' / 
 
 the euthyphro 
 
 OF 
 
 \ 
 
 PLATO 
 
 / I 
 
 WITH 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES 
 
 BY 
 
 m 
 
 GEORGE HENRY WELLS, M.A., 
 
 Scholar of St. John’s College, Oxford, and Assistant Master at Merchant 
 
 Taylor’s School. 
 
 THIRD EDITION REVISED. 
 
 LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS. 
 
 t 
 
 YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN. 
 
 1884. 
 
LONDON 
 
 R. CLAY, SONS. AND TAYLOR, 
 BREAD STREET HILL. 
 

 TSf. w 
 
 legtf 
 
 «C 
 
 t 
 
 t 
 
 N 
 
 a 
 
 ~7 
 
 AD VENERABILEM ARCHIDIACONUM 
 JACOBUM AUGUSTUM HESSEY, D.C.L., 
 PRECEPTOREM DILECTISSIMUM. 
 
 636350 
 
 I 
 

 PREFACE. 
 
 The value of the Euthyphro as a specimen of 
 Platonic writing has been fully recognised by scholars; 
 its greatest defect being, perhaps, its brevity ; and it 
 has seemed to the writer that, if well mastered, the 
 
 Dialogue will serve as an excellent introduction to the 
 
 % 
 
 larger and more advanced compositions of Plato. 
 
 The writer of these Notes thanks most sincerely those 
 who have, by their countenance or recommendations, 
 enabled him to give his work to the public ; especially 
 Bev. C. T. Cruttwell, Head Master of Bradfield College, 
 Dr. Huckin, of Bepton School, Dr. Baker, of Merchant 
 Taylors’ School, Dr. Gallop, of Christ’s College, 
 Finchley, and Bev. A. J. Church, of Betford School. 
 He is also much indebted to his colleague, A D. 
 Godley, Esq., for valuable assistance in revision of 
 
 Bradfield, 
 
 December 1879. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 4 > 
 
 INTRODUCTION.1 
 
 TEXT AND NOTES.19 
 
 EXCURSUS 65 
 
THE EUTHYPHRO OF PLATO. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 “ In the Meno , Anytus had parted from Socrates with 
 the threatening words, that ‘ in any city, and particularly 
 in the city of Athens, it is easier to do men harm than 
 to do them good : ’ and Socrates was anticipating another 
 opportunity of talking with him. In the Euthyphro , 
 ■i Socrates is already awaiting his trial for impiety in the 
 porch of the king Archon. But before the trial pro¬ 
 ceeds Plato would like to put the world on their trial, 
 and convince them of ignorance in that very matter 
 touching which Socrates is accused. An incident which 
 may perhaps really have occurred in the family of 
 Euthyphro, a learned Athenian diviner and soothsayer, 
 furnishes the occasion of the discussion.” 
 
 In these words Professor Jowett opens his intro¬ 
 duction to the dialogue of the Euthyphro, one of the 
 smaller but not less interesting dialogues which are 
 concerned with the trial and condemnation of Socrates 
 on a charge of impiety. To grasp the bearing of the 
 dialogue, and to realise fully the circumstances of it, it 
 will be well to glance shortly at the history of Greek 
 religious thought, at the phenomenon of Socrates and 
 his method of inquiry, and at the collision, as Plato 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 gives it, between the Athenian philosopher and the 
 Athenian Conservatives. 
 
 And first, with regard to the origin and progress of 
 religious inquiry in Greece, we must look back to the 
 mythical Greece of Achilles, of Theseus, and of Aga¬ 
 memnon, as a country where the king rules, the priests 
 perform religious offices, and the people obey both, as 
 a matter of course, and as an obedience to tradition. 
 The kings and the priests rule because they have found 
 power placed in their hands, and the people obey because 
 it has never occurred to them to do otherwise, or to 
 question the divine right of kings— 
 
 o'tre de/xiarras 
 
 7r pbs Aids tlovarai, 1 
 
 nor to dispute the propriety of religious observances. 
 They were taught that the man who did his duty to his 
 country and his country’s gods was sure to prosper, that 
 he would be deoTg (piXog, just as one who trespassed 
 was QeoTq Such was the religious attitude, un- 
 
 inquiring and restful. 
 
 By far the most important part of religion at this 
 period was the observance of outward forms 2 —forms 
 which marked the worshipper as a true brother and 
 member of the state under whose auspices they were 
 performed ; just as in the subdivisions of the state—the 
 yparpicu or gentes —there were solemn sacrifices offered 
 at stated times when the presence of all heads of houses 
 — t pparepeg or clansmen—was required. In an early stage 
 of civilisation such a mode of expressing confraternity 
 was felt to be necessary, to prevent schism in the state 
 and guarantee security by vows of mutual defence and 
 good offices. This junction of the religious and clannish 
 
 1 II. 1, 239. 2 See Note A, at end. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 S 
 
 sentiment made the former more interesting and the 
 latter more sacred. And such was religion in its civil 
 or political aspect. But if we turn to the side of religion 
 which respected the individual—the subjective side— 
 what do we find! We find that the belief of which 
 these outward forms and observances were the symbols, 
 was—at any rate with respect to the gods—the secondary 
 and the minor consideration. Belief, actively exercised, 
 scarcely occurred to the worshipper of this period ; and, 
 if it did occur, had little importance attached to it. 
 
 Nor was it required as long as this unquestioning, 
 obedient attitude was preserved towards religion. The 
 prayers and sacrifices were regularly made ; and, al¬ 
 though certain gods might be less respected than others 
 for their cowardice or lust, still such anthropomorphism 
 made the religion easier of acceptance as a whole. If 
 it had occurred to a Greek of this age we are considering 
 to say, “ These gods are nought,” he would have been 
 laughed at, more for his inaptness than his impiety. 
 “ At any rate,” the reply would have been, “ they are 
 the gods to whom our fathers prayed, and they were 
 prosperous upon the earth : why then should not we 
 follow them'? Let well alone.” Such a question was 
 not suited to that age : the mind was not in a stage to 
 receive such a consideration as the existence or non¬ 
 existence of the gods. 
 
 But the inherent activity of the Greek intellect soon 
 began to move from this resting-place, stimulated pro¬ 
 bably by contact with the culture and science of Egypt. 
 The birth of Thales, commonly known as the first Ionic 
 philosopher, or physicist, an Ionian, is placed about 
 639 b.c. In him w T e see the beginning of a new stage 
 of thought, viz. that of scientific inquiry. This inquiry 
 took at first the direction of physics. Such a man as 
 
4 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Thales would have looked round upon the universe and 
 said to himself, “ What and whence is all this % ” And 
 inquiries of this kind continued to be made with more 
 or less assiduity down to the time we are specially con¬ 
 sidering and beyond. The question, then arises—“ How 
 did such inquiries affect popular beliefs and popular 
 theology ? ” To answer this question we must ask first — 
 
 “ Who was the embodiment of the old religion ] and what 
 was the conception of Deity ] ” And we shall find that 
 the ultimate authority, the supreme being, of religious 
 contemplation was Zeus, in effect a glorified man, not 
 very remote from the popular conception of a Hercules 
 or a Theseus. True, behind Zeus there sometimes 
 peeped out a still more important authority—Fate, 
 Dire Necessity; but practically the religious horizon 
 was bounded by the conception called Zeus. He was 
 77art)p dvSpbiv re Bedj v te : and the Greeks said of them¬ 
 selves, ’E k &lgq eijfjLEv. Now when men began to specu¬ 
 late, the authority of Zeus, like the authority of all 
 other matters of traditional acceptance, came to be 
 questioned. And other sources of all existence began 
 to be looked for instead of the god Zeus, the only 
 quality which was preserved from the conception of a 
 god being that of unity. So for cloud-compelling Zeus 
 one physicist substituted water as the origin of all 
 things, and another matter , a third air ; again we have 
 a higher ideal of being , and of mind , of number , and of 
 change. Z evg bang ttot fortv, 1 exclaims the chorus of 
 old Argive senators in the Agamemnon of ^Eschylus;— 
 
 “ Zeus whoever he may be,” implying an instability of 
 belief in a personal God that seems marvellously out of * 
 place in Athens the home of gods—an instability ex¬ 
 emplified in many other passages in the earliest writers. 
 
 1 JEsch. Ag. 160. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 5 
 
 If such speculations, on the origin of existence as affect¬ 
 ing popular beliefs and traditions, had been confined to 
 the chamber of the speculator, their result might have 
 been considerably retarded but hardly suppressed. As 
 it was, they were not concealed but given to the world. 
 The men who speculated were generally prominent 
 characters, being attached to the court and person of 
 some tyrant or leading politician; and from such a 
 position the propagation of their ideas was easy. But 
 as long as these ideas were entertained and these 
 inquiries were conducted under the protection and with 
 the countenance of powerful patrons, the propagation 
 was but limited. Such inquiries did not touch the bulk 
 of the citizens, who were not amenable to the philoso¬ 
 phers’ influence, but were confined to the court of the 
 tyrant or the clique of the minister. They were the 
 relaxation of the learned, not the gospel for the 
 ignorant. Such was the position occupied by the 
 earlier philosophers. 
 
 Passing on next to that period when despotism was 
 everywhere making room for democracy, we find philo¬ 
 sophy in bad case; and, in this regard, democracy shows 
 more tyrannical than tyranny. For what tyranny had 
 countenanced or encouraged—viz. freedom of speculation 
 —democracy, in its puristic care of the children of the 
 state, would not hear of. Let us illustrate this change 
 of bearing by an example. Anaxagoras, born c. b.c. 500, 
 was an Ionian, settled at Athens, and the friend of 
 Pericles. He had elaborated a system of philosophy in 
 his mind, which left him no interest in politics. This 
 want of political taste was, as we know, a heinous fault 
 in a Greek state. Even Solon, the equitable lawgiver, 
 had forbidden citizens to “ be of no side ” in a political 
 contest, although Solon knew veil that political contests 
 
 i 
 
6 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 frequently were settled only by civil war. In conformity 
 with these facts Anaxagoras was marked out as a man 
 worthy of indictment; and notice what the indictment 
 was. Not merely that he was guilty of impiety—that 
 he had enthroned Note as Lord and Father of all things 
 in the stead of Zeus—but that he was guilty of sedition. 
 He was accused of Medism, i.e . of Persian proclivities, 
 when, as Maurice remarks, “ probably the fact that there 
 was such an empire as the Persian existing had escaped 
 him.” Re was in consequence obliged to fly from 
 Athens, and Pericles’ reputation suffered a temporary 
 eclipse from supposed complicity with the dangerous 
 philosopher. 
 
 We have, then, in Greek thought at this time the 
 onward moving and the retarding element. Let us 
 examine them. The Greek word expressing sedition, 
 or revolutionary tendencies, is ; to be a 
 
 seditious person is Kaivi^eiv or i.e. a pro- 
 
 mulgator of new things. This word, bearing as it 
 usually does a bad sense, embodies at once the con¬ 
 servatism (implied in the condemnatory use of the 
 word) and a more important trait of the Greek mind, 
 wnich we may call the Inquisitive, the Radical, or the 
 Destructive, in whichever light we may regard it. The 
 person who uses the word re^Tepta/uLOQ disapproves of 
 the vzwTEpiGTriQ, who is none the less a fact in Greek 
 politics and Greek society. This latter trait was really 
 the stronger, and became ultimately the pervading one 
 in Greece; but the conservative element was strong also 
 and died hard, numbering amongst its defenders such 
 champions as Aristophanes. In a matter of life and 
 death—for such was this struggle regarded at any rate 
 by the Conservatives—it is not to be wondered at if the 
 blows were not always well directed, or if they did not 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 7 
 
 always hit the mark intended. Such a misdirected blow 
 •—to carry on the metaphor—was the prosecution of 
 Socrates for impiety by Meletus, Anytus, and Lyco. 
 These prosecutors were men striking in the dark : they 
 could feel that Socrates was a* prominent and an assail¬ 
 able figure, and so they struck, but scarcely knew why. 
 Like Anaxagoras, Socrates was a philosopher; like him, 
 also, Socrates was prosecuted for impiety. But before 
 showing how this dialogue with Euthyphro springs out 
 of the story of Socrates’ indictment, we must pause to 
 speak a few words about this unique and soul-stirring 
 character, Socrates. 
 
 Socrates, son of Sophroniscus, was an Athenian citizen, 
 born c. b.c. 468. He was of a constitution extraordi¬ 
 narily robust, and of an unprepossessing appearance. 
 He had served with credit in military campaigns at 
 Potidsea, Delium, and Amphipolis; and he had taken 
 part in public trials and in legislation. In the latter 
 department he had gained a character of strict impar¬ 
 tiality with some, and of obstinacy with most of the 
 Athenians, owing to his rigorous obedience to his prin¬ 
 ciple. He was, in one word, a man of strong conviction 
 —that is the keynote to his character; and perhaps we 
 shall not err in saying that the strength of his con¬ 
 victions was never surpassed by that of any other man. 
 He attributed this strength of his convictions to a 
 supernatural, accompanying influence, which he called 
 his laifjioviovy or spirit. What is conveyed exactly by 
 this term is hard to say. Plato’s account of it is as 
 follows : that it was a or monitorial voice, that 
 
 it had been with him from a child, that it prevented 
 him from taking part in politics, and that it never 
 originated action, but only prevented particular acts. 
 del d7rorpe7rei 7rpoTpe7rei tie ovnoTt. Socrates himself 
 
8 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 looked upon it as a direct spiritual deterrent, to guard 
 him from wrong acts which ignorance or rashness might 
 suggest, to the temporary subjection of his better judg¬ 
 ment. The Christian will see in it a strong similarity 
 to the voice of conscience. Dr. Riddell’s note in his 
 edition of the Apologia gives a full account of the 
 passages bearing on the subject, and will be consulted 
 with advantage. Socrates’ psychological history was 
 given as follows by himself : he had a great desire for 
 wisdom and knowledge, in the search for which he 
 never rested. But he found it so difficult of acquire¬ 
 ment that he was nearly in despair. For in his search, 
 although he approached, as was natural, all kinds of 
 men with reputations for wisdom and for knowledge, 
 scientific and otherwise, he found that—to use his own 
 expression—they all of them knew nothing and yet 
 thought they did. And this discovery, by the way, con¬ 
 firmed his belief in the Delphic oracle (see Note B, at 
 end), from which he had learnt with surprise that he was 
 himself the wisest man on earth. “ For,” he concluded 
 “ if all these would-be wise men say that they know 
 and know not, then I, who do not know, but confess 
 my ignorance, am in this respect wiser than them all.” 
 A negative conclusion, and one eminently characteristic 
 of Socrates. He then made it the business of his life 
 in the first place to convict men of their ignorance, and 
 in the second to supply as much positive knowledge as 
 could be educed from conversational intercourse between 
 himself, his followers and friends, and the Athenian 
 public. He did not arrogate the title and position of 
 teacher in these conversations, or rather conversaziones ; 
 he was rather the director, who encouraged the con¬ 
 versation and pointed out who was on the right track, 
 and where error lay. He met every man on equal 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 9 
 
 ground, presupposed no superior information in him¬ 
 self, but rather seemed to give others credit for it, and 
 endeavoured by a method of conversational argument, 
 as logical as the age permitted, to set in their true light 
 and reduce to their truest form, any statements that 
 might be hazarded by the speaker or might appear 
 in the course of the conversation. A favourite means 
 of bringing out the ignorance of a dogmatic conversa¬ 
 tionist was this affected ignorance of Socrates—his 
 Eipcjyeiu, as it was called. By putting forward his 
 ignorance, he would lead the other speaker on to rash 
 assertions, the falsity of which could be easily demon¬ 
 strated by a rigorous application of logic, thereby 
 confuting positions which might often have been held 
 by less aggressive advocates of their soundness. Another 
 point of importance in Socrates’ method is his recog¬ 
 nition of the value of definition. “ Define Piety,” says 
 Socrates. The answer is, “ Piety is doing as I am now 
 doing, viz. bringing a guilty man to justice.” “No; 
 that is pious,” replies Socrates; “a particular act of 
 piety, not piety itself.” In this word-fencing, which 
 bears so conspicuous a part in the dialogues of Plato, 
 Socrates is not always strictly consistent: he is not 
 above using a little quibbling here and there to convict 
 a man of false statement, so long as he is convicted. 1 
 And to finish our sketch of Socrates as the dialectician, 
 we must not omit a pleasant trait 2 —his repugnance to 
 the idea of taking money for his teaching ; nor his 
 humour ; 3 nor the unbounded patience with which he 
 brought out a conclusion or demonstrated an error. It 
 remains to say a word upon the outcome of Socrates’ 
 practice of conversation in Athens. The immediate 
 outcome was the death of Socrates. And why] We 
 
 1 v . not . ad c. xv. 2 c. iii. 3 ch. L 
 
 i 
 
10 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 have seen the age of inquiry succeeding the age of belief 
 and repose. We hear Athenian veujTepiZovTEc asking of 
 everything—“ Why is this so ? What authority have 
 we for this statement, that institution ] ” Socrates lived 
 in the very melee of such an age. Since the philosophers 
 and poets had first started the ball of inquiry, it had 
 been rolling with ever-increasing velocity, shaking and 
 overturning everything that could not offer a firm re¬ 
 sistance. Inquiry is a noble right of mankind, but, 
 like all rights, is liable to perversion. Such perversion 
 follows when the inquirers are unscrupulous, depraved, 
 or ignorant. Socrates represents the enlightened in¬ 
 quirer ; he was taken for the depraved one. Of this 
 latter type specimens abounded, who were guilty of the 
 moral iconoclasm, the excesses, the perversions of youth, 
 the stupid insubordination to constituted authority, of 
 which Socrates and his friends were accused, and for 
 which Socrates paid the penalty of death. To conclude : 
 we might not inaptly term the period of Socrates' accu¬ 
 sation and death the Athenian Revolution ; for in the 
 mental history of mankind ib was the culmination of 
 the greatest movement the world has ever seen. At 
 that time philosophy, literature, psychology, and 
 science were receiving a direction and an influence 
 the effect of which has by no means yet ceased to be 
 felt. 
 
 Whatever doubts may have been thrown on the 
 authenticity of the Euthyphro as a genuine Platonic 
 dialogue can hardly fail to be dispelled on its perusal. 
 In its masterly delineation of character, its perspicuity 
 of style, its grasp of dialectic, and its elucidation of 
 truth by the confutation of error, it is worthy of a place 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 11 
 
 by the side of the best of Plato’s dialogues, and although 
 one of the shortest, it is one of the most typical. Here 
 are the Socratic logic, the Socratic eipujvti a, the protest 
 against the popular theology, the conception of unity in 
 plurality, the antagonism against spurious knowledge, 
 and the “ conclusion where nothing is concluded ”—all 
 embraced in a short conversation of a few pages. The 
 dialogue arises out of the prosecution of Socrates on a 
 charge of impiety by Meletus, Anytus, and Lyco. In 
 the words of Professor Jowett, quoted above, Plato 
 would like to try the world for impiety before the 
 world proceeds to try Socrates. And Plato takes, as 
 a representative of the world, the Athenian world, that 
 is, a man, Euthyphro. His character is best unfolded 
 by the dialogue itself. He is what we might term a 
 religionist—a man of forms and ceremonies, of an 
 antiquated and outrageous theology, and of incurable 
 prejudice. Plato introduces him to us as a prosecutor 
 in a suit of painful grotesqueness—the prosecution of 
 his own father for murder. 
 
 To explain this apparently outrageous conception, we 
 must suggest that Plato has taken Euthyphro as a type 
 of the Athenians themselves, and is attempting to put 
 before the Athenians their own inconsistency, and has 
 donned for the nonce the comic mask of Aristophanes. 
 Just as, in the comedy of The Clouds, Aristophanes had 
 represented a son beating his father as a result of 
 sophistic teaching, so here Plato would remind the 
 Athenians that their own theology and legislation can 
 be, and is, brought to an absurdity and a caricature in 
 the hands of its bigoted and unthinking professors. 
 Socrates in this dialogue says, in effect: “ You prose¬ 
 cute me for impiety, so be it; but are you free from 
 
12 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the charge of impiety yourselves, Athenians ? The tales, 
 the immoral and blasphemous tales, which make up a 
 large part of your religion, so-called, are impiety, not 
 my teaching, which would drive such abominations out 
 of religion, and which you call radical, unconstitutional, 
 and corrupting.” 
 
 In Euthyphro then we have a picture of the conserva¬ 
 tive Athenian who is perfectly satisfied with his own 
 religion, no matter into what glaring absurdities it may 
 lead him. Now to see in what manner Socrates en¬ 
 counters this incarnation of bigotry and into what 
 questions he attempts to lead the mind of the bigot. 
 The main idea running through the Euthyjihro would 
 seem to be of this tenor. To define piety is impossible ; 
 we cannot say what is holy, but we can act it; and 
 therefore let every man try to be pious and serve God, 
 and not lay down the law about piety. Euthyphro, on 
 the contrary, is quite ready to define piety or anything 
 else with which religion is concerned, and Socrates, in 
 his usual way, humours him and requests a definition. 
 But the definition given is soon shown to be inadequate, 
 and another is requested, and a third. In the first, 
 Euthyphro says, “ Piety is doing what I am now doing/’ 
 Next, a Piety is that which is dear to the gods, or to all 
 the gods .’ 9 Thirdly, “ Piety is attention to the gods.” 
 And when for the third time he is shown to have given 
 an inadequate rule of piety, he does not take his failure 
 to heart; he does not say, “ I confess I know nothing cer¬ 
 tain about piety; pray teach me.” No ! he is content to 
 leave certain knowledge alone, and go on in his own 
 pretentious and superficial creed. He goes his way into 
 the law court to contest against his own father the law 
 as he reads it, and Socrates goes his : not however to 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 13 
 
 contest in a law court, but to search the wide w^orld for 
 an answer to his unceasing inquiry, “ What is Right ? 
 Is there a man on earth who can tell me 1 ’ ’ until the 
 Athenians weary of this questioner who is a reproach 
 to their city and their creed, silencing his eloquent and 
 earnest converse in the tomb. 
 
ANALYSIS. 
 
 Eu. What has brought you to the Jaw court, Socrates ? 
 
 Soc. An impeachment of corrupting the youth, 
 Euthyphro, preferred by one Meletus, a clever lad; he 
 is reforming the state, and begins by reforming me. He 
 says I make new gods. 
 
 Eu . Ah ! the Athenians will not listen to what I 
 have to say on that subject; they laugh. 
 
 Soc. I wish they would only laugh, if they would 
 hear as well. Well, and what is your suit? 
 
 Eu. I am prosecuting my father for murder. 
 
 Soc. Good heavens ! Y> 7 hat a theologian, if you can 
 do that without fear of heaven’s vengeance ! 
 
 Eu. My dear Socrates, in a case of right and wrong, 
 relationship has no place. My father killed a hired 
 servant (a murderer himself) by wilfully neglecting him 
 in chains. 
 
 Soc. Then if you are so certain that you are right, be 
 my champion and be my reference; when they prosecute 
 me, I will say, Here is Euthyphro, he knows that I am 
 not wrong; fight out the question with him. Now 
 tell me what is holiness and unholiness. 
 
 Eu. That which I am now doing in my prosecution, 
 Socrates, is holy, just as Zeus acted towards Cronus, and 
 Cronus towards Ouranus. 
 
ANALYSIS. 
 
 15 
 
 Soc. Why ! do you believe all that ? Do you think 
 the gods fought and quarrelled as people say ? 
 
 Eu. Certainly I do. 
 
 Soc. Really. But you didn’t tell me what holiness 
 is—you said, “ This particular thing is holy.” Now 
 that doesn’t tell me what holiness is. What is the 
 general definition of holiness ? 
 
 Eu. Oh! holiness is that which is dear to the gods, 
 and vice versd. 
 
 Soc. Stay ! You said that the gods disputed, did you 
 not ? Then how are we to know, if they dispute, what 
 is holy and what is unholy, for they will have different 
 opinions ? And it is not on minor questions, just as if 
 you and I were to differ on a question of dates, but on 
 the most important questions of faith and morals that 
 they will differ. 
 
 Eu. They could never differ about justice being done, 
 for instance. 
 
 Soc. No more do men; they are all anxious for justice 
 to be done. The difficulty is what is the right 1 what is 
 justice ? When they are agreed on that, men and gods, 
 they will do it, and not before. So you have not given 
 me a rule for finding holiness. Shall we say what all 
 the gods love is holy, and what they all detest, unholy $ 
 
 Eu. Yes. 
 
 Soc. Is the holy loved by the gods because holy, or 
 holy because loved by the gods ? 
 
 Eu. I don’t follow. 
 
 Soc. Try in this way : everything borne, led, seen, 
 become, loved, implies something that bears, leads, sees* 
 makes, loves. And this something is prior to the other. 
 Therefore, “the gods love,” is a prior notion to “loved 
 by the gods.” Therefore also the gods do not love 
 because a thing is god-beloved ; they love a thing for 
 
ANALYSIS. 
 
 some other reason. And this other reason will imply a 
 notion prior to the gods loving, just as the gods loving 
 is prior to the notion god-beloved. 
 
 Then if you grant that the gods love holiness because 
 it is holy, we shall have these three notions in order of 
 priority and extension :— 
 
 (1) Holiness. 
 
 (2) The gods loving. 
 
 (3) God-beloved. 
 
 From these we will draw our deductions. And I am 
 proving that holiness is not merely the same as god- 
 beloved, as you say. For, 
 
 (1) If holiness and god-beloved were the same, 
 
 Then holiness would be a posterior notion to the gods 
 
 loving ; 
 
 But holiness is a prior notion to the gods loving. 
 
 Therefore it is not the same with the god-beloved. 
 
 (2) If the god-beloved and holiness were the same, 
 
 Then the god-beloved would be a prior notion to gods 
 
 loving ; 
 
 But the god beloved has been proved to be a posterior 
 notion to gods loving, 
 
 Therefore it is not the same with holiness. 
 
 So that you have not defined me holiness even now. 
 
 Eu> You are a Dsedalus ; you make the argument act 
 like a moving creature, 
 
 Soc . No, it is you; but let us go on. Justice and 
 holiness are not the same thing, are they 1 All holiness 
 is just ; but it does not follow that all justice is holy. 
 Just as it is true that all reverence implies fear; but 
 not true that all fear implies reverence. 
 
 Cannot we then get a definition of holiness by seeing 
 what part of justice it is. 
 
ANALYSIS. 
 
 17 
 
 Eu. Oh, yes; holiness is that justice which attends 
 to the gods. 
 
 Soc. Attends to them ? As men attend to dogs and 
 horses, <fcc., to make them better and finer. But how 
 do we make the gods better and finer; or help them to 
 do great deeds, as the physicians’ art helps them to cure 
 sick people 1 
 
 _ • 
 
 Eu. I don’t know. If you do your duty in the way 
 of sacrifices and prayers, you will be prosperous and you 
 wfill be holy. 
 
 Soc. Oh ! I see ; holiness is the science of giving and 
 taking with the gods, a sort of business % 
 
 Eu. Business, if you like—we give them honour and 
 glory. 
 
 Soc. Things that please them, in fact. 
 
 Eu. Certainly. 
 
 Soc. Ah ! but we proved that holiness was not that 
 which pleased the gods, the god-beloved, in fact. 
 
 Eu. Daedalus again; you have brought it round once 
 more. I must be off. Good morning. 
 
 Soc. Alack ! alack ! I thought I was to be told how 
 to live and please heaven. 
 
 <5 
 
nAATONOS EY0Y<PPON. 
 
 CAP. I. 
 
 TV vedrepov, 0) ScofcpaTes, yeyovev, otl av ra? ev steph. 
 A v/ceicp KCLTaXnriov Biarpifids ivOdhe vvv hiaTpifieis ~ 
 
 7 repl rrjv rov fiacnXecos arodv ; ov yap ttov real ooi 
 ye Bitcy rt? ovaa rvyyavei 77*^09 rov 6aai\ea odaireo 
 ifiou 
 
 212 . Ovtol Brj \6rjvaloi ye f co TLvdinfipov, Bifcrjv 
 avTrjV koXovglv , aXka ypacfrtfv. 
 
 vecorepov. Stallbaum finds this 
 use of tlie comparative, i.e., 
 newer than we already have, 
 “novo novius,” especially natu¬ 
 ral to the Athenians, who were 
 always telling or hearing some 
 new thing. But forms like 
 “ssepius” will illustrate it 
 better. 
 
 ev Ai iKelcp ... SC. yvfivaalto. 
 The colonnades of the gymnasia 
 were the resort of philosophers. 
 This gymnasium was so called 
 from the neighbouring temple 
 of Apollo Lyceus. 
 
 biarpifids. This word seems to 
 combine the meanings of haunts 
 and pursuits. The latter is 
 preferable. 
 
 fiaotAecas crrodi/. The erroa is 
 that of Zeus Eleutherius ; the 
 fiao'iAevs itt that archon whose 
 duties were religious, who pre¬ 
 
 sided over prosecutions for im¬ 
 piety or murder. Compare 
 Theaetetus ad fin., vvv fiev oZv 
 dvavTriTedv fioi els rr)v rov /3aai- 
 Aecos (TToav eirl tt)v MeAyrov 
 ypa<p7)v r\v fie yeypairrai. (The 
 Lyceum and Eleutherium were 
 at opposite points of the 
 city.) 
 
 kcl\ <tol 76 . . . overa rvyydvei . 
 “You have not, 1 suppose, as 
 well as 1 . . .” 
 
 ov . . . Zlkt]v . . . o.AAa ypaiprjv. 
 ypa<py\ is used only of a public 
 prosecution, under which head 
 fell those tried by the fiao-iAevs : 
 Slur) is the general term. Its 
 first sense (which we find in the 
 next sentence) is “bill of accu¬ 
 sation,” lodged with the magis¬ 
 trate. Thus yeyportraif “lias 
 had a bill entered,” middle 
 voice. 
 
20 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 ETG. Tt r/j/ys'; <ypa<f>r)v <^z zn, €OLfC€) yeypa- 
 tct at ; ov yap i^elvo ye tcaTayvcbaopLac, G09 <jv ye 
 erepov ; 
 
 B 212 . Ou 7 ap o 5 j/. 
 
