This is a modern-English version of The Memorabilia, originally written by Xenophon. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.





THE MEMORABILIA

Recollections of Socrates



By Xenophon





Translated by H. G. Dakyns










Contents











     Xenophon the Athenian was born 431 B.C. He was a
     pupil of Socrates. He marched with the Spartans,
     and was exiled from Athens. Sparta gave him land
     and property in Scillus, where he lived for many
     years before having to move once more, to settle
     in Corinth. He died in 354 B.C.

     The Memorabilia is a recollection of Socrates in
     word and deed, to show his character as the best
     and happiest of men.
     Xenophon the Athenian was born in 431 B.C. He was a student of Socrates. He fought alongside the Spartans and was exiled from Athens. Sparta granted him land and property in Scillus, where he lived for many years before having to move again to settle in Corinth. He died in 354 B.C.

     The Memorabilia is a record of Socrates' words and actions, highlighting his character as the best and happiest of men.
  PREPARER'S NOTE

  First Published 1897 by Macmillan and Co.
  This was typed from Dakyns' series, "The Works of Xenophon," a
  four-volume set. The complete list of Xenophon's works (though
  there is doubt about some of these) is:

  Work                                   Number of books

  The Anabasis                                         7
  The Hellenica                                        7
  The Cyropaedia                                       8
  The Memorabilia                                      4
  The Symposium                                        1
  The Economist                                        1
  On Horsemanship                                      1
  The Sportsman                                        1
  The Cavalry General                                  1
  The Apology                                          1
  On Revenues                                          1
  The Hiero                                            1
  The Agesilaus                                        1
  The Polity of the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians   2

  Text in brackets "{}" is my transliteration of Greek text into
  English using an Oxford English Dictionary alphabet table. The
  diacritical marks have been lost.
  PREPARER'S NOTE

  First Published 1897 by Macmillan and Co.
  This was typed from Dakyns' series, "The Works of Xenophon," a
  four-volume set. The complete list of Xenophon's works (though
  there is doubt about some of these) is:

  Work                                   Number of books

  The Anabasis                                         7
  The Hellenica                                        7
  The Cyropaedia                                       8
  The Memorabilia                                      4
  The Symposium                                        1
  The Economist                                        1
  On Horsemanship                                      1
  The Sportsman                                        1
  The Cavalry General                                  1
  The Apology                                          1
  On Revenues                                          1
  The Hiero                                            1
  The Agesilaus                                        1
  The Polity of the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians   2

  Text in brackets "{}" is my transliteration of Greek text into
  English using an Oxford English Dictionary alphabet table. The
  diacritical marks have been lost.






THE MEMORABILIA

or

Recollections of Socrates





BOOK I

I

I

I have often wondered by what arguments those who indicted (1) Socrates could have persuaded the Athenians that his life was justly forfeit to the state. The indictment was to this effect: "Socrates is guilty of crime in refusing to recognise the gods acknowledged by the state, and importing strange divinities of his own; he is further guilty of corrupting the young."

I have often thought about what reasons those who charged Socrates could have used to convince the Athenians that his life should justly be taken by the state. The charge was basically this: "Socrates is guilty of a crime for refusing to acknowledge the gods recognized by the state and bringing in his own unusual deities; he is also guilty of corrupting the youth."

 (1) {oi grapsamenoi} = Meletus (below, IV. iv. 4, viii. 4; "Apol." 11,
    19), Anytus ("Apol." 29), and Lycon. See Plat. "Apol." II. v. 18;
    Diog. Laert. II. v. (Socr.); M. Schanz, "Plat. Apol. mit deutschen
    Kemmentar, Einleitung," S. 5 foll.
(1) {oi grapsamenoi} = Meletus (below, IV. iv. 4, viii. 4; "Apol." 11,
    19), Anytus ("Apol." 29), and Lycon. See Plat. "Apol." II. v. 18;
    Diog. Laert. II. v. (Socr.); M. Schanz, "Plat. Apol. mit deutschen
    Kemmentar, Einleitung," S. 5 foll.

In the first place, what evidence did they produce that Socrates refused to recognise the gods acknowledged by the state? Was it that he did not sacrifice? or that he dispensed with divination? On the contrary, he was often to be seen engaged in sacrifice, at home or at the common altars of the state. Nor was his dependence on divination less manifest. Indeed that saying of his, "A divinity (2) gives me a sign," was on everybody's lips. So much so that, if I am not mistaken, it lay at the root of the imputation that he imported novel divinities; though there was no greater novelty in his case than in that of other believers in oracular help, who commonly rely on omens of all sorts: the flight or cry of birds, the utterances of man, chance meetings, (3) or a victim's entrails. Even according to the popular conception, it is not the mere fowl, it is not the chance individual one meets, who knows what things are profitable for a man, but it is the gods who vouchsafe by such instruments to signify the same. This was also the tenet of Socrates. Only, whereas men ordinarily speak of being turned aside, or urged onwards by birds, or other creatures encountered on the path, Socrates suited his language to his conviction. "The divinity," said he, "gives me a sign." Further, he would constantly advise his associates to do this, or beware of doing that, upon the authority of this same divine voice; and, as a matter of fact, those who listened to his warnings prospered, whilst he who turned a deaf ear to them repented afterwards. (4) Yet, it will be readily conceded, he would hardly desire to present himself to his everyday companions in the character of either knave or fool. Whereas he would have appeared to be both, supposing (5) the God-given revelations had but revealed his own proneness to deception. It is plain he would not have ventured on forecast at all, but for his belief that the words he spoke would in fact be verified. Then on whom, or what, was the assurance rooted, if not upon God? And if he had faith in the gods, how could he fail to recognise them?

First of all, what evidence did they provide that Socrates refused to acknowledge the gods recognized by the state? Was it that he didn’t make sacrifices? Or that he disregarded divination? On the contrary, he was often seen making sacrifices, either at home or at the state’s common altars. His reliance on divination was just as clear. In fact, his statement, "A divinity gives me a sign," was known by everyone. So much so that, if I'm not mistaken, it was at the heart of the claim that he introduced new deities; although there was nothing more novel about him than about other believers in oracles, who typically depend on various omens: the flight or cry of birds, the words of people, unexpected encounters, or the entrails of a sacrificial animal. According to popular belief, it isn’t the mere bird or random person that knows what is beneficial for a person; rather, it is the gods that use such signs to communicate the same. This belief was also held by Socrates. However, while people usually talk about being swayed or guided by birds or other creatures they encounter, Socrates framed his language according to his beliefs. "The divinity," he would say, "gives me a sign." He often advised his friends to do this or avoid that based on this divine message, and in reality, those who heeded his warnings thrived, while those who ignored them regretted it later. It’s clear he wouldn’t want to appear to his daily companions as either a fool or a deceiver. If that were the case, it would seem he was both, assuming the God-given signs only reflected his own tendency to mislead. Clearly, he wouldn’t have dared to make predictions at all if he didn’t believe that what he said would actually come true. So on what, or who, was that confidence based, if not on God? And if he believed in the gods, how could he possibly deny their existence?

 (2) Or, "A divine something." See "Encyc. Brit." "Socrates." Dr. H.
    Jackason; "The Daemon of Socrates," F. W. H. Myers; K. Joel, "Der
    echte und der Xenophontische Sokrates," i. p. 70 foll.; cf.
    Aristot. "M. M." 1182 a 10.

 (3) See Aesch. "P. V." 487, {enodious te sombolous}, "and pathway
    tokens," L. Campbell; Arist. "Birds," 721, {sombolon ornin}:
    "Frogs," 196, {to sometukhon exion}; "Eccl." 792; Hor. "Od." iii.
    27, 1-7.

 (4) See "Anab." III. i. 4; "Symp." iv. 48.

 (5) Or, "if his vaunted manifestations from heaven had but manifested
    the falsity of his judgment."
(2) Or, "A divine something." See "Encyc. Brit." "Socrates." Dr. H. Jackason; "The Daemon of Socrates," F. W. H. Myers; K. Joel, "The True and the Xenophontic Socrates," i. p. 70 foll.; cf. Aristot. "M. M." 1182 a 10.

(3) See Aesch. "P. V." 487, {enodious te sombolous}, "and pathway tokens," L. Campbell; Arist. "Birds," 721, {sombolon ornin}: "Frogs," 196, {to sometukhon exion}; "Eccl." 792; Hor. "Od." iii. 27, 1-7.

(4) See "Anab." III. i. 4; "Symp." iv. 48.

(5) Or, "if his supposed signs from heaven had only proven the falsehood of his judgment."

But his mode of dealing with his intimates has another aspect. As regards the ordinary necessities of life, (6) his advice was, "Act as you believe (7) these things may best be done." But in the case of those darker problems, the issues of which are incalculable, he directed his friends to consult the oracle, whether the business should be undertaken or not. "No one," he would say, "who wishes to manage a house or city with success: no one aspiring to guide the helm of state aright, can afford to dipense with aid from above. Doubtless, skill in carpentering, building, smithying, farming, of the art of governing men, together with the theory of these processes, and the sciences of arithmetic, economy, strategy, are affairs of study, and within the grasp of human intelligence. Yet there is a side even of these, and that not the least important, which the gods reserve to themselves, the bearing of which is hidden from mortal vision. Thus, let a man sow a field or plant a farm never so well, yet he cannot foretell who will gather in the fruits: another may build him a house of fairest proportion, yet he knows not who will inhabit it. Neither can a general foresee whether it will profit him to conduct a campaign, nor a politician be certain whether his leadership will turn to evil or good. Nor can the man who weds a fair wife, looking forward to joy, know whether through her he shall not reap sorrow. Neither can he who has built up a powerful connection in the state know whether he shall not by means of it be cast out of his city. To suppose that all these matters lay within the scope of human judgment, to the exclusion of the preternatural, was preternatural folly. Nor was it less extravagant to go and consult the will of Heaven on any questions which it is given to us to decide by dint of learning. As though a man should inquire, "Am I to choose an expert driver as my coachman, or one who has never handled the reins?" "Shall I appoint a mariner to be skipper of my vessel, or a landsman?" And so with respect to all we may know by numbering, weighing, and measuring. To seek advice from Heaven on such points was a sort of profanity. "Our duty is plain," he would observe; "where we are permitted to work through our natural faculties, there let us by all means apply them. But in things which are hidden, let us seek to gain knowledge from above, by divination; for the gods," he added, "grant signs to those to whom they will be gracious."

But his way of interacting with his close friends has another side. When it comes to the basic needs of life, his advice was, "Do what you believe is best for these things." However, for those deeper issues with unpredictable outcomes, he encouraged his friends to consult the oracle about whether to proceed or not. "No one," he would say, "who wants to successfully manage a household or a city, or who aspires to properly steer the government, can afford to ignore guidance from above. Certainly, skills in carpentry, construction, metalworking, farming, the art of leading people, as well as the theory behind these tasks, and the sciences of math, economics, and strategy, are subjects of study and within human understanding. Yet, there’s still an important side to these that the gods keep for themselves, the impact of which is beyond human sight. A person may sow a field or plant a farm perfectly, but they can’t predict who will harvest the crops. Someone might build them a beautifully proportioned house, but they don’t know who will live there. A general can’t foresee if a campaign will benefit him, nor can a politician be sure his leadership will lead to good or bad outcomes. Even a man who marries a lovely wife, hoping for happiness, can’t know if he’ll end up with sorrow because of her. Similarly, a person who has built a strong network in the state cannot know if that will lead to being ousted from his city. To believe that all these matters are entirely within human judgment, without considering the supernatural, is foolishness. It’s equally absurd to consult the will of Heaven on questions we can decide through our own knowledge. It’s like asking, “Should I choose an expert driver as my coachman or someone who has never held the reins?" “Should I appoint a sailor as the captain of my ship, or a landlubber?” And so on, regarding everything we can understand through counting, weighing, and measuring. Seeking divine guidance on such matters is a form of disrespect. "Our path is clear," he would say; "where we can use our natural abilities, we should absolutely apply them. But for things that are hidden, let’s seek knowledge from above through divination; for the gods," he added, "give signs to those they choose to bless."

 (6) Or, "in the sphere of the determined," {ta anagkaia} = certa,
    quorum eventus est necessarius; "things positive, the law-ordained
    department of life," as we might say. See Grote, "H. G." i. ch.
    xvi. 500 and passim.

 (7) Reading {os nomizoien}, or if {os enomizen}, translate "As to
    things with certain results, he advised them to do them in the way
    in which he believed they would be done best"; i.e. he did not
    say, "follow your conscience," but, "this course seems best to me
    under the circumstances."
 (6) Or, "in the realm of the inevitable," {ta anagkaia} = certain, whose outcomes are necessary; "things certain, the law-governed area of life," as we might put it. See Grote, "H. G." i. ch. xvi. 500 and passim.

 (7) Reading {os nomizoien}, or if {os enomizen}, translate "Regarding things with certain outcomes, he advised them to handle them in the way he believed would work best"; i.e. he didn't say, "follow your conscience," but, "this approach seems best to me given the situation."

Again, Socrates ever lived in the public eye; at early morning he was to be seen betaking himself to one of the promenades, or wrestling-grounds; at noon he would appear with the gathering crowds in the market-place; and as day declined, wherever the largest throng might be encountered, there was he to be found, talking for the most part, while any one who chose might stop and listen. Yet no one ever heard him say, or saw him do anything impious or irreverent. Indeed, in contrast to others he set his face against all discussion of such high matters as the nature of the Universe; how the "kosmos," as the savants (8) phrase it, came into being; (9) or by what forces the celestial phenomena arise. To trouble one's brain about such matters was, he argued, to play the fool. He would ask first: Did these investigators feel their knowledge of things human so complete that they betook themselves to these lofty speculations? Or did they maintain that they were playing their proper parts in thus neglecting the affairs of man to speculate on the concerns of God? He was astonished they did not see how far these problems lay beyond mortal ken; since even those who pride themselves most on their discussion of these points differ from each other, as madmen do. For just as some madmen, he said, have no apprehension of what is truly terrible, others fear where no fear is; some are ready to say and do anything in public without the slightest symptom of shame; (10) others think they ought not so much as to set foot among their fellow-men; some honour neither temple, nor altar, nor aught else sacred to the name of God; others bow down to stocks and stones and worship the very beasts:—so is it with those thinkers whose minds are cumbered with cares (11) concerning the Universal Nature. One sect (12) has discovered that Being is one and indivisible. Another (13) that it is infinite in number. If one (14) proclaims that all things are in a continual flux, another (15) replies that nothing can possibly be moved at any time. The theory of the universe as a process of birth and death is met by the counter theory, that nothing ever could be born or ever will die.

Once again, Socrates lived his life in public view; in the early morning, you could see him walking to one of the parks or wrestling areas; at noon, he would join the growing crowds in the marketplace; and as the day ended, wherever the largest group of people gathered, there he would be, mostly talking, while anyone who wanted could stop and listen. Yet, no one ever heard him say or saw him do anything disrespectful or irreverent. In fact, unlike others, he dismissed all discussions about big topics like the nature of the Universe; how the "kosmos," as the experts call it, came to be; or what forces cause celestial events. He argued that worrying about such matters was just foolishness. He would first ask: Did these researchers really think their understanding of human affairs was so complete that they could afford to discuss high-level speculations? Or did they believe they were fulfilling their responsibilities by ignoring human concerns to ponder divine issues? He was amazed that they didn’t realize how far beyond human understanding these problems were; as even those who take pride in discussing them often disagree wildly, much like madmen. Just as some madmen lack awareness of what is genuinely terrifying while others fear things that aren't scary at all; some readily say and do anything in public without shame; others feel they shouldn’t even walk among their fellow humans; some disrespect neither temple nor altar nor anything sacred to God’s name; while others worship idols and even animals—they are similar to thinkers whose minds are troubled by concerns about Universal Nature. One school of thought claims that Being is one and indivisible. Another argues it is infinite in number. If one asserts that everything is in constant change, another counters that nothing can ever be moved at all. The idea of the universe as a cycle of birth and death is opposed by the belief that nothing could ever be born or die.

 (8) Lit. "the sophists." See H. Sidgwick, "J. of Philol." iv. 1872; v.
    1874.

 (9) Reading {ephu}. Cf. Lucian, "Icaromenip." xlvi. 4, in imitation of
    this passage apparently; or if {ekhei}, translate "is arranged."
    See Grote, "H. G." viii. 573.

 (10) See "Anab." V. iv. 30.

 (11) See Arist. "Clouds," 101, {merimnophrontistai kaloi te kagathoi}.

 (12) e.g. Xenophanes and Parmenides, see Grote, "Plato," I. i. 16
    foll.

 (13) e.g. Leucippus and Democritus, ib. 63 foll.

 (14) e.g. Heraclitus, ib. 27 foll.

 (15) e.g. Zeno, ib. ii. 96.
(8) Literally, "the sophists." See H. Sidgwick, "J. of Philol." iv. 1872; v. 1874.

(9) Reading {ephu}. See Lucian, "Icaromenip." xlvi. 4, apparently imitating this passage; or if {ekhei}, translate as "is arranged." See Grote, "H. G." viii. 573.

(10) See "Anab." V. iv. 30.

(11) See Arist. "Clouds," 101, {merimnophrontistai kaloi te kagathoi}.

(12) For example, Xenophanes and Parmenides, see Grote, "Plato," I. i. 16 and following.

(13) For example, Leucippus and Democritus, ib. 63 and following.

(14) For example, Heraclitus, ib. 27 and following.

(15) For example, Zeno, ib. ii. 96.

But the questioning of Socrates on the merits of these speculators sometimes took another form. The student of human learning expects, he said, to make something of his studies for the benefit of himself or others, as he likes. Do these explorers into the divine operations hope that when they have discovered by what forces the various phenomena occur, they will create winds and waters at will and fruitful seasons? Will they manipulate these and the like to suit their needs? or has no such notion perhaps ever entered their heads, and will they be content simply to know how such things come into existence? But if this was his mode of describing those who meddle with such matters as these, he himself never wearied of discussing human topics. What is piety? what is impiety? What is the beautiful? what the ugly? What the noble? what the base? What are meant by just and unjust? what by sobriety and madness? what by courage and cowardice? What is a state? what is a statesman? what is a ruler over men? what is a ruling character? and other like problems, the knowledge of which, as he put it, conferred a patent of nobility on the possessor, (16) whereas those who lacked the knowledge might deservedly be stigmatised as slaves.

But Socrates’ questioning about the value of these thinkers sometimes took a different direction. He said the student of human knowledge expects to gain something from his studies for his own benefit or that of others, as he wishes. Do these explorers of divine workings hope that once they've figured out what forces cause various phenomena, they'll be able to create winds and waters at will and produce bountiful seasons? Will they be able to control these things to meet their needs? Or has that idea never even crossed their minds, and will they simply be satisfied with understanding how such things come to be? However, while this was how he described those who dabbled in such matters, he himself never grew tired of discussing human issues. What is piety? What is impiety? What is beautiful? What is ugly? What is noble? What is base? What do we mean by just and unjust? What about moderation and madness? What is courage? What is cowardice? What is a state? What is a statesman? What is a ruler over people? What is a ruling character? And similar questions, the knowledge of which, as he put it, granted a kind of nobility to the one who understood, while those who lacked this knowledge could rightly be considered slaves.

 (16) Or, "was distinctive of the 'beautiful and good.'" For the phrase
    see below, ii. 2 et passim.
(16) Or, "was characteristic of the 'beautiful and good.'" For the phrase see below, ii. 2 et passim.

Now, in so far as the opinions of Socrates were unknown to the world at large, it is not surprising that the court should draw false conclusions respecting them; but that facts patent to all should have been ignored is indeed astonishing.

Now, since Socrates' opinions were not widely known, it's not surprising that the court would make incorrect assumptions about them; however, it is truly shocking that obvious facts were overlooked.

At one time Socrates was a member of the Council, (17) he had taken the senatorial oath, and sworn "as a member of that house to act in conformity with the laws." It was thus he chanced to be President of the Popular Assembly, (18) when that body was seized with a desire to put the nine (19) generals, Thrasyllus, Erasinides, and the rest, to death by a single inclusive vote. Whereupon, in spite of the bitter resentment of the people, and the menaces of several influential citizens, he refused to put the question, esteeming it of greater importance faithfully to abide by the oath which he had taken, than to gratify the people wrongfully, or to screen himself from the menaces of the mighty. The fact being, that with regard to the care bestowed by the gods upon men, his belief differed widely from that of the multitude. Whereas most people seem to imagine that the gods know in part, and are ignorant in part, Socrates believed firmly that the gods know all things—both the things that are said and the things that are done, and the things that are counselled in the silent chambers of the heart. Moreover, they are present everywhere, and bestow signs upon man concerning all the things of man.

At one point, Socrates was part of the Council; he had taken the senatorial oath and pledged "as a member of that body to act in accordance with the laws." This led him to become President of the Popular Assembly when that group decided to execute the nine generals—Thrasyllus, Erasinides, and the others—with a single vote. Despite the intense anger of the people and threats from several powerful citizens, he refused to bring the matter to a vote, believing it was more important to stick to the oath he had taken than to wrongly please the public or protect himself from the threats of the influential. His belief about the care the gods have for humanity was quite different from that of the average person. While most people think the gods have limited knowledge, Socrates was convinced that the gods know everything—both what is said and done, as well as what is thought in the hidden corners of the heart. Additionally, they are present everywhere and provide signs to humanity about all aspects of life.

 (17) Or "Senate." Lit. "the Boule."

 (18) Lit. "Epistates of the Ecclesia." See Grote, "H. G." viii. 271;
    Plat. "Apol." 32 B.

 (19) {ennea} would seem to be a slip of the pen for {okto}, eight. See
    "Hell." I. v. 16; vi. 16; vi. 29; vii. 1 foll.
(17) Or "Senate." Literally "the Boule."

(18) Literally "Epistates of the Ecclesia." See Grote, "H. G." viii. 271; Plat. "Apol." 32 B.

(19) {ennea} seems to be a typo for {okto}, eight. See "Hell." I. v. 16; vi. 16; vi. 29; vii. 1 and following.

I can, therefore, but repeat my former words. It is a marvel to me how the Athenians came to be persuaded that Socrates fell short of sober-mindedness as touching the gods. A man who never ventured one impious word or deed against the gods we worship, but whose whole language concerning them, and his every act, closely coincided, word for word, and deed for deed, with all we deem distinctive of devoutest piety.

I can only repeat what I said before. It's amazing to me how the Athenians were convinced that Socrates lacked sound judgment when it comes to the gods. He never said or did anything disrespectful toward the gods we worship; in fact, everything he said and did perfectly matched what we consider to be true devotion.

