may not be so very difficult to arrive at a just view of the genius of Socrates by an historico-psycho- logical mode of enquiry. It was perhaps nothing more than a strong presentiment, which being directed by an accurate knowledge of things, led him to form his 1 In the M&noires de litterature tires des Registres de VAcade, mie Royale des inscriptions et des belles lettres, Tome IV. p. 333. a Paris 1723. 2 Rhetor. II. 23. ) 06f f/ Qtov tpyov. 3 Osiris und Sokrates, p. 185. foil. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxlii conclusions from cause to effect by analogy, without his being perfectly conscious of the process. Such an exalted feeling of presentiment is often found in persons of a lively imagination and refined organization ; and that Socrates belonged to this class will be seen hereafter. But Socrates himself actually considered it as an inward divine voice that restrained him from engaging in unpro- pitious undertakings. This hypothesis seems to be fully confirmed, not only by the universal belief of antient Greece and Rome in guardian-spirits, who attended men from their birth, but also by the manner in which Socrates himself speaks of this daemon, and by the examples which are recorded of its influence. The principal passages which refer to this daemon are in the Theages 1 and Apology 2 of Plato, and in the Memora- bilia of Xenophon. 3 Plato and Xenophon seem to 1 In the Theages he says : "Bart yap n Qtiq, fioipq, irapnro- fitvov tfiol tK TraiSbg ap^dfjiivov Saipoviov. trrri s TOVTO (puvij, fj OTUV yivr}Tai, ad pot fftipaivti, o av /ueXXw irpaTTtiv, TOVTOV airoTpoTTiiv , TrpoTpeirti Sf ovSsiroTf.p. 128. D. Compare Cicero de Divinat, I. 54. Ast indeed (in the Journ. Philol. by Hauff, Stuttgard, 1803. p. 260.) asserts that the Theages is spurious, but, even if we could admit this, we must yet confess that, considering the agreement with the other passages of Plato, Platonic thoughts, at least, constitute its basis. 2 In the Apology he speaks almost in the same manner: "E/ioi S't TOVT tffTiv tK ircuSog ap^d/Jifvov , tjxai'ij Tig yiyvofievt], i} orav yeviirat, ait airorpkirti. fis TOVTOV, o Av /xsXXo* Trpar- Tftv, irpoTptTTtt Sf ovvoTf. c. xix. Compare Plat. Phaedr. p. 242. B. 3 2wKpari;e. says Xenophon, &Qirip tyiyvwffKiv, OVTOIG t\iye. TO SaifJLOviov yap, tr), ffrjpaivfiv. Kal TroXXoif rStv ZVVOVTWV irportyoptvt, TO. plv iroiiiv, TO. ft ft.fi TTOI&V, TOV Saipoviov xxiv LIFE OF SOCRATES. contradict each other on this point; for Plato states that the dasmon only used to restrain him, but Xenophon represents the genius as disclosing to him the future in general, what should not be done as well as what should be done. But both statements, though apparently contradictory, can, as Charpentier 1 and Tennemann 2 observe, be very well reconciled. For Plato only ex- presses himself more decidedly in saying that the voice had only restrained, and never impelled him. Actions from which he was not restrained, were lawful to him, and unattended with danger. In the Apology of Plato 3 he concludes from the silence of the voice during the latter period of his life, that whatever then happened to him, was for his good. But Xenophon does not draw a precise distinction between that which the voice directly commanded, and that which Socrates concluded from its silence. 3 Our view of the nature of the deemon of Socrates is thus confirmed by the manner in which he himself is represented as expressing himself upon it, both by Xenophon and Plato. But the probability is still irpofftifiaivovrog. Kai roig fiev irti9ofiivoi<; avTif ffvviepi, roi ci firi TTtidofitvoig fitTiftiXe. Memorab. I. 1.4. 1 La vie de Socrate, p. 104. 2 Geschichte der Philosophic, vol. II. p. 33. 3 c. xxxi. 4 [Mr. Thirlwall, in the " Philological Museum," No.VI. p. 583, also remarks, " that there is really no inconsistency between the passage in Xenophon, and the assertion in the Apology and in the Phsedrus. For it is evident, that a sign which only for- bade might, by its absence, show what was permitted, and thus a positive kind of guidance might not improperly be ascribed to it." ED.] LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxv more increased by the examples which Socrates gives as the fruits of the suggestions of the daemon. The genius advised him not to take any part in public affairs, 1 and at first did not allow him to enter into any intimate connections with Alcibiades. 2 Socrates, on his flight after the defeat of Delium, was warned by his genius, and in consequence of it, would not take the same way as the others. 3 He also dissuaded his friends from undertaking apparently indifferent actions Charmides, from visiting the Nemtean games; Timarchus, from retiring from the repast and he also opposed the expedition to Sicily. 4 All this he could have known, without revelation, in some measure by an accurate knowledge of circumstances, to which, in most cases, 1 TOVTO iariv o JJLOI Ivavrtovrai TCL TroXmcd irpdrrtiv. Apoloff. C. XIX. He himself adds the reason immediately afterwards : " Because an honest man who zealously resists the multitude and prevents unlawful actions, must by necessity be- come a victim to his honesty." 8 Alcib. I. p. 103. E. Here too he adds the reason, because, he said, Alcibiades in his youth would not have listened to his instructions with proper attention, and he therefore should have spoken in vain. 3 Cicero de divinat. I. 54. Idem Socrates, cum apud Delium male pugnatum esset, Lachete prsetore, fugeretque cum ipso Lachete : ut ventum est in trivium, eadern, qua ceteri, fugere nole- bat. Quibus quaerentibus, cur non eadem via pergeret, deterreri se a deo dixit, turn quidem ii, qui alia via fugerant, in hostium equitatum inciderunt. This event is more minutely related by the author of the Socratic letters, p. 6 & 7. 4 This and several other instances are related in the Theages of Plato, p. 129 foil. Cicero, de divinat. I. 54. observes that a great number of such instances were recorded by Antipater in his books de divinatione. Some are also mentioned by Cicero him- self. xxvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. every-day experience would lead him ; and many things, on the other hand, must be attributed to chance. It is not likely that the voice of which Socrates speaks, should have been a mere figurative expression : he was indeed convinced of its reality, which is sufficiently accounted for by his mental organization. This convic- tion of Socrates was moreover facilitated by the belief of the antients in the direct influence of the Deity on man, and in guardian spirits who accompanied man from his birth ; and more especially by his own belief in the close connection between the human race and the Deity, as well as by his ignorance of mental philosophy. 