Eger See, ΓΞ at at

aot. Oye oi te 2

Moga τα Paes

ΠΝ ὌΝ

ΡΞ

= al α 7 ac ἊΣ τἂν ~~

ts i ae ᾿ Τ᾿ ΣῈ

᾿ ree

Teta ve ἰὼ ΤΑ ἜΝ ΣΝ eer ane Sak

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from Microsoft Corporation

https://archive.org/details/apologyofplatowi0Oplatuoft

Pia eb ΝΥΝ ἔτ (oon ἐν in 45 ae δε ¥

ἫΝ sme | ety)

2

ae

. ; Ἀν etry ey! <p i ee = ᾿ ΕΝ νὰ ᾿ 7 : ee ahora * i 2 ie ΜΡ i et | aoe : : tdi : ee Re Sa

᾿ ei rae

> ἴμεν

Ἂν.

γᾶν κι

ΕΝ erie

ae ἂν

——— ——— ψὍΦφὌοᾳΨΔΨῆΦφορΝΨρρσ

ee: | DEPARTMENTAL |

( i MP. ὩΣ A) te τ (25/8 EE

)

of

THE APOLOGY

OP ῬΙΑΤΌ:

London

MACMILLAN AND CO,

PUBLISHERS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF

@Oxford

ap τ᾿ — είν γῆ σῇ SSeS ! DEPARTMENTAL

Plato. Apol odicis

πε APOLOGY.

’

oe oe ram) ae ro me

OF PLATO,

WITH

A REVISED TEXT AND ENGLISH NOTES,

AND A DIGEST OF PLATONIC IDIOMS,

BY THE

REV. JAMES RIDDELL, M.A.

FELLOW AND TUTOR OF BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD.

OXFORD: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS,

M.DCCC.LXXVII.

ADVERTISEMENT.

CoMPLETE in itself, this volume is yet but a fragment of a larger undertaking. In the Oxford series of Plato’ works, which commenced with Mr. Poste’s edition of the Philebus in 1860, the Apology, Crito, Pheedo, and Symposium were under- taken by Mr. Riddell. Had he lived, all four would probably have appeared together. The Digest of Idioms, founded on an examination of all the writings of Plato, which he had prepared to accom- pany his edition of these dialogues, would not have seemed out of proportion to the other contents of such a volume. His death on the 14th of Septem- ber, 1866, left the undertaking incomplete. The preparations which he had made for the Crito, Pheedo, and Symposium, though extensive and valuable, had not received their final shape. But the Apology seemed to be ready for the press. Its text was settled, a critical and exegetical com- mentary was written out fair, and a full introduc- tion had been provided, together with an appendix

vl ADVERTISEMENT.

on the δαιμόνιον of Socrates. The Digest of Idioms also, to which frequent reference was made in the commentary, appeared to have been transcribed for the printer, although a few pencil notes (which have been printed in this volume at the foot of the pages to which they belong) showed that addi- tions would have been made to it, if the writer had lived to print it himself, and perhaps in some instances a different expression would have been given to the views which it contains. Under these circumstances it has been thought advisable to publish the Apology and the Digest of Idioms by themselves. My task has been only, in conducting them through the press, to remove clerical errors and to verify references.

It may be convenient to state that Plato is cited in this volume according to the pages of Stephanus. In reference to the Orators the sections of Baiter and Sauppe’s Zurich edition have been given toge- ther with the pages of Stephanus in the minor Orators and Reiske in Demosthenes. In the Dra- matists Dindorf’s numbers are followed as they stand in the edition of the Poetee Scenici published in 1830. With regard to quotations, the text of the Zurich editions has been used both for Plato and for the Orators, the text of Dindorf (from the edition of 1830) for the Dramatists. Wherever a reading is quoted which is not found in these editions, | have endeavoured to indicate the source from which it has been derived.

ADVERTISEMENT. vil

The text of the Apology itself is in the main that of C. F. Hermann. Even the punctuation is his. Some of the brackets found in his edition have been silently omitted: but, with this excep- tion, every instance in which he has not been followed is mentioned in the commentary.

EDWIN PALMER.

BatiioL CoLLeGE, OXx¥Forp, June 8, 1867.

nee i i

INTRODUCTION

PART I.

THE TRIAL OF SOCRATES.

1. NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING.

THE trial of Socrates took place before a Heliastic court, so/ 4 according to the forms of an ordinary γραφὴ δημοσία. The > ebay indictment (ἔγκλημα) is called ἀντωμοσία 19 B, 24 B, and ἀντι-

γραφὴ 27 C,—terms which allude to the proceedings of the avdxptots before the Archon Basileus, before whom both the indictment and the plea in answer to it were presented in writing and confirmed severally by oath. And the terms ἀντιγραφή, ἀντωμοσία, proper at first to the defendant, came

to be used of the prosecutor, and even were transferred to

the indictment (ἔγκλημα) itself, thus presented in writing and

sworn to.

2. THE ACCUSERS.

The indictment was preferred by Meletus; see below the form preserved by Diogenes Laertius, and compare Plato’s Euthyphro 2 B. Hence it is Meletus who is called on by Socrates to answer arguments as to its words and meaning in the Apology. Hence again Socrates asks why did not Mele-_ tus bring witnesses (34 A), and again observes (36 A) that the ‘penalty for not obtaining 2 of the votes would have fallen on Meletus. Little account can be taken of the statement of Maximus Tyrius, Disp. xxxix. p. 228, MéAitos μὲν ἐγράψατο “Avutos δὲ εἰσήγαγε Λύκων δὲ ἐδίωκε. For authors vary on this distinction, and the continuation of the passage—xaredixasav δὲ of ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἔδησαν δὲ of ἕνδεκα ἀπέκτεινε δὲ ὁ ὑπηρέτης--- shows that these words are, as Stallbaum says, magis oratorie

Χ INTRODUCTION.

quam vere dicta. See Meier und Schomann, Der Attische Process, Ὁ. 709. n. 19.

Of Meletus, the ostensible prosecutor of Socrates, in reality little more than the tool of Anytus, we only know that he was a young tragic poet. He is characterised by Plato (Euthy- phro 2 B) as νέος tis καὶ ἀγνώς, and is ridiculed as a poet by Aristophanes (Ran. 1302). The Meletus (Andoc. de Myst. 94. p. 12) who was one of the four who arrested Leon (Apol. 32 C) may have been this Meletus’ father, who bore the same name, but there is nothing to show it.

Lycon, a rhetorician, is mentioned by Aristophanes (Vesp. 1301) with Antipho.

Anytus was by far the most considerable of the three accusers, whence they are described (Apol. 18 B) as τοὺς ἀμφὶ ἤΑνυτον, and Socrates is called by Horace (Sat. II. iv. 3) Anyti reus. He was ἃ leather-seller (Xen. Apol. Soc. 29), and had been a rich man. As a sufferer and worker for the popular cause he had earned a reputation second only to Thrasybulus. With Thrasybulus he had fled from Attica, and the Thirty had confiscated his estates and included him in the decree of banishment (Xen. Hell. II. iii. 42). He held a command in the camp at Phyle (Lys. xiii. 78. p. 137), and at the restoration was joint author with Thrasybulus of the Act of Amnesty (Isocr. XVill. 23. p. 375). Plato (Meno go B) represents him as high in popular favour. His was nevertheless (Atheneus XII. p. 534 E) not a spotless character. Aristotle moreover (acc. to Harpo- eration on the word dexagew) says that he was the first man who bribed an Athenian court ; and Diodorus, who repeats this (xiii. 64), adds that it was on his trial for treason (Zeller, Philos. der Griech. II. p. 142 n.). As Anytus was the most influential accuser, so there is reason to think he was the most inflamed against Socrates. Meletus and Lycon were actuated at most by a class-prejudice,—if indeed we should not rather regard them as mere tools of Anytus. All three however belonged to classes! which Socrates had offended by his incessant censure

' Socrates is made by Plato (Apol. 23 E) to represent his three accusers as all actuated by class-feeling in their attack upon him. Ἔκ τούτων καὶ Mé- Anos μοι ἐπέθετο Kal “AvuTos καὶ Av-

, ‘ ε Ν A lol κων, MéAntos μὲν ὑπέρ τῶν ποιητῶν

ἀχθόμενος, “Avutos δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν δημιουρ- γῶν καὶ τῶν πολιτικῶν, Λύκων δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν ῥητόρων. The contrast which is implied in this sentence between #7 ropes and πολιτικοὶ shows that the words severally denote definite classes

INTRODUCTION. xi

of those who exercised professions of the principles of which

they could give no intelligent account.

Nowhere is this cause

of offence traced more connectedly than in the Apology itself

of Athenian citizens. Thereseems no ground for thinking with Wiggers (Sokrates p. 97) and others, who have followed in this view Petitus’ Com- ment, in Legg. Attic. Lib. ITI. Tit. iii, that there was any order of ῥήτορες, ten in number, appointed yearly, and deriving their origin from Solon. Any such institution could not but have interfered with the ἰσηγορία which even to the time of Demosthenes was the cherished charter of Athenian democracy. On the contrary, even the precedence which was allowed by Solon in the assembly to speakers above the age of 50 seems to have . fallen into abeyance. But we find that in the time of the Orators or earlier (see the latter part of Cleon’s speech in Thucyd. IIT. 40) these ῥή- topes had attained a mischievous im- portance. Aschines speaks of them (iii. 3. p. 54) as δυναστείας ἑαυτοῖς πε- ριποιοῦντες, and in Alcib. IT. 145 A it is said that ὅσα δή ποτε ἡ πόλις πράτ- τει πρὸς ἄλλην πόλιν ἢ αὐτὴ καθ᾽ αὑτήν, ἀπὸ Ths τῶν ῥητόρων ξυμβουλῆς ἅπαντα γίγνεται. To be ἃ ῥήτωρ had become a regular profession. A new art had arisen, designated by the name fr Topian, which is seen to have been itself a new word from the way in which it is used in the Gorgias (448 D)—77v καλουμένην ῥητορικήν. In their capacity of συνήγοροι the ῥήτορες were brought into prominence (Hee- ren, Polit. Hist, of Anc. Greece, c. 13. p- 232 of Eng. Transl.) by the fre- quency of state trials in the time suc- ceeding the Peloponnesian war. But it was no less as σύμβουλοι to the Assembly that the ῥήτορες were in requisition. In all questions of legis- lation and of policy the debate was mainly in their hands. The epoch of this ascendancy is dated by Isocrates

(viii. 121. p. 183, where he calls it τὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος δυναστείαν) from the Decelean war, or subsequent to Pericles (ib. 126, p. 184). The two species, ovp- βουλευτικὴ and δικανική, of Aristotle’s triple division of ῥητορικὴ in his trea- tise correspond with this double scope of the ῥήτωρ 5 profession. The πο- λιτικοὶ as a class must have emerged at the same time as the ῥήτορες. In itself πολιτικὸς Means no more than ‘Statesman’ in the sense in which this term might have been applied to Pericles. But an Athenian of Plato’s time, speaking with reference to Athens, would mean by πολιτικοὶ that class of men who made public busi- ness their profession,—rovs πολιτικοὺς λεγομένους, Plat. Politic. 303 C. Our conception of the πολιτικοὺ will be best completed by comparing them with the ῥήτορες. Down to Pericles’ time there would be no distinction. He united both characters like the great men before him. But after- wards the debates came into separate hands, and the speakers in the As- sembly were for the most part no longer the great commanders in the field and the bearers of the highest offices. The fact and the reasons are stated by Aristotle (Pol. V. v. 7), viv δὲ τῆς ῥητορικῆς ηὐξημένης of δυνάμενοι λέγειν δημαγωγοῦσι μὲν δι᾿ ἀπειρίαν δὲ τῶν πολεμικῶν οὐκ ἐπιτίθενται. At the same time, inasmuch as counsel as well as action was needed for the conduct of the state, those who were engaged in the different branches of this common work were not abso- lutely contradistinguished: cf. Plato, Gorg. 520 A, Phdr. 258 B, and the general terms in which the ῥήτορες are described—e, g. by Lysias (xviii. 16. p. 150) as of τὰ THs πόλεως πράτ- τοντεξ.

Xu INTRODUCTION,

(21 C--22 C). Illustrations oecur also abundantly elsewhere, We see from the Ion (533 E) how poets were brought under this censure for parading inspiration as the substitute for reason. ‘The rhetoricians? again as in the Gorgias were cen- sured for producing persuasion without knowledge. Yet stronger and yet more incessant was the denunciation of the mischievousness and presumptuousness of undertaking: politics ἀπὸ ταὐτομάτου (Xen. Mem. IV. ii. 3), or without knowledge of principles (Aleib. I. 113 C). But Anytus was actuated, over and above such a class-feeling, by personal animosity. One ground of this has been said to have been his “ amor spretus Alcibiade *:” so Luzac and Wiggers. Plato further (Meno 94 E) makes him threaten Socrates with mischief in bewilderment and mortification at being told, in effect, that in teaching * his son the family business he had done nothing towards his real education. These personal motives, however, remained in the back-ground; and so again, if he entertained yet another grudge against Socrates as the teacher of Critias, the avowal of it was incompatible with the Act of Amnesty. Therefore he made the attack under cover of defending the democracy. The ἐπιείκεια of the restored people did not last long (Plat. Epist. VII. 325 B), and was naturally succeeded by a sensitive and fanatical zeal for their revived popular institutions.

3. NUMBER OF THE JUDGES.

The statement of Wiggers (Sokrates p. 132 note), and of Matthiz (Miscell. Philol. vol. I. p.252.note 35), that the number of the judges on Socrates’ trial was 556 or 557, has been re- peated without question even by Mr. Grote (Hist. Gr. vol. VIII. p- 654, chap. 68). It is, however, as Dr, Cron ὅ remarks (in his note on Apol. 36 A), merely an assumption from the false reading τρεῖς in this passage, taken in connection with the

about it.—Zeller II. p. 141 note. * Cf. Xen. Apol. Soc. 29. δνυτος

2 The enmity of the rhetoricians extended itself after Socrates’ death

to the Socratists (Luzac de Dig. Soer. Sect. IT. § 4).

3-The story of this “amor Alci- biade ” rests on the testimony of Plu- tarch and of Satyrus apud Atheneum, but is unlikely in itself, and because Plato and Xenophon are wholly silent

ἀπέκτονέ με ὅτι αὐτὸν τῶν μεγίστων ὑπὸ τῆς πόλεως ἀλιούμενον οὐκ ἔφην χρῆναι τὸν υἱὸν περὶ βύρσας παιδεύειν.

5 Platon’s Ausgewiihlte Schriften erklirt von Christian Cron und Julius Deuschle.—Teubner, 1865.

INTRODUCTION. Xili

statement of Diogenes Laertius (II. v. 40), κατεδικάσθη διακο- σίαις ὀγδοήκοντα μιᾷ πλείοσι ψήφοις τῶν ἀπολυουσῶν, whence the numbers are supposed to have been 281 for condemnation,

275 for acquittal.

There is no reason (as Mr. Grote allows) for mistrusting the precise statement of Diogenes, nor is there any more reason, if we have regard to Greek habits of expression, for doubt that the 281 represented the aggregate majority, not the amount by which it exceeded the minority.

Hence, accepting the reading τριάκοντα here, the whole number cannot have been 556 or 557. An independent argu- ment against such a number would be that it resembles no other recorded numbers on trials. Those which we find, such as 200 (Dem. in Mid. 223. p. 585), 500 (frequently), 700 (Isoer. XViii. 54. p- 381), 1000 (Dem. in Mid. 223. p. 585), 1500 (Plu- tarch. Vit. Periclis, 72), 2000 (Lysias, xili. 35. p. 133), 2500

. (Din. in Dem. 52. p. 96), 6000 (Andoc. 1,17. p. 3), even if they are only approximate, must stand for something near

multiples of 100.

Now Pollux (VIII. 48) mentions 401 and 201 as the num- bers in two different cases of φάσις, and elsewhere 1001 and 1501. This affords the clue to a conjecture of much pro- bability (Meier und Schémann, Der Attische Process, p. 140), that this was a provision not exceptionally but uniformly for an odd number of judges, (frustrated sometimes, it would appear, by the default of individuals at the last moment), but that the common way of indicating the number was, for brevity’s sake, to mention the variable constituent, omitting the invariable 1. And Heffter (Athen. Gerichtsverfassung, Ῥ. 55) clenches this by a passage from Ulpian’s ° Commentary on Demosthenes’ oration against Timocrates: διὰ τοῦτο δὲ ὁ εἷς

προσετίθετο ἀεὶ τοῖς δικασταῖς iva μὴ ἴσαι γένοιντο αἱ ψῆφοι.

Τοῦ τ

Accordingly, if we take the total number of Socrates’ judges

5. [Ulpian’s note is on the words δικαστηρίοιν δυοῖν εἰς ἕνα καὶ χιλίους ἐψηφισμένων (Dem. c. Timocr. 9. p. 702) and stands as follows: ἐν τοῖς μεγάλοις καὶ ἐσπουδασμένοις πράγμασι συνήγοντο ἐκ δύο δικαστηρίων πλη-

ροῦντες ἀριθμὸν χιλίων καὶ ἑνός. διὰ Le] = ε if ay 4

τοῦτο δὲ 6 εἷς προσετίθετο ἀεὶ τοῖς

δικασταῖς ἵνα μὴ ἴσων γενομένων τῶν

ψήφων ἐξ ions ἀπέλθοιεν οἱ δικαζόμενοι

ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνος δόξη νικᾷν ᾧ ἂν ὁ εἷς

; προσετέθη."

oeeererew

XIV INTRODUCTION.

as 50i (which is also Heffter’s conclusion), and the number of those for condemnation as 281, we have 220 for his acquittal. Then 31 exactly, or 30 in round numbers, changing sides, would have effected his acquittal. Cron, not allowing for the odd 1, reckons 219 for acquittal.

4. Form or INDICTMENT.

Plat. ὙΠῸ: 24 Β. ἘΣ. τῶ ἀδικεῖ τούς τε νέους ἐἰαφθεύρον

καὶ θεοὺς οὺς ἡ πόλις νομίζει οὐ νομίζων ἔ ἕτερα δὲ δαιμόνια καινά.

Diog. Laert. II. 40. ἣ ἀντωμοσία τῆς δίκης εἶχε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον" ἀνάκειται γὰρ ἔτι καὶ νῦν, φησὶ Φαβωρῖνος ἴ, ἐν τῷ Μη- τρώῳ' Τάδε ἐγράψατο καὶ ἀντωμόσατο Μέλητος Μελήτου Πιτθεὺς Σωκράτει Σωφρονίσκου ᾿Αλωπεκῆθεν' “Αδικεῖ Σωκράτης οὗς μὲν 7 πόλις νομίζει θεοὺς οὐ νομίζων, ἕτερα δὲ καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσηγού- μενος" ἀδικεῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς νέους διαφθείρων. τίμημα θάνατος.

5. PROCEDURE AT THE TRIAL. ORDER OF THE PLEADINGS.

From Aischines (ii. 197. p. 82) we learn that in ἃ γραφὴ παρανόμων the time assigned for the trial was divided into three equal lengths: ἐγχεῖται τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ὕδωρ τῷ κατηγόρῳ ἜΣ ΤΕΣ τὸ δὲ δεύτερον ὕδωρ τῷ τὴν γραφὴν φεύγοντι καὶ τοῖς εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα λέγουσι (i.e. τοῖς συνηγόροις, not the witnesses whose examination was extra to the time allowed for the pleadings: οἵ, Lys. xxiii. 4, 8. pp. 166, 167, καί μοι ἐπίλαβε τὸ ὕδωρ) ..... τὸ τρίτον ὕδωρ ἐγχεῖται τῇ τιμήσει καὶ τῷ μεγέθει τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ὑμετέρας (i.e. for the prosecutor to speak again on the amount of penalty, and the defendant to reply, and the judges to vote).

The second of these lengths then would be occupied by the defence of the accused and his συνήγοροι, represented by the main part of the Apology, i.e. as far as 35 ἢ. The Xeno- phontean Apology says (22) that speeches were made ὑπό τε αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν συναγορευόντων φίλων αὐτῷ, but the Platonic manifestly would have us think of Socrates defending himself alone.

Then would follow the taking of the votes of the judges, and the announcement of the result, by which the charge is declared proven.

The third length then begins with the second speech of the

7 [Favorinus wrote a work on Socrates in the time of the Emperor Hadrian. }

INTRODUCTION. XV

prosecutor in advocacy of the penalty he had named ; and the remainder of it would be occupied by Socrates’ ἀντιτίμησις, where the Apology again takes up the thread (35 E—38 C). It was open to the prosecutor to ask now for a lighter penalty than that which he had named in the indictment. It was in the defendant’s speech on the ἀντιτίμησις that he brought for- ward his wife and children ad misericordiam.

Then would follow the voting of the judges upon the amount of the penalty.

Here the formal trial would end, and the condemned person would be led away by the officers of the Eleven (cf. Apol. 39 E). This is the moment, however, to which the concluding portion of the Apology (from 38 C) belongs. Whether or not the indulgence of such a concluding address was historically conceded to Socrates, there must have existed sufficient pre- cedent for it to give verisimilitude to the ascription of it to him. The Xenophontean Apology (24) agrees here. ᾿ The raised platform, called βῆμα, served for accuser and accused in turn as well as for their witnesses, whence the phrase éy@ παραχωρῶ, Apol. 34 A, and similarly Andoe. i. 26. p- 4, καὶ σιωπῶ καὶ παραχωρῶ εἴ τις ἀναβαίνειν βούλεται, and fisch. iil. 165. p. 77, παραχωρῶ σοι τοῦ βήματος ἕως ἂν εἴπῃς.

6. PRocEDURE AT THE TRIAL. SPEECHES OF THE ACCUSERS,

We find that speeches were made by all the three. Com- pare for Meletus Apol. 34 A, and for the other two Apol. 36 B, ἀνέβη “Avutos καὶ Λύκων. It is implied however that Meletus spoke first.

Grote (VIII. 647. ο. 68) conjectures that they made a par- tition of their topics, ‘“‘ Meletus undertaking that which re- lated to religion, while Anytus and Lycon would dwell on the political grounds of attack.” More accurately, Meletus’ busi- ness would be to support the indictment proper, while the political charges and insinuations would be dwelt on by Anytus as carrying with him ἠθικὴ πίστις in this topic, and by Lycon as familiar with it in his capacity of ῥήτωρ. The only citation in Plato’s Apology which is referable to one accuser rather than another is the saying ascribed to Anytus (29 C), εἰ δια- φεύξεται Σωκράτης, ἤδη av ὑμῶν οἱ υἱεῖς ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἃ Σωκράτης διδάσκει πάντες παντάπασι διαφθαρήσονται. ἢ οὖν τὴν ἀρχὴν οὐκ

XV1 INTRODUCTION.

ἔδει Σωκράτη δεῦρο εἰσελθεῖν ἢ ἐπειδὴ εἰσῆλθεν οὐχ οἷόν τέ ἐστι τὸ μὴ ἀποκτεῖναι.

The other citations are general; e.g.17 A, χρὴ ὑμᾶς εὐλα- βεῖσθαι μὴ ὑπὸ Σωκράτους ἐξαπατηθῆτε ws δεινοῦ ὄντος λέγειν, and 33 B, καὶ τούτων ἐγὼ εἴτε τις χρηστὸς γίγνεται εἴτε μὴ οὐκ ἂν δικαίως τὴν αἰτίαν ὑπέχοιμι-τ--τν allusion to the alleged dete- rioration by him of Critias and Alcibiades, which was made much of by the prosecution according to Xenophon.

In the Memorabilia of Xenophon likewise the citations are all ascribed in general terms to 6 κατήγορος. Mem. I. ii. g, ᾿Αλλὰ νὴ Ala, 6 κατήγορος ἔφη, ὑπερορᾷν ἐποίει τῶν καθεστώτων νόμων τοὺς συνόντας, λέγων ὡς μωρὸν εἴη τοὺς μὲν τῆς πόλεως ἄρχοντας ἀπὸ κυάμου καθιστάναι... .... τοὺς δὲ τοιούτους λόγους ἐπαίρειν ἔφη τοὺς νέους καταφρονεῖν τῆς καθεστώσης πολιτείας καὶ ποιεῖν βιαίους. Ib. 12, Σωκράτει ὁμιλητὰ γενομένω Κριτίας τε καὶ ᾿Αλκιβιάδης πλεῖστα κακὰ τὴν πόλιν ἐποιησάτην. Ib. 49, Σωκράτης... «τοὺς πατέρας προπηλακίζειν ἐδίδασκε πείθων μὲν τοὺς συνόντας αὐτῷ σοφωτέρους ποιεῖν τῶν πατέρων, φάσκων δὲ κατὰ νόμον ἐξεῖναι παρανοίας ἑλόντα καὶ τὸν πατέρα δῆσαι, τεκμη- ρίῳ τούτῳ χρώμενος ὡς τὸν ἀμαθέστερον ὑπὸ τοῦ σοφωτέρου νόμι- pov εἴη δεδέσθαι. Ib. 51, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους συγγενεῖς ἐποίει ἐν ἀτιμίᾳ εἶναι παρὰ τοῖς αὐτῷ συνοῦσι, λέγων ὡς οὔτε τοὺς κάμνον- τας οὔτε τοὺς δικαζομένους οἱ συγγενεῖς ὠφελοῦσιν ἀλλὰ τοὺς μὲν οἱ ἰατροὶ τοὺς δὲ οἱ συνδικεῖν ἐπιστάμενοι. ἔφη δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν φίλων αὐτὸν λέγειν, ὡς οὐδὲν ὄφελος εὔνους εἷναι εἰ μὴ καὶ ὠφε- λεῖν δυνήσονται: μόνους δὲ φάσκειν αὐτὸν ἀξίους εἶναι τιμῆς τοὺς εἰδότας τὰ δέοντα καὶ ἑρμηνεῦσαι δυναμένους. ἀναπείθοντα οὖν τοὺς νέους αὐτὸν ὡς αὐτὸς εἴη σοφώτατός τε καὶ ἄλλους ἱκανώτατος ποιῆσαι σοφούς, οὕτω διατιθέναι τοὺς αὐτῷ συνόντας ὥστε μηδα- μοῦ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς τοὺς ἄλλους εἶναι πρὸς αὐτόν. Ib. 56, ἔφη & αὐτὸν ὃ κατήγορος καὶ τῶν ἐνδοξοτάτων ποιητῶν ἐκλεγόμενον τὰ πονηρότατα καὶ τούτοις μαρτυρίοις χρώμενον διδάσκειν τοὺς συνόν- τας κακούργους τε εἶναι καὶ τυραννικούς, ᾿Ησιόδου μὲν τὸ

"Epyov δ᾽ οὐδὲν ὄνειδος ἀεργείη δέ τ᾽ ὄνειδος"

τοῦτο δὴ λέγειν αὐτὸν ὡς ὁ ποιητὴς κελεύοι μηδενὸς ἔργον μήτε 2} va / 3, “ Ὁ , 3 Ἂς n Ὁ“ é A an ἀδίκου μήτε αἰσχροῦ ἀπέχεσθαι ἀλλὰ καὶ ταῦτα ποιεῖν ἐπὶ τῷ κέρδει... . «τὸ δὲ “Ομήρουν ἔφη ὁ κατήγορος πολλάκις αὐτὸν λέγειν ὕτι ᾽Οδυσσεὺς

Ὅντινα μὲν βασιλῆα κ. τ. A. “

INTRODUCTION. Xvil

ταῦτα δὴ αὐτὸν ἐξηγεῖσθαι ws ὁ ποιητὴς ἐπαινοίη παίεσθαι τοὺς δημότας καὶ πένητας.

7. PRocEDURE ΔΤ THE Triat. Socrates’ SPEECH. (i.) The defence.

Socrates speaks in presence of a large audience of Athenians over and above his judges (cf. Apol. 24 E, where he speaks of οἵδε of ἀκροαταὶ in pointed distinction from οἱ δικασταί), but he is addressing professedly his judges alone’ (cf. Apol. 17 C, eis ὑμᾶς εἰσιέναι, 18 A, δικαστοῦ μὲν yap αὕτη ἀρετή). It is there- fore these alone who are designated by the ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι at the opening and throughout: Steinhart observes that the appellation ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταὶ is reserved until the final address to be applied only to the judges who vote for acquittal. For mention of such audiences cf. Lysias xl. 35. p. 123, πολλοὶ καὶ τῶν ἀστῶν Kal τῶν ξένων ἥκουσιν εἰσόμενοι τίνα γνώμην περὶ τού- των ἕξετε, Esch. 1. 117. p. 16, ὁρῶν πολλοὺς μὲν τῶν νεωτέρων

* The δικασταὶ were very animated listeners. They answered speakers on being appealed to: cf. Asch. iii. 202. p. 82; so Andoc. i. 33. p. 5, ef μὲν ow ὑμῖν δοκεῖ ἱκανῶς περὶ τούτων dro- λελογῆσθαι δηλώσατέ μοι ἵνα προθυμό- τερον περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀπολογῶμαι. Or they stopped a speaker to put a ques- tion: cf. Andoc. i. 70. p. I0, εἴ ris τι

ὑμῶν ποθεῖ ἀναστὰς ὑπομνησάτω, and fEsch. ii. 7. p. 29. They used the in- terpellation of κατάβα; Aristoph. Vesp. 979. It seems to have been a common practice not only of political but even of judicial assemblies to express their pleasure or displeasure at what was said. The general word for such ex- pressions of feeling was @¢pv8os. That it was a word medi significationis we see from Plato, Legg. 876 B, δικα- ornpia..... ὅταν μηδὲ σιγῶντα ἀλλὰ

θορύβου μεστὰ καθάπερ θέατρα ἐπαι- νοῦντά τε βοῇ καὶ ψέγοντα τῶν ῥητό- pow ἑκάτερον ἐν μέρει κρίνῃ, and AB- schines ii. 51. p. 34, θορυβησάντων én’ αὐτῷ τῶν μὲν ds δεινός τις εἴη καὶ σύν- Opos τῶν δὲ πλειύνων ὡς πονηρὸς καὶ The word

lovepos. occurs in an

~ ; J | ᾿ x ,

v7 j Crt KATH Sx * AXTA τὴ εἴ ἱ Ὁ sd

unfavourable sense in Plato, Protag. 319 C, καταγελῶσι καὶ θορυβοῦσι, An- docides ii. 15. p. 21, Lysias xii. 73. p. 126, ἐθορυβεῖτε ὧς οὐ ποιήσοντες ταῦτα, 74. p- 127, εἶπεν ὅτι οὐ μέλοι αὐτῷ τοῦ ὑμετέρου θορύβου. It was unrestrained in its nature: cf. Asch. i. 83. p. 11, μετὰ yéAwros θόρυβος, 164. p. 23, πολ- A} κραυγὴ παρὰ τῶν δικαστῶν αὐτῷ ἀπαντήσεται, iii. 122. Ὁ. 70, κραυγὴ πολ- λὴ καὶ θόρυβος, Isocr. xv. 272, θορύβου καὶ βοῆς ἅπαν ἐμπλήσητε τὸ δικαστή- ριον. On the other hand it expressed applause unequivocally : cf. Isocr. xii. 264. p. 288, οὐκ ἐθορύβησαν ὃ ποιεῖν εἰώθασιν ἐπὶ τοῖς χαριέντως διειλεγμέ- νοις ἀλλ᾽ ἀνεβόησαν ὡς ὑπερβαλλόντως εἰρηκότοβ. The θόρυβος which Socrates deprecates was of the unfavourable kind. This is implied by his urging that it is not his fault if the truth is unpalatable. Θόρυβος would thus seem to be confined to the δικασταί, not joined in by the ἀκροαταί. The word is applied to Meletus in Apol. 27 B merely in the sense of interrupting by making irrelevant remarks instead of answering.

XVill INTRODUCTION.

προσεστηκότας πρὸς τῷ δικαστηρίῳ πολλοὺς δὲ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων οὐκ ὀλίγους δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἄλλης Ἑλλάδος συνειλεγμένους εἰς τὴν ἀκρόασιν, li. 5. Ὁ. 28, ἢ τῶν ἔξωθεν περιεστηκότων (σχεδὸν δ᾽ οἱ πλεῖστοι τῶν πολιτῶν πάρεισιν) ἢ τῶν δικαστῶν, 111. 56. p. 61, ὕσους οὐδεὶς πώποτε μέμνηται πρὸς ἀγῶνα δημόσιον παραγενο- ὁ μένους.

Production of witnesses.

It has been questioned by C. F. Hermann whether Plato intended the reader of the Apology to imagine any introduc- tion of witnesses to take place. It can hardly be doubted that he did: it is part of the verisimilitude which characterises the whole speech. At 19 D Socrates, wishing to appeal to the judges as witnesses, employs the common formula for doing so -- μάρτυρας δ᾽ αὐτοὺς ὑμῶν τοὺς πολλοὺς παρέχομαι. Cf. ΒΟ}. 1]. 122. p. 44, καὶ τούτων ὑμεῖς of τὴν ψῆφον μέλλοντες φέρειν ἐστέ μοι μάρτυρες. Similarly, when at 21 Α---καὶ τούτων πέρι ὁ ἀδελφὸς ὑμῖν αὐτοῦ οὑτοσὶ μαρτυρήσει, ἐπειδὴ ἐκεῖνος τετελεύτηκε, —he uses the very circumstantial formula commonly in use in such a case, he must intend us to go on to fill up the picture with the actual production of the witness. And at 32 E καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν ἔσονται πολλοὶ μάρτυρες must mean that the pro- duction of the witnesses is to follow, coming so near as it does to the common formula τούτων δ᾽ ὑμῖν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρέξομαι (cf. e. g. Antipho v. 20. p. 131, and Lysias x. 5. p.116). The future consistently used in the two last cases (contrast the present in the first case) would not suit the supposition of | mere reference to persons who are not to be produced. Again, © 24 A, τούτου πᾶν τοὐναντίον εὑρήσετε is Very like an implied promise to produce evidence. Lastly, the employment against Meletus of the common topic (34 A)—‘ Why did he not call witnesses who if what he said was true could not have failed to establish it?’—and the subjoining of the conventional chal-_ lenge εἰ δὲ τότε ἐπελάθετο viv παρασχέσθω' ἐγὼ παραχωρῶ" would be suicidal in a speaker who forbore to call witnesses | himself.

Interrogation of the accuser.

In accordance with the law (Demosth. ὁ. Steph. B. 10. p. 1131, τοῖν ἀντιδίκοιν ἐπάναγκες εἶναι ἀποκρίνασθαι ἀλλήλοις. τὸ ἐρωτώμενον μαρτυρεῖν δὲ μή), and with the common practice (cf. Lysias xill. 30, 32. p. 132, where spaces are left for a

INTRODUCTION. ΣΥ͂Σ

formal ΕΡΩΤΗΣΙΣ, as for ΜΑΡΤΥ͂ΡΕΣ elsewhere, and add Lys. ΣΙ]. 24, 25. p. 122, where a specimen is given at length), Meletus is questioned by Socrates in 24 C and the following paragraphs. In 25 D Socrates himself appeals to the law in support of his right to put such questions—azcxpwvat, ὦ ᾽γαθέ' καὶ yap 6 νόμος κελεύει ἀποκρίνεσθαι.

(ii.) “H ἀντιτίμησις.

In the Xenophontean Apology (23) it is denied that Socrates made any ἀντιτίμησις----οὗὔτε αὐτὸς ὑπετιμήσατο οὔτε τοὺς φίλους εἴασεν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔλεγεν ὅτι τὸ ὑποτιμᾶσθαι ὁμολογοῦντος εἴη ἀδι- κεῖν. The Platonic ἀντιτίμησις, both of the σίτησις ἐν πρυτα- | νείῳ and of the 30 mine, is (waiving the question of its being historical or not) wholly ironical: there could be no serious expectation that such an offer would be accepted. Diogenes Laertius says that this ἀντιτίμησις turned 80 more of the judges against him—xai ot θάνατον αὐτοῦ κατέγνωσαν προσθέντες ἄλλας ψήφους ὀγδοήκοντα.

(iii.) The last words.

The latter part from rots δὲ ἀποψηφισαμένοις (29 E) we are to imagine as spoken ἐν ᾧ οἱ ἄρχοντες ἀσχολίαν ἦγον, and only those who chose would hear it (cf. παραμείνατε τοσοῦτον χρόνον,

ibid.).

Pea’ Ή:

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE APOLOGY.

1. ITS ORATORICAL STRUCTURE.

i. Its employment of commonplaces (τόποι),

i. The “old accusers.” iil, The Delphic response. iy. The general arrangement of the defence properly so called. v. Its dramatic framework.

2. HOW FAR CHARACTERISTIC OF SOCRATES. 3. ITS ADEQUACY AS A DEFENCE.

T. ORATORICAL STRUCTURE.

A close examination of the structure of the Apology resolves the question how far it preserves to us the actual defence made by Socrates. The criticism of Wiggers and Schleierma- cher, that the Apology is the purest extant relic of Socrates, falls to the ground before the internal evidence which the Apology itself supplies. Xenophon (Mem. IV. viii. 5) tells us that Socrates turned his thoughts away from the preparation of any defence—iin μου ἐπιχειροῦντος φροντίσαι τῆς πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀπολογίας ἠναντιώθη τὸ δαιμόνιον. Now the Apology is artistic to the core, whether in respect of the recurrence of received τόποι of Attic pleaders, or of the arrangement and out- ward dress of the arguments (observe especially the artifice of “the old accusers,” of which presently), or of the tripartite dramatic arrangement of the whole. The art and the manner, worthy as they assuredly are of Plato, are also distinctively characteristic of him. The subtle rhetoric of this defence would ill accord with the historical Socrates, even had the defence of Socrates been as certainly as we know it not to have been the offspring of study and premeditation.

INTRODUCTION. XX1

(i.) Employment of commonplaces.

We may trace this in detail through the defence or the first of the three parts of the oration.

The exordium may be completely paralleled, piece by piece, from the Orators. The imputation of conjoint falsity and plausibility, the denial of being δεινὸς λέγειν (cf. Lys. xix. 1, 2. p- 152, Iseus x. 1. p. 79), the asking pardon for λόγους πολὺ τῶν εἰθισμένων λέγεσθαι Tap’ ὑμῖν ἐξηλλαγμένους (as Isocr. xv. 179 expresses it), the plea of unfamiliarity with law-courts (Isocr. xv. 38. p. 318, οὕτως ἀπέχομαι τούτων ὡς οὐδεὶς ἄλλος τῶν πολιτῶν), the begging for an impartial hearing (Lys. xix. 2, 3. p. 152), the deprecation of θόρυβος (cf. 6. g. AEsch. 11. 24. Ῥ. 31, ἐπαινῶ εἰς ὑπερβολὴν ὑμᾶς, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι σιγῇ καὶ δικαίως ἡμῶν ἀκούετε), the disclaiming a style unbefitting an old man (cf. Isocr. xil. 3. p. 233, ἡγοῦμαι yap οὐχ Gpydrrewy),—these topics, of which the exordium of the Apology is wholly made up, occur continually in the Orators.

Next, in meeting the judges’ prejudices, advantage is taken of another common topic—allegation of the existence of δια- Bodal (cf. Lysias xix. 5. p. 152). The way in which the charge of being a σοφὸς is dealt with has many parallels: ef. 6. g. Isocr. xv. passim. No accusation was more indiscri- minately launched than this, and the answers to it assumed consequently, in great measure, the character of common- places.

Socrates twits Meletus with having instituted the whole of the proceedings for his own amusement (24 C); so Lysias xxiv. -18. p. 170; and again with presuming on the inadvertence or obtuseness of the court; cf. Lys. xxvi. 5. p. 175, ταῦτα χρὴ ὑπολαμβάνειν μὴ εὐήθεις αὐτῷ εἶναι δοκῆτε.

Socrates alleges (32 A), though i in a refined way, the meri- torious acts of his past life ;—a common τόπος. Cf. Lys. xvi. 19 S11. ppt 40, TOL.

Compare again ἐγὼ δὲ διδάσκαλος μὲν οὐδενὸς πώποτ᾽ ἐγενόμην (33 A) with Isocr. xv. 85, ἐγὼ δὲ τῶν μὲν ἰδιωτῶν οὐδένα πώποτε φανήσομαι παρακαλέσας ἐπ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν τὴν δὲ πόλιν ὅλην πειρῶμαι πείθειν τοιούτοις πράγμασιν ἐπιχειρεῖν ἐξ ὧν αὐτοί τε εὐδαιμονή- govot κιτ.λ,

The answer to the charge about perverting the young is

XX11 INTRODUCTION.

paralleled by Isocr. xv. 240, τοὺς πατέρας ἂν ἑωρᾶτε τῶν συνόν- τῶν ἡμῖν καὶ τοὺς οἰκείους ἀγανακτοῦντας καὶ γραφομένους.

The particular form of challenge is paralleled by Andoc. 1. 35. Ὁ. 5) τούτων τοίνυν τῶν ἀνδρῶν οἱ μὲν ἥκουσι καὶ εἰσὶν ἔνθαδε τῶν δὲ ἀποθανόντων εἰσὶ πολλοὶ προσήκοντες" ὧν ὅστις βούλεται ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ λόγῳ ἀναβάς με ἐλεγξάτω.

The argument (34 A) καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς ἐγὼ ἔχω ὑμῖν εἰπεῖν ὧν τινα ἐχρῆν μάλιστα μὲν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ παρασχέσθαι Μέλη- τὸν μάρτυρα is a stock argument against an adversary who does not produce witnesses. Cf. Arist. Rhet. I. xv. 17. The avowal of disdaining to solicit compassion is to be compared with Isocr. xv. 321. p. 345, and Lys. xvill. 24, XX. 35. pp- 151, 161. :

The leaving the event to God (19 A), τοῦτο μὲν ἴτω ὅπῃ τῷ θεῷ φίλον, and (35 D), ὑμῖν ἐπιτρέπω καὶ τῷ θεῷ κρίνειν περὶ ἐμοῦ is not characteristic of Socrates, for it occurs in the typical oration of Antipho (1. 20. p. 113, ἡ 8 airéa...... ἕξει [τὰ ἐπίχειρα], ἐὰν ὑμεῖς τε καὶ οἱ θεοὶ θέλωσιν, and ibid. 25, 31. p. 114), though indeed sparingly in the Orators generally. The Gods are invoked at the outset of Demosthenes’ speech on the Crown

(p. 225).

(11.) “The old accusers.”

Aristotle in his Rhetoric {ΠῚ ν τὴ remarks, περὶ δὲ δια- βολῆς ἕν μὲν τὸ ἐξ ὧν ἄν τις ὑπόληψιν δυσχερῆ ἀπολύσαιτο" οὐθὲν γὰρ διαφέρει, εἴτε εἰπόντος τινὸς, εἴτε μή.

An artifice in the Apology which demands separate notice is | the way in which the prejudices of the Judges a are dealt with.

᾿ The attack on them is so carefully me masked that ae be aA das Se ‘The strength of the prejudice |

and see aac of his defence healed be ΓΕ πὶ specially against it. He could not hope to combat the charges © of his prosecutors on their own merits in presence of a general - aversion which was in harmony with these charges. Worst — of all, this aversion was too well reflected by the Court itself. ; It was matter of exigency, therefore, to deal with it at once, — and so we find it sueceeding the exordium almost hurriedly. But to this was joined the necessity of avoiding both the direct ἷ

imputation of it to the judges, which would have been to offend :

INTRODUCTION. XXlil

them further, and the designation of it at once as a vox populi, which would have been to acknowledge its weight.

It is therefore introduced to the judges under a disguise. Their attention is drawn to it not as the attitude of their own minds, not as matter of common fame, but as emanating from certain individuals who with time and perseverance have done their work. The calumny, now so wide-spread and influential, is all traceable to them. It is not possible to single them out (“except perhaps a certain play-writer ”); in default of which, —the only fair method,—they are individualised in imagination. They are marked off by a special designation,—* the original accusers,”—and their calumny is made more tangible by throwing it into the form of a technical indictment supposed to be preferred by them and read before the Court.

Οἱ πρῶτοι κατήγοροι are but a figure for 4 τῶν πολλῶν δια- βολή, and what makes the neutralising of this διαβολὴ at once 80 necessary and so delicate a matter is that it is that ἣν ὑμεῖς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἔσχετε. But these two identifications emerge in one or two places only. Twice only is the reference to the judges pointedly disclosed,—‘I hope, if possible, to convert you from a prejudice which you” (the repeated pronoun is emphatic) “have so long harboured” (19 A, 24 A). Imme- diately, however, after these disclosures, the argument re- sumes its disguise. In like manner once only, considerably later (28 A), when he notices the inferior importance of the charges of Meletus, which he has just answered, to the older charges, he acknowledges these as vox populi—i τῶν πολλῶν διαβολή τε καὶ φθόνος. _ The seriousness of tone which marks the answer to “the old accusers,” the ἠθικὴ πίστις which is thrown into it, and the absence of irony, contrast sharply with the banter with which the charges of the real indictment are met immediately after- wards. This earnestness and almost anxiety of tone, the prominent position of this portion of the Apology, the irrele- vance of its ostensible reference, the very technicality with which it is drawn up, forbid a more literal acceptation of its drift, and constrain us to find in it a signal exercise of rhe- torical art.

a.) The Delphic response. Again, as the objective prominence given to “the old

XXIV INTRODUCTION.

accusers’ is a rhetorical cloak for an attack on the prejudices of the judges, so the prominence given to the Delphic response (20 E sqq.) is a device of a semi-rhetorical character under cover of which Socrates is enabled to avoid an avowal of the real purpose which had animated him in his tour of exami- nation,—which was to effect an intellectual revolution by sub- stituting a sounder knowledge for the prevalent pretensions to knowledge, of the hollowness of which he entertained the deepest conviction, Such an explanation would, to say the least, not have been appreciated. What is to be noticed is, that he does not plead the oracle, (the authenticity of which there is no ground for doubting), as an after excuse for his necessarily unpopular mission,—which would have been natu- ral enough. But he goes beyond this, and represents the oracle as the cause of his engaging in that mission; whereas (as Zeller observes) he must have already been committed to this and already been a marked person, before any such ques- tion as that put to the Pythia by Cherephon could have had any point or elicited any such remarkable answer. The repre- sentation of the oracle as giving him the first suggestion of his crusade against fictitious knowledge, as having through- out been the lodestar to which he shaped his course, and as having sustained him in the thankless labour of years, is unhistorical ; but Socrates employs it in the exposition of his antecedents in a semi-rhetorical spirit, to bring the audience a certain distance on their way without the offence which a direct avowal of his purpose would have aroused in their minds.

(iv.) The general arrangement of the defence properly so called.

Every care has been taken to marshal the topics of the defence to the best advantage. The answer to the indictment itself is placed in the middle of the speech, where least atten- tion naturally falls upon it. The arrangement is the same as that of Demosthenes’ speech on the Crown, but the reasons are different in the two cases. In both the technical argu- ment is introduced, where it will least challenge attention ; but there because it is the weak point of Demosthenes’ case, here because, though easily established, it is comparatively immaterial to the issue. The real effort of the defence needed

INTRODUCTION. XXV

to be exerted first in combating the general prejudices which affected Socrates as a reputed Philosopher and Sophist, and secondly in offering a somewhat more particular personal jus- tification of Socrates. Accordingly the portions of the defence which are concerned with these two points, as they are the fullest and most earnest, are also the most conspicuous by position. The first confronts us at the outset, and the other engages us after Meletus has been dealt with.

(v.) Dramatic framework.

The customary procedure of an ἀγὼν τιμητὸς has prompted Plato to crown the Apology of Socrates with a further artistic completeness. The oration becomes a drama. An action in three stages passes before us; the tone changes with the action ; there is even some change in the dramatis persone. We take our stand among the listeners who crowd the court. The first Act comprises the defence, with the dialogue between Socrates and Meletus, the voting of the judges, and the decla- ration of their verdict. The second comprises the τίμησις of the prosecutor, Socrates’ ironical ἀντιτίμησις, the intervention of Plato and other friends of Socrates, the first suspense, and then the final verdict. In the third Act the judges appear before us distinguished into two separate bodies, addressed separately by Socrates, the one his friends, his true judges, the other divested of the name and doomed to the conse- quences of their unrighteous deed. The tone of apologetic | argument in the first Act is succeeded by dignified irony in the sec second, and this again in the third by a strain of lofty

pr ophecy.

2. How Far 15 THE APOLOGY CHARACTERISTIC OF SOCRATES ?

Zeller (II. 134. note) insists that there is an absence in the Apology of that free artistic handling which characterises the Dialogues, and claims this as an evidence that Plato has bound himself to follow the line actually taken by Socrates. But the strength of this position is diminished by several con- siderations. In the first place we have seen how great an amount of art has found its way into the structure of the Apology ; we have seen too how that same art has not been

XXV1 INTRODUCTION.

restricted to the arrangement and outward dress of the speech, but so penetrates its very substance, that even here it is im- possible to ignore or definitively to limit the rhetorical element, ΤΌ is only with this considerable abatement that Zeller’s asser- tion of the absence of free artistic handling can be admitted. But, in the second place, so far as the fact remains,—and to a certain extent it does,—it is referable to more obvious causes than that of fidelity to the speech of Socrates. The con- ditions which Plato had to fulfil were those of a speech in a court of justice, pronounced on a definite historical occasion ; he had to consult the exigencies of forensic verisimilitude, and to embody a reply to the definite charges of a well-known indictment. And although with him (as with Xenophon in the Memorabilia, though in a different manner,) the main object certainly was the ultimate one of presenting to the world a serious and adequate justification of his adored teacher, yet he was none the less under the necessity of adopting for his framework the circumstances of the actual trial. In the third place,—-in presence of little or no independent testimony as to what Socrates actually said,—we have the fact before us that the Platonic Apology was not alone in the field as a professed record of the great teacher’s defence. The Xenophontean Apology, devoid as it is of authority, being perhaps a compi- lation from Xenophon’s Memorabilia I. i, 11, IV. viii (see Stein- hart’s Anmerkungen I. 2 in Platon’s Sammtliche Werke uber- setzt von Hieronymus Miiller, Leipzig 1851), is a case in point. Had the Platonic Apology been a record of confessed history, is it possible that the Xenophontean Apology should have been so framed as to differ from it not only as to what was said but as to what was done,——as for instance in the statement (22) that Socrates’ friends spoke at the trial as συνήγοροι, and again (23) that Socrates refused ὑποτιμᾶσθαι altogether, both which statements conflict with the Platonic representation? But there were yet other Apologies extant besides these. Aristotle in the Rhetoric (II. xxiii. 13) quotes from a Socratic Apology of Theodectes, as containing the fol- lowing passage, εἰς ποῖον ἱερὸν ἠσέβηκε; τίνας θεῶν οὐ τετίμηκεν ods ἡ πόλις νομίζει ; and besides in the same chapter he quotes the following passages without mention of their authors but obviously from similar compositions; μέλλετε δὲ κρίνειν οὐ

INTRODUCTION. XXVil

περὶ Σωκράτους ἀλλὰ περὶ ἐπιτηδεύματος, εἰ χρὴ φιλοσοφεῖν (18), and τὸ δαιμόνιον οὐδέν ἐστιν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ θεὸς ἢ θεοῦ ἔργον" καίτοι ὅστις οἴεται θεοῦ ἔργον εἶναι τοῦτον ἀνάγκη οἴεσθαι καὶ θεοὺς εἶναι (8). Once more, it is probable enough, that the story? of Lysias having offered Socrates for use on his trial a defence of his own composing grew out of his having written an elaborate posthumous Socratic Apology.

It is then too much of an assumption, though countenanced by Zeller and Mr. Grote as well as by many older writers on the subject, that we can rely on the Platonic Apology as a substantial reproduction of the speech of Socrates. Inde- pendently of Plato’s representation we know not what So- crates said, or whether he said much or little, or how far he concerned himself with a direct reply to the charges laid against him; nor, when we have studied that representa- tion, do we know these things any the better. Even if the studied speech of Plato embodied authentic reminiscences of the unpremeditated utterances of his master, to disen- gage the one from the other is more than we can assume to do.

Notwithstanding, we can seek in the Apology a portrait of Socrates before his judges and not be disappointed. Plato has not laid before us a literal narrative of the proceedings and bidden us thence form the conception for ourselves : rather he has intended us to form it through the medium of his art. The structure is his, the language is his, much of the sub- stance may be his; notwithstanding, quite independently of the literal truth of the means, he guarantees to us a true con- ception of the scene and of the man. We see that “ liberam contumaciam a magnitudine animi ductam non a superbia” (Cie. Tuse. I. 29), and feel that it must be true to Socrates, although with Cicero himself we have derived the conception from Plato’s ideal and not from history. We hear Meletus subjected to a questioning which, though it may not have been the literal ἐρώτησις of the trial, exhibits to us the great ques- tioner in his own element. We discover repeated instances of the irony, which, uniting self-appreciation with a true and unflattering estimate of others, declines to urge considerations

9 Diog. Laert. II. 40, Cic. de Orat. 11, Valer. Max. VI. iv. 2, Stob. Flor. I. 54, Quintil. Inst. II. xv. 30, XI.i. VII. 56.

XXV1l INTRODUCTION.

which iie beyond the intellectual or moral ken of the judges. Here we have that singularity of ways and thoughts which was half his offence obtruding itself to the very last in con- tempt of consequences. Here we have that characteristic assertion of private judgment against authority which declares itself in the words ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ 7) ὑμῖν (29 Ὁ). Here we have also his disapproval of the existing democracy of Athens which he rather parades than disguises. And lastly, the deep religiousness which overshadowed all his character breathes forth in the account he renders of his past life, in his antici- pations of the future, and in his whole present demeanour.

Thus while the problem of the relation of the Apology to what Socrates actually said must remain unsolved, there is no doubt that it bodies forth a lifelike representation ; a repre- sentation of Socrates as Plato wished us to conceive of him, yet at the same time as true to nature as the art of Plato could render it.

3. THE ADEQUACY OF THE APOLOGY AS A DEFENCE.

That the Apology aims at much more than a refutation of the indictment of Meletus is already sufficiently evident. We have seen that the avowed answer to Meletus is that part of the speech which by its position least challenges attention, and which is least characterised by an air of serious concern. The statement is besides repeatedly made, that the real strength of the prosecution lies outside of the indictment, and requires a commensurately wider effort to meet it.

The worth, then, of the Apology as a defence must be measured, in the first instance, if we will, by its sufficiency as an answer to Meletus, but chiefly and ultimately by its suffi- ciency as a justification of Socrates’ whole manner of life.

It will not much affect our estimate, whether we regard the Apology as no more than a defence adapted to the historical occasion of the trial and to judicial ears, or as a posthumous justification of the great master in the eyes of the Hellenic world. Though the more comprehensive aim is doubtless the real one, yet public opinion had undergone” so little change

1 As a matter of fact, the Athe- death. The story of their passionate nians never repented of Socrates’ remorse being evoked by the repre-

INTRODUCTION. XXxl

in favour of Socrates since his death, that the justification which was most calculated to satisfy it was identically that which would have been most to the purpose at the trial.

First, then, what sort of an answer is offered to the indict- ment of Meletus ὃ

That indictment divides itself into two allegations,under the heads respectively (as we should say) of religion and of morality. The mischief to morality is the perversion of the youth; the offence against religion is the setting forth of strange gods in the place of those of the state.

Now though these are put into the form of specific charges against Socrates, they are so (all but that of the καινὰ da- μόνια) In appearance alone ; they are really selected from the string of imputations ἐπ δεν brought against Philosophers and Sophists. The Philosophers, i. e. ἘΠ ἐπε Were popu- larly associated with atheism, the Sophists with ῬεΥγοτοιοη οἵ _ the youth. The allegations of “the old accusers,” to which the Apology first αὐ τι τς itself, are drawn from the same repertory, and arraign Socrates in like manner under the two heads of religion and morality as Philosopher and Sophist. It is true that the particular complaints there expressed are not the same; but it is not that the charges put forward here are less general than those. They are only omitted there because they were to come under consideration here. In the Clouds both these and those are put forward against Socrates, one after the other. And in the Apology itself (23 C—D) “the old accusers” are represented as eventually appending both “ perversion of the youth” and “atheism ” to their other charges.

The indictment therefore of Meletus contained no charge, save that of δαιμόνια καινά, which would not be met (so far as might be) by the explanation Socrates had rendered of the deeper and wider and older prejudices, personified in “ the old accusers,” or by the justification he might be able to offer of the general method of his life.

sentation of Euripides’ Palamedes (41 whereas we find Xenophon, five years B. n.) is fabulous. Euripides pre- after Socrates’ death, dealing with the deceased Socrates by 7 years. Xeno- allegations against Socrates as if still phon and Plato would have made the ἴῃ full possession of the popular mind. most of any such change of feeling: See Zeller, IT. p. 138. note.

XXV11L INTRODUCTION.

Here therefore Socrates contents himself with a dialectical victory over Meletus; instead of entering into the merits of the question with him, he disposes of him summarily by adding him to the list of pretenders. Ifthe charge of δαιμόνια καινὰ is subjected to the same treatment,—a treatment characterised by Dotlinger as little better than sophistical,—it is because that charge is itself a sophistical one. It wrests τὸ δαιμόνιον into δαιμόνια, the divine agency of which Socrates consistently spoke into divine beings. Socrates therefore is only returning Meletus’ sophism upon himself, when he treats the δαιμόνια of

the indictment as if it had been δαιμόνια πράγματα. His whole .

dealing with the question of heterodoxy has an observable air

of carelessness. Though he explicitly disavows atheism, and —

calls the sun and moon gods, yet he nowhere commits himself to a distinct recognition of the state gods, any more than he repudiates belief in any others. But it must be remembered that in those days few could have cast a stone at Socrates for such reticence : and that ifa man’s practice was religious, there was little enquiry into his opinions ; and that Socrates’ cha- racter as a religious man, his strictness and frequency in reli- gious observances, was beyond doubt and made proof super- fluous,—though the Xenophontean Apology enters into it at length. From the personal imputation of irreligion, in short, Socrates had little to fear, and he could afford to deal with it lightly; whereas to that of perverting the youth he addresses himself twice elsewhere, in addition to the dialectical refutation of it here.

Thus what was really formidable in the indictment of Mele- tus resolved itself into the more general imputations which connected Socrates with those two suspected classes of men, the Philosophers and the Sophists ; and, keeping in view the fact that the Apology addresses itself elsewhere in full to those imputations, any fuller treatment of them under the head of the indictment can be spared.

The remainder of the defence is taken up with two lines of argument : the first, at the outset of the speech, deals with the general prejudices, which existed against Socrates as Philo- sopher (Physicist) and Sophist ; the other, which follows the special reply to the indictment, offers a particular justification for Socrates’ manner of life as a citizen.

INTRODUCTION. XXX

In the earlier portion Socrates does what he can, first to separate himself from those two suspected classes, and then to explain how the prejudice arose in the public mind, and how it became strengthened by personal animosity.

It is hardly necessary to show that the imputations of “ the old accusers ” contain nothing of an individual character, but are (as Socrates alleges) mistakenly transferred from the popu- lar notion of the Philosophers and the Sophists. The title σοφὸς ἀνὴρ, Which Socrates takes such pains to disclaim, is the appellation originally bestowed on the Ionic philosophers, as men whose speculations had fathomed the universe, and from this association was matured that distinction between it and φρόνιμος which we find in Aristotle (Ethic. Nic. VI. vii. 5, Θαλῆν καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους σοφοὺς μὲν φρονίμους δ᾽ οὔ φασιν εἶναι). It was in connecting Socrates with a supposed class οἵ specu- lative men that the force and odiousness of the designation. σοφὸς ἀνὴρ consisted. The imputation contained in the words τὰ μετέωρα φροντίζων or ζητῶν, 1. 6. τὰ οὐράνια, is equally gene- ral. The Scholiast on Aristoph. Nub. 96 says, κοινὸν τῶν φιλοσόφων ἁπάντων ἔγκλημα. In 431 B.c. Diopeithes, a fanatical Rhetor, carried the law εἰσαγγέλλεσθαι τοὺς τὰ θεῖα μὴ νομί- Covras ἢ λόγους περὶ τῶν μεταρσίων διδάσκοντας (Plutarch. Vit. Pericl. 169 1), Aristoph. Vesp. 380). Eupolis (Fragm. Com. ed. Meineke, II. p. 490) says of Protagoras, ἀλαζονεύεται μὲν, ἅλι- THplos, περὶ τῶν μετεώρων. Once more, the reference in τὸν ἥττω λόγον κρείττω ποιῶν Kal ἄλλους ταὐτὰ ταῦτα διδάσκων 15 palpably general. The earlier Sophists, as teachers of plead- ing, first incurred and perhaps courted the imputation of τὸν ἥττω κιτιλ., and from them the imputation was derived to others. Isocrates (xv. 15. p. 313) speaks of the charge being made against himself, ὡς ἐγὼ τοὺς ἥττους λόγους κρείττους δύνα- μαι ποιεῖν, and again (30. p. 316), ὡς διαφθείρω τοὺς νεωτέρους λέγειν διδάσκων καὶ παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον ἐν τοῖς ἀγῶσι πλεονεκτεῖν. Odium also attached to the profession™ of an instructor in speaking. Hence schines’ designation (i. 94. p. 13) of De- mosthenes as λογογράφος, and (117. p. 16) ὁ τὰς τῶν λόγων τέχνας κατεπαγγελλόμενος τοὺς νέους διδάσκειν, crowned by the

1 Λόγων τέχνην μὴ διδάσκειν (Xen. freedom of speech. How came the

Mem. I. ii, 31) was a law of the suspicion of λύγων τέχνη to survive Thirty Tyrants against liberty and the Tyranny}

XXX INTRODUCTION.

designation σοφιστής (125. p. 17): ef. ii, 165, iii. 173. pp. 50, 78. Hence, weightier for its dispassionateness, a remark of Thucydides (VIII. 68) about Antiphon ὑπόπτως τῷ πλήθει διὰ δόξαν δεινότητος διακείμενος, τοὺς μέντοι ἀγωνιζομένους καὶ ἐν δικαστηρίῳ καὶ ἐν δήμῳ πλεῖστα εἷς ἀνὴρ, ὅσοις ξυμβουλεύσαιτό τι, δυνάμενος ὠφελεῖν. This odium, in which the profession was held, was akin to fear; Isocrates (xv. 230) explains it thus, ἡ περὶ τοὺς λόγους δεινότης ποιεῖ τοῖς ἀλλοτρίοις ἐπι- βουλεύειν.

Thus the charges recited present us with nothing indi- vidually characteristic of Socrates, but only (as he himself calls them 23 D) ra κατὰ πάντων τῶν φιλοσοφούντων πρόχειρα. These were the materials for the popular representation of Socrates, which accordingly (like the caricature in the Clouds) is a compound of the conventional lineaments of the Philosopher (Physicist), and of the Sophist. The μετέωρα φροντίζων is due to the Philosopher, and the τὸν ἥττω λόγον κιτιλ. to the Sophist, while the title σοφὸς ἀνὴρ stands! alike for the one and the other.

To relieve himself from the yoke of these imputations Socrates fairly draws attention to the want of connection be- tween himself and these two suspected classes. Of those speculative studies he! denies any knowledge, and as to his having ever discoursed on them to others he courts further the testimony of his judges, of whom many had frequented his society.

The line of argument which he takes in distinguishing him- self from the Sophists seems less cogent than it might have

with the fact, that he used to call attention to the evidence of design in nature as a help to piety (Xen. Mem. VI. iii. 3 sqq.), that he is in fact

15 Plat. Apol, 20 A, Evenus is ἀνὴρ Πάριος σοφός, Xen. Mem. II. i. 21, Πρόδικος 6 σοφός is mentioned; as on the other hand σοφιστὴς is borrowed

to express Philosopher.

18. There is no want of harmony between Socrates’ disclaimer here and what he tells us in the Pheedo of his having taken up physical speculation in early life. He had given it up forthwith, on finding no satisfaction in it; and he could truly say (Apol. 19 C), ἐμοὶ τούτων οὐδὲν μέτεστι. Nor again is his disclaimer at variance

(as Zeller remarks, II. p. 117) the pa-. rent of the teleological idea which has given unity and ideality to the study This

half-religious view of his had nothing

of nature ever since his days.

in common with those indemonstrable hypotheses, which the Physical Phi- losophers tried in turn to fit to the

universe.

INTRODUCTION. XXxiil

been. He dwells on the most external difference alone. He points to the Sophists giving courses of lectures on various subjects, professing to turn out finished politicians, pleaders, debaters, and the like, pursuing this as a regular trade, and flourishing by it; he flatly disclaims any such characteristics (for even these, it seems, had been attributed to him, εἴ twos ἀκηκόατε κιτιλ. 19 D), and so passes on. Here certainly was a sufficiently palpable dissimilitude, demanding no acuteness to appreciate it; but why was it not worth while to clench the argument by going more thoroughly into the contrast? We miss the manifold and deep divergence which might have been traced between a system which relied on the attainment of objective certainty, and one which, while it questioned received opinions, had no interest in either substantiating these, or establishing truer ones in their place; between a system which opened out a method of truth-seeking investigation, and one which, had it prevailed, would have made philosophy thence- forth an impossibility (Zeller, II. p. 130); between a system which proposed to place all human action on an intelligible principle, and one which professed to furnish the intellect alike for any use, regardless of principles. All this and more could have been pleaded in evidence of the wide gulf which sepa- rated Socrates from the Sophists; we can only suppose that the Court, or the people of Athens (to which-ever we suppose for the moment the justification to be directed), were incapable of appreciating the fundamental unlikeness, and that the dropping of the subject here is at once true to the Socratic irony, and at the same time suggests that the real position of Socrates was never understood by the mass of his country- men or by their compendious representative the Heliastic Court.

The sequel of this disclaimer of the popular identification is

a setting forth of the facts which were the occasion of it. A man who himself exercised no practical profession, was ever showing himself dissatisfied with received empirical rules and

maxims, and ever requiring from others a reason fortenets which they had never questioned, while in doing this he evinced matchless dialectical powers and forced a confession of ignorance from men known to be perfectly self-satisfied,—such aman answered sufficiently well the description of Philosopher D

XXXIV INTRODUCTION.

and Sophist when once Aristophanes! had given the hint. This was the naked explanation of the popular identifica- tion, and this it is in fact which lies couched under Socrates’ parables of the wisdom which consisted in knowing his own ignorance, the Delphic Response, and the tour of questioning (Apol. 20 D—E, 23 A—B). And this account, which has all the appearance of truth, must stand good, in our estimate of the defence, as a plea which ought to have commanded atten- tion. The speaker himself indeed despairs of its obtaining entrance into minds preoccupied ; it was likely, he says (20 D), to sound to them like a jest. But the cause for despair lay not in the insufficiency of the plea, but in the invincibility of the prejudice to be combated. Nor has the whole strength of that prejudice yet been indicated. Had Socrates been really a Philosopher or a Sophist, there would have been nothing to be added ; the supposed mischiefs of his teaching would have been alone in the scale. But so far as popularity was con- cerned, the difference between Socrates and Philosophers or Sophists told against him and not in his favour. The moral suspicion harboured against what he was supposed to be was aggravated by personal animosity against what he was. The ever busy talker, the merciless questioner, who avowed the exposure of self-deceived pretenders to be the mission of his life, and pursued this mission uncompromisingly for a quarter of a century and more in such a narrow society as was com- prised within a Hellenic state, without ever even stirring from the midst of them, encountered enmities which never lighted on the head of Philosopher or Sophist ; a specimen of which is the individual grudge which Anytus is said to have borne Socrates.

It is then a mistaken moral prejudice, intensified and quick- ened by the actual smart of personal affronts,—the former refuted to no purpose, the latter absolutely intractable,—which here threatens to overbear the defence. It is this aggravated prejudice, the working of which is foreshadowed in those discerning words (28 A), καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ὃ ἐμὲ αἱρήσει, ἐάνπερ

4 Zeller remarks that the fact of | popular conception. May we ποῦ ra- the Aristophanic caricature having — ther suppose that he led it, and regard stuck to Socrates to the end of his the Apology here as elsewhere as true life shows that Aristophanes hit the to facts?

INTRODUCTION.

XXXV

αἱρῇ, ob Μέλητος οὐδὲ “Arutos, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τῶν πολλῶν διαβολή τε καὶ φθόνος.

On Soeratic principles, a defence had discharged its office when it had set before the Court not grounds of feeling but rational grounds for its acceptance. Socrates has hitherto disproved (as fully as the range of the popular mind admitted) the mistaken 15 identification of him with Philosophers and Sophists. He has given the explanation of the mistake, and he has pointed out how that very explanation accounts for the confirming of the mistake irrationally through personal animosity. He has exhausted his armoury; against this animosity itself he has no weapons; if his judges or the public will allow it to affect their verdict, it cannot be helped—rafr’ ἔστιν ὑμῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τἀληθῆ, ...... καί τοι οἷδα σχεδὸν ὅτι τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἀπεχθάνομαι (24 A).

Beyond the reply to Meletus’ indictment we find a fresh branch of the defence before us. Socrates is no longer overtly answering charges, old or recent, but rather directly justifying the usefulness of his life. He takes a view of himself, as it were from further off, and reviews his whole attitude as a citizen.

The question arises, how this part of the speech serves any direct purpose of the defence.

Of the strong points on the side of the prosecution, one has remained hitherto almost untouched : it is not one which appears in the indictment proper, or in that of “ the old accusers ;” nor again has it that stamp of inveteracy which would have marked it had it been part of the Aristophanic caricature. But it was the moving cause of the present in- dictment being preferred at all.

1 The mob who in 1791 sacked Dr. Priestley’s house at Birmingham

** Philosophers !’ ‘Church and King for

‘ever!’ And some persons, to escape

in consequence of his espousal of the principles of the French Revolution, of which the news had just reached England, proceeded to threaten all with whom Priestley had been asso- ciated not in politics or religion but merely by ἃ common devotion to chemistry and invention. “mon cry among the mob was, ‘ No

“A com-

"

“their fury, even painted ‘No Phi- “losophers’ on the walls of their ... Boulton and Watt were “not without apprehensions that an “attack would be made on them, as “the head and front of the ‘ Philo- ‘“‘sophers’ of Birmingham.”’—Smiles’ Life of Boulton, ch. 20.

* houses!

XXXV1 INTRODUCTION.

It is tolerably clear from the accounts of the speeches for the prosecution that political charges entered freely into them. See Xen. Mem. I. ii. 9, 12, &e. To Socrates was there ascribed the evil done to their country by Critias the oligarch and Alcibiades the demagogue; the strange doctrine that the poorer private citizens were a fair mark for ill usage; the unfriendly criticism on election to offices by lot,—which was probably made use of as a special ground in support of the accusation of perverting the youth, since the ventilation of such doctrines tended to make them disloyal or insubordinate. A line of Hesiod was alleged to have been wrested by him to a like purpose, as countenancing rapacity.

There were indeed independent and domestic proofs alleged for perversion of the youth, but those which have been noticed were political. All these topics had been employed by the prosecution, and it is scarcely likely that in addition to them Socrates’ abstinence from public affairs, his relations to Char- mides, another of the Thirty, and to Xenophon, the friend of Sparta, and under sentence of banishment at the time, and perhaps his depreciating mention of the tradesmen in the Ecclesia (Xen. Mem. III. vii. 6), were not also brought up against him. Such charges and insinuations as these were indeed foreign to the indictment, but they were calculated to have considerable weight with the Court.

For one characteristic of the moment was the keen feeling with which since the restoration of the democracy the Athe- nians cherished their particular conception of political loyalty. That conception was somewhat narrow and exacting. The primary requisite was not only ‘ assent and consent,’ but enthusiasm towards the letter of the constitution ; and second only to this, as the natural reaction from the depression which the usurpation had caused, was a devotion to the material interests of the state, and the display of energy in amassing wealth.

The prosecutors, or at least the leading spirit among them, were no doubt actuated in their institution of the proceedings by the same political sensitiveness which they sought to in- spire in the judges and betrayed in their speeches. Anytus was a man of strong political convictions; he had lost a for- tune through his fidelity to the cause of freedom. And if he

INTRODUCTION. XXXVI

was partly animated by a personal grudge against Socrates, he was none the less the person to take up a political grievance against him.

There must have come to the surface some fresh element for the old prejudice so to pronounce itself. As Sophist or Philosopher, Socrates’ cup had long been full ; nor was there any reason in that point of view for its overflowing now if it had not before. Aristophanes’® had ceased to attack him. As a mark for personal enmity’ he had been more prominent and defenceless either in connection with the Herme trials or after the battle of Arginuse. It would be a difficult problem, why the extreme step was taken now and not till now, did we not take into account the 15 political sensitiveness which, as the offspring of the restored democracy, formed a new element in public opinion as it affected Socrates.

We shall not be unprepared, then, to find that the remain- ‘ing part of the defence is in some sense political,—as much so, as that of a non-political man could be. It is the defence ofa reformer, though not of a political reformer. To ignore the political charge altogether in the defence would have been either a confession of weakness or a dangerous oversight, how- ever fully the indictment might have been disposed of. But, moreover, political insinuations had been pressed into the service of the indictment itself in connection with the charge of perverting the youth.

It is obvious, that Socrates was precluded from meeting these charges in the way which would best have pleased his judges. He could have said that he had never transgressed the laws ; he could say (as in fact he does say) that he loved his countrymen intensely; but for the existing constitution he could profess no enthusiasm. Yet here we must observe, that his coldness did not arise from frank political dislike of demo- cracy, nor is his dissatisfaction to be measured by the one or two well-known criticisms which he passed upon it. He cared

16 [So Stallb. Prolegg. ad Plat. pation of the Thirty lasted from June Sympos. p. 28. Zeller (II. p. 150) 404 8.6. to February 403. The Ar- asserts the contrary and appeals to chonship of Euclides began in 403 Aristoph. Ran. 1491 sqq.] and ended in 402. In April 399 Any-

" Cf. Zeller, IT. p. 142. tus brought Socrates to trial.

1 Cf, Zeller, Π, p. 152. The usur-

e

XXXVI INTRODUCTION,

for politics only as involving the interests of the individual (Xen. Mem. III. iv. 12), and it is to his view of individual well- being that we must look, if we would understand the degree or the significance of his reserved attitude towards the consti- - tution. Its faults connected themselves in his mind with other faults at once further from the surface and far graver. To him the alarming symptoms were such as these,—that this systein extolled as so perfect could coexist with an utter abey- ance of principles ; could be carried on by men, who, in know- ledge of it, were mere empirical adventurers ; that it neither undertook nor directed education; that much might be going wrong within it, without its giving any check or warning ; that morality might share the general wreck and not be: missed ;—and that, all this while, the Athenian mind should throw itself without misgiving into such a system, and find all its wants satisfied, and its self-complacency encouraged ; that, while intolerance was stimulated, the belief in any unwritten law of right beyond and above the positive enactments of the state had all but died out, and a belief in divine sanctions was scarcely felt (Apol. 35 D).

It was for these deeper reasons that Socrates was totally out of harmony with the political optimism of his countrymen. Here was the cause of the gravest manifestation of his irony. The discord was the more complete, because it turned upon considerations of the well-being of individuals rather than upon political predilections and fancies. And out of those considerations there rose up before his mind a clear vision of a great need, and of the remedy which would remove it, and of an obligation upon himself to be the applier of that remedy.

The discord had jarred upon the sensitive ear of restored democracy, and filled it with a feeling of offence which pre- sently found interpreters in Anytus and others. The whole deep disharmony did not strike them; but, conscious of its presence, they detected and treasured up superficial results of it, such as the detached adverse criticisms upon the government, and perhaps followed with a like jealousy the abstinence from public life; and they added to these other irrational aggrava- tions, such as the connection with Critias and Alcibiades, and the well-known cry of perversion of the youth. It was the

INTRODUCTION. XEXIK

same offended sense which prompted the decisive step and brought Socrates to trial; and which, while the charges brought were the old and staple cries against the Philosophers and Sophists, aggravated these with a new political stigma.

But it is time to return to Socrates, and to the part of the Apology which still remains to be considered. We are now in a position to judge of it as a political defence, if such it shall turn out to be.

Of the particular political charges we find Socrates here only touching upon one, and that allusively,—the charge of being answerable for the misconduct of Critias and Alcibiades and perhaps others (33 B). The line he mainly follows is general.

We have analysed the attitude of Socrates towards the state of which he was a citizen into the following parts ;—first, dis- satisfaction, chiefly on moral grounds, with the prevalent state- - theory; secondly, conception of the remedy to be applied to it; and, thirdly, conviction that the application devolved upon himself. And in a full general justification of himself in a political point of view, he would have had to expound all these points seriatim. We find him however reticent as to the first point: at most he only hints at it in the simile (30 E) of the high-bred horse, whose greatness of frame makes him some- what sluggish, and who needs some gadfly to stir his spirit, and in the remark (31 A) that it is an extreme boon to be so roused. He interweaves the second point with the third, yet sparingly, and only in the way of explanation. It can hardly be said that the conception of the remedial plan is completely unfolded ; though we find notices of it in the doctrine (29 D sqq.) that the care and improvement of the soul, and the pur- suit of wisdom, truth, and virtue, are to be ranked infinitely above the pursuit of riches; the doctrine (36 C) of the need of consciously-possessed principles of individual and political action, tested (29 E, also 38 A) by self-examination ; and the doctrine (33 A) of the imperative duty of adhering to what is just, alike in public and in private life. It is the third point, the assumption by himself of this mission, into which the speaker throws his strength: with this he starts, and to this he limits his justification. His first and paramount plea in this justification is that (28 B sqq. and 33 C) the work was under-

xl INTRODUCTION.

taken in obedience to the above-mentioned divine call, 1. 6. was an indefeasible duty, and therefore to be performed without respect of consequences, or counter-inducements, or human in- hibition (29 D),—the proof of the divine call, i. e. of the reality of the obligation, being that nothing else would have sustained him in such a course of self-sacrifice (31 B). His other plea is that his assumption of this work was an incalculable benefit to his countrymen. In what remains he sets forth, in answer to supposed objections, first, that to have entered public life in preference to dealing with individuals would have been neither a practicable nor an effective method of pursuing this mission (31 C sqq.); and, secondly, the innocent tendency of his work (inculeating righteousness, not training for professions or imparting knowledge, 33 A), excluding the suspicion of per- verting the youth,—a suspicion which is also refuted inde- pendently (33 C).

To have enlarged upon the first point would obviously have stood Socrates in little stead. He could not have done so without appearing to admit the political allegations of his accusers in their entire force; and thus the vindication of himself as a reformer lacks the support which it would have gained from a premised statement of the need of reform. But, to pass on from this first drawback to its effectiveness, the actual vindication offered must in itself have seemed to the majority of the Athenians partly paradoxical and partly visionary. In representing himself as having done good service by urging on them the care of their souls, by unswerv- ingly insisting on righteousness in them and in himself, So- crates was traversing ground where they could not follow him. These things had for them no meaning. They required devo- tion to the letter of their constitution, they were on the verge of a panic at the appearance of disaffection ; and this was their righteousness. With this they were content, when the sub- stance of the old religion and the old morality were really departed from them. They were necessarily far from believing that it could be any man’s duty or mission to set himself up among them as a preacher of righteousness,—as he himself says expressly in the ἀντιτίμησις (37 E38 A). To us there may seem to be nothing so far out of the common in the moral work of which Socrates claims to be the sole promoter, as to

INTRODUCTION. xh

elevate him to a position of singularity. But it was a novel work enough to his contemporaries. It is a difficulty through- out in the way of appreciating Socrates, that positions, which ever since his time have been household words, not in moral philosophy merely but in common life, were in his mouth, to the men of his generation, original and novel; and that the simple principles he lays down here, so far from being common- place to his audience, must have rather transcended their moral apprehension.

Nor must it be forgotten that their old distrust of the Sophist came in to the aid of their distaste for the reformer. So far from believing in his principles of moral reformation, they were confusedly identifying these with the old sophistical teaching. Hence it is that the disclaimer ἐγὼ διδάσκαλος οὐδενὸς x. τ. A. finds place here.

There were ample reasons, then, why this Bart of the de- fence should fail. Socrates stood before his countrymen a confessed reformer, and they were strangers to the idea of reformation except in a political sense,—a sense in which the Athens of the day had no room for reformers.

But the failure of the defence here urged by Socrates upon his countrymen is to be laid not to his charge but to theirs. The point upon which our whole judgment must turn is this. Was the need of a reformation so urgent as Socrates supposed it to be? If so, then Socrates was no less in the right, no less a benefactor, because they failed to feel the need, and they in crushing 15 him were no less guilty of a national hypocrisy.

There is no need to sum up at any length the results of our

19. It is a poor sophism to urge that the stages of an ἀγὼν τιμητός, or the venality of Athenian jailors, made So- crates’ death his own act,—an even- tuality which his accusers themselves never contemplated. This last as- sumption (which Kéchly espouses) is directly at variance with the Apo- logy, which (29 C) makes Anytus responsible for the argument that it were better Socrates should never have been tried, than that he should escape with his life. To excuse the judges as having been after the first

step unwilling instruments of a legally unavoidable catastrophe, is a plea which we never think of allowing to the eastern despot, who after betray- ing his righteous minister “ laboured “ till the going down of the sun to de- “liver him.” The justice or injustice of the catastrophe is involved in that of the first step. The whole respon- sibility fell upon the judges from the moment when, in affirming the accu- sation Σωκράτης ἀδικεῖ x.7.A., they gave their voice against the truth.

xl INTRODUCTION.

inquiry into the worth of the Apology as a defence. Its art is consummate ; its statements are (as the exordium promised) unalloyed truth; its reticences are condescensions to the audience with whom it deals. It is exhaustive; it lays open by turns 2° all the motives and influences which were at work against Socrates; and the more pains we are at to represent these to ourselves by means of an independent investigation, the more reason we shall find to acknowledge that the true clue lay all the while close to our hand in the Apology.

2° That the Sophists had no hand selves too much under the same sus- in bringing about the condemnation picion with Socrates to have dared to of Socrates is clear. Anytus was the inflame that suspicion. Cf. Zeller, II. enemy of Sophists. The Sophists had p. 139. no political influence, and were them-

ABBREVIATIONS IN TEXTUAL COMMENTARY.

V=Vulgar text, settled originally by Stephanus.

B= Bekker.

S=Stallbaum.

Z=Zurich editors.

H= Hermann.

Oxon.=the Bodleian MS. known as ‘ Codex Clarkianus.’

[Dr. Gaisford first published the readings of this MS. in 1820. Mr. Riddell collated the Apology anew for this edition, and also the Crito, Phido, and Symposium. |

ΓΤ.

Steph.

ATIOAOVIA 2ORPALOI2:

17.

a \ a 5 ΕΝ > a , I. Ὅ τι μὲν ὑμεῖς, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, πεπον- Ν a ἢ IA , > 5 \ > 5 θατε ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμῶν κατηγόρων, οὐκ οἰδα᾿ ἐγὼ δ᾽ οὖν QA 3 oN . ᾽ .Σ ΄ 3 , > Ars , . oa καὶ αὐτὸς UT αὐτῶν ὀλίγου ἐμαυτοῦ ἐπελαθομην" οὕτω “ WY. , > , φ Μ ᾽ aes πιθανῶς ἔλεγον. Kat τοι ἀληθές ye, ws ἔπος εἰπεῖν, »ῸΝ » / , \ > lo aA > , ~ οὐδὲν εἰρήκασι. μάλιστα δὲ αὐτῶν ev ἐθαύμασα τῶν Δι ~ e > , A 9 - ὅλ. e a πολλῶν ὧν ἐψεύσαντο, τοῦτο ἐν ᾧ EAEYOV ὡς χρὴν 4 ΄σ 3 “ Ν -“ > a «ες ὑμᾶς εὐλαβεῖσθαι, μὴ ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐξαπατηθῆτε, ὡς δει- ~ Mw , XN A Ν > ed σ » / b νοῦ ovtos λέγειν. τὸ yap μὴ αἰσχυνθῆναι, ὅτι αὐτίκα CaS ~ ? ΄ » » \ Se um ἐμοῦ ἐξελεγχθήσονται ἔργῳ, ἐπειδὰν μηδ᾽ ὁπωσ - ad tf N td “ “ A τιοῦν φαίνωμαι δεινὸς λέγειν, τοῦτό μοι ἐδοξεν » ra > γ 3 ᾽ ον » ΟΥ̓́ αὐτῶν ἀναισχυντότατον εἶναι, εἰ μὴ ἄρα δεινὸν κα- a Φ ΄ Ν » “ / 4 ’ \ \ Aovow οὗτοι λέγειν τὸν τἀληθῆ A€yovTa’ εἰ μὲν yap a ΄ , x » » ‘nt τοῦτο λέγουσιν, ὁμολογοίην ἂν ἔγωγε οὐ κατὰ TOU-

5 er 2 \ 3 φῳ ἽΝ τους εἶναι ῥήτωρ. οὗτοι μὲν οὖν, ὥσπερ ἐγὼ λέγω,

5. ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν] This quali- fies the οὐδὲν following, making it equivalent to ἢ τι ἢ οὐδὲν below.

8. μὴ --- ἐξαπατηθῆτε]! This sentence is not affected by the tense of the main construction, because the contingency it ex- presses remains still future at the moment of its being al-

luded to by the speaker. Digest of Idioms, § go.

14. ov xara] A thorough litotes: ‘far above these :’ ‘a far greater orator than they.’ Cf. Hdt. i. 121, πατέρα καὶ μη- τέρα εὑρήσεις, ov κατὰ Μιτραδά- τὴν τε τὸν βουκόλον καὶ τὴν γυ- ναῖκα αὐτοῦ.

σι

"» ὺ

A. The Defence.

Exordium.

44

yy x Oe > θὲ 3 / ee ω δ᾽ ᾽ a 3 ’ j ἢ τι ἢ οὐδὲν ἀληῦθες εἰρηκασιν" υμεῖς εμου ακου- Pp. Τ'

a δ σεσθε πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν.

ΠΛΑΤΩ͂ΝΟΣ

ἷ“

ἢ z ἢ "9 2 οὐ μέντοι μὰ Δί, ὦ

ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, κεκαλλιεπημένους γε λόγους, ὥσπερ

τς , δὰ / 3 5 \ οἱ τούτων, ῥημασί TE καὶ ὀνόμασιν, οὐδὲ κεκοσμη-

I. ἤ τι ἢ οὐδὲν] This form of expression we have from Homer, Od. iv. 80, ᾿Ανδρῶν δ᾽ 7 κέν Tis μοι ἐρίσσεται, ἠὲ καὶ οὐκί, So Hadt. ii. 140, ἤ τις ἢ οὐδείς. And Eurip. Dan. Fr. vi. Κρείσ- cov yap οὔτις χρημάτων πέφυκ' ἀνήρ, Πλὴν εἴ tis* ὅστις δ᾽ οὗτός ἐστιν οὐχ ὁρῶ.

2. οὐ μέντοι] Opposed to ἀκούσεσθε π. τ. ἀλ.----οτι shall have the truth entire, but not drest up. This contrast is only carried as far as ὀνόμασι" after which the idea of the contrast between truth and falsehood is resumed (that is, πιστεύω yap κιτιλ. gives the rationale of ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ---ἀλήθειαν") and con- tinues to elovévar,—since πλάτ- τοντι λόγους refers not to arti- ficial language but to fualsifi- cation; a μειράκιον, to hide a fault, uses falsehood and not rhetoric.

3. ὥσπερ οἱ] The nom. is the regular construction, where the noun brought into com- parison can be made the sub- ject of the clause introduced by ὥσπερ. The attracted con- struction, exemplified by ὥσπερ μειρακίῳ below, is less common. Dig. 176.

4. ῥήμασι... ὀνόμασι] What do these two terms mean here? For in Sophist. 262 a, b, they distinctly mean ‘verb’ and ‘noun,’ in Cratyl. 399 b, ¢, as distinctly ‘expression’ and ‘word’ (Aw φίλος is the ῥῆμα,

Δίφιλος the ὄνομα). Now the conjoint phrase seems to have had a familiar rhetorical sig- nification ; οἵ, Symp. 198 b, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπὶ τελευτῆς τοῦ κάλλους τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐξεπλάγη ἀκούων ; 199 b, ὀνόμασι καὶ θέσει ῥημάτων, 221 6, τοιαῦτα καὶ ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα' whence we may conclude that the asso- ciation here is similar. And if we compare passages of rhe- torical criticism in the Ora- tors, where these words occur, we shall find the meaning ap- proaches to that in Cratyl. ra- ther than that in Sophist. : cf. Zischin. ill. 72, p. 64, od yap ἔφη δεῖν (καὶ yap τὸ ῥῆμα μέμνη- μαι ὡς εἶπε, διὰ τὴν ἀηδίαν τοῦ ὀνόματος) ἀπορρῆξαι τῆς εἰρήνης τὴν ovppaxiav—where the ῥῆμα is the whole expression, the ὄνο- pais ἀπορρῆξαι. Further, as So- erates could not speak without ‘expressions’ and ‘ words,’ it is the artistic use of them he here disclaims ; which, in the case of ὀνόματα, would consist in what Aischines—ii. 153, p. 48—calls ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων σύνθεσις, and also in tropes and other figures of speech, and choice of un- usual words, cf. Isocr. 1x. 9g. Ῥ. 190, μὴ μόνον τοῖς τεταγμένοις ὀνόμασιν, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ξενοῖς τὰ δὲ καινοῖς τὰ δὲ μεταφοραῖς" while ῥήματα would extend to whole expressions, cf. A%schines’ cari- cature, lil. 166. p. 77, τὰ μιαρὰ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀπίθανα ῥήματα.

ἈΠΟΛΟΓΊΑ ZOKPATOYY.

45

Υ cal / “ » 17. μένους, ἀλλ᾽ ἀκούσεσθε εἰκῇ λεγόμενα τοῖς ἐπιτυ-

a Ss , \ (2 5 aA rd χοῦσιν ὀνόμασι πιστεύω yap δίκαια εἶναι a λέγω,

‘ e fod » 2 Ν >» καὶ μηδεὶς ὑμῶν προσδοκησάτω ἄλλως" οὐδὲ yap av

δή ποι, ὦ avd NOE τῇ ἡλικίᾳ @ που πρέποι, ὦ avdpes, τῇδε τῇ ἡλικίᾳ ὥσπερ μει-

, 4 ’ ᾽ e a Ud paki@ πλάττοντι λογους εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσιέναι.

x, / Kal μεν- 5

Ν , a1 ao, > a a e “ / τοι καὶ πάνυ, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοῦτο ὑμῶν δέομαι

Ν ’ aN \ a > a / > / ’ὔ καὶ παρίεμαι: ἐὰν διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν λόγων ἀκουητέ

᾽ , ’ Ὡς ” ΄ Soe? μου ἀπολογουμένου, Ou ὧνπερ εἴωθα λέγειν καὶ ἐν

> a “Ὁ. 4 “ - “ « “ Ces , ἀγορᾷ ἐπὶ τῶν τραπεζῶν, ἵνα ὑμῶν πολλοὶ ἀκηκόασι,

ἀκαὶ ἄλλοθι, μήτε θαυμάζειν μήτε θορυβεῖν τούτου το

σ »μ δὰ Cs , a ἜΠΙΟΝ a Jem, ενεκα. EXEL yap OUT@OL. νυν έγω 7 P@TOV €7TL δικα-

στήριον ἀναβέβηκα, ἔτη γεγονὼς πλείω ἑβδομήκοντα.

12. πλείω] Hermann’s note may satisfy us here: “elo vel contra Oxon. cum VBS retinere quam cum Turicensibus omittere

4. ὥσπερ----εἰσιένα) Three peculiarities ; 1. μειρακίῳ is at- tracted into the case of πλάτ- rovrt, cf. Dig. 176; 2. mAdr- τοντι is attracted into the case of ἡλικίᾳ: and 3. the gender of πλάττοντι notwithstanding fol- ‘ lows the thought, ef. Dig. 184.

5. καὶ μέντοι] A stronger form of καὶ---δέ, Dig. 145.

7. τῶν αὐτῶν λόγω» This has respect primarily to the conversation with Meletus, which is prefaced by the re- quest, 27 Ὁ, μὴ θορυβεῖν ἐὰν ἐν τῷ εἰωθότι τρόπῳ τοὺς λόγους ποιῶμαι. But, as something like this was recognised in ordinary pleadings under the name of ἐρώτησις (see Introd. p. x.), the reference here probably extends to the conversations rehearsed (20 a), alluded to (21 ¢sqq., 23 c), and imagined (28 b, 29 c), in the course of the defence; perhaps also to the castigation intermingled

with it (30 d, 31 e, 35 b, c).

9. ἀγορᾷ κιτ.λ.)] The passage of Xenophon (Mem. I. i. 10) is well known ;—éxeivds ye det μὲν ἦν ἐν τῷ φανερῷ. πρωΐ τε yap εἰς τοὺς περιπάτους καὶ τὰ γυμνάσια ἤει, καὶ πληθούσης ἀγορᾶς ἐκεῖ φανερὸς ἦν, καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν ἀεὶ τῆς ἡμέρας ἦν ὅπου πλείστοις μέλλοι συνέσεσθαι. For τράπεζαι as places of resort cf. Lysias ix. 5. Ρ. 114, κἀμοὶ μὲν τὰ προειρη- μένα διείλεκτο ἐπὶ τῇ Φιλίου τρα- πέζη" and shops generally, cf. νου στιν: 20. Ρ. ἘΠῸ:

ὑμῶν πολλοὶ] ὑμῶν is em- phatic. As Stallb. remarks, the frequenters of the τράπεζαι would be of the richer class.

10. θορυβεῖν] See Introd. p. xvi. note 8.

II. ἐπὶ δικαστήριον] The prep. has the notion of ‘presenting oneself to’ the court. Cf. Iszeus, Fr. vii. 1. 1. 15, λέγειν ἐπὶ δικα- otnpiov. The ἀναβέβηκα refers to the Syya, cf. Introd. p. xv.

46 ITAATQNOZ

3 ᾿ ἮΝ 3 »ἶ a ’ / , σ Ὶ ἀτεχνῶς οὖν ξένως ἔχω τῆς ἐνθάδε λέξεως. ὥσπερν. τ7. 53 x “ ὕ > Y/ , οὖν ἂν, εἰ τῷ ὄντι ξένος ἐτύγχανον ὧν, ξυνεγιγνώ-

σ ὃ YA a Cee » if na “a ΝΣ “ 8 κετε δήπου ἂν μοι, εἰ ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ φωνῇ τε καὶ τῷ». 18,

΄ ἘΠ > - » θ ΄ \ δὲ δ τε σι 4 τρόπῳ ἐλεγον, ἐν οἷσπερ ἐτεθράμμην, καὶ δὴ καὶ νῦν a ¢e a , / ἘΡ ’ “ x 5TGUTO ὑμῶν δέομαι δίκαιον, ὡς γ᾽ ἐμοὶ δοκῶ, τὸν μὲν ἷ , na , an By, \ \ , , ; τρόπον τῆς λέξεως ἐᾷν ἴσως μὲν γὰρ χείρων, ἴσως δὲ , » Se ΤΣ ΞΕΝ \ a o Ν , € βελτίων ἂν ein’ αὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο σκοπεῖν καὶ τούτῳ ἊΝ a / / ΄ Ἃ Ue ἴω Tov νοῦν προσέχειν, εἰ δίκαια λέγω ἢ μὴ" δικαστοῦ | \ \ “ » ti GE: \ » “ , § μεν yap αὕτη ἀρετή, ῥήτορος δὲ τἀληθὴ λέγειν. ͵ ξεν J A \ 3 Q > ΄ E zeae? II. Πρῶτον μὲν οὖν δίκαιός εἰμι ἀπολογήσασθαι, : ο efence; A A ? ᾿ ρῶν ας, ἃ a XN τὴ a , - ΡΟΝ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, πρὸς τὰ πρῶτά μου ψευδὴ κατη- ὃ ὍΝ eek Y Ν , s "΄ \ : himself γορημένα Kai τοὺς πρώτους KaTNYOpOUS, ἔπειτα δὲ ;

against the Ἀ ὌΨΙ Re τε , Hee a \ prejudices σρὸς TA ὕστερα καὶ τοὺς ὑστέρους. ἐμοῦ yap TOAADb of the 2 A κ᾿ Ἂς; ΄ kn ‘court, and = KATNYOpoL γεγόνασι πρὸς ὑμᾶς Kal πάλαι πολλὰ ἤδη his coun- A, Ν ΤῸΝ » \ , ἃ ΠΝ a

trymen ge-I5€TN καὶ οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς λέγοντες, OVS ἐγὼ μᾶλλον nerally. A A \ » τ τῇ , », \ φοβοῦμαι ἢ τοὺς ἀμφὶ ᾿Ανυτον, καίπερ ὄντας καὶ

malui, quia doctius additamentum est quam quod ad interpolato- rem referamus. Immo facile ejici poterat propter Criton. 52 e, videturque jam Apollodoro ignotum fuisse, qui apud Diog. La. IT. δ 44. ipso septuagesimo ante mortem anno natum statuit; at duos ut minimum annos adjiciendos esse scite Boeckhius Corp. Inser. IL. p. 341 probavit, nusque mox comparato Synes. Calv. Encom. c. 17 confirmavimus ; cf. de theor. Deliac. p. 7.” Zeller agrees, but makes 72 years the extreme limit.

ts pra

5. δίκαιον] “1 request this will interfere with true judg- of you as a piece of justice.” ment.

COLT AM RC χρὴ Ge PONTO οἷα" 9. αὕτη] This represents νοεῖσθαι ἀληθές, Legg. 795 ¢, the preceding clause αὐτὸ ---ἢ ταὐτὸν δὴ τοῦτ᾽ .. -. ἐν τοῖς GA- μή being in fact τοῦτο, at- λοις πᾶσι χρὴ προσδοκᾷν ὀρθόν tracted into the gender of ‘as the right thing. ἀρετή. Dig. 201.

6. ἴσως μὲν γὰρ] The reason 14. καὶ πάλαι] This καὶ only

urged is a general one. The emphasises πάλαι. Dig. 133. consideration of style, if al- And in καὶ οὐδὲν---- λέγοντες we lowed at all, will be operative have the common καὶ after πολ- just in those cases where it Aoi.—It was 24 years since is better or worse than the the Clouds were represented : case deserves,—just where it Forster,

AITIOAOTIA ZOKPATOYS. 47

a / 3 A a 18. τούτους δεινούς" ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνοι δεινότεροι, ὦ avdpes, οἱ

ε a ἐν » tA

ὑμῶν τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐκ παίδων παραλαμβάνοντες ’ > ΄“ “ 2xa\ > ,

ἐπειθόν Te Kal κατηγόρουν ἐμοῦ μᾶλλον οὐδὲν ἀληθές,

e wv ΄ ‘\ 3 / ie / ὡς ἔστι τις Σωκράτης, σοφὸς ἀνήρ, TA TE μετέωρα

e “ “ » φροντιστὴς καὶ τὰ ὑπὸ γῆς ἅπαντα ἀνεζητηκὼς καὶ 5

Ds ued ; , Ἂς τ 5 ν eTov ἥττω λόγον κρείττω ποιῶν. οὗτοι, @ ἄνδρες "AG “ « Uf ἧς “ ὃ [ἡ e

ηναῖοι, οἱ ταύτην THY φημὴν κατασκεδάσαντες, οἱ / ’ e A S ’, e ΄σ δεινοί εἰσί μου κατήγοροι" οἱ yap ἀκούοντες ἡγοῦνται

ἣν cal “ al ‘ / v » Τοὺς Ταῦτα ζητοῦντας οὐδε θεους νομίζειν. ETTELTA

’ ec / XX Ἂ , εἰσιν οὗτοι οἱ κατήγοροι πολλοὶ καὶ πολὺν χρόνον το

+ , » x Ν > , oe € /

ἤδη κατηγορηκότες, ἐτι δὲ καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἡλικίᾳ an ec xX / > 7

λέγοντες πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἐν ἣ ἂν μάλιστα ἐπιστεύσατε,

“ Υ̓ ww 2 e ΄“ 4 > “

παῖδες ὄντες, ἔνιοι O ὑμῶν καὶ μειράκια, ἀτεχνῶς

ἐρήμην κατηγοροῦντες ἀπολογουμένου οὐδενός. ὃ δὲ

3. μᾶλλον] BS omit: Z retain, and rightly; for the rhythm would be intolerable without it, or without (which Hermann

would prefer) the three words μᾶλλον οὐδὲν ἀληθές.

2. τοὺς πολλοὺς] Closely with ἐκ παίδων. They ἔπειθον all, but only most, not all, as children. Cf. below ο, παῖδες ὄν- τες, ἔνιοι δὲ K.T.A.

3. μᾶλλον] With ἔπειθον and κατηγόρουν. just in the same Way as πολὺ μᾶλλον [κατηγ.] be- low, e. Here it is intended to balance the comparative δεινό- Tepo.—‘ were more busy in ac- cusing me and trying to per- suade you.’

4. σοφὸς---ποιῶν] This “ac- cusation,” both as given here, and as repeated with mock formality 19 Ὁ, is nothing more than a vivid way of represent- ing, for a rhetorical purpose, the popular prejudice, in which the court shared. See Introd. p. xxi. The charges it contains

are two-edged, being borrowed partly from the vulgar repre- sentation of the Philosopher, partly from that of the Sophist: the μετέωρα φροντ. points to the Philosopher, the τὸν--- ποιῶν to the Sophist. The title σοφὸς ἀνὴρ would at once be under- stood as ἃ class-appellation,— ef. 23 a, 34 ¢; In it the mean- ing and associations of Philo- sopher are uppermost, yet not so as distinctly to exclude those of Sophist. See Introd. p. xxxi1. MiF2t

13. παῖδες... . μειράκια] We should have reversed the order, and said, ‘when you were all of you young, and most of you mere children.’

14. ὃ 6€—ér| This is not a changed but an abbreviated

a. Exist- ence of such pre- judices, and their nature, viz. that So- crates was, as a Phy- sicist and a Sophist, a subverter severally of religion and of mo-

rality.

48 MAATQNOZ

΄ ’ , “ »ὼλ me ΤᾺΝ er πάντων ἀλογώτατον, OTL οὐδὲ TA ὀνόματα οἷον TeEp. 18. ΘῈ τ ΤῊΝ 2Q7 Ν 5 ia ‘ 7 Ν αὐτῶν εἰδέναι καὶ εἰπεῖν, πλὴν εἴ τις κωμῳδιοποιος ἃ z 3, fue ce \ ΄ \ lad / τυγχάνει wv’ ὅσοι δὲ φθόνῳ Kat διαβολῇ χρώμενοι As “ > iZ e \ Ν > Ν ν + ὑμᾶς ἀνέπειθον, ot δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ πεπεισμένοι ἄλλους , e , Or ΝΥ βπείθοντες, οὗτοι πάντες ἀπορώτατοί εἰσιν οὐδὲ yap ΄, al ’ 3 a > lal xo ἀναβιβάσασθαι οἷον τ᾽ ἐστὶν αὐτῶν ἐνταυθοῖ οὐδ Dias BEN: 3 ᾽ Ne ats » a ἴτε ἐλέγξαι οὐδένα, ἀλλ᾽ avayKn ἀτεχνῶς ὥσπερ σκια- ΄σ΄ 3 Ψ the Ν 3 7 δ > μαχεῖν ἀπολογούμενόν τε καὶ ἐλέγχειν μηδενὸς ἀπο- ΄,ὔ , > ἊΝ; e “ ¢ \ κρινομένου. ἀξιώσατε οὖν καὶ ὑμεῖς, ὥσπερ ἐγὼ (4 us $8 , if ς το λέγω, διττούς μου τοὺς κατηγόρους γεγονέναι, ἐτέ- \ Ν »» / Ca \ \ ρους μὲν τοὺς ἄρτι κατηγορήσαντας, ἑτέρους δὲ τοὺς ig A ΡΝ Ψ Ν “Ὁ a \ 3 , TAAL, OVS ἐγὼ λέγω, καὶ οἰήθητε δεῖν πρὸς ἐκείνους © lal , \ e ΄σ > is πρῶτον με ἀπολογήσασθαι: καὶ yap ὑμεῖς ἐκείνων ΄ > if , Ἂν Ἂν an πρότερον ἠκούσατε κατηγορούντων, Kal πολὺ μᾶλλον 2. κωμῳδιοποιὸς] ΝῊ ; κωμῳδοποιὸς BSZ with 2 MSS. B quotes Fischer mistakenly asserting that at Phedo 70 ὁ all the MSS. have kopodor.; but this is untrue for Oxon. and 6 others.

Meeris’ assertion that κωμῳδοποιὸς is the Attic and the other the common form does not bind us.

construction. In full it would Plato (Menex. 235 e, Euthyd.

be ὃ δὲ πάντων ἐστὶν ἀλογώτατον, ἐστὶ τοῦτο, ὅτι. Dig. 247.

2. εἴ tis] Aristophanes is named below, 19 ὁ, and is doubtless chiefly meant, but not exclusively. Eupolis had said (Meineke 11. p. 553), Μισῶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ καὶ Σωκράτην, τὸν πτωχὸν ἀδολέσχην, ος τἄλλα μὲν πεφρόν- τικεν, ὁπόθεν δὲ καταφαγεῖν ἔχοι Τούτου κατημέληκεν. And a play of Ameipsias, represented with Aristophanes’ Clouds, was called the Connos, and the Chorus was of Phrontistee (Athen. v. p- 218). It is likely enough (Zeller, ii. p. 41. note 3), that Ameipsias introduced the same fact, or the same fiction, as

272 6), and made the music- master Connus Socrates’ in- structor.

3. ὅσοι δὲ includes all but the εἴ rs’ that is, ὅσοι stands for ὅσοι ἄλλοι. Cf. Thezet. 159 b, where πάντα ἃ is equivalent to πάντα τἄλλα ἃ. This ὅσοι [ἂ- λοι] is then subdivided into [οἱ μὲν] φθόνῳ χρώμενοι and οἱ δὲ--- πείθοντες. The οἱ μὲν is supplied from οἱ δὲ by ana- strophe; Dig. 241. The aa- λους πείθοντες is put in to make the sense clear, but virtually repeats the idea of ὑμᾶς ἀνέ- meOov' it does not affect the regularity of the construction.

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY?2. 49

xX a ΄“ Co 3 4 > 7 7 Sone ME) 8, ἢ τῶνδε τῶν ὕστερον. elev’ ἀπολογητέον bn, ὦ av- » “ , a / ᾽ν 9. Spes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ ἐπιχειρητέον ὑμῶν ἐξελέσθαι τὴν , a e ἴω Ψ lal vA wy ’ διαβολήν, ἣν ὑμεῖς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἔσχετε, ταύτην ἐν οὕτως ὀλί βουλοί ἐν οὖν ἂν τοῦτο ἐν οὕτως ολίγῳ χρόνῳ. βουλοίμην μεν οὖν ἃ ἢ “ » ls ‘ οὕτω γενέσθαι, εἴ τι ἄμεινον Kal ὑμῖν καὶ ἐμοί, καὶ 5 ΄,ὕ 7) a > , ; 53 \ SLN πλέον τί με ποιῆσαι ἀπολογούμενον᾽ οἶμαι δὲ αὐτὸ x 3 ᾿᾿ , @/ » χαλεπὸν εἶναι, καὶ οὐ πάνυ με λανθάνει οἷον ἐστιν. σ ΄- \ v av “ ΄σ { ce ἮΝ U4 ὅμως τοῦτο μὲν ἴτω ὅπῃ τῷ θεῷ φίλον, τῷ δὲ νόμῳ / πειστέον καὶ ἀπολογητέον. "2 ἫΝ “ (4 e 111. ᾿Αναλάβωμεν οὖν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, τίς ἡ κατηγο- τὸ , 3 / » - τ Χ ΄ © \ Ν ρία ἐστίν, ἐξ ἧς ἡ ἐμὴ διαβολὴ γέγονεν, ἡ δὴ καὶ ’ ’ Ν \ Ψ' b πιστεύων Μέλητός με ἐγράψατο τὴν γραφὴν ταυτην. oJ ΄ elev’ τί δὴ λέγοντες διέβαλλον οἱ διαβάλλοντες ; a 3 , a 3 ~ ὥσπερ οὖν κατηγόρων THY ἀντωμοσίαν δεῖ avayva- 3: ἔσχετε] ΒΖΗ; ἔχετε. The preposition ἐν would be strange with ἔ ἔσχετε if the meaning were ‘ have entertained during so long a time.’ ἐν means rather ‘within the limits of ;’ and s0, with respect to the further limit, ay the distance of. Thus Sores exactly falls into its place; ‘ye first came to have so long ago.’ 4. ἐν οὕτως] Though this collocation is rarer than οὕτως ev ὀλ., yet it occurs; e.g. below 24a (where this passage is alluded to) : Iszeus yi. 33. Ρ. 59, ἐν πάνυ ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ, Lysias,

xix. 8. p. 152, ἐν οὕτω δεινῷ καθέστηκεν. The rhythm pr obably determines the order, T here i is no need for the οὑτωσὶν of V.

2. τὴν διαβολήν] Not the ἐστὶν ὁ ἐμὲ αἱρήσει, ... οὐ Μέλη-

name οἵ σοφός (cf. 20 d, τό τε ros,... ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τῶν πολλῶν δια- ὄνομα καὶ τὴν διαβολήν, and again ββολή. 23 a); nor ‘calumny’ simply 13. διέβαλλον οἱ διαβάλλοντες}

(cf. below, ἡ κατηγορία... ἐξ js This fulness of expression is ἡ ἐμὴ διαβολή)" but calumny common in Plato, and gives

believed, i. e. ‘ prejudice.’ the air of deliberateness. Dig. 7. οὐ πάνυ here as elsewhere 262. retains its meaning of ‘hardly,’ 14. ὥσπερ qualifies not only |

‘scarcely ;’ but this is to be in- RaTHVepoe but also ἀντωμοσίαν. terpreted as ἃ litotes:—‘I can and ἀναγνῶναι. They are qgvasi-| hardly say I do not know.’ prosecutors; it is a quasi-tn-|

Dig. 1 39: dictment ; and Socrates makes} 11. 7 δὴ] The antecedent of believe to read it. 7 is διαβολή. Cf. 28 a, καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἀντωμοσίαν) So 24 b. This

b. Refu- tation of them.

50 ITAATOQNO®

3 a 4 3 an \ 4 "i ναι αὐτῶν' Σωκράτης ἀδικεῖ καὶ περιεργάζεται ζη- ν. τς

lol Fi € Ν ζω XQ > be. \ XN ΄ ἄμ τ, τῶν τὰ τε ὑπὸ γῆς καὶ οὐράνια, καὶ τὸν ἥττω λόγον , a \ 4 » Ν a 7 κρείττω ποιῶν, Kat ἄλλους ταὐτὰ ταῦτα διδασκων. , / a N e a τοιαύτη Tis ἐστι ταῦτα yap ἑωρᾶτε Kal αὐτοὶ ἐν ~? id , Ψ, Nye ΄σ 57H Αριστοφάνους κωμῳδίᾳ, Σωκράτη τινὰ ἐκεῖ περι- U2 lg 14 3 la Ν vy φερόμενον, φάσκοντά τε ἀεροβατεῖν καὶ ἄλλην πολ- τ , ἊΝ e \ rar "7 , Anv φλυαρίαν φλυαροῦντα, ὧν ἐγὼ οὐδὲν οὔτε μέγα 54 Ἂ 7 » .-᾿ \ > (2 > ΄ / οὔτε μικρὸν πέρι ἐπαΐω. καὶ OVX ὡς ἀτιμάζων λέγω iN Uf ᾿ , an id τὴν τοιαύτην ἐπιστήμην, εἴ τις περὶ τῶν τοιούτων

, 9 ᾿ , cy ae e XN , / ιοσοῴος ἐστι pn πως ἐγὼ ὑπὸ Μελήτου τοσαύτας

2. καὶ οὐράνια] So Z; VBSH καὶ τὰ ἐπουράνια. 8. μικρὸν] According to Meeris, σμικρὸς is Attic. Yet in AMschin. and Isoer. μικρὸς occurs uniformly. Below, d, all the MSS. have σμικρόν. But to press uniformity would be arbitrary. See Lobeck, Pa- thol. Pars 11. De Orthogr. Gr. inconst. ὃ 1, who instances pas- sages in which both forms occur in close neighbourhood or even in the same sentence ; Dem. Ol. B. 14. p. 22, Arist. Hist. An. IT. XV. pp. 506, 507. He quotes from Apollonius (Pron. 63) the general principle οὐκ ἐξωμάλισται τὰ τῶν διαλέκτων καὶ μάλιστα τὰ τῶν ᾿Αττικῶν. Cf. Phedo, go ἃ. Rhythm must be in some degree a guide.

8. καὶ οὐχ ὡς---ἐστ] This is well-marked irony. Socrates declines here to pronounce, before an audience who would

term, like ἀντιγραφὴ 27 a, 15 used to designate the ἔγκλη- μα. Both ἀντωμοσία and ἀντι- γραφὴ were properly said of

the defendant's plea, presented in writing and sworn to, in the ἀνάκρισις, or preliminary proceeding before the Archon Basileus. But as the ἔγκλημα was likewise then presented in writing and sworn to, the same words came to be applied to it also. See Introd. p. ix.

