Skip to main content

Full text of "Aristotle De sensu and De memoria; text and translation, with introduction and commentary"

See other formats













Cambridge : 



etpjtg: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 


[All Rights reserved.] 







)(AplC )(AplN fAp 6CTIN H TIKTOyc Afl. 


I. THE dialogues of Plato, which I chose, from 
time to time, for the school work of my Sixth Form, 
were chiefly the Protagoras, the Euthydemus, and the 
Hippias Major; since this last, if not Platonic, is very 
amusing and instructive. But I seldom allowed any 
of my foremost boys to leave school without reading 
with them privately in the evenings the Theaetetus 
also, as the best preparative for their deeper study 
of Plato and of Greek philosophy in general : often 
adding to it the earlier books (i 4) of Aristotle s 
Ethics. In the past year, 1880, I took it for the sub 
ject of my Cambridge Lectures, reading a translation 
to my class, and commenting as occasion required. 
This was executed in the first instance quite indepen 
dently, without reference to Professor Jowett s ver 
sion; but in revising my translation for the press I 
have compared the two, with frequent advantage, as 
might be expected, to the correction of my own work. 
Still the result is, that I have generally departed less 
widely from the literal Greek than my confrere in the 
Sister University: and the reason of this is evident: 


the Master of Balliol has translated for the instruc 
tion of all English-speaking students of Plato, whether 
Greek scholars or not: I for the special convenience 
of Greek students in Universities. 

II. The order of Plato s writings, and the genu 
ineness of many, are questions respecting which the 
varieties of opinion and the controversies resulting, 
chiefly within the present century, have been so many 
and so discordant, as to prove that no certainty can 
be reached on either point. Schleiermacher s trans 
lation with its prefaces (first published 1804 1810) 
was the trumpet-call of the warfare which has gone 
on ever since. His elaborate attempt to arrange the 
dialogues on a systematic principle of nascent and ever 
growing philosophic doctrine has not been fully accept 
ed by any of the scholars who have since published 
their views, Ast, Socher, Stallbaum, K. F. Hermann, 
Steinhart, Susemihl, Suckow, Munk, Bonitz, Ueberweg, 
Schaarschmidt and others : while Ritter Brandis and 
Zeller, historians of Greek philosophy, are less unfa 
vourable to the principle of Schleiermacher, though not 
admitting it in its details. Out of 35 or 36 dialogues 
usually set down as Plato s, Ast will only accept 14 
as genuine; viz. (i) Protagoras, Phaedrus, Gorgias, 
Phaedo: (2) Theaetetus, Sophista, Politicus, Parmeni- 
des, Cratylus: (3) Philebus, Symposium, Respublica, 
Timaeus, Critias: in this order. Thus he even rejects 
the Leges, though cited by Aristotle. This may be 
considered the extreme opinion on the sceptical side, 
as Grote in his work on Plato and the other com 
panions of Socrates represents the extreme credulous 


view, supporting the Alexandrine canon of Thrasyllus, 
a grammarian of the Augustan age, cited by Diogenes 
of Laerta. This canon rejected ten dialogues, which 
Diogenes enumerates; and these have since then 
been universally treated as spurious. Some of them 
did not survive: seven are printed at the close of 
the Tauchnitz edition and by Bekker, along with 
the 13 Epistles (which Grote, differing from most 
scholars, accepts as genuine) and the Definitions (opoi). 
Thrasyllus distributed the dialogues of Plato into two 
classes; (i) d. of Investigation (fty-njTwcoi); (2) d. of 
Exposition (IX^TJJTJTL/COL). These he also subdivided 
variously : but his subdivisions have little interest. 
The chronological order of the dialogues, like the 
genuineness of many, is a much disputed question on 
some points: strikingly so respecting the date of the 
Phaedrus, which Schleiermacher, as an essential fea 
ture in his system, deems the earliest; while others, as 
Stallbaum and Steinhart, place it among the latest. 

Generally, it may be said that the shorter and 
slighter dialogues, when accepted as genuine, are 
ascribed to Plato s youth; the Republic, Timaeus and 
Leges are universally admitted to be the latest: while 
the Theaetetus, Sophista and Politicus (usually too 
the Parmenides and Cratylus) are supposed to have 
been written by Plato during his travels or on his 
return at all events before his 4Oth year. 

The following arrangement is that of a critic who 
had evidently given much time and thought, with 
great zeal, to the elucidation of these questions; I 
mean K. F. Hermann. He, in common with most 


writers on this subject, distributes the works which he 
accepts into three groups: (i) the earlier, composed 
partly before the death of Socrates B.C. 399, partly 
after it, before Plato quitted Megara: (2) those written 
under the influence of the Megarian dialectic, during 
or immediately after the years of travel: (3) the later, 
commencing with the Phaedrus, and going on during 
the second half of Plato s career, while he was scho- 
larch of the Academy, from 386 (probably) till his 
death in 347. 

(I) (2) (3) 

Hippias II. Cratylus e Phaedrus e 

Ion Theaetetus Menexenus* 

Alcibiades I. Sophistes e Symposium e 

Charmides Politicus e Phaedo e 

Lysis Parmenides. Philebus e 

Laches Respublica e 

Protagoras Timaeus e 

Euthydemus Critias e 

Apologia Socr.* Leges e. 

Crito e 
Hippias I. 

Those to which e is appended are classed by Grote 
as dialogues of exposition ; the rest are of investiga 
tion (zetetic) except the two with asterisks, which are 
of neither kind, Grote accepts seven others which 
Hermann disallows. 


It is satisfactory to gather from these notices that 
the Theaetetus is admitted on all hands to be a 
genuine work of Plato. It is almost universally as 
cribed to his age of manhood, and to a time when 
(having imbibed before his 2/th year the lore and 
didactic skill of Socrates, having in the subtle dis 
cussions of Megara had full opportunity of prac 
tising the dialectic method) he had enlarged his 
learning and experience by intercourse with the ma 
thematicians of Cyrene and the Pythagorean school 
men of Italy. The dialogues called Sophistes and 
Politicus are connected with the Theaetetus, and their 
genuineness is generally admitted, though the So 
phistes is disallowed by Ueberweg. 

III. A preface to the Theaetetus would be in 
complete without some account of antecedent Hellenic 
philosophy. But in a preface, even to Plato s works,, 
much more to a single dialogue, such an account 
must be brief and eclectic. Some topics must be 
placed in stronger light, and more fully considered 
than others. What are these? 

(1) In the first place, Socrates is an interlocutor 
in all Plato s dialogues, excepting the Laws : and 
in most of them (though not in the Sophistes) we 
find him discussing, more or less, some principle or 
practice of those who are called Sophists. With 
Socrates himself therefore, with his method, and with 
the Sophists and their doctrines, a young student will 
do well to make acquaintance, before he enters upon 
any of Plato s writings. 

(2) In several of Plato s works (as in the Theaete- 


tus) appears the contrast between (i) the physical 
teaching of the Eleatic School (Melissus, Parmenides, 
Zeno), the forerunner of pantheism, in which the 
universe is one Being (Ens) at rest, and (2) that of 
Heracleitus of Ephesus, who taught Becoming in the 
place of Being, Many rather than One, Motion and 
Change instead of Rest, ascribing such motion to 
the flow of a prevailing fiery element (nrauTa pel). 
Distinct again from these were (i) the teaching of 
Empedocles of Agrigentum, who took the concord 
of four elements (fire, air, earth, water) as the base 
of existence ; (2) that of the Atomists, Leucippus 
and Democritus, who ascribed the origin of things to 
the fortuitous concurrence in space of small indivisi 
ble particles (arofia) ; (3) that of Anaxagoras, who 
assigned the arrangement of his opoiojjiepeiai, to 
supreme Intelligence (1/01)9). All these philosophers 
had been preceded by two other famous schools in 
the 6th century B.C.: (i) the Ionian (Thales, Anaxi- 
mander, Anaximenes), who imagined the primary sub 
stance of things to be the first, Water, the second, 
Indeterminate Matter (TO aTreipov), the third, Air: 
(2) the Italic sect of Pythagoras, which lasted long, and 
formed a powerful order. This school ascribed marvel 
lous organic properties to Number, and believed in 
the transmigration of souls. All the philosophers 
above-named, from Thales to Anaxagoras, flourished 
during the century and a half anterior to the age of 
Socrates (600 440 B.C.), though their exact dates are 

Zeller, whose views are welcomed by Professor 


Jowett, maintains that all these various schools were 
engaged in teaching purely physical doctrines; for 
that even the seeming abstractions, assumed as primal 
by the Pythagoreans the Eleatics and Anaxagoras 
(Number, Being, Intellect), were not understood by 
them as absolutely incorporeal. See Zeller s Preso- 
cratic Philosophy (translated byAlleyne); also Preller s 
Historia Philosophiae(for citation of passages), Schweg- 
ler s History of Philosophy (translated by Stirling), 
and the fuller work of Ueberweg (published by 
Messrs Hodder and Stoughton). 

IV. Socrates is said by Cicero to have called 
down philosophy from heaven ; by which is meant 
that Socrates was the first to change the direction 
of philosophical studies in Hellas ; to divert them 
from the universe to man himself, from cosmogony 
to anthropology. But this credit belongs rather 
to that school of thinkers with whom Socrates was 
most at war, to those who are called Sophists : espe 
cially to Protagoras the eldest and most influential 
of their number the author of the famous dogma 
man is the measure of all things/ in other words, 
what seems to each is to each. Protagoras was born 
at Abdera in Thrace, and flourished B.C. 450 430. 
Gorgias of Leontini was contemporary, but lived to 
a great age, dying 380. Prodicus of Ceos flourished 
435. Others of note were Hippias of Elis, Polus, 
Thrasymachus, and the brothers Euthydemus and 
Dionysodorus. They professed to teach all subjects 
of liberal education; philosophy, rhetoric, language, 
logical eristic, &c. : and they travelled from city to 


city, exacting and obtaining large fees for the in 
struction given. This instruction was calculated, as 
they declared, to acquaint their pupils with the pro 
gress of human civilization, to free them from preju 
dices, to give breadth and strength to their mental 
faculties, to make them wise thinkers and fluent speak 
ers, to teach them how to form just opinions on public 
affairs, how to manage their own property, and to 
deal with mankind in general. 

In mentioning this famous Sophistic school, so far 
as it deserves to be called a school, we may note the 
fate which has attended the name itself and its derived 
words. Sophist, sophistical, sophism, sophistry, so 
phistication, are all of them terms used to designate 
what is delusive and false. A similar discredit in 
modern times attaches to the words Jesuit, Jesuitical, 
Jesuitry, Jesuitism. So the words heresy, heretic, 
heresiarch, heretical, are now never used except in a 
vituperative sense. Yet Sophist was a creditable 
name originally : it is given by Herodotus to the 
Seven Sages and to Pythagoras. Jesuit simply means 
a member of the Society of Jesus, such title being 
allowed by the Pope (who calls himself Vicar of Jesus 
Christ on earth ) to the Order of Ignatius Loyola, for 
the enhancement of its dignity and credit. Heresy 
(atpecrt?, choice) merely meant the Latin secta, a sect: 
and Clement of Alexandria calls the Catholic Church 
itself the best of all heresies (sects). Each of these 
terms therefore acquired its evil sense, partly, no 
doubt, by errors and faults of those who bore them, 
partly by the charges and invectives of powerful ene- 


mies. Undoubtedly the Sophists, as a class, found 
their most powerful enemy in Plato: and upon his 
dialogues (especially the Euthydemus, Gorgias, Hip- 
pias I. and Sophistes) the principal charges against 
them as a class originally rest. In the great historian 
of Greece, Mr Grote, they have found their most 
powerful champion and rehabilitater ; their cause 
being likewise pleaded strongly by the late Mr Lewes 
in his History of Philosophy. All Greek students 
have in their hands Grote s History; and they may 
be referred to that work for a general statement 
of the case on both sides; but more particularly to the 
facts and arguments urged by him as counsel (so to 
say) for the defendants in Part II. Ch. Ixvii. 1 On the 
other side, as not fully agreeing with Mr Grote s strong 
championship, may be consulted Thirlwall s History 
of Greece, Ferrier s Lectures, and Professor Jowett s 
prefaces to the Platonic Dialogues, especially his 
preface to the Sophistes. 

V. Besides the Academic school of Plato and his 
successors, philosophic schools of minor influence were 
founded by three other pupils of Socrates. These 
were Antisthenes, Aristippus, and Eucleides. Antis- 
thenes taught at Athens in the gymnasium called 
Cynosarges, whence his school was called that of 
the Cynics. He held that virtue alone suffices for 
happiness, anticipating the later Stoic doctrines. 
Diogenes of Sinope, whose interview with Alexander 
the Great is so famous, was the best known member of 

1 Grote s views are supported by Mr H. Sidgwick in two able 
papers printed in the Cambridge Journal of Philology (Nos. vm. ix.). 


this school. Aristippus of Cyrene founded the Cyre- 
naic or Hedonic school, which taught that pleasure is 
the supreme good of man, thus forerunning the later 
teaching of Epicurus. Eucleides of Megara founded 
the short-lived Megaric school, which is said to have 
taught a fusion of Eleatic and Socratic doctrines. 
Dialectic was among its special studies, and was 
occasionally carried to the excess known as Eristic. 
Many curious puzzles of thought are ascribed to its 
disciples. Of these three schools see a brief account 
in Schwegler s History of Philosophy (Transl. p. 53), 
and consult also the larger work of Ueberweg (Vol. I. 
34 38). It was to Megara that Plato retired after 
the death of Socrates, and resided there before his 
travels, probably exercising himself in dialectic dis 
cussion. Susemihl thinks that in gratitude for this 
kindness he commemorates his Megarian friends in 
the introduction to the Theaetetus, thus indirectly 
dedicating the dialogue to them. 

VI. An analysis of the Theaetetus is given in 
the headings of the several sections, noted in the 
Greek text I. XLIV., in the translation I 44. In 
the notes at the close, as in the Greek text, the mar 
ginal pages and alphabetic divisions of the first edition 
of Stephens are also referred to. These notes are 
chiefly designed to trace the chain of Plato s reasoning 
in places where it is not easily discerned : but occa 
sionally they refer to the commentaries of Professor 
Campbell and H. Schmidt. 



K. P. 






[Xumeri marcjinales Arabici qui vocantur, editionis primae StepJia- 
rJanae paginas indicant, Romani ejusdem editionis capitula. Stellula 
payinae, signum I sectionis initium notat.] 

I. * "Aprt, co Teptyiwv, rj 7ra\ai e dypov , TEP. 142 
ETTiet/crC? ira\ai. KOI ere "ye e^rjrovv /car a^opav KCLI 
e6avfjia^ov on ov*% oto? r 77 evpelv. ET. Oi) <yup i) 
KCLTO, TroXw. TEP. IIoD fjir/v ; ET. E/9 \i^kva /cara- 
ftaivwv QeaiTr iTU) ei>e-rv^ov fyepofjievw eV KopiiOov CLTTO 
TOU arparo-TreSou AQrjva^e. TEP. ZWVTL rf rere\ev - 
TTJKOTL ; ET. TAWVTL KOI /jia\a yL6oyt9 %aXe7rc3? jjbei> C 
7p e^et /cal VTTO Tpavfjudrcov TIVOOV, puXXov fJir}v avrbv 
alpel TO yeyovfa VQGTHLCL ev TO) arparevf^ari,. TEP. 
r] SvcrevrepLa; ET. Nat. TEP. Qlov avBpa Xe- 
Kiv&vv(p elvai. ET. KaXoz^ re /ecu ayaOov, co 
ayv CTTCL rot /cat- z/t>z/ rj/covov TIVWV fjuc iKa ejKW- 
TWV avruv Trepl Tf}v /JLCI^TJV. TEP. Kal ovBev 
7 aroTTov, a\\a TroXv Oav/AacrTOTepov, el firj rotoOro? 
r\v. drdp TTW? OVK avrov Meyapol KareXvev ; ET. C 
O OLKa&e eVet eycoj e&eo/jirjv /cal avvepovXevov, 

ij06\e. KOI S^ra TrpoTrefji ^a^ avrov, 
iraKiv dvfjivr i(T0r)v Kal eOav/macra ^cofcpdrovs, cJ? 
d\\a T6 87 etTre /tat TTf/jl TOVTOV. So/eel <ydp 



6\iyov TTpo TOV Oavarov eWu^eo/ aura) ueipaKLW OVTL, 

Kal (Tvyyevo/ievos re Kcii oiaXe^Oels rrdvv dyao-drjvat, 

avTov Trjv $V(TIV. Kal aoi e\6ovTi AOrjva^e TOU? re 

D \cyov? ou? SteXex$?7 avrw BlTjffi^ffaro, Kal fj,d\a d^lovs 

uKofjs, etvre re OTL Tracra dvdyKT] sir) TOVTOV e\\6^Lfjiov 

ryevearOai, eiirep et? r)\iKLav eX0oi. TEP. Kal u\r)0f) 76, 

oj? eoi/cev, elirev. drap rtVe? r)crav ol \OJOL ; e^ot? av 

Sujj^crao daL , ET. Ou /JLO. TOV A/a, OVKOVV ovrco ^ye 

143 airb aro/JLaros aXX eypatyajjujv jJiev TOT ev6vs * 

/^^J/yLtara, vcrrepov Be Kara o"^o\rjv d 

eypa<f)ov, fcal ocra/a? AQrjv 

TOV ^cdfcpdTrjv o /jurj eyLte/^z/^yLt^i/, Kal Stvpo 
\0a)v lrrr]i wp6oviJi^v. WCTTC JJLOI o-%eS6v TI ?ra? 6 Xoyo? 
yeypaTTTCU. TEP. AX^^/;* r^Kovad crov Kal 
Kal [JievTOL del ^e\\cov KeXevaeiv em^el^ai 
Sevpo. aXXa TL Kw\vei vvv T^/za? $ie\6elv ; T 
eywye Kal dvajravaaaOai Seo^ai, o5? e^ dypov 
ET. AXXa //,e*> 8?) /cat avro? ^X,P L Ep 

a, WCTTG OVK av dr)$a><; dvairavoLi^rjv. aXX 
, Kal dfjia dvarravQ^evoi^ o Trat? 

TEP. Op^? Xeyew.ET. To jnev Sr) (Bi(3\iov, <S 
Vf TOVTC eypa^df^rjv be &ij ovTwal TOV \oyov, OVK 
l 2,a)KpdTr]i> Sirjyov/Jievov a;? SiTjyeiTO, aXXa Bta\ey6- 
fj,evov ol? 6<prj &ia\e\6r)vai. (f)r) Be TO> re 

va ovv ev 

Trape^uiev TrpayaaTa at /xera^i) TOJV \oywv SITJ- 
rrepl avrov re, OTrore \eyot, 6 ScoKpaV???, olov 
\\al eya) efyrjv rj Kal eyco eljrov, 77 av irepl TOV djro- 
Kpivo/jievov, on 2<vve(j)7] rj Oi;^ w/JLo\uyei, TOVTWV eveKa 
a5? avTOV ai)rot? SiaXeyouevov eypatya, e^e\cov ra TOL- 
avra. TEP. Kat oJ8e^ ye drro Tpiirov, c 


ET. A\\, jral, Xa/3e TO fBi@\iov fcal \eye. II. SO. 
Et /iez^ T&V ev Kvprjvg /j,d\\ov K7)&6/jLT)v, d) eoSwpe. D 
TO. e /ce a/> <re Km Trepl eKeivwv dvrjpcoTwv, & rives avToOi 
Trtpl yeaofJLCTplav r) TLVCL d\\7)v cf)i\,ocro<j)iav eicri TWV vewv 
iroLovfJievoL vvv Be rj-rrov yap eVetVou? 77 
Se (f)i\>, teal /Jia\\ov emOu/AO) elbevai, TiW? 
vt<>v ewiSofcn yevecrdai eVtei/ceZ? favra Srj 
re CT/COTTCO /caO ocrov Svua/uiai, KOI roi)? a\\ov<; 
ot? av opoo TOU? veovs e6e\ovras i;vyylyvo-0ai. aol $t] 
OVK oXiyiaroi Tr^cnd^ovcri, KOI Sucaiws afio? yap 

ew/jLerpias evetca. el Brj ovv Tivl E 
d^iw \6yov, ^Seo)? av TrvOoifjLrjv. EO. Kat 
&) SwATpare?, /JUOL re elirelv Kal aol dfcovaai, TTCLVV 
, ouf) VJJLLV rwv Tro\iTU>v peipaici(p evrerv^TjKa. Kal 
v r]v /ca\6s, e(f)ol3ovfjLrjv av a(f)68pa \eyeiv, fir) KCLI 
ofaj ev eTriOvfJiLa avrov elvaC vvv $e, KOI ^ fioi 
v, OVK e<JTi Ka\os, nrpocreoiKe Se crol TTJV re 
Kal TO eco roov Ofji/uLarcov rjrrov Be rj av 
aSea>? 8/) \eyco. ev * yap laQi ort a>v Srj TTCD- 144 
everv^ov Kal irdvv TroXXot? TreTrXTjaiaKa ovSeva 
TTO) rjcr6oiJL7]V OVTW 6av/jLa(7T(v^ eu 7re(pvKora. TO yap 
ovra, 609 aXkw ^a\7r6v } irpdov av elvai Sta- 
, Kal eirl TOVTOLS dvbpelov irap ovnvovv, eya) 
our av OJO/J.7JV yeveaOai ovTe opw yiyvo/Jbevovs aXX 
01 T d^t9 w<J7rep OUT09 Kal dy^ivoi Kal IJLVTJ paves a$? 
Ta TroXXa Kal TT/QO? Ta? opyds 6vppO7rol etVt, Kal dr- 
TOt/T9 fyepovrai axTTrep Ta avepfiaT terra TrXoia, Kal pa- B 
vLKairepoi, r) dv^peiOTepoi fyvovTai, o i re av e/jL/3pi- 
0eaT6poL vwOpoL Tra)? diravTWCTi Trpos Ta9 /^aOrjo-e^ Kal 
ye/jiovTes. 6 8e OVTOJ \eiws Te Kal 

ep-^erau eVt Ta? (JLaOrjcrei^ Te Kal 


a TroXXrJ? Trpaorijro^, olov e\alov pevjAa d-^ro^rl 
, ojcrre QavfJidaai TO T^\LKGVTOV ovra ovrco ravra 
aOai. 2O. Ev a yyeXXew. TtVo? Se /cat etrrt 
OJZ; 7ro\LT(jov ; @EO. A/crj/coa /JLV TouVo/za, fjivrj^oveva) 
C Se ou. aXXa Y^/ 3 crrt rwv&e iwv TrpocrLovTwv 6 ev rro 
upTi ryap v TO) e^(o Spoua) rf\ei(f)ovTo eraipoi re 
VTOL avrov leal ai;TO9, 1^0^ 8e /xot SOKOVGLV d\L- 
Seupo levai. a\\a a/coTrei, el ytyvcocrKeis av- 


teal irdvv 76, w 0tXe, di/3/3o? olov KOI av TOVTOV Sirj- 
7et, teal aXXco? eu8o/c//xou, /cat fjuevroi /cal ovcriav poKa 

7TO\\T)V KaT\L7T6. TO 8 OVOfJia OVfC OL$a TOV /LLlpaKlOV. 

D EO. ea/T^ro?, w Sft)/cpaT69, TO 76 oVoyu-a* T^ 
fJLtvToi ovaiav So/covcri JJLOL eTrlrpoTrol rives &ie(f)0ap/ce- 
vai- a\X oyLtco? /cat. vrpo? T^ TCOI/ ^prj^drcov e\evOe- 
pLorrjra Oav/jLao-ros, w Sa/c^are?. ^H. Tevvi/cov \eyeis 
TGV tivSpa. /cat yu-ot /ceXeue avrov evOdfte Trapa/caOi- 
fecr^at. @EO. "EcrTat ravra, Seairr)T, Sevpo irapd 
ZiWKpaTY]. iO. naz^u yitez^ our, co @ea/T?7Te, tVa 
e/jiavrbv dvaaKe^wfJiai, TV olov TL e^co TO 
E (^T/crl 70/3 OeoScupo? e^etz^ yLte crot CJJLOIOV. drop el 
vwv e^ovTOiv e/carepov \vpav e^rf aura? 
ofjioiw^, TCOTepov ev6v$ dv eTTLarevofMev rj 
dv el fjiovffi/cos GJV \fyei; EAI. 
a I/. 2H. OVKOVV TOLOVTOV fJLcv evpovT<$ 
d/jLovaov Be, TJTrta TOv^ev ; @EAI. \\Xr)9fj. S^. Nuz/ 
Se 7 olyLtat, et Tt yLteXet ?;yLt^ TT/? TcSz^ Trpoaw rrwv O/JLOIO- 
145 Tr?To?, o-K7rreov el 7/?a(/)t/co? * &)*> \eyei 77 ou. 0EA1. 
Ao/cet yLtot. SO, ^H o^ ^cojpa(f)LfCos eoSwpo?; 0EAI. 
Ou^, ocroz^ 7 e /u,e elSevaL. SH. 7 Ap oi;6e yew^eTpiKo^ ; 
OEAT. ITa^Tco? S^TTOU, co Sco/c/3aTe?. SQ. ^H /cat 

EAITHT02. 7 

KCU \OyiCTTlKOS T KCLl fjLOV(7ltCO<$ KCLi Odd 

e^erat; 0EAI. "Epoiye Boicel. SO. Et ph 
pa 77^ 9 TOV crco/^aro? TI o/xo/of? fyrjaiv eivai, eTraivwv 
Try 77 tyeycov, ov TTUVV avro) d^iov TOV vovv 
6EAI. "Icroj? ov. SO. T/ 8 et irorepov 
yjr)v enraivol TT/^O? aperijv re KOI tro<f>uu>] ap 
a^iov TO) /Ltei^ aKovaavTi TrpoOvfJieluOai a 
TOV eTraiveOevra, ra> & 7rpo6vfj 
EAI. Tldvu IJLEV ovv, w Sft)/cpare?. III. SO. f lpa 
TOIVVV, co (>i\6 ea/TT^re, o"ol //-ey eTTiSeifcvvvai, 
eu Tcr^t, ort eo8&)/)09 TroXXoi)? 
eTraivecras f evou? re *m darov^ ovSeva TTCO eTry 
o-e z^i)^ 8>J. 0EAI. Eu z^ e^ot, co 

^oDV eXejev. SO. Ou^ ouro? o T^OTTO? 

d\\d fjurj dvaSvov rd w 

vra \eyew rovSe, f iva 
fiapTvpeli> Trdvrws yap ovSels eTTio-Kijtyet avTM. d\\d 
Oappfjov efJLfAeve TTJ 6/jLo\oyla. OEAI. AXXa %/^ ravra 
Troieiv y el aoi Bo/cel. SH. Aeye ST; yLtof fjiavOdveis TTOV 
Trapd BeoScopou ^ew^eTpia^ cirra; @EAI. "Eycoye. 
211. Kal TOOV Trepl da-rpovo/jiLav re Aral dpfjiovias Kali) 
\oyio-jjiovs ; 0EAI. IIpoOv/jLOV/jial ye &rf. SO. Kal yp 
70), w Trat, irapd ye TOVTOV /cdl Trap d\\wv, oC? di> 
otojpal TL TOVTWV eTraieiv. aXX* U/JLWS TO. fjuev a XXa e^ct) 
Trept aura /jLerpicos, af^ifcpov Be TL aTropw, o fJieTa oov 
Te KOL T(ZvBe cTKeTTTeov. icai /JLOL \eye up* ov TO /*av- 
Odveiv eaTi TO aotywTepov yiyvecrdai Trepl o jjiavOdvei, 
rt? ; EAI. Ila;? ydp ov] 5)H. 2<o<f)La Se 
cro<f)ol ol (T0(f)ol. 0EAI. Nat. 2O. Touro Se 
Siacfrepei, rt eVicrTr/^,?;? ; 0EAI. To TTOLOV; SO. f H 
ao(f)ia. 77 ovft djrep eVicrT^oz/e?, raOra Kal cro<^ot; 



(R)EAI. Tt pr)V\ ^n. Tavrov dpa eTriarrfjLLir) xal &o- 

</>ta ; EAI . Nat. Sfl. Tovr avro TOLVVV o-rlv o 

aTTOpco /cal ov SvvafJLai, \a{3eiv iKavws Trap 1 

146 eJTLO TrjfJi rj o rl TTOTC Tvy%dveL ov. dp ovv ^77 

\e<yeiv avro ; T L (f>are ] rt? av r^Lwv TT^WTO? elVot ; o Be 
bv, teal 09 av del d/jLaprdvy, KaOeSelrat, axTTrep 
ol TratSe? ol acfiaipl^ovTes, 6Vo? 05 8 av Trepi- 
o^, /3aaL\evo-ei i]^v /cal eVtrafet o 
TL av /3ov\r}TaL dTTOtcplvecdai. Tt aiyare ; ou rt TTOV, 
w eoSa)y9e, 700 UTTO ^uXoA-Ofy/a? dypotKi^o/jLai, Trpo- 
TroiTJcrai, Bia\ejecrOaL real (j)l\ovs re 
\\r)\(u<> yiyveaOat ; EO. f/ H/cicrTa. 
co ^(jOKpares, TO roiovrov av eirj dypoitcov, d\\d 
fjieipaKiwv TL fce\,eve croi diroKplvecrdat. eya) fj,v 
<ydp drjOrjs r^? ToiavTTjs SiaXe/CTov, Kal ouS av crvv- 
eOi^eaOai t]\iKiav e^co* TolcrBe Be Trpeiroi re av TOVTO 
Kal TTO\V TrX.elov 7riBt$o iev TW <ydp OVTI r) veoTijS et? 
Tcav eTrlSoviv e^et. aXX , oocnrep r)p%M, firj d^leao TOV 
dX)C epwTa. IV. SH. A/toue*? 8^ , eo 
, a \eyet> eo^copo?, eo aTTLcrTetv, co? e ^yw oZ/xat, 
C-oi/re cru e0e\r)(Ti<?, ovTe 0e/-u? vrept ra roiaura dvBpl 
<TO<&> eTTLTaTTovTi, vewTepov aTreiOelv. aXX* e$ /cat ^ez/- 
etVe TL aoi So/eel elvai eTrio-T^fjbrj ; EA]. AXXa 
77, co 2<a)KpaT6s, eTreiSiJTrep i>fj,els /ceXeuere. 
ydp, civ TL Kal dudpTco, eTravopOoocreTe. SO. 
/zei/ o^t , z^ Trep fye olot re wjjuev. 0EAI. Ao/cet Tot- 
z^ff yLtot /cat a Trapd eoScopov av TA? /Jid&oi eTTKTTrj/JLai 
elvai, yecoaeTpla re /cat a? z/Oz^ ST) av &if)\0es, /cal 


Tracrat re /cat e/cdaTr) TOVTCOV, OVK aXXo rt 77 
elvat. Sfl. Tevvaicos 76 /cat c/><XoSct^ci)?, co 


, ev aiTr)9el<? TroXXa S/So)?, /cal TroiKiXa 
a r 7T\ov. EAI. ITcG? ri TOVTO Xeyet?, GO 
2)11. "Icrw? yu-ez/ ovoev o JJLIEVTOI otyLtat, (f)pd<T(0. orav 

CTKVTIKTJV, fJLT) TI aXXo (j)pd%i<i T) eTT^Cm^^ V7TO- 

epyaalas ; EAI. Qv&ev. 2H. Tt 6 orav E 
jv ; //-^ T^ aXXo 17 eTTia-Tij JJL^V rrjs rwv %v\ivwv 
pyao-las ; EAI. Oi)8e rovro. 2li. OVKOVV 

ev dfjL(j)oiv, ov /carepa 7riarrj/j,rj, TOVTO opi^eis ; EAI. 

No./. ^S^i. To 8e <ye G7rep(DT7]6ev, w eatT^re, 01) 


yap dpiOfJifjcjai, aura? fBovKo^evoi rjpo^eOa^ a\\(i yva)- 
vau eTTicrTrj/A rjv avro o TI TTOT eo~TLV. rj ovBev \6yco ; 
0EAI. Hdvv fJLev ovv opdcos. Sfl. * S/ce -v^at 8?) KOI 147 
rdSe. i rt? T; /^^? TWZ^ <$>av\wv TI /cal rrpo^eipwv epot- 
TO, olov Trepl 7ri]\ov, o TI TTOT eaTLV, el aiTQic^ivai^- 
6a avTw 7rr;Xo9 6 T&V ^VTpewv teal TT^Xo? o TWV ITTVQ- 

teal TTT/XO? o TWV Tr\iv6ovp<ywv, OVK av 
; EAI. "Icnw?. SH. Yipwrov fjuev ye TTOV 

/c T^? rj/jueTepas aTTOKpicrews TOV 
orav 6i7rct)/jL6v TT^Xo?, etre o TWV KopoirXaOwv 
LT a\\wv WVTLVWVOVV &Tj/j,iovpya)v. tf oiei, rt? rt li 
O-VVLTJCTL TWOS ovo/jba, o pr) oloe ri iaTiv ; EAI. Ovoa- 
fjidis. SO. Ovo a pa eTrto-nj/^rjv VTro^/^drcov avvlijcriv 
o eTrLcrTJJfjLrjv /JLTJ eZSco?. EAI. Ov yap. 2fl. "^KUTLK^V 
apa ov crvvi7](7iv o? av err LCTTTI /nrfv dyvorj, oi)Se TIVCL 
EAI. "EcrTtv OVTCO. 2H. FeXo/a apa 
T<M epaiT^OevTi C TT io -TT] /AT) rl e&TW, orav 
Te^vr)? TLVOS ovofJba. TLVOS yap e7TL(TTr)- 
diroKplverai, ov TOVT epwTijOeis. EAI. "Eot/ce/A c 
TTOV eov <pav\a)$ KOL f3paye(i)<> CUTTO- 
drrepavTOv 6S6v. olov /cal Iv rf) 


rov 7rv)\ov epWTijaei <$>av\ov TTOV /ecu avrXou^ elrrelv, ort 
yn vypo) (frvpaOeicra 7777X0? dv ir),ro S orov edv ^alpetv. 
V. @EAI. PaStoi/, &3 ZwKpares, vvv ye ovrco fyaiverai* 
drdp KivSvveveis epwrdv olov Kal avTois r)fM,v 
D lo-fj\0e Sia^eyofjuevois, e/Jiol re KOI rco era) 

rovro) ^wKpdret,. 2H. To irolov 8/7, ft) earn/re ; 
(5)EAI. Tlepl Swafjiewv TL r^Liv eoSajpo? oBe e /f ypa0e, 
re rpiTToSo? 7re/?t :afc Trez/reTroSo?, aTrofyaivtov on 
ov ^vfJifieTpoi rfj Tro^iala, teal ovra) Kara /jLiav 
7rpoaipovfjievo<; f^e^pi rfjs errraKaieicarroo<; ev 
Be ravrrj TTCO? eveo"%ero. i]^lv ovv ela-rjXOe ri roiovrov, 
eTretS?) drreipoi ro TrX^o? a * Svvd/JieLS efyaivovro, rreipa- 
E Ofjvai %u\\a{36iv et? eV, orro rrdaas ravra? rrpcaayo- 
pevdofjiev T? Svvdfjieis. SO. ^H /cat cvpere ri roiovrov ; 
EAI. "EyLtot^e SoKovfjiev. (Ttcorrei Be teal av. 2O. Ae^ye. 
EAI. Toy dpiOfjuov rrdvra Bl^a ^ie\d^o{Jiev. rov JULCV 
laov leaKis <yLyv(70ai rco rerpaywvro ro 
arreucao avres rerpdywvbv re Kal IcrorrXevpov 
211. Kal ev ye. EAI. Toy roivvv 
148 f^era^v rovrov, d>v Kal rd rpia Kal rd rrevre * KOL 
vra? 09 d$vvaro<$ t<T09 IcraKis yeve&Oai, d\\* rj rr\eiwv 
e\arrovdici<s rj e\drru>v ir\eovaKis yiyverai, fjuei^wv Se 
Kal e\d-rra)v del 7T\evpa avrov 7rept\a/ji/3dvei, ru> rrpo- 
fjLrfKeL av a^^ari drreiKaa-avres TrpofjurjKT) apidfjiov eVa- 
\eaafjiev. SO. KaXXtcrra. aXXa ri ro fjuera rovro ; 
EAI. f/ Ocrat /jiev ypa/jU/Aal rov Iao7r\evpov Kal CTTL- 
TreSov dpiOfJiov rerpaywvi^ovai, prJKOS oopLo-d/neOa, oaai 
B Be rov erepo/JiiJKTi, Svvafjieis, ft)9 ^r]K.ei fjiev ov ^v^erpovs 
eKetvais, rots B emrre^oi^ a Bvvavrai. Kal irepl rd 
crreped d\\o roiovrov. SH. "Apicrrd y dvOpwrcwv, a3 
7raiSc9, (Lcrre {AOL BoKel 6 0eoS&)po9 OVK eVo^o9 rot? 


ecreaOai. EAI. Kat ^v, GO "2 UK pares, o 76 
irepl eTTLcrTTj/jLTj^, ou/c uv Bwalfiijv aTTOKplvaadai 

7Tpl TOV /jirfKOVS KOi TJJ? SvVfl fJ,WS. KaiTOL (TV y<= 

A|reuS?)9 o @6o8co/3o?. SH. Tt Sat; et tre vrpo? Spopov c 
fiTjSevl ovrw Spofju/cq) (j)rj TWV vewv evrerv- 
elra SiaOewv TOV aK/ud^ovTOS teal 

QVK eycoye. zQ. AXXd rrjv eTricrTr) /HTJV , w<T7rep 
vvv Srj eyot) e\eyov, o-/jiiKp6v TL olei elvai, e^evpelv Kal ov 

T&V TTCLVTr) CLKptoV] @EAl. N^ TOV Afc 6J(OJ Kal fJLCL\a 

ye TWV d/cpOTaTayv. 211. Qdppei Toivvv Trepl aavTM KCLI 
Tt, olov QeoScopov \eyeiv, TrpoOvfJuijOtfTl 8e nravT\ rpoTrw D 
TO)v re a\\a)v 7repi /cal eTTiar^/AT;? \a/3eiv \oyov, TL 
TTore Tvy^dveL ov. EAI. Ilpo0vfj,Las fiev eveicev, w 
VI. ^O. "I^t S/; 

eXa/3e?, OVTCO Kal ra? TroXXa? e7rt<7T/;/u.a? ez^t \6yro Trpocr- 
eLirelv. 0EAI. AXX ez} Tcr^t, w 2<w/cpare?, TroXXa/a? E 

ai/ro eTre^eiprjcra GicecLcraL, aKovwv ra? Trapa crov 

d\\d yap OVT ai)ro? 

efJiavTOV (W? Itcavws TL \eyw, OVT a\\ov a 
\eyovTOS ouro)? <w? cri) Sia/ceXeuet, 01) /^ez/ S?) au ou 
a7ra\kayrivaL TOV yLteXXet^. 2O. OSiWt? 7^p, <w 
(5)eaiT?7T6, 8ta TO ft?) /rez/o? aXX eyKVfJiwv elvaL. 0EAI. 
olSa, < ^MKpCLTes o JJLZVTOL treTrovOa Xeyco. ^O. Etra, 
eo * /amryeXacrre, ouV d/crjtcoas co? 70) et/u fto? /xa/a? 149 
yevvaias re Arat /3Xoo-fpa9, ^aLvapeT^ ; EAT. 

14.8 c. Num legendum sit roi; pro rou quaeri potest, non decerui. 


TOVTO 76 rj/covaa. SO. *Apa /cal on eVtr^Seuo) TTJV 
avTTjv Te^vrjv d/crj/coas ; (DEAL Oi)Sa/Ac3?. SH. A\V 
ev 1(70* on fJLr} fjLevTOL /JLOV KaTeLTrrjs Trpos TOI)? aXAou?. 
\e\r)0a yap, w eralpe, ravTrjv e^wv TTJV TCj^vrfV ol Se, 
are OVK ei8or69, TOVTO pev ov \e<yovo-i Trepl eVoO, OTL Be 
aTOTTtoTaTos elfjbt, /cal TTOIW TOVS avOpwirovs aTropelv. r) 
B fcal TOVTO aicrjitoas ; EAT. "70)76. ^O. ElVft) ouz/ 


&rj TO irepl r9 fAaias airav w? e^et, /cal ^aoz/ fjua6r]o-ei 
o /3ov\o/mai. oiaOa <yap TTOV OTL ovBe/jLia avrwv GTL 

CiVTYJ Kvl<TKOfjieV7] T6 Kdl TLKTOVCTd aXXcr? fAai6VTai, 

al rj^if] dBuvaTOi TLKTCIV. 0EAI. Tldvv /juev ovv. 
. PCiTiav $e 76 TOVTOV (fracrlv elvai TTJV 
OTL aXo^o? ovaa Trjv \o^e[av etXij^e. o-Tepifya 

C ovv apa OVK eSw/ce ^aievea-Oai, OTL rf dvOpwirivri 
dcrOevecrTepa rj \afteiv Te%vr)v wv av rj aTreipo? rat? 
8e St r)\Ltc(,av aro/cot? TrpocreTa^e, Ti/jL 
ofjLOiOTrjTa. OEAI. Et/co?. 2H. OVKOVV teal ro Se 
re Kal dvaryKOiov, ra? KVOVO-CLS KOI fJi 
fjLa\\ov V7TO T&V IJLCLLWV r) TWV a\\wv ; EAI. Hdvv 
76. Sfl. Kal fjbrjv Kal 8tSoOcrat 76 at ^alai 

D /cal eTraSovaaL SvvavTaL eyeipeLV re ra? 

/jia\6aK(0Tpas, av yQouX&)zvrat, TroLelv^ /cal TIKTZIV re S/) 
ra? SvcrTOKOvaas, /cal edv veov ov Bogy dfj,/3\i(7KlP t 
dfj,{3\Lo-/covcriv ; EAI. "EcJTi raOra. ^O. *Ap oi5i> 
ert /cat roSe aural^ ?jcr07jo~aL, OTL /cal TTpo^vrjo-Tpiai etVt 
SeLVQTaTaL, co? Tracrcro^ot ovcraL Trepl TOV yvwvaL, iroiav 
^pr) TTOLfp dvSpl avvovaav 009 dpicrTOVs TratSa? TLKTCLV ; 
EAI. Oi) Tra^u TOVTO olBa. SH. AXX tcr^ ort eVl 

119 D. j/eoj/ OP corruptum videtur. 


TOVTti) [JLLOV (frpOVOVCTlV 7} CTTt Trj O/ji^d X.TjrOfJLLa. VV06l, E 

ydp rrjs avrrjs r) d\\rj<; oUi re^vrj^ elvai Oeparreiav re 

Kal %vyKO/J,lS))v rtOV 6K 7^9 KdpTTWV Kal O,V TO yiyiXC- 

dKG.iv et? rroiav yrjv Trolov <f>vroi> re KOI (77rep/jia Kara- 
; EA1. Ov/c, d\\a r^9 avrrjs. 2H. Et ? 
Be, w (f)l\e, aXXyv fiev olei rov roiovrov, a\\7jv 
Be gvyKOfJLiSfjs , ( H )EAI. OVKOVV etVo? 76. 2H. * Ov 150 
7p. d\\d Bid rr]V O&LKOV re teal dre^yov ^vvaycoyrjv 
dvBpos teal ryvraircos, y Brj TTpoaycoyela ovo^a, favyovai 
teal rr\v TrpofAwrjcrriKrjv are (re^val ovcrai at p,alai, <fro- 

rj et? e/celvvjv rrjv air lav Bid ravr^v e 
ee rat9 ye 6Wco9 yu,a/a<9 jj<6vai,$ TTOV 
Kal 7rpofJivr]cra(Tdai opOws. 0EAI. Qaiverai. SO. To 
[lev roivvv rwv jjiaiwv roaovrov^ eXarrov Be rov e/jiov 
Bpu/jiaros. ov yap rrp6<recm yvvai^lv eviore fjuev elBw\a 
rl/creiv, ecrrt B* ore dXrjOivd, rovro Be /JLTJ pdbiov elvat B 
Biayvoovai. el ydp rrpocrrjv, fjueyio-rov re Kal Ka\\io-rov 
epyov TJV dv rat9 Calais ro Kpivew ro aXijOes re Kal 
M. 77 OVK ota; 6EAI. 70376. VII. 2fl. Tg Be y 
rfjs pa iev crews ra fjiev aX\a vjrap-^eL, oaa 
Be rco re tivBpas d\\d fir) yvvaircas 
Kal ru> rds ^u^a9 avrow riKrovcras em- 
crKorrelv, d\\d fir) rd crwjJLara. fjieyicrrov Be rovr evi rfj 
r/fjLerepa re^vrj, ftacravi ^e.iv Bvvarov elvai rravrl rpoira), c 
irorepov e lBwXov Kal ^jrevBos drrorLKrei rov veov j] Bidvoia 
r) yovifjibv re Kal d\r)0es. eVel roBe ye Kal e/juol virdp- 
^et, oTrep rat9 Calais dyovLs elpi ao^tas, Kal orrep rjBrj 
TroXXot /jioi wveiBio-av, W9 rovs fjuev u\\ovs epaira), avrbs 
Be ovBev uTTOKpivo/jiai irepl ovBevbs Bid rb fJL^Bev e^eiv 
cro</)o^, d\7]0es bveiBi^ovcn. rb Be airiov rovrov re Be 
fiaieveo-Oai pe 6 6ebs dvayKal^ei, yevvdv Be direKw\vcrev. 


elfJil 3>7 ovv auro? fjiev ov TCCIVV Ti cro<o9, ovBe ri fiot, 
I) ecrTtv evpr^fjia TOIOVTOV, yeyovbs T??9 eyu/j?9 ^1^779 eK- 
yovov ol 8 e/.iol ^vyyiyvbfjuevoi TO uev Trpwrov fyaivovrai 
evioi uev KOI r rravv d/jbaOels, irdvres $6 Trpolovcrrjs T^? 
, olcnrep av 6 0eo$ TrapeiKrj, Oav^ao-rov ocrov 
, co? avrols re KOI rot? aXXot? SOKOIXTL KOI 
rovro evapyes, on Trap 1 e/mov ovSev TrcoTrore fjiaOovre^^ 
d\\* avrol Trap avrwv 7ro\\a tcai Ka\a evpovres re 
/cat Kare^ovre^. TT)<? pevTOi fjiaietas 6 6e6s re /cal eyw 
E afrto?. coSe Be $rj\ov 7ro\\ol TJSrj rovro dyvor/o-avres 
Kal eavrovs alTiaadfjievoi^ efjiov Se /caTacfrpovija avTes, 77 
avrol rj VTT a\\wv Tretcr^eVre?, dirfi\6ov 

TOV SeOVTOS, d7T6\00VT$ $ TCi T6 \0i7rd 

$id Trovrjpdv ^vvovaiciv /cdl rd UTT e/jio 
Karens Tpe(f>ovTS dirwXea-av, tyevBf) /cal et ScoXa 
7r\6iovos TTOLrjcrd/jLevoi TOV d\ri6ovs, TeKevrwvTes 8 av- 
roZ? re /cal rot? aXXot? e$o%av dfAaOeis eivai. wv et? 
i yeyovev ^ Apicrrei^T]^ * 6 AvcrLfia^ov /cal d\\oi Trdvv 
l?, t>rav ird\iv e\6u>(Tiv Seo/juevoi T^9 e /A?;? 
Kal Oav/jLaard Spwvres, eV/ot? JJLEV TO ryiyvo- 
IJLOL SaifjibvLov d7ro/C(D\vi ^vvelvai, eWcu? 8e ea 
ical TTakiv avTol eViSt^oacrt. Trdo-^ovcn oe Brj ol efjiol 
Kal TOVTO TavTov rat? TiKTOVGais d)Oi- 
yap teal aTroplas ep J r n i r JT\avTai vwcras re KCLI 
TroXu /zaXXo^ r; eKelvai. TavTrjv Se Trji> w^lva 
eyelpeiv re Kal d-rroTraveiv 77 e/Jirf Ttyvr) cvvaTai. Kal 
B OLTOL fjuev 8?) OUTC09. evioTe Se, co eair^re, o az^ 
/tot /xr) SO^WCTL TTCO? 6yKvp,oves elvai, yvois OTL ov&ev 
BeovTai, Tcdvv eUyCte^co? Trpo/j.i Sf^ai,, /cal %vv 

150 E. 77 ai)rot ^ I/TT aXXuv. Ita rectissime Heind. Stallb. alii, 
pro vulgato 7; auroi isir d\\uv. 


elirelv, Trdvv t/cavccs roird^co ols av ^vyyevouevoi, ovaivTo. 
ajv TToXXoL"? f^ev Sij egeSw/ca IT/DoSt/cco, 7roXXou9 Be aXXot9 
ao(f)ols T6 /cal OecTTrecrioiS duSpdat,. Tavra Srj croi, w 
dptare, eveica TOVOE eayfcvva, vTTOTrrevwv ere, coajrep KOL 
avros oii, wSiveiv TI KVOVVTO, evftov. 7rpocr(f)epov ovv 
Trpo? fie w? 7T/30? /iata? vlov KOI avrov fjuaievrLicov, ical c 

a CLV epCOTM, TTpoOvfJiOV O7TC05 OtO? T* el, O0TO)? 

vacrdai. KOI edv dpa cr/coTrovfjievos TI, <Lv av 

eiSco\ov KOI /XT) aXiqOes, elra i>7ret;aipa)fja(, KOI 
r) dyplaive uxrTrep al TrpcororoKOt, Trepl rd 
TroXXot <ydp 7/877, co Oav/jidorie, Trpo? p,e OVTCO 
ware dr^vw^ $d/cvew froiftoi elvai, eVei- 
Sdv Tiva \fjpov avroov d(f)aipu)/j,ai,, KOI ov/c oioirrai fj,e 
evvoia TOVTO Troielv, Troppco oVre? rov elbevai OTI ouSet? 


ov&ev Spa), d\Xd /jtoi i^eOSo? re ^vy^wprjcraL /col 
dfyavicrai ovSa/u&J? 6e/Jiis. VIII. Tld\iv Sr) ovv ef a 
w Sealrrjre, o TL TTOT earlv eTTio-r^rj, Treipw \eyeLv cJ? 
S ou^ oto? T* et, fjujSeTroT* etVr;?. e ay 7/) (9eo9 c6e\r) 
KOI dvBplfy, oto9 r ecret. 0EAI. AXXa [JLevTOi, co 
Sw/cpare?, croO 76 O#T&> 7rapafce\evofJLevov ala^pov fir} 
ov iravrl rpOTrw TTpoOv/jieicrdai, o rl -U9 e^et Xeyeiv. E 
jioi 6 eTricrrd/jievos TL alaOdveadai rovro, o 
/cal W9 76 vvvl {fralverai, ovtc aXXo TL 
T; aL<T0r)(7is. 2)H. Eu 76 KOI yevvaia)<;, co 

Koivy aKe"rwfJiea, yovi^ov r vefjaaov Tuy^vet, ov. 
0EAI. Nat. ^H 

\6yov ov (j>av\ov elprjtcevai Trepl 
XX ov eX.eje * /cal TlpcoTayopas. rpoirov Se Tiva d\\ov 152 
TOL avTa Tavra. (frrjal ydp TTOV TfdvTwv 


fJLCTpOV vpWTTOV evat. TU>V fJLV OVTC0V, ft)<? (TTl, TtoV 

to? OVK ecrriv. aveyvco/cas yap TTOV , EAI. 
KCU TToX/Va/a?. SO. QVKOVV ovrw TTCO? \eyei, 
W9 ola fjiev e/cacrra efjuol (paiverat, Toiavra JJLV eanv 
e/moi, ola Se aol, TOI&VTCL 8e av aoi av6pwjro<$ 8e crv re 
Kayw ; EAI. Aeyet <yap ovv ourw?. 2^0. EtVo? 
ao(f)ov avSpa fjbr] \r]pelv ejraKoXovO^aw^ev ovv 
ap OVK eviore Trveovros dve/Jiov rov avrov 6 /j,ev 
piyoi, o & ov ; /cat o yue^ tfpe/j,a, 6 8e cr(f)6Spa ; EAI. 
Kal fjba\a. SO. IIpT/90^ oi)i/ Tore auro e<^) eavrov TO 
v 77 ou ^v^pov (forjcro/jLev , rj ireicro/jieOa TU> 

OTi Tft> yL66^ piyoVVTL tyvXpOV, Tft) Se yLt^ 

OL> ; EAI. "Eo//cez^. SO. Ot)/cow /cal fyaiverai ovrws 
e/carepw j 0EAI. Nat. SH. To 8e 76 (^aiverai alcrdd- 
C vecrdai e&Tiv ; @EAI. "Ecrrt 7<7/D. 2^. ] Oa^racri a 
apa, al aio-9r]o-i^ TCLVTUV ev re OepfAol? KOI TCCLCTI rot? 
TOIOVTOIS. ola jap aio-Oaverai e/cacrro?, roiavra eAracrrw 
/cat Kivbvvevei, elvai. EAI. "Eot/cei/. SO. Ai<rdrjtri4 
apa rov oVro? aet eVrt /cat J^euSe?, w? eTTLCTT^fJLrj ovo~a. 
EAI. Qaiverai. 2H. *Ap oui> TT/^O? Xapirwv irdcr- 
cro^)6? rt? ^^ 6 Tlpatraycpas, /cal rovro rjjMV pev v 

TO) TroXXft) crup^erco, rot? Se fjbaO^ral^ eV diropprjrw \ 
rrjv a\7)Qeiav eXeyev ; EAI. IIco? 877, w w/care 
D rovro \eycis ; 2H. 700 epco at 
Xoyov, co9 /oa ei; yitez^ a-uro a^ auro 
dv rt, TrpocreiTrois opOws ov$ OTTOLOVOVV n,, a\V eay a$<? 
/A67a TTpoo-ayopevys, /cal o-jAL/cpov (fraveirai,, teal edv ftapv, 
Kov(f)ov } ^vfJLTravra re ourco?, co? fjL7)$evos oWo? ez^o9 ^re 
OTTOLOVOVV e/c be or) (fropds re teal Kt,vrj(7O>i 

152 B. e0 eovToO. De hac lectione cf. Vers. 


Kal Kpdcrecd? Trpo? d\\r)\a ylyveraL Trdvra, a &rj 

eivai, ovfC op9ws TrpocrayopevovTes eo~n fiev yup ovBe- 

TTOT obSeV, del Be ylyverai. Kal rrepl rovrou rrdvre^ p, 

yopas T fcal *Hpa/cXetro? Kal E/ATreSo/cA,//?, /cal 

ol a/cpoi T^9 Troirjcrews e/carepas, KWjJiw^ia^ fj,ev 

re Oewv yeve&iv K 

iravra elprjtcev eKyova po?;? re Kal /aircrew?, rj ov 
rovro XeV^; @EAI. "E/^o^e. IX. SH. T/? ovv av 
CTL Trpos ye TOCTOVTOV * (TrparoTreSov Kal (Trparrjyov 153 
f/ Q/jLTjpov SvvaiTO d/jL<j)i(T/3riT}i(7a$ /Jirj 01 KarayeXao-TOS 
EAI. Ov pdSiov, co Sco/^pare?. SO. Oi) 
eTrel Aral raSe rc3 Xoyw (Tij^ela Iteavd, 
on, rb fnev elvai, SOKOVV Kal TO yiyvetfOat KIVY](TI^ Trap- 
e^et, TO be pr) elvai, Kal d7r6\\vcrOai, rjcrv^ia TO yap 
OepjJibv re Kal Trvp, o &r) Kal rd\\a yevva Kal eTrirpo- 
avro yevvfirai K <^opa? Kal rptyew? rovrw Se 

?; ov% aural yevecrew Trupo? ; EAT. Kvrai c 
ovv. Sn, Kal ^rjv TO ye rwv ^wcov 76^09 e /c TOOV 
TOVTWV <f>veraL 0EAI. Hci)? & ov ; Sfl. Tt Sat; 
01)^ UTTO r)o-v%las {lev Kal apyfa,? 
crLCDV o~e Kal Kt,vijo~ecov &5? evrl TO 
; 0EAI. Nat. SH. H 8 eV 
VTTO fjLa@rjO~ecos [lev Kal /Lte\er7^9, 

OVTWV, Krdral T fxaOrj/nara Kal o~u)^erat, Kal yiyverat, 
f3e\rlct)v, VTTO & ija-v%ias, d/JLeXerTjala^ re Kal dfiaOtas 
oucr779, ovre TL pavOdvei a Te av /judOrj eTTiXavOdverat, ; 
EAI. Kal yttaXa. SO. To jj,ev apa dyaObv 

152 E. vfjt.<pep{<rdutf recte se habet pro vuJg. v/j.<ptpe(r0ov. . 
K. P. 2 


Kara re ^rv^v Kal Kara <rwua, ro Se rovravrlov , 
0EAI. "EotA;ez>. ^O. "Ert ovv aoi \eyco vyveaias re 
Kal yakrjvas Kal ocra rotavra, ort al aev riarvyiai ar)- 
Kal arroXXvacri, rd o erepa aw^ei\ Kal errl rov- 
rov K0\o(f)0)va dvayKafo 7rpoo-(3ifldfav, rr^v xpvcrrjv 
009 ov$ev a\\o r) rov rjXiov "Quiipos Xeyei, Kal 

D S^Xot OTL ew? fte^ ^ ^7 rrepifyopa y KivovaerT) Kal 6 
rj\io$, rrdvra ecrri Kal aw^erai ra ev Oeots re Kal av- 
Opwrrois el Se crralrj rovro wcnrep SeOev, rravra ^pj jaar 
av ^La^dapeLTj Kal Devoir av ro Xeyouevov dvco Kara) 
rrdvra; 0EAI. AXX euoiye So/cet, w Sw/epare?, ravra 
$r)\ovv, arrep Xeyei?. X. Z^t. TrroKafte roivvv, co 
apicrre, ovraxrl. Kara ra ofju/nara rrpwrov, o &r) Ka\ei\ 
\ev;cov, urj elvai avro erepov ri e fco rwv awv 
^778 cv TO?? oauacrL urjSe riv avru* yjcapav 

E aTrord^ys. rjSi^ yap av elrj re ov TTOV ev rd^ei Kal uevot, 
Kal OVK dp ev yevecrei, ylyvoiro. 0EAL AXXa TTW? ; 
Sfl. ^TTCoaeda TO) aprt, \6yro, urjSev avro Ka6^ avro ev 
ov riOevres Kal rjulv ovrco ae\av re Kal \evKov Kal 
onovv d\\o xpwua e/c r//? 7rpoo-/3o\r]$ rwv ouadrcov 
737)09 rrjv rrpoa-YjKOva-av (popdv fyavelrai yeyevrjuevov, Kal 
o Brj eKaa-Tov* elvai fyauev ^pwaa, ovre ro rrpocr(Bd\\ov 
154 ovre * TO 7rpo(rl3a\\6a6vov ecrrat, d\\d uera^v ri eKa- 
<rrft) iSiov yeyovo?. rj av &uo"%vpicrai,o dv, c9 olov crol 
(f)TLverai eKacrrov %p(juua, roiovrov KCLI Kvvl Kal orroovv 
fab) ; 0EAI. Ma At OVK eycoye. ^H. Tl 
dv6pco7T(t) dp* ouoLGv Kal (Tol <^aiverai onovv 
rovro lo-^vpa)^, ?} TTO\V udX\ov, on oioe crol avrw 
ravrov Sid ro urfSeTrore 6/^ota)9 avrov creavrw e^eiv ; 

B 0EAI. ToOro udXkbv uoi SOKCL r) exelvo. SH. Qv/covv 
el aev o TrapauerpovueOa i} ov efyarrroueOa, ueya 1} 
\evKov *] Oepubv fji 1 , OIK dv rrore d\\ f o rco rrpoarrecriv 


dv eyeyovei, avTo ye uyBev p,eTa(3d\Xov el Be av 
TO TrapaueTpovfJievov rj e^aTrro/jievov eKaaTov rjv TOVTCOV, 
OVK av av d\\ov irpoaeXOovTO? r; TI TraOovTO? avro 
jji7]$ev Tradbv aXXo av eyeveTo. ejrel vvv ye, w </>/Xe, 
6av/j.aaTd re /cal ye^ola ev^eptos TTW? avayica^o^eOa 
\eyeiv, to? (j^alrj av Tlpairayopa? re Kai Tra? o ra avra 
e/celvw eTTL^eipwv \eyeiv. 0EAL lift)? &rj teal TTOICL 
\eyeis ; SO. ^fjuicpov \a{3e irapa^eiyfJLa, /cal irdvra C 
elcrei a /3ov\o/j,ai. d<TTpayd\ov$ yap TTOV ef, av aev 
Ter-rapa^ avroLS Trpoa-eveyKys, TrXe/ou? (frauev elvai TWV 
Terrdpwv Kal ^/zioX/ou?, edv Be BooBe/ca, eXarrof? Kal 
?;/x/ o-e/9 /cal ovBe dveicrov a\X&)? \eyeiv. r) av ave^ei; 
0EAI. OVK eywye. ^H. Tt ovv ; dv ere Hpwraycpas 
eprjTai 1 ] rt? aXXo9, 7 fl ea/r^re, e<Tv OTTO)? rt 
rj 7r\eov ylyverat, aXXco? rj av^r]0ev] TL 
0EAI. Eaz^ /^eVj w 2aj/c/?aTe?, TO BOKOVV 7rpo<> Trjv 
vvv eptorrjO iv dTTOfcplvwaai, ort oJ/c eanv edv Be Trpc? D 
T?)y TrporepaV) <>v\aTTO)v urj evavria eitrw, on, ecmv. 
2n. E5 76 vrj TTJV r/ Hpav, c3 (t Ae, /cat Qeiws. drdp, a:? 
coi/cev, edv aTrofCpivrj on ecrriv, J^vpLTrlBeiov TL vuj3r)- 
aeTai rj jjuev ydp y\o)TTa dve\eyKTO$ rjfjiiv ecrrat, rj Be 
<ppr}v ovtc dve\ey/CTO$. EAI. *A\T]Qfj. 2O. Ov/covv 
el uev Beivol Kal ao(j)ol eyco re Kal av tfuev, TfdvTa Ta 
TWV (j)pevv e^ra/core?, rjBr) dv TO \OLTTOV K Trepiovaias 

eKpoiouev vvv Be are IBir^Tai, TrpwTov /3ov\7]aoue0a 
OedaaaOai aura TTpos avTa, TL TTOT IGTLV d Biavoov- 
ueOa, TTOTepov r]fuv aXX^Xoi? ^vacf)WveL rf ovB 1 OTTO)- 
aTtovr. (B)EAI. Haw uev ovv eycoye TOVT dv /3ov\0i- 
urjv. XI. ^O. Kal fjirjv eycoye. ore 8 OVTCOS 


a\\o ri rj rjpeua, a><? irdvv 7ro\\r}v cr^oX?)z> ayovres, 
155 rrd\iv erravao-fce ^roueOa, ov * SvcrKoXaivovTes, d\\d TW 
ovri r]ad<$ avTovs e^erd^ovres, tirra TTOT earl ravra TO, 
(pd&uara GV THJAV. d)V Trp&Tov emcrKorrovvres (frrjcrouev, 
Co? 70; ol/jiai, /jLTjSeTTore prjSev av pei^ov p,7]$e eXarrov 
ryevecrdai /i^re oy/ca) /x^re dpi6fjiu) f ew9 ICTOV elrj avro 
eavTai. ov% ovrax; ; EAI. Nat. SO. kevrepov 8e 
76, o5 fjitjre 7rpo<JTi6oiTO ^re afyatpolro, rovro fju^re 
av%avecr6al irore /^rjre fyOiveiv, del Se IGOV elvai. 