1 1 [Schleiermacher, however, argues from a passage in the Me- morabilia (1. 1. 2.3.) of Xenophon, that Socrates himself could never have considered his Saiftoviov, in the light of a specific super- natural being. For Xenophon there speaks of it as something resem- bling in kind the ordinary instruments of divination , as birds, voices, omens, sacrifices. See " Philological Museum," No. 6. p. 582. Ritter, in his " History of Antient Philosophy," (Vol. II. p. 37 39.) observes, " We shall not perhaps be far wrong, if we ex- plain the dcemonium of Socrates as nothing more than excitability of feeling, expressing itself as a faculty of presentiment. It must not, however, be supposed that we seek thereby to screen Socra- tes from the imputation of superstition ; for his opinion of de- moniacal intimations was in unison with his veneration, not merely of the Deity, but of the gods. This is apparent from his recom- mendation of divination as a remedy for the deficiency of our knowledge of the future and of contingent events, his advice to Xenophon that he should consult the Delphic god as to his Asiatic expedition, his disposition to pay attention to dreams, and lastly, his constant sacrifices, and his command to make all due offerings to the Gods of House and State. Now in this super- stition there are two points to be distinguished ; that which he derived from the common opinion of his nation, and that which was founded on his own experience. In both phases it is equally LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxvii It thus appears that the daemon of Socrates merely related to things the consequence of which was uncer- tain; but whenever the morality of an action was discussed, Socrates never referred to his daemon. He was perfectly convinced that in order to know what is superstitious, but venial, if not commendable. For, in respect to the former, he who, brought up in the olden creeds and tra- ditions of his country, adheres to them so long as nothing bet- ter is offered for his adoption, and so far as they are not op- posed to his own reason and enlightenment, is, to our minds, a better and a wiser man than he who lightly or hastily turns into ridicule the objects of public veneration. As to the demoniacal intimations of Socrates, they were, in common with his other superstitions, the good foundation of his belief, that the gods afford assistance to the good, but imperfect endeavours of vir- tuous men, and prove the scrupulous attention he paid to the emotions and suggestions of his conscience. Among the various thoughts and feelings which successively filled and occupied his mind, he must have noticed much that presented itself involun- tarily, and which, habituated, as he was, to reflect upon every subject, and yet unable to derive it from any agency of his own, he referred to a divine source. This is particularly confirmed by the exhortation he gives, in Xenophon, to Euthydemus, to renounce all idle desire to become acquainted with the forms of the gods, and to rest satisfied with knowing and adoring their works, for then he would acknowledge that it was not idly and without a cause that he himself spoke of demoniacal intimations. By this Socrates evidently gave him to understand that this de- moniacal sign would be manifest to every pious soul, who would renounce all idle longing for a visible appearance of the Deity. Still, in spite of all this, he cautiously guarded against the danger of that weak and credulous reliance upon the assistance of the Deity which necessarily proves subversive or obstructive of a rational direction of life ; for he taught that those who consult the oracles in matters within the compass of human powers, are no less insane than those who maintain the all-sufficiency of hu- man reason." ED.] xxviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. right and wrong, reason is the only unerring principle. 1 Among all the instances mentioned in the Theages of Plato, there is not one in which the rectitude of an action was decided by the daemon. Hence many au- thors, such as Buhle, go too far, when they extend the influence of the daemon to moral feeling. Respecting things imposed upon us as duties, according to the opinion of Socrates, oracles ought not to be consulted. 2 But it is interesting to see how this conviction of a genius acted on Socrates, and how, together with the external causes above mentioned, it led him to a careful observation of his own mind. On every occasion he listened to the voice of his genius. Whenever a person desirous of improvement wished to have his instructions, Socrates ascertained whether his genius would not dis- suade him ; and whenever he was requested to do some- thing which was not at variance with morality, his ge- nius was consulted. It will be needless to explain how 1 Plutarch de genio Socratis, Tom. III. p. 482. says, the dae- mon of Socrates only enlightened him on obscure subjects into which human prudence could not penetrate. But it is surprising that Socrates did not make use of this genius in all doubtful cases. When Xenophon had received letters from his friend Proxenus, persuading him to go into Asia, and to enter into the service of Cyrus the younger, he communicated them to Socrates, and asked for his advice. Socrates referred him to the oracle of Delphi. See Xenoph. Anal. III. 1. 5. Cicero, de divinat. I. 54. says : Xenophonti consulenti, sequereturne Cyrum, posteaquam exposuit, quse sibi videbantur, Et nostrum quidem, inquit, huma- num est consilium : sed de rebus et obscuris et incertis ad Apol- linem censeo referendum, ad quern etiam Athenienses publice de majoribus rebus semper retulerunt. 2 Epictetus, Enchiridion, p. 118. edit. Jacobi. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxix greatly such a disposition must have contributed to turn the inquiries of Socrates from the speculative ques- tions which had engaged previous philosophers, such as the origin and formation of the world, the unity of the first cause and the variety of its operations, in short, from divine to human affairs, in the sense of Socrates. 