7. ὧν ἐγὼ] The antecedent of ὧν must be the matters in the ἀντωμοσία, not the imme- diately preceding words.

οὐδὲν οὔτε μέγα] Accus. cog- nate, not accus. of the object ; Dig. 6. ᾿Ἐπαΐω is intransitive.

have welcomed it, a condem- nation of studies against which at other times he had freely declared himself, on the double ground (1) that human nature ought to be studied first, Xen. Mem. I. i. 12, and (2) that the Physicists got involved in ques- tions which were really beyond the powers of the human mind, ib. 11, and arrived moreover at impotent conclusions, ib. IV. τ. ἢ.

το. τοσαύτας] ‘ Upon so grave a charge’ as that of pronounc- ing upon things of which he

Ee a eo

AIIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY?2. 51

19. δίκας φύγοιμι' ἀλλὰ yap ἐμοὶ τούτων, ὦ avdpes

ἃ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, οὐδὲν μέτεστι.

’ > > Ν ΄“ μάρτυρας δ᾽ αὐτοὺς ὑμῶν » § vy Ν » nn e ΄ » ’ τοὺς πολλοὺς παρέχομαι, καὶ ἀξιῶ ὑμᾶς ἀλλήλους , Ν ΄ σ > “ , > διδάσκειν τε καὶ φράζειν, ὅσοι ἐμοῦ πώποτε ἀκη- ,ὔ -" is ‘ me 3 ~ e “ (Woah } < Koate διαλεγομένου" πολλοὶ δε ὑμῶν οἱ τοιοῦτοί εἰσι ? Ss > 7 > ΄ > Ν ΕΥ ,ὔ φραζετε οὖν ἀλλήλοις, εἰ πώποτε ἢ σμικρὸν ἢ μέγα , A a ‘ a , VA ἤκουσέ τις ὑμῶν ἐμοῦ περὶ τῶν τοιούτων διαλεγομέ- > 7 , a Covers) » Ν νου καὶ ἐκ τούτου γνώσεσθε ὅτι τοιαῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ 3 ’ ~ a e , τάλλα περὶ ἐμοῦ a οἱ πολλοὶ λεγουσιν. ‘ Ἁ Ἅ)ὦ » , > ze: 3 ΙΝ. ᾿Αλλὰ γὰρ οὔτε τούτων οὐδέν ἐστιν, οὐδέ y ΕΥΣ » , e > A / 3 ΄ » , εἴ τινος GKNKOATE ὡς ἐγὼ παιδεύειν ἐπιχειρῶ ἀνθρώ- ΄ς ΄ ’΄ xat ΄ » , Tous Kal χρήματα πράττομαι, οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἀληθές. > my. ἢ i? rn Ν Ss Ν ev ἐπεὶ Kal τοῦτό ye μοι δοκεῖ καλὸν εἶναι, εἴ τις οἷος

» ΕΣ , 2 J a , Φ T εἴη παιδεύειν ἀνθρώπους ὥσπερ Γοργίας τε ὃ

3. τοὺς] H. brackets. But if we read αὐτοὺς just before, follow- ing the weight of MSS., τοὺς is required by the Greek.

was ignorant,—the fault he himself so strongly reprobated in others.

I. ἀλλὰ γὰρ] ‘ But the truth ied Be ΣΕ

3. τοὺς πολλοὺς] A modest way of saying ‘all of you.’ Cf. Tsocr. Xvi. 23. p. 363, τί ἂν ὑμῖν τὰ πολλὰ λέγοιμι; and Rep. 556 8, τὰ πολλὰ τῶν ἑκουσίων συμβολαίων.

ἀλλήλους διδάσκειν τε καὶ φρά- ¢ev| This is ἃ hysteron pro- teron: Dig. 308. With φρά- (ev is to be supplied of course ἀλλήλοις, dropped by an idiom of abbreviation: Dig. 233.

14. ὥσπερ Γοργίας] Gorgias is spoken of by Isocrates as having made greater profits by teaching than any other man of his profession. Yet the sum was but small: ὁ δὲ πλεῖστα κτησάμενος ὧν ἡμεῖς μνημονεύομεν,

Γοργίας 6 Λεοντῖνος, though ἃ single man and unburdened by Liturgies, χιλίους μόνους στατῆρας κατέλιπε. Isocr. xv. 155. p. 83. The ὑποκριταὶ, he says, ib. 157, made much greater fortunes. Nor indeed is Socrates saying that the profits made by the Sophists were great. The sum which Socrates mentions below, 20 Ὁ, as Evenus’ price, 5 mine (500 francs), seems to have been above the average: Iso- crates, Xill. 3. p. 291, speaks of 3 or 4 mine (3-400 fr.) as a common price. Isocrates has been said, it is true, to have taken as much as Io mine for his rhetorical course ; Gorgias and Prodicus even 100. But what made the frequenting of Sophists’ courses expensive was that people never thought they had had enough of them.

2

52 ΠΛΑΤΩ͂ΝΟΣ

a Q\ , e a xe , es r Ὶ Λεοντῖνος καὶ Προδικος ὁ Κεῖος καὶ Ἱππίας ο ᾿Ηλεῖος. p- 19 / ἣν σ΄ 5. yy el ᾿ » Ἂς aN τούτων yap ἕκαστος, ὦ ἄνδρες, οἷος T ἐστὶν ἰὼν if a ’ Ἂς gy iw V4 an εἰς ἑκάστην τῶν πόλεων τοὺς νέους, οἷς ἔξεστι τῶν e a ~ en) om - Ἃ , ἑαυτῶν πολιτῶν προῖκα Evveivat ᾧ av βούλωνται, / / QA , if , sTouTous πείθουσι Tas ἐκείνων ξυνουσίας ἀπολιπόντας Ῥ. 20 / “- 7 , Ν V4 σφίσι ξυνεῖναι χρήματα διδόντας καὶ χάριν προσει- ‘4 > - γ᾽ > , VE, δέναι. ἐπεὶ καὶ ἄλλος ἀνὴρ ἐστι Πάριος ἐνθάδε ὮΝ SN 3 / 3 an 3 yy \ σοφός, ov ἐγὼ ἠσθόμην ἐπιδημοῦντα' ἔτυχον yap Χ » Ne ἫΝ / ΄ c προσελθὼν ἀνδρὶ os τετέλεκε χρήματα σοφισταῖς ΕΝ "ὦ 5, , a , τοπλείω ἢ ξύμπαντες οἱ ἄλλοι, Καλλίᾳ τῷ ᾿ἹἹππονίκου" an 9 3 VA 3 Ν M ’ 5 , Gre ei τοῦτον οὖν ἀνηρομην---ἐστὸν yap αὐτῷ δύο υἱέε---- K AN > δ 5; 72 ’ lg \ er ἽΝ ΩΝ αλλία, nv δ᾽ ἐγώ, εἰ μέν σου τῶ υἱέε πώλω ἢ , / δ x » a F μόσχω ἐγενέσθην, εἴχομεν ἂν αὐτοῖν ἐπιστάτην λα- an ἐν vA δ ΒΩ 5 x , x βεῖν καὶ μισθώσασθαι, ὃς ἐμελλεν avT@ καλώ τε Kal 5» Ν ᾽ \ , 3 ΕΟ eS "Δ τ6 ἀγαθὼ ποιήσειν τὴν προσήκουσαν ἀρετὴν ἦν δ᾽ ἂν b ie x “ « “ Ἃ a a “ > οὗτος ἢ TOY ἱππικῶν τις ἢ τῶν γεωργικῶν" νῦν ὃ » Ἂν >’ / 3 “4 / > a > fal ἂν 3 ἐπειδὴ ἀνθρώπω ἐστὸν, τίνα αὐτοῖν ἐν νῷ ἐχεις ἐπι- iA lal / an J 5» ἴω an στάτην λαβεῖν ; Tis τῆς τοιαύτης ἀρετῆς, τῆς ἀνθρω- , “ , δὲ , 5S AS πίνης TE καὶ πολιτικῆς, ἐπιστήμων ἐστίν ; οἰμαι yap 14. καλώ τε καὶ ἀγαθὼ] So Oxon, introduce a synaleepha.

It seems unnecessary to

~

5. τούτους πείθουσι] The there is quite as good a field

construction is changed from the infin. to a finite verb. Dig. 277. The change of construc- tion is not gratuitous, but ex- presses (ironical) admiration. The passage in Theages, 128 a, is a reminiscence of this pas- sage, including the change of construction.

6. mpocedéva | The πρὸς stands compounded in its ad- verbial and not in its prepo- sitional sense. Dig. 120.

4. ἐπεὶ καὶ] The connecting thought is—‘and at Athens

for professed teachers as else- where.’

8. ὃν ἐγὼ ἠσθόμην] Socrates im- plies that he speaks from hear- say when he states ἐστὶν ἐνθάδε.

το. Καλλίᾳ] Cf. Cratyl. 391 Ὁ, οἱ σοφισταί, οἷσπερ καὶ ὁ ἀδελφός σου Καλλίας πολλὰ τελέσας χρή- ματα σοφὸς δοκεῖ εἶναι. “ Cal- lias fuit omnium Atheniensium sue etatis non modo facile di- tissimus, ita ut simpliciter 6 πλούσιος diceretur, sed etiam nequissimus suique peculil maxime prodigus.”—Fischer.

ANOAOTMIA ZOKPATOY2. 53

3 ’ x Xx a e7 “ 4 20. ge ἐσκέφθαι δια τὴν τῶν υἱέων κτῆσιν. ἐστι TIS,

4, δ , 53 a , “op ees) ’, ἔφην ἐγώ, ἢ οὔ; Πάνυ γε, ἢ δ᾽ os. Tis, ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, ν᾿ 4 Ν ΄ ΄ » , ΕΣ 3 καὶ ποδαπος, καὶ πόσου διδάσκει; Eunvos, edn, ὦ > 4 I 7, Ve me! 5 QA 3 \ Ν Ε > x ώκρατες, Πάριος, πέντε pv@v’ καὶ ἐγὼ τὸν Evnvov ε A » , \ , Nz 6 ἐμακάρισα, εἰ ws ἀληθῶς ἔχει ταύτην THY τέχνην καὶ 8 Ψ 3 a 7 > \ 3 XQ > N > οὕτως ἐμμελῶς διδάσκει. ἐγὼ οὖν Kal αὑτὸς ἐκαλλυ- ΄ »᾿ 3 7 A νόμην τε καὶ ἡβρυνόμην av, εἰ ἠπιστάμην ταῦτα.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ γὰρ ἐπίσταμαι, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι.

e ΄ » 3 ecg ΝΜ ἐν BENS Se fc. Expo- V. Ὕπολαβοι ἂν οὖν τις ὑμῶν ἰσως" ἀλλ᾽ ὦ Σώ- «Ὁ: FPO Ν Χ lo , e [4 7 Kpares, TO σὸν τί ἐστι πρᾶγμα; πόθεν αἱ διαβολαί το the vert Ω ΄ 2 » ‘ ΄ ὋΣ Ws liarities σοι αὗται γεγόνασιν; ov yap δήπου σοῦ ye οὐδὲν lari eae LEY. 3 IAD Bay, ᾿ γ : in himself, τῶν ἄλλων περιττότερον πραγματευομένου ἔπειτα heh , ΄ Xx , id 5 ΄ Μ istak TOO QUT φήμη τε καὶ λογος γέγονεν εἰ μὴ τι ἔπρατ- ΕΝ ἫΝ on 3 ,ὕ 3 Cet ae τες ἀλλοῖον ἢ οἱ πολλοί: λέγε οὖν ἡμῖν, TL ἐστιν, οἵ ΕἸΣ ΕΙΟΙΒῦ an

d ἵνα μὴ ἡμεῖς περὶ σοῦ αὐτοσχεδιάζωμεν. ταυτί μοι 15 Ἐς τ

“ / / Χ e “ ’ 53 ὡς δοκεῖ δίκαια λέγειν ὁ λέγων, Kay@ ὑμῖν πειράσομαι eae of the = > “ , “ a > ΄ς , , ἀποδεῖξαι, τί TOT ἐστι τοῦτο Ὁ ἐμοὶ πεποίηκε TO τε _ lowness of the preva- "ιν ᾿ at ie : i lent pre- 6. ἐγὼ οὖν] So Oxon. and 2 other MSS. ἔγωγε is not wanted rane here. to know- ledge,

9. Ὑπολάβοι ἂν οὖν] Here Socrates, though still ostensibly occupied with ‘the old ac- cusers, passes from the denial of the imputations current against him as a reputed σο- gos to an account of the per- sonal dislike which had be- fallen him individually. See Introd. p. xxxiv.

10. πρᾶγμα] In the sense of pursuit, or plan of life or study or the like. Cf. Crito 53 d, τὸ τοῦ Σωκράτους πρᾶγμα, Euthyd. 304 a, τοῦτο τοῦ πράγ- ματος σφῶν, 6, χαρίεν γέ τι πρᾶγμά ἐστιν ἡ φιλοσοφία.

The order of the words in this clause gives emphasis to

σόν" ‘ What is it, then, that you (since we are not to identify you with the σοφοὶ) have been about ?’

13. εἰ μὴ--- πολλοί] This clause is the double of σοῦ ye—zpay- ματευομένον" an instance of the widely extended idiom which I have ventured to call Binary Structure: Dig. 207. Very parallel is Thue. V. 97, καὶ τὸ ἀσφαλὲς ἡμῖν διὰ τὸ καταστραφῆ- vat ἂν παράσχοιτε.... ., εἰ μὴ πε- ριγένοισθε, τον Π ΤῈ εἰ μὴ περιγέ- νοισθε repeats διὰ τὸ καταστρα- φῆναι. ΟἿ, also Hom. Od. ii, 246, Εἴπερ yap κ᾿’ ᾿Οδυσεὺς κιλ., ἀλλά κεν αὐτοῦ ἀεικέα πότμον ἐπίσποι, Εἰ πλεόνεσσι μάχοιτο.

54

ΠΛΑΤΏΝΟΣ

Μ \ , , 9 ὄνομα καὶ THY διαβολὴν. ἀκούετε δή. Kal ἴσως μὲν P- 20

ἢ Ν ε a / > / 35, an ψ ὡς δόξω τισιν UM@V παίζειν, εὖ μέντοι LOTE, πασὰν υμιν

τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐρῶ" ἐγὼ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, δὶ

Ial > > Δ Ν / Ἂν an NG ὯΝ y+ οὐδὲν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ διὰ σοφίαν τινὰ τοῦτο TO ὄνομα EO XK.

/ ἊΣ if UL 4 3 εν 35) > 5ποίαν On σοφίαν ταύτην; ἥπερ ἐστὶν ἴσως avOpw-

Ἁ ἴ- πίνη σοφία.

Cae Hels Ν , , 3 T@ OVTL yap κινδυνεύω Ταυτὴν εἶναι

pes @ AY ἐς ΓΑ ΚΟΥ, A yx ” , A σοφὸς" οὗτοι δὲ TAX ἄν, οὗς ἄρτι ἔλεγον, μείζω τινὰ

x oy, / Ν 5 Ἃ » y , ἢ Kat avOpwrov σοφίαν σοφοὶ Elev, ἢ οὐκ ἔχω TL

,ὕ > \ \ » 5. Ὁ , λέγω: οὐ γὰρ δὴ ἔγωγε αὐτὴν ἐπίσταμαι, ἀλλ᾽ ὅστις

ὧν / t NSS a tae = 3) a v4 10 φησὶ ψεύδεταί τε καὶ ἐπὶ διαβολῇ TH ἐμῇ λέγει.

μὴ θορυβήσητε, μηδ᾽ δόξω τι ὑμῖν μέγα λέγειν. ov γὰρ ἐμὸν ἐρῶ

μοι, ὦ ἀνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι,

τ. ὄνομα] Of σοφός. See note on σοφός, 18 b.

5. ἥπερ κιιλ.)] ‘My wisdom is precisely (wep) that only wis- dom, as I believe (ἴσως), which is possible to man:’ namely (21 d, 23 b), knowledge of his own ignorance. Socrates speaks of this as knowledge because it implies two things ;—(1) the

|possession of a standard or ideal of knowledge, with the conception of a method for at- taining it; and (2) self-know- ledge, such as would result from the Socratic system of self-examination (cf. 38 a, note), revealing the amount of actual short-coming. This is know- ledge until the positive know- ledge is attained, and if that never can be, then this is the only knowledge. Socrates’ faith, however, in the partial attain- ableness of positive knowledge never wavered, and his mis- giving here must be restricted to the possibility of complete attainment.

- Φαίδρου τοῦδε.

ok εαν

Ν τον

8. ἢ οὐκ ἔχω τί λέγω] ‘Or some wisdom that—I know not how to characterise it. It is some predicate, alternative with μείζω ἢ κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον, which Socrates affects to be at a loss for. The idiom is an expe- dient for abbreviation; the sentence is hurried to its con- clusion after its point has been expressed, by a clause super- seding the enumeration of fur- ther particulars: cf. Dig. 257, where the present passage is especially compared with Gorg. 494 ἃ, (A) Φημὶ τὸν κνώμενον (B) Πότερον εἰ

\ \ , a aA »* τὴν κεφαλὴν μόνον κνησιῷ, ἢ ἔτι

ἡδέως ἂν βιῶναι.

τί σε ἐρωτῶ ;

12. οὐ γὰρ ἐμὸν] Cf. Symp. 177 ἃ, ἡ μέν μοι ἀρχὴ τοῦ λόγου ἐστὶ κατὰ τὴν Εὐριπίδου Μελανίπ- οὐ γὰρ ἐμὸς ὁ μῦθος ἀλλὰ Cf. also Alc. I. 113 e. The verse in the Me- lanippe was Οὐκ ἐμὸς 6 μῦθος ἀλλ᾽ ἐμῆς μητρὸς πάρα. So Eur. Hel. 513, Λόγος γάρ ἐστιν οὐκ ἐμός, σοφῶν δ᾽ ἔπος.

πὴην"

1 και

e

a a oS

orp

ἐμὴν ii SR hy ya Me Li, a tg

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY2.

»»"» 90

/ a x ᾽ ,ὕ ont \ 20. λόγον, ὃν ἂν λέγω, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ἀξιόχρεων ὑμῖν τὸν

21.

7 > , “ \ ra 5 ΄ ’ » / λέγοντα ἀνοίσω. τῆς yap ἐμῆς, εἰ δὴ Tis ἐστι σοφία Ἂς σ ’΄ rpc PZ ἊΝ. \ XN 3 καὶ οἵα, μάρτυρα ὑμῖν παρέξομαι τὸν θεὸν τὸν ἐν

Ὡς = \ ev) : , Δελφοῖς. Χαιρεφῶντα yap ἴστε που. οὗτος ἐμὸς TE

ε ᾿Ξ 53 > , ε a a , ε rae BY ἑταῖρος ἦν ἐκ νέου, καὶ ὑμῶν τῷ πλήθει ἑταῖρος TES

QA 7 Ἂν Ν , a > e lal

καὶ Evvehuye τὴν φυγὴν ταύτην καὶ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν κα- aA Εν XV e 3 A e ιν τῆλθε. καὶ ἴστε δὴ οἷος ἦν Χαιρεφῶν, ὡς σφοδρὸς > ξ ‘ » 3 ἐφ᾽ ὅ τι ὁρμήσειε. καὶ δή ποτε καὶ εἰς Δελφοὺς » Ἁ > ‘ ΄ Zz (2 σ

ἐλθὼν ἐτόλμησε τοῦτο μαντεύσασθαι: καί, ὅπερ

λέγω, μὴ θορυβεῖτε, ὦ avdpes’ ἤρετο γὰρ δή, εἴ τις

. σε , ΄ 3 « 4 ἐμοῦ εἴη σοφώτερος. ἀνεῖλεν οὖν ἡ Πυθία μηδένα

3. μάρτυρα---Δελφοῖς] “ There is no need (says Zeller, Phil. der Griechen II. p. 45. note 2), to deny the authenticity of the oracle, but we cannot regard it as having given the primary impulse to Socrates’ tour of enquiry. Socrates must have been already a known per- sonage for Cherephon to have put his question to the Pythia, or for her to have taken it up.” It is therefore semi-rhetorically that the oracle is here repre- sented as the cause of Socrates’ eccentric and unpopular pro- ceeding. The Iambic form,— σοφὸς Σοφοκλῆς &Kc.—in which the response appears in Diog. 11. 37, and Suid. σοφός, is a later invention—an expansion of the Pythia’s simple negative recited here.

6. καὶ ὑμῶν---κατῆλθε] This allusion to Cherephon’s ante- cedents is added not without purpose,—to dispose the court to hear more indulgently the story which is to follow.

In detail :—The full point of the phrase πλήθει ἑταῖρος is

to be found in the contrast of the adherents of the Thirty; more especially the ἑταῖροι of the oligarchical clubs, and the body of 3000 hoplites organ- ised by the Thirty from their partisans. φυγὴν refers to the subsequent expulsion of all not included in the 3000 from Athens, and their withdrawal presently after (when they found no safety in Attica) to Thebes, Megara, Oropus, Chal- cis, Argos, &c. This flight, as an event still vividly remem- bered, is called ταύτην, ‘the re- cent.’ So Isocr. matches it with the old troubles under the Pi- sistratidee ---τὴν δημοκρατίαν. . . δὶς ἤδη καταλυθεῖσαν, καὶ τὰς φυγὰς τὰς ἐπὶ τῶν τυράννων καὶ τὰς ἐπὶ τῶν τριάκοντα γενομένας, Vill. 123. Ρ. 184. With κατῆλθε cf. Lysias, X. 4. p. 116, ἐξ ὅτου ὑμεῖς κατε- ληλύθατε' it is the recognised description of the restoration of democracy and end of the eight months’ reign of the Thirty, signalised by the solemn return of Thrasybulus and the exiles from Pireus to Athens.

Io

ἀν Te ee eee

and the course of experi- ments by which he had con-

firmed that conviction ;

56 TAATOQNO®

σοφώτερον εἶναι. καὶ τούτων πέρι ὁ ἀδελφὸς ὑμῖν p.

αὐτοῦ οὑτοσὶ μαρτυρήσει, ἐπειδὴ ἐκεῖνος τετελεύ-

THKEV.

VI. Σκέψασθε δὲ ὧν ἕνεκα ταῦτα λέγω" μέλλω

syap ὑμᾶς διδάξειν, ὅθεν μοι ἡ διαβολὴ γέγονε. ταῦτα

Ἂ 3 XN > , 5 , / τ ie yap ἐγὼ ἀκούσας ἐνεθυμούμην οὑτωσί τί ποτε λέγει

« y Ν / Cae a TaN ‘ XN ΕΝ ὁ θεός, καὶ τί ποτε αἰνίττεται; ἐγὼ γὰρ δὴ οὔτε

έγα οὔτε σμικρὸν ξύνοιδα ἐ αὐτῷ σοφὸ ὦν" τί οὖν μέγ μικρ μαυτᾷ ς ὦν" τί

\ / / ae aN 14 ey 3 \ ποτὲ λέγει φάσκων ἐμὲ σοφώτατον εἶναι; ov yap

΄ / XN , an Ἂς τοδήπου ψεύδεταί ye’ οὐ γὰρ θέμις αὐτῷ: καὶ πολὺν

A yA ’ t / ΄ yay 7 μὲν χρόνον ἠπόρουν, TL ποτε λέγει, ETTELTA pmoyls

vA ον lp ’ a 1g A 3 Υ̓͂ TQVU ἐπι ζχτησιν αὐτου τοιαυτὴν τινὰ ετρατομβμῆὴν.

cy > , an , Ἂς 5 ε ἦλθον ἐπί τινα τῶν δοκούντων σοφῶν εἰναι, ὡς

> lat aya / 3 i aS tal A 3 ἐνταῦθα, εἴ πέρ που, ἐλέγξων τὸ μαντεῖον καὶ ἀπο-

a a a oS e a i i, 15 φανῶν TH χρησμῷ ὅτι οὑτοσὶ ἐμοῦ σοφώτερος ἐστι;

\ ΠΣ SNAG 7: a 3 a Spe, σὺ δ᾽ ἐμὲ ἔφησθα. διασκοπῶν οὖν τοῦτον----ονοματι

Ν 7 , 3 / an “- γὰρ οὐδὲν δέομαι λέγειν, ἣν δέ τις τῶν πολιτικῶν,

Ν A aN an πο { Ss -S σρος OV εγὼ σκοτων Τοιοῦτον TL ἔπαθον ω avo ες re

᾿Αθηναῖοι----καὶ διαλεγόμενος αὐτῷ, ἔδοξέ μοι οὗτος

I. ἀδελφὸς] Cheerecrates : Xen. Mem. 11. iii. 1

2. μαρτυρήσει] The μαρτυρία is to be supposed to follow at once. Introd. p. xviii.

10. ov γὰρ θέμις αὐτῷ] CF. Pind. Pyth. ix. 42, τὸν οὐ θεμι- τὸν ψεύδει θιγεῖν.

17. τῶν πολιτικῶν] In itself this word means no more than ‘statesman, in the sense in which it might have been ap- plied to Pericles, and is applied, Legg. 693 a, to the old law- givers and settlers of Hellas. But an Athenian of Plato’s time speaking of Athens would

ἂν na 53 Ν, 3, a 200 ἀνὴρ δοκεῖν μὲν εἶναι σοφὸς ἄλλοις τε πολλοῖς

mean by πολιτικοὶ that class of men who made public J business a profession,—rovs πολιτικοὺς λεγομένους (Politic. 303 e). As distinguished from the ῥήτορες, they were men who sought appointments to public offices, while the ῥήτορες were pro- fessional speakers in the Ec- clesia. Cf. 23 e, and see Introd. p- X. note I.

1g. διαλεγόμενος αὐτῷ, ἔδοξέ zot| This inversion of govern- ment is of common occurrence among the forms of changed construction: Dig. 271. ἔδοξε s ‘I came to think,’ as 32 b.

q

4 ,

Ke ih

21.

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY2. 57

» ’; A Ψ' « A 3 3 ve » ἀνθρώποις καὶ μάλιστα ἑαυτῷ, εἶναι δ᾽ οὔ κάπειτα

᾽ Ψ Ψ “ ὃ ’ὔ σ W \ 53 Ul ἃ ἐπειρώμην AUT@ OELKVYUVAL, OTL OLOLTO μέν εἰναι coos,

ΕΣ δ᾽ » > 00 3 Ψ > 60 Ν Ne εἴη δ᾽ οὔ. ἐντεῦθεν οὖν τούτῳ TE ἀπηχθόμην καὶ πο a a ΄ \ > Χ ’ 5 > \ > λοῖς τῶν παρόντων, πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν δ᾽ οὖν ἀπιὼν ἐλο- 4 σ / \ a 3 4 3 XN id γιζόμην ὅτι τούτου μὲν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐγὼ σοφώ- 5 ’ » uA οὖ A e “ 3 ’ » \ TEpos ely’ κινδυνεύει μὲν γὰρ ἡμῶν οὐδέτερος οὐδὲν \ Ἂς "57 >’ - ‘ay f ,ὔ ΕΣ ὦ καλὸν κἀγαθὸν εἰδέναι, ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος μὲν οἴεταί τι εἰδέ- > 3 ei 3 Ἂν , a ἊΣ > 3 » A ναι οὐκ εἰδώς, ἐγὼ δὲ, ὥσπερ οὖν οὐκ οἶδα, οὐδὲ Wy BY A a , ων 3 a οἴομαι: ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ , 7 3 a aA \ ὃ ἠδὲ ” τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, OTL ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι 10 / A Yew: Μἷ 3S" A > , εἰδέναι. ἐντεῦθεν ἐπ᾿ ἄλλον Ha τῶν ἐκείνου δο- Ψ / 3 , ἌΝ A κούντων σοφωτέρων εἶναι, καί μοι ταὐύτα ταῦτα 2) ἂς 3 ~ 3 ἐᾷ Ν ΕΝ a ἐδοξε" καὶ ἐνταῦθα κακείνῳ καὶ ἄλλοις πολλοῖς 3 , ἀπηχθομην. A eno ae ” > a 5 , VII. Mera ταῦτ᾽ οὖν ἤδη ἐφεξῆς ἦα, αἰσθανόμε-

"μ᾿,

\ ἣν , Ν x a > Ψ νος μὲν καὶ λυπούμενος καὶ δεδιως ὅτι ἀπηχθανόμην, a A > a 3 i 53 Ν A A X ὕμως δὲ ἀναγκαῖον ἐδόκει εἶναι TO τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ a 4 3 A Ν πλείστου ποιεῖσθαι" ἱτέον οὖν σκοποῦντι τὸν χρησ- J , ’ὔὕ i) ἈΝ a / ~ 5 re μόν, TL λέγει, ἐπὶ ἅπαντας τοὺς TL δοκοῦντας εἰδέναι. κ᾿ κ \ , 5°" ’ IT a τῇ κ καὶ νὴ τὸν κύνα, ὦ ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι' δεῖ γὰρ πρὸς ε n 2 A 7 " cy \ SEN By, , om ὑμᾶς τἀληθὴ λέγειν ἢ μὴν ἐγὼ ἐπαθὸν τι τοιοῦτον" e \ ΄ » a Μ tA > , ΄ οἱ μὲν μάλιστα εὐδοκιμοῦντες ἔδοξαν μοι ὀλίγου δεῖν - if ’ “ 8. “ Ἂν \ , τοῦ πλείστου ἐνδεεῖς εἶναι ζητοῦντι κατὰ Tov θεόν,

5 \ “ ΄ » , - ἄλλοι δὲ δοκοῦντες φαυλοτεροι ἐπιεικέστεροι εἶναι

το

» \ \ , » A Vi + leper \ ἄνδρες πρὸς τὸ φρονίμως ἔχειν. δεῖ On ὑμῖν τὴν

SiueN / 3 ΄σ a ’ Ν ΄ ἐμὴν πλανὴν ἐπιδεῖξαι ὠσπερ πονοὺς τινας πονοὺυν -

20. νὴ τὸν κύνα] What was mouth of Socrates. In Ατὶ-

meant by this oath is clear from Gorg. 482 b, μὰ τὸν κύνα τὸν Αἰγυπτίων Gedv,—that is, the dog-headed or, more correctly, jackal-headed Anubis. In Plato this oath is only found in the

stoph. Vesp. 83, a slave, Sosias, uses the same oath.

23. τοῦ πλείστου ἐνδεεῖς] Cf. Euthyd. 292 ὁ, τοῦ ἴσου ἡμῖν ἐνδεῖ ἢ ἔτι πλείονος,

ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

58

o Se Lie, e , 7 \ Ξ TOS, WA μοι καὶ ἀνέλεγκτος ἡ μαντεία γένοιτο. μετὰ P. 2% \ x \ 3: ON \ ΟΥ̓ ,ὔ γὰρ τους πολιτικους na €77L TOUS TOLNTAaS Τοὺς TE “ n Ἂν ἊΝ “ ’ AN XN τῶν τραγῳδιῶν Kai τοὺς τῶν διθυράμβων καὶ τοὺς b + « » a δι τ » ΄ / ἄλλους, ὡς ἐνταῦθα ἐπ᾽ αὐτοφώρῳ καταληψόμενος » XN > / > , av 5 τ' 4 βέμαυτον ἀμαθέστερον ἐκείνων ὄντα. ἀναλαμβάνων 5 3 an Ἂς y “ » , ἐφ οὖν αὐτῶν τὰ ποιήματα, ἃ μοι ἐδόκει μάλιστα πε- A 3 “ I x > \ / 4 πραγματεῦσθαι αὐτοῖς, διηρώτων ἂν αὐτοὺς τί λέ- ων “ Ἔ > 3 cal > / your, iv ἅμα τι καὶ μανθάνοιμι παρ αὐτῶν. αἰσχυ- 3 Ca , a 3 3, 3 pe “ Ἅ νομαι οὖν ὑμῖν εἰπεῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τἀληθη ὅμως δὲ Ζ / « yy ἂν - aad: 2A a IOpNTEOV. ὡς ἔπος yap εἰπεῖν ὀλίγου αὐτῶν ἀπάντες e ΄ Ἃ / ᾽ Coe 5 ao οἱ παρόντες ἂν βέλτιον ἔλεγον περὶ ὧν αὐτοὶ ἐπεποι- ΄ SY 5 a “ » τον, NKETAY. ἔγνων οὖν καὶ περὶ τῶν ποιητῶν ἐν ὀλίγῳ I. καὶ ἀνέλεγκτος] H’s conjecture κἂν ἐλεγκτὸς (1) is Mere con- jecture ; (2) would not give the sense he wishes, since ἐλεγκτὸς is not ‘contradicted’ but ‘admitting contradiction ;’ and (3) if it did, would spoil the general meaning, since Socrates’ leading principle throughout is that the oracle must be ¢rue, and that the proof of this would come out simultaneously with the true sense. 12. ἐν ὀλίγῳ] H’s conjecture ἑνὶ λόγῳ is needless. For ἐν ὀλίγῳ means the same, viz. ‘in short,’ not ‘in a short time ;’ just like ἐν βραχεῖ, Symp. 217 a, ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ, Isocr. 1. 40. p. 11. Of course ἑνὶ λόγῳ occurs also, 6. g. Lysias, xill. 38. p. 133; and H might have argued something from the variation of reading between kar’ ὀλίγον and κατὰ λόγον, Thue. vi. 34. med.

τ. ἵνα μοι --- γένοιτο] “ With the object of finding positively unumpeachable proof of the divine declaration.’ A double meaning is wrapped up in μοι, —it is both ‘by my agency’ and ‘for my satisfaction.’ signifies the superaddition of demonstration, which all the world must accept, to the cer- tainty which had been in So- crates an exercise of faith. μαντεία signifies (1) the process by which oracles are obtained, or (2), as here, and 29 a, the fact oracularly communicated, This signification still remains

‘ Καὶ

distinct from that of μαντεῖον, |

which was the form of words

in which the oracle was given ; ᾧ

μαντεία 18. the meaning of the a distinction to feel which we have only to remem- ber that to get at the meaning from the words was in the case of oracles a process in- volving exactly that degree of difficulty which suited the god or his prophet.

II. of παρόντες] With Stallb. and against Wolf, we must take this to mean ‘those pre- sent at each several time,’ and not ‘the present audience.’

μαντεῖον"

AMNOAOTIA ZOKPATOY?2. 59

Pe ad a ΄ » \ , 22. τοῦτο, OTL οὐ σοφίᾳ ποιοῖεν ἃ ποιοῖεν, ἀλλὰ φύσει XN So) / 4 e ’ Ν e eTuwt καὶ ἐνθουσιάζοντες, ὥσπερ οἱ θεομάντεις καὶ οἱ ἢ , \ \ @ , \ \ . χρησμῳδοί' καὶ yap οὗτοι λέγουσι μέν πολλὰ καὶ so” \ >OQ\ 2 ΄, αν , καλα, ἴσασι δὲ οὐδὲν ὧν λέγουσι. τοιοῦτον τί μοι > , ΄ Ν e Ν , z x 4 ἐφάνησαν παθὸος καὶ οἱ ποιηταὶ memovOoTes’ καὶ apa > , 2. A ν \ , > , Ν a) ἠσθόμην αὐτῶν dia τὴν ποίησιν οἰομένων καὶ τάλλα ΄ 3 2 ΄ ἃ > 5 » “ 3 σοφωτάτων εἶναι ανθρώπων, ἃ οὐκ ἦσαν. ἀπῇα οὖν Ἂν » a “ » a 37 , @ Kal ἐντεῦθεν τῷ αὐτῷ οἰομενος περιγεγονέναι, ᾧπερ καὶ τῶν πολιτικῶν. a 5 > \ ΄ 5 VIII. Τελευτῶν οὖν ἐπὶ τοὺς χειροτέχνας ja’ ἃ > “΄“ \ ὃ ᾽δὲ » / « », ἐμαυτῷ γὰρ ξυνήδειν οὐδὲν ἐπισταμένῳ, ὡς ἔπος 9 a , We Mark “ τὰ τῷ \ ὮΝ εἰπεῖν, τούτους OE y ἤδειν ὅτι εὑρήσοιμι πολλὰ καὶ XN > , Ν ’ὔ ay > » , καλα ἐπισταμένους. Kal τούτου μὲν οὐκ ἐψεύσθην, ᾽ 9549. id AEN. ’ > , / {a αλλ ἡπίσταντο ἃ ἐγὼ οὐκ ἡπισταμὴν καὶ μου ταὐτῃ , 3 > 5) > - oe, σοφώτεροι ἦσαν. ἀλλ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ταὐτόν ” » e 4 a e , μοι ἐδοξαν ἔχειν ἁμάρτημα, ὅπερ Kal οἱ ποιηταί, καὶ vias ἈΝ ἊΣ ς τ \ , Ἂς > οἱ ἀγαθοὶ δημιουργοί: διὰ τὸ THY τέχνην καλῶς ἐξερ- ΄ -“ > -.} Ν 5S) \ , γάζεσθαι ἕκαστος ἠξίου καὶ TaAAa τὰ μέγιστα σο- , Lo} > “ -“ e ΄ ,ὔ φωτατος εἶναι, καὶ αὐτῶν αὕτη ἡ πλημμέλεια ἐκείνην Ν ΄, » , “ > » δὴ 5 ‘ » eTnv σοφίαν ἀποκρύπτειν WOT ἐμε ἐμαυτὸν ἀνερω- 20. ἀποκρύπτειν] This is the reading of one MS. Φ. The dominant reading of the MSS. (including Oxon.) is ἀποκρίπτει. The editors have espoused ἀπέκρυπτεν᾽ but such a text would

not account for such a variant as ἀποκρύπτει in the best MSS. ᾿Αποκρύπτει itself is scarcely possible (on the principle of πεπραγ-

The usage of the orators e.g. Antipho vi. 14. p. 143, proves this; cf. Antipho ii. A. πολλοὶ τῶν περιεστώτων τούτων a. 9. p. 116, and (esp.) y. 5. ταῦτα πάντα ἀκριβῶς ἐπίστανται, Pp. 118, οὐδεὶς yap ὅστις τῶν παρ. Andoc.i.139.p. 18,008’ ὑμῶν τῶν ὄντων οὐκ ἂν ὀκνηρότερος.... ἦν. καθημένων οὐδεὶς ἂν ἐπιτρέψειε. Lysias uses in the same mean- 16, ἔδοξαν] The nom. is καὶ ing, but without the same pos- οἱ ἀγαθοὶ δημιουργοί. The force sibility of question, of mapaye- of the aor. is, as in 21 ¢, ἔδοξε, vopevot. ‘The expressions used, ‘I came to see.’

whether for the audience or 18. ra μέγιστα] Politics are for the court, are different; especially meant.

5

or

60 ΠΛΑΤΩΏΝΟΣ

a e Ἂν nw fa) , δ : τᾷν ὑπὲρ τοῦ χρησμοῦ, πότερα δεξαίμην ἂν οὕτως P. 22.

eA x δ," td ἊΝ Ἂ \ > A ὥσπερ ἔχω EXELV, NTE TL σοφὸς ὧν THY ἐκείνων / z > ᾽ν N > 7 Ὰ > 4 ἃ σοφίαν μητε ἀμαθὴς τὴν ἀμαθίαν, ἢ ἀμφότερα ἃ δ᾽ τ oy x » , 5 » a ΩΝ ἐκείνοι ἐχουσιν ἔχειν. ἀπεκρινάμην οὖν ἐμαυτῷ καὶ a Ate. lame ὦ aS aS 5TO χρησμῷ, OTL μοι λυσιτελοῖ ὥσπερ ἔχω ἔχειν.

which 3 AN δὴ an ’ ἦς 3 y Mane IX. Ἔκ ταυτησὶ δὴ τῆς ἐξετάσεως, ὦ ἄνδρες

᾽ ΄σ ΧΝ ΄ ments fur- ᾿Αθηναῖοι, πολλαὶ μὲν ἀπέχθειαί μοι γεγόνασι καὶ Pp. 23.

ther sup-

3 - ,ὕ , “ \ plied the οἷαι χαλεπώταται καὶ βαρύταται, ὥστε πολλὰς δια- key to the

. . \ 3 3 » la 4 / \ an 4 sonny Boras am αὐτῶν γεγονέναι, ὀνομα δὲ τοῦτο λέγεσθαι, ο Θ

Β . x 5 + 7 e A / prejudice τοσοῴος εἰναι. οἴονται yap με ἑκάστοτε οἱ παρόντες against a Pan 5 Pe eee ἢ , κατ Sarees ταῦτα αὐτὸν εἶναι σοφόν, ἃ ἂν ἄλλον ἐξελέγξω" TO ye \ ͵ 5) 397 ~ + ε \ \ 5 ee δὲ κινδυνεύει, ὦ ἄνδρες, τῷ ὄντι ὁ Geos σοφὸς εἶναι, ῬΘΙΒΟΠΆ, Wi a rn i n , “ « enmities Καὶ ἐν τῷ χρησμῷ τούτῳ τοῦτο λέγειν, ὅτι ἡ ἀνθρω- which , , ΓΕ We Ν ΝΥ ΣΣ ΣΟ ἘΠ ΕΝ See Cees \ theyhad πίνῃ σοφία ὀλίγου τινὸς ἀξία ἐστὶ καὶ οὐδενός" Kal excited ; 7) σῷ Ὁ > , Ν 4 on 15 φαίνεται TOUT οὐ λέγειν τὸν Σωκράτη, προσκεχρῆσθαι

\ ewe te. ae wh ον ΄, if, “ δὲ τῷ ἐμῷ OVOMATL, EME παράδειγμα ποιούμενος, ὥσπερ b ΩΝ > 5» “ @ e a ὌΝ Ἅ Fi QV εἰ εἰποι OTL οὗτος ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνθρωποι, σοφώτατος

3 (of ad , yy “ 3 Ἂν ἐστιν, οστις ὥσπερ Σωκράτης EVVWKEV OTL OVOEVOS

“ , > Tails) , \ , n°? 3 2 ὟΝ ἀξιός ἐστι TH ἀληθείᾳ πρὸς σοφίαν. ταῦτ᾽ οὖν ἐγὼ

μάτευμαι, ἀπείρηκα, Pheedo gg d, ὁρῶ ib. 98 b); but points to ἀπο- κρύπτειν, Which is to be governed by ἔδοξε understood from ἔδοξαν, which gives also the best sense.

6. ταυτησὶ] The --ὶ is not always strictly δεικτικόν, Lob. Path. Pars 11. p. 230, “ Sepe Oratores, etiamsi de absentibus loquuntur, quos modo designarunt et auditoribus quasi spectandos propo- nunt, iota demonstrativo utuntur, et seepius etiam negligunt, si

de presentibus.” Cf. τουτὶ, 37 6. ἐξετάσεως] We cannot fol- low Oxon. and 3 other MSS. in reading ἔξεως, which is the result of an old contraction misread. 15. τοῦτ᾽ οὐ] This conjecture

of F. A. Wolf we must necds adopt for τοῦτον of the MSS.

9. ὄνομα δὲ----εἶναι] Lit. ‘and 11. τὸ δὲ] Accus. of pronoun T am called by this name, that neuter, standing for the whole IT am wise. The subject of λές. sentence immediately follow- γεσθαι is [ἐμὲ], not ὄνομα. And ing: Dig. 19. σοφὸς εἶναι 15. by attraction for 14. καὶ οὐδενός" ‘07 nothing :’ [τὸ] εἶναί pe σοφόν. the καὶ is disjunctive.

ἈΠΟΛΟΓΊΑ SOKPATOYS. 61

A Μ Ἂς nw 4 cal QA 3 ~ A XN 23. μὲν ἔτι καὶ νῦν περιιὼν ζητῶ Kal ἐρευνῶ κατὰ TOV ΄ Ν ~ 2 a Ν if Μ “᾿ ᾿ θεόν, καὶ τῶν ἀστῶν καὶ ξένων ἂν τινα οἴωμαι σοῴφον J Ξ Ν 3 ΄ὔ Xx 5 lal rn A >’ εἶναι: Kal ἐπειδάν μοι μὴ δοκῇ; τῷ θεῷ βοηθῶν ev- σ » Ν᾿ , Ν ε Ν / “ δείκνυμαι OTL οὐκ ἐστι σοφὸς. καὶ ὑπο TaUTNS τῆς > , yy a aA , a , XN τ ἀσχολίας οὔτε τι τῶν τῆς πόλεως πρᾶξαί μοι σχολὴ 8 ᾽ »” s », A ’ , > Ὁ 3 , γέγονεν ἄξιον λόγου οὔτε τῶν οἰκείων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν πενίᾳ

μυρίᾳ εἰμὶ διὰ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ λατρείαν.

XN \ , e , > “ e X. Πρὸς δὲ τούτοις οἱ νέοι μοι ἐπακολουθοῦντες, and τ Ρ̓ 3 ; τὸ yi moreover ois μάλιστα σχολὴ ἐστιν, οἱ τῶν πλουσιωτάτων, Bee το text for / / ,ὔ > , lal τ αὐτόματοι χαίρουσιν ἀκούοντες ἐξεταζομένων τῶν 10 fastening , 3 ΄ Tea os 53 on Socrates ἀνθρώπων, Kat αὐτοὶ πολλάκις ἐμὲ μιμοῦνται EIT _ individu- 3 ally the ΄ ᾽ 4 yy 2 ἐπιχειροῦσιν ἄλλους e€eTae’ κάπειτα, οἶμαι, EV- imputation , \ > , > ΄, \ "Ὁ 7 (previously ρίσκουσι πολλὴν ἀφθονίαν οἰομένων μὲν εἰδέναι TL only a » ΄ “ὦ ἡ Sa Σὸν x 8. ἢ > A 3 class-impu- ἀνθρώπων, εἰδότων δὲ ὀλίγα ἢ οὐδέν. ἐντεῦθεν οὖν tation) of

3 a , > ἢ 5 9 perverting οἱ Um αὐτῶν ἐξεταζόμενοι ἐμοὶ ὀργίζονται, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ 15 the youth;

« lal Ν Ke e , , > 4 αὑτοῖς, καὶ λέγουσιν ὡς Σωκρατὴς τίς ἐστι μιαρω- Ν. / X / x » ? ἃ τατος καὶ διαφθείρει τοὺς νέους" καὶ ἐπειδὰν τις

1. μὲν ἔτι] Oxon. gives μὲν ἔχω ἔτι, but in the hand of a re- storer, and not on the traces of the old letters. (Gaisf. wrongly represents ἔχων as the reading. ἔχων would be redundant, like ἔχων φλυαρεῖς, &c.) 2. καὶ ξένων] So Oxon. and 3 other MSS. Edd. καὶ τῶν ξένων. But the variation is in the spirit of Plato: ef. Dig. 237, and add Pheedo 85 a, αὐτὴ ἥ re ἀηδὼν καὶ χελιδὼν καὶ ὁ ἔποψ. 11. μιμοῦνται] So Oxon, &c. μιμούμενο: ig a con- jecture of Hermann.

4. ὑπὸ ταύτης] Later, 31 0, he gives a second reason for abstaining from public life.

6. ἐν πενίᾳ μυρίᾳ] Cf. Legg. 677 c, the beautiful expression

ster compares Rep. 539 b, oi μειρακίσκοι, ὅταν TO πρῶτον λόγων γεύωνται, ὡς παιδιᾷ αὐτοῖς κατα- χρῶνται, ἀεὶ εἰς ἀντιλογίαν χρώ- μένοι, καὶ μιμούμενοι τοὺς ἐξελέ-

μυρίαν τινὰ φοβερὰν ἐρημίαν, Rep. 520 6, μυρίῳ βελτίων.

For the fact, with respect to Socrates, cf. with Stallbaum Xen. CEcon. ii. 3.

11. καὶ αὐτοὶ---- ἐξετάζειν] For-

γχοντας αὐτοὶ ἄλλους ἐλέγχουσι καὶ ἐκ τούτων δὴ αὐτοί τε καὶ τὸ ὅλον φιλοσοφίας πέρι εἰς τοὺς ἄλλους διαβέβληνται.

ἐμὲ μιμοῦνται] ΒΥ practising upon each other.

and lastly, in com- bination

62

MAATQNOZ

3 \ » a Ae. o Wy Mad i + QUTOUS EPWTE, O Tl TTOLMV Και; TL διδάσκων, EXOUVGL

\ ΣᾺΝ a 4) A d \ ἊΝ a μὲν οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγνοοῦσιν, ἵνα δὲ μὴ δοκῶσιν

» “ Ν \ ΩΣ r if ΄ ἀπορεῖν, τὰ κατὰ πάντων τῶν φιλοσοφούντων προ-

a , o ἊΝ / Ν \ τς Ἂς χείρα TQAUTA λεγουσιν, ΟΣ Ta μέτεωρα Kal TQ ὕπο

es ὧν » \ / \ Χ “ , syns, Kat θεοὺς μὴ νομίζειν, καὶ τὸν ἥττω λόγον

/ σ΄ \ \ » a δὶ 3 Ἃ 3... Κ᾽ κρείττω ποιεῖν. τὰ yap ἀληθη, οἰμαι, οὐκ av ἐθέ-

ik “ if / vA λοιεν λέγειν, ὅτι κατάδηλοι γίγνονται προσποιού-

μενοι μὲν εἰδέναι, εἰδότες δὲ οὐδέν.

ot 3 5 ATE OU’, OLUaL,

, / A φιλότιμοι ὄντες καὶ σφοδροὶ καὶ πολλοί, καὶ ξυντε-

Ψ. Ν la) {4 AUF ES a > / τοταγμένως Kal πιθανῶς λέγοντες περὶ ἐμοῦ, ἐμπεπλη-

« a ἃ cy Ἂς / \ A κασιν ὑμῶν Ta ὦτα καὶ πάλαι καὶ σφοδρῶς δια-

βάλλοντες.

/ ’ ye » ’ ἐκ τούτων καὶ Μέλητος μοι ἐπέθετο καὶ

9. ξυντεταγμένως] So BSZ. H with two MSS. ξυντεταμένως.

But ξυντεταγμ. means ‘in set array :’ YR

οἱ ξυντεταγμένοι ῥήτορες.

4. ταῦτα] Latin ista; idio- matically expressive of con- tempt, Dig. 318.

ὅτι τὰ μετέωρα] Understand ζητῶ or the like, by com- parison of το b.

12. ἐκ τούτων] ‘It is upon this footing’—namely that of an old general prejudice, ag- gravated by supervening per- sonal animosity,—‘that I am now attacked by’ &c. The meaning ‘in consequence of’ would be too strong, both for the sense here, and for the idiomatic use of the phrase ; ef. Dig. 116: the meaning ‘upon the strength of’ would also exceed the warrant of the Greek, though not of the sense, ef. 19 a, 7 δὴ καὶ πιστεύων Μέ- Antos kK.T.A,

Kat Μέλητος ---- ῥητόρων] For an account of Socrates’ three accusers and their motives,

Gl, ΠΟ “ny ea. 37,

and of the classes of per- sons called here πολιτικοὶ and ῥήτορες, see Introd. p. x. note 1.

The δημιουργοὶ are here joined with the πολιτικοί, because Any- tus represented a trade himself, and herein was but one of many instances of the same conjunc- tion of pursuits in those times at Athens. Socrates was wont to speak slightingly of mechan- ical arts (Xen. (Econ. iv. 3), —a view which would seem to connect itself with his praise of σχολὴ (Diog. ti. 31, A]. Var. x. 14): and a conversation, in which he pressed an uncom- mercial view of education upon Anytus himself with reference to his son, seems to have been among the causes of Anytus’ personal hatred of Socrates. (See again Introd. p. xii.)

5 p. 43. e .

AIIOAOTIA ΣΟΚΡΆΤΟΥΣ. 63

, / \ € \ a iad “Avutos καὶ Λυκων, Μέλητος μὲν ὑπὲρ τῶν ποιητῶν > ΄ Μ \ e \ a “ \ ἀχθόμενος, Avutos δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν δημιουργῶν καὶ a “ , \ ε | “ e y a τῶν πολιτικῶν, Λύκων δὲ UTEP τῶν ῥητόρων᾽ ὥστε, “ » ΄ Du ΚῸΝ ¥ , ἰὸς ἃ 5 er 3 ὅπερ ἀρχόμενος ἐγὼ ἔλεγον, θαυμάζοιμ᾽ ἂν εἰ οἷός τ + « a ΄ Ν δὴ 3 / 3 εἴην ἐγὼ ὑμῶν ταύτην τὴν διαβολὴν ἐξελέσθαι ἐν ὕ OAL VO οὔ λλὴ vu ταῦτ᾽ οὕτως ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ οὕτω πολλὴν γεγονυῖαν. ῦ ΄ 3 yy > “ A « a ἔστιν ὑμῖν, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τἀληθῆ, καὶ ὑμᾶς Wy ἊΝ vd > \ if οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν ἀποκρυψάμενος ἐγὼ λέγω » « , , 3 \ “ A οὐδ᾽ ὑποστειλάμενος. Kai τοι οἶδα σχεδὸν ὅτι τοῖς » lad 9 , Z ἃ Ν 4 σ΄“ 9 ~ 4 αὐτοῖς ἀπεχθανομαι᾿ ὃ καὶ τεκμήριον OTL ἀληθὴ λέγω No: [κά » Ν e AY e 5.5 Ἁ Ν Ν BY καὶ ὅτι αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ διαβολὴ ἡ ἐμὴ καὶ Ta αἰτια AE? 2” a 2? 3 , ταῦτά ἐστι. καὶ ἐᾶν TE νῦν ἐὰν TE αὖθις ζητήσητε na e , ταῦτα, οὕτως εὑρήσετε. ᾽Σ \ \ 3 τ᾿ e a / ’ ΧΙ. Περὶ μὲν οὖν ὧν οἱ πρῶτοί μου κατήγοροι , » x 7 ἐν . a κατηγόρουν αὕτη ἔστω ἱκανὴ ἀπολογία πρὸς ὑμᾶς" XN ae ’ὔ Ν > , Ν » “ πρὸς δὲ Μέλητον τὸν ἀγαθὸν τε καὶ φιλόπολιν, ὡς ἡ e 12 x rat 7, φησι, καὶ τοὺς ὑστέρους μετὰ ταῦτα πειράσομαι > a 3 \ Toast Ge va , ἀπολογεῖσθαι. αὖθις yap dn, ὥσπερ ἑτέρων τούτων L , 3 Ἂς ’ὔ ὄντων κατηγόρων, λάβωμεν αὖ τὴν τούτων ἀντωμο- / 3, , ie x ΄ \ 5 “ , σίαν. ἔχει δέ πως ὧδε Σωκρατὴ φησὶν ἀδικεῖν τοὺς ’ Χ A e if 7 τε νέους διαφθείροντα καὶ θεοὺς ovs ἡ πόλις νομίζει » , a \ , , Ων Ἢ \ οὐ νομίζοντα, ἕτερα δὲ δαιμόνια καινά. TO μὲν δὴ

Vv “ / > 5 , \ “ 3 ’ ἔγκλημα τοιοῦτόν ἐστι τούτου δὲ τοῦ ἐγκλήματος

I. ὑπὲρ] We are to under- charges.

stand, not that the accusers were acting on behalf of their respective classes, but merely that they were to be regarded as representatives of the feel- ings of those bodies.

9. τοῖς αὐτοῖς] Lit. ‘through the same things:’ that is, in stating the facts I am virtually reiterating and attesting the

ΓΙ. ἡ διαβολὴ ἡ ἐμὴ] Empha- sis is of course on διαβολή. ‘This is,—i.e. ‘in this con- sists—the prejudice against me.

16. ἀγαθόν] ‘Public bene- factor.’

20. ἔχει δέ πως ὧδε) See In- trod. p. xiv.

with the old general prejudice, had in- spired the present prosecu- tion.

5

Io

Second part of Defence;— J ustifica- tion of him- self as against the counts of the indict- ment, sepa- rately ;—

" σι

64 ΠΛΑΤΩ͂ΝΟΣ

a ¢ es , Fi § a.Perver ἐν ἕκαστον ἐξετάσωμεν. φησὶ yap δὴ τοὺς νέους P- 34: sion of the 5 Es , SENN a a youth, ἀδικεῖν με διαφθείροντα. ἐγὼ δὲ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι,

a 4 v “ ἀδικεῖν φημὶ Μέλητον, ὅτι σπουδῇ χαριεντίζεται, ᾿Ξ / la \ ’ ῥᾳδίως εἰς ἀγῶνας καθιστὰς ἀνθρώπους, περὶ πραγ- , » 7 ΄ « δμάτων προσποιούμενος σπουδάζειν Kal κήδεσθαι, ὧν 5 \ / rg ’ , « \ a oS οὐδὲν τούτῳ πώποτε ἐμέλησεν. ὡς δὲ τοῦτο οὕτως a» » Ὁ Ὧν “ ἔχει, πειράσομαι καὶ ὑμῖν ἐπιδεῖξαι. rn 3 te , 7 Two an- XII. Καί μοι δεῦρο, ὦ Μέλητε, εἰπέ: ἄλλο τι swers(both =, Re * ies ᾿ e , dialecti- ἢ περὶ πολλοῦ ποιεῖ, ὅπως ὡς βελτιστοι OL νεώτεροι cal) ; ” 3 3 rues Seuss / , ᾽ τ 6 τοέσονται ; Eywye. “Ic δὴ νῦν εἰπε τούτοις, τίς av- hypocrisy \ , x a ὯΝ τοὴ 5 , ΄ of the τοὺς βελτίους ποιεῖ; δῆλον yap ὅτι οἶσθα, μέλον γέ charge ;

N \ \ / 3 , ε / σοι. τὸν μὲν yap διαφθείροντα ἐξευρών, ὡς ys, JEN ’ ΄ S \ Law ἢ N \ \ ἐμὲ εἰσάγεις τουτοισὶ καὶ κατηγορεῖς" τὸν δὲ On βελ-

, a , \ ΙΝ UA 5) a 7 ’ τίους ποιοῦντα ἰθι εἰπε καὶ μήνυσον αὐτοῖς, Tis ἐστιν.

I

or

ὁρᾷς, ὦ Μέλητε, ὅτι σιγᾷς καὶ οὐκ ἔχεις εἰπεῖν; καί ὁρᾷς, NTE, Yas καὶ οὐκ ἔχεις εἰπεῖν; / an «9 e XN /

τοι οὐκ αἰσχρὸν σοι δοκεῖ εἶναι καὶ ἱκανὸν τεκμήριον

- \ Ny Ψ, “ ϑὼλ 7 ᾽ Le

ov δὴ ἐγὼ λέγω, OTL σοι οὐδὲν μεμέληκεν ; ἀλλ᾽ εἰπέ,

53 , > εν ’ lh na Ἢ ’ ΕΣ

ὦ ᾽γαθέ, τίς αὐτοὺς ἀμείνους ποιεῖ ; Οἱ νόμοι. ᾿Αλλ

A a Φ ΄ » Ν id »

οὐ τοῦτο ἐρωτῶ, ὦ βέλτιστε, ἀλλὰ τίς ἄνθρωπος, “ la ἌΝ ΩΝ, a 9 Χ ’

2000TIS πρῶτον καὶ αὐτὸ τοῦτο οἶδε, τοὺς νόμους.

Οὗτοι, ὦ Σώκρατες, οἱ δικασταί. Πῶς λέγεις, ὦ

3. σπουδῇ χαριεντίζεται] Oxy- moron: ‘is playing off a jest under solemn forms. The machinery of the law, with all its solemnity of circumstance and all its serious consequences, is set in motion by him for his mere amusement. Cf. χαριεντι- ζόμενος in the same sense 27 a, where it is explained by παίζοντος.

8. Καί μοι κιτ.λ.] The ex- amination of Meletus by So- crates, which now follows,

though it naturally affords scope for exhibiting Socrates’ characteristic talent, is legally speaking the customary ἐρώ- τησις, to which either party was bound to submit at the requisition of the other. In- trod. p. xviil.

18. ἀμείνους] ‘Better citi- zens, —better toward others: whereas βελτίους above means, strictly speaking, better in themselves.

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY2. 65

4 a XN , , eb A 7 > x 4. Μέλητε; οἵδε τοὺς νέους παιδεύειν οἷοί TE εἰσι Kal

΄ , , ao xX βελτίους ποιοῦσι; Madara. Llorepov ἅπαντες, ἢ ε A Ὁ. ΤῊΝ « » yw of > \ \ οἱ μὲν αὐτῶν, οἱ O ov; “Amavres. Εῤ ye νὴ τὴν σ ΩΝ , a 3 , Ηραν λέγεις, καὶ πολλὴν ἀφθονίαν τῶν wdedovv- δ A ,ὔ a ς » Ἂν ’ “ των. τί δὲ dn; οἵδε οἱ ἀκροαταὶ βελτίους ποιοῦσιν, 5 Ν τ \ e / ἢ οὔ ; Kai οὗτοι. Ti δὲ οἱ βουλευταί ; Kai οἱ Bov- ᾽ 3 3 , ἈΝ e ΄ λευταί. ᾿Αλλ᾽ apa, ὦ Μέλητε, μὴ οἱ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, « > Ἂ (2 ὃ θ , Χ ’ὔ - “Δ οἱ ἐκκλησιασταῖ, διαφθείρουσι τοὺς νεωτέρους ; ἢ ’ ΄ , a (od > ΄ , κἀκεῖνοι βελτίους ποιοῦσιν ἅπαντες : Κακεῖνοι. Ilav-

yy e Μ ’ “ XN > Χ ~~ τες apa, ws ἔοικεν, Αθηναῖοι καλοὺς καγαθοὺυς ποιοῦσι το

πλὴν ἐμοῦ, ἐγὼ δὲ μόνος διαφθείρω. οὕτω λέγεις :

’΄ / ~ / / > 3 a Πάνυ σφόδρα ταῦτα λέγω. TloAAnv γ ἐμοῦ κατ- tb ’ / > , is ἔγνωκας δυστυχίαν. καί μοι ἀπόκριναι ἢ καὶ περὶ sf 4 ~ MM e e Ἁ ,ὔ ἵππους οὕτω σοι δοκεῖ ἔχειν οἱ μὲν βελτίους ποι-

a ΄ὕ » 5 - , οὔντες αὐτοὺς πάντες ἀνθρωποι εἶναι, εἷς δέ Tis O15 “δ i ’ “A iS ξ

διαφθείρων: ἢ τσυναντίον τούτου πᾶν εἷς μέν τις ὁ

, wed ee ΄σ “Δ ΄ / Cae βελτίους οἷος T ὧν ποιεῖν ἢ πάνυ ὀλίγοι, οἱ ἱππικοί: e \ BAD whee a Ν “ a οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ ἐάνπερ ξυνῶσι καὶ χρῶνται ἵπποις, δια-

, ’ o ν ἘΣ id Ν Ν φθείρουσιν; οὐχ οὕτως ἔχει, ὦ Μέλητε, καὶ περὶ

τ Oo

΄“Ἁ ς _ Mv ec , / ¢ ’ ἵππων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ζώων; πάντως δή- 9270. Ss NEW, ’ “ 8.“ a“ που, ἐάν τε σὺ καὶ AvuTos οὐ φῆτε eav τε φῆτε: \ X Μ > , Μ Ν Χ , ’ πολλὴ yap ἂν Tis εὐδαιμονία εἴη περὶ τοὺς νέους. εἰ « \ ΄, \ , e ” εἷς μὲν μόνος αὐτοὺς διαφθείρει, οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι ὠφε- A \ , 3 e ios » / λοῦσιν. ἀλλὰ yap, ὦ Μέλητε, ἱκανῶς ἐπιδείκνυσαι

to

or

σ » , > ’ὔ Load / ἣν ~ OTL οὐδεπώποτε eppovtigas τῶν νέων, Kal σαφῶς » , \ pe oS) , “ » Ὁ 7 ΄ ἀποφαίνεις τὴν σαυτοῦ ἀμέλειαν, OTL οὐδὲν σοι μεμέ-

ἊΣ Ὁ 3 NGS , ANKE περὶ WY ἐμε εἰσαγεις.

24. ἀλλὰ γάρ] ‘But {πὸ ἔτ play upon words is doubtless is;’ as above το c, ἄς, Dig. intended; see several instances τὴ): in Plato collected Dig. 324.

26. ἀποφαίνεις----ἀμέλειαν] Be- In this case the probability is tween ἀμέλειαν and MéAnte ἃ strengthened by the constant

2. the stupidity of it.

66 IAATONOS

7 Mapes SE aS δ Ν ΄, 3 XIIT. Ἔτι δὲ ἡμῖν εἰπὲ ὦ πρὸς Διὸς Μέλητε, p. 2% Υ͂ yy an 5» / la 3 πότερον ἐστιν οἰκεῖν ἄμεινον ἐν πολίταις χρηστοῖς ἢ ΄- Soa τὰς 3 ΄ IAN ΄ ἣὟἮῃ πονηροῖς ; ὦ τᾶν, ἀποκριναι οὐδὲν yap τοι χαλεπὸν » a > e Ἂν , 3 7 Χ ἐρωτῶ. οὐχ οἱ μέν πονηροὶ κακόν τι ἐργάζονται τοὺς x8 5 VA e o y+ € > > ἧς 3 A 5 ἀεὶ ἐγγυτάτω εαυτῶν ὄντας, οἱ δ᾽ ἀγαθοὶ ἀγαθὸν TL; ΄ 3) 93 v4 , Ν an Ilavy ye. ᾿ἔστιν οὖν ὅστις βούλεται ὑπὸ τῶν ξυ- ΄ ΄ a Ἃ a , νόντων βλάπτεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ ὠφελεῖσθαι ; ἀπόκρι- ἃ Byes: 4 Ν Ἂ « Ψ. fi ’ Ta val, ὦ yade καὶ yap ὃ νόμος κελεύει ἀποκρίνεσθαι. yy Ae. / 7, δὰ “- , ἐσθ ootis βούλετα, βλαπτεσθαι; Οὐ δῆτα. Φέρε tA , 3 \ 5 4 n I's / \ 10 δὴ, πότερον ἐμὲ εἰσάγεις δεῦρο ws διαφθείροντα τοὺς ,ὔ / a τι τ ΔΨ», νεωτέρους καὶ πονηροτέρους ποιοῦντα ἑκόντα ἢ ἄκοντα: , 7 , a 53 a an Ν Ἕκόντα ἔγωγε. Τί δῆτα, ὦ Μέλητε; τοσοῦτον σὺ » A , 53 vp + te vy ἐμοῦ σοφώτερος εἰ τηλικούτου OVTOS τηλικόσδε ὧν, 4 XN \ Ὑὕ σ ε \ , ’ ὥστε σὺ μέν ἔγνωκας OTL οἱ μὲν κακοὶ κακὸν τι ἐργά- SEN S 4 , ε a ε Ne 3 15 ζονται ἀεὶ τοὺς μάλιστα πλησίον ἑαυτῶν, οἱ δὲ aya- ὁ Ν » (i » NN x X 3 a > Ἢ “ Ooi ἀγαθον᾽ ἐγὼ δὲ δὴ εἰς τοσοῦτον ἀμαθίας ἥκω, ad AD 9) ΩΝ ad 7 Ἂν 7 ὥστε καὶ TOUT ἀγνοῶ, OTL, ἐάν τινα μοχθηρὸν ποιήσω an [4 ie ΙΑ “ > > » τῶν ξυνόντων, κινδυνεύσω κακὸν τι λαβεῖν ἀπ᾽ αὐ- ΄σ τὰ an XN a XN id XN an « τοῦ, ὦστε τοῦτο τὸ τοσοῦτον κακὸν ἑκὼν ποιῶ, ὡς \ , na be 5 id 20dys ov; ταῦτα ἐγὼ σοι ov πείθομαι, ὦ Μέλητε, SS. \ xaN 4 » 7 ’ » x 2 οἶμαι δὲ οὐδὲ ἄλλον ἀνθρώπων οὐδένα: ἀλλ᾽ ἢ οὐ ΡῬ' 26 / x > » oJ ΄ ᾽ διαφθείρω, ἢ εἰ διαφθείρω, ἄκων, ὥστε σύ γε κατ / > Ay Pe - Ud ἀμφότερα ψεύδει. εἰ δὲ ἄκων διαφθείρω, τῶν τοιού- e 3 “ , ΄ των καὶ ἀκουσίων ἁμαρτημάτων οὐ δεῦρο νόμος εἰσά-

25γειν ἐστίν, ἀλλ᾽ ἰδίᾳ λαβόντα διδάσκειν καὶ νουθετεῖν"

recurrence of the juxtaposi- οἴει, ὦ πρὸς Διός, ἢν δ᾽ ἐγώ, and

tion; see 24 6 above, and 26 αὶ below.

26 b below. 8. 6 νόμος] See note, 24 ὁ. I. εἰπὲ ---- Μέλητε] The ad- 13. τηλικόσδε] Meletus was

dress ὦ Μέλητε has suffered a very young man: cf. Eu- tmesis by the interlacing of thyph. 2 b,c, and below 26 e εἰπὲ πρὸς Διὸς with it: Dig. extr.—Stallb.

288. See also Rep. 332 ¢, ri

AITIOAOTIA ΣΩΚΡΑΤΟΥ͂Σ. 67

r Ἁ fod yay ’ , “ ὙἝ ~ δῆλον yap ὅτι, ἐὰν μάθω, παύσομαι ὃ γε ἄκων ποιῶ.

σὺ δὲ ξυγγενέσθαι μέν μοι καὶ διδάξαι ἔφυγες καὶ οὐκ ἠθέλησας, δεῦρο δὲ εἰσάγεις, οἷ νόμος ἐστὶν εἰσά- \ , 4 > ’ > te yew τοὺς κολάσεως δεομένους, ἀλλ᾽ ov μαθήσεως. XIV. ᾿Αλλὰ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοῦτο μὲν 5

a ” She Nas: φὰς Ὧν τῷ ae “ ΄, , ΤῚΣ δῆλον ἤδη ἐστίν, ὃ xe Eye, OTL NSE Του Τῶν wines

4 ΄ »»ἢ 3 - ie οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν πώποτε ἐμέλησεν᾽ ὅμως δὲ eer

\ ΄ὕ ey a \ , pe st 7΄, Με δὴ λέγε ἡμῖν, πῶς pe ys διαφθείρειν, ὦ Μέλητε, setting

X 7 xX “A \ [χά Ἂ ἊΝ forth of τοὺς νεωτέρους ; ἢ δῆλον On ὅτι κατὰ THY γραφὴν, strange ἃ... 5 ΄ \ , κ , A - , spiritual ἣν ἐγράψω, θεοὺς διδάσκοντα μὴ νομίζειν ovs ἡ πόλις το mere ἔ - \ , 7 5 me , Ὁ answere νομίζει, ἔτερα δὲ δαιμόνια Kawa; ov ταῦτα λέγεις OTL _ by reduc-

΄ ; 5 τ Ξ ᾿ J ing Mele-

διδάσκων διαφθείρω; Πάνυ μὲν οὖν σῴφοδρα ταῦτα tus toa

, N - 5 , ἢ ες contra- λέγω. Προς αὐτῶν τοίνυν, ὦ Μέλητε, τούτων τῶν diction.

a - A ε , » , δ ἵν , Ν θεῶν, ὧν νῦν ὁ λόγος ἐστίν, εἰπε ETL σαφεστερον καὶ » Ἂς Ν ΄σ 5 7 i > Ἅ ἊΣ » (2 ἐμοὶ καὶ τοῖς ἀνδράσι τουτοισί. ἐγω yap ov δύναμαι 18

΄σ , / 4 , 53 ΄ μαθεῖν, πότερον λέγεις διδάσκειν με νομίζειν εἶναί

ὰ ΄, ΄ Ν 53..ὦ ἡ y , ef , x τινὰς Geovs,( καὶ αὐτὸς apa νομίζω εἶναι θεούς, καὶ

> he tN Ν , yy > \ 7 > ὮΝ ’ οὐκ εἰμὶ TO παράπαν ἄθεος οὐδὲ ταύτῃ ἀδικῶν οὐ

, “ - , Pte Sle v2 ἍΝ ΡΤ Ὁ Ὁ μέντοι οὕσπερ γε ἢ πολις, ἀλλ ετέρους, καὶ TOUT + σ » ra) σ ἘΣ δ , ΄ ἐστιν ὁ μοι ἐγκαλεῖς, OTL ETEPOUS* ἢ παντάπασι με

\ y ὌΝ / \ ἡ; » A φὴς οὔτε αὐτὸν νομίζειν θεοὺς τούς τε ἄλλους ταῦτα

᾽. ca (Z Χ » U διδάσκειν. Ταῦτα λέγω, ὡς TO παράπαν ov νομίζεις

2. ἔφυγες] ‘Didst decline.’ Cf. Ar. Ach. 717, Κἀξελαύνειν χρὴ τὸ λοιπόν, κἂν φύγη τις ζη- μιοῦν. With Plato, however, this meaning of the word is more common in the com-

nom. to ἐμέλησεν. Dig. 6.

14. ὧν νῦν] ‘Whom the ar- gument at present concerns :’ equivalent to οὺς λέγομεν as distinguished from περὶ ὧν λέ- youev. —Stallb., rightly. Cf.

pound διαφεύγειν. Cf. Symp. Soph. 263 a, σὸν ἔργον δὴ φρά- 174 ἃ. ἔφυγες and otk 76. ew περὶ οὗ τ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ ὅτου form ἃ hysteron proteron, [ὁ λόγος], Legg. 678 a, πόλεως

though not a strongly marked one.

7. οὔτε --- σμικρὸν] cognate after

Accus.

ἐμέλησεν, not

καὶ πολιτείας πέρι καὶ νομοθεσίας,

= ~ ΄ a

ὧν νῦν ὁ λόγος ἡμῖν παρέστηκεν, , 3

. +. μνήμην εἶναι.

iS)

68 ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ θεούς. ὮἸ θαυμάσιε eae ἵνα τί ταῦτα λέγεις

οὐδὲ ἥλιον οὐδὲ σελήνην ἄρα νομίζω θεοὺς εἶναι, ὧσ-

περ οἱ ἄλλοι ἄνθρωποι;

Μὰ Δί, ὦ avdpes δικασταί,

» Ν ΧΝ \ σ΄ / Ν a) δὴ \ , ἐπεὶ Tov μὲν ἥλιον λίθον φησὶν εἶναι, τὴν de σεληνὴν

5 γῆν.

᾿Αναξαγόρου οἴει κατηγορεῖν, ὦ φίλε Μέλητε,

Ν oS ἘΝ fad ἣν 7 > Ν ᾽ / Kal οὕτω καταφρονεῖς τῶνδε καὶ οἴει αὑτοὺς ἀπείρους

zc 3S “ 5 Ἂ γραμμάτων εἶναι, ὥστε οὐκ εἰδέναι ὅτι τὰ ᾿Αναξα-

γόρου βιβλία τοῦ Κλαζομενίου co TOUT@Y TOV

λόγων; καὶ δὴ καὶ οἱ νέοι ταῦτα map ἐμοῦ μανθά-

τονουσιν, ἃ ἔξεστιν ἐνίοτε, εἰ πάνυ πολλοῦ, δραχμῆς e

3. Μὰ Δι] Understand οὐ νομίζει.

5. ᾿Αναξαγόρου]͵ Xen. Mem. IV. vii. 7, makes Socrates re- fute the alleged opinion of

Anaxagoras, τὸν ἥλιον λίθον διάπυρον εἶνα. Anaxagoras’

formula was μύδρον διάπυρον, which others took to mean ἃ mass of iron. Of the moon he asserted that it had οἰκήσεις, λόφους, φάραγγας, whence that he believed it to be γῆ was an inference.

8. βιβλία)" “Is secundum Laert. II. iti. 8, et Clem. Alex. ibi ab interpp. lauda-

tum, philosophorum primus βιβλίον ἐξέδωκε συγγραφῆς, li- brum ἃ 86 sertptum edidit. Hoc tamen de Anaximandro alii, alii de Pherecyde Syro dicunt.””—Forst.

9. καὶ δὴ καὶ] Tronical : ‘and so then,’

το. d—mprapévovs| The doc- trines, not the books. that is, if they should happen to see a play in which these doctrines are promulgated, as in Eurip. Orest. 982, μύλοιμι

τὰν οὐρανοῦ μέσον χθονός «Πα T Cs

5} γῇ . €VLOTE

μέναν αἰωρήμασι πέτραν ἁλύσεσι χρυσέαισι, φερομέναν δίναισι, βῶ- λον ἐξ ᾿Ολύμπου. Dacier, as Stallbaum observes, curiously mistook the sense of this pas- sage, and imagined that a volume of Anaxagoras might be bought at that time for a drachma. But in fact the price of paper itself was then excessive at Athens, Emile Egger, in a letter to Firmin Didot (Revue Contemporaine du 15 Septembre, 1856), men- tions fragments of an account rendered by certain Athenian officers in 407 B.C., in which the price of sheets of paper (χάρται), for writing copies of these accounts SE upon, was 1 drachma and 2 obols each, 1. e. 1 fr. 20 cent.—a sum which, according to Boeckh’s computation, accepted by Eg- ger, would be equivalent to 4 fr. 80 cent. now.

εἰ πάνυ πολλοῦ] ‘At the most :’ the same expression occurs Alcib. I. 123 ¢, dégtos μνῶν πεντήκοντα εἰ πάνυ πολλοῦ, Gorg. 5 δύο ἜΕΡΕΣ ἐξδάξαξο:

511 d, ἐὰν πάμπολυ,.

The are

> P- 4 d

AITIOAOTIA ΣΩΚΡΑΤΟΥ͂Σ. 69

26. ἐκ τῆς ὀρχήστρας πριαμένους Σωκράτους καταγελᾷν, ἐὰν προσποιῆται ἑαυτοῦ εἶναι, ἄλλως τε καὶ οὕτως ἄτοπα ὄντα. ἀλλ᾽ ὦ πρὸς Διός, οὑτωσί σοι δοκῶ,

οὐδένα νομίζειν θεὸν εἶναι ; Οὐ μέντοι͵ μὰ Δί᾽ οὐδ᾽

ὁπωστιοῦν. Απιστός γ᾽ εἶ, ὦ Μέλητε, καὶ ταῦτα 5

μέντοι, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖς, σαυτῷ. ἐμοὶ γὰρ δοκεῖ οὑτοσί,

ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, πάνυ εἶναι ὑβριστὴς καὶ ἀκό-

λαστος, καὶ ἀτεχνῶς τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην ὕβρει τινὶ

27

Ἂς > U ‘ ’, , » \ καὶ ἀκολασίᾳ καὶ νεότητι γράψασθαι. ἔοικε yap

4. νομίζειν] Oxon. alone has νομίζω, which, though anacoluthic after δοκῶ, has a vividness of its own, and certainly points to the right way of understanding the sentence as an instance of binary structure: see Commentary. But we cannot claim acceptance for νομίζω with such preponderating authority in favour of

νομίζειν.

most the θεατρώνης could de- mand for any place was a drachma ; the price for an or- dinary place was two oboli. See Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, translated by G. C. Lewis, p. 223. n. 315 of 2nd edition.

2. ἄλλως τε καὶ] Which the youths must know are not mine, ‘to say nothing of their singularity, which would make the theft still more glaring. Steinhart has well observed that the meaning of ἄτοπα is not ‘absurd,’ but ‘uncommon’ or ‘peculiar ;’ etymologically, what cannot be assigned to any known place or origin. He further remarks that nei- ther Socrates nor Plato would have rejected these notions as ‘absurd. Cf. the striking passage in Legg. 886 d, where Plato declines to controvert these positions although he

would uphold the gods.

3. οὑτωσί----εἶναι) The two sentences οὑτωσί σοι δοκῶ and οὐδένα----εἶναι are both descrip- tions of the same fact, the re- statement being the more pre- cise ; οὑτωσί σοι δοκῶ stands by a sort of attraction for οὑτωσί σοι δοκεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ, of which the filling up in the re-statement would have been ἐμὲ otdeva— εἶναι. Dig. 207, 208.

5. Δπιστός κιτ.λ.] The ques- tion Meletus had answered affirmatively was, not whether Socrates was an atheist, but whether it was his opinion that Socrates was an atheist, —oirwci σοι δοκῶ; Socrates’ comment on this is ‘Very well; nobody else will believe that, and I am pretty sure you do not yourself,’ i.e. I am pretty sure you are saying what you know to be untrue.

70

MAATQNOZ

co 5 , ΄, 3 , 4 ὥσπερ ALLY LA ξυντιθέντι διαπειρωμένῳ, apa γνωσε- Pp. !

΄ ε X \ 5 fal , κ ται Σωκράτης ὁ σοφὸς δὴ ἐμοῦ χαριεντιζομένου καὶ

» ”> » a λέ > 3 14 Lay Ἀ EVaVTL ἐμαύυτῳ AEyoVTOS, ἢ ἐξαπατήσω QUTOV καὶ

A ΒΩ ὁ 5 , Ὁ \ > X , τοὺς ἄλλους τοὺς ἀκούοντας : οὗτος yap ἐμοὶ φαι-

XN > , λέ ΣΆ «ς a >’ a a 5VETAL TA EVAVTLA εγειν QUTOS εαυτῳῷ εν ΤΊ) γραφῇ;

4 x 3 7 3 Las , δ ᾽ ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ εἴποι: ἀδικεῖ Σωκράτης θεοὺς οὐ vo-

Ν Ν. , / arnt 3 μίζων, ἀλλὰ θεοὺς νομίζων. καί τοι τοῦτό ἐστι

/ παίζοντος.

XV. Ξυνεπισκέψασθε δή, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἣ μοι φαί-

fal ’ ἊΝ ἈΠ εν ἂν > Υ͂ 3 / . 10 VETAL ταῦτα λέγειν' σὺ δὲ ἡμῖν ἀπόκριναι, ὦ Μέλητε

ὑμεῖς δέ, ὅπερ KAT ἀρχὰς ὑμᾶς παρῃτησάμην, μέμνη-

σθέ ἡ) θορυβεῖν. ἐὰν ἐν τῷ εἰωθότι τρόπῳ τοὺ € μοι μὴ θορυβεῖν, ἐὰν ἐν τᾷ ρόπῳ τοὺς

J 5 λογους ποιῶμαι.

2, “ , Ss ΄ ἔστιν ὅστις ἀνθρώπων, ὦ Μέλητε,

» ’, \ ’ id 3 5 3 ’ \ ἀνθρώπεια μὲν νομίζει πράγματ᾽ εἶναι, ἀνθρώπους δὲ

3 ,ὔ 5 x Soh Ἂς Nap ‘ τι οὐ νομίζει; ἀποκρινέσθω, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ μὴ ἄλλα καὶ

ΕΥΣ 3» ad ad \ > tA arava OopvBeira ἐσθ᾽ ὅστις ἵππους μέν οὐ νομίζει

5 (3 \ \ , Xx ’ Ἂ \ > ν εἰναι, ἱππικὰ δὲ πράγματα : ἢ αὐλητὰς μεν οὐ νομίζει,

» \ \ ΄ ᾽ yy se age 2 > Los avanTika δὲ πράγματα; οὐκ ἐστιν, ὦ ἄριστε ἀνδρῶν

Σ Ν X , > , ’ Χ Ν Ἂ Ν ad εἰ μὴ σὺ βούλει ἀποκρίνασθαι, ἐγὼ σοὶ λέγω καὶ τοῖς

1. διαπειρωμέῳ] ‘He is like one, who, by framing a mock-riddle, is trying (as he says to himself) whether will Socrates, &e. We have here one participial clause (ὥσπερ —£vvri8.) within another (δια- metp.); aS Rep. 555 ©, τὸν det ὑπείκοντα ἐνιέντες ἀργύριον τιτρώ- Notice, that it is ὥσ- [re αἴνιγμα, “ἃ mock-riddle, one which has no answer.

2. ἐμοῦ χαριεντιζ,] The use of the genitive, after verbs of knowing, secing, and shewing, seems to be limited in Attic Greek to a noun joined with a participle. After verbs of men-

OKOVTES,

tioning, it is not so limited. Dig. 26. Cf. Lobeck on Soph. Aya:

15. ἄλλα καὶ ἄλλα] Similar expressions are—Euthyd. 273, ἄλλην καὶ ἄλλην ἀποβλέποντες, Phdr. 235 a, ὡς οἷός τε ὦν, ταὐ- τὰ ἑτέρως τε καὶ ἑτέρως λέγων, ἀμφοτέρως εἰπεῖν ἄριστα, 271 ἃ, ἔστιν οὖν εἴδη τόσα καὶ τόσα, καὶ τοῖα καὶ τοῖα, Legg. 721 Ὁ, χρή- μασι μὲν τόσοις καὶ τόσοις, τῇ καὶ τῇ δὲ ἀτιμίᾳ, Phileb. 24 ἃ, τὸ εἰς αὖθίς τε καὶ αὖθις.

τό. θορυβείτω] Merely by making irrelevant remarks in- stead of answering ;—brawl- ing, as we might say.

τ.

AIIOAOTIA ΣΩΚΡΑΤΟΥ͂Σ. ve!

\ Ν > , 3 , : 27. ἄλλοις τουτοισί. ἀλλὰ TO ἐπὶ τούτῳ γε ἀποκριναι"

, \ , , Sar cS: , e ἔσθ᾽ ὅστις δαιμόνια μὲν νομίζει πραγματ᾽ εἶναι, δαί- » ΝΜ ε 57 “ μονας δὲ οὐ νομίζει; Οὐκ ἐστιν. “Qs ὠνησας, ὅτι Ν νὰ ς > ΄ μόγις ἀπεκρίνω ὑπὸ τουτωνὶ ἀναγκαζόμενος. οὐκοῦν , \ , ‘ / Ν ὃ ὃ Ψ abd δαιμόνια μὲν φής με καὶ νομίζειν καὶ διδασκειν, εἴτ᾽ 5 “- ze > is ’ ’ / οὖν καινὰ εἴτε παλαιά" ἀλλ᾽ οὖν δαιμόνιά ye νομίζω ἣν if “ 7 3 ΄“" κατὰ τὸν σὸν λόγον, καὶ ταῦτα καὶ διωμόσω ἐν τῇ a \ ΄ , ‘ , ΄ ἀντιγραφῇ. εἰ δὲ δαιμόνια νομίζω, καὶ δαίμονας δή -

Ξ XA 5 Ψ / YA » 5 > Ὁ που πολλὴ ἀνάγκη νομίζειν μέ ἐστιν οὐχ οὕτως »Ὲ BA 7 / , e ~ » XN ἔχει; ἔχει δή" τίθημι yap σε ὁμολογοῦντα, ἐπειδὴ το

> > 7 Χ \ , τος es go 4 d οὐκ ἀποκρίνει. τοὺς δὲ δαίμονας οὐχὶ ἤτοι θεοὺς γε

δ »

e , xX ΄ ΄ \ Ye ἡγούμεθα ἢ θεῶν παῖδας: dys ἢ ov; Ilav ye. > ΄ » , e - ε x / \ Οὐκοῦν εἴπερ δαίμονας ἡγοῦμαι, ws ov ys, εἰ μεν / aD eo » a 3 ff 7 Geol τινές εἰσιν οἱ δαίμονες. TOUT ἂν εἴη Ὁ ἐγώ l 9 » / Ἂν 4 XN 3 e t σε αἰνίττεσθαι καὶ χαριεντίζεσθαι, θεοὺς οὐχ ἡγού- 15 ’ 5 \ 6 ἊΝ 3 e ΄ 6 , 3 δή μενον φάναι ἐμε θεοὺς αὖ ἡγεῖσθαι πάλιν, ἐπειδηπερ , e A Ἂν »ΙΝ Sone ’ ΤᾺ An’ ye δαίμονας ἡγοῦμαι" εἰ δ᾽ αὖ οἱ δαίμονες θεῶν παῖδές > / \ 3X » A ΕΣ yw », © εἰσι νόθοι τινὲς ἢ ἐκ νυμφῶν ἢ EK τινων ἄλλων, ὧν ἊΝ τς ἣν x 3 YA lal X ΄σ δὴ καὶ λέγονται, τίς ἂν ἀνθρώπων θεῶν μὲν παῖδας

ε ἘΞ 3 \ \ , ε , \ x ” » ἡγοῖτο εἶναι, θεοὺς δὲ μὴ : ὁμοίως yap av ἄτοπον εἴη, 20

¢ 5 » “ \ a RT te > ἈΠ 6 MOTEP αν El TLS ππῶν μεν παῖδας ὭγΟΙΤΟ ἢ Και OV@V

6. δαιμόνιά ye] To make the equivocation of Meletus is the reasoning sound, δαιμόνια jsimply returned upon himself. here and δαιμόνια πράγματα {Contrast, where Socrates is above ought to mean the {speaking uncontroversially of same; which it must be ac- ‘his monitor, the distinctly ad- knowledged they do not. It jectival θεῖόν τι καὶ δαιμόνιον 31 must be observed, however, c. See Appendix A, on τὸ that the original perversion δαιμόνιον. lay with Meletus, whose charge 8. ἀντιγραφῇ] The ἔγκλημα Ἰ οἵ δαιμόνια καινὰ was based sim- is so called, as it has been al- iply on Socrates’ τὸ δαιμόνιον. ready called dvrwpocia. See ΝΟΥ by this Socrates meant το Ὁ note. fa divine agency, but Meletus 18. ἔκ τινων ἄλλων ὧν] That thad wrested it into the sense is, ἐξ ἄλλων ὧν τινων.

ἰ οὗ a divine being. So that here

Third part 10

of Defence; —J ustifi- cation of the pursuit in which his life had been spent, viz., that of a moral reformer, interwoven with no- tices of the reform- atory doc- trine itself.

> τῇ ἐστί.

72 ΠΛΆΤΩΝΟΣ

δ e , od Ἂ ΤῊ ΟἿΣ δ ε a Ὦ ; [τοὺς ἡμιόνους], ἵππους δὲ καὶ ὄνους μὴ NYOITO εἶναι. Ῥ. 27:

3 53 > yy “ Ἂ na ᾽ ἀλλ᾽, ὦ Μέλητε, οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπως σὺ ταῦτα οὐχὶ > 7 e a > Me: XN Ν ’ ἀποπειρώμενος ἡμῶν ἐγράψω [τὴν γραφὴν ταύ-

Nn > - “ » “ > Ν ᾽ \ 5.7] Fy

τὴν | ἢ ἀπορῶν ὅ τι ἐγκαλοῖς ἐμοὶ ἀληθὲς ἀδίκημα τ \ 7 / x XN a

εὕπως δὲ GU τινα πείθοις ἂν καὶ σμικρὸν νοῦν aS 5 / e 3 “ » ἴων 3 X Ων ἔχοντα ἀνθρώπων, ὡς [οὐ] τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐστὶ καὶ

δαιμόνια καὶ θεῖα aah καὶ αὖ τοῦ αὐτοῦ μήτε

δαίμονας μήτε θεοὺς μήτε ἥρωας, μος μηχανή Pp 28,

ἐστιν. XVI.

ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀδικῶ κατὰ τὴν Μελήτου γραφήν, ov πολλῆς

᾿Αλλὰ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ὡς μὲν

ra Ss » / » Φν "Ὁ ἊΝ, Ν n ᾿ δ μοι δοκεῖ εἰναι ἀπολογίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἱκανὰ καὶ ταῦτα ὃ \ we? las yy yay σ“ / » , δὲ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐμπροσθεν ἐλεγον, OTL πολλὴ μοι ἀπέ- , Ν , asf o , χθεια γέγονε καὶ πρὸς πολλούς, εὖ ἴστε ὅτι ἀληθές Στ Ὁ; ὩΣ a \ e 4 S2Z eon καὶ TOUT ἔστιν ὃ ἐμὲ αἱρήσει, ἐάνπερ αἱρῇ, οὐ Na to/ e a an , Μέλητος οὐδὲ “Avuros, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τῶν πολλῶν διαβολὴ , A ἐν XN 7 τε καὶ φθόνος. ἃ δὴ πολλοὺς καὶ ἄλλους καὶ ἀγα- AN SIN a 5 \ ‘ Creal " »ῸΝ \ θοὺς ἄνδρας ἤρηκεν, οἶμαι δὲ καὶ αἱρήσειν" οὐδὲν δὲ Ὁ

ἣν Ν >’ 3 Cy nr 5 ’ ΩΝ 3 Ry 5 δεινὸν μὴ ἐν ἐμοὶ στῆ. ἴσως O ἂν οὖν εἴποι τις

6. πείθοις ἂν ὡς οὐ] The οὐ is not simply pleonastic, as in the case of two negatives in the same clause, but it is irra- tional. It is a confused anti- cipation of the coming negative Dig. 264.

18. ovdév—org | ‘The rule is in no danger of breaking down in my case. This use of οὐδὲν δεινὸν is idiomatic: οἵ. Gorg. 520 d, οὐδὲν δεινὸν αὐτῷ μὴ ἀδικηθῇ, ‘we need not apprehend for him any injury,’ Phedo 84 b, οὐδὲν δεινὸν μὴ φοβηθῆ, ‘we need not appre- hend that the soul will have to fear.’ The ‘apprehension’ is

οὐδεμία.

supposed to affect the speaker and his hearers, as interested in the contingency under dis- cussion. So here Socrates is speaking half ironically, in- teresting himself, as it were, for the rule, against himself. στῇ 15. also idiomatically used, as ἃ quasi-impersonal ;—that is, ἃ Vague nominative, such as ‘the course of events,’ is un- derstood. See Dig. 97 ; where among other parallels is given Ar. Eth. Nic. VI. ix. 9, στή- σεται γὰρ κἀκεῖ. στῇ is literally ‘come to ἃ stand-still. Stallb, is wrong here.

ἈΠΟΛΟΓΊΑ. ZOKPATOYS3. 73

ieee) > > , 5 ᾽ὔ A > ,

28. εἰτ᾽ οὐκ αἰσχύνει, ὦ Σώκρατες, τοιοῦτον ἐπιτήδευμα > , » @ , Nes a > \ ἐπιτηδεύσας, ἐξ οὗ κινδυνεύεις νυνὶ ἀποθανεῖν; ἐγὼ

\ , x , , > , σ > A de τούτῳ ἂν δίκαιον λόγον ἀντείποιμι, ὅτι οὐ καλῶς 4 SiS, ΕΣ ΄ ,ὔ e , λέγεις, ὦ ἄνθρωπε, εἰ οἴει δεῖν κίνδυνον ὑπολογίζεσθαι ὡς ἰρνς EN ΄ " “ Ν χ » , τοῦ Cv ἢ τεθνάναι ἄνδρα ὅτου τι καὶ σμικρὸν ὄφελός 5 > > ᾽ > SPA , i “ Ψ ἐστιν, αλλ οὐκ ἐκεῖνο μόνον σκοπεῖν, ὁταν πράττῃ, / , “δ yy , τ > XN > a πότερον δίκαια ἢ ἄδικα πράττει, Kal ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ Ν x» a A \ Δ a A , 3 ὁ ἐργα ἢ κακοῦ. φαῦλοι yap av τῷ ye σῷ λόγῳ Elev ΄“ 4 ’ὔὕ 4 3 ’, id tA Tov ἡμιθέων ὅσοι ev Τροίᾳ τετελευτήκασιν οἵ TE δ, om “ » ev ὮΝ ΄σ ~ ἄλλοι καὶ ὁ τῆς Θέτιδος υἱός, ὃς τοσοῦτον τοῦ κιν- το VA LA si Ν ΕῚ , Ly “ δύνου κατεφρόνησε παρὰ τὸ αἰσχρὸν τι ὑπομεῖναι, a > ‘ 3 ε ’, > “ , ὥστε ἐπειδὴ εἶπεν ἢ μήτηρ αὐτῷ προθυμουμένῳ σ » “ Ν ig - Εκτορα ἀποκτεῖναι, θεὸς οὖσα, οὑτωσί πως, ὡς ἐγῴ- = 5 a , , aA 7 Ν μαι" ὦ παῖ, εἰ τιμωρήσεις [Πατρόκλῳ τῷ ἑταίρῳ τὸν 4 ary, > A \ A govov καὶ “Exropa ἀποκτενεῖς, αὐτὸς amobavet’ av-15 Le ’ 4 2 of ‘ Ἔ, lad e Tika yap τοι, φησί, μεθ᾽ “Extopa πότμος ἑτοῖμος" ὃ \ ~ > 3 / A A , ΄- δὲ ταῦτ᾽ ἀκούσας τοῦ μὲν θανάτου καὶ τοῦ κινδύνου » Ne Χ \ a Ἂς ~ NX “Δ ὠλιγώρησε, πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον δείσας τὸ ζῆν κακὸς ὧν Ἂς ΄ / HY ΄ » /

ἃ καὶ τοῖς φίλοις μὴ τιμωρεῖν, αὐτίκα, φησί, τεθναίην δὴ > θ Ν “ 10 “ a ee ΄ Pe ἰκὴν ἐπιθεὶς TH ἀδικοῦντι, Wa μὴ ἐνθάδε μένω κατα- 20

, A Ν ", γέλαστος Tapa νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν ἄχθος ἀρούρης. μὴ ΦΌΩΝ yw / , Ν , oe αὐτὸν ole φροντίσαι θανάτου καὶ κινδύνου: οὕτω \ ΝΜ Ss » > an an , @ mM γὰρ ἔχει, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τῇ ἀληθείᾳ: οὗ ἂν τις « ἣν , ‘ AY =) 7 , cy “Δ Μ ἑαυτὸν τάξῃ ἢ ηγησάμενος βέλτιστον εἶναι ἢ ὑπ᾽ ἂρ-

χοντος ταχθῃ. ἐνταῦθα δεῖ, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, μένοντα rs

4. ὑπολογίζεσθαι) See be- illustration is used Symp. 179

low, d note. e. The reference in what fol- 5. ὅτου τι καὶ σμικρὸν] ‘A lows is to Hom. II. xviii. go. man of any worth at all.’ This 23. οὗ ἄν τις κιτ.λ.] The for-

idiomatic concurrence of καὶ mer ἢ in this sentence is hy-

With σμικρόν τι is frequent: perbatically postponed to éav-

Dig. 132. τὸν τάξη, which in sense is In- 10. ὁτῆς Θέτιδος] The same cluded under it. Dig. 290%.

a. That first and foremost it was under- taken in obedience to the already mentioned divine call, and there- fore to be performed without respect of conse- quences

or counter- induce- ments.

74 ΠΛΑΤΩ͂ΝΟΣ

fr

, \ ε 7 (i ,, , Z κινδυνεύειν, μηδὲν ὑπολογιζόμενον μήτε θάνατον μῆτε p. 28 yy \ N an a Z ἄλλο μηδὲν πρὸ Tov αἰσχροῦ.

> N 3 x Ἃ af > vy 5 XVII. Ἐγὼ οὖν δεινὰ av εἴην εἰργασμένος, ὦ aS 3 ΄σ 3 lof ’ « 5᾽ yy ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, εἰ, OTE μέν με οἱ ἄρχοντες ETATTOY, 6 A « lad “ 52᾽ Ν » Le Q > sous ὑμεῖς εἵλεσθε ἄρχειν μου, καὶ ἐν ΠΠοτιδαίᾳ καὶ ἐν > Ve , ἐς A @ σι. 32) Αμφιπόλει καὶ ἐπὶ Δηλίῳ, τότε μὲν οὗ ἐκεῖνοι ἔτατ- yy “ τὴ 5, Ν >’ , τον ἔμενον ὥσπερ καὶ ἄλλος TIS καὶ ἐκινδύνευον

» lal an ἣν a rd τς > XN dnt ἀποθανεῖν, τοῦ δὲ θεοῦ τάττοντος, ὡς ἐγὼ φήθην TE ἜΑΣΙ A , A a ἐς καὶ ὑπέλαβον, φιλοσοφοῦντά με δεῖν ζῇν καὶ ἐξετά- ᾿ \ Ν Χ y 3 a \ oe 10 GOVTA ἐμαυτὸν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, ἐνταῦθα δὲ φοβηθεὶς p. 29. Ἃ Ψ» vx » ε a n / X\ té ἢ θάνατον ἢ ἄλλο ὁτιοῦν πρᾶγμα λίποιμι τὴν τάξιν. Ν Leas aN 5 Ἄγε » a ΚΩΣΘΙ ΟΝ, 7, δεινὸν μέντ᾽ ἂν εἴη, καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς TOT av με δικαίως » yA 9 / “4 3 ΓΑ x 5 εἰσάγοι τις εἰς δικαστήριον, ὅτι οὐ νομίζω θεοὺς εἶναι » a - VA Ss \ é x x7 ἀπειθῶν τῇ μαντείᾳ καὶ δεδιὼς θάνατον καὶ οἰόμενος A 3 > 7 XN , , - 53 1s σοφὸς εἰναι οὐκ ὧν. τὸ yap τοι θάνατον δεδιέναι, ὦ 3, ‘ sy) > XN - 53 XN ἄνδρες, οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἐστὶν ἢ δοκεῖν σοφὸν εἶναι μὴ + “ ἊΝ 5.) » Ν ἃ ’ ‘3 33, ovTa’ δοκεῖν γὰρ εἰδέναι ἐστὶν ἃ οὐκ οἶδεν. οἶδε | \ ἣν ’ Ν XN ’ xa ’ vi “-“ μὲν γὰρ οὐδεὶς τὸν θάνατον οὐδ᾽ εἰ τυγχάνει τῷ > ’ὔ » id XN n an ,ὔ ἀνθρώπῳ πάντων μέγιστον ὃν τῶν ἀγαθῶν, δεδίασι

? (2 53 9 , ὌΝ Ui an na > / Ν 200 ὡς εὖ εἰδότες OTL μέγιστον τῶν κακῶν ἐστί. καὶ b

a a > ’ / 3 Ν “ἤ « 4 « ] τοῦτο πῶς οὐκ ἀμαθία ἐστὶν αὕτη ἡ ἐπονείδιστος, ἡ Ϊ

1. ὑπολογιζόμενον,͵]Ή ‘Giving bravery. Delium, 424 B.c, any countervailing weight to;’ witnessed his famous retreat, literally, ‘reckoning per con- (Symp. 221 a, b, Lach. 181 b). tra” The ὑπὸ conveys no Of his campaign before Am- image of subtraction, according phipolis, 422 3B.c., we know to our notion of the operation, — less.

but the signification of meet- 10. ἐνταῦθα δὲ] ἐνταῦθα repeats Ι ing from an opposite direction: τοῦ θεοῦ τάττοντος κ,τ.λ. ---- δὲ P see Dig. 131. marks the apodosis.

ἘΝ Ποτιδαίᾳ----Δηλίῳ] At Poti- 20. Kal roUro.... αὕτη] Not 1

dea (see Charm, init., Symp. pleonastic; but ‘what is this 219, 220) between 432 and 429 ~~ but that very same reprehen- | p.c,, Socrates rescued Alcibi- sible ignorance?’ τοῦ οἴεσθαι ades but resigned in his favour which follows is ἃ genitive his claim to the reward of — epexegetic of ἀμαθία, Dig. 24.

AIIOAOTIA ΣΩΚΡΆΤΟΥΣ. 75

΄- » 4 a > Ss » \ , acy » ». 29. τοῦ οἴεσθαι εἰδέναι ἃ οὐκ οἶδεν; ἐγὼ δέ, ὦ ἀνδρες, a ” , a A 3 , τούτῳ καὶ ἐνταῦθα ἴσως διαφέρω τῶν πολλῶν avOpo- Ν 3 δή ya , ,ὔ my , πων, καὶ εἰ δὴ TH σοφώτερος Tov φαίην εἰναι, τούτῳ ΕΣ a > 2sa% e A a a 3 σ C4 ἄν, OTL οὐκ εἰδὼς ἱκανῶς περὶ τῶν ἐν ALdov οὕτω / ἣν \ “ \ > a καὶ οἴομαι οὐκ εἰδέναι: τὸ δὲ ἀδικεῖν Kal ἀπειθεῖν 5 ΄ 7 ἧς fal Ν » , a X ‘\ τῷ βελτίονι, καὶ θεῷ καὶ ἀνθρώπῳ, ὅτι κακὸν καὶ 5» 7 53 Q 3 ἐπὶ a - 2 αἰσχρόν ἐστιν οἶδα. πρὸ οὖν τῶν κακῶν, ὧν οἶδα o , > a AS 3 > 3 \ ” Uf OTL κακά ἐστιν, ἃ μὴ οἶδα εἰ ἀγαθὰ ὄντα τυγχάνει 3 , > x 7 τ in wv οὐδέποτε φοβήσομαι οὐδὲ GevEouae’ ὥστε οὐδ᾽ εἴ pe c νῦν ὑμεῖς ἀφίετε ᾿Ανύτῳ ἀπιστήσαντες, ὃς ἐφ ἢ τὴν τὸ or human 5 : Ἶ ἐξ νά μονα ‘ a \ fal “ = be \ 3 a = ἀρχὴν ov δεῖν ἐμὲ δεῦρο εἰσελθεῖν ἢ, ἐπειδὴ εἰσηῆλ- tion;— el 53 ἈΝ ‘ Ψ “ ᾽ὔ ’ὔὕ θον, οὐχ οἷον τε εἶναι τὸ μὴ ἀποκτεῖναί με, λέγων

\ Caan e ’ , Μ x 3 a ε πω προς ὑμᾶς WS, εἰ διαφευζοίμην, ἤδη ἂν ὑμῶν οἱ υἱεῖς

2. τούτῳ καὶ K.T.A. | ‘In this province also [of the unseen] I believe I am distinguished from the mass of mankind herein, and if I were to say I was wiser in any point than any other person, I should say it was herein, that’ &c. The former as well as the latter τούτῳ both relate to the same fact, to the same 6éri,—upon which a strong emphasis is thus made to converge. Cf. Gorg. 484 6, λαμπρός τ᾽ ἐστὶν ἕκαστος ἐν τούτῳ, κἀπὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἐπεί- γεται, Νέμων τὸ πλεῖστον ἡμέρας τούτῳ μέρος, Ἵν᾽ αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ τυγ- χάνει βέλτιστος The sup- pression after τούτῳ ἂν is a graceful evasion of self-asser- tion. See Dig. 255.

10. ἀπιστήσαντες] ‘ Disbeliev- ing’ the representation urged by Anytus as the reason why Socrates should die; not ‘ re- fusing to follow Anytus’ coun- sel’ to put Socrates to death.

” ων.

It is therefore to be connected, not with the words imme- diately following (ὃς ἔφη --- ἀποκ- τεῖναί pe), but with those next to them (λέγων---διαφθαρήσον- ra). Stallb. differs.

13. ἤδη ἂν] The construction of the fut. indic. with ἂν is abundantly established. ἂν here belongs to διαφθαρήσονται, and to refer it to the part. ἐπιτη- devorvres is a shift which will not apply to other passages (Dig. 58), and dislocates this. Observe, as to διαφθαρήσονται itself, that its not being affect- ed by the Oratio Obliqua is to be accounted for regularly ; it is because the event it denotes is still in the future at the moment of its being alluded to by Socrates. Plato is never arbitrarily irregular in this class of constructions: Dig. go. It might be said here, that διαφευξοίμην denotes an event equally in the future. But

the plan being, to

76

3 ’ A , ? i? Τὰ ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἃ Σωκρατὴς διδάσκει πάντες παντά- Pp. 29.

ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

, 5, ‘N a 7 Moss. πασι διαφθαρήσονται.----εἴ μοι πρὸς ταῦτα εἴποιτε ὦ

΄ a \ > / > is » a | , Σώκρατες, νῦν μὲν ᾿Ανύτῳ ov πεισόμεθα, ἀλλ᾽ adi-

, Sas iL , 9: 199 ae , 5 , EMEV σε, ETL TOUT) [MEVTOL, ἐφ @TE μῆκετι ἐν TAVTN

5τῇ ᾧγτήσει ὁιατριβειν μηδὲ φιλοσοφεῖν' ἐὰν δὲ ἁλῷς

ἔτι τοῦτο πράττων, ἀποθανεῖ" εἰ οὖν με, ὅπερ ie

ἐπὶ τούτοις ἀφίοιτε, εἴποιμ᾽ ἂν nie ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐξέ ὦ

ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι

δὲ αλλ “ fa) aN ε a X\ “ ε “Δ > 4 Ἂν μ ον τῷ θεῳ ἡ ὑμῖν, καὶ εωσπερ ἂν ἐμπνέω καὶ

ον 5 > \ , a τς tary teach the 10010$ TE ὦ, οὐ μὴ παύσωμαι φιλοσοφῶν καὶ ὑμῖν

paramount value of the soul, and the duty of caring for it, and the need of consci- ously-pos- sessed principles of action.

, , Ν 3 ,ὔ a x δεν παρακελευόμενος TE Kal ἐνδεικνύμενος OT@ αν GEL

ry , e an , eT ” “ 3 yf ἐντυγχάνω ὑμῶν, λέγων οἷάπερ εἰωθα, OTL ὦ ἀριστε

ἀνδρῶν,

» ω 7 4 a ie ᾿ς Αθηναῖος ὧν, πόλεως τῆς μεγίστης καὶ

3 ’ 9 ,ὔ , ἊΣ XN εὐδοκιμωτάτης εἰς σοφίαν Kal ἰσχύν, χρημάτων μὲν

> >’ / » , “ y Cd “ 15 οὐκ αἰσχύνει ἐπιμελούμενος, OTTWS TOL ἐσται ὡς πλεῖ-

στα, καὶ δόξης καὶ τιμῆς, φρονήσεως δὲ καὶ ἀλη-

΄ ‘ a a σ ε , 4 > θείας καὶ τῆς ψυχῆς, ὅπως ws βελτίστη ἔσται, οὐκ 3 la ’ N if nm ἐπιμελεῖ οὐδὲ φροντίζεις ; καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῶν ἀμφισ- a Ν cad » r > SPN > / ψῆν ΤΣ βητῇ καὶ φῇ ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, οὐκ εὐθὺς ἀφήσω αὐτὸν

IW » >’ > Dé S38 \ ’ if x 20000 amet, ἀλλ᾽ ἐρήσομαι αὐτὸν Kal ἐξετάσω Kal

> WA Ry se ἊΝ an n 3 Ve , ἐλέγξω, καὶ ἐάν μοι μὴ δοκῇ κεκτῆσθαι ἀρετήν, φάναι

then it is not an event which is assumed as about to happen at all.

LePrOTe rs ὁ e208 φιλοσοφεῖν"] For constructions of relative pronouns and adverbs with the infinitive, see Dig. 79.

8. ἀσπάζομαι καὶ φιλῶ] “᾿Ασπά- ζεσθαι est aliquem salutare ita, ut eum amplectaris; φιλεῖν ita, ut eum osculeris.’—Stallb. Here of course both words are used, by transference, for the feelings which those actions hetoken. Note too, that the

transference affects both: it is not that φιλῶ already expresses a feeling, and thus gives the turn to ἀσπάζομαι their coor- dination in the phrase requires that they should enter into it homogeneously.

πείσομαι---ὑμῖν] The parallel is striking to the declaration of the holy apostles, Acts v. 29, πειθαρχεῖν δεῖ Θεῷ μᾶλλον ἢ av- θρώποις.

14. ἰσχύν] Stallb., after Fis- cher, “de animi magnitudine et fortitudine.”

(ae)

slat

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY2. Τὶ

4 > A a \ / wv Ν 3 / 30. δέ, ὀνειδιῶ ὅτι τὰ πλείστου ἄξια περὶ ἐλαχίστου ΄ A A / \ ’ a x ποιεῖται, Ta δὲ φαυλότερα περὶ πλείονος. ταῦτα Kal ν»: Vd a “Δ » 7 , νεωτέρῳ καὶ πρεσβυτέρῳ, ὅτῳ ἂν ἐντυγχάνω, ποιήσω, Ὡς , Q > ΄ αλλ δὲ ΄ 3 “ (oA καὶ ξένῳ καὶ ἀστῷ, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῖς ἀστοῖς, ὅσῳ μου , > ᾿ ’ A Ἀ , e 7 5 ἐγγυτέρω ἐστὲ γένει. ταῦτα yap κελεύει ὁ θεὸς, εὖ 5 wv Ν » \ y 3 / ε a ΄ ᾽ Ni ἴστε, καὶ ἐγὼ οἴομαι οὐδέν πω ὑμῖν μεῖζον ἀγαθὸν , 2 - / x Ν ΑἹ ἴω re v2 yever Oat ἐν TH πόλει ἢ τὴν ἐμὴν τῷ θεῷ ὑπηρεσίαν. > \ A Ν᾿ 7 3 ἊΝ ¥, Δ / οὐδὲν yap ἄλλο πράττων ἐγὼ περιέρχομαι ἢ πείθων e ~ LA , 7] 4 ὑμῶν καὶ νεωτέρους Kal πρεσβυτέρους μητε σωμάτων ΄ ,ὔ 7 / \ ao b ἐπιμελεῖσθαι μήτε χρημάτων πρότερον μηδὲ οὕτω το = / e ~ “ σ « > , » ’ὔ σφόδρα ὡς τῆς ψυχῆς, ὅπως ὡς ἀρίστη ἐσται, λέγων σ > > , > A 7 » 9 > > “a OTL οὐκ ἐκ χρημάτων ἀρετὴ γίγνεται, ἀλλ ἐξ ἀρετῆς , iN 5: » \ a > , “ χρήματα καὶ τάλλα ἀγαθὰ τοῖς avOpwros ἀπαντὰ eat hy \ , > \ 3 a , καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ. εἰ μὲν οὖν ταῦτα λέγων δια- ἐ c / ον , τ, .9. (ἫΝ, ” re > , , vA θείρω τοὺς νέους. ταῦτ᾽ av εἴη BAaBEpa’ εἰ δέ τις μέτ5 3 ΝΜ ᾿ “Δ A > \ , Ν a φησιν ἄλλα λέγειν ἢ ταῦτα, οὐδὲν λέγει. πρὸς ταῦτα, , » 5.» a 5 , > , Ὰ ΄ \ φαίην av, ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἢ πείθεσθε Ανύτῳ ἢ pn, καὶ > 3 , x A 3 A ε ᾽ a ᾽ x tA ἢ ἀφίετε ἢ μὴ ἀφίετε, ὡς ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἂν ποιήσοντος Wy » / , , ς ἄλλα, οὐδ᾽ εἰ μέλλω πολλακις τεθνάναι.