II

II

No less surprising to my mind is the belief that Socrates corrupted the young. This man, who, beyond what has been already stated, kept his appetites and passions under strict control, who was pre-eminently capable of enduring winter's cold and summer's heat and every kind of toil, who was so schooled to curtail his needs that with the scantiest of means he never lacked sufficiency—is it credible that such a man could have made others irreverent or lawless, or licentious, or effeminate in face of toil? Was he not rather the saving of many through the passion for virtue which he roused in them, and the hope he infused that through careful management of themselves they might grow to be truly beautiful and good—not indeed that he ever undertook to be a teacher of virtue, but being evidently virtuous himself he made those who associated with him hope that by imitating they might at last resemble him.

I find it just as surprising that people believe Socrates corrupted the youth. This man, who, in addition to what has already been said, kept his desires and passions firmly in check, who was exceptionally able to endure the cold of winter and the heat of summer along with all kinds of hard work, who had trained himself to limit his needs so effectively that even with the bare minimum he never felt lacking—can it really be believed that such a person could have led others to become disrespectful, lawless, indulgent, or weak in the face of hard work? Was he not, instead, a source of inspiration for many through the passion for virtue he ignited in them and the hope he instilled that through careful self-management they could become truly beautiful and good? Not that he ever claimed to be a teacher of virtue, but since he was obviously virtuous himself, those who spent time with him hoped that by imitating him, they might eventually become like him.

But let it not be inferred that he was negligent of his own body or approved of those who neglected theirs. If excess of eating, counteracted by excess of toil, was a dietary of which he disapproved, (1) to gratify the natural claim of appetite in conjunction with moderate exercise was a system he favoured, as tending to a healthy condition of the body without trammelling the cultivation of the spirit. On the other hand, there was nothing dandified or pretentious about him; he indulged in no foppery of shawl or shoes, or other effeminacy of living.

But don’t think he didn’t take care of himself or that he supported others who didn’t. While he disapproved of overeating balanced by excessive work, he favored enjoying food in moderation along with regular exercise, as this promoted good health without hindering personal growth. He was also far from being flashy or showy; he didn’t engage in any pretentiousness with things like fancy shawls or shoes, or any other indulgent lifestyle.

 (1) See  (Plat.) "Erast." 132 C.
(1) See (Plat.) "Erast." 132 C.

Least of all did he tend to make his companions greedy of money. He would not, while restraining passion generally, make capital out of the one passion which attached others to himself; and by this abstinence, he believed, he was best consulting his own freedom; in so much that he stigmatised those who condescended to take wages for their society as vendors of their own persons, because they were compelled to discuss for the benefits of their paymasters. What surprised him was that any one possessing virtue should deign to ask money as its price instead of simply finding his reward in the acquisition of an honest friend, as if the new-fledged soul of honour could forget her debt of gratitude to her greatest benefactor.

Least of all did he make his friends greedy for money. He wouldn’t, while generally controlling his passions, profit from the one passion that drew others to him; and by not doing so, he believed he was best preserving his own freedom. He even criticized those who lowered themselves to accept payment for their companionship, calling them sellers of their own selves, since they had to cater to the interests of their employers. What shocked him was that anyone with virtue would stoop to ask for money in exchange for their worth instead of just finding their reward in forming a genuine friendship, as if the newly awakened spirit of honor could forget its gratitude to its greatest benefactor.

For himself, without making any such profession, he was content to believe that those who accepted his views would play their parts as good and true friends to himself and one another their lives long. Once more then: how should a man of this character corrupt the young? unless the careful cultivation of virtue be corruption.

For himself, without claiming anything like that, he was happy to believe that those who agreed with him would be good and true friends to him and to each other for the rest of their lives. So again: how could a man like this corrupt the young? Unless nurturing virtue is considered corruption.

But, says the accuser, (2) by all that's sacred! did not Socrates cause his associates to despise the established laws when he dwelt on the folly of appointing state officers by ballot? (3) a principle which, he said, no one would care to apply in selecting a pilot or a flute-player or in any similar case, where a mistake would be far less disastrous than in matters political. Words like these, according to the accuser, tended to incite the young to contemn the established constitution, rendering them violent and headstrong. But for myself I think that those who cultivate wisdom and believe themselves able to instruct their fellow-citizens as to their interests are least likely to become partisans of violence. They are too well aware that to violence attach enmities and dangers, whereas results as good may be obtained by persuasion safely and amicably. For the victim of violence hates with vindictiveness as one from whom something precious has been stolen, while the willing subject of persuasion is ready to kiss the hand which has done him a service. Hence compulsion is not the method of him who makes wisdom his study, but of him who wields power untempered by reflection. Once more: the man who ventures on violence needs the support of many to fight his battles, while he whose strength lies in persuasiveness triumphs single-handed, for he is conscious of a cunning to compel consent unaided. And what has such a one to do with the spilling of blood? since how ridiculous it were to do men to death rather than turn to account the trusty service of the living.

But, says the accuser, (2) by all that's sacred! didn't Socrates make his friends disrespect the established laws when he talked about the foolishness of choosing state officers by ballot? (3) A principle that, he suggested, no one would want to apply when picking a pilot or a flute player or in any similar situation, where a mistake would be far less severe than in political matters. According to the accuser, words like these encouraged the youth to scorn the established constitution, making them violent and reckless. But personally, I think that those who seek wisdom and believe they can guide their fellow citizens regarding their interests are the least likely to support violence. They know all too well that violence brings enmity and danger, while good outcomes can be achieved through safe and friendly persuasion. The victim of violence holds a grudge like someone who has had something precious stolen, while the willing recipient of persuasion is ready to show gratitude to the one who has helped him. Thus, coercion is not the approach of someone who seeks wisdom, but of someone who abuses power without thought. Once again: the person who resorts to violence needs the backing of many to fight his battles, while the one whose strength lies in persuasion can succeed on their own, as they possess the cleverness to gain agreement without assistance. And what does someone like this have to do with shedding blood? How absurd it would be to kill others instead of making use of the reliable service of the living.

 (2) {o kategoros} = Polycrates possibly. See M. Schantz, op. cit.,
    "Einleitun," S. 6: "Die Anklagerede des Polykrates"; Introduction,
    p. xxxii. foll.

 (3) i.e. staking the election of a magistrate on the colour of a bean.
    See Aristot. "Ath. Pol." viii. 2, and Dr. Sandys ad loc.
(2) {o kategoros} = Possibly Polycrates. See M. Schantz, op. cit.,
    "Introduction," p. 6: "The Accusation Speech of Polycrates"; Introduction,
    p. xxxii. foll.

(3) i.e. basing the election of a magistrate on the color of a bean.
    See Aristot. "Ath. Pol." viii. 2, and Dr. Sandys ad loc.

But, the accuser answers, the two men (4) who wrought the greatest evils to the state at any time—to wit, Critias and Alcibiades—were both companions of Socrates—Critias the oligarch, and Alcibiades the democrat. Where would you find a more arrant thief, savage, and murderer (5) than the one? where such a portent of insolence, incontinence, and high-handedness as the other? For my part, in so far as these two wrought evil to the state, I have no desire to appear as the apologist of either. I confine myself to explaining what this intimacy of theirs with Socrates really was.

But, the accuser responds, the two men (4) who did the most harm to the state at any time—namely, Critias and Alcibiades—were both associates of Socrates—Critias the oligarch and Alcibiades the democrat. Where would you find a bigger thief, savage, and murderer (5) than one of them? Where such a shocking level of arrogance, indulgence, and arrogance as the other? Personally, as far as these two harmed the state, I don't want to seem like I’m defending either of them. I’ll just explain what their relationship with Socrates really was.

 (4) See "Hell." I. and II. passim.

 (5) Reading {kleptistatos te kai biaiotatos kai phonikotatos}, or if
    {pleonektistatos te kai biaiotatis}, translate "such a manner of
    greed and violence as the one, of insolence, etc., as the other?"
    See Grote, "H. G." viii. 337.
(4) See "Hell." I. and II. passim.

(5) Reading {kleptistatos te kai biaiotatos kai phonikotatos}, or if {pleonektistatos te kai biaiotatis}, translate "such a manner of greed and violence as the one, of insolence, etc., as the other?" See Grote, "H. G." viii. 337.

Never were two more ambitious citizens seen at Athens. Ambition was in their blood. If they were to have their will, all power was to be in their hands; their fame was to eclipse all other. Of Socrates they knew—first that he lived an absolutely independent life on the scantiest means; next that he was self-disciplined to the last degree in respect of pleasures; lastly that he was so formidable in debate that there was no antagonist he could not twist round his little finger. Such being their views, and such the character of the pair, which is the more probable: that they sought the society of Socrates because they felt the fascination of his life, and were attracted by the bearing of the man? or because they thought, if only we are leagued with him we shall become adepts in statecraft and unrivalled in the arts of speech and action? For my part I believe that if the choice from Heaven had been given them to live such a life as they saw Socrates living to its close, or to die, they would both have chosen death.

Never were there two more ambitious citizens in Athens. Ambition was in their blood. If they had their way, all power would be in their hands, and their fame would outshine everyone else's. They knew about Socrates—first, that he lived an entirely independent life on minimal resources; next, that he was extremely self-disciplined regarding pleasures; and finally, that he was so skilled in debate that there was no opponent he couldn't easily manipulate. Given their views and the nature of the duo, what seems more likely: that they sought out Socrates because they were drawn to the allure of his lifestyle and impressed by his demeanor? Or because they thought that if they teamed up with him, they would master politics and become unmatched in speaking and action? Personally, I believe that if they had been given the choice from Heaven to live the life that Socrates lived until the end or to die, they would both have chosen death.

Their acts are a conclusive witness to their characters. They no sooner felt themselves to be the masters of those they came in contact with than they sprang aside from Socrates and plunged into that whirl of politics but for which they might never have sought his society.

Their actions clearly show who they are. As soon as they felt in control of those around them, they turned away from Socrates and jumped into the chaotic world of politics, which they might never have pursued if it weren't for him.

It may be objected: before giving his companions lessons in politics Socrates had better have taught them sobriety. (6) Without disputing the principle, I would point out that a teacher cannot fail to discover to his pupils his method of carrying out his own precepts, and this along with argumentative encouragement. Now I know that Socrates disclosed himself to his companions as a beautiful and noble being, who would reason and debate with them concerning virtue and other human interests in the noblest manner. And of these two I know that as long as they were companions of Socrates even they were temperate, not assuredly from fear of being fined or beaten by Socrates, but because they were persuaded for the nonce of the excellence of such conduct.

It might be argued that before teaching his friends about politics, Socrates should have focused on teaching them self-control. (6) Without contesting this idea, I want to emphasize that a teacher inevitably reveals his own approach to living by the principles he teaches, along with providing thoughtful encouragement. I know that Socrates presented himself to his friends as an admirable and noble person, engaging with them in discussions about virtue and other important human matters in the most elevated way. During their time together, I know that as long as they were with Socrates, they displayed self-restraint, not out of fear of being punished by him but because they were momentarily convinced of the value of such behavior.

 (6) {sophrosune} = "sound-mindedness," "temperence." See below, IV.
    iii. 1.
(6) {sophrosune} = "sound-mindedness," "temperance." See below, IV. iii. 1.

Perhaps some self-styled philosophers (7) may here answer: "Nay, the man truly just can never become unjust, the temperate man can never become intemperate, the man who has learnt any subject of knowledge can never be as though he had learnt it not." That, however, is not my own conclusion. It is with the workings of the soul as with those of the body; want of exercise of the organ leads to inability of function, here bodily, there spiritual, so that we can neither do the things that we should nor abstain from the things we should not. And that is why fathers keep their sons, however temperate they may be, out of the reach of wicked men, considering that if the society of the good is a training in virtue so also is the society of the bad its dissolution.

Maybe some self-proclaimed philosophers (7) will argue: "No, a truly just person can never become unjust, a temperate person can never become intemperate, and someone who has learned any subject will never act as if they haven't." However, that's not what I believe. The workings of the soul are similar to those of the body; lack of exercise in an organ leads to its inability to function, whether physically or spiritually, so we can't do the things we should or avoid the things we shouldn't. That's why parents keep their sons, no matter how temperate they are, away from wicked people, believing that just as the company of good people nurtures virtue, so too does the company of bad people destroy it.

 (7) In reference to some such tenet as that of Antisthenes ap. Diog.
    Laert. VI. ix. 30, {areskei d' autois kai ten areten didakten
    einai, katha phesin 'Antisthenes en to 'Rraklei kai anapobleton
    uparkhein}. Cf. Plat. "Protag." 340 D, 344 D.
 (7) Regarding a belief like that of Antisthenes as cited in Diogenes Laertius VI. ix. 30, {they find pleasure in the idea that virtue can be taught, as Antisthenes states in the "Rraklei" and that it can exist independently}. See also Plato's "Protag." 340 D, 344 D.

To this the poet (8) is a witness, who says:

To this, the poet (8) can attest, who says:

    "From the noble thou shalt be instructed in nobleness; but, and if
    thou minglest with the base thou wilt destroy what wisdom thou
    hast now";
"From the noble, you will learn about nobility; but if you associate with the lowly, you will ruin the wisdom you have now."

And he (9) who says:

And he who says:

    "But the good man has his hour of baseness as well as his hour of
    virtue"—
"But a good person has their moments of weakness just like they have their moments of strength."

to whose testimony I would add my own. For I see that it is impossible to remember a long poem without practice and repetition; so is forgetfulness of the words of instruction engendered in the heart that has ceased to value them. With the words of warning fades the recollection of the very condition of mind in which the soul yearned after holiness; and once forgetting this, what wonder that the man should let slip also the memory of virtue itself! Again I see that a man who falls into habits of drunkenness or plunges headlong into licentious love, loses his old power of practising the right and abstaining from the wrong. Many a man who has found frugality easy whilst passion was cold, no sooner falls in love than he loses the faculty at once, and in his prodigal expenditure of riches he will no longer withhold his hand from gains which in former days were too base to invite his touch. Where then is the difficulty of supposing that a man may be temperate to-day, and to-morrow the reverse; or that he who once has had it in his power to act virtuously may not quite lose that power? (10) To myself, at all events, it seems that all beautiful and noble things are the result of constant practice and training; and pre-eminently the virtue of temperance, seeing that in one and the same bodily frame pleasures are planted and spring up side by side with the soul and keep whispering in her ear, "Have done with self-restraint, make haste to gratify us and the body." (11)

to whose testimony I would add my own. I see that it’s impossible to remember a long poem without practice and repetition; just like forgetfulness of the teachings fades in a heart that no longer values them. With the warnings, the memory of the mindset in which the soul longed for holiness also disappears; and once that is forgotten, is it any surprise that a person also loses the memory of virtue itself? I also notice that someone who falls into habits of drinking or dives headfirst into reckless love loses their old ability to do what’s right and avoid what’s wrong. Many who found it easy to be frugal while passion was low, as soon as they fall in love, immediately lose that ability, and in their reckless spending, they no longer hold back from pursuing gains that once seemed too lowly to consider. So, is it really hard to believe that a person can be self-controlled today and the opposite tomorrow; or that someone who once had the ability to act virtuously might not completely lose that power? To me, it seems that all beautiful and noble things come from constant practice and training; especially the virtue of temperance, since in the same body, pleasures are planted and grow alongside the soul, constantly whispering, "Forget self-control, hurry to satisfy us and your body."

 (8) Theognis, 35, 36. See "Symp." ii. 4; Plat. "Men." 95 D.

 (9) The author is unknown. See Plat. "Protag." l.c.

 (10) Cf. "Cyrop." V. i. 9 foll.; VI. i. 41.

 (11) See my remarks, "Hellenica Essays," p. 371 foll.
(8) Theognis, 35, 36. See "Symp." ii. 4; Plat. "Men." 95 D.

(9) The author is unknown. See Plat. "Protag." l.c.

(10) Cf. "Cyrop." V. i. 9 foll.; VI. i. 41.

(11) See my remarks, "Hellenica Essays," p. 371 foll.

But to return to Critias and Alcibiades, I repeat that as long as they lived with Socrates they were able by his support to dominate their ignoble appetites; (12) but being separated from him, Critias had to fly to Thessaly, (13) where he consorted with fellows better versed in lawlessness than justice. And Alcibiades fared no better. His personal beauty on the one hand incited bevies of fine ladies (14) to hunt him down as fair spoil, while on the other hand his influence in the state and among the allies exposed him to the corruption of many an adept in the arts of flattery; honoured by the democracy and stepping easily to the front rank he behaved like an athlete who in the games of the Palaestra is so assured of victory that he neglects his training; thus he presently forgot the duty which he owed himself.

But to get back to Critias and Alcibiades, I want to emphasize that while they were living with Socrates, they were able to control their base desires thanks to his support; however, once they were separated from him, Critias had to flee to Thessaly, where he ran with people who knew more about lawlessness than justice. Alcibiades didn't have it any better. His good looks attracted many beautiful women who pursued him like a prize, while his political influence and connections made him vulnerable to the manipulations of many skilled flatterers. Celebrated by the democracy and easily rising to prominence, he acted like an athlete in the Palaestra who is so confident in winning that he neglects his training; as a result, he soon forgot the responsibilities he had toward himself.

 (12) Cf.  (Plat.) "Theag." 130 A.

 (13) See "Hell." II. iii. 36.

 (14) Cf. Plut. "Ages.," "Alcib."
(12) Cf.  (Plat.) "Theag." 130 A.

(13) See "Hell." II. iii. 36.

(14) Cf. Plut. "Ages.," "Alcib."

Such were the misadventures of these two. Is the sequel extraordinary? Inflated with the pride of ancestry, (15) exalted by their wealth, puffed up by power, sapped to the soul's core by a host of human tempters, separate moreover for many a long day from Socrates—what wonder that they reached the full stature of arrogancy! And for the offences of these two Socrates is to be held responsible! The accuser will have it so. But for the fact that in early days, when they were both young and of an age when dereliction from good feeling and self-restraint might have been expected, this same Socrates kept them modest and well-behaved, not one word of praise is uttered by the accuser for all this. That is not the measure of justice elsewhere meted. Would a master of the harp or flute, would a teacher of any sort who has turned out proficient pupils, be held to account because one of them goes away to another teacher and turns out to be a failure? Or what father, if he have a son who in the society of a certain friend remains an honest lad, but falling into the company of some other becomes a good-for-nothing, will that father straightway accuse the earlier instructor? Will not he rather, in proportion as the boy deteriorates in the company of the latter, bestow more heartfelt praise upon the former? What father, himself sharing the society of his own children, is held to blame for their transgressions, if only his own goodness be established? Here would have been a fair test to apply to Socrates: Was he guilty of any base conduct himself? If so let him be set down as a knave, but if, on the contrary, he never faltered in sobriety from beginning to end, how in the name of justice is he to be held to account for a baseness which was not in him?

Such were the misadventures of these two. Is the sequel extraordinary? Filled with pride from their lineage, elevated by their wealth, boosted by power, and deeply affected by a multitude of human temptations, and separated for a long time from Socrates—what a surprise that they became incredibly arrogant! And for the wrongdoings of these two, Socrates is to be blamed! The accuser insists on it. But despite the fact that in their youth, when they could have easily strayed from good behavior and self-control, this same Socrates kept them humble and well-behaved, not a single word of acknowledgment comes from the accuser for this. That’s not the standard of justice applied in other cases. Would a master of the harp or flute, or any teacher who has produced skilled students, be held responsible just because one of them leaves for another teacher and ends up failing? Or what father, if he has a son who is a good kid around a certain friend, but becomes worthless in the company of another, would immediately blame the earlier teacher? Wouldn’t he be more likely to praise the first one as the boy worsens around the latter? What father, who shares time with his children, is blamed for their wrongdoings if his own character is solid? Here’s a fair question to ask about Socrates: Did he ever act in a dishonorable way? If so, then he should be called a fraud, but if he remained consistently virtuous from start to finish, how can he be held accountable for faults that weren't his?

 (15) Or, "became overweening in arrogance." Cf. "Henry VIII. II. iv.
    110": "But your heart is crammed with arrogancy, spleen, and
    pride."
(15) Or, "became excessively arrogant." Cf. "Henry VIII. II. iv. 110": "But your heart is filled with arrogance, resentment, and pride."

I go further: if, short of being guilty of any wrong himself, he saw the evil doings of others with approval, reason were he should be held blameworthy. Listen then: Socrates was well aware that Critias was attached to Euthydemus, (16) aware too that he was endeavouring to deal by him after the manner of those wantons whose love is carnal of the body. From this endeavour he tried to deter him, pointing out how illiberal a thing it was, how ill befitting a man of honour to appear as a beggar before him whom he loved, in whose eyes he would fain be precious, ever petitioning for something base to give and base to get.

I’ll go further: if someone isn’t guilty of any wrongdoing but approves of the bad actions of others, then he should also be held accountable. Listen: Socrates knew that Critias was attached to Euthydemus and that he was trying to approach him like those shameless people whose love is purely physical. Socrates tried to dissuade him, pointing out how degrading it was and how inappropriate for a man of honor to act like a beggar in front of someone he loved, trying to make himself valuable while constantly asking for something lowly to give and receive.

 (16) See below, IV. ii. 1 (if the same person).
(16) See below, IV. ii. 1 (if it's the same person).

But when this reasoning fell on deaf ears and Critias refused to be turned aside, Socrates, as the story goes, took occasion of the presence of a whole company and of Euthydemus to remark that Critias appeared to be suffering from a swinish affection, or else why this desire to rub himself against Euthydemus like a herd of piglings scraping against stones.

But when this reasoning went nowhere and Critias wouldn't listen, Socrates, as the story goes, used the opportunity of the entire group being there along with Euthydemus to point out that Critias seemed to be acting really strangely, or else why would he have this urge to rub up against Euthydemus like a bunch of piglets scraping against rocks?

The hatred of Critias to Socrates doubtless dates from this incident. He treasured it up against him, and afterwards, when he was one of the Thirty and associated with Charicles as their official lawgiver, (17) he framed the law against teaching the art of words (18) merely from a desire to vilify Socrates. He was at a loss to know how else to lay hold of him except by levelling against him the vulgar charge (19) against philosophers, by which he hoped to prejudice him with the public. It was a charge quite unfounded as regards Socrates, if I may judge from anything I ever heard fall from his lips myself or have learnt about him from others. But the animus of Critias was clear. At the time when the Thirty were putting citizens, highly respectable citizens, to death wholesale, and when they were egging on one man after another to the commission of crime, Socrates let fall an observation: "It would be sufficiently extraordinary if the keeper of a herd of cattle (20) who was continually thinning and impoverishing his cattle did not admit himself to be a sorry sort of herdsman, but that a ruler of the state who was continually thinning and impoverishing the citizens should neither be ashamed nor admit himself to be a sorry sort of ruler was more extraordinary still." The remark being reported to the government, Socrates was summoned by Critias and Charicles, who proceeded to point out the law and forbade him to converse with the young. "Was it open to him," Socrates inquired of the speaker, "in case he failed to understand their commands in any point, to ask for an explanation?"