1 1 Cams, in his Ideen zu einer Geschichte der Philosophic, p. 524 foil, says : " How much must the belief of being under the immediate influence of a protecting genius, have increased his attention to himself, and to what great resolutions and noble self- confidence must it have led him, at that age in which simplicity of heart is still the prevailing characteristic '. It is just as re- markable, that he was most strongly attracted to those who had observed in themselves a similar guide." c 3 xxx LIFE OF SOCRATES. CHAPTER IV. SOCRATES never established any particular school; he taught wherever chance led him, and wherever he found men to whom he thought he might be useful by his in- structions, or, to speak the language of Socrates, wherever his genius did not prevent him : in public walks, in the gymnasia, porticos, markets, &C. 1 In the same sense in which Socrates established no school, he had no disciples; hence he asserts in the Apo- logy, 3 he had taught none; yet a circle of inquisitive men and youths were soon assembled around him, and, charmed with his conversation and instruction, were at- tached to him with incredible affection. Such were Plato, Xenophon, Aristippus, Cebes, Simmias, Euclides and others ; and it was, properly speaking, from his school, i. e. from the instructions which he had occa- sionally given, that all the distinguished Greek philo- 1 Plat. Apolog. C. I. Xenoph. Mem. I. 1. 10. Libanius, Apolog. Socrat. p. 7. edit. Reiske : TOIOVTOQ wv Kai Sidywv, WQ triv, uQTTso TIQ Kotvbe 7rar)p Kai Trjc iroXtwg o\;e KrjdffiCJv irtpuvoffTti raQ TraXalffrpaf, TO. yvnvdma, TO \vKtiov, T>}V d/ca- Stjfjiiav, rijv ayopdv, OTTOI /i\Xt Ivrtv^taQai K, r. X. 2 Apolog. XXI. : 'Eyti de SiSdffKaXos fu.v ovdevbs TTWITOT' tytvopqv. Compare Plutarch, An Seni sit gerenda res publ. Tom. II. p. 796. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxxi sophers subsequently proceeded. He gave his instruc- tions gratis, a disinterestedness which formed the most striking contrast to the covetousness of the sophists. 1 Socrates never delivered any complete discourse, but conversed with his hearers in a friendly manner on topics just as they were suggested by the occasion. 2 His method of teaching, however, had something pe- culiar to himself, which will be more fully developed in the following remarks. The peculiarity of his method consisted in questions, the nature of which, however, was different according to the persons with whom he conversed. Whenever Socrates had to deal with sophists, who were puffed up with their pretended wisdom, he used that admirable kind of irony which Cicero translates by " dissimulatio" 3 a translation which Quinctilian 1 Xenoph. Mem. I. 2. 6 foil, and chap. 6. 2 Ou yap lori, he says to Alcibiades, roiovrov rb ipov. viz. dirtiv Xoyov /xafcpov. (Plat. Alcib. I. p. 106. B.) To Anti- phon, the sophist, he says : 'Edv TI a^ia ayaQbv, SiddffKw, Kai aXXotf avvlffrrjfii, Trap' a>v av ijyw/tai w0{X?j<7ff0ai n avrovc tig aptrrjv. Kai TOVQ Orjffavpovg rwv iraXai aoQwv avSp&v, ovg IKSIVOI KaTiXnrov iv /3if3\ioig ypdif/avrec, avt\'iTTMV, Koivy ffiiv roTf ^t'Xotg ftt'p%o/tat' cai av TI opw/isv ayaObv, *cXyo/i0, Kai fieya vojJi'iZ,op,tv /cgp^og, lav aXXjjXoie w^e'Xijuoi. yiyi/(iju0a. Xeaoph. Mem. I. 6. 14. 3 Academ. II. 5.: Socrates de se ipse detrahens in disputatione plus tribuebat iis, quos volebat refellere. Ita quum aliud diceret atque sentiret, libenter uti solitus est ea dissimulatione quam Grseci tipwvtiav vocant. Quinctil. Institut. Orat. IX. 2., says : Ironia est totius voluntatis fictio apparens magis, quam confessa, ut illinc verba sint verbis diversa, hie sensus sermonis, et joci, et tota interim causse confirmatio, turn etiam vita universa ironiam habere videatur. C. 20. Dum enim vita universa ironiam habere xxxii LIFE OF SOCRATES. did not approve of 1 and which is nothing more than the contrast of the half-ridiculing and half-sincere con- fession of his ignorance with the boastings of those who thought themselves to be wise. In this manner conceited pride was exposed by questions; and the distinguishing characteristic of the ridicule consisted in Socrates pretending that he could not form an opinion in any other manner; and this I conceive to be the principal difference between the Socratic and Platonic irony. That of Socrates, which is described by Xeno- phon in its purity, has nothing of Plato's bitterness; its playfulness only instructs, but never enrages. A more minute comparison of the conversation of Socrates videatur ; qualis est vita Socratis. Nam ideo dictus est eipwv, i. e. agens imperitum et admirator aliorum tamquam sapientum. The later academicians understood this irony of Socrates in a wrong way, and therefore represented him as the founder of their scepticism. Acad. IV. 23. They also endeavoured to imitate the form of the Socratic method of disputing. Tuscul. I. 10. I need hardly remind the reader that we are here only speaking of that kind of irony which is peculiar to Socrates. For on other occasions he often employed that kind of ridicule which we usu- ally call irony, and which was peculiar to the Athenians in gene- ral, viz. that contrast between the literal meaning of the expres- sion with the thought conveyed by it, by which a meaning is con- veyed to the minds of the hearers totally different from the literal sense of the words. Instances of this irony are to be found in the celebrated dialogue with Theodota, and in the conversation with Pericles the younger, on whom Socrates bestows much praise for his talents as a general. " I know very well," replies Pericles to Socrates (Memorab. III. 5. 24), " that thou dost not say this thinking that I am actually striving after this kind of knowledge, but in order to suggest to me that a future general ought to try to acquire all this kind of wisdom." 1 Institut. Orat. IX. 2. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxxiii with Hippias, as it is described both by Plato and Xenophon, J at which the latter was present, may serve to show this difference more strikingly. This Socratic irony was admirably calculated to place such conceited persons as the sophists in their true light. If any one entered into a discussion with them, he was so much overwhelmed with a host of philosophical terms and sophisms, that the point in question w r as en- tirely lost sight of. Socrates played the part of an at- tentive hearer, who was sincerely desirous of compre- hending their sublime wisdom, and now and then asked a short question which was apparently quite insignifi- cant, and did not at all belong to the point at issue, 2 and which being answered by the sophists with a smile, he imperceptibly went on, and compelled them, at last, after being perplexed in contradictions, to acknowledge their ignorance. Examples of such conversations are found in all the writings of the disciples of Socrates ; but here too we must chiefly depend upon Xenophon, the most faithful interpreter of the manner in which Socrates thought and acted. Besides the above-men- tioned conversation with Hippias, examples occur in that with Euthydemus, 3 and in other places. But when Socrates met with disciples desirous of im- provement, his instructions again were not given in a 1 Memoral. IV. 4. 