 ET0. XXXa ere aXXo 9 ; 
 
 212. n dvu 76. 
 
 ET0. Tk o5ro? ; 
 
 212. OuS’ auT 09 7rapu ytyvcoaKco, go E vOvcppov, 
 tov avhpa' veo<; yap Tt9 p^oi (fraiverai /cal ayvco^ 
 ovopba^ovai puevTOi avTOv , a>9 eycbpiai, M eXrjrov. earl 
 he tov hrjpiov UiTOevs, eu Tiva va> exec? Hirdea MeX?;- 
 tov , olo^ T€TavoTpcx a ical ov ttclvv evyevecov, eVt- 
 ypvirov he. 
 
 ET0. O v/c ivvoco , co 'Sco/cpaTes. aXXa S 77 rtVa 
 7 pa<firjv ere yeypaiTTCu ; 
 
 C 212. ^HvT^a; ou/c dyevvrj, doseptoiye ho/cel * to 7«p 
 
 B. ov ydp, &c. “For I will 
 not suspect you of bringing an 
 action against any one.” Lit., 
 “ For 1 will not think that badly 
 of you (as might be vulgarly 
 said) that you are accusing 
 another. ” 
 
 ovv. If there is any logical 
 sequence in the use of this par¬ 
 ticle, we must understand some 
 such ellipse as, “You know me 
 well, and so cannot suspect me 
 of that,” i.e. “of course not.” 
 
 Notice that ttclvv tl is gene¬ 
 rally found with a negative. 
 dyvws, passive, “obscure.” 
 /xeWoi, adversative particle. 
 “ But his name ...” 
 
 eVrt be rbv br\p.ov, called by 
 Jelf (579, 4) the adverbial accu¬ 
 sative, because it limits or de¬ 
 fines the verbal notion of being. 
 Of. Her. 6, 83, KAtaz/Spos yevos 
 eh' $Lya\evs air’ ApKabirjs. 
 
 ei Tiva vcp ex^Ls. “ If you re¬ 
 member.” Thus Socrates in the 
 Republic (490 A), when re¬ 
 capitulating, says riyeiro be, el 
 vcp ex €LS > d\rjdeLa. 
 
 Oiw T6T., %.e. TOIOVTOV OS €(TTL 
 
 reravddpi^, cf. Thuc. 7, 21, irpbs 
 avbpas roAfjLTipovs, o'Lovs Kal 
 ’ Adrjvalovs, and Soph. Trach. 443, 
 7 T 60s 5’ OV X& T *P aS (sc. &PX ei ) 
 o'lasy' efjiov. It is a species of the 
 common attraction of the relative 
 to the case of the antecedent. 
 
 reravor. with long straight 
 hair. ov ttclvv evy. implying 
 youth. 
 
 eTviypvivov. Cf. 474 Rep. C., 
 tov 5e t b ypviTov fia cti\ik 6 v <pare 
 elvai. 
 
 r\vTiva> &c. Through this 
 statement of Socrates runs a 
 vein of that quiet but suggestive 
 and biting irony in which ho 
 is unequalled. This is not 
 
ETOr$PI2N. 
 
 21 
 
 veov ovtcl toctovtov irpayfia iyvcofcovat ov (fravXov 
 i<TTLV. i/cecvos ydp, C 09 $rjcnv, oZSe, tlvcl rpoirov oi 
 veoL Sca(j)detpovTaL /cal rive? oi SiatyOeipovTes avrovs. 
 Kal Kivhvvevei <ro0o9 Tt9 eiuai' /cal rrjv ipirjv afxaOLav 
 kutcSoov cE >9 hia^deipovTO^ 7 * 01)9 rjXi/cuoTa^ avrov , 
 epyeTCbi /carrjyopriacov pcov y wcnrep 7rpo9 pbrjrepa, 7rpo9 
 T?)^ 7 ToXiV. /cal (fraLVGTai pLOL TCOV 7 ro\LTL/CO)V pLOVO? 
 ap^eadat opO a>9* dpOcbs yap ian tcjv vecav 7 rpcorov D 
 kTTifJieXrjOrjvaij 0770)9 eaovTai 6 tl aptaroc , coajrep 
 yecopyov ayaOov twv vecov cfrvTcbv ei/cos 7rpS)T0v eirt- 
 y JbeXrjdrjvdL , yae7*d Se roOro /cal tcoz/ aXXcov' /cal S?) 
 /cal MeA,?yT09 lVo)9 TTpobrov /aev rjpbcis e/acaOalpei, rov 9 
 Tcay vecoj/ Ta9 ySXdcrTa9 StacfrOeipovTas, W9 (frrjaLV 
 eiretTa puera tovto SrjXov, otc tcov 7rpea/3vrep(ov 
 
 elpcaveia, which was a dialectical 
 process. 
 
 C. rb . . iyvcaKevai. These 
 words form the subject of the 
 sentence: “A young man de¬ 
 termining upon such an impor¬ 
 tant step.” But translate, “ It 
 is no mean enterprise for a young 
 man,” &c. 
 
 bia<p9. This corrupting in¬ 
 fluence must usually be taken 
 of the moral side of a man’s 
 nature, though it trenches some¬ 
 times on the intellectual. 
 
 us Bia(pd. Understand £/jlov 
 from £fX 7 ]u. 
 
 Trpbs tt]v p.’qrepa. So Thrasy- 
 machus, in the Republic, when 
 he is augered with Socrates for 
 worsting him in argument, says, 
 “ Have you a nurse, Socrates ? ” 
 EtVe pLoi , e</>77, w ’XcaKpares, rirdij 
 aoi eariv ; 
 
 TToAiriKiav. Jowett, “our 
 political men.” Stallb. and Mat - 
 thiae, “politics.” The latter 
 seems preferable, which will 
 then depend on apxeadcu. 
 
 D. opOws yap . . . Supply 
 ttoAltikcov apx^adai, “For the 
 right way to begin .... is 
 to . . ” 
 
 4 Trt/jLe\ 7 ] 6 ijvai. The middle 
 here should be brought out; its 
 force, “ apply one’s self to,” e.cj. 
 
 eaovrai. .Notice this realistic 
 future (instead of an ordinary 
 conjunctive) pointing to the cer¬ 
 tain result of a proper training. 
 elrcos, sc. eari. 
 
 Kal 5 r) Kal MeA^Tos. ““Well 
 then, Meletus also,” sc. in his 
 moral and political husbandry : 
 the particles mark the transition 
 from the simile to the reality. 
 
 ftrcos. Here again the sar¬ 
 casm peeps out = “no doubt.” 
 
 ras pAaaras. Keeping up 
 the metaphor, “these young 
 sprigs.” 
 
 eKKad. This word, from the 
 special sense of cleansing, has 
 come to be applied to any re¬ 
 moval of superfluous or objec¬ 
 tionable matter, and is used of 
 finishing a statue, ridding & laud 
 
22 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 €7rip.€\7)0el<; TrAeiaToiv /cal pueybaTcov dya6o)v amo? 
 rf) 7 roXei <yevrjcreTcu y w<? ye to eircos $jvpb(3r)vab i/c 
 TOiavTrjs apxVS dp^apbevcp. 
 
 CAP. II. 
 
 ET0. BovXobpbrjv av y 3) Sco/cpaTes, d\V oppcohco f 
 pit] TovvavTLOv yevrjraL. dre^va >9 yap pbob ho/cel d(f> 
 eGTLas apx^o'Oab /ca/covpyelv rqv 7 to\lv, eV^e^ptov 
 dhb/celv ere. /cal pbob Xeye, tl /cal Troiovvrd ere cprjcri 
 Sicicpdeipecv rod? veovs ; 
 
 B 212 . ’’Arona, c 2 Oavpbdcne , a>9 ovtco y d/covaab . 
 c brjal yap pie 7 TOL 7 ]rrjv elvab deebv , /cal co? /cabvov 9 
 Trobovvra Oeov 9, tgu9 S’ ap^aiov 9 oi 5 vopbi^ovra eypd- 
 \jraro tovtcov avreov eve/ca , <#9 (frrjabv. 
 
 ET0. Malaga), co 'hejb/epares' orb hr) erv to 
 
 of pests, clearing an account, 
 washing the interior of a corpse 
 for preservation. 
 
 to et’/cos. Implying a reference 
 to the particular case in hand : 
 “the natural result,” opposed 
 to ehc 6 s, “likely.” 
 
 arex^cos, “without art,” i.e. 
 “ simply ” or “ plainly.” With 
 this adverb join d<£>’ earlas. For 
 the expression, compare Ar. 
 Yesp. 846— 
 
 a\\ } 'Lva. 
 
 ’ A(}> kffTLOLS apx^^ievos €7TlTp:\J/CO 
 nva. 
 
 tl kglI t. “ Quid tandem faci- 
 lentem,” Stallb. Here/cai adds 
 a notion of disbelief in the 
 idea expressed by the word it 
 precedes. In every explanation 
 of a Greek particle, it must be 
 remembered that the voice and 
 gesture accompanying it pro¬ 
 
 bably told much more than the 
 word itself, which was often a 
 mere peg on which they hung. 
 
 B. aroira . . . anovcrcu. The 
 sense is clear: “A monstrous 
 charge, according to the account 
 we have of it.” A similar 
 phrase is ws eiros ehrtiv, “using 
 this expression ; ” and in the 
 Pliilebus, 12 C., we have this 
 phrase with the omission of &>s, 
 ecrTi 7 cip, aKovtiv /Lieu oxjtcos, dir- 
 Acos ev ti. It is called by Mat- 
 thiae the absolute infinitive. 
 
 6 av/j.acri€, my fine fellow: lit., 
 “ wonderful,” “ admirable.” 
 
 ttoitjt^v, a side thrust at the 
 poetaster Meletus. 
 
 tovtcov avT. ev. “ On these 
 two counts.” 
 
 Mav 6 dvQo, “I hear” (collo¬ 
 quially), “ I understand. ” For 
 the daifioviov , v. Introduction, 
 
 p. 7. 
 
EY0Y<£PX2N. 
 
 23 
 
 haifioviov (p>r)s aavrcp e/cdaroTe yiyveaOai. go ? ovv 
 
 / CCLIVQTO/jLOVVTO 9 GOV 7 T6pl TO, 0€La 767 pCLITTai TdVTTjV 
 
 t rjv 7 pcKpjjv, /cal go 9 htaftaXoov Sr] ep^eTai eis to 
 fcaaTrjpiov , 66So;9 <m evStd/ 3 o\a rd rotavra rrrpbs 
 tou? 7roX,Xoi)9. *;al e/tou yap rot, orav t*. A,e7ft) eV C 
 i/c/cXrjGca irepl tgov deicov , TrpoXeycov avrov ? Ta yLteX- 
 XovTa, KarayeXcoGiV go? pbacvopcevov' /caiioi ovbev o 
 tl ov/c aXrjdes ecprj/ca cov TTpoeLTrov’ aU’ oyu-w? (f) 6 o - 
 vovglv rjpLLV iraGb tcw t oiovtol?. aU’ ooSev avroov 
 XPV (ppovTi&iv, aW opidae ievat. 
 
 €kcuttot€, * ‘ on each occasion. ” 
 Thus we find it put in the same 
 sentence with ae/, Ar. Nub., 
 1279— 
 
 norepa vopl^eis naivbv del tov 
 A iu 
 
 veiv vbcop end(TTOT , ^ . . . (Le. 
 “every time he does rain.”) 
 
 This rendering agrees with the 
 intermittent and unoriginative 
 character of the 5 aipovLoy. 
 
 KaivoTo/jLovvros. The idea in¬ 
 volved in this word is that of 
 cutting into something afresh. 
 Observe the vowel variation of 
 this and other roots in different 
 combinations. Thus— 
 
 Verb pres. — ei, €, or a : repvco, 
 / 3 aAAco, aneipco. 
 
 Verb aor.—a : erapov, efiaAov , 
 eanapov. 
 
 Verb comp. — 0: Kaivoropeco , 
 5 id/ 3 oAos, opoanopos. 
 
 In translating, make two sen¬ 
 tences of the passage: thus 
 
 Jowett, “He thinks you are a 
 neologian ; and he is going to 
 have you up before the court for 
 this.” 
 
 cos $LaQa\ . . . epxerai, “ He 
 seems to be going to play the 
 part of a traducer. ” 
 
 C. cov npoelnov. A common 
 attraction of the relative to the 
 case of the antecedent. Cf. 
 Thuc. 7, 21, ay cov an b t coy no- 
 Aecov cov eneare arpanav . 
 
 aAAa . . . aAAa. The first is 
 adversative of the clause nairoi 
 . . ., the second of both clauses 
 preceding taken together, and 
 might be translated, “ Well ! 
 we mustn’t pay heed . . .” 
 
 opbae ievai. Latin : cominus 
 pugnare, “come to close quar¬ 
 ters.” Cf. Thuc. 2, 62, opoae 
 ievai roils exOpols, and Ar. Keel. 
 863, fiadioreov 6 poo’ > eerri, and 
 Dem. JDionysod. 12 55 , 14, cos 
 ecopa Tjpas opbae nopevopevovs , 
 “ When he saw us going straight 
 at him, ready to prosecute,” i.e. 
 
24 
 
 nAATf2N02 
 
 CAP. III. 
 
 212. ’12 (pike Kvdinppov, dXXd to fiev /carayeXaa- 
 
 drjvau laws ov8ev rrpaypia. A drjvaiocs yap rot, gos 
 
 6 yL 606 So/CCt, 00 CTCpoSpCL pieXei, OV TLVa 8 eiV 0 V UL(i)VTai 
 elvai , //,?) p>evTQi 8 i 8 aa/caXucov rrjs avrov aocpcas’ ov 
 8 ' av teal clXXovs oiwvrai rroielv rotovrovs, OvpLOvvrau, 
 €lt ovv (pdovw, cos av XeyetSj elre 8 c aXXo tl. 
 
 ET 0 . T ovrov ovv 'Kepi okcos 7rore Trpo? ipue 
 eyovaiv, ov 7raw eKiOvpLW TreipaOrjvai. 
 
 2i2. ’Icrc09 7ap <ju 80/cels arvaviov aeavrov 
 7rape^€iv /cal 8i8daKetv ov/c eOeXecv rrjv aeavrov 00- 
 cpiav' eyco 8e (po/ 3 ovp,ai, purj in to (piXavOpwircas 8 okco 
 
 Xacas ovdev 7 rp. So Gorg. 447? 
 B, ovbev 7 rpayjua, & 'ZwKpareSy iyu 
 yap Kal iaaojiai. 
 
 8 eiv 6 v. This word expresses a 
 quality on which the Athenians 
 prided themselves, viz. that of 
 skill and daring combined, v Cf. 
 the description of the chariot- 
 race in Electra, Soph., 731, yvovs 
 5 ’ ou| 5 A driucou deivbs rjvioarpbpos, 
 “ And the daring charioteer 
 from Athens seeing it . . .” 
 Compare the whole description of 
 Athenian aggression and daring 
 in Thucydides, I, 68, seqq. 
 
 D. [XT] fieuroL bibacnc. “ Pro¬ 
 vided that he be not anxious to 
 impart his knowledge, learn¬ 
 ing.” /it) introduces a supposi¬ 
 tion, not a fact. 
 
 TTOieiv, sc. tolovtov. “ But if 
 they think any man of this kind 
 is making others like himself.” 
 
 eXr ovv p 66 vcp. Cf. Pericles’ 
 criticism of Athenian audiences, 
 Thuc. 2, 35, ore yap £vvei 8 cos Kal 
 eiivovs aKpoar^s Tax & u Tl ei/ 5 e- 
 earepcos irpbs a fiovXeral re Kal 
 tniaraTai vojaioeie 8i]\ova6ai, ore 
 
 &7 reipos iariv a Kal irAeovaCeadai, 
 Sia (pQovov eX n inrep ttjv eavrov 
 
 (pVCTLV CLKOVOl. 
 
 ov 5 ’ $lv . .. Ov/jLOvvTai. Omission 
 of the demonstrative object after 
 6vp.ovvrai. We should expect iav 
 8e riva oXuvrai .. r ovrep 6vp.ovvrai. 
 The construction is due to the 
 synthetic tendency which avoids 
 a demonstrative where the sense 
 can be preserved in a continuous 
 relative clause. 
 
 c os av Aeyeis. Here we notice 
 Socrates guarding against a con¬ 
 clusion that is open to question. 
 He never takes anything for 
 granted that admits of question 
 or of further substantiation. 
 
 arraviov aeavr. noielv. Jowett 
 paraphrases, “You are select 
 in your acquaintance.” Lit., 
 “ make yourself rare,” or “ diffi¬ 
 cult of access.” 
 
 vtt b pi\. Explanatory, gives 
 the reason. Lat., quae mea est 
 comitas : it does not strike the 
 Athenians so ; it is put in paren¬ 
 thetically so by Socrates to show 
 wh}' he teaches. 
 
ETOT^PX2X. 
 
 25 
 
 aviols 6 tL 7 rep 6%Q) i/c/ce^vfieuco^ iravrl dvSpl \eyetv, 
 ov /juovov avev puaOov , a\\a /cal TTpoanOel 9 av rjSeco 9, 
 ec t t? /-tow edeXoc a/coveiv . €t //iv ozJv, 8 vt'i' S?) eAeYoy, 
 peWoiev piov tcarayeXav, cocnrep av (fry? aavrov , E 
 ot'Sei' az> et?; dySes 1raiCpvjas /cal yeXcbvras iv t<£ 
 SL/caarypto ) Scayayecv, el Se airovSdaovTaL, tout’ ySy 
 QTTj) dno^yaerai aSrfXov jrXyv v/jllv tch? pbavreatv. 
 
 ET 0 . AXX’ ovSev earac, <S Sco/cpares, tt pd- 
 ypua, tiWd av T€ /card vovv aya/viel ryv Si/cyv, oifiai 
 Se /cal ipe ryv epbyv. 
 
 CAP IV. 
 
 2f2. E art Se Srj aoi , & E vQvtfipov, tl 9 y Si/crj ; 
 (freuyecs avryv rj Scco/ceis ; 
 
 8oku> avTo?s, “I am known,’ 
 “ I have the reputation.” 
 
 avev fucrdov. This was one ol 
 the great differences between 
 Socrates and the ordinary so¬ 
 phist. Cf. Rep. 337, D., where 
 Thrasymachus says they cannot 
 expect him to expound his views 
 for nothing. aWa tt pbs rep paQe'tv 
 K.aX airoTLcrov apyvpiov. 
 
 a\\a Kal . Here we pass into 
 the sphere of the potential: the 
 potential particle &v is employed, 
 and the verb historic conjunc¬ 
 tive. Expanded, “etTis iOe\oi 
 amoveiv, piadov npoffTideiT) &v.” 
 Other neuter verbs of the kind 
 are, icepSalveiv, to gain ; i-vp.fia\- 
 \eo-Qai, to contribute, &c., Stallb. 
 
 oi/ 5 ev av ety. Notice Socrates’ 
 lofty indifference to human 
 weakness, if he can only obtain 
 any sort of hearing for his 
 gospel. 
 
 E. 07177 aTrifirja'eTai. Quo sci¬ 
 licet modo eventurum sit. 
 
 adrj\ov, &c. Socrates seems 
 here to betray an expectation 
 that the movement bodes no 
 good to him; veiling it in the 
 usual Greek fashion with a 
 euphemistic obscurity of ex¬ 
 pression. 
 
 (p.avT 7 ]v. “Are you being pro¬ 
 secuted in your suit ?” Acc. of 
 respect or further limitation. 
 Cf. Ar. Ecp, 617, 7 rws rb irpayp* 
 ayuviaoj; and Dem. 653 , 25 , 
 ypa(pj]v aycDvi^ecrdai, To be en¬ 
 gaged in a matter, a trial. So 
 here, “Are you defendant or 
 prosecutor in your suit ? ” Or, 
 to explain it thus :—In such an 
 expression the acc. will be found 
 to be the case in which the sub¬ 
 stantive ordinarily occurs in 
 kindred expressions : e.g., 5 'ucrjv 
 or ypa(pr]Vj ypacpeadai, &c. And 
 it may then be transferred by 
 analogy to intransitive verbs 
 such as 5 tu;/ca>, (pevyu. 
 
26 
 
 nAAT£2N02 
 
 ET0. Atco/cco. 
 
 212. T Lva\ 
 
 4 ET0. lN 0y Suo/ccov av Bo/cco fiaiveaOai. 
 
 212 . T i Bai) Treropbevov t iva Bicofceis ; 
 
 ET0. rioXXoi; 76 Bel TceTecrQai, 6 ? ye Tvyyavei 
 cov ev fid\a TrpeafivTT)*;. 
 
 212. T/? outo9 ; 
 
 ET0. c O e/Aos Trarrjp . 
 
 212. f O cro 9 , cS fteXTicrre; 
 
 ET0. ndvv fjiev ovv. 
 
 212. s, EcTTi Be tl to ey/cXrjpa /cal tlvos r\ Bl/ctj ; 
 ET0. <i>ovov, d> '2oofcpaTe$ ; 
 
 212 . 'HpdfcXeis' rj rrrov y co ^Ev0vcf)poy f dyvoelrat 
 
 VITO TCOV TToWcoy OITT] 7 TOT 6 Op 6 d) 9 6^6£. OU 7ap 
 
 g olfACLL ye tov e r TTLTV')(0VT0$ elvcu opdcos avro irpd^ai % 
 dXka Troppco 7 tov i)Brj aocfilas eXavvovros. 
 
 ET0. Yloppco puevToc yrj Al\ 2) 'LcoKpares. 
 
 *ov diwKow. Notice again this 
 synthetic construction. 
 
 itetoplevov. A double sense is 
 here intended. For the word 
 means besides * 4 flying ” (the or¬ 
 dinary sense), to move swiftly. 
 Cf. el(v9ajii€i/ \eyety ettI twv 
 Tax^ws rpexovroiVf otl tt erovrai ; 
 and Rep. 567* D., ttoWo\ r/l-ovcri 
 tt 6T0fjLej/0L, said of people gather¬ 
 ing quickly towards an object. 
 
 ttoWov, gen. privative, acc. to 
 Jelf. Matthiae explains it as a 
 genitive of distance from , appli¬ 
 cable strictly to the first mean¬ 
 ing of the verb, but transferred 
 to its secondary sense. Jowett, 
 44 Nay, he is not very volatile at 
 his time of life.” 
 
 ?j 7 tov. 44 Asseverationem 
 
 cum dubitatione ttov signifi¬ 
 cant,” Stallb. 4 * Certainly,” or 
 44 surel v, I should think f 
 
 OTTT] 7 tote opOcos e%e*, ** ^hat is 
 right.” Lit., where the case 
 stands right on any occasion 
 (itote). So ovtcos ex €l > Kaf c&s 
 
 *X €l > & c -> 
 
 TOV ETVITVXOVTOS. Cf. Rep. 
 352, C., OV yap TTEpl TOV E 7 TLTV 
 Xovtos 6 \ 6 yos , aWa i:Ep\ tov 
 ovTLva Tpoirov XPV ** The 
 
 question does not treat of a 
 chance subject.” So here, 44 a 
 chance person,” 44 any one.” 
 
 B. cro(plas. For this genitive, 
 cf. Lysides, 204, D„ 7 r6ppco 
 eJ TropEv 6 p.Evos tov EpcoTos ; and 
 Ar. Ran. 35— 
 
 Kal yap iyyvs tt )s 6 vpas°HB tj 
 
 (Sadlfav Eijj.1. 
 
 P.EVT 01 . If we are to find any 
 adversative force in this particle 
 here, we must suppose such an 
 ellipse as, 44 But {of course I 
 see) they must certainly be.” 
 
ET0r<i>pr>N. 
 
 27 
 
 2X2. ’'Ectt c Se Sr] rcdv oi/cetcoy r*9 o jedveoos vi to 
 rov (tov 7 Tarpon ; y Sy\a Sy' ov y dp av 7 too vrrep ye 
 dWorptov erre^yecada (f)6yov avra>. 
 
 ET 0 . TeXotov, co Soo/cpare 9, ore o'iec n Scacpepecy 
 etre dWorpcos ecre ohcelos 6 redyed 9, aXV 01} touto 
 pcovov Secy cj)v\drrecy } ecre ev Sc/cy e/crecvey 6 /crecvas 
 etre pcy, /cal el pcey ev Sc/cy , eay, el Se per], eire^ceyac, 0 
 eay 7 rep 6 /crecyas avyearios croc /cal dpcorpaTTe^os y. 
 
 laoy ydp r6 pccaapca yeyverat, eay £vyy$ red rocovrcp 
 ^vyecSoos, /cal per] dcpocriocs aeavroy re /cal e/cecyov rfj 
 St/cy eire^cdy. eTrel oye drrodaydov TreXdrys Tt9 yv 
 
 t oiv olneioov tis. For Socrates 
 would not suppose Eutliypliro 
 capable of pushing such an 
 accusation against his father 
 unless the plea of family satis¬ 
 faction at least could be urged. 
 
 reOvecvs. This participle is 
 formed analogically from a syn¬ 
 copated form of the perfect. So 
 we hnd earapeu, rkdvarov, reO- 
 vapev, karoos, Treirrcoros, &C. 
 
 TeA oiov, &c. This sentence 
 requires careful analysis. The 
 words &AA 5 ov rovro, seqq., give 
 Euthyphro’s view of what ought 
 to he done in the case of a murder, 
 he having dismissed Socrates’ 
 suggestion in the words yeXoiov 
 . . . redveubs. But we must 
 notice that ov refers to Socrates’ 
 mistaken view of the case, and 
 does not belong to de 7 u <pv\ar- 
 reiv. Leaving it out, we might 
 paraphrase, “Whilst the true 
 course is to notice,” &c. For 
 the legal question, v. fin. Note. 
 
 iav 7r ep . . . jcvveanos .. . The 
 revolting idea of a son proceeding 
 against a father for such a crime 
 will appear less repulsive, though 
 hardly less dreadtul, if we call to 
 mind the intense belief of the 
 
 Greeks in an actual Nemesis or 
 “providence of retribution.” 
 The extreme and typical instance 
 of this is the murder of Clytem- 
 naestra by her son Orestes, which, 
 it will be remembered, was 
 solemnly justified by the testi¬ 
 mony of a goddess. Aesch. Eum. 
 Stallbaum adds another motive 
 for the proceeding, viz., the 
 fear of being implicated in the 
 crime ; a view which he fortifies 
 with an apt quotation from Hor. 
 Od. 3 , 2 , 26 :—. 
 
 “ Yetabo qui Cereris sacrum 
 
 Yolgarit arcana, sub isdem 
 Sit trabibus fragilemve 
 mecum 
 
 Solvat phaselon. Ssepe Diegpiter 
 Neglectus incesto addidit inte¬ 
 grum .” 
 
 iaov. Sc. to you as to him. 
 
 C. cupoaiois. Conjunctive^rim. 
 notice. 
 
 TreXarTjs. These were attached 
 to the soil, not actual slaves, 
 but received a sixth of the 
 produce they raised for their 
 liirers. Hence called eKTripopot, 
 ipyoXafiot, drjrts, villeins or 
 serfs. 
 
28 
 
 FIAATflNOS 
 
 e/^09, /cal ct >9 eyeoypyov/Jbev ev rfj N d£cp, idrjrevev i/cel 
 Trap" rjfuv . 7rapoivr)cra<z ovv /cal opycaOels tcov ol/ce- 
 TCOV Tivl TWV r)fJL€T6pCOV a7TO(J(j)CLTT€L aVTOV. 6 OVV 
 
 7rarrjp ^vvbrjcras T01/9 7 roSa? /cal t «9 ^eipa^ avrov , 
 D /caraf 3 a\oov 669 t acppov tlvcl, Tre^irei bevpo dvbpo, 
 Trevao/Jbevov rod i^rjyrjrov 6 tl XPV iroieiv. iv be 
 tout( p to) xpovcp tov bebe/aevov o)\byd)pei t e /cal 
 rjfjbeKeb d )9 dvbpoc^bvov /cal ovbev ov 7 rpaypba, el /cal 
 diroQdvob' oirep ovv /cal eiradev. vtto yap Xipbov /cal 
 plyovs /cal tcov becr/acov dTrodi/ijcr/cei irplv tov dyyeXov 
 7 rapd tov i^rjyrjTou acj)b/cea6ab. raura br] ovv /cal 
 ayava/cTel o re 7 raTrjp /cal ol dWoi ol/celoi , otl eyco 
 virep tov dvbpofiovov to u TraTpl (j) 6 vov eTre^epxppbaL, 
 
 ovt 6 aTro/cTeivavTi , 009 <fiacriv e/celvob, out el 6 tl 
 
 iv Na£a>. Such an occupation 
 (of a conquered territory) was 
 called a k\t) povx'ia, and the holder 
 KXrjpovxos , or yew/jLopos. For 
 the account of this colonisation, 
 v. Thuc. 1, 98, compared with 
 Plut. Pericl. ii. 
 
 oltcercov. These were the re¬ 
 gular bought slaves, domestics. 
 
 D. i^yrjrov. Used of an 
 expounder of oracles in Herodo¬ 
 tus. At Athens their duties 
 were monopolised by the Eumol- 
 pidae, the guardians of tra¬ 
 ditional, unwritten law or 
 usage; their nearest counterpart 
 were the jurists of Pome, cf. 
 Deni. Euerg. 1160, ^\6ov cos 
 robs i^7)yr)ra.s \vol elSt'njv on 
 ue xph iroieiv rrepl rovrcov. 
 
 wXiy&pei. The latter part of 
 this word is said to be akin to 
 Lat. cura. Gk. ovpos , a guard, 
 cf. V A pKTovpos, vereor, ward, 
 ware, guard. We can certainly 
 trace other words through ex¬ 
 actly the same changes, e.y. :— 
 
 Gk. Lat. Eng. 
 oivos vinum wine 
 
 Irea vitis withy 
 
 vimen 
 vieo 
 
 a? vae woe 
 
 epyov work 
 
 obdev 'ov 7r. V.S. 3 fin. for the 
 expression: a curious though 
 common absolute accusatival 
 construction, paralleled by Rep. 
 426 C. Trpoayopevov(TL rots tto\7- 
 rais rr\v Karaarao’iv rr)s 7 t6\€cos 
 o\t)v /it) Kivelv, cos cnroOavov/jievoVy 
 6 s av rovro Spa. See also 604 
 B, KaWirrov tjtvx^ &y^iv iv 
 £ v/Kbopais , cos ovbev irpoficuvov 
 ru> xaA.e 7 rcos (pipovn . 
 
 rcov Sea/icov, “the manacles 
 he had on him,” his chains. 
 So in French, la tete, his head. 
 
 out’ airoKreivavri . . . our’, &c. 
 The speaker is here hurried into 
 some confusion of language by 
 his vehement statement. Lit. 
 “who has neither killed him. 
 