Critias's hatred for Socrates definitely started with this incident. He held onto it and later, when he was one of the Thirty and working with Charicles as their official lawmaker, he created a law against teaching rhetoric just to defame Socrates. He couldn’t think of any other way to attack him except by using the common accusation against philosophers, hoping it would turn public opinion against him. This accusation was completely unfounded regarding Socrates, from anything I’ve ever heard him say or learned from others. But Critias's motives were clear. At a time when the Thirty were executing upstanding citizens en masse and encouraging people to commit crimes, Socrates made a comment: "It would be quite surprising if a cattle herder who was constantly reducing and harming his herd didn’t see himself as a poor herdsman, but even more surprising is that a ruler of a state who continually harms and diminishes his citizens wouldn’t feel ashamed or see himself as a bad ruler." When this remark got back to the government, Socrates was summoned by Critias and Charicles, who pointed out the law and forbade him from talking to the youth. "Is it allowed," Socrates asked the speaker, "if I don’t understand their orders on any point, to ask for clarification?"

 (17) Lit. "Nomothetes." See "Hell." II. iii. 2; Dem. 706. For
    Charicles see Lys. "c. Eratosth." S. 56; Aristot. "Pol." v. 6. 6.

 (18) See Diog. Laert. II. v. ("Socr.")

 (19) i.e. {to ton etto logon kreitto poiein}, "of making the worse
    appear the better cause." Cf. Arist. "Clouds."

 (20) See Dio Chrys. "Or." 43.
(17) Lit. "Lawgiver." See "Hell." II. iii. 2; Dem. 706. For Charicles, see Lys. "c. Eratosth." S. 56; Aristot. "Pol." v. 6. 6.

(18) See Diog. Laert. II. v. ("Socr.")

(19) i.e. {to ton etto logon kreitto poiein}, "making the worse appear as the better argument." Cf. Arist. "Clouds."

(20) See Dio Chrys. "Or." 43.

"Certainly," the two assented.

"Sure," the two agreed.

Then Socrates: I am prepared to obey the laws, but to avoid transgression of the law through ignorance I need instruction: is it on the supposition that the art of words tends to correctness of statement or to incorrectness that you bid us abstain from it? for if the former, it is clear we must abstain from speaking correctly, but if the latter, our endeavour should be to amend our speech.

Then Socrates: I’m ready to follow the laws, but to avoid breaking them due to ignorance, I need guidance. Are you suggesting that the skill of using words leads to accurate statements or inaccurate ones when you advise us to avoid it? If it’s the first case, it’s clear that we should stop speaking correctly. But if it’s the second, we should work to improve our speech.

To which Charicles, in a fit of temper, retorted: In consideration of your ignorance, (21) Socrates, we will frame the prohibition in language better suited to your intelligence: we forbid you to hold any conversation whatsoever with the young.

To which Charicles, in a fit of anger, replied: Given your ignorance, (21) Socrates, we'll put the prohibition in terms that are more appropriate for your understanding: we forbid you to have any conversations at all with the young.

 (21) See Aristot. "de Soph. El." 183 b7.
(21) See Aristot. "de Soph. El." 183 b7.

Then Socrates: To avoid all ambiguity then, or the possibility of my doing anything else than what you are pleased to command, may I ask you to define up to what age a human being is to be considered young?

Then Socrates: To avoid any confusion or the chance that I might do anything other than what you want me to, could you please define how long someone should be considered young?

For just so long a time (Charicles answered) as he is debarred from sitting as a member of the Council, (22) as not having attained to the maturity of wisdom; accordingly you will not hold converse with any one under the age of thirty.

"For as long as he can't sit as a member of the Council," Charicles replied, "because he hasn't reached the maturity of wisdom; therefore, you won’t have conversations with anyone under the age of thirty."

 (22) The Boule or Senate. See W. L. Newman, "Pol. Aristot." i. 326.
(22) The Boule or Senate. See W. L. Newman, "Pol. Aristot." i. 326.

Soc. In making a purchase even, I am not to ask, what is the price of this? if the vendor is under the age of thirty?

Soc. When making a purchase, I shouldn’t ask, “What’s the price of this?” if the seller is under thirty.

Cha. Tut, things of that sort: but you know, Socrates, that you have a way of asking questions, when all the while you know how the matter stands. Let us have no questions of that sort.

Cha. Oh, stuff like that: but you know, Socrates, that you have a knack for asking questions when you already know the answer. Let’s skip the questions like that.

Soc. Nor answers either, I suppose, if the inquiry concerns what I know, as, for instance, where does Charicles live? or where is Critias to be found?

Soc. I guess Nor responds too, if the question is about what I know, like, for example, where does Charicles live? Or where can I find Critias?

Oh yes, of course, things of that kind (replied Charicles), while Critias added: But at the same time you had better have done with your shoemakers, carpenters, and coppersmiths. (23) These must be pretty well trodden out at heel by this time, considering the circulation you have given them.

Oh yes, definitely, things like that (Charicles replied), while Critias added: But at the same time, you might as well be done with your shoemakers, carpenters, and coppersmiths. (23) They must be pretty worn out by now, given how much you've put them to work.

 (23) Cf. Plat. "Gorg." 491 A; "Symp." 221 E; Dio Chrys. "Or." 55, 560
    D, 564 A.
(23) Cf. Plat. "Gorg." 491 A; "Symp." 221 E; Dio Chrys. "Or." 55, 560 D, 564 A.

Soc. And am I to hold away from their attendant topics also—the just, the holy, and the like?

Soc. Am I supposed to avoid discussing their related topics too—the just, the holy, and so on?

Most assuredly (answered Charicles), and from cowherds in particular; or else see that you do not lessen the number of the herd yourself.

Most definitely (answered Charicles), especially from cowherds; or make sure you don’t reduce the size of the herd yourself.

Thus the secret was out. The remark of Socrates about the cattle had come to their ears, and they could not forgive the author of it.

Thus the secret was out. Socrates' comment about the cattle had reached them, and they couldn’t forgive the person who said it.

Perhaps enough has been said to explain the kind of intimacy which had subsisted between Critias and Socrates, and their relation to one another. But I will venture to maintain that where the teacher is not pleasing to the pupil there is no education. Now it cannot be said of Critias and Alcibiades that they associated with Socrates because they found him pleasing to them. And this is true of the whole period. From the first their eyes were fixed on the headship of the state as their final goal. During the time of their intimacy with Socrates there were no disputants whom they were more eager to encounter than professed politicians.

Maybe enough has been said to explain the kind of relationship that existed between Critias and Socrates, and their connection to each other. However, I’ll argue that if a teacher doesn't appeal to the student, true education doesn't happen. It can't be said of Critias and Alcibiades that they connected with Socrates because they found him appealing. This was true throughout that entire period. From the start, they were focused on gaining leadership of the state as their ultimate goal. During their time with Socrates, there were no opponents they were more eager to challenge than established politicians.

Thus the story is told of Alcibiades—how before the age of twenty he engaged his own guardian, Pericles, at that time prime minister of the state, in a discussion concerning laws.

Thus the story is told of Alcibiades—how before turning twenty he got into a debate about the laws with his guardian, Pericles, who was then the prime minister of the state.

Alc. Please, Pericles, can you teach me what a law is?

Alc. Please, Pericles, can you tell me what a law is?

Per. To be sure I can.

Sure, I can do that.

Alc. I should be so much obliged if you would do so. One so often hears the epithet "law-abiding" applied in a complimentary sense; yet, it strikes me, one hardly deserves the compliment, if one does not know what a law is.

Alc. I would really appreciate it if you could do that. People often use the term "law-abiding" as a compliment; however, it seems to me that you don't really deserve that compliment if you don't understand what a law is.

Per. Fortunately there is a ready answer to your difficulty. You wish to know what a law is? Well, those are laws which the majority, being met together in conclave, approve and enact as to what it is right to do, and what it is right to abstain from doing.

Per. Fortunately, there's a straightforward answer to your question. You want to know what a law is? Well, laws are what the majority, gathered together in a meeting, agree upon and establish regarding what is right to do and what is right to avoid doing.

Alc. Enact on the hypothesis that it is right to do what is good? or to do what is bad?

Alc. Do we act on the assumption that it's right to do good or to do bad?

Per. What is good, to be sure, young sir, not what is bad.

Per. What is good, for sure, young man, not what is bad.

Alc. Supposing it is not the majority, but, as in the case of an oligarchy, the minority, who meet and enact the rules of conduct, what are these?

Alc. If it's not the majority, but instead a minority, like in an oligarchy, who comes together to create the rules of behavior, what are these rules?

Per. Whatever the ruling power of the state after deliberation enacts as our duty to do, goes by the name of laws.

Per. Whatever the governing authority of the state decides after considering it, and tells us we must do, is called laws.

Alc. Then if a tyrant, holding the chief power in the state, enacts rules of conduct for the citizens, are these enactments law?

Alc. So if a tyrant, who has the main power in the state, makes rules for how the citizens should behave, are those rules considered law?

Per. Yes, anything which a tyrant as head of the state enacts, also goes by the name of law.

Per. Yes, anything that a tyrant in charge of the state establishes is also called law.

Alc. But, Pericles, violence and lawlessness—how do we define them? Is it not when a stronger man forces a weaker to do what seems right to him—not by persuasion but by compulsion?

Alc. But, Pericles, how do we define violence and lawlessness? Isn't it when a stronger person forces a weaker one to do what seems right to them—not through persuasion but through coercion?

Per. I should say so.

Definitely. I should say so.

Alc. It would seem to follow that if a tyrant, without persuading the citizens, drives them by enactment to do certain things—that is lawlessness?

Alc. It seems that if a tyrant forces the citizens to do certain things through laws without convincing them, isn’t that lawlessness?

Per. You are right; and I retract the statement that measures passed by a tyrant without persuasion of the citizens are law.

Per. You’re right; I take back what I said about measures enacted by a tyrant without the citizens' influence being considered law.

Alc. And what of measures passed by a minority, not by persuasion of the majority, but in the exercise of its power only? Are we, or are we not, to apply the term violence to these?

Alc. And what about actions taken by a minority, not through convincing the majority, but just by using their power? Should we, or should we not, call these actions violence?

Per. I think that anything which any one forces another to do without persuasion, whether by enactment or not, is violence rather than law.

Per. I believe that anything someone compels another person to do without convincing them, whether through rules or not, is more like violence than law.

Alc. It would seem that everything which the majority, in the exercise of its power over the possessors of wealth, and without persuading them, chooses to enact, is of the nature of violence rather than of law?

Alc. It seems that whatever the majority decides to impose on those who have wealth, without convincing them, is more about force than about actual law?

To be sure (answered Pericles), adding: At your age we were clever hands at such quibbles ourselves. It was just such subtleties which we used to practise our wits upon; as you do now, if I mistake not.

"Sure thing," Pericles replied, adding, "At your age, we were pretty good at those kinds of arguments ourselves. It was those little tricks that we used to sharpen our minds, just like you do now, if I'm not mistaken."

To which Alcibiades replied: Ah, Pericles, I do wish we could have met in those days when you were at your cleverest in such matters.

To which Alcibiades replied: Ah, Pericles, I really wish we could have met back when you were at your sharpest in these issues.

Well, then, as soon as the desired superiority over the politicians of the day seemed to be attained, Critias and Alcibiades turned their backs on Socrates. They found his society unattractive, not to speak of the annoyance of being cross-questioned on their own shortcomings. Forthwith they devoted themselves to those affairs of state but for which they would never have come near him at all.

Well, as soon as they felt they had achieved the upper hand over the politicians of the time, Critias and Alcibiades distanced themselves from Socrates. They found his company unappealing, not to mention the irritation of being questioned about their own flaws. Immediately, they dedicated themselves to political matters that they would have never approached him about in the first place.

No; if one would seek to see true companions of Socrates, one must look to Crito, (24) and Chaerephon, and Chaerecrates, to Hermogenes, to Simmias and Cebes, to Phaedondes and others, who clung to him not to excel in the rhetoric of the Assembly or the law-courts, but with the nobler ambition of attaining to such beauty and goodliness of soul as would enable them to discharge the various duties of life to house and family, to relatives and friends, to fellow-citizens, and to the state at large. Of these true followers not one in youth or old age was ever guilty, or thought guilty, of committing any evil deed.

No; if you want to see the true companions of Socrates, you should look to Crito, Chaerephon, Chaerecrates, Hermogenes, Simmias, Cebes, Phaedondes, and others who stayed close to him not to shine in the rhetoric of the Assembly or the courts, but with the higher goal of achieving such beauty and goodness of soul that they could fulfill their various responsibilities to their homes and families, to their loved ones, to their fellow citizens, and to the state as a whole. Among these true followers, none were ever guilty, or thought to be guilty, of doing any evil deed, whether in their youth or in their old age.

 (24) For these true followers, familiar to us in the pages of Plato,
    ("Crito," "Apol.," "Phaedo," etc) see Cobet, "Pros. Xen."
(24) For these genuine followers, recognizable to us in the works of Plato, ("Crito," "Apol.," "Phaedo," etc) see Cobet, "Pros. Xen."

"But for all that," the accuser insists, "Socrates taught sons to pour contumely upon their fathers (25) by persuading his young friends that he could make them wiser than their sires, or by pointing out that the law allowed a son to sue his father for aberration of mind, and to imprison him, which legal ordinance he put in evidence to prove that it might be well for the wiser to imprison the more ignorant."

"But despite all that," the accuser insists, "Socrates encouraged sons to disrespect their fathers by convincing his young friends that he could make them smarter than their dads, or by highlighting that the law allowed a son to sue his father for being crazy and to imprison him, which legal rule he used as evidence to show that it could be good for the wiser to imprison the less knowledgeable."

 (25) See "Apol." 20; Arist. "Clouds," 1407, where Pheidippides "drags
    his father Strepsiades through the mire."
(25) See "Apol." 20; Arist. "Clouds," 1407, where Pheidippides "pulls his father Strepsiades through the mud."

Now what Socrates held was, that if a man may with justice incarcerate another for no better cause than a form of folly or ignorance, this same person could not justly complain if he in his turn were kept in bonds by his superiors in knowledge; and to come to the bottom of such questions, to discover the difference between madness and ignorance was a problem which he was perpetually working at. His opinion came to this: If a madman may, as a matter of expediency to himself and his friends, be kept in prison, surely, as a matter of justice, the man who knows not what he ought to know should be content to sit at the feet of those who know, and be taught.

Socrates believed that if someone can justly imprison another person for no better reason than foolishness or ignorance, then that same person cannot rightly complain if they are kept in bonds by those who are more knowledgeable. To address these issues, he constantly worked on understanding the difference between madness and ignorance. His conclusion was this: If a madman can be kept in prison for the benefit of himself and his friends, then, for the sake of justice, a person who lacks essential knowledge should accept being taught by those who know better.

But it was the rest of their kith and kin, not fathers only (according to the accuser), whom Socrates dishonoured in the eyes of his circle of followers, when he said that "the sick man or the litigant does not derive assistance from his relatives, (26) but from his doctor in the one case, and his legal adviser in the other." "Listen further to his language about friends," says the accuser: "'What is the good of their being kindly disposed, unless they can be of some practical use to you? Mere goodness of disposition is nothing; those only are worthy of honour who combine with the knowledge of what is right the faculty of expounding it;' (27) and so by bringing the young to look upon himself as a superlatively wise person gifted with an extraordinary capacity for making others wise also, he so worked on the dispositions of those who consorted with him that in their esteem the rest of the world counted for nothing by comparison with Socrates."

But it was their entire group of friends and family, not just the fathers (according to the accuser), whom Socrates disrespected in front of his followers when he said that "the sick person or the person involved in a lawsuit doesn't get help from their relatives, but from their doctor in one case, and their legal advisor in the other." "Listen to what he says about friends," the accuser adds: "'What’s the point in them being nice if they can’t actually help you? Being nice means nothing; only those who know what’s right and can explain it are truly deserving of respect;' and by encouraging the young to see him as an exceptionally wise person with a special ability to make others wise too, he influenced those around him to the point where they viewed everyone else in the world as insignificant compared to Socrates."

 (26) See Grote, "H. G." v. 535.

 (27) Cf. Thuc. ii. 60. Pericles says, "Yet I with whom you are so
    angry venture to say of myself, that I am as capable as any one of
    devising and explaining a sound policy."—Jowett.
(26) See Grote, "H. G." v. 535.

(27) Cf. Thuc. ii. 60. Pericles says, "Still, I, the one you are so upset with, dare to say that I’m as capable as anyone at coming up with and explaining a solid plan."—Jowett.

Now I admit the language about fathers and the rest of a man's relations. I can go further, and add some other sayings of his, that "when the soul (which is alone the indwelling centre of intelligence) is gone out of a man, be he our nearest and dearest friend, we carry the body forth and bury it out of sight." "Even in life," he used to say, "each of us is ready to part with any portion of his best possession—to wit, his own body—if it be useless and unprofitable. He will remove it himself, or suffer another to do so in his stead. Thus men cut off their own nails, hair, or corns; they allow surgeons to cut and cauterise them, not without pains and aches, and are so grateful to the doctor for his services that they further give him a fee. Or again, a man ejects the spittle from his mouth as far as possible. (28) Why? Because it is of no use while it stays within the system, but is detrimental rather."

Now I admit the talk about fathers and other family relationships. I can go further and add some of his other sayings, that "when the soul (which is the true center of intelligence) leaves a man, even if he is our closest friend, we take the body and bury it out of sight." "Even in life," he used to say, "each of us is ready to give up any part of our best possession—namely, our own body—if it's useless and unhelpful. We will remove it ourselves or let someone else do it for us. So, people cut their own nails, hair, or corns; they let doctors perform surgeries and treatments, enduring pain, and they are so grateful for the doctor's help that they pay them. Or again, a person spits out whatever is in their mouth as far as they can. Why? Because it serves no purpose while it stays inside and is actually harmful."

 (28) See Aristot. "Eth. Eud." vii. 1.
(28) See Aristot. "Eth. Eud." vii. 1.

Now by these instances his object was not to inculcate the duty of burying one's father alive or of cutting oneself to bits, but to show that lack of intelligence means lack of worth; (29) and so he called upon his hearers to be as sensible and useful as they could be, so that, be it father or brother or any one else whose esteem he would deserve, a man should not hug himself in careless self-interest, trusting to mere relationship, but strive to be useful to those whose esteem he coveted.

Now, through these examples, his goal wasn’t to promote the idea of burying one’s father alive or harming oneself, but to demonstrate that a lack of intelligence leads to a lack of value; (29) and so he urged his listeners to be as sensible and helpful as they could be. Whether it’s a father, brother, or anyone else whose respect he wanted to earn, a man shouldn’t just indulge in selfishness based on relationships, but should work to be beneficial to those whose respect he sought.

 (29) i.e. "witless and worthless are synonymous."
(29) i.e. "witless and worthless are the same thing."

But (pursues the accuser) by carefully culling the most immoral passages of the famous poets, and using them as evidences, he taught his associates to be evildoers and tyrranical: the line of Hesiod (30) for instance—

But (the accuser continues) by selectively choosing the most immoral lines from famous poets and using them as proof, he trained his followers to be wicked and tyrannical: the line from Hesiod (30) for example—

    No work is a disgrace; slackness of work is the disgrace—
    No work is embarrassing; the shame comes from being lazy.

"interpreted," says the accuser, "by Socrates as if the poet enjoined us to abstain from no work wicked or ignoble; do everything for the sake of gain."

"interpreted," says the accuser, "by Socrates as if the poet urged us to avoid no task that is wicked or shameful; do whatever it takes for the sake of profit."

 (30) "Works and Days," 309 {'Ergon d' ouden oneidos}. Cf. Plat.
    "Charm." 163 C.
(30) "Works and Days," 309 {'Ergon d' ouden oneidos}. Cf. Plat. "Charm." 163 C.

Now while Socrates would have entirely admitted the propositions that "it is a blessing and a benefit to a man to be a worker," and that "a lazy do-nothing is a pestilent evil," that "work is good and idleness a curse," the question arises, whom did he mean by workers? In his vocabulary only those were good workmen (31) who were engaged on good work; dicers and gamblers and others engaged on any other base and ruinous business he stigmatised as the "idle drones"; and from this point of view the quotation from Hesiod is unimpeachable—

Now, while Socrates would have completely agreed with the ideas that "it's a blessing and a benefit for a person to be a worker" and that "a lazy, do-nothing person is a terrible evil," and that "work is good and idleness is a curse," the question comes up: whom did he mean by workers? In his terms, only those were considered good workers (31) who were engaged in good work; he labeled dicers, gamblers, and others involved in any low and destructive activities as "idle drones"; and from this perspective, the quote from Hesiod is beyond reproach—

    No work is a disgrace; only idlesse is disgrace.
    No job is shameful; only laziness is shameful.

But there was a passage from Homer (32) for ever on his lips, as the accuser tells us—the passage which says concerning Odysseus,

But there was a line from Homer (32) always on his lips, as the accuser tells us—the line that talks about Odysseus,

    What prince, or man of name,
    He found flight-giv'n, he would restrain with words of gentlest blame:
    "Good sir, it fits you not to fly, or fare as one afraid,
    You should not only stay yourself, but see the people stayed."

     Thus he the best sort us'd; the worst, whose spirits brake out in
     noise, (33) He cudgell'd with his sceptre, chid, and said, "Stay,
     wretch, be still, And hear thy betters; thou art base, and both in
     power and skill Poor and unworthy, without name in counsel or in
     war." We must not all be kings.

 (31) See below, III. ix. 9.

 (32) "Il." ii. 188 foll., 199 foll. (so Chapman).

 (33) Lit. "But whatever man of the people he saw and found him
    shouting."—W. Leaf.
    What prince or notable man he encountered, he would gently chide with the softest words: "Good sir, it doesn't suit you to flee or act out of fear. You should not only maintain your own composure but also help the people remain steady."

    Thus, he treated the best among us; the worst, whose spirits erupted in chaos, he struck with his scepter, scolded, and said, "Stay quiet, wretch, and listen to those better than you; you are lowly and, in both power and skill, poor and undeserving, lacking any reputation in counsel or war." Not everyone can be kings.

 (31) See below, III. ix. 9.

 (32) "Il." ii. 188 foll., 199 foll. (so Chapman).

 (33) Lit. "But whatever man of the people he saw and found him shouting."—W. Leaf.