2 Cicero, de Oratore, III. 16'., blames Socrates for having first separated philosophy and eloquence, which however in the sense above described was highly praiseworthy. 3 Memoral. IV. 2. xxxiv LIFE OF SOCRATES. didactic form ; but he applied the same method of ask- ing which is called after him the Socratic method, and which owes to Socrates, if not its origin, at least its cultivation and perfection. He himself called this method the ri-)(yri paievriKti (ars obstetricia\ and on that account compared himself to his mother Phaena- rete, who though not fruitful herself, was yet admirably skilled in bringing to light the children of others. " I am an accoucheur of the mind," says he, in the Theaetetes of Plato, " just as my mother is an accoucheur of the body." By this comparison Socrates sufficiently charac- terises the nature of his method. It is nothing else but an analytical development of the undigested materials existing in the minds of his hearers, and as such it is ap- plicable only as far as the materials are already in the possession of the pupil, or previously communicated to him by synthesis. As regards the form, we have an example of this Socratic method of asking in the Meno of Plato ; where Plato makes Socrates apply his method in order to prove his own (Plato's) doctrine of ideas. Socrates there asks quite an ignorant boy some geome- trical questions, to which the boy gives correct answers. From this, Plato draws the conclusion that the boy could not have answered in that manner, if his soul had not acquired, in a state previous to its being united to its body, a knowledge of the nature of things ; but he seems to have overlooked one important fact, that this knowledge had been previously communicated to the lad by Socrates, in the way of synthesis. This method of asking, which is usually called the LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxxv Socratic method in a limited sense of the word, is in its character often similar to irony, but is different in its object and effect. It differs from our catechetical me- thod in as much as it was confined almost exclusively to adult persons, in whom a tolerable share of knowledge might be supposed to exist, so that they not only an- swered, but also asked, and thus carried on a lively con- versation. But what formed its characteristic feature, was its aiming at leading men to knowledge by reflect- ing upon themselves, and not upon external objects. This line of demarcation must not be overlooked, and it would be rashness to introduce the Socratic method into our elementary schools. x Socrates applied this method with great skill, 2 and in modern times he has justly been considered as the supreme master of it. He accommodated himself to the individual dispositions, and to the peculiar wants, of each of his disciples, and connected his instructions with the most ordinary events of the day. He rather appeared to instruct himself than to pretend to instruct others, rather called forth ideas than communicated them. The questions were clear and concise ; however absurd the answers might be, he knew how to make 1 See Steuber's dissertation : Kann die Katechese uber mora- lisch-religiose Wahrheiten zu einerfreien Unterredung zwischen dem Lehrer und den Katechumenen erhoben werden ? in Loffler's Magazinfur Prediyer, vol. V. part I. p. 220 foil. * Cicero, de finib. II. 1. Socrates percontando atque interro- gando elicere solebat eorum opiniones, quibuscum disserebat, ut ad hsec quse hi respondissent, si quid videretur, diceret. Hence the invention of dialogues is attributed to Socrates. xxxvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. them subserve his purposes. In his conversation he commenced with the most undisputed propositions which even a person with any sagacity might under- stand and comprehend. 1 He omitted no intermediate ideas, but went on carefully from one to another. If in his researches Socrates sometimes appears to have en- tered too much into detail, 2 we must not forget that by the want of precision in Greek expressions this apparent diffuseness was often necessary. He introduced a great degree of clearness into his conversations; which he accomplished both by his placing a thing in a point of view the best suited to the person to whom he spoke, and by viewing it in all its relations, by returning to it in various ways, by accurately dissecting the simple qualities of an idea, until the truth which Socrates in- tended to teach, became evident to his disciples, and, as it were, their own. He knew how to interest those who conversed with him and who seemed to have no wish to enter into any further discussion with him as Alcibiades by describing their own character, and by appealing to their peculiar wishes and hopes. 3 This is the favourable side of the Socratic method ; if however we examine it with impartiality, w r e must ac- knowledge that his art of asking was not altogether free from sophistry ; yet this tinge of it did not constitute him a sophist, as he never substituted one idea for another, or confounded dissimilar ideas. Neither did 1 Xenoph. Mem. IV. 6. 15. (Econ. 6. 2 foil. 2 As in Xenoph. Mem. I. 2. 57 ; IV. 6. 3., 4, 13 & 23. 3 Plat. Alcib. I. p. 104, E. foil. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxxvii Socrates intentionally try to make error victorious over truth, which is an essential feature in a sophist, but his confounding heterogeneous ideas often arose from a want of precision in the Greek language. 1 This kind of sophistry is found in the dialogues of Plato ; as in the conversation with Thrasymachus, in the first book of the Republic, where the expression a/jLeivov ^jjv gives rise to a sophistical dispute ; and in all the passages in Avhich the word KO\OS is sometimes interpreted by beau- tiful and sometimes by good.