B EAI. Ko/u&5 pev oiv. SO. ^Ap ovv ov KOI rpirov, 
o pr) Trporepov r)V, d\\a varepov TOVTO elvai dv&v rov 
real ^i^veaOai dSvvaTOV, 0EAI. Ao/ea 76 
. Tavra 77, ol/j,ai, 6fjLO\oyr}fj.ara rpla 
avra avrols ev rf) rj^erepa tyvxf), orav rd irepl 
dcrrpayd\wv Xeyw/jLev, r) orav <pa)p,ev e/x 
owra, /j,S]T av^rjOewra /-t^re rovpavriOV TraOovrct, ev 
crov TOV veov vvv fj,ev peifa elvai, varepov Se 
/jLiyBev TOV efiov oyrcov dtfiaipeOevTOS d\\d crov 

C avt;7)0evTos. et /u yap Srj Zcrrepov o Trporepov OVK rjv, 
ov yevofJievo^ dvev yap rov yiyveaOai yeveaOai dftvva- 
TOV, uijo ev Be aTroXXi)? rov OJKOV OVK. av rrore e 
eXaTrwv. /cal d\\a Srj [jLVpia erri uvpiois ovrws ^ 
eirrep /cal ravra rrapaSe^cueOa. errei yap rrov, w Seal- 
rrjre So/ceis yovv uoi, OVK drreipos rcav roiovrcov elvai. 
EAI. Kal vrj TOL? Oeovs ye, w 2<a>Kpare$, 
a>9 Oav^d^w, ri rror eVrl ravra, KOI eviore cJ? d 

D ft\errwv els avrd crKoroSiviw. SO. eoSwpo? yup, w 
cj)L\e, tyaiverai ov /ca/eco<? rorrd^eiv rrepl rfjs c^ucrea;? crov. 
fjbd\a ydp (f)L\oo~6(j)ov rovro TO Tra^o?, TO vavfjia^eiv 
ov ydp d\\r) dp^rj ^tXocro^/a? rj avrr), /cal eoiKev 6 TYJV 

ov /ca/cws yevea\oyelv. 

6EAITHTO2. 21 

d\\a TTOTepov fJiavOdveis r/S^, Bib ravra roiavr ecrrlv 
e f <MV TOV T[pa)Tay6pav (fiauev Xe yetz/, r) OVTTW ; EAT. 

UOL BoKUI. 211. XaplV OVV fJiOL 1(761, 6CIV (TOl 

os, fiaXXov Be dvBpwv 6vo/jLacrTa)i> r//? Siavoias r/;z/ 

. ITcG? 7p ou/c elaoiJLCLi, /cal irdw <ye 
XII. 2O. "AOpei, Br) TrepHJKOTTwv, ^ Tt9 TCOI/ d 
7raKovr). elcrl Be QVTOI ol ovBev d\\o olo/jievoi elvat, 
77 ov av &VVWVTCLL djrpl^ Tolv ^epolv \a{3eo-0ai, Trpd^eis 
Se teal yevea-eis /cal irav TO doparov OVK d7roSe%6fjLei>oi, 
co? ei> oixrias fiepeL 0EAL Kat /JL6V Srj, w ^cofcpares, 
cr/cX^poL? 76 Xeyet? /cal * avrirvTrovs dvOpcoTrov?. SO. 156 
Eicrt p /^/), w Trat, /taX* eu (jfjtovcroi. d\\ot, $e TroXy 
/co/JityoTepoi, a>v /AeXXca trot ra fjivcrrr^pia \eyeiv. dp%rj 
$6, l r]<$ Kal a vvv 5?) 6\6yo/jiev irdvra rjprrjrat, ^Se 


ouSez/, T97? Se /ct^crew? 5i;o el 8?;, TrX^et ftez/ aTreipov 
e/cdrepov, $vva/jiiv Be TO yaez/ Troieiv e%ov, TO Be 
etc Be T^? TouTO)z> o/^tXta? Te ral Tp/A/rea}? TT/JO? a 
fyiyverai e/cyova vrX^et /^ez> aTretpdj BiBvfjua Be, TO peis B 
al<r@7jTOV, TO Be alcrQr\<Ti<$, del crvveKTr-LTTTOvcra /cal yev- 
VW^VY] fieTa TOV alcrOrjTOV. al fj,ev ovv alcr0ij(T6i<? Ta 
ToidBe THAW e^pvtriv ovo/maTa, o-v^et? re /cal d/coal Kal 
ocr^>pr)(jet? teal i^ru^et? Te /cal Kavcreis Kal rjBovai rye Brj 
Kal \vjrai Kal eTri.Ov/JLLaL Kal (frofioi, K6K\rnjbevai Kal 
aXXat, direpavTOi peit al dvwvv^oi, Tra/^TrX^^et? Be a I 
i, TO B av ala67]Tov 761/09 TOVTCOV kicaaTais 
, o^reai, //ez/ ^pca/^ara TravToBaTrals nravTO- c 
BaTrd, a/coat? Be wcrauTO)? <&>z/cu, Kal Tat? aXXat? at- 
crdtjcrea-i, Ta aXXa alcrO^Ta %vyyevf) yLjvoueva. Tt 8?) 

OW T/yLttZ/ /3oV\Tai, OVTO? 6 JJLvdo?, to eatTT/Te, 7T/509 Ta 


TrpoTepa ; apa evvoels EAT. Ov iTavv, oj z,u>KpaT$. 
SO. A\V aOpei lav 7ra>9 aTroreXeadrj. /3ov\eraL yap 
Brj \eyeiv &>9 Tavra Trdvra pev, uxnrep \eyojjiev, Kivelrai, 
Tayo<$ Be /ou jBpaBvrrjs evi Ti) Kivijaei, avrwv. ocrov fj,ev 
ovv ftpaBv, ev TW avru) KOI TT/OO? ra irK^aia^ovra rrjv 
D K.ivj)Giv tercet KOI ourco S>] <yevva, TO- 8e ryevvwfAeva 
ovrci) S?) [/3^a3i;Tep. e<mv ocrov Se ai) Ta%y, TT^O? ra 
iroppwOev T)}V Kivrjaiv tercet /cat OUTO) ryevva, TCL Be 
ryevvwfJieva OUTCD 8^] OaTrco earl (peperai jap Kal Iv 
(f)0pa avrwv 77 Kiv^a^ Tre^v/cev. eTreiBav ovv (j/jL/j,a Kal 

\6VKOTrjra re /cal cuaOrjcrw avrtj ^UJJU^VTOV, a ov/c dv 
TTOTG jevero etcarepou eKeivwv 77/309 a\\o 
rore Srj /jbera^u (^epo^evwv r/J? fiev o-v/reo)? TT/OO? 
E O(f)0a\fjicov, T?}? Se Xeu/cor^To? Trpc? TOU 
KTOVTO? TO xpw/jia, 6 fjbev o(f)da\/jio<$ apa o^e 
eyevero Kal 6 pa $r) rore /cal eyevero ov TI oifris a\\d 
os opwv, TO Be ^vyyevvrjaav TO %pa)fjLa \evKOTt]TO^ 
al eyeveTO ov \evKOT7js av d\\a \evKov, 
etre %v\ov etre \idos etre GTLOVV %uvej3r) ^prj/j,a %/3<w- 

(T0r)V(U TO) TOIOVTO) ^pCO/HaTL. Kal TaXka >} OUTCt), 

aK\rjpov Kal OepfJiov Kal TravTO, TOV avTOV Tpoirov LTTO- 
\r)7TTeov, avTO ^v KaO^ auTO {JLrjSev elvai, o 8/} Kal 
157 rore * e\,eyo/J,ev, ev Be TIJ 7T/oo9 aX\.r)\a 6/Ju\ta nravTa 
yiyveaOal Kal TravTola avro T/;9 Kivrjcreti)^, eTrel Kal TO 
TTOLOVV eluai TI Kal TO iraa^ov av Ti eVl ei o? ^ 

156 D. /3pa5i!repa et qime in uncinis sequuntur, omissa in codd., 
supplevit Stephanus e Cornarii eologis : et sine uncinis edidit Bekker, 
sensu, ut videtur, exposcente; respuunt tamen Campb., Jowett. 

E. OTIOVV x/>^" a ex correctione Cornarii receperunt Heind. 
et Bekker. pro vulg. OTOVOVI> 


CD? (fracriv, OVK tivai rrayiws. ovre yap TTOIOVV e<rri ri, 
Trplv dv ro) 7rdo-%ovri gvveXOfl, ovre irdo-^ov, irplv av 
ru> TTOiovvrC rb re rivi- %uve\6bv Kal TTOIOVV d\\w av 
rrpouTreaov rrdcr^ov dve^dvr}. ware e aTrdvrwv rov- 
T(ov, ojrep e f dp^rj? e\eyouv, ov&ev elvai ev avrb KaO* 
avrb, d\\d rivi del yiyveaOai, rb 8 elvai, rcavra- 
e^aipereov, ov% OTl ^ael^ 7ro\\d Kal dpn tfvay- B 

TO 8 ov 8et, w? 6 rciJv aofpwv \byo$, ovre ri 
ovre rov oi/V eaov ovre roSe OUT eKeivo ovre 
d\\o ovSev ovoaa, o re dv lo~rrj, d\\d Kara 
<j)0eyyeo-0ai yiyvbueva Kal Troiovaeva Kal 
Kal a\\oLOv/jieva <w? edv ri Tt? CTTT/CTT; TCO \bjw y eve- 
\eyKros 6 rovro TTOIWV. 8et 8e Kal Kara uepos ovrco 
\eyeiv Kal irepl 7ro\\wv dOpoicrOevrwv, (L Brj dOpolcruari, 
re riOevrai Kal \i6ov Kal eKao~rov %wbv re C 

elvai, Kal yevoto dv avrcov w? dpeaKovrwv ; SEAL OVK 
vida eywye, u> 2*rt)Kpares Kal yap ovBe nrepl o~ov Bvvauai, 
Karavorjcrai, rrbrepa BoKOVvrd aoi \eyeis avrd ?} eaov 
diroTreipd. ^O. Ov /jivrjuoveieis, (a (>i\e, bri eyco aev 
- oloa ovre Troiovuai, r&v roiovrwv ovBev eaov, a/ 
avrwv tlyovos, ere Be aaievouai Kal rovrov 
i<y re Kal rrapariOrffJH, eKacrrwv rwv o~ocf)wv arco- 
i, e co? dv ei? (^co? TO crbv Boyua ^vve^aydya) D 

8e, TOT 77817 crKe^rofjiai e ir dveuialov eire 
dvafyavrjcrerai. d\\d OappHv Kal Kaprepwv ev 
Kal dvBpelb)? diroKplvov d dv (jxilvrjTCU croi Trepi wv av 
EAI. E/oajTa 877. XIII. 2^. Ae76 roivvv 
, el CTOL dpecrKei rb urj n elvai aXXa jiyveaOau 
del dyaObv Kal Ka\bv Kal Trdvra, d dpru 


BEAI. AXX /jLOtje, 7Tl,$r) (70V d/COLO) OVTW 

Oav/jLacrlcos (paiverai w? e%ei,v \6<yov KOI V7ro\r)7rreov 
E ijTrep $>t,e\rf\.v9a<s. ^O. M?) rolvvv d7ro\L7ra)uev ocroz> 
e\\el7rov avrov. Xe/Trerat e evvjrviwv re Trepi KOI 
vocrt&v, TWV re U\\GL>V teal Davids, ocra re Trapa/coveiv 
rj irapopav tf TL a\\o TrapaiaOaveaOai Xe^erat. olaOa 
<ydp TTOV, OTL ev TTCLCTI TOVTOIS 6fio\oyov/jievco 
So/eel ov dpri Sifjfjiev \6yov, w? Traz^ro? fjia\\ov 
158 -^refSet? alcrOrjcreis ev * cturoi? ^i<yvoiJLeva^, teal TTO\\OV 
3et^ TO, (^aivbfJLeva e/cdcrra) ravra /ecu eivai, a\\a irav 
Tovvavriov ov$ev &v fyaiverai elvai. @EAT. 
crrara Xeya?, ^(OKpares. SO. Tt9 &rj ovv, w 
\6L7TTat Xo<yo? TO) T>)^ aicrOrjCTtv 67Ti(7Trj^ 
K.CLI TO, (^aivojjieva eKaara) ravra KOLI eivai rovrw, a) 
(^aiverai ; 0EAI. *EY<W /^e^> f ^ ^wKpares, otcvw 
OTI OVK 6^oj T/ \6<y(0, SLOTI pot, vvv Brj eTreTrX^^a? 
I) O,I;TO. evrel W9 d\7)9(JuS ye ov/c av SvvaifjLrjp 
rrjcrat,, w? ot pawo pevoi rj ol oveipwrrovres ov 
So^a^ovcrLv, orav ol fiev Oeol avrwv oiwvrai eivai) ol 
&e TTTTjvol re, Kal a5? Trero/jLevoi ev TO* VTTVU) SiavowvTai. 
SO. ^Ap ovv ovSe TO TOiovbe a{Ji$>io fBr)Tr)p l a evvoels 
irepl avrwv, /tdXto-ra Se ?re^l TOU 6Va/3 re Kal virap ; 
EAI. To Trolov ; SO. tN O TroXXa/a? <re ol/xat 

Koevai eptoT&vTtoVy TL av Tt? 

el Ti9 epoiro vvv OUT&)? eV TOO irapovTi, irorepov tca- 

Kal irdvra, a Siavoov^eOa, oveipwrrofiev, rj 
C eyprjyopafAev re Kal VTrap aXX^Xot? SiaJ^eyoueOa. 
EAI. Kal fArjv, & ^(tiKpares, arropov ye, orw %pT] 
eTTi&eiPai, retcfjiripiw. Trdvra ydp waTrep avncrrpofya ra 
avrd Trapaico\ovdel. a re yap vvvl 
KfoXveu Kal ev rw evwirviw So/cet^ aXX^Xot? 


KOI oTav Brj ovap oveipara SorcwfJLev Snjyelo-dai, aroTro? 
77 O/JLOLOTIJ^ TOVTCOV liceivois. SO. Qpas ovv, OTI, TO 

dfj,(f>icr/3r)Tr)o-ai, ov ^aXeTrov, ore /cal TTOTepov eaTiv VTrap 
7) ovap dfjifyia-firiTelTaL, KOI cij LCTOV cWo? TOV %p6vov D 
oz> KaOevBo/jiev co eyprjyopaLiev, ev e/cctTepa) 8ta/Lta^erat 
rjLJiwv rj ^rv^rj ra del irapovTa SoyfjiaTa TravTO? LJLO\\OV 
elvat, d\r]6)], wcrre L<TOV JJLQV %p6vov TaSe (fra/jiev ovTa 
elvat, icrov ^e e.K.&iva y /cal OULOIWS ed) e/caTepOLS Biio"yv- 
pi%ofi0a. 0EAI. TLavraTracn fjiev ovi>. 5^O. OVKOVV 
Kal Trepl vocrcov re Kal ^avLcov o avrcs ^0709, 7T\r/v TOV 
ypovov, OTI, ovvl Tcro? : 0EAI. Op$ak. SO. Tl ovv: 

/Vr /v / 

0EAI. Te\olov fievr av eurj TroXXa^y, SO. AXXa E 
Tfc aXXo e^et? crac^e? eVSe/facr^at, OTrola TOVTCOV TU>V 
a\rj0rj; EAI. Oi/ [JLOI, COKM. XIV. SO. 
TOLVVV aKove, ola Trepl avrcov av \eyoLev ol ra aet 
So/covvTa opi^o/juevoi, ro5 SOKOVVTI, elvai dXyOrj. \eyovo~t, 
Se, co? 700 ol/jiai, O^TCO? epcoTwvTes, O ea/T^Te, o az^ 
erepov rj TravTCLTracri, /XT; TT/; Ttz^a &vvafJLLV TTJV avT^v 
efei rco erepw ; /cal /u,r) V7ro\a/3(i)f^ev r/J /xez^ TUVTOV elvat, 
fj Be erepov, aXX 0X0)9 erepoi/. 0EAI. 
TOLVVV TavTov TL e^eiv TJ ei> Svvd/jieL * r) eV 159 
a XXro OTWOVV, OTau fj KOfAiSy erepov. SO. ^Ayo ow 
i ou /^al dvopotov dvayxalov TO TOLOVTOV 
lOEAI. "E/xot76 SoKel. SO. Et a/3a Tt J;vfJ,/3alvei o 
i T 1 ) yLyve&Qai, 77 dvofJLOioVj etre eaurco etre aXXw, OLJL-OL- 
i ov/j,evov fjuev TavTov (ftrjtJOLAev yiyveo~uai, avo/JLOiovLj^evov 
\$e erepoz/; EAI. AvdyKTj. SO. OVKOVV TrpoaOev 
. eXeyo/jiev, w? ?roXXa /xe^ 6^77 ra TroiovvTa Kai ctTreipa, 
i (aaavTws 8e 76 ra Tcdcr^ovra j EAI. Nat. SO. Kai 


fjirjv OTL ye XXo aXXw (Tvu/jLiyvv/Aevov Kal aXXw ov 
B TavTa dX)C erepa yevvrjaei , EAI. Tldvv [lev ovv. 
SO. Aeyw/uiev Sr) e/jue re Kal ere Kal raXX* jj$r) Kara 
TOV avrov \6yov, ^WKOCLTT] vyiaivovTa Kal ^wKpaTr) 
CLV dcrOevovvTa. iroTepov O/JLOLOV TOUT e/celvo) r} dvo- 
fjioiov (f)>](TO/jLev ; 0EAI. *Apa TOV daOevovvTa 2w- 
KpaTrj, o\ov TOVTO Xeyei? oXco IKCLVM, TO> vyiaivovTL 
^WKpaT6L ; SO. KaXXtcrTa VTre Xa^e^ avro TOVTO \eyo). 
0EAI. Avouoiov SVTTOV. 2H. Kal eTepov dpa OVTCOS. 

11 i I 

axjTrep dvofioiov , 0EAI. AvdyKij. SO. Kal KaOev- 
C SovTa St] Kal TrdvTa, a vvv 
0EAI. "l^ycoye. SO. f/ ]^KaaTov 
TToieiv a\\o TI, orav fJiev \d/3rj vyiaivovra 2 
w? erepa) /JLOI, ^prjaerai, uTav Se dadevovvra, aj? erepw ] 
EAI. Ti 8 ov yu,eXXet ; 2H. Kal erepa >} efi 
eKarepov yevvrjcrop^ev eytjo re 6 Trdcr^cov Kal eKelvo TO 
TTOIOVV ; 0EAI. Tt jjutjv ; 2O. (/ Orav ^/) olvov Trivet 
fioi (j)ziveTai, Kal y\VKV$ , 0EAI. Nat. 

D Te TTOLOVV Kal TO rrdcr^ov yXvKVTTjTd Te Kal aicrOrjcrtv, 
ti/jia (pepo/meva dfi^orepa, Kal r) fjiev aio-Orjcr^ TT/DO? TOI) 
Trao voz/To? ovcra alcrdavoijLei fjv rr)v y\<jjcrcrav 
ydcraTO, 77 $e y\VKVT7)S Trpo? TOV OLVOV Trep 
^epofMevr) y\VKUV TOV OLVOV Tfj vyiaivovcrr) <yX( 
erroiTjcre Kal elvai Kal tyaiveuOai. 0EAI. Tldvv 
ovv TO, Trporepa rjpJiv ovrcos a)/no\oyr)ro. 
Se aaOevovvra, aXXo TL TrpwTOv jaev Trj aX^Oeia ov TO 
auTov e\a/3ev ; dvojLLoty yap Srj rrpoarj^dev. 0EAI 

E Nat. 2n. f/ ETepa 77 av eyevvrjo-aTrjv o Te TOLOVT 

159 A. Kal a XXy ov. Fortasse legendum /cat aXXy aJ ov. 


TI TOV olvOV 7TOCT9, TTCpl fjLV T)}v y\0)T- 

rav aiaQ^criv TriKpoTrjTos, Trepi Be TOV olvov 
cal <pepo/j,evrjv TriKpoTrjTa, Kal TOV plv ov 
/XXa TTiKpov, efjie Be OVK aiaOrjcnv aXX* alo~6avofjievov , 
9EAI. Ko/^uSJ} {lev ovv. SO. QVKOVV eyou re ovBev 
TTore yevr/crojAai, OUTW? alcrdavcjjievos TOV yap 
i XXof d\\rj cuo Q rjo is, Kal aXXoiov * Kal d\\ov iroiel 160 
ov aladavo/jievov oi/r eKelvo TO TTOLOVV e/u,e /mr) TTOT 
i\\a) o~vve\6ov TavTOv yevvrjcrav TOLOVTOV yevrjTai, drru 
/ap d\\ov aXXo yevvrjcrav a\\o2ov yev^o~eTai. EAI. 
Ecrri TavTa. SO. OJSe fjur/v eywye e/jiavTM TOIOVTOS, 
KCLVO Te eavTco TOLOVTOV yev^aeTai,. EAI. Ov yap 
vv. SO. AvayKT] Se ye e/jie re TWOS yiyveo-Qai, OTav 
yiyvwfjiai ala6av6/j.evov yap, jjLijo evbs Se 
dSivarov yiyvecrOac eKelvo re TIVL ylyve- 
rOai, OTav y\VKv rj TTIKOOV i] TI TOLOVTOV ylyvrjrai B 

fj,ev ovv. SO. AetVerat >rj, oljjuai, r)[uv 
}Xkr[\ois, LT ecr/Jiev, elvai, etre yiyvbfjbeOa, yiyveo~6ai,, 
TreiTrep iJ/jLoiv TI di dyKTj TTJV ovcriav o~w^>el H>ev, 
e ovbevl T(juv dX\wv, 01)8 av ^JJLLV avTols. 
.eiTreTai, c-vvBeSeaOai,. ILaTe elre TIS elvai TI 
Lvl elvai 77 TIVOS 77 Trpos TI prjreov avTa>, etre yiyve- 
~6aC avTO Be e<^> avTOv TL TJ ov r] yLyvofjbevov OVTC 
VT( \eKTeov ovT 1 aXXof \eyovTO<$ aTroSeKTeov, co9 o 
,6^09 ov BLe\tj\.v6a/jLev arifjLaivei. EAI. 
lev ovv, co ScoVpaTe9. 2O. OVKOVV ore S?) TO 
oiovv e/jiol dTt, KOL OVK aXXco, eyw Kal alcrOdi 
^ToO, aXXo9 3 ov] EAI. IIft)9 yap ov ; SO. AX?;- 
dpa e/Jiol r) efjurj ai(jQj)o~is T^9 ydp earj^ overlap del 
Kal eye*) KpiTrjs KaTa TOV TlpaiTayopav TCOV Te 


OVTWV e/JLOl, W9 (TTl, Kal TMV fJ-T) OVTWV, fo9 OVK (TTIV. 

D 0EAI. "Eoitcev. XV. SO. Hw9 dv oiv d^evS^ &* 
Kal ur) TTTaicov Trj Siavota nrepl Ta oi>Ta 77 yiyvoaeva 
OVK eTTLCTTrj^wv dv eirjv wvTcep alo~07jTij^ ; 0EAI. Ou- 
07TW9 ov. 2n. TLa<yKd\.a)<; dpa croi e iprjTai, OTI 
OVK aXXo TL ecrTLV 77 alo~6r)(Ti<$, Kal et9 TavT( 
?, Kara [Lev "Ourjpov Kal Hpa/cXeTOi> KC 
TO TOIOVTOV (f>v\ov olov pevaaTa KivelaOai Ta TrdvTa, 
KCLTCL $e TlpwTajopav TOV aofywTarov rrdvTcov ^prjfjidTWvk 
dvOpwjTov ueTpov elvai, KCLTCL Se SealrrjTOv TOVTCOV- 
E ouT&)9 ^OVTWV aiaB^cnv eTTio~Tr]p J rjv yiyvecrOai. 77 
yap, & 0ea/T77T6 j (^w^ev TOVTO o~ov aev elvai olov 
veoyeves Tra&iov, eaov 8e ualevaa ] rj ?raj9 Xe^/e^j* 
0EAI. QVTCDS dvdyKTj, (o 5,&)/cpaT9. SH. TOUTO fjiev:* 
BIJ, W9 eoLKe, fjioyi? TTOTC eyevvr]o-auev, o TL 8/7 vroTe 
Kal Tvy^dvet, ov. fjuerd Be TOV TOK.OV Ta du(>i 
avrov &J9 dXrjOco? ev KVK\ft) TreptOpeKTeov TO) 
c-KOTrovfJievovs urj \d0rj tfads OVK d^iov ov Tpocf)t)s T^ 
161 f yL<yi>6/jLei>ov ) aXXa * dvefjualov Te Kal ^1)809. 77 ov 
olei TravTCOs Beiv TO ye aov Tpecfreiv Kal urj drroTiQivai J 
17 Kal dve^ei e\ey%ouevov opcov, Kal ov crcf)6Bpa ^aXeTrct- 
*, edv T^9 o"ou w9 TrpcoTOTOKOv avTo vc^aipfj ] 0EO. 
<(jLKpaTS, 0ea/T77T09* ovSa/jicos yup $vcr- 
aXXa 7T/009 dewv elrre, 7} av ov% OVTCOS ^X l/ * 
SO. 4*^X0X0709 7 el dre\vw Kal %pv]o-Tos, co 0eo Scope, 
on fie olei \6ya)v Tivd elvai 6v\aKov Kal paSlco? e^e- 
13 Xoz^Ta epelv, 009 OVK av e%ei OVTCO Tavra. TO Se yiyvQ 
/jievov OVK evvoels, OTL ovSels TCOV \6ycov e^ep^eTai Trap 
cfjLov, aXX del Trap a TOV eaol 7rpo<7c)ia\eyo/jLevov, eyco \< 
Be ovSev eTTLcrTauai, TT\eov TT\r)V /3pa%eo<?, bcrov \6yov j 
Trap* eTepov cro(j)ov \afBelv Kal c 


/cal vvv rovro rrapd rovSe ireipdao/jLai, ov rt avrb<? 
elv. 0EO. Si) KCL\\LOV, w ^wxpa 


vfjidfo rov eralpov crov Upwrayopov , @EO. To C 
TTOLOV ; SO. Ta [lev a\\a /moi TTCLVV T^Seco? elpT]K,ev, o5? 
TO BOKOVV etcd(TTfp TOVTO Kal <JTL rrjv S dp%rjv TOV 
\6<yov reOav/jiarca, OTI, ov/c elirev ap XpfjLevos T^? AX^- 
Oeias, on- Trdvrcov ^prjfjLaTwv fjierpov early v<$ rj tcvvo- 
rf rt a\\o droTTwrepov TWV 
X-OTrpeTrais /cal Trdvv Ka 
r)fjuv \j6iv } evSeircvvfjievos, on rj^el^; fjuev CLVTOV uxnrep 
Beov eOavfjidfy/jLev eVl (rofylq, o 8 a pa Tvy%avev u>v 
19 <j>p6v7]aLV ovSev ySeXrtwy /Sarpd^ov yvpivov, fj,r] on D 
d\\ov rov dvOpwrrwv. r) TTCO? Xeyo/jiev, to eoScope ; el 
yap Srj eKaarw dX7]0es eo~rai o av &t alaOtjo-ecos So^dfy, 
/col firjre TO a\\ov rrd6os a XXo? j3e\nov Siafcpivel, /jLijre 
rrjv coav rcvpiwrepos eo-rai lma-ice*fyao~6ai erepos rrjv 
erepov, opdrj r) ^efS^?, aXX o 7roXXa/ct9 e lprjrai, avros 
rro? fAovos So^do-ei, ravra Se irdvra opOd 
Kal d\rj0fj, ri Stj Trore, w eratpe, Tipwrayopas 
, ware Kal dX\.wv 8iSacrA:aX 
/jLjd\a)V yuiaQ&v, 77/^669 Se dfjbaOearepoi re 

rjv Trap 1 exelvov, fierpv ovri, avrw e 
avrov ao<plas ; ravra 7ra)9 /- 

iv rov Hpwrayopav ; TO 8e $r) efjiov re Kal rrjs 
^9 [jiaievriKris aiyoi), baov <ye\a)ra o^>Xt- 
olfjiai Se Kal ^vfirraaa rj rov >ia\eyea0a(, 
. ro <ydp emaKoirelv Kal eiri^eipelv \eyxeiv 
Ta9 aXXr^Xo)^ (fravracrlas re Kal Soa9, opOds eKaarov 
oucra9, ov fjLaKpd * jjiev Kal SiwXvyLos (j)\vapla, el d\r)- 162 
I d\rjdeia Upcorayopov, aXXa fir) rrai^ovaa IK roj 


@EO. T fl 2& 

<itA.o9 bvrfp, wairep <rv vvv >>} elvre?. ou/c ay ouz^ Se^-at- 
/u-7;y t e yCtoi) 6jJ<o\oyovvTos eXey^ecr^at TlpwTayopav, 
ouS ay <rot Trapd Sofaz/ dvnTeiveiv. TOV ovv Seairi^rov 
7ra\iv \a/3e. TTCIVTWS Kal vvv Srj yu,a\ e /z/^eXcG? crot 
(f)aivero vTra/coveiv. SO. T Apa /caz/ et? Aa/cefWftoj a 
B eXOcav, w eoSwpe, 777309 r9 ira\al(TTpas d^iots api 

v^, eviovs (f>av\ov$, avros fjurj 
TO eISo9 irapaTroSvofJ&vos ; EO. AXXa 
, eiirep fjLe\\oiev /JLOL ejmpe^eiv /cal Tret- 
fLvTrep vvv olfjuai vfjua^ Trelcretv e yite yLtei^ eayi 
Kal /JLTJ e\KLV Trpo? TO ryvjJLvdcriov o-K\rjpov 
ovra, rc3 3e ^/} vecorepco re Kal vyporepw OVTI 
7rpocr7ra\aiLp. XVII. SO. *AXX el 
C <rot <f>i\ov, ovS* e/jiol e^jdpov, fyaalv ot 
TrdXiv &rj ovv 7rl TOV cro(f)oi> QeairyTov Ireov. Aeye"-] 
817, (v Seairrjre, Trpwrov fAev a vvv &iij\6ofJLV, dpa ov j 
el efai 0^9 ourws dva^av^o-ei f^TjSev I 
et9 crocjjiav OTOVOVV dvOpwirwv 1} Kal 6ewv ; ^ j 
IJTTOV TL otei TO Hp&T&ryopeiov p^eTpov els Oeovs rj els \ 
dvBpWTrovs XeyecrOai; EAI. Ma At" OVK eycoye. Kal j 
uTrep ye epcoTas, Trdvv 6 av [Jid^w . rfVLKa yap Sifjfjiev, | 
D oz^ TpoTrov \eyoiev TO SOKOVV tcd<rr(p TOVTO Kal elvai | 
TO) ooKovvTt, Trdvv fJiOi ev e<f>alvTO \eyea-6ai vvv S&] 
TovvavTiov TCi^a fjieraireTTTCDKev. Sfl. Neo9 yctp ei, cw I 
Tral T/9 ovv Sr)fjir)yopia<; o^ea>9 VTraKoveis Kal j 
. 7rpo9 yap Tavra epel Tlpayrayopas rj rt9 
auroO, ^O yevvaloi Traioes re /cat yepovTes, 
yopeiTe ^vyKade^ofjuevoi, Oeovs re et9 TO fjueaov u 
o^9 e 7co e/c Te TOT) \eyeiv Kal TOV ypdfaiv Trepl 
ceJ9 eicrli> *j ct9 ou/c elaiv, e^aipoij Kal d ol 


]airo$e%ot,VTO dxovovTes, Xeyere TavTa, o>9 oeivov el 
$LOiaei, 6t9 o-o(j)Lav e/ca<7T09 TWV avdpcorrayv /Bocr/cr/uaTOS 
bTovovv aTTcSei^iv Be /cal dvdyicr)v 01)8 TJVTIVOVV \eyeTe, 
[zXXa TO> euKOTi vptjcrOe, a) el edeXoi eoS&)po9 ?} 
49 TWV yewfJberpwv xpcduevos yewueTpeiv, dfyos c 
ovov av e/lrj. aKorrelTe ovv o~v re Kal eoSwpo$, el 
TToBe^ecrOe Tn6avo\.oyia re Kal eltcodi irepl * Trf\iKov- 163 
cov \eyouevovs \6yovs. 0EAI. AXX ov BiKaiov, co 
cure o~v oi/re av 

rj (TKeTTTeov, w? eoi/cev, W9 o re cro? /cal 6 
^0709. EAI. Haw fJLtv ovv a\\rj. S-fl. 
/co7roofj,V, el a pa ecrrlv eTricmju r) re /cal 
avrov rj erepov. eh yap TOVTO TTOV iras 6 \6yos rj 
reive, KCLI TOVTOV %apiv ra 7ro\\a KCLI aroTra ravra 
Ktvrjcrauev. ov yap ; EAI. TlavraTraa-i uev ovv. 
l. T H ovv 6ao\oyija-ouev, a rco opav alaOavo/JLeOa B 
Tc5 a/covetv, Trdvra ravra (ifia /cal erricrTacrOaL ; olov 
v /3ap{3(ipa)v Trplv fJLaOelv TTJV (fiwvrjv rrorepov ov 
aKoveiv, orav (pOeyywvTai, rj d/coveiv re /cal 
a \eyovai ; /cal av ypd/jLuara fjirj emard- 
ii OL, /3/\e7roz/Te9 et9 aura rrorepov ov% opdv r) erri- 
rraadai, etVep opw/iev, SiLa- ^vpLovfj.eOa ; BEAT. Avro 
! re, co J^wKpares, TOVTO avTtov, ojrep opwfjLev re /cal 
l/covo/jiev, eTTLCTTacrOaL (frijaoaev TV /j,ev yap TO cr^rjaa 
, \al TO %pu)/iLa opdv re Kal eTTicrTacrOai, TCOV o*e TTJV ou- G 

\ijTa /cal /BapVTrjTa dfcovetv T tiua /cal e&evat a Se ol 


e ypa/jL/xaTia-Tal rrepl avTwv Kal ol epurjvels $L$a(T/cov(Ti,v t 
VTe alaOdvecrOai rc3 opdv r} d/coveiv ovTe eTcidTaoQai. 
O. "Api&Td y, a3 SeaLTrjTe, /cal ov/c a^tov aoi Trpos 
avTa d^icrfSrjTijo-ai,, lira Kal avgxvr}. XVIII. AXX* 
oa or) Kal ToSe d\\o irpoo-iov, Kal aKOTret, rrfj aiTO 


$ia)o-6 fjieOa. EAL To TTOLOV Brj ; 2X1. To Toiov^e, et 
Tt? epotTO, apa BvvaTov, OTOV Tt? eVtcrT^/ua)^ yevoiTO 

D 7TOT6, ert e^ovra fivrjurjv avrov TOVTOV Kal aw 
Tore ore fte/^Tat //-/} eVt<7Tacr$at auro TOUTO, o 

Tat. /jLatfpokoya) oe, &)? eot/ce, poiM.o/itez o? epeuuat, et 
/jiadcov Tt? Tt /JLe/mvrj/jievos fir) olSe. EAL Kat 
&5 2&VpaTe? J Tepa? 7ap a^ et?? b Xeye/?. ^ 
e 7&) \r)pu> } aKOTrei 8e. r/pa TO opa^ ou/c 

cat T?)y otyiv aiaQj](Jiv\ EAL "70)76. 

6 tSce)f Tt ZTTLGTr^WV KIVOV t ye r /Ol>l O et6 

E TLV apTi \6yov ; EAL Nat. 2X1. Tt Bat] 

jnevTOi Tt ; EAL Nat. 2X1. IIoTepo^ ou- 
) Tti^o?; EAL Tt^o? SrJTTOV. 2X1. QIKOVV w^ 
/cat oyz^ fjo-OeTO, TOIOVTMVI TIVWV ; EA I. Tj 
; 2n. lN O 8?) et8e r Tt?, yLte/^^rat TTOL* 
EAL Me yLt^Tat. 2X1. ^H Kal /u-ucra? ; 77 TOVTO 
era? eVeXa ^eTO ; EAL AXXa oeivov, to 2 
164 TOVTO 76 <fyavai. 2X1-. * Aet 76 //-et^TOt, et atjocroi/jiev T 
irpoaOev \6yov et 8e //-r), ol ^erat. EAL Kat e ^jB 

Z^?} TOf At" VTTOTTTeVW, 0V fjLTjV CKaV(2<> 76 CTVVVOte 

etTre TT^. 2X1. T^Se 6 yLtez; opwv ejr LCTTY] /Lta 
TOVTOV yeyovev, ovTrep opwv* o^t? 7^p /cat 
A:at eTTKTTrjfjLrj TavTCV w[JLO\6<yr]Tai. EAL Tla^f 76. 
2X1. O e 76 6p&3^ /cat ITT ICTTIJ JJLWV ryeyovws ou ecopa^ 
cav invcrrj, /j,/j,vr}Tai M^v, ovy 6pa oe avTo. 77 7ap : 
B EAL Na/1 2X1. To Be ye ov^ opa OVK eV/crraTal 
IGTIV, etvrep /cat TO opa liria TaTai. EAL AX^^, 
2X1. 2f/i/3atVet apa, ou Tt? ETricrTrifjicov eyeveTO, eV( ; 

V \ , / /J ^V e I 

fjiefJiV7]fjievov avTOV fjn; e?rtcrTao"C at, eTreior) OV X P a ( 
Tepa? effra/jiev av eivai, et ylyvoLTo. EAL 
Tara Xe^et?. 2X1. Ta5z/ aSwaYa)? 8^ Tt fu 


<f>aiverat,, edv Ti? eTTLCTTt ja^v KCLI aicrO^oriv ravrov <>fj 
elvai. EAI. "Eot/cei/. Sflt. "AXXo dpa e/cdrepov (f>a- 
reov. EAI. KivSvvevei. S&. Tt ovv S/)T av etrj 
7rd\iv ef dp^f)?, w? eot/te, \eKreov. Ka/rot C 

7TOT6 fJ,\\0/JLV, W @eatT77T6, SpClV , EAI. TtVo? 

; SO. ^aivo^eOa fjuoi aXetcrpvovos a<yevvovs SL/CTJV, 
iTplv veviKrjKevai, aTTOTr^S^o-ai/re? avro TOU \6jov a 
EAI. IIc5? Srj ; SO. *AvTi,\oyiKoi)s eoiKa^ 

6 /Jio\oy ta<? avQyuo\o^ri(jd^evQi /cat 

rov \6yov dyaTrdv, KOI ov 

l d\.\d ^Lhoao^oi eivai \av0dvofjuev ravrd etcel- 
rot? Seivol? dv&pdcn Troiovvres. EAI. OVTTCO D 

eis. 2H. A\V 700 ireipdcrofjiai Srj- 
irepl avrwv o ye Srj vow. rjpofJueOa yap Srj, el 

Kal /jLfjLV7)IJ,evOS T/9 TL flTJ eVtCTTaTafc, KCU TOV 

Kal fAVcravra fJLe^vrifjievoVy bpwvra Se ov } diro- 
es, OVK elSora aTreSetfa/Aey /cal apa /jbefAvij/jbevov 
Tovro S eivai O&VVCLTOV. Kal oura) S/} fjivOos aTrajXero 
o TlpcorayopeLOS, Kal 6 cro? o^a 6 r^? eVtcrT?;/^? Kal 
alcrOijaetos, on raurov eVrt. EAI. QaiveraL. SH. E 
Ot rt aV, ol/jbai, w <j)l\, eiTrep ye 6 irarrjp TOV erepov 
e^rj, aXXa TroXXa av rj/Jivve vvv Se opfyavov aurov 
7rpo7rrj\aKL^ofjiev. Kal yap 01)8 ol eTrlrpoTroi,, 01)5 
Upwrayopas Kare\L7re, fforjOelv eQeXovGiv, av QeoBwpos 
el? oSe. aXXri 8/7 avrol KivBvvevcrouev rov SiKalov eveic 
avraj ftor]6elv. @EO. Ou yap eya), w ^coKpares, d\\d 

v KaXXta? 6 ITTTTOVLKOV TMV * eKelvov eV/rpoTro?" 16 
t? Se 7T&)? Odrrov IK rwv ^jnXwv \6ycov Trpo? rrjv 
yetofJLerplav aTrevevcrafiev. X.dpiv ye /jbevroi, e^ofJLev, edv 
avTQ) fiorjOfjs. Sii. KaXw? Xeyet?, co ecSwpe. dKe^rai, 
ovv rr/v y ejjirjv ^o^d^iav. TWV yjip dpru Beivorepa dv 
K. P. 3 


Tt<? 6/jio\oyij(Tece firj rrpocre^wv rot? pr/pavi rov vovv, 
y TO TroXi) el9lo fieda (j)dvai re /cal drrapvelcrdai. o~o\ 
\eyo} OTrrj, rj @eaLrr/rcD ; 0EO. E/9 TO KOLVUV jjuev ovv, 

B drroKpLveo-0(D Se o vecorepos <r</>aXe/? 7p TJ 
/jiOvij(T6i,. XIX. 2H. Aeyco 8rj TO Seivorarov e 
eari 8e, oZ//.<zt, Toiov^e rC apa olov re rov avrov elSora 
Tt rovro o olSe /JLTJ elSevat ; EO. T/ 8?) ou^ aTroicpi- 
vovjjieOa, w @6aiV?7Te; EAI. ASumToV Tro 
eycoye. ^11. Oi/ /e, et TO opav ye eTrlcrracrdat, 
ri yap xpiyo ei d<fcvfcrq) epa)rrjfj,arL, TO \6<y6/u,evov eV 
(f>pea,Ti (Tvve^ofjuevo^) orav epcora dvefCTrXrjKTOs dvijp, 
Kara\afSwv rfj %etpl crov rov erepqv ofyOaXjJiov, el 

C TO IfJLarLOV raj KaTei\rjfjL/j,evw , EAI. Oi) (fr 

rovra) ye, T&> fjievroi erepw. 


670), (f>i)(Ti,, rovro ovre rdrrco ovr rj 
TO OTTO)?, aXX 6t o enrio-rao-aL, rovro /cal ov/c eirio-ra- 
crai. vvv Se o ov-% opqs, opwv fyaivei. (L/jio\oyr)icw<; 
Se rvy%dveis TO opdv erricrracrOaL /cal TO JJLT) opav fjirj 
erricrraa-Oai. e f ovv rovrwv \oytov ri croi crva^alvet. 
EAI. J AXXa \oyiofjiai,, on rdvavria ol? V7re0pr)v. 
SO. v lo-a)5 Se 7 , eo 0avud(Tie, rrkeico dv roiavr eVa^e?, 
6 T/5 ere rrpoo-^pwra, el erricrraa-Oai, eari aev o^v, e 
8e dfjLj3\v, /cal eyyvdev fjiev err[o~ra(j6aiy rropp 
pr}, /cal a(f)6$pa teal ripe^a TO avro, /cal ci\\a 
a e\\o^u)i dv 7re\raa-ri/cos dvrjp /JUcrOo^opos ev \6yoi<? 
t]viK ercLarri^v /cal cu&QTjcriv ravrov edov, 
dv et? TO aicoveiv /cal ocrfypaivecrOat /cal TO? 
roiavras alaOrjcreis, rjXeyx^ ^ v CTT^WP xal OVK dviei<$ y 
irplv Oavfjidcras rrjv rro\vdparov <ro<f>lav %vve7ro$lo 07]<; 
vrf avrov, ov Brj ere xeipwo-duevos re /cal ffz/S^cra? rj$7] 


av Tore e\vrpov ^pTj/jidTwv, offcov crol re /cdfcelvw 
TtV ovv Brf 6 HpwTayopa?, (frairjs av tcro)?, \cyov eVt- 
Kovpov TO?? avrov epel ; u\\o re TreipcoaeOa \eyeLv ; 
EAT. TIdvv aev ovv. XX. SH. Tavrd re Brj Trdvra, 
oo-a rjaels Iwa^vvovre^ avra) \eyopev, KOI 6/xocre, oZ/zat, 
* ^copr/a-erai, Karafypovwv rj/Awv teal \eycov, Ouro? Srj 166 
6 ^w/cpdrTj^ 6 ^p7;o-T09, 7rei8r) avru) TrcuStov TL e 
f$l(T6V, el olov re Tov O.VTOV TO avTO 
Kal fJLTf elSevai, KOI Seicrav dire^tfe Bid TO /AT} 
Trpoopav, ryeXwra Srj TOV e/Lte ev rot? 
TO 8e, <w pqOvjJLOTaTe 2<w/cpaT69, T?JS ^ 
efJL&v Si epcoTr jaew^ cncoTrys, av /JLCV 6 epwTTjOels oldirep 
av eyw diroKpivaifjiriv (iTTOKpivdfjLevos cr(f>d\\riTa(,, <ya> 
eXej^o/mai, el 8e d\\oia, ai/Tus 6 epQ)Tr)0eis. avTi/ca B 
<ydp oo/ceis Tivd croi ^vy^wprjcrecrdaL fjivrj^v Trapelval T& 

ra^o?, olov oVe eVacr^e, 
r jro\\ov ye Bel. rj av aTroicvrjaeiv 
6fjLo\oyelv olov T elvai, elSevai real prj eiBewu TOV avTov 
TO avTo ; rj edvjrep TOVTO Belay, $coo~eiv TTOTC TOV avTov 
elvai TW dvo/JLOiov^evov TO> Trplv dvo/jLoiovadai OVTI ; 
fjLa\\ov be TOV elval Tiva, aXV 0^%^ TOU?, Kal TOVTOVS 
direipovs, edvirep dvo/jLolwo~i<; ytryinjrai, el G 

ye Ser/cret 6rjpevo~ei<> Siev\a/3el(T6ai> d\\?j- 
\(ov ; d\\\ W uafcdpie, (frrjo-ei,, yevvaiOTepws CTT at/To 
e\6wv, o \eya), el bvvacrai, e^e\ey^ov, a>s ov^l iSiat, 
alcrOriG-eis eicdcrTW r}/jid)V ytyvovTai, r) co? l&lfav yiyvo- 
jjievcov ovSev TL dv fiaXkov TO (fraLvofjievov uovat efcelva) 
ylyvoLTO, rj, el elvaL Bel ovo/jLa&LV, eir], (pirep fyaiveTai. 
v? Be Br] /cal KvvoKe<pd\ovs \eya)v ov JJLOVOV avTO<$ vrjvels, 
a\\a Kal TOI)? aKovovTas TOVTO Bpdv et? TO. avyypdfjL- 

(MOV dvaTreiOew, ov /caXcG? TTOLOOV. eyco ydp D 



tv rr]V d\r)6eiav e^av w? yeypafia jjuerpov yap 
eivcu TWV re uvrwv Kal fjiTJ fjivpiov /j,evTot, 
Sia(f)epeLv erepov erepov avrw TOVTO), en TCO /JLEV d\\a 
can re fcal fyaiverai, rco oe d\\a. KOI (rofyiav KOI 
cro(f)bv civftpa TroXXov Sea) TO fjur] tfrtivcu eivai, a\X CIVTOV 
TOVTOV KOL \eja) crocfrov, 09 dv TIVI TIIJLWV, co fyaiverai, 
Kal ecm /cared, fjLeTCLjSaXXwv Troirjar) dyaOd (fraivecrOal 
re /col elvai. TOV ^e \6yov av ^ TOO pr}/j,arl fiov 

E BLWKC, aXX c53e en aa^earepov fidOe, TI Xeycw. olov 
yup ev rot? rrpoo dev eXeyero dvafjuvrjcrOrjTi,, on r&) }JiV 
dcrOevovvri TriKpd fyaiveTai a ecrOiei, /cal eari, ru> Se 
\}<yiaivovTi ravavTia <JTL KOI (^aiverat. acxfiwTepov fjuzv 
ovv TOVTCOV ovBerepov Set Troifjaai ov$e ydp SUVCITOV 
167 ovSe * KarrjyoprjTeov, a5? 6 ^ev K/I/AVMV /za#>??, ort 
TOiavra Boj-d^ei, 6 8e vyiaivwv cro^>o?, on a\\ola 
fjbera^\7]reov S eVl Odrepa djjLeivwv ydp r; erepa eis. 
OVTCO Se /cal ev rfj Trai oeici djro erepa? e^ew? eVl rrjv 
ofieivo) jjLTa/3\r]Teov. aXX 6 fjLev larpos <>ap/ji(iKOi<; 
fjLera/3d\\eL, 6 Se cro^ia-rr]^ Xoyoi?. eVel ov rl ye 
ijrevSf) So^d^ovrd T/? nva varepov d\7jdfj ewolijtrm 
Bod$euf ovT6 ydp rd pr) vvra Swctrbv Sofacrat, ovre 
d\\a irap d dv irdvyrj, ravra 3e del d\r)0f}. d)OC 

B oifJLai, Trovrjpa ^^%";? e^et Sof^fovra? avyyevr} avrrjs 
y eVo/^cre Bofdacu erepa roiavra, d o~rj nves rd 
VTTO aireipias 0X1)6?) Ka\ovaiv y eyd) Se 
/3e\rla) fjLV rd erepa T&V erepcov, aXrjdearepa oe ovSev. 
Kal TOI)? aocfrovSj co </Xe %u>icpaTe$, TTO\\OV Sea) ftarpd- 
vou? \eyeiv, d\\d Kara fjiev crw/zara larpovs \eya), 
Kara Se (f)vrd yewpyovs. $7)^1 yap Kal TOVTOVS TOA? 
(frvTols dvn Trowrjpocv ala-@>jcrea)v, orav n avruv d 

C %pr](TTds Kal vyieivds alaOtjaeis re Kal u 

8EAITHTO2. 87 

Troielv, TOU? &e ye aofyovs re KOI dyaQovs prjropas rat? 
Tro\eo-i ra ^prjara dvrl rwv Trovrjpwv St/caia So/celv 
elvai rroielv. eirel old y av e/caa-rrj iro\ei 8i/caia ical 
Ka\d 8ofcf), ravra teal elvai avTi), ea>9 av avrd vofii^rj. 
6 cro^)09 dvrl Trovrjpwv ovrwv aurot? e/cdarajv 
a eTToirjcrev eivai /cal So/cetv Kara Be TOV avrov 
\6yov /cal 6 ao<pL(7T7]^ TOV? TraiSevofAevovs oirco vvd- 
TTaiBaycoyeLU 0-0(^0? re /cal afftos 7ro\\tov xpy- 
rot? 7rai$ev9eicn. /cal OUTCO cro^wrepol re elcnv D 
erepcov /cal ovSels tyevbrj So^d^ei, /cal crot, lav 
re /3ov\rj edv re prf, dveicreov ovri jmerpo) aw^erai <ydp 
Iv rovrois o ^070? o^ro?, o5 av el pev e^et? e^ dp^rj*; 
dfifyia-ftrirelv, d/JL^ia-^ret,, \6ja) dvriiet;e\6tov, el Se 
SL epwrrjaeMV ffovXet, Si epwrrfa-ecov ov$e yap TOVTO 
favKTeov, d\\d rrdvrwv /xaA,/crra Sico/creov ru> vovv 
eyovri. Troiei fjuevroi ovrcocri fir) dSl/cei ev rut epcordp. E 
/cal yap 7ro\\r) d\oyla dperijs (f)da/coira e 
/j.r)&tv aX\ 77 dSiicovvra ev \6yoL? 
8 earlv ev rco roiovrq), brav rt? 
dywvi,ofj,evo<$ ra? Biarpi/3ds Troifjr 

yo/j,evos, /cal ev /JLCV rut Trait,?] re Kai a(f)a\\r) /cad 
ocrov av Svvrjrai, ev Se ru> SiaKeyecrOai, orrov^d^r] re 
/cal erravopOol TOV TTpocr&ia\eyonevov, eicelva /juova avTco 
rd a^akfjiara, d auro? v<f) eavrov Kal 

Trporepwv dvvovcnwv Trape/cercpovcrTO. v fj,ev yap 


ovro) TTOifjs, eaurou? alrid(jQvrai ol 

croi, Trjs avTwv rapa^/5? /cal aTropias, aXX ov ere, 

(re fjiev ^i^ovrai /cal $i\r)crovaiv, ai5rot9 Se 

/cal (frev^ovrai dfi eavrwv et9 <f)i\ocro<j)Lav, iv a\\oi, 

yevofievoi, dTra\\ayw(TL TGOV ol irporepov r)(Tav eav Qe 

rdvavria TOVTCOV Bpas, uatrep ol TroXXo/, TavavTia 


t aoL /cal TOI)? gvvovra? avrl <f>L\oo-6(j)Ci)v 
B picrovvTas TOVTO TO Trpay^a aTro^avels, eireibav Trpecr- 
ffvrepoi, yevwvTai. edv ovv efJLol TrelBrj, o KOI Trporepov 
eppr/Or], ov &vo~/j,ev(i)S ouSe //-o/^Tttfft;?, aXX iXew rrj 
biavoiq j-vy/caOels w? a\r)6u)<$ cr/ce^ei, rl Trore \e<yo/jiev, 
Kiveta-Oai re dirotyaivofjievoi, ra Travra TO T6 &OKOVV 
e/cddra) TOVTO fcal elvau l$ia>Tr} TG fcal TroXei, KOI K 
TOVTCOV eirune&frei, eire TCLVTOV etVe teal a\\o e 
KOI ai(T07)cris, aXX ov%, tocnrep apTi, etc o-vvr]9eias 


\KOvre<> aTropias aXX^Xot? TravToSairds 
TavTa, w QeoSwpe, TW eraipw crov eh ^orjOeiav Trpocr- 
KCLT fir)v Bvvafitif, o-^it/cpd diro aiJLiKpwv el 
efy, p,e^a\eiOTepov av Tot? avTov e 
XXI. @EO. IIa/fet9, w Sft>/c^aTe9* TTOVV <ydp 
TO) dvbpl /3/3orj0r]Kas. 2H. E2 Xe^ei?, w eralpe. /cal 
fjbot etVe eVei/oTyo-a? TTOV Xeyoi/TO? cipTi TOV Upwrayopov 
D KOI oveiol^ovTos rjplv, OTL TT^O? Tra&iov TOI)? \6yovs 
TO* TOV 7rai8o9 ^>o/3ri) dywvL^oifJieOa et? Ta 
A:at ^apLevna/jiov TIVCL a.TroKaX.&v, a 
8e TO irdvTwv /^eTpov, o"irov$do-ai 
irepl TOV avTov \byov ; <S)EO. Hat? yap ov/c 
cS ^wtcpaTes\ SO. Tt ovv, 
@EO. 2</>o8yoa ye. 2H. 
7T\r)V crov Trai&ia eo~Tiv j 6 
E Kal ere Set epa>TWVTd<$ Te /cal cnroKpivofJievovs aXX?;Xot9 
cnrovo do-ai, 7Tpl TOV avTov \6yov, iv a prf TOI TOVTO y 
e^rj ey/cdXelv, w? TralfovTes TT/QO? /jLetpd/cia $ieo-/ceilra/J>e6 y 
av TOVTOV TOV \6yov. (B)EO. Tt S ; 01; TroXXcS^ TO* 
fieyaXovs irwywva^ e^ovTcov cifieivov av e 

AXX ou 

0EAITHTO2. 39 

<rov ye } w eoScope, a/jLeivov. /-tr) ovv oiov e/ue fiev T&> 
<rw eraipw rereXevrrjKOTi, Sew Travri rpoTrw eVayu-vi/eii/, 
<re * e /j,r)8evl, aXX t$t, cS dpLcrre, o\iyov eV/crTrou, 169 
T VTOV avrov ea>9 ai> eiSw/uev, etre apa ere Set 
wept, perpov tivai, etre Traz/re? ofioiws 
crol i/cavol eavroi? et? re acrrpovopLav Kal raXXa, wz/ 

cri) Tre pt alriav e^ei? La$epeiv. EO. Oi) paSiov, 
cw toKpaTes, crol 7rapaKa6tj/jLvov ft?} StSomt 
eya) aprt TrapeXrjprjcra (frdcr/cwv ere GTTLTpetyetv fJLOt, 
(iTToBvecrOai, /cat ov^l dvay/cdcreiv /caOdtrep 
/jiovioC av Be fiot, So:et? vrpo? TOI/ ^/cippcova fjia\\ov 
TeiveLv. Aa/ceSai/Aovioi /JLCV yap airizvai rj aTroSvecrOai B 
K\ei ov<Ti, crv Se KCLT AvTalov Tt /xot fidXXov So/ceis 
TO &pd/j,a $pdv TOV yap 7rpocre\66vra ov/c dviijs irplv 
dvay/cdays aTrobvcras ev rot? \6yois trpocrTrdKaicrai. 