ET0TcI>P12N. 
 
 29 
 
 fiaXccT d'rreiiTeivev , dv8po(f>6vov ye 0 VT 09 tov arro 
 OavovTOS, ov Selv (bpovrl^eiv virep tov tolovtov' avo- E 
 c tlov yap elvai to viov iraTpl (jrovov eire^ievac /cafccb 9 
 €lBot€<;, g3 Soo/cpaTes, to Oelov g$9 tov octlov tc 
 
 7 repi Kal tov avoalov. 
 
 212. 2i) Se Srj 7 rpo? A 109 , rS E vOvcppov, ovTcoal 
 
 dfcpificbs oi€L eiriaTao-dai Trepl to)v Oeicov, otttj e^et, 
 
 Kal TCOV 6 O’ LG) V T6 Kal aVO<JLWV, CtJCTT6 TOVTCOV OVTCO 
 
 TTpa^OevTcov^ w9 orv Xeyet?, ov (pof3el SiKa^ofievo? tco 
 T raTpi\ 6Va)9 /Arj av av dvoatov Trpaypia Tvy^dvr)? 
 
 7r , clttcov ; 
 
 ET 0 . OvSev yap dv /xov otfieXo 9 et?;, cd ScoKpaTe 9, 5 
 oz)Se to) av Siacfrepoi EvOvcjrpcov tcjv 7roWcov dvOpco- 
 ttcov, el pr) Ta TOiavTa iravTa aKpcftw eiSeirjv. 
 
 so they say, nor, even if he had, 
 should one give thought to a 
 murderous wretch like the de¬ 
 ceased.” The second oirre begins 
 an entirely fresh sentence, al¬ 
 though corresponding logically 
 to the first ovre, which stands 
 before a subordinate clause ; and 
 so we should expect another 
 dependent sentence after the 
 second ovre to this effect : “Nor, 
 even if he had, properly liable 
 to punishment for murdering 
 such a wretch as this.” ov be¬ 
 fore is merely intensitive 
 according to the common prac¬ 
 tice of using more negatives to 
 emphasize denial. 
 
 E. Trpbs Albs, “before,” i.e. 
 “ by Zeus.” 
 
 axrre, &c. Notice the se¬ 
 quence; —oXei eVu rraadai. . . axrre 
 ov (poi 8e? . . . ottcos /jl^ . . . riry- 
 
 X& v ? s - 
 
 aly “in your turn,” i.e. be 
 committing impiety yourself 
 
 whilst accusing your father of 
 impiety. 
 
 O vdev yap. Elliptical. “No! 
 For then ...” The phrase 
 means, “ 1 should be good for 
 nothing,” cf. Laws, 856 C, tt as 
 5 e av7ip, ov Kal (T/juKpbv ocpeXos, 
 evbeiKvvrca rals apxcds. The 
 pretence of astonishment on the 
 part of Socrates in the former 
 sentence is meant to draw out 
 from Euthyphro this unqualified 
 assumption of theological om¬ 
 niscience. It is then assumed 
 as a basis for a string of de¬ 
 ductions, inevitably ending in 
 the conclusion, “which is ab¬ 
 surd,” just as Euclid starts with 
 his impossible assumption in a 
 reductio ad absr&rdum. For the 
 use of the proper name instead 
 of e'yco, cf. Virg. Aen. i. 48, “et 
 quisquam numen Junonis adoret 
 praeterea ? ” where Juno herself 
 is the speaker. 
 
so 
 
 HAATQNOE 
 
 CAP. V. 
 
 212 . Ap’ ovv (ioi , co Oav/idcrce JLvOvtfipov, /cpdriarov 
 ean paOrjTT] era) yeveaOat /cal rrpo tt)<? ypacf>r)<; tt}<? 
 7 rpo? MeX^TOv aura ravra 7 TpOKaXeladat avrov 
 Xeyovra , ot 4 eycoye /cal ev tw e/nrpoa 6 ev XP° V( P 7i>JL 
 dela irepl iroXXov iTroiov/irjv elhevai, real vvv i/reihrj 
 fie i/cecvo? avToerxeStd^ovTa cj^rjai /cal /catvoropovvra 
 7 repl rcov Oelcov e^a/iapravecv, (laOrjrf ?? S?) yeyova <769' 
 /cai el fiev, co MeX^Te, tyairjv dv } F,v 0 v(f)pova o/ioXoyel s 
 B crocfrbv elvat r a roiavra /cal op0a>? vofii^eiv, /cal e/ie 
 rjyov /cal /if) huca^ov’ el he (ir 7, e/celvw rc 3 StSaa/caXm 
 Xa%e ht/erjv rrporepov rj e/iot } co? rou? Trpeafivrepovs 
 hia^OeLpovri, e/ie re /cal rov avrov irarepa , e’p-e p,ey 
 hthdcr/covn, e/celvov he vovderovvri re /cal /coXa^ovre 
 
 TAp’ ouz/, nonne ? But acc. to 
 Hermann it is a milder, less 
 positive, interrogation than ap’ 
 ovv ov. 
 
 7 rpoKaA€?(r 6 cu. Like many 
 verbs in Greek and Latin with 
 two accusatives. Others are 
 epcarav, alre 7 v , dLSdcrtceiv, evvvvai , 
 a (paipelv ; and to take another 
 example of this verb, arrep Kal 
 rb Trp 6 repov $$ 7 } 7 TpovKaX^cra/uLeda, 
 Thuc. ii., 72, and below at the 
 end of this passage, a npovKaAov- 
 /i-y avr 6 v. 
 
 avTocrx^ L ^C ei1/ ‘ crx € ^' La 1S a 
 
 raft, or piece of light woodwork, 
 knocked up for a passing occa¬ 
 sion, hence a “ makeshift.” 
 Hence the word here means to 
 speak offhand, for the occasion, 
 without sufficient grounds. It 
 is especially applicable, Fischer 
 remarks, to those orators or 
 rhetors who would undertake to 
 speak on any given subject 
 without notice, making up for 
 
 solid information by means of 
 fine language. 
 
 B. aocpbv elvai ra roiavra. 
 For this construction compare 
 Xen. Cyr., iii., 3, 9, of crpa- 
 nciorai . . . i'rrio’TTj/jLOves ^(Tav rh. 
 7r poaijKovra ry eavruv eKacrros 
 ottA'ic/el ; iEsch. Choe. 21, x°^ s 
 7rp ott0/jltt 6 s j and at the end of this 
 Dialogue, crocpbs ra 6e7a yeyova. 
 
 rep biba(TKaA(p Aa%€ 5 . This 
 dative is that of the remoter 
 object, that is the person or 
 thing affected indirectly by the 
 action of the verb. It maj T be 
 called the Dative of Interest, for 
 under such a notion would fall 
 a vast number of examples like 
 the present in Latin and Greek, 
 e.g. oi n\aTai€?s Aayxavovari 
 SiKrjv ro7s AaKebaifiovioLs , Dem. 
 1378, ii., and auTo; re Ka/JL&v<rr) 
 i(T6Ade7v oIkt6v Ttz/a, Her. 3, 14. 
 What is called Dative of Grati¬ 
 fication we should put under 
 this head. 
 
ET0T^PI2N. 
 
 31 
 
 /cal iav /jli j piot TrelOrjrai /xt] 8 ' t779 8 l/ct]<z rj dvr 
 
 ifiov r/pdffirjTCLL ere, avTa ravra Xeyecv iv rep 8 c/ca- 
 arrjpicp a tt povrcaXovp^rjv aiirov. 
 
 ET0. Nat pbd A l go ^do/cpares, el apa ipue eVt- 
 %etpr/(7€L€ ypdcfoecrOaL, eypoipu av, G 09 ol/juai, oirr\ craQpos 
 ian, /cal 7 to\v av pplv 7 Tporepov Trepl i/cetvov \c709 
 yevoiro iv rob 8t/caarppi(p rj 7 repl ipiov. 
 
 212. Kai 67 co roi, go cjolXe iracpe, ravra ytyvcocncwv 
 pLadrjrrjs eTTLOvpbob yeveaOai <xo9, elScb 9 ore /cal a\\o 9 
 irov Tt9 tfal 6 MeX? 7 T 09 0UT09 ere yaev ouSe 80/cec opav , 
 
 
 e/te Se o{ 5 to )9 otjeco? dre^vco^ /cal paStco? /carelSev , ware 
 dcrefieLa? iypdyjra.ro. vvv ovv 7 rpos Alo<; \eye p>oi , o 
 vui> §77 aacjocb 9 elSevac Sua^vpt^ov' ttolov tl to evaefies 0 
 
 acpir/. Notice this is not an 
 intransitive use. must be 
 supplied from fxoi. 
 
 avra ravra Xeyeiv. The con¬ 
 struction, which had become quite 
 a direct one after its introduc¬ 
 tion by tin, tin eycoye, &c., now 
 changes hack to the infinitive, 
 depending really upon Kpano-rov 
 etrrt, at the beginning of Socrates’ 
 remarks, as /xaQiirrj cry yevecrOai 
 did before. 
 
 & 7 rpovK. avrtiv. For this con¬ 
 struction, Y.S. The object and 
 effect of this supposed case which 
 Socrates puts forward is to ex¬ 
 hibit Euthyphro in the light of 
 the reference and authority upon 
 such questions of religion and 
 morals as are being discussed 
 between the two. Euthyphro 
 takes the bait eagerly. He is 
 quite ready to help Socrates if 
 he is in a difficulty, and does not 
 nrofess a doubt as to whether he 
 himself can be mistaken, even 
 though an Athenian audience 
 laughs at him. His entire self- 
 confidence shows amusingly, 
 
 contrasted with the insinuating 
 and humble professions of So¬ 
 crates, who will learn anything 
 he can from the omniscient 
 Euthyphro. This is the elpccvsia 
 of Socrates, where he causes his 
 companion to believe himself 
 well-informed, whilst he really 
 is not. 
 
 C. cradptis, 4 ‘unsound.” 
 
 Kar€ 7 $€v —more than eTSei/, 
 
 “ noticed.” So Teiresias to 
 Oedipus— 
 
 opyrjv e/ze'iil/co r^jv ^perjv, r7]v 
 
 <tol $ 5 OflOV 
 
 yalovaav ov /careTSes. 
 
 Soph. 0 . T. 337. 
 
 tiucrxvpKov craeptos eidevai. Cf. 
 Phaed. 114 D., rb jubv ovv ravra 
 tiuo’xvpio-ao'dai ovroos *X* IV • • • 
 ov Trpe7r€L vovv exovri. For the 
 fact, Y. S. 4, E., init. ad fin. 
 
 D. tto 7 ov n. The force of Tt 
 here, though untranslatable, is to 
 imply ignorance, or an unde¬ 
 fined notion in the inquirer’s 
 mind. 
 
nAATiiNOS 
 
 32 
 
 €LVCtL KCIL TO UGGj3e$ KCil 7 T 6 pL (J)OVOV KCLl 7 T€pl TO)V 
 
 a\\o)v ; f) ov ravrov ianv ev Tvaorrj irpd^et to oglov 
 clvt'o avT(p, /cal to ovcglov av tov peev oglov 
 iravTos evavTiov, avTo Se avTU) opiOLOv /cal e^ov puiav 
 Tiva theav /caTa ttjv avoaioTrjTa ttclv , 6 tl 7 rep dv 
 pueWy dvoGiov elvau; 
 
 ET@. Tl avTcos Sy7 tov, a) 2ct) spares. 
 
 CAP. YI. 
 
 2f2 . Aeye Srj, tl (fry? elvac to oglov /cal tl to 
 dvoGtov ; 
 
 ET 0 . A67W Toivvv , otl to piev oglov egtlv direp 
 670) vvv ttolco, tw aSi/covvTi 7) Trepl (fiovovs f) irepl 
 iepwv /cXoirds rj tl aWo tcov tolovtcov i^apbapTavovTL 
 E e ? 7 re^ievai, edv T6 iraTyp d>v Tvy^avy idv tg pirjTyp edv 
 re aWo 9 ogtlgovv , to Se pirj eire^Levai dv oglov. eirev, 
 d) ' 2 (d/cpaT €$ 9 deaaai, d<; peeya gol ipco Te/cpugpiov tov 
 
 ov ; nonne ? 
 
 KaX t b av6criov av , &C., 
 v whilst the impious, again, is 
 that which is contrary to all 
 that is pious, hut is still itself 
 like itself ...” 
 
 riva , the indefinite again. Al¬ 
 though Socrates postulates one 
 form (ISeav) for the impious, he 
 purposely avoids defining it— 
 “Some form or other which is 
 one. ” 
 
 Kara tt)v avoa. “according 
 to,” i.e . “in virtue of its im¬ 
 piety.” tvciv must thus be taken 
 with avrS , although placed at 
 the end of the clause for the 
 sake of rendering clearer the 
 
 dependence of the relative 
 clause on, &c. 
 
 Atyco toivvv. Euthyphro here 
 makes an error. Socrates asks 
 in effect, “What is your defi¬ 
 nition of piety and impiety?” 
 This requires a general descrip¬ 
 tion or rule whereby we may 
 know the one by the other; 
 but Euthyphro only g ; ves a 
 .special or particular instai.ce or 
 two, quite inadequate for the 
 definition Socrates requires. He 
 says, “ This and that is impiety,” 
 whilst his answer should be 
 couched in the form, “ Piety 
 consists in ...” (See Note C, 
 at end.) 
 
EY0Y<t>P12N. 
 
 33 
 
 VOflOV OTL OVTC0S €%eL , O KCLl aWoLS f)8r] 6L7TOV, OTL 
 
 ravra opdoos av ecrj ovtm ytyvoaeva, /jlt] eircrpeTreLv 
 tw daefiovvrL prj S’ av ogtlgovv rvyydvr\ cov. avrol 
 yap ol dvOpcoiroi rvyyavovaL vopu^ov T69 rov Ala tmv 
 6ecbv apLGTOV teal BiKaiorarov, teal rovrov opoXoyovaL 
 tov avrov rrarepa Brjaac, otl tovs vlels /careTrcev ov/c 6 
 ev 8l/ci 7, /ca/celvov ye av tov avrov 7 rarepa e/crepelv 
 8 l ere pa to Lavra' ipol Be ^aXeiraLVova lv } otl tg> 
 rrarpl eire^ep^opaL clBlkovvtl , kcll oi/t &)9 avrol avrol? 
 ra evavria Xey ovgl 7 re: L re tmv Oeoov /cal rrepl 
 
 ipLOV. 
 
 212. \pa ye, do E v0v(f>pov, rovr early ov eve/ca 
 rrjv ypacfrrjv cfrevyco, otl t a roLavra erreLBav tl? 7repl 
 tmv Oedov Xeyy, Bva^epco? ttm? arroBe^opai ; 8l a 8?}, 
 do? eoL/ce f (firjGti tl? pee e^apapraveLV. vvv ovv el /cal 
 Gol ravra %vvBo/cel rdo ev elBorc irepl tmv tolovtmv, 
 dvdy/crj 8r], do? eouce , /cal rjplv %vy%Mpelv. rl yap tal B 
 c prjaopev , ol ye /cal avrol opoXoyovpev Trepl avrcov 
 prjBev elSevaL ; aXXa poL elrre 777509 <t>iAiov f av co? 
 dXrjddo? rjyel ravra ovtm yeyovevaL ; 
 
 E. tov v6/ulov on , for '6n 6 
 vo/jlos ovtoos %x €L ' Anglice, “a 
 proof of the law being so.” 
 
 '6tl ravra , &c., “that this 
 would be the right course to 
 take.” 
 
 €Turp€Treiv, “to give in.” Cf. 
 Her. 2, 120, r6v ov TrpocrriKe 
 abinebvn rep abeXQecp iTTirpeireiv. 
 
 avrbu yap, &c. Stallb. com¬ 
 pares for this story Ar. Nub. 
 903, nws br/ra 81*77$ ovenjs 6 Zevs 
 ovk a7r8A.coA.ev, rbu 7r arep avrov 
 Srjo-as ; 
 
 avrol avroii ra ev. Xey. 
 “They contradict themselves,” 
 or “stultify themselves.” 
 
 &pa ye rovr 3 eerr. V. S. 5, 
 init., a speculative, suggestive 
 interrogation. 80 Jowett, “ May 
 not this be?” Stallb. wishes to 
 make it a confident question, 
 giving confirmatory power to 
 ye ; but this view hardly suits 
 Socrates’ humble approaches to 
 the wisdom of Euthyphro. 
 
 B. avayKrj 877, “then I must 
 give in.” Notice the change to 
 the plural in the pronoun. Stallb. 
 finds in it a humble self-relega¬ 
 tion of Socrates to the mass, or 
 vulgar. 
 
 QiXlov, i.e. Zevs <p'iXios. Cf. 
 Ar. Ach. 730. Nal rbv QlXiov. 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 ET0. K al en ye tovtcov davpiaoccbrepa, &T 2 co¬ 
 
 mpares, a ol iroXXol ov/c toaoi. 
 
 2 £1. K al iroXepiov apa rjyei ov elvac tg3 ovtl ev 
 tois deols irpos aXXrjXovs, teal e^Opa^ ye Seivd? /cal 
 jid^as /cal dXXa roiavra iroXXd, ola XeyeraL re viro 
 tojv iroagrcbv , /cat vtto tcSv ayaddov ypacfrecov rd re 
 G dXXa lepd rjplv /caraireiroi/cCXirai, /cal Brj /cal to?? 
 pbeyaXots YlavaOrjvaLoc ? 6 7re7rXo? /xeerro? rcov tolov -* 
 rcov TTOi/ciXpLarcov dvdyerai e?? rrjv aKpoiroXiv ; ravr 
 dXrjOrj (f)oo/i€v elvat, go E v0vcf)pov ; 
 
 ET©. M?) jiova ye, c5 Eco/cpare^ aXX ’ birep dpri 
 elirov, /cal dXXa ooi iy&> iroXXa, eavirep /3ovXy , ire pi 
 tgov 6ei(ov StrjyrjoopLai, d ov a/covoov ev o?S’ on 
 ercirXayrjoei. 
 
 Kal e tl. Again an ellipse of 
 tlie direct reply. V. S. 4 , fin. 
 ovtib yap. Translate here, “ Cer¬ 
 tainly, and besides these. ” 
 
 Kal 7 roXe/jLoj/, &c. The point 
 of this inquiry is to elicit from 
 Euthyphro the admission that 
 the gods dispute among them¬ 
 selves, and if so, what becomes 
 of our ultimate authority for 
 right and wrong, if it is vari¬ 
 able, not fixed ? In the Republic 
 Socrates comes to a conclusion 
 on this point, viz. that all these 
 stories, representing the gods as 
 either vicious or variable, are 
 entirely wrong, and such stories 
 are accordingly banished from 
 his ideal state. Cf. Rep. 378, 
 la very similar passage to this. 
 
 Kal vtt 6, a break in the con¬ 
 struction. Transl., “And the 
 
 devices with which (otots if the 
 construction were regular) our 
 other sacred objects are adorned, 
 notably the robe (which) is de¬ 
 voted to Minerva.” We should 
 expect some verb like KaraTreiroiK. 
 after ttettAos, but we are again 
 surprised. The notion of adorn¬ 
 ment is put in apposition, viz., 
 lieo’rbs tcov tolovt. TroLKiXfjLarcou, 
 and the place of the verb taken 
 by the notion of offering, avd- 
 yeraL. 
 
 C. eu oT 5 ’ tin. A colloquial* 
 ism ; it is equal in value to an 
 asseverative adverb, and like an 
 adverb can be applied to any 
 word in the sentence, e.g. Soph. 
 Ant. 276, 7r ape l pa y a kwv ov% 
 eKOVGLV, olS’ tin. So drjXtivon^ 
 ch. 7 , E, fin. infra. 
 
ET0T^PX2N. 
 
 35 
 
 CAP. VII. 
 
 212. Ov/c av Oavpd&LpL. aXXd ravia p iv poL 
 elaavdt^ 67 rl a%oXr)s ScrjyrjaeL. vvvl Se, oirep aprt ae 
 fjpoprjv, TreLpoo aatpecnepov enrelv. ov yap pe, go 
 
 eratpe, to irporepov i/cavm iblSatjas ipcoTrjaavTa to D 
 ocnov , o tl 7 TOT ecrj, dXXd pot ehre ?, otl tovto Tvy- 
 ^dvet ocnov ov, o av vvv Troiels, cfrovov eire^Loov rw 
 7 tut pi. 
 
 ET0. K al aXrjdrj ye eXeyov, go 2c otcpaTes. 
 
 212. ’Icrco?. dXXa yap , o3 E vdvcppov, /cal aXXa 
 7roXXd (firjs elvai caia. 
 
 ET0. Ken yap eaTtv. 
 
 212. MepvyaaL ovv, otl ov TovTcfaot Sie/ceXevoprjv, 
 ev tl r) $vo pe htha^at tgov 7toXXgov oaicov, dXX' e/celvo 
 avid to elSos, g£ 7 rdvTa tgl oaia oaLa iaTiv ; ecprjada 
 
 D. '6 tl 7 tot €477, V, S. note on 
 \eyoo tolvvv. Here Socrates 
 makes the objection there men¬ 
 tioned. “What impiety was 
 generally (71-oTe), was my ques¬ 
 tion, but you tell me that this 
 or that (particular case) is im¬ 
 pious, which does not help me 
 to a canon of piety and impiety.” 
 
 Kal aXyOrj. Here Euthypbro 
 misses Socrates’ point altogether. 
 Socrates has therefore to bring 
 home the difference between 
 universal and particular by 
 another method. 
 
 eldos. The best explanation 
 of this term is to be found in 
 the words following:—“ By vir¬ 
 tue of which impiety is impiety.” 
 In other words, that quality or 
 mode of action which makes a 
 word or deed impious, without 
 
 which it would not be impious, 
 which is common to and will be 
 found in all impiety. The ex¬ 
 pression, $ irauTa ‘6crta ocria icrTiv 
 corresponds to the expression 
 kclto. t)]v avoffiOTriTa, in ch. 5 , 
 D. fin., “Having one form in 
 virtue of its impiety,” i.e. pre¬ 
 senting the same marks or cha¬ 
 racteristics of impiety by which 
 it is known for impiety. This 
 e? 5 os was in Plato’s belief a real, 
 existing essence, the universal , 
 whilst particular manifestations 
 of it only existed in an inferior 
 and unreal sense. From which 
 it may be gathered that he looked 
 upon our world and all that it 
 contained as only “the shadow 
 of things perfect.” Cf. “Who 
 serve unto the example and 
 shadow of heavenly things .” 
 
 D 2 
 
36 
 
 17AATX2N02 
 
 E 7 dp irov ilia Ihea ra re avoaca avoaca eivai tca\ tcl 
 oaia oaia' i) ov pLvrjpoveveis ; 
 
 EY0, ’'E 7 W 76 . 
 
 2X1. Tavrrjy tolvvv /xe avrrjv hiha^ov ttjv iheav, 
 ti$ Trore €<ttlv, iva et? i/ceivrjv dTro^Xeirayv teal ypco- 
 fievos avrf) TrapaheiypcaTij 0 piev civ r olovtov 77 , ow av 
 v) av r) aAAo? T 6 ? irpaTTr ], cpco oaiov eivai, o 0 av 
 pi7] TOIOVTO V, p>7J (j)U 5. 
 
 EY0. AAA’ ovtco /3ov\ei, co 2 co/cpare 9 , kcll ovtco 
 aoi cfrpdaco. 
 
 2X2. ’AAA,a /x?)^ /3ov\op,a( 76. 
 
 EY0. ’'Ecttz, tolvvv to fiev tol$ Oeois TrpoatyiKes 
 oaiov, to he /x?) 7rpoa(f)i\es avoaiov . 
 
 7 2X1. na 7 *;aA&) 9 , w E£#i/<£poz/, /cal o5? € 70 ) i^rjTOW 
 
 ecprjcrQa yap 7 rov. An example 
 of Socrates’ insinuating use of 
 dialectic. Euthyphro had not 
 actually made this statement. 
 It had been made for him, and 
 put in his mouth by Socrates, 
 V. S. 5 fin., zx ov l JLLai/ TLV ° L 
 
 Kara rr/w avocnorrira. 
 
 E. Mta t$ea. Notice where 
 this is tending. It has been 
 granted that the gods dispute, 
 and that therefore right and 
 wrong are not fixed, unvariable ; 
 but now we are showing that 
 they are fixed, one, and un¬ 
 alterable. 
 
 Tvapadeiyjian. So in Republic, 
 rovreo 7r apaSeLy/uari xP^. uej/os ) 
 where irapad. is complement to 
 rovrep, in apposition to it. 
 
 V Ean toluvu. Here Socrates 
 has succeeded in eliciting a 
 general definition of piety and 
 impiety from Euthyphro; 
 whether it is a right one or a 
 wrong one, he says, remains to 
 be seen. It will easily appear 
 
 that we are at once involved in 
 a contradiction by this defini¬ 
 tion. Thus— 
 
 The pious is that which pleases 
 the gods. 
 
 But the gods differ. 
 
 .*. That which pleases one 
 god displeases another. 
 
 Again, the impious is that 
 which displeases the gods. 
 
 . \ The same thing can be 
 pious and impious at the same 
 time. 
 
 This contradiction he now 
 proceeds to draw out. 
 
 a\\a ij?(]v . . . “ Why of course 
 I want to hear.” ye implying, 
 “ how can you ask ? ” 
 
 6 eo 7 s 7r poacpiXes. It will be 
 noticed that the weak point in 
 this definition, apart from the 
 dilemma about the gods’ dis¬ 
 putes, is that it presupposes an 
 intimate knowledge of the divine 
 nature unknowable to men. As 
 a definition, therefore, it is of 
 no use. 
 
ET0T<PP22N. 
 
 37 
 
 diro/cpivaadat <76, ovtco vvv aTre/cpivw. et pevTot 
 a\rj6e ?, tovto ov 7 T(o oloa , dWa cri) hrfXoy otl 67re/cSt- 
 Sa£et<; co? eanv dXrjdr] a \ey ei?. 
 
 ET 0 . Ilavu pev ovv. 
 
 CAP. VIII. 
 
 222 . <Pepe S 77 , eTrta/ce^Jrcopeda, tl Xeyopev. to 
 pey OeocfriXes T6 aou 6 6eo(j)i\r)<; ayOpcoTTO? o<7£0?, to 
 Se deopLaes /cat 6 deoptarjs avoctos' ov ravrov d 
 icrrlv , a\\a to ivavTtcoTarov to batov tco avoalco. 
 ov% ovtcos ; 
 
 ET0. Outgo yLtev ouk 
 
 222. Kgh 60 76 (f)aiv€Tat eiprjaOat. 
 
 ET0. A o/cco, 5) '2od/cpaTes' elpy]Tat yap. 
 
 222. O v/covv /cal otl aTaatd^ovcriy , oi 6eot , co 
 Eu0u<ppou, #al SiacfrepovTat aWrjXots /cal eydpa 
 €<jtlv eV aoTOc? 7 rpo? d\\rj\ovs, /cat tovto elprjTat; 
 
 ET0. E'iprjTat yap. 
 
 222. ,r E x@pav Se /cat opya$, co apLCTTe , 97 7rep^ 
 tlvcov Sta(f)opd Troiel\ &he 8e a/coirtopev. ap av el 
 
 B 
 
 dri?^ou otl. y.S. on eu oTS’ 5 rt. 
 B. Aok£, censeo. This per¬ 
 sonal use is not infrequent. Cf. 
 
 Soph. 221, A., 80/CW jUer, 07 T€p 
 &pTi Trpovdep.eda de?v e£evpe?v, 
 toot’ avro ifcv air or ere\e a 6 ai. 
 In 12 init. we have, "'Eywye p.01 
 SoKw [xavOaveiv ; where the con¬ 
 structions meet halfway. 
 
 €fp 7 ]Tcu yap ... In 5 fin. Ka\ 
 t b av 6 (nov av rov p.ev oalov iravrbs 
 ivavrlov. Euthyphro seems to 
 hint, “ As if there could be any 
 doubt about what I have given 
 my assent to ! ” 
 
 7 ] Trepl tlvcov oiacpopa . . . . 
 “ What is the dispute, and about 
 what do they differ ?” 
 
 ap av el. We get &i> thus 
 early in the sentence to show 
 
 that it is to be a potential one, 
 a contingency. So ovk old’ hv el 
 ve(<rat/u, Eur. Med. 941, where 
 the potential particle kv, as in 
 the present passage, qualifies the 
 verb. So in Timaeus 26 B., ovk 
 tiv oI5a ei Svvai/iriv air aura ev 
 pLV'hp.r) TraXiv A afielv ; where tzv 
 must be taken with Svva'ipLTjv. 
 
 7 re pi apLd/xov , ‘ ‘ about number, ’ , 
 i.e. “in a question of numbers. ” 
 In this example Socrates is lead¬ 
 ing up to the principle, that 
 questions on which we should 
 differ would be the abstruse and 
 complex problems of morals, re¬ 
 ligion, &c. Hence the differ¬ 
 ences of the gods must be also 
 concerning the most important 
 and radical principles. 
 
38 
 
 HAATX2N0S 
 
 Siac^epolpieda eyco re /cal av 7 repl dpidpiov, orrorepa 
 7 r\€L(i)> 7) rrepl rovrwv Siatfiopa eydpovs av rjpids 
 C 7 roiol /cal opyl^eadai dWrj\oi$, rj ei ri \oyiapibv e\- 
 dovre 9 7 repi ye rcbv roiovrcov rayy civ airaWa - 
 yelpiev ; 
 
 ET 0 . Yldw ye. 
 
