LAB DAILY

     
      
   
 

 
 

Filmed & Processed by the
Library Photographic Service

University of California
Berkeley 94720
JOB NO.__38/3]3

DATE
Reduction Ratio 7— |

ho c——————

I 1.0 ke 4

la

M1 m 22
mn Ih
[lL25 fie [Le

 

 

hs

 

I

I

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STAN

JARDS-1963-A

LLL LET

 

   
 
 

 

 

 

INCHES 1 Palate a ee 1 qr pl freed
me, Hn h hn + Th + ew : " i t Th Thm ih Tf mo Th er 1 0
HTH TTT mh ll mi wil

DOCUMENT SOURCE:
Hain Libre UCB

 
 

 

THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY

OF CALIFORNIA

i GIFT OF

PROFESSOR
LEON J. RICHARDSON

 

 

"starry

 

end he i

ra

 

 

 

¢]

Hi
ial
t if i

Aa

0

 

Yor?

 
 

e———

 

 

 

COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS

EDITED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

JOHN WILLIAMS WHITE, LEWIS R. PACKARD, AND THOMAS D. SEYMOUR.

APOLOGY OF SOCRATES

AND

CRITO

EDITED
v

ON THE BASIS OF CRON’S EDITION
BY

LOUIS DYER

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY.

BOSTON:
PUBLISHED BY GINN & COMPANY.
1890.

 
 

A

0

~~.

Lo
Q \
. bi

PREFACE.

4 Tais edition of the Apology of Socrates and the Crito is based
1 upon Dr. Christian Cron’s eighth edition, Leipzig, 1882. The

Notes and Introduction here given have in the main been con-
fined within the limits intelligently drawn by Dr. Cron, whose
c commentaries upon various dialogues of Plato have done and still
do so much in Germany to make the study of our author more
profitable as well as pleasanter. No scruple has been felt, how-

 

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1885, by a ever, in making changes. I trust there are few if any of these
JoHN WILLIAMS WHITE AND THOMAS D. SEYMOUR, i which Dr. Cron might not himself make if he were preparing his
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. i work for an English-thinking and English-speaking public.

No editor of Plato in England or America can escape the :
influence of Dr. Jowett’s labors upon Plato; certainly not one !
| who owes so much to Dr. Jowett’s teaching and friendship as |
4 I do. This is a debt which, because it is contracted uncon- r
I ~~ sciously for the most part, can hardly be adequately acknowledged. |
Riddell’s valuable edition has suggested many changes and addi-
Add'l tions in the Notes, and Stallbaum has been assiduously consulted. A
The Appendix to the Introduction differs very materially from J

-the corresponding portion of Dr. Cron’s book. There as else-

where I have been constantly advised and as constantly enlight-
GIFT ened by my kind friend and former teacher, Professor W. W.
Goodwin. But this list of my creditors must necessarily remain
incomplete, for I cannot mention those who have helped me most,

1 nor can I record here the names of all my pupils, past and pres-

 

ent, whose needs have been my guide and my impulse in pre-
J. 8. CusuINg & Co., PRINTERS, BOSTON.

paring this book.

BE | 855

po
gras

 
1v PREFACE.

The Text is substantially that of Dr. Cron’s edition ; where

there is alteration, reasons are given in the Critical Appendix. In

no case have the illustrative citations of the German commentary
omitted ; so far as possible, indeed, further

The dramatists, especially Euripides,
It is easy

been inconsiderately
citations have been made.

have been constantly drawn upon for new citations.

to underrate the importance of Euripides to the reader of Plato ;

ble to overstate in the interests of higher scholarship

it is impossi
the desirability of having even the :
letters discipline themselves in the reading and heeding of

tions offered to illustrate their author.

youngest students of Greek
cita-

LOUIS DYER.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY,
July, 1885.

 

INTRODUCTION,

Tue endowment of philosophical thought with a beautiful form 1
of its own was the last literary triumph of Greece. Guided by a
wonderful law of growth, the Greeks, before dealing with philos-
ophy, had already displayed in the elaboration of various kinds of
literature their singular susceptibility to beauty. Epic and lyric
composition first ran their full course and then the drama suc-
ceeded them. Indeed not poetry only but also history and oratory
preceded philosophy, for when the drama was perfect they were
nearly so. Philosophy, meanwhile, still lacked an outward form
for the expression of what she was bound to say. This lack in-
volves more than a question of clothing: the body itself of Greek
thought was as yet but imperfectly developed. Since thought
(ratio) is the soul of which the body is utterance (oratio), we
cannot wonder at finding a single Greek word (Adyos) for both, nor
can we fail to see that the soul of philosophy was not full-grown
until it had fashioned for itself a body in which to stand forth free
and independent.

The merest glance at the history of philosophy! justifies this
statement. Greek philosophy first gave signs of life in the cos-
mogonies and theogonies of early poets who were anything but

! The most important facts aretobe five volumes, i. and ii. “ The Pre-So-

found: (1) in Plato’s writings, (2) in
Aristotle’s writings, especially in the
first book of his Metaphysics. The
chief modern books are: (1) Historia
Philosophiae Graecae et Romanae ex
fontium locis contexta. Locos colleg.
H. Ritter et L. Preller. Ed. 5. (2)
Brandis, Handbuch der Geschichte
derGriechisch-Romischen Philosophie.
2 Theile. (3) Zeller, die Philosophie
der Griechen, translated by various
hands, and published by Longmans in

cratic Philosophy,” iii. “ Socrates and
the Socratic Schools,” iv. “ Plato and
the Older Academy,” v. “The Stoics,
Epicureans, and Sceptics.” (4) F.
Ueberweg, Grundriss der Geschichte
der Philosophie des Alterthums, His-
tory of Philosophy from Thales to
the present time, Vol. I. “Ancient
Philosophy.” (5) G. H. Lewes’s Bio-
graphical History of Philosophy.
(6) J. F. Ferrier’s Lectures. (7) The
best book for young students is J. B.

 
     
     

 

   
    
   
     
    
 

cece

re

cn ET

SET

PEER RAT

INTRODUCTION.

philosophers; and even those famous worthies, the seven wise
men, belong rather to the history of politics and civilization In
general, than to the special history of philosophy. The name
of Thales, one of the wise seven, stands at the beginning In
Greek philosophy. He, and with him his fellow-townsmen and
successors, Anaximander and Anaximenes, asked this question:
What is that something out of which everything in Nature grows
and is made? At Miletus, a town whose political and intellectual
vigor gave it preéminence among the Ionian colonies in Asia Minor,
these three men lived and sought for something omnipresent and
unchanging, for the real substance which underlies the unceas-
ing surface-changes offered to man’s senses In the world, They
all found this in elementary matter of some description. Thales
described it as WATER, Anaximander as to émepov, the UNLIMITED.!
Anaximenes called it az. But this elementary matter no one of
the three opposed to Spirit ; for the opposition of ¢spiritual’’ and

: r
«« material,”” or of ‘‘matter’’ and ‘ minc ”» came much later. To
the Milesian philosophers matter was a something which, if not
divine, was instinct with divine energy.

3 Yet a far less material notion of this permanent something under-

lying all change was undoubtedly arrived at by the Pythagoreans.
Born at Samos, Pythagoras emigrated to Croton, where about 530
B.C. he founded the half religious and half political society which
bore his name. These Pythagoreans believed that NUMBER was
the essence of things, the permanent and real part of the world,
or, to give their second way of putting the doctrine, that the ele-
ments of numbers are the elements of things. This doctrine
admits of application not only to the physical world, but also to

Mayor’s Sketch of Ancient Phils Wa Poets | & ae Dosw 2
ales to Cicero. Cambridge, of Pla ansle

fe > Press Series. Special works ~~ B. Jowett. (5) Grote, Plow and the
on Plato are: (1) K.F. Hermann, Ge- other companions 9 Sd we 0 A
schichte und System der Platonischen 1 Matter strippe 8 i Borba
Philosophie. (2) Steinhart, Einleitung dary-lines ; a Soenng w hel

zu Platon’s Simmtlichen Werken, everything and anyt 1ing, is, a dy 2
iibersetzt von H. Miiller, und Platons as 1t 1s limited in one way i wy le A
Leben. (3) Susemihl, die genetische “everything by turns and n g

Entwickelung der Platonischen Philo- long.”

 

  
      
    
        
    
        
       
     
     
      
       
   
  
 

 

EEE

INTRODUCTION.

the moral world, —to the whole field of human action.! But the

Pythagoreans framed no philosophy of right and wrong. They
contented themselves with a few practical maxims which were use-

ful in the work of their society.

Among the various doctrines

attributed to Pythagoras and his school, we can with certainty
connect only one with Pythagoras himself. He certainly main-
tained the theory of the Transmigration of Souls.? Philolaus,
probably an elder contemporary of Socrates and Democritus, first
stated the tenets of this school in writing. He came to Thebes,
where he taught, nearly at the same time with Lysis, his well-
known brother-Pythagorean. Of the book by Philolaus entitled
ITept Pvoews, such fragments as have been preserved are collected
by Boeckh,® and supply an invaluable source for the history of the
old-school Pythagoreanism. Of the later Pythagoreans Archytas
of Tarentum, who lived in the fourth century B.c., is the most note-
worthy. He distinguished himself in politics and in mathematics.

The Pythagoreans approached a comparatively spiritual concep-
tion of nature, but the Eleatics went further in the same direction.
Xenophanes of Colophon, the reputed originator of this new doc-
trine, was probably a contemporary of Pythagoras. Looking upon
the world as a whole, he maintained that the ALL is the ONE, and
that the One is God. This utterance implies a deep-seated moral
conviction that God is perfection. Parmenides, who was born
about 515 B.c.,* at Elea, a Phocaean colony in Italy, first devel-

! Number is the law and the bond

that holds the world together; every-
thing, if we are to know it, must be
numbered, i.e. odd oreven. Odd num-
bers are limited, even numbers are
unlimited, and all cases of opposition
are, as it were, cases of the opposition
of odd to even so that the following
list of opposites may be made kara
cvatotiav, under two heads: —

(A) (B) (A) (B)
Limited . Unlimited. | Rest . . . Motion.
Odd . .. Even. Straight . Crooked.
One . .. Many. Light. . . Darkness.
Right . . Left. Good. . . Bad.
Male. . . Female. Square . . Oblong

(Rectangle).

2 Of. The Merchant of Venice, Act
IV. Scene I. 130 ff. ; also Ovid, Metam.
XV. 165 ff. :

? Philolaos des Pythagoreers Leh-
ren nebst den Bruchstiicken seines
Werkes, von August Boeckh. Berlin,
1819. The authenticity of these frag-
ments has recently been called in
question.

* To fix this date ¢f. Plato’s Theae-
tetus, p. 183 e, and Parmenides, p.
127 b, where it is said that Socrates,
in carly youth, saw both Zeno and
Parmenides, and that the latter was a
very old man. The age of Parmenides
was sixty-five, while Zeno’s is placed at

A i

   
  
  

 
 
    
   
   
   
    
      
    
    
        
        
       
        
      
    
 

INTRODUCTION.

oped the doctrines of Xenophanes, saying that what has not Being
but is many does not exist. He maintained the Oneness of all
that is, calling it Being, pure and simple. Following Xenophanes,
Parmenides set forth his doctrine in a long didactic poem in epic
verse. Zeno supported this theory by indirect demonstration,
pointing out the contradictions in which we are involved by mala.
taining the opposite view, that what is many has Being or exists.
Finally, Melissus of Samos, well known as a Samian general in the
revolt of that island from Athens, about 440 B.c., accepted the
views of Parmenides, and, unlike Zeno, argued directly? that
Being is eternal, infinite, one and unchangeable.’ :

The physical first cause of Pythagoreanism suggests the possi
bility of a systematic theory of right and wrong, that is of Ethics.
The Eleatic first cause gives promise of a coming system of philo-
sophic reasoning, of Dialectic. For all this we must not call Zeno
the originator of Dialectic. Any inclination to do so ought to dis-
appear after a consideration of his method in controversial reason-
ing and proof. He argues, not to win truth from the heart of his
facts, but to defend a ready-made doctrine and to thrust it upon
those whose attention he gains. At its best this is rhetoric, at its
worst it is sophistry. :

Conflicting authorities leave us uncertain whether it was before
or after the completer statement of the Eleatic doctrines by Par-
menides, that Heraclitus of Ephesus flatly contradicted the saying

forty. This is not history, but it gives talk of anything as being ? I histo is
a chronological clue. Being, either it always existe or x
1 Assert that the many things seen came into existence at some time.

in the world really exist, and you it came into existence it must have
must admit that they are at the same grown out of something of which we
time limited and limitless. For if these could have said it is or it is not. Out
things are real there must be a defi- of that which is not nothing can grow,
nite sum of them, not more and not Sherotone Being can only have grown
less. Hence they are limited. But out oi being. :

they are also i ig because, tak- 3 Fragmenta philosopher Gros
ing their definite sum and subdividing  corum collegit recensuit Yoru . G.
it as often as we please, we still can . A. Mullachius. Parjsiis, 18 3 ;
go on with the subdivision indefinitely + (Cf. the placing of “good” an

 

and without limit.
2 If there is no Being, why do we

“bad” on the Pythagorean list of
pairs, p. 3, note 1 above.

INTRODUCTION.

of his older contemporary Xenophanes that the One admits neither
motion nor change. Heraclitus is said to have flourished about
the sixty-ninth Olympiad, 500 B.c. The elaborate superstructure
of his teaching rested upon the following statement: ¢ Every-
thing is moving like a stream, and nothing stands still ; all things
are forever coming into existence and ceaselessly flowing away.
The world was from the beginning, and always will be, ever-living
FIRE, kindling by fixed degrees and by fixed degrees dying down.
Everything has its price in terms of Fire, and Fire pays for the
world as gold buys goods and goods are sold for gold.”” The
phraseology here used abundantly shows that Heraclitus, in speak-
ing of fire as he does, is not following the older Ionic philos-
ophers by taking his turn at describing anew a permanent substra-
tum in their sense. Under the veil of his oracular words the
meaning is given as it were in a parable.  Ever-living Fire
stands for the restless impulse which underlies the process of
BECOMING or transformation. This process he also calls the up-
ward and the downward way, meaning the constant shifting of
things growing up and dying down. This he thought was the
common life in all Nature. Such was the picture which he drew
of the world. In the same vein Heraclitus said, ‘“ The father of
all things is war,” meaning by war the united play of opposites or
things contradictory. ¢ Concord,” he said, ¢“is the daughter of
strife.”

By making his system account for the world of sensible things
Heraclitus undoubtedly improves upon the Eleatics. And this, too,
in spite of his substantial agreement with them in certain leading
conclusions. In the first place, both schools agree in rejecting all
sensible impressions as wholly untrustworthy ; reaching this conclu-
sion, however, from points of view diametrically opposed. This
agreement is most obvious in their respective accounts of par-
ticular (sensible) things. Heraclitus’s stream of ceaseless trans-
formation or Becoming allows to no single thing an instant of real
and permanent existence, and thus practically relegates all things
that we see in the world to a state of non-existence. Parmenides
regards the sensible world as non-existent, opposing to it pure
existence one and indivisible. But the Eleatics provide no means

 
   

pe

ST fag EST

 

  
 
  

  

 

  

INTRODUCTION.

for connecting pure Being on the one hand with Not-being on the
other, and, unlike Heraclitus, they cleave the world in twain and
find no way of uniting the two parts. In the second place, Par-
menides teaches that outside of the thought of the One there is no
true thinking but only deceptive ¢opining,” while Heraclitus urges
that the ‘universal’ which pervades all things (+6 fuwwdv = 76 kowdv)
alone has understanding. This understanding the ‘individual’
shares only in proportion to the degree of its submission to and
submersion in the ‘universal.’ Here is substantial agreement, but
here again Heraclitus takes a wider view than Parmenides, and
accordingly makes a fuller provision for the facts.

Though Heraclitus did not follow the example of Xenophanes
and Parmenides, but wrote his work?! in prose, he expressed himself
most obscurely. It was on this account that the ancients them-
selves nicknamed him ¢ okorewds, the man of darkness. We hear that
Socrates, when asked by Euripides for his opinion of Heraclitus’s
book, gave this answer: ¢ All that I could fathom was excellent ;
what I could not fathom is no doubt the same, only we had better
send to Delos for a man to do the diving.” Aristotle says that
Heraclitus is obscure because it is impossible to decide how his
words are to be combined, and of the parts of his book that are
preserved not a few justify this statement. For instance, a passage
that has been much discussed & rd oodov poivov Méyerdar ovk éBéker, kal
0éev Znvos otvopa gives rise to two questions, neither of which can be
satisfactorily answered. Shall we put a comma before or after kal
ie? How are the various words in the sentence to be construed ?

Empedocles of Agrigentum stated his doctrines in a didactic
poem after the manner of Xenophanes and Parmenides. He chose
the epic form, and his work was the model after which Lucretius
wrote his De rerum natura. Empedocles flourished in the ciglty-
fourth Olympiad, near the middle of the fifth century B.c. This
date is confirmed by the report that he visited the newly founded

1 Schleiermacher has collected and tempted restoration of the original
explained the fragments that are pre- sequence of the fragments, Borakii
served (Museum der Alterthumswis- von Ephesus, by Dr. P. Schuster, eip-
senschaft, 1.3, Berlin, 1808; or,Werke zig, 1873. See also Heracliti Ephesii
zur Philosophie, II. 1). See the at- reliquae, ed. I. Bywater, London, 1877.

 

INTRODUCTION.

colony of Thurii. His system is closely connected with the Eleatic
as well as with the Heraclitan scheme of things, and also shows
traces of Pythagorean influence. Starting from the first principle,
that Not-being can no more come to be than Being can decay and
cease to be, he concludes that what men call growth and decay are
respectively cases of the combination and of the disintegration of
primal elements. His four elements are the familiar ones, to each
of which his imaginative genius gives a mythological name. Fire,
described as flaming Aether, he names Zeus ; Air, Hera; Earth,
Aidoneus; Water, Nestis. These four elements were at the be-
ginning inseparably united within the eternal Globe (Saipos),
which in all its parts was of like consistency. But outside of this
globe ruled Strife (Neixos), who finally invaded it, causing com-
plete disintegration. The resisting impulse of Love (®kia) reacted
from within and brought about a partial reintegration. This reac-
tion and reintegration gave rise to the frame of the world (Kdopos)
with all the particular things which it comprises. In his detailed
account of sensible perception, feeling, and intellectual apprehen-
sion of the good and the bad, Empedocles applies his fundamental
principle with an unsteady hand, and is often involved in contradic-
tions. His religious theories are set forth in a separate work called
Kabappol.

Neither the date nor the place of the birth of Leucippus can
be determined, but we know that he founded the school of the
Atomists. Democritus of Abdera, born in the eightieth Olympiad,
about 460 B.c., was certainly his younger contemporary, and
probably his disciple. Upon Democritus devolved the task of de-
veloping this new system of thought.! The Atomists were unwill-
ing to say either with Heraclitus (1) Being is a process of constant
change, or with Parmenides (2) Being immovable and unchangeable
exists apart from all particular things, but like Empedocles they
said (3) A number of ORIGINAL ELEMENTS exists. Instead, however,
of four elements, they supposed an unlimited number of Atos
(al dropoi, SC. odolar Or i8éa). These indivisible Atoms were in-

! For the interesting fragments of menta,” Berol. 1843. Also his work
his well-written work, ¢/. Mullach’s referred to above, p. 4, note 3.
“Democriti Abderitae operum frag-

 

  

 

9
   
  
   
 
 
   
 
   
   

!
1
§
§

 

 
 
   
 

 

 

 

_ wen
SRR TINE

INTRODUCTION.

wardly alike in essence, and so small as to be indistinguishable ;
they differed in shape, arrangement, and position. Their combina-
tion means growth ; their separation means decay and destruction ;
the difference in their situation and arrangement is at the bottom
of such variety and change as we see in the world. But why, we
may ask, should these Atoms combine or separate ? Because,
says the Atomist, NEcEssiTY forces them to move. This necessary
motion comes, not from any source or cause beyond and above
them, but is derived partly from an original rotary motion, a twist
which they take at the start, and partly from their constant col-
lision one with another and the consequent reaction. But to
move at all they need room to move in. This room is a vacuum
which offers no resistance; it is free and empty space or VOID,
while the atoms are space compacted and filled full, or FULNESS.
Reality consists solely of these Atoms, and hence they are Being,
while the Void is Not-being. And yet Not-being in this sense
has a relative existence. Therefore the Atomists did not hesitate
to say: Being no more is than Not-being. By Atoms not the
physical world of the senses only, but also the soul, is explained.
The body is the cabin, exivos, of the soul, and on this basis an
attempt is made to explain mental activity and the life of the soul.
Here the shortcomings of the Atomistic explanation of the world
show themselves. Still, against the Atomists the point is not
well taken that, by necessity, an Atomist must mean chance
or what is arbitrary, and all praise is due to the determined
logic with which they apply their principle consistently to every
detail. Democritus is credited with a number of admirable moral
maxims; they express, however, the plain common-sense of a
man who means to make the most of life, rather than a matured

philosophy of conduct.

10 Anaxagoras of Clazomenae was born in the seventieth Olympiad,

about 500 B.C., and thus his birth preceded that of Empedocles and
Democritus ; but he must be counted as belonging to a maturer
phase of thought.! When Anaxagoras said : ¢¢ Order is introduced

1 Aristotle, Metaphysics A, 8: *Ava- pos, &melpovs elval ¢pnou Tas apxds. Of
taybpas . . . Ti pév Akl mpbrepos dv Tob- his book ep! doews a number of frag-
Tov ("EumedoxAéovs), Tois 8’ &pyors oTe- ments are preserved. Schaubach has

ST

? « it ai Say RR aa

INTRODUCTION.

’

into the All by minp,”’ there was no further use cither for the
half-mythological forces of Empedocles, or for the blind necessity
of the Atomists. And yet, there was much upon which all the
three schools would have agreed; Democritus and Empedocles
would have welcomed Anaxagoras’s dictum, ‘The Greeks are
wrong in believing that there is such a thing as growing to be
out of nothing or perishing away into nothing; nothing grows to
be and nothing perishes, but all things are the mingling together
and the falling apart of elements that really exist. So, therefore,
to grow into being is properly to-be-compounded, and to perish is
to-fall-apart.” These elements that really exist Anaxagoras did
not define as Empedocles defined his elements or as the Atomists
‘defined their atoms. He often calls his elements seeds, owéppara,
and they have certain determinate qualities which make them the
seeds of this, that, or the other particular kind of thing, e.g. gold,
wood, bone. Flesh, blood, and bone are respectively combinations
of parts, each one of which parts has the peculiar properties of the
whole of which it is one part, and the whole has the properties of
each of its parts. In speaking of such a whole, as well as of
its parts, Aristotle used the word oJpowopep (Spoos, like, and pépos,
part) ; therefore, the whole theory has often been called HOMOIO-
MERIC. In the beginning, the sum of things infinitesimally small
and infinite in number, no one of which could be perceived on
account of its smallness, lay in a mass together. Finally minp
intervened, separating like from unlike and introducing order. The
most delicate and purest of essences, mind enters into combination
with nothing else; it understands all things for and by itself, and
over all it rules supreme. In such unmistakable terms as these
did Anaxagoras set forth the idea of an all-wise and all-powerful
essence completely distinct from matter. The words which he
chose are no doubt inadequate because borrowed from the domain
of the senses, but their import is clear. The fact that he reached
this conception of mind gives to Anaxagoras a conspicuous place
in the history of Greek philosophy, and yet he hardly knew the

published them: Anaxagorac Clazo- them into his book. See on Apology,
menii fragmenta collecta et illustrata, p. 26 d.
Lips. 1827. Mullach has also put

   
  
    
  
   
  

    

 

i * 3 BEN A 2 eat ns 3
SR GaN Gh se aes ma re fs es
HE S EE 2 BSeras s

Ge mn ST

       
 

 

INTRODUCTION.

full bearing of his discovery. Mind, he says, when in the begin-
ning all things lay in a motionless mass, gave them their first im-
pulse and lent the motion which brought order into all. In other
respects Anaxagoras’s explanation of nature is materialistic, the
same in kind with those of his predecessors and contemporaries.
This is what Plato and Aristotle say, and it is of this that they
both complain. In order that the conception of mind reached by
Anaxagoras might be made fruitful, there was need that it be com-
pletely worked out, and for this the foundations of philosophy had
to be laid anew. For this necessary work of reconstruction no
more favorable place could have been found than Athens. Indeed,
it was at Athens, and in the society of its most noteworthy men,
especially of Pericles and Euripides, that Anaxagoras himself lived.
He was, however, finally accused of atheism and exiled by the
enemies of his great friend Pericles. Leaving Athens, he retired
to Lampsacus, and there ended his days.

After numerous attempts to account for the world of sensible
things on a physical basis, the very school of thinkers who sought
to explain matter by matter began to feel the need of some first
cause which should lie outside of matter and above it. Hencefor-
ward the one thing indispensable for the full recognition of such a
first cause was a vigorous impulse which, arousing and uplifting
the moral energy of national thought, should re-shape Philosophy
by the help of this new conception. This required impulse was
found in the practical demand, now for the first time made upon
philosophers, that they abandon the retirement in which, with little
or no reference to what was going on about them, they had up to
this time carried on their speculations.! Now the time had come
when the world demanded a new departure in education, and now
was the opportunity for Philosophy to try her strength. At first
this trial seemed to lead rather to destruction than to reconstruc-
tion; the wear and tear of practice threatened completely to
swallow up all theory. Various tendencies, indeed, the obvious

1 They show no little impatience cussions or fall behind, — every man
and disdain of every-day men like of them steadily goes on his chosen
ourselves. It matters little to them way. Plato, Sophist, p. 243 a.
whether we keep pace with their dis-

INTRODUCTION.

results not a few of them of doctrines previously taught, accom-
plished nothing but their own destruction. But this very destruc-
tion served to point a moral, since it showed that the engrossing
aim of sound philosophy must not be to adorn its devotees with
irresponsible cleverness and to train their faculties in that kind of
intellectual dexterity whose chief reward is success. For it became
evident that a moral ideal was required which, in the teaching of the
Sophists, was absent. This lack of a freshly grasped and high moral
standard, coupled with the effort to turn their disciples into dex-
troas performers on the stage of life, characterized many different
teachers at this time. These teachers were the Sophists, and their
teaching is usually called not Sophistry but Sopmistic.! This
term is accordingly applied to the teaching of men who, in the
details of their theories, often had little or nothing in common.
Men who appeared as public professors of wisdom called them-
selves Sophists, and were so called by the public. They gathered
about them old and young, and, for a stated fee, gave lectures
to hearers fresh from the heat of a keen and active political
strife in such branches of knowledge as were likely to interest
men so pre-occupied. In short, the practical needs of political life
led them to annex the widening territory of rhetoric to the tradi-
tional domain of philosophy. They devoted much energy to the
art of vigorous speech-writing and of finished speech-making.
These were the outward graces which a Sophist used in order to
make his teachings and lectures attractive. Rhetoric and Sophistic
were sister arts, inseparable from the outset, and for every man
who was anxious to find the best market for his proficiency in

! Grote, in his History of Greece  Sophists together. Three negative
(ch. 67), is certainly right in rejecting statements apply to all the Sophists

this designation, if it must mean that
the teachings and principles of all
Sophists were the same or that all of
them taught in the same way. The
word Sophistic may, however, be said
to imply such similarity in methods of
teaching and in doctrine as would (1)
fairly distinguish the Sophists from
Socrates, and (2) lead us to class the

which do not apply to Socrates: JSirst
the Sophists did not teach free of
charge, second they did not in any
strict sense lay foundations for the
future development of philosophy,
third they did not cast their lot either
with their own or with any adopted
country.

 

 
INTRODUCTION.

these arts, Athens, at that time the centre of all the intellectual
activity of the day, was a natural place of abode.

12 Among the representatives of the new turn which thought had
taken, Protagoras and Gorgias are especially prominent. A ccord-
ingly, more than all the rest, these two have earned a place in the his-
tory of philosophy. Protagoras of Abdera was the first who claimed
as his distinguishing title the name of Sophist.! When he was born
and when he died? cannot be satisfactorily determined. At all
events, he was a contemporary of Socrates, though considerably his
elder.’ Protagoras, during his long life of seventy years more or
less, made repeated and protracted visits to Athens. He was, how-
ever, forced to discontinue them on account of a vote of the Athenian
assembly condemning him as an atheist. His philosophical theory
was based upor. the dictum of Heraclitus that all things are con-
stantly in a state of flux. But, in applying this principle to human
thought and human action, he reached conclusions which were not
infrequently opposed to those of the great Ephesian. In place of
Heraclitus’s §wos Adyos he maintained that Man is the measure

of all things; of things that are that they are, of things that are not
that they are mot.* By man he understood man as this or that

! See Plato’s Protagoras, p. 317 only by the right man; by an ideally

a, b.
? His birth is variously placed be-
tween 490 and 480 B.c. (in 487, 485,
or 481), and his death between 420
and 408 s.c.

3 Plato’s Protagoras, p. 317¢: ob-
devds GTov od wdvTwy bv Sudv kad HAulay
warhp etn, there is not a man of you
all whose father I might not be so far as
years go.

* The original words as given by
Diog. Laert. (ix. 51) are: * wdvrwv

Xpnpdtwy pérpoy dvfpwmos, Td uty dy-

Twy @s Eri, TAY 8¢ odk SvTwy bs odie
éorw.” This is sometimes so inter-
preted as to mean simply that nothing
can be measured, i.c. known, unless
there is some one to measure or know.
This might then mean that the right
measure of all things would be taken

perfect man endowed with ideally per-
fect knowledge. In saying that Pro-
tagoras did not mean this ideal man
Cron agrees with the following ac-
count, translated ( freely) from Plato’s
Theaetetus, p. 161 ¢: “In other re-
spects I am charmed with the doctrine
of Protagoras that what seems to each
man is, but I can never swallow his be-
ginning. Why did he not commence by
saying the measure of all things was
a hog or a dog-faced baboon or some
still worse monster, and that so far as
wisdom went he himself was no whit
wiser than a tadpole? If each man
is his own best judge and all that he
decides upon is right and true, how
then is Protagoras wise enough to
teach the rest of us, and to charge us
roundly for it ? ”

 

INTRODUCTION.

individual. This amounted to cutting away all footing for knowl-
edge, after reducing knowledge to the sensation or sensible per-
ception of a given individual.
Gorgias of Leontini! in Sicily appeared at Athens in 427 B.C., On
an embassy from his native town.? His mission was successful,
and his brilliant oratory won such golden opinions that large num-
bers crowded to listen to his show speeches and paid him hand-
somely for his trouble. Later he revisited Athens and travelled to
various places in Greece (Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 16 ff.), always with
the same success. It is said that he was a hundred years old
when he died.’ His philosophical views and method of reason-
ing were based upon the Eleatic system, and are summed up in the
following words from his book (ep pioews 1 wepl Tob pr) Svros, Nature,
Or THAT WHICH 18 NOT): ‘Nothing is; if anything is, it cannot be

known; if anything can be known, it cannot be communicated.”

But the chief concern of Gorgias was the teaching of rhetoric;
here he sought to win fame. Still, his instruction seems to have
been confined to practical hints in regard to details and he objected
to being called a Sophist.

Among the other distinguished Sophists, ,Hippias of Elis and 14

Jesodiens of Ceos were especially famous.“ Hippias was chiefly

noted for his extensive knowledge of genealogy and of mathemati-
cal astronomy,* but he also plumed himself upon his miscellaneous
accomplishments in various practical directions. Prodicus is best
known for his nice discriminations between words of similar mean-
ing, and for his moral lectures. Xenophon (Mem. ii. 1. 21) has pre-
served one of these, the very clever story of the Choice of Heracles.

The bustling activity of these and of other Sophists who had no
fixed abiding-place, produced no marked effect upon philosophy
beyond making clear the insufficiency of all previous speculation.
After a hundred years and more, Greek thought had reached the
conclusion that to talk of real truth was idle, and that all knowl-

1 This same name is applied to the 3 The dates given for his birth vary
inhabitants. Ptolemaecus is alone in from 496 B.c. (Foss) to 483 B.c. (Frei);
calling the town Aedvriov. for his death, from 384 B.c. to 375 B.c.

? Diodorus xii. 53. Thue. iii. 86 does 4 See on Apol., p. 18 b.
not mention him by name.

 

 
14 INTRODUCTION.

»

edge depends solely upon sensible perception and sensation. So,

_ therefore, knowledge could at most change worse sensations into
“better ones, —more profitable and pleasanter ones.

16 — This doctrine virtually involved the destruction of all philosophy.

Therefore Socrates, who won the day against it, is rightly called

the deliverer and the new founder of philosophy.

17 Socrates, the son of a sculptor Sophroniscus,! was born at Ath-

ens, and as a boy followed his father’s occupation. Soon, however,
he abandoned sculpture and devoted himself to the profession to
which he thought God called him; this was a continuous warfare
carried on against the conceit of sham knowledge in all its forms.
Wherever and whenever he met it he was bound to expose sham
knowledge as real ignorance.” As for himself, he claimed no
knowledge beyond the capital fact that he knew nothing. By this,
however, he did not mean that real knowledge was as the Sophists
maintained impossible. For though Socrates said that God alone
was really wise, his meaning was that the whole duty of man was
comprised in the struggle toward that real knowledge which alone
gives the power to do right. And just here Socrates declared that
all virtues, dperal, were essentially forms of knowledge, and were
based upon the understanding of some class of things. This in-
volved the final identification of virtue in general with understand-
ing. If virtue’ is understanding, it follows that no one does wrong
knowingly ; men sin only in so far as they are in ignorance of
what is right. A man who knows the right, who has real knowl-
edge, will do the right, for then that knowledge will be stronger
within him than any desire. Naturally the standard of this genu-
ine knowledge is not arbitrary, nor is it borrowed from anything
outside of the soul. Socrates based all knowledge upon necessary
obedience to the commandment inscribed upon the temple at

 

INTRODUCTION.

Delphi, I'v. ceavrdv. Xenophon (Mem. iv. 2) gives an account
of Socrates’s explanation of this.!

Two questions arise concerning [Socrates’s idea of knowledge
as the foundation of righteousness. (1) What constitutes this
knowledge? (2) What is the field in which it works? Xenophon,
Plato, and Aristotle vie with one another in declaring that Socrates
would always ask about everything under discussion: What is the
general idea of which this, that, or the other is a particular instance ?
v{ ékaoTov dom Tay Svrwv. Let every man first answer this question,
and then he is a fit guide for his friends; otherwise it is a case of
‘the blind leading the blind.” Hence, when Socrates found a man
who claimed the possession of knowledge, his test question was,
Can you define the thing which you say you know? And he
usually found his man incapable of giving the required definition,
and accordingly showed up the boasted knowledge as ignorance.

In applying this test, and in taking the steps by which he led up
to and determined the definition required, consisted the peculiar
method of Socrates. Ie always began with everyday facts, and
then proceeded by the method of question and answer, either (1)
to the definition and general idea required, or (2) to the irresistible
conclusion that some definition in vogue which he had taken up
was wrong. The steps taken in going from a given class of par-
ticulars to their universal, which is the general idea including them
all, are called éwayowyr, induction. Hence, Aristotle ascribes to Soc-
rates the discovery of the epagogic or inductive method (rods émwakri-
kovs Adyovs), and of the definition of universals (vo Jpitecfar kaddhov,
— hence 8pos = definitio).

By the pravecric (Swahekricrj) of Socrates is meant simply his
acuteness in so guiding a series of questions and answers that some-
thing was finally done toward determining a general conception
and reaching some measure of truth. This process required a liv-

1 The ordinary date given for his
birth is Ol. 77, 3 or 4=470/69 B.C.:
probably Ol. 77, 2 or 1 =472/1 B.C. is
nearer the truth. CY. infra note on
§ 30, and Apol., p. 17d.

2 f. Apol, p. 294 ff, particularly
the explanation of e, épfgouar rté.

3 It cannot be denied that even in

Socrates’ conception of &per4, the old
notion so manifest in Homer (cf. Doe-
derlein, Hom. Gloss., p. 536) of ‘skill’
or cleverness was still very strong.
The German word ‘Tugend’ and its
corresponding idea are similarly con-
nected with ‘Tauglichkeit’ and ‘Tiich-
tigkeit.’

ing issue raised between a man skilled in questioning and some
one willing to answer him. But, soon after the day of Socrates,

1 We may summarize the philosoph-
ical situation as follows: Protagoras
said : Man is the measure; Socrates
met this by asking: What is man?

Gorgias said: We cannot have real
knowledge ; Socrates met this by say-
ing : Before we give up knowledge let
us seriously try to know ourselves.

15

18

 

 

 

 
INTRODUCTION.

‘dialectic’ became a philosophical term applied particularly to the
more developed and many-sided method of Plato ; indeed, it finally
became identified with Plato’s logic or theory of ideas. Quite apart
from Socrates’s dialectic is the controversial art of certain Sophists
(dvrihoyikri) , for, whereas this controversial art only sought per-
petual controversy, the essential peculiarity of the dialectic of
Socrates was that it aimed at the understanding of truth.

20 The discussions of Socrates were almost always ethical. Nearly
all questions which up to his day had engrossed philosophers he
summarily excluded from the field of his investigation. He asked :
What is virtue? what is holiness? what is justice? what is courage?
And his answer, in every case, was understanding, — the under-
standing of what is good in reference now to one and now to an-
other class of facts. Courage, for instance, is the understanding of
what is good in relation to things terrible and dangerous; and he
has courage whose conduct is right in cases of terror and danger.
Yet Socrates recognized that the original bent with which the indi-
vidual is born here disclosed itself ; since he saw that, just as one
man’s body is born stronger than his neighbor’s, so one man’s soul
was born more courageous than his neighbor’s. Yet he maintained
that every man, be the qualities born in him what they might, could
advance in excellence (wpos dperrv) by learning and practice.

21 Such is Socrates’s doctrine in its outlines, as Xenophon, Plato,
and Aristotle have represented it in their writings. Socrates him-
self, as is well known, was the author of no books. We have,
therefore, no direct statement of his views at first hand. The most
important authority for his teachings is Xenophon, especially
his four books of ‘‘ Memoirs of Socrates’ (dmwopvmpovedpara,! com-
mentarii, Memorabilia). In this work the writer undertakes to
defend the memory of his friend and master against the accusa-
tions and slanders of all enemies. With this in view, he sets forth
all that he can remember of the conversations of Socrates. All
must be ready to allow that Xenophon, who was nothing if
not a man of action, failed to understand Socrates’s position in

1 It has been claimed that the Me- The poet’s allusion, however, is prob-
morabilia are referred to by Horace ably more vague.
(A. P. v. 310), as Socraticae chartae.

  

    

   

INTRODUCTION. 17

   
 

the history of Greek philosophy ; he could not adequately appreci-
ate him as a philosopher. But of the man his portrait is invaluable, ih
in spite of this or perhaps on account of this. Writing from a pop- |
ular point of view, he corrects Plato’s ideal representation of the NE
master Socrates, and helps us to the facts about Socrates as he B an
lived and taught. Further, in the judicious remarks scattered here it —
and there through Aristotle’s writings, we have always a most wel-
come supplement, and often a most wholesome corrective; by
drawing from all these sources we are enabled to bring our ideal i
Socrates within the limits of historical fact. ip %

An account of Socrates’s theory gives no adequate knowledge 22 T=
of his historical significance. A necessary aid must be sought in
some description of his personality, of Socrates during life and
Socrates facing death.!

It has already been said that Socrates thought his life consecrated 23
to the service of a higher power and his every act the fulfilment
of a task laid on him by God. This it was that forbade his
following any of the pursuits which engross the majority of
men. He was poor? but his poverty was not so complete as
his frugality. The fulfilment of God’s command imposed upon :
him abstention from politics, except in cases where to abstain |
would be to neglect the plain duties of a citizen. He served as a
hoplite in three campaigns,’ and showed in battle that he was no
mere talker about courage. This same temper, this unterrified
obedience to duty, unswerving in the way of right and law, he dis-
played as one of the senators* and prytanes on the occasion of the
memorable popular assembly which illegally condemned the gen-
erals victorious at Arginusae. Here he faced the arbitrary caprice
of the people with the same strength of mind which made him

 

  
  
  
  
   
  
 
 
 
    
 
  
 
 
 
 
   

 

.mnn rn  ,kADsS

1 When Xenophon is used as our au-
thority, it should be remembered that
the subtler qualities of such a man as
Socrates were likely, either to escape
so unimaginative a mind, or, if felt,
to be represented inadequately by
a writer comparatively destitute of
dramatic power. These are just the
qualities which distinguish Socrates
from all other teachers, and these

 

  

are given by Plato alone. Cf. ‘Socra-
tes,” a translation of the Apology,
Crito, and parts of the Phaedo.
Charles Secribner’s Sons, New York.

2 Apology, p. 23 ¢ and note; also
Xen. Mem. I. vi.

3 Apology, p. 28 e and note; also
Laches, pp. 181 ab, 188 e¢, and Sym-
posium, pp. 219 e-221 ec.

+ Apology, p. 32 b with note

  
 

   
ro — a ee Se etre
RR i —

3

%

18 INTRODUCTION.

afterwards’ prefer death to a cowardly and unrighteous submis-
sion to the thirty tyrants.

24  Critias, like Alcibiades, was for a time a disciple of Socrates

chiefly for the reason that he expected in that capacity to learn
certain useful accomplishments. Later, as the leading spirit among
the Thirty, this same Critias undertook to make the Fobitul oy
pation of Socrates uncomfortable for him. The conversation be-
tween the two is preserved by Xenophon (Mem. i. 2. 31 ff.).
The passage is characteristic of both speakers, and should certainly
be read by all, for it familiarizes us with the plan of active opera-
tions to which Socrates devoted all of his life and energy.
Xenophon tells us that Critias, and with him Charicles who was
also an influential member of the Thirty, had been irritated by
Socrates’s freedom of speech. They pointedly reminded him of the
terms of a law which they had promulgated to meet his particular
case, and threateningly bade him obey its behests: Adyowv Téxmv
bt 8uddokew, no one shall teach the art of words. It is no matter
or surprise that this law should have been aimed at Socr
two reasons: first, because of the tendency to i
as one of the Sophists. Indeed, he seems to have been looked
upon simply as the most popular and effective of Sophists, and
hence he became for the comic poets the representative Sophist.?
The second reason is, that the words Adywv réxwn, taken in their
widest sense, do apply to Socrates’s characteristic way of question
and answer, as well as to rhetoric; and yet there were really
many outer and palpable marks which distinguished Socrates
and his teaching from the Sophists and their art. A Sophist
charged for his instruction, and hence would usually teach in
some place of private resort; Socrates, since he was the servant

Apology, p. 32 e¢ d with note. compares himself with the statues of
In the Clouds, first put on the Silenus (Xenophon, Symposium, ch. 5;
stage in B.c. 423, Aristophanes brings Plato, Symposium, ch. 33). How then
Socrates before his audience in that could we expect the comic poets to
capacity. An added piquancy was abstain from caricaturing one so easy
given by Socrates’s peculiar personal to caricature ? Anybody could rec-
appearance, which fell so very far ognize a mask which was meant for
short of the Hellenic ideal of beauty. Socrates.
Indeed Socrates himself frequently

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

of God, would take no man’s pay. Hence, he naturally pre-
ferred the most public places, such as the market, the gymnasium,
a public porch, or some workshop. Being no respecter of persons
he was ready to discuss with every man, and eager to share the
search for truth with any new comer. The genuineness of this
desire for cooperation was undoubted, for he declared himself
unable alone to get at any knowledge. To exemplify this his
homely description of his art as intellectual midwifery (pawevrict)
and his comparison of it with the profession of his mother, the
midwife Phaenarete, may be mentioned.! This idea made him
protest against being called any man’s teacher, indeed he stoutly
denied that he had any pupils. As substitutes for these names
of teacher and pupil, Xenophon and Plato use words which all of
them describe the pursuit of truth on equal and friendly terms.
The chief delight of Socrates was to gather about him young 26
men of good parts who were eager for knowledge. This led him to
frequent places where they habitually assembled, such as the palaes-
tra or the gymnasium. No doubt the Thirty bore this in mind when
they bade him not to consort with any one under thirty years of
age. But Socrates was ready to talk with men of all ages and all
stations, no matter where he found them. He was often seen con-
versing eagerly with workmen, and this led him to draw freely upon
their familiar surroundings and occupations for topics and for
illustrations. And hence we hear the frequent complaint that
he was continually harping upon cobbling, cobblers, carpenters,
smiths, and the like. He was considered a bore who repeated the
same thing about the same subject ad nauseam ; whereas, the Soph-
ists were at infinite pains never to use the same phraseology twice
in discussing the same thing. Of course this implied that their
attention was riveted upon the way of putting things : they dazzled
their hearers and drew from them tumultuous applause, little caring
if the enthusiasm lasted but for a moment. But the whole energy
of Socrates was absorbed by the central purpose of rousing a right
understanding and of implanting a firm and fruitful conviction.
That the knowledge itself which Socrates strove for was far other

1 Cf. Alcibiades I, p. 431e; Theaetet., p. 149 a.

 

 
20 INTRODUCTION.

than that which the Sophists so glibly taught, is best shown by a
contrast between one characteristic attribute of his discourse and
theirs. The Sophists made a great flourish of trumpets ( émidefis) ;
they began with a perfectly rounded self-complacency. Socrates
began by protesting that he was sure of one thing only, — his own
ignorance. Wisdom, he declared, is of God; and this, said he,
was the meaning intended by the oracle at Delphi by the words :

~. No man is wiser than Socrates. This self-knowledge is nothing

27

more than a purified form of the genuinely Greek idea of temper-
ance, codpocivy. It is based upon the immemorial belief that
the gods are jealous and refuse to tolerate men who put them-
selves upon a pedestal.! The conceit of self-knowledge with
which the Sophists were puffed up, Socrates undoubtedly con-
sidered a case in point. Against this conceit he waged war
with his incomparable irony, before which all their wisdom became
as nothing. He made it plain to them, and to whomsoever it might
concern, that all their general notions were confused and worthless.
A tempered form of his irony is seen in his treatment of young
and enthusiastic votaries of learning. First of all, he helps them
to an understanding of their ignorance, but yet he leaves in their
souls such a sting as stirs them to an earnest struggle for real
insight. Indeed, we have seen that the humility of Socrates’s self-
measurement was by no means incompatible with a fixed determi-
nation to win the truth which leads to righteousness. Socrates
said, in short: Let no man call himself a coders, owner of
wisdom, but let every man be a $\doodos, lover of wisdom.

There is, indeed, no uncertain ring in the religious tone of Soc-
rates’s philosophy. By his conversations® he strove to rouse in
others the religious sense, and at the same time he exhibited in his
own life a heartfelt piety, rooted in the purest gratitude for the good-
ness of God, and manifested in the most scrupulous conformity to
all the outward rites and observances of public worship. Even the
popular practice of consulting oracles and interpreting omens, he did
not, according to Xenophon,* reject. He merely sought to confine it

1 Hdt. I. 32.
? Cf. Apology, p. 837e; Republic,

3 See Xen. Mem. i. 4 and iv. 3.
* Cf. particularly Mem. Li. 2 sqq.,

p. 337 a: ékelvy % eiwbvia eipwveia Sw- especially 6-9; see also Anabasis iii.
KpdTOUS. 1. 5-7.

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 21

to difficulties for dealing with which God had given to man neither
the knowledge nor the capacity. In all these cases, Socrates him-
self was singularly favored in that he possessed a gift sent of God,
— a heavenly voice of warning. Whenever this voice spoke within
him he knew that what he was about to do would result in harm
and that therefore he must abstain from it; when the voice was
silent he was the stronger in his purpose and strengthened others
in theirs.! Socrates most certainly did not conceive of this voice
as an emanation from a special and independent divinity, but as
a revelation of the love and the wisdom of God. Such a revela-
tion, he thought,” might well come to any man, though perhaps
not in the same way. Still Socrates may have been uncommonly
sensitive to this influence, and more conscientious than most men
in doing what it prompted. Be this as it may, what we know
about the matter serves to prove that his trust in God was excep-
tional ; indeed this is nowhere made clearer than in cases where
Socrates did not hear the voice, and yet, without its warning to
direct him, was deaf to the clamors of selfish fears which greatly
disturb other men,— cases where he did what he knew was right
without petty anxiety as to the end.

Intimately connected with this remarkable strength of moral 28

character is the absolute control in which his body was held by his
mind. The capital manifestation of this is to be found in the
accounts which have been preserved of his ¢ staying power’ while he
was engaged in following up a train of thought. The best instance
of this Plato gives in the following story of Socrates at the siege of
Potidaea.? Early one day a subject of thought occurred to Socrates
while he was walking, and he stopped; for twenty-four hours he
stood stock-still, because he could not come to any conclusion until

 

1 Cf. Apol,, pp. 3led, 40ab; Xen.
Mem. i. 2, 1-5. In the Appendix to
his edition of the Memorabilia, Brei-
tenbach enters into this whole ques-
tion. See also Susemihl in Bursian’s
Jahresbericht I. 5, p. 546, and Zel-
ler II., pp. 69-83 of the third edition.
Cf. Riddell’s Apology, Appendix A,
and Cardinal Manning’s The Daemon

of Socrates, Longmans and Green,
1872.

2 Schleiermacher proves this in his
note on Apology, p. 27b, by showing
that Plato and Xenophon alike use
daiudviov as an adjective. Cf. on
Apol,, p. 31d.

3 Sympos.,p.220¢cd ; see also, on the
credibility of the story, Zeller II.,p.69.

 

 
 

]

99 INTRODUCTION.

the next morning. In other respects as well his endurance was re-

markable : he was hardened to every privation. Winter and sum-

mer alike he went barefoot, and always wore clothes of the same

texture and thickness. This, in fact, made the rigours of a winter
| in Thrace tell upon him far less than upon his comrades in arms.!
| Apart from his soldiering, hardly anything could induce Socrates
to leave Athens, as he is made to say himself in the Crito.? As for
temperance and frugality, we have seen that he was remarkable

\ for both.

29 The outline given above may be regarded as an historically trust-
worthy account of the character of Socrates. And now we need
hesitate no longer in agreeing with the enthusiastic estimate of
Socrates given at the end of the Memorabilia. But all this cer-
tainly leaves us but ill-prepared for the manner of the great man’s
‘taking off.” Prosecuted in his declining years, on a most serious
charge, he was, after a legal trial, sentenced to death. And all
this happened, not during any oligarchical or democratic reign of
terror, but at the very time when everybody was admiring the
moderate spirit of the newly-restored Athenian democracy. It was
shortly after the archonship of Euclides and the deposition of the
thirty tyrants by Thrasybulus. As far as history has determined
them, the facts about this trial are as follows : —

30 In the first year of the ninety-fifth Olympiad, while Laches was
archon, and when Socrates had already passed the limit of three-
score years and ten,’ Meletus, seconded by Anytus and Lyco, came
forward with his accusation. In Plato’s Euthyphro Meletus is
described as an insignificant youth, and in the Apology he is
treated with a measure of contempt. Some identify him with the
poet Meletus,* others say he was the poet’s son,’ though ‘a chip
of the old block,” since the words (Apol. 23 e) vmép wounTOV

 

1 Sympos., p. 220 ab.

2 Crito, ch. XIV. with note on p.53 a.

3 Apol,, p. 17d and supra, p. 14,
note 1. OL 95,1 =400/399 B.c.

4 Aristoph. Frogs, v. 1302.

5K. F. Hermann, in his Disputatio
de Socratis accusatoribus, maintains
that there were four different persons

named Meletus, (1) the accuser of
Socrates, (2) the poet referred to in
the Frogs, (3) the Meletus, cf. Apol.,
p- 32ed, who obeyed the thirty, and
arrested the unoffending Leon of Sala-
mis, (4) the Meletus of Xen. Hell. ii.
4.36. Frohberger argues against this
in the Philol. Anzeiger II. 7.

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 93

dx0dpevos imply that he was poetically inclined. He led the pros-
ecution, the other two being technically his cvwriyopo. It is plain,
however, that the substantial man of the three was Anytus, since
it was the influence of Anytus which chiefly —— the verdict.!
Anytus, who had inherited a handsome property and had filled the
highest offices in the commonwealth, was at this particular time
one of the most popular men in public life. He had worked with
all his might to help Thrasybulus expel the Thirty and to restore
the democracy. Not only did he condemn Socrates as being one
of the Sophists against all of whom his bitterness was uncompro-
mising, but in addition he owed him an especial grudge. For
Socrates, it appears, had made certain indiscreet and irritating
comments upon his private affairs.? Lyco is absolutely unknown
beyond what is said in the Apology (22 e). There he is repre-
sented as a professional speech-maker, and it is reasonable to
infer that as such he contributed far more than Meletus toward
the success of the prosecution.

The indictment was submitted by Meletus to the dpxwv Backes, 31

whose jurisdiction covered all cases involving religion. Its formal
terms were :> Socrates is guilty of not believing in the gods believed
in by the state, and also of introducing other new divinities. More-
over, he is further guilty of corrupting the young. The penalty
proposed is death. This was an indictment for an offence against
the state*; accordingly it was technically a ypads (public suit), and,
as further qualified by the specific charges, a ypadr doeBelas (a pub-
lic suit on the count of impiety).

As to the negative clause of the first count (ods pév 1 wokis vopife 32

feovs ov vopitwv), it certainly is difficult to see any fact to justify
such an accusation, inasmuch as Socrates expressly recognized the
law of the land (vépos wohews) as the final arbiter in all that con-
cerned the worship of the gods; and, indeed, himself scrupulously

 

1 Apol., p. 36a.

2 [Xen.] Apol. 29, sqq. Probably
there is some reference to Anytus’s
unjust hatred of Socrates in Xen.
Cyrop. iii. 1. 38 sqq.

3°ABikel Swkpdrns obs uév Af woAis

voul(et Beods od voullwr, Erepa dt Kawd
Saudia elonyoluevos (or eiopépwy With
Xen. Mem. i. 1. 1). &dike? 8¢ kal Tovs
véous draglelpwy.
4 See infra, § 67, and Apol., p. 19b.
5 Apol., p. 26d.

V7

HE
i
1
he
|

 
24 INTRODUCTION.

observed all its requirements.” The terms of the second (affirma-
tive) clause (érepa 8¢ kawd. Saipdvia elonyovpevos) apparently refer to
the much mooted Saipdviov, — the mysterious communication from
God to Socrates. This allegation was a slander, but had it been
true could hardly have had much weight at Athens, where the
introduction of new divinities was not a crime.
It is, however, probable that the first count was introduced as sa
foil to the second, and was primarily intended as a means for
giving a legal foothold to the suit. For among all known pro-
visions of Athenian law there is not one under which Socrates
could have been prosecuted on the second count (dBiket 8¢ kal Tovs
véous Sadlelpwv). This view is confirmed by the difficulty which even
the thirty tyrants had in interfering officially with Socrates’s deal-
ings with young men. They had to pass a special law for the pur-
pose, and that law was doubtless abolished when the democracy
was restored. At all events it is certain that in the accuser’s mind
the second count was the most important. We have only to re-
member the prejudices of Anytus, and to recall the fact that he
was still smarting under Socrates’s sharp criticism of the way in
which he educated his son. We can understand his indignation,
though we do not share it. Now Anytus was a citizen in excellent
standing, and naturally felt sure of success against such heresies
in any appeal to the law. What, then, is easier to understand than
his eagerness to take advantage of any pretext that offered itself
against Socrates? He was eager to save his country by redress-
ing his own grievance. Nor is it difficult to see why many of
the judges should have been inclined to sympathize with him.
They were enthusiastic for the democracy, and looked with dis-
favour upon any man like Socrates who had so often and so
sharply criticized institutions dear to the democrat’s heart. Still,
it is more than questionable whether such criticisms were amen-
able to the law of a commonwealth whose shibboleth was free
speech (wappnoia). A connection, on Socrates’s part, with overt
or covert attempts at revolution cannot be thought of ; any sug-
gestion of the kind falls by its own weight, for it is pure and
unadulterated slander. But still it was urged that Alcibiades and
Critias, notorious scourges of the body politic, were for some time

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

the companions of Socrates. And, though Xenophon has abun-
dantly shown the injustice of remembering this against Socrates,
the judges could not forget it. The memory of these men’s crimes
was still so fresh that every one was inclined to mistrust the man
to whose teaching many attributed the misdeeds which had so lately
made life unbearable. This teaching they were therefore deter-
mined to stop, and nothing could better have served their purpose
than the first count of the indictment, an accusation of atheism,
for at Athens it had often gone hard in the courts with those who

had to meet this charge.

This whole accusation was from the first met calmly and collect- 34
edly by Socrates, and he showed the same temper at the bar of the
court. There is a story, told twice of Socrates,! which brings
this unrufiled spirit vividly before us, and Plato’s Theaetetus does
the same more subtly. Plato represents that intricate and abstruse
philosophical discussion, carried on by Socrates with phenomenal
fair-mindedness and consummate ease, as taking place immediately
before the great teacher was compelled by the summons of Meletus
to appear for preliminary examination before the magistrate?
(dpxwv Bachevs). It was a sense of duty only which forced Soc-
rates to appear, both at this time and afterwards, at the trial. It
was his duty, he thought, to appear in his own case and to make
his own plea,’ though he made it without real hope or serious

1 « Hermogenes, the son of Hippo-
nicus,” a friend of Socrates, “noticed
that Socrates, though he conversed
freely on things in general, avoided
any allusion to the impending suit.
‘My dear Socrates,” said he, ‘surely
you ought to be attending to your
brief.” ¢ Why, do I not seem to you,’
answered Socrates, ‘to have passed
my life with my brief constantly in
view ?’ “ What do you mean by that?’
asked Hermogenes. ‘I mean that I
have shunned evil all my life, that,
I think, is the most honorable way
in which a man can bestow attention

upon his own defence.”” [Xen.]Apol.,

§ 3 sqq. Cf Mem. iv. 8. 4 sqq., where

the story is almost verbally repeated.

2 Theaetet., p. 210 ¢ d.

3 Cicero (Deoratore I. 54) is our chief
authority for the following tale about
Socrates’s defence. The celebrated
orator Lysias, out of the fulness of
his friendship for Socrates, wrote him
a speech for his defence. Socrates
declined it when offered, because he
thought it would be undignified for
him to use it, and in spite of the fact
that it was a marvel of pleading. The
story is probably founded on the fact
that upwards of six years after Soc-
rates’s execution Lysias wrote a rhetor-
ical exercise (declamatio) on the theme
of Socrates’s defence, as an answer to

 
INTRODUCTION.

desire of escaping the death-penalty proposed by his accuser.
His defence was made without previous preparation,! and there
breathed in it such noble pride and such uncompromising inde-
pendence that its effect must rather have irritated than conciliated
his judges. In the court-room as on the battle-field Socrates was
always the same fearless champion of his own and his country’s
honour. «Where other men consulted their own safety, God re-
quired Socrates to be faithful and to obey orders.
86 And so it came to pass that the judges brought in the verdict of
‘guilty,’ but by no large majority. In cases of this nature the
law did not fix the penalty beforehand,® and Socrates had still the
right of rating his guilt at his own price, dvrimipdofar, his ac-
cuser having proposed, rwécfar, the penalty of death. After the
defendant had named his counter-penalty, the court was bound to
choose one of the two.* Just as in his plea Socrates had disdained
the ordinary means of working upon the feelings of the court by
tears and supplications, so now he scorned the obvious way of
safety still open to any man whose guilt had been affirmed by
verdict. He absolutely refused to suggest any real counter-pen-
alty, and hence an increased majority ® sentenced him to death.
The same courage which had animated him while speaking his
defence, the same rooted conviction that they who love God ed
fear no evil, supported him now when his execution had become a
question of days and hours, and prevented him from countenancing
any plan for disobeying the laws of the state. Exceptional diva,
stances® delayed the execution of his sentence for thirty days after

a speech on the other side of the case 1§ 73.

by the rhetorician Polycrates. For a 5 It is said that the adverse major-
discussion of the matter, see Spengel ity was increased by eighty votes
( Svvaywyh Texvév, p. 141) and Rauch- which had previously been cast for a
enstein (Philol. XVI. 1). verdict of ‘not guilty.’

1 “But when they deliver you up, 6 Crito, p. 43¢ with note on 7
take no thought how or what ye shall  xAoto. Cf. Xen. Mem. iv. 8.2: “He
speak: for it shall be given you in was constrained to live for thirty
that same hour what ye shall speak.” days after his case was decided be-
Motinew x., v. 19. cause it was the month of the yearly

Apol, p. 36a and ibid. note on el festival and embassy to Delos, and the
Tpidicovra KTE. law prohibited all public executions
3 Ibid., p. 35d and infra, § 73. until the return of the sacred envoys

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

it was rendered, and his friends, perhaps with the connivance of
the authorities, offered him means of escape and also oppor-
tunity to use them. But he was firm in refusing these, just as
while on trial he had been firm in rejecting every opportunity to
secure either a favourable verdict or a lighter penalty. The tale
that shortly after his death the Athenians repented and actually
called the accusers to account rests on such slender authority that
it must not be taken as history.

Of all the companions of Socrates none more deeply revered the
master’s noble life than Plato, and no heart was more deeply stirred
by the pathos of his death. At the time Plato was still young, barely
thirty years of age.! Aristo his father and his mother Perictione
were both of good old Athenian stock. Codrus was one of his
ancestors on his father’s side, and by his mother he was descended
from Solon. At the age of twenty he became a disciple of Socra-
tes, having until that time devoted his energies to poetry. It is
said that he was already so much of a poet that he was on the eve
of bringing out a tetralogy; but when he became a disciple of
Socrates he gave himself entirely to philosophy. At last he had
found a field which was to be all his own, a field where his genius
was soon to work wonders; for his philosophy was to guide the
spiritual and intellectual life of his countrymen to a new and
splendid consummation. Before this he had not been unacquainted

 

 

from Delos. During this time not one
of his familiar friends could detect
in his case any change in the manner
of his life from what it had always
been. And as for his previous carcer,
he certainly always commanded un-
paralleled admiration for living a
cheerful and contented life.” The
annual festival and embassy to Delos
— another festival, also called AA,
was celebrated every four years —
came in the tenth or eleventh month
of the Athenian ycar (Movvvxiwy or
OapynAidy), hence the death of Soc-
rates probably occurred in Thargelion
(our May and June); the year was
399 B.C.

1 Various dates are given for Plato’s
birth. (1) The usually accepted one
depends on Athenaeus, and is the
archonship of Apollodorus, Ol. 87, 3
=430/29 B.c. (2) Diogenes Laertius
gives Ol. 87, 4=429/28 =.c., Epa-
meinon’s year as archon, and the year
of Pericles’s death. (3) Zeller follows
Hermodorus, a pupil of Plato, and
fixes upon 428 /27 B.c. The birthday
is said to have been the seventh day
of Thargelion, a day sacred to Apollo.
In the year 428 /27 B.c. this came on
May 26/27, or, as others claim, May
29/30. (Cf. Steinhart.

27

wg. = <= Sh -

 
Pp

En

28

38

INTRODUCTION.

with philosophy, and we are told that Cratylus had initiated him
into the mysteries of Heraclitus ; but not until he met Socrates had
he found the guide and friend who was to lead him in all his specu-
lations toward the goal of truth.

It is not possible to decide whether some of Plato’s earliest writ-
ings (e.g. the Lysis) were produced during Socrates’s life, or all of
them after the master’s death. The bias of opinion now-a-days
inclines to the latter view, and insists upon the unhistorical and
ideal picture of Socrates which Plato everywhere alike has drawn.
At all events, the questions dealt with by Plato’s earliest works
were just the ones constantly discussed by Socrates, though even
here and at the outset Plato displays originality. His vocation was
to cornect together the definitions insisted upon by Socrates and to
reduce them to an ordered system by the application of a single
law or principle. At the very outset he took up the same lines which
his whole life was devoted to following out, and he ended by es-
tablishing dialectic as a science. Yet he never lost sight of Socra-
tes, who always moved before him as the perfect philosopher. He
valued philosophical writing only so far as it mirrored the ways,
the wisdom, and the words of the ideal philosopher, and his works
are pictures of the marvellous personality of Socrates. Hence it is
that Plato, when he wrote, could not dispense with the peculiarly
Socratic form of question and answer, but in his hands the dialogue
is fashioned and developed into a new form of literature. His early
interest in art and his familiarity with all the forms of poetry nat-
urally stood him in good stead here, and we need not wonder that
the poetic fire and dramatic vividness of his dialogues are univer-
sally admired.

39 Among the dialogues which he first wrote the Proracoras is

perhaps the one which most conspicuously exemplifies these great
qualities. Both in the subject dealt with, and in the conclusions
arrived at, the Protagoras belongs to the school of Socrates. Vir-
tue is there defined as knowledge of what is good, and in this are
contained and summed up all particular virtues. Therefore, (1)
virtue can be taught, and (2) no man is wicked freely and of his
own proper choice. Wickedness is ignorance of what is good, and
perfect goodness belongs only to God. Man’s virtue is incomplete

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 929

and tentative only, — it is a constant struggle; God alone is in-
variably and forever good. There is nothing discussed here which
was not an every-day topic with Socrates and his friends.

In the Goreias Plato discusses the relation of goodness to 40

pleasure, a matter barely touched upon in the Protagoras. The
opposition between rhetoric and dialectic is most effectively drawn
by contrasting the sophist and his scheme of morals with the true
philosopher. Rhetoric is a sham art of living, the beau-ideal of
which is the unbridled indulgence by each individual of every pass-
ing whim, a fool’s paradise where the bodily appetites are gorged.
The true art of living, on the other hand, seeks and finds everywhere
law, order, and righteousness (8wawoovvn), even though in so doing
all temporal happiness and life itself be sacrificed. Higher than
this earthly life is life eternal and the hereafter, where he only is
blessed who has walked upon earth in the paths of righteousness.
Therefore, it is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong. The
former does harm that lasts but a day, the latter brings enduring
contamination.

This bare outline is enough to suggest that the fate of Socrates 41

was in the mind of the writer of the Gorgias. This is confirmed
by the merciless directness of its arguments, and by the tone of
severity and almost bitterness which pervades the whole work.
The Gorgias contains the moral teachings of Socrates and a great
deal more, for there we find them as it were transfigured. More-
over, we get a glimpse of Plato’s political creed. An aristocrat
by birth, he could hardly have learned the love of democracy
from Socrates, though even without this master there was enough
in contemporary political events to incline him to the views which
he held. It has been supposed that Pericles died in the course of
the same year which saw the birth of Plato.! Plato’s earliest im-
pressions about politics may therefore best be understood by read-
ing in Thucydides the history of that time. It was the era of decay
in Athenian morals both public and private, an era which Thuecy-
dides described with a heavy heart. If Plato went a step further
and, in seeking for the cause of so much harm, attributed this

1 This chronological coincidence is not certain. See p. 27, note 1.  £~

\

3

I

1

i |
oh
i
v
Wi

copes

 

shan

og A ES RRS SR BEER EEE Ei Ea

 
30 INTRODUCTION.

degeneration to Pericles, it surely can be urged that such a view of
the great statesman’s leadership is not absolutely untenable even
when judged by the strictest standard of historical impartiality.
But though Plato loved democracy less, it was not because he loved
the thirty tyrants more. Two of his mother’s kin, his uncle Char-
mides and also Critias, were conspicuous among the Thirty, but
Plato was neither of them nor with them. What Socrates had to
endure revealed to his disciple the infamy of the Thirty and their
lust for power, while any dawning hopes from the moderate temper
shown by the newly restored democracy which supplanted them
was more than obscured by Socrates’s trial and condemnation.
He found in these events new reasons for adopting the plan of
life which of old had been congenial to him, and he was thus
confirmed in his inclination to serve his country by shunning all
active participation in his country’s affairs. It would surely be
rashness to urge that, in deciding upon the manner of his life,
Plato lacked either patriotism or common sense.

42 To avoid political entanglements, and at the same time to add
to his intellectual attainments, Plato left Athens shortly after Soc-
rates’s death, and retired to Megara, the home of a group of his
philosophical friends. Euclides of Megara, a warm friend of
Socrates, was the central figure among them. Like many other
disciples of Socrates, Antisthenes for example, Euclides was at
great pains to reconcile the Socratic definitions or general ideas
with the Eleatic doctrine of the oneness of pure being. Plato
who, in the Euthyphro, early foreshadows a more abstruse account
of these general ideas than Socrates had given, natu ally sought to
profit, while thinking out his own views, by those of Euclides. But
the Eleatic motionless Being worked apparently. like a palsy upon
the Megarians, for Plato gained no new light from his friends
at Megara. However he certainly was impelled by his sojourn

! The opinion of Pericles expressed of modern writers. Recently Biich-

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

there to supplement what he knew of the Eleatic doctrine by more
thorough studies. If the Socratic philosophy may be called the
ground in which the tree of Plato’s knowledge took firm root, what
he gained at Megara, and the familiarity with the Eleatic doctrines
which he soon acquired, may be compared to the showers which
watered that ground, and enabled the roots of the tree to strike
deeper, and helped its branches to a fuller growth.

This same end was subserved by his further travels. He first 43
went to Cyrene, — perhaps by way of Ephesus, where he may have
wished to become acquainted with the living representatives of
Heraclitus’s school,— and there spent some time with Theodorus
the mathematician. Though Theodorus was the reputed exponent of
Protagoras’s philosophy, Plato was chiefly drawn to him as a great
mathematician and geomecter. The Athenians certainly were not
likely to forget the learning which he had exhibited when he visited
their city.! The importance attached by Plato to mathematics as
a necessary part of right education? is notorious, as is also his own
proficiency in that branch of learning.? After a visit to Egypt, he
proceeded to Magna Graecia that he might there consort with the
Pythagoreans, from whose learning he obviously expected to derive
great benefit. The chief man among them was Archytas of Taren-
tum. Distinguished alike for statesmanship and as a general,
Archytas had originated the analytic method in mathematics, and
had solved many problems in geometry and mechanics, besides
achieving a great name in philosophy. The society of Archytas
and his school revived Plato’s interest in practical government,
which had died with Socrates. As a sight-seer Plato extended
his tour to Sicily, and was there introduced by Dio to the court
of the elder Dionysius. But his Athenian visitor was too out-
spoken for that tyrant, and finally incurred his ungovernable re-
sentment. At the time, just before the peace of Antalcidas, there
was war between Athens and the Peloponnesians, — and so it

by Thucydides (ii. 65) is very favour-
able. Grote warmly defends the repu-
tation of Pericles against the less
favourable comments of Plato, Aris-
totle, Plutarch, and a certain number

senschiitz in his ‘Besitz und Erwerb
im griechischen Alterthume’ has again
accentuated the other side, and Herz-
berg in turn argues, Jahrbiicher fiir
Ph. u. P. 100, 5,in favour of Pericles.

 

1 Xen. Mem. iv. 2. 10.

2 Over the door of his lecture-room
was written, it is said: Let no one un-
versed in geometry enter here, undels
dyewuéTpnTos eiciTw.

3 It is very commonly asserted that
he solved the Delian problem (the
doubling of a cube), and on doing so,
criticized the usual manner of dealing
with mathematics.

 
  
     

 
  

INTRODUCTION.

occurred to Dionysius that his guest should become Sparta’s
prisoner of war. He was sold and carried as a slave to Aegina,
whence he was finally ransomed by the generous zeal of Anniceris
of Cyrene.!

44 At the age of forty Plato was again in Athens, and he brought

with him great treasures of knowledge and of experience. During
his absence, moreover, he had been busy writing, and the Tue-
AETETUS serves as a reminder of his sojourn at Megara and at
Cyrene. It is a dialogue within a dialogue ; the introductory con-
versation may be called Plato’s dedication of the whole work to
his friends at Megara. The question, What is knowledge? is
asked, and every typical answer to it, beginning with the most
obvious one, Knowledge is sensation (aloes), and ending with
the most abstruse one, is first stated with fairness and then with
equal fairness refuted. In this dialogue we find Socrates and
Theaetetus represented more effectively than anywhere else in
Plato’s writings, while in the companion pictures, so eloquently
drawn by Socrates, of the philosopher and the practical man or
lawyer, Plato seems to be vindicating himself against fault-finders.?

1 This whole account of Plato’s
being sold as a slave and then ran-
somed is not well substantiated by
trustworthy authorities.

* It is important at this point to
have clearly before the mind some
statement of Plato’s THEORY OF IDEAS.
In the Theaetetus (p. 210a) Socrates
is made to say: “Then, Theaetetus,
knowledge is not (1) sensation (atoy-
ois); nor is it (2) true opinion (86ta
aAnfs) ; nor again, (3) true opinion
coupled with definition (Aéyos mpoayiyvé-
uevos).” This of course represents the
view of Plato and not of Socrates,
for (3) is very nearly what Socrates
would have called knowledge. With-
out any direct allusion to his theory
of ideas, Plato shows in this dialogue
that no definition of knowledge is
logically possible unless the definition
itself contains the term defined. To

define true opinion we must distin-
guish, and to distinguish we must
have already a true opinion of the
characteristic differences between one
notion and another. Plato’s way out
of the difficulty, which closes in on
all sides and seems to leave no avenue
of escape, is a recourse to his theory
of ideas, and for a statement of this
theory we have to go to his other dia-
logues. He did not reject Socrates’s
definitions, but rather erected them
into a symmetrically organized scheme
of thought, of reality. These ideas
are the realities dimly suggested by
the world around us; but neither
they nor anything else would ever be
suggested to us or known by us if we
had not lived in another and a better
world where these ideas exist. We
know things in this world because,
before coming here, we have seen

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 33

 

In the Sopmist, the Porrticus, and the PArRMENIDES, we have 45
works more or less obviously connected with the Theactetus. These
are the dialectical dialogues, so called because they are devoted to
a connected account of dialectic. At the same time they contain
a searching criticism of Heraclitus and of the Eleatics. One char-
acteristic of the three works last named is that in them® it is not
Socrates who leads the discussion.

As soon as Plato returned to his native land he gathered pupils 46

about him in the Academy, a suburban gymnasium close to his
own house and garden. Here he taught with but few interrup-
tions throughout the remaining forty years of his life. About the
matter or manner of his teaching in the Academy we know noth-
i it i f his writings which were written
ing, unless we find it in those 0 g

while he was engaged in teaching.

There are weighty reasons for surmising that the Punaeprus was 47

written at the beginning of this period,” and accordingly it is
prefaced, appropriately enough, by a graceful sketch of the scenery
near Athens. Here dialectic is treated as something more than the
science of that which really is (ideas); it is that and also the
genuine art of putting things or oratory, and as such it is as far
superior to ordinary rhetoric as reality is to sham or instruction
to persuasion. Both teaching and learning are based upon the
history of the human soul, and consist in a revival of memories
(dvdpwmas) which are stored away in every soul while it is yet living
in the divine world of ideas and before it comes to dwell on earth
in a mortal frame. The relation of teacher and learner is spoken
of as under the control of the pure and heaven-sent passion of love.
The two become as one in order to bring forth knowledge from

those original shapes of which things 1 Lately there has been a revival of
here are poor copies. Dialectic is the the doubt as to whether Plato wrote
means of education and the perfected these three dialogues. :

activity of thought by which we learn 2 Schleiermacher considers the
to neglect the bad copies and fix our Phaedrus as Plato s maiden discourse ;
minds upon the originals, which are with this view other writers of emi-
in heaven. There they are all in their nence either wholly agree, or at least
right place, and there goodness and place it among Plato’s earliest works.
truth shine upon them, enabling us to

see them aright.

    

 
  
   
  
 
   
  
   
  
  
  
   
  
   
   
   
   
  
  
   
  
   
  
       
     
     
       
      
      
      
       
      
       
     
     
       
     
 

34 INTRODUCTION.

the learner's soul. The Sympostum (cvpmdaiov, banquet) and the
Praepo like the Phaedrus are masterpieces of style and may be
called companion pictures : the Symposium represents the Snr
pher in his moments of conviviality ; the Phaedo portrays him
face to face with death. The PaILEBUS contains an inquiry into
the idea of the good and is not so conspicuous for the charm of
its style, since it deals with most abstruse ethical and dialectical
(metaphysical) points. In the course of the dialogue a great deal
is said of the Pythagorean philosophy as stated by Philos

43 In the Philebus, more than in any of his previous works, Plato

strives to throw the light of philosophy upon the facts of life
and this he does to a still greater extent in those of his works
which usually are considered his latest: the RepusLic (rolhurela)
the Timarus and the Crrrias, all three of which are closely oon.
nected, and the Laws. These discourses, because they are attempts
to mould facts into harmony with ideal principles, to construct Pe
world as it should be, are called his constructive works. The
most celebrated of these, and indeed the most admirable of all
Plato’s works, is the Republic. Beginning with the question
‘““ What is justice?’’ the writer soon develops the fact that Slice,
belonging as it does to the state as much as to any divides]
citizen, can most easily be seen in the former, where it is ‘ writ
large.” Recognizing three classes of citizens as natural and
necessary in the state, he connects them with his tripartite divi-
sion of the soul.? His class of rulers correspond to the reason
(6 Moywerikdv) ; his class of warriors to the (irascible) impulsive part
(7d Bupoerdés) ; his class of producers to the appetites (10 émBupnTikov)
These three classes in combination work out the happiness of the
whole state, and it is the happiness of all which determines the
teaching and training of each. The rulers follow wisdom (codla) ;
the warriors, courage (dv8pela) ; rulers, warriors, workers in Nison
0: ro dE 1 fe Ss
based in the Timaeus upon a division he js fies Sia 4s
xplained as faculties of the soul b
into two parts. The soul has (1) its ~~ Wildauer, Beitriige zur Geschichte dor
immortal or rational part, and (2) its Psychologie, in the TPhilosophische

irrational or mortal part. This last Monatschrift, 1873.
(2) is subdivided into (a) a noble part :

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 35

follow self-control (cwdposivn). Justice (S8wkarooivn), the virtue of
virtues, works toward the determining ideal for the sake of which
the limbs of the body politic cdoperate ; and while the collective
happiness of all citizens depends on justice, justice is gained by
having each of the three classes pursue its characteristic perfec-
tion or virtue. This certainly is not the Socratic doctrine of the
unity of all virtues, but a modification of it. With this great work
are connected the Timacus and the (unfinished) Critias. The
Timaeus describes the universe as an organic and rational crea-
tion, just as the state is described in the Republic. The Critias
represents the ideal state as having existed in Attica before the
deluge. There is also the story of their wars with the Atlantids.
The dates and the facts thus given are of course purely mythical,
and purport to be derived from foreign traditions. In what rela-
tion the twelve books of Plato’s Laws stand to the ten books of
the Republic is a question still under discussion, as is also the
question whether Plato himself put the finishing touches upon his
Laws as they have come down to us. Whether he wrote it as it
actually stands or not, the work, in spite of the many eccentric
views and odd turns of speech which it contains, is broadly con-

ceived and of very great interest.

The general drift of these last works prepares us for Plato’s last 49

two visits to Sicily, where the younger Dionysius showed such
promise both intellectual and moral that Plato hoped with his
help to realize his new theories of government and of education.
At the instance of Dio he accepted an invitation from the younger
Dionysius, and again went to Syracuse in spite of the harsh
treatment which had so precipitately terminated his former so-
journ in that city. The too irascible elder Dionysius had died
Ol. 103, 1 = 368-7 B.c. On his arrival Plato carried everything
before him and it became the court fashion to imitate young Diony-
sius’s enthusiasm for the new philosophy ; but back-stairs intrigues
soon turned the tables upon the reformer. His friend Dio was incau-

1 Socrates said that wisdom was in boldly executing the ruler’s com-
virtue. Plato said (1) wisdom ac- mands is the warrior’s virtue, (3) wis-
quired and exercised for the whole dom in obedient service to his betters
state is the ruler’s virtue, (2) wisdom is the workman’s virtue.

0
Hil
ih
"iH
i
", ¥
v

adil

 
INTRODUCTION.

tious, and his indiscretion was promptly punished with banishment
by the same clique of flattering courtiers which soon after brought
about, against the wishes of Dionysos, the dismissal of Plato.
But the repentant king again urged Plato to come back, promising
that Dio should be recalled. The Pythagorean circle at Tarentum
urged acceptance, and finally, still hoping to carry his pet theories
into effect at Syracuse,' Plato made his third visit to Syracuse. It
was not long, however, before all the influence of Archytas was
required to get our philosopher back to Athens alive. How little
Plato’s high hopes of the younger Dionysius were realized, is but
too plain from the character of that tyrant as afterwards exhibited.

50 The remainder of Plato’s life was engrossed by teaching and

writing. Of his pupils many were from foreign parts, and among
his numerous Athenian hearers there were not a few marked men,
statesmen and generals such as Chabrias Timotheus and Phocion,
orators such as Lycurgus and Demosthenes. Though hard to
prove, it is easy to believe that Demosthenes’s keenness and
irresistible readiness in argument was stimulated and perfected
by a training in the dialectic of Plato. Plato lived to a green old
age,” and death finally surprised him in the full possession of all
his faculties when upwards of eighty (Ol. 108, 1 = 348-7 n.c. )-

The vigor of his mind at the time is brought home to us by the
tale that after death they found under his pillow a draft of the

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

of Plato’s sister. The Chalcedonian Xenocrates succeeded Speu-
sippus.

We may well call it a lucky chance that has preserved for us all 51
of Plato’s works.! They are an exhaustless treasurehouse filled to
overflowing with thoughts which have been the inspiration and the
delight of successive generations of men, for they appeal alike to

the philosopher and to the poet; to the former by the fulness of

their wisdom, to the latter by the beauty of their style. Plato chose
the form of question and answer, and in presenting philosophi-
cal truth dramatised the process by which such truth is reached.
Once chosen, that form became, in the hands of so great a master
both of thought and of style, something new under the sun, and
took its place among the other exemplars of literary art created by
the Greeks as the Greek method of presenting philosophy. The
various forms in which previous philosophical speculations had ap-
peared were but the imperfect statements of unperfected theories.
The one thing which these forms perfectly represented was the lack
of completeness which characterized the early systems of philoso-
phy.? Socrates brought down Philosophy from the clouds of
heaven to the needs of life upon earth,’ and, the uncompromising
ordeal of his cross-questioning once passed, her worth and strength
became manifest. Then at last, transfigured as it were by Plato’s
genius, she appeared in all the beauty of a form of literature

3 3
wo
TT * ~ op pe ———
mt A a El

 

opening passage of the Republic, which he had covered with
erasures and corrections. Pausanias, who made his ¢ grand tour’
in the second century after Christ, saw the tomb of Plato in the
Ceramicus (Kepapekds), not far from the Academy. The post left
vacant by Plato, the charge of his school which became known
as the older Academy, was undertaken by Speusippus, a son

1 Cf. Laws iv., p. 709e sgg. This died on his birthday, just as he had
passage irresistibly suggests the gen- completed his eighty-first year. A
eral condition of things which Plato, similarly unauthenticated tale is re-
on the occasion of his last two jour- peated by Cicero, who says (Cato
neys, expected to find at Syracuse, major 5.13): “uno et octogesimo ano
and indeed largely what he actually scribens est mortuus.” Perhaps his
did find. word “scribens” is simply a version

2 Seneca is probably repeating an of the story of the tablet discovered
‘idle tale’ when he says that Plato under the philosopher’s pillow.

 

quite worthy of her message.

This is the moment which at

the opening of this sketch was anticipated. In Plato’s dialogues

1 Besides the works already enu-
merated and the Apology and Crito,
there are quite a number of others.
Some of these Plato has been supposed
not to have written. Those whose
authenticity has been questioned con-
nect themselves with the Protagoras;
they are: the Ion, Hippias Maior
and Minor, the first and second Alci-
biades, Lysis, Charmides, Laches Eu-
thyphro. Then there are dialogues
connected with the so-called dialecti-
cal discourses: the Meno, the Euthy-
demus, the Cratylus. The Menexenus

remains, and the only dialogues with
which it can be in any way compared
are the Apology and the Phaedrus.
Of course no mention is here made of
such other short discourses as have
been falsely attributed to Plato but
are now admitted by all to be spurious.