The accuser informs us that Socrates interpreted these lines as though the poet approved the giving of blows to commoners and poor folk. Now no such remark was ever made by Socrates; which indeed would have been tantamount to maintaining that he ought to be beaten himself. What he did say was, that those who were useful neither in word nor deed, who were incapable of rendering assistance in time of need to the army or the state or the people itself, be they never so wealthy, ought to be restrained, and especially if to incapacity they added effrontery.

The accuser tells us that Socrates interpreted these lines as if the poet supported hitting common people and the poor. However, Socrates never made such a statement; that would be like saying he deserved to be beaten himself. What he actually said was that those who were useless in both speech and action, and who couldn't help the army, the state, or the people in times of need—regardless of their wealth—should be kept in check, especially if they combined their uselessness with boldness.

As to Socrates, he was the very opposite of all this—he was plainly a lover of the people, and indeed of all mankind. Though he had many ardent admirers among citizens and strangers alike, he never demanded any fee for his society from any one, (34) but bestowed abundantly upon all alike of the riches of his soul—good things, indeed, of which fragments accepted gratis at his hands were taken and sold at high prices to the rest of the community by some, (35) who were not, as he was, lovers of the people, since with those who had not money to give in return they refused to discourse. But of Socrates be it said that in the eyes of the whole world he reflected more honour on the state and a richer lustre than ever Lichas, (36) whose fame is proverbial, shed on Lacedaemon. Lichas feasted and entertained the foreign residents in Lacedaemon at the Gymnopaediae most handsomely. Socrates gave a lifetime to the outpouring of his substance in the shape of the greatest benefits bestowed on all who cared to receive them. In other words, he made those who lived in his society better men, and sent them on their way rejoicing.

As for Socrates, he was the complete opposite of all this—he was genuinely a lover of the people and of all humanity. Although he had many passionate admirers among both citizens and outsiders, he never charged anyone for his company; instead, he generously shared the wealth of his wisdom with everyone. In fact, some took the valuable insights they received from him for free and sold them at high prices to others in the community, who, unlike him, didn't have a love for the people and refused to engage with those who couldn't pay. However, it's worth mentioning that Socrates brought more honor to the state and a richer reputation than Lichas, whose fame is well-known, brought to Lacedaemon. Lichas hosted and entertained foreign visitors in Lacedaemon at the Gymnopaediae very lavishly. In contrast, Socrates dedicated his life to generously offering his profound benefits to anyone willing to accept them. In other words, he made those who interacted with him better individuals and sent them on their way filled with joy.

 (34) See "Symp." iv. 43; Plat. "Hipp. maj." 300 D; "Apol." 19 E.

 (35) See Diog. Laert. II. viii. 1.

 (36) See "Hell." III. ii. 21; Thuc. v. 50; Plut. "Cim." 284 C. For the
    Gymnopaediae, see Paus. III. xi. 9; Athen. xiv. p. 631.
 (34) See "Symp." iv. 43; Plat. "Hipp. maj." 300 D; "Apol." 19 E.

 (35) See Diog. Laert. II. viii. 1.

 (36) See "Hell." III. ii. 21; Thuc. v. 50; Plut. "Cim." 284 C. For the 
    Gymnopaediae, see Paus. III. xi. 9; Athen. xiv. p. 631.

To no other conclusion, therefore, can I come but that, being so good a man, Socrates was worthier to have received honour from the state than death. And this I take to be the strictly legal view of the case, for what does the law require? (37) "If a man be proved to be a thief, a filcher of clothes, a cut-purse, a housebreaker, a man-stealer, a robber of temples, the penalty is death." Even so; and of all men Socrates stood most aloof from such crimes.

I can only conclude that, given how good a person Socrates was, he deserved to be honored by the state rather than sentenced to death. I believe this is the strictly legal perspective, because what does the law state? (37) "If a person is proven to be a thief, a pickpocket, a burglar, a kidnapper, a temple robber, the punishment is death." And yet, Socrates was the farthest removed from such crimes of anyone.

 (37) See "Symp." iv. 36; Plat. "Rep." 575 B; "Gorg." 508 E.
(37) See "Symp." iv. 36; Plat. "Rep." 575 B; "Gorg." 508 E.

To the state he was never the cause of any evil—neither disaster in war, nor faction, nor treason, nor any other mischief whatsoever. And if his public life was free from all offence, so was his private. He never hurt a single soul either by deprivation of good or infliction of evil, nor did he ever lie under the imputation of any of those misdoings. where then is his liability to the indictment to be found? Who, so far from disbelieving in the gods, as set forth in the indictment, was conspicuous beyond all men for service to heaven; so far from corrupting the young—a charge alleged with insistence by the prosecutor—was notorious for the zeal with which he strove not only to stay his associates from evil desires, but to foster in them a passionate desire for that loveliest and queenliest of virtues without which states and families crumble to decay. (38) Such being his conduct, was he not worthy of high honour from the state of Athens?

To the state, he was never the cause of any harm—whether in war, through faction, treason, or any other wrongdoing. And while his public life was free from any offenses, so was his private life. He never hurt anyone, neither by withholding good nor by causing harm, nor was he ever accused of any of these wrongdoings. So where is the basis for the indictment? Who, instead of doubting the gods as stated in the charges, was more recognized than anyone else for his devotion to them; and who, far from corrupting the youth—a charge vigorously pushed by the prosecutor—was known for his efforts to keep his peers away from bad desires and to spark in them a passionate longing for that beautiful and essential virtue without which societies and families fall apart? Given this conduct, did he not deserve to be highly honored by the state of Athens?

 (38) Or, "the noblest and proudest virtue by means of which states and
    families are prosperously directed."
(38) Or, "the highest and most esteemed quality through which nations and families are successfully managed."

III

III

It may serve to illustrate the assertion that he benefited his associates partly by the display of his own virtue and partly by verbal discourse and argument, if I set down my various recollections (1) on these heads. And first with regard to religion and the concerns of heaven. In conduct and language his behaviour conformed to the rule laid down by the Pythia (2) in reply to the question, "How shall we act?" as touching a sacrifice or the worship of ancestors, or any similar point. Her answer is: "Act according to the law and custom of your state, and you will act piously." After this pattern Socrates behaved himself, and so he exhorted others to behave, holding them to be but busybodies and vain fellows who acted on any different principle.

It might help to show that he supported his friends partly by showcasing his own virtue and partly through discussion and debate if I share my various memories (1) on these topics. First, let's talk about religion and matters of the divine. In both his actions and his words, he followed the guidance given by the Pythia (2) in response to the question, "How should we act?" regarding sacrifice or honoring our ancestors, or similar issues. Her response was: "Act according to the laws and customs of your state, and you will act with respect." Following this example, Socrates conducted himself in the same way, and he encouraged others to do the same, believing that those who acted differently were merely meddlesome and shallow individuals.

 (1) Hence the title of the work, {'Apomenmoneumata}, "Recollections,
    Memoirs, Memorabilia." See Diog. Laert. "Xen." II. vi. 48.

 (2) The Pythia at Delphi.
 (1) Hence the title of the work, {'Apomenmoneumata}, "Recollections, Memoirs, Memorabilia." See Diog. Laert. "Xen." II. vi. 48.

 (2) The Pythia at Delphi.

His formula or prayer was simple: "Give me that which is best for me," for, said he, the gods know best what good things are—to pray for gold or silver or despotic power were no better than to make some particular throw at dice or stake in battle or any such thing the subject of prayer, of which the future consequences are manifestly uncertain. (3)

His formula or prayer was simple: "Give me what’s best for me," for, as he said, the gods know best what good things are. Praying for gold, silver, or absolute power is no better than making a specific dice roll or betting in battle or anything else with uncertain future outcomes. (3)

 (3) See (Plat.) "Alcib. II." 142 foll.; Valerius Max. vii. 2;
    "Spectator," No. 207.
(3) See (Plat.) "Alcib. II." 142 foll.; Valerius Max. vii. 2; "Spectator," No. 207.

If with scant means he offered but small sacrifices he believed that he was in no wise inferior to those who make frequent and large sacrifices from an ampler store. It were ill surely for the very gods themselves, could they take delight in large sacrifices rather than in small, else oftentimes must the offerings of bad men be found acceptable rather than of good; nor from the point of view of men themselves would life be worth living if the offerings of a villain rather than of a righteous man found favour in the sight of Heaven. His belief was that the joy of the gods is greater in proportion to the holiness of the giver, and he was ever an admirer of that line of Hesiod which says,

If he offered only small sacrifices due to limited means, he believed he was in no way lesser than those who frequently made large sacrifices from their greater resources. It would be troubling for the gods themselves if they preferred large sacrifices over small ones, as this might mean that the offerings of wicked people would be accepted over those of the good; furthermore, life would hardly be worthwhile for people if the favors of Heaven were given to villains rather than to righteous individuals. He believed that the joy of the gods is greater in proportion to the holiness of the giver, and he always admired that line from Hesiod which says,

    According to thine ability do sacrifice to the immortal gods. (4)

 (4) Hesiod, "Works and Days," 336. See "Anab." III. ii. 9.
    Sacrifice to the immortal gods according to your ability. (4)

 (4) Hesiod, "Works and Days," 336. See "Anab." III. ii. 9.

"Yes," he would say, "in our dealings with friends and strangers alike, and in reference to the demands of life in general, there is no better motto for a man than that: 'let a man do according to his ability.'"

"Yes," he would say, "in our interactions with both friends and strangers, and when it comes to the demands of life in general, there's no better motto for a person than this: 'let a person do according to their ability.'"

Or to take another point. If it appeared to him that a sign from heaven had been given him, nothing would have induced him to go against heavenly warning: he would as soon have been persuaded to accept the guidance of a blind man ignorant of the path to lead him on a journey in place of one who knew the road and could see; and so he denounced the folly of others who do things contrary to the warnings of God in order to avoid some disrepute among men. For himself he despised all human aids by comparison with counsel from above.

Or to make another point. If it seemed to him that he had received a sign from heaven, nothing would have made him ignore that divine warning. He would rather be convinced to follow a blind person who doesn’t know the way on a journey than to go against the clear path shown by someone who could see. He criticized the foolishness of others who act against God’s warnings just to dodge some bad reputation among people. For him, he looked down on all human assistance compared to guidance from above.

The habit and style of living to which he subjected his soul and body was one which under ordinary circumstances (5) would enable any one adopting it to look existence cheerily in the face and to pass his days serenely: it would certainly entail no difficulties as regards expense. So frugal was it that a man must work little indeed who could not earn the quantum which contented Socrates. Of food he took just enough to make eating a pleasure—the appetite he brought to it was sauce sufficient; while as to drinks, seeing that he only drank when thirsty, any draught refreshed. (6) If he accepted an invitation to dinner, he had no difficulty in avoiding the common snare of over-indulgence, and his advice to people who could not equally control their appetite was to avoid taking what would allure them to eat if not hungry or to drink if not thirsty. (7) Such things are ruinous to the constitution, he said, bad for stomachs, brains, and soul alike; or as he used to put it, with a touch of sarcasm, (8) "It must have been by feasting men on so many dainty dishes that Circe produced her pigs; only Odysseus through his continency and the 'promptings (9) of Hermes' abstained from touching them immoderately, and by the same token did not turn into a swine." So much for this topic, which he touched thus lightly and yet seriously.

The way he chose to live his life was one that, under normal circumstances, would allow anyone to face life with a positive attitude and spend their days calmly. It definitely wouldn’t cause any financial difficulties. His lifestyle was so simple that anyone could earn enough money to live like Socrates without working too hard. He ate just enough to enjoy his meals—his appetite was the perfect seasoning; as for drinks, since he only drank when he was thirsty, anything he had was refreshing. If he got invited to dinner, he easily avoided the trap of overindulgence, advising those who struggled with their cravings to skip anything tempting if they weren’t hungry or thirsty. He believed these excesses could harm the body, mind, and soul; or as he would sarcastically put it, “It must have been by feeding people so many fancy dishes that Circe turned them into pigs; only Odysseus, thanks to his self-control and the 'nudges of Hermes,' didn’t indulge and therefore didn’t turn into a pig himself.” That wraps up this topic, which he approached both lightly and seriously.

 (5) {ei me ti daimonion eie}, "save under some divinely-ordained
    calamity." Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 18; "Symp." viii. 43.

 (6) See "Ages." ix; Cic. "Tusc." v. 34, 97; "de Fin." ii. 28, 90.

 (7) Cf. Plut. "Mor." 128 D; Clement, "Paedag." 2. 173, 33; "Strom." 2,
    492, 24; Aelian, "N. A." 8, 9.

 (8) "Half in gibe and half in jest," in ref. to "Od." x. 233 foll.:
    "So she let them in..."

 (9) {upothemosune}, "inspiration." Cf. "Il." xv. 412; "Od." xvi. 233.
(5) {ei me ti daimonion eie}, "except under some divinely-ordained disaster." Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 18; "Symp." viii. 43.

(6) See "Ages." ix; Cic. "Tusc." v. 34, 97; "de Fin." ii. 28, 90.

(7) Cf. Plut. "Mor." 128 D; Clement, "Paedag." 2. 173, 33; "Strom." 2, 492, 24; Aelian, "N. A." 8, 9.

(8) "Half in jest and half in humor," referring to "Od." x. 233 foll.: "So she let them in..."

(9) {upothemosune}, "inspiration." Cf. "Il." xv. 412; "Od." xvi. 233.

But as to the concerns of Aphrodite, his advice was to hold strongly aloof from the fascination of fair forms: once lay finger on these and it is not easy to keep a sound head and a sober mind. To take a particular case. It was a mere kiss which, as he had heard, Critobulus (10) had some time given to a fair youth, the son of Alcibiades. (11) Accordingly Critobulus being present, Socrates propounded the question.

But when it came to Aphrodite's concerns, his advice was to stay away from the allure of beautiful people. Once you get involved, it’s hard to keep your head straight and your mind clear. For example, there was just a kiss that Critobulus (10) had given to a handsome young man, the son of Alcibiades. (11) So, with Critobulus there, Socrates raised the question.

 (10) For Critobulus (the son of Crito) see "Econ." i. 1 foll.; "Symp."
    i. 3 foll.

 (11) See Isocr. "Or." xvi. Cobet conj. {ton tou 'Axiokhou uion}, i.e.
    Clinias.
 (10) For Critobulus (the son of Crito), see "Econ." i. 1 and following; "Symp." i. 3 and following.

 (11) See Isocr. "Or." xvi. Cobet suggested {ton tou 'Axiokhou uion}, meaning Clinias.

Soc. Tell me, Xenophon, have you not always believed Critobulus to be a man of sound sense, not wild and self-willed? Should you not have said that he was remarkable for his prudence rather than thoughtless or foolhardy?

Soc. Tell me, Xenophon, haven’t you always thought of Critobulus as a sensible guy, not reckless or stubborn? Wouldn’t you say he’s known more for his wisdom than for being careless or rash?

Xen. Certainly that is what I should have said of him.

Xen. That's definitely what I should have said about him.

Soc. Then you are now to regard him as quite the reverse—a hot-blooded, reckless libertine: this is the sort of man to throw somersaults into knives, (12) or to leap into the jaws of fire.

Soc. So now you should see him as the complete opposite—a passionate, impulsive person who lives life on the edge: this is the kind of person who would do somersaults into knives or jump into the flames.

 (12) Cf. "Symp." ii. 10, iv. 16. See Schneider ad loc.
(12) Cf. "Symp." ii. 10, iv. 16. See Schneider ad loc.

Xen. And what have you seen him doing, that you give him so bad a character?

Xen. And what have you seen him doing that makes you think so poorly of him?

Soc. Doing? Why, has not the fellow dared to steal a kiss from the son of Alcibiades, most fair of youths and in the golden prime?

Soc. What’s going on? Hasn’t this guy dared to steal a kiss from the son of Alcibiades, the most beautiful young man in his prime?

Xen. Nay, then, if that is the foolhardy adventure, it is a danger which I could well encounter myself.

Xen. No, if that's the reckless challenge, it's a risk I could definitely face myself.

Soc. Poor soul! and what do you expect your fate to be after that kiss? Let me tell you. On the instant you will lose your freedom, the indenture of your bondage will be signed; it will be yours on compulsion to spend large sums on hurtful pleasures; you will have scarcely a moment's leisure left for any noble study; you will be driven to concern yourself most zealously with things which no man, not even a madman, would choose to make an object of concern.

Soc. Poor soul! What do you think will happen after that kiss? Let me tell you. In that instant, you'll lose your freedom; your bond will be signed. You'll be forced to spend a lot of money on harmful pleasures, and you’ll hardly have any time left for meaningful pursuits. You’ll be pushed to focus obsessively on things that no one, not even a crazy person, would want to care about.

Xen. O Heracles! how fell a power to reside in a kiss!

Xen. Oh Heracles! What a brutal power lies in a kiss!

Soc. Does it surprise you? Do you not know that the tarantula, which is no bigger than a threepenny bit, (13) has only to touch the mouth and it will afflict its victim with pains and drive him out of his senses.

Soc. Does that surprise you? Don't you know that the tarantula, which is only the size of a threepenny bit, (13) just has to touch the mouth to cause its victim pain and drive them insane?

 (13) Lit. "a half-obol piece." For the {phalaggion} see Aristot. "H.
    A." ix. 39, 1.
(13) Lit. "a half-obol piece." For the {phalaggion} see Aristot. "H. A." ix. 39, 1.

Xen. Yes, but then the creature injects something with its bite.

Xen. Yes, but then the creature injects something when it bites.

Soc. Ah, fool! and do you imagine that these lovely creatures infuse nothing with their kiss, simply because you do not see the poison? Do you not know that this wild beast which men call beauty in its bloom is all the more terrible than the tarantula in that the insect must first touch its victim, but this at a mere glance of the beholder, without even contact, will inject something into him—yards away—which will make him man. And may be that is why the Loves are called "archers," because these beauties wound so far off. (14) But my advice to you, Xenophon, is, whenever you catch sight of one of these fair forms, to run helter-skelter for bare life without a glance behind; and to you, Critobulus, I would say, "Go abroad for a year: so long time will it take to heal you of this wound."

Soc. Ah, you fool! Do you really think that these beautiful creatures don’t leave any mark with their kiss, just because you can’t see the poison? Don’t you realize that this wild beast we call beauty, when it’s in full bloom, is even more dangerous than a tarantula? The insect has to touch its victim first, but beauty can inject something into you—just by a glance, without any physical contact—something that will change you completely. Maybe that’s why the Loves are called “archers,” because these beauties can wound you from a distance. (14) My advice to you, Xenophon, is to run for your life whenever you see one of these stunning figures, without looking back. And for you, Critobulus, I’d suggest, “Take a year away: that’s how long it will take to recover from this injury.”

 (14) L. Dindorf, etc. regard the sentence as a gloss. Cf. "Symp." iv.
    26  ({isos de kai... entimoteron estin}).
(14) L. Dindorf, etc. consider the sentence to be an annotation. See "Symp." iv. 26 ({isos de kai... entimoteron estin}).

Such (he said), in the affairs of Aphrodite, as in meats and drinks, should be the circumspection of all whose footing is insecure. At least they should confine themselves to such diet as the soul would dispense with, save for some necessity of the body; and which even so ought to set up no disturbance. (15) But for himself, it was clear, he was prepared at all points and invulnerable. He found less difficulty in abstaining from beauty's fairest and fullest bloom than many others from weeds and garbage. To sum up: (16) with regard to eating and drinking and these other temptations of the sense, the equipment of his soul made him independent; he could boast honestly that in his moderate fashion (17) his pleasures were no less than theirs who take such trouble to procure them, and his pains far fewer.

Such (he said), in the matters of Aphrodite, just like with food and drinks, should be the caution of anyone whose footing is uncertain. At the very least, they should stick to a diet that the soul can do without, except for what the body really needs; and even then, it shouldn't cause any disturbance. (15) But for him, it was clear that he was ready for anything and untouchable. He found it easier to avoid the most beautiful and tempting things than many others do to steer clear of weeds and trash. To sum it up: (16) regarding eating, drinking, and other sensory temptations, the strength of his soul made him self-sufficient; he could honestly say that in his moderate way (17) his pleasures were no less than those who go to great lengths to obtain them, and his troubles were far fewer.

 (15) Cf. "Symp." iv. 38.

 (16) L. Dindorf  (brackets) this passage as spurious.

 (17) On the principle "enough is as good as a feast," {arkountos}.
 (15) Cf. "Symp." iv. 38.

 (16) L. Dindorf (brackets) this passage as fake.

 (17) Based on the idea that "enough is as good as a feast," {arkountos}.

IV

IV

A belief is current, in accordance with views maintained concerning Socrates in speech and writing, and in either case conjecturally, that, however powerful he may have been in stimulating men to virtue as a theorist, he was incapable of acting as their guide himself. (1) It would be well for those who adopt this view to weigh carefully not only what Socrates effected "by way of castigation" in cross-questioning whose who conceived themselves to be possessed of all knowledge, but also his everyday conversation with those who spent their time in close intercourse with himself. Having done this, let them decide whether he was incapable of making his companions better.

There's a common belief, based on the perspectives shared about Socrates in both speech and writing, that even though he was very effective at encouraging people towards virtue as a theorist, he couldn't actually guide them himself. (1) Those who hold this opinion should carefully consider not just what Socrates achieved "by way of castigation" through his questioning of those who thought they knew everything, but also his daily conversations with people who were close to him. After reflecting on this, they should decide if he was truly incapable of helping his companions improve.

 (1) Al. "If any one believes that Socrates, as represented in certain
    dialogues (e.g. of Plato, Antisthenes, etc.) of an imaginary
    character, was an adept ({protrepsasthai}) in the art of
    stimulating people to virtue negatively but scarcely the man to
    guide ({proagein}) his hearers on the true path himself." Cf.
    (Plat.) "Clitophon," 410 B; Cic. "de Or." I. xlvii. 204; Plut.
    "Mor." 798 B. See Grote, "Plato," iii. 21; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 51
    foll.; Cf. below, IV. iii. 2.
(1) Al. "If anyone thinks that Socrates, as shown in certain dialogues (like those of Plato, Antisthenes, etc.), was a master at motivating people to pursue virtue in a negative way, but hardly the person to lead his listeners along the true path himself." Cf. (Plat.) "Clitophon," 410 B; Cic. "de Or." I. xlvii. 204; Plut. "Mor." 798 B. See Grote, "Plato," iii. 21; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 51 foll.; Cf. below, IV. iii. 2.

I will first state what I once heard fall from his lips in a discussion with Aristodemus, (2) "the little," as he was called, on the topic of divinity. (3) Socrates had observed that Aristodemus neither sacrificed nor gave heed to divination, but on the contrary was disposed to ridicule those who did.