 212. O v/covv /cal 7 repl rov pbeityvos /cal eXarro- 
 F 09 el StacfrepOLpLeOa, eirl rb pierpelv iXdovres rayy 
 rravaaip.ed ’ av tt)? tHa<£opa9 ; 
 
 ET0. ’'EcrTt ravra. 
 
 2)12. Kal € 7 r/ 76 to iaravai eXdovres, cb 9 eyaifiai, 
 rrepl rov /3apvrepov re /cal /covcj)orepov b ia tepid elpiev 
 
 V 
 
 a,z>; 
 
 ET 0 . IIco 9 yap ov ; 
 
 212 . II epl T2V09 Se S?) Sieveydevre? /cal errl t iva 
 /cpicriv ov Svvdpievoi atyitceadai eydpoi ye av aWrj- 
 \o£? elpiev teal opyi^olfieda ; I'crco? ov rrpoyeipbv aol 
 D eariv, aXV e/zoi 5 X670VT09 a/correi , et TaS’ cVt} to t6 
 Shcaiov /cal to abi/cov /cal /eaXov /cal alaypov /cal 
 ayadov /cal /ca/cov . ap’ 02} ravra ean, 7 repl efiv Sie- 
 veydevres koli ov Svvapievoi errl i/cavrjv /cpiaiv avrebv 
 eXdelv eydpoi aXKrfKois ? yiyvojieda, orav yLyvobpieda, 
 /cal eyco /cal av /cal 01 aWoi avdpanroi 7 ravres ; 
 
 ET 0 . ’A\V eanv avrrj rj Siacfiopd, c0 'Zcb/cpare 9, 
 /cal 7 repl rovreov. 
 
 C. 7T€pl ye ra>v r. “In (trivial) 
 matters of this sort.” 
 
 iaravcu, “weighing,” lit. 
 “standing” (act .)i.e. “poising,” 
 “ producing an equilibrium.” 
 Hence the name of statics, 
 which is the consideration of 
 bodies in equilibrium . 
 
 e7rl riva Kp'iaus; “to what 
 tribunal ? ” 
 
 D. raft, “these (subjects of 
 dispute).” 
 
 yiyvo/ieOa. A touch of realism 
 in the middle of an imaginary 
 situation. We should have ex¬ 
 pected ytyvol/ieOa tiv. As the 
 sentence goes on, we see how the 
 transition takes place in the wri¬ 
 ter’s mind, with the words, teal 
 iyw Kai av Kal navres &v 6 ocotoi. 
 
ET0T<I>P12N. 
 
 39 
 
 212. T L Si; ol deoi, & E vdv(ppov, ov/c ehrep tl 
 S tatyipovTcu, Si avra t avra Siacf)epoiVT dv ; 
 
 ET0. n oXXrj avayfcrj. 
 
 212. K al tcjv decov apa, cS 7 evvale E vdvc^pov, E 
 gXXol dXXa S[/caia rjyovvTai /cara top aov Xoyov, 
 Kal KoJXa teal ala^pa Kal dyada teat Kaica. ov yap 
 dv 7rov earaaia^ov aXXijXoLs, el ptrj 7 rept tovtcov 
 S cecfrepovTO' rj yap ; 
 
 ET0. ’0 p 6 co<; Xeyets. 
 
 212. 0 vkovv enrep KaXa r]yovvTat etcaarot /cat 
 
 ay ad a Kal StKaia , ravra Kal cjytXovat, ra Se evavTta 
 tovtcov puaovatv ; 
 
 ET0. Haw ye . 
 
 212. T avTa Se ye, ca? crv ty 7 ?, oi ptev StKaia rjyovv- 
 Tat, ol Se aSiKa' Trepl a Kal apt(f)ia/3rjTovvTe(; aTaatd- 
 %ovat Te Kal r iroXepiovaiv dXXijXots. dp’ ov% ovtco ? ; 8 
 
 ET0. Ovtco?. 
 
 212. Tavra apa, <w? eoiKe , puaelTai Te vtto tcov 
 decov Kal cjuXetTai, Kal deopuarj Te Kal deocptXr] TavT 
 
 * V 
 
 av etrj. 
 
 ET0. ,r E oiKev. 
 
 212. Kal oerta apa Kai avoata ra avra dv etw, 00 
 Evdixppov, tovtcd tco Xoycp. 
 
 ET0. K tvSvvevet. 
 
 rt 8 e introduces a new step in 
 the argument. “What then ? ” 
 
 8 L avra t., “ through,” i.e. 
 
 “ on account of,” “ in our desire 
 to settle such matters as these. 
 
 E. ov yap, &c. That is, “these 
 are the only subjects upon which 
 we can possibly imagine them 
 differing—the highest and most 
 complex questions.” 
 
 &\\a, predicate. 
 
 rauTcfc. Notice accent. 
 
 Tovju) r £ \6ycp. Dativus 
 Modi. Similar examples are 
 Tovrcf) rpoTTCf?, 'jvK’qQti rroWol. In 
 Latin by a preposition or abla* 
 tive, e.g., secundum tuum ser- 
 monem. Hoc modo. 
 
 KLv 8 wevei. It will be well here 
 to review the last section of the 
 Dialogue, which ends at this 
 point. Socrates had asked (cap. 
 
40 
 
 ITAATONOS 
 
 CAP. IX. 
 
 212. O vk apa o rjpoprjv direzcpivuzy go Oavpdcne. 
 
 ov ydp Toino ye rjpcorcov, o 'zvyydvei ravrov ov oaiov 
 t€ zeal avocnov o S’ dv deotyiAe 9 fj, zeal Oeopuaes icrriv, 
 B C 09 eoucev. ware, go Ev6v<fipov , o av vvv 7 roiel<; tov 
 7 rarepa zco\d^u>v, ovhev davpaaroVy el tovto 8poov too 
 pev Au rrrpoacjotAe^ iTOteiSy tc3 Se Kpovcp zeal tw Ovpa - 
 z/e3 €%6p6vj zeal T(p pev f H (pataTcp (f>tAov, ttj Se'Hpa 
 e^Opov* zeal eo t*9 aXAo? rcoy Oeoov erepos erepep 
 SiacfoepeTcu 7 repl avrov, zeal ezceivoLS zccltcl ravid. 
 
 ET0. AAV olpcu, go 2jGozcpaT€Sj 7 repi ye tovtou 
 t gov Oeoov ovSeva erepov erepep 8ia<fiepecr0aLy go 9 ov 8el 
 Bc/crjv 8 l86vcu ezcelvov, 09 dv aSlzccos rtva dirozcreivp. 
 
 7 init.) for a general definition 
 of tlie pious and impious. Eu- 
 thyphro’s definition had been, 
 “ That which the gods love is 
 pious ; that which they hate is 
 impious.” “But,” replies So¬ 
 crates, “you have already al¬ 
 lowed that they are not at one 
 with each other on many sub¬ 
 jects, and, if so, they will cer¬ 
 tainly dispute on this one we 
 are considering. Therefore if 
 one god loves the same thing 
 which another hates, your defi¬ 
 nition will not hold.” 
 
 % S’ %.v deocf) . . . “Butwhat¬ 
 ever is beloved of heaven, that 
 is also hated of heaven.” Notice 
 conjunctive and indicative 
 senses. 
 
 B. ji\v An ... For Zeus 
 had set the example of ill-using 
 parents, whilst Cronus and Ura¬ 
 nus had been both of them suf¬ 
 ferers, and Hephaestus had been 
 expelled by his father from 
 heaven. 
 
 Hal €Kelvois Kara ravra. It 
 will be to them according to the 
 
 same,” i.e. “there will be the 
 same difference in their case as 
 well.” For this dative V. S. note 
 on toj dtdao'KaAcp Aa%e S'iktjv, 5 
 ad. med. B. 
 
 ’AAA. 5 olfiai. Euthyphro here 
 starts on a wrong scent. “ How¬ 
 ever they may differ ” says he, 
 “ in other things, they do not 
 differ on this cardinal point, 
 viz., that justice should be 
 done.” “No more do men dif¬ 
 fer on that point,” replies 
 Socrates. 
 
 ws ov Set . . . The ov seems 
 redundant to us. But it brings 
 out the differing, the other side 
 of the question to the one 
 usually adopted. It is what the 
 opponent would say. We have 
 ov and not /jltj in the dependent 
 sentence because, in the words of 
 Matthiae, the sentence does not 
 express the thought of the 
 speaker (but that of another 
 person), nor has reference to his 
 thought. Or we may look at it 
 merely as the negation of Set, 
 comparing ovk iw, ov (prj/M, 
 
ET0T^PI2N. 
 
 41 
 
 2 X 2 . T c Se; avOpcoireov, co E vdvppov, r)Sr) tcvo 9 
 rjfcovaas apjfyicrftTiTOVvTOSjtos t ov dSc/ccos diro/CTecvavTa C 
 rj aWo dSc/coos TTOiovvra otlovv ov Sec Sc/crjy ScSovac ; 
 
 ET 0 . Ot'Sev pcev ovv ttclvovtcu tclvt dpcpccr- 
 / 3 rjTOvvres /cal aWodc /cal iv rocs Scfcacrrrjp/oc?. dSc- 
 /covvres yap TrapuroWa , 7 ravra ttocovctc /cal \eyovac 
 (pevyovres rrjv S(/cr)v. 
 
 2 X 2 . /cal opcoXoyovcrcv, 00 EvOvppov, aSc/cecv, 
 /cal o pcoXoy ovvt e^ opccas ov Secy (pacrl crpas ScSovac 
 Si/crjv ; 
 
 ET 0 . OvSapccos tovto ye. 
 
 2 X 2 . O v/c apa 7 ray ye ttocovctc /cal Xeyovac. tovto 
 
 yap , olpcaiy ov t oX^ccoac Xeyecv ovS ’ dpcpccrf 37 jTecv, 00s 
 ov%l, €67 rep dSc/covac ye, Soreov Sc/crjy * dXX’ olpcac, ov D 
 epaaev dSc/celv' rj yap ; 
 
 ET 0 . ’A Xrjdrj Xeyec?. 
 
 2 X 2 . Ov/c apa e/cecvo ye dpcpca/ 3 r]TOV(TCv } oj? ov tov 
 dSc/covvra Sec ScSovac Sc/crjv dX\e/cecvo ctcos a/jccpicr- 
 / 3 rjrovac, to Tt? earev 6 aSc/ccov /cal tc Spcov /cal 
 7 rore. 
 
 C. oudev fiev ovv ttclvovtcu. 
 “ On the contrary, they are 
 always,” &c. Cf. Soph. 0 . C. 
 
 3 °> 3 1 * 
 
 OI. f) bevpo 7rpo(T(rr€ixoyra Ka^op- 
 pL&lievov ; 
 
 AN. real 5rj juev ovv irdpovra. 
 
 Oed. On his way towards us ? 
 An. Nay. Just here. 
 
 In this reply Enthyphro fails 
 to see the exact meaning of 
 Socrates’ question. He has not 
 been asked, ‘ ‘ Do men try to get 
 ofF punishment ? ” but “ Do men 
 openly deny that justice must be 
 done after a crime ? ” This 
 Socrates puts more clearly in his 
 next question. 
 
 fi Ka\ o/jlo\. “Yes, but dc 
 they allow, &c. ? ” koX prefixed 
 to a word thus often implies a 
 belief in the speaker that the 
 thing is not so ; Y.S. ch. 2, init. 
 tl Kal Tvoiovvrd ere <pi](TL dicupQel- 
 pziv robs veovs ; 
 
 ovk &pa. The difficulty is to get 
 them to acknowledge themselves 
 in the wrong. 
 
 D. rb ris, &c. A good ex¬ 
 ample of a whole sentence, con¬ 
 taining two or three clauses, 
 becoming a noun substantivo 
 and being manipulated as such. 
 Cf. Plat. Rep. 327. ovKovVf tfv 
 
 5 ’ eyoo, €V eri Xelnerai rb 7 rei- 
 (Tcofiev v/ids , a>s XPV i)P-ds acpeivai. 
 Here we have the difficulty stated 
 
42 
 
 riAAT12N02 
 
 ET ©. \\r)9r] \eyeis. 
 
 212 . O vkovv avrd ye ravra teal oi 6 eot rreirov- 
 
 BacriVy e'nrep oraaid^ovai rrepi twv hucaiwv /cal 
 dScfccov, gj? 6 aos \oyo 9, real oi pbiv (foaatv dWrjXovs 
 dSc/celv, oi Se ov (joaatv ; errel enelvo ye higrrov, go 
 6 avpbdate, ovSels ovre deoov ovre avdpcbrrcov 7oXfia 
 E \eyeiv, cos ou tgg 76 dSiKovvn horeov Si/crjv. 
 
 ET 0 . N ai, tovto /mev dXrjdes Xeyecs, go ^co/cpares, 
 re ye KefydXaiov. 
 
 212. ’AAA’ etcaarov ye, olfiai, do E vdvcjopov, rcov 
 rrpa^devroov d pb(\o Lavrov a iv oi dpbfpLcr/SrjTOvvTes, feat 
 avOpcorroi Kai deoi, e’nrep dpucfocaftrjrovcu 6eoi rrpd^eoos 
 rivos rrepi Siaefoepopievoi oi fiev hucaicos (foaalv avrrjv 
 rrerrpd^Oai^ oi Se dbitcaos' ap ov% ovreos ; 
 
 ET©. Yldvv ye . 
 
 in definite language. 1 { Men are 
 ready enough to do justice when 
 they know what it is, especially in 
 its special cases, what and where 
 and when. The difficulty is to 
 know these points.” 
 
 ovkovv, &c. “ Is it not then 
 
 the same case exactly with the 
 gods too?” Lit. “Do not the 
 gods experience this ? ” Cf. 
 Rep. 563, C., avrbs yap els aypbv 
 vopevo/ievos Oa/aa avrb Trdo'x&‘ 
 
 00s 6 <rbs Xoyos. Again, Eu- 
 thyphro had only had this ad¬ 
 mission extorted from him. V. 
 S. 8, D. 
 
 ov (paaiv, “negant,” i.e. nec— 
 aiunt. 
 
 E. r<p ye adiKovvTt, Dative of 
 
 interest; the person concerned 
 in the Sbnjs Soo'ls. V. S. note 
 on 5 B. ad med. 
 
 t 6 ye Ke(pd\aiov. Jelf describes 
 this as an accusative in appo¬ 
 sition ; but it is hard to help 
 looking upon it in some passages 
 as a nom., e.g. Theat. 190, B., 
 ^ KaX , rb TravTW KetydXaiov, 
 cKOTrel ef 7 tot, &c. Here, no 
 doubt, the accusatival sense 
 suits better, like such expressions 
 as eV) 8e arevdxoyro ywaXcKes 
 n arpoKXov TTpScpaaiv, a(puy 5’ 
 avTcov Kr]be’ eKaarir]. 
 
 ejeaarov. Not “ every parti¬ 
 cular,” but a “ particular case,” 
 or “particulars,” explained fur¬ 
 ther on by 7 r pdietis rivos . 
 
m ©T^PUN. 
 
 43 
 
 S'* 
 
 CAP. X. 
 
 2 X2. "Idt TOtvWy £ (f)i\€ E v 6 vcf)pov, StSa^ov /cal 9 
 €/jL6, lvcl cro<fiooT€po<; yevco/jicu , tl gol Te/cfirjpcov cgtlv , 
 ax? 7Tavre9 fleol rjyovvraL eneivov a$Lfcoo$ t eOvavcu, 89 
 dv 6 rjrevcov avSpocjoovos <y e ybpLevo$, £uv8e6el 9 vi to tov 
 8 ec 77 roToi; rov anroQavbvTOs, (pddarj Te\evTr]GCL$ Sid tu 
 heapbd, 7 rplv rov ^vv^rjaavra irapa t cbv i^rjfyrjroov 7 repl 
 avrov TrvOeGOcu, tl yprj Troiecv , /cal virep rov tolovtov 
 Srj opOcbs eyet hre^ievai Kal iiriGKigTVTeGQaL cjoovov rov 
 vlov too 7 rarp'i’ Wl, irepl tovtcov TreLpoo tl puoL cra</>€9 
 ivSei ^clgOcll, g$9 TravTos pbdWov irdvTes Oeol rjyovvTaL 
 
 opdob? 'bye.LV TCLVTTJV TTJV 
 
 8 t 8 a£. Enthyphro being ^pro¬ 
 bably discouraged by having bis 
 mistake thus plainly set before 
 him, has to be reassured by 
 fresh professions of inferior 
 knowledge on Socrates’ part. 
 
 &s Ttavres deol rjyovvraL . . . 
 After these words we have a 
 general description of the occur¬ 
 rence, the words Kal vi rep rod 
 roLovrov depending on ri reK- 
 fjLTipiov earw &s : “ How do you 
 know that all the gods think .. . 
 and that it is right ? ” 
 
 os av Qr\revu>v . . . (pQacn So¬ 
 crates puts the case indefinitely, 
 so as to qualify the direct inter¬ 
 rogative and soften his apparent 
 incredulity : “ Supposing a man 
 to be serving, and were to com¬ 
 mit a murder,” &c. Hence the 
 .employment of the potential 
 expressing contingent or possible 
 action, and of the conjunctive. 
 But it is not an entirely ima¬ 
 ginary case. Hence the con¬ 
 junctive is primary. 
 
 av 8 po(p 6 uos yev. This expres¬ 
 sion seems to imply possible 
 
 7 rpa^LV. KCJLV pLOL L/cavobs B 
 
 innocence of intent to slay. 
 Translate, “ committed man¬ 
 slaughter.” 
 
 (pdacrr) reXtor^aas. Take with 
 TTpii/, “ loses his life before. . 
 
 Cf. 4, init., os ye rvyyavei &v 
 ev /j.aXa Trpea^vrTjs. For this 
 verb, Xen. Cyr. 1, 3, 12. %aAe- 
 7 rbu tfv aAA ov (pQaaai rodro rcoL'i]- 
 cravra , sc. “To do this before 
 he did.” 
 
 8 ecr/j.d. Noun heteroclite. 
 eTri(TKr}Trrea 9 ai. “ Dicitur de 
 iis, quae cum impetu quodam in 
 aliquid irruunt.” Stallb, S/ctjtttw 
 is used of a darting light in 
 Aesch. Ag. 302, A l/jLj/rjv 5 ’ virep 
 Topytjoiuv ecTKrjipev (paos. For the 
 gen. <p 6 vov, cf. damnatur ca¬ 
 pitis, and capitis accusare in 
 Nepos. 
 
 Tvavrbs paWou. The sense 
 of comparison is lost here : 
 “without doubt,” “absolutely.” 
 Cf. Rep. 555, D., Kal ela 8 ai/e(- 
 £ovres er l 7 tA ovaiwrepoi Kal ev- 
 n/iirepoi yiyvcovrai ; to which 
 the answer is, iravrds ye /xuWov 
 
44 
 
 riAATHNOS 
 
 evheil-r), ey/cw/ud^mv ae iirl crotpia ovSeiroTe wav- 
 
 G OfjLCLL. 
 
 ET0. A AX’ !'cr co 9 ov/c oXiyov epyov iariv, co 2 co¬ 
 mpare 9‘ eVel iravv ye Ga<ficds e%OLpu av eTTLSei^ai oot . 
 
 2 X2. Mav^avct)* otc gw ho/cS) tCov hucaaTtov 
 SvcrfjLaOeaTepos elvcu’ eirel i/ceivois ye evhei^ei hrjXov 
 otl, co 9 dhucd re ecrn /cal oi deol diravre^ tcl roiavra 
 
 piGOVGLV. 
 
 ET0. Udvv ye Gacfrco 9 , co Sco/cpare?, eav Trep 
 a/covcoGL ye puov \eyov 70 s. 
 
 CAP. XI. 
 
 C 2 X 2 . AXX’ d/covGovrai y edvirep ev 8o/cfj$ Xeyetv . 
 t o8e Se gov evevor)Ga a/jb^Xeyovros, /cal 7r/309 epcavTov 
 g/ co7rco' el 6 tl pbdXtGTa pee Evdvcppcov SiSd^ecev, C09 
 oi deol diravTes rov tolovtov ddvarov rjyovvrab dhucov 
 elvac, tl pbdXXov eycb pbepbdOrj/ca 7 rap' Ei Idvcppovos, tl 
 7 tot €<jt l to oGiov T€ /cal to avoGLov \ OeopbLGe? pcev 
 yap tovto to epyov , C09 eoc/cev, ecrj dv. aXXa yap ov 
 
 B. eVet. To this truly mobile 
 particle it is hard to assign a 
 meaning that will serve for more 
 than two consecutive passages. 
 Euthyphro says, “ It will likely 
 be a long affair ; ” and “ I could 
 lay the question before you very 
 clearly. 5 ’ What then is the 
 connection between these two 
 remarks? If we look on to 
 Socrates’ rejoinder it will seem 
 that he takes Euthyphro’s re¬ 
 mark to imply, “You will need 
 a lot of explanation,” and allows 
 that he is certainly very dense. 
 The full sense would then seem 
 to be, “ ’Twill be a long business 
 since (you will need it explained 
 very clearly, and this I shall be 
 able, and) feel it my duty to do.” 
 
 Havdavctiy “I comprehend.” 
 Cf. Ar. Birds, 1003, ME. May- 
 Qaveis ; TIE. Ov fiavdavu0. Others 
 join fxavQavco otl . . . 
 
 rwv dLKao- tu>v dvcr/jL. Refers to 
 the vfords in 3 B., 7 to\v av rjpuy 
 Trporepov 7 repl iLceivov Adyos yeV- 
 olto iy Tcp diKacrTTipicp tt epl ifiov. 
 C. r 6 de refers to what follows. 
 Ei > 9 v(ppcDv. The third person 
 here instead of the second gives 
 an additional weight to the state¬ 
 ment of the situation, enabling 
 Euthyphro as it were to put 
 himself outside himself, and 
 view the difficulty as a disin¬ 
 terested spectator. 
 
 ws tWev, i.e. according to 
 Euthyphro’s decision on ground 
 of his own knowledge. 
 
Er0T4>P12N. 
 
 45 
 
 rovrcp i(f>dvrj apn dopLGpLeva to oglov /cal firj. to yap 
 Oeopucrh ov /cal 0eocf)L\e< ? ecf>dvrj. wGTe tovtov piv 
 d$Lr)/iL ere , g 3 Eo0o<£poy, /cal 6t /3ov\ei, iravres avTO D 
 fiyeLcrOwaav 6eol abucov /cal 'iravTe? pucrovvTcov. aXX 
 apa tovto vvv eiravopdovpLeOa iv tw Xoyco o 
 dv 'TTCLVTe 9 Oi 0€ol pUGCOGlV, aVOGLOV eCTTLVj O b (XV 
 (j)L\d)GLV, OCTLOV * O b' aV OL pL€V (pL\(i)<TLV, 01 be p^LGCOGiV, 
 ovberepa rj dpLcfrorepa ; ap’ outgo /3ouXet rjpdv wpiaOab 
 VVV TTCpl TOO OCTLOV /Cal TOO aVOGLOV \ 
 
 ET0. Tt ycip /ca)\vet, co 'Ecti/cpares ; 
 
 212. OuSev e/xe ye, go Eu^utipov, czXXa 0*0 S?) to 
 crov G/coirei, el tovto vTrode/xevos ovtco paGTa pie 
 bibd^ei^ o 07 lecryov. 
 
 ET0. ’AXX’ eycoye (foalrjv av tovto elvac to octlov, 
 o dv 7 ravT6? ol 0eol cfoiXcoGL, /cal to evavTLOv, o avE 
 7ravT€? oi deol /jlmtSmtiv t avocnov. 
 
 212. Ov/covv emcTKorrddpLev av tovto, go Evdvfipov, 
 el /caXco? Xeyerac; rj ieo/xev /cal outgo? rjpioov T€ avTcov 
 aTrobe^cojxeda /cat tgov aXkcov, eav fxovov (joy t/<? 
 ti eyeiv ovtgo, ^vy^copoOvres c^eiv ; rj G/ceiTTeov, tl 
 \eyei 6 \eycov ; 
 
 ET0. 2/c6ttt€ov. olpbai pcevTOL eycoye tovto vvvl 
 /caXco? \eyea0ai. 
 
 ov TovTcp i(p. apn up., “ These 
 distinctions have no bearing on 
 the definition of piety and im¬ 
 piety.”—Jowett. 
 
 rb yap, subj., deo/iiabs ov appo- 
 sitive, Ka\ 6eo(pi\es, predicative. 
 
 a,<piTjfjLi cre, “I let yon off from 
 this ; ” i.e., “You need not con¬ 
 cern yourself about proving that 
 to me.” 
 
 D. 67T avop0ovfj.e6a, “set up¬ 
 right afresh ; ” prove and justify 
 any proposition. Stallb. aptly 
 compares i\eyx* LV , which com¬ 
 bines the two notions of dis¬ 
 
 proving an antagonist’s assertion 
 and proving your own. Cf. Ar. 
 Eccl. 485, Trpayfx £\eyxQev. 
 
 ws h p. 4 v. The emphatic word 
 in this sentence is iravres, 
 “What all the gods hate.” 
 
 ovBerepa 3 ) a/uepbrepa. Cf. Rep. 
 555 , D, ol H €V d(p€'l\OVT€S XP ea > 
 ol Bh &ti[jloi yeybvores, ol Bh 
 afKpbrepa. 
 
 E. 7]/uuv re avr. cnroBex . • . 
 * * on our own or other’s autho¬ 
 rity.” Cf. Phaed. 92, E., /ur? re 
 ifiavrov [a^t* 6.\\ov airoSf' 
 
 X^aOau 
 
46 
 
 FTAAT12N02 
 
 CAP. XII. 
 
 2 fl. T do 'ya6e, / 3 e\,nov elcrofieda . ivvorjaov 
 10 yap to tolovSc' dpa to octlov , ct£ oatov e&Ti, (joiXeLTai 
 
 VITO TOW 0600V, 7 ) OTL (f)L\€?TCU, OCTLOV 6GTLV ; 
 
 ET0. Ov/c 0I8' o tl Xeyeis, do 2 co/cpare 9 . 
 
 212. AAA’ eyft> TreipdcropLcu aacfoearepov (fopdcraL 9 
 Xeyopiev tl (foepopLevov /cal cjoepov, /cal ayopuevov /cal 
 dyov, /cal opdopbevov /cal opobv' /cal iravTa tcl tol- 
 avTa pbavOdveLs otl eTepa dWrfXcov 6 gtI /cal fj erepa. 
 ET0. 'Eycoye pLOL So/coo puavdaveLv. 
 
 222. Ov/covv /cal (joCXovpLevov tl £gtl, /cal tovtov 
 €T6pov to (jnXovv ; 
 
 T A pa rb ticriov ... In other 
 words, “Are these gods with 
 their quarrels and disputes to 
 be the rule for us, or is there 
 a higher basis or sanction of 
 Right which they recognise in 
 their better moments ? 55 
 
 ovk 0I8 5 . . . Notice Euthy- 
 phro’s in acquaintance with the 
 logic of the Sophists. 
 
 Ka\ Travra, &c. “And that 
 there is a difference in all such 
 things; and where the difference 
 lies.” ^ 
 
 “in what way, manner, or 
 regard.” Cf. Lat. qua. 
 
 ovkovu , &c, The drift of this 
 piece of reasoning requires eluci¬ 
 dation. I11 brief it is this : “All 
 things that are in a particular 
 condition are so because they 
 have been brought into it by a 
 motive power, e.g. the carried, 
 the led, the become, the loved, 
 have all had some one to carry, 
 lead, make, or love them. Now 
 Euthyphro and I are asking, Is 
 piety to be defined as ‘ the loved 
 of the gods V No. Because we 
 /nust not say that, because we 
 
 find the two (viz., piety and the 
 loved of the gods) roughly corre¬ 
 sponding, we are to rest satisfied. 
 Piety may be something more 
 than the loved of the gods. And 
 we know that the ‘ loved of the 
 gods 5 implies that the gods love. 
 Now the gods loving is prior to 
 loved of the gods. So we can 
 put our definition back a step 
 and say, ‘ Piety is found in all 
 cases of the gods loving; 5 and 
 there may be other cases un¬ 
 known to us of piety. Clearly, 
 then, Piety, or the Holy, is the 
 larger and anterior notion. For 
 ‘ Heaven loves * is anterior to 
 ‘loved of Heaven. 5 If a reason 
 or cause is to be found for 
 ‘ Heaven loves, 5 we are irre¬ 
 sistibly forced back to the prin¬ 
 ciple because it is holy. 55 This, 
 then, is the order : (1) This is 
 Holy; (2) Therefore all the gods 
 love it; so we find that (3) Things 
 holy are god-beloved. Thus does 
 Plato deify the Idea, and ration¬ 
 alise the deity, being driven to 
 his conclusion by the state of 
 the popular theology. 
 
Erer^p&N. 
 
 47 
 
 ET0. riois 7 ap ov ; 
 
 2X2. Aeye S/j pcot, rrorepov to pepopcevov , Stem B 
 c peperac 9 pepopcevov earev, rj 8c aAAo r t ; 
 
 ET0. Ou/c, a’XXa 8m touto. 
 
 212 . Kal to ayopcevov Srj, 8 cotl ayerac , /cat to 
 opcopcevov, 8 iotl oparac ; 
 
 ET0. Haw ye . 
 
 2 X 2 . Od/e opa Stem opcopcevov ye iarc, Sea rovro 
 oparac, aAAa rovvavrcov Score oparac, Sea rovro 
 GpcopcevoV ovSe Score ayopcevov iarc, Sea rovro aye¬ 
 rac aAAa Score ayerac, Sea rovro ayopcevov' ovSe 
 Store pepopcevov, peperac, aAAa Score peperac, 
 
 pepopcevov . apa /caraSrjAov, go E vdvppov, o /3ovAopcac 
 Aeye tv ; /3oi/Aopcac Se roSe, ore, ec re ycyverac rj C 
 ec re rraayec re, ov% ore ycyvopcevov iarc, ycyverac, 
 aXX’ ore ycyverac , ycyvopcevov earev' ovS 9 ore rraayov 
 earl, rraa^ec, aAA’ ore rraayei, rraayov earev * fj ov 
 ^vyxcopecs outgo ? ; 
 
 ET0. ’'Eycoye. 
 