. Apicrrd 76, a5 eo3ft)pe, rrjv vocrov jj,ov d r jrei,Ka- 
os fievrot, eyon eiceivtov. jjivpiou yap jjSij 
yu-ot r H/oaXee9 re /cat Srjaees evrvy^dvovre^ /caprepol 
7T/)o? TO \eytv /jid\* v i*vy/ctc6<f)a(TLv, aXX eyco oiJSeV 
Tt fj,d\\ov d(f)L(TTa/JLaL ovrco Tt? epa)? Seti/o? eVSeSu/ce 
T/;? Trept rauTa yv/J,vct(rias. firj ovv yit^Se <7u (frOovijcrys Q 
Trpoo-avaTpiijr/iijLevos aavrov re dfia Kal e/Lte ovfjaai. 
EO, QvSev ert dvTiXeyo)) aXX 0(76 OTTT; e^eXet? ?raz/- 


dvaT\rjvai eXey^ofJLevov. ov ^evroi Trepatrepa) ye 
&v TTporldeo-ai oto? T e<70/xat irapacr^elv e^avrov crot,. 
SO. AXX dp/eel KOI /-te^pt TOVTGOV. /cat /u-ot 
TTjpet TO Toto^Se, /a?; TTOU TratSt/coz/ Tt \d6cofiev 
TCOJ/ \6ycov TTOiov/jLevoi, /cal Tt? TraXiv 
0EO. AXXa ST) 7retpacro/u,at 76 

XXII. 2)H. ToOSe TO LVVV Trpwrov ird\Lv 


dvTi\aj3(0fJie0a, ovnrep TO Trporepov, /cal iBwuev, opO&s 

avrdp/crj e/cacrTois els (frpovrjcnv firolei, /cal rjjMV ^vve^w- 
prjorev 6 Upcorayopas, Trepi re rov daelvovos /cal %ei- 
povos Bia<f>pl,v Tivds, 01)9 Brj /cal eivai <ro<povs. ov^t , 
EO. N<z/. SO. Et fjiev roivvv avros rrapwv wfJLo\oyei } 
E d\\d fir) rjfjieLS /BorjOovvres VTrep avrov ^vve^wprjo afjiev, 
ovBev av ird\iv e Bei, 67rava\a(36vTas pefiaiova-Oac vvv 
Be Ta^ av TLS rfads d/cvpovs TiOelrj Trjs VTrep e/celvov 
oaoXoytas. Bio /ca\\iovcos ^X, GL cra( f ) ^ aT P ov 7re /^ TOVTOV 
avrov Bio/jio\oytj<Tao-0ai ov yap TI, crfjLitcpbv 7rapa\\drrei, 
OVTCOS e^ov rj d\\cos. @EO. A.eyeis d\rj0t). SO. M?) 
TOLVVV Be d\\a)V, dX)C e/c TOV e/celvov \6yov W9 Bid 

ijo Ppa^vrdrcov * \dftwjJLev rrjv 6/j,o\oylav. EO. ITc59; 

/ SO. Ovra)o~l. To BOKOVV efcdarct) TOVTO real eivai fyrjcrL 
TTOV c5 Bo/cei } EO. < & t r]o~l yap ovv. SO. Ov/covv, w 
Tlpwrayopa, /cal r^iels dv0pco7rov, ad\\ov Be Trdvrayv 
dv0pw7rci)v Bo^as \eyofjiev, /cal (frauev ovBeva ovriva ov 
rd fjiev avrov r/yeicr0ai rdov d\\wv aotpcorepov, Ta Be 
d\\ov$ eavrov, /cal ev ye TOIS fieyio TOis /civBvvois, orav 
ev o-rpaTeiais r) voaois rj ev 0a\drr7j 

rr v /) \ >r \ ) ( > 

(t)cr7rep 7rpo9 c/6Of9 e~veiv TOVS ev e/cacyrois 
B (rcoTTjpas o~d)(jt)V Trpoo ooKcoi Tas, ovtc a\\co 
povTa? 77 TO) elBevai. /cal rrdvra TTOV peard rdi 0pu>- 
Triva ^TJTOVVTCOV BiBa(7/cd\ovs re /cal dp^ovras eavrwv 
re Kai TWU dX\ajv ^cooov TWV Te epyatriwv, oiofj^evwv re 
av L/cavdov fjuev BiBda/ceiv, Itcavwv Be dp^eiv eivai. /cal 
ev TOVTOV airaai TI d\\o (frrjcroaev rj avrovs TOVS dv0pco- 
7TOU9 i / yet<T0ai croffriav /cal dfjbaOiav eivai irapd c 
EO. OvBev d\\o. SO. Qv/covv TTJV fJiev 
] rj Bidvoiav qyovvrai, rrjv Be dpaOiav tyevBrj 

@EAITHTO2. 41 

EO. Tl jJLrjV ; 2fl. Ti ovv, w Upwrayopa, ^prja-o- G 

TTOTepov d\rj6rj <f>a)ju,ev del TO?)? dvOpw- 
7roi>9 $of;deiv, 77 Trore jjiev d\r)Qrj, Trore Se tyevbrj ; ef 
ydp TTOV ^v/Jiftaivei fjbr} del d\rjdrj a\V ayLt- 
avTovs SoJ;dQiv. aKOTrei yap, w eoSwpe, el 
civ rt? rw^ a/ji^n Tlpayrayopav rf cri) auro? &a- 
cw? ouSet9 tfyeirai, erepo? erepov afJiaOrj re 
nvai KOI tyevSf) So^d^ew. EO. AX\ CLTTLO-TOV, w 
ZiGOKares. Sn. Kal ^r]V et9 roOro ^y e dvdyfcrjs * 6 D 
6 iraviwv xprjfjbdrcov fjberpov dvOpwirov \zywv. 
2ln. "Qrav crv icpivas TL jrapd cravrq) 
/xe aTTofyaivr) irepi TWOS Bo^av, crol pev Brj TOVTO 
*card TOV efceivov \oyov d\7]0e$ ecrra), rj^lv &e 
Trepl T/;? cr/79 Kpi(rew<s Trorepov ov/c ecrri 
yeveordat,, 77 aet ere Kpivofiev d\r)9tj So^d&iv ; 77 pvplot, 
/Jbd^ovrat dvTi&o^dtovres, rjyovj&evoi, ijrev- 
$fj Kpiveiv re KOI olecrOai, ; EO. NT) TOV Ata, c3 ^co- 
, /Jid\a [Avptoi, SrJTa, (hrjalv r/ O//, 77^09, ot x 7^ A -ot E 
dvOpwirwv 7rpdyfj,aTa Trape^ovcrcv. 2H. Tt GUI/ j 
9 cri) rore aavTM /juev d\rj^tj Sofafet9, 
evBn j @EO. "Eot/cet e/c <ye roO \6yov 
ivdyfcrj elvai. SH. Tt 8e aurw IIp&>Tayopa ; yo oO%l 
ivdytcr], el fjuev fjirjde CLVTOS COSTO /uerpov elvau dvOpcoTrov 
ol TroXXo/, axnrep ovBe olovrai, /j,r)$evl Srj elvcu 
ravTrjv TT/V d\r)6eiav, fjv etcelvos eypa^frev , el Se * airro9 171 
lev were, TO Se 7r\fj0o$ yar) avvoierai, olaf? OTI TrpwTov 
Lev ocra) 7r\eiovs 0^9 //.T) &o/cei rj 0^9 Bo/cei, TOCTOVTW 
id\\ov OVK ecrTiv 77 ecrTiv , @EO. Avdy/crj, eljrep ye 
e/cdcTTrjv Bo^av e<TTai teal OVK ecrrai. SH. "EiTretTa 
ye TOUT e^et KO^^QTCLTOV e/ceivos pev Trepl TTJS avTov 
rjcrea)S TTJV TCOV dvTi$ot;a%6vTa)v Oirjcriv, rj e/celvov 77- 


yovvTai ^ev^eo-Oai, %vy%ci)pel irov dXrjdtj elvat, 0/10X0- 
7o3v TO, ovTa $o%deiv anrawras. 0EO. TIdvv aev ovv. 

B SH. OVKOVV Trjv avTOV av 

TWV yyovuevcov avrov tyevSecrOai, ojjio\o<yei 0X1)6)) el 
0EO. Avdy/CTj. SO. Ol e 7 aX,Xot ov ^vy^wpovcnv 
eavrovs "^revbeoOai ; EO. Ov yap ovv. ^H. O Se 
7* av 6fjLO\oyl Kal ravTyv d\rjdrj rrjv~ $6%av t% wv 
yeypafa. EO. Qaivercu,. SH. Ef airdvrwv apa 
a7r6 Upcorayopov dp^afievcov djbL(f)io-/3r]Tij(TeTaL, fj,aX\.ov 
8e VTTQ 76 eicelvov 0/^0X07^ crerat, oray TW rdvavria 
\eyovri, %v<Y%c0pf] d\7]0rj avrov &od%6iv y rore Kal 6 

C Tlpcorayopas avrbs ^vy^cop^a-eraL urjre Kvva yu-^re 
TOV eTTLrv^ovra dvOpwirov fMerpov elvat, U7j$e Trepl ez^o? 
ov av fir) fjbdOrj. ov% OVTCOS @EO. Oi^ro)?. 2ft. Ou- 
tfow eVetS?) djJL^Lcr^rjrelTai VTTO TTCLVTWV, ov&evl av eirj 
r) Upcorayopov d\r)6eia d\r]0r)<?, ovre rivl d\\a) ot/V 
avro) exeivip. EO. "Ayav, w Sw/cpare?, TOZ^ eralpov 
IJLOV Kara0eo/jiV. SO. AXXa rot, co </Xe, aSrj\ov, el 
Kal TrapaOeoaev TO opOov. elfcos ye dpa eicelvov Trpea-ftv- 

D repov ovra ao^wrepov tjfjuov elvaC Kal el avrUa eV- 
revdev dvaKi^eie y^e^pt TOV av%evo$, TroXXa av eae re 
\rjpovvTa, co? TO eltcos, Kal ere 6uo\oyovvTa, 
ov ot^otro aTTOTpe^wp. aXX ^yiuv dvdyKrj, 
oluai, xprjaOai rjuiv aurot?, OTrolol Tives eauev, Kal 
TCL BoKovvTa del TavTa \eyeiv. Kal SfjTa Kal vvv aXXo 
Ti fy&jJLev 6fjbo\oyelv av TOVTO ye OVTLVOVV, TO elvat 
(TO(j)(0Tpov eTepov eTepov, elvai Be Kal d 
EO. E/xot 7 ovv So/eel. XXIII. SO. T H Aral 
av iidkLGTa "(TTavQai TOV \6yov, y ^et? VTreypd 

E porjOovvTes UpcoTayopa, c? ra yLtev TroXXa ^ SOKCL, 

, 6epud, fypd, y\VKea y 7rdvTa 


ocra TOV rvrrov TOVTOV* el Be TTOV ev TKTI 
mafylpew a\\ov a XXou, rrepl ra vyieivd /cal vo<7U)Bij 
\e6e\rio~ai av $avai //,?} rrav yvvaiov teal rraiBiov /cal 
vhjplov be l/cavov elvai lavQai avTO yiyvwcr/cov eavrto 
\TO vyieivov, d\\a evravOa Srj a\\ov a\\ov Siatyepeiv, 
KtTrep TTOV J @EO. "EyLto^y^ Bo/cel OVTWS, SO. * OVK- 
\ovv real irepl TroXiriKtoV, /ca\a p,ev /cal alo-^pa /cal 
/cal a$i/ca /cal cxria /cal /JLJJ, ola av e/cdaTrj 
olrjOelo-a Orjrat, vo^i^ia eavrfj, ravra real elvai 
h"fj d\r}9eia e/cacrrrf, /cal ev TOVTOIS fj,ev ov&ev <ro0co- 
rrepov ovre IBtwrrjv IBtcorov ovre 7r6\iv iroXews elvat, 
Iv Be TO) %v/jL<j)epovTa eavrf/ i] fjirj ^v^epovra 
Ivravtf, eiTrep TTOV, av o/jLoX.oyijcrei, v/ji/3ov\6v re 
SovXov Bta<f)peiv /cal 7r6\ea)s Bo^av erepav erepas 
i\ij0eiav, /cal ov/c av TTCIVV ToX/jUJcreie (f)f)o ai>, a av B 
i drjrai, TroXt? ^vfjL(f)epovra OL7jdel(Ta avrfj, Travros JJLCL\\OV 
tavra /cal gvvoioreiv. aXX e /cet, ov \eyw, ev rot? Bi/caiot,<; 
! kal dBiicois /cal ocrtot? /cal dvocriois, eOekovcrw la ^ypL- 
I ^ecr^ai, w? ov/c ean (frvcrei, avrwv ovBev ovalav eavrov 
fyov, d\\a TO tcoivri B6%av rovro <yi<yverai, dXrjOes rore 
1 trav Bogy /cal ocrov av Bo/cf) y^povov. /cal o<roi ye Brj 
{ lirj TravTciTracn TOV Upwrayopov \6yov \eyovo~Lv, ooBe 
rra)? Tyv crotfrlav ayovcn. Aoyo? Be 77^9, w eoSa)^>e, 
J 1/c \6yov, fiel^cov eg eXarroz/o?, /cara\a/ji(3dveL 0EO. G 
: Vv/covv a^o\r]V ayofjiev, & Zw/cpares ; SH. <&aiv6/jLe0a. 

- leal TroXXa/a? fjiev ye Bij, w Bat/j,6vie, /cal aXXore icare- 
! 07;cra, arap /cai vvv, cu? CI/COTCOS 01 ev rat? (f)t,\ocro(f)iais 

-\ [roXw xpovov BiaTptyavres et? rd Bi/cao-rijpia iovre? 

ye\oloi (fralvovrai, prjropes. EO. II&59 Brj ovv \eyeis ; 

: fl. KivBvvevovcriv ol ev Bi/cacrTr) plots /cal rot? roiov- 

fot9 /c vecov KV\tvBovfJt>voi TTpos TOW ev <f>i\o(To<$i /cal 


D rfj TOiaBe BiaTpi/3r) reOpa^^evov^ co<? olfcerai, 

e\ev0epov<> reOpdcfrdai. EO. II?; 8^ J 2O. Ht rot? 
ev, TOVTO o av elrres, del Trdpeari, o"xp\r) /cal roi)? 

ez^ elprjvr) eiri cr^oX?/9 TTOIOVVTCLI coajrep 
rplrov rjSrj \6yov ex \6yov fjLeTa\a^/3dvo/jLei> 
ivoi, eav avrovs 6 e7re\6wv TOV 7rpOKip,evov JJLOL\- 
\ov, KadaTTep r//xa?, dpe&r), teal Bid /jLa/cpwv rj /3pa^ea)v 
fji6\6i, ovSev \eyeiv, dv povov TV^WCTI, TOV 6Wo?. ol Be 
ev do"%oKiq re del \eyovcn KareTreiyei, <ydp vScop peov, 

E KOL ov/c e<y%c0pel Trepl ov dv eTTLOv/^r/o-coo-i, roi)? 

Troteicrdai, aXX dvdyicr)v e^wv 6 avTi^ucos e^earrj/ce /cal 
VTToypacfirjv Trapavayiyvcoa-KoiJievrjv, cov eVro? ov pyreov 
(rjv dvrco/jLoo iav Ka\ov(7iv ^) ol Be \6yot del Trepl OJJLO-. 

BoV\OV 7T/90? BeO-TTOT TJV KCldrj/JLevOV, ev %eipl Tr)V SiKTJl* 

e^ovra, teal ol dyouves ovSeTrore Trjv d\\a)<; a\X del 
TTJV Trepl avTov 7roXXa/ct9 Be /cal Trepl ^v^<^ 6 S^o/zo?, 
173 war* ef * dirdvTwv TOVTWV evrovoi /cal Bpi/m,ei$ ylyvov* 
rat, eTno-rdfjievoi TOV BeaTroTJjv \6yw re 6c07revo ai /cal 
y ^apicraaOai, crfjiiKpol Be /cal OVK opdol ra? tyv^ds, 
yap avj;r)v ical TO evdv re /cal TO ekevdepov r] en 
vecov Bov\ela d^rjpTjTac, dvay/cdovo-a TrpaTTeiv 
yu-eyaXou? KivBvvovs /cal (f)6{3ov<$ en aTraXat? 
eVt/3aXXoi;<7a, 01)9 ov Bwdfievoi yuera TOV Bi/caiov /call 
d\r)0ovs V7ro(f>epiv, evOvs eirl TO ^frevBo^ re /cal 
eIXX^Xot>9 dvTaBi/celv Tpeirofjievoi, vroXXa /cd/jbTTTOvTai, 
B o~vytc\a)VTai, coaO vyies ovBev e^ovTe^ rfj? Biavola? el 
avBpas e/c /jieipa/cicov Te\evTco(n, Bewol re /cal cro(f)<. 
&)9 oiovrai. Kal OVTOL [lev Br} TOWVTOL, ci 
T0t>9 Be TOV rj/^eTepov ^opov TroTepov /3ov\ei\ 
Bie~\.06vTe<; rj edo-ai>Te$ irakiv errl TOV \6yov TpairccaeBc^ 
f iva pr) /cat, o vvv Brj eXeyopev, \iav TTO\V Ty eXevdepim 

0EAITHTO2. 45 

real fJLera\r)^rei TMV \6ywv Karn^p^/jLeda ; EO. 

^coKpares, XXa SieX^cWes". irdvv yap ev 
rovro Lp7)Kas, OTL ov-% T/yu-et? ol ev rut roiwSe %opev- C 
oz/re? TWV \oycov VTTTjperai. a\\ ol \6yoi ol r^f 

oLKerai, KOI e/cacrro? avrwv Trepi^ev 
cr0?jvai,, orav rifuv So/ey ovre yap SiKaarrjs ovre 

rat?, eTTiTifjLijacov re KOI ap^wv 
wap* 7] XXIV. ^O. Aeywfiev $r}, cJ? eoifcev, 
trot ye So/eel, Trepl TMV /copv^atcov rl yap av rt? 
ye ^)avXo)? SiarpiftovTas ev (friXocrocfria \eyoi ; Ovrot, 
)e TTOV e/c vecov Trpwrov /juev etV ayopav ov/c iaaai rrjv 
ooov, ovBe OTTOV SiKacrTripiov rj (3ov\vrr)pi,ov rj TL KOLVOV D 

r//9 TroXect)? crvveSpiov vofMovs 8e /cal ^^(^/cryLtara 
eyofjieva 77 yeypafjiu,eva ovre opwaiv ovre dfcovovcn. 
l Se eraipeiwv eV ap^a? /cal crvvoboi Kal Selwva 
val crvv av\r)rpl(TL KOJ/JLOL, oi$e ovap Trpdrreiv Trpocr- 
avrois. ev Be rj Ka/cws rt? yeyovev ev TroXet, 
7 Tt TW /ca/cov <TTLV etc Trpoyovwv yeyovos r/ Trpo? 
ivopav rj yvvaitcwv, /Jid\\ov avrov \e\r]0ev 77 ol Trjs 

\ey6fievoi, %oe?. Kal ravra irdvr ovo* ori E 
ol&ev, oiSev ov$e yap avrtov aTre^erai, TOV evSo/ci,- 
lelv ^dpiv, aXXa ra> ovri TO crwfjLa JJLOVOV ev rfj TroXet 
tetrat avrov Kal eVtS^yLte?, r) $e Bidvoia, ravra irdvra 
a/JLiicpd Kal ovSev, dri^da-acra Travraxfj 
peperai Kara Htv&apov, rd re yds virevepOe Kal rd 

yewfjierpovda, ovpavov re virep arpovo/jbovaa, 
a Trcrav Trdvrp (frvaiv * epevi>w/j,ev7j r>v OVTWV Ka- 174 

TTOV o\ov, 6/9 TV eyyus ovSev avrrjv 
O. ITa)? TOVTO \eyeL 1 ?, GO 2^coKpares ; 
cal a\-fjv dcfrpovojjuovvra, & QeoSwpe, Kal avco /3Xe- 
Trovra, Treaovra els <f>peap, ^parrd ns e/^/ieX?}? Kal 


Xapiecra-a Oeparraivis drroo-Kw-^raL \eyerai, w? ra 

ev ovpavfi Trpodv^olro elSevai, TO, euTrpocrOev avrov 

Kal rcapa TroSa? \av6dvoi avrov. ravrov Be dptcel\ 

B crtcwfifia eVl rcdvras, OCTOL ev <f>l\iHTO<f>ia Bidyovai. re 
yap bvri rov roiovrov o /j,ev 7r\r)<TLov Kal 6 yelrcoi 
\6\rj06v, ov [jbovov o ri rrparrei, aXX* oXiyov Kal 
dvOpwTros eanv rj ri a\\o OplfJLfJLa ri Be rror ecrrl 
av6po)7Tos Kal ri ry rotavrrj tyvaei, rrpoo-rjKet, 
rwv a\\cov rroielv rj rrda %eiv ) fyrei re Kal rrpdy^ar 
e%i iepevvu>iJievos. n,av0dvei<$ yap TTOV, 
ov ) EO. "E^yajye* Kal d\r]6i] Xeyet?. SO. Totydpn 
e5 (f)i\e, ISla re <rvyyiyv6fjL vos 6 roiovros eKaarw K( 

C S?7/>to<r/a, orrep dp^oftevos eXeyov, orav Iv 
T] TTOV d\\o@i, avayKao-6f) rrepl rtov rrapd TroSa? KC 
eV o<f)0a\[jioi$ Sia X.eyea-Qai, yi\wra 

parrai?, d\\d Kal rw a\\(a o^Xa), et? 
re Kal rcaaav drropiav e^rrirrrayv vrro drreipias, 

re yap rat? XotSo/nat? i&iov e ^et ovbev ovbeva \oi- 
Sopeiv, ar OVK elSdb? KaKov ovSev ovbevbs eK rov fit 
D fJLfjLe\errjKevai drropv ovv yeXoios fyaiveraC ev 
Tot? erraivoi<$ Kal rat? roov aXXcov i^eya\ 
, d\\a r> ovri yeXajv 6i>$r)\o<> 
SoKel elvai. rvpavvov re yap rj {Sa<n,\ea e 

eva ru>v vofjiewv, olov o-v/3a>rr)v, rj 
rj riva @OVKO\OV r/yelrai, aKoveiv ev^ai^o 
j3$d\\ovra SvcrKoXwrepov be eKeivwv %a>ov Kal eVi- 
ftovXorepov Troifjuaiveiv re Kal /3$d\\eiv vo^i^ei avrovs 
dypoLKOv Be Kal diralSevrov vrru acr^oXta? ovbev rjrrov 
E TcSi/ vouewv rov roiovrov avayKalov ylyveadai, O-TJKOV 
ev opet, TO ret^o? 7rep(,/3e/3\r]jjLevov. yfjs Be orav 

0EATTHTO2. 47 

\7T\e0pa tf en 7rXe/et> a/covey w? rt? apa KeKTrj/jLevo? 
\ Oav/JLacnd nr^Oei, Ke/cTr)Tai, nrdva-fJUKpa So/cet aKoveiv et? 
\a7rao~av elwOws TTJV yrjv ^Keiretv. TCL 8e or) <yevr) vf 
ITCOV, &$9 yevvalos Tt9 eirra Trarmrovs 7rXouo- 
\d7ro(j)fjvai, TravTaTrcKTiv d/ji/3\v teal eVt o-pucpov opwvrwv 
\rjy6irai, TOV eiraivov, VTTO * aTraiSevo-ias ov Svva/jievcov ei? 175 
TO irav del /3X7retz^, ovSe Xoyi^eo-Qat,, ort, TTCLTTTT^V Kal 
\7rpo yovwv fjivpidbes e/cacrrro yeyovaaiv dvaplO/AijTot,, Iv 
leu? 7r\ovaioi Kal TTTw^ot /cal ySacrtXefc Kal $ov\ot, /3dp- 
\f3apol T Kal r/ E\A?7z/e? TroXXa/ct? fjuvploi, fyeycva(n,v 
\orwovV) aXX evrt irevre K.CLI elKOGi, KaraXoyq) Trpoyovwv 
Kal avacfrepovTcov et? f Hpa/cXea TOZ/ A//,- 
aroTra avray KarafyaiveTai T?}? <riJ,iKpo\o<yia<$, 

6 ttTT* *A/A<f)l,TpV(i)VO<> t? TO aVa) 7TeVTKailKO(7TO^ B 

O? 7;^, ota avvefBawev avrw Tv^y, Kal 6 Trevr^Ko- 
avr avrov, yeXa oy bwajjievtov Xoyi^ecrOai T Kal 
dvorjrov ^f%^9 d7ra\\drreiv. ev airacri, $tj 
Touroi? o TOfoOro? VTTO Twv TroXXft)^ KaTay\aTai, TCL 
e%(t)v, w? SoKei, rd 8 eV Trocrlv dyvowv 
re Kal ev eKao-ro^ diropwv. EO. Tlavrcnracn rd 
S, co ^u>Kpare^. XXV. SH. r Orav 8e 
ye Tiva ai;T09, co (/>/Xe, ektcvcrrj dva), Kal ede\r]crrj TIS 
! 6KJ3r}vai, eV TOU Tt e YGu ere d&iKto rj cri) e /ze ; et? c 
^ auT?}? St/catoo-J^? Te /cal aSi/cia?, rt Te eKarepov 
ivrolv Kal TL T&V TrdvTWV r) a\\rj\wv SiafyepeTOV) rj IK 
ov 9 eiSalfjuov KeKTr]p,ei>os T av TTO\V y^pvcrtov, 
3acrtXei a9 Trepi Kal dvOpwiriwr)*; oX&)9 evSai/j,ovta$ Kal 
eirl aKtyiv, TTOLCO re TLVG ecrrov Kal riva 
dvOpwTTov (j)vcrei> TrpocrrjKei, TO fj,ev KTijcraaOat, 
IVTOLV, TO 06 aTrotywyeiv, irepl TOVTCOV aTrdvTwv oTav 
iv Berj \6yov $&bvat, TOV o-fjLiKpbv eKelvov TTJV 


Kal BpifjLvv Kal BiKaviKov, Trd\iv av TCL dvri(7Tpo^>a 
l\iyyi,wv re dfi v^rrj\ov KpeuaaOel? Kal 
dvw6ev VTTO aT]0ias dSrj/jiovGJv re Kal 
Kal {3ap/3apia)v ye\a)Ta Bparrat? jjuev ov Trap- 
e^ei ovB* aXX<w dirat^evTW ovBevl, ov yap alaOdvovrai,, 
rot? S eyavTiw? 1} &5? dvSpaTroSois Tpafy 
Ouro? >r) eKarepou T/DOTTO?, w SeoSwpe, 6 /Jt,ei> rw ovn e 
E tKevOeptq re Kal cr^oXry TeOpafjifjuevov, bv Sr) (j>i\6(70(f)ov 
Ka\i$, a) dveuecnjTOV evrjOei, SoKelv Kal ovfrevl elvai, 
orav et? Bov\(Ka e/jLTrearj ^iaKOvrj/jiara, olov 
$e(7fjiov fir) eTTicrTdfJievos crvcrKevdcracrOai 

rj OcoTras Xo^ou? o 8 av rd JJLCV roiavra iravra 

re Kal ofeco? SiaKovelv, dvaftd\\a-6c 
Se OVK eiTKnap^evov 7ri$et,a eX.eft?epco? ovSs 7 dpfjiovlav 
176X070)^ Xa/3oi^TO? * opOws vuvricrai, Oe&v re Kal dvSpoov 
/Biov d\r)0f). EO. E Traj/ra?, 
a Xeyet?, co&Trep e^e, vrXetcoy az^ elprjvr) Ka\ 
KCLKCU eXarrco /car di OpwTrovs elr). 2O. AXX OI/T 
airoKecrOai rd KaKa SwaTov, w o&a)pe VTrevavriov yap 
TI TO) dya9q) ael elvai dvdyK?) oi/V ev Beols avro 
ibpvo-dai, rr)V Be OvrjTrjV $vaiv Kal rov&e rov TOTTOV 
7T6/3t7roX6i ef dvdyKr)<$. Bio Kal TreipdcrOai, %pr) evQevS 
B eKelcre favyew o TI rd^ia-ra. (frvyrj Be ofjioiwcri 
Kara TO Bvvarov OfjLol&ffW Be Siicaiov Kal ocnov 
(frpovtjo-ews yevecrOai. d\\d yap, co dpicrre, ov Trdvv 
paBiov Tretuat, w? apa ov% (av eveKa ol TroXXot fyacri Bel 
Trovrjpiav [lev fievyeiv, dperrjv Be Sua/ceiv, rovrcov 
TO /AW eTTLTijBevTeov, TO 8 ov, iva Brj fjirj /ca/co? Kal 
ayaOo? BoKy elvai, Tavra ydp evriv 6 \ey6jjievos ypa&v 
vO\os, w? efiol <f>atvT(U TO Be d\7)6e<; wSe \eya)/j,ev. 
C ^eo9 ovBa/Jifi ouSayu-cC? aSt/co?, aXX 1 c^9 olov re 


6EAITHTO2. 49 

TO?, /cal OVK ecrnv avTaj ofioioTepov ovBev 77 09 dv TJJJLWV 
v yei>r)Tat, o TL BiKaioTaTo?. Trepl TOVTOV Kal 77 oj? 
TJ^ dvBpo? KOI ov&evla re /cal di avBpla. 
rj /jiev ydp TOVTOV yvwcris ao$>ia fcal aperr) d\7]6ivr]^ 77 Be 
wyvoia d/jiaOla Kal tca/cta evapyrjs al 5 a\\au 
re SoKovaai, Kal crofylai ev pev TroXiTA/cat 
yiyv6/jivai, fyopTiicai, ev Be re ^z/ai? /Sdvavcrot. rc3 ovv 

Kal dvocna \eyoVTi 77 irpaTTOVTi [laKpui D 

TO fJirj (Twy^wpelv Seivw VTTO 
eivai. dya^XovTai yfjp TCO 6vet$ , Kal o Lovrat 
OTI ov \rjpoi elcri, 7779 aXX&>? d%0rj, d\)C 

TOI)? o-coOrjo-o/jievovs. \KTeov ovv 
fjid\\6v elcnv oloi OVK OIOVTCLI, OIL ov)(l 
d^/voovcn ryap tyjAiav a&iKias, o Bel iJKio-Ta 
yvoeiv. ov yap eaTiv rjv BOKOVCTL, 7r\7jjai re Kal 
avaroi, wv eviore irdcryovcriv ov&ev d^LKOvvTes, d\\d 
v dovvaTov eKcfrvyelv. @EO. TtVa Srj Xeyet? ; ^O. E 
IapaSeiyauTcov, GJ (friXe, ev rcS OVTI .O~TWTWV, TOV (JLtv 
eiov evBaijJLOveo-TdTov, TOV Be aOeov dOXicoTaTov, ov-% 
OTI OVTCOS e-^eiy VTTO 77X1$* 0x77x6? re Kal Trjs 
dvoia? \avQdvovcri TCO fjuev ouoiovuevoi, BLU 
ra? * aStVou? TTpa ^-et?, rc3 Be dvouoiovfAevoi,. ov 8/} 177 

TlVOVCTi BlK7]V fc3^T6? TOV iKOTa ftlOV O) OaOlOVVTat. 

eav 8" eiTTw/jbev, OTI, dv fjLij dira\\aywo-i T/;? 
Kal Te\evTT]G-avTas avrovs eKelvo? uev 6 TWV 

TOTTO? ov Be^erat, evOdSe Be TTJV avToi? oy 
T?/? Btayayy^ del e^ovai, KaKol /ca/cot? 
Tavra Brj Kal TravTuTracrw oj? Beivol Kal Tcavovp<yoi 
dvorjTWV Tivwv aKovaovTai. OEO. Kal fjid\a Brj, c5 
SwArpare?. 2O. OlBci TO/, a> eTalpe. ev uevTot, TI Ti 
atVot? crv[ji,j3ej3r)Kev, OTL dv IBia \6yov Bsrj Bovval Te Kal 
K. r. 4 


Se^aaOai Trepl wv ^re^ovcri, Kal eOe\ijcrci)(nv 
7ro\vv xpovov iiTTo^elvai /cal fir) dvdvSpws favyeiv, Tore 
, do ^aifjLovte, TeXeirr&We9 ovtc dpeo-Kovaiv avTol 
Trepl oov \eyovcrL, KOI r) pijTopiKr) eKelvTj TTO)? O.TTQ- 
i, coaTe TralSwv fATjSev SOKGLV Siafapeiv. Hepl 
ovv TOVTCOV, eVetS?) /cal irdpepya rvy^dvet, \eyufjieva, 
C aTToarco^ev el 3e ^77, TrXeto) del eTrippeovra 
rjfjiwv TOP e% dp xfjs \6yov eVt Se rd e/JLTTpoaOev 
el /cal aol So/cei. EO. EyLtot jjiev rd roiavra, co 
SooKpaTes, OVK d^Searepa d/coveW pdco jap rrfXiKw^e 
OVTI e7raKo\ou6elv el fAevroi, So/eel, 7rd\iv e7rav[wp,ev. 
^ XXYI. SO. Qv/covv evravOd TTOV tfjmev rov Xoyov, ev 
o) e(>ajjiV TOVS TTJV (frepo/jsevrjv ovaiav \eryovras, K.CLI TO 
del SOKOVV e/cdcTTft) rovro Kal elvai rovra) M SoKel, ev\ 
fjiev rot? d\\oi<$ e9e\eiv Siia^vpL^ecrOaL, Kal ov% rjKLorra 
I) irepl rd Sltcaia, W9 iravjos /jid\\ov, a av Ofjrai TroX-i? 
So^avra avrfj, ravra Kal ecrri StVata rf) OejjLevr), ewcnrep 
av Ke^jrat Trepl &e rdyadov ovSeva dvSpeiov eO OUTGO? 
elvai, ojcrTe To\/Jidv S/ayLta^eo-^at, OTL Kal a av co(f)e\i/j,a 
OL7]Oel(7a TroXt? eavTy OfJTai, Kal eaTi TOCTOVTOV %povov 
oaov av Kerjrai cc(f)e\iua, ir\r]v el Ti? TO ovoua \eyot, 
TOVTO Se TTOV (TKcoufju civ ir) 7T/)09 o \eyouev. ov^l j 
E 0EO. Haw <ye. 2O. M^ \eyeToo TO i/Vo/za, dX\.d TO 
irpdyua, o ovo/jia^ouevov Oewpelrai. EO. MT; 
SO. A/vV o av TOVTO ovoud^r), TOVTOV ST^TTOU 
%eTai vouoOerovuevTj, Kal irdvTas rou9 vouovs, Kad^ oaov 
(Herat re Kal SvvaTai, co? ftj^eXt/iwraTOf? eavTrj TiOeTau. 
178 ?* TT^O? d\\o TL /3\e7rovaa vo^odeTelrai ; EO. * Ou- 
SafjLWS. 2H. ^H ovv Kal Tvy^dvei del, rj TroXXa Kal 
BiaaapTavei eKao-Trj ; EG. Qluai ejcoye Kal Siauap- 
"Ert TOLVVV ev6eve av uu\\ov Tra? 

EA1THTO2. 51 

ravrd raOra, el Trepl iravros TIS TOV e! Soi>9 
Tj, ev cS Kal TO ci)(f>e\ifjiov Tvy^dvei, ov. ecrTfc 8e 
TTOV /cal Trepl TOZ> fjue\\oi>ra %p6vov. orav yap VOJJLO- 
, co? eo-oaevovs ftj^)eX//iou? roz)? vo/uuovs rt^e- 
a et? TOZ^ eVetra ^povov. TOVTO Se yu-eXXo^ opOws 
av \eyoi/j,ev. EO. Hdvv 76. SO. "I^t S/;, ovrcoal B 

Tlpcorayopav rj aXXov TLVCL TOOV eiceivw TO, 
avra \ey6vT(ov Tldvrwv fjierpov avOpwrrbs ea-riv, w? 
, c5 Upcorajopa, \evicwv, ftapecov, /coixfxov, ovftevo? 


ev avrw, ola iraor^ei, roiavra olo/Jievos, d\r)0rj re oUrai 
ovra. ov% OUTCDS , @EO. QVTO)S. 2H. T H 
TWV /jieXXovTCDv ea-ea-Oai, (frijao/jiev, ($ Tipwrayopa, 
TO Kpirrjpiov ev avTw, Kal ola av oltjOf) e&ecrOai, G 
ravra Kal yiyverat, eiceivto TW olijOevTi ; oloz^ 
ap orav Ti9 olrjOfj loioorrj? avrov irvperov 
Kal ecrecrOai ravrrjv ryv Oep/JLOTrjra, Kal erepos, i 

f}, Kara Tr]V Trorepov S6av (frcojuev TO fjie\\ov 

TJ KaToi TTJV du<poTepcov, Kal TO) JJLGV l 
ov OepfJLOS ovSe TrvpeTTwv yevr]creTai, eavTw Se dacfro 
EO. Te\oiov ILZVT av elrj. SO. AXX , olaai, Trepl 
olvov y\VKVTr)TO<? Kal avo-TTjpoTTjTo^ ueXXovarjs eo~- D 

j TOV yecopyov S6a, d\\ y ov%l q TOV KiOapia-Tov, 
Kvpla. EO. Tl fjiijv ; Sn. O08 av av Trepl dvap- 
UOCTTOV Te Kal evapfjioo-TOV eaopevov 7rai$oTpi{37]$ av 
/3e\Tiov So^dcreie /JLOVO~IKOV, o Kal eireiTa avTut T&5 
ffr) Sofet evdpuoa-TOV elvai. @EO. QvSafAcos. 
. QUKOVV Kal TOV ueXXovTos eo Tidaeo dai, fir) fjiayei,~ 
OVTOS, o-Keva^o/jLevrjs Ooivr)?, aKvpOTepa rj Kpio~L<$ 
T??? TOI) O^ITOTTOLOV Trepl Trjs eaouevT)? tfSovrjs. Trepl uev 
yap TOV rjSrj OVTOS eKacrTw 778609 r) yeyovoTos fjuy&ev E 




e/cdo~TU) /cal $o%eiv teal ecrecrOai, Trorepov ai/TO$ avT(p 
dpLo~TOS KpiTr)<s ; rj ai>, co Hpwrayopa, TO rye nrepl Xo- 
70?;? TTiOavov ercdcTTU) ry JJLWV ecrouevov els $LKao~TT}pLOV 
j3e\nov av irpo^o^ucrais rj TWV I^LWTU)V ocmaovv J 
EO. Kal fjidXa, co ^GOKpares, rovro 76 (T(f)6$pa VTTI^ 
a^velro iravrwv SicKfrepetv auro?. SH. Ni) A/a, co 
179 yLteXe ?} ou8e/9 7 a^ aurco SteX^ero * StSou? 
dpyvpiov, el Try rou? avvovras eireiOev, OTL teal TO 
Xoz/ ecre&daL re /cal So^ctv ovre /jbavrts ovre rt? aXXo? 
(tfieivov Kpiveiev av rj avros avra>. EO. AXrjdeaTCiTa. 
SO. OVKOVV Kal al vo^oOecriai, /cal TO aj^eXtyLtof 7re/ot 
TO fjueX\.ov ecnL, KOI Tra? ay 0/^,0X070 1 vofj,o9eTov/j,evr]V 
7roXX/rfc? di dy/cyv elvai TOV w 
@EO. MaXa 76. S 

B Trpo? TOZ^ 8^Sacr:a.Xoy crou elp-rja-era^ OTL dvdjKTj 
c/juio XoyeLV cro(f)<JOTep6v Te d\\ov d\\ov elvat /cal TOV 
TOIOVTOV fjieTpov eivai, ejjiol Be TM 
oircocTTiovv dvdjKTjv eivai fjueTpa) <yiyvecr6ai,, GJ? a 
rjvdy/ca^ev 6 vTrep e/cei vov Xoyo?, etV e/3ov\,6/jir)v etre 
TOLOVTOV eivai. EO. ^fcelvrj /JLOC Sorcec, cJ Saj/ 
/jid\L(TTa d\lo-fcecr0at, 6 \6yos, a\icrKo/ji6vo$ /cal 
fj Ta? TcSz^ d\\fi)v So^as Kvpias Troiel, avTai Be 
vf]crav Tot 9 etcelvov Xo7ou? ovSapfj 

C 2H. IloXXa^?;, w eoSa)/)6, :al d\\rj dv TO ye TOLOVTOV 
aXo/7;, fJLrj irdcrav TTCIVTCS d\r)0rj &6av elvaC Trepl Se 
TO Tcapov eKao-Tto ?ra^o9, e^ wv al alo-Or^aei^ Kal al 
KaTa TauTa? 80 ^ai rylyvovTaL, %a\eTrct)Tepov e\etv, 0)9] 
OVK dXyOels. t crw? Se ovBev \eyco dvd\WTOi <ydp, el; 
Tv%ov. elcrl, Kal 01 fyda-KovTes avTas evapyei*; Te elvat, 

ovTa \eyoLev, Kal 

6EAITHTO2. 53 

oe OVK CLTTO (TKOTTOV 6Lpt]KV a(7r}CrtV KOi 67ri(TTr)lJt,7)l> 

Tavrbv 6e[jievos. TcpocriTeov ovv eyyvTepco, co? 6 i/Trep D 
UpwTayopov \6yo$ eVeraTTe, /cal arceTrreov rrjv fapo- 
TavTTjv oucriav Bia/cpovovra, etre v<yies etre o~a6pov 

XXVII. 0EO. IloXXoi) /cat Bel 
irep\ /j,ev Tijv *\wviav /cal 
7rafJLTTo\v. ol <yap rov f HpaK\6irov eralpoi 
TOVTOV rov \6yov paka IppwfJLevws. 2H. Ta> rot, 
<f>l\e (deoSape, fJiaX\ov cr/ceTTTeov KCLI e 
avrol inroretvovTai. 0EO. TlavraTracri, fjiev ovv. /cat E 
yap, co SwKpaTes, irepl TOVTWV rwv Hpa/c X.eiTelwv, 1} 
wcrTrep av \eyeis QfjiTjpeicov, /cal ert 7ra\,aioTepu>v, av- 
Tot? fjtev rot? Trepl n}v "Ei(f)ecroi>, ocrot TrpoaTroiovvrai, 
e / u,7ret^)ot el^at, oJSe^ fjiaXkov olov re StaXe^^^at ?} 
Tot? ol<JTp)(Tiv. are^^o;? 7^/3 Kara TO, avyypd/A/JLara 
AepovTai, TO 8 eirifjielvai eVt Xoyw /cat epcortj/nari, /cal 

cru^/co? eV [Jizpei diroKpivacrOai, /cat epecrOai TJTTOV * 180 
at-Tot? ez^t 17 TO fjirjoev /j,a\\ov Se V7rep/3d\\i, TO ouS 

Ol)Z/ 7T/30? TO yLtT^Se (7fJLLKpOV IvelvaL TOt? 

%i a9 aXX aV Ttm Tt 6/977, ucnrep etc 

alvi,<y/uiaTa)$rj aVao-TraWe? diroTO^evovcn, KCLV 

\6yov \aftelv, Tt eiprjfcev, 
yL66Ta)^oyLtacr/xeVft), irepavels Be ovSeTTOTe ovSev 
ouSe 76 e/ce?z/ot ai^TOt Trpo? aXX^Xou?, 
<j)v\dTTOV(Ti, TO /jirjBev fteftaiov edv elvai /U^T B 
\6<yM fj,r)T ev Tat? avTwv ^in^at?, r^yovfievoi, w? 6yLtot 
8o/cet, auTo aTacnfjiov elvai TOVTW Be Trdvv iro\e Covert,, 
/cat /ca^ oo-o^ BvvavTai, 7ravTa-)(o6ev efc/3d\\ovo-t,v. 2)0. 
, co eoScope, TOL? dvBpas /u-a^o/ze^ou? ecopa/ca?, 
elprjvevovai, Be ov avyyeyovas ov yap aot, eTalpoi 


aXX , ol/Jiai,, rd roiavra rot? [JuaOr^ral^ eVi 
(f)pd^OV(Tlv, 01)9 *> /3ov\a)vrai, cfioiov? avrol? iroir]<jai. 
<S)EO. Ilotoi? yLta#??Tat9, GO Scujjuovie ; ouSe yiyverai rwv 
C TOLOVTWV erepo? erepov fJiaOr^Tr]^, aXA, avrofiaroL dva- 
i, oirbOev av rv^rj eVacrTo? aurcGz^ eV^ofcrtacra?, 
TOI^ erepov 6 erepo? ou8e^ ^yelrai, el^ivai. Trapa 
ovv TOVTtoVy oTrep yet, epwv, OVK av Trore Xo/Sot? 
\6yov ovre eKOvrcov ovre OLKOVTWV avrovs Be Set Trapa- 
\a(36i>Tas ILcrirep Trpo^X^jjba eTTior/coTreicrOaL 2)H. Kal 
76 Xe7et9. TO 76 &?} TTpo/BXrj^a a\\o TL ira- 

Trapa fAev TV ap^aicov, /^era 
D eTriKvTTToJievcov rou? 7roX\ou9, to9 7 

re ^a 

KCLI ov&ev earr)K, Trapd e TCO^ vcrrepayv, are 
pwv, dvafyav^ov aTroSeifcvv^evcov, iva teal ol 
avT&v rrjv crofyiav fjudOwcnv dfcovo-avres /cal 
rfKiOiws olo/JLvoi, rd fjiev eGTavai, rd & KLvei(T0ai 
ovrwv, p,a6ovres $ <m irdvra Kivelrai rifJiwcnv av- 
Toi/9 ; 6\iyov Se eTreXa^o/u-^z/, co QeoScope, on aXXot av 
E TCLvavria TOUTOIS drre^vavTo, olov d/civr)TOV re\e6eiv 
TO) TTCLVT vvo/ju elvai, /cal u\\a ocra MeXto-o-ot re /cal 

evavnovfievoi iravi TOVTOW 
ev re Trdvra earl /cal eo-rrj/cev avro ev avru>, OVK 

, ev fj Kivelrai. Totrot9 ovv, a> eraipe, irdai rl 
Kara cr/JLiKpbv yap Trpolovres XeX^a/^ez/ 
d/jL(j)OTpa)v et9 TO f^ecrov TreTTTWKOTes, Kal av pr) Try 
181 d/jivvofjievoi, Siacfcv ywfjLev, * BLKTJV Saxro/jbev wcnrep ol ev 
Ta49 7ra\ai<TTpais Bid rypau/jirjs Trai^ovres, orav VTT 
djji(f)OTepcov \r](f>0evTe$ e XKcovrai, et? rdvavrla. 

ovv fJLot, TOV9 erepovs irporepov (TKeTrreov, e< ovcnrep 
TOU9 peovras. Kal edv pev TL 

6EAITHTO2. 55 

\eyovTes, avve\t;o/ji,ev per avTwv rj^a^ aurot 1 ?, TO 1)5 ere- 
pou? /c<f)vyeiv Treipwjjievoi lav Be ol rov o\ov crTaaiwTai 
d\r)6ecrrepa \eyeiv BoKoocri, (f)vo{j,e0a Trap* avTov<$ CLTTO 
TOVTWV TWV Kal Ta dfctvrjTd KivovvTwv. da(j)OTepoi S B 
av fyavwai jjLijBev fierpiov \eyovres, <ye\oioi, 
rjryov/uLevoi T/yW-a? pev TI \eyetv (f)av\ov^ ovras, 
XatoL ? ^e /cal TrcLa-crotfiovs avbpa? d 
opa ovv, co &ooa)p6, el \vcriTe\ei ei? TOVOVTOV Trpolevai, 
KivSvvov. @EO. Qv&ev fiev ovv dve/crov, w ^WK pares, 
fjnj ov ^iacrKe^rao-Oai, TL \eyovcriv eKarepOi rwv dvSpwv. 
XXVIII. Sri. ^/ceirreov av ecrj crov j oura) Trpodv- 
ovv JJ.OL dpX*) elvat, Trjs cr/ce-^reaj? /civrj- 
Trepi, TTOLOV Ti 7TOT6 apa \eyovTes fyaal rd Trdvra G 

(Bov\ofJLa(, Be \ej6iv TO roiovSe Trorepov ev 
Tt eZSo? aur/J? XC T ova iv rj ooo-Trep e/xot (fralverai, Svo ; fir] 
IJLOVOV epol BoKelrco, d\\d o-ujufiere^e /cal cru, iva 
TTao-^wfjuev, av Ti Kal Bey. Kai JJLOL Xeye* upa 
KivelcrQai AraXet?, oTav TI %dopav K %(0pas /j,eTaj3d\\r) 
rj Kal ev ra> at/rat aTpe^raL ; @EO. "Eijcoye. SH. 
Tovro fjiev TOLVVV v eo~Tco eZSo?. OTav Be TI f^ev ev rcS 
avrai, yripacrKr) Be 7; ^e\av e/c \evKov 77 (7K\7jpov e/c D 
fjiaXaKOV yiyvijTai, rj TWO, d\\r]V d\\oi.w(Tiv uXkoi&Tai,, 
apa ov/c d^iov erepov etSo? fydvau Kivr]a-ew<$ ; @EO. 
BoKel. XH. AvajKalov fJbev ovv. Bvo Brj 
ei$7j Kivr)(rec0$, d\\ola}(7iv, Tt]v Be 

@EO. Op0a}<; ye \eycov. 2H. TOVTO TOLVVV OVTCO Bie- 
\ofjievoi, BLa\ey(t)/j,eOa 17877 TO?? Ta irdvTa $>da-Kov(Ti 
i, Kal epwTwaev, HoTepov Trdv <j>aTe d^oTepa)^ 

Te Kal dXXoiovuevov, rj TO jj,ev TI E 

181 D. rrjv 5^ irepL(f>opa.v. Latere videtur corruptio. Cf. Vers. 


, TO 8 ere/)ft)9 ; EO. AXXa pa At" eycoye 
OVK ea) eilTGUf otzat S av avai a()oreco^. SH. Et 

76 //,?;, co eraipe, Kivovp,ev re avros /ca 

, /cal ovo~v fjLa\\ov 6p9ws efet eljrelv, ort Kivel- 
ra Travra 77 oil ecrrTj/cev. @EO. y A 

2O. QVKOVV eTreiSrj KiveicrOai avra Set, TO Be 
182 KivtlaQai jjirj evelvat, /mrjSevl, Travra ST) Traaav 

del Kiveurai. @EO. A-vcvyKij. ^O. 2<KOTrei Si j JJLOL roSe 


e\eyOfJ>ev $avai avTovs, cfrepecrOai, exao-Tov 
TOVTWV a/jia alo-Orjaei fjueTa^u TOV TTOLOVVTO? re Aral 
Tracr^oz TO?, /cal TO yLtez^ Trda^ov alcrOrjTuv aXV o^/c 
ai(jQj](Jiv ert yvyveaOai, TO Se TTOIOVV TTOLOV TL aXX 01) 

TTOlOTTJTa ; r<T&)? OUl^ ^ TTOLOTr)? afjia aXkoKOTOV T6 (j)aLV6- 

Tai ovojjia, Kal ov ^avQavei^ dOpoov \eyo/j,evov /caTa 
B /^e/)^ ovv oLKove. TO 7a/3 TTOIOVV OVTC ^6^07779 oi/Ve 
, 6epfJiov Se /cal \evicov <yi<yv6TaL, /cal 
, yap irov, ev Tot9 trpoa-Ozv OTL 

\ejo/mev, e^ fJ.7]Bev avTo KI& avTO elvai, y^t^S aw TO 
TTOLOVV r) Trda^oVj o XX ef d/jupoTepcov 77/509 a 

T9 alcr6r](Teis Kal TCL atffBffra 
TO. fjiev TCOICL CLTTCL yiyvecrOai, TO. $e alfjQ 
@EO. Me/iwy/iaf 7TW9 8 ou ; ]Sn. Ta yue^ Toivvv aXXa 
C %aipeiv eacrw/jiev, eire aXXftJ9 etVe ouTO)9 \eyovo~Lv ou 
8 ev/ca \eyojjiev, TOVTO fjibvov (f)v\dTTa>/AV, epcoTcovTes 
K^etTat /cal pet, co9 ^aTe, Ta Travra ; T] fyap ; @EO. 
Nat. SO. Oi;/co{)^ d/J,(f)OTepa<;, a9 StetXoyLte^ 

l aXXototy-tez/a ; @EO. IIa>9 

182 B. airoTlKTovTa suspectum facit sequens ra. Conici potest 
airoTiKT6iJ.eva. Quod si nihil mutetur, statuenda est accusativi ab- 
soluti constructio. 


eiTrep ye Brj TeXe&>9 KLvrjaerai. 5fl. Et fiev Tolvvv 
ecfrepeTO fjicvov, 7/XXotoOro Be atj, efyo/Liev av TTOV elTrelv, 
ola drra pel ra fapoueva. r] TTOJ? \eycoaev; 0EO. 
Ot/T&>9. ZO. l&TreiBr) Se oz;Se TOVTO uevei, TO \evxov D 
metz^ TO peoz^, d\\a /ueTa/SaXXet, <#<7T6 /cat auTou rovrov 
^elvai por)V, T^J? Xev/coTrjTOS, KOI /ULeTa/3o\r}v ei9 a\\7]v 
\Xp6av, u>a IAT) aXc3 ravrrj pevov, apd vrore oIoV Te Ti 
TrpocreiTret^ %pdofjLa, ware /cal opOcos r jrpocra<yopeveiv } 
|OEO. Kal T/9 fJL^avY], a> ^cofcpares ; ^7 aXXo <ye rt rtov 
ITOIOVTWV, eiTrep del \e<yovros vTre^ep-^erai, are ftr} peov. 
Sn. TL Be Trepl alcrOijcrews epovjjiev oiroiacrovv, olov TT/? 
JToO opav TI aicoveiv ] p^eveiv nrore ev CLVTOJ TCO opav E 
p; d-KOveiVj 0EO. QVKOVV Bel ye, eiirep Trdvra KivelraL 
EH. Ovre apa opav Trpocrprjreov TL yLtaXXov 77 fjirj opuv, 
]pvBe TLV (i\\7]V ai(jQ r r]a iv /xaXXoz/ 77 firj, TTCLVTWV ye irdv- 
TCO? Kivov/jiei wv. 0EO. Ov yap ovv. SO. Kal 

ye e7ri(TTi]/jL7), (L$ ecf)a/jLev eya> re /cal 
BEG. ^Hz/ TavTa. SO. O^Sey apa eTnari] JJL^V /jid\\ov 
) 7rto-T)jfjL^v aTTe/cpiva fjL0a epwrcoaepoi,, o TL ecrTiv 

@EO. * Eoi/caTe. 2)11. KaXoz> av r^lv 183 
TO eTravopdayaa T?]S aVo^p/o-ea)?, Trpodv^rj- 
9elo"iv aTToBel^at,, OTI irdvTa KivelTai, f iva Brj e/ceivij rj 
opdr) <f)avf). TO o\ a? eoi/cev, effrdvt], el Tfdvra 
Trcicra aTro/cptcrt?, Trepl OTOV av Tf? diro/cplv^Tai, 
opOrj elvai, OVTQ) T e^eiv fyavai /cal /z?) oyr&)9, el 
, yiyvecrOai, f (va ar) crTrjcrco/jiev avrovs T> \6y(p. 
9EO. O/?^ft)9 \eye(,s. SO. H\rjv ye, w e6Ba)pe, OTI, 
Te eiTrov /cal ov% OVTCO. Sel Be ovBe TOVTO OVTO) 
\.eyeiv ovBe yap av eVfc KIVQLTQ OVTCO ovS* av JJLI) OVTCO B 
JvBe yap TOVTO Kivr)<Ji<$ aXXa Ttv d\\rjv (f)(ovrjv OeTeov 
rot9 TOV \6yov TOVTOV \eyovo-iv, W9 vvv ye 


avrwv vTToOecriv ov/c e^ovcri pr^para, el //,?} dpa TO ovo 
OTTO)?. udXio-ra o OUTG09 av avrois dp/JLOTTOi, direipoi 
\eyofjievov. EO. Ol/ceiordrrj <yovv SidXeKros avr^ 
SO. Qvtcovv, to eo Scope, roO re crou eralpoi 
teal OVTTO) auy^copovfj.ev avrw ITCLVT 
C avSpa iravTwv ^prj^drMV fjierpov elvai, av pr) fypovifJbh 
Tt9 r) e7ricrTr}fj,r)v re al crOrja iv ov crvy^wpTjaofjieOa Kara 
ye Trjv rov irdvTCi KivelaOai peOoSov. el (JLT) rl 
aAA,o)? eatr?;ro9 oSe \ejei. EO. 