XVIII. Μὴ θορυβεῖτε, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἀλλ᾽ 20 Ὁ. That it

» , ΄ Δ Δ, τ pried \ Me ok ee was of vital ἐμμείνατέ μοι ois edenOnyv ὑμῶν, μὴ θορυβεῖν ep ols use to his a , > sas, , N ΄ ε δον 5 Sey country- av λέγω, ἀλλ ἀκουειν καὶ yap, WS ἐγὼ Opal, ονἢ- men,—a > , , Ν 5 ἘΣ PEPE. ian τς divine σεσθε ἀκούοντες. μέλλω yap οὖν aTTa ὑμῖν ἐρεῖν blessing to them,

Ν Μ Se -ε- Ν ΓΑ ΝΝ ~ καὶ ἀλλα, ep οἷς ἰσως βοήσεσθε' ἀλλὰ μηδαμῶς “ al 3 \ » Ἂν \ ποιεῖτε τοῦτο. εὖ γὰρ ἴστε, ἐὰν ἐμὲ ἀποκτείνητε TOL- 25

lad ΝΜ - > Ἂ ’ 7 ovTOY ὄντα, οἷον ἐγὼ λέγω, οὐκ ἐμὲ μείζω βλάψετε

15. ταῦτ᾽ ἂν εἴη] ‘If preaching virtue is perversion, then in- deed I am a mischievous per- son; for I never rest from preaching it.’ The ταῦτα is not identical with the ταῦτα of the line before, but is more com-

prehensive ; it stands for the whole clause referred to in the phrase ταῦτα λέγων, and means ‘this practice of mine.’

24. βοήσεσθε)] A stronger ex- pression of feeling than @opu-

Bet.

78 ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ :

“Ὁ

« 5 , SN \ \ yar AN , | ἢ ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἐμὲ μὲν yap οὐδὲν ἂν βλάψειεν P- 3% + ld 4 5, IQ\ \ x , οὔτε Μέλητος οὔτε ᾿Ανυτος οὐδὲ yap av δυναιτο" ἃ » \ 3 ν 5 > ( > et Sa : ov yap οἴομαι θεμιτὸν εἶναι ἀμείνονι ἀνδρὶ ὑπὸ χεί- 7 3 Υ̓ , ει LN ” Nees, povos βλάπτεσθαι. ἀποκτείνειε μέντ᾽ av ἴσως ἢ ἐξε- γ᾿ x‘ 3 ’ τ ’ XN a Ὄ ” ἊΨ 5λάσειεν ἢ ατιμασειεν᾽ ἀλλὰ ταῦτα οὗτος LOWS οἴεται Ἂς δ, / ’ Ψ SN ) 3 ” καὶ ἄλλος Tis που μεγάλα Kaka, ἐγὼ δ᾽ οὐκ οἴομαι, ἣν Χ al a Ὰ Ὁ a ,ἷ ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον ποιεῖν ἃ οὗτος νυνὶ ποιεῖ, avdpa , » a id a 3 Sa oP. ἀδίκως ἐπιχειρεῖν ἀποκτιννύναι. νῦν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες 3 cad A fd Ν \ a Αθηναῖοι, πολλοῦ δέω ἐγὼ ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ ἀπολο- a “ ΩΝ » 3 » «ε \ e fa / ιογείσθαι, ws τις ἂν οἰοιτο, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπερ ὑμῶν, μὴ τι ’ XN a cod U CoS a ἐξαμάρτητε περὶ THY τοῦ θεοῦ δόσιν ὑμῖν ἐμοῦ Kara- ψηφισάμενοι. ἐὰν γὰρ ἐμὲ ἀποκτείνητε, οὐ ῥᾳδίως e ηφισάμενοι. γὰρ ἐμ ητε, οὐ ῥᾳδίως δ, a ἘΣ oe 5 a Ν 4 ἄλλον τοιοῦτον εὑρήσετε, ἀτεχνῶς, εἰ καὶ γελοιότερον ΕῚ a , ΄ , Ὁ Ν an A “ εἰπεῖν, προσκείμενον τῇ πόλει ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὥσπερ . aN ΙΝ Ἂς pas Cote N Q δὲ 60 τοίππῳ μεγάλῳ μεν καὶ γενναίῷ, ὑπὸ μεγέθους δὲ νωθε- ’ Ν ’, » , τύ ον / ’ he στέρῳ Kal δεομένῳ ἐγείρεσθαι ὑπὸ μύωπος τινος Ὶ οἵ, δή ὃ Ὧν, Ae θ Ἂς » \ 5 aN θ , , lov δὴ μοι δοκεῖ ὁ θεὸς ἐμὲ TH πόλει προστεθεικέναι na / aA e A , > τοιοῦτόν τινα, ὃς ὑμᾶς ἐγείρων καὶ πείθων καὶ ὀνει- Mi oa σ Q\ , AS e 7 Ψ δίζων €Va ἕκαστον οὐδὲν παύομαι τὴν ἡμέραν ὁλὴν Ῥ. 31: Ξ , aA iy 91 yaeec: ἕ ςοἡτανταχοῦ προσκαθίζων. τοιοῦτος οὖν ἄλλος οὐ ῥᾳ- A ΕἸΣ eS , σι ὧδ » cy me San ’ Ν / δίως ὑμῖν γενήσεται, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν ἐμοὶ πεί- / Ψ' id a By, ἌΝ x id Onabe, φείσεσθέ μου" ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἴσως Tax av ἀχθο- “ € id » , Υ͂ μενοι, ὥσπερ οἱ VUTTACOVTES ἐγειρόμενοι, κρούσαντες

5. ἀτιμάσειεν] H substitutes a conjecture of his own, ἀτιμώσειεν, quite needlessly ; for ἀτιμάζω, though it properly means to treat or regard as ἄτιμος, while ἀτιμόω is to make ἄτιμος, yet also has this technical sense: cf. Lege. 762 d, περὶ τὰς τῶν νέων ἀρχὰς ἦτι- μάσθω πάσας. 23. kpovoavres| Another unhappy conjectural substitution of H occurs here,—sdpovcarres, because (he says)

13. εἰ καὶ γελοιότερον refers which follows them. not to the words immediately 23. κρούσαντες] ‘ With a sin- succeeding, namely, προσκείμες gle tap,—as you would a νον----θεοῦ, but to the simile μύωψ.

ATIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY?2. 79

ΕΣ , 3 , ε 4 Δ > / 1. ἄν pe, πειθόμενοι ᾿Ανύτῳ, ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἀποκτείναιτε, « ε 5 ἊΝ Ἂς , / Cotes) A > εἶτα Tov λοιπὸν βίον καθεύδοντες διατελοῖτ av, εἰ vA δ e ἊΝ e ΄“ > , , μή τινα ἄλλον ὃ Geos ὑμῖν ἐπιπέμψειε κηδόμενος

Ct cles “ \ , AN a 2 e Aye ὑμῶν. ὅτι δ᾽ ἐγὼ τυγχάνω ὧν τοιοῦτος, οἷος ὕπο as its sin- A An hes , , > , Δ , 2 gularity b τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ πόλει δεδόσθαι, ἐνθένδε ἂν κατανοήσαιτε" 5 alone > \ > , » Swe ἀν - Ἢ 3 Ps might suf- ov yap ἀνθρωπίνῳ ἔοικε TO ἐμὲ τῶν μὲν ἐμαυτοῦ fice to ε ͵,ὔ » , Cee, ~ ΗΝ , > shew. ἁπάντων ἡμεληκέναι καὶ ἀνέχεσθαι τῶν οἰκείων ἀμε- , ΄“ » Μ Ἂν A α ν 1A Aovpevwv τοσαῦτα ἤδη ἐτη, TO δε ὑμέτερον πράττειν > Πὰν ε , , oa tf > > XN ἀεί, ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ προσιόντα ὥσπερ πατέρα ἢ ἀδελφὸν é ἐ ’ὔ ΄ > ΄ » a Ν > πρεσβύτερον, πείθοντα ἐπιμελεῖσθαι ἀρετῆς. καὶ εἰ το Δ , 3.2% , > , Q Ἂν ΄ μέντοι TL ἀπὸ τούτων ἀπέλαυον καὶ μισθὸν λαμβα- ms , 53 ¥y r μὰ νων ταῦτα παρεκελευομὴην, εἶχον ἂν τινα λογον᾽ νῦν Ὧν δες ὠς \ N 3 ey ὧ ε 7 ‘i 7 δὲ ὁρᾶτε δὴ καὶ αὐτοί, ὅτι οἱ κατήγοροι τάλλα πάντα , ΄ ΄ y > - ’ὔ ἀναισχύντως οὕτω κατηγοροῦντες τοῦτο γε οὐχ οἷοί 3 i} > ~ , ’ὔ 6 TE ἐγένοντο ἀπαναισχυντῆσαι παρασχόμενοι μάρτυρα, 15 ε τὰ Ἐν , > , N ee oe ὡς ἐγὼ ποτε τινα ἢ ἐπραξάμην μισθὸν ἢ ῃτησα. « XN ’ 53 » ἊΝ ip: A va 3 “ ἱκανὸν γάρ, οἶμαι, ἐγὼ παρέχομαι τὸν μάρτυρα, ἀληθὴ « Ρ 5 ὡς λέγω, τὴν πενίαν. ” “Δ 5 ΄ “ἤ 5 “ Χ XIX. Ἴσως ἂν οὖν δόξειεν ἄτοπον εἶναι, ὅτι δὴ ες. (Inan- swer to ἃ

κρούσαντες 15. ‘debile pulsandi verbum.’ Such a word however is just what was wanted. 10. καὶ εἰ μέντοι τι] Ἢ drops the ro, probably for want of con-

sidering that the collocation is hyperbatical for καὶ μέντοι εἴ τι. ΘΟΕ 6: ᾿

14. οὐχ οἷοί τε] They would doubtless make the assertion, cf. 19 d: but what they did not find it practicable to do was to bring evidence in sup- port of it. That is, gram- matically speaking, the pri- mary intention of the sentence ἀπαναισχυντῆσαι ---- μάρτυρα [1685 in the participial clause, and not in the verb ἀπαναισχυντῆ- oa. See Dig. 303.

19. Ἴσως ἂν οὖν] The domi- nant reason of Socrates’ absti- nence from public affairs was not so much the impossibility of maintaining himself in a public position without sacri- fice of principle or of life ; but rather, that he felt his mission to be a moral and an indi- vidual one, and that from his point of view it was infinitely less important to rectify a

80 MAATQNO2

Se 7Q/ N a , Ἂν Ν supposed eyo ἰδίᾳ μὲν ταῦτα ξυμβουλεύω περιιὼν καὶ πολυ- Pp. 3) objection) ᾿Ξ ᾿ X ’ ets ἦ, > \ that to πραγμονῶ, δημοσίᾳ δὲ ov τολμῶ ἀναβαίνων εἰς TO have en- Ἐς ἈΝ ΩΣ , a , , tered pub- πλῆθος τὸ ὑμέτερον ξυμβουλεύειν TH πόλει. τούτου lic life, in aie apckines POS Pies Se SP Τά onsen ; ; i preference δὲ QUTLOV ἐστιν O υμεις ἐμοὺυ πολλακις QAKY)KOATE πολ- to dealing he “ ἌΡ Ν , , with indi: 5 λαχοῦ λέγοντος, ὅτι μοι θεῖον TL καὶ δαιμόνιον γίγνε- ἃ viduals, yee nora <3 a hiss a , aa tie ται φωνή, ὃ δὴ καὶ ἐν TH γραφῇ ἐπικωμῳδῶν Μέλη- a method 3 , δ. ΤΑΝ \ Pee fees ae » δὲ ἢ , practically τὸς ἐγράψατο" ἐμοὶ δὲ TOUT ἐστὶν ἐκ παιδὸς ἀρξζαάμε- possible f Ἂ δ , δ' ἃς » ΝΗ νον φωνὴ τις γιγνομένη, ἢ ὅταν γένηται, ἀεὶ ἀπο- righteous ΄ a a ox got ΄ , δὲ ΤΩ τρέπει με τοῦτο O ἂν μέλλω πράττειν, προτρέπει OE

yy an? Ὑ a a \ Ν ιοοὔποτε᾽ TOUT ἐστιν ὃ μοι ἐναντιοῦται τὰ πολιτικα ?. ’ 7 at an

πράττειν. καὶ παγκάλως ye μοι δοκεῖ ἐναντιοῦσθαι"

5 XN ” Ss yy ’ la ’ 3. “Ὁ 4 3 εὖ yap ἰστε, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, εἰ eyo πάλαι ἐπε-

th a \ Ν is is Ἃ

χείρησα πράττειν τὰ πολιτικὰ πράγματα, πάλαι ἂν

vd ἂν. 8 x ζω ᾿ς 3 A 3, ΩΝ ἀπολώλη καὶ οὔτ av ὑμᾶς ὠφελήκη οὐδὲν ovT ἂν &

» 4 i ἣν + id > ola ,

15€MAVTOV. καί μοι μὴ ἄχθεσθε λέγοντι τἀληθῆ" ov

5. γίγνεται φωνή] All MSS. have this φωνή, and all edd. except V bracket it. Needlessly; Fischer points out the parallel to the next sentence, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ἐκ παιδὸς ἀρξάμενον φωνὴ τις γιγνο- μένη. 9. τοῦτο ὃ ἂν] Edd. prefer τούτου. But ἀποτρέπει πράτ- τειν τοῦτο is a construction borne out by Theet. 151 ἃ, ἐνίοις μὲν τὸ γιγνόμενόν μοι δαιμόνιον ἀποτρέπει Evveiva, [Dem.] Procwem. xx. Pp. 1431, δείξας ἃ τότε ἡμάρτετε, viv ἀποτρέψω ταὐτὰ παθεῖν, and analogous constructions such as Xen. An. III. 1. 20, πορίζεσθαι τὰ ἐπιτήδεια κατέχουσιν ἡμᾶς. τοῦτο here is the reading of five MSS. besides Oxon. It is moreover less likely to have been invented than τοῦτο. 15. Kal poe μὴ] H alters this into καὶ μή μοι, comparing Pheedo 105 b. But καί poe is ἃ common commence- ment of a sentence in the Orators.

particular policy, than by laying hold of individuals and making statesmen of them to raise the standard of statesmanship.

De ἀναβαίνων | To the Pnyx ; as in the famous πᾶς ὁ δῆμος ἄνω καθῆτο, Dem. de Cor. τόρ. p. 285.

5. θεῖόν τι καὶ δαιμόνιον] See Appendix A, on τὸ δαιμόνιον.

6. ἐν" τῇ γραφῇ] When he

spoke of the ἕτερα καινὰ δαιμό- vua,—a perversion of the truth which Socrates characterises as a caricature by his use of the word ἐπικωμωδῶν, which seems to mean ‘selecting for caricature. So σκώπτειν is to mock at, ἐπισκώπτειν to mock at some particular trait in a person,

wb ne

AIIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY’. 81

\ » a > , , » C5 ἈΝ vy yap ἐστιν Ὅστις ἀνθρώπων σωθήσεται OUTE ὑμῖν οὔτε 37 / > ‘ / > , x ἄλλῳ πλήθει οὐδενὶ γνησίως ἐναντιούμενος καὶ δια-

, Ἁ » \ 4 > “ A κωλυων πολλὰ ἀδικα καὶ παράνομα ev TH πόλει

, > > > a7 » Ν lad ΝΜ , γίγνεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναγκαῖον ἐστι TOY τῷ OVTL μαχου-

e \ ΄σ / / 3 , , ενον ὑπέρ τοῦ δικαίου, καὶ εἰ μέλλει ὀλίγον χρόνον 8 ft ἢ

ie , > \ Ἁ / σωθήσεσθαι, ἰδιωτεύειν ἀλλὰ μὴ δημοσιεύειν. ΄ ΄ ¥ =~ , , XX. Μεγάλα δ᾽ ἔγωγε ὑμῖν τεκμήρια παρέξομαι , » > DALE tad a » » ’ τουτων, οὐ λογους, GAA ὃ ὑμεῖς τιμᾶτε, ἐργα. ἀκου- ,ὔ ἈΝ ΓΙ γ΄ an “ xa care δὴ μου Ta ἐμοὶ ξυμβεβηκότα, iv’ εἰδῆτε ὅτι οὐδ $a S e 7 Ἁ Ἂν , 4 ἂν ἑνὶ ὑπεικάθοιμι παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον δείσας θάνατον, Ἂς ve , Ne Ὁ x 3 , LD iia A, ean μὴ ὑπείκων δὲ ἅμα Kav ἀπολοίμην. ἐρῶ δὲ ὑμῖν φορ- Ν \ 7 A , ‘ , S23 τικὰ μὲν καὶ δικανικα, ἀληθῆ δε. ἐγὼ yap, ὦ ᾿Αθη-

II, ἅμα κἂν] This is Ast’s conjecture. MSS. are chiefly divided between ἅμα καὶ Gua ἂν (which Oxon. exhibits), ἅμα καὶ ἀπολοίμην, and ἀλλὰ καὶ ἅμ᾽ ἂν ἀπ. Of the edd., VSZ have ἅμα καὶ ἅμ᾽ ἂν, B ἅμ᾽ ἂν ἀπολοίμην, H ἅμ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἀπολοίμην. It seems vain to find more than a shadowy justification for ἅμα καὶ ἅμα. The variants may easily have come from ἅμα κἂν, in the form ἅμα καὶ dv. My friend Mr. Campbell ingeniously proposes ἄλλα καὶ ἄλλ᾽ ἂν ἀπ., ‘should be ready to meet death in sundry forms:’ cf. Soph. Ο. T. 661, 6 τι πύματον ὀλοίμαν. 12. δικανικά] H conjecturally prefixes οὐ, observing “ quis credat, Socratem, qui statim a prin- cipio se ξένως ἔχειν τῆς ἐνθάδε λέξεως professus est, nunc judicialia verba promittere?” But equally how then should Socrates know that what he was going to say was not δικανικά 1 Besides, the speech in point of fact betrays abundant knowledge of techni- calities ; cf. 34 a, εἰ δὲ τότε x.r.A. See Commentary below.

8. 6—épya] ‘What your practice Lysias, xii. 38. p. 123, body is wont to appreciate says, ἐν τῆδε τῇ πόλει εἰθισμένον highly, the actions of a life.” ἐστί, πρὸς μὲν τὰ κατηγορημένα ὑμεῖς (says Socrates),—not as μηδὲν ἀπολογεῖσθαι, περὶ δὲ σφῶν individuals, but as represent- αὐτῶν... ὡς στρατιῶται ἀγαθοί ing Athenians generally, when εἰσι «.7.A. Whence again So- acting as judges in the Ecclesia, crates says just below, he is or the Heliwa,— ‘you parti- ‘about to employ a topic of cularly are susceptible to such vulgar use, and one that sa- appeals.’ vours of the law-courts.’

Here appears, in a refined 11. μὴ ὑπείκων δέ] ‘ But would form, the common τόπος of be ready to perish at once as rehearsing a man’s past ser- the price of not yielding,’ vices in his defence ; of which φορτικὰ καὶ δικανικά] φορτικὰ

6

as expe-

rience on two occa- sions of his life had shewn him.

82

ναῖοι, ἄλλην μὲν ἀρχὴν οὐδεμίαν πώποτε ἦρξα ἐν THY 3:

TMAATOQNOZ

ΤᾺ 5, / » e ~ ¢€ πόλει, ἐβούλευσα δέ καὶ ἔτυχεν ἡμῶν ἢ φυλὴ "Av-

~ , 7 id an \ , τ τιοχὶς πρυτανεύουσα, OTE ὑμεῖς τοὺς δέκα στρατηγοὺς

x ΕἸ » ἊΣ Ν 3 ΄“ , ’ , τοὺς οὐκ ἀνελομένους τοὺς EK τῆς ναυμαχίας ἐβου-

5AecGe ἀθρόους κρίνειν ) ὃς ἐν τῷ VOTE € aOpoovs κρίνειν, παρανόμως, ὡς ἐν τῷ ὑστέρῳ

VA lat ¢. a Yn χρόνῳ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν ἔδοξε.

ΣΝ oN , a TOT ἐγὼ μονὸος Τῶν πρὺ-

J 35 7 ΣᾺΝ \ 5 XN ἊΝ τάνεων ἡναντιώθην ὑμῖν μηδὲν ποιεῖν παρὰ τοὺς

7. ὑμῖν is retained, in deference to weight of MSS., and with all the edd., against Oxon. and 2 other MSS.: although évav- τιοῦσθαι does not require a dative of reference, especially in a description of formal proceedings.

stands here in its simple meaning of ‘vulgar’ in the sense of ‘common, —not as implying (as Fischer and others think) self-assertion or bad taste; a meaning which (1) would make ἐρῶ ὑμῖν sound blunt even to harshness; (2) does not harmonise with δικα- wkd, for an arrogant tone is not characteristic of persons addressing their judges; and (3) does not suit the parallel passage Gorg. 482 6, εἰς τοιαῦτα ἄγεις φορτικὰ καὶ δημηγορικὰ, ... ἃ φύσει μὲν οὔκ ἐστι καλά, νόμῳ δέ. δικανικὰ is likewise a colourless word ; —not ‘lawyerlike’ in the sense of ‘dry,’ nor yet ‘streitsiichtig’ (Steinhart), but simply ‘characteristic of speak- ers in courts of justice.’

3. τοὺς δέκα] Strictly only eight ; for Conon was not in- cluded, and another of the ten was dead. Xenophon, in one of his accounts (Mem. I. 1. 18), speaks with more definite in- accuracy of ἐννέα στρατηγούς.

5. παρανόμως, In two re- spects ; (1) that they were tried ἄθροοι (see Thirlwall, Hist. Gr.

vol, IV. App. 2, where it is shewn that this right of sepa- rate trial is not to be traced to the decree of Cannonus) ; and (2) that they were not heard in their own defence; for in the assembly in which the charge was brought first in- formally, they only (Xen. Hell. I. vii. 5) βραχέα ἕκαστος ἀπελο- γήσατο, οὐ γὰρ προὐτέθη σφίσι λόγος κατὰ τὸν νόμον: and in that in which they were con- demned they were not heard at all.

7. ἠναντιώθην . . . ἐναντία ἐψη- φισάμην] What is the precise reference of these expressions ἢ Was ἠναντιώθην a refusal to put the question? This is left for uncertain by Mr. Grote, who says that upon Xenophon’s shewing ‘it can hardly be ac- counted certain that Socrates was Epistates.’ (Hist. Gr. ch. 64.) Again, to what act does ἐναντία ἐψηφισάμην refer ἢ

It may be well to give the other accounts of this oceur- rence at length :—

(a) Xen. Mem. I. i. 18, βου-

? Aevoas yap ποτε, . . . ἐπιστάτης ἐν

ἈΠΟΛΟΓΊΑ ZOKPATOY?2. 83

, Ν » / > y, Ν e , κι 2. νόμους καὶ ἐναντία ἐψηφισαμην, καὶ ἐτοίμων ὄντων

τῷ δήμῳ γενόμενος, ἐπιθυμήσαντος τοῦ δήμου παρὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐννέα στρατηγοὺς μιᾷ ψήφῳ ἀποκτεῖναι πάντας, οὐκ ἠθέλησεν ἐπιψηφίσαι, ὀργιζομένου μὲν αὐτῷ τοῦ δήμου πολλῶν δὲ καὶ δυνατῶν ἀπειλούν- των.

(b) Ib. IV. iv. 2, émorarns γενόμενος οὐκ ἐπέτρεψε τῷ δήμῳ παρὰ τοὺς νόμους ψηφίζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ σὺν τοῖς νόμοις ἠναντιώθη τοιαύτῃ ὁρμῇ τοῦ δήμου x.T.A.

(c) Xen. Hell. I. vii. 9-15, ἐντεῖθεν ἐκκλησίαν ἐποίουν, εἰς ἣν ἡ Βουλὴ εἰσήνεγκε τὴν ἑαυτῆς γνώ- μην, Καλλιξένου εἰπόντος, τήνδε .... τῶν δὲ πρυτάνεων τινῶν οὐ φασκόντων προθήσειν τὴν διαψή- φισιν παρὰ τοὺς νόμους, αὖθις Καλλίξενος ἀναβὰς κατηγόρει αὐ- τῶν τὰ αὐτά. οἱ δὲ ἐβόων καλεῖν τοὺς οὐ φάσκοντας. οἱ δὲ πρυτά- ves φοβηθέντες ὡμολόγουν πάντες προθήσειν, πλὴν Σωκράτους τοῦ Σωφρονίσκου" οὗτος δ᾽ οὐκ ἔφη, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ κατὰ νόμον ποιήσειν.

(d) Axiochus, 368 d..... οἱ πρώην δέκα στρατηγοί" μὲν οὐκ ἐπηρόμην τὴν γνώμην" οὐ γὰρ ἐφαίνετό μοι σεμνὸν μαινο- μένῳ δήμῳ συνεξάρχειν᾽ οἱ δὲ περὶ Θηραμένην καὶ Καλλίξενον τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ προέδρους ἐγκαθέτους ὑφέντες κατεχειροτόνησαν τῶν ἀν- δρῶν ἄκριτον θάνατον. The word ἐγκάθετοι is explained by sch. li. 3. Pp. 54, kal Tatra €érepot τινες τὰ ψηφίσματα ἐπιψηφίζου- σιν, οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ δικαιοτάτου τρό- που λαχόντες προεδρεύειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ παρασκευῆς καθεζόμενοι.

(6) Gorg. 474 ἃ, πέρυσι βου- λεύειν λαχών, ἐπειδὴ ἡ φυλὴ ἐπρυ- τάνενε καὶ ἔδει pe ἐπιψηφίζειν, γέλωτα παρεῖχον καὶ otk ἠπιστά- μὴν ἐπιψηφίζειν. For this, as Luzae aptly remarks, is the

G

was oes oT eyo

historical fact before us dis- guised by Socratic irony. That Socrates was Epistates

is at least a probable conclu- sion from (a), (Ὁ), and (4), to say nothing of (e); in further support of which, (b) and (d) imply that he carried his point, which he could not have done but as Epistates.

The reference of ἠναντιώθην must therefore be to Socrates’ refusal to put the question, which resulted, as (d) credibly relates, in the adjournment of proceedings to the next day, when a more pliable Epistates presided.

The other clause, ἐναντία ἐψηφ., is, equally with ἦναν- τιώθην, in connection with μό- vos τῶν mprtaveov’ the struc- ture of the sentence points to this inevitably. Now against referring this to the eventual voting in the assembly is (1) the unlikelihood that So- crates should be the only one of the prytanes who voted in the minority, when several of them had come to see that the bill was illegal. And (2) what if he had been the only one? it was no marked distinction: the minority was large, and he and the rest of the prytanes would merely vote as indi- viduals. So likewise to refer it to the stages immediately preceding that final voting, would be in contradiction with the mention made in the ac- counts of the opposition of others beside Socrates. To refer it, again, to the debate on the bill in the council, before it was adopted as a

i)

(Oy

84

MAATONOS

, XQ » 7 nan e 7 Q ra ἐνδεικνύναι με καὶ ἀπάγειν τῶν ῥητόρων, καὶ ὑμῶν P-

προβούλευμα, would be to lay the scene of it too far from that of ἠναντιώθην ὑμῖν with which it is coupled, and would make μόνος τῶν πρυτάνεων flat, since the πρυτάνεις had no prominent functions in the council. The remaining alternative, and this is in itself a plausible one, is to refer it to the first stage of proceedings in the assembly, where, preparatorily to the προ- βούλευμα being read out by the κηρυξ, 1t was handed to the proedri, who with the nomo- thete had to pronounce whe- ther it contravened any exist- ing law. Here was the precise moment at which legal pro- vision had been made for enter- taining the very objection taken by Socrates. We may then, with at least some probability, refer ἐναντία ἐψηφισάμην to So- crates’ condemning the bill as illegal when it was referred in due course to the joint con- sideration of the proedri and nomothetee. The hysteron proteron is on Greek prin- ciples natural : ἠναντιώθην----νό- μους precedes, because it, and not the earlier opposition, was the conspicuous and crowning act in Socrates’ whole proceed- ing; Dig. 308.

With Socrates’ more glo- rious refusal to put the ques- tion may be compared the conduct contemptuously attri- buted to Demosthenes by A‘s- chines, 11. 84. p. 40, ἀναγνωσθέν- Tos τοῦ ψηφίσματος, ἀναστὰς ἐκ τῶν προέδρων Δημοσθένης οὐκ ἔφη τὸ ψήφισμα ἐπιψηφιεῖν: βοώντων δὲ ὑμῶν καὶ τοὺς προέδρους ἐπὶ

‘ fol > wy ¢ τὸ βῆμα Kar ὄνομα καλούντων,

οὕτως ἄκοντος αὐτοῦ τὸ ψήφισμα ἐπεψηφίσθη.

The series of checks which the forms of the Ecclesia im- posed on bills in progress, with a view to guard existing laws, was as follows :—z. The, προβούλευμα was handed to the! proedri, who after conferring’ with the nomothete pro-: nounced whether or not it: contravened existing laws ; and, ἢ if they passed it, it was read) out by the κῆρυξ. 2. After this, it was open to any citizen to stop it by lodging ay ὑπω- pooia in earnest of his inten- tion to bring against its author? ἃ γραφὴ παρανόμων. 3. Or the Epistates might refuse to put the _question—under liability, } of course, to ἔνδειξις if he re- fused improperly. 4. Or the rest of the proedri (by a ma- jority, we may suppose,) might in like manner refuse their consent. See sch. 1]. 65, 11]. 39. pp. 36, 59.-—Schimann de Com. Ath. ch. xi.

τ. ἐνδεικνύναι καὶ ἀπάγειν] ‘To procure my suspension or ar- rest.’ The processes of ἐνδειξις and ἀπαγωγὴ are often men- tioned in conjunction, as here, and Dem. c. Timocr. 146. p. 745, Lept. 156. p. 594, Anti- pho v. 8, 9. p. 130, &c., and in the βουλευτικὸς ὅρκος as it stood after the amnesty. Amid several divergent accounts of these processes, the best is Heffter’s (Ath. Gerichtsverf. Ρ. 195). Ἔνδειξις might be in- stituted, among other cases, against any who should hold an office while he owed pub- lic money; or (a luculent

AITIOAOTIA ZOKPATOY’2. 85

, ’ὔ A. an tf A ~ 32. κελευόντων καὶ βοώντων, μετὰ TOU νομου καὶ τοῦ , 5, a / “ , x 6 δικαίον ᾧμην μᾶλλόν pe δεῖν διακινδυνεύειν ἢ μεθ᾽ « - , Ἂν ,ὔ 4 ΄ ὑμῶν γενέσθαι μὴ δίκαια βουλευομένων, φοβηθέντα + “' , - A ἐπὶ Υ» δεσμὸν ἢ θάνατον. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ἣν ἔτι δημοκρα- a , ᾿ » δ \ > if ed, z τουμένης τῆς πόλεως" ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὀλιγαρχία ἐγένετο, 5 t , 3 , , , FLA οἱ τριάκοντα αὖ μεταπεμψαμενοί ME πέμπτον αὐτὸν ᾽ \ , / > - > a eis τὴν θόλον προσέταξαν ἀγαγεῖν ἐκ Σαλαμῖνος , \ , an) ᾽ ΄ Η͂ - Ν Ν Λέοντα τὸν Σαλαμίνιον, ἵν ἀποθανοι' οἷα δὴ καὶ A A \ , , ἄλλοις ἐκεῖνοι πολλοῖς πολλὰ προσέταττον, βουλο- Ἔ ἧς a , , μενοι ὡς πλείστους ἀναπλῆσαι αἰτιῶν' τότε μέντοι το

δ᾽ τὰ > , ’ wy, Gy 5 ΄ “ δ ΠΝ ἀἐγὼ οὐ λόγῳ ἀλλ᾽ ἔργῳ αὖ ἐνεδειξάμην, ὅτι ἐμοὶ

instance) against any prytanis or proedrus who in discharge of his function in an assembly of the people should depart from the form of proceeding prescribed by law (Dem. ec. ΠΥπίοΟῦ 227. p32707).. loathe latter case, offenders were liable to a fine, and to ἔνδειξις, which ἔνδειξις was not only an expe- dient for levying the fine, but had the immediate effect of suspending them from office

uutil the fine was paid. The Thesmothetze had _ exclusive cognisance of ἔνδειξις. The

statement of Pollux, that it pertained to the Archon Basi- leus, is unsupported ; likewise his definition of ἔνδειξις, on which some writers rely,—that it was ὁμολογουμένου ἀδικήματος, οὐ κρίσεως ἀλλὰ τιμωρίας δεο- pevov,—is called by Heffter ‘a mere jingle of words.’ ’Ara- yoy) was of wider application than ἔνδειξις. Moreover, its object was the bringing the offender into custody, which in ἔνδειξις was not the rule.

ἔνδειξις was 80 interdictory procedure, ἀπαγωγὴ a proce- dure of summary arrest. To be lable to it, a person must be taken ἐπ᾿ αὐτοφώρῳ, in per- petration of an illicit act. The body which had cognisance in ἀπαγωγὴ was the Eleven, who registered (Heffter p. 210) the apprehension of the criminal and the cause of arrest (Lys. ΧΙ. 86. p. 138), and who fur- ther, supposing the arrested person to be already under sentence of law, had charge of the execution of this sentence.

7. θόλον] The building where the prytanes, and while they lasted the Thirty, daily ban- queted and sacrificed. It was near the council-chamber.

10. ἀναπλῆσαι] This νου, ΠΚ6 implere in Latin, is used idio- matically of communicating pollution ; whence here ‘im- plicate.’ See for example Phe- do 67 a; and cf. especially with the present passage Antipho, li. A. α. το. p. 116, συγκαταπιμ- πλάναι τοὺς ἀναιτίους,

d. (In an- swer to a supposed objection) that the innocent tendency of the re- formatory doctrine, which was simply to teach un- compro- mising ad- herence to righteous- ness, and not to train for professions or impart knowledge, excluded the sus- picion of perverting the youth,

Io

86 IIAATQNOZS

΄ \ Ie 5 εν , 3 “ 5.» θανάτου μὲν μέλει, εἰ μὴ ἀγροικότερον ἣν εἰπεῖν, οὐδ᾽ Ῥ.

e “ a \ Ν >, ,

ὁτιοῦν, τοῦ δὲ μηδὲν ἀδικον μηδ᾽ ἀνόσιον ἐργάζεσθαι, \ \ e ‘

ἐμὲ γὰρ ἐκείνη ἡ ἀρχὴ οὐκ

1 ᾽ he oa ᾽ Ἂς 5 ad + id > Us

ἐξέπληξεν οὕτως ἰσχυρὰ οὖσα, ὥστε ἀδικόν TL ἐργά-

, \ Ν a / τούτου δὲ TO πᾶν μέλει.

XV an τ , \

5σασθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ ἐκ τῆς θόλου ἐξήλθομεν, οἱ μὲν ΄ 7 9 5 \ ” ’, τέτταρες ᾧχοντο εἰς Σαλαμῖνα καὶ ἤγαγον Λέοντα, ΣΡ ἌΣ χα , > \ ” ἊΣ ἢ δ Ν ΟΣ ἐγὼ δὲ φχόμην ἀπιὼν οἴκαδε. καὶ ἴσως ἂν διὰ ταῦτ » ’ὔ ς ἣν ¢ ’ x ἣν ᾽ὔ Ψ 5 X ἀπέθανον, εἰ μὴ ἡ ἀρχὴ διὰ ταχέων κατελύθη καὶ

’ Cie. 7 , TOUTOY ὑμῖν ἔσονται πολλοὶ μάρτυρες.

," a) 5 δ, 5) Ve yo

ΧΧΙ. °Ap’ οὖν av pe οἴεσθε τοσάδε ern Siaye- , $7 3 \ ΄ Ἂν / > el νέσθαι, εἰ ἔπραττον Ta δημόσια, καὶ πράττων ἀξίως 3 XN > a > Ἃ an ip , tod ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ ἐβοήθουν τοῖς δικαίοις Kal, ὥσπερ

"A al . £ > iA n “~ XP, τοῦτο περὶ πλείστου ἐποιούμην; πολλοῦ γε δεῖ, a -Ἂἢ a x a» 3, 3 ye ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι. οὐδὲ yap av ἄλλος ἀνθρώπων

,ὔ yy te n a Si 5 ΄ «ε SON Tov τι ἔπραξα, τοιοῦτος φανοῦμαι, καὶ ἰδίᾳ ὁ αὐτὸς @ > Ν (4 ’ ION \ XN οὗτος, οὐδενὶ πώποτε ξυγχωρήῆσας οὐδὲν Tapa TO / y A yy ΄ὔ » la A « δίκαιον οὔτε ἄλλῳ οὔτε τούτων οὐδενί, οὺς οἱ δια-

᾿ 5 \ \ βάλλοντές μέ φασιν ἐμοὺς μαθητὰς εἶναι. ἐγὼ δὲ

΄ \ » δὴ fF: > 9 Ἕ 5 ’ (4 20 διδάσκαλος μὲν οὐδενὸς πώποτ᾽ ἐγενόμην" εἰ δέ τίς

/ \ Ἂν 5 an és ’ n μου λέγοντος καὶ τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ πράττοντος ἐπιθυμεῖ » , ν΄ ΄ yo , > \ ἀκούειν, εἴτε νεώτερος εἴτε πρεσβύτερος, οὐδενὶ

/ > x 4 \ 7 πώποτε ἐφθόνησα, οὐδὲ χρήματα μὲν λαμβάνων

. ὑμῖν͵ So MSS. and edd. generally. ὑμῶν is a conjecture of H. Q. up S δ i

Q. μάρτυρες] The μαρτυρίαι are

supposed to follow here. In- trod. p. Xvill. 20. διδάσκαλος οὐδενὸς] He

means (see b below) that he imparted no pd@npa,—no pro- fessional knowledge; even of καλοκαγαθία he never ὑπέσχετο διδάσκαλος εἶναι Χο. Mem. I. :..3. Cf. his declining ἐπιμε-

λεῖσθαι Nicias’ son, Laches 208 d. What he sought to impart was rather a habit of mind; “not to dispense ready-made truth like so much coin, but to awaken the sense of truth and virtue; not to force his own convictions on others, but to test theirs.’ —Zeller.

—

» , > ‘ \ Ἂν fa) , Ve 7 τ οὐδείς. ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ διὰ παντὸς τοῦ βίου δημοσίᾳ τε, εἴ YP.

>

ATIOAOTIA SOKPATOY?2. 87

33. διαλέγομαι μὴ λαμβάνων δ᾽ ov, ἀλλ᾽ ὁμοίως καὶ

πλουσίῳ καὶ πένητι παρέχω ἐμαυτὸν ἐρωτᾷν, καὶ ἐάν τις βούληται ἀποκρινόμενος ἀκούειν ὧν ἂν λέγω. καὶ τούτων ἐγὼ εἴτε τις χρηστὸς γίγνεται εἴτε μή, οὐκ ἂν δικαίως τὴν αἰτίαν ὑπέχοιμι, ὧν μήτε ὑπεσχόμην 5 μηδενὶ μηδὲν πώποτε μάθημα μήτε ἐδίδαξα" εἰ δέ τίς φησι παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ πώποτέ τι μαθεῖν ἢ ἀκοῦσαι ἰδίᾳ ὅ τι μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι πάντες, εὖ ἴστε ὅτι οὐκ ἀληθὴ λέγει. ΧΧΙ]. ᾿Αλλὰ διὰ τί δή ποτε per ἐμοῦ χαίρουσί —asus-

\ , , 5 Ὰ ἘΞ ὩΣ picion τινες πολὺν χρόνον διατρίβοντες : akNKOATE, ὦ GV- 10 which was > “ Ρ ~ e ΄ QA > , > A 3 x also ee Opes ᾿Αθηναῖοι: πᾶσαν ὑμῖν τὴν ἀληθειαν ἐγὼ εἴπον᾽ _ futed inde- pendently.

[4 ᾽ ΄ , ᾽ , vod , ὅτι ἀκούοντες χαίρουσιν ἐξεταζομένοις τοῖς οἰομένοις \ 3 a 3 > »”, » Ν » » ΄ μὲν εἶναι σοφοῖς, οὖσι δ᾽ οὔ ἔστι γὰρ οὐκ ἀηδές. > \ \ ~ e 3; ᾽ὔ / € ‘\ ΄ ἐμοὶ δὲ τοῦτο, ὡς ἐγώ φημι, προστέτακται ὑπὸ τοῦ ΄ ν Ν Ὶ / J > , Ν θεοῦ πράττειν καὶ ἐκ μαντείων καὶ ἐξ ἐνυπνίων καὶ 18 MS , ὩΣ / x LAA 6 if “ παντὶ τρόπῳ, ᾧπερ τίς ποτε καὶ ἀλλὴ θεία μοῖρα » ’ Wwe a , , a 5 ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ ὁτιοῦν προσέταξε πράττειν. ταῦτα, ὦ > “ ‘\ > ~ 3 ΟΥ̓ X\ Δ 72 ᾽ x \ A@nvaiot, καὶ ἀληθὴ ἐστὶ καὶ εὐέλεγκτα. εἰ yap On » “ / Χ \ XN Ν Ψ ἔγωγε τῶν νέων τοὺς μὲν διαφθείρω, τοὺς δὲ διέφ- “ A 5», \ od , Oapka, χρὴν δήπου, εἴτε τινὲς αὐτῶν πρεσβύτεροι 20 , » “ , 3 Las δ . γενόμενοι ἐγνωσαν OTL νέοις οὖσιν αὐτοῖς ἐγὼ κακον 4 7 / Ν 5 τ > / πώποτέ τι ξυνεβούλευσα, νυνὶ αὐτοὺς ἀναβαίνοντας » “ “ ᾿ς “ \ ΩΝ > ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖν Kal τιμωρεῖσθαι: εἰ δὲ μὴ αὐτοὶ »Μ A ’ , \ los , , ηθελον, τῶν οἰκείων τινὰς τῶν ἐκείνων, πατέρας καὶ

5 ἊΝ \ Μ» Ἂν ,ὔ ε ἀδελῴους καὶ ἀλλοὺς τοὺς προσήκοντας, εἴπερ UT 25

It. εἶπον.) So Stallbaum, rightly. εἶπον, Hermann. See Commentary.

2. καὶ ἐάν τις] This is a soft being interjected. Then ὅτι is way of saying,‘AndITamready ‘because.’ See the examples to question him, if he chooses.’ which Stallb. quotes—Euthy-

12. ὅτι ἀκούοντες] Stallb.right- phro 3 b, Rep. I. 332 a, III. ly joins this with ἀλλὰ διὰ τί--- 402 6, 410 dd. διατρίβοντες ; the ἀκηκόατε---εἶπον'

88 ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

» a Ν » , la “ ~ ἐμοῦ TL κακὸν ἐπεπόνθεσαν αὐτῶν οἱ οἰκεῖοι, νῦν μεμ- P- 3 Ἐν x a Ν , a νῆσθαι καὶ τιμωρεῖσθαι. πάντως δὲ πάρεισιν αὐτῶν Seen “ A Sak € las la ΑἹ , πολλοὶ ἐνταυθοῖ, ovs ἐγὼ ὁρῶ, πρῶτον μὲν Κρίτων εξ / ’ XN ¢€ ‘gy tA A οὑτοσὶ, ἐμὸς ἡλικιώτης καὶ δημότης, Κριτοβούλου e ms Pie ey, ε ἢ δ τοῦδε πατήρ᾽ ἔπειτα Λυσανίας ὁ Σφήττιος, Αἰσχίνου “ ΤΑ yy a Ν 4 τοῦδε πατήρ' ἔτι ᾿Αντιφῶν ὁ Κηφισιεὺς οὑτοσί, ’ td du 5) Ὁ - € 5 Ἐπιγένους πατήρ᾽ ἄλλοι τοίνυν οὗτοι, ὧν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ 3 , a a , / 4 ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ διατριβῇ γεγόνασι, Νικόστρατος, ὁ Θεο- a 3, N ,ὔ \ , ζοτίδου, ἀδελφὸς Θεοδότου----καὶ ὁ μὲν Θεόδοτος

2. καὶ τιμωρεῖσθαι] BS om.; VZ retain; H brackets. The likelihood is not great that the words have been inserted from the end of the former sentence (H brackets them there, by mistake); the rhythm almost requires them; and there is point in attributing the same vindictive feeling to the kinsmen as to

the youths themselves.

The repetition is like Brutus’ repe-

tition of ‘for him have I offended, in Shakespeare’s Jul. Ces.

Act ILL. Scene ii.

4. Κριτοβούλου &e. | With Critobulus Socrates holds con- versation in Xen. Mem. I. iii, 11. vi. He is mentioned also in Athen. V. 220a, with “schines, distinguished from others of the name as 6 Σωκρατικός, the son of Lysanias (see Diog. Laert. 11. 60), who afterwards became a teacher for money of the Socratic doctrines, and wrote Socratic dialogues (Schol. in Menex.). He was at vari- ance with Aristippus (Luzac de Dig. Soc. sect. LI. § 2), and there is a fiagment of an in- vective written against him by Lysias, illustrating the enmity of the Orators against the So- cratists: he is of the company named in the Pheedo (59 b). Epigenes is meutioncd Xen. Mem, IIL. Σὰ 1, and Phado 59 b: his father Antipho is not otherwise known. Demo-

docus, the father of Paralus and Theages, is an interlocutor in the Theages. Of Theages it is said, Rep. 496 b, ety δ᾽ ἂν καὶ ὁ TOU ἡμετέρου ἑταίρου Θεάγυυς χαλινὸς οἷος κατασχεῖν᾽ καὶ γὰρ Θεάγει τὰ μὲν ἄλλα πάντα παρε- σκεύασται πρὸς τὸ ἐκπεσεῖν φιλο- σοφίας, ἡ δὲ τοῦ σώματος νοσο- τροφία ἀπείργουσα αὐτὸν τῶν πο- Adimantus 15 an interlocutor in the Rep. (357-368, 548). Apollodorus appears in the Phedo (59 a, 117 d) as passionately attached to Socrates, and in the Symp. says of himself (172 6), ἐγὼ Σωκράτει συνδιατρίβω καὶ ἐπιμελὲς πεποίημαι ἑκάστης ἡμέρας εἰδέναι ὅ τι ἂν λέγῃ ἢ πράττῃ, and is said (173 d) to have got τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τὸ μανικὸς καλεῖσθαι. Nicostratus, Theodotus, Para- lus, and Mantodorus are only mentioned here.

λιτικῶν κατέχει.

ἈΠΟΛΟΓΊΑ ZOKPATOY?2. 89

’ a xX mart, > ΄ ..33. τετελεύτηκεν, ὥστε οὐκ ἂν ἐκεῖνος γε αὐτοῦ κατα- ΄ o , aes: . 34. SenBein—, καὶ Πάραλος ὅδε, ὁ Anpodoxov, οὗ nv ’ὔ Ψ σ \ ΟΣ , Θεάγης ἀδελφός" ὅδε δὲ ᾿Αδείμαντος, ὁ ᾿Αρίστωνος, ec > ἊΝ ’ ,ὕ @ οὗ ἀδελφὸς οὑτοσὶ Πλάτων, καὶ Αἰαντόδωρος, οὗ , , Mv \ ᾿Απολλόδωρος ὅδε ἀδελφός. καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς 5 \ ω a rey \ “ ’ ἘΝ > ἐγὼ ἔχω ὑμῖν εἰπεῖν, ὧν τινὰ ἐχρῆν μαλιστα μέν ἐν D ἑαυτοῦ λό) σθαι Μέλητον paptupa’ τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ παρασχέσθαι Μέλη μαρτυρ 3 \ f > ΄ a 7 eas εἰ δὲ τότε ἐπελάθετο, viv παρασχέσθω, ἐγὼ παρα- on ‘\ / » 4 a > . , χωρῶ, Kal λεγέτω, εἰ TL ἔχει τοιοῦτον. ἀλλα τουτοῦυ a « 7. cy » ΄’΄ > Ν πᾶν τοὐναντίον εὑρήσετε, ὠὦ ἀνδρες, πάντας ἐμοὶ το - A “ \ > βοηθεῖν ἑτοίμους τῷ διαφθείροντι, τῷ κακὰ ἐργαζο- , \ > , ae σ΄ ΓΟ ΡΣ \ b μένῳ τοὺς οἰκείους αὐτῶν, ὡς φασι Μίλητος καὶ ” > ΟΝ \ \ e , Pe) KN Avutos. αὐτοὶ μὲν yap ot διεφθαρμένοι tay ἂν ἐᾷ » a e \ , λογον ἔχοιεν βοηθοῦντες" οἱ δὲ ἀδιάφθαρτοι, πρεσ- ΄ yy e , , βύτεροι ἤδη ἄνδρες, οἱ τούτων προσήκοντες, τίνα 15 wv yy , A ΕῚ “Δ ἊΝ ἄλλον ἔχουσι λόγον βοηθοῦντες ἐμοὶ ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τὸν > ΄ \ , “ ,ὕ ΄ \ ὀρθὸν τε καὶ δίκαιον, ὅτι ξυνίσασι Νίελητῳ μὲν Wev- ie > Ν Aver, , δομένῳ, ἐμοὶ δὲ ἀληθεύοντι ; ἐξ : se a \ Se XXIII. Elev δή, ὦ avdpes’ a μὲν ἐγὼ ἔχοιμ᾽

Conclu- 3 > 2S , > - Ny ” ” sion ae av ἀπολογεῖσθαι, σχεδὸν ἐστι ταῦτα καὶ ἄλλα ἴσως 20 reason for not en-

A , Sr 1S, «- a » , > C TOLAUTA, TAXa ὃ αν TLS υμῶν αγανακτήσειεν aVa- treating Ν ε A ce \ ἈΦ γι. τ x the mercy μνησθεὶς EavTov, εἰ ὃ μέν καὶ ἐλάττω TOUTOV! TOU of the court,

> “ > lal > , 3 ΓΔ ΄ , ἀγῶνος ἀγῶνα ἀγωνιζόμενος ἐδεήθη τε Kal ἱκέτευσε

\ \ \ a , , τοὺς δικαστὰς μετὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, παιδία τε

to

οι

[4 ~ > A (cA ed 7 > , | αὑτοῦ ἀναβιβασάμενος, va ὁ τι μάλιστα ἐλεηθείη.

ἣν » “- / Ν / / 3 \ A καὶ ἄλλους τῶν οἰκείων Kal φίλων πολλοὺς, ἐγὼ δὲ

if καταδεηθείη] The κατα--

βήματος, ἔως ἂν εἴπης. Note by

implies absence of all reserve or modification: here in a bad Sense it expresses an unprin- cipled act. Dig. 122.

8. ἐγὼ παραχωρῶ) The full expression occurs schin. iii. 165. Pp. 77, παραχωρῶ σοι τοῦ

the way, that the examination of witnesses was extra to the time allowed for the pleadings; ef. Lysias xxiii. 4, 8. pp. 166, 167, καί μοι ἐπίλαϑε τὸ ὕδωρ.

26. ἐγὼ δὲ ἄρα] ‘And then finds that 1.

90 ITAATQNO®S

» Ni 32 fe ὔ x n , οὐδὲν apa τούτων ποιήσω, Kal ταῦτα κινδυνεύων, Pp. 3. Ἕ x fa Ν yf , δ, τὸ > ὡς av δόξαιμι, Tov ἔσχατον κίνδυνον. τάχ᾽ οὖν τις

an 3 , > , DY , ταῦτα ἐννοῆσας αὐυθαδέστερον av πρὸς με σχοίη, \ 3 Ν > la 7 lal EY an καὶ ὀργισθεὶς αὐτοῖς τούτοις θεῖτο av μετ᾽ ὀργῆς Ν an , { n o yy an 5τὴν ψῆφον. εἰ On τις ὑμῶν οὕτως ἔχει,---οὐκ ἀξιῷ ἃ \ \ "7 3 ΡΣ ae oy. A \ μὲν yap eywye’ εἰ δ᾽ οὖν, ἐπιεικῆ av μοι δοκῶ πρὸς a / , “ ᾽ ,ὔ ey yy Se ἊΣ v4 τοῦτον λέγειν λέγων OTL ἐμοί, ὦ ἄριστε, εἰσὶ μέν TA an ἧς ~ Ν na ποὺ τινες καὶ οἰκεῖοι" Kal yap τοῦτο αὐτὸ TO τοῦ «ες fe 5 > >’ ε 3 Ἂς 4 ’ > S Ἶ ia tA Opypov, οὐδ᾽ ἐγὼ ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης Te- 3 ͵7 “ ’ in 10 puka, GAN ἐξ ἀνθρώπων, ὥστε Kal οἰκεῖοί μοί εἰσ! eon Sy: “ a - \ 4

καὶ υἱεῖς, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τρεῖς, εἷς μὲν μειράκιον

3, 7 ¥ , φ 3 “ ΛΝ an a

ἤδη, Ovo δὲ radia’ ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὐδέν᾽ αὐτῶν δεῦρο

4 ,ὔ id lod ἀναβιβασάμενος δεήσομαι ὑμῶν ἀποψηφίσασθαι. τί \ > 2O\ , ,ὔ » , δὴ οὖν οὐδὲν τούτων ποιήσω; οὐκ αὐθαδιζόμενος, e 3 yf 9, Lat 3 9 ων 4 150) avopes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, οὐδ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἀτιμαζων, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν , SX 2 XN Δ ΩΝ ᾿ y θαρραλέως ἐγὼ €xw πρὸς θάνατον ἢ py, ἄλλος λό ὃς δ᾽ οὗ dof Lt ἐμοὶ καὶ ὑμῖν καὶ OA oyos, πρὸς δ᾽ οὖν δοξαν καὶ ἐμοὶ καὶ ὑμῖν καὶ ὅλῃ a / By “ Ν S: 927 eX. a xAN τῇ πόλει οὐ μοι δοκεῖ καλὸν εἶναι ἐμὲ τούτων οὐδὲν a / 3, a ByA τς ποιεῖν καὶ THALKOVOE ὄντα καὶ τοῦτο τοὔνομα ἔχοντα, > 3 \ aS oF - ΩΣ vA 2ο εἴτ οὖν ἀληθὲς eit οὖν ψεῦδος" ἀλλ᾽ οὖν δεδογμένον

“ £ Qn an έ ἐστι τῷ Σωκρατει διαφέρειν τινὶ τῶν πολλῶν Bs : ρ

ΟΠ τῷ Σωκράτει] VBS τὸν Σωκράτη, ZH τὸ Σωκράτη, both with some MS. authority. The last is worst ; for such an emphatic use of the name Socrates palpably requires the article. And

ΤΙ, εἷς μὲν Lamprocles μ ]

2. ws ἂν δόξαιμι] Refers to (Xen, Mem. IL ii. 1). d00°

κίνδυνον, not to ἔσχατον" ---" dan-

ger, as he would think it.

5. οὐκ ἀξιῶ μὲν γὰρ] γὰρ refers to εἰ---ἰ 1 say 7/,] for though I do not expect it of you, yet [making the suppo- sition, ] 7fit should be so.’

6. ἐπιεικῆ] ‘ Conciliatory.’

g. Ὁμήρου] Odyss. xix. 163.

Sophroniscus and Menexenus (Pheedo 116 b).

15. εἰ μὲν] ‘Whether I can look death in the face or not.’ —Whewell.

19. τοὔνομα] The name of σοφός" ef. 20 d, and below, εἴτε σοφίᾳ εἴτε k,T.A.

AITIOAOTIA ZOKPATOYS. of

P: 35. ἀνθρώπων. εἰ οὖν ὑμῶν ot δοκοῦντες διαφέρειν εἴτε

σοφίᾳ εἴτε ἀνδρείᾳ εἴτε ἄλλῃ ἡτινιοῦν ἀρετῇ τοιοῦτοι α eiTe ἀνδρείᾳ εἰτε ἄλλῃ ἡτινιοῦν ἀρετῇ τοιοῦ Μ ᾽ Ν Δ ΩΝ “ ΓΝ, , ἐσονται, αἰσχρὸν ἂν εἴη" olovaTEep ἐγὼ πολλάκις ἘΠ , “ , ᾿ a Υ 5. εωρακα τινας, ὅταν κρίνωνται, δοκοῦντας μὲν τι εἶναι, ΄ \ ’ ed ε , 3 / θαυμάσια δὲ ἐργαζομένους, ὡς δεινὸν τι οἰομένους ) 3. 13 a σ“ » , 5) , πείσεσθαι εἰ ἀποθανοῦνται, ὥσπερ ἀθανάτων ἐσομέ- ΨΙΝ e a ἊΝ \ / A > Ν ων νων, ἐὰν ὑμεῖς αὐτοὺς μὴ ἀποκτείνητε" οἱ ἐμοὶ δοκοῦ- » , “ , , “ ψυ "3 x σιν αἰσχύνην TH πόλει περιάπτειν, WOT ἂν τινα καὶ ““ ie e lod σ e ’, » ¥, τῶν ξένων ὑπολαβεῖν ὅτι ot διαφέροντες ᾿Αθηναίων ΕῚ > Vf A e ~ »Μ ΄ > ΄“ Ἀ εἰς ἀρετὴν, οὺς αὐτοὶ ἑαυτῶν ἔν τε ταῖς ἀρχαῖς καὶ “ δ ΄ ,ὔ - A ταῖς ἄλλαις τιμαῖς προκρίνουσιν, οὗτοι γυναικῶν > ᾿ ’ὔ ΄ td 5 » ’ ΄“ οὐδὲν διαφέρουσι. ταῦτα γάρ, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, yw ¢, a AY a ἊΝ ΄ ῳ e A OUTE ὑμᾶς χρὴ ποιεῖν τοὺς δοκοῦντας καὶ οτιοῦν 5, 3. oN e a A tga 5) 7 > \ εἰναι, OUT, ἂν ἡμεῖς ποιῶμεν, ὑμᾶς ἐπιτρέπειν, ἀλλα

~ ἈΝ \ aA τοῦτο αὐτὸ ἐνδείκνυσθαι, ὅτι πολὺ μᾶλλον καταψη-

against both this and τὸν Σωκράτη stands the consideration, that the meaning would be ‘people have made up their minds that Socrates zs ¢o differ ;’ it is the form of a resolution which zs to take effect; whereas the meaning required is ‘they have made up their minds that Socrates differs’ now. τῷ Σωκράτει leaves this clear. It is the reading of Oxon. and three other MSS. ; and in accepting it we follow Bernhardy (Syntax. p. 94), who supports it with parallels. See Dig. 183.

2. dvdpeia] Oxon. here has ἀνδρίᾳ, but is not consistent. Dindorf (on Ar. Nub. 510) says ἀνδρεία alone is the true form, —as proved (1) by the Ionic dieresis dvSpnin (2) by the fact that in poetry it never occurs where the metre would require ἀνδρία (except in Eur. Here. F. 475, πατὴρ ἐπύργου, μέγα φρονῶν én’ avdpia, which Elmsley has emended evavépia) ; (3) by the testi- mony of Etym. M. p. 461. 53, that the traditional orthography was ἀνδρεία till Apollonius invented ἀνδρία: (4) by the prepon- derating adherence of the MSS. to ἀνδρεία, 13. οὔτε ὑμᾶς VH ὑμᾶς, BSZ (following 2 MSS.) ἡμᾶς. H says “ὑμᾶς com- modum sensum preebet; nec plebem, modo aliquo loco haberi velit, facere, nec si singuli faciant, permittere debere.”

3. ἔσονται) ‘If we are to given a different turn to the have such conduct on the part meaning. of those,’ &c. εἶεν would have

σι

Ιο

92 IAATQNOZ

a κ᾿ 9 \ ᾿ς , 4 : φιεῖσθε τοῦ Ta ἐλεεινὰ ταῦτα δράματα εἰσάγοντος Pp. 3: ,ὔὕ Ἂ (A a x a « καὶ καταγέλαστον τὴν πόλιν ποιοῦντος ἢ τοῦ ησυ- / “4 χίαν ἄγοντος. ie \ “ Ψ' ἘΣ »» SIAN ΧΧΙΝ. Χωρὶς de τῆς δόξης, & ἄνδρες, οὐδὲ id ΄ a [οὶ a a n By \ 5 δίκαιον μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι δεῖσθαι Tov δικαστοῦ οὐδε ς ΄ / Ν ΄’, / δεόμενον ἀποφεύγειν, ἀλλὰ διδάσκειν καὶ πείθειν. » κι 2X if , ε lA Tae rn ov yap ἐπὶ τούτῳ καθηται ὁ δικαστὴς, ἐπὶ τῷ κατα- Ἂς / a An χαρίζεσθαι τὰ δίκαια, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ κρίνειν ταῦτα' ΔΕ , ᾽ A oN a a5 RES x καὶ ὀμώμοκεν οὐ χαριεῖσθαι ois ἂν δοκῇ αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ ΄ \ Ν / » Ν yy « a 10 OLKATELV κατὰ τοὺς νόμους. οὔκουν χρὴ OvTE ἡμᾶς 5»γ7 an a 3, e ΄ ih > / ἐθίζειν ὑμᾶς ἐπιορκεῖν, οὔθ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐθίζεσθαι: οὐδέ- \ AY Crees » a τὶ 3 AeA, τεροι yap av ἡμῶν εὐσεβοῖεν. μὴ οὖν ἀξιοῦτέ με, ar Sk ᾽ an an a X ε - ΄ ὦ ἀνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοιαῦτα δεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς πράττειν, a , e ἐξ τ 5 ΄, , , or ἃ μήτε ἡγοῦμαι καλὰ εἶναι μήτε δίκαια μητε ὅσια, + i3 Χ / i N 3 Uf ΄ τράλλως τε μέντοι νὴ Δία πάντως καὶ ἀσεβείας φευ- ἃ td Ἂ Ἂ of. a x wv » yovra ὑπὸ Μελήτου τουτου. σαφῶς yap av, εἰ {4) « a Ἂς nan ὃ lal A) yA 7 / πείθοιμι ὑμᾶς καὶ τῷ δεῖσθαι βιαζοίμην ὀμωμοκότας, in NY Ve \ «ς ΄σ lal 3 Ν θεοὺς ἂν διδάσκοιμι μὴ ἡγεῖσθαι ὑμᾶς εἶναι, καὶ

> A 3 ἐν “δ ’ a c ατέχνως απολογούμενος κατηγοροίην αν ἐμαυτοῦ ὡς

0. ὀμώμοκεν] Part of the judge’s oath was ἢ μὴν ὁμοίως ἀκροάσεσθαι

ca , TWV KaTNYVOPOVVT@V

καὶ τῶν ἀπολογουμένων" Isocr. Ry eets pe 711. χαριεῖσθαι] emMiat- des ΗΠ]

not favour whomsoever he feels inclined to favour.’

το. ἡμᾶς] Defendants in general.

11. ἐθίζεσθαι) ‘Allow your- selves to be habituated ;’ an

ΕΠ ὑπ of {πὲ semi-middle isense. Dig. 88.

15. ἄλλως---καὶ ‘But, by Zeus, especially, when I am on my trial at Meletus’ instance for impiety. A remarkable

hyperbaton. The phrase ἄλλως Te πάντως καὶ 15 rent asunder to admit the μέντοι νὴ Δία (which is also a familiar sequence, Phedo 65 d, 68 b, 73 d, Rep. 332 a), which could have found no other convenient place. What makes such ἃ tmesis possible, without prejudice to perspicuity, is the very fact that ἄλλως τε πάντως καὶ 15 a Βα ΠΟ Εν familiar phrase to admit of this dismemberment and yet be recognised: Div. 294. Thus Bekker, in reading arbitrarily ἄλλως τε πάντως νὴ Δία μάλιστα μέντοι καὶ, 15. wide of the mark.

ANOAOTIA SOKPATOY2. 93

Ρ. 35. θεοὺς ov νομίζω. ἀλλὰ πολλοῦ δεῖ οὕτως ἔχειν" VO- μίζω τε γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ὡς οὐδεὶς τῶν ἐμῶν κατηγόρων, καὶ ὑμῖν ἐπιτρέτω καὶ τῷ θεῷ κρῖναι περὶ ἐμοῦ ὅπῃ μέλλει ἐμοί τε ἄριστα εἶναι καὶ ὑμῖν. 5

ToS, \ \ \ a 3 Μ 3 e XXV. Τὸ μὲν μὴ ἀγανακτεῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθη- a ne ᾿ a2 Ὰ Ὁ ; ounter- Ρ. 36. ναῖοι, ἐπὶ τούτῳ τῷ γεγονότι, ὅτι μου κατεψηφίσασθε, at » ΄ \ , Sei ne , of the ἄλλα τέ μοι πολλὰ ξυμβάλλεται, καὶ οὐκ ἀνέλπιστον — Penalty.

ve ‘\ a A 9 \ XN a μοι γέγονε TO yeyovos τοῦτο, ἀλλα πολὺ μάλλον / / a , Ν , θαυμάζω ἑκατέρων τῶν ψήφων τὸν γεγονότα ἀριθ- το ’ > ἊΝ »Μ Mv lod ’ DAL » fa

μον. Ov yap ῳᾧμὴν ἐγωγε οὕτω Tap OALyoY ἐσεσθαι,

» A Ἂν 7 A / e wv > 7

ἄλλα παρὰ πολύ viv δέ, ws ἔοικεν, εἰ τριάκοντα

3 3

12 τριάκοντα] So ZH ; τρεῖς VBS. Of MSS., Oxon. with five others has τριάκοντα' which also approves itself independently.

5. καὶ ὑμῖν] The defence of Socrates, which would occupy the second division of the pleadings, being thus con-

point of the sentence: Dig. 258. It is incorrect to sup- ply, as Stallbaum does, καὶ [δὴ καὶ τοῦτο ὅτι] οὐκ, και. Ra-

PET ree

cluded, there would follow here the voting of the judges, and the announcement of their verdict, declaring the charge proven. Then would begin the third division of the pleadings, consisting firstly of a speech on the side of the prosecution in advocacy of the penalty named, and secondly of So- crates’ dvtitiunow, where the Apology again takes up the thread. Introd. pp. vi, xi, xvii.

8. καὶ οὐκ---τοῦτο] The halt- ing connection (grammatically speaking) between this clause and the preceding part of the sentence is idiomatic. The shortest way is taken to arrive at the particular which is the

ther there is a substitution of a shorter form of expression, complete in itself, but not agreeing with the plan on which the sentence set out.

11. οὕτω παρ᾽ ὀλίγον] Hyper- batical for παρ’ οὕτως ὀλίγον" Dig. 298. Lit. ‘up to so lit- tle’ difference from the other quantity compared: i.e. ‘so close.’ Dig. 124.

12. τριάκοντα] The number of condemning votes was 281, out of a court of 501: so 30 in round numbers, or 31 ex- actly, changing sides, would have effected an acquittal. See, for the fuller discussion of this point, Introd. p. xii sqq.

04 ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

lé He a WA i3 yy 4 }

μόναι μετέπεσον τῶν ψήφων, ἀποπεφεύγη av. Με- p. 36. \ 3 e > a a ip

λητον μὲν οὖν, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκῶ, Kal νῦν ἀποπέφευγα,

\ > ΄ ’ ’ Σ x na a tf καὶ ov μόνον ἀποπέφευγα, ἀλλὰ παντὶ δῆλον τοῦτο

σ“ 5» \ » Υ, 57 \ ,ὔ , ye, ὅτι, εἰ μὴ ἀνέβη Avutos καὶ Λύκων Karnyopn- » a x 93 , 5σοντες ἐμοῦ, κἂν ὠφλε χιλίας δραχμάς, οὐ μεταλα- b

SN ‘ ᾽ lal ,

βὼν τὸ πέμπτον μέρος τῶν ψήφων. XXVI. Τιμᾶγας. δ᾽ οὐ ὁ ay, Ἵ ΤΠ ματον οὖν μοι ὃ ἀνὴρ θανατου.

a. Proposal on the footing of full justice, —ironical.

93 ᾿ Sas \ \ Bs <3 Coin 3 id Ba, elev’ ἐγὼ δὲ δὴ Tivos ὑμῖν ἀντιτιμήσομαι, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾽ἊΘ lal A ΕΥ n “ a 9 ͵7 / 5 vim Ὁ» (2 ηναῖοι ; ἢ δῆλον ὅτι τῆς akias; τί obv; TL ἀξιὸς τοεἰμι παθεῖν ἢ ἀποτῖι ὅ θὼν ἐν τῷ βίῳ οὐ εἰμ ἢ ἀποτισαι, o τι μαθὼν ἐν τῷ βίιῳ οὐχ ς / a ᾽ ’ , Ka e , ησυχίαν ἦγον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀμελῆσας ὥνπερ οἱ πολλοὶ, a Ἂς ’ , a Ν χρηματισμοῦ τε καὶ οἰκονομίας καὶ στρατηγιῶν καὶ

δημηγοριῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀρχῶν καὶ ξυνωμοσιῶν

The implication in μόναι that the majority was small would recommend the corruption of τριάκοντα into τρεῖς. In Andoe. iil. 4. p. 23, πεντήκοντα is a necessary emendation for πέντε, Cf.

Taylor, Lectt. Lys. cap. vi.

2. ἀποπέφευγα] Half in jest, in allusion to his accusers being three to one, Socrates represents the majority as obtained by the joint influence of the three: supposing then each accuser represented by one-third of the majority, Me- letus gets less than 100, 1. 6. less than one-fifth of the whole. The indictment stood in Me- letus’ name, but the really formidable accuser was Any- tus: see again Introd. p. x.

6. τὸ πέμπτον p.| Not ‘a fifth, but ‘the’ indispensable ‘fifth.’

10. παθεῖν ἢ ἀποτῖσαι] A tech- nical legal expression ; ἀποτῖσαι applies to a pecuniary penalty, παθεῖν to death, imprisonment,

or the like. So Dem. Mid. 47.

Ῥ. 529, ὅτου ἂν καταγνῷ ἡ ἡλιαία, τιμάτω περὶ αὐτοῦ παραχρῆμα, ὅτου ἂν δοκῇ ἄξιος εἶναι παθεῖν ἢ ἀπο- τῖσαι (part of the νόμος ὕβρεως), in Timocrat. 105. p. 733-

ὅ τι μαθών] ‘For having taken it-into my head, in the disposal of my life, to deny myself rest.’ ἐν is not ‘during,’

13. ἄλλων] Here is the idio- matic use of ἄλλος for ‘be- sides :’ Dig. 46. ἄλλων agrees with all three genitives follow- ing: ‘and what not besides,— magistracies, clubs, and fac- tions,’

ξυνωμοσιῶν] These associa- tions were as rife at Athens under the Thirty as in the Peloponnesian war.

AIIOAOMIA ZOKPATOY’. 95

iA “ 9 lad , ’ e a . 36. Kal στάσεων τῶν ἐν TH TOAEL γιγνομένων, ἡγησα-

——————_ .-τώ5.---Ῥ-ὡ)»ο;ο

Ν κ ¥ 2 4 ie} δ a ο μένος ἐμαυτὸν T@ OVTL ἐπιεικέστερον εινᾶυ 1) WOTE

93 iNet) ἈΠ , ’ a \ ᾽ 3 Ξ- εἰς ταῦτ᾽ ἰόντα σώζεσθαι, ἐνταῦθα μὲν οὐκ a, ot » ‘ 7, Cane. if > Sy, \ » ἐλθὼν μήτε ὑμῖν pyre ἐμαυτῷ ἔμελλον μηδὲν ὀῴφελος 5 ΝΩ͂Ν \ SV SUNY? oe fast N een) ’ A \ εἶναι, ἐπὶ δὲ TO ἰδίᾳ ἕκαστον ἰων. εὐεργετεῖν τὴν , ᾽ , ε Ὁ ΕΣ » a 5 μεγίστην εὐεργεσιαν, ws ἐγὼ φημι, ἐνταῦθα ya, > ΄ led e ΄“ ,ὔ N , , ἐπιχειρῶν ἕκαστον ὑμῶν πείθειν μὴ προτερον μῆτε a e aA \ > - \ e A τῶν ἑαυτοῦ μηδενὸς ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, πρὶν ἑαυτοῦ ἐπι- / a e / ἊΝ ’ μεληθείη, ὅπως ὡς βέλτιστος καὶ φρονιμώτατος » , ΄“ “ ’ ΩΝ » “ ΄- , ἐσοιτο, μῆτε τῶν τῆς πόλεως, πρὶν αὐτῆς τῆς πὸο- “ »Μ 4 Ν Χ WANs , Aews, τῶν τε ἄλλων οὕτω κατὰ TOY αὑτὸν τρόπον » a ; , 3 Ney, A A "» ἐπιμελεῖσθαι" τί οὖν εἰμὶ ἄξιος παθεῖν τοιοῦτος ὧν: » , τὰ MEY > a a τὰ \ ἀγαθὸν τι, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, εἰ δεῖ ye κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν τῇ ἀληθείῃ ἄσθαι' καὶ ταῦτά ἀγαθὸν αν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ τιμ αῦτα γε ayalo - “ Ἃ , » , IP hie ΄, > . τοιοῦτον, ὃ TL ἂν πρέποι ἐμοί. τί οὖν πρέπει ἀνδρὶ if > ty id ~ Ἂν bi ae ΄ [ πένητι εὐεργέτῃ: δεομένῳ ἄγειν σχολὴν ἐπὶ τῇ ὑμε- ΄, , > » “ A 5 Κ΄ τέρᾳ παρακελεύσει ; οὐκ ἐσθ᾽ ὃ τι μᾶλλον, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾽ a ΄ Ὁ e nN a Μ » Αθηναῖοι, πρέπει οὕτως, ὡς τὸν τοιοῦτον avdpa ἐν J ΄“ 6 Av ἀλλ a » e ΄ πρυτανείῳ σιτεῖσθαι, πολυ γε μᾶλλον ἢ εἰ τις ὑμῶν

oe > , x , ͵ ἵππῳ ἢ ξυνωρίδι ἢ ζεύγει νενίκηκεν ᾿Ολυμπίασιν.

5. ἐπὶ δὲ---εὐεργεσίαν)] This

XX. Ig. p. 159. Add Dem. F.

clause is repeated in the word ἐνταῦθα, and governed by ja’ and the ἰὼν with εὐεργετεῖν 15 a redundancy. (At the same time probably another clause is confusing itself with this in the speaker’s mind, to which ἰὼν would be essential, namely, ot δὲ ἰδίᾳ ἕκαστον ἔμελλον ἰὼν εὐεργετεῖν, 1. 6. of δὲ ἰὼν ἔμελλον ἰδίᾳ ἕκαστον evepy.)

14. τιμᾶσϑβαι] ‘That I should lay the penalty.’

16. εὐεργέτῃ] Stallbaum cites Aen. de Vectig. iii. 11, Lys.

L. 330. p. 446, τῷ δὲ: δοίητι ἂν ἐν πρυτανείῳ σίτησιν ἢ ἄλλην τινὰ δωρεάν, αἷς τιμᾶτε τοὺς εὐ- ἐργέτας ;

17. μᾶλλον πρέπει οὕτως ὡς] This is the form of comparison with ὡς, complicated by the redundant insertion of οὔτως, Dig. 164.

20. ζεύγει] Here this word plainly stands for three or four horses. Hesychius in voc. EAVS καὶ ἐπὶ τριῶν καὶ τεσσάρων ἔτασσον.

5

_ Ὁ

b. Com- promise,— ironical also.

15 εσθαι.

96 ITAATQNO®

e A \ ε a a 3 vA “ 9S oN O μὲν yap ὑμᾶς ποιεῖ εὐδαίμονας δοκεῖν [εἰναι], ἐγὼ δὲ S) ks Ν ε Ν a xar - ἌΝ ἣν ε εἶναι: καὶ ὁ μὲν τροφῆς οὐδὲν δεῖται, ἐγὼ δὲ ὯΝ, > 3 a \ \ , a 2s) ἐομαι. εἰ οὖν δεῖ με κατὰ TO δίκαιον τῆς ἀξίας τι- a {4 an vA μᾶσθαι, τούτου τιμῶμαι, ἐν πρυτανείῳ σιτήσεως. , 5 a , XXVIII. Ἴσως οὖν ὑμῖν καὶ ταυτὶ λέγων παρα- , a / “ Ἂς fe) " X ig πλησίως δοκῶ λέγειν ὥσπερ περὶ TOU οἰκτου καὶ τῆς 3 , ey Ν Ν 3 yy Ss ἀντιβολήσεως, ἀπαυθαδιζομενος᾽ TO δὲ οὐκ ἐστιν, ὦ 3 lal n QA , ων Ἀθηναῖοι, τοιοῦτον, ἀλλὰ τοιόνδε μᾶλλον. πέπεισμαι

WNC) ON 5 ΄ὕ 3 Ὡς ᾽ , ’ NG. ἰοῦ τς ς ἐγὼ ἑκὼν εἶναι μηδένα ἀδικεῖν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλὰ ὑμᾶς

a » ue 10 TOUTO οὐ πείθω" ὀλίγον. yap χρόνον ἀλλήλοις διει-

if: » , e > 5 ἡ TS , a λεέγμεθα: ἐπεῖ, ὡς ἐγῴμαι, εἰ ἣν ὑμῖν νόμος, ὥσπερ ᾿ς χλλ 9" θ , X a 7 Ἂς 7 ¢ vA καὶ ἄλλοις ἀνθρώποις, περὶ θανάτου μὴ μίαν ἡμέραν , / ΕΣ \ 7 7 yf A > > μόνον κρίνειν, ἀλλὰ πολλᾶς, ἐπείσθητε ἀν᾽ νῦν δ᾽ ov ΨΥ » ie 3 / a Ν 9 A ῥάδιον ev χρόνῳ ὀλίγῳ μεγάλας διαβολὰς amodv-

, N 3 Ἂν tA Ε] a na πεπεισμένος On ἐγὼ μηδένα ἀδικεῖν πολλοῦ , , ΕῚ ». > na 3 a 3 δέω ἐμαυτὸν γε ἀδικήσειν καὶ KAT ἐμαυτοῦ ἐρεῖν av- UA « ἂψ ΄, 3 rn ig , TOS, ὡς ἀξιός εἰμί του κακοῦ καὶ τιμήσεσθαι τοιουτου

\ a ’ , 3 \ , a Ὄ τινὸς ἐμαυτῷ, τί δείσας: ἢ μὴ πάθω τοῦτο, οὗ

ji / a a > "ὦ 9 > Μέλητός μοι τιμᾶται, ὃ φημι οὐκ εἰδέναι οὔτ᾽ εἰ

’ Ἂ apse: » , > 5 ΝΣ Τὰ AY ὩΣ 2ο ἀγαθὸν οὔτ᾽ εἰ κακὸν ἐστιν; ἀντὶ τούτου δὴ ἐλωμαι

@ 3 Bad ὦ a "»ὕ ’ Ὁ ὧν εὖ οἰδ᾽ OTL κακῶν ὄντων, τούτου τιμησάμενος ; , a \ , nn oa 3 δ πότερον δεσμοῦ: καὶ τί με δεῖ ζῆν ἐν δεσμωτηρίῳ, ,ὔ a 7.4 , ’ 5 os “ δουλεύοντα τῇ ἀεὶ καθισταμένῃ ἀρχῇ: τοῖς ἕνδεκα :

oy J o Δ » ’ ἀλλὰ χρημάτων, καὶ δεδέσθαι ἕως ἂν ἐκτίσω ; ἀλλὰ

12. ἄλλοις ἀνθρώποις] The Lacedemonians, for instance. See Thucyd. i. 132.

21. ὧν---ὄντων] Genitive of a noun with participle after verbs of knowing, &c.: Dig. 26. The clause however is complicated by the presence of ὅτι, indicative of a mo- mentary intention to adopt a

finite instead of a participial construction: Dig. 279.

23. Tots ἕνδεκα] εἷς ad’ ἑκάσ- της φυλῆς ἐγίγνετο, καὶ γραμμα- τεὺς (‘secretary’) αὐτοῖς συν- ηριθμεῖτο' Poll. vill. 102. They had charge of the prisons, as well as of the execution of sentences.

Ῥ. 36.

Θ

Ῥ. 37:

aS τσ ΠΝ

ATIOAOTIA SOKPATOYS. 97

> , γ 3 “ “a Ἂ Μ Ps 3 Χ 4 . 37. ταῦτον μοί ἐστιν, ὅπερ νῦν δὴ ἔλεγον" οὐ γάρ ἐστι

7: e A > / 9 ἐν Ἂ “-“ 7, μοι χρήματα, ὅπόθεν ἐκτίσω. ἀλλὰ On φυγῆς τιμη- σωμαι; ἴσως γὰρ ἄν μοι τούτου τιμήσαιτε. πολλὴ

| Ped fae? , yy » a » , ie ᾽ μέντ᾽ ἂν pe φιλοψυχία ἔχοι, εἰ οὕτως ἀλογιστοὸς εἰμι,

Υ͂ ε a ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι λογίζεσθαι, ὅτι ὑμεῖς μὲν ὄντες 5

A 7, ’ et ae 3 A \ an πολῖταί μου οὐχ οἷοι TE ἐγένεσθε ἐνεγκεῖν τὰς ἐμᾶς

ἃ διατριβὰς καὶ τοὺς λόγους, ἀλλ᾽ ὑμῖν βαρύτεραι γε-

48.

γόνασι καὶ ἐπιφθονώτεραι, ὥστε ζητεῖτε αὐτῶν νυνὶ ἀπαλλαγῆναι: ἄλλοι δὲ ἄρα αὐτὰς οἴσουσι ῥᾳδίως. πολλοῦ γε δεῖ, ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι. καλὸς οὖν av μοι ὁ βίος εἴη ἐξελθόντι τηλικῴῷδε οὐ, ἄλλην ἐξ ἄλλης πόλιν πόλεως Calpine Te Kal Sec Atevalieu® ὧν. εὖ γὰρ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι, ὅποι ἂν ἔλθω, λέγοντος ἐμοῦ ἀκροά- σονται οἱ νέοι ὥσπερ ἐνθάδε: κἂν μὲν τούτους ἀπε- λαύνω, οὗτοι ἐμὲ αὐτοὶ ἐξελῶσι, πείθοντες τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους" ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀπελαύνω, οἱ τούτων πα- τέρες τε καὶ οἰκεῖοι δι᾿ αὐτοὺς τούτους.

XXVIII. Ἴσως οὖν ἂν τις εἴποι σιγῶν δὲ καὶ

e 7, ΕΣ > ,ὕ ’ @! > » Come ησυχίαν ἄγων, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὐχ οἷος T ETEL ἡμῖν

» \ ~ / / ἐξελθὼν ὧν; τουτὶ δή ἐστι πάντων χαλεπώτατον 20

a iz, ε a ὙΠ \ ΄,ὕ “ a A TELOAL τινας υμων. εαν TE γὰρ λέγω OTL T@ θεῷ ἐ ἐ » “ ὅς 3 Ν Ν Ν - 3 » id e i ἀπειθεῖν TOUT €OTL Καὶ διὰ TOUT ἀδύνατον ῃησυχιαν wv » ΠΑ θ , «ε » ’, ὲ 59 > 3 αγεέειν, οὐ πεισεσῦε μοι WS ειρωνευομένῳ εαν TF aU

/ σ Ν 7 ,ὔ > Ν Δ » / λέγω OTL καὶ τυγχάνει μέγιστον ἀγαθὸν ὃν ἀνθρώπῳ

ἴω e Ψ « » an X / TOUTO, EKAOTNS ἡμέρας περὶ ἀρετῆς τοὺς λογοὺυς ποι- 25

a Ν ΄ BA ἣν xy Φ' lal 5 “ » / εἰσθαι καὶ τῶν ἄλλων, περὶ ὧν ὑμεῖς ἐμοῦ ἀκούετε

20. τουτὶ] Cf. textual note on ταυτησί, 22 6.

2. ἀλλὰ δὴ] Introduces the 1. ἐξελθόντι] ‘If I quit the last of a series of suppositions. city :’ as below e, ἐξελθὼν ζῆν.

Dig. 142. 20. τουτὶ] Namely, ὅτε οὐχ 9. ἄλλοι δὲ ἄρα] Tronical, οἷός τε ἔσομαι.

Η

98 MTAATOQNO®

Zz ἊΝ Ἄ 5 διαλεγομένου καὶ ἐμαυτὸν καὶ ἄλλους ἐξετάζοντος, Op. 38

δὲ ἀνεξέταστος βίος οὐ βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ, ταῦτα δ᾽

I. ὁ ἀνεξέταστος ---- ἀνθρώπῳ] The interrogatory discipline which Socrates thus extols was that to which he sought to bring all with whom he conversed.

The subject, about which the answerer was questioned, was himself: which is the rea- son why Socrates always iden- tified the process with the carrying out of the Delphic precept, Τνῶθι oceavrév. The branches of enquiry to which it led were manifold :—

(1) knowledge of one’s own natural endowments and posi- tion, with a view to living for the greatest good of oneself and others :—6 ἑαυτὸν ἐπισκε- Wapevos ὁποῖός τίς ἐστι πρὸς THY ἀνθρωπίνην χρείαν κι. Xen. Mem: IVa, 257°

(2) review of the actual use to which one has been and is putting one’s life—Laches 187 6, διδόναι wept αὑτοῦ λόγον, ὅντινα τρόπον νῦν τε Cy καὶ ὅντινα τὸν παρεληλυθότα χρόνον βεβίωκεν" and below 39 ὁ, διδόναι ἔλεγχον τοῦ βίου"

(3) examination of one’s opinions, — their — coherence, their consistency, the history of their formation ; of which the results are—consciousness of one’s own ignorance, and consciousness of the grounds of one’s knowledge: Xen. Mem. ἘΠῚ ix. 6, Soph. 230 b-—d:

(4) investigation of the prin- ciples of human life and action (for which the knowledge of one’s own nature is ἃ pre- requisite: Alc, I. 133 ¢, ap’ οὐκ

μὴ γιγνώσκοντες ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς... 4 > “Δ 3 , \ MF , δυναίμεθ᾽ ἂν εἰδέναι τὰ ἡμέτερα αὐτῶν κακά τε καὶ ἀγαθά ;)—Xen, 4 “ 5 Mem, I. 1. 16, περὶ τῶν ἀνθρω- πείων ἀεὶ διελέγετο σκοπῶν τί > Q? , > ΄ fe , , εὐσεβές, τί ἀσεβές, τί καλόν, τί 9 7 , , , y+ , αἰσχρόν, τί δίκαιον, τί ἄδικον, τί , , , , > oi σωφροσύνη, τί μανία, τί ἀνδρεία, τί δειλία, τί πόλις, τί πολιτικός, τί ἀρχὴ ἀνθρώπων, τί ἀρχικὺς av- θρώπων, καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων, ἃ iB ᾿ | € - \

τοὺς μὲν εἰδύτας ἡγεῖτο καλοὺς κἀγαθοὺς εἶναι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἀγνοοῦντας ἀνδραποδώδεις ἂν δικαίως κεκλῆς- and here (just above) τυγχάνει μέγιστον ἀγαθὸν ὃν ἀν-

σθαι

θρώπῳ τοῦτο, ἑκάστης ἡμέρας περὶ ἀρετῆς τοὺς λόγους ποιεῖσθαι.

But this examination was not a mere discipline ending in itself, but a preparation to qualify a man for receiving culture and improvement (Ale. a a ey ae Laches 188 b, ἀξιοῦντα μανθά- νειν ἕωσπερ av (2), for attaining connectedness of

ἐπιμελείας δεόμεθα,

knowledge and rational method in action, and for doing the best by him- self and the state.

Socrates seems to have em- ployed the strongest terms he could find to assert the indis- pensableness of this discipline : —Xen. Mem. I. 1. 16 (quoted above), ILI. ix. 6, τὸ ἀγνοεῖν ἑαιτόν, καὶ ἃ μὴ olde δοξάζειν τε καὶ οἴεσθαι γιγνώσκειν, ἐγγυτάτω μανίας ἐλογίζετο εἶναι, Soph. 230 (dl, τὸν δ᾽ ἀνέλεγκτον αὖ νομιστέον, ἂν καὶ τυχχάνῃ βασιλεὺς ὁ μέγας ὦν, τὰ μέγιστα ἀκάθαρτον ὄντα, ἀπαίδευτόν τε καὶ αἰσχρὸν K.T.A,, Hip. Ma. 304 6, τὸ καλὸν ἀγνοῶν"

Ν a ow , » Καὶ ΟἿΤΟΤΕ Οὑτὼ διάκεισαι, οιέει σοι

v : , , , 38. eve ἧττον πείσεσθέ μοι λέγοντι.

ATIOAOTIA ΣΟΚΡΆΤΟΥΣ. 99

A \ yy \ Ta δὲ EXEL μὲν -΄ ε > , Say. ͵ χὰ » CUE οὕτως, ὡς eyo φημι, ὦ avdpes, πείθειν Oe ov ῥάδιον. Ν » \ 4 7} 3 » » Ν 3 ΄σ A » καὶ ἐγὼ Gu οὐκ εἰθισμαι ἐμαυτὸν ἀξιοῦν κακοῦ οὐ- \ \ 3 , ᾽ ΄ εἰ μὲν yap ἦν μοι χρήματα, ετιμησαμὴν > 7 fo ἊΨ » , ᾿ 3 \ ‘ av χρημάτων ὅσα ἔμελλον exTicev' οὐδὲν yap

δενός.

> 7. “ \ > \ » » We Fe 2 μ4 δ εβλαβην᾽ νῦν δὲ ov yap ἐστιν, εἰ μὴ apa ὅσον ἂν > AN ,ὔ 3 cod , te / lol ἐγὼ δυναίμην ἐκτῖσαι, τοσούτου βούλεσθε μοι τιμῆ- ΝΜ > δ , » a Cin ua an

iaws ὃ ἂν δυναίμην ἐκτῖσαι ὑμῖν μνᾶν ap-

ὡς \ a

Πλατων δὲ ode,

ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι. καὶ Κρίτων καὶ Κριτόβουλος καὶ

σαι. >

/ ΄ 3 a γυρίου" τοσούτου οὖν τιμῶμαι. ὦ > / / , , “ / Απολλοδωρος κελεύουσί με τριάκοντα μνῶν τιμὴ-

» > ᾽ a “ 3 / σασθαι, αὐτοὶ 6 ἐγγυᾶσθαι: τιμῶμαι οὖν τοσούτου,

» Cite » mes , - » , ἐγγυηταὶ δ᾽ ὑμῖν ἔσονται τοῦ ἀργυρίου οὗτοι ἀξιό-

χρεῷ.

κρεῖττον εἶναι ἣν μᾶλλον ἢ τεθνά- ναι; and in the passage be- fore us.

And was there not a cause! The current opinions, drawn from men’s practical exigen- cies, imperfect observation, and debased morality, were no sounder than their sources. It was abhorrence of this mass of error and conventionality (which meanwhile the Sophists were accepting as the material of their system), which impelled Socrates to seek to reconstruct human opinion on a basis of ‘reasoned truth,

3. καὶ ἐγὼ ἅμ] A supple- mentary reason;—‘ Were si- lence possible, it would be no less a xaxév' which therefore I should decline imposing on myself,’

6. viv δὲ οὐ γὰρ] This com- bination of particles occurs always in setting aside a hy-

H

pothetical case which is the opposite of the existing state of the case. The δὲ and the yap enter simultaneously into the combination, where there is no ellipse nor aposiopesis. Dig, 1.49,

12. ἐγγυᾶσθαι] Governed by an equivalent of ‘they say’ contained in κελεύουσι. Cf. Symp. 213 a, πάντας οὖν. κελεύειν εἰσιέναι καὶ κατακλίνεσ- θαι, καὶ τὸν ᾿Αγάθωνα καλεῖν αὐ- Dies 245%

13. ἀξιόχρεῳ.) The third and last division of the pleadings being thus concluded, there would follow first the final voting and then the final ver- dict of the judges: by which the formal trial would be con- cluded.

After this, however, some ‘last words’ are still conceded to Socrates, who continues to address those of his judges

2

τόν.

μη

“δ αν 85

ο

C. Last reflections, addressed to the judges :

a. to those who had voted for his con- demnation ;

το καταψηφισαμένους θάνατον.

« r a 2 » ig 2ovpers τῶν ἄλλων ἀκούειν.

100 ITAATQNO> XXIX. Ov πολλοῦ γ᾽

a a 5, χὰ Ἂς als [ὦ Ἂς n θηναῖοι, ὄνομα ἕξετε καὶ αἰτίαν ὑπὸ τῶν βουλο- if A / nr € , 3 / μένων THY πόλιν λοιδορεῖν, ὡς Σωκράτη ἀπεκτόνατε, a» / la x / Ν 9S ἄνδρα σοφόν" φήσουσι yap δὴ με σοφὸν εἶναι, εἰ Ν A ’ , e / Ces 3 ie ’ 5 5 καὶ μὴ εἰμί, οἱ βουλόμενοι ὑμῖν ὀνειδίζειν. εἰ οὖν

/ 3 iA Ψ > ἃς A > 7, Ἃ περίιέεμεινατε ολιγον χρόνον», απὸ TOV αὐυτοματοῦυ ἂν

LL ata a Chet δι ἣν Ν Ν Ν e / σ ὑμῖν τοῦτο ἐγένετο᾽ ὁρᾶτε yap δὴ τὴν ἡλικίαν, OTL

΄ 3 3 ~ an , if N 3 Yh ’ὔ πόρρω ἤδη ἐστὶ τοῦ βίου, θανάτου δὲ ἐγγύς. λέγω Ν a > Ν U2 ei a 3 \ ‘N N 3 an δὲ τοῦτο οὐ πρὸς πάντας ὑμᾶς, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τοὺς ἐμοῦ , \ Ν , ἘΣ λέγω δὲ καὶ τοδὲ πρὸς x 5 Χ i 5) 5) 5 » τοὺς αὐτοὺς τούτους. ἴσως με οἴεσθε, ὦ ἄνδρες, 3 7 Ά e - Mc - x € lal ἀπορίᾳ λόγων ἑαλωκέναι τοιούτων, οἷς ἄν ὑμᾶς yy 5 ia “ a XN Ue. [τά ἔπεισα, εἰ ᾧμην δεῖν ἅπαντα ποιεῖν καὶ λέγειν, WATE

a N la - / ἀποφυγεῖν τὴν δίκην. πολλοῦ ye δεῖ, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπορίᾳ

ν Cc? » Ψ, , \ 14 Nee 15 μὲν ἑάλωκα, οὐ μέντοι λόγων, ἀλλὰ τόλμης καὶ ἀναι-

/ Ἂς “ ’ 7 tA XN e la a σχυντίας καὶ τοῦ ἐθέλειν λέγειν πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοιαῦτα, “ ἃ REN “ ra REY ’ , - , / AS ol ἂν ὑμῖν ἥδιστ᾽ Hv ἀκούειν, θρηνοῦντος TE μου καὶ > ib ΒΩ an Ν U4 \ ὀδυρομένου καὶ ἄλλα ποιοῦντος καὶ λέγοντος πολλὰ

Ἂν ’ , » a ε » / - X + καὶ ἀνάξια ἐμοῦ, ὡς ἐγώ φημι: ota δὴ Kat εἴθισθε

» » ΕΥΣ , φι ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε τότε φηθην

who choose to remain and hear him.

Whether such a concession was actually made to Socrates, or whether it was only a suf- ficiently eommon practice to give verisimilitude to the Πο- tion, is a question which can hardly be determined. See Introd. p. xv.

I. οὐ πολλοῦ γ᾽ ἕνεκα χρόνου] Socrates is telling the Athe- nians that they would not have had to wait long to be saved the reproach of putting him to death, by letting nature take her own course. ‘It was but

a brief space after all, by fore- stalling which they were en- tailing on themselves the re- proach.’ ἕνεκα marks here the efficient not the final cause ; the meaning is not ‘you will incur reproach for the sake of taking from me a brief re- mainder of life;—but ‘a brief space will be the cause of your ineurring it.’ The ‘ brief space,’ accordingly, is not that between the present moment and his execution, but that be- tween his execution and the moment when he would have died in the course of nature,

oa ἢ Soy: EVEKA χρόνου, ὦ ἄνδρες P. |

AITIOAOTTIA SOKPATOY®2. 101

” oa a , a 3 \ ᾽ , 38. δεῖν ἕνεκα τοῦ κινδύνου πρᾶξαι οὐδὲν ἀνελεύθερον, ΝΜ ~ ay ao 3 x 7 ANG οὔτε νῦν μοι μεταμέλει οὕτως ἀαπολογησαμένῳ, ἀλλὰ \ a e A - > ΄ , πολὺ μᾶλλον αἱροῦμαι ὧδε ἀπολογησάμενος τεθνάναι δ » , lal yy \ » , SAS aD ᾽ὔ fod ἢ ἐκείνως ζῆν" οὔτε yap ev δίκη οὔτ᾽ ἐν πολέμῳ OUT SEEN Waa Ὁ) Ὁ »ακ 7 A a a σ 39. ἐμὲ οὔτ᾽ ἄλλον οὐδένα δεῖ τοῦτο μηχανᾶσθαι, ὅπως 8 » / ΄ a , Ν 3 “ ἀποφεύξεται πᾶν ποιῶν θάνατον. καὶ γὰρ ἐν ταῖς be Ψ ΄ , a ἧς 3 ΄σ μάχαις πολλάκις δῆλον γίγνεται OTL τὸ γε ἀποθανεῖν yo > 7 Ny ὦ > Ν \ > Vie ee , av τις ἐκφύγοι καὶ ὅπλα ἀφεὶς καὶ ep ἱκετείαν τρα-

/ na / yy Ἂν / TOMEVOS τῶν διωκοντων᾽ Kat ἄλλαι μηχαναὶ πολλαί

-

» » e 7 ΄ (4 a i εἰσιν ἐν ἑκάστοις τοῖς κινδύνοις, ὥστε διαφεύγειν 10

ἀλλὰ

Ἂ 3 ἌΣ, ΓΦ 7 ty SD (2 ᾽ ΄ μὴ οὐ τοῦτ ἢ χαλεπὸν, ὦ ἄνδρες, θανατον ἐκφυγεῖν,

΄ »7 A a a ἈΝ / θανατον, eav τις τολμᾷ πᾶν ποιεῖν καὶ λέγειν.

a SS Ψ / a \ ἀλλὰ πολὺ χαλεπώτερον Tovnpiav’ θᾶττον yap θα- ΄ ἊΣ . A StS \ “ χ ΝΥ N b νάτου θεῖ. καὶ νῦν ἐγὼ μὲν are βραδὺς ὧν καὶ ’ ε \ ΄ / (ind e » > Ny πρεσβύτης ὑπὸ τοῦ βραδυτέρου ἑάλων, οἱ δ᾽ ἐμοὶ τ 7 a ~ ἂν » a v « \ an , κατήγοροι ἅτε δεινοὶ καὶ ὀξεῖς ὄντες ὑπὸ τοῦ θάτ- “ ΄σ \ \ ΓΚ e 37 Ae “ τονος, τῆς κακίας. καὶ νῦν ἐγὼ μὲν ἀπειμι VP ὑμῶν

θανάτου δίκην ὄφλων, οὗτοι & ὑπὸ τῆς ἀληθείας

7. τό γε ἀποθανεῖν ἄν tis] Before ἄν VH have ῥᾷον BSZ reject it. H errs in thinking that ῥᾷον exists in Oxon, —no doubt misled by Gaisf. Lectt. Plat., i in whom “ p. 39 a 3 paiov” must be an erratum for “ ῥαῖον om.”

4. ἐκείνως] Understand ἀπο- ἄδικον λωβᾶται κι τ. λ.; Gorg. λογησαμενος again. 500 a, μέγιστον τῶν κακῶν ἐστὶν 12. μὴ... ἢ] An instance of ἡ ἀδικία τῷ ἀδικοῦντι. Between

the presumptive variety of the deliberative conjunctive. It is confined to negative sen- tences. Dig. 59 note.

13. θᾶττον yap 8. θεῖ) This refers to the reflex effect of wickedness on the evildver’s soul, which it degrades and ruins. Cf. Crito 47 e, adda μετ᾽ ἐκείνου (sc. the soul) ἄρα ἡμῖν βιωτὸν διεφθαρμένου, ᾧ τὸ

danger and death there is many a chance of escape, as Socrates has just before said; but none between the evil deed and it internal consequences. Stallb’s quotation of Odyss. vili. 329, Οὐκ ἀρετᾷ κακὰ Epya’ κιχάνει τοι βραδὺς ὠκύν" is not to the point.

18. ἱπὸ--- ὠφληκότες] ‘Sen- tenced by Trutii to receive the penalty of’—Whewell.

102 IAATONOZ

ὠφληκότες μοχθηρίαν καὶ ἀδικίαν. καὶ ἐγώ TE τῷ p.: Ἴ μοχυὴρ ‘ yo Pp: ; , ’ 7 Ὁ a ΄ 5 τιμηματι ἐμμένω καὶ οὗτοι. ταῦτα μέν που lows “ ~ a 3 ΕἸ Ὶ “ οὕτω καὶ ἔδει σχεῖν, καὶ οἶμαι αὐτὰ μετρίως ἔχειν. XN x Ἂ \ a a “, XXX. To δὲ δὴ μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπιθυμῶ ὑμῖν χρη- a 5 7 , Ε \ , ᾽ εσμῳδῆσαι, ὦ καταψηφισάμενοί μου καὶ γάρ εἰμι c yy 2 a > -“ ΄,΄ 3 ἂν a ἤδη ἐνταῦθα, ἐν ᾧ μάλιστ᾽ ἄνθρωποι χρησμῳδοῦσιν, δ , 53 EA φημὶ yap, ὦ avdpes, A ’ ν 3 ͵ / Ὁ n oS Se cy XN ον οἱ EME ἀπεκτόνατε, τιμωρίαν ὑμῖν ἥξειν εὐθὺς μετὰ

“ 4 a ὅταν μέλλωσιν ἀποθανεῖσθαι.

x SN / \ ἣν \ LIEN “

τὸν ἐμὸν θάνατον πολὺ χαλεπωτέραν νὴ Av ἢ οἵαν

δεν 4D / a \ a uA , IOEME ATEKTOVATE’ νῦν yap τοῦτο εἰργασασθε οἰόμενοι

ἀπαλλάξεσθαι τοῦ διδόναι ἔλεγχον τοῦ βίου, τὸ δὲ

10. οἰόμενοι] After οἰόμενοι H inserts conjecturally μέν, taking this to be suggested by οἰόμενοί με of some MSS., and by an erased blank in Oxon. The erasure in Oxon. was probably με, for an accent has been erased also from —ou. ‘This however may have been an erasure by the original scribe ; such as for in- stance must have been that at Crito 53 d, where stands & φθέραν

with an erasure between

1 €y@ TE ws ΜΠ Καὶ οὗτοι] “ak as well as they. ἐγὼ has the stress, and stands (in accord- ance with Greek arrangement) first for that reason. Dig. 307.

6. ev ᾧ---χρησμῳδοῦσιν] The opinion, which connects pro- phetic enlightenment with the approach of death, has main- tained its hold upon mankind in all ages. Patroclus foretells Hectors: ‘death, 0. xvi. 851, and Hector the death of Achil- les, Il. xxu. 358: instances to which classical writers often appeal; thus Xen. Apol. 30, ἀνέθηκε μὲν καὶ Ὅμηρος ἔστιν ots τῶν ἐν καταλύσει τοῦ βίου προ- γιγνώσκειν τὰ μέλλοντα, βούλομαι δὲ καὶ ἐγὼ χρησμῳδῆσαϊί τι, Cie. De Div. I. 30, Facilius evenit appropinquante morte ut anini futura augurentur ; ex quo ct

διφθέραν being plainly the true reading.

illud est Calani, de quo ante dixi, et Homerici Hectoris qui moriens propinquam Achilli mortem denuntiat. So Shak- speare, Rich. II. Act II. Se. 1. (Gaunt) “Methinks, I am a prophet new inspir’d; And thus, expiring, do foretell of him.” And Sir H. Davy (“ Re- mains,” p. 311) speaks of him- self as “looking into futurity with the prophetic aspirations belonging to the last moments of existence” —in a letter dated just two months before his death.

9. οἵαν] Se. τιμωρίαν. A vir- tual cognate accusative after ἀπεκτόνατε. Dig. 1.

11. διδόναι ἔλεγχον] Namely, under the process of ἐξέτασις, cf. 38 a note, and esp. Laches 187 e there quoted.

ATIOAOMIA SOKPATOY:S. 103

conan X\ » ,ὔ 3 v. e > , "4 39. ὑμῖν πολὺ ἐναντίον ἀποβήσεται, ws ἐγὼ φημι. πλεί- y © ΄σ e y ἃ a \ a d ous ἐσονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἐλέγχοντες, OVS νῦν ἐγὼ κατεῖχον, ¢ a \ 3 3 7 ὡ Ν 4 » ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἡσθάνεσθε: καὶ χαλεπώτεροι ἔσονται “ ΄ , > ΄ a , ὁσῳ VEWTEPOL εἰσι, καὶ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον ayavaKTHCETE. > Ν BY ’ ’ὔ le εἰ yap οἴεσθε ἀποκτείνοντες ἀνθρώπους ἐπισχήσειν 5 ΄ 3 , \ va a σ > > ΄- ~ > > τοῦ ὀνειδίζειν τινὰ ὑμῖν OTL οὐκ ὀρθῶς ζῆτε, οὐκ Op- re “ 2 > 4 > 3 oS i? > πε », θῶς διανοεῖσθε" οὐ γάρ ἐσθ᾽ αὕτη ἡ ἀπαλλαγὴ οὔτε {A \ Σ lA > ’ ,ὔ {2 πανυ δυνατὴ οὔτε καλὴ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνη καὶ καλλίστη eur, ΝΥ ἊΝ » / > ig \ καὶ ῥᾷάστη. μὴ τοὺς ἄλλους κολούειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ΄ῳ σ΄ »ν , a παρασκευάζειν ὅπως ἔσται ws βέλτιστος. ταῦταιο \ 3 e ΄σ ΄ , 7 μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν τοῖς καταψηφισαμένοις μαντευσαμενος ᾿ς 8 ἀπαλλαττομαι. | Yr ν τ’ ¥- ΄ \ 4 e , “Δ | AXXI. Τοῖς δὲ ἀποψηφισαμένοις ἡδέως av δια- ag , ALN a , a. 4 » Meek tee λεχθείην ὑπὲρ τοῦ yeyovoTos τουτουῖ πραγματος, ἐν voted for 15 ac- @ ε + > , ay Ν » » = ᾧ οἱ ἄρχοντες ἀσχολίαν ἄγουσι καὶ οὕπω ἔρχομαι 15 quittal. “9 , ΄ ? Z, ἘΣ 4 oi ἐλθόντα pe δεῖ τεθνάναι. ἀλλὰ pol, ὦ avdpes, , A , 3 \ Ἂ / παραμείνατε τοσοῦτον ypovov' οὐδὲν yap κωλύει “ XN / os + e r 40. διαμυθολογῆσαι πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἔως ἔξεστιν. ὑμῖν Ν ε iS “ Σ΄’ N f yap ws φίλοις οὖσιν ἐπιδεῖξαι ἐθέλω TO νυνί μοι ; Ν , - > Ἂς , ΔΑ | ξυμβεβηκὸς τί ποτε νοεῖ. ἐμοὶ yap, ὦ avdpes δικα- 20 ’ chee \ \ ΤᾺΝ τσ, A Ὁ , oTai—vpas γὰρ δικαστὰς καλῶν ὀρθῶς ἂν καλοίην

7 ’ ,ὔ e \ ᾽ “7 --- θαυμάσιον τι γέγονεν. ἂρ εἰωθυϊῖὰ μοι μαν-

) \ .¢ A , » \ τὸ , Lf Ν τ τικὴ 7 τοῦ δαιμονίου ἐν μὲν τῷ πρόσθεν χρόνῳ παντὶ πάνυ πυκνὴ ἀεὶ ἦν καὶ πάνυ ἐπὶ σμικροῖς ἐναντιου- fe ” ΄, ἈΝ » “ if Ν \ μένη, εἴ τι μέλλοιμι μὴ ὀρθῶς πράξειν: νυνὶ δὲ :5 15. οἱ ἄρχοντες], That is, οἱ 22. ἡ εἰωθυ αἹ ‘The direction ἕνδεκα. I am wont to receive from the 20. δικασταί] Steinhart re- divine voice.’ See App. -A, on marks that up to this point, τὸ δειμόνιον. where first the true and false 24. πάνυ ἐπὶ σμικροῖς ἐπὶ sepa- : judges are separated, the form rates πάνυ from σμικροῖς. to of the address used has been which it belongs: Diy. 298. ᾿ ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι.

104 TMAATQNOZ

V4 ev e lal Ν 2 , Ν a x ξυμβέβηκε μοι, ἅπερ ὁρᾶτε Kal αὐτοί, ταυτὶ a ye δὴ p. 40 > f Μ΄ , yy “ sy οἰηθείη av Tis καὶ νομίζεται ἔσχατα κακῶν εἶναι.

5 ἂν Ν » 3 Ἢ, “ “ἢ » 7, Ἂν a ἐμοὶ δὲ οὔτε ἐξιόντι ἔωθεν οἴκοθεν ἠναντιώθη τὸ τοῦ b a an yf Cater 9 i, 3 ath, eM kN x

θεοῦ σημεῖον, οὔτε ἡνίκα ἀνέβαινον ἐνταυθοῖ ἐπὶ τὸ , 9) 2 lal / 3 a / ,

5 δικαστήριον, οὔτ᾽ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ οὐδαμοῦ μέλλοντί τι > cal L 3 δ᾽ Va a ’ ἐρεῖν" καίτοι ἐν ἄλλοις λόγοις πολλαχοῦ δὴ με 3, / Sf Ce \ \ > an Ν, ’ ἐπέσχε λέγοντα μεταξύ: νυνὶ δὲ οὐδαμοῦ περὶ ταύ-

AN ΄“ ΕΣ ’ yy » Ἂν S/s Ὁ δ \ f τὴν THY πρᾶξιν οὔτ᾽ ἐν ἔργῳ οὐδενὶ οὔτ᾽ ἐν λόγῳ » , i 7 5 » 3 e Us ηναντιωταὶ μοι. TL οὖν αἰτιον εἶναι ὑπολαμβάνω: » \ € lod 9 Sut; Lt , XN ἊΝ Oey ὑμῖν ἐρῶ" κινδυνεύει yap μοι τὸ ξυμβεβηκὸς a > \ 7 Ἂς ΕἾ 2) » Φ e A τοῦτο ἀγαθὸν γεγονέναι, καὶ οὐκ ἐσθ᾽ ὅπως ημεῖς » a e ὦ a ᾽ ἢ N 5 ἣν ορθῶς ὑπολαμβάνομεν, ὅσοι οἰόμεθα κακὸν εἶναι τὸ ὁ ee / ΄ 2 Ἃ > τεθνάναι. μέγα μοι τεκμήριον τούτου γέγονεν" οὐ Δ yy > σ“ » > id δ΄, Ν 5» Ν yap ἐσθ᾽ ὅπως οὐκ ἠναντιώθη av μοι τὸ εἰωθὸς τὸ > , A Si eN > Ν , 15 σημεῖον, εἰ μὴ TL ἔμελλον ἐγὼ ἀγαθὸν πράξειν. TVw 3 , \ κ aA ε \ XXXII. ᾿Ἐννοήσωμεν δὲ καὶ τῇδε, ὡς πολλὴ , , > 5 \ Pat 5 a \ ΄ ,ὔ ἐλπίς ἐστιν ἀγαθὸν αὐτὸ εἶναι. δυοῖν yap θατερὸν > x , AY ‘ - AN Ss ’ 7 ἐστι TO TEOVavat’ ἢ yap οἷον μηδὲν εἶναι μηδ᾽ αἰσθη- , Ἂ y XN “ “δ x Χ σιν μηδεμίαν μηδενὸς ἔχειν τὸν τεθνεῶτα, ἢ κατὰ τὰ / a , 5 ͵ 20 λεγόμενα μεταβολὴ τις τυγχάνει οὖσα καὶ μετοίκησις 5. μέλλοντί τι] This accurately represents the reading of Oxon., et which stands μέλλοντί (τί being prima manu), importing that re should follow μέλλοντι, Gaisford here is inexact in his repre- sentation. 7. ταύτην] So VBH; αὐτήν SZ. It is impossible to find a clear meaning for αὐτὴν, which is the reading of Oxon.

and five other MSS. Cf. Pheedo 60 a, where Oxon. (alone) has ταύτην for αὐτήν.