 2X2. O vkovv /cal to pcAovpcevov rj ycyvopcevov re 
 earev rj rraa^ov rc vrro rov ; 
 
 ET0. n aw ye. 
 
 2 X 2 . K al rovro apa ovreo ? e%et, coarrep ra rrporepa * 
 ou;^ <m pcAovpcevov iarc, pcAecrac vrro dov pcAecrac , 
 aXX’ oTt pcAecrac, pcAovpcevov ; 
 
 ET0. ’Avay/crj. 
 
 B. Ou/c &pa, «&c. This is to 
 show that the deocpiAes is not 
 the cause of the gods loving it, 
 but, e contrario , the gods loving 
 is the cause of its being OeotfuAes. 
 11 is not therefore holy, because 
 6eo(pL\4s. 
 
 C. /3 ovAo/jlcu Aeyeiv, “mean..” 
 Cf. French “vouloir dire.’* 
 
 O vkovv ... il Well, and the 
 loved has become what it is, 
 or is what it is through some 
 agency ? ” 
 
 vTrb o3v. V. S. note on &v 
 TTpOZLTTOV, II. 
 
48 
 
 nAAT12N02 
 
 D 212. T l 8rj ovv Aey ofiev 7 repl tov oglov } cb Eu- 
 0 v(ppov ; aWo tl (fu^ecTcu vtto 6 et bv n tclvtcov, co <? 6 
 g'o<? \ 0709 ; 
 
 ET0. N at' 
 
 212. *Apa 81 a tovto, otl oglov iartv, rj &l aAAo ti ; 
 ET0. O v/c, aWd 81 a tovto. 
 
 212. A loti a pa 'oglov ogtl, ffrCkevrai , aU’ ov% otl 
 
 <j)L\.6LTaL, Sid TOVTO OGLOV €G7 tV ; 
 
 ET0. 5 'E OLK€V. 
 
 212 . AUa fiev Brj Slotl ye tyiketTaL vtto 0 ecbv, 
 fpiAovfievov ogtl /cal 0 eocf)LAe<> to 0 eocf)LAe< ?. 
 
 ET0. llco? yap ov ; ^ 
 
 212 . O v/c dpa to 0 eo(j)LAe$ oalov ogtlv , (b E£- 
 0 ij(f)pov } ovSe to oglov 0 eo(j)tAe 9 , G 09 cn) AeyeL?, aAA’ 
 E eTepov toito tovtov. 
 
 ET0. riw9 $rf, co '2(bfcpaT €$; 
 
 212. f 'Orfc ofioAoyovfiev to fiev oglov Sta tovto 
 <j)iAeLG0aL , 0T6 oglov eGTLV , aXV 01; StoTt (piXelraL, 
 oglov elvGL * 77 7 ap ; 
 
 ET12. Na/. 
 
 D. &AAo t: (pi\e7rai . . . i.e. 
 “ We have without doubt agreed 
 that all the gods love it.” The 
 whole phrase was &AAo tl So 
 in Her. I, 109, &AAotl t) Ael- 
 ttetcll rb evGevtev E/JLol Kivbvvoov 
 6 fieyicTTOs ; 
 
 Al 6 tl &pa ... We here as¬ 
 sume the major premise, “Be¬ 
 cause a thing is holy .*. it is 
 god-beloved.” 
 
 Ovk apa rb Oeo^lAes, &c. The 
 god-beloved is not therefore the 
 same thing as the holy, or “ The 
 god-beloved and the holy are not 
 coextensive and coincident.” 
 
 E. otl 6/jioAoyovfXEv ... In 
 this chapter Socrates has been 
 proving two propositions •— 
 
 (1) That the GeoQlAes is so 
 because the gods love it; in 
 other words, that the gods loving 
 must be regarded as something 
 coming before the existence of 
 the OeocPlAes, or god-beloved. 
 
 (2) That the OeocPlAes cannot 
 with any reason or accuracy be 
 said to be the same thing as the 
 oaiov. Euthyphro allows that 
 the gods love a thing because 
 it is holy—A l 6 tl &pa ocn 6 v ectti 
 (PiAe7tcu. This, then, is some¬ 
 thing prior to the gods loving, 
 and if the gods loving is prior 
 to the god-beloved, then, a for¬ 
 tiori , the 0a lou is prior to and 
 greater than the OeocPlAes. 
 
EY0Y4>PX2N. 
 
 49 
 
 CAP. XIII. 
 
 2X2. To Se ye deocpiXes ort cpiXecTaL vtto 0€qjv, 
 avTu> tov T&) tg3 (piXeiadai 0eo<pL\e<z elvaL, aXX' ov% 
 otl OeocpLXe 9 , Sea tovto (fnXecaOat. 
 
 ET0. A Xrjdr} Xeyecs. 
 
 2X2. AXV et ye ravrbv rjv , co cpiXe JLvdvcppou, to 
 OeocpcXes /cal to oglov , 66 aev Sea to oglov ef/cu 
 icpiXecTO to oglov, /ca\ Sta to deocptXes elvac ecpc- 
 XetTO av to deocpiXe?' el Se Sea to (pLXeiadcu vi to 11 
 decov to OeocpiXes deocpiXe ? rjv, teal to oglov av Sea 
 to (piXecG0ai oglov rjv . vvv Se opas, otl evavTicos 
 e^eTov, co? iravTcnraGiv eTepco ovTe aXXrjXcov. to jxev 
 yap, OTL < pL\€LTCU, eGTLV olov (piXeLG0aL‘ TO S’ OTfc 
 €gtlv olov (piXeLGdai , Slu tovto (piXeLTaL. /cal klvSv- 
 veveL?, co Ev0iicppov, epcoTcojjievos to oglov , o r l 
 
 *A\A.* ef ye ravrbu ?jv. Again, 
 premising these three steps— 
 (i) The holy is loved by the 
 gods because it is holy; (2) The 
 gods love certain things; (3) The 
 god-beloved is the result of the 
 gods loving—we can argue thus : 
 If the holy and the god-beloved 
 were the same, from (3), then 
 the holy would be the result of 
 the gods loving; but from (1) 
 the holy is the cause of the gods 
 loving, which is absurd. Next: 
 If the holy and the god-beloved 
 were the same, from (1), the god- 
 beloved would be loved by the 
 gods, because it is god-beloved, 
 i.e. it would be the cause of the 
 gods loving; but from (3) it is 
 the result of the gods loving, 
 which is absurd. 
 
 olov <pi\eiaQai, i.e. ttertov. “Pro¬ 
 pter suam ipsius naturam.”— 
 Stallb. 
 
 otl <pi\e7rai, i.e. 6eo(pi\es: 
 i.e. we place it under the holy 
 things, because we recognise in 
 
 it the characteristics of the 
 ftenov. 
 
 t b /met / yap ... A restate¬ 
 ment of the position. The one, 
 viz., the god-beloved, being 
 loved, or because it is loved, is 
 lovable, or “of a kind to be 
 loved” (Jowett), while the other 
 is loved beeause it is of a kind 
 to be loved. In the latter case 
 the lovable qualities are evident, 
 in the former they need to be 
 drawn out. 
 
 Kal KLj/dvueveis . . . “So it ap¬ 
 pears, Euthyphro, that you will 
 not make known to me the true 
 essence of the holy, but only 
 tell me one of its particular cases 
 or manifestations,” viz., that all 
 the gods love it. Y. S. note on 
 7, eidos. ElSos and ovaia are 
 different names for the same 
 thing, viewed in different lights : 
 elSos, the true form or model, 
 exemplar; ovaia, the really ex¬ 
 isting, opposed to 7r aOos, what is 
 experienced [Traax^rai) by men. 
 
 E 
 
50 
 
 ITAATONOS 
 
 7 tot eaTi, ttj v fiev ova Lav pot. avTOv ov /3ovXea6ai 
 SrjXwaai, 7ra#o? he ti irepl avrov Xeyeiv, 6 tl Tre- 
 TTOV 06 tovto to oaiov, (fyiXelaOac in to i ravTcov OecoV 
 o n he ov, ovttco elires. el ovv aot (piXov, fir) fie 
 a7roicpvy\rr), aXXd irakiv elire e£ apX0 7ro ' r6 ov to 
 oatov eiTe (pcXeiTat vi to Oeoov, €lt€ OTihrj Traax^i. ov 
 ydp 7 repi tovtov htotaopeOa' aXX' elire TrpoOvfioos, 
 tl eaTi to re oa:ov kcli to avoaiov' 
 
 ET0. AXX , co 'Eco/cpcLTes, ov/c e%co eycoye o7Tgo? 
 aot ehrco o voco. 7 TepcepxeTcu yap 7r<a? del r)fiiv o av 
 TrpoOwfieda, Kal ovk eOeXei fievetv ottov av thpvaco- 
 fieda avTO. 
 
 212. T ov rjfieTepov irpoyovov , go Ev0v(f)pov, eoifcev 
 elvai AathaXov tcl vtto aov Xeyopeva. Kal el fiev 
 avra eyco eXeyov Kal eTtOefirfv, tacos av fie eire- 
 OKWirTes, go? apa Kal ifiol KaTd ttjv eKetvov £vyye- 
 vetav tcl ev toIs Xoyots epya dirohchpaaKei Kal ovk 
 eOeXei fievetv fl ottov av tls avra 0f)‘ vvv he — aol yap 
 al viroOeaets elatv—dXXov hr) Ttvos het aKcoptfiaTOs. 
 ov yap eOeXovat aot fievetv, go? Kal avTco aoi hoKet. 
 
 ET0. E fiol he hoKet a%ehov tl tov avTov aKcofi- 
 
 fiaros, to 'ZooKpaTes, hetaOat tcl Xeyofieva' to yap 
 
 8 n ttcttovOs t 2 > 8 c ... “ a par¬ 
 ticular phase which the holy 
 undergoes,” “one aspect of the 
 holy.” V.S. note on 9 , ovkovl>, 
 &c. 
 
 B. efrrco t> vow, “express my 
 thoughts.” 
 
 'jrepiepxGTcu. Sc. to the same 
 point. 
 
 et pcev . . . vvv be, infra. 
 
 &pa, “as you say.’ 
 
 toC rjfxeTepou irpoy. Ct. Alcib, 
 Maj. 121, A., Socr. /ecu ydo rb 
 rj/xerspov, S) 7 evva'le ’AAKifiiabr], 
 tis AaidaAov . . . ( avacpeoercu ). 
 
 C. a 7 robibpdcrK€i. These were 
 certain statues or figures en¬ 
 dowed with locomotive power. 
 
 c toi , with reference to Euthy- 
 phro’s words, nept.epx*Tai . . . 
 7 ]/juv ... For col V. S. note on 
 5 , bibacKdAcp. 
 
 ov . . . ideAovci /xeveiv, “show 
 an inclination to be on the 
 move.” Jowett. 
 
 rb yap, &c. “ For it is not 1 
 
 who worked in this locomotion, 
 this inability to stay in one 
 place . . .” 
 
ET0T^P12N. 
 
 51 
 
 7 repuevai civtols tovto /cal fir] fievetv ev tcG avTa> ov/c 
 €7co elfii 6 evTi0efc, dWa erv fioi So/ce?9 6 AalBaXos' D 
 € 7 rel ifiov ye eve/ca efievev dv ravra ovtcos. 
 
 212. KtvSvvevco dpa w eraepe , e/ceivov t ov 
 
 dvSpos Seworepos yeyovevai ttjv Te^vrjv toctovtw , ocr&) 
 
 6 fiev ra avrov fiova eiroLeL ov fievovra, ey go 8e 
 7 rpo? toZ? ifiavrov , 009 eoace, /cal rd aWorpia. /cal 
 Srjra tovto fioi Trj 9 Te^vrj^ eaTL KOfi’^roTaTOv, oti 
 d/ccov elfii cro(f)6 <?. i/3ov\ofirjv yap dv fioi toi>9 \o- 
 70U9 fieveuv, /cal d/civrjTco 9 I8pva0ai fiaWov rj 7rpo 9 E 
 A ai8a\ov aocf^la t a TavTaXov \prjfiaTa yeveadat. 
 teal tovtcov fiev a8rjv. iTreiSrj 8e fioi So/cecs av Tpv- 
 (j)d.Vj ainos ctol £ vfi'Kpodvfirjaofiai Selvae, 07T&)9 dv 
 fie 8i8a^ai<; Trepl tov og'iov' /cal firj irpoairoicdfnj 9 . 
 
 D. ifiov 76 eVe/ca, “as far as 
 I am concerned.” Cf. Eng. 
 “for me ;” e.g., “You may go 
 for me” = “I will not stop 
 you.” So Her. I, 42, rod (pvXacr- 
 ctovtos elvtKtv. 
 
 beivirtpos tt iv Tex*'. Cf. rbu 
 Sri/Mov Tlirdevs ; ch. I and 
 note. 
 
 rrjs rex^St partitive geni¬ 
 tive, “amongst the character¬ 
 istics of my art this one is the 
 finest.” 
 
 fiaWov &c., “rather than 
 to possess the wealth of Tantalus 
 besides the cunning of Daedalus.” 
 
 E. abr\v, SC. exojuei'. “A 
 truce to this.” 
 
 rpv<pav, “ mollem et delicatum 
 te praebere,” Stallb. This verb 
 expresses the feeling of fas¬ 
 tidiousness and effeminacy con¬ 
 sequent upon indulgence or deli¬ 
 cate living, all which is here 
 transferred to the intellectual 
 sphere. 
 
 avr 6 s aoi, &c. “ I will take 
 
 pains to help you towards point¬ 
 ing out to me ...” As it were 
 infuse the healthy desire of im¬ 
 parting real knowledge into one 
 who already has the power, but 
 lacks the inclination. By such 
 an artful manifestation of words 
 does Socrates try to excite Eu- 
 thyphro to say all he can for the 
 question, drawing him on by this 
 skilful flattery to help the poor 
 stumbler, as he represents him¬ 
 self, along the road of know¬ 
 ledge. 
 
 This little diversion concern¬ 
 ing Daedalus, with the remarks 
 preceding and following, is 
 thrown in, in a masterly manner, 
 to rest the mind of the hearer 
 between the arguments. So¬ 
 crates is going to begin another 
 bout on the original question, 
 but gives his companion a short 
 breathing time and a slight re¬ 
 freshment (this little Daedalus 
 episode) before again entering 
 the dialectical lists. 
 
 E 2 
 
52 
 
 nAAT&NOS 
 
 the yap' ovk dvayKalov crot hoKet htKatov elvat 7 ray 
 to oatoy ; 
 
 ET0. V E potye. 
 
 2X2. ’A p’ ovv /cal Tray to hUatoy oatoy, rj to 
 12 pev oatov 7 rav otKatov , to he htKatov ov irdv oatov. 
 dXXd to pev avrov oatov , to Se tc /cal dXXo ; 
 
 ET0. GTropai, co 'EoLfcpares, toc? Xeyopevots. 
 
 212. Kal ya?)z/ vecoTepos y epov el ovk eXaTTOv rj 
 oaco aocjxoTepos' aXX\ 0 Xeyco , Tpv<fia<; viro ttXovtov 
 jr)$ ao<fila$. aXX\ cd pa/cdpte , IrvvTetve cravrov' Kal 
 yap ovhe %aXeirov KaTavorjaat o Xeyco. Xeyco yap hr] 
 to evavTiov rj 6 7 rotr]Tr)s eTrolrjaev 6 Trotrjaa^ 
 
 Zrjva he tov & ep^avTa, Kal 09 Tahe ttuvt 
 ecpVTevaey, 
 
 Ovk edeXets ehreuv' iva yap Se' 09 , evQa Kal 
 alhoos. 
 
 eyo) ovv tovtco htatyepopat tco 7 rot 7 ]Trj. elirco aot oTrrj ; 
 
 ET0. Yldvv ye. 
 
 2X2. Ov hoKel pot elvat , tva heos, evda Kal atSco9. 
 7 roXXol yap poi hoKOvat, Kal voaov 9 Kal Trevtas Kal 
 
 ovk avar/Kouov . . . Socrates 
 is going to extract from Euthy- 
 phro the admission that although 
 all things holy are just, it is not 
 true that all just things are holy. 
 This may be thus geometrically 
 represented— 
 
 A, things just ; B, things 
 holy. 
 
 where we see that though no 
 things holy are not also just, 
 there are yet some just things 
 (A) which are not holy (B). 
 
 Hence holiness is a part or 
 species of what justice is the 
 whole or genus. 
 
 rb 8e n. The indefinite pro¬ 
 noun is added because it is not 
 known what part of justice is 
 covered by holiness, and what 
 by other virtues. So Lucian, 
 D. Mort. 16, 5, el yap 6 piv ns 
 ev ovpava >, o5e nap 1 7)piv, crv rb 
 e/fSwAov, rb 5e awpa eV O try 
 kovis fjbr) yeyevrirai, where 6 
 fiev t is is the (indefinable) di¬ 
 vine part of Heracles that has 
 left the earth. 
 
 ^vvreive a. “brace yourself.” 
 
 7roi7jT7js. Stasinus, who wrote 
 the Cypria. 
 
Er0T<j>pnN. 
 
 53 
 
 aWa 7 roWa to Lavra SeStores, SeStevat fiev , alSetadat 
 8 e ptrjSev ravra . a SeStaatv. ov teal aol So/cet ; 
 
 ET0. ndi/i/ 76. 
 
 212. AAV 2 Va 76 alSoos, eV#a /cal Seo 9 elvar 
 errel ear tv carts aihovpievos rt rvpdypa /cal alor'xy- 
 vopevos ov TTefyofirpraL re /cal SeSot/cev apta ho%av 
 7 rovrjpias ; 
 
 ET 0 . A eBot/ce ptev ovv. 
 
 2 X 2 . Ov/c ap opdo )9 e^et XeyetV tva yap Beo 9, 
 evda /cal aiBcos, dAA’ tva ptev alBci 9, eV 0 a #al Seo 9 * 
 ou ptevroi tva ye Beo 9, rcavrayov alBcoSy eVl rrXeov 
 yap , olpuat, Beo 9 alBov 9 * ptoptov yap alBcos Beovs, 
 oxTirep aptdpov 7 repirrov, oeare 01)^ tVa 7 rep apedpeos, 
 evda /cal 7 repirrov, tva Be rreptrrov, evda /cal aptdpios. 
 errei yap irov vvv ye ; 
 
 ET 0 . Ildvi/ 76. 
 
 2X2. To rotovrov rolvvv K,al e/cet Xeycov rjpo!)- 
 rcov, apa iva Bl/catov, evda /cal oaiov , 77 Iva /iev oaiov , 
 efvtfa /cal Bt/catov, tva Se Bt/catov, 00 rravrayov oaiov' D 
 
 aAA* 'Iva /xev aldws . . . This 
 will be expressed as above, C C 
 being fear, D being reverence. 
 
 All reverence implies fear, but 
 not all fear reverence. And 
 there the poet is wrong, for he 
 makes the two coextensive. 
 
 oi> ixevroi \iva ye deos ... 76 
 
 qualities the whole sentence, 
 Deing placed as soon as possible 
 after the beginning of the wrong 
 statement, to which it calls at¬ 
 tention, or which it stigmatises. 
 
 67 rl TrXeov, &c. “ Fear is a 
 
 term of wider extension than 
 
 reverence, which is a part of 
 fear.” 
 
 &<tt€ oi>x, &c. “ In the same 
 
 way all number is not odd, but 
 all odd implies number.” All 
 this is to show that, though all 
 things holy are just, all just 
 things are not holy—that justice 
 is the larger head under which 
 we can range holiness. Defi¬ 
 nition, logicians tell us,. is per 
 genus et differentiam , i.e. by 
 giving the genus or family, and 
 the distinctive marks of the 
 particular member of the family 
 we have in view. Justice is the 
 genus : it remains then to find 
 the differentia, or distinguishing 
 marks of this particular phase 
 of justice called holiness. 
 
54 
 
 riAATX2N02 
 
 fxopiov yap tov Si/caiov to caiov , ovtco cf)copev f) a\\co<; 
 aoi So/cel ; 
 
 EY* 0 . O vtc y uW ovtco. (fiaivei yap pot opQcos 
 Xey eiv. 
 
 CAP. XIV. 
 
 Si?-. "Opa Sr) to piera tovto. el yap pepos to oaiov 
 tov Si/calov, Sei Sr) ypas, fc>9 eoi/cev , e^evpelv to 7 roiov 
 pcepos av eirj tov Sucalov to ocriov. el pev ovv av pe 
 rjpcoTa 9 tl tcov vvv Sr), olov ttolov pepos €<ttIv dpidpov 
 to apTtov /cal 7/9 wv Tvyyavei 01/T09 6 dpiQpos, ehrov 
 av, 0 Ti 09 av pr) a/caXrjvo 9 y, aXX! laoa/ce\r)<$' fj ov 
 So/cei aoi ; 
 
 ET 0 . y, Epoiye . 
 
 E 212 . rie^pw S?) /cat cru epe ovtco SiSa^ai, to ttolov 
 pepo<? tov Si/caiov oaiov ecTiv, iva /cal MeX?;T&) 
 Xeycopev py/ceO' rjpas aSuceiv prjh' aaefielas ypdcfrea- 
 6 at, co 9 i/cavco 9 rjSrj 7 rapa aov pepa6rj/coTa 9 ra T 6 
 evcrefir) /cal oaia /cal Ta pr). 
 
 ET0. ToSto tolvw epoiye So/cei, 5 ) 'Zco/cpaTes, 
 to pepos tov Sucalov elvai cvaefies Te /cal oaiov, to 
 7 repl tt)v tcov 6 ecbv depaireiav * to Se 7 repl ttjv tcov 
 avdpcoTTCov to Xolttov elvai tov Si/calov pepo 9. 
 
 D. rb &pTiov, even, conn. w. 
 &pct), &pn , “fitting exactly;” 
 explained by icroaneX'fis, equal- 
 limbed, opposed to (TKaXrjuos, 
 halting, or with unequal limbs. 
 These terms are transferred here 
 from geometry to arithmetic. 
 
 E. tovto t olvvv. Socrates at 
 last succeeds in getting a further 
 
 definition out of Euthyphro, 
 which he at once proceeds to 
 test. Euthyphro divides justice 
 into two parts, perhaps with the 
 odd and even division of num¬ 
 bers running in his head, into 
 justice with respect to heaven, 
 and with respect to men. The 
 former, he says, is holiness. 
 
ET0T<£PX2N. 
 
 55 
 
 CAP. XY. 
 
 2X2. Kat /ca\w<? ye fioi, do E vGvtypov, (pauvec \eyew 
 aWa <j fjLuepov tivos en evSerjs el/at. rrjv yap Gepa- 13 
 7 relav ovttgo ff vvirjfju fjvrLva ovofia^eis. ov yap ttov 
 \eyet,$ ye, olai Trep /cal at irepl rd aWa Gepairelai 
 cltri, TOLavrTjv /cal i repl Geovs. \ey opbev yap ttov — 
 olov (pa/jiev, 'dir/ rou? ov n ra? eiriciTaTai Gepaireveuv , 
 aX)C 6 imruco?' rj yap ; 
 
 ET0. Haw ye. 
 
 2X2. f H yap ttov l ttttlkij imrwv Gepairela . 
 
 ET0. Nat. 
 
 2X2. OvSe ye rcvva? n rd? evriarTarai, Gepaireveiv, 
 dXX’ 6 /cvvriyeri/cos. 
 
 ET0. Ovtcos. 
 
 2X2. f H yap 77 * 01 / /cvvrjyeTircr] /cvvo/v Oepairela . 
 
 ET0. Nat. B 
 
 2X2. f H Se /3o7j\arL/crj (3ocov. 
 
 ET0. Haw ye. 
 
 2X2. C H Se 8rj ocriorrjs re /cal ev&efieia Gecov; 00 
 E vGvcjopoV outgo \eyei<; ; 
 
 ET0. ’'£ 70 ) 76 . 
 
 2X2. O v/covv Gepaireia ye 1 rdcra ravrov hiairpar- 
 t6t at, olov TOLOvSe ‘ eV’ ayaGco rivl iari, /cal axpeXeia 
 
 aAAa (TjUKDov. Socrates will 
 not start on the discussion of 
 this definition without having 
 it clearly understood what the 
 words mean. 
 
 A eyofxsv yap 7 rov . . . Socrates 
 was going to say, “We under¬ 
 stand, do we not, that every 
 Qepaneia has its particular art, 
 and cannot be undertaken ex¬ 
 
 cept by him who is acquainted 
 with that art.” But he breaks 
 oft' with an example, ol6v <pa/xev f 
 and proceeds to establish the 
 principle in his usual way by 
 aggregating instances.—Stallb. 
 
 B. olov roi6vfie, SC. \eya), as 
 is shown by Rep. 331 C, olov 
 roi6vde Ae^w, ttus Xlv ttov 
 cXttoi . . . 
 
56 
 
 riAAT12N02 
 
 tov Oepayrevoptevov, ojairep opa9 S77, oti oi lttttol vtto 
 tt]? Imrucrj 9 OepaTrevopbevoi dx^eXovviat Kal ffeXTiovs 
 ylyvovrac 7) ov Sokovgl gol ; 
 
 ET 0 . ’E picnye. 
 
 C 212. Kat oi Kvves ye 7 tov vtto 7779 KvvrjyeTiKT 79 
 /cat 06 /5 o 69 vtto 7779 fiorfKcLTUcrjSy /cal 7aXXa Trdvra 
 Goaavrcos' rj eVt / 3 Xd/ 3 rj otei tov OepaTrevopievov rrjv 
 OepaTreiav eivat ; 
 
 ET 0 . Ma A 1 ov/c eycoye. 
 
 212. ’AXA’ €7r’ ax peXela ; 
 
 ET 0 . n C09 S’ ov ) 
 
 212. *H ouy /cat 77 ogiottj 9 Oepaireta ovaa Oecov 
 oocpeXeid re icm Oecov Kal / 3 eXrlov 9 701)9 #601)9 7rotet; 
 /cat cn/ toOto %vy%copr)GaL<; av , <£9 eVetSai/ rt oglov 
 
 TTOLfjS, fieXjLCO Tivd TCOV Osd)V CLTT€pyd^€C ) 
 
 ET 0 r Ma At’ oo/c eycoye. 
 
 212. OoSe yap e’ya), ai Ei)#i/<£poy, ot/xat ere tovto 
 Xeyetv* ttoXAoz) /cat Seco' aXXa tovtov S77 eve/ca Kal 
 dvrjpo/Jirjv, rlva ttotg Xeyo£9 777V OepaTreiav tcov Oecov , 
 D oji^ 777017x6^69 ere T 0 cavT 7 ]v Xeyeiv . 
 
 ET 0 . Kat opOcos ye , a> 2 a)/cpare 9 ‘ 06 yap 70c- 
 avTTjv Xeyco. 
 
 2a 
 
 Etev aXXa T/9 S77 Oecov Oep 
 
 a rret a eirj av 
 
 qg C07779 ; 
 
 9 
 
 0/ 17 T 7 TOI. These examples 
 from common life are very fre¬ 
 quently used by Socrates to 
 establish analogies. Cf. Hep. 
 335> &\<nrT6fi*voi 8’ 'Lttttol £eA- 
 jioos ^ x eL P ovs y' L 7 vovtcu; x*Lpovs. 
 apa ets T77V ro/v kvvCou aperyu ij els 
 iyv ‘tTnroov; k. r.A. 
 
 C. c-J. Perhaps this pronoun 
 has a distinctive force: “You 
 - the theologian (who can hardly 
 think £0). ” 
 
 7 roAAoo wal 8e&>. Y. S. note 
 
 on 7 roAAou, ch. iv. 
 
 tovtov 8r) eveKCL Kal avTjp6/xrjp 
 . . 7 iyov/j.€vos . . “ I asked you 
 for this reason, viz., that I wanted 
 your repudiation of such an idea.’ > 
 ovx belongs to A tyeiv, and yyov- 
 V-evos means more than “think¬ 
 ing,”—“ Because I expected.” 
 
 D. r is 8 )j 6 ., “quod tandem 
 deoruni officium?” acc. of cog¬ 
 nate notion. 
 
ET0T4>PI2N. 57 
 
 ET0. Hvnrep, co ^w/cpare 9 , oi BovXol tov 9 8e- 
 (77TOT615 Qepairevovcnv. 
 
 212. May#ayeo* viTTjpeTL/crj tls av, do? soi/eev, eh) 
 0eoh. 
 
 ET0. Haw p,ev ovv. 
 
 CAP. XVI. 
 
 J/ 
 
 212. E^<H9 av ovv ehrelv, rj larpoh virr\periK.r) 
 
 eh tlvos epyov airepyaaiav 
 ovk eh vytetas olet ; 
 
 if]v’K€p . . . 6ep . Cf. Rep. 5, 
 456 , 1 ), aotryv avr\ 1/j.aTiuv 
 aixfpUaovrai. Matthiae explains 
 such, verbs as governing an accu¬ 
 sative on account of the active 
 sense implied in them. 
 