TOVTCOV <ydp TrepavOevrcov teal ejjue Set 

KpivofJievov Kara ra<? crvv9r)Kas, e 
TO Trepl rov Upcorayopov \6<yov re Xo? O-^OLTJ. XXIX. 
EAI. M;) Trpiv 7 dv, to QeoBcope, ^aytcpdrr)? re /cal &v 
D TOZ)? <f)do-/covTa$ av TO irav eardvai, Sie\0r)T6, a 
dpn TTpovOeaOe. EO. Neo? ft)V, to Sealrrjre, 
irpecrfivrepovs d$LfceLV StSacr/cet9 
Ta9; d\\d Trapaafcevd^ov OTTO)? Ttov e 

oyov. EAI. Eai/ Trep rye 
av iJKOva-a Trepl wv \ej(o. 0EO. 
t9 vreoYoz 7rpo/ca\ei ^co/cpdrrj et9 Xo<yoi/9 7rpo/ca\ovuvo<; 
eptora ovv /cal d/covo-ei. SH. AXXa /zot Snrcto, to @eo- 
E Sw/oe, Tre/?/ 7e wv Ke\evet SealrijTOS ov Trela-ecrOai avrui. 
@EO. Tt 8 o^z/ ou Trela-ecrdaL SO. Me 7u<ro-oz zev 


1^09 ^ (f>opTifc><; aKOTTtofjiev, rjrrov al<T%vvouai, f} eva 
ovra Tlap/jLevL&rjv. Hap/J,evlSr)S Se JJLOI (paiverai, TO TOU 
Qpijpov, alSolos Te yLtot ayLta Seiz/09 re. ^vaTrpoa-e/jiL^a 
ryap &rj Tto dvSpl irdvv veos Trdvv Trpecr^vrp, tcai aoi 
184 ecfrdvr) (3d9o$ TI e^eiv iravrdnradi ryevvatov. * (f)o/3ovjjLai, 
ovv, fjurj ovre TCL \eyoueva ^vvitouev, rl re Siavoovuevos 
TTO\V 7r\eov XetTraj^e^a, teal TO uerio~Tov, ov eveica 


o XOYO? ajp/AtjTai, etcTTT/zT/? Trepi, r TTOT eo-rv, 
TOV <yei>r]Tai> VTTO TWV eTreicrKco/jLa^ovTGJv h.oytov, el 

T6 Kal OV VVV lyelpO 

Trapepyy a/ce^erai, mfdi av 

irdOoi, eire tVa^co?, fjLrjKvvofJievo^ TO rrjs eVicrT^^? d(j)a- 
viei. Set Be ovSerepa, d\\a eaiTr]Tov wv /cvel Trepl B 
eiTKTTijfJLris TreipaaOau ?;^a? rfj fjiaievrifcfj T^vr) airo- 
\vaai. @EO. AXXa %/3^7, eZ So/eel, ovray iroitiv. SH. 
"Ert TOtvvv, w ecttr^re, rocrot Se ?rept rwv elpr^jievwv 
eirla Ke ^rai. aicrOrjcriv ^np Brj eir ICTTIJ ^rjv (nreicpivw. 
r\ yap ; 0EAI. Nat. Sft. Et ou^ rt? ere wS epwra)^ 
TU> TCI \evKa Kal [JLe\ava opa dvdpwiros KOI reo ra o^ea 
/cat {3apea dfcovei ; etVot? ai^, ol/jiai, o/ifiaffl re ^al cJcrtV. 
I 0EAI. "7^76. SO. To Se v%epe<; T&V ovo^drwv re C 
I /cat prHJLaTwv Kal /Ltr) St d/cpi/Setas egeTaty/jievov rd fiev 
I TroXXa ou/c dyevves, d\\d fjuaXXov TO TOVTOV evavriov 
dve\ev6epov, ecrTi Be ore dva^Kaiov, olov Kal vvv dvd 
67ri\a/3ecr0ai, Tr;? aTTOKpiaews, r)v uTTOKpivei, y OVK O 
I GKOTrei yap, dTTOKpLcris Trorepa opdorepa, co 
TOVTO elvau 6^>^aX/zoi/9, 77 &i ov opufiev, Kal 
ajTa, i] >i ov d/covofiev ; 0EAI. At &v eKacrra alada- 
I vo/jieOa, e/jioiye BoKei, a> ^,GOK pares, fjba\\ov rj ot?. SO. D 

Aeivov yap TTOV, &5 Tral, el TroXXat Ttz^e? ev i]fuv, wcnrep 
1 eV SovpeLois tTTTTOt?, al(jQr)Gei<s eyKaO^vrai^ d\\a fir) els 
fjilav TLVCL IBeav, elre tyv%r)v eire o TI Bel Kd\elv, Trdvra 
ravra ^vvreivet, fj Bid TOVTWV olov opydvwv alaQavo- 
oo~a ala drjrd. 0EAI. AXXa /AOL BoKel ovrco 
v rf eVeiVa)?. 2H. ToO Be rot, eveKa avrd crot 
BtaKpij3ovfj,ai, j et TLVI r}/JLO)i> avrcov ra> auTco Bia [lev 
iKvovjJieOa \evKwv TC Kal ^eXdvcov, Bid Be 
erepwv av TIVWV, Kal ! e fei? epwrw^evos E 


Trdvra TCL Toiavra a? TO ato/ia dva^epeiv ; l <76>9 Se /3eX- 
TLOV ere \eyeiv avra a.7TOKpiv6p,evov /j,d\\ov r) cue virep 
crov TTO\VTrpay/uioveiv. teal JJLOI \eye OepfJid KOL o-K\7)pd 
KOI Kov(f)a Kal yXvKea Si cuV aladavet, dpa ov TOV cra)- 
/JLCLTOS e/cacrra Ti@r)s ; 97 a\\ov TLVOS ; 0E AI. 
a\\ov. ZtQ. ? H Kal eOeXsTjcreis Ofjuo\o<yelv, a $ 
185 Swdfjiews alaOdvei, dBvvarov elvai * &L a\\r)$ ravr 
i, olov a Si a/co//?, SL o-v/rect)?, ^ a Si? otyews, Si 
EAI. IIw? <ydp OVK e6e\r)crw, ^H. Et ri 
7re^)l d/jL^orepwv Stavoet, OVK. av Sid <ye roO erepov 
opydvov, ovS* av Sid rov erepov irepl d/jL^OTepwv alcrOdvoi 
av. EAI. Ov <ydp ovv. &. Tlepl Srj fywvrjs KOL nrepl 
Xpoas TTpurov fjbev avro TOVTO 7T6pl d/jL(f)OTepct)v Siavoei, 
on d^orepo) earov ; EAT. "Eycoye. Sfl. OVKOVV 
Kal OTI e/cdrepov e/carepov [Jiev erepov, eavrw Se TavTov\ 
B EAI. Ti fMJv ; SO. Kal on, d^orepa) Svo, e/cdre- 
pov Se ev j EAT. Kal TOVTO. ^O. OVKOVV Kal 6tVe 
dvo/JLola) eire ofioiw d\\t]\oiv, SvvaTos el eTrio-KetyaaOai, ; 
@EAI. "Icra)?. Sll. TaOra S?) TTCLVTCL Sid TIVOS irepl 
avTolv Siavoei , OVTG yap Si* aKofjs OVTC Si* oS^eco? olov 
re TO KOIVOV \a/jL/3dveiv Trepl avrojv. eVt Se Kal ToSe 
TeK/Jbrjpiov Trepl ov \eyojjiev el <ydp SvvaTov eirj d^o- 
Tepco aKi}rao-0ai, dp* (7TOv d\p,vpw r) ov, oicrO* on e^eis 
C eiTreiv w eirio-Ke^rei, Kal TOVTO ovTe o^t? ovre OKOTJ 
<paiv6Tai, d\\d TL a\\o. EAI. Tt 5 ov jj,e\\ei, rj ye 
Sid T?;? 7\a)TT?;9 Svva^is ; SH. KaXw? \eyeis. r) Se 
?} Sid TiVo? Svvafjiis TO T eVl Trdcn KOIVOV Kal TO eVl 
Touroi? Sr)\oi croi, co TO edTiv eTrovoud^eis Kal TO OVK 
O-TI Kal d vvv Srj r^pwTw^ev Trepl avTwv ; TOUTOt? Trao-^ 
TTOta aTroScocreis opyava, Si wv aladdveTai TJ^WV TO 
alo~9av6fievov e/cao~Ta; EAI. Ovo-lav Xeyet? Kal T6 



j ifjirj elvat,, Kal ouoiOTqTa Kal dvouoiOTijTa, Kal TO TavTov 
> JTe Kal TO erepov, eVt Be ev Te Kal TOV d\\ov dpiOaov D 
jjTrepl avT&v. Bf)\ov 8e, cm Kal apTiov T Kal irepiTTov 
r, Kal TttXXa, oVa TOVTOLS eVeTat, Bid TtVo9 TTOTC 
TOL) crw/^aTO? Ty tyv%f] alaOavofJieOa. 2H. "Tirepev, 
to eatV^Tf, dKo\ov6els, Kal eo~Tiv d epcoTw avTa Tavra. 
>EAI. AXXa /za. Ata, co Sw/cpaTe?, eycoye OVK dv e^ot/u 
/, irXrjv 7 OTi yitot 8o/cet T?)^ dp%r/v ovB elvai TOLOV- 
"ov ovBev TouTot? opyavov iBiov, waTrep e/ceivois, aXX 
IUT?) 8t avTrjs 77 ^v^rj Ta Koivd /zot (fxilverai irepl E 
maKOTrelv. 2H. KaXo? 7^/5 eZ, ( 
GO? e\eye edSco/oo?, alaxpos o 
Te KayaOos. 77^09 8e TW /caXw eu 

\6yov avraXXafa?, et (f>alverat ooi Ta 
v avTrj ot, avTijs 77 tyv%r) eTUCTKOTrelv, Ta Be Bid TGOV 
v crco^aTO? Bvvdaewv. TOVTO yap r\v, o /cal a^Tco ^aot 
6t, j3ov\6fjLTjv Be Kal (7ol Bo^ai. EAI. * AXXa 186 
Aaiverai ye. XXX. ^H. IIoTe/o&)^ oi)i/ T/^? 

OV(7Lav ; TOUTO 7/3 fJL(l\l(TTa 7Tt 7TOVTWV TTape- 

EAI. 700 /x.ev coz; ai^T?) 77 ^v^ 

*+ f\ t TT \ \ ff \ \ 

li ^:at TO o/iioiov Kai TO 

ai TO TavTdv Kal crepov ; EAI. Nat. SH. T/ 
e Ka\ov Kal aur%p6v t Kal dyadov Kal KaKov ; EAI. 
al TOVTCOV aoi BoKel ev Tot? ad\icrTa Trpos d\\ij\a 
TTJV ova lav, dvaXoyL^ouevrj ev eavTrj TO, 
eyovoTa Kal Ta TrapovTa Trpo? TO. ac\\ovTa. SO. B 

a XXo T ToO yu.ei o-K\r)pov TTJV arK\rjpoTr)Ta 
id T^/9 67ra(/)/;9 alaO^O erai, Kal TOV yu-aXa/coO TT}^ 
a\aKOTT)Ta too-avTcos ; EAI. Nat. SO. Tr)^ 8e 76 
vaLav /cat o T ea~Tov Kal Trjv evavTiCTTjTa Trpo? aX- 
/cat TT/y over lav av T^9 evavTiOT?)Tos avrrj 77 


erraviovaa Kal avu{3d\\ovaa 777309 d\\r)\a Kplveiv 7m- 
parcu rjfMV. (DEAL Hdvv pev ovv. SO. QVKOVV ra( 

C ju,ev evOvs yevouevois irdpeart, fyvaei aladdveaOat, 
dvOptoTTOi? re Kal 0rjploLs, oaa 8 La rov aoouaros Tra- 
flrjuara eVt T?}^ tyv xrjv reivei, ra Se irepl TOVTWV dva- 
irpos re ovaiav Kal <ti$e\eiav ^07^9 Kal ev 
7ro\\ct)v TrpayfjLaTwv Kal ira&eias Trapayl- 
ryverai ot9 av Kal TrapajLyvrjrai ; EAI. TiavraTracn 
fj,ev ovv. iSfl. Qiov T6 ovv a\7]0eia<> TV^elv, q> yu-^Se 
overlap ; EAI. ABvvarov. 2O. Oy Se d\r)6eias rt9- 
drv^o-ei, Trore TOVTOV eTncrrr) pwv carat,] EAI. Kat 

D 7ra>9 az/, oo ^wKpares ; SO. Ey yu-ez/ a/sa rot9 Tra-; 
0r)fjLaa-iv OVK evt eTTiar^ar), eV Se TO) rrepl eiceivtov av\- 
\o<yt,o-fjia) overlap jap Kal d\rj6eia<$ IvravOa fiev, cos- 
eoiK, Svvarbv d^racrOaL, eKel Se dSuvarov. 0EAI. 
verai. Sflt. ^H ovv ravrov GKCLVO re Kal rovro 
roaavras Siafyopds e^ovre ; BE A I. QVKOVV ?} 
rye. 2<l. Ti ovv Bt] /ceiv<p a7roSiSa)9 6Vo/xa, TW opav. 
cLK.ove.iv, ccr(j)pu l ive(70a{,, ^v^ecrOaL, 6epp>aivea6ai j 0EAI. 

PJ AlaOdveo-Qat, ey&ye ri yap a\Xo ; 2O. H^Traz/ ap 
alcrOrja-iv ; EAI. *Avd<yKr). 2H. T Ht 761 
, ov fMere(7riv dXrjOelas d^raaOau ovSe yap oucr/a? 
0EAI. Oi5 70/0 o?v. 2H. Ou 8* a/o eVto-ny/*^. EAI 
Oi5 yap. 2H. Oi)/c ap* ai/ ei?7 Trore, co ea/TT/re 
aio-Grja-is re Kal eTricrrrj^r] ravrov. EAT. Ou <f>aive- 
ra/,, co 2a)ACpaT9, /^at ud\Hrrd ye vvv Karafyaveararoi 
yeyovev d\\o ov alaOrja-ew^ eTTicrrrjarj. Sli. AXX* 01 
187 T* * yLtez/ S?) rovrov ye eveKa yp^oueOa $ia\ey6fjievoi, "vc 
evpwfjiev ri rror OVK ear eTriarrjur), d\\d ri eariv 
oyu,co9 Be roaovrov ye 7rpo(3e{3rJKauev, ware 
avrr)v ev alaOrjaei TO Trapdjrav, aXX* ev eKelvco TO 


\ovofjiaTL, o TL TTOT e%ei, r} ^v^r}, orav avrrj /ca& avTrJv 
f 7rpaypaTvr)Tai Trepl TO. ovra. 0EAI. AXXa /j,r)v TOVTO 
rye /caXeirai, w 2&WpaT69, ft>9 eyw 

#ft)9 <yap olei, co </>/Xe. teal opa S/) vvv irakiv ej 
rrrdvTa rd TrpocrOev e faXen/ra?, et rt p,ak\ov /cadopas, B 
) evravda 7rpo\TJ\v9as. KOI Xeye avdis, T I TTOT 
eVtcrn/yu-?/. XXXI. @EAI. Aofa^ /iey iraa-av el- 
ireiv, ew ^Go/cpares, dSvvarov, eTreiS?} /cat tyev$r}<> ecrrt 
KivSwevei ^e 77 aK^O^s So^a ^TTLcrrrjfir] elvai, teal 
TOVTO dTTOKefcplo-da). edv jap fir) (fravrj irpolovaiv, 
TO vvv, d\\o n Treipaao/jLeOa \eyeiv. 2O. Ou- 
nra) /nevToi, %pv, w Oeatr^re, \e>yeiv, TTpoBv^w^ jj,a\\ov, 
7 QJ? TO TTp&rov wtcvGiS aTTOKpiveaOai. edv yap OVTCO 
ppw/jiev, SVOLV Odrepa, r) evprjo-o/jiev e<^) o ep^ofjieOa, C 
n rjrrov olrfcro^eOa elSevai, o /jLrj8ajj,fj la^ev KCLITQI ov/c 
av eivj yLteyCtTTTO? /ucr^o? 6 rotouro? Aral 8^ #at z/Oi/ rt 
^779 ; Suoty OVTOIV elBeoiv 80^779, TOU yu,ez> d\r)6ivov, tyev- 
poi/9 Se TOU erepov, rrjv d\r}dr) So^av 
BEAI. "70)76 TOVTO yap av vvv JJLOI, 
|Ap ot i/ T* a^iov Trepl 80^779 dva\a^elv 7rd\iv ; EAI. 
Fo Trolov Sr] \eyeis ; SO. parret /^e 7r&)9 ^i)^ re /fat 
tXXore ST; TroXkdicis, cocrr eV diropia 7ro\\f] 7rpo9 D 
\fjLavrov Kal 7T/D09 d\\ov ryeyovevat,, ov/c e%ovTa elirelv T I 
TOT eVrt TOVTO TO iraOos Trap TJIMV Kal Tiva TpoTrov 
lyyiyvo/jievov. EAL To TTOLOV or) ; SH. To $od%iv 
rivd ^revSij. CTKOTTW Brj Kal vvv 6Ti $L(TTCI^U>V ) TTOTepov 
\do-Q)fjiev avTO r) e7rio-/ce^co/j,eOa a\\ov Tpojrov r) o\lyov 
TpoTepov. EAL Tt yu,^, a> Xco/c^are?, eltrep ye /cal 
TTrjovv (fraiveTat Selv ; dpTt ydp ov /ca/ccos ye av /cal 
j )ecSa)po9 eXeyeTe o"^o\rj<^ Trept, ^9 ovbev ev rot9 ToiolaBe 
\aTTreiyei. SO. OpOws vTre/jivrja-as. la~co^ ydp ov/c E 


CL7TO KCLlpOV TToXlV &(TTTep fyvOS jJieTe\6elv. /CpeLTTOV 
7TOV CTfjLI.KpOP 6V Tj TTO Xv fir) IKdVWS TTepdvai. EAI. T 

fi-qv] SH. lift;? ovv } TL Sr) KOI \eyofjLev ; tyev&rj 
e/cdo-rore elvai Sofo^, /cat TIVCL T]^(JUV &odeiv 
TOV 8 av dXij&fji oj? (f)v<rei OVTCDS e-%ovrwv ; EAT 
jap &rj. 5^O. Qv/covv roSe 7 ea$ r 
/cal tcaO^ e/cao-rov, TJTOL ei&evcu T) 

yap /cal Iiri\.av9dvecr6ai /nera^v rovrcov ew? 
ovra yaipeiv \e r yw ei> rw irapovn vvv yap riyCiv Trpo 
\6yoi> early ovSev. EAT. AX/Va H^v, w ^co/cpa 
a\\o j ovSev Xe/Trerat rrepl eKacrrov 7T\rjv el&evat, r) 
elBevai. SH. OVKOVV rj^Tj dvary/crj rov So^d^ovra So- 
%deiv r) wv TL ol^>ev i} JJLT} oi^ev } EAT. Avdy/CTj. 
SO. Kol pr]V elbora ye ^rj el^zvai TO avro r) fir) et 8orai 
B elBevai, dSvvarov. EAI. IIak S ov ; SH. **Ap* ovv 
6 rd ^Irev^rj So^dfav, a oiSe, ravra oterat ov ravra eivai, 
d\\d erepa arra wv olSe, /cal d^orepa elBcio^ dyvoel av 
d/ji(f>oTepa ; EAI. AXX* dSvvarov, w %a>Kpares. ^O. 
dpa, a /j,rj olSev, t /yelrai avrd elvai erepa cirra\ 

, Kal TOVT e(7TL T(t) /bLTjre eaLT7]TOV fJ,l /T 

BoTi et? rr)v ^Lavoiav \a/3elv w? o S 
C ea/TT^ro? ?) o ea/T7;T09 ^wfcpdrrjs ; EAI. Kat 
TTCO? ai^ ; SO. AXX oi) yLt^V, a ye Ti? olSev, olerau TTOV 
a fir) olBev avrd dvai, 01)8 av d yu,?) ol&ev, d olde. 
EAI. Tepa? 7<ip ecrrai. 2O. Ha)? ou^ az/ TJ? 
tyevbr) Zo^daeiev ; e /ero? 7p TOLTCOV dSv vaiLv TTOV S 
^6^, eTreiTrep iravr rj IG^ZV r) OVK ia^ev, ev Se 
ovSa/LLov (fralverai Svvarov tyevSr) ^ofacrat. EAI. 
*A.\7)0e(TTaTa. SH. ^Ap ovv ov ravrrj a/ceiTTeov 
^Tov^ev, Kara TO elcevai /cal /j,rj eloevai lovras, d\\d 
D /card TO elvai /cal (JLTJ ; EAI. II w? \eyei? ; SO. 


M?) a7r\ovv $, cm 6 ra //.?) ovra trepl OTOVOVV So^d^wv 
OVK eo-0 a$9 ov tyevSr/ So^acm, Kav OTTOKTOVV aXXco? rd 

%{] 0EAI. EtVo? 7 av, co 
oz}^ ; rt epovpev, w eatr^re, eaz 
^VVCLTOV Se ortpovv o Xe^erat, Afat rt? dvO pw- 
JTGOV TO fjij] ov So^dcrei, el re Trepl TCOZ^ OVTWV TOV etre auro 
^:a^ at/ro; Kal ^et? S?;, 009 eoiice, TT/QO? ravra (^YJO-OJJLGV 
^ Qrav <ye dXiyOrj fjLrj ol ^rat olofievos. i] 77^9 epovjjiev ; E 
EAI. O^ro)?. SO. ^H ou^ /tat a\\o6L TTOV TO TOIOV- 
TOV ecrTL ; 0EAI. To irolov ; 2O. El r^? 6pa fjuev TI, 
opa 8e ov&ev. 0EAI. Kal TTCO? ; 2li. AAAa yu,?)^ et 
ei/ 76 rt opa ; TO;^ OVTWV TI opd. rj au olei TTOTG TO ev ev 
rot? yLt?) oii(jiv elvdi ; 0EAI. Oi)/c eycoye. Sfl. O apa 
eV 76 rt opo)^ 6V ri opa. 0EAI. OatVerat. 2) ft. * Kai 189 

apa rt d/covcov ev ye TL dicovei /col ov d/covei, EAT. 
Nat. 2O. Kal 6 cLTTTOfJievo^ &r/ TOV e^o? 76 TOU avrrerat 
/eat 6Wo?, et7T6p e^o? ; 0EAI. Kal roOro. 2ft. O e 
8?) $oj;d(i)v ovx ev TL Sofa^et ; 0EAL Avdytcrj. Sft. 
*O 5 eV rt So^a^a)^ OL A: ov TI J 0EAI. ^vj^wpw. 
SH. f O apa ^^} 6z/ &oj;da)v ovoev Sofafet. 0EAI. OJ 
<au>erat. SO. AX,Xa yLt?)i/ o 76 fjLr)ev <$oj;da)v TO 
irapdirav ov&e Sofafei. 0EAI. A^Xoz^, 0^9 eoiicev. 2ft. 

1 Oi)/c apa otoz/ re TO /AT) 6z^ So^d^ew, oi/re vrepl rcG^ B 
OVTWV ovT6 avTO /cad ovio. 0EAI. Ov (pctiveTai. Sft. 
"AXXo rt ap e crrl TO ifrevSfj $od%iv TOV TU pr) CVTCU 
Bofafai/. 0EAT. "AXXo eoifcev. Sft. OI/ T ap ouTW9 
ouVe cu9 6\lyov Trporepov ecrKOTrovfJiev, tyev^rfs e crTt oo^-a 
ev wlv. 0EAI. Ou 7p ovv Srj. XXXII. SO. A\V 
apa wSe ^v^vo^vov TOVTO Trpoa-ayopevofiev ; 0EAI. 

; Sft. AXAoSo^tai Ttz/a oucraz/ tyevSrj <j>afAV elvai 

, UTCtV T/9 Tt TCtZ^ OVTWV d\\0 aV TW^ OVTWV) C 

K. P. 5 


avTaXkagd/jievos Trj Siavoia, (fry elvai. ovrco yap bv fiev 
del 8oaet, erepov Be dv9* erepov, /cal a^aprdvwv ov 
Si/catco? av Ka\.olro ^ev^rj So^d^wv. (B)EAI. 
d fjioi, vvv So/cet? elprjfcevai,. orav yap TI$ dvrl 
Ka\ov alo-%pov rj dvrl ala^pov Kakov o%d^rj, rore w? 
d%i tyevftr). SO. Ar;\09 et, cS 
JJLOV /cal ov SeStw?. @E AI. T/ 
Oi;/c az^, oljjiai, crol So/cw TOV d\7)6cos 
D dvTi,\a(3ecr0(U, epofjuevos, el olov re Ta^u /3/3aSeo)9 17 
KOV(J)OI> /3apl&)9 ^ aXXo Tt evavriov pr) Kara TT)V avrov 
$v(7iv d\\d Kara TTJV TOV evavriov ryiyveaOai eaura) 
evavrla)?. TOVTO pev ovv, iva /JUT) jjLdrrjv 
d(j)lrj/jii,. dpecncei Se, ey? </)^79, TO ra ^frevS 
d\\oSo%eiv elvai ; EAI. 3/ E/<totye. SO. " 
/cara rrjv arjv Sogav erepov TI ew9 erepov /cal fjirj cu9 e/celvo 
rfj Siavola TiOecrOat,. EAI. "Ecm, pevToi. 2O. 
E"Orav ovv rovO* 77 iavoid TOV Spa, ov /cal dvay/cij avTrjv 
rj TO eTepov iavoelo-6ai ; EAI. 
fjLev ovv. 2Q. "Hroi a/za 75 rj ev fiepet, ; 
0EAI. KaXXtcrra. ^O. To 8e SiavoeicrOai, ap ojrep 
eyw /caXet9 ; EAI. Tt /caXwv ; SO. Aoyov, ov avTr} 
7T/309 avTrfv TI tyvxf] Sie^epxeraL Trepl a>v av CTKOTTYJ. ^9 
76 /AT) 6t Sa)9 <7ot diro^aivo^aL. TOVTO ydp /JLOI, lv^d\\eTat 
Siavoov/JLevrj, OVK a\\o TI rj ia\e<yea 6ai ) avTrj eavTr)v 
pa)TO)o-a * Aral aTTOKpLvo/jLevrj, /cal $>do-Kovo~a /cal ov 
fyda-Kovcra. oTav &e 6/3/cracra, etre /3pa&vTepov eire /cal 
ogvTepov eVai^acra, TO avTO rj&r] (fry /cal pr) 
So^av TavTfjv TiOepev ai/Trjs. WCTT eycoye TO S 
\eyeiv /ca\co /cal Trjv &6%av \6jov elprjfjLevov, ov 
7rpo9 a\\ov ovBe <}>a)vf), d\\d o-iyf) trpos avTOV. av Se 
TL ; EAI. Ka7<w. ^O. "OTav apa TI$ TO erepov 


erepov So^dfy, Kal d>rjo-lv, cw? eoiKe, TO" erepov erepov 
elvai TTpos eavrov. EAI. Tt ^771; ; SO. * Kvapiiivr]- B 
GKOV 8/7, el TTCOTTOT etTre? 717)09 aeavrov, on TTCH/TO? 
fjua\\ov TO TOfc Ka\bv ala^pov ICTTLV r/ TO CL&IKOV Bt/ccuov, 
TJ Kal TO iravTwv Ke<fia\ai,ov cncoTrei, el TTOT eTre^elpricra^ 
ireiOeiv w? iravTos paXXov TO CTepov erepov 

O"Ti,i>, rj irav TOVVCLVTLOV ou ev VTTVW 

elirelv TT^O? creavTOV, 0^9 iravTaTracriv a pa TO. nrepiTTa 

I d\\o TOLOVTOV. 0EAT. AXrjOfj 
. "AXXoi/ 8e Ttva ol et vyiaivovTa rj ^aivofjievov TO\- c 

cnrovBf} TT/JO? eavTov elTrelv, avaTreiOovTO, CLVTOV, 
dvay/cij TOV /3oO/^ ITTTTOV elvai rj TO, Svo ev ; EAI. 
a At" ov/c 70)76. SO. OVKOVV el TO \eyew ?rpo9 
eavrov &o%aeiv eaTiv, ovo~el$ d/jL(f)6Tepd 76 \ejwv Kal 
Soj;d(i)v Kal e ^aTTTOyLte^o? apfyolv TTJ ^v^f) 617TO.I dv Kal 
So^do-eiev, 009 TO erepov erepov ICTTLV. ea-reov $e Kal crol 
TO prjfj,a Trepl TOV erepov. \eya> <ydp avTO TfjSe, prfieva 
So^d^eiv, W9 TO alcr^pov KO\OV rj aXXo TL TWV TOLOVTCOV. D 
EAI. S A\V, oa ScJ/cpaTe9, ec3 T KaL JJLOI So/eel W9 
Xe76t5. 2O. *Au(f)Ci) fjiev dpa So%dovTa dovvaTov TO 
erepov erepov $od%ei,v. EAI. "Eoi/eei/. SO. AXXa. 
//,T)I/ TO erepov <ye fJiovov So^dfav, TO Se erepov 
ovBeTTOTe oogda-ei TO eTepov erepov elvai. EAI. 

IT o <d av 

SO. OI/T* dp" dfJifyoTepa ovTe TO erepov Bo- 
y^co pel aXXoSofet^ WGT el Ti9 opieiTat, cc- E 
%av tlvau yfrevBf) TO eTepoSo^elv, ovoev dv \eyot, ovTe 
yap TavTrj ovT6 Kara TCU TrpoTepa aive.Tai tyevSr)? ev 
Wlv ovaa S6a. EAI. OVK eoiKev. XXXIII. SO. 
AXXa /juevTon, co eatr^Te, TOVTO pr) <$avr]oreTat ov>, 
TroXXa dvayKaaBrjo-o/jLeOa 6ao\oyeiv /cal aTOira. EAI.. 



Ta Troia $ij ; O. Ou/e epcS <ro, Trplv av ir 
ireipaOaj (TKOTTOOV. alcr^vvolarjv <ydp av vTrep rjfjb&v, ev 
co aTTopovuev, dvayKa^ouevcov o/jio\o<yeiv ola Xeyw. a\X* 
191 eav * evpcouev Kal eXevOepot, <yevtoue0a, TOT rjorj irepl 
TGOV a\\cov epovjmev <w? iracr ^ov TWV avra, e/cro? TOV 
yeXolov ecrrcore? eav Be iravrr) aTropTJcrw/jiev, TaTreivw- 
Oevres, ol/xat, TW \6j(D 7rapet;o/jL6v oj? vavTL&vres irarelv 
T /cal xpija-Oai, o TL av (3ov\7]Tai. y ovv en nropov TLVCL 
evpidKco TOV ty)T Yj {jbdT o<$ Tj/jiiv, a/cove. 0EAI. 
IJLOVOV. 2)Ii. Ov (f)rj(7(t) ^a? opOais cuo\oyfj aai, rjvi 
touo X.o yrjo-ajULev, a rt? olBev, d&vvarov So^dcrai, a /Mr} 

B olSev elvai avrd, /cal ^eva6?]vai dX\d iry Svvarov. 
EAI. *Apa \eryeis u Kal eyu> Tore vTrw 
avro efyauev, roiovrov elvai, on evior e 

, TroppwOev Se opv aXXov, ov ou ( yi<yvwG \;(t) > 
elvai ^ca/cpdrfj, ov ol$a ; rylyverai, <yap Srj ev ra> 
TOLOVTW olov \eyeis. 2H. OVKOVV direar qaev avrov, 
on a icruev, eVo/et T/yCta? e/Sora? pr) elSevai,; 0EAI. 
Haw uev ovv. 2O. Mrj <yap OVTCO nOwuev, d\\ wSe. 
Kai t<j&)9 iry rifjCiu o-u<y%a>pr}(TeTai, IVa)? Se dvnrevel. 

C a\\d yap ev rc3 TOIOVTW e^oaeda, ev a> dvdjKfj Trdvra 
aerao-rpe(f)ovTa \6yov j3acravieiv. o-Koirei ovv, el n 
\e<yco. dpa evn ar) elSora n Trporepov varepov uaOelv ; 
0EAI. v Eo-rt fjievrot. SO. OVKOVV Kal avOiS erepov 
Kal erepov ; 6EAI. Tt 8 ov ; Sfl. 069 ty fwt \6yov 
V/ca ev rat? ^TV^CLL^ ijadov evov Krjpivov eKua<yelov, rat 
uev ueiov, TW 8 eXarrov, /cal rc3 aev /caOapwrepov 
Kvjpov, rc3 Be /coTTpcoBeo-repov, KOL a/c\r]poTepov, evioi? 

D 5e vyporepov, eVri 8 0*9 aerplw^ e%oi/ro9. EAI. 
TOLVVV avro (fxZfjiev elvai r^9 rwy 
/cal eh TOVTO, Z n av 


/3ov\r)0u>aev fjLVTj/jiovevo-ai, &v av i&couev 7) atcovcrajfjiev 
avTol evvorjcrcofjiev, VTre-fcovTes avro rat? alaOrjcrecri, 
Kal evvoiais, dTrorvTrovaOai, wcnrep Sa/crv\ltov o-rjuela 
Kal b uev av eXfJUKyn t /jivrjfjioveveiv 
re Kal eiricrraa-dai,, eW av evfj TO ei$a)\ov avrov. orav 

e ea\ei<p0fj r) /j,r) olov re yevrjrat, eK/jLayrjvai, eVt- E 
\e\ricr6ai re KOI //,?} eTTiaracrOai. @EAT. "Eara) ovrws. 
2n. C O roivvv eTTidrdfjuevo^ fjulv avrd y O-KOTTWV 8e ri 
wv opa rj dicovei, dOpei el apa rotwSe rpovrw tyevBrj 
u.v So^dcraL EAI. TLoifo Brj nvi ; ISO. A A oiSev, 
els elvai rare fj,ev a olSe, rare Se a prf. ravra 
ev rot? irpoaOev ov 
yovvres dSvvara. 0EAI. 
Aet c58e * \eyea-0at, rrepl avrwv, e% dpxfjs Stoptfo/xe- 192 
on o fJiev Tt9 olSey fywv avrov fj,vrj fjbelov ev rfj 
alaOdverai, Se avro fjuj, rovro olrjOrjvai, erepov 
cov olSev, e^ovra Kal e/ceivov rvirov, alaOavofjievov 
/x?;, dovvarov. KOI o ye olftev av, olrjdrjvai elvai, o 
IJLYJ olSe ^778 e^et avrov a^pa^l oa Kal o /Jirj olSev, o 
olSev av Kal o fj,rj olSev, o olSe Kal o alo-Qdveral 
<ye, erepov n wv alcrOaverai, olrOvai elvai Kal b alcrOd- 

verat, &v ri /jbt} alcrOdverat, Kal o /Ltr) alaOdverai, wv 
alaOdveraC Kal o /ir) ala-Odverai, wv alaOdverai. B 
en ye av wv oiSe Kal alcrOdverat, Kal e^et TO 
Kara rrjv aicrOrjcriv, olrjOijvai, av erepov rt wv 
Kal al(T0dverai Kal e^ei av Kal eKelvov TO crTjfjielov 
Kara rr t v aicrO^aiv, dSvvaTMTepov en eKeivwv, el olov 
re. Kal o olSe Kal o alcrQdverai e^wv ro /^vrj^etov 
opOdos, o olSev olrjdfjvat, dSvvarov Kal o oibe Kai at,o~0a- 

191 D. Mxpvres. Multi codd. et edd. "habent vTrfyovTas. Cf. 
Yers. Angl.. 


verai e^wv Kara ravrd, o alvOdveraC /cat o av 7*17 ol$e 
C fjurj&e alaOdve-rai, o /JLTJ ol$e /*??3e alo-OdveraC /cal o 
fjirj olBe fjLTjBe alo-Odverai, o ar) oZSe KOI o yur) oZSe 
alaOdverat, o pr) aio-0dveraL irdvra ravra V 
d^vvafjiia rov ev avrois tyevSrj TWO, So^dcrai. \eiireraL 
Srj ev rot? roiolaBe, eiirep TTOV a\\o0i,, TO TOIOVTOV 76- 
EAI. Ez^ T KTI ^ ; lav a pa e f avrwv n 
{JbdOw vvv fjuev <ydp ov-% eVo/ 2H. Ez^ ol? 
olbev, OLTjOrjvat, avrd erep arra elvai <Lv olSe /cal alo~6d- 
I) verai rj wv pr) ol&ev, aladdverai $e 77 wv otSe /cal 
alaOaverai, cuv olSev av /cal alaOdverai. 0EAI. 
7ro\v TfKelov d7re\ei(f)97)v TJ Tore. XXXIV. SH. ^ 
Brj dva.7ra\LV uKove. eya) etSa>? eo$a)pov /cal ev 
fjLefJbvrjfMevo^ oto? e crr^, /cal Sealrrjrov /card ravrd, d\\o 
TI evlore [lev opw avrovs, eviore $6 ov, /cal aTrro/Jiai 
TTOT avr&v, Tore 8 ov, ical d/cova) rj nva a\\rjv aio-0rj- 
<JLV alorOdvofjiai, rore 8 aiaOTjcnv fJLev ovBe/julav %co irepl 
vfjL&v, fjLe/jivrjfjLai e Vfia? ov$ev I /TTOV /cal eTrlcrraf^aL 
E auro? ev euavro) ; 0EAI. Tldvv [lev ovv. 2H. ToOro 

rovvv TTpwrov fJiae wv jBoiiXo^ai ^rfkuxrai, w? ert 
a olBe fir) alcrOdvecrOai, can Se alcrOdveo Oai. EAI. 
*A\r)6fj. SO. OVKOVV /cal a arj ol$e, TroXXidfCis fiev 
can jjuri^e alcrOdvecrOai, TroXXdrcis &e alcrOdveadai fjiovov , 
6EAI. "Eo-rt /cal rovro. 2!X J8e ST) edv TL ad\\ov 
193 vvv eTTio-Trrj. ^w/cpdnjs eTTiyiyvcoafcei * QeoScopov /cal 
QeaiTTjTov, opa Se arj^erepov, /i^Se d\\ij alo-6r)crLs avrw 
Trapecm, irepl avrwv OVK av vrore ev eavraJ So^do-eiev 
w? o eaiV^To? ecrrl SeoScopos. \eyco TL rj ovBev ; 
0EAI. Nat, d\7]6rj ye. 2<Q. ToOro /^ez^ TOLVVV e/ceivwv 
TTpwTov rjv wv e\ejov. EAI. Hi/ yap. X 
TOIVVV, on TOV uev ryiyvtoor/coov vuwv, rov Se 

6EAITHT02. 71 

Be firjo erepov, OVK dv rrore av 
, ov oI6\x, elvai ov pr) olBa. (B)EAI. QpOcos. 
Tplrov Se, /Jirjoerepov yiyvooo-Kcov /jirjBe alaOavo- 

OVK av oii]0iv]V, ov pr) olBa, erepov riv elvai B 
wv /Z.T) olSa. /cal ra\\a ra TT pore pa ITCW& et;rjs vo/ji,ie 
iraXiv d/cij/coevai,, ev ot? ouSeTror e^yco Trepl o~ov teal 
eoSo)pov ra tyevSrJ Sofacro), oi/re fyiyvodcr/tayv ovre 
ayvowv a/40a>, oi/Ve TOV fJ>ev, TOV 8 ov fyiyvaxr/cav. 
/cal Trepl alcr6r]a-ea>v Kara ravrd, el apa 7rei. EAT. 
. AeiTrerat, roivvv ra tyevbfj Sot;d(7ai, ev 
, orav ryiyvwG-tcwv ere /cal SeoBwpov, /cal e^cov ev 
e/celvft) rat /crjplvo) ticrTrep SaKrv\lajv a-cfxpv dfjLffrolv ra C 
ia, bid fjiaKpov /cal pr} l/cavws opav afj,<f>co rrpo6v- 
}, TO oiicelov e/carepov o-rjfjLeiov aTro&ov? rfj ol/ceia 
ifyei, ejjiftifidcras rrpo a api^ocrat et? TO eavrrfs LXVOS, 
iva ryevrjrat dvayvcopiais, elra rovrwv drrorv^wv /cal 
warrep ol e^rra\iv vrro^ovjjLevoL 7rapa\\di;a$ 7rpoo-/3d\a) 
Trjv e/carepov otyiv 77/309 TO d\\6rpiov aTj/uetov, 77 /cal 
ola rd ev Tot? Karoirrpois rrjs o-v|rea)? rrddr), $ej;i,d 
et? dpiarepd /jLerappeovarjs, ravrov rraOwv Sia/judprco D 
rore Srj avfjipalvei, 77 erepoSo^la /cal TO ^ev^rj So^d^eiv. 
EAI. "Eot/ce yap, w ^wKpares, Oav^acrlw^ w \eyeis 
TO T^? 86^?;? rrdOos. 2)H. "ET^ roivvv /cal orav djj,<f>o- 
repovs yiyva>o-/ca)v rov p,ev Trpbs raj <yi<yv6oo-/ceiv alaOd- 
vcofiai, rov Se /x^, rrjv Be <yvxn>v rov erepov pr) Kara 
rrjv aio-drjaiv e%a), o ev T0i9 7rp6o~0ev ovrcos e\eyov 
/cal IJLOV rore OVK epavdaves. EAI. Ov <ydp ovv. 
SO. ToDro ^TJV eXeyov, on yiyvwo-Kaiv rov erepov /cal 
1 alcrOavofjievos, /cal rt}v yvooo-iv /card rrjv tdur0ij<nv av- E 
TOV e%a)i/, ovSeTTore olrjcrerai elvai, avrov erepov nva 
wv <yiyvtoo-/cei, re /cal aladdverat, /cal rrjv yvwcnv av 


Kal eKelvov e%ei Kara Tr)v alaOri&iv. r/v yap TOVTO ; 
EAI. Nat. 2fl. Hape\L7reTO Be ye TCOV TO vvv \eyo- 
/jievov, ev (j> Br) (frauev TTJV tyevBrj B6av ylyvecrdat TO 
afjifyw yiyvcocrKOVTa Kal a/A(j)co opoovTa rj TIVCL d\\7jv 
194 * al<jQj](Jiv e%ovTa a^olv TW a^jjieia) /AT) KCLTO, Tr)v av- 
TOV aicrOricriv etccurepov e%iv, aXX olov TO^OTTJV ^>av\ov 
Trapa\\a%ai TOV CTKOTTOV /cal a^ap-relv, o 8rj Kal 
o9 apa wvbfJbaaTat,. EAL Et/cora)? 76. SH. Kal 
Toivvv TW yuez^ Trapfj aiffOtja t^ TWV ayfJtel&v, TOO Se 
/JLTJ, TO Be T57? aTCovorj]^ alcrQrja-ews Tr) Trapovarj Trpocr- 
irdvTrj TavTrj ^reuSerat r) Sidvoia. fcal evl 
q), Trepl wv fjbev /AT) olce rt? /jiijSe fjaOero TTWTTOTC, 
OVK ecmv, w? eoircev, ovre tyevBecrdat, OVTG ^euS^? 
B $6%a, el TL vvv ?7/u-et9 ^7^6? \eyofjiev irepl Be wv 
re /cal alo-QavofJieOa, ev aurot? rourot? 
eX/rrerat t] Bo^a tyevBrjs Kal a\rjOrj<^ ryiyvo/jLev?], Ka- 
TavTiKpv fjiev Kal KaTa TO evdv TO. oiKela crvvdyovcra 
aTroTVTrcofiaTa Kal TVTTOVS, d\7]drjs, et? Tr\dyia Be Kal 
(TKO\id tyevBrjs. OEAI. QVKOVV /caXco?, co 
\eyeTai , 2H. "Ert TOIVVV Kal TaBe dKovaas 
G avTo epet?. TO aev yap TokyOes Bo^d^eiv Ka\6v, TO 
tyevBevOai ala^pov. EAI. IIft)9 8 oi/; 
TOIVVV (fracrlv evOevBe yiyveaOai. OTav uev 6 KTjpos TOV 
ev Tfj ^vxfi fiaOvs T6 Kal 770X1)9 /cal Xeto9 Kal 
wpyaa^evo^ 77, TO. lovTa Bid TWV alo-Oijcrecov, 
voueva ek TOVTO TO T^ ^%?9 fceap, o tyrj f/ 
aiviTTo^evos TYJV TOV Kijpov oaoiOTrjTa, TOTe fjiev Kal 
TOUT069 KaOapd TO, crrj/jLela eyyiyvojjieva Kal iKavcos 
D ToO /3a^ou9 e%ovTa Tro\w%pbvid Te yiyveTai Kal elcrlv 
01 TOLOVTOI TTpcuTOv fjiev evfJLa0el^, ejreiTa uvijuoves, eiTa 
ov 7rapa\\aTTOvo~i TWV alaBrja-ewv TO, 


dXrjOrj. cra^rj yap /cal eV evpv^copla ovra 
Siavefjiovcnv eVl ra avrdov e/cao-ra e/c/jiayela, a 
?} ovra KaX-elrai. /cal ao(f)ol Sr) OVTOL Kakovvrai. 77 
ov &orcei CTOL ; EAI. TTrep^uw? yu-ez ouV. SO. f Qrav 
1 Toivvv \CL<JIOV TQV TO /ceap y, o 877 enryvecrev o irapra E 
oro^o? TTO^T/;?, 77 oraz^ KOTrptoSes /cal fjurj tcaOapov rov 
rj vypov <T(fioSpa 77 cr/cX rjpov, &v fjiev vypov, 
pev, 7ri\r}cr/jLoves 8e ryiyvovrcu,, wv Se cr/cXypov, 
Tavavria. 01 $e Srj \daiov /cal rpa^v \iOooBe^ re 77 
7779 17 /coTTpov (7V/j(,fjLi<yeicrr)s e/^TrXeo)^ e^ovre^ daa(f)rj ra 
etcfjiayela ia^ovcrcv. aaa^rj Se /cal ol rd crK\7]pd /3d6os 
yap ov/c evi. daafyr} Se /cal ol rd vypd VTTO rydp TOV 

ra^v * ylyverai, dfAvSpd. edv Se irpos TrdcrL 195 
eV d\\ij\a)v o-v/JLTreTTTCOKOTa 77 VTTO arevo^co- 
, euv TOV (rfjii/cpov y TO "^rv^dpioVy en, 
! ttcelvcov. TrdvTes ovv OVTOL yiyvovTat, oloi 
tyevbr). oTav ydp TI opwcriv 77 d/covaHTLv 77 
/cacrTa dirovefjieiv Ta%y e/cacrrot? ov ^vvd^e 
re eldi teal d\\OTpiovo[jLovvTes Trapopaio-L re /cal Trapa- 
l KOVOVCTL /cal Trapavoovcri 7r\eicrTa, /cal /caXovvTat, av OVTOL 
re Sr) TWV OVTWV /cal d^aOel^. EAI. Op- B 

dpa ev rjfilv i^euSet? Soa? elvat } EAI. 2<(f)6$pa ye. 

211. Kal d\r)0els Srj ; EAI. Kal d\r)0eis. 

ovv olo/jieOa l/cavcos (t)fjio\oyrj(j6ai, OTL Tcav 

ecTTov d/jL(f)OTpa TOVTW TOJ Boga ; EAI. 
v. XXXV. ^fl. keivov T, oj 
? KivSvvevei, /cal dijoes elvai, dvrjp 

EAI. TV Sat; irpos TL TOUT elvre?; 2H. TT}Z^ e/^au- G 

rl yap av TI<? d\\o OelTO ovofta, OTCIV dva) /caTO) 


Xoyof? \Krj Tt? VTTO vtoOeias ov Svvdaevos 7rei<r6fjvai, 
Kal # &vo-a7ra\\a/CTO$ d(j> eKacrrov \6yov; EAI. Si) 
oe Brj Tt ovcr^epalvet^ ; 2X1. Oi; Svo-^epalvco uovov, 
aXXa /cal SeooiKa o Tt aTTOKpivovaaL, av rt? eprjral 
fie T H ^coKpares, evprjKa? S>) tyevSrj So^av, on, oi/Ve 
eV rat? alcrdrjo-ecriv eart irpos dXkr)\a<$ ovr ev rat? 
D Siavoiais, aXV eV r^ J avvatyet, alcrOijcrews Trpos 8ta- 
voiav ; ^^crft) Se eiy^, oifjiai, Ka\\w7ri,6fjLevo<z W9 Ti 
evprjKorwv ^^v Ka\6v. EAI. "EyLtotye So/eel, <w 2<w- 
/cpare?, OVK ala^pov elvat, TO vvv diroSeSeLy/JLevov. 2fl. 
Ou/coi)^, <?;<m, Xe^et?, or^ av TW dvOpwTrov, ov &ia- 
voovfieOa JJLOVOV, 6paJ/J,V & ov, I TTTTOV OVK av irore 
olr)6eiTj/JL,v elvaiy ov av ovre opwaev ovre aTTTOfieQa, 
SiavoovfJieOa Be JJLOVOV /cal aXV ovoev alaOavo/JieOa irepl 
auTcv , Tavra, oluai, ^rjcrcD \eyeiv. EAI. Kal 6pOd)<s 
E 76. z)n. T/ ovv ] (frrjaet, rd evSe/ca, a urjoev d\\o rj 
Siavoelral rt9, d\\o TL e/c rovrov rov \6yov OVK av 
Trore olrjQeir) ScoBe/ca elvai, a uovov av Siavoelrai, ; Wt, 
ovv $r], av aTro/cpivov. EAI. AA.V diroKpivov/jLai,, 
on, opwv uev av rt? ^ e<pa7rr6aevo<; olrjOeiTj rd evbeica 
ocooKa eivai y d uevToi ev TTJ Btavola G^ei, OVK av TTOTG 
Trepi avrwv ravra Bo^daeiev OVTCO. SO. Tt ovv, ot et 
Tiva TTCDTTore avrov ev avTu> Trevre Kal eTrrd, \eyay &e 
196 arj dvOpwTTOvs eirrd Kal irevre TTpoOeaevov 
UTJO a XXo TOIOVTOV, aXX avrd Trevre Kal eTrrd, d 
eKel uvyueia ev r eKuayelq) elvai Kal ^ev^rj ev 
OVK elvai Sogdcrai, ravra avrd el Tt? dvOpWTrwv 
TTcovrore eo-Ketyaro \eywv 7rpo<; avrbv Kal epcoroov, 
TTOT eari, Kal 6 uev Tt? elirev olrjOels v$eKa avrd 
ewai, o oe oobSeKa TJ irdvres \eyova-L TG Kal olovrai 
avrd elvai; EAI. Ov ad TOV Ata, a 


TToXXo! Br) KOI V&eKa. eCLV Be 76 ev 7T\iOVi CLpiO^W B 

i, fjid\\ov o-$d\\erai. oi^ai yap ere rcepl 
piOfJiov \eyeiv. ]fl. Qp6w<$ 7p otei. 
evdvfJLov, ^TI rl Trore ylyverai aXXo rj avra ra 
rd ev rw etcfjuayeiq) eVSe/ca oivjQfjvai. EAI. 
76. 2)11. QVKOVV et? TOU9 Trpwrov? ird\iv dvrjicei 
; o 7ap TOVTO TraOwv, o ol&ev, erepov avro olerai 
(tiv av oZSe^, o (>a{AV d^vvaTov, KOI TOVTW avra) 

elvai, tyevSr} So^av, iva /Arj rd avrd 6 C 
dvajfcd^oiro et Sw? pr) elSevai dpa. 0EAI. AX7/- 
2<l. Qv/covv aXX OTIOVV $ei anrofyaivtiv TO 
rd tyevSf) So^d^eiv rj Stai/o/a? TT/DO? alcr6r)<TW irapa\- 
\a<yrjv. el jap TOVT tfv, ov/c av trore ev avrols rot? 
^iavo^fjuacTLv etyevBofjLeda vvv Be TJTOL OVK ecm "fyevSrjs 
Bo^a, r) a Ti9 olBev, olov re IJLTJ elBevat. /ecu TOVTCDV 
irorepa alpel , 0EAI. "ATropov a lpecriv irporidrjSy w 
^wfcpare?. 2O. AXXa ^evrou d/jL^orepd 76 KLV&V- D 
vevet, o Xo7o? OVK edaeiv. O/JLWS Be, rcdvra yap roX//.^- 
reov, rl el emyeipr}craiiLv dvaio-^yvrelv ; 0EAI. IIa59 ; 
SO. ]6e\ijcravres eiTrelv, TTOLOV rl iror eori TO eVt- 
0EAI. Kal rl TOVTO dvaia"xyvrov \ SO. 
QUA: evvoelv, on, 7r9 ^/AAZ; e^ ap%^9 o X&709 
yeyovev eTrKrrijfJLrjs, w9 ou/e elBocri, rl rror 
ecrrlv. 0EAI. EwoaS /xez^ oiJz/. SO. "E^retr ou/c 
elBoTas eir io~rr] fjiirjv a7ro<palveo~0ai ro 
olov ecrnv ; aXXa <ydp, GO eatr^re, TraXat E 
tXTfjuev dvairXeu) rov p,rj KaOapws id\,eyecr6ai. fMVpid/ci,? 

, , ^ , \ > V 

eipr)Ka/j,ev TO <yi i yva)o~KOfMev Kai ov yi,yvQ)o~KO^ev, feat, 
real ovtc eTTiCTTd^eOa, 9 n crvvievTes d\- 
)V ev cS en e7rio~Tij fjurjv dyvoovjmev. el Be (BovKeu, 
Kal vvv ev TO> TrapbvTi /ce^pvV 6 ^ a ^ T< ? dyvoeiv re 


Kal (TvvLevai, &>? irpoo-fj/cov avTols ^prjcrdai, ecirep are- 
pofjieOa emo-Tr] /?)<;. EAI. AXXa Tiva rpoirov Sta- 
197 ^-efefc, co ^wKpares, TOVTWV a7re%oyu,ez>o9 ; 2H. * Qvo eva 
wv ye o? elfJLL el aevToi, rjv dvTiXoytKos, oto? dvr]p el 
/cal vvv Trap fjv, TOVTWV r av ecf)7j aTre^ecrOai, Kal 
cr(f)6$p av a eya) \eyco 67re7r\iiTTev. eTretSrj ovv 
(fravXoi, (Bov\ei TO\fjLi]cra) eiTreiv, olov e crrt TO eV/crra- 
a6ai ^aLverai yap UOL Trpovpyov rt av <yevecr0at,. 
EAL ToX/^a TOLVVV vrj Ata. rovrcov Se /JLTJ 
<joi ecrrai, TroXX?) avyyvcofjiTj. XXXVI. 2H 
ovv o vvv \e<yov<Ji TO eirlcrTao daL , OEAI. 
ov fjbevToi, ev ye ru> Trapovri /^vrj/jiovevco. 2)H. 
B o-T^yLt?;? TTOV efyv <j)acrlv avro elvat,. @EAI. 

TOLVVV (7fjLLKpOV /J,Ta0GO/Ji0a 

KTrjcriv. EAI. Tl ovv &rj ^^cret? rovro 
CKGIVOV SiacfrepeLV ; 2H. "Icro)? /z-ez/ ovSev o 8 o^if 
L, aKovcra^ o-vvSofclua^e. EAI. Eaz/ Trep <ye olo? 
co. SO. Ov TOLVVV oi ravrov 

rep %eiv. olov el Ipartov Trpid/jievos rt? Kal 
&v fir) (fropot, e%eiv fj,ev OVK av avTov avTO, 

C Se 7 e Qalfiev. EAI. Kal opOca? ye. SH. "Opa 
Kal 7r idTTi fjirjv el %>vvaTov OVTW KeKTTjfjLevov 

C wcrirep el rt? opviOas dypias, TrepL(TTepd<$ ij rt 
, vrjpevcras OIK.QI KaTacncevacrdfJievos Trepio Tepewva 
Tpe(f)OL TpoTrov fjLev yap dv TCOV Tiva cfraiaev avTov 
aura? del e^eiv, OTL &rj /ce/cr^rat. 77 yap; EAI. Nat. 
2O. TpoTTov Se 7 d\\ov ovBe/Jilav exeiv, d\\d 
/j,ev avTw Trepi aura? Trapayeyovevai, eTreiBr) ev 
Trepi^o\(f) VTTo^eipLOv^ eTroirjcraTO, \a/3elv Kal 

D etreiSdv fiovKrjTai, 0r)pevcra/JLev(p rjv dv del edekrj, Kal 
7ra\iv a<j)ievat, Kal TOVTO eJ;eivat, iroielv, oVocra/a? dv 

6EAITHTO2. 77 

Bo/cf) avTo). BEAT. "Ecrrt ravra. SH. TLa\tv 77, 
ev rot? TrpccrOev Krpivov TI ev rat? 