2 The best account of the compara-
tive inefficiency of these early philoso-
phers is Plato’s own. Cf. the passage
from the Sophist quoted supra, p.
10, note 1

3 Cicero, Tusc. v. 4,10, and Academ.
1. 4, 15.

 
 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

the central purpose and the crowning result is to stimulate in
every reader a self-reliant vigor of understanding which shall
grapple boldly with the self-imposed task of seeking after the
fundamental idea, and achieve in the end a clear insight into the
whole subject discussed. Without this effort of mind no man
can ever emerge from darkness into light. That Plato did not
overestimate the value of his own or of any writings is clearly
shown in the Phaedrus. The views there expounded probably
influenced him to choose the dialogue-form, which is a reproduc-
tion, a mirror, as it were, of the words of living truth spoken by
the living teacher. That he did not however underestimate the
value of philosophical writing he shows rather in deed than in
word. For how, otherwise, can we account for the long series of
writings produced by him from the age of thirty until the time of
his death, —a period of fifty years? By writing he increased the
number of those who felt his influence, and this he might well seek
to do while still believing that, compared with the spoken word,
the written word was dead.

The many resources of Plato’s artistic imagination are appa-
rent in the varied settings of his dialogues. The simplest form
(1) has no introduction or preamble, but is a dialogue, with occa-
sional interruptions from interested bystanders, in which one of
the parts is taken throughout by the same speaker, usually Soc-
rates, while the other may be successively assumed by various
persons. Instances of this form of dialogue are the Gorgias and
the Phaedrus, which best exemplify the dramatic power of Plato
even in this simplest form of dialogue. More intricately dramatic
and effective are the narrated dialogues, to which the second and
third classes belong. These are (2) without preface and with no
account of the persons to whom the narration or reading, as the
case may be, is made, — e.g., the Republic; or (3) introduced by
a short dialogue between the narrator and his friends, who soon
become his attentive listeners. In (3) sometimes, though rarely,
the narrated dialogue is momentarily interrupted before the close,
and at the close a few words are commonly exchanged between the
narrator and his auditors. Dialogues of this kind are the Sympo-
sium and the Phaedo. Just as these various forms are used accord-

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

ing to the demands of the subject discussed or the artistic plan of
the author, so in certain of Plato’s later writings, in fact very
commonly where very abstruse points are considered, the dramatic
form is subordinated and all but disappears.

Something must now be said of the two works before us. They 53
are both of them closely connected with the trial and death-sen-
tence of Socrates. Of the two the first is

THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES.

If we heeded our first impressions on reading the Apology, we
should pronounce it a report of what Socrates actually said in
court, since it is given as a speech made by Socrates and we feel
convinced that Socrates would naturally have made just such a
speech. But there is nothing in this fact alone that necessarily
bears such a construction, for Plato’s dialogues are all of them
conversations more or less fictitious, and yet are represented as
carried on in the most life-like manner by historical personages.
To reach any trustworthy conclusion as to the historic accuracy of
the Apology would require more information than that supplied by
Plato himself, and yet Plato is the only witness whom we can trust.’
We have, therefore, to depend chiefly upon internal evidence.”
There is no doubt that, not Plato only, but any disciple and friend
of Socrates who had been present on such a momentous occasion
would have been more than eager to spare no pains in accurately
reproducing the words of his master,—of the father of his souls
new-birth. He would have left no stone unturned in striving to
reach and to write, ¢ the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

1 We are not warranted in pinning all the circumstances too well to allow
our faith to Xenophon’s (?) ’Amoroyia of its not being an exact report, while
Swipdrovs, a production whose origin the latter strives to deal with the ar-
and value are equally doubtful. Xen- guments used to prove his untrust-

ophon’s Memorabilia, on the other
hand, is inadequate for our purpose.
2 Schleiermacher and Zeller uphold
the accuracy of Plato’s report. . The
former argues that the speech suits

worthiness. Ueberweg lately has taken
this same point of view with great de-
cision. In the admirable introduction
of Steinhart is to be found the best
presentation of the opposite view.

 
 

40 INTRODUCTION.

truth,’ that it might live as a monument of the great man’s moral
and intellectual worth forever. And individually Plato must have
regarded such an undertaking as his opportunity to appeal to the
supreme court of intelligent and unprejudiced mankind from the
death-sentence pronounced by an unjust court upon the incom-
parable master. In such an enterprise Plato’s memory would
undoubtedly do good service. Yet it is hard to see how a mind
like his, distinguished rather for its devotion to speculative truth
and for its obedience to the laws of artistic and poetical symmetry
than for its submission to the inelastic canons of history, could,
even in such a case as this, have endured the straight-jacket of
stenographic accuracy. Plato doubtless heard with attentive ears
and held with retentive memory all that was spoken before the
court by the man he loved best. And indeed no hand was better
trained than his in presenting faithfully the peculiar conversational
genius of Socrates. But for all that, and by means of it all, he
has gained and used the second sight of a sympathetic and creative
imagination ; he has given us more than the actual defence of Soc-
rates in court. In Plato’s Apology, Socrates on trial for his life
stands before us in clear outline, sharply contrasted with any typical
presentation of the drift of contemporary public opinion ; for public
opinion, so far as it opposed him and his ways, is personified by
his named and unnamed accusers.! He is condemned in court,
but before the tribunal of the eternal fitness of things he and his
life-work stand acquitted.

54 However, we have no right to assume that this could not all be

accomplished without unduly sacrificing historical accuracy. The
nobler, the more appropriate we suppose Socrates’s actual words to
have been, —and no one will incline to say they were not appro-
priate and noble, —the less would Plato feel called upon to depart
from a simple report of what he had actually heard. In the
absence of anything like convincing proofs of the contrary, it is
reasonable, with due allowance for Plato’s artistic bent and after
taking into consideration the circumstances under which he wrote,
to conclude that his Apology of Socrates resembled very closely

1 Cf. Apology, p. 18ab s¢q.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION.

the speech actually made in court by Socrates. The circumstances
under which Plato wrote lead however to the following qualification
of this statement of substantial identity. Any speech reported in
writing necessarily differs from the speech as originally made,
and no orator even can write down from memory the words
he has used, — as for Socrates he spoke on the spur of the mo-
ment without previous notes or preparation of any kind.! Plato
heard him just as Thucydides heard Pericles, and as Thucydides,
with the most earnest desire to reproduce as a part of history
Pericles’s speeches,? could not avoid making them by his manner
of statement to some extent his own, so it was with Plato and the
speech of Socrates. He could not, in spite of the accuracy which
he observed in reproducing the situation at the trial and the words
to which he had so attentively listened, avoid giving the Apolog
of Socrates in a way which makes it a work of his own, though
at the same time it is the genuine defence of Socrates.’ The
success with which Plato brings before us the living persons con-
cerned in Socrates’s trial is the best proof that he allowed himself
a certain freedom of expression in presenting the matter and man-
ner of Socrates himself. Among Plato’s many works distinguished
for vividness of dramatic characterization, the Apology is one of
the most noteworthy. In the Apology we have the most life-like
of Plato’s many portraits of Socrates.

We find many inequalities in the speech of the Apology, and 53

1 Qf. Apology, p. 17 ¢. Those un- tes. The intimacy of ten years’ stand-
convinced by the genuine ring of this ing between the two latter made their
passage may still doubt. We know case one of ideal friendship, where, at
Socrates chiefly from Plato, hence dis- least in intellectual matters, what be-
cussions of Plato’s trustworthiness are longed to Socrates was Plato’s, and
apt to beg the question. vice versa. Therefore Plato, if he

2 For the best account of this whole made the defence of Socrates charac-
matter, cf. Professor R. C. Jebb’s ar-  teristically his own, could be sure that
ticle on the speeches of Thucydides, it was also and for that reason char-
published in a volume of Oxford acteristically Socrates’s. Was not
Essays called Hellenica, edited by Plato, therefore, better prepared to
E. Abbott, Rivingtons, 1871. deal with Socrates, the friend of his

 

3 There is an important difference
between the relation of Thucydides
to Pericles and that of Plato to Socra-

youth, than was Thucydides to deal
with Pericles, who certainly was not
one of his intimates ?

 
rr .

EE

eR ORR EN

Cah SBR la -

Ta —

 

2 INTRODUCTION.

indeed a tendency here and there to repetition and circumlocution.!
This is not only characteristic of Socrates in general, but partic-
ularly characteristic of him or of any one when speaking off-hand.
Equally characteristic of Socrates is the cross-examination? and
the frequent recourse which is had to the dialogue form ;? for
Socrates undoubtedly went as far in this direction as the rules of
Athenian pleading would allow.

No matter whether we take the speech as a verbal report or as,
in the main, an invention of Plato, if we once admit that its aim
was to vindicate Socrates before the whole world no less than ta
influence the particular men who were his judges, it is easy to
understand the line of defence taken in the Apology. The counts
in the indictment against him are summarily dealt with, for Socrates
is chiefly anxious to show that the sole cause of his accusation
is the wide-spread prejudice against him. This prejudice he
grapples with, and seeks by analyzing to remove it, appealing in
justification of all that he had habitually said and done to his
commission from God. The careless way in which he quotes the
terms of the indictment, — he reverses the order of the counts
against him and deals with them in that order,— would prove the
speaker’s indifference to the opinion of his judges, if such laxities
were not known to be very common in the Athenian courts. Far
more important, therefore, or rather all important, is the fact that
he does not meet the accusation of disbelief in the gods of Athens.
We have seen that nothing would have been easier than a trium-
phant refutation of this charge; yet the matter is passed over, and
Socrates prefers to merge the narrower question in a consideration
of the more sweeping charge of downright atheism, of disbelief in
all gods. Evidently Socrates cared little for winning his case, but
much for the opportunity afforded him to enlighten his fellow-
citizens as to the wider and deeper import of the point at issue.
The device by which the terms of the accusation to be met
were enlarged’ was one sanctioned by the traditional procedure in

1 Cf. Apol, p. 26b ad fin. andec, 3 Cf. Apol,, p. 20a-c; p. 29¢ at
also p. 28e sqq. the end sqq. and elsewhere. |
2 Cf. Apol,, pp. 24d -27e. + Of. supra, § 31.

> Cf. Apol., p. 26D sqq.

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 43

courts! at Athens. Under cross-examination on the meaning of
his bill of indictment, the accuser himself gave to Socrates the
wider interpretation best suited for the answer with which it was
to be met.

The manner in which Socrates talks of death and of the here- 87
after is very striking. There is more than a conviction that
compared with wickedness death is no evil, for that conviction is
made the firmer by the comforting hope that death is but the door
which leads to everlasting life and happiness. If this be consid-
cred not Plato’s addition but Socrates’s literal statement, then the
moral steadfastness and the joy with which Socrates hailed death’s
deliverance was the best re-enforcement for Plato’s own doctrine
of the immortality of the soul, which is stated in the Phaedo and
clsewhere.

The closing words on immortality play an important part in 58
the tragic development of the situation; for the first part and the
verdict of guilty which succeeds it awaken a sense of cruel injustice,
which, by the second part and the ensuing sentence of death, is soon
brought to a second climax but is finally mitigated by the closing
words of Socrates. This third part bears we may say to the two
parts that precede it a relation similar to that borne by the Eumen-
ides of Aeschylus to the preceding plays of the Oresteian trilogy,
and solves a tragic situation by merging a narrowed view of justice
in a broader one by which it is superseded.

The first of these three subdivisions, which is the defence 59

proper, is complete in itself. Though all the laws of oratorical
art are here carefully observed, the usual practices of oratory are
sharply criticised. The five natural heads of the argument cer-
tainly are unmistakable, since, by carefully following the connec-
tion of thought, we can easily mark the words in which the speaker
dismisses one point and takes up another.

1 Cf. infra, § 71, note 2.

 

TR a es Tog i
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
   
  
  
  
  
   
  
  
    
  
  
 
  
  
    
   
  
    
  
   
   
  
  
  
  
   
   

   

 

INTRODUCTION.

   
  

ANALYSIS OF THE FIRsT PART, OR THE DEFENCE PROPER,
cc. I-XXIV.

(a) c. i. Introduction (mwpoolpwov, exordium)
__ J principium.
instnuatio (édpodos).
(D) c. ii. Statement (wpobeos, propositio) of the case and of the
plan in the plea.
(¢) ce. iii-xv. Refutation (Aves, confutatio)

a 4 former accusers, cc. iii-x.

~ Lof Meletus, cc. xi-xv.

(d) cc. xvi-xxii. Digression (wapékBaos, digressio) on Socrates’s life.

(¢) ce. xxiii, xxiv. Peroration (éwilloyes, peroratio). This is an attack
upon the usual form of peroration, and ends with
a confession of trust in God.

An introduction (a) is always intended to prepare the hearers for
listening to the speaker’s plea. This is especially hard in the face
of prejudice against the speaker’s person or against his case.
The rules of speech-writing here prescribe recourse to insinuation
épobos, a subtle process by which the speaker wins over the sympa-
thies of his audience. Ie may do this (1) by attacking his
opponent, (2) by conciliating his audience, (3) by strongly stat-
ing his personal hardship in the case, or (4) by putting concisely
the difficulties involved in dealing with the facts. After the intro-
duction follows (0) the statement mpdeors. This is commonly a
plain unvarnished tale covering the matters of fact involved. If
such an account be unnecessary the statement sets forth simply the
plan of the plea. This plan is not unfrequently accompanied by a
subdivision (partitio), which is sometimes simply a summary of
heads (enwmeratio),' and sometimes a detailed account of topics
(expositio).? Here, again, Socrates’s defence follows the rules
of oratory. Next comes the most important part, the proof
(wloms, probatio), represented by (¢) the refutation which natu-
rally falls, as indicated above, under two heads. In the manner

I Rhet. ad Herenn. I. 10, 17: Enu- 2 Ibid. Expositio est, cum res, qui-
meratione utemur, cum dicemus nu- bus de rebus dicturi sumus, exponimus
mero, quot de rebus dicturi simus. breviter et absolute.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 45

of refutation here given, the genuine Socrates is in his element,
and here he is pictured to the life. After proof or refutation, as
the case may be, comes, in the programme of oratorical orthodoxy,
(d) a digression. This was the orator’s opportunity to try his
wings. The theme chosen in a digression needed no more than an
indirect bearing upon the argument of the case, and the ornamental
part which the digression often played has led to the Hge of
another term for it, i.e. exornatio or embellishment.’ This, too,
can be found in Socrates's speech, and so perfect is its beauty
that the laws of school-oratory are more than satisfied. Yet,
embellishment though it be called, this part of the speech has
nothing that is far-fetched or beside the ping; in the Apology it
is the complement of the preceding negative refutation, is posi-
tive and required reinforcement (confirmatio). The transition to
(¢) the peroration is plainly marked. At this point the orator, and
more than ever if he were on trial for his life, made a desperate
appeal to the feelings of his hearers. No means of moving ihe
judges were left untried. Recourse to such methods Bourapes
condemned as equally dishonest and dishonorable.” This part of

1 Rhet. ad Herenn. II. 29, 46: Ex-  thesoul have nothing to do with Be
ornatio constat ex similibus et exem- but affect only the judge Limse .
plis et rebus iudicatis et amplificatio- Hence, if all legal EE ere
nibus ct ceteris rebus quae pertinent regulated as in certain SO 52:
ad exaugendam et collocupletandam guished for paritentony bos oss
argumentationem. these emotions yous p ay id iv

2 Cf. Xen. Mem. iv. 4. 4: “oddev whatever. Indeed 2 Sunor an nas
70éAnoe Ta elwbiTwy év TY SicacTnply point, some urging t 1at : = oly
mapd Tos vluovs moiijoat, he lent him- prescribe this cons y He of ors
self to none of the violations of law enforce the principle, an 2 e nn y
which were customarily committed in plea which 1s off the poi : Tap
courts.” It appears that there was no the rule of procedure 8 9% Be &
special law forbidding in so many words opagus, and a Yory joo r ue an 2
an oratorical appeal to the emotions judge should certain y nev ini
of the judges in the ordinary courts. mind warped by the in fsaas 9 ger,
This is confirmed, indeed, by Aristotle of jealousy, or of pity broug a4 hes :
in his Rhetoric (I. 1, a passage particu- upon him. To have ig hen
larly important in commotion with ae 4 Shey Se spe a 3 rE ul
Apology). There Aristotle first criti- or to gives ot Te bao

70s various rhetorical practices, and using 1t. To the proce
a nots to say ; “prejudice, Arcopagus we mars vk : py
pity, anger, and all such emotions of  Quintilian’s words (VL. 1, 7):

 
pence eel me Solas ah

AE TR Ch ei ERS

 

 

46 INTRODUCTION.

the Apology is an attack upon the ordinary practice of pleaders in
court. Not unmanly subserviency to men, but manly submission
to God's will are heard in the closing words of this defence.

60 Such was the temper of the Apology written for Socrates by
Plato, and as such, whether intentionally or unintentionally, it
must have been in striking contrast with the drift of the plea shin
Lysias is said to have elaborated for the same case." The tradition
that Plato undertook to plead in the capacity of Socrates’s advo-
cate (ounijyopos) but was not allowed to do so rests on very slight
authority. It is therefore ridiculous to suggest that this Jo
which Plato did not prepare, was the first outline orn
worked up in the Apology.

61 The second and third parts, which come respectively after the
first and the second verdict, can hardly be expected to answer all
the requirements of a set speech. And yet these are symmet-
rically arranged, and their topics skilfully set before us. The
second part naturally opens with an allusion to the verdict of
¢ guilty’ just rendered ; any regular peroration would have been out
of place before the third, which is the suitable conclusion both for
the first part and the second. And where, indeed, is there a more
eloquent and nobly impressive ending than this? That part of it
addressed to the judges who voted for Socrates’s acquittal is cer-
tainly made most prominent and very appropriately so. For these
judges, they who alone are worthy of that title, are his chosen
friends ; to their kindred souls he confides the unspeakable hopes
of happiness after death that are stirring within him, and invites
them to be of good cheer and not to fear death. In so doing, even
while death stares him in the face, he does not blench, but obeys
his captain and works as the servant of God.

62 Closely connected with the Apology is the dialogue called the

CRITO.

This dialogue belongs to the first class® of Plato’s dialogues ; it
is a conversation pure and simple, neither narrated nor read to an

nis affectus movere etiam per prae- 1 Cf. supra, § 34 and note.
conem prohibebatur orator.” 2 Cf. supra, § 52
; .

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION. 47

audience introduced at the beginning. There are two speakers
only, Socrates and Crito. Their close friendship has been men-
tioned in the Apology (p. 33 d). This intimacy was unbroken,
and though Crito was much absorbed by the care of his exten-
sive property, yet, in all the fortunes of Socrates's life, Crito had
been his firm friend. And now that a sentence which he could
not but regard as unjust had been pronounced upon his friend,
Crito rebelled against its execution and against the shame of
seeing Socrates die a criminal’s death. To prevent this he was
willing to risk his fortune and his civil rights. The lucky combi-
nation of circumstances which furthered the plans made for this
end has already been explained.’ Apparently, nothing prevented
Socrates's escape from prison but Socrates. At this juncture
Socrates stands before us as the ideally loyal citizen. Though
opposed to the principles of the democracy at Athens, he submits
without reservation to its laws and exhorts all others to do the like.
This, he declares, is the first and the most imperative duty of every
citizen. Such is the historical groundwork of the dialogue. The
dramatic picture given of this situation admits of the application
of various terms used to designate the development of the plot

in a Greek tragedy.

ANALYSIS oF THE CRITO.

(a) cc. 1, IL Prologue (wpohoyos); the characters and their mental
situation (100s Te kal mwabos).

(b) ce. 1I-X. Entanglement (8éos or mhokn) of the logical situation.
1. c. iii. The threats of the multitude.
2. ¢.iv. The prayers of friends.
3. c.v. The jeers of enemies.

1. cc. vi, vii. The threats are many but duty is one.

2. c. viii. Nothing should warp our idea of duty.

3. cc. ix, X. It is wrong to run away from prison, and
wrong should not be done, evel in retaliation.

1 Of. supra, § 36 and note.

=>

 

 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
   
  
   
 
  

i

a

Fir ———————

 

48 INTRODUCTION.

Cc CC. —.. . i
(©) XI-XV Clearing up (Avois).! The laws of Athens require his
submission and his death.
1. cc. xi, xii. Socrates owes them life liberty and
happiness.
2. cc. xiii, xiv. They require and he has promised obe-
dience.
3. ¢. Xv. He will gain nothing by disobedience.

(d) cc. xvi, xvii. Epilogue (éwloyos). There are laws in Hades which
can reach him who disobeys law upon earth.

64 Like the Apology, this work bears memorable witness to the

nobility of Plato’s mind, and it reveals especially his lofty patriot-
ism. As for Socrates, we see in both these works that not words
only but deeds prove him a more law-abiding citizen than scores
of men whose spurious good-citizenship is well portrayed on many
pages of the Crito (e.g. p. 45 €). The very laws of the land, as
well as the example of Socrates submitting to his unjust oss
tence of death, declare in no uncertain tones to every Athenian
what true patriotism is and how it is preserved.
The Crito is by no means simply the chronicle of a conversa-
tion actually held ; though it is based upon facts, it must still be
recognized as Plato’s work. This is proved by the finished skill
both of plan and execution displayed in this dialogue, short and
simple though it is. Moreover, in the Crito we see that Plato has
made a step forward in his notion of duty. For here is the earliest
statement of Plato’s ‘golden rule’: Injustice always is wrong ; it
is wrong to retaliate injustice by injustice.” In the Gerais (see
supra, § 40) this rule is applied more universally and tl upon
its rational basis. Indeed, from a philosophical point of view
we may regard the Crito and the Apology as a suitable preface
to the Gorgias, if we do not forget that both are primarily pictures
of the one great master whom Plato in all his works most
delighted to honor.

1 .
For most of the details of the detailed analysis of the dialogue on
analysis given above Cron is not the same principle.
responsible, though it is substitute 2 See i
: I usihle, thong 8 substituted See on és of woAAol olovrai, Crito,
or his § 63, where there is a less p.49Db.

 

 

 

 

 

 

     
   

APPENDIX

ON ATHENIAN COURTS OF LAW.

Qrx thousand Athenian citizens were entrusted with the power 66
to decide law-suits. Choice was made by lot every year of six
hundred men from each of the ten tribes (¢vhal), and any citizen

over thirty years of age was ¢

ligible. Every one thus chosen was

liable, after taking the prescribed oath? of office, to be called upon

to act as a Swacrds; Swkacral, jurymen,

1 The chief authority is Meier and
Schomann, Der Attische Process, Cal-
vary (Berlin, 1884). See also K. Fr.
Hermann, Lehrbuch der griechischen
Staatsalterthiimer, and G. F. Scho-
mann, Griechische Alterthiimer, 2 vol-
umes, of which the first has been
translated into English, and published
under the title Antiquities of Greece
by Rivingtons (London, 1880).

2 The oath, which is cited in the
speech of Demosthenes against Timo-
crates (149-151), 1s of doubtful authen-
ticity. Schomann and Lipsius (p. 153,
note 17), by omissions and bracketed
additions change the formula there
given into the following, which, ex-
cepting the last bracketed clause,— a

conjecture of Friinkel’s, — is not far
from the real form: ymeprovua Kao
robs véuovs kal T& Ymplopata Tob dNuov
rob *Afnvalwy kal Tis BovAijs T@v TeVTa-
koolwy, [mepl Gv ¥ tv ybuot py Gai,
yvdun TH SucarordTy Kal oUTE XApLTOS
veka ob’ ¥xbpas], ... Kal &icpodaopuat
rob Te katnylpov Kal TOU &moA0yoUuévoY
Suolws augotv, ral Ynprodpar wepl avTov
0d av 71 9 Bdlwkis, [kal edopkodyTL pév
pot €ln WOAAG Kal dyad, émioprodvTe 8¢
eidrea abr Te Kal yéver], I will vote in
accordance with the laws and enactments
of the Athenian people and of the Senate

5 was the official name * by

of Five Hundred, [and where there is no
law, in accordance with my best knowl-
edge of what is just, unmoved alike by

favor and by enmity], and I will give

impartial hearing both to the accuser and
to the defendant, and vote on the question
at issue in the suit. [If I keep this oath
let blessings be my portions if I break it
let ruin seize on me and all my kindred.]
Sce on duduoker kté., Apol., p. BLY
3 The use, in other connexions, of
Sucacrhs with the meaning of Judge
leads many to translate ducaoral Judges
and not jurymen. Neither of these
words is satisfactory, but to describe
a body of citizens without any techni-
cal knowledge of the law as judges is
certainly more misleading from a
modern point of view than to call
them jurymen. It must be remem-
bered, however, that the presiding
magistrate did not perform the duties
of a modern judge in any important
respect, so that the dwcacral had the
substantial powers both of judge and
jury in all cases brought before them.
4 The customary form in addressing
them was & Hvdpes dikaoraf, but this
could be varied. We have sometimes
& avdpes *Abnvaiot, sometimes & &vdpes,
and once and again & ’Afnvaior. Cf.
Apol., pp. 17a, 22 e, 26d, 30 b.
 

 

 

mn ————— We. ~~

50 APPENDIX.

which they were addressed. These six thousand were divided into
a reserve of one thousand, to be used as substitutes etc., and a main
body of five thousand for regular service. A subdivision of the five
thousand was then made into ten courts, of five hundred each, called
Sukaomipwa, for, like the English word court, Sukacrijpiov may mean a
judicial body as well as the place where such a body sits in judg-
ment. Sometimes a court was composed of less than five hundred
jurymen, e.g. of two or four hundred ; sometimes we find two or more
courts of five hundred sitting as one, but it is doubtful whether the
whole six thousand ever sat as one court. The even numbers,

200, 500, 1000, etc., were habitually increased by one, and for
that purpose a Sikaoris was drawn from the 1000 supernumeraries.
This precaution was taken to avoid a tie vote.

On days appointed for holding court each of the subdivisions
above mentioned was assigned by lot to one of the places used as
court-rooms, and there tried the suit appointed for that time and
place. Each juryman received as the badge of his office a staff
(Baxmpta) corresponding in color to a sign over the door of his
court. He also received a ticket (odpBodov), by showing which he
secured his fee after his day’s service. Cf. Dem. De Cor. 210. A
fee of one obol (about three cents) for every day’s session was in-
troduced by Pericles, and afterwards trebled by Cleon.

67 Almost all cases except those of homicide were tried in these

63

Heliastic courts, and the jurymen were called also qAacral from
the name nwa, given to the largest court-room in Athens. The
most general term to designate a law-suit is 8ikn, though the same
word also has the narrower meaning of a private suit. According
as the complaint preferred involves the rights of individuals or
of the whole state, §ikar in the wider sense were subdivided into
(1) 8ikar in the narrower sense, private suits, and (2) ypapal, public
suits. Since the state was the real plaintiff in public suits, any
fine which in such suits might be imposed upon the defendant went
to the state ; accordingly in public suits, the accuser, as a rule, was
entitled to no part of the penalty.

In the ordinary course of procedure, every plaintiff was required
to present his indictment (ypady), or complaint (Aqks), in writing

to the particular magistrate whose department included the matters

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX. D

) om-
involved. Most suits thus came before the nine archons, ¢ :
; p ning six.
monly before one of the first three or before all of the rp ig
The first archon, — called é dpxwv Par excellence, — dea Se uy
i ily ri i itance ; the sec
i i family rights and inher
with charges involving y rights | : ge
archon, called Bacw\evs, With those involving the Per Fi
; : igi io worship; the third ar ,
irel licion and public worship ; :
requirements of relig : A
7] ases involving foreig
called mwoNépapyos, dealt w ith most cases abe WE
(pérorkor) and foreigners; the remaining six, — C¢ wl
«uv - ; 5 ’
ine dealt with almost all cases not especially ae
: ot Ir hic ¢ disposed
re, 1 er es which were p
; ree. There were, however, cas
the first three. Ther a
of by other magistrates, or otherwise especially pros ao EL
] : e a
The accusation had to be made in the presence of t es
with due notice to appear. g

) +1 3 YT { » red
ad previously been sery
a, wo witnesses to the summons

notice required the presence of t ; EW kts oe,
(kAqTiipes) If the magistrate allowed proceeding a
: 1 posted i me
the terms of accusation were copied and posted In 2
: TT xe
i his publication a day was lixed,
at the time of this pt
place, and a j rostral
which both parties were bound to appear betore 5 es
: pnt > ‘here the pls
for the preliminary i nvestigation (Svdkprats) . : pac : > eo Stten
’ or! both of them alread)
endant’s answer, ;
charges and the def { Vooth paris
: ir + oath, and both pt
; ‘ere reaffirmed under ,
down and handed 1n, W ; : dal toate.
submitted to the magistrate such evidence as they pons hy
J . . ne vy g C LW 9
The reaffirmation or confirmation under oath was ca a i
sometimes dvropocia.’ The evidence submitted consistec : : on
4 J . . ys - ) $3 -
Adanc -arious kinds, the def
'S ntary evidence of var
from the laws, documentary oan dnder
tions of witnesses, and particularly any testimony gis ha
) by slaves, which had been taken and written

» e Lo" aVOoS ; . a _* g
tortie (8 The magistrate fixed his official seal

in the presence of witnesses.
testified falsely against me in the state-
ments recorded in the evidence submitted.
The answer is: ZTépavos MevexAéovs
*Axapveds TaANO7 éuapTipnae Sapp
) 7 . gas Ta &v TQ YpappoaTelp YEY ’
ih wi Jeay ye the testimon y which Foes gue 3s ny as
Tom aan auuéva, Apollodorus the recorded in the go i 2 x
Ypoppatey y attr accuses Steph- 2 Jiwpooia refers strictly on
hans Bn nian of Menecles, double oath of the two parties ; a
ns J he at y ; the damages pocia to the Aormdnrs on 1.
J ii fied at one talent. Stephanus ~~ both are used for each singly.

1 Cf. (Dem. XLV. 46) the wiliten
charge (Afi&is) in a private i Awod-
Aédwpos Taclwvos ’Axapvevs Zrepdve
MevekAdovs *Axapvel YevdopuapTuptwy, Ti

d, 69

 

 
   

      
 

 

  
  
  
  
  

 

    

 
 

  
  
 
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
   
  
   
 
  

 

 

Re Ihe

52 APPENDIX.

upon all the documents thus submitted, and took charge of them
against the day when the case was to be tried.

70 On the day (+ xvpla) when a court was to sit upon any case,

7

the magistrate who had presided over the preliminary investigation
proceeded to the appointed court-room, where he met the Sicacral
assigned by lot (émkexAnpwpévor) to the case. Both parties to the
suit, having been previously notified, were required to put in an
appearance. Proceedings in court were opened by some religious
ceremony ; then the clerk (ypapparevs) read aloud the written accu-
sation and the reply, and finally the parties to the suit were succes-
sively called forward to state their case. This was the opening of
the case (eloayoyy Tis 8ikns’) by the magistrate (doaywyeds). Cf. Aris-
toph. Vesp. 860 ff., Antipho, vi. 42.

The law required that every man should conduct his own case in
person, and hence those who were not themselves skilful pleaders
generally recited speeches which had been written for them by
others. Still, the law permitted a man to appear in court accom-
panied by advocates (ouwjyopor), who came as his friends, and
therefore were not supposed to be paid for their trouble; not
infrequently, after a short speech from the principal, the most
important part of his plea was made by one of his advocates. E.g.
Demosthenes’s speech on the Crown was made as Ctesipon’s advo-
cate. The water-clock (kNérdpa, sometimes called simply =é ¥8wp) was
used to measure the time allotted to each for pleading before the
court. When called for, the written documents offered in evidence
were read by the clerk, and meanwhile the clock was stopped. By
way of precaution, the witnesses whose depositions were read had
to be present in court and acknowledge their testimony. While
making his plea a man was protected by law from interruption by
his opponent, and the law required his opponent to answer his
questions.” The jurymen had a right to interrupt the speaker

1 To this correspond the words % stantially the same thing. Hence the
elgodos Tis dlkns, Crito, p. 45e, just as presiding magistrate, Hyeudv Tod dika-
we find eigdyew used both of ri» 3i- arnplov, is also called 6 eloaywyels
knv and of rods dugpieBnrovvras. Cor- 2 According to the terms of She
respondingly, we find eicépxesbar and  wyéuos quoted in Dem. xLvr. 10: Toy
eioiévar said both of the suit and of  avridikow émdvaykes elvar dmorplvacou
the parties to the suit, meaning sub-  &AAfA0s Td SpwTduevor, papTupety 8¢ ut,

ear NRA 5

eG
A a SE A

rem
Sr

 

 

 

APPENDIX. 53

(1) if in their opinion he was off the point, (2) if they required
fuller explanation on any point whatsoever. Of course, there were
frequent attempts to prejudice the jurymen instead of enlightening
them, and nothing was commoner than to make appeal to their
sympathies. It was by no means an unusual occurrence for a
defendant to appear in court with his wife and children, or with
infirm and helpless parents, and sometimes with friends of great
popularity or of high character ; he depended upon these to act as
his intercessors with the court. Such practices, though mani-
festly tending to disarm the severity of the law and to defeat the
ends of justice for which the court was organized, seem never
definitely to have been prohibited in any court except the
Areopagus.

When the pleas had been made, the jurymen proceeded without 72
preliminary consultation to decision by a secret vote. In public
suits, only one speech was allowed to the plaintiff, and one to the
defendant. In private suits, two were allowed to each. The jurors
generally voted with bronze balls or discs, either solid (to denote
acquittal) or perforated (to denote condemnation). These were
called yvipor. If the vote was a tie, the case went in favor of the
defendant; and, in a public suit, if less than one-fifth of the votes
were for the plaintiff, he was fined, and also debarred from ever
again acting as plaintiff in a similar suit. This fine was fixed at
1000 drachmas, about $170. The plaintiff in such a suit also
incurred both these penalties if, without good and sufficient
excuse, he failed to appear in court, and thus by his own act
allowed that his case was bad. If the defendant failed to appear,
the case went against him by default (see on éprpnv karnyopovvres,
Apol. 18 ¢), and he was pronounced guilty in contumaciam. In
most private suits, the plaintiff, under similar circumstances, for-
foited one-sixth of the sum which he claimed ; this forfeiture was
called érwBelia, one obol for every drachma.

Suits, both public and private, were divided into (1) dydves T3

npnrol, in which, if it decided against the defendant, the court
had still to determine the degree of punishment to be inflicted

the two parties to the suit are required to but cannot give testimony as witnesses.
answer cach what question the other asks, Cf. Apol., p. 25d.

   

 
 

 

 

 

APPENDIX.

(rlpmpa), because no penalty was fixed by law; and (2) dyéves
dripnroy, in which, after deciding against the defendant, the court
had no further decision to make, because the penalty was fixed
by law. In cases of the former kind, if they were public suits
— like the ypadr doefelas brought against Socrates, — the sneer
proposed the penalty which he considered adequate,’ and the
accused, if convicted, had the right to make a counter-proposi-
tion ; then followed the decision of the court.? It is still a moot
point whether the judges were confined to a choice between these
two propositions or could, if they saw fit, inflict a third penalty
midway between the two.

74 The ordinary penalties for crimes against the state were death
banishment, loss of rights of citizenship (dria), confiscation of
property, and fines. All these are summed up in the formula
constantly used at Athens: & mu xpr wabeiv 4 dworiocar,’ what a man
must suffer or pay for his offence. In case the convicted defendant
was not an Athenian by birth, he might be sold into slavery, and
thus additionally punished by the loss of his freedom.

76 The magistrates who had to oversee the execution of the pun-
ishment of death were called the Eleven (oi év8exa). Ten men on
this board were chosen by lot every year, one from each of the
ten tribes; the eleventh was a scribe, ypapparevs. They had gen-
eral charge of all prisons, and they issued the order requiring flueix
subordinates * to execute the penalty of death. ?

1 Of. supra, §31 ; also, § 69 and note. (sc. éavrg) Twds but also dmoriuacda
2 The technical terms which were (Xen. Apol. 23) were used

used are found in Apol., pp. 36 b, 37 ec. 8 Cf. Apol.,, p. 36 b :

It is noticeable that not only ruasfa: 1 Cf. Phaed., p. 116 b.

 

 

IIAATQNOS ATIOAOTIA SQOKPATOTX.

I. “0 7 pév Spel, ® dvdpes ’ A@naiot, memdvfare vo

~ 5 ~ ’ Ss 70 S.A > ) \ J ec 9
TWY CrLwV KAT) YOPwWV, OVK oLod* €yw ovY Kol O0VUTOS VT

5 ~ hb] / 5 ~ 5
AVTOV OALyov EMLAVTOV ere

Bou ovrw mbavos éNeyov.

/ 3 / e yy 3 ~ 3 Q\ 3 / /
kalror a\nbés ye ws €mos eLTew oVOEV ELPNKATL. palioTa

\ 9 ~ A 9 / ~ ~ I) ’ / ~ ’
S¢ avrov & é0adpaca TOV TOANGY WV EJeEVTarTo, TOUTO €V

S E\eyov ws Xp) Spas ebhaBetobal py) vr éuov éSamaty)-

IL 1. § Tu piv vpeis® éyw dé: mot
Seis pév- yd dé because the clauses
as wholes, not duets and gy, are
contrasted.

& &vdpes *Abnvaiol: instead of the
more usual and technical & &vdpes
dwcaotal, which Socrates reserves for
his closing words (40a to the end)
addressed to those who voted for his
acquittal. See on & &vdpes kté., 26d,
and Introd. p.49, note 4. — memwovlare:
have been affected, though act. in form
is pass. in meaning, and therefore
takes omd with the gen.

2. § ov: introduces an asserted
fact, which is contrasted with the
preceding statement of uncertainty,
but at any rate, Lat. certe. Cf. Xen.
An. i. 3. 5, el pev dra woNow OUVK
ol3a, aiphoouas 8’ 0 3 v Spas kré., whether
[ shall be doing what is right I do not
Jonow, but at any rate I will choose you.
[Idt. iii. So, kal éxéxBnoav Adyor &maTo
pev lows “EAMppwy, eNéxbnoay & ov,
and arguments were urged which to some
(lreeks seem apocryphal, but at any rate
they were urged.

kal avrds: even myself, sc. © How
then may not you have been affected!”

3. ONlyov: sc. dev, used abs. G.
268; I. 956 and T43Db. Cf. 22a.—
mOavds, dAndés : these words state
and contrast the respective aims of
rhetoric and of dialectic (philoso-
phy).

4. o& ¢mos elmelv: qualifies the
sweeping denial in ov3év, hardly any-
thing. G. 268; H. 9506. For an equiv.
idiom in Herodotus, ¢f. Hdt. ii. 15, 7d
AérTa orl kaTdppuTdy Te kal vewoTl, &'s
Ady eimely, avamepnvds, has only re-
cently, so to speak, come to light.

5. adrav iv dadpaca TGV WONNGY :
connect both gens. with &év. adTdv,
about them, designates the persons who
are responsible for the é (cf. below b,
To0Té pot Edokey alTOY dvaioxuvTéTaTOY).
rv moAA@y gives the sum of which
gy is part. See also on Tobs mwoAAoUs
in 18 b.— Tovro: explaining & and
in appos. with it. —év ¢ : refers to the
passage where the statement is made.

6. xen: the original warning was
xph edAaBeiobar.  Xxpein, but not xpiv,
would be grammatically possible.
G. 243; H. 932. For the use of xpi,
cf. 33d, 34a, and Lach. 181¢. G.

.

222 ~. 2; H. 897.

 

St. 1.
p- 17.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
  
    
   
 
 
 
  
 
    
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
   
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

17

Ore os Sewod ovros Aéyew. 70 yap pn atoyvvbnrar or Y

ITIAATONOS,

avrika vm éuov éfeleyxbhjoovra. €pyw, émeldav und

6mwoToty alvopar dewds Aéyew, TovTé pou €dofev adrav

’ ’ 2 ’ \ yy \ ~ a
10 aval vYTOTATOV E€LVOL, €L U7) apa dewov Kalovo Ww 0UTOL

Myew Tov Ta\nfn Néyovra: ei pév yop TovTO Aéyovow,

e bY ’, AY 3 \ ’ 3 cs 2
OLOAOYyOMV AV €YyWYE OV KOTO TOVUTOVS €waLl PNTwp. OovTol

\ ~ <
Rev yo, Gomep éym Myw, 1) TL 7) ovOer aknbes eiprjkacw:

e ~ / ~ 2
vuets 8€ pov dkovoealfe maoav mr akijfeav.

10. el pr} dpa: unless perchance,
Lat. nisi forte. In order to sug-
gest that the one safest way out of the
difficulty is to beg the whole question
at issue, dpa introduces a definition of
good speaking, and ironically con-
nects with it the assertion that Soc-
rates is a good speaker.

11. el pév: if indeed. This use of
wuév, like many others, shows its con-
nexion with wfr. The supposition is
merely restated.

12. ov kara TovTous: but not after
their pattern. A parenthetical state-
ment, which he proceeds to explain
(see on udyis, 21b, and cf. 27¢). The
explanation begins with od uévror and
ends with the chapter. Pending this
explanation, these words mean a bet-
ter or a worse speaker than they, v.e.
one not on their level.
> 13. yoiv: at all events.—%H Tv 4
ovdév: little or nothing. Cf. Hdt. iii.
140, avaBéBnke 4 Tis 7) ovdels kw
wap’ Huéas adrdv, hardly a single one of
them has ever been here. Xen. Cyr. vil.
5. 45, Tolrwy 3¢ TAv mepieaTNKlTWY
# Twa 3) ovdéva olda, now of these by-
standers I know next to no one at all.

14. Jpets 8¢ pov drxovaeode: instead
of euod & éxoloesde. The position of
duets suggests a contrast with odro:
uév; the sense calls for éuod d¢ (Juels)
axotaeale. This collocation leaves op-

3
ov pévrol

portunity for bringing out wacar Tv
éAffeiav with great prominence. For
a similar shifting of emphasis, cf.
Xen. An. iii. 1. 25, kaye dé, ei uev
duets 0énete éfopuar éml TavTa, Emeala
duty BolAouat, €i & Opels TdTTETé
pe nyetoba odder mpopacifopar THY
AAtklay, now I for one, if you are
minded to bestir yourselves to accom-
plish this, am ready to follow your lead ;
if you however appoint me to lead you 1
make no excuse on the score of my age.
See App.

15. kekaAhemnpévous kré. : in Crat.
399a b Ad ¢piros is quoted as a prua;
when changed to Algwros it becomes
an dvoua. Here dvduara means words,
puerta means phrases. In grammar
Jvowa. Means noun, pyiue means verb.
The kdomos Té&v Adywv (ormatus)
means specifically the use of tropes
and figures of speech. Orators took
great pains in the choice of single
words, and in the collocation and
suitable arrangement of their words
in phrases. Accordingly, in Symp.
198 b, Socrates is made to bestow un-
stinted praise upon Agathon’s speech:
ToD KAAAOUS TOV OvoudTwv kal
popdTwy Tis odk bv éfemAdyn dkodwy,
who would not have been beside himself
on hearing words and phrases of such
marvellous beauty ? Then he contrasts
his own fashion of speaking with Aga-

    
 
  

20 dvSpes, Te 17) MAikia :
els vpas eloiéval. Kal pévtol Kal AVY, Alby
y Séopar kal maplepar: dav duo TOV avTOY Noywy
vou 80 Gvmep elwba \éyew Kal €v

 

 

 

o ¢ ’ es
WO TEP oL TOUTWV, OT)

AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYZ.

 

YL oN / ~ 3 ~
pévous, GAN drovoeale elk \eyoueva TOLS ETLTUXOUOW c

dvépaoct

. \ \
FLO TEV yop Stkaia evar a Ayo, Kal pndets

’Q \ A ’ / »
VOY poo dokn TdT aMws* 0vOe yap av dnjmrov TPETOL, ©

~ € ~
TOUTO VU®
a ’ 9
aKoUNTE LOU ATONOYOV[LEY

17 hon’s as follows: dpa ody Ti kal

rotobrou Adyov déel, mepl "EpwTos TaAn0n
Aeybueva Giovew, bvépact d¢ Kal
Oger papaTwy TowadTy, Mola 3 av
Tis TUX émeAbovoa, consider now whether
you feel the need of such a speech as
this, of hearing the truth told about love
in words and phrases arranged just in
the way they suggest themselves (cf. eixfi
Acydueva). See Introd. 55.

17. elky, Tois émTux0UTLY Vopac :
the same fact stated under two differ-
ent but parallel aspects, oxijua ék mo-
paAAfiAov. See on wdAar kTé., 18 by and
on kal adrol kré., Crit. 48d, and for the
facts Introd. 34. Also for freq. sneers
at the unrefined illustrations and home-
ly vocabulary of Socrates, cf. Gorg.
489b-491¢c. Cf. also Xen. Mem. i. 2.
37, 6 8 Kpirlas, “aan T@vdé Tol oe
améxeaba” En “defo, & Sdxpares,
ray orvréoy kal TOV TekTévwy Kal TAY
xaAréwy- Kal yop olpal adTovs 107 wid:
TeTpiplat S1aBpvAovuévous omd gov.

18. & Néyw : referring to the speech
which follows, my plea. — pndels poo
Soknodrw: for the aor. imv. third
pers. in prohibitions, sec GMT. 806,
N. 1b; G. 254, ~.; IL 874).

20. Be TH MAwkiq: for amanas old
as I. wadrrovr agrees in gender with
euot, i.e. the person involved in wAd7-

yt
"]

4 /’ A / A / v
WTTTEP JLELPAKLD TAATTOVTL 0yo S

& dvdpes’ Abmpaior,

3 St Gta,

plicitly, by ide (equiv. to Tj éudi).
The comparison is attracted into the
dat., i.e. domep uepaxie stands for
Gomep weipdiioy dy TAATTOL.

21. els vpds : before you, sc. TovS
Sucacrds, i.e. TO dwcacrhpov. Cf. the
similar use of év. — kal pévro. kal
maw: yes, and most fervently too. kal
wévro = a rhetorical ‘yes,’ the second
ral adds a specification of the inten-
sity with which the request is made,
«and indeed I beg of you, and I beg
you most fervently too.”

22. Séopan kal waplepar: of. 27D,
TapnTNTdunY. — TOV adTdvy Aoywv :
«this has respect primarily to the
conversation with Meletus, which is
prefaced by the request, 27b, un Oopv-
Bely ew &v 1g eiwddTi Tpdmep TOUS Adyovs
rodpat. But, as something like this
was recognized under the name of
epdTnais (see Introd. 71), the reference
here prob. extends to the conversa-
tions rchearsed (20a), alluded to

(21e¢ sqq., 23 ¢), and imagined (28 b,
20 ¢), in the course of the defence;
perhaps also to the castigation inter-
mingled with it (30d, 3le, 35D,

e).” R. :
23. kol &v ayopd kal @ANofu: sce
Introd. 29. 4 r 1/1 ¢ |

LA 2
\

   
  

 

57

~ ’ ’
15 pa Ala, & dvopes > Afyroatol, kekal\iemnuévovs ye Aoyovs, 17
pact Te Kal ovopaTw OVOE KEKOT[AT)-

rovr. and suggested, though not ex- I

 
  

    
 
 

25

  
 
 
  
 
 
  
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
  
   

d

 

d
an

2 A 3 A A ~ foe ~ As 3 ’ \

dyopa émi av Tpameldv, wa lvpwv mollot aknkoaot, kat 17
§ K ! ~ y — ©

allo, pire Daypdlew pre Vopuc ToUTOV €veka. €xel d

yap ovTwat. viv éywm TPOTOV ETL
[&]

IIAATONOS = O)

waoTiplov avaBéLBnka,

én yeyovos mheiw €BdoprkovTa: drexvas odv Eévws éxw
ET) Y€Y acl 7 X hus €x
~ 3 / : 25] OAR & ” ¥ ’ ~ » ’
ms évbade Aéfews. womep ovv av, el 7 ovr &évos
"7 y EI A Se S ’ » Ty YY yo
érvyxavor dv, EEylyr@GKeTe ONTOV AV MOL EL EV EKEWY

24. tpamelwv: Tpdme(ar (banks) as
well as shops, esp. those near the
market place, were favorite lounging
places at Athens. Cf. Lys. 1x. 5,
KGuol uev To mpoepmuéva dieilexTo éml
Th Pklov Tpamé(y, now the facts just
recited I gathered from a conversation
at Philius’s bank. Cf. also Id. xxiv.
19-20, where, to meet the charge that
his shop is the resort of evil minded
persons without visible means of sup-
port, the defendant says: Tata Aéywy
00d¢v éuod kaTnyopel uaAAov A) TAY FA-
Awy Goor Téxvas Exovar (who follow
trades), obd¢ Tov bs éue elobvTwy (My
customers) uaAdov §) T@dv bs Tovs &A-
Aovs dnuiovpyols (tradesmen). €ExaoTos
yap Sudy elbioTar mpoaporrar ( frequent,
lounge in) 6 uév mpds mpvpomwoAeiov (per-
Sumer’s), 6 8¢ mpds kovpetov (barber-
shop), 6 8¢ mpds arvroTouetoy (cobbler’s),
6 & 8mou wv TUX, kal TA€loTOL MEV GS
ToUs éyyurdTw Ti)s Gyopas KaTAOKEVa-
ouévouvs (keeping shop), éndxioror 8¢ bs
ToVs wAeloTor &méxovras adris. On
the last point, cf. Xen. Mem. iv. 2. 1,
where Socrates aioOavduevos adrdr (sc.
Tov E000dnuov) dia vedTnTa (because
he was so young) o¥ww eis THv &yo-
pav eigibvra, el 8¢ Ti BobAoiro diampd-
(acai, kabiovta eis Nviomoieidw
Ti (a harness-maker’'s) T&v éyyvs
Tis &yopas, eis TovTo kal adTds Pet
KTéE.

25. OopuBetv: fopuBeiv and 64pvBos
describe noisy demonstrations whether
of approval or disapproval, and are

1
used esp. of large assemblies. Cf. I

Rep. vi. 492 b, dtav ovyrkabe(duevor
abpdor of moAAol els éxkAnalas 9) eis
dikacThpia #) Oéatpa 7) oTpardmeda i
Twa EAAOY Kkowdy wAH0ous EUAAoyov EVv
ToAAG OopiVBe Ta uv Yéywor TRY
Aeyouévwy 3) mparTouévwy, Ta d¢ émaivd-
ow ...kal ékBodvTes kal KpPOTOUYTES
kTé., whenever the multitude gathers and
crowds the seats of assemblies, courts,
theatres, or camps, or collects in any
place where crowds commonly resort,
and there makes a great uproar with
shouting and clapping of hands meting
out praise to this and blame to that in
a speech or a play, etc.

26. éml dukaotrjpov: “the prep. has
the notion of presenting one’s self to
the court. CF. Isae. Frg. (Dion IH. de
Isae. 10), Aéyew éml ducaoTnpiov. The
dvaBéBnra refers to thé Bjua.” R.

27. éBSopnkovra: see Introd. 17 and
App. Cf. also Lys. x1x. 55, éyw yap
En yeyovws #0n TpidkovTa olite
T¢ matpl oddév wdmoTe AvTeimov, obiTe
TOV WoOMT@Y 00dels mot évekdAeoey
(brought accusation), éyyis Te oikdv Tis
ayopas ovde wpds dtkaocTply od de
wpds BovAevrnply HpOny oddemd-
wOTE, TPL TAVTYY THY TUUPOpLy Yevéadad.

28. év0ade: i.c. év dicagryplois. The
gen. tis Aéfews depends upon Eévws
(G. 182, 1; H. 757a), the adv. of
£évos,—used almost in the sense of
&mepos,— which in this sense takes the
gen., but is rare in Att. prose.

@omep ouv av kté.: for the position

   
  
   
  
  
     
 
 
   
 

/

ew

30

35

18
a

— —

ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYZS.

hy

™) dv) Te Kal TY [TPOTY
\ \ \/_ .~ ~ en
kal 1 Kal vv TOUTQ UMD

 
  

. 3 / 2 2 ‘
GoW JMIOELy — © LT ang

\ \ Agate TA ’ Ay \ \ ’
TOV [LEV TpOrOV ™Ss Né€ews (av T— lows pv yap Xepwv,
a a — ~ \
lows 8¢ Bektiwy dv eln —udrd 8¢ ToDTd GROTEW Kal TOUT

\ ~ ’ > S : \é A 2. S ~ \
TOV vovv TLIXEXLY €L LKaLQ €yw Mn MM LKOLO TOV LEV

yap avn Apert pritoposy Eran 0) Méyew.

II. Tparov pév otv Oikawds ein amohoyrioactal, @

3

~

y 5 ~ \ \ ~ / d ~ /
dvSpes *Abyraiol, mpds TO. TPGTA [OV YEVON) KATIYOPT[LEVD.
\ © \
kal Tovs mpdTOUS KaTySpovs, ETeLTa. O¢ TPOS TA. VTTEPA Kal
~ / : \
Tovs Sorépovs. éuod yap TONNOL KATI}yOpOL YEYOVATL TPOS

and repetition of #&v, sce GMT. 42, 3;
G. 212, 2; H. 864.

30. dv: dialect, with esp. refer-
ence to pronunciation, while Tpime,
style of speech, describes more gener-
ally any unusual choice and combi-
nation of words.

ére@pdppnv: had been brought up,
belongs to the supposed case. Sce
on ds &ueArer, 20 a. Foreigners were
allowed to appear in court only in
exceptional cases. Ordinarily their
gévos, quest-fiiend, or their mpdéevos,
resident consul, represented them in
court and was surety for them.

31. kal 613 kal: takes the place of
ofrw kal after &omep; 37 calls atten-
tion to the case in point here cited. —
yov: not now in contrast to then, but
as it is contrasted with as it would
have been. “Now that I am not
a stranger in Athens, but only a
stranger in courts.” Lat. nunc is
used in the same way. Cf. Liv. ii. 12.
14. — ds yé pou Soka: rather than &s
~ éuoi, the reading of inferior Mss.
adopted by many editt. The impor-
tant word is &s, not wolf, which is
the least emphatic form in which the
pron. could be introduced. Here
the pers. pron. is used instead of the

refl. H. 684. For the analogous use
of the oblique cases of adds instead of
the ind. refl., see G. 145, 2, N.; 11.684 a.

32. tows, lows: the reason urged
is a general one. The influence of
style, if felt at all, will be felt just
in those cases where the style of
the plea is better or worse than the
case deserves, — just where it inter-
feres with true judgment. For simi-
lar phraseology, cf. Xen. Cyr. iv. 3.
2, {ows uv ody oltws Exel, lows de
kal mowodaw adTd TH Mdovii xepi{buevol
(for their own satisfaction). Two Gen.
of Ver. i. 1,

If haply won perhaps a hapless gain;

1f lost, why then a grievous labor won.

35. avry: in place of ToiTe, by
assimilation to the gender of the
pred. apers. It refers to the preced-
ing clause ad7d . . . p1.

II. 1. 8ikauds elpe kré.: for certain
adjs. used pers. with the inf., see
GMT. 93, 1, x. 2b; G. 261, 1; H. 952.

2. Yevdn kaTnyopnpéva : not Yevdas,
because in the act. the idiom is kary-
yopety Ti Twos.

4. épotv yap kté.: introducing the
reason why Socrates is to speak first
mpos T& WP@TA . . . kaTydpovs.

mwpos vpds : With karfyopos yeydvaas,

    

29

éNeyov &v olomep érelpdupuny, 18
Séoparsd (kaLoy, Bs Y€ pot Soka) ou EL

18
a

     
  

  
  

10
18

   

60

IIAATONOZS

-

yovres, obs éyd pallor pofoduar 3) Tovs dul “Avvrov,

'Kaimep OvTas kal ToUTovs Oewovs: dAN éketvor SewdTepot,

un

& dvdpes, oi Vudv Tods molovs ék maidwy mapalauSd-

Ly ’ =] \ ’ ’ nl e y
VOVTES emelfov TE KO KAQT)yopovy EMLOV,| WS ETTL TLS Sw-

’ _ \ 3 77 ’ / \ i, RE A
KPATYS, TOPOS AvTjp, Td TE LETEWPA PPOVTLOTNS Kal TA VTO

which is equiv. to karnyopfikac. Cf.
Euthyph. 2 ¢, épxerar katnyophowy pov
wpds TH moAw, where mpds relates to
those to whom the accusation is ad-
dressed.

5. kai, kal: the first kal empha-
sizes wdAat, the second requires no com-
ment. — mwdAat woAAa 10m én: see on
eikfy kré., 17e. mda goes back to the
beginning of the accusations while
moAAe kTé. follows out their long con-
tinuance. This has been going on
more than twenty years at the very
least, for the Clouds was first put upon
the stage in 423, and Socrates was
tried in 399.

6. Tovs apdl "Avvrov: when fol-
lowed by the acc. of a person’s name,
oi wept and of éu¢pi mean the person
and those connected with him (sub-
jects, followers, companions, adher-
ents). G. 141, ~. 3; H. 791, 3 jin.
Anytus was the most influential ac-
cuser. See Introd. 30.

8. Tovs woA\ovs : most of you. The
art. is not used here (as in 17 a above,
r@v moAA@v) to call up something
familiar; it contrasts most of them,
who were caught young and taught to
abhor Socrates, with the few, implied
in the part. gen. sudv, to whom this
may not have happened. G. 142, 2,
N.2and ~. 3b; H. 665 and 673 Db.

mapalapBdvovres: this word often
is used of one who takes charge of
a child and educates it. Cf. Alec. IL

121 e, dls émra d¢ yevduevoyv érdv TOV

Tada TapalauBdvovoLy obs éketvor
Bacirelovs madaywyods oSvoud ovo.
But this sense is too narrow for the
present context. More to the point
is Gorg. 483 e, where AauBdrew is used
in a wider sense, which is analogous
to that of maparauBdvew here, Tovs
BerTioTous Kal éppwuMeveTTdTOUS NUDY
abT@v, ék véwy AauBdvovTes, domep
Aéovtas karemddovres kté., taking the
best and most vigorous of our number in
our earliest youth, and by incantations
subduing us as if we were young lions.
9. érelfov Te kal kaTnydpovy: preju-
diced you against me by unceasing
accusations. Strictly speaking karn-
~vopotvTes &rebor is required, but co-
ordination here idiomatically takes
the place of subordination. — ms
SokpdTns : Tis with prop. names
conveys an indefiniteness and uncer-
tainty which are always uncomplimen-
tary and which in this case amount
to scorn, an individual (somebody or
other) named Socrates. Cf. what d’ you
call him? used colloquially in Eng.
10. copos avip: these words are
practically intended to mean a Sophist.
“The title oogpods avfp would at once
be understood as a class-appellation,
cf. 23 a, 34 ¢; in it the meaning and
associations of Philosopher are up-
permost, yet not so distinctly as to
exclude those of Sophist.” R.—
Td, Te peréwpa . . . AvelyTNKWS: POD-
ular prejudice coined this phrase, or
something like it, to stigmatize all

5 buds kal wdlat woAa 10n én kai ovdér dlnbés Aé- 18

18
b

>

n Fo uny

   

~ © 3 \ © ~
yNs amavro avelnTrws Kal TOV YTT® Noyov KPelTTw TOLHY. 18

AIIOAOTIA 3QKPATOYS.

   

61

CN 2 y 3 ~
ovrol, @ avdpes "Abyvaiol, oi Tavryy THY drjungr kara- c

post ¢ S 7 5.7 ’ € LA s ’
TO KEOATAVTES OL O€ELVOoL €Lol Mov KaT7yopoL. ol Yap OKOV-

e ~ \ ~ ~ 5 \ \ /
ovTes NyovrraL Tovs TavTa {nrovvras ovde Peovs vouilew.

scientific investigation into nature.
With such investigation began and
ended the earliest Greek philosophy
(Introd. 2-12), and even Socrates’
contemporaries, the Sophists, — nota-
bly Hippias,— were much addicted
to it. See Introd. 14. Qf. Prot. 315¢,
épalvovto d¢ mepl ¢Ploews Te kal TOV
peTedpwy GoTpovoutked ¥TTa diepwTav
tov ‘Immiav, and they (Eryximachus,
Phaedrus, and Andron) appeared to
be plying Hippias with astronomical
questions about nature and the heavenly
bodies. The phrase ra imd 4s (where
owé has the very unusual sense of
beneath and covered by) does not refer
to definite matters searched into, but
is part and parcel of a sweeping as-
sertion that nothing either high or low,
nothing “in heaven above or in the
earth beneath or in the waters under
the earth ” is safe from their fatuous
and futile curiosity. This popular view
is amusingly exaggerated and drama-
tized by Aristophanes in the Clouds,
184-234. Here the word &mravra adds
a final touch of exaggeration. — ¢pov-
Twos: used trans. here like ¢povri-
(eww with acc... For a dat. similarly
governed, cf. Thy éuny 1¢ Beg UVmnpe-
olay, 30 a, where see note. See also
App.— “This ‘accusation,’ cogpds . . .
mowwv, both as given here, and as re-
peated with mock formality in 19 Db,
is nothing more than a vivid way of
representing, for a rhetorical purpose,
the popular prejudice, in which the
court shared. The charges it con-
tains are two-edged, being borrowed
partly from the vulgar representation

 

Cai",

of the Philosopher, partly from that
of the Sophist; the ueréwpa ppovriorss
points to the Philosopher, the ror...
rowdy to the Sophist.” R.

11. Tov sjrTw Adyov k7é.: any teach-
ing of rhetoric, as such, must contain
hints as to the most effective means
for making the best of a bad case by
presenting it skilfully. How far this
must be condemned should not be
decided without reference to circum-
stances and facts. To-day it is equally
impossible to assert that a lawyer in
all cases is bound not to defend a
client whose cause he knows to be
unjust. Popular opinion at Athens
seems to have been convinced that
the Sophist’s single aim in teaching
rhetoric was to communicate the art
of proving that black was white. Cf.
the Clouds, 889-1104, where Aristoph-
anes introduces the dikaios Adyos and
the &dwkos Adyos respectively. They
have an argument in which the &3wos
Adyos wins. Cf. Cic. Brut. 8, where
the excellent Claudius says of the
Sophists: docere se profiteban-
tur quemadmodum causa in-
ferior (ita enim loquebantur)
dicendo fierisuperior posset.
His opposuit sese Socrates,
qui subtilitate quadam dis-
putandi refellere eorum in-
stituta solebat verbis.

13. ol Sewol: in the pred. The
accusers just mentioned as kar’ éfo-
xv dewol.

14. ovd¢ Oeovs «7é.: the investiga-
tions alluded to above were, it was
charged, not only a foolish waste of

Wot

Cre, va

xn

18
b

LY

oY

|
doll

 

 
  
  

     
 
 
  
  
  
  
   
   
    
   
  
   
   
  
   
  
   
   
  
  
   
   
   
  
  
    
  
    
  
    
  
    
  
   

ox

4 ai
NE 1
i

ro

RRR Na
—_

sab

  
   
  
  
   
   
  

    
 
  
       
        

  
  

¢

id a A { (5

A

N

62 MMAATQNOS

/
wl fA

¥ Zi.» ? ¢ ’ \ \ \ ’

15 EMELTA [ELOY OVUTOL OL KAT1)yopoL ToANol kal Tour xpovov 18
; *S. : ’ Er Se \ ’ A e ’ ’
107 KAT)YOPNKOTES; €TL OE Kal €v TavTy TI) NAikia Aéyovres

\ ce A 3 ooo, A > ’ ~ »
! TOPOS VMAS, €V 7) av paAioTo ETLOTEVO ATE, TALOES OVTES,

viol & VuAY Kal pepdicio,Grexvis EprfpmyarnyBdvres

THAT J |

b J / 5 / A \ /’ 9 /
aroloyouuévov 0V0evds. 0 0€ TdvTwY aloyaTaTov, OTL OVOE

| \ 9 / / 3.” To) / \ 3 ~ \ yy
20 TQ, OVOMOTO OLOV TE|AUTWY €LOEVAL Kol €Lmew, TANY €L Tis d

KOU@OLOTOLOS TUYXAVEL BV.

18 useful time, but actually (hence the

o0d¢, not even, in the text) led to athe-
ism. See Introd. 10, 12, and 33 fin.
16. év ™ Aula: with duas.
17. év y av émorevoare: for the
{ potential ind. with &» denoting what
I may have happened and perhaps did
happen, see G. 226, 2, N. 2. See the
examples in L. and S. s.v. av B. IL. c.
| 18. éprpnv karnyopovvTes: supply
diknv. The fem. termination is used
in this idiom, though &muos is more
commonly of two terminations, and
kaTnyopdv Epnuov, in exactly the sense
required here, occurs in Dem. xxI.
87. The acc. is cognate with karynyo-
povvres. G.159; H.7156b. Cf also the
common law phrases, didkew ypagpny,
prosecute an indictment, pebyew ypapiyv,
defend a suit at law. The sense of the
whole is repeated in untechnical lan-
guage by the appended amroAoyovueévov
0)8evds. In fact the case they prosecuted
always went by default, with none to
speak for the defendant. When either
party to a lawsuit failed to appear,
< the court, as we say, entered a default
3S against him, épuny katayryvdoker Ti-
vds, and either one of the two parties
to the suit who appeared épiunv rkpater
or épnunv aipei, sc. dikgv. In such a
case a plaintiff, if present, épunv kary-
~yopet (diknv) and the absent defendant
épuny OpAiokdver dlkny. — dTeXVas :
absolutely, i.e. without artifice, and
hence simply, as a matter of course.

  
 

       

ooot 8¢ pfdvew kal SuaBoly

19. ¢ 8 mwdvrwv dloywrartov kTé. :
TovTo, the correlative of &, is sup-
pressed for brevity’s sake. Tov7d
éorw must be read between the lines.
The clause with 67. stands in appos.
to this suppressed antec. Often a
further step toward brevity is taken,
and in place of such a clause as this
one with §7. we have an independent
clause, sometimes even introduced by
vap. Cf. Isoc. vii. 83, § d¢ mdvrwy
OXETALOTATOY, ODS Yap SpuoAoyfoaiuey by

18

mwoYNpPoTdTOUS €lval T®Y WONTGY ToUTOUS
MOTOTATOUS PpUAakas Nyovueda Tis moAL-
Telas elvai, but, what is of all things most
grievous! we are wont to consider those
the commonwealth’s most trustworthy
guardians whom we should count as the
meanest of our citizens.

21. kopodiomowss : the Clouds of d
Aristophanes (see Introd. 25) is here
more esp. alluded to, since it contains
the specific charges just mentioned.
Cratinus, Ameipsias, and Eupolis also
ridiculed Socrates.

ogo. 8¢ k7é.: the clause of 8¢ kal
adTol wemewruévor enlarges the scope of
$O8vw Kal SiaBoAfi xpduevor. As it is ap-
pended as an after-thought, the sense
of the leading verb is casually reiter-
ated in &AAovs melfovres. Strictly
speaking memeiouérvor is subordinated
to welBovres. Logically the sense re-
quires: Soot 8¢, of pev Plvy . . . xpd-
uevol, of 8¢ kal adTol memeiouévor, Huas
avémeifov. The first 8¢ goes back to the

Vk J

| XP OWEVOL UHaS avémelbov,
[3 9 / / ’ :

Qovres, — ovTOL TAUTES ATOPWTATOL ELOLY

2d AILOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 1 63

nN \

| dA\ovs mel
Woo AT og WAAAY \ 2) 9
yap dvafipdoac aL oly T
9 3 3 /
25 eNéyfar obdéva, dAN avaykn

\ /
__ ot 8¢ kal avrol memeLT EVOL 18

9 \
ovOe
SoTL OUTOV &tavbot lov’

ATEXVDS DOTEP TKLAUAXEW

\ 9 / ~
amoloyolueroy Te kal ENéyxew (umOErOS ATOKPLIOLEVOV./

Nz ~ GE ~
AEB TaTE ODY KAL VLELS,

’ , Wy
KQTTyGpOvS YEYOLEVaL,
\ \

TaAvTAS, ETEPOVS de TOV

30 8¢tw, mpos ékelwovs TPATOV AE, :
Sets ekelvow TPOTEPOV NKOVT OTE a La ;
paN\ov 7) TGVdE TOV voTepov * / Elev dmohoynTeov on, :

Kai émiyeLpnTéor UUDY ¢lehéala Tp 19

avdpes *Abnvaiot,

\
womep éym Neyo, SurTovs pov Tous
Vita > ’
érépovs pv TOUS apTL KATIYOPN- 4
’ ad. 9.7 ’ AS 4 dof
§ mrdlaL oUS €yw \éyw, kal ombnTe e <

9 / 0 ‘ \ \
e, amoloynoacbar: Kat yap
Kol TONV

3

w

3
| Av vues € 5 vpdvw Eoxere, TAUTNY €V
 Swafolrjy, nv vues ev TON@ XPOvY €oxere, m

pags Mia

main statement of the preceding sent.
about the anonymous accusers, 9 de

.. eimetv. On the loose conversa-
tional structure of such sents., sec
Introd. 55.

25. domep TKLGPAXEW KTE.: T¢ Kal
used here to connect, not two different
ideas, but twe different ways of put-
ting the same idea. Socrates would
he sure always to use his favorite
method of question and answer, and
therefore  okiauaxew GmoNoyOUueroy
for him would be practically éxéyxew
undevds &moKpYOUEVOV. By thus say-
ing one and the same thing twice over,
the speaker expresses his idea all the

| more effectively.

27. dfwioare: the two notions of
4&wov, worth (price) and right, are as
usual blended in this word, duly grant.
Notice the persistent recurrence In
various forms of the idea conveyed
by Gomep éyd Aéyew. See Introd. 55.

29. ots Aéyw: refers to b above.
— olyjfyre rré.: it was common for
a speaker to ask the court to approve

¢

’ ‘ . 18
of some order of topics which he pro-

posed to follow. Fora fuller descrip-

tion of éxelvovs, see b above; notice

that it refers to érépovs 8¢ Tovs maha.

These old-time accusers, though the

last-mentioned, were the most remote

in thought, for Anytus and his crew

were actually present as T@vde shows.

II. 696 b.

32. elev: well, pointing to what has
just been said, and implying that the
whole must be accepted by his hear-
ers as a matter of course. It is like
«So far, so good!” &rw often has
the same force. Grammatical argu-
ments are used to prove that this elev
is nothing more nor less than the al-
ternative form used not infrequently
in place of the opt. elnoar. The force
of 8% is very much that of elev, for it
indicates that the duty of making
some plea must be taken for granted.

33. tiv Saori : the prejudice pro- 19

. . a
duced by the slanders just described.
34. {oxere: acquired. See onEoxnka,
; : :
20d, and cf. Hdt. i. 14, Tv Tupavyida

A
oS

1)

   
     
  
  
    
 

Sabie

RRR SL
   

    

 
 

      
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
  
 
  
  
   
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
   
  
   
 
  
    
       
      
 

  

64

35°

£

19
a

T

7
Bil 4)

Sra— A MAE

OVTWS Shiye Xpovy.

TIAATONOS, .

yevéo Bau, el TL ALfLELOV Kal Vp Kol funky fikal” mAéov T( poe
Fofouydmeydnens ola 0¢ AUT ANETOV eat, Kal
aid Xa

ov ToVV WE Nar OdveL oidv éoTw.

i Oe TOUTO Lev, ro

omy 10 Oe Ppilov, Tp O¢ vou mrewoTéov Kal dmohoynéov.

115, AvahdBoper ody é§ d

é€ Ns 7M éu) duafSoM) yeyoveri

7s, “ris 7 karyopic EoTiy

n Ka marelor MénTos

JAE Sypojara mp ypadny TAvTYY. elev" TL TO) Myoptes
i ol Sra BallovTes ; Soirep oDV KAT YO PWV i
AvTOpoTian) >OeL dvayvévar (adTiv ) ) SwKkparns adikel Kal

mepuepydlera {prov Td TE Dro YNs Kal ovpavid Kal TOV

i doxov of Mepuvadai. When &xew
means, be in possession, &rxov means,
came into possession. G. 200, x. 5b;
11. 841. — ravrqv: resumptively after
the interrupting clause of explanation
introduced by #».

36. el mu: if at all. — dpewvov: used
without an expressed standard of
comparison because the opposite in-
evitably suggests itself, “Detter in
any way than that I should not ac-
complish anything.”

[ar\éov morelv: pr oficere.

38. ov mwdwvv: not at all. Here cer-
tainly hardly would not be adequate.
Cf. phys. wdvu, 21 b.

39. 76 es: the divine will or God.
The art. is used not because any par-
ticular god is referred to, but with a
generic or collective force. Cf. Crit.
43 d, and see on 7¢ eg, 36d and 42a
and é eds, Orit. 54 e.

III. 2. moredov: not as above,
18 ¢, fidem habens, but rather con-
fidens or fretus. Cf. Ale. 1. 123 ¢, =i
ody word eoTw Gre migTebel TO pet
pdiciov; Come now, on what does the
youth rely ? — Méknros : sce Introd.
30, and for ypopy, ibid. 67.

4. domep ovv karnyopwv: a freq.

idiom in comparisons; the leading
and dependent clauses are briefly
blended in one ; dvaryvaval as well as
dvrwwosiay are involved in this con-
solidation. The reference is to the
formal reading of the documents in
a suit before the full court. On
dvrwuocia, see Introd. 69.

5. é8ukel: very commonly, as here,
a3wcety has almost the force of a pf.
One of its obvious meanings is adds
elu, which practically signifies, I have
done wrong or I am guilty. GMT. 10,
1, N. 4; H. 827

6. moder: is a busybody. A
busybody either minds other people’s
business or makes too much of his
own. Socrates is accused of the first;
for a good case of the second, ¢f. Nep.
Arist. 1.4, sibi non placere quod
tam cupide elaborasset, ut
practer ceteros Tustus appel-
laretur. Cf. 20¢, wepirrbrepoy mpary-
pat evoueyov, ¢ and see on To peTéwpa in
18 b. — ovpdwia: the art. is omitted
because omd iis kal odpdvia form one
conception. 0. Xen. Mem. i. 1. 19,
Zunphrys 8¢ wdvra Nyeito Oeods eBéva,
rd Te Aeybueva kal wpaTTipeva
kal T& ory BovAevdueva (the unuttered

Bovhoipay pez; oOV’ av TI. QUTWS 19

1¢

b

 

10

19
b

C

 

 

jl
h
i
i
bv
E
B
i
¥
iy
’

—r

AITOAOTIA SQKPATOYZ.

NTTW \Gyov i TOLOV Kal aA\\ovs TQ “AUTO TOUT Ot-

OdTKWY.

TOLAUTY) TiS €oTL" TAUTQ yap Sopare Th avTOl

&v 7 “ApioToddvovs Komedia,’ SwkpdTn Twa €KeL TEPL-
Pepopevov, Ppdokovrad Te depofiareir Kal i wo
Phvapioy phvapovra, Su éyw ovdev (Love péya, ovTe

puaseplns Jépil énato,

Kal 00x dridlov Aéyaprip (got.

alr Smaps) lL TLS mepl TOV TOLOUTWV Topos €oTL"
pn TWS éyw VITO MelrTov TOO AUTAS dilkas Puyo

plans in man’s thought). In Prot. 315 ¢,
Plato satirizes the astronomical lore
of Hippias.

7. da\\ovs. . .
11 and 25.

8. Towadtn ms: Socrates alone is
responsible for the exact w ords; the
accusation itself is vague. — TavTa
yop €wpdre: in the Clouds, Aristoph-
ancs put before the Athenians their
own feelings against Socrates, he dra-
matized a prejudice alre ady existing.

9, Swkpdrn Twi kTé: In appos.
with 7abra. For the force of Twd,
see on Tis Swkpdrys, 18 Db; it implies
that Socrates in the Clouds bears no
close resemblance to the real Socrates.
Cf. Clouds, 218-225, where Strepsia-
des on entering Socrates’s thinking-

shop says: Who is this man up there
in the basket? Iearing it is Socra-
tes, he asks him what he’s about.
answers aepoBatd kal mepL-

S.ddakwy : see Introd.

Socrates
ppovd Tov HiXwow, on air [ tread and
oversee the sun.

10. $dokovra kTE.:
10 wepipepdpuevor.

11. &v: referring to all statements
of the sort above mentioned. — ove
péyo ovTe pikpov: 2 reénforcement
of the ondév stated disjunctively. Cf.
21b and 24a; a for a similar locu-
tion, ¢f. Dem. 1X. 5, offre uukpov obire
uéya obdev TAY a (that you ought

suberdinated

to da) meaty rary Sudy Kax@s To mpAY-
pote Exe, See on #4 Tt 3) ovdéy, 17D.
12. 0X ds drypdiwy: of. in e below,

kal TooTé Yé wor Boxer KaAdv evar.
«Such knowledge is a fine thing, if
any one has it.” Socrates ironically
hints that no one has it. Cf. Xen.
Mem. i. 1. 11, od8¢ yap wepl Tis TAY
wdvTwy GpUTews, TEP TOV IAAwY of TAEL-
gTot, dieAdyero, orom@Y dmws 6 KaNoUue-
vos Omd T@v copoT@dy Kéomos Eu, Kal
row avdyras (by what necessary laws)
¢kaora ylyverar T@Y odpaviwv © GAA Kal
robs ¢ppovrifovTas To TolaUTG pwpalvov-
ras &medelkvver. Those who pursued
these studies were crazy, he thought,
because man ought first to know him-
self (cf. id. i. 1. 12, kal mwp@TOV ey
adT@y éokdmer, woTepd more vopioay-
res ikav@ds 400 Tavlpdmiva €idé-
vat EpxovTal eml TO mWepl TAY TOWITWY
ppovriCer, and 38 a below), and be-
cause these physicists looked into
questions which were really bey ond
the sphere of man (ibid.
avbpdmeia mapévTes, TA ra d¢ oko-

TQ 3%

walvnes, Hye dural TQ TpooNKOVTQ
mpdrreir) and therefore arrived at
impotent con clusions (cf. id. iv. 7. 6-7).
See on & Tis kté., 20 e, and tnitod 10.

14. po... ¢vyoyw: Schanz brack-
ets these words: “quia sanam
interpretationem spernunt.”
Stallbaum punctuates “uy. ..¢oyouue!”

      
      

2 om ow RR ane in

ASA RSH WR 3 ey

wR A,

AFR.

ARE as

Md.

 
  
  
    

  
 
 

19
c

 

d

     

66

15 aA\G yap: épol TOUTWY,

ITAATQNOS,

TRU Go |

/ ~
pdprupas 8¢ avrovs pv rods moods Tapéyopat, Kal

i 3 ~ ~ ¢ © ~
ash AEB Bpas AAMjlovs Suddokew Te kal ¢palew,(0ooL éuov

’ 3 / / 7 \ A.C ~ e ~
wdmore dknrdare Stakeyouévov DgolNol 6€ Jub oL ToLov-
, Fag Ot \ , a 9 ’ ’ py NAN, ‘A \ A
rol elo) ppdlere ov dAAnhois, €L T@WOTE (n pkpor 7)

’ Ay Reape Gow anda > of Lieb Od \ . 5
pévov: Kal €k TOVTWY yh eae Sri T6TANT éoTi Kal TANNA

mepl nov a ot "TORO )Néyovow. _, fers +6 TIF
> \ \ y ’ ~ fe ¥ SN, 3. Y
IV. ’AN\a yap:ovre TovTWY 008¢y €oTivy oVOE 7 €L ToS

5 ’ Je Nn 3 ca 5 ~ 9 ’ \ ’
AKNKOATE WS €yw Tadevew ETLXELPW avOpwmovs Kol XPM-

/ DOE ~ 3 /
ATA TPATTOMAL, IOVOE TOVUTO alnbés.

~ ' py iA ol ay h opis
pot Boker KaNOV eva del Tis [olds T em riaSevew| avlpo-
© ’ ¢ ~ \ ’ IY ie ~
TOUS WO TEP Topytas Te 0 Aeovrwwos Kat [1pddikos o Kewos
\ ¢ ’ e 9 ~ /, \ © ~ ¥
kal ‘Immias 6 HMAelwos. ToUTWVY yap €EKAOTOS, ® dvdpes,

The meaning certainly appears to be,
may I never by any chance have to de-
fend myself against Meletus on so seri-
ous a charge! 8ixar is often best rep-
resented in translation by the sing.
For md with pedyew, see on mwemdvlare,
17a. If Socrates despised the wis-
dom of the natural philosophers, he
would be pretending to know what
he did not know. Meletus then would
have a strong case against him, for
the charge would be so serious that
Socrates could not attempt to defend
himself. Socrates ironically attrib-
utes to Meletus and the courts his
own strong disapproval of pretended
knowledge.

15. d\\a ydp: but the truth is, the
truth, namely, which contradicts the
notion that Socrates pretends to know
what he is ignorant of, and also gives
the reason why Aristophanes’s attack
does not touch him, but the physi-
cists only.

18. oi

rowourol elon: are in that

   

case, sc. the one just mentioned ; hence
the art. is used.

22. mep\ épov: the colloquial tone
is marked in the position of these
words. Instead of «the other stories
which people tell about me,” Socrates
says, “the other stories about me,
which people tell.” The rel. clause is
appended as anapparent afterthought.

IV. 1. é\\a ydp: in turning to a
new topic, a glance is thrown back-
ward (o¥re...#& Tw), and the new
departure begins with the emphatic
00dé. ¥orw is equiv. to the following
aAnbés (éoTw).

3. mel: although. Strictly a con-
necting thought must be supplied.

4. ms ely: the regular apod.
kaAby &v ely is represented by its
equiv. in sense, dokel KkaAdy elvau.
GMT. 54, 2b,and compare 63, 4 b.

5. &omwep Lopylas: on Gorgias, see
Introd. 12-14. Protagoras was not
living at this time. See Introd. 12.

6. Tovtwy yap €xacTos Kté.: the

  

& dvdpes *AOnpaior, 0bdév péreaTL. 1

/ ¥ ’ ce A y 7 A LA ’
20 LEY) NKOVTE TIS VUwv €MOV JTTEPL TWY TOLOVTWV OLANEYO- Commins

34 \ ~_7 ’
E€ETEL Kal TOVTO YE e

 

 

ty

~

e/ alybes JON 4 ‘e. "7
0(0S T_EOTLY LWY ELS EKATTY)
¥ ~ ¢ ~ ~
eat. [tov éavrdv TOMTWY

: ’ / \ ye ’ DX Aeusl
\wvTal, fede TOVUTOVS meifovat TAS EKELVWY Evvovaias amoAL- 20

ATIDAOTIA SQKPATOYS. _ /f,
I Vr fon who LL 0 peed
A , \ ’ o
UV TQV TONEWY TOUS VEOUS, OLS 19

1)

  
     
     

-

Srpotia Evvewar |p | av PBov-
T

mévras adiol Evvewar|xpripaTa Su8dvras kal xapw mwPoo -
edévar. émel kal dA\\os dvnp €oTi Ildpuos évBdde | aodos)
A S..\ 3 / 3 o ~ y \ \
dv éyw polouny émonuovvra €TUXOV YAP mrpooe\dwv
’ \ , Tae, ~ ; A Er UX
avdpi Os reréhekel XpipaTa TOPLOTALS mheiw 7) Edpmavres
¢ 3 / ~ ¢C /’ ~ ” gy inmary
oi a\otyKal\ig,7@ Tmmovikov: TOUTOV OUY AVOOUTY ==
3 \ \ 3 _~ S ’ ¢ / > AL “ > > ’ /
éoTOV yap AUT OVO ULE — O Kal\ia, nv O €yw,: €L pev
\ (3 A A ah ’ ’ 6 y A ’ ~
gov T& vide TOAG 7) pOTXw Eyeveo ty, eLXolLey AV avTow
FUR Aa \ A) whan p c ly ‘
emiordmy NaBew Ral uo dadobal, ds éueRXer adr kalo

’ \ ’ \ oak. AL,
re kal dyabw moujoew THY TPOOTT]

A Ql A ~ ¢ ~ A ~ > ~ ~ S

qv odros 1) TOV immkdy TI8Y) TOY YEWPYLKWY® VVY

’ ys 3 ’ ’ ’ rn 3 a 3 ~ ¥ ’ ’

ered) avlpdmo ody, TW, AVTOW EV VQ) EXELS EMOTATYV
~ ~ 9 ~ ~ 3 ’ LIN

NaBeiv; Tis; TS TOLUTNS APETNS, TS avfpomivys Te Kal

ironical surprise of Socrates is repro-
duced by the anacoluthon in this sent.
With oids 7 éoriv the speaker appar-
ently leads up to meifew, but the em-
phatic rodrous (in which the clause
rods véous ols . . . BobAwrTau is summed
up) is followed by meffovot instead.
(The pl. after ékaoros is not uncom-
mon. H. 609a.) Then comes the
statement of a fact which is surpris-
ing, they pay these men, and finally the
climax is capped by their giving them
thanks to boot. To give this last point
mpoaeidévar, which should be a partic.
like 3:8évras, is put on a par with
tvveivar. For a fuller account of these
teachers, see Prot. 316 eff.