* To these passages it might be objected that Plato made Socrates speak so- phistically; but the same arguments are also found in Xenophon ; and even in the writings of this most faithful disciple of Socrates, we find that he confounds 1 [This assertion, if applied to the Greek language in general, will certainly not find many advocates. If, however, the word KaXog, which Wiggers especially mentions, is the only instance, few, who are acquainted with the meaning, which this word has in all the writings of Plato, will feel disposed to assent to the asser- tion in the text. For with what justice can we find fault with the Greek language, because some sophist avails himself of a word, which according to his opinion has two different meanings, while Plato himself certainly does not attribute two distinct meanings to it ? According to Plato, nothing is useful which is not good, and nothing is good which is not at the same time useful. If we wish to account for the sophistries of Socrates, of which there are indeed several instances, it should be recollected that Socrates was in his youth instructed by sophists, and subsequently came very often in contact with them, and therefore cannot have been entirely free from their influence ; every man partakes, more or less, of the character of the age in which he lives. On the other hand, Socrates sometimes used the weapons of the sophists them- selves to expose their ignorance. ED.] * As in the Gorgias, p. 462. D. d xxxviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. the ideas of the beautiful and useful, which are both implied in the Greek word raXos ; and also the ideas of virtue and happiness, the bene beateque vivere of Cicero, which the Greek expressed by the word V7rpai'a. In this manner he attributed to the expressions of those with whom he conversed, a meaning which was not in- tended. 1 A second peculiarity of the Socratic method of teach- ing is, that Socrates himself never gives a definition of the subject in dispute, but merely refutes the opinion of the person with whom he converses. Thus he awakened the true philosophical spirit; and by throwing out doubts, stimulated the mind of his hearer to further examination. In the Meno of Plato, Socrates does not, properly speaking, define what virtue is, but only what it is not, and thus merely refutes the definition given by Meno ; and the conclusion that it is a deia fjiolpa is rather ironical : 2 Meno therefore compares Socrates to a cramp-fish 3 which paralyzes every one that 1 Xenoph. Mem. III. 8 ; IV. 2. 26. The Socratic manner of ask- ing questions is, however, a dangerous instrument in the hands of a sophist, as it is so very easy to take words in different senses, and thus to oblige the person who answers to make assertions which but for the application of those sophisms, he would never ac- knowledge as his own. Protagoras, who perceived this, com- bined the Socratic method with that of the sophists. Diog. IX. 8. 4. 2 I should at least not like to infer with Carus (Geschichte der Psychologic, p. 254.) from this passage that Socrates had looked at virtuous men as inspired by the deity. Besides it would be incompatible with the assertion of Socrates that virtue can be taught. 3 p. 80. A. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xxxix comes in contact with it. l This mode of disputing (in utramque partem disputare) descended to the school of Plato, 2 and constituted the academica ratio dis- putandi, 3 though Socrates did not employ it in the sense in which the later academy made use of it. So- crates was far from philosophical scepticism ; he was unconcerned about speculation ; and the truths of prac- tical philosophy had for him positive evidence. By this mode of disputing, Socrates acquired a con- siderable advantage over the sophists ; for as he did not openly express his own opinion, they could not lay hold of his views, but were obliged to allow him to at- tack and to refute their dogmatical assertions. " Thou shalt," says Hippias, the sophist, to Socrates, 4 "not hear my opinion, before thou hast explained to me what thou meanest by the just. For it is enough that thou laughest at others in proposing to them questions and refuting them; but thou never givest any account or answer thyself, nor wishest to express thy opinion on any subject." As Socrates did not deliver any complete discourse, the form of his philosophical lectures cannot be spoken of, and consequently there are no complicated con- clusions, corollaries, &c., which abound in the writings of other philosophers. 1 Oil yap, he says in the same dialogue (p. 80. C), tiiiropwv avrbf roi> aXXouf TTOIUJ cnropeiv, aAAa Travrbg [ia\\ov avrbc; airoptttv ovr Kai rove d\Xov iroiw airoptiv. 2 Cicero de Nat. Dear. I. 5. 3 Cicero Tuscul. I. 4. 4 Xenoph. Mem. IV. 4. 9. xl LIFE OF SOCRATES. A third peculiarity of the Socratic method was the inductive mode of reasoning. " Two things," says Aristotle (Metaph. XIII. 4.), " are justly ascribed to Socrates, induction and illustration by general ideas." Cicero 1 also mentioned it as something peculiar to So- crates and Aspasia. Instances of such inductions are most numerous in the Memorabilia of Xenophon. 2 Thus he tried to prove by induction, to Chserecrates, who did not live on the most friendly terms with his brother Ch89rephon, what he ought to do to gain the af- fections of his brother ; 3 to his friend Diodorus that he must support poor llermogenes ; 4 to timid Char- mides, who had too great a diffidence in his own talents, that he must endeavour to obtain public ap- pointments. 5 A fcmrth and last peculiarity of the Socratic method of teaching was the palpable and lively manner in which he delivered his instructions, leading his hearers from the abstract to the concrete by similes, allegories, fables, apophthegms, passages from poets, and sayings of wise men. A peculiar talent of Socrates was the power he possessed of demonstrating the correctness or incorrect- ness of general assertions by applying them to individual cases. It is evident that a distinctness of conception 1 De Invent. I. 51 foil. Topica. 10. 2 'OiroTt e, says Xenophon (Mem. IV. 6. 15.), aiiTof n X6y^> fit^ioi, SICL TUIV fiaXiffra bpoXo-yovntvuv iiropivtro, vopiZtitv Tavrt]V rt)v ad\eiav ilvai \6yov. 3 Xenoph. Mem. II. 3. 11 foil. 4 Ibid. II. 10. * Ibid. III. 7. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xli must have been promoted by such a popular method of reasoning, especially among a people thinking as prac- tically as the Greeks. It was also best adapted for ex- posing the absurdity of many assertions of the sophists, who principally delighted in general propositions. If the sophists expressed themselves in dazzling theses and antitheses, Socrates directly applied them to in- dividual cases taken from common life, and thus de- monstrated in a palpable manner the inapplicability of their assertions. His similes were taken from the immediate circle of his hearers : a circumstance for which, it is well known, Socrates has often been ri- diculed. A great many passages from the Socratic philosophers might be quoted in proof of the manner in which he rendered abstract ideas palpable ; but it will be suffi- cient here to give the classical passage from the Sym- posium of Plato, in which Alcibiades, the favourite of Socrates, gives his opinion on the method of teaching pursued by Socrates. 