OVK olo o rt TrXacr^ta, z/Dt a eV 

Trepicrrepeuivd riva Tra 

wv, ra? [lev /car dye\as ovcras %w/ot9 rwi^ a\\wv, 
ra? Se /^ar oXt^a?, eV/a? Se fjbovas Sid Tracrwv, oirr] 
av TV^WOTL, Trero/jLevas. 0EAI. Tle7rot,ijo-6a) S^ . aXA,a E 
T/ TovvrevOeV) 2O. ITaiStft)!/ /^e^ OVTWV $avai ^prj 
elvcu TOVTO TO dyyelov Kevov, dvrl Se TWV opviOwv 
rjv 8 civ e7ricnr)n, r]v KT7]crdfj,evos 
rj et? rov 7repi/3o\ov, $avai avrov fAefAadqrcevai, 
rj evpii/cevai, TO Trpdj/jia, ou TJV CLVTJ] r) eTrio-jij/ATj, /cal 
TO iiricTTCKjQai TOVT elvai. 0EAI. "Ecrra). 2)O. To 
Toivvv Tra\iv r)v av * /SouX^rat T&V CTT 1,0-77) fjiwv Oypeveiv 198 
KOI Xa/SoVra la^eiv KOI avOis afyihai a/coTrei, TLVWV 
belrai, ovofjidTwv, etre TWV avrwv u>v TO Trp&rov, ore 

eTre eTepwv. /JLaOijaei, S evTevOev 
pov, ii \eyco. dpiO^TLKrjv fJiev <ydp \eyeis 
EAI. Nat. SO. TCLVTTJV $r) V7r6\a]36 Otjpav e 


SH. TavTr} 5?;, ol/ULai, Trj Te^vrj avros re 
ra? eVia-TT/fta? TWV dpiOn&v e^et /fat B 
M Trapaiu>(Tiv o TrapaSiBov?. 0EAI. Nat. 2H. 
Kat Ka\ov/jbev <ye TrapaStSo^ra /xef SiSdaKeiv, Trapa- 
\a[ji/3dvovTa Se [JiavOdveiv, e%ovTa Se >} r<w KeKTrjaOai 
ev TCO Trepio Tepewvi, e/celvw eTrlaTacrdai,. 0EAI. TIdvv 
fjiev ovv. 2O. Ta> Se $r) evTevOev rjSrj Trpocrcr^e? TOZ^ 
vovv. dpi0/LL7jTi,Ko<; ydp wv TeXew? a XXo TL TcdvTas 
dpiOfjiovs eTr/a-rarat; TrdvTcov yap apiO^wv eicrlv avrut 
ev Tfj Tfrvxy eVta-r^at. 6EAI. T/ ^V; 2H. *H ovv c 
6 Totouro? dpcOfjiol av TTore Tt r) auro TTpo? ai5roj/ ^ 


a XXo TI T&V e %0), ocra ej^ei dpiO^ov ; 0EAI. TTcw? yap 
oi>; 2)11. To Be dpiQ^elv <ye OVK a\\o TI d^crofjiev TOV 
TTOCTO? T9 dpi6fj>bs Tvy%dve{, oov. EAI. 
. *O a pa eTrlararat, crK07rovjj,evos fyaiverai, 
(w? ov K. elSws, ov co/jLo\o r y?JKafAei> ajravra dpiO/jiov 
vai. aicoveis yap irov ra? TOiavra? 
OEAI. "70)76. XXXVII. 2ft. Ou/couz/ 
tcd^ovres rfj rwv Trepio-repwv KTrjaei re KOI Orjpq 
epovfjuev, OTI Sirrr} TJV 77 Orjpa, rj /j,ev Trplv efcrrjaOai, TOV 
KKTTJo-0aL GveKd, ?] Se /ce/CTrj/Aevo) TOV \aftelv KOL e^etv 
V rat? ^epcrlv a iraKai eKe/cr^TO. OVTO) Be Kal wv 
TrdXai, eVtcrT^yLtat q<rav avry (JuaOovn Kal ^TTLcrraro 
avrd, iraXiv ecm KarafiavOdveiv ravrd ravra dva- 
TJV eTTiarruJLT^v efcdarov /cal LG^ovTa, rjv 
Trd\ai, irpo-^eipov 3 OVK el%e rf} Sta- 
voia] EAI. *A\?j0rj. 2)H. TOUTO 8^ apri, rfpoorcov, 
E OTTO)? %pr} rot? ovopacn ^pwjjievov \e<yeiv irepl avr(Zv, 
orav apiOfjLYia wv cy 6 dpi9fjLJ]riK,o^ rj TI d 
o ypafi^artKo^. w? eTriaTa/Aevos apa ev TW 
7ra\iv epxerat, ^aQr](jo^vo^ Trap* eavrov a 
EAI. A\V aroTTov, cw SaJ^are?. 2Q. A\V a OVK 

uev avrov dvayvuxreaOai, Kal d 
, SeBcoKores avrat irdvra /j,ev ypd/jL/mara, irdvra Be 
i 99 pi^ov eTrlo-rao-Oai, ; 6EAL 
70^. ^11. BouXet 01)^ Xe7&)//, 
ovBev TJIUV /ieXet, OTTT; rt? %at/3e* eX/cwy TO 
Kal fiavddvew, eVeiSfj 8e wpLadpeOa erepov pev TI, TO 
KKT?j(T0ai, Trjv eiria-TTJjj.riv, erepov Be TO e-^iv, o 
rt? KT7]Tai prj KeKTrjo-Qai, dBvvaTov fa/lev elvai, CO 
ovBeTTOTe (TVfi&alvei o rfc? olBe ^ elBevai, ^evBrj 
B6%av olov T dvai Trepl avTov \apelv, ^ <ydp 

0EAITHTO2. 79 

rrjv eTTio-rrfU rjv rovrov olov re, aXX erepav dvr e/cei- B 
vrjs, orav drjpevcov riva cur? avrov eTTLo-nj/Jirjv StaTre- 
rouevcov dv& erepas erepav dfjiaprwv \d/3rj, ore dpa rd 
evSetca ScoSefca wrjQrj elvai, rrjv rd)v ev&efca eTTio-Tijfjirjv 
dvrl T^? TWV Sw8Ka \a/3(i)v, Tr)v ev eavrw olov (f>dr- 
Tav dvrl irepia-repas. 0EAI. "E^et yap ovv \6yov. 
5*11. f/ Orav Se 76 rjv eTTt^eipel \a/3elv \d/3rj, d^rev^elv 
re /cal rd ovra So%det,v Tore, KOI ovrco $rj elvau d\7jOrj 
re Kal ^Jrev&rj 8ofaz/, /cal &v ev rols irpoaOev ebvcr- c 
ovSev I/JLTTO^WV tylyvecrOai ; tcraj? ovv fjuoi, 
rj TrcS? Trot^crct?; EAI. Oi/ra>?. SO. 
Kat rydp rov /JLCV a eTT/crrarat pr) eiriaTacrOai aTrrfX- 
\d<y/j,0a d yap KefCTij/j,eOa f^rj Ke/crrjaOat, ovSafiov en, 
<rvfJL/3alvei, ovre ^evaOela-i nvos ovre ^tj. Seivorepov 
TrdOos d\\o TrapafyaiveaOaL poi So/eel. 0EAI. 
To TTOLOV ; !SO. Ei rj Ttov eTTio-Trjficov fjL6Ta\\ayr) 
evorjs ryevrjaerai TTOTC Sofa. 0EAI. Ilftj? ^ ; SH. 


ryvoeiv, firj ayvcofjiocrvvrj a\\a rfj eavrov eTnar?)^?], 
eTreira erepov av rovro So^a^eiv, TO 8 erepov TOUTO, 
ov TroXX?) d\oyta, eVio-T^//?;? Trapayevopevr}? <yvw- 
vai fiV rrjv tyv%r)v prjoev, dyvorjaai Se Trdvra ; ex yap 
rovrov rov \6yov /cco\Vi, ov&ev /cal ayvoiav Trapaye- 
vo/j,evT]v yvwvai ri Troiijaat, Kal rv(f)\6r7)Ta ISeiv, eiTrep 
ical eTTia-rr]^ dyvorjaai Trore nva Troirjcrei,. EAI. 
"Io-a)5 ydp } co Zto/cpares, ov AraXw? rd$ opviOas eri- E 
6e/JLv 7rtc7T/;/za? fjLovov nOevres, eSet, $ /cal dve7Tio~r f r]- 
fjLO(rvva$ riBevai ouov crvv&iaTrerofAevas ev rfj 
Kal rov Oripevovra rore fj,ev eTrio-rr/fjirjv \afj,^ 
rare 8 dveTTLcrrrj^oa-vvTjv rov avrov rctpt tyevSf) 
rfj dveTricrrrjfjLoo-vvr), d\7]0rj Be rfj e 


2ft. OJ pdbiov ye, GO ecuTT/Te, /*?} e-rraivelv ere. o 
uevroi, etTre?, ird\iv cTrla/ce^ai,. earco (lev yap GO? 
200 Xe7et9 o Se 817 TTJV dveiria-Tirjaoo-uv^v * \a{3cov -^evSr) 
aev, <j>fa Sogdo-ei. 37 yap; EAI. Nat. 2ft. Ou 
SrjTTov Kal jjyq<rral <ye tyevSrj So^d&iv. EAI. II co? 
rydp ; SO. AXX d\f]6fj 76, /cal co? t$<09 
Trepl wv e^revaraL EAI. 11 ^v y SO. 
apa olrjaerai reOijpevKdfc eyziv, czXX* ou/c d 
vvvr)v. EAI. A^Xoz^. SO. Ou/couz; pafcpdv irepie\- 
7ra\iv eVl TJ)^ Trpoorrjv Trdpecr^ev diroplav. 6 
eXeyrcTifcos eVet^o? ryeXacra? <$>r)(rei IIoTepo^ co 
rt? et Sco?, eVtcrT^^v re /cal az^e- 
rjv oi$ev, krepav avrrjv o lerai TIVCL eivai, 
&v olSev ; 77 ov&erepav avrolv elSais, r)v fir) olSe, $oj;det, 
erepav wv ov/c olSev ; 17 T?;^ yitez> et Sa)9, TT)Z/ 8 ou, }z> 
/U-T) olSez^ , <?) fjv fir) olSev, -rjv olSev r/yeirai, ; ^ 
av JAOI epelre on TWV eTTLO TTjiJL^v KOLI ave. i ma"Ti(}- 
v eicriv av eTTLo-TTJ^ai, a? o K6KTrnjuevo<$ ev ere- 
rtal rye\olois Trepio-repewo-iv rj K?) pivots TrXacr jj,acrt, 
C fca0elpj;as, eaxnrep av KetcriJTai, liria-raTai, Kal edv 
fjiT) 7rpo%elpov$ %?) ev rfj tyv%f) /cal ovrco $rj dvay/ca- 
crdijorecrOe et? ravrov irepLrpe^eiv avpiaKLs ovbev irXeov 
T/ Trpo? ravra, do eatr^re, aTroKpivov- 
EAI. AXXa yita A/a, co Sco^pare?, ejcoye ov/c 
, TL ^p?) \eyeiv. 2ft. *Ap ouz/ ^ti/, to ?rat, 
o Xo709 e7ri7r\rjTTei ) Kal evSeiKwrai, on ov/c 
tyevSfj Sogav Trporepav ^rovfjuev 6^^0-777^9, 
D afyevres , TO S earlv aSvvarov yvcovai,, irplv av Ti? 
eVfco-T^z; iW^9 Xa/3?7, rt TTOT eVrtV. EAI. A- 
vdjKrj, ti 5)a);/3aT69, eV TW irapovn 009 \eyeis oU 
XXXVIII. 2ft. TV ouj; 745 epet ira\iv et; d 


ov yap irov aTrepov^ev ye TTW. EAT. "H/acrra, 
lav rrep yu-r) crv ye dirayopevay^. SO. A 676 817, rt az/ 
i ad\ia-ra elrrovres yicicrr dv rj/jiLV aurot9 evavriw- 

EAI. "Qrrep erce-^eipov^ev, c5 ^oo/cpares, eV E 
TCO TrpoaOev" ov <yap e%<w eycoye a\\o ov&ev. ^O. To 
! Trolov ; EAI. T?)^ d\r)6r) 86av eTTL&Tr} [LJ]V elvai. 
mva/jtdpT7]Tov 76 Troy eVrt TO &oj;deiv ahrjOrj, /cal TO. 
VTT avrou ytyvofieva irdvra /ca\d /cal dyaOd yiyverai. 
2^1. O TOV TTorafjiov Ka6r)<yovfLevoS) a> eatr^re, et^iy 
apa Sei^ew avTO ical rovro lav lovres epevvw/jiev, Ta^ 
av /jL7r6$iov yevop,evov avro * (f)rjvec TO ^rovfjievov^ 201 

>j\oi> ovSev. EAI. Op^c3? \eryeW aXX 
ye real a-ff07ro)/j,v. 2H. OVKOVV rovro ye /3pa- 
ecos Te^vrj ydp <TQI o\r] arj/JLaivei [Ar) elvai 
avro. EAI. IIcG? Brj ; Kal TI? avrtj ; 2H. 
H TWV fJLeyio-TWV et? aofytav, 01)5 Brj /ca\ovcri, prjropds 
re Kal SiKaviKovs. OVTOL ydp TTOV rfj eavroov re^vy 
ireiOovcnv ov oiSdcrKOVTes, d\\d oot;deiv iroiovvres a av 
j3ou\(i)i>Tai,. TJ av olet> Seivovs rtvas OVTCO StSacr/caXou? 
elvai, coo-re ot? fjirj irapeyevovro rives dirocrrepovfievo^ B 
^pijfjLara rf ri d\\o (Bia^oaevois, TouTOt? &uva(r0ai vrpo? 
vocop a/jLLKpov Si8dt;ai, IKCLVU><$ roov yevofievtov rrjv d\rf- 
Oeiav j. EAI. OuSa/^c39 eycoye otyotat, d\\d rrelaau 
fj,ev. Sll. To Trelaai, 8 ov^l So^daai \eyeis iroirja-ai ; 
EAI. Tt HTJV ; Sn. OVKOVV orav Siicaiods Treio-Ocoai, 
Sitcacrral Trepl wv L&OVTI, JJLOVQV eo~riv elSevai, aXXcos oe 
fji^ ravra rore ej; drcofjs Kplvovres, d\7]6r} &6j;av Xa- C 
ySoi/re?, dvev eTTia TrjfjLrjs e/cpivav, opOd TreicrOevres, elrrep 
ev c&i/cacrav ; EAI. HavrdTraai, fJiev ovv. SH. Ov/c 
av, oo <j)L\e, et ye ravrov rjv Soga re d\r)9rj<; [/cal Suca- 
orTijpia] /cal ircidrr}^^ opOd Tror dv &i/cao~rr)S a/epos 
K. P. C 


eo~6j;a%ev avev eTTicrrr/ws vvv e eotKev aXXo ri, e/cd- 
repov elvai. EAT. f/ O 76 eyco, w Sco/c/mTe?, etVoWo? 
TOV d/cova-as eVtXeX?? 07^77 *;, vvv 8 evvooj. ecfrrj Se TTJV 
D fjuev fjierd \6yov d\7}0rj So^av emo-rr] jjurjv elvai, rrjv be 
a\oyov e /cro? eVto-TT/^? /cat wv pev fJbrj Ian 
OVK cTria-Tyrd elvai, ovrajcrl Kal ovofid^wv, a 8 
eTricrTrjTd. Sli. 9 H AraXw? Xe^et?. ra 8e S/) e 
ravra /cal /AT) TT/} Siypei, \e<ye, el dpa Kara ravrd crv re 
Kayo) aKriKoa^ev. EAI. A\X oi)/c olSa, el e^evpr/o-ay* 
Xeyo^ro? yLte^r av erepov, c^? eyw/^ai,, dKo\ov6r)(raiiJn,. 
XXXIX. SO. "A/cove 8?) 6Vap ai/rl oveiparos. eya 
E 7^/5 au eBo/covv aK.ove.iv TLVWV, on rd jjuev vrpcora 
olovTrepel crrot^eta, e^ wz^ rj^els re (TvyKelfjieOa /cal 
, \6yov OVK e^oi. avro yap Ka@* avro efcacrrov 
povov eirj, Trpoo-eiireZv Se ovSev aXXo SVVCLTOV, 
ovff to? (TTIV, ov6* W9 OVK ecTTLV Tj&r) yap av ovcriav 
>.02 * r) fj,rj ovcriav avrw TrpoaTiOecrOai, Selv Se ovSev Trpocr- 
(frepeiv, eiirep avro eKelvo JJLOVOV rt? epel. ejrel ovBe TO 
avro ovSe TO eKelvo ovSe TO eKaarov ovBe TO povov 
ouSe TO TOUTO Trpocroicrreov, ovS* a\\a TroXXa roiavra. 
ravra fjbev yap TrepLrpe^ovra iracn, irpoo-fyepea-Oai, erepa 
ovra eKelvwv, 0^9 irpocrriOerai, Seiv e, elirep rjv Svvarov 
avro \eyecrOai, Kal etyev oiKelov avrov \6yov, avev roov 
ciXktov arrdvrwv \eyeaOai. vvv Se dSvvarov elvat, onovv 
B rwv Trpwrwv prjOijvai \6y<p ov yap elvai avr) aXX rj 
ovo/j-d^earOai povov Ivo^a yap JJLOVOV e^eiv, rd Se ex 
rovrcDv rj^rj crvytcel^eva, wo-rrep avra irerrXeKrat,, ovrco 
Kai ra ovopara avr&v crv^rrKaKevra \6yov yeyovevai 
ovofjiarwv yap avfJi7r\OKr)v elvat, \6yov ovcriav. ovro) 
8?) rd fjLtv crrofyela a\oya Kal dyvcocrra elvai, alcrOrjra 
Se* Ta? Be cruXXa/Sa? yvcocrrds re Kal pr)ra<$ Kal d\7j0e2 


rj So^ao-rds. orav fiev ovv avev \6yov rrjv d\r)6r/ 


irepl avro, yiyvwaiceiv oil rov yap fjur) Svvd/jievov 
Bovval re KOI S^aadat, \6yov dve7ri(Trr//jLova eivai Trepl 
rovroV 7rpoa\at36vTa 8e \6yov Svvarov re ravra Trdvra 
yeyovevat /cal reXetw? Trpo? eTTtcrr^yu.?;!/ e^eiv. Ourco? av 
TO evvTTViov rj aXXco? d/cy/coa? (B)EAL O^TOJ 
2^0. ApeV/cei oyi/ ere /cat TiOeaa 
/jierd \6yov err tarrj JJLTJV eivai ; @EAI. 
ovv. SO. ^Ap , co eatT^re, vvv ovrco 
TTJ ypepa elXtj^ajjiev o 7rd\at, /cal TroXXol TWV 
v ^rfTovvres Trplv evpelv Kare^paaav ; BEAT. 
yovv Sorcei, w 2<foKpaTe$, A:aXcT? \eyea-0ai TO i/i)^ 
. SO. Kat 6t/co? 7e <XI;TO TOUTO OUTW? e%eiv 
Tt? 7^/3 a^ Aral eVt eTTicrr^/jurj eirj %pt9 \6yov re ical 
opOfjS of?79 ; e// yu-eWot Tt /ae TWZ/ ^Qkvrw 
BEAI. To Trolov %r] ; SO. *O /cal So/eel 
KO/jf^roTaTa, r*;9 TOL fj,ev (jroi^ela ayvwara, TO Be 
av\\a/3(jov 7et o? yvaxTTov. 0EAI. Ovrcovv op&a>$ ; E 
SO. Icrreoi/ 8/;* axTTrep jap ofjurfpov^ e^o^ev TOV \6yov 
rd Tra palely fjiara, 0^9 ^pw^evos etTre travra ravra. 
0EAI. Ilota, 5>J; SO. Ta TW^ ypa^drcop crroi^ela 
re /cal <7i/XXa/5a9. 77 otet aXXocre ?rot ffXeTrovra ravra 
elrrelv rov elrrovra, a \eyofjbev ; 0EAI. Ou/c, aXX et9 
ravra. XL. SO. Bao-aj/tfa)/z.e^ * Sr} aura dva\a{i/3d- 203 

Be 77/^^9 auVou9, oi;T&J9 rj OV% ovrcos 
e/jdOojuuev. (frepe TrpwroV dp at, jj,ev av\- 
Xa/5at \oyov Covert,, rd Se aro^ela a\oya\ EAI. 
"Icrco9. SO. Tldvv fJi,ev ovv /cal /jiol (fiaiveraL 2*o)/cpa- 
Toi/9 yovv CL Tt9 epoiro rrjv rrpwrvjv crv\\a/3r)v ovrcocri, 
O QeairijTe, \eye ri ICTTI Ww, ri drroK-pw el ; EAI. 

G 2 


f/ Ort aiy/jia teal CD. 5fl. QVKOVV rovrov e^et? \6yov 
T?j9 cruXXa/3>;9; EAL "Eyftjye. SO. "I# 8/7, ouro>9 
B etVe #al TOZ> TOZ) cly^a \6yov. 0EAI. Kal 7rc39 TOU 
o-TOL^elov T9 />e? crTOfc^eta ; Kal ydp Srj, & SwATyoare?, 
TO re criy/jia TWV a(f>cai>a)v earl, -^o0o? ri? p,6vov, olov 

GVplTTOVCTTJS T/J? <y\WTT7JS TOV 8 at) /5/Jra 01/T6 </)CO^^ 

cure ^0009, ou8e rcGz^ 7r\eicrTwv aTOiyeiwv. ware TTCIVV 
ev e^et TO \eyeo-0ai, avra d\oya, wv ye ra eyapyearara 
avrd, ra errra, (jx&vrjv JAOVOV fyeij \6yov Se oi)S ovnvovv. 
2O. TouTt yLtei dpa, & eralpe, Karwp6(t)icap,ev rrepl em- 

C ffTJw*. EAL aiv6fi,e6a. SO. Tt 8e 817 ; TO /ZT) 
yvwarbv elvai TO GroL^elov, d\\a rrfv GVbXaftrjv ap 
cpOws diroSeSeLyfjieQa; EAL EiVo9 76. SO. 
877, T^V (rvXka(3r)p Trorepov \eyopev ra d/jL(j)6repa 
Xeia, ical eav TrXe/a) fj rj Svo, ra rravra, rj ulav nva IBeav 
yeyovvlav (rvvreOevrwv avrwv ; EAI. Td arravra 
efJLOiy SoKovfJiev. SO. (/ Opa Brj 7rl SVOLV, aty/^a /cal 
w. d/jL(f>6repd ecrriv TJ Trpoorr] orv\Xa/3r} rov e /xoO oz;o- 
/Jiaros. d\\o n o yiyvuxricwv avrrjv rd dfjufyorepa 

D yvyv&<Ttcet ; EAL Tt y^v ; SO. To <riyfj.a /cal TO 
ft) dpa yiyvux7Ki. EAL Nat. Sft. Tt 8e ; exdrepov 
ap ayvoel, Kal ovBerpoi> elBofa djj,$6repa 
EAL AXXa Beivov Kal d\oyov, w ^w 

a pevroi el ye dvdy/cr] eicdrepov yiyvooo-Kew, elirep 
d Ti9 yvaaerai, irpoyiyvwa-Keiv ra aroi^ela 
avay/ctj TW ue\\ovrl trore yvaxrecrOai, crv\\a- 
l ouTft)9 rjiuv o Ka\o? \6yos dTroSeSpa/cw ol%r}- 

E crerai. EAL Kal ad\a ye efa^i/^9. 2li. Ou yap 
A > aXoj9 avrov <j)v\drrouev. Xpfjv yap to-&>9 T?)^ cryXXa- 
/?T;I/ riOea-Qac fjur) rd crroi^ela, aXX e f eKeivwv ev n 
yeyovos eI8o9, t 8eay /^taz/ ai^TO auToD e^ois, erepov 8e 

0EAITHTO2. 85 

TWV o-TOL^eiwv. 0EAI. Tldvv fj,ev ovv /cal Taya y 

tiv fj,d\\ov OVTWS 77 e/celvcos X OL ^ 

ov TrpoBoreov ovrcos dvdvBpcos fieyav re /cat 

\oyov. 0EAI. Ov yap ovv. SO. E^eret) Brj, 0)9 vvv 

(f)a/j,ev, JULIO, * ISea e f efcaarcov TWV avvapfJLOTTovTwv 204 

Lyvo/jbevTj rj av\\a/3r} 6/uo/w? eV re ypdfjL- 
KOI ev rot? aXXoi? airao i. EAL Tidvv ^ev ovv. 
SO. OVKOVV pepr) avrrjs ov Bel elvai. EAI. Tt Si}; 
SO. f/ Ort oi5 ai^ r; fiepTj, TO o\ov dvdytcij TO. nravra 
f^epij elvai. rj KOI TO u\ov e/c TV fiepajv \eye(,s yeyovos 
ev TI eZSo? eTepov TWV TTCLVTWV fiepdov ; E AI. 70)76. 
SO. To Be &rf irav /cal TO o\ov TTOTepov TCLVTOV Ka\ei<? 
$ eTepov efcdrepov ; 0EAI. "E^w pev ovSev tra^e?, B 
ort 5e /ceXeveis Trpodv/Acos diroKplva<T@at, irapaKivo v- 
vevwv Xe7O), ort eTepov. SO. H yu-ez^ TrpoOvfAia, <u 
QeaiTijTe, opdr f el Be fcal 77 dTTOKpio-is, a/cetrTeov. 
0EAL Ae? e 76 S.;. XLI. SO. OVKOVV Bia^epoi av 
TO o\ov TOV Trai/ro ?, a>9 6 j/Oi; Xo70? ; 0EAI. Nat. 
SO. Tl Be Brf ; r TrdvTa fcdl TO trdv ecrd o TI Bia- 
olov eTreiBdv \eya)fj,ev ev, Bvo, Tpia, rerrapa, 
, ef, /cal edv St9 r/ota 17 rpt9 3i;o T; rerrapa re C 
/cat i;o 77 rpta /cal Bvo /cal eV, TroTepov ev Tracri TOVTOLS 
TO avTo 77 eTepov Xeyopev ; 0EAI. TavTov. SO. *Ap 
aXXo T r* ef ; 6EAL OuSeV. SO. OVKOVV ty e/cd- 
0-7779 Xef6&)9 Traz^ra ra ef elpt]/ca/jLev ; 0EAT. Nat. 
SO. ITaXti/ 8 ouSez/ \eyofjiev TCI nravTcu \eyovTes ; 
0EAI. Avdy/crj. SO. H aXXo rt 77 ra ef ; @EAI. 
OuSeV. SO. Tauroy dpa ev ye rot9 ocra e apt- D 
O eVrt TO re Traz^ irpoaayopevo^ev /cal TO, 

204 c. Tra.i>Ta. TO. Z. Hcindorf. legit irav TL TO, ?|. 


EAT. Qalverai. SO. *OSe S>) rrepl avrcov \eyo/jiv. 
6 TOV 7r\eOpov dpiO^os ical TO rr\eOpov ravrov. ?} yap ; 
EAT. Nat. SO. Kal 6 TOV aTa&lov Srj wcravTWS ; 
EAT. Nat. SO. Kal urjv Kal 6 TOV crTpaTOTreoov 
ye Kal TO crTpaTOTreBov, Kal TrdvTa TO, TOiavTa 6/Wa>? ; 

6 yap dplduOS TTtt? TO tv TTuV GKCLCTTOV CLVTWV 

EAT. Nat. SO. e O 5e sK(i<rra)v dpi0/Ao$ JJLV 
E TI f/ l^epT} (7Tiv t EAT. OvSev. SH. f/ Oaa apa 
pepr), GK fjiepwv av e tTj EAT. Qaiverai. SO. Ta Be 
ye TcavTCL fAepij TO irav eivai ofJioX-oyelrai, enrep Kat, o 
TTa? dpi6[Jbos TO Trap co-rat. EAT. Ovro). 2H. To 
o\ov cip OVK ecrTLv K jjiep&v. Trav yap av elf], Ta 
TrdvTa ov uepr). EAT. Ov/c eoiKe. SO. Mepo? T 

O~0 y OTOV d\\OV eO"Tiv 07Tp GCTTLV rj TOV 0\OV , EAT. 

205 Toy Traz/ro? ye. SO. * Az/SptArc3? ye, GO eatr^re, 
yLta^et. TO rrav Se ov^ orav fiijBev o,iry t avTo TOVTO 
TTCLV e&Tiv , EAT. AvdyKrj. SO. f/ O\ov Se ov Tav- 
TOV TOVTO eVrat, ov av fMiSaufj juLySev aTroarary ; ov 
3 av aTroo-raTy, OVTE o\ov oi/re Trav, aaa yevopevov 
e/c TOV avTov TO avTo ; EAT. Ao/cet pot vvv ovBev 
8uuf>pLV Trdv re Kal o\ov. SO. QVKOVV eXeyouev, on 
ov av pepTj 77, TO o\ov re Kal rrdv rd rrdvTa 
eo-Tat; EAT. Udvv ye. SO. Ud\iv Bij, orrep d 

7T^eLpOVV, OVK, CiTTep T) <TV\\ajBr) fJirf Ta CTTOL^eld 

B i<rnv y dvayKij avTrjv ur) co? fjbeprj e^eiv eavTrjS ra 
UToi xela, 77 TauTo^ ovaav avroL? ouoicos e/eeivoi? yvw- 
crrrjv eivai ; EAT. OVTCDS. SO. OVKOVV TOVTO i va 
M yevyTai,, erepov avTwv avTrjv eOeueOa ; EAT. Nat. 
SO. Tt 8 ; el fir) Ta o-Toi^ela <rv\\a@f]<: j^epy eartv, 
a XV aVra elrrelv, a pepy uev ICTTL <rv\\aflr)<i, ov 
d y e/cetVr;?; EAT. OvSauoo? el yap, 


, fiopia TCIVTTJS crvyxwpol rjv, ye\olcv TTOV 
ra crroi x&la d<j)evra err d\\a levai. 20. HavraTraa-L 
$r/, c5 eatTTyre, Kara rov vvv \6yov jjiia n<$ IBea d/jue- V 
picrros <TV\\a/3rj av en?. EAI. "E<K/ce. Sfl. 
ovv, co <f)i\e, OTI 6\L<yov eV TO> Trpoade 
rjryoviJLevoi ev Xeyeo-Oai,, ort, TWV Trpwrcov OVK eirj 
ef COP ra a\\a o-vyKeirai, &IOTI, avro KaO avro k tcacrTov 
elrj dcrvvOerov, /cat ov$e TO elvai irepi avrov opOws e^oi 
7rpocr(f)epovTa elirelv, ov&e TOUTO, co? erepa teal d\\6rpia 
/cal CLVTTJ 8/7 rj atria aXoyov re Kal ayvto- 
tot; EAI. Me[j,vr)iJLai. 2Q. ^H ovv 
-n? T} avrrj rj air la TGV /uo^oetSe? Tt /cat d^epi- 
avrb elvai; eyco jjbtv yap ov/c opc3 aXkrjv. EAI. 
Ov yap ovv Srj fyaiveTai. ^fl. QVKOVV ei9 ravrov 
fJL7re r n-rcoKi> rj av\\a^rj elSo? eteeivq), etirep pepy re 
fji tj e^6t /cal fjila earlv ISea ; EAI. HavraTracri, 
ovv. SH. Et fjiev a pa rro\\a aroL^ela rj 
(m /cal o\ov ri y ^prj & avrrjs ravra, O/JLOLO)? ai re 
o~v\\a/3al yvajaral Kal pyral Kal ra drot^eta, eVetTrep 
ra rcavTa f^epTj r<o oXco ravrov ecfrdvr]. EAI. Kat 
fjioka. Sn. Et ^e 76 eV re /cal dfiepes, oyno/<w? yLtez/ 
av\\a{3}j, wcrauT&)9 Se aroL^elov a\oybv re Kal ayvco- 
<rrov 77 7ap aur>) alrta rroitjcrei avrd roiavra. EAI. 
OVK e^a) aXXa)9 elrrelv. 2H. ToOro //,ez/ apa /^T) a?ro- 
Se^cof^eOa, o? z/ ^^777 crv\\af3r)V fiev yvwcrrov Kai 
p7)rov, aroi^elov Se rovvavriov. EAI. M?) 7/3, ef- 
7T6/3 TO) X07W rreiOo/jLeOa. 2H. * TV 8 av ; rovvavriov 
\eyovro<$ ap ov H,CL\\OV av dtrooe^aio e wv afro? 
crvvoicrOa cravrq) ev rfj rwv ypa/JL^drcov 
EAI. To Trolov; SO. r H? ovoev a XXo 

77 ra aroL-^ela ev re rfj o^rei, SiayiyvcoaKeiv 


Treipobfjievos KOI eV rfj d/cofi avro KaO* avro e/cao-Tov, iva 
pr) 77 Oecris ere rapdrroi \eyofj,evwv re KOI ypafyofjbevwv. 
0EAI. A\?)6e(7TaTa \eyeis. 2ft. Ev Be KiOapicrrov 
reXe&>9 ^e^aO^tcevai /JLWV aXXo TI tfv rj TO T (f>66y- 

13 76) e/caaro) bvvaa-dai eTraicoKovOelv, iroia^ %op$fjs eli) 
a Srf (Troi^ela Tra? av 6/j,o\oyr/(7eie fJiovo-iKrjs \eyea6ai, ; 
EAI. OvSev a\\o. Sn. *lv fiev ap avrol e/jL7reipoi 
ecr/jiev crroL^elcov /cal (rv\\a/3u>v, el Bel CLTTO rovrcov 
reftfJialpecrOai, KOL ei? ra a\\a, TTO\V TO TWV o-roi^eiwv 
761/0? evapyecTTiEpav re Tr/v yvwcriv e-)(eiv <f)r)cro/jiev teal 
rfjs <Tv\\a/3fjs 7rpo9 TO \aj3eiv 

, /cal edv Tt? <j>fj GV\\a^r]v /jiev 
ayvwarov Be irefyvKevcu o-Toi^elov, etcovra rj a/covra 
Trai^eiv rjyrjcrofjLeO avrbv. EAI. Ko/AtS?; p^ev ovv. 

C XLII. SO. AXXa Br) rovrov {lev en KCLV a\\at 
(paveiev aTroSc/fei?, w? e/j,ol Bo/cei TO Be Trporcel/jievov 
fjirj e7r(,\a9a)fjie0a Bi avrd IBelv, o TI Bi i7roT KOI \eyerai, 
TO fjuerd Bo^rjs d\7]6ov^ \6yov TrpoayevofLevov TTJV TeXew- 
TaTT^v eTTiaTrj^LTju yeyovevai. EAI. OVKOVV *xpr} opav. 
Sfi. <&epe Bj, TL TTOTe ySouXeTat TO^ \6yov rjfjLLv or] 
viv\ Tpi&v yap ev Tt fioi, Bo/cel \eyeiv. 0EAI. Ti- 

-I) vo)i> Br} ; Sfl. To f.Lev Trpwrov elt] av TO Tr]V avTov 
Bidvoiav efji^avr) Troieiv Bia (frwvfjs peTa prjfjiaTwv Te 
teal ovofACLTcov, cocTTrep et? /cdroTTTpov 77 vBa)p Tt}v Bo^av 
e/CTV7rov{ievov et9 Trjv Bid TOV crTo/xaTO? porjv. r) ov Bo/cel 
aoi TO TOIOVTOV XO YO? elvai, ; EAI. "E/Aoi^e. TOV yovv 
avTo cpwvTd \eyeiv (fra/juev. ISO. OVKOVV av TOVTO ye 
?ra9 Troielv BvvaTos QCLTTOV rj a^oXaiTepov, TO evBel- 
gacruai, TL Bo/cel Trepl etcdcrTOv CLVTW, o fir) eveos rj /cto(j)o<> 
air />%i75 fcal OUTO)? ocro^ TI opdov ^o^d^ovai, irdvTes 

E auTO /ATa Xo^ou (fravovvrai, e^oz/Te?, /cal ovBa/jiov 


CTI opdrj Soga %&>pt9 eTrio-Ty /ur)? yevr/creTai. EAT. 
*A.\r)0}). 2H. M?) Toivvv paSlws KaTayiyvcoo-KWuev TO 
fjLrjSev elpijKevai TOV dTrocfrrjvd/jievov eTricrTrffJi rjv, o vvv 
(TK07rov/jiev. t<76)9 yap o \eya)V ov TOVTO e\eyev, d\\d 
TO epcoTr)9evTa TI Kao~Tov BvvaTov elvai TTJV aTroKpiaiv 
Sid TCOV crTOi^eiwv aTToSovvai * Toy epouevw. EAI. 207 
Qlov TL \eyets, &1 SwArpare? ; ^D. Qlov Kal r HcrtoSo9 
Trepl dfj,d%r)s \eyei TO eKarov Be Te BovpaO dad^r)^. d 
OVK dv SvvaluTjv eiTreiv, olaai Be ovBe av 
av epcDTijdevTe? o TI eaTiv dua%a, el 

i, d^cov, vTrepTepia, dvTvyes, vyov. EAT. 
ITayi> fjiev ovv. 2H. C O Be ye icrcos O LOIT dv tfuds, wo-Trep 
av TO crov ovoaa epWTTjOevTas KOL aTTOKpivouevovs KdTa 
<rv\\a{3r)v, ye\olov<; elvai op0u><; aev Sogd^ovTas Kal B 
\eyovTa<$ a \eyo/j,ev, olopevovs Be ypa/muaTiKov? elvai 
Kal e%eiv Te Kal \eyeiv ypauaaTiKaJs TOV TOV eaiT^Toy 
oi/o/xa-T09 \6yov. TO 8* OVK elvai eTrio-Trjuova)? ovSev \eyeiv, 
Trplv dv Bid TcSv aTOi^eiwv fjierd TTJS dXrjdovs 80^779 
CKaaTov irepaivrj TIS, oirep Kal ev Tot9 TrpoaOev TTOV 
{ eppTjOTj. EAI. Epp77$77 7<^p. 2H. Q UTW TOIVVV Kal 
I Trepl d/jLa^r)^ rjads Liev 6p0>]v eyeuv So^av, TOV Be Bia 
i TOJV eKaTov eKeivwv Swd/juevov Sie\6eiv avTrjs TTJV ov- C 
1 trlav, Trpoo~\a(BovTa TOVTO, \6yov Te Trpo(rei\r)<pevai Trj 
i d\7]0ei Bo^rj Kal dvTl Bo^acrTiKov Te%viKOv Te Kal eTTi- 
\ VTTJuova Trepl dud^ijs overlap yeyovevai, Bid crToi%ela)v 
[TO o\ov TrepdvavTa. EAI. QVKOVV ev SOKCI O-QI, c3 
\ ^a)/cpa,T69 J SO. Et <TOI, w eTalpe, BOKCI, Kal aTroBe^ei 
l Ttjv Bid TOV <7Toi%eLOv Bie^oBov Trepl eKao-TOV \6yov 
elvai, TI}V Be KaTa cri;XXa/3a9 ^7 Kal KaTa fiel^ov CTI 
u\oy(av, TOVTO pot, \eye, r (v aino Trio~K07r(t)/J,v. D 


0EAI. AXXa irdw a?roSe^o/iat. SH. Uorepov 77701;- 

elvcu OVTLVOVV orovovv, orav TO airol 
ore [lev TOV avrov &OKTJ ai~a> elvai, rore e erepov, ij Kal\ 


EAI. Ma At" OVK 70)76. H. Etra a uvr) novels evi 
rrj TWV ypafjLjjLarav fiaOijaei /car dp%a<; <rav~6v re KOU 
TOL-? aXXou? ^/jctzrra? avrd ; EAI. *Apa \eyeis r^d 

E aiTijs (ru\\a/3ij$ rore /iev erepov, rore e erepoi/ 
Tfyov/j,ei ovs jpa^-fia, KCU TO avTO rore [J,ev 19 TT}V 7rpo<r- 
rjKovaav, Tore e e/9 a\\rjv TiOevTas crv\\a/3r)V , fi.j 
Taura \e~/(D. 0EAI. Ma At" 01) TOLVVV dp,vr]^ovwA 
ov$e 76 TTOJ rr/ovfjiai iiricrra^Oai TOVS oi/ra)? e^oz ra? 
n. Tt GUI/ ; oray eV rou TOIOVT<O Kaiput QeairrjTov 
^fpa&wv TI$ OtjTa Kal e o rjTal T6 eiv ypdfaiv 

S fpatfry, real av * Qeoa>pov eTTi^eipwv ypdfaiv TCLV /cal 
e oirjTdi T feiv ^/pd<j>eiv Kal ypd-^rr), ap iTri 
<*)7JcrofJ.ev avTov TTJV irputTTjv TWV vperepcov O 
G-v\\afir,v ; 0EAI. AXX CLOTI wfio\o^fTjo-afjLv TOV ou- 
TOJ? %ovTa /I7J7T&) eitievai. ^H. Ko)\t6t ovv TI Kal Tr 
TTJV oeurepav crv\\a/3r]v Kal TP LTTJV Kal TerdpTrjv OL 
e^eiv TOV avTov j EAI. OvBev 76. SO. *Ap ovv rore 
TTJV &a (Troixeiov i%otov %a)V 7pa-v!ret QeaiTTj 
fjierd op6r,s ^0^779, oTav e 77? ypd^rj ; EAI. A?;\oi^ 

B 2H. ; Ou/coi)i/ ert dveTTLcrrrj^v &v, opda Be 
ax <f>afiev ; EAI. Nat. 2H. Aayoi; 76 e 

eypa<f>v, rjv &rj \cr/ov wfJL 0X0777 craftev. EAI. \\\7]0rj. 
^n. "Etrrti/ apa, co eraipe, /zera Xcxyou O/D^ oofa, 
OITTTQ) 8et eTTKTTrjaTjv Ka\iv. EAI. Kfi/8yj/euet. XLIII. 
]fi. "Ovap Brj, w? eoiKev, eTrXovrrjcrapev olrjdevTes 

8EATTHTO2. 91 


pwftev ; {tret)? y a p v TOVTO T? avrov opielTai, aX- C 
Xa TO \oL7rov eZ3o9 T&Ji/ Tpicev, a>v ev ye Tt e<f>afj^v 
TOV eTTLGTr) fJLT]v opifcofievov B6av 
eivai op6rjv fierd \cr/ov. 0EAI. O/ 

TO /jv yap rjv Biavoias ev 
>, TO 8 apTt \e-)(6ev Bta aTOi^eio 
-I TO o\ov TO Be Brj TpiTov TI Xeye*? ; ^H. </ ( 
av 01 TroXXot eftroiev, TO e^eiv TI (Trjfielov el-rrelv, w 
firdiTcov Bia<f)epet TO epamjQev. 0EAI. Olov Tiva TIVOS 
fiot \6yov etTreiv ; SO. ! Olov, el j3ov\ei t r)\iov 
iKavov OLfJ&i croi elvat aTrote^ao Oai, ort TO \afiirp6- 
TaTov eo"Tt, TGov KOTO, TOV ovpavov iovT(DV Tepl yiji 1 . 
BEAT. Haw fiev ov v. ^H. Aa/3e Brj ov X^P lv ^ipjfrai. 
0"n Be oTrep apTt eXeyo/ier, <o? apa Trjv Biafiopdv et 
TOV av \anj3dvr)S, y TWV u\\oyv Bia&epet, \o~/ov 1 

i Ta 9, \rjijret eaj? 8 av KOIVOV TIVOS 
fxeiKDv irept o~ot ecrrcu, o \6yos, wv av ij KOIVOTTJS /. 
BEAT. ^lavOdvco /cat fiot Bo/cet KO\Q^ e^etv \cyov E 
TO TOIOVTOV tca\eiv. O. O? B* av fier* opOrfS Bo^rjs 
vepl OTOVOVV TV OVTQ)V Trjv Bta&opdv T<av d\\(DV 7rpo<r- 
aiTov 7ri<mjfjLfDV yeyovct^ carat, ov Trporepov rjv 

0EAI. <>a/JLV 76 flTJV OVTG). 2O. XOj/ 

w SeaiTijre, Travrd~a<Tiv eyaxye, eTretBrj eyyvs 
&<rrrep o-Ktaypa^fJtaTO<; yeyova TOV \e~/ofievov, ^wtrjfju, 

\eyeadai. 0EAI. II <? Tt TOVTO ; H. * 4>/)a<ra>, 209 
olo? Te yevcofJLai. op8r)v eywye e%cov Boav irepk o*oO, 
lv o~ov \6yor, yiyvootricto Brj <re, el 
0EAI. Xa/. Sfl. Aoyo? Be 76 


r}V 77 T?7? err]? SiafyoporriTos epfjLTjveia. EAT. 
5ft. HznV ot z e$oi;aoi> povov, d\\o TI co rwv dX\,oov 
Siatyepew, TOVTCOV ov&evos ^TTTO^I rfj Biavoia ; EAI. 
OVK eoi/ce. 5ft. Tcov KOLVWV n dpa ^ievoov/ji^v, u>v 
ovSev av i^aXkov rj rt? aXXo? e^et. (*)EAI, AvdyKij. 
Sft. Qepe Brj 7rpo9 Ato? TTOJ? rrore ev ro3 TOLOVTO) <re 
a^of 77 a\Xoi> OVTLVOVV j $e? <yap yae Siavoov- 
, &)? ecrriz/ otro? eatV^ro?, o? az> ^ re avOpco- 
TTO? /cat ^77 ptz/a :at o^Oakfjiov^ Kal crro/jLa Kal ovrco 
Srj i> e/cao-Tov rcov yaeXcof. aur-?; ouz/ 77 ^iavoia ecrO o 
n fia\\ov iroirjcrei pe SeaiTrjrov r) Seo&copov $iavoel(T0ai,, 
rj TO \eyofievov, Mucrc3^ TOV eayaiov ; 0EAI. T/ 7ap ; 
Sft. A\V eaz^ 8?) /Ltr) /jiovov rov e^ovra plva /ecu o<pOa\~ 
C fJ<ovs SiavoijOw, a\\a Kal rov aifjiov re Kal e%6(j)0a\fj,ov, 
ari TL (76 av ^ak\ov So^dcrco rj eaavrov r) ocrou TOLOVTOI, ; 
0EAI. QvBev. 5ft. A\V ov irporepov ye, olfjuai, 
ev e/zol $oaa~0rj(T6Tai,, irp\v av 77 crLfJLOTrjS aurrj 

Trap e/nol ^va^^riva^vr] Karadrjra^ 
TaXXa ouro)? ef c2i> et cru, 77 e/ze, /cat eaz/ avpiov a 
Trja-co, dvauvija-ei, /cal Troujcrei, op6a &oj;deiv Trepl 
I) crov. OEAI. "AX^Qearara. 5ft. Hepl rrjv Scafo- 
poTTjra apa Kal 77 opOtj 3ofa az^ 6^77 e/cda-rov 7TpL 
0EAI. Qaiveral 76. 5ft. To o^ Trpoa-\a$elv \6yov 
rrj opQf) Sofy rl av ert, eirj ; el aev yap TTp 
\eji y biafyepei, rt, rwv aXXwz/, irdvv rye\ola 
TJ eV/ra^t?. EAI. Deo?; 5ft. r ftz/ dp^^z/ So^a 
77 TWV d\\wv $uuf>ipei, TOVTWV 7rpoa\a/3e2v 

209 c. ^ fye. Si 17 Platonis est, neglegentius scriptum videtur. 
Sed nescio an debuerim vel cum Heindorfio o vel d reponere. 


opOrjv So^av, y rwv a\\wv Siacfrspei,. /cal ovrw? 
rj fjbev a-/cvrd\r)s 77 vrrepou r] orov Btj \eyerai rrepirporrrj 
7T/909 ravrrjv rrjv errira^iv ovSev av \eyoi, rv(f)\ov Be E 
TrapafceXevais av KaXolro Sucaiorepov TO yap a e 
ravra 7rpo<r\a/3eLi> K6\eveiv, iva f^dOcofiev a S 
TTCLVV ryevvaiws eoiKev eo-Korw/^evM. 0EAI. EtVe Sij, 

Tt VVV $7} C09 epWV 7TV00V J 2H. Et TO \OJOV, 0) 7TCU, 

7rpoa-\a/3eiv <yvu>vai Ke\evei,, d\\d /JLT) So^daaL rrjv 

\6yov. TO <ydp 
TTOV \afBelv GCTTLV. * rj yap ; EAT. Nat. 2fl. OVKOVV 210 

eoi/ce, rl ecmv eTTicmjfjL rj, cLTroKpivelrai, 
on Sofa opOrj fj.erd eTTKTTijfiTjs SicKfropoT rjTos. \6<yov yap 

TOUT av CLTJ KCLT* e/celvov. 0EAI. 
2)O. Kal iravTCLTrao-i ye evrjOe^, fyrovvrcov 

, So^av (frdvai, opdijv eivai [ACT lina Tr) ///?;? elre 
eire orovovv. ovre apa al o-drjcris, w ea/- 
ovre &6%a d\7jOrj^ ovre per d\r)0ovs 0^77? Xo- 
709 TrpocryiyvofAevos eVtcrT^T; av ely. 0EAI. Ov/c B 
eoifcev. SO. *H ovv en /cvov/jbev n Kal ooBlvofjiev, w 
<t>i\, Trepl eTrio-Tr/fjiijf;, 77 Trdvra eKTero/ca/^ev ; @EAI. 
Kal val fjia At" eycoye 7r\elco rj ocra ei%ov ev e/zai/Tw 
ere eip^ica. SH. Ov/covv ravra /j,ev aTravra 77 
re^vrj dve/juaid $7)0-1, yeyevrjaOai, /cal 
OVK a^ua rpocf)r}s ; EAI. YlavraTracri, /buev ovv. XLIV. 
. Eaz/ rolvvv a\\cov fiera ravra ey/cv/jLcov 7Tlj(lpy? 
yiyveo-Oai, w SeairijTe, lav re yiyvy, /3e\novcov eaei c 

Sta rrjV vvv e^eracrtv, edv re /cevos T}?, rjrrov 
j3api)s Tot9 crvvovcrt, teal tffj,epwrepo$, cro)(f)p6vQ)s OVK 
eio evai, a /JLTJ olada. ro<rovrov yap JJLOVOV tf 


} Te%vrj Svvarai, ir\iov Be ovBev, ovBe rt, oltia a>v 
, oaoi, fjLeydXoi, /cal Qav^acjioi a^Spe? elai re ical 

rrjv Be fJLdieiav ravrrjv eya> re /cal rj /jLyjrij 
eXa^Oyttez/, 77 pep TWV lyvvaifcaiv, eya) Be TOJV 
teal yevvatcov /cal ocroi /ca\oL vvv ev o 
pot, e/9 rrjv rov ySacrtXeo)? crrodv 
arfrrjv, r]V fie yejpairrai ewQev Se, w 0eo<- 
, Bevpo 7rd\iv 

/c 0ov 
vewv re 




[Euclides, founder of the Megaric School, and his friend Terpsion, both 1 
of them pupils of Socrates, meet in one of the streets of Megara. The 
former mentions that on his way to the harbour he had met Theae- 
tetus, wounded and dangerously sick, being carried to Athens from 
the Athenian camp near Corinth. A conversation ensuing on the 
noble character of Theaetetus, and the estimation in which he was held 
by Socrates, Euclides says that he has at home in manuscript a 
dialogue, which Theaetetus took part in with Socrates. As Terpsion 
expresses a wish to hear this dialogue, the friends adjourn to the house 
of Euclides, where a slave reads it aloud to them as they repose. ,] 

Eu. Ha, Terpsion! long in 1 from the country 2 ? 
Ter. A good while. And you 3 I was looking for 
you in the Agora, and wondering that I could not find you. 
Eu. I was not in the city. 
Ter. Where then? 

L 1 "ApT{...77 TrdXai; English idiom would say just in? or long in? 
but not both. The translation therefore omits one alternative. 

2 *E d-ypov. Terpsion has a country residence; whether a town 
house also, there is nothing to show. 

3 Kat <r 76. This emphasis implies a question as to the cause of 
Euclid s absence. The dyopa or market-square was a promenade, 
where a friend might be locked for at a certain time of day, as in the 
Cascine at Florence. 

K. P. 7 



Eu. As I was going down 4 to the harbour I met with 
Theaetetus being carried to Athens from the camp at 

Ter. Alive or dead ? 

Eu. Alive, but only just 5 . Besides being very ill from 
wounds, he is more seriously affected 6 by the malady which 
has broken out in the army. 

Ter. You mean the dysentery ? 

Eu. Yes. 

Ter. In danger, you say, such a man as that ! 

Eu. Ay, a gallant and good one 7 , Terpsion . It was but 
just now I heard some people praising him highly for his 
behaviour in the battle 8 . 

Ter. Nothing strange in that. It were far more sur 
prising if he had not behaved so. But how came he not to 
put up here at Megara 9 ? 

Eu. He was in haste to get home. For all my entrea 
ties and advice, he would not stay. So after accompanying 
him some way, as I went back I bethought me of the mar 
vellous divination shown by Socrates in so many cases, 
especially in that of Theaetetus. I think it was but a little 

4 Kara^cuVwj . The preposition KO.TO. compounded with verbs of 
motion often implies coastward movement, the converse being dud. 
The harbour was Nisaea. -^ 

5 Kcu fj.d\a. The intensive KCU is largely used by Plato. 
Aipet. A technical verb for morbid affection. 

7 KaA6i> re /ecu dyadov. Ka\oKaya6ia is the Athenian term frf 
heroic ideal of a gentleman. 

s Mdxqp. What battle is here meant we cannot absolutelj 
termine. The great battle near Corinth, in which the LacedaenW 
defeated the Athenians, was in July, 394 B. c. Grote, H. Gr. P 
ch. Ixxiv. Demosth. Lept. 41. But Plato may point to some 
affair before 387. 

9 Ai/roD Meyapcu, two local adverbs -iv atfrots ro?y 
Megara itself; at the very place he had reached, viz. Megara. 


while be .3jp his own death that he met him, a mere lad at 
the tin.c, ,n d, after conversing and arguing with him, admired 
his geniu? greatly. When I went to Athens, he repeated 
to me the arguments lie had held with him well worth 
hearing tiey we;e and said this youth must inevitably be 
come distinguished, if he should reach man s estate. 

Tt r. He spoke the truth, manifestly. But what were 
the arguments? ( an you repeat them? 

j^^H^Hindeed : not from mere recollection. But, 

,g returned home immediately, I jotted down 10 some 

s at onre, and, afterwards taxing my memory at leisure, 

nt on. ^riting; and, every time I visited Athens, I used 

ask Socntes anything I had not remembered, and to 

eke cjBKtons on my return here. So that I have got 

;arly the whole conversation in writing. 

Ter. True : I heard you say so once before ; and I 
.ave always been meaning to bid you show it me, but have 
.oitered till this moment. What hinders us from perusing 
it now ? Especially as I am in real want of rest, after com 
ing from the country. 

Eu. Well, and I too escorted Theaetetus as far as 
Erineum 11 ; so I should not dislike a siesta. Let us go then; 
and while we repose, the attendant shall read to us. 
Ter. A good suggestion. 

\_T/iey go to Euclid s house.~\ 

t^u. Here is the manuscript, Terpsion. I must observe 

1 i I wrote out the conversation in my own way: not in 

but narrative form as Socrates related it to me, but as a 

2 *ue between him and his fellow-disputants, whom he 

3 Ytypa.ij/ . The use of the middle voice here, as compared with 
Euclid afterwards, is notable : perhaps it implies the act of writing at 
where nent frcm recollection and/0r his own future revision. 
Cascintineum : a locality on the way from Megara to Athens. 


id Thsaetct 

stated to be Theodorus the geometrician and Thsaetetus. 
And, in order to escape the troublesome between 
the speeches in my manuscript (such as, when cc#tes was 
speaker, I spoke/ I said/ and, in case of an answerer, he 
agreed or he disagreed ) I wrote as if he were actually 
talking with them, and got rid of such interpolation, 

Ter. Well, no harm in that, Euclid. 

JLu. Now, boy, take the volume, and read. 

[The slave reads aloud all that follow$>\ _ 

2 [The interlocutors in the following dialogue are: Socrate;. fieodqnts the 
geometrician of Cyrene, and Theaetetus. Tivo you ig friends of the 
latter are also present, one of whom is called Socrat /3Sttf neither of 
them is made to speak. Socrates, meeting Thcodorn. in a gymnasium 
at Athens, asks him if he has encountered any youths of promise. 
Theodorus names Theaetetus with high praise, adding that in some of ^ 
his features he resembles Socrates. Theaetetits, then approaching with . 
his two friends, is invited to sit beside Socrates, who engages him in a 
conversation about their personal resemblance. The purpose of it \ 
seems to be, partly to test the dialectic faculty of Theaetetus, partly to $ 
embolden him by relating the praise he has received from so compe- 1 
tent a judge as Theodoriis."\ 

So. If I had a peculiar interest in Cyrene and its 
affairs, Theodorus, I would ask you about things there, and 
about its people, whether any of the young men in those 
parts are studying geometry or other scientific subjects. But 
I really care for them less than I do for our youth here, 
and would rather know which of our own young men are 
expected to become scholars. This therefore I observe 
for myself as well as I can, and inquire about it frorr 
every body else, with whom I see the young men desj at 
to converse. Now the largest number of pupils 


your lectures ; and justly : for you deserve it on many 
grounds, but especially for geometry. So I shall be glad to 
hear if you have met with any one worth naming. 

Theo. Yes, Socrates ; among your citizens I have met with 
a youth, whose character I can cite as well worthy of your 
attention. If he were handsome, I should be much afraid 
to mention him, lest any one should fancy I am in love with 
him. But in fact (don t be vexed with me) he is not hand 
some: he has a flat nose and protruding eyes like you: but 
less marked in his case than in yours. I speak then with 
out scruple. And I can assure you that of all the persons 
I ever met (and I have associated with a great number) I 
never found any of a nature so wonderfully excellent. Apti 
tude for learning such as few attain, combined with a 
temper singularly mild, and furthermore with unrivalled 
courage, I could never have expected to find, nor have I 
ever seen any similar instances. Those who, like him, are 
quick and ready-witted and gifted with a good memory, are 
liable to keen emotions; they rush impetuously like unbal 
lasted vessels, and grow up with more of madness in them 
than of valour : whilst others of more solid temperament 
usually approach studies in a somewhat sluggish mood, and 
laden 1 with forgetfulness. But he comes to all his studies 
and investigations with perfect gentleness, like a current of 
oil flowing without sound, so smoothly, firmly and success 
fully, that we marvel to see one of his age perform these 
things as he does. 

So. Good news indeed. Pray whose son is he ? 

Theo. I have heard the name, but do not remember it. 
However, he is the middle one of those who are now ap 
proaching us. He and these friends of his were anointing 

L l IV/wires. A word properly applied to laden vessels, and here 
opposed to dvcp/j-driffra TrXota. 


themselves just now in the outer race-course. They have 
finished, I suppose, and are coming this way. So see if you 
know him. 

So. I do. He is the son of Sophronius of Sunium, just 
such a man, my friend, as you describe this one to be, of 
good repute generally, and, I can tell you, a man who left a 
considerable property. But I do not know the name of the 

Theo. Theaetetus is his name, Socrates : the property I 
fancy certain trustees have wasted: yet even in money mat 
ters he is wonderfully liberal. 

So. A noble character you give him. Bid him come 
and sit down by me here. 

Thco. I will. Theaetetus, come and sit here by Socra 

So. Do by all means, Theaetetus, that I may view my 
self, and see what kind of face I have. Theodorus says it s 
like yours. Now if each of us held a lyre in his hand, and 
he said they were tuned to the same pitch, should we believe 
him at once, or should we have taken note whether he 
spoke as a musician ? 

Theae. We should have taken note. 

So. And if we found him such, should we not believe 
him, if ignorant of music, we should disbelieve ? 

Theae. True. 

So. And in the present case, I suppose, if we care at 
all for resemblance of faces, we must consider whether he 
speaks with a painter s skill or not. 

Theae. I think so. 

So. Is then Theodorus skilled in portrait-painting? 

Theae. Not to my knowledge. 

So. And is he not skilled in geometry ? 

Theae. Without doubt, Socrates. 


So. And in astronomy and calculations and music 2 
and every subject of education ? 

Theae. I think so. 

So. If then he says, either by way of praise or dispraise, 
that we are alike in some bodily feature, it is not very well 
worth while to attend to him ? 

Theae. Perhaps not. 

So. But how, if he were to praise the soul of one or 
the other for virtue and wisdom ? Would it not be worth 
while for the one who heard the praise to observe him 
who was praised, and for the other to exhibit himself with 
alacrity ? 

Theae. Quite so, Socrates. 

[Socrates, after telling Theaetetus of the high praise given to him by 3 
TJuodorus, and, questioning him about his studies, leads him to 
admit that the end to be gained by them is "wisdom? and that this 
is the same thing as knowledge. He goes on to confess the difficulty 
he finds in defining what knowledge is, and invites the company to 
discuss the question. 77ieodorus declines for himself, pleading age 
and want of dialectic practice, but suggests that Theaetetus should be 
invited to carry on the discussion with Socrates.~\ 

So. It is time, then, my dear Theaetetus, for you to 
exhibit and for me to observe. For I must tell you that, 
although Theodorus has often spoken to me with praise of 
many persons, both foreigners and citizens, he never gave 
such praise to anybody as he did to you just now. 

TJieae. I am glad to hear it, Socrates ; but see to it, 
that he did not speak in jest. 

2 Mou<rt/c6s. This word can either mean musical, or literary. 
The former is more probable here. 


So. That is not the way of Theodorus. So do not 
retract your admissions on the plea that our friend here 
speaks in jest, lest he be compelled to add an affidavit. I 
am sure nobody will indict him for perjury 1 . So stand to 
your confession boldly. 

Theae. Yes, I must, if you think so. 

So. Tell me now : you learn, I suppose, from Theodo 
rus some lessons of geometry ? 

Theae. I do. 

So. And of astronomy and harmony and calculations ? 

Theae. I use my best endeavour. 

So. So do I, my boy, both from him and from all 
others whom I suppose to have any acquaintance with the 
subjects. Nevertheless, though I am in general pretty well 
versed in them, I have one little difficulty, which I must 
examine with your help and that of our friends here. Tell 
me, does not to .learn mean to become wiser in that which 
one learns ? 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. And by wisdom it is, I suppose, that the wise are 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Does this differ at all from knowledge ? 

Theae. Does what differ ? 

So. Wisdom. In things whereof we are knowing, are 
we not also wise ? 

Theae. Can it be otherwise ? 

So. Are then wisdom and knowledge the same thing ? 

Theae. Yes. 

Heindorf rightly says : ftrwmjirreii h. 1. est i. q. 

^v5ofj.apTvpiuv. The verb in this sense is usually middle; but 
Aeschines Tim. 142 has the active, r,v ot5t fevSonaprvpiuv 
SeelDelow 5 ; also Diet. Ant. (Martyria, 


So. Now here is precisely my difficulty, and I cannot 
[uately comprehend in my own mind what knowledge 
illy is. Are we then able to define it ? What say ye? 
[Which of us will speak first ? Whoever misses the mark on 
>ach trial, shall sit down, as boys playing at ball say, for 
lonkey: and whoever goes through to the end without miss- 
ling, shall be our king 2 , and shall command us to answer 
tnything he likes to ask. But perhaps, Theodorus, my love 
)f discussion leads me to be rude in trying so hard to make 
[us argue, and become, friendly and chatty with one another. 
Theo. No, Socrates, such a wish is the reverse of rude- 
Iness. But call on one of the youths to answer you. I am 
unaccustomed to this kind of debate, and too old to acquire 
the habit. It would suit our young friends, and they would 
get on much better: for it is a fact that in all things youth 
has the gift of progress. So, as you had Theaetetus in hand 
at first, do not let him go, but continue to question him. 

I [Theaetetus, having modestly consented to take his share of the argument, 
endeavours to define knowledge* 3v ftM Drifting Trf" " TTftTfn fifj|f 
arts which are specific kinds of iL_ Hereupon Socrates, by a series of 
clencnc questions tJt TfiP Itl&fecttc manner, exposes the futility of all at 
tempts to define, which contain the term itself proposed for definition.] 

So. You hear then, Theaetetus, what Theodorus says ; 
and you will not, I think, wish to disobey him. In such 
matters a wise man s injunctions cannot be lawfully dis 
obeyed by his junior. Speak then well and nobly. What 
do you think that knowledge is ? 

T/ieae. I must, Socrates, since you both require. No 
doubt, if I make any blunder, you will correct me. 

2 BeurtXerfo-et. See Hor. Epist. I. I, 59: pueri ludentes, Rex eris, 
aiunt, si recte facies. 


So. Certainly, if we are able. 

Theae. Well then, I think that all the things one can 
learn from Theodorus are knowledge; geometry for instance 
and the others which you enumerated just now : and again 
leather-dressing 1 , and the trades of the other craftsmen, all 
and each, I consider nothing else than knowledge. 

So. In a truly noble and bountiful style, my friend, 
when asked for one thing you give many, and various thing? 
instead of a simple one. 

Theae. Why, what is the sense of your words, Socrates? 

So. Perhaps none at all*: however, I will explain what 
I mean. When you name leather-dressing, do you intend 
anything else than the knowledge of the manufacture of 
shoes ? 

Theae. Nothing else. 

So. Or when you name carpentry, do you intend any 
thing but the knowledge of the manufacture of wooden im 
plements ? 

Theae. No, nothing. 

So. In both cases then, you express that thing of which 
each is the .knowledge ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. But the question put, Theaetetus, was not concern 
ing the various subjects of knowledge, or their number. We 
did not ask with a wish to count them, but to know what 
the nature of knowledge itself is. Am I talking nonsense ? 

Theae. No, quite correctly. 

So. Consider this also. Should some one ask us any 
trivial and obvious question, such as, what is clay? if we 

4 J SKUTOTO/UKTJ and (TKVTiKir], ffKurorbfJioi and cr/curets are indifferently 
used for the shoe-trade. 

2 -QtSiif (\4yu). Atyeiv oi/Sh, to speak unreasonably (wrongly); 
TI to speak reasonably (rightly). 


said in reply, the clay of the potters, and the clay of the 
stove-makers, and the clay of the brickmakers, should we 
not deserve to be laughed at? 

Theae. Probably. 

So. In the first place because we thought the questioner 
would understand us from our answer, when we introduce 
the word clay, whether we add that of the doll-makers, or 
of any other craftsmen. Does anybody, think you, under 
stand any name of anything, when he does not know its 
correct meaning? 

Theae. Not at all. 

So, Then he who is Ignorant of * knowledge/ does not 
understand knowledge of shoes. 

Theae. He does not. 

So. And he who is ignorant of knowledge does not 
understand leather-dressing or any other art ? 

Theae. True. 

So. Then an answer made to the question What is 
knowledge ? is ridiculous, when a person gives in his reply 
the name of some art. For he names the knowledge of 
something, when that was not the thing asked from him. 

Theae. Apparently. 

So. In the next place, when he might have answered 
easily and briefly, he goes an infinite way round. For in 
stance, in the question about clay, it was easy and simple to 
say, that clay is moistened earth, and to abstain from add 
ing whose it is. 

[ Theaetetus now accepts the principle of definition laid dawn by Socrates^ 5 
and illustrates it by citing certain mathematical ter?ns adopted by 
himself and his fellow-student, yoimg Socrates, to distinguish rational 
and irrational numbers. These terms are (a) rerpdyuvos dptfftot, 
square number (4, 9, 16, 25. .. 2 )y (/3) irpo^K^ dpt.diJ.6s, oblong 


number (the restexc. i); (7) MKOS, length (all integral numbers after i) < 
which may be represented by straight lines, and used to form squares; 
(8) 8wa/j.eis (irrational roots, \Aj, \/5, J6 crv.) which are incom* 
mensurable with the unit of length (irotiiala), but can become sides : 
of fgures commensura&le in area with squares. Socrates applauds , 
this invention) and exhorts Theaetetus to apply his mind in the same 
way to discover a definition of knowledge.] 

Theae. Yes, Socrates this method now indeed appears . 
easy. You seem to be asking the same sort of question 
that occurred some time since to us in our discussions; 
to myself I mean, and your namesake, Socrates here. 

S0. What was that, Theaetetus ? 

Theae. Theodoras was writing out for us something 
about * powers, proving, as to the * tripod and the c pente- 
pod, that in length they are not commensurable with the 
foot-unit: and so proceeding one by one as far as seventeen: 
but here he somehow came to a pause. We then bethought 
us of such a notion as this: since the powers were evidently 
infinite in number, to try to comprise them under one term, 
by which we should entitle all these powers. 

So. Did you find any such term ? 

Theae. I think we did. Consider it yourself. 

So. Speak on. 

Theae. We divided number generally into two classes, 
one, that which is capable of being formed by the multipli 
cation of equal factors into one another, we likened in 
form to the square, and called it square and equilateral. 

So. Very good. 

1 fpl-rrovs, as Heindorf says, is evMa Svvdftei rpiTrovs, i.e. J^ 
which is irrational (not commensurate with the foot-unit, not integral), 
but potentially rational (becoming so when squared: ^3x^3 = 3). 
So irevrtTTovs and the rest. The use of Suva/us is therefore differ- 
ent from the modern mathematical term "power" (* 2 , x*...x n ). 