4. ἐνταυθοῖ ἐπὶ τὸ Sex. | An 18. οἷον"] ‘As it were. Pa- emphasised equivalent of ἐπὶ renthetical to the construction. rode τὸ δι. Cf. Lege. 679 ad, The words which it qualifies κατὰ πόλιν μύνον αὐτοῦ, equi- are μηδὲν εἶναι. (The subject valent to Kar αὐτὴν μόνον τὴν of μηδὲν εἶναι is τὸν τεθνεῶτα). πόλιν, Thucyd, vii. 16, τῶν αὐτοῦ ~— Dig. τ6. Cf. below, οἷον ὕπνος, ἐκεῖ δύο προείλοντο, Vili, 28, καὶ and again ὁ, οἷον ἀποδημῆσαι. ἐς τὴν Μίλητον αὐτοῦ Φίλιππον 19. τὰ λεγόμενα] In the popu- καθιστᾶσι, lar religious teaching.

AITIOAOTIA ZOKPATOYS2. 1

a a A , ~ 3 , 5 + , p. 40. τῇ Ψυχῇ τοῦ τόπου τοῦ ἐνθένδε εἰς ἄλλον τόπον. Ν Υ̓ 4 ” 7 > > > « ΄ ἃ καὶ εἴ γε μηδεμία αἴσθησίς ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾽ οἷον ὕπνος, > ΄’΄ ψ' ᾽ 5, AY « a 7 ἐπειδὰν τις καθεύδων μηδ᾽ ὄναρ μηδὲν ὁρᾷ, θαυμα-. , x ” e Zi Ἔν ἐδ \ x ἊΣ ” σιον κέρδος ἂν εἴη ὁ θάνατος. ἐγὼ yap ἂν olmat, εἰ 3 Xr Ea δέ , Ν , 3 cy -“ Ἂ τινα ἐκλεξαμενον δέοι ταύτην τὴν νύκτα, ἐν 7) οὕτω ϑ of ὅν a \ » κατέδαρθεν, ὥστε μηδ᾽ ὄναρ ἰδεῖν, καὶ τὰς ἄλλας ’ὔ e 7, Ἁ - / “ 3 A ᾽ νύκτας τε καὶ ἡμέρας τὰς τοῦ βίου τοῦ εαυτοῦ ἀντι- , , κ κ᾿ , ΄ 9 ἘΞ παραθέντα ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ δέοι σκεψάμενον εἰπεῖν, ͵ ΕΝ “ ΕΥ̓ , , πόσας ἄμεινον καὶ ἥδιον ἡμέρας Kal νύκτας TaUTNS A \ β , ’ Aimee es Bi 5 EN κ τῆς νυκτὸς βεβίωκεν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ βίῳ, οἶμαι ἂν μη 10 σ > if , > \ Ν 7 , 3 ’ 6 ὅτι ἰδιώτην τινὰ, ἀλλὰ τὸν μέγαν βασιλέα εὐαριθμη- ΓΝ Ὁ ΄σ 5 XN , XN \ » ᾿ 7 \ τους ἂν εὑρεῖν αὑτὸν TavTas προς Tas ἄλλας ἡμέρας καὶ , ’ 53 a « 74 / if ww νύκτας. εἰ οὖν τοιοῦτον ὁ BavaTos ἐστι, κέρδος ἔγωγε 4 Ν \ »>Q\ , ε = , , λέγω: καὶ yap οὐδὲν πλείων ὁ πᾶς χρόνος φαίνεται a \ Sy x / ΄ Ω > 3 - > lon ΄ οὕτω δὴ εἶναι ἢ μία νύξ. εἰ δ᾽ αὖ οἷον ἀποδημῆσαί ss ε ΄ > ΄, > » , > a ἐστιν ὁ θάνατος ἐνθένδε εἰς ἄλλον τόπον, καὶ ἀληθῆ ’ Ny A / €. Μ 3 a 9X 4 ε ἐστὶ τὰ λεγόμενα, WS Apa ἐκεῖ εἰσὶν ἁπαντες οἱ τεθ- a , a sy ἣν Ζ ” 4 ay » νεῶτες, τί μεῖζον ἀγαθὸν τούτου εἴη ἄν, ὦ ἄνδρες / > > , 5. Ὁ ΟΣ » 'Ῥ. 41. δικασταί ; εἰ yap τις ἀφικόμενος εἰς Διδου, ἀπαλ- / a ΄ a ΙΕ « / λαγεὶς τούτων τῶν φασκόντων δικαστῶν εἶναι, εὑρη- 20 \ e » A v2 a τῷ Ue get τοὺς ws ἀληθῶς δικαστάς, οἵπερ καὶ λέγονται pS , na? ε ΄ 9 χ ἐκεῖ δικάζειν, Μίνως τε καὶ Ῥαδάμανθυς καὶ Αἰακὸς 21. ὡς] So VBS; ZH omit. Oxon. has it above the line but in first hand. The ὡς is constantly added where it is a popular appellation of which the propriety is recognised, and is frequently

found after the article, as Phdr. 256 b, τῶν ὡς ἀληθῶς ᾿ολυμπιακῶν, Rep. 345 €, τοὺς ὡς ἀληθῶς ἄρχοντας, &e., &e.

I. τῇ ψυχῇ] An intensified form of the dative of reference, equivalent nearly to a genitive: Diew 28:

12. αὐτὸν] A resumption of ἰδιώτην τινά and βασιλέα, after the intervention of εὐαριθμ. ἂν εὑρεῖν,

22. Μίνως τε---ἄλλοι] These nouns are in the nominative by attraction to the interposed relative clause, as the nearest construction: Dig. 192.

Nowhere else does Triptole- mus occur as judge of the dead (though in Hom. Hymn.

en

106

Ν ἰ 7 ad a , καὶ Γριπτόλεμος καὶ ἄλλοι ὅσοι TOY ἡμιθέων δίκαιοι Ῥ. 41τ-

ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

ee. ΕΣ iy ks a Bi 5 ὌΝ ΩΝ oF « EVEVOVTO ἐν T@ EQUTOV LD, apa dav PCL τε ἢ

Se 5 a ἀποδημία ; ἢ ad ‘Oper ξυγγενέσθαι καὶ Μουσαίῳ

i A tA 3) καὶ Ησιόδῳ καὶ “Ομήρῳ ἐπὶ πόσῳ av τις δέξαιτ᾽ ἂν { o L

᾿ς a oN \ Ἂν 7 f- / ὑμῶν; ἐγὼ μὲν yap πολλάκις ἐθέλω τεθνάναι, εἰ

ταῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ἀληθῆ: ἐπεὶ ἔμοιγε καὶ αὐτῷ O ὴ γθὴ μοιγ ὶ αὐτῷ θαυμαστὴ

ἂν εἴη ἡ διατριβὴ αὐτόθι, ὁπότε ἐντύχοιμι Παλαμήδει Ὁ΄

ν᾽, a es 7 3, a καὶ Αἴαντι τῷ TeAapovos καὶ εἴ τις ἄλλος τῶν

A ἂν , »» G ’, παλαιῶν δια κρισιν ἄδικον τέθνηκεν, ἀντιπαραβαλ.--

Demet. 153 he sits in judgment on earth). Also Plato is the only Greek who styles AZacus judge of the dead, here and Gorg. 523 6; though many Ro- mans mention him thus. But the same principle accounts for the ascription of such a sub- terranean preeminence to these two, and to the remaining two more widely recognised judi- cial personages named here. All four were connected with the secret rites, or mysteries, of their native places; Minos with the Cretan mysteries, which through the Orphic in- fluence were widely known, Rhadamanthus, his assessor, 1s his countryman, Adacus was the hero of /Egina, where there were (Pausan. II. 30, Origen ady. Cels. vi. 290. ¢. 22, Lu- cian, Navig. 15) mysteries of Orphic origin. And Triptole- mus was counected, of course, with Eleusis. These judees are an instance of the fact that certain features of the Greek mythology were first the pro- duct of the mystery-worship, and thence made their way into the popular, mind.—D6OI- linger, Gent. and Jew, Vol. I.

Bk. ii. p. 175. The same ac- count may be assumed to hold of the ἄλλοι τῶν ἡμιθέων, who are subjoined to these four ; for very many places had mystery-rites. Rhadamanthus is mentioned in Homer, (Od. vil. 323), and therefore ante- cedently to mysteries, as a judge, but on earth and not in the nether world.

6. ἔμοιγε καὶ αὐτῷ] ἡ το! should have a pleasure pecu- larly my own.’

7. διατριβὴ] Cf. Euthyphro sub init., Legg. I. 625 a. :

ὁπότε--- τέθνηκεν | This depends upon ἀντιπαραβάλλοντι. The whole sentence é67ére—anbes εἴη is are-statement more at length of θαυμαστὴ ἂν εἴη ἡ διατριβή, which it follows asyndetically, an instance of Binary Struc- ture: Dig. 207.

Ὁ. ἀντιπαραβάλλοντι] Socrates’ comparison of himself with Palamedes recalls the fable of the representation of the Pa- lamedes of Euripides soon atter Socrates’ death, when, at the words ἐκάνετε ἐκάνετε τὸν πάν-

iy , δ DARN > σοφον, ω Δαναοι, TavV οὐδὲν ἀλ-

= “ γύνουσαν ἀηδόνα Movoay, τῶν

“Ἑλλάνων τὸν ἄριστον, the whole

AITIOAOTIA SOKPATOY2. 107

\ A 7 ‘ A 3 A e 3 \ p. 41. λοντι τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ πάθη προς τα ἐκείνων, ὡς ἐγὼ

Ss > X 5 \ wv Ν XN SN , \ οἶμαι, οὐκ ἂν ἀηδὲς εἴη. καὶ On TO μέγιστον. τοὺς > nm >? if Ν 5 ΄ a ΝΥ 3 ΄ ἐκεῖ ἐξετάζοντα καὶ ἐρευνῶντα ὥσπερ τοὺς ἐνταῦθα ’ an , > Ν , W ,ὔ διάγειν, τίς αὐτῶν σοφὸς ἐστι καὶ τίς οἴεται μέν, Μ a » oy RS / Den £2 3: » 1a ἔστι δ᾽ ov. ἐπὶ πόσῳ δ᾽ ἂν τις, ὦ ἀνδρες δικασταί, 5 ’ > Sr XN te wy Χ \ δέξαιτο ἐξετάσαι τὸν ἐπὶ Tpotav ἄγοντα τὴν πολλὴν \ “δ δ , δ yy , στρατιὰν ἢ Οδυσσέα ἢ Σίσυφον, ἢ ἄλλους μυρίους A 35 » a - » a av τις εἴποι Kal ἄνδρας καὶ γυναῖκας; οἷς ἐκεῖ δια- , ~ ᾽ , σὰν ἐν Ὰ ” λέγεσθαι καὶ Evveivar καὶ ἐξετάζειν ἀμήχανον av εἴη εὐδαιμονίας. > any τ , ’ \ » > τ ,ὔ ἐκεῖ ἀποκτείνουσι: τά τε γὰρ ἄλλα εὐδαιμονέστεροι > « » -“ “ > % ὮΝ » \ \ , εἰσιν οἱ ἐκεῖ τῶν ἐνθάδε, καὶ ἤδη τὸν λοιπὸν χρόνον > ΄ , > / \ ld ’ a 3 / ἀθανατοί εἰσιν, εἴπερ ye TA λεγομενα ἀληθὴ ἐστίν. 7 Tn > N Cr. , aay, ΧΧΧΠΙ. ᾿Αλλὰ καὶ ὑμᾶς χρὴ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικα- ,ὕ 5.2 3 \ \ , , 7 σταί, εὐέλπιδας εἶναι πρὸς Tov θανατον, καὶ ἐν τι: - la / σ > wy > 3 ΄σ τοῦτο διανοεῖσθαι ἀληθές, ὅτι οὐκ ἐστιν ἀνδρὶ ἀγαθῷ Ν > \ yy a » / ΣῸΝ » κακὸν οὐδὲν οὔτε ζῶντι οὔτε τελευτήσαντι, οὐδὲ ἀμε- a « \ An \ / , . dxat \ 3 δ λεῖται ὑπὸ θεῶν τὰ τούτου πραγματα᾽ οὐδὲ τὰ ἐμὰ od 3 NX ~ > [4 4 3 ’, a , νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ αὐτομάτου γέγονεν, ἀλλα μοι δηλὸν

» A a » ΄ Ἂ » ’ ἐστι τοῦτο, OTL ἤδὴ τεθναναι καὶ ἀπηλλάχθαι πραγ-

τ᾽

6. ἄγοντα] Edd. ἀγαγόντας, But there is strong syntactical justification (besides the weight of Oxon. and five other MSS.)

ld 3 Τὰ ’ ied « TTAVTWS OU δηπου TOUTOUV YE EVEKA OLIO

ο

for ἄγοντα. See Commentary.

audience, reminded of Socrates, burst into tears. Cf. Introd. p- XXVill. note Io.

6. ἄγοντα) Participle of the imperfect, which gives greater fullness and vividness than the aorist would have given. Cf. Legg. 635 a, καθάπερ μάντις ἀπὼν τῆς τότε τιθέντος αὐτά (meaning Lycurgus or Minos), 677 ς, Θῶμεν δὴ τὰς ἐν πεδίῳ πόλεις...

διανοίας τοῦ

ΡΥ > Kone! , » apOnv ἐν τῷ τότε

χρόνῳ διαφθείρεσθαι (meaning at the Deluge).

hae ἄλλου ς----εἴποι] The de- sire for brevity in the summing up of the enumeration breaks off the legitimate plan of the sentence: Dig. 257.

16. dAndés] ‘As a verity.’ See 18 a, note.

20: πραγμάτων The wants and hardships of old age. Cf. Xen, Apol. 32, ἐμοὶ μὲν οὖν δοκεῖ

108 TTAATONO® ΑΠΟΛΟΓΙΑ SOKPATOYS.

7 lA 5 A an ν \ ’ a μάτων βέλτιον nv μοι. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἐμὲ οὐδαμοῦ ν. 41. > / Ἂν a ἈΝ ΒΩ a ἀπέτρεψε TO σημεῖον, καὶ ἔγωγε τοῖς καταψηφισα- Ve ΟΥ̓ a / 3 LA if, μένοις μου καὶ τοῖς κατηγόροις οὐ πάνυ χαλεπαίνω. καίτοι οὐ ταύ ἢ διανοί. ζοντό ὶ οὐ ταὐτῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ κατεψηφίζοντο μου καὶ Lf 3 3 s7 Ψ nan > 5 5kaTnyopouv, ἀλλ οἱἷομενοι βλάπτειν᾽ τοῦτο αὐτοῖς e

ἄξιον μέμφεσθαι. τοσόνδε δέομαι μέντοι αὐτῶν᾽

\ ean an 3 \ ‘yl , ey Tous υἱεῖς μοῦ, ἐπειδὰν ἡβήσωσι, τιμωρήσασθε, ὦ yy 5 » x A an a a UN e ΄σ > / avopes, TavTa ταῦτα λυποῦντες, ἅπερ ἐγὼ υμᾶς ἐλυ- ἐκ Cc μὰς a Ἃ ii x Μ πουν, ἐὰν ὑμῖν δοκῶσιν ἢ χρημάτων ἢ ἄλλου του , >’ 5 x > 5 Ν ᾽Ν a , τοπρότερον ἐπιμελεῖσθαι ἢ ἀρετῆς, καὶ ἐὰν δοκῶσί τι 3 ΝΑ 3} 5 , 3 a a ry es eon εἰναι μηδὲν ὄντες, ὀνειδίζετε αὐτοῖς, ὥσπερ ἐγὼ ὑμῖν, “ » 3 a Ὧι “ ” / 3: 3 OTL οὐκ ἐπιμελοῦνται ὧν δεῖ, καὶ οἴονταί τι εἶναι ὄντες » «Ἢ yy ἐν τ ἢ an la , οὐδενὸς ἀξιοι. καὶ ἐὰν ταῦτα ποιῆτε, δίκαια πεπον-

\ » Ἁ yf «ς ? e ἴω » A x e eum dws ἐγὼ ἔσομαι vp ὑμῶν αὑτὸς τε καὶ οἱ υἱεῖς.

"- σι

ἰλλὰ Ν ὃ “ > 4 3 Ν \ » 0 af

ἀλλα yap ἤδη @pa ἀπιέναι, ἐμοὶ μὲν ἀποθανουμένῳ, δὲ \ ΄΄ a iO αν ‘uate Ἐν +” i Saw ὑμῖν δὲ βιωσομένοις" ὁπότεροι δὲ ἡμῶν ἔρχονται ἐπὶ

yA a 24 ἈΝ x Ἃ “ a ἄμεινον πρᾶγμα, ἀδηλον παντὶ πλὴν ἢ τῷ θεῷ.

6. δέομαι μέντοι αὐτῶν] Edd. μέντοι αὐτῶν δέομαι, and so all MSS. except Oxon. But which collocation most exactly suggests the emphasis required ? The position of μέντοι has often to be referred to a subtle ear. Cf 31 b, καὶ εἰ μέντοι τι, and Dig. 294. τῇ. ἢ] So edd., rightly. The weight of Oxon. with four other MSS., giving εἰ, 15 diminished by the itacisin.

θεοφιλοῦς μοίρας τετυχηκέναι" τοῦ μὲν γὰρ Biov χαλεπώτατον ἀπέλιπε kT.

3. οὐ πάνυ] Here, as else- where, οὐ πάνυ marks only a bare denial: Dig. 139. So- crates is satisfied with saying, ‘I have no sufficient cause to be displeased” His εἰρωνεία would in no case have suffered him to say, ‘I am far from being displeased,’

8. ταὐτὰ ταῦτα λυποῦντες] By plying them unweariedly with warning and remonstrance.

4 To

17. πλὴν ἢ] This combination is exactly parallel to ἀλλ᾽ ἤ. The two particles enter the combination coordinately, in- troducing the exception to the preceding universal negative in their own several ways. πλὴν implies ‘it is known to none,— saving that [in contradiction to this] it is known to God ;’ ἢ, less harshly, ‘it is known to none, or however [only] to rod.’ See Dig. 148, and cf. Ar. Nub. 360, Οὐ yap ἂν ἄλλῳ γ᾽ ὑπ-

ακούσαιμεν . . Πλὴν ἢ Προδίκῳ.

OO ee 0]. i. ee

Aol PEN Da xo vA,

To δαιμόνιον.

THE word δαίμων was used to denote either θεὸς or a spiritual being inferior to θεός, Its distinctive meaning as applied to either class is that it denotes such a being in his dealings with men. From Homer to Plato δαίμων is persistently marked by this mean- ing’. Δαιμόνιος therefore denotes a connection with divine agency; and τὸ δαιμόνιον denotes sometimes such an agency, and sometimes the agent itself. So Aristotle (Rhet. IT. xxiii. 8), τὸ δαιμόνιον οὐδέν ἐστιν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ θεὸς ἢ 2 θεοῦ ἔργον, and for this distinction we may com- pare Plato (Phdr. 242 6), εἰ δ᾽ ἔστιν ὥσπερ οὖν ἔστι θεὸς ἢ τι θεῖον ὁ Ἔρως. When we read in Xenophon (Mem. I. i. 2), διετεθρύλητο ὡς

φαίη Σωκράτης τὸ δαιμόνιον ἑαυτῷ σημαίνειν: ὅθεν δὴ καὶ μάλιστά μοι δοκοῦσιν αὐτὸν αἰτιάσασθαι καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέρειν, both senses of the word are exemplified. Socrates meant by τὸ δαιμόνιον a divine agency; Meletus wrested this into the sense of a divine being. In the Apology Socrates marks the position as a caricature by the expression ἐπικωμωδῶν, and then gives the interpretation consistent with his own meaning—viz. δαιμόνια πράγματα. That Socrates is not speaking of a being is clear from other passages also, as when he says (Apol. 31 0), ὅτι μοι θεῖόν τι καὶ δαιμόνιον γίγνεται, or (Phdr. 242 b), τὸ δαιμόνιόν τε καὶ τὸ εἰωθὸς σημεῖον γίγνεσθαι, or (Euthyd. 272 6), τὸ εἰωθὸς σημεῖον τὸ δαιμόνιον, or (Theet. 151 a), τὸ γιγνόμενόν μοι δαιμόνιον. Nor does Plato, who recognises the common notion

1 Tn Plat. Symp. 202 d— 203 a, δαίμων. this view of δαίμων appears very dis- ? Whence the phrase of .Eschines tinctly, though there, as the doctrine (ili. 117. p. 70) ἴσως δὲ καὶ δαιμονίου held is that θεὸς ἀνθρώπῳ οὐ μίγνυται, τινὸς ἐξαμαρτάνειν αὐτὸν προαγομένου all μαντικὴ is the province of the ἰΞ indeterminate.

110 To δαιμόνιον.

of a personal attendant δαίμων (Legg. 730 a, Tim. 90 a), ever give this name to the phenomenon in question. Even Theages (as Zeller remarks, IT. 65. ἢ. 2) gives no personality to τὸ δαιμόνιον. Ἢ φωνὴ ἡ τοῦ δαιμονίου (Theag. 128 6) is ambiguous. Plato’s use is some- times adjectival (e. g. τὸ δαιμόνιον σημεῖον), and sometimes elliptically substantival. Grammatically, Xenophon confines himself to the latter use only,—still merely in the signification of a divine agency. Zeller notices that the interpretation of Socrates’ δαιμόνιον as a being remained peculiar to his accusers (Cicero translating it by divinum quiddam, Divin, I. 54, not by genius) until it was revived by Plutarch, the Neo-Platonists, and the Christian Fathers.

What then were the nature and function of this δαιμόνιον σημεῖον 4

Let us first consult Xenophon, in whom the chief passages are these :

Ἔα ΠΝ ay ake : . , Υ̓͂

Mem, I. 1. 2-5, διετεθρύλητο γὰρ ὡς φαίη Σωκράτης τὸ δαιμόνιον ἑαυτῷ σημαίνειν ὅθεν δὴ καὶ μάλιστά μοι δοκοῦσιν αὐτὸν αἰτιάσασθαι καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέρειν. ὁ δὲ οὐδὲν καινότερον εἰσέφερε τῶν ἄλλων, ὅσοι μαν-

εἶ , bt bred A“ Ν ΔΛ Ν , Νὴ , τικὴν νομίζοντες οἰωνοῖς τε χρῶνται καὶ φήμαις καὶ συμβόλοις καὶ θυσίαις.

= , \ ς , > \ 2 IQs \ 2 a 207 οὗτοί Te yap ὑπολαμβάνουσιν ov τοὺς ὄρνιθας οὐδὲ τοὺς ἀπαντῶντας εἰδέναι τὰ συμφέροντα τοῖς μαντευομένοις, ἀλλὰ τοὺς θεοὺς διὰ τούτων αὐτὰ σημαί- νειν, κἀκεῖνος δὲ οὕτως ἐνόμιζεν. ἀλλ᾽ οἱ μὲν πλεῖστοι φασὶν ὑπό τε τῶν ὀρνίθων καὶ τῶν ἀπαντώντων ἀποτρέπεσθαί τε καὶ προτρέπεσθαι" Σωκράτης δέ, ὥσπερ ἐγίγνωσκεν, οὕτως ἔλεγε. τὸ δαιμόνιον γὰρ ἔφη onpatvew* καὶ πολλοῖς τῶν ξυνόντων προηγόρευε τὰ μὲν ποιεῖν, τὰ δὲ μὴ ποιεῖν, ὡς τοῦ δαιμονίου προσημαίνοντος. καὶ τοῖς μὲν πειθομένοις αὐτῷ συνέφερε, τοῖς δὲ μὴ πειθομένοις μετέμελε.

IV. ili, 12-13, Σοὶ δ᾽, ἔφη, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἐοίκασιν ἔτι φιλικώτερον ἢ ἄλλοις χρῆσθαι [οἱ θεοί], εἴ γε μηδὲ ἐπερωτώμενοι ὑπὸ σοῦ προσημαίνουσί σοι ἅ τε χρὴ ποιεῖν καὶ ἃ pn. Ὅτι δέ γε ἀληθῆ λέγω καὶ σύ, ὦ Εὐθύδημε,

, Δ ‘ > ΄ oa eI A A “ “ a 5 ᾽ > -~ γνώσῃ, av μὴ ἀναμένῃης ἕως av τὰς μορφὰς τῶν θεῶν ἴδῃς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξαρκῇ σοι τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν ὁρῶντι σέβεσθαι καὶ τιμᾷν τοὺς θεούς.

Ty an 7 3 a \ ΄ τ “ , oe ,

IV. vill. 1, φάσκοντος αὐτοῦ τὸ δαιμόνιον ἑαυτῷ προσημαίνειν ἅ τε δέοι

Ἂ δὶ \ ΄ Ae, a »- , , καὶ ἃ μὴ δέοι ποιεῖν ὑπὸ τῶν δικαστῶν κατεγνώσθη θάνατος.

*TV. vill. 5-6, ᾿Αλλὰ νὴ τὸν Δία, φάναι αὐτόν, ὦ “Eppoyeves, ἤδη μου ἐπιχειροῦντος φροντίσαι τῆς πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀπολογίας ἠναντιώθη τὸ δαιμόνιον. καὶ αὐτὸς εἰπεῖν, Θαυμαστὰ λέγεις. τὸν δέ, Θαυμάζεις, φάναι, εἰ τῷ θεῷ δοκεῖ βέλτιον εἶναι ἐμὲ τελευτᾷν τὸν βίον ἤδη ;

LV. vill. 11, εὐσεβὴς οὕτως ὥστε μηδὲν ἄνευ τῆς τῶν θεῶν γνώμης ποιεῖν,

Symp. vill. 5, τοτὲ μὲν τὸ δαιμόνιον προφασιζόμενος οὐ διαλέγει μοι

τοτὲ δ᾽ ἄλλου τοῦ ἐφιέμενος.

᾿ ΐ

Τὸ δαιμόνιον. ΤΕ

To which must be added still from the Memorabilia, I. i. 109, Σωκράτης ἡγεῖτο πάντα μὲν θεοὺς εἰδέναι, τά τε λεγόμενα καὶ πραττόμενα Kal τὰ σιγῇ βουλευόμενα, πανταχοῦ δὲ παρεῖναι καὶ σημαίνειν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις περὶ τῶν ἀνθρωπείων πάντων.

Thus we see that Xenophon tells us nothing as to the nature of Socrates’ δαιμόνιον, save that it was the instrument through which divine intimations reached him unsolicitedly. He adheres (unless we admit as his the θεοῦ por φωνὴ φαίνεται in ὃ 12 of the Neno- phontean Apology) to the expression σημαίνειν τὸ δαιμόνιον, Meaning by this expression (as already said) that τὸ δαιμόνιον is but the

ee le ὦὕ.

instrument, while it is the gods who a1 are the | e_agents, whence in Με say

oe

other passages we have as equivalent expressions [θεοὶ] προσημαίνουσι (Mem. LY. iii. 12), τῷ θεῷ δοκεῖ (ib. vill. 6), θεῶν γνώμη (ib. 11). Its

5 Ε 4 . “ἜΣ intimations differ from those obtained by μαντικὴ in being given

spontaneously. Socrates 1s represented as having thought himself

ep — singular, as a matter of fact, in possessing this gift. He did not

urge others to seek for a similar sign, Although he believed (Mem. 1. i. 19) πάντα μὲν θεοὺς eidevar .... πανταχοῦ δὲ παρεῖναι καὶ σημαίνειν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις περὶ τῶν ἀνθρωπείων πάντων, he seems either to have directed others to μαντική (Mem. I. i. 6), or the oracle (Cie. de Divin. i. 54), or to have given them the benefit of his own divine intima- tions (Mem. 1. 1. 4). He however believed that if others had not this gift, it was by their own fault (Mem. IV. iii. 13).

What its function was according to Xenophon, we gather from the identification of its province with that of μαντική, which is defined in Mem. 1. 1. 6-9, ἀλλὰ μὴν ἐποίει καὶ τάδε πρὸς τοὺς ἐπιτηδείους" τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἀναγκαῖα συνεβούλευε καὶ πράττειν ὡς ἐνόμιζεν ἄριστ᾽ ἂν πραχθῆη- var’ περὶ δὲ τῶν ἀδήλων ὅπως ἀποβήσοιτο μαντευσομένους ἔπεμπεν εἰ ποι- nréa’ καὶ τοὺς μέλλοντας οἴκους τε καὶ πόλεις καλῶς οἰκήσειν μαντικῆς ἔφη προσδεῖσθαι" τεκτονικὸν μὲν γὰρ ἢ χαλκευτικὸν ἢ γεωργικὸν ἢ ἀνθρώπων ἀρχικὸν ἢ τῶν τοιούτων ἔργων ἐξεταστικὸν ἢ λογιστικὸν ἢ οἰκονομικὸν ἢ στρα- τηγικὸν γενέσθαι, πάντα τὰ τοιαῖτα μαθήματα καὶ ἀνθρώπου γνώμη αἱρετὰ ἐνόμιζεν εἶναι: τὰ δὲ μέγιστα τῶν ἐν τούτοις ἔφη τοὺς θεοὺς ἑαυτοῖς κατα- λείπεσθαι, ὧν οὐδὲν δῆλον εἶναι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις... ἔφη δὲ δεῖν ἁ μὲν μαθόν- τας ποιεῖν ἔδωκαν οἱ θεοί, μανθάνειν, ἃ δὲ μὴ δῆλα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐστί, πειρᾶσθαι διὰ μαντικῆς παρὰ τῶν θεῶν πυνθάνεσθαι τοὺς θεοὺς γὰρ οἷς av ὦσιν ew σημαίνειν. ‘

This accords with Plato, Apol. 40 a, ἡ εἰωθυῖά μοι μαντικὴ ἡ τοῦ δαιμονίου. It was no such guide in the matter of right and wrong as conscience is; nor yet an universal oracle to reveal truths of science or of futurity. Its function was on the one hand practical

112 Τὸ δαιμόνιον.

—to pronounce upon a proposed course of action, of which Socrates had cognisance, either as himself a party to it or in the interest of his friends—,on the other hand it pronounced ‘not on the morality but on the expediency (in the Socratic sense of what was really for the best) of the proposed course. This would not exclude from its decision moral questions, where the obligation either was obscure or mainly depended on the consequences. It was not a mere pre- sentiment, a foreboding of chance misfortune or of chance success, the mere reflection of a man’s own feelings of happiness or gloom while in spite of them he carries out his course of action. It stamped in Socrates’ belief a definite character of expediency or inexpediency on the course intended, and he newer disobeyed it.

In Plato the notable passages are these :—Apol. 31 στε, τούτου δὲ αἴτιόν ἐστιν ὃ ὑμεῖς ἐμοῦ πολλάκις ἀκηκόατε πολλαχοῦ λέγοντος, ὅτι μοι θεῖόν τι καὶ δαιμόνιον γίγνεται φωνή, ὃ δὴ καὶ ἐν τῇ γραφῇ ἐπικωμωδῶν Μέλητος ἐγράψατο. ἐμοὶ δὲ τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ἐκ παιδὸς ἀρξάμενον, φωνή τις γιγνομένη, ἢ ὅταν γένηται ἀεὶ ἀποτρέπει με τοῦτο, ὃ ἂν μέλλω πράττειν, προτρέπει δὲ οὔποτε. τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν ὅ μοι ἐναντιοῦται τὰ πολιτικὰ πράττειν. 40 a-b, ἡ γὰρ εἰωθυϊά μοι μαντικὴ ἡ τοῦ δαιμονίου ἐν μὲν τῷ πρόσθεν χρύνῳ παντὶ πάνυ πυκνὴ ἀεὶ ἦν καὶ πάνυ ἐπὶ σμικροῖς ἐναντιουμένη, εἴ τι μέλλοιμι μὴ ὀρθῶς πράξειν. νυνὶ δὲ ξυμβέβηκέ μοι, ἅπερ ὁρᾶτε καὶ αὐτοί, ταυτί, ἅ γε δὴ οἰηθείη ἄν τις καὶ νομίζεται ἔσχατα κακῶν εἶναι. ἐμοὶ δὲ οὔτε ἐξιόντι ἕωθεν οἴκοθεν ἠναντιώθη τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ σημεῖον, οὔτε ἡνίκα ἀνέ- βαινον ἐνταυθοῖ ἐπὶ τὸ δικαστήριον, οὔτ᾽ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ οὐδαμοῦ μέλλοντί τι ἐρεῖν. καίτοι ἐν ἄλλοις λόγοις πολλαχοῦ δή με ἐπέσχε λέγοντα μεταξύ. νυνὶ δὲ οὐδαμοῦ περὶ ταύτην τὴν πρᾶξιν οὔτ᾽ ἐν ἔργῳ οὐδενὶ οὔτ᾽ ἐν λόγῳ ἠναντίωταί pot.—Euthyd. 272 e, κατὰ θεὸν γάρ τινα ἔτυχον καθήμενος ἐνταῦθα, οὗπερ σύ με εἶδες, ἐν τῷ ἀποδυτηρίῳ μόνος, καὶ ἤδη ἐν νῷ εἶχον ἀναστῆναι" ἀνισταμένου δέ μου ἐγένετο τὸ εἰωθὸς σημεῖον τὸ δαιμόνιον. πάλιν οὖν ἐκαθεζόμην.----ὈἸάγ. 242 b, ἡνίκ᾽ ἔμελλον, ὦγαθέ, τὸν ποταμὸν διαβαίνειν, τὸ δαιμόνιόν τε καὶ τὸ εἰωθὸς σημεῖόν μοι γίγνεσθαι ἐγένετο---- ἀεὶ δέ με ἐπίσχει ὃ ἂν μέλλω πράττειν---, καί τινα φωνὴν ἔδοξα αὐτόθεν ἀκοῦσαι, ἥ με οὐκ ἐᾷ ἀπιέναι πρὶν ἂν ἀφοσιώσωμαι, ὥς τι ἡμαρτηκότα εἰς τὸ Oetov.—Alcib. I. init. 103 a-b, τούτου δὲ τὸ αἴτιον γέγονεν οὐκ ἀνθρώ- πειον, ἀλλά τι δαιμόνιον ἐναντίωμα, οὗ σὺ τὴν δύναμιν καὶ ὕστερον πεύσει. νῦν δ᾽ ἐπειδὴ οὐκέτι ἐναντιοῦται, οὕτω προσελήλυθα. εὔελπις δέ εἰμι καὶ τὸ

λοιπὸν μὴ ἐναντιώσεσθαι aditd.—Theet. 151 a, ἐνίοις μὲν τὸ γιγνόμενόν

8 Wiggers and Zeller have noticed Athenian people—is thrown on the this. Remark the contrast in the divine mission (28 e), the matter of Apology. The matter of duty—not judgment—to abstain from politics— to desert the post of preacher to the is attributed to the δαιμόνιον (31 d).

weal

——— , ν

See ee ee

sine

Τὸ δαιμόνιον. 113

μοι δαιμόνιον ἀποκωλύει ξυνεῖναι ἐνίοις δ᾽ ea.—Rep. 496 6, τὸ δ᾽ ἡμέτερον οὐκ ἄξιον λέγειν, τὸ δαιμόνιον σημεῖον' ἢ γάρ πού τινι ἄλλῳ ἢ οὐδενὶ τῶν ἔμπροσθεν γέγον. The passages in the Theages consist in part of parrot-like repetitions of descriptions of the phenomenon culled from various dialogues, in part of inventions founded on these.

The account in these passages exhibits some additions and varia- tions as compared with that of Xenophon.

As to the nature of the phenomenon, it is explained to be a sign, which consists of articulate words, and the use of which corresponds to the μαντικὴ of other men. It is represented as a gift almost peculiar to Socrates, though by him possessed from his childhood upwards.

Its function seems somewhat heterogeneous, compared with what we have found it in Xenophon. Besides giving warnings as to an intended course of action, it reminds of a duty unperformed (Phdr.) ; or an advantage accrues from obeying it, which has no rational connection whatever with the obedience (Euthyd.). The tales of the Theages dwell on the marvel exclusively ; yet, while they leave the φωνὴ unconnected with any act of the judgment, they leave room for supplying such a connection. Plato further tells us that its function was a negative one—dei ἀποτρέπει προτρέπει δὲ οὔποτε (Apol.). The importance of this limitation shall be considered presently.

From these data we may now seek to arrive at a conclusion for ourselves. According to both Xenophon and Plato the fact itself, which Socrates accounted for by the δαιμόνιον σημεῖον, Was ἃ sudden sense, immediately before carrying a purpose into effect, of the expediency of abandoning it,—or, Xenophon would add, | apps cuting it. Meanwhile we are not ἘΠ to accept Socrates’ account of the cause of this sudden feeling ; first, because he was no psy- chologist, and, while in his own belief he was merely describing his own consciousness,—or, as Xenophon says, ὥσπερ ἐγίγνωσκεν οὕτω καὶ €deye,—he was really importing into his description an inference of his own; secondly, because he rather diminishes the weight of his own testimony for us, not merely by his attention to dreams (Pheedo 60 6), but more by his absolute faith in μαντικὴ and its use in obtaining for others the same divine guidance which he obtained unasked through the σημεῖον ; and, thirdly, because while he believed himself to have detected divine agency here, he was perfectly un- conscious of it in its more ordinary province, as the author of “ all holy desires, all good counsels, and all just works.’ If, then,

I

114 Τὸ δαιμόνιον.

declining Socrates’ account, we are disposed to refer the pheno- menon to ordinary psychological causes, we can do so satisfactorily, provided we confine our attention to Xenophon’s account alone. All Xenophon’s notices of it encourage the view, that it was a quick exercise of a judgment informed by knowledge of the sub-

ject, trained _by. experience, and inferring from cause to effect

without, consciousness of the process. In a mind so purified by

temperance and self-knowledge, so single of purpose and unper- turbed by lower aims, endowed with such powerful natural faculties, especially those of observation and of causality, the ability to fore- cast and forejudge might become almost an immediate sense. But it must be confessed that some of the features in Plato’s account are a little embarrassing to this view. The singularity ascribed by Plato (Rep. 496 c) to the gift need not rank among these diffi- culties, since Xenophon mentions it as a singular characteristic of Socrates (Mem. IV. viii. 11) that he was φρόνιμος ὥστε μὴ διαμαρ- τάνειν κρίνων τὰ βελτίω Kal τὰ χείρω, μηδὲ ἄλλου προσδεῖσθαι ἀλλ᾽ αὐτάρ- κης εἶναι πρὸς τὴν τούτων γνῶσιν, which is the rationalised description of this very phenomenon. But the statement that Socrates enjoyed the gift from his earliest days is not fully consistent with the explanation just put forward,—with any consideration, that is, of

’ the effect of observation, experience, moral training, or habit of

mind. Again, as we have seen, two of the instances of the occur- rence of the σημεῖον which are related in Plato preclude the expla-

» nation of an act of judgment. It is no judgment, however pene-

trating, which recalls Socrates from the stream he had purposed

crossing and brings him back to Phedrus, or which forbids him to

leave his seat just before the fortuitous entrance of Euthydemus and his companions. If we are to accept these features as his- torical, we must give up all attempt to rationalise the phenomenon at all, and fall back upon Socrates’ own account as final. But, first, we have seen that there are reasons against accepting his account, and, secondly, against the historical probability of these two instances stands the fact that, thoughparalleled in Plutarch, they are unlike any other instances given by Xenophon and Plato; for (setting aside the Theages as apocryphal) in all the other instances it is implied that the course’ of action forbidden by the warning is pre- judicial, not through its fortuitous consequences, but through some- thing amiss in itself, and that the course upon which the agent is thrown back leads to the good result by a chain of means and not by a chain of accidents.

Τὸ δαιμόνιον. 11

We must therefore adopt the alternative which involves 1658

considerable difficulties, and regard Plato as less faithful than Xeno- |

phon in his illustration of the phenomenon. It is not difficult to suppose that by tracing it back to Socrates’ boyhood nothing more may be intended than that his memory did not serve him to indi- cate the first beginning of those habits of observation and that moral and mental training from which the faculty grew. And as to the heterogeneous instances of warnings given by it, since as individual instances they are certainly inventions, part of the machinery of the dialogues in which they stand, it is doing no violence to Plato’s genius to suppose, that as an inventor he has not scrupled to travesty the character which belonged to the actual and serious use of the gift, and to extend its operation playfully into the domain of chance.

There remains to be noticed in Plato’s account the well-known

restriction of τὸ δαιμόνιον to negative functions. In describing the sign asa voice, Plato adds (Δ 0]. 31d), dei ἀποτρέπει με τοῦτο ὃ ἂν μέλλω πρᾶττειν προτρέπει δὲ οὔποτε. One difficulty lies in the nature of the case. What kind of divine communication or what kind of judg- ment could that be which yielded only negative utterances! Cer- tainly no act of judgment could be such: the same penetration which could discern the inexpediency of a course of action would serve for the discerning of the more expedient alternative. A divine communication might be imagined under any self-imposed restric- tion ; still the restriction would, in proportion to its arbitrariness, discredit yet more this hypothesis, which we have already seen reason to abandon. Another difficulty lies in the conflict of testi- mony as to this peculiarity. Xenophon attributes to the sign an approving as well as ΠΙΕΕΡΡΤΘΤΊΩΝ force (Mem. IV. viii. 1, φάσκοντος αὐτοῦ τὸ δαιμόνιον ἑ ἑαυτῷ προσημαίνειν ἅ τε δέοι καὶ ἃ μὴ δέοι ποιεῖν οἴ, I. i. 4, as quoted above). Cicero (De Divin. i. 54) simply echoes Plato. Plutarch (De Socr. Dem. c. 11. p. 1015), agreeing with Xenophon, represents the sign as κωλῦον ἢ κελεῦον.

These are the two difficulties which have to be met. No attempt has been made to meet the first: the second has been met by swallowing the first whole, and supposing Xenophon to be in error in not distinguishing the actual communication made by the sign, and the inference which Socrates made from it, and which might (as in Apol. 40 a) be positive. But we shall meet both difficulties by some such explanation as the following. As to the reconcilement of authorities, when Plato makes Socrates say dei ἀποτρέπει pe, he

τ:

|

Rly ket

116 To δαιμόνιον.

describes it by its most perceptible act, for its coincidence with an existing purpose would be superfluous and little noticeable. It was only when the presentiment ran counter to his will that Socrates became distinctly conscious of it. An illustration of this oversight occurs in the statement of some moderns concerning conscience, that it has only a negative function,—as if there were no such thing as “an approving conscience.” In this case also the origin of the misstatement is the same, the more acute and marked cha- racter of the negative function. Thus it is the statement of Plato which needs to be supplemented, while that of Xenophon, so far from needing qualification, is alone commensurate with the common sense of the case. As to the fact to which Plato’s notice points, the words προτρέπει δὲ οὔποτε would seem not to be an idle tautology, a reiteration of what we have seen to be a defective statement, but to mark another feature in the case. The Voice was no zmpulse ; it did not speak to the will, but had a critical or reflexive function ; it did not contribute to form a purpose, but pronounced judgment on a purpose already in being. Motives, on the other hand, impel the will always in some direction; they cannot be negative. Thus the setting forth the first part of the statement on the negative side only is justified in a way by the antithesis. And the meaning of the two clauses together is, that the Voice is a reflexive judgment on purposed actions, but does not supply motives of action.

The fact which τὸ δαιμόνιον represented was an unanalysed act of judgment,—not on a principle, but on a particular course of action already projected; not on the morality of this, but on its expe- diency in the Socratic sense of the term. It was κριτική, not ém- τακτικῆ. Whatever connection it might really have with the springs of the will would certainly be left out of the statement by one who could identify virtue with knowledge. It was Socrates’ substitute for pavtixn. This implies that in the province where men are wont to supplement the failure of penetration by external preternatural aids, Socrates refused, for himself, such irrational expedients, and found, in many instances at least, a guide within himself. But to this guide, being (as we have seen) the outcome of an assemblage of unanalysed processes of thought and judgment, he in all good faith gave a religious name. His mental acts, so far as he could unravel them, were his own, were human ; beyond his ken they were divine ; and what really was of the nature of an immediate critical sense seemed to him an immediate inspiration.

No Christian would be startled by a view which recognised every

To δαιμόνιον. Ly

part of his mental processes as performed in dependence on God,— nor on the other hand would he be shocked to hear them spoken of as independently and properly his own. So long as each view reached the whole way, he would be satisfied with it, and would comprehend it. What Socrates did was to halve each of these views, and to speak of his mental processes as human up to the point where he could still follow them,—beyond that as divine.

APPENDIX B

DIGEST OF IDIOMS.

Idioms of Nouns :—Accusative Case, §§ 1—23.

Idioms of Nouns :—Genitive Case, §§ 24—27.

Idioms of Nouns :—Dative Case, §§ 28—29.

Idioms of the Article, §§ 30—39.

Idioms of Pronominal Words, §§ 40—55.

Idioms of Verbs, 88 56—1II0.

Idioms of Prepositions, §§ 11I—131.

Idioms of Particles, §§ 132—162.

Idioms of Comparison, §§ 163—178.

Idioms of Sentences :-——Attraction, §§ 179—203.

Idioms of Sentences :—Binary Structure, §§ 204—230.

Idioms of Sentences :—Abbreviated Construction, §§ 231—261. Idioms of Sentences :—Pleonasm of Construction, §§ 262—269. Idioms of Sentences :—Changed Construction, §§ 270—286. Tdioms of Sentences :—Arrangement of Words and Clauses, §§ 287—311. Rhetorical Figures, §§ 312—326.

§ 1. Iptoms or Nouns :—Accusative Cass.

Besides the Accusatives governed by Verbs Transitive, as such, occur the following, of a more Adverbial character.

A. Accusatives referable to the principle of the Cognate Accu- sative.

a. Direct and regular instances of the Cognate Accusative. It will suffice, as a notice of these, to point out that they are of two kinds only, viz.—

a. the Accusative of the Act or Effect signified by the Verb. 3. the Accusative of the Process indicated by the Verb.

δῷ 1—3.] ACCUSATIVE CASE. 119

Virtual Cognate Accusatives, i.e. such as are cognate in sense only and not etymologically, are intended to be here included. The “Accusative of the General Force of the Sentence” is really an Accusative of Apposition. See below, F (δὲ 10-12).

§ 2. δ. Accusatives which must be analysed as Adjectives or Pronouns in agreement with an unexpressed Cognate Accusative. These are commonly neuter (not always; cf. Hdt. v. 72, κατέδησαν τὴν ἐπὶ θανάτῳ).

Pheedo 75 b, ὁρᾷν καὶ ἀκούειν καὶ τἄλλα αἰσθάνεσθαι----“ perform the

other acts of the senses.’

Ib. 85 Ὁ, ἡγοῦμαι... οὐ χεῖρον ἐκείνων τὴν μαντικὴν ἔχειν.

Symp. 205 b, τὰ δὲ ἄλλα ἄλλοις καταχρώμεθα ὀνόμασιν, i.e. ‘in the other cases.’ Stallbaum takes this of ‘the other (εἴδη) species of things’ which have to be named, ‘quod ad ceteras attinet formas. This might be; but the construction of the par- ticular verb χρῆσθαι leads us the other way ; cf. Thue. ii. 15, τῇ κρήνῃ... ἐγγὺς οὔσῃ τὰ πλείστου ἄξια ἐχρῶντο, Hdt. i. 132, χρᾶται [τοῖς κρέασιν] ὅ τι μιν λόγος αἱρέει. τ

Phdr. 228 ςο, (Α) Ὥς μοι δοκεῖς σὺ οὐδαμῶς με ἀφήσειν κιτιλ. (Β) Πάνυ γάρ σοι ἀληθῆ δοκῶ.

Theet. 193 6, δεξιὰ εἰς ἀριστερὰ μεταρρεούσης.

Legg. 792 ¢, τοῦτ᾽ οὐκέτ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ ξυνακολουθήσαιμ᾽ av—‘ this is one step further than I can go with you.’ Exactly parallel are the Homeric τόδ᾽ ἱκάνεις, τόδε χώεο, &c.

Crat. 425 ς, εἴ τι χρηστὸν ἔδει αὐτὰ διελέσθαι.

§ 3. c. Adjectives as well as Verbs are followed by a Cognate

Accusative, or by one referable to the same principle. X Apol. 20 b, καλώ re καὶ ἀγαθὼ τὴν προσήκουσαν ἀρετήν.

ΤΌ. d, κινδυνεύω [σοφίαν] ταύτην εἶναι σοφός.

Meno 93 Ὁ, ταύτην τὴν ἀρετήν, ἣν αὐτοὶ ἀγαθοὶ ἦσαν.

Rep. 349 6, οὐκοῦν καὶ ἅπερ φρόνιμον ἀγαθὸν [εἶναι λέγεις] ;—‘ good at those things 72 which he is wise.’

Ib. 579 d, δοῦλος τὰς μεγίστας θωπείας καὶ δουλείας.

Laches 191 6, τοῦτο τοίνυν αἴτιον ἔλεγον ὅτι ἐγὼ αἴτιος.

So Thucyd. i. 37, αὐταρκῆ θέσιν κειμένη, V. 34, ἀτίμους ἐποίησαν ἀτι- μίαν τοιάνδε.

(Β, C, and D, which follow, are to be regarded as very near akin to each other.)

120 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 4—6.

§ 4. B. Accusatives of the part to which the action, or charac- teristic, is limited, as περᾷν πόδα, βρύχειν ὀδόντας. (Lobeck), Ad- jectives as well as Verbs, of course, are followed by this Accu- sative.

Charmid. 154 ¢, θαυμαστὸς τὸ κάλλος.

Cf. Soph. O. T. 371, τυφλὸς τά τ᾽ Sra τόν τε νοῦν τά τ᾽ ὄμματ᾽ εἶ.

§ 5. C. Accusatives Quantitative (or, in all the instances follow- ing, Adjectives in agreement with such Accusatives), expressing how much of the subject is brought under the predication.

Lege. 958 d, ἃ δὲ ἡ χώρα πρὸς τοῦτ᾽ αὐτὸ μόνον φύσιν ἔχει, .. . ταῦτα

ἐκπληροῦν.

Ib. 6, ὅσα τροφὴν... ἡ γῆ . . . πέφυκε βούλεσθαι φέρειν.

Rep. 467 ¢, οἱ πατέρες, ὅσα ἄνθρωποι, οὐκ ἀμαθεῖς ἔσονται---- to the extent of human capacities.’ It is hard to hit upon the exact ellipse, comparing other instances; but it cannot be wrong to look on the Accusative as quantitative.

Crito 46 e, σὺ γάρ, ὅσα ye τἀνθρώπεια, ἐκτὸς εἶ τοῦ μέλλειν ἀποθνή- σκειν αὔριον.

Th. 54 ἃ, ἀλλ᾽ ἴσθι, ὅσα γε τὰ νῦν ἐμοὶ δοκοῦντα, ἐάν τι λέγῃς παρὰ ταῦτα, μάτην ἐρεῖς.

Rep. 405 ¢, ἰατρικῆς δεῖσθαι 6 τι μὴ τραυμάτων ἕνεκα, ἀλλὰ Ov ἀργίαν.

Phdr. 274 a, οὐ γὰρ... ὁμοδούλοις δεῖ χαρίζεσθαι μελετᾷν..., ὅ τι μὴ πάρεργον. ;

Tim. 42 6, ἄριστα τὸ θνητὸν διακυβερνᾷν ζῶον, 6 τι μὴ κακῶν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ γίγνοιτο αἴτιον.

Tb. 69 4, σεβόμενοι μιαΐνειν τὸ θεῖον, 6 τι μὴ πᾶσα ἢν ἀνάγκη.

ΤΌ. go e, διὰ βραχέων ἐπιμνηστέον, ὃ μή τις ἀνάγκη μηκύνειν.

§ 6. Hither are also to be referred the following instances, with the distinction that here the quantitative accusative is applied metaphorically, as the measure of the degree of the act or process.

Legg. 679 a, οὐδὲ ἐν προσδέονται σιδήρου. As we say, ‘not one bit.’

Cf. τί det; (‘what need 2’ not ‘ why is there need 2’) illustrated by Iseeus, ii. 39, τί ἔδει αὐτοὺς ὀμνύναι... ; οὐδὲ ἕν δήπου.

Pheedo 91 d, σῶμά γ᾽ ἀεὶ ἀπολλύμενον οὐδὲν maverar— ceases not

one bit. To join it with σῶμα would ruin the sense. And cf. 100 bh, ἅπερ. . . οὐδὲν πέπαυμαι λέγων, and Euthyphro 8 c¢, οὐδὲν

Ἢ 3 , ΄ 5 2 a μὲν οὖν παύονται ταῦτ ἀμφισβητοῦντες,

§§ 7, 8.] ΟΠ ACCUSATIVE CASE. 121

Pheedo 99 ¢, τἀγαθὸν καὶ δέον ξυνδεῖν καὶ ξυνέχειν οὐδὲν οἴονται.

Euthyd. 293 ¢, ἧττον οὖν τι οὐκ ἐπιστήμων εἷ |

Charm. 174¢, ἧττόν τι ἡ ἰατρικὴ ὑγιαίνειν ποιήσει ;

Crito 47 ο, τοὺς τῶν πολλῶν λόγους καὶ μηδὲν ἐπαϊόντων. Note, that ἐπαϊόντων is intransitive (as infra d, εἴ τίς ἐστιν ἐπαΐων), and therefore μηδὲν ἐπ. is not ‘who understand nothing,’ but ‘who do not understand one bit.’

KApol. 19 ¢, ὧν ἐγὼ οὐδὲν οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν πέρι ἐπαΐω.

~Ib. 21 Ὁ. ἐγὼ... οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν ξύνοιδα ἐμαυτῷ σοφὸς ὦν.

~Ib. 26 Ὁ, Μελήτῳ τούτων οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν πώποτε ἐμέλησεν---- where, in accordance with the two last instances, οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν is not the Nom. to ἐμέλησεν, nor in regimen with τούτων, but in agreement with the Acc. Cognate after ἐμέλησεν. In Crat. 425 c, οὐδὲν εἰδότες τῆς ἀληθείας, and Legg. 887 e, ὅσοι καὶ σμικρὸν νοῦ κέκτηνται, the case is different.

Crito 46 c, πλείω τῶν παρόντων. . . ἡμᾶς μορμολύττηται.

Phileb. 23 6. πολλὰ ἐσχισμένον.

Symp. 193 ἃ, ἅπαντα εὐσεβεῖν περὶ θεοὺς---- in all his acts to act piously towards the gods.’

- Apol. 30 ¢, ἐμὲ μείζω βλάψετε. \ Gorg. 512 Ὁ, ἐλάττω δύναται σώζειν.

Cf. Homer’s πάντα, as in Od. iv. 654, τῷ δ᾽ αὐτῷ πάντα ἐῴκει, and the common expression τὰ μὲν---τὰ δέ.

-§ 7. Ὁ. Accusatives of the way, or manner—

Symp. 207 d, τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκείνῳ λόγον, ἡ θνητὴ φύσις ζητεῖ ἀεὶ εἶναι.

Politic. 296 6, τὸν ὅρον... ὃν ὁ copes... διοικήσει τὰ τῶν ἀρχο- μένων.

Rep. 416 b, τὴν μεγίστην τῆς εὐλαβείας παρεσκευασμένοι .---“ on ἃ foot- ing of the greatest possible caution.’ (τὴν μεγίστην τῆς εὐλαβείας like τὴν πλείστην τῆς στρατιᾶς, Thue. vii. 3, &c.)

Cf. Ar. Pax 232, καὶ yap ἐξιέναι, γνώμην ἐμήν, μέλλει.

§ 8. Refer to this the common phrase τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, &c.: and, probably, the “Accusative Absolute,’—‘ on such and sucha footing,’ Protag. 314 6, δόξαν ἡμῖν ταῦτα, ἐπορευόμεθα. Critias 107 6, ἐκ δὴ τοῦ παραχρῆμα νῦν λεγόμενα, τὸ πρέπον ἂν μὴ δυνώμεθα πάντως ἀποδοῦναι συγγιγνώσκειν χρεών.

Phileb. 13 Ὁ, τί οὖν δὴ ταὐτὸν... ἐνόν, πάσας ἡδονὰς ἀγαθὸν εἶναι

122 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 9—12.

mpocayopevers ; Cf. Andoc. i. 92. p. 12, σκέψασθε τί αὐτοῖς ὑπάρχον ἑτέρων κατηγοροῦσι.

§ 9. E. Accusatives referable to the principle of the Accusative of Time or Space.

To designate them thus is not an idle periphrasis; it seems to include, together with the instances of an Accus. of Time or Space in the literal meaning, those in which the notions of Time or Space are applied metaphorically. Only the latter need be noticed here.

Phileb. 59 6, τὸ δὴ μετὰ ταῦτα dp’ od μιγνύναι αὐτὰς ἐπιχειρητέον ;— where ‘ after’ means in the order of discourse.

Soph. 259 b, τὸ dy... μυρία ἐπὶ μυρίοις οὐκ ἔστι---- ten thousand times twice told’ for ‘in so many instances.’

Phdy, 241 ἃ, οὐκέτ᾽ ἂν τὸ πέρα ἀκούσαις ἐμοῦ Aéyovros—‘ saying any- thing further’ for ‘saying anything more ;’—a real metaphor, as discourse only metaphorically takes up space. As to the construction, τὸ πέρα is not governed, transitively, by ἀκούσαις, but follows λέγοντος,

Symp. 198 b, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπὶ τελευτῆς τοῦ κάλλους τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημά- των τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐξεπλάγη ἀκούων ; τὸ ἐπὶ red. is ἃ metaphor from space, probably, rather than time. Either way, Stallb. is wrong in explaining the construction by his favourite ‘ quod attinet ad,’

§ 10. F. Accusatives in Apposition with, or standing for, sen- tences or parts of sentences. Soir

These Accusatives may be either (1) Noun-Phrases ; see a below: or (2) Pronouns Neuter, agreeing with Nouns understood,—viz. either Relative Pronouns; see b below: or Demonstratives, &c. ; see c below.

The doctrine here advanced asserts two positions, which are worthy of notice; viz.

§ 11. (i.) These Noun-Phrases and Neuter-Pronouns are Accu- satives. The prevalence of the Neuter Gender makes this difficult to prove ; but such instances as are decisive afford an analogy for the rest :—

Theet. 153 ¢, ἐπὶ τούτοις τὸν κολοφῶνα, ἀναγκάζω προσβιβάζων K.T.r.

Cf. Soph. O. T. 603, Καὶ τῶνδ᾽ ἔλεγχον... πεύθου, and the Adverbs ἀρχήν, ἀκμήν, τὴν πρώτην, &c.

§ 12. (11.) They represent, by Apposition or Substitution, the

sentence itself. To say, that they are Cognate Accusatives, or in

Apposition with the (unexpressed) Cognate Accus., would be inade-

δ 13.] ACCUSATIVE CASE. 123

quate to the facts. For (1) in most of the instances the sense points out that the Noun-Phrase or Pronoun stands over against the sentence, or portion of a sentence, as a whole; (2) in many of them, not the internal force but merely the rhetorical or logical form of the sentence is in view. It might be said that they are Predicates, while the sentence itself is the Subject.

§ 13. a. Accusative of Noun-Phrases in Apposition— Legg. 736 a, τούτοις, δι᾿ εὐφημίας ἀπαλλαγήν, ὄνομα ἀποικίαν τιθέ- μενος. Crat. 395 d, ὧν καὶ τέλος, ἡ πατρὶς ἀνετράπετο. Crito 45 d, τὸ σὸν μέρος, 6 τι ἂν τύχωσι τοῦτο πράξουσι. Soph. 260 a, τὸ μὲν μέγιστον, φιλοσοφίας av στερηθεῖμεν. Ἃ Apol. 25 Ὁ, ἢ τοὐναντίον τούτου πᾶν, εἷς μέν τις κιτιλ. Legg. 691 ἃ, τὸ μὲν εἰκὸς καὶ τὸ πολύ, βασιλέων τοῦτο εἶναι νόσημα. Politic. 293 a, ἑπόμενον δὲ τούτῳ, τὴν ὀρθὴν ἀρχὴν δεῖ ζητεῖν. The Accusatives in the instances which follow characterise the logical or rhetorical form— Symp. 205d, ro μὲν κεφάλαιον, ἐστὶ πᾶσα 7... ἐπιθυμία... . ἔρως.

So 223 d, Critias 108 e, Theet.190b. Cf. Ep.to Heb. viii. 1. Theet. 153 ¢, ἐπὶ τούτοις τὸν κολοφῶνα, ἀναγκάζω προσβιβάζων κ.τ.λ. Pheedo 66 e, δυοῖν θάτερον, ἢ οὐδαμοῦ ἔστι κτήσασθαι τὸ εἰδέναι, ἢ k.T.A.

Similarly 68 c (plural), and Charm. 160 Ὁ.

Illustrations from other writers begin with Homer: II. iv. 28, Λαὸν ἀγειρούσῃ, Πριάμῳ κακά, 155, θάνατόν νύ τοι ὅρκι᾽ ἔταμνον, 1X. 115; οὔ τι ψεῦδος ἐμὰς ἄτας κατέλεξας, XXIV. 735, piper... ἀπὸ

πύργου, λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον, Od. xxi. 35, ἔγχος ἔδωκεν, ᾿Αρχὴν ἕεινο- σύνης. fasch. Ag. 225, θυτὴρ γενέσθαι θυγατρός, γυναικοποίνων πολέμων ἀρωγάν, 1406, νεκρὸς... τῆσδε δεξιᾶς χερὸς Ἔργον, Cho. 200, εἶχε συμπενθεῖν ἐμοί ”Ayadpa τύμβου, κιτ.λ., 205, Καὶ μὴν στίβοι γε, δεύτερον τεκμήριον, Ποδῶν ὁμοῖοι, τοῖς τ᾽ ἐμοῖσιν ἐμφερεῖς. Eur. Or. 1105, Ἑλένην κτάνωμεν, Μενέλεῳ λύπην πικρόν. Ar, Acharn. 4τι, οὐκ eros χωλοὺς ποιεῖς. (So Virg. An. xi. 383, Proinde tona eloquio, solitum tibi.) Thucyd. iii. 111, πρόφασιν ἐπὶ Aaya- νισμὸν ἐξελθόντες (and similarly v. 80): cf. the Homeric prece- dent 1]. xix. 302, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γυναῖκες, Πάτροκλον πρόφασιν, σφῶν δ᾽ αὐτῶν κήδε᾽ ἑκάστη (not, as Jelf, Gr. Gr. ὃ 580, πρόφασιν in Apposition to Πάτροκλον), Ar, Vesp. 338, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔφεξιν, ὦ μάταιε, ταῦτα δρᾷν σε βούλεται: Antipho vy. 63, p. 136, ἀλλ᾽, αὐτὸ

194 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 14, 15.

TO ἐναντίον, ἐκεῖνος τοῦτο θᾶσσον ἂν im ἐμοῦ ἐπείσθη. Add, as

above, Soph. O. T. 603, Καὶ τῶνδ᾽ ἔλεγχον... πεύθου. § 14. The formula of Quotation falls under this head—

Alcib. 1. 121 d, ἡμῶν δὲ γενομένων, τὸ τοῦ κωμῳδοποιοῦ, οὐδ᾽ of γείτονες σφόδρα αἰσθάνονται. x Apol. 34 d, καὶ γάρ, τοῦτο αὐτὸ τὸ τοῦ 'Ομήρον, οὐδ᾽ ἐγὼ ἀπὸ δρυός κιτιλ. Pheedo 77 d, Soxeis .. . δεδιέναι, τὸ τῶν παΐδων, μὴ ὡς ἀληθῶς ὁ ἄνε- μος x.7.A.—where τὸ τῶν π. is not connected with δεδιέναι, but refers to the sentence 6 ἄνεμος αὐτὴν... διασκεδάννυσιν" that is, does not mean ‘to fear, as children fear,’ but ‘to fear lest it be as children think it is, that the soul goes into the air.’

§ 15. b. Accusative of Relative Pronoun Neuter in Apposition, with a sentence following—

Protag. 352 6, τοῦτο τὸ πάθος, ὅ φασιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἡδονῶν ἡττᾶσθαι---- ‘which is what men describe when they say they are, &c.

Soph. 217 6, δι ἐρωτησέων, οἷόν ποτε καὶ Παρμενίδῃ χρωμένῳ καὶ διεξιόντι λόγους παγκάλους παρεγενόμην ἐγώ. The illustration which Socrates means to impress on the stranger is not simply Parmenides’ use of ἐρωτήσεις, but the whole scene,—the λόγοι πάγκαλοι in which the ἐρωτήσεις were interwoven, and his own presence on these occasions. Cf. Thucyd. 11. 40, ὃ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀμαθία μὲν θράσος λογισμὸς δὲ ὄκνον φέρει: and Vi. 55, οὐχ ὡς ἀδελφὸς νεώτερος ὧν ἠπόρησεν ἐν ᾧ οὐ πρότερον ξυνεχῶς ὡμιλήκει τῇ apxj—where ἐν ᾧ is not=ey τούτῳ ἐν ᾧ, but=ev τούτῳ ὅ, Le. ‘in a predicament which was that of his not having,’ &c. And in the common expressions ἀνθ᾽ ὧν ΞΞἀντὶ τῶν, d, and ovvexa= ἕνεκα τοῦ, 6, the Relatives ἃ and ὃ are instances of the same construction, agreeing with the sentence which they introduce.

Ὑ Gorg. 483 a, ὃ δὴ καὶ σύ, τοῦτο τὸ σοφὸν κατανενοηκώς, κακουργεῖς ἐν τοῖς λόγοις--- and this is exactly how you, profiting by your knowledge of this subtilty, cheat in argument.’

Theet. 158 Ὁ, (A) dp οὖν οὐδὲ τὸ τοιόνδε ἀμφισβήτημα ἐννοεῖς... . 5 (B) Τὸ ποῖον; (A) ὃ πολλάκις σε οἶμαι ἀκηκοέναι ἐρωτώντων, τί ἄν τις ἔχοι τεκμήριον ἀποδεῖξαι x.r.A.—‘ that which is expressed by the question, which I dare say you have often heard, what, &c.

Symp. 188 ο, ἃ δή, προστέτακται τῇ μαντικῇ ἐπισκοπεῖν τοὺς ἔρωτας —where ἃ δὴ agrees with the whole of what follows—‘ And thus it stands, accordingly :---μαντικὴ is charged with the care of,’ &e.

§ 16.] ACCUSATIVE CASE. 125

Symp. 222 b, ἃ δή, καὶ σοὶ λέγω μὴ ἐξαπατᾶσθαι ὑπὸ τούτου---' and thus accordingly, I press upon you also not to be,’ &c.

§ 16. So with the ‘parenthetical’ ofov,—in Apposition with the entire sentence— =

Rep. 615 Ὁ, καὶ οἷον εἴ τινες πολλῶν θανάτων ἦσαν αἴτιοι... ., Kopi-

σαιντο. So Politic. 298 a, Tim. 19. Ὁ. Euthyphro 13 a, λέγομεν yap rov,—olov φαμὲν ἵππους οὐ πᾶς ἐπίστα- ται θεραπεύειν x.T.X. Politic. 267 6, οἷον οἱ ἔμποροι καὶ γεωργοὶ Kal... διαμάχοιντ᾽ ἂν οὗτοι ξύμπαντες κιτ.λ. , Or with a portion of a sentence or a single word.

Phdr. 243 ἃ, ποτιμῷ λόγῳ οἷον ἁλμυρὰν ἀκοὴν ἀποκλύσασθαι.

Politic. 277 ¢, τὴν οἷον τοῖς φαρμάκοις καὶ τῇ συγκράσει τῶν χρωμάτων

ἐνάργειαν.

Pheedo 64 d, ἡδονὰς τὰς τοιάσδε, οἷον σιτίων τε καὶ ποτῶν.

Ib. 73 ¢, (A) πῶς λέγεις ; (B) οἷον τὰ τοιάδε.

Ib. 78 d, τῶν πολλῶν καλῶν οἷον ἀνθρώπων.

Tb. 83 Ὁ, κακὸν ἔπαθεν an’ αὐτῶν... οἷον ἢ νοσήσας ἢ K.T.A. yApol. 40 6, δυοῖν θάτερόν ἐστι τὸ τεθνάναι" ἢ yap οἷον μηδὲν εἶναι...

τὸν τεθνεῶτα ἢ K.T.A.

All these instances of οἷον show that? it stands outside the con- struction of the sentence. But its being in a particular number and case still requires explanation, and the only explanation 18, that it is in Apposition with the sentence or some portion of it. Note, that this ofov has two shades of meaning, according as it introduces (a) a metaphor, when it means ‘as it were;’ or (Ὁ) an instance, when it means ‘for instance.’ A different analysis is re- quired for οἷον δή, οἷα δή, οἷα, e.g. in

Critias 112 ¢, οἷα θέρους, κατεχρῶντο ἐπὶ ταῦτα αὐτοῖς.

Symp. 203 Ὁ, ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐδείπνησαν, προσαιτήσουσα οἷον δὴ εὐωχίας

οὔσης ἀφίκετο ἡ Πενία.

Here the same principle so far appears, that the Neuter Ante- cedent to which the Relative refers is (not a Cognate Accus. but) the whole clause,—viz. in the former instance, κατεχρῶντο ἐπὶ ταῦτα αὐτοῖς, in the latter προσαιτηήσουσα. The Relative sentence is ellip- tical; cf. the use of Relatives generally with 67, and the fuller expression in

Phedo 60 a, τοιαῦτ᾽ ἄττα εἶπεν οἷα δὴ εἰώθασιν αἱ γυναῖκες.

1 The ὅσον in ὅσον οὐ stands exactly in the same position.

128 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δδ το, 26.-

Eur. Androm. 209, Σὺ δ᾽ ἤν τι κνισθῆς, . . . Μενέλεως δέ σοι Μείζων ᾿Αχιλλέως" ταῦτά τοί σ᾽ ἔχθει πόσις. 2 St. Pet. i. 5, καὶ αὐτὸ τοῦτο

ἣν i vee] δέ, σπουδὴν πᾶσαν παρεισενέγκαντες, ἐπιχορηγήσατε K.T.A.

§ 19. y. For a sentence expressed immediately after —

Pheedo 105 a, ὅρα δὴ εἰ οὕτως ὁρίζει, μὴ μόνον τὸ ἐναντίον τὸ ἐναντίον

μὴ δέχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκεῖνο,----ὃ ἂν ἐπιφέρῃ τι ἐναντίον. . .. ἐναν- / ΄ ΄ τιότητα μηδέποτε δέξασθαι.

Protag. 326 ἃ, οἵ r αὖ κιθαρισταί, ἕτερα τοιαῦτα, σωφροσύνης ἐπιμε- λοῦνται.

Rep. 334 b, τοῦτο μέντοι ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ ἔτι, ὠφελεῖν μὲν τοὺς φίλους ἡ δικαιοσύνη κιτ.λ.

Hip. Ma. 283 d, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο,---μῶν μὴ κιιλ. Cf. Demosth. Cor. 123. p. 268, καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο, in Leoch. 55. p. 1097, ἐπεὶ κἀκεῖνο, Lys. Xlil. 79. p. 137, ἀλλ᾽ ἕτερον.

Soph. 248 ἃ, τὸ δέ, ὡς τὸ γιγνώσκειν εἴπερ ἔσται ποιεῖν τι, TO γιγνω- σκόμενον ἀναγκαῖον αὖ συμβαίνει πάσχειν.

Legg. 630 ἃ, τὸ δέ,----τὥς χρῆν ἡμᾶς λέγειν ;

Th. 803 d, τὸ δ᾽,---ἦν ἐν πολέμῳ μὲν ἄρα οὔτ᾽ οὖν παιδιὰ πεφυκυῖα οὔτ᾽ αὖ παιδεία.

K ‘Apol. 23 a, τὸ δέ,---κινδυνεύει,. τῷ ὄντι ὁ θεὸς σοφὸς εἶναι.

Cf. St. Paul, 2 Cor. ix. 6, τοῦτο δέ, ὁ σπείρων φειδομένως, φειδομένως καὶ θερίσει, St. Mark ix. 23, τό, εἰ δύνασαι πιστεῦσαι---({Π6 τὸ throws emphasis on the succeeding words). Cf. also the common idiom τοῦτο pev—rodro δέ (each a pre-statement of the clause which it introduces).

§ 20. δ. Accusative of Neuter Pronoun (generally τις or ἄλλος)

standing for a sentence, or portion of a sentence, unexpressed—

Pheedo 58 ¢, ri δὲ δὴ τὰ περὶ αὐτὸν τὸν θάνατον ; τί ἦν τὰ λεχ- θέντα κ.τ.λ.

Symp. 204 d, (A) ὁ ἐρῶν τῶν καλῶν τί ἐρᾷ ; (B) Γενέσθαι αὑτῷ--- where τί stands for a whole dependent sentence, thus; ‘he who desires things beautiful desires that they should—what ?’ The dependent sentence is thus left unexpressed, but that ri stands for it is proved by the answer, which supplies one.

Exactly parallel is Ausch. Ag. 953, (A) Τί δ᾽ ἂν δοκεῖ σοι Πρίαμος, εἰ τάδ᾽ ἤνυσεν; (B) Ἔν ποικίλοις ἂν κάρτα μοι βῆναι δοκεῖ. So St. John xxi, 28, Κύριε, οὗτος δὲ τί ;—where τί is the implicit

completion of the sentence.

δ 21] ACCUSATIVE CASE. 129

On this principle are to be explained the phrases which follow. kK Apol. 26 d, ἵνα τί ταῦτα λέγεις ; (similarly Symp. 205 a.)—There is no γένηται to be supplied; τί in itself is the full repre- sentative complement of the sentence ; the actual complement is of course suspended in the interrogation.

Meno 86 e, εἰ μή τι (similarly Rep. 509 c), and Symp. 222 6, εἰ μή τι ἄλλο. The sentence is complete; the 7 and the τι ἄλλο stand for full propositions.

Symp. 206 e, (A) ov τοῦ καλοῦ ἐστὶν ὁ ἔρως .. .. (Β) ᾿Αλλὰ τί μήν; (A) Τῆς γεννήσεως καὶ τοῦ τόκου ἐν τῷ kag. Here the τί refers back to the words τοῦ καλοῦ, and itself stands for a similar phrase ; which is proved by the answer Τῆς γεννήσεως. Except on the principle now before us, the phrase would have been variable, and we should in the present instance have found (what Steph. conjectures) ἀλλὰ τίνος μήν; Similarly 202 ἢ. The phrase may of course equally stand for a whole sentence, as Rep. 362 d, 438 b (‘and what then?’). The same.expla- nation holds of the τί in the phrase of polite assent, τί μήν ; ἢ (literally ‘if not, then what 1) The explanation of τύ; in the sense of ‘why?’ is the same; and of the answering particle ὅτι, ‘ because.

§ 21. In the following instances the significance of the τί is

hinted in a second interrogation following.

Phdr. 234 ¢, τί σοι φαίνεται ὁ λόγος ;---οὐχ ὑπερφυῶς εἰρῆσθαι ;

Protag. 309 Ὁ, τί οὖν τανῦν ; —} παρ᾽ ἐκείνου φαίνει :

Soph. 266 ο, τί δὲ τὴν ἡμετέραν τέχνην :--ἀρ᾽ otk αὐτὴν μὲν οἰκίαν οἰκοδομικῇ φήσομεν ποιεῖν ;

Phedo 78 d, τί δὲ τῶν πολλῶν καλῶν... .; ἄρα κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἔχει, ἢ κατλ.; (The genitive τῶν----καλῶν is suspended in a loose con- struction, which the second interrogation supersedes.)

Phileb. 27 6, τί δὲ ὁ σὸς [βίος]... ;---ἐν τίνι γένει ἂν λέγοιτο;

So probably Phedo 64 d, (A) φαίνεταί σοι φιλοσόφου ἀνδρὸς εἶναι ἐσπουδακέναι περὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς καλουμένας τὰς τοιάσδε κιτ.λ, ; (B) Ἥκι- στα. (A) Τί δὲ τὰς τῶν ἀφροδισίων ; (Β) Οὐδαμῶς, (A) Τί δὲ τὰς ἄλλας τὰς περὶ τὸ σῶμα θεραπείας ;----δοκεῖ σοι ἐντίμους ἡγεῖσθαι ὁ τοιοῦτος ; See more instances under Binary Structure ($ 207).

Legg. 630 ¢, otk ἄλλο ἢ πρὸς τὴν μεγίστην ἀρετὴν μάλιστα βλέπων

2 Add τί μέλλει; as in Hipp. Mi. imvariable, though attracted some-

373 ἃ, Rep. 349 d. μέλλει can be times into μέλλομεν. K

128 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 19, 20.

Eur. Androm. 209, Σὺ δ᾽ # τι κνισθῆς, . . . Mevédews δέ σοι Μείξζων "AX”XEws ταῦτά τοί o ἔχθει πόσις. 2 St. Pet. i. 5, καὶ αὐτὸ τοῦτο

δ, A yas δέ, σπουδὴν πᾶσαν παρεισενέγκαντες, ἐπιχορηγήσατε K.T.A.

§ 19. γ. For a sentence expressed immediately after —

Phedo 105 a, ὅρα δὴ ef οὕτως ὁρίζει, μὴ μόνον τὸ ἐναντίον τὸ ἐναντίον

μὴ δέχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκεῖνο,---ὃ ἂν ἐπιφέρῃ τι ἐναντίον... ἐναν- , ΄΄ , τιότητα μηδέποτε δέξασθαι.

Protag. 326 a, οἵ τ᾽ αὖ κιθαρισταί, ἕτερα τοιαῦτα, σωφροσύνης ἐπιμε- λοῦνται.

Rep. 334 b, τοῦτο μέντοι ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ ἔτι, ὠφελεῖν μὲν τοὺς φίλους ἡ δικαιοσύνη K.T.A.

Hip. Ma. 283 d, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο,---μῶν μὴ κιιλ. Cf. Demosth. Cor. 123. p. 268, καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο, in Leoch. 55. p. 1097, ἐπεὶ κἀκεῖνο, Lys. ΧΙ], 79. p. 137, ἀλλ᾽ ἕτερον.

Soph. 248 d, τὸ δέ, ὡς τὸ γιγνώσκειν εἴπερ ἔσται ποιεῖν τι, τὸ γιγνω- σκόμενον ἀναγκαῖον αὖ συμβαίνει πάσχειν.

Legg. 630 d, τὸ δέ,----πῶς χρῆν ἡμᾶς λέγειν ;

A 3 > > δ ‘ ,᾿ Zee | 3. ν “ 2 eed

Th. 803 d, τὸ δ᾽,---ἦἣν ἐν πολέμῳ μὲν ἄρα οὔτ᾽ οὖν παιδιὰ πεφυκυῖα οὔτ αὖ παιδεία.

Χ Apol. 23 ἃ, τὸ δέ,--κινδυνεύει,, . τῷ ὄντι ὁ θεὸς σοφὸς εἶναι.

Cf. St. Paul, 2 Cor. ix. 6, τοῦτο δέ, ὁ σπείρων φειδομένως, φειδομένως καὶ θερίσει, St. Mark ix. 23, Td, Εἰ δύνασαι morevoa—(the TO throws emphasis on the succeeding words). Cf. also the common idiom τοῦτο μὲν----τοῦτο δέ (each a pre-statement of the clause which it introduces).

§ 20. 6. Accusative of Neuter Pronoun (generally ris or ἄλλος)

standing for a sentence, or portion of a sentence, unexpressed—

Phedo 58 ¢, ri δὲ δὴ τὰ περὶ αὐτὸν τὸν θάνατον ; τί ἦν τὰ λεχ- θέντα κ-τ.λ.

Symp. 204 d, (A) ὁ ἐρῶν τῶν καλῶν τί ἐρᾷ ; (Β) Γενέσθαι αὑτῷ--- where τί stands for a whole dependent sentence, thus; ‘he who desires things beautiful desires that they should—what ?’ The dependent sentence is thus left unexpressed, but that τί stands for it is proved by the answer, which supplies one.

Exactly parallel is AZsch. Ag. 953, (A) Τί δ᾽ ἂν δοκεῖ σοι Πρίαμος, εἰ τάδ᾽ ἤνυσεν; (B) Ἔν ποικίλοις ἂν κάρτα μοι βῆναι δοκεῖ. So St. John xxi. 28, Κύριε, οὗτος δὲ ri ;—where τί is the implicit completion of the sentence.

.

| | | |

| | |

§ 21. ACCUSATIVE CASE. 129

On this principle are to be explained the phrases which follow.

AK Apol. 26 d, ta τί ταῦτα λέγεις ; (similarly Symp. 205 a.)—There

is no γένηται to be supplied; τί in itself is the full repre- sentative complement of the sentence ; the actual complement is of course suspended in the interrogation.

Meno 86 e, εἰ μή τι (similarly Rep. 509 c), and Symp. 222 6, εἰ μή τι ἄλλο. The sentence is complete; the τὶ and the τι ἄλλο stand for full propositions.

Symp. 206 e, (A) οὐ τοῦ καλοῦ ἐστὶν ὁ ἔρως .. .. (B) ᾿Αλλὰ τί μήν ; (A) Τῆς γεννήσεως καὶ τοῦ τόκου ἐν τῷ καλῷς Here the τί refers hack to the words τοῦ καλοῦ, and itself stands for a similar phrase ; which is proved by the answer Τῆς γεννήσεως. Except on the principle now before us, the phrase would have been variable, and we should in the present instance have found (what Steph. conjectures) ἀλλὰ τίνος μήν; Similarly 202 d. The phrase may of course equally stand for a whole sentence, as Rep. 362 d, 438 Ὁ (‘and what then?’). The same.expla- nation holds of the τί in the phrase of polite assent, τί μήν; (literally ‘if not, then what!) The explanation of τί; in the sense of ‘why?’ is the same; and of the answering particle ὅτι, * because.

§ 21. In the following instances the significance of the τί is

hinted in a second interrogation following.

Phdr. 234 6, τί σοι φαίνεται ὁ λόγος ;---οὐχ ὑπερφυῶς εἰρῆσθαι ;

>

Protag. 309 Ὁ, τί οὖν τανῖν ; ---ὖ παρ᾽ ἐκείνου φαίνει;

Soph. 266 ς, τί δὲ τὴν ἡμετέραν τέχνην ;—Gp otk αὐτὴν μὲν οἰκίαν οἰκοδομικῇ φήσομεν ποιεῖν ;

Phedo 78 d, τί δὲ τῶν πολλῶν καλῶν. .. .; ἄρα κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἔχει, ἣ x.t.d.; (The genitive τῶν----καλῶν is suspended in a loose con- struction, which the second interrogation supersedes.)

Phileb. 27 6, τί δὲ ὁ σὸς [Sirs] . . .;—eév τίνι γένει ἂν λέγοιτο;

So probably Phedo 64 d, (A) φαίνεταί σοι φιλοσόφου ἀνδρὸς εἶναι ἐσπουδακέναι περὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς καλουμένας τὰς τοιάσδε x.t.d. ; (B) Ἥκι- στα. (A) Τί δὲ τὰς τῶν ἀφροδισίων ; (Β) Οὐδαμῶς. (A) Τί δὲ τὰς ἄλλας τὰς περὶ τὸ σῶμα θεραπείας ;---δοκεῖ σοι ἐντίμους ἡγεῖσθαι ὁ τοιοῦτος ; See more instances under Binary Structure ($ 207).

Legg. 630 ς, οὐκ ἄλλο ἢ πρὸς τὴν μεγίστην ἀρετὴν μάλιστα βλέπων

3 Add τί μέλλει: as in Hipp. Mi. invariable, though attracted some-

373 ἃ, Rep. 349 ἃ. μέλλει can be times into μέλλομεν.

K

130 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 22.

αεὶ θήσει τοὺς νόμου. Here ἄλλο denotes in outline a whole clause, the form of which is revealed to us by the contrasted clause πρὸς---- βλέπων.

Rep. 372 d, τί ἂν αὐτὰς ἄλλο ἢ ταῦτα ἐχόρταζες; where τί ἄλλο represents a sentence parallel to the contrasted sentence αὐτὰς ἂν ταῦτα ἐχόρταζες.

lustrations of this construction abound in Thucydides, e.g.

lll. 85, ὅπως ἀπόγνοια ἢ τοῦ ἄλλο τι ἢ κρατεῖν τῆς γῆς, i. τό, οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ πόλιν τὴν αὑτοῦ ἀπολείπων ἕκαστος, 40, μήτ᾽ ἄλλο τι ἢ γυμνοὶ ἀνέ- χεσθαι, iV. 14, ἄλλο οὐδὲν ἢ ἐκ γῆς ἐναυμάχουν, V. 98, τί ἄλλο ἢ τοὺς... πολεμίους μεγαλύνετε ; Vil. 75, οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ πόλει ἐκπεπολιορκημένῃ ἐῴκε- σαν, Vill. 5, ἀμφοτέρων... ὄντων οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ ὥσπερ ἀρχομένων. (Notice the two last, which prove the invariableness of the οὐδὲν ἄλλο.)

§ 22. The Adverbial Interrogatives ἄλλο τι ἢ and ἄλλο τι are instances of the same principle; and may conveniently be discussed here once for all.

They have the following points in common: (1) as to their use, they both expect_an affirmative answer,: (2) as to their construction, the ἄλλο in both (as in the instances heretofore given) is used pro- leptically; and (as we have said) both are instances of the Neuter Pronoun Accusative standing for a sentence, or portion of a sen- tence, unexpressed.

But from this point we must investigate them separately.

Λλλλο τι ἢ challenges an affirmation with respect to some special portion of the sentence. It may be that it sometimes affects the whole; but (unlike ἄλλο τι) it can, and in most instances does, affect a particular portion of the sentence. And the interrogation is, in strictness, limited to the part affected.

Apol. 24 ¢, ἄλλο τι ἢ περὶ πολλοῦ ποιεῖ, ὅπως ὡς βέλτιστοι οἱ νεώτεροι ἔσονται; The interrogation is made as to περὶ πολλοῦ ποιεῖ, Rep. 372 a, ἄλλο τι ἢ σῖτόν τε ποιοῦντες καὶ brodrpara; The inter- rogation is made as to σῖτόν re π. κ. ὑποδήματα, to the exclusion of the Verb διαιτήσονται. Ale. I. 129 b, τῷ διαλέγει σὺ viv; ἄλλο τι ἢ ἐμοί ; The phrase gets its meaning thus; the speaker, about to name ἃ certain fact or thing, gives it emphasis by first asking whether any other ought to be named instead of it.

a

Some doubt might be felt whether ἢ is ‘than’ or ‘or. Certain

phrases would point to ‘or,’ such as

§ 22.] ACCUSATIVE CASE. 131

“ Gorg. 459 ὃ, τοῦτο συμβαίνει ἢ ἄλλο τι ; Politic. 266 b, (A) μῶν ἄλλως πως πέφυκεν, ἢ καθάπερ «7h. ; (B) οὐκ ἄλλως. Legy. 683 e, βασιλεία δὲ καταλύεται ἢ καί τις ἀρχὴ πώποτε κατελύθη μῶν ὑπό τισων ἄλλων ἢ σφῶν αὐτῶν: Protag. 330 ς, riv ἂν Ψψηῴον θεῖο : τὴν αἰτὴν ἐμοὶ ἢ ἄλλην ; Ἔ 7 7 ἣν hy TRAE SET 3 Bat more decisive for than’ are Protag. 357 6, διὰ τὸ οἴεσθαι ἄλλο τι ἢ ἀμαθίαν εἶναι, and the varia- tious, Soph. 220 ¢, τὰ τοιαῖτα μῶν ἄλλο τι πλὴν pan χρὴ προσαγορείειν ; Phedo gt d, ἄρα ἄλλ᾽ ἢ ταῖτ᾽ ἐστίν, ἃ κατὰ. - and the common fer- mul οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ and τί ἄλλο ἢ which are not ambiguous. “AMo τὰ challenges an affirmation with respect ἰὼ the whule sen- tence which follows it.

Rep 7 ¢, Gio πὶ ee τὸ σὶ οὕτω ποιήσεις :-—Vou mesn, do * you, p- i t ‘a ? » Ἵ

that + Hou will do so}

.

Ib. 369 ἃ, ἄλλο τι γεωργὸς μὲν εἷς, ὁ δὲ οἰκοδόμος. ἄλλος δέ τις ὑφαν- ms ;—where the force οὗ the ἄλλο τὶ cannot stop short of the whole sentence.

* Gorg. 467 d, ἄλλο τι οὖν οὕτω καὶ περὶ πάντων͵---ἐάν τίς τι πράττῃ ἔνεκά του. οὐ τοῦτο Ξοίλεται κτλ. :—where the interrogation must go on to the end; and, bestles. the whole sentence is gathered up in the pre-announcing clause οὕτω καὶ περὶ πάντων. bhedo 79 Ὁ, (A) Φέρε 37, ἄλλο ti ἡμῶν αἰτῶν τὸ μὲν σῶμα ἐστι τὸ δὲ ψυχή; (B) Οὐδὲν Dro.

Symp. 201 a, ἄλλο τι 6 ἔμως κάλλοις ἂν εἴη ἔρως, αἴσχους δ᾽ ot ;

(In Euthyd. 286 ς, ἄλλο τι ἢ ψευῆ «rd... the interrogation goes

through several clauzes: but here two MSS. omit 7.)

tir

Thus ἄλλο re affects the whole οὗ the sentence, like the Frenc nest ce pas que. The pee it makes is not restricted to any particular pertion of the sentence

But how does it come to hav ae meaning! For there ts no colour for supposing that It ret for ἄλλο τι 7.

͵

It represents an unexpressed sentence (according to the use οἱ

before us) :—namely, ‘any diderent proposition from that about to be enunciated. The speaker. Ly ἄλλο τι, * puts the question’ about this shadow of a prowsiticn. but anticipates the judgment by offering simultaneously fcr acceptance his own view. Thus the interrogation strictly speaking belungs to

152 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ᾽ 23—25.

the ἄλλο τι alone, though it spreads from it to the whole sentence beyond.

§ 23. The last use to be mentioned of the Neuter Accusative of ἄλλος as standing for a sentence, or portion of a sentence, unex- pressed, is in winding up an enumeration.

Symp. 176 a, doavras τὸν θεὸν καὶ τἄλλα τὰ νομιζόμενα.

Theet. 159 b, καὶ καθεύδοντα δὴ καὶ πάντα ἃ νῦν διήλθομεν. (I class this passage under the present head, because by the sense πάντα must stand for τἄλλα πάντα. Cf. ὃ 249.)

In neither of these passages can the Accusative be said to be Cognate, as if it were subjoined by καὶ to the unexpressed Cognate Accusatives of ἄσαντας and καθεύδοντα᾽ for it is really other participles that are added, co-ordinate with ἄσαντας in the one case and καθεύ- δόντα in the other.

Theet. 145 a, ἢ καὶ ἀστρονομικὸς καὶ λογιστικός τε καὶ μουσικὸς καὶ

ὅσα παιδείας ἔχεται ;

Phdr, 227 ¢, πένητι μᾶλλον ἢ πλουσίῳ καὶ πρεσβυτέρῳ ἢ νεωτέρῳ καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα ἐμοὶ πρύσεστι.

Ib. 246 e, τὸ δὲ θεῖον καλὸν σοφὸν ἀγαθὸν καὶ πᾶν 6 τι τοιοῦτον." ; ys

§ 24. Iptoms or Nouns:—Genitive Case.

A. Genitive of Epexegesis.

Apol. 29 b, ἀμαθία... αὕτη ἡ ἐπονείδιστος, ἡ τοῦ οἴεσθαι εἰδέναι ἃ οὐκ

οἶδεν. Phedo 78 b, τοῦτο τὸ πάθος... τοῦ διασκεδάννυσθαι. [So Oxon. and one other MS. | Ib. 96 b, ὁ τὰς αἰσθήσεις παρέχων τοῦ ἀκούειν καὶ ὁρᾷν καὶ αἰσθάνεσθαι. Ib. 97 ἃ, αὕτη ἄρα αἰτία αὐτοῖς ἐγένετο δύο γενέσθαι, ἡ ξύνοδος τοῦ

πλησίον ἀλλήλων τεθῆναι.

§ 25. B. Genitive of a Substantive with ὡς, loosely, denoting the agent to whom a particular effect is to be referred. Symp. 212 ὁ, καὶ ἐξαίφνης τὴν αὔλειον θύραν κρουομένην πολὺν ψόφον παρασχεῖν ὡς κωμαστῶν --ὙΥ ΠΟΥ 6 ὡς κωμαστῶν does not closely follow ψόφον, but characterises the general effect produced.

* [Under these three examples is written in the MS. “ Proof to be subjoined that these are Accusatives.” |

eee Se a ΨΨ ἈΝ,

OS ae

§ 26.] GENITIVE CASE. 133

Cf. Arist. Eth. 1. xiii. 18, οὕτω δὴ καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς... . φαμὲν ἔχειν λόγον, καὶ οὐχ ὥσπερ τῶν μαθηματικῶν---(΄ not in the sense in which mathematicians use the expression.’) Esch. Eum. 628, θανεῖν... . . Τόξοις ἑκηβόλοισιν, ὥστ᾽ ᾿Αμαζόνος, Cho. ggo, Ἔχει γὰρ αἰσχυντῆρος, ὡς νόμου, δίκην (the law being personified into an agent, as frequently elsewhere). Soph. Aj. 998, Ὃ ξεῖα γάρ σου βάξις, ὡς θεοῦ τινός, AAP ᾿Αχαιούς (‘like a θεία φήμη, that is.) Trach. 768, προσπτύσσεται Πλευραῖσιν ἀρτίκολλος, ὥστε τέκτονος (‘like carver’s work.’) Ib. 112, πολλὰ γὰρ ὥστ᾽ ἀκάμαντος ἢ νότου ἢ βορέα τις κύματα.. ... iéoc—which points again to the Homeric

τὸν δ᾽ οὔποτε κύματα λείπει Παντοίων ἀνέμων, Il. 11. 396.

§ 26. C. Genitive of a Noun with a Participle, after Verbs of knowing, seeing, shewing.

YX Apol. 27 a, dpa γνώσεται Σωκράτης ὁ σοφὸς δὴ ἐμοῦ χαριεντιζομένου 5

Ib. 37 b, ὧν εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι κακῶν ὄντων.

Crat. 412 ἃ, μηνύει ὡς φερομένοις τοῖς πράγμασιν ἑπομένης τῆς ψυχῆς.

Rep. 558 a, ἢ οὔπω εἶδες... αὐτῶν μενόντων ;

Cf. Hom. 1]. iv. 357, ‘Qs γνῶ χωομένοιο. Asch. P. V. 760, ‘Qs τοίνυν ὄντων τῶνδέ σοι μαθεῖν πάρα. Soph. Aj. 281, ‘Qs ὧδ᾽ ἐχόντων τῶνδ᾽ ἐπίστασθαί σε χρη. Eur. Med. 1311, ‘Qs οὐκέτ᾽ ὄντων σῶν τέκνων φρόντιζε δή.

Probably of the use of these Verbs with a Genitive unaccom-

panied by a Participle there is no clear instance in Plato.

In Charm. 154 6, ἐθεασάμεθα... . . τοῦ εἴδους, the Genitive is very possibly Partitive, as also in

Rep. 485 Ὁ, μαθήματος... ὃ ἂν αὐτοῖς δηλοῖ ἐκείνης τῆς οὐσίας.

In Legg. 646 d, καὶ τῆς περὶ τὸν οἶνον ἄρα διατριβῆς ὡσαύτως δια- νοητέον, the Genitive has tacit reference to περὶ in the question previously put, οὐκοῦν χρὴ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιτηδευμάτων πέρι δια- νοεῖσθαι τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον :

In Rep. 375 d, οἶσθα γάρ που τῶν γενναίων κυνῶν, ὅτι τοῦτο φύσει αὐτῶν τὸ ἦθος, κυνῶν is governed by ἦθος.

D. Genitive of a Noun, without any Participle, after* Verbs of

mentioning.

Meno 96 a, ἔχεις οὖν εἰπεῖν ἄλλου ὁτουοῦν πράγματος, ot x.r.\.;—Why

* The passage, Rep. 439 b, τοῦ τοξύ- τοῦ is governed by χείρ. See under

Tov ov καλῶς ἔχει λέγειν ὅτι κιτιλ., is Binary Structure (§ 225). to be construed otherwise ; τοῦ τοξύ-

134 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 27, 28.

this is not to be explained on the principle of Attraction of Antecedent to Relative, see under Attraction (§ 191.)

Legg. 804 6, καὶ οὐδὲν φοβηθεὶς εἴποιμ᾽ ἂν τοῦτον τὸν λόγον οὔτε ἱππικῆς οὔτε γυμναστικῆς, ὡς ἀνδράσι μὲν πρέπον ἂν εἴη, γυναιξὶ δὲ οὐκ ἂν πρέπον.

Cf. Soph. Aj. 1236, Ποίου κέκραγας ἀνδρὸς ὧδ᾽ ὑπέρφρονα ; and ib. 1257, O. C. 355, τοῦδ᾽ ἐχρήσθη σώματος, Trach, 1122, Τῆς μη- τρὸς ἥκω τῆς ἐμῆς φράσων.

In Homer, Verbs of knowing ὅχο. also thus govern a Genitive of

a Noun without a Participle.

1]. xii. 229, Εἰδείη τεράων, Od. xxi. 36, Γνώτην ἀλλήλων, and so

XXill. 109, Γνωσόμεθ᾽ ἀλλήλων. [1]. xiv. 37, ὀψείοντες citys, XVI.

811, διδασκόμενος πολέμοιο.

§ 27. E. Genitive of a Noun placed at the beginning of a con- struction, for the sake of premising mention of it, without any grammatical justification of the genitive.

Pheedo 78 d, ri δὲ τῶν πολλῶν καλῶν... . ; dpa κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἔχει, ἢ κιτιλ. 5

Gorg. 509 d, τί δὲ δὴ τοῦ ἀδικεῖν ; πότερον... ἢ καὶ κιτιλ.;

Legg. 751 b, δῆλον... ὅτι... τοῦ πόλιν εὖ παρεσκευασμένην ἀρχὰς ἀνεπιτηδείους ἐπιστῆσαι τοῖς εὖ κειμένοις νόμοις, .. . οὐδὲν πλέον εὖ τεθέντων [ἐστί].

Rep. 576 d, ἀλλ᾽ εὐδαιμονίας τε αὖ καὶ ἀθλιότητος, ὡσαύτως ἢ ἄλλως κρίνεις ;

Cf. Aisch. Ag. 950, Τούτων μὲν οὕτως" and Eum. 211, Τί γὰρ γυναι- kos ἥτις ἄνδρα νοσφίσῃ ; also Arist. Pol. I. iv. 1, ὥσπερ δὲ ἐν ταῖς ὡρισμέναις τέχναις ἀναγκαῖον ἂν εἴη ὑπάρχειν τὰ οἰκεῖα ὄργανα, εἰ μέλλει ἀποτελεσθήσεσθαι τὸ ἔργον, οὕτω καὶ τῶν οἰκονομικῶν.

The principle seems to be that the intended mention of the thing

is regarded from the side of the genitive as limited and occasioned by it. Near this use stands also

Lege. 969 ¢, τὴν πόλιν ἐατέον τῆς κατοικίσεως.

§ 28. ΤΡΙΟΜ5 or Nouns:—Darive Case.

Certain intensified uses cf the ‘Dative of Reference’ are notice- able. a. Where the Dative is only justified by making the notion of Reference concentrated enough to include Possession.

a, Dative of Nouns. ¥Apol. 40 ¢, μεταβολή τις τυγχάνει οὖσα Kal μετοΐκησις τῇ ψυχῇ.

τ ‘ > , ¢ κι - a ? Pheedo 62 b, npas τους ἀνθρώπους ἕν τῶν κτημάτων τοῖς θεοῖς εἶναι.

δὲ 29, 30.] DATIVE CASE. THE ARTICLE. 135

Phileb. 58 c, τῇ μὲν ἐκείνου ὑπάρχειν τέχνη διδοὺς πρὸς χρείαν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις κρατεῖν.

Legg. 760 6, τῷ τόπῳ ἑκάστῳ τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν εἶναι τοιάνδε τινά.

Ib. 820 6, ἄστρων... τὴν μάθησιν τοῖς νέοις. B. Dative of Pronouns.

Charm. 157 e, ἡ πατρῴα ὑμῖν οἰκία.

Legg. 624 Ὁ, ταῖς πόλεσιν ὑμῖν θέντος τοὺς νόμους.

Theet. 210 b, ἡ μαιευτικὴ ἡμῖν τέχνη.

Phedo 60 ¢, θεὸς... ξυνῆψεν εἰς ταὐτὸν αὐτοῖς τὰς κορυφάς.

Ib. 72 6, ἦν που ἡμῖν ἡ ψυχή [Oxon.], and ibid. ἡμῖν ἡ μάθησις.

Cf. Thue. i. 6, οἱ πρεσβύτεροι αὐτοῖς τῶν εὐδαιμόνων. Iseeus vi. 6.

p. 56, τὼ μὲν οὖν ἀδελφὼ ait@ . . . ἐτελευτησάτην.

§ 29, b. Where the Dative is justified by making the notion of Reference include that of the Object. a. In the case of the latter of two Substantives. Symp. 194 d, ἐπιμεληθῆναι τοῦ ἐγκωμίου τῷ Ἔρωτι. Rep. 607 a, ὕμνους θεοῖς καὶ ἐγκώμια τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς. Legg. 653 d, τὰς τῶν ἑορτῶν ἀμοιβὰς τοῖς θεοῖς. ΤΌ. 950 6, ἀγώνων τούτοις τοῖς θεοῖς.

᾿ β. In the case of the remote Object after a Verb. This usage is partly owing to the force of Attraction, and the instances are given under that head (ὃ 183).

§ 80. Ipioms oF THE ARTICLE.

a. As a Demonstrative Pronoun Antecedent. Theet. 204 d, ἔν ye τοῖς ὅσα ἐξ ἀριθμοῦ ἐστί. So Protag. 320 d, Phileb. 21 Ὁ,

Soph. 241 6, τεχνῶν τῶν ὅσαι περὶ ταῦτα εἰσί.

4 Phdr. 239 Ὁ, τῆς ὅθεν ἂν x... (referring to συνουσία.) q > μᾶς a FD. a m”

; Tb. 247 6, ἐν τῷ O ἐστιν OV ὄντως.

7 Phileb. 37 a, τὸ ᾧ τὸ ἡδόμενον ἥδεται.

ΐ Tim. 39 6, τῷ 6 ἐστι ζῶον.

Critias 115 b, τὸν ὅσος ξύλινος (referring to καρπός.) Lege. 761 6, περὶ τοὺς ὧν ἐπιμελοῦνται.

Th. 905 bh, ἐκείνων τῶν οὖς κιτιὰλ,

13652 <8 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8§ 3133.

Pheedo 75 a, ἐκείνου ὀρέγεται τοῦ ὃ ἐστὶν ἴσον. Ib. 102 6, τῷ ὅτι Φαίδων ὁ Φαίδων ἐστίν.

Jelf, G. G. § 444, notices that “this idiom is peculiarly Platonic,” adding however one or two instances from the Orators.

§ 31. b. Prefixed to Personal Pronouns, laughingly. Theet. 166 a, γέλωτα δὴ τὸν ἐμὲ ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ἀπέδειξε. Soph. 239 b, τὸν μὲν τοίνυν ἐμέ ye κιτιλ. Phileb. 20 b, δεινὸν προσδοκᾷν οὐδὲν δεῖ τὸν ἐμέ. Ib. 59 Ὁ, τὸν μὲν δὴ σὲ καὶ ἐμὲ καὶ Τοργίαν καὶ Φίληβον χρὴ συχνὰ χαίρειν ἐᾷν. Lysis 203 b, παρὰ τίνας τοὺς ὑμᾶς ; Phdr,. 258 a, καὶ ὃς εἶπε, τὸν αὑτὸν δὴ λέγων, κιτ.λ. Jelf, G. G. § 452, says “this construction seems to be confined to the Accusative.”

§ 32. c. When the Substantive has a plurality of Adjectives quali- fying it, the order is disturbed, with a view of relieving the heavi- ness of the term, in various ways.

a. By postponing the Substantive, when one of the Adjectives ought to have followed it.

Crat. 398 b, ἐν τῇ ἀρχαίᾳ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ φωνῇ.

Ib. d, τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν τὴν παλαιὰν φωνήν.

Symp. 213 6, τὴν τούτου ταυτηνὶ τὴν θαυμαστὴν κεφαλήν.

Legg. 732 6, τὸ θνητὸν πᾶν ζῶον.

Pheedo 100 a, τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ὄντων [so Oxon. and seven other

MSS. ]—i. 6. τῶν ἄλλων ὄντων ἁπάντων. β. By bringing in the Substantive before its time.

Phileb. 43 a, τὸν λόγον ἐπιφερόμενον τοῦτον.

Lege. 659 d, τὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου λόγον ὀρθὸν εἰρημένον.

Ib. 790 ὁ, τῶν περὶ τὰ σώματα μύθων λεχθέντων.

Ib. 793 Ὁ, 6 νῦν δὴ λόγος ἡμῖν ἐπιχυθείς.

§ 33. Upon these principles are to be explained the seeming anomalies which occur, in the Tragic Pocts especially, in the collo-

eation of Substantives with a plurality of epithets preceded by the Article.

a, Adschyl. Cho. 496, φίλτατον τὸ σὸν κάρα (for φ. Kapa τὸ σόν), Suppl. 9, αὐτογενῆ τὸν φυξάνορα γώμον (for γάμον τὸν φυξ.). Soph.

§ 34.] THE ARTICLE. 187

e

Phil. 133, Ἑρμῆς ὁ πέμπων δόλιος (for “E. δόλιος ὁ πέμπων). Thue. i. 126, ἐν τῇ τοῦ Διὸς τῇ μεγίστῃ ἑορτῇ. Lysias vil. 24. p. 110, ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις τοῖς ἐμοῖς χωρίοις. Ar. Eq. 1323, Ev ταῖσιν ἰοστεφάνοισιν οἰκεῖ ταῖς ἀρχαίαισιν ᾿Αθήναις (the last three instances from Jelf).

8. Asch. Agam. 1642, 6 δυσφιλεῖ σκότῳ Λιμὸς ξύνοικος (where λιμὸς is anticipated), Eum. 653, τὸ μητρὸς αἷμ᾽ ὅμαιμον (perhaps, for the αἷμ᾽ ὅμαιμον might otherwise be regarded as virtually a single word, as in Mschin. 111. 78. p. 64, ὁ yap puodrexvos, καὶ πατὴρ πονηρός, οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο δημαγωγὸς χρηστός, where πατὴρ πονηρός is for the purpose of the sentence a single word), Suppl. 349, τὰν ἱκέτιν φυγάδα περίδρομον. Soph. Aj. 134, τῆς ἀμφιρύτου Sadapivos ... . ἀγχιάλου, ib. 1166, τὸν ἀείμνηστον τάφον εὐρώεντα, Phil. 394, τὸν μέγαν Πάκτωλον εὔχρυσον, Ο. T. 671, τὸ σὸν... . στόμα ᾿Ελεινόν, ib. 1199, τὰν γαμψώ- νυχα παρθένον χρησμῳδόν. Pind. Ol. V. 4, τὰν σὰν rodw . . . λαοτρόφον. Thuc. i. 96,6 πρῶτος φόρος ταχθείς, V. 11, πρὸ τῆς νῦν ἀγορᾶς οὔσης (these two from Jelf).

The anomalies which remain unexplained are those in which a Possessive Pronoun is concerned,—in all the instances ἐμός, sch. Agam. 1226, τῷ μολόντι δεσπότῃ Ἐμῷ. Soph. Aj. 572, ὁ λυμεὼν ἐμός, Ο. T. 1462, Ταῖν δ᾽ ἀθλίαιν οἰκτραῖν τε παρθένοιν ἐμαῖν. Eur. Hipp. 583, Ζεὺς ὁ γεννήτωρ ἐμός. All that can be said in explanation of the exceptional form of these passages, is that they are exceptional in meaning. Generally, where there is a Possessive Pronoun attached to the Substantive, it is that which makes it definite; here the Substantive is perfectly defined in its application inde- pendently of the Possessive Pronoun.

§ 34. d. Omitted with the former of two Substantives in regimen. Observe, that a different shade of meaning results from this devi- ation from the common form; a shade of meaning which would be rendered equivalently by attaching the second Noun more loosely to the former.

Rep. 395 ¢, δημιουργοὺς ἐλευθερίας τῆς πόλεως---᾿ artificers of freedom

for the city.’

Symp. 182 c, συμφέρει... φρονήματα μεγάλα ἐγγίγνεσθαι τῶν dpyo- pevov—‘ that high-spiritedness in the ruled should be strongly developed.’

Ib. 196 Ὁ, περὶ μὲν οὖν κάλλους τοῦ θεοῦ---“ beauty as attributable to the god.’

Theet. 175 a, ἄτοπα αἰτῷ καταφαίνεται τῆς cpixpohoyias— a marvel in the way of minuteness.’

138 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 35—38.

Crat. 391 Ὁ, ὀρθοτάτη τῆς σκέψεως--- truest manner of viewing’— ἡ ὀρθοτάτη would have been ‘the truest part of the view.’ Hip. Ma. 282 a, φθόνον τῶν ζώντων----“ envy against the living.’ Cf. Thue. ili. 82, τῶν τ᾽ ἐπιχειρήσεων περιτεχνήσει καὶ τῶν τιμωριῶν ἀτοπίᾳ, Vi. 16, ἐπὶ τοῦ Μήδου τιμωρίᾳᾳ. Hat. ii. 19, τοῦ ποταμοῦ δὲ φύσιος πέρι (φύσιος being a topic of enquiry). Different are addresses, as Lege. 662 ¢, ὦ ἄριστοι τῶν ἀνδρῶν, 817 a, ὦ ἄριστοι τῶν ξένων, 820 b, ὦ βέλτιστοι τῶν “Ἑλλήνων, where the Voca- tive supersedes the Article.

§ 35. e, Omitted with the latter of two Substantives in regimen. The meaning indicated by this peculiarity is the close union of the notions represented by the two Nouns.

Symp. 187 C, ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ συστάσει ἁρμονίας τε Kai ῥυθμοῦ.

Cf. Thite.-iv. 92, τὸ ἔσχατον ἀγῶνος. Hdt. 1. 22, τὸ ἔσχατον κακοῦ,

§ 36. Different is the case where the latter Substantive is the name of a country or of the inhabitants of a country or city; for before such Nouns the Article is habitually omitted. This is worth observing, for the sake of precluding misapprehension of the con- struction, where there is a concurrence of Genitives.

Phedo 57 a, οὔτε yap τῶν πολιτῶν Φλιασίων οὐδεὶς ἐπιχωριάζει τὰ νῦν

"AOnva¢e—‘ for neither of the Phliasians does any citizen,’ &c. That is, Φλιασίων is governed by οὐδεὶς τῶν πολιτῶν.

Lege. 625 ¢, τὴν τῆς χώρας πάσης Κρήτης pvow-—where Κρήτης is governed by χώρας φύσιν. Cf. Thue. 111. 109, τῶν ξυστρατηγῶν ᾿Ακαρνάνων, vil. 30, διέφθειραν ... Θηβαίων τῶν Βοιωταρχῶν Σκιρφώνδαν. § 37. f. Omitted after οὗτος preceding a Substantive. Rep. 399 ¢, ταύτας δύο ἁρμονίας. Ib. 621 b, οὗτος, ὦ Γλαύκων, μῦθος ἐσώθη. Symp. 179 6, τοῦτο γέρας. Soph. 237 d, τὸ τί τοῦτο ῥῆμα. ν Gorg. 489 b, οὑτοσὶ ἀνήρ. Ib. 505 6, οὗτος ἀνήρ. Phileb. 16 ¢, ταύτην φήμην. Tim. 52 d, otros... δεδόσθω λόγος. § 38. g. Omitted before ἀνὴρ or ἄνθρωπος standing (as Forster expresses it) “ pronominis loco,”

δὲ 39—41.] PRONOMINAL WORDS. 139

Pheedo 58 6, εὐδαίμων γάρ μοι ἀνὴρ [so Oxon. and three other MSS. ] ἐφαίνετο, ὦ ᾿Εχέκρατες----Ἕἀνὴρ being the subject.)

Tb. 98 Ὁ, ἐπειδὴ προϊὼν καὶ ἀναγιγνώσκων ὁρῶ ἄνδρα τῷ μὲν νῷ οὐδὲν χρώμενον.

Cf. #schin. ii. 57. p. 35; σκέψασθε δὴ δεινὴν ἀναισχυντίαν ἀνθρώπου" also ill. 99. p. 67, καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο ἄνθρωπος ἴδιον καὶ οὐ κοινὸν ποιεῖ, and 125. p. 71, ἐπειδὴ ἐκ τοῦ φανεροῦ τὴν πόλιν ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἠδύνατο σφῆλαι.