11. emel kal dAhos : “the men just
named are not the only ones, for
also, ete.”

12. fo0dpny: see on fodéuny oloué-
vwv, 22 C.

14. Kalle: at Callias’s house

foreigners, and particularly foreign

Sophists, were welcomed. Callias’s
fondness for Sophists is humorously
brought out in the Protagoras, where
he is almost crowded out of house
and home by them. The indulgence
of this and of other tastes exhausted
his resources, and he died in poverty.
His father Hipponicus fell in« the
battle at Delium (424 B.c.).

17. 8s épeNhev: for éueArov and the
inf., without #», expressing a past
likelihood which was not realized, see
GMT. 49, 2, ~. 3e. Here is a present
likelihood (see ib. a for an analogous
use of &e:) which is not realized, who
would, in the case supposed (ei .. . po 0c-
cacbai), proceed to make them, etc.

21. Ts dvbpwmivns kTé.: sc. the
boys must be civilized and human-
ized. Civilization involves the exist-
ence of the family and the state, and
these require education. Cf. Arist. Pol.
i. 2.9, dvbpwmos ioe moATikdy (Gov,
man is by nature a political animal.

67

pry ’ ’ ” ’
Kovoay QAPETNV* MV do b

20
a

i

RCE a

GREAT TY

Liha

aan ,—

i RRR Ani we

ISIN HW
 

68

10

> ww

ft # 0 5 ~
~ME » \ W

IIAATONOZ=

~ : » C / \
mo\irukis, emoTiuwy, éotlv; olpa ydp oe éorédlfar dia 20

ooh

\ ~ ec’ TN y ¥ 3 / A ¥ II /
™y TOV vidwy KkTiow. €oTL TiS, EP €ys, 7) ov; Ilavv

ye, 7 © Os.

» 9 \ / \
Tis, fw & éyd, kal modamds, kal wéoov Si-

25 Sdoker; Etmpos, én, & Sdkpares, Tlapios, mevre prov:

9 A \ 4 3 \ 3 /’ gy e¢ 9 ~ y f ’
Kal €yw TOV Evnvov EMLaKAPLO A, EL ws a\nfos €xol TAVTNY

} POR 5
my TéXQY Kal oUTWS Firs vrs Silddokel. éyw odv kal c

3% 3 ’ 0 ’ » > ’
adds ékal\vrduny Te Kal NBpurouny av, €L NTLOTAUNY

radra: GAN od yap émioTapa, & dvdpes “Abnvatot.

V. ‘TmoldBot dv odv Tis VpGV lows * a\\’, & Sdkpartes,

70 oov 7 éoru wpaypa ; wher ai SiaBolai ool avTaL ye-

25. Edqvos kré. : nota wordis wasted
in this answer, upon the brevity of
which largely depends the humor
of the story. Evenus is elsewhere
mentioned as a teacher of oratory
and a writer of elegiacs. A few such
poems attributed to him still exist.
Here he is introduced as a Sophist
and a teacher of virtue. The small-
ness of his charge for instruction
prob. measures accurately the value
attached to it by his contemporaries,
and places him and his teaching in
the second rank. Protagoras charged
100 minas. There have been attempts
to distinguish between a younger and
an elder Evenus, both of whom came
from Paros and wrote elegiacs. If
there were two, allusion is here made
to the elder.

26. el €xov kal 8i8doker: in the
original statement which Socrates
may be supposed to have in mind,
both of these were in the indic. Both
might change to the opt. (GMT. 77,
1; H.937) after éuaxdpioa. The change
to the opt. from &xe: throws ei &xo, as
it were, into the background, leaving
ofTws upuerds diddoker, which contains
a very pointed insinuation, in the
more vivid indic, See App.

27. &upelds : synonymous with
dpbas. Its opposite is mAnuuerds (dis-
cordantly or falsely, of a false note).
The word also conveys by innuendo
the notion that the teaching of Eve-
nus is cheap, and this is the point here
made. In Criti. 106 b, perplws and
mapa pélos, TAnuueAds and éuuerds are
used as contradictories.

V. All error is distorted truth; until
a man sees the truth which a particu-
lar error caricatures, he will not re-
nounce his error; to denounce error
as such is therefore not enough.
Thus far Socrates has argued against
the grossly erroneous popular opinion
of himself; now he proceeds to exhibit
the truth. His upright conduct has
been exasperating, for obedience to
God has led him to defy men.

1. d\N, @ Sdkpates kTé. : objections
dramatized and put in the form of
questions. The argument is: “there
must be some cause.” Hence the yap
in od yap dfmov.

2. 16 oov mpaypa: What is that you
have been about? or better, What is this
about you? Accordingly mpayuais used
either in the sense of pursuit, study, or
plan of life ; or it has no independent
meaning, but is joined with the art.

Cc

—r—

10

20

 

ATIOAOTIA 3SQKPATOYS.

’ > \ S / ~ 33a ile » : 7
yévaow; ov yap ONmov{gov ye ovOEY TWY ANAWY TEPLTTO- 20

Vd y oN / ’ \ /
TEPOY TPAYUATEVOUEVOV ETETAN 00 AUT) Pun TE Kai Noyos
/ 5 2 7 y : AS ~ A e / / ~
5 yéyovev, €i wij TL €mpaTTeS-dANotov 7) ol TohAoi+ Aéye ovv
nui 7( éoTw, a pi) Mues mepl gov adrooyedidlwpmer.
’ o ~ ot AE € \é \ 3. An 6. ~ /
TavTi pot Ookel Oikaia Aéyew 0 Néywvy, Kayw VL TeLpa.-

9 o ~ / } \ ~ A \ ’ ’
gopat dmodeifal TL TOT €TTL TOUTO O €UOL TETOINKE TO TE
y \ \ o A / 3 / o ’ 3» y \ o /
Svopa kal Tv SwaBoljy. dkovere Of. kal lows uév d6fw

\ ~ / , ~ ~
Tow Vuev mallew, €0 pévroL Lote, TATAY Vp THY AN)-
sn 9 \ ’ » yy 5
Oerav pd. éya ydp, & dvdpes *Abmraior, 3.’ ovdér alN 17)
o \ : / \ ~ \ ¥ yy : ’ \ /’
10. Coplay Twa TovTO TO Svopa €oxmKa. olay O01) godiav

re Ft y Th \

/’ & 3 \ y 3 / /’
TOUT 5 NTEP ECT LOWS avfpwrivy godia. TW OVTL YQ

and ody, the whole being a paraphrase
for Swkpdrns. See on 1d Tod SwkpdTovs
mpaypa, Crit. 53 d.

3. mepirroTepov: what overpasses
the limit restraining common men,
and hence provokes suspicion. See
on wepiepyderar, 19b, and cf. Soph.
Ant. 68, 10 yap mepiosa mpdooew olk
Exer votv oddéva. Fur. Bacch. 42711.
copy & améxew mparida Ppéva Te me-
piogocdy mapa ¢wT@v: TO wAifos
§ To TO PpavAdrepov évduiae xpiiTai Te
(whaté’er the multitude of lowlier men
puts faith in and practises) T68 bv
dexoluav. That gob . . . mpayuaTevoue-
vou (although as you say you have been
doing nothing) conveys a statement of
fact, not a supposition, is shown by
ovdéyv. The &rerra points the con-
trast between two statements of fact,
(1) ood (gen. after ¢nAun) mwpaymatevo-
uévov, and (2) Tocadrn ¢fun yéyovev.
The words el uf) Tt... of moAAol (see
App.) re-state (1) more mildly and as
a supposition. “The evil report did
not arise about you while you were
doing nothing out of the way, unless
your behaviour was eccentric.” A
man may be eccentric and yet keep

within bounds ; ¢f. below d and e, also
23 a.

8. To dvopa kal Tv SiafoAnv: sc.
copos. To be distinguished from ¢7un
Te kal Adyos only as bringing out the
bad repute which was their result. Cf.
the Lat. nomen. The words rv dio-
BoAfy show that dvoua is not to be
taken in its usual sense of good name
or fame, but closely with &wBoA7y,
both the name and the blame.

11. dA\N 4: this collocation with
008¢y indicates that &AA’ 4 arose from
the use of #AAros. For a case where
dAAos precedes it, cf. 34.

12. &oxnka: I have become pos-
sessed of and still have. See on &rxere,
19 a, and Phaedr. 241 b, vovv #87 éax-
kbs kal oecwppovnkds, after he had
come to full understanding and gained
self-control.

mwolav . . . Tavrmv: this question
treads upon the heels of the preced-
ing sent. so closely that 3d is not
repeated. wolav is in the pred.; we

- might expand to mola copia éorlv adn

30 Sw Tovro . . . Eoxnra. H. 618.
13. Himep: sc. dw éxelvyy TOTO . . .
doxnra, fimep kré., just that which.

69

 

 
15

 

IIAATQNOZ

kiwdwedw TadT 1 js+ ov Se rdy’ wv) ob 1 {
nv €var godds: ovTOL OE TAX AY OUS ApTL
¥ ’ AA s YN. ] \ A A
éNeyov. peilw Twa. 7) KAT avlpawmov ocodiav codol elev, 7 ©
9 y / / 3 \ \ ¥ SO. Ss.” 9 9
ovk €xw TL ANéyw* ov yap On €ywye aUTNY EMLOTARAL al
Soris pot Pevderal Te Kal ene SuaBoly 7 Eup Néyen. kai
pot, & dvopes *Abnvaior, pv) BopuPBionre, pnd éav 86éw Tu
Er ’ / 9 \ 3 \ y ™ \ / A A /
Op péya-déyew: ov yap EOV Ep TOV \dyov lov av Aeyw,
3 Ye /..3 9 / ¢ ~ \ / 3 /’ ~ \
aN < ELS, ao pewv VLLY TOV. AéyovTa javolow. TIS yap
15. 7 ovk EXw KkTE.: ironical. Such spoken. Tor. Sat. ii. 2, 2, mec meus 2
wisdom is one of two things, either hic sermo est sed quae prae-
superhuman or no wisdom at all. cepit Ofellus.) For a similarly
18. pr) OopuPrjomre: do not interrupt ~~ compressed statement, cf. ikavdy TOV
me with noise, strictly referring to the pdprupa, Ble. “A pred. adj. or subst.
moment fixed by éaw 84fw rré. In is often a brief equiv. for one clause
21 a, and 30 ¢, the pres. is used (uy of a compound sent.” II. 618. éudv
fopuBeire) because the request is less and a&tibxpewv are both preds., and
precise, make no disturbance. GMT. special point is given them by their
86; H. 874a. position. This sent. is far more tell-
19. péya Aéyev: not of course in ing than what might be spun out of
the sense of speaking out loud (cf. Rep. it, sc. Aéyw yap Adyov kal 6 Adyos ov épd
v. 449 b, 6 *Adeluavtos péya id Aywy, obk éuds éoTi, GAN avolow (sc. Tov Ad-
beginning to speak above his breath), but yo») eis Tov Aéyovra Os akibxpews vuiy
in that of ueyaAnyopelv, as uéya po- eoriv. — Sv dv Aéyw : equiv. to dv WéA-
ver is used in the sense of umeyaro- Aw Aéyew, though it is formally a

ppoveiv. Cf. Rich. I1. iii 2, hypothetical rel. clause with indef.
antec., “the word I shall utter, whatever

. 9 y . . .
od Boys with women’s voices the word may be, that I say, will not be
Strive to speak big, and clap their female ‘ ” v ‘ :
joints mine, ete.” Cf. Crit. 44 c.
20. qvolow: in the sense of shifting

In stiff unwieldy arms against thy crown.
responsibility. For avapopd in that

— ov yap €pov kTé.: a compressed sense, ¢f. Eur. Orest. 414 ff. GAN’ EoTv
form of statement, made effective  Juiv dvapopd Tis Euupopds ... Poi
with the audience by the allusion to Bos keheboas unTpds ekmpatar povov.
certain Euripidean strains. (Cj. Eur. Tis Yap eps, el KTé.: it required
Frg. 488, kodk éuds 6 uvbos aan’ uss skill as well as modesty to avoid
unrpds wpa, not mine the word, I heard ~~ blurting out here with ris éuijs cogplas.
it from my mother. This line is paro- The ei 8) Tis éomt interrupts just in
died in Symp. 177 a, 7 pév po gpxh time. Cf. Isocr. Xv. 50, wepl uev ody
Tob Adyov é&oTi KaTd TY Edpimidov Tis éuils elte BotAeale KkaAely duvd-
MeAavimmmy: ob yap éuds 6 pv- pews, ere pihocoplas, ere SuatpiBis,
Bos GAAG Paudpod TovdE. The same d«nkdare macay THY aAfOetar, now you
sentiment is found in Eur. Hel. 513, have heard all the truth about my talent
Adyos ydp éaTiv obk éubs, COPEY 3 mos, or methodical study or pursuit, which-
not mine the word; by clerkly men twas ever you like to call it.

 

——

 

 

 

25

21
a

ATIOATIA SQKPATOYZ.

\ \ \ ~ ! ~ f ?
Tov Oedv Tov év Aehpols. | Xarpedavra yap LOTE TOV. OVTOS

8S eA > 3 ’ \ ec A ~ ’ eA 7
€ULOS TE ETALPOS NY €K VEOV KOOL VAWV TW An feu ETALPOS TE 21

’ \ \ cop pec - HARUM Ts oA A
kal Evvépuye ™py duyny roy kay ‘ped vudv karl.

2 0e. el Sv} rie & ’ \ 9 ’ e A Ly
EMTS, EL nN TLS €EOTL godia Kol Ola, papTUp vw mapé€opar 20

\ ¥ \ D » ~ } , op
kal lore On ofos Jv Xatpehpdv, ds apodpos ip’ 0 TL OpuT)-

\ ~
cee. kal On more kal els Aehdovs éNwv éréhunoe TovTo
’ 0 . \ 9 ’ / A ie——t
pavreboacha kal émep Néyw wij GopuBere, o avopes:
yy \ \ ¥ ~ ¥ ~ 2
npero yap O01) € Tis €uov €w) ocopiTEPOS.  AVELNEY id

21. ola: goes back to mofavind above. Tw. All these allusions had the ef-

22. Xapepavra: certainly, if the fect of influencing the court in favor,
Athenians did not know Chaerephon, of what they were about to hear.
many a joke of Aristophanes at 25. o¢odpds: Chaerephon was a
Chaerephon’s expense was lost on born enthusiast. Cf. Charm. 153 b,
them; see below on line 25. He is Xapepdy dé, dre kal pavikds Gv, avamn-
mentioned by Xen. (Mem. i. 2. 48) as ¥foas ék uéowy €er mpds pe. Aristoph-
one of those friends of Socrates of éxel- anes calls Chacrephon “a bat ” (Birds,
ve auviicar obx Tra Snunyopirol yévowTo, 1554); Chaerephon and Socrates be-
GAN Tva Kkaol Te kéyabol yevduevor kal long to the jaundiced barefoot brother-
olke kal oikérais kal pilots Kal moXet Kal hood (Clouds, 104). Browning, Aris-
morlTais dvawro kards xpiolat tophanes’s Apology,

23. pV TY wAn0e : the HAwoTal Tn me ’twas equal balanced flesh rebuked
are here taken as representing the Excess alike in stuff-guts Glauketes
whole people; and here, as often, wA%- Or starveling Chaerephon; I challenge both.

fos is equiv. to d7uos, and means dem- 26. kal 81 wore kat kré.: well then

ocratic party. Cf. Lys. passim.— érai- really once. Cf. 18a. The regular way
. a > » fn Yo . ~ M . . .

pos: partisan. Cf. Gorg. 510 a, ils of introducing a particular instance of

’ / ~ 3

imapxovons molitelas éTaipov elvat, Lo be what has been stated generally. What

a partisan of the government in power. Chaerephon did at Delphi was an
24. tiv duyriv Tavrmy: an allusion, instance of his opodpdrys.
which no one present could fail of rovro: a cognate acc. after uavret-
understanding, to the exile from  cacfo in anticipation of fpero KkTéE.
which all conspicuous democrats had ~~ For Touro referring forward, see H.
only four years before returned (in 696a. For a similar acc. after wav-
403 B.c.). The Thirty Tyrants were revecbar, cf. Eur. Jon. 3461, 1Q. 6 &
the authors of this banishment; cf.  éxredels (exposed) mais mov oT; €loopd
Xen. Hell. ii. 4. 1, mpoetmoy pév Tois dos (alive) * KP. obi oldev obdels.
{tw TOD kaTaldyou (not registered on TabTa kal pavrTebouat.
their catalogue of 3000 oligarchical sym- 27. Smep Néyw: I repeat, lit. just
pathizers) ui) elowévar eis TO doTv.  Pev- what 1am saying. Cf. 17¢ and 20e.
yovrwy B¢ eis Tov Mead, kal évTed- 28. aveihev ovv 1) ITvbia: odv closes
fev moAAods dyovres evémAnoav kal TG an explanatory digression and leads
Méyapa kal Tas @7Bas TY smoxwpoty- back to udprupa uiv wapétouar. The

AL

 

RR GERI a Ry

f
|
|

SRR RRR Ria

SRR

fl lA WY i,

Ea

ARE Ca

  

 

 

  
   

 

 

 
 
  
 

72

IIAATQNOZ

¢ / / / 3 \ ’ ’ ¢

7 Mulia punoéva TOPWTEPOV elvat. Kal TOUTWVY TEPL O
> \ ce A 3 ~f—e -— ’ ’ Ee,

30 a.OeN pos, VMLY QUTOV OVTOOL JLOPTUPT TEL, émreLdn) EKELVOS

/’
TETENEUTNKEY.

VI. Sképacle 8¢ dv eveka ravra Ayo: pélo yap
¢ ~ / © ¢ \ / ~ \ 5 \
vpas diddEew obey pou Sia BoN1) yéyove. TavTa yap yw
AKOVT AS éveBupovuny odTwol: T( mOTE NéYEL O feds, kal TL

Bel 3.7 \ on ¥ / y a
MOTE OQIVLTTETAL; €EYyw Yap 01 OUTE LEYQ OUTE OC ULKPOV

Ebvorda éuavr® oodos Wy: Ti OV OTE NeyeL PATK®Y EMLe

9

’ a Yr —— ’ . ’ / 9 \
godpaTaToy €wat; ov Yap Sijrov evderar yer ov yap

oracle in question is lost, but we have a
very fair substitute in Sods SopokAils
copdrepos & Edpumidys | dvdpdv d¢ mdv-
Twy (OF &mdvTwy) SwkpdTns copdTaTos.
See the Schol. on Arist. Clouds, 144.

29. ¢ dSeAdos: sc. Chaerecrates.
We are told that once, when the two
were at variance, Socrates intervened
as peacemaker. C7. Xen. Mem. ii. 3. 1.

VI. 3. =i wore alvirrerar: through
modesty Socrates takes it for granted
that this is “a dark saying.” Fora
genuinely enigmatical oracle, cf. Paus.
v. 3. 5, vlverar 8¢ ois Bagi\ebawy
(Temenus and Cresphontes) adT@y
Adyiov Tbe, Hyemdva Tis kaBddov
rotciolar TOV Tpiépbarmoy, that they
should make “the three-eyed” leader of
their home return. The “three-eyed”
turned out to be Oxylus, son of An-
draemon, whom they met riding on a
one-eyed mule; ace. to Apollodorus,
Oxylus was one-eyed and bestrode a
two-eyed horse. See an essay on Greek
Oracles by F. W. H. Myers, in his
volume entitled Essays Classical (Lon-
don, 1883).

5. codos dv : see on émoTauévy, 22¢.
— Nye ddokay: Aéye here refers to
the meaning and pdokwr to the words
in which it was conveyed.

6. ov Srjmov: of course I do not sup-
pose. mob adds a shade of uncer-

   

tainty to the stress of 37. Notice
that Socrates’s long struggle (udyis
mdyv) is dramatized in these short,
quick sents., which suggest a man
talking to himself. —ov yap Oépis:
would be against his nature. God,
being by nature truthful, could not
lie; cf Rep. ii 382 e, wdvty yap
dfevdes TO dauubviby Te kal TO Belov,
the nature of divinity and of God 1s
absolutely void of falsehood. The im-
plicit faith of pious Greeks in oracles,
esp. in those of Apollo, is proved
directly by such words as Pindar’s
Yevdéwy ob &mreral, he (Apollo) sets
not his hand to falsehood (Pyth. iii. 9),
Tov ob Beurtdy Yebder Oryeiv, lis unlaw-
ful for him to have part in a lie (Pyth
ix. 42). It is also shown indirectly
by the horror, expressed so often by
the tragedians, at finding Phoebus’s
speech untrue. Against all blasphe-
mous attribution of falsehood to the
gods, Plato defends the faith in Rep.
ii. 383 b, where he reprobates the fol-
lowing lines of Aeschylus (spoken by
Thetis in a lost play), k&yd Td ®oiBov
Octov dpevdes ardua | Amor elvar pav-
Tei Bpbov Téxvy (with skill prophetic
fraught) § 8 abTds buvdv, abTds év 601)
maply (marriage-feast) adros Tad elmo,
ards or 6 kravdw | Tov maida TOV
¢udv. The hesitating tone adopted by

21

21

 

 

 

 

10

15
21

AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYSZ.

    
 

3

’ 3 ~ \ \ \ / 3 / 4 2
Oéuis adr. Kal ONY [Ley XpOVOV 1NTOPOVY TL OTE \éyel, 21
/ - A ~
drevra péyis wavy émi|\firmow avTov brown TWA €Tpa-

TOU.

3 ~ y 5 / hy ~ \ 3 ~
evravba, evrep mov, ENéyEwy TO pavTeELOV Kal amroparwy ¢ =

9 > AL»
N\Oov irl Twa Tov dokoUvTwy TOopAY Ewa, 1S

~ ~ < e \ 3 ~ Vd / 3 \ 39 \
TG XPNOKG OTL OUTOUL ELOY gopdTEPOS €0TL, OV O €ue
» ; ~ 2 ~ ys. J \ sQ\ ’
épnao ba. SLT KOTOY 00V TOUTOV — OVOLATL Ya 0vOer O€o-
pat Aéyew, Nw O€ TiS TOV TONTIKGY POS OV éy® TKOTGY
rowodrdy Tu erabov, & dvdpes “Abnvaior — Kai daheyo-

9 ~ » 0) 9 \ ~ ~
pevos avrg, €30&€ po ovToS 6 ap Soke pv evar oopos

Socrates in mentioning this oracle
(21 a), and his interpretation here,
suggest that he himself would never
have asked Chaecrephon’s question;
the question could be settled by hu-
man means and in such cases Socra-
tes’s practice agreed with the senti-
ment in Eur. Hel. 753 ff.

The gods why question? Nay, we rather
should

With sacrifice approach them, and a prayer

For what is good, disdaining prophecy, . . .

What prophecy will lead the sluggard man
to thrift ?

Of prophets best good counsel is and sense.

Cf. Xen. Mem. i. 1. 9, daiuovar (were
crazed) Em 8¢ kal Tods pavTevouévous
& Tots avfpdmois Ewray of Becol pabovo
Siaxplvew (to learn and know thoroughly).

8. poyis wdwv: after a long strug-
gle, a qualification of reira érpamd-
unr which repeats parenthetically the
idea of méavy xpdévov. For a similar
parenthetical qualification, see on od
kat Tovrous, 17 b. For the position
of wdvv, see on od wdvv, 19 a. — Torav-
™v Twa: sc. (ATnow, purposely vague,
«which I began in some such way as
this.” See on rowadry 715, 19 €.

10. dmodavav T¢ xpnope : the ora-
cle is personified.

11. érv: introducing direct quota-
tion, GMT. 79; I. 928 b. —éori: really

is. This whole clause was spoken
with special emphasis.

13. wpds ov émalov: cf. (org. 485,
SpotbraTov wdaxw mpbs ToUs GiAocodovy-
Tas &omep wpds TOUS Yearlouévous kal
raiovras, in the case of philosophers I
feel just as I do about people who lisp
and are childish. Contrast the use of
mpés in such expressions as mpbs éuav-
Tov oromdy, pondering in my mind ; wpos
aAAHAOUS TrOTODWEY, we consider among
ourselves (cf. mpds “éuavtdy éNoyi(ouny
in d below).

14. kal Siaheydpevos avre : strictly
speaking, this covers the same ground
as Swackomdy Todorov. Socrates has no
test except by conversing with his
man.

15. ¢8ofé pou: idiomatically substi-
tuted before Sokeiv (fo seem) to avoid

Sota in the unusual but possible sense,
I came to the opinion. The same ana-
coluthon occurs both when the nom.
part. precedes (¢f. Xen. An. iii. 2. 12,
kal edEdmevor Th ‘Apréude émdaovs
hw karaxdvoiey T@v moheulwy TooavTas
xipalpas katabboew Ti Og, émel ok
elxov ikavas ebpeiv, &8ofew adToOls
car eviauTdy mevTakoaias 8vew kté.) and
when it follows (cf. Th. iii. 36, «kal
smd opyfis €dokev abTols ob Tovs wap-
dvras uévov dmoxTelvar GANG kal TOUS
dravras MuriAnvalovs door 7HB@a, émi-

21]

 

 

 

 
 

 

  

 

 

 

REAR

SES ge Kien
A —— —

1) as & o VAY
amele
Bay rt

i
y y

’ »
25 0VOE olopat eloéva.

21

QC

d

dA\ous Te mo\\ots dfipdmon
ov* dmerra & ereLpdumy AUTO

ITAATONOS

bet pidugra. & avrg, €var © 21
ELKVVUV AL JOT oLoLTO LEV evo

 ———
aodos, €u 0 ov. | évrev lev) ov TOUT TE amy Gop Kal

Fo ro vs

 

TONNOLS TOV mapdvra: pos EuavToy, 0 odv dim Eho-
20 YL [0 ouNY, OTL TOUTOV puso TOU avlpdmov é €ya TodaTEPSs etpue
Bs per. yop nde 0vdérepos oVOCY KaAOV klyofoy

eloévat, aN’ ovToS LEV oleTal TL €lOéval ovk €LOWS, € Eyw O¢,

o 2 ) A SQN ¥
WO TEP OovV OVK 0l0a, 0VOE oLopat.

y / 3 5 .
€OLKOQ Y ovv TOVUTOV YE

~ ’y A ’, ’ » ‘cp A \ 2
TMLKPW TWL. OVTQ TOUTQ. TOPATEPOS EVAL, OTL QU JAM) olda

b J ~ bl 5 y sn ~ - 5 /
evrevlev em al\ov 70 TOV EKELYOV

’ / i / y \ ~ »
OoKOVVTWY godpwTépwy €lvaL, Kal Mol ToUTA ToUTA €dofe
\ gis “a Sf » \ ¥ A 9 CA ,?
kal evravba KAKEWQ Kol allots moots amy déunv.

VII. Mera 7avr ov [78m] épeéns Na alobavduevos pev

Tower

kKaAodvTes TH awdoTacw, taxing them
with their revolt).

19. wpos épavrov .. . éhoyilopnv:
see on line 13 above.

20. ot . . . epi:
pendent like rt ofoiro in line 17, but
like ri. obrool . .. &mi in line 11
above.

23. domep ovv: the odv leads back
to kwdvveler pev yap kré., which in turn
contains a reaffirmation of éyd yap...
aopds Gv, b above. Here odk, not 0ddév,
is used, because the antithesis is be-
tween not-knowing and false assump-
tion of knowledge. — €owka y 0vv : now
il seems at least that,etc. + ody is a bet-
ter reading than voov, since &uwca and
rovrovrequire precisely the same stress
in the connexion of thought. One of
the many examples of v¢ repeated in
Hom. is Il. v. 258, oltre & od maAw
adbis amoiceTov @krées mmol | dupw ag’
nuelwy, € yy ody Erepds ye plynaw.

24. avrg TouTw: serves to prepare
the way for the clause with ¢ri, which

not really de-

[ kal] \vrovuevos kal Oediws (ort amyyBavdunv,) opws O€

gives a detailed specification of what
is indefinitely stated in ouwcpg Tw.

VII. 1. ovv: pointing back to the
end of 21 b. —q8n: straightway or im-
mediately, vividly bringing up the
moment of past time alluded to.

2. oT amnxOavopmy : this gives the
fact of which Socrates says he was al-
ways conscious (aiocfavduevos), so that
he was constantly tormented (Avmo!-
uevos) and terrified (deduds). With
Avmoduevos and dediws, 6m would mean
because ; these two parts. should there-
fore be attached to aig@avduevos. No-
tice, however, that aicavduevos fol-
lowed by dr: (that) is a very uncommon
const. Cf. amyx0unv in d above with
amrnxBavéunv, here in something like
the sepse of the colloquial “was get-
ting wyself disliked.”

opws 8¢ édokeu: correl. with aiobavd-
uevos uév, breaks out of the partic.
const. Socrates, in stating his deter-
mination to do his duty, adopts a con-
versational style. See on &o¢é uot in

21

d

 

“——

DAD lle tn wy

 

dvarykaiov €ddkeL- eval TO TOU Oeov wep

ATIOAOIIA SQKPATOYS.

2 ~
TAELOTOV TTOLEL-

aOar- iréov odv.okomovvTL TOV XPopy TU Moyerlf éml amav-

5 Tas ToUs Tu dokovvTas €ldévai. Kal Vi) TOV KUva, & GrOpPES
5 ~ ~ \ \ ce A ~ ’ a \
Abnvator— Sei yap mpos vuas Taknln Aéyew —) pny

9 iN ¥ ’ ~ ec \ ’ 35 ~
€yw erabov TL TOLOVUTOV*® OL [LEV HAANLTTO Ev OKLULOVVTES

Sod pou d\iyov Setv Tov mheloTov évdeers ear {nTovrTL

kara Tov Oedv, dAou 8¢ dokovvTes pavhdrepor émielkéTTe-

ec above, and on &AX’ el uév in 34 e be-

low. Cf. also Lach. 196 e, ToiTo Aéyw
ov malwy GAN é&varykoiov oluar kté., [
say this not by way of a joke, but I think
it absolutely unavoidable, etc.

3. 70 Tov Oeov: the interest of the

god, which required of Socrates that

he should refute or confirm the or-
acle.

4. iréov ovv: a change to the dir.
discourse strikingly introduced by the
narrator. Such a transition is often
resorted to for the sake of vividness.
Cf. Xen. An. v. 5. 24, mapeAbov 8 av-
T@v 8AANos elmey OTL 0) WOAemov woun-
dduevor fkotev, GAN’ émidelkovTes OTL Pi
Not eiol. kal Eeviois, Hv uv EAOnTE KTE.
Id. vii. 1. 39, where the transition is
the reverse, udAa udAus, pn, dampatd-
pevos fikw + Aéyewv yap AvatiBioy
or. kré. Still more striking is 7d.
Ilell. i. 1. 27, mapiivecav &vdpas dyadovs
elval, meuvnuévovs Ooas Te vavpaxias
avtol kal adTods vevikNkaTe, they
charged them to be brave men and not to
Jorget in how many sea-fights, “with only
your own forces, you have been victori-

> ons.” — gkomwovvTL: Not oredouévey, for

Socrates simply proceeds as he began.
Hence the subj. of gkomovyr: is not
expressed. See on duwarepwuéry, 27 a.

5. vq Tov kvva: this form of assev-
eration is a whim of Socrates, upon
which the Schol. says, ‘Padauavfvos
Spiros 0bTos 6 kata Kurds 9) xnvds (goose)

) mAardvov (plane-tree) 3) kpiov (ram) 4
Twos EAAOv TowoUTOV" 01S AV wéyiaoTo s
§pros GmavTi Adye kbwy,|EretTa
xfv: Oeods 8 ealywy (they named
no god), Kparivos Xelpwor (i.e. inthe
Chirons).
va uy kara Bed of Gprol ylyvwvTal, Tolov-
Tot 8¢ kal of SwkpdTous Gpkot. A humor-
ous turn is given to this oath in Gorg.
482, ud Tov Kiva TOV Alyvrriwr Ociv.
Socrates would swear by the Egyp-
tian god, but not by any of the gods
whom he worshipped. His objection
to doing this may be illustrated by
the reasons for “An act to restrain
the abuses of players,” 3 James L c.
21. “For the preventing and avoiding
of the great abuse of the holy name
of God in Stage-plays, Enterludes,
May-games, shews, and the like.” See
Clarke and Wright on Merch. of Ven.
i. 3.

6. 1 piv: expresses solemn assev-
eration, and is introduced to corrobo-
rate the preceding oath. The Schol.
explains it as meaning &vrws 319, in
very truth. It is, however, the usual
formula for beginning any affirmation
prefaced by a solemn oath.

9. kata Tov Oéov: under the god's
command. The inquiry was com-
manded of God, because it was possi-
ble to understand the meaning of the
oracle only by experience, and Soc-
rates’s experience had not yet justified

\ / \ / 3 /
KOTO TOUTWY O€ VOMOS OMVUVOL

«1
Qt

21

&

oe AR i

SSR

 

 

Sh RS RS RRR Rs pe eA

SORES Ram

AE a

p RA

 

 
 

 

 

 

PR TO , 4p nd TECOST {
¢ - 2 3 ? o TEU) a A & V te F Ew 0) v r™ é ; J
* ot ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOY3. 7 i
4 vy LA rn 4 bi
76 ITIAATQONOX x forts 2g Sad - aden n 14
pao Ta mempaypaTevobal aurols, OMpaTOY AV aurous L
* y \ \ / ¥ ~ QA ~ . . ’ ) S A E) i]
10 pou elva avdpes TPOS TO PPOVIUWS EXEL. det on) UU TY 22 Néyouev, ww dpa TL KOU pavfavouut TAP AUTWV. ALO XUVO- 4
dun whdvyy émdeifor @ > x v U | Bn tly nly. 3 vd IAn0n: duos 8¢ pmréoy 1
pny whavny €moelfal WOTEP TOVOUS TWAS TOVOUVTOS, Lva par ody Vp €elmew, © avOpeEs, TaAAUN: Ops PY .
\ ys ec ’ ’ \ \ : A . A or ec ’ a B !
jot Ko avéeNeyKTOS 7) MOVTELOL YEVOLTO.  LETA Yop TOUS 20 OS eros yap ELEY dAiyov AUTWV OITOVTES Ol TAPOVTES av
S$... 3. \ \ ’ Any Cw a A 5 ’ Yl ANCELE : i
i TONLTLKOUS jo. €TTL TOUS TOLTAS,TOUS{TE TOV TPAYROLDY Kal | Bé\Tov €Neyov mePL Gv avrol EMETOLNKET AY. €YPWY OUV | mn
) \ ~ ’ : \ \ » ) A 5 ” ie : 1. R o > ’ ~ . {
| Tovs Tov SbvpduBwrd kal Tovs dAlovs, os évravfa ér’ b ( Kal TepL TOV TOUT OV [&v ONiy® TOVTO, OTL OV oTopla TOoLOLEY ¢ A
’ » N ’ > \ ’ ’ ’ 7 & e 4
15 avToPWP® KaTAANPOUEVOS EUAVTOV apabéorepov EKELVWY & mrowoter, alka PvoeL TL Kal évfovoialovtes womep ot |
y hb} / I) Ss ~ \ yd & ’ / \ \ ~ ’ \ ih
ovta. avahauBavwy ovv aUT@Y To ToujuaTa, d ol €OGKeL feopdvress kai of xpnopedol kal yap odrol AéyovoL ev b
A } Gk peed \ 3 \ ~ ’ ~ / 8
29 25 OMG Kal Ka\d, LoaoL O€ 0V0Er GV A€YovoL. TOLOUTOV Ti i]
him in thinking that he understood the oracle (cf. 22¢) while really he %~ > / ’ « \ Ores: Kol aa. ol
8 it. was proving it to be irrefutable. This 8 | : Pot. épdimaay wdfos kato . he aenOp $ H 3
11. domep wovovs Twas wovovvros: achievement is ironically stated as 29 | Hara A I, A A ws 1 obriatel i?
‘ “ GOD hilosophical) kal ways. Hence they are appropriately §
my Herculean labors, as I may call his real purpose. Cf. a used by CR yea coaplod Wy Tacans of wile, CF 181 i
them ; the gen. agrees with éuov im- Hom. in indignant or ironical ques- aon hia bie of Fuetsy Ennin boo: by (grace of) nature. Here i
[lied inytsoquiy. dup. 6.137, 1; tions, eg. 10, xiv. 3614, "Apyen; val gi : o) areiiofo, . used here used to express what Plato elsewhere i
H. 691. The words mdvovs movovvros 8 adre ueblener “Extopt vikny | Mpiauldy, : ig Ye is made evident by means by ela polpa, by the grace of ! |
| Wore sure to remind his hearops of Tmylns Bpus) £3309 Eppa, Argiees, wl ee kt of the agent. G. 188, heaven. Acts done g¢ioe are done un- : |
: several passages in the tragedians, and must we to Priam’s son Hector again win 197 9 H. 760. See also consciously,are inspired by something i
where Heracles, a character endeared yield the day, that he on our ships may | Oy ang eh © 5

to them chiefly by his heroic strug-
gles, recounts his labors. Socrates
compares his own intellectual encoun-
ters with the physical ones endured

lay hands and be sure of renown? Soc-
rates was, he here implies, guided to
just the result which he least ex-
pected. This might easily suggest

App. — SuppdTwv dv: see on 20 be- below the surface of our every-day
low. selves, whereas conscions acts are, if

18. iv &po kré.: mentioned as a right, guided by réxvn and soils, art
subordinate end to be reached by the and wisdom. Cf. Ion, 633 e-534 ¢, mav-

we

gs WH

ac. at

; ov end L (epic
‘ : | { n 11 above.— Tes yap ol Te Tey émdy moral (€] |
1 by Heracles, and recounts in a half- the irony of fate, so tragically ex- Yo  y For i: amy was dis- poets) of dyafol odk ék Téxvns (out
es rata NT » : . . ’ . alo VVOMaL : 1 ’ f 3. Loo oni y ¥ |
| tragic vein these “labors” imposed of  emplified in Sophocles’s Oedipus the creditable to the poets, and Socrates of knowledge of their art) &AN> EvOeot

strove . . . simply for greater stress. C7. Gorg. wm . 5 ani tian 2A Ad fe
f of maine, 5 Ad i 2 kiln your ar Ye > here, instead of the partic. Socrates polpg, Tobro Hovey 9 Boy LL :
Still, still, ye are the same whose sometime ~~ “OYOH JUTE 10 AEP JOUL BIGHUILS 1 fecls shame at the idea of telling  wowely Karas, ép° 0 7 Movea avrov 3
strength its close. This is not like kal parfd- 1

God. Cf. Soph. Trach. 1046f. and
1089 ff.,

In many a heat, by fearful odds hard pressed,
With arms and straining back ere now I

In haunts Nemean smote the shepherd’s bane,

And tamed the lion whom none dared ap-
proach,

Or look on, etc.

Cf. Eur. H. F. 1255-1280, and esp.
the chorus, 348-455; Browning in
Avristophanes’s Apology translates the
whole of this play. — iva pou kal «7é. :
Socrates, assuming for the sake of
his point an attitude of opposition
says that he thought he was refuting

King, which was first performed about
429 B.c. and presumably was familiar
to the court. In clauses with a
(émel, and émeidh), ral is freq. used

voit below, b, where kal means also.
The opt. clause va yévoiro depends
upon wovovvros, which represents the
impf. G. 204, ~. 1; II. 856 a.

14. kal Tous aMlovs: see the pas- b
sage from the Jon quoted in the note
on c¢ below. The kwugdiomool arc
hardly included here. The idea that
the genuine poet was a being endowed
with exceptional wisdom was common
in ancient times. Cf. Arist. Poet. 9. 3,

 

Lesitates to mention it. For thissame (inspired) dv Te s Kal warexdpevor {pos-
borrowing of shame from another’s sessed) mwdvTa rabra 1% KaAG Myo,
actions, see Crit. 45d and e. When worfuara, at of perowouol ((yric poets)
alo xbveslar means feel shame at the of &yabol GFavTws...aATE VV OV TEX VY

what nevertheless must be told, be-  &punoev, 6 uév dibupduBovs (ome can
cause it is the truth. write dithyrambs), é 8¢ dyndpun (hymns
20. oi mwapdvres: those who were of praise), 6 oe imopx uaa (choral
present, i.c. the bystanders. Hence av songs, accompanied by a lively dance),
I eyov, used with the same iterative  ¢ 8 &mn (epics), 6d idyBovs (fambics)
force as dmpdrwv &v above. GMT. ... 8 TaiTa de 6 Beds éfaipobpevos
30, 2; H. 835. ToUTwy TOV ve ly (taking al reason

c 23. dice Tul kal évBovoudfovres: out of them) robrois xpiiras bmperais
the dat. ¢pvoe: and nom. partic. charac- kal Tols xpnou@dols kal TOUS MAVTEO!

. . ~ /
terize the same subj. in two parallel  Tois Oeiots.

 

he ds i

 
 

 

A RN

=

78

30

22

VE ‘4
IIAATQNOS ~~ €/f] J
The ’ bb bv
wbparfiin. |

no ouny AUTOV dla ™Y Zoe, ojonerer

gopwrdrar eval drfpémar ta ovk Moav.

amrjja ov kal

y Kol TAAN\a 22

évrevlev TQ avTO 0iOLEVOS TEPLYEYyOVEVAL dep Kol TOV {

TONMTLKODV.

~ » / on
VIII. Te\evrav odv émi Tovs Xesporéxras yo.

3 ~
Spur

yop Emde oud émorauéve os émos elmety, TovTous O€
y Pew & oTL evprioouus moa. kal kala cE Si Kat
TOUTOU [eV OUK &pesatpy, aN’ nmioTarro a éyw ovK 7L-

oTduny, Kai ov TAUTY aoldnepos Roan

aN’, @ dvopes

"“Abnpaio, Tad pot €dofav Exew GpdpTp, buep Kal ol
womTal, kal ol dyabol Smutovpyol: Oia TO TY vx KOL-
ws ébepydleatar EKATTOS lov kal Ta\\a Ta péyloTa

A

ToPpaTATOS eval, Kal avTOY avr) 7) TAY ppLENEe EKELVNV

27. fo8Spny olopévay : like dxodor-
res éteralouévwr, 23c. The acc. oc-
curs in 20 a, dv fobduny émdnuovvra.
Cf. Xen. Mem. ii. 2. 1, aloc0dpevés
more AaumpokAéa TOV wpeaBiTaTov
vidy &avrod mwpds THY unTépa xahemal-
vovra (in a passion with his mother).

28. codwrdrwy: pred. agreeing with
olouévwy, which contains the subj. of
elvai. — dv@pdmoy : part. gen. G. 168;
I. 650. — a ovk woav: sc. gogoi. Cf.
Xen. Mem. iv. 6.7, d érlcTara €kaatos,
robro kal copds éoTw. On the acc.
of specification, see G. 160, 1; H. 718.

VIII. 1. Tehevrav: finally. For
partics. used adverbially, see GMT.
109, x. 8; G. 138, x. 7; H. 968a and
619 a.

2. ¢moTAREVY: of 21b. —8¢ y
v¢ gives stress to Todrouvs, but yields
the first place to 8¢ (cf. 24¢, éyo 3¢
ve); uév also takes the same prece-
dence. As a rule, 7¢é comes imme-
diately after the word which it empha-
sizes, or else between the noun and
its art.

4. nmwioravro:
any implication that they have ceased
to know at the time when he speaks.

6. dmep kal, kal ol k7é.: this repe-
tition of kai is idiomatic in correl.
sents., and may be represented by one
Eng. word, also. With of womrai it
is easy to supply é&xovaw from the
Ixew of the leading clause; similar
cases are very frequent in Greek.

7. Sud To kTé.: here begins the ex-
planation which the preceding clause
demands. ~dp might have been added,
i.e. 8 yap TO . . . éepydCeabau, OT, THY
vip Téxvny éEepyalbuevos KTE.

8. TdA\\a Ta péywora: adjs. used
subst. take the art. after 6 &AAos quite
as commonly as substs. do. Ta péyioTa
refers to affairs of state and of the
common weal, as in Rep. iv. 426¢,
gopds Ta péyiwora and Gorg. 484c,
yvéoe, tv éml Ta pellw E\Ops, édoas
#dn pirocoplay, you shall know if once
you proceed to affairs of larger concern
and give up My once for all.
Cf. also Xen. An. ii. 6. 16, and in

d

9)

they knew, without ad

Sl REE em

—

 

 

——

a

\ ’ 5...) or > ~ 29
10 THY Coplay ATEKPUTTEV, WOTE JE ELAVTOV |AVEPWTAY, UTEP

15

en
dd ad

d

-
ATIOAOI'IA ZQKPATOYS.

TOD XP1I pov, wleepe, Sefaipmy av oUTw(WoTEP exw) ExeLY
pte TL Todos dv exelvwy godiar pire pais (rip
dpalior, i 1 apucpdrepa & a ékewol €xovaw éxew. dmespiudpop
0DV EUaVT@ Kal TG XPNOR@ OTL (woL AvaLTENOl GoTep Exw

»
€X€ w.

IX. ’Ex ravmoli 67) ms éferdoews, & dvdpes ’Abnvaiol,
mol al peév améyleial por yeydvaot kal ofar yalerdraral
\ ’ 4 \ \ 5 3 9 ~ 2’
kat Bapirarat, wore mwoA\as dwaBolas dam avrw YEYOVE-

vai, Svopua 0€ TovTo Aéyeolai, oodos eva.

Mencx, 234 a, én) Ta pellw émwoers Tpé-
mwealar kal px ew MUAY mix Epes.

9. Apple :
20 c.

10. dore pe: not dor éué, which
would be too emphatic. It repre-
sents dvmpdTwy éuavtdr without éye.
Cf. e below, and see App. — vmép Tov
xpnopov : in the name of and, as it
were, on behalf of the oracle.

11. Sefaipmv av: that is «if it were
mine to choose.”
ais is implied.

see on éuueAs,

el pot yévorro 7 alpe-
Notice the idioms
bomep Exw €xew and & éxetvor Exovoww
¢xewv. In both the order is just the
reverse of the natural Eng. one. In
Lat., the corresponding idioms follow
the same order with the Greek.

12. pmre mv: 71 strengthens the
negation ufire. Cf. ori, uiTe.

IX. 1. 8: here used by way of
closing and summing up the previous
line of argument. On & #vdpes ’Aby-
vatot, see Introd. p. 49, ~. 4.

2. olav Xalewwrarar: sc. eiol, ex-
plained by places where the same
idiom is expanded, c.g. Xen. Men. iv.
8. 11, éuol mev 3) éddker [Swkpdrys]
TolovTos elvar ofos bv ein &poTds Te Kal
evdaiuovéoTaros.

4. dvopa 8¢ Tovto Aéyeofar : instead

olovTaL yap

of dvoua 8¢ TovTo éAeyduny. Although
8¢ co-ordinates the whole with roAAal
wer kré. and the two form the leading
clause, yet the inf. Aéyeofa: half in-
corporates these words with the &ore
clause. This irregular const. is per-
fectly clear in a conversational style
like that of Socrates. It has the
effect of stating more distinctly the
fact that this epithet copds, as ap-
plied to Socrates, is the capital in-
stance of moAXal diaBoAci and results
from them. —oodos: introduced to
explain precisely what is meant by
Svoua TovTo. The nom. cogpds leads
back to the main statement woAAal
améxOewal por vyeydvasi, which, how-
ever, dwells in the speaker’s mind as
GméxOnuar. oopds agrees ace. to rule
with the nom. subj. of this aréxOnua.
G. 136, x. 3; H. 940. If éué, the acc.
subj. of Aéyedbar, had been expressed
instead of understood, this nom. would
not have been possible. — elvav: the
inf. elvar is idiomatically used with
pred. nouns or adjs. after évoud(erv,
ovoud(eafar, and the like. Cf. Rep. iv.
428 e, ovoudovral tives elvai, are called
by certain names. Prot. 311e, coploTyy
ovoudCovat Tov avdpa elvar. Lach. 192 a,
@ Sdkpates, TL Aéyels TovTo O év waTw

99

«

23

 

Gr RL

 

waded Batis
  
 
 

 
 

rn I ts

80

¢ /’ ¢ ~ "N ~
5 JLE €KAOTOTE OL suplupel eden itis eval a

10

He
2

a

 

ITAATQNOZ

/’ A

y ptf Me a ~
aloy €feNéyEw | 10 O€ Kew OVVeveL) & avopes, To ovr 0 feos

4 a

\ ~ \
goos eva, Kal

Ns

&v TQ XPNoNP TOUTE TOUTO Néyew, OTL 1)

’ ’ ’ ’\ / \ 9 Sr ’ \ \ > ]. \
avbpwmivy godia 0Aiyov TLVOS a&la ETL Kol ovdevds Kat

/, ~ / \ /’ ~ \ ~
Paiverar TovTO AEyEw TOV SwKpATY, rpoakexpnobar o¢ 7

~ . ’ ’ © A
dup Svduart éué mapddevypo molUuevos, womEp av €l

¥ o 2 ce A ry 0 ’ 2. 3 o
€ELTTOL OTL OVTOS VMWV, W avy PWTTOL, TohWTATOS €EOTLY, OOTLS

© ’ |Z o i) \ ¥ , ’ ~ 9 0 ’
WITTEN SwKPATYS l€yvwKey OTL OVOEVOS aids €EOTL ™ al” ea

\ ’ -~ 3 2 y 8 \ » \ ~ \ ~
TPOS COPAY. TAUT OVV €Y®W [LEV ETL KAL VUV TEPUWY (nro

ovoud (ets TraxvriTa elvar, Soc-
rates, what do you mean by (how do you
define) this common quality which in all
these expressions you call quickness?

5. TavTa: see on & ovk fNoav, 22¢.
— a: cf. Euthyd. 295 a, dora TavTa
ekenéyxouar, I am most pleased to be
self-convicted of this. Change eEenéy-
youar from pass. to act., and the acc.
of the person reappears; radra in the
quoted passage, like & in the text, is a
cognate acc., which, in such colloca-
tions, is almost invariably a pron. of
some sort. G.159 and ~.4; H. 725c¢.

6. 10 8¢ kwduvever: TO O¢, in fact,
is adv., meaning practically the same
as rodvavtioy, for it introduces an as-
sertion which, being true, necessarily
contradicts the previous false state-
ment. Plato is particularly fond of
this use of 70 8. See, for the adv.
use of the art. in Att, G. 143, 1; H.
654 b. — T¢ dvr: serves to point the
contrast between this true statement
and the false one which people be-
lieve (ofovrat).

8. kal ovdevos: brought in as: a
climax after éAlyov. Cf. Theaet. 173 e,
H 8¢ diudvoia TabTa WdvTa NYNCAUEV
ocpikpd kal odd év, but his (the phil-
osopher’s) mind regarding all this as
little or nothing at all. The Lat. idiom
is much the same as the Greek. Cic.

Or.16.52, rem difficilem, di im-
mortales, atque omnium dif-
ficillimam, a thing which, heaven
knows, is hard ; or rather, hardness can
no farther go.

9. TouTo Aéyew: sc. ti 7 avbpwmivy
copia kré. The argument runs as fol-
lows: “People credit me with know-
ing all the things which I convict my
neighbors of not knowing. The truth
is far otherwise, for God alone has
real knowledge. The meaning of his
dark saying about my being the wis-
est of men is simply that ‘human
wisdom is vanity.” He does not
mean that Socrates has any other
than human wisdom. He only uses
the name ¢ Socrates’ because he needs
a particular instance.” The double
acc. with Aéyew closely resembles the
idiom kako Aéyew Twd. Cf. Crit. 48a.
See App.

10. domwep dv el: in this compressed
idiom &v alone represents a whole
clause, which the context readily sug-
gests. GMT. 53, ~. 3; H.905,3. For
a case where the ellipsis is a simpler
one, cf. Xen. Cyr. i. 3. 2, fowa(erd
Te adTdv bomep bv (sc. aomd(oiro) el Tis
wdAat gurTelpauuévos kal wdAar PIAGY
aawd oiTo.

13. Tair ovv: cf. Prot. 310e, GAN

. abT& TavTa Kal viv fkw mapa oé, that’s

dv 23

15

Rr
i

) (ESE

NS ~ \ \ / A ~ ’ ~ \ ’ ¥
Kol €EPEVVW Kato TOV feo; KOlL TWY OOTWY KO Evo, ay 23

AITOAOTTA SQKPATOYS.

¥ \ ig J \ 3 o ’ \ o ~ ~ A ~
TWO. OlWMOL TOPOV EWVAL® KOL ETELOAY [LOL (1) 00K}, TQ VEY

~ 9 /, © 3 ¥y / \ e€ \ /
BonbOav évdeikvupal OTL OVK €O0TL ag0hos. Kol VO TAVUTT)S

~ ~ ~ ~ \
THs doxollas ovTe TL TGV TNS TONEWS mpakal por oxoh).

~ ’ ’
yéyover d€wov Néyov olre TG oikeiwy, aN’ é&v mevia pupig

3 \ \ i ~ ~ / \ Koi
elut dua Tv Tod Beod Aarpeiav. ITEP
X. TIpos 8¢ Tovrois oi véou pot émraxolovlovvres ols
/ 9 ’ :
plore ool] éoTw, ol TGV TAOVCLWTATWY, GUTOL.ATOL

just why I have come to you. G.160,2,

N.; H. 719c. The object is omitted
as in Gorg. 503 d, éav (n7iis KaAds,
ebphioes, if you search in the right way,
you shall find. Cf. eidévas below in d.

14. kal §évav: notice the not un-
usual grouping under one art. of two
words connected by kai.

15. 7¢ Bed Bonbdv: cf. on imep Tob
Xpnouov, 22e.

18. év mevig pupla: cf. Legg. iii
677e, uvplay Tia poBepav épnulav; Rep.
vii. 520 ¢, mpvple Béatwov. Cf. Xen.
Oecon. ii. 1-4, where Critobulus and
Socrates converse substantially as fol-
lows: “C. I have gained reasonable
self-control ; therefore, Socrates, give
me any hints you can : tell me the best
way to manage my property. But
perhaps you think me already quite
rich enough. S. That is my own
:ase, not yours. I am sure that I am
a rich man, but I consider you pov-
erty-stricken, and sometimes I am
quite worried about you. C. I like
that, Socrates! For heaven’s sake
do be good enough to tell me what
price you imagine that your property
would fetch, if sold, and what mine
would sell for. S. I am sure a fair
buyer would be glad of the chance of
getting my house and all my property
for five minas (about eighty-five
dollars). I am sure you are worth

more than a hundred times that sum.
C. How comes it then that you are
so rich and I so poor? S. My
income provides amply for all my
wants, but for your wants you need
three times as much as you have.”
The possession of five minas must have
placed Socrates in the lowest of the
four classes established by Solon, that
of the @jres. Originally this lowest
class had few political duties and
no political rights; later on, a law
proposed by Aristides gave them the
same rights as the others.

19. jv Tob Oeov Aarpelav: cf.
Phaedr. 244 e, H pavia éyyevopévn ral
mpopmreboaca ols Ee, GraAAayhy eUpe-
T0, KaTapuyodoa mpds Oedv ebxds Te Kal
Aatpelas, madness intervened and by
prophesying to those who were in straits
Sound relief by recourse to prayer unto
the gods and the observance of their rites.
The dat. (less freq. the gen.) with ver-
bal nouns occurs chiefly after nouns
such as Aarpela and edx#, which ex-
press the abstract idea of the act
denoted by the verb; but Plato uses
both the gen. and dat. with dmnpéras,
and the gen. with érfkovpos; while the
dat. with Bonds is familiar in many
Greck authors. In the const. with
imnpeaia below, 30 a, the dat. 7¢ few
takes the place of the gen. here.

X. 2. avrdparor: of their own motion,

2 if

 &

 

i
|
i
IR
of 1
is
\ 4
1 9
4
09 ;
29 4
b §
i
3%
§
# of
X i
2 I
$
fo
sd
i i
i]
1
- i
|
2
C oo
a hh
Wl
Ed
|
3
x
2 t
2
1

 

Fi 1
3 /
a

 
 

 

 

82 TAATQONOS ATTOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 33

\ \ © ’ / ~ \ \ 9 ~ 4
Lew kal TOV NTT® ANOyoV KPETT® TOLEW. TQ Yop a\nfn,23 mn

3 > A sn 7 ’ og ’ ’S 2 ’ 2

15 olpat, ovk Gv éfélower Néyew, oTu kata mlot ‘ylyvovral
' , \ 2) ’ 5) / S \ 3d ’ & o
TPOGTOLOVMEVOL ev €OEVaL, €LOOTES OE OVOEY. ATE OUV,
olpat, puNdTpoL dvres Kal opodpol kal molhoi kai Evvre- e i
raypévos kal mlavos Méyovres mepl éuov, éumemAnkaciy 7
Spey 76 Bra. Kal TINA Kal VU ocPpodpis SuafBdAovres. €x

’ LIAS / ’ Ss 7 \Y \ ’

20 TovTWY Kat MeAnTOos pot émélfero kai Avvros kat Avkwv,

/ 3 /’ 3 ~
Xaipovow dkovovres éferalopévov tov avbpoTwr, kal 23

Epis, Fao

ER le i ih Lil EA. iy —

5 A ’ 3 \ = a8
aUTOL TONNAKLS EWE MLUOVVTAL, ELT EMLYELPOVTLY aA\ovs

9 / yy 5
5 éferalew: kdmerta, olpatr, elpiokovor mow ddboviav
3 / \ 3
otopuévwr uév eldévar 1. avbpdmwy, €lddTwy O¢ SAiya i)
J / 3 ~ » ~
ovdév. évrevlfer odv oi Vm alTdv éferalduevol éuol Spyi- !

 

5 5 3 ¢ ~ \
lovrai, aAN’ ovy avrols, kal Aéyovow ws Swkpdrys Tis d

BSA A

3 /’ \ /’ \
€oTL plapotaros kai Owapleiper Tovs véovs: kal émelddv 4
10 b J \ 3 ~ © ~ \ © /, » ~ » \ 1
7 Se €PWTQ O TL TOLGY KAL O TL OLOATKWY, EXOVUTL LEV Mé\nTos pév Vmép TOV TONTWY axOopevos, “Avvros o¢ 1
ov 1 1 oO n z h ) 7S > ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ’ NE." x
: €Y Sle; all a’yvoovaoiLy, wa o€ MN doKkGaL ATTOPELY, UTEP TWV ON LOVPY WY kal TOV moMTik®OY, Avkowr 0 TEP 24 3
= /’ ~ SM
TA 2” , ~ ~ © o s ’ S \ ’ 3H
(Era, ml Tu-10y PhooodovrTwy mpoyeLpa TavTa Né- Gv pyrépwy: Boe, Smep dpxdpevos éyw eyov, Bavpd- i
o ro ’ \ \ ue lw ~ . iad
il _YOVOW, OTL Td peTéwpa Kal TA VTO YS kat Beovs urn voui- 93 Rea) yoieel Kon &
23 ia be construed with ¢ ~ 93 . qa 4 To dA\nbq: the truth, namely 87 personal animosity, —that I am now i
$ Se EARTLo with éraxorovbobvres.  1@v yovéwy dperofvra mites dripdow- or carddnror kré. Eng. idiom requires a attacked by, etc.” R. In spite of il
i the os a wi Plato Eomparey ow, elta év épnula piAwy dvapavijs. sing. or an abstract noun more fre- 19a, 7 37) kal moTebwy MéAnTos, which i :
-. oriole oe ae effect of Socrates’s _6. SAiya 1} oudév: see on 4 i 7) 0vdéy, quently than the Greek, eg. Taba states the fact here alluded to, “in i
: ri 3 : i with the charm ex- 17D. and on oAlyov kal oddevds, 23 a. often means this. H.635. Cf. Phaed., consequence of” would here be an : }
ah hos re Smooth disoourse of 8. dA’ oy : instead of. Cf. Xen. 62d, GAN avénTos uv Hvbpwmos Tax’ inappropriate translation for ék. On i
nn aL Wisgs and Gorgias. An. ii. 1. 10, where kal od is used with hv oinfeln TabTa, pevkTéoy elvar amd the accusers, see Introd. 30. :
Ca ironed acon of the the same meaning. See App. — Zw- d rob decmérov, but a fool might perhaps 21. dmép TEV TOMTAV, Smuiovpydv, i
i ind Hi A118 - orgias, Prodi-  kparns T's: scown Tis Swkpdrys, 18 b. think this, that he ought to run away TOALTLK®V, prjTopwy : We must not press 1
us, ¢ ippias in 19 e above, where 11. &AN ayvoovoiv: see App. from his master. the word smép. The accusers merely 1
12. Td kard mwdvrev kTé.: TavTa 16. elS¢var: one man claims knowl- represented the feelings of their respec- i

 

EE

—

 

| especially the implication of Todrous
weifova: should be noticed. Cf. Prot.
317 e-319 a, where Protagoras is rep-
resented as giving a very taking ac-
count of his own teaching for the
benefit of young Hippocrates.

4. pipotvrar, elt’ émyeapovow ké.:
they are for imitating me, and then they
undertake, etc. No strict sequence in
time is here marked by elra, although
their readiness to imitate must logi-
cally have preceded the acts in which
their imitation consisted. For a most
lively description of the early symp-
toms of such imitators, ¢f. Rep. vii.
539 b. In other editt. uiuoduero: is sub-
stituted for uiwovvras, needlessly, since
this use of eira, where kgra would
seem more natural, is quite common.
Cf. 31 a, and also Xen. Mem. ii. 2, 14,
Tos avlpdmovs puAdin uf oe aidBiuevor

means the familiar well-worn com-
monplaces. These may be found in the
Clouds of Aristophanes. Xenophon,
referring specifically to the Adywr
Téxvn, which is not lost sight of here,
uses almost the words of our text in
Mem. i. 2. 31, 70 Kkowj Tols ¢uhoodpois
Umd T@Y WOAAQY émiTiudpuevoy émipépwy
avrg, (Critias) making against him the
charge made by the many against phil-
osophers in general. Cf. 18b ¢, 19b,
and see on el yap dperov, Crito, 44d.

13. 67. Ta peréwpa k7é.: the sense
requires that from line 10 3ddokwy
should be understood, or rather &:-
daokwy diaplelper Tovs véous. On this
implied 8iddorwr depend (1) the two
aces. To. ueréwpa, Ta wd is, and (2)
the two infs. vouilew and woetv. CY.
26Db and 19D.

 

edge of this, and another, knowledge
of that; the absurdity is in all cases
the same, i.e. their claiming knowl-
edge at all.
e 17. tuvreraypévas: either (1) in
phrases well combined, or (2) with their
forces drawn up, or (3) = kata Td furTe-
rayuévor, i.e. according to a concerted
plan. (2) and (3) make it refer to
the united efforts of those represented
by the three accusers. fvvrerauévws,
the reading adopted by Schanz, means
about the same as g¢odpas below, i.e.
contente, with might and main. This
would really amount to the same as
(2), and suits the context far better
than (1) or (3).
19. ék TovTwy: “it is upon this foot-
ing, —namely that of an old general
prejudice, aggravated by supervening

tive classes. The pfiropes have not been
explicitly mentioned before. For the
romral, cf. 22a; for the woh ikol, cf.
21¢; for the &nuwovpyol, cf. 224A.
Prob. the p#ropes were thought of
under the general designation of wos
rcol. This is the more likely because
the line between men who habitually
spoke on public questions, and what
we may call professional speakers,
was not yet clearly drawn at Athens.
All this lends weight to the sugges-
tion that the words kal T&v woAiTiKGY
are a later addition, for which Plato
is not responsible. See App. In
favor of keeping the words, however,
is the fact that Anytus, who, like
Cleon, was a Buvpoodéyns, tanner, came
into collision with the views of Socra-
tes rather as a moAirikds than as a

 
 

A

0,
L

84 ~ IIAATONOS ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 85 oh

A y os sv 3..\ ee.” ’ \ vv \o» o 1
low’ av et oids 7° em eyw vu TavTny my dwaSolny éfe- 24 ad TV TOUTWY avTwpooiav. Exel O0€ Tos Goer J wk party 24 {

’ 3 o 3 7 ’ o \ A
25 Méobar év ovrws ONiyw xpdve oltre mow yeyovviav. nov adikety ~Tods Te véovs Siadleipovra kal i

a : aE
Ape eo ps

~. yy 3 eC mm [) ¥y 3 ~ ’ ~ \ ~ 14
TOUT €oTw vu, @ avdpes ‘Abyvaiol, Tandy, kai vuas Oeovs ovs 7) mols vouiler od vouilovra, érepa 1
TO uév On éykAnua ToLovTY éoTIv. ¢
dno

3 A ’ 5
€yw Oé YE @

» ’ y
OUTE Ey OUTE UiKPOY AmoKpuaueros éym AMéyw od’ vmro- dé darpudvia kaivd.

—

 

’ pp ITE \ o ~ 3S. Mm m | a > =
oTeNduevos.  kaiTol olde axedOv OTL Tols adTols dey ld - ; 10 TovToV O€ TOV éykhjpartos!év ékaarov éferdowuev.

Soliaaimwieriabl eR
ents ER A ed
AREER SSS SS —-

+. A \ \ / 3 ~ et 4

yap 81) Tovs véovs aduke ue dadbeipovra.
avdpes *Abfnvaiol, adikelr dnur Mé\yrov, oTLigmovdy Xa-
pievtileray padios eis ayova kabioras avBpdmovs, mepl

A \ ’ & 5 ~ ’ \ @ © 3 \

vopaL® 0 kai Tekurpior ott andy Néyw kal orv avy éoriv
e S \7 € 5D is aN \ y ~ rr > NSN 37 ~

30 7) OwaBol1) 1) un) kal Ta alTia TavTd é0TL. Kal édv Te VOY

37 J ~

éav Te adbis {nmijoyre TadTa, oVTws €Vprjoere. b .
XI IIe \ ¢ 2.2 ¢ ~ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ S ’ \ 0 0 2

. Tlept pev ov av ol mpdTol pov karijyopol kaTyyd- TpaypdTov mpoomolovueros orovoalew kal krdecfar bv

e \ ~ © ¥
ws o€ TOVUTO OVUTWS EXEL

 

© 3 \. ed A ’ \ ~
povY avTy) €0TW Kary) daroloyia wpos vas: mpods de ME- 15 000€v TOUTW TOTWOTE EUENYTED.

\ > ’ \ ’ ° a
AnTov Tov ayalov Te kal Gulémolw, @s dno, kal Tovs Telpdoopar kal Vuty émderiad.

e ’ . \ ~ ~
VOTEPOUS [ETA TAUTA meLpAoomar dmoloyetofad.

avlis

XII. Kai pou Sebpo, & MéNyre, eimé: do Tu 4) mepi

SRR Cl a eR RR AR a

\ /
5 yap 01), womep €répwy ToVTWY SvTwWY KaTydpwy, NdBwuey | moANov molel omws @s-PENTLOTOL ol vehTEPOL €ETOVTAL ;
23 dnuovpyds. It may be that Socrates 31. ovrws evpricere : supply éxovra. 2% 2 pwv, as if we were dealing with accusers. the phrase éaywvilecar dikny, contend 24 i
\ had aristocratic views about the de- The finite verb is also left out in such Socrates distinguishes between two in a law-suit. The sing. is used dis- e gi
basing effect of manual labor similar cases, cf. Rep. ii. 360 d, Taira utv odv sets of accusers, but maintains that tributively, involving men in a law-suit. 0
to those of Plato and Aristotle. Cf. 8) ofrws, sc. Exe the charges preferred by his actual Cf. Xen. Rep. Lac.8. 4, €popot . . . kipiot Ey
Xen. Oecon. iv. 2 and 3, where Socra- XI. 2. wpos vpds, mpos MeéAnrov: b accusers (Anytus, Meletus, and Ly-  dpxovras...kararaboou kal eiptal Te kal | |

24

io TE ogre

 

tes is represented as saying that the
mechanical arts enervate men’s bodies
and womanize their souls. Also (ibid.
vi. 7) where Socrates again is made
to say that in case of an invasion the
Texvitaur will prove cowards.

26. Tavr €or vpiv: there you have,
etc, “just what I promised to tell
you at the beginning of my speech.”

27. vmooreldpevos: the meaning
here is illustrated by many places in
Dem., eg., xxxvi1. 48, Kal 7¢ undtv
omooTeAAbuevoy und aloxvvéuevor kia-
Noew kal Odvpetadai, by his readiness
to resort to absolutely undisquised and
shameless wailing and lamentation. See
also xix. 237, avdyrn 8¢, & dvdpes *Aby-
vaio, peta wappnoias diahexOivar undév
UmooTeAAduevoy. :

28. Tols avrols: sc. by just such un-
disguised and unmitigated statements.

29. airy, Tavra: both pred.

cf. 18 a, dmoroynoacbar mpds Ta HoTepa
(sc. kaTnyopnuéva) ral Tos SaTépovs (sc.
kaTnydpovs) ; the Greek idiom is &roro-
yeioOar mwpds (1) Tods dikaords, (2) Tods
katnydpovs, (3) Ta karnyopnuéva. In
Eng. the idiom is to plead (1) before
the court, (2) against the accusers,
(3) against (to) the accusations.

3. Tov ayalov Te kal ¢uAdmolwv:
that upright and patriotic man. The
addition of &s ¢no: suggests that few
or none encourage Meletus in ‘laying
this flattering unction to his soul.”

4, avbis .. . av: once more... in
turn. A strong distinction is made
between the serious accusation of the
first accusers, those who have preju-
diced the public mind, and that of
Meletus.

5. domwep éTépwy TouTWY SvTWY Ka-
™yopwy: as if these were a second set
of accusers. Cf. 19b, &amep ody karnyd-

 

con) are based upon those of his real
accusers (public prejudice and mis-
representation).

6. éxer 8 mows ode: mds, substan-
tially, implies that the quotation is
not literal. See Introd. 31 and 56. Cf.
Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 21, Mpddixos . . . wepl
Tis GpeTiis amopalveTar §Oé wws Aéywy.

7. ¢noilv: Meletus, already named
as the chief accuser.

9. To éykAnpa: see Introd. 67.

11. éyw 8¢ ye: see on 22d.

12. omovdyy xapievriferar: this is
an ofduwpov; for xapievrifecbai is akin
to male, the subst. to which, ra:did,
is the contradictory of omovds. “ Me-
letus treats a serious business (an
accusation involving life and death)
as playfully as though the whole mat-
ter were a joke.” Cf. 27a.

13. els aywva kabiords : aydv is the
usual word for a suit at law; hence

mepl Tis Yuxis eis @ydva kaTacTioal,
the ephors had power both to supersede
and to imprison the magistrates and to
bring them to trial for their lives.

14. dv: not dependent upon oddév
which is an adv. ace. See on Todrwy,
26 Db.

15. Toure: gives greater vividness
than ad7r¢ would give.

16. kal vpiv: “so that you can see
it as plainly as I can.”

XII. 1. 8evpo, elmé: come and tell
me. Cf. below, 10. 8) viv eimé. 8evpo
is freq. found instead of &xov, éAr6é.
Cf. Theaet. 144 4, OcaltnTe, dedpo mapa
SwrpdTn, come here, Theaetetus, and
sit by Socrates. Homer has a similar
idiom. Cf. Od. xvii. 629, &xeo, Sevpo
kaXéoooy WW avriov adrds éviamy, come,
summon him hither, that face to face he
may tell me himself. On the cross-ex-
amination, see Introd. 71.—d\\o mv 4 :

 

Rds mea es DER ne as
 

: » 4 \ : : . - “
” yi ‘ iJ Colt a Ane int M AADY £0 ; p for on / ; it
4 f - i v . #

 

 

 

 

 

86 : IMTAATONOS, AITOAOI'TA 3SQKPATOYS. 87 i i
. ~ S J} _ - iB
"Eywye. "160i 87) viv elmé TovTows Tis avrovs ferlavs moLet; 5 Nevrai.” "ANN apa, @ Mé\nre, 1 oL &v TY Sdnas, oi 25 il
Oho, yap ore oto fla, puélov ye ool. TOV puso yop Suacplei- | 20 €EKKAnOLAO TAL, _owpbeipovor TOUS VEWTEPOUS ; 7) KAKewoL i"
a : i |
5 pov eeupi, bs js, €ue elodyeis TOUTOLOL Kal i Berrien mowovaw amavres; Kakewor Tldvres apa, @S A
J pets * TOV O¢ on Beltiovs molovvTa LOL etme kal PNVVT OV ” €oLKED, "Afnvaio KAAOUS *hyflots TOLOUTL STAY nov, €yo : a
| adrols 7is éoTiv. 6pds, @ Mé\yte, oTL TUyds Kal ovk éxels ,- o¢ uévos DuaspBeipe. ovrw yes; (Tldvy opédpa Tadra i
} elev ; KalToL oUK aloXpov ooL SOKEL €lval Kal LKAVOV Te- Ayes.” IoAAsjy y Gof Karéyvokas Svorvylav. kal prot 1
kuijplov ob On éyd Néyw,0ti coi oder menénker ; dAN 25 dmdkpwar: 7 kal mepl irmovs ovrw oo. Sokel éxew: of |
5S 9 1» ’ ’ 5 \ ’ ’ ~n ie ’ ’ ’ \ ’ ~ ’ \ ) » a ® )
10 eimé, aryalé, Tis avrovs apeivovs moter; Ou vopor. ANA pev Beltiovs mowovvres avrovs wavres avfpwmol eval, €is b
’ ~ ’ ~ A ’ ’ \ ’ » © ( , ¢ , "1S 9 y / n 2 , i
OV TOVUTO €EPUT®, Bé\tiore, alla Tis avbpomos, OO0TLS e | Oé TIS 0 Suapleipwr ; 7) TOUVAVTLOV TOUTOV TOV. €LS LEV TLS
rT ~ ) De 5 10€. oh 4 0d a So- ¢ Be / t/ A ~ A / ANE ce e€ ’. e i
PWTOV KOL QAUTO TOUTO OLOE, TOUS VOMOUS. UTOoL, = 0 TLOVUS Los TE-WV TTOLEW 7) TAVV OALYOL, OL LTTLKOL® OL Bi
pares, oi Owkaoral. Ils Aéyes, &@ Méyre; olde Tovs 8¢ moloi, éavmep Evvmar kal xpovrar trmous, dapBeipov- ¥
/ ’ I ’ 3 \ ’ ~ / : ’ © y 2 ’ \ \ © \ ~ a
véovs mardevew oiol Té eigl kal [eltiovs morovo; Ma- 30 ow; ovy ovuTws €xelL, @ MENTE, kal mepL mTWY Kol TOY
oT 2 amie © A € \ ce QY ¥» 9 ¥ £. 7 ’ ’ ’ 3 / \ \¥ 14
| 15 Ahora. Ilorepov amavres, 7) ou puev avrwy, ol d ov; Amav- alwv ardvrov (Gov; mavrws Simov, édv Te oV kal Avv- i
: | res. ED yew mp "Hpav Néyes kat mop apboviav tév iy TOS OV Te édv Te PrTe MOAN) yap dv Tis edDdaipovia ein |
) > ’ 7 Q\ ’ 4 e \ ’ ~ . Z s |
apelovvror. ri o¢ or}; ode ol ipo ron Bedrivus mn. : 2 19. aAN dpa k7é.: cf. Evy, 290e, standing (émiTiuo) were members of i
'§ 8 tf aw 7) ov; Kat ovrot. Ti 6¢ ot BovAevradi ; Kal ot Bov- 25 30. aAN’ Spe, & pls Aus, pi 6 é Brion. the public assembly (ékkAnoia) at
it : 24 : f <) 24 | wos Av 6 TadT eimdy, éyd 8¢ ob uéuvnuar; Athens.
\ c this idiom, in Plato generally with- occasions the magistrate ewwayew, to 4 KP. moios Ktfourmos ; S. Why then, good 27. rovvavriov wav: quite the re- b i
| out the #, is an abbreviated form of bring info court, the suit. | gracious! have I forgotten, and was it ~~ verse, an adv. acc. perhaps of measure ib
| question, is it otherwise than, etc., 6. Tov wowovvTa elwé kal pnvvoov: Ctesippus who said it? C. Ctesippus? or content. Cf. Gorg. 516 e, aGAA& Td5e |
which always leads up to the answer for the acc. after unvbew, ¢f. Andoc. 1. “7 rubbish! Questions with us take a neg- uot eimeé éml Tov, el Aéyovraioi *Abnvaiot i
« assuredly ” or “most undoubtedly.” 13, odode ’Avdpduaxos éunvvoev. ative answer for granted. The use of 8a MepinAéa BeAriovs yeyovévaur, § wav i
H. 1015 b. Here the answer is im- 7. tls éorw: of. King Lear, i. 1, | apa here marks the last stage in Soc- 7odvavriov Siagpbapiivar om éxelvov. :
plied by &ywye. where Cordelia says to her sisters: | rates’s exhaustive enumeration. Only In C7it.47 bed Socrates appeals from 8
d 4. Tov Swadbelpovra: having discov- 1 know you what you are. I the ékxAnaiaaral are left. “Somebody the many and ignorant to the few, or i
ered their corrupter in me, you bring me 9. Aéyw: the pres. because Socrates : in Athens is corrupting the youth. to the one who has special knowledge. ; |]
before this court and make your accusa- is only maintaining what he has just We have seen that it is nobody else, 29. Suadfelpovorry: by its emanci- ;
| tion. In Eng. clearness requires a asserted. The ellipsis with peuéAncer ] hence possibly it is these gentlemen.” pation from the government of Joker
repetition of the éué, which in Greek is readily supplied from the context. But this is absurd, hence wdvres &pa this statement is made especially vig- i
goes only with eiodyes. 12. ojroy, oi Swkacral : these men, : *Abnaiol kTé. — ol ékkAnaracTtal: this  orous. The transition has already been 3
5. elodyeis: you summon into court, the judges. The ovTou is isolated by the e AY, - has probably crept into the text, and half made by eis wuév Tis, where in- i
commonly with eis Sikaorhpiov or els voc. from oi dukacral. The oide which [ was originally a marginal note, put instinctively we supply éor{ in spite of A
E, Tobs Swcaords, instead of which 7ov- follows includes, strictly speaking, . by way of giving a word parallel to  doke. |
{ Jl rowri is used. Sometimes also elodyewr only the HAwgrai who were present  axpoarali and BovAevral. There was 31. mdvrws Sxjmov: before this Soc- i
| is found. with the gen. of the charge. at the trial; but they are evidently good reason for varying the sameness rates waits a moment, to give Meletus iE
Hl Cf. 26a. The word, strictly speaking, taken as representing all Sasa. of discourse by saying oi év 75 éxkAn- opportunity to answer. :
{ | should be used only of the magistrates 17. oi dxpoaral: the audience, all : gia. There seems less reason for put- 32. ov rte: the answer no is made 3
/ (Introd. 70), but not infrequently it except the dikagrai, who have been ting this last idea in two ways. All prominent by the order of clauses. 2
! { is said of the plaintiff, whose charge mentioned. See on 27 b. | Athenians twenty years of age in full  éav ob ¢pije, if you say no, éav uh PATE, i
nu :
{ | ( Pio} i

 

 
ITAATONOS,

mepl ToUs véous, €l els ev pbvos avTOvS duaplelpet, oi &
do Sdelaiow. alla ydp, @ Méngre, ikav@s €miOel-
 Kkvvoal Ore obdemdmore éppdvrioas TOV véwy, Kal Taps
dmodatvers wip ocavrod duéleiav, 6TL oVOér ToL puenéNnke
mepl Gv éué elodyes.

XIII. "Er 6¢ wy eimé, @ 5 mpds- Auds Meh, méTepoy
eo oikely duewov év moliTais XpnoTois 7 _movnpots:
& 7dv, dmdkpwar: oddév ydp ToL ahem épwTw. OVX ol

\ \ ~
pev rovnpol kaxdv Tu épyd{ovral Tovs del éyyvTdTw éavTdY

if you do not say yes. ob ¢pire must primarily émdelkvvs savrév. G. 199;

be taken closely together as equiv. to
a verb of denying. GMT. 47, 3, ~.
Cf. Lys. x111. 76, éav utv ¢paorn dpivixov
amokTeival, TobTwy uéuvnolde . . . éav &
ob ¢pdory, &pedbe kté. For the use of
uh, cf. Dem. xxi. 205, &v 7° éyd ¢d, &v
Te uy ¢@.— wOANY . . . evdarpovia:
here ris applied to an abstraction par-
ticularizes it. Thus the eddaipovia is
represented as of some sort; this makes
the form of statement more specific
though still vague.

33. el Suadleiper, wpehovowv: the
pres. indic. here is not used in the
prot. that immediately belongs to the
apod. moAAY ... 4» fp. GMT. 54,1 a.
The connexion of thought requires an
intervening prot., or some qualifying
adv. like elkérws. This implied prot.,
with its apod., goes with ei diapbeipei,
operovow. Cf. 30b and, for a case
where dixalws represents the prot. re-
quired by the sense, Xen. An. vii. 6.
15, ei 8¢ mpbabev ad wdvTwy pdAioTa
pihos &v, viv wdvtwy SiapopdTards
(most at variance) eipi, was bv ET
Sikalws... bp dudv airltav Exoyut;

34. émbelkvvoar: the mid. perhaps
implies criticism of Meletus’s bearing,
since émdelkvvobar and éxidefis are
used of pretentious performances.
Here, however, ¢mdeikvvoar means

H. 812. For the added &r: clause, see
the next note, and on 7is éorw, 24 d.

36. &TL 0vdév dou kTé.: appended to
explain yy cavrod auéreav. Here at
last is the pun upon Meletus’s name
(¢f. also 26 b), for which the constant
recurrence of the idea of peuéanke
(variously expressed, éuéAnoer and
mepl OAA0D motel in 24 ¢, uélov yé oo
and peuéAnker in 24d) has already
paved the way. For similar plays
upon words, cf. Soph. 0. 1’. 395, ¢
unde eidws Oidtmovs, Symp. 185 ¢, Mav-
ocaviov 8¢ mavoauévov, and the obvious
play upon Agathon’s name, ib. 174b;
Rich. I1. ii. 1,

Old Gaunt indeed, and gaunt in being old, . ..
Within me grief hath kept a tedious fast;
Gaunt am I for the grave; gaunt as a grave.

XIII. 1. & mwpos Aws Méhnre: for
the same order, cf. Men. 71d, ob 8¢
adrds, & wpds Oedv Mévwy kré. For
a different order, see 26b, Crit. 46 a.
In 26 e the voc. is not expressed.

3. & Tdv: my friend, or my good
friend. Cf. Dem. 1. 26, GAN’ & 7dv,
odx! Bovrfoerar. The orthography is
much disputed, and we find & raw,
ara, and & ’rav.

4, Tovs éyyvrdtw éavrév dvras:
i.e. those who were most unavoidably
influenced by them.

AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS.

oBai; amokpivov, @ dyabé: kai yap 0 vopos ke\ever amo-
kpiveaar. éol ootis Rovere Brdmreofar; [ely ira.
Dépe hs wérepov ue elodyes Sedpo ¢ AN i HA TOUS
veaTépous Kal wow porépovs TolovrTa €xovra. 7 dkovra;

“Ekovra eywye. T¢ Sra, & w MéNnyTe; TO00VTOV ov € Spb

codirepos i el yhukovTov Svros THAkocde Gv, doTE OV pev
éyvwkas OTL OL piv Kkakol Kakoy Tu épydlovral del Tovs pre-
Mora mhnoiov éavtav, ol 0 dyaflo. dyabiv: ye oe 0) els

> rogoirov-dpabias 7 KO, WOTE Kal TOUTO ayvow, OTL, édv TVA

poxOnpov mojo Tov Ewdvrev, kwdvelow Kakéy TL Aa-
Bey 4 am adToD, (OTE TODTO TO TOTOVTOV-KAKOV EKOV TOL,
ws Ps ov; TavTA ye TOL Ov meilopas, & @ Mélnre, i iv
Se ovOe dAlov dvfpimar ovdéva. © aN’ 1) ov duagpleipa, 7,
el Suacpeipo, AKO, OOTE OV ve Kot dporepa reve. €l
O€ aAKwY Suapleipw, TOV TOLOUTWY Kol AKOVUOLwV afLapTY)-

7. dmokplvov: after a pause. —o 15. dyvod : for the indic. with doe,

vopos kré.: see Introd. 71 with note 1.

11. TooovTOV OV KTE.: TNALKOUTOS
and ryAwkdode, acc. to the context,
mean indifferently so young or so old.
See Introd. 30. Notice the chiastic
order: — ad S< uod

TYALKOUTOV TnAikdode.

Cf. below, 26 e fin., and Euthyph. 2b,
véos ydp tis pot ¢alverar kal dyvds:
ovoud{ovar uévror abdTdy, bs éydua,
MéAnTov, ori 8¢ Tov dfjuov Iirlels, el
Tv &v vé Exes Tir6éa MéAnTov, olov
Tetavdrpixa kal od wdvu edyéveiov, émi-
ypumoy 8¢, a young person who, I con-
ceive, is not much known: his name is
Meletus and Pitthis is his deme, — per-
haps you remember a Meletus of Pitthis,
who has rather a beak, a scrubbed beard,
and lank long hair.

see GMT. 65, 3; H. 927.

16. kakov Tu Aafeiv ar’ avdrov: in
the case supposed the kakdv is the
natural result. Tt is stated, however
(¢f. the equiv. idiom é&yafdv Tt AaBeiv
wapd Twos), as something which the
victim goes out of his way to obtain.

18. olpar ovdéva: cf. Lach. 180 a,
kowwvely Erowos (sc. eluf), oluar 3¢ Kal
AdxnTa Tévde (sc. €rowuov elvar).

19. #, dxwv: the verb is supplied
from its subordinate clause, ei dia-
¢pOelpw. More usually the verb of the
subord. clause is implied and that of
the leading clause expressed. Socrates
believed that all sin was involuntary,
oddels éxdv auaprdver. See Introd. 17.

21. kal deovoiwy: strictly speaking
this is superfluous, since TowodTwy takes

89

5 dvras, ol 0 dyabol dyalfév mv; Tldvv ye "Borw odv 607s 25
Boveras VTO TOV Euvdvror BNdmreo fa paMov 7 deere! a

26

 

 

 
——

 

 

A .
RR

 

RET

90

 

4 yy ~
frat 0 YE OKWY TOolWw.

ITAATQNOS

o
pater ov Oevpo vouos eicdyew éoriv, aN’ ila NaBdvra. 26
duddokew kal vovlerelv: dnlov yap ori ov pdbw wadoo-
ov O¢ Evyyevéalar pév por kai Oc-

“pein ” " —— > 5 4 ~ \ ’ ’ ?
25 0agal epuyes kat ovk NOéNpoas, Sevpo 8¢ elodyes, of

’ ’ \ > ’ \ toc Fri S ’ > ’ >
VOMOS €TTLY ELOGYEW TOUS KOAAOEWS O€omé€rous, all’ ov

pabrjoens.

XIV. AN\a ydp, & dvdpes ’Abyvaior, Touro pév Snlov

qa 9 \ ¥y o ’ , ¥ ’ » \
0 €Yyw eAeyov, oTL Mel\yre TOUTWYV OUTE EY OUTE JULKPOV

aps Largs

’ : 2» 9 2 NY \ 2 em ~ \
TomoTe éuéAnoer: ouws o€ 8 Aéye futv, Ths pe ds dua-
Pleipew, & Mé\yre, Tovs vewrépous ; 7) Sov 8) Sri, kara

5 Tv ypany J éypdw, Oeods 8ulddakovra pr) vouilew ods

e / [4 © \ ’ / 3 ”~ /
n mols vouilet, €repa 8¢ darudvia kawd ; ov Tada Aéyes

the necessary meaning from its rela-
tion to &xwv. Here is another case of
Socrates’s homely fashion of repeating
himself. See Introd. 55.— For the
gen. of the charge after elodyew, see
on eicdyew, 24 d.

23. wavoopar kté.: from mod we
must supply wowwy with radeouar. Such
an ellipsis as this is obvious, and
therefore not uncommon. See App.

25. épvyes xté.: you declined. So-
crates offered Meletus every op-
portunity for such an effort. See
Introd. 25. The compound Siapedyew
in this sense is more common, but cf.
Eur. Heracl. 595 f., alrol 8¢ mpoori-
Bcvres (imposing) &AAowsw wdvovs, ma-
pov aeadabar (when they might be wholly
spared), peviduecla uh Oaveiw.
From this quotation it appears that
uf might have been used before vy-
yevéobar and diddtar. See Arnold’s edit.
of Madvig’s Syntax, 156, Rem. 3.
For cases of ékpeldyew qualified by a
neg. and followed by 7d u) od and uy
ob, cf. Soph. 225b, odkér’ éekpedtera
(sc. 6 copuardis) . . . TO my od Tob
vévous (kind) elvar Tob T@v Oavuaro-

SH SG FT 9 I Erp OO 50RD

wowwy Tis eis. GMT. 95, 3. Phaedr.
277 de, Td yap dyvoev . . . odk ekpelyet
Th GAnbela uh odx émoveldioTov elvai.
GMT. 95,2 ¢. For an entirely differ-
ent case, cf. 39 a, where 7d dmwofaveiv
represents fdvarov.

XIV. 2. rovrav: sce on év, 24 c.
— oUTe péya ouTe pikpov: a stronger
way of saying o0dév. The whole is
adv., and therefore in the cognate
acc. rather than in the gen. See G.
160, 2, and 159, Nx. 2; H. 719 b.

3. pws 8é 81: all the carelessness
of Meletus is accumulated in 8uws,
and thus the adversative force of &¢
is enhanced, while 8) brings the state-
ment of contradiction to a point; that
is, marks transition from a general
to a special account of Hv Tob MeA%-
Tov GuéAelav.

4. 1 Snlov: appends a more precise
and pressing question to the first, and
anticipates the answer. In Lat. an
is used in this way. The ellipsis in
ott kara kté. is to be supplied from
Ts pe ons dragplelpew ;

6. Tavra: does not go with Aéyes
but with d:8daokwr.

 

26

 

 

AIIOAOI'IA SQKPATOYZ.

91

~ ; ’ \ 3 ntis ~
Sri Siddakwr Swaplelpw; 'Tdvv pév odv opodpa TavTa 26
Néyw.”’ [pos avrav rolvur, @ Mé\yte, TovTOV TOV Pedr wv

~ \ > ’ A 3... \ \ ~
vow 6 \oyos €aTiv, elme €TL TAPETTEPOV KAL EOL KAL TOLS

¥ ’ 3 , toy 3 5 A « diene Oe
apa vouilw eva feovs, kal ovk ent 70 mapamwar abeos
~ < e /’ 5 yy € /
0UdE Tar) 4Sikd,) ov pévroL ovomep ye 1 WONLS, AA’ eTe-
™\ im gi’ he Lidi: mm & A Ty -. ’
povs, Kal TOUT ETT O [LoL €YKANELS, OTL €TEPOVS TF) TavTaL-

} ’ o \ ’ »
15 #dai pe Ps ovre avror vopilew Oeovs Tols Te ahlovs
Lt 3 A 2 a

if ~ le... \ nr ’ 3 Id

ravra Siddokew. "Tavra NMyw, ®S TO-TAPATAY OV VOWUL-
< 4 ’ ~ /’ i

les Oeots) *Q Oavpdowe Mé\yre, va 7i TavTa A€YeLs ;

7. mwdvv piv ovv kré. : Meletus agrees
and asserts with all his might and
main, I assure you exactly that is what
I do mean. mdvv and opddpa give
strength to the assertion raita Aéyw
(cf. 25a), ody signifies agreement with
Socrates, and wér (a weakened unv)
gives him the assurance of it.

8. &v ¢ Aoyos: that is, obs Aéyoue.
A prep. is more usual, but compare
Thue. i. 140. 3, 70 Meyapéwy Ynpioua,
with id. 139. 1, 7b mepl Meyapéwr Yi-
piwopa. There are many cases where
the gen. is used without a prep. (esp.
where wept would seem appropriate).
Kr. Spr.47,7,6. Stallbaum, however,
insists that wep{ is not implied here,
and distinguishes between mepl @v ¢
Adyos and dv 6 Adyos, just as between
Aéyew (have in mind) Twd and Aé-
yew wept Twos. That such a distine-
tion sometimes holds good is plain
from other passages in Plato. Cf.
Stallb. in loc. and Soph. 260 a, gov
Epyov BY ppdew mepl 0b 7 Earl kal Gov
(sc. 6 Adyos).

10 ff. woTepov Néyes kré.: the two
horns of this dilemma are, I. wdrepov

. 671 érépovs, and IL. 4) . . . dddorew.
In I. there are two subdivisions:

 

(a) sibdakew . .. Twas Beals and (b) kal
abrds dpa . .. ott érépovs,— which is
described as the inevitable result of
(a). InIl. there are two subdivisions :
(¢) offre... Beads, — which contradicts
(b), — and (d) Tovs Te . . . diddoKew, —
which contradicts (a), but is not stated
as the result of (¢). After making
his first point («), Socrates, carried
away by the minute zeal of explana-
tion, states (b) independently of Aéyeus.
Therefore it would be clearer to print
kal adds dpa . .. TL éTépous in a paren-
thesis if it were not for éykaiers, which
in sense reénforces Aéyeis. kal avTds
gpa, being strongly affirmative, is fol-
lowed by kal otk (rather than odd¢)
¢iuf. This, in turn, being strongly
neg., is followed by od8¢ (rather than
kal ovk) adwe@. Although the sense
connects od uévror . . . éTépovs with yo-
uilew . . . Beots preceding, the syntax
connects it with roui(w elvar Oeols.
From this we supply the ellipsis with
$11 érépous, sc. voullw Beads.

14. Tour’ &omw: 7TovTto and d mot
¢ykaAels are not correl. See on Tov7’
dv ely, 27d.

17. va Ti, k7é.: sc. yévnrar, what makes
youtalk like that? See on va pot kaf,22 a.

A 2 lL Rr a wR ’

10 dv8pdat Tovrolgi. éym yap ov dvvapar pabew mworepov c
3 ’ \ 3

) Néyers dlddakew pe vouilew eval Twas Oeovs, (kal avros

26
c

tagennr 7

 ——

Be

Br

es a
R—.

gra me PS RS ——

 

i ae Set LEE

fe pa
  

 

I 5
” wr Fall Sl ai

a —

20 Nhvov Aifov nay evar, THY O¢ i of vo.

ITAATONOS,

0U0€ Yhiov ovOE aehjuny apa vopullw Oeovs eva, Go Tep ol 2

allot dvfpwmou ; ; ‘Me, AC, @ avdpes OwkaoTal, érel Tov LE

pov oLeL a Li @ hire Meéne, Kal oUT® kataipovels

+y

*Avaayo-

TOVOE Kal oleL avTOVS amrelpovs VPA AT WY elva,) WaTE OVK

18. ovdé ... oud: not even ... nor
yet.— dpa: the insinuation of Meletus
was both startling and unwelcome to
Socrates, who nevertheless meets it in
a tone of playful irony. Every re-
ligious-minded Greek reverenced the
sun. No appeal was more solemn
and sincere than that to #HAws mavd-
wns. Accordingly this appeal is con-
stantly met with in the most moving
situations created by tragedy. Ajax,
when in despair he falls upon his
sword, and outraged Prometheus from
his rock, both cry out to the sun.
Ion, before entering upon his peaceful
duties in the temple, looks first with
gladness toward the sun. Both Hera-
cles and Agave are saved from mad-
ness when they once more can clearly
recognize the sun. That Socrates
habitually paid reverence with exem-
plary punctiliousness to this divinity
not made by human hands is here sug-
gested and is still more plainly shown
in Symp. 220 d, where, after some
account of a brown study into which
Socrates had fallen, we read: 6 &¢
[Swkpdrns] eioThrer uéxpt ws éyévero
kal fies avéoxev: Emerra @xer amid
Tpoceviduevos T¢ NAige, then,
after a prayer to the sun, he took his
departure. On Socrates’s religion, see
Introd. 32.

19. & dvdpes Swkaoral: Meletus
uses this form of address, which Plato
is careful not to put into the mouth
of Socrates. See ond &rdpes k7é., 17 a.

20. ’Avataydpov: see Introd. 10.
Diog. Laert. ii. 3. 4, reports that An-

Be aa a tl

axagoras declared 7dv fav uddpov
elvar dudmupov (a red hot mass of stone
or iron) kal pel(w Tis MeAomovviiaov. . .
THY 8¢ ceAvny olkfioeis Exew Kal Adpous
kal pdpayyas (ravines). From this last
apparently the public inferred that
Anaxagoras held the belief which
Meletus attributes so wrongfully to
Socrates, i.e. Thy 3¢ oceAvyy yijv. The
real view of Socrates in regard to
such an account of the ‘“all-seeing
sun,” as was attributed to Anaxago-
ras, is perhaps represented by the
parenthetical refutation introduced
by Xenophon in Mem. iv. 7.7. For a
criticism of Anaxagoras which is more
worthy of Socrates himself, see the
one attributed to him in the Phaedo,
097 c-99d. The capital objection there
made to Anaxagoras is that he un-
folds his dogmatic views dueAfoas Tas
@s aAnbads aitias Aéyew. The argu-
ment here is: “apparently you take
me for Anaxagoras, and forget that
it is Socrates whom you are prose-
cuting.” Diogenes Laertius, ii. 3. 5,
gives a startling story about Anax-
agoras : gaol 8 adtdv mpoemeiy (prophe-
sied) Thy mepl Alyds moTaudy (Aegospo-
tami) Tov AlBov wrdow (the fall of the
stone), ov elmev éx Tov NAlov weoeioda.

21. ovrw: qualifying a&melpovs be-
low as well as karappovels.

22. ypappdroy: in literature. vypdu-
uate stand in the same relation to
pabfuara as litterae to discipli-
nae. Plato meant to be outspoken in
dealing with the stupidity which led
the court to pronounce Socrates guilty.

  

 

FRIETINR A

26

 

AITIOAOI'TA 3SQKPATOYS.

eldévar oTL TO. "Avagaydpov a TOV K\a{operiov y /é pe 26

TOUTWV TOV Mes Kal RI kai ol véoL TAUTA Tap éuov
25 pavfdvovow, a a eeatw evioTe,. €l TavY oANoD, Opaxps.

EK 0s SpxioTpds TPLOUEVOLS Swxpdrovs Rarayey, éav e

POT TOTAL €avTov eva, dMws TE Kal VTS droma ovrag

—ovk €ldévar: od hue Soc
wishes to suggest the most positive
form of statement: ofirws &mepor
ypapuudrwy eicly bore ovk Toaot OTe
kté. This vivid use of od for u# in
inf. clauses after &ore is not uncom-
mon where it is indifferent whether
the indic. or infin. is used ; thus here
dare otk loact or Gore uy eidévau
would be equally regular and doe
ovk €idévar is a mixture of the two.
See GMT. 65, 3; H. 1023 b.

23. BBMia: cf. Diog. Laert. ii. 3.
8, mpartos (sc. of the philosophers) 3¢
’Avataydpas kal BiBAlov éfédwre (pub-
lished) avyypadis.

24. xal 8 kal: and now you expect
people to believe that it is from me, etc.

25. 4...€k TNS OPXNOTPAS TrPLa-
pévous : sc. the doctrines, not the books.
— évlore: that is when, as they often
might, they chanced to see a play in
which these doctrines were promul-
gated, as in Eur. Orest. 982,

Where hangs a centre-stone of heaven and
earth

With linked chains of gold aloft suspended,

Where whirls the clod erst from Olympus

flung,
There I would go.

It is said that, in the lost play of
Phaethon, Euripides called the sun
xpvaéav Barov, a clod of gold. Such
utterances could be heard by any
who paid the price of admission and
listened to this poet’s choral odes,
which were sung éx 74s dpxnorpas. The
price of admission to the theatre of
Dionysus thus appears to have been
at most (el mdvv woAAov) one drachma.

26

93

Ordinary spectat ors paid two obols, “5

one-third of a drachma, or about six

cents. Pericles passed a law provid-/
ing that Athenians who asked for it

should receive two obols for this pur-
pose from the public treasury. The
mention here of a maximum admis-
sion price of one drachma suggests
that the better places may have been
reserved by the manager (called fea-
Tpdyns Or BeatpordAns, sometimes even
apxiréxtwy) for those who could pay
more than six cents. In the account
rendered (sce Rangabé, Antiquites Hel-
léniques, the inscription numbered 57,
lines 30-33, also C. I. 4.1. 324, pp.
171,175) for building the Erechtheum
(407 B.C.) is found the following item:
dvarduara: @vhuata* XdpTat éwyi-
Onoav dbo és & Ta avriypapa éveypd-
Yauev FFI, expenditures : purchases:
[item] bought two sheets of paper upon
which we wrote our accounts, 2 drachmas
and 4 obols. It is accordingly absurd
to suggest that a volume of Anax-
agoras at this time could have cost
as little as one drachma, even if it
could be proved that books were
sold in the orchestra of the theatre
of Dionysus; or if, that failing,
we were content with the notion of
a book-market close to the Agora.
The part of the é&yopd where the
statues of Harmodius and Aristogei-
ton stood bore the name dpx7noTpa,
but nothing goes to show that books

a.

—y

|

were sold there. mm

27. &\\ws Te kal... dromwa: the more
so because of their singularity. “ With-

 

k a — Mibshnaaioa

   

 
    
      
   
   
   
   
   
 
      
        

      
      
      
        
        
 
    
  
   
   
    
    
   
  
  
 
    
   
 
    
   
  
    
   
 
    
  
  
   
   
   
   

   
te

or
a

wo

»

 

 

A a ec
CAST HS ww
“
-
2

a ARR EN Se TT SRS PET

94

 

Und)

ITAATONOZS,

a\\’ @ TpoS Aus, ovrwai oo. Sokd ovdéva vopilew Oeov

eval; {oY} peivros pa AC oO omwoTiovw.”
30 © Myre, Kal TavTO pros, AN éuol dokets, TavTQ.

*AToTS ¥ €l,
€pot

pev yap Ookel ovTooL, @ drdpes "Abdio, TAVY Elvan

"UL ot Bam

vBpioTys kal dkdhaaTos, Kal Grannis ™Y ypadny rainy

upper Twi Kal arolao ia Kol VeoTNTL ypapacbar,

yap WO TEP dbviypa LET, Stamepolieri, a dpa yrdoe.

3»

i out taking even that into account, the

youths must know well enough that
these are not my doctrines.” Etymo-
logically &roma suggests not absurd,
but uncommon, eccentric. See the pre-
ceding note.

28. dA\\’ & pos Awds: see on @ mpds
kté., 25¢, and cf. Dem. 1x. 15, AN’
EoTv, & mpds Tod Adds, 8aTis €b Ppovav
«+. okéfaur’ &v; This marks the tran-
sition to a second argument against
the charge of atheism, and hence
Meletus repeats the charge. Socrates
has already shown the absurdity of
the charge viewed as a statement of
fact. Now he considers it as a state-
ment of opinion (odTwol cor Sok ;),
and urges that Meletus is not entitled
to hold such an opinion because it
conflicts with another of Meletus’s
own views. See App.

29. dmortos el ...cavry: you are
discrediting . . . your own (proper) self.
Cf. the use of mlavds in the contrary
sense, e.g. Phaed. 67 e, el Ti ody duiv
mibavdTepds elu év Th amoroyla A Tols
>Abnvatwy dikaoTals, eb dv Exo.

33. UBpe. TW kal dkxolaciq kal
veotTNTL: in a spirit of mere wantonness
and youthful bravado. — €owke Evvri-
@évr.: there are three possible consts.
with éowévai: (1) it may be followed
by the dat. part. as here, (2) it may
take the nom. part., (3) it may take

35 Tal JWKPATNS 0-00P0OS O01) €UoD XapierTilopévov Kal €vaw-

Carn tim aril

the inf. With the partic. nom. or
dat. éowévar means to offer the appear-
ance of (to seem like unto one) being;
with the infinitive it means to seem, on
consideration, to be. For the inf. const.
cf. 21d above; for the rarer nom.
partic. cf. Cratyl. 408 b, # ye 1pis amd
Tov elpewv (an old-fashioned word mean-
ing tell) €éo1ke kex Anuévn, and Xen.
Hell. vi. 3. 8, éolkate Tupavvio. uaAAov
A mohirelaus H86pevor. See App.
34. dwamwerpwpéve: “one participial
clause (&omep Evvriféyri) within an-
other (Sameipwuévy); as Rep. viii.
055 e, Tov del Imelkovta éviéy Tes apyi-
pov TiTpdokovTes, they (the busi-
ness men) inserting their sting, that is,
their money, into any who yields them
opportunity, keep inflicting wounds. No-
tice that it is &omep alviyua, a  mock-
riddle, one which has no answer.” R.
Cf. for the use of the pres. partic.
Phaed. 116 ¢ ad, olgba yap & HA0or ay-
véAAwy. Xen. Hell. ii. 4. 37, Ereumov
. Aéyovras bri kré. An. ii. 4. 24, §
.OKOT®Y el
diaBaivotey Tov moraudv. Id. iv. 5. 8,
Bpwtdy (eatables) 8i1edldov kal diémeume
d1ddvTas kté. See on oromodvti, 21 e.
Usually Siameipaca: takes the gen.,
but here the question which follows
explains the nature of the dudmeipa.
35. 6 gopos 8: that enlightened
man, spoken with irony. — éuov xapt-

T'Aods alTols émepdy .

ON TM PL ESO COM

€oLke dha

26

27

 

ATIOAOTTIA 3SQKPATOYS. 90

8
3 Meeipati, A ’ 5 \ \ \ »
70> éuavr® Néyovros,|i) éfamrariow avTov kal Tovs allovs 27

\ bl ’ ol \ 3 \ ’ \ 5 / \€
TOUS AKovorTaS; 0UTOS Yop €uol ¢aiverar To. évavtia Aé-
~ ~ ~ & A 5 y 3 ~

yew avTos éavt@ €v TY) Ypad)), KOOTEP av €L €LTOL® a.OukeL

Sukpdrys feovs ov voui{wv, ala BOeovs vopilwv. kairo

10 70976 éorimailovros.s -. a bd nls
XV. Ewvemaréjaobe 54, @ avdpes, 7 pot Guelvercy
TOVTQ, Aéyew © a 8€ 1] pv dmdékpwat, @ MéMyre © vues 0,

Saas, Pa oo BAM

omep Kat apxds Duds mapyrnadpy) perma dé pot pb
Bopuficiv, dav &v 76 €lwlore TPOTE Tos Ayous ToLdpaL.
5 éoTw dots awlbpdmwr, @ MéMyre, avlpdmeia perv vouile
mpdypar elvad, dvGpdimovs dé ov vouile; dworpwéo to,
@ avopes, kal pn da kai dA\\a Gopufietio: éol ooTis

UTToUS LEV OV vopilet, rma O€ i 7 adMaras

~~

Lev ov voile elva, a VAN TIO d¢ TPAYROTA ; ; OUK €0TW, O
y ’ ~ 3 \ \ IA 3 /’ 0 3 /
10 apLOTE avd pv + €L MM gv Bov €L ATOKpWwaAo al, €yw gol

ways trying to get up a disturbance ;
more lit., disturbing in one way and
another. Cf. Xen. An. i. 5. 12, kal od7os
uty (Menon’s soldier) avrot fuaprev
(missed) &AANos 8¢ Alby (sc. Inot Tob
KAedpxov) kal &AAos, elta woAAol
kpavyis yevouévns. Ibid. vii. 6.10, peta
TovTOV BAA0s avéaTn duoiws kal &AAos.
See also Euthyd. 273 b, dre Awvved-
dwpos kal 6 Ev0Udnuos mpdTov uev émi-
ardyTes (stopped) SieAeyéaOny GANHAOw,
GAANY kal SAANY &moBAémovTes eis
huas (now and then glancing at us).
The acc. is after the analogy of 8dpv-
Bov OopuBeiv, i.e. a cognate acc. G.
159; H. 715. Here Meletus (cf. 254)
gives no answer apart from such
demonstrations of disgust as Socra-
tes complains of. The words in ¢
below, dmd TovTwyl dvaykalduevos sug-
gest that the court was finally forced
to interpose. Of course many “waits”
of one kind or another may have oc-

evrifopévov: for the gen. of noun
and partic. with yvdoera:, see exam-
ples cited in note on 7a0duny, 22 ¢

36. Tovs GA\ovs: see on Tois AAs,
b below. :

37. To évavria Aéyeww avros éavrg
kté.: to contradict himself in so many
words. A more positive phrase than
¢vavtia éuavtg Aéyew above.

XV. 2. ravra Aéyewv:
SwkpdTys . . . Oeods voutlwy KTé.
b 4. Tous Adyovs: the art. has nearly
the force of a poss. here. G. 141,
N. 2; H. 658. In many such cases as
here the art., strictly speaking, points
out something which the context has
already suggested. To all such sug-
gestions a Greek audience was very
sensitive. Hence the freq. and deli-
cate use of the dem. art. in Greek.
G. 143; H. 6564. On the method of
Socrates, see Introd. 18, 21, 25, 26.

7. d\\a kal GA\a OopuBelrw : be al-

sc. adikel

fr ———

 

nS a EE oe a “SS
-—

x
y
p ws ER .

BE lL ie irl

 

 
 
A neva
bung a

a
ten

——

 

96

TE MIS

ni

3

Hi

ou PP pve,
NY ST
pa " w & pn

ITAATONOS

}

’ \ ~ ¥ aA be Anley
Aéyw kal Tois dA\ows TovToioi. dA\a 70 émi Todrw ye dmd- 21
y mp ’y : 0)
kpwar: eal ooris Saupudvia uév vopilew mpdypar eva, o

\ » \ 5 , s " . - ~7% i,

daipovas 8¢ ov vouiler; Odk éorw. ‘Qs avyoas ote us- 1 pd
5

YS amekpive vTo TovTwYL avaykalduevos.

> ~ ’
OVKOvY Saud -

\ ’ \ / C~ IPRA
15 via per ¢ns me kat vouilew kal Suddokew, er’ ody kaa

y ~
eure) Tahad © aN’ oDv Saupdvid ye vouilw kara TOV oOov

’ \ \ ~ \ [/Qjoe pv A ta
Aoyov, kal TavTa kai Slwpdow év Tf dvriypady. el O¢

’ / \ /’ o \ i¥ € Aa
Oarpudvia vouilw, kai Saipovas Sjmov roA\y) avdyrn| vou-
2 3 3 9 { x
Lew pé éorw: ody ovtws éxer; éxer Of: Tibpul ydp oe

27 i :
p curred during such a cross-examina-

tion as is here given.

11. 7ois dA\Aoiws: all except the ac-
cuser and the accused ; the audience
(a above) and more esp. the dikacral.
— 70. éml TOUTQ ye amokpwar: please
to answer the next question. “This will
go to the bottom of the whole mat-
ter.” éml TolTe is almost the same as
peta TovTo. éml with the dat. easily
passes from the meaning of nearness
to the kindred sense of immediate
succession in time. The acc. is like
10 épwTnbév (the question which has been
asked) or Td épwrduevoy, the question
which 1s being asked, freq. used with
amokpiveoat.

13. as avqoas: Oh! thank you!
Used absolutely, like iuvare in Lat.
— poyts : see on udyis wdwv, 21 b.

16. dAX’ ovv: not essentially differ-
ent from & odv. See on 17a. — Saur-
pond ye: “To make the reasoning
sound, datudvia here and Saudia wpdy-
unata above ought to mean the same;
which it must be acknowledged they
do not. It must be observed, how-

. ever, that the original perversion lay

with Meletus, whose charge of daiud-
via kad was based simply on Soc-
rates’s 7d Oawdvior. Now by this

EIA i

[4 ~ \
20 opoloyovvra, €mewdy) odk dmokpive. Tovs 8¢ Salwovas

Socrates meant a divine agency, but
Meletus had wrested it into the sense
of a divine being. So that here the
equivocation of Meletus is simply re-
turned upon himself. Contrast, where
Socrates is speaking uncontroversi-
ally of his monitor, the distinctly adj.
use, 0eidv Ti kal dawudviov, 31¢.” R.
17. rq dvruypady: elsewhere and
in its stricter use this means the
written affidavit put in as a rejoinder

“by the accused; rarely as here, the

accusation or the written affidavit of
the accuser. So in Hyper. Fux. §§ 4,
33 (Col. 20, 40). Harpocration on
the word avriypagpn says, evidently
referring to this passage: MAdrwy 8¢
év Th SwkpdTovs amoloyla TO alTd KaAel
avTwpooiav kal avrrypagpiv. See Introd.
69 and ~. 1 and 2.

19. &xev: repeated by way of an-
swering yes after olrws Eyer; simi-
larly the simple verb is often repeated
after a compound form. See on
Crit. 44d.— 8: certainly. Such an
affirmation is not only self-evident
(justified by common sense), but also
follows from the admission which
Meletus already has made.

20. Tovs Salpovas k7é.: the defi
nition here given is consistent with

0 3 re tS

I 1
( ] nh!
00"
{ A
LAE

27

nV
i b

 

 

 

25

27

AIIOAOT'TIA 3SQKPATOYS.

&

ans)

~ ~ \ A y
ov 7rou Beols ye vyyovpela 4) Oeav maidas; ¢ys 7) ov;

-— Ln ca perso e

/ { 5 ~ L' 22 , e ~ ¢ \ Ppp Enig,
Ilavv ye) Ovkovv etrep dalpovas Myovpal, ws OU dns, EL

\ / / In ~ 3 A ¥. ay / /
pey, Beoi Twes ewow ol daipoves, [TOUT av €m 0 €yw dpi
i mt

Ils. os LE
oe avirreafar kal ydpievrileafar,)Peods ovx ryyodpevov
/ 3 \ 0 \ - € ~ 0 (A 3 o / S /’ ova
Ppdvar éué feos ad nyetofar maw, émrednmep ye Oqiuovas
~ ~ ~ ~ § 7 i \
Hyodpar: el 8 ad oi dalpoves Pew waidés ela vobouTives

5 ~ Unpiett yi Z ~~ $ CN RA \ y Aten + \ , A
7) €k voppov 7) €k TWoY aAAwy, wv on kat Aéyovial, TiS av

awbpdTov Oedv pév maidas ryoito eal,

> os RX & Ww

Oeods S¢ © ;

e/ / \ A ¥ y & A » © \ ~
OMOLWS yap ay aTOoTOoV El), WOTEP ay EL TLS LTTWY [LEV maL-

Greek usage from Homer to Plato.
In Homer 0eds and daiuwv, applied
to any divinity in particular or to
divinity in general, are all but inter-
changeable terms. The distinction
between them, if distinction there is,
suggests itself rather in the adjs.
derived from them than in the two
nouns themselves. Hesiod, Op. 108-
125, calls the guardian spirits that
watch ever men daluoves; to the
rank of “8aiuoves he says those were
raised who lived on earth during
the golden age. He distinguishes be-
tween Oeof, daiuoves, and. fpwes, and
this same distinction is attributed to
Thales. On’ this Plato based the
fancy expressed in the Symposium
(202e): wav Td datpdviov perald
(intermediate) éari Beov Te Kal OvnTov

. éppmvedoy kal diamopOuevov (inter-
preting and convoying) Oeols Ta wap’
avbpdmrwy kal avlpdmois Ta mapa Bed,
Tov uty Tas defges kal Oualas, T@v de
Tis émrdtets Te kal auolBas (commands
and rewards) Tv Quai.

21. ¢ys 7 od: three Eng. words,
yes or no?, will translate this. See
on ov gre, 25D.

22. elmwep Salpovas ryovpar kTé.: a
complex prot., which falls into two
simpler conditions, each of which ex-

cludes the other. The latter apply
the broader supposition erep daiuovas
fHyoduat in turn to alternative apodoses,
both of which it limits. Cf. Xen. An.
vii. 6. 15, for a very similar construc-
tion: émel ye why Yeldesbar dptato
Sens wep! Tov mood, — this might
readily have taken the form of a
prot., — el uév émawd addy, dikciws
4v ue kal aiTigole kal wiooiTe: ei B¢
mpdafev adT@ . . . pikos bv viv... dia
popdTatds, elm, wos bv Er dikalwyi..
0p Dudy aitiay Eo ;. On the com-
bination of indic. and opt, see. GMT.
54, and on el SiagpBelpe, kte.; 25 b
above. iis

23. Tour Av elm: by Touro the pre-
ceding conditions, efrep . . . Hryotuar and
el...daluoves, are grasped into one; and,
thus combined in Todto, they become
the subj. whose pred. is the suppressed
(éxeivo) antec. of 8. To § oe aivirTesta:
kal xapievti(eafar is appended ¢dva,
which explains it and has the same
subj. ; all this points back to feods ov
voul (wy GANG Oeods voui(wr, 27.9.
27. dv: equiv. to é& dv, for “ when
the antecedent stands before the rela-
tive, a preposition (in this case éx)
belonging to both usually appears

27
d

only with the first.” See It. 1007. — |

’
+ you know. ;

Toad.

~e
bo .
J

   

     

ee

8 doh a 4
ST i MT RT ee Se cs Ed = Rls

A SS
-

HE a Se SA

        
 

cir LE Lil i

     
   
     
     
     
 
   
   
   
  
   
    
   
    
  
    
  
    
   
  
   
  
  
  
    
   
    
   
   
     
 

en pp

  

      
     

   
98 MAATQONOS

385% 7

30 das Vyolro [7] Kal Ovwv, TOUS MULOVOUS, imrmrovs 0¢ Kal

ovous um Wyse evar. aN, & Mépre, | ovk ow Smws

ov roTaL [ovxi/ ldromepdpevos piv Déypdijo THY ypadny

. Lapes occ
To Mm

2 35 Opdrwv, oS [ov] TOV avToD éori Kal Saupudvia Kal Pera

ows O¢ ov Twa melfous bv Kol opikpdu-volo Lxovre av-

« Darin Kol 0D TOD avToD pire Saiuovas pe Oeovs pajTE
Npwas, ( (ovOeuia pay ETT. that

XVI. ’AN\a yap, @ avdpes "Afnaiow, |S] Lev éyw OVK

9
adikd kara T)v Meljrov ypadiy, ov moA\ns po. Soke
a» > ’ 5 Ne \ \ ~ a \ ns ~
erat amroloyias, AAG kava Kal TavTo: O Oe Kal €v TOS
» ¥ ’ S ’ \
eum poo fev e\eyov, oTL TOA) uot améy ea yéyove kal
\ / Ny © bh / 5 \ ~ 9% y A
5 pos moAlovs, €V LOTE OTL aM és €0TL. KOL TOUT ECT O
pt aiprjoet, édvmep aipp, ov MéAnTos ovo€ Avvros, aN’
7m Tov moAGr Siafol] Te kal GOdvos. & 61) mollovs kai

27 30. Tovs npwovovs : these words do which might be dispensed with. See
© not interfere with the grammar, al- App.—mel@ois dv os [od]: is not
though they make sad havoc with simply pleonastic, as in the case of
the sense, unless 4 disappears. two negatives in the same clause, but
33. | amopwv & Ti, kré.: this no it is irrational, and can hardly be
doubt was Socrates’s real view of the right. mws means how or by which
case of Meletus (cf. 23d), whereas after unxavf. A similar use of és is
all that precedes is only to bring explained GMT. 65, 1, N. 4.

\ 27
. ©

rary) 9 bropory; “0 TUL éyralois uot - dn bes adiinud +

28

27
e

9

home to the court how foolish and XVL 1. d\\d ydp, ...Tadra: this

self-contradictory the charge is. amo- phrase dismisses one topic to make
pov and amomeipduevos, in connexion room for the next one.

with éypdyw, refer to continued action 5. ¢ épé alprjoer, éavmrep alpy: will
in past time. —éykalois: the opt. be the condemnation of me, if condemna-
represents Meletus’s original reflexion tion it is to be. aipeiv and aAiokeofa
ri éykaA®; The subjv. might have are technical terms of the law, as is
been retained. GMT. 71. the case with ¢edyew and didkew.

34. dmwws 8¢ ov k7é.: here Socrates 7. 8: certainly. The allusion is to
closes his argument to the effect that facts generally known and acknowl-
it is a contradiction in terms to say edged, cf. 31 d. — woAAovs kal d\\ovs
of one and the same man (1) that he kal dyabovs: instead of kal &Arovs
is a complete atheist, and (2) that he  moAAods kal &yaois. The first kal is
believes in daiudvia. The second To the idiomatic kal of comparisons. Cf.
avrod must be regarded as redundant, 22d, dwep kal of momral, and the idiom
a simple repetition of the first one ef Tis kal #AAos. The second «ai is

a

pr ET,

# i

BT RA
RE ag . es

3 i ®t
ga :
bo

4
i
y

Fos.

 

 

ATIIOAOI'TA 3SQKPATOYS.

y \ \ oy 0 2 \ NS tual
a\ovs kal dyafovs dvdpas 7jpnkev, olpar 3€ kal aiprjoew: 28
sq \ \ A. 5 9.8 A 8’ A a » a
over 8¢€ Sewov wi) év éuol oy. Lows O Av 0DY €LTOL TLS® EIT b

’ ’ ’ 2 / ~ ’ ’ ’ /
10 OVK ci @ 2orpares, TOLOVTOV Clik Chk i

é& ov Ku Ovvevels url amoblavety ; ! yw Oe TOUT® aw dikaLov :

FoR re

Adyov arethroyut, ¢ OTL OV KoA Gs

x Array

2 tela

AéyeLs, @ vfpore, €L OLEL

wy fp net
O€wv kivOvvov smokoyil sit. (700 ow 9) refvdvad dvopa> 3
[rou TL Kal apple Sn ow, GAN ok ékeivo plea

a——-

15 OKOTEL, oT PUTTY, wopp? Scie 3 mM aoLKa mpizges Kal

drdpos dyafov épya 7 Kakov. pavlol yap av fr ye og
—t

\Syw elev TOV pbéar 6 000L €V Tpoly rereheurijkacw oL TE ¢

dot kal 6 Ths ©éridos vids, ds TogoUTOY TOU KwovvoVU

 

equally idiomatic, and joins mwoAAods
with a second adj. Cf. moAdol kal
cool avdpes.

9. ovdév 8¢ Sewvov pn év...oTy: the
rule is in no danger of breaking down in
my case. Cf. Phaed. 84 b, obdev dewov
uh PpoBnbi, we need not apprehend that
the soul will have to fear. Gorg. 520 d,
and Rep. v. 465b. There is a touch
of irony in this way of saying “I do
not think.” Socrates as it were en-
lists on the side of the rule. This
idiom throws no light on od w#f with
subjv. or fut. indic. GMT. 89, 1,
Nx. 2. For the quasi-impersonal use
of ari, come to a stand-still, cf. Arist.
Eth. Nic. vi. 9. 9, orfioeTar yap kaxel.
Theaet. 153d, €ws uev dv 0) wepipopa 7
kwovuévn kal 6 HAs, mdvra &rTi Kal
odetar...el 8¢& araln Tovro &amep
de0éy (tethered), mdvra xpiuar’ av dia
¢Oapely. In such contexts the aor.
orivar denotes the entrance into a
state of quiet or collapse. GMT. 19,
N. 1.— lr’ ovk aloxvve: a question
indicating surprise. The perversity
of Socrates, in view of the fact just
recited, is unreasonable. When such
a question is accompanied by an
urgent statement of the reason for

surprise (here TowdTov...é of, kré.), it
may be introduced by elra or éreita,
otherwise not.

11. &ya 8¢ kré.: cf. Crit. 48d for
the same thought, and Xen. An. iii. 1.
43, for its application to the risks of
war. In the Ajax of Sophocles, 473
480, the same idea is brought to the
following climax: —

Honor in life or honorable death
The nobly born and bred must have.

13. kiv8uvov Tov {Mv 1M Tebvavar:
the question of life or death. Cf. for
the use and omission of the art., Rep.
i. 334 e, kiwduvedouev (perhaps we, etc.)
otk pds TOv PpiAov kal éx0pdv
0és0ar (have defined). Cf. for the
thought, Aj. 475-476: —

7( yap map’ Nuap Nuépa Tépmely Exel

npoobeioa kavadeioa Tov ye katbaveiv;

15. drav mwpdrry: whenever he does
anything. GMT. 62. See App.

17. Tov fqpbéwv: ie. Tar MHpdw.
Hesiod, W. and D. 158, calls the
fourth race, &vdpav npdwy Belov yévos of
karéovtar | fuifeor kTé., and he counts
among their number the heroes that
laid siege to Thebes and to Troy.

18. ¢ mis @érdos vids: any appeal ¢
to the example of Achilles was always

 

99
Kf (a v4
a’

100 ~ " IIAATQNOS

/ \ \ 3 / €
KaTePpovnoe mapa To ailoxpdv TL Vroueval, Gore ered 28
20 elmer 1 wiRTHP AvTG 0 ve E z v

Nn pRTYP w mpobupovpéve “Exropa dmokteival,

\ 3 ¢ ’ sn O)
feos odoa, ovrwoi mws, Os €yw olpal @ mal, el TIUWP)-

’ ~ ’ ©
oes Ilarpokde 7 éraipw Tov ¢ovov kai "Exropa dmrokrte-
~ 3S..\ 9 3 3 / ’ / 5
veils, avros amobaver® avrika ydp Toi, ¢moi, wel

“E ’ ¢ ~ ¢ Sa A ’ ’ a oN
KTOpQ TOTMOS ETOLMLOS*® O O€ TAVUTA AKOVO AS TOV MEV

25 Bavdrov kal Tov kwdUvov GAiydpnoe, mold 8¢ pallov

’ \ ~ = \ A \ ~
Ocioas 70 {Mv kaxds @v kai Tols ¢dilois wy) Type,

S 7 >... ’ ’ ~ ~
avTika, ¢noi, re@vainv dikyy émbes to ddukovrre, iva.

py) €vbdde pévw karayéhaoros mapa vnuol kopwvicw
axfos dpovpys. uy avrov ole ppovricar Havdrov kal
30 KwOUYoV; oUT® ‘yap éxei, & avdpes *Abnvaiod, my alnbeia-
ov av Tis éavrov Tay ynodpuevos Bé\tioTov evar 7) vr

28

oc very telling. The enthusiasm with

which all Greeks regarded this hero
was shown by temples raised in his
honor and by countless works of art
in which he appeared. Homer, Od.
xi. 489, tells how Achilles found his
favored condition in the lower world
hardly to be endured. The post-
homeric story-tellers said that he was
living in the islands of the blest. Qf.
Symp. 179 e, where this same scene be-
tween Thetis and Achilles is quoted,
and the scholion (Bergk 10) to Harmo-
dius: —

No, sweet Harmodius, thou art not dead,

But in the Islands of the Blest men say,

Where lives swift-foot Achilles far away,
And Tydeus’ son, they say, brave Diomed.

We hear that Ibycus, and after him
Simonides, wishing no doubt to make
Achilles’s happiness complete, repre-
sented him as married to Medea in
Elysium.

21. eds ovoa: added in a very un-
usual way, because the circumstance
has unusual weight. The utterance
of Thetis was not only prompted by

the natural anxiety of a mother for
her son, but also was inspired by the
unerring wisdom of a goddess. Cf.
Hom. Od. iv. 369 and 468, 0ecol 5¢ Te
wavra loacw. The passage from Hom.
Il. xviii. 70 ff., is quoted rather loosely
in part (odrwel mws), and partly word
for word.

24. 6 8 ravra dxovoas kTé.: at
this point &ore is forgotten. The
long speech and explanation given to
Thetis makes this break in the const.
very natural. In fact, this clause is
as independent as if a co-ord. clause
(with or without wév) had preceded
it.— Tov Oavdrov: notice the excep-
tional use of the art., which is usually
omitted with @dvaros as an abstract
noun. Cf. 28e,29a,32¢, 38¢,39ab,
Crit. 52¢. For the art. used as here,
cf. 29a, 404d, 41 c.

29. pn... ole: see on GAN’ dpa, 25a.

31. 1 vn’ dpxovros Taxfy: instead
of 7) on &pxovros keAevabeis or even
raxfels. Some such expression is
called for grammatically by the form
of the first alternative 9 %ynoduevos

28
c

Y M/F 1 Té re dbp)

 

/

- z
Pe

SOC WW

PTC

ef JI \
- {3
rel 611 v AT ; becom hig ‘oak wf Jerr

Ase al A [7

wean editn. ATTOAOTTA SOKPATOYS.

9% fi Cry Jb Lf y Per

v i N A A ~ S - ’ \ S ~ ’
apyovros Taxly, évravba Oci, ws uot dokel, uévovra Kw- 28
Swede undév vmoloyuduevor pire Oavarov pire allo

poder TPO TOV aloXpPov.

XVII ’Eyw odv dewa dv elnr-eipyacuévos, & dvdpes

kré. This irregular interjection of
the finite const. represents the facts
better. The commander’s order, if
given at all, was peremptory, and re-
quires a more positive statement than
the less urgent yynoduevos kré. In the
sense vm’ &pxovros Taxfy is the alter-
native of éavrov 7dén. See App.

33. vmoloyifopevov: as in b above,
UmoAoyi(eafar means take into account,
i.e. in striking a balance. Cf. Crit.
48d, where nearly the same idea is
expressed. For a detailed descrip-
tion of the process of striking a
balance involved in dmwoAoyi(eaOar, cf.
Phaedr. 231b, oi uév épdvres oko-
TovoLY & Te kak@ds 8iélevto . . . kal &
Temoukagw eb, kal dv elxov mdvov
wpoaTi0évTes NyobvTar wWdAar THY
atlay amodedwrévar xdpiv Tols épwuévors.
Tos 8¢ uh) épdoiv ote THY TGV oikelwy
auéreiav dia TovTo €oTi mpodacilecbar
ote ToVs mapeAnAvOdTas wévovs
dmoroyileaOar kré. The force of
omé here is very near to that of arti,
and, so far from primarily indicating
a process of subtraction, it involves
first of all an addition.

34. wpo Tov aloxpov: moral turpi-
tude (tur pe), not death, was the harm
which Socrates struggled to avoid at
any and every price. Cf. 29b and
Soph. Ant. 95 ff.

Nay, leave me and my heart’s untoward plan
To suffer all thou fear’st; naught will I suffer
That shall estop me from a righteous death.

XVII. Having established the prop-
osition that disgrace is more fright-
ful than death, Socrates can now
answer the question of 28 b, if he can

TET
>
ET

)

prove that it would have involved,
and would still involve, disgrace for
him not to have followed the pursuit
which has brought him in danger of
his life. This point he makes clear by
an appeal to the analogy of military
discipline, which, as he claims, applies
to his relations to the gods. He is a
soldier in the army of Apollo.

1. 8ewd. av elqy . . . Nmwoypr Tv Ta-
gw: much here depends upon disen.-
tangling past, pres., and fut. See
GMT. 55,3, Rem. The prot. (limiting
the apod. Sewa bv ely kré., lit. I should
prove to have done a dreadful thing) in-
cludes various acts in the past which
are looked upon from a supposed time
in the fut. It falls into two parts: one,
marked off by uév, states (in the form
of a supposition) well-known facts in
the past; the other, distinguished by
3¢, states a supposed future case in
connexion with certain present cir-
cumstances. See on 5. The outra-
geous conduct for him would be with
this combination of facts and convic-
tions, after his past fidelity to human
trusts, at some fut. time to desert his
divinely appointed post of duty: if
while then I stood firm I should now
desert my post. The repetition of uév
and 3¢ respectively is for the sake of
clearness. For the same repetition
cf. Isocr. vii. 18, wap’ ols mév ap
uhTe puharh ute (nuia T@v TowITWY
kabéotnke unl ai kploes axpiBers elo,
mapa TobToLs per Swpbelpesdar Kal
Tas émieikels TAY Pplaewy, mov d& ufTe
Aabetv Tots aducovor Pddiby éaTi ufTe
PAVEPOTS YEVOUEVOLS CUYYVOUNS TUXEW,

 
Lie ae. Thon 3 ln Aed Fi.

102 ITAATQNOZ : ATTOAOTTA SQKPATOYS.
r er whou
"Abypaio, €L, OTe | per pe ol apxovTes érarrov, ols DpueLs ém AnNo, TOTE ev loD jéxetvor € ETATTOV €fLEvoV Gomep Kal 28
-et\ea be dpyew pov, kai év Tloridaia kai év’ Apdurdler kal

5 dANOS TIS Kal L exw SVvevor dmoblaveiv, Tou 518¢ | Oeov Td1TOVTO $) 4%

-

vrata & éetirhrovs ~ylyvesbar Tas
kaxonlelas, for (they knew) that while
among those who have neither established
safequards nor penalties for such crimes
nor any strict organization of justice,
that while among these, I say, even
righteous characters are corrupted; at
the same time, where wrong-doers find
it easy neither to conceal their transgres-
sions nor to secure condonation when de-
tected, there I say (they knew that)
evil dispositions end by dying out. Cf.
also Gorg. 512 a. Notice that the
uév clause is important only with ref-
erence to the 8 clause, upon which
the main stress is laid; the §¢ clause
is made prominent through the con-
trast afforded by the logically subor-
dinate uév clause. This same relation
is indicated in the Eng., French, and
German idiom by the use of some
word like “while” in the uév clause.

2. ol dpxovres: not the nine ar-
chons, but, as the context shows, the
generals in command upon the field
of battle.— vpeis etAeoe : the dikaoral
are here taken as representing the
whole 8juos, from which they were
selected by lot. See Introd. 66. Per-
haps Socrates has also in mind the
other Athenians present at the trial.
See on 24e and 25a. The generals
were elected by show of hands (xeipo-
roviz) and their electors were the éx-
kanoweatal. Cf. 25a.

3. év ITombaiq . . . AqAie : Poti-
daea, a Corinthian colony on the
peninsula Chalcidice, which became
a tributary ally of Athens without
wholly abandoning its earlier con-
nexion with Corinth. Perdiccas, king
of Macedonia, took advantage of this
divided allegiance to persuade the Po-

tidaeans to revolt from Athens, which
they did in 432 B.c. The Potidaeans,
with the reinforcements sent them by
the Peloponnesians, were defeated by
the Athenian force under Callias. For
two whole years the town was in-
vested by land and blockaded by sea,
and finally made favorable terms with
the beleaguering force. In the en-
gagement before the siege of Po-
tidaca, Socrates saved Alcibiades’s
life. Cf. Symp. 219 e-220e, where
Alcibiades gives a most enthusiastic
and witty account of the bravery and
self-denial of Socrates during the
whole Potidaean campaign, and says
of the battle in question: 8re yap 7
udxn Hv é (after) fs éuol kal TapioTela
(the prize for gallantry in action) &sc-
ocav oi aTparnyol, oUdels dAAos éue Eow-
cev avfpdmwy A obros, TeTpwuévoy (when
I was wounded) od é0éawy dmolimeiy,
GAA curvdiéowoe kal Ta SmAa Kal abTOV
éué. Alcibiades says that Socrates
ought to have had the prize which was
given to himself by favoritism. Cf.
Charm. 153 b ¢.— The battle at Am-
phipolis, an Athenian colony on the
Strymon in Thrace, took place in the
year 422. The Athenians were defeat-
ed, and their general, Cleon, perished
in the rout, while Brasidas, the Spartan
general, paid for victory with his life.
— Delium was an enclosure and a
temple sacred to Apollo in Boeotia
near Oropus, a border town sometimes
held by the Athenians and some-
times by the Boeotians. The battle,
which was a serious check to the
power of Athens, resulted in the de-
feat and death of their general, Hip-
pocrates. Cf. Xen. Mem. iii. 5. 4, a¢’
ob # Te abv ToAuldy 7év xiMlwy év Ae-

 

Le ws yb ofr Te kat SréhaBov))pikogd ovVTd [LE Sei {qv

Kal éefdlovta ¢ Geman Kal TOVS d\ovs, Jevrata]SEpofSn-

e “akd

eis 7 dao 7) do Sroiv-nplype Amour jy Taw. 29

Qewdy Toy ei, Kal ins dnl 76; TOT av ME Oikalws elodyol
Vetus

10 TIS €LS duaorpior, OTL OV voplde Oeovs evar amelbov

7] pesvnely Kal dediws Aavatov Kal 0Loperos agodos evar,

, (neds)

OUK-WV. TO yap TOL favarov dediévad, ® dvdpes, 0VOEV

» v § ~ \ 3 \ Oy ~

do éoTiv 7) dokew Godoy [ear fn ovra: Ookew yap

J / 3 3 3 \ J \ \ /

eldévar €oTiv a OUK OlOEr. 0iO€ ev yap ovoels Tov Pdva-
pe 2

he Hd (a

Badely ocuupopd éyévero kal 1% ued

‘ImmokpdTovs éml Agile, ék Tol-
Twy TeTamelvwTar (has been hum-
bled) pév % Tév ’Abnvaiwy wpds Tols
BowTovs kté. Notice that both Plato
and Xen. say én! (not év) AnAlw, be-
cause at the time there was no ex-
tended settlement at or near the place.
For the gallantry of Socrates in the
retreat, cf. Symp. 221 ab. Alcibiades
was mounted, and therefore could ob-
serve better than at Potidaea how
Socrates behaved, and he says: dor
Nv Bedoacbar SwkpdTn, OTe amd AnAiov
Puy avexdpet TO oTpatémedov . . . wpd-
Tov pev §aov mepiijy Adxmros (his com-
panion in flight) 7¢ &ugppwr elvai:
Ereita dfAos Av... 011 Tis AYeTau
ToUTOV TOD UVdpos, udAa éppwuévws Guv-
vertar. See also the similar testimony
of Laches in Lach. 181 Db.

4. &pevov kal ékuvduvevov dmobaveiy :
The repeated allusions which are scat-
tered through Plato’s dialogues to the
brave conduct of Socrates in these
battles show that it was well known
at Athens. — domwep kal alos Tis:
just like many another man. He is
careful not to make too much of the

|
/

med ~ knot

facts. The indef. 7is here means
some, 7.e. any Indefinite person, be-
cause many persons are thought of
under &AAos.

5. Tov 8¢ Oeov TaTTOVTOS: i.C. NOW
that my post is assigned me by the god,
a circumstance of the supposition e:
Almowuwt, which is repeated in évravfa.

6. ws éy® @1fnv Te kal vméhafov:
as I thought and understood, sc. when
I heard the oracle which was given
to Chaerephon. —8¢iv: depends on
the force of commanding in rdrrovros.
Apollo gives him an injunction, to
the effect that he must live, ete.

8. Amour trv Taw: so worded as
to suggest Awroratiov pag, a techni-
cal phrase of criminal law. Any one
convicted of Awroratia forfeited his
civil rights, i.e. suffered aria.

9. Tdv: of, truly, emphasizes this
repetition of the strong statement
which begins the chapter.

14. & ovk oldev: sc. 6 doxdv eidévau,
i.e. the same indef. subj. which is to be
thought of with the preceding infs.
Of. below b, and 39d. As a rule, the
third person, when it means vaguely
any one (the French on) or anything, is

 
  

  

Eg rd ye

So -
EERE

aa

 

er

1

wi L rapes

|

  

04

 

 

/
ATIOAOTIA SOQKPATOYS.

 
 

 

 

 

 

ITAATONOS A | 105
. + | whol
[one 200n Ax A bi be for amen ; -— (
’Q\y 9 , happen ~ ’ yr i. ¥ a \ b Xr 9 ~ 3 \ ~ 5 ~ » / 3 \
15 Tov ovd el TUYXOVEL TQ apie TAVTWY péyioror dv 29 gE épn 1) |Tv apxnv. oy 3% €jL€ Oevpo eloeNfew 1, émeldn) 29
~ ’ ~ ~ y _ | : s ~ ory Se sd rn cAhn an \ ’ ‘ ~ , ,
Tov ayabovs dedlaot & ,WS €) €L00TES OTL péyiorov TOV kT elon\fov, ovy olov Te ear TO M1) QTOKTEWAL (UE, Aéywy
~ KZ “htt ! : \ hr ¢ ’ | beviol o A Ei, e ce ~
KOK®WY €0TL. KO TOU vk _auabia” éoriv avy 7b 1 mpos vpds bs, el Swipevioiuny, on av Tudv oi viels- Fi
pnarnty revdysocbly magty ~ » ' oNp a es ~ ——— . » : ’ S , a 5 — S S , , Fn, ipl. “
€TOVELOLOTOS 1) Tov oteafal eldévar & ovk older ; éyw 8, & 30 émurnOedorTes -a- Jwkpatns- OL0doKeL TAVTES TAVTATATL
— \ ~ =~ A wt “appa lm ¥ KO Srna y “iS ’ :
avopes, TOUT Kou éevravla Lows ot PW TWY ToA\@Y dv- 1 Siac ApPNOOVTAL — €L (LOL TPOS TAVTA ELTOLTE: @ SoKpa.- FL.V
a © HeRAl Af Fy fd i iF ——
' J HAC B2rr -~ a ~ \ 9 / 5 i /’ 9 5 9 2.31 3 A
20 Oporwr, kal el) 81/70 oopdrepds [Tov dain evar, TobTe | Tes, vou uev 'Avute ov mewooueba, a\N ddleuér oe, ém
¥ o > of =F SR ~A SPQ liad — A ’ oe 315 * ’ > ’ ~ ’ ’
av, OTL OUK €L0WS LKOV@S beplronS “Abov ovrw Kal olo- > ntniod TOUTQ UévTOL €° (OTE pmkére év TavTy 77) {ymijoe Swrpi-
ne 38un PSS 32 Bud vullinelids wo Fy wo 3% ddovoddyt & se Ta ps 1
pat ovk €io€vai: TO O¢ ddikew kal dmelfety Tw [Beltiovt, spud one Bew ume pthocodew + éav 0 alws eri’ Tovro wpdrTWY, | /
~ © ‘ ~ ~ S ~~ © 3 sy \ / 5 Id
kat fed kal avBpdme, 6TL Kakdy Kal atoxpov €aTw) oida, 35 amolaver-_|el odv LE, OEP €lmoVv, €mL TOUTOLS aAploLTE, d \
2 ~ ~ 2 ~ ¢ Tn ~ ¥ A (BE) 4 3 5 ce A ¥ ’ ~ 3 ’
TPO_OVY TOY _KAKOV GV 0100, O Lk Q un oda € elmo’ 4v vpuy orL éyw vuas, avopes “Abnvaiol, domdlo-
\ ¥y ‘a y \ \ ~ ’ \ ~ ~ ~ Ke \
25 ayyaba dvra Tvyydvelovdémore ¢oBricopar ode pevlopar H+ par pév kal Gud, reioopar 0€ pallor To Peo 9 duly, kal
’ J & A 3 welBy \ A oh aot 3 9 \ ’
WOTE OVO €L JLE VUV ULELS apiere Auto amoThoavres, Os c EWTTEP AV EUTVED Kal OLOS TE W, OU [7] TAVTWUAL PLlo-
mn § / a / ~ ~ / x 9 2
29 wr : Le hv] + 29 | TopOY Kal VY TaPAKENEVOUEVOS TE Kal €EVOELKVUMEVOS revt «4
a Dot expressed. —Tov Odvarov oud’ el: 20. el 81: if really, i.e. if, as the b + TN 3 > Ee 7 0 Tr —
by prolepsis for 00% ei 6 Odvaros, not oracle suggests. | 40 OT av Q€L EVTVYXOV® VUWV, AEYwV otarep ewwba, OTL, W
even whether, i.e. whether death may 21. oik elds. ..oUtw: ie. Gomep : Uva i ty : “ , - oo 29
not actually be. Thus he is as far odk oda... ofrw. ofirws sums up a L c of émreiv is not uncommon in Plato. 36. dvBpes 'ABnvaio.: a fictitious d

as possible from knowing that death
is the greatest of harms. For a fuller
statement, cf. 37Tb. See on Tod favd-
Tov, 28 ¢, for the use of the art.

15. ov: here, as usual, in the gen-
der of éyafdy, which is implied in the
pred. uéyiororv Tov dyabov.

17. rovro: not in the gender of
auabia. This makes a smoother sent.
than airy ds ok auabia éorlv ality
7 kté., which was the alternative. —
adtn 1 émwoveldioros: that very same
reprehensible, limiting éuabia and re-
calling the whole statement made
above, 21 b-23 e.

19. Tovrw, Toure dv: repeated for
the greater effect. Both represent
the same point of superiority, i.e. §7.
kté. Notice the cleverness of the
ellipsis after av. Socrates thus evades
any too circumstantial praise of him-
self. For the ellipsis in the leading
clause, see on 3 ... dxwy, 25e. —
kal évravla: here too.

previous partic. clause, and its force
is nearly so likewise. Cf. Men. 80 ¢,
Tarts MAAAov adTds amopdyv oftw Kal
TOUS AAOUS Gmopety Toil.

24. dv... éorTw: a notable in-
stance of assimilation. G. 153; H.
994. See on &v eb 01% 811 Kakdv
dvrtwy, 3Tb. kakd is related to &v as
ayafd in the next line is related to &.
—olda el: see on Tov Odvaror k7é.
above a.

26. el daplere...el ovv dolore,
elroy’ dv: the speaker weakens ei viv
aplere (if you are now ready to acquit
me) by the explanatory detail of ef
pot efrorre and by various reiterations
of the conditions upon which this re-
lease may be granted, until the weaker
clause ei aploire comes of itself to his
lips as all that is left of the more
positively worded prot. with which
he began. — dmomijcavres: conveys ¢
the idea of disregarding rather than
that of disbelieving. This meaning

Cf. Laws, 941 ¢, 6 pev odv metalels
Nu@dv T¢ Adyw edTuxel Te kal eis xpd-
vov &mavra ebTuxol, 6 8¢ amioTNOAs
Td peta TavTa TOHOE Twi paxéobw
véug.

27. ov 8¢iv, olov Te elvar: in the
original form this would be odx &de
and ody oidv 7é éoriv. GMT. 15,3;
H. 853 a. — eloeNBeiv: on this use of
eicgépxeafar, see Introd. 70 with the
note. Meletus probably argues: “If
Socrates had not been prosecuted, his
evil communications might have been
ignored ; once in court, his case al-
lows but one verdict. To acquit him
is to sanction all his heresies.”

29. el Suadevfolpny : fut. opt. in indir.
disc. GMT. 26; 69, 1; H. 855 a. — dv
. . . Suadplaproovrar: an uncommon
apod. GMT. 37, 2, n.1; H.845. See
App.

33. éd’ ore: for const. with inf.,
see GMT. 99; H. 999 a.

35. ovv: after a digression.

i
}
8
1

 

apostrophe. Cf. Dem. vir. 35, ei oi
"EAAnves &powd Ouas, dvdpes *Abnvaio,
méumeTe &s nuas éxdoTore mpéaPes
kté. See App. —domwdfopar kal &i-
Aw: you have my friendship and my
love, but, etc. &omd(ecfa designates the
greeting of friends. Cf. Od. iii. 34-35,
where Nestor and his sons see Tele-
machus and Mentes, &8pdot HABov amwav-
Tes, | xepolv 7 HowdlovTo kal
édpudadba avwyov. CF. also Il. x. 542,
Tol d¢ xapévres | 8ekifi HomdovTo
Emeaol Te pekixlowow.

37. meloopar: cf. Acts iv. 19, 6 d¢
MéTpos kal 'lwdvyns amokpibévres elmo
npds avrols: el dlkaidy éoTw évamiov
(in the sight) Tov Oeod, budv dkovety
paAAov 3) Tod Beod kplvaTe, thd.
v. 28, meif0apxeiv (obey) Sei Oe
maiAov 9) avlpdmors.

38. ov pn wavowpar: see on oddey
kTé., 28a. For ov un with the subj.
in strong denials, see GMT. 89, 1;
H. 1032.

1

a i i ls i.

    
 
 
     
  

FT, wk

   
 

ei

  
     
  

A
ey

AL,

    
     
    
      
      
 
   
  
  
   
  
  
   
   
    
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
  
  
   
  
  
     
  
  
 

ts ——— on

  
     
     
106

» 9 ~ 3 ~ y ’ ~ ’ \
apiwore avdpav, Afnvatos wv, mohews Ts peyioT)s Kai 29

IIAATONOZS

7) ’ 8.1 ’ \ 2.1 ’ A tJ
EVOOKLUWTATYS €LS |oodlar Kat LOXUV) XPYRATWY [LEV OVK

3 4 L'4 ~ \
ALT UVEL ETLUENOUMEVOS OTTWS OOL ETAL WS TAELOTA Kol

06&ns kal Tuuvs, Pporjoens O6é kai alybeias kai Ts
~ A © a ’ » $3 A 3Q\ ’
45 Yuxns omws @s Perio) €oTar ovk €myreler ove Ppovti-

(les; kal édv Tis vue dppio Bry kai df émyueheiofa,
(En I lL TN 5 ’ 5 Ay ¥ > 5S 3 7 >
~ ovk €vfvs adrjow avTov ov0’ amet, alN’ épryaomat avTov

\ 0 y / N33 / \ ¥ \ ~ ~
kat éferaow kal é\éyéw, kal €éav pou un) Ook) kekrTnobou

dperjv, pdvar 6€, dveldid oTL Ta TAeloTov alia wept éla-

/ ~ \ \ ’ \ ’ ~
50 XLOTOV TTOLELTAL, TO o¢ pavloTepa TEPL TAELOVOS, TAUTQ

kal vewTépo kal mpeoPuTépw, OTw Av TVYXAVe, TOUjoW,

kal E€ve kal ATT®, allov O€ Tols AoTOLS, O 2
¢ Dy [4 TOLS AOTOLS, 00 Q Lov €yyv-

41. wolews TNs peylomns kré.: cf.
Xen. An. vii. 3. 19, mpocerbor d¢ kal
Eevopovtt EAeye: aU kal mTOAews pe
yioTns el kal mapa Sevdn Td cov dvoua
ueyioréy éori. The gen. is in appos.
with ’Abnvates =’Abnvev &v. Cf. Hipp.
Ma.281e,7 duerépa T@v copiaTdY TEXYN.
G. 137, ~x.1; H. 691. For the points
of superiority, ¢f. Thue. ii. 35-46.

42. els ocodlav kal loxvv: for the
full meaning, cf. 38 ¢-39 d, also Thue.
ii. 40, 41. Here ioxds means the
strength which rules the kingdom of
the mind (copia). Cf. Thue. i. 138,
where he says of the typical Athenian
Themistocles: jv yap 6 OeuiaTokAis,
BeBadtata 8) ploews ioxvv dnAd-
cas, kal diapepdvTws Ti és abTd uaAAov
érépov &fios Oavudoar. This ¢loews
ioxvs, when circumstances disclosed
its perfection, was cogia, the virtue of
virtues, chiefly prized by Socrates as
including all others.

Xpnpdrov . . . Yuxns : the same prolep-
sis as that in 29 a, where 7dr Odva-
7ov is pointedly mentioned before its
time. Notice the significant use of
the art. with Yvxis, a word which

i leh
like copa WW J, Sh, without the
art. in cases that seem to require it;
t3s accordingly has the force of a
possessive pron. G. 141, ~. 2; H. 658.

45. ovk émpelei: see on Juws de
éddket, 21 e.

47. épricopan, éfeTdow, ENéytw : these
words in this order represent the
process by which Socrates so often
disconcerted his fellow-countrymen.
Beginning with a harmless question
or two, his method soon proved un-
comfortably scrutinizing (éterdow), and
generally ended by convicting (éAéyéw)
of ignorance.

50. TavTa vewTépw MONO W: molely,
like wpdrrew and épyd(esfar, often
takes in addition to the acc. of the
thing done a dat. of the person for
whom the thing is done, but the acc.
of the person to whom it is done.
Cf. Xen. An. iii. 2. 3, olopar yap bv

nuas TowavTa mabety ola Tovs €xBpovs

oi Oeol morjoeiarv. Ibid. 24, kal Huiv
av old’ G11 Tpiodapevos (thrice gladly)
TadT émolel, el édpa Nuas uévew wapa-
crevrlouévovs.

52. dow. ..éoré yéve : the thought

 

AIIOAOTIA ZSQKPATOYS.

’ 3 \ ’ ~ \ ’ ec /’ 5 \
TEPW €ETgTE YEVEL. TAVUTOA yap Ke\eveL Oo feds, EV LOTE, KAL

’ \ » 3 ’, ¢ ~ ~ 9 \ / 3 ~
€yw oLoat 0VOEY Tw vy petlov ayafov yevéa Oar €V ™

/ A \ 3 \ ”~ ~ e / 3 \ \ yy
woe 7) ™py ur 70 ep Vmypeciav. ovdeév yap dAlo

mpartwv éyn mepiépyopar 7) melbloy Vuovr Kal vewTépPovs

kal mpeoPurépovs puijte copter émyueetobar unre Xpn-

pdrev mpdrepor unde ovtw opédpa ms TNs Puxns omws

@S apioTy €oTal, ANéywr: OVK €Kk XPNLATOY APETY) YiyVeETAL,

al\’ é€ aperns xpipara Kai Ta, dMaYayada Tois dvbpd-

4 \ IQ, \ ’ > \ 3 ~
TOLLS OaTOVTA Kol (Ola Kal onpooia. €L LEY OVY TavTa

of Socrates insensibly returns to his
hearers, in whom he sees embodied
the whole people of Athens. The cor-
relative of Gog readily suggests itself
with uaArov. Cf. the same case, 39 d.
Cf. Euthyph. 12 ¢, kal uj vedrepds vé
pov €l ovr ENaTTov 3) Gow copdTepos.

55. Tv T¢ fed vmmpeoiav: see on
dovAos, Crit. 50 e, and contrast Tov Oeov
Aatpeiav, 23 ¢; cf. also Tv Tov Oeod
dda vuiv, d below; see also on 7a
uetéwpa ¢povrioTis, 18 b.  Imypesia
takes the same dat. of interest which
is found with the verb from which it
is derived. The Lat. idiom is the
same, e.g. Cic. de Legg.i.15.42, Quod
si iustitia est obtemperatio
scriptis legibus institutisque
populorum, ete.

58. mwporepov: sc. 9) Tis Yuxijs, which
has to be supplied out of @s 73s Yv-
xis. undé is not a third specification
with ufre . . . ure. It serves only to
connect olrw o¢pddpa With mpdrepov,
aiid is neg. only because the whole
idea is neg.

60. é£ dperns xprpara: the foun-
dation of real prosperity is laid in
the character; the best of windfalls
is natural good sense sharpened by
experience; this is the making of
your successful man’s character, and

¢ & ro.

the mending of his fortunes; this is
apern (skill in the art of right living), i.e.
wisdom (oogpia). See on eis cogplav,
9d. Such is in substance Socrates’s
theory of getting on in the world,
which may be gathered from Xeno-
phon’s Memorabilia in many places:
see (i. 6) his defence against the go-
pions Antiphon, who accuses him of
being kaxodaipovias diddokaros; (ii. 5)
his hint to a parsimonious friend, ége-
Tdeiv éavtdv éméoov Tols ¢pilots &fios
en; (ii. 6. 22-25) his analysis of what

makes a kaAds Te kayabds (gentleman),

where of all such he says, 8dvavra
mewdvtes (fasting) kal dup@dvTes aAvmws
giTov kal moTob kolvwvely . .. dvvavTal
d¢ Kal xpnudTwy ob uévov Tob mAeove-
ket (selfish greed) amexduevor, vouluws
(righteously) kowwreiy AAG kal érapkeiy
aAAfAais; and see particularly (ii. 7, 8,
9,and 10) the success which his practi-
cal advice brought to his friends Aris-
tarchus, Euthérus, Crito, and Diodo-
rus in their various difficulties. For
a full elaboration of Socrates’s rule
of right living in the abstract, see his
conversation on ed mparrew with young
Callias, 70 *A&idxov uepdriov, Euthyd.
278 e-282 d, where Cleinias is startled
to learn that cogia is edrTvxia (good-
luck). The gods endow us with such

RR

eb ee CS ig ed

BE SB

= a TR a Sr

 
ho rm@d

108 ITAATONOZS AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 109

LL i i i pi a

2 \ »
5 Borjoeade: alla pndapds TOLELTE TOVTO. €v yep LOTTE, 30
) D 5 as Ua .
Tis pé ¢now alla Aéyew 7) Tabra, ody Aeyel. TPOS | dav éueé Aalereiore TOLQDTOV OVTA OLOV fy Aéyw, ovk Epe |
@ "Abnvaiol, 7) welfleale *Avire 4) pi, - § ell Phaspere 4 7 bpis adTOUS © éuE pev yop oder av BAa-

heen oUTE MénTos ovre "AvuTos* ode yap av Ovvawro

Aéyowr duadleipw Tovs véovs, adr’ av ely BlaPBepd: ei &¢

Ag of
fi #

 

Ba I Aa Ls iid

~ ’ »

TOvTA, Painy av,
NN ’ A \ afr ¢ wl ~ A

65 Kai 1) dcpleTe 7) un) adiere, @s €uov ovk Av ToLjTOVTOS

30

alla, ovd €i wéAw mol\dkis Tebvdvad.
XVIII. Mw BopvBeire, avdpes *Abyvaior, dO. éupuei-
vaté pou ols éderblyy vudv, wy BopuBetr ép’ ols av Aéyw,

> gS ’ \ 4 e 3.7 3 y ut ’ ’
all’ axovew* kal ydp, ws €éyw otpal, ovjoeale drovovres.

pEN© yap ov dita UML

common sense as we have, Futhyph.
15 a, Rep. ii. 366 ¢, 375 c-e, 379 b ¢;
we owe it to them that it is possible

- to thrive and in the end to win, Rep.

x. 613, 617 e.

62. Tavr dv ein BAaPepd: this radra,
all this, covers more ground than the
Tavra above. The first means what
Socrates says, the second means that
and also the fact that he says it.
“If this corrupts the youth, my prac-
tice in saying it would do harm; but
the truth cannot corrupt them, there-
fore my speaking it can do no harm.
To prove that I am a corrupter of the
youth, you must prove that I have
said something else; that cannot be
proved, for it is not true.” With ei
diapleipw, Tavr’ bv €ln, cf. ei dperobow,
25 b, where see note.

63. wpos Tavra: wherefore.

65. os épov kTé.: knowing that 1
should never alter my ways. worhoor-
Tos &v represents mojow &v. ‘GMT.
41, 4; H. 845 and 861. Cf. Dem. x1x.
342, obs oTiovv bv érelvy wolf aor
Tas avppnrdtes éx Tis wohews Eoreabe.
See on dwaplaphoovral, 29 ¢. For an
important question of Ms. reading
here, see App. For the ei uéarw used
as periphrastic fut. see GMT. 25, 2;
H. 846. For the indic. fut. or subjv.
pres. in prot. depending upon the opt.

épew kal dha, ép’ ois lows
in apod. with #», see GMT. 54, 1b; °

H. 901 a.

66. mwoMldkis: many times or many
deaths. The Eng. idiom like the
Greek requires no definite specifica-
tion such as “to die a hundred
deaths.” In certain cases in Greek as
in Eng. a large number is specified.
Cf. éxfkoas pvpidrts ayo BodAoma,
Ar. Nub. 738; &rvovs (for pea-soup?);
BaBaiwak, pvpidris év 7¢ Biw, Ran. 63.
Cf. Tpiodouevos, quoted from Xen. An.
iil. 2. 24 on 30a. Demosthenes not
unnaturally uses uvpudris where he
exclaims (1x. 65), 7e0vdva: 8¢ uvpid-
Kis KperTTOv 9) koAakelg Ti moifjoar SiAim-
mov. — TeBvavar: the absolute contra-
dictory of {7v, here used rather than
the somewhat weaker amrofvfiorew.
This distinction is, however, not strict-
ly maintained. Cf. 39e, 43d, and the
similar use of raAelv and kexAfiofas,
yiyvookew and éyvwkévai, umuviiokew
and ueuvijobai, kraola: and kextiioOa.

XVIII. 2. ols éderfdny vpav: he
asked them uh GopuBeiv. See above on
BopuBeiv,17d, and on us BopuBhonTe, 20e.

3. kal ydp, péA\w ydp, ev yap lore:
the first ydp is closely connected with
axovew, the second goes back to the
leading clause u#® 6opuBety and ac-
counts for the renewal of a request
which the speaker has made three

10 B\amrecfou.

h

od yap oltopat Oepuiroy. eval Spelvore dvip} v7ro Xelporos d
ATOKTELVELE’ pevriy lows 7 dekdoae 7)
.dripdoeae: da Tadta odTos uév lows oletar kai dAos

tis mov peydla kakd, éyw 8 ovk olopat, d\ka Tov pal-
Nov mower & oPros vwi wouel, avdpa ddlkws Emiyelpew
dmokTwrival. viv odv, @ avdpes "Alyn, moA\ov Oéw
dy vrep Guano] dmoloyetafar, ®s Tis av olotro, aAN
vmép Bue, pun TL é€apaprnre epi ie r00- Beod Odo w

Duty éuov kataymPioauevo.

times already. The third dp, now,
merely points the new statement for
which Socrates has been preparing
the court. Compare the use of ~yap
after prons. and advs., e.g. 31 b after
év0évde, and in general after any pref-
atory form of words to give point to
any statement which is expected, as in
Tis yap éuis, 20 e. dp with this force
is esp. freq. after & d¢ (10 8¢) uéyioroy,
dewdrarov, also after onuetov 8¢, Texud-
pov 8¢ and other favorite idioms of
like import in Plato and the orators.
H. 1050, 4 a.

5. Borjoeafe: this is more than a
disturbance (@opuBeiv) ; it is an outcry.

9. Oepitov dpelvove dvBpr PAamrre-
oar: cf. 21 b. Oewrdv takes the dat.,
and, after the analogy of &eorw, an
inf. (BAdwTeoOa:) is added. The pass.
BAdwreofar makes this const. appear
more unusual than e.g. in Phaedo, 67 b,
uh kab@apg (unclean) yap kabapot épd-
wreolar uh ov Oewirdv jf. For the im-
port of the words 6éuis and Oeurrdy,
see on ov yap 0éuws, 21 b,

éav yop ue ATOKTEWNTE, e

10. dmokTelvere pevTav, 1) GTIpWO ELEY :
amoktelvew is used here secondarily of
the Swcaorai and the whole people,
and primarily of the accusers whose
prosecution aims at compassing Soc-
rates’s death. &riula involved the for-
feiture of some or of all the rights
of citizenship. In the latter case the
&rimwos was looked upon by the state
as dead, i.e. he had suffered “civil
death” (la morte civile), and his
property, having no recognized owner,
was confiscated. Cf. Rep. viii. 553 b,
eis dikaoThplov éumeadvta Umd oukopav-
Tv 9 &mobavévra 9) ékmeodvra H GTi-
uwlévra kal THy odolar dmacav
amoBaAdvTa. See App.

@\\os Tis mov: many another.
See on &AAos, 28 e.

15. dX’ vmép vpav : cf. Euthyphro’s
remark just before the trial, Euthyph.
5b c, el dpa éut émxephoee (6 Méry-
ros), ebpo’ bv, dbs oluai, 8wp oabpds
(rotten) éari, kal woAY Gv Huiv wp d-
Tepov mepl éxelvov Adyos yévor
To év 7¢ dikagTnply A wepl uo.

TR Sg gee
CC — -

 
110

 

 

RES pam ee = NS

a AS EN

 

ov padiws al\ov TowovTOV evproeTey drexviss, el Kal yer. 30

ITAATQNOZS

repay elmew, mpooKeijuevonsT) TONE [vwo 700 Beov |, momep

0 (TQ peydhe Lev Kal yevvaie, UTO peyéfovs 0¢ vwle-
orépew Koi Seopéve éyeipeo fo UO pws Twos: olov
o1 pos Ookel 6 feos épe 4} moe mpogTefeuéva, TOLOVTOV

Tva 0s pas éyeipwy Kal melOwv Kal oveldilwy € eva. €xa-

18. drex vas... wpookelpevoy : added
instead of a clause with oios to ex-
plain 7owdTor. See on olos deddabau,
31 a.— el kal yehowoTepov elmelv : though
it sounds rather absurd to say so, or
better, “if I may use such a ludicrcus
figure of speech.” This is thrown in
to prepare his hearers for the humor-
ous treatment of a serious subject
which follows. A close scrutiny of
the simile shows that Socrates mis-
trusted the sovereign people. mpookei-
uevov is the regular pass. of wpooTi6é-
vai. See below (22) for the same idea
put actively. See App. for the reading
Umd Tov Oeov, and for the remaining
difficulties here involved.

21. Jmwo pvemos Twos: by a gadfly.
For this word, cf. Aesch. Supp. 307,
308, BonAdryy (ox-driving) wdwma wwn-
Tipiov (urging on), olotpov (gadfly) ka-
Aovow abtdy oi Neldov wméras. Also
in the Prometheus Io’s tormentor is
calied oloTpos (567) and é¢voTouos
nowy (674 £.). Here the tormentor of
Athens is a iwwnAdrys udwy. No-
tice how humorously (vyeAowdrepor) the
situation is met. First the Athenians
are compared to a horse bothered out
of inaction by a buzzing horse-ly.
The metaphor of the horse is not
pressed, but that of the uiwy is inge-
niously elaborated as follows: “Soc-
rates gives them no rest but bores
them all day long (wpookabi{wy), and
does not allow them even a nap; he
bothers them incessantly when they

are drowsing (of vvord{orvres). Then °

they make an impatient dash (xpov-
ocavtes) at him which deprives them
forever of his company.” For similar
irony, cf. Verg. Aen. vi. 90, nec Teu-
cris addita Juno|Usquam abe-
rit. uiwy is by some taken in its
later and metaphorical sense of spur.
See App. — Twos: like the Lat. qui-
dam used to qualify an expression
which is startling. — olov 81 pov Soxket
0 Oeds . . . wpooreberkévar: lit. in which
capacity God seems to me to have fas-
tened me upon the state,— such an one
(in fact) as never ceases, etc., a repe-
tition of mpooreiuevor [omd Tob Oeod].
Avoid the awkwardness of too lit.
translation. Notice that ofov really re-
fers not to the wdwy simply but to the
pbwy engaged in enlivening the horse.
This is implied by rowdrdy Twa and
the explanatory clause with &s.

23: oveditwy ékaoTov: dredi(e alone
requires the dat. Cf. 11. ii. 254, 7¢ viv
'ATpeldp Avauéuvov: moiuévi
Aadv float d vedi (wr, and below 41e.
The acc. here is due to the prepon-
derating influence of weifwv; both mei-
6wy and ovedi{wy are however intro-
duced simply to explain éyelpwr, with
which they are as it were in apposi-
tion. The awakening process here
thought of prob. consisted of ques-
tions persuasive in part and partly
reprehensive.

24. T™jv npépav . .. wpookabifwy :
this specifies the means by which the

 

 

——

ARR ig

 

 

ATIOAOI'IA 3QKPATOY3.