Theae. Al". intervening numbers, to which belong 3 and 
5 and every one that is incapable of being formed by the 
multiplication of equal factors, but is formed either by a 
larger number having a smaller or by a smaller number 
having a larger as its multiplier, we likened on the other 
hand to the oblong figure, which in every instance has 
greater and lesser sides, and called it oblong number 2 . 

So. Excellent. What next ? 

Theae. All lines which being squared form an equi- 
ateral plane figure we defined to be length ; all which 
brm an oblong, we comprised under the name powers 
i.e. irrational roots), as not being commensurable with 
he others except through the surfaces which they have 
power to form*. And similarly with respect to the solids 

So. Nobody in the world could do better, my boys. So 
I do not think Theodorus will incur the guilt of perjury. 

Theae. But as to your question about knowledge, 
Socrates, I could not answer it in the same way as that 
about length and power. Yet you seem to me to be look 
ing for some such answer. So that now Theodorus again 
appears to be a false speaker. 

So. Well, but if he had praised your running, and said 
he had never met with any young man so fleet, and then in 

- This appears as a general expression in the form 

n x i - ( = i - x n ) = n + r. 
n \ n J 

Example: 2 x i (=ix 2) = 3. As n is any integer, this includes all 
numbers greater than unity, Terpdyuvos as well as irpo^KTjs dpt0/t6s. 

3 Tots 6" tirnrtdois a dvvavTcu. Thus ^/i2 being 3*464 (nearly), 
*/i~2 XfJ 12 = 12 = 2 x 6 = 3 x 4 = (geometrically represented) a rectangle 
with sides respectively either 2 and 6, or 3 and 4, or an imaginary 
square with side 3*464 (nearly). 


a racing-match you had been defeated by one in the prime 
of life,^and very fleet, do you think his praise would have 
been any the less true ? 

TJieae. I do not. 

So. And, as to knowledge, as I was saying a little while j 
since, do you think it a small thing to discover its nature, 
and not one of the highest achievements? 

Theae. Nay indeed, Socrates, I do place it among the- 
very highest of all. 

So. Then be at ease about yourself : and consider that 
Theodoras speaks truly, and shew desire in every way to 
obtain a right definition of knowledge, as of all other things.- 

Theae. As for desire, Socrates, it will not be found 

6 [ Theaetetus, though he has not yet succeeded in finding a definition of 
knowledge, confesses a mental feeling that he is always on the verge of 
success. Socrates likens this feeling to the throes of impending child 
birth in women: and reminding Theaetetus that he himself (Socrates) 
is the son of an excellent midwife , he claims the analogous function of 
assisting the labour of intellectual parturition in the minds of young\ 
men ; and describes the obstetric art in many of its details, with a 
view to illustrate and justify his own method as an educator.] 

So. Come then: you made a good suggestion just now. 
Imitate your answer about the powers . As you comprised 
their vast number under one term, so also try to describe 
the many kinds of knowledge by a single definition. 

Theae. I assure you, Socrates, I have often endeavoured 
to gain insight into that matter, while listening to the ques 
tions you put. But, though 1 cannot persuade myself that 
I have anything important of my own to say, or that I have 
heard from some one else any such statement as you require, 


nevertheless I cannot rid myself of the feeling that I am on 
the point of doing so 1 . 

Sv. Oh ! you are in the throes of labour, dear Theae- 
tetus, through being not empty, but pregnant. 

T/ieae. I do not know, Socrates. I tell you my feeling, 
at all events. 

So. Have you not heard then, simpleton, that I am 
the son of a very famous and solid midwife, Phaenarete ? 

Theae. I have heard it before now. 

So. Have you heard too that I practise the same art ? 

Theae. Never. 

So. I do really. But don t tell of me to other people. 
I am not known, my friend, to have this skill. And others, 
being unaware, do not say this of me, but only that I am a 
very strange person, and that I perplex people. Have you 
heard this too ? 

Theae. I have. 

So. Shall I tell you the reason ? 

Theae. Pray do. 

So. Reflect then upon the general situation of midwives, 
and you will more easily learn what I mean. You know, I 
suppose, that none of them practise while they are still con 
ceiving and bearing children, but those alone who are past 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. This custom is said to be derived from Artemis, for 
that she, though a virgin, has the charge of parturition. Ac 
cordingly, she did not indeed allow barren women to become 
midwives, because human nature is too weak to acquire an 
art of which it has no experience: but she assigned it to 

! MeXXfti/ is undoubtedly the true reading, giving the cue to the 
parable of the midwives. MeXet? would fail to do this. 


those who are past the age of childbearing, in honour of 
their resemblance to herself. 

Theae. Naturally. 

So. Is not this also natural, that those who conceive 
and those who do not are better known by midwives than 
by others ? 

Theae. Quite so. 

So. Moreover also midwives, by giving drugs and 
chanting incantations, are able to excite the throes and to.; 
quell them, if they will, and to make those who have 
hard time bring forth: and they produce abortion 1 , if the 
case require it. 

Theae. True. 

So. Have you furthermore noted this in them, that they 
are also very clever match-makers, being well skilled to 
know what woman uniting with what man must bear ths 
finest children ? 

Theae. I was not quite aware of that. 

So. I assure you they pride themselves on this much 
more than on their special practice 2 . Just consider. Do 
you think the care and collection of the fruits of the earth 
belongs to one art, and the knowledge of what soil you must 
plant or sow to another ? 

Theae. No, to the same. 

So. And do you consider it different in the case of a 
woman ? 

Theae. Seemingly not. 

So. No, truly. But on account of the unlawful and 

1 NAw ov. Prof. Campbell writes, Sc. TO pptyos, said here of 
the embryo "at an early stage," i.e. before it is dangerous to do so. 
But most commentators do not believe that v4or would be used of TO 
Kvrjfio.. Heindorf conjectures otov for vtov ov. The words may be a 
gloss, and in translation no point is lost by neglecting them, as above 

2 Gr. 



unscientific conciliation of man and woman, which is termed 
procuration/ midvvives, being a respectable body, shun 
match-making, fearing lest by this they should incur the 
other charge. For it is only to genuine midwives, I suppose, 
that the art of correct match-making belongs. 

Theae. Apparently so. 

So. Thus highly important is the function of midwives ; 
but less so than my procedure. For, it does not happen to 
women at one time to bear idols, at another true children, 
so that it shall not be easy to distinguish them. Had they 
been liable to this, the greatest and noblest task for mid- 
wives would have been to decide between the true child 
and the untrue. Do you not think so ? 

Thcae. I do. 

[ The parable of the application of the obstetric art to the labours of the 7 
intellect is carried on and concluded.} 

So. But my art of midwifery, though it has in other 
respects the same conditions as theirs, differs in these points, 
that I attend men, not women, and that I inspect the labour 
of their souls, not of their bodies. The most important 
skill in our art is, the being able to _lest in very way 
whether the young man s mind is bringing forth an idol and 
an unreality, or a genuine and true progeny. For to me as 
well as to the midwives belongs the following condition. I 
am incapable of producing wisdom, and the reproach which 
many ere now have cast on me, that, while I question others, 
I myself give no answer about anything, because I have no 
I wisdom in me, is a just reproach. The reason of it is this : 
| the god compels me to act the midwife, but hindered me 
[from engendering. I then am not indeed perfectly wise 
| myself, nor have I brought to birth any discovery of that 
K. P. 8 


kind, as the outcome of my own soul. But of those who 
resort to me, some indeed appear in the outset utterly igno 
rant, but all, as the intercourse proceeds, and the god gives 
opportunity, make wonderful progress, in their own opinion 
and in that of others. And it is evident that they do so 
n^Lby any learning they have gained from me, but because 
they have of themselves discovered many excellent things, 
which they retain. Of that midwifery however I and the 
god are authors. The proof is this. Many persons ere now, 
not knowing that fact, and imputing all to themselves while 
they despised me, quitted me earlier than they ought, either 
of their own will or by the persuasion of others 1 . After this, 
they baulked all subsequent conceptions by evil intercourse, 
and lost by ill nurture the offspring which I had helpec 
them to, valuing unrealities and idols more than truths; am 
ended by seeming to themselves, as to everybody else, mer 
blockheads. One of these, though there are many more, i 
Aristeides 2 son of Lysimachus. When these truants com 
back and pray for admission to my society, and move heaven 
and earth to gain it, with some of them my familiar geniu 
forbids me to consort, with others it allows me : and thes 

7 - 1 >? avrol 77 UTT a\\uv Treicr^j/rej. The translation follows thi 
conjecture ; MSS. omit the second 07, by the absence of which aural be 
comes void of sense and propriety. Is it not possible that Plato wrot 
/ecu 77 avrol eavrovs (/Aev) amacrd/zei ot e/xoO S KaTatppovrja avTes rj VTT 
a.\\ui> irtLffdevres K.T.\. Many ere now, being ignorant of this, anc 
either imputing all to themselves, while they contemned me, or per 
suaded by others &c. &c. ? This would give a still better sense than th 
adopted reading, viz. Many forsook the teaching of Socrates : all did 
so in ignorance of his divinely given power (TOVTO dyvoTJffavTes) ; bu 
some through self-conceit (17 avrol eavrots amao-a^ei/ot) , some througl 
yielding to persuasion (17 VTT aXXwv 7rei<r06/rej). Also ths passag 
would be more perspicuous if eavrovs /mtv were written. 
a descendant of the great Aristeides. 



latter improve again. And this affection also they that as> 
sociate with me have in common with women in labour : 
they feel throes and are full of worry day and night much 
more than the women. And my art has the power to excite 
and allay that throe. So much then for them. And some 
times, Theaetetus, when any do not seem to me to be preg- 
nant, perceiving that they do not need me, I very kindly 
make a match for them, and, with the blessing of heaven, 
F~guess very aptly by whose conversation they will profit. 
Many I have made over to Prodicus 3 , many to other wise 
and inspired men. I have spoken at this length to you be 
cause I suspect, in conformity with your own opinion, that 
you are suffering throes from some inward conception. Deal 
with me then as the son of a midwife, and a practitioner 
myself, and try to answer my questions as well as you are 
able. And if, on examining anything you say, I consider it 
an idol and not a true progeny, and so remove it quietly 
and put it away, don t be angry as women at their first lying 
in are about their infants. For many, my good friend, 
have felt towards me so that they are actually ready to bite 
me when I take from them any cherished trifle : and they 
imagine I am not acting kindly; so little are they aware 
that no god isjinkind to men, and that I do nothing of this 
sort from ill will. But my sense of duty will in no wise 
allow me to accept falsehood and stifle truth. 

[ Theaetetus, again exhorted by Socrates, takes courage, and suggests as a, 8 
defining term for knoit lc/.i^e cuVtf^crts, perception {sensation, sensuous 
perception}. Socrates at once identifies this definition with the famous 
doctrine of Protagoras, TT&VTUV \p-tj fiaruv ptrpov avdpuiros, f man is 

3 E^5u;Ka UpodiKii}. E/c5t5oVcu (dvyar^pa) means to give a daughter 
in marriage. Prodicus of Ceos was a famous Sophist, learned in his 
tory, mythology, and legend. 



the measure of all things? He goes on to argue that this implies 
what appears to each is true to each? and after illustrating by an 
example he farther proceeds to connect this view -with that of Hera- 
cleitus and his school (to whom he adds Homer] respecting a per 
petual motion or fiux of all things irwra pet. This doctrine does 
not suffer a fixed term of being to be given to anything, such as one, 
some, of some quality, great, small, heavy, light, &c. 
Nothing is any of these, but by motion and commixture all things 
become this or that. There is no*beingS w-?v 

So now again, returning to the point, Theaetetus, endea 
vour to say what knowledge is: and never reply that you 
are unable : for if the god please and you play the man, you 
will be able. 

TJieae. Well, Socrates, when you thus exhort, I must 
own it were disgraceful not to use one s utmost endeavour 
to state what suggests itself to the mind. It seems to me 
then that he who knows anything perceives what he, knows; 
and, in my present view, knowledge is nothing else than 


~ So. Wll and nobly said, my boy. It is quite proper to 
speak with such open frankness. But now let us examine 
the doctrine in common, to see whether it is a genuine 
product or a wind-egg. Knowledge, you say, is per 
ception ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. I really think you have given an account of know 
ledge which is not insignificant, being one which Protagoras 
also gave. But he has said the same thing in a different 
way. He says, I fancy, that man 2 is the measure of all 

8 1 Ata6r](Tis. Sensation; perception , or rather, sensuous percep 
tion, which must be understood when either of the two former terms 
is used in this translation. 

2 "AvOpuirov, i. e. the human mind ; the mind of each percipient. 


things; of things existing, that they do exist; of non-existing 
things, that they do noT exist. Have you perhaps read 
/ this ? 

Theae. Yes, I have read it often. 

So. He speaks then to this effect, that such as things 
Sappear to me, they severally are to me ; andjsjich_as they 
"appear to you. they severally are to you. The term man 
includes you and me. 

Theae. He does speak so. 

So. Yes; and it is probable that a wise man is not 

talking nonsense : so let us follow his track. Does it not 

1 sometimes happen that, when the same wind is blowing, 

one of us is cold, the other not ; and one is slightly cold, 

kjtlie other exceedingly ? 

Theae. No doubt. 

So. Shall we then in that case say the wind in itself 3 is 
cold or not cold; or shall we assent to Protagoras that. to 
one who feels it cold it is cold, to one who does not feel it, 

Theae. The latter, I should say. 

So. And this is apparent to each ? 

Theae. Yes. ^ 

So. And the termj is. apparent implies/ perceiving ? 

Theae. It does. 

So. Appearance then and perception concur in things 
warm and the like generally. For such as each perceives 
them, they probably are to each. 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Perception then is always of that which ( is ; and it 
is unerring, since it is knowledge. 

3 In itself. Codd. have <?0 eauro, which Prof. Campbell supports 
by examples. Bekker reads ((> eair. But t<f> IO.VTOU is most usual 
in this sense. 


Theae. Manifestly. 

So. In the name of the Graces, then, was Protagoras a 
man of consummate shrewdness, and did he hint this darkly 
to us of the common herd, while to his disc pies he spoke 
the truth in secret confidence 4 ? 

Theae. What do you mean by this, Socrates ? 

So. I will state to you a doctrine of no slight import 
ance : namely, that nothing in itself is one, nor can you 
rightly call a thing some or of some kind, but, if you 
style it great, it will turn out also small, and if heavy, light, 
and so in every case ; since nothing is one or some, or 
of some kind : but from vection and motion and mixture 
with each other all things come to be, of which we say 
that they are, using a wrong term : for nothing at any tune 
is, but always comes to be. And on this point let all 
philosophers except Parmenides 5 be compared in their 
order, Protagoras and Heracleitus and Empedocles 6 : and 
of the poets those that are consummate in each poetic kind, 

4 The work in which Protagoras expounded his doctrine was called 
AX^eta, Truth. To this circumstance Plato here alludes, but perhaps, 
as Prof. Campbell says, he means that Protagoras " told the real truth, 
not in his book which is so entitled, but privately to his disciples." 

5 II\V Uapftevidov. Parmenides, the greatest name to the Eleatic 
School and here made its representative (though Xenophanes before 
him, and Zeno after him, taught similar principles), held the doctrine 
directly opposed to the Heracleitean, namely, that the universe is one, 
continuous, stable : that only being is ; non-being is not ; there is 
no becoming. 

6 E/iTreSo/cX???. Prof. Campbell justly says that Plato introduced 
the words Kpaveus Trpbs a\\rj\a in order to include Empedocles of 
Agrigentum, who, without accepting the doctrine of Heracleitus, that 
ovtev fort, TrdvTa ylyveTai, denied the Eleatic unity, continuity and 
stability of substance, teaching that phenomenal changes are caused by 
the intermixture of four elements (fire, air, water, earth) which are 
themselves alone unchangeable. 


in the comic, Epicharmus 7 , in the tragic, Homer 8 ; for in 

Ocean of gods progenitor and Tethys mother 

he has said that all things are born from flux and motion. 
Does he not seem to say so ? 
Theae. I think he does. 

[ The Heracleitean doctrine (ira.vra pel] is further expounded and seemingly 9 
defended. But, as it is confuted afterwards (28), we mttst explain 
this defence as an instance of the Socratic 

So. After this then, who that disputes with so great a 
host, and Homer its captain, can avoid making himself 
ridiculous ? 

Thcae. It were not easy, Socrates. 

So. No indeed, Theaetetus. Since our statement 
that motion produces the semblant 1 * being, and the coming 
to be, while * non-being and * perishing are produced by 
rest has in its favour many competent proofs. The heat 
of fire, which engenders and protects other things, is 
itself engendered by vection and attrition. And these are 
motions 2 . Are not these the parents of fire ? 

7 ETnfxap/uos. Diogenes Laertius, in. 10, quotes verses from Epi 
charmus, the comic poet of Syracuse (490 B.C.), which contain the 
doctrine of perpetual mutation. 

8 TpcryySi as SrO/w/pos. Plato recognizes only two forms of poetry, 
viz. Comedy and Tragedy, including in the latter Epic poetry, and its 
great master Homer. See Rep. X. 495 D, eirHTKeiTTtov r^v -re Tpayydiav 
Kal TOV riyfj.ova aurJJs "Ofjnjpov. 

9 J T6 ptv elwu SOKOVV. As he is professing to expound the Hera 
cleitean theory, which does not admit rb clvtu, he evasively says rb 
nival SO/COUP, the semblant being. 

2 Totfrea 8 Kirqaeis* This, is the reading in most codd., for which- 


Theae. They are. 

So. Moreover the race of animals is produced from 
them ? 

Theae. To be sure. 

So. Again : is not the habit of bodies ruined by rest 
and laziness, and preserved in general 3 by exercise and 
motion ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And does not the habit of the soul by learning and 
study, which are motions, acquire doctrines and preserve 4 
them and become better, while through rest, which is the 
absence of study and learning, it both learns nothing, and 
forgets what it has learnt ? 

Theae. Decidedly. 

So. The one then, namely motion, is a good both in 
soul and body, the other is the reverse. 

Tlieae. Seemingly. 

So. Must I farthermention to you calms and serenities 
and such-like things, showing that quietudes rot and destroy, 
while their opposites preserve? and besides these must I 
clinch the matter 5 , and evince that by the golden cord J 
Homer means nothing but the sun, and indicates that, as 
long as the revolution continues, and the sun keeps moving, 

(dual) is suggested. But some have TOVTO 5e Kivrjcris, which 
Bekker edits, and Campbell approves. 

8 In general, us e-rrl rb TTO\I>, read in many codd. and by Stobaeus. 
Professors Jowett and Campbell prefer ert TroXi) for a long time, as in 
cod. Bodl. 

4 SWITCH. The middle voice of o-wfw is specially used of memory. 

5 T^ Ko\o(j)U)va avayKafa 7rpo(r(3ipafai> ; must I bring up my crowning 
reason and prove conclusively (dvay K dfa) ? See Strabo s explanation 
of Ko\o<f>ui> in Liddell and Scott s Lexicon. Others have been given, 
for which see Heindorf s note. 

6 For Homer s xpvcr?} cret/>d see IL viu. 47. 


all things in heaven and earth exist and are preserved ; but 
should this stand still as if fettered, all things would be 
spoilt, and, as the saying is, turned upside down ? 

Theae. In my judgment, Socrates, he does indicate 
what you say. 

[ The relativity of thefactwfaensatwn is ill tt strafed by the phenomena of 10 
colour, number and size. What you call colour has no definite place 
or existence within or without you. It is the result of a passing col 
lision between your eyes and the flux of things suited to act on them. 
It is neither in the agent nor in the patient, but generated in passage 
between them. It will not be the same to tiuo subjects nor to the same 
subject at different times. The object measured or touched cannot be 
in itself great, white, hot or anything else ; if it were, it would not 
appear different to another subject. The subject touching or measuring 
cannot be any of these, for, if so, it would be so always, and would not 
be modified by application to another object. Socrates illustrates by six 
dice, which, as compared with four, are more, and half as many 
ogain (i.e. 3:2), but fewer and half compared with twelve (i.e. 
1:2). Can then anything become more without being increased ; 
or fewer without being diminished? Theactetus is puzzled ; and 
Socrates merrily stiggests that they are amusing themselves with mere 
quibbles, like JMegarian disputants^ 

So. Conceive the matter in this way, my good friend. 
As to vision first : that what you call white colour is not 
in itself something outside your eyes or in your eyes. And 
do not assign to it any place : for then, being somewhere 
in position, it would be and remain, and would not by 
generation come to be. 

Theae. How so? 

So. Let us follow the doctrine we were lately stating, 
that nothing exists as an independent unit; and in that 
way we shall see that black and white and every other 
colour have come to be from the coincidence of the eyes 
with the suitable motion ; and thr. what in each case we call 


colour, is neither that which makes nor that which receives 
the impact, but something between, which is peculiar to 
each. Or would you insist that what each colour appears 
to you, such it appears also to a dog or any other 
animal ? 

Theae. No indeed, I would not. 

So. Again : does anything appear to another man like 
what it appears to you? Are you strongly convinced it 
does, or are you much rather sure that even to yourself it is 
not the same, because at no two times are you exactly the 

Theae. .The latter seems to me truer than the former. 

So. Accordingly, if a thing beside which we measure 
ourselves, or which we handle, were large or white or hot,- 
it would never have become different by contact with some 
other, unless it underwent a change in itself. And if again 
the measuring or handling subject had been any of these, 
it would not have become different when another approached 
or suffered any affection, if there were no affection in itself. 
For now, my friend, we are compelled in a careless sort of 
way to say marvellous and ridiculous things, as Protagoras 
would affirm, and every one who ventures to propound the 
same that he does. 

Theae. How do you mean ? and what kind of things ? 

So. Take a small sample, and you will know what I 
mean. Six dice, if you place four beside them, we say are 
more in number and half as many again. If you bring : 
twelve, we say the six are fewer in number, and half the 
second set. To say otherwise were intolerable. Will you 
tolerate it ? 

Theae. No, I will not. 

So. Well : suppose Protagoras or some one else were 
to ask you: Theaetetu:. is it possible for anything to 


, become greater or more, except by being increased ? What 
I answer would you give ? 

Theae. If I were to answer what I think in reply to 
your present question, Socrates, I should say * no : but if with 
; reference to the former one, to avoid self-contradiction, I 
I should say * yes. 

So. Well said, my friend, by Hera, and divinely. But 
if you answer * yes, something will occur like the case in 
Euripides 1 : our tongue will be unconvicted, but our mind 
not unconvicted. 
Theae. True. 

So. So then, if you and I were clever and wise folk 
who had intimately studied the whole sphere of mind, and 
from that time forth amused ourselves with trying one 
another s powers, we should have engaged in a sophistical 
conflict of this kind, and be bandying arguments with each 
other 2 . But now, as we are not professors, we shall wish to 
look at the statements comparatively, and see what it is 
we mean ; whether they are consistent with each other or 

Theae. Certainly that is what I should wish. 

[The contradictions and difficulties implied in these statements are now 11 
set forth. It cannot possibly be true that anything becomes greater or 
less while it is equal to itself, or is increased without addition or 
diminished without subtraction, or that it is what it was not before 
without having come to be." 1 And yet the case of the six dice, and the 
case of an old man who was taller than a growing youth and in the 
course of one year is shorter without having come to be different, 
seem to clash with these indubitable propositions. What are we to 

1 EvpnrLSeiov n. See Hippol. 612, 17 y\Coffa <5/xci/*ox ^ 

2 In this passage Plato censures the pseudo-dialectic (eristic) prac 
tice of certain sophistic teachers as idle waste of time. 


Others there are much more refined, whose mysteries I am 
going to describe to you. Their principle is, and upon it all 
we were just now saying depends that the whole universe 
is motion, and nothing else but this, and of motions two_ 
kinds, each in number infinite, but, in respect of power, the 
one involving action, the other suffering. From the asso 
ciation and attrition of these with each other are formed 
products in number infinite, but of two sorts, one percepti 
ble, the other perception, which continually breaks forth and 
is born with the perceptible objects. Perceptions, we find, 
have the following names ; sight, hearing, smell, feelings of 
cold and heat, pleasure and pain and desire and fear and 
others : infinite are those without names ; and those with 
names very numerous. And the objects of perception 
again are born with each of these, colours of all kinds with 
all kinds of vision, sounds with hearing similarly, and with 
the other perceptions other objects of perception are con 
nate and * come to be. What meaning has this tale for us, 
Theaetetus, in reference to the former questions? do you 
perceive ? 

Thcae. No, Socrates. 

So. See then if it can be brought to its closing point. 
It means that all these things, as we say, are in motion, and 
in their motion are found swiftness and slowness. That 
which is slow has its motion in the same place and in refer 
ence to things near, and so engenders : and the things thus 
engendered [are slower. But that which is swift has its 
motion in reference to things at a distance, and so engen 
ders, and the things thus engendered] 2 are swifter, for they 

2 The words in brackets are not found in codd., but introduced by 
Stephens from the Eclogae of Cornarius. Bekker is so > ced 
of their being Plato s, that he prints them- without bracket 1 \ ft id 
Heindorf maintains them. But Professors Jowett and Cam] *?Vt 


are conveyed, and their motion naturally consists in vection. 
When then the eye and any other of its suitable objects 
approach and beget whiteness and its kindred perception, 
which could never have come to be if either of them had 
gone to something else, then, while the sight on the part of 
the eyes and the whiteness on the part of that which co- 
engenders the colour are moving in mid space, the eye 
becomes full of sight, and at length sees and comes to be, 
nowise sight, but a seeing eye, j&nd that which co-engen 
dered the colour is filled full with whiteness, and comes to 
be not whiteness but a white thing, whether it be wood or 
stone or anything else that happens to have been coloured 
with this hue. And other things similarly, hard and warm 
and all the rest, we must understand in the same manner 
to be nothing by themselves, as we heretofore said, but 
in their mutual intercourse to become all and of all kinds 
from motion : since of agent and patient, as they affirm, 
taken apart (cVt ei/os) it is impossible to form any definite 

them, holding that rb. (3pa5urepa mean rb iroiovv and rb ircurxov, and 
TO, Oda-ffw the alaSr/veis and ai<r9r]Ta engendered by them. I have been 
unable to convince myself that this latter view is right. The words 
s TO. Tr\-r}aid^ovra T-QV Kivrjffiv &rx et seem intended to describe the 
organs of touch and taste, as distinguished from those of sight and 
hearing, which can be employed on distant objects. It may be replied 
that the example given is that of sight and its object, and the latter is 
spoken of as ir\^(ndffa.v to the eye : which may seem to prove that 
anything on which rb iroiouv can act may be said irXrjcndfav avry, 
whether more or less distant. Weighty as this reply is, it does not 
remove my difficulty; for I am unaKe to discern the use of discrimi 
nating between agent-patient and their products as to slowness and 
swiftness. The act of generation between the eye and a very distant 
object must surely have been regarded by Plato (whatever later mathe 
maticians may say of it) as a swift act. I admit however that the 
question at issue is difficu\ and doubtful: but it does not embarrass 
Plato s general meaning here. See note at the close of the Translation. 


notion : for nothing is an agent till it concurs with a patient, 
nor a patient till it concurs with an agent : and that which 
concurs with one thing and is an agent, if it lights upon 
another, proves to be a patient, so that, as we before said, 
nothing is * one by itself/ but always comes to be to some 
other ; and the term being must be removed on all sides, 
although we are often, even in our present discussion, com 
pelled to use it from habit and ignorance. But it is not 
proper, as the wise lay down, to allow the use of the word 
some, or> of some or me or this or that or any 
other term which fixes, but in accordance with nature to 
speak of things as coming to be and being created and 
perishing and taking new forms. Since if any one fixes 
anything in speech, he who does so is easily confuted. And 
we ought to speak in this way both of individuals and of 
many in the aggregate, by which aggregation we determine 
man and stone and each class of animals. Do these 
views seem pleasant to you, Theaetetus, and will you find a 
taste of them agreeable ? 

Theae. I don t know, Socrates; for about you too I 
cannot discern, whether you are speaking these as your own 
opinions, or trying me. 

So. Do you not remember, my friend, that I indeed 
neither know nor adopt any of such things as mine ? but I 
am barren, and act as midwife to you, and on that account 
I charm, and offer you, to be tasted, wise things of various 
sorts, until I can help to bring to light your opinion ; and 
when it is brought forth, ti:en and not before I will exa 
mine if it shall prove a wind-eg or a genuine offspring. So 
then with courage and patience answer well and manfully 
whatsoever appears to you to be right concerning my several 

Theae. Ask then. 


{Arguments against the Protagorean doctrine from dreams, fevers and 13 
madness are suggested and answered. Persons so affected perceive 
different things from those perceived when they are awake and in 
health. Are these contradictory perceptions in each case equally tnte 
to the percipient , ? ] 

So. Say then again, whether you are satisfied that 
nothing should * be, but ever come to be/ good and noble 
and all things which we were lately recounting. 

Theae. Yes ; since I have heard this recital of yours, it 
appears to me marvellously clear that it is reasonable, and 
that we must accept the principles as you have stated them. 

So. Let us then not abandon what remains of our 
question. There remains the topic of dreams and diseases, 
madness especially, and all that is called mis-hearing or 
mis-seeing or any other wrong perception. For you know, 
I suppose, that in all these cases the principle we lately 
explained seems by admission to be confuted^ since un 
doubtedly false perceptions occur to us in them, and things 
that appear to each are far from being, but, quite con 
trariwise, none of the things that appear are. 

Theae. You speak most truly, Socrates. 

So. What reason then is left, my boy, to him who lays 
down that perception is knowledge, and that things which 
appear to each are in every such case ? 

Theae. For my own part, Socrates, I shrink from 
answering that 1 have nothing to urge, because just now 
you rebuked me for saying so. Yet in very truth I cannot 
contend that maniacs or dreamers do not imagine falsities, 
when some of them think they are gods, and others suppose 
they are fowls, and imagine they are flying in their sleep. 

So. Have you not in mind then a certain difficulty 
raised about them, especially as to the sleeping and waking 
vision ? 

K. P. 9 


Theae. What difficulty ? 
So. A question which I think you have often heard 
people ask, what proof one would have to give, if somebody 
were to ask at this moment, whether we are sleeping and 
dreaming all that we imagine, or are awake and talking to 
one another in that state. 

Theae. Indeed, Socrates, it is a perplexing thing to say 
by what proof we could establish it : for all the facts succeed 
one another as counterparts. Even the whole discussion we 
have now held there is nothing to prevent our seeming to 
have held in a dream. And when in a dream we seem to 
be relating dreams, the similarity between the cases is 

So. You see then that it is not difficult to raise a ques 
tion, since it can be questioned even whether we are waking or 
dreaming. And as the time during which we are asleep is 
equal to that in which we are awake, our soul in each state 
contends that the fancies which from time to time occur 
are true, so that for half the time we say that the one are 
existent, for half the other, and we are equally confident 
in regard to each. 

Theae. Yes, unquestionably. 

So. And is not the same true of diseases and madness, 
except that the times are not equal ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Well, shall truth be determined by length or short 
ness of time ? 

Theae. That were ridiculous on many grounds. 

So. Have you then any other clear sign to show which 
of these fancies are true ? 

Theae. I think not. 


I [The answer is, that a percipieiit is not the same subject in each of two i 
different^ | states : an^T if cither of Hi .v (rd Yti rcCWa) is 

ro 7fwd uetw) is cJianged. Grotc says that the 

y cardinal prinapiese^onn^xnioits itself in a perpetual scries of 
definite manifestations. To say that I the subject perceive is to say that 
I perceive some object : to perceive, and perceive nothing, is a contra 
diction. Again, if an object be sivcet, it must be sweet to some per 
cipient subject: sweet, but sweet to no one, is an impossibility. Necessity 
binds the percipient to a thing perceived. Every term applied to one 
implies some reference to the other : no name can be truly predicated 
of the one which implies being or l coming to be" 1 apart from the 
other. } 

So. Hear then from me what they will say on this 
point, who lay it down that what from time to time * seems/ 
is true for him who so beholds it. Their opinion, I think, 
is expressed by this question : * O Theaetetus, of two things 
which are totally different, can the one and the other have 
any identical powers? We must not assume that the things 
in question are in one respect the same, in another different, 
but that they are wholly different. 

Thcae. It is impossible that they should have anything 
the same, either in power or in aught else, when they are 
wholly different. 

So. Must we not also perforce confess the two things 
to be unlike ? 

T/icae. I think so. / 

So. If, then, anything happens * to become like, either 
to itself or to another, shall we say that when made like it 
becomes the same ; when it gets unlilce, different ? 

Theae. Necessarily. 
So. Were we not previously saying that agents are 
many and infinite, and patients likewise ? 
Thcae. Yes. 




So. And also that a thing combining first with one, 
then with another, will not produce the same things, but 
different ? 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. Let us now specify myself, or you, or anything else, 
in the same relations. Say Socrates in health and Socrates 
out of health. Shall we say the latter is like the former, 
or unlike ? 

v Theae. Socrates out of health, you say ; do you com 
pare this as a whole with the former as a whole, with 
Socrates in health ? 

So. Very well put : that is my meaning. 

Theae. Unlike, of course. 

So. And different, as being unlike ? 

Theae. Necessarily. 

So. And you will say the same of Socrates sleeping, and 
in all the states we cited ? 

Theae. I would. 

So. And will not each of the things which have an 
active nature, when they find Socrates in health, deal 
with me as one thing ; when out of health, as a different 

Theae. They must. 

So. And I, the patient, and that agent, will in each 
case produce different things ? 

Theae. To be sure. 

So. When I drink wine in health, does it appear to me 
agreeable and sweet ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. True; for, by our admissions, the agent and the 
patient produced sweetness and perception, both of them 
in motion together; and perception on the side of the 
patient made the tongue percipient, and sweetness on the 


part of the wine, moving about it, made the wine to be and 
to appear sweet to the healthy tongue. 

Theae. Such certainly were our previous admissions. 

So. But when it finds me out of health, does it not in 
the first place find one who is not the same? It comes 
to an unlike object. 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Such a Socrates, then, and the draught of wine, 
I produce different things; in regard to the tongue a per 
ception of bitterness, in regard to the wine a bitterness 
\ beginning to be and moving ; and the wine it makes not 
\ bitterness, but bitter, and me not perception, but one that 

Theae. Assuredly. 

So. I then shall never become percipient of anything 
else in the same way ; for perception of another is another 
thing, and makes the percipient different and another ; nor 
will that which acts on me, if it concur with another, ever 
engender the same and become similar : for from another 
it will engender another and become different. 

Theae. That is true. 

So. I then shall never become similar to my former 
self; nor will the object become similar to its former self. 

TJieae. No, surely not. 

So. When I perceive, I must needs become percipient 
of something : for to become percipient, yet percipient of 
nothing, is impossible; and the object, when it becomes 
sweet or bitter, or anything of the kind, must become so to 
some one : for to become sweet, yet sweet to no one, is 

Theae. Assuredly. 

So. Then, I think, the inference remains, that to each 
other we are, if we are, or we come to be, if we come 

130 134 THEAETETUS. 

to be : since necessity binds our essence indeed, but 
binds it to nothing else, nor yet to ourselves individually; 
it remains then that we are bound to one another. So that 
if a person says that anything is or becomes, he must 
say that it is or becomes to something, or of some 
thing, or in relation to something ; but, if we have come 
to a right conclusion, he must not say or allow of any 
one else saying, that anything is or comes to be 

Theae. Undoubtedly, Socrates. 

So. And so, when that which acts on me is to myself 
/ and not to another, I perceive it, and no one else does. 
/ Theae. Certainly. 

So. Then my perception is true to me : for it belongs 
. always to my being ; and, according to Protagoras, I am ; 
judge of things which are to me, that they are, and of things 
which are not, that they are not. 

Theae. So it seems. 

15 [Having thus by a series of plausible arguments brought to birth the 
suggestion of Theaetetus, that knowledge is sensuous perception, Socrates 
asks if he can bear to learn that the bantling after all is not worth 
rearing. Thcodorus interferes, and pledges himself for the tolerant 
temper of his pupil. He is reminded that Socrates only professes to 
draw out the thoughts of those who converse with him.] 

So. How then, being infallible and unerring in mind as 
regards things which are and come to be, can I be un 
knowing of things whereof I am percipient 1 ? 

Theae. In no sort of way. 

So. Therefore you have said very well that knowledge 

15 * AiV#??r??s, a novel word, but here pretty certainly the true one. 


is nothing else than perception ; and it turns out to be one 
and the same thing, that (as Homer and Heracleitus, and 
their whole tribe, affirm) all things move like streams, and 
that (after the opinion of the consummately wise Protagoras) 
man is the measure of all things, and that (as Theaetetus 
infers from these premises) perception is proved to b( 
ledge. Is it so, Theaetetus? Must we say. that this, as 
it were, is your newborn child, and the product of my 
midwifery ? What say you ? 

Theae. It must be so, Socrates. 

So. This then, seemingly, we have with much difficulty 
brought to birth, whatever it prove to be. And now, after 
its birth, we must, in good sooth, run round the hearth with 
it in our discourse 2 , not failing to observe whether the child 
be worth nurture, and not a wind-egg and an unreality. Or 
do you deem it absolutely necessary to rear your offspring, 
and not to put it away ? Can you bear to see it confuted, 
and not be greatly out of temper if some one should filch 
from you your firstborn ? 

T/ieo. Theaetetus will bear it, Socrates. He is not 
the least ill-tempered. But in heaven s name tell me, is not 
this then true ? 

So. You are a very gourmand of discussion, Theodorus, 
and a good creature, in that you take me to be a sack of 
arguments, and think I can pull out another, and aver that 
what we have said is untrue. But you do not note what is 
taking place : that none of the arguments proceed from 
myself, but from him who is conversing with me at the time ; 
and that I know nothing more than this little feat, how to 
obtain an argument from another wise person and to treat 

2 The fifth day after a child s birth the festival was called 

when the babe was carried round the laria and received its 


130 134 THEAETETUS. 

to be : since necessity binds our essence indeed, but 
binds it to nothing else, nor yet to ourselves individually;; 
it remains then that we are bound to one another. So that 
if a person says that anything is or becomes, he must 
say that it is or becomes to something, or of some 
thing, or in relation to something ; but, if we have come 
to a right conclusion, he must not say or allow of any 
one else saying, that anything is or comes to be 

Theae. Undoubtedly, Socrates. 

So. And so, when that which acts on me is to myself; 
/ and not to another, I perceive it, and no one else does. 
/ Theae. Certainly. 

So. Then my perception is true to me : for it belongs 
/ always to my being ; and, according to Protagoras, I am 
/ judge of things which are to me, that they are, and of things 
which are not, that they are not. 
Theae. So it seems. 

15 {Having thus by a series of plausible arguments broitght to birth the 
suggestion of Theaetetus, that knowledge is sensiwus perception, Socrates 
asks if he can bear to learn that the bantling after all is not worth 
rearing. Thcodorus interferes, and pledges himself for the tolerant 
temper of his pupil. He is reminded that Socrates only professes to 
draw out the thoughts of those who converse with him.} 

So. How then, being infallible and unerring in mind as 
regards things which are and come to be, can I be un 
knowing of things whereof I am percipient 1 ? 

Theae. In no sort of way. 

So. Therefore you have said very well that knowledge 

15 * AladTjrrjs, a novel word, but here pretty certainly the true one. 


is nothing else than perception ; and it turns out to be one 
and the same thing, that (as Homer and Heracleitus, and 
their whole tribe, affirm) all things move like streams, and 
that (after the opinion of the consummately wise Protagoras) 
man is the measure of all things, and that (as Theaetetus 
infers from these premises) perception is proved to 
ledge. Is it so, Theaetetus? Must we~sayTthat this, as 
it were, is your newborn child, and the product of my 
midwifery ? What say you ? 

Theae. It must be so, Socrates. 

So. This then, seemingly, we have with much difficulty 
brought to birth, whatever it prove to be. And now, after 
its birth, we must, in good sooth, run round the hearth with 
it in our discourse 2 , not failing to observe whether the child 
be worth nurture, and not a wind-egg and an unreality. Or 
do you deem it absolutely necessary to rear your offspring, 
and not to put it away ? Can you bear to see it confuted, 
and not be greatly out of temper if some one should filch 
from you your firstborn ? 

Theo. Theaetetus will bear it, Socrates. He is not 
the least ill-tempered. But in heaven s name tell me, is not 
this then true ? 

Sv. You are a very gourmand of discussion, Theodorus, 
and a good creature, in that you take me to be a sack of 
arguments, and think I can pull out another, and aver that 
what we have said is untrue. But you do not note what is 
taking place : that none of the arguments proceed from 
myself, but from him who is conversing with me at the time ; 
and that I know nothing more than this little feat, how to 
obtain an argument from another wise person and to treat 

2 The fifth day after a child s birth the festival was called A/ci0t- 
dpofjua, when the babe was carried round the ecrrt a and received its 


it fairly. And I will now try to obtain one from our friend, 
and not to say something of my own. 

Theo. You put the thing well, Socrates : so be it. 

1 5 \Socrates now assails the doctrine of Protagoras. If man is a measure, 
why not an ape or a frog? If his own sensation is true to every man, 
what makes Protagoras superlatively wise? or what is the good of\ 
arguing on any subject ? Theodorus, who was challenged as a friend 
of Protagoras, declines to take up his defence, and refers Socrates backt 
to Theaetettis.~\ 

So. Do you know then, Theodorus, what surprises me 
in your friend Protagoras ? 

Theo. What is that ? 

So. I am much pleased with everything else he has 
said, how what seems to each is to each. But the com 
mencement of his treatise does surprise me. I wonder 
that in the outset of his Truth he did not say that a pig, 
or a dog-faced baboon, or any other more monstrous spe 
cimen of things that have perception, is the measure of all 
things, that so he might have spoken to us at once in a 
magnificent and very disdainful style, ostentatiously shewing 
that, while we were marvelling at his wisdom, as if he were 
a god, he was all the while not a whit superior in judgment 
to a tadpole, not to say, to any of his fellow-men. Or 
how are we to put the case, Theodorus ? For if that opi 
nion shall be true to each man which he gets by percep 
tion, and nobody s affection shall be better determined by 
another person, nor one be more entitled than another to 
review opinion, and to say whether it be true or false, but, 
as has been often said, each j>erson singly shall form his 
own_jopinions, and all these. ^shalTb^ ngfil and True^why; 
in the world, my friend, is Protagoras so wise as to be justly 
deemed a worthy teacher with high fees, and we dunces in 


comparison,, who must go to school to him, though each of 
us is the measure of his own wisdom? Must we not say 
.that Protagoras speaks thus to amuse the vulgar? while as 
.Co my case, and that of my art of midwifery, I forbear to 
say what ridicule we incur : so indeed does the whole 
practice of dialectic. For, as to reviewing and criticising 
each other s fancies and opinions, when each man s are 
right, is it not a tedious and monstrous folly, if the Truth 
of Protagoras is true, and he did not proclaim it in jest 
from the shrine of his book ? 

Theo. He was my friend, Socrates, as you said just 
now. I cannot therefore allow Protagoras to be confuted 
by my admissions, nor yet resist you contrary to my opinion. 
So take in hand Theaetetus again. For certainly he ap 
peared some time back to follow your lead very prettily. 

So. If you went to the wrestling-courts at Lacedaemon, 
Theodorus, and there beheld naked people, some your in 
feriors, would you refuse to strip yourself beside them, and 
exhibit your own form competitively ? 

Theo. Why do you think I would not refuse, Socrates, 
with their permission and consent? So now I shall try to 
persuade you to let me look on, rather than be dragged to 
the play-ground in my present stiff condition, and to wrestle 
it out yourself with one who is younger and more supple. 

[Socrates asks Thcaetetiis if his faith in the Protagorean doctrine is shaken 17 
by what has been said. When he admits that it is, he is rallied by 
Socrates for his facility, and recalled to the question, * Knowledge is 
sensation. Are ive to say we know the barbarian tongues because we 
hear them spoken, or letters because ive see them ? Theaetetus replies 
that we know them in some respects, not in others.} 

So. If such is your will, Theodorus, I don t say nill/ 
as proverbialists have it. So I must turn again to the wise 


Theaetetus. Tell me then, Theaetetus, first of all, as to our 
late discussions ; do you not share my surprise if thus 
all of a sudden you shall turn out to be no wise inferior! 
in wisdom to any man or even any god ? Or do yooj 
suppose that the measure of Protagoras is less applicable! 
to gods than to men ? 

Theae. Upon my word I do not. And as to your 
question, I am much surprised. For when we were engaged 
in showing how that which seemed to each was also 
to him who thought it, the statement appeared to me very* 
good ; but now another view has taken its place all of a 

So. You are young, my dear boy: you quickly succumb 
to popular declamation,* and become a convert. For Pro 
tagoras, or some one on his part, will say in reply : My fine 
gentlemen, young and old, ye sit together and declaim, 
bringing gods into question, whom I, after speaking and 
writing about them, as to their existence or non-existence, 
set aside : and you say just* what the populace would 
hear with approval, that it is too bad for mankind not to 
differ in wisdom from every kind of beast : but you offer 
no convincing proof whatever ; you resort to probability, 
which if Theodoras or any other geometrician sought to 
use in geometry, he would be good for nothing. Just 
consider then, you and Theodoras, if on such important 
subjects you will accept arguments relying on mere per 
suasion and probability. 

Theae. No, Socrates, we should not any more than 
yourself affirm that to be just. 

So. We must view it then in some other way, as you 
and Theodoras suggest. 

Theae. In some other way certainly. 

So. In this way then let us consider it : whether know* 


fledge and perception are the same or different. For to this 
point, I ween, our whole argument tended ; and for this 
purpose we stirred all these many strange questions. Did 
[we not ? 

Theae. Assuredly. 

So. Shall we then admit that all the things which we \ 
perceive by sight and hearing we at the same time know? \ 
For instance, before we have learnt the language of the 
barbarians 1 , shall we say that we do not hear them when I: 
they speak, or that we both hear and understand what they \ 
ay ? And again, if we do not know letters, shall we, when , 
we look at them, say we do not see them, or shall we insist | 
that we know, since we see them ? 

Theae. So much of them, Socrates, as we see and hear, 
(we shall say we know ; we shall say we both see and know 
the figure and the colour, and that we both hear and know 
the sharp and flat sound : but what grammarians and inter 
preters teach concerning them we shall say we neither per- 
jceive by sight and hearing, nor know. 

So. Excellent, Theaetetus. And it is not worth while 
to dispute these positions of yours, that you may grow. 

Socrates noiv brings an argument against the Protagorean doctrine ivhich 18 
he afterwards acknowledges to be captions and eristic. He says that 
Theodorns ought to champion the cause of his friend s children, as their 
guardian. Theodonts naively says that Callias holds that office, not 
himself. ] 

But look at this other question also which approaches, 
md consider how we shall repel it. 

2 All who spoke another language than Greek were by the Hellenes 
Called pdppapoi. Hence Prof. Jowett renders this word in English, 


Theae. What is that ? 

So. This. If any one shall ask c Suppose a man has 
become cognisant of anything, is it possible that, having 
and preserving memory of this thing, at the time when hd 
remembers he should not know the very thing which he 
remembers? But I am verbose, apparently, when I wish 
to ask if a man remembering anything he has learnt does 
not know it. 

Theae. How could that be, Socrates ? The thing you 
suggest would be a miracle. 

So. Perhaps then I am trifling : but consider. Do you 
not call seeing perceiving, and sight perception ? 

Theae. I do. 

So. Has not then one who has seen something become 
cognisant of the thing he saw according to your last state 
ment ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Well : do you not grant there is such a thing as! 
memory ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Memory of something or of nothing ? 

Theae. Of something, certainly. 

So. Of what one has learnt then, and of what one has 
perceived ; of such things, is it not ? 

Tlieae. Undoubtedly. 

So. What a man has seen, he remembers at times, I 
suppose ? 

Theae. He does. 

So. Even when he has shut his eyes ? or on doing so 
has he forgotten ? 

Theae. It were monstrous to suppose that, Socrates. 

So. We must, I can tell you, if we are to maintain our 
former argument. If not, there is an end of it. 


TJieae. I really suspect so myself; but I cannot quite 
jmake up my mind. Tell me how. 

So. In this way. One who sees becomes, we say, . 
:ognisant of what he sees. For sight and perception and \ 
knowledge are admitted to be the same. 

Theae. Quite so. 

So. And he who saw and became cognisant of what | 
le saw, if he shuts his eyes, remembers, but does not see I 
he thing. Is it so ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And not seeing means not knowing, if seeing means j 

Theae. True. 

So. The inference then is, that, while a man remembers . 
something of which he has become cognisant, yet, since he 
does not see, he does not know it : and this we said would 
e a miracle. 

Theae. All quite true. 

So. If then anybody says that knowledge and percep-/ 
ion are the same, there results an evident impossibility. 

Theae. So it seems. 

So. Therefore we must distinguish one from the other< 

Theae. I suppose so. 

So. What then will knowledge be? We must begin 
Dur statement over again, it seems. Yet what are we going 
o do, Theaetetus? 

Theae. About what ? 

So. We seem to me, like an ignoble cock, to hop away 
rom the argument and crow, before we have gained the 

Theae. How so ? 

So. Like rhetorical disputants we seem to be content 
that we have come to a mutual agreement as to the admitted 


uses of words, and by some such method mastered the ques 
tion. And though we say we are not Eristics but philoso 
phers, we unconsciously imitate the practice of those clever 

Theae. I do not yet understand your meaning. 

So. Well then, I will try to explain my view of the 
matter. We were asking whether a man who has learnt and 
remembers something does not know it ; and taking the case 
of one who had seen, and after shutting his eyes remembered 
though he did not see, we shewed that he did not know at 
the same time that he remembered ; and this, we said, was 
impossible. And so the Protagorean fable came to ruin, 
and yours with it, as to knowledge and perception being the 

Theae. Apparently. 

So. But it would not, my friend, if the father of the 
former fable had been alive. He would have made a strong 
defence for it : but now that it is an orphan, we insult it. 
For even those trustees, whom Protagoras appointed, one oi 
whom was Theodoras here, do not come to the rescue. 
Well, in the interest of justice, I will run the risk of helping 
him myself. 

Theo. No, Socrates, I was not his children s trustee, 
but rather Callias son of Hipponicus. I diverged some 
what earlier from abstract studies to geometry. But we 
shall be much obliged to you if you will succour him. 

So. Well said, Theodoras. Have an eye then to my 
succour. For a man would have to make stranger admis 
sions than we lately made, if he did not attend to the terms 
in which we are generally wont to affirm and deny. Shall I 
explain how to you or to Theaetetus ? 

Theo. To the company generally, but let the younger 
one answer. For he will incur less disgrace by defeat. 


[Socrates produces some more eristic puzzles. ] 19 

,So. I put now the most startling question. To this 
effect, I think. Is it possible for the same man knowing a 
thing not to know what he knows? 

Thco. What answer shall we give, Theaetetus ? 
Theae. Impossible, in my opinion. 
So. Not if you lay it down that seeing is knowing. 
For how will you deal with that inevitable question, when, 
as they say, you are caught in a well, and an unabashed 
man claps his hand to one of your eyes and asks, whether 
with the closed eye you see your cloak. 

Theae. Not with that one, I suppose I shall say, but 
with the other. 

So. Then you see and do not see the same thing at 
the same time ? 

Theae. In a sort of way. 

So. I do not, he will say, define anything, nor did I 
ask how, but only whether you know that which you do 
not know. And now you are shown to see what you do 
not see; and you have admitted that seeing is knowing 
and not seeing not knowing. Consider the inference from 
these premises. 

Theae. I consider that it directly contradicts my former j 

So. Probably, my fine gentleman, you would have had 
more such experiences, if somebody had further asked you 
whether it is possible to know keenly or to know bluntly, 
and to know near and not at a distance, and to know the 
same thing intensely or moderately, and other questions, 
countless in number, which a light-armed mercenary am 
bushed ir the arguments might have asked, when you laid 


it down that knowledge and perception are the same ; anc 
attacking your senses of hearing and smelling and the like 
he might have worried you with incessant confutation, until, 
admiring his accursed wisdom, you were entangled by him 
so far, that after mastering and binding you tight he mighl 
then have ransomed you for what sum you and he agreec 
on. Now what argument, perhaps you may say, will Pro 
tagoras advance in aid of his doctrine ? Must we not try 
to state it ? 

Theae. Certainly we must. 

20 [Socrates, having obtained from Theaetetns an admission that Protagoras 
otigJit to be heard in his own defence, undertakes to plead his cause, 
and docs so in the assumed person of Protagoras himself ^\ 

So. Besides all this that we urge in his defence, he will 
also, methinks, come to close quarters, contemning us, and 
saying : Here s this good creature Socrates, who when a 
lad got frightened on being asked whether it is possible for 
the same person at once to remember some particular thing 
and not know it, and in his fright said no, because he 
could not see before him, made a laughing-stock of me in 
the course of his arguments. But the fact, my easy-goin< 
Socrates, stands thus : when you examine any of my doc 
trines by the method of interrogation, if the person ques 
tioned give such answers as I should, and be defeated, 
I am confuted; but if they differ from mine, then the 
person questioned is confuted. For instance, if mutual 
word-catching is the thing to guard against, do you think 
anybody will concede to you that the memory of a past 
feeling is anything like what the feeling itself was at the 
time when it was experienced? Far from it. Or again, 
that he will shrink from admitting that it is r )ssible for 



the same person to know and not to know the same thing ? 
Or, if he dread this that he will grant an altered person 
to be the same he was before he was altered ? Or rather 
that anybody can be called one and not many infi 
nitely multiplied, if alteration goes on. But, O my good sir, 
he will say, encounter my main doctrine more generously, 
if you can, and prove against it that individual perceptions 
do not come-to-be to each of us, or that, supposing they 
do, it does not follow that the appearance will i come-to-be 
(or be/ if that is the proper term) to that person alone, 
unto whom it appears. When you talk of swine and dog- 
headed baboons, you are not merely swinish yourself, but 
you likewise induce your hearers to act as such towards my 
treatises without any decency. For I say that the Truth 
is as I have written: that each of us is^a measure of 
tings that are and are not : but that, nevertrieTessr""OTre 
man differs vastly from another in this very respect, that 
to one man some things are and appear, to another other 
Brings. And I am far from denying that wisdom and a 
(wise man exist, fftit the man I call wise is he who, by 
; working change^ 1 markes things to appear and to be good 
to any one of us, to whom they appear and are evil. And 
again, do not press my argument literally; but understand 
[from the following explanation more clearly what I mean, 
i Recollect how it was formerly said, that to a sick man 
fhis food appears to be and is bitter, but to a man in health 
he opposite is the fact and appears so. Neither of these 
(persons ought wt to make wiser than the other; that is 
impossible: nor -may we declare that the sick man is igno- 
jrant for holding such an opinion, or the man in health 
is wise for holding another. We must effect a change to 
the opposite state: for the one habit is better than the 
lother. So also in education we must cause a change from 
K. r. 10 



the one habit to the better. Now the physician changes by 
medicines ; the wise teacher by arguments. Never indeed 
did anybody make one who had false opinions afterwards 
to hold true ones. For it is not possible either to thin 
what is not, or anything but what one feels; and this is 
always true. But, I suppose, when through a bad habit 
of mind a man has corresponding opinions, a good habit 
makes him hold opinions resembling it ; phantasms which 
some persons from inexperience call true: but I call some 
better than others, not truer. And wise men, dear Socrates, 
I "am far from calling frogs : but in relation to bodies I 
call them physicians, in relation to plants husbandmen. 
For I say that these last also produce in plants, instead 
of evil sensations when any of them are sickly, good and 
healthy sensations and truths, while wise and good rheto 
ricians make good things instead of evil seem just to states. 
Since whatever things seem just and good to each state, 
are such to it, as long as it deems them lawful; but the 
wise man, in the place of those things which are severally 
evil to each, makes the good both to be and tp seem right. 
And on the same principle the sophist a oO, who is able to 
instruct his pupils thus, is both wise and vorthy of high fee 
at their hands. And thus some are wiser than others, and 
nobody thinks falsities : and you, whether you will or not, 
must submit to be a measure. For on these grounds this 
doctrine is maintained. And, if you wish to revive you 
dispute with it, dispute by counter- arguing at full ; or if yo 
prefer the method of questioning, adopt it. ; for no person 
sense will avoid this method, but w^ll pursue it most wil 
lingly. Mind this however; you must not question unfairly. 
For it is most unreasonable in one who professes esteem fo]| l 
virtue to be constantly pursuing an unfair .method of argu 
ment. Now unfairness is shown, when a. man fails to con 


duct his arguments diversely; in one way as a combatant, 
in another as a dialectician: in the former case rallying 
and tripping up as much as he can, in the latter being 
serious, and correcting his respondent, showing him only 
those errors into which he was led by his own fault or in 
consequence of former discussions. If you act thus, your 
fellow-debaters will impute to themselves the fault of their 
own confusion and perplexity, not to you; and they will 
follow and love you, and fly from themselves to philosophy, 
that they may become different, and get rid of their former 
selves. But if you take the contrary course, as most do, 
you will find an opposite result, and your pupils instead of 
philosophers will turn out haters of philosophy, when they 
grow older. If then you will follow my advice, as was 
before said, you will, in no hostile or contentious spirit, 
but with a really mild and condescending temper, consider 
what we mean, when we declare that all things are in 
motion, and that what seems is also to each, individual 
as well as state. From these considerations you will discern 
whether knowledge and perception are the same : but not, 
as you lately sought, from the use of words and names, 
which most people pervert in every sort of way, causing 
each other all kinds of perplexity. Such, Theodorus, is 
the slight assistance which, from slight resources, I have 
supplied, as I best could, to your old friend. Had he 
been alive, he would have helped his own cause in grander 

[Protagoras had been made in the pleading of Socrates to complain that 21 
admissions hostile to his doctrine had been wrung from the mouth of a 
terrified lad. Socrates now constrains Theodorus to submit, very re 
luctantly , to a dialectic argument on the general question at issue. ] 



Theo. You are joking, Socrates : for you have helped 
him most valiantly. 

So. You are very obliging, my friend. Allow me one 
word. You noticed probably that Protagoras in what he 
said reproached us for holding our discussions with a boy, 
and using that boy s alarm as a weapon of contention 
against his propositions : and while he represented this 
as mere amusement, he called the measure of all things 
a grave topic, and urged us to deal seriously with his 

Theo. Of course I noticed it, Socrates. 

So. Well : do you bid us take his advice ? 

TJieo. Very earnestly. 

So, Do you see that all here are boys except you? 

If then we are to take his advice, you and I must deal 

seriously with his doctrine by mutual questions and answers, 

that he may not have to reproach us with considering this 

subject in a jocular manner with lads. 

TJieo. Nay, but would not Theaetetus follow the inves 
tigation of a doctrine better than many who have great 
beards ? 

So. Not better than you, Theodorus. Do not suppose 
that I am bound to defend your deceased friend in every 
manner, and that you are bound in no manner. But 
come, good sir, follow the argument a little way, till such 
time as we know whether you are to be the measure of 
diagrams, or if all are competent in themselves, equally with 
you, to treat of astronomy and the other subjects wherein 
you are reported to excel. 

Theo. When one sits beside you, Socrates, it is not easy 
to decline discussion. Indeed I spoke nonsense just now 
when I said you would allow me not to strip, and that you 
would not compel me as the Lacedaemonians do: you seem 


rather to tend in Sciron s l direction. The Lacedaemonians 
indeed bid one depart or strip, but you seem to me to act 
your part like Antaeus 2 : you will not let one who comes to 
you go away before you have forced him to strip and wrestle 
with you in argument. 

So. You have found very good precedents for my 
malady, Theodorus : but I am more robust than they were. 
Many a Hercules and Theseus strong in argument have ere 
now met and thumped me very hard ; but I do not flinch 
for all that : with such a wonderful love of this kind of 
exercise am I possessed. Do not then refuse to benefit 
yourself as well as me by trying a fall with me. 

Theo. Be it as you will : I refuse no longer. I must 
inevitably endure by cross-examination whatever destiny 
you spin for me in this discussion. I shall not however be 
able to put myself in your hands beyond the limit which 
you have proposed. 

So. -That limit is sufficient. And pray help me to be 
careful of this, that we do not unawares carry on any 
childish kind of argument, and incur reproach again for 
doing so. 

Theo. Very well, I ll try my best 

[The argument of Socrates against the doctrine of Protagoras, that man 22 
is a mcastire to himself J may be briefly summarised thus. That doc 
trine means, l what seems to each is to each? Now to the mass of 
mankind this doctrine seems to be untrue, because it is certain that 
men in general do consider some to be wiser than others, and look lip 
to the "wise as teachers and guides. Therefore to them it is untnie. \ 

x Sciron, or Scirrhon, the legendary robber, who flung travellers 
from rocks. He was slain by Theseus. 