§ 39. ἢ. (from Jelf, Gr. Gr. § 459) “‘ Ταὐτόν, θάτερον, sometimes take the Article, as, their original Article being lost in the Crasis, they are regarded as simple words :

Tim. 37 b, περὶ τὸ ταὐτόν.

Ibid. 6 τοῦ θατέρου κύκλος.

Ib. 44 Ὁ, τό τε θάτερον καὶ τὸ ταὐτόν."

§ 40. Iproms or ῬΕΟΧΟΜΙΧΑΙ, Worps.

Dialogue gives great occasion for the use of Pronouns, and Plato has imparted to his use of them a great appearance of freedom and variety. It is like a skilful chess-player’s use of his pawns.

A. Use of Neuter Pronoun to represent a sentence, or portion of asentence. This has been treated of at length under the Accu- sative Case (δὲ 15-23).

§ 41. B. Use of Plural Neuter Pronoun to express a singular fact. This usage contributes to the enrichment of the style; firstly, by varying it; and secondly, by representing the fact as a complex phenomenon, an aggregate of many parts, the sum of many con- stituents, the meeting-point of many relations. Tatra is so constantly thus used, that it is only remarkable in particular juxtapositions :— Protag. 323 6, ὅτι μὲν ov... . ἀποδέχονται x.7.d., ταῦτα λέγω" ὅτι δὲ K.T.A., τοῦτό σοι μετὰ τοῦτο πειράσομαι ἀποδεῖξαι. Symp. 173 6, εἰ οὖν δεῖ καὶ ὑμῖν διηγήσασθαι. ταῦτα χρὴ ποιεῖν. Tb. 198 Ὁ, οὐχ οἷός τ᾽ ἔσομαι οὐδ᾽ ἐγγὺς trovrwyv—where τούτων Ξετοῦ οἷός τ᾽ εἶναι. Ib. 204 Ὁ, Ἔρωτα... μεταξὺ εἶναι σοφοῦ καὶ ἀμαθοῦς. αἰτία δ᾽ αὐτῷ καὶ τούτων ἡ γένεσις.

Phedo 62 d, τάχ᾽ ἂν οἰηθείη ταῦτα. φευκτέον εἶναι ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσποτου.

140 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8$ 42—44.

Pheedo 105 d,76 μὴ δεχόμενον... τί νῦν δὴ ταῦτα [50 Oxon. and Ven. II] ὠνομάζομεν; ᾿Ανάρτιον, ἔφη.

Tim. 87 b, ταῦτα μὲν οὖν δὴ τρόπος ἄλλος λόγων.

Alcib. I. 109 ¢, πρὸς ταῦτ᾽ ἄρα, τὸ δίκαιον, τοὺς λόγους ποιήσει.

Legg. 864 a, τὴν δὲ τοῦ ἀρίστου δόξαν, ὅπῃπερ ἄν ἔσεσθαι τούτων ἡγήσωνται πόλις εἴτε ἰδιῶταί τινες.

Cf. Antipho vi. 1. p. 141, ἥδιστον... μὴ γενέσθαι κιτιλ., καὶ εὐχόμενος ἄν τις ταῦτα εὔξαιτο. AAischin. 11. 166. p. 50, ταῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ὁ προ- δότης καὶ τὰ τούτοις ὅμοια. And primarily Hom. II. viii. 362,

BK Nard χε , ὡ Οὐδέ τι τῶν μέμνηται, ὅ οἱ μάλα πολλάκις υἱὸν Τειρόμενον σώεσκον.

ὃ 42. Αὐτά. Pheedo 60 ο, εἰ ἐνενοῆσεν αὐτὰ Δἴσωπος. Τὰ ἕτερα, ἀμφότερα, πότερα, &c. Pheedo 68 ο, τυγχάνει Sv καὶ φιλοχρήματος καὶ φιλότιμος, ἤτοι τὰ ἕτερα τούτων ἢ ἀμφότερα. Crito 52 ἃ, δυοῖν θάτερα. So Pheedo 76 ἃ [δυοῖν τὰ ἕτερα Oxon. and Ven. I].

Lege. 765 d, πατὴρ μάλιστα μὲν υἱέων καὶ θυγατέρων, εἰ δὲ μή, θάτερα. Cf. Iseeus i. 22. p. 37, δυοῖν τοῖν ἐναντιωτάτοιν θάτερα, 111. 58. p. 43, δυοῖν τὰ ἕτερα. Xen. Mem. II. il. 7, πότερα οἴει θηρίου ἀγριότητα δυσφορωτέραν εἶναι ἢ μητρός ; Antipho v. 36. p. 133, ποτέρῳ xpy- σονται τῶν λόγων ; πότερα ᾧ πρῶτον εἶπεν ἢ ᾧ ὕστερον; Lysias lv. 15. p. 102, ἃ μὲν ἐκεῖνοι ἤδεσαν, ἐλθόντας ἡμᾶς ὡς τοῦτον, καὶ

ἡμεῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν.

§ 43. The same tendency is observable in the case of Adjectives which admit of it: a chance is represented as the sum of so many contingencies ; a quantity as the sum of so many smaller units.

Tim. 69 a, οὐ δυνατὰ [ἐστί].

Aleib. I. 134 6, ws τὰ εἰκότα.

Lege. 828 a, ἐχόμενά ἐστι τάξασθαι... ἑορτάς.

Menex. 235 b, ἡμέρας πλείω ἢ τρεῖς.

μ Gorg. 512 b, ἐλάττω δύναται σώζειν. Apol. 30 ¢, οὐκ ἐμὲ μείζω βλάψετε. Cf. Hat. vii. 2, ὅτι νομιζόμενα εἴη τὸν πρεσβύτατον τὴν ἀρχὴν ἔχειν.

And primarily Homer.

ὃ 44. C. Use of Irregular Pronominal Correlatives. As Pronouns form a prominent feature m contrasted or cor-

δὲ 45, 46.] | PRONOMINAL WORDS. 141

relative clauses, so they also contribute their share to the want of symmetry which such clauses often exhibit.

We find ὁ μέν---ὁ ἕτερος, rwés—oi δέ, &c. as Correlatives: or by Anastrophe the former Correlative is omitted. For instances at length see below under Abbreviated Construction (§ 241).

§ 45. (The heads which remain treat of the uses of particular Pronouns.)

D. a. Use of ἄλλος and ἕτερος.

Though these words are not equivalent, they are often inter- changed by Plato. Every érepos is an ἄλλος, though the converse is untrue: and, under this limitation, the words circulate into each other’s place in every possible way. Wherever there is question of two parties or things, both words are liable to be called into requi- sition. Even when the number exceeds two, for the first two of the series either word is used. Or the whole former part of a series is thrown into an aggregate, to justify the use of ἕτερος in the latter part.

Legg. 872 a, ἐὰν βουλεύσῃ θάνατόν τις ἄλλος ἑτέρῳ" (though equally

we have 879 b, ὃς δ᾽ ἂν ἄκων ἄλλος ἄλλον τρώσῃ.)

Critias 109 Ὁ, τὸ μᾶλλον ἄλλοις προσῆκον, τοῦτο ἑτέρους αὑτοῖς κτᾶσθαι.

Euthyphro 2 b, (A) οὐ γὰρ ἐκεῖνό γε καταγνώσομαι, ὡς σὺ ἕτερον [γέ-

γραψαι]. (B) Οὐ γὰρ οὖν. (A) ᾿Αλλὰ σὲ ἄλλος ; (B) Πάνυ γε.

Phileb. 61 d, ἡδονὴ... ἑτέρας ἄλλη... ἀκριβεστέρα,

Politic. 262 a, τῶν μὲν ἀνθρώπων ἑτέρα τις εἶναι. τῶν δὲ αὖ θηρίων

ἄλλη τροφή.

Soph. 224 6, τὸ μὲν... ἑτέρῳ, τὸ δὲ... ἄλλῳ προσρητέον [ὀνόματι].

Ib. 232 d, (A) τὰ... περί τε πάλης καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τεχνῶν... (Β) Καὶ

πολλῶν γε ἑτέρων.

Symp. 196 6, ἃ γάρ τις ἢ μὴ ἔχει ἢ μὴ οἶδεν, οὔτ᾽ ἂν ἑτέρῳ δοίη οὔτ᾽ ἂν

ἄλλον διδάξει. Here it is possible that the words would have lost appropriateness by being reversed ; because a thing can be given only to one, while it can be taught to any number.

Theet. 184 6, ἃ δι’ ἑτέρας δυνάμεως αἰσθάνει, ἀδύνατον εἶναι bv ἄλλης

ταῦτ᾽ αἰσθάνεσθαι.

ἢ 40. 8. ἄλλος, ‘besides,’

’Gorg. 473 C, πολιτῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ξένων.

χω" 36 b, χρηματισμοῦ τε καὶ οἰκονομίας καὶ στρατηγιῶν καὶ δημη- \

- Pars > = . A ΄ γοριων Και των ἄλλων αρχωὼν Kat ξυνωμοσιῶν καὶ στάσεων.

142 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 47,48.

§ 47, E. Uses of αὐτός.

a. Αὐτός. The Neuter Singular of αὐτὸς is used peculiarly in Apposition to express the essential nature of a thing, sometimes in the Platonic and sometimes in a more popular sense.

Rep. 363 a, οὐκ αὐτὸ δικαιοσύνην ἐπαινοῦντα, So 472 6.

Pheedo 65 d, φαμέν τι εἶναι δίκαιον αὐτὸ ἢ οὐδέν ;

Protag. 360 6, τί ποτ᾽ ἐστὶν αὐτὸ ἡ ἀρετή.

Crat. 411 d, αὐτὸ ἡ νόησις.

In the more popular sense, but not in the Platonic, αὐτὸς in Con- cord, and αὐτὸ τοῦτο in Apposition, are used also. E.g.

Phileb. 62 a, αὐτῆς περὶ δικαιοσύνης.

Symp. 199 d, αὐτὸ τοῦτο πατέρα.

Pheedo 93 Ὁ, αὐτὸ τοῦτο... ψυχήν.

The remaining uses of αὐτὸς are not exclusively Platonic.

β. αὐτὸς in the sense of sponte.

The most noteworthy instances are with Semi-Impersonal Verbs, and will be found below (ὃ 99)...

y. αὐτὸς in the sense of solus.

Symp. 179 a, οὐδεὶς οὕτω κακὸς ὅντινα οὐκ ἂν αὐτὸς ὁ [Ἔρως ἔνθεον ποιήσειε πρὸς ἀρετήν.

Tb. 187 ¢, ἐν μέν γε αὐτῇ τῇ συστάσει ἁρμονίας τε καὶ ῥυθμοῦ οὐδὲν χαλεπὸν τὰ ἐρωτικὰ διαγιγνώσκειν.

Tb. 198 d, τἀληθῆ λέγειν... ἐξ αὐτῶν δὲ τούτων τὰ κάλλιστα ἐκλε- γομένους ὡς εὐπρεπέστατα τιθέναι.

x“ Apol. 21 d, σμικρῷ τινὶ αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος.

Euthyd. 293 ὁ, (A) οὔκουν ἐπιστήμων εἶ; (Β) Πάνυ γε, τούτου γε αὐτοῦ.

Legg. 836 b, αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἐσμέν.

Rep. 437 €, αὐτὸ τὸ διψῆν... ἐπιθυμία... αὐτοῦ meparos— thirst, according to the simple notion of it :’—whence we see how Use a flows from this.

§ 48. δ. αὐτοῦ (Adverbial) in the sense of ‘on the same spot as heretofore.’

1 o \ ᾽ = , AY ΄ ΄ κα

Symp. 216 a, (va μὴ αὐτου καθήμενος Tapa τουτῷ καταγηραάσω-ς--Ἰ. C. not ‘here’ nor ‘ there,’ but ‘ rooted to the spot.’

Ib. 220 ¢, ξυννοήσας yap αὐτόθι ἕωθέν τι εἱστήκει σκοπῶν. (The

᾽ ] GE

order is hyperbatic for ξυννοήτας ἑωθέν τι, αὐτόθι εἱστήκει σκοπῶν) —‘ stood without moving from the spot where he was.’

§ 49.] PRONOMINAL WORDS. 143

Soph. 224 d, αὐτοῦ καθιδρυμένος ἐν πόλει.

Cf. Hom. 1]. ii. 237, τόνδε δ᾽ ἐῶμεν Αὐτοῦ ἐνὶ Τροίῃ γέρα πεσσέμεν, 332, > +? » , ᾽ς ΧΩ - > x > a ree Bd id Αλλ᾽ ἄγε, μίμνετε πάντες, evxvnuides ᾿Αχαιοὶ, Αὐτοῦ, εἰσόκεν ἄστυ μέγα Πριάμοιο ἕλωμεν. Thue. ili. 81, οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ τῶν ἱκετῶν διέφθειραν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἀλλήλους, Vill. 28, καὶ ἐς τὴν Μίλητον αὐτοῦ Φί-

λιππον καθιστᾶσι.

§ 49. F. Use of ἐκεῖνος.

Instances occur frequently in Plato, in which the same object is designated successively, in the same sentence or contiguous sen- tences, by οὗτος or the oblique Cases of αὐτός, &c., and ἐκεῖνος. This mobility of language serves as an index of the onward movement of the thought, and helps and incites the hearer (or us the readers) to keep pace with it. As new objects are brought into the centre of the field of observation, the objects which were just now full in front drop behind.

(Two or three of the following instances are quoted by Stallbaum.)

Pheedo 60 ἃ, λέγε τοίνυν αὐτῷ... ὅτι οὐκ ἐκείνῳ βουλόμενος... ἀντί- τεχνος εἶναι ἐποίησα ταῦτα, Here ἐκείνῳ is identical with αὐτῷ. 10. 68 ε, φοβούμενοι ἑτέρων ἡδονῶν στερηθῆναι, καὶ ἐπιθυμοῦντες ἐκεί- νων, ἄλλων ἀπέχονται ὑπ᾽ ἄλλων κρατούμενο. The ἐκεῖναι are

identically the ἕτεραι.

Tb. 73 ©, ἐάν ris τι πρότερον ἢ ἰδὼν ἢ dxovoas..., μὴ μόνον ἐκεῖνο γνῷ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἕτερον ἐννοήσῃ.

Tb. 100 b, εἴ μοι δίδως τε καὶ ξυγχωρεῖς εἶναι ταῦτα... .. Σκόπει δὴ τὰ ἑξῆς ἐκείνοις, Cebes’ answer has intervened, and Socrates refers in ἐκείνοις to the same things which he had just called ταῦτα.

Tb. 106 b, ἄρτιον μὲν τὸ περιττὸν μὴ γίγνεσθαι ἐπιόντος τοῦ ἀρτίου, ὥσπερ ὡμολόγηται, ἀπολομένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνου ἄρτιον γεγονέναι. The αὐτοῦ and ἐκείνου both refer identically to τὸ περιττόν, αὐτοῦ becoming ἐκείνου as ἄρτιον is brought forward.

10. r11 Ὁ, ras δὲ ὥρας αὐτοῖς κρᾶσιν ἔχειν τοιαύτην, ὥστε ἐκείνους ἀνόσους εἶναι καὶ χρόνον ζἣν πολὺ πλείω τῶν évOdde—where αὐτοῖς fades into ἐκείνους as mention τῶν ἐνθάδε approaches.

Crat. 430 6, δεῖξαι αὐτῷ, ἂν μὲν τύχῃ, ἐκείνου εἰκόνα.

Laches 186 b, εἴ τις ἡμῶν, ἔχει... ἐπιδεῖξαι τίνες ᾿Αθηναίων... δὲ ἐκεῖνον ὁμολογουμένως ἀγαθοὶ γεγόνασιν.

Politic. 277 e, τῶν στοιχείων ἕκαστον ἐν ταῖς βραχυτάταις καὶ ῥᾷσταις τῶν συλλαβῶν ἱκανῶς διαισθάνονται, καὶ τἀληθὴ φράζειν περὶ ἐκεῖνα

δυνατοὶ γίγνονται... . ταὐτὰ δέ γε ταῦτα ἐν ἄλλαις ἀμφιγνοοῦντες

144 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 50---52.

καιλ. The ἐκεῖνα gives notice that our attention is to be pre- sently turned to ταὐτὰ ταῦτα ἐν ἄλλαις.

Cf. Ar. Eth. IX. i. 4, ὧν γὰρ δεόμενος τυγχάνει, τούτοις καὶ προσέχει, κἀκείνου γε χάριν ταῦτα δώσει---ΠΘΥΘ ἐκείνου is identical in refer- ence with the preceding rovros,—and more capriciously, X. ix. 16, ἐπὶ τὸ καθόλου βαδιστέον εἶναι δόξειεν ἄν, κἀκεῖνο γνωριστέον ws ἐνδέχεται, εἴρηται yap ὅτι περὶ τοῦθ᾽ αἱ emorjuac—where first ἐκεῖνο

and then τοῦτο refer to τὸ καθόλου.

§ 50. G. Uses of τις (indefinite).

In the sense of ‘a particular this or that,’ 7s is made to contri- bute to give liveliness and variety to the language. Thus

a. In illustrations rs gives the force of ‘for instance,’ or rather

the French ‘ par exemple.’

Symp. 190 d, εἰ [ἔρως] μητρός Twos ἢ πατρὸς ἐστί,

Phiedo 66 ¢, ἄν τινες νόσοι προσπέσωσιν.

Phdr. 230 d, θαλλὸν ἤ τινα καρπὸν προσείοντες.

Hip. Ma. 292 a, δεσπότης τίς σου ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐστί; 3 1) ρ )

§ 51. 8. Or it draws the attention away from the particular illustration given to the kind of notion intended by it,—thus softening the effect of it.

Phdr. 261 ὁ, εἰ μὴ Γοργίαν Νέστορά τινα κατασκευάζεις, ἤ τινα Θρασύ-

μαχόν τε καὶ Θεόδωρον ᾽Οδυσσέα.

Phileb. 16 ο, διά τινος Προμηθέως.

Cf. Asch. Agam. 55, ὕπατος δ᾽ ἀΐων ἤ τις ᾿Αἀπόλλων ἢ Πὰν κ.τιλ.

Ar. Ran. 912, ᾿Αχιλλέα τιν᾽ ἢ Νιόβην κιτ.λ,

§ 52. y. In enumerations it has the force of ‘ this or that:’ but, specially, added (capriciously, as one might say) to one member of the enumeration, it serves the purpose of creating variety, which in enumerations Plato specially affects for the purpose of keeping the attention alert.

Symp. 203 a, 6... περὶ τέχνας ἢ χειρουργίας τινὰς [σοφὸς] βάναυσος.

Pheedo 65 ¢, μήτε ἀκοὴ μήτε ὄψις μήτε ἀλγηδὼν μηδέ τις ἡδονή. [So

Hermann from Oxon. |

Apol. 27 d, εἰ οἱ δαίμονες θεῶν παῖδές εἰσι νόθοι τινὲς ἢ ἐκ νυμφῶν ἢ

ἔκ τινων ἄλλων.

Phdr. 235 ο, ἢ που Σαπφοῦς... .. ἢ ᾿Δνακρέοντος .. ., i) καὶ συγγρα-

φέων τινῶν.

Politic. 305 b, μήθ᾽ ὑπό τινων δώρων μήθ᾽ ὑπὸ φόβων μήτε οἴκτων μήθ᾽

ὑπό τινος ἄλλης ἔχθρας μηδὲ φιλίας.

δὲ 53—55-] PRONOMINAL WORDS. 145

§ 53. H. Uses of τοιοῦτος.

a. Conversationally, for ‘such as I am thinking of,’—but have not yet explained.

Symp. 210 d, ἐπιστήμην μίαν τοιαύτην, ἥ ἐστι καλοῦ τοιοῦδε... ὃς yap av... παιδαγωγηθῇ, ... κατόψεταί τι θαυμαστὸν τὴν φύσιν καλόν κιτιλ' —the explanation of τοιαύτην beginning immediately after it, with 7 ἐστι.

Phedo 73 ¢, .. . ὅταν ἐπιστήμη παραγίγνηται τρόπῳ τοιούτῳ, ἀνάμνησιν εἶναι. λέγω δὲ τίνα τρόπον ; τόνδε" [so Stallb. and Herm.] ἐάν τις κατὰ. The τοιούτῳ expresses that it is such as the speaker has in his mind; his explanation of it to others follows at λέγω δέ.

§ 54. 8. As a mere substitute or symbol for a particular word

preceding, to avoid repetition of the same sound.

Pheedo 67 a, καὶ οὕτω μὲν καθαροὶ ἀπαλλαττόμενοι... . μετὰ ToLoLTwY ἐσόμεθα---Ἰ. 6. μετὰ καθαρῶν.

Tb. 80 ¢, ἐὰν μέν τις χαριέντως ἔχων τὸ σῶμα τελευτήσῃ καὶ ἐν τοιαύτῃ épa—where τοιαύτῃ simply means χαριέσσῃ.

Ib. d, ἡ ψυχὴ dpa, τὸ ἀειδές, τὸ εἰς τοιοῦτον τόπον ἕτερον οἰχόμενον---- where τοιοῦτον ἕτερον means ἀειδῆ.

Tb. 84 ἃ, τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὸ θεῖον καὶ τὸ ἀδόξαστον θεωμένη... οἴεται... ., ἐπειδὰν τελευτήσῃ, εἰς τὸ ξυγγενὲς καὶ εἰς τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀφικομένη amm\AadxGai—where τὸ τοιοῦτον stands for τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὸ θεῖον καὶ τὸ ἀδόξαστον.

Ib. 79 ¢, πλανᾶται καὶ ταράττεται κιτιλ., ἅτε τοιούτων ἐφαπτομένη--- where τοιούτων is a substitute for πλανωμένων καὶ ταραττομένων.

Symp. 208 d, ὑπὲρ ἀρετῆς ἀθανάτου καὶ τοιαύτης δόξης.

Legg. 723 d, οὐδὲ γὰρ ἄσματος παντὸς δεῖ τὸ τοιοῦτον dpav—where Goparos is actually governed by τὸ τοιοῦτο δρᾷν, because this is the substitute for προτιθέναι προοίμιον in the foregoing sentence :

οὗ Symp. 210 b, quoted above (ὃ 17).

§ 55. This Idiom extends to other kindred Pronouns.

Rep. 507 Ὁ, πολλὰ καλὰ καὶ πολλὰ ἀγαθὰ καὶ ἕκαστα ottws—where οὕτως personates πολλά.

Legg. 853 Ὁ, νομοθετεῖν πάντα ὁπόσα νῦν μέλλομεν τοῦτο Spav—where τοῦτο δρᾷν represents εἰς δικαστὰς ἄγειν or the like, implied from ἣν δεῖ λαμβάνειν αὐτὸ τιμωρίαν καὶ τίνων ποτὲ δικαστῶν τυγχάνειν preceding.

L

146 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8§ 56, 57.

Cf. Hdt. ili. 82, ἀνδρὸς yap ἑνὸς τοῦ ἀρίστου οὐδὲν ἄμεινον ἂν φανείη" γνώμῃ γὰρ τοιαύτῃ χρεώμενος---ἰ. 6. ἀρίστῃ. Ar. Eth. I. x. 11, ὑπάρξει δὴ τὸ ζητούμενον τῷ εὐδαίμονι καὶ ἔσται διὰ βίου τοιοῦτος---- 1. 6. εὐδαίμων, and VIII. iv. 1, ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ἡ διὰ τὸ χρήσιμον" καὶ γὰρ τοιοῦτοι ἀλλήλοις οἱ dyaboi—i. 6. χρήσιμοι. Add IX. vii. 6, ἥδιστον δὲ τὸ κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν, καὶ φιλητὸν ὁμοίως. Thuc. 11. 49, καὶ πολλοὶ τοῦτο καὶ ἔδρασαν εἰς φρέατα---Ἰ. 6. ἔῤῥιψαν σφᾶς αὐτούς, and ἵν. 64, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους δικαιῶ ταὐτό μοι ποιῆσαι, ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν

> cal s Ἂν ¢ A ~ , “~ aA © ἴ € “ αὐτῶν Καὶ μὴ ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων τοῦτο παθεῖν----Ἰ. 6. ἡσσᾶσθαι. Ar. Eth. TV. 1. τι, φιλοῦνται δὲ of ἐλευθέριοι: ὠφέλιμοι yap, τοῦτο δ' ἐν τῇ δόσει---ὙΠΘΥΘ τοῦτο stands for ὠφέλιμοί εἰσι, V. vi. 5, διὸ οὐκ 2A ed Ξ > 6 ¢ - fa xo ἔν +

UK ἐῶμεν ἄρχειν avUp@TOV, OTL EAUT@ τοῦτο ποίει [se. ἄρχει], VIII. xiii. 7, ἡ δ᾽ ἠθικὴ οὐκ ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς, GAN ὡς φίλῳ δωρεῖται, ἢ

ὁτιδήποτε ἄλλο.

ᾧ 56. Ipioms or VERBs.

A. Mood.

a. Indicative Constructions.

a. The meaning assigned to Indicative Imperfects, Aorists, or Pluperfects, with εἰ, depending on a similar Apodosis with ἄν, holds equally (1) when they depend on a simple Infinitive.

Crito 52 ο, ἐξῆν σοι φυγῆς τιμήσασθαι, εἰ ἐβούλου.

Ib. 44 b, οἷός τ᾽ dv σε σώζειν εἰ ἤθελον ἀναλίσκειν χρήματα, ἀμε-

λῆσαι.

Pheedo 108 d, εἰ καὶ ἠπιστάμην, 6 βίος μοι δοκεῖ... οὐκ ἐξαρκεῖν.

Soph. 246 d, [δοκεῖ δεῖν μάλιστα μέν, εἴ πῃ δυνατὸν ἦν, ἔργῳ βελτίους

ποίειν,ς

Legg. 790 6, οἰκεῖν [ξυμφέρει], εἰ δυνατὸν ἦν, οἷον ἀεὶ πλέοντας.

§ 57. (2) In clauses connected by a Relative Adverb or Pronoun with an Indicative of unfulfilled past contingency.—The prin- ciple of Sequence here illustrated has not been observed except in the case of Indicatives following Relative Adverbs: whereas (besides the other outlying instances which come before us here) the principle applies equally to the Optative (see below, § 72).

Euthyd. 304 e, ἄξιόν γ᾽ ἦν ἀκοῦσαι κιτιλ., ἵνα ἤκουσας k.T.A.

Crito 44 ἃ, εἰ γὰρ ὥφελον.. . . οἷοί τε εἶναι κιτιλ', ἵνα οἷοί τε ἦσαν K.T.A.

Thest. 161 ¢, τεθαύμακα ὅτι οὐκ εἶπεν K.T.A., ἵνα μεγαλοπρεπῶς .. «+

ἤρξατο κτλ.

Rep. 378 ἃ, ᾧμην [ἂν] dev... δ ἀπορρήτων ἀκούειν κιτιλ., ὅπως ὅτι

ho ‘ , 3 a ἐλαχίστοις συνέβη ἀκοῦσαι,

δὲ 58, 59.] VERBS. 147

v Gorg. 506 Ὁ, ἡδέως ἂν Καλλικλεῖ τούτῳ ἔτι διελεγόμην, ἔως aitd.... ἀπέδωκα K.T.A.

Charm. 171 6, τοῦτο δ᾽ ἦν ἄν, οὗ ἐπιστήμην εἶχον---- this would have

ebeen that of which they had knowledge.’

In the next instance ἵνα heads a second clause in a different meaning. ¥ Meno 89 Ὁ, οὖς... dv ἐφυλάττομεν, ἵνα μηδεὶς αὐτοὺς διέφθειρεν, ἀλλ᾽

ἐπειδὴ ἀφίκοιντο εἰς τὴν ἡλικίαν χρήσιμοι γίγνοιντο.

In the next, ὅπως loses its power over the second of two clauses, and the meaning is supplied by ἄν.

Legg. 959 ¢, ζῶντι ἔδει βοηθεῖν, ὅπως 6 τι δικαιότατος ὧν καὶ ὁσιώτατος

ἔζη τε ζῶν καὶ τελευτήσας ἀτιμώρητος ἂν ἐγίγνετο.

Instances need not be multiplied: as an illustration, we may notice in conclusion the virtually but not formally identical con- struction in Soph. El. 1022, Εἴθ᾽ ὥφελες κιτιλ. πάντα γὰρ κατειργάσω--- where consequently we need not suppose an ellipse of ἄν, The usage begins with Homer: cf. Il. vi. 348, Ἔνθα pe kip’ ἀπόερσε.

§ 58. 8. Future Indicative with ἄν. Rep. 615 ἃ, οὐχ ἥκει, οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἥξει δεῦρο.

XApol. 29 ο, ἤδη ἂν... ἐπιτηδεύοντες διαφθαρήσονται. Symp. 222 a, ἰδὼν ἄν τις... εὑρήσει. Euthyd. 287 d, καὶ νῦν οὐδ᾽ ἂν ὁτιοῦν ἀποκρινεῖ ; Phdr. 227 Ὁ, οὐκ ἂν οἴει με καὶ ἀσχολίας ὑπέρτερον πρᾶγμα ποιήσεσθαι ;

The Future exceptionally retains this ἂν in Oratio Obliqua.

Legg. 719 6, τὸν αὐτὸν ἂν ἐπαινέσοι.

Cf. Iseeus i. 32, προσηπείλησεν ὅτι δηλώσοι ποτ᾽ ἄν.

§ 59. b. Conjunctive Potential Constructions.

The Conjunctive Potential has always a deliberative meaning, which however admits of further distinctions, according to various kinds of sentences.

a. In matters of abstract opinion, it is ἢ Presumptive. In matters in which the will is concerned, it is 8. Deliberative (in a more special sense) when the sentence is interrogative : y. Hortatory or dehortatory, when the sentence is not inter- rogative. Only the first of these heads requires illustration by examples here.

5. This use is confined to negative sentences. L 2

148 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὴ 60-—62.

a. Presumptive use.

With μή.

“ Gorg. 462 6, μὴ ἀγροικότερον ἢ τὸ ἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν.

Rep. 603 ¢, py τι ἄλλο 7 παρὰ ταῦτα;

Symp. 194 6, ἀλλὰ μὴ οὐχ οὗτοι ἡμεῖς ὦμεν.

ΧΑ ΡΟ]: 39 a, μὴ οὐ τοῦτ᾽ ἦ χαλεπόν.

The Indicative is also used with μὴ and μὴ οὐ similarly: e.g. Euthyd. 298 ¢, μὴ οὐ λίνον λίνῳ συνάπτεις ; and (not interrogatively) Protag. 312 a, ἀλλ᾽ ἄρα μὴ οὐχ ὑπολαμβάνεις---- but perhaps, then, you do not suppose.’

With ὅπως μή.

Crat. 430 d, ὅπως μὴ ἐν τοῖς ζωγραφήμασιν ἢ τοῦτο, .. .. ἐπὶ δὲ τοῖς

ὀνόμασίν οὔ. The Indicative is also used with ὅπως μή. Meno 77 a, ὅπως μὴ οὐχ οἷός τ᾽ ἔσομαι. Pheedo 77 Ὁ, ἐνέστηκεν ὃ νῦν δὴ Κέβης ἔλεγε... .., ὅπως py... . δια-

σκεδάννυται ἡ ψυχή.

§ 60. With οὐ μή.

Passing by the common use (Aorist), we have the Present with

ov μὴ in

Rep. 341 ¢, οὐ μὴ οἷός τ᾽ ἧς.

Phileb. 48 d, οὐ μὴ δυνατὸς ὦ.

Cf. Iseeus viii. 24. p. 71, οὐ μὴ εἰσίῃης. [So Bekker’s edition: the Zurich editors give εἴσει εἰς from Bekker’s conjecture.| Xen. Cyrop. VIIL. i. 5, οὐ μὴ δύνηται. Soph. O. C. 1024 (some MSS.) ov μή ποτε... ἐπεύχωνται.

The following is only a variation of the use with οὐ μῆ, πολλοῦ

δεῖ standing as a mere Adverb for ov.

¥ Gorg. 517 ἃ, πολλοῦ γε Set μήποτέ τις τοιαῦτα ἐργάσηται.

§ 61. ο. Conjunctive Subjunctive Constructions. The following alone need be mentioned. a. After σκοπεῖν, ὁρᾷν, and the like, with μή. (This is as it were the Oratio Obliqua of b. a.) Phdr. 260 a, σκοπεῖν μή τι λέγωσι.

¥ Gorg. 512 ἃ, ὅρα μὴ ἄλλο τι τὸ γενναῖον καὶ τὸ ἀγαθὸν 7}.

§ 62. This use is frequent in the Indicative : e. g. La. 179 Ὁ, ὁρῶμεν μὴ Νικίας οἴεταί τι λέγειν.

οὐ ΩΣ ee a

§§ 63—65.] VERBS. 149

Soph. 235 a, διστάζομεν ἔτι μὴ τυγχάνει κιτιλ.

Ly. 216 ς, σκεψώμεθα pr... λανθάνει κιτιλ.

Ib. 218 d, φοβοῦμαι... py. . . ἐντετυχήκαμεν. Phedo 84 e, φοβεῖσθε μὴ δυσκολώτερον . . . διάκειμαι.

§ 63. 8. After πρίν, without ἄν, in negative sentences. Phedo 62 ¢, μὴ πρότερον αὑτὸν ἀποκτιννύναι δεῖν, πρὶν ἀνάγκην τινὰ ὁ θεὸς ἐπιπέμψῃ. [So all the MSS.] Theet. 169 Ὁ, τὸν yap προσελθόντα οὐκ ἀνίης πρὶν ἀναγκάσῃς . . προσπαλαῖσαι. [So all the MSS. | Legg. 873 a, οὐδὲ ἔκπλυτον ἐθέλειν γίγνεσθαι τὸ μιανθὲν πρὶν φόνον φόνῳ ὁμοίῳ ὅμοιον ἡ δράσασα ψυχὴ τίσῃ.

§ 64. y. After σκοπεῖν, ὁρᾷν, and the like with ἐάν. Crito 48 e, ὅρα τῆς σκέψεως τὴν ἀρχήν, ἐάν σοι ἱκανῶς λέγηται. Pheedo 100 ¢, σκόπει δὴ τὰ ἑξῆς ἐκείνοις, ἐάν σοι ξυνδοκῇ ὥσπερ ἐμοί. “Gorg. 510 b, σκόπει δὴ καὶ τόδε ἐάν σοι δοκῶ εὖ λέγειν.

Charm. 167 b, σκέψαι ἐάν τι περὶ αὐτῶν εἰπορώτερος φανῇς ἐμοῦ.

Cf. Lysias xv. 5. Ρ. 144, σκέψασθε ἐὰν ἱκανὸν γένηται τεκμήριον. Απάος. i. 37. p. 6, ἀναμιμνήσκεσθαι ἐὰν ἀληθῆ λέγω. And pri- marily Homer (Jelf, Gr. Gr. § 877), Il. xv. 32, Ὄφρα ἴδῃ, ἤν τοι χραίσμῃ.

What is worth noticing upon this usage is, that ἐὰν gives a dif- ferent shade of meaning from the more usual εἰ, The question submitted is represented by it as a perfectly open one; whereas εἰ would hint the speaker’s foregone conclusion, and give a certain appearance of positiveness. Edy is therefore chosen for the sake of expressing more perfect courtesy, in contexts such as those just given, which relate to the conduct of the dialogue.

ὃ 65. δ. With ὃς ἄν. The different shades of meaning presented by ὃς with the Indica-

tive and ὃς ἂν with the Conjunctive are parallel with those just pointed out in the case of εἰ and ἐὰν after σκοπεῖν. The meaning

‘of és ἂν bears upon a doubtful reading in Phedo 96 a, presently to

be mentioned. Ly. 217 ¢, οἷον ἂν ἦ τὸ παρόν, τοιαῦτα éori— where οἷον ἂν 7 leaves it quite undetermined of what kind τὸ παρὸν is. Phedo 98 6, ἐμοὶ βέλτιον δέδοκται ἐνθάδε καθῆσθαι, καὶ δικαιότερον παραμένοντα ὑπέχειν τὴν δίκην ἣν ἂν κελείσωσι. Here it is not

that ἣν ἂν κελεύσωσι has any future force, for the penalty had

150 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8§ 66, 67.

been awarded: but it gives the meaning ‘that it is right to

stay and abide the penalty, whatever it be, which they have awarded,’

Pheedo 96 a, ἄν τί σοι χρήσιμον φαίνηται ὧν ἂν λέγω, πρὸς τὴν πειθὼ περὶ ὧν ἂν λέγῃς χρήσει (taking for granted here® the reading ὧν ἂν Aéyns)—‘ you can apply it to satisfying yourself with respect to your objections, whatever they be.” It is true that the objections had preceded ; but this only makes the instance parallel to the last: and what ὧν ἂν intimates is, that Socrates does not wish to bind Cebes to the precise case he has stated. As just before he had said ἐξεπίτηδες πολλάκις ἀναλαμβάνω, ἵνα μή τι διαφύγῃ ἡμᾶς, εἴ τέ τι βούλει προσθῇς apedns,—to which Cebes had guardedly replied ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲν ἔγωγε ἐν τῷ παρόντι οὔτ᾽ ἀφελεῖν οὔτε προσθεῖναι S€ouat,—he now, by giving a general turn to the sentence, leaves a loophole open for future qualification.

§ 66. d. Optative Potential Constructions.

a, Without ἄν, expressing simple possibility.

Lege. 777 ¢, πρὸς ἅ τις ἅπαντα βλέψας διαπορήσειε.

Euthyd. 298 6, (A) Οὐκοῦν τὸν σαυτοῦ πατέρα τύπτεις ; (B) Πολὺ μέντοι δικαιότερον τὸν ὑμέτερον πατέρα τύπτοιμι.

“Gorg. 492 b, τί τῇ ἀληθείᾳ αἴσχιον καὶ κάκιον εἴη ;

Pheedo 88 ο, μὴ οὐδενὸς ἄξιοι εἶμεν κριταί, ἢ καὶ τὰ πράγματα αὐτὰ ἄπιστα 7—Wwhere the Optative, as distinguished from the Con- junctive, denotes a transitory as opposed to a permanent contingency.

§ 67. β. Without ἄν, this being understood from a preceding

coordinate sentence.

Rep. 360 b, οὐδεὶς ἂν γένοιτο, ὡς δόξειεν, οὕτως ἀδαμάντινος. Θὲ Thucyd. vi. 89, δημοκρατίαν... . οὐδενὸς ἂν χεῖρον [γιγνώσκοιμι], ὅσῳ καὶ λοιδορήσαιμι.

Symp. 196 6, κρατοῖντ᾽ ἂν ὑπὸ ἔρωτος, ὁ δὲ κρατοῖ.

Pheedo 99 a, εἰ. . - λέγοι, .. . ἀληθῆ ἂν λέγοι" ὡς μέντοι... .. ποιῶ, . .. πολλὴ καὶ μακρὰ ῥαθυμία εἴη τοῦ λόγου. [So Oxon. and three other MSS. ]

Charm. 174 6, (A)... ὠφελοῖ ἂν ἡμᾶς. (Β) Ἦ καὶ ὑγιαίνειν ποιοῖ ;

6 It is the reading of Oxon. and to be preferred, So Hermann and one other good MS. But perhaps the Zurich editors, the other reading—dy A€yers—ought

δὲ 68—70.] VERBS. 151

Rep. 382 d, (A) πότερον διὰ τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι τὰ παλαιὰ ἀφομοιῶν ἂν ψεύδοιτο; (Β). .. (A) ᾿Αλλὰ δεδιὼς τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ψεύδοιτο; § 68. γ. With ἂν in clauses where the ἂν adheres closely to the

Verb, and not to the Relative Pronoun or Particle by which the clause is introduced.

Symp. 187 d, ὡς ἂν κοσμιώτεροι yiyvowro ... δεῖ χαρίζεσθαι.

Ib. 190 ¢, δοκῶ μοι ἔχειν μηχανήν, ὡς ἂν εἶεν κιτιλ.

Phdr. 230 b, ἀκμὴν ἔχει τῆς ἄνθης, ὡς ἂν εὐωδέστατον παρέχοι τὸν

τόπον. “ Gorg. 453 6, ἵνα οὕτω mpoin, ὡς μάλιστ᾽ ἂν ἡμῖν καταφανὲς ποιοῖ.

Hip. Ma. 283 e, οὐχ οἷός τ᾽ ἦσθα πείθειν, os... ἂν. ἐπιδιδοῖεν.

Pheedo 82 6, δι᾽ ἐπιθυμίας ἐστίν, ὡς ἂν μάλιστα αὐτὸς ὁ δεδεμένος συλ-

λήπτωρ εἴη.

Protag. 318 6, εὐβουλία... ὅπως ἂν ἄριστα διοικοῖ,

Ly. 207 6, προθυμοῦνται ὅπως ἂν εὐδαιμονοίης.

Crat. 395 a, κινδυνεύει τοιοῦτός τις εἶναι ὁ ᾿Αγαμέμνων οἷος ἃ ἂν δόξειεν

αὐτῷ διαπονεῖσθαι.

Ib. 398 6, οὐδ᾽ εἴ τι οἷός τ᾽ ἂν εἴην εὑρεῖν, οὐ συντείνω.

Legg. 700 6, ἡδονῇ δὲ τῇ τοῦ χαίροντος, εἴτε βελτίων εἴτε χείρων ἂν

εἴη τις, κρίνοιτο ὀρθότατα.

Cf. Antipho i. 17. p. 113, ἐβουλεύετο ἡ ἄνθρωπος ὅπως ἂν αὐτοῖς τὸ

φάρμακον δοίη, πότερα πρὸ δείπνου ἢ ἀπὸ δείπνου.

It may be noted, that these clauses are not Subjunctive, and that this difference marks off these instances from such as Rep. 412 ἃ, φιλοῖ,... ὅταν οἴοιτο κ-τιλ., Lege. 661 ς, ἔλαττόν [ἐστι κακὸν] ἂν ὡς ὀλίγιστον ὁ τοιοῦτος χρόνον ἐπιζῴη, which must be separately accounted for.

§ 69. 8. With ἄν, equivalently for the Future. (δ᾽) Following a Future in the Protasis. Pheedo 107 ς, ὁ κίνδυνος νῦν δὴ καὶ δόξειεν ἂν δεινὸς εἶναι, εἴ τις αὐτῆς ἀμελήσει. \Apol. 35 ἃ, εἰ... ἔσονται, αἰσχρὸν ἂν εἴη. § 70. (6) Following a Conjunctive with ἂν in the Protasis.

Rep. 556 a, ἐάν τις mpootdtrn ..., χρηματίζοιντο ἄν. So 402 d.

Symp. 200 6, ὅταν ris λέγῃ, εἴποιμεν ἄν.

Phdr. 244 b, ἐὰν δὴ λέγωμεν. .., μηκύνοιμεν ἄν.

Phileb. 55 6, ἄν τις... xopity..., φαῦλον... ἂν γίγνοιτο.

152 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [$$ 7174.

§ 71. (8°) Following an Indicative, involving a Future meaning. Symp. 208 ¢, εἰ ἐθέλεις εἰς τὴν φιλοτιμίαν βλέψαι, θαυμάζο:ς dv... , εἰ μὴ ἐννοεῖς x.7.4.—where εἰ ἐθέλεις βλέψαι is a virtual Future. \/Apol. 37 6, πολλὴ ἄν pe φιλοψυχία ἔχοι, εἰ οὕτως ἀλόγιστός εἶμι K.TA, because the fact is not so as yet. Protag. 349 ©, οὐκ ἂν θαυμάζοιμι, εἰ... CAeyes—because I do not know the fact as yet. Crat. 428 b, εἰ μέντοι ἔχεις τι σὺ κάλλιον τούτων λέγειν, οὐκ ἂν θαυμάζοιμι.

Laches 186 ο, εἰ δὲ Νικίας. .. μεμάθηκεν, οὐκ ἂν θαυμάσαιμι.

§ 72. 6. Optative Subjunctive Constructions. a. Under principal Optative sentence with or without ἄν (see above, δὲ 66, 67)—the Subjunctive sentence being (a') Relative. ¥ Gorg. 512 6, τίν᾽ ἂν τρόπον τοῦτον ὃν μέλλοι χρόνον βιῶναι ὡς ἄριστα βιῴη; Meno 92 ¢, πῶς οὖν ἂν εἰδείης περὶ τούτου τοῦ πράγματος ..., οὗ παντάπασιν ἄπειρος εἴης ; Cf. Hom. Od. xili. 291, Κερδαλέος κ᾿ εἴη... ὅς σε παρέλθοι, lv. 222, *Os τὸ καταβρόξειεν. .. οὔ κεν βάλοι, XV. 358, Λευγαλέῳ θανάτῳ, ὡς

μὴ θάνοι ὅστις ἔμοιγε. .. φίλος εἴη.

§ 73. (a?) Adverbial.

Legg. 730 ¢, μετόχος εἴη, ἵνα ὡς πλεῖστον χρόνον ἀληθὴς dv diaBr0t,

Meno 98 ο, ὠφέλιμοι ἄνδρες ἂν εἶεν, . .. εἴπερ εἶεν.

Rep. 541 a, ὡς ἂν γένοιτο, εἴπερ ποτὲ γίγνοιτο, δοκεῖς εὖ εἰρηκέναι.

Politic. 295 ¢, εἴπωμεν . .. ἰατρὸν μέλλοντα... ἀπέσεσθαι.... συχνάν, c ᾿" Ἂ Ka Δ΄’ ὡς οἴοιτο, χρόνον, ἂν ἐθέλειν κιτ.λ. 5

Cf. Hom. 1]. ν. 214, ἀπ᾽ ἐμεῖο κάρη τάμοι ἀλλότριος φώς, Ei μὴ ἐγὼ τάδε τόξα φαεινῷ ἐν πυρὶ θείην, Od. xii. 106, μὴ σύ γε κεῖθι τύχοις

ΐ Ρ ns sey) 3. Xs;

ὅτε ῥοιβδήσειεν, ib. 114, Τὴν δὲ κ᾽ ἀμυναίμην ὅτε μοι σίνοιτό γ᾽ ἑταίρους, XX1. 114, Οὔ κέ μοι ἀχνυμένῳ τάδε δώματα πότνια μήτηρ

> me? Λείποι ἅμ᾽ ἄλλῳ ἰοῦσ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐγὼ κατόπισθε λιποίμην.

§ 74. 8. Under principal Indicative sentence, when the dependent Verb is intended to belong to all time—the Subjunctive sentence being

(81) Relative.

Legg. 759 b, οἷς μὴ καθεστήκοι καταστατέον [ἐστὶν] ἱερέας.

tage ΒΩ ee

δὲ 75—77.] VERBS. 153

Cf. Hom. 1]. v. 407, οὐ δηναιός, ὃς ἀθανάτοισι μάχοιτο, Od. vi. 286, Kai δ᾽ ἄλλῃ νεμεσῶ, ἥτις τοιαῦτά ye ῥέζοι, 111. 319, Ex τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὅθεν οὐκ ἔλποιτό γε θυμῷᾳ Andoc. iil. 1. p. 23, τοῖς ἔργοις ἀφ᾽ ὧν

ἡ εἰρήνη γένοιτο ἐναντιοῦνται.

§ 75. (8°) Adverbial.

Rep. 410 ¢, οὐχ οὗ ἕνεκά τινες οἴονται καθιστᾶσιν, wa... θεραπεύοιντο.

Euthyd. 296 e, οὐκ ἔχω ὑμῖν πῶς ἀμφισβητοίην ... ὅπως οὐ πάντα ἐπίσταμαι.

¥ Gorg. 448 e, οὐδεὶς ἐρωτᾷ, ποία τις εἴη ἡ Topyiov τέχνη. [So most

if not all of the MSS. }

Alc. I. 135 a, τυραννοῦντι δέ, ὡς μηδὲ ἐπιπλήττοι τις αὐτῷ, τί τὸ συμ- βησόμενον ;

Cf. Hom. Od. xiv. 374, Ἐλθέμεν ὀτρύνῃσιν, ὅτ᾽ ἀγγελίη ποθὲν ἔλθοι, ΧΥΙΪ. 250, "Aéw τῆλ᾽ ᾿Ιθάκης, ἵνα μοι βίοτον πολὺν ἄλφοι,

§ 76. (8°) Adverbial with εἰ,

Politic. 268 d, rotro . .. [ἐστὶ] ποιητέον, εἰ μὴ μέλλοιμεν K.7.A.

Meno 80 d, εἰ ἐντύχοις αὐτῷ, πῶς εἴσει ὅτι τοῦτό ἐστιν ;

Hip. Ma. 297 6, ὅρα γάρ, εἰ... τοῦτο φαῖμεν εἶναι καλόν.

Legg. 642 a, ὁρᾶτε τί ποιῶμεν, εἰ ταῦτα μὲν ἐάσαιμεν κ.τ.λ.

Ib. 658 ¢, εἰ... τὰ πάνυ σμικρὰ κρίνοι παιδία, κρινοῦσι τὸν τὰ θαύματα ἐπιδεικνύντα.

Charm. 173 ¢, εἰ δὲ βούλοιό ye, . . . συγχωρήσωμεν κ.τ.λ.

Pheedo gt ἃ, οὐ γὰρ dros... δόξει ἀληθὴ εἶναι προθυμηθήσομαι, εἰ μὴ εἴη πάρεργον. Cf. the same phrase, but under an Infinitive sentence, Rep. 411 e; and Ar. Eth. Nic. V. iv. 5, λέγεται ὡς ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν ἐπὶ τοῖς τοιούτοις, κἂν εἰ μή τισιν οἰκεῖον ὄνομα εἴη, TO κέρδος.

Cf. Hom. Od. vii. 51, θαρσαλέος γὰρ ἀνὴρ ἐν πᾶσιν ἀμείνων Ἔργοισιν τελέθει, εἰ καί ποθεν ἄλλοθεν ἔλθοι. Ar. Eth. Nic. I. iv. 7, εἰ τοῦτο φαίνοιτο ἀρκούντως, οὐδὲν προσδεήσει τοῦ διότι. Lysias XXXIV. 6, τί τῷ πλήθει περιγενήσεται, εἰ ποιήσαιμεν κ-τ.λ. ;

§ 77. y. Under an Infinitive sentence—which necessarily leaves the time of the Dependent Verb, as under the last head, undefined.

Charm. 164 a, εἰ δοκεῖ τις ὠφέλιμα καὶ ἑαυτῷ ποιεῖν καὶ ἐκείνῳ ὃν ἰῷτο.

Lysis 212 d, εἰ ὁ ἕτερος φιλοῖ, φίλω εἶναι ἄμφω.

Theet. 164 a, δεῖ γε μέντοι [τοῦτο φάναι, εἰ σώσοιμεν τὸν πρόσθε λόγον.

154, DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 78, 79.

Phedo 95 d, προσήκειν φὴς φοβεῖσθαι, εἰ μὴ ἀνόητος εἴη, τῷ μὴ εἰδότι.

Protag. 316 ¢, οἴεται τοῦτο γενέσθαι, εἰ σοὶ ξυγγένοιτο.

Legg. 927 6, τὸν νοῦν, ᾧ καὶ βραχὺς ἐνείη, προσέχοντα εὐεργετεῖν.

Pheedo 85 d, κινδυνεύοντα διαπλεῦσαι τὸν βίον, εἰ μή τις δύναιτο ἀσφα- λέστερον.. . . διαπορευθῆναι.

Cf. Hom. Il. iv. 262, σὸν δὲ πλεῖον δέπας αἰεὶ Ἕστηχ᾽, ὥσπερ ἐμοί, πιέειν ὅτε θυμὸς ἀνώγοι, Od. xxiv. 253, Τοιούτῳ δὲ ἔοικας, ἐπεὶ λούσαιτο φάγοι τε, Ἑὑδέμεναι μαλακῶς. Thuc, 1. 120, ἀνδρῶν σω-

> ῥ' ΄σ φρόνων ἐστίν, εἰ μὴ ἀδικοῖντο ἡσυχάζειν.

§ 78. Note that the principle of the Optatives classified under (β) and (y) is the same essentially. Hermann (De Part. ἂν) notices the usage under (y): but the extent of the principle hag not attracted attention.

§ 79. f. Infinitive Constructions. Infinitive after Relative Pronouns and Adverbs. Rep. 415 6, evvas... τοιαύτας, οἵας χειμῶνός τε στέγειν καὶ θέρους ἱκανὰς εἶναι. # Gorg. 457 d, εἰπόντες τοιαῦτα, οἷα καὶ τοὺς παρόντας ἄχθεσθαι. Protag. 334 6, χρῆσθαι ἐλαίῳ. .. ὅσον μόνον τὴν δυσχέρειαν κατα- σβέσαι. Theet. 161 b, οὐδὲν ἐπίσταμαι πλέον, πλὴν βραχέος, ὅσον λόγον παρ᾽ ἑτέρον σοφοῦ λαβεῖν. Protag. 330 6, φάναι τῆς ἀρετῆς μόρια εἶναι οὕτως ἔχοντα .. ., ὡς οὐκ εἶναι κιτιλ. Symp. 213 a, παραχωρῆσαι τὸν Σωκράτη ὡς ἐκεῖνον καθίζειν. Euthyd. 306 6, καί μοι δοκεῖ... ἀλλόκοτος εἶναι, ὥς γε πρός σε τἀληθὲς εἰρῆσθαι. x Apol. 29 ¢, ἀφίεμέν σε, ἐφ᾽ ᾧτε μηκέτι φιλοσοφεῖν. Phdr. 269 d, τὸ δύνασθαι ὥστε ἀγωνιστὴν τέλεον γενέσθαι. Protag. 338 ¢, ἀδύνατον ὑμῖν ὥστε Πρωταγόρου τοῦδε σοφώτερόν τινα ἑλέσθαι. Politic. 295 a, ἱκανὸς γένοιτ᾽ ἂν... ὥστε ἑκάστῳ προστάττειν τὸ προσ- ῆκον. Pheedo 103 6, ἔστιν ἄρα περὶ ἔνια τῶν τοιούτων, ὥστε μὴ μόνον αὐτὸ τὸ εἶδος ἀξιοῦσθαι κιτ.λ.

Cf. Thue. i. 2, νεμόμενοι τὰ αὑτῶν ἕκαστοι, ὅσον ἀποζῆν. And likewise

δὲ 80—82.] VERBS. 155

Soph. Ant. 303, Χρόνῳ ποτ᾽ ἐξέπραξαν ὡς δοῦναι δίκην, Aj. 378,

Οὐ γὰρ γένοιτ᾽ ἂν ταῦθ᾽ ὅπως οὐχ ὧδ᾽ ἔχειν, 924, ‘Qs καὶ παρ᾽ ἐχθροῖς

ἄξιος θρήνων τυχεῖν.

§ 80. g. Infinitive Uses.

a, Future following οἷός re, δυνατός, &c. Pheedo 73 a, οὐκ ἂν οἷοί τ᾽ ἦσαν τοῦτο ποιήσειν. Phdr. 277 d, οὐ πρότερον δυνατὸν τέχνῃ ἔσεσθαι. Cf. Lysias xxvii. 2. p. 178, ὁπότε ἂν δοκῶσιν αἴτιοι εἶναι ψηφιεῖσθαι

ὑμᾶς. Isocr. xiii. 2. p. 291, ἡμῖν ἐνδείξεσθαι βουλόμενος. [The

Zurich editors give ἐνδείξασθαι.

§ 81. 8. Aorist equivalent in meaning to Future.

Symp. 193 ἃ, ἐλπίδας παρέχεται [ἡμᾶς] εὐδαίμονας ποιῆσαι.

Euthyd. 278 ο, ἐφάτην ἐπιδείξασθαι τὴν προτρεπτικὴν σοφίαν.

Protag. 316 ¢, τοῦτο δὲ οἴεταί οἱ μάλιστα γενέσθαι, εἰ σοὶ ξυγγένοιτο.

Cf. Hom. I]. ix. 230, ἐν δοιῇ δὲ σαωσέμεν ἢ ἀπολέσθαι Νῆας, Nill. 666, Πολλάκι γάρ οἱ ἔειπε γέρων ἀγαθὸς Πολύϊδος Νούσῳ ὑπ᾽ ἀργαλέη φθίσθαι, XXll. 119, ὅρκον ἔλωμαι Μή τι κατακρύψειν ἀλλ᾽ ἄνδιχα πάντα δάσασθαι, Od. 11. 171, φημὶ τελευτηθῆναι ἅπαντα, iV. 253, Ὥμοσα μὴ μὲν πρὶν... ἀναφῆναι, ix. 496, φάμεν αὐτόθ᾽ ὀλέσθαι. Thuc. i. 26, προεῖπον... ὡς πολεμίοις χρήσασθαι, 81, εἰκὸς ᾿Αθη- vaious... μήτε τῇ γῇ δουλεῦσαι (so with οὐκ εἰκὸς ili. 10, iv. 85, Vill. 46), 111. 46, τίνα οἴεσθε ἥντινα οὐκ ἄμεινον παρασκευάσασθαι ; Vv. 22, οἱ δὲ... οὐκ ἔφασαν δέξασθαι, ii. 3, ἐνόμισαν ἐπιθέμενοι ῥαδίως κρατῆσαι, iv. 63, τὸ ἐλλιπὲς... ἱκανῶς νομίσαντες εἰρχθῆναι, i, 126, τῷ Κύλωνι... ἀνεῖλεν ὁ θεός, καταλαβεῖν τὴν ἀκρόπολιν. fEsch. Pers. 173, toi... μή σε δὶς φράσαι, Agam. 1262, ἐπεύ- χεται.. .. ἀντιτίσασθαι (not ‘prays’ but ‘boasts’). Soph. Phil. 1329, παῦλαν ἴσθι τῆσδε μή ποτ᾽ ἐντυχεῖν Νόσου, Aj. 1082, Ταύτην νόμιζε τὴν πόλιν χρόνῳ ποτὲ Ἔξ οὐρίων δραμοῦσαν εἰς βυθὸν πεσεῖν (not aor. of custom, as Herm. and Linw.). Eur. Andr. 311, Σὲ μὲν yap ηὔχεις θεᾶς βρέτας σῶσαι τόδε. Hat. 1. 53, προλέ- γουσαι. .. μεγάλην ἀρχήν μιν καταλῦσαι, vi. 62, τὰ ἄλλα ἔφη καταινέσαι. Τιγϑἰὰθ xiii. 15. p. 131, οὐκ ἔφασαν ἐπιτρέψαι, ib. 32. Pp. 132, οὐ γὰρ οἶμαί σε ἔξαρνον γενέσθαι, XXXill. 2, ἡγήσατο τὸν ἐνθάδε σύλλογον ἀρχὴν γενέσθαι. [So Bekker: the Zurich editors have γενήσεσθαι.] Ar, ΝΡ. 35, ἐνεχυράσασθαί φασιν.

§ 82. y. Present equivalent in meaning to Future.

Crito 52 ο, ὡμολόγεις καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς πολιτεύεσθαι. Ψ Gorg. 520 6, μὴ φάναι συμβουλεύειν, ἐὰν μή τις αἰτῷ ἀργύριον διδῷ.

156 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ἢ 83.

Politic. 264 e, ἢ οὐκ οἴει καὶ τὸν ἀφρονέστατον. . . δοξάζειν οὕτως ;

Cf. Thue. iv. 24, ἤλπιζον... χειρώσασθαι, καὶ ἤδη σφῶν ἰσχυρὰ τὰ πράγματα γίγνεσθαι, 127, προσέκειντο, νομίσαντες φεύγειν τε αὐτὸν καὶ καταλαβόντες διαφθείρειν, 27, ὅτι... αὐτοὺς ἐνόμιζον οὐκέτι σφίσιν ἐπικηρυκεύεσθαι. Asch. Eum. 892, τίνα με φὴς ἔχειν ἕδραν ; Antipho ii. A. a. 5. p. 115, τὸν μείζονα ἐπίδοξον ὄντα πάσχειν. Iseeus 11. 32, ὠμόσαμεν εὖ ποιεῖν ἀλλήλους. Isocr. vi. 69. p. 130, μὴ yap οἴεσθ᾽ αὐτοὺς μένειν. [So Bekker’s edition: the Zurich editors give μενεῖν from Bekker’s conjecture. |

§ 83. 6. Infinitives following certain Verbs (of saying, thinking, &c.) sometimes contain a Dictative force. They are in fact Infini- tives Oblique of the Deliberative Potential. In consequence of this force of the Infinitive in these cases, the governing Verb gets a different and a stronger meaning: to ‘say’ becomes to ‘recom- mend’ or to ‘pray:’ to ‘think’ becomes to ‘think fit,’ or to ‘give counsel.’ But it is through the Infinitive, as being an Infinitive of the Potential, that the meaning of the governing Verb is strengthened ; and not vice versa.

Protag. 346 b, Σιμωνίδης ἡγήσατο καὶ αὐτὸς... τύραννον... ἐπαι- νέσαι---΄ thought fit’—lit. ‘thought it-was-incumbent-on-him- self-to-praise.’

Crat. 399 d, ψυχὴν λέγεις ἐπισκέψασθαι.

Hip. Ma, 291 a, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ... ἡμᾶς μᾶλλον φάναι «.7.d.—not ‘that we say’ but ‘that we should say.’

Pheedo 83 6, of δικαίως φιλομαθεῖς κόσμιοί τ᾽ εἰσὶ καὶ ἀνδρεῖοι οὐχ ὧν οἱ πολλοὶ ἕνεκά φασι. Here the meaning is not ‘for the reason which the world attributes to them,’ but ‘for the reason for whieh the world says people ought to be [temperate]. That is, φασὶ is followed by κοσμίους εἶναι understood, and this εἶναι contains the Dictative force.

Tb. 104 6, ὃ τοίνυν ἔλεγον dpicacba—‘ what I proposed that we should define.’

Cf. Hom. 1]. iil. 98, φρονέω δὲ διακρινθήμεναι ἤδη ᾿Αργείους καὶ Τρῶας (‘I think good’). Thucyd. ili. 44, νομίζω περὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἡμᾶς βουλεύεσθαι, iv. 86, οὐδὲ ἀσαφῆ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν νομίζω ἐπι- φέρειν, Vil. 42, νομίσας, οὐχ οἷόν τε εἶναι. .., οὐδὲ παθεῖν ὅπερ Νικίας ἔπαθεν (where the Dictative force is possessed by the second Infinitive only), 11. 42, τὸ ἀμύνεσθαι καὶ παθεῖν μᾶλλον ἡγησάμενοι ἢ τὸ κιτ.λ.,) Ve 40, ἡγούμενοι, ὅπῃ ἂν ξυγχωρῇ, ἡσυχίαν

δὲ 84, 85.] VERBS. 157

ἔχειν, 1. 40, ἀντείπομεν, τοὺς προσήκοντας ξυμμάχους αὐτόν τινα κολάζειν, Υ. 46, λέγων... τὸν πόλεμον ἀναβάλλεσθαι, IV. 909, ἀπε- κρίναντο.... ἀποφέρεσθαι τὰ σφέτερα (‘ answered, Carry off your dead’), vi. 13, ψηφίζεσθαι τοὺς Σικελιώτας καθ᾽ αὑτοὺς ξυμφέρεσθαι. Esch. Choeph. 143, Λέγω (‘I pray’) φανῆναι σοῦ, πάτερ, τιμάορον. Soph. Trach. 543, ᾿Εγὼ δὲ θυμοῦσθαι μὲν οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι (‘do not know that one ought to be angry’).

§ 84. «. Infinitive as a Noun Substantive, without the Article. Symp. 194 d, οὐδὲν διοίσει, ὁπῃοῦν ὁτιοῦν γίγνεσθαι. So Rep. 523 6. In Apposition. x Apol. 23 a, ὄνομα δὲ τοῦτο λέγεσθαι, σοφὸς εἶναι. Protag. 323 b, ὃ ἐκεῖ σωφροσύνην ἡγοῦντο εἶναι, τἀληθῆ λέγειν. Under government. Rep. 429 Ὁ, κύριοι ἂν εἶεν ἣ τοίαν αὐτὴν εἶναι ἢ τοίαν.

Symp. 209 Ὁ, εὐπορεῖ λόγων περὶ ἀρετῆς καὶ περὶ οἷον χρὴ εἶναι τὸν ἄνδρα.

§ 85. ¢ An Accusative’ of the Infinitive, with the Article, some- times occurs subjoined in justification of some expression of feeling just preceding. The “ τὸ indignantis”’ is included in this use (it is exemplified in the first two passages following); but a more com- mensurate designation would be the ‘ Apologetic Infinitive.’

Pheedo 99 Ὁ, πολλὴ ἂν καὶ μακρὰ ῥαθυμία εἴη τοῦ λόγου. τὸ yap μὴ

διελέσθαι οἷόν τ᾽ εἶναι κιτιλ.

Symp. 177 a, οὐ δεινόν, ἄλλοις μέν τισι θεῶν ὕμνους κιτιλ,.;. Ἡρακλέους καὶ ἄλλων ἐπαίνους... ἅλες ἔπαινον ἔχοντες... καὶ ἄλλα τοιαῦτα συχνὰ ἴδοις ἂν ἐγκεκωμιασμένα. τὸ οὖν τοιούτων μὲν πέρι πολλὴν σπουδὴν ποιήσασθαι, ἔρωτα δὲ μηδένα πω ἀνθρώπων K.T.A,

The speaker justifies the warmth with which he has spoken by

subjoining a studiedly dispassionate statement of the case.

Compare Eur. Med. 1051, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐμῆς κάκης, Τὸ καὶ προέσθαι μαλθακοὺς λόγους φρενί and, exactly parallel, Ale. 832, ἀλλὰ σοῦ, τὸ μὴ φράσαι x.T.r,

Pheedo 60 b, ὡς θαυμασίως πέφυκε [τὸ ἡδὺ] πρὸς... τὸ λυπηρόν, τὸ ἅμα μὲν αὐτὼ μὴ ἐθέλειν παραγίγνεσθαι τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ: The τὸ ἅμα κιτιλ. (taking for granted the reading here) is the justification of the expression ὡς θαυμασίως. [τὸ is the reading of Oxon. and one other MS.]

7 If an opinion must be hazarded as to the force of this Accusative, it must be that it is Causal. See § 18 above.

158 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [S$ 86, 87.

Cf. Antipho i. 28. p. 114, θαυμάζω δὲ τῆς τόλμης τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ καὶ τῆς διανοίας, τὸ διομόσασθαι. Similarly Hyperid. Or. Fun. col. 3, ἄξιόν ἐστιν ἐπαινεῖν τὴν πόλιν ἡμῶν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἕνεκεν, TO προελέσθαι. Here the Infinitives justify the warmth of the expressions θαυμάζω and ἄξιόν ἐστιν.

Symp. 204 ἃ, αὐτὸ γὰρ τοῦτο, ἐστὶ χαλεπὸν ἀμαθία, τὸ μὴ ὄντα καλὸν κἀγαθὸν μηδὲ φρόνιμον δοκεῖν αὑτῷ εἶναι ἱκανόν. Here τὸ μὴ κιτιλ. contains the reason for ἐστὶ χαλεπὸν ἀμαθία : but, put as it is not in the common Causal form, but under this apologetic form, it also justifies the tone of impatience in which ἀμαθία has been mentioned.

§ 86. 7. The Accusative of the Infinitive, expressing the result,

in negative clauses, is common.

Apol. 36 a, τὸ μὲν μὴ ἀγανακτεῖν... ἄλλα τέ μοι πολλὰ ξυμβάλ- λεται k.T.A.

Phedo 74 ἃ, ἢ ἐνδεῖ τι ἐκείνου τὸ μὴ τοιοῦτον εἶναι ; [So Hermann without MS. authority. |

This use would seem to be confined to negative clauses.

Lach. 190 6, ἐγὼ αἴτιος... τὸ σὲ ἀποκρίνασθαι μὴ τοῦτο ὃ διανοού- μενος ἠρόμην ἀλλ᾽ ἕτερον, is no exception, since the negative is but postponed.

The Genitive of the Infinitive expresses the cause or purpose

primarily, rather than the result, in both affirmative and negative clauses.

§ 87. B. Voice.

a. “Third sense of Middle Voice.” The ascription to the Middle Voice of this meaning,—‘to get a thing done by another,’-—is proved to be erroneous, and that in its favourite exemplification (διδάσκεσθαι), by some passages in the Meno.

Meno 93 d, ἢ οὐκ ἀκήκοας ὅτι Θεμιστοκλῆς Κλεόφαντον τὸν υἱὸν ἱππέα μὲν ἐδιδάξατο ἀγαθόν; and, just after, emadevcaro—where the whole point of the passage lies in the education of the son by the father himself distinctively.

On the other hand, we have

Meno 94 ¢, Θουκυδίδης αὖ δύο υἱεῖς ἔθρεψε... ., Kal τούτους ἐπαίδευσε τά τε ἄλλα εὖ καὶ ἐπάλαισαν κάλλιστα ᾿Αθηναίων" τὸν μὲν yap Ξανθίᾳ ἔδωκε τὸν δὲ Εὐδώρῳ---ὙΠογ6 the Active ἐπαίδευσε is as distinc- tively used of the father’s getting his sons taught by others. Similarly ib. b, ἃ, ἐδίδαξε.

ᾧ 88.] VERBS. 159

As the favourite example, διδάσκεσθαι, thus® falls to the ground, so do the rest. δΔανείξζεσθαι, for instance, is ‘to take a daveioy,’ as δανείζειν is ‘to give a daveiov’ that is, the general meaning of the Verb being ‘to deal in daveia, the Middle means ‘to deal in them for oneself.’ So it is with other Verbs expressing transactions to which there must be two parties: χρᾷν and χρῆσθαι express the active and passive side of ‘dealing in oracles.’ So, rather differently, ‘bringing a man to justice’ becomes, on the disinterested side, the office of the judge, κρίνειν, and, on the interested side, the office of the prosecutor, κρίνεσθαι.

The fact is, that the Active Voice is quite as susceptible as the Middle of the meaning ‘to get a thing done by another;’ neither Voice, however, by any proper inherent force, but in virtue solely of the common principle that “ qui facit per alium facit per se.”

Examples of the Active Verb having this meaning may be found in Asch. Ag. 594, Ὅμως δ᾽ &vov,—where Clytemnestra attributes to herself the same action which was in y. 87 described by the words περίπεμπτα Ovookweis,—in Hadt. 111, 80, [ἀνὴρ τύραννος] κτείνει axpi- τους, &c.

§ 88. Ὁ. There is a genuine inherent sense of Verbs, which deserves more distinct notice than it has received. It stands half- way between the Middle and the Passive.

‘To allow oneself to be,’ ‘to expose oneself to be,’ ‘to get

oneself,—subjected to this or that, may be designated the Semz- |

Middle sense. The following are examples.

Crito 48 d, ἐξάγοντες καὶ ἐξαγόμενοι---' allowing ourselves to be carried across the border.’

Phedo 67 a, ἀναπιμπλώμεθα----. allow ourselves to be infected, And so Hip. Ma. 291 a.

Soph. 253 Ὁ, [φθόγγους] τοὺς συγκεραννυμένους τε καὶ pn—‘ which allow themselves to be united ’—i. e. ‘ which harmonise.’

Meno 91 ο, μηδένα... τοσαύτη μανία λάβοι, ὥστε παρὰ τούτους ἐλθόντα λωβηθῆναι----᾿ get himself into disgrace.’

Phileb. 58 ο, ἀπεχθήσει Topyia—‘you will incur the hatred of Gorgias,’

5. διδάξασθαι also means ‘to takea χορὸν ἀνδρῶν, Arist. Nub. 783, ὙΘᾺλ εἴς" pupil” So Pind. Ol. viii. 77, τὸ διδά. ἀπέῤῥ᾽, οὐκ ἂν διδαξαίμην σ᾽ ἔτι (So ξασθαι δέ τοι εἰδότι ῥάτερον, Simonid. crates speaks.) ap. Gaisf. Fr. liv. p. 377, διδαξάμενος

160 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 89.

' Apol. 35 6, χρὴ οὔτε ἡμᾶς ἐθίζειν ὑμᾶς ἐπιορκεῖν, οὔθ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐθίζεσθαι. Equally marked is the existence of this use in other authors.

Hom. Od. ii. 33, dvnpevos—‘one that earns a benefit,’ iv. 373, ‘Qs δὴ δῆθ᾽ evi νήσῳ épixeac—‘ allowest thyself to be detained’ by Calypso. Thue. 1. 77, ἐλασσούμενοι ἐν ταῖς ξυμβολαίαις δίκαις, ‘letting ourselves be curtailed of our due,’ similarly iv. 64, ὅσον εἰκὸς ἡσσᾶσϑαι. Eur. Phen. 602, (A) Καί σε δεύτερόν γ᾽ ἀπαιτῶ σκῆπτρα καὶ θρόνους χθονός. (B) Οὐκ ἀπαιτούμεσθα. Soph. Aj. 217, νύκτερος Alas ἀπελωβήθη. Dem. de Cor. 277. p. 318, τὴν ἐμὴν δεινότητα... εὑρήσετε πάντες ἐν τοῖς κοινοῖς ἐξεταζομένην ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἀεί, c. Dionys. 14. Ρ. 1287, ἡγούμενοι δεῖν ἐλαττοῦσθαί τι καὶ συγχωρεῖν. Add στεφανοῦσθαι, so common in Pindar (e.g. Ol. vil. 15, Nem. vi. 19) for ‘ winning a crown.’

Hence also the double sense of Verbals in -rés, as γνωστός, from γιγνώσκειν, ‘known:’ γνωστός, from γιγνώσκεσθαι, ‘capable of being known’ (lit. ‘allowing itself to be known’). And in privatives— ἄλυτος, from λύειν, ‘unbroken ;’ ἄλυτος, from λύεσθαι, ‘that does not allow itself to be broken,’ ‘ unbreakable.’

The same sense extends into Latin. Livy iii. 42, Natura loci ac vallo, non virtute aut armis, tutabantur, lit., ‘let themselves be protected by the strength of their position ’—i. e. ‘were fain to let their natural and artificial defences protect them.’ So Juv. xv. 157, defendier isdem Turribus, Virg. Ain. ii, 707, cervici imponere nostre. So juris consultus is ‘one who lets himself be consulted in matters of law.’

§ 89. C. Tense.

A Dependent sentence following a Main Past Construction is not affected (in Tense or Mood) by the Tense of the Main Construc- tion in the following cases.

a. When a fact contemplated in the Dependent clause as already extant continues so at the time of its being alluded to by the speaker.

Phedo 98 b, ἀπὸ δὴ θαυμαστῆς ἐλπίδος ὠχόμην φερόμενος, ἐπειδὴ ὁρῶ ἄνδρα τῷ μὲν νῷ οὐδὲν χρώμενον κιτιλ. The fact of which Socrates had become aware was one which, with its consequence of disappointed hopes, still remained in full force at the time at which he was speaking.

Th. 99 d, ἔδοξε τοίνυν μοι μετὰ ταῦτα, ἐπειδὴ ἀπείρηκα Ta ὄντα σκοπῶν,

§ 90.] VERBS. 161

και. The pursuit then already renounced had. never since been resumed.

, Apol. 21 Ὁ, ἠπόρουν τί ποτε λέγει. The judgment of the Oracle once uttered is regarded as remaining on record for all time.

Pheedo 88 c, ἐδόκουν... eis ἀπιστίαν καταβαλεῖν. . ., μὴ οὐδενὸς ἄξιοι εἶμεν κριταί, ἢ Kal τὰ πράγματα αὐτὰ ἄπιστα 7. There are here two Dependent clauses: the former, expressing a transitory contingency, is affected by the Main Construction and thrown into Oratio Obliqua; the second, expressing a hypothetical fact which if verified must be permanent, is not affected.

Tim. 32 6, ξυνέστησεν ὁ Evmoras ... τάδε διανοηθείς, πρῶτον μὲν ἵνα

. τέλεον . «. εἴη, - «. ἔτι δὲ ἵνα ἀγήρων καὶ ἄνοσον 7. Cf. Lysias i. 6. p. 92, ἐπειδὴ... γυναῖκα ἡγαγόμην .. . ἐφύλαττον,

ἐπειδὴ δέ μοι παιδίον γίγνεται «,7.X,

§ 90. 8. When the event contemplated as future in the Dependent clause is still in the future at the moment of its being alluded to by the speaker.

x Apol. 17 a, ἔλεγον, ὡς χρῆν ὑμᾶς εὐλαβεῖσθαι μὴ ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐξαπατηθῆτε —because the deception threatened was to be looked for in the speech which was now but begun.

Symp. 193 6, πάνυ ἂν ἐφοβούμην, μὴ ἀπορήσωσι λόγων"... viv δὲ ὅμως θαρρῶςἨ At the moment at which this is said, the point of time when the contingency of ἀπορῆσαι will be decided is still future.

Apol. 29 ¢, ἔφη... λέγων πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὡς, εἰ διαφευξοίμην, ἤδη ἂν ὑμῶν οἱ υἱεῖς διαφθαρήσονται. The reason why διαφευξοίμην is affected by the Oratio Obliqua, though equally future with διαφθαρήσονται which remains unaffected, is that the Protasis describes an event purely hypothetical, not one assumed as about to happen at all. εἰ διαφεύξομαι would have implied an assumption that Socrates would be acquitted.

Symp. 198 b, ἐνθυμούμενος ὅτι οὐχ οἷός τ᾽ ἔσομαι. . . οὐδὲν καλὸν εἰπεῖν, ὑπ᾿ αἰσχύνης ὀλίγου ἀποδρὰς ὠχόμην. He has still the task before him, and still the feeling that he will be unequal to it.

Ib. 198 6, προυρρήθη γάρ, ὡς ἔοικεν, ὅπως ἕκαστος ἡμῶν τὸν Ἔρωτα ἐγκωμιάζειν δόξει.

Cf. Dem. de Cor. 85. p. 254, ἁ viv οὗτος ἔφη συμβήσεσθαι, ἐὰν ἐγὼ στεφανῶμαι.

M

162 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 9193.

§ 91. The use of this construction is in Plato so carefully re- stricted to the cases just specified, that it would be unjustifiable to confound it with the simple irregular recurrence to the Oratio Recta, which is so common in other writers.

Symp. 190 6, ἐβουλεύοντο 6 τι χρὴ αὐτοὺς ποιῆσαι would be an exception to the rule, if χρὴ were an ordinary Verb.

The rule seems to hold in Homer, Il. v. 127, Od. ili. 15, and v. 23, and viii. 44, and xiii. 417, &c. Nitzsch (on Od. iii. 76) denies that the principle here pointed out is the true one. He points out two passages, Il. v. 567 and xv. 596, as refuting it. But in both these (1) the reading varies between Optative and Conjunctive, and (2) in both two purposes are mentioned, so that if the Conjunctive is the right reading it may well have been adopted for the purpose of distinguishing the nearer and the remoter purpose.

§ 92. b. Imperfect Tense used for the Oratio Obliqua of the ‘ Prophetic Present.’

Symp. 190 ©, οὔτε γὰρ ὅπως ἀποκτείναιεν εἶχον ... , αἱ τιμαὶ γὰρ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἱερὰ τὰ παρὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων npavi¢ero—where, just as οὐκ εἶχον is the Oblique Narration of the thought οὐκ ἔχομεν, ‘they could not, they thought,’ so ἠφανίζετο represents them thinking αἱ τιμαὶ ἡμῖν κιτιλ. ἀφανίζεται. Now ἀφανίζεται would have been a ‘Prophetic Present,’ and so ἠφανίζετο is the Oblique Narration of this.

Cf. Antipho ii. A. β. 9. p. 117, ἁλοὺς μὲν yap τὴν γραφὴν τῆς μὲν οὐσίας ἤδειν ἐκστησόμενος, THs δὲ πόλεως Kai τοῦ σώματος οὐκ ἐστε- ρούμην----Ἰ felt I could not be.’ Andoc. i. 58-60. p. 8, φονεὺς οὖν αὐτῶν ἐγινόμην «.t.d. ταῦτα δὲ πάντα σκοπῶν εὕρισκον K.T.A.— where the σκοπῶν shews that ἐγινόμην means ‘I felt I was on the way to become.’

§ 93. c. Aorist.

a. Its meaning strongly exhibited by force of the construction in which it stands.

Phdr. 249 a, ai δὲ ἄλλαι, ὅταν... τελευτήσωσι, κρίσεως ἔτυχον.

Gorg. 484 a, ἐὰν... φύσιν ἱκανὴν γένηται ἔχων ἀνήρ, ... ἐπαναστὰς ἀνεφάνη δεσπότης ἡμέτερος ὁ δοῦλος.

Phileb. 17 ἃ, ὅταν γὰρ ταῦτα λάβῃς οὕτω, τότε ἐγένου σοφύς.

Lysis 217 d, ὅταν δὴ τὸ γῆρας αὐταῖς ταὐτὸν τοῦτο χρῶμα ἐπαγάγῃ, τότε ἐγένοντο. . . λευκαί.

The Subjunctive construction with ἄν, not admissible with a past

i

§§ 94—97.] VERBS. 163

Tense, constrains us to see in the Aorist the expression of an action instantaneously complete, rather than of an action necessarily past.

§ 94. 8. Its meaning strongly exhibited by force of the context.

Pheedo 88 d, πῇ 6 Σωκράτης μετῆλθε τὸν λόγον ; lit. ‘ overtook ’ (same metaphor as 89 6, εἰ... . pe διαφεύγοι [Hermann from first hand of Oxon. | ὁ λόγος). Cf. Pind. Ol. vi. 62, μετάλλασέν τέ μιν. Antipho ii. A. a. 3. p. 113, ἕως ἂν διωχθῇ, ‘ until he is caught.’

Th. 108 ¢, [ἡ μὲν] φέρεται εἰς τὴν αὐτῇ πρέπουσαν οἴκησιν' ἡ δὲ. . .. ᾧκησε τὸν αὐτῇ ἑκάστη τόπον προσήκοντα----ἰ 6 good soul, without a moment of suspense, or sensible lapse of time, ‘at once finds a home in’ &e.

Symp. 172 a, οὗτος, οὐ περιμένεις; Κἀγὼ ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα----τιοῦ ‘waited for him to come up with me,’ but ‘let him come up with me.’

ΤΡ. 173 b, τί οὖν οὐ διηγήσω por; Same phrase Protag. 310 ἃ, ‘ why not at once relate it to me?’ So Phedo 86 d, Soph. 251 6, &c. Cf. Arist. Vesp. 213, Τί οὐκ ἀπεκοιμήθημεν ;

Symp. 209 a, ἃ ψυχῇ προσήκει καὶ κυῆσαι καὶ κυεῖν. κυῆσαι is the first moment of the state κυεῖν.

Hence Apol. 21 ¢, 22 ἃ, ἔδοξε, ἔδοξαν, ‘I came to think.’

$95. D. Impersonal Verbs.

Impersonal Verbs in the same rigid form as in Latin do not exist in Greek. Even those which express the processes of inani- mate nature, as ὕει, viper, ἔσεισε (Thue. iv. 52), are only impersonal in that particular use, and not always so even then.

We find, however, in addition to these,

§ 96. a. Passive Impersonals (the nearest approach in Greek to strict Impersonais).

Phdr. 232 a, οὐκ ἄλλως αὐτοῖς πεπόνηται.

Ib. 261 b, λέγεταί τε καὶ γράφεται.

Politic. 299 a, ὧν δ᾽ ἂν καταψηφισθῆ.

Legg. 9148, δηλωθέντων (Genitive Absolute).

δ 97. b. Quasi-Impersonals (as we may call them), where a vague Nominative, such as ‘ the circumstances,’ ‘ the event,’ ‘the course of events,’ is understood. The common words ἐνδέχεται, παρέχει (Thue. iv. 85 &c.), the phrase οὕτως ἔχει, &c., are such cases. We do not know always whether the vague understood Nominative is Plural or Singular, except where the Verb is represented by a periphrasis

M2

164 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 98, 99.

(as Hom. 1], iv. 345, pir’ [jv], xiv. 98, Τρωσὶ μὲν εὐκτὰ γένηται, XVi. 128, οὐκέτι φυκτὰ πέλωνται, χχὶ. 533, ὀΐω Aoiy’ ἔσεσθαι, Od. ii. 203, ἶσα ἔσσεται, Vill. 384, HO ἄρ᾽ ἕτοιμα τέτυκτο, Xi. 455, οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυ- ναιξίν, Thuc. 11. 3, ἐπεὶ ἕτοιμα ἦν, i. 102, τούτου ἐνδεᾶ ἐφαίνετο, 1. 7, πλωϊμωτέρων ὄντων, Hdt. vi. 52, δῆλά ogi ἔσεσθαι, the common ἀδύνατά ἐστι, &c.), or where (as in several of the following) an Ad- jective stands in agreement with the vague understood Nomi- native. Rep. 580 ἃ, δέξεται, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, καὶ ἑτέραν ἀπόδειξιν ----“ the case will admit.’ Ib. 452 ἃ, καὶ τοῦτο évedeiEaro—‘ the result made this plain also.’ Pheedo 73 b, ἐάν τις ἐπὶ τὰ διαγράμματα ἄγῃ ἐνταῦθα σαφέστατα κατη- γορεῖ ὅτι τοῦτο οὕτως €xec—‘ what ensues is proof positive,’ Wc. Apol. 28 b, οὐδὲν δεινὸν μὴ ἐν ἐμοὶ orf—lit. ‘lest the course of events should come to a stand-still’ ‘There is no danger of the rule breaking down in my case. Cf. Ar. Eth. VI. vii. 9, στήσεται yap kaxei—‘for there too demonstration must stop.’ Hat. 11. 82, ἐκ δὲ rod φόνου ἀπέβη ἐς μουναρχίην. Phileb. 25 d, GAN ἴσως καὶ νῦν ταὐτὸν Space.— perhaps it will do equally well now.’ Pheedo 118 a, ἐπειδὰν πρὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ yévnrac—‘ when the action of the poison reaches the heart.’

§ 98. In the next instance, we find an Impersonal clause repre- senting the Verb.

Tim. 24 ο, ἐξ ἧς ἐπιβατὸν ἐπὶ τὰς ἄλλας νήσους... ἐγίγνετο.

§ 99. In the following instances we find an Adjective or Parti-

ciple in agreement with the vague understood Nominative.

Phileb. 20 ¢, προϊὸν δ᾽ ἔτι σαφέστερον Seige.—‘the sequel of the argument will make this yet clearer.’

Pheedo 117 b, καὶ οὕτως αὐτὸ ποιήσει---- the agent left to itself will complete its work.’ There is delicacy in the vagueness with which both the deadly agent and its effect are designated.

Thet. 200 ὁ, ὁ τὸν ποταμὸν καθηγούμενος ἔφη ἄρα δείξειν αὐτό. A man who goes first through a stream, if asked, “ How deep is it?”, says, “ How can 1 tell beforehand ? we shall see.” From this passage we gather that the expression was in popular use.

Critias 108 ¢, τοῦτο μὲν οὖν οἷόν ἐστιν, αὐτό σοι τάχα δηλώσει.

δῷ 100—103. | VERBS. 165

Hip. Ma. 288 b, Gre μὲν ἐπιχειρήσει εὖ οἶδα' εἰ δ᾽ ἐπιχειρήσας ἔσται καταγέλαστος αἰτὸ beifec—‘ we shall see by the event.’ Protag. 324 a, αὐτό σε διδάξει.

Ib. 329 b, ἱκανὸς μὲν μακροὺς λόγους καὶ καλοὺς εἰπεῖν, ὡς αὐτὰ δηλοῖ,

§ 100. Cf. Hdt. ν. 78, δηλοῖ δὲ οὐ κατ᾽ ἕν μοῦνον, ἀλλὰ πανταχῆ, ἡ ἰσηγορίη ὥς ἐστι χρῆμα σπουδαῖον, Vi. 86, οὔτε μέμνημαι τὸ πρῆγμα, οὔτε με περιφέρει οὐδὲν εἰδέναι τουτέων τῶν ὑμεῖς λέγετε. 50}. Choeph. 993, Φίλον τέως, νῦν δ᾽ ἐχθρόν, ὡς φαίνει, κακόν (‘as the event shews.’) ZEschin. i. 40. p. 6, ὡς αὐτὸ τοὖργον ἔδειξεν. Antipho v. 60. p. 136, αὐτῷ μοι πρόφασιν οὐδεμίαν ἔχει ἀποκτεῖναι τὸν ἄνδρα. Liysias xX. 20.

p- 118, δηλώσει δέ" (sc. id quod sequitur δηλώσει) οἰχήσεται γάρ.

_ $101. We find also Non-Impersonal sentences on the model of some of the foregoing, e. g. Crat. 393 6, τὸ ὄνομα, ὃ αὐτὸ ἡμῖν δηλώσει K.7.A. Ib. 402 ¢, τοῦτό γε (τὸ ὄνομα) ὀλίγου αὐτὸ λέγει ὅτι K.T.A. Soph, 237 ὃ, καὶ μάλιστά γε δὴ πάντων ὁ λόγος αὐτὸς ἂν δηλώσειε. Cf. Dem. c. Dionys. 13. p. 1287, ἐδήλωσε δ᾽ αὐτὸ τὸ ἔργον. Eur. Hel. 146 sqq., (A) Συμπροξένησον, ὡς τύχω μαντευμάτων “Orn νεὼς

στείλαιμ᾽ ἂν οὔριον πτερὸν κιτ.λ.---(Β) Πλοῦς, ὦ ξέν᾽, αὐτὸς σημανεῖ.

§ 102. E. Intransitive use of Verbs Transitive.

Some Verbs Transitive recede, in particular significations, into Intransitive Verbs. At the same time, they do not cease to be Active ; neither do they become strictly Reflexive.

This happens in two cases.

§ 103. a. When that, to which the action was originally repre- sented as passing on, is, or comes to be regarded as, a part of the Agent ; and when further the mention of it can be dropped without marring the sense. “Eye, in several of its senses, exemplifies this process.

From ἔχειν governing an Accusative of part of the Subject we have, e.g. Hom. Od. xix. 38, κίονες ὑψόσ᾽ @yovres—‘ holding,’ pro- perly not themselves, but their heads, or, vaguely, parts of them- selves, aloft. So Hdt.i. 181, ἀνάβασις ἐς αὐτοὺς ἔξωθεν κύκλῳ περὶ πάντας τοὺς πύργους ἔχουσα πεποίηται---- ὙΠ 6 6 ἔχουσα has for its Object each part of the ἀνάβασις in succession.

From ἔχειν governing an Accusative of that which comes to be regarded as part of the Subject, we have e.g. Od. iii. 182, αὐτὰρ ἔγωγε Πύλονδ᾽ ἔχον ----΄ held my ship on her course for Pylos ;’—the

166 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ξξ 104, 105.

ship, as following the will of her captain, is, when we are speaking of his movements, virtually part of him ;—whence simply ‘I held on for Pylos.’

On the other hand, in the following passage κατέχειν has for its Object that which is literally a part of the Subject.

Pheedo 117 ©, οἷοί τ᾽ ἦσαν κατέχειν τὸ μὴ δακρύειν---- to keep them- selves, —but properly those parts of themselves which had to do with the particular affection in question.

So again the common ἔχε δή (Crat. 439 a, Gorg. 490 b, Lach. 198 b, Legg. 639 d) is ‘hold, scil. your foot from advancing—your tongue from speaking—your thoughts from running on—(as the case may be).

V Gorg. 475.4,76 λόγῳ ὥσπερ ἰατρῷ mapéxov—‘ offering,’ not strictly oneself, but the particular limb or part needing treatment.

§ 104. Other examples in Plato are

Rep. 388 e, ὅταν τις ἐφιῇ ἰσχυρῷ γέλωτι. So 563 a, ξυγκαθιέναι.

Tb. 422 ο, ἀναστρέφειν. So Lach, ΤΟΙ 6.

Ib. 467 b, ἀναλαβεῖν.

Ib. 473 Ὁ, μεταβαλεῖν.

Tb. 540 a, 591 6, παρακινεῖν. So 573 0, ὑποκινεῖν.

Pheedo 65 a, ἐγγύς τι τείνειν τοῦ τεθνάναι.

Ib. 98 d, χαλῶντα καὶ ξυντείνοντα τὰ νεῦρα.

Phdr. 228 6, παῦε. Jelf instances this also in Hom. Od. 1. 340, iv. 659. [In Od. i. 340 the reading seems doubtful. |

Politic. 258 a, Θεαιτήτῳ, . . . ξυνέμιξα.

Pheedo 72 b, εἰ τὸ καταδαρθάνειν μὲν εἴη, τὸ δ᾽ ἀνεγείρεσθαι μὴ ἀντα- ποδιδοίη----Ἰ1ϊ. (as we might say) ‘put in an appearance on the other side.’

§ 105. This Intransitive use of these Verbs becomes so natural, that, after it is established, when in particular cases it 15 convenient that the Object should be expressed, it is expressed in the Dative.

E. g. Il. xxiii. 686, ἀνασχομένω χερσὶ στιβαρῇσι. The language had been accustomed to ἀνασχέσθαι Intransitive for holding up the hands ; so that when, in order to characterise the hands, the poet _ desires to express the Object, it falls more naturally into the Dative. |

So Od. ix. 489, Ἐμβαλέειν κώπῃ --- ἐμβαλεῖν being used alone, 6. g. in Aristoph. Ran. 206, for ‘dashing in the oars.’ (An erroneous interpretation of this last passage arises from neglect of the prin- | ciple we are noticing.)

So Od, x. I 40, νηὶ κατηγαγύμεσθα.

§§ 106—109.] VERBS. 167

§ 106. b. When the Accusative of the Object, not being in any way referable to the Agent, is nevertheless so natural a sequence to the Verb, that the Verb itself will suggest it if omitted.

Symp. 196 ἃ, πειρατέον μὴ ἐλλείπειν---- to fall short ’—lit. ‘to leave

a deficiency of so much in a given quantity.’

Phdr. 237 d, θέμενοι ὅρον, εἰς τοῦτο ἀποβλέποντες καὶ ἀναφέροντες τὴν σκέψιν ποιώμεθα, ἀναφέροντες, ‘referring,’ scil. our assertions and reasonings.

¥ Gorg. 512 6, ἐπιτρέψαντα περὶ τούτων τῷ OeG—‘ entrusting,’ scil. the decision.

δ 107. Some uses of ἔχειν illustrate this process also.

We find, Thue. ili. 89, τῶν σεισμῶν xareydvrav'—there is no need to express what they pervaded or occupied, since σεισμοὶ (so used) must be σεισμοὶ τῆς γῆς. Or when ἔχειν is used of an army occupy- ing a position, the Verb alone suffices to express this. And (as we have seen in the parallel case) so fixed may this use become, that when the position occupied needs to be expressed, another con- struction is found for it; cf. Thuc. ili. 34, ἐν διατειχίσματι εἶχον᾽ 50 viii. 28. Similarly a general moving his army is said ἄγειν, without any Object expressed: whence the next step is that the whole army, which strictly ἄγεται, is said ἄγειν. cf. Thuc. v. 54, ᾿Δργεῖοι δ᾽ ἄγοντες THY ἡμέραν ταύτην πάντα τὸν χρόνον, ἐσέβαλον. [So Arnold : ἐσέ- βαλλον Poppo and Giller].

§ 108. This is the account of a variation, which might else be

taken merely for one of government :—

Pheedo 58 e-59 a, οὔτε yap ὡς θανάτῳ παρόντα pe ἀνδρὸς ἐπιτηδείου ἔλεος εἰσήει . . .* διὰ δὴ ταῦτα οὐδὲν πάνυ μοι ἐλεεινὸν eioje. AD emotion may be said either to enter the person himself (as in ἔλεός pe εἰσήει), or to enter his soul ; but in this case if the reference to the person be made clear the mention of the soul may be spared ; that is, the Verb becomes Intransitive, and is followed by a Dative of the person (as in the latter sentence of the passage quoted).

§ 109. F. Uses of the Participle.

a. Periphrastically, with Auxiliary Verb Substantive.

Politic. 273 b, πολλῆς ἦν μετέχον ἀταξίας.

Ib. 274 6, εἶναι γεγονός, 280 a, ἦν ἂν τεθέν. 308 ο, ἐστὶ τείνοντα.

by ᾽ ᾿ » “ὮΝ > . 2 " » 5 QS he Tin. 38 C, ἐστιν ov, Od d, ἡγνοῆκως av εἰ 77 ©. εἰὴ θεαθιθόμεγον.-

168 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ τιο---ττὰ.

Soph. 244 ¢, τὸ ἀποδέχεσθαι. . . [ἐστὶ] λόγον οὐκ ἂν ἔχον. Legg. 860 6, εἰ δὴ ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχοντά ἐστιν.

§ 110. 8. Peculiar Intransitive use of ἔχων with Verbs. Euthyd. 295 ¢, ἔχων φλυαρεῖς. Phdr. 236 e, ri δῆτα ἔχων στρέφει;

§ 111. Ivtoms or Prepositions. "Ava.

In Composition.

Pheedo 87 a, ἀνατίθεμα. Of withdrawing any deed or word. Not a metaphor from draughts particularly, though capable of being so applied—as in

Hipparch. 229 6, ὥσπερ πεττεύων ἐθέλω σοι ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ἀναθέσθαι 6 τι βούλει τῶν εἰρημένων. Cf. Soph. Aj. 476, Προσθεῖσα κἀναθεῖσα τοῦ γε κατθανεῖν, and Lobeck’s note upon it. ᾿Από. [

Of the use of the bodily members.

Rep. 613 b, δρῶσιν ὅπερ οἱ δρομῆς ὅσοι ἂν θέωσιν εὖ ἀπὸ τῶν κάτω ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ἄνω pn—‘ who run fairly with their legs, but with the upper part of their bodies (head, neck, arms) in bad form.’ (Even supposing that κάτω could refer to the starting point and ἄνω to the turning point, which can scarcely be supported by instances, the absolute use of τὰ κάτω and τὰ ἄνω in this meaning is inconceivable.)

Legg. 795 "Ὁ, ὁ τελέως παγκράτιον ἠσκηκὼς . . . οὐκ ἀπὸ μὲν τῶν ἀρι- στερῶν ἀδύνατός ἐστι μάχεσθαι κιτ.λ.

Cf. Aristoph. Vesp. 656, λόγισαι φαύλως μὴ ψήφοις ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ χειρός.

§ 112. Add.

a. With Accusative ; ‘by help of. This is the use so common afterwards in the Orators.

Rep. 352 ¢, ἐνῆν τις αὐτοῖς δικαιοσύνη, . . . δ ἣν ἔπραξαν ἃ ἔπραξαν. b. With Genitive.

Pheedo 82 6, τὴν ψυχὴν... ἀναγκαζομένην... σκοπεῖσθαι τὰ ὄντα... μὴ αὐτὴν δι’ αὐτῆς----ἰ ἀοί] πο only by and through itself,’ inde- pendently of anything external to itself.

So Rep. 510 b, αὐτοῖς εἴδεσι SC αὐτῶν τὴν μέθοδον ποιουμένη, and

similarly 511

§§ 177. 18} PREPOSITIONS. 169

Cf. Ar. Eth. Nic. V. iv. 14, ὅταν μήτε πλέον μήτ᾽ ἔλαττον ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὰ δ αὑτῶν γένηται.

Rep. 463 6, εἰ ὀνόματα διὰ τῶν στομάτων μόνον φθέγγοιντο.

Th. 580 Ὁ, ὁ διὰ πάντων κριτὴς ἀποφαίνεται---- the paramount judge decides absolutely.’ An ordinary sense of διὰ πάντων, beginning with Homer.

Meno 74 a, τὴν μίαν, ἣ διὰ πάντων τούτων éeoti—‘which is out beyond all these,’ i.e. ‘which all these run up to,’ ‘which is paramount to all these.’

Rep. 343 Ὁ, διὰ νυκτὸς καὶ nuéepas—‘night after night and day after day.’

Ib. 621 a, πορεύεσθαι διὰ καὐματός τε καὶ πνίγους δεινοῦ.

Symp. 220 Ὁ, ἀνυπόδητος διὰ τοῦ κρυστάλλου ἐπορεύετο. This use of διὰ in prose is unique: see Bernhardy’s Syntax, p. 234. It obtains in poetry, beginning with Homer’s διὰ νήσου ἰὼν in Od. ΧΙ]. 335. Is its employment in the text intended for the sake of grandi- loquence ?

e. In Composition.

Symp. 221 b, διαπορεύεσθαι, and Critias 106 a, διαπορεία----οἵ tra- versing a certain interval of space between two defined points, —‘doing the distance.” Cf. διαθεῖν, Protag. 335 e.

§ 113. Eis.

a, Of progress along or in a certain route. Pheedo 114 Ὁ, φέρονται... . . εἰς τοὺς ποταμούς----πιοῦ ‘ into’ but ‘along’ or ‘down’ the rivers®.

§ 114. 8. ‘To the number of.’

Legg. 704 b, ἀπέχει θαλάττης εἴς τινας ὀγδοήκοντα σταδίους.

Cf. Thuc. iv. 124, ὀλίγου ἐς χιλίους. So Xenophon and Demosth.

δ 115. y. ‘In regard to,’ ‘in the point of,’ ‘ with a view to.’ Symp. 184 b, evepyerovpevos εἰς χρήματα. Ibid. d, ὁ μὲν δυνάμενος εἰς φρόνησιν καὶ τὴν ἄλλην ἀρετὴν EvpSad- λεσθαι, ὁ δὲ δεόμενος εἰς παίδευσιν καὶ τὴν ἄλλην σοφίαν κτᾶσθαι. Ib. 196 ο, εἴς γε ἀνδρίαν Ἔρωτι οὐδὲ ΓΆρης ἀνθίσταται. Ib. 219 4, ἀνθρώπῳ τοιούτῳ οἴῳ ἐγὼ οὐκ ἂν μην ποτὲ ἐντυχεῖν εἰς φρόνησιν καὶ εἰς καρτερίαν.

Theet. 169 a, ἱκανοὶ ἑαυτοῖς εἰς ἀστρονομίαν.

9 (Under this example is in the MS, “Cf. Odyss."]

170 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 116—118.

Theet. 178 6, τὸ περὶ λόγους πιθανὸν ἑκάστῳ ἡμῶν ἐσόμενον eis δικα- στήριον βέλτιον ἂν προδοξάσαις ἢ τῶν ἰδιωτῶν ὁστισοῦν ; Legg. 635 a, ἔστι ταῦτα οὕτως, εἰς ἃ καὶ μηδέν ye avis ἐπιτιμῶν τοῖς νόμοις ἡμῶν. Euthyd. 305 d, τὰ νικητήρια εἰς δόξαν οἴσεσθαι σοφίας πέρι. NTP β Cf. Hom. Il. iii. 158, Αἰνῶς ἀθανάτῃσι θεῇς εἰς ὦπα ἔοικεν. Also ? : ἢ 7 Andoe. ii. 23. p. 22, πολιτείαν διδόντας τε, καὶ εἰς χρήματα μεγά- , χρήματα pey λας δωρεάς. Liysias xxvi. 21. p. 177, περὶ ἐμοῦ οὐδὲν οὗτος εἰπεῖν

- ϑ , ἕξει els μισοδημίαν.

§ 116. ’Ex. a. Euthyd. 282 a, ἐκ παντὸς τρόπου παρασκευάζεσθαι. b. Apol. 23 a, ἐκ τούτων καὶ Μέλητός μοι eréero—‘ hereupon :’ the notion is of sequence of time rather than consequence. Cf. Asch. Eum. 2, ἐκ δὲ τῆς Θέμιν, Choeph. 1055, Ποταίνιον yap

Cte) το ν᾽ Py) Sal , ν > ΄ , αἷμά σοι χεροῖν ere’ “Ex τῶνδέ τοι ταραγμὸς ἐς φρένας πίτνει.

δ 1. “Ἐν; a. ‘In the point of.’ Rep. 402 d, ἐν τῷ εἴδει spodoyotvra—‘ agrecing in their aspect.’ Symp. 213 6, νικῶντα ἐν λόγοις πάντας ἀνθρώπους. Theset. 206 a, τὰ στοιχεῖα ἐν τῇ ὄψει διαγιγνώσκειν πειρώμενος. b. Adverbially compounded. / Gorg. 457 a, ἐμβραχύ. Cf. the form καθεῖς in St. John vill. 9g, ἐξήρ-

χοντο εἷς καθεῖς.

§ 118. Ἐπί. a. With Dative ;—‘in connection with’—signifying a more material connection than it signifies with the Genitive.

Rep. 376 e, ἔστι δέ που ἡ μὲν ἐπὶ σώμασι γυμναστική, ἡ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ψυχῇ μουσική.

Ib. 408 b, οὐδ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις τὴν τέχνην δεῖν εἶναι.

Ib. 532 ¢, ἐπ᾽ ἀδυναμίᾳ βλέπειν.

Symp- 186 ἃ, [Ἔρως] οὐ μόνον ἐστὶν ἐπὶ ταῖς ψυχαῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων.

Tb. 184 6, ἐπὶ τούτῳ καὶ ἐξαπατηθῆναι οὐδὲν αἰσχρόν.

Tb. 186 b, ἄλλος μὲν ὁ ἐπὶ τῷ ὑγιεινῷ [Ἔρως ἄλλος δὲ ὁ ἐπὶ τῷ νοσώδει,

Ib. 210 a, τὸ κάλλος τὸ ἐπὶ ὁτῳοῦν σώματι.

Ibid. b, τὸ ἐπ᾽ εἴδει καλόν,

Soph. 247 d, τὸ ἐπί τε τούτοις ἅμα καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνοις ξυμφυὲς γεγονός.

Politic. 310 ἃ, ἐπὶ τούτοις δὴ τοῦτ᾽ εἶναι τέχνῃ φάρμακον.

§§ 119—122.] PREPOSITIONS. 171

Tim. 48 6, ἱκανὰ ἦν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν λεχθεῖσιν.

Cf. Andoe. i. 25. p. 4, τῶν φευγόντων ἐπὶ τοῖς μυστηρίοις.

§ 119. b. Adverbially compounded. Legg. 697 6, ἐπὶ ἔτι χείρους.

Cf. Hom. Od. viii. 245, ἐξ ἔτι πατρῶν.

§ 120. c. In Composition.

Crito 43 ¢, émAverai—‘exempts. Perhaps the meaning of ἐπὶ is ‘with a further result’ or ‘condition, and so ἐπιλύεσθαι would be to obtain a man’s release, under the condition of a ransom to be paid. Similarly would ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι be ‘to announce so as to bind oneself in time to come,’ and so ‘to offer,’ ‘ promise,’

Symp. 172 a, ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα. ἐπιστῆναι is to stop in the course of progress from one point to another. στῆναι is to stop, with- out any reference to moving again. So ἐπιλέγεσθαι is to pick out, e.g. in passing along a line, ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα is equivalent to the one word ἐπέμεινα. For ἐπιμένειν see under περί, ὃ 127.

Pheedo 62 6, ὁ Σωκράτης... ἐπιβλέψας πρὸς ἡμᾶς. From the notion of succession here again we should get ‘looking [from Cebes| to us, —‘ turning to us. Cf. Apol. 31 d, ἐπικωμῳδῶν.

§ 121. Kara. a, With Accusative.

Legg. 918 a, ἔπεται κατὰ 7é5a—‘ in close succession.’

Soph. 243 d, κατὰ πόδα ye, ὦ Θεαίτητε, ὑπέλαβες---- you have caught at once the train of the thought.’ This is of course a pregnant use of the Preposition, implying κατὰ πόδα ἑπόμενος.

b. With Genitive, in Attributive sense.

Meno 74 Ὁ, μίαν ἀρετὴν λαβεῖν κατὰ πάντων.

Ib. 76 a, κατὰ παντὸς σχήματος τοῦτο λέγω.

Ib. 77 a, κατὰ ὅλου εἰπὼν ἀρετῆς πέρι.

Pheedo 70 d, μὴ τοίνυν κατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων σκόπει μόνον rovro— consider this not as an attribute of mankind only.’ The κατά, in ἃ preg- nant use, stands for ὡς κατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων λεγόμενον.

Phdr. 260 b, συντιθεὶς λόγον ἔπαινον κατὰ τοῦ ὄνου.

§ 122. c. In Composition. a. Symp. 219 c, καταδαρθάνειν----" to earn by sleeping.’

8, Of doing a thing without regard to other considerations.

172 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ὃ 123—125.

| Apol. 33 6, οὐκ ἂν ἐκεῖνός ye αὐτοῦ karadenbety—implying the request

to be unprincipled or arbitrary.

Legg. 861 b, δοὺς δὲ οὐδένα λόγον ὡς ὀρθῶς εἴρηκε, κατανομοθετήσει.

Cf. Lysias vi. 3. p. 103, ἢ κατελεῆσαι ἢ καταχαρίσασθαι ᾿Ανδοκίδῃ. Iszeus vil. 38. p. 67, τοὺς ἔχοντας ἀποδοῦναι τὰ ὄντ᾽ αὐτῷ κατα- vaykacavres—‘ peremptorily compelling.’

This κατὰ often, but not always or necessarily (see the last in-

stance), gives an unfavourable meaning to the word.

§ 128, Μέχρι. Adverbially compounded. Gorg. 487 ¢, μέχρι ὅποι. § 124. Tapa. a. With Accusative. a, Soph. 242 a, παρὰ πόδα μεταβαλὼν ἐμαυτόν. Cf. Pind. Pyth. x. 62, πὰρ ποδός, and Soph. Phil. 838, παρὰ πόδα. B. Apol. 36 a, οὕτω παρ᾽ dd‘yov—literally, ‘up to so little’ dif- ference from the other quantity compared, i.e. so near it. y. In Comparison; signifying not ‘beyond’ but ‘contrasted with’ (lit. ‘put coordinate with’). Phdr. 276 6, παγκάλην λέγεις παρὰ φαύλην παιδιάν. Theet. 144 a, ἀνδρεῖον παρ᾽ ὁντινοῦν. For other instances see Idioms of Comparison, ὃ 174. Cf. Thue. v. 00, ἐπειδὴ παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον τὸ ξυμφέρον λέγειν ὑπέθεσθε. b. With Dative. Rep. 366 b, καὶ mapa θεοῖς καὶ παρ᾽ ἀνθρώποις πράξομεν κατὰ νοῦν--- ‘our dealings both with gods and with men will be what we desire.’

Symp. 188 d, ὁ περὶ τἀγαθὰ μετὰ σωφροσύνης... . ἀποτελούμενος καὶ map ἡμῖν καὶ παρὰ θεοῖς [Ἔρως |--“ temperance exercised in deal- ings between ourselves (men) and with the gods,’

§ 125. c. With Genitive ;—‘ obtained from’ or ‘ proceeding from,’ —of a sentiment or opinion. Legg. 733 a, τοῦτο παρὰ τοῦ λόγου χρὴ λαμβάνοντα σκοπεῖν. Soph. 226 d, λέγεται παρὰ πάντων καθαρμός τις. Legg. 692 b, τὸ δὲ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν γιγνώσκεσθαι ταῦτα... οὐδὲν σοφόύν----- ‘that these things should receive recognition from us.’ (ταῦ, 412 6, mapa πολλῶν ὁμολογεῖται.

§§ 126, 127.] PREPOSITIONS. 173

Politic. 296 a, λόγον τὸν mapa τῶν πολλῶν λεγόμενον.

Critias 107 Ὁ, τὰ παρὰ πάντων ἡμῶν ῥηθέντα.

Protag. 312 b, ἡ παρὰ Πρωταγόρου μάθησις.

Symp. 182 d, ἡ παρακελευσις τῷ ἐρῶντι παρὰ πάντων θαυμαστή. (παρὰ πάντων follows παρακέλευσις.)

Cf. Andoc. i. 140. p. 18, παρὰ πάντων ὁμολογουμένως ταῦθ᾽ ὑμῖν

ὑπάρχει.

§ 126. In the remaining instances the Preposition has a pregnant force: that is, the fact that an opinion or sentiment is referred to is left to be understood from the παρά.

Rep. 362 ¢, παρὰ θεῶν καὶ παρ᾽ ἀνθρώπων τῷ ἀδίκῳ παρεσκευάσθαι τὸν

βίον ἄμεινον.

Ib. 461 e, βεβαιώσασθαι παρὰ τοῦ λόγου.

Ib. 612 ¢, μισθοὺς... ὅσους τε καὶ οἵους τῇ ψυχῇ παρέχει παρ᾽ ἀνθρώ-

πων τε καὶ θεῶν.

Ibid. d, ὥσπερ ἔχει δόξης καὶ παρὰ θεῶν καὶ παρὰ ἀνθρώπων.

Tim. 52 d, otros.... παρὰ τῆς ἐμῆς ψήφου λογισθεὶς ἐν κεφαλαίῳ

δεδόσθω λόγος.

With this use οὗ παρὰ cf. that οἵ πρός, Hdt. iii. 137, ἵνα φανῇ πρὸς

Δαρείου ἐὼν καὶ ἐν τῇ ἑωυτοῦ δόκιμος. Antipho i. 25. p. 114; καὶ γὰρ ἂν δικαιότερον καὶ ὁσιώτερον καὶ πρὸς θεῶν καὶ πρὸς ἀνθρώπων

γένοιτο ὑμῖν.