I will first share what I once heard him say during a discussion with Aristodemus, known as "the little," about divinity. Socrates noted that Aristodemus neither made sacrifices nor paid attention to divination; instead, he was inclined to mock those who did.

 (2) See Plat. "Symp." 173 B: "He was a little fellow who never wore
    any shoes, Aristodemus, of the deme of Cydathenaeum."—Jowett.

 (3) Or, "the divine element."
(2) See Plat. "Symp." 173 B: "He was a small guy who never wore any shoes, Aristodemus, from the district of Cydathenaeum."—Jowett.

(3) Or, "the divine aspect."

So tell me, Aristodemus (he began), are there any human beings who have won your admiration for their wisdom?

So tell me, Aristodemus (he began), are there any people who have impressed you with their wisdom?

Ar. There are.

Ar. There are.

Soc. Would you mention to us their names?

Soc. Could you tell us their names?

Ar. In the writings of epic poetry I have the greatest admiration for Homer.... And as a dithyrambic poet for Melanippides. (4) I admire also Sophocles as a tragedian, Polycleitus as a sculptor, and Zeuxis as a painter.

Ar. In epic poetry, I really admire Homer... And for dithyrambic poetry, I admire Melanippides. (4) I also have great respect for Sophocles as a tragic playwright, Polycleitus as a sculptor, and Zeuxis as a painter.

 (4) Melanippides, 430 B.C. See Cobet, "Pros. Xen." s.n.
(4) Melanippides, 430 B.C. See Cobet, "Pros. Xen." s.n.

Soc. Which would you consider the more worthy of admiration, a fashioner of senseless images devoid of motion or one who could fashion living creatures endowed with understanding and activity?

Soc. Which do you think deserves more admiration, someone who creates meaningless images without movement or someone who can create living beings with intelligence and action?

Ar. Decidedly the latter, provided his living creatures owed their birth to design and were not the offspring of some chance.

Ar. Definitely the latter, as long as his living creatures were made with intention and not just the result of random chance.

Soc. But now if you had two sorts of things, the one of which presents no clue as to what it is for, and the other is obviously for some useful purpose—which would you judge to be the result of chance, which of design?

Soc. But now if you had two types of things, one of which gives no indication of its purpose, and the other is clearly intended for some useful function—which one would you consider to be a result of chance, and which one a product of design?

Ar. Clearly that which is produced for some useful end is the work of design.

Ar. Clearly, anything created for a practical purpose is the result of design.

Soc. Does it not strike you then that he who made man from the beginning (5) did for some useful end furnish him with his several senses—giving him eyes to behold the visible word, and ears to catch the intonations of sound? Or again, what good would there be in odours if nostrils had not been bestowed upon us? what perception of sweet things and pungent, and of all the pleasures of the palate, had not a tongue been fashioned in us as an interpreter of the same? And besides all this, do you not think this looks like a matter of foresight, this closing of the delicate orbs of sight with eyelids as with folding doors, which, when there is need to use them for any purpose, can be thrown wide open and firmly closed again in sleep? and, that even the winds of heaven may not visit them too roughly, this planting of the eyelashes as a protecting screen? (6) this coping of the region above the eyes with cornice-work of eyebrow so that no drop of sweat fall from the head and injure them? again this readiness of the ear to catch all sounds and yet not to be surcharged? this capacity of the front teeth of all animals to cut and of the "grinders" to receive the food and reduce it to pulp? the position of the mouth again, close to the eyes and nostrils as a portal of ingress for all the creature's supplies? and lastly, seeing that matter passing out (7) of the body is unpleasant, this hindward direction of the passages, and their removal to a distance from the avenues of sense? I ask you, when you see all these things constructed with such show of foresight can you doubt whether they are products of chance or intelligence?

Soc. Doesn't it make you think that the one who created man from the very beginning designed him with useful purposes in mind—providing him with various senses? He gave us eyes to see the visible world and ears to hear the sounds around us. And what would the point be of smells if we hadn’t been given nostrils? How could we enjoy sweet and spicy tastes without a tongue to interpret them? Moreover, don’t you think it seems like foresight to have eyelids that close delicately, acting like folding doors that can open wide when needed and shut firmly in sleep? And to protect our eyes from harsh winds, there are eyelashes as a barrier? (6) There’s even the way eyebrows provide a sort of cornice above our eyes, preventing sweat from dripping down and harming them. Then, think about how the ear is designed to pick up all sounds without being overwhelmed, and how the front teeth of all animals are meant to cut, while the molars grind food down to pulp. The mouth is conveniently located near the eyes and nostrils, serving as an entrance for all that the body needs. And lastly, since passing waste is unpleasant, the way the passages lead backward and are kept away from our sensory openings makes sense. I ask you, when you see all these features designed with such apparent foresight, can you really believe they are just random occurrences?

 (5) Cf. Aristot. "de Part. Animal." 1. For the "teleological" views
    see IV. iii. 2 foll.

 (6) "Like a sieve" or "colander."

 (7) "That which goeth out of a man."
(5) See Aristot. "de Part. Animal." 1. For the "teleological" views see IV. iii. 2 and following.

(6) "Like a sieve" or "colander."

(7) "That which comes out of a man."

Ar. To be sure not! Viewed in this light they would seem to be the handiwork of some wise artificer, (8) full of love for all things living. (9)

Ar. Definitely not! When seen this way, they look like the work of some skilled creator, full of love for all living things.

 (8) "Demiurge."

 (9) Passage referred to by Epictetus ap. Stob. "Flor." 121, 29.
(8) "Demiurge."

(9) Passage referenced by Epictetus in Stob. "Flor." 121, 29.

Soc. What shall we say of this passion implanted in man to beget offspring, this passion in the mother to rear her babe, and in the creature itself, once born, this deep desire of life and fear of death?

Soc. What should we say about this urge in humans to have children, this instinct in mothers to raise their babies, and in the newborn itself, this intense desire to live and fear of dying?

Ar. No doubt these do look like the contrivances of some one deliberately planning the existence of living creatures.

Ar. No doubt these look like the creations of someone intentionally designing the existence of living beings.

Soc. Well, and doubtless you feel to have a spark of wisdom yourself?

Soc. Well, you probably think you have a bit of wisdom yourself, right?

Ar. Put your questions, and I will answer.

Ar. Ask your questions, and I'll answer them.

Soc. And yet you imagine that elsewhere no spark of wisdom is to be found? And that, too, when you know that you have in your body a tiny fragment only of the mighty earth, a little drop of the great waters, and of the other elements, vast in their extent, you got, I presume, a particle of each towards the compacting of your bodily frame? Mind alone, it would seem, which is nowhere to be found, (10) you had the lucky chance to snatch up and make off with, you cannot tell how. And these things around and about us, enormous in size, infinite in number, owe their orderly arrangement, as you suppose, to some vacuity of wit?

Soc. And yet you think that there isn't any wisdom to be found anywhere else? And that’s especially surprising since you know that your body contains a tiny part of the vast earth, a small drop of the great oceans, and bits of all the other elements, which are immense in their scope. You must have gotten a bit of each to build your physical self, right? It seems like only the mind, which is nowhere to be found, (10) you somehow managed to grab and run off with, though you have no idea how. And these things around us, huge in size and countless in number, you believe owe their orderly arrangement to some gap in intelligence?

 (10) Cf. Plat. "Phileb." 30 B: "Soc. May our body be said to have a
    soul? Pro. Clearly. Soc. And whence comes that soul, my dear
    Protarchus, unless the body of the universe, which contains
    elements similar to our bodies but finer, has also a soul? Can
    there be any other source?"—Jowett. Cic. "de N. D." ii. 6; iii.
    11.
(10) Cf. Plat. "Phileb." 30 B: "Soc. Can we say our body has a soul? Pro. Definitely. Soc. And where does that soul come from, my dear Protarchus, if not from the body of the universe, which has elements similar to our bodies but finer, and also has a soul? Is there any other source?"—Jowett. Cic. "de N. D." ii. 6; iii. 11.

Ar. It may be, for my eyes fail to see the master agents of these, as one sees the fabricators of things produced on earth.

Ar. It might be, because my eyes can't see the master creators of these, like one sees the makers of things produced on earth.

Soc. No more do you see your own soul, which is the master agent of your body; so that, as far as that goes, you may maintain, if you like, that you do nothing with intelligence, (11) but everything by chance.

Soc. You no longer see your own soul, which is the main force behind your body; so, as far as that goes, you could argue, if you want, that you don’t do anything with purpose, but instead everything by accident.

 (11) Or, "by your wit," {gnome}.
(11) Or, "using your intelligence," {gnome}.

At this point Aristodemus: I assure you, Socrates, that I do not disdain the Divine power. On the contrary, my belief is that the Divinity is too grand to need any service which I could render.

At this point, Aristodemus said: I assure you, Socrates, that I don't dismiss the Divine power. On the contrary, I believe that the Divine is too great to need any help that I could offer.

Soc. But the grander that power is, which deigns to tend and wait upon you, the more you are called upon to honour it.

Soc. But the greater that power is, which chooses to serve and support you, the more you are expected to respect it.

Ar. Be well assured, if I could believe the gods take thought for all men, I would not neglect them.

Ar. Rest assured, if I believed that the gods cared about everyone, I wouldn’t ignore them.

Soc. How can you suppose that they do not so take thought? Who, in the first place, gave to man alone of living creatures his erect posture, enabling him to see farther in front of him and to contemplate more freely the height above, and to be less subject to distress than other creatures (endowed like himself with eyes and ears and mouth). (12) Consider next how they gave to the beast of the field (13) feet as a means of progression only, but to man they gave in addition hands—those hands which have achieved so much to raise us in the scale of happiness above all animals. Did they not make the tongue also? which belongs indeed alike to man and beast, but in man they fashioned it so as to play on different parts of the mouth at different times, whereby we can produce articulate speech, and have a code of signals to express our every want to one another. Or consider the pleasures of the sexual appetite; limited in the rest of the animal kingdom to certain seasons, but in the case of man a series prolonged unbroken to old age. Nor did it content the Godhead merely to watch over the interests of man's body. What is of far higher import, he implanted in man the noblest and most excellent type of soul. For what other creature, to begin with, has a soul to appreciate the existence of the gods who have arranged this grand and beauteous universe? What other tribe of animals save man can render service to the gods? How apt is the spirit of man to take precautions against hunger and thirst, cold and heat, to alleviate disease and foster strength! how suited to labour with a view to learning! how capable of garnering in the storehouse of his memory all that he has heard or seen or understood! Is it not most evident to you that by the side of other animals men live and move a race of gods—by nature excellent, in beauty of body and of soul supreme? For, mark you, had a creature of man's wit been encased in the body of an ox, (14) he would have been powerless to carry out his wishes, just as the possession of hands divorced from human wit is profitless. And then you come, you who have obtained these two most precious attributes, and give it as your opinion, that the gods take no thought or care for you. Why, what will you have them to do, that you may believe and be persuaded that you too are in their thoughts?

Soc. How can you think that they don’t consider these things? Who, first of all, gave man alone among living beings his upright posture, allowing him to see further ahead and to freely contemplate the heights above, making him less susceptible to distress than other creatures (who are similar to him with eyes, ears, and mouths)? (12) Then think about how they gave the animals of the field (13) feet for movement only, but to man they also gave hands—those hands that have accomplished so much to elevate us in happiness above all other animals. Did they not also create the tongue? While it is found in both man and beast, in man it is designed to move to different parts of the mouth at different times, enabling us to produce clear speech and a system of signals to express our needs to one another. Consider the pleasures of sexual desire; while limited to certain seasons for other animals, in man it spans an uninterrupted series lasting into old age. Furthermore, it was not enough for the divine to merely take care of man's bodily needs. Much more importantly, He instilled in man the noblest and most exceptional kind of soul. For what other creature, to start with, has a soul to appreciate the existence of the gods who have orchestrated this magnificent and beautiful universe? What other species can serve the gods like man does? How well-suited is the human spirit to prepare against hunger and thirst, cold and heat, to ease suffering and promote strength! How suited is it to work towards knowledge! How capable of storing in memory everything he has heard, seen, or understood! Is it not clear to you that, alongside other animals, men live and act as a race of gods—naturally excellent, supreme in physical and spiritual beauty? For, note this: if a creature with human intellect had been trapped in the body of an ox, (14) he would be unable to fulfill his wishes, just as hands without human intelligence are useless. Yet here you are, with these two invaluable traits, and you believe the gods don’t think about or care for you. What do you expect them to do for you to believe and be convinced that you too are in their thoughts?

 (12) See Kuhner for an attempt to cure the text.

 (13) {erpetois}, a "poetical" word. Cf. "Od." iv. 418; Herod. i. 140.

 (14) See Aristot. "de Part. Animal." iv. 10.
(12) See Kuhner for an effort to fix the text.

(13) {erpetois}, a "poetic" word. See "Od." iv. 418; Herod. i. 140.

(14) See Aristotle, "de Part. Animal." iv. 10.

Ar. When they treat me as you tell us they treat you, and send me counsellors to warn me what I am to do and what abstain from doing, (15) I will believe.

Ar. When they treat me like you say they treat you, and send me advisors to tell me what I should do and what I should avoid, (15) I will believe.

 (15) See IV. iii. 12.
(15) See IV. 3. 12.

Soc. Send you counsellors! Come now, what when the people of Athens make inquiry by oracle, and the gods' answer comes? Are you not an Athenian? Think you not that to you also the answer is given? What when they send portents to forewarn the states of Hellas? or to all mankind? Are you not a man? a Hellene? Are not these intended for you also? Can it be that you alone are excepted as a signal instance of Divine neglect? Again, do you suppose that the gods could have implanted in the heart of man the belief in their capacity to work him weal or woe had they not the power? Would not men have discovered the imposture in all this lapse of time? Do you not perceive that the wisest and most perdurable of human institutions—be they cities or tribes of men—are ever the most God-fearing; and in the individual man the riper his age and judgment, the deeper his religousness? Ay, my good sir (he broke forth), lay to heart and understand that even as your own mind within you can turn and dispose of your body as it lists, so ought we to think that the wisdom which abides within the universal frame does so dispose of all things as it finds agreeable to itself; for hardly may it be that your eye is able to range over many a league, but that the eye of God is powerless to embrace all things at a glance; or that to your soul it is given to dwell in thought on matters here or far away in Egypt or in Sicily, but that the wisdom and thought of God is not sufficient to include all things at one instant under His care. If only you would copy your own behaviour (16) where human beings are concerned. It is by acts of service and of kindness that you discover which of your fellows are willing to requite you in kind. It is by taking another into your counsel that you arrive at the secret of his wisdom. If, on like principle, you will but make trial of the gods by acts of service, whether they will choose to give you counsel in matters obscure to mortal vision, you shall discover the nature and the greatness of Godhead to be such that they are able at once to see all things and to hear all things and to be present everywhere, nor does the least thing escape their watchful care.

Soc. Send your advisors! Now, what happens when the people of Athens ask for guidance from an oracle and receive answers from the gods? Aren't you an Athenian? Don't you think the answer is meant for you too? What happens when they send signs to warn the states of Greece? Or to all of humanity? Aren't you a person? A Greek? Are these not meant for you as well? Can it be that you are the only one singled out for divine neglect? Again, do you think the gods could have instilled in human hearts the belief that they can bring good fortune or suffering if they didn’t have that power? Wouldn't people have uncovered the deception after all this time? Don't you see that the most enduring and wise of human institutions—whether cities or communities—are always the most pious? And in individual people, the older and wiser they become, the deeper their sense of spirituality? Yes, my good sir (he exclaimed), take this to heart and understand that just as your mind can control your body as it pleases, so must we think that the wisdom that exists in the universe governs all things as it sees fit; for it can hardly be that your eye can look out over many leagues, while the eye of God is powerless to see everything at once; or that your soul can think about matters here or far away in Egypt or Sicily, but that God's wisdom and thought aren't sufficient to encompass everything at once. If only you would model your behavior (16) with fellow humans. It’s through acts of service and kindness that you find out which of your peers are ready to return the favor. By including someone in your thoughts, you uncover the secrets of their wisdom. If, in the same way, you would test the gods with acts of service, you would find out that they can indeed guide you in matters beyond human understanding, and that their nature and greatness are such that they can see everything, hear everything, and be present everywhere; nothing escapes their vigilant care.

 (16) Or, "reason as you are wont to do."
(16) Or, "think like you usually do."

To my mind the effect of words like these was to cause those about him to hold aloof from unholiness, baseness, and injustice, not only whilst they were seen of men, but even in the solitary place, since they must believe that no part of their conduct could escape the eye of Heaven.

In my opinion, the impact of words like these was to make those around him stay away from wrongdoing, low behavior, and unfairness, not just when they were in public, but even in private, because they had to believe that no part of their actions could go unnoticed by Heaven.

V

V

I suppose it may be taken as admitted that self-control is a noble acquirement for a man. (1) If so, let us turn and consider whether by language like the following he was likely to lead his listeners onwards (2) to the attainment of this virtue. "Sirs," he would say, "if a war came upon us and we wished to choose a man who would best help us to save ourselves and to subdue our enemy, I suppose we should scarcely select one whom we knew to be a slave to his belly, to wine, or lust, and prone to succumb to toil or sleep. Could we expect such an one to save us or to master our foes? Or if one of us were nearing the end of his days, and he wished to discover some one to whom he might entrust his sons for education, his maiden daughters for protection, and his property in general for preservation, would he deem a libertine worthy of such offices? Why, no one would dream of entrusting his flocks and herds, his storehouses and barns, or the superintendence of his works to the tender mercies of an intemperate slave. If a butler or an errand boy with such a character were offered to us we would not take him as a free gift. And if he would not accept an intemperate slave, what pains should the master himself take to avoid that imputation. (3) For with the incontinent man it is not as with the self-seeker and the covetous. These may at any rate be held to enrich themselves in depriving others. But the intemperate man cannot claim in like fashion to be a blessing to himself if a curse to his neighbours; nay, the mischief which he may cause to others is nothing by comparison with that which redounds against himself, since it is the height of mischief to ruin—I do not say one's own house and property—but one's own body and one's own soul. Or to take an example from social intercourse, no one cares for a guest who evidently takes more pleasure in the wine and the viands than in the friends beside him—who stints his comrades of the affection due to them to dote upon a mistress. Does it not come to this, that every honest man is bound to look upon self-restraint as the very corner-stone of virtue: (4) which he should seek to lay down as the basis and foundation of his soul? Without self-restraint who can lay any good lesson to heart or practise it when learnt in any degree worth speaking of? Or, to put it conversely, what slave of pleasure will not suffer degeneracy of soul and body? By Hera, (5) well may every free man pray to be saved from the service of such a slave; and well too may he who is in bondage to such pleasures supplicate Heaven to send him good masters, seeing that is the one hope of salvation left him."

I suppose it’s generally accepted that self-control is an admirable quality for a man. (1) If that’s the case, let’s consider whether the following words would actually inspire his listeners (2) to develop this virtue. “Gentlemen,” he would say, “if war were to break out and we needed to choose someone who could help us survive and defeat our enemy, I doubt we’d pick someone we knew to be a slave to his cravings, whether it be food, drink, or lust, and who easily gives in to fatigue or sleep. Could we really expect someone like that to save us or conquer our foes? Or if one of us were nearing the end of his life and wanted to find someone to take care of his sons’ education, his daughters’ safety, and his assets in general, would he consider a libertine suitable for such responsibilities? Of course not; no one would dream of placing their livestock, their storage, or their projects in the hands of an unreliable person. If we were offered a butler or a helper with such a reputation, we wouldn’t accept him as a gift. And if he wouldn’t accept an unreliable servant, how much effort should the master himself put into avoiding that label? (3) The person lacking self-control isn’t the same as the selfish or greedy. Those can at least be seen as benefiting themselves at the expense of others. But the person who is out of control can’t claim to be a benefit to himself if he’s a burden to everyone around him; the damage he causes to others pales in comparison to what he does to himself, as it is truly disastrous to ruin—not just one's home and possessions—but one’s own body and soul. To use an example from social interactions, no one enjoys being around a guest who clearly finds more joy in food and drink than in the company of friends—who neglects his companions’ affection to fawn over a lover. Doesn’t it come down to this: that every decent person ought to see self-restraint as the foundation of virtue? (4) It should be the base upon which he builds his character. Without self-restraint, who can truly internalize any valuable lesson or practice it meaningfully? Or, to put it another way, what pleasure-seeker won’t experience a decline in both spirit and body? By Hera, (5) every free man has reason to pray to be saved from serving such a master; and it’s just as sensible for someone enslaved by such pleasures to ask Heaven for good masters, since that is his only hope for redemption.

 (1) Lit. "a beautiful and brave possession."

 (2) {proubibaze}.

 (3) Or, "how should the master himself beware lest he fall into that
    category."

 (4) {krepida}. See Pind. "Pyth." iv. 138; ib. vii. 3; ib. fr. 93.

 (5) See below, III. x. 9, xi. 5; IV. ii. 9, iv. 8; "Econ." x. 1;
    "Cyrop." I. iv. 12; Plat. "Phaedr." 230 B. Cf. Shakesp. "by'r
    Lakin."
(1) Literally, "a beautiful and brave possession."

(2) {proubibaze}.

(3) Or, "how should the master himself be careful not to fall into that category."

(4) {krepida}. See Pind. "Pyth." iv. 138; ib. vii. 3; ib. fr. 93.

(5) See below, III. x. 9, xi. 5; IV. ii. 9, iv. 8; "Econ." x. 1; "Cyrop." I. iv. 12; Plat. "Phaedr." 230 B. Cf. Shakesp. "by'r Lakin."

Well-tempered words: yet his self-restraint shone forth even more in his acts than in his language. Not only was he master over the pleasures which flow from the body, but of those also which are fed by riches, his belief being that he who receives money from this or that chance donor sets up over himself a master, and binds himself to an abominable slavery.

Well-chosen words: yet his self-control was even more evident in his actions than in his speech. He not only had mastery over physical pleasures but also over those that come from wealth. He believed that by accepting money from various donors, one makes oneself a servant and enters into a terrible form of slavery.

VI

VI

In this context some discussions with Antiphon the sophist (1) deserve record. Antiphon approaches Socrates in hope of drawing away his associates, and in their presence thus accosts him.

In this context, some conversations with Antiphon the sophist (1) are worth noting. Antiphon approaches Socrates, hoping to sway his followers, and greets him in their presence.

 (1) {o teratoskopos}, "jealous of Socrates," according to Aristotle
    ap. Diog. Laert. II. v. 25. See Cobet, "Pros. Xen."
(1) {o teratoskopos}, "jealous of Socrates," according to Aristotle ap. Diog. Laert. II. v. 25. See Cobet, "Pros. Xen."