1 1 p. 221. E. EJ i9(Xu riQ TUV Sw/cparovj aicovtiv Xoywv, 0a- vtlev civ irdvv yeXoioi TO irpwrov roiavra ical ovo^ara Kai pfi/jtara t$uQiv TrspiafnrsxovTai Sarvpov av rtva vfipitTTov Sapdv. ovovt; yap KavGrjXiovg Xeyti icai xaX/csae rivdg KUI e (cat j3upi//ae. Kat ati Bia r&v avrtiv ravra tyaivirat \syetv, wQTt airtipoe Kai avorjTog avQpbtTrog irag av rwv \6j(t>v KaraytXaant. Sioiyofitvog tie iSwv dv rig ical tvToc avrwv yiyvofitvoQ irputrov [lev vovv txovrag tvSov fiovovg eiipjjcrft rStv Xoytav, S-TrtiTct GeiordrovQ Kai irKtiara dydX/iara dptrijf tv aiiroig t^ovraq Kai STTI irXtiffrov TtivovraQ, fid\\ov St (iri TTO.V offov irposfjicei ffKoirefv T(f fiiXXovTi KaX< icdyaOf tfftffOai. A great power in speaking is attributed to him even by his enemies, Aristoxenus d 3 xlii LIFE OF SOCRATES. The ironical character of the method of Socrates was principally directed against the sophists, whom he com- bated very successfully with this weapon : and indeed sharp weapons were necessary to humble these men who undeservedly enjoyed so great an authority among the Greeks. There were however among the sophists some very superior men, who only wanted the true spirit of philosophy, the love of truth and science, in order to accomplish great things. We cannot therefore rank all the sophists in the same class, and must care- fully distinguish a Protagoras or a Gorgias, who deserve our sincere respect for their talents, and who were cele- brated as orators, and made the first researches into the nature of language, from a Dionysodorus and Euthy- demus, whom Plato, in his Euthydemus, describes as true logomachists. Socrates took the field against these two classes of sophists, and established moral conscious- ness, founded on common sense, in opposition to their moral scepticism ; and notwithstanding their sophistical stratagems, often extorted from them the shameful con- fession of their own ignorance. His disciples, encouraged by his example, carried the irony of their master against the sophists further than himself. " The sons of the richest people," says Socrates, in Plato's Apology, * " who necessarily have the greatest leisure, follow me of their own accord, and are pleased when they hear me refuting these men. Yea, they themselves often follow and Porphyry. Theodoret. ad Grsecos infideles, Serm. IV. p. 56. 1 C. X. LIFE OF SOCRATES. xliii my example, and undertake to examine others." Xo wonder that Socrates gained for himself the perfect hatred of these people, and that they left no means un- tried to effect his ruin. But of this hereafter. xliv LIFE OF SOCRATES. CHAPTER V. SOCRATES lived in the simplest manner; and it was from this circcumstance that he was enabled to maintain his philosophical independence, notwithstanding his li- mited means. * He despised the luxurious mode of living, which had greatly increased in his time at Athens, as well as all those sensual enjoyments that de- stroy the health both of body and mind. 2 Yet Socra- tes did not violate the laws of taste and propriety ; but observed a nice distinction, by the neglect of which the Cynics destroyed all that genuine humanity, which ren- dered Socrates so amiable, notwithstanding the austerity of his manners. 3 1 " I think," says Socrates to Critobulus in the CEconomicus of Xenophon (II. 3.), " if I could find a reasonable purchaser, I should perhaps get five minse for all my property, including my house." 2 Zj/e yovv ovrwc, says Antiphon, the sophist, to Socrates (Xenoph. Mem. I. 6. 2.), w ovS' av tig SovXoc; IITTO Sta-irory Stairw/iivoc [iiivfit, atria rt airy, KOI irora iriviiQ TO. 0auX6- rara, Kal Ipdriov rintyliaai ov fiovov <{> uTravraq Kpivtiv. In this same passage the LIFE OF SOCRATES. Iv But to condemn all by one vote, was contrary to an ancient law of Cannonus, according to which the vote ought to have been given upon each individual sepa- rately. Hence the prytanes, and Socrates at their head, refused to put the illegal question to the votes of the people. Yet, when the latter, enraged against the pry- tanes, loudly demanded that those who resisted their pleasure, should themselves be brought to trial, they yielded to the general clamour with the exception of Socrates, who alone remained unshaken. Notwithstanding all the threatenings that were used against him, he could not be induced to desist from his resolution, but boldly declared he would do nothing which he considered contrary to his duty. In conse- quence of this refusal, the question could not be put to the vote, and the assembly was therefore adjourned ; another epistates and other irpotfyoi were chosen, and the enemies of the admirals obtained what they had wished for. The admirals were condemned to death, and the six, who were in Athens, were executed. 1 This was the only civil office that Socrates ever held ; antient law of Cannonus is mentioned, which enjoined Slxa IKCIGTOV. [On the decree of Cannonus see Appendix II. to the fourth volume of Mr. Thirlwall's " History of Greece." ED.] 1 They were sentenced to death B. c. 404. Luzac, in his Dis- quisitio de Epistatis et Proedris Atheniensium, p. 114, which is added to his discourse de Socrate Cive, has considered the subject very carefully. The principal passages of the antients are : Xenoph. Hellen. I. 7. and ^Esch. Axiochus, c. 12. Though ^Eschines may not be author of this dialogue, yet the agreement existing between him and Xenophon, proves its authenticity with regard to historical facts. Ivi LIFE OF SOCRATES. and we cannot be surprised when so many acts of injustice were committed, which he alone could not possibly have prevented, that he entirely withdrew from public business. He mentions this himself, as the reason of his living a private man. " Be assured, men of Athens, if in former times, I had wished to engage in public affairs, I shoiild have perished long ago, with- out being either useful to you or myself." 1 Socrates himself lived to see the injurious consequences, which the xinjust condemnation of those admirals brought down upon Greece, in the mournful issue of the Pelo- ponnesian war. The very year after their condemnation, (405. B. c.) the Athenians for want of able generals were entirely defeated by the Lacedeemonians under Lysander; their fleet was destroyed, Athens besieged, and reduced to the necessity of surrendering at dis- cretion to the victors. Lysander after this established the government of the Thirty Tyrants, whose memory is branded in history ; and Socrates was one among the many who had to struggle with their injustice. Freret indeed has endeavoured 2 to prove that Socrates supported these hateful oligarchs, and that by this circumstance we must account for his condemnation immediately after their fall. But this assertion is at variance with everything recorded, respecting the history and opinions of Socrates. He was indeed favourably disposed towards an aristocratical govern- 1 Plato, Apolog. c. XIX. 8 Magazin Encyclopedique, Seconde