δ 127. Περί. μ᾽, With Dative—‘in the sphere of,’ literally.

Protag. 314 a, ὅρα μὴ περὶ τοῖς φιλτάτοις κυβεύῃς τε καὶ κινδυνεύῃς.

Pheedo 114 d, θαρρεῖν χρὴ περὶ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ψυχῇ ἄνδρα. The feeling is represented as locally watching over its object.

ἃ. In Composition.

Pheedo 59 6, καὶ ἡμῖν ἐξελθὼν ὁ θυρωρὸς .... εἶπε περιμένειν, καὶ μὴ πρότερον παριέναι κατιλ. The meaning οὗ περιμένειν will be eluci- dated by distinguishing it from ἐπιμένειν. ἐπιμένειν is to stop in the course of a progress from one point to another until somebody comes or something happens. The ἐπί, as in ἐπιστῆ- ναι, is local, and it also presumes that the progress is to be resumed. It answers to the Latin prestolari. περιμένειν is to defer any intended proceeding, to remain zn statu quo, until

19 (In the MS. the uses of wept with the Accusative and the Genitive were the Dative are lettered b., its uses in to have come in, lettered a. and c.]} Composition d. Apparently uses with

174 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 128, 129.

a certain future moment. The zepi has reference simply to the lapse of the interval of time. Hence περιμένειν here is ‘to wait a certain time,’ which time is specified in the next words. ἐπιμένειν Would be unsuitable, as the admission of the visitors into the prison could hardly be regarded as a continuation of their walk to the prison.

Symp. 172 a, ὁ Φαληρεύς, ἔφη, οὗτος ᾿Απολλόδωρος, οὐ περιμένεις ; Κἀγὼ ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα. Here the addition of the local ἐπιστὰς in the second sentence shews that περιμένειν is not local. οὐ περιμένεις ; ‘wait a moment’ is more civil than ‘ wait there.’

§ 128. Πρός.

a. With Accusative. Pregnant force ;—i.e. not ‘for’ but ‘7 regard of fitness for’: in other words, the Preposition is related to the sentence, in which it stands, not immediately, but through the medium of an unexpressed clause.

Pheedo 117 b, τί λέγεις περὶ τοῦδε τοῦ πόματος, πρὸς τὸ ἀποσπεῖσαί τινι ;—‘ what sayest thou as to this draught admitting of a libation to a deity?’ lit. ‘in regard of its fitness for a libation.’

Protag. 328 b, νοῆσαί τινα, πρὸς τὸ καλὸν κἀγαθὸν yevérOar—‘ to notice a person [favourably] in regard of his fitness for becoming’ &c.

Symp. 177 b, ἐνῆσαν ἅλες ἔπαινον θαυμάσιον ἔχοντες πρὸς ὠφέλειαν.

Lege. 757 0, νέμει τιμὰς μείζοσι μὲν πρὸς ἀρετὴν ἀεὶ μείζους κιτιλ.

Pheedo 69 a, ἡ ὀρθὴ πρὸς ἀρετὴν ἀλλαγή----Ἰ1{. ‘right in regard of fitness for making men good.’

Rep. 581 6, ἀμφισβητοῦνται ἑκάστου τοῦ εἴδους ai ἡδοναὶ... .. πρὸς TO κάλλιον καὶ αἴσχιον ζῆν.

b. With Dative.

Pheedo 112 6, ἄναντες yap πρὸς ἀμφοτέροις τοῖς ῥεύμασι τὸ ἑκατέρωθεν γίγνεται μέρος, [So Oxon.]

Ib. 84 ¢, πρὸς τῷ εἰρημένῳ λόγῳ ἦν-----' absorbed in.’

Cf. Dem. F. L. 127. p. 380, ἢν ὅλος πρὸς τῷ λήμματι (Jelf).

δ 129. e. In Composition with a Verb πρὸς sometimes has the general meaning of ‘additionally,’ and therefore rather qualifies the whole sentence than unites with the Verb, and does not affect in any way the meaning of the Verb.

Rep. 521 d, δεῖ ἄρα καὶ τοῦτο προσέχειν τὸ pabnua—‘to have in

addition.’

Ib. 607 b, προσείπωμεν δὲ a’ry7—‘ and let us say to her moreover.’

Ne enemy ὧν...

δὲ 130, 131.] PREPOSITIONS. 175

Theet. 208 6, τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν ἄλλων προσλάβη----΄ apprehends in addition its difference from other things.’ So 209 d, προσ- δοξάσαι.

| Apol. 20 a, σφίσι ξυνεῖναι χρήματα διδόντας, καὶ χάριν προσειδέναι.

Pheedo 74 ἃ, τόδε προσπάσχειν, ἐννοεῖν.

"Gorg. 516 d, Θεμιστοκλέα ταὐτὰ ταῦτα ἐποίησαν καὶ φυγῇ προσεζη- μίωσαν.

§ 130. Ὑπέρ.

‘With a view to.’

Pheedo 107 ¢, ἐπιμελείας δεῖται οὐχ ὑπὲρ τοῦ χρόνου τούτου μόνον ἐν ᾧ καλοῦμεν τὸ ζῆν.

Protag. 318 d, εἰπὲ τῷ νεανίσκῳ καὶ ἐμοὶ ὑπὲρ τούτου ἐρωτῶντι.

Cf. Lysias xii. 78. p. 127, οὐχ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἀποθανόντος Θηραμένους ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς αὑτοῦ πονηρίας.

191. Xie:

a. Adverbially compounded. Phdr. 242 d, ὑπό τι ἀσεβῆ [λόγον ]---- somewhat impious.’ ’ Gorg. 493 C, ὑπό τι ἄτοπα, b. In Composition. a, ὑπολογίζεσθαι. ἱ Apol. 28 d, Crito 48 d, Phdr. 231 b. Similarly,

Protag. 349 ¢, ἔγωγε οὐδέν σοι ὑπόλογον τίθεμαι.

Lach. 189 Ὁ, λέγ᾽ οὖν μηδὲν τὴν ἡμετέραν ἡλικίαν ὑπόλογον ποιούμενος.

Note, that ὑπολογίζεσθαι is not restricted to an unfavourable sense; cf. Lysias xxx. 16. p. 184, οὐδὲν εἰκὸς αὐτῷ τοῦτο ὑπόλογον γενέσθαι [so Bekker ; οὐδένα... τούτου Zurich editors]|—where αὐτῷ means ‘in his favour,’ and xxyiil. 13. p. 180, οὐδὲ ἀδίκως τούτοις φημὶ ἂν εἶναι ὑπόλογον τὴν ἐκείνων pvynv,—not, as Taylor, ‘honestam excusationem in suo exsilio habere, but ‘non injuria iis laudi imputandum.’

The word does not mean ‘to subtract,’ according to our notion of the operation ; but ‘to reckon against, ‘per contra’ :—the same meaning of ὑπὸ which we get in ὑπαντᾷν, ὑπωμοσία (‘an affidavit to stop’ proceedings), ὑποτιμᾶσθαι (equivalent to ἀντιτιμᾶσθαι).

B. ὑποπίνειν.

Rep. 372 d, μετρίως ὑποπίνοντες.

DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 132.

§ 182. Ipioms or ῬΑΒΤΙΟΙΕΒ.

A. Kai expletive,—preceding and indicating the emphatic word.

Here

a, In Relative Interrogative or Conditional sentences.

καὶ may generally” be rendered ‘at all.’

|

Phedo 77 Ὁ, πρὶν καὶ εἰς ἀνθρώπειον σῶμα ἀφικέσθαι---- before it came at all.’

Tb. 88 a, πρὶν καὶ γενέσθαι ἡμᾶς---΄ before we came into being at all,’

Ib. 110 a, ὅπου ἂν καὶ γῇ 7 —‘ exists at all’

Apol. 22 a, ἵνα μοι καὶ ἀνέλεγκτος 7 μαντεία γίγνοιτο. Here καὶ fastens itself to the latter portion of the compound ἀνέλεγκτος —‘ not to be called in question at all.’

Pheedo 66 d, ἐάν τις ἡμῖν καὶ σχολὴ γένηται.

Tb. 108 d, εἰ καὶ ἠπιστάμην----1{ I even had had the knowledge.’

Ib. 110 b, εἰ δεῖ καὶ μῦθον λέγειν καλόν----1{ it is allowable to narrate a fiction at all.’

Cf. Thue. 1. 15, ὅθεν τις καὶ δύναμις παρεγένετο.

This καὶ frequently enters into a set phrase with the Adjective σμικρός.

Apol. 28 b, ὅτου τι καὶ σμικρὸν ὄφελός ἐστιν.

Soph. 247 6, εἴ τι καὶ σμικρὸν ἐθέλουσι συγχωρεῖν.

Ib. 261 b, θαρρεῖν χρὴ τὸν καὶ σμικρόν τι δυνάμενον.

Phileb. 58 a, ξύμπαντας ὅσοις νοῦ καὶ σμικρὸν προσήρτηται.

Politic. 278 d, mas... δύναιτ᾽ ἄν τις ἀρχόμενος ἀπὸ δόξης ψευδοῦς ἐπί τι τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ μικρὸν μέρος ἀφικόμενος κτήσασθαι φρόνησιν ;

The remaining passages shew the καὶ entering into Interrogative

phrases.

the key to these passages is e.g. Thue.

Euthyphro 3 a, τί καὶ ποιοῦντά σέ φησι διαφθείρειν τοὺς νέους ; Ib. 6 b, τί γὰρ καὶ φήσομεν ;

Pheedo 61 6, τί γὰρ ἄν τις καὶ ποιοῖ ἄλλο ;

Laches 184 d, τί γὰρ ἄν τις καὶ ποιοῖ ;

11 Perhaps it is better to say that a numerous force, which it might

strike any one we were.’ So Arist.

ii. 11, οὔκουν χρή, εἴ τῳ καὶ δοκοῦμεν TAN- θει ἐπιέναι, τούτου ἕνεκα ἀμελέστερόν τι παρεσκευασμένους χωρεῖν ----' if any one considers that we are a numerous force, as we are, —or rather ‘if we are

Eth. Nic. V. xv. 9, εἰς ἃ δὴ βλέπουσι \ oy 3 , Ν ς , καὶ δοκεῖ εἶναι ἀδικία πρὸς αὑτόν--- ‘upon this view there 7s, what we are inclined to think there is, injury

of oneself.’

αι... ee οὐκ μον

§ 133.] PARTICLES. Seley

There is a latent affirmation in a simple Interrogative sentence with ri. The καὶ neutralises this affirmation. ‘What have you done?’ implies that you have done something: the first instance above shews how this implication is neutralised. It is not so with πῶς kai, ποῦ καί, &c., where the καὶ affirms the implied Proposition : Aasch. Choeph. 328, Ποῖ καὶ τελευτᾷ... λόγος ; ‘ what was the issue?’ —implying expectation of one. [Dindorf with the MSS. reads Kai ποῖ. Cf. however Eurip. Pheen. 1354, Πῶς καὶ πέπρακται διπτύχων παίδων φόνος ; |

8. In Affirmative Independent sentences. Here the force of καὶ is often difficult to render by a word, but it seems to be always identical with the emphasis.

Phileb. 23 a, παντάπασιν ἄν τινα καὶ ἀτιμίαν σχοίη.

Euthyd. 304 6, οὑτωσὶ yap πως καὶ εἶπε τοῖς ὀνόμασι.

Rep. 328 ς, διὰ χρόνου γὰρ καὶ ἑωράκειν αὐτόν.

Ib. 395 6, πολλοῦ καὶ δεήσομεν. This phrase often recurs.

Symp. 177 ἃ, φάναι δὴ πάντας καὶ βούλεσθαι.

Ibid. b, καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἧττον καὶ Gavpaoréyv—where Stallbaum well compares Thue. vi. 1, ἢ μᾶλλον καὶ ἐπέθεντο, but wrongly joins καί, both there and here, with the Adverb. [So Stallbaum, but his reference is wrong. He seems to mean Thue. iv. 1, where the old editions have 9 μᾶλλον καὶ ἐπετίθεντο, Poppo and Goller with most of the MSS. ἡ καὶ μᾶλλον ἐπετίθεντο. |

Phedo 107 ¢, ὁ κίνδυνος καὶ δόξειεν ἂν δεινὸς εἶναι,

Phileb. 25 b, σὺ καὶ ἐμοὶ φράσεις, ὡς οἶμαι.

§ 133. Adverbs of intensity are often thus emphasized. | Apol. 18 b, καὶ πάλαι πολλὰ ἤδη ἔτη. Rep. 342 ¢, συνεχώρησεν ἐνταῦθα καὶ μάλα μόγις. Symp. 189 a, ἔφη εἰπεῖν τὸν ᾿Αριστοφάνη ὅτι Καὶ μάλ᾽ ἐπαύσατο. Tb. 194 a, εὖ καὶ μάλ᾽ ἂν φοβοῖο. Pheedo 117 b, καὶ μάλα ἵλεως. bid. ς, καὶ μάλα εὐχερῶς. Protag. 315 ἃ, στρώμασι καὶ μάλα πολλοῖς. Legg. 832 a, καὶ μάλ᾽ ἐνίοτε οὐκ ἀφυεῖς ὄντας. Pheedo 61 6, καὶ γὰρ ἴσως καὶ μάλιστα πρέπει μέλλοντα ἐκεῖσε ἀποδὴη- μεῖν διασκοπεῖν κιτιλ, Rep. 404 b, ἁπλῆ που καὶ ἐπιεικὴς γυμναστικὴ καὶ μάλιστα ἡ περὶ τὸν πόλεμον.

Ni

178 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 134, 135.

Legg. 773 ¢, ἁ μὴ βουλόμεθα ξυμβαίνειν ἡμῖν, καὶ μάλιστα ξυμβαίνει ταῖς πλείσταις πόλεσι.

Euthyd. 293 6, (A) ᾿Αλλ᾽ οὐδὲν ἄρα ἐπίστασθον ; (B) Καὶ μάλα, ἢ δ᾽ és—‘ on the contrary.’

Cf. Hom. Od. i. 318, Adpov .. . δόμεναι οἶκόνδε φέρεσθαι, Καὶ μάλα καλὸν ἑλών, ib. 46, Καὶ λίην κεῖνός γε ἐοικότι κεῖται ὀλέθρῳ, 1]. xiii. 658, Τῶνπέρ τις καὶ μᾶλλον ἐέλδεται ἐξ ἔρον εἷναι, Od. vill. 154; Κήδεά μοι καὶ μᾶλλον ἐνὶ φρεσὶν ἤπερ ἄεθλοι. Hat. ii. 69, οἱ δὲ περὶ Θήβας καὶ κάρτα ἥγηνται αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἱρούς (where of course καὶ κάρτα goes with ἥγηνται. Asch. P. V. 728, Αὗταί σ᾽ ὁδηγήσουσι καὶ μάλ᾽ ἀσμένως, Choeph. 879, καὶ μάλ᾽ ἡβῶντος δὲ δεῖ, Eum. 373, δόξαι τ᾽ ἀνδρῶν καὶ μάλ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αἰθέρι σεμναὶ κιτιλ. Soph. El. 1455, Πάρεστι δῆτα καὶ μάλ᾽ ἄζηλος θέα.

§ 184. Καὶ is subject to Hyperbaton in this use as in others. In the foregoing examples the καὶ indicates the stress laid on the word next following it: but when the word to be emphasized begins the clause the καὶ is sometimes postponed.

Pheedo 63 ο, εἴπερ τι ἄλλο τῶν τοιυύτων, διισχυρισαίμην ἂν καὶ τοῦτο

—where the καὶ emphasizes διισχυρισαίμην. Ib. 68 ς, ἡ σωφροσύνη, ἣν καὶ of πολλοὶ ὀνομάζουσι σωφροσύνην---- where the stress of καὶ includes ἥν. “Gorg. 620 b, μόνοις δ᾽ ἔγωγε καὶ ᾧμην τοῖς δημηγόροις καὶ σοφισταῖς οὐκ ἐγχωρεῖν μέμφεσθαι τούτῳ---Υ 616 καὶ emphasizes μόνοις,

Cf. Hdt. i. 191, ἐς ὃ δὴ καὶ τὸ κάρτα ἐπύθοντο---Ἰ. 6. (if the order

allowed it) τὸ καὶ κάρτα.

ὃ 135. Μή:

a. In Indicative sentences expressing a negative supposition.

Theet. 192 6, Σωκράτης ἐπιγιγνώσκει .. ., ὁρᾷ δὲ pnd€érepov— but sees, by the supposition, neither.’

Phileb. 18 6, τοῦτ᾽ αὐτὸ τοίνυν ἡμᾶς ὁ πρόσθεν λόγος ἀπαιτεῖ πῶς ἐστιν ἕν καὶ πολλὰ αὐτῶν ἑκάτερον, καὶ πῶς μὴ ἄπειρα εὐθὺς ἀλλὰ k.T.A.

Phedo 106 d, σχολῇ γὰρ ἄν τι ἄλλο φθορὰν μὴ δέχοιτο. The mean- ing is not ‘of all things that exist scarce anything could be, in such a case, exempt from corruption, but ‘there could hardly exist anything not admitting corruption.’ The exist- ence of the whole class ‘incorruptible’ becomes questionable.

Hip. Ma. 297 6, ὃ ἂν χαίρειν ἡμᾶς ποιῇ, μή τι πάσας τὰς ἡδονάς, GAN

μὰ

ὃ ἂν διὰ τῆς ἀκοῆς ----' suppose we say, not.’

cdi oe eee

δὲ 136—139.] PARTICLES. 179

Hip. Ma. 299 d, Gp’ οὖν ἡδὺ ἡδέος... διαφέρει τῷ ἡδὺ εἶναι ; μὴ γὰρ εἰ μείζων τις ἡδονὴ ἢ ἐλάττων.

Politic. 292 6, πεττευταὶ τοσοῦτοι οὐκ ἂν γένοιντό ποτε, μή τι δὴ βασιλεῖς ye—‘let alone kings.’ Comparing this with the last instance but one, we see how the force of μή τι is enhanced by its following the clause with which it is contrasted.

Tim. 26 c, λέγειν εἰμὲ ἕτοιμος, μὴ μόνον ἐν κεφαλαίοις ἀλλὰ K.T.A,

Politic. 295 6, μὴ ἐξέστω δὴ παρὰ ταῦτα ἕτερα προστάττειν ; (‘is he to be forbidden 1)

Cf. Aschin. iii. 21. p. 56, ὅτι ἦρξα, μὴ ἀποδημήσω; (‘am I not to’ &c. ἢ)

The μὴ in the Brachylogical combination μὴ ὅτε comes under this head ; for instances see below, ὃ 154.

§ 136. 8. In the Deprecatory form of contradiction.

Euthyd. 294 ¢, (A) οὐκ ἐξαρκεῖ σοι ἀκοῦσαι κιτιλ.; (B) Μηδαμῶς" ἀλλὰ κιτιλ.

Ib. 300 a, (A) τί δέ; (B) Μηδέν.

Protag. 318 Ὁ, τοῦτο μὲν οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν λέγεις" ἀλλὰ μὴ οὕτως.

Meno 75 ἃ, (A) πειρῶ εἰπεῖν. (Β) Μή, ἀλλὰ σὺ εἰπέ.

Cf. Aristoph. Vesp. $54, (A) Οὗτος σύ, ποῖ θεῖς ; ἐπὶ καδίσκους ; (Β) μηδαμῶς.

§ 137. y. In the sense of ‘whether.—For instances see above, § 61.

§ 138. δ. In the sense of ‘ perhaps’—from which the sense of ‘whether’ just mentioned flows. See above, ὃ 59.

Euthyd. 298 ¢, μὴ yap, ὦ Εὐθύδημε, τὸ λεγόμενον, οὐ λίνον λίνῳ συνάπτεις ;—‘ are you perhaps not joining’ &c.? i.e. ‘perhaps you are not joining.’

Protag. 312 a, ἀλλ᾽ dpa μὴ οὐχ brodaySavers—‘ perhaps, then, you on the contrary do not suppose.’

§ 139. Οὐ πάνυ. The universal meaning of οὐ πάνυ is ‘ hardly,’ ‘scarcely.’ Theet. 149 d, οὐ πάνυ τοῦτο οἶδα. Ib. 172 b, οὐκ ἂν πάνυ τολμήσειε φῆσαι. Symp. 180 ¢, οὐ πάνυ διεμνημόνευεν. Tb. 204 d, οὐ πάνυ ἔφην ἔτι ἔχειν ἐγὼ προχείρως ἀποκρίνασθαι. N 2

x

180 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 140, 141.

Pheedo 63 a, od πάνυ εὐθέως ἐθέλει πείθεσθαι.

Ibid. ο, οὐκ ἂν πάνυ διισχυρισαίμην.

ΤΌ. 85 d, οὐ πάνυ φαίνεται ἱκανῶς εἰρῆσθαι.

Tb. 100 a, οὐ πάνυ ξυγχωρῶ.

Theet. 145 a, οὐ πάνυ ἄξιον τὸν νοῦν προσέχειν.

Ib. 176 b, οὐ πάνυ ῥάδιον πεῖσαι.

Pheedo 59 a, οὐδὲν πάνυ μοι ἐλεεινὸν εἰσήει.

Apol. 41 d, καὶ ἔγωγε τοῖς καταψηφισαμένοις μου καὶ τοῖς κατηγόροις οὐ πάνυ χαλεπαίνω. ᾿

The following three instances are decisive for the meaning

“scarcely.”

Euthyphro 2 b, οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸς πάνυ τι γιγνώσκω, ὦ Εὐθύφρον, τὸν ἄνδρα.

Protag. 331 6, οὐ πάνυ οὕτως, οὐ μέντοι οὐδὲ αὖ ὡς σύ μοι δοκεῖς οἴεσθαι.

Phileb. 41 ἃ, σχεδὸν γὰρ τῷ ψεύδει μὲν οὐ πάνυ πονηρὰς ἄν τις λύπας τε καὶ ἡδονὰς θείη, μεγάλῃ δὲ ἄλλῃ καὶ πολλῇ συμπιπτούσας πονηρίᾳ.

The following three are to be interpreted on the principle of

Litotes.

Symp. 195 68, κρανίων, ἅ ἐστιν od πάνυ padaxd—‘ skulls, which can hardly be said to be soft things.’

Apol. 19 a, οἶμαι δὲ αὐτὸ χαλεπὸν εἶναι, καὶ od πάνυ pe λανθάνει οἷόν eorw—‘ I can hardly say I do not know.’

Tb. 41 d, καὶ ἔγωγε τοῖς καταψηφισαμένοις μου. . . οὐ πάνυ χαλεπαίνω —‘I can scarcely say I am displeased’—‘I have no sufficient cause to be displeased.’

Cf. Ar. Eth. Nic. 11. vii. 3, ἐλλείποντες περὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς οὐ πάνυ

, = > a γίγνονται, IV. i. 30, τὰ μὲν οὖν τῆς ἀσωτίας ob πάνυ συνδυάζεται.

§ 140. Different is Laches 183 c, οὐ πάνυ ὀλίγοις ἐγὼ τούτων παρα- yéyova—where πάνυ goes closely with ὀλίγοις. Quite different also

, are πάνυ ov, παντάπασιν ov, &e.

§ 141. Οὐδέ.

The use of οὐδὲ for καὶ οὐ in the sense not of ‘and not’ but of ‘also not’ is worth pointing out in cases where the οὐδὲ qualifies specially not a Substantive (the common case) but some other Part of Speech.

Phileb. 23 b, σχεδὸν δὲ οὐδὲ fadvov—tfor σχεδὸν δὲ καὶ οὐ ῥάδιον.

δὲ 142, 143.] PARTICLES. 181

Legg. 730 d, τίμιος μὲν δὴ καὶ ὁ μηδὲν ἀδικῶν ὁ δὲ μηδ᾽ ἐπιτρέπων τοῖς ἀδικοῦσιν ἀδικεῖν πλέον ἢ διπλασίας τιμῆς ἄξιος ἐκείνου----“ but he who beyond this does not allow’ &c.

Euthyphro 15 b, μέμνησαι γάρ που ὅτι κιτιλ. ἢ οὐδὲ μέμνησαι ;—for a A > ΄ ‘ ἣ . { . .

ἢ καὶ οὐ μέμνησαι; ‘or on the contrary,’ lit. ‘or, which is also an alternative.’

Phedo 72 a, ἰδὲ τοίνυν οὕτως ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ἀδίκως ὡμολογήκαμεν----Ἰ. 6. ἰδὲ τοίνυν καὶ οὕτως ὅτι οὐκ ἀδίκως wp.

Crito 44 b, ὡς ἐμοί, ἐὰν σὺ ἀποθάνῃς, οὐδὲ μία ξυμφορὰ ἐστίν, ἀλλὰ «7A, Taking this reading now for granted [Oxon. and one other MS. have οὐδεμία], it will be explained by resolving the οὐδέ, and attaching the καὶ to os, ‘since moreover the event of your death is to me not one misfortune, but’ &c.

Tb. 45 a, καὶ yap οὐδὲ πολὺ τἀργύριον éori—for καὶ yap καὶ k.7.A.

Ib. 45 ¢, ἔτι δὲ οὐδὲ Sikacov—for ἔτι δὲ καὶ οὐ δίκαιον.

45 Ὁ,

Cf. Isocr. xviii. 65. p. 383, ὅτ᾽ οὐδ᾽ οὕτω padiov ἦν----“ when, besides,

it was not easy. Ar. Eth. V. vill. 10, ἔτι δὲ ovSé—for ἔτι δὲ

x > Και OV,

ΕΣ Ane a. Introducing a supposed objection.

Rep. 365 c-d, we have seriatim ἀλλὰ γὰρ--------ἀλλὰ δή.

Apol. 37 b-c, we have the series πότερον ἀλλὰ ἀλλὰ δή.

8. Introducing an instance.

Symp. 196 d—197 a, we have the series πρῶτον μὲν καὶ μὲν

δὴ... γε-------αλλά,

ᾧ 143. Εὐθύς, νῦν, αὐτίκα, πολλάκις, ὅζα.

a, evus, ‘from first to last, Phdr. 259 c.

8. νῦν, ‘as the case now stands,’ Crito 54 b, Apol. 38 b.

y. αὐτίκα, ‘for instance,’ Theet. 166 b, Protag. 359 e, Phdr. 235 6, Legg. 727 a, Gorg. 483 a, ὥσπερ αὐτίκα, Laches 195 ὃ, ἐπεὶ αὐτίκα.

δ. πολλάκις, ‘perchance, after μή, Protag. 361 c: after εἰ dpa, Phedo 60 e, Laches 179 b, 194 a, Politic. 264 b, εἴ τινων πολλάκις ἄρα διακήκοας, Phdr. 238 d, ἐὰν dpa πολλάκις νυμφόληπτος γένωμαι. And perhaps Phedo 73 d, ὥσπερ γε καὶ Σιμμίαν τις ἰδὼν πολλάκις Κέβητος ἀνεμνήσθη.

ε. ὅτε, ‘whereas.’ “Or οὖν δὴ equivalent to ἐπειδὴ οὖν, Soph.

254 Ὁ, Tim. 69 a. So ὁπότε, Euthyd. 297 d, Laches 169 d.

182 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ξδ΄ 144—147.

ὃ 144. The remaining heads treat of Particles in combination. B. In order to understand and to interpret certain combinations of Particles, regard must be had to the fact, that they enter simzl- taneously into the sentence, as it were speaking at once rather than in succession. a. A familiar instance is the combination καὶ----δέ, e.g. Rep. 573 b, ἕως ἂν καθήρῃ σωφροσύνης, καὶ μανίας δὲ πληρώσῃ ἐπακ- τοῦ. The δὲ and the καὶ enter into the meaning abreast of one another,

δ 145. b. Kai μέντοι only differs from καὶ----δὲ in that the μέντοι is stronger than the δέ, and that the two Particles are not neces- sarily separated by the intervention of other words.

Symp. 214 6, καὶ μέντοι οὑτωσὶ ποίησον.

Tb. 222 ἃ, καὶ μέντοι οὐκ ἐμὲ μόνον ταῦτα πεποίηκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ Χαρ-

μίδην κιτ.λ. Ϊ Apol. 17 ὁ, καὶ μέντο: καὶ πάνυ τοῦτο ὑμῶν δέομαι.

Ib. 26 e€, ἄπιστός γ᾽ εἶ, καὶ ταῦτα μέντοι σαυτῷ.

Th. 31 b, καὶ εἰ μέντοι τι ἀπὸ τούτων ἀπέλαυον κ-τ.λ.

Euthyd. 289 6, καὶ μέντοι οὐδὲν θαυμαστόν.

Ale. I. 113 ὁ, καὶ μέντοι καὶ εὖ λέγεις.

§ 146. 6. Such a combination again is καὶ οὖν Kai. Protag. 309 b, καὶ yap πολλὰ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ εἶπε, βοηθῶν ἐμοί, καὶ οὖν Kat ἄρτι ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνου ἔρχομαι. d. Such again is δ᾽ ἀλλά. Soph. 235 d, σὺ δ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ εἰπὲ πρῶτον. e. And again δὲ---- μέντοι.

Phdr. 267 c, Πρωταγόρεια δὲ οὐκ ἢν μέντοι τοιαῦτ᾽ ἄττα :

§ 147. f. ᾿Αλλὰ γάρ.

Here we must observe that there is no Ellipse, such as is in- volved in the supposition that, whereas the γὰρ refers to the clause immediately subjoined to it, the ἀλλὰ belongs either to a clause understood or to a clause following at a greater distance. The sense forbids such a supposition: for the ἀλλὰ sits much closer to the clause immediately subjoined than the yap does. ᾿Αλλὰ yap has two meanings: one when it introduces an objection, and is there- fore ironical; the other, which alone needs illustration, when it has the force of ‘but be that as it may,’ or ‘but the truth is.’

§ 148.] PARTICLES. 183

Symp. 180 a, Αἴσχυλος δὲ φλυαρεῖ κιτιλ." ἀλλὰ yap τῷ ὄντι K.7.D,

Phdr. 228 a, εἰ ἐγὼ Φαῖδρον ἀγνοῶ, καὶ ἐμαυτοῦ ἐπιλέλησμαι" ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐδέτερα ἔστι τούτων.

Pheedo 87 d, μέτρι᾽ ἄν μοι φαίνοιτο λέγειν, ὡς ἡ μὲν ψυχὴ πολυχρόνιον ἐστι, τὸ δὲ σῶμα ἀσθενέστερον καὶ ὀλιγοχρονιώτερον. ἀλλὰ γὰρ ay gain ἑκάστην τῶν ψυχῶν πολλὰ σώματα κατατρίβειν... . ἀναγκαῖον μέντ᾽ ἂν εἴη κιτ.Ὰ.----" but, he might say, be that as it may,’ &c.

Ib. 95 c—d, pnview ... . ὅτι πολυχρόνιόν ἐστι ψυχὴ κιτιλ. ἀλλὰ yap οὐδέν τι μᾶλλον ἦν ἀθάνατον.

Meno 94 6, ἀλλὰ γάρ, ὦ ἑταῖρε, μὴ οὐκ ἦ διδακτὸν ἀρετή---- but the truth is.’

| Apol. 19 ¢, καὶ οὐχ ὡς ἀτιμάζων λέγω κιτιλ, ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἐμοὶ τούτων, ὦ ' ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, οὐδὲν μέτεστι. So Ibid. d, Ib. 25 ο, &c.

Cf. Hom. Il. vii. 237-242, Αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν εὖ οἶδα μάχας κιτ.λ.. ᾿Αλλ᾽ οὐ γάρ σ᾽ ἐθέλω βαλέειν κιτιλ., Od. x. 201, Κλαῖον δὲ λιγέως κιτ.λ.’ "ANN’ οὐ γάρ τις πρῆξις ἐγίγνετο μυρομένοισιν.

§ 148. g. “ANN ἢ, πλὴν ἢ. The joint meaning is ‘except.’ By the ἀλλὰ the exception to

the negative which has preceded is stated flatly: the 7 allows the negative statement to revive, subject to this exception alone.

2 ,

Symp. 189 6, viv δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν [ἀνδρόγυνον] ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἐν ὀνείδει ὄνομαι κείμενον. >=.

Phedo 82 b, μὴ φιλοσοφήσαντι ot θέμις ἀφικνεῖσθαι ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τῷ φιλο--- μαθεῖ.

Ib. 81 Ὁ, ὥστε μηδὲν ἄλλο δοκεῖν εἶναι ἀληθὲς GAN ἢ τὸ σωματοειδές.

ΤΌ. 97 4, οὐδὲν ἄλλο σκοπεῖν προσήκειν ἀνθρώπῳ... ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τὸ ἄριστον.

Protag. 329 d, οὐδὲν διαφέρει GAN ἢ μεγέθει καὶ σμικρότητι.

Tb. 334 ¢, μὴ χρῆσθαι ἐλαίῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ὅ τι σμικροτάτῳ.

ΤΌ. 354 b, ἢ ἔχετέ τι ἄλλο τέλος λέγειν, .. ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἡδονάς τε καὶ λύπας ;—The interrogative is equivalent to a negative; so that the rule stands good that ἀλλ᾽ ἢ occurs only after a negative in the main construction. The ἄλλο is anticipatory of the exception, and this is also pleonastic.

| Apol. 42 a, ἄδηλον παντὶ πλὴν ἢ τῷ θεῷ --ασαῖῃ a virtually nega- tive sentence, the ἄδηλον παντὶ being equivalent to δῆλον οὐδενί, The analogy cf ἀλλ᾽ ἢ perfectly justifies, so far as Syntax is concerned, the disputed reading πλὴν 7. The πλὴν and the ἢ enter the meaning simultaneously, introducing the exception

184 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ὃ 149.

each in its own way; πλὴν implies ‘it is known to none— saving that [in contradiction to this] it is known to Ged >" 3, less harshly, ‘it is known to none, or however [only] to God.’ Cf. Thuc. v. 60, od μετὰ τῶν πλειόνων βουλευσάμενος, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἑνὶ ἀνδρὶ κοινώσας, 80, ἐψηφίσαντο... μὴ ξυμβαίνειν τῳ ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἅμα, Vil. 50, οὐκέτι ὁμοίως ἠναντιοῦτο, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ μὴ φανερῶς γε ἀξιῶν ψηφίζεσθαι,

Vill. 28, οὐ προσδεχομένων ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ᾿Αττικὰς τὰς ναῦς εἶναι.

§ 149. h. νῦν δὲ... γάρ. This combination is always preceded

by a hypothesis of something contrary to facts, and is parallel to -

the Protasis of that sentence, which it contradicts. The δὲ and the γὰρ exercise a simultaneous force; δὲ represents that the condition stands differently in fact from what it is in the supposed case, and yap further represents that the inference must be different.

The combinations viv S€... γὰρ and ἀλλὰ γὰρ approach each other in meaning as well as in structure. Noy dé... yap is however only used in contradicting the Protasis of a hypothetical proposi- tion. There is of course no Ellipse to be supplied; that is, we are not to look on to a sentence beyond to supply a clause to the viv δέ, The δὲ sits as close to the clause immediately subjoined as does the ydp* the νῦν (‘as the case actually stands’) belongs to both Particles equally. Some of the instances which follow would admit of the Elliptical explanation of the νῦν d& but none of them neces- sitate it, and some others do not admit of it.

Euthyphro 11 ¢, καὶ εἰ μὲν αὐτὰ ἐγὼ ἔλεγον, ἴσως ἄν pe ἐπέσκωπτες"

νῦν δὲ σαὶ γὰρ αἱ ὑποθέσεις εἰσίν. ἄλλου δή τινος δεῖ σκώμματος.

Ib. 14 ¢, ὃ εἰ ἀπεκρίνω, ἱκανῶς ἂν ἤδη ἐμεμαθήκη. νῦν δὲ ἀνάγκη γὰρ τὸν ἐρωτῶντα τῷ ἐρωτωμένῳ ἀκολουθεῖν" τί δὴ αὖ λέγεις K.T.A. ;

| Apol. 38 a, εἰ μὲν ἦν μοι χρήματα, ἐτιμησάμην ἄν" νῦν δὲ ov yap εστιν.

Protag. 347 a, σὲ οὖν, καὶ εἰ μέσως ἔλεγες ἐπιεικῆ καὶ ἀληθῆ, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἔψεγον. νῦν δὲ σφόδρα γὰρ ψευδόμενος δοκεῖς ἀληθῆ λέγειν" διὰ ταῦτά σε ἐγὼ ψέγω.

Charm. 175 a—b, οὐ γὰρ ἄν που... ἀνωφελὲς ἐφάνη, εἴ τι ἐμοῦ ὄφελος ἦν. νῦν δὲ πανταχῆ γὰρ ἡττώμεθα.

Laches 184 d, εἰ μὲν γὰρ συνεφερέσθην τὠδε, ἧττον ἂν τοῦ τοιούτου ἔδει. νῦν δὲ τὴν ἐναντίαν γὰρ Λάχης Νικίᾳ ἔθετο. εὖ δὴ ἔχει ἀκοῦσαι καὶ σοῦ.

Ib. 200 e, εἰ μὲν οὖν κιτιλ., δίκαιον ἂν ἦν κιτιλ. νῦν δ᾽ ὁμοίως γὰρ

, > > , > , ΤῊΝ ΟῚ ἃ TTQVTES εν aTropla ἐγενόμεθα. Tl OVY av Tts K.T.A. 3

en -

δὲ 150-- 153. PARTICLES. 185

Legg. 875 ¢, ἐπεὶ ταῦτα εἴ ποτέ τις ἀνθρώπων . . . παραλαβεῖν δυνατὸς εἴη, νόμων οὐδὲν ἂν δέοιτο κιτ.λ. νῦν δὲ οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν οὐδαμοῦ οὐ- δαμῶς ἀλλ᾽ ἢ κατὰ βραχύ. διὸ δὴ τὸ δεύτερον αἱρετέον.

Cf. Lysias xii. 61. p. 125, ὅμως δ᾽ ἐγὼ γὰρ δέομαι ἀναπαύσασθαι.

§ 150. i. The cases of οὐ μὴ and μὴ οὐ, when they make one negative, must be explained upon this principle of simultaneity of force. The resulting negation, though single, is both subjective and objective.

Of οὐ μὴ a single instance may sufiice.

Laches 197 d, καὶ yap μοι δοκεῖς οὐδὲ μὴ ἠσθῆσθαι ὅτι κιτ.λ.

Of the uses οὗ μὴ οὐ Mr. Campbell, Theetetus, Appendix B, has given a happy analysis and explanation. But it may be noticed that in a peculiar instance his restriction of μὴ οὐ to a Dependent clause, with the Infinitive or Participle, does not apply.

Phileb. 12 6, πῶς yap ἡδονή ye ἡδονῇ μὴ ody ὁμοιότατον ἂν εἴη ;—

which however is virtually equivalent to πῶς γὰρ ἂν ἐνδέχοιτο,

58 ΟἹ ay “ \ > ε ΄ 3 * noovny ἡδονὴ μὴ οὐχ ὁμοιότατον εἰναι:

§ 151. C. Many combinations of Particles are Elliptical. Such are those of a Negative with ὅτε or ὅπως which follow. a. Ov μόνον ὅτι---- I was not only going to say’ (parenthetically). Symp. 179 b, ἐθέλουσιν, οὐ μόνον ὅτι ἄνδρες, ἀλλὰ καὶ κιτιλ. Legg. 751 b, οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν πλέον εὖ τεθέντων, οὐδ᾽ ὅτι γέλως ἂν πάμπολυς ξυμβαίνοι, σχεδὸν δὲ κιτ.λ. Cf. Thue. iv. 85, καὶ γὰρ οὐ μόνον ὅτι αὐτοὶ ἀνθίστασθε, ἀλλὰ καὶ οἷς

ἂν ἐπίω, ἧσσόν τις ἐμοὶ πρόσεισι.

§ 152. b. Οὐχ ὅπως has a similar meaning in Negative sentences. Whence moreover οὐχ ὅπως is said to be equivalent to οὐχ ὅπως οὐ" which means that the Negative which follows extends its meaning backwards over the οὐχ ὅπως clause.

Meno 96 a, οἱ φάσκοντες διδάσκαλοι εἶναι οὐχ ὅπως ἄλλων διδάσκαλοι

ὁμολογοῦνται, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ αὐτοὶ ἐπίστασθαι.

Cf. Thucyd. i. 35, οὐχ ὅπως κωλυταὶ. .. γενήσεσθε, ἀλλὰ καὶ . περιόψεσθε (where the Negative is borrowed by κωλυταὶ γενή- σεσθε from περιόψεσθε. which being its opposite is a virtual Negative), ili. 42, οὐχ ὅπως ζημιοῦν ἀλλὰ μηδ᾽ ἀτιμάζειν.

§ 153. c. Οὐχ ὅτι--- not but that ;’ lit. ‘I was not going to deny

186 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8§ 154, 155.

that ’ (parenthetically). Occurring in sentences of Negative form, it borrows their Negative. It is quite different from οὐ μόνον ὅτι. Theet. 157 Ὁ, ὥστε ἐξ ἁπάντων τούτων, ὅπερ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐλέγομεν, οὐδὲν εἶναι ἕν αὐτὸ καθ᾽ αὑτὸ... .. τὸ δ᾽ εἶναι πανταχόθεν ἐξαιρετέον, οὐχ ὅτι ἡμεῖς... ἠναγκάσμεθα.. . . χρῆσθαι αὐτῷ. Protag. 336 d, Σωκράτη ἐγγυῶμαι μὴ ἐπιλήσεσθαι, οὐχ ὅτι mai¢ec—‘ for Θ ’ PEED AE yy ORG Es Le 7 OU: all it be true that’ &c. Y Gorg. 450 6, οὐδεμίαν οἶμαί σε βούλεσθαι ῥητορικὴν καλεῖν, οὐχ ὅτι TO ῥήματι οὕτως εἶπες. Lysis 210 6, πᾶσα ἣ τοιαύτη σπουδὴ οὐκ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐστὶν ἐσπουδασμένη

. +. οὐχ ὅτι πολλάκις λέγομεν K-T.A.

§ 154. d. Μὴ ὅτι--- ποάππι, ‘much less’ or ‘much more,’ accord- ing as the sentence is Negative or Affirmative: ‘not to say, 1. 6. not supposing us to say.

Symp. 207 e, μὴ τὲ ---- ἀλλὰ Καί: So 208 a.

» Apol. 40 d, μὴ ὅτε... ., ἀλλά.

Protag. 319 d, μὴ τοίνυν ὅτι... ἀλλά,

Lege. 799 ¢, πᾶς που νέος, μὴ ὅτι πρεσβύτης.

Crat. 427 6, ὁτιοῦν πρᾶγμα, μὴ ὅτι τοσοῦτον.

Phileb. 60 d, καὶ ὁτιοῦν εἶναι ἢ γίγνεσθαι, μὴ ὅτι δή γε ἡδονήν.

Phdr. 240 6, ἃ καὶ λόγῳ ἀκούειν οὐκ ἐπιτερπές, μὴ ὅτι δὴ κιτιλ.

VGorg. 512 b, ὃς οὔτε στρατηγοῦ, μὴ ὅτι κυβερνήτου, οὔτε ἄλλου οὐδενὸς

> rs ΩΝ ἦ Ψ ἐλάττω ἐνίοτε δύναται σώζειν.

ὃ 155. D. Elliptical also, but in a still greater degree, are the

combinations which now follow.

ἃ. Οὐ μέντοι dAAd—‘ yet, so far from the contrary. After ov μέντοι is to be understood a proposition the contrary of that which follows the ἀλλά,

Symp. 199 ἃ, χαιρέτω δή" οὐ yap ἔτι ἐγκωμιάζω τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον" οὐ μέντοι ἀλλὰ τά γε ἀληθῆ... ἐθέλω εἰπεῖν---ἰ yet ποῦ so that I am unwilling,—on the contrary I am willing,—to utter the truth.’

Meno 86 ¢, (A) βούλει οὖν x... ; (Ὁ) Πάνυ μὲν οὖν, οὐ μέντοι, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἀλλ᾽ ἔγωγε ἐκεῖνο ἂν ἥδιστα σκεψαίμην----“ yet not so that it would not,—on the contrary it would,—be most to my taste to’ &e.

Crat. 436 d, ἐκείνης δὲ ἐξετασθείσης ἱκανῶς, τὰ λοιπὰ φαίνεσθαι ἐκείνῃ ἑπόμενα. οὐ μέντοι ἀλλὰ θαυμάζοιμ᾽ ἂν εἰ καὶ τὰ ὀνόματα συμφωνεῖ αὐτὰ αὑτοῖς---- yet I do not mean by this, that I should ποῦ wonder,—on the contrary I should wonder,—if’ &e.

Uns Glee

δὲ 156—160. | PARTICLES. 187

Cf. Thue. v. 43, od μέντοι ἀλλὰ καὶ φρονήματι φιλονεικῶν ἠναντιοῦτο. So viii. 56, ἐνταῦθα δὴ οὐκέτι ἀλλ᾽ ἄπορα νομίσαντες κ.τ.λ.

§ 156. b. Of οὐ γὰρ ἀλλὰ the same explanation holds ;—‘ for not

the contrary, but, i.e. ‘for, so far from the contrary.’

Euthyd. 305 e, τί οὖν ; δοκοῦσί σοί τι λέγειν 3 οὐ γάρ τοι ἀλλ᾽ 6 γε λόγος ἔχει τινὰ εὐπρέπειαν----᾿ for I must say, &c.: more literally, ‘for, do you know, so far from the contrary,’ &e.

Ib. 286 b, πῶς λέγεις 3 οὐ γάρ τοι ἀλλὰ τοῦτόν ye τὸν λόγον. . . ἀεὶ θαυμάζω----" for, do you know, I must say I’ ζο.

Pheedo 83 6, κόσμιοί τ᾽ εἰσὶ καὶ ἀνδρεῖοι, οὐχ ὧν of πολλοὶ ἕνεκά φασιν . 2. οὐ γὰρ ἀλλ᾽ οὕτω λογίσαιτ᾽ ἂν ψυχὴ ἀνδρὸς φιλοσόφου---- for, so far from the contrary, ---ἰ. e. ‘ for, most assuredly.’

δ 157. c. Οὐ μόνον ye adda.

Phedo 107 Ὁ, οὐ μόνον γ᾽ ἀλλὰ ταῦτά τε εὖ λέγεις, καὶ τὰς ὑποθέσεις τὰς πρώτας, καὶ εἰ πισταὶ ὑμῖν εἰσιν, ὅμως ἐπισκεπτέαι. The full construction is οὐ μόνον γε ταῦτα εὖ λέγεις, ἀλλὰ ταῦτά τε εὖ λέ- γεις καὶ x.7.A.—‘ not only is what you say true, but a further observation in the same direction is true,’ namely ras ὑποθέ-

σεις K.T.A,

§ 158. What is to be noticed as to all the three expressions, οὐ μέντοι ἀλλά, οὐ yap ἀλλά, and οὐ μόνον γ᾽ ἀλλά, is, that the ov is not retrospective but proleptic, referring to a proposition which is not expressed but is indicated by its contrary expressed in the ἀλλὰ clause.

§ 159. E. Other noticeable combinations of Particles are such as

follow. a. Μέν ye answered by δέ, in working out a contrast between

two characters.

Symp. 180 d, πῶς δ᾽ οὐ δύο τὼ θεά ; ἡ μέν ye KA. ἡ δὲ KTA,

Tb. 215 Ὁ, πολύ γε θαυμασιώτερος ἐκείνου" ὁ μέν γε κιτιλ. σὺ δὲ KATA,

Cf. Thue. i. 70, οἱ μέν γε νεωτεροποιοί, Dem. de Cor. 93. p. 257, ὁ μέν ye σύμμαχος ὦν. [80 Bekker: ὁ μὲν γὰρ Zurich ed.]}

fEschin, i. 63. p. 62, ὁ μέν γε τὴν ἐξουσίαν δέδωκε.

b. καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ... γε. Legg. 728 d-e, τίμιον εἶναι σῶμα οὐ τὸ καλὸν οὐδὲ ἰσχυρὸν κιτιλ., καὶ

‘ ὑδὲ A , ’ > , A) δ᾽ > ~ , μην OVOE TA TOLUT@Y y εναντια, Ta εν Τῷ μεσῳ.

δ 160. The following are various combinations with δή, to which ye is often subjoined.

188 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 161, 162.

c. Καὶ μὲν δή, with and without ye subjoined.

Rep. 409 a, διὸ δὴ καὶ εὐήθεις. .. φαίνονται κιτιλ. Καὶ μὲν δή, ἔφη, σφόδρα γε αὐτὸ πάσχουσιν.

Symp. 196 6, ᾧ δὴ πρέπει ἡμᾶς μαρτυρίῳ χρῆσθαι, ὅτι ποιητὴς ὁ Ἔρως «ον πᾶσαν ποίησιν τὴν κατὰ μουσικὴν... καὶ μὲν δὴ τήν γε τῶν ζώων ποίησιν τίς ἐναντιώσεται K.T.A. ;

Soph. 217 Ὁ, καὶ μὲν δὴ κατὰ τύχην γε, ὦ Σώκρατες, λόγων ἐπελάβου παραπλησίων κιτ.Ὰλ.

Phdr. 221 d, καὶ μὲν δὴ εἰ μὲν κιτιλ, εἰ δὲ KA, So 2220029350: ἃ. ᾿Αλλὰ μὲν δή, without or with ye.

Crat. 428 Ὁ, ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ---- well, no doubt.’

Crito 48 ἃ, ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ... ye—‘ well, but then’ (in the mouth of an objector).

Pheedo 75 a, Euthyphro τὸ d, Gorg. 492 6, 506 d, ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ... ye—‘ but further ’—in a consecutive proof.

e. ᾿Ατὰρ οὖν δὴ... ye. Politic. 269 ἃ. f. "ANN οὖν δὴ ὅμως ye. Rep. 602 b.

. OV yap 6)... ye. Pheedo g2 Ὁ:

h. ‘Qs δή τοι---- how true is it that. Rep. 366 ο, Tim. 26 Ὁ.

1. Ὡς δὴ 00—ironical. Gorg. 468 e, 499 b.

j. Καὶ δὴ xai—‘ then, I suppose,’ ironically. Apol. 26 d.

§ 161. F. Correlative Particles. a. It is worth observing that in the Laws of Plato οὐ has more frequently δὲ contrasted with it than ἀλλά. b. Instead of the common ἄλλως τε καὶ we find sometimes καὶ ἄλλως καί, as Laches 181 a, 187 6. ce. Irregular Correlatives. Tim. 20 d, μάλα μὲν ἀτόπου, παντάπασί ye μὴν ἀληθοῦς. Legg. 927 b, ὀξὺ μὲν ἀκούουσι, βλέπουσί τε ὀξύ. Symp. 205 d, τὸ μὲν κεφάλαιον, κιτιλ. ἀλλ᾽ οἱ μὲν... οἱ δὲ κιτιλ, Ib. 177 Ὁ, καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἧττον καὶ θαυμαστόν, ἀλλὰ κιτιλ.

| A ΄ Apol. 38 d, ἀπορίᾳ μὲν ἑάλωκα, οὐ μέντοι λόγων.

§ 162. Note, that μέντοι is used, and not δέ, (1) when particular emphasis has to be given to the opposition ; (2) where, as in the instance here quoted, δὲ could not be conveniently used ; (3) in expressing opposition to a clause which is itself introduced by δέ.

bik

δὲ 163—165.] COMPARISON. 189

§ 163. Ipioms or Comparison.

A. Syntax of words of the Comparative Degree.

B. ,, .» words of the Superlative Degree.

C. ,, 5, other Comparative words and formule.

A. Comparatives. ἃ. Ordinary form.

The only case needing remark under this head is that of a clause compared by #, while its pronominal pre-statement (see above, ὃ 19) is compared in the Genitive.

Pheedo 89 d, οὐκ ἄν τις μεῖζον τούτου κακὸν πάθοι, ἢ λόγους μισήσας.

Crito 44 ¢, τίς ἂν αἰσχίων εἴη ταύτης δόξα, ἢ δοκεῖν κιτ.λ. ;

So Lysias xxv. 23. p. 173; οὐδὲν yap ἂν εἴη αὐτοῖς χαλεπώτερον τού-

των, ἢ πυνθάνεσθα. We trace the Idiom back to Homer, Od. Vi. 182, οὐ μὲν γὰρ Tovye κρεῖσσον καὶ ἄρειον, Ἢ ὅθ᾽ ὁμοφρονέοντε νοήμασιν οἶκον ἔχητον ᾿Ανὴρ ἠδὲ γυνή. So Hat. i. 79, ὥς οἱ παρὰ δόξαν ἔσχε τὰ πρήγματα, ἢ ὡς αὐτὸς κατεδόκεε.

δ 164. b. Rarer forms.

a, ‘Qs as the Conjunction of Comparison. Rep. 526 ¢, ἅ ye μείζω πόνον παρέχει οὐκ ἂν ῥᾳδίως οὐδὲ πολλὰ ἂν εὕροις ὡς τοῦτο. ἌΡ]. 36d, οὐκ ἐσθ᾽ ὅ τι μᾶλλον πρέπει οὕτως os. . . σιτεῖσθαι. Cf. Hom. Il. iv. 277, [νέφος] μελάντερον nite πίσσα. So Lysias vil. 12. p. 109, ἡγούμενος μᾶλλον λέγεσθαι ὥς por προσῆκε, ib. 31. Ῥ. 111, προθυμότερον πεποίηκα ὡς... ἠναγκαζόμην. § 165. 8. Comparative followed by Prepositions. Tapa. Note, that the παρὰ in this construction is not ‘ beyond,’ but ‘contrasted with’ (lit. ‘put co-ordinate with.’) Cf. Phdr. 276 e, παγκάλην λέγεις παρὰ φαύλην wadiavy, And Thucyd. v. go, ἐπειδὴ παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον τὸ ξυμφέρον λέγειν ὑπέθεσθε. Politic. 296 a, εἴ τις γιγνώσκει παρὰ τοὺς τῶν ἔμπροσθεν βελτίους νόμους. Legg. 729 6, ἐστὶ τὰ τῶν ξένων καὶ εἰς τοὺς ξένους ἁμαρτήματα παρὰ τὰ τῶν πολιτῶν εἰς θεὸν ἀνηρτημένα τιμωρὸν μᾶλλον. Πρό. Pheedo 99 a, δικαιότερον... εἶναι πρὸ τοῦ φεύγειν... ὑπέχειν... δίκην. Crito 54 b, μήτε παῖδας περὶ πλείονος ποιοῦ μήτε τὸ ζῆν μήτε ἄλλο μηδὲν πρὸ τοῦ δικαίου.

Cf. Hat. i. 62, οἷσε ἡ τυραννὶς πρὸ ἐλευθερίης ἦν ἀσπαστότερον.

190 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ἐᾷ 166—168.

᾿Αντί. Rep. 619 ¢, αἰτιᾶσθαι τῶν κακῶν πάντα μᾶλλον ἀνθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ. Ἔν. Euthyd. 303 ¢, πολλὰ μὲν οὖν καὶ ἄλλα οἱ λόγοι ὑμῶν καλὰ ἔχουσιν, ἐν δὲ τοῖς καὶ τοῦτο μεγαλοπρεπέστερον. Kara after ἢ. Pheedo 94 6, πολὺ θειοτέρου τινὸς πράγματος ἢ καθ᾽ ἁρμονίαν.

§ 106. 6. Irregularities. a. Pleonastic form. Crat. 433 ἃ, ἔχεις τινὰ καλλίω τρόπον... ἄλλον, ἢ κιτιλ. ; “ Gorg. 482 b, οἶμαι τὴν λύραν μοι κρεῖττον εἶναι ἀναρμοστεῖν .. . μᾶλλον ἢ ἐμὲ ἐμαυτῷ ἀσύμφωνον εἶναι. Charm. 159 6, Politic. 286 a, Tim. 87 ο, Lege. 720 6, 854 6 ;—all instances of a Comparative Adjective or Adverb with μᾶλλον or

ἧττον.

§ 167. 8. Comparative in regimen twice over.

Protag. 350 b, θαῤῥαλεώτεροι εἰσὶν αὐτοὶ ἑαυτῶν, ἐπειδὰν μάθωσιν, ἢ πρὶν μαθεῖν.

Symp. 220 6, προθυμότερος ἐγένου τῶν στρατηγῶν ἐμὲ λαβεῖν ἢ σεαυτόν. A compendious way of saying two things; one, that Socrates was anxious that Alcibiades should be chosen rather than himself ; the other, that, though the generals too were anxious for this, Socrates was more anxious than they. This con- struction is illustrated by the other simpler instance.

Exactly parallel is Thue. vii. 66, τό γ᾽ ὑπόλοιπον τῆς δόξης ἀσθενέστε-

~ , ov αὐτὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἐστὶν ἢ εἰ μηδ᾽ ὠήθησαν. | (1)

§ 108. y. Case after ἢ assimilated to the Case before it, by Attrac-

tion.

Pheedo 110 ¢, ἐκ [χρωμάτων] λαμπροτέρων καὶ καθαρωτέρων ἢ τούτων.

Meno 83 ο, ἀπὸ μείζονος ἢ τοσαύτης γμαμμῆς.

This does not appear to be the regular construction. Compare the constructions with ὥσπερ, δὲ 175, 176, below. The Homeric use with ἢ varies: on the one hand we have, Il. 1. 260, καὶ ἀρείοσιν ἠέπερ ὑμῖν ᾿Ανδράσιν ὡμίλησα' on the other hand, Il. x. 557, ἀμείνονας, ἠέ περ olde, Ἵππους δωρήσαιτ᾽, Od. xvii. 417, σὲ χρὴ δόμεναι καὶ λώϊον ἠέ περ ἄλλοι, 1]. xxiv. 486, Μνῆσαι πατρὸς σεῖο. .. Τηλίκου ὥσπερ ἐγών. In Demosth. also there are both constructions with ἢ" e.g. F. Τῷ, 27. P. 349, οὐδὲν ἐλάττονος ἢ τούτου" but De Cor. 162. p. 281, τῶν πρότερον

δὲ 169—172.] COMPARISON. 191

a

ἢ ἐγὼ δοκιμασάντων, ib. 178. p. 287, ἡμῶν ἄμεινον ἢ ᾿κεῖνοι mpoopw-

μένων.

§ 169. δ. Omission of 7.

Legg. 956 a, ὑφὴν δὲ μὴ πλέον ἔργον γυναικὸς μιᾶς ἔμμηνον.

Ib. 958 6, ὑψηλότερον πέντε ἀνδρῶν ἔργον.

Phedo 75 ἃ, οὐ περὶ τοῦ ἴσου... μᾶλλόν τι καὶ περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ καλοῦ. [Oxon. alone omits ἢ here. The other MSS. and the edd. have ἢ rai. |

δ 170. «. Omission of μᾶλλον.

Rep. 370 a, ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως οὕτω ῥάδιον ἢ ’ketvas.

Meno 94 6, ἴσως ῥᾷάδιόν ἐστι κακῶς ποιεῖν ἀνθρώπους ἣ εὖ. Cf., a8 the Zurich editors suggest, Lysias xii. 89. p. 128, Isocrat. v. 115. P. 105, Vill. 50. p. 169.

Tim. 75 6, ξυνέδοξε τοῦ πλείονος βίου φαυλοτέρου δὲ τὸν ἐλάττονα ἀμείνονα ὄντα παντὶ πάντως αἱρετέον.

Cf. Xen. Mem. IV. iii. 9, εἰ ἄρα τι ἔστι τοῖς θεοῖς ἔργον ἢ (΄ other than’) ἀνθρώπους θεραπεύειν. Lysias ii. 62. p. 196, θάνατον per’ ἐλευθερίας αἱρούμενοι ἢ βίον μετὰ δουλείας, XXi, 22. P. 163, οὐκ οἶδ᾽ οὕς τινας ἣ ὑμᾶς ἐβουλήθην περὶ ἐμοῦ δικαστὰς γενέσθαι.

§ 171. B. Superlatives. a. Ordinary form. b. Rarer forms—with Prepositions. Ἐπί. Tim. 23 b, τὸ κάλλιστον καὶ ἄριστον γένος ἐπ᾿ ἀνθρώπους. Perhaps this is consciously Homeric: ef. 6. g. Od. xxiii. 124, σὴν yap ἀρίστην Μῆτιν en’ ἀνθρώπους φάσ᾽ ἔμμεναι. Periphrastic with ἐν. Legg. 742 e, τοὺς κεκτημένους ἐν ὀλίγοις τῶν ἀνθρώπων πλείστου vopi- σματος ἄξια κτήματα. Th. 892 a, ὡς ἐν πρώτοις ἐστὶ σωμάτων ἔμπροσθεν πάντων γενομένη. § 172. c. lrregularities. a. Legg. 969 a, ἀνδρειότατος τῶν ὕστερον ἐπιγιγνομένων. Cf. Pheedo 62 a, τοῦτο μόνον τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων. 8. Pleonastic. Symp. 218 d, rod as 6 τι βέλτιστον ἐμὲ γενέσθαι. Legg. 731 Ὁ, πρᾶον ὡς 6 τι μάλιστα. 10. οοϑ ἃ, ὡς ὅτι μάλιστα ἀγριώτατος.

192 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 175--175.

Legg. 758 a, ws 6 τι μάλιστ᾽ ὀλιγίστοις. Cf. Hom. Od. vill. 582, μάλιστα Κήδιστοι.

δ 173. C. Other Comparative words and formule. a. With 7. Rep. 330 ¢, of δὲ κτησάμενοι διπλῇ ἢ οἱ ἄλλοι ἀσπάζονται αὐτά. Tb. 534 ἃ, ἵνα μὴ ἡμᾶς πολλαπλασίων λόγων ἐμπλήσῃ ἢ ὅσων οἱ παρε- ληλυθότες. Ib. 455 ¢, διαφερόντως ἔχει ἢ τὸ τῶν γυναικῶν. Pheedo 95 ὁ, διαφερόντως ἢ εἰ ἐν ἄλλῳ βίῳ βιοὺς ἐτελεύτα. Phdr. 228 d, διαφέρειν τὰ τοῦ ἐρῶντος ἢ τὰ τοῦ μή. Crat. 435 a, ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνομοίου γε ἢ ὁ διανοούμενος φθέγγομαι. Phileb. 35 ἃ, ἐπιθυμεῖ τῶν ἐναντίων ἢ πάσχει. So Phdr. 275 a. Gorg. 481 ὁ, ἀλλά τις ἡμῶν ἴδιόν τι ἔπασχε πάθος ἢ οἱ ἄλλοι.

Crito 53 6, τί ποιῶν ἢ εὐωχούμενος ἐν Θετταλίᾳ ;

δ 174. b. With παρά.

Rep. 337 ἃ, ἑτέραν ἀπόκρισιν παρὰ πάσας ταύτας περὶ δικαιοσύνης, βελτίω τούτων.

Pheedo 105 b, παρ᾽ ἣν τὸ πρῶτον ἔλεγον ἄλλην.

Laches 178 b, ἄλλα λέγουσι παρὰ τὴν αὑτῶν δόξαν.

Ib. 181 d, ἐὰν δ᾽ ἔχω τι ἄλλο παρὰ τὰ λεγόμενα.

Lege. 927 6, ποικίλλοντες ἐπιτηδεύμασιν ἰδίοις τὸν τῶν ὀρφανῶν βίον παρὰ τὸν τῶν μή.

And, with παρὰ simply, Theeet. 144 ἃ, ἀνδρεῖον παρ᾽ ὁντινοῦν.

§ 175. ο. With ὥσπερ and the like Adverbs ; and with correlative Adjectives of likeness. Pheedo 86 a, εἴ τις διισχυρίζοιτο τῷ αὐτῷ λόγῳ ὥσπερ σύ. Ib. 100 ὁ. ἐὰν σοὶ ξυνδοκῇ ὥσπερ ἐμοί. . Gorg. 464d, ἐν ἀνδράσιν οὕτως ἀνοήτοις ὥσπερ οἱ παίδες. | Apol. 17 b, κεκαλλιεπημένους λόγους ὥσπερ οἱ τούτων. Politic. 274 ἃ, ἔδει τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοὺς αὑτῶν ἔχειν καθάπερ ὅλος ὁ κόσμος. With Adjectives. ᾿ Gorg. 458 ἃ, οὐδὲν οἶμαι τοσοῦτον κακόν, ὅσον δόξα ψευδής. Tim. 78 Ὁ, πλέγμα ἐξ ἀέρος καὶ πυρὸς οἷον οἱ κύρτοι ξυνυφῃνάμενος. Protag. 327 d, ἄγριοί τινες, οἷοίπερ ods πέρυσι Φερεκράτης ἐδίδαξεν ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ. So Crat. 432 6. Cf. Hom. Od. xx. 281, Πὰρ δ᾽ dp’ ᾿οδυσσῆϊ μοῖραν θέσαν... . Ἴσην

€ > , ᾽ ͵ ως αὐὑτὸι TEP ἐλαάγχανον.

ὦ ἐμ ee

δξ 176, 177.] COMPARISON. 193

δ 176. Note, that where the Noun brought into comparison by

ὥσπερ is the Subject of the Relative clause, there is a preference for the Nominative, in spite of such an Ellipse of the Verb as might have led to an Attracted Construction.

Cf. Hom. 1]. xxiv. 486, Μνῆσαι πατρὸς σεῖο, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ, Τηλίκου, ὥσπερ ἐγών. Liysias vi. 32. p. 106, λυπουμένῳ ὥσπερ οὗτος. Isocr. xvlil. 47. p. 380, τοὺς ὥσπερ Καλλίμαχος βεβιωκότας. This non-admission of Attraction often secures the meaning ; as /Eschin. ii. 120. p. 44, τοὺς μικροπολίτας, ὥσπερ αὐτός, φοβεῖν τὰ τῶν μειζόνων ἀπόρρητα. [So Bekker: αὑτοὺς Zurich ed.| Jelf (Gr. Gr. § 869) notices, as rare instances of Attraction, Thuc. Vi. 68, οὐκ ἀπολέκτους ὥσπερ καὶ ἡμᾶς, Soph. O. C. 869, δοίη βίον Τοιοῦτον οἷον κἀμὲ γηρᾶναι ποτέ, Lys. 492.72, is e, Xill. 72. p. 136] οὐδαμοῦ yap ἔστιν ᾿Αγόρατον ᾿Αθηναῖον εἶναι ὥσπερ Θρασύβουλον. We may add, however, from Plato, the instance in Apol. 17 6, ¢ ov yap ἂν πρέποι τῇδε τῇ ἡλικίᾳ ὥσπερ μειρακίῳ πλάττοντι λόγους | εἰς ὑμᾶς elovévat,—where μειρακίῳ is affected by Attraction to |

πλάττοντι.

§ 177. d. Comparison of one Sentence as a whole with another.

Symp. 179 6, διὰ ταῦτα δίκην αὐτῷ émébecay,.... οὐχ ὥσπερ ᾿Αχιλλέα ἐτίμησαν. ΤΌ. 189 ¢, δοκοῦσι... .. θυσίας ἂν ποιεῖν... .., οὐχ ὥσπερ νῦν τούτων

οὐδὲν γίγνεται.

Ib. 213 b, ἐλλοχῶν αὖ με ἐνταῦθα κατέκεισο, ὥσπερ εἰώθης ἐξαίφνης ἀναφαίνεσθαι.

Ib. 216 d, ἐρωτικῶς διάκειται. .., καὶ αὖ... οὐδὲν οἶδεν, ὡς τὸ σχῆμα αὐτοῦ τοῦτο οὐ Σειληνῶδες :- This sentence becomes an instance under the present head by the removal of the stop after τοῦτο. The liveliness of the passage gains by this, as much as it suffers by the common punctuation. The conversion of a categorical sentence at its close into an interrogative one is natural and common. [The Zurich editors have the common punctuation. |

Theet. 187 Ὁ, χρή, ὦ Θεαίτητε, λέγειν προθύμως μᾶλλον ἢ ὡς TO πρῶ- Tov ὥκνεις ἀποκρίνεσθαι.

Apol. 39 ¢, τιμωρίαν ὑμῖν ἥξειν... .. χαλεπωτέραν νὴ Ad ἢ οἵαν ἐμὲ ἀπεκτόνατε.

Cf., perhaps, Thuc. i. 19, ἐγένετο αὐτοῖς ἐς τόνδε τὸν πόλεμον 7 ἰδία παρασκευὴ μείζων ἢ ὡς τὰ κράτιστά ποτε μετὰ ἀκραιφνοῦς τῆς ξυμμαχίας jvOnoav—taking ὡς to be not ‘when’ but ‘how;’ but

O

194 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§$ 178, 179.

primarily Hom. Od. xxiv. 195-199, ὡς εὖ μέμνητ᾽ ’Odvojos .... Οὐχ ws Τυνδαρέου κούρη κακὰ μήσατο ἔργα.

§ 178. We may notice the graceful use of the vague Comparative

expressing a modified degree.

Symp. 176 ς, ἧττον ἂν εἴην ἀηδής.

Politic. 286 b, ἔσχε μῆκος πλέον.

Pheedo 115 b, ἅπερ ἀεὶ λέγω, οὐδὲν καινότερον.

Charm, 174 ¢, ἧττόν τι, Euthyd. 293 ¢, ἧττον οὖν τι, in Interrogative sentences, are a soft οὐκ and οὐκοῦν.

Cf. the Latin si minus.

§ 179. Ipioms or Sentences :—ATTRACTION.

A full scheme of all the varieties of Attraction may be con- structed upon the instances found in Plato. The varieties which are treated of here include all but some of the most common.

A. Attraction of Dependent sentences.

a. Infinitival sentences.

a. The ordinary form of Attraction here is that to be seen in Ar. Eth. III. v. 3, ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν dpa τὸ ἐπιεικέσι καὶ φαύλοις εἶναι, or Lysias xxviii. 10. p. 180, τοῖς dpyovow ... ἐπιδείξετε πότερον χρὴ δικαίοις eivar,—in distinction from the unattracted form, 6. g. Asch. Choeph. 140, Αὐτῇ τέ μοι δὸς σωφρονεστέραν πολὺ Μητρὸς γενέσθαι.

Crat. 305 6, κατ᾽ ἐκείνου λέγεται οὐδὲν οἵου τε γενέσθαι προνοηθῆναι.

Hip. Ma. 202 ¢, τὸ καλόν, ὃ παντί, ᾧ ἂν προσγένηται, ὑπάρχει ἐκείνῳ

καλῷ εἶναι.

It will be seen here that to present an opportunity for Attrac- tion, there must be Ellipse of the Subject of the Infinitival sentence, and moreover its Copula and Predicate must be in distinct words. Where the subject of the Infinitival sentence is also the subject of the principal sentence, Attraction is invariable, and the construc- tion cannot be conceived without it,—as βουλομένων ὑμῶν προθύμων εἶναι, Thue. i. 71; where notwithstanding there is Attraction (though Lobeck denies it).

8. A form, which in one or two particular Idioms is common, is developed in greater variety in Plato: where the Infinitival sentence is dismembered, and the Subject or some other prominent Noun of the Dependent sentence is placed in advance, under the direct government of the principal sentence.

δὲ 180—183.] ATTRACTION. 195

One common type is (6. g.) Hdt. v. 38, ἔδεε ξυμμαχίης of μεγάλης ἐξευρεθῆνα. And primarily Homer, II. xviii. 585, Of δ᾽ roe δακέειν μὲν ἀπετρωπῶντο λεόντων, and vii. 409. Another common, though peculiar, type is ἐγὼ δίκαιος εἰμὶ τοῦτο ποιεῖν᾽ which stands for δίκαιόν ἐστιν ἐμὲ τοῦτο tovev—the ἐμὲ being attracted out of the Infinitival government into that of the principal sentence. Cf. Hdt ix. 77,

ἄξιοι ἔφασαν εἶναι σφέας ζημιῶσαι.

§ 180. Of the Platonic type only specimens need be given here ;

for the rest cf. ‘ Binary Structure,’ δὲ 214, 220, below.

Symp. 207 a, εἴπερ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἑαυτῷ εἶναι ἀεὶ ἔρως eoriv—where τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, the Subject of the Infinitival sentence, is separated from it, and placed under the government of ἔρως ἐστὶν in the principal construction.

In the following it is not the subject, but some other Noun, of the Infinitival sentence, which is attracted.

Rep. 443 b, ἀρχόμενοι τῆς πόλεως οἰκίζειν. ¥ Gorg. 513 6, ἐπιχειρητέον ἡμῖν ἐστὶ τῇ πόλει καὶ τοῖς πολίταις θερα- πεύειν. Legg. 790 0, τρόπον ὅνπερ ἤργμεθα τῶν περὶ τὰ σώματα μύθων λεχ-

θέντων διαπεραίνειν.

§ 181. y. In the following the two forms above exist together. The Subject of the Infinitival sentence suffers Attraction in the manner just mentioned, and secondly the Predicate of the Infini- tival sentence is attracted into agreement with it.

Rep. 459 b, δεῖ ἄκρων εἶναι τῶν ἀρχόντων.

Euthyd. 282 d, οἵων ἐπιθυμῶ τῶν προτρεπτικῶν λόγων εἶναι.

§ 182. Note, however, that when both constructions have the same Subject, the Predicate of the Infinitival sentence reverts to the main construction.

Legg. 773 Ὁ, τὸν αὑτῷ ξυνειδότα φερόμενον.

΄ a > Charm. 169 a, od πιστεύω ἐμαυτῷ ἱκανὸς εἶναι. ‘

δ 183. 6. In another type, affecting the same class of sentences as the last, we have the Subject of the Infinitival sentence, after δίκαιόν ἐστιν, ἀνάγκη ἐστίν, οἷόν τε ἐστίν, and the like, or after Verbs of judging, turned into a forced Dative of Reference after δίκαιον &c. Doubtless, the Dative of Reference often finds its place in the Meaning as well as the syntax; but this is not always the case,

O 2

196 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 184.

e.g. in the passages from Hip. Ma. 294 b, Meno 88 ο, and Crat. 392 a: whence the true account of it is Attraction.

Rep. 334 ¢, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως δίκαιον τότε τούτοις τοὺς μὲν πονηροὺς ὠφελεῖν κιτιλ.

Crito 50 6, καὶ σοὶ ταῦτα ἀντιποιεῖν οἴει δίκαιον εἶναι ;

Pheedo 75 ¢, ἀνάγκη ἡμῖν αὐτὴν εἰληφέναι.

Hip. Ma. 280 e, τὸ ὀρθῶς λεγόμενον ἀνάγκη αὐτῷ ἀποδέχεσθαι.

Tb. 294 b, ἀνάγκη αὐτοῖς μεγάλοις εἶναι.

Charm. 164 b, γιγνώσκειν ἀνάγκη τῷ ἰατρῷ.

Meno 88 ¢, εἰ ἄρα ἀρετὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ τί ἐστι καὶ ἀναγκαῖον αὐτῷ ὠφελίμῳ εἶναι.

Laches 196 6, ἀναγκαῖον οἶμαι τῷ ταῦτα λέγοντι μηδενὸς θηρίου ἀποδέ- χεσθαι ἀνδρίαν.

Menex. 241 ἃ, οἷόν τε ἀμύνεσθαι ὀλίγοις πολλούς.

Pheedo 106 b, ἀδύνατον ψυχῇ ἀπόλλυσθαι.

Phdr, 242 b, αἴτιος γεγενῆσθαι λόγῳ τινὶ ῥηθῆναι.

Phileb. 33 a, τῷ τὸν τοῦ φρονεῖν ἑλομένῳ βίον οἶσθ᾽ ὡς τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον οὐδὲν ἀποκωλύει ζῆν.

Crat. 392 ἃ, ὀρθότερόν ἐστι καλεῖσθαι χαλκὶς κυμίνδιδος τῷ αὐτῷ ὀρνέῳ.

Pheedo 92 ο, πρέπει ξυνωδῷ εἶναι καὶ τῷ περὶ τῆς ἁρμονίας [λόγῳ].

Soph. 231 6, ἔθεμεν αὐτῷ συγχωρήσαντες δοξῶν ἐμποδίων μαθήμασι περὶ ψυχὴν καθαρτὴν αὐτὸν εἶναι.

Rep. 598 d, ὑπολαμβάνειν δεῖ τῷ τοιούτῳ ὅτι εὐήθης.

_ Apol. 34 6, δεδογμένον ἐστὶ τῷ Σωκράτει διαφέρειν τινὶ τῶν πολλῶν ἀνθρώπων. [So Oxon. See note on the text, p. go, above.]

Cf. Philolaus ap. Stob. p. 458, οὐχ οἷόν τ᾽ ἧς οὐθενὶ τῶν ἐόντων καὶ γιγνωσκομένων ὑφ᾽ ἁμῶν γνωσθῆμεν, and again ib., ἀδύνατον ἧς ἂν καὶ αὐταῖς κοσμηθῆμεν. [Quoted by Boeckh in his Philolaos, ὩΣ 62.] Andoe. 1. 140. p. 18, rade ὑμῖν ἄξιον ἐνθυμηθῆναι.

On the other hand we have, unusually, Gorg. 458 d, αἰσχρὸν δὴ τὸ λοιπὸν γίγνεται ἐμέ ye μὴ ἐθέλειν.

§ 184. b. Attraction of Participial clause attached to the Infini- tival sentence. Here the unattraeted form would be e.g. Crito 51 d, mpoayopevopev ᾿Αθηναίων τῷ βουλομένῳ... ἐξεῖναι λα- βόντα τὰ αὑτοῦ ἀπιέναι. Cf. Hdt. ix. 78, καὶ τοὶ θεὸς παρέδωκε ῥυσάμενον τὴν Ἑλλάδα κλέος καταθέσθαι, and Hom. Il. x. 187, τῶν ὕπνος ὀλώλει Νύκτα φυλασ-

σομένοισι.

§§ 185—187.] ATTRACTION. 197

Instances of the attracted form are Apol. 17 ¢, οὐδὲ yap ἂν πρέποι oie τῇ ἡλικίᾳ... πλάττοντι λόγους εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσιέναι -- where πλάττοντι is attracted into correspond- ence with ἡλικίᾳ though the Gender follows the thought, as in Legg. 933 a, ταῖς ψυχαῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων δυσωπουμέναις πρὸς ἀλλήλους.

Cf. Hom. Il. iv. τοι, Evyeo.. . ῥέξειν ἑκατόμβην... Οἴκαδε νοστήσας.

§ 185. Reference to the unattracted form explains such places as

Symp. 176 d, οὔτε αὐτὸς ἐθελήσαιμι ἂν πιεῖν, οὔτε ἄλλῳ συμβουλεύ- σαιμι, ἄλλως τε καὶ κραιπαλῶντα --- Where κραιπαλῶντα agrees regularly with the subject of the πιεῖν understood after συμβου- λεύσαιμ. And somewhat similarly

Phdr. 276 6, τοῦ δυναμένου παίζειν... pvOodoyotvra—this Accusa- tive arising from a mis-recollection of the Infinitive construc- tion last preceding.

§ 186 c. Dependent sentences introduced by Conjuuctions or Oblique Interrogatives.

a. Here, too, as in the Infinitival sentence, the sentence is torn asunder, and a portion of it, consisting of a Noun or a Noun-phrase, brought under the direct government of the principal construction.

This Attraction manifests itself in an ordinary type in e.g.

Laches 196 a, τοῦτον οὐ μανθάνω 6 τι βούλεται λέγειν.

More remarkable Platonic forms are 6. g.

Soph. 260 a, δεῖ λόγον ἡμᾶς διομολογήσασθαι, τί ποτ᾽ éotiv—where λόγον has been attracted into the principal construction, although this can supply only a loose government for it.

Phedo 64 a, κινδυνεύουσιν ὅσοι τυγχάνουσιν ὀρθῶς ἁπτόμενοι φιλοσο- φίας λεληθέναι τοὺς ἄλλους ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἐπιτηδεύουσιν ἢ ἀποθνή- σκειν. This is an Attraction for κινδυνεύει λεληθέναι τοὺς ἄλλους

[J a ὅτι ὅσοι K.T.A,.

§ 187. In the following it is not the Subject, but some other Noun or Noun-phrase, of the Dependent sentence, which is attracted.

Phedo 102 Ὁ, ὁμολογεῖς τὸ τὸν Σιμμίαν ὑπερέχειν Σωκράτους οὐχ ὡς τοῖς ῥήμασι λέγεται οὕτω καὶ τὸ ἀληθὲς Execr—where TO. . . Σωκρά- τους is the Accusative attracted under government of ὁμολογεῖς (compare δεῖ λόγον ἡμᾶς διομολογήσασθαι, above).

198 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 188, 189.

Crito 44 d, αὐτὰ δῆλα τὰ παρόντα νυνί, ὅτι οἷοί τ᾽ εἰσὶν οἱ πολλοὶ οὐ \ ΄ a a > “κα δὰ eV alg 32 “ € aN τὰ σμικρότατα τῶν κακῶν ἐργάζεσθαι---Ἰ. 6. δῆλόν ἐστιν ὅτι οἱ αὐτὰ \ , > » ς , Retest ΠΡ Daan > \ τὰ παρόντα ἐργασάμενοι, οἱ πολλοί, οἷοί τ᾽ εἰσὶν οὐ τὰ K.T.A, Pheedo 82 ἃ, δῆλα δὴ καὶ τἄλλα οἷ ἂν ἑκάστη ἴοι----Ἰ. 6. δῆλόν ἐστι δή, eH Se cal δ, oe: ” οἱ ἂν ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἑκάστη ἴοι. For the rest of the instances under this head see ‘ Binary Structure,’ δὲ 213, 218, below.

§ 188. 8. Comparative sentence introduced by #, attracted, after omission of the Copula, into agreement with the principal con- struction.

Meno 83 ¢, ἀπὸ μείζονος ἢ τοσαύτης γραμμῆς.

(See the remarks under ‘ Idioms of Comparison,’ ὃ 168, above.)

§. 189. B. Attractions involving the Relative. ἃ. Attraction of Relative to Antecedent. a, From Accusative into Genitive. Apol. 29 b, κακῶν ὧν οἶδα ὅτι κακὰ ἐστίν. ‘Phdr. 249 Ὁ, ἀξίως οὗ ἐβίωσαν βίου. Cf. Hom. Il. ν. 265, Τῆς γάρ τοι γενεῆς, js Τρωΐ περ εὐρυόπα Ζεὺς Δῶκε. β. From Accusative into various cases before βούλει 15, which with the Relative forms almost one word, like Latin quzvis. Crat. 432 a, ra δέκα ἢ ὅστις βούλει ἄλλος ἀριθμός. YGorg. 517 a, ἔργα... οἷα τούτων ὃς βούλει εἴργασται. Phileb. 43 d, τριῶν ὄντων ὧντινων βούλει. y. From Dative into Genitive. Legg. 966 e, πάντων ὧν κίνησις... οὐσίαν ἐπόρισεν. 6. From Nominative into Genitive. Thet. 165 e, ξυνεποδίσθης ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ob δή σε χειρωσάμενος... ἂν ἐλύτρου. Cf. Dem. de Cor. 130. p. 270, οὐδὲ γὰρ ὧν ἔτυχεν ἦν----ἰ. 6, τούτων ἃ ἔτυχεν. 15 Compare (though these do not involve the Relative) Rep. 414 ¢, ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν δ᾽ οὐ γεγονὸς οὐδ᾽ ofa εἰ γενόμενον av. Symp. 216 d, ἔνδοθεν δὲ ἀνοιχθεὶς πόσης οἴεσθε γέμει σωφροσύνης ; Euthyphro 15 a, τί δ᾽ οἴει ἄλλο ἢ τιμή τε καὶ γέρα ; Phiedo 59 ¢, tives prs ἦσαν οἱ λόγοι ;

§§ 190, 191.] ATTRACTION. 199

Dative. Rep. 402 a, ἐν ἅπασιν οἷς ἔστι περιφερόμενα. Pheedo 69 ἃ, τοῦτο δ᾽ ὅμοιόν ἐστιν ᾧ νῦν δὴ ἐλέγετο. Accusative. Cf. Thue. v. 111, perhaps, περὶ πατρίδος βουλεύεσθε [βουλὴν] ἣν μιᾶς πέρι... ἔσται. (The same interpretation is suggested as “possible” in Jelf, Gr. Gr. § 822 note.)

§ 190. e. Preposition, by which the Relative is governed, absorbed by Attraction.

Rep. 520 ἃ, ἐν πόλει ἣ ἥκιστα πρόθυμοι ἄρχειν of μέλλοντες ἄρξειν.

Ib. 533 d-e, οἷς τοσούτων πέρι σκέψις ὅσων ἡμῖν πρόκειται.

Laches 192 b, τίς οὖσα δύναμις ἡ αὐτὴ ἐν ἅπασιν οἷς νῦν δὴ ἐλέγομεν

αὐτὴν εἶναι, ἔπειτα ἀνδρία κέκληται --- ὙΠ ΓΘ ois must be for ἐν ois.

Crat. 438 6, ἄρα δι ἄλλου του ἢ οὗπερ εἰκός ;

"Gorg. 453 6, πάλιν δ᾽ εἰ ἐπὶ τῶν αὐτῶν τεχνῶν λέγομεν ὧνπερ viv δή.

Stallbaum (on Apol. 27 d) cites other instances from Plato, but he is not warranted in giving them the same interpretation. Thus

Apol. 27 d, ἢ ἔκ τινων ἄλλων ὧν δὴ καὶ λέγονται is simply ‘or

[sprung] from some other beings, whose children accordingly they are called.’

Phedo 76 d, ἐν τούτῳ [τῷ χρόνῳ] ἀπόλλυμεν ᾧπερ κτλ. Here the

best and most MSS. have ἐν ᾧπερ.

Of other writers, cf. Soph. O. C. 748, Οὐκ ἄν mor ἐς τοσοῦτον αἰκίας πεσεῖν “ES0€ ὅσον πέπτωκεν. Iseus Fr. a. 8 [ed. Bekker. Is. xii. 7, ed. Zur.], ἄλλοθεν ποθὲν ἢ ἐκ τούτων ὧν, Lysias xiv. 2. p. 139, ἐπ᾿ ἐνίοις [τούτων] ὧν οὗτος φιλοτιμεῖται τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αἰσχύνεσθαι, ΧΧΙ. 21. p. 163, δέομαι μὴ ἡγήσασθαι τοσαῦτα χρήματα εἶναι ἃ (‘any sum of money iz consideration of which’) ἐγὼ βουλοίμην ἄν τι κακὸν τῇ πόλει γενέσθαι. [So Bekker and the MSS. & 4 ed. Zurich. ]

δ΄ 191. Ὁ. Attraction of Antecedent to Relative. Meno 96 a, ἔχεις οὖν εἰπεῖν ἄλλου ὁτουοῦν πράγματος οὗ of μὲν φάσκοντες διδάσκαλοι εἶναι κιτ.λ. ; Politic. 271 ¢, τὸν βίον ὃν κιτιλ. πότερον... ἦν κιτ.λ. 5 Meno 96 ς, ὡμολογήκαμεν δέ γε, πράγματος οὗ μήτε διδάσκαλοι μήτε μαθηταὶ εἶεν, τοῦτο μηδὲ διδακτὸν εἶναι. Crito 45 b, πολλαχοῦ καὶ ἄλλοσε ὅποι ἂν ἀφίκη.

The last of these instances is of a peculiar type, though the

200 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ὃ 192, 193.

former are common, and have their prototypes in Homer: ef. Il. x. 416, φυλακὰς δ᾽ ἃς εἴρεαι,. .. Οὔτις κεκριμένη ῥύεται στρατόν, Od. viii. 74, ἀειδέμεναι κλέα ἀνδρῶν, Οἴμης τῆς τότ᾽ ἄρα κλέος κιτιλ., XXIi. 6, σκοπὸν ἄλλον ὃν οὔπω τις βάλεν ἀνὴρ Εἴσομαι αἴ κε τύχωμι, XXill. 356, Μῆλα ὃ ἅ μοι κιτιλ., Πολλὰ μὲν αὐτὸς ἐγὼ ληίσσομαι, ἄλλα δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ Δώσουσ᾽ (where μῆλα represents ἀντὶ μήλων). On Od. viii. 74 Nitzsch holds οἴμης to be attracted from οἴμη ποῦ οἴμην᾽ because elsewhere the attracted word is the forerunner of a principal sentence to be completed, whereas here it is in sense but part of the exegetic Relative sentence. Thus the sentence would be one - on the model of Od. i. 50, Νήσῳ ἐν ἀμφιρύτῃ... Nicos δενδρήεσσα, or Il. vi. 396, ᾿ετίωνος" ᾿Ηετίων, ὃς ἔναιε kA.

§ 192. c. Construction changed after Relative clause by Attrac- tion to the Relative clause as the nearest construction.

N.B. This principle, of Attraction to the nearest construction, extends also to other cases where there is no Relative clause. See δὲ 201-203, below.

Rep. 402 Ὁ, οὐδὲ μουσικοὶ πρότερον ἐσόμεθα οὔτε αὐτοὶ οὔτε οὕς φαμεν

ἡμῖν παιδευτέον εἶναι τοὺς φύλακας.

Phedo 66 e, ἡμῖν ἔσται οὗ φαμὲν ἐρασταὶ εἶναι φρονήσεως.

Protag. 342 b, σοφίᾳ τῶν Ἑλλήνων περίεισιν, ὥσπερ ods Πρωταγόρας

ἔλεγε, τοὺς σοφιστάς.

Crito 48 ο, ἃς δὲ σὺ λέγεις τὰς σκέψεις. .., μὴ ὡς ἀληθῶς ταῦτα

σκέμματα 7 KT.

Hip. Ma, 281 ¢, ἐκεῖνοι ὧν ὀνόματα μεγάλα λέγεται ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ, Πιττα-

κοῦ K.T.A, Symp. 200 d, ἐκείνου ἐρᾷν ὃ οὔπω ἕτοιμον αὐτῷ ἐστιν οὐδὲ ἔχει, τὸ εἰς τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον ταῦτα εἶναι αὐτῷ σωζόμενα τὰ νῦν παρόντα. | Apol. 41 ἃ, εὑρήσει τοὺς ἀληθῶς δικαστὰς οἵπερ καὶ λέγονται ἐκεῖ δικά- ζειν, Μίνως κιτιλ.

Cf. Hom. Il. ix. 131, μετὰ δ᾽ ἔσσεται ἣν τότ᾽ ἀπηύρων, Κούρην Βρισῆος.

§ 193. It is not to be supposed that the Nouns which follow the Relative clauses in the first three of these examples are Antecedents to the Relatives. As in the fourth example the Relative has an expressed Antecedent ἐκείνου, so in the others it has one understood; and the Nouns τοὺς φύλακας, τοὺς σοφιστάς, ταῦτα, are respectively exegetic of the understood Antecedent. (Taira represents a Feminine Noun by another Attraction, which see below, § 201.)

δὲ 194—196.] ATTRACTION. 201

Cf. Hom. Od. i. 69, Κύκλωπος κεχόλωται ὃν ὀφθαλμοῦ ἀλάωσεν, ᾿Αντί- θεον Πολύφημον. Also Il. xii. 18-20. To this explanation must be also conformed that of Soph. Antig. 404, ὃν σὺ τὸν νεκρὸν

᾿Απεῖπας.

§ 194. The same principle accounts for the following also.

Symp. 206 a, οὐδέν ye ἄλλο ἐστὶν οὗ ἐρῶσιν ἄνθρωποι, ἢ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ.

Pheedo 80 a, τὸ μὲν οὖν ἔχειν ὅ τι λέγοι ἐκεῖνος οὐδὲν Aromov—where ἐκεῖνος is attracted from ἐκεῖνον, since it is ἔχειν and not λέγοι which requires this Pronoun as its Subject.

Symp. 199 6, καλῶς μοι ἔδοξας καθηγήσασθαι τοῦ λόγου, λέγων ὅτι πρῶτον μὲν δέοι αὐτὸν ἐπιδεῖξαι ὁποῖός τίς ἐστιν ὁ Ἔρως, ὕστερον δὲ τὰ ἔργα atrov—where we should have had αὐτὸν... τὸν Ἔρωτα but for the intervention of ὁποῖός τίς ἐστιν, which prevented recurrence to the Accusative.

The same bias shews itself abnormally in Lysias xxv. 18. p. 173,

» = a 2 - , ig be > , οἴεσθε χρῆναι, os ἐκεῖνοι παρέλιπον... ὑμεῖς ἀπολέσαι.

§ 195. d. Attraction of the entire Relative clause (1. 6. of Subject and Predicate,—Copula having been omitted) to the Antecedent. a.

Symp. 220 Ὁ, ὄντος πάγου οἴου δεινοτάτου.

Phedo 104 ἃ, τοῦ περιττοῦ ὄντος οὐχ οὗπερ τῆς τριάδος.

Soph. 237 ¢, οἴῳ γε ἐμοὶ παντάπασιν ἄπορον.

Legg. 674 ς, οὐδ᾽ ἀμπέλων ἂν πολλῶν δέοι οὐδ᾽ ἥτινι πόλει.

Rep. 607 a, ὅσον μόνον ὕμνους ποιήσεως παραδεκτέον εἰς τὴν πόλιν---- for ὅσον ποιήσεως ἐστιν ὕμνοι.

Cf. Hom. Od. ix. 321, τὸ μὲν... ἐΐσκομεν.. . ὍὌὍσσον θ' ἱστὸν νηός, X. 112, γυναῖκα Εὗρον ὅσην τ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφήν, 167, Πεῖσμα δ᾽ ὅσον τ᾽ dpyuav. Ar. Eq. 977, πρεσβυτέρων τινῶν οἴων ἀργαλεωτάτων͵ Soph. Aj. 488, πατρὸς Εἴπερ τινὸς σθένοντος, 1416, ἀνδρὶ... .. ἀγαθῷ... κοὐδενί πω λῴονι θνητῶν, O. C. 734, πόλιν... σθένου-

σαν... εἴ τιν᾽ Ἑλλάδος μέγα. Arist. Metaph. IX. ii. 1, ἀντί- κειται δὲ τὸ ἕν καὶ τὰ πολλὰ κατὰ πλείους τρόπους, ὧν ἕνα τὸ Ev καὶ

τὸ πλῆθος ὡς ἀδιαίρετον καὶ διαιρετόν.

§ 196. 8. More peculiar (because the Relative is made to agree with the Subject of the Relative clause—contrast οὐχ οὗπερ τῆς τριάδος above) are

202 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 197—199.

Soph. 246 ο, ὑπὲρ ἧς τίθενται τῆς odclas—i. e. ὑπὲρ [τοῦ] ὃ τίθενται τὴν οὐσίαν εἶναι.

¥ Gorg. 477 a, (A) ὠφελεῖται dpa; (B) Nai. (A) "Apa ἥνπερ ἐγὼ

ὑπολαμβάνω τὴν ὠφέλειαν :---ἰ, 6, ἄρα [ὠφελεῖται τοῦτο] ὅπερ ἐγὼ

ὑπολαμβάνω τὴν ὠφέλειαν εἶναι ;

§ 197. y. In the following the Relative clause is represented by the Relative word only, the Subject being identical with that of the main sentence and being therefore, with the Copula, omitted.

Cf. Hom. Od. ii. 209, Εὐρύμαχ᾽ ἠδὲ καὶ ἄλλοι ὅσοι μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοί, —i.e, ἄλλοι μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοί, ὅσοι ἔστε: and Hat. iv. 28, ἀφό- ρῆτος οἷος κρυμός---- frost which was insufferable,—to such a degree was it ;’ and ib. 194, of δέ σφι ἄφθονοι ὅσοι ἐν τοῖς οὔρεσι γίνονται" in all which instances there is no patent Attraction, but it is made possible by the Ellipse, after the Relative, of its Subject and the Copula.

Euthyd. 275 0, σοφίαν ἀμήχανον danv— inconceivable, so great was it.’

ν Gorg. 477 d, ὑπερφυεῖ τινι ἄρα ws μεγάλῃ βλάβῃ καὶ κακῷ θαυμασίῳ ὑπερβάλλουσα.

Cf. the common Idiom ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ πλεῖστα ὅσα---“ things “super- latively many, so many were they’—where ὅσα is doubtless an Accusative.

The same explanation applies, though Attraction does not find place, in the Adverbial expressions ἀμηχάνως os (Rep. 527 6, Phdr. 263 d), ὑπερφυῶς ὡς (Symp. 173 ὁ, Gorg. 496 6), θαυμαστῶς ὡς (Phzedo g2 a, Symp. 200 a).

δ 198. The Homeric Idiom with τοῖος differs—e. g. in Od. i. 209, θαμὰ τοῖον, 111. 321, Ἐς πέλαγος μέγα τοῖον, iv. 371, Nims... λῶν τόσον, ib. 776 and vii. 30, σιγῇ τοῖον, xi. 134, ᾿Αβληχρὸς μάλα τοῖος, XV. 450, Κερδαλέον δὴ τοῖον, Xx. 302, Σαρδάνιον μάλα troiov—‘to that degree, —indicating an imagined, and therefore an intense, degree.

Toiov expresses the degree of the epithet preceding; our οἷος justifies the epithet being there at all.

§ 199. e. Attraction of the entire Antecedent clause (Copula omitted) to the Relative.

Charm. 175 ¢, οὐδενὸς ὅτου οὐχὶ ἀλογώτερον. So Protag. 317 c.

Politic. 308 b, οὐδαμῶς ὡς οὐ φήσομεν.

Cf. Hdt. vil. 145, οὐδαμῶν τῶν οὐ μέζω.

§§ 200—203.] ATTRACTION. 203

§ 200. f. Attraction of the Relative into agreement with the Predicate of its own clause. Phdr. 255 6, ἡ τοῦ ῥεύματος ἐκείνου πηγή, ὃν ἵμερον Ζεὺς ὠνόμασε" (where the Antecedent of ὃν is ῥεύματος.) Cf. the Homeric*H θέμις ἐστίν. Il. ix. 276, &e.

§:201..C, a. Attraction of a Neuter Pronominal Subject into agreement with the Predicate. _ Apol. 18 a, δέομαι... τοῦτο σκοπεῖν, κιτ.λ." δικαστοῦ yap αὕτη ἀρετή —where of course αὔτη refers to τοῦτο σκοπεῖν κιτ.ὰ,

Soph. 240 Ὁ, οὐκ ὃν dpa ἐστιν ὄντως ἣν λέγομεν εἰκόνα ;

Crat. 386 ο, εἰ... ἐστὶν αὕτη ἡ ἀλήθεια (referring to what had just been agreed upon).

Minos 317 a, πολιτικὰ ἄρα ταῦτα συγγράμματά ἐστιν, ovs of ἄνθρωποι νόμους καλοῦσιν.

Crito 48 ο, ds δὲ σὺ λέγεις τὰς σκέψεις. .., μὴ ὡς ἀληθῶς ταῦτα σκέμματα y—Wwhere ταῦτα represents τὰς σκέψεις, but has been assimilated to σκέμματα, the Predicate of its own sentence.

Cf. Hom. Il. 1. 239, σκῆπτρον... ὁ δέ τοι μέγας ἔσσεται ὅρκος, V. 305, ἔνθα τε μηρὸς ᾿Ἰσχίῳ ἐνστρέφεται, κοτύλην δέ τέ μιν καλέουσι. Hadt. i. 86, ἀκροθίνια ταῦτα (sc. τὸν Κροῖσον) καταγιεῖν. 2,30}. P.V. 753; Ὅτῳ θανεῖν μέν ἐστιν οὐ πεπρωμένον" Αὕτη yap ἦν ἂν πημά- των ἀπαλλαγή. So Virg. En. x. 828, Si qua est ea cura.

§ 202. Ὁ. Attraction of the Copula into agreement with the Predicate. Meno gI ὁ, οὗτοί ye φανερά ἐστι λώβη. Legg. 735 8; τοὺς μέγιστα ἡμαρτηκότας ἀνιάτους δὲ ὄντας, μεγίστην δὲ οὖσαν βλάβην. Parmen. 134 b, πάντα, ἃ δὴ ὡς ἰδέας αὐτὰς οὔσας ὑπολαμβάνομεν.

| Politic. 271 6, θεὸς ἔνεμεν... , ζῶον ὃν ἑτέρον θειότερον. «

§ 203. 6. Attraction of the Article of an Infinitival clause into agreement with a word preceding, with which that clause is in | Appesition.

Charm. 173 6, ἐμμένομεν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ εὐδαίμονα εἶναι τὸν ἐπιστημόνως ζῶντα.

Legg. 908 ς, τῇ δόξῃ, τῇ θεῶν ἔρημα εἶναι πάντα.

Cf. Hdt. vi. 130, τῆς ἀξιώσιος, τῆς ἐξ ἐμεῦ γῆμαι. Xen. Mem. 1.

ili. 3, καλὴν ἔφη παραίνεσιν εἶναι, τὴν Kad δύναμιν ἔρδειν.

204 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 204, 205.

§ 204. Iptoms or SENTENCES :—Brinary STRUCTURE.

Certain Idiomatic affections of the Sentence are the grammatical result of expressing in two parts a conception which exists in the speaker’s mind as one.

The immediate use of this artifice is to present the conception to the hearer in two parts, which, after entering his mind separately, will there reunite.

The ulterior use is (1) to facilitate a clear expression of a com- plex conception, and (2) to set before the apprehension two images of the object, as it presents itself at two successive moments ; and by this means to give it the same kind of fullness with which the image of material objects is invested by “binocular vision.”

This Idiom has been, in certain of its forms, ranked under Appo- sition. But it does not resemble it except in a nakedly grammatical point of view. Apposition forms but one description of the object, and therefore is no Binary Structure at all: in other words in Apposition the two representations are simultaneous; whereas in the Idiom before us they are substitutive ; the thought has moved in the interval between them; and though the one is in some sort a repetition of the other, they are not identical

§ 205. Examples of this Idiom in its main forms are to be found in all Greek literature; but its applications in Plato are preemi- nently various and subtle. These are embodied in the following classification.

A. When the Binary Structure embraces two different sentences, both descriptive of the same fact. The mark of the Binary Struc- ture is that the two sentences are grammatically coordinated by Asyndeton.

Note, that the first-placed sentence always contains something which is unfolded more fully, or restated in another way (sometimes with anacoluthic redundancy of construction) in the latter.

B. When the Binary Structure, not extending to the Verb, consists of two successive expressions describing the same thing.

Note, that the first-placed expression is sometimes the less em- phatic, or at least the more general, and is introductory to the other; sometimes it is the more emphatic and sufficient, and the other follows epexegetically.

—r -*

§§ 206, 207.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 205

C. When a Dependent sentence bas been resolved into two parts, by disengaging from its construction, and placing in advance of it, a portion of it consisting of a Noun or Noun-phrase, and bringing both parts coordinately under the government of the Principal sentence.

§ 206. Note, that (1) the forestalled portion thus has a degree of attention ensured to it, which, not being always self-evidently em- phatic, it might otherwise fail to obtain: and (2) grammatically, the forestalled portion may be said to suffer Attraction,—Attraction, that is, out of the Dependent construction into the Principal construction.

§ 207. A. Where the Binary Structure embraces two different sentences, both descriptive of the same fact, and grammatically coordinated by Asyndeton. (Note, that the effect of Asyndeton is always to make the connection closer; it is its office to denote simultaneity or rapid sequence.)

a. Common type of instances.

3 ᾿ΆΡΟΙ. 41 ἃ, θαυμαστὴ ἂν εἴη ἡ διατριβὴ αὐτόθι, ---ὁπότε ἐντύχοιμι Πα- λαμήδει κιτιλ., ἀντιπαραβάλλοντι τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ πάθη πρὸς τὰ ἐκείνων, ὡς ἐγὼ οἶμαι, οὐκ ἂν ἀηδὲς εἴη.

Symp. 198 c, τὸ τοῦ Ὃμήρου ἐπεπόνθη,--- ἐφοβούμην κιτ᾿.λ.

Phedo 67 6, εἰ φοβοῖντο καὶ ἀγανακτοῖεν, οὐ πολλὴ ἂν ἀλογία εἴη,----εἰ

μὴ ἄσμενοι ἐκεῖσε ἴοιεν οἷ K.T.A. ;

Ib. 68 d, οὐ ταὐτὸν τοῦτο πεπόνθασιν,----ἀκολασίᾳ τινὶ σὠφρονές εἰσιν ;

Ib. 73 b, αὐτὸ τοῦτο δέομαι παθεῖν περὶ οὗ ὁ λόγος,--- ἀναμνησθῆναι.

So too 74 ἃ, Gorg. 513 ο, 519 b, Phileb. 46 c, Menex. 235 b,—in all of which the first-placed expression is formed with πάσχειν.

Ib. 70 a, [ψυχὴ] ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ διαφθείρηταί τε καὶ ἀπολλύηται, ἣ ἂν

ἅνθρωπος ἀποθάνῃ --- εὐθὺς ἀπαλλαττομένη τοῦ σώματος... . . οἴχηται διαπτομένη καὶ οὐδὲν ἔτι οὐδαμοῦ 7. Here the sentence εὐθὺς... ἢ is the complete double of the sentence ἐκείνῃ... . . ἀποθάνῃ.

Ib. 86 b, τοιοῦτόν τι μάλιστα ὑπολαμβάνομεν... . . εἶναι,----ὥσπερ κιτ.λ.,

κρᾶσιν εἶναι τούτων K.T.A.

Gorg. 505 6, ἵνα μοι τὸ τοῦ ᾿Επιχάρμου γένηται,----ἃ πρὸ τοῦ δίο ἄνδρες

ἔλεγον, εἷς ὧν ἱκανὸς γένωμαι.

Phileb. 35 6, (A) τί δ᾽, ὅταν ἐν μέσῳ τούτων γίγνηται : (BD) Πῶς ἐν

μέσῳ; (A) Διὰ μὲν τὸ πάθος ἀλγῇ κοτιλ. ;

206 DIGEST ‘OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 208, 209.

Legg. 697 a, τὸ δὲ τριχῇ διελεῖν... . . πειραθῶμεν, ----διατεμεῖν χωρὶς τά τε μέγιστα καὶ δεύτερα καὶ τρίτα.

Ib. 708 b, ὅταν μὴ τὸν τῶν ἑσμῶν [ὁ κατοικισμὸς] γίγνηται τρόπον, --ἕν γένος ἀπὸ μιᾶς ἰὸν χώρας οἰκίζηται.

This Idiom begins with Homer: see Od. viii. 339, At γὰρ τοῦτο

>»

γένοιτο, ἄναξ ἑκατηβόλ᾽ "Απολλον,--- Δεσμοὶ μὲν τρὶς τόσσοι ἀπείρονες ἀμφὶς ἔχοιεν, . . . Αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν εὕδοιμι παρὰ χρυσέῃ ᾿Αφροδίτῃ. ΟἿ, Aristoph. Lys, 1210, εἰ δὲ πάνυ δεῖ τοῦτο δρᾷν, Ὑμῖν χαρίζεσθαι, ταλαιπωρήσομεν. Virtually similar is

Apol. 20 ὁ, οὐ yap δήπου σοῦ ye οὐδὲν τῶν ἄλλων περιττότερον πραγ- ματευομένου ἔπειτα τοσαύτη φήμη .... γέγονεν,---εἰ μή τι ἔπραττες ἀλλοῖον ἢ οἱ πολλοί: (for cod... . πραγματευομένου is a virtual protasis, of which e? .. . . πολλοί is the double.)

Cf. Thue. v. 97, καὶ τὸ ἀσφαλὲς ἡμῖν διὰ τὸ καταστραφῆναι ἂν παρά-

oxoire... , εἰ μὴ περιγένοισθε.

§ 208. b. 15 Instances involving anacoluthic redundancy.

Phileb. 13 b, οἴει γάρ τινα συγχωρήσεσθαι, --- θέμενον κιτιλ., εἶτα ἀνέξε- σθαί σου λέγοντος K.T.X. ;

Crito 45 6, μὴ δόξῃ ἅπαν τὸ πρᾶγμα... ... ἀνανδρίᾳ πεπρᾶχθαι... .---- κακίᾳ καὶ ἀνανδρίᾳ διαπεφευγέναι ἡμᾶς δοκεῖν.

Apol. 26 e, οὑτωσί σοι δοκῶ,---οὐδένα νομίζω θεὸν εἶναι ; [So Oxon. alone. See note at p. 69, above. |

Legg. 859 d, εἶναι τοὺς δικαίους ἀνθρώπους, ἂν καὶ τυγχάνωσι k.T.Ay— κατ᾽ αὐτό ye... παγκάλους εἶναι.

Tb. 933 b, ἐπιχειρεῖν πείθειν, ἄν ποτε ἄρα ἴδωσι κιτ.λ.,---ὀλιγωρεῖν τῶν

τοιούτων διακελεύεσθαι.

§ 209. c. In Similes or Comparisons. In such cases there is great tendency to the Binary Structure: the fact illustrated is stated (perhaps only in outline) before the illustration, and re-stated after it. Note, that in these cases the pre-statement is often broken off or merely hinted at, so that the full sense is first expressed in the re-statement. (This is especially noticeable in expressions involving δοκεῖ or the like.) The instances in other authors begin with Homer : e.g. Il. ix. 13, ἀν δ᾽ ᾽Αγαμέμνων Ἵστατο δακρυχέων, ὥστε κρήνη μελάνυ- dpos .. . ,— "Qs ὃ βαρὺ στενάχων ere’ ᾿Αργείοισι μετηύδα. Cf. also Soph.

15 (In the margin of the MS. is written—“ Quere. Are these really distinct from those given in § 2077” ]

§§ 210, 211.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 207

= a a A > = , Aj. 840, Kai σφᾶς... Ξυναρπάσειαν, ὥσπερ εἰσορῶσ᾽ ἐμὲ Αὐτοσφαγῆ πί- πτοντα,---τὼς aitoopayeis .. . . ὀλοίατο. (ΕΔ. Col. 1239, 60... . ὥς τις ἀκτὰ.. . . κλονεῖται,----ῶς καὶ τόνδε K.T.A. νὰ 8 > \ ~ \ , a Φ τὰς 6 , 6 \ , we

org. 403 6, οὐ KaTa τουτὸν τὸν νόμον ον ἡμεις τισεμεῦα πλαττοντες

, 4 ,

τοὺς βελτίστους... .---ἐκ νέων λαμβάνοντες, ὥσπερ λέοντας κατεπᾳ- δοντες, καταδουλούμεθα.

Orin om a ἣν \ - \ “ 3 a ε

Politic. 296 6, τοῦτον δεῖ καὶ περὶ ταῦτα τὸν ὅρον εἶναι... .., ὥσπερ ὁ

Ψ , ‘ ’ὔ a Ν \ \ > \ κυβερνήτης . . . . σώζει τοὺς συνναύῦτας,---οὕτω καὶ κατὰ τὸν αὑτὸν τρόπον τοῦτον, K.T.A.

A , Phedo 61 ἃ, ὅπερ ἔπραττον τοῦτο ὑπελάμβανον αὐτό μοι ἐπικελεύειν, ef © ἂν , , Φ \ oa ee “ ὥσπερ οἱ τοῖς θέουσι διακελευόμενοι, ----καὶ ἐμοὶ οὕτω τὸ ἐνύπνιον ὅπερ ἔπραττον τοῦτο ἐπικελεύειν.

Tb. 109 6, κατιδεῖν ἂν ἀνακύψαντα, ὥσπερ ἐνθάδε οἱ ἰχθύες ἀνακύπτοντες

c ~ A > , a »” 4 ay 2 “2 τ ὁρῶσι τὰ ἐνθάδε,----οὕτως ἄν τινα καὶ τὰ ἐκεῖ κατιδεῖν.

Crito 54 d, ταῦτα ἐγὼ δοκῶ ἀκούειν, ὥσπερ οἱ κορυβαντιῶντες τῶν αὐλῶν

δοκοῦσιν ἀκούειν,----καὶ ἐν ἐμοὶ αὕτη ἡ ἠχὴ . . . βομβεῖ.

Politic. 260 ¢, καί μοι δοκεῖ τῇδέ πῃ, καθάπερ κ-τ.Ὰ.,----καὶ τὸ βασιλικὸν

» »» Ἢ es γένος ἔοικεν ἀφωρίσθαι.

Crat. 417 Ὁ, ἔοικεν, οὐχὶ καθάπερ οἱ κάπηλοι αὐτῷ χρῶνται͵----οὐ ταύτῃ

λέγειν μοι δοκεῖ τὸ λυσιτελοῦν.

ΤΌ. 433 ἃ, ἵνα μὴ ὄφλωμεν, ὥσπερ οἱ ἐν Αἰγίνῃ νύκτωρ περιϊόντες ὀψὲ

e “- Ν e oe > ‘ ‘\ , , > Led >. > , ao 6500,—kal ἡμεῖς ἐπὶ Ta πράγματα δόξωμεν αὐτῇ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ οὕτω πως ἐληλυθέναι ὀψιαίτερον τοῦ δέοντος.

Tim. 19 b, προσέοικε δὲ δή τινί μοι τοιῷδε τὸ πάθος, οἷον εἴ Tis... .

ἀφίκοιτο κιτιλ.,--- ταὐτὸν καὶ ἐγὼ πέπονθα πρὸς τὴν πόλιν ἣν διήλθομεν.