2 Antaeus, the gigantic wrestler, who slew his opponents : but was 
himself defeated and slain by Hercules. 


And Protagoras, on his own principle, must allow that they are 
right ; from which it necessarily follmvs that he is wrong, even in his 
own opinion. In short l the Truth" 1 of Protagoras is not true to him 
self or to any body else. ] 

So. Let us first revert to the objection we took before, 
and see whether we were right or wrong in being out 
of humour and censuring the doctrine, in that it made every 
one competent in wisdom ; and whether Protagoras rightly 
conceded to us, that, in respect of better and worse, some 
do surpass, and they are wise. Is it not so ? 

Theo. Yes. 

So. Now if he had himself been present and made this 
admission, instead of our making it in his defence, we need 
not have strengthened ourselves by recurring to the subject : 
but now perhaps some one may allege that we are in 
competent to make the confession on his part. It is 
better to come to a clearer mutual understanding on this 
special point. For whether it is so or not makes a great 

Theo. Very true. 

So. Let us obtain the admission not through others, 
but from his statement, as briefly as we can. 

Theo. How ? 

f So. In this way. He says, does he not, that what 
seems to every one is also to him unto whom it seems ? 

Theo. Yes, he does. 

So. Do not we also, Protagoras, state a man s opinion, 
or rather the opinions of all men, when we say that 
there is nobody who does not deem himself wiser than 
others in some respects, and others wiser than himself in 
other respects; and, moreover, that in the greatest perils, 
when they are distressed in war or disease or at sea, men 
regard their rulers on such occasions as gods, expecting 


them to be their saviours, though they differ from them in 
nothing but knowledge? And all human life teems with 
people who are seeking teachers and rulers of themselves 
and of other living creatures and of the various trades; 
and teems, again, with other people who deem themselves 
competent to teach and competent to rule. And in all 
these cases what else can we say than that men_themselves 
think there exists among them wisdom and ignorance ? 
"Tfu o. Nothing else. 

So. Do they not deem wisdom to be true thought, and 
ignorance false opinion? 

TJuo. Certainly. 

So. Well then, how shall we deal with the argument, 
Protagoras? Must we say that men always have true 
opinionSj_or sometimes true, sometimes false ? From both 
views it results that they do not always think true things, 
but at times true things, at times false. For consider, 
Theodorus, whether any Protagorean, or you yourself, would 
wish to contend that no one person considers any other 
to be unlearned and to have false opinions. 

Theo. That is incredible, Socrates. 

So. And yet the doctrine which says that man is the 
measure of all things is brought to this unavoidable con 

Theo. How so? 

So. When you, after forming some judgment in your 
own mind on any point, declare to me your opinion, be it 
granted according to his doctrine that this is true to you : 
but is it not allowed to the rest of us to become judges 
respecting your judgment ? must we always judge that you 
have true opinions? do not a countless number in each 
instance contend against you with contrary opinions, be 
lieving that you judge and think falsities ? 


Theo. Yes verily, Socrates, countless myriads indeed, 
as Homer says, who give me all the trouble in the world. 

So. Well ? would you have us say that in that case you 
have opinions true to yourself but false to the countless 
myriads ? 

Theo. Such seems to be the necessary inference from 
the statement. 

So. And how as to Protagoras himself? Supposing 
he did not think man a measure, and the public did not 
think so, (as indeed they do not), would it not necessarily 
follow that what he delivered in writing as Truth, is Truth 
to nobody? or if he thought so, and the public does not 
agree with him, do you see that in proportion as those who 
deny are more numerous than those who affirm, so much 
more decidedly it is or is not so ? 

Theo. Of necessity, if according to each individual 
opinion it will be or will not be so. 

So. In the next place it involves this very queer result, 
that he on his side, by confessing that all men hold true 
opinions, admits that the opinion of the opposite party 
about his opinion (which they deem false) is a true one. 

Theo. Certainly. 

So. Will he not admit that his own is false, if he 
confesses that the opinion of those who suppose him to 
think falsely is true ? 

Theo. Of course. 

So. But the others on their side do not admit that they 
think falsely. 

Theo. No, they do not 

So. And he again confesses also this opinion to be true 
according to his written doctrines. 

Theo. Evidently. 

So. By all parties then it will be contended, including 


Protagoras (by him it will rather be confessed, for when he 
grants to a gainsayer that the latter thinks what is true, then 
does Protagoras himself confess), that no dog or man he 
meets with is a measure concerning anything which he has 
not learnt. Is it not so ? 

Theo. Yes. 

So. Since this is the contention of all, to nobody 
will the Truth of Protagoras be true, neither to himself nor 
to anyone else. 

Theo. We run down my friend very hard, Socrates. 

So. But it is doubtful, my friend, if we are outrunning 
the fact. It is likely that he being older is wiser than we : 
ind if he could at once pop up his head where we are, 

would not sink down and run away again, until, pro 
bably, he had convicted me of talking much nonsense, and 
you of agreeing to it. As it is, we must needs, I think, 
nake the best of ourselves, such as we are, and state our 
real opinions for the time being. And must we not now 
say that everybody will confess this that one man is wiser, 
one more ignorant, than another ? 

Theo. Yes, I think so. 

If we admit, Socrates goes on, that each may judge for himself with equal 23 
truth as to some sensible things, as hot 1 and cold; 1 this is not uni 
versally applicable. For instance, all do not know with equal truth 
what is wholesome 1 for them. Again, if we admit that states and 
persons may judge with equal truth of right 1 and wrong 1 holy 1 
and unholy, 1 they certainly cannot equally well decide what is and 
will be expedient and inexpedient for them. But, he adds, this opens 
new questions* Well, says Theodorus t have we not leisure for them ? Yes, 
replies Socrates, we have ; and this is the reason why philosophers 
make such a poor figure in the law-courts. Their habits are those of 
freemen; those of lawyers are in a manner slavish. Then follows 
the Socratic picture of an Athenian lawyer s habits and character. 


He asks if Theodorus wishes to hear its contrast in the habits and < 
character of the true philosopher. Theodorus is very desirous to 
hear this.} 

So. Must we not also say that our argument is mostJ 
stably conducted on the lines we prescribed in our defence 
of Protagoras, averring that most things are as they seem to 
each, hot, dry, sweet, all such-like 1 ? but that, if he will grant! 
that one excels another in anything, he will be ready to sayj 
so in judgments upon health and disease: not every woman 
or child or beast, he will admit, knows what is wholesome 
in its own case, and is competent to cure itself: here, if 
anywhere, one excels another. 

Theo. I think so. 

f^. ">-_ So. || In politics, too, will he not say, that of things 
honourable and dishonourable, just and unjust, holy and un 
holy, whatsoever each state shall deem and enact to be lawful 
for itself are also lawful in truth for each, and that in these 
no individual or state is wiser than another? but in enacting 
things expedient or inexpedient, here, if anywhere, he will 
confess that counsellor differs from counsellor and the 
opinion of one city from that of another in respect of truth, 
and he will certainly not venture to affirm, that whatever 
a state shall deern and enact to be expedient for itself will 
most assuredly be expedient. // But of the former things I 
named, justice and injustice, holiness and unholiness, they 
(the Protagoreans) are ready to insist that none has any 
essential nature, but that whatever has seemed good by 
public consent is true when it has seemed good, and as long 
as it seems good 2 . And those who do not altogether echo 

1 Such-like, ova rou T^TTOU TOI/TOU, lit. all that are of this type, i.e 
(as Prof. Jowett says) immediate sensations. 

2 In the first two speeches ( 23) assigned to Socrates the subjects 
who express or allow opinions are very indistinctly stated. The reasor 


the doctrine of Protagoras, take some such philosophic 
view. But now, Theodorus, we have question growing out 
of question, greater out of less. 
y Theo. Are we not at leisure, Socrates ? 

S0. We appear to be. On many occasions, my good 
sir, I have noticed, but especially on this, how natural it is 
for those who have spent much time on philosophy, when 
they go into the law-courts, to shew themselves absurd 

Theo. How do you mean ? 

So. People who from their youth have been knocking 
about in law-courts and such like scenes, as compared with 
those who have been reared in philosophic and literary 
society, seem to have had a breeding like that of slaves 
compared with freemen. 

Theo. In what respects ? 

So. In that (referring to your last observation) philoso 
phers have leisure at all times, and hold their discussions 
peacefully and with leisurely ease, and as we have now been 

of this seems to be, that he is referring throughout to what was said in 
his defence of Protagoras made in the name of Protagoras ( 20). The 
oratio obliqua with which the first speech begins is dependent (as the 
translation indicates) on the aXXo n (f>Q>fjiev (imist we not say ?) at the 
close of the previous speech in 22. Of vyxc0p^<rerac and fde\ rjeai av 
Ivai, according to Heindorf and Stallbaum, rts TIVCL understood are 
severally the subjects. I am rather disposed to understand Upwraydpas 
and HpuTayopav, as Protagoras had been mentioned just before, and 
his confession would be appropriate here. For the same reasons I sup 
pose him to be the subject on whose statement or admission the oratio 
obliqua depends in the first paragraph of the second speech (OVKOVV 
K.T.A.), after which 6fj.o\oy^aei comes, where Protagoras is the natural 
subject. In the next sentence, where he recurs to TCI, Ka\a /c.r.X., 
Plato uses the plural tBtXovo-w i<rxvple<rdai. We cannot doubt that 
he speaks of the scholars of Protagoras, who still profess their master s 
doctrine on the question specified. 


pursuing three arguments in succession, so do they also,, 
if one which follows pleases them better than the preced 
ing; nor do they care whether they speak briefly or at 
length, if only they can attain truth. The other class 
always speak in haste ; for the flow of water 3 quickens them, 
and they are not allowed to make their speeches on any 
thing they desire; and the opponent stands over them 
holding compulsion in the shape of a prescribing document 
read in the ear, beyond the limits of which they must not 
speak, yclept an affidavit 4 : and the arguments are always 
about a fellow-slave addressed to a master on the bench, 
who holds justice between his finger and thumb; and 
the contests are never away from the point 5 , but to the 
point of self-interest ; and often too the race is for life. So 
that on all these grounds they become keen and shrewd, 
knowing how to wheedle the master by word and gratify him 
by deed, being stunted and crooked in soul. For their 
slavery from childhood has robbed them of growth and 
uprightness and freedom, compelling them to act tortuously, 
setting before their yet tender souls great perils and fears. 
And as they cannot bear up against these with the help ofl 
justice and truth, they have recourse at once to falsehood 
and mutual injury, and twist themselves in many ways, and 
become warped ; and so they pass from youth to manhood 
without any mental soundness, becoming, as they imagine, 

3 Flow of water. The K\\ffv8pa or water-clock, used to measure 
the time allowed to each orator, and placed within his view. 

4 Affidavit, avTU/j.o(ria, literally counter-affidavit. The pleas of 
each party in a cause were affirmed by their several oaths : and by these 
affirmations they or their advocates would be bound, and could not 
stray from them. 

5 Away from the point, TJV d XXws (6Sw), a proverbial phrase. Such 
also is 7re/>i if/vxw 6 5p ofj.os. 


clever and wise. Such is this class of men, Theodorus. 
Would you wish us now to describe those of our circle, or 
to pass them by and return to our argument, that we may 
not, as we just now said, abuse too far our freedom in the 
change of topics ? 

TJieo. Not so, Socrates ; finish the description. For 
you have said with great truth that we who form a circle 
like this are not servants of our discussions : our discussions 
are, as it were, our servants, and each of them waits to be 
completed when we think fit. For amongst us there is no 
presiding authority; neither dicast to rule, nor spectator, as 
in the case of poets, to censure. 

[The habits and character of the true philosopher are depicted in this and 24 
the succeeding chapter. } 

So. We must speak then, seemingly, since you think 
proper, concerning the leaders of such a circle ; for why need 
one mention the inferior students of philosophy? This 
class from their youth, in the first place, do not know 
the way to the agora, nor where a law-court is or a council- 
hall or any other political meeting-room : laws and decrees 
spoken or written they neither see nor hear. Societies 
agitating for office and clubs and dinners and wine-bouts 
with flute-girls these are practices which even in dreams 
do not occur to them. Whether any one in the city is well 
or ill born, whether a person has inherited any disgrace 
from ancestors on the male or female side, he knows no 
more than he does of the proverbial * gallons in the sea. 
He does not even know that he is ignorant of all these 
things; for it is not for credit s sake that he stands aloof 
from them, but in point of fact it is only his body that 
reposes and resides in the city, while his mind, deeming 


all these things petty and insignificant, moves in every 
direction, as Pindar says, measuring things beneath the 
earth and on its surface, and star-gazing above the heaven, 
and searching out everywhere the nature of each class of 
existing things, condescending to none of those which are 
near it. 

Theo. How do you mean, Socrates ? v 

So. Compare the case of Thales, O Theodorus. While 
he was astronomising and gazing upward he fell into a well; 
and a clever and witty Thracian maidservant is said to 
have taunted him with desiring to know what was in heaven, 
but not seeing what was before him and at his feet. s The 
same taunt is good for all who are devoted to philosophy. 
For in fact such a student is not only unaware of what his 
next neighbour is doing, but does not even know whether 
he is a man or some other creature. But what man is, and 
what it belongs to such a nature to do or to suffer differently 
from all others, this he inquires, and takes pains to search 
out. You understand, I hope, Theodorus, do you not ? 

Theo. I do, and your words are true. 

So. Therefore, my friend, a man like this, in his 
associations private and public, as I said at first, when in 
a law-court or elsewhere he is compelled to discourse oi 
things at his feet and before his eyes, becomes a laughing 
stock not only to Thracian maids, but to the general public, 
falling into wells and perplexities of every kind from inex-j 
perience ; and his awkwardness is marvellous, raising a sus 
picion of imbecility. For when personal reviling is the order 
of the day, he has no scandalous charge to bring, knowing 
no evil of anybody, because he has never taken the trouble. 
So he gets laughed at for his helplessness. And when* 
eulogies and glorification of others are the theme, he is 
seen to laugh in right earnest without any affectation; and 


so he seems to be silly. When a tyrant or a king is ex 
tolled, he thinks he hears one of the herdsmen, swineherd 
or shepherd or cowherd, congratulated for his large milking: 
but he considers that the royal proprietors in their tending 
and milking have to deal with a more untoward and insidious 
animal than the others have, and that any one of them 
must, for want of leisure, perforce prove quite as rude and 
uninstructed as the real herdsmen,- having his fortifica 
tion built round him like a stall upon the mountain. 
When he hears it said that somebody, who has got ten 
thousand acres of land or more, has a wonderfully large 
estate, he thinks the quantity named a very small one, from 
being in the habit of contemplating the whole earth/ And 
when they extol birth, and say that some one is a gentleman 
for being able to show seven rich ancestors, this he regards 
as praise emanating from very dull and short-sighted persons, 
who through want of education can never take a comprehen 
sive view, so as to see that every man has had countless 
myriads of forefathers, among whom in every case are found 
many rich and poor, kings and slaves, both Greeks and 
barbarians, recurring again and again. He is amazed at the 
manifestly narrow conception of those who pride themselves 
on a list of twenty-five ancestors, carried back to Heracles, 
son of Amphitryon ; and he laughs at men who cannot bear 
in mind that the twenty-fifth ancestor, counting back from 
Amphitryon, and again the fiftieth before him, were just 
whatever they might happen to be and by such reflection 
get rid of their foolish vanity, v On all these occasions 
such a man is scorned by the multitude, partly, it would 
seem, on the charge of arrogance, partly for not know 
ing what stares him in the face, and for helplessness in 

Theo. It certainly does happen as you say, Socrates. 


25 \When Socrates has completed his description of the true philosopher, 
Theodorus, assenting, says there would be less evil in the world if all 
men felt as he did. Socrates says that evil must remain as the anti 
thesis of good ; and, in a beautiful digression, he exhibits the contrast 
between justice and holiness on the one hand, which are blessed and 
godlike, injustice and unholiness on the other, which are wretched aM 
godless. The unrighteous are apt to pride themselves on their own 
wickedness; but their self-satisfaction is unreal, and collapses at the 

So. But when he himself, my friend, leads any man 
to take a higher view, and that man consents to quit his 
How do I wrong you or you me, for the consideration 
of justice and injustice what each is in itself, and wherein 
they differ from all other things or from each other, or to 
turn from the maxim Happy the king, happy the possessor 
of much gold/ to the consideration of kingship itself and 
human happiness and misery generally what they are and 
how it befits human nature to attain the one and escape 
the other on all these subjects, I say, when that joe 
narrow-mindej^ render reason, 

he presents a counterpart_of the j3hilo.sopher. Stationed 
upon a height and gazing down from his elevated posi 
tion, he turns diz^^JVarn jjngxpprjpjp^ and, uneasy 
perplexed and stuttering, he is a laughing-stock, not tc 
Thracian girls or any uneducated person, for they do not 
see the absurdity, but to all whose training has not beer 
that of slaves. Such are their several characters, Theodorus^ 
One is that of the man really bred in freedom and leisure, 
whom you call philosopher; who may without reproach 
seem simple and be incompetent when he is engaged ir 
menial services ; when he does not, for instance, know ho\\ 
to pack a trunk of linen, or to season a dish or a flattering 
speech. The other is that of him who can perform all suet 


services thoroughly and briskly, but who does not know 
how to don his cloak like a gentleman, or, by acquiring 
harmony of language, to sing well the true life of gods and 
blessed men. 

Theo. If you could bring home what you say to all 
men, Socrates, as you do to me, there would be more peace 
and less evil in the world. 

So. Nay, Theodorus, evil cannot, on the one hand, 
perish altogether, for something opposite to good there 
must ever be ; nor, on the other, can it find a seat in heaven : 
but our mortal nature and this lower region it haunts per 
force. A Wherefore we must endeavour to fly from this world 
to the other as soon as we can. Now that flight means 
the becoming like to God as much as possible; and the 
way to be like God is to becomejust and holy and wise. 
But indeed, my excellent friend, it is by no means an easy 
task to convince the world that the reasons on which most 
people found the duty of shunning vice and pursuing 
virtue are not the just motives for practising the latter and 
avoiding the former : in order, to wit, that a man may not 
seem to be wicked, and that he may seem to be good. 
These views, in my clear opinion, are what is called an 
old woman s fable : the real truth we may state as follows. 
God is in no way and in no degree unjust, but just in the 
highest extreme ; and nothing is more like to him than one 
of us who in his own sphere shall become as just as possible. 
Hereby is shown a man s veritable power, in the one case ; 
in the other, his worthless and unmanly character. For 
the cognition of this truth is genuine wisdom and virtue, 
while the ignorance of it is manifest unintelligence and 
viciousness. Everything else which is taken for mental 
power and wisdom is in political government vulgar, in art 
ignoble. It is by far the best way then not to allow for a 
K. P. 11 


moment that one who acts unjustly and speaks or practises 
impiety is a man of powerful mind because he is a rogue. 
Such people pride themselves on the reproach, and suppose 
it to mean that they are no whipsters, no mere loungers 
about the streets, but the sort of men they ought to be to 
hold their own in the state. , . They must be told the truth 
therefore; namely that their belief of not being what 
they are makes them what they are so much the more. 
For they do not know the penalty of injustice, a thing of all 
others which it is most proper to know. It is not what they 
suppose, stripes and capital punishments, which men some 
times do not incur when they act unjustly, but one from 
which it is impossible to escape. 

Theo. What do you refer to ? 

So. There are, my friend, established in the world two i 
types ; of supreme happiness in the godly nature, of supreme 
misery in the ungodly: and these men, not seeing this truth, , 
in their weakness and utter folly do by their unjust deeds 
insensibly become like the latter nature, unlike the former. , 
The punishment they suffer is that of living a life corre 
spondent with that nature to which they become like. , 
And if we tell them that, unless they get rid of their 
wondrous wisdom, when they are dead, yon place pure 
from evil will not receive them, and they will ever continue 
to live in this world a life resembling themselves evil 
amidst evil associations such language they will un 
doubtedly hear as clever and cunning rogues listening to 
a pack of fools. 

Theo. To be sure they will, Socrates. 

So. I know it well, my friend. There is however one 
thing that befalls them. If in private they are required to 
give a reasonable account of their censures, though for a 
long time they are willing to abide the brunt manfully and 


not to flee like cowards, at last, my good sir, they are 
strangely dissatisfied with their wn reasoning; and that 
rhetoric of theirs dies out, somehow or other, so that 
they seem no better than children. As to these people, 
however, since the topic is a mere digression, let us drop 
the conversation : or else further considerations will con 
tinue to stream in and stifle our original argument. Let 
us return to the previous question, with your leave. 

Tkeo. For my own part, Socrates, I lend an ear to such 
digressions with quite as much pleasure, as they are easier 
for a man of my age to follow. But, if you prefer it, let us 
return to our subject. 

/ 4 
> fx 

[Returning to his subject, Socrates says that the laws of a state have 28 
expediency (TO u<pt\i[j.ov) for their end ; but they often fail to attain 
it. Expediency is tested by the future. Does Protagoras pretend to be 
a measure of tJiis ? Will not a medical man judge better than he of 
the probability of a fever, a vine-grower of the expected quality of a 
wine, and so on, even as Protagoras himself coidd jiidge better than 
they of the arguments likely to prevail in a court of law ? This -was 
his forte and profession. He got afortime by it. Would he have done 
so if fie had told those who consulted him that they could judge as well 
as he ? No : and it is hence evident that the more intelligent man is a 
measure, the unintelligent has no claim to be so called. Trite, says 
Theodorus ; and my friend } s doctrine is overthrown by this argument 
as well as by the former which showed that, while he admitted the 
opinions of all men to be true, most men denied this opinion of his to 
be true: which leaves him self-confuted. Yes, says Socrates, and 
many other confuting reasons might be added. But the momentary 
affections, from which arise sensation and opinion, are not so easily 
shown to be tintnte. There is great disputation on this subject. ,J 

So. We had, I think, reached this point in our argu- 
) ment. jfj Speaking of those who teach the notion of moving 



essence, and who aver that what at any time seems to each is 
for him to whom it seems, we said that while on other points, 
and specially with respect to justice, such men would insist 
strongly, that what a state enacts as its pleasure, is just for 
the enacting state as long as it remains enacted yet with 
respect to good, none are so bold as to contend that what 
a state enacts considering it useful, is useful so long as it 
remains enacted, unless one choose to lay stress on the 
mere term; and that would be quibbling as to our real 
question. Would it not ? 

Theo. Certainly. 

So. He should not dwell on the term, but on the thing 
which under that term is considered. 

Theo. True. 

So. Whatever term the state give to it, that which the 
state aims at in its legislation is, I suppose, this : all its laws, 
so far as its opinion and power extend, are framed in order 
to be as useful to itself as possible. H Does it legislate with 
any other view ? 

Theo. None. 

So. Does it always succeed? or do all states err in 
many cases ? 

Theo. I think they sometimes err. 

So. Ay, and one may be led to this same admission 
more readily, by putting the question as to the whole class, 
of which the useful is a part. I suppose it relates to future 
time as -well as to present. \\ When we legislate, we enact 
our laws as intended to be useful for the time that is to 
follow. This we should rightly term future ? 

Theo. Certainly. 

So. Well then : let us ask Protagoras, or any of those 
who adopt his doctrine, this question. Man is the measure 
of all things, as ye say, O Protagoras ; of things white, heavy, 


light, all such-like. For, having the test in himself, thinking 
what he feels, he thinks what is, and what is to himself true. 
Is it not so? 

T/ieo. It is. 

So. And of things which are hereafter to be, we 
shall say, O Protagoras, has he the test in himself, and 
do they turn out to him such as he thinks they will be ? 
Heat, for instance : when an unskilled person thinks that 
he will be seized with fever, and that this state of heat will 
occur, and another, who is a medical man, has an opposite 
opinion, shall we say that the future will turn out according 
to the opinion of one of the two, or according to that of 
both, and that to the medical man he will not be hot or 
feverish, but to himself both these ? 

Theo. This would be absurd. 

So. And, I suppose, with respect to the future sweetness 
or harshness of wine, the vine-grower s opinion, not that of 
the harp-player, will prevail ? 

Theo. Of course. 

So. Again, as to good and bad music, a gymnast cannot 
judge beforehand so well as a musician, even of that which, 
after he has heard it, the gymnast himself will deem to be 
good music. 

Theo. Certainly not. 

So. The judgment also of one who, without culinary 
skill, is preparing to feast, will, while the banquet is in 
preparation, be less valid concerning the future pleasure 
than the judgment of the cook. We must not in our 
present argument inquire as to that which now is or 
which has been pleasant to each, but as to that which 
is about to seem and to be pleasant, whether each 
individual is the best judge for himself. For example, 
would not you, Protagoras, form beforehand a better opinion 


than an untutored person of the arguments which each of 
us would find persuasive in a court of law ? 

Theo. The very point, Socrates, in which he used to 
declare strongly that he had no rival. 

So. To be sure he did, my dea.r friend ; and nobody 
would have paid large sums of money to converse with him, 
if he had tried to persuade his pupils that no person, 
prophet, or other, is a better judge of what in the future will 
be, and "seem to be, than a man s own self 1 . 

Theo. Very true. 

So. Are not legislation and expediency concerned with 
the future, and will not every one confess that a state, 
when legislating, must of necessity often fail to attain that 
which is most useful? 

Theo. Certainly. 

So. Then it will be a fair thing to say to your master, | 
he must perforce confess that one man is wiser than another, 
and that such a man is indeed a measure : while for me, who 
am unknowing, there is no kind of necessity to become a 
measure, compelled though I was just now to be one, 
whether I would or not, by my argument in his defence. 

Theo. In my judgment, Socrates, that is the best way 
of confuting his doctrine, though it is also confuted by this 
consideration, that it makes other people s opinions valid, 
and by these opinions (as was shown) his statements are 
deemed to be anything but true. H 

^ So. In many other ways, also, Theodorus, a doctrine 
such as this, that every opinion of every person is true 
can be confuted. But, in respect to momentary affections, 
from which arise perception and correspondent opinion, 
it is more difficult to convict these of untruth. I am 
very likely wrong, however : possibly they are irrefragable ; 
1 See Notes appended. 



and those who assert them to be clear, and to be cognitions, 
may perhaps tell the truth, and our friend Theaetetus may 
not have missed the mark in laying down that perception and 
knowledge are the same. We must come closer then and 
examine this moving essence, by tapping it to see whether 
it sounds whole or cracked. No slight war is waged about 
this between combatants not a few. 

\Theodorus gives a half serious, half jocular, character of the Heracleitean 27 
champions of the Flux. Socrates stipports it by citing Homer s "words 
as a veiled philosophy, openly professed by Heracleitus. He then refers 
to the antagonistic School (Eleatic), of ivhich are Melissus and Par- 
mcnidcs, "who teach the doctrine of Rest and Oneness of Being. Be 
tween the two, he says, we may find ourselves perplexed like outsiders 
between the two contending parties in the game called 5tct 

Theo. Far indeed from being a slight one ; in Ionia the 
doctrine makes great strides. The followers of Heracleitus 
support it very vigorously. 

So. On that account, dear Theodorus, we must examine 
it more fundamentally, as they suggest. 

Theo. Decidedly. For indeed, Socrates, as to these 
followers of Heracleitus, or, as you say, of Homer, and of 
others still more ancient, if we take their leading men about 
Ephesus, who pretend to be learned in the doctrines, there 
is no possibility of holding an argument with them any more 
than with lunatics. They are always in motion after the 
manner of their writings, and as to pausing on one sub 
ject, and inquiring and answering quietly in turn, their 
power of doing this is below zero. An infinite minus 
quantity goes nearer to expressing that these men have 
not in them the least particle of quietness. If you ask 
them any question, they pluck as it were out of their quiver 


a iittle riddling phrase or two and shoot them at you, and if 
you try to get any account from the man of what he has 
said, you will be smitten with another under some novel 
change of name, and so you will never reach a conclusion 
with any one of them. Nor indeed will they themselves do 
so in their mutual discussions. They carefully guard them 
selves from allowing any certainty to appear either in an 
argument or in their own souls, deeming this, I suppose, a 
stable principle. Any such they are at war with and repel, 
as much as they can, on every side. 

So. Probably, Theodorus, you have seen these men in 
battle, and never met with them in a pacific state, as they 
are no companions of yours. But, I suppose, they do teach 
certain principles at leisure to their scholars, whom they wish 
to make like themselves. 

TJieo. What do you mean by scholars, my good sir? 
These folk are not scholars one of another ; they arise by 
spontaneous growth, each from some casual inspiration, 
and there is not one of them that supposes another to know 
anything. From these men, as I was going to say, you can 
never get a reason with or against their will. We must 
ourselves receive their doctrine, and examine it like a 
mathematical problem. 

So. Very fairly suggested. We have however received the 
problem in another shape, from the ancients first, who hide it 
from the multitude in poetry, how that Oceanus and Tethys, 
the progenitors of all things, are streams, and that nothing 
stands still : from later writers secondly, who, being 
wiser, proclaim their views openly, that even a cobbler 
may hear and learn their wisdom, and cease to suppose 
some existences stand still while others are moving, 
and so, having been taught that all things move, may 
honour his teachers. I almost forgot, Theodorus, that 


others again put forth the doctrine opposite to this : for 

Unmoved is that they call the universe/ 

and other dogmas, which, in opposition to all the preceding, 
such men as Melissus and Parmenides 1 insist upon, how that 
all things are one, and that this one stands self-supported, 
having no region wherein it moves. How shall we deal 
with all these, my friend? for we have gone on little by 
little till we find ourselves unexpectedly thrown midway 
between them, and if we do not struggle to find an escape, 
we shall be punished like those who play across a line in 
wrestling-grounds, when they are seized by both parties and 
dragged in opposite directions. So I think we must begin by 
considering the one party, to whom we first addressed our 
selves, the fluent gentlemen. And if they appear to have 
good reasons, we will help them to drag us over, and try to 
escape from their opponents ; but if the standard-bearers of 
* the Whole seem to give the true account, to them will 
we fly from those who move even the immoveable. If we 
find that neither of them have any satisfactory account to 
give, we shall get laughed at for supposing that poor 
creatures like us have anything of weight to say, and for 
disavowing men of the highest antiquity and wisdom. 
Consider, Theodorus, whether it is our interest to incur so 
great a risk. 

Theo. Nay, Socrates, it cannot be endured that we 
should refuse to consider what each of these parties has to 

1 The Eleatic School; see p. u3. 


[Socrates now disproves Jhe doctrine that perception is knowledge on Hera- 
chit ean principles. Motion is of two kinds, loco motion ^including 
revolution} and variation. And, as all is in flux, every tiling must 
have both these motions. Referring now to the account previously \ 
given of the manner in which sensation is generated, he shews that no 
object can be called by any name : for before you can say that it is this \ 
or that (white for instance) the flitx has proceeded, and the object is ] 
ncnv something else. Perception therefore can be no more said to be\ 
knowledge than to be not knowledge, and the doctrine of Protagoras \ 
falls to the ground. Socrates sums up by saying that he therefore^ 
does not allow that man is the measure of all things, zmless it be a\ 
wise man ; nor yet that, according to the Hcracleitean doctrine (i 
pel), knowledge is perception. } 

So. W T e must consider them, as you urge it so strongly. 
I think the first step in our consideration is concerning 
motion, to see what they intend by saying that all thin^ 
move. What I mean to say is this. Do they speak 
one kind of motion, or. as I think evident, two? But let 
it. not be my sole opinion ; share it with me yourself, thj 
we may abide in common any result. Do you say a thin^ 
is moved when it changes from place to place, or revolves 
in the same place ? 

Theo. I do. 

So. Let this be one kind. Now, when it stays in th< 
same place, but grows old, or becomes black from bein^ 
white, or hard from being soft, or undergoes any other varia 
tion, is it not proper to say this is another kind of motion ? 

Theo. I think so. 

So. You cannot help it. These then I name are tw< 
kinds of motion, variation one, revolution another 1 . 

1 irepKpopdv. But we should have expected Qopav, as Plato says : 
immediately ^po^vov re /cat d\\oiovfjt,vov. Prof. Campbell thinks the 
motion of the heavens is regarded as embracing all other kinds. Is this 
quite satisfactory, or must we assume that Trepifvpiv is corrupt here ? 


Theo. You name them rightly. 

So. Having made this division, let us now argue 
rith those who say that all things move, and put to them 
Ms question : do you say that all things move in both 
svays, by local movement and by variation, or that one 
Jimg moves in both ways, another in one of the two ? 

Theo. Nay, upon my word I cannot pronounce. I 
:hink they would say all things move in both ways. 

So. Yes; for if not, my friend, they will evidently make 
em to be both in motion and at rest, and it will be no more 
ight to say that all things move than that they stand still. 

Theo. Most truly stated. 

So. Accordingly, since they must move, and it is im- 
>ossible for anything not to be moving, all things are 
ilways moving with every kind of motion. 

Theo. Necessarily. 

So. Now consider this point in their statements. 
Did we not say that they state the generation of heat or 
whiteness or any other perception in some such way as 
his that each of these things at the moment of perception 
noves between the agent and the patient, and that the 
>atient comes to be a percipient 2 but not perception, 
nd the agent a qualified thing but not a quality? 
Perhaps however quality seems to you to be a strange term, 
ind you do not understand it when named in the general. 
Hear it then in particulars. The agent comes to be neither 
heat nor whiteness, but a hot thing and a white thing, and so 
with everything else. You remember, I suppose, that in 

2 The ms. word ala-0-rjTbv here must be corrupt. Buttmann s con- 
ecture cuV^rV (though not elsewhere found) has been largely received. 
Prof. Campbell prefers alffdavopcvov, chiefly on account of gender. 
But, as the patient is conceived of as a man, the synesis is surely 


our former statements we laid it down thus ; that nothii 
is one by itself, so also neither agent nor patient; 
that from both * coming to be together in mutual relatioj 
sensations and sensible things are engendered, and the 01 
comes to bf- ftf y qualify pun tfac other percipient 3 

Theo. I remember, of course. 

So. Let us now spare ourselves the pains of considei 
ing their other various propositions, and, noting the oJ 
which is the subject of our discussion, let us put to themtO 
question : * All things, you say, move and are in flux. 9 
this right ? 

TJuo. Yes. 

So. Do they then move with both kinds of motiol 
which we distinguished, locomotion and variation? 

Theo. Of course they do, if they are to move coml 

So. If they moved only, and were not changed, 1 
suppose we should be able to say what kinds of thinl 
they are that move in flux. Should we not ? 

Theo. Yes. 

So. Since it is not even an abiding fact, that wh: : is I 
flux flows white, but it changes, and so there is a flux m 
this very thing, whiteness, and a change to another colon! 
that it may not be convicted of abiding in this one is 1 
ever possible to name any colour so as to give a correcj 

Theo. What possibility can there be, Socrates, in thi 
or any other such thing, if it always slips away as one 
speaking, being in constant flux ? 

So. And what shall we say of any kind of perception^ 
such as sight or hearing? Shall we say that it ever abides 
in the act of seeing or hearing? 

* On this corrupt place see the appended Notes. 



Thto. Certainly it must not, seeing that all things are 

So. We cannot therefore aver that we see a thing more 

n that we do not see it, or that we have any perception \ 

ore than that we have it not, since all things are in every | 

r moving ? 
; Theo. We cannot indeed. 

L So. And yet knowledge is perception, as I and Theae- 
tas settled it 
Thto. So it was. 

So. Accordingly, when asked what knowledge is, in 
reply we no more stated what it is than what it is not 
Theo. Seemingly not 

So. A fine issue to the supplement of oar answer, when 
were so eager to show that all things move 5 for the 
pose, forsooth, of proving that answer right Now the 
g proved seems to be, that, if all things move, every 
irer on every possible subject is equally right to say it 
s so and it is not so, or if you prefer the term, comes 
be/ that our terminology may not make them 4 stationary, 
Thto. Yon say rightly. 

So. Except, Theodoras, that I said So* and Not so/ 
ought not to use this word So/ for no motion would be 
ssed by it; nor yet Not so/ for here again is no 
m. But we must supply some other language to those 
state this doctrine; since now in fact they have no 
lords to convey their own hypothesis, except perhaps 
powise. This might suit them best, being an indefinite 
;.. ; .-. . , .. 
Thto. Yes, that style of speech would be most natural 

Heiad. would read fevrotfr, oonelres: ori (r& 
suits better: bat rfrvto may stand, Deferred to rs parrot. 


So. Thus, Theodorus, we have got rid of your friend 
and do not yet concede to him that every man is th* 
measure of every thing, if he be not a wise man ; nor ye 
will we concede that knowledge is perception, at least 01 
the supposition of all things moving. 

T/ieo. A good hearing, Socrates : for, as this topic i 
concluded, I must be rid of the task of answering you, a 
by our compact I was to be, when the question about th 
doctrine of Protagoras should come to an end. 

29 \Theodorus rejoices that, according to the bargain, he was to be let o^ 
from the argument at this point. Theaetetns thinks he should go o; 
to discuss the opposite theory of Jest { Theodorus jocularly scolds him 
and insists on his taking his turn. He consents. But Socrates, prc 
fessing the highest respect for Parmenides, and alluding to the dijfictiltit 
which his writings present, prefers adhering to the question at issu 
the definition of knowledge. Returning to his dialectic process, t 
i leads Theactetus to admit that it is more proper to say we perceiz 
through the senses than with the senses, thus pointing to a centre 
percipient (Hie soul}. Ke.\l lie makes him admit that tJie senses bdon 
to the body, and that things perceived by one organ are not perceive 
by another. Hence any common notion acquired about things which ai 
perceived by two different organs is not acquired through either organ, 
as existence, sameness, difference, likeness, and so on. What are t} 
organs through which all these and other abstract notions are a 
quired 1 ? Theaetetus thinks they have no peculiar organs assigned 
them ; but that the soul by its own powers observes these common pr 
perties. Socrates commends his conclusion as agreeing with his own 

Theae. Nay, Theodorus, not before you and Socrate 
have discussed, as you just now proposed, the doctrine 
those who on the other hand affirm that the universe is a 

Theo. What? you, Theaetetus, a mere youth, teachin 
your elders to commit the sin of violating compacts ! Come 
gird yourself up to debate with Socrates that which remain 


Theae. Oh, certainly, if he wishes. But I should have 
:>een delighted to hear the other topic discussed. 

Theo. You challenge cavalry to the plain when you 
;hallenge Socrates to argument. Ask him, and you will 
lear his answer. 

So. Ay, Theodorus; but I do not think I shall obey 
he call which Theaetetus makes. 

Theo. Why not obey it ? 

So. As to Melissus and the others who represent the 
iniverse as one and at rest, I respect them too much 
;o treat their views cursorily ; but in still greater respect do 
[ hold the single name of Parmenides. He appears to me to 
neet Homer s definition, venerable and likewise awful 1 / I 
yas brought into contact with him when I was very young 
md he very old, and he struck me as possessing a depth 
character pre-eminently noble. I fear that we may not 
mderstand his language, still more that we may fail to 
ichieve his meaning : above all, I am afraid that our original 
question, the definition of knowledge, may cease to be con 
sidered, if a fresh crowd of arguments rushes in, and gains 
3ur attention. In particular, this hopelessly large argument 
svhich we are awakening, if considered as a digression, 
trould be unworthily treated; or, if pursued adequately at 
iill length, it will swamp the question of knowledge. We 
should do neither one nor the other, but endeavour by our 
art of midwifery to deliver Theaetetus of his conceptions 
about knowledge. 

Theo. Very well; we must, if you please. 

So. Once more then, Theaetetus, consider this part of 
our previous discourse. You said in reply to me that 
knowledge is perception. Did you not ? 

Theae. Yes. 

1 //. in. 172. 


So. If anybody were to ask you the question, with 
what a man sees white things and black, and with what 
he hears sharp things and flat, you would say, I suppose, 
with the eyes and with the ears. 
Theae. I should. 

So. The easy acceptance of names and terms, and the 
non-exaction of strict accuracy, is indeed generally not out 
of place in a well-bred man ; we may rather say the reverse \ 
is vulgar, yet is it occasionally necessary. And so in the 
present instance I must perforce take exception to the 
answer which you give, in so far as it is wrong. Consider j 
which answer is more correct, that the eyes are that with \ 
which, or that through which we see, and the ears that I 
with which, or that through which we hear. 

Theae. Through which in each case. I think, Socrates, ] 
rather than with which. 

So. Yes, my boy ; it is strange, I ween, if in us, as I 
though we were wooden horses 2 , many independent senses 1 
are seated, instead of all these tending in common to some 1 
centre, whether we call it soul or anything else, whereby, ; 
through these senses as instruments, we perceive all things- 

Theae. I think this latter view the truer one. 
So. Why am I putting these minute questions to you? 
If with some one and the same part of ourselves we through 
the eyes apprehend things white and black, and through the 
other organs other things, and you will be able, on being asked, 
to refer all such perceptions at once to the body.., perhaps 
however it is better you should specify them in answer to 
me than that I should save you that trouble. Now tell me. 
The organs through which you perceive hot things and hard 

2 Plato alludes here to the famous wooden horse of the Trojan 


(and light and sweet do you not state them to belong 
I severally to the body, or do they belong to anything else? 

Theae. To nothing else. 

So. Will you also be ready to admit, that what you per- ,- 
jceive through any one organ, you cannot possibly perceive ; 
through another ; for instance, what you perceive by hearing, 
you cannot perceive by sight, or the converse ? 

Theae. I most readily admit it. 

So. If you have any common notion about both, you 
I would not acquire it from the one organ or from the other 
concerning both ? 

Theae. I should not. 

So. As to sound and colour, in the first place, have you 
this same notion respecting both, that both are ? 

Theae. I have. 

So. You suppose also, that each is different from each, 
and the same with itself? 

Theae. To be sure. 

So. And that both are twain, but each is one ? 

Tlieae. Yes. 

So. Are you not also able to observe whether they are 
:e one another or unlike ? 

Theae. Probably. 

So. Through what do you form all these notions con 
cerning both? For neither through hearing nor through 
sight is it possible to obtain a common notion of them. 
Here again is another instance in point. If it were pos 
sible to examine, whether both are briny or not, you 
know that you will be able to say with what you will 
examine, and this is evidently neither sight nor hearing, but 
something else. 

Theae. No doubt it isj namely, the power exercised 
through the tongue. 

K. P. 12 



So. Well said. Now, through what does the power act 
which makes manifest to you what all things generally have 
in common with these particularly what you mean, to wit, 
in saying is/ is not/ and all else comprised in our late 
questions ? What organs will you assign as those through 
which our percipient faculty perceives all these severally? 

Theae. You mean being and non-being, and likeness 
and unlikeness, and sameness and difference, and more 
over unity and any other number applicable to things 
perceived ? Evidently too your question includes the even 
and the odd, and all other such notions; asking through 
what bodily organ we perceive them with the soul. 

So. You follow me admirably, Theaetetus, and these 
are the very questions I ask. 

Theae. Well, Socrates, I really can give no other answer 
than this, that in my opinion these have originally no organ 
peculiar to them, such as the sensible objects have, but the 
soul through its own individual power appears to me 
observe the common properties of all. 

So. Yes, Theaetetus, you are a beauty, and not, as 
Theodoras said, ugly: for he who speaks beautifully is| 
beautiful and good. And besides your beauty, I am much 
obliged to you for releasing me from a world of talk, if th 
soul appears to you to observe some things through itself, 
and other things through the bodily organs. This was my 
own opinion, and I was wishing it to be yours. 

Theae. Yes : to me it is apparent. 

30 [Socrates now draws from Theaetetus the admission that while certain\ 
properties, as hardness and softness, are perceived through the sensed 
common to men and beasts, essence, difference, use, and the like at 
matter of reflection by the soul attained through education. Withe 
attaining essence, truth is not attained, nor without truth knowledge, \ 


It is not in the affections themselves, biit in the reasonable conclusions 
fSncern^g, iheni^ thaFTullnSfelTgirtttt^And "what is the common name 
for all these affections? Perception, which cannot therefore attain 
essence or truth or knowledge. Hence it follows that perception and 
knowledge cannot be the same thing. Theaetetus admits the failure of 
this theory. Socrates reminds him that the search is not to find ^uhat 
knowledge is not, but to find what it is, and then begs him to consider 
what it is that the soul is said to do, when it forms a judgment on 
existing things. Theaetetus replies : It is said to opine to form an 
opinion. Socrates now asks if he can give a new answer to the 
question, What is knowledge ?\ 

So. To which of the two classes do you assign 
* being ? For this is the notion most universally present. 

Thcae. I assign it to that class which the soul attains to 
by itself. 

So. Do you say the same of likeness and unlikeness, of 
sameness and difference ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And again of nobleness and baseness, good and 

Thcae. Yes : these are things the essence of which, 
above all others, I believe that the soul observes in their 
mutual relativity, comparing within itself the past and the 
present with the future. 

So. Wait a moment. Will it not perceive the hardness 
of a hard object through the touch, and so again the softness 
of a soft one ? 

T/ieae. Yes. 

So. But their being, and what they are, and their 
mutual opposition, and again the being of that opposition, 
the soul itself, by reflecting and by comparing them with 
each other, endeavours to determine for us ? 

Theae. Quite so. 

So, Men and beasts then, as soon as they are born, are 



able by nature to perceive some things, those affections I 
mean which reach through the body to the soul. But the 
reflections concerning these in regard to essence and use are 
acquired, by those who do acquire them, painfully and 
gradually through the troublesome process of education. 

Theae. Undoubtedly. 

So. Can any one attain truth, who does not attain 
being ? 

Theae. He cannot. 

So. And if he fail to attain the truth of a thing, will he 
ever have knowledge of it ? 

Theae. Impossible, Socrates. 

So. Knowledge, then, does not lie in the affections of 
sense, but in the reasoning concerning them : for in this it 
seems possible to grasp essence and truth, and not in the 
affections ? 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. Do you call two things the same which are in so 
many respects different ? 

Theae. There were no justice in doing so. 

So. What name do you give to the one class seeing, 
hearing, smelling, being cold and hot ? 

Theae. Perceiving I would certainly call them. 

So. Their common notion then you would call percep 

Theae. Of course. 

So. And this, we say, has no share in the attainment 
of truth, having none in the attainment of being. 

Theae. It has none. 

So. Nor yet in the attainment of knowledge ? 

Theae. No. 

So. Then, Theaetetus, perception and knowledge will 
not be the same ? 


Theae. Evidently not, Socrates. Now especially has 
knowledge been very clearly proved to be a different thing 
from perception. 

So. But it was not by any means with this view that 
we began our argument, to find what knowledge is not, but 
to find what it is. Nevertheless we have so far advanced 
as not to seek it in perception at all, but in that name 
which, whatever it be, is applicable to the soul s action 
when by itself it deals with existing things. 

Theae. This, I imagine, Socrates, is called opining 
(forming opinion). 

So. You imagine rightly, my friend. Now go back 
again and, erasing all that went before, see if you have any 
clearer view, after having advanced to this point. Tell me 
once more what knowledge is. 

[The first definition proposed by Theaetetus that sensuous perception.^ 31 
knowledge being thus overthrown by the elenchus concluded in 30, 
he is invited to attempt a second. He hopes now to find one in that 
realm of pure thought which consists in believing, judging, or opining 
(forming opinion}. But as it occurs to him that opinions formed 
are not ahvays tme, he sees that he miist limit his definition ; and, 
accordingly, he ventures to sugest l>< 

Against this docTrme Socrates opens a battery of argument without 
delay. It implies that such a thing as false opinion is possible : 
and that possibility Socrates is not prepared to admit. All things 
subject to opinion are, he says, such as a man either knows or does 
not know. If he opines, he either knows or does nof know that about 
which he opines : he cannot know, and not know, one and the same 
thing. Can he then (when he opines falsely) mistake one known 
thing for another known thing 1 ? No. Or a known thing for an 
unknown? No. Or an unknown for a known? No. Or one 
unknown for another unknown ? Impossible. But if he forms a 
false opinion, he must err in one of these four ways :att which are 
impossible. Therefore to form false opinion is impossible. But 
perhaps, adds Socrates, we should regard being and not-being 


rather than knowing and not-knowing. May not a man opine what 
is false, if he opines what is-not ? But he goes on to argue that 
nobody can opine what is not any more than he can see or hear 

Jivhat is not : to opine what is not is to opine nothing : that is, not 
to opine at all. Therefore false opinion is no more possible from this 
point of mew than it was from the former.] 

Theae. To say that it is opinion generally, Socrates, is 
impossible, since there is false opinion. But true opinion 
probably is knowledge : so let this be my answer. If it 
shall be disproved while we proceed, as in the last case, we 
will try some other statement. 

So. Your present forwardness to speak, Theaetetus, is 
more to the purpose than your original reluctance to an 
swer. For in this way, we shall secure one of two ad 
vantages : we shall either find what we are in quest of, or 
our conceit of knowing what we do not know will be di 
minished. And this will be no despicable reward. Now 
let us see what it is you say. There being two kinds of 
opinion, the true and the false, do you make TRUE OPINION 
the definition of knowledge ? 

Theae. I do, according to my present view. 

So. Is it worth while to resume the question of opi 

Theae. Which do you mean ? 

So. I am somewhat disturbed now, as often before, 
and have found myself sorely perplexed in my own mind 
and in conversation, from my inability to say what this con 
dition is in us, and in what way engendered. 

Theae. What condition ? 

So. The holding of false opinion. Now again I am 
still considering and doubting whether we should leave it, 
or review it in a way different from that we took some 
little time ago. 


Theae. Why not review it, Socrates, if there is any 
clear gain in doing so ? For, as to leisure, you and Theo- 
dorus said very justly, that there is nothing to hurry us in 
such cases. 

So. Well reminded. And perhaps it is not unreason 
able to return upon our tracks. It is better, you ll allow, 
to achieve a little well than much inadequately. 

Theae. Of course. 

So. Well then ? What do we in fact affirm ? do we 
say that there is in each case false opinion, and that some 
one of us opines falsely, another again truly, as if such 
were the natural rule ? 

Theae. Yes, we do. 

So. Does not this occur to us . in respect of all things 
generally, and of each particularly either knowing or 
not-knowing? for learning and forgetting, which lie between 
these, I set aside for the moment, as having no relation to 
our present argument. 

Thcae. In fact, Socrates, nothing else remains in each 
case but knowing and not-knowing. 

So. Is it not a necessary consequence that he who 
opines must opine about one of the things which he 
knows, or one of those which he does not know ? 

Iheae. It is. 

So. And it is impossible, if he knows a thing, not to / 
know it, or, if he knows it not, to know it ? 

Theae. Quite impossible. 

So. Does then he who holds a false opinion think / 
that things which he knows are not what they are, but some T 
other things within his knowledge, and knowing both, is he J 
ignorant of both ? 

Theae. It cannot be so, Socrates. 

So. Or does he suppose things which he does not 


know to be some other things outside of his knowledge ? 
Does it happen to one who knows neither Theaetetus nor 
Socrates to imagine that Socrates is Theaetetus or Theaete 
tus Socrates ? 

Theae. How can that be ? 

(So. But surely a man does not think that what he 
knows is what he does not know, or that what he does 
not know is what he knows. 

Theae. That were a miracle. 

So. In what other way then can any one hold false 
opinions ? Except under the conditions stated it is impos 
sible, I suppose, to have opinion. In every case we either 
\ know or do not know, and so situated, it is manifestly im- 
) possible for us ever to have false opinions. 

Theae. Very true. 

So. Perhaps we ought to examine our question with 
reference not to knowing and not-knowing, but to being 
and not-being. 

Theae. How do you mean ? 

So. Consider if it be not a simple truth that one who 
thinks concerning anything that which is not, will inevitably 
think what is false, whatever the condition of his mind in 
other respects. 

Theae. This again is probable, Socrates. 

So. How then? What shall we reply, Theaetetus, if 
any one examine us : Is what you say possible for any 
one, and will any human being think what is not, either 
about some existing thing, or in the abstract? Seemingly 
we shall say in reply : Yes, when he thinks, and does not 
think what is true. Or how are we to speak? 

Theae. As you say. 

So. Does the like happen in any other case ? 

TJieae. What do you mean ? 


So. That a person sees something, yet sees nothing. 

T/ieae. How can that be ? 

So. If he sees some one thing, that something is 
among things that are. Or do you think * the one is ever 
among the things that are not ? 

Theae. Not I. 

So. He then, who sees some one thing, sees some 
thing that is. 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. And he who hears something hears some one thing, 
and a thing that is. 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And he who touches, I suppose, touches some one 
thing, and a thing that is, since it is one. 

Theae. Yes. 

\ So. And does not he who opines form opinion of 
some one thing ? 

Theae. He must. 

So. And does not he who forms opinion of some one 
thing form it of some thing thaljs ? 

Theae. I grant this. 

So. He then who opines what is not opines nothing. 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. Well, but he who opines nothing does not opine 
at all. 

Theae. That seems clear. 

So. Therefore it is not possible to think what is not, 
either about things that are, or in the abstract. 

Theae. Manifestly not. 

So. Thinking falsities is therefore different from think 
ing what is not. 

Theae. It seems different. 

So. And thus neither from our present consideration 


(of being and not-being), nor from our previous one (of 
knowing and not knowing), do we find false opinion to 
exist in us. 

Theae. No, we do not. 

32 \_Socrates asks, whether false opinion may not possibly be found in what 
he calls allodoxy* the m 

another fly^^gg^ftitjfc Theaetetus would like to accept this expla4 
nation. But Socrates disappoints him. A short dialectic elenchtis (z#1 
the course of which Socrates describes opinion as the result of a con 
versation which the soul holds with itself] leads to the conclusion 
that, assuming tzvo different things the noble and the base the 
just and the unjust a horse and an ox, &c., nobody can mistake one 
for the other, either if he has formed an opinion of both, or if he 
has formed an opinion of one, but not of the other : so that allodoxy 
(which he now terms heterodoxy] does not supply any rational defini 
tion of false opinion^ 

So. But can we not speak of it as happening in this 

Theae. How? 

So. We can say that an opinion which may be called 
an allodoxy is false when anybody says that some one 
existing thing is another existing thing, exchanging them in 
his mind. For thus he always thinks of "what exists, but of 
one thing instead of another, and, as missing that which he 
had in view, he may be said to have false opinion. 

Theae. Your present statement seems to me very cor 
rect. For when any one opines that a thing is ugly instead 
of beautiful, or beautiful instead of ugly, then he very truly 
has false opinion. 

So. Evidently, Theaetetus, you speak in contempt of 
me, and without fear. 

Theae. Pray why ? 


So. You do not expect, I fancy, that I shall lay hold 
your term truly false , and ask if it is possible for the 
>wift to come-to-be slowly, or the light heavily, or for any 
rther opposite to come-to-be not according to its own 
pture, but according to the nature of its opposite in a 
lanner opposed to itself. This however that your con- 
jdence may not be fruitless I pass over. You say you 
ire pleased with the notion that opining falsities is c allo- 

Theae. I am. 

So. Then in your opinion it is possible to determine 
[in your mind that one thing is another, and not itself. 

Theae. It is. 

So. When therefore the mind does this, must it not 
perforce think either of both things, or of one of the two ? 

Theae. Yes, it must. 

So. At the same time, or else by turns. 

Theae. Very good. 

So. Do you employ the term thinking in the same 
sense that I do ? 

Theae. How do you define it ? 

So. A discourse which the soul holds with itself 
about what it considers. I am representing this to you 
not as a fact that I know. In the exercise of thought, the 
soul, as I fancy it, is simply engaged in conversation, 
questioning itself and answering, affirming and denying. 
And when, having reached a definition, whether slowly 
or by a more rapid impulse, it at length agrees and affirms 
undoubtingly, we state this to be its opinion. So that 
I call opining the soul s speaking, and opinion its spoken 
word, not addressed to another or uttered by the voice, but 
silently to itself. 

Theae. So do I. 


So. Therefore, when any one opines that one thing is 
another, he says to himself, it would seem, that one thing 
is another. 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. Try to remember whether you ever said to your 
self, Assuredly the noble is base, or, The unjust is 
just. Or, to sum up, consider if you ever attempted to 
convince yourself that assuredly one thing was another : or 
if, on the contrary, you never even in sleep ventured to 
say to yourself, Undoubtedly the odd is even, or any 
such thing? 

Theae. You say the truth. 

So. Do you think any body in or out of his senses 
ever ventured seriously to say to himself, trying to make 
himself believe, that an ox must needs be a horse, or two 
things one ? 

Theae. No indeed, not I. 

So. If then to speak to oneself is to opine, nobody who 
speaks and thinks of both things, and apprehends both 
with his soul, can say and think that one is the other 
But you must avoid the terms one and other. I ll state 
the point in this way : Nobody thinks that the noble is | 
base, or anything of the sort. 

Theae. Well, Socrates, I give up the terms, and I agree 
with you. 

So. That one who thinks of both cannot possibly 
opine that one is the other? 

Theae. Seemingly not. 

So. Again, if he thinks of the one alone, and of the 
other not at all, he will never opine that one is the other. 

Theae. True : for so he would be forced to apprehend 
that of which he has no thought. 

So. Accordingly allodoxy is inadmissible for any one 


who thinks either of both or of one. So that whoever shall 
define false opinion to be heterodoxy will talk nonsense : 
"or it is shown by this method as well as by the former that ( 
"alse opinion cannot exist in us. 
Theae. Seemingly not. 

Socrates seems, or feigns, to be driven to despair by the failure of his 33 
three attempts to find the habitat of false opinion. It is not in the 
region of kwjwledge, nor in that of being^ nor in that confusion of 
phenomena, %vhich he terms allodoxy. Surely it must be somewhere. 
Surely mistakes are made. May not a person know something, and, 
seeing something else which he does not know, mistake it for that 
thing which he knows ? At this point in the dialogue Plato in- 
trodtices two parables or myths. He supposes first, a memorial 
waxen blojjz, and, later on, a bird-ca^e or aviary, to be sitttated in the 
human mind. (In figments of this kind Plato takes great delight : 
he has scattered them with profusion throughout his works. They do 
not supply to the pure intellect that verification which it demands in 
order to accept a philosophic theory. Btit the literary composer finds 
them a very convenient resource. They fill up gaps in serious argu 
ment. They roiise the imagination, they charm the fancy: they 
attract and amuse the general reader, when fatigued with dry 
dialexis. In short, they are a vahiablepart of that -fivxayuyla, which 
Plato, who has a rhetoric of his own, is far from disdaining for his 
own -use. See Dr Thompsons Introduction to his edition of the 
Phaedrus, especially pp. xxi ii, also p. 141.) In this section a general 
description is given of the waxen block or tablet, as Mr Grote calls it 
(eKfjiaydov). The wax varies in various cases, in some being larger, 
firmer, cleaner, and in every way better than in others. The recep 
tacle also is more or less wide and convenient. The tablet is a gift of 
Mnemosyne (memory] for impressing by seals every one s sensations 
and thoughts. These are remembered and known while the impressions 
remain : when these fade, they are forgotten and no longer known. 
Socrates goes on to state when false notions cannot be formed, and 
when they can.~\ 

So. And yet, Theaetetus, if this shall be proved im- 


possible, we shall be compelled to admit many absun;| 

Theae. What are they ? 

So. I will not say till I have tried every point of viewj 
For I should blush for us if, in a moment of perplexity, 
were forced to admit such things as I allude to. But 
we find a way to get free, then and not before we will sp( 
of others as thus perplexed, standing clear of ridicule oui 
selves. But, if we find ourselves posed on every side, then! 
in a humble frame, I suppose, like sea-sick men, we shal 
allow the argument to trample on us and treat us as il 
will. Listen, while I tell you how I may still find a wa}| 
of escape from our inquiry. 

Theae. Pray tell me. 

So. I will say we were wrong in admitting that it is 
impossible to opine that what one knows is what one does 
not know, and so to be deceived : for it is in a certain 

Theae. Do you mean what I myself suspected at th< 
time we made the assertion a case occurring sometim< 
like this, that I, knowing Socrates, and seeing at a distanc 
another whom I do not know, think it is the Socrates 
whom I know? For in such a case something like what 
you say comes to pass. 

So. Did we not abandon that view, because it made 
us, while knowing, not to know what we do know ? 
. Theae. Certainly. 

So. Suppose we do not state it thus, but in the follow 
ing manner. Perhaps it will give way to us, perhaps resist. 
But indeed we are in such a strait, that we must perforce 
turn about and examine every argument. See if I ask a 
rational question. Is it not possible to learn something 
which you formerly did not know ? 


Theae. Yes, it is. 

So. And one thing after another ? 