Antiphon. Why, Socrates, I always thought it was expected of students of philosophy to grow in happiness daily; but you seem to have reaped other fruits from your philosophy. At any rate, you exist, I do not say live, in a style such as no slave serving under a master would put up with. Your meat and your drink are of the cheapest sort, and as to clothes, you cling to one wretched cloak which serves you for summer and winter alike; and so you go the whole year round, without shoes to your feet or a shirt to your back. Then again, you are not for taking or making money, the mere seeking of which is a pleasure, even as the possession of it adds to the sweetness and independence of existence. I do not know whether you follow the common rule of teachers, who try to fashion their pupils in imitation of themselves, (2) and propose to mould the characters of your companions; but if you do you ought to dub yourself professor of the art of wretchedness. (3)

Antiphon. Why, Socrates, I always thought that philosophy students were supposed to grow happier every day; but you seem to have gained different results from your philosophy. At any rate, you exist—I'm not saying you live—in a way that no slave under a master would tolerate. Your food and drink are the cheapest kinds, and as for clothes, you stick to one miserable cloak that works for both summer and winter; and so you go all year round without shoes or a proper shirt. Plus, you aren’t interested in making or having money, the mere pursuit of which can bring pleasure, just as having it adds to the enjoyment and freedom of life. I don't know if you follow the usual pattern of teachers, who try to shape their students to be like them, (2) and aim to influence the characters of your friends; but if you do, you should call yourself a professor of the art of misery. (3)

 (2) Or, "try to turn out their pupils as copies of themselves."

 (3) See Arist. "Clouds," {on o kakodaimon Sokrates kai Khairephon}.
(2) Or, "try to shape their students to be just like them."

(3) See Arist. "Clouds," {on o kakodaimon Sokrates kai Khairephon}.

Thus challenged, Socrates replied: One thing to me is certain, Antiphon; you have conceived so vivid an idea of my life of misery that for yourself you would choose death sooner than live as I do. Suppose now we turn and consider what it is you find so hard in my life. Is it that he who takes payment must as a matter of contract finish the work for which he is paid, whereas I, who do not take it, lie under no constraint to discourse except with whom I choose? Do you despise my dietary on the ground that the food which I eat is less wholesome and less stengthening than yours, or that the articles of my consumption are so scarce and so much costlier to procure than yours? Or have the fruits of your marketing a flavour denied to mine? Do you not know the sharper the appetite the less the need of sauces, the keener the thirst the less the desire for out-of-the-way drinks? And as to raiment, clothes, you know, are changed on account of cold or else of heat. People only wear boots and shoes in order not to gall their feet and be prevented walking. Now I ask you, have you ever noticed that I keep more within doors than others on account of the cold? Have you ever seen me battling with any one for shade on account of the heat? Do you not know that even a weakling by nature may, by dint of exercise and practice, come to outdo a giant who neglects his body? He will beat him in the particular point of training, and bear the strain more easily. But you apparently will not have it that I, who am for ever training myself to endure this, that, and the other thing which may befall the body, can brave all hardships more easily than yourself for instance, who perhaps are not so practised. And to escape slavery to the belly or to sleep or lechery, can you suggest more effective means than the possession of some powerful attraction, some counter-charm which shall gladden not only in the using, but by the hope enkindled of its lasting usefulness? And yet this you do know; joy is not to him who feels that he is doing well in nothing—it belongs to one who is persuaded that things are progressing with him, be it tillage or the working of a vessel, (4) or any of the thousand and one things on which a man may chance to be employed. To him it is given to rejoice as he reflects, "I am doing well." But is the pleasured derived from all these put together half as joyous as the consciousness of becoming better oneself, of acquiring better and better friends? That, for my part, is the belief I continue to cherish.

So, faced with this challenge, Socrates replied: One thing is clear to me, Antiphon; you have such a vivid picture of my miserable life that you would choose death over living like I do. Now let's look at what you find so difficult about my life. Is it that someone who gets paid has to finish the job for which they were hired, while I, who don’t take payment, am free to talk to whoever I want? Do you look down on my diet because the food I eat is less healthy and less filling than yours, or because what I eat is harder to find and more expensive than what you have? Or does the food you buy taste better than mine? Don’t you realize that the hungrier you are, the less you need fancy sauces, and the thirstier you are, the less you care for exotic drinks? As for clothing, we change outfits to deal with cold or heat. People wear shoes just to protect their feet while walking. Now I ask you, have you ever noticed that I stay indoors more than others because of the cold? Have you seen me fighting for shade because of the heat? Don’t you know that even someone weak by nature can, through exercise and practice, outperform a giant who neglects their body? They will excel in their training and handle the strain more easily. But it seems you refuse to believe that I, who constantly train myself to handle whatever the body throws at me, can endure hardships more easily than you, who might not be as practiced. And to avoid being enslaved by hunger, sleep, or lust, can you think of a better way than having something powerful to look forward to, something that not only brings joy in its use but also promises lasting benefit? Yet you do know this; happiness doesn’t come from feeling accomplished in nothing—it belongs to someone who believes they are making progress, whether in farming or crafting, or any of the countless tasks one might undertake. They can find joy in thinking, "I’m doing well." But is the pleasure from all those things combined half as joyful as the awareness of becoming a better person, of making better friends? That’s what I continue to believe.

 (4) "The business of a shipowner or skipper."
(4) "The work of a shipowner or captain."

Again, if it be a question of helping one's friends or country, which of the two will have the larger leisure to devote to these objects—he who leads the life which I lead to-day, or he who lives in the style which you deem so fortunate? Which of the two will adopt a soldier's life more easily—the man who cannot get on without expensive living, or he to whom whatever comes to hand suffices? Which will be the readier to capitulate and cry "mercy" in a siege—the man of elaborate wants, or he who can get along happily with the readiest things to hand? You, Antiphon, would seem to suggest that happiness consists of luxury and extravagance; I hold a different creed. To have no wants at all is, to my mind, an attribute of Godhead; (5) to have as few wants as possible the nearest approach to Godhead; and as that which is divine is mightiest, so that is next mightiest which comes closest to the divine.

Once again, if the issue is about helping friends or the country, who has more time to dedicate to these goals—someone living my life today, or someone who lives in the way you think is so fortunate? Who would find it easier to adopt a soldier's life—someone who can't get by without luxury, or someone who is satisfied with whatever is available? Who would be quicker to give in and plead for mercy during a siege—the person with extravagant needs or the one who can happily manage with what's at hand? You, Antiphon, seem to think that happiness is all about luxury and excess; I have a different belief. To have no wants at all is, in my opinion, a trait of the divine; to have as few wants as possible is the closest we can get to the divine; and just as what is divine is the strongest, what is closest to the divine is the next strongest.

 (5) Cf. Aristot. "Eth. N." x. viii. 1.
(5) Cf. Aristot. "Eth. N." x. viii. 1.

Returning to the charge at another time, this same Antiphon engaged Socrates in conversation thus.

Returning to the topic later, this same Antiphon engaged Socrates in conversation like this.

Ant. Socrates, for my part, I believe you to be a good and upright man; but for your wisdom I cannot say much. I fancy you would hardly dispute the verdict yourself, since, as I remark, you do not ask a money payment for your society; and yet if it were your cloak now, or your house, or any other of your possessions, you would set some value upon it, and never dream, I will not say of parting with it gratis, but of exchanging it for less than its worth. A plain proof, to my mind, that if you thought your society worth anything, you would ask for it not less than its equivalent in gold. (6) Hence the conclusion to which I have come, as already stated: good and upright you may be, since you do not cheat people from pure selfishness; but wise you cannot be, since your knowledge is not worth a cent.

Ant. Socrates, I see you as a good and honest person; however, I can't say much about your wisdom. I doubt you would disagree with my view, considering you don’t charge for your company. Yet, if it were your cloak, your house, or any of your belongings, you would value them and wouldn’t dream of giving them away for free, let alone trading them for less than what they’re worth. To me, this clearly shows that if you believed your company had any value, you would ask for at least an equivalent in gold. (6) Therefore, I've come to the conclusion I mentioned earlier: while you may be good and honest, avoiding cheating out of pure self-interest, you can't be wise because your knowledge isn't worth anything.

 (6) Or rather "money," lit. "silver."
(6) Or rather "money," literally "silver."

To this onslaught Socrates: Antiphon, it is a tenet which we cling to that beauty and wisdom have this in common, that there is a fair way and a foul way in which to dispose of them. The vendor of beauty purchases an evil name, but supposing the same person has discerned a soul of beauty in his lover and makes that man his friend, we regard his choice as sensible. (7) So is it with wisdom; he who sells it for money to the first bidder we name a sophist, (8) as though one should say a man who prostitutes his wisdom; but if the same man, discerning the noble nature of another, shall teach that other every good thing, and make him his friend, of such a one we say he does that which it is the duty of every good citizen of gentle soul to do. In accordance with this theory, I too, Antiphon, having my tastes, even as another finds pleasure in his horse and his hounds, (9) and another in his fighting cocks, so I too take my pleasure in good friends; and if I have any good thing myself I teach it them, or I commend them to others by whom I think they will be helped forwards on the path of virtue. The treasures also of the wise of old, written and bequeathed in their books, (10) I unfold and peruse in common with my friends. If our eye light upon any good thing we cull it eagerly, and regard it as great gain if we may but grow in friendship with one another.

To this attack Socrates: Antiphon, we hold onto the belief that beauty and wisdom share a common trait: there’s a right way and a wrong way to handle them. The person who sells beauty earns a bad reputation, but if that same individual recognizes the inner beauty in his lover and becomes his friend, we see his decision as wise. (7) The same goes for wisdom; someone who sells it to the highest bidder is called a sophist, (8) as if to say he's selling out his wisdom. However, if that same person recognizes the noble qualities in someone else, teaches him all the good things, and makes him his friend, we view him as fulfilling the duty of every good and kind citizen. Following this idea, I too, Antiphon, have my preferences; just as others find joy in their horses and hounds, (9) or in their fighting cocks, I find joy in good friends. If I possess any good knowledge, I share it with them, or I recommend them to others whom I believe can help them on their journey toward virtue. I also explore and discuss the wisdom of the ancients, which they have recorded in their books, (10) with my friends. When we discover something good, we eagerly embrace it and see it as a significant gain if we can grow our friendship with one another.

 (7) Add "and a sign of modesty," {sophrona nomizomen}.

 (8) {sophistas}. See Grote, "H. G." viii. 482 foll.; "Hunting," xi.
    foll.

 (9) Cf. Plat. "Lys." 211 E.

 (10) Cf. "Symp." iv. 27.
(7) Add "and a sign of modesty," {sophrona nomizomen}.

(8) {sophistas}. See Grote, "H. G." viii. 482 foll.; "Hunting," xi. foll.

(9) Cf. Plat. "Lys." 211 E.

(10) Cf. "Symp." iv. 27.

As I listened to this talk I could not but reflect that he, the master, was a person to be envied, and that we, his hearers, were being led by him to beauty and nobility of soul.

As I listened to this talk, I couldn’t help but think that he, the master, was someone to be envied, and that we, his audience, were being guided by him towards beauty and the nobility of spirit.

Again on some occasion the same Antiphon asked Socrates how he expected to make politicians of others when, even if he had the knowledge, he did not engage in politics himself.

Once again, at another time, Antiphon asked Socrates how he planned to turn others into politicians when, even if he had the knowledge, he didn't participate in politics himself.

Socrates replied: I will put to you a question, Antiphon: Which were the more statesmanlike proceeding, to practise politics myself single-handed, or to devote myself to making as many others as possible fit to engage in that pursuit?

Socrates replied: I have a question for you, Antiphon: Which approach is more like a true statesman, to engage in politics myself alone, or to focus on preparing as many others as possible to participate in that pursuit?

VII

VII

Let us here turn and consider whether by deterring his associates from quackery and false seeming he did not directly stimulate them to the pursuit of virtue. (1) He used often to say there was no better road to renown than the one by which a man became good at that wherein he desired to be reputed good. (2) The truth of the concept he enforced as follows: "Let us reflect on what a man would be driven to do who wanted to be thought a good flute player, without really being so. He would be forced to imitate the good flute player in the externals of his art, would he not? and first or all, seeing that these artists always have a splendid equipment, (3) and travel about with a long train of attendants, he must have the same; in the next place, they can command the plaudits of a multitude, he therefore must pack a conclave of clackers. But one thing is clear: nothing must induce him to give a performance, or he will be exposed at once, and find himself a laughing-stock not only as a sorry sort of flute player, but as a wretched imposter. And now he has a host of expenses to meet; and not one advantage to be reaped; and worse than all his evil reputation. What is left him but to lead a life stale and unprofitable, the scorn and mockery of men? Let us try another case. Suppose a man wished to be thought a good general or a good pilot, though he were really nothing of the sort, let us picture to our minds how it will fare with him. Of two misfortunes one: either with a strong desire to be thought proficient in these matters, he will fail to get others to agree with him, which will be bad enough; or he will succeed, with worse result; since it stands to reason that anyone appointed to work a vessel or lead an army without the requisite knowledge will speedily ruin a number of people whom he least desires to hurt, and will make but a sorry exit from the stage himself." Thus first by one instance and then another would he demonstrate the unprofitableness of trying to appear rich, or courageous, or strong, without really being the thing pretended. "You are sure sooner or later to have commands laid upon you beyond your power to execute, and failing just where you are credited with capacity, the world will give you no commiseration." "I call that man a cheat, and a great cheat too," he would say, "who gets money or goods out of some one by persuasion, and defrauds him; but of all imposters he surely is the biggest who can delude people into thinking that he is fit to lead the state, when all the while he is a worthless creature." (4)

Let's consider whether by discouraging his friends from pretending and being fake, he actually encouraged them to pursue virtue. (1) He often said there was no better way to gain respect than by genuinely becoming good at what you want to be recognized for. (2) He reinforced his point like this: "Imagine a person who wants to be seen as a good flute player, but isn't really one. They would have to copy the good flute player's external traits, wouldn't they? Firstly, since these artists always have impressive gear and travel with a large entourage, they would need the same. Next, they must gather a group of cheerleaders since good players often attract applause from crowds. But one thing is certain: they must avoid performing, or they’ll be exposed and become a laughingstock—not just a poor flute player, but a pathetic fraud. Now they have a lot of expenses and not a single benefit to gain, and to make things worse, they’re left with a terrible reputation. What's left for them but a dull, unfulfilling life, ridiculed by others? Let's look at another example. Suppose someone wants to be seen as a good general or pilot, even though they aren't. Picture how it would go for them. They face two problems: either they desperately want to be seen as skilled but can't convince anyone else of that, which is bad enough; or they manage to convince others, which is worse, because it’s clear that someone in charge of a ship or leading an army without the necessary skills will quickly endanger people they don’t want to hurt and will exit the scene in disgrace." Thus, through one example after another, he would show the futility of trying to appear wealthy, brave, or strong without actually being so. "Sooner or later, you'll be given responsibilities that are beyond your ability to handle, and when you fail in areas where you're thought competent, the world won't pity you." "I consider a person who convinces someone to give them money or goods through persuasion to be a cheat, a big cheat at that," he would say, "but of all imposters, the worst is the one who tricks people into thinking they are fit to lead the state while being completely worthless." (4)

 (1) {apotrepon proutrepen}. See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 450 foll.

 (2) Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 22.

 (3) Or, "furniture of the finest," like Arion's in Herod. i. 24.
    Schneid. cf. Demosth. 565. 6.

 (4) Here follows the sentence  ({emoi men oun edokei kai tou
    alazoneuesthai apotrepein tous sunontas toiade dialegomenos}),
    which, for the sake of convenience, I have attached to the first
    sentence of Bk. II. ch. i.  ({edokei de moi... ponou.}) I
    believe that the commentators are right in bracketing both one and
    the other as editorial interpolations.
(1) {apotrepon proutrepen}. See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 450 foll.

(2) Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 22.

(3) Or, "furniture of the finest," like Arion's in Herod. i. 24. Schneid. cf. Demosth. 565. 6.

(4) Here follows the sentence ({emoi men oun edokei kai tou alazoneuesthai apotrepein tous sunontas toiade dialegomenos}), which, for convenience, I have attached to the first sentence of Bk. II. ch. i. ({edokei de moi... ponou.}) I believe that the commentators are right in bracketing both one and the other as editorial additions.




BOOK II

I

I

Now, if the effect of such discourses was, as I imagine, to deter his hearers from the paths of quackery and false-seeming, (1) so I am sure that language like the following was calculated to stimulate his followers to practise self-control and endurance: self-control in the matters of eating, drinking, sleeping, and the cravings of lust; endurance of cold and heat and toil and pain. He had noticed the undue licence which one of his acquaintances allowed himself in all such matters. (2) Accordingly he thus addressed him:

Now, if the effect of these talks was, as I imagine, to discourage his listeners from the ways of dishonesty and deception, (1) then I'm certain that language like the following was meant to inspire his followers to practice self-discipline and perseverance: self-control regarding eating, drinking, sleeping, and sexual desires; endurance of cold, heat, hard work, and pain. He had observed the excessive freedom that one of his friends permitted himself in all these areas. (2) So he addressed him like this:

 (1) This sentence in the Greek concludes Bk. I. There is something
    wrong or very awkward in the text here.

 (2) Cf. Grote, "Plato," III. xxxviii. p. 530.
(1) This sentence in Greek wraps up Book I. There’s something off or really awkward in the text here.

(2) See Grote, "Plato," III. xxxviii. p. 530.

Tell me, Aristippus (Socrates said), supposing you had two children entrusted to you to educate, one of them must be brought up with an aptitude for government, and the other without the faintest propensity to rule—how would you educate them? What do you say? Shall we begin our inquiry from the beginning, as it were, with the bare elements of food and nutriment?

Tell me, Aristippus (Socrates said), if you had two children to raise, one of them destined for leadership, and the other with no inclination to govern—how would you educate them? What do you think? Should we start our discussion from the basics, like food and nourishment?

Ar. Yes, food to begin with, by all means, being a first principle, (3) without which there is no man living but would perish.

Ar. Yes, food is essential to start with, as a basic necessity, (3) without which no one can survive.

 (3) Aristippus plays upon the word {arkhe}.
(3) Aristippus plays with the word {arkhe}.

Soc. Well, then, we may expect, may we not, that a desire to grasp food at certain seasons will exhibit itself in both the children?

Soc. Well, then, we can expect, can’t we, that a desire to get food at certain times will show up in both the kids?

Ar. It is to be expected.

Of course.

Soc. Which, then, of the two must be trained, of his own free will, (4) to prosecute a pressing business rather than gratify the belly?

Soc. Which one of the two should be trained, of his own free will, (4) to focus on important work instead of just satisfying his hunger?

 (4) {proairesis}.
(4) {decision-making}.

Ar. No doubt the one who is being trained to govern, if we would not have affairs of state neglected during (5) his government.

Ar. No doubt the person who is being trained to govern, if we don't want state affairs to be neglected during their leadership.

 (5) Lit. "along of."
(5) Lit. "along with."

Soc. And the same pupil must be furnished with a power of holding out against thirst also when the craving to quench it comes upon him?

Soc. And the same student must also be able to resist thirst when the urge to satisfy it hits him?

Ar. Certainly he must.

Of course he must.

Soc. And on which of the two shall we confer such self-control in regard to sleep as shall enable him to rest late and rise early, or keep vigil, if the need arise?

Soc. So, which of the two will we give this self-control over sleep that will allow him to sleep in and wake up early or stay up if necessary?

Ar. To the same one of the two must be given that endurance also.

Ar. The same one must also be given that endurance too.

Soc. Well, and a continence in regard to matters sexual so great that nothing of the sort shall prevent him from doing his duty? Which of them claims that?

Soc. So, is there someone who can really say they have such self-control when it comes to sex that nothing can distract them from their responsibilities? Who's making that claim?

Ar. The same one of the pair again.

Ar. The same one from the pair again.

Soc. Well, and on which of the two shall be bestowed, as a further gift, the voluntary resolution to face toils rather than turn and flee from them?

Soc. So, which of the two will be granted, as an additional gift, the willingness to confront challenges instead of running away from them?

Ar. This, too, belongs of right to him who is being trained for government.

Ar. This also rightfully belongs to someone who is being prepared for leadership.

Soc. Well, and to which of them will it better accord to be taught all knowledge necessary towards the mastery of antagonists?

Soc. So, which of them would be better suited to learn all the knowledge needed to master opponents?

Ar. To our future ruler certainly, for without these parts of learning all his other capacities will be merely waste.

Ar. To our future ruler, definitely, because without these areas of knowledge, all his other skills will just be wasted.

Soc. (6)Will not a man so educated be less liable to be entrapped by rival powers, and so escape a common fate of living creatures, some of which (as we all know) are hooked through their own greediness, and often even in spite of a native shyness; but through appetite for food they are drawn towards the bait, and are caught; while others are similarly ensnared by drink?

Soc. (6) Wouldn't a person with that kind of education be less likely to be fooled by competing forces, helping them avoid the common fate of living beings? Some of these creatures, as we all know, get caught because of their own greed, often despite being naturally cautious; they are lured in by their hunger and end up trapped, while others fall into similar traps because of their thirst?

 (6)  (SS. 4, 5, L. Dind. ed Lips.)
(6)  (SS. 4, 5, L. Dind. ed Lips.)

Ar. Undoubtedly.

Absolutely.

Soc. And others again are victims of amorous heat, as quails, for instance, or partridges, which, at the cry of the hen-bird, with lust and expectation of such joys grow wild, and lose their power of computing dangers: on they rush, and fall into the snare of the hunter?

Soc. Others, too, fall victim to passionate desires, like quails or partridges, which, at the call of the hen, become driven by lust and anticipation of pleasure, acting recklessly and losing their ability to assess dangers: they rush in and end up caught in the hunter's trap.

Aristippus assented.

Aristippus agreed.

Soc. And would it not seem to be a base thing for a man to be affected like the silliest bird or beast? as when the adulterer invades the innermost sanctum (7) of the house, though he is well aware of the risks which his crime involves, (8) the formidable penalties of the law, the danger of being caught in the toils, and then suffering the direst contumely. Considering all the hideous penalties which hang over the adulterer's head, considering also the many means at hand to release him from the thraldom of his passion, that a man should so drive headlong on to the quicksands of perdition (9)—what are we to say of such frenzy? The wretch who can so behave must surely be tormented by an evil spirit? (10)

Soc. And wouldn't it seem disgraceful for a man to be swayed like the dumbest bird or animal? Just like when an adulterer invades the deepest part (7) of a home, fully aware of the dangers his actions bring, (8) the serious legal consequences, the risk of getting caught, and then facing the harshest humiliation. Considering all the terrible penalties that loom over the adulterer's head, and the many ways available to free him from the grip of his desires, how can a man recklessly rush headlong into the quicksand of destruction (9)—what can we say about such madness? The unfortunate person who acts this way must surely be tormented by a malevolent spirit? (10)

 (7) {eis as eirktas}. The penetralia.