3 \ /’ \ e /’ < ~ - /’
orov oder mavopal THY Nuépar oAny ravrayov-mpookaldi- 31

~ > ¥ y e ’ ce A ’ > ¥

25 (wv. TOLWDTOS DY AANOS 0V padiws Vuv yerijoeral, & av-
°C ’ 3 S.. 0. ’ ’ ce A > ¥

Opes, aN’ éav €uol meifyobe, peioeote prov + Dpueis d lows

Tay’ av dxfipevor, oomep oi vvoTalovres Syeypiperas,

hpi ores dv pe, mellopevol "AviTe, padins dv dmwokTel-

vate, €ira Tov \ourov Blov kabevdovres Siatelotr dv, el
’ > ¥ ¢ \ ¢ ~ 3 ’ ’ e ~
30 wu] Twa d\\ov 6 feds piv émméupeic knOdueros vuOY.
ore & éyw Tvyydvw-@v TOLUTOS, ios, vo Tov BOeov Ty
: / "9
mo\e 8eddabar, &vbévde av karavoaaire + ov yap avbpw-
’ » eT. \ ’ ney > ’
ming éouke TO Cue TOV per EpavTov Amaro Mpehpecvay
’ 2) ~~ ’ ’ ~
kal avéyealar Tov olkeiwy auelovuévwr TooavTa 10N Em),
35 70 O¢ Vuérepov mpdrTEw del, 0g €KATTY TPOTLOVTA
¢ ’ A 5 \ ’ / 3
oomep marépa 7) ddehdov mpeoButepov, meiblovta Emye-
Aetofa. dperns. kal € pévToL TL ATWO TOUTWY dméNavoy
~ a ¥
kal poor hapBdver Tavta TapekeNevouny, eixov av Twa
Aoyov + viv 3¢ opare &1) kal avTol, OTL OL KATY yopOL TAA-
< ~ ~ ’ .
40 \a TdvTa AVOLOXUVTOS OUT® KATY YOPOUVTES TOUTO ‘Ye

Bl a Drocess of awakening, indicated by

* the three preceding partics., was made
possible. Pres. and aor. partics. ex-
press the means, as the fut. partic. ex-
presses purpose. GMT. 109; H. 969.

26. lows Td’ dv: may be perhaps,
a combination which is by no means
infrequent. The importance of padiws
is well indicated by the repetition of
the &v, which has already served to em-
phasize xpovsavres. Notice, however,
that grammatically it is required only
once and goes with the verb of the
apod. amokTelvaire. See on &omep od
av, 17d.

27. domep oi vvordlovres kTé.: like
men disturbed in their nap. This sar-
casm could not fail to raise a laugh
at Athens where the dwaorys vvord-
(wv was a common sight. Cf. Rep.
405 ¢, undev detgbar vvoTdlovTos

dikaagtov. Cf. Quint. Inst. iv. 1.73.
29. elra: see on wiuwovvtal kTé., 23 C.
31. olos 8edooOar: cf. Crit. 46D.

For the inf. without the art., limiting

certain adjs. and advs., see GMT. 93;

H. 1000.

32. ov ydp: see on kal ydp, 30 ¢. —
dvlpomive : the neut. used subst. Cf.
Phaed. 62d, &oike TovT0o &Témew. Com-
monly the neut. is used predicatively,
e.g. &owce TovTo ETOomoV €lva.

34. dvéxeoBar apehovpévav: for the
acc. or gen. allowed with this verb,
and for the added partic. sce GMT.
112, 2, Nx. 2; H. 983.

37. el pévror: if, to be sure. Tol in-
fluences the apod. (elxov &v kTé.) as
well, then at least I should have some
reason, i.e. there would be an obvious
explanation of my conduct. Cf. 34D,
abrol Tax bv Adyov Exoiev kTé.

 

111

AT SR FO

— Ce = Sr SS
il LLL ESTES

i a EE
—
  

 

EAT EI I reo mnee Y
asin isra pT

ER — a
wo os - = > x

- *
li
wey res .

  

112

ITAATONOS

ov) oloi Te éyévovTo dmavaiTXvrTiTaL, Tapacydpmevor pdp-
TUpa, @s Eye woré Twa 9) émpalduny pabov 4 yprpoa.
Lkavov yap, oluad, éyw mTapéxopual TOV paprupa, as andy

/ \ /’
Aéyw, Tv Teviav.

y ? ’ y 2
XIX. "Tows av ody d6feier dromov evar ot 87) yd
ola \ ~ & A ’ \ \ A ~
a pev Tava EupfBovievw mepuwr kal molvmpaymovd,
/’ \ J ~ 3 /’ 3 \ ~ \ ¢ /’
Onpocig 3¢ od Tod dvaBaivwv eis TO-mAjfos TO Suére-

41. ovy oloi Te: “They would doubt-
less make the assertion, ¢f. 19d; but
what they did not find it practicable
to do was to bring evidence in sup-
port of it.” R. The leading idea of the
clause amavaioxvrrijoa: . . . udprupa is
expressed in the partic., not in arava-
oxvytijcar. For cases where aioxd-
veda, used with a partic., does not
contain the main idea, cf. 28 b, 294d,
Crit. 53 ¢. — TovTo dmavailTXVVTY-
oaL: SC. Tait THY Avaicxvvtiav dma-
vaio xvvtiicar. &mé in this compound
contributes the idea of completion,
which in the case of shamelessness
involves going to an extreme, to go to
such an extreme with their shamelessness,
or, to be so absolutely shameless as this.
The kindred notion of fulfilling a
task undertaken is also involved. Cf.
Xen. An. iii. 2. 13, érofvovaw, meaning
pay off the arrears of a promised sacri-
fice.

43. Tov paprvpa: sc. wapéxouar udp-
Tupa kal 6 udpTus dv mapéxomar ikavds
éorw. Cf. 20e. ikavéy is used predi-
catively, and the necessity of the art.
is obvious.

XIX. 1. tows av ovv Sofeev dro-
mov: Socrates has two good reasons:
(1) his divine mission, (2) the per-
sonal disaster involved in any other
course. Of these the first really in-
cludes the second. That he did not
regard abstention from public duty
as in itself commendable is proved

by his conversation with .Charmides
(Xen. Mem. iii. 7), &&idroyov utv dvdpa

s/ 3 ~ \ / ~ / >
ovTa, OkvouvTa O€ mposiévar TE fue

(to address the people) kal 7T@v Tis
ToAews mpayudTwy émueAeiobar. He
pointedly asks Charmides: e 8¢ 7s,
duvatds Gv T@Y Tis moAews mpayudrwy
émiueduevos Hv Te méAw abfew (ad-
vance the common weal) kal adrds dia
T0UTO Tiuad dat, dkvoin 8%) TodTo WpdTTEWY
ovk &v eikdrws derds voui{oto; See
also ibid. i. 6. 15.

2. mwolvmpaypovéd: am a busybody.
See on wepiepydferar, 19 b. Nothing
short of a divine mission could jus-
tify this. Plato invariably uses the
word in an unfavorable sense. Cf.
Gorg. 526 ¢, avdpds piroodpov T& adrod
mpdtavtos kal od woAumpayuovfigavros
év 7¢ Bip. There is a subtle irony in
woAvmpayuovd as here used by Soc-
rates. It was his business to mind
other people’s business, therefore he
was far from being really woAvmpd-
yuwy. Cf. Xen. Mem. iii. 11. 16, kal 6
Swrpdtns émordnrwy (ridiculing) Thy
aiTov amparyuoovvny (abstention from
business), “’AAN’, & @eoddry,” Edm, “ od
wavy poi Ppddidy ori axordoar (be at
leisure) + kal yap Bia mpdyuara woAA
kal dnpdaia wapéxer por doxoriay (keep
me busy).” Cf. 33ab.

3. dvaBalvov els T0 mAnlos: there
is no implication, as in 17 d, of él
70 Bua. The wA780s commonly assem-
bled in the Pnyx, to which Socrates

 

 

 

 

 

 

AITIOAOTIA 3SQKPATOYS.

 

y 3 ~
pov EvpBovlevew Ty) woNeL. TOUTOV O€ alTLOY €0Tiw O Vpels 31

5 éuov moA\dkis aknkéare mohhayov Aéyovros, 61L pot Bed

TL Kal Oaupudviov yiyveral, [pari], On kat év 1) ypady a

”~ ~ 9
EMKOUWODY Mé\nros éypdato: €uol O¢ TOUTS €aTw ék
LA : © ’ ’ \
TaLd0s apéduevoy Pwr TiS Yyryvouéry, 3) otav yévnral del
WIA YP ~ ; \
ATOTPETEL LE TOVTO O Av UENA® TPATTEW, TPOTPEmEL O€ OV- ~

~ 9 © ’ ~ \ \ /
moTE"* TOUTO €EOTLY O rot €EvaVTILIOVTOL TA TONLTLKA TPATTELY.

\ /’ /’ ~ 9 ~ 2 \ » 2
Ka TUYKAN®S YE Lot OoKeL évavriovoBar- Ev Yap LOTE, W

\ ~ \
avdpes 'Afnvaiol, el éyn mda émexelpyoa mwpdrrew TA

\ ¥ 3 A € ~~
moMTIKa TPdypaTa, malar dv dmoh@ly kal ovr dv vnas

wpel)kn ovdev ovr av éuavriv.

kai por wi) aybeole e

Aéyovti Tall + ov yap éoTw ooTis avlpamer cwbijoera

[ Rove. ’ ’
oUTe VuLv ovte ale mA1leL oVOevl yvyoins évavriovuevos

Kal OLOLKWAUWY TOANG aOLKa Kol TOPAVOUA €V TY) TWONEL

~ ~N y /
ylyveofarydA\a AVayKalOVy €0TL TOV TG OVTL LOLXOUMEVOV 32

thus would, like every one else, be
obliged to ascend. Cf. Dem. xviir.
169, duels 8 eis THhv ékkAnolav
émopeveale kal ... mwas 6 duos Arvw
kd 0nTo.— TO wAN0os TO VpEéTepov : sce
on 7¢ wAfle, 21 a.

5. Oetov Tv kal Sawpoviov ylyverar,
[dw]: see Introd. 27, with first x. on
p. 21, and 32. ¢wry is explanatory of
the vague 0eidy 71 kal dawudviov, and
is in the pred.: a something divine and
Jrom God manifests itself to me, a voice.
This thought is earnestly reiterated
below in nearly the same words. See

App.

d 6. J 8) kal: see on d 3¢ kal, 28 a.

— émkwpwdav: Meletus caricatured
Socrates’s utterances about the eid 7
kal dawudviov by making them out to
be the belief in kawa Saiudvia. Cf. 26 e.

7. éx wados dpfdpevov: ever since
my boyhood. This partic. followed by
awd or éx, when time is referred to,

corresponds to various idioms, here to ’
ever since. The case of the partic. is
that of the word which it limits. Cf.
Legg, ii. 661 b, Tadrd éori &dikois Kd-
kota (Vumavta, apltdueva amd Tis
Uytelas.

9. dmoTpémet, évavTiouTAL TPATTELY :
cf. 32b, and see on under mwoieiv. —
tovro: governed by mpdrrew, which is
expressed in the subordinate clause.
Cf. Lach. 179 a, aveivar adrods §
BovAovTar moiety, to leave them free to do
what they wish.

12. wdAat...wdAae: the rights and
duties of Athenian citizenship began
as soon as a man was twenty.

13. amohdAn, ddeAnkn: the earlier
Att. writers rarely use the plpf. in
ew. G. 119, 4; H. 458a.

15. ov, ovTe, oUTe, ovBevi: a re-
markable repetition of the neg. Cf.
34 e.

16. ywmolws: uprightly or openly.

 

113

is iS LL li £AtcAre

RR a

A ae

ir orig ri SA
TOYS. 115
114 ITAATQNOS ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYZ

Sueavkd, any 6€é éyw yap, & ’Abnvaioy, any pev 32
apy ovOep lav ndmore Npka év T) WONeL, éBoitevaa O€* b
kai érvxer Mudv 1) Gul >Avrioxis mpuravedovoa, ore

e¢ \ ~
Umep Tov Oukaiov, kal el péler S\lyov ypdvov cwbice. 32
20 ofai, Ldwwrevew, da wy) Snuooiedew.
/ 5 ~
XX. Meydha & é&ywye piv texpijpia mapéfopad
/’ 3 / 3 3 A ¢ ~ ~ ¥y 3 /
TOUTWV, OU AOYOUS, aAN’ 0 vuels Tare, EPYyQ.  QKOU-
’ \ \ * ° A
care 01 pov 7a éuol vpBeBnkdra, wa eldire Sri 0d’
oN e .\ Smeal \ > Ot /’ / \
av evi vrewaboyul rapa 70 Oikaov deicas Bdvarov, wi
5 U / Oe , 3 A / 3 ~ Oe ¢ ~ \ \ \
TELKWY O€ aja amoloipuny. €pd O¢ Viv PopTika pev kal

 

32
82 by way of reproof, says to Socrates lunar year of 354 days, or in leap-

a (Gorg. 482 e) ad yap 79 Svri, & Sdkpa- years, for 38 or 39 days. Of this board
res, eis Towdra Hyeis PpopTikd Kal of fifty (whose members were called
dnunyopikd, ¢dokwy TV dAffeay  mpurdves during its term of office) one
dubkew ¢oprid. Cf. Rep. ii. 367 a, member yas chosen every day by lot,
TAUTA .« . . @paciuaxds Te kal ANOS mod AS émoTaTtns, Or president. The ém:-

a

cs

TE T— - 2
AI ah RE WSR ER NR es ve
Ce ‘ ‘ x - EE rm en it AA

TE

A TRIER RB

TT

nA rec

—

AO.

oe

J
i =
TE SITET SR Sr,

nS

a

ge

32 : .
8 19. kal el: introduces a very ex-

treme form of supposition, implying
that even then the conclusion is unas-
sailable; el kal (cf. 30 e) introduces a
condition implying that in that case,
as in many others, the conclusion re-
mains. See H. 1053, 1, 2.

20. aANo. pv: and not. The Eng.
idiom avoids the Greek abruptness.
For Aad in abrupt transitions, see
H. 1046, 2D.

XX. 2. ov Aoyovs k7é.: as Demos-
thenes says (11. 12), amas uév Adyos,
av amy To wpdypata (deeds), paraiby Ti
(folly) ¢aiverar kal kevéy. Cf. Lach.
188 c-e, where the harmony of a
man’s deeds and words is spoken of
as 7g dvr (fv npuoouévos adds adrod
Tov Blov obupwvov Tois Adyois mpos Ta
épya, arexvds dwpiatl . .. fiwep udvy
‘EAA? éotw apuovia, really living in
tune, where a man makes his own life a
concord of words and deeds, composed
really in the Dorian mode, which is the
only true Greek harmony.— ¢ veils kré. :
the audience as representing the Athe-
nians in general. “You appreciate
facts only, there is no nonsense about
you.” Here appears what amounts
to the common 7dmros of rehearsing a
man’s services in his own defence, of
which practice Lysias (x11. 38) says,
ob yap 3) olde TovTO aAdTy Wpoghkel
wojoal, Sep év ThHde TH woAer elbioué-
vov éatl, mpds peév Ta kKaTnYyopPN-
uéva undev amoAoyeiaOar, mepl d¢

opdy adTdy ETepa Aéyovtes (raising side
issues) évlore é&tamar@ow, Suiv awo-

/ ~ '
detkvivTes &s oTpaTi®TaAl Aya-

6oi eiguv kté. For another instance
of this practice indulged in, cf. 28 e-
29 a.

3. oud’ dv €vi: stronger than odden
av. (Cf. Gorg. 512 e, Thy eipapuévny
(fate) odd bv els éwgpiyor, and ibid.
021 ¢, &s pot dokels, &@ Sdrpartes, moTed-
ew und’ wv &v TobTwy mabetv. . . , How
confident you seem, Socrates, that you
never will suffer any of these things!
G.77,1,~. 2; H. 290a.

4. vrekdOorpe : second aor. opt. from
Umelkew with a8 appended to the stem,
ve. vmee-. G. 119, 11; H. 494 and a.
The present dmewdfew, like Siwrdbew
(Sudkew), auvvdlew (quiver) and axé-
Oey (éxew), is prob. a fiction. It is
hard to prove that this 6 adds strength
to the meaning of dmwelkeww. In certain
cases this 6 is appended in the pres.
Ter€ébewy, paébev, preyébew. Cf. Curt.
Griech. Etym. pp. 62 and 63.

5. dpa dwololpny : if this, as Schanz
maintains, is what Plato really wrote,
the necessary av gets itself supplied
from 038° bv él above. Cron, fol-
lowing Stallbaum, writes dua ral Gua
&v; Riddell defends Ast’s conjecture,
dua kav. The text here still remains
hard to establish. See App.— ¢op-
Tika kal Sikawvikd: cheap and tedious
commonplaces, a collocation which
suggests the words of Callicles, who,

» N

 

 

 

 

TIS bmp Sikatoatvns Te kal adikias Aé-
yoiey &v, petaoTpégorres adbTolv THY
dhvauy popTikds, Bs vy éuol dokel.
For dnunyopued, which has the sense
of in bad taste, cf. Gorg. 494 ¢, where
Callicles, shocked at Socrates’s re-
marks, says &s dromos el, @ SdkpaTes,
kal &rexvads dnunydpos. See also on

| kekaAAemnuévovs, 17e. It was com-

mon in the courts and assemblies at
Athens for the speakers to call a
spade a spade. Of course they al-
ways declared that they must speak
the truth, and the whole truth. This
duty was often made the pretext for
pg not strictly in good taste.

7. éBovhevoa 8¢: but I was chosen
to the senate, i.e. the senate of five
hundred, chosen by lot. One of this
senate’s chief duties was to act as a
committee, so to speak, before whom
came, in the first instance, the ques-
tions to be dealt with by the éxrAnoia
(assembly). A preliminary decree (mpo-
BovAevua) from this senate was the
regular form in which matters came
before the assembly.

8. &ruxev... mpUTAVEVOUTDL: the
fifty representatives in the senate of
each of the ten tribes (each guvAq tak-
ing its turn in an order yearly deter-
mined by lot) had the general charge
of the business of the senate, and
directed the meetings both of the
senate and of the popular assembly,
for 35 or 36 days, i.e. one tenth of the

ordtns held the keys of the public
treasury and of the public repository
of records, also the seal of the com-
monwealth, and, further, presided at
all meetings of the senate and of the
assembly. Later (prob. in 378 B.C,
the archonship of Nausinicus, when
the board of nine mpdedpor, whom the
¢mordrns chose every morning by
lot from the non-prytanising tribes,
was established) a new officer, the
emordrys Tav mwpoédpwy, relieved him
of this last duty. In Socrates’s time,
the ¢uAd mpuravebovoa, and the ém-
ordrns of the day, had the responsi-
bility of putting to the vote (émyn-
pie) any question that arose or of
refusing to allow a vote. Socrates be-
longed to the d%uos ’AAwmekn, in the
¢uAY ’Avrioxis. Notice the addition of
*Avrioxis here without the art. and as
an afterthought; fudv % PvA7n would
have been sufficient, though less cir-
cumstantial. — ¢re vpels xré.: after
the Athenian success off the dane
called Arginusae, in 406 B.c. This
battle is also spoken of as % wepl Aé-
eBoy vavuaxle, Xen. Hell. ii. 3. 32-35.
The victorious generals were promptly
prosecuted for remissness in the per-
formance of their duty. Accused of
having shown criminal neglect in fail-
ing to gather up the dead and save
those who, at the end of the engage-
ment, were floating about on wrecks,
they pleaded ““ not guilty.” The squad-

 
 

 

ag,

‘5

116 ITAATQONOS,

it
t

Gort

e A \ ’ \ \ > 9 | / \ 9
ULELS Tovs Oka TTPATYYOVS TOUS OUK dvelouévous Tovs €k
10 71)$ vavpayxias éBovleabe ablpdovs kpivew, wapavdpws, ws

EI

- ~ e ’ ’ ~ eC. m™ 2 & 2.3 5 .\ /’
€V TQ VOTEPQW XPove ogy Vw €00CE. T0T €yw MOVOS
32

 

d¢ Tis eis Tv ekkAnciav : pdokwy ml
Tel xovs GAplTwy (on a meal-barrel)
owbijvar: émoTéArew (enjoined upon) §
adTg Tos amwoAAvuévous (those who were
drowning), éav ocwbfj amayyethar T¢ 8i-
ue, 8Te oi aTpaTnyol odk dvelAovro (res-
cued) Tovs aploTovs dmep Tis marpidos
vevouévovs. Cf. Xen. An. i. 2. 3, where

ron detailed for this duty had been hin-
dered, they said, by stress of weather.
The main fleet went in pursuit of
the worsted enemy. The details of
the case for and against them cannot
satisfactorily be made out, though
the reasons are many and strong for
thinking them innocent. The ille-
gality of the procedure by which they
were condemned is undoubted. They
were condemned évéuws (1) because
judgment was passed upon them é&6pd-
ous, t.e. md YN &mavras,— this was  xias rods év adr} vavuaxfoavrds Te kal
illegal, since not only the general kaxas wempaydras. G. 191, N. 6; H.
practice at Athens, but the decree of 788 a. For this subst. use of oi éx
Cannonus (7d Kavvwvov Yf¢iaua) pro- with the gen. there are many paral-
vided &8ixa (apart) €kacrov kplvew,— lels; such subst. use is common with
(2) because they had not reasonable preps. denoting close relation to their
time allowed them for preparing and object, — in, on, fiom, etc. Notice the
presenting their defence. Cf. Xen. point given to wapavduws by its posi-
Hell. i. 7. 5, Bpaxéa €xaoctos ameroyf- tion; it comes in almost as if it began
caro, ov yap mwpodTéldn opiait Ad an independent sent. Cf. Lach. 183 b,
vos kata TOv vduov. See Xen. Torydprot ds bv olnrar Tpaypdlav rkaAws
Hell. i. 6. 33 ff. and 7; Mem. i. 1. 18;  moelv . . . edBbs Sevpo PpépeTar Kal T0icl’
iv. 4. 2. émideikvvow eik dT ws. Xenophonsays

9. Tovs 8éka orpatnyovs: the round that the Athenians soon repented of
number of all the generals is given their rash and illegal action. Cf. Xen.
here. One of the ten, Archestratus, Hell. i. 6. 35, kal od wéAAg xpdve UoTe-
died at Mitylene, where Conon, an- pov ueréuere Tois ’A@nvalois kal éYnoi-
other of them, was still blockaded ocavro, olrwes tov dfuov éiqymdrnoar
when the battle was fought. Of the (deceived) mwpoBoAds adrdv elva:
remaining eight who were in the bat- (their case was thus prejudiced by an
tle, two, Protomachus and Aristoge- informal vote of the assembly) kal
nes, flatly refused to obey the sum- ¢éyyvnras karacrTiioca:r, ws &»
mons to return to Athens. Thusonly «p:0&civ. The fate of these generals
six reached Athens, and these, Peri- was remembered thirty years after-
cles, Lysias, Diomedon, Erasinides, ward by the Athenian admiral Cha-
Aristocrates, and Thrasyllus, were put  brias. He won a great victory off
to death. — rovs ék Tis vavpaxlas: Naxos (B.c. 376) but neglected to
not only the dead but those who pursue the enemy, in order to save
{1 were floating about in danger of their the men on the wrecks and bury the
lives. Cf Xen. Hell. i. 7.11, mapiir@e dead. Cf. Diod. xv. 3s.

—

—
rer Nag —

ape a
A I rR

a ——

év Tals mOAegw Jvras éx TAY moAewv.
Here the fuller expression would per-
haps be ok averouévovs éx Tis vavua-

AR

A I EE

TE Tn “rs, r -
Wp —
es le Rm NAS A NI
» BE

oT ——

RRs -

Te

— —

Ee ——————
a

nslin—id
—
Bn ACRE ETRY

32

Tobs éx T@v woAewy is equiv. to Tods

HS mr

 

 

 

 

ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS.

y LAR
at, Pr
§

117

~ ’ ’ ’ \ ~ A \ ’
TWY TPVUTOAVEWY Mravtidfny undev mole Tapa TOYS VOJLOVS 32

rN 7s 4 3 ’ (Pe Spo ¥ 3 S ’
[kat EYaVTLO éymiodun |; Kal ETOLUWY, OVTWYV €EVOELKVUVAL

’ ~ ’ \ ~ nal p \
JE KOl QTAYeEw TOV PNTOPWY. Kal VUOV KENEVOVTwY Kal

’ \ \ ~ / \ ~ o / y IAN /
15 Bodvrev, pera TOV VOMOV Kal TOV OLKALOV PUY KoA oy ME

Setv Siakwdvvevew 7) ped’ duov yevéolar pi) dikawa Bov-

Aevouévwr dofnbévra deopov 7) Gavarov.

\ ~ \
Ka. TOVTO. [EV

nw _€rL SnpokpaTovuérns Ts TONews © émeldn O¢ SAvyapyia

éyévero, ol TpudkovTa aD METATEUPAUEVOL [LE (TEUTTOV
3 A N03 \ ’ ’ ) - > z ~
avrov els my Bé\ov mpooérafav dyayeww éx Salautvos

12. qvavriwbnv: used absolutely
as often.—— pndév mowelv: after the
neg. idea in fravtidony. GMT. 95, 2
N.1la; H.963 and 1029. Butcf.31de.

13. kal évavrio éymbiodpny: and 1
voted against it, i.e. allowing the ques-
tion to be put. See App. Socrates was
émardrys T@v wpurdvewy on this day
and followed up this opposition, —
manifested when in consultation with
the other mpurdveis,—by absolutely
refusing to put the question to vote.
Cf. Gorg. 474 a; Xen. Mem. i. 1. 8; iv.
4. 2. For a different account of the
facts, see Grote’s Greece, c. G4, fin.
Connect évavria éyneioduny with udvos
T&V TpuTdrewy. — évdelkvivar, GTA Ye:
&vdetis and amaywyn were two sum-
mary methods of procedure in mak-
ing prosecutions. Both dispensed
with the usual delay, and allowed the
magistrates (in &deilis, it was the
board of the Thesmothetae; in ama-
ywyi, it was usually the board called
oi €vdeka) to deal summarily with cer-
tain charges. &deitis was a form of
summary indictment, laying informa-
tion usually against one who dis-
charged functions or exercised rights
for which he was legally disqualified,
as when an &rwoes entered public
places in Athens; amaywyf was the
summary arrest and giving in charge

of a man caught in actual crime. Cf.
Poll. vir. 49, 5 8¢ araywyq, brav
Tis ov &oTwv éydeliaclar uy mapdvra
ToUTov mwapdvra ém alTodpdpy AaBdv
amaydyn. The two processes might
therefore be used in the same case.

14. Trav pyropwy : these professional
speakers had no class privileges; only
their more frequent speaking distin-
guished them from ordinary citizens.

15. Bodvrawv: cf. Xen. Hell. i. 7. 12,
Td 8¢ mwA#los éBda dewdy elvai, €i un Tis
édaer TOv dfjmov mpdTTew O dv BodAn-
Tat Apparently the crowd jeered
at Socrates. Cf. Gorg. 474 a, wépvo
(a year ago) BovAebew Aaxdv, émedy 7)
puAY émpuTdveve kal Eel ue émuympiCew,
véAwTa mapeixov kal obk Aw
crauny émiynpilerr.

16. ped Jpav yevéobar: to place
myself on your side.

19. oi Tpudkovra: they were called
the Thirty rather than the Thirty Ty-
rants. — av: in tun. Both democ-
racy and oligarchy, however opposed
in other respects, agreed in attempt-
ing to interfere with the independence
of Socrates.

20. els Tv Oohov: the Rotunda.
The name orids was also applied to it
from its resemblance to a parasol.
Cf. Harp. (s.v. 6éros) who further
says it was the place mov éoTi@vTai

co TN

A

 
 

 

S—
ENG erm Porn RST

 

leper Wrap EA

 

sm——
nN me
RR SR PERT BN

en

     

118

Aéovra Tov Salapiviov wa damofdvor: ota 81) kal dAlois 32

ITAATONOS,

éxetvor mol\ots mola TpOTLTaTIor Bovkdpevo. ws mhEL-

oTOVS dvamhijoaL airiév - © TOTE pévrol oy ov Aoyw alN

Ay

py ad dveeiddpny, OTL épuol Oavdrov [LEV péNe,< el pwn

wos
25 dypouirepov NY €lmew,)ov0 OTLODY, TOU 0 -under- duro

32

pyo- adoro: épydleota ToUTOV 0€ TO TAY peer. éue

op éxelvn 7 apx 0VK ééémn tev UT WS br xupe odoa,

wore ddukdy TL épydoacbai, a\\’ émedn) ék ns Bolov

3 / c \ / y 3 ~ \ ¥
éénhfoper, ol pv TérTapes @yovTo €is Zalauiva Kol Mya.-

(dine) oi mpvrdvers. Cf. also Poll.
viii. 155, 9 606A os év 7 ovvedelmvovy
éxkdoTns Nuépas mevTNKOVTA TiS TAY
wevtakoolwy BeovAls,  mwpuvTaves-
cvoa purf. Cf. E. M. sv. 06Aos
bpopny elxe mepipepi) oikodountiv, ovxl
Ellyn, bs Ta dAAa oikodoufuara. The
Thirty used the 8dros as their official
residence.

21. Aéovra: Leon of Salamis was
an Athenian general. He, like Ly-
sias’s brother Polemarchus and many
others (Xen. Hell. ii. 3.39), fell a vic-
tim of the rapacity of the Thirty. —
ola: i.e. Towavta yap. Cf. Cic. Cat.
nr. 10. 25, quale bellum nulla

.barbaria...gessit.—8q: in
speaking of an incontrovertible fact,
indeed. Notice the order of words.

23. dvamAnoav: (mplicate, the Lat.
implere, or contaminare. ava-
wAews is used similarly. Cf. Phaed.

07a, éav 871i udAioTa undev pL @-

LEV TY TOuaTL UNdE KOLVWVDUEY,
di un (except so far as) waca avdaykn,
unde avamipmAoueba Tis TobTOU
pvoews. With this passage cf. espe-
cially Antipho, 11. a, 10, ovykaramiu-
wAdvatr Tous avartiovs. For the facts,

ef. Lys. X11. 93, cvvwpereiobar pév yap

buas ovk AElovy, cvvdiaBdAAecOal
® #vdyrkalov. See also Critias’s
speech in the Odeum, Xen. Hell. ii. 4

9: del ody Vuas, bomep kal Tiu@y pede
fete oUTw Kal T&v kwdlvwy petTéxew.
TOV ov katelleyuévwy *EAevowiwy ka-

/ ~
TaynpioTéoy éotiv, (va TadTa Nuiv-

kal QappiTe kal poBrole.

24. el pn dypoikoTepov nv elmelv:
a supposition contrary to fact with
suppressed apod. used by way of show-
ing hesitation. C7. the same const.
in Futhyd. 283 e, & &éve @odpie, ei uy
aéypotkdrepov Hv eimelv, elmov
dv “gol eis keparfy,” § Ti pabdy pov
kal T@v ¥AAwy katayevder kTé. The
usages of gentle speech at Athens
adopted this formula to soften and
excuse a strong expression. Cf. Gorg.
509 a, TavTa . . . kaTéxeTar kal 8édeTal,
kal el aypokbrepov eimely éoTi, 01d 7-
pols Kal adamavrivois Advyous.
The é&ypowdrepdv 71, for which Soc-
rates apologizes, is undoubtedly the
curt and blunt colloquialism of wéAe
uot 00d étiovyv. Such an apology per-
haps would prepare the less sensitive
modern for language not less curt
and blunt, but far more “ colloquial.”

26. Tovrov &¢: pointedly summa-
rizes the preceding clause.

28. doe: not the correlative of
odTws, but to be connected immedi-
ately with étémantevr. The idiom éx-
TANTTEW Twa els Ti 1s similar.

29. d&xovro, wxopnv: went straight

 

 

ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS.

30 yov Aéovra, éyo dé OX Spy aTLWY olkade.

Swe avr amébavov, €& 1) Mm apx” dia Taxéov kaTe\vln-
0 Kal TOUTWY Dp éoovrar moot paprupes.

XXI. “Ap ov dv pe oleae Toodde & én Siwyevéobar,

el émparTov Ta dnpudoia Ka mpdrrww dios drpds dyeing

éBovjflovy Tots Oukalots |kad, GoTEp XPT), TOUTO EPL TAEL-

aTOV AOD 0s woA\ov ye O€l, @ dvopes "Abpraioe. 00+

5 yap av aos avfpdmar ovoels. aAN eyo dL. TAVTOS TOV 33

Biov Sypuooiy. 7€] €L mov TL émpaga, ToLoUTOS pavovpuat, lear

ola o 6 avTOS 0vTOS, 0VOEVL THTOTE SvyXopijoas oVOEV Tapa.
70 "Stuuror) lovUTe dN ovTe ToUTWY 0VOEV(, ovs ol OuaBdl-

Novres €ué paow Sods pares elvad.

oy de dddaka-

10 Aos pv oVdevds TAHTOT éyevouny el O€ Tis gon Myorros

Kal TO. €LavTOU TPATTOVTOS

”n 2

‘4°. The recurrence of the same
word only makes more plain the dif-
erence of the courses pursued.

31. Sua Tax€wy: a common expres-
sion with Thucydides and Xenophon,
equiv. to ia rdxovs. Cf. dia Bpaxéwv,
Prot. 339a; Gorg. 449 a. The Thirty
were only eight months (June 404-
Febr. 403) in power, for they ceased
to rule when Critias fell at Munychia
in the engagement with Thrasybulus
and the returned exiles. In the in-
terim before the restoration of the
democracy, ten men, doubtless one for
each ¢uvAf, were put in their place.
Cf. Xen. Hell. ii. 4. 23.

e 32. pdprupes: possibly proceedings
were here interrupted for these wit-
nesses, though it seems quite as likely
that Socrates is appealing to the 3:
kaotal themselves to be his witnesses.
Hermann, who thus understands it,
reads duav instead of duiv, an unneces-
sary change. :

XXI. 1. ap’ ovv: by odv we are

Emilupuel AKOVEL, ELTE VEWTE-

referred to what immediately pre-
cedes for our answer to this question.

2. &mparrov: distinctly refers to a
continued course, a line of action.

3. roils Swkalows: whatever was just,
neut., a concrete way of expressing an
abstraction.

5. aN’ éys: i.e. “however it may
be with others, as for me, I, etc.”

6. TowvTtos: explained by Evyxw-
phoas. This amounts to a very di-
rect appeal to the facts, and may be
regarded as a shorter substitute for
Tow00T0s Ppavotuar date (Or olos) undevl
Evyxwpiioal, kal yap ¢avoiuar undevl
tvyxwphoas. For the commoner but
more vague idiom, ¢f. Crit. 46 b.

9. éya 8¢ kré.: sce Introd. 25, fin.

11. Ta épavrol WPATTOVTOS : See on
moAvmpaymovd, 31 e.  émbvuer does not
exclude either ére@lunoe or émbvunoe,
but rather implies them. Cf. Tvyxave
in 18d. The notion of habitual action
is conveyed in the form of the same
single act indefinitely repeated.

     
  
  
  
 
  
  
   
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
  
 
  
     
   
   
  
  
   
   
    
  
  
   
  
  
   
   
  
     
   
   
   
      
  

119

| Kal lows av 32

[3 Ve

ITAA a

A  —

ar

90)
ATIoAONA SQKPATOYS. 121

120 ITAATQNOS,

vy 3 \ ’ 9 / 3 Q\ /

pos etre mpeaPirepos, ovdevi amore épfdvnaa, ovde xp1- 33 XXII. AMG Sid T( 01) mote per’ Spo Xaipovai Twes 33
\ / / \ / \ ¥ 3 3

pata pev hapBdvov Sialéyopar, un AapBdaver 8¢ ov, al\’ b
opolws kal mhovoiw kai TéMTL TAPEXW EuavTOv épwTav,
15] kai édv Tis BovAyTaL drokpwiuevos dkovew av av Néyw.
Kal TOUTwY éyw €iTe TIS XPNOTOS YlyveraL €lte mij, ovK av
Swcalws Tv airiav Vméyoyut, Gv pire vmeayduny undevt
\ /’ / /’ IN 7 3 ’ /’ 9
undev mémore pdbnua pijre édidaca el 8¢ tis dno wap

3 ~ / / ~ \ 3 ~ IQ» © \ \ y
éuod mamoré Tu pabety 9) akovoar Ldig 6 TL un) Kal allot

 

wolvv -xpbvov Oiarpifovres; aknkdare, & dvpes *Aly-
vator® waocay vu Tv ahjbfeiar éyw elmov, oti dkovovres

 

’ ; / ~ >» ~~. 3
xaipovow éferalou€vois Tots olopévols uev evar godots,)
» o yy ¥ \ iyi 9 Oé 3 \ \ ~ ‘e 3 ’
05000 01+ £710 Yop hii Gnoss Yok 8¢ TovTo, (Ws yd
Pr) TpoB rar vo 700 fed; TpATTEW Kai ێk pav-
Telov kal €€ évumvioy kal avr pom, @mep Tis ToTE Ka

 

aA\y- Oeia-poipa avfpdme kal 6TLOVY. wpooérade TPAT-

i

 

 

a NE

II SO IIE -

NN Cs a

’ ay 9 yy. 3 AN 2
wavTes, €V LoTe OTL oUK aly Aéyeu.

12. o0vd¢: applies neither to the
uév nor to the §¢ clause separately,
but to their combination. See on
dewa bv elmy, 28d.

15. dmwokpivopevos dkovewv: charac-
teristic of the Socratic cvvovsia. See
Introd. 19. —dkovew «k7é.: first éaxod-
ew is to be construed with BovAnTat
(see on TovTo, 31 dA), then mapéyw
euavtdy axovew is to be supplied from
the preceding. After mapéxw, axod-
ew, like épwrarv above, expresses pur-
pose. See G. 2656 and H. 951; also,
for the use of the act. voice, see
G. 261, 2, Rem.; H. 952 a. Socrates
means: I am ready for questions, but
if any so wishes he may answer and
hear what I then have to say.

16. TovTwy éyd kTé.: éyd is placed
next to 7odrwr for the sake of con-
trast, while rodrwr, though it is gov-
cerned by =ls, inevitably adheres to
qv aitiav méyoyut. This last cor-
responds as a pass. to airlav émpépewv
or mpooTifévar. The notion of respon-
sibility is colored, like the Eng. “have
to answer for,” with the implication
of blame. For an account of those
whom Socrates had chiefly in mind,
see Introd. 24 and 33.

17. dmweoxopnv: is meant probably
as a side thrust at imposing prom-
ises like the one attributed to Pro-

tagoras about his own teaching in
Prot. 319 a. Socrates himself fol-
lowed no profession strictly so called,
had no ready-made art, or rules of
art, to communicate. His field of
instruction was so wide that he can
truly say that, in the accepted sense
of 8iddoreww and uwav@dvew at Athens,
his pupils got no learning from him.
They learned no udénua, acquired no
useful (professional) knowledge. He
put them in the way of getting it
for themselves. Plato makes Soc-
rates decline to become the tutor of
Nicias’s son (Lach. 207d). He taught
nothing positive, but removed by his
searching questions the self-deception
which prevented men from acquiring
the knowledge of which they were
capable. See his successful treatment
of the conceited Ei000dnuos 6 kaAds,
in Xen. Mem. iv. 2.

19. dA\\ov mdvres: not very differ-
ent in meaning from &aios 7s, 28 e.
It differs from of &AAot wdvres, the
common reading here, just as wdvres
&vbpwmor (all conceivable men) differs
from wdvres of #vfpwmor. In such
cases if the noun alone would not
have taken the art., it does not take
it when qualified by was and the like.
Compare all others and all the others.
Here we have a complete antithesis

TEL. TOVTA, @ "Abypaio, Kal ah} €oTL Kal shéheyrra dl

€l yop on eywye TQV véwy TOUS pév agpleipo, TOUS O€

Ouéplapka, xpnv Ofmov, elite Twes alTOY wpeoBUTepor

to idlg, which takes the place of the
more usual dnuooia; Socrates calls at-
teation to the publicity of the places
where he talks (¢f. 17 ¢) and to the
opportunity of conversing with him
offered to all alike.

XXII. 3. elmwov : the 67: clause really
answers 8wx 7 . .. diatplBovres; but
grammatically it is an appended ex-
planation of Hv éA%feiar, and is gov-
cerned by elroy. — diovovTes, éferalopé-
vos: both are in close relation with
xaipovat; contrast the const. of the
same partics. in 23 c.

5. ovk andés: i.e. fdiaToy, a case of
Awrdrys (simplicity), or welwos (diminu-
tion), quite like the Eng. not at all un-
pleasant. Such are the common ody
fkiora (mdvtwy udAwora) and od wavy
(cf. not quite). Socrates perhaps agreed
with La Rochefoucauld, Maximes, 31,
Si nous n’avions point de défauts,
nous ne prendrions pas tant de plai-
sir a en remarquer dans les autres. —
ws éyw nui: as I maintain, implying
not so much that he makes his asser-
tion now as that he now emphatically
calls attention to the assertion al-
ready made and substantiated. For
the analogous use of the pres. express-

ing continued result of past action,
see GMT. 10, ~. 4; H. 827. Here ¢pnul
almost means 1 am maintaining and
have maintained. See on wep Aéyw 21 a,
and cf. Lach. 193 e, BoiAer ov ¢ Aé-
Yyouerv mwelbdueba 16 ye TogovTOV; |.
TE Ady bs kapTepelv kKeAelel.

6. ék pavrelwy, kal mavti TpoTe: a
phrase which suggests that ék wavrods
Tpémov has made room for wavri Tpdne.
The kat before mavri is best rendered
by and generally. For the facts, cf.
21 Db and Crit. 44 a.

7. rls wore kal aAAn: ever at any
time at all, any other.

8. Bela poipa: will of Providence.
What is appointed by the Deity is
contrasted with a man’s own choice;
the phrase freq. qualifies what man
attains or enjoys through no effort or
desert of his own but almost ayafi
poipa (by the grace of good luck). Cf.
Rep. 493 a; Arist. Eth. i. 9. 1.

9. evéheykTa: easy to prove, not easy
to disprove. So éAéyxew means prove
a point by disproving its contradictory.

10. et yap 81: for {f really, i.e. as we
must suppose if Meletus speaks truth.

11. xpnv karqyopeiv: av is not re-
quired. GMT. 49, 2, Nx. 3a. The con-

 
f
An
i

or

 

 

 

a TI os

i pai ce SA

ara,

122

ITAATONOZS

/’ y © ” ~
YEVOUEVOL EYVOTAY OTL véols OVO AUTOLS éyw KOKOV Tra -

’ / \ 3 \ J rt 3 ~
woré Tu EvveBovlevoa, vuvt avrovs avaefBaivovras €uov

katyyopety kal Typwpeiobar el 3 un) avrol ffelov, TOV

3 /’ \ ~ 5 /’ / \ 3 \ \
15 OlKELWY TWAS TwWV €EKEWWY, TATEPAS Kal ade dovs Koll

y \ ’ > c.9 3 ~ \ 3
aANOUS TOUS TPOTN)KOVTAS, ELTTEQ UT EUOV TL KOKOV ETTE-

’ J ~ ¢ 3 ~ ili ~ \ ~
movBeoay OVUTWY OL OLKELoL, Vv pepvno Ba [kal TLLWPEL-

gla]. wmdvrws 8¢ mapeoTw avTGY molot evravBfol obs

3 \ e ~ ~ \ / € ’ 3 \ e /’ \
éyw op, mpaTtov pev Kplrwy ovrooi, €uos MAtkiatns Kal

20 dnudmys, KpiroBovlov Tovde marip: érera Avoavias 6

ODO

[313]

d

clusion states an unfulfilled obligation.
H. 897. All the prots. here expressed,
including ei diagbelpw and ei émemdy-
Beda, belong to the first class (GMT.

49. 1; H. 893), and the apod. xpiiv

involves its own unfulfilled condition.
GMT. 49, 2, x. 3, Rem. 1. xpi» to-
gether with this implied prot. forms
the apod. which goes with el diagpbeipw
kré. GMT. 55, 1. This prot. is dis-
junctively elaborated in two parallel

| clauses, (1) etre &yrwoar, (2) ei oe ui

|
}

abTol Hferov. See on elmep kré. 27 d.
Instead of efre... elre we have elre

. ei 8¢ (like o¥re ... 00d¢), which
gives a certain independence to the
second member. Hence it is treated
as a condition by itself, and the lead-
ing protasis, el diapbeipw, is substan-
tially repeated in elmep émemdvfeoav.
If (as Meletus urges) I am corrupting
some youny men, and have corrupted
others, then (if they were doing their
duty) they would, supposing some of
them convinced on growing older that
in their youth 1, ete., now stand forth,
etc.

13. dvaBaivovras: see on éml dika-
oThpiov, 17 d.

15. Trav ékelvav: on the repetition
of the art. here, sce G. 142, 2; HH.
668.

16. Tous mwpoarkovras: Eng. idiom

suggests either 7@&v mpoonkdvrwy or
mpoofkovras without the art. After
the detailed enumeration, rarépas . . .
aAAovs, ToUs mpoairovras is introduced
appositively to sum up, and therefore
the article is used.

17. kal Tipwpeiocdar: combine with
uepviiobar, and the idea is that of uvy-
owaxeiv, a word which had lately been
much used in the political turmoils at
Athens. Cf. the final agreement be-
tween oligarchs and democrats, Xen.
Hell. ii. 4. 43, § uyy wu) pvnowcary-
ELV.

18. mdvres: as in answers, cer-
tainly. — évrav@oi: connect with md-
petoy, which thus denotes the result
of mapiévar. We might call it here
the perf. of mapiévar. Cf. Xen. An. i.
2. 2, kal AaBdvTes Ta GmAa mwapioav eis
Sdpdets. For the converse, cf. 36¢,
évravba ok 7a.

19. Kplrov: it is he whose name
is given to the well-known dialogue
of Plato. See Introd. 62.

20. SnpoTns: see on Ervye mpuTavel-
ovoa, 32 b. — Kpirofovdov: although
his father Crito modestly declares
(Luthyd. 271 b) that he is thin (oxAn-
¢pds) in comparison with his exquisite
playmate Clinias (cousin of Alci-
biades), Critobulus was famous for
his beauty. See Xen. Symp. 4. 12 ff.

ATIOAOTIA 3SQKPATOYZ.

Siijrrios, Aloxlvov Tovde marip: €rv "Avripav 6 Knee 33

\ e /’ 5 / / y ’ RD nN
olevs ovtooi, Emvyévovs warp: allou Tour ovrol wy
e 3 /’ ~ ~ / ’
ot adehdol év Tadty 1) OatpBy yeydvaoi, NikéaTparos
6 Oeolotidov, ddelpos BeoddTov — kal 0 ev PeddoTos

¢ -\ ~ ~

rere\evTnKer, GoTe ovk dv ékewds ye adrov katadenbein
— kal Tldpalos 68€ 6 Anuoddkov ob jr Oedyns adehpos:

He was one of Socrates’s most con-
stant companions. The Oeconomicus
of Xenophon is a conversation be-
tween Socrates and Critobulus. The
affection between Socrates and Crito
is best shown by the pains taken by
the former in furthering Critobulus’s
education. In the Memorabilia (i.
3. 8 ff.) Socrates indirectly reproves
Critobulus by a conversation in his
presence held with Xenophon. The
same lesson he reinforces (ii. 6. esp.
31 and 32). That it was needed ap-
pears from fhe impetuous character
shown by Critobulus in Xenophon’s
Symposium. Cf. 3. 7, ti yap ab, épn,
@ KpitdBovAe, éml ivi uéyiatov Ppoveis
(of what are you proudest?) ; ém) kdA-
Aet, &pn. That Critobulus perplexed
his father is shown in Euthyd. 306 a,
where, speaking of his sons, Crito says:
KpiréBovAos 8 #dn nAwlav Exe (is get-
ting on) kal deital Tivos, 6a Tis al

, T0v ovfger.—0 Zdnrrios: of the

dipos Spnrrds in the pur) *Arapartis.

21. Aloxlvov: like Tlato, Xeno-
phon, and Antisthenes, Aeschines (sur-
named 6 Swkpatikds) carefully wrote
down the sayings of Socrates after
the master’s death. Three dialogues
preserved among the writings of Plato
have been attributed to Aeschines
the Socratic. The Eryxias possibly
is by him, but hardly either the Axio-
chus or the treatise mepl aperijs. Aes-
chines was unpractical, if we can
trust the amusing account given by

Lysias (fr. 3) of his attempt to estab-
lish, with borrowed money, a Téxvy
pvpeyuikfy (salve-shop). His failure in
this venture may have led him to
visit Syracuse, where, according to
Lucian (Parasit. 32), he won the favor
of Dionysius. —’Avripav: Aeschines
and Antiphon here present should not
be confused with their more cele-
brated namesakes, the orators. This
Antiphon was of the 8fjuos Knoiow
in the gual *Epexbnis, but nothing fur-
ther is known of him.

22. ’Emyévovs: the same whom
Socrates saw (Xen. Mem. iii. 12) véov Te
lvra Kal TO o@ua Kak@s E€xovTa. SOC
rates reproached him then and there
for not doing his duty to himself and
to his country by taking rational ex-
ercise. — rolyvy: moreover, a transi-
tion. The fathers of some have been
named, now he passes on to the case
of brothers.

23. ravry: i.e. the one in question.

25. ékeivas ye: he at least, i.e. 6 éxel
— § ev “Aidov, Oeddotos, named last but
the more remote. Cf. Euthyd. 271 Db,
where ékeivos refers to Critobulus just
named.— avrov : NidoTparos, of whom
he is speaking. Since his brother is
dead, Nicostratus will give an abso-
lutely unbiassed opinion. — karaden-
Oein : lit. deprecari, but really it means
here overpersuade, i.e. persuade a man
against his better judgment. Cf. kata-
xapiCeabai, 35 c.

26. @edyns: this brother of Para-

HR I RTS ————— p—

gp

 
 

TR

CL T Hs

Fd
N\
\

ATIOAOTIA SOKPATOYS. 125 dl

CNTR INR b
AE
<
pup

124 IIAATQNOS, I i
i | oi diepfapuévor Tdy av Aoyov é€xower Ponbovvres: oi 8¢ 34 i
i 00€ 8¢ *Adeluavros 6 *AploTwvos ob ddelpos ovroot TT\d- 34 Qs Sepp x ol iy ’ a
| i Px : i al > . adudplapror, mpeaBuTepor 10 avdpes, ol TOUTWY TPOTT)- i!
I TOV, Kol Alavrédwpos ov AmoAAddwpos 00€ adel pds. Kal i

kovtes, Tiva allov éyovat Aoyov Bonbovvres émol dAN 4

 

 

 

almost religious fervor. In the ’Awo-
Aoyla Swkpdrovs (28), attributed to
Xenophon, he is mentioned as émriBuus-

conclusion suggested by the preced-
ing clause. Socrates means: this fact
(mwdvras Bonbeiv, kTé.) proves my inno-

 

3. dvapvnolels €avrov: many dike
oral had been defendants.

would be surprised at such unseemli-
ness where he was concerned.

E ¥ > ¥ ~ 9... .~ ? ~ 3
: dA\\ovs mollods éym €xw Vuly elmew, Gv Twa EXPNY jud- A LN. CA \ Qs v ; ’ \ »
; N: Ai hx , u N TOV opbov Te Kal Olkatov, ott &wvicaot Me\yTo EV WOO I
ol 30 \ioTa pév év TO €avrov Aye mapaocyéobfar MéyTov 2s 2d 88 / 1
I . Le + , % . 3 ie 10 Yrevdopéve, ELC. de alnfedovr. ; ih
{i pdprupa- €i 0é Tote €melabero, vv mapaoyéobo, éyw » , » A iN Law ’ ia i
’ dl : Ns 9 iia XXIII. Elev 61f, @ avdpes* a pév éym éxo’ dv dmo- |
| TAPAYWP®D, Kol NEYETwW, €L TL EXEL TOLOUTOV. OANA TOUTOV ~ a ~ «ov y A |
§ . ; a . 3 : Moyea fa, oY E00 €EOTL TOUTA Kal GANG LOWS TOLAUTA. i
i wav Tovvavriov evprjoere, @ avdpes, wavras éuot Ponbeww / > ¥ oa , ) . ~ 1
: an - " A Ss ; % nig lis Ta d av Tis Vpuov ayavaktioeer avauvnolbels éavrov, e i
ETOLUOVS TQ Suapfeipovr, TQ KOKA épyalopéve TOUS OLKEL- ve oa s 3.2 * asa s A > ’ !
Sm , Ny TN €L O LEV Kal ENATTW TOUTOUL TOV Qywros aywva oywyl(o- 1
35 ous avTOV, 0s Pact MéAnTos kat Avvuros. avToL wey yap b 3Q \e os \ \ \ ~ 5
1 % 5 5 pevos €0enfn Te kal ikérevaoe Tovs OlkaaTas META TONNGY |
bi 00 : 1 3 ~ ral) 4 2 ’ ’ e - ¢ ¢
. lus is known through Rep. vi. 496 b, vas itv laxvpds advo’ (Swrparovs), &A- , Sakpiwv, Tada. TE AUTOU avaBiBacduevos, wa oT wd.-
| where Plato uses the now proverbial Aws & edffns (a simpleton). Of the : , S97 ns ig .
If expression, 6 Tod @edyovs xaAwds, the persons here mentioned, Nicostratus, Nora é\enlein, Kal AANOVUS TOV OLKELWY Kal dilwy roANovs, A
i bridle of Theages, i.e. ill health. Such  Theodotus, Paralus, and Aeantodorus 5 A Qy  dQN  ¥ ’ / \ ~ , A
3 . . . >
| was the providential restraint which are not elsewhere mentioned; and of yo 0¢ ovdév apo Foray Toam, Kot Toute, kiwOvvedwy,
Ei made Theages, in spite of political the eleven here named as certainly a4 34 :
I temptations, faithful to philosophy; present at the trial (there is doubt b cence; for how else can we account 4. el €denOn «7é.: see, esp. for the » |
1g otherwise, like Demodocus, his father, about Epigenes) only four (or five for the following? ~dp applies to force of uév and &¢ on dewa &v ely,
: he would have gone into politics. with Epigenes), Apollodorus, Crito, both clauses adrol uév and oi 3¢é; more 28 d. — é\darTw dydva: the uéyioros
Demodocus is one of the speakers in  Critobulus, and Aeschines, are named especially to the latter. For Adyor  &ydv was one involving a man’s fran- |}
| | the Theages, a dialogue wrongly at- in the Phaedo as present afterwards éxoter, see on ei uévroy, 31 Db. chise and his life. C7. Dem. xx1. 99, |
iE a4 tributed to Plato. in the prison. 37. oi Tovtwv mpoomkovres: this madla yap mapacThoeTar kal KkAafioe
4 " 27. *A8elpavros : son of Aristo and 29. pdhorta pév: by all means. In partic., like &pxwr and ovvdpxwy, has kal TobTois abrdy éfaurhoerar, and 186,
i brother of Plato and of Glaucon the clause beginning with ei 8¢, év 76 by usage become substantially a noun. ofa 7olvvy 811 78 madie Exwv 68v- !
(Xen. Mem. iii. 6. 1) ; both of Plato’s  éavroi is referred to by 7éte and con- The poets apparently were the first peirat (the defendant will bring his
hE brothers were friends of Socrates. trasted with viv mapaoxéofo. to use partics. in this way. Cf. Aesch. children and burst into lamentations) kal
iL Glaucon and Adimantus are intro- 31. éyd mwapaxwpd: parenthetical. Pers. 245, ibvrwv Tots Tekovaoi; Eur.  moAAods Adyous kal Tamewods éper, da- 4
E § duced in the Republic; Adimantus is “The full expression occurs Aeschin. Fl. 335, 6 ékelvov Texdwv. The parti- kpbwy kal &s éAeevdraTov mov
=i older, and is represented as not on so iii. 165, wapaxwpd cot Tod BApaTos, cipial use and the use as a noun sub- ad7dv. For another appeal which was i
hil familiar a footing with Socrates as €ws &v efwps” R. The time used sisted side by side. Cf. Legg. ix. customary in Athenian courts, see on Hl
Hh his younger brother. for introducing evidence was not 868 b, T@v mpoonkbvrwy T¢ Tehevth- ob Adyous and ¢oprikd kal dwavird,
28. *AmwoA\odwpos : surnamed 6 ua- counted as a part of the time allotted savry, and ibid. Tods mpoofkovras Tov 32 a. |
: vicds because of his intense excita- for the pleadings, but the water-clock reAevthoavros. GMT. 108, 2; H. 966. 6. madla avrov: see App. iM
tl bility. Cf. Sympos. 173d. This is (7d #3wp) was stopped while a wit- 38. dAN 1): see on aAX’ 4, 20 d. 8. éya 8¢ dpa: and then finds that I. |
bi nowhere better shown than in the ness was giving account of his evi- XXIII. 1. elev 81: this closes the To be sure Socrates had enough Hy
: Phaedo, 117 d, where he gives way to dence. Cf. Lys. xxmnr 4, 8, 11, 14, argument proper of the defence, and friends and to spare who were pres- |
b i uncontrollable grief as soon as Soc- and 15, kal uo: émiraBe (addressed to marks the beginning of the perora- ent in court, but he refused to make oH
i h rates drinks the fatal hemlock. Inthe an officer of the court) 7d #8wp. See tion. such wrongful use of their presence |
i Symposium, 172 e, he describes his ~~ App. 2. lows Towavra: in much the same and sympathy. &pa implies that any | i
iris first association with Socrates with 35. ydp: calls upon us to draw a b strain. one who knew Socrates of course d

{
i

i
i

hdl

 
 

 

r—

 

i ea

 

 

 

126

15

20

34

/ ha , ts] {. }

IIAATQONOS,

1.3 ~

os dv 86a, Tov éoyaTov kivduvov. TAX OUY TIS TOUTA 34
wg A ’ ’ ’ 0 N- 3 \

10 éwworjoas avfadéoTepor av TPOS pe (TX0L), Kal Spyiobeis

~ ~ aN 39 ~ \ ~
adrols TovTois feito dv per dpyns Ty yYmdov.

el OY Tis

Subv ovrws éxeL— otk GEwd pév yap éywye: el 0 ot,
ries) dv pou Sokd pds TovTor Néyew Néywy OT épol, @
dpuaTe, elaiv pév moy Tes Kal OikeloL: Kal yap TOUTO
adrd TO Tov ‘Opripov, 00d éyd drd Spvds od Amd mETPNS
méduka, GAN ¢€ avbpdmwv, doTe Kal olkelol poi eloL Kal
viets, & dvdpes *Afnvaio, Tpeis, els pev pepdriov 70m,
Sto 8¢ wadla- dAN Suws ovdéva avTdv Sevpo avafBiBa-

oduevos Sefoopar Vudy droympioacba.

Tl on ouvv

> ¥ >
0UO&V TOUTWY TO)T®W; OVK avfadi{opevos, @ avdpes *Ab-
~ ~ \ ’ 3 VY
vatol, 00d vuas driudlwv: AN el pév fappaléws yw exw

9. os dv Sofa: of course Soc-
rates is far from believing himself
that the risk he runs is a desperate
one.

10. av0abéorepov oxoin: would be
too easily offended, more lit. repre-
sented by more (than otherwise) self-
willed. The dikaoral might easily be
too proud to submit to criticism of
their own conduct in like cases; the
more so because Socrates said that
he was too proud (cf. e below) to fol-
low their example. Cf. La Rochefou-
cauld, Maximes, 34, Si nous n’avions
point d’orgueil, nous ne nous plain-
drions point de celui des autres.

11. avrois Tovrows: causal. —el 1:
see on ei d1, 29D.

12. yap: “(I say if) for though I
do not expect it of you yet (making
the supposition) if it should be so.”
The force of el & ody is resumptive.

13. émewkn: not harsh, i.e. concili-
atory.

14. kal olkelor: “I am not alone in
the world, but I too have relatives.” —
TovTO OUT To Tov ‘Oprjpov : this idiom

(with the gen. of the proper name) is
common in quotations. No verb is
expressed, and the quotation is in ap-
position with rotro, etc. Cf. Theaet.
183 e, Tapuevidns 8¢ pot paiveras, Td
ToD ‘Oufipov, aidoids Té pot dua
deivds Te. This const. is not con-
fined to quotations. Cf. the freq. use
of dvoiv Odrepov as in Phaed. 66 e,
dvoiv BdTepov, 3) oddauod Esti KTH-
cacbai Td €idévar 3) Terevrfoacw. The
quotation is from Hom. Od. xix. 163,
ob yap amd dpuds éoar mahaipdTov 0vd
amd mérpns.

16. kai, kal: not correlative. The
first kal means also, while the second
introduces a particular case under
oiketor and means indeed or even.

17. 7peis: not added attrib. but
appositively, three of them. Their
names were Lamprocles (Xen. Mem.
ii. 2. 1), Sophroniscus, and Menexe-
nus. Diog. Laert. I1.26 ; Phaed.116 Db.

20. av0abildpevos: ii is mot in a
vein of self-will or stubbornness. See
on ¢ above.

21. el piv Oappadéws Exw KTE.:

e

a’ +

~

 

 

 

Z [ Y A fr “"
Vor ew UH Nv

-

AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS.

pos Odavarov 4 wi, dos Aon) pos & otv doar kal 34

\

95 \ \ ¢ ~ \ ) ~ / » ~ ~
EMOL Kal UMLY Kou oA7 ™ mole ov LoL Ookel kaov elvat
> A ’ dQ ~ \ sr a -~

ELE TOUTWV OVOEY TOLELY Kal TNA\ikovOe OVUTO Kal TOUTO TOU-

¥ » s 2 ~ ~
25 vopa. €xovra, eit odv alnbés er’ odv Yevdos: AN odv

deSoypévor y€ ori TO Swkpdy Siapépew Twi TOV TONGY
5 0 / 5 ~~ ¢ ~ e o ~ o / ¥ /’

avbpomwv. el oUv VpuGY ol GokovrTes dapépew ele Todia
» b} / » y e ~ ~ ~

ete avdpeia elite AANy YTWwLoUY Ape) TowovTOL ETovTa,
5 y ¢

atoxpov av ei): olovomep €yw moNNdKLS EwpoKd Twas,

< ’ ~ »
30 oTav Kplwwvral, dokotvras wév Tu ear, ovpdowa 3¢ épya-

4 e o / 3 / 4 5 3 ~
lop€vovs, ws Oewdr Tu olopévovs meloealar el amobavody-
© 3 / / A ”
Tal, womep abavdtwv éoopévov, Gv Vues adTovs wm

whether I can look death in the face or
not. At this point the grammatical
consistency breaks down. &AAd ought
to be followed by a partic. (oiduevos
perhaps), but o¥f wot ore is the only
trace of it. See on Juws d¢ éddkey,
2le. The anacoluthon (H. 1063) is
resorted to because Socrates wishes
to mention his real motive, and yet to
avoid saying bluntly “I am too brave
to do anything so humiliating.” Hav-
ing said el uev Gapparéws ké. the next
clause (mpds & odv k7é.) shapes itself
accordingly.

22. aANos Aoyos: another question
or matter. 7. Dem. 1x. 16, ei uév yap
pipe TavTa 9) undev duly adTdv EueAAer,
d&AAos bv ein Adyos obTos.—§’
ovv: but at all events or at any rate,
like certe after sive—sive. See
on & ody, 17 a.

24. ovdev: see on amorpémrer, 31d.
— TOUTO TOUVOpQ: SC. dogpds. Sce on
dvoua 8¢ kTé., 23 a. Socrates purposely
avoids using the word gogds either
here or below.

25. Yevdos: used as the contrary
of the adj. aanés. Cf. Euthyd. 272 a,
av Te Yevdos, édv Te aAnldes 77. Some-
times it is even used attrib. with a

noun. Cf. Polit. 281b, mapddotdy Te
kal Yevdos dvoua. Cf. Hom. I/.ix. 115,
@ yépov, otiTL Yevdos euas Tas ka
TeAékas.— dA ovv SeSoypévov yé ote:
however that may be, people have ar-
rived at the opinion. Cf. Prot. 327 ¢,
aAA’ 0dv adAnTal yo v mwdvres foav
ikavol @s wpds Tobs ididTas (non-profes-
sionals).

26. To: used here to indicate that
what follows is quoted. G. 141, ~. 7.

27. ol 8Bokovvres: those generally
reputed. Here Socrates may have
had Pericles in mind, if Plutarch’s
gossip is truth. Cf. Pericl. 32. 3,
Acmaciar pev ody éfnThoarto, moOAAQ
wavy mapa Thy dkny, bs Aloxivys poly,
apels Uwep adriis ddkpva Kal denbels
T@v dikaotdv, he begged Aspasia off,
though Aeschines says it was by a fla-
grant disregard of justice, by weeping

Jor her and besceching the jurymen.

32. adavarTwv éoopévay : the subj. of
this gen. abs. is the same as that of
amobavovyrar. This is not the regular
const., for usually the gen. abs. ex-
presses a subord. limitation, and clear-
ness demands an independent subj.
Here, and in many cases where it intro-
duces an independent idea, it depends

127

|
39 4
? 1
|
|
|
4 i
e bp!
¥
|
3
35
a

 

 
vi

 

 

IT —
> mdi ”; pr
SEA rem TY AT

em A sna -

 

 

ange

a.

 

SRE Me EI, st

_—

AN

Be = AE a —
a

Ee ER NA ERE, SB ey

128

$0.
cS
40
5
3D
a
b

9 ’ A 5 \ S ~ 9 ’ ~ ’
QTTOKTELVNTE® OL €UOL OOKOVUT LY QLOXUVNV TT) wONEL TEPL- 35

 

IIAATQONOS,

/’ <r y ¥ \ ~~ / ¢ ~ 4 ¢

dnrew, Gor dv Twa kal TGV Ever vmohafel oti ot dia

" ’ ’ ’ 5 s ’ ) YN. ~ ¥

35 pépovres "Abnraiwv els dperiy, obs avroL €avTwy ev TE
~ ~ \ ~ » ~ ?

Tals dpyals kal Tails dAAaLS TyLOLs TpoKkpivovaw, ovToL

yuraik@y ovdév dapépovat.

TavTa Yap, & dvdpes *Ab-

~ y e ~ \ ~ \ o ~ \ ¢ ~
valol, OUTE VMAS XP?) TOLEW TOUS OOKOUVTAS Kal OTLovY

2 » 9 A e ~ ~ e ~ ’ ’ 9 \ ~
clvar, our av Hels modper vpas émTpémew, alla ToUTO
adrd deikvvabar, rv TOAD palov karaymepieiobe Tob Ta
Oeewo. Tavra Spdpara elodyovros kal kaTayéhaoTov ™Y
7é\w moodrTos 7) Tod fNovyiay dyovTos.

XXIV. Xwpis 8¢ ts 86éns, & dvdpes, ovdé Slkaidy

Soke evar deta) D 0 D ovdé ded 1
pot Soke evar Setofar ToU OLKATTOU OUOE OEOUEVOV ATO-
pevyew, aAa dddgkew kai weibel U yop émi TOUT

yew, L mwelfew. ov yap emi ®

’ c /’ 3 \ ~ / \ /’

kdfnprar & Swkacmis, ém T¢ karaxapilecbar To dikaua,
GAN emi T¢ Kplvew TabTa: Kal SpGLOKEy OU yapero fa

on the leading clause for its subj. Cf.
Xen. An. i. 4. 12, kal odk épacav iéva,
ov pf Tis adrols xphuara 313g, domep
kal Tols mwporépois pera Kipov avaBaot
...kal TabTa odk ml paxy idv-
ror. G.183 and 278,1,~.; H.972a d.

36. ovTou: a very pointed reiteration.

39. pels, vpds: the defendant and
the dwacrai. Cf. ¢ below.

40. Tov elodyovros: the onc who, etc.,
or ‘him who, here conveying the no-
tion of quality, the man so shameless
as to. G.276,2; H. 966. The phrase
is borrowed from the stage. Cf. Legg.
viii. 838 ¢, §rav 3) @véoTas ij Tas Oidi-
wrodas eloAywoiv.

XXIV. 1. xopls 8¢ mis Sofns, ovdé
Sixawov : after the unseemly practice
has been condemned 'by reference
to 7d kaAdy (86a), it is found still
more inconsistent with 7d dixator, and
this is conclusive against it. The
second o098¢ (with arogpedyev) is merely
the idiomatic correlative of the first

one. On the argument involved, see
Introd. 71, fin.

3. 8bdokewv kal mele: perhaps
the full idea would be, diddokew kal
diddtavra (or Siddokovra) meifew. For,
strictly speaking, melerv may be the
result of mere entreaties, but this
Socrates would probably have called
Bud(eabar rather than melfew. Cf. d
below.

4. ém\ T¢ xkaraxapifecdar: this ex-
plains éml TodTe. karaxapiesfaur TO
dlkaiov, “ make a present of justice.”
Notice the evil implication of kara in
composition.

5. duupokev : part of the oath taken
by the Swacral was, kal &xpodoouat
ToD Te kKaTnydpov Kal TOD &mwoAoyouuévov
Spolws augoiv. The orators were al-
ways referring to this oath. Cf.
Aeschin. 11. 6 ff.; Dem. xvi 6,
ete. See Introd. p. 49, note 2. Cf.
also the sentiment, grateful to Athe-
nian hearers, with which Iolaus be-

b

9

oY

on

 

 

RR

a SR tS ATLL 0 ER Ried Poon

SA

—————

ATIOAOTTA SQKPATOYS.

129

A o ~ 5 ~ A\a S ’ \ \ ’ »
oLS aw OKM oavTQ, AANA OLKOTELY KATA TOUS VOMLOVS. OVKOUVV 35

\ ¥ e ~ 20¢ c ~ 3 ~ Y/ e ~ sN7”
xp) ovre Mpas 0ilew pas émopkew ov pas éfilecOar
0vérepor yap dv Nudv eboeBolev. pi) odv allovTé pe,
& dvpes *Afnaiol, Towdra Sew mpos vuds mpdTTEW, a

10 pifre Tryodpar kad evar pire Sikawa wire oa, aA\ws

Te pévrou vi) Ala [mdvrws] kal doefelas devyorra 576 Me. a
Trou Tovrout. capds yap dv, e melboyut vpas Kol TQ
Setofar Pualolumy dpwpokdras, Peods dv Suddakoyut ui
Hyetiofar Duds evar, kal ATEXVOS ATONOYOUWEVOS KATIYO-

gins his appeal to Demophon, king of
Athens, Eur. Heracl. 181 ff., va dmap-
xe uv 768 év mf off xOovl, | eimelvy
dkodoal T év uéper mdpeaTi poy|
kovdels uw amdaer mpdobev, domep UAAo-
Bev. od belongs to ouduoxer not to
the inf, for otherwise the negative
would be uf and not od. (Cf. Phaedr.
236 e, duvvut ydp GOL... HN MAY...
undémoré aou Erepov Abyov undéva unde
vos eémdeltew). He has sworn not that
he will, ete., but that he will, etc. See
Dr. Gildersleeve’s article in the Amer
ican Journal of Philology, Vol. 1. p.
49.

7. Oiteaar: allow yourselves to be
habituated.

8. npaév: includes both the speaker
and the court referred to above by
suas and duas respectively.

9. d pire rnyodpaw: notice the
order. Socrates adds ufre doa last
because he remembers the émiopreiy
above. Perjury involves wrong to
the gods named in the violated oath,
hence od8érepot by ebaePoiev.

10. &M\ws . . . kai: the hyperba-
ton (H. 1062) consists in interrupting
the familiar phrase #AAws Te kal to
make room for uévror vy Ala, after
which #AAws is forgotten and wavtws
is brought in with kai, ten thousand
times less so too because I actually, etc.

See App. There is an intended humor
in this accumulated agony of empha-
sis which leads up to what Socrates
has called Meletus’s practical joke.
Of. 26e, dokel vedrnTi ypayacbar and
27 a, Tovré ori wallovros. Cf. also
the ironical allusions to this charge
throughout the Euthyphro, particu-
larly (3 b) ¢nal ydp ue morpriy (almost,
manufacturer) elvar Bewv, and (16a)
odkért adrooxedid(w (deal at random)
008¢ kaworou® (have new-fungled no-
tions) mwepl abTd (Ta Bela).

12. melBoupr kal T¢ Selofar Patol-
pn: a double opposition which forci-
bly brings out (1) the absurdity of
doing any real violence (Bud(erfar is
a strong word) by simple entreaties,
(2) the incompatibility between mel-
fev and Bid(eobar. All this gives in
a nutshell the drift of Socrates’s ear-
nest objection to the practice of irrele-
vant appeals for pity and mercy. For
the full force ¢f Budleabar, cf. Rep.
vi. 488 d, 3 melfovres 9) Bualbuevor, (by
percuasion or by violence) Tdv vavkAa-
pov.

13. Beovs ... evar: extraordinarily
separated, giving great emphasis to
eivar. The whole arrangement of
words here is intended to arrest the
attention and thus prevent their im-
portant meaning from being slighted.

oO
)

C

[oy |

d

i a v

|
i

!
oh
fy

i —

a nie

 
 

 

130 IIAATQNOS, ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 131 1

EY a ~ i. ~ ~ [3 if
15 poly &v éuavrod os feovs ob voullw. dA\a woANoD Oe 35 pot mola EupBdMeral, kal ovk AvéNTITY pou yéyove 36 a
or y ’ a ~ e > ~ \ ~ e ’ p

| ovTws €xew: vouilw TE yap, @ dvdpes 'Afnvator, ws 0VOELS | TO Y€yOVOS TOUTO, a\a mohy pallor Oavpalw éxatépwy :
Tov éudv Karyydpov, kal Yui émrpérw kal 179 Bed Kpi- 5 Tov Yur TOV yeyovdta dpilludv. ob yap @ouny Eywye 1

ovUTw map ONiyov éoeafar, AANNa mapa TONY: vUV O¢€, Ws
doukev, €l Tpudkovra pévar perémeaov TOV Ynjdwy, dmgme- i
’ ¥ ’ \ A e E) \ S ~ \ ~ ’ i
petyn dv. Mé\yTov peév ovw, Ws €uoL OOKW, KaL VUV aTo0-
/’ \ J / 3 ’ 3 \ \ ~
mépevya, kal ob pdvov dmomépevya, alla marti nov

4 \ 9 ~ © / 5 ’ y » \ .e ~
vai mepL €uov omy) MEANEL EOL TE APLOTA EVAL KAL ULV.

XXV. To pév py dyavakreiv, &@ dvdpes "Abnvaiol, e

 

: 3 \ ’ ~ ’ o ’ ¥ 2 oi
i | éml ToUTw TQ YeyovoTL, 6TL pov Kateympicacle, alla TE 36 ot
: 9 above), there is a repetition of the close. The whole idea of by a small 36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15. mwoA\ov Set k7é.: this is far
from (lacks much of) being the case (so).

17. émrpémo 7 Bed: cf. 42 a, adn-
Mov mavtl wAYr 9) T¢ Oe. Socrates
sees a divine providence in any de-
cision that may be rendered, and
concludes his plea with words of sub-
mission.

18. dpwora: what Socrates under-
stood to be &piworov for every man may
be read in the Euthydemus (279 a-
281 e), where Socrates discusses hap-
piness with Clinias; and at the end
of the Phaedrus in his prayer: & ¢iAe
Mdy Te kal ¥AAor daoi Thide Oeol, dolnTé
pot kaA@ yevéaOar Tivdob ev (with
in) + whey (outward acts and fortunes)
® doa Ew, Tols évrds elval pot pila.
wmAobaoioy d¢& vouiloiput TOV Oo-
pbv. Td d¢ xpvood wATbos en uot Soov
ufite pépewv ufTe yew dvvarr GAlos 9)
6 odppwyv.— kal vpiv: he is loyal to
the &waoral; since they represent
Athens, they are his friends. Cf. the
words of Phaedrus at the end of the
prayer, kal éuol TabTa TUVEUXOU' KOWG
Yap To TOY PiAwy.

XXV. Here ends Socrates’s plea in
answer to Meletus, Anytus, and Lyco.
But much remained to be discussed
and decided before the case was dis-
posed of. The pleadings in a ypagy
aoeBelas, like those in a ypagph mwapavd-
uwy, were (1) a speech of the prose-
cution, (2) a speech of the defend-

|
i 9
ei 00 35

ant in reply, (3) a vote on the de-
fendant’s guilt or innocence. This
would end the matter if the defendant
were acquitted. But the judges found
a verdict of guilty against Socrates.
After such a verdict there remained
always (4) a speech from the prosecu-
tion urging the penalty already pro-
posed or a compromise, and (5) a
speech on behalf of the defendant
in which he actually proposed some
penalty to be inflicted (avririunots) in
place of his opponent’s. Cf. Aeschin.
11.197 £. After ¢. xxiv. comes the ver-
dict of the dwkaoral, which is followed
by the rf{unais of Meletus. Then with

c¢. XXv. begins the arvririunois of Soc-
rates. Then comes the final vote
fixing the penalty. See Introd. 74.
1. 70 pa dyavakreiv: the inf. with
the art. is placed at the beginning of
the clause, and depends upon a word
of prevention expected instead of Evu-
BdAAerar. “Many things contribute
toward my not grieving,” i.e. prevent
me from grieving. G. 263, 2, and 160,
1; H. 961. The fact that .I feel no
disposition to make an outcry, results
from many causes, etc. Cf. Rep. i
331 Db, 70 unde akovrd Tiva éfa
wTaTHoat. . . uéya uépos €is ToUTO
0 TOV XpnudTwy KkTiols cvu BAAN ETL,
where the parallel is complete except
that, because of the long and intri-
cate specifications (omitted in quot.

 

SL et

inf. in els TovTO.

2. ér pov kareyndicacde: a defi-
nition of rode T7§ yeyovdre.

3. kal...yéyove: a departure from
the beaten track. «kal 07: odk kTé.,
though regular, would have been cum-
brous. The important fact detaches
itself from any connective like dre.
This is often the case in clauses con-
nected with 7€... kal, ore . . . olTe,
uév . .. 8 See on Juws d¢ &ddkey,
21 e, and dwgbeipovay, 25 b. — ovk
avé\mioTov: no surprise, i.e. not unex-
pected. Compare @dunr just below
almost in the sense of #Amor. The
use of ms and erie and the
like to express expectation, without
reference to the pleasure or pain in-
volved in the event expected, is com-
mon enough in Greek; sometimes
even the context makes the expecta-
tion one of pain or harm to come.
In English, hope is rarely used in the
sense of mere expectation, but cf.
Rich. III. ii. 4, 1 hope he is much
grown since last I saw him; Mer. of
Ven. ii. 2, As my father, being I hope
an old man, shall fruitify unto you.

6. ovtw wap d\iyov: so close. obTws
is separated from oAlyov by mapd, a
case of apparent hyperbaton. See on
dAAws Te kTé., 30d. The combination
wap’ OAlyov is treated as inseparable,
because the whole of it is required to
express the idea “a little beyond,” i.e.

majority is qualified by o¥rws. The ve
oAlyov was thirty votes. (f. Dem. xxiv.
138, dA (wmoy TOv diAiTmov TOU vavkAf-
pov vidv uikpod (almost) uev amextei-
vate, xpnpudTwy 8¢ ToOANGY abTob ékeivov
dvririuwpuévoy map OAiyas Ynpovs
(within a small majority) Ariudaoare. The
subj. of &resfar is of course to be
supplied from Tov yeyovéra &pbudy. —
os Zowkev: used freq. (like the Eng.
“as it appears”) in cases even of the
greatest certainty.

7. el Tpudkovra kTé. : strictly speak-
ing 31. Diog. L. ii. 5. 41, says: karte
dikdaOn, Siakociats o0ydonkovTa
pid mheloot T@v dmoAvovady (sc. Yi
¢wv). The total number of votes
against him was therefore 281; so
that 220 of the 501 &wkaocrai (see
Introd. 66) must have voted in his
favor. Socrates probably counted
the numbers roughly, as he heard
them, and said that thirty votes would
have turned the scale. When Aes-
chines was acquitted of the charge
of wapampeaBela, betrayal of trust when
on an embassy, brought by Demos-
thenes, his majority is said to have
been also thirty votes. For Demos-
thenes, as here for Socrates, such de-
feat was, under the circumstances,
victory. See Introd. 72.

8. dmomédevya: i.e. alone, Meletus
could not have got 100 votes, since
with two helpers he failed to get 300.

 

i ——————— AA NR me poten to oo

20 A TE LT

——

3 Ul 5 ANT 5%
 

 

 

 

 

TEI

A —— : - ——
A SRE ty Ooi.
~ Tr lt ey a

A

TU
ERS : -

—
”. oR a oR, ERRIRTY fe cee

whole fifth is meant. Cf. Prot. 329 e,
petaAapBdvovow... Tv TiS GpeTHS
poplwy of pty &AANo oi d¢ &AAo.
Xen. An. iv. 5. 5, ob mposlecay mpds TO
nip Tos oYllovtas, ei uh peradoiev ab-
Tois mupovs ...&ba OY ueredidooav
GAAfAois @ v elxov €kaoTol.

XXVI. 1. mpdrar Oavdrov: fixes
my penalty at death. See Introd. 73.
For the omission of the art. when
0dvaros means the penalty of death,
cf. 37b, and see on Toi favdrov, 28 c.

2. viv: ethical dat. G.184,3; H.770.

3. 7 dMhov kré.: with 4 (an) is ap-
pended the interrogative answer to
the first question, which is merely
rhetorical. — rns dlas : sc. wuss. This
ellipsis is so common that % é&tia is
treated as a noun; here Twunjs may
easily be supplied from the verb. On
wabeiv #) amorioar, see Introd. 74.

4. § mv paddy: strictly speaking,
this is the indir. form of ={ uabav,
which hardly differs from =i wav.
GMT. 109, Nn. 7b; H. 968 c. Both
idioms ask, with astonishment or dis-

depends upon the notion of deciding a
question implied in ri &fwos . .. amo
rica, “what sort of a penalty do I
deserve to pay since the question in-
volved is what possessed me,” etc. This
is more striking than the regular
phrase odx #ovxiay dywv or ayaydv.
Cf. Euthyd. 299 a, 3waidrepov bw Td¥
Suérepov matépa Tiwroyu 8 Ti mabw
copobs viels obTws Epuaev.— AN’ dpe-
Mjoas: this is more fully explained
below by évradfa odk fia, for which
see on 9 below.

5. dvmep oi moANoli: sc. émyuerovvTal,
supplied from éperfoas. Cf. Hdt. vii.
104, &vdyer 8¢ TwdTd alel, obk édv Per
vew obd¢v wAflos avbpdmwy ék paxms,
GANG wévovTes &v Th TdEL émikpaTéew 7)
améAAvolar (sc. rkeAebwy). EkaoTos is
often to be supplied from oddels. For
a similar ellipsis, see Hom. Od. vi.
193, oir’ ody éobijTos deviioear odiTé Tev
&AAov | Gv éméoy ixérmy Tahamelpiov
avridoavta (sc. ui) Odebecbar). Socra-
tes’s specifications cover both public
and private life.

 

pode, and erdoewv. Cf. Phaedo,110e,
kal Alfois kal yi kal Tols &AAois
(dows (as well as in animals) Te kal
¢vrois. Homer uses a similar idiom,
Od. i. 132, map & adTds khoudy 0éro
molkihoy EkTobey &AAwv uvnoThpwy.
Socrates means to include all per-
formances which bring a citizen into
public life; he talks of responsible
public offices as on a par with irre-
sponsible participation in public af-
fairs. Of course erparnyia is a public
office, and among the most important;
but dnunyopla is not so, even in the case
of the popes. For the facts, cf. 32D.