 7) larpols vTT'qperiK'f], The art, 
 subservient or auxiliary to heal¬ 
 ing others, which physicians 
 use. Distinguish this carefully 
 from 7 ] 6eo7s inrTjperLKT] lower 
 down, which means “the art 
 which others use serviceable 
 to the gods for their own 
 benefit. ” 
 
 There is a transition from one 
 sense of Oepareia and vnrjpeTiKri 
 to another in this passage. The 
 6 epa 71 eta of dogs, horses, &c., is 
 directed towards their physical 
 improvement. depaTreia there¬ 
 fore means “care for, 5 ’ without 
 any notion of subservience, but 
 simply the care that every good 
 master or workman gives to the 
 instruments he uses for making 
 a livelihood. But when we 
 come to the answer, H\vTczp 01 
 bov\o. r ovs decnrdras depa ttsv- 
 ovcnv , the metaphor changes. It 
 is no longer the mechanic or 
 the herdsman working indepen¬ 
 dently, and giving proper atten- 
 
 rvyxavei ovca virr)peT*K.r)\ 
 
 tion to his tools and his beasts, 
 but a servant attending to the 
 different wants and arbitrary 
 demands of his master. Notice 
 therefore the distinction drawn 
 above. The depaireia larpois 
 vTT 7 ]peTiK 7 j is the course of study 
 and knowledge of detail neces¬ 
 sary or ancillary to a physician’s 
 right employment of his art; 
 the result of it is iryieia, health, 
 to the objects of its attention : 
 whilst the depaneia deo7s vnrjpeT. 
 is the unreasoning, implicit at¬ 
 tention that must be given from 
 an inferior towards a superior in 
 whose service he finds himself. 
 The first deoaireia is objective, 
 directed towards the accomplish¬ 
 ment of an external effect; the 
 second is the discharge of a 
 duty. Plato, however, by pre¬ 
 serving the same phraseology 
 with really different meanings, 
 drives Euthyphro to seek for 
 some external good effected by 
 our attention to divine worship 
 and other religious duties, for 
 the benefit of heaven ; instead 
 of perceiving that the conscious¬ 
 ness of rectitude must be the 
 chief resuit of attention to pious 
 duties. 
 
58 
 
 nAA'TONOS 
 
 EY0. ’■E7&>7e. 
 
 2 i 2 . Tt Se ; rj vavirr)yoLS vTrrjperi/crj els rivo ? 
 epyov direpyaaiav vrrrjpen/crj eanv ; 
 
 E ET0. A rjXov otl, go ^Go/cpares, els 7 rXoiov. 
 
 2X2. Kat rj ol/coBopiois ye 7 rov els ol/ctas \ 
 
 ET0. Nat'. 
 
 2X2. EtVe Brj, go dpiare * r) Be 6eols vrvr\perL/cr\ els 
 r tvos epyov direpyaalav virrjperucr] av ecrj ; SrjXov 
 ydp, on av olada eTTeiBrjirep ra ye 6ela /caXXiara 
 elBevau dvOpwircov. 
 
 ET0. Kat aXrjOfj ye Xey go, go 2 go k pares. 
 
 2X2. EtVe Brj 7 rpos Ato?, rl rror early i/celvo 
 to rzay/caXov epyov , o ol 6eol drcepyaCpvrai rjpXv 
 vTvrjperai ? ^pcopbevot ; 
 
 ET0. floAAa /cat /caXa, go Sob/cpares. 
 
 14 2X2. Kat 7 a/) ot arparrjyol , go (joiXe* dXX* oyitGo? 
 
 to /cecjoaXatov avrcov paBioos av €ittols, on vl/crjv iv 
 rob 7 ToXeiiGo dnepyaCovra «• w 01 / ; 
 
 4 ET0. riw? S’ 00 ; 
 
 2 X 2 . rioXXa Se 7 ’ ot/tat /cat /ca\a /cat ot yecopyol. 
 o/<tG)? to /ce(f)dXaiov avrcov earl rrjs arrepyaalas 
 rj i/c rrjs yrjs rpocjor/. 
 
 ET0. IT dvv ye . 
 
 2X2. Tt Se Brj ; rtov 7roXXcbv /cal /caXcov , a ot 
 6eol direpya^ovrai, n to /cefyaXatov eari rrjs direp- 
 yaaias ; 
 
 B ET0. Kat oXLyov rob rrporepov elirov , go 2go- 
 Kpares , OTt irXeLovos epyov early a/cpi/3cbs ravra 
 
 7 ]fuu virriperais Y. S. 
 
 ch. 7, E, XP ( * } / JL€U05 a ^ T V napa- 
 deiyjuarif and note. 
 
 rb K€(pa\aioy. Understand rrjs 
 anepycurias before avruv from the 
 next remark of Socrates. 
 
 7rA.6 lovos ipyov. This gen. is 
 explained as follows by Mat- 
 thiae: “The genitive denotes 
 the person or thing in which 
 anything is found, whether as a 
 property or a quality,” &c., &c. 
 
EY0T4>P22N. 
 
 59 
 
 7 ravra o$9 e%ei piaOelv' roSe pievroi goi dirXcb^ Xeyco, 
 on iav fiev /ce^apiGpieva ns eirLGrrjrai to?? Oeois 
 Xeyeiv re /cal irparreiv ev'xopievb^ re /cal Ovcov, ravr 
 eerri rd ocria, /cal gco^gi ra ro lavra too? re ISiov? 
 oi/covs /cal rd /coivd rcZv rroXecov * rd S’ evavria rcov 
 Ke^apia/jbevcov daeffi 7, a Srj /cal avarpeirei duavra /cal 
 drroXXvaiv. 
 
 CAP. XVII. 
 
 212 . *H 7 toXv jioi Sid /Bpa^urepcov, co E vOucfipov, 
 el e/ 3 ovXov, ei 7 res av to /ceefrdXaiov S)V rjpeoreov. dXXd 
 yap ov irpoOvpios pie el SiSd^ai' SrjXo 9 el, /cal yap vvv 
 eireiSr) eir avreo rjcrQa , airerpaTrov' b el dire/cplva >, C 
 i/cavco? av rjSr) rrapa gov rrjv OGiorrjra epiepia 6 r}/cr]. 
 vvv Se — avay/cr) yap rov epcorcovra rep epcorcopievcp 
 a/coXovOeiv, 07rrj av e/cetvo 5 vTrdyrj* ri Srj av Xeyei 5 
 to oaiov elvai /cal ri]V OGiorrjra ; ovyl eTriGrrjpirjv 
 nvd rod Oveiv re /cal evyeaQai ; 
 
 ET0. '’Eiyeoye. 
 
 2 X 2 . O v/covv to Oveiv ScDpelaQal ean rol$ Oeols, 
 
 to S’ ev^eaOai alreiv tou? Oeov 5 ; 
 
 ET0. K al piciXa, c 0 2u)/cpare$. 
 
 212. 'l&TriGrrjpir) dpa alrrjaea/cal Soaeco 5 Oeols J) 
 17 6 aiorr}<; av elrj, e/c rovrov rov Xoyov. 
 
 ET0. n aw /caXcbs, co Scb/cpares, %vvrj/cas o ehrov . 
 
 212. ’E7 nOvpirjrrjs yap elpu, co (plXe, rrjs arjs Gocf/ia? 
 
 Here we may say not a property 
 or a quality, but a species or 
 part of a genus or whole, and 
 refer it to the general head of 
 the partitive genitive, “is a 
 matter of further exertion.” 
 
 B. <rw^et, “saves,” i.e. from 
 
 crruais or dispute, as we see from 
 the corresponding words, ava- 
 rpenei Ka\ enr6\\. 
 
 7 ro\v, join to fipaxvTepcov, 
 Srj\os €?, plane videris. 
 
 C. eV aurep tfada. Cf. Rep. 
 532, tot € 8^ eV ai/T<£ ylyvtrai 
 
60 
 
 FIAATON02 
 
 kcu 7Tpoae^(o tov vovv avTrj' ware ov %apal ireaeirat 
 6 tl av eiirrj's' dWd fioi ke£ov, tls avrrj rj vtttj peeria 
 €<ttl T 0 Z 9 0eols\ alrelv re <pf)$ clvtovs /cal hihovcit 
 ifcecvon ?; 
 
 ET®, ’'E 70 ) 76 , 
 
 CAR XVIII. 
 
 20 A p ovv ov to opucos cureiv av ecy, cov oeo- 
 
 fieda Trap* i/celvcov, ravra avTOV$ alrelv ; 
 
 ET®. AXXa tl; 
 
 20, K al av to ScSovai dpdeds, cjv i/celvoL Tvyya- 
 vqvctl Seopbevoc Trap ’ ypucjv TavTa e/celvoL? av clvtl- 
 E SoopelcrOai ; ov 7 dp irov tg^vlkov 7’ av ecy Scopocpopelv 
 ScSovTa T(p TavTa , wv ouSev Seurat. 
 
 ET®. A \rj6rj keyeis, (L 'Zoo/cpaTes. 
 
 20. ’FjpL 7 ropL!cr) dpa tl<z av ecrj, c3 E v6v(ppov f 
 Teyyy fj ocuoTrjs Oeols /cal avOpcoTTOis Trap' aX- 
 kykcov, 
 
 ET®, ’E pLiropucrj, el ovtco 9 rjSiov gol ovopba^eev. 
 
 20. ’AXX* ovSev rjSbov epLOLye, el pbfj Tvyycwei 
 a\rj 6 e 9 ov, (frpdaov Se pLOL, tl$ y cocf)e\€La tols Oeocs 
 TvyydveL overa diro tcov Scopcov edv Trap ypicov \apt,/ 3 a- 
 ^5 vovglv ; a puev yap StSoaGL, 7 ravTt SyXov ovSev yap 
 yiiLv ecrTlv dyadov, 6 tl av per) e/celvoc Scoglv' a Sk 
 Trap' rjpLOJV kapL^dvovcrc, tl docf)e\ovvTaL ; y toctovtov 
 avTcbv 7 rXeove/CTovpev /card Tyv epLTropiav, coerre TravTa 
 Tayada Trap' avTcov \apbj 3 dvopbev, e/celvoL Se Trap 
 ypucov ov Sev ; 
 
 D. a\\a tl. SC. ttAAo. 
 
 E. ov yap 7 tov . . . Of. Rep. 
 374 , B, 7) 7T6pl TOV TTdXeUOV 
 aycovla ov Texi/t/c^ 5o/c€t eZvai ; 
 “Is it not of the nature of an 
 
 art?” So nere, “It does not 
 seem to be of the nature of an 
 art that one should give,” &c. 
 
 & . . . Omission of ante¬ 
 
 cedent. 
 
ET0T<I>PX2N. 
 
 61 
 
 ET0. AW’ o'iei, do 2oo/cpares, tovs 6eovs oocpe- 
 Xeiadai airo tovtoov , a Trap rjpcov Xapi/3dvovcriv ; 
 
 212 . AWa Tt Srj7roT av elrj ravra , cS EvQvtypov, 
 tcl Trap fjpoov boopa tols 9 eoi 9 ; 
 
 ET0. Tt S’ otet aWo ^ Ttp,77 re teal yepa /cal 
 birep iydb dpre eXeyov, ; 
 
 2X2. Ke^apicrpevov dpa eartv, do EvOvcppov, to B 
 oaiov, ttW’ ov^l axpeXipov ovbe (piXov T0Z9 Oeois ; 
 
 ET0. O Ipiai eycoye 7 rdvTcov ye p,d\iara (piXov. 
 
 212 . 1 ovto ap ecTTLV av, 0x5 eoi/ce, to ocriov , to 
 
 rot? #eot 9 cpiXov . 
 
 ET0. MaXtCTa 76 . 
 
 CAP. XIX. 
 
 212. Oavpaaei ovv lavra Xeyoov, eav croc oi Xoyoi 
 cpaivcovTai purj pievovTes } dXXd fiabd^ovTes, /cal ipie 
 aiTidaei tov AaibaXov fiabt^ovTas aurou9 7 roieiv, 
 auT09 coy ttoXv ye Te^vi/ccoTepo^ tov A aibaXov /cal 
 kv/cXgo TrepabvTas ttolqiv ; rj ov/c alcrOdvei, ort 6 Xoyo 9 
 7]pblv TrepieXOoov TraXiv et ’9 rainov rj/cei; pLepLvrjaac q 
 yap ttov, otl ev tg3 epurpocrOev to T6 ocnov /cal to 
 OeocpiXe 9 02 } TavTOV rjpiv ecpavrj , aW’ eVepa aXXrjXoov' 
 fj ovbe pepvrjaai ; 
 
 ET0. * / E7&)76. 
 
 212 . NOy ouv ol>a: evvoeis, otl to to ?9 #eot9 
 <piXov cprjs ocriov elvai; tovto be dXXo ti rj deocpiXe 9 
 yiyveTai; rj ov; 
 
 t'l drjTroT. “What name shall 
 we give ? ” “ What are we to 
 
 call ? ” 
 
 B. /j.a\Lcrra <pi\ov. Thereby 
 bringing the question round to 
 its original starting-point. The 
 
 question is put in the negative 
 form, that this answer of Euthy- 
 phro’s may be more emphatic 
 and uncompromising. 
 
 C. iu t <£ e/ATTpoaOev. Cll. 12 
 ad fin. 
 
62 
 
 rTAATX2N02 
 
 ET0. Flaw ye. 
 
 212. O vfcoyv 7 j dpn ov fcaXoos wpoXoyovpev, fj el 
 Tore tcaXcos, vvv ovk opOax; ridepeda. 
 
 ET0. V E oifcev. 
 
 CAP. XX. 
 
 D 212. ’E£ cLpX*)s upa rjplv 7 ra\iv aKeirreov , n 
 
 earu to oaiov * o j? ^ 7 ( 0 , 7 rplv av padw, e/co)v elvai 
 ovk dirobeiXidaco. aWa pr] pe dripaarjaWa 
 rrravrl Tpoircp 7 rpoae^o'iv rov vovv 6 n paXiara 
 vvv elrre rrjv aXrjOeiav. olaOa yap, elirep tls aUo? 
 dvdpcbircov, /cal ovk acfjereos el, coairep 6 Ylpcorev 
 7 rplv av ehrys. el yap pr) fjbrjada cracfrcos to re oaiov 
 Kal to avoaiov, ovrc eanv oVco? av 7rore eire^elpyaa^ 
 v7rep av8pb<z 6r)jb^ avSpa irpeafivjrjv irarepa Sioo/cd- 
 deiv cfrovov , aWd /cal tou? 6eov<; av eSe/cra? 7 rapa- 
 E / civSvveveiv , yu,?) oi’/t opOcos avro 7roir)aois, Kal too? 
 dv6pd>7rov<; rja^vvOr)^. vvv Se €z) oIS’, 6Vt cra0w? oi'et 
 elSevai to t€ oaiov Kal pr]. elire ovv, co /3e\riare 
 E vOvcfrpov, Kal pr) diroKpvr\ry 6 tl avro rjyei. 
 
 ET0. E laavOis t olvvv, cS 'EooKpares. vvv yap 
 airevhco ttoi, Kal poi copa dirievai. 
 
 212. Ola TTuiels, co eralpe' air e\i r/So? pe Ka- 
 TafiaXcbv peyaXrjs airepyei, r)v el^ov, gj 9 7 rapa aov 
 
 D. a js iyco, understand ftrflt. 
 “ Be sure I will not ...” 
 
 €K(i)i ! elvai. Jelf’s explanation 
 of this phrase seems scarcely 
 likely : he compares dcleiv 6 .pur- 
 ros, and makes elvai — ovirtav, 
 “ Willing in real earnest.” To 
 
 this example Matthiae adds 04 /us 
 
 elvai, crvfntav elvai, r^/xepov elvai. 
 
 einep ris &Wos. Socrates’ last 
 attempt on the self-complacency 
 of Euthvphro. 
 
 edeiaas. This word must be 
 taken both with Oeovs and napaK. 
 
EY0Y<£PI2N. 
 
 63 
 
 fiadchv ra re oaia real fit] teal tt)? t rpo? M eXyrov 
 ypacfrfjs aira\\a%ofiac, ip 8 eil;dpevos ifceivw on (70909 16 
 rjSrj irap E vdvcfrpovos ra 6 ela yeyova /cal on ov - 
 Ken vir ayvoia? avroo'^eSid^co ov 8 e KacvoTopco 
 irepl avra , /cat 6 ?) Kal top aWov Slop 6 n dpeivop 
 fiLcocrotfirjp. 
 
 E. airaWd^o/uLcu . . . j8 icoaol- 
 Schleiermacher and Engle- 
 hardt make these two verbs 
 depend on elxo^, as the nearer 
 and remoter result, respectively, 
 of the indicative proposition ‘ ‘ I 
 hoped. 5 ’ For this compare the 
 well-known passage in Thucy¬ 
 dides— 'Kapavl<Tx ou • • • (ppvKTOvs 
 onus acra<prj ra (nj/xe^a rj, Kal /xrj 
 PorjOoTev. Stallb. condemns this 
 on the ground that we shall have 
 a “ constructio difficilis et con- 
 torta; 55 and that Socrates will 
 be undertaking to live a better 
 life than Euthyphro {a/xeivov 
 j8 1coaoLfxT]v), whom he has already 
 confessed to be “innocens et 
 
 integer” (3 A). But dt /xeii/ov may 
 
 very well refer simply to an 
 
 improvement in Socrates’ own 
 
 moral condition. And as for 
 
 the construction, it must be 
 
 noticed that Stallbaum’s is open 
 
 to precisely the same objection 
 
 which he brings against Schleier- 
 
 macher’s and Engelhardt’s, for 
 
 we have the unusual sequence 
 
 no less, viz. ij/dei^a/xevos . . . '6ti 
 
 ye yova . . . Kal fiiaxrolfXTii/, no 
 
 less “ difficilis et contorta.” 
 
 And this construction will have 
 
 to bo explained in just the 
 
 same wav as that of Schleier- 
 «/ 
 
 macher, and with greater diffi¬ 
 culty. 
 
EXCURSUS. 
 
 ON THE CHARACTER OF EUTHYPHRO. 
 
 In Greek History there is a certain character of whom 
 the hero of this Dialogue strongly reminds us, and this 
 character is Nicias. Nicias was a man of exemplary 
 piety, and so is Euthyphro. Nicias’ actions were almost 
 invariably governed by principle, and the same can be 
 said of Euthyphro. Both were highly superstitious— 
 ^eL(7L^ai/jLoveg —in an age when superstition meant rather 
 extreme reverence for everything divine, and was viewed 
 more as a commendable than as a vulgar weakness. And 
 both are presented to our view in situations where their 
 bigotry shows as melancholy as it is preposterous; thus 
 the one refuses to take advantage of the only hope of 
 escape left to a large army reduced to the last extremity 
 of famine, disease, and desperation, because the moon is 
 eclipsed and must be propitiated ; whilst the other is 
 calmly proceeding to the arraignment of his own father 
 on a charge of murdering a wretched serf. The serf, it 
 should be remarked, is a murderer himseif, and died of 
 exposure (or wilful neglect, as his son Euthyphro no 
 doubt intended to depose before the dicasts). 
 
 With this singular plea does Euthyphro first come 
 
 F 
 
 
EXCURSUS. 
 
 66 
 
 before our notice. Let it not be supposed that the idea 
 of such an action at law is absurd, and that we have 
 here only a caricature. Turning to the picture of 
 Athenian neglect or positive ill-treatment of the old, 
 we read in the Acharnians of Aristophanes as follows :— 
 
 oi yepovres oi ttclacuoI pLepLcplfiecrOa rrj -rroXei. 
 
 ov yap apices sKtivoov £>v ivavixaxhvoLpLtv 
 
 y7)po[3o(rK6v{jLe(r6 y v(p ’ vfiah/, aAAa Seiva Tvdo’xo/xei/. 
 
 oirives yipovras &i'Spas i/xfiaXovres is ypa<pas 
 
 vtt b veaviaKoov care KarayeXaaOai piyrdpoou. — 676, &C. 
 
 V 
 
 (the exact case in point). 
 
 And again, in Wasps, 605, &c , if the father comes 
 nome with his fee, well and .good, all the family are 
 glad to see him; and if he comes without it— 
 
 Ke\ u 7? /xe Se^cret 
 
 is ere /3A iipai Kai rbv ra/xiau, OTvb^ dpiarov Tvapadr^aeL 
 narapaadueuos Ka) roudoovaas. ’dXXr)V ait? /jloi Ta%i/ /xaty. 
 
 i.e. “lest he mix me (uXX??r fid£ av) a deadly cake<”— 
 Mahaffy. And yet once more, a sad but decisive in¬ 
 stance, from the Clouds , 844 seqq. :— 
 
 o y (/j.o., rl dpacrco nvapacppovovvros rov ttcltdSs ; 
 
 Trorepa tv apavoias avrbv elcrayaycou eA 00 ; 
 
 ^ rods o'ooo'jrpyo'is ttju /xaviav avrov (ppaaco ; 
 
 “ My father is mad—let me see. Shall I bring him into court, 
 or get a coffin ready for him ? ” 
 
 With these instances before us, we can see that this 
 situation, as described by Euthyphro, need not be much 
 exaggerated. Plato has probably given us here a typical 
 and extreme case of unfilial bearing at Athens. 
 
 But whilst admitting the case to be an extreme one, 
 we must give Euthyphro his due. Now his self- 
 sufficiency appears by turns absurd, irritating* and 
 impressive. He could no more be persuaded that his 
 course of action-admitted of error than he could explain 
 
EXCURSUS. 
 
 67 
 
 the nature of Right and Wrong to Socrates. Thus, in 
 Ch. IY. E, when relating how this prosecution of his 
 father did not seem quite justifiable to his relatives, he 
 describes them as kclkujq eIcoteq to OeIov idg too dacov 
 te nipi kcu tov dvocTLov —“ taking a wrong view of divine 
 matters with respect to wTiat is holy and unholy/’ This 
 is the self-complacency of a man who thoroughly believes 
 in his creed. And so again, in the same chapter, when 
 examined by Socrates as to his confidence in his pro¬ 
 ceedings, he replies: ovdiv yap dv pov oipEXog eu /, (J 
 
 oKparEg , ov^e Tip dv diaipEpoi JZvdv(j)pljJV TU)V itoXXiov 
 dvdp(sJ7riov , el /.it] Ta roiavTa irdrTa aKptfdidg EiCEtrjv. 
 
 In fact, his knowledge of things divine seems to reach 
 to an extent undreamed of by the ordinary citizen; thus 
 
 OTTEp dpTL EL7T0V , Kttl dXXa OOL kyh) 7ToXXd , EUVTTEp jjOvXt], 77Epl 
 Tidv OeUov dirjyi)(ropai) d av atcoviov e'l oTb* otl EKTrXayijuEi. 
 
 To take another instance at once of his self-sufficiency 
 and his immovable religious convictions, in Ch. IY. B, 
 yeXolov , id HojKpaTsg otl o\el tl diatyEpEiv e'lte uXXoTpioc e'lte 
 olkeIoq 6 TEOvEidg. And again of the former quality 
 Ch. Y. C, EVpOifJL dv, (dg oipai , oirrj aadpog eittl, kol 7 roXv 
 dv ijp.lv TTpOTEpOV 7TEpl EKEIVOV Xoyog yEVOLTO EV Tip blKU- 
 
 cTTjpiip, r) 7rEpl dpov. From this we see that his self-re¬ 
 liance extended beyond the sphere of religious dogma to 
 that of forensic contention; for we cannot understand 
 him here as relying merely 011 his superior knowledge of 
 the subject : the Athenians laugh at that. He himself 
 says (Ch. II. C) : “ No, he is going to assume the 
 offensive and pick holes in his opponent’s case.” 
 
 But with all this confidence in his argumentative 
 powers we do not find him an apt dialectician. He is 
 unable to see the force of the logical text that, if all A 
 is B it does not follow that all B is A : Ch. III. A., 
 J Ap' ovv Kal 7 Tctv to liKaiov omov, <fcc , precc. et. seqq. 
 
68 
 
 EXCURSUS. 
 
 He is also sorely bewildered by Socrates’ question, 
 “ Is the holy loved by heaven because holy, or is it holy 
 because loved by heaven?” And when that question 
 has been proved the last step has to be explained over 
 again before he can see the bearing of it, Ch. XII. E. 
 In Ch. XIII. B. he is fairly reduced to confusion, and 
 plaintively urges that the argument will come round in 
 a circle, and will not stay where it is put. That he has 
 a touch of the rhetor in his character we notice from his 
 paraphrase of Socrates’ version of piety in Ch. XYI. A, 
 where he escapes from the logical difficulty (of telling 
 what are the spy a of God towards which he is assisted 
 by human attention) under a rather eloquent statement 
 of what he considers piety to be. He is finally wearied 
 of the argument, and escapes by means of the plea of 
 another engagement. 
 
 There is a question suggested by the character of 
 Euthyphro with regard to his own profession. Why 
 was he not 777717 c, or expounder of religious legis¬ 
 lation ? Who so fitted for the task as one oc naira 
 Otia aKpifiajg eicetrj ? Who could have expounded the will 
 of heaven with such incontrovertible emphasis, such 
 quieting conviction, as Euthyphro ? To be sure he was 
 not quite procf against a dialectical attack; but then 
 dialecticians generally managed their own religious 
 affairs, and would not be likely to trouble the state 
 servant. He seems, too, to have been a free Athenian, 
 and presumably of good family. The office of Exegetes 
 seems, however, to have been confined to the noble 
 family of the Eumolpidae. Apart from this restriction? 
 we can imagine no one better fitted for the office than 
 Euthyphro, especially in his own eyes. The most 
 pleasing trait in his character is his unaffected 
 expression of feeling towards Socrates anent his 
 
EXCURSUS. 
 
 69 
 
 prosecution by Meletus, of whom he says, KaKovpytlv rt)v 
 ttoXli’ E7Ti^eif)U)y dfkiceiv (re. That he was not a man of 
 unkindly feeling is clear from this passage and the 
 general tone of the Dialogue. This being granted, 
 serves to bring out with greater clearness the extra¬ 
 ordinary strength of his creed, requiring as it did the 
 prosecution of his own father for a capital crime, and 
 scattering all such feelings as filial affection to the 
 winds. 
 
 Only in Roman history can we find bigotry to parallel 
 Euthyphro’s, viz., in the person of Cato the Younger. 
 The two men exhibit the same uncompromising and pre¬ 
 determined attitude towards any attempt to divert them 
 from their convictions. And herein lies the difference 
 between Euthyphro and Nicias, viz., that whilst oppo¬ 
 sition to the latter sometimes produced irresolution, it 
 only serves to confirm the former in his purpose. And 
 thus on Socrates proving for the third time that Euthy¬ 
 phro is ignorant of the true nature of Right and Wrong, 
 and calling his attention to the wickedness of prosecuD 
 ing a father without being prepared to show just ground 
 for such a step, Euthyphro calmly takes down Socrates 7 
 appeal for instruction as though it were no hint to 
 himself of his ignorance, and replies, EiaavOig tulvw, 
 a) 2(A'foarec* 
 
 i 
 
LONDON: 
 
 R Clay, Sons, and Taylor, 
 
 BREAD STREET HILL. E. C. 
 
71 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 Note A. 
 
 In the volume of Essays called Uellenica , page 94, 
 in Mr. Nettleship’s paper upon Plato’s Theory of Edu¬ 
 cation, we read as follows: “ The element of dogmatic 
 fixity in their (the Greeks’) religion attached much more 
 to its ritual than to it£ ideas; these latter were a plastic 
 material, growing in accordance with the secret laws of 
 psychology and language, or the conscious design of 
 poets.” And Professor Sayce extends the same principle 
 to the pagan world at large. Thus in the Contemporary 
 Review , September 1883 , “ The Gods of Canaan : ” “We 
 must not forget that pagan religion did not imply 
 morality. It was a strict attention to matters of ritual, 
 with wdiich human conduct had nothing to do . . . . 
 The Phoenician did not go to his religion to learn the 
 rule of right and wrong ; his religious duty consisted in 
 winning the favour of the gods or deprecating their 
 resentment; and this could only be effected by sacrifice 
 and offering, and the strict performance of the ritual. 
 Whatever, therefore, was done in the service of religion 
 lay outside the sphere of morality; the ethical principles 
 which controlled daily life ceased to exist within the 
 precincts of the temple.” 
 
 Note B. 
 
 The firmness of Socrates’ belief in the divine character 
 of the Delphic oracle may be understood from the fol¬ 
 lowing passage in Xenophon’s Anabasis, 3 , 1, 5 , seqq. 
 
72 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 “ There was a man named Xenophon in the army, an 
 Athenian, who had joined the expedition neither as 
 commander, captain, or private soldier, but had come 
 from home at the invitation of Proxenus, who was 
 an old friend of his. Proxenus promised to bring 
 Xenophon into favour with Cyrus, ‘ whom/ said he, ‘ I 
 love better than my own country/ Xenophon read the 
 letter and told Socrates about his intended journey. 
 And Socrates suspected that Athens would complain if 
 Xenophon threw in his lot with r Cyrus, because Cyrus 
 was reputed to have taken an active part with the Lace¬ 
 demonians in their war against Athens. So he advised 
 Xenophon to go to Delphi and consult the god about his 
 projected journey. Xenophon, therefore, went and 
 asked Apollo to which of the gods he ought to sacrifice 
 and pray, if he wished to be successful in his undertaking 
 and return in safety. And the oracle answered, ‘To 
 the proper gods.’ Then he returned home and told 
 Socrates. But he found fault with him for making up 
 his mind that he was right to go on the journey, and for 
 framing his question as he had done; ‘ for/ said he, 
 ‘ your first question should have been, “ Shall I go or 
 not?” However/ he added, ‘as you put your question 
 so, you must do what Apollo told you.’ ” This is valu¬ 
 able testimony to Socrates’ orthodoxy. The events 
 recorded here by Xenophon cannot have taken place 
 earlier than b.c. 402, and probably happened in b.c. 401, 
 when Socrates was in his sixty-eighth year; and pro¬ 
 vided that Xenophon is narrating events as they actually 
 took place, we have here an answer to that clause of the 
 indictment which accused Socrates of not believing in 
 his country’s gods. 
 
July 1889. 
 
 A CLASSIFIED LIST 
 
 OF 
 
 EDUCATIONAL WORKS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 GEORGE BELL & SONS. 
 
 Cambridge Calendar. Published Annually (August). 6s. 6c7. 
 Student's Guide to the University of Cambridge. 6j. 6d. 
 
 Oxford : Its Life and Schools. 7s. 6<2. 
 
 The Schoolmaster's Calendar. Published Annually (December). Is. 
 
 BIBLIOTHECA CLASSICA. 
 
 A Series of Greek and Latin Authors , with English Notes, edited by 
 
 eminent Scholars . 8 vo, 
 
 %* The Works with an asterisk (*) prefixed can only be had in the Sets of 26 Fols. 
 