Theae. Why not ? 

So. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that there 

in our souls a waxen block, in one soul larger, in 
another smaller, of purer wax in one, in another of less 
3ure, harder in some, moister in others; in some of medium 

Theae. Well. 

So. Let us say it is a gift of Mnemosyne, mother of 
the Muses, and that on this we strike off, as if we were 
mpressing ring-seals, any thing we wish to remember among 
those we see or hear or imagine, submitting the block to our 
senses and imaginations ; and that whatever is impressed, 
we remember and know as long as its image subsists ; but 
that, when it is obliterated or fails to be impressed, we have 
forgotten and do not know. 

Theae. Be it so. 

So. See then if he who knows things, and considers 
anything he sees or hears, may have false opinions in some 
such way as the following : 

Theae. In what way ? 

So. By thinking sometimes that what he knows is 
what he does know, sometimes what he does not know. In 
our previous statements we were wrong in denying this to 
)e possible. 

Theae. How do you state it now ? 

So. Our statement on the subject must be this. We 
irst determine, that what a person knows, having a record 
of it in his soul, but without perceiving it, he cannot pos 
sibly think to be some other thing which he knows, having 
an image of this also, but not perceiving it. And again 
it is impossible to think that what he knows is what he 



knows not and has no seal of: and that what he know. 1 ] 
not is [something else] which he knows not : and that wha j 
he knows not is what he knows : and to think what he 
perceives is some other thing which he perceives; and whal 
he perceives, a thing which he does not perceive ; anc! 
what he does not perceive to be another thing which h< 
does not perceive ; and what he does not perceive to 
a thing which he perceives. And again to think that 
thing which he knows and perceives, having the seal o 
it according to perception, is some other thing which htj 
knows and perceives having its seal also according to per; 
ception this is, if it can be, still more impossible than 
the preceding suppositions. And what one knows ancj 
perceives, having its record correctly, it is impossible tc 
think [something else] which one knows : and what omj 
knows and perceives under similar conditions, to be [some 
thing else] which one perceives: and what one neitheij 
knows nor perceives to be [something else] which on< 
neither knows nor perceives : and what one neither knows! 
nor perceives, to be [something else] which one does noi 
know; and what one neither knows nor perceives, to be 
[something else] which one does not perceive. All these 
things involve the very utmost impossibility of having any 
false opinion about them. There remain the following 
cases, in which, if anywhere, such a thing may happen. 

Theae. What are they ? perhaps they may help me t< 
understand. At present I do not follow you. 

So. In the case of things which a person knows, to think 
that they are some other things which he knows and per 
ceives ; or some other things which he does not know, bull 
perceives : or that [some things] which he knows and per 
ceives are [some others] which he also knows and perceives. | 

Theae. I am more in the dark now than before. 



I \In this section it is shewn how, by the misuse of the waxen tablet, false 34 
opinion may be supposed to cccur ; namely, by an erroneous union of 
sensation and impression. Mr Grote states it as follows : "A man, 
having sealed on his memorial tablet the impressions of two objects 
A and B, which he has seen before, may come to see one of these objects 
again : but he may by mistake identify the present sensation with 
the wrong past impression, i. e. with that past impression to which it 
does not belong. Thus, on seeing A, he may erroneously identify it 
with the past impression B, instead of A ; or vice versa. And so 
false opinion will lie, not in the conjunction or identification of sensa 
tions with sensations, nor of thoughts (or fast impressions) with 
thoughts, but in that of present sensations with past impressions or 
; thoughts" Such an occurrence Socrates imputes to defects in the 
waxen block; which may be too shallow or too hard or too soft or too 
narrow, or impure, or inclosed in too small a space. ] 

So. Listen to this restatement Do not I, knowing 
Theodorus and remembering in my mind what sort of man 
he is, and Theaetetus similarly, sometimes see them, some 
times not, and sometimes touch them, at other times not, 
and hear them or have some other perception of them, and 
again have no perception of you, but not the less remem 
ber you and know you in my mind ? 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. This is the first lesson which I wish to make 
known to you, that a man may not perceive, or may per 
ceive, things which he knows. 

Theae. True. 

So. Things too which he does not know, a man may 
often not perceive, often perceive merely ? 

Theae. This too is possible. 

So. Now see if you follow me more easily. Socrates 
knows Theodorus and Theaetetus, but sees neither, and has 
no other present perception about them. He could never 

- K. P. 13 


form an opinion in his mind that Theaetetus is Theodo- 
rus ? Do I speak sense or not ? 

T/ieae. All quite true. 

So. This was the first of the cases spoken of. 

Theae. It was. 

So. The second was, that knowing one of you, an< 
not knowing the other, and perceiving neither, I can nev( 
suppose the one I know to be the one I do not know. 

Theae. Right. 

So. Thirdly, knowing and perceiving neither, I cannot 1. 
suppose one whom I do not know to be some other 
whom I do not know. And as to all my former sup- i 
positions, imagine that you have heard them stated again 
in order, wherein I can never have false opinions about 
you and Theodorus, either if I know or if I do not know ! 
both, or if I know one, but not the other. And similarly 
with regard to perceptions, if you follow me. 

Theae. I do. 

So. False opinion remains possible in a case like 
this : when, knowing you and Theodoras, and having in 
that waxen block the seals of both of you as from rings, 
then, seeing both at a distance and indistinctly, I strive to 
assign the proper seal of each to its proper visage, and to 
introduce and adapt this to its own mould, in order that 
recognition may take place : but if, failing in the attempt, 
and interchanging, like those who put on the wrong shoes, 
I apply the visage of each to the other s seal ; or again, if 
I go wrong by an affection like that of sight in mirrors, 
when it flows from right to left : then heterodoxy and false 
opinion occur. 

Theae. You describe with marvellous truth, Socrates, 
the conditions to which opinion is liable. 

So. Moreover [false opinion happens] when, knowing 


both, I perceive one, as well as know him, but not the 
other, and so my knowledge of the second of the two is 
not according to perception a case put in my former 
statement, which you did not then understand. 

Theae. I did not. 

So. Well, I meant to say that a person knowing and 
perceiving the one, and having his knowledge according to 
perception, will never think that he is some other whom he 
knows and perceives, and of whom his knowledge is also 
according to perception. Was it so ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. There remained, I think, the case we now deal 
with, in which we say that false opinion happens when a 
person knowing and seeing both, or having any other 
perception of both, does not keep each of the seals in 
accordance with his perception, but like a bad archer 
shoots beside the mark and so errs; and such error is 
called a falsity. 

Theae. And reasonably. 

So. And so, when to one of the seals perception is 
present, but not to the other, and the mind adapts the seal 
which is without perception to the perception present, in 
every such case it is deceived. In one word, about things 
which a person knows not and never perceived, error and 
false opinion seem out of the question, if there is any 
soundness in our present argument : but in those things 
about which we have knowledge and perception, opinion 
turns and twists about, becoming true or false ; true, when 
it brings the proper impressions and forms to meet oppo 
sitely and straightly; false, when it brings them crosswise 
and crookedly. 

Theae. Is not this a noble statement, Socrates ? 

So. You will say so with more assurance after hearing 



what I have further to state : for to think the truth is 
noble, to be deceived is base. 

Theae. No doubt. 

So. These things are said to happen as follows. When 
the wax in any person s soul is deep and abundant and 
smooth and nicely wrought, the impressions become durable 
which pass through the senses and are sealed on this 
(waxen) heart of the soul, as Homer called it in allusion 
to the resemblance of wax ; for then, and in all such cases, 
they are formed in it pure, and have depth enough. And 
such persons are in the first place quick to learn, in the 
next retentive, and finally they do not interchange the seals 
of the perceptions, but form true opinions. For as their 
impressions are distinct and have ample room, they rapidly 
distribute them to their several niches ; and such impres 
sions are called real: and these persons are termed wise. 
Do you not think so ? 

Theae. With entire conviction. 

So. When any person s heart is shaggy, as that all- 
wise poet sang, or when it is miry and of impure wax, or 
exceedingly soft or hard they whose heart is soft, are 
quick to learn, but forgetful ; they whose heart is hard, the 
opposite : and they who have a shaggy and rough and 
gritty heart, or one defiled with a mixture of earth or 
mire, have their impressions indistinct. In those who 
have hard hearts, they are indistinct too, for depth is 
wanting : likewise in those who have soft hearts, for 
through confusion they soon become faint. And if besides 
all these faults they are furthermore crushed one upon 
another for want of room, when a man s soul is small, they 
are still more indistinct than in the former cases. All these 
people are capable of having false opinions. For when 
they see or hear or imagine anything, being unable to 


assign each thing quickly to its proper impression, they 
go tardily to work, and, assorting erroneously, they see 
and hear and conceive most things wrongly. And of these 
persons again we say, that they have false notions of things, 
and are ignorant. 

Theae. Never was a truer statement, Socrates. 

So. May we say then that false opinions exist in us ? 

Theae. Decidedly. 

So. And true? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Now we think it sufficiently agreed that both these 
kinds of opinion certainly exist ? 

Theae. Beyond all question. 

[Socrates has no sooner reached his conchision as to the formation of false 35 
opinion, than he proceeds to confute it. There are phenomena for 
which it does not account. Errors occur inthe identification nf one 
past impression with another~T~a7id~ tTiislcads to the dilemma that 
cither false opinion is impossible, or it is possible for a person not to 
know what lie does know. This dilemma Theaetetus cannot solve. 
A iicTSdcrdTes remarks that this discussion has become impure, in that 
they have constantly used the terms knowing, knowledge, and 
* ignorance before they have reached a definition of these terms. As, 
however, he admits that he cannot carry on the discussion without 
using them in some sense or other, he declares himself willing to 
make the attempt, and Theaetettis applauds his resolution, .] 

So. What a truly terrible and disagreeable creature, 
Theaetetus, a chattering man appears to be. 

Theae. How so ? What do you say this for ? 

So. Because I am so annoyed by my own dullness and 
manifest garrulity. For what else can one call the conduct 
of a man, who wears every argument threadbare, and cannot 
be made to quit it, because he is too stupid to be convinced? 

Theae. What vexes you ? 

So. I am not only vexed, but at a loss how to answer, 
should any one question me and say: Have you now, 


Socrates, discovered that false opinion lies neither In the 
mutual relation of perceptions, nor in that of thoughts, but 
in the union of perception with thought? I shall say, 
Yes, I suppose, with a triumphant air, as if we had made 
some beautiful discovery. 

Theae. I see nothing the reverse, Socrates, in what has 
now been proved. 

So. Do you mean, he will say, that we can never sup 
pose the man, whom we think of but do not see, to be a 
horse, which again we neither see nor touch but only think 
of, and in no way perceive? I suppose I shall say that 
I do mean it. 

Theae. Yes, and rightly. 

So. Well, he will say, as to the number eleven, which 
is an object of thought only, must it not follow from 
this statement that nobody could ever suppose it to be 
twelve, which is also an object of thought only? Come 
now, reply yourself. 

Theae. I shall reply that any one who saw and touched 
them might think eleven to be twelve, but so far as he 
had them in thought, he could never conceive such an 
opinion regarding them. 

So. Well, take the case of one who set before him 
self and regarded in his own mind five and seven. I 
don t mean seven and five men or anything of the sort, 
but the notions of five and seven, of which we say that 
they are recorded there on the waxen block, and that as to 
them it is impossible to have false opinion. Of these 
things I ask if it never chanced, that while people were 
considering them, and conversing with themselves, and 
inquiring how many they come to one person would think 
and say they were eleven, another twelve : or would all 
say and think that they make twelve ? 

Theae. No, indeed, not all; many will say, eleven. 


And if a person has higher figures under consideration, he 
is still more liable to error. I suppose you are speaking 
of number generally. 

So. Your supposition is right. Consider whether any 
thing happens in such a case but imagining the number 
twelve, in the block, to be eleven. 

Theae. Nothing else, seemingly. 

So. We are thus carried back to our former discussion. 
The person in such a case supposes a thing which he 
knows to be another thing which he knows. This we 
said was impossible ; and on this very ground we forced 
the conclusion that false opinion does not exist, in order 
that the same person might not be compelled to know and 
not know the same things at the same time. 

Theae. Very true. 

So. Therefore we must declare that holding false 
opinion is something else than a discrepancy between 
thought and sensation. For, if it were this, we could 
never be deceived in our mental concepts themselves. But 
now either there is no false opinion, or it is possible for a 
person not to know what he knows. Which alternative 
do you choose ? 

Theae. You offer an impossible choice, Socrates. 

So. Ay, but the argument will hardly allow both. 
Nevertheless, as we must risk the utmost, suppose we 
venture to be shameless? 

Theae. How ? 

So. By making up our minds to say what to know 

Theae. Why is this a shameless act ? 

So. You seem not to bear in mind that all our dis 
cussion from the first has been a quest of knowledge, as 
suming that we do not know what it is. 


Theae. I do bear this in mind. 

So. Is it not then shameless, if we do not know know-,JJ 
ledge, to proclaim what knowing means? But in fact, ] 
Theaetetus, we have been long infected with an impure I 
method of discussion. Over and over again we have used I 
the terms we know, and we do not know, we have ] 
knowledge and we have not knowledge, as if we could 
understand one another, while we are yet ignorant of know- I 
ledge. If you remark, at this very moment we have again ] 
used the terms ignorance and understanding, as though it 
were fit for us to use them, if we are destitute of knowledge. 

Theae. But in what way will you argue, Socrates, if you 
abstain from these terms ? 

So. In no way, while I am the man I am : but I could 
if I were a votary of contention. Were a man of that 
school now present, he would profess to abstain from such 
terms, and would rebuke us sternly for our conduct. Since 
however we are such poor creatures, will you let me ven 
ture to say what knowing is? For I am clear that it will 
be of some help to us. 

Theae. Oh yes ! pray venture. You will have great 
excuse for not abandoning these terms. 

{Having consented, for the sake of discussion, to use the tern knowing, 
though still imdefined, Socrates now observes that most people suppose 
it to mean the having of knowledge? For his own part, he would 
rather say the possessing, than the having : for a person cannot 
justly be said to have what he never uses, though he may possess 
it, like a coat kept in a wardrobe but never worn. This distinction 
he illustrates by his second parable, that of the mental dove-cage. 
A person may be supposed to have caught a number of doves (i.e. to 
have acquired sciences or cognitions) which he has turned into his cage 
or aviary, and so possesses. But, if he wants to catch one of his 
doves (i.e. to recall and use one of his acquired cognitions], he has 


pursue another chase in his mental aviary; and this may not 
be successful. He mi~y fail to catch the dove he wants (i.e. he 
may Jindthat he has forgotten the science he had once acquired} or he 
may get hold of a wrong dove (i.e. he may confuse things which he 
could accurately distinguish at a former time}.~\ 

So. You have heard then what people now mean by 

Theae. Possibly : but I do not remember at the mo 

So. They say it is a having of knowledge. 

Theae. True. 

So. Let us make a slight change and say, possession of 

Theae. What will you say is the difference between 

So. Perhaps none : but you may as well hear, and 
help me to test my opinion. 

Theae. I will if I can. 

So. Having does not appear to me the same thing 
as possessing/ For instance, if any one bought a coat, 
and being master of it did not wear it, we should not say 
he had, but possessed it. 

Theae. Right. 

So. Now see if it is possible in the same manner to 
possess knowledge without having it. Suppose a person 
had caught wild birds, doves or any other sort, and built a 
dove-cage in his dwelling and fed them. In a certain way 
we should say he always has them, because he possesses 
them. Should we not ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. In another sense we should say he has none of 
them, but he has got a power over them, since he has made 
them subject to him in a domestic inclosure of his own. 


He can take and hold them when he likes, catching any 
one he wishes, and he can let it go again. And it is free to 
him to do this as often as he thinks proper ? 

Theae. It is. 

So. So then, even as in the previous part of our dis 
course we framed in human souls a strange sort of waxen 
figment, let us again make in every soul a certain cage of 
various kinds of birds, some in flocks apart from the rest; 
others in small groups; others alone, flying among all 
wherever they may chance. 

Theae. Suppose it made. What next ? 

So. While we are children (we must say) this struc 
ture is empty : and we must think of sciences instead of 
birds: and whatever science any one has acquired and 
shut up in his inclosure, we must say that he has learnt or 
discovered the thing of which it is the science : and this is 

Theae. Be it so. 

So. Again, as to catching any one of the sciences a 
person chooses, and taking and holding it, and letting it 
go again, consider by what terms these acts should be 
described, whether by the same as when he was first ac 
quiring the sciences, or by others. You will learn what I 
mean more clearly from the following illustration. There 
is an art you call arithmetic ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Suppose this to be a pursuit of the knowledge of 
odd and even. 

Theae. Well, I do. 

So. By this art, I imagine, a person both has the 
cognitions of all numbers in his power, and transmits them 
to another. 

TJieae. Yes. 


So. And we say that one who transmits teaches, and 
[one who receives learns, and one who has them by possess- | 
ing in that cage knows? 

Theae. Quite so. 

So. Attend and see what next follows. Does not a 
perfect arithmetician know all numbers ? For he has in his 
soul the science of all numbers. 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. Could not such a person count any sum mentally, 
.or any outward objects capable of numeration ? 

Theae. No doubt he could. 

So. And shall we say that counting means anything but 
\ considering how great any number is? 

Theae. Such is its meaning. 

So. Then what a person knows, he is shown to con- j 
sider as if he did not know, though we have allowed that he / 
knows all number. You have heard, I suppose, of these | 
vexed questions? 

Theae. I have. 

[Socrates now confutes his own hypothesis. Catching a dove which you 37 
acquired and possess, seems to mean learning from yourself what you 
know already. This Theaetetus sees to be absurd. And the confusion 
of two known things appears to be not less absurd. For this kno^vledge 
is shewn to produce the effect of ignorance. Why may not ignorance 
as well be shewn to product the effect of knowledge, and blindness that 
of sight ? May we not imagine, says Theaetetus, that the cage contains 
nesciences (non- cognitions ] as well as sciences (cognitions] and that false 
opinion may take place when a per son, hunting for a science, gets hold 
of a nescience in its stead ? By a short elenchus Socrates shews that 
this hypothesis implies consequences which have been already acknow 
ledged to be impossible. For the man who has thus got hold of nes 
cience mistakes it for science, does he not? Yes, says Theaetetus. But 
how can anybody, knowing two things, take one for the other, or, 
knowing neither, take ^vhat he does not know, for something else that 


he does not know : or knowing one but not the other, take ivhat he 
does know for what he does not know, or the converse. All these are\ 
impossibilities : and so we, until we know what knoivledge is, cannot 
know what false opinion is.] 

So. We then, following the similitude of the possession 
and chase of doves, will say that the chase was double ; one 
before acquirement, with a view to possession : the other 
after possession, in order to take and hold in hand what the 
owner had long ago acquired. So even those same things 
of which a person had the knowledge long since by learning, 
and which he then knew, he may again thoroughly learn 
by resuming and holding the knowledge of each, which 
he had indeed long ago acquired, but had not within his 
mental grasp. 

Theae. True. 

So. I was just now asking what terms we must use to 
speak of such cases, as when the arithmetician proceeds to 
count or the grammarian to read. Does he in this case, 
although he knows, come to learn from himself what he 
knows ? 

Theae. That were absurd, Socrates. 

So. But must we say that he will read and count 
what he does not know, after allowing him to know all 
letters and all number? 

Theae. This again is unreasonable. ^~~ 

So. Would you have us state that, as to terms, we 
do not care at all in what way anybody likes to twist the 
words knowing and learning; but that since we de 
nned possessing knowledge to be one thing, having it 
another, we say it is impossible for any one not to possess 
what he has acquired ; so that it never happens that any one 
does not know what he knows, but it is possible to get hold 
of a false opinion concerning it : for it is possible not to 


have the knowledge of this one, but of another in its stead, 
when chasing any of the sciences which flit from him, he 
mistakes and lays hold on one instead of another, as in the 
case when he thought eleven to be twelve, getting hold of 
the knowledge of eleven, instead of that of twelve, the 
ring-dove as it were within him instead of the pigeon ? 

Theae. Yes, that is reasonable. 

So. But when he gets hold of that which he tries to 
take, shall we say, that then he is free from error and 
opines realities, and that in this way there is true and 
false opinion, and that none of the difficulties which we 
found in our foregoing arguments come in our way ? Per 
haps you will endorse my statement. Will you ? 

Theae. I will. 

So. Then so far we are rid of the notion that people 
do not know what they know : for it no longer happens in 
any case not to possess what we do possess, whether de 
ceived about it or not. And yet there seems to glance 
sideways on me a trouble still more formidable. 

Ttieae. Of what nature ? 

So. Whether the interchange of cognitions will ever 
come to be false opinion. 

Theae. How do you mean ? 

So. First, as to the notion of anybody s having know 
ledge of a thing, and at the same time being ignorant of it, 
not by inacquaintance, but by his own knowledge : next, as 
to opining this to be one thing, and the other thing to be 
this is it not the height of unreason, that, when know 
ledge is present the soul should recognize nothing, and be 
ignorant of everything? for on this principle there is no 
thing to prevent ignorance being present and causing one to 
know something, and blindness causing to see, if knowledge 
shall ever cause any one to be ignorant. 


Theae. Perhaps, Socrates, we did not arrange the birds 
well in placing sciences only, but we ought to have placed 
also nesciences flying about with them in the soul ; and the 
chaser, at one time getting hold of a science, at another of 
a nescience, has about the same thing opinions false by 
nescience, true by science. 

So. It is not easy, Theaetetus, to avoid praising you. 
But review your proposition. Suppose it as you state. 
He who lays hold on nescience, you say, will have false 
opinions. Is it so ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. He will not, I suppose, think he has false opi 
nions ? 

Theae. How can he ? 

So. He will think he has true ones then, and as to 
things in which he is deceived, he will be in the same 
condition as if he knew them ? 

Theae. No doubt. 

So. He will think that he has chased and got science, 
not nescience? 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. Accordingly, after a long circuit we have reached 
our original perplexity. Our critic will again laugh and 
say : My right worthy friends, will one who knows them" 
both, science and nescience, suppose that which he knows 
to be the other which he knows? or knowing neither of 
them, does he imagine what he knows not to be the other 
which he knows not : or, knowing one but not the other, 
does he suppose the one he knows to be the one he knows 
not, or the one he knows not to be the one he knows ? 
Or will you tell me again that there are also sciences 
of sciences and of nesciences, which he who possesses 
has shut up in some other ridiculous dove-cage or waxen 


(,, 2nt, and knows as long as he possesses them, even if 

f ^ave them not ready to hand in his soul? and so will 

^ ^mpelled to run round and round to the same 

vn <? I it gaining anything by it? What answer shall 

ana " o j^se questions, Theaetetus ? 

2 ff C - ea %> Socrates, I do not know what we ought 

which r.5 

^id? oes not t ^ ie ar g ument > m 7 boy, rebuke us justly, 
and she .^hat we are wrong in leaving the question of 
knowledge, and investigating false opinion first? It is 
impossible to know this latter, before we have adequately 
settled what knowledge is. 

Theae. At this point, Socrates, I must accept your 

[Are we then to abandon the inquiry what is knowledge . ? Theaetetus 38 
will not do so, if Socrates is ready to continue it ; but he reverts to 
his second definition, that true opinion is knowledge. Socrates says that 
the whole profession of Zaiuyers and orators gainsays this doctrine : for 
their whole business is to persitade dicasts that certain things which 
the dicasts did not personally witness, are true, and that they ottght to 
decide accordingly. If they do so decide, and that rightly, they have 
formed a true opinion, which cannot be called knowledge, but the result 
cf persiiasion. Therefore true opinion and knowledge are not iden 
tical. Theaetetus now remembers that he once heard it said, that trtte 
opinion with rational explanation (\oyos) is knowledge, Things are 
unknowable, (f they cannot be rationally defined: if they can, they 
are kiiowable. ] 

So. Returning to the original question, what is one 
to say that knowledge is? For we shall not give in yet, 
I suppose. 

Theae. Certainly not, if you do not set the example. 

So. Say then how we must define it in order to escape 
best from self-contradiction. 


Theae. As we proposed in our foregoing discussioi 
Socrates. I have no other suggestion to make. 

So. What was the definition ? 

Theae. That true opinion is knowledge. True 
is, I suppose, free from error, and its results are all j se ^ 
and good. 

So. The man who led the way into the river a i s i n g you,, 
tetus, said the trial will prove; and if we sear/ V011 cms 
as we go, perhaps the fact will stop us and exhijju what we 
are looking for. If we stand still, we shall see nothing. 

Theae. Right. Let us proceed and look out. 

So. This look-out of ours will be a brief one : for 
a whole profession indicates that true opinion is not know 

Theae. How so ? What is that profession ? 

So. The profession of the mightiest in wisdom, who 
are called orators and lawyers. These men in their art 
persuade, not by teaching, but by making men opine 
whatever they will. Do you suppose there are any 
teachers clever enough, within the flowing of a little water, 
to teach adequately the truth of facts to certain persons, 
who were not present when they were robbed of money, or 
when they received some other violence ? 

Theae. I do not suppose they could ; but they would 

So. By persuading you mean, causing to form ar 
opinion ? 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. When therefore dicasts are justly persuaded abou 
things which can be known by seeing only, not otherwise 
in that case, judging the things by what they hear, the 
judged without knowledge, though persuaded rightly, if thei 
verdict was good ? 


Theae,. Unquestionably. 

S0. If, my friend, true opinion and knowledge were 
the same, a perfect dicast would never form a right opinion 
without knowledge. But now it seems they are not one 
and the same. 

Theae. As to this I had forgotten, Socrates, a thing 
which I once heard somebody say : but I now recollect it 
He said that true opinion accompanied with rational expla 
nation was knowledge, but unexplained opinion out of the 
sphere of knowledge : things of which there is no explana 
tion are, he said, not knowable, using that very term ; but 
those which have explanation are knowable. 

So. Well said. But what distinction did he draw be 
tween these knowable and unknowable things? Tell me, 
that I may see whether you and I have heard the same 
version or not. 

Theae. I am not sure that I can recall it : but, if an 
other told it, I think I could follow him. 

[Socrates says that he too has heard a similar definition, which he proceeds 39 
to explain by the analogy of words and letters. The primordial elements 
of things are not matters either of knowledge or of true opinion, or of 
rational explanation, but of sensible perception merely. An element 
can only be perceived and called by its name. You can give it neither 
predicate nor epithet : you cannot speak of it as being, as this or 
that" 1 or each," 1 or single: for so you add to it something foreign 
to itself, and it is no longer an element. But the compounds of these 
elements may be known and explained by enumerating the elements of 
which they are composed. And to do this is to furnish a rational 
explanation (Aoyos) of them. Theaetetus accepts this statement, and 
repeats the new definition of knowledge stated in the preceding section. 
Socrates intimates that he is dissatisfied with the statement that 
elements are unknowable, while their compounds are knowable. He 
further proposes to discuss this question in reference to syllables and 
the letters or elements of which they are composed J\ 

K. P. 14 


So. Hear then dream for dream. Methoughc I heard 
some say that the primal elements, as it were, of which we 
and all other things are compounded, have no reason : for 
it is only possible to name each by itself, not to predi 
cate anything else of it, either that it is or is not, as in 
such case * being or not-being is attached: while it is 
wrong to ascribe either, if one is to speak of the thing 
itself alone. We must not, they say, ascribe the term self 
or that or each or single or this, or many other like 
expressions : for these run about and are applied to all 
things, being different from the things to which they are 
attached. If the primal element were capable of being 
described, and had a proper description of its own, the 
fitting course would be, that it should be described apart 
from all others. Since, however, it is impossible for any one 
of the first rudiments to be denned in words, there is 
nothing for it except to be named only : name is all it has. 
But, as to the things compounded of these, as they are 
themselves complex, so also their names being combined 
constitute definition : for a complex of names is the essence 
of definition. Thus I dreamed that the elements are un- 
described and unknown, but perceptible ; while their com 
binations are known and expressed and conceived by true 
opinion. Whenever any one gains the true opinion of any 
thing without definition, his soul is truthful with regard to it, 
but does not know it, for one who cannot give and receive 
a spoken account of anything is incognisant of it. But 
after adding such an account, he is capable of becoming 
all this, and is perfect in knowledge. Have you heard the 
dream thus or otherwise ? 

Theae. Exactly thus. 

So. Are you content with it, and do you lay it down 
that true opinion combined with explanation is knowledge ? 


Theae. Quite so. 

So. Have we to-day, Theaetetus, in this manner found 
at last what from ancient time so many wise men have 
grown old without finding ? 

Theae. At all events, Socrates, I think our present 
statement a good one. 

So. It may naturally seem so. For what can be called 
knowledge apart from definition and right opinion? Yet 
I am displeased with one of the things we said. 

Theae. What was that ? 

So. One that seems to be stated very neatly, how 
that the elements are unknown, but the class of combina 
tions known. 

Theae. Is not that true ? 

So. We must see. For we have as hostages all the 
examples which he used in saying what he did. 

Theae. What are they? 

So. Letters and syllables. Do you think the speaker 
had anything but these in view when he said what we cite ? 

Theae. No : he thought of these. 

{Assailing the new definition with reference to letters and syllables, and 40 
taking as an instance the first syllable of his (nun name, Zw, Socrates, 
by a short clenchus, proves that the syllabic is not known, unless the 
letters sigma and omega are known also. But, starting a fresh 
argument, he sitggests that possibly a syllable is a general notion 
having a nature independent of its letters. Theaetetus is willing to 
accept this vieiu. Then, says Socrates, it can have no parts. Why ? 
Because l a whole" 1 must mean all its parts Can a whole be a 
notion distinct from all its parts? Theaetetus ventures to say it can. 
Socrates asks if the all and the whole are different. Theaetetus 
risks the answer: they are different. , ] 

So. Let us then take and test them; or, rather test 
ourselves, whether we learnt letters on this principle or any 



other. To begin : can syllables be defined, but letters 

Theae. Probably. 

So. I take the same view. If some one asked about 
the first syllable of Socrates for instance and said, Tell me, 
Theaetetus, what So is : how would you answer? 

Theae. Sigma and Omega. 

So. This then you hold to be the definition of the 
syllable ? 

Theae. I do. 

So. Well now, tell me similarly the definition of 

Theae. How can one tell the elements of an element ? 
For indeed, Socrates, Sigma is one of the consonants, a 
sort of noise only, as when the tongue hisses ; Beta again 
has neither sound nor noise : nor have most of the letters. 
So they may very well be called undefined, as the clearest 
of them have sound alone, but no definition at all. 

So. So much then, my friend, we have rightly deter 
mined concerning knowledge? 

Theae. Apparently. 

So. Well now? Have we rightly admitted that the 
letter is not known, but only the syllable ? 

Theae. Seemingly. 

So. Do we 1 now say that the syllable is both letters, 
or if there be more than two, all these, or some one idea 
arising from their combination ? 

Theae. I think we should say, all of them. 

So. Take the case of two, Sigma and Omega. These 
two form the first syllable of my name. Does not one who 
knows the syllable know both ? 

Theae. To be sure. 

So. He knows Sigma and Omega ? 


Theae. Yes. 

So. How then ? Is he ignorant of each, and, knowing I 
neither, does he know both ? 

Theae. That were strange and unreasonable, Socrates. 

So. And yet, if a person must perforce know each, in 
order to know both, it is absolutely necessary for one who is 
ever to know a syllable, to know the letters first. And thus 
our beautiful argument will have run clear away from us. 

Theae. Ay, and in a very sudden way. 

So. We do not keep a good watch on it. Perhaps we 
ought to have laid it down that a syllable is not the letters 
themselves, but some notion arising from them, having one 
form belonging to itself, while another belongs to the sepa 
rate letters. 

Theae. Quite so. And perhaps this statement may be 
truer than the other. 

So. We must consider the point, and not abandon in 
this cowardly way a great and dignified theory. 

Theae. Surely not. 

So. Suppose it be as we now say. The syllable is one 
general form arising from the harmonious adaptation of the J 
several elements ; both in grammar and everywhere else. 

Theae. Very well. 

So. Then there must be no parts of it. 

Theae. Why? 

So. Because, if a thing has parts, the whole must ne 
cessarily be all the parts. Or do you say that a whole 
formed of parts is a notion distinct from all its parts ? 

Theae. Yes, I do. 

So. Do you call the all and the whole the same or 
different ? 

Theae. I have no clear view: but as you bid me 
answer readily, I take the risk of saying they are different. 


So. Your readiness, Theaetetus, is right. Whether the 
answer is so too, we must consider. 
Theae. We must. 

41 [The first eighteen questions of this section comprise an elenchus, "by which 
Socrates compels Theaetetus to admit, that there is no difference be 
tween the all^ and the whole] and that both terms, in a thing that 
has parts, mean all the parts? He then puts this alternative, which 
Theaetetus grants : if the sytlable is not the letters., they are not its 
farts : if it is the same with them, both must be known equally. 
And it was to avoid this latter conseqitence that it was taken to be 
different. But what are the parts of syllables, if the letters are not ? 
Theaetetus admits, that, if syllables have parts, these must be the 
letters. In that case, says Socrates, according to the doctrine as 
sumed, a syllable must be a single form without parts. And in that 
case, he now proves, it must be elementary, and so ^indefinable and 
unknown. It is not true, therefore, that the syllable can be defined 
, and knoivn, iinless the letters can be so likewise. This proof Socrates 
strengthens by the testimony of experience. In learning to read, did 
not Theaetetus endeavour to distinguish each individual letter ? In 
learning music, did he not strive to distinguish each particular note ; 
and are not the notes the elements of music ? All this Theaetetiis 
admits. And Socrates draws the conchision, that elements may be 
known even more clearly than compounds (syllables}.] 

So. Will not the whole differ from the all, according to 
your present argument ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Well now, is there any difference between all (plu 
ral) and the all (singular) ? For instance, when we say, one, 
two, three, four, five, six, and if we say twice three or 
thrice two, or four and two, or three and two and one, 
do we in all these cases speak of the same or something 
different ? 

Theae. Of the same. 


So. That is, six ; is it not ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. In each form of speech we have spoken of all 
the six? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Again, when we speak of all, do we not speak of 
one thing ? 

Theae. We must. 

So. Is it not of the six ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Do we predicate the same unity of all things 
consisting of number, whether under the term irav or rd 
-irdvTa (in singular or plural form) ? 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. Let us now state the question as follows : The 
number of the acre and the acre are the same ; are they 

TJieae. Yes. 

.$?. And so of the furlong ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Again, the number of the camp and the camp, and 
all such things similarly? For the whole number is the 
essential whole in each case? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And is not the number of each the parts of each ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And all things which have parts will consist of 
parts ? 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. And all the parts have been admitted to be the all, 
if the entire number is to be the all. 

1 Reading, with K. F. Hermann, 5 01)% ft> for MS 5 oW&. 41 


Theae. True. 

So. Then the whole does not consist of parts. For it 
would be the all, being all the parts ? 

Theae. Seemingly not. 

So. But can any thing which is a part, be a part of 
any thing except of a whole ? 

Theae. Yes, of the all. 

So. You show fight manfully, Theaetetus. But is it 
not in the very case when nothing is absent that the all 
is all ? 

Theae. Necessarily. 

So. And v/ill not the whole be the very same thing 
that from which nothing is anywhere absent? For that 
from which anything is absent, is neither a whole nor an 
all, each of these being equally constituted by the same 
combination of parts. 

Theae. I now think there is no difference between an 
all and a whole. 

So. Did we not say, that whenever a thing has parts, 
the whole and all will mean all the parts ? 

TJieae. Certainly. 

So. Again : to resume my late essay, if the syllable is 
not the letters, does it not follow that it has not the 
letters for its parts, or if it be the same with them, it must 
be known equally with them ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Was it not to obviate this result that we defined it 
to be different from them ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Well, if the letters are not parts of a syllable, have 
you any other things to name, which are parts of a syllable, 
besides its letters ? 

Theae. By no means. For if I allowed it to have 


parts, it would be ridiculous to abandon the letters, and 
seek anything else. 

So. Decidedly, Theaetetus, according to the present 
view a syllable must be a single generality without parts. 

Thcae. Seemingly. 

So. Do you remember, my friend, that a short time 
back we accepted the statement, deeming it a good 
one, that of the primal elements, of which all things are 
composed, there is no definition, because each by itself is 
uncompounded, and that it is not right to apply to it the 
term is, nor yet this, which are alien and foreign to it; 
and this cause makes such element undefinable and un 
known ? 

Theae. I remember. 

So. Is there any other cause than this of its being 
simple and indivisible ? I see no other. 

Theae. Apparently none. 

So. Accordingly, the syllable is shown to belong to the 
same class as the element, if it has no parts, and is one 
general notion? 

Theae. Undoubtedly. 

So. If then the syllable has many letters, and is a cer 
tain whole, and they are its parts, syllables and letters are 
alike knowable and utterable, since all the parts were 
shown to be the same with the whole ? 

Theae. Assuredly. 

So. But if it is one and indivisible, both syllable and 
letter are equally undefinable and unknowable : for the 
same cause will make them both so ? 

Theae. I cannot contradict you. 

So. Let us not accept this statement from anybody, 
that a syllable can be known and expressed, but not a 


Theae. We must not, if we concur with the argument. 

So. Yet further : would you not rather accept the 
opposite view, from knowing what happened to yourself 
when you learnt to read ? 

Theae. What is that ? 

So. That all you went on doing in the course of 
learning was, to try to distinguish each individual letter as 
you saw and heard it, that their order might not confuse 
you when they were spoken and written. 

Theae. Very true. 

So. And did not a complete instruction at your music- 
master s mean the being able to follow each note, and 
say what string answered to it? These everybody would 
own to be properly called the elements of music. 

Theae. Yes. 

So. So far then as we have experience of letters and 
syllables, if from these cases we may draw inferences as to 
others, we shall say that the class of elements admits of a 
knowledge much clearer than the syllable, and more 
important for the perfect mastery of each study; and, if 
any one shall say that the syllable is naturally known, but 
the element unknown, we shall think he is joking or 
talking nonsense ? 

Theae. Undoubtedly. 

42 [Recurring to the third definition of knowledge proposed by Theaetetus 
true opinion >v){fTi National explanation (\6yos) Socrates now 
criticises this adjunct. What does it mean? Three answers may 
be given, (i) It may simply mean speech. Well ; but all ivho. are 
not born deaf and dumb speak sooner or Tater ; and all true opinion 
ivill carry speech with it; and so it can never be separate from know 
ledge. (2) Koyosjnay mean the power of describing anything by the 
elements of which it consists. Hesiod says : a wagon has a hundred 


planks. But you and /, says Socrates, cannot detail these: we 
describe a wagon by certain known parts : axle, wheels, body, yoke, 
&>c. Thus we have a right opinion about it: but, as we cannot 
emimcrate the elements, we have not the full knowledge. UiTagain, 
in tlie case of spelling: perhaps somebody can spell the name Theae- 
tetus quite correctly, having a true opinion about it, and being able 
to emunerate its syllables correctly: but, when another name, Theo- 
dorus, is in question, he is found to spell it wrongly (writing Te 
for 0e) This proves that his true opitiion in the former instance 
did not amount to knowledge: and thus again we find true opinion 
-with rational explanation to fall short of knowledge^ 

So. Other proofs of this fact might be shewn, I 
think ; but let us not for their sake forget to keep in view 
the proposed topic, namely, what is meant by saying 
that true opinion combined with rational explanation is 
the most perfect knowledge. 

Theae. We must keep it in view. 

So. Well now, what does the term explanation indicate 
to us ? I think it means one of three things. 

Theae. What are they ? 

So. The first will be making one s meaning clear 
through the voice with verbs and nouns, imaging opinion 
in the stream through the voice as in a mirror or in 
water. Do you not consider explanation to be something 
of this sort ? 

Theae. I do. We say therefore that one who does so 

So. This however is not everybody able to do sooner 
or later, to shew what he thinks about anything if he is 
not born deaf or dumb? and so all those who have any 
right opinion, will appear to have with it the faculty of 
explanation, and right opinion will thus nowhere be formed 
without knowledge. 

Theae. True. 


So. Let us not however lightly pronounce sentence on 
him who defined knowledge in the way we are now con 
sidering that he is guilty of talking nonsense. Perhaps 
he did not mean to say this, but rather the being able, 
when asked what anything is, to make answer to the 
questioner in terms of its elements. 

Theae. Instance what you mean, Socrates. 

So. As Hesiod speaking of a wagon says, A wagon 
consists of a hundred planks. I cannot describe them, 
probably you cannot. If we were asked what a wagon is, 
we should be content if we could say, wheels, axle, body, 
seat, yoke. 

Theae. Quite so. 

So. The questioner might perhaps think us ridiculous, 
as he would if being asked your name and making answer 
by syllables, while all we thought and said was right 
we deemed that as skilful grammarians we had in mind 
and stated grammatically the definition of the name Theae- 
tetus; though the fact is that nobody can define any 
thing with knowledge, until he fully describe it in its 
elements with true opinion; as was before, I think, laid 

Theae. It was. 

So. So too he might consider, with respect to a 
wagon, that we have right opinion indeed, but that one 
who was able to detail its nature by those hundred planks, 
had, through this addition, joined explanation to true 
opinion, and instead of opinion had got technical know 
ledge about the nature of a wagon, having fully described 
the whole in its elements. 

Theae. Do you not think his opinion good, Socrates ? 

So. If you think so, my friend, and accept this view, 
that the full description of everything by its elements is 


explanation, but the description by syllables or anything 
more comprehensive is failure of explanation, tell me so, 
that we may criticize it. 

Theae. I quite accept that view. 

So. Do you accept it under the belief that a person is 
cognisant of anything when he thinks that the same thing 
sometimes belongs to the same, sometimes to another, or 
when he thinks that to the same thing at one time one 
thing belongs, at another time another ? 

Theae. I believe nothing of the sort. 

So. Do you forget that, when you learnt your letters 
at first, you and the other scholars did such things ? 

Theae. Do you mean that we thought first one letter, 
then another, belonged to the same syllable, and that we 
assigned the same letter sometimes to its proper syllable, 
sometimes to another? 

So. That is what I mean. 

Theae. No, I do not forget ; nor do I consider 
that they who are in this condition have yet acquired 

So. Well, when a child of that age writing * Theaetetus, 
thinks he ought to write, and does write theta and 
epsilon, and again attempting to write Theodorus thinks 
he ought to write and does write tau and epsilon, 
shall we say that he knows the first syllable of your 
names ? 

Theae. It has been just allowed that such an one does 
not yet know. 

So. Is there anything to hinder the same child from 
making a similar error in respect of the second, third, and 
fourth syllables ? 

TJieae. Nothing at all. 

So. Will one who has in mind the description by 


elements write Theaetetus with true opinion, whensoever 
he writes it in just order ? 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. Being still without knowledge, though having right 
opinion, do we say ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And yet he unites explanation with right opinion : 
for he wrote that description by elements which we admitted 
to be rational explanation ? 

Theae. True. 

So. And thus, my friend, there is a right opinion with 
explanation, which we cannot yet call knowledge. 

Theae. Apparently. 

43 {There remains (3) a third meaning of \6yos, viz. a mark of difference 
/j ii<!iii h anything is shewn to be distinct from everything else. It 
is said that, while you perceive only those features which the thing 
has in common with others, you have trite opinion of it only : but 
that, when you add those which are peculiar to it and characteristic, 
then you have the knowledge of it. Socrates proves this to be falla 
cious. You have not a true opinion abput . anybody or anything, 
until youareco^is^tf^of^^^ecidiarities fa vour object. Hence it 
.JK follows that such a \6yos_Js already included in true opinion, and 

that, if an adjunct to this, it is merely siiperfluous and absurd. So 
then, says Socrates, all our three attempts to define knowledge have 
failed. Have you any other conception, Theaetetus? No, says the 
youth : you have already helped me to say much more than was in my 
own mind.} 

S0. So we seem only to have dreamt we were rich in 
thinking we had the truest explanation of knowledge. Or 
must we suspend this charge? Somebody, perhaps, will 
not define explanation thus : but rather as the remaining 
form of those three, one or other of which we said would 


be taken as explanation/ by one who denned knowledge 
to be * true opinion with explanation. 

Theae. You justly remind me. There was one form 
left. The first was the image, as it were, of thought in 
utterance: the second, now discussed, was the road to the; 
whole through the elements. What do you call the 

So. That which most people would define as being 
able to mention some sign by which the thing in question 
differs from all others. 

Theae. Can you give me an instance of any such ex 
planation of anything ? 

So. Yes, one which, if you like, I think you may com 
petently accept concerning the sun, that it is the brightest 
of the bodies which travel in the heaven round the earth. 

Theae. Certainly. 

So. Now learn why this is said. The fact is, as we 
were lately saying, that, if you take the difference between 
each individual and all others, you will get a definition, as 
some say : but, as long as you lay hold of some common 
feature only, your account will be about those things which 
have that community. 

Theae. I understand. And I think it right to call such 
a process definition. 

So. But whosoever with right opinion about any thing 
learns furthermore its difference from others, will have gained 
knowledge of that of which before he had opinion. 

Theae. Yes, we state it so. 

So. Now then most decidedly, Theaetetus, since I have 
come near to our proposition, as it were to a drawing, 
I do not understand it in the least. As long as I stood 
at a distance from it, there appeared to be some sense 
in it. 


Theae. What do you mean by this ? 

So. I will tell you, if I can. Having a right opinion 
of you, if I add to this your definition, I know you ; if not, 
I have opinion of you only. 

Theae. Yes. 

So. And the definition was the interpretation of your 

Theae. Even so. 

So. When I was opining only, was it not the case that 
I did not: grasp with my mind any of the points in which 
you differ from others ? 

Theae. Seemingly. 

So. Then I was taking note of some of the common 
features, which belong no more to you than to other 
people ? 

Theae. Of course. 

So. Now do pray tell me : in such a case how will 
you more than anybody else have been conceived by me? 
Suppose me to imagine that this is Theaetetus, whoever 
is a man, and has a nose and eyes and mouth, and any 
other individual member. Will this imagination cause me 
to conceive Theaetetus more than Theodorus, or, pro 
verbially speaking, any rapscallion whatever ? 

Theae. How can it ? 

So. Or, if I imagine him having not only nose and 
eyes, but also as the one who has a flat nose and prominent 
eyes, shall I have a notion of you more than of myself, or 
of any other with these features ? 

Theae. No. 

So. Theaetetus, I fancy, will not be conceived in my 
mind until this flatness of nose shall have stamped and de 
posited in my heart some memorial different from all other 
snubnesses of nose seen by me (I might say the same of all 


your other features), which shall bring you to my mind, if I 
meet you to-morrow, and make me to have right opinion 
about you. 

Theae. Most true. 

So. Right opinion then in each case will be concerned 
with differentiation. 

Theae. Evidently. 

So. What then will be f the adding explanation to right 
opinion ? For if it means, to add an opinion of the manner 
in which one thing differs from all others, this direction 
becomes utterly ridiculous. 

Theae. How ? 

So. Of things whereof we have a right opinion as to the 
nature of their difference from others, it bids us add a right 
opinion of the nature of their difference from others. And 
thus the proverbial twirl of the scytal or the pestle or any 
thing else would be a mere trifle compared with this direction : 
nay it might more fairly be called a blind man s direction : 
for to bid us add what we have got already, that we may 
learn what we think already, is a splendid illustration of a 
man groping in the dark. 

Theae. Tell me now what answer you meant to give to 
your last question. 

So. If bidding us to add explanation is bidding us to 
know distinction, not to have an opinion of distinction 
the finest of our definitions of knowledge will turn out to be 
a nice sort of thing. For to know is, I suppose, to get 
knowledge. Is it not ? 

Theae. Yes. 

So. Then, if asked, it seems, what knowledge is, a 
person will reply that it is right opinion with a knowledge 
of difference : for the addition of explanation will mean this 
in his view. 

K. P. 15 


Theae. Seemingly. 

So. Yet it is utterly silly, when we are seeking know 
ledge, to say that it is right opinion with knowledge whether 
of difference or of anything else. So, Theaetetus, neither 
sensible perception, nor true opinion, nor explanation ac 
companying true opinion will be knowledge. 

Theae. Seemingly not. 

So. Do we still conceive anything and feel throes, my 
friend, about knowledge, or have we given birth to every 
thing ? 

Theae. By all that s sacred, Socrates, with your help I 
have said more than I had in my own mind. 

So. And does not our art declare that all these products 
have turned out to be wind, and not worth rearing ? 

Theae. Decidedly so. 

[ Well, Theaetetus, says Socrates in conclusion, the discussion of to-day 
will have done you good service in every -way. You will cease to 
think you know things which you do not know, and your future 
conceptions will be consequently truer. Also you will be a more 
amiable companion, more willing to tolerate the mistakes of other 
disputants. I must now leave you, to keep an appointment with my 
accuser Melitus. To-morrow, Theodorus, let us meet here again.\ 

So. Well, Theaetetus, if you seek to become, and do 
become, pregnant with other thoughts hereafter, the present 
enquiry will have improved your conceptions ; and, if you 
do not, you will be less severe to your associates, more 
mild and temperate, not supposing that you know what 
you do not know. So much only as this my art can do, no 
more. Nor do I know any of the things which others 
do, who are and have made themselves great and 


wondrous men. This midwifery I and my mother received 
as our function from God, she to practise it on women, I 
on young, noble and beautiful men. 

Now, however, I must encounter Melitus and his in 
dictment against me at the Porch of the King 1 . In the 
morning, Theodorus, let us meet again here. 

4.4 1 The indictment against Socrates for impiety was brought by his 
accusers Anytus and Melitus in the court of the apxuv /ScwiAei/j, situated 
at the arba thence called /SacrtAi/ci?, the Porch of the King. 


\TJie references are (i) to chapters in translation; (2) to pages in text and 
translation; (3) to pages in Ed. I. of Stephens, as she^vn in margin 
of text. \ 

pp. 10, 109. St. 147. D. Trepi SvvdfJLeuv TL rffuv cc- 
SCO/DOS oSe eypa<e, r^s re rpiVoSos Trept KCU TrevTeVoSos aTro^at- 
vwv on /z?7Ke6 ou v/x/xerpoi TT^ TroSiata, Theodoras was descri 
bing to us something about powers, proving as to the root 
of 3 and root of 5, that they are not in length commensur 
able with the foot-unit : i. e. shewing that \/3 is greater than 
i and less than 2, and that */$ is greater than 2 and less 
than 3; that therefore they do not contain unity so many 
times; that they are fractions, not integers. With TroSiaia 
understand ypa/x/xf/. 

H. Schmidt in his Exegetic Commentary tries to shew 
that what Theodorus taught was a corollary to the Pythago 
rean Theorem (Euclid i. 47); that Swa/xeis mean the powers 
a 2 ) b 2 &c. as in modern algebra, and that 7ro8icua here is a 
unit square a 2 , by which the squares of a series of hypote 
nuses of right-angled triangles, having for their kathetes a 
and the foregoing hypotenuse, are all commensurable: since 



V = 2a 2 , c* = so 2 , d 2 = 4# 2 , &c. Theodorus may have taught 
this truth, but it is certainly not introduced here, as the 
word IJUJKCL proves, shewing TroStaia to be the linear foot-unit. 
And that Swa/ms mean roots, not the modern powers, is 
clear from what follows 148 A, 6 crai Se rov erepc^??/^, <Wa/xei9, 
to? /XT^KCI ju-ev ov u/xju,erpous eKeiVais, rots 8 eTriTreSots a SiWvrat, 
i.e. v3, \/5 &c. are called powers, because they have 
power, when squared, to form areas which are commensur 
able with the squares 4, 9, 16, 25, &c. So Professors 
Jowett and Campbell. 

pp. 15, Il6. St. 151 E. of eXeye KCU, IIpcoTayopa?. 
The words in which Plato recites the famous doctrine of 
Protagoras on the relativity of knowledge (/xerpov ai/0pw7ros, 
homo mensura) are probably cited from that philosopher s 
treatise called AXv^eux, Truth. But the identification of it 
with the suggestion of Theaetetus that knowledge is 
sensuous perception, I suppose with Grote, (Plato, n. p. 323 
note) to be Plato s own view, which Grote considers 
unjust, contending at some length against it (322 336). 
His main argument is, that implication of object and sub 
ject is universal, affecting Noumena as well as Phaenomena: 
cogitata suppose a cogitans, as much as sensibilia 
suppose a sentiens. Therefore Protagoras would not have 
limited the application of his maxim to aur^cris alone. We 
must concur with Grote in lamenting that we get the statements 
and arguments of Protagoras at second hand only; and that 
the views of others, as of Heracleitus and his great opponent 
Parmenides, are known to us only in fragments and citations, 
and from the late biographies of Diogenes Laertius. 

pp. 1 6, 117. St. 152 A. "Av$pco7ros Se arv re Kayw; 
Socrates means : as Protagoras applies his doctrine to man 
generally, he applies it to you and me, seeing that we are 


pp. 1 6, 117. St. 152 B.C. By the illustration here used 
Socrates proves that the maxim of Protagoras means that 
what appears to any one is to him : and, as appearance 
implies perception, it follows that perception is knowledge. 

pp. 16, 118. St. 152 C. *Ap ovv K.r.X. Why this out 
burst? Socrates has just drawn from Theaetetus the ad 
mission that aia6ir]cris TOV OVTOS eori, perception is of the 
existent, of that which is. But the Heracleitean doctrine 
does not allow that anything is (eVri) but says that all 
things yi yverai come to be. And Protagoras in his A/V/f- 
0ia adopts this: so we must infer from what follows. What? 
says Socrates : did Protagoras then teach an obscure exoteric 
doctrine (fivigaro) to the multitude, and tell the truth in 
esoteric confidence (ev d-n-oppiJTu IfAeyev) to his disciples? 
Did he teach the one to believe in ovra, the others in 
nothing but yiyvo/xeva? A IviTTeaOai, to speak in riddles, is 
used of obscure or purposely veiled language. That Plato 
considered the doctrines which now follow to be involved 
in the teaching of Protagoras, is evident; indeed he dis 
tinctly says so; nor can we doubt that he had foundation 
for his statement in the writings of that sophist. But it is 
evident also that he does not here quote his precise words : 
ancl it must always be doubtful how far Protagoras was com 
mitted to all the refinements of the Heracleitean school, 
which appear in the next passage and afterwards. 

pp. 17, 119. The Platonic complication of the three 
doctrines (i) the Heracleitean (otoi/ pev/xaro. Kiveto-0cu ra 
TTtti/ra) (:;) the Protagorean (TTOLVT^V xp77/xaTu>v avOpwrrov 
wen) ar d that put forth by Theaetetus (oLa-Orja-Lv 
yiyvta-Ooi) is summarised below, 15, pp. 28, 135. The fol 
lowing observations of Grote (Plato, IT. p. 324) deserve 
special attention, and supply a valuable key to the difficulties 
occurring in Plato s treatment of this subject from 9 to 15 


and again from 15 to 30, where the definition aicrfqons is 
finally abandoned. Upon all the three opinions, thus 
represented as cognate or identical, Sokrates bestows a 
lengthened comment (occupying a half of the dialogue).... 
His strictures are not always easy to follow with assurance, 
because he often passes with little notice from one to the 
other of the three doctrines which he is examining : because 
he himself, though really opposed to them, affects in part to 
take them up and to suggest arguments in their favour: 
and further because, disclaiming all positive opinion of his 
own, he sometimes leaves us in doubt what is his real 
purpose whether to expound or to deride the opinions 
of others whether to enlighten Theaetetus, or to test his 
power of detecting fallacies. We cannot always distinguish 
between the ironical and the serious. Lastly, it is a still 
greater difficulty that we have not before us any one of the 
three opinions as set forth by their proper supporters. 
12 pp. 21, 125. St. 155 E. rw a/Aw/T<ov. Prof Camp 
bell in his learned Introduction to this dialogue ex 
amines at large the question, who are the men whom 
Plato glances at here in such uncomplimentary language. 
Had he in mind Antisthenes and the Cynics? or Demo- 
critus and the Atomists ? If Plato had either of these two 
schools in view, it seems more probable that these were 
the followers of Democritus. The yyjyev^ mentioned in 
the Sophistes (p. 246 &c.) are evidently the same as the 
o-KXypol /cat O.VTLTVTTOL (eu juaX a/iovcrot) in this pla:e. See 
Campbell, pp. xx, xxx. 

pp. 22, 126. St. 156 D. I must retract th-j partial 
favour which my notes in the text and translation shew to 
the interpolated words of Cornarius. I find the vie v taken 
by Prof. Campbell and Prof. Jowett supported zilso by 
H. Schmidt (though Miiller in his German translation 


renders the words of Cornarius, and Steinhart does not 
contradict him) : to which authorities I have to add an 
opinion which I highly value, that of my friend and former 
pupil Mr R. D. Archer-Hind, Fellow of Trinity College, 
Cambridge. I had never felt disposed to follow Bekker 
in printing the passage as an unquestioned portion of the 
text; yet I hardly know that I regret having given my 
readers the opportunity of seeing and estimating that which 
conciliated the favour of so many eminent scholars. My 
own judgment in a case of this kind I regard as of little or 
no value. 

} PP- 35) J 44- St. 1 66 A. Socrates, who up to this 
point has seemed to play with the doctrine of his intended 
victim Protagoras, as a cat with a wretched mouse, some 
times expounding and apparently supporting it, but only 
to strike it immediately with a harder blow, now professes 
to make a formal defence of it in the name of its author, 
for the express purpose of obliging Theodorus to take 
his turn in the dialogue, instead of Theaetetus, and submit 
to an elenchus, in defence of his old friend Protagoras. 
Tov e/xe is an assumption of dignity : a man like me. 

i pp. 52, 1 66. St. 179 A. if he had tried... a marts 
own self In this translation we follow the reading ei 7777 
TOVS o-woi/ras eVet^ev instead of the vulgate d M. Prof. 
Campbell, though he keeps ct /XT) in the text, accepts 
emendation in his note, but prefers et &). I can have 
no doubt that avros must not be referred to Protagoras 
by reading avrw after it, but that the sense must be as I 
have given it, avVos aura>, a man s own self. So Prof. 
Jowett (who also reads 877) every one for himself 

\ pp. f,6, 172. St. 182 B. exAA e a/x<oTc pu)i/ K.rA. 
The meaning of this passage can be none other than what 
is given in my translation, which is the same as Prof. 


Jowett s in effect. But how the Greek construction is to 
be explained is doubtful. Prof. Campbell s note gives very 
faint assistance, and neither Heindorf s ccumm/ for a/x^ore- 
PCDV, nor aVoTiKTo/Aeva for a-TTOTiKTovTa, fully satisfy. All we 
can say of the place is medicam manum expectat. 

38 pp. 82, 209. St. 201, C. It is commonly supposed that 
the words eiTroWos TOV aKoixras refer to Antisthenes. 

44 As respects the definition of knowledge, this dialogue 
only arrives at certain negative conclusions; namely, that 
knowledge is neither perception, nor true opinion, nor 
true opinion combined with rational explanation. Yet, in 
the course of it, Plato has achieved certain objects, which 
he had in mind, and which he valued. For (i) he has paid 
a debt of gratitude to his Megarian friends and hosts, 
Eucleides and Terpsion; (2) he has shewn what he after 
wards declared by his inscription on the Academy, /x^Seis 
ayew/xe rp^ros euriTco, that mathematical studies (i.e. exact 
science) are a necessary avenue to mental studies (i.e. to 
transcendental or abstract science) ; (3) he has shewn that 
minds capable of pursuing the former with success are 
not necessarily capable of mastering the latter: this he 
indicates by the nature of Theodorus, which is ^philo 
sophic, as compared with that of Theaetetus, who is an apt 
student of philosophy ; (4) he has confuted doctrines (Pro- 
tagorean and Heracleitean), which he considers erroneous 
and mischievous, and has exhibited the errors of the great 
leader of that sophistic band, which he had, from his 
master Socrates, a mission to combat and defeat; (5) he 
has found a noble opportunity to develope those moral and 
political doctrines, as to the struggle of philosophic truth 
against fallacious rhetoric, which he mooted in the Gorgias, 
and developed more fully in the Republic at a later 
time ; (6) he does achieve a positive result by the victorious 



assertion of a central seat of thought, to which all percep 
tions are conveyed, and so converted into ideas: this is 
>7, the soul of man. The subsequent elenchi, which 
confute the second and third definitions attempted by 
Theodorus, seem to me little more than gladiatorial word- 
fights, intended by Plato to exercise and display the dia 
lectic skill which he had acquired at Megara, and at the 
same time to amuse and puzzle the minds of his readers 
by the parables or myths of the waxen tablet and the dove- 
cage. But he may have had more serious aims in these 
elenchi than are obvious to my mind. 


PA Plato 

4279 Theaetetus