7. fvvaopociav kal ordoewv: the
former relates to political factions,
the so-called éraiplas, instituted to
overthrow the existing government,
the latter to revolutions, whether from
democracy to oligarchy, or from oli-
garchy to democracy. Such combi-
nations and seditions were rife toward
the end of the Peloponnesian war.
See Grote, ¢. LXV.

8. nfynodpevos épavrov kté.: freq.
the pron. is not given, and then the

if
| 132 HAATONOY ATIOAOTTA SQKPATOYS. 133 ;
1 4
{ ~~. o ’ A 5. y \ ’ ’ H \ ~ \ PN ~ it
i 10 ToUTO YE, OTL, €L U7) avéfn “Avvros kai Avkwv karTyyopn- 36 plas kal oTpaTyyldv kai OnuNyopudr kal TAY dA\ev 36 i
£ ~ A 3 / N 3 \ N ~ ~ \ ~ ~ fh
: govtes éuod, kav Ale xihias Spaxpas ov peralaBov TO b dpxov kal Evvepooibv kal oTdoewv TAY €v TY) WONeL iH
E ’, ~ /’ , ~~ i |
i méparrov pépos TéV Ynjdov. yryvouévwy, Nynoaueros EUaVTOr TG OVTL ETLELKETTEPOV a
3 ~ ’ 3 € ’ ) . a A 9 ~ 9 ~ u
A XXVI. Tara & odv por 6 avnp Aavarov. elev evar 1) wore els Tavr Lovo o@leoba, évravba pev ovk ec iH
i \ \ , ce A s ’ bf y 3 ~ : ~ 2 ~ ~ | |
{ | éyw 8¢ 87) Tivos vu avTiTIU)OOpAL, © dvdpes "Afnvaior ; 10 ja, of éNfaw pire Vu ute éuavtd EueNhov under Ode- it
ot ~ ov ~ 9 4 vrs 2 / 3 - A is : 3 9 ~
I§ A Shov Orv TNs dias; TL 0VV; Ti aids ei malbew 7 Nos evai, émi 8¢ 70 dla €kaoTov [lwv] edepyerel Tv peyi- |
¥ ~ o \_.'3 ” ’ 3 z > 3XX?’ ~ 5 An dg i!
5 amortoat, 6 TL pabov év Te Bip ov mavxiav yor, GAN ov evepyeaior, ws yo nu, evtavba ya, érixepiv éxa- |
; , ~ e ’ ~ \ > ~ \ , ~ ~ :
i» 5 duehjoas Gvrep ol moANoL, XPNMUATLOUOV TE KAL OLKOVO- arov vuev mellew py mpoTepor mite TOV €avrov undevos
: ap s ~ A oe ~ > 7. y e ’

| 36 10. et pr} 6véPn : for the accusersand approval, for the reason of an act. 3 émpehetofau, mplv éavrou émypelnleln omws ws BéltioTos
H 9 their respective importance,see Introd. They resemble two English ways of | 15 Kol PpovipdTaTos €0OLTO, QTE TOV ™s TONEWS TPW avTns i
{ 30. Notice avéBn . . . kaTnyopioovTes. asking ‘why ?’ < what possessed (ua- : ~ 5 ~ \\ o a 5 A , :

11. yuhlas Spaxpds: sec Introd. 72. 0dv) you?’ ‘what came over (raf) TNS TONEws, TOV TE AN\wWV OUT® KATA TOV QUTOV TPOTOV

. frniicen 2° ; sv — an emphatic tly x 3s >

=n TUL MRMTTOV £008 ¢ (ef. Dem. Xvi Ee Tusa 8 is 6. kal Tav d\\wv dpx@v kté.: and const. is different. Cf. Xen. An. v.

103, To pépos TOV Ynpwy Ovk Ines) a : ohnoeted iy the loading magistracies besides and plots and fac- 4. 20,ikavol fynoduevor elvai. . . Tad-

the indispensable fifth part, not a fifth oosely . Wie tions. #AAwy is attrib. to apx@v tvvw- Ta mpartew kré. Like the present

part. The acc. is used because the clause. Such connexion as there is

case is Soph. 234 e, oluat d¢ kal éue
Tv &T1 méppwdev dpeaTrdéTwy €lval.

9. els Tavr lovra: the reading dvra
can hardly be defended. See App.

11. emi 8¢ To i8lq rré. : but toward pri-
vately benefiting individuals. This is
strictly the completion of the thought
introduced by aAA’ aueAqoas, which,
though évratfa uév otk ja furnishes
its verb, still requires a positive ex-
pression to explain odx navxiav 7vyov.
évravba, as is often the case with odros,
is resumptive, and restates éml 7d dla
écaorov kTé. The whole period is full
of repetitions, but {dv comes in most
unaccountably., See App. See on
ToUTwy "yap €kagtos, 19 e.

13. pn wpoTepov rTé.: cf. 30ab.

14. mpiv émpeAnBein : mpiv takes the
opt. on the principle of oratio obli-
qua, since the tense of the leading
verb (7a) is secondary. GMT. 67,1;
66, 2, N. 1; H. 924.

15. dws €oorro : GMT. 45; 1.885 a.
16. Tav Te dN\wv: not a third spe-
cification in line with ufre... ufre,
but connected with the whole uh wpé-

 

ep ———— To PA —— WT — Ae

ARS A NEE SS

——

BE lB A A
 

 

 

 

      
     
        
      
     
     
       
            
    
    

 

ro
un
RR
A ———
Laman re

    
   
   
    
   

|
|

  

sg
——.,

I —

1384 IMAATQONOS

20

25

36

3 ~ 7 A ’ ¥ ~ ~ y ’
émypelelofar 7 ody el dios mabew Towovros wv; aya-
4 > J > ~ 3 ~ \ \ 3 &/ ~
Ov 11, & avdpes *Abnrator, el Oct ye kata TV allay ™
3 /’ ~ \ ~ / > \ ~ < A
dAnleia rypaofar kal Tavrd ye dyalov Touro, 0 TL OV
wpémor éuol. Ti odv mpémer avdpl wémri edepyéry, Seo-
pve dyew axolp éml T)) UpeTépe TAPAKENEVTEL; OVK
¥ » © ~ » yy 3 ~ / < e
¢o® § Tu pallor, & dvdpes ‘Abnvatol, mpemer ovTws, OS
Tov TowvTov dwdpa &v mpuravely ourelo far, TONY ye pa -
Nov 7) € Tis Dudw irre 7) Ewwpldl 1) Ledye VEVIKMKEY
5 / e \ \ e ~ ~ 9 ’, ~
Olvumiaciy. 6 MEV yap VMAS TOLEL eddaluovas Ookety
 » 3 \ \ 3» \ € \ ~ 3 \ ~ 3 \
eval, éyw S8¢ evar kal 6 pev TPOPYS ovdév Oeirat, €yw

Tepov . .. MbAews. — KATA TOV AUTOV Tpo-
ov: repeats ék mapaAAfrov the thought
conveyed by o¥rw, which points back
to u% mpdrepov .. . mpi, r.e. so that what
was essential might not be neglected
in favor of what is unessential.

17. 7l odv «ré.: a return to the
question asked above, with omission
of what does not suit the new con-
nexion. Notice in the next line the
position of dei, which is emphasized
by the ~¢ that follows, if you insist
that, etc.

20. dvdpl mévmm. evepyéTyn: a poor
man who has richly served the state.
He is poor, and therefore needs the
airnais, which he deserves because he
is an edepyérns. ebepyérns was a title
of honor, bestowed under special cir-
cumstances upon citizens and non-
citizens.

22. ploy mpéme ovrws: with col-
loquial freedom Socrates combines
two idioms otk &0’ 811 uaAAov mpéme
# and dr: mpémer ofrws bs. See App.

23. ¢v mpvravely oireicar: those
entertained by the state (1) were in-
vited once or (2) were maintained
permanently. Socrates is speaking
of (2), i.e. maintenance in the pryta-
neum. The archons dined in the Geouo-

9éoiov 3 the senatorial Prytanes dined
in the 6dAos, and in later times also
those called é&elgiro, — certain Eleu-
sinian priests, scribes, heralds, etc.
See on eis Thy 06Aov, 32 ¢. The public
guests sat at table in the Ipvraveiov,
which was at the foot of the north-
east corner of the Acropolis. Some
of them earned the distinction by
winning prizes in the national games,
some received it on account of their
forefathers’ benefactions to the state,
e.g. the oldest living descendants of
Harmodius and of Aristogeiton re-
spectively were thus honored. The
most ancient IMpvravelor on the Acrop-
olis was in historic times used only
for certain religious ceremonies.

24. {mmo kTé. : 1.6. KENT, race-horse ;
tovwpldi, a pair; (ebye, four horses
abreast. Since a victory in the great
panhellenic festivals was glorious for
the country from which the victor
came, he received on his return the
greatest honors, and even substantial
rewards. Cf. Rep. v. 465 d, where
Plato speaks of the uaxapiords Blos bv
of OAvumiovikar (@oi, the blissful life
Olympian victors lead.

36
d

ob

d

26. ouvdiv Seirar: only rich men e

could afford to compete.

 

 

10 amro\vea fad.

ce

ATIOAOTTA 3QKPATOYS. 135

d¢ Oé
€ Ocopat.
’ ~
ola, Tovrov TipdpaL, é& TpuTavein oirioews.
XXVIL “lows ofv duly kal Tauri A
. lows ovv vpuw kai Tavri Aéywr mapamly-
/ ~ /’ 4 ~ ~
oiws Ookd Néyew domep wept Tov olkTov Kai Ths dvriBo-
’ J
Mjoews, aravfadi{duevos: 70 8¢ ok éoTw, @ "AbOnpvaiol,

~ ° \ ’ ~ oh
ToLUTOV, GANG ToLoVe pallov. mémeiTpar éya éxav-elvar)
A : Z

/ 3 ~ 5 ”~ ~
5 unQ€va ddikely avbpdmev, ala duas TovTo ov melbw:

OAiyov ya ) iIAAots dielhé émel, Os ey
Aiyov yap xpévov alijhoss tetéypelo- emei, ws éyopar,
» a, / 4 \ ¥
EL NV VU VOWOS, wo mep Kai allows avBpdmous, wept Gavd-
\ / e ’ /’ ’
Tov 1) play npuépav pdvov kpivew, ala molds, émelabnTe
~ 3 3 ec’ 3 ’
av: Vv bd /’ ’
Uv 8 ov pddiov év Xpdrew OAlyw peydhas SuaBolds
’ \ 5 \ 4 ~ ~
OM TemeELoTuEVos 01) éyw undéva adikely molov
’ > , 1A | ~ ~
Oéw éuavrdv ye ddikrioew kal kar’ éuavrod épev airds,
¢ y /’ 3 / ~ \
ws aids epi Tov kakov, kal TiwjoeoBar ToovTov TWoS
3 ~ 4 ’ ~» \ ’ ~ 2
éuavte. Ti Ocigas; Bn un wdbw TovTo oh MéNnTds pot
~ © ’ nN ¥
TipaTaL, 0 nui ovk €idévar ovr el dyalov ovr el kakdv
28. év wpuravelw ourjoews : cf. above
TOV TowvTor €v wpuTavely ciTeta lal.
The art. is omitted, since this is
thrown in merely to explain rod7ov.
XXVIIL 3. aravladi{opevos: in the

spirit of stubbornness, This serves to
explain waparAnoiws xré. For the

*AAetavdpidov), c. 6, épwrdvTds Twos
adTdy, ia Ti Tas mepl Tob Bavdrov dlkas
wAeloow nuépats of <yépovres kplvovai,
wToAAals, Epn, nuépats kpivovay,
dr. mepl OavdTov Tols SiamapTdvovew
(those who go completely wrong) obk Eat

Plut. Apopth. Lac. s.v. ’Avatavdpidov or 3]

facts, see on 7¢ deioOar Biaoluny, 35d.
— 0 8¢: refers to the act which has
been only incidentally touched upon
(Tavtl Aéywy = bri TabTa Aéyw). 6 OB,
oi 8, 7d 8, are used without a pre-
ceding uév when they introduce some
person or topic in contrast to whaw
has just been dwelt upon, here wepl
Tov ofkrov kTé. For a different use of
TO 8€, see on 7b d¢ kwdvveder, 23 a.

4. éxwv elvar: an apparently super-
fluous inf. G. 268, ~.; H. 956a. For
the facts, see on 3 &kwr, 25 e.

7. domwep kal dows: for instance
the Lacedaemonians. (Jf. Pseudo

uetaBovAeboaocbar (to reconsider). Thu-
cydides also says in his account of
Pausanias, i. 132. §, xpduevot 7¢
Tpdmyw grep eidBaciv és opas ab-
Tos (their own countrymen), uy Taxes
elvar mepl avdpds SmapTidTov dvev dvau-
ptoBytiTwy Tekunplwy PBovAevoal Ti
avHKeoTOV.

11. d8iwknjoery, épeiv, Tipnoeodar : the
fut. is used to disclaim the fut. (GMT.
27, ~. 2; H. 855) intention.

el o ~ \ \ ol ~ S 5/7 ~
ov O€L we kara TO Oikatov Ts Alas Tiyua- 36

37

A Cx SPARTA

b

0

13. 7i Seloas: what fear is there to b

induce me? Supply verbs from the
three infs. above.
14. ¢npl: see above 28 e-30b.

   
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
      
        
     

PE

pm 3 on

     
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wakd Svra to kaxdv dvrwy, and the in-
sertion of &r. after olda. eb old OTe
and 0% §ri occur freq. (in parenthe-
sis) where gr: is superfluous. See on
SiAov dri, Crito, 53 a, and ¢f. Dem. x1X.
9, uvnuovebovtas budv old Bt TOUS TOA-
Mobs Omouvioat, to remind you, although
I know that most of you remember it. Cf.
Glorg. 481 d, aiodvopal 0dv 00D EKATTOTE
.. br oméa bv ¢fi gov Ta mwadika .

ob duvauévov avrinéyew. So the
ace. and inf. may follow §r. and &s.

16. Tovtov kté.: a part (ri) of Gv,
by fixing my penalty at that. See App.

17. SovhevovTa.: as a man in prison,
who ceases to be his own master.

18. Tois ¢¥deka: sce Introd. 75 and
of. oi Gpxovres, 39 e.— da XPRATOV ©
a neg. answer to the preceding rhetori-
cal question is here implied ; other-
wise # might equally well have been
used. The second &AAd introduces an
objection, which answers the ques-
tion immediately preceding it. — kal
SebloOar KkTé.: to remain in prison.

GMT. 18,3, 5. Cf. in Dem. xx1v. 63,

denoting purpose, see GMT. 65, 1; 1.
911. — dA. 81: but then. See on AAG
5%, Crit. 54a. The &AAd points to the
impossibility just asserted of Socra-
tes’s paying a fine himself, while 1
introduces the one possible alternative.
22. dukofux la : clinging to life, which
is opposed to edyvxia (courage). Cf.
Eur. Hee. 315, mérepa maxoiued’, 9
piroYvxhoouer; ibid. 348, rkaxd
pavotuar kal piAdyvxos yuri; also
the speech where Macaria chooses to
die, Heracl. 516 ff., kodx aioxvvovuw
377°, av 8h Tis Aéyp | “Tl Sebp’ apikedtd
ixeglowct abv kAddois | adTol ¢LAoYuv-
xovvres; eure xBovds” with the ad-
miring words of Tolaus, ibid. 697 ff.,
GAN & uéyioroy érmpémovs’ edyu xia
racer Yyovaikdyv,...—eb... elpl: cf.
30 b, and see on dapbeipovay, 25D.
23. 81 vpeis pév: that (if) you, my
fellow-citizens, proved unable to bear my
company. After this we look for
something like this: “then others will
prove still less able to bear it.” But
instead, we find a question with #pa,

 

W
*
i
ik
Pig
&
136 ITAATQNOZ ATIOAOTTA SQKPATOYS. ; 137 i
- ee
* J ¥ TVR Ans i :
a a AQ @ ~ syd & A ’ ’ h
15 éaTw ; GUTL TOUTOV 01) ENwpaL WV €V 010 OTL KOK®WV OVTWY, 31 25 Aéyovs, aAN’ vp Bapitepar yeyovaos kai émpbovarepar, 37 A
4 ~ \ ’ ”~ ~ < ~ ~ \ 5 ~ i
TOUTOV TIUNCAEVoS ; TOTEPOV OETUOV; KOL Ti [LE det {qv eo wore (yreite adTov voi amallayfrar: allot O¢ dpa i
nn SN 2 3 n ’..\ ¥ ¢ ’ ~ A 2 ~ i
&v Seauwrnpip, Oovievovra TI del, kabigTapery apxns adras oloovat padins ; mood ye Set, @ “Afnralol. kalos hl
fd ~ ® N’ _N. & A 3 ’ a ¥ ¥ ~ IR
: Tots &vdeka ; GANG XpNUATOY, Koy Sedéofar éws av €KTi- odv av pou 6 Bios ein ééehddvr Tnhik@de avlpdme dA\yv
! 9 o Tol A \ ¥ . 3 x ’ > ’ Sratiserp / \ 3 ’ ~ 2 i |
{i | ow; GANO TOUTOV MOL ETTLY OTEQ VUV on €\eyov: ov op é¢ dns molews aperBouéve kai éehavvouéve (Mv. ev |
3 \ 3 n \ ™ A y ’ ~ i
|¢ : 20 €0TL pol XPNMATA Smdbevy ekrlow. AA\a On duyns Tiw)- 30 yop 010’ oti, av €Nbw, Néyovros €uov akpoaoovrtal oi véol i
} \ ¢ ’ a \ ~ }
£3 copa; lows yap dv pot ToUTou TiwjouTe. TOMA) [LEV- womep évfdde: kav pév TovTOUS dmENAUV®W, 0DTOL ue avTOL e |
¢ / 9 <r \ ~ \
1» dv pe puhofuyia Exol, el ovTwS ANGYLOTOS Esl WOTE fu) ele\do melfovres Tovs mpeoPurépovs: éav O€ un) arelavve,
gl 0 A ~ ’ 3 \ ~
i SvvacBai Noylleabas, ou Vues pv dvres moONITAL pov OUY oi ToUTWY TaTépES TE Kal OlKEWOL OL AVTOUS TOUTOUS.
{ a ~ \ ti) \ » 2 ¥ ¥ ~
: ool te éyéveale éveykew ras éuas SwatpiBas kai TOUS d XXVIII “lows odv dv Tis elmo auyov 0€ kal Mov-
! » A 2 ~ AH
| A” gi ol Shroot Each xlav dywv, & Sdkpates, ovx olds 7 €oer Nuiv éSeNfwv :
oe 15. Oopat @v...8vrev: a remark-  éaw § dpyvplov Teundy, Sedéobw Téws (Sws) , \ pi , , A dp
) able const., arising from éwpal Tt exrion 8 Ti dw adTod kaTayvwaby. {nv ; TOVUTL on) €EOTL TrOVTWV XaleraTaToy melTal Twas
exelvwy & €d olda kaka vra, by the as- 19. voy 81: just now. or 2dr 7¢ vio Neve Ori 760 Ob Analy ror dort
» ’ 3 a » gTlL
similation of ékelvwr & to dv and of 20. ekricw: for the fut. with rel. + Yop Y ¢ ¢ Tr

\ \ ~ 9 7) / e / y 3 ’ /
Kol ola TOUT oOovvaTov novxwav yew, ov mretoealé MOL

Mov ye dei. The dependence of the
whole upon dr. is forgotten because
of the intervening detailed state-
ment.

25. Bapvrepar:, fem. because Tas
éuas diarpiBds is the most important
idea and ToUs Adyovs is incidentally
added by way of explanation. For
agreement with the most prominent
noun, see G. 138, N. 2b.

28. ¢ Plos: the art. as here used
has something of its original demon-
strative force; accordingly éteA8dvr.
... (qv is appended as if to a dem.
pron., that would be a glorious life for
me, to be banished at my time of life.
Notice that étépxesfar means go into
exile ; pebyew, live in exile; and katie
vai, to come back from exile. Instead
of T™Aik@de avbpémy, the commoner
idiom would be TyAwkg@de ovr. But
cf. TnAwolde dvdpes, Crit. 49 a; Euthyd.
293 b, moAd yap pov A) pavlavew THA:
kdévde 8vdpa, and Legy. i. 634 4, od yap

— AA é dAAns «k7é.: cf. Xen. An.
V. 4. 31, avaBodvTwy GAAGAwy Evvikovoy
eis THv érépav ék Tis érépas mWoAews.
Elsewhere we find the substantive
repeated, e.g. Témov . . . Témov, 40 c.

The whole expression suggests the
restless life led by the so-called
sophists. Cf. Soph. 224 b, where the
typical sophist is described as Tov
uabiuara fvvwvolbuevoy méAwy Te éx mo-
Aews voulouatos duelBovra, one who goes
from town to town buying up and selling
knowledge for coin. Cf. also Prot. 313 a-
314 b.

33. 8 avrovs Tovrtous: to describe
the involuntary cause in contrast to
oUTOL avdTol.

XXVIII 2. éteANOav Inv: to live on
in exile. This forms a unit to which
ory@v and novxiav &ywy are added by
way of indicating the manner of life
he will lead. The meaning of %jov-
xlav &ywy is plain from 36 b.

3. Tout 8: that is the thing of which,

A ——— A ogy

US, .. ?

the document which winds up with: will others then, etc., answered by mwoA- &v TAkoiode avdpdat mpémoi TO TowbTOV.  €lc.; cognate acc. after reicar, — Twvds :

.
3 , of i Arona ) pn RX 8

“
———— SRNR

  
 
138 ITAATONOS AIIOAOTI'TIA 3SQKPATOYS. 139

’ ’ ~ ¥ ’ A ’ 3... e A
Bove é pov Typnoar. lows 8 av Suvaiuny éxtioar vu 38
pray apyvpiov: TooovTov ov Tiudpai. IINdrwv 8€ G0,

@ avdpes ‘Abyvaiol, kai Kpitwv kat KpurdBovlos kal

bs elpwvevopévy: édv 7 ad Aéyo OTL Kal TUyXOVeL pip 38
arov dyaldov dv dvbpdme TodTO, ékdaTNS npépas mepl dpe-
ris Tos Néyovs moet fa Kal TOV id EPL ov Speci
euod drovere Sualeyopuévou kal éuavTov kat allovs gerd.
10 {ovros, 6 O¢ dveléraaTos Bios ov Buwros avbfporo, rubra
S &ru frrov meloeaté pou Néyovti. 70. de éxer pev ovTwS
ws eyo Put, @ avdpes, meibew O€ ov peor. Kas dys
dpa ov eliopon éuavrov dEwody KOKO oboevds. €l Lev |
yap Mv pot XPNpraTa, erumadpuny &v xpnpdrer ooa ped bos bores det 1
15 Nov ekricew- ovdév yap av éBNdBny: viv d¢—ov yap
éoTw, €L pa) pa doov dv éya Svvailunmy ékriogai, TogoUTOY

 

 

20 'AoANGOwpos kelevovai pe TpidkovTa pray Tyuioacbtal,
Jt

a ne, anh res

 

3 \ 5 3 ~ ~ 2 / 3 \ 5
avrol. 8 éyyvaclair: Tyudpar ody TooovToU, éyyunTal O
vuty €oovral Tov dpyvplov odour afd pen.

XXIX. Ov mol\od y éveka xpdvov, @ avdpes *Afy-
~ » & \ s 7 ¢ \ ~ /’ \
vaio, ovopa €€ere kal alriav vmo Tov Povlouévwr Tv
/’ ~ ¢ /’ 3 ’ yy /
woAw Nowopety, ws Swkpdry dmexTovate, avdpa dodo:
’ \ \ \ 5 > \ \ y ¢ ’
Prjooval yap 87) codov evar, €& kal un eiul, oi BovAdue-

eC A 2
vou vty ovedilew. el odv mepiepelvare S\iyov xpdvov,

 

 

i" 3... 4.9 » 38
37 some, used habitually by the orators 12. kal éyo dp’ ovk elfuopar: after a”

e : v Si ‘ i — 1 here, has 3s ~ A ~ A ~
where they will not or cannot be defi Socrates, in 28 e-30 ¢ and here, aS TOU avTopdTou Sy vuiy T0970 éyévero- Spare yap 8)

 

A Re Fr

rr ee
23 WE
> :
¥ oh 4 os “
£ FRAT Er ie
— EE cama

nite. Socrates probably means almost shown that he neither can nor should

all of the Athenians.

6. elpwvevopéve: see Introd. 26. —
kal Tuyxdver péyiorov dyaov: it is
not duty only, it is the highest good
and gives the greatest pleasure.

8. Tovs Agyovs: his speeches.

10. dveféracTos: this may mean
unexamined, unscrutinized, or without
scrutiny, in which latter case a man
neither examines himself nor others,
that is, his life is unthinking. Verbal
adjs. in Tos, esp. with a privative,
occur with both an act. and a pass.
sense. Here the act. meaning sub-
stantially includes the pass. in so far
as it involves self-examination (kal
uautdy Kal Tous EAAovs eterdCovros). —
Buwras : worth living. Cf. YekTds, blame-
worthy, and émawerds, praiseworthy. —
radra 8 &m: &¢ introduces apod.
(GMT. 57) in order to bring it into
relation with the preceding od wei
sec0é poi. The two correspond very
much like the two introductory clauses
dy Te... éy 7 ab. See on dewa bv
ely kré., 28d.

11. To 8¢: see on 7d d3¢, 37 a.

abandon his customary manner of
living, and has thus proved that he
neither can nor should live in exile; he
further adds (cf. the reasons given in
37b) that he cannot propose banish-
ment as his penalty. Banishment he
has already (28 e ff.) rejected, though
here he rejects it in a somewhat al
tered form.

13. el pév yap Mv kté.: dp is re-
lated to the thought which lies unut-
tered in the previous explanation:
not from love of money do I refuse to
make a proposition. The apod. in-
cludes oa ZueArov kTé. See on Os
dueArer, 20 a.

15. viv 8¢ —ov ydp: but as it is, b

(I name no sum of money,) for money
I have none. The connexion is similar
to &AA& ydp (19 a, 20 ¢), where the un-
expressed thought alluded to by dp
is easily supplied. viv 3é expresses
forcibly the incompatibility of facts
with the preceding supposition. Cf.
Lach. 184 A, viv 3¢ eb 87) Exel axovoat
kal oov.

16. el prj dpa: see on ei uy dpa, 17D.

 

 

 

\ ¢ ’ < / ¥ 3 \ ~ ’ ’, \
™v nhikiav ore woppw Non éoTi Tov Plov, Javarov be
> ’ ’ \ ~ 5 \ ’ ec ~~ 5 \ \
€yyvs. Aéyw 0¢ TovTO OU POS wAvTas vas, dAha mpos

18. pvav dpyvplov: about seventeen
dollars. This is certainly small com-
pared with the fines imposed in other
cases, e.g. upon Miltiades, Pericles,
Timotheus.

21. avrol & éyyvacOai: sc. ¢aoiy,
to be supplied from keAedovai. Their
surety would relieve Socrates from
imprisonment.

22. afwoxpew: responsible, an assur-
ance hardly needed in Crito’s case.

XXIX. Here ends Socrates’s avriri-
unas, and it was followed by the final
vote of the court determining Socra-
tes’s penalty. With this the case
ends. Socrates has only to be led
away to prison. See note on ¢. XXV.
above, 35d. See Introd. 35 and 36.
In the address that follows, Socrates
is out of order. He takes advantage
of a slight delay to read a lesson to
the court.

1. ov woMhov y €veka Xpovov: a

compressed expression. By condemn- ©
ing Socrates, his judges, in order to
rid themselves of him, have hastened
his death by the few years which re-
mained to him; thus, to gain a short
respite, they have done a great wrong.

2. dvopa éfere kal alriav: the name
and the blame. See on Td Jvoua kal
hv diaBoAqy, 20d, and Svoua 8¢ TovTO
kTé., 23 a.—vwo : as if with dvouadt-
cgeole and aiTiachfoeabfe. See on wemwdy-
fate, 17 a. Some periphrasis like
Uvoua é€tere kté. was often preferred
by the Greeks to their somewhat cum-
brous fut. pass. (of which there are
only two examples in Hom.).

7. mwoppw Tov Blov: far on in life.
For the gen. with advs. of place, see
G. 182,2; H. 757. —Oavdrov 8¢ éyyvs:
and near unto death. The contrast in-
troduced by &¢ is often so slight that
but overtranslates it. Cf. Xen. Cyr.
i. 5. 2, 6 Kvalapns 6 Tov ’AdTudyous

 
 

 

rm e—
TIRE re PO pi i ssi

 

i
TW —

 

140 TIAATONOZS

/
rods uot karaympioapévovs Bavarov. Myo O¢ kal TOO€ 8
y 5
10 POS TOUS AUTOVS TOUTOUS. LOWS [UE oleae, & dvdpes,
s ’ ’ c ’ ’ CE) «e An ’
amopia Noywv Ealwkéral TOLOUTWY, OLS GV UMUOAS ETELTA, EL
¥ A © ~ \ ’ o ’ ~ \
Sumy Sev dmavra moe kai Aeyew woe amoduyew THY
4 ~ ~ 9 ss 3 / \ e/ 9 /
Sikmy. wONNov YE Set.  aAN’ dmopia pev €dAwka, ov ev-
/ 9 \ / p, / \ ~ 5 /
Tou Noywr, dANG TOMS Kal avaloXvrTLas kat Tov éfé\ew
15 Néyew pos Tuas TOLAVTA, of dv Suv 7OwoTa Nr dkovew,
fpnrodvrds Té pov kal $Svpopévov kal dha TOLOVVTOS
\ / \ \ 3 / 3 ~ e 3 /’
kal \éyovros molAa Kai avdéia Euov, os eyo Pui: ola e
\ \ yy € ~ ,~ a 3 / 3 zd y /
5 kal elfuole Duels TGV alloy akovew. aN’ ovTe TOTE
ss 7 ~ <r ~ 2’ ~ 9 \ 5 /
@ On Setv éveka TOU kwdvvov mpafal ovoey ave\evlepov,
20 ole vo pot perapélel oUTwS ATONOYNTApEVY dA\a. Tov
pou pera ynoapéve,
~ ¢ ~ ° 3 / / a 3 ’
pallor aLpovpal @®O€ ATONOYNT ALEVOS relvavar 7) €xkewws
~ » \ 3 /’ y 35 3 / ¥Y 3% 3 \ y 5 ¥
{qv- ovTe yap €v Siky ovr’ €v moNén OUT €ue OUT alov
~ ~ ~ < ~ ~
ovdéva Set Tovro umyavas fal, oTws amoevéeTal wav ToLWY 39

©)
°)

the person heard, unless BpnvotvTos... q

mais, Ths 8& Kipov unrpds adeAdds KTE.
¢nue is looked upon as a gen. absolute

An. i. 7. 9, elmep Aapelov éorl mals,
duds d¢& adengds, ovk duaxel Tau éyd
Anpouat.

d 12. doTe droduyeiv: so as to escape,
ie. in order to escape. The Greek
jdiom expresses not so much purpose
as result. There really seems very
little difference between this doe

thrown in as an afterthought for the
sake of a more circumstantial and
clearer statement. For the facts, ¢f.
Gorg. 522 d, where (evidently with ref-
erence to the point here made) Plato
puts the following words into Socra-
tes’s mouth: el 3¢ koAakikfls pnTopukis

with the inf. and an obj. clause with (rhetorical flattery) evdelg TeAevTgmy
4rws and the fut. ind. GMT. 98, 2, dywye, €b olda Bri padlws Bois dv pe
and 45; H. 953 and 885. Cf. Phaedr. pépovra TOV BavaTov.
252 @, wav woo Smws TOLOUTOS (sc. 19. o08¢v: see on oddéy, 34 e. e
pindoopos) Eorar, and Phaed. 114 c, 21. $8 dmoloynodpevos: in this
Xp) wav WOLELY Gore apetiis Kal ppove- way, etc. i.e. after such a defence.
sews &v 7 Blo peraoxew. Cf. also oYrws above means as I have, and
Hore dapelyew, 39a below. that idea is vividly repeated by ¢de.
14. TéApns: in its worst sense, like Thus its contrast with éxelvws (sc.
the Lat. audacia. Cf. éav Tis ToA- &roroynaduevos) is made all the more
ug, 39a below, and Crit. 53 e. striking. — TeBvdvar : see on Telvdva,
16. @pnvoivTos KTE.: a development 30 c.

of the idea in TotadTa, of &v KTE. Here
is a transition from the acc. of the and everything. Cf. mavovpyos, a ras:

thing (sound) heard to the gen. of cal. (Cf 384d.

23. wiv mwoway: by doing anything 4

 

 

AR He SE SR ie

RSs

wid

SRR

|

 

AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 141

’ \ \ 3 ~
fdvatov. kal yap €v Tals payors moANdkis Onhov yi- 39

© ’ 9 ~
25 yverar 61L 76 ye amoblavew dv Tis éxdiyor kal omha
3 \ \ 3.1% ¢ /’ ~
dels kal ép’ ikerelav TPATOPEVOS TOV OUWKOVTWY® Kal
yy \ ’ 3
dMar unyxaval mol\ai €low €v €KAoTOLS TOUS KWwOUVOLs
< /’ / S/
woe dwadevyew Odvarevs- 1 ma w Kal
Ppevyew Oavarov,—€av TiS TOMLQ TAY TOLEW Kou

: fing
Ayew. g\\a. pun ov Tour 7) [xohemdy, @ avdpes, Qdavarov
30 ékuyely, akKa roku YaXeraTepor movnpiov: Barrov yap
Qavdrov fet. kal vov éyw perv are Bpadvs dv kal mpe-
oBvrns vmod Tov Bpadurépov édAwy, oi 8 éuol karriyopol
dre dewol kal 0feis ovres vmod Tov fdrroves, Ts kakias.
kal vov éyw pv dey VP per Gavdarov Sikny dpAdv,
35 ovroL O Umo Ts a\nbelas dpAykiTes poxPnpiav kai adi-
Klay. kal éyd Te TO TyfpaTL éupévo Kal obToL. TAUTA MEV
TOV LOWS OUT® Kl €0EL OYE, KAL OLLaL QUT WETPLmS EXE.

XXX. To d¢ 81) pera Touro émbuud Jur Xpnopuwdn-

go

Q

2 28. ore: cf. unxavaclar Smws just Te kal dprimos, olvexa mdoas | wOAAdY

above, and see on &gte &mopuyeiv,
38 d.

29. p1j...7: substituted rhetori-
cally for a statement of fact. See on
uh okéupara 7, Crit. 48 ¢. For the
idea of fearing implied, see GMT.
46, N. 4.

30. a\\a mov k7é.: fully expressed
we should have Gara uh moAd xaAemd-
Tepov 7 wovnplav éxguyetv. — BdTTOV
favdrov Oct: flies faster than fate, to
preserve the alliteration, which here,
as often, is picturesque. For the
thought, cf. Henry V. iv. 1, “ Now if
these men have defeated the law and
outrun native punishment, though
they can outstrip men, they have no
wings to fly from God.” In the
thought that wickedness flies faster
than fate, we have perhaps a remi-
niscence of Homer’s description of
“Ary, Il. ix. 505 ff., % & “Arn oOevapn

Imenmpobéel, pOdve. 8é Te macay ém’ alav |
BAdwTove® avbpdmovs.

34. Oavdrov 8ikmv dpAwyv: with
opAiokdvewv, whether used technically
(as a law term) or colloquially, we
find the crime or the penalty either
(1) in the acc. or (2) in the gen. with
or without diknyv. On the accent, see
App.

36. kal éyd x7é.: i.e. they escape
their punishment just as little as I
escape mine. The kai before &e:
makes a climax: “perhaps it was
necessary for the matter actually to
shape itself just as it really has.”

37. axeiv: on the meaning of oxeiv
and yew respectively, see on &rxere,
19a.

XXX. 1. 70 8 8&1 pera Touro:
0 8¢ is used adverbially; see on
td 8 3Ta. xpnouedijoal, declare a
prophecy.

b

39

 

ro ——— Br a —

a iS a

8s
142 IIAATQONOS,

AIIOAOT'TIA 3QKPATOYS. 143

oa, & karalmPioduevol pov. kal ydp ei Mon évravla, 2

3 “ IN sy ¥ # o ~ 4 IAN
év © pdhor avfpomor Xpnouwoovow, otav MEAAWOW

3 ~ \ / s y A 3 \ 3 /’
dmofaveiofar. ¢yui ydp, & avOpes, ol EWE ATEKTOVATE,
’ ECE © 3 \ \ \ 3 \ / \
5 Tiwwpiay uv flew evlfvs wera Tov éuov favator mwolv
xaherwrépav vi) Ala 7) olav éué dmekTdvare: viv yap ToUTO

5 / 57/ 3 /’ ~ / y

eipydoaofe oiouevor diral\dfeobar Tov SL0dvar €eyyov
~ ’ \ \ ¢ ~ \ 3 / 3 /’ € J ’
Tod Blov, 70 8¢ Vuy moN évavriov amofroeral, ws €yw
dnui.  mhelovs €oovrar Vuas oi éNéyxovres, ols viv éyw

~ e ~ \ 5 3 ’ \ ’ y
10 KaTELY OV, VMELS oe OVK nobaveale * KO XaAeT@OTEPOL €ETOV-
Tar Sow vedTepol loi, Kal Vues palNov dyavaKTioETE.

~ 3 \ y 3 <
voetalfe. ov yap éol avry 7 dmallayy) ore wavy dwar) 39
¥ ’ 9 3s ’ \ /
15 ouTe kal1), aN’ éke L pd ) TOU
> 7, vn kat kaANLOTY) Kol PdoTn, 1) TOUS
aAlovs kolovew, dAN’ éavre ‘ > 2
Ss Kolovew, al\’ éavrov mapaockevdlew omws éoTat

 

ws BéNTioTOS. TOUTA wey ody Vuw Tols kaTaympLoamé-
VOLS LOVTEVOAUEVOS ATAANATTOM AL.

XXXI. Tous 6¢ dmoymdiorauévors ndéws av Siale-
xOeiqy vmép Tov YEYOVOTOS TOUTOUL TPAYMLATOS, €V ® ol
apxovres doyoliav dyovol kal ove €pyopar of é\Bovra

 

~ /’ » ~

pe Oct Tefvavar. dANd poi, & dvdpes, Tapauelvare Too 0D-
’ 5 \ \ ~

Tov Xpovov: ovOer yap keller Siapvholoynaar mpos AANT]-

 

3 \ ¥y 3 /’ bd /’ J /’ ~
el yap oleale dmokreivovres avbpamovs émoxnoew Tov
3 /’ \ ¢ ~ </ 3 bd ~ ~ > 3 ~
dveldilew Twa Vuiv ru otk Spbas (ire, ovk dps dia-

Methinks I am a prophet new-inspired,

3. avlpamor opwdovoy KTE.:
P XPIoh And thus expiring do foretell of him:

 

 

prob. Socrates has in mind such
cases as Homer mentions, //. xvi.
851 ff., where Patroclus as he dies
prophesies truly to Hector, of 6nv 00%
adbrds dnpov Béy, GANA Tou dn | Eyx:
wapéatnrey Odvatos kal poipa KpaTai,
and xxii. 358 ff., where Hector’s last
words foretell the killing of Achilles
by Paris and Phoebus Apollo. C7.
Verg. Aen. x. 739, —

Ille autem expirans : Non me, quicumque es,
multo,

Victor, nec longum laetabere ; te quoque fata

Prospectant paria, atque eadem mox arva
tenebris.

Cf. also Xen. Cyr. viil. 7. 21, 7 3¢ Tob
avlpdmov Yuxh Tire (at the hour of
death) dfmov OeioTdTn KaTapalverar Kal
Tére TIL TOV MEAAdvTWY mWpoopd: TiTE
dp, &s oie, pdAioTa éAevlepovrar. The
same idea is found in many litera-
tures. Cf. Brunhild in the song of
Sigfried (Edda), —

I prithee, Gunther, sit thee here by me,

For death is near and bids me prophecy.

See also John of Gaunt’s dying speech,
Rich. 11. ii.,—

His rash fierce blaze of riot cannot last,
For violent fires soon burn out themselves.

4. dmwektovare: sc. by their verdict,
and by the penalty which they voted
after Socrates had made his coun-
ter-proposition (of a penalty), évriri-
pu.

6. olay épé amektovare: this is after
the analogy of 7Twwwplay Tiuwpeiofai
Twa, without some reminiscence of
which it would hardly occur to any
one to say Odvator or Tiuwplay éue
amextévate. amektdvare is substituted,
as more vivid and concrete, for the
expected Teriudpnafe. Similarly we
have udxnv vikav or nrTacfar as more
specific equivalents of udxnv udxesbar.
— viv: expresses reality. This use
of vow is akin to its very frequent use
in contrast to a supposition contrary
to fact (cf. 38 b, Lach. 184 d and 200 e);
but here it is connected with a false
account of what will come to pass, in
contrast with the true prophecy of
Socrates,

8. To 8¢ kré.: for a similar idiom,
though more strongly put, cf. Soph.

ov ¥ Ce -~ ~ ~
Movs €ws €feoTw: Vu yap os ¢ilows odow émdetfar
’N/ \ ’ ~ ~
é0ehw 70 vuvi pou EvuBeBnros Ti more voel.  éuol ydp, &
y /’ ¢ ~ ~ ~
avipes dukaoTai— vpds yap Sikacras kaldv opfds av

 

 

 

Ka\ot wisrilF ’ / ’ ¢ \ 5 ”~
mv avpagor TL y€yover. 1m yap eiwbuid pot

244 a, va... Td 8¢ TolTOU YiYYyTaL
wav Tovvavtiov.

14. €00’ adn: not od ydp eof kre,
as Schanz has it. The position of
éoti near ov at the beginning of the
clause justifies the accent. G. 28, 3,
N. 1, fin.; H. 480, 3.

15. pn Tous dANovs kolovew: to op-
press no man, corresponding to the pre-
ceding awoxTelvovTes . . . émaxNoew KkTé.

XXXI. 2. ¥mép: has just the same
meaning with wepi. See L.and S. s.v.
omép, fin. Socrates speaks about what
has befallen him, which he looks upon
as for the best since it is the will of
Divine Providence. — ot dpxovres : see
Introd. 75, and ¢f. 37 e.

3. aoxollav dyovo: are busy. They
were occupied with the arrangements
for conveying Socrates to prison. For
TeOvdvai, see on rebvdrar, 30 c.

4. a\\a: used freq., for the sake
of greater vivacity, before the imv.
or subjv. of command. See on aAx’
éuol kté., Crit. 45 a.

5. ovdév yap kwhvew: indicates the

alm self-possession of Socrates, so
strongly contrasted with the ordinary
attitude of those under sentence of
death.—8wapvloloynoar : more friend-
ly and familiar than diaAéyesfai. Thus
Socrates prepares to open his heart
upon matters not strictly relevant,
which only those of whom he is fond
and who care for him need hear. Cf.
Phaed. 61 e, Tows kal pdAioTa mpémer
uéAAovTa ékeioce amodnuely diac ko-
wmelv Te kal pvboAoyelv mepl Tis
amodnuias Tis éxel, molav Twa alThy
oidueba elvar.

8. vpds yap kTé.: see on § Ti uev
vues, 17 a.

9. 1 ydp elwbvia k7é.: notice how
many short statements of fact crowd
one upon the other. This serves to
arrest the attention. The 6Oavudoidy
Ti 1s that now, when Socrates has such
a fate before him, the voice is silent,
while previously, etc. See on dewa dv
ely (fin.), 28 e.

i OE A A A A MT A oy ——

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

wm

 

144

\ € ~ o ’ 3 \ ~ ’ / A
10 LOVTLKY) TM) TOV OLLOVLOV €V [LEV TQ wpSobev XPove TowVTL 40

’ A S\N» \ ’ 3. A ~ ¥
WAVY TUKVY) GEL MV KAL AVY ETL THLKPOLS EVAVTLOUMEDY), EL

ITAATONOZS,

71 wé\owue pn opbas mpakew : vuvi de SupBéRnké wo,

or ME, \ Sch \ © \ ’ ’ ¥ \
aTeP opaTe Kal avTolL, TavTL a Y€ 0) oinlein av TLS Kal

’ » ~ 3 3. 3 Se ¥ 3&2 v 0
voutleral €ETxaTa KOKWVY €lvat, ELOoL 0O€ 0OVUTE é&LovTe Ewvey

y 3 /’ \ ~ ~ ”~ y e /’ bd /’
15 otkolev nravtidln TO TOV feov OMNMULELOY, OVUTE MVIKA OAVE-

3 / /
20 NravTIWTAL LOL.

3 ~~, 9... \ Vd y 5 ~ /
Bawov évravfor émi 70 dukaaTrpLov, OUTE €V TO ANoyw

ovdauov wéNhovri Tu épelv: Kaitou év dAhots Aoyois 7OM-

Aaxod On pe éméoye Méyovra perali: viv 86¢ ovdauwod

\ ’ \ a.& ¥y 5 5 5S \ ¥ 3 3 \o
TEPL TOVUTYY TY THAGW ovuT €v €EQYyW OVO€EVL OUT €V AOY®

¢ ~ 5 ~ / /’ \ \ ~ 5 \
vpiv pd: kwdvvedel yap por 70 SupBeBnros Touro ayalbor
/ \ 5 y y © ¢ .~ 9 ~ ¢ ’
yeyovévai, kal ovk al omws fuels opbas vrolauBdvoper
ooou otduelo kakov elvar 70 TeBvdva.

’ / 5 \ > 6 < 5 5 / yy
Lov TOUTOV YEYyovey: ov yap €Tg OTwWS OVK Nvartn tn av

’ ” y > ¢ / 3 \
TL OUV QLTLOV Elva vrolapBdve ; Ey

péya pov Term)-

\ 3 Oc ~ 3 /’ ¥y 3 \ 3 \
pot 70 elwlos omueiov, € py 7 éuelhov éyw ayalbov

Tpatew.

10. nm Tov Sauwpoviov: see on Saiud-
viov, 31d. See App.

11. mrdvv éml opukpols: see on ofTw
map’ OAlyov, S50 a.

12. dpbas mwpatewv: ie. so that all
would be for the best, an expression
which is closely allied to ed mpdrrew.
Cf. below ¢, ayabov mpaewv. Cf. 45d.

13. d ye 8 «k7é.: €é emphasizes
the idea expressed, and 34 appeals to
the patent fact. Cf. ¢pdorovrd ye 8,
Crit. 45d. — kal... vopiterar: a shift
from act. to pass. Cf. Charm. 156 e,
TabTa oUTw Aéyoval Te kal Exe. Perhaps
as voul(eTar expresses the opinion act-
ually in vogue, it should be strength-
ened in translation by some adv.

14. éwbev: in the morning. Cf.
Xen. An. iv. 4.8; vi. 3. 23; and Hom.
Od. i. 372,

17. woA\axot 81: in many situa-
tions, and hence, often.

18. Aéyovra perafv: for this and
other advs. with the temporal partic.,
see G. 277, 6, ~. 1; H. 976. Usually
uetaty is prefixed, not appended.

19. arepl TavTnv TV wpa: in re-
gard to this whole affair, referring to
the whole trial, and including every-
thing that led up to it.

20. dmolapBdvw : not subjv., since
there is no question of doubt. The
question is only a vivid fashion of
speech, of which Plato is very fond.

22. mpels: to be connected imme-
diately with doo... This use of the
pron. gives a genial color to the
whole; in Eng. we should use a par-
titive expression, all tose among us.

 

25. épeAhov: referring definitely to ¢

 

 

 

 

 

ATIOAOTTIA SQKPATOYS.

 

145

XXXII. ’Eworjowpmer 8¢ kal 70c @&s moNN1) €Nwis 40

9 3 \ 3..\ 3
cCoTWw ayafov avTO €ELval.

”~ \ / / 5 \
Svotv yap Oarepov éori TO

refvdvar: 7) yap ofov under evar pnd alobpow unde-

’ S \ ¥ \ ~ A A \ ’
pay um €VoS €EXEw TOV rebventa, Nn KATA TA Aeyoueva,

5 werafBolr] Tis TvyxdveL odaa kal perolknais TN) Yuxy TOU

40

le

rémov Tov evBévde eis a\\ov TOTMOV.

\ ¥ ’
Kol €ELTE pundeuia

alobnols éorw, aAN’ ofov vmvos émelddv is xabevdwv

do ova Sev pa. Bavudoiov ké€pdos dv ein 6 Bdvaros
pnd dvap pmdev 5p, avy pos dv ely

Ws, \ 2 3 » ’ ’ ’ ’ \
€yw yap ay oluat, €L TVA éxhe€djuevov Oéot TQUTYY THY

past time but still containing the idea
of continued action. Cf. Xen. An. v.
8. 13, ei 8¢ TovTo mdvTes émowovuey (had
done), dravres bv drwAdueba. For the
facts, see Introd. 27, fin.

XXXII 1. kal tne : after an argu-
ment based upon the silence of his
inner voice, Socrates considers the
question upon its merits.

2. elvar: not Zoeobar. G. 203, N. 2;
H. 948 a. Cf. Hom. Ii. ix. 40, dauudv?,
odrw mov mdAa EAmear vias Axaidv |
amrroréuovs T Euevar kal GrvdAikidas @s
ayopedeis; Cf. also Il. xiii. 300, émel
of mob mopar offrws | Sebeabar moAé
poto kdpn koudwyras’Axatols.

3. olov pndév elvan: without defi-
nitely expressed subj. (cf. ofov amodn-
picar in e below), to be dead is as to
be nothing, i.e. its nature is such that a
man when dead is nothing.

4. tov teBveara: the subj. of Exew
(not of elvai), which is an after-
thought.— kara Td Neyopeva: Socrates
associates his idea of the life hereafter
with stories and traditions which are
themselves a development of Homer's
utterances about the HAvgwv wediov
and Hesiod’s account of the uakdpwr
vijco.. The later poets, eg. Pindar,
continued what Homer and Hesiod
began. And Pindar, furthermore, in-

corporates into his descriptions of life
after death Orphic and Pythagorean
accounts of metempsychosis. Here
and in the Phaedo (70 e-72 a) Socrates
appeals to a maAads Adyos.

5. mq Yuxn: a dat. of interest.
G. 184, 3; H. 771. The gen. would
express the subject of the action
designated. — Tov Tomwov : governed by
ueTaBoAy kal wetoiknats. Of these two
the latter repeats the former in more
specific form. The gen. corresponds to
the acc. with ueraBdAAew and (rarely)
Cf. Theaet. 181 ¢, Grav Tt
Xdpav ék xdpas weTaBIANY.

6. Tov évBévde: sce on Tous ék Tis
vavuaxlas, 32b. See also App. —kal
elre: the second member is introduced
by ei & ad in line 19.

7. olov vmvos: ¢f. Hom. Od. xiii.
T0f., kal 7¢ Hdvuos Umvos éml Brepa-
pois Emimwre | viyperos fHdioTos, OavdTe

MUETOLKELY.

dyxioTa eoikds.

40

8. képdos: not édyabdy, because Soc- d

rates does not consider such a con-
dition as in itself a good.

9. dv olpai: &v belongs to edpeiv,
and on account of the length of the
prot. is repeated first with olua: in 14,
and again just before the inf.; similarly
déou is twice used in the prot. See on
{ows Tax tv, 31 a. — éxAefdpevov kal

SU A UIE RAR A SR,

ap aa——

i: prety

A

a TO AS SI

R— CIR
146 ITAATQONOS ATIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS. 147

, 3 ° A / os EE NN A 3 >
10 vikTa, év 7) ovTw karédaplev wore undé dvap idelv, kal 40 Blow, &pa ad\y dv ely» dmodyuia; 9 ad ‘Oper Evyye- 41
/ \ ’ \ ¢ / Ae ’ 3. /
véolar kal Movoaion kal ‘Howdde kai Ounpe emt mooQ
y S€ 3 A ¢ ~ 3 \ \ \ / eQé
av Tis débats dv vuov; éyo pév yap wolldkis €felw
/ 3 ~ /’ 3 9 ~ 3 \ » \ 3 ~
30 refvdval, el TavTd éoTw AaAnlfn: emel €uorye kal avTQ
\ N y ¢ \ 3 / € / bl ’
Qovpacty) dv en 7 SwarpB) avr, oméTe €vTUXOLUL b
TahapiSer kal Alavr 7 Tehaudros kal €l Tis dANos TwY

Tas dA\as vikras Te kal Nuépas Tas Tov Blov Tov éavrod
avrirapalévra Tavty T) vukTl 8éoL Tkrepduevor elmely, |
méoas duewov kal BOwov Nuépas kal vikras TOVTYS TNS.
vukros PBefiwker év To éavrov Bio, olpar &v wy) ore 1Su5-
15 Tv wd, AAG Tov péyar Baogihéa edaplfurfrovs dv edpeiv o

 

sub Let A.

 

 

25 Lew, Mivws Te kal ‘Padduavfus kal Alakds kal Tpurrolepos

e

3. \ / \
avTov Favras) pos Tas dias nuépas kal vikTas.
~ e 0 ’ ’ 5 ’ d y ’ \ \
Towovtor 6 Bavards éoTi, képdos €ywye Néyw: kal yap
3 \ ’ ¢ ~ [ly ~
0VOEV Thelwy 6-TaS-XPOVos Paiverar ovTw On evar 1) pia
’ sy QQ Aa A ’ ~
vo€. el 0 lad olov dmodmunoai éorw 6 Odvaros évhévde
5 vy / ~
20 els allov T6mov, kai a\nbn éoTi Ta Aeydueva ws dpa éker
5 < ~ ~
elow amavres oi Telvewres, TC perfor dyalov TovTov €ln
y a ’ o
dv, & dvdpes OukaoTal; €lydp Tis dpikduevos els “Adov,

’ 2 ;
€L Oovy

3 \ ’ ~ ~ ~

amal\ayels ToUTwY TOV PackovTwy SLKaoTAY Eval, evpr)- 41
\ 5 ~ <

oe Tovs alnlfis Sukaotds, olmep kal Aéyovrar éxer Sukd.-

\ ¥ © ~ e ’ ~ ~
kal dAhot 6ooL Tar Nuibéwr dikawol éyévovro év TQ éautdv

dvrirapabévra okedpevov: the first 20. ds dpa: a conclusion derived 40 which characterizes all his mythical  plius, a king in Euboea. The wisdom }
two partics. coupled by kal are subor- immediately from the admission that digressions, and adapts the myth to of Palamedes provoked the jealousy
dinated to areyduevov, just as it is death is a migration from earth to the point which he desires to makes of Odysseus, Diomedes, and Aga-
subordinated in turn to eimeiv. See some other place. dicd(ew implies action in two capaci- memnon, and was his ruin. Ace. to |
on ru amnxbaviuny, 21 e. 23. dwkaorav: for case, see G. 1306, 4 ties: (1) as judge, pronouncing upon the post-homeric story Odysseus plot-

14. pn oT, dAAa kTé.: not to speak
of any one in private station, no, not the
Great King, etc. aad is used here to
introduce a climax. See H. 1035 a.

16. avrov: sc. this gives a final
touch of emphasis to Bagiréa. Socra-
tes talks of the king of Persia in
the strain which was common among
Greeks in his day. Polus,in the Gor-
gias (470 e), is startled because Soc-
rates refuses to take it for granted
that the king of Persia is happy.

17. képdos "Aeyw: sc. adTdv. — kal
yap «té.: for thus the whole of time ap-
pears no more than a single night, etc.

N.3 0b; H. 940 a.

25. Mivws k7é.: connected gram-
matically with the rel. sent. rather
than with robs dwcaords. Cf. Phaed.
66 e, 7ére fuiv ora 0b eémiBuuoi-
név Te kal pauev épactal elvai, ¢ppovi-
Tews, éredar TeAevtowuer kté. The
three first mentioned, Minos, Rhada-
manthys, and Aeacus, were sons of
Zeus, and while living had earned
great fame by their scrupulous ob-
servance of justice. They are also
named in the Gorgias as the ministers
of justice in the world below. In
Dante’s Inferno (v. 4-17) Minos, curi-

 

 

41

malady Si kplow ddwkov Téfvmkev. dvrurapaBdAlovte

ously transformed into a demon with a
long tail, still fulfills the same duties,—
. . . When the spirit evil-born

Cometh before him, wholly it confesses;
And this discriminator of transgressions

Seeth what place in Hell is meet for it;
Girds himself with his tail as many times
As grades he wishes it should be thrust

down.

In Ar. Frogs, Aeacus is Pluto’s foot-
man. For a painting representing the
judges of the underworld, seeGerhard’s
Vasenbilder, plate 239. — Tpurrolepos :
a son of Eleusis, glorified in the tradi-
tions of Demeter Oeouopdpos. He was
the disseminator of intelligent agri-
culture. Plato uses here the freedom

the deeds and misdeeds of every soul
that has lived and died (this is the
account of Minos in the Gorgias), and
(2) as king and legislator. Cf. Hom.
Od. xi. 568 ff., where Minos is shown
xpboeov arkfimrpov Exovra, OeuaTelorTa
vékvaow. Probably here the prevail-
ing idea is that of king and legislator.
Homer (Od. iv. 564 ft.) places Rhada-
manthys among the blessed in the
Elysian fields.

27. ’Opdei «7é.: Orpheus and Mu-
saeus with Homer and Hesiod were
honored as the most ancient bards
and seers of Greece.

La wAi ast

28. ém\ woow: price stated in the
form of a condition. — The repetition
of 4» has an effect comparable to the
repeated neg. The first & is con-
nected with the most important word
of the clause, while the second takes
the place naturally belonging to &v in
the sent. GMT. 42, 2, fin. CY. 31a.

29. mwoA\dkis TeBvdvar: cf. Dem. ix.
65, TeOvdvar d¢ uvpidkis KpEITTOV KTE.
Cf. 30e.

30. &povye kal avrg : for me myself
more particularly.

31. omore: when (if at any time) I
met.

32. ITahapnde: the son of Nau-

ted so successfully, by forging a mes-
sage to Palamedes from Priam, that
Palamedes was suspected of treason
and stoned by the Greeks. Cf. Verg.
Aen. 82 ff. and Ov. Met. xiii. 56 ff.
The title is preserved of a lost trag-
edy by Sophocles called Palamedes
and of one by Euripides. The fate
of Ajax is well known through Hom.

Od. xi. 541 ff. See also Met. xiii. and

the Ajax of Sophocles.

33. dvrurapaBdAlovri: a case of
asyndeton (H. 1039), which occurs not
infrequently where as here a sent.
is thrown in by way of explanation.

41

b

 

i —— — i Se Se

 

seas
148 ITAATQONOS, ATIOAOT'TA 3SQKPATOYS. 149

TO épavrob wily pos Ta exelvov, @S éyo olpad, ouK av 41
pn] oy

Kol on 70 péyroTov, TOUS €Kel éeralovra Kal !

XXXIII. ’AN\a kai dpas xp1y, @ dwdpes dukaoTal, 41

 

35 andes em.

Bcd, Bo

evé\mrioas eval pos TOV Lo, Kol €v TL TOUTO diavo-

9 Alordm & \ 5 ~ / Ss A ’
EPEVVWIVTA WO TED TOUS évravfa Suaryew, TiS avT@Y 0OoPpOs ! etafal dndés, or. ovk CoTw av pt dyafe KakOy ovOer d

9 \ / y / ¥y 3 ¥y S..\ / y ¥

€0TL, KQL TLS OLETAL LEV, EOTL 0’ ov. emi TOO Q 0’ av Tis, @ | ovre {avi OUTE TeENevTnTavTL, ovO€ apLeENeLTaL vro Bedv Ta

dvopes dikaoTad, béfarro éerdoal TOV él Tpolsy dyovra, 5 ToUTOV TpdypaTa oU0e Ta épa DOV dnb-ro9-avropdrov

TY woh oTpaTIaY [9 ‘Odvaoéa 9 io vor, [3 aANovs e yéyovev, dA\\a pou SiMdy & €ETTL T0UTO, oT 1707) Tefvdvar kal
p wg

40 pvplovs (dv Tis elmou) [kal avopas Kal yvvaikas, | ofs éel dmpdybos mpoypdrin Bérruov hv po Sia rovro Kal

Siakéyeafar kai Evvelvar kal éferdlew durxavov av ei éué ovdapuov dmérpee TO omuELOY, Kal Eyarye TOIS KaTAY)-

JO ’ eX apd 3a 9 S ’ / ’ <r \ e 3 ~
eEvoaLuovias. TAVTWS OV OMNTOV TOVUTOV-YE€~EVEKA OL €EKEL

 

\ 3
PLoapévois pov kal Tols KaTyyopols ov wavy Yalemaww.

 

 

 

 

9 ’ ’ \ ¥ 5 ’ ’ ’ e ted
dmokTelvovaL: Td Te yap dA\a evdaiuovéoTepol eigw ol 10 KaiToL OV TavTY TN Siavota kateymdilovrd pov kai kaTy-
éxet Tv évhdde, kal On Tov Nourov xpovov ablldvarol elow, yépouw, GAN’ oiduevor BNdmrew Tobro adrois dfwov méu-

y \ / 9 ~ i
45 elmep ye Td. heyopeva anh). | pealor. Toadvde pévroL Oéopar avTdy: TOUS viels mov !
4 pol is easily supplied from the pre- moly Siwkaly xpduevos Eéptns éml TY c 4 XXXIII. 2. év Tv Touro: this one voice was silent. Contrast the oppo- 4

ceding Zuorye. The partic. is used ‘EAAdda lorpdrevoey §) 6 marip adTob thing above all. The position of Todro, site view expressed by Achilles (Hom.

as with #desfay, to which ok hv andes  éml Skiblas; 7) ¥AAa uvpla Ev Tis Exot coming as it does after instead of Od. xi. 489 ff.), and in Eur. 1. A. 1249-
ey is substantially equivalent. Cf.  rowira Aéyew b before €v 7, is very emphatic. 1252, where Iphigenia, pleading for
also the partic. with impers. expres- 40. ols Suakéyeada kal fuveivar kal d 6. tebvavar kal dmmAAdxOar: the life, says, & ovvrepoioa marta vikfow }
sions like duewdy éori, perauéret pos, etc. éEerdtew : when verbs governing differ- pf. is used, because to speak of the Adyov: | 7b pas 768 dvbpdmoiw Bi :

35. kal 87 70 péyworTov: and what ent cases have the same object, the completion of the change, ie. to be  ogrov BAémew, | Ta véple & 0d8év- |

after all is the greatest thing. Then Greek idiom usually expresses the dead, is the most forcible way of put-  paiverai 8 3s ebxera: | faveiv. Kakds
follows, in the form of a clause in object once only, and then in the case | ting the idea. mpdyuara applies to the (fv kpeioaor A kas faveir. !
apposition, explanation of the pe governed by the nearest verb. ‘ trouble and the unrest of a busy life. 11. BAdmreww: used abs. without
viorov. The whole is equivalent to 41. dpnxavov evdarpovias : more 7. BéAtiov fv: Socrates considers acc. of the person or of the thing, j
7d péyiordy dori Toro, &erd(ovra did- blessed than tongue can tell. Cf. Theaet. ( the whole complication of circum- because the abstract idea of doing
yew (with an indef. personal subj.). 175a, &rowa dT kaTagalveral Tis stances in which he is already in- harm is alone required. — robo . .
See on ofov undev elvai, 40 c. opikporoyias (pettifogging), and Rep. volved, or in which he must, if he dfwov pépdecdar: so fur it is fair to
38. dyovra: not éyaydvra because viii. 567e, where xpijua, something lives, sooner or later be involved. blame them. Contrast 17b, Tod7é po: |
it represents ds fye. GMT. 16,2; H. like which is probably implied in the Deliverance from this he welcomes  &otev ad Tay, this...about them; and cf. i
856 a. Cf. Tim. 25b ¢, where the above cases, is expressed, 74 pmakd- as a boon. Cf. 39b.—8ud Tovro ké.: Symp. 220 e, Tord Yé pot ofire née |
fabled might of prehistoric Athens is prov Aéyas Tupdryvov xpipa. A ¢f.-40a ¢. Socrates argued from the «kré. They deserve blame for their
described, @v ‘EAMpwy dryovuévn ... also Rep. i. 328e, gob Hdéws by muoi- silence of 7d Saiudviov that no evil was malicious intention and for the reason
kpatfioaca Tey émbyrwy Tpbraia Erne. pny. . . méTepov xahemdy Tob Blov ) wis in store for him when he went before given in 29b. — dio: it is fair. ar e

This loose use of the impf. instead of
the aor. is not uncommon where ex-
treme accuracy is not aimed at.

39. Slovdov: cf. Hom. 71. vi. 1563 ff.
Od. xi. 593 ff. — The most comprehen-
sive clause, 9... yvvaikas, escapes from
the grammatical const., a not uncom-
mon irregularity. Cf. Gorg. 483d e,

ob adTd eEayyéAAers.

42. wdvres ov Snmov: in any event,
we know that they kill no man there,
etc. — TovTov ye €veka : spoken point-
edly and not without an intended
thrust at those who voted his death;
the reason given certainly proves more
than the point here made.

the court. This led him to conclude
that his death could be no harm. On
further consideration, he is confirmed
in this, because death is never a harm.
Applying this principle to his own
actual circumstances, its truth be-
comes the more manifest, so that,
finally, he can explain why the divine

Gory. 465 e, dfiov wey ody éuol ld id
my Exe éorl.

12. Toocovde pévror: «“ although they
certainly are far from wishing me
well, yet I ask so much as a favor,”
i.e. so little that they can well afford
to grant it. Then follows an expla-
nation of Togdvde.

it

‘ ’ :
of Uv . - nat A A
¥ hL Uigaend > Ag PU

Bs

a —

RAAT Sh (Sa
150

 

TE

 

SE

A ——
nn A

|
|

 

 

   
  

MNLach, Jrrambod frat

émreldav Bricwot ripaproacte @ avopes, TavTa TAUTA 41

Fr

IIAATONOS AIIOAOTIA SQKPATOYS.

  

Ae PPR cuthans

\virovvres Lae éyw vpas é\vmouy, ay Vu Sokdaw 1)

Lord he Ak gus Cand

Xppedaay 7) d\\ov-Tov TPGTEPOV émipuek Nevo fa 7) N aperis,
kai av Sokwol Tu eva pnO&v-cvres, bvedilere adTols

WOTEP éya UY, oTL oOVK émpueNovvTal OV det) Kol otovtal

A IY ’ yx. ¥
TL €lvau dvres ovdevos aot.

oN A A ’
KOlL EV TAUTOA TTOLNTE, Olkaa

\ 3 \ ¥y [BE ¢ ~ 3 / \ ¢ eA"
merovlas éyo éoopar VP VUGY, AUTOS TE Kal OL VLELS.
9 \ \ ¥ © 3 / 3 \ \ 9 /’ C A
dA\a yap non wpa amTéval, €uol pev amobavovuévw, vu

~ ¥
de Buwaopévous: budrepos d¢ piv épxovTaL €ml AUEWOV
wpayua, adnov wavri wh 7) 79 Oeo.

W Andrea

13. 1Brjowor: see on &rxere, 19a.
Cf. Hes. Op. 131, &4AX’ Grav HBfoete kal
$Bns uérpov Tkorro.

16. dveditere: see on dvedi(wy Exa-
ator, 30 e.

18. 8ikawa memovbus: to be under-
stood in the light of cc. xviii. and
xxvi. Socrates looks upon what is
usually taken as the most grievous in-
jury as the greatest possible blessing.

19. avros Te kté.: for éyw advtds
kré. Cf. Crit. 50 e. Cf. Soph. 0. C.
461, eérdfios mev Oidimovs katowkTioal,|
adTds Te maidés 0° alde.

20.d\\d ydp «7é. : serves to close the

speech, giving at the same time the
reason for coming to an end.

22. wiv 1: pleonastic like aan’ 4
in 20d. See App. —T@ Ow: cf. the
subtly ironical way in which the same
thought is put in the Euthyphro
(3d e), where, speaking of his accu-
sers, Socrates says, el u¢v ody, d vov 3
EAeyov,uéAroiéy uov kataryeAav, borep ov
¢1's cavTod, obdev bv en andes waiovTas
kal yeAdvTas &v T¢ dikacTnply daya-
vetv: ei 8¢ omovddogovTal TOUT’
48n &8mp amoBNoeTar &InAov
TAY Y Oulv Tols pdvrTeadiv. See
on dpiwora, 35d.

  

I ———

 

 

 

   

IIAATONO3 KPITQN.

TA TOT AIAAOIOYT IMPOZQITA
SQKPATHS, KPITQN. St. 1.

I. 20. T{ muwdde dpiéar, & Kplrwv; 3) ov wpe €rt

eaTiy;
KP. Tlavv perv odv.
30. Inika palora;
KP. "Opbpos Babs.

30. Oavpdlw érws NOé\yaé go 6 ToU Secpwrnpiov

PvNag vrakovoal.

KP. Evwmjfns ndn pol éorw, & Sdkpates, dia 70 wo\-

\dkis Sedpo poirav, kai Tu Kal eVepyérTal UT €uov.

SQ. "Apri 8¢ nies 7) malo;

1. Kpilrov: see Introd. 62. See on

Apol. 334, fin., and cf. 38 b, fin.
4. mvika pdAwora, about what time
ts it? In Lat. maxime and ad-
modum are so used, e.g. locus pa-
tens ducentos maxime pedos,
Liv. x. 38. 5; locus in pedum
mille admodum altitudinem
abruptus, id. xxi. 36. 2.

5. dpbpos Pabus: the adj. limits
Upbpos, so that the whole expression
means rather the end of night than
the beginning of day. C7. the time
when the Protagoras begins (310 a),
Tis mwapeA@obans wukTds Tavrnoi, Eri
Babéos 4pbpov. The description in the
same dialogue of young Hippocrates
feeling his way through the dark to
Socrates’s bedside shows that pfpos

   

Babis means, just before daybreak. Cf. 43

Xen. An. iv. 3. 8 ff.,, where Xenophon
dreams a dream, émel d¢ Jpbpos Hv .
58erdé Te kal ds TdxiwTa €ws Umépawey
¢0bovro. Here Jpbpos means the dark
before the dawn. Cf. also éupirikn
vig, Hom. 11. vii. 433, Hues & or’ &p
ww nos, Ere 8 aupAvkn vif, | THuos &p’
qupl muphy kpitds Eypeto Aads ‘Axaidv.
6. 10éAnoe vrakovoar: did not re-

fuse to let you in. Cf. Xen. An. i. 3. 8

for odk #0ere, he refused. With dma-
kovoa, cf. Acts xii. 13, and Xen. Symp.
1. 11, ®iArmos 8 6 yeAwvomowds kpoboas
Thy 80pav elme T¢ Vmaxoboavti (the por-
ter) elocayyethar §oTis Te €ln KTE.

9. kal. ..kal k7é: and what is
more, I’ve done a little something for him.
7! is equiv. to edepyeaiav Twa (a tip).

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

™
go
ms

Te

 

KP. ’Emieik®ds mala.

ITAATONOS,

- 43

30. Eira wos ovk e€vfvs émjyepas pe, a\\a ouyy b

rapakabtnool ;

~ 9 A \ ¥y
KP. Od pa 7ov Ala, & Sdkpates, 00d av adros mbelov

\ > ’ \ \ ~
15 év TooAUTY) TE aypvmvig Kol Noy €wal. OANA Kal OO0v

: \
rdlar Oavpdlo aloBavdpevos ds )0éws kabevdes: Kal
y Oé 3 y o ¢ nO o / \ A
érirndés oe ovk ryelpov, la ws NYOLOTA OLAYYS. Kal TOA-

/ \ d / \ / 9 \ ~ Bi oa S-
\dkis puév &1 oe kal wpoTepov €v TavTlL TY Pie EVOL

~ ~ ~ /’
vuora, ToD TPSTov, TONY 8€ pdlioTa €v TY) VIV TapETTWIY)
~ Ie ¢ /’ Ss \ \ / ’
20 Evpdopd as padivs avy kat Tpdws pepe.
a ¥ » ~
50. Kai yap dv, @ Kplrov, mA\nupuelés ern) ayavakTew

TnAikovTOV OvTa, €i O€L NOY TeNevTa.
KP. Kal doi, &@ Swkpartes, TN\koDTOL € TOLAUTALS
Evppopais ahlorovral, AN’ 0v0év avrovs émlverar 1) MAi-

\ ~ ~ ’ /
25 kia TO wi) ovxL AYOVOKTEW TY) TAPOVTY) TUX).

30. "Eot Tavra.

alo 7i 81) ovrw mpo ddiéar;

V 4 bh} /
KP. ’Ayyel\iav, @ Sdkpates, pépwyr Xalemny, ov ToL,
ws éuol Paiveral, a\\’ éuol kal Tols cots émrurndelous TOO LY

¢ \ ~ ~
kal xahemy kal Bapetav, jv éyw, ds éuol dokd év TOL

30 Bapvrar dv évéykayut.

43
b

12. elra: refers to émeikds mda in
a vein of wonder or perhaps of gentle
reproof.

14. ov pd Tov Ala: the neg. be-
longing to the clause that follows is
inserted by anticipation in the oath.
The answer to Socrates’s question is
implied clearly in the use of 03¢, and
becomes categorical in kal émiTndes
KTE.

15. év Tocavry Te aypumvig kTé.:
r¢ is introduced after rogadry, which
belongs to both substs. This position
of 7¢ is very common after the art.
or a prep. — dA\Nd kal: but furthermore.

17. tva Sudyys: for the subjv. after

a secondary tense, see GMT. 44, 2;
H. 881 a.

18. e¥Saipdvioa Tov Tpomwov: for the
gen. of cause, see G.173,1; H. 744. At
the end of the sentence, a clause with
&s (equiv. to rt odTw) is introduced in
place of the gen. — For the facts, see
Introd. 36 and note 6, p. 26.

21. wAnppelés: cf. Apol. 22d and
see on éuueAds, Apol. 20 c.

25. To pj ovxl dyavakTely: émAverTal
is here qualified by 098éy, and is used
in the sense of preventing. Hence the
doubled neg. GMT. 95,2, ~8.15; H.1034.

29. kal xalemijv kal Bapelav: an
effective and almost pathetic reitera-

9
2)

b

 

 

 

 

35

KPITQN.

159

    

[3]

’ > ~ ”~
30. Twa tadmr; 1 70 mhotov adikTar €k Arlov, ob 43

et dpuropévov Telvdvar pe;

KP. Ouro. dn ddikrar, dA\\a doket uév pot new Triue-

3 OQ 9 ’ 4 / 3 \ / \
pov é& ov amrayyEANova NKOVTES TIVES ATO Sovviov kat

/ 95 ~ 5 /
KATAALTTOVTES €EKEL AUTO.

© © ’ A ‘9.9 \ ’ y ¥
wv] ori €eL Tjpepov, kal dvdyky 01) els avplov oral, @

dn\ov oVV €K TOUTWV [Tov ayyé-

3

’ \ /’ ~
Swkpates, Tov Biov oe TeENevTav.

II. 30. ANN, & Kpirwv, 70xy ayaby.

b J ~
€L TAUTY TOS

0 ~ ’ / 5d 5 / 3 hd 3A /’
eots Ppilov, Tavry éoTw. ov wévrol otpar New avTo TIj-

pLepov.
tion of the first xaAemwfv, made all the
stronger by the doubled «al.

30. év Tois Bapurar dv evéykaupt:
in Hdt., Thuc., Plato, and later writers,
év Tots, about, is idiomatically used to
limit the superl. Thus év Tos be-
comes an adverb, which describes not
absolute precedence but an average
and comparative superiority. Cf.
Thue. iii. 17, év Tols wAeloTar, among
the most numerous (not ‘the very most
numerous,” since Thue. adds that the
number was exceeded once) where the
gender of mAelorar is noticeable. Cf.
also id. i. 6. 3, év Tols wp@ToL d¢
*Abnvaior Tv Te cidnpov katéBevto KTE.
Here the position of §¢é shows that év
Tois mp@Tou 1s taken almost as one word,
i.e. wpaTot limited so as to mean prac-
tically the first, or substantially the first
of those who laid down, etc.

31. Tiva Tavrny: connect with ¢é-
pwr above. For i, sce on # d5A0v, Apol.
26 b. — 10 mwholov «7é.: cf. Phaedo,
b8a: Tovrd éaTi TO mAoiov, de Pac
*Afnvaiol, év ¢§ Onaels mote eis Kpfhrnw
ToVs dls émta éxelvous (the seven couples
to be sacrificed to the Minotaur) ¢xero
dywy kal €owaé Te kal adTds éowlbn. TH
ody ’AméAAwvt ebtavTo, bs AéyeTal, ToTE
el ocwbeiey, éxdoTov ETous Oewpiav (a sol-
emn embassy) amwdiew eis AfjAov: fv 37

del kal viv &ri éf éxelvov kar’ éviavtdv
(every twelvemonth) v¢ Oe§ méumovow.
éredav odv Hpiwvrar Ths Oewplas, véuos
éotly adTols év T7¢ xpéve TobTe Kabapel-
ew THY woAw kal dnuocia undéva amo-
kTwvivar (to put no one to death by
public execution), ply tv eis AfjAov agpl-
knTat TO wAolov Kal WIA Oeboo KTE.
Cf. Introd. 36.

32. Tebvdvar: see on Tefvdvar, Apol.
30 ¢, fin.

33. doket pév: with no following
8¢. In such cases the original affinity
of uév with uj» is usually apparent.
Its meaning is, indeed, surely.

35. Tav dyyélwv: can hardly have
been written by Plato, since &yyeAos
in the sense of ayyeAia is not used
except by later writers (Polybius),
while éx prevents us from taking
ayyéAwy as referring to persons. See
App.

II. 1. d\N, @ Kpirwy, Tixn dyady:
it’s all for the best, Crito. &AAa intro-
duces in vivid contrast to Crito’s de-
spondency the cheerful hope of Soc-
rates. — TUxy dyadn: a hopeful in-
vocation often prefixed to a solemn
statement. Cf. Symp. 177 e, &AAa
Toxn &yalf karapxérw ®aidpos, let
Phaedrus make a beginning and good
luck to him. Used freq. like the

d

 
 

 

 

5

IIAATONOZS,

KP. TI6fev Touro Tekpaiper ;
30. *Eyd cou pd. TI) ydp mov voTepalq Sel pe amo
¢ TY po. TH YP poLg M 5

’ A 2 A NG \ A ~
Ovjokew 7) 7) av €NOy To mhoiov.

KP. ®aci y€é ToL O7) oi TovTwr KUpLOL.

3 /’ ~ 3 ’ ¢ / 3 S..\ 4

30. Ov Tolvwy Ts émovans Nuépas oluar avTo NEew,
> \ ~ ed 4 \ ¥ 3 /’ A
Aa 7s érépas. Tekpaipopar O¢ €k Twos évmviov 0
10 ébpaka SNiyov mpdrepov TavTNS TS VUKTOS® Kal KWOV-

’ ~ 9 9 ~ ’
vevels &v Kalp@ TL OUK €YELpaL (Le.
5 \
KP. "Hy 8¢é 7) 7( 70 évvmviov;
~ \ 9
50. ’E8Sker tis por yu) mpooeNfovoa kali) kal ever-
/’ , ’ » / \ 5 ~ 3 ’
Svs, Nevka. ipdria Exovaa, kaléoar pe kal elmew* & 2o-
y ’ / /’ 3 /’ @
kpares, pati kev TpurdTe POinv épiBwlov ikoto.
» ~
KP. "Aromov 70 évimriov, & ZdKpares.

Lat. quod bonum felix faus-
tumque sit, or quod bene ver-
tat. Cf. Dem. 111. 18, &repos Aéyet Tis
Bertiw* TabTa moieite ayaby Tixn. Cf.
also the comic perversion of it in Ar.
Av. 436, kpepdoaTov TU x aya df|és TOV
imvdv low wAnciov Tovmardrov. For
the most formal use of this word, see
many inscriptions and the decree,
Thue. iv. 118. 11, Adxns elme Tixn
ayadi m7 *Abnvalwy woietafar THY ékexet-
play (armistice). In Xen. Hell. iv. 1.14,
it is used of a betrothal: éuol uev Tol-
vv, pm, dokei, 6 ’Ayeciiaos, o¢ ue,
& Smlpiddra, TOXY Gyaly didivar
"Ori hy Buyarépa. Cf. also Xen. Cyr.
iv. 5. 51, aAAG déxoual Te, Epm, Kal
&yalii TOxn fuels Te immels yevoiueda
Kal duels SiéhoiTe T& KoLvd.

5. T ydp mov kré.: this is the first
premiss that follows the conclusion
stated above in od wévror fife THue
pov, the second is contained in the
account of the dream.

7. oi Tovtwy kupwoi: sce Introd.
75, and cf. Apol. 39 e.

8. Tis émovons fpépas: means the

same as Thuepov, for Socrates is now

thinking of the fact that day has not
yet dawned. See on pbpos Babis, 43 a.
10. TavTtys Ts vukTos : in the course
of this night. The vision came after
midnight, a circumstance of the great-
est importance, according to Mosch.
Idyll. 11. 2, vukTds 87e TpiTaTov Adxos
{oraTal, eyyili 8 fds .. . €DTe kal ATpe-
kéwy mowpalverar &vos ovelpwy. (Jf.
Hor. Sat. i. 10. 32 ff., —
Atque ego cum Graecos facerem, natus mare
citra,
Versiculos, vetuit me tali voce Quirinus
Post mediam noctem visus, cum somnia vera.
11. év kawped Tun: usually expressed
by the shorter év kawpg, opportunely.
Qf. Legg. iv. 708 e, éav mpds kaipdy Twa
Aéywpuev. The is has the effect of a
litotes, as e.g. in Ee Tiva Adyov,
there is good and sufficient reason for it.
15. dpa x7é.: quoted from Hom.
Il. ix. 363, fjuati ke Tpirdre POiny épi-
BwAov ikoluny.
16. d&romov kTé.: sc. éori, an excl.
which nearly approaches the form of
a regular sent. Cf. Hom. Il. i. 231,

 

 

KPITON.

9 \ \
30. ’Bvapyes pév odv, os y€ pou doket, @ Kpirawv.
2 3
ITI. KP. Aiov ye, os éowkev. aAXN’, & dative SaKpa.-
y \ ~ 9 \ / \ / e¢ b} / bY \
Tes, €TL kal vov éuol meilov kal cobnTic ws éuot, éav ov
3 /’ 3 /’ ~
amolfavys, ov pia Evpdopd éoTw, alla XWPLS (Lev TOU
5 ~ ~\
éorepnobfar TolovTov émurydelov, ofov éywm ovdéva pj more

e ’ ~ c ~
edprow, €rL 8¢ kal moots O0Ew, ol éué kal o€ wi) Tapas

» e ?/ y ’ 3 ¥
(ocaogw, as olds Te ov oe odlew, el f)lehov avaliokew

/ 9 ~ / /’ a 5 ’ y Vd
XPNpatTa, ape ool. KOoLToL TLS av alo xLwv Ew TAVTYS
dS¢€ Nn o ~ ’ \ A ’ ~ 0 A ’

oa. 7) OOKELW XPNUATA TEPL TAELOVOS TOLELTVaL 7) dilovs ;

dnuoBdpos Bagirels, émel obTidavoiow
avdooes, and bid. v. 403, oxérAwos,
0Bpuuoepyds, bs odr 0er’ (recked not)
alovAa pé(wv. See App.

17. évapyés pév ovv: it is surely
plain enough, immo evidens. The
full meaning can hardly be under-
stood without reading the context of
the verse (363) which is quoted. Cf.
Hom. Il. ix., vv. 356-368. Socrates
thinks of dying as going home, and
Phthia was the home of Achilles.
—¢€ pou: not 4’ éuol. The emphasis
falls on the verb rather than on the
pron. See on &s yé uot dora, Apol. 18 a.