 .ffilschylus. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 8s. 
 
 Cicero s Orations. By G. Long, M.A. 4 vols. 32s. 
 Demosthenes. By R. Whiston, M.A. 2 vols. 10s. 
 
 Euripides. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 3 vols. 24s. 
 
 Homer. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. The Iliad, 2 vols. 14s. 
 Herodotus. By Rev. J. W. Blakesley, B.D. 2 vols. 12s. 
 Hesiod. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 5s. 
 
 Horace. By Rev. A. J. Macleane, M.A. 8s. 
 
 Juvenal and Persius. By Rev. A. J. Macleane, M.A. 6s. 
 
 Plato. By W. H. Thompson, D.D. 2 vols. 5s. each. 
 
 Sophocles. Yol. I. By Rev. F. H. Blaydes, M.A. 8s. 
 
 -Yol. II. F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 6s. 
 
 *Tacitus: The Annals. By the Rev. P. Frost. 8s. 
 
 * Terence. By E. St. J. Parry, M.A. 8s. 
 
 Virgil. By J. Conington, M.A. Revised by Professor H. Nettle ship. 
 3 vols. 10s. 6d. each. 
 
 An Atlas of Classical Geography; 24 Maps with colouied Out¬ 
 lines. Imp. 8vo. 6s. 
 
2 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 GRAMMAR-SCHOOL CLASSICS. 
 
 A Series of Greek and Latin Authors , with English Notes. 
 
 Fcap. 8 vo. 
 
 Caesar : De Bello Gallico. By George Long, M.A. 4 s. 
 
 - Books I.-III. For Junior Classes. By G. Long, M.A. Is. 6d. 
 
 -Books IV. and V. Is. 6 d. Books VI. and VII. Is. 6 d. 
 
 Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius. Selected Poems. With Life. 
 By Rev. A. H. Wratislaw. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Cicero: De Senectute, De Amicitia, and Select Epistles. By 
 George Long, M.A. 3s. 
 
 Cornelius Nepos. By Rev. J. F. Macmichael. 2s. 
 
 Homer: Iliad. Books I.-XII. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 
 
 4s. 6d. Also in 2 parts, 2s. 6d. each. 
 
 Horace. With Life. By A. J. Macleane, M.A. 3s. 6<2. In 
 
 2 parts, 2s. each. 
 
 Juvenal : Sixteen Satires. By H. Prior, M.A. 3s. 6 d. 
 
 Martial : Select Epigrams. With Life. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 
 
 4s. 6d. 
 
 Ovid: the Fasti. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 3s. Qd. Books L 
 and II. Is. 6d. Books III. and IV. Is. 6d. 
 
 Sallust: Catilina and Jugurtha. With Life. By G. Long, M.A. 
 
 and J. G. Frazer. 3s. 6d., or separately, 2s. each. 
 
 Tacitus : Germania and Agricola. By Rev. P. Frost. 2s. 6 d. 
 
 Virgil: Bucolics, Georgies, and iEneid, Books I.-IV. Abridged 
 from Professor Conington’s Edition. 4s. 6d.—iEneid, Books V.-XII. 4s. 6d. 
 Also in 9 separate Volumes, as follows, Is. 6d. each Bucolics—Georgies, 
 I. and II.—Georgies, III. and IV.—iEneid, I. and II—^Eneid, III. and 
 IV.—iEneid, V. and VI.—iEneid, VII. and VIII.—^Eneid, IX. and X. — 
 iEneid, XI. and XII. 
 
 Xenophon: The Anabasis. With Life. By Rev. J. F. Macmichael. 
 
 3s. 6d. Also in 4 separate volumes, Is. 6d. each:—Book I. (with Life, 
 Introduction, Itinerary, and Three Maps)—Books II. and III.—IV. and V. 
 —VI. and VII. 
 
 - The Cyropaedia. By G. M. Gorham, M.A. 3s. 6d. Books 
 
 I. and II. Is. 6d.—Books V. and VI. Is. 6d. 
 
 - Memorabilia. By Percival Frost, M.A. 3s. 
 
 A Grammar-School Atlas of Classical Geography, containing 
 
 Ten selected Maps. Imperial 8\o. 3s. 
 
 Uniform with the Series . 
 
 The New Testament, in Greek. With English Notes, <fcc. By 
 Rev. J. F. Macmichael. 4s. Gd. In parts, sewed, 6d. each. 
 
Educational Works. 
 
 3 
 
 CAMBRIDGE GREEK AND LATIN TEXTS. 
 
 iEscliylus. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 2s. 
 
 Caesar: De Bello Galileo. By G. Long, M.A. 1*. 6d. 
 
 Cicero: De Senectute et De Amicitia, et Epistolae Selectee. 
 By G. Long, M.A. Is. 6d. 
 
 Ciceronis Orationes. In Verrem. By G. Long, M.A. 2s. 6d. 
 Euripides. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 3 vols. 2s. each. 
 Herodotus. By J. G. Blakesley, B.D. 2 vols. 5s. ^ 
 
 Homeri Ilias. I.-XII. By F. A. Paley, H.A., LL.D. Is. 6d. 
 Horatius. By A. J. Macleane, M.A. Is. 6 d. 
 
 Juvenal et Persius. By A. J. Macleane, M.A. Is. 6 d. 
 Lucretius. By H. A. J. Munro, M.A. 2s. 
 
 Sallusti Crispi Catilina et Jugurtha. By G. Long, M.A. Is. 6 d. 
 Sophocles. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 2s. 6 d. 
 
 Terenti Comcediae. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2s. 
 
 Thucydides. By J. G. Donaldson, D.D. 2 vols. 4s. 
 
 Virgilius. By J. Conington, M.A. 2s. 
 
 Xenophontis Expeditio Cyri. By J. F. Macmichael, B.A. Is. 6d. 
 Novum Testamentum Greece. By F. H. Scrivener, M.A., D.C.L. 
 
 4s. 6d. An edition with wide margin for notes, half bonnd, 12s. Editio 
 Major, with additional Headings and References. 7s. 6d. See “page 14. 
 
 Catullus. A Revised Text, with Introduction by Dr. J. P. 
 Postgate. 16mo. [Iti the press. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE TEXTS WITH NOTES. 
 
 A Selection of the most usually read of the Greek and Latin Authors, Annotated for 
 Schools. Edited by well-known Classical Scholars. Fcap. 8 vo. Is. 6d. each , 
 with exceptions. 
 
 ‘ Dr. Paley’s vast learning and keen appreciation of the difficulties of 
 beginners make his school editions as valuable as they are popular. In 
 many respects he sets a brilliant example to younger scholars.’— Athenceum. 
 
 * We hold in high value these handy Cambridge texts with Notes.’— 
 Saturday Review. 
 
 iEschylus. Prometheus Yinctus. — Septem contra Thebas.— Aga¬ 
 memnon.—Persas.—Eumenides.—Choephoroe. ByF. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 
 Eunpiaes. Alcestis.—Medea.—Hippolytus.— Hecuba.— Bacch®. 
 —Ion. 2s. —Orestes. — Phoenissae.—Troades.—Hercules Furens.—Andro¬ 
 mache.—Iphigenia in Tauris.—Supplices. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 
 Homer. Iliad. Book I. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. Is. 
 Sophocles. (Edipus Tyrannus.—(Edipus Coloneus. — Antigone. 
 
 —Electra—Ajax. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 
 
 Xenophon. Anabasis. In 6 vols. By J. E. Melliuish, M.A t> 
 
 Assistant Classical Master at St. Paul’s School. 
 
 - Hellenics, Book II. By L. D. Dowdall, M.A., B.D. 2s. 
 
 - Hellenics. Book I. By L. D. Dowdall, M.A., B.D. 
 
 Lin the press. 
 
 Cicero. De Senectute, De Amicitia, and Epistol® Select®. By 
 G. Long, M.A. 
 
 Ovid. Fasti. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. In 3 vols., 2 books 
 
 in each. 2s. each vol. 
 
4 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 Ovid. Selections. Amores, Tristia, Heroides, Metamorphoses. 
 By A. J. Macleane, M.A. 
 
 Terence. Andria.—Hauton Timorumenos.—Phormio.—Adelplioe. 
 By Professor Wagner, Ph.D. 
 
 Virgil. Professor Conington’s edition, abridged in 12 vols. 
 
 Others in preparation. 
 
 PUBLIC SCHOOL SERIES. 
 
 A Series of Classical Texts , annotated by well-knovm Scholars. Cr. 8vo. 
 
 Aristophanes. The Peace. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 4s. 6 d, 
 
 - The Achamians. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 4s. 6 d. 
 
 - The Frogs. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 4s. 6 d. 
 
 Cioero. The Letters to Atticus. Bk. I. By A. Pretor, M.A. 4s. 6d, 
 
 Demosthenes de Falsa Legatione. By R. Shilieto, M.A. 6s. 
 
 - The Law of Leptines. By B. W. Beatson, M.A. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Livy. Book XXI. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Maps, 
 by the Rev. L. D. Bowdall, M.A., B.D. 3s. 6d. 
 
 - Book XXII. Edited, &c., by Rev. L. D. Dowdall, M.A., 
 
 B.D. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Plato. The Apology of Socrates and Crito. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 
 10th Edition. 3s. 6d. Cheap Edition, limp cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 - The Phaedo. 9th Edition. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 6s. 6 d. 
 
 - The Protagoras. 4th Edition. By W. Wayte, M.A. 4s. 6 d. 
 
 - The Euthyphro. 3rd Edition. By G. H. Wells, M.A. 3s. 
 
 - The Euthydemus. By G. H. Wells, M.A. 4s. 
 
 - The Republic. Books I. & II. By G. H. Wells, M.A. 3rd 
 
 Edition. 5s. 6d. 
 
 Plautus. The Aulularia. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 3rd Edition. 4s. 6d. 
 
 - The Trinummus. By W. Wagner,Ph.D. 3rd Edition. 4s. 6d. 
 
 - The Menaechmei. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2nd Edit. 4s. 6d. 
 
 - The Mostellaria. By Prof. E. A. Sonnenschein. 5s. 
 
 - The Rudens. Edited by Prof. E. A. Sonnenschein. 
 
 [.In the press . 
 
 Sophocles. The Trachiniae. By A. Pretor, M.A. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Sophocles. The Oedipus Tyrannus. By B. H. Kennedy, D.D. 5s. 
 
 Terence. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2nd Edition. 7 s. 6d. 
 
 Theocritus. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 2nd Edition. 4s. 6 d. 
 
 Thucydides. Book VI. By T. W. Dougan, M.A., Fellow of St. 
 John’s College, Cambridge. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Others in preparation. 
 
 CRITICAL AND ANNOTATED EDITIONS. 
 
 Aristophanis Comoedife. By H. A. Holden, LL.D. 8vo. 2 vols. 
 Notes, Illustrations, and Maps. 23s. 6d. Plays sold separately. 
 
 Caesar’s Seventh Campaign in Gaul, B.C. 52. By Rev. W. C. 
 Compton, M.A., Assistant Master, Uppingham School. Crown 8vo. 4s. 
 
V _ 
 
 Educational Works. 
 
 5 
 
 Calpurnius Siculus. By C. H. Keene, M.A. Crown 8 vo. 65 . 
 Corpus Poetarum Latinorum. Edited by Walker. 1 vol. 8 vo. 18s. 
 Horace. Quinti Horatii Elacci Opera. By H. A. J. Munro, M.A. 
 
 Large 8vo. 10s. Gd. 
 
 Livy. The first five Books. By J. Prendeville. 12mo. roan, 5s. 
 Or Books I.-III. 3s. 6d. IY. and V. 3s. 6d. Or the five Books in separate 
 vols. Is. 6d. each. 
 
 Lucan. The Pharsalia. By C. E. Haskins, M.A., and W. E. 
 
 Heitland, M.A. Demy 8vo. 14s. 
 
 Lucretius. With Commentary by H. A. J. Munro. 4th Edition. 
 Yols. I. and II. Introduction, Text, and Notes. 18s. Yol. III. Trans¬ 
 lation. 6s. 
 
 Ovid. P. Ovidii Nasonis Heroides XIY. By A. Palmer, M.A. 8 vo. 6 ?. 
 
 - P. Ovidii Nasonis Ars Amatoria et Amores. By the Rev. 
 
 H. Williams, M.A. 3s. 6d. 
 
 -- Metamorphoses. Book XIII. By Chas. Haines Keene, M.A. 
 
 2s. Gd. 
 
 - Epistolarum ex Ponto Liber Primus. ByC.H.Keene,M.A. 3.?. 
 
 Propertius. Sex Aurelii Propertii Carmina. By F. A. Paley, M.A., 
 LL.D. 8vo. Cloth, 5s. 
 
 - Sex Propertii Elegiarum. Libri IV. Recensuit A. Palmer, 
 
 Collegii Sacrosanctae et Individuas Trinitatis juxta Dublinum Socius. 
 Fcap. 8vo. 3s. Gd. 
 
 Sophocles. The Oedipus Tyrannus. By B. H. Kennedy, D.D. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 8s. 
 
 Thucydides. The History of the Peloponnesian War. By Richard 
 Shilleto, M.A. Book I. 8vo. 6s. 6d. Book II. 8vo. 5s. Gd. 
 
 LOWER FORM SERIES. 
 
 With Notes and Vocabularies. 
 
 Eelogse Latinse; or, First Latin Reading-Book, with English Notes 
 
 and a Dictionary. By the late R,ev. P. Frost, M.A. New Edition. Fcap. 
 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 Latin Vocabularies for Repetition. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. 
 
 2nd Edition, revised. Fcap. 8vo. Is. Gd. 
 
 Easy Latin Passages for Unseen Translation. By A. M. M. 
 Stedman, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. Is. Gd. 
 
 Virgil’s iEneid. Book I. Abridged from Conington’s Edition by 
 Rev. J. Gr. Sheppard, D.C.L. With Yocabulary by W. F. R. Shilleto. 
 Is. 6d. [Noio ready. 
 
 Caesar de Bello Gallico. Books I. and II. W 7 ith Notes by George 
 Long, M.A., and Yocabulary by W. F. R. Shilleto. Is. Gd. each. 
 
 [Book III. in the press. 
 
 Tales for Latin Prose Composition. With Notes and Vocabu¬ 
 lary. By G. H. Wells, M.A. 2s. 
 
 Materials for Latin Prose Composition. By the late Rev. P. 
 
 Frost, M.A. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. Key (for Tutors only), 4s. 
 
 A Latin Verse-Book. An Introductory Work on Hexameters and 
 Pentameters. By the late Rev. P. Frost, M.A. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 
 2s. Key (for Tutors only), 5s. 
 
 Analecta Grseca Minora, with Introductory Sentences, English 
 Notes, and a Dictionary. By the late Rev. P. Frost, M.A. * New Edition. 
 Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Greek Testament Selections. 2nd Edition, enlarged, with Notes 
 and Yocabulary. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
6 
 
 George Bell and Sons’ 
 
 LATIN AND GREEK CLASS-BOOKS. 
 
 (See also Lower Form Senes.) 
 
 Faciliora. An Elementary Latin Book on a new principle. By 
 the Rev. J. L. Seager, M.A. 2s. 6d. 
 
 First Latin Lessons. By A. M. M. Stedman. Is. 
 
 Easy Latin Exercises, for Use with the Revised Latin Primer 
 
 and Shorter Latin Primer. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. ( Issued vrith the 
 consent of the late l)r. Kennedy.) Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Miscellaneous Latin Exercises. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 A Latin Primer. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. Is. 
 
 Auxilia Latina. A Series of Progressive Latin Exercises. By 
 M. J.B. Baddeley,M.A. Fcap.8vo. Part I. Accidence. 3rd Edition, revised. 
 2s. Part II. 4th Edition, revised. 2s. Key to Part II. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Scala Latina. Elementary Latin Exercises. By Rev. J. W. 
 Davis, M.A. New Edition, with Vocabulary. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Passages for Translation into Latin Prose. By Prof. H. Nettle- 
 ship, M.A. 3s. Key (for Tutors only), 4s. 6d. 
 
 Latin Prose Lessons. By Prof. Church, M.A. 9th Edition. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Analytical Latin Exercises. By C. P. Mason, B.A. 4th Edit. 
 Part I., Is. 6d. Part II., 2s. 6d. 
 
 By T. Collins, M.A., Head Master of the Latin School, 
 
 Newport, Salop. 
 
 Latin Exercises and Grammar Papers. 6th Edit. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 Unseen Papers in Latin Prose and Verse. With Examination 
 Questions. 4th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 - in Greek Prose and Verse. With Examination Questions. 
 
 3rd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 
 
 Easy Translations from Nepos, Caesar, Cicero, Livy, &c., for 
 Retranslation into Latin. With Notes. 2s. 
 
 Scala Graeca : a Series of Elementary Greek Exercises. By Rev. J. W. 
 
 Davis, M.A., and R. W. Baddeley, M.A. 3rd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2*. 6d. 
 Greek Verse Composition. By G. Preston, M.A. 5th Edition. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Greek Particles and their Combinations according to Attic Usage. 
 
 A Short Treatise. By F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Rudiments of Attic Construction and Idiom. By the Rev. 
 W. C. Compton, M.A., Assistant Master at Uppingham School. 3s. 
 
 By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A., Wadham College, Oxford. 
 
 Latin Examination Papers in Grammar and Idiom. Crown 
 8vo. 2s. 6d. Key (for Tutors and Private Students only), 6s. 
 
 Greek Examination Papers in Grammar and Idiom. 2s. 6 d. 
 
 By the Rev. P. Frost, M.A., St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
 
 Materials for Greek Prose Composition. New Edit. Fcap. 8vo. 
 
 2s. 6d. Key (for Tutors only), 5s. 
 
 Florilegium Poeticum. Elegiac Extracts from Ovid and Tibullus, 
 New Edition. With Notes. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 
 
Educational Works . 
 
 i 
 
 Anthologia G-rseca. A Selection of Choice Greek Poetry, with Notes. 
 By F. St. John Thackeray. 4>th and Cheaper Edition. 16mo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Anthologia Latina. A Selection of Choice Latin Poetry, from 
 Naevius to Boethius, with Notes. By Rev. F. St. John Thackeray. Revised 
 and Cheaper Edition. 16mo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 By H. A. Holden, LL.D. 
 
 Foliorum Silvula. Part I. Passages for Translation into Latin 
 Elegiac and Heroic Yerse. 10th Edition. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 - Part II. Select Passages for Translation into Latin Lyrio 
 
 and Comic Iambic Yerse. 3rd Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Folia Silvulee, sive Eclogae Poetarum Anglicorum in Latinum et 
 Grsecum conversas. 8vo. Yol. II. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Foliorum Centurise. Select Passages for Translation into Latin 
 and Greek Prose. 10th Edition. Post 8vo. 8s. 
 
 TRANSLATIONS, SELECTIONS, &c. 
 
 %* Many of the following books are well adapted for School Prizes. 
 
 iEschylus. Translated into English Prose by F. A. Paley, M.A., 
 LL.D. 2nd Edition. 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 - Translated into English Yerse by Anna Swan wick. 4th 
 
 Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Horace. The Odes and Carmen Saeculare. In English Yerse by 
 J. Conington, M.A. 10th edition. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 - The Satires and Epistles. In English Yerse by J. Coning- 
 
 ton, M.A. 7th edition. 6s. 6d. 
 
 -Odes. Englished and Imitated by various hands. Is. 6d. 
 
 Plato. Gorgias. Translated by E. M. Cope, M.A. 8vo. 2nd Ed. 7s. 
 
 - Philebus. Trans, by F. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. Sm. 8vo. 4s. 
 
 - Theastetus. Trans. byF. A. Paley, M.A., LL.D. Sm.8vo. 4s. 
 
 - Analysis and Index of the Dialogues. By Dr. Day. Post8vo.5s. 
 
 Sophocles. (Edipus Tyrannus. By Dr. Kennedy. Is. 
 
 - The Dramas of. Rendered into English Yerse by Sir 
 
 George Young, Bart., M.A. 8vo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 Theocritus. In English Yerse, by C. S. Calverley, M.A. New 
 
 Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Translations into English and Latin. By C. S. Calverley, M.A. 
 
 Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Translations into English, Latin, and Greek. By R. C. Jebb, M.A., 
 H. Jackson, Litt.D., and \V. E. Currey, M.A. Second Edition. 8s. 
 Extracts for Translation. By R. C. Jebb, M.A., H. Jackson, 
 Litt.D., and W. E. Currey, M.A. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Between Whiles. Translations by Rev. B. H. Kennedy, D.D. 
 
 2nd Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Sabrinae Corolla in Hortulis Regiae Scholae Salopiensis 
 Contexuerunt Tres Yiri Floribus Legendis. Fourth Edition, thoroughly 
 Revised and Rearranged. With many new Pieces and an Introduction. 
 
 [Ready immediately . 
 
 REFERENCE VOLUMES. 
 
 A Latin Grammar. By Albert Harkness. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 - By T. H. Key, M.A. 6th Thousand. Post 8vo. 8s. 
 
 A Short Latin Grammar for Schools. By T. H. Key, M.A. 
 F.R.S. 16th Edition. Post 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
8 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 A Guide to the Choice of Classical Books. By J. B. Mayor, M.A. 
 
 3rd Edition, with a Supplementary List. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. Supple¬ 
 mentary List separately, Is. 6d. 
 
 The Theatre of the Greeks. By J. W. Donaldson, D.D. 8th 
 
 Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Keightley’s Mythology of Greece and Italy. 4th Edition. 5 j, 
 
 CLASSICAL TABLES. 
 
 Latin Accidence. By the Bev. P. Frost, M.A. Is. 
 
 Latin Versification. Is. 
 
 Notabilia Qusedam; or the Principal Tenses of most of the 
 Irregular Greek Verbs and Elementary Greek, Latin, and French Con¬ 
 struction. New Edition. Is. 
 
 Richmond Rules for the Ovidian Distich, &c. By J. Tate, M.A. 1*. 
 The Principles of Latin Syntax. Is. 
 
 Greek Verbs. A Catalogue of 'Verbs, Irregular and Defective. By 
 J. S. Bail’d, T.C.D. 8th Edition. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Greek Accents (Notes on). By A. Barry, D.D. New Edition. Is. 
 Homeric Dialect. Its Leading Forms and Peculiarities. By J. S. 
 
 Baird, T.C.D. New Edition, by W. G. Ptutherford, LL.D. Is. 
 
 Greek Accidence. By the Bev. P. Frost, M.A. New Edition. Is. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE MATHEMATICAL SERIES. 
 
 Arithmetic for Schools. By C. Pendlebury, M.A. 3id Edition, 
 revised and stereotyped, with or without answers, 4s. 6d. Or in two 
 parts, 2s. 6d. each. 
 
 Examples (nearly 8000), without answers, in a separate vol. 3s. 
 
 In use at St. Paul’s, "Winchester, Charterhouse, Merchant Taylors’, 
 Christ’s Hospital, and Manchester Grammar, and at many other 
 Schools and Colleges. 
 
 Algebra. Choice and Chance. By W. A. Whitworth, M.A. 4th 
 Edition. 6s. 
 
 Euclid. Books I.-VI. and part of Books XI. and XII. By H. 
 
 Deighton. 4s. 6d. Key (for Tutors only), os. Books I. and II., 2s. 
 Euclid. Exercises on Euclid and in Modern Geometry. By 
 J. McDowell, M.A. 3rd Edition. 6s. 
 
 Trigonometry. Plane. By Bev. T. Vyvyan, M.A. 3rd Edit. 3s. 6d. 
 Geometrical Conic Sections. By H. G. Willis, M.A. Man¬ 
 chester Grammar School. 5s. 
 
 Conics. The Elementary Geometry of. oth Edition, revised and 
 enlarged. By C. Taylor, D.D. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Solid Geometry. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. 4th Edit, revised. 6s. 
 Geometrical Optics. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. 3rd Edition. 4s. 
 Rigid Dynamics. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. 4s. 
 
 Elementary Dynamics. By W.Garnett, M.A.,D.C.L. othEd. 6s. 
 Dynamics. A Treatise on. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc., F.B.S. 7s. 6 d. 
 Heat. An Elementary Treatise. By W. Garnett, M. A., D.C.L. 4th 
 Edition. 4s. 
 
 Elementary Physics. Examples in. By W. Gallatly, M.A. 4s. 
 Hydromechanics. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc., F.B.S. 4th Edition. 
 Part I. Hydrostatics. 5s. 
 
 Mathematical Examples. By J. M. Dyer, M.A., Eton College, 
 and It. Prowde Smith, M.A., Cheltenham College. 6s. 
 
 Mechanics, Problems in Elementary. By W. Walton, M.A. 6s. 
 
Educational Works. 
 
 9 
 
 CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL AND COLLEGE 
 
 TEXT-BOOKS. 
 
 A Series of Elementary Treatises for the use of Students. 
 Arit hm etic- By Rev.C. Elsee, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 13th Edit. 3*. 6d. 
 -By A. Wrigley, M.A. 3s. 6d. 
 
 -A Progressive Course of Examples. With Answers. By 
 
 J. Watson, M.A. 7th Edition, revised* By W. P. Goudie, B.A. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Algebra. By the Bev. C. Elsee, M.A. 7th Edit. 4s. 
 
 -Progressive Course of Examples. By Rev. W. F. 
 
 M'Michael, M.A., and R. Prowde Smith, M.A. 4th Edition. 3s. 6 d. With 
 Answers. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Plane Astronomy, An Introduction to. By P. T. Main, M.A. 
 
 5th Edition. 4s. 
 
 Conic Sections treated Geometrically. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc. 
 
 6th Edition. 4s. 6d. Solution to the Examples. 4s. 
 
 -Enunciations and Figures Separately. Is. 6 d. 
 
 Statics, Elementary. By Rev. H. Goodwin, D.D. 2nd Edit. 3s. 
 
 Hydrostatics, Elementary. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc. 13th Edit. 4s. 
 
 Mensuration, An Elementary Treatise on. By B.T.Moore, M.A. 3> .6 d. 
 
 Newton’s Principia, The First Three Sections of, with an Appen¬ 
 dix ; and the Ninth and Eleventh Sections. By J. H. Evans, M.A. 5th 
 Edition, by P. T. Main, M.A. 4s. 
 
 Analytical Geometry for Schools. By T. G.Vwvan. 5th Edit. 4*. 
 
 Greek Testament, Companion to the. By A. C. Barrett, M.A 
 
 5th Edition, revised. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Book of Common Prayer, An Historical and Explanatory Treatise 
 on the. By W. G. Humphry, B.D. 6th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Music. Text-book of. By Professor H. C. Banister. 14th Edition, 
 
 revised. 5s. 
 
 - Concise History of. By Rev. H. G. Bonavia Hunt, 
 
 Mus. Doc. Dublin. 9th Edition revised. 3s. 6d. 
 
 ARITHMETIC AND ALGEBRA. 
 
 See also the two foregoing Series . 
 
 Arithmetic, Examination Papers in. Consisting of 140 paper?, 
 each containing 7 questions. 357 more difficult problems follow. A col¬ 
 lection of recent Public Examination Papers are appended. By C. 
 Pendlebury, M.A. 2s. 6d. Key, 5s. 
 
 Graduated Exercises in Addition (Simple and Compound). By 
 W. S. Beard, C. 8. Dept. Rochester Mathematical School. Is. 
 
 For Candidates for Commercial Ccrtijicates and Cicd Seroice Kvams. 
 
 BOOK-KEEPING. 
 
 Book-keeping Papers, set at various Public Examinations. 
 Collected and Written by J. T. Medhurst, Lecturer on Book-keeping in 
 the City of Loudon College. 3r. 
 
 A 2 
 
10 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 GEOMETRY AND EUCLID. 
 
 Euclid. Books I.-VI. and part of XI. and XII. A New Trans- 
 
 lation. By H. Deighton. Books I. and II. separately, 2s. (Fee p. 8., 
 
 - The Definitions of, with Explanations and Exercises, 
 
 and an Appendix of Exercises on the First Book. By R. Webb, M.A. 
 Crown 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 - Book I. With Notes and Exercises for the use of Pre¬ 
 paratory Schools, &c. By Braithwaite Arnett, M.A. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 - The First Two Books explained to Beginners. By C. P, 
 
 Mason, B.A. 2nd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 The Enunciations and Figures to Euclid’s Elements. By Rev. 
 
 J. Brasse, D.D. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. Without the Figures, 6d. 
 
 Exercises on Euclid and in Modern Geometry. By J. McDowell, 
 
 B.A. Crown 8vo. 3rd Edition revised. 6s. 
 
 Geometrical Conic Sections. By H. G. Willis, M.A. (See p. ft.) 
 Geometrical Conic Sections. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc. (See p. 9.) 
 Elementary Geometry of Conics. By C. Taylor, D.D. (See p. 8.) 
 
 An Introduction to Ancient and Modern Geometry of Conics. 
 
 By C. Taylor, D.D., Master of St. John’s Coll., Camb. 8vo. 15s. 
 
 Solutions of Geometrical Problems, proposed at St. John’s 
 College from 1830 to 1846. By T. Gaskin, M.A. 8vo. 12s. 
 
 TRIGONOMETRY. 
 
 Trigonometry, Introduction to Plane. By Rev. T. G. Vyvyan, 
 
 Charterhouse. 3rd Edition. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 An Elementary Treatise on Mensuration. By B. T. Moore, 
 
 "M.A. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Trigonometry, Examination Papers in. By G. H. Ward, M.A. r 
 Assistant Master at St. Paul’s School. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 ANALYTICAL GEOMETRY 
 AND DIFFERENTIAL CALCULUS. 
 
 An Introduction to Analytical Plane Geometry. By W. P. 
 Turnbull, M.A. 8vo. 12b. 
 
 Problems on the Principles of Plane Co-ordinate Geometry. 
 By W. Walton, M.A. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 Trilinear Co-ordinates, and Modern Analytical Geometry of 
 Two Dimensions. By W. A. Whitworth, M.A. 8vo. I6.s. 
 