§ 210. As a variation, the Binary Structure is sometimes de- veloped in the illustration, and then there is no re-statement of the illustrated fact,—this being implied sufficiently in the re-statement of the illustration.

Pheedo 60 ¢, ᾧ ἂν τὸ ἕτερον παραγένηται ἐπακολουθεῖ ὕστερον καὶ τὸ ἕτερον᾽ ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ αὐτῷ μοι ἔοικεν, ἐπειδὴ K.T.X.,— ἥκειν δὴ φαίνε- ται ἐπακολουθοῦν τὸ ἡδύ.

Charm. 156 b, ἐστὶ γὰρ τοιαύτη [ἡ ἐπῳδὴ] οἵα μὴ δύνασθαι τὴν κεφαλὴν μόνον ὑγιᾶ ποιεῖν, GAN’ ὥσπερ ἴσως ἤδη καὶ σὺ ἀκήκοας τῶν ἀγαθῶν 5» - 5 ‘ , , oa ἰατρῶν, ἐπειδὰν k.t.\.,—Aeyougt που ὅτι k.T.A.

§ 211. 4. Pairs of Interrogative sentences, the former of which

is partly Pronominal,—a skeleton sentence, which is put forward to arrest attention, and to introduce the re-statement, of which it is

208 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§§ 212, 213.

the double. The Pronominal part is the Interrogative ri, which represents the Predicate, or part of the Predicate, of the re-state- ment. These Binary Interrogative sentences therefore follow the general principle of Double Interrogatives in Greek ; which 15, that the one introduces the other,—the first-placed being always the less precise and definite.

Phdr. 234 ¢, τί σοι φαίνεται ὁ λόγος; οὐχ ὑπερφνῶς εἰρῆσθαι ;— where τί foreshadows ὑπερφυῶς εἰρῆσθαι. (Cf. Symp. 204 d, ὁ ἐρῶν τῶν καλῶν τί ἐρᾷ ; Γενέσθαι αὑτῷ.)

Ib. 269 a, τί δὲ τὸν μελίγηρυν "Ἄδραστον οἰόμεθα ἢ καὶ Περικλέα, εἰ ἀκούσειαν κιτ.λ. ; πότερον χαλεπῶς ἂν αὐτοὺς... εἰπεῖν κιταλ. 5

Charm. 154 d, τί σοι φαίνεται ὁ νεανίσκος ; οὐκ εὐπρόσωπος ;

Phileb. 27 6, τί δὲ ὁ σὸς [Bios]; ἐν τίνι γένει ἂν λέγοιτο ;

Ib. 56 ο, τί δὲ λογιστικὴ K.7.A. ; πότερον ὡς μία λεκτέον ;

Phdr. 277 ἃ, τί δ᾽ αὖ περὶ τοῦ καλὸν ἢ αἰσχρὸν εἶναι τὸ λόγους λέγειν κιτιλ. ; ἄρα οὐ δεδήλωκε τὰ λεχθέντα... ὡς κιτιλ. ;---τί foreshadows ὡς K.T.A.

Protag. 309 b, τί οὖν τὰ νῦν ; ἢ παρ᾽ ἐκείνου φαίνει ;

Soph. 266 ¢, τί δὲ τὴν ἡμετέραν τέχνην ; dp’ οὐκ αὐτὴν μὲν οἰκίαν οἶκο- δομικῇ φήσομεν ποιεῖν ;

Phedo 78 d, τί δὲ τῶν πολλῶν καλῶν...

κιιλι; (where the Genitive is suspended in a loose construc-

Ἀν A 9 Nn ΚΑ a +3 ἄρα κατὰ ταῦτα ἐχει, ἢ

tion, which the re-statement supersedes.)

Gorg. 474 ἃ, τί δὲ τόδε; τὰ καλὰ πάντα εἰς οὐδὲν ἀποβλέπων καλεῖς ἑκάστοτε καλά; Here the virtual Subject of the re-statement 15 foreshadowed by τόδε, which therefore is Nominative ; and the Predicate by τί, which (as in all the other instances) is Accu- sative.

Cf. Soph. Aj. 101, τί yap δὴ παῖς ὁ τοῦ Aaepriov ; Ποῦ σοι τύχης

ἔστηκεν |

§ 212. The passages also (quoted under ‘ Accusative Case,’ δὲ 15-- 19, above), in which a Pronoun Accusative is in Apposition to a whole sentence following, are virtually of Binary Structure : for the Accusative is the shadow of a sentence.

§ 213. B. When the Binary Structure, not extending to the Verb, consists of two successive expressions describing the same thing. a. Where the first-placed expression is the less logically specific, or the less emphatic, and is introductory to the other.

§§ 214, 215.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 209

a. Where it is a Noun-phrase. Apol. 37 ¢, τῇ ἀεὶ καθισταμένῃ ἀρχῇ, τοῖς ἕνδεκα. ᾿ς Phedo-65 d, λέγω δὲ περὶ πάντων, οἷον μεγέθους πέρι κιτιλ.,---τῆς οὐσίας, ὃ τυγχάνει ἕκαστον ὄν. Ib. 81 6, τοῦ ξυνεπακολουθοῦντος, τοῦ σωματοειδοῦς, ἐπιθυμίᾳ. ΤΌ. 82 b, εἰς ταὐτόν, τὸ ἀνθρώπινον γένος. Ib. 113 a, τῶν τετελευτηκότων, τῶν πολλῶν. Symp. 215 b, τῷ Σατύρῳ, τῷ Μαρσύᾳ. Euthyd. 274 6, τὸ πρᾶγμα, τὴν ἀρετήν, μαθητὸν εἶναι. Crat. 415 a, τὸ ὄνομα ἡ μηχανή. ΤΡ. 435 c, τῷ φορτικῷ τούτῳ προσχρῆσθαι, τῇ ξυνθήκη. Protag. 317 Ὁ, εὐλάβειαν ταύτην οἶμαι βελτίω ἐκείνης εἶναι, τὸ ὁμολο- γεῖν μᾶλλον ἢ ἔξαρνον εἶναι. Charm. 173 8, ἐμμένομεν τῷ λόγῳ, τῷ εὐδαίμονα εἶναι τὸν ἐπιστημόνως ζῶντα. Legg. 908 ο, τῇ δόξη, τῇ θεῶν ἔρημα εἶναι πάντα. Gorg. 462 c, οὐκοῦν καλόν σοι δοκεῖ ἡ ῥητορικὴ εἶναι,----χαρίζεσθαι οἷόν

> > > , τ᾽ εἶναι ἀνθρώποις ;

§ 214. 8. Where it is Pronominal. Euthyphro 8 6, τοῦτο μὲν ἀληθὲς λέγεις, τὸ κεφάλαιον. ~ Apol. 24 8, αὐτὸ τοῦτο οἶδε, τοὺς νόμους. Crat. 423 6, αὐτὸ τοῦτο μιμεῖσθαι δύναιτο ἑκάστου, τὴν οὐσίαν. Ψ Gorg. 500 6, οὗ τί ἂν μᾶλλον σπουδάσειέ τις, ἢ τοῦτο, ὅντινα χρὴ τρόπον ζῇν ; (the two expressions are οὗ and ἢ τοῦτο κιτιλ.) Tb. 518 a, ταύτας μὲν δουλοπρεπεῖς εἶναι, τὰς ἄλλας τέχνας. Phileb. 38 b, ἕπεται ταύταις... ἡδονὴ καὶ λύπη πολλάκις, ἀληθεῖ καὶ ψευδεῖ δόξη λέγω. Tim. 22 d, οἱ μὲν ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσι διασώζονται, βουκόλοι νομεῖς τε. Protag. 351 a, τὸ μὲν καὶ ἀπὸ ἐπιστήμης γίγνεσθαι, τὴν δύναμιν. Rep. 396 ¢, ὁ μέν μοι δοκεῖ, ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, μέτριος ἀνήρ, ἐθελήσειν. Legg. 861 d, τοῖν δυοῖν τὸ μὲν οὐκ ἀνεκτὸν ἐμοί, τό γε μὴ λέγειν K.TA, Symp. 198 d, τὸ δὲ ἄρα οὐ τοῦτο ἦν, τὸ καλῶς ἐπαινεῖν ὁτιοῦν. Ib. 207 d, δύναται δὲ ταύτῃ μόνον, τῇ γενέσει. Tb. 222 ἃ, ἐντὸς αὐτῶν γιγνόμενος... νοῦν ἔχοντας μόνους εὑρήσει, τῶν λόγων. Add to these the frequently-recurring expression ἦ δ᾽ ὃς ὁ Σωκράτης.

§ 215. Under this head come also the instances of αὐτὸ in its peculiar Platonic meaning.

210 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 216, 217.

Symp. 199 d, αὐτὸ τοῦτο πατέρα.

Phedo 93 b, αὐτὸ τοῦτο... ψυχήν. Protag. 360 6, τί mor’ ἐστὶν αὐτὸ ἡ ἀρετή. Crat, 411 d, αὐτὸ ἡ νόησις.

Rep. 363 a, οὐκ αὐτὸ δικαιοσύνην ἐπαινοῦντες.

§ 216. y. Where it is a Relative clause. Rep. 402 b, οὔτε αὐτοὶ οὔτε οὕς φαμεν ἡμῖν παιδευτέον εἶναι, τοὺς

φύλακας.

Pheedo 74 d, οἷς νῦν δὴ ἐλέγομεν, τοῖς ἴσοις, Similarly Hip. Μὰ.

291 ὁ, Gorg. 469 a, Protag. 342 b, Crito 48 ο, Legg. 653 6, &e.

Crat. 422 b, ἃ ἐρωτᾷς, τὰ ὀνόματα. Similarly Phileb. 42 e.

Tim. 33 a, ἃ ξυνιστᾷ, τὰ σώματα.

Hip. Ma. 294 a, ᾧ πάντα τὰ μεγάλα ἐστι μεγάλα, τῷ ὑπερέχοντι.

Symp. 200 d, ἐκείνου ἐρᾷν, ὃ οὔπω ἕτοιμον αὐτῷ ἐστιν οὐδὲ ἔχει, τὸ εἰς τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον ταῦτα εἶναι αὐτῷ σωζόμενα τὰ νῦν παρόντα.

Theet. 167 b, ἃ δή τινες τὰ φαντάσματα... ἀληθῆ καλοῦσιν--- and these, I mean their opinions, some call true.’

Tim. 40 b, ἐξ ἧς δὴ τῆς αἰτίας γέγονεν dca... ἀεὶ peve—‘ and hence, from this cause namely, arise,’ &c.

Legg. 647 a, φοβούμεθα δέ ye πολλάκις δόξαν... ὃν δὴ Kal καλοῦμεν τὸν φύβον ἡμεῖς ye... αἰσχύνην.

Another explanation might have been conceived of some of these passages, that they are simply cases of Antecedent and Relative in reversed order. But this would not apply to the last five; conse- quently, all must be referred to the principle of Binary Structure. It is to be noticed, that the operation of Attraction, probably in the three last instances, certainly in two of them, complicates the case ; i. 6. that the Relatives agree not with their Antecedents, but respec- tively with ra φαντάσματα, and τῆς αἰτίας. See ‘ Attraction,’ ὃ 201, above.

Cf.,as instances in other authors, Mschin. i. 72. p. 10, Sv... ἠκού- cate τῶν νόμων. And Soph. Ant. 404, θάπτουσαν ὃν σὺ τὸν νεκρὸν ᾿Απεῖπας ---- ‘him whom thou forbadest to bury, namely that corpse’ (the order is hyperbatic).

§ 217. Not to be identified with the foregoing are the followmg, which contain an implicit sentence, though it has been operated on by Ellipse, and in the first two by Attraction also.

Soph. 246 c, ὑπὲρ ἧς τίθενται τῆς ovcias—i. ο, ὑπὲρ [τοῦ] ὃ τίθενται

A SK 1; >. τὴν ουσιαν εἰναι,

δδ 218—220.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 211

“Gorg: 477 ἃ, ἥνπερ ἐγὼ ὑπολαμβάνω τὴν ὠφέλειαν----ἰ, 6. [τοῦτο] ὅπερ ἐγὼ ὑπολαμβάνω τὴν ὠφέλειαν εἶναι. Phedo 78 d, ἧς λόγον δίδομεν τοῦ eivac—where ἧς is the Predicate and τοῦ εἶναι the Subject of a sentence of which the Copula is suppressed,

§ 218. b. Where the first-placed expression is the more emphatic and sufficient of the two. a. Common type of instances. “Gorg. 503 6, τοὺς ἄλλους πάντας δημιουργούς, ὅντινα βούλει αὐτῶν. Critias 110 6, πάνθ᾽ ὅσα ξύννομα (oa... πᾶν δυνατὸν πέφυκεν. Phdr. 246 ¢, ἡ δὲ... [ψυχὴ]... σῶμα γήϊνον λαβοῦσα, ζῶον τὸ ξύμ- παν ἐκλήθη. ~ Phedo 61 b, ots προχείρους εἶχον μύθους... .,, τούτους ἐποίησα, οἷς πρώτοις ἐνέτυχον. Tb. 69 b, χωριζόμενα δὲ φρονήσεως, .. .. μὴ σκιαγραφία τις ἢ ἡ τοιαύτη ἀρετή. Ib. 105 a, ὃ ἂν ἐπιφέρῃ . . .,, αὐτὸ τὸ ἐπιφέρον τὴν ἐναντιότητα μηδέ- ποτε δέξασθαι. Crat. 408 a, τὸ ἑρμηνέα εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἄγγελον κιτ.λ., περὶ λόγου δύναμίν ἐστι πᾶσα αὕτη ἡ πραγματεία.

Legg. 668 d, τῶν μεμιμημένων 6 τι ποτέ ἐστιν, ἕκαστον τῶν σωμάτων. Ib. 734 6, καθάπερ οὖν δή τινα ξυνυφὴν ἢ καὶ πλέγμ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ὁτιοῦν οὐκ ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν οἷόν τ᾽ ἐστὶ τὴν τ᾽ ἐφυφὴν καὶ τὸν στήμονα ἀπεργάζεσθαι. Cf. Soph. Aj. 1062, αὐτὸν... σῶμα τυμβεῦσαι τάφῳ, 1147, Otte δὲ

καὶ σὲ καὶ τὸ σὸν λάβρον στόμα.... Tay’ ἄν Tis... Χειμὼν κατασβέ-

σειε τὴν πολλὴν βοήν.

§ 219. A curious variation occurs in Protag. 317 a, τὸ ἀποδιδράσκοντα μὴ δύνασθαι ἀποδρᾶναι ... , πολλὴ μωρία καὶ τοῦ ἐπιχειρήματος. Phedo 99 a, εἴ τις λέγοι... ὡς διὰ ταῦτα ποιῶ ἃ ποιῶ, ... .. πολλὴ ἂν

καὶ μακρὰ ῥαθυμία εἴη τοῦ λόγου.

§ 220. β. Where the first-placed expression is collective, the other distributive.

Symp. 178 a, τούτων ὑμῖν ἐρῶ ἑκάστου τὸν λόγον.

ΤΌ. 190 d, αὐτοὺς διατεμῶ δίχα ἕκαστον.

Tim, 32 Ὁ, πρὸς ἄλληλα... ἀπεργασάμενος, 6 τί περ πῦρ πρὸς ἀέρα

τοῦτο ἀέρα πρὸς ὕδωρ, καὶ ὅ τι ἀὴρ πρὸς ὕδωρ ὕδωρ πρὸς γῆν. We may trace this back to Homer: e.g. Od. i. 348, ὅστε δίδωσιν PAD,

212 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 221, 222.

‘Avdpdow ἀλφηστῇσιν ὅπως ἐθέλῃσιν ἑκάστῳ, X. 172, ἀνέγειρα δ᾽

ig , , » , \ a ΄ ἑταίρους Μειλιχίοις ἐπέεσσι, παρασταδὸν ἄνδρα ἕκαστον.

§ 221. y. Where the latter expression is restrictive of the former, being in fact only a re-enuntiation of part of it.

Pheedo 64 b, οἶμαι yap ἂν δὴ τοὺς πολλοὺς... ξυμφάναι ἄν, τοὺς μὲν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἀνθρώπους καὶ πάνυ. Υ Gorg. 517 8, δόξαι καὶ αὑτῷ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις θεραπευτὴν εἶναι aera

παντὶ τῷ μὴ εἰδότι ὅτι K.T.A,

Cf. Hdt. viii. 83, καὶ of σύλλογον τῶν ἐπιβατέων ποιησάμενοι προηγό- peve εὖ ἔχοντα ἐκ πάντων Θεμιστοκλέης. Aristot. Eth. VI. xii, ἔπειτα καὶ ποιοῦσι μέν, οὐχ ὡς ἰατρικὴ δὲ ὑγίειαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἡ ὑγίεια, οὕτως ἡ

σοφία εὐδαιμονίαν.

§ 222. 6. Where the latter expression is merely pronominal, and resumptive.

Grammatically, the pronominal resumption is (where no change of construction intervenes) a pleonasm: but rhetorically it is not redundant. Its function is to recal to the thoughts in its proper place an expression which has, for a special purpose, been set in advance of the main portion of the sentence, or which has been held in suspense by the intervention of some Adjectival, Adverbial, or Relative clause, or some change of construction.

Instances of main portion of sentence intervening.

Theet. 155 6, ἐάν σοι ἀνδρῶν ὀνομαστῶν τῆς διανοίας τὴν ἀλήθειαν

ἀποκεκρυμμένην συνεξερευνήσωμαι αὐτῶν.

Apol. 40 d, οἶμαι ἂν μὴ ὅτι ἰδιώτην τινά, ἀλλὰ τὸν μέγαν βασιλέα

εὐαριθμήτους ἂν εὑρεῖν αὐτὸν ταύτας.

Rep. 375 d, οἶσθα γάρ που τῶν γενναίων κυνῶν ὅτι τοῦτο φύσει αὐτῶν

τὸ ἦθος.

Legg. 700 ¢, τοῖς μὲν γεγονόσι περὶ παίδευσιν δεδογμένον ἀκούειν ἦν

αὐτοῖς.

Phileb. 30 d (though the pronoun here has more force), ἀλλ᾽ ἐστὶ, τοῖς μὲν πάλαι ἀποφηναμένοις ὡς ἀεὶ τοῦ παντὸς νοῦς ἄρχει ξύμμαχος. ἐκείνοις. | I Rep. 353 ἃ, τὸ ἐπιμελεῖσθαι καὶ ἄρχειν καὶ βουλεύεσθαι καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα.

πάντα, ἔσθ᾽ ὅτῳ ἄλλῳ ἢ ψυχῇ δικαίως ἂν αὐτὰ ἀποδοῖμεν ; | Cf. Soph. O. T. 717, Παιδὸς δὲ βλάστας od διέσχον ἡμέραι Τρεῖς καί |

νιν K.T.A. Ι ἰ

alin: ena ee

§§ 223—226.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 213

§ 223. Instances of Adjectival, Adverbial, or Relative clause intervening.

Symp. 200 a, πότερον ὁ Ἔρως ἐκείνου, οὗ ἐστιν ἔρως, ἐπιθυμεῖ αὐτοῦ; Similarly Charm. 195 a.

Theet. 188 b, 4 μὴ οἶδεν, ἡγεῖται αὐτὰ εἶναι ἕτερα ;

Phedo 104 d, ἃ 6 τι ἂν κατάσχῃ, ἀναγκάζει... αὐτὸ ἴσχειν, and simi- larly in the next sentence.

Ib. 111 ὁ, τοὺς δέ, βαθυτέρους ὄντας, τὸ χάσμα αὐτοὺς ἔλαττον ἔχειν.

Alcib. I. 115 6, τὸ ἄρα βοηθεῖν... .., ἣ μὲν καλὸν κιτιλ., καλὸν αὐτὸ προσεῖπας ;

Legg. 625 ἃ, τοῦτον οὖν φαῖμεν ἂν ἡμεῖς. .., ἐκ τοῦ τότε διανέμειν

κιτιλ., τοῦτον τὸν ἔπαινον αὐτὸν εἰληφέναι.

~§ 224. Instances of change of construction intervening.

Tim. 37 d, ἡμέρας yap καὶ νύκτας καὶ μῆνας καὶ ἐνιαυτοὺς οὐκ ὄντας πρὶν οὐρανὸν γενέσθαι, τότε ἅμα ἐκείνῳ ξυνισταμένῳ τὴν γένεσιν αὐτῶν μηχανᾶται.

Phileb. 49 Ὁ, πάντες ὁπόσοι... .. ἀνοήτως δοξάζουσι, καθάπερ ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων, καὶ τούτων ἀναγκαιότατον ἕπεσθαι τοῖς μὲν K.T.A.

Ib. 13 Ὁ, κακὰ δὲ ὄντ᾽ αὐτῶν τὰ πολλὰ καὶ ἀγαθὰ δέ, ὅμως σὺ προσα- γορεύεις ἀγαθὰ αὐτά. [For it is αὐτῶν, not τὰ πολλά, which is represented by aird.]

. , ὅν, Ὁ Φ' Hip. Ma. 292 d, ὁ παντὶ ᾧ ἂν προσγένηται ὑπάρχει ἐκείνῳ καλῷ εἶναι.

§ 225. Note, that caution is needed before applying this expla- nation of the resumptive Pronoun. For instance, in Phdr. 265 6, τούτων δέ τινων... ῥηθέντων δυοῖν εἰδοῖν, εἰ αὐτοῖν τὴν δύναμιν x.7.d., the τούτων... εἰδοῖν isa Genitive Absolute. So Symp. 195 a, φημὶ οὖν ἐγὼ πάντων θεῶν εὐδαιμόνων ὄντων Ἔρωτα... ... εὐδαιμονέστατον εἶναι aitav,— πάντων... ὄντων is a Genitive Absolute. (For the construction, ef. Laches 182 Ὁ, ἐπιτιθεμένου ἄλλου ἀμύνασθαι αὐτόν.) Again, Laches 182 d, τὸ ὁπλιτικὸν τοῦτο εἰ μέν ἐστι μάθημα... χρὴ αὐτὸ μανθάνειν,----ὁπλιτικὸν is Nominative. (Cf. a similar construction Symp. 202 b.) Again, Rep. 439 Ὁ, τοῦ τοξότου od καλῶς ἔχει λέγειν, ὅτι αὐτοῦ ἅμα ai χεῖρες τὸ τόξον ἀπωθοῦνταί τε καὶ προσέλκονται, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἄλλη μὲν ἡ ἀπωθοῦσα χείρ, κατλ,, --τοῦ τοξότου belongs to the sentence ἄλλη μὲν ἡ ἀπωθοῦσα χείρ, K.7.A,

§ 226. C. Dependent sentence resolved into two parts, by disengaging from its construction and premising a portion of it consisting of a Noun or Noun-phrase, and brivging both parts co-ordinately under the government of the Principal sentence.

214 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 227.

a. The premised expression may be the Subject of the Dependent |

sentence. a. The Dependent sentence being one with a Finite Verb. Euthyd. 294 ¢, οἶσθα Εὐθύδημον, ὁπόσους ὀδόντας ἔχει ; Hip. Ma. 283 ἃ, τεκμήριον σοφίας τῶν νῦν ἀνθρώπων, ὅσον διαφέρουσι. Phedo 75 b, εἰληφότας ἐπιστήμην αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἴσου, 6 τι ἐστίν. Theet. 162 4--, θεοὺς... ots ἐγὼ... ὡς εἰσὶν ἢ ὡς οὐκ εἰσίν, ἐξαιρῶ. Pheedo 86 d, Κέβητος ἀκοῦσαι, τί αὖ ὅδε ἐγκαλεῖ τῷ λόγῳ. Ib. 95 b, ταὐτὰ δὴ οὐκ ἂν θαυμάσαιμι καὶ τὸν Κάδμου λόγον εἰ πάθοι. Laches 179 6, εἰσηγήσατο οὖν τις ἡμῖν καὶ τοῦτο τὸ μάθημα, ὅτι καλὸν εἴη μαθεῖν τὸ ἐν ὅπλοις μάχεσθαι.

“Gorg. 449 6, δηλοῦσι τοὺς κάμνοντας, ὡς ἂν διαιτώμενοι ὑγιαίνοιεν.

Note, that a very loose government suffices for the premised

expression, as in the three instances following.

Soph. 260 a, det λόγον ἡμᾶς διομολογήσασθαι, τί ποτ᾽ ἐστίν.

Ibid. d, τὴν εἰδωλοποιικὴν .... διαμάχοιτ᾽ ἂν... .. ὡς παντάπασιν οὐκ

ἔστιν.

Protag. 354 ἃ, οὐ τὰ τοιάδε λέγετε, οἷον τά τε γυμνάσια καὶ τὰς στρα-

τείας K.T.A.,.— OTe ταῦτα ἀγαθά ;

In the two remaining instances the premised expression becomes the Subject of the principal sentence.

Y Gorg. 448 ἃ, δῆλος γάρ μοι Πῶλος....., ὅτι τὴν καλουμένην ῥητορικὴν νον νιν μεμελέτηκεν.

Pheedo 64 ἃ, κινδυνεύουσιν ὅσοι κιτιλ. λεληθέναι τοὺς ἄλλους ὅτι οὐδὲν

ἄλλο ἐπιτηδεύουσι.

The form illustrated by some of the above examples is of course common enough in all authors, beginning with Homer: cf. Od. xvii. 373, Δὐτὸν δ᾽ οὐ σάφα οἶδα, πόθεν γένος εὔχεται εἶναι, XVIil. 374, Τῷ κέ μ᾽ ἴδοις, εἰ ὦλκα διηνεκέα προταμοίμην. The looser governments are illustrated by Thue. ili. 51, ἐβούλετο δὲ Νικίας... τοὺς Πελοποννησίους, ὅπως μὴ ποιῶνται ἔκπλους, Aristoph. Av. 1269, Δεινόν γε τὸν κήρυκα, τὸν

Ἂν ‘ A) > , 5 ΄, , ΓΑ παρὰ τοὺς βροτοὺς Οἰχόμενον, εἰ μηδέποτε νοστήσει πάλιν.

§ 227. 8. The Dependent sentence being an Infinitival one. Legg. 653 a, φρόνησιν δὲ [λέγω, εἶναι] εὐτυχὲς ὅτῳ καὶ πρὸς τὸ γῆρας παρεγένετο. Crat. 419 d, οὐδὲν προσδεῖται τοῦ διότι ῥηθῆναι. Phdr. 242 b, αἴτιος γεγενῆσθαι λόγῳ τινὶ ῥηθῆναι.

a a “ ΗΝ Symp. 207 ἃ, τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἑαυτῷ εἶναι ἀεὶ ἔρως ἐστίν.

— δὰ

§§ 228, 229.] BINARY STRUCTURE. 215

In the remaining instance the premised expression becomes the

Subject of the Principal sentence.

Charm. 153 b, ἤγγελται... ἡ μάχη πάνυ ἰσχυρὰ γεγονέναι,

§ 228. Note, that Attraction occurs, where possible, in the

residuary Dependent sentence also ; as in the remaining instances.

Pheedo go Ὁ, ἐπειδάν τις πιστεύσῃ λόγῳ τινί, ἀληθεῖ εἶναι. Crat. 425 b, σὺ πιστεύεις σαυτῷ, οἷός τ᾽ ἂν εἶναι----οἰἰγαοίοα for οἷόν τ᾽ ἂν εἶναί σε. Hip. Ma. 283 6, ἐφθόνουν τοῖς ἑαυτῶν παισίν, ὡς βελτίστοις γενέσθαι. Rep. 459 b, δεῖ ἄκρων εἶναι τῶν ἀρχόντων. 459 Ὁ; ρ PX Euthyd. 282 d, οἵων ἐπιθυμῶ τῶν προτρεπτικῶν λόγων εἶναι. : μ porp by

§ 229. b. Or the premised expression may not be the Subject of

the Dependent sentence.

Consequently redundancy, implicit or explicit, often occurs, as

in some of the instances which follow, in which Ὁ is prefixed to the words in which the redundancy lies.

a. The Dependent sentence being one with a Finite Verb.

Phedo 58 6, εὐδαίμων μοι ἀνὴρ ἐφαίνετο καὶ τοῦ τρόπου καὶ τῶν λόγων, ὡς ἀδεῶς καὶ γενναίως ἐτελεύτα. [ἀνὴρ Herm. with Oxon. and most of the other MMS.]

Crito 43 Ὁ, σὲ... εὐδαιμόνισα τοῦ τρόπου, ὡς ῥᾳδίως αὐτὴν φέρεις.

Ῥμᾶν, 264 d, τὴν αἰτίαν τῆς τῶν πτερῶν ἀποβολῆς, δ ἣν ψυχῆς Τάἀπορρεῖ.

Symp. 172 a, διαπυθέσθαι τὴν Ἀγάθωνος ξυνουσίαν.... περὶ τῶν ἐρω- τικῶν λόγων, τίνες ἦσαν.

Euthyd. 272 b, οὐ φοβεῖ τὴν ἡλικίαν, μὴ ἤδη πρεσβύτερος ἧς:

Politic. 309 d, τὸν δὴ πολιτικὸν... Gp’ ἴσμεν, ὅτι προσήκει μόνον δυνατὸν εἶναι τῇ τῆς βασιλικῆς μούση ἵ τοῦτο αὐτὸ ἐμποιεῖν ;

Protag. 318 6, εὐβουλία περὶ τῶν οἰκείων, ὅπως av... Τ οἰκίαν διοικοῖ.

Tim. 24 6, τὴν εὐκρασίαν τῶν ὡρῶν ἐν αὐτῷ κατιδοῦσα, ὅτι φρονιμω- τάτους ἄνδρας οἴσοι----(Ξς. ὁ τόπος, referred to in αὐτῷ.)

Critias 108 b, προλέγω σοὶ τὴν τοῦ θεάτρου διάνοιαν, ὅτι θαυμαστῶς ὁ πρότερος εὐδοκίμηκεν ἐν 7 αὐτῷ ποιητής.

Apol. 25 ¢, ἀποφαίνεις τὴν σαυτοῦ ἀμέλειαν, ὅτι οὐδέν σοι Τμεμέληκε.

Meno 96 6, ὡμολογήκαμεν τοῦτό γε, ὅτι οὐκ ἂν ἄλλως ἔχοι.

Phedo 65 d, τῆς οὐσίας, 6 τυγχάνει ἕκαστον Τὄν. (Cf. καὶ 213, above.)

Meno 72 b, μελίττης περὶ οὐσίας, 6 τι ποτ᾽ ἐστί.

216 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 230.

Cf. Thuc. v. τό, Πλειστοάναξ... ἐς ἐνθυμίαν τοῖς Λακεδαιμονίοις det προβαλλόμενος, ὡς διὰ τὴν Τἐκείνου κάθοδον παρανομηθεῖσαν ταῦτα EvpBaivor.

In the three remaining instances, the premised expression

becomes the Subject of the Principal sentence.

Pheedo 82 a, δῆλα δὴ καὶ τἄλλα, of ἂν ἑκάστη ἴοι, κατὰ τὰς αὐτῶν ὁμοιότητας τῆς wedérns—which means δῆλον δὴ οἷα καὶ τἄλλα ἔσται, τούτεστιν οἷ ἂν ἑκάστη ἴοι K.TA.

Crito 44 d, αὐτὰ δῆλα τὰ παρόντα, ὅτι οἷοί 7 εἰσὶν οἱ πολλοὶ οὐ τὰ. σμικρότατα τῶν κακῶν é€epyd¢ecbac—which means δῆλον ὅτι οἷοί τ᾽ εἰσὶν... ἐξεργάζεσθαι, τοιοῦτον γὰρ ἔργον ἐστὶν αὐτὰ τὰ παρόντα.

Tb. 45 8, μὴ δόξῃ ἅπαν τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸ περὶ σὲ ἀνανδρίᾳ τινὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ πεπρᾶχθαι, καὶ ἡ εἴσοδος τῆς δίκης εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον, ὡς 1 εἰσῆλ- θὲς; «ΚΙ ΣΙΝ.

§ 230. 8. The Dependent sentence being Infinitival.

Symp. 197 a, τὴν τῶν ζώων ποίησιν τίς ἐναντιώσεται, μὴ οὐχὶ [Ἔρωτος εἶναι σοφίαν 7) {γίγνεταί τε καὶ φύεται πάντα τὰ ζῶα:

Pheedo 102 b, ὁμολογεῖς τὸ τὸν Σιμμίαν ὑπερέχειν Σωκράτους, οὐχ ὡς τοῖς ῥήμασι λέγεται οὕτω καὶ τὸ ἀληθὲς ἔχειν.

Legg. 641 d, τὸ ἀληθὲς διισχυρίζεσθαι, ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχειν.

Rep. 480 6, διῇμεν τὴν φύσιν, οἷον ἀνάγκη φῦναι τὸν καλόν τε κἀγαθὸν ἐσόμενον...

Ib. 443 Ὁ, ἀρχόμενοι τῆς πόλεως οἰκίζειν.

ὕ Gorg. 513 6, ἐπιχειρητέονν ἡμῖν ἐστὶ τῇ πόλει καὶ τοῖς πολίταις θεραπεύειν.

Lege. 790 ¢, ἤργμεθα τῶν περὶ τὰ σώματα μύθων λεχθέντων διαπερ- αίνειν.

Politic. 285 6, τοῖς μὲν τῶν ὄντων, ῥᾳδίως καταμαθεῖν, αἰσθηταί τινες ὁμοιότητες πεφύκασι.

Hip. Ma. 294 6, οἴχεται ἄρ᾽ ἡμᾶς διαπεφευγὸς τὸ καλόν, γνῶναι 6 τι ποτ᾽ ἐστίν.

Crito 52 b, οὐδ᾽ ἐπιθυμία σε ἄλλης πόλεως ἔλαβεν εἰδέναι.

Critias 115 d, ἕως εἰς ἔκπληξιν μεγέθεσί τε κάλλεσί τε ἔργων ἰδεῖν τὴν οἴκησιν ἀπειργάσαντο.

Pheedo 84 ¢, ὡς ἰδεῖν ἐφαίνετο.

Apol. 33 b, παρέχω ἐμαυτὸν ἐρωτᾷν.

Cf. Hom. 1]. vii. 409, Οὐ γάρ τις φειδὼ νεκύων κατατεθνηώτων Τίγνετ᾽,

ἐπεί κε θάνωσι, πυρὺς μειλισσέμεν ὦκα én voor, πυρὺς μ μεν ὦκα.

§§ 231, 232.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 217 Virtually similar is Phileb. 26 Ὁ, ὕβριν... κατιδοῦσα ἡ θεός, πέρας, . . . οὐδὲν... ἐνόν. In the remaining instances the premised expression becomes the Subject of the Principal sentence. δ Apol. 37 d, καλὸς οὖν ἄν μοι ὁ βίος εἴη, ἐξελθόντι... Civ. Protag. 313 a, ἐν ᾧ πάντ᾽ ἐστὶ τὰ σά, ἢ εὖ ἢ κακῶς mparrew—(sc. σέ.) Rep. 525 b, προσῆκον τὸ μάθημα ἂν εἴη νομοθετῆσαι καὶ πείθειν τοὺς μέλλοντας ἐν τῇ πόλει τῶν μεγίστων μεθέξειν ἐπὶ TF λογιστικὴν ἰέναι. Gorg. 449 b-—c, εἰσὶ μὲν ἔνιαι τῶν ἀποκρίσεων ἀναγκαῖαι διὰ μακρῶν Tt τοὺς λόγους ποιεῖσθαι.

Euthyd. 281 d, κινδυνεύει ξύμπαντα ἃ κιτιλ., οὐ περὶ τούτου ὁ λόγος αὐτοῖς εἶναι ὅπως K.T.A.

Cf. Thue. viil. 46, εὐτελέστερα δὲ τὰ δεινά, ἡ βραχεῖ μορίῳ τῆς δαπάνης, καὶ ἅμα μετὰ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἀσφαλείας, αὐτοὺς περὶ ἑαυτοὺς τοὺς

Ἕλληνας κατατρῖψαι.

§ 231. ΤΡΙΟΜΒ oF SENTENCES :—ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION.

A. Antecedent and Relative clauses supplying each other’s Ellipses.

Symp. 212 ¢, 6 τι καὶ ὅπῃ χαίρεις ὀνομάζων, τοῦτο dvduate—where we must supplement the Antecedent sentence thus—rodro καὶ ταύτῃ ὀνόμαζε.

Phedo 98 ἃ, ταῦτα καὶ ποιεῖν καὶ πάσχειν ἃ πάσχει---- ὙΠ γ6 the Relative sentence intended is fully ἃ πάσχει καὶ ποιεῖ.

Symp. 178 a, ἃ δὲ μάλιστα καὶ ὧν ἔδοξέ μοι ἀξιομνημόνευτον, τούτων ὑμῖν ἐρῶ ἑκάστου τὸν Adyov—where the Antecedent sentence

fully is τούτων ἑκάστου τὸν λόγον, καὶ ταῦτα, ὑμῖν ἐρῶ.

§ 232. B. Ellipses supplied from parallel constructions in co-ordi- nate clauses.

ὃ τυγχάνει... ἔστιν ὅτε καὶ οἷς βέλτιον τεθνάναι ἢν. Pheedo 62 a, TUYX aN 6 ἢ 7 ois δὲ βέλτιον τεθνάναι, θαυμαστὸν... εἰ τούτοις τοῖς ἀνθρώποις μὴ

ὅσιόν ἐστι x.t.\.,—where after οἷς δὲ must be supposed to be repeated καὶ ὅτε, and after τούτοις τοῖς ἀνθρώποις similarly καὶ τότε.

Tb. 69 b, τούτου μὲν πάντα καὶ μετὰ τούτου ὠνούμενά τε καὶ πιπρασκό- peva.... μετὰ φρονήσεως--- ΠΟΘΙ must be supplied φρονήσεως καὶ before μετὰ φρονήσεως, parallel to τούτου καὶ μετὰ τούτου.

218 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8 233, 234.

Politic. 258 a, Geariro ... συνέμιξα χθὲς διὰ λόγων Kal viv ἀκήκοα, Σωκράτους δὲ ovdérepa—where the clauses supply each other crosswise ; ἀκήκοα requires the Genitive Θεαιτήτου, and οὐδέτερα implies a Σωκράτει parallel to Θεαιτήτῳ, as Well as a Σωκράτους.

§ 233. C. Dependent Noun silently supplied from one of two co-ordinate clauses to the other, in a new and different government.

Apol. 19 d, ἀξιῶ ὑμᾶς ἀλλήλους διδάσκειν τε καὶ ppag¢eer—where ἀλλήλοις is to be supplied to φράζειν.

Laches 187 d, διδόντες τε καὶ δεχόμενοι λόγον map’ ddAj~Aoy—where ἀλλήλοις is to be supplied to διδόντες,

Legg. 934 6, διδασκέτω καὶ pavOavéro τὸν ἀμφισβητοῦντα----ἰο μανθα- νέτω Supply παρὰ τοῦ ἀμφισβητοῦντος.

Protag. 349 a, σὲ παρακαλεῖν... καὶ ἀνακοινοῦσθαι----86. σοί.

Phdr. 238 6, τῷ ὑπὸ ἐπιθυμίας ἀρχομένῳ, δουλεύοντί re—se, ἐπιθυμίᾳ.

Ib. 278 6, πρὸς ἄλληλα κολλῶν τε καὶ dpaipdv—sc. ἀπ᾿ ἀλλήλων.

Symp. 195 b, μετὰ δὲ νέων ἀεὶ ξύνεστί τε καὶ ἔστιν, 1. 6. καὶ ἐστὶ τῶν νέων.

Cf. Xen. Hell. I. iii. 9, ὅρκους ἔλαβον καὶ ἔδοσαν παρὰ Φαρναβάζου.

§ 234. Τὴ. New Subject in the second of two clauses silently

supplied from the former.

Rep. 333 0, ὅταν μηδὲν δέῃ αὐτῷ χρῆσθαι, ἀλλὰ κεῖσθαι----8ο. αὐτό.

Symp. 212 6, θύραν ψόφον παρασχεῖν, . . . καὶ αὐλητρίδος φωνὴν ἀκούειν---8ο. αὐτούς, from αὐτοῖς implied by παρασχεῖν.

Ib. 187 ©, ὅπως ἂν τὴν μὲν ἡδονὴν αὐτοῦ καρπώσηται, ἀκολασίαν δὲ μηδεμίαν ἐμποιήσῃ---80. ἡ ἡδονή.

Rep. 414 d, ἐδόκουν ταῦτα πάσχειν τε, καὶ γίγνεσθαι περὶ αὐτούς ----80. : ταῦτα. |

Phedo 58 b, νόμος ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ καθαρεύειν τὴν πόλιν, καὶ δημοσίᾳ μηδένα ἀποκτιννύναι----50, αὐτούς.

Ib. 72 ©, λῆρον τὸν ᾿Ενδυμίωνα ἐνδείξειε καὶ οὐδαμοῦ ἂν φαίνοιτο----80. *Evdupiov.

Apol. 40 a, ἅ ye δὴ οἰηθείη ἄν τις καὶ νομίζεται ἔσχατα κακῶν elvar— where the Nominative to νομίζεται is ἃ supplied from the pre- ceding Accusative a (This is an instance of the next head also.)

4% [Under this section is written ἢ Tllustr.:” but the illustrations were

the MS. “TJllustr. from Homer:” and never put in. ] so under §§ 235, 269, 300, 301, 308,

δὲ 235—237.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 219

§ 235. E. Relative Pronoun, in a new and different government, supplied to the second clause.

Symp. 200 d, ὃ οὔπω ἕτοιμον αὐτῷ ἐστιν, οὐδὲ ἔχει.

Ib. 201 ἃ, οὗ ἐνδεὴς ἐστί, καὶ μὴ ἔχει.

Pheedo 65 a, ᾧ μηδὲν ἡδὺ τῶν τοιούτων, μηδὲ μετέχει αὐτῶν.

Gorg. 482 b, 4 σὺ νῦν θαυμάζεις, παρῆσθα δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς λεγομένοις.

Menex. 243 ¢, ὧν χρὴ ἀεὶ μεμνῆσθαί τε καὶ ἐπαινεῖν.

§ 236. In the following passages, the force of the Relative is still to be supplied, although a Demonstrative Pronoun fills its place in the construction.

Rep. 357 Ὁ, ἡδοναὶ ὅσαι ἀβλαβεῖς καὶ μηδὲν διὰ ταύτας γίγνεται.

Tb. 395 d, ὧν φαμὲν κήδεσθαι καὶ δεῖν αὐτοὺς ἄνδρας ἀγαθοὺς γενέσθαι.

Phedo 100 b, ἃ εἴ μοι δίδως τε καὶ ξυγχωρεῖς εἶναι ταῦτα.

Virtually similar is Rep. 337 6, πρῶτον μὲν μὴ εἰδώς, ... ἔπειτα... ἀπειρημένον αὐτῷ εἴη, where μὴ εἰδὼς is the equivalent of ὃς μὴ εἰδείη.

§ 237. F. Common part supplied from a preceding to ἃ subse-

quent clause. a. Definite Article.

The brackets indicate where Articles have to be supplied. The complete irregularity with which they are expressed and omitted shews that the object is, next to conciseness, to produce variety of expression and sound.

Rep. 344 ¢, τὸ μὲν τοῦ κρείτονος ξυμφέρον τὸ δίκαιον τυγχάνει dv, τὸ

δ᾽ ἄδικον | | ἑαυτῷ λυσιτελοῦν.

Ib. 438 b-c, τὰ πλείω πρὸς τὰ ἐλάττω.... καὶ αὖ [] βαρύτερα πρὸς [ | κουφότερα καὶ [ 1 θάττω πρὸς τὰ βραδύτερα.

Tb. 477 a, ἐπὶ μὲν τῷ ὄντι γνῶσις, ἀγνωσία δ᾽ ἐπὶ [| μὴ ὄντι.

Th. 544 ¢, ἥ τε... ἐπαινουμένη, ἡ Κρητική" ... καὶ [ ] δευτέρα... καλουμένη δ᾽ ὀλιγαρχία.

Th. 545 a, τὸν φιλόνεικον... καὶ [1] ὀλιγαρχικὸν αὖ καὶ [ ] δημοκρα- τικὸν καὶ τὸν τυραννικόν.

Phedo 67 d, χωρισμὸς τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ [ | σώματος. [So Oxon.]

% Gorg. 469 6, καὶ τά ye ᾿Αθηναίων νεώρια καὶ [ 1 τριήρεις καὶ τὰ πλοῖα, [So most MSS. }

Symp. 186 e, ἥ τε ἰατρικὴ... ., ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ [ 7 γυμναστικὴ καὶ [ 1

γεωργία.

220 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ὃ 238—24r.

Phdr. 253 d, ἀρετὴ δὲ τίς τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, ἢ [1 κακοῦ κακία, οὐ διείπομεν.

Phileb. 45 a, μείζους γίγνονται περὶ τοὺς κάμνοντας. .., ἢ περὶ [ | ὑγιαίνοντας ;

Legg. 780 6, τοὺς μὲν ἐλάττονας εἰς τὰς χεῖρας, [ | μείζους δ᾽ ὑπὸ τὴν ἀγκάλην.

Ib. 960 ο, [| Λάχεσιν μὲν τὴν πρώτην, [ 1 Κλωθὼ δὲ τὴν δευτέραν, τὴν ΓΑτροπον δὲ | | τρίτην.

§ 238. b. Preposition. Symp. 209 ἃ, καὶ εἰς Ὅμηρον βλέψας καὶ Ἡσίοδον. . Apol. 25 b, καὶ περὶ ἵππων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων. So Phedo 111 d, &e.

§ 239, 6. Some larger part of the clause.

Politic. 308 6, τοὺς μὴ δυναμένους κοινωνεῖν... ὅσα ἐστὶ τείνοντα πρὸς

ἀρετήν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ἀθεότητα.

§ 240. G. Anastrophe; that is, the supplying of a word from a subsequent to a former clause. The object is, as Dissen (Pind. Nem. x. 38) remarks, to give liveliness to the sentence by strength- ening the later clauses of it. The use of this figure is more extensive in poetry than in prose; the following species of it, however, occur in Plato. a. Anastrophe of Definite Article. (This is the converse of the usage considered under the last head.) Rep. 491 d, εἴτε ἐγγείων εἴτε τῶν ζώων. Phileb. 35 6, ὅσα περὶ σωτηρίαν τ᾽ ἐστὶ τῶν ζώων καὶ τὴν φθοράν. Legg. 795 b, διαφέρει μαθὼν μὴ μαθόντος, καὶ ὁ γυμνασάμενος τοῦ μὴ γεγυμνασμένου. Cf. Hom. Od. xviii. 228, ᾽Εσθλά τε καὶ τὰ χέρηαᾳ. Aschyl. S. ο. T. 314, ἀνδρολέτειραν καὶ τὰν ῥίψοπλον ἄταν, Suppl. 194, Aidoia καὶ γόεδνα καὶ τὰ χρεῖ᾽ ἔπη, Cho. 727, χθόνιον δ᾽ Ἑρμῆν καὶ τὸν νύχιον.

§ 241. b. Anastrophe of Pronouns in Correlative clauses. Rep. 455 6, καὶ γυνὴ ἰατρική, ἡ δ᾽ ot. So 451 8. Symp. 207 d, νέος ἀεὶ γιγνόμενος, τὰ δὲ ἀπολλύς---Ὑ ΠΟΥ we must supply τὰ μὲν to νέος γιγνόμενος. Pheedo 105 d—e, (A) τὸ δὲ δίκαιον μὴ δεχόμενον καὶ ὃ ἂν μουσικὸν μὴ ; μὴ δεχόμ μ μὴ where before

δέχηται [τί ὀνομάζομεν] ; (B)”Apovaor, τὸ δὲ ἄδικον ἄμουσον must be supplied τὸ μέν. So Soph. 221 e, 248 a, Phileb. 36 e, &c.

oN ae

δὲ 242—244.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 221

Thezt. 191 0, κήρινον ἐκμαγεῖον, ... τῷ μὲν Kabapwrépov κηροῦ, τῷ δὲ κοπρωδεστέρου, καὶ σκληροτέρου, ἐνίοις δὲ typorépov—where before σκληροτέρου must be supplied ἐνίοις μέν.

Apol. 18 d, ὅσοι δὲ φθόνῳ... χρώμενοι ὑμᾶς ἀνέπειθον, οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ πεπεισμένοι ἄλλους meiGovres—where before φθόνῳ must be supplied οἱ μέν.

Cf. Hom. Il. xi. 536, ἀφ᾽ ἱππείων ὁπλέων ῥαθάμιγγες ἔβαλλον, Αἱ δ᾽ ἀπ᾿ ἐπισσώτρων, ΧΧῚΪ. 157, παραδραμέτην, φεύγων, ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε διώκων, IX. 511, Εἰ μὲν γὰρ μὴ δῶρα φέροι, τὰ δ᾽ ὄπισθ᾽ ὀνομάζοι, Od. iii. 33, κρέα ὥπτων ἄλλα δ᾽ ἔπειρον, Xiv. 232, Τῶν ἐξαιρεύμην μενοεικέα, πολλὰ δ᾽ ὀπίσσω Λάγχανον (1. 6. πολλὰ μὲν μενοεικέα).

§ 242. 6. Anastrophe of Correlative Adverbs. Theet. 192 d, axovw,.. . τότε δὲ αἴσθησιν οὐδεμίαν ἔχω. Phedo 116 a, διαλεγόμενοι περὶ τῶν εἰρημένων καὶ ἀνασκοποῦντες, τότε

δ᾽ αὖ περὶ τῆς ξυμφορᾶς diekidvres—where τότε must be supplied

before διαλεγόμενο. So also Critias 119 d, Phileb. 35 8, him: 221}

The leaving μὲν to be supplied from an expressed δὲ in the Cor- relative clause is common: e.g. Rep. 357 0, 358 a, 572 a, Symp. 199 Ὁ, 201 6.

Cf. Hom. 1]. xxii. 171, [ἄλλοτε μὲν] Ἴδης ἐν κορυφῇσι πολυπτύχου, ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε κιτλ., XVI. 689, Ὅστε [ὅτε μὲν] καὶ ἄλκιμον ἄνδρα oBet ... dre 8€ ΚΙ τολ and so Xx. 52.

§ 243. d. Anastrophe of Correlative Conjunctions. Soph. 217 e, κατ᾽ ἐμαυτόν, εἴτε καὶ πρὸς ἕτερον. Gorg. 488 d, διόρισον, ταὐτὸν ἢ ἕτερόν ἐστι k.T.A. Theset. 169 d, ἴδωμεν, ὀρθῶς ἢ οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἐδυσχεραίνομεν. So 161 d, ΤΌ. 173 d, εὖ δὲ ἢ κακῶς... μᾶλλον αὐτὸν λέληθεν. Cf. Hom. Od. ii. 132, Ζώει dy’ ἢ τέθνηκε.

§ 244. 6, Anastrophe of Prepositions.

Phileb. 22 c, τῶν μὲν οὖν νικητηρίων πρὸς τὸν κοινὸν βίον οὐκ ἀμφι- σβητῶ πω ὑπὲρ νοῦ, τῶν δὲ δὴ δευτερείων ὁρᾷν καὶ σκοπεῖν χρὴ πέρι τί δράσομεν.

This kind of Anastrophe is as common in Homer as it is in later

poets.

The converse usage is noticeable in peculiar instances: cf. Hom. Tl. xi. 374, Ἦτοι ὁ μὲν θώρηκα ᾿Αγαστρόφου ἰφθίμοιο Αἴνυτ᾽ ἀπὸ

229 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 245, 246.

στήθεσφι παναίολον ἀσπίδα τ᾽ Syov. And Theocr. i. 83, Πάσας ἀνὰ

κράνας, πάντ᾽ ἄλσεα, ib. 117, Οὐκ ἔτ᾽ ἀνὰ δρύμως. οὐκ ἄλσεα. ) ἢ ) ρυμως,

§ 245. H. Verb supplied from a co-ordinate clause either preceding

or subsequent.

Symp. 213 a, κελεύειν εἰσιέναι, καὶ τὸν ᾿Αγάθωνα καλεῖν a’rév—in the second clause is to be supplied λέγειν out οὗ κελεύειν,

Apol. 38 b, κελεύουσί με τριάκοντα μνῶν τιμήσασθαι, αὐτοὶ δ᾽ ἐγγυ- ἄσθαι.

Τὴ the following instance the Verb is supplied after an intervening

complete clause.

Symp. 183 a, ἢ χρήματα βουλόμενος παρά του λαβεῖν ἢ ἀρχὴν ἄρξαι ἤ tw’ ἄλλην Sivayuv—where to the last clause must be supplied λαβεῖν from the next but one preceding.

In all the following it is the Substantive Verb that has to be

supplied,

Symp. 186 a, ὡς μέγας καὶ θαυμαστὸς καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶν ὁ θεὸς retvee—where ἐστὶ is to be supplied to μέγας καὶ θαυμαστός.

Soph. 256 6, ξύμπαντα... ἐροῦμεν... εἶναί τε καὶ [supply ‘are Ἴ » ὄντα.

Phdr. 234 6, σαφῆ καὶ στρογγύλα καὶ ἀκριβῶς ἕκαστα τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀποτετύρνευται.

Tim. 22 4, ὁ Νεῖλος εἴς τε τὰ ἄλλα σωτὴρ καὶ τότε ἐκ ταύτης τῆς ἀπορίας σώζει.

Ib. 56 b, οὕτως ὡς καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστον μὲν ... οὐδὲν ὁρώμενον, ξυναθροι- σθέντων δὲ... ὁρᾶσθαι.

Legg. 872 a, ἐὰν δὲ αὐτόχειρ μὲν μή, βουλεύσῃ δὲ θάνατόν τις ἄλλος ἑτέρῳ.

§ 246. I. Verb or Participle supplied from subordinate construc-

tion to main construction, or vice versa.

Phdr. 330 d, ὥσπερ of τὰ θρέμματα θαλλὸν... προσείοντες ἄγουσι---- where to οἱ τὰ θρέμματα must be supplied ἄγοντες.

Pheedo 114 b, of ἂν δόξωσι διαφερόντως πρὸς τὸ ὁσίως Bidvac—where to διαφερόντως must be supplied βεβιωκέναι.

Thest. 180 a, ὑπερβάλλει τὸ οὐδ᾽ οὐδὲν πρὸς τὸ μηδὲ σμικρὸν ἐνεῖναι---- where to τὸ οὐδ᾽ οὐδὲν must be supplied ἐνεῖναι.

Cf. Isocr. ix. 28. p. 194, παρακαλέσας ἀνθρώπους, ὡς οἱ τοὺς πλεί-

στους λέγοντες, περὶ TevTHKovra—where to of. . - λέγοντες must

he supplied λέγουσι. (Cf. Epist. ad Hebr. x. το.) Hat. 11. 86,

δὲ 247—249.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 223

οὕτω μὲν τοὺς Ta πολυτελέστατα σκευάζουσι νεκρούς. Thue. il. 53, ῥᾷον γὰρ ἐτόλμα τις ἃ πρότερον ἀπεκρύπτετο μὴ καθ᾽ ἡδονὴν ποιεῖν---- ἐτόλμα sc. καθ᾽ ἡδονὴν ποιεῖν.

§ 247. J.

| Apol. 18 6, ὃ δὲ πάντων ἀλογώτατον, ὅτι οὐδὲ τὰ ὀνόματα οἷόν Te αὐτῶν

᾿ eiSévai—which is to be supplemented thus—é δὲ πάντων ἐστὶν ἀλογώτατον, ἐστὶ τοῦτο, ὅτι .τ.λ.

Symp. 183 Ὁ, 6 δὲ δεινότατον, ὥς γε λέγουσιν οἱ πολλοί, ὅτι καὶ ὀμνύντι μόνῳ συγγνώμη.

Still more elliptical is

Phdr. 248 Ὁ, οὗ δὲ ἔνεχ᾽ ἡ πολλὴ σπουδή, ἡ προσήκουσα... νομὴ ἐκ τοῦ ἐκεῖ λειμῶνος τυγχάνει οὖσα---ἰ. 6. οὗ δὲ ἔνεχ᾽ ἡ πολλὴ σπουδὴ ἐστίν, ἐστὶ τοῖτο, ὅτι ἡ Tp. K.T.A.

Cf. Xen. Mem. II. vi. 17, ὃ ταράττει σε, ὦ Κριτόβουλε, ὅτι πολλάκις ... ὁρᾷς κατὰ, Isocr. iv. 176. p. 77, ὃ δὲ πάντων καταγελαστό- τατον, ὅτι κατιλ. Lysias xxx. 29. p. 186, ὃ δὲ πάντων δεινότατον, ὅτι κιτιλ. [So Bekker : Zurich edd. omit ὅτι. We have also the following variations :—Isocr. vi. 56. p. 127, ὃ δὲ πάντων σχετ- λιώτατον, εἰ κιτὶλ. (and similarly xviii. 18. p. 375), XV. 23. P- 314, ὃ δὲ πάντων δεινότατον, ὅταν κιτιλ., Lysias XIX. 25. p. 154, ὃ δὲ μέγιστον Texunpiov’ Δῆμος yap x.T.A.

§ 248. K. Of two Nouns in regimen, the governing Noun left to be supplied by the context, while its place in the construction is taken by the governed Noun.

Symp. 214 6, μεθύοντα ἄνδρα παρὰ νηφόντων λόγους παραβάλλειν----

where μεθύοντα ἄνδρα stands for μεθύοντος ἀνδρὸς λόγους.

Ib. 217 d, τῇ ἐχομένῃ ἐμοῦ kAivn—where ἐμοῦ stands for κλίνης τῆς ἐμῆς.

Protag. 310 6, οὔτ᾽ ἂν τῶν ἐμῶν ἐπιλίποιμι οὐδὲν οὔτε τῶν φίλων.

This natural idiom begins with Homer: cf. IL xvii. 51, κόμαι Xapi-

τεσσιν ὁμοῖαι. ΠΝ

§ 249. L. Complementary ἄλλος omitted.

Theet. 159 Ὁ, καὶ καθεύδοντα δὴ καὶ πάντα ἁ viv dinhOopey—where πάντα stands for ‘all besides.’

Ib. 145 a, ἀστρονομικὸς καὶ πολιτικὸς... καὶ ὅσα παιδείας ἔχεται.

Phedo 69 b, τούτου πάντα. .. πιπρασκόμενα---᾿ all other things being parted with for this.’

So τί μήν ; ‘what, if not what you say ?’

Cos, teats

Corn Seen

994. DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 250—253.

§ 250. M. Contrasted clause to be mentally supplied.

Rep. 475 8, οὐδαμῶς [φιλοσόφους φήσομεν], ἀλλ᾽ ὁμοίους μὲν φιλοσό- φοις---80. φιλοσόφους δ᾽ οὔ.

Theet. 201 Ὁ, οὐδαμῶς ἔγωγε οἶμαι [δύνασθαι διδάξαι}, ἀλλὰ πεῖσαι pev—se. διδάξαι δ᾽ οὔ.

Crito 43 d, οὐ δή τοι ἀφῖκται, ἀλλὰ δοκεῖν [50 Oxon. and two more MSS. | μέν μοι, ἥξειν τήμερον----56. ‘but I am not sure.’

Phdr. 242 ¢, εἰμὶ μάντις μέν, οὐ πάνυ δὲ σπουδαῖος, ἀλλ᾽, ὥσπερ οἱ τὰ

fA [οἱ a Ν “ γράμματα φαῦλοι, ὅσον μὲν ἐμαυτῷ μόνον ἱκανός.

Cf. Andoe. i. 22. p. 4, ταυτὶ ἔλεγεν ἄν, ἢ οὔ; ἐγὼ μὲν οἶμαι----8ο. ‘but -

another might not.’ (οἶμαι μὲν ἐγὼ would have been ‘I think, but am not sure.’

§ 250*. MM. Disjunctive clause to be mentally supplied. Crat. 389 6, ἕως ἂν τὴν αὐτὴν ἰδέαν ἀποδιδῷ, ἐάν τε ἐν ἄλλῳ σιδήρῳ,

[ἐά > a > >, | “ > an - ᾿ εν εαν TE εν τῷ αὐτῷ, ομως op ως EXEL TO opyavov.

§ 251. N. Protasis of a hypothetical reason left to be mentally

supplied.

Symp. 236 b, (A) ἔχεις εἰπεῖν ; (B) Od μέντ᾽ dv... ἐφοίτων παρὰ σέ —i.e. ‘No: for else I should certainly not have,’ το.

Phdr. 227 ἃ, εἴθε γράψειεν k.7.A.° ἦ γὰρ ἂν ἀστεῖοι καὶ δημωφελεῖς εἶεν οἱ λόγοι.

Euthyd. 280 a, οὐ yap δήπου ἁμαρτάνοι γ᾽ ἄν ποτέ τις σοφίᾳ... .. ἦ γὰρ ἂν οὐκέτι σοφία εἴη.

§ 252. O. Hypothetical sentence :----εἴπερ representing the Pro-

tasis.

Euthyd. 296 b, οὔκουν ἡμᾶς ye [σφαλεῖ], ἀλλ᾽, εἴπερ, σέ.

Rep. 497 6, οὐ τὸ μὴ βούλεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽, εἴπερ, τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι διακω-- λύσει.

Legg. 667 ἃ, οὐκ, ὦ ᾽γαθέ, προσέχων τούτῳ τὸν νοῦν δρῶ τοῦτο, εἴπερ.

Ib. g00 @, καὶ τῶν μὲν προσήκειν ἡμῖν, εἴπερ, ὁπόσα φλαῦρα.

Cf. Arist. Eth. VIII. iii, ἀλλ᾽ εἴπερ, σώζεσθαι βούλεται αὐτόν, ἵνα αὐτὸς ἔχη" also ib. IX. vii, X. iti, And Aristoph. Nub. 227, Ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπὸ ταῤῥοῦ τοὺς θεοὺς ὑπερφρονεῖς, ᾿Αλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, εἴπερ.

§ 253. P. Hypothetical sentence ;---εἰ δὲ representing the Pro-

tasis.

Symp. 212 ὁ, ef μὲν βούλει, ὡς ἐγκώμιον εἰς "Ep@ra νόμισον εἰρῆσθαι"

> δέ μὲ Ἂ δ 4 2 , “ wer ¢ εἰ δέ, ὃ TL καὶ ὕπῃ χαίρεις ὀνομάζων, τοῦτο ὀνόμαζε.

δὲ 254, 255.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 225

Euthyd. 285 ¢, εἰ μὲν βούλεται, ἑψέτω, εἰ δ᾽, ὅ τι βούλεται τοῦτο

ποιείτω.

Legg. 688 b, εἰ μὲν βούλεσθε, ὡς παίζων εἰ δ᾽, ὡς σπουδάζων.

Alc. I. 114 b, τί οὐκ ἀπέδειξας, εἰ μὲν βούλει, ἐρωτῶν με ὥσπερ ἐγὼ

ae εἰ δέ, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπὶ σεαυτοῦ λόγῳ διέξελθε.

This εἰ δὲ does not stand for εἰ δὲ μή, in reference to the βούλει of the former clause ; but refers to a βούλει of its own, with reference to the coming clause.

The usage is common in Homer: ef. I. vi. 376, Ei δ᾽, ἄγε, xxii. 381, Εἰ δ᾽, ἄγετε, ix. 46, εἰ δὲ καὶ αὐτοί, Φευγόντων κιτιλ., 262, Εἰ δέ, σὺ

μέν μευ ἄκουσον.

§ 254. Q. Hypothetical sentence ;—suppression of Apodosis. Rep. 575 ἃ, οὔκουν ἐὰν μὲν ἑκόντες ὑπείκωσιν----' ἐὰν δὲ κιτιλ, Gorg. 520 6, εἰ εὖ ποιήσας ταύτην τὴν εὐεργεσίαν ἀντ᾽ εὖ πείσεται----" εἰ δὲ μή, οὔ. More commonly the form is ἐὰν μὲν... . εἰ δέ, as also in Thucy- dides. Symp. 185 d, ἐὰν μέν σοι ἐθέλῃ παύεσθαι ἡ λύγξ---- εἰ δὲ μή, K.T.Ar. Legg. 854 ¢, καὶ ἐὰν μέν σοι λωφᾷ τι τὸ νόσημα--- εἰ δὲ μή, κιτιὰ, Protag. 325 d, ἐὰν μὲν ἑκὼν πείθηται----- εἰ δὲ μή, κιτιλ. Ib. 311 d, ἂν μὲν ἐξικνῆται .. "ef δὲ μή, KT. Hip. Ma. 287 ἃ, ἐὰν... ἀντιλαμβάνωμαι---- suppose I’ &c. Symp. 199 6, ἀπόκριναι ὀλίγῳ πλείω, iva μᾶλλον καταμάθῃς ὃ Bovdo- μαι" εἰ γὰρ ἐροίμην x.r.A.—‘ suppose I were to ask, now,’ &c. Rep. 440 d, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ πρὸς τούτῳ καὶ τόδε evOvpel . . ὅτι K.T.A.— Symp. 177 Ὁ, εἰ δὲ βούλει αὖ σκέψασθαι x.t.A.— With εἰ βούλει, or εἰ βούλεσθε, the Protasis also is often curtailed. Symp. 220 ἃ, εἰ δὲ βούλεσθε ἐν ταῖς μάχαις x.r.A.—Wwhere εἰ βούλεσθε represents εἰ βούλεσθε σκέψασθαι τὸν Σωκράτη ὁποῖος ἐστίν. Crat. 392 a, εἰ δὲ βούλει περὶ τῆς ὄρνιθος. Theet. τοῦ 6, εἰ δὲ βούλει, . . κεχρήμεθα.

ὩΣ

Cf. Hom. 1]. i. 580, Εἴπερ γάρ κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσιν κιτιλ., XVI. 559, ἀλλ᾽ εἴ μιν ἀεικισσαίμεθ᾽, κιτιλ., XX1. 487, Εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις πολέμοιο δαήμεναι κ.τ.λ., Od. xv. 80, Εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις. Suppression of the Apodosis is also common in Homer after éerei,—as II. ili. 59, Od. iii. 103, vili.236.

§ 255. R. Form of Apodosis of a Hypothetical represented by ay, the Verb or Participle being understood.

Phedo 08 c, ἔδοξεν ὁμοιότατον πεπονθέναι ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις. . . . λέγοι, ἢ μ ρ Df

Q

226 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 256, 257.

In this common phrase the ἂν represents not so much ἃ par- ticular sentence, such as e.g. here πεπονθὼς ἂν εἴη τις, but rather a vague sentence such as τὸ πρᾶγμα ἂν εἴη.

Apol. 29 Ὁ, τούτῳ καὶ ἐνταῦθα ἴσως Siapépo... , καὶ εἰ δή τῳ σοφώ- τερός του φαίην εἶναι, τούτῳ dv—se. σοφώτερος ἂν φαίην eivar-—but this suppression is a graceful escape from the appearance of self-assertion.

Politic. 308 6, εἴ τις πρᾶγμα ὁτιοῦν, . .. κἂν εἰ τὸ φαυλότατον, . . . ξυνί- στησιν. Here the xiv... φαυλότατον is exegetic of ὁτιοῦν----ἰ any whatever, so that even if you understood it of the vilest it would mean that.’ The καὶ is hyperbatically placed, and be- longs to the εἰ clause.

Symp. 221 6, ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα ἔξωθεν περιαμπέχονται, Σατύρου ἄν τινα ὑβριστοῦ Sopav'—‘ something [like] what a satyr’s hide would be.’ In this instance, as also in the last, it is a Participle, not a Verb, which is to be understood.

Rep. 468 a, ri δὲ δὴ τὰ περὶ τὸν πόλεμον ; πῶς ἑκτέον k,T.A. ; Λέγ᾽,

a> ἔφη, Tot av;

§ 256. 5. Condition or Reason referring to an implicit Propo-

sition.

Pheedo 61 b, Εὐήνῳ φράζε. . . ἂν σωφρονῇ ἐμὲ dudxeer—‘ tell him to follow me,—which he will do if he is wise.’

Symp. 173 d, ὁπόθεν... τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν ἔλαβες... . , οὐκ οἶδα ἔγωγε" ἐν μὲν γὰρ τοῖς λόγοις ἀεὶ τοιοῦτος εἶ--“1 do not know how you came by it, but at all events it fits you ; for’ &e.

Theeet. 158 a, ὀκνῶ εἰπεῖν ὅτι οὐκ ἔχω 6 τι λέγω" ἐπεὶ K.T.A.

Protag. 333 ¢, αἰσχυνοίμην ἂν ἔγωγε τοῦτο ὁμολογεῖν' ἐπεὶ πολλοί γέ φασι κιτιλ.

Tb. 335 ¢, εἶμι: ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἂν ἴσως οὐκ ἀηδῶς σου ἤκουον.

§ 257. T. Direct conjunction of one or more particulars with a clause covering the rest. a. In summarily breaking off enumeration of particulars. Phzedo 100 d, ἡ ἐκείνου τοῦ καλοῦ εἴτε παρουσία εἴτε κοινωνία εἴτε ὅπῃ ἡ ρ Ι δὴ καὶ ὅπως προσαγορευομένη. Leos. 824 6, εἴτε τριετηρίδες εἴτε αὖ διὰ πέμπτων ἐτῶν «i ὅπῃ καὶ ὅπως Θ ᾽ ese?) iy ἶ a a dy... διανεμηθῶσι. Tim. 48 ο, τὴν μὲν περὶ ἁπάντων εἴτε ἀρχὴν εἴτε ἀρχὰς εἴτε ὅπῃ δοκεῖ. Crito 50 ἃ, εἴτ᾽ ἀποδιδράσκειν, εἴθ᾽ ὅπως δεῖ ὀνομάσαι τοῦτο.

| Apol. 41 b, ’Odvocéa ἢ Σίσυφον ἢ ἄλλους μυρίους ἄν τις εἴποι.

δὲ 258, 259.] ABBREVIATED CONSTRUCTION. 997

Pheedo 70 6, οἷον τὸ καλὸν τῷ αἰσχρῷ ἐναντίον [τυγχάνει ὄν], καὶ ἄλλα δὴ μυρία οὕτως ἔχει. Similarly Pheedo 73 d, 94 b, Gorg. 483 d, Legg. 944 Ὁ.

Protag. 325 a, δικαιοσύνη, καὶ σωφροσύνη, καὶ τὸ ὅσιον εἶναι, καὶ συὰ- λήβδην ἕν αὐτὸ προσαγορεύω εἶναι ἀνδρὸς ἀρετήν.

The peculiarity of these contracted forms of expression may be appreciated by comparing the following regularly composed sen- tence :—

Protag. 358 a, εἴτε yap ἡδὺ εἴτε τερπνὸν λέγεις εἴτε χαρτόν, εἴτε ὁπόθεν καὶ ὅπως χαίρεις τὰ τοιαῦτα ὀνομάζων, ὦ βέλτιστε Πρόδικε, τοῦτό μοι πρὸς ὃ βούλομαι ἀπόκριναι.

The contracted forms give us always the feeling of abbreviation,

as if the speaker was himself impatient of prolixity. "org. 494 ἃ, (A) φημὶ τὸν κνώμενον ἡδέως ἂν βιῶναι. (B) Πότερον εἰ τὴν κεφαλὴν μόνον κνησιῷ, ἢ ἔτι τί σε ἐρωτῶ ;

Apol. 20 d, οὗτοι δὲ τάχ᾽ ἂν..... μείζω τινα ἢ κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον σοφίαν

3 σοφοὶ εἶεν, ἢ οὐκ ἔχω τί λέγω.

§ 258. b. In summary transitions to one particular.

Legg. 715 0, τοὺς ἄρχοντας... ὑπηρέτας... ἐκάλεσα οὔ τι καινοτομίας ὀνομάτων ἕνεκα, GAN ἡγοῦμαι k.T.A.

Apol. 36 a, τὸ μὴ ἀγανακτεῖν... ἄλλα τέ μοι πολλὰ συμβάλλεται, καὶ pol. 36 ἃ, τὸ μὴ dy μ μ : οὐκ ἀνέλπιστόν μοι γέγονε TO γεγονὸς τοῦτο.

Cf. Lysias xxviii. 4--5. p. 179, οἶμαι... οὐδένα dv... ἐπιτρέψαι...., ἄλλως τε καὶ ᾿Εργοκλῆς ἔλεγεν. St. Mark vi. 5, καὶ οὐκ ἠδύνατο ἐκεῖ

> , , a > A 2 , οὐδεμίαν δύναμιν ποιῆσαι, εἰ uy... ἐθεράπευσε. Hip. Ma. 281 ς, (A) τί ποτε τὸ αἴτιον ὅτι οἱ παλαιοὶ... .. φαίνονται

ἀπεχόμενοι... ; (B) Τί δ᾽ οἴει ἄλλο γε ἢ ἀδύνατοι ἦσαν ; Pheedo 63 d, (A) σκεψώμεθα τί ἐστὶν ὃ βούλεσθαί μοι δοκεῖ πάλαι εἰπεῖν. (B) Τί δὲ ἄλλο γε ἢ πάλαι μοι λέγει ὁ μέλλων K.T.A. ;

§ 259. U. Use οὗ πολλοῦ δεῖ instead of οὐ.

In the regular or full construction πολλοῦ δεῖ is either interjected varenthetically, or subjoined, to strengthen a negation. But, in the Fostances which follow, a Negative is dropped out, and the πολλοῦ δεῖ 3 made to fill the same place in the construction which the Negative Iled. Rep. 378 ¢, πολλοῦ δεῖ μυθολογητέον..., ἀλλὰ κιτιλ, Symp. 203 6, πολλοῦ δεῖ ἁπαλὸς. ...., ἀλλὰ σκληρός. Fully and regularly this would have been οὐχ ἁπαλός, --- πολλοῦ γε καὶ det,—

ἀλλὰ σκληρός. 9 2

228 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§§ 260—262.

V Gorg. 517 a, πολλοῦ ye δεῖ μήποτέ τις τοιαῦτα ἐργάσηται. Fully οὐ

μήποτέ τις (πολλοῦ γε δεῖ) τοιαῦτα ἐργάσηται.

§ 260. V. Extension of the government of a Verb, irrationally, so as to admit of the addition of an afterthought to a Participial clause without a new construction.

Politic. 276 6, εἰς ταὐτὸν βασιλέα καὶ τύραννον ξυνέθεμεν, ἀνομοιοτάτους ὄντας αὐτούς τε καὶ τὸν τῆς ἀρχῆς ἑκατέρου tpdrov—where there is no justification in the sense for bringing τὸν τρόπον under pe government of ξυνέθεμεν.

§ 261. W. Two Participles, representing the reciprocal action of two parties, made to agree each of them with both conjointly,—to avoid specification in set terms.

Crito 48 d, ἐξάγοντές τε καὶ eLaydpevoi—i. 6, σύ τε ἐξάγων, ἐγώ τε

ἐξαγόμενος.

Cf. Isocr. vi. 47. p. 125, ἀπείποιμεν δ᾽ ἂν ἀκούοντές τε καὶ λέγοντες--

i. 6. ὑμεῖς τε ἀκούοντες, ἐγώ τε λέγων. Somewhat similarly Arist.

Categ. vi. 13, ὄρος μὲν μικρὸν λέγεται, κέγχρος δὲ μεγάλη, τῷ τῶν —

ὁμογενῶν μείζονα eivac—where however μείζονα, still more brachy- logically, stands for τὴν μὲν μείζω, τὸ δὲ ἔλαττον. § 262. Ipioms oF SENTENCES :—PLEONASM OF CONSTRUCTION.

From instances of Pleonasm must be excluded

1. Cases in which the force of a word has been attenuated by

its frequent use in that particular connection; e.g. εἶναι subjoined’—

to ἑκὼν and the like:

2. All cases in which redundancy has resulted from Change of Construction, or from Binary Structure:

3. Cases of fullness of Construction: e.g.

Pheedo 62 a, τοῦτο μόνον τῶν ἄλλων drdvrev—which is simply the

full form of which μόνον ἁπάντων would have been an abbrevia-_

tion; as ‘distinct from all the rest’ is more accurate than ‘distinct from all :’ Or the use of ὥστε with the Infinitive, following δύναμαι &e. Or the use of a deliberate form of speaking, as in { Apol. 19 b, τί δὴ λέγοντες διέβαλλον οἱ διαβάλλοντες ; Ib. 34 d, ἐπιεικῆ ἄν μοι δοκῶ... λέγειν λέγων KT,

Th. 36 a, οὐκ ἀνέλπιστόν μοι γέγονε τὸ γεγονὸς τοῦτο.

ποτασας τς,

§ 263.] PLEONASM OF CONSTRUCTION. 229

Legg. 858 a, τίνα τρόπον ἂν γιγνόμενον γίγνοιτο.

Pheedo 75 ἃ, καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἐρωτήσεσιν ἐρωτῶντες καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἀποκρίσεσιν ἀποκρινόμενοι.

Cf. Isceus ii. 22, οὐκ ἂν ποιησάμενος ἄλλον οἰκειότερον ἐμοῦ ποιήσαιτο ἄν" whereby we are reminded of Homer’s (Od. xi. 612) Μὴ τεχνη- σάμενος μηδ᾽ ἄλλο τι τεχνήσαιτο “Os κεῖνον τελαμῶνα ἑῇ ἐγκάτθετο τέχνῃ.

Or, in coordinate clauses which have a common part, the

expression of this in each clause, as in

Phdr. 255 d, ὥσπερ ἐν κατόπτρῳ ἐν τῷ ἐρῶντι ἑαυτὸν ὁρῶν.

Rep. 553 b, πταίσαντα ὥσπερ πρὸς ἔρματι πρὸς τῇ πόλει.

Pheedo 67 d, ὥσπερ ἐκ δεσμῶν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος.

~ (Compare these with the real Pleonasm of Prepositions below— § 265.)

§ 263. A. Pleonasm of particular words.

a. Of the Negative. a. In the same clause.

Rep. 339 Ὁ, οὔπω δῆλον οὐδ᾽ εἰ μεγάλη.

Ib. 389 a, οὐκοῦν Ὁμήρου οὐδὲ τὰ τοιαῦτα ἀποδεξόμεθα.

Crito 43 b, οὐ μὰ τὸν Δί᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἂν αὐτὸς ἤθελον.

Euthyd. 279 ἃ, οὐδὲ σεμνοῦ ἀνδρὸς πάνυ τι οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἔοικεν εἶναι εὐπορεῖν. So Pheedo 115 6.

Politic. 300 6, μηδὲν πλῆθος μηδ᾽ ἡντινοῦν δυνατὸν λαβεῖν τέχνην.

Phedo 100 a, οὐ μὰ τὸν Δία οὐ σφόδρα.

Hip. Ma. 292 b, οὔ μοι δοκεῖ, ὦ Ἱππία, οὔκ, εἰ ταῦτά γε ἀποκρι- ναίμην.

Lysis 221 6, οὐκ ἄν, εἴ γε τὸ κακὸν κιτιλ., οὐκ ἂν ἦν κιτιλ,

Crat. 398 6, οὐδ᾽ εἴ τι οἷός τ᾽ ἂν εἴην εὑρεῖν, οὐ συντείνω.

Euthyphro 4 d, οὔτ᾽ εἰ ὅ τι μάλιστ᾽ ἀπέκτεινεν, . . . οὐ δεῖν.

Cf. Hom. I. i. 86, &e.

The usage is common, of course, where the Negative is distri- buted to subdivisions of the sentence, as in

Theet. 163 a, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ δίκαιον οὔτε σὺ οὔτ᾽ dy ἡμεῖς φαῖμεν.

The object of the Pleonasm is, after premising the Negative as an

nouncement of the general form of the sentence, to place it also

close contact with the word which it immediately concerns.

230 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 264—268.

§ 264. 8. Not in the same clause. In this case the repetition - seems almost 1 irrational. Apol. 27 e, ὅπως δὲ σύ τινα πείθοις ἂν ὡς od, κιτιλ., οὐδεμία μηχανή ἐστι. Legg. 741 d, μηδὲ τοῦθ᾽ ἡμᾶς λανθανέτω περὶ τόπων, ὡς οὐκ εἰσὶν ἄλλοι τινὲς διαφέροντες ἄλλων πρὸς τὸ γεννᾷν ἀνθρώπους ἀμείνους καὶ χείρους" οἷς οὐκ ἐναντία νομοθετητέον. οἱ μέν γέ που διὰ πνεύ-

ματα K.T.A. ἃ

. ; : ξ Ἶ τ Cf. Antipho vi. 10. p. 142, οὔτε ὅστις οὐκ ἄλλα κατηγορεῖ ἢ ἃ διώκει ἐν πράγματι τοιούτῳ, πιστεῦσαι δήπου αὐτῷ ἀξιώτερόν ἐστιν ἢ ἀπιστῆσαι

—where οὐκ is irrational.

§ 265. ἢ. Of Prepositions. Phdr. 278 a, ἐν δὲ τοῖς διδασκομένοις... ἐν μόνοις τὸ ἐναργὲς εἶναι.

Cf. Thue. ili. 53, ἐν δικασταῖς οὐκ ἐν ἄλλοις δεξάμενοι γενέσθαι ἢ ὑμῖν.

§ 266. ο. Of Conjunctions. Symp. 210 b, καὶ ἐὰν ἐπιεικὴς dv τὴν ψυχήν τις καὶ ἐὰν σμικρὸν ἄνθος ἔχῃ. 4. Of dv. Phdr. 276 b, τῇ γεωργικῇ χρώμενος τέχνῃ ἂν σπείρας εἰς τὸ προσῆκον ἀγαπῴη ἄν κιτ,λ. Apol. 31 a, κρούσαντες ἄν με, πειθόμενοι ᾿Ανύτῳ, ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἀποκτεί-

VQlLTE,

6. Of ἔφη, &c. Symp. 175 d, καὶ εἰπεῖν ὅτι Ed ἂν ἔχοι, φάναι, ὦ ᾿Αγάθων. Ib. 190 ©, λέγει ὅτι Δοκῶ μοι, ἔφη, κ-τ.λ, § 267. Β. Resumption of a Noun, where no Change of Construc- tion has intervened, by Oblique Cases of αὐτός.

See under ‘ Binary Structure,’ ὃ 222, above.

§ 268. C. Pleonasm in sentences of Contrast. Politic. 262 a, τὸ ζητούμενον ἐν διπλασίοισι τὰ viv ἐν τοῖς ἡμίσεσιν εἰς τότε ποιήσει ζητεῖσθαι. Legg. 805 ἃ, ἡμίσεια πόλις ἀντὶ διπλασίας. Tim. 39 ὁ, ὀλίγοι τῶν πολλῶν. Pheedo 58 ἃ, πάλαι γενομένης αὐτῆς πολλῷ ὕστερον φαίνεται ἀποθανών.

Ib. 7 6, ἐκ μεΐζονος ὄντος πρότερον ὕστερον ἔλαττον γενήσεται.

15 Of., perhaps, Thucyd, iii. 36, πόλιν ὅλην διαφθεῖραι μᾶλλον ἢ οὐ τοὺς αἰτίου.

ie

§§ 269—271.] CHANGED CONSTRUCTION. 231

Soph. 219 b, ὅπερ ἂν μὴ πρότερόν τις ὃν ὕστερον εἰς οὐσίαν ἄγῃ. So 265 Ὁ.

Cf. Lysias xxxi. 24. p. 180, τοιγάρτοι πρότερον βελτίων γενόμενος περὶ τὴν πόλιν, ὕστερον βουλεύειν ἀξιούτω.

Pheedo 64 ¢, ἐὰν ἄρα καὶ σοὶ ξυνδοκῇ ἅπερ καὶ ἐμοί.

Ib. 76 e, ἀναγκαῖον, οὕτως ὥσπερ καὶ ταῦτα ἔστιν, οὕτως καὶ τὴν ἡμε- τέραν ψυχὴν εἶναι.

Cf. Xen. Anab. II. i. 22, καὶ ἡμῖν ταὐτὰ δοκεῖ ἅπερ καὶ βασιλεῖ, Hom. Tl. vi. 476, δότε δὴ καὶ τόνδε γενέσθαι Maid ἐμόν, ὡς καὶ ἐγώ περ, ἀριπρεπέα Τρώεσσι, (and more in Heindorf, on Pheedo 64 ο).

§ 269. D. Pleonasm in stereotyped phrases.

Pheedo οἱ d, πολλὰ δὴ σώματα καὶ πολλάκις κατατρίψασα.

Ib. 99 Ὁ, πολλὴ καὶ μακρὰ ῥαθυμία.

Ib. 79 6, ὅλῳ καὶ παντί (perhaps).

Legg. 823 6, μήτε ἐγρηγορόσι μήτε εὕδουσι κύρτοις ἀργὸν θήραν δια-

πονουμένοις. (This perhaps approaches nearer to Hyperbole— for which see § 317, below.)

§ 270. Ipioms oF SENTENCES :—-CHANGED CONSTRUCTION.

A. As to Cases of Nouns. a. Nominative Absolute—in exposition.

Soph. 266 d, τίθημι δύο διχῆ ποιητικῆς εἴδη" θεία μὲν καὶ ἀνθρωπίνη κατὰ θάτερον τμῆμα, κατὰ δὲ θάτερον τὸ μὲν αὐτῶν ὄν, τὸ δὲ ὁμοιωμάτων τινῶν γέννημα.

Ib. 218 6, τί δῆτα προταξαίμεθ᾽ ἂν εὔγνωστον καὶ σμικρὸν .. .; οἷον ἀσπαλιευτής.

§ 271. Ὁ. Inversion of government. Theet. 192 a, δεῖ ὧδε λέγεσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν, ἐξ ἀρχῆς διοριζομένους. | Apol. 21 ¢, διαλεγόμενος αὐτῷ, ἔδοξέ μοι οὗτος ὁ ἀνὴρ k.t.d,

Legg. 811 c, ἀποβλέψας πρὸς τοὺς Adyous..., ἔδοξαν... μοι. εἰρῆσθαι.

Ib. 922 b, ἀναγκαῖον δὲ εἰπεῖν, βλέψας κ.τιλ.

Phileb. 49 Ὁ, πάντες ὁπόσοι κιτιλ., ἀναγκαιότατον ἕπεσθαι τοῖς μὲν

Te > ΄ βώμην αὐτῶν κοτιλ, Theet. 173 d, σπουδαὶ δ᾽ ἑταιρειῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀρχὰς καὶ σύνοδοι καὶ δεῖπνα

νΥ , ΄ ἣν" ΄ καὶ σὺν αὐλητρίσι κῶμοι, οὐδὲ ὄναρ πράττειν προσίσταται αὐτοῖς.

232 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ἐδ 272—275.

Symp. 208 6, of δὲ κατὰ τὴν ψυχήν---εἰσι yap k.t.A.—rTovT@v ὅταν TUSOK, Tah

Gorg. 474 6, καὶ μὴν τά ye κατὰ τοὺς νόμους... ov δήπου ἐκτὸς τού- των ἐστὶ τὰ καλά.

Rep. 565 d-e, ὡς ἄρα ὁ γευσάμενος τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνου σπλάγχνου .... ott \ , , , ἀνάγκη δὴ τούτῳ λύκῳ γενέσθαι.

Euthyd, 281 d, κινδυνεύει σύμπαντα... οὐ περὶ τούτου ὁ λόγος αὐτοῖς

εἶναι.

Critias 107 6, ἐκ δὴ τοῦ παραχρῆμα νῦν λεγόμενα, τὸ πρέπον ἂν μὴ

, , > ‘e , , δυνώμεθα πάντως ἀποδιδόναι, συγγιγνώσκειν χρεών.

§ 272. ο. Different governments, either of them regular, brought together into one sentence.

Rep. 378 d, τοιαῦτα λεκτέα μᾶλλον πρὸς τὰ παιδία εὐθὺς καὶ γέρουσι.

Ib. 566 e, ὅταν πρὸς τοὺς ἔξω ἐχθροὺς τοῖς μὲν καταλλαγῇ τοὺς δὲ καὶ διαφθείρῃ.

Symp. 203 a, διὰ τούτου πᾶσά ἐστιν ἡ ὁμιλία... θεοῖς πρὸς ἀνθρώ- πους, καὶ ἐγρηγορόσι καὶ KabevSovor—the words καὶ ἐγρηγορόσι καὶ καθεύδουσι referring to ἀνθρώπους.

Pheedo 88 ο, εἰς ἀπιστίαν καταβαλεῖν οὐ μόνον τοῖς προειρημένοις λόγοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς τὰ ὕστερον μέλλοντα ῥηθήσεσθαι.

§ 273. d. Change to a previous construction. Rep. 413 6, τὸν ἀκήρατον ἐκβαίνοντα καταστατέον apxovra... , καὶ

Ay sf ἐν ΄σ A ie; , , τιμὰς δοτέον καὶ ζῶντι καὶ τελευτήσαντι, ... γέρα λαγχάνοντα.

§ 274. 6. Change to a Genitive Absolute.

Rep. 590 d, ἄμεινον marti... . ἄρχεσθαι, μάλιστα μὲν οἰκεῖον ἔχοντος KitaNe

Legg. 755 d, τούτους εἶναι στρατηγοὺς... δοκιμασθέντων καθάπερ οἱ νομοφύλακες.

§ 275. f. The following are simple Anacolutha, reducible to no

principle whatever,

Legg. 823 ἃ, εἴθ' ὑμᾶς μήτε τις emOupia.... more λάβοι. .., μήτε

ἐγρηγορόσι μήτε καθεύδουσι κύρτοις ἀργὸν θήραν διαπονουμένοις.

Critias 116 d, νεὼς ἦν σταδίου μὲν μῆκος, εὖρος δὲ τρισὶ πλέθροις.

§ 275*. ΑΔ. As to Number of Nouns and Pronouns. a.

Pheedo 62 a, τυγχάνει τῷ dvOpore ... ἔστιν ὅτε καὶ ois βέλτιον.

ere

δὲ 276, 277.] CHANGED CONSTRUCTION. 233

Pheedo 82 a, of ἂν ἑκάστη ἴοι κατὰ τὰς αὐτῶν ὁμοιότητας τῆς μελέτης.

Symp. 207 b, ἐρωτικῶς διατιθέμενα περὶ τὴν τροφὴν τοῦ γενομένου, καὶ ἕτοιμά ἐστιν ὑπὲρ τούτων SiaudyerOar—where τούτων = τοῦ γενο- μένου.

Protag. 345 6, οὐχ ὃς ἂν μὴ κακὰ πονῇ ἑκών, τούτων φησὶν ἐπαινέτης εἶναι.

Rep. 426 ο, ὡς ἀποθανουμένους, ὃς ἂν τοῦτο δρᾷ. Conversely to the last two instances

Symp. 187 e, προσφέρειν οἷς ἂν προσφέρῃ, ὅπως ἂν τὴν ἡδονὴν καρ- πώσηται. b.

Rep. 554 a, θησαυροποιὸς ἀνήρ, obs δὴ καὶ ἐπαινεῖ τὸ πλῆθος. 99 ἢ ρ Ἢρ, Ui] 1

§ 276. B. As to Verbs.

a. Original construction abandoned, after interposed clause, in favour of that of the interposed clause. (For other applications of the same principle, see ‘ Attraction,’ δὲ 192-194, above.)

Pheedo τοῦ b, ras ὑποθέσεις τὰς πρώτας, καὶ εἰ πισταὶ ὑμῖν εἰσίν, ὅμως ἐπισκεπτέαι σαφέστερον.

This change is commonest after such interposed clauses as express

saying, seeming, or thinking.

Crat. 384 ὁ, ὅτι δὲ οὐ φησὶ κιτιλ., ὥσπερ ὑποπτεύω, αὐτὸν σκώπτειν.

Phdr, 272 d, παντάπασι γάρ, ὃ καὶ κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς εἴπομεν, ... ὅτι οὐδὲν... δέοι κιτιλ.

Gorg. 493 b, τὸ δὲ κόσκινον ἄρα λέγει, ὡς ἔφη ὁ πρός με λέγων, τὴν ψυχὴν εἶναι.

Legg. 728 d, τὸ δὲ τρίτον, πᾶς ἂν τοῦτο νοήσειε, τὴν τοῦ σώματος εἶναι

Ἄν, , , κατὰ φύσιν τιμήν.

277. Ὁ. Construction changing from Infinitive to Finite Verb. 8158

Symp. 177 6, 70... . Ἔρωτα μηδένα πω ἀνθρώπων τετολμηκέναι ἀξίως € a > > τῳ ears ὑμνῆσαι, ἀλλ᾽ οὕτως ἡμέληται.

Ib. 184 b, ἔστι... .. νόμος, ὥσπερ κιτιλ., οὕτω δὴ καὶ ἄλλη μία μόνη δουλεία ἑκούσιος λείπεται οὐκ ἐπονείδιστος.

Apol. 19 6, τούτων ἕκαστος οἷός τε ἐστὶν ἰὼν εἰς ἑκάστην τῶν πόλεων

‘ , Ls ” “- ¢ ~ a r - zen ,

τοὺς νέους, οἷς ἔξεστι τῶν ἑαυτῶν πολιτῶν προῖκα ξυνεῖναι ᾧ ἂν βού- λωνται, τούτους πείθουσι k.T.A.

Theet. 190 d, αἱ μαῖαι δύνανται τὰς ὠδῖνας μαλθακωτέρας ποιεῖν, καὶ τίκτειν τε δὴ τὰς δυστοκούσας, καὶ ἐὰν νέον ὃν δόξη ἀμβλίσκειν, ἀμ-

βλίσκουσι.

234 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8 278—281.

§ 278. ὁ. Construction begun afresh with Conjunction or Rela-

tive, after intervention of a Participial or Adverbial clause.

Legg. 810 d, κελεύεις yap δή pe, τῆς αὐτῆς ὁδοῦ ἐχθοδοποῦ γεγονυίας πολλοῖς, ἴσως δ᾽ οὐκ ἐλάττοσιν ἑτέροις προσφιλοῦς..., μεθ᾽ ὧν δια- κελεύει με K.T.A,

Crito 44 b, χωρὶς μὲν τοῦ ἐστερῆσθαι τοιούτου ἐπιτηδείου, οἷον ἐγὼ οὐδένα μήποτε εὑρήσω, ἔτι δὲ καὶ πολλοῖς δόξω κιτιλ.

Gorg. 457 b, ἐὰν δέ, οἶμαι, ῥητορικὸς γενόμενός τις κἄτα ταύτῃ τῇ τέχνῃ ἀδικῇ.

Rep. 530 Ὁ, ἄτοπον... ἡγήσεται, τὸν νομίζοντα... καὶ ζητεῖν κιτιλ.

3 ny" te ἡ —Critias 114 6, ἡ νῆσος αὐτὴ παρείχετο... . . τὸ νῦν ὀνομαζόμενον μόνον,

ts δὲ λέ bmg 3 \ a 5 Ses ΕῚ , >? ir τότε OE TAEOV OVOMATOS ἣν TO yevos EK ys OpUTTOMEVOY ορείχα. κου.

§ 279. d. Construction begun with ὅτι, after Verbs of knowing or saying, and finished without regard to it. “ Gorg. 481 d, αἰσθάνομαί σου ἑκάστοτε... ὅτι ὁπόσ᾽ ἂν φῇ σοῦ τὰ παιδικὰ καὶ ὅπως ἂν φῇ ἔχειν οὐ δυναμένου ἀντιλέγειν. Legg. 892 d, εἶπον ὅτι πρῶτον ἐμὲ χρῆναι πειραθῆναι κατ᾽ ἐμαυτόν. Crito 50 b, ἐροῦμεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι ᾿Ηδίκει γὰρ ἡμᾶς ἡ πόλις ;

Protag. 356 a, εἰ γάρ τις λέγοι ὅτι ᾿Αλλὰ πολὺ διαφέρει.

§ 280. Often, from the frequency of this use with οἶδα, and with λέγω or εἶπον, ὅτι becomes in such contexts a mere expletive.

Rep. 501 a, οἶσθ᾽ ὅτι τούτῳ ἂν διενεγκεῖν. ! Apol. 37 b, ὧν εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι κακῶν ὄντων.

Symp. 175 d, καὶ εἰπεῖν ὅτι Εὖ ἂν ἔχοι k.7.A.

ΤΡ. 180 ἃ, εἰπεῖν τὸν ᾿Αριστοφάνη ὅτι Καὶ μάλ᾽ ἐπαύσατο.

§ 281. C. As to Oratio Obliqua. a. Change from Indicative to Infinitive Oratio Obliqua.

Gorg. 517 c-d, σὲ... οἶμαι... ἐγνωκέναι Os... ἡ μὲν ἑτέρα διακονικὴ ἐστίν, 7 δυνατὸν εἶναι ἐκπορίζειν κιτιὰ,

Rep. 391 c-d, μηδ᾽ ἐῶμεν λέγειν, ὡς Θησεὺς... .. ὥρμησεν οὕτως ἐπὶ δεινὰς ἁρπαγάς, μηδέ τιν᾽ ἄλλον... ἥρω τολμῆσαι ἂν κιτιὰ,

Charm. τ64 ἃ, δοκεῖ τὸ γράμμα ἀνακεῖσθαι... ἀντὶ τοῦ χαῖρε, ὡς τούτου μὲν οὐκ ὀρθοῦ ὄντος τοῦ προσρήματος, τοῦ χαίρειν, οὐδὲ δεῖν τοῦτο παρακελεύεσθαι ἀλλήλους.

Laches 198 b, ἡγούμεθα... δεινὰ μὲν εἶναι κιτιλ." δέος δὲ παρέχει KT.

δέος γὰρ εἶναι k.T.A. yap

§§ 282—284.] CHANGED CONSTRUCTION. 235

§ 282. b. Change from Indicative to Optative Oratio Obliqua.

Protag. 327 c-d, εἰ δέοι αὐτὸν κρίνεσθαι πρὸς ἀνθρώπους, οἷς μὴ παι- δεία ἐστίν, ἀλλ᾽ εἶεν ἄγριοι.

Pheedo 95 c—d, οὐδὲν κωλύειν φὴς πάντα ταῦτα μηνύειν... . ὅτι πολυ-

? ΜΙ liad}

χρόνιόν τέ ἐστι ψυχὴ κιτιλ. ἀλλὰ yap οὐδέν τι μᾶλλον ἦν ἀθάνατον κτλ." καὶ ταλαιπωρουμένη.... ζῴη K.TA,

ΤΌ. 96 b, ἐμαυτὸν ἄνω κάτω μετέβαλλον σκοπῶν... .. πότερον τὸ αἷμά ἐστιν κιτιὰλ., ἐκ τούτων δὲ γίγνοιτο μνήμη.

Phdr. 241 b, ὁ δὲ ἀναγκάζεται κιτιλ., ἠγνοηκὼς .... ὅτι οὐκ ἄρα ἔδει ποτὲ ἐρῶντι... χαρίζεσθαι... ., εἰ δὲ μή, ἀναγκαῖον εἴη κιτ.λ.

Hip. Ma. 301 d, δόξαν εἴχομεν περὶ ἐμοῦ τε καὶ σοῦ, ὡς ἑκάτερος ἡμῶν εἷς ἐστί, τοῦτο δέ, ὃ ἑκάτερος ἡμῶν εἴη, οὐκ ἄρα εἴημεν ἀμφότεροι.

Gorg. 512 a, λογίζεται ὅτι οὐκ εἰ μέν τις... .., τούτῳ δὲ βιωτέον ἐστὶ καὶ τοῦτον ὀνήσειεν.

Phileb. 41 d, [εἴρηται] ὡς τὸ μᾶλλόν τε καὶ ἧττον ἄμφω δέχεσθον, καὶ ὅτι τῶν ἀπείρων εἴτην.

Charm. 156 d—e, Ζάμολξις, ἔφη, λέγει ὅτι. . . οὐ δεῖ k.7.A., ἀλλὰ τοῦτο

x Ww » καὶ αἴτιον εἴη K.T.A,

It should be observed, however, that the Optative in these pas- sages is not simply the effect of Oratio Obliqua: for some of the passages are in Present time. The emergence of the Optative marks the transition from fact to inference ; it indicates that we are not called upon to accept an additional assertion, but only to follow one step further in the direction already supposed. This is the principal account to be given of this change of construction: it may be, however, that a subsidiary cause is the increasing need, as the sentence unwinds, of marking the dependence upon the main construction of the later and therefore more remote clauses.

§ 283. c. The contrary change, from the Optative Oratio Obliqua to the Indicative, is in Plato very uncommon ; such as is found in Tim. 18 ο, ἐτίθεμεν, μηχανώμενοι ὅπως μηδεὶς... γνώσοιτο, νομιοῦσι δὲ

πάντες K.T.A,

§ 284. d. Change from Optative Oratio Obliqua to Infinitive Oratio Obliqua.

Phedo 96 b, ἐμαυτὸν ἄνω κάτω μετέβαλλον σκοπῶν ..... ap’, ἐπειδὰν κιτιλ., ὥς τινες ἔλεγον, τότε δὴ τὰ ζῶα ξυντρέφεται' καὶ πότερον K.TA., ἐκ τούτων δὲ γίγνοιτο μνήμη καὶ δόξα, ἐκ δὲ μνήμης καὶ δόξης γίγνεσθαι ἐπιστήμην. This passage exemplifies b. also (where it

236 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 285—287.

is quoted). The justification of this further change to the Infinitive lies in the parenthetical ὥς τινες ἔλεγον, which usurps here the influence properly due to πότερον.

§ 285. e. Participial clause, in a sentence of Infinitive Oratio Obliqua, changing into Infinitive.

Phedo 111 ὁ, τόπους δ᾽ ἐν αὐτῇ εἶναι, τοὺς μὲν βαθυτέρους καὶ ava- πεπταμένους μᾶλλον ἢ ἐν ᾧ ἡμεῖς οἰκοῦμεν, τοὺς δὲ τὸ χάσμα. . .. ἔλαττον ἔχειν.

Politic. 293 6, λεκτέον μεμιμημένας . . . , ἃς μὲν ὡς εὐνόμους λέγομεν ἐπὶ τὰ καλλίω, τὰς δὲ ἄλλας ἐπὶ τὰ αἰσχίονα μεμιμῆσθαι.

Cf. Hom. Il. xviii. 535, Ἐν δ᾽ Ἔρις ἐν δὲ Κυδοιμὸς ὁμίλεον, ἐν δ᾽ ὀλοὴ Κήρ, ΓΑλλον ζωὸν ἔχουσα νεούτατον, ἄλλον ἄουτον, ΓΑλλον τεθνειῶτα κατὰ μόθον ἕλκε ποδοῖιν, Od, vil. 125, ὄμφακες εἰσὶν "AvOos ἀφιεῖσαι,

- > ἐν" , ἕτεραι δ᾽ ὑποπερκάζουσιν.

§ 286. D. Inversion of the Antecedent clause, so that the Pronoun in it does not refer to the Relative foregoing, but to some other word in the Relative clause.

Theet. 201 b, ois μὴ παρεγένοντό twes ... , τούτους δύνασθαι k.7.X.;

where τούτους refers to τινες,

Phedo 70 e, dpa ἀναγκαῖον, ὅσοις ἐστί τι ἐναντίον, μηδαμόθεν ἄλλοθεν

αὐτὸ γίγνεσθαι k.7.d. ;----αὐτὸ refers to τι.

Lysis 219 d, ὃ ἄν τίς τι περὶ πολλοῦ ποιῆται... ., ἦρα καὶ ἄλλο τι ἂν

περὶ πολλοῦ ποιοῖτο }

Pheedo 105 b, ᾧ ἂν τί ἐν τῷ σώματι ἐγγένηται, θερμὸν ἔσται ;—sec. τὸ

σῶμα.

Symp. 204 Ὁ, ὃν δὲ σὺ φήθης Ἔρωτα εἶναι, θαυμαστὸν οὐδὲν ἔπαθες. y ἢ O01) ρ ) μ'

§ 287. Ipioms or SENTENCES :—ARRANGEMENT ΟΡ Worps AND CLAUSES.

A. Hyperbaton.

The displacement of the natural order of words, which is called Hyperbaton, is not of capricious adoption. Its use is 1. to increase the facility of regulating the emphasis; and 2. to enable language to represent, in a degree, the rapidity of thought, by making one expression literally catch up another.

The Hyperbaton which results from the close adherence of Pre- positions to their cases (see below, § 298) is to be excepted from the account just given. It is the result simply of a grammatical exigency.

§§ 288, 289.] ORDER OF WORDS AND CLAUSES. 237

The name Hyperbaton had been given, and the fact recognised, in Plato’s owntime. Socrates in the Protagoras (343 e), in rectify- ing the explanation of the passage of Simonides, says ὑπερβατὸν δεῖ

θεῖναι ἐν τῷ a ὁ ἀλαθέ εἰναι ἐν τῷ ᾷσματι τὸ ἀλαθεως.

§ 288. a. Clauses intermingled by Hyperbaton.

Legg. 693 ¢, καὶ ἄλλα δὴ πολλὰ ἡμᾶς τοιαῦτ᾽ ἂν γίγνηται ῥήματα μὴ διαταραττέτω.

Ib. 860 d, ἀκουσίως δὲ ἑκούσιον οὐκ ἔχει πράττεσθαί ποτε λόγον---- where the two clauses οὐκ ἔχει λόγον and ἀκουσίως ἑκούσιον πράτ- τεσθαι are counterchanged.

| Apol. 26 a, οὐ δεῦρο νόμος εἰσάγειν ἐστί.

Instances frequently occur in clauses incidental to the machinery

of the dialogue,—as in

Phedo 71 ¢, ἐγώ σοι, ἔφη, ἐρῶ, ὁ Σωκράτης.

Symp. 214 ¢, ἀλλά, φάναι, ὦ Ἐρυξίμαχε, τὸν ᾿Αλκιβιάδην.

| Apol. 25 ¢, εἰπὲ ὦ πρὸς Διὸς Μέλητε. Similarly 26 6, Meno 71 d.

Symp. 212 6, wa... τὴν τοῦ σοφωτάτου καὶ καλλίστου κεφαλήν--- ἐὰν εἴπω οὑτωσί---ἀναδήσω---ἄρα καταγελάσεσθέ μου ὡς μεθύοντος ;

Two sentences are here counterchanged. As Alcibiades rehearses the form of words with which he intends to accompany the crowning of Socrates, he interrupts himself to justify them, and does his best to carry on the two sentences together. These, if one had been postponed to the other, would have run—* That from my own head to the head of the wisest and handsomest of men I may transfer this garland—Well! and if I shall say that,—what then? will you make fun of me?” In trying to carry on both together, he breaks and counter- changes them, distinguishing them doubtless by difference of tone.

Even so violent a trajection as this has its parallels in Homer.

§ 289. b. Grammatical governments intermingled by Hyperbaton. Laches 195 a, πρὸς τί τοῦτ᾽ εἶπες βλέψας ; Symp. 191 ἃ, ἔστιν... ὁ ἔρως ἔμφυτος ἀλλήλων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. Phdr. 249 d, ἔστι δὴ οὖν δεῦρο ὁ πᾶς ἥκων λόγος περὶ τῆς τετάρτης μανίας. Politic. 309 a, ὑπὸ κακῆς βίᾳ φύσεως ἀπωθούμενα.

Phileb. 19 6, παῦσαι τὸν τρόπον ἡμῖν ἀπαντῶν τοῦτον.

238 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 290—293.

Cf. Andoe. i. 30. p. 5, τούτων οὖν ἐμοὶ τῶν λόγων ἢ τῶν ἔργων τί προσήκει; Hat. ii. 134, ἔτεσι γὰρ κάρτα πολλοῖσι ὕστερον τούτων

a a f cal τῶν βασιλέων τῶν τὰς πυραμίδας ταύτας ἢν λιπομένων ‘Podamis.

§ 290. 6. Pronouns (unemphatic) postponed by Hyperbaton. Politic. 261 b, τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ ταῖς τῶν ἀψύχων γενέσεσιν αὐτοῦ τάσσοντες —where αὐτοῦ belongs to τὸ μέν. Theeet. 166 d, τὸν δὲ λόγον αὖ μὴ τῷ ῥήματί μου dioxe—where μου belongs to τὸν λόγον. : Gorg. 469 ἃ, κἄν τινα δόξῃ μοι τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτῶν κατεαγέναι δεῖν---- where αὐτῶν belongs to τινα.

Phedo 60 b, ὡς ἄτοπον... ἔοικέ τι εἶναι tovro—where τι would normally have found its place beside ἄτοπον.

A common type is the postponement of an Antecedent τις. Theeet. 188 a, ἀνάγκη τὸν δοξάζοντα δοξάζειν ἢ ὧν τι οἶδεν ἢ μὴ οἶδεν. Crito 53 b, ἐὰν εἰς τῶν ἐγγύτατά τινα πόλεων ἔλθῃς.

§ 290*. cc. Correlative Conjunctions,—the former postponed by Hyperbaton. 2 —Apol. 18 d, ὥσπερ σκιαμαχεῖν ἀπολογούμενόν τε καὶ ἐλέγχειν.

Ib. 28 d, οὗ ἄν τις ἑαυτὸν τάξῃ ἢ ἡγησάμενος βέλτιστον εἶναι ἢ ὑπ᾽

ἄρχοντος ταχθῇ. § 291. d. Adverbs and Particles displaced by Hyperbaton. Οὕτω.

Legg. 747 b, ἕν οὐδὲν οὕτω δύναμιν ἔχει παίδειον μάθημα μεγάλην----

where οὕτω belongs to μεγάλην.

Theet. 169 ¢, οὕτω τις ἔρως δεινὸς evdéduee—where οὕτω belongs

to δεινός.

§ 292. Ἴσως. Legg. 640 6, τάχ᾽ ἂν ὀρθῶς ἴσως μέμφοιτο. Symp. 194 ¢, τάχ᾽ ἂν αἰσχύνοιο αὐτοὺς εἴ τι ἴσως οἴοιο k.T.A. That this is a trajection of ἴσως we have ground for inferring, 1. from the analogy of the preceding instance, 2. from the familiarity of the combination τάχ᾽ ἂν ἴσως, and 3. from the perfect unfamiliarity of εἰ ἴσως.

eis OB Symp. 187 b, od yap δήπου ἐκ διαφερομένων γε ἔτι τοῦ ὀξέος καὶ βαρέος ἁρμονία ἂν ein—where ἔτι is constructed with οὐκ ἂν εἴη.

§§ 294—296.] ORDER OF WORDS AND CLAUSES. 239

Crat. 399 a, κινδυνεύσω ἔτι τήμερον σοφώτερος τοῦ δέοντος γενέσθαι---- ἔτι With σοφώτερος.

Tim. 53 d, τὰς δ᾽ ἔτι τούτων ἀρχὰς ἄνωθεν θεὸς οἶδε.

§ 294. Μέντοι intrusive, i.e. displacing rather than displaced. Phdr. 267 c, Upwraydpeia δέ, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὐκ ἦν μέντοι τοιαῦτ᾽ ἄττα ; _ Apol. 35 6, μὴ οὖν ἀξιοῦτέ με τοιαῦτα δεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς mparrew, . ἄλλως τε μέντοι νὴ Δία πάντως καὶ ἀσεβείας φεύγοντα. The phrase ἄλλως τε πάντως καὶ is rent asunder to admit the words μέντοι νὴ Δία, which could have found no other convenient place. It is because ἄλλως te πάντως καὶ had become a fixed phrase that it can suffer this Tmesis without bringing the sense into doubt. In the disengaged μέντοι νὴ Δία another familiar sequence (as pointed out by the Zurich editors, coll. Phedo 65 d, 68 b, 73 d, Rep. 332 a,) is to be recognised. Cf. Ar. Nub. 788, Tis ἦν ἐν ἧ ματτόμεθα μέντοι τἄλφιτα ;

§ 295. Te intrusive.

Crito 48 a, ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ φαίη γ᾽ ἄν τις οἷοί 7 diol ἡμᾶς of πολλοὶ ἀποκτιννύναι. It might seem at first sight improbable that this ye should not belong to the clause within which it stands. But we have ground for recognising a trajection here 1. in the sense, which is not helped by ye with φαίη: 2. in the familiarity of the sequence ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ. . . . ye, coll. Pheedo 75 a, Euthyphro ro d, Gorg. 492 6, 506 d: and 3. in the con- sideration that φαίη ἂν is not consciously to the speaker a separate clause; that is, it is a parenthesis so familiar that it does not interrupt the thought. It is parallel to Pheedo 59 6, τίνες φὴς ἦσαν οἱ λόγοι; Euthyphro 15 a, τί δ᾽ οἴει ἄλλο ἢ τιμή ; Symp. 216 ἃ, πόσης οἴεσθε γέμει... . . σωφροσύνης ; and to the instance next following. (It is plain that in all these cases the meaning does not admit of separating off the parenthetic Verb by commas.) Moreover we find the ἂν preceding the gain, as in Phedo 87 a, τί οὖν, ἂν φαίη ὁ λόγος, ἔτι ἀπιστεῖς ; but ἂν could not commence the clause if it were consciously regarded ag distinct.

Gorg. 492 6, ἀλλὰ μὲν δὴ καὶ ds ye σὺ λέγεις δεινὸς ὁ Bios.