III. 1. & Sawpowee: most excellent,
meaning about the same as @ Oavudote,
or & pakdpie, rather stronger than
wyafé. Of course no color of irony is
given here. Cf. Symp.219b, rovrg 7¢
dawpovip &s aAnbds kal Oavuasrte, and
Gorg. 456 a, where Socrates is speak-
ing of the scope (8dvauis) of rhetoric:
datpmovia ydp Tis &uorye katapalvera
70 uéyelos odTw aromovvri. The word
daiudyios, which was used by Homer
only in addressing persons, received
from Pindar an enlarged meaning, so
as to include whatever proceeds from the
gods. This was adopted by Att. writers,
and of course its adoption involved
applying it to things. Plato still
further enlarged the ground which it

covers. In addressing persons, he
gives it a flattering or an ironical
implication ; applied to things, he uses
it for what is extraordinary, super-
human. See on efmep dalpovas kté.,
Apol. 27 d.

2. rv kal voy: this gives a hint as
to what Crito has planned. It is devel-
oped later. See Introd. 62.

3. fvpdopd éorv: more vivid and
natural than &orai.— Xwpls peév ..
érv 8¢: quite apart from my losing, etc.
«oo 1 shall further, etc. See App.

4. éorepnoBar: the pf. inf. with
xwpls. —ouvdéva. pm mote: equiv. to
ob wh moré Twa, and so here with the
fut. indic., I shall certainly never, ete.
GMT. 89, 1; H. 1032.

6. os olds Te wv kTé. : I shall seem to
many to have neglected you whereas I
was able to save you. olds Te dv og ew
represents ofds Te fv of (ew, I might
have saved you, if I had wished. GMT.
49, 2, 5. 2; H, 897.

8. 1 Sokelv . .. ¢pi\ovs: explaining
rabrys, which covers an idea already
contained in what precedes. Cf. Gorg
500 ¢, mepl TovTov eigly Huiv of Adyor,
00 Ti wv waAAov omovddoeié Tis (than
which what would a man be more in-
clined to pursue with diligence)... H
TovTo, SvTiva xpi Tpdmov (iv kTé. Where
the gen. after a comp. is a dem. or

a T_T ———— I — 5 AB SR 50 Aa Gai

 

 
 

 

mew

 

 

 

156

\ 0% 3 9 ’
ob yap meloovTal oi wONNOL @S OV AUTOS OVK nBéNyoas 44

IIAATQONOZS

10 divas evhévde Hudv mpolbupovuévor.

$0. *AMNa 7 juiv, & pakdpie Kpilrov, ovte ms T0V
ToMGy 8déns péler; ol yap émewéaTatol, Gv palo
d&wov ppovrilew, fyrfjoovrar avra ovTw rempaxfar womep

15

20

44

av mwpaxly.

3

KP. *AMN’ 6pas On Oru dvdykn, @ Zokpartes, Kal TNS

Tov mOANGr O0Ens uélew.

avro O¢ dha Ta waporTa

~ 3 \ / ~
yuri, ori ofol Té €low of MOANOL OU TA OULKPOTATO TOV
~ 3 /’ 3 \ \ , 5 / 37 5
kakdv éfepydleabfar, dANa Ta péyLoTa oXEOOV, €AV TIS EV

avrols SuaBeB\yuévos 7).

30. Ei yap dpelov, & Kpirwr, oloi Te elvas oi mol\ol
76 péyiora kara Epydleata, a oloi Te Hoar kal dyaba
76 péyiora, kal kahds dv elxev: viv oc ovdérepa. olol TE
ove yop Gpdviyov ovTe dppova dvvatol morjoat, moLOVTL

\ ~ © a ’
O€ TOVUTO O TL AV TUX WOW.

[/ ” Id
IV. KP. Tadra piv 8) ovrws éxéra: Tdde 0 & 20-
7 9 -~ ~ \ ~ yy
kpates, elré po: apd ye 1) €pov mpopn let kal TGV alwy

rel. pron., an explanatory clause (here
with the inf., cf. Eur. Her. 297) intro-
duced by #, may always be appended.
Cf. 53 b ec.

13. domep dv wpaxOy: see on dv dv
Aéyw, Apol.20 e. The aor. subjv. has
the force of the fut. pf. GMT. 20,
Nn. 1; H. 889c.

15. Jp@s 81: Crito means to point
at the case in hand. “The fact is that
the many are really in a position, etc.”
Crito has profited but little by what
Socrates has said in the court-room.
Cf. Apol. 304d, 34 ¢, 40 a, etc.

20. el yop ddehov kré.: a wish
the object of which is not attained.
fva ofol Te 7oav expresses an unat-
tained purpose depending on the pre-
ceding unfulfilled wish. GMT. 44, 3;

4
IL 884, See on bs ZueAres, Apol. 20a.

21. &pydfecfar: serves as a repeti-
tion of étepyd{eadas above. Such repe-
tition of the simple verb is common.
Cf.49cd and Lys. 209 ¢, Ti wor’ bv ein
75 alTiov, Ti évTaiba uev od diakwAiov-
aw, év ofs d¢ 8pTi éAéyopuer kwAdovaw.

22. kahds kté.: indeed (i.e. if this
wish were granted) it would be delight-
ful. — viv 8: introduces the fact.
Supply épydeabas here, and worfjoavres
with § 71 & rdxwow. In hypothetical
and rel. sents. Tvyxdveww may be used
without the partic., which is always
suggested by the leading clause.

IV. 2. apd ye pi: like w# alone
(Apol. 25 a), apa uf looks for a neg.
answer, but it may also (see on u1,45e)
convey an insinuation that in spite

s 2

 

5

44

fp
[a {

KPITQON.

157

9

emurndelov, pi, éav ov évbévde €éEéNOys, oi oukoddvrTar 44
¢ ~ / 4 e \ I / 3 ’ \
NW wpdypara mapéxwow os ae evfévde kk éaow, kal
5 avayykaocloper 7 kal maocavy Tv ovoiav amofalelw 1)

\ A \ ¥ ~

ovxva xpripata, 7 kat aAlo Tv wpos Tovtois mabew ; el
yap TL TowUTOr pofel, €ncov avTo Xaipew: nuELs ydp
mov dikaiol éoper odoavTés oe KWOUVEVEW TOUTOV TOV

kivbuvov kal éav 8éy érv TovTov pellw. al\’ éuol melBov
\ \ y /
10 Kat 17) aAAws ToieL.

30. Kal ravra mpounbovuar, & Kpirwr, kai dla

mold.

KP. Mjre 7olvvr tavra ¢pofov: kal yap ovdé mov

3 / /’ 5 A / / \ ~ / \
TAPYVUPLOV ETTW, O Gé\ova AaBovres TWES TWoAlL TE Kal

5 ~ 35 ’ y 3 Cc ~ /’ \
é€ayayetw évbévie. ETELTA ov opas TOUTOVUS TOUS OVKO-

/ ¢ 9 ~ \ IQN a /’ 3 5 \ ~
pavras ws evreles, Kal ovOer av O€oL €m avTovs mwoANoD

of the expected denial the facts really
would justify an affirmative answer;
you surely don’t, though I imagine you do,
is Crito’s meaning. The w#® which fol-
lows mpounfei is obviously connected
with the notion of anxiety in that
verb. The same idea is again pre-
sented in ¢oBel (are fearful) below.
The subjv. mapéxwow conveys an idea
of action indefinitely continued, where-
as étéalps and avaykacfouer denote
simply the occurrence of the action.

8. Oikawol éopev kTé.: see on Bi
kaids elu, Apol. 18 a.

9. a\\’ épol melfov, pn... mole:
no, no! do as I say. &AAd with the
imv. introduces a demand or a request
made in opposition to an expressed re-
fusal or to some unwillingness merely
implied or feared. This vigorous re-
quest is reinforced by the neg. uj
wolet, do this and do not do that. Cf. 46 a.

13. pyre: the second clause, which
we miss here, appears below (b) in the
resumptive statement wep Aéyw, unre

kTé.— ¢ofov: reiterating ¢poBei above,
be fearful. It is a part of Crito’s char-
acter to return again and again to his
point. Cf. 43 d, and see Introd. 62.
Further he had here a welcome oppor-
tunity for airing his grievances against
the sycophants (blackmailers). Crito
had been himself the victim of these
rascals until he found a vigorous
friend, *Apxédnuov, wdvv ueév ikavdv ei-
mwelv Te kal mpatai, wévnTa 8¢, as Xeno-
phon puts it, who delivered him from
them. This good riddance was due
to the advice of Socrates. Cf. Xen.
Mem. ii. 9. 4, odk &v odv Opéais Kal
dvdpa (sc. just as you keep dogs to
protect sheep from wolves), Goris é0¢é-
Ao. Te kal dVvauTd gov ameplkew Tous
émix elpovvTas Adikely TE.

15. Tovrovs : said with scorn. Cf.48e,
TobTwy TAVv woAA@v, and Dem. XVIIL
140, kal Ta uév #AAa kal pépew HdUvad,
bs Cowkev, ) woAis kal mou@v oV TOS
Aav@dvew (this fellow could do...un-
detected).

I A CARTIER

 

 
158 IIAATONOS | | KPITQN. 159

s ’ \ Se eh \ A 5..8 ’ €. 3.7 45 ’ A \ ’ \ A e \ ~
apyvpiov; ool O€ UTAPXEL WEY Ta éua XPipaTa, Ss éyo | 5 Bovhduevol. wpPOS O€ ToUTOLS Kal TOUS VIELS TOUS OAUTOD 45
éuovye Sokels mPodiddvau, ovs dou €Eov kal ékbpépar kal a

 

 

5 ¢ ’ y. \ 3.8 ’ > ¥
otpaL, LKava® €meLTo. Kol €L TL €uod KNOdueros ovk ole
Ocv avaliokew Tapd, Eévor odror évbdde éroymor dvali-
20 okew: els O€ Kal kekduiker ér’ avTd TovTO dpylpLov ika.-
’ / e ~ [
vov, Juyppias 6 OnBaios: €royuos 8¢ kal KéBns kal do
AN \ ’ & 4 / / ~ /
moANoL maAvy.  WOTE, omEP Néyw, wire TavTa dofovuevos
3 /’ \ ~
ATOKAUYS TAVTOV TAOTAL, UNTE O €Neyes év To SikaoTnplw
o ’ / 0 © 3 A y 5 \ 4 ~
voXepés Tou yevéa lo, oti ovk av €xois é€ehfav 6 TL xp@o
~ ~
25 oavre: molaxov mer ydp kal dA\hooe Gmou dv ddiky
3 / ’ \
ayamyoovai oe: éav 0é Bovly els Oerraliarv vas, eloiv
9 * ~ 4 © \ ~ /’ \ 9 /
épot éket évou, ol ae mepl mood moujoorTar Kal dodad-
4 © ~ ~
Near oo mapéfovtar woe oe undéva \vmely TOY kara
Oerraliav.
y 7B n
V. "Er 8¢, & Sdkpates, 008¢ Slkaidy pou Soxeis ém-
XEWpew mpayua, ocavrov mwpodovvar, €€ov cwblirar: kal
~ \
TOLOUTA OTTEVOELS mepl Tavrov yevéofad, amep av kai oi

9 ~ ’ ’ ’ \ \ \ ’ 4 A

ékraudetoal olxjoel katalmdy, kal TO cov uépos, 6 TL av

TUXWOL, TovTo Tpdovaw: TevéovTal OE, ds TO €lkOS, Tol-
/ / y ’ 3 ~ 3 / \ \

oUTwr otamep elwle yiyveotar év Tals dppavias wept Tods

9 ’ A \ 9 \ ~ ~ A

opdavovs. 7) yap ov xp moretotar Tatdas, 9 Evvdiaralal-

~ \ / \ /’ \ / ~
TWPEW Kol TpéPovTa Kal roadeorTa gv O€ rol dokels

7a pabuudrara aipetalai xpn O¢, amep av dvjp ayabk

pabvudrara aipetalais xpn) 6, amep av avnp dyabos
kal dvdpeltos €Nowro, Tavra aipeiolfai, pdokovrd ye &)
aperns Oa mavtos Tov [lov émpueletolart ws Eywye kal
UTEP 00D Kal UTEP NUOV TOV TOV émurndelwy aloyivopal,
pn) 86én dmav TO Wpaypa 70 WEL o€ dvavdpig Twi TY)
nuerépa mempaxlal, kal 1) eloodos Ts Olkns els 70 Ouka-
oripiov os elon\ev éEov pi) eloellet, kal adTos 6 dyov

V. 7. 16 oov pépos: pro tua genuinely évdpes in the proper sense
parte or quod ad te attinet.— of the word. They failed éavavdpla

 

3 ’
éxOpol gov omedoardy te Kal éomevoar ol Siagpfeipa

17. ool 8: the argument is as
follows: the amount required to settle
with these sycophants, I should be
ready enough to expend for almost
any one, but for you, etc.— dmwdpyxe :
¢f. Napboaris...dwfipxe 76 Kipw,
pthovoa abTdv paAior 9) kré., Xen. An.
i. 1. 4; kal Smdpter Suiv % uh mors
éxdvres ydp ue détovrai, ibid. v. 6. 23.
— ws éyw olpar: said with reference
to the appositive ikavd.

18. ouvk olev: Crito recollects what
Socrates had said (45 a, in connexion
with 44 e). See on od ¢iire, Apol. 25D.

19. gێvou odror: cf. Apol. 33 e, Ara:
Tolvwy obroi kTé. The pron. calls up
the ¢évo: as present in Athens, and, for
rhetorical purposes, within sight. The
art. is omitted because ¢évou is a pred.,
these others who are évou.

21. KéPns: Cebes also was from
Thebes, and the two play a very im-
portant part in the Phaedo.

23. amokdpns cavrov odoai: get
tired of trying, ete. Here is no impli-
cation that Socrates has already tried
to getaway. Crito only hints that any
other course is nothing short of moral
cowardice. See App. —o €\eyes: cf.
Apol. 37 ¢ A.

24. xpwo: the opt. representing
the subjv. of doubt. GMT. 34, 3.

25. doce: for #Arof:, which we
expect after moAAayod on account of
dro. This is attraction, or inverse
assimilation. (Cf. Soph. 0. C. 1226,
Bijvas ketBev 80evmep Hike.

V. 4. o¢ SuadBeipar : dé is accented
for emphasis and to disconnect it
from &omwevoar.

 

6 TL av Tuxwo: see on viv §¢, 44 d. wi. Cf. Euthyphro’s boast, efpo’

8. Touro mwpdfovowv: cf. ed, kakds,
and even ayaddr (used adv.) with
mparreww (Apol. 40 ¢). See on uy
opbas mpdtew, Apol. 40 a.

10. 7 yap x7é.: the dp is connected
with an unexpressed reproof.

13. Jdokovra ye 81: sc. aé, at all
ceents you who maintain, ete., or particu-
larly when you maintain. Sce on & +e
81, Apol. 40 a.

16. pm: sce on &pa ye ui, 44e.
The notion of fear is remotely im-
plied. For this const., very common
in Plato, sce GMT. 46, ~.4, fin.; II. 867.
— dvav8pla TW kTé.: a certain sort of
cowardice on our part. Notice the em-
phasis given to 777 Yuerépr, for which
we are responsible. If Crito and the
rest, by showing more energy, by
using all possible influence against
Meletus and his abettors, had carried
the day, they would have been more

av bmn oabpds éori, Euthyph. 5 ec.

17. kal 1 eloodos... kal 6 aywy: in
apposition with arav 70 mpayua 7d mepl
cé. On the meaning of the technical
terms, see Introd. 70, with note 1, p.
52. Precisely how the trial of Socra-
tes could have been avoided except
by flight from Athens is not clear.
There is a wholly untrustworthy tra-
dition that Anytus offered him terms
of compromise. Probably there were
abundant means at hand for raising
legal technicalities and for securing
in this way an indefinite delay. All
that Crito necessarily suggests is that
flight was open to Socrates before
proceedings began. At Athens, as
at Rome, the law allowed a man to go
into voluntary exile. See Introd. 72.

18. ¢ dywv: the management of the
case. See on eis ayadva kabiords, Apol.
24 c.

 

 
 

 

160 ITAATONOS,

~ / ¢ / \ ~
Ts Olkns ws éyévero, kal 70 Televraiov On) Tour WoTEP 45

/ ~
20 kaTdye\ws Ts Tpaews Kakia TW Kal avavdpig TN Me
’ / ~ ~ Ly
Tépa Siamedevyévar Nuas Soke, olTwés Te ovxL éodoa-
\ \ °
perv ovdeé ov oavrdy, olor Te Ov kal dvvardy, € TL Kai
\ e¢ ~ ¥y A ” ~ 3 ” / © \
JLKPOY NudY Opelos Nv. TaVTA ODY, & 2dKpaATES, Opa 1)
or ~ ~ \ ” ~
Apa TQ KOKQ Kal aioXpa 7) ool 7€ kai nu. dla Bov-
Vd ~ ©
25 Nevov, wallov 8¢ ovde Bovlevealar eri wpa, ala BeBov-
”~ ’ \
Aevolfar. pia 8é Bovhii: ms yap émovans vuvkrds wdvra

Tavra Oct mwempaybai. ei 6€ TL mepyuevovper, Adlvarov

45

19. 70 TeAevralov Tour(: the scene

of this act is laid in the prison.
20. karayelws: because, in Crito’s

22. oudé ov cavrdv: sc. &woas.
Crito hints at Socrates’s part, then
recurs to his own. The interjection
opinion, all who were involved made of such a clause in a relative sent.
themselves a common laughing-stock is irregular. — olov Te 8v: like dv
by their weak-minded negligence and above. For the fact, cf. 45b ec.
irresolution. Cf. Cymbeline, i.,— 24. dpa Tw Kake: dua is used as
mpos freq. is. Cf. Symp. 195 ¢, véos
uev ody earl, mpds 8¢ 74 véw amards, he
is young and in addition to his youth he
is tender. Cf. also Theaet. 185 e, kar ds
yap €l . . . mpds 8¢ TG kag (in addition
to your beauty) eb émoinods we kTé. —

a\Ad: cf. line 28 below, and see on

Howso’er ’tis strange,

Or that the negligence may well be laughed at,
Yet it is true, sir.
In the whole drift of Crito’s phrase-
ology, the notion of acting a part on
the stage before the Athenian public
is prominent. — kakiq x7é.: this is
really in Crito’s eyes the culmination GAA’ éuol meifov, 45 a. This speech
of disgrace (connect with 7d rerev- has the dignity which genuine feeling
Taiov) in a matter that has been dis- alone can give. Cf. Rich. IIL. iv. 3,—
gracefully mismanaged. Here is a Come, have learned that fearful commenting
return to the leading thought and a Is leaden servitor to dull delay;
departure from the regular gram- Deny Ks impotent and snail-paced beg-
matical sequence. The anacoluthon Then fiery expedition be my wing.
is most obvious in the repetition of On BeBovAedabar, to have done with de-
doketv after do¢n. liberation, cf. Dem. vir. 3, oluat TH

21. Suamedevyévar pds : people will  raxloryy cvupéperv BeBovAedofar
think they allowed every advantage «kal wapeokevdafai, and 1v. 19, Taira...
and every opportunity, especially the wag: deddx0ar pul deiv. GMT. 18,36;
possibility of escape which now en- H. 851 a.
grosses Crito’s thoughts, to pass unim- 26. TNs émovons: cf. 44a.
proved. 7uas is the object. Cf. Charm. 27. el 8¢ mu TEPULEVODpEY : this adv.
156 e, TovTo alTiov Tov diagpevyetr use of 7lis developed out of the cog-
Tobs mapa Tois "EAAnow iaTpos Ta moAA& nate acc. (kindred signification). Cf.
voafuara, i.e. the reason why Greek doc- the Eng. idiom, “ to delay somewhat
tors fail to cure most diseases. (a bit).” G. 159; H. 715.

46

46

BENS HNN EB

 

10
46

KPITQON.

\ 3S... /
KOlL OVKETL OLOV TE.

fou pot kat pndauds alos mole.
VI. 30. °Q ¢ile Kpirov, 5 mpoluuia cov moAN\OV b

> 3 4 3 / y J \ /’ © /
ala, €L LETQ TLWOS opbornros Em) EL O¢ mM, 0O0W pelo,

/ /’
TOO OUT® XAAeTOTEPA,

~ ” \ e ~ y
okomelofar ovv xp Muas ere

~ / y /’ C 3. 3 / ~ 3 \ A...
Tadra TpakTéov €lTe uit @s éyw ov wovor vuv alla Kai det

ToL0DTOS 050s TOV euav undevi dM melblealar 9) To \oyw,

6s av pot, Noylopéve BélTioTos daivyTa.

TOUS 0€ M\O-

yous obs év 79 éumpoaler éeyov od Svvapar viv ékfBa-

ely, émedr} pou 18e 7 TOY Yéyover, AA\a axedov TL GpoLoL

/’ \ \ 3 \ ¥ \ ~ &
daivovTal pot, Kal TOUS aUTOUS mpeo Pen Kal TLD OVTTEP

\ ’ a \ \ ’ y ’ ’ ~
kal wpérepov: Gv éav un PeTio exwper Aeyew ev TQ

VI. 2. dla: sc. éoriy, in spite of
the opt. in the prot. GMT. 54, 20;
H. 901 b. — el eln: not if it should be,
but if’ it should prove to be. Cf. dewa
av ey eipyaouévos, Apol. 28 A. For
the present, Socrates does not decide
whether Crito’s zeal is right or wrong.

4. ov povov kté.: Socrates main-
tains that “truth is truth to th’ end
of reckoning” (Measure for Measure,
v.1). vovand ae/ might almost change
places, since the important point is
that Socrates, after proclaiming the
supremacy of reason (cf. Apol. 38 a)
in prosperity, finds his belief still firm
in adversity. Cf. 563 ¢ and e. Cf.
As You Like It, ii. 1,—

Sweet are the uses of adversity,

Which, like the toad, ugly and venomous,

Wears yet a precious jewel in his head.
Socrates meets in his trial and death-
sentence “the counsellors that feel-
ingly persuade him what he is.” For

collocations similar to this combina-
tion of vor and &el,cf.49 e; Hom. 11. ix.
105, ofor yd voéw, Huey mdAar 8° rt Kal
viv. Cf. also Eur. Med. 292, od viv ue
mp@dTov AANA mwoAAdkis, Kpéov, | EBAaje

dda kré., and Soph. Phil. 965, éuol uev
olkTos dewds éumémtwké Tis | Tov av-
pds, od viv mp@dTov, GANA kal TdAaL.

5. Towovros oles: for the omission
(rare except with the third person) of
the copula, cf. Gorg. 487 dA, kal uyv
dri ye olos mappnoudlesdar, equiv. to
87 TowodTos €l olos kTé. For ofos mel-
fedbai, see on TowivTes, Apol. 33 a. —
Tav pov kTé.: Ta éud includes all the
faculties and functions both of body
and of mind. Among these Advyos is
included, since it means man’s reason
as well as his reasons and his reason-
ings, — his utterances and his princi-
ples. Cf. below 47 e, eis Ti T@v TOD
arefovvros and 47 e, 11 mot’ éoTl TAY
NUETEpwy.

6. Tous 8¢ Aoyous kTé.: these words
imply a measure of reproof at least
when spoken to Crito, who had in
general approved of Socrates’s prin-
ciples.

8. épowor: not different in sense
from of ad7oi, and to be understood in
the light of what immediately follows.
See on kal wpdrepov, 48 b. “They
seem like what they formerly were.”

161

AAO. TavTl TPIT, @ ZOKPATES, TEL- 46

 

NA SH RA

I SUA

 

 
 

162 ITAATONOS

, EE 4 or ’ /’ ’ 3QY A rd
7apdvrL, €0 lob StL ov wif cou Evyxwpriow, 08’ av mheiw 46
Tov viv Tapdvtwy 7) Tér moAMGY Slvauls Gomep mTadas
Nas poppolvrmral, Seauovs kal fJavdrovs émuréumrovoa,
Kal XpypudTwy dpalpéoes. TOS OY UY WETPLOTATO OKO-

4 3 / 3 ~ \ ~ \ / 9 /
15 roipuela avrd ; €l mpaTOY pPéV TOVTOV TOV Noyor avaldSot-

A \ / \ ~ ~ / ~ J /
pev, Ov OU NEYELs TEPL TOY dow, TOTEPOV KAN@S €NEYeETO
ékdaToTe 1) ov, OTL Tals uev Oet TY oly TPoTEXEWw TOV

~ ~ \ y \ \ 3 3 ~ > / ~
vour, Tals 0¢ ov 1) mp uev ue Oc amrobvijokew kalds a
5 / ~ \ /’ y 9 /’ © y ©
éNéyero, vUV Oe kaTddnhos apa €yévero, oT. AA\wS €veka.
20 \dyov é\éyero, Nv 6¢ madi kai Pplvapia ws aknbos; émri-

 

KPITQN. 163

Popo & yay’ émorépactar, & Kpitew, KOW)) WETO. OO, 46
el TL pou aA\otérepos Paverral, émeLdn) @O€ €xw, 1) 0 avTos,
kal edaoper yalpew 7) mewrdpeda alrd. éNéyero O€ mows,
@s éygual, €KAOTOTE @Oe VTO TAY olopévar TL Néyew,
25 Gomep viv On éyw E\eyov, Sri rédv Sofa as oi avbpwmol
Sofdlovar Séol Tas uév wept woANOY moweio Bar, Tas O¢ pi. e
TodTo Tpos Pedv, & Kpirwv, ov doKeEL KANWS TOL Aeyeotau ;
ov yap, doa ye ravlpdmea, ekTos €l ToD peNNew amolvy-
oKew avpLov, Kal OK av Oe rapakpovoL 7) TaPOVTa Evp- 47
30 dpopd.* ake 01), ov LKAV@S Soke cou Néyeolou, Gr od
mdoas xp Tos O06fas Tév avbpomwv Twa, alla. Tas

 

 

 

46
b

C

Supply kal mpdrepov (from what fol-
lows) with §uoor.

11. whelo poppoAvrTnTar: uses more
hobgoblins to scare us. uopuoAdTTerba
has the double acc. like BAdwrrew Twd
Ti. Mopuw, like Eumovoa, was one
of the fictitious terrors of the Greek
nursery. Cf. Gorg. 473; Ar. Av.
1244, wérepa Avddv # Ppiya | Tavr)
Aéyovoa mopuorvrTecOar dokets; The
Schol. there suggests that the alarm
began ard T&dv mpocwmeiwy (masks) Tov
¢v Tals Tpaywdlats vmokpiT@y, & éxdAovy
poppoAvkela. TotobTols 8¢ Kal al yvvaikes
Ta wadia poBovaw. Cf. Phaed. 77 e.

13. 8eopovs kal Oavarovs émumép.-
movoa k7é. : by confronting us with bonds,
with death, with loss of wordly goods.
These are the usual punishments, to
the harshest of which Socrates has
been condemned. The plural is used
to put an abstract idea more vividly
and concretely, as it were, by a process
of multiplication. Cf. the use of
mortes, neces, and the common
poetical use of Odvaro:r to describe a
violent and premature death, and in
general the free use of the plural by
the poets in phrases like myxror kA-
pdrwy mpooauBdaes, Kur. Phoen. 489,
and Bacch. 1213, dwudrwy mpocauBd-

cess, I. T. 97, eicBdoes, tbid. 101, also
the common use of dwaAAayal both in
poetry (Eur. Phoen. 701) and in prose
(Lys. x11. 53 ; x111. 80, efc.). That such
plurals were only a stronger way of
putting the singular is clearly shown
in Eur. Bacch. 1350, aiai, deddk Tal,
wpéaBu, TAfNpoves ¢vyal. For Odva-
Tos, meaning the penalty of death, sce
on Apol. 36 b.

15. el avahaPowpev: I think, if we
should begin by taking up your point, ete.
That is, such thorough consideration
(44 b, 45 e) of Crito’s (bv ad Aéyes)
point involves considering the whole
question whether, ete.

18. # mwplv pév k7é.: with 4 (an) a
second question is superadded, which
substantially forestalls the answer to
the first. Cf. Apol. 26 b. Here the
answer suggested by &pa is to be taken
ironically. See on éAAa xpnudrwy,
Apol. 37 e, and cf. 47 e below, and esp.
50e and 51a, where we find # mpds
uty dpa got TOv matépa . . . wpds 8¢ THY
mwaTpida &pa.

19. dN\ws: not at all seriously, as a
mere joke, i.e. in a sense other than
its proper one; the expression is a
strong one. Cf. Phaedo, 76 e, ei 3¢ uy

éoTi TavTa, UAAws bv 6 Adyos ovTos

 

/ ~ 9 \ ~ Id .
pv, Tas O ov; TL ns; TavTA OUXL KaADS AEyeTaL;

KP. Kalws.

~ \ \ \
SO. Odkody Tas py XPNITAS TUYLAY, TAS O¢ Tornpas

35 pu) ;

KP. Nad.

SQ. Xpnoral 3¢ ody al TOV Ppovipwv, Torn pal oe al

~ 9 ’
TOV appovwy ;
KP. Ilas & ov;

clpnuévos etn. Evexa Adyov, for the

( . . .
form’s sake (dicis causa)— quite

different from Adyov xdpw (exempli
causa)—is brought in éx mapaAAnrov.
See on eiky KkTé., Apol. 17 e.

24. 7 Nyew: the contradictory of
ovdey Aéyew. Cf. Apol. 30D. It means,
“to say something that can be de-
pended upon, that amounts to some-
thing.” Cf. Lach. 195¢, Ti Boke
Adxns Aéyew, & Nukia; Eowke uévrol
Aéyew 71, to which Nicias humorously
tesponds, kal yap Aéyet yé Ti, 00 uévrol
aAnOés ye.

25. wuv 8n: just now.

e 28. doa ye Tavlpdmaa: humanly

speaking. Cf. Dem. XVIIL 300, doov
Jv avbpwmivg Aoyioug dvvatbv, as jar

as human calculation could. For the 4
adv. ace. §oa, see G. 160, 2; H. 719.
One who is but a man can be sure of
his life for no single moment, though
he may have a reasonable confidence.
Cf. Henry V. iv. 1,1 think the king is
but a man, as I am ; the violet smells
to him as it doth to me; all his senses
have but human conditions.” Notice
the force of vé. Cf. 54d, doa ve Ta
vov éuol SokovvTa. Ko 47

30. ikavaes: sufficiently, satisfacto- o
rily, and hence rightly or truly. ixavas
very commonly appears in conjunc-
tion with werplws or kaAds, to either
one of which it is substantially equiv.
Cf. Symp. 177 e and Phaed. 96 A.

"392. For an omission here, see App.

 

 
 

 

 

 

5

47

ITAATQNOS

VIL. 30. ®épe 8}, nds ad 7a Toadra é\éyero; yv- 47
pvaldpevos avip kal TOUTO TPATTWY TOTEPOY TavTOS Ardpds b

> L \ ’ \ SSE \ ~ 2 A eA ’
€TALV@ Kal Yoyw Kat nN TOV vovy TPO EXEL, 7) €VOS Ovov

S.. 7 A A ’ ’ , ’ ¥
€EKEWOV 0S av TUVYXOvn LlaTpos 7 wadorpifins wy ;

KP. ‘Evds pdvov.

20. Ovkovr ¢oBeicbtar xp Tovs Ydyovs kai domd-
\ 3 / \ ~ €.\ 3 / 3 \ \ \
{eabas Tovs émaivovs Tovs Tov évds éxelvov, dN. ua) Tos

TOV TOANNOV.
KP. Anka &j.

VII. 1. w@s av é\éyero: the impf,
because the new question (a3) involves
a matter which has already been dis-
cussed. GMT. 11, ~n. 6; H. 883. —
Ta Tolavra: refers to what follows.
The definite instance given is only
one of many possible illustrations of
the kind. On the inductive method,
see Introd. 18, and for further exam-
ples, cf. Apol. 26b. Cf. also Lach.
184 ¢-185b, where the same example
is elaborated to establish the same
principle that approval and instruc-
tion alike should, if we are to heed
them, come from the one man who
has made himself an authority, 6 ua-
6wy kal émrndevoas, while the praise
and blame of the many is to be neg-
lected. There also the importance of
deciding aright in regard to gymnas-
tic training is strongly insisted upon,
as follows: %) mepl ouwcpot oleae yur!
kwdvvebew kal ov kal Avaluaxos, GAN’
ob mepl TovTOV TOD KTAMATOS, D TOY Due-
Tépwy uéyiorov dv Tvyxdver, .. . dmolot
&v Twes of maides yévwyral.

2. TovTo wpdrrwy: a man who makes
this his work, and hence is an expert in
earnest about it. One whose opinion
professionally given is worth more
than any layman’s would be. Cf.
Menez. 244 c, nynoduevor Aaxedaiudyior
« «. opérepov iidn ¥pyov elvar kaTa-

dovAodoOa:r Tods #AAovs, TadT
ExpatTov. As this radra refers to
kaTadovAovalar, 0 the Tot70 in question
refers to the notion of gymnastics
implied in ~yvuvaléuevos; the whole
phrase means, a person who wishes to
make an athlete of himself. Cf. Hdt.
Vi. 105, &roméumovaw és Swdprny Kfpuka
Pedimmidny *Abnvaiov uév dvdpa, dAAws
3¢ fuepodpduov Te kal TodTO Me
AETOVTa.

4. latpos 17 walorpifns: often
coupled together as having special
charge of bodily vigor and health.
The iatpds was expected to cure and
to prevent disease by a prescribed
regimen (Swurnrikn); the wadorpiBns
professed and was expected (Gory.
452 b) rahols Te kal Ioxvpods moiely
ToVs avfpdmovs Ta oduara; he it was
who really gave instruction in gym-
nastics. For fuller details, see Scho-
mann, Antiquities of Greece, 1. 505 f.
Iccus of Tarentum, glorified as a suc-
cessful gymnast, is reputed to have
been most strict in regard to a tem-
perate diet. Cf. the proverbial phrase
“Ikkov detmvov. Sometimes medicine
and gymnastics were both made the
business of the same man, as in the
case of Herodias of Selymbria. Cf.
Prot. 316 d e, éviovs 8¢ Twas foOnuas kal
yvpuvaaTikfy (sc. professed teachers

 

10

KPITQN.

’ ¥ 3 ~ 2, \ ’
SQ. Tavry apa avTw TPOAKTEOV Kal YUVA Oo TEOY
9 ’, \ / D A ~ e.\ o ~ ~ ’ \
édeoréov YE Kal TOTEOoV, mn av TW EVL OK7 TW €ETLOTATY) Kol

 

~ ~ 2 y
ématovti, pallov 4) 9 Edumact Tols dANos ;

KP. "Eor. Tavra.
30. Elev.

3 ’ A LA en \ ’ yA
arehjoas o¢ TW €VL Kal aTipaoas avTOov

\ \ ~ ~
15 Tv 06av kal Tovs éraivovs, Tiurjoas O¢ Tovs TGV TONGY

20

’ \ 3 “7 ~ 15 \ ’
Aoyovs Kaw pundev €TawvTwy, apa ov €V KOAKOV TELTETAL,

KP. IIas yap ov;

\ ~ \ ~ / \ 5
30. TiO orl TO KAKOV TOUTO KOL TrOL TeELvelL Kal €is

/ ”~ ”~ hb J ~~
Tt Tov Tov amelbovvros;

~ < ~
KP. Anlov ore eis 70 aopa.
~ nn » /
OVKOOY Kal TAN\a, @ Kpirwv,

30. Kalas MNéyes.

TOUTO yap OLN \vo Lv.

& o \ ’ S ’ \ Sn \ \ ~ o ’
ovTwsS, wa M7 TaVTA LLojLev, Kol n KO TEPL TWY LKOLWY

\ ot \ > ~ \ ~ \. 8 04 A ~
Kal aOlkwy Kal ailoXpav kal ka\@dv kal ayalor kal kak@v,

» 2 ”~ e \ ee ~ ’ /, ~ ~ AG
wEpL wv voy 7) Bovhy nu éoTw, woTepov TY TOY WONGY

~ ~ o y 7 A ~ ~

25 06&n Set uas émeclar kai doPfetocfar admijv, § 1) TOV
e 7 » ’ 3 3 oh A o ~ \ 9 ’ 0 \
€VOS, €L TiS €E0Tw €malwy, Ov Ol kai aioyvveobar kai ¢o-

= ~ \ ¥ ? 3 y i»
Betobar pallov 7) Epmavras Tos dAlovs; & ei ui) dko-

of ), ofov"1k kos Te 6 Tapavrivos, kal 6 viv
&re dv oddevds fiTTwy copioTys ‘Hpd-
Oikos 6 SeAvuPBpiavds, TO d¢ &pxaiov
Meyapels. The great physician Hero-
dicus is ridiculed for coddling his
bodily infirmities, Rep. iii. 406 b, wapa-
koAovBdy yap T¢ voofuar: Oavaciue
dvi obre idoacBai, oluai, olds 7° fv éav-
Tv, ... dv Oavardv (dying hard) §¢
wd coplas eis yhpas aplreTo.
11. kal éSeoréov ye: ~€ serves
where various points are enumerated,
to mark a new departure, 7.e. a fact
different in kind from the preceding
ones and thus belonging to a new
class. Cf. Gorg. 450 d, dpilbunticy kal
Aoyioriky (calculation) kal yewuerpiky
kal werrevricd) (draught-playing) yc kal
Aart woAAal Téxvai. Theaet. 156,

Yes (sights) Te kal droal kal dopphoeis
(smells) wal YoEes (chills) Te kal rad-
ces (burns) kal Hdoval ye dh kal Avwa
kal émibuular (desires) kré.

15. Tous Adyous : states collectively
what has been subdivided into 8d¢a,
Ydyos, Erawos.

16. kal pndév émaidvrwv: of those
in fact who have no special knowledge
whatever. See App.

18. els Tl k7é. : see on Tov éuadv, 46 b.

22. kal 84 xal: and then also, of

course. See on kal 8) kal, 18a. ‘Here
Socrates has at last reached his goal;
his point has been established by in-
duction. Notice the doubly chiastic
arrangement, —
Swkalwv. _aioxpav. _dyabav
adikwy >< cakiy Ls

165

Kal 47

d

47
b

 

 
 

 

166 ITAATQONO=

KPITQON. 167

NovOriooper, Sradfepodper éxeivo kai AwBnodueba, o TQ 47 TO NP sq ‘oe ’
NO OEY, POV Noon ’ 1 €EOTL TWV MNUETEPWY, TEPL O M) TE adikia Kat 7m dukatooivy 48

 

 

 

 

pv Sucalw Bé\tiov éylyvero, TY 8¢ ddike dmdN\vro. 7) doriy;
i 30 0VOEV €0TL TOTO; 15 KP. Od8auas.
5 KP. Opa éywye, @ Sakpartes. 30. ANG TyuLETEPOY §
‘ VIII. 30. ®épe 61, éav| To UO TOD UYLEWOD MEV BéN- ; KP. TIo\¥ ye.
£ TLOV Yryvopevov Vo TOV vooddovs \0¢ dwadblepoperor / | 30. Ok dpa, & Bé\tiare, md uly ovrw Gpovre-
doNéowpev, mellouevol py T) TOV émaiovTwy 3déy, apa oréov, Ti épovow ol mol\ol Muas, d\\’ 0 Tu 6 ématwy wepL
IH Burov Nuiv ori dieplapuévov avrob ; ori O€ Tov TOVTO e ot vou Strata ral le, kal adm) 9 dhjfe. doe
i 5 70 o@pa 1) ovXi; TPAOTOV Mev TAUTY) OUK phos eLonyeL, elon yoduevos ™s

| | KP. Nad.

Tov moMGr 86&ns Sev Has povrilew wept Tdv Sukaiwy
30. Ap’ ofv Burov nuilv éotw pera poxbnpod Kal

\ ~ ~
kal kav kai ayafdv kal T@v évavriov. dA\\a pév oj,

 

a y .. eo oe
a . in
“ $%. a i 5
A TO Er on Se”.
is SIRT. cp HA RONG TT i Sr . - “ ance

emi
es >
a NA “

 

 

 

 

10

Siepfappévov cwuatos ;
KP. Ovdauds.

30. "ANG per ékelvov dpa Muiv PBuwtdv Swepfappé-
RY 25 \ ~ \ Se ot yy J A
vou, @ TO dOtkov uév AwBaraL TO OE OlKaLoV OVIXNTW; 7)

tL

~ ~ ”~ © J
Pav\drepov fyovpeda elvar Tob cOpaTos €kewo, o TL TOT

29. &ylyvero, amé\hvro: i.e. yiyve
oBas, &méAAvalar éxéyeTo, the so-called
philosophical impf., which carries a
statement of the admitted results of
a previous discussion back to the
well-remembered time when the facts
stated were established in argument.
GMT. 11, ~. 6; 11. 833. Cf. Cic. Of.
i. 40. 143, itaque, quae erant
prudentiae propria, suo loco
dicta sunt.

VIII. 3. waBopevor prj kré.: by its
position uf contradicts 77... 3d¢n,
but not wei@duevor, and implies &AAa
mh Tov ph érabvrwy 36kp. The effect
of writing weiduevor uf instead of ui
weiBduevor is to lay greater stress on
both words, and the failure to say
distinctly whose opinion it is which
is obeyed leaves all the more stress
on uf. — dpa Puerdy kTE.: see on
dvetéraoros Blos, Apol. 38 a. The

meaning is that life is worthless, ¢.e.
od Avairehel, ovk doy (iv. Cf. 83 ¢,
and Rep. iv. 445 a, fuiv éotl okéja-
oat, mérepov ad AvaireAel (pays) Sika
Te mpdrTew kal kaAd émrndelew kal
elvar dlkawov . . . 3) adiketv Te kal &dikov
elva.. The expressions diapeipduevoy
and dwAéowuer bring us to the point
of extreme deterioration at which
life becomes impossible.

10. d\\a . . . dpa: ironically op- e

posed to the preceding negative state-
ment, but at the same time requiring
no for its answer. This last must be
indicated by the tone in which the
question is asked. See on pa, 46d.

11. ¢: after both verbs, though
ovivdvar does not govern the dat. See
on ofs . . . éferd(ewv, Apol. 41¢. Even
AwBagfa: usually takes the acc.

12. 8 Tu wor’ éorl: it was not speci-
fied above (a), and there is no reason

 

25

48

a

’ y ¥ oc 2 sy e ~ ¢ \ H ’
dain Y av TLS, OLOL TE ELT MLAS OL TOANOL ATOKTWYUVAL.

KP. An\a 87) kal TavTa* dain yap ov, @ SdKpates.

30. ANply \éyeus. a\N’, & Bavpdoie, olUros TE ©

’ A ~ » ~
Ndyos dv Sue\n\vfapuer éuovye Boker ért oporos evar [16]
\ 4 ~ ~
kal mpdrepov: kal T6ve ad okdmel el Eri péver Nuiv 9) ov,

¢
»

<) ~ on ~
ote 00 70 {nw mepl whelaTOV TOTEOY, ala 70 ev (qv.

for arguing about its name (yuvx7)here.
18. ovk dpa wdvv ovrw: then we must
not ...at all ...so much as all that,
ete. oYrw refers back to the drift of
Crito’s argument. Here again Socrates
takes the last step in a long induction.
19. ={...d m: a not unusual com-
bination of the dir. and indr. forms of
question. Cf. Gorg. 500 a, ap’ ody war-
tds avdpds éoTw éxAéfacbar mola ayaba
Tov 1)3éwy oT) kal dmoia kakd, }) TexVikOD
(specialist) 3¢i els €kaarov; The double
acc. as in kaka (kakds) Aéyew Tivd.
20. avr) 1M d\jlea: ie. Truth,
speaking with the lips of § émaiwy, or
appearing as the result of strict and
patient inquiry.
23. dA\\da pév 81: again Socrates
reproves Crito, this time for his ap-
peal to the Athenian public (44d).

— pv 81: certainly, equiv. to uqw or
nearly so.

25. Sqha 84 wré.: Crito eagerly b

catches at this objection and strength-
ens it with kal. Thus he implies that
there is more than meets the eye, 7.e.
that there are many other valid ob-
jections. Cf. 45a. See App.

26. ouTos Te 0 AOYos kTé.: TE COr-
responds to kal... ad following. For
a similar kal . . . kal ad, see Lach.
181d, kal Tobrwy mépt Eywye wepdaopal
cuuBovAedew §v Ti dbvwpar kal ad & wpo-
kale: wdvra moiety. The connexion
of thought would not hinder us from
subordinating the first clause: “as
our discussion just closed agrees with
what we argued formerly (when deal-
ing with the same matter), so, etc.”

29. 87. ov To tv ké.: cf. Apol. 28 bE.

 

ad

tre
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BR  ——

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

168

30

10

 

KP. ANG péve.

IIAATQONOS

7 ~ \ ’ © 9 ’ b
$0. TO 8¢ ed kal Ka\@ds kal OLKAlwS OTL TOUTOV €OTTL

A ’
péver 7) ov pével;
KP. Mével.

IX. SQ. Odkodv ék TOV OJLONOYOUNEVWY TOUTO OKET-

/ ’ /’ 3 \ 3 / ~ 9 ’ \
réov, worepov Sixaiov éué évbévde mepdohar é&uévar pu)
dpiévrov *Abypaiwy, 3) ob Oikaiov: kal av pév daivyro
’ ’ 3 \ ’ IA A \ \ ’ \

Slkavov, mewpdpela, el 8¢ wi, édpev. as 0¢ ov Méyes Tas

’ /’ d ’ ’ \ ’ \ ’
sides mepi Te Graldoews xpypdTey kal 06§ns Kal wai-
Swv Tpodijs, pi) ds a\nbos Tavra, & Kplrwv, oxéupata 7)

nh

~ ¢ ’ 3 / \ J ’ > ¥ >

TOV Padiws GTOKTWYUITWY Kal ava BLwTKopévwy y av, €L
FE 5S oN ~ ’ ~ ~ e A yg

ofol 7 Hoar, ovderi Ew VY, TOUTWY TOV TOMY. Muw 0,
9 Or e ’ A e ~ \ Oe ¥ , A
émeldn) 6 \Oyos oUTWS ALPEL, [L1) OVOEV ao okemrTéOV 7) 7)
© ~ \ nr ’ ol ’ \ ’
Sep vov 01) ENéyoper, TOTEPOY OLKALL mpdoper kai Xp)-
~ / ~ 3S 1 3 ’ 3 / \

[LaTO. TENOUVTES TOUTOLS TOUS EME evhépde éfdéovor Kal

31. 10 8¢ ev «ré.: this is needed be-
cause of the confused ideas which
many associate with eb (jv, e.g. (1)
plain living and high thinking, or (2)
high living and no thinking. For the
latter meaning, cf. Rep. i. 320 a, ol
ody mheioTos (T@y mpea Buty) Tas év Ti
vebryTi Hdovds mobobyTes GyavakToUoy
bs peydAwy Twdv amesTepnuévol, kal
rére utv ed (@vTes, viv de ovd¢ (@r-
res. On this whole subject consult
the discussion in Prot. 351 b ff.

IX. 4. Tas okéPes: drawn into the
const. of the rel. clause, to which pre-
cedence has been given. The art. is
commonly not retained in such a case,
e.g. obs 1 mous vopiler Oeods ob voullwy.
The corresponding demonst. Taira is
attracted into the gender of the pred.

6. pn... 17: sc dpa kré. Look to it,
C'rito, lest all this, at bottom, may prove
to be, etc. A milder way of saying
rabTa okéupara LvTa patveral, strength-

ened by &s aAnfads. See on wip ob
root 7, Apol. 39 a.

7. kal dvaPuwokopévev y dv: and
would bring them to life again too. The
4y forms with this partic. the apod.
avaBidoreadas is used here like avaBiw-
cacla in Phaed. 89d. Usually it is
intransitive, like avaBiovat

9. ¢ Adyos ovtws aipel: the argu-
ment has prevailed thus far. Cf. Hor.
Sat. i. 3, 115, nec vincet ratio
hoe, tantundem ut peccet
idemque | qui teneros caules
alieni fregerit horti | et qui
nocturnus sacra divum lege-
rit. Ibid. ii. 8, 225, vincet enim
stultos ratio insanire nepo-
tes, and 250, si puerilius his
ratio esse evincet amare. It
is rare to find this idiom with an acc.
of the persons discussing, as in Rep.
x. 607 Db, 6 yap Adyos Huds per. — py

. 4: as in 6 above.

48

¢&

48

 

KPITQN.

   

169

’ \ 3 \ ’
xdpiras kai abrol éédyovrés te kai éfaydpevor, 9) TY) dAn- 48

0 ’ 7) /’ / ~ ~ a ’
€LQL O.OLKY)O OEY TAVTA TAUTO TOLOVVTES® KAY pawadpela

dduka adra épyalduevol, wi) ov 8€p Vmoloyileabar ovr el
15 drolfvijokew Sei mapapévovras kai Novxioar dyovras ovre
a\\o 6TLoDY TdaYEWw TPO TOU AdLKEW.

KP. Kalds puév pov Ookers Aéyew, ® SdkpaTes: opa

d¢ 7{ Spapev.

~ a ’ - \ Oy »
50. Skorouer, & dyalé, kowy, kal el my éxels avTile-
3 ~ / 3 / /’ ’ > \ ’
20 yew éuod Néyovros, dvrileye, kal oo. meloopar: el Oe pa),
~ ¥ 2 /
mavooL ON, & pmoakdpie, ToAdkis pmol Néywy Tov avTov

’ \
Noyov, os xpn év0évde axdvrov *Abnvaiov éue dmévar:

e bl \ \ ~ ~ /’ ~
wS €ye TEPL TONNOU TOLOVUAL TELOAS TE TAUTA TPATTELWY,

d\\a un akovros.

12. kal avrol k7é. : kal adTol, we our-
selves too, stands for Crito and Soc-
rates. Crito is responsible, in the
supposed case, not only for his ex-
penditure of money (xpiuata TeAovY-
Tes), but also for instigating the act
of Socrates, or rather for persuading
him to allow various things to be
done for him. — éfaydpevor: the pass.
is especially strong, “we ourselves
are both rescuers and rescued.”

15. ovre wdoxew: sc. ei dei, to be
supplied from the preceding clause.

16. mpd Tov adukeiv: cf. Apol.28 bd.
The sense is, “there must be no ques-
tion about submitting to the utter-
most (é7wody wdoxew) rather than com-
mitting unrighteousness.” See also
54 b, where, as in this case, a choice
is involved, and mpd is used in the
sense of in preference to or instead of.

23. ds: inasmuch as, equiv. to émel.
Cf. quippe in Lat.

24. GAN py dkovros: opposed dis-
tinctly to weioas ae, with your approval.

Cf. 49e fin, and Xen. An. v. 6. 29,

spa 8¢ 87) Tis orépews THY ApxNY, dv

ethveyke yap TOV Adyov, Gs éyd mpart-
Tew Tabra dwwooluny #87 od weloas
dmas. The vivid contrast of these
two clauses makes the omission of
cov, the subj. of &rovros, the easier.
Indeed, cases are common where a
personal or a dem. pron. or some
vague general notion of persons or
things is the subj. implied. For a
somewhat similar case, ¢f. Hom. Od.
iv. 645 ff., pp’ €d €idd % oe Bin aéxov-
Tos &mnlpa via méAawav, NE kav oi
ddkas. — édv Néynrav: in case the state-
ment shall satisfy you. éav does not
like ei (cf. 48 b) mean whether. GMT.
71, x. 1. Cf. Phaedo, 64 ¢, oréja
8%, dryabé, éav dpa kal gol Euvdoky
kré. The subj. of the dependent sent.
is made by anticipation (prolepsis)
the object of dpa. Cf. Milton, Sonnet
to Sir Henry Vane, xvi1., “ Besides to
know | Both spiritual power and civil,
what each means, | What severs each,
thou hast learned, which few have
done.” Cf. below (49 d). Socrates
is earnestly enforcing a principle.

48

  
 

170 IIAATONOZX

KPITQN. . 171

¢ ~ ’ \ ~ 3 ’ \ 3 ’ 9 ~
2 cou ikavds Mynrai, kal mepd dmokpivesfar 10 epwTape- 49 adikely T( dOLKODYTL Kal KaKOV Kai GLoXpov TUyXOVveL Ov 49

 

 

vov 7 av paliora oy).
KP. ’AN\a TeELPATOUAL.

~y /, ¢ / 4 \ ¥ SN /
16 &umpoalev xpdve dpoloyiby ; [omep kai apt é\éyero-]
5 7) mao Huw éxewar ai mpdabev opoloyia év Talo Oe Tals

9 ’ e / 3 ’ 9 /’ \ / 3 ’

ONlyais NUEPALS EKKEXVWEVAL ELOY, Kal malo, o Kpitov,
¥ ’ /’ y \ 3 / ~
dpa. Tnhikoide [yépovres] avdpes mpos dA\jlovs amoudy

words #) wavrds waAAov kté. below, we

aov kté. has already stated. There-

 

49

\ ’ \ A ¥
TOVTL TPOTW ; pauey 1) ov;

KP. ®apév.
\ / 3 ~
| X. 30. 0ddeni Tpdme Pandy ékdvras ddumréor elvar, 15 30. OdSauds dpa Set duce.
1 \ y a ~ nN
3 Tul pv dduknréov TpéTY, TW 8¢ ov; 7) ovdapuds TO ‘ye KP. Ov dra.
’ ~ » ’ \ ¥ ’ ¢ ’ t. A xs ~
dSikety ovre dyalfov oltre kKaAOv, @s TOAAAKLS MU KOL €V 30. 008¢ ddikoduevor dpa dvradikew, ms ol moANot

olovTal, émreldn ve 0VOapLDS O€l AOLKELY.

to the twofold disjunctive prot. ere
. €lTe, kal elte . . . €lTe.
17. ds ol woANol olovrar: that do-
ing harm to one’s enemies’ was part

.| ...8ewdy i3eiv. In Soph. 4.79,
it is Athena herself who asks, ofikouvy

véAws HdioTos eis éxfpovs yerav; Con-
trast Soph. Ant. 523 f.: KP. odrot wo
obxBpbs, 00d Grav Odvy, piros. | AN. ob-
Tot cuvéxOew, GANG avupirety Epuv. Cf.

at large. That the historical (in con-
trast to the Platonic) Socrates at least

Siaheydpevor ed fopev Nas AUTOS Taldwy oVOY Siaché- b and parcel of the popularly accepted Eur. Andr. 520 ff., where Menelaus

» < - 9 ” o . “7 rule of life is plain from many pas- says it is folly to spare the offspring of

i POVTES ; 7) TaAVTOS praAlov OVUTWS EXEL WOTEP TOTE e\éyeTo sages like that in Isocrates to De- one’s foes, évola ueyarn Aeimew éxOpovs

| 10 Huy, ere paciv oF oANOS ere wl, rot ere Ser Nas FL monicus L 26, bolus aio x pov plipute éxOpav, étdv wrelves, and id. 107,

E ~S \ y ’ y \ . Y . hy £X0p2 viet Tals Kanoroiie ts where Orestes says, éxfpov yap avdpwv
|! | TWVOE XAANETWTEPA TAT EW ELTE KAL TPAOTEPQ, OWS TO 7y€ Kal Ty piAwy HTTaclal Tals edepyeal-  polpav els dvacTpodiy (for us to destroy
| 10 : 19 ats. Compare the character of Cyrus it) daluwv 8{8wsi. Cf. Eur. Heraclid.
i > 26. 4 oly: sc. kara TO aandts dy After each double question (1) ovdenl a the younger, Xen. An. i. 9.11, ¢pave- 1049 ff., the grim humor of Alcmena,

Lf amokplveafar TO épwTdpevoy. UdALTTa AS . buoroyhln; (2) 9 macar... mavl pos & fv, kal €l Tis Ti ayabdv 9) Kkakdy who says of Eurystheus, éxfpds nev

| in the question nj udAwrra ; Cf. Rep. Tpéme; Socrates has looked at Crito rojoeiey adTdy, vikav weipdpevos kTé.  avip, Weel d¢ katbavdv. See also

bi vii. 537d, of &v udA ito Ta TowiToL GUY, for an answer. Finally he extorts Cf. also Meno’s definition, Men. 71 e, Bacch. 1344-1348, where Agave ad-

. 3 TobTous eis uelovs Tiuds kabioTdvar. the briefest assent by the pointed ality early &vdpds G&perd, ikavdy elvar mits her guilt but asks for mercy,

: | | X. 1. éxdvras dSuknréov: sc. muds. panty 9) otf; in line 13 below. 78 Ths méAews mpdrrew, kal wpdrrovra and Dionysus refuses mercy because
Et 3d The const. with the acc. corresponds 6. ékkexvpévar eloi: thrown away. Tobs piv pihous eb mol, Tobs § éxfpovs he has been offended. Agave an-
Ei {| to the equivalent de with the acc. Cf. Henry VIII. iii. 2, “Cromwell, I kaxds. Plato eloquently defends his  swers: Opyas mpémer Oeols oly duoi-
\ Hi and inf. GMT. 114,2; H. 611 a. For charge thee, fling away ambition,” more Christian view throughout the odo6atr Bporois. This shows an ideal
Ath] the facts, see Introd. 65. and Soph. Phil. 13, uy kal pabp w first book of the Republic, in the of moral conduct for the gods, such
E14 2. 7 ovdapds rré.: here the first fikovTa KdKkxéw TO Way Gopiopa, TE piv Jorgias, and elsewhere. That the as Plato preaches for men. Compare
ME member of the disjunctive question  adrix’ aipfoew Sok. Similar is the many do assert this, Socrates might Soph. Aj. 679-682, 8 7° &xOpos nuiv

Hi is resumed, so that the questioner Lat. effundere gratiam, labo- say is not only made probable by the és 700dv® éxBapéos, | bs ral pIANowy

{, gives notice to the questioned, as it rem. —kal mwaAar k7é.: one of the known tendencies in human charac-  adls, & Te Tov ¢pirov | Togat® imovpywy
tt were, of his opinion. For the accent two partics. forms the predicative ter, but it is proved by every-day ex-  dpeAely BovAfigouar | ds aiév ob ue
| of 7wi when (exceptionally) it begins complement of éAdfouev, the other perience in dealing with men. Many  vodvra, with Henry VIII. iii. 2, “ Love
it its clause, see G. 28, ~.1(1); I.119a. stands in opposition to the pred. By recognized authorities encouraged thyself last, cherish those that hate

Hh 4. dwep kal dpm é\éyero: prob. not the added TnAwkoide avdpes (see on 7o- them in such a view. Cf. Archil. Frg. thee; | still in thy right hand carry
ty | written by Plato. If genuine, it can-  godror od, Apol. 25 d), this opposition 65, &v & émiorapar uéya, | TO raxds gentle peace | to silence envious
A not refer to anything here, but relates is put still more strongly. &pa gives pe Bpavra dewois dvrapelBecbau kaxois. tongues. Be just and fear not.”
Ih to the drift of 46 b and 48 b. See point to the irony. See on &p’ ov, 47 e. Solon, Frg. 13, 5, where he prays to  Shakspere thus expresses the view of
Hi | App. 11. Jpws wavtl TPO: A more dis- b the Muses that they would grant him the Platonic Socrates and of Plato in

il] 5. 4 wdoas kré.: here and in the tinct reiteration of what # mayrds paA- elvar 8¢ yAvkdy de Ppihois, éxbpoior d¢ contrast to that of the Greek public

 

 

 

 

see how hard Crito finds it to assent.

fore one as much as the other belongs

 

 
   

 

Be

 

 

A AT

A IT AA

 

 

Ss BI 4

— a

 

172 *

20 30. Ti 8¢ on; KAKOUPYELY det, @ Kplrwv, 7) ov;

25

KP. Ov ¢awerad.

IIAATONOZ

¥

KP. Ob det djmov, @ Sdkpares.

5 T{ S 2. 9 ”~ ~ ’ ¢ ¢
2.0). L €, AVTLKAKOVOYEW KOK®WS Tao XorTa, ws Ol

moot pao, dikatov 1) od OlkaLov ;

KP. Od8auds.

50. To yap mov Kkak®ds molew avlpdmrovs Tov AOLKELY

oder Sadépe.
KP. ’AMnfn Néyes.

¥ » ’ ~ ~ ~
30. Ovre apa avTadikely Sel oUTE KAK®DS TOLEW OVOEVa

9 ’ 0 | e ~ ’ e 9 y ~
avfparov, ov ay oTLovy TAT XT) VT O0UVTWYV.

~

\ © 3
Kal opa, o

30 Kpirwv, Tadra kabopoloyav omws pi) mapa d6§av opolo-

vfs. oda yap ort \iyois TLol TabTA Kal dokel kal OoeL.

? 3 & o 2) \ ° ’ ’ ’ ¥ \
OLS OVUY OUTW OEOOKTAL Kal OLS Ks TOUTOLS OVK €0TL Kown)

Bov\ij, AAA. avaykn TovTOUS aA\Awv kaTappovew, opwv-

Tas Ta dAMAwv Bovievpara.

did not contradict this maxim of
popular morality is perhaps evident
from one place in the Memorabilia
(ii. 6. 35), where, apparently with the
ready approval of Critobulus, Socra-
tes says, Omi &yvwkas &vdpds apeTiy
elvat vikav Tovs uev ¢pllovs eb mowodvTa,
robs & &xOpovs wards. This does not
make him precisely responsible for
the maxim, since he practically quotes
it from the mouth of The Many. In-
deed, the context has a playful color,
which ought to warn us not to take
Socrates precisely at his word.

19. ov alverar: plainly not. As
ot ¢pmus means I deny rather than I do
not assert, 80 ob ¢alverar means not ut
does not appear, but it does appear not.

20. kakovpyeiv: this word, like ka-
k@s wotelv, covers more cases than
ddwcetv: it includes adwceiv and also
cases of harm done where there is

, or 3 \ \ A
OKOTTEL O07) OVVY Kal OV €v

little or no question of right and
wrong involved. Apparently, it was
more commonly used inevery-day mat-
ters than &dwcetv. In Crito’s answer his
uncertain certainty is indicated by &7-
mov; had he meant that he was per-
fectly certain, he would have used 87.

28. ovre dpa k7é.: the completest
presentation of this precept must be
sought in the teaching of Christ. Cf.
Luke vi. 27, éAAa Suiv Aéyw Tois axob-
ovaw: &yamate Tos éxOpovs budv, ka-
ADs TOLETTE TOLS ULOOUOLY Das KTE.

30. kafopoloydv, dpoloyys: see on
el yap dperov, 44 A.

32. Tovrois ovk ot kté.: this is
strongly set forth in the Gorgias,
where the Sophist and the true Phi-
losopher represent respectively these
two clashing theories. See Introd. 65.

34. BovAhevparta: counsels, i.e. their
manner of thinking and acting.

49

d

KPITON.

173

~ \ ~ \ 3 ’
35 pala, TOTEPOV KOWWVELS Kal Evvdoker oo, Kal apxapeda 49
’ ~ ’ ¢ 334 ’ 06 ¥ ¥
evredfer Bovlevduevol, ws ovoémore opbws €XovTos ouTe
~ ~ ”~ ~ y ~ /
ToD GSuKkeEly oUTE TOD GVTAOLKELY OUTE KOKWS TAT XOVTO

45

49

’ , ’ ~ ~ Yi s | 7 \ ’
apvveatal AVTOPAOVTO KAKDS® 1) aploTacar Kal Ov Kot-
~ ~ ~ \ / <r \ ”~
VOVELs TNS ApXTS; éuol pev yap Kal TANaL OUT® KOL VUV e

~ \ /
40 &ru Sokelr ool 8 el my dy SédokTar, Néye Kal OldaT Ke.

5 \ b / ~ / \ \ ~~ y
el O¢ EULEVELS TOLS wpdobe, TO |LETG TOUTO QLKOUVE.
~ 9 \ /
KP. AM éuuéo Te Kal Evvdokel pots alla Aéye.
a ~ ~ ’ ’ ~
SQ. Aéyw on) ad TO ETA TOUTO, pralhov 0 EPUT®

’ AY ¢ \ ’ 5. ¥ ’ A
TOTEPOV a av TLS OMO oyna TW LKALOL OVTQ TTOLMTEOV 7)

é€amarnréoy ;
KP. Tlowréov.

XI. 30. ‘Ek tovrwr On abpe.

amidvres évbévde

~ / ~ ~
fuels ui) meloavres TY TOMY TOTEPOV KAKWS TWAS TOLOV- 50

\ ~ a © S ~ A y \ ’ € oF
[LEV Kal TavTa OVS NKLOTA €L 7) ov, Kal ELLEVOML Vv OLS

e /’ S /’ > A .
OUONOY)TAEY OLKALOLS OVTLY 1) OV;

. 86. ds ovdémore iTé.: a statement
of what is involved in évredfer, which
is equiv. to ék Tobrov Tod Adyov (taking
this principle for granted). ds with
the gen. abs. is used in this same
way also after Aéyew. Cf. Men. 05 e,
ole ori ev Tobrois pv bs SdakTov
obans Tis GpeTiis Aéyel;

39. ms dpxns: ¢f kal apx pueda év-
rebBer above. apx# is the starting-
point of an investigation, — a principle,

e a conviction. — kal wdAav kTé.: see on

od ubvov ké., 46.

41. 76 perd Touro: not what re-
sults, but what comes next. It may
be taken adv. (like 7d &wd Todde and
the like) and translated further. What
is referred to is expressed in wéTepov
kTé. below.

43. péAhov 8¢: or rather. Cf. Lach.
196 ¢, Aéye 8¢ por & Nukia, aA ov &
NUL.

»

» , 49
44. 4 damaryréov: Socrates says

this rather than 3 od momréor because
of the preceding & dv Tis buoAoynoy
re. Such an admission pledges a
man to put his principle in practice.
¢tamarav is mot only construed with
an acc. of the person, here easily
supplied from 7g, but furthermore
takes the acc. of the thing. Cf. Xen.
An. v. 7. 11, el 8¢é Tis budv i) ards éfa-
rarnOivas bv oferar TabTad) GAAov ea
raTHoal Tad Ta, Aywy didagkéTw.

XI. 1. i rovrwv: in the light of
this. Sce on 48¢, é&k T@v Suohoyouué-
vwv, and cf. Henry IV. i. 1,“ For more
is to be said and done | than out of
anger can be uttered.” The particular
plan of flight Socrates considers in
the light of, or out of, the general
conclusion just approved.

3. ols ovo: the dat. is assimilated
regularly to the omitted obj. of éuué

50
a

 

 
 

on

Be

 

i

— —
To i
a . i ."”,

a —i—

. BN a
sommes VEIN
- .

RN
ts a AI ~
. CD
he ERA ATR TRAIN. i OA 3355, el
——— C—O EE.

Sa ora

174

5

KP. Ovk éxo, @ Sdkpares, amokpivacbfal wpos 6 épw- 50

~ . 3 \ 3 ~
Tas ov yap €vvod.
3 9 ?
30. ANN’ @de okOmeL.

ITAATONOZS

el pé\ovow nutv évfévde

elTe AmoddpaTKew, elf’ dmws Oe dvoudoar Touro, ENOSy-

LA \ ~ ’
TES OL VOMOL Kal TO KOowov 77S TONEWS emroTdVTES épowro®

~ / ~
10 elmé pot, & Sdkpates, Ti €v vp éxers mowelv; dA\o Tu 9)

’ ~ ¥ D3 ~ ~ ’ ~
TOUT® TO EPpy © ETLYELPELS OLOVOEL TOUS TE VOUOUS MUGS b

3 / \ / \ ’ \ \ / A ~
amoléoar kal Edpmracay Ty wow 70 gov puépos; 1) Ookel

vopev. Guoroyfioauer would require
the acc. as in 49 e above.

5. ovk €xw kté.: Crito seems afraid
of understanding what is meant; the in-
evitable consequences involved alarm
him. See on kaxovpyeiv, 49 ¢. This
natural state of mind on his part
gives good and sufficient reason for a
reconsideration of the whole subject
from a new point of view.

7. péN\ovorwy rpiv: for the dat. cf.
Symp. 192 d, ei adrois...émaras 6
“HoaioTos . . . &oro. Prot. 321 ¢, amo-
port. 8¢ adrg Epxerar Mpounbels. See
on ¢,47 e. The statement there given
covers a very large number of cases
where a partic. and a finite verb are
combined like ér8dvTes Epovro.

8. €l0’ omwws x7é.: this softening
phrase is used purely out of consid-
eration for Crito. To use the word
applied to runaway slaves might give
offence. One of the annoying mis-
haps that befell a well-to-do Athenian
was to have to give chase when a
slave ran off to Megara or Oenoe.
Cf. Prot. 310 ¢, where Hippocrates
nearly lost his dinner, udAa ye oye
apucduevos éf Oivdns. 6 dp Tot mals
ue 6 Sdrupos amédpa. Of course such
conduct on the slave’s part was con-
sidered despicable. Cf. 62d, dovAos
gpavAdraros. The dovAos xpnords, who
appears in tragedy more frequently

than in real life, would not run away,
because of his attachment to his mas-
ter. Cf. Eur. Med. lines 54 f., xpn-
oTolat dovAois Evupopa Ta deamordv | ka-
k@s mTvéyTa Kal Pppevdv avlamrTeTal, the
first of which recurs in the Bacchae
(1029), Alc. 768-77; and cf. also Eur.
Andr. 56-59, where the slave says to
Andromache, e¥vouvs 8¢ kal oor (@vri 7°
Av 1¢ o0¢ wéoe. In Xen. Oec. 7.37
and 38, and 9. 11-13, is an interesting
account of the position of slaves in
the household.

9. Td kowdv Tis wolews: the com-
monwealth. Cf. Xen. An. v. 7. 18, and
Hdt. i. 67, Smaprinréwy T7¢ Koy dia
meumouévous, sent by the commonwealth
of Sparta. So Cicerosays commune
Siciliae. The personification of the
state and the laws which here follows
is greatly admired and has been abun-
dantly imitated, e.g. by Cicero in his
first Catilinarian Oration (7. 18). The
somewhat abrupt transition from ui
above to & Sdkpates suggests the fact
that Socrates considered himself alone
responsible to the laws in this matter.

10. do Tu 7: see on #&AAo Ti ,
Apol. 24 c.

11. Toys Te vapors : notice the order
and cf. 53 a, fuels of véuor.

12. 10 odv pépos: see on Td ody
uépos, 45d. Here it is about the same
in sense with ka@ 8gor ddvaval, 51 a.

60
a

IQ 7 \ ¢ ~ ¢ / \ 3 3 04 \ ot y .
20 NolKeL yop Mas 1 TONS Kal OUK 0pU®S TNV OLKMY €EKPLVE; ©

50
b

KPITON.

/ 3 \ \ 3
gou 0i0y Te €rL ékelvmy THY WOW €lvai Kal [11] AvaTe- 50

° \ > / 5 ’

rpddlar, év 7) al yevopevar Sikar pmdév ioxvovow, all
~ \ ’ 4

15 9d OuwTdY drvpol TE yiyvovTal Kal SwapOelpovrar; Ti
”~ oN ~ ~ \
épodper, & Kpirwv, mpos Tavra kali dA\a TowavTa; TOANA

~ ¢ \ /
yap dv Tis €xor dNws Te Kal prTwp €LTEL UTEP TOUTOU

~ Pa \ /
ToD vépov dmol\vpévov, ds Tas Oikas Tas dikacleioas

3» A 5 ~ \ ’ \ <)
TPOTTATTEL kuplas elvadt. Mn €EPOV[LEV TPOS avTOovS OTL

~ A 2.3 ~
TAUTQ 7) TL EPOVLEV ;

KP. Tadra vm) Ala, & 20kpartes.

XIL 30. T{ odv, vw elmwow oi véuolr® & ZOKPATES,
7 kal radra GpoldynTo uv TE Kai ool, 7 euuévew Tals
Sikais als &v 1) méhis Swkdly; el odv alrov favpdloyuev
\eyovTav, lows Qv elroler OTL, & ZWKPATES, pn Gavpale TO
Neydueva, dAN’ dmokpivov, ered) kal elwbas xpnobar 7

épwTay TE kal amokpivesbfai.
~ ~ 9 ~ ’
Kal TONEL EmLXELPELS Npas dmoAAvvai; ov mpwTor nev d

pépe ydp, Ti éykakdv Nuw

> /’ ¢ ~ \ d > ¢ ~ 2\ ’ SB \ é ow
oe eyejoaper NES Kal OL Nu@Y ENGuLAvey TY INTEP
/ » / e ~

gov 6 Tarp kal épUTEvaéy TE; PpdTov oVY, TOUTOLS NUWY,

13. elvar: the attention is drawn to
elvas, exist, by the negative statement
of the same idea in wu) dvarerpagplal,
not to be utterly overturned, which fol-
lows. GMT. 18.

17. d\\ws Te kal prirwp: a side
thrust at the trained speakers which
recalls the irony of the opening page
of the Apology. — vmwép TovToV TOV
vopov amoNAvpévov: on behalf of this
law whose existence is in jeopardy. Cf.
below d, émixepels amoAAdvar. This
notion of threatened action is often
attached to the pres. and impf. of this
verb. GMT. 10, x. 7 and 11, ~. 4;
H. 828. Cf. An. v. 8.2, mov 7¢ piyet
arwAAdueda. The whole wording of

. EF
this passage recalls the Athenian 50

usage which required that a law, if
any one proposed to change or repeal
it, should be defended by regularly-
appointed state-advocates (gvriyopor).

19. &r n8ikew ydp: o7¢ followed by
direct quotation, as in 21e. Notice
how spirited and quick the answer is
made by ydp. “Yes (I certainly have
this intention) for, etc.”

XII. 2. kal Tavra: sc. that in cer- ¢

tain cases the sentence of the laws
may and should be set at nought. —
7 upévew: or (was the agreement be-
tween us) simply to abide by, etc.
3. ais av dukdfy: cf. 50 b and 51 e.
5. émedy kté.: see Introd. 19.

AAA AE AS

1
fd
i
gl
f
4
i

 

 
 

 

176 ITAATQONOS,

i / / \ 5 / 3 a \ 0D /’
{ yevouévov Tpodrv TE KAL TUOELQY EV 7) KOL TV émra.devlns ;
” ~ e ~
i 7 od ka\@s mpodérarTov NuGY oi éml ToUTOLS TeETAYMUEVOL
ge /’ /’ ~ \ ~ ~ ’ -~
{ | vouol, mapayyéA\Novres TO TATPL TQY OQ OE EV [LOVOLK])
le \ ~ o ’ AQ /’ y >» 3 \
£! 15 Kal YyupuvaoTik]) radedew ; Kalas, painy av. elev. meld)
| S¢ éyévov kal €ferpddnys kal émadevlbys, € ww ele
| Y TPAPYS éradevlns, €xois av elmew

1 5 10. Tois mepl Tovs ydpovs : probably

i Socrates was thinking particularly
of the laws governing marriage which
established the legitimacy of children

 

| | (yvnoibrns). See Schoemann, Antiqui-
Ei ties of Greece, p. 357.

i : 11. @\\a: instead of &reira &¢,

al which would have been written here

1 to correspond to wp@Tov uév if Socra-

bl tes’s answer had not intervened.
| | 14. év povaiky] Kal YURVaoTIKY: these

3 words cover the whole of education
(maudela), as Plato, Rep. ii. 376 e, says,
dori mov §) piv éml ocduadt yvuvaoTik,
H & éml Yuxii movowsh. “The educa-
tion of the average Greek gentleman,
like that of the average English gen-
tleman, comprised a certain amount
of mental cultivation and a certain
amount of athletic exercise. The
former, besides reading, writing, and
some elementary mathematics, con-
sisted mainly in the reciting and learn-
ing by heart of poetry, along with
the elements of music, and sometimes
of drawing. Perhaps because so
much of the poetry was originally
sung or accompanied, the word ‘ mu-
sic’ was sometimes applied to the
education in literature as well as in
music proper, and it is in this wider
sense that Plato habitually uses it.
gig! | Under the term ‘ gymnastic’ was un-

 

 

~ \ ec 5 \ e / » \ \ ~

TPOTOY Mev ws OvXL 1UETEPOS Nobo kai €kyovos kal dov-
/’ \ ~

Nos, adrds Te kal oi ool mpdyovolL; Koi €l Tov’ ovrws

derstood the whole system of diet
and exercise which, varying with the
customs of different states, had for
its common object the production of
bodily health and strength, and the
preparation for military service.”
Hellenica, The Theory of Education in
Plato’s Republic, by R. L. Nettleship,
M.A. p. 88. See on TovTo mWpaTTWY,
47a. See also Schoemann, Greek An-
tiquities, pp. 359 ff.

17. Sovhos: opposed to deomdrys.
Cf. Hdt. vii. 104, where Demaratus
says to Xerxes that the Lacedaemo-
nians éactfepor eves ob mdvta éAel-
Oepol elgi+ Emeari ydp opr deomdTys
véuos. Elsewhere Plato uses dov-
Aedew of the obedience which the law
requires, e.g. Legg. 762 e, 6 un dov-
Aeboas 00d dv deamdrns ~yévorro ios
émalvov, kal kaAAwmi(eaOar (cf. éxaA-
Avvbuny, Apol. 20 ¢) xp T¢ KaAds
dovAeboar maAAov 1%) T¢ kaAds &pkai,
mpaTov uty Tols vépots, ws Tav-
Tv Tois Oeois odogav BdovAelay, Emeaita
ois mpeaBurépois kré. Cf. Apol. 23b,
30 a, and also Eur. Orest. 418, where
Orestes says in a very different spirit,
SovAebouer Beals, § Ti mor’ elaly oi Oeol.
Cf. 52d. This high standard of obe-
dience, unhesitating and unqualified,
to the established law, was familiar
1" the Athenians before Plato wrote.

~ ’ ~ \ \ ’ ’ e 3 ~
10 TOLS VOMLOLS TOLS TEPL TOUS YOAOVS, péucper TL @S OV KAA®S 50
¥ 3 / / y 9 \ ~ \ \ ~
EXOVOoWw ; Ov péudopad, Pain av. oANG TOLS TEPL TV TOV

d

20

25

ct
<

KPITQN.

   

177

~ » 2 \ \ ’ \ 8.” \
Exel, ap’ é¢ loov oleL evar oOL TO dlkatov Kal Nu, Kat 50

~ ~ ~ \ \ ~ 9
arr dv Hels ad émiep@Er TOLEW, Kal O00 TAUTO. aVTL-
~ y /’ 3 A \ \ y \ ’
Tole otel Slkaiov €lvat; 1) TPOS LEV APA TOL TOV ATEN
3 3 vd » \ ot \ \ \ o / y
otk e€ laov Mv 10 Slkator Kal TPOS TOV OETTOTNY, EL TOL

¢ © V4 ~ \ b J ~
av érvyyavev, GaTE, drep MATYOLS, TAUTA KOL AVTUTOLELY,

y ~ 5 Vd 9 / y ’ 9 / r
otre Kak®s aGkovovTa ArTINéyEw OUTE TUTTOWEVOY OVTLTUT- bl
~ ’ \ \ \ ’ y
ew ore A\\a TowadTa moAd: wpds 8¢ mv warpida dpa
©) \ \ bl ~
kai Tovs vépous €aTaL OOL, WOTE, €AV OE ETLYELPWUEY
e ~ 3 ’ ’ e /’ i) \ \ Se CE
Niels amolAival Slkaiov 7yoUpevoL €lval, Kal OU O€ MAS

Among many passages in the trage-
dians, cf. Soph. Ant. 663 ff, doris &
bwepBas 9) vopovs Budletar |  Tovme
rdoaew Tols kpativovaw voei, | ol dor’
eralvov Tobrov EE éuod Tuxeiv. | GAN
dv méhis orhoete, Todde xph KAvew |
kal opikpd kal Sikata kal TG-
vavria. Cf also Cic. Clu. 53. 146,
legum idcirco omnes servi
sumus, ut liberi esse possi
mus, and ¢f. in Eur. Suppl. 429 ff.,
the speech of Theseus, beginning,
obdty Tupdvvov Suouevéorepov mioAel|
mov TO piv mpdriorov obk eloly vé-
pot | kowol, kpatel § els TOV véuov
kexrnuévos | adbrds wap’ aired, Kal
188 odvkér tar’ Yoov. Cf. also ibid.
316-353, 403-408, and the words of
Aethra, 312 f., 7d ydp Tot cuvéxov (bond
of union) &vbpdmwy wéheis | TobT E00,
Tay Tis Tobs vémovs owl Ka
A@s. Many lines in the Heraclidae
of Euripides show that ready and
free obedience to law distinguished
Athens, av ed xapltwy Exovoav wOALY,
(379 £.). Cf. 181-198, 305 f., 329-332,
420-424.

18. avrds Te kTé.: see on adrés Te
kré., Apol. 42 a.

21. 7 wpos pév...mpos 8é rré.: the
first clause is logically subordinate.
See on dewa bv ey, Apol. 28d. &pa
is ironical. See on &AAa . . . &pa, 47 e,

"
and particularly on # mplv uév r7é.,
46 4, where #pa occurs only in the
second clause. For the repetition,
see Prot. 325b ¢, didaktod 8¢ Jvros kal
fepamevrod (sc. dperiis) T& pev GAAa
dpa ToUs viels diddorovral, ép’ ols odk
Zor Odvaros 5 (mula, av uh érioTwyTa,
¢p ¢Bt...TabTa ¥ dpa ob Siddokov-
Tat, 00d’ émiuerovyTal Tacav emiuéreay ;
Notice the position of oof, which is
nevertheless not the emphatic word.

22. fv: “when you were under
your father or perhaps your master.”
The past (7v) is opposed to the fut.
(éorai). — kal wpds TOV deomoTnY: for
the odAos xpnoTds, see on JodAos in
17 above.

23. dmep wdoxows : anything that was
(at any time) done to you. GMT. 62;
H. 914 B (2). Though subord. to
Sore . . « avTimotery, this clause is also
limited by the neg. statement ovk ۤ
Yoou #v, which limits the clause doe

. . TOAAd.

24. oltre... wold: an explana-
tion of &ore...é&vrimoiely, in which
the neg. of ovk é foov Hv is repeated.
— kak®s dkovovra dvTikéyeiwv: equiv.
to Aoidopoluevoy GrTIAOIBOPELY.

27. ore kal ov dé émyepnoes:
so that you in your own turn will, ete.
a0, when expressed in Att., has em-
phatic position. kai indicates equality,

1
a

Cn

—
 

 

 

 

 

178 | IIAATQNOS,

\ ’ \ \ ’ ¢
Tovs vOpovs kal Tv marpida kal’ doov Svvacar émiyelprj- 51

9 ’ \ /’ ~ ~
oes avTarol\vval, Kal PTEls TavTa TOLWY Oka TPAT-

¢ ~ 3 / ~ 9 ~
30 Tew, 6 T) al\npleia TNs aperns émipeduevos; 1 ovTws el

. / 4 / / © / \
coos, wore NéAnbév oe oTL uMTPOs TE Kal waTPds Kal TEV

y / € /’
aA\wy TPOYSVLY ATAVTOY TYMOTEPOY éoTw 1) TaTpls Kal

/ , /’ \
TEUVOTEPOY Kal ayLaTeEPoV Kal €v peifov poipa kal mapa
L

~ \ 3 >» /’ ”~ ~
Oeots kat wap avBpdmois Tois vovr éyxovat, kai oéBeafar

~ \ ~ € /’
35 Oct kal pallov vmeikew kal Bumrevew marpida yaleraivov-

\ ’ \N a ’ A ~
oav 1) marépa, kal 1) welbew 7) mole & Av kelevy, Kal
tL

5% wy.
i" d¢ points the contrast between od and

TELS.

29. Tavra mowdv Sikaia mpdrreay:
cf. Dem. 1x. 15, ral TowadTa mpdrTwy
71 émoler; and 1v. 2, 0ddév TOY dedvTwy
wowobvTwy . . . avd & mwpooijke mwparTiy-
rwv. And yet Aristotle often makes
a careful distinction between mowely
and wpdrTew.

30. o émpehopevos kté.: for the
art., see on Tod eladyovros, Apol. 35 b.
The irony comes out in ofrws (ita
not tam) el cogpds, bare AéAnOév oe.
7) conveys very vigorously the covert
reproof of the whole question, are
you really? 4 would be comparatively
weak. See App.