 An Elementary Treatise on Solid Geometry. By W. S. Aldis, 
 M.A. 4th Edition revised. Cr. 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Elliptic Functions. Elementary Treatise on By A. Cayley. D Sc. 
 Professor of Pure Mathematics at Cambridge University. Demy 8vo. 15s. 
 
Educational Work. h. 
 
 MECHANICS & NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 
 
 Statics, Elementary. By H. Goodwin, D.D. Fcap. 8vo. 2nd 
 
 Edition. 3s. 
 
 Dynamics, A Treatise on Elementary. By W. Garnett, M.A , 
 D.C.L. 5th Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Dynamics. Rigid. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. - 4s. 
 
 Dynamics. A Treatise on. By W. H. Besant, D Sc.,F.R.S. 7$. fid. 
 
 Elementary Mechanics, Problems in. By \V. Walton, M.A. New 
 
 Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Theoretical Mechanics, Problems in. By W. W T alton, M.A. 3rd 
 
 Edition. Demy 8vo. 16s. 
 
 Hydrostatics. By W. H.Besant, D.Sc. Fcap. 8vo. 13th Edition. 4s. 
 
 Hydromechanics, A Treatise on. By W. H. Besant, D.Sc., F.R.S, 
 8vo. 4th Edition, revised. Part I. Hydrostatics. 5s. 
 
 Hydrodynamics, A Treatise on. Yol. I. 10s. 6d.; Vol. II. 12s. 6cL 
 A. B. Basket, M.A. 
 
 Optics, Geometrical. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. Crown-8vo. 3rd 
 
 Edition. 4s. 
 
 Double Refraction, A Chapter on Fresnel’s Theory of. By W. S. 
 Aldis, M.A. 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Heat. An Elementary Treatise on. By W. Garnett, M.A., D.C.L. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 4th Edition. 4s. 
 
 Elementary Physics. By W. Gallatly, M.A., Asst. Examr. at 
 
 London University. 4s. 
 
 Newtons Principia, The First Three Sections of, with an Appen¬ 
 dix ; and the Ninth and Eleventh Sections. By J. H. Evans, M.A. 5th 
 Edition. Edited by P. T. Main, M.A. 4s. 
 
 Astronomy, An Introduction to Plane. By P. T. Main, M.A. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo. cloth. 5th Edition. 4s. 
 
 - Practical and Spherical. By R. Main, M.A. 8vo. 14*. 
 
 Mathematical Examples. Pure and Mixed. By J. M. Dyer, M.A. t 
 and R. Prowde Smith, M.A. 6s. 
 
 Pure Mathematics and Natural Philosophy, A Compendium of 
 
 Facts and Formulae in. By G. R. Smalley. 2nd Edition, revised b} 
 J. McDowell, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Elementary Mathematical Formulae. By the Rev. T. W. Open- 
 
 shaw, M.A. is. 6d. 
 
 Elementary Course of Mathematics. By H. Goodwin, D.D. 
 
 6th Edition. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 Problems and Examples, adapted to the ‘ Elementary Course of 
 
 Mathematics.’ 3rd Edition. 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Solutions of Goodwin’s Collection of Problems and Examples. 
 
 By W. W. Hutt, M.A. 3rd Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo. 9s. 
 
 A Collection of Examples and Problems in Arithmetic, 
 Algebra, Geometry, Logarithms, Trigonometry, Conic Sections, Mechanics, 
 &c., with Answers. By Rev. A. Wrigley. 20th Thousand. 8s. 6d. 
 Key. 10s 6d 
 
 Science Examination Papers. Part I. Inorganic Chemistry. By 
 R. E. Steel, M A., F.C.S., Bradford Grammar School. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d_ 
 
12 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 TECHNOLOGICAL HANDBOOKS. 
 
 Edited by H. Trueman Wood, Secretary of the Society of Arts. 
 
 Dyeing and Tissue Printing. By W. Crookes, F.R.S. 5s. 
 
 Glass Manufacture. By Henry Chance, M.A.; H. J. Powell, B.A.; 
 and H. G. Harris. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Cotton Spinning. Bv Richard Marsden, of Manchester. 3rd 
 
 Edition, revised. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Chemistry of Coal-Tar Colours. By Prof. Benedikt, and Dr. 
 
 Knecht of Bradford Technical College. 2nd Edition, enlarged. 6s. Gel. 
 
 Woollen and Worsted Cloth Manufacture, by Roberts Beau¬ 
 mont, Assistant Leciurer at Yorkshire College, Leeds. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Cotton Weaving. By R. Marsden. [In the press. 
 
 Colour in Woven Design. By Roberts Beaumont. [In the press. 
 Bookbinding. By Zaehnsdorf. [ Preparing . 
 
 Others in preparation . 
 
 HISTORY, TOPOGRAPHY, &e. 
 
 Rome and the Campagna. By R. Bum, M.A. With 85 En¬ 
 gravings and 26 Maps and Plans. With Appendix. 4to. 21s. 
 
 Old Rome. A Handbook for Travellers. By R. Burn, M.A. 
 With Maps and Plans. Demy 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Modern Europe. By Dr. T. H. Dyer. 2nd Edition, revised and 
 continued. 5 vols. Demy 8vo. 21. 12s. 6d. 
 
 The History of the Kings of Rome. By Dr. T. H. Dyer. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 The History of Pompeii : its Buildings and Antiquities. By 
 T. H. Dyer. 3rd Edition, brought down to 1874. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 The City of Rome: its History and Monuments. 2nd Edition, 
 revised by T. H. Dyer. 5s. 
 
 Ancient Athens : its History, Topography, and Remains. By 
 T. H. Dyer. Super-royal 8vo. Cloth. 7s. 6d. 
 
 The Decline of the Roman Republic. By G. Long. 5 vols. 
 
 8vo. 5s. each. 
 
 Historical Maps of England. By C. H. Pearson. Folio. 3rd 
 Edition revised. 31s. 6d. 
 
 History of England, 1800-46. By Harriet Martineau, with new 
 
 and copious Index. 5 vols. 3s. 6d. each. 
 
 A Practical Synopsis of English History. By A. Bowes. 9th 
 
 Edition, revised. 8vo. Is. 
 
 Lives of the Queens of England. By A. Strickland. Library 
 
 Edition, 8 vols. 7s. 6d. each. Cheaper Edition, 6 vols. 5s. each. Abridged 
 Edition, 1 vol. 6s. 6d. Mary Queen of Scots, 2 vols. 5s. each. Tudor and 
 Stuart Princesses, 5s. 
 
Educational Works. 
 
 13 
 
 Eginhard’s Life of Karl the Great (Charlemagne). Translated, 
 
 with Notes, by W. Glaister, M.A., B.C.L. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 The Elements of General History. By Prof. Tytler. New 
 
 Edition, brought down to 1874. Small Post 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 History and Geography Examination Papers. Compiled by 
 
 C. H. Spence, M.A., Clifton College. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 PHILOLOGY. 
 
 WEBSTER’S DICTIONARY OP THE ENGLISH LAN- 
 
 GUAGE. With Dr. Mahn’s Etymology. 1 vol. 1628 pages, 3000 Illus¬ 
 trations. 21s.; half calf, 30s.; calf or half russia, 31s. 6d.; russia, 21. 
 With Appendices and 70 additional pages of Illustrations, 1919 pages, 
 31s. 6d.; half calf, 21 .; calf or half russia, 21. 2s.; russia, 21. 10s. 
 
 * The best practical English Dictionary extant.’ —Quarterly Review , 1873. 
 Prospectuses, with specimen pages, post free on application. 
 
 Richardson’s Philological Dictionary of the English Language. 
 Combining Explanation with Etymology, and copiously illustrated by 
 Quotations from the best Authorities. With a Supplement. 2 vols. 4to. 
 41.14s. 6d. Supplement separately. 4to. 12s. 
 
 Brief History of the English Language. By Prof. James Hadley, 
 
 LL.D., Yale College. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 The Elements of the English Language. By E. Adams, Ph.D. 
 
 21st Edition. Post 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Philological Essays. By T. H. Key, M.A., F.R.S. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Synonyms and Antonyms of the English Language. By Arch¬ 
 
 deacon Smith. 2nd Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Synonyms Discriminated. By Archdeacon Smith. Demy 8vo. 
 
 2nd Edition revised. 14s. 
 
 Bible English. Chapters on Words and Phrases in the Bible and 
 
 Prayer Book. By Rev. T. L. O. Davies. 5s. 
 
 The Queen’s English. A Manual of Idiom and Usage. By the 
 
 late Dean Alford. 6th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. sewed. Is. 6d. cloth. 
 
 A History of English Rhythms. By Edwin Guest, M. A., D.C.L. 
 
 LL.D. New Edition, by Professor W. W. Skeat. Demy 8vo. 18s. 
 
 Elements of Comparative Grammar and Philology. For Use 
 in Schools. By A. C. Price, M.A., Assistant Master at Leeds Grammar 
 School. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Questions for Examination in English Literature. By Prof. 
 
 W. W. Skeat. 2nd Edition, revised. 2s. 6d. 
 
 A Syriac Grammar. By G. Phillips, D.D. 3rd Edition, enlarged. 
 
 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
14 
 
 George Bell and Sons’ 
 
 DIVINITY, MORAL PHILOSOPHY, &c. 
 
 By the Rev. F. H. Scrivener, A.M., LL.D., D.C.L. 
 Novum Testamentum Greece. Editio major. Being an enlarged 
 
 Edition, containing 1 the Readings of Westcott and Hort, and those adopted 
 by the Revisers, &c. 7s. 6d. For other Editions see 'page 3. 
 
 A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. 
 
 With Forty Facsimiles from Ancient Manuscripts. 3rd Edition. 8vo. 18s. 
 
 Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament. For English 
 
 Readers. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Codex Bezse Cantabrigiensis. 4to. 265. 
 
 The New Testament for English Readers. By the late H. Alford, 
 D.D. Vol. I. Part I. 3rd Edit. 12s. Vol. I. Part II. 2nd Edit. 10s. 6d, 
 Vol. II. Part I. 2nd Edit. 16s. Vol. II. Part II. 2nd Edit. 16s. 
 
 The Greek Testament. By the late H. Alford, D.D. Vol. I. 7tb 
 Edit. 11. 8s. Vol. II. 8th Edit. 11. 4s. Vol. III. 10th Edit. 18s. Vol. IV. 
 Part I. 5th Edit. 18s. Vol. IV. Part II. 10th Edit. 14s. Vol. IV. 11. 12s. 
 
 Companion to the Greek Testament. By A. C. Barrett, M.A. 
 
 5th Edition, revised. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
 
 The Book of Psalms. A New Translation, with Introductions, &c. 
 By the Very Rev. J. J. Stewart Perowne, D.D. 8vo. Vol. I. 6th Edition, 
 18s. Vol. II. 6th Edit. 16s. 
 
 - Abridged for Schools. 6th Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. ScL 
 
 History of the Articles of Religion. By C. H. Hardwick. 3rd 
 
 Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 History of the Creeds. By J. R. Lumby, DD. 3rd Edition. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Pearson on the Creed. Carefully printed from an early edition. 
 
 With Analysis and Index by E. Walford, M.A. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Liturgies and Offices of the Church, for the Use of English 
 
 Readers, in Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer. By the Rev. 
 Edward Burbidge, M.A. Crown 8vo. 9s. 
 
 An Historical and Explanatory Treatise on the Book of 
 
 Common Prayer By Rev. W. G. Humphry, B.D. 6th Edition, enlarged. 
 Small Post 8vo. 2s. 6d. ; Cheap Edition, Is. 
 
 A Commentary on the Gospels, Epistles, and Acts of the 
 
 Apostles. By Rev. W. Denton, A.M. New Edition. 7 vols. 8vo. 9s. each. 
 
 Notes on the Catechism. By Rt. Rev. Bishop Barry. 8th Edit. 
 
 Fcap. 2s. 
 
 The Winton Church Catechist. Questions and Answers on the 
 Teaching of the Church Catechism. By the late Rev. J. S. B. Monsell, 
 LL.D. 4th Edition. Cloth, 3s. j or in Four Parts, sewed. 
 
 The Church Teacher’s Manual of Christian Instruction. By 
 
 Rev. M. F. Sadler. 38th Thousand. 2s. 6d. 
 
Educational Works. 
 
 15 
 
 FOREIGN CLASSICS. 
 
 A Series for use in Schools, with English Notes, grammatical and 
 explanatory, and renderings of difficult idiomatic expressions. 
 
 Fcap. 8 vo. 
 
 Schiller’s Wallenstein. By Dr. A. Buchheim. 5th Edit. os. 
 
 Or the Lager and Piccolomini, 2s. 6d. Wallenstein’s Tod, 2s. 6d. 
 
 -Maid of Orleans. By Dr. W. Wagner. 2nd Edit. Is. 6d. 
 
 -Maria Stuart. By Y. Kastner. 2nd Edition. Is. 6d. 
 
 Goethe’s Hermann and Dorothea. By E. Bell, M.A., and 
 E. Wolf el. Is. 6d. 
 
 German Ballads, from Uhland, Goethe, and Schiller. By C. L. 
 Bielefeld. 3rd Edition. Is. 6d. 
 
 Charles XII., par Voltaire. By L. Direy. 7th Edition. Is. 6d. 
 
 Aventures de T61emaque, par Fen61on. By C. J. Delille. 4th 
 Edition. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Select Fables of La Fontaine. By F. E. A. Gasc. 18th Edit. Is. 6d. 
 
 Pieeiola, by X.B. Saintine. By Dr. Dubuc. 15th Thousand. Is. Qd. 
 
 Lamartine’s Le Tailleur de Pierres de Saint-Point. By 
 J. Boielle, 4th Thousand. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 Italian Primer. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 FRENCH CLASS-BOOKS. 
 
 French Grammar for Public Schools. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo. 12th Edition, revised. 2s. 6d. 
 
 French Primer. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 8th Ed. Is. 
 
 Primer of French Philology. By Rev. A. C. Clapin. Fcap. 8vo. 
 
 4th Edit. Is. 
 
 Le Nouveau Tresor; or, French Student’s Companion. By 
 M. E. S. 18th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 French Examination Papers in Miscellaneous Grammar and 
 Idioms. Compiled by A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. 4th Edition. Crown 
 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Key to the above. By G. A. Schrumpf, Univ. of France. Crown 
 8vo. 5s. (For Teachers or Private Students only.) 
 
 Manual of French Prosody. By Arthur Gosset, M.A. Crown 
 
 8vo. 3s. 
 
 Lexicon of Conversational French. By A. Holloway. 2nd 
 Edition. Crown 8vo. 4s. 
 
 PROF. A. BARRERE’S FRENCH COURSE. 
 
 Elements of French Grammar and First Steps in Idiom. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Precis of Comparative French Grammar. 2nd Edition. Crown 
 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Junior Graduated French Course. Crown 8vo. Is. G d. 
 
16 
 
 George Bell and Sons’ 
 
 F. E. A. GASC’S FRENCH COURSE. 
 
 First French Book. Fcap. 8vo. 98th Thousand. Is. 
 
 Second French Book. 47th Thousand. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6 d. 
 
 Key to First and Second French Books. 5th Edit. Fcp. 8vo. 3s. 6 d. 
 French Fables for Beginners, in Prose, with Index. 16th Thousand. 
 12mo. Is. 6d. 
 
 Select Fables of La Fontaine. 18th Thousand. Fcap.8vo. Is. 6 d, 
 Histoires Amusantes et Instructives. With Notes. 16th Thou¬ 
 sand. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Practical Guide to Modern French Conversation. 17th Thou¬ 
 sand. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 French Poetry for the Young. With Notes. 5th Edition. Fcap. 
 
 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Materials for French Prose Composition; or, Selections from 
 
 the best English Prose Writers. 19th Thous. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. Key, 6s. 
 Prosateurs Conteraporains. With Notes. 10th Edition, re¬ 
 vised. 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Le Petit Compagnon; a French Talk-Book for Little Children. 
 
 12th Thousand. 16mo. Is 6d. 
 
 An Improved Modem Pocket Dictionary of the French and 
 
 English Languages. 45th Thousand. 16mo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Modern French-English and English-French Dictionary. 4th 
 Edition, revised, with new supplements. 10s. 6d. 
 
 The ABC Tourist’s French Interpreter of all Immediate 
 Wants. By F. E. A. Gasc. Is. 
 
 MODERN FRENCH AUTHORS. 
 
 Edited, with Introductions and Notes, by James Boielle, Senior 
 
 French Master at Dulwich College. 
 
 Daudet’s La Belle Nivernaise. 2s. Qd. For Beginners . 
 
 Hugo’s Bug Jargal. 3s. For Advanced Students. 
 
 GOMBERT’S FRENCH DRAMA. 
 
 Being a Selection of the best Tragedies and Comedies of Moliere, 
 R,acine, Corneille, and Voltaire. With Arguments and Notes by A. 
 Gombert. New Edition, revised by F. E. A. Gasc. Fcap. 8vo. Is. each; 
 
 sewed, 6d. Contents. 
 
 Moliere :—Le Misanthrope. L’Avare. Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme. Le 
 Tartuffe. Le Malade Imaginaire. Les Femmes Savantes. Les Fourberies 
 de Scapin. Les Pr&heuses Ridicules. L’Ecole des Femmes. L’Ecole des 
 Maris. Le M^decin malgr^ Lui. 
 
 Racine :—Ph^dre. Esther. Athalie. Iphig^nie. Les Plaideurs. La 
 Th^ba'ide; ou, Les Freres Ennemis. Andromaque. Britannicus. 
 
 P. Corneille: —Le Cid. Horace. Cinna. Polyeucte. 
 
 Voltaire :—Zaire. 
 
 GERMAN CLASS-BOOKS. 
 
 A Concise German Grammar. By Frz. Lange, Pli.D., Professor 
 R.M.A. Woolwich. In three Parts. Part I. Elementary. 2s. Part II. 
 Intermediate. Is. 6d. Now ready. Part III. Advanced. In the press. 
 
 Materials for German Prose Composition. By Dr. Buchheim. 
 
 12th Edition, thoroughly revised. Fcap. 4s. 6d. Key, Parts I. and II., 3s. 
 Parts III. and IV., 4s. 
 
Educational Works . 
 
 17 
 
 German Conversation Grammar. By I. Sydow. 2nd Edition. 
 Book I. Etymology. 2s. 6d. Book II. Syntax. Is. 6d. 
 
 Wortfolge, or Rules and Exercises on the Order of Words in 
 German Sentences. By Dr. F. Stock. Is. 6d. 
 
 A German Grammar for Public Schools. By the Rev. A. C. 
 Clapin and F. Holl Muller. 5th Edition. Fcap. 2s. 6d. 
 
 A German Primer, with Exercises. By Rev. A. C. Clapin. Is. 
 Kotzebue’s Der Gefangene. With Notes by Dr. W. Stromberg. Is. 
 
 German Examination Papers in Grammar and Idiom. By 
 
 R. J. Morich. 2s. 6d. Key for Tutors only, 5s. 
 
 German Examination Course. By Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D. 
 Elementary, 2s. Intermediate, 2s. Advanced, Is. 6d. 
 
 German Progressive Course. By Prof. F. Lange. Elementary 
 
 Reader, Is. 6d. Intermediate and Advanced (in the press). 
 
 MODERN GERMAN SCHOOL CLASSICS. 
 
 Small Crown 8vo. 
 
 Hey’s Fabeln Fiir Kinder, Edited by Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D. Is. 6d. 
 Benedix’s Dr. Wespe. Edited by F. Lange, Ph.D. 2s. 6d. 
 Hoffman’s Meister Martin, der Kiifner. By Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D. 
 
 Is. 6d. 
 
 Heyse’s Hans Lange. By A. A. Macdonell, M.A., Ph.D. 2s. 
 
 Auerbach’s Auf Wache, and Roquette’s Der Gefrorene Kuss. 
 By A. A. Macdonell, M.A. 2s. 
 
 Moser’s Der Bibliothekar. By Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D. 2s. 
 
 Ebers’ Eine Frage. By F. Storr, B.A. 2s. 
 
 Freytag’s Die Journalisten. By Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Gutzkow’s Zopf und Schwert. By Prof. F. Lange, Ph.D, 2s. 
 
 German Epic Tales. Edited by Karl Neuhaus, Ph.D. 2s. 6 d. 
 
 Humoresken. Novelletten der besten deutsclien Humoristen der 
 Gegenwart. Edited by A. A. Macdonell, M.A. Oxon. Authorised Edition. 
 
 _ [In preparation. 
 
 ENGLISH CLASS-BOOKS. 
 
 Comparative Grammar and Philology. By A. C. Trice, M.A., 
 
 Assistant Master at Leeds Grammar School. 2s. 6d. 
 
 The Elements of the English Language. By E. Adams, Ph.D. 
 21st Edition. Post 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 The Rudiments of English Grammar and Analysis. By 
 
 E. Adams, Ph.D. 16th Thousand. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 A Concise System of Parsing. By L. E. Adams, B.A. Is. 6 d. 
 
 General Knowledge Examination Papers. Compiled ly 
 A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Examples for Grammatical Analysis (Verse and Prose). Se¬ 
 lected, &c., by F. Edwards. New edition. Cloth, Is. 
 
 Notes on Shakespeare’s Plays. By T. Duff Barnett, B.A. 
 Midsummer Night’s Dream, Is.; Julius Csesar, Is.; Henry V., Is.; 
 Tempest, Is.; Macbeth, Is.; Merchant of Venice, Is.; HamLt, Is. 
 
18 
 
 George Bell and Sons' 
 
 By C. P. Mason, Fellow of Univ. Coll. London. 
 
 First Notions of Grammar for Young Learners. Fcap. 8vo. 
 
 41st to 46tli Thousand. Cloth. 9d. 
 
 First Steps in English Grammar for Junior Classes. Demy 
 
 18mo. 41th Thousand. Is. 
 
 Outlines of English Grammar for the Use of Junior Classes. 
 
 71st to 76tli Thousand. Crown 8vo. 2s. 
 
 English Grammar, including the Principles of Grammatical 
 Analysis. 30th Edition. 125th to 130th Thousand. Crowm 8vo. 3s. 6 d. 
 Practice and Help in the Analysis of Sentences. 2s. 
 
 A Shorter English Grammar, with copious Exercises. 34th 
 to 38th Thousand. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 English Grammar Practice, being the Exercises separately. Is, 
 
 Code Standard Grammars. Parts I. and II., 2d. each. Parts HI., 
 IV., and V., 3d. each. 
 
 Notes of Lessons, their Preparation, &c. By Jose Bickard, 
 Park Lane Board School, Leeds, and A. H. Taylo-r, Rodley Board 
 School, Leeds. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 A Syllabic System of Teaching to Read, combining the advan¬ 
 tages of the ‘ Phonic * and the ‘ Look-and-Say ’ Systems. Crown 8vo. Is. 
 Practical Hints on Teaching. By Rev. J. Menet, M.A. 6th Edit, 
 revised. Crown 8vo. paper, 2s. 
 
 How to Earn the Merit Grant. A Manual of School Manage¬ 
 ment. By H. Major, B.A., B.Sc. Part I. (3rd Edit.) Infant School, 3s. 
 Part II. (2nd Edit, revised), 4s. Complete, 6s. 
 
 Test Lessons in Dictation. 4th Edition. Paper cover, Is. 6 d. 
 
 Drawing Copies. By P. H. Delamotte. Oblong 8vo. 12s. Sold 
 
 also in parts at Is. each. 
 
 Poetry for the Schoolroom. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6 d. 
 
 The Botanist’s Pocket-Book. With a copious Index. By W. R. 
 
 Hayward. 6th Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. cloth limp. 4s. 6 d. 
 Experimental Chemistry, founded on the Work of Dr. Stockhardt. 
 By C. W. Heaton. Post 8vo. 5s. 
 
 Lectures on Musical Analysis. Sonata-form, Fugue, &c. By 
 Prof. H. C. Banister. 2nd Edition, revised. 7s. 6d. 
 
 GEOGRAPHICAL SERIES. By M. J. Barrington Ward, M.A. 
 
 With Illustrations. 
 
 The Map and the Compass. A Reading-Book of Geography. 
 
 For Standard I. New Edition, revised. 8d. cloth. 
 
 The Round World. A Reading-Book of Geography. For 
 Standard II. lOd. 
 
 About England. A Reading Book of Geography for Standard 
 
 III. [In the press. 
 
 The Child’s Geography. For the Use of Schools and for Home 
 
 Tuition. 6d. 
 
 The Child’s Geography of England. With Introductory Exer¬ 
 cises on the British Isles and Empire, with Questions. 2s. 6d. Without 
 Questions, 2s. __ 
 
 Geography Examination Papers. (See Eistory and Geography 
 Papers, p. 12.) 
 
Educational Works. 
 
 19 
 
 Helps’ Course of Poetry, for Schools. A New Selection from 
 the English Poets, carefully compiled and adapted to the several standards 
 by E. A. Helps, one of H.M. Inspectors of Schools. 
 
 Book I. Infants and Standards I. and II. 134 pp. small 8vo. 9d. 
 Book II. Standards III. and IV. 224 pp. crown 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 Book III. Standards V., VI., and VII. 352 pp. post 8vo. 2s. 
 
 Or in PARTS. Infants, 2d. j Standard I., 2d.; Standard II., 2d. 
 Standard III., 4d. 
 
 Picture School-Books. In Simple Language, with numerous 
 
 Illustrations. Royal 16mo. 
 
 The Infant’s Primer. 3d.—School Primer. 6d.—School Reader. By J. 
 Tilleard. Is.—Poetry Book for Schools. Is.—The Life of Joseph. Is.—The 
 Scripture Parables. By the Rev. J. E. Clarke. Is.—The Scripture Miracles. 
 By the Rev. J. E. Clarke. Is.—The New Testament History. By the Rev. 
 J. G. Wood, M.A. Is.—The Old Testament History. By the Rev. J. G. 
 Wood, M.A. Is.—The Story of Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress. Is.—The Life 
 of Martin Luther. By Sarah Crompton. Is. 
 
 BOOKS FOR YOUNG READERS. 
 
 A Series of Reading Boohs designed to facilitate the acquisition of the power 
 of Reading by very young Children. In 11 vols. limp cloth, 6d. each. 
 
 Those with an asterisk have a Frontispiece or other Illustrations. 
 
 *The Old Boathouse. BeU and Fan; or, A Cold Dip. 
 
 *Tot and the Cat. A Bit of Cake. The Jay. The 
 
 Black Hen’s Nest. Tom and Ned. Mrs. Bee. 
 
 *The Cat and the Hen. Sam and his Dog Redleg. 
 
 Bob and Tom Lee. A Wreck. 
 
 *The New-born Lamb. The Rosewood Box. Poor 
 
 Fan. Sheep Dog. 
 
 \ 
 
 Suitable 
 
 for 
 
 Infants. 
 
 *The Two Parrots. A Tale of the Jubilee. By M. E. ' 
 
 Wintle. 9 Illustrations. 
 
 *The Story of Three Monkeys. 
 
 * Story of a Cat. Told by Herself. 
 
 The Blind Boy. The Mute Girl. A New Tale of 
 
 Babes in a Wood. 
 
 The Dey and the Knight. The New Bank Note. 
 
 The Royal Visit. A King’s Walk on a Winter’s Day. 
 
 Suitable 
 
 for 
 
 Standards 
 I. St II. 
 
 * Queen Bee and Busy Bee. 
 
 * Gull’s Crag. 
 
 * A First Book of Geography. By the Rev. C. A. Johns. 
 
 Hlu8trated. Double size, Is. 
 
 SyUabic Spelling. By C. Barton. In Two Parts. Infants, 3d. 
 
 Standard I., 3d. 
 
20 George Bell and Sons Educational Works. 
 
 BELL'S READING-BOOKS. 
 
 FOR SCHOOLS AND PAROCHIAL LIBRARIES. 
 
 Now Beady. PostQvo. Strongly bound in cloth, Is. each. 
 
 ♦Life of Columbus. \ 
 
 * Grimm’s German Tales. (Selected.) 
 
 * Andersen’s Danish Tales. Illustrated. (Selected.) 
 Great Englishmen. Short Lives for Young Children. 
 Great Englishwomen. Short Lives of. 
 
 Great Scotsmen. Short Lives of. 
 
 *Masterman Heady. By Capt. Marryat. Illus. (Abgd.) 
 *Poor Jack. By Capt. Marryat, R.N. (Abridged.) 
 
 Suitable 
 
 for 
 
 Standards 
 III. & IV. 
 
 * Scott’s Talisman. (Abridged.) 
 
 * Friends in Fur and Feathers. By Gwynfryn. 
 
 * Dickens's Little NeU. Abridged from the ‘ The Old 
 
 Curiosity Shop.* 
 
 *Poor Jack. By Captain Marryat, R.N. Abgd. 
 Parables from Nature. (Selected.) By Mrs. Gatty. 
 Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare. (Selected.) 
 Edgeworth’s Tales. (A Selection.) 
 
 * Gulliver’s Travels. (Abridged.) 
 
 * Robinson Crusoe. Illustrated. 
 
 * Arabian Nights. (A Selection Rewritten.) j 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 \ Standards 
 
 ; iv. & v. 
 
 *The Vicar of Wakefield. v 
 
 * Settlers in Canada. By Capt. Marryat. (Abridged.) 
 Marie: Glimpses of Life in France. By A. B. Ellis. 
 
 4 
 
 Poetry for Boys. Selected by D. Munro. 
 
 * Southey’s Life of Nelson. (Abridged.) 
 
 *Life of the Duke of Wellington, with Maps and Plans. 
 *Sir Roger de Coverley and other Essays from the 
 
 Spectator. 
 
 Tales of the Coast. By J. Runciman. 
 
 * These Volumes are Illustrated. J 
 
 Standards 
 V. VI. & 
 VII. 
 
 Uniform with the Series , in limp cloth , 6d. each. 
 
 Shakespeare’s Plays. Kemble’s Reading Edition. With Ex¬ 
 planatory Notes for School Use. 
 
 JULIUS C2ESAR. THE MERCHANT OF VENICE. KING JOHN. 
 HENRY THE FIFTH. MACBETH. AS YOU LIKE IT. 
 
 Londoa: GEORGE BELL & SONS, York Street, Co vent-Garden. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
\ 
 
 
 m crv j?/ 4