Annee, Tom. V. p. 474 foil. LIFE OF SOCRATES. Ivii ment, but in the old Attic sense of the word, viz. to a form of government in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of the best and wisest ; but he could never have approved of an oligarchy, and least of all of a despotic oligarchy, like that of the Thirty. Socrates loved his fellow-creatures too well to wish them to be ruled by such oppressors. There can be no blame attached to Socrates, that Critias, one of the Thirty, had been his disciple, for it could not be in the school of Socrates that he had learnt the bad principles on which he acted. He had, as we are told by Xenophon, 1 not sought the instruction of Socrates because he loved him, but like Alcibiades, in order to learn the kingly art which was the name for politics, or the science of governing men 2 in the same manner as every young Athenian anxious to distinguish himself in the state, sought the instructions of some one of the sophists, among whom Socrates was ranked. Critias not finding what he expected, soon afterwards abandoned the company of Socrates ; and we also know how he afterwards behaved towards his former master. Socrates never made use of the language of flattery ; but censured on every occasion the wicked rulers of a poor and orphan people. This reached the ears of the Thirty. Critias and Charicles, who were appointed to compose a code of laws, forbade, with the intention of injuring Socrates, any instruction to be given in the art of speak- ing ; a profession, however, in which Socrates had never been engaged. But when he continued to converse with 1 Memorat. I. 2. 39. 2 Memorab. IV. 2. 11. Iviii LIFE OF SOCRATES. young men, and show them the path of real wisdom, Critias, who moreover entertained an old aversion to Socrates for having censured his sensual pleasures with Euthydemus and Charicles, summoned him before their tribunal, and altogether forbade him from conversing with or instructing young men. Socrates in his usual manner had used a simile, which gave great offence to the Thirty, who felt its truth. " I should indeed wonder," Socrates had said, " if a cow-herd under whose care the cows grow fewer and thinner, would not own that he was a bad cow-herd, but it is still more astonish- ing to me, if a state-officer who diminishes the number of citizens and renders them unhappy, is not ashamed and will not own, that he is a bad officer of the state." Charicles added the significant words : " By god, pray, do not speak of the cow- herd ! take care that thou dost not thyself diminish the flock by speaking again of them." " Now it was evident," adds Xenophon, " that after the simile of the cows had been reported to them, they were enraged against Socrates." 1 Thus Socrates, far from supporting the tyrants, was a declared enemy of these base and cruel men, and none of their edicts had the effect of inducing him to abandon that course which he considered his duty. Entertaining no fear of them, he did not leave Athens, which is duly appreciated by Cicero. 2 The Thirty summoned him with four others to the Tholos, the place in which the 1 Memorab. I. 2. 29. 2 Ad Attic. VIII. 2 : " Socrates, quum triginta tyranni essent, pedem porta non extulit." LIFE OF SOCRATES. lix prytanes used to take their meals ; and commanded him to bring Leon of Salamis to Athens, who had obtained the right of citizenship at Athens, but had chosen a voluntary exile, fearing that the tyrants might execute him, as he was a wealthy and distinguished man. 1 " Then indeed," says Socrates in Plato's apology, " I showed by my actions and not merely by my words, that I did not care (if it be not too coarse an expression) one jot for death ; but it was an object of the greatest care to me to do nothing unjust or unholy. For that govern- ment, though it was so powerful, did not frighten me into doing anything unjust ; but when we came out of the Tholos, the four went to Salamis and took Leon, but I went away home. And perhaps I should have suffered death on account of this, if the government had not soon been broken up." In this manner Socrates most effectually refused taking any part in the unjust acts of the Thirty, 2 who were very anxious to gain him over to their interest, as 1 Tort [isvTot tyio ov Xoyy, dXX" lpy^> av ivtSn^dfiriv, on iftoi Qavarov fiiv fit\ti, li fir) dypoiKOTtpov f)V liirtiv, oiiS OTIOVV K. r. X. c. XX. Quo' OTIOVV seems to be an expression which only people of the lower classes made use of. hence the addition of Socrates : EI/*J) dypotKortpoi' ijv t'nriiv, " quamvis forte rudior loqui videar." Libanius, the imitator of the Attic idiom, on this account adds before ovd' OTIOVV the softening oe i'nrtlv. Apol. p. 8. The courage and intrepidity of Socrates before the Thirty is often mentioned. Seneca Epist. 28 : " Triginta tyranni Socratem circumsteterunt, nee potuerunt animum ejus infringere.'' Diog. II. 24 : T Hv t (Swicparjje) SijuoKpariKoc;, tag fijXov tK re TOV fiij tiai role TTtpt Kptrt'av , oi &evoiov, rrjv jiiapiav TOV flvpaoStyov 'Avvrov ypa^oi/xi Kai TO 6pui"AvvTOV, KaiVsp'wrac Kai Tovrovg dfivove- dXX' tKtivoi dtivorepoi, d avSptf, 01 vfi&v TOVQ TroX- Xovg tK TraiSwv 7rapa\a[jifl(ivovrf tTTiiOov re Kai Karjjyopoui/ ifiov ovSev aXrjOig, a>e tan TIQ Sa>Kpa'r;, ffob(; dvf)p, TQ, rt. fterswpa ^povriffrJjc, Kai TO. virb yfjg tiiravra aVs^jjrjjKwf , Kai rbv i]TTo> Xoyov Kpci'rrw iroiwv* OVTOI, w avfiptq 'AQrjvaioi, * A man who investigates all things above and below the earth (ftr&>po0po*Ti(rri7c, is the expression of Aristophanes,) was an atheist, according to the ideas of the Athenian people, for a na- tural philosopher and an atheist were synonymous appellations. These natural philosophers were also called /lerewpoXeer^at. A sophist is a person who gives to a bad cause the appearance of a LIFE OF SOCRATES. Ixxxv Aristophanes and his party, it is true, could not directly contribute to the accusation of Socrates, for the times were too distant ; but they assisted to prejudice the minds of the people against our philosopher, and to exhibit him not only as an object of ridicule, but as a man dangerous to the constitution. This was certainly an effect which these calumnies were calculated to pro- duce, and in which they wonderfully succeeded. Mele- Tavrijv rint]v KaraffKsSdffavTfs, oi Stivoi fiffi fiov Karfjyopoi' 01 yap O.KOVOVTIQ rjyovvrai TOVQ ravra Zyrovvrte ovdi QtovQ vofii- %tiv. tTrtird tiffiv ovroi oi Karriyopoi TroXXoi Kai TroXiiv xpovov f]Sr] KaTr]yopt]KOTtQ, In Si Kai iv ravr-g ry i)\iKu t i Xeyovref Trpog vfiag, iv y av /iaXrra iTriartvaart, icalSiQ ovree, tvioi St vpwv teal fi.iipa.Kia, art\vuiQ ipr)[iT]v Karrjyopovvrff, cnro\oyov^kvov ovSivog. "O Se TTO.VTWV aXoyairarov, on ovSe ra 6v6p.ara olov rt avrSiv tiSevai Kai tiirtiv, TrXrjv t*t Tie KianySoTroib t>v. C. II. good one, by means of eloquence. This proves that Aristophanes did not distinguish Socrates from the sophists ; and indeed proofs of this are met with throughout the Clouds. Thus Socrates in- vokes the Clouds, the protecting deities of the sophists ; Socrates teaches how the Xoyog Sinatoq may be conquered by the Xoyoc dfiKOQ ; he makes astronomical researches (to this must be re- ferred his soaring in the air in a basket, v. 184 foil.) ; and he re- ceives money for his instructions (v. 98. 