31. pmrpos: for a similar order of
words, cf. Prot. 346 a, avdpl moAAdkis
ovuBiivar (sc. avtdy émavaykd(ew Pireiy
kal éraweiv) untépa 9) marépa @&AAdko-
Tov 3) matpida 7) &GAAo Ti TAY TowVTwWY.
Cf. also Hom. Od. ix. 367, ufrnp #8¢
maTnp 70° UAAoL wdvTes éTaipol.

32. 1 marpis: by the addition of the
art. the definite fatherland of each
and every man is indicated. Cf. be-
low, b, and 54 e¢. For the art. used as
a poss., see G. 141, ~. 2; IH. 658. Cf.
Henry V. iv. 6, “ He smiled me in the
face.” Cf. ¢ below. On the facts,
cf. Cic. Off. 1. 17. b7, cari sunt

parentes, cari liberi, propin-

qui, familiares; sed omnes
omnium caritates patria una
complexa est, pro qua quis
bonus dubitet mortem oppe-
tere, si ei sit profuturus? Cf.
also Hector’s els olwvds dpioros, auive-
00a: wepl warps, Hom. 11. xii. 243.

33. év peltove polpq: after the
analogy of Homeric expressions like
that used by Poseidon of Zeus, 7. xv.
195, pevérw Tpirdry vl polpp, ie. in
the one of the three parts of the
world allotted to him as one of the
three sons of Cronos. Cf. Eur. I. 7.
1491, is oplouévns uolpas ebddaiuoves
ovras, and Hdt. ii. 172, 7a uév mpara
Tov "Apacw Alybrrior év oddeuln molpy
ueydAn nyov (considered of little or no
account, nullo magnopere loco
habebant).

34. oéBeaBar k7é.: the subj. of oé-
Beaba: is an implied 7wd, not % marpis.

35. marplda xalewalvovcav: the
acc. after oéBeoOai, vmeikew, and Ow-
webev, though dmelkewvy should be fol-
lowed by the dat. See on ¢, 47 e.
Cf. Liv. xxvii. 34. 14, ut paren-
tium saevitiam, sic patriae pa-
tiendo ac ferendo leniendam
esse.

36. mwelBev: used absolutely, as in
Apol. 35 ¢, to change her mind, to
convert to your way of thinking; some-

O
b

KPITON. 179

’ ~ y
mdoyew, édv TL WPOOTATTY rabely, Hovyiav dyovra, édv 51
~ y
re TomreaOa édv Te Seiabal, édv Te els TONEpov ayy TPW-
~ \
Onodpevov 7) dmofavovuevov, momréoy TAUTA, Kal 70 OL-
PY \ 3. y
40 KaLOV OUTWS EXEL, Kal OVXL VTELKTEOV 00d dvaywpnTéov
IQ / \ / 9 \ +3 / A 3 o
0uSe Neurréov Tv Td Ew, AANA. kat €v TONE Kal ev OLKO.OTY)-
A :
plw Kal TAVTOXOV momréov & Gv keledy 1) WMS Kou 7
/’ aN 0 J \ \ ot / /’ 0 oS
warpls, 1) weilblew avn 7) TO Olkalov wépuke, Braleabar
o »
ovy Soov ovTe pmTépa. ovTe marépa, TONY 8€ ToUTWY €TL
2 3 A
45 fyrrov Tv waTpida; Ti Ppricoper wpos Tavra, ®@ Kpitwv;

3 ~ / \ ’ A »
aAnBn Néyew TOUS VOUOUS 7) OV;

KP. "Epovye JOKEL.

XIII 30. Skéme Tolvuw, & Sdrpates, palev av lows

¢ /’ 3 ¢ ~ ~ 9 ~ /
oi véuoL, €L MNUELS TAVTA a\nfy \éyouev,

& b) /
oTL OV OLKaLA

Huds émixepeis Spav a vv emiyeLpels. Tels yap O€ Yev-

2
1 times to propitiate, as in Hom. Il. i.
prop

100, rére Kkév pv CAmdAAwra) iAao-
cduevor meml@oipev. Cf c below.
The first two é&dv ve clauses (like
ere... elre, sive. ..sive), with
mpoardrry understood, are explanatory
of dv 71 wpoordrry mabeiv, while the
third takes a new verb with a new
apod. The two former are specifi-
cations under mdoxew, the third in-
stances analogous cases where un-
qualified obedience to the state is
necessary. The emergencies of war
are taken as typical of a host of
others, and then with év dicaaTpie
the argument is brought to a head.
This elaboration of the period leaves
to its own devices momTéoy TavTa
(which, grammatically, is subordinate
to AéAnféy ae).

40. kal ovxl vmewkTéov: A neg. re-
iteration of momTéov TavTa. We must
not draw back, we must not retreat,
we must not leave the ranks. Corre-
sponding to these three duties, there

”
were three forms of indictment, dopa 9
relas, deirlas, Aimoratiov. On the last,
cf. Apol. 28 e-29 a. ariula was the
penalty involved in all these cases.

43. #4 weldewv: the inf. coming after c
an impersonal verbal often depends
on an implied 3¢; even when no Je
precedes. GMT. 114, 2, ~x.; H. 991 a.
Cf. Gorg. 492 4, Tas uty émibuplas ois
ob koraoTlov, ei péAhet Tis oloy Bel elvat
tava d¢ abras bs ueyloTas WANpwow
adrais audbey yé mwobey éroipd(erv.
—q .. . muke: quomodo ius-
tum comparatum sit, an expla-
nation of wel@ewv, which implies 8:3d-
skew (cfs Apol. 35 ec, Biddorew Kal
welfew).

XIII. 1. okome Tolvwy kTé.: an
application of the universal truth to
a particular instance.

2. gr kré.: the relation of dikawa
to & kré. is the same in which aay-
97 of the clause preceding stands
to rapra. Supply an inf. govern-

ing a.

 
|

 

————

 

AREER

 

ERNIE SIRT w al
se Sy

 

 

 

 

 

 

SL ia Ue

180 ITAATQONOS,

’ ’ 0 ’ S ’ S ’ Cod
VO AVTES, EK pépavres, TOLOEVTAVTES, LETAOOVTES ATAVTWV 61

2 7 2 ~ \ S$ LAY ~ ’
5 QV oloL TE NUEY KAAWY TOL KAL TOLS allots mao TolNiTals,

d

© 4 ~ 3 / / 5 /
OjLWS TPOOYOPEVOLEY, TW éovaiov meromkévar “Alnraiwy |

~ / 9 \ ~ \ ¥ bh ~ ’
TQ Bovopévw, éredav dora Kal (oy TO €V TY) TONE
°

mpdypara Kal MUAS TOUS VOUOUS, ©

A \ 3 /

) AV WU) APECTKWUEY
e -~ 3 = / \ e ~N 3 / © A ’
Nets, fear AafBovTa TA AVTOV ATLEVOL OTOL OV BovAnrai.

\ D0 \ e ~ ~ /’ ’ S /’ 3 IS 5
10 Kal OVOELS MUAY TOV VOUWY EUTOOWY €TTLY OVO QITayO-

’ > / ’ ’ ce A ’ ’ ’ 3 / ’ \
PEVEL, €EAVY TE TLS BovAnral VUL@V ELS amToLKLaY Leva, EL UM

9 /’ ¢ ~ Ae / ys / ~ » YJ
dpéaroper ues Te kal 1) TONS, édv Te ETOLKEW AANOTE

wou ENO, iévas éxetoe dmou dv BovlnTar éxovra Ta avTov.
ds 8 dv vuov mapaueivy, 6pdv Ov Tpomov Nuels TAS TE
15 Sikas Sikdlopev kal Ta Tv TéAw Siotkovuer, 10m Paucy
TovTOY @poloynkévar €pyw Nu & Gv Nuels KeleVwuey
rovjoew TabTa, kal Tov pi) welbdpevor Tpixy papéy doi-
Kew, tu Te yevvrals odow Huy ov welberar, kal OTL Tpo-

51
d

7. émeday Sokipacdy: there was
strict examination (Jdoxiuacia) into ev-
ery youth's claim to be declared an
Athenian citizen when he had com-
pleted his eighteenth year. If he
proved of Athenian parentage, and
otherwise qualified, he was declared
of age, and registered in the Anéwap-
xikdy ypapuatetov of his deme. See
Schomann, Antiq. of Greece, pp. 359 f.

9. NaBovra: the dat. might stand
here, but cf. Symp. 176 d, Rep. iii.
414 a, Euthyph. 5 a, Eur. Heracl. 693,
Soph. El. 479 ff., Aesch. Cho. 410 {.,
and Symp. 188d, od7os...wacay Nuiv
ebdaipoviay mwapacrevd(er kal GAANAos
Omihety kal ¢plAovs
elvai kal Tols kpelTToow Nudv Oeots, here
ts what makes ready for us all hap-
piness, what makes us capable of being
friends and familiars of our fellow-men
and also of the gods, who are mightier

than we. See G. 138, N. 8a; H. 941.

dvvauévovs

11. édv.. . BovAnrar . . . el pr Gpé-
okowpev: éav BodAnTar, as well as dmou
bv BodAnra:r in line 9 is a future sup-
position and depends on the future
force of iévau in line 13 (cf. § av &pé-
orwuer in 8 above). Then ei ui dpéoror-
wey comes in naturally as a vaguer
supposition subordinated to the oth-
ers. If any of you wants (shall want)
to go off to a colony, supposing we and
the state should not satisfy him. The
notion of a citizen’s not being suited
by the law is so monstrous that it
is stated as remotely as possible.

12. &dv Te perowkeiv: cf. 52 e, also
the picturesque use of uérowos, Aesch.
Pers. 319, and by Eurystheus, in
speaking of his own body buried in
foreign soil, Eur. Heracl. 1030 ff., 6a-
vévra dp pe Gdyed ob Td udpoiuov,
... | kal ool uév etvous kal mores cw
pos | péToikos adel kelgouar kata x0o-
vds.

 

 

KPITON. am

~ \ @ e ’ €..."~™ Lid ¥ ’
peda, kal §tu dpoloyrjoas Huiv welleocbar ovre meilberar

y ’ e ~ ’ \ ~ ~ ,
20 ovTe meiller Muas, €L uN KAAS TL TOLOVMEV, wporibévrov

e

NpdY Kal ovk dyplws émrarTévTey Tole a av kelebwpey,
3 bE / ~ / A / e ~ A ~ ’
d\\a épiévrwv vow Odrepa, 7) meilbew Muas 1) molew, Tov-
Tov 0VOéTEpPA TOLEL,
XIV. Tavras 81 paper kai oé, Sdrpares, Tals airias
Sy / y /’ A ~ \ 3 4 9
véfeaOar, elmep movjoeis & émwoets, kai oy NkwoTa "Ady.
worl d ’ 9 ? 3 ~ / 3 oF 3 \ y o \
valwv dé, d\\’ & Tols palioTa. €L OVY €yw €LToLuL® Old
’ /’ y » /’ / / < 3
mi 8; lows dv pov dikailws kabdrrowzo Aéyovres, oTL ev
~ ’ ’ ’ y \ ’
Tots poliora *Abypalov éya avrols @poloynkws TUYXar®
’ \ e ’ ~ \ A 4 ’
TavTyy Tv Opoloylav. daler yap av OTL, @ ZGKpaTes,
~ & \ ~
peydla Huy TovTwr Tekprpid €0Tw, OTL TOL Kal TELS
3 /’ \ ¢ / 5 \ y ~ y 9
Apéoroper kal 7 mé\is+ ov yap dv wore Tar alwr "Aby-
/’ € /’ / 3 Ss ~ 3 / 3 ’
valor drdvrov diadepdvTws év adr) émedrues, eb pi) oo

’ y \ yy. 3 A ’ ’ > » ~
TW ’ L
10 duacpepd S NPETKE, KaL OUT €TL Oewpiav TWTOT €EK T7S

on

wohews éEnNles, [oT pu) ara els 'Iabudv,] ovre (aloo

1) ’ 5 ’ ’ » IAN 9 S
ov QjLOTE, €L MM ToL OTPATEVTOMLEVOS, OVUTE a nv amo n-

re}

19. Jpoloyrjoas welleaBar: not mei-
oeabat, although weloeabar would mean
about the same. GMT. 15, 2, ~. 2.
Cf. 52 d below, where moAirelesfar is
twice used similarly, with 52 ¢ in.

20. mwporbévrwy Mpav: 7) weibesbau
3) welder must be supplied from what
precedes. The same idea is then
expressed negatively and once again
positively. afpeow mporifévar is also
used, meaning to leave a man free to
choose. Socrates can never repeat
too often that the state is right, as
against those who seek to evade the
authority of its law. This fact ac-
counts for the clause which follows:
ToVTwy obdéTepa moiel, a mere repeti-
tion of otire mwelberar oie welber Huas.

22. Odrepa: the notion of plurality
has here practically disappeared, as is
often true also in the case of ravTa.

XIV. 2. &véteabar: cf. 54 a, Bpéyov-
rai kal waudevoovrar. These are cases
of the anomalous use of the fut. mid.
of these verbs for the fut. pass. —
kal: and what is more.

4, év Tols palioTa: see on év Tos
Bapirara, 43 c.

10. kal olre...ovre: the promi-
nence of the hypothetical expression
(ob yap bv kré.) grows less here, and
completely disappears with od3¢, as
the contradictory aaAd plainly shows.
fewpla means not only a state embassy
to games and festivals (see the pas-
sage from the Phaedo quoted on 7d
motor, 43 ¢) but also attendance at
religious festivals, particularly at the
great national games, on the part of
private individuals. See on éAdrTw
aredfunoas, 53 a.

12. el pif wou orparevoopevos: for

61

F

52

51

b
 

 

 

 

 

 

182

’ 3 ’ ’ 9 ce ¥ y SQ I
play émronjow mdmore womep oi allo avBpwmor, 0vd €mi- 52

IIAATONOS,

\
Bupia oe dns molews 0v8e dAwr vopwy éNaSev eldévar,

9 \ e ~ e r A \ ¢ ¢ / / <
15 dANG MUELS TOL LKAVOL MNUEV KOL 1) N)[LETEPD TOMS® OUT®
/ € ~ ¢ ~ \ € / > ¢ ~ /’
oh6Spa Huds pov kal opoldyes kal’ yuas mo\TevTe-
/ ¥ i, ~ 9 Ss. 3 / € 3 Vd
glOal Ta TE da] Kal waLdas €v aUTy €ToTwW WS APETKOV-

4 : ~ / y / 9 9 ~~ ”~ 2 9 ~

| oms got Ts mé\ews. €TL Toivvy év avty) TN dikm én oot
~ /’ 93 / \ © ~ b) jee tmta——— ~

dvyns ryjoacbtal, el ¢Bovlov, kal Ome YUV dKOVONS TTS

i
i

Rammer,

/ 3 ~ / € ’ ~
20 TONEWS ETLYELPELS, TOTE EKOVONS TOL) TAL.

\Q\ 7 \
gv O¢ TOTE [EV

ekalwmilov ds ovk dyavakTav €i Oéol refvdvar o€, alla
¢ ~ e ¥y \ ~ ~ ’ ”~ \ y 9
pov, as épnaba, mpo Ts Pvyns Odvarov: vov O€ ovT
2kelvovs Tos NSyous aloyivel, oUTe NudY TOV VOUWY EVTpE-

3 ~ ~ ’ © a ~
wei, émiyelpdy Sadlepar, mpdrTels TE amep av dovhos
/’ /’ 9 / 9 ~ \ \
25 pav\éraros Tpdfeier, AmOOOPATKEY ETLXELPWY TAPA TAS
/’ \ \ C ’ > A ec ~ 4
Evvbrikas Te kal Tas opoloyias, kall as uw EvvéfQov molt-

’ ~ \ 2 ¢ ~ ~ 3 A 9 4 3
reveofai. mTPOTOY EV OY NYU TOUTO AUTO ATOKPLYAL, EL

an fn Néyopev Pdokovrés o€ wpoloynkéval mro\reveafal
kal Huds pyw, dN ob Adyw, 1) ovk dnb. Tl pope

30 TPOS ravra, ®@ Kplrov; dA\o Tt 7) GpoNOYDMEY ;

52
b

the campaigns of Socrates, see on
év TMoridalg, Apol. 28 e. Kuphony, per-
haps, prevented the addition of ovde-
play after &wodnuiav. Cf.52 e and 64b.

14. el8évar: added for the sake of
clearness and precision. The result
is that the preceding gen. seems to
be a case of prolepsis. Cf. Hom. Il.
ii. 720, Tétwv eb eiddres pt pdxeobal.
Soph. EL 5421., § ov éuav “Adns Tw
Tuepov Tékvwy | ) Tév éxelvns Eaxe dai-
caclar wAéov. The subj. or obj. of
the inf. is often put by anticipation
as the obj. of its governing verb,
noun, or adj.

17. kal... émoujow: is freed from
its connexion with &uoAdyes, to which,
however, 7d Te #AAa is still attached.
See on kal yéyove, Apol. 36a. This

irregularity was hardly avoidable,
since a participle would have been
clumsy, and the idea does not suit a
clause with §r.. Accordingly it was
hardly possible to subordinate it to

moAiTeveaat.

18. Zt. Tolyvy: transition to a new

point, which, however, remains closely
connected with the leading idea.

19. duyis Typjoacdar: cf. Apol.37c
and see on Taras favdrov, Apol. 36D.
20. dre pév: cf. Apol. 37 c-38 a.

21. éxalemwifov: cf. Apol. 20 c,
ekaAAvwduny Te kal RBpuvduny dv.

23. ekelvovs Tovs Adyovs aloxv-
ver: not ashamed of those words, but,
ashamed to face those words. MH. 712.
The words are personified and con-
front him with his disgrace. Cf. 46 Db.

C

 

 

KPITQN.

 

KP. ’Avdykm, @ SdKkpartes.

30. "ANo Tu odv dv Pater 4) Evvbijkas Tas mpods Nuds
adrovs kai spoloylas mapaBaivels, ovy VO dvdykns Opo-
Noyriocas ovd¢ dmarnbels ovdé év oMiye Xporve dvayka-
35 ofeis Povhevoaclai, ANN’ &v éreaw éBdoprjkovra, év ols
3 fon 9 Vd 9 \ 5 / e ~ \ /
ééy ou dmiévar, €l 1) NPETKOWLEY THLELS unde OSikaat
3 /’ / ¢ e ’ » \ \ y /
épalvovrd gou al omoloyiar eal. OV 8¢ ovre Aakedai-

~ y /’ A \ ¢ ’ \ 9 ~
pova. mpoypod ovte Kprjrny, ds 87) ékdoTore dys evvoper-
alas, oUre AAV oUdepiar Trav ‘EN\gvidwy molewy 0VOE TOV
40 BapPBapwcdv, dA ENdrTw é§ avis dmedjunoas 7) oi Xw-

Noi T€ Kat Tuplol kal oi d\\ot dvammpor* oUT®w ooL dage-

/ ~ ¥ 3 ’ ¥ e /’ \ ¢ ~
pdvrws Tv d\wy ’Abnraier npeoker 1) TONLS TE KOL NLELS
¢ /’ ~ © /’ \ | / Ss 7» y /
oi véuot Sov OTL" Tive yop Av TOMS APETKOL AVEV VOUWY ;

29. aN ov Adyw: not merely in your
professions. That GuoAoynkévar is the
verb with which rye is connected
appears from the context. Cf. 5le.

30. d\\o Tu. 7: see on &AAo TH,"

Apol. 24 ¢, and cf. Phaed. 79 ¢ quoted
below.

32. npds avrovs: without any re-
flexive meaning. Cf. Phaed. 79 a,
AAO Tt Hudv adTdv A TO piv odud
oti, TO 8¢ Yuxh. But cf. ble.

35. ¢v {teow éPSoprkovra: ¢f. Apol.
17d. Socrates here speaks less accu-
rately than in 51d.

38. ds 8 éxdorore k7é.: Plato,
like many others, often praises these
states, whose similar institutions were
all of them based upon the common
character due to their Dorian origin.
In the Memorabilia, Xenophon, him-
self the ardent admirer of Sparta,
reports various conversations where
Socrates praises Dorian institutions.
See (Mem. iii. 5. and iv. 4) his com-
mendation of the strict obedience to
law at Sparta and of the education

which prepares men for it. The edu-
cation of Spartan women was less
admired and less admirable. Cf. Eur.
Andr. 595 ff., 008 dv ei BovAoird Tis|
chppwy yévorro Emapriatidwy kbpy . . . |
3pbuovs mahaloTpas 7 obk &vagxeTovs
uol | kowas Exovoi. KkdTa Oavud ev
xpewv | € uh yvvaikas coppovas wai-
deveTe;

40. dre dwedrpnoas : cf. Phaedr.
230 ¢, where Phaedrus says to Socra-
tes as they are taking a walk in the
country : ob 8¢ ye, & Oavudaie, aTOTG-
Tatds Tis palvel. &Texvas yap fevayov-
puévy (a stranger come to see the sights in
town) Tvl kal obi émixwply Eowas* obTws
ek Tov HoTeos oT els Thy mepopiav
(foreign parts) amodnuels, ob &w Tei-
xovs Euovye Boxes Td mapdwav éfiévau.
Socrates answers: ovyylyvwoké poi, &
bpioTe, pihopalbis ydp eips Td pev ody
xwpla kal T& 3évdpa obdéy W e0éner Bidd-
okew, oi 8 év T¢ Hote &vbpwmol

43. 8f\ov é7v: appended at the end
of the sent. by way of emphasis with-
out having any place in the const.

183

52

63

52

«L

 
 

KPITQN. 185

184 ITIAATQONOS

10 vou TGV véuwy, kal BeBaidoes Tous Sukaorais Ty d6€av 53
Gore Sokew dpfds mw Slkqy dukdoar GoTiS yap vépov c
/’ 3 Id ’ A / \ J ’
Swadlopeds Eari, ohddpa mov Softer av véwy ye Kal avor)-
3 4 2 > ’ > ’ ’
Tov dvfpdmov duapbopevs evar. mToTEPOV OVY Ppevéer Tas
re edvopovpévas woes kal Tév Avdpdv TovS KOO ULWTA-

~ Se Mn 9 9 ’ ~ e 2’ IN te."
viv 8¢ 87) ovk éuuévels wots @poloynuévols; €av MUW ye 53
0 5 > , : \ 3 IN ’ y 3 ~
45 meifly, & Sdkpares: Kal OV KaTayENAOTOS YE EEL €K TS
/’ 3 /’
mwoNews éEeNOav.
\
XV. Skémer yap &f, ravra wapaBas kai éapaprd.-
vow Tu TobTev Ti dyaldov dpydoe oavrdv 4) Tovs émurndei-
\ ~ ; Ey ~ ~ 2 ~ A
ovs Tods cavrov; or ueviyap kwduedoovai yé gov oi b | 15 Tous; Kal ToDTO wolovrTL Apa dfdy cou {My €oTar; 1)
2
TA\Tidoes TOUTOS Kal GraLoXUITHOELS Siakeydpevos —
lvas Ao 3 Sdkpares; 3 ovomep &vbdde, dos 1 apem /
rivas Noyovs, & Zdrpates; 1 ovoTED , ©S 1) dpeETn)  —x
A ¢ a ,-,.__n 7 3’ ¥ ~ 3 ’ A \
kai 7) Sukatoavy mheloTov dor Tols dvbpamols kau Ta
vépipa. kal of vépoL; Kal UK oleL doxmpLov dv davetoar

 

 

9 . ~
émurideior kal avrol dpevyew kal orepnbnvar Ts Toews 7
\ 3 7 3 / IY on 3. \ ~
5 Tv ovoiav droléoar, axedéy Tu Shor: avrds O¢ mpwroY
\ 3\ ~
pv &w els Taw Eyydrard Twa mohewr ENOys, 9) OrBate 7)

 

Méyapdde, —evvopovrrar yap dudorepar—molépios née,

 

 

& Sdkpares, ™ ) Aired . © i) 20 70 TOU > L ave; oleoBat ye f aAN €ék wer d

4! partes, T]) TOUTWY WONTELQ, KL OOOUTEP KIOOVTAL TO TOU SWKPATOUS TPAYA ; { ye Xp1- mn

A ~ ec ~n ’ € ’ ’ ’ ¢ ’ , ~ / 9 ~ © Se ’ i \

TOV avTov wé\ewr, vroNéfovTal oe dwadbopéa ryyovpe- | T0UTOV TOV TOTWV OQTAPELS, nes 8¢ els Oerraliov mapa.
53 { rods &évovs Tovs Kpirwvos: éket yap On mheiom araéia

3 See on & tyres, Apol. 37h. H.1049, 61; H.210.— eivopoivra ydp: for the
la. Qf. Eur. Suppl. 396, Kadueios, &s facts, see on &s 3%) éxdoToTe, 52 €, and
owe, ob ad’ oI 871, riiput. Ar. cf. Soph. O. C. 919 ff., kaiTot oe @%Bai
Hl Clouds, &3ikovvr’ &dikeicOar kal kakovp- 7 obi émaldevoav kakdy* | ob yap piroi-
3 1 yoovr’, o18 87. Its stress is given ow #vdpas éxdirouvs Tpépeww. In Thebes, 25

chiefly to kal fuels of vduor.

i ————.

r 9 ’ \ ¥ N ¢ 4 3 / e ’

kal akolacia, kal lows &v 1Oéws gov akoloier ws yeloiws
ek Tov deopwrnplov dmedidpackes Trev 7é Twa mepulé-
pevos, 9 Supfépar NafBav 7) dha. ola 8) eldbaow évokeva.- x

ee
Lab) |

2 sprment

 

 

44. ovk éppévers: a more vivid form
of question than éuuevers. The laws
give answer to their own question in
dav Hiv ye mwelfp, which implies aan’
uuevels. Socrates might have said
GAN’ duuérw.

45. karayélacros: with reference
to his preceding operations. Cf. 52¢
above, ob 8¢ TdTe pev KkTé.

XV. 1. okdmer: prefixed to an
independent sent. just as dpds often
is. Cf. 47 a and Prot. 336 b. — wapa-
Bas kal éfapaprdvwy : this = éav mapa-
Bris kal éfauaprdrys. The pres. marks
the continuance of the action.

5. oxedov mu: this adv. use of 7l
is common with wdvu, oxeddv, mAéov,
uaAroy and word. —mparov pév: the
corresponding clause follows below
(d) in a different form. See on éAAd,
60d.

before and during the Peloponnesian 53

war, there was a moderate oligarchy
(8Aryapxia icdvouos, different from the
duvasrela Alywv of the time of the
Persian wars) in political sympathy
with Sparta. Megara also had an
oligarchical form of government, and
had been, since the battle of Coroneia
(447 B.C.), on the Spartan side.

8. Tovrwy: referring either to the
cities (instead of év Todrois) or to
their inhabitants. Cf. Hom. Od.
xxiii. 319, #8 &s TyAémvAov AaioTpv-
~oviny &plkovro, | of vijds 7° SAecay kal
euvuidas éralpovus.

9. vmwofAéYovrar: suggestive of the
Homeric $wddpa idév. “They will look
upon you with suspicion.” The im-
plication of suspicion is conveyed by
the wd in d¢popav, dmoYla, as in Xen.
An. ii. 4. 10, of 3¢ “EAAyres vpopov-
Tes Tobrous abrol ép’ éavrav éxdpovy

10. kal BePardoes wré.: dota and
Soxelv in the same sense, as in 44 c.
«Indicibus opinionem confir-
mabis ut recte videantur tu-
lisse sententiam.” Wolf.

17. 1: see App.

19. &v Javeiocbar: see on ovk bv
wohoovtos, Apol. 30 b.

20. 76 Tov SwkpdTovs wpdypa : little
more than a periphrasis for Swkparys.
Cf. v5 ody mpaypa, Apol. 20 ¢; Hipp.
Ma. 286 e, pairov yap bv eln Td éudy
mpayua kal dwricdy, I should be a
wretched ignoramus. Eur. Heracl. 57 1.,
ob ydp Tis LoTw ds mdpoild alphoerar |
Thy ov &xpeiov dbvamiy avr Ei

d pvobéws. — oleofal ye Xp] : a very com-

mon way of answering one’s ow” ques-
tion. Cf. 54D.

22. ékel yop On kré.: Socrates
speaks as if the fact were familiar
to Crito. The nobles of Thessaly

were rich and hospitable, and bore
the reputation of being violent and
licentious. Some light is thrown upon
the whole subject by the character of
Meno given by Xenophon, An. ii. 6.
21 ff. Cf. also Dem. 1.22, Ta 7év OeTTa-
Ao ¥mioTa fv dfmou Pploet kal del wagw
avbpdmois. This chiefly relates to their
political character. Cf. also the ironi-
cal words of Socrates on the Thessa-
lians in Plato’s Meno, 70 a b.

24. okeviv Té Twa kré.: to this
first clause the disjunctive 9 dipfépav
3 #AAa is subordinated. The Bdipfé-
pa was, according to the Schol. on
Ar. Nub. 73, a moiuevicdy mepiBoAator.
orev and évokevd(eobai refer to change
of costume, and are also used of the
costumes of actors. Cf. Ar. Achar.
383 f., where Dicaeopolis, before be-
ginning his defence, says: viv ody pe
mp@Tov mply Aéyew édoate évokevdoa-

7. MéyapdSe: see App. and also G.  dryeudvas Exorres.

 
 

 

 

 

Se YER

 

186

30

35

ITAATQNOZS

¢ 9 / \ \ ~ \ ”~
{eaOa. oi dmodidpdokovres, kal TO OXNUO TO CTOUTOV 53

/ © oe / 9 / ~ / ~ /’
peral\dfas: o1L 8¢ yépwr amp, opikpod xpovov To Big
Notmod dvrTos Gs TO €ikds, éTOAuNTas OVTWS aloXp@s émt-

~ ~ ~
Oupety {p, vopous Tods peyioTovs wapafds, ovdels Os pet;
y A ’ ~ 9 \ ’ 9 ’ 3 /’
lows, av uw] Twa Amys: el O¢ pif, akovgel, @ Swkpates,
\ : S / ~ € / i \ ’ /
woA\a. kal dvd oavrov. vmepxOuevos On Pudge mwdv-
Tas dvfpdmovs kai Sovebwr: Ti moldy 7) eDwyoUuevos €v
pon SUX
@erraliq, Gomep ém Seimvov drodednunkws eis Oertaliav ;

3 - ~

Adyo. 8¢ ékewou oi wept Sukatoo vs Te kal Tis AAAS dperi)s
n ew » ’ \ 3 ~ ’ o ’
wou nuiv éoovrar; dA\a On Tov waldwr eveka Bovle

~ o gy ww un ’ \ Q 7 Q7 ’

(qv, va avTovs ékbpélms kal mardedays; Ti 0é; eis Oer-
/ 9 \ 3 \ / \ ’ /
Talay adrovs dyaywv Opépes Te kal maudedoes, Eévovs
© ~ ~
monjoas, a kal TOUTO ATONAITWOW; 1) TOUTO MeEy ov,

o0al Ww ofov &0Midrarov. Cf. also ibid. of the foregoing clause. This cannot

436. oxiua, on the other hand, re-
lates to the other disguises of face
and figure necessary to complete the
transformation.

28. os To elkds: that is according
to the law of nature. —éroApnoas:
see on TéAuns, Apol. 38 d, and App.

29. ovdels 8s: will there be nobody to
say this? i.c. “absolutely every one,”
expressed interrogatively. Here, as
in many common idioms, the verb “ to
be” is omitted.

30. el 8¢ pn: otherwise. GMT. 52,
1, ~. 2; H. 906, 6. —dxovoer . .. avafia :
like axovew rand (9wd Tivos) is the pas-
sive of Aéyew xaxd. Cf. 60e. The
kal between woAAd and évdafia should
not be translated.

31. 81: accordingly. He must make
up his mind to it, he has no choice.

32. kal Sovhevwv: better under-
stood absolutely than with an implied
dat. Here we have a blunt statement
of the fact which Socrates had in
mind in saying dmepxduevos. — Tl worav
7 k7é.: the partic. goes with the verb

be reproduced in Eng., “in fact how
can you live there except in one con-
tinual round of revelry, as if you had
come to Thessaly to eat and drink.”
No #AAoe is needed after =i.

35. d\Ad 81: a new objection raised

‘and answered by the laws themselves

in respect of what Crito said, 45 c-
46 a. — d\\a.: relates to the preced-
ing thought: of course these sayings
are nowhere, “but are you actually
willing 2” etc. See on Apol. 37 e.

38. iva kal Tovro k7é.: i.e. in addi-
tion to all other obligations. &mwoAad-
ew is often used, as here, ironically.
How a Greek looked upon exile is
plain from passages like Eur. El.
1311 ff. odx #9 | oikTpa. Al. mwémovle,
mA O11 Aelmer woAw Apyeiwv. OP.
Kal Ties #ANas gTovaxal ueiovs | 9) vis
warpgas Opov éxAelmew; and Phoen.
388 ff., where Polynices, answering Io-
casta’s question, 7{ 7d orépecbar watpi-
dos ; 9) Kady uéya; says uéyiatov: Epyp
& eotl peilov ) Aéyp. Cf. Richard II.
i. 3, —

40

KPITQN.

adrov 8¢ rpepduevor cov [drvros Béltiov Bpéfovrar kai 54

/’ \ /’ ~ 9 ~ ¢ \ 3 /’
radebaovrar, un Ewwdvros gob avrols; ol yap émrrdeiol
¢ \ 5 / 3. A /’ 3 3 /’
oi ool émuehjoovTar avTGy. wOTEPOY €av eis Oertaliav
3 /’ 3 ’ 3\ \ 5 © 3 Id
dmodpuifons émpeljoovral, dav 8¢ eis “Aov dmodnpur)-

3 /’ ¥ / y ?
ONS OUXL ETUUEN)TOVTAL; ELTTEP YE TL 0peNos QUTWY €TTL
~ ~~ y / ’
Tév oou packdvrwv émumdelwy evar, oteabal ye xp.
XVI. ANN, & Sokpates, meldopevos Mu TOIS TOS
~ ~ / ~ ~
Tpodedat wite madas wEPL TAELOVOS TOLOV pire 70 {Mv
~ 9
prire do umdév mpd Tov Sukalov, va eis “Awdov eNDwv
~ ~ 3 A v9
éxns wdvra tavra dmoloyioaclfal Tols Exel apyovow:
“ TA
ovre yap évfdSe cou daiverar TavTA TPATTOVTL GpuEWOV
3 IQ /’ IQ\ ¢ 4 06 y ~ ~
elvar ove SukardTepov 0UdE 6aLATEPOY, 0VOE ANY TWY TWY
0 / ¥ 3 ~ 3 / ¥ y IANO ~
0vdevi, ovTe éketoe dpikopéry auewov €oTal. aAAa VUY
\ 5 /’ y 3\ 3 / 3 ¢ 3 ¢ ~ ~ ’
per NOknuévos der, éav amiys, ovY VP NUWY TOY VOUWY
< ~ 3
da vrrd dvbpdmwr: éov Oé eEENOYs ovTws aloXpAS avTa-

187

’ ~ /’
10 Sikrioas Te Kal AUTLKAKOUPYY TAS, TAS TAVTOU OMoNOyLas
~ \ \ \ 9
re kal Evvbikas Tos mpos Nuas mTapaBas Kal Koka €pya-

a

What is my sentence then but speechless
death,

Which robs my tongue from breathing na-
tive breath?

and Dante, Paradiso, XxvI1I., —

"Thou shalt abandon everything beloved

Most tenderly, and this the arrow is

Which first the bow of banishment shoots
forth.

Cf. also many well-known passages in
the Odyssey, e.g. Od. i. 58, iéuevos kal
kamvdy amobpdakovra voijoar 7s yains,
ix. 27 f., of Tot éyd ve | 7s ~yains diva
pat yYAvkepdrepoy AA idéobai, XX. 99.

39. 0péfrovrar kal Tardevoovrar: see
on évéteabai, 52 a.

44. Tay... evar: explanation of

abt@v. oof is not to be connected

b with ¢packdvrwr. —oleaBal ye Xpn: cf.

53 c.

XVI. 3. mp: after wepl mAelovos.
See on mpd Tov &dikeiv, 48 d.

5. dpewov . . . SikaroTepov: see on
duewov, Apol. 19 a.

6. ovd¢ dAAwTav aav: the laws add
this for Crito’s benefit. Cf. 45 c-46 a.

7. viv pév: assuming that Socrates
has made up his mind not to take
Crito’s advice.

8. ovx vd npav k7é.: the laws add
this in the vein of what has gone
before.

9. vr’ dvlpumwy: referring to the
fallible mortals who act as guardians
and representatives of the blameless
laws. See Introd. 30-35. Cf. Apol.
24d, dvbpwmos, doris mp@Tov Kal avTd
TovTo olde, ToVs vduovs.

11. mwapafds, épyacdpevos: subor-
dinated to the foregoing partics.

 

b
 

 

 

 

 

 

188

15

IIAATQNOZ

’ ’ A © eo ’ \ ’
TAUEVOS TOUTOUS OUS NKLOTA €OEL, OOUTOV TE KAL ¢ilovs

\ ’ \ 8 ~ e ~ / ~ ~
Kal waTpioa Kal MLAS, TELS TE OOL XONETAVOVLEY {wvTe,

kal exer of Huérepor ddeNdol

Naar TO TOV WEPOS.
Néyer pahov 9) ILELS-

5

GMa pu) o€ Tel

e ’ J J
ot év “Aiwbov VOUOL OUK EVULE-

~ ¢ / 3 / </ . ¢ ~ 3 /’ 9
oe ae dmodéfovrar, eldbTes OTL KaL MLAS ETEXELPTTAS TITO-

/

K ’ ~ A
oy Kpitov morew a

XVIL Tavra, & pike éraipe Kpirowv, ed tofu or éya
Sokd aKovEW, OTTER ol kopuBavTidvTes TOV AGUNQY OOKOU-
ow akovew, kai &v éuol aut WM XN TOUTWY TWV \Sywv
Bop Bet kai woe pn Stvaclar Tov dMov dkovew: dla
lo, ooa ye Ta vv €pol SokovvTa, €av Néyns TAP TATA,

paTNY €PELS.

ov ’ » ¥ ’ ’ ’
Sus [LEVTOL EL TL OLEL m\éov TOT EW, EYE.

KP. ANN, ® SwkparTes, ovK €xw Néyew.

14. ol &v "ASov vopou : cf. Soph. Ant.
450 ff., ob yap Ti por Zebs Hv 6 knpvEas
rdde, | 00’ # Evwoukos Tov kdTw Oedv
Alkn kTéE.

XVIL 1. & dike éraipe Kplrov:
Socrates speaks with great tender-
ness in order to make his final re-
fusal the less hard to bear. The
exceptional feature in this form of
address lies in the mention of Crito’s
name at the end. :

2. ol kopuBavTiavTes: KopvBavTiay
means act like the Corybantes. These
were priests of Phrygian Cybele,
whose orgiastic rites were accompa
nied by dances and deafening music.
Here a species of madness seems to
be indicated, under the influence of
which men imagined that they heard
the flutes that were used in Coryban-
tian revels. Cf. Ion, 534 a, bomep oi
KopuBayTidyTES OK duppoves Byres Op-
xovvTat, oUTw kal of meAomowol ok Ep-
ppoves Byres Ta KAA uéAn TabTe wOLOU-
ow, and the song of the bacchants in
Eur. Bacch. 114-129 and 1556-161, —

Soon shall the country rejoice in the dance;

Soon with his revellers Bacchus advance;

Into the hills, the hills shall he fare,

Joining the host of his women-folk there.

Far from their homes and their weaving
they came,

Goaded by Bacchus and stung by his name.

O wild Curetes’ vaulted lair!
O hallowed haunts of Crete!

‘Where new-born Zeus found faithful care,
And kind protection meet

In caverns safe from every snarc.

Corybantes, wearing helms three-rimmed,
Stretched skins to make my drum’s full
round ;
Then they, in hollowed caves, lithe-limbed,
With drums, and, with the flute’s shrill
sound
Full Phrygian, bacchic ditties hymned.

Sing Dionysus, and praised let him be;
Beat ye the deep-sounding drums as of old;
Sing to the Evian god evoe!

Greet him with Phrygian cries, and let flutes
Trill in your revels and ripple shrill joy;
Instruments holy the holy employ.

5. doa ye kré.: a limitation added
to soften the assertion. See on doa
ve Tavlpameia, 46e. No obj. is needed
with Aéyps. Aéyew mapa KkTé COMES

r

0
d

ee ——

op

 

 

 

 

54
d

KPITON.

» ’ 3 ’ \ /
30. "Ea Towvr, o Kpitov, Kal TPATTOMLEY TAUTY, emeL-

7) ravry 6 Beds vpmyetTac.

very near the meaning of dvrinéyew.
Cf. 48 d. Cf. also the omission of
the obj. éué with the preceding mower
uh dvvaclar KTé.

8. ¢a: used abs. with a following
subjv. or imv. to dismiss a matter
under discussion. Cf. Charm. 163e,
da, fv & éyd- uh ydp mw TO éuol dokovy
sromduer, GAN b ab Aéyeis viv. Euthyd.
302¢c, Za, & Awovvolbdwpe, ebphuer Te
kal uh xahemds pe podidacke. —TAUTY :
the repetition of the same word is
effective.

9. ¢ Oeds: see on 7g Oed, Apol.
19a. Here, as at the end of his de-

fence proper, Apol. 35d, and at the
end of his closing words in court,
Apol. 42 a, Socrates mentions 6 feds.
Dante closes each one of the three
parts of his great poem with a refer-
ence to the stars. This is no accident
in either case, though Plato had a
philosopher’s reason which Dante
could not give, except for the closing
line of the Paradiso, which is é feds
translated into the language of the
poet, “I Amor che muove il Sole e
I’ altre stelle,” The love which moves the
sun and the other stars.

189

94
e

54

 
 

 

MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS.

SINCE all the extant Mss. of Plato follow or attempt to follow Thrasyl-
lus in his subdivision into nine tetralogies or groups consisting of four
members each, and since Thrasyllus was instructor to the emperor Tibe-
rius, it follows that the origin of no Ms. of Plato now known to exist can
be assigned to a date much earlier than the middle of the first century
A.p. The following is a table exhibiting Thrasyllus’s tetralogies, and
also naming the best Ms. in which each tetralogy is preserved : —

 

¥

. ‘Enthyphro. “Apology. Crito. Phaedo. Clarkianus(B).

 

66

. | Cratylus. Theaetetus. Sophist. | Statesman.

 

7 : |e
. | Parmenides. _ Philebus. _ | Symposium. Phaedrus.

 

| Alcibiades I. | Alcibiades II. | Hipparchus. Anterastae.

 

 

. | Theages. Charmides. Laches. Lysis.

.| Euthydemus. | Protagoras. Gorgias. , | Meno. ,

.| Hippias maior. | Hippias minor. To. Menexenus. | Venetus

 

 

.| Clitophon. Republic. Timaeus. , | Critias. KE Parisinus

¢

 

 

 

 

 

 

IX. | Minos. Laws. Epinomis. | Letters.

 

 

Of the three Mss., the most trustworthy is Clarkianus, and the least
trustworthy is Venetus T. Schanz constructs the pedigree of the existing
Mss. of Plato, and traces them all to an original or Archetypus. This
parent Ms. consisted of two volumes: Vol. I. contained the first seven
tetralogies; Vol. IL. contained the last two tetralogies, together with a
number of works attributed with more or less confidence to Plato. The
copies made of Vol. I. were of two kinds, (1) incomplete, omitting the
seventh tetralogy, and (2) complete. The best Ms. now preserved repre-
sents an incomplete copy of Vol. I. of the Archetypus; this is the codex
Clarkianus, the capital authority for the first six tetralogies. The com-
plete copy of Vol. I is represented by the much less trustworthy codex
Venetus T, the best authority for the seventh tetralogy. : .

The best representative of Vol. IL. of the Archetypus is codex Parisi

nus A.

MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS. 191

The leading facts about these three Mss. are as follows: —

I. Copex CLARKIANUS, referred to by the single letter B for brevity’s
sake and because the Ms. is called also Bodleianus. It is now in the
Bodleian Library at Oxford, and is “the fairest specimen of Grecian
caligraphy which has descended to modern times.” Daniel Clarke found
this Ms., in October, 1801, in the library of a monastery on the island of
Patmos. It was beautifully written on parchment, in the year 896 A.p.,
by a skilful scribe, one Joannes, for the use of Arethas, who afterwards
became archbishop of Caesarea. See M. Schanz, Novae Commentationes
Platonicae, pp. 105-118; and Daniel Clarke, Travels in Various Coun-
tries of Europe, Asia, and Africa.

II. Copex VENETUs T, Bekker’s f. This Ms. is now in the Library
of St. Mark’s in Venice, and is chiefly valuable where the Clarkianus
entirely fails, i.e. for the seventh tetralogy. For a more detailed account,
see M. Schanz, Ueber den Platocodex der Marcus-Bibliothek in Venedig;
also the preface to Vol. IX. of the same author’s critical edition of Plato’s
works. The date of this Ms. is very uncertain.

III. Parisinus A, No. 1807 (formerly 94 and 2087). This Ms. is now
in the National Library at Paris; it was probably written early in the
tenth century after Christ. It comprises the eighth and ninth tetralo-
gies of Thrasyllus, together with seven spurious dialogues. The Clito-
phon, with which it begins, is numbered twenty-nine. See M. Schanz,
Studien zur Geschichte des Platonischen Textes, and the general intro-
duction to his critical edition of Plato’s works. There are many other
Mss. of Plato, for some account of which also see Schanz in his general
introduction, and in Bursian’s Jahresbericht (9, 5, 1, pp. 178-188), where he
summarizes his results and defends them against Jordan and Wohlrab.

IMPORTANT EDITIONS OF PLATO'S COMPLETE WORKS.

PLATONIS OPERA QUAE EXTANT OMNIA. Ex nova Joannis Serrani
interpretatione, perpetuis ejusdem notis illustrata. Henrici Stephani
de quorundam locorum interpretatione judicium, et multorum contextus
graece emendatio. — Excudebat Henricus Stephanus. M.D.LXXVIII.
3 vol. in fol.

In all modern editions of Plato, numbers and letters which refer to the
pages of the edition of Stephanus are found in the margin. This is the
most convenient mode of reference, and is now universally employed to
the exclusion of the less well-established subdivision into chapters. The
edition of Stephanus (Henri Estienne) is in three volumes, but to give
the volume is superfluous, since the name of the dialogue is given in every
reference. Each page is divided into five parts by the letters (a) bec d e
placed down the margin.

 
 

192 MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS.

Pratonis Diarogr. (Gr. et Lat.) Ex recensione Imm. Bekker. 3
Partes. in 8 Voll. Commentaria crit. et scholia. 2 Voll. Berolini, 1816-
1823. (This edition contains the first systematic collation of Mss., and
the result is a great improvement upon the Stephanus text.)

Pratonis Diarogr. Text. ad fidem codd. Florent., Paris., Vindobb.
aliorumque recogn. G'dfr. Stallbaum. 12 Tom. Lipsiae, 1821-1825.

PLATONIS OPERA OMNIA. Rec. prolegomenis et comment. illustr. Gdfr.
Stallbaum. 10 Voll. Lipsiae, 1827-1877. (In the Bibliotheca Graeca of
Jacobs and Rost.)

PratoNis OPERA QUAE FERUNTUR OMNIA. Recogn. I. G. Baiterus,
Toa. C. Orellius, A. G. Winckelmannus. Acced. variet. lectionis Stepha-
nianae, Bekkerianae, Stallbaumianae, scholia, Timaei lexicon, nominuin
index. 2 Pts. Turici, 1839-1842.

Pratoxis Diavocr secandum Thrasylli tetralogias dispositi. Ex re-
cognitione Caroli Friderici Hermanni. 6 Voll. Lipsiae (1851, 1853),
1873, 1874.

PrLaToxis OPERA, QUAE FERUNTUR OMNIA, ad codd. denuo collatos,
ed. Martinus Schanz. Ed. ster. Lipsiae, 1875-1877.

IMPORTANT OR CONVENIENT EDITIONS OF THE APOLOGY AND OF
THE CRITO.

PraTonis Diaroct V. Amatores, Euthyphro, Apologia, Crito, Phaedo.
Recens. notisque illustravit Nath. Forster. Edit. III. Oxonii (1745),
1765.

Pratonts Diavrocr IV. Euthyphro, Apologia, Crito, Phaedo. E rec.
Henr. Stephani. Gr. Ad fid. codd. Mss. Tubing. August. aliorumque et
librorumm editorum veterum rec. animadvers. illustravit, tertium edid.
Toa. Frid. Fischer. Lipsiae, 1783.

Pratonis Diarocr IV. Meno, Crito, Alcibiades uterque cum annota-
tione critica et exegetica, cur. I. Er. Biester. Ed. V. Cur. Ph. Buttmann.
Berolini (1780), 1830.

PLATONIS APOLOGIA, CRITO ET PHAEDO. Accedit emendationis speci-
men in nonullis reliquorum dialogorum. Edidit R. B. Hirschig. Tra-
jecti ad Rhen, 1853.

Pratonis ArorLoGIA SocrATis ET Crrto. Ed. V. aliquanto auct. et.
emendat. quam cur. M. Wohlrab. Lipsiae (1827), 1877. (This is Vol. IL,
Section 1, of Teubner’s ten-volume publication of Stallbaum’s complete
Plato mentioned above.)

MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS. 193

The ArorLoGgy or Prato, with a revised text and English notes, and

a digest of Platonic idioms. By the Rev. James Riddell, M.A. Oxford,
1867.

PrLATo’s ApoLoGy AND Crirto, with notes. By W. S. Tyler. New
York, 1860.

PLATO’S APOLOGY OF SOCRATES AND CrITO, With notes. By W. Wag-
ner. Cambridge, England, 1869. (Boston, 1877.)

PrLATONS VERTEIDIGUNGSREDE DES SOCRATES UND KrITON. Er-
klirt von Dr. Christian Cron. Achte Auflage. Leipzig, 1882. (This edi-
tion is the basis of the present work, and is the first part of an edition of
the selected works of Plato, edited for the use of schools by Dr. Cron and
Dr. Julius Deuschle.)

 
 

 

CRITICAL NOTES.

THESE notes are Dr. Cron’s necessary explanation of the text which
he has adopted. Where departures have been made from Dr. Cron’s
text, they are in turn discussed. The first reading is the one adopted
in this edition. B denotes Codex Clarkianus (= Bodleianus). T de-
notes Codex Venetus T. S denotes the reading adopted by Schanz, W
that adopted by Wohlrab. Bem. denotes Dr. Cron’s “ Kritische und exe-

*getische Bemerkungen zu Platons Apologie, Criton, und Laches. Separat
Abdr. aus dem fiinften Supplement-band der Jahrb. fiir classische Phi-
lologie,” pp. 64-132. Leipzig, 1864. Teubner.

APOLOGY.

17 a, p. 55 (1). & mu: with S. Cron writes 6m, following the analogy of
dois, Tis, but 6 Tu is unquestionably needed for clearness.

17 b, p. 56 (13). vyovv: with inferior Ms. and B (second hand). ovv, B
(first hand) and Cron following S.

17 b, p. 56 (14). 8¢ pov: & épov, SW with Heindorf.

17 ¢, p. 57 (17). dAX’: with Bessarion’s Ms. (Venetus E). dA\Ad, Cron and
S following DB.

17 e, p. 57 (18). ovopacr: with B. dvopaoiy, Cron and S with Bessarion’s
Ms. and. Venetus 185 (Bekker’s II).

17 4, p. 58 (27). whelw €BSopmkovra: Cron with S following B omits the
mAelw, which is found only in inferior Mss. Hermann adopted whelw éBSopr-
KovTaQ.

18 a, p. 59 (31). ds y€ pov: with S. &s y épol, W,

18 a, p. 59 (2). Pevdq karnyopnpéva: [Yevdn] karnyopnpéva, S with Hirschig.

18 a, p. 59 (4). yeyovaoi: with the best Mss. yeydvaow, Cron following
S. There are marks of correction in B and other Mss., but no Mss. cited by
S reads yeyovao.

18 b, p. 60 (9). épov: the Mss. read épov paAlov ovdév dAnbés. Hermann
bracketed pdA\Aov ...aAn0és as a gloss, while the Ziirich edition lets the words
stand. S writes épov pd Tov... ouvdév akndés. Bekker and Stallbaum, follow-
ing Mss. of slight value, read épov ovbév dAnbés. The suggestion of Schanz
is the best unless these words are simply to be cut out. Riddell says “the
rhythm would be intolerable without the three words pa\Aov ov8év dAn0és.”

18 b, p. 60 (10). Jpovriorys: Albert von Bamberg (Fleckeisen’s Jahrbiicher,

 

CRITICAL NOTES. 195

113, 10) proposes to cut out ppovriorys, because no exact parallel to this ace.
of the dir. obj. has been found in prose. So far he is right, even against
Kriiger’s citation of various adjs. joined with elvay, for such combinations are
very closely akin to verbal forms. On the other hand, to make such a point
of the distinction between the indir. (or remoter) obj. which Bamberg would
allow, and the dir. obj. which he proposes to disallow, is to ignore the difference
in this particular between Greek and Latin syntax. In the shifting of voice
from act. to pass., for instance, the distinction between dir. and indir. obj. is
far less scrupulously defined in Greek than in Latin. To be sure Xenophon
twice uses the gen. with $povrioris (cf. Symp. 6. 6, Tév peredpwv dpovrioTrs
and Mem. iv. 7. 6, rév ovpaviov dpovriorys). It should be remembered that
consistency may be too much insisted upon. Furthermore &ma§ elpnuéva are
not surprising in a speech, which, like the Apology, aims to give Socrates’s
personal hobbies in language as in thought.

18 ¢, p. 61 (12). ot ravrqv: Heindorf. tavrqv, W following the Mss.

18 ¢, p. 61 (13). dxovovres: dxovoavres, S following B (first hand).

18 d, p. 62 (20). e Tis: el prj ms, W. See his prolegg., p. 42.

18 4, p. 62 (21). kwpwdowods: with S following B. Elsewhere xwpgdo-
mowds (Tpaywdomoids) is found in the best Mss.

18 4, p. 63 (23). mdvres: wdvrwy, W. See his prolegg., p. 42.

18 e, p. 63 (32). Uhlig quotes (Rhein. Mus. 19, 1, and Fleckeisen’s Jahrb.
121, 10) the authority of several grammarians to prove that the exclamation
elev has no connexion with elvar. He maintains that it is and always was an
interjection, and that there was originally an aspirate at the beginning of the
second syllable, like dof, eddv (bacchic interjections), and the Attic Tads.

19 ¢, p. 65 (13). odds or * pi dvyoyur: with Riddell. codds éom, pi
¢vyorue, Cron.

194d, p 66 (19). pkpov: with Cron and S following B. opikpov, inferior
Mss. Judging from other cases, cf. below (28 b) and in the Crito (46 a),
opikpov and pikpoy have about equal claims in any given place.

19d, p. 66 (1). ovdév €or: with S. ov8év [éorwv], Cron. ovdév éoriv, W.

19 e, p. 67 (7). olos T° éoriv: [olds T éotiv], S.

19 e, p. 67 (9). wel@ovor: mwelbovoiy, S.

20 a, p. 67 (10). olor: with B (second hand) and other Mss. odlow,
Cron following S with B (first hand). :

20 a, p. 67 (17). kale Te kal dyad: following B with S W. Venetus T
reads kala kdyadw. In his preface to Vol. IL, Schanz very emphatically re-
jects the reading of B and defends T, but he has not the courage of his con-
victions, and finally retains the reading of B.

20 ¢, p. 68 (26). éxo: B. éxe, SW.

20¢c, p.69.(5). e pj Tu... whol: [el prj mv... mwoMho(], S and Cobet.
Bobrik (Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 113, 5) argues against bracketing the words, “ that
the meaning of mwepirrov is quantitative while that of dA\\ofov is qualitative.”
S (Bursian’s Jahresbericht, 9, 5, 1, p. 188) is not convinced.

 
 

 

196 CRITICAL NOTES.

20 d, p. 69 (8). dori: &éorwv, S W—“éomi(v erasa) BD,” S.

20 4, p. 69 (8). mwemoinke: mwemolnkev, S W.

20 e, p. 70 (18). pn® édv: with Heusde (Spec. crit. p. 11). pn8¢ &v, Cron
following S with B.

20 e, p. 70 (20). Tov Néyovra: Ta AexOévra, Liebhold.

20 e, p. 71 (21). éomi: éoTwv, SW.

21 a, p. T1 (23). éraipds Te kal: [éraipds Te kal], S with Ludwig. Miiller-
Striibing gives at too great length (Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 121, 2) his too ingenious
account of Ar. Clouds, 1072 ff.; but in a note (pp. 90, 91) he very acutely
suggests that Zrrrios was a nickname bestowed by Aristophanes in the
Clouds upon Chaerephon, “mukpol ydp oi Zdrrrior kal ovkoddvrar,” Schol.
on Ar. Plut. 720. Qf. Laches, 197 ¢, fin., with Stallbaum’s note.

21 ¢, p. 78 (11). coddrepds éor: with S W. But the reading of B, as
Gaisford specifically says, is éoTu.

21 ¢, p. 73 (14). kal Sialeydpevos avr: [kal Siadeyopevos avre], S. Wex
includes these words in the parenthesis and connects them with wpds ov
KTE.

21 d, p. 74 (23). &owkd y’ ody: with Biumlein. &owka yovv, S W.

21 e, p. 74 (2). kal Avmrovpevos: [kal] Avmrovpevos, S with Cobet.

22 a, p. 76 (11). va poi: va pi poi, S with H. Stephanus, and Madvig.
The latter (Adv. Crit. I. p. 367) says “Sed residet scrupulus in kai, quod
aptum non est.”

22b, p. 77 (17). pdA\ora: Schanz (Philol. 28, 3, p. 5566) suggests kd\Aiora
without venturing to introduce it into the text. With this use of pdAwrra
might be compared Hor. Sat. i. 10, 58, Versiculos magis factos et euntes
mollius.

22 ¢, p. 78 (29). T$ avrg: T¢ avrg avrdv, S with Bekker following infe-
rior Mss. See, however, Heindorf’s Annotatio critica in Apologiam Socratis,
p. IX. Berolini MDCCCYV.

22 4, p. 78 (7). kal...8npovpyol: [kal...Snpovpyol], S with Hirschig.

23 a, p. 80 (9). rovro: with Stallbaum following inferior Mss. Tour ov,
S W with F. A. Wolf. The reading of B and all the best Mss. is Tovrov,
which Ast defends (Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und Kunst, Vol. I. part 2,
p. 104). See Bem. p. 90 {.

23 ¢, p. 82 (8). ovx avrois: ovk avrols, W following inferior Mss. with
H. Stephanus and Engelhardt, who refers avrois, of course, to the young.
But it is by no means natural that men who are found out should not be
angry with their discoverers. Their natural anger is, however, turned against
Socrates, the real instigator of their discomfiture. Socrates is not saying that
they should not be angry with him, but rather urges that they should be
angry with themselves, i.e. with their own conceit of knowledge. This is the
meaning demanded by the context, see d below, ad fin. Further, Tovros
would give the sense required by W far more clearly than avrots.

23 d, p. 82 (11). dyvoodow : dudiyvooiow, S. dmopovay, Ast. Cobet ex-

CRITICAL NOTES. 197

punges the words dAX’ dyvoovow. There is, however, no sound objection either
to the way in which the words are introduced or to the words themselves.

23 c, p. 83 (15). olpav: with Stallbaum. olopar, Cron following S and all
good Mss. In this chapter B has olpaw twice, see lines 5 and 17. It looks
like superstition to write olopar here.

23 e, p. 83 (17). fvvreraypévos: fvvrerapévas, S with Hermann following
Bessarion’s Ms.

23 e, p. 83 (22). kal Tdv wohirikadv: [kal Twv wolvrikwv], S with Cobet.

24 a, p. 84 (30). &om: Cron and S write éorw because there are traces of
erasure in B.

24 b, p. 84 (5). domep: us, Rieckher.

24 d, p.86 (5). Tovrowrl: els Tovroval, S with Cobet. See Kr. Spr. 48,11, 4.

24 e, p. 86 (14). mwowvor: Cron following S writes mowovoww because of
traces of erasure in B; similar traces after elo in this line do not lead them
to write elow.

25 a, p. 87 (19). oi éxxAnoracral: [ol ékkAnoracrai], S with Hirschig and
Cobet. See Bem. p. 93.

25 ¢, p. 88 (1). mworepdv éoriv: with the Mss. morepov éorv, S W.

25 ¢, p.- 88 (3). & rdv: with S, who deviates but little from & rdv, the read
ing of B. &rav, Cron. W reads & dv. Krause explains it as meaning & Zev

25 d, p. 89 (7). dmwokpivov: dmwokpivar, W.

25 e, p. 89 (19). 1, el SiadBeipw, drwy: 7 Siadbelpw drwy, S with Stephanus
Naber reads 1, el SuapOelpw, Sadbelpw drwy.

26 a, p. 89 (21). kal deovoiwv: bracketed as a gloss by S with Cobet.

26 a, p. 90 (24). &§: ov, S. Heindorf reads ¢ . . . ToL®, wordy.

26 a, p. 90 (1). SqAov: with Cron’s seventh edition following B. 8nlov 18y
éorlv, Cron’s eighth edition with Schanz, who, however, says of the two words
(Novae Commentationes Platonicae, p. 163), “ Verba minime necessaria velim
deleantur.”

26 c, p. 91 (10). Tovrowrl: with B (second hand) and Vaticanus 1029 (Bek-
ker’s r). Cron following S writes Tovrois with Venetus 185 (Bekker’s mI).
TovTols, B.

26 ¢, p. 91 (13). @AN': with Bessarion’s Ms. Cron following S writes
dA\\d. with B and other Mss.

26 d, p. 92 (20). ’Avafaydpov: ["Avafaydpov], S. Baiter requires Zwkpd-
TOVS.

26 e, p. 93 (26). éx Tis dpxrorpas wpiapévors: Birt (Das antike Buchwe-
sen, Berlin, 1882, p. 434, Rem. 4) says, “ The notion that these writings were
themselves sold &v =f dpxrorpe is not conveyed here, for, if so, why should
¢vlore have been used ? In fact, kal 8x kal appends to the BuBAla something
else which is sold for a drachma and which, therefore, cannot have been the
BpAla.”

26 e, p. 94 (28). oo. Soka. . . voplleww: oor [Sokd] . .. voplfw, S who fol
lows B in respect of voplfw.

 
 

 

198 : CRITICAL NOTES.

- 27 b, p. 95 (10). éyd cou: following B. ¢yd ool, S W with Heindorf. As
the emphasis is wholly on éyw, there seems to be no good reason for disre-
garding the reading of B.

27 e, p. 98 (30). [#] kal 8vwv, Tods rmdvovs: with S. 1 [kal] dvwv [Tous
njpdvous], Cron. A change of some kind is unavoidable; the least possible
change is to bracket +f with Forster, who is followed by Heindorf and Cobet.
This yields perfectly good sense, better, in fact, than Cron obtains by brack-
eting kal and Tovs npLovovs.

27 e, p. 98 (32). [radra] ... mv ypadry Tavrqy: with S. Tadta... [Tv
ypadrv ravrny], Cron. S and Cron agree that both expressions cannot stand.
S is probably right in saying that not rv ypadrv Tavrny but ravra should be
bracketed, as a gloss added to explain dwomweipwpevos.

27 e, p. 98 (35). [ov] Tod airoi: ob Tov avrov, S W. Wecklein says (Rhein.
Mus. 36, 1, p. 145), “ Any one who grasps the argument summarized at this
point in the Apology ought to agree to the following completion of it: dwws 8¢
od Twa melfous . . . avdpdmav, ds ov Tod avrod éoTw kal Sapdvia kal Oela [kal
Salpovas kal Beovs] fyeiofar kal av Tov avrov [prjre Sawpdvia pire Beta] prre
Salpovas pire Oeovs, ovBepla pnxavi éorwv.” Goebel, in the Programm of the
Gymnasium at Fulda, first rejects all the interpretations made with a view to
retaining ov before Tod avrov, and then proceeds to defend it by arguing that
weifows is used in an absolute sense, while the clause beginning with «os he
takes as a causal parenthesis. The chief objection to this explanation is that
it explains the whole sentence away, leaving it not a leg to stand on. It is
better, therefore, to reject od and to consider that pire fjpwas was added along
with the rest in Meletus’s anxiety to make his charge of irreligion a sweeping
one. A religious-minded Athenian certainly believed in gods and in heroes.
The term Salpoves, since the precise meaning of the word was hard to fix,
might —so far as Meletus’s immediate purpose went — have been omitted,
but the preceding Sawpdwia make its introduction here indispensable. On
Meletus’s ascription to Socrates of belief in Saupdvia is based Socrates’s asser-
tion that so far from being an atheist, he believes like any other Greek in
gods and demi-gods, called Salpoves or more commonly tjpwes.

27 e, p. 98 (36). ad Tod adrod: af [Tod adrov], S with Hirschig.

27 e, p. 98 (36). pire fjpwas: bracketed as a gloss by S.

28 a, p. 98 (7). kal d\\ovs: kalovs, S with Hirschig.

28 b, p. 99 (15). mwpdrry: wpdrry mv, W following Mss.

28 ¢, p. 100 (21). & wai: S omits these words which are added in the mar-
gin of B.

28 d, p. 100 (31). wdfy #4: with B and other best Mss. Cron following S
writes rdf with Bessarion’s Ms., strengthened by various authors who quote
tdfp, omitting the =.

29 a, p. 103 (9). 8ewdv Tdv: 8ewvov Tév, S W.

29 b, p. 104 (22). dbukeiv: Otto Erdmann proposes (Fleckeisen’s Jahrb.
119, 5, p. 412) to substitute amo reiv.

CRITICAL NOTES. 199

29 ¢, p. 105 (31). Suadbaprjcovrar: following B. Sadbapricovro, Hirschig:
following Bessarion’s Ms.

29 d, p. 105 (36). dvdpes: following B. & d&vBpes, inferior Mss.

29 d, p. 106 (43). aloxvve: B. aloxvwvn, other Mss.

29 4, p. 106 (43). émpelovpevos: B. émpehopevos, Bessarion’s Ms.

30 a, p. 107 (54). év Tq woke: Ileller prefers kal Tq mole.

30 b, p. 107 (59). Aéywv ovk: Aéyawv, 61 ok, W.

30 b, p. 108 (65). + prj ddlere : 7 pf, ddblere, Schlenger, in Philol. 41, 3, p.
532 f.

30 ¢, p. 109 (6). olov éyed Néyw: Wecklein (Rh. Mus. 33, 2, p. 307) requires
olov dv éyd Aéyw, because these words are to be closely connected with the
detailed statement that follows, wposkelpevov . . . pvwos, 30 e. But Socrates
plainly has this thought in mind already, as is proved by his postponing its
amplification until after another thought introduced with éué pév ydp has been
developed. The point is that éué pév ydp kré is also in the closest connexion
with the leading idea TowouTov dvra.

30d, p.109 (11). dripdoetev: with Hermann. drpdoeev, W following Mss.

30 e, p. 110 (19). [vo Tov Beov]: S with Hirschig. vmo Tov 8eov, Riddell.

30 e, p. 110 (21). ¥wo pvwmos Twos: unless vwo Tov feov above is bracketed,
this comes in very awkwardly.

30 e, p. 110 (21). olov is taken by Goebel as a neuter, and he does not
connect §s with rowovtov Twa, but with éué. He does not urge that the other
way is ungrammatical, but apparently he thinks that the sense is in favor of
his explanation. His argument is hardly convincing.

31 a, p. 111 (29). Swareloir’ dv: Suarehoire dv, Cron following S with the
best Mss.

31 a, p. 111 (30). émurépdec: with B and other Mss. Cron following S
writes émmépPeev on the authority of Venetus 185 (Bekker’s mm) and of an
erasure in B.

31 b, p. 111 (37). pévror: pév, S with Cobet and Hermann.

31 b, p. 111 (38). elxov: elxev, S with Wex.

31 c, p.112 (2). wolvmpaypovéd: molvmwpaypovav, S following inferior Mss.

31d, p. 113 (6). [wv]: bracketed by Forster, whom F. A. Wolf followed.
wvi, B. Cron omits the word.

31d, p. 113 (12). maar: bracketed by S with Cobet.

32 a, p. 113 (18). d\Aa: with S and Bessarion’s Ms. dAN, Cron.

32 a, p. 114 (5). dpa dwololpnv: with S, who now appeals to Venetus T.
dpa kal dpa dv, Cron following B.S, previously to his collation of Venetus T,
argued as follows : “Plato scripsit dpa, quo cum dittographia dpa dv conjuncta
est; inde lectionum varietas nata ; dv ex antecedentibus posse suppleri notum.”

32 b, p. 115 (8). *Avrioxis: bracketed by Hirschig and S. The preceding
av certainly makes it plausible that *Avriox{s may have been introduced as
a marginal gloss. See Bem. p. 104.

32 b, p. 117 (12). #vavrdbny: dvavriébny fpiv, W. Diring (Fleckeisen’s

 
 

200 CRITICAL NOTES.

Jahrb. 119, 1, p. 15) supposes tkat Horace had this passage (chap. xx.) in
his mind when he wrote the third ode of the third book of his Odes.

32 b, p. 117 (13). [kal évavria éymbiodpny]: Hermann brackets these
words but W believes them to be genuine. If they are retained, it follows
either (1) that Socrates was not (in spite of reasonable evidence that he was)
the ¢mordms Tév wpurdvewy, and therefore voted against the unlawful propo-
sition when it came up in the assembly as any member might have done, or
(2) that Socrates voted alone in a preliminary meeting of the prytanes against
having the question put to the people in an unlawful form. (2) explains the
context best. But when all is said and done, the whole wording is clumsy
and repetitious, since "jvavriddny would do quite as well alone, and the cumu-
lative effect of kal is tiresome.

33 b, p. 120 (14). épwrdv: Goebel prefers éparav.

33 b, p. 120 (19). d\\ov: following B. ol d\Ao, S W.

33 e, p. 123 (24). 6 OcoforiSov: with Bessarion’s Ms. @eoforiSov, Cron
with S following B. Sauppe argues that the art. is not necessary here; it
certainly is desirable.

34 a, p. 124 (32). Tovrov: Goebel prefers Tovrovs.

34 ¢, p. 125 (3). dvapwnobels: dvapvyodels, Cron and S following B, where
dvapynuoels is read.

34 ¢, p. 125 (6). adrov: B. adrod, W. Heller argues in favor of rd avrod.
He is right in so far that the ordinary idiom would give us the art.; but after
all the art. would be indispensable only if Td mwawdla (meaning all his chil-
dren) had preceded.

34 a, p. 126 (14). elo pév mov Twves: with S and Stallbaum. elol pév mod
Tes, Cron.

34 d, p. 126 (17). vies: P.Foucart (Revue de Philologie, I. 35) bases upon
Attic inscriptions the following remarks as to the orthography of this word:
«une série d’exemples depuis le cinquitme siecle jusqu’au deuxieme avant
notre ére montre que au moins en prose, les Athéniens employaient toujours
la forme ¥ds. ... A partir de la conquéte romaine, vids se rencontre dans les
inscriptions attiques, ainsi que vds; la forme de la langue commune finit par
Pemporter, et c’est la seule qu’emploient les copistes.” The Attic form without
v is preserved only in Parisinus (A). See S, Vol. XII pp. viii. and ix.

34 e, p. 127 (26). 76 Zwkpdrn: t¢ Swkpdrer, S W with Riddell. This
dat. was preferred by Bernhardy. Nevertheless, the analogy of mwpoonkewv
and dpéokew does not bear unqualified application to 8edox far. The reading

“ "
of B is Té. cwkpdre, which suggests that the interlinear correction may be

the right reading. If the dat. be adopted here, then appeal would have to be
made to Hdt. iv. 59, 8é8okrar Tolar wpwrowst Tov pavrioy avroio amwoAAvodal.
35 b, p. 128 (38). vpds: B. njuds, S W.
35 a, p. 129 (11). [wdvras]: with 8 W. Stallbaum brackets vj Ala wav.
tws. wdvres, Cron following B.

 

 

 

CRITICAL NOTES. 201

36 a, p. 131 (4). 16 yeyovds Touro: [70 yeyovos] Touro, S with Cobet, who,
indeed, rejects these three words because he thinks they have come into the
text from the margin. There is certainly room for doubt.

36 a, p. 131 (7). dmomwepevyn: S argues for dwemedevyn in Vol. XII. p. xiii.

36 ¢, p. 133 (9). ivra: with S W following E. évra, Cron following B.
Cron defends éyra in his Bem. p. 109 f. The example quoted from Tac. Ann.
vi. 22 (where see Nipperdey’s note) is not convincing.

36 c, p. 133 (11). [ldv]: with S W. {idv, Cron. § says (Studien, p. 35) of
the whole passage: “Hermann was for doing away with évradfa ga. But
certainly 8 requires a finite verb. Simply bracket wv and the whole diffi-
culty is solved. The word was apparently added by an interpolator who con-
strued évravla ga closely with émyepav, after the analogy of Phaedo 200 b,
{pxopar yap 81 émyepdv ou émbeifacdar. Of course évraivfa makes any such
explanation absurd.”

36 d, p. 134 (22). pé\lov: Liebhold proposes, not to bracket paklov, but to
change it into ye &\\o.

36 d, p. 134 (25). Soketv elvar: Sokeilv [elvan], S with Hermann,

37 b, p. 136 (16). Tovrov: Tov, S W-with Meiser.

37 ¢, p. 136 (18). ois évbexa: [roils évdeka], S with Heindorf.

37 ¢, p. 136 (22). pevrav: pévr av, W.

37 e, p. 137 (4). &orl: Cron following S writes éorlv because of signs of
erasure in B.

37 e, p. 137 (5). Tour’: with Bessarion’s Ms. Cron following S writes
rovro with B.

38 a, p. 138 (12). pdduov: pddia, W. See Wohlrab’s prolegomena, p. 39.

39 b, p. 141 (34). dpAdv: Cobet and S, Vol. V. p. x. édAwv, W following
BT. See Wohlrab in Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 1876, p. 127.

39 b, p. 141 (36). pév mov: Heller proposes pév ovv, which is added by a
later (second) hand in the margin of B and is also the reading of some infe-
rior Mss., which, however, also retain ov.

39¢, p. 142 (7). elpydoacde olopevor: elpydoacdé pe olopevor, S with Winckel-
mann. elpyacfe oldpevo,, W. Hermann added pév after olopevor on the
strength of signs of erasure in B, which were also detected by S.

39 d, p. 143 (14). od yop &o0 : following B according to Gaisford. od ydp
éo0’, S and W, who neither of them make any mention of Gaisford’s report
on the reading of B.

40 a, p. 144 (10). 1 Tov Sawpoviov: [1 Tov Sarpoviov], S with Schleiermacher.

40 ¢, p. 145 (5). Tov Tomov Tou: bracketed as a gloss by S with Hirschig.

41 a, p. 147 (29). é0éAw: with Bessarion’s Ms. Cron following S writes
0¢\w with the best Mss. Here, and Phaedr. 249 b, we have the only two clear
cases where the best Mss. credit Plato with using 8éAw after a word ending in
a consonant.

41 a, p. 147 (30). Tavrd éomw: following S with Bessarion’s Ms. radr
éotly, Cron with best Mss.

 
 

202 CRITICAL NOTES.

41 b, p. 147 (33). 7~évnkev. avriwapaBd\lovri: TéBvnkev, dvrimapaBal-
lov, S.

41 b, p. 148 (34). ékelvav, ds: ékelvov. dos, S.

41 b, p. 148 (35). andés: B. dndrs, W with several Mss.

41 b, p. 148 (36). Tis avrev: with W. The best Mss. read tis dv avrav.
tis 81 avray, Cron with S, who adds the 84 as his own conjecture.

41 b, p. 148 (37). €orm: with Mss. é&orw, Cron and S, because there are
signs of erasure in B, and Venetus 185 (Bekker’s II).

41 b, p. 148 (39). ayovra: B. ayayovra, S W following other Mss.

41 c, p. 148 (46). dAn0q: with all Mss. Cron following S writes dAnfn
éorlv because it is added in the margin of B. S argues against admitting it
in Nov. Comm. p. 161.

42 a, p. 150 (22). wAqv 7: wv el, S following D. The reading of B can
not be made out, but Gaisford and S incline to think it is wv el.

CRITO.

43 a, p. 151 (1). mpg} &rv éorlv: with B. wpa éorlv, S following inferior
Mss. and the Ziirich edition.

43 b, p. 152 (19). vov: von, W.

43 b, p. 152 (20). mwpgws: mwpdws, S following the Mss. The « subscript is

an essential part of the word. See Curtius, Grundziige, No. 379. The Mss.
authorities leave the matter doubtful, though for Plato mpdos is the prevail-
ing orthography. wmpavs is always without «. S has lately made up his mind
to write mpgos even in Plato. See Vol. XII. p. 6.

43 d, p. 153 (33). Ooket . .. new: Sokelv ... 1fEe, S with Buttmann.

43 4, p. 153 (35). Tovtwy [Tév ayyéhwv]: Tovurwy Tov dyye\idy, W.

44 b, p. 155 (3). Evpdopd éotiv: fupdopd éorar, S with Hirschig.

44 b, p. 155 (3). Tov éorepnodar: Sallier. Hermann keeps the Mss. read:
ing cov éorepnodar. Madvig (Adv. p. 368) finds reason for writing cov éore-
pricopas in the strange combination of the inf. and fin. moods by pév and &.
Rieckher reads wp@rov pev cov éoTeproopat.

44 b, p. 155 (5). &ru 8é: ém 84, S. Rieckher strikes out bs before olds Te.

45 b, p. 158 (19). gévo. ovroL évldde: £€vor [ovTor] évBdde, S. Eévor rv év-
0dd¢, W with the explanation praeterea, praeter me. See Fleckeisen’s
Jahrb. 1877, pp. 222 ff. and Cron’s Bem. p. 117. It certainly seems far more
natural to take év@ade as a gloss explaining ovrol than to regard ovrow as a
gloss.

45 b, p. 158 (23). dmokdpys: amokvys, S with Jacobs. Here S, contrary to
his usual practice, has not been able to resist a tempting but unnecessary
emendation.

46 b, p. 161 (4). ov povov viv: ov viv mparov, S with A. Nauck. ‘ee the
preface to the third edition of Cron’s Apology and Crito (p. xiv." ).

CRITICAL NOTES. 203

46 d, p. 162 (19). viv 8: S (XII p. xviii.) proposes to write vuvds follow-
ing B. But see S, VIII. p. 159.

47 a, p. 163 (30). ody ikavas: ovxl kakas, S with Hirschig.

47 a, p. 163 (32). Tas 8 ol: with S. tds 8 ol; [ovdé wdvrwy, da Tav piv,
trav 8 ov;], Cron with W. The words bracketed do not occur in B, and S
rejects them as a confusing interpolation (Nov. Comm. p. 162). They occur
in the margin of B and in inferior Mss.

47 c¢, p. 165 (15). tiv 8cfav kal Tovs émaivovs: Tv Bofav [kal Tovs émal-
vous], S. Tjv Scfav kal Tovs Yoyous kal Tous émwaivovs, Stallbaum. Tovs
Joyous kal Tovs émaivovs, Hirschig.

47 ¢, p. 165 (18). éorl: €or, all editions. But the emphasis should be
carefully kept on 7{, on rot, and on els r{, and not put on the verbs.

47 ¢, p. 165 (20). SuwoMAvow: so it stands corrected in B. 8woMAve, S fol-
lowing inferior Mss.

47 c¢ d, p. 165 (24 ff.). The simpler punctuation of Cron’s seventh edition
has been preferred to that of the eighth. In the latter Cron follows Goebel.

48 b, p. 167 (25). Ania 81 kal Tavra: given to Socrates by W with Butt-
mann. S brackets ¢ain yop dv and makes Crito’s speech include and Aéyes.
Goebel proposes Ana yap 81 kal Tavra, pain y dv, & Zdkpartes. If anything
is to be omitted, a\ndn Aéyews could best be spared.

48 d, p. 169 (15). ovre aAAo: oir el dANo, S with Forster.

48 e, p. 169 (23). meloas oe: with Buttmann. mwetoal oe, W following the
Mss. See Cron’s preface to his first edition of the Apol. and Crito, p. xii.,
also Bem. p. 117 f. Meiser (Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 109, 1, p. 41) favors a change
of order mweical oe, dAAd pn dkovros Tavra wparrew. Goebel urges wavoal
ae, which would, however, be intolerable after wavoat 157.

49 a, p. 170 (4). [dmep kal dprL é\éyero] : Meiser proposes to find room for
this between 1 and masa.

49 b, p. 170 (7). TqAwkoiBe [yépovres] : with Jacobs. TnAikoiBe yépovres, W.
Some authority for not bracketing would perhaps be found in Lach. 180 d.

50 c, p. 175 (2). éppévew: éppevelv, S with Hirschig.

50 d, p. 176 (10). ols vopors: [Tois vopors], S with Hirschig.

50 d, p. 176 (14). wvopor: [vopor], S with Hirschig.

50 e, p. 177 (20). gol: ov is preferred by Buttmann, Stallbaum, Hirschig,
Goebel.

51 a, p. 177 (26). &orar: S. éi€orar, W following the Mss. ég loov €oran,
Hirschig.

51 a, p. 178 (30). 7: #, W following the Mss. §S says the first hand in B
wrote 1. See on 53 ec.

51 d, p. 180 (12). apéokoipev: dpéokopev, S with Madvig.

51 e, p. 181 (19). mweifecOar: meloeobar, S with Buttmann.

52 a, p. 181 (1). o¢, Suwkpates, Tals: B. oé [Swkpares] Tals, S. o¢, &
2k ates, Tals, W.

5 9, p. 181 (11). énAOes, [ote ... ToOpov,] ore: éEnAOes, ovre, S. S gives

 
 

 

 

204 CRITICAL NOTES.

reasons as follows: Verba ér . .. IoO8udv, quae jam Athenaeus 5, 15, legisse
videtur, in marg. add. be, incluserunt Turicenses delevit MS [i.e. Schanz him-
self]. See his Nov. Comm. p. 162.

52 d, p. 182 (28). molvreverfar: B. mo\revoeodar, S with inferior Mss.

53 a, p. 183 (43). &flov... vopwv: bracketed by S with H. Stephanus
and Hirschig, who also both reject ol vopot.

53 a, p. 184 (44). é&upéves: B. {ppevels, SW following the second hand
in B.

53 b, p. 184 (7). Méyapdde: Meydpade, W. Gaisford remarks on Phaedr.
227 d : “péyapdde Fuit péyapa 8¢ p. m.” Is this the reading of B in this pas-
sage also ?

53 c, p. 185 (17). #4: B. 4, SW. Asinbl a, p. 178 (30), where the read-
ing of B is harder to make out, so here also S writes yj. The more vigor-
ous 7 (really) is better suited to the context than +, which simply makes
affirmation a matter of course.

53 e, p. 186 (28). aloxpds: with S and W. Still yAloxpws, which is added
on the margin of B, deserves attention, and perhaps should be preferred. Cf.
in the preceding line (27) the undoubtedly correct peralhdfas, which is on
the margin of B, while in the text we find karaAAdfas, which both S and W

reject.
53 e, p. 186 (32). kal Sovhevov: Ti: kal [Sovhevwv *] Tis, S with Schleier-

macher.

53 e, p. 186 (32). év Oerralie: bracketed by S at Ast’s suggestion.

54 a, p. 187 (41). &mpehtjoovTar avrav, woTepov: [émpehrjoovrar] avrav
ToTEPOV, S.

54 b, p. 187 (1). webopevos piv: Meiser inserts after these words Tols cols
yeniras kal (Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 109, 1, p. 41).

54 d, p. 188 (1). Kplrwv: [Kplrwv], S.