8 296. “Av, anticipated Hyperbatically with οἶμαι and the like. Apol. 32 e, dp’ οὖν ἄν pe οἴεσθε τοσάδε ἔτη διαγενέσθαι ; Pheedo 64 b, οἶμαι yap ἂν δὴ τοὺς πολλοὺς, .. δοκεῖν. Soph. 223 a, τὸ προσῆκον ὄνομ᾽ ἂν ἡγοῦμαι καλεῖν αὐτόν.

240 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 297—299.

Soph. 224 d, οἶμαί σε, κἂν εἴ tis... . προὐτάξατο, καλεῖν οὐδὲν ἄλλο κιτιλ, where ἂν belongs to καλεῖν.

Euthyd. 294 d, οὐκ ἂν οἴει ὁμολογῆσαι ἡμᾶς ;

Phdr, 234 6, οἴει ἄν τινα ἔχειν ;

Tim. 26 b, οὐκ ἂν οἶδα εἰ δυναίμην.

Cf. Iszeus vill. 20. p. 71, μὴ οἴεσθ᾽ ἄν, εἰ κιτὶλ,, μήτ᾽ ἂν τὸν πατέρα... εἰσενεγκεῖν. Thue. iv. 28, οὐκ ἂν οἰόμενος αὐτὸν τολμῆσαι, V1. IT, Σικελιῶται δ᾽ ἄν μοι δοκοῦσιν, . .. καὶ ἔτι ἂν ἧσσον δεινοὶ ἡμῖν

γενέσθαι, Vill. 103, οὐκ ἂν οἰόμενοι σφᾶς λαθεῖν τὸν παράπλουν.

§ 297. 6, Prepositions postponed by Hyperbaton. Legg. 711 6, ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ξυμπάσης δυνάμεως ὁ αὐτὸς πέρι λόγος, Soph. 265 a, καί τισιν ἐν τοιούτοις εἴδεσιν. Pheedo 83 6, οὐχ ὧν οἱ πολλοὶ ἕνεκά φασι.

Cf. Αμάος. i. 117. p. 15, ὧν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ εἵνεκα ἐπεβουλεύθην.

» § 298. f. Prepositions intrusive ; that is, retaining their place next to the Adjective prefixed to their Substantive, to the exclusion of Adverbs and the like which qualify that Adjective.

Rep. 391 d, οὕτως ἐπὶ δεινὰς ἁρπαγάς.

Ib. 395 Ὁ, ἔτι τούτων εἰς σμικρότερα.

ΤΌ. 397 b, ὀλίγου πρὸς τὴν αὐτήν.

Symp. 195 6, ἑξῆς ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ψυχαῖς---ἴοΥ ἐν ἑξῆς πάσαις,

Theet. 205 ¢, ὀλίγον ἐν τῷ πρόσθεν.

Pheedo 70 ¢, οὐ περὶ προσηκόντων.

Ib. 110 ὁ, πολὺ ἔτι ἐκ λαμπροτέρων.

| Apol. 40 a, πάνυ ἐπὶ σμικροῖς. Phdr. 245 d, pnd ἐξ ἑνὸς. So Politic. 310 ¢. ν Gorg. 449 0, ὡς διὰ βραχυτάτων.

Lege. 876 b, ὅ τι περὶ σμικρότατα.

Cf. Thue. i. 63, ὡς ἐς ἐλάχιστον χωρίον, ili. 46, ὅτι ἐν βραχυτάτῳ, ibid, ὅτι ἐπ᾿ ἐλάχιστον, 1. 23, ἔστι παρ᾽ οἷς, 35, πολὺ ἐν πλείονι αἰτίᾳ, Vil. 36, οὐκ ἐν πολλῷ, 79, οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγων ἀσπίδων, 42, οὐδὲ ... καθ᾽ ἕτερα, and so 59, μηδὲ καθ᾽ ἕτερα, and on the same principle vii. 72, ἔτι ras λοιπὰς for τὰς ἔτι λοιπάς.

§ 299. Note, that Plato not unfrequently admits Tmesis: e. g.

Phdr. 230 ¢, ἐν ἠρέμα προσάντει. Hip. Ma. 297 b, ἐν πατρός twos ἰδέᾳ.

δὲ 300, 301.] ORDER OF WORDS AND CLAUSES. 241

Legg. 797 d, ἐν, ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν, οὐ τοῖς μὲν τοῖς δ᾽ οὔ. [ Apol. 19 ἃ, and 24 ἃ, ἐν οὕτως ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ (cf. Iseeus vi. 33. Ρ. 59»

ἐν πάνυ ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ).

Phileb, 20 b, πρὸς δὲ αὖ τοῖς.

Legg. 666 ο, εἰς μέν γε τὸ προάγειν.

Ib. 729 d, εἰς μὴν πόλιν.

Ib. 832 ¢, σὺν ἀεί τινι βίᾳ.

Phedo 59 ἃ, διὰ δὴ ταῦτα.

Phileb. 35 6, διὰ μὲν τὸ πάθος.

Rep. 371 ἃ, ἀντὶ αὖ ἀργυρίου.

Phdr. 238 ς, ὑπὸ αὖ τῶν... ἐπιθυμιῶν.

§ 800. Β. Primary intention of a sentence suspended by inter- * position of clause of (a) Contrast or (b) Explanation. a. Clause of Contrast interposed.

Rep. 401 6, καὶ ὀρθῶς δὴ δυσχεραίνων, τὰ μὲν καλὰ ἐπαινοῖ K,7.X., τὰ δ᾽ αἰσχρὰ Ψέγοι 7 ἂν ὀρθῶς καὶ pesoi—where ὀρθῶς δὴ δυσχεραίνων is continued in τὰ αἰσχρὰ Ψψέγοι.

Symp. 173 6, ὅπερ ἐδεόμεθά σου, μὴ ἄλλως ποιήσῃς ἀλλὰ διήγησαι.

Ib. 179 ¢, ἔργον οὕτω καλὸν... ὥστε... εὐαριθμήτοις δή τισιν ἔδοσαν τοῦτο γέρας οἱ θεοί, ἐξ Atdov ἀνεῖναι πάλιν τὴν ψυχήν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐκείνης aveicav—the ὥστε being continued at τὴν ἐκείνης ἀνεῖσαν.

Theet. 145 d, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, τὰ μὲν ἄλλα ἔχω περὶ αὐτὰ μετρίως, σμικρὸν δέ τι dwopa—where ὅμως appertains to σμικρόν τι ἀπορῶ.

Phedo 69 d, οἱ πεφιλοσοφηκότες ὀρθῶς. ὧν δὴ καὶ ἐγὼ κατά γε τὸ δυνατὸν οὐδὲν ἀπέλιπον ἐν τῷ βίῳ, ἀλλὰ παντὶ τρόπῳ προὐθυμήθην yeveoFac—where the construction of ὧν is continued at παντὶ τρόπῳ.

Ib. 87 d, ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἂν φαίη, ἑκάστην... ἀνυφαίνοι, ἀναγκαῖον μέντ᾽ ἂν εἴη, κατὰ. The objection started by ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἂν φαίη is sus- pended, while allowance is made for opposite truth, until ἀναγκαῖον μέντ᾽ ἂν «7.2.

Ib. 106 b, τί κωλύει, ἄρτιον μὲν τὸ περιττὸν μὴ γίγνεσθαι... ., ἀπολο- μένου δὲ αἰτοῦ ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνου ἄρτιον γεγονέναι ;

Legg. 822 ¢, dp’ οὐκ οἰόμεθα γελοῖόν τε καὶ οὐκ ὀρθόν, ἐκεῖ γιγνύμενον

> , a > εκ ἘΞ ΄ , ἦν ἂν τότε, νῦν ἐνταυθοῖ καὶ ἐν τούτοις γίγνεσθαι ;

§ 301. b. Clause of Explanation interposed. Symp. 206 b, οὐ μέντ᾽ ἂν σὲ ἐθαύμαζον ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ ἐφοίτων παρά σε —where, in meaning, οὐ μέντ᾽ ἂν goes with ἐφοίτων, the ἐθαύ- μαζον ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ being explanatory.

K

942 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [8 302, 303.

Protag. 335 6, τῶν δολιχοδρόμων τῳ διαθεῖν τε καὶ ἕπεσθαι.

Phdr. 244 d, ἡ μανία ἐγγενομένη καὶ προφητεύσασα οἷς ἔδει.

Lege. 648 e, πρὸς δὲ τὴν ἐσχάτην πόσιν ἀπαλλάττοιτο πρὶν ἀφικνεῖσθαι. V Gorg. 512 ἃ, λογίζεται ὅτι οὐκ «.7.A.—an elaborate instance.

§ 302. In other writers we have as illustrations Of a.

Thue. vi. 68, ἐξ ἧς κρατεῖν Set ἢ μὴ ῥᾳδίως ἀποχωρεῖν. Xen. Hell. VII. ili. 7, ὑμεῖς τοὺς περὶ ᾿Αρχίαν .... οὐ ψῆφον ἀνεμείνατε ἀλλ’ ἐτιμωρήσασθε, Isoer. vill. 85. p. 176, τοσοῦτον δὲ διήνεγκαν ἀνοίᾳ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, ὥστε τοὺς μὲν ἄλλους αἱ συμφοραὶ συστέλλουσι wee. , ἐκεῖνοι δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὑπὸ τούτων ἐπαιδεύθησαν, xii. 118. p. 257, αἱ μὲν οὖν αἰτίαι... διὰ μακροτέρων μὲν αὐτὰς διῆλθον, αὗται δ᾽ οὖν ἦσαν. Dem. de Cor. 289. p. 322, ἀρετῆς καὶ δείματος, οὐκ ἐσάωσαν Ψυχάς, ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αἴδὴν κοινὸν ἔθεντο βραβῆ. Soph, Ant. 21, rapov..., Τὸν μὲν προτίσας, τὸν δ᾽ ἀτιμάσας ἔχει.

Of b.

Thue. 1. 39, ἦν ye οὐ τὸν προὔχοντα καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς προκαλούμενον K.T.A., LU. 91, περὶ ἣν ἡ ᾿Αττικὴ ναῦς φθάσασα καὶ περιπλεύσασα. Hom. Il. x. 307, Ὅστις τε τλαίη, ot τ᾽ αὐτῷ κῦδος ἄροιτο, Νηῶν ὠκυπόρων σχεδὸν ἐλθέμεν. Asch. Pr. V. 331, Πάντων μετασχὼν καὶ τετολμηκὼς ἐμοί. Soph. Ant. 537, Καὶ ξυμμετίσχω καὶ φέρω τῆς αἰτίας, 1270, τὰ δ᾽ ἐν δόμοις "Eouxas ἥκειν καὶ τάχ᾽ ὄψεσθαι κακά, El. 1154, ἧς σὺ πολλάκις Φήμας λάθρα προὔπεμπες ὡς φανούμενος Τιμωρός, Ο. T. 717, Παιδὸς δὲ βλάστας οὐ διέσχον ἡμέραι Τρεῖς καί νιν ἄρθρα κεῖνος ἐνζεύξας ποδοῖν. Theocr. Id. xxv. 72, τὸν δὲ γέροντα... κλάζον τε περίσσαινον τ᾽ [ Alii κλάζοντε], Epigr. ΧΙ,

᾿ΔΛρχίλοχον καὶ στᾶθι καὶ εἴσιδε.

§ 303. C. Primary Intention of a sentence expressed apart from the Verb—(i.c. the virtual Primary Predicate to be sought in some other word, or ina Participial clause.)

Rep. 495 d, οὗ δὴ ἐφιέμενοι πολλοὶ aredeis . . . . Tuyxavovaw—where

ἐφιέμενοι is the virtual Primary Predicate.

Thent. 142 ¢, δοκεῖ yip μοι ὀλίγον πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου ἐντυχεῖν αὐτῷ.

th. 173 b, πύτερον βούλει διελθύντες ἢ ἐάσαντες... τρεπώμεθα ;

Pheedo 63 ¢, ὅτι rapa θεοὺς δεσπότας πάνυ ἀγαθοὺς [ἐλπίζω] ἥξειν...

διϊσχυρισαίμην ἄν. The virtual Primary Predicate is δεσπότας πάνυ ἀγαθούς.

Ib. 63 d, σκεψώμεθα τί ἐστιν ὃ βούλεσθωί μοι δοκεῖ πάλαι εἰπεῖν, The

virtual Primary Predicate is βούλεσθαι, τοῦ δοκεῖ,

* a e e - yy {b. 65. b, i}... Kat of ποιηταῖς 2. τ λυ τσ τ Gre... τ Opoper, ‘Lhe

§

304.] ORDER OF WORDS AND CLAUSES. 243

a

Primary Intention, with which 4 connects itself, is in the ὁρῶμεν clause.

Tb. 69 c, ἀλλὰ τῷ ὄντι πάλαι αἰνίττεσθαι ὅτι... κείσεται. The ἀλλὰ τῷ ὄντι connects itself with the κείσεται clause.

Ib. 88 b, οὐδενὶ προσήκει θάνατον θαρροῦντι μὴ οὐκ ἀνοήτως θαρρεῖν. Of the Infinitival sentence θάνατον... . θαρρεῖν the virtual Pri- mary Predicate is θάνατον θαρροῦντι"---Ἰὴ other words, it would normally be θάνατον θαρρεῖν, but is changed into a Participial clause for the sake of linking a further sentence to it.

Symp. 207 d, otros μέντοι οὐδέποτε τὰ αὐτὰ ἔχων ἐν αὑτῷ ὅμως ὁ αὐτὸς καλεῖται. The Primary Intention of the sentence is satis- fied at ἔχων.

Soph. 224 d, οἶμαί ce, κἂν et τις αἰτοῦ xabidpupevos ... . προἰτάξατο, καλεῖν οὐδὲν ἄλλο πλὴν ὅπερ νῦν δή.

Apol. 31 Ὁ, τοῦτό γε οὐχ οἷοί τε ἐγένοντο ἀπαναισχυντῆσαι παρασχόμενοι μάρτυρα. The οὐχ οἷοί re connects itself with παρασχ. μάρτ.

In illustration, we have in Thue. i. 2, ἄδηλον ὃν ὁπότε τις ἐπελθών, kai ἀτειχίστων ἅμα ὄντων, ἄλλος ἀφαιρήσεται. Hat. i1. 134, οὐδὲ ὧν -οὐδὲ εἰδότες μοι φαίνονται λέγειν, 1X. 105, τοῖτον δὲ κατέλαβε ὕστερον τούτων ἀποθανόντα κεῖσθαι. Hom, Od. iv. 739, Εἰ δή πού τινα κεῖνος ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μῆτιν ὑφήνας ᾿Εξελθὼν λαοῖσιν ὀδύρεται. Asch. Ag. 479, τίς ὧδε παιδνὸς. .. , παραγγέλμασιν νέοις πυρωθέντα καρδίαν, ἀλλαγᾷ "λόγου καμεῖν ; (the virtual Predicate in the Infinitival sentence being πυρωθέντα), 740, παρ᾽ αὐτὰ δ᾽ ἐλθεῖν ἐς ᾿Ιλίου πόλιν λέγοιμ᾽ ἂν φρόνημα νηνέμου γαλάνας (‘there came what I should call a spirit’ &c.—virtual Predicate not ἐλθεῖν but φρόνημα v. y.), 796, οὐκ ἔστι λαξεῖν ὄμματα φωτὸς τὰ δοκοῦντ᾽ εὔφρονος ἐκ διανοίας vdapet σαίνειν φιλότητι (Where in the Infinitival sentence depending on δοκοῦντα the virtual Predicate ts εἴῴρονος, not σαίνειν---" which with seeming-kindly heart fawn’ &.) Soph. Aj. 798, τήνδε δ᾽ ἔξοδον ᾿Ολεθρίαν Αἴαντος ἐλπίζει Pépeev— he fears that this foray, which [by me his messenger] he interprets, will be fatal to him.’ Here ὀλεθρίαν is the virtual Predicate.

§ 304. D. Cliasmus, or Inverse Parallelism of clauses and sen-

tences.

.

Rep. 438 ¢, ἐπιστήμη δέ τις καὶ ποιά τις [ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ] ποιοῦ τινὸς καὶ τινός.

Ib “ ᾿ ” “ ΖΗ͂Ν ΄ ’ ι ’ . 404 C, παν μὲν epyorv παν δ᾽ ἔπος λέγοντάς τε καὶ πράττοντας,

"Ὁ τὰ

944 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δὲ 405, 306.

y a »

Rep. 597 d, ὄντως κλίνης ποιητὴς ὄντως οὔσης" ἀλλὰ μὴ κλίνης τινὸς μηδὲ κλινοποιός τις.

Symp. 186 ἃ, οὐ μόνον ἐστὶν ἐπὶ ταῖς ψυχαῖς... πρὸς τοὺς καλούς" ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς ἄλλα πολλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις.

Tb. τοῦ b, οὔτ᾽ ἀδικεῖ, οὔτ᾽ ἀδικεῖται, οὔθ᾽ ὑπὸ θεοῦ, οὔτε θεόν.

t

Theat. 173 d, νόμους δὲ καὶ ψηφίσματα λεγόμενα ἢ γεγραμμένα, οὔτε ὁρῶσιν οὔτ᾽ ἀκοΐουσι.

Fes ’ ς A 3 Lg A A > , -

Symp. 218 a, δεδηγμένος τε ὑπὸ ἀλγεινοτέρου καὶ τὸ ἀλγεινότατον ὧν ἄν τις δηχθείη, τὴν καρδίαν ἢ ψυχὴν γὰρ δηχθεὶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν φιλο- σοφίᾳ λόγων.

Soph. 231 ἃ, καὶ γὰρ κυνὶ λύκος, ἀγριώτατον ἡμερωτάτῳ.

ν᾽ Gorge. 474 ο, καλόν τε καὶ ἀγαθόν, καὶ κακὸν καὶ αἰσχρόν.

Phed 2 ἧς Te καὶ μέ ῦ μὲν τῷ θει ὑπερέχε 1eGO0 102 ὁ, σμικρὸς TE Καὶ peyas... «Τοῦ μὲν τῷ μεγέῦδει ὑπερέχειν τὴν σμικρότητα ὑπερέχων, τῷ δὲ μέγεθος τῆς σμικρότητος παρέχων ὑπερέχον.

ie tA ae Tb. 69 b, τούτου καὶ μετὰ τούτου ὠνούμενά τε καὶ πιπρασκόμενα.

§ 305. So in Dialogue. Υ Gorg. 453d, (A) πότερον . . . πείθει, ἣ οὔ; (B) Οὐ δῆτα [86. οὐ πείθει], ἀλλὰ πάντων μάλιστα πείθει. Tb. 496 d, (A) πότερον οὖν ἔτι πλείω ἐρωτῶ, ἢ ὁμολογεῖς K.7.A. ; (Β) Ὃμολογῶ, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐρώτα. In Dialogue, however, the Parallelism is often Direct, instead of Tnverse. : Rep. 337 ¢ (A) ἄλλο τι... ποιήσεις ; ὧν ἐγὼ... ἀποκρινεῖ ; (Β) Οὐκ ἂν θαυμάσαιμι" εἴ μοι σκεψαμένῳ οὕτω δόξειε. Ib. 428 ἃ, (A) τίς, καὶ ἐν τίσιν; (B) Αὕτη, ἡ φυλακική, καὶ ἐν τούτοις τοῖς ἄρχουσιν. Soph. 267 ἃ, (A) Μιμητικὸν δὴ... ἀπονειμώμεθα" τὸ δ᾽ ἄλλο πᾶν ἀφῶμεν κιτιλ, (B) Νενεμήσθω, τὸ δὲ μεθείσθω,

Cf, Hom, Od. vi. 170-197, where Odysseus is answered in order by

Nausicaa,—1 70-4, corresponding to 187-190, andthe remainder |

to the remainder. And /Msch. Ag. 622, 623, and ib. 1202-5, ΚΑ. Μάντις μ᾽ ᾿Δπόλλων τῷδ᾽ ἐπέστησεν τέλει᾽ Προτοῦ μὲν αἰδὼς ἦν ἐμοὶ λέγειν τάδε. ΧΟ. Μῶν καὶ θεός περ ἱμέρῳ πεπληγμένος ; “Αβρύ-

“ > Τὰ 4 νεται γὰρ πᾶς τις εὖ πράσσων πλέον.

§ 306. Often, also, of two points put by A, the former only is

taken up by B,

77 ee

§§ 307, 308.] ORDER OF WORDS AND CLAUSES. 245

Rep. 341 b, (A) οὔτε yap ἄν pe λάθοις κακουργῶν, οὔτε κιτιλ. (B) Οὐδέ γ᾽ ἂν ἐπιχειρήσαιμι.

Phedo 79 b, (A) τί δὲ ἡ ψυχή ; ὁρατόν, ἢ ἀειδές ; (B) Οὐχ ὑπ᾽ ἀνθρώ- πων γε.

Hip. Ma. 293 6, (A) τὸ πρέπον ἄρα τοῦτο λέγομεν ὃ παραγενόμενον ποιεῖ ἕκαστα φαίνεσθαι καλά, . .. ἢ ὃ εἶναι ποιεῖ, ἢ οὐδέτερα τούτων : (B) Ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ (sc. ὃ----φαίνεσθαι).

v Gorg. 462 b, (A) ἐρώτα ἢ ἀποκρίνου. (B) ᾿Αλλὰ ποιήσω ταῦτα. και

μοι ἀπόκριναι. ὦ Σώκρατες.

§ 807. E. Comparative emphasis in co-ordinate expressions marked by the order (which is often the reverse in Greek of what it would be in English).

Symp. 173 6, καὶ δῆλόν ye δὴ ὅτι οὕτω διανοούμενος καὶ περὶ ἐμαυτοῖ καὶ περὶ ὑμῶν μαίνομαι. The emphasis is on ἐμαυτοῦ, and the ὑμῶν is quite faint.

Tb. 175 Ὁ, viv οὖν νομίζοντες καὶ ἐμὲ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν κεκλῆσθαι ἐπὶ δεῖπνον καὶ τούσδε τοὺς ἄλλους, Oeparevere—‘ I your master, as well as

the others.’

Ib. 185 ς, τυχεῖν δὲ αὐτῷ twa ἢ ὑπὸ πλησμονῆς ἢ ὑπό τινος ἄλλου λύγγα ἐπιπεπτωκυίαν----᾿ from some cause, most probably reple- tion,

Ib. 189 e, καὶ εἶδος καὶ ὄνομα----' the class as well as the mere name,

Euthyphro 3 ἃ, εἴτ᾽ οὖν φθόνῳ, ws σὺ λέγεις, εἴτε δι’ ἀλλο τι----' for whatever cause. most probably for envy.

Apol. 39 b, καὶ ἐγώ τε τῷ τιμήματι ἐμμένω καὶ otroa— ‘I as well as they.’

§ 308. F. Hysteron Proteron: where (in other words) the order of expression, following that of thought, reverses the order of occur- rence of facts.

Thewt. 162 b, εἴπερ μέλλοιέν μοι ἐπιτρέψειν καὶ πείσεσθαι.

& Apol. 19 d, ἀλλήλους διδάσκειν τε καὶ φράζειν. “ Gorg. 474 ἃ, γέλωτα παρεῖχον καὶ οὐκ ἠπιστάμην ἐπιψηφίζειν.

Pheedo 80 ¢, συμπεσὸν τὸ σῶμα καὶ ταριχευθέν.

Ib. 100 b, ἐπιδείξειν καὶ ἀνευρήσειν.

Ib. 87 ς, πολλὰ κατατρίψας τοιαῦτα ἱμάτια καὶ ὑφηνάμενος.

Symp. 190 6, ras.... ῥυτίδας τὰς πολλὰς ἐξελέαινε καὶ τὰ στήθη

διήρθρου. R 3

246 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. _[§§ 309, 310.

Symp. 209 6, τίκτει καὶ γεννᾷ.

Tim. 73 6, γῆν ἐφύρασε καὶ ἔδευσε.

Apol. 32 b, ἠναντιώθην ὑμῖν μηδὲν ποιεῖν παρὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ ἐναντία ἐψηφισάμην.

Or. Hdt. νη]. 114, ὁ δὲ γελάσας τε καὶ κατασχὼν πολλὸν χρόνον...

εἶπε.

§ 309. G. Interrogation emerging late in the sentence. By this arrangement, so common in Plato, the sentence generally gains animation, and its emphatic part is distinctly indicated.

a. With Negative.

Phedo 80 e, ἐὰν μὲν καθαρὰ ἀπαλλάττηται κιτ,λ.---οὐκοῦν οὕτω μὲν ἔχουσα KT.A, 5

Rep. 402 a, ὥσπερ dpa γραμμάτων πέρι τότε ἱκανῶς εἴχομεν ὅτε K.T.A, --οὐκοῦν καὶ εἰκόνας K.T.A, 5

Th. 581 e, τὸν δὲ φιλόσοφον ποιώμεθα τὰς ἄλλας ἡδονὰς νομίζειν. «... τῆς ἡδονῆς οὐ πάνυ πόρρω K.T.A, 5

Th. 587 ἃ, πλεῖστον δὲ λόγου ἀφίσταται οὐχ ὅπερ νόμου καὶ τάξεως ;

Tb. 590 a, ἡ δ᾽ αὐθάδεια καὶ δυσκολία ψέγεται οὐχ ὅταν τὸ λεοντῶδες.. ..

αὔξηται ;

Legg. 830 d, καὶ ταῦτα δὴ φοβηθεὶς... μὴ φαίνηταί τισι γελοῖα, οὐκ

ἄρα νομοθετήσει;

Protag. 351 ὁ, ἐγὼ γὰρ λέγω, καθ' ὃ ἡδέα ἐστίν, dpa κατὰ τοῦτο οὐκ

ἀγαθά >

Thid. ἃ, ἡδέα δὲ καλεῖς od τὰ ἡδονῆς μετέχοντα ;

Meno 78 ¢, ἀγαθὰ δὲ καλεῖς οὐχὶ οἷον ὑγίειαν K.7.A. ;

Tb. 88 d, καὶ μὲν δὴ καὶ τἄλλα, ἃ νῦν δὴ ἐλέγομεν... εἶναι, ἄρ᾽ οὐχ

εἰ ᾿ ὥσπερ K.TA, ; Symp. 216 d, καὶ αὖ ἀγνοεῖ πάντα καὶ οὐδὲν οἶδεν, ὡς τὸ σχῆμα αὐτοῦ

τοῦτο οὐ σειληνῶδες ; [The Zurich editors give τοῦτος οὐ a. ;|

§ 810. b. Without Negative. Soph. 233 6, δρῶσι δέ ye τοῦτο πρὸς ἅπαντα, φαμέν ; Hip. Ma. 301 ¢, ἐπεὶ καὶ νῦν, πρὶν ὑπό cov ταῦτα νουθετηθῆναι, ὡς εὐήθως διεκείμεθα, ἔτι σοι μᾶλλον ἐγὼ ἐπιδείξω K.TA. ; ¥ Gore, 496 ο, τὸ mewhy ἔλεγες πότερον ἡδὺ ἢ ἀνιαρὸν εἶναι ; Phileb. 44 ἃ, οἶμαι τοιόνδε τι λέγειν αὐτούς, ὡς εἰ βουληθεῖμεν ὁτουοῦν

εἴδους τὴν φύσιν ἰδεῖν, πότερον κ-.τ.λ. ;

δὲ 311, 312.] RHETORICAL FIGURES. 247

Politic. 265 6, ὁ πολιτικὸς ἄρ᾽ ἐπιμέλειαν ἔχειν φαίνεται πότερα κιτ.λ. ;

Legg. 683 6, βασιλεία δὲ καταλύεται, ὦ πρὸς Διός. ἢ καὶ κιτιλ,, μῶν ὑπό τινων ἄλλων ἢ σφῶν αὐτῶν;

Apol. 37 Ὁ. πολλοῦ δέω ἐμαυτόν γε ἀδικήσειν κιτιλ., τί δείσας ; [So Hermann punctuates. |

Crito 53 ¢, ἢ πλησιάσεις τούτοις καὶ ἀναισχυντήσεις διαλεγόμενος---- τίνας λόγους. ὦ Σώκρατες ;

Ibid. e, ὑπερχόμενος δὴ βιώσει πάντας ἀνθρώπους καὶ δουλεύων, .---τί ποιῶν ; [The Zurich editors give δουλεύων" |

Cf. Lysias xii. 64. p. 135, ᾿Αγόρατος τοὺς μὲν ἀπέκτεινε, τοὺς δὲ φυγάδας ἐντεῦδεν ἐπού)σε,---τίς ὧν αὐτός ;

§ 311. H. Enclitic reeommencing, or even commencing, a clause.

Phileb. τό c, θεῶν μὲν εἰς ἀνθρώπους δόσις, ὥς ye καταφαίνεται ἐμοί, ποθὲν ἐκ θεῶν ἐρρίφη.

Ib. 25 Ὁ. καί pur δοκεῖ τις, ὦ Πρώταρχε, αὐτῶν φίλος ἡμῖν νῦν δὴ γεγονέναι,

Ib. 46 ¢, ὁπόταν... τις τἀναντία ἅμα πάθη πάσχῃ. ποτὲ ῥιγῶν θέρηται καὶ θερμαινόμενος ἐνίοτε Ψύχηται.

Phedo 65 d, zi δὴ oe morore tt... eles; [So Oxon. But the edd. give ἤδη οὖν πώποτέ τι εἶδες ; |

Cf, Dem. de Cor. 44. p. 240, περιιὼν. ὁ Φίλιππος Ἰλλυριοὺς καὶ Τριβαλλούς, τινὰς δὲ καὶ τῶν “Ἑλλήνων, κατεστρέφετο. Similarly ἂν commences a parenthetic clause.

Phedo 87 a. τί οὖν, av dain ὁ λόγος, ἔτι ἀπιστεῖς : (See above,

Cf, Dem. Olynth. A. 14. p. 13. ri ody, av tis etrot, ταῦ τ déyees ; {So one Paris MS. τις ἂν Zurich editors. ]

ol2. RaEToRICAL FIGURES.

7,“ 90

A. Metonymy.

Rep. 497 ἃ, ὧν ὑμεῖς ἀντιλαμβανόμενοι dednhoxare —‘ of those [objections |. your allegation of which has shewed me that’ ἄς.

-Synip. 177 Ὁ, ἐνῆσαν dies ἔπαινον exovres—equivalent to ἐνῆν

ἔπαινος ἅλεσι διδόμενος. A strange instance.

Ib. 205 b, ἢ ἐκ rot μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ ὃν ἰόντι ὁτῳοῦν airia—that is, ἡ τοῦ ἰέναι ὁτιοῖν αἰτία.

Theet. 167 ¢, ἀντὶ πονηρῶν ὄντων αὐτοῖς ἑκάστων χρηστὰ ἐποίησεν

2 Av Ὡς = ειναι Και COKELY,

248 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [ἐν 515, 4145

Theet. 190 6, αἰσχυνοίμην ἂν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀναγκαζομένων ὁμολογεῖν---

‘IT should be ashamed at our being compelled’ &e. | Apol. 33 6, χαίρουσιν ἐξεταζομένοις τοῖς οἰομένοις εἶναι σοφοῖς.

Pheedo 88 d, ὁ λόγος... .. ὥσπερ ὑπέμνησέ pe pnbeis—‘ the recital of the argument as it were reminded me.’

Th. 68 a, τούτου ἀπηλλάχθαι ξυνόντος atrois—‘ be rid of the company of this.’

Charm. 173 Ὁ, ἐκ τούτων οὕτως ἐχόντων. So Lege. 959 6.

Lege. 959 0, καλὸν ἔστω καλῶς καὶ μετρίως τὰ περὶ τὸν τετελευτηκότι: γιγνόμενα----“Ἰοῦ it be a credit to have the obsequies handsomely or decently performed.’

§ 313. B. Catachresis. Ὑποπτεύειν for ‘to expect.’ Theet. 164 a, καὶ ἐγώ, νὴ τὸν Δία, ὑποπτεύω, οὐ μὴν ἱκανῶς ye συννοῶ. ᾿Αμήχανος οἵ number. Phdr. 229 d, καὶ ἄλλων ἀμηχάνων πλήθη τερατολόγων τινῶν φυσέων. Δαιμόνιος.

Critias 117 Ὁ, κάλλος ὕψος τε δαιμόνιον ἔχοντα.

§ 314. Θαυμαστός, θαυμάσιος, has many gradations of Catachrestic meaning. a, ‘Strange,’ ‘eccentric.’ Symp. 182 e, θαυμαστὰ ἔργα. So 213 d, θαυμαστὰ ἐργάζεται. 8. ‘Incomparable,’ ‘capital;’—only the intention of super- lativeness being retained. Apol. 41 b, θαυμαστὴ ἂν εἴη ἡ διατριβὴ αὐτόθι. y. Of a recommendation or ἃ feeling or an assertion,—‘ de- cided,’ ‘emphatic,’ ‘ positive.’ Symp. 182 d, ἡ παρακέλευσις τῷ ἐρῶντι παρὰ πάντων θαυμαστή---- ‘most positive is the encouragement given by all’ Tim. 29 d, τὸ μὲν οὖν προοίμιον θαυμασίως ἀπεδεξάμεθά cov—‘ most decidedly approved.’ Juthyd. 283 ¢, θαυμαστῶς σπουδάζοιμεν ---- were particularly aXioUs.’ Pheedo 74 b, (A) φῶμέν τι εἶναι ἢ μηδέν ; (B) Φῶμεν μέντοι νὴ Δία, θαυμαστῶς γε. θαυμαστῶς qualifies φῶμεν not εἶναι---- ΒΥ Yes most positively.’

Ib. 92 a, θαυμαστῶς ὡς éreicOnv-—‘ was most decidedly convinced.’

eh

2 ibs 7 Cragell τωρ νδοι

δὲ 315—318.] RHETORICAL FIGURES. 249

ὃ 315. Ὑπερφυῶς, καλῶς, σφόδρα, are also in the same way used to express decided assertion or assent to an assertion. Y Gorg. 496 c, (A) ὁμολογοῦμεν ταῦτα; .... . (Β) ᾿Αλλ᾽ ὑπερφνῶς ὡς ὁμολογῶ ---- I agree most decidedly.’

Pheedo 76 e, ὑπερφυῶς δοκεῖ μοι ἡ αὐτὴ ἀνάγκη εἶναι.

Phileb. 26 a, (A) dp’ οὐ ταὐτὰ ἐγγιγνόμενα ταῦτα... μουσικὴν ξύμπα- σαν τελεώτατα ξυνεστήσατο; (B) Κάλλιστά ye. Probably an intermediate step to this Catachresis is the use of καλῶς λέγειν for ‘to say truly,’ e.g. Phdr. 227 Ὁ.

Tb. 24 Ὁ, (A) ἀτελῆ δ᾽ ὄντε δήπου παντάπασιν ἀπείρω γίγνεσθον. (Β) Καὶ σφόδρα γε. 50 30 6.

Phdr. 263 ἃ, (A) εἰπὲ... εἰ ὡρισάμην ἔρωτα ἀρχόμενος τοῦ λόγου.

3 ρισάμην ἔρωτα ἀρχόμ όγ (B) Νὴ Δί᾽ ἀμηχάνως ye ὡς σφόδρα---- most decidedly you did.’

ὃ 316. Μέγας. Phedo 62 Ὁ, ὁ... λόγος... μέγας τέ τίς μοι φαίνεται καὶ οὐ ῥᾷδιος διιδεῖν, ‘ cumbersome,’ i. 6. ‘ perplexing.’ Euthyd. 275 d, τὸ μειράκιον, dre μεγάλου ὄντος τοῦ ἐρωτήματος, ἠρυθρίασέ τε καὶ ἀπορήσας ἔβλεψεν εἰς ἐμέ. So Hip. Ma. 287 ἃ.

§ 317. C. Hyperbole.

Euthyd. 303 b, ὀλίγου καὶ of κίονες of ἐν τῷ Λυκείῳ ἐθορύβησάν τ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖν ἀνδροῖν καὶ ἥσθησαν.

Hip. Ma. 295 ἃ, ἀκριβέστερον τῆς ἁπάσης ἀκριβείας.

Legg. 823 6, μήτε ἐγρηγορόσι μῆτε εὔδουσι κύρτοις ἀργὸν θήραν διαπο- voupevois—the supposition of the alternative εὔδουσι, in order to make the denial total, is hyperbolical. Cf. Arist. Eth. X. ix. 11, δεῖ... μήτ᾽ ἄκοντα μήθ᾽ ἑκόντα πράττειν τὰ φαῦλα. Soph. Antig.

fg δ. ee , - ΟΝ. - ? ΄ 1108. tr tr ὀπάονες Οἵ τ᾽ ὄντες οἱ T ἀπόντες.

| 4 ἱ ὃ 318. Τὸ. Formule expressive of Contempt. a. Otros. Apol. 23 ἃ, τὰ κατὰ πάντων τῶν φιλοσοφοίντων πρόχειρα ταῦτα λέγουσιν. Cf. Ar. Nub. 296. οἱ τρυγοϑαίμονες οὗἶτοι. 060. τὰς κατὰ Φρῖνιν ταύτας 90. pry μ : }

τὰς δυσκολοκάμπτους [καμπάς.

250 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [δ 319—323.

§ 319. b. Hotos ; ν Gorg. 490 d, (A) ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως ἱματίων [τὸν βελτίω πλέον δεῖν ἔχειν dys] ....(B) Ποίων ἱματίων ;---- Clothes, forsooth !’ Charm. 174 b, (A) dpd ye ἣ [οἶδε] τὸ πεττευτικόν; (B) Ποῖον

TETTEUTLKOD 5

§ 320. c. Plural of Singular Terms.

Menex. 245 d, οὐ yap Πέλοπες οὐδὲ Κάδμοι k.7.A.

Pheedo οὗ ο, ἀέρας καὶ αἰθέρας καὶ ὕδατα αἰτιώμενον.

Symp. 218 a, Φαίδρους, ᾿Αγάθωνας, ᾿Ἐρυξιμάχους.

Rep. 387 b, Κωκυτούς τε καὶ Στύγας καὶ ἐνέρους καὶ ἀλίβαντας.

Cf. 386}. Ag. 1439, Χρυσηΐδων μείλιγμα τῶν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Ιλίῳ. It is fre- quent in Aristophanes: cf. Ecclez. 1069, ὦ Πᾶνες, ὦ Κορύβαντες, Ach. 270, καὶ Λαμάχων ἀπαλλαγείς, Ran. 963, Κύκνους ποιῶν καὶ Μέμνονας. It is equally used with a sense of dignity,—as in the dithyrambic fragment of Pindar [p. 224 ed. Dissen], γόνον ὑπάτων μὲν πατέρων μελπέμεν γυναικῶν te Kaduecay ἔμολον, 50.

Bacchus the son of Zeus and Semele.

§ 321. d. Periphrasis. Lege. 953 8, θρέμματα Nethov—for Egyptians.

§ 322. E. Simile introduced as a Metaphor,—i. e. with the Particle of Comparison omitted. (See this noticed by Aristotie, Rhet. ITI. x—xi, where he charac- terises it as πρὸ ὀμμάτων ποιεῖν.) Euthyphro 11 ¢, οὐκ ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἐντιθείς, ἀλλὰ σύ μοι δοκεῖς ὁ Δαίδαλος. Cf. Soph. Aj. 169, μέγαν αἰγυπιὸν δ᾽ ὑποδείσαντες τάχ᾽ ἂν ἐξαίφνης εἰ σὺ φανείης σιγῇ πτήξειαν ἄφωνοι, Asch. P. V. 856, οἱ δ᾽ ἐπτοη- μένοι φρένας Κίρκοι πελειῶν οὐ μακρὰν λελειμμένοι Ἥξουσι, Ag. 394, ἐπεὶ διώκει παῖς ποτανὺν ὄρνιν, Eurip. Bacch. 1114, Πρώτη δὲ μήτηρ

ἦρξεν ἱερία φύνου.

ἢ 323. F. Play upon Words. Rep. 621 b, μῦθος ἐσώθη καὶ οὐκ ἀπώλετο, Kat ἡμᾶς ἂν σώσειεν. Symp. 185 6, Παυσανίου δὲ παυσαμένου,---διδάσκουσι γάρ pe ἴσα λέγειν οὑτωσὶ οἱ σοφοί. Ib. 198 ο, Γοργίου κεφαλὴν δεινοῦ λέγειν. Ib. 174 b, ὡς ἄρα καὶ ἀγαθῶν ἐπὶ δαῖτας ἴασιν αὐτόματοι ἀγαθοί----ἴὴ

allusion to Agathon.

§§ 324, 325.] RHETORICAL FIGURES. 25}

| Ape. 25 0, ἀλλὰ γάρ, ὦ Μέλητε, .. .. σαφῶς ἀποφαίνεις τὴν σαυτοῦ ἀμέλειαν.

Thezet. 194 ¢, κέαρ, ὃ ἔφη Ὅμηρος αἰνιττόμενος τὴν τοῦ κηροῦ ὁμοιό- τητα.

Phedo 8ο d, εἰς... τόπον... ἀειδῆ, εἰς Αἴδου ὡς ἀληθῶς.

Ib. 89 Ὁ, ἐάνπερ ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος τελευτήση καὶ μὴ δυνώμεθα αὐτὸν ἀναβιώ- σασθαι. The play upon the words lies in their reference to the subject of the discussion.

Ib. 92 ὁ, πρέπει ye εἴπερ τῳ ἄλλῳ λόγῳ ξυνωδῷ εἶναι καὶ τῷ περὶ τῆς ἁρμονίας.

Legg. 802 6, δεινὸν γὰρ ὅλῃ γε ἁρμονίᾳ ἀπάδειν ἢ ῥυθμῷ ἀρρυθμεῖν.

ΤΌ. 803 d, ἦν ἐν πολέμῳ μὲν ἄρα οὔτ᾽ οὖν παιδιὰ πεφυκυῖα οὔτ᾽ οὖν παιδεία,

Cf. Hom. 1]. ΧΗ]. 773, νῦν τοι σῶς αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος.

§ 324. G. Hendiadys.

The Hendiadys which occurs in Plato (belonging to the last of Lobeck’s four kinds,—cf. note on Soph. Ajax, 145) is that where Synonyms are set side by side with the view of expressing the idea more forcibly. This might be called Rhetorical Hendiadys. With Demosthenes it is a favourite instrument of δείνωσις.

Pheedo 98 b, τῷ μὲν νῷ οὐδὲν χρώμενον οὐδέ τινας αἰτίας ἐπαιτιώμενον.

Ib. 111 d, συντετρῆσθαι τε πολλαχῇ καὶ διεξόδους ἔχειν.

Crito 47 Ὁ, γυμναζόμενος ἀνὴρ καὶ τοῦτο πράττων.

Gorg. 472 b, ἐκβάλλειν με ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας καὶ τοῦ ἀληθοῦς.

Tim. 87 d, ὧν οὐδὲν σκοποῖμεν, οὐδ᾽ ἐννοοῦμεν ὅτι k.7.X. 4

Phileb. 23 a, τὴν ἀκριβεστάτην αὐτῇ προσφέροντα βάσανον καὶ ἐξε-

λέγχοντα.

Legg. 953 ἃ, ἐπιμελεῖσθαι καὶ τημελεῖν.

§ 325. H. Interrogation answered by the speaker himself.

This may be called Rhetorical Interrogation. Its object is te awaken the attention.

Pheedo 73 ¢, λέγω δὲ τίνα τρόπον; τόνδε. ἐάν Tis τι K.T.X.

Rep. 360 e, τίς οὖν ἡ διάστασις ; ἥδε. μηδὲν ἀφαιρῶμεν κιτ.λ. Χ Apol. 34 ἃ, τί δὴ οὖν οὐδὲν τούτων ποιήσω ; otk αἰὐθαδιζόμενος, ὦ

᾿Αθηναῖοι, κιτ.λ. Ib. 40 b, τί οὖν αἴτιον εἶναι ἱπολαμβάνω; ἐγὼ ὑμῖν ἐρῶ.

Protag. 343 b, τοῦ δὴ ἕνεκα ταῦτα λέγω; Ὅτι κιτιλ' So Gorg. 457 6.

252 DIGEST OF IDIOMS. [§ 325.

Gorg. 453 6, τοῦ οὖν ἕνεκα δὴ αὐτὸς ὑποπτεύων ce ἐρήσομαι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ αὐτὸς λέγω; οὐ σοῦ ἕνεκα, ἀλλὰ τοῦ λόγου.

Ib. 458 a, ἐγὼ δὲ τίνων εἰμί ; τῶν ἡδέως μὲν ἂν ἐλεγχθέντων κιτιλ.

Ib. 487 Ὁ, καὶ ἐμοὶ εἶ εὔνους. τίνι τεκμηρίῳ χρῶμαι ; ἐγώ σοι ἐρῶ. οἶδα k.T.A,

Meno 97 e, πρὸς τί οὖν δὴ λέγω ταῦτα; πρὸς τὰς δόξας τὰς ἀληθεῖς.

Lege. 7ΟΙ ¢, τίνος δὴ Kai ταῦθ' ἡμῖν αὖ χάριν ἐλέχθη ; δεῖν φαίνεται Κιτιὰ,

ΤΌ. 780 a, τίνος δὴ χάριν ταῦτα εἴρηται; τοῦδε, ὅτι κιτιλ.

Tim. 31 a, πότερον οὖν ὀρθῶς ἕνα οὐρανὸν προσειρήκαμεν, ἢ πολλοὺς καὶ ἀπείρους λέγειν ἦν ὀρθότερον; ἕνα, εἴπερ K.T.A.

Critias 111 a, πῶς οὖν δὴ τοῦτο πιστόν, καὶ κατὰ τί λείψανον τῆς τότε γῆς ὀρθῶς ἂν λέγοιτο; πᾶσα kK...

Symp. 206 e, πάνυ μὲν οὖν, ἔφη. τί δὴ οὖν τῆς γεννήσεως ; ὅτι κιτιλ.

{So Hermann punctuates. The Zurich editors give the answer to another speaker. |

May, 1878.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

BOO 5

PUBLISHED FOR THE UNIVERSITY BY

MACMILLAN AND €O.; LONDON;

ALSO TO BE HAD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS DEPOSITORY, OXFORD.

——o-0-o—___

LEXICONS, GRAMMARS, &c.

(See also Clarendon Press Series pp. 21, 24.)

A Greek-English Lexicon, by Henry George Liddell, D.D., and Robert Scott, D.D. Sixth Edition, Revised and Augmented. 1870. 4to. cloth, τὶ. 16s.

A Greek-English Lexicon, abridged from the above, chiefly for the use of Schools. Seventeenth Edition. Carefully Revised throughout, 1876. Square 12mo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A copious Greek-English Vocabulary, compiled from the best authorities. 1850. 24mo. bound, 35.

Graecae Grammaticae Rudimenta in usum Scholarum. Auctore Carolo Wordsworth, D.C.L. Eighteenth Edition, 1875. 12mo. bound, 45.

A Greek Primer, in English, for the use of beginners. By the Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews. Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.

A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation, by H.W. Chandler, M.A. 1862. 8vo. cloth, Ios. 6d.

Etymologicon Magnum. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit et notis variorum instruxit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. 1848. fol. cloth, 11. 12s.

Suidae Lexicon. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit Thomas Gaisford, ΘΙ; “Lomi, 1. 1824. Χο]... εὐ ἢ, 21.328.

[2] Β

2 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Scheller’s Lexicon of the Latin Tongue, with the German ex- planations translated into English by J. E. Riddle, M.A. 1835. fol. cloth, 11. 1s.

Scriptores Rei Metricae. Edidit Thomas Gaisford, 8.T.P. Tomi III. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Sold separately: Hephaestion, Terentianus Maurus, Proclus, cum annotationibus, etc. Tomi II. 10s. Scriptores Latini. 5s.

The Book of Hebrew Roots, by Abu ’L-Walid Marwan ibn Janah, otherwise called Rabbi Yonah. Now first edited, with an Appendix, by Ad. Neubauer. 4to. cloth, 2], 7s. 6d.

A Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew. By S.R. Driver, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Thesaurus Syriacus : collegerunt Quatremére, Bernstein, Lors- bach, Arnoldi, Field: edidit R. Payne Smith, S.T.P.R.

Fasc. I-IV. 1868-77. sm. fol. each, 1]. 15.

Lexicon Aegyptiaco-Latinum ex veteribus Linguae Aegyp- tiacae Monumentis, etc., cum Indice Vocum Latinarum ab H. Tattam, A.M. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

A Practical Grammar of the Sanskrit Language, arranged with reference to the Classical Languages of Europe, for the use of English Students, by Monier Williams, M.A. Fourth Edition, 1877. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Etymologically and Philo- logically arranged, with special reference to Greek, Latin, German, Anglo-Saxon, English, and other cognate Indo-European Languages. By Monier Williams, M.A., Boden Professor of Sanskrit. 1872. 410. cloth, 4l. 14s. 6d.

Nalopdékhydnam. Story of Nala, an Episode of the Maha- Bharata: the Sanskrit text, with a copious Vocabulary, Grammatical Analysis, and Introduction, by Monier Williams, M.A. The Metrical Translation by the Very Rev. H. H. Milman, D.D. 1860. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Sakuntala. A Sanskrit Drama, in seven Acts. Edited by Monier Williams, M.A., D.C.L., Boden Professor of Sanskrit. Second Edition, 8vo. cloth, 21s.

An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, by Joseph Bosworth, D.D., Pro- fessor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. New edition. In the Press.

An Icelandiec-English Dictionary. Based on the MS. col- lections of the late Richard Cleasby. Enlarged and completed by G. Vigfusson. With an Introduction, and Life of Richard Cleasby, by G. Webbe Dasent, D.C.L. 4to. cloth, 31. 7s.

A List of English Words the Etymology of which is illustrated by comparison with Icelandic. Prepared in the form of an Appenpix to the above. By W. W. Skeat, M.A,, stitched, 2s,

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 3

A Handbook of the Chinese Language. Parts I and II, Grammar and Chrestomathy. By James Summers. 1863. 8vo. half bound, τὶ. 8s.

Cornish Drama (The Ancient). Edited and translated by E. Norris, Esq., with a Sketch of Cornish Grammar, an Ancient Cornish Vocabulary, etc. 2 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 11. 15.

The Sketch of Cornish Grammar separately, stitebed, 2s. 6d.

GREEK CLASSICS, &c.

Aeschylus: quae supersunt in Codice Laurentiano typis descripta. Edidit R. Merkel. 1861. Small folio, clotb, τὶ. Is.

Aeschylus: Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Second Edition, 1851. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Aeschylus: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1841. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Aeschylus: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. Dindorfio. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Sophocles: Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione et cum commentariis Guil. Dindorfii. Tbird Edition, 2 vols. 1860. fcap. 8vo. cloth, tl. 1s.

Each Play separately, limp, 2s. 6d. The Text alone, printed on writing paper, with large margin, royal 16mo. cloth, 8s. The Text alone, square 16mo. cloth, 35. 6d. Each Play separately, limp, 6d. (See also p. 23.)

Sophocles: Tragoediae et Fragmenta cum Annotatt. Guil.

Dindorfii. Tomi 11. 1849. 8vo. cloth, ros.

The Text, Vol. I. 5s.6d. The Notes, Vol. II. 4s. 6d.

Sophocles: Scholia Graeca:

Vol. I. ed. P. Elmsley, ALM. 1825. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. Vol. 11. ed. Guil. Dindorfius. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Euripides: Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- dorfii. Tomill. 1834. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Euripides: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1840. 8vo. cloth, los. Euripides: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. Dindorfio. TomilV. 1863. 8vo. cloth, 11. 16s. Euripides : Alcestis,ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 1834. 8vo. sewed, 2s. 6d. B 2

4 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Aristophanes: Comoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Tomi II. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 115.

Aristophanes: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 115.

Aristophanes: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. Dindorfio. Partes III. 1839. 8vo. cloth, τὶ.

Aristophanem, Index in: J.Caravellae. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Metra Aeschyli Sophoclis Euripidis et Aristophanis. De- scripta a Guil. Dindorfio. Accedit Chronologia Scenica. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Anecdota Graeca Oxoniensia. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. TomilV. 1834-1837. 8vo. cloth, 11. 2s.

Anecdota Graeca e Codd. MSS. Bibliothecae Regiae Parisien- sis. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. TomilIV. 1839-1841. 8vo. cloth, τς δὲ

Apsinis et Longini Rhetorica. E Codicibus MSS. recensuit Joh. Bakius. 1849. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Aristoteles; ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri. Accedunt In- dices Sylburgiani. Tomi XI. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 21. Ios. The volumes (except vol. IX.) may be had separately, price 5s. 6d. each.

Aristotelis Ethica Nicomachea, ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri. Crown 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Choerobosci Dictata in Theodosii Canones, necnon Epimerismi in Psalmos. E Codicibus MSS. edidit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi Ill. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Demosthenes: ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Tomi I. II. III. IV. 1846. 8vo. cloth, il. Is.

Demosthenes: Tomi V. VI. VII. Annotationes Interpretum. 1849. 8vo. cloth, 155.

Demosthenes: Tomi VIII. IX. Scholia. 1851. 8vo. cloth, τον.

Harpocrationis Lexicon, ex recensione G, Dindorfii. Tomi 11. 1854. 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

Herculanensium Voluminum Partes II. 8vo. cloth, ros.

Homerus: Ilias, cum brevi Annotatione C. α. Heynii. Acce- dunt Scholia minora. Tomi II. 1834. 8vo. cloth, 155.

Homerus: Ilias, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Homerus: Scholia Graeca in Hiadem. Edited by Prof. W. Din- dorf, after a new collation of the Venetian MSS. by D. B. Monro, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College.

Vols. I. Il. 8vo. cloth, 24s. Vols. III. IV. 8vo. cloth, 26s. Homerus: Odyssea, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 5

Homerus: Scholia Graeca in Odysseam. Edidit Guil. Dindorfius. Tomi II. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 15s. 6d.

Homerum, Index in: Seberi. 1780. 8vo. cloth, 65. 6d.

Oratores Attici ex recensione Bekkeri: I. Antiphon, Andocides, et Lysias. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 7s. II. Isocrates. 1822. 8vo. clotd, 7s. IIT. Isaeus, Aeschines, Lycurgus, Dinarchus, etc. 1823. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Scholia Graeca in Aeschinem et Isocratem. Edidit G. Dindor- fius. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Paroemiographi Graeci, quorum pars nunc primum ex Codd. MSS. vulgatur. Edidit T.Gaisford, $.T.P. 1836. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Plato: The Apclogy, with a revised Text and English Notes, and a Digest of Platonic Idioms, by James Riddell, M.A. 1867. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Plato: Philebus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by Edward Poste, M.A. 1860. ὅνο. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Plato: Sophistes and Politicus, with a revised Text and Eng- lish Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. 1866. Svo. cloth, 18s.

Plato: Theaetetus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. 1861. 8vo. cloth, gs.

Plato: The Dialogues, translated into English, with Analyses and Introductions, by B. Jowett, M.A., Master of Balliol College and Regius Professor of Greek. A new Edition in 5 volumes, medium Svo. cloth, 3]. 105.

Plato: Index to. Compiled for the Second Edition of Pro- fessor Jowett’s Translation of the Dialogues. By Evelyn Abbott, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Balliol College. Demy 8vo. paper covers, 2s. 6d.

Plato: The Republic, with a revised Text and English Notes,

by B. Jowett, M.A., Master of Balliol College and Regius Professor of Greek. Demy 8vo. Preparing.

Plotinuss EdiditsPaGreuzer: © “fom Til. 18352 4:0. τῷ Bs,

Stobaei Florilegium. Ad MSS. fidem emendavit et supplevit Ἴ- Gaistord; νον, TomilV. μοι cloth; 11:

Stobaei Eclogarum Physicarum et Ethicarum libri duo. Ac- cedit Hieroclis Commentarius in aurea carmina Pythagoreorum. Ad MsS. Codd. recensuit T. Gaisford,S.T.P. Tomill. 8vo. cloth, 115.

Xenophon: Historia Graeca, ex recensione et cum annotatio- nibus L, Dindorfil. Second Edition, 1852. 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d.

Xenophon: Expeditio Cyri, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Din- dorhi. Second Edition, 1855. 8vo. cloth, τος. 64.

6 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Xenophon: Institutio Cyri, ex ree. et cum annotatt. L. Din- dorfii. 1857. 8vo. cloth, ros. 6d.

Xenophon: Memorabilia Socratis, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L, Dindorfii. 1862. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Xenophon: Opuscula Politica Equestria et Venatica cum Arri- ani Libello de Venatione, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 1866. 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, &c.

The Holy Bible in the earliest English Versions, made from the Latin Vulgate by John Wycliffe and his followers: edited by the Rev. J. Forshall and Sir F. Madden. 4 vols. 1850. royal 4to. cloth, 3]. 3s.

The Holy Bible: an exact reprint, page for page, of the Author- ized Version published in the year 1611. Demy 4to. half bound, τὶ. 15.

Vetus Testamentum Graece cum Variis Lectionibus. Edi- tionem a R. Holmes, S.T.P. inchoatam continuavit J. Parsons, 5.1.Β. Tomi V. 1798-1827. folio, 7/.

Vetus Testamentum ex Versione Septuaginta Interpretum secundum exemplar Vaticanum Romae editum. Accedit potior varietas Codicis Alexandrini. Tomi III. ditto Altera. 18mo. cloth, 18s.

Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt; sive, Veterum Inter- pretum Graecorum in totum Vetus Testamentum Fragmenta. Edidit Fridericus Field, A.M. 2 vols. 1867-1874. 4to. cloth, 51. 5s.

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Latina, cum Paraphrasi Anglo-Saxonica. Edidit B. Thorpe, F.A.S. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Gallica e Cod. MS. in Bibl, Bodleiana adservato, una cum Versione Metrica aliisque Monumentis pervetustis. Nunc primum descripsit et edidit Franciscus Michel, Phil, Doct. 1860. 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d.

Libri Prophetarum Majorum, cum Lamentationibus Jere- miae, in Dialecto Linguae Aegyptiacae Memphitica seu Coptica. Edidit cum Versione Latina H. Tattam,S.T.P. Tomi 11. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 17s.

Libri duodecim Prophetarum Minorum in Ling. Aegypt. vulgo Coptica. Edidit H. Tattam, A.M. 1836. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Novum Testamentum Graece. Antiquissimorum Codicum Textus in ordine parallelo dispositi. Accedit collatio Codicis Sinaitici. Edidit E. H. Hansell, S.T.B. Tomi NI. 1864. 8vo. balf morocco, al. 12s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 7

Novum Testamentum Graece. Accedunt parallela S. Scrip- turae loca, necnon vetus capitulorum notatio et canones Eusebii. Edidit Carolus Lloyd, S.T.P.R., necnon Episcopus Oxoniensis. 1876. 18mo. cloth, 35.

The same on writing paper, with large margin, cloth, τος. 6d.

Novum Testamentum Graece juxta Exemplar Millianum. 1876. 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

The same on writing paper, with large margin, cloth, 9s. Evangelia Sacra Graecae. fcap. 8vo. /imp, 15. 6d.

The New Testament in Greek and English, on opposite pages, arranged and edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 2 vols. 1837. crown 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Novum Testamentum Coptice, cura D. Wilkins. 1716. 4to. cloth, 12s. 6d.

Evangeliorum Versio Gothica, cum Interpr. et Annott. E. Benzelii. Edidit, et Gram. Goth. praemisit, E. Lye, A.M. 1759. 4to. cloth, 12s. 6d.

Diatessaron ; sive Historia Jesu Christi ex ipsis Evangelistarum verbis apte dispositis confecta. Ed. J. White. 1856. 12mo. clotb, 3s. 6d.

Canon Muratorianus. The earliest Catalogue of the Books of the New Testament. Edited with Notes and a Facsimile of the MS. in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, by S.P. Tregelles, LL.D. 1868. 4to. ° cloth, los. 6d.

The Five Books of Maccabees, in English, with Notes and Illustrations by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 1833. 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d.

The Ormulum, now first edited from the original Manuscript in the Bodleian Library (Anglo-Saxon and English), by R. M. White, D.D. 2 vols. A new Edition in the Press.

Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae, a J. Lightfoot. 4 new Edition, by R. Gandell, M.A. 4 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 1]. 15.

FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, &c.

Antient Liturgies; being a Reprint of the Texts, either original or translated, of the most representative Liturgies of the Church, from various sources. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and a Liturgical Glossary, by C. E. Hammond, M.A., author of Textual Criticism applied to the New Testament. Crown 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d. Just Published.

Athanasius: The Orations of St. Athanasius against the Arians. With an Account of his Life. By William Bright, D.D., Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History, Oxford. Crown 8vo. cloth, gs.

The Canons of the First Four General Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. Crown 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

8 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Catenae Graecorum Patrum in Novum Testamentum. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. Tomi VIII. 1838-1844. 8vo. cloth, 21. 4s. Clementis Alexandrini Opera, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii.

TomilV. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 31. Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in XII Prophetas. Edidit P.E. Pusey, A.M. Tomill. 1868. 8vo. cloth, 2l. 2s.

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in D. Joannis Evangelium. Accedunt Fragmenta Varia necnon Tractatus ad Tiberium Diaconum Duo, Edidit post Aubertum P. E. Pusey, A.M. Tomi III. 8vo. cloth, 2]. 55.

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini Commentarii in Lucae Evan- gelium quae supersunt Syriace. E MSS. apud Mus, Britan, edidit R. Payne Smith, A.M. 1858. 4to. cloth, Il. as.

The same, translated by R. Payne Smith, M.A. 2 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 145.

Ephraemi Syri, Rabulae Episcopi Edesseni, Balaei, aliorumque. Opera Selecta. E Codd. Syriacis MSS. in Museo Britannico et Biblio- theca Bodleiana asservatis primus edidit J. J. Overbeck. 1865. 8vo. cloth, tl. Is.

A Latin translation of the above, by the same Editor. Pre- paring.

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis Libri XV. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit T. Gaisford, $.T.P. Tomi lV. 1843. 8vo. cloth, τ]. 10s.

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Demonstrationis Libri X. Re- censuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi lI. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Busebii Pamphili contra Hieroclem et Marcellum Libri. Re- censuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Busebius’ Ecclesiastical History, according to the text of Burton. With an Introduction by William Bright, D.D. Crown 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Eusebii Pamphili Hist. Eccl.: Annotationes Variorum. Tomi II. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 17s.

Evagrii Historia Ecclesiastica, ex recensione H. Valesii. 1844. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae. Recensuit I. Bywater, M.A. Svo. cloth, price 6s.

Irenaeus: The Third Book of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, against Heresies. With short Notes, and a Glossary. By H. Deane, B.D., Fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford. Crown 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Origenis Philosophumena; sive omnium Haeresium Refutatio. E Codice Parisino nunc primum edidit Emmanuel Miller. 1851. 8vo. cloth, los.

Patrum Apostolicorum, 8. Clementis Romani, S. Ignatii, 8. Polycarpi, quae supersunt, Edidit Guil. Jacobson, S.T.P.R. Tomi II. Fourth Edition, 1863. 8vo. cloth, τ]. Is.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 9

Reliquiae Sacrae secundi tertiique saeculi. Recensuit M. J. Routh, 8.T.P. TomiV. Second Edition, 1846-1848. 8vo. cloth, τὶ. 5s.

Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Opuscula. Recensuit M. J. Routh, $.T.P. Tomill. Zbird Edition, 1858. 8vo. cloth, tos.

Socratis Scholastici Historia Ecclesiastica. Gr.et Lat. Edidit R. Hussey, S.T.B. Tomilll. 1853. 8vo. cloth, 1és.

Sozomeni Historia Ecclesiastica. Edidit Κα. Hussey, $.T.B. Tomi lll. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Theodoreti Ecclesiasticae Historiae Libri V. Recensuit T. Gaisford,S.T.P. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Theodoreti Graecarum Affectionum Curatio. Ad Codices MSS. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1839. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Dowling (J.G.) Notitia Scriptorum SS. Patrum aliorumque vet. Eccles. Mon. quae in Collectionibus Anecdotorum post annum Christi ΜΡΟΟ. in lucem editis continentur. 1839. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, &c.

Baedae Historia Ecclesiastica. Edited, with English Notes by G. H. Moberly, M.A. 1869. crown 8vo. cloth, Ios. 6d.

Bingham’s Antiquities of the Christian Church, and other Works. 10 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 3]. 35.

Bright (W., D.D.). Chapters of Early English Church History. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Burnet’s History of the Reformation of the Church of Eng- land. A new Edition. Carefully revised, and the Records collated with the originals, by N. Pocock, M.A. With a Preface by the Editor, 7 vols. 1865. 8vo. 4/. 4s.

Burnet’s Life of Sir M. Hale, and Fell’s Life of Dr. Hammond. 1856. small 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Cardwell’s Two Books of Common Prayer, set forth by authority in the Reign of King Edward VI, compared with each other. Third Edition, 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Cardwell’s Documentary Annals of the Reformed Church of England; being a Collection of Injunctions, Declarations, Orders, Arti- cles of Inquiry, &c. from 1546 to 1716. 2 vols. 1843. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Cardwell’s History of Conferences on the Book of Common Prayer from 1551 to 1690. Tbird Edition, 1849. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland. Edited, after Spelman and Wilkins, by A. W. Haddan, B.D., and William Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History, Oxford. Vols. I. and III]. Medium 8vo. cloth, each 1. Is.

Vol. II. Part I, Medium 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d. Vol. Il. Part 11. Church of Ireland; Memorials of St. Patrick. stiff covers, 3s. 6d. B 3

10 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Formularies of Faith set forth by the King’s Authority during the Reign of Henry VIII. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Fuller's Church History of Britain. Edited by J. S. Brewer, M.A. 6 vols. 1845. 8vo. cloth, 11. 19s.

Gibson’s Synodus Anglicana. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Hussey’s Rise of the Papal Power traced in three Lectures, Second Edition, 1863. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Inett’s Origines Anglicanae (in continuation of Stillingfleet). Edited by J. Griffiths, M.A. 3 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

John, Bishop of Ephesus. The Third Part of his Ecclesias- tical History. [In Syriac.] Now first edited by William Cureton, M.A. 1853. 4to. cloth, 11. 12s.

The same, translated by R. Payne Smith, M.A. 1860. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Knight's Life of Dean Colet. 1823. 8vo. cloth, 75. 6d.

Le Neve’s Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Corrected and continued from 1715 to 1853 by T. Duffus Hardy. 3 vols. 1854. 8vo. cloth, ms els

Noelli (A.) Catechismus sive prima institutio disciplinaque Pietatis Christianae Latine explicata. Editio nova cura Guil. Jacobson, A.M. 1844. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Prideaux’s Connection of Sacred and Profane History. 2 vols. 1851. 8vo. cloth, Ios.

Primers put forth in the Reign of Henry VIII. 1848. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Records of the Reformation. The Divorce, 1527-—1533. Mostly now for the first time printed from MSS. in the British Museum and other Libraries. Collected and arranged by N. Pocock, M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. cloth, 11. 16s.

Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. The Reformation of Ecclesiastical Laws, as attempted in the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth. Edited by Ε. Cardwell, D.D. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Shirley’s (W. W.) Some Account of the Church in the Apostolic Age. Second Edition, 1874. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Shuckford’s Sacred and Profane History connected (in con- tinuation of Prideaux). 2 vols. 1848. 8vo. cloth, 105.

Stillingfleet’s Origines Britannicae, with Lloyd’s Historical Account of Church Government. Edited by T. P. Pantin, M.A. 2 vols. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 1058.

Stubbs’s (W.) Registrum Sacrum Anglicanum. An attempt to exhibit the course of Episcopal Succession in England. 1858. small 4to. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. Ds

Strype’s Works Complete, with a General Index. 27 vols. 1821-1843. 8vo. cloth, 71. 13s. 6d. Sold separately as follows :— Memorials of Cranmer. 2 vols. 1840. 8vo. cloth, 115. Life of Parker. 3 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, 165. 6d. Life of Grindal. 1821. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d. Life of Whitgift. 3 vols. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 165. 6d. Life of Aylmer. 1820. 8vo0. cloth, 35. 6d. Life of Cheke. 1821. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d. Life of Smith. 1820. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d. Ecclesiastical Memorials. 6 vols. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 1/. 135. Annals of the Reformation. 7 vols. 8vo. cloth, 2/. 35. 6d. General Index. 2 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, 115. Sylloge Confessionum sub tempus Reformandae Ecclesiae edi- tarum. Subjiciuntur Catechismus Heidelbergensis et Canones Synodi Dordrechtanae. 1827. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

ENGLISH THEOLOGY.

Beveridge’s Discourse upon the XXXIX Articles. The third complete Edition, 1847. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

Bilson on the Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, with a Biographical Notice by R.Eden, M.A. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Biscoe’s Boyle Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. 1840. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Bull’s Works, with Nelson’s Life. By E. Burton, D.D. 4 new Edition, 1846. 8 vols. 8vo. cloth, 2]. gs.

Burnet’s Exposition of the XX XIX Articles. 8vo. cloth, 75.

Burton’s (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Divinity of Christ. Second Edition, 1829. Svo. cloth, 7s.

Burton's (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. 1831. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Butler’s Works, with an Index to the Analogy. 2 vols. 1874. 8vo. cloth, 11s.

Butler’s Sermons. §8vo. clsth, 55. 6d.

Butler’s Analogy of Religion. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Chandler’s Critical History of the Life of David. 1853. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Chillingworth’s Works. 3 vols. 1838. 8vo. cloth, 1/. 15. 6d.

Clergyman’s Instructor. Sixth Edition, 1835. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 64,

Comber’s Companion to the Temple; or a Help to Devotion in the use of the Common Prayer. 7 vols. 1841. 8vo. cloth, τὶ. 11s. 6d.

Cranmer’s Works. Collected and arranged by H. Jenkyns, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College. 4 vols. 1834. ὅγο. cloth, 11. 10s.

12 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Enchiridion Theologieum Anti-Romanum. Vol. I. Jeremy Taylor’s Dissuasive from Popery, and Treatise on the Real Presence. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s. Vol. II. Barrow on the Supremacy of the Pope, with his Discourse on the Unity of the Church. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d. Vol. III. Tracts selected from Wake, Patrick, Stillingfleet, Clagett, and others. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 115. [Fell’s] Paraphrase and Annotations on the Epistles of St. Paul. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Greswell’s Harmonia Evangelica. Fifth Edition, 1856. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Greswell’s Prolegomena ad Harmoniam Evangelicam. 1840. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Greswell’s Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement of a Harmony of the Gospels. 5 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 3]. 3s.

Hall’s (Bp.) Works. 4 new Edition, by Philip Wynter, D.D. 10 vols. 1863. 8vo. cloth, 31. 35.

Hammond’s Paraphrase and Annotations on the New Testa- ment. 4 vols. 1845. 8vo. cloth, τὶ.

Hammond’s Paraphrase on the Book of Psalms. 2 vols. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Heurtley’s Collection of Creeds. 1858. 8vo. cloth, 65. 6d.

Homilies appointed to be read in Churches. Edited by J. Grifliths, M.A. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Hooker’s Works, with his Life by Walton, arranged by John Keble, M.A. Sixth Edition, 1874. 3 vols. 8vo. cloth, 11. 11s. 6d. Hooker’s Works; the text as arranged by John Keble, M.A.

2 vols. 8vo. cloth, 115. Hooper’s (Bp. George) Works. 2 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 85. Jackson’s (Dr. Thomas) Works. 12 vols. 8vo. cloth, 3]. 6s. Jewel’s Works. Edited by R. W. Jelf, D.D. 8 vols. 1847. 8vo. cloth, Il. 10s. Patrick’s Theological Works. 9 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 1/. 15, Pearson’s Exposition of the Creed. Revised and corrected by E. Burton, D.D. Sixth Edition, 1877. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Pearson’s Minor Theological Works. Now first collected, with a Memoir of the Author, Notes, and Index, by Edward Churton, M.A.- 2 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth, Ios.

Sanderson’s Works. Edited by W. Jacobson, D.D. 6 vols, 1854. 8vo. cloth, 11. 10s.

Stanhope’s Paraphrase and Comment upon the Epistles and Gospels. A new Edition, 2 vols. 1851. 8vo. cloth, Ios.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 13

Stillingfleet’s Origines Sacrae. 2 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 9s.

Stillingfleet’s Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion; being a vindication of Abp. Laud’s Relation of a Conference, &c. 2 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth, 105.

Wall’s History of Infant Baptism, with Gale’s Reflections, and Wall’s Defence. A new Edition, by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 2 vols. 1862. 8vo. cloth, τ]. Is.

Waterland’s Works, with Life, by Bp. Van Mildert. 4 nea Edition, with copious Indexes. 6 vols. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 2]. 115. Waterland’s Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, with a Preface by the present Bishop of London. 1868. crown 8vo. cloth,

6s. 6d.

Wheatly’s Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer. A new Edition, 1846. 8vo. cloth, 55.

Wyclif. A Catalogue of the Original Works of John Wyclif, by W. W. Shirley, D.D. 1865. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Wryclif. Select English Works. By T. Arnold, M.A. 3 vols. 1871. 8vo. cloth, 21. 2s.

Wyclif. Trialogus. With the Supplement now first edited. By Gotthardus Lechler. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 14s.

‘ ENGLISH HISTORICAL AND DOCUMENTARY WORKS.

British Barrows, a Record of the Examination of Sepulchral Mounds in various parts of England. By William Greenwell, M.A., F.S.A. Together with Description of Figures of Skulls, General Remarks on Prehistoric Crania, and an Appendix. By George Rolleston, M.D., F.R.S. Medium 8vo., cloth, 25s.

Two of the Saxon Chronicles parallel, with Supplementary Extracts from the Others. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and a Glossarial Index, by J. Earle, M.A. 1865. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Magna Carta, a careful Reprint. Edited by W.Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History. 1868. 4to. stitched, Is.

Britton, a Treatise upon the Common Law of England, com- posed by order of King Edward I. The-French Text carefully revised, with an English Translation, Introduction, and Notes, by F. M. Nichols, M.A. 2 vols. 1865. royal 8vo. cloth, 11. 16s.

Burnet’s History of His Own Time, with the suppressed Pas- sages and Notes. 6 vols. 1833. 8vo. cloth, 2]. Ios.

Burnet’s History of James II, with additional Notes. 1852. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Carte’s Life of James Duke of Ormond. 4 new Edition, care- fully compared with the original MSS. 6 vols. 1851. Svo. cloth, 11. 5s.

Casauboni Ephemerides, cum praefatione et notis J. Russell, S.T.P. Tomill. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

14 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England. To which are subjoined the Notes of Bishop War- burton. 7 vols. 1849. medium 8vo. cloth, 2]. 10s.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England. 7 vols. 1839. 18mo. cloth, 1. 15.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England. Also His Life, written by Himself, in which is in- cluded a Continuation of his History of the Grand Rebellion. With copious Indexes. In one volume, royal 8vo. 1842. cloth, τὶ. 25.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) Life, including a Continuation of his History. 2 vols. 1857. medium 8vo. cloth, τ]. 2s.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) Life, and Continuation of his His- tory. 3 vols. 1827. 8vo. cloth, 16s. 6d.

Calendar of the Clarendon State Papers, preserved in the Bodleian Library. Jn three volumes. Vol. 1. From 1523 to January 1649. 8vo. cloth, 18s. Vol. II. From the death of Charles I, 1649, to the end of the year 1654. ὅνο. cloth, 16s. Vol. Ui. From 1655 to 1657. 8vo. cloth, 14s.

Freeman’s (HE. A.) History of the Norman Conquest of England: its Causes and Results. Vols. I. and Il. Third Edition. 8vo. cloth, 11, 16s. Vol. Il. The Reign of Harold and the Interregnum. Second Edition. ὅνο. cloth, τ]. 15. Vol. IV. The Reign of William. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 1]. Is. Vol. V. The Effects of the Norman Conquest. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Kennett’s Parochial Antiquities. 2 vols. 1818. 4to. cloth, τὶ. Lloyd’s Prices of Corn in Oxford, 1583-1830. 8vo. seaved, 15.

Luttrell’s (Narcissus) Diary. A Brief Historical Relation of State Affairs, 1678-1714. 6 vols. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 1]. 4s.

May’s History of the Long Parliament. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Rogers’s History of Agriculture and Prices in England, a.p. 1259-1400. 2 vols. 1866. 8vo. cloth, 21. 2s.

Sprigg’s England’s Recovery; being the History of the Army under Sir Thomas Fairfax. A new edition. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Whitelock’s Memorials of English Affairs from 1625 to 1660. 4 vols. 1853. Svo. cloth, 11. 10s.

Protests of the Lords, including those which have been expunged, from 1624 to 1874; with Historical Introductions, Edited by James E. Thorold Rogers, M.A. 3 vols. 8vo. cloth, 2]. 2s.

Enactments in Parliament, specially concerning the Universi- ties of Oxford and Cambridge. Collected and arranged by J. Griffiths, M.A. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 15

Ordinances and Statutes [for Colleges and Halls] framed or approved by the Oxford University Commissioners. 1863. 8vo. clo¢b, 125.

Sold separately (except for Exeter, All Souls, Brasenose, and Corpus), at Is. each.

Statuta Universitatis Oxoniensis. 1877. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

The Student’s Handbook to the University and Colleges of Oxford. Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Index to Wills proved in the Court of the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, &c. Compiled by J. Griffiths, M.A. 1862. royal 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Catalogue of Oxford Graduates from 1659 to 1850. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

CHRONOLOGY, GHOGRAPHY, &e.

Clinton’s Fasti Hellenici. The Civil and Literary Chronology of Greece, from the LVIth to the CXXIIIrd Olympiad. Third edition, 1841. 4to. cloth, τὶ. 14s. 6d.

Clinton’s Fasti Hellenici. The Civil and Literary Chronology of Greece, from the CXXIVth Olympiad to the Death of Augustus. Second edition, 1851. 4to. cloth, τ]. 12s.

Clinton’s Epitome of the Fasti Hellenici. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Clinton’s Fasti Romani. The Civil and Literary Chronology of Rome and Constantinople, from the Death of Augustus to the Death of Heraclius. 2 vols. 1845, 1850. 4to. cloth, 31. gs.

Clinton’s Epitome of the Fasti Romani. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 75.

Cramer’s Geographical and Historical Description of Asia Minor. 2 vols. 1832. 8vo. cloth, 115.

Cramer’s Map of Asia Minor, 15s.

Cramer's Map of Ancient and Modern Italy, on two sheets, 15s.

Cramer’s Description of Ancient Greece. 3 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, 16s. 6d.

Cramer’s Map of Ancient and Modern Greece, on two sheets, 155.

Greswell’s Fasti Temporis Catholici. 4 vols. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 2l. Ios.

Greswell’s Tables to Fasti, 4to., and Introduction to Tables, 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Greswell’s Origines Kalendarie Italice. 4 vols. 8vo. cloth, 215725.

Greswell’s Origines Kalendarie Hellenice. 6 vols. 1862. 8yo. cloth, 4ἰ. 4s.

16 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS, AND GENERAL LITERATURE.

The Logie of Hegel; translated from the Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences. With Prolegomena. By William Wallace, M.A. 8vo. cloth, 14s.

Bacon’s Novum Organum. Edited, with English notes, by G. W., Kitchin, M.A. 1855. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Bacon’s Novum Organum. Translated by G. W. Kitchin, M.A. 1855. Svo. cloth, gs. 6d.

The Works of George Berkeley, D.D., formerly Bishop of Cloyne; including many of his writings hitherto unpublished. With Prefaces, Annotations, and an Account of his Life and Philosophy, by Alexander Campbell Fraser, M.A. 4 vols. 1871. 8vo. cloth, 21. 18s.

The Life, Letters, &c. 1 vol. cloth, 16s, See also p. 23.

Smith’s Wealth of Nations. A new Edition, with Notes, by J. E. Thorold Rogers, M.A. 2 vols. 1870. cloth, 21s.

A Course of Lectures on Art, delivered before the University of Oxford in Hilary Term, 1870. By John Ruskin, M.A., Slade Professor of Fine Art. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

A Critical Account of the Drawings by Michel Angelo and Raffaello in the University Galleries, Oxford. By J. C. Robinson, F.S.A. Crown 8vo. cloth, 4s.

MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCE, &c.

Archimedis quae supersunt omnia cum Eutocii commentariis ex recensione Josephi Torelli, cum nova versione Latina. 1792. folio. cloth, 11. 5s.

Bradley’s Miscellaneous Works and Correspondence. With an Account of Harriot’s Astronomical Papers. 1832. 4to. cloth, 17s.

Reduction of Bradley’s Observations by Dr. Busch. 1838. 4to. cloth. 35.

A Treatise on the Kinetic Theory of Gases. By Henry William Watson, M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 1876. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Rigaud’s Correspondence of Scientific Men of the r7th Century, with Table of Contents by A. de Morgan, and Index by the Rev. J. Rigaud, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, 2 vols. 1841-1862. 8vo. cloth, 18s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. ΤΠ

Treatise on Infinitesimal Calculus. By Bartholomew Price, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Oxford. Vol. I. Differential Calculus. Second Edition, 8vo. cloth, 14s. 6d. Vol. II. Integral Calculus, Calculus of Variations, and Differential Equations. Second Edition, 1865. 8vo. cloth, 18s. Vol. III. Statics, including Attractions; Dynamics of a Material Particle. Second Edition, 1868. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Vol. IV. Dynamics of Material Systems; together with a Chapter on Theoretical Dynamics, by W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S. 1862. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Daubeny’s Introduction to the Atomic Theory. Second Edition, greatly enlarged. 1850. 16mo. clotb, 6s.

Vesuvius. By John Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Geology, Oxford. 1869. Crown 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d.

Geology of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames. By the same Author. 8vo. cloth, 215.

Synopsis of the Pathological Series in the Oxford Museum. By H. W. Acland, M.D., F.R.S., 1867. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Thesaurus Entomologicus Hopeianus, or a Description of the rarest Insects in the Collection given to the University by the Rey. William Hope. By J. O. Westwood, M.A. With 40 Plates, mostly coloured. Small folio, balf morocco, 71. 105.

Text-Book of Botany, Morphological and Physiological. By Dr. Julius Sachs, Professor of Botany in the University of Wurzburg. Translated by A. W. Bennett, M.A., assisted by W. Τ, Thiselton Dyer, M.A. Royal 8vo. half morocco, 11. 11s. 6d.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Ebert’s Bibliographical Dictionary, translated from the German. 4 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 11. Ios.

Cotton’s List of Editions of the Bible in English. Second Edition, corrected and enlarged. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Cotton’s Typographical Gazetteer. 1831. 8vo. cloth, 125. 6d.

Cotton’s Typographical Gazetteer, Second Series. 1866. 8vo. cloth, 123. 6d.

Cotton’s Rhemes and Doway. An attempt to shew what has been done by Roman Catholics for the diffusion of the Holy Scriptures in English. 1855. 8vo. cloth, gs.

18 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Series.

The Delegates of the Clarendon Press having undertaken the publication of a series of works, chiefly educational, and entitled the (larendow Press Series, have published, or have in preparation, the following.

Those to which prices are attached are already published; the others are in preparation.

I. ENGLISH.

A First Reading Book. By Marie Eichens of Berlin; and edited by Anne J. Clough. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 4d.

Oxford Reading Book, Part I. For Little Children. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 6d.

Oxford Reading Book, Part 11, For Junior Classes. Extra fcap 8vo. stiff covers, Od.

An Elementary English Grammar and Exercise Book. By O. W. Tancock, M.A., Assistant Master of Sherborne School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.

An English Grammar and Reading Book, for Lower Forms in Classical Schools. By O. W. Tancock, M.A., Assistant Master of Sherborne School. Third Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Typical Selections from the best English Writers, with Intro- ductory Notices. Second Edition, In Two Volumes. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. each.

Vol. I. Latimer to Berkeley. Vol. II. Pope to Macaulay. The Philology of the English Tongue. By J. Earle, M.A.,

formerly Fellow of Oriel College, and sometime Professor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A Book for the Beginner in Anglo-Saxon. By John Earle, M.A., Professor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 25. 6d.

An Anglo-Saxon Reader. In Prose and Verse. With Grammatical Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By Henry Sweet, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 19

Specimens of Early English. A New and Revised Edition. With Introduction, Notes, and Glossarial Index. By R. Morris, LL.D., and W. W. Skeat, M.A. Part I. Jn the Press. Part II. From Robert of Gloucester to Gower (a.D. 1258 to A.D. 1393). Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Specimens of English Literature, from the ‘ Ploughmans Crede’ to the ‘Shepheardes Calender’ (4.p. 1394 to 4.D. 1579). With Introduction, Notes, and Glossarial Index. By W. W. Skeat, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman, by William Langland. Edited, with Notes, by W. W. Skeat, M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Chaucer. The Prioresses Tale; Sir Thopas; The Monkes Tale; The Clerkes Tale; The Squieres Tale, &c. Edited by W. W. Skeat, M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Chaucer. The Tale of the Man of Lawe; The Pardoneres Tale; The Second Nonnes Tale; The Chaaouns Yemannes Tale. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. (See p. 20.)

Early Elizabethan Drama; Dr. Faustus, by Marlowe, and Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay, by Greene; with Introductions, Notes, &c., by A. W. Ward, M.A., Professor of History and English Literature in Owens College, Manchester. In the Press.

Shakespeare. Hamlet. Edited by W. G. Clark, M.A., and W. Aldis Wright, M.A. Extra tcap. 8vo. st covers, 2s.

Shakespeare. Select Plays. Edited by W. Aldis Wright, M.A. Extra feap. 8vo. stiff covers. The Tempest, Is. 6d. King Lear, 15. 6d. As You Like It, 1s. 6d. A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 15. 6d, Julius Caesar, 2s. Fust Publisked. Coriolanus. In the Press. (For other Plays, see p. 20.)

Milton. The Arevpagitica. With Introduction and Notes. By J. W. Hales, M.A., late Fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge. Extra fcap. Svo. cloth, 35.

Addison. Selections from Papers in the Spectator. With Notes. By T. Arnold, M.A., University College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Burke. Four Letters on the Proposals for Peace with the Regi- cide Directory of France. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by E. J. Payne, M.A. Extra fcap, 8vo. cloth, 5s. Hust Published.

20 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Also the following tn paper covers :— Gray. Elegy, and Ode on Eton College. 2d. Johnson. Vanity of Human Wishes. With Notes by E. J. Payne, M.A. 4d. Keats. Hyperion, Book I. With Notes by W. T. Arnold, B.A. 44.

Milton. With Notes by R. C. Browne, M.A. Lycidas, 3d. L’Allegro, 3d. Il Penseroso, 4d. Comus, 6d.

Parnell. The Hermit. 2d.

A SERIES OF ENGLISH CLASSICS,

Designed to meet the wants of Students in English Literature, under the superintendence of the Rev. J. S. BREWER, M.A., of Queen’s College, Oxford, and Professor of English Literature at King’s College, London.

It is also especially hoped that this Series may prove useful to Ladies’ Schools and Middle Class Schools; in which English Litera-

ture must always be a leading subject of instruction.

A General Introduction to the Series. By Professor Brewer, M.A.

τ. Chaucer. The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales; The Knightes Tale; The Nonne Prestes Tale. Edited by R. Morris, Editor of Specimens of Early English, &c., &c. Sixth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.6d. (See also p. 19.)

2. Spenser’s Faery Queene. Books I andII. Designed chiefly for the use of Schools. With Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By G. W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor of Christ Church. Book I. Eighth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. Book II. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

3. Hooker. Ecclesiastical Polity, Book I. Edited by R. W. Church, M.A., Dean of St. Paul’s; formeriy Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.

4. Shakespeare. Select Plays. Edited by W.G. Clark, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; and W. Aldis Wright, M.A., Trinity College, Cambridge. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers,

I. The Merchant of Venice. 1s. 1. Richard the Second. Is. 6d. 111. Macbeth. 1s. 6d. (For other Plays, see p. 19.)

——_ oe ΡΌΨΘΙΝ

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 21

5. Bacon. I. Advancement of Learning. Edited by W. Aldis Wright, M.A, Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo, cloth, 4s. 6d. II. The Essays. With Introduction and Notes. By J. R. Thursfield, M.A., late Fellow and Tutor of Jesus College, Oxford,

6. Milton. Poems. Edited by R. C. Browne, M.A. 2 vols. Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Sold separately, Vol. I. 4s.; Vol. II. 3s. (See also pp. Ig, 20.)

7. Dryden. Select Poems. Stanzas on the Death of Oliver Cromwell; Astrea Redux; Annus Mirabilis; Absalom and Achitophel ; Religio Laici; The Hind and the Panther. Edited by W. D. Christie, M.A. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

8. Bunyan. The Pilgrim’s Progress; Grace Abounding. Edited by E. Venables, M.A., Canon of Lincoln. Nearly Ready.

9. Pope. With Introduction and Notes. By Mark Pattison, B.D., Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford. I, Essay on Man. Fifth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. 1s. 6d. II. Satires and Epistles. Second Edition. Extra fcap. Svo. 25.

10. Johnson. Rasselas ; Lives of Pope and Dryden.

11. Burke. Select Works. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by E. J. Payne, M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister-at-Law, and Fellow of University College, Oxford.

I. Thoughts on the Present Discontents; the two Speeches on America. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

II. Reflections on the French Revolution. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

12. Cowper. Edited, with Life, Introductions, and Notes, by H. T. Griffith, B.A., formerly Scholar of Pembroke College, Oxford.

I. The Didactic Poems of 1782, with Selections from the Minor Pieces, A.D. 1779-1783. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

II. The Task, with Tirocinium, and Selections from the Minor Poems, A.D. 1784-1799. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

ΤΙ LATIN.

An Elementary Latin Grammar. By John B. Allen, M.A,, Head Master of Perse Grammar School, Cambridge. Second Edition, Revised and Corrected. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

A First Latin Exercise Book. By the same Author. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d,

22 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

A Series of Graduated Latin Readers.

First Latin Reader. By T. J. Nunns, M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.

Second Latin Reader. In Preparation.

Third Latin Reader, or Specimens of Latin Literature. Part I, Poetry. By James M¢Call Marshall, M.A., Dulwich College.

Fourth Latin Reader.

Cicero. Selection of interesting and descriptive passages. With Notes. By Henry Walford, M.A. In three Parts. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Each Part separately, limp, 1s. 6d. Partil. Anecdotes from Grecian and Roman History. Part IL. Omens and Dreams: Beauties of Nature. Part III.- Rome’s Rule of her Provinces.

Cicero. Selected Letters (for Schools). With Notes. By the late C. E. Prichard, M.A., formerly Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, and E. R. Bernard, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Pliny. Selected Letters (for Schogls), With Notes. By the same Editors. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Cornelius Nepos. With Notes. By Oscar Browning, M.A,, Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, and Assistant Master at Eton College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Caesar. The Commentaries (for Schools). With Notes and Maps. By Charles E. Moberly, M.A.

Part I, The Gallic War. Third Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s.6d. Part II, The Civil War. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. The Civil War. Book I. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.

Livy. Selections (for Schools). With Notes and Maps. By H. Lee-Warner, M.A., Assistant Master in Rugby School. Extra fcap. 8vo. In Parts, limp, each 1s. 6d.

Part I. The Caudine Disaster. Part 11. Hannibal’s Campaign in Italy. Part III. The Macedonian War.

Livy, Books I-X. By J. R. Seeley, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History, Cambridge. Book I. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Also a small edition for Schools.

Tacitus. The Annals. Books I-VI. With Essays and Notes,

By T. F. Dallin, M.A., Tutor of Queen’s College, Oxford. Preparing.

Passages for Translation into Latin. For the use of Pass- men and others. Selected by J. Y. Sargent, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Magdalen College, Oxford. Fifth Edition. Ext. tcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 23

Cicero’s Philippie Orations. With Notes. By J.R. King, M.A., formerly Fellow and Tutor of Merton College. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, τος. 6d.

Cicero. Select Letters. With English Introductions, Notes, and Appendices. By Albert Watson, M.A., Fellow and formerly Tutor of Brasenose College, Oxford. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Cicero. Select Letters. Text. By the same Editor. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Cicero pro Cluentio. With Introduction and Notes. By W. Ramsay, M.A. Edited by G.G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity, Glasgow. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Cicero de Oratore. Book I. With Introduction and Notes. By A.S. Wilkins, M.A., Professor of Latin, Owens College, Manchester. In the Press.

Catulli Veronensis Liber. Iterum recognovit, apparatum criticum prolegomena appendices addidit, Robinson Ellis, AMM. Demy 8vo. cloth, 16s. Fust Ready.

A Commentary on Catullus. By Robinson Ellis, M.A. Demy

8vo. cloth, 16s.

Catulli Veronensis Carmina Selecta, secundum recogni- tionem Robinson Ellis, A.M. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Horace. With a Commentary. Volume I. The Odes, Carmen Seculare, and Epodes. By Edward C. Wickham, M.A., Head Master of Wellington College. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Also a small edition for Schools.

Ovid. Selections for the use of Schools. With Introductions and Notes, and an Appendix on the Roman Calendar. By W. Ramsay, M.A. Edited by G. G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity, Glas- gow. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Persius. The Satires. With a Translation and Commentary. By John Conington, M.A. Edited by Henry Nettleship, M.A. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Selections from the less known Latin Poets. By North Pinder, M.A. Demy 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin. With Intro- ductions and Notes. By John Wordsworth, M.A. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Vergil: Suggestions Introductery to a Study of the Aeneid. By H. Nettleship, M.A. ὅνο. sewed, Is. 6d.

The Roman Satura: its original form in connection with its literary development. By H. Nettleship, M.A. 8vo. sewed, Is.

24 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

A Manual of Comparative Philology. By T. L. Papillon, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of New College. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. cloth, 6s.

The Ancient Languages of Italy. By Theodore Aufrecht, Phil. Doct. Preparing. 5

The Roman Poets of the Augustan Age. By William Young Sellar, M.A., Professor of Humanity in the University of Edinburgh. Virem. 8vo, cloth, 14s.

The Roman Poets of the Republic. By the same Editor.

Preparing.

III. GREEK.

A Greek Primer in English for the use of beginners. By the Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews. Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 15. 6d.

Graecae Grammaticae Rudimenta in usum Scholarum. Auctore Carolo Wordsworth, D.C.L. Eighteenth Edition,1875. 12mo. bound, 4s.

A Greek-English Lexicon, abridged from Liddell and Scott’s 4to. edition, chiefly for the use of Schools. Seventeenth Edition. Care- fully Revised throughout. 1876. Square 12mo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Greek Verbs, Irregular and Defective; their forms, mean- ing, and quantity; embracing all the Tenses used by Greek writers,

with reference to the passages in which they are found. By W. Veitch. New Edition. Crown 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

The Elements of Greek Accentuation (for Schools): abridged from his larger work by H. W. Chandler, M.A., Waynflete Professor of Moral and Metaphysical Philosophy, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

A Series of Graduated Greek Readers. First Greek Reader. By W.G. Rushbrooke, M.L. Extra tcap. 8vo, cloth, 2s, 6d. Fust Published. Second Greek Reader. By A.J. M. Bell, M.A. In the Press. Third Greek Reader. In Preparation.

Fourth Greek Reader; being Specimens of Greek Dialects. With Introductions and Notes. By W. W. Merry, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of Lincoln College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Fifth Greek Reader. Part I. Selections from Greek Epic and Dramatic Poetry, with Introductions and Notes. By Evelyn Abbott, M.A., Fellow of Balliol College. Ext. feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Part II. By the same Editor. In Preparation.

Aeschylus. Prometheus Vinctus (for Schools). With Intro~ duction and Notes, by A. Ο, Prickard, M.A., Fellow of New College. In the Press.

—— ee ae

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 25

Xenophon. Anabasis, Book II. With Notes. By (Ὁ. 8. Jerram, M.A. In the Press.

Xenophon. Easy Selections (for Junior Classes), With a Vocabulary, Notes, and Map. By J. S. Phillpotts, B.C.L., and C. S. Jerram, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Xenophon. Selections (for Schools). With Notes and Maps. By J.S. Phillpotts, B.C.L., Head Master of Bedford School. Fourth Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Arrian. Selections (for Schools). With Notes. By J. S. Phill- potts, B.C.L., Head Master of Bedford School.

Cebes. Tabula. With Notes. By C.S. Jerram, M.A. In the

Press.

The Golden Treasury of Ancient Greek Poetry; being a Col- lection of the finest passages in the Greek Classic Poets, with Introduc- tory Notices and Notes. By ΚΕ. 5. Wright, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 85. 6d.

A Golden Treasury of Greek Prose, being a collection of the finest passages in the principal Greek Prose Writers, with Introductory Notices and Notes. By R.S. Wright, M.A., and J. E. L. Shadwell, M.A. Ext. tcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Aristotle’s Politics. By W.L. Newman, M.A., Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford.

Demosthenes and Aeschines. The Orations of Demosthenes and Eschines on the Crown. With Introductory Essays and Notes, By G. A. Simcox, M.A., and W. H. Simcox, M.A. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Theocritus (for Schools). With Notes. By H. Kynaston, M.A. (late Snow), Head Master of Cheltenham College. Second Edition. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Homer. Odyssey, Books I—XII (for Schoois). By W. W. Merry, M.A. Fifth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Book II, separately, 1s. 6d. Homer. Odyssey, Books XIII-XXIV (for Schools). By the

same Editor. Jn the Press.

Homer. Odyssey, Books I-XII. Edited with English Notes, Appendices, etc. By W. W. Merry, M.A., and the late James Riddell, M.A. Demy 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Homer. Odyssey, Books XIIJI-XXIV. With Introduction

and Notes. By S. H. Butcher, M.A., Fellow of University College.

Homer. Tliad, Book I (for Schools). By D. B. Monro, M.A. In the Press.

Homer. Iliad. With Introduction and Notes. By D. B. Monro, M.A.

A Homeric Grammar. By Ὁ. Β. Monro, M.A. Preparing.

26 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Plato. Selections (for Schools). With Notes. By B. Jowett, M.A., Regius Professor of Greek; and J. Purves, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of Balliol College, Oxford.

Sophocles. The Plays and Fragments. With English Notes and Introductions. By Lewis Campbell, M.A., Professor of Greek, St. _ Andrews, formerly Fellow of Queen’s College, Oxford. 2 vols. Vol. I. Oedipus Tyrannus. Oedipus Coloneus. Antigone. 8vo, cloth, 14s.

Sophocles. The Text of the Seven Plays. By the same Editor. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Sophocles. In Single Plays, with English Notes, ἄς, By Lewis Campbell, M.A., and Evelyn Abbott, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. limp. Oedipus Rex, Oedipus Coloneus, Antigone, Is. gd. each. Ajax, Electra, Trachiniae, 2s. each.

Sophocles. Oedipus Rex: Dindorf’s Text, with Notes by the present Bishop of St. David’s, Ext. fcap. 8vo. limp, Is. 6d.

IV. FRENCH.

An Etymological Dictionary of the French Language, with a Preface on the Principles of French Etymology. By A. Brachet. Translated into English by G.W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor of Christ Church. Crown 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Brachet’s Historical Grammar of the French Language. Translated into English by G. W. Kitchin, M.A. Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d

Corneille’s Cinna, and Moliére’s Les Femmes Savantes. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by Gustave Masson. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Racine’s Andromaque, and Corneille’s Le Menteur. With Louis Racine’s Life of his Father. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Moliere’s Les Fourberies de Scapin, and Racine’s Athalie. With Voltaire’s Life of Molitre. By the same Editor. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Selections from the Correspondence of Madame de Sévigné and her chief Contemporaries. Intended more especially for Girls’ Schools. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

Voyage autour de ma Chambre, by Xavier de Maistre; Ourika, by Madame de Duras ; La Dot de Suzette, by Fievée ; Les Jumeaux de l’H6tel Corneille, by Edmond About; Mésaventures d’un Ecolier, by Rodolphe Topffer. By the same Editor, Extra fcap. 8vo. clotb, as. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 27

Regnard’s Le Joueur, and Brueys and Palaprat’s Le Grondeur. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Louis XIV and his Contemporaries; as described in Extracts from the best Memoirs of the Seventeenth Century. With English Notes, Genealogical Tables, &c. By the same Editor, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

V. GERMAN.

LANGE’S German Course. By HERMANN LANGE, Teacher of Modern Languages, Manchester:

The Germans at Home; a Practical Introduction to German Conversation, with an Appendix containing the Essentials of German Grammar. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

The German Manual; a German Grammar, a Reading Book, and a Handbook of German Conversation. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A Grammar of the German Language. 8vo. cloth, 35. 6d. This ‘Grammar’ is a reprint of the Grammar contained in ‘The German

Manual,’ and, in this separate form, is.intended for the use of students who wish to make themselves acquainted with German Grammar chiefly for the purpose of being able to read German books.

German Composition; Extracts from English and American writers for Translation into German, with Hints for Translation in foot- notes. In the Press.

Lessing’s Laokoon. With Introduction, English Notes, etc. By Dr. ALBERT Hamann, Teacher of German at the Taylor Institution, Oxford. In the Press.

Also, Edited by C. A. BUCHHEIM, Phil. Doc., Professor in King’s College, London.

Goethe’s Egmont. With a Life of Goethe, &c. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 35. Schiller’s Wilhelm Tell. With a Life of Schiller ; an historical

and critical Introduction, Arguments, and a complete Commentary. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Lessing’s Minna von Barnhelm. A Comedy. With a Life of Lessing, Critical Analysis, Complete Commentary, &c. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

In Preparation.

Schiller’s Egmont’s Leben und Tod, and Belagerung von Antwerpen. Nearly Ready.

Goethe’s Iphigenie auf Tauris. A Drama. With a Critical

Introduction, Arguments to the Acts, and a complete Commentary. Selections from the Poems of Schiller and Goethe. Becker’s (K. F.) Friedrich der Grosse.

28 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

VI. MATHEMATICS, &e.

Figures Made Easy: a first Arithmetic Book. (Introductory to ‘The Scholar’s Arithmetic’) By Lewis Hensley, M.A., formerly Fellow and Assistant Tutor of Trinity College, Cambridge. Crown 8vo. cloth, 6d.

Answers to the Examples in Figures made Easy, together with two thousand additional Examples formed from the Tables in the same, with Answers. By the same Author. Crown 8vo. cloth, Is.

The Scholar’s Arithmetic; with Answers to the Examples. By the same Author. Crown 8vo, cloth, 4s. 6d.

The Scholar’s Algebra. An Introductory work on Algebra. By the same Author. Crown 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Book-keeping. By ΚΕ. 6. C. Hamilton, Financial Assistant Secretary to the Board of Trade, and John Ball (of the Firm of Quilter, Ball, & Co.), Co-Examiners in Book-keeping for the Society of Arts. New and enlarged Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. limp cloth, 2s.

A Course of Lectures on Pure Geometry. By Henry J. Stephen Smith, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow of Corpus Christi College, and Savilian Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford.

Acoustics. By W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S., Savilian Professor of Astronomy, Oxford. Crown 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. By J. Clerk Maxwell, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Experimental Physics in the Uni- versity of Cambridge. 2 vols. Svo. cloth, 11. 11s. 6d.

An Elementary Treatise on the same subject. By the same Author. Preparing.

VII. PHYSICAL SCIENCE.

A Handbook of Descriptive Astronomy. By G. F. Chambers, F.R.A.S., Barrister-at-Law. Third Edition. Demy 8vo. cloth, 28s.

Chemistry for Students. By A. W. Williamson, Phil Doc., F.R.S., Professor of Chemistry, University College, London. A new Edition, with Solutions, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

A Treatise on Heat, with numerous Woodcuts and Diagrams, By Balfour Stewart, LL.D., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy in Owens College, Manchester. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. Od.

Lessons on Thermodynamics. By R. E. Baynes, M.A., Senior Student of Christ Church, Oxford, and Lee’s Reader in Physics. early Ready.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 29

Forms of Animal Life. By G. Rolleston, M.D., F.R.S., Linacre Professor of Physiology, Oxford. [Illustrated by Descriptions and Drawings of Dissections. Demy 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Exercises in Practical Chemistry (Laboratory Practice). By A. G. Vernon Harcourt, M.A., F.R.S., Senior Student of Christ Church, and Lee’s Reader in Chemistry; and H. G. Madan, M.A., Fellow of Queen’s College, Oxford.

Series I. Qualitative Exercises. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. clotb, 7s. 6d. Series II. Quantitative Exercises.

Geology of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames. By John Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Geology, Oxford. ὅνο. cloth, 21s.

Crystallography. By M.H.N. Story-Maskelyne, M.A., Pro- fessor of Mineralogy, Oxford; and Deputy Keeper in the Department of Minerals, British Museum. Jn the Press.

VIE. HISTORY.

The Constitutional History of England, in its Origin and Development. By William Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History. Jn Three Volumes. Crown 8vo. cloth, each 12s.

Select Charters and other Illustrations of English Con- stitutional History, from the Earliest Times to the Reign of Edward I. Arranged and Edited by W. Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History in the University of Oxford. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

A History of England, principally in the Seventeenth Century. By Leopold Von Ranke. Translated by Resident Members of the University of Oxford, under the superintendence of G. W. Kitchin, M.A., and C. W. Boase, M.A. 6 vols. 8vo. cloth, 31. 3s.

Genealogical Tables illustrative of Modern History. By H. B. George, M.A. Second Edition. Revised and Corrected. Small 4to. cloth, 12s,

A History of France. With numerous Maps, Plans, and Tables. By G. W. Kitchin, M.A. In Three Volumes. Crown 8vo. cloth, each 10s. 6d.

Vol. 1. Down to the Year 1453. Vol. 2. From 1453-1624. Vol. 3. From 1624-1793.

A Manual of Ancient History. By George Rawlinson, M.A., Camden Professor of Ancient History, formerly Fellgw of Exeter College, Oxford. Demy 8vo. cloth, 14s.

A History of Germany and of the Empire, down to the close of the Middle Ages. By J. Bryce, D.C.L., Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Oxford.

A History of British India. By S. J. Owen, M.A., Reader in Indian History in the University of Oxford.

30 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

A History of Greece from its Conquest by the Romans to the present time, B.c. 146 to A.D. 1864. By George Finlay, LL.D. A new Edition, revised throughout, and in part re-written, with con- siderable additions, by the Author, and Edited by H. F. Tozer, M.A., Tutor and late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. In Seven Volumes. 8vo. cloth, 3], Ios,

A History of Greece. By E. A. Freeman, M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford.

A Selection from the Despatches, Treaties, and other Papers of the Marquess Wellesley, K.G., during his Government of India; with Appendix, Map of India, and Plans. Edited by 5, J. Owen, M.A., Reader in Indian History in the University of Oxford, formerly Professor of History in the Elphinstone College, Bombay. 8vo, cloth, 1], 4s.

Ix. LAW.

Elements of Law considered with reference to Principles of General Jurisprudence. By William Markby, M.A., Judge of the High Court of Judicature, Calcutta. Second Edition, with Supplement. Crown 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

An Introduction to the History of the Law of Real Property, with original Authorities. By Kenelm E. Digby, M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister-at-Law, and formerly Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. Second Edition, Crown 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

The Elements of Jurisprudence. By Thomas Erskine Holland, D.C.L., Chichele Professor of International Law and Diplo- macy, and formerly Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. In the Press.

The Institutes of Justinian, edited as a recension of the Institutes of Gaius. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Alberici Gentilis, 1.C.D., I.C. Professoris Regii, De Iure Belli Libri Tres. Edidit Thomas Erskine Holland I.C.D., Turis Gentium Professor Chicheleianus, Coll. Omn. Anim, Socius, necnon in Uniy. Perusin. Iuris Professor Honorarius. Small 4to. half morocco, 21s.

Gaii Institutionum Juris Civilis Commentarii Quatuor; or, Elements of Roman Law by Gaius. With a Translation and Com- mentary by Edward Poste, M.A., Barrister-at-Law, and Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Second Edition. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Select Titles from the Digest of Justinian. By T. E. Holland,«D.C.L., Chichele Professor of International Law and Diplo- macy, and formerly Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, and C. L. Shadwell, B.C.L., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Jn Parts.

Part I. Introductory Titles. 8vo. sewed, 25, 6d. Part II. Family Law. 8vo. sewed, 15.

Part III. Property Law. 8.0. sewed, 25. 6d.

Part IV. Law of Obligations. Jn the Press.

Clarendon Press, Oxford. 31

X. MENTAL AND MORAL PHILOSOPHY.

Bacon. Novum Organum. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, &c., by T. Fowler, M.A., Professor of Logic in the University of Oxford. 8vo. cloth, 14s. ust Published.

Selections from Berkeley, with an Introduction and Notes. For the use of Students in the Universities. By Alexander Campbell Fraser, LL.D. Crown 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d. See also p. 16.

The Elements of Deductive Logic, designed mainly for the use of Junior Students in the Universities. By T. Fowler, M.A., Professor of Logic in the University of Oxford. Fifth Edition, with a Collection of Examples. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

The Elements of Inductive Logic, designed mainly for the use of Students in the Universities. By the same Author. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

A Manual of Political Economy, for the use of Schools. By J. E. Thorold Rogers, M.A., formerly Professor of Political Economy, Oxford. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legisla- tion. By Jeremy Bentham. Crown 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

atl. ART, &e.

A Handbook of Pictorial Art. By R. St. J. Tyrwhitt, M.A., formerly Student and Tutor of Christ Church, Oxford. With coloured Illustrations, Photographs, and a chapter on Perspective by A. Mac- donald. Second Edition. 8vo. balf morocco, 18s. i

A Music Primer for Schools. By J. Troutbeck, M.A., Music Master in Westminster School, and R. F. Dale, M.A., B. Mus., Assistant Master in Westminster School. Crown 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.

A Treatise on Harmony. By Sir F.A. Gore Ouseley, Bart., Professor of Music in the University of Oxford. Second Edition. sto. cloth, τος.

A Treatise on Counterpoint, Canon, and Fugue, based upon that of Cherubini. By the same Author. 4to. cloth, 16s.

A Treatise on Musical Form and General Composition. By the same Author. 4to. cloth, 10s.

The Cultivation of the Speaking Voice. By John Hullah. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

32 Clarendon Press, Oxford.

XII. MISCELLANEOUS.

Specimens of Lowland Scotch and Northern English. By Dr. J. A.H. Murray. Preparing.

Dante. Selections from the Inferno. With Introduction and Notes. By H.B. Cotterill, B.A. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Tasso. La Gerusalemme Liberata. Cantos i, ii. With Introduction and Notes. By the same Editor, Extra fcap. ὅνο. cloth, 2s. 6d.

A Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew. By S.R. Driver, M.A., Fellow of New College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Outlines of Textual Criticism applied to the New Testament. By C. E. Hammond, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Exeter College, Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Antient Liturgies. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and a Liturgical Glossary, by C. E. Hammond, M.A. Crown 8vo. cloth, los. 6d.

The Modern Greek Language in its relation to Ancient Greek. By E. M. Geldart, B.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

A Handbook of Phonetics, including a Popular Exposition of the Principles of Spelling Reform. By Henry Sweet, President of the Philological Society, Author of a ‘History of Euglish Sounds,’ &c, Extra fcap. Svo. cloth, 4s. Od.

A System of Physical Education: Theoretical and Practical. By Archibald Maclaren. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Published for the University by MACMILLAN AND CO, LONDON.

Also to be had at the CLARENDON PRESS DEPOSITORY, OXFORD.

The DELEGATES OF THE PRESS invite suggestions and advice from all persons interested in education; and will be thankful for hints, &c. addressed to the SECRETARY TO THE Detecates, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

ae 1

"-

, Ye Fata

ee ene

ΟΝ 7 ὧν: νὶ

a.

a, ον

ΕΝ

ae

ee muta

ae eu as! [1 ia

mae Σ

aie hae

ati rn

Ba ce Bs we ee oe a

m

2h =. ἡ

*

a Oe ae

iz

δ" ieee

oe ae at Ay Σ

᾿ς

ake So

ni

<a SP es ee ἘΣ ΟΣ _ a Ν : pie a eat

'. ‘of πάπως, τ:

. : oe a ; 7 7 " A

τὰν

ae eae

ὩΣ ‘= econ a fae ae 1 ΕΣ

Ὁ oe

ou

>

wie Pe

heater

Le

oe my, ares need

yah ea ceo ea a

ay en <= Soe Seas

“Ape ae RY Oe

ΤΥ

on

ἌΡ ΣΌΣ Ν pe

Ἰ5 ΠῊΒ TE GY ΠΒῚΒ EE BT ΠΠ

PA Plato 4279 The Apology of Plato

WALLACE ROOM

sa =

ees

a τς

4

471 4 Bey H ΠΝ ΠΑ att

if

Mitek

ie : a tan Ἵ ἫΝ el teh} Pata nia Hata pe ἧς ies Ἢ bat ἦ

z τ he Σ ᾿ POSS STB THEN Ν q nat rigger tey ay ΝΣ ΤΑΝ ἼΩΝ ; sieht: eG

ΠΡ ἢ

iTS.

Ne ti

i ΑΘ

ἜΑΡ

MI ) ᾿

tell ee fy AS)

ἮΝ

ἣν

ΜῊΝ IRS SND

SEP MAG ἀμ Ae ΡΗ μὴν Ke he Soenes ἐψεῖ ἫΝ a ἘΠῚ it ile * agi GAP EN ;

μέ ΔΜ Ση ΣΙ ΤῊ

ΤΥ th

¥

¢

ἮΝ Me. ἢ i

=F; cowed er

τ 9

t

"

᾽ν oy Y aioe 4 iif

aaa taht! aa

Se