 (8) Or, "he knows the risks he runs of suffering those penalties with
    which the law threatens his crime should he fall into the snare,
    and being caught, be mutilated."

 (9) Or, "leap headlong into the jaws of danger."

 (10) {kakodaimonontos}.
(7) {eis as eirktas}. The inner sanctum.

(8) Or, "he understands the risks he faces of suffering the penalties threatened by the law for his crime if he falls into the trap and gets caught, resulting in punishment."

(9) Or, "jump straight into the jaws of danger."

(10) {kakodaimonontos}.

Ar. So it strikes me.

Got it.

Soc. And does it not strike you as a sign of strange indifference that, whereas the greater number of the indispensable affairs of men, as for instance, those of war and agriculture, and more than half the rest, need to be conducted under the broad canopy of heaven, (11) yet the majority of men are quite untrained to wrestle with cold and heat?

Soc. And doesn’t it seem odd that, while most of the essential activities of people, like war and farming, and many other things, need to take place outdoors, the majority of people are totally unprepared to deal with the cold and heat?

 (11) Or, "in the open air."
(11) Or, "outside."

Aristippus again assented.

Aristippus agreed again.

Soc. And do you not agree that he who is destined to rule must train himself to bear these things lightly?

Soc. Don’t you think that someone who is meant to lead should learn to handle these things with ease?

Ar. Most certainly.

Of course.

Soc. And whilst we rank those who are self-disciplined in all these matters among persons fit to rule, we are bound to place those incapable of such conduct in the category of persons without any pretension whatsoever to be rulers?

Soc. And while we consider those who have self-control in these matters as suitable to lead, we must place those who lack such discipline in the group of people who have no claim to be leaders whatsoever?

Ar. I assent.

Sure. I agree.

Soc. Well, then, since you know the rank peculiar to either section of mankind, did it ever strike you to consider to which of the two you are best entitled to belong?

Soc. Well, since you understand the unique status of each group of people, have you ever thought about which of the two you deserve to be a part of?

Yes I have (replied Aristippus). I do not dream for a moment of ranking myself in the class of those who wish to rule. In fact, considering how serious a business it is to cater for one's own private needs, I look upon it as the mark of a fool not to be content with that, but to further saddle oneself with the duty of providing the rest of the community with whatever they may be pleased to want. That, at the cost of much personal enjoyment, a man should put himself at the head of a state, and then, if he fail to carry through every jot and tittle of that state's desire, be held to criminal account, does seem to me the very extravagance of folly. Why, bless me! states claim to treat their rulers precisely as I treat my domestic slaves. I expect my attendants to furnish me with an abundance of necessaries, but not to lay a finger on one of them themselves. So these states regard it as the duty of a ruler to provide them with all the good things imaginable, but to keep his own hands off them all the while. (12) So then, for my part, if anybody desires to have a heap of pother himself, (13) and be a nuisance to the rest of the world, I will educate him in the manner suggested, and he shall take his place among those who are fit to rule; but for myself, I beg to be enrolled amongst those who wish to spend their days as easily and pleasantly as possible.

“Yes, I have,” replied Aristippus. “I don’t for a second consider myself among those who want to rule. In fact, when I think about how serious it is to take care of one’s own needs, I view it as foolish not to be satisfied with that, but to take on the extra burden of providing for everyone else’s wants. The idea that someone should sacrifice their own happiness to lead a state, and then be held responsible for fulfilling every single demand of that state, seems to me the height of absurdity. Honestly! States treat their leaders just like I treat my household staff. I expect my servants to provide me with plenty of essentials, but not to touch any of them themselves. Similarly, states see it as a ruler’s duty to supply them with every possible good thing while keeping their own hands off. So, as for me, if anyone wants to create chaos for themselves and annoy everyone else, I’ll teach them the way suggested, and they can join those suited to rule; but personally, I choose to be among those who want to live as easily and enjoyably as possible.”

 (12) Or, "but he must have no finger in the pie himself."

 (13) See Kuhner ad loc.
(12) Or, "but he shouldn't get involved himself."

(13) See Kuhner ad loc.

Soc. Shall we then at this point turn and inquire which of the two are likely to lead the pleasanter life, the rulers or the ruled?

Soc. So, should we now ask which of the two is likely to have a more enjoyable life, the rulers or the ruled?

Ar. By all means let us do so.

Sure, let's do it.

Soc. To begin then with the nations and races known to ourselves. (14) In Asia the Persians are the rulers, while the Syrians, Phrygians, Lydians are ruled; and in Europe we find the Scythians ruling, and the Maeotians being ruled. In Africa (15) the Carthaginians are rulers, the Libyans ruled. Which of these two sets respectively leads the happier life, in your opinion? Or, to come nearer home—you are yourself a Hellene—which among Hellenes enjoy the happier existence, think you, the dominant or the subject states?

Soc. Let's start with the nations and races we know. (14) In Asia, the Persians are in charge, while the Syrians, Phrygians, and Lydians are under their rule. In Europe, the Scythians are in power, and the Maeotians are ruled. In Africa (15), the Carthaginians hold power, while the Libyans are subjected. Which of these two groups do you think leads the happier life? Or, to bring it closer to home—you are a Hellene yourself—which among the Hellenes do you think has the happier existence, the dominant states or the subjugated ones?

 (14) Or, "the outer world, the non-Hellenic races and nationalities of
    which we have any knowledge."

 (15) Lit. "Libya."
(14) Or, "the outside world, the non-Greek races and nationalities that we know about."

(15) Literally, "Libya."

Nay, (16) I would have you to understand (exclaimed Aristippus) that I am just as far from placing myself in the ranks of slavery; there is, I take it, a middle path between the two which it is my ambition to tread, avoiding rule and slavery alike; it lies through freedom—the high road which leads to happiness.

No, (16) I want you to understand (shouted Aristippus) that I won't put myself in a position of slavery; I believe there’s a middle ground between the two that I aim to walk, steering clear of both power and oppression; it goes through freedom—the main road that leads to happiness.

 (16) Or, "Pardon me interrupting you, Socrates; but I have not the
    slightest intention of placing myself." See W. L. Newman, op. cit.
    i. 306.
(16) Or, "Excuse me for interrupting you, Socrates; but I have no intention of putting myself forward." See W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 306.

Soc. True, if only your path could avoid human beings, as it avoids rule and slavery, there would be something in what you say. But being placed as you are amidst human beings, if you purpose neither to rule nor to be ruled, and do not mean to dance attendance, if you can help it, on those who rule, you must surely see that the stronger have an art to seat the weaker on the stool of repentance (17) both in public and in private, and to treat them as slaves. I daresay you have not failed to note this common case: a set of people has sown and planted, whereupon in comes another set and cuts their corn and fells their fruit-trees, and in every way lays siege to them because, though weaker, they refuse to pay them proper court, till at length they are persuaded to accept slavery rather than war against their betters. And in private life also, you will bear me out, the brave and powerful are known to reduce the helpless and cowardly to bondage, and to make no small profit out of their victims.

Soc. It's true, if only your path could avoid people, as it avoids rules and slavery, there would be some truth in what you say. But being surrounded by people, if you plan neither to rule nor to be ruled, and don’t want to cater to those in power, you must see that the strong have a way of making the weak feel ashamed both in public and in private, treating them like slaves. I’m sure you’ve noticed this common situation: a group of people has sown and planted, then another group comes in and harvests their crops and chops down their fruit trees, essentially besieging them because, even though they're weaker, they refuse to show the proper respect until they eventually agree to accept slavery instead of fighting against their superiors. And in personal life too, you can confirm that the brave and powerful often reduce the helpless and cowardly to servitude, profiting from their victims.

 (17) See "Symp." iii. 11; "Cyrop." II. ii. 14; Plat. "Ion," 535 E; L.
    Dindorf ad loc.
(17) See "Symp." iii. 11; "Cyrop." II. ii. 14; Plat. "Ion," 535 E; L. Dindorf ad loc.

Ar. Yes, but I must tell you I have a simple remedy against all such misadventures. I do not confine myself to any single civil community. I roam the wide world a foreigner.

Ar. Yes, but I must tell you I have a simple solution for all those mishaps. I don’t limit myself to any one community. I travel the world as an outsider.

Soc. Well, now, that is a masterly stroke, upon my word! (18) Of course, ever since the decease of Sinis, and Sciron, and Procrustes, (19) foreign travellers have had an easy time of it. But still, if I bethink me, even in these modern days the members of free communities do pass laws in their respective countries for self-protection against wrong-doing. Over and above their personal connections, they provide themselves with a host of friends; they gird their cities about with walls and battlements; they collect armaments to ward off evil-doers; and to make security doubly sure, they furnish themselves with allies from foreign states. In spite of all which defensive machinery these same free citizens do occasionally fall victims to injustice. But you, who are without any of these aids; you, who pass half your days on the high roads where iniquity is rife; (20) you, who, into whatever city you enter, are less than the least of its free members, and moreover are just the sort of person whom any one bent on mischief would single out for attack—yet you, with your foreigner's passport, are to be exempt from injury? So you flatter yourself. And why? Will the state authorities cause proclamation to be made on your behalf: "The person of this man Aristippus is secure; let his going out and his coming in be free from danger"? Is that the ground of your confidence? or do you rather rest secure in the consciousness that you would prove such a slave as no master would care to keep? For who would care to have in his house a fellow with so slight a disposition to work and so strong a propensity to extravagance? Suppose we stop and consider that very point: how do masters deal with that sort of domestic? If I am not mistaken, they chastise his wantonness by starvation; they balk his thieving tendencies by bars and bolts where there is anything to steal; they hinder him from running away by bonds and imprisonment; they drive the sluggishness out of him with the lash. Is it not so? Or how do you proceed when you discover the like tendency in one of your domestics?

Soc. Well, that's quite the clever trick, I must say! Of course, ever since Sinis, Sciron, and Procrustes were gone, travelers have had it easy. But if I think about it, even today, people in free societies make laws to protect themselves from wrongdoing. Besides their personal connections, they gather lots of friends; they fortify their cities with walls and defenses; they stock up on weapons to fend off criminals; and to make sure they're safe, they even team up with allies from other states. Despite all this protective gear, these same free citizens sometimes still fall victim to injustice. But you, without any of these protections; you, who spend half your days on the dangerous highways; you, who, no matter what city you enter, are lesser than even the lowest of its free citizens, and the type of person anyone looking to cause trouble would easily pick out for attack—yet you believe that with your foreign passport, you are safe from harm? Now that’s a flattering thought. And why? Do you think the authorities will proclaim: "This man Aristippus is safe; let him go in and out without fear"? Is that what gives you confidence? Or do you find security in knowing you would be such a worthless slave that no owner would want to keep you? Who would want a servant who hardly wants to work but loves to spend money? Let’s pause and think about this: how do owners deal with such employees? If I’m not mistaken, they punish laziness by withholding food; they prevent stealing with locks and bars if there's anything valuable; they stop escape with chains and confinement; they beat the laziness out of them with a whip. Isn’t that how it goes? Or how do you handle it when you see the same tendencies in one of your workers?

 (18) Or, "Well foiled!" "A masterly fall! my prince of wrestlers."

 (19) For these mythical highway robbers, see Diod. iv. 59; and for
    Sciron in particular, Plut. "Theseus," 10.

 (20) Or, "where so many suffer wrong."
(18) Or, "Nice move!" "An amazing fall! my champion of wrestlers."

(19) For these legendary highway robbers, see Diod. iv. 59; and for Sciron specifically, Plut. "Theseus," 10.

(20) Or, "where so many are wronged."

Ar. I correct them with all the plagues, till I force them to serve me properly. But, Socrates, to return to your pupil educated in the royal art, (21) which, if I mistake not, you hold to be happiness: how, may I ask, will he be better off than others who lie in evil case, in spite of themselves, simply because they suffer perforce, but in his case the hunger and the thirst, the cold shivers and the lying awake at nights, with all the changes he will ring on pain, are of his own choosing? For my part I cannot see what difference it makes, provided it is one and the same bare back which receives the stripes, whether the whipping be self-appointed or unasked for; nor indeed does it concern my body in general, provided it be my body, whether I am beleaguered by a whole armament of such evils (22) of my own will or against my will—except only for the folly which attaches to self-appointed suffering.

I correct them with all the hardships until I force them to serve me properly. But, Socrates, to return to your student trained in the royal art, which, if I’m not mistaken, you believe to be happiness: how will he be better off than those who are in a bad situation, despite themselves, simply because they have to suffer? In his case, the hunger and thirst, the cold chills, and the sleepless nights, along with all the variations of pain he’ll experience, are all his choice. For my part, I don’t see what difference it makes, as long as it's the same bare back taking the blows, whether the beating is self-imposed or comes uninvited; it doesn’t really concern my body in general, as long as it’s my body, whether I’m surrounded by a whole host of such troubles by my own will or against my will—except for the foolishness that comes with self-inflicted suffering.

 (21) Cf. below, IV. ii. 11; Plat. "Statesm." 259 B; "Euthyd." 291 C;
    K. Joel, op. cit. p. 387 foll. "Aristippus anticipates Adeimantus"
    ("Rep." 419), W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 395.

 (22) Cf. "suffers the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune."
(21) See below, IV. ii. 11; Plat. "Statesm." 259 B; "Euthyd." 291 C; K. Joel, cited work, p. 387 and following. "Aristippus predicts Adeimantus" ("Rep." 419), W. L. Newman, cited work i. 395.

(22) See "endures the challenges and misfortunes of outrageous fate."

Soc. What, Aristippus, does it not seem to you that, as regards such matters, there is all the difference between voluntary and involuntary suffering, in that he who starves of his own accord can eat when he chooses, and he who thirsts of his own free will can drink, and so for the rest; but he who suffers in these ways perforce cannot desist from the suffering when the humour takes him? Again, he who suffers hardship voluntarily, gaily confronts his troubles, being buoyed on hope (23)—just as a hunter in pursuit of wild beasts, through hope of capturing his quarry, finds toil a pleasure—and these are but prizes of little worth in return for their labours; but what shall we say of their reward who toil to obtain to themselves good friends, or to subdue their enemies, or that through strength of body and soul they may administer their households well, befriend their friends, and benefit the land which gave them birth? Must we not suppose that these too will take their sorrows lightly, looking to these high ends? Must we not suppose that they too will gaily confront existence, who have to support them not only their conscious virtue, but the praise and admiration of the world? (24) And once more, habits of indolence, along with the fleeting pleasures of the moment, are incapable, as gymnastic trainers say, of setting up (25) a good habit of body, or of implanting in the soul any knowledge worthy of account; whereas by painstaking endeavour in the pursuit of high and noble deeds, as good men tell us, through endurance we shall in the end attain the goal. So Hesiod somewhere says: (26)

Soc. So, Aristippus, don’t you think there’s a huge difference between suffering voluntarily and suffering involuntarily? Someone who starves themselves by choice can eat whenever they want, and someone who is thirsty by their own decision can drink, and so on. But someone who suffers these things against their will can’t stop the suffering just whenever they feel like it. Plus, a person who chooses to face hardship does so with a positive attitude, fueled by hope—like a hunter chasing wild animals who finds enjoyment in the effort because they’re excited about catching something, even if the rewards are small for their struggles. But what about those who work hard to gain good friends, defeat their enemies, or become strong in body and spirit to manage their households well, support their friends, and help the land that raised them? Don’t we have to believe that they’ll also take their hardships lightly, focusing on these greater goals? Don’t we think they’ll tackle life with optimism, supported not only by their own moral integrity but also by the world’s recognition and admiration? And once again, habits of laziness and chasing fleeting pleasures, as gym teachers say, can’t really build a strong body or instill any valuable knowledge in the soul; rather, through hard work and striving for noble achievements, as wise people tell us, we’ll ultimately reach our goals. As Hesiod says somewhere:

    Wickedness may a man take wholesale with ease, smooth is the way
    and her dwelling-place is very nigh; but in front of virtue the
    immortal gods have placed toil and sweat, long is the path and
    steep that leads to her, and rugged at the first, but when the
    summit of the pass is reached, then for all its roughness the path
    grows easy.

 (23) Cf. above, I. vi. 8.

 (24) Or, "in admiration of themselves, the praise and envy of the
    world at large."

 (25) See Hippocrates, "V. Med." 18.

 (26) Hesiod, "Works and Days," 285. See Plat. "Prot." 340 C; "Rep."
    ii. 364 D; "Laws," iv. 718 E.
Wickedness is easy to embrace; the path is smooth and its location is close by. But in front of virtue, the immortal gods have placed hard work and effort. The path to virtue is long and steep, and at first it can be rough. However, once you reach the summit, the journey, despite its challenges, becomes easier.

(23) Cf. above, I. vi. 8.

(24) Or, "in admiration of themselves, the praise and envy of the world at large."

(25) See Hippocrates, "V. Med." 18.

(26) Hesiod, "Works and Days," 285. See Plat. "Prot." 340 C; "Rep." ii. 364 D; "Laws," iv. 718 E.

And Ephicharmus (27) bears his testimony when he says:

And Ephicharmus (27) confirms this when he states:

    The gods sell us all good things in return for our labours.

 (27) Epicharmus of Cos, the chief comic poet among the Dorians, fl.
    500 B.C. Cf. Plat. "Theaet." 152 E, "the prince of comedy";
    "Gorg." 505 D.
The gods give us all the good things in exchange for our efforts.

(27) Epicharmus of Cos, the leading comic poet among the Dorians, fl. 500 B.C. Cf. Plat. "Theaet." 152 E, "the prince of comedy"; "Gorg." 505 D.

And again in another passage he exclaims:

And once more in another passage, he exclaims:

    Set not thine heart on soft things, thou knave, lest thou light
    upon the hard.
Set not your heart on easy things, you scoundrel, or you might end up with the difficult.

And that wise man Prodicus (28) delivers himself in a like strain concerning virtue in that composition of his about Heracles, which crowds have listened to. (29) This, as far as I can recollect it, is the substance at least of what he says:

And that wise man Prodicus (28) expresses similar ideas about virtue in his work about Heracles, which many people have heard. (29) This, as far as I can remember, is the essence of what he says:

 (28) Prodicus of Ceos. See Plat. "Men." 24; "Cratyl." 1; Philostr.
    "Vit. Soph." i. 12.

 (29) Or, "which he is fond of reciting as a specimen of style." The
    title of the {epideixis} was {'Orai} according to Suidas,
    {Prodikos}.
(28) Prodicus of Ceos. See Plat. "Men." 24; "Cratyl." 1; Philostr. "Vit. Soph." i. 12.

(29) Or, "which he likes to share as an example of style." The title of the {epideixis} was {'Orai} according to Suidas, {Prodikos}.

"When Heracles was emerging from boyhood into the bloom of youth, having reached that season in which the young man, now standing upon the verge of independence, shows plainly whether he will enter upon the path of virtue or of vice, he went forth into a quiet place, and sat debating with himself which of those two paths he should pursue; and as he there sat musing, there appeared to him two women of great stature which drew nigh to him. The one was fair to look upon, frank and free by gift of nature, (30) her limbs adorned with purity and her eyes with bashfulness; sobriety set the rhythm of her gait, and she was clad in white apparel. The other was of a different type; the fleshy softness of her limbs betrayed her nurture, while the complexion of her skin was embellished that she might appear whiter and rosier than she really was, and her figure that she might seem taller than nature made her; she stared with wide-open eyes, and the raiment wherewith she was clad served but to reveal the ripeness of her bloom. With frequent glances she surveyed her person, or looked to see if others noticed her; while ever and anon she fixed her gaze upon the shadow of herself intently.

When Heracles was transitioning from boyhood to the peak of youth, having reached a time when a young man, on the brink of independence, clearly shows whether he will choose the path of virtue or vice, he went to a quiet place and sat, pondering which of those two paths he should take. As he sat there deep in thought, two tall women approached him. One was beautiful, naturally confident; her body was graceful, and her eyes displayed modesty. Her movements were steady and controlled, and she wore white clothing. The other was different; her soft curves revealed her upbringing, and her skin was enhanced to appear whiter and rosier than it actually was, and her shape made her look taller than she truly was. She had wide-open eyes and wore clothes that highlighted her figure. She frequently checked her reflection or looked around to see if others noticed her, and she often gazed intently at her own shadow.

 (30) Reading {eleutherion phusei,...} or if {eleutherion,
    phusei...} translate "nature had adorned her limbs..."
(30) Reading {eleutherion phusei,...} or if {eleutherion, phusei...} translate "nature had decorated her limbs..."

"Now when these two had drawn near to Heracles, she who was first named advanced at an even pace (31) towards him, but the other, in her eagerness to outstrip her, ran forward to the youth, exclaiming, 'I see you, Heracles, in doubt and difficulty what path of life to choose; make me your friend, and I will lead you to the pleasantest road and easiest. This I promise you: you shall taste all of life's sweets and escape all bitters. In the first place, you shall not trouble your brain with war or business; other topics shall engage your mind; (32) your only speculation, what meat or drink you shall find agreeable to your palate; what delight (33) of ear or eye; what pleasure of smell or touch; what darling lover's intercourse shall most enrapture you; how you shall pillow your limbs in softest slumber; how cull each individual pleasure without alloy of pain; and if ever the suspicion steal upon you that the stream of joys will one day dwindle, trust me I will not lead you where you shall replenish the store by toil of body and trouble of soul. No! others shall labour, but you shall reap the fruit of their labours; you shall withhold your hand from nought which shall bring you gain. For to all my followers I give authority and power to help themselves freely from every side.'

"Now, when these two approached Heracles, the one initially named walked steadily towards him, while the other, eager to outshine her, rushed forward to the young man, exclaiming, ‘I see you, Heracles, unsure and struggling over which path of life to take; be my friend, and I’ll guide you to the most enjoyable and easiest way. This is my promise: you’ll experience all of life’s pleasures and avoid any pain. First of all, you won’t have to worry about war or business; you’ll focus on other topics; your only thoughts will be about what food or drink you find tasty; what sounds or sights bring you joy; what scents or touches give you pleasure; what delightful romantic encounters will captivate you; how to rest your body in the softest sleep; how to enjoy each pleasure without a hint of pain; and if ever you start to worry that this flow of happiness will one day fade away, trust me, I won’t take you to a place where you have to work hard and struggle to replenish your happiness. No! Others will work, but you’ll reap the rewards of their efforts; you won’t hold back from anything that brings you gain. For all my followers, I grant the authority and power to help themselves freely from every side.’"