99. 113115. 245. 246.) &c. A slight allusion to the sophistry of Socrates we find also in the answer of Ischomachus (in Xenoph. (Econom. c. 11. 25.) to the question, how Ischomachus was getting on with his law- suit : " When it is sufficient," he says, "for my defence to tell the truth, very well ; but when I have recourse to lies, dear Socrates, I cannot give to the bad cause the appearance of a good one." The opinion of those who suppose that Aristophanes had been induced by the sophists to abuse Socrates, may be thus satis- factorily refuted. h Ixxxvi LIFE OF SOCRATES. tus would perhaps not have ventured to come forth with an accusation against Socrates, had not a favourite poet of the Athenian people paved the way, and indirectly undertaken his accusation. " Let us go back," says Socrates, in the Apology, " to the commencement, and the first charge from which the calumny has arisen, relying on which, Meletus has brought the present charge against me." That the Clouds of Aristophanes did not obtain the prize, but a play of Cratinus, who contested for it with him and Amipsias, cannot surprise us ; nor should it lead us to the conclusion, that the Clouds of Aristophanes were unfavourably received by the Athenians. 1 It was not the applause of the people which decided the prize, but judges were especially ap- pointed for that purpose ; who were often biassed by opposite motives, and who may have been influenced in this instance by circumstances unknown to us. 2 1 Argum. II. ad Nubes edit. Herm. says that Alcibiades and his party had prevented the success of this piece. Accord- ing to ^Elian's account (Var. Hist. II. 13.) the people were so much pleased with the Clouds of Aristophanes, that they ex- claimed : " No one but Aristophanes ought to be rewarded with the prize." Aristophanes himself considered it the most perfect of his comedies (Nub. v. 522, and Vespse, v. 1039). The account of JEtian, however, deserves just as little credit as the anecdote which he relates immediately after it, that Socrates knowing that he would be the object of bitter satire, was not only present during the performance, but that having heard that many stran- gers were present, and were inquiring who Socrates was, he came forth in the midst of the comedy, and remained standing in a place where he could be observed by all, and compared with the copy. * [For an account of the Clouds of Aristophanes, see a note at the end of this chapter. ED.] LIFE OF SOCRATES. Ixxxvii 4. Socrates was not in favour of a democratical form of government : this must also have contributed to his accusation. Socrates, like the sages of antiquity in general, approved of an aristocracy in the original sense of the word, viz. a constitution which entrusted the supreme power to the hands of the best in a moral point of view. 1 Socrates was aware how dangerous it is to intrust the supreme power to the hands of an uneducated populace ; his own experience taught him how easy it was for selfish demagogues to gain favour with an in- 1 An aristocracy, according to the conceptions of the Athe- nians before the time of Alexander the Great, was not opposed to democracy, but to oligarchy. In an aristocracy the people always had great influence, but in an oligarchy they were entirely de- prived of it. One of the principal passages relating to this point is in the Menexenus of Plato, p. 238. C. Plato there represents Socrates as repeating a funeral discourse of Aspasia, in honour of those who had died for their country. HoKirtia yap rpoQi) dv- Optiiirwv sari, says Aspasia, KaXr} fiiv dyaQwv, rj Si ivavria KciKwv. <>c ovv sv Ka\y TroXirtia &TpdT](rav oi irpoaQiv I'lfiwv, dvayKalov $T)\ffai, Si' f)v Si] KaKtivoi dyadoi Kai oi vvv tlaiv, S>v o'iSt rvyxuvovffiv ovTtg oi TtTtXtVTTjKoTts. 'H yap avrfi TToXireia cai rort i\v icai vvv, dpwroKparia, iv y vvv TC. tro\i- TivofitQa Kai rbv dti %povov Ve, (Ktivov WQ ra TroXXa. Ka\ti fit o fulv avri\v dripoKpaTiav, o Si aXXo, $ av %aipy. tan Sk ry d\i)9ti(f fitT* tvSoKiae 7rX?j0ovc dpicrro/cparta. /SacriXtTg fitv yap dti t'lfjCiv eiffW OVTOI Si rort fiiv tic yevove, rori Si aiptrot' iytcpaTtg Si rjc TroXtwf ra TroXXa rb 7rX?j0oc, TUQ Si dp^dc SiBuffi Kai TO (cparop Tolg dti S6%affiv dpt'oroic tlvai, Kai ovrt dffOtvtia, ovTt vtvia, ovrt dyvuffiy, irarkputv dTTt\rj\arai ovSti<; ovSi Tolg svavrioig rf.ri\ir\rai wgirtp iv aXXaig TroXtatv, dXXd t\Q opoe, o SoZag ffoaTiav ovaav. This sentiment was also maintained by his successors. Plato and Xenophon, although differing in their principles and opinions on other subjects, agree with each other on this point. 2 Xenoph. Mem. III. 7. 6. 3 II. 1. LIFE OF SOCRATES. Ixxxix said : " but perhaps that crier in the market or the tent-maker ?" When Alcibiades answered this also in the negative, " Well then," said Socrates, " do not the people of Athens consist of nothing but such persons ? and if thou art not afraid of each of them individually, thou canst not be afraid of them when they are as- sembled." Even in his Apology he did not conceal his anti-democratical feelings. 1 It is but natural that such assertions of our philosopher should have inflamed those irritable Athenian democrats, according to -whose ideas the election of magistrates by lot was the very found- ation of their democracy, and that they should have been strongly inclined to accuse a man who held such opinions. This anti-democratical mode of thinking was not only thought to be discovered in the expressions of Socrates ; his having educated the cruel tyrant Critias, was alleged as an actual proof of it, although Socrates had not the slightest share in his tyrannical principles. We cannot be surprised that in the accusation of Socrates no mention was formally made of Critias and of the Thirty Tyrants in general, of Alcibiades, Hipparchus, and many others of the oligarchical party, who had been more or less intimately connected with Socrates; nor can it be maintained that these connections had no in- fluence on the accusation. The omission of this very important point must be ascribed to the general amnesty 1 C. XIX. Oil yap tanv, ovrig avQputirwv aiaQijairai ovre vfuv OVTI aX\