 (31) Or, "without change in her demeanour."

 (32) Reading {diese}, or {dioisei}, "you shall continue speculating
    solely."

 (33) It will be recollected that Prodicus prided himself on {orthotes
    onomaton}. Possibly Xenophon is imitating (caricaturing?) his
    style. {terphtheies, estheies, euphrantheies}.
(31) Or, "without changing her behavior."

(32) Reading {diese}, or {dioisei}, "you will keep on speculating only."

(33) It should be remembered that Prodicus took pride in {orthotes onomaton}. Perhaps Xenophon is mimicking (or poking fun at?) his style. {terphtheies, estheies, euphrantheies}.

"Heracles hearing these words made answer: 'What, O lady, is the name you bear?' To which she: 'Know that my friends call be Happiness, but they that hate me have their own nicknames (34) for me, Vice and Naughtiness.'

"Heracles, hearing this, replied: 'What, oh lady, is your name?' She answered, 'Know that my friends call me Happiness, but those who hate me have their own names for me: Vice and Naughtiness.'"

 (34) So the vulg. {upokorizomenoi} is interpreted. Cobet ("Pros. Xen."
    p. 36) suggests {upoknizomenoi} = "quippe qui desiderio
    pungantur."
(34) So the vulg. {upokorizomenoi} is interpreted. Cobet ("Pros. Xen." p. 36) suggests {upoknizomenoi} = "for those who are stung by desire."

"But just then the other of those fair women approached and spoke: 'Heracles, I too am come to you, seeing that your parents are well known to me, and in your nurture I have gauged your nature; wherefore I entertain good hope that if you choose the path which leads to me, you shall greatly bestir yourself to be the doer of many a doughty deed of noble emprise; and that I too shall be held in even higher honour for your sake, lit with the lustre shed by valorous deeds. (35) I will not cheat you with preludings of pleasure, (36) but I will relate to you the things that are according to the ordinances of God in very truth. Know then that among things that are lovely and of good report, not one have the gods bestowed upon mortal men apart from toil and pains. Would you obtain the favour of the gods, then must you pay these same gods service; would you be loved by your friends, you must benefit these friends; do you desire to be honoured by the state, you must give the state your aid; do you claim admiration for your virtue from all Hellas, you must strive to do some good to Hellas; do you wish earth to yield her fruits to you abundantly, to earth must you pay your court; do you seek to amass riches from your flocks and herds, on them must you bestow your labour; or is it your ambition to be potent as a warrior, able to save your friends and to subdue your foes, then must you learn the arts of war from those who have the knowledge, and practise their application in the field when learned; or would you e'en be powerful of limb and body, then must you habituate limbs and body to obey the mind, and exercise yourself with toil and sweat.'

But just then, another of those beautiful women came up and said: 'Heracles, I've come to you as well, since I know your parents well, and I’ve seen your upbringing; because of this, I have good reason to believe that if you choose the path that leads to me, you will become the doer of many great and noble deeds. And I too will be honored even more because of you, shining with the light of your brave actions. (35) I won’t mislead you with empty promises of pleasure, (36) but I’ll tell you the truth about what God wants. Know that among the things that are beautiful and respected, none have been given by the gods to mortals without hard work and struggle. If you want the favor of the gods, you must serve them; if you want to be loved by your friends, you must help them; if you want to be honored by the state, you must support it; if you want to earn admiration for your virtue from all of Greece, you must strive to contribute something good to Greece; if you want the earth to yield her fruits abundantly for you, you must respect the earth; if you want to gather wealth from your livestock, you must work hard for them; or if you aim to be powerful as a warrior, capable of saving your friends and defeating your enemies, then you must learn the skills of war from those who know them, and practice them in the field once you’ve learned; or if you want to be strong in body, then you must train your body to follow your mind, and work out with effort and sweat.'

 (35) Or, "bathed in the splendour of thy virtues."

 (36) Or, "honeyed overtures of pleasure."
 (35) Or, "immersed in the brilliance of your virtues."

 (36) Or, "sweet gestures of pleasure."

"At this point, (as Prodicus relates) Vice broke in exclaiming: 'See you, Heracles, how hard and long the road is by which yonder woman would escort you to her festal joys. (37) But I will guide you by a short and easy road to happiness.'

"At this point, (as Prodicus says) Vice interrupted, saying: 'Look, Heracles, how difficult and long the path is that this woman wants to take you on to her festive pleasures. (37) But I will lead you down a shorter and easier way to happiness.'"

 (37) Hesiod, "Theog." 909; Milton, "L'Allegro," 12.
(37) Hesiod, "Theog." 909; Milton, "L'Allegro," 12.

"Then spoke Virtue: 'Nay, wretched one, what good thing hast thou? or what sweet thing art thou acquainted with—that wilt stir neither hand nor foot to gain it? Thou, that mayest not even await the desire of pleasure, but, or ever that desire springs up, art already satiated; eating before thou hungerest, and drinking before thou thirsteth; who to eke out an appetite must invent an army of cooks and confectioners; and to whet thy thirst must lay down costliest wines, and run up and down in search of ice in summer-time; to help thy slumbers soft coverlets suffice not, but couches and feather-beds must be prepared thee and rockers to rock thee to rest; since desire for sleep in thy case springs not from toil but from vacuity and nothing in the world to do. Even the natural appetite of love thou forcest prematurely by every means thou mayest devise, confounding the sexes in thy service. Thus thou educatest thy friends: with insult in the night season and drowse of slumber during the precious hours of the day. Immortal, thou art cast forth from the company of gods, and by good men art dishonoured: that sweetest sound of all, the voice of praise, has never thrilled thine ears; and the fairest of all fair visions is hidden from thine eyes that have never beheld one bounteous deed wrought by thine own hand. If thou openest thy lips in speech, who will believe thy word? If thou hast need of aught, none shall satisfy thee. What sane man will venture to join thy rablle rout? Ill indeed are thy revellers to look upon, young men impotent of body, and old men witless in mind: in the heyday of life they batten in sleek idleness, and wearily do they drag through an age of wrinkled wretchedness: and why? they blush with shame at the thought of deeds done in the past, and groan for weariness at what is left to do. During their youth they ran riot through their sweet things, and laid up for themselves large store of bitterness against the time of eld. But my companionship is with the gods; and with the good among men my conversation; no bounteous deed, divine or human, is wrought without my aid. Therefore am I honoured in Heaven pre-eminently, and upon earth among men whose right it is to honour me; (38) as a beloved fellow-worker of all craftsmen; a faithful guardian of house and lands, whom the owners bless; a kindly helpmeet of servants; (39) a brave assistant in the labours of peace; an unflinching ally in the deeds of war; a sharer in all friendships indispensable. To my friends is given an enjoyment of meats and drinks, which is sweet in itself and devoid of trouble, in that they can endure until desire ripens, and sleep more delicious visits them than those who toil not. Yet they are not pained to part with it; nor for the sake of slumber do they let slip the performance of their duties. Among my followers the youth delights in the praises of his elders, and the old man glories in the honour of the young; with joy they call to memory their deeds of old, and in to-day's well-doing are well pleased. For my sake they are dear in the sight of God, beloved of their friends and honoured by the country of their birth. When the appointed goal is reached they lie not down in oblivion with dishonour, but bloom afresh—their praise resounded on the lips of men for ever. (40) Toils like these, O son of noble parents, Heracles, it is yours to meet with, and having endured, to enter into the heritage assured you of transcendant happiness.'"

"Then Virtue spoke: 'No, miserable one, what good things do you have? Or what pleasant things do you know of that you won't lift a finger to get? You can't even wait for pleasure to come, but as soon as you desire it, you're already full; eating before you’re hungry and drinking before you’re thirsty. To satisfy your appetite, you must hire a whole army of cooks and bakers, and to quench your thirst, you need the finest wines and go searching for ice in the summer. To help you sleep, simple blankets aren't enough; you need couches and feather beds and someone to rock you to sleep. Your desire for sleep doesn't come from hard work but from emptiness and having nothing to do. Even the natural urge for love, you force prematurely by any means you can think of, mixing the genders to serve your needs. That's how you educate your friends: with insults at night and drowsiness during the precious hours of the day. Immortal, you are cast out of the gods' company and disrespected by good people; that sweetest sound, the voice of praise, has never delighted your ears, and the most beautiful sights are hidden from your eyes because you've never seen a noble deed done by your own hand. If you open your mouth to speak, who will believe you? If you need anything, no one will satisfy you. What sane person would want to join your unruly crowd? Your revelers are a sad sight—young men who are weak and old men who are empty-headed: in their prime, they indulge in lazy idleness, and they drag on through a life of wrinkled misery: and why? They feel shame over their past actions and groan from weariness about what’s still left to be done. In their youth, they squandered their pleasures and saved up a lot of bitterness for old age. But my company is with the gods; I converse with the good among men; no generous act, divine or human, is done without my help. Therefore, I am honored in Heaven above all and on earth among those who rightfully honor me; as a beloved partner of all craftsmen; a loyal protector of homes and lands, who is blessed by the owners; a helpful friend to servants; a courageous ally in times of peace; and a steadfast supporter in times of war; an essential part of all friendships. My followers enjoy food and drink that are sweet in themselves and free of trouble, allowing them to wait until their desire matures, and they experience more satisfying sleep than those who don't work. Yet they feel no pain when parting from it, nor do they neglect their duties for the sake of sleep. Among my followers, the young cherish the praise of their elders, and the old take pride in the honor of the young; they joyfully remember their past deeds, and are pleased with today's good actions. Because of me, they are dear to God, loved by their friends, and respected in their homeland. When they reach their destined goals, they don’t fade into oblivion with disgrace but bloom anew—their praises echoing on the lips of people forever. Such toils, O son of noble parents, Heracles, are yours to face, and having endured them, you will enter into the assured legacy of transcendent happiness.'"

 (38) Reading {ois prosekei}, or if {proseko}, translate "to whom I am
    attached."

 (39) Cf. "Econ." v. 8.

 (40) Or, "so true is it, a branch is left them; undying honour to
    their name!"
(38) Reading {ois prosekei}, or if {proseko}, translate "to whom I am attached."

(39) Cf. "Econ." v. 8.

(40) Or, "so true is it, a branch is left to them; eternal honor to their name!"

This, Aristippus, in rough sketch is the theme which Prodicus pursues (41) in his "Education of Heracles by Virtue," only he decked out his sentiments, I admit, in far more magnificent phrases than I have ventured on. Were it not well, Aristippus, to lay to heart these sayings, and to strive to bethink you somewhat of that which touches the future of our life?

This, Aristippus, is basically the idea that Prodicus explores in his "Education of Heracles by Virtue," though he expressed his thoughts in much grander language than I have attempted. Wouldn't it be wise, Aristippus, to take these words to heart and consider what affects our future life?

 (41) Reading {diokei}, al. {diokei} = "so Prodicus arranged the parts
    of his discourse."
(41) Reading {diokei}, al. {diokei} = "that's how Prodicus organized the sections of his talk."

II

II

At another time, he had noticed the angry temper shown by Lamprocles, the elder of his sons, towards their mother, and thus addressed himself to the lad.

At another time, he noticed the anger displayed by Lamprocles, the older of his sons, toward their mother, and said to the boy.

Soc. Pray, my son, did you ever hear of certain people being called ungrateful?

Soc. Please, my son, have you ever heard of certain people being called ungrateful?

That I have (replied the young man).

That I have (replied the young man).

Soc. And have you understood what it is they do to get that bad name?

Soc. And do you understand what they do to earn that bad reputation?

Lamp. Yes, I have: when any one has been kindly treated, and has it in his power to requite the kindness but neglects to do so, men call him ungrateful.

Lamp. Yes, I have: when someone has been treated well and has the chance to return the favor but chooses not to, people call him ungrateful.

Soc. And you admit that people reckon the ungrateful among wrongdoers?

Soc. So you agree that people consider the ungrateful as wrongdoers?

Lamp. I do.

Lamp. I do.

Soc. And has it ever struck you to inquire whether, as regards the right or wrong of it, ingratitude may not perhaps resemble some such conduct as the enslavement, say, of prisoners, which is accounted wrong towards friends but justifiable towards enemies?

Soc. Have you ever thought about whether ingratitude might be similar to something like the enslavement of prisoners, which is considered wrong towards friends but acceptable towards enemies?

Lamp. Yes, I have put that question to myself. In my opinion, no matter who confers the kindness, friend or foe, the recipient should endeavour to requite it, failing which he is a wrongdoer.

Lamp. Yes, I have asked myself that question. In my view, regardless of whether the kindness comes from a friend or an enemy, the person receiving it should try to repay it; if not, they are in the wrong.

Soc. Then if that is how the matter stands, ingratitude would be an instance of pure unadulterate wrongdoing?

Soc. So if that’s the case, ingratitude would be a clear example of outright wrongdoing?

Lamprocles assented to the proposition.

Lamprocles agreed to the proposal.

Soc. It follows, then, that in proportion to the greatness of the benefit conferred, the greater his misdoing who fails to requite the kindness?

Soc. It follows, then, that the greater the benefit given, the worse the wrongdoing of someone who doesn’t repay that kindness?

Lamprocles again assented.

Lamprocles agreed again.

Socrates continued: And where can we hope to find greater benefits than those which children derive from their parents—their father and mother who brought them out of nothingness into being, who granted them to look upon all these fair sights, and to partake of all those blessings which the gods bestow on man, things so priceless in our eyes that one and all we shudder at the thought of leaving them, and states have made death the penalty for the greatest crimes, because there is no greater evil through fear of which to stay iniquity.

Socrates continued: And where can we hope to find greater benefits than those that children get from their parents—their dad and mom who brought them into existence, who allowed them to see all these beautiful things, and to enjoy all those gifts that the gods give to people, things so valuable to us that we all tremble at the idea of losing them, and societies have made death the punishment for the worst crimes because there is no greater evil that keeps us from wrongdoing.

You do not suppose that human beings produce children for the sake of carnal pleasure (1) merely; were this the motive, street and bordell are full of means to quit them of that thrall; whereas nothing is plainer than the pains we take to seek out wives who shall bear us the finest children. (2) With these we wed, and carry on the race. The man has a twofold duty to perform: partly in cherishing her who is to raise up children along with him, and partly towards the children yet unborn in providing them with things that he thinks will contribute to their well-being—and of these as large a store as possible. The woman, conceiving, bears her precious burthen with travail and pain, and at the risk of life itself—sharing with that within her womb the food on which she herself is fed. And when with much labour she has borne to the end and brought forth her offspring, she feeds it and watches over it with tender care—not in return for any good thing previously received, for indeed the babe itself is little conscious of its benefactor and cannot even signify its wants; only she, the mother, making conjecture of what is good for it, and what will please it, essays to satisfy it; (3) and for many months she feeds it night and day, enduring the toil nor recking what return she shall receive for all her trouble. Nor does the care and kindness of parents end with nurture; but when the children seem of an age to learn, they teach them themselves whatever cunning they possess, as a guide to life, or where they feel that another is more competent, to him they send them to be taught at their expense. Thus they watch over their children, doing all in their power to enable them to grow up to be as good as possible.

You don't really think that people have kids just for the sake of physical pleasure, do you? If that were the case, there are plenty of options on the streets and in brothels to satisfy that urge. It's clear that we put a lot of effort into finding partners to have the best children possible with. We marry these partners and continue our family lines. A man has two main responsibilities: he needs to support the woman who will raise their children with him and also prepare for the well-being of the children who aren't born yet by providing as much as he can for them. The woman, when she becomes pregnant, carries her precious burden with much effort and pain, risking her life as she shares the food that nourishes her with the child inside her. After enduring the struggle of giving birth, she takes care of the newborn with loving attention—not because the baby can express gratitude, since it doesn't even know who is caring for it and can't communicate its needs. The mother, guessing what is best and what will make the baby happy, tries to meet those needs. For many months, she feeds the child day and night, without concern for what she might get in return for all her hard work. The care and concern of parents don't stop after nurturing; when children are ready to learn, parents teach them all the skills they have for navigating life, and if they believe someone else can teach better, they send their kids to learn from that person at their own cost. In this way, they look after their children, doing everything they can to help them grow up to be the best they can be.

 (1) Lit. "the joys of Aphrodite."

 (2) "For the procreation of children." See below, IV. iv. 22; "Pol.
    Lac." i.

 (3) Lit. "to leave nought lacking."
(1) Literally, "the joys of Aphrodite."

(2) "For the purpose of having children." See below, IV. iv. 22; "Pol. Lac." i.

(3) Literally, "to leave nothing out."

So be it (the youth answered); but even if she have done all that, and twenty times as much, no soul on earth could endure my mother's cross-grained temper.

So be it, the youth replied; but even if she has done all that, and twenty times more, no soul on earth could tolerate my mother's difficult temper.

Then Socrates: Which, think you, would be harder to bear—a wild beast's savagery or a mother's?

Then Socrates: Which do you think would be harder to endure—a wild beast's brutality or a mother's?

Lamp. To my mind, a mother's—at least if she be such as mine.

Lamp. To me, a mother—at least if she’s anything like mine.

Soc. Dear me! And has this mother ever done you any injury—such as people frequently receive from beasts, by bite or kick?

Soc. Oh my! Has this mother ever harmed you in any way—like the injuries people often get from animals, such as bites or kicks?

Lamp. If she has not done quite that, she uses words which any one would sooner sell his life than listen to.

Lamp. If she hasn't done exactly that, she uses words that anyone would rather sell their life than listen to.

Soc. And how many annoyances have you caused your mother, do you suppose, by fretfulness and peevishness in word and deed, night and day, since you were a little boy? How much sorrow and pain, when you were ill?

Soc. And how many annoyances do you think you've caused your mother, through your fussiness and irritability in what you say and do, day and night, since you were a little kid? How much sorrow and pain did you bring her when you were sick?

Lamp. Well, I never said or did anything to bring a blush to her cheeks.

Lamp. I never said or did anything to make her blush.

Soc. No, come now! Do you suppose it is harder for you to listen to your mother's speeches than for actor to listen to actor on the tragic stage, (4) when the floodgates of abuse are opened?

Soc. No, come on! Do you really think it's harder for you to listen to your mother's talks than for an actor to listen to another actor on the tragic stage, (4) when they start throwing insults at each other?

 (4) See Grote, "H. G." viii. 457; Plut. "Solon," xxix.
(4) See Grote, "H. G." viii. 457; Plut. "Solon," xxix.

Lamp. Yes; for the simple reason that they know it is all talk on their parts. The inquisitor may cross-question, but he will not inflict a fine; the threatener may hurl his menaces, but he will do no mischief—that is why they take it all so easily.

Lamp. Yes; for the simple reason that they know it's all just talk on their part. The interrogator may ask tough questions, but he won't impose a fine; the one who threatens may throw out his threats, but he won't cause any harm—that's why they handle it all so easily.

Soc. Then ought you to fly into a passion, who know well enough that, whatever your mother says, she is so far from meaning you mischief that she is actually wishing blessings to descend upon you beyond all others? Or do you believe that your mother is really ill disposed towards you?

Soc. Then should you really get angry, when you know very well that, no matter what your mother says, she means you no harm and is actually wishing for blessings to come upon you more than anyone else? Or do you think that your mother truly has negative feelings towards you?

Lamp. No, I do not think that.

Lamp. No, I don’t think so.

Soc. Then this mother, who is kindly disposed to you, and takes such tender care of you when you are ill to make you well again, and to see that you want for nothing which may help you; and, more than all, who is perpetually pleading for blessings in your behalf and offering her vows to Heaven (5)—can you say of her that she is cross-grained and harsh? For my part, I think, if you cannot away with such a mother, you cannot away with such blessings either.

Soc. So this mother, who is kind to you and takes such good care of you when you’re sick to help you get better, and makes sure you have everything you need; and, most importantly, who is always asking for blessings for you and offering her prayers to Heaven (5)—can you honestly say that she is mean or cruel? For my part, I think if you can’t appreciate such a mother, then you can’t appreciate such blessings either.

 (5) Or, "paying vows."
Or, "keeping promises."

But tell me (he proceeded), do you owe service to any living being, think you? or are you prepared to stand alone? Prepared not to please or try to please a single soul? to follow none? To obey neither general nor ruler of any sort? Is that your attitude, or do you admit that you owe allegiance to somebody?

But tell me, do you owe service to anyone, do you think? Or are you ready to be on your own? Ready not to please or even try to please anyone? To follow no one? To obey neither a general nor any kind of ruler? Is that how you feel, or do you acknowledge that you owe loyalty to someone?

Lamp. Yes; certainly I owe allegiance.

Lamp. Yes; of course I owe loyalty.

Soc. May I take it that you are willing to please at any rate your neighbour, so that he may kindle a fire for you in your need, may prove himself a ready helpmate in good fortune, or if you chance on evil and are stumbling, may friendlily stand by your side to aid?

Soc. Can I take it that you're willing to help your neighbor, so he can light a fire for you when you're in need, be a supportive partner in good times, or stand by you to help when you're facing difficulties?

Lamp. I am willing.

Lamp. I'm willing.

Soc. Well, and what of that other chance companion—your fellow-traveller by land or sea? what of any others, you may light upon? is it indifferent to you whether these be friends or not, or do you admit that the goodwill of these is worth securing by some pains on your part?

Soc. So, what about that other chance companion—your travel buddy by land or sea? What about anyone else you might encounter? Do you not care whether they are friends or not, or do you acknowledge that winning their goodwill is worth putting in some effort on your part?

Lamp. I do.

Lamp. I will.

Soc. It stands thus then: you are prepared to pay attention to this, that, and the other stranger, but to your mother who loves you more than all else, you are bound to render no service, no allegiance? Do you not know that whilst the state does not concern itself with ordinary ingratitude or pass judicial sentence on it; whilst it overlooks the thanklessness of those who fail to make return for kindly treatment, it reserves its pains and penalties for the special case? If a man render not the service and allegiance due to his parents, on him the finger of the law is laid; his name is struck off the roll; he is forbidden to hold the archonship—which is as much as to say, "Sacrifices in behalf of the state offered by such a man would be no offerings, being tainted with impiety; nor could aught else be 'well and justly' performed of which he is the doer." Heaven help us! If a man fail to adorn the sepulchre of his dead parents the state takes cognisance of the matter, and inquisition is made in the scrutiny of the magistrates. (6) And as for you, my son, if you are in your sober senses, you will earnestly entreat your mother, lest the very gods take you to be an ungrateful being, and on their side also refuse to do you good; and you will beware of men also, lest they should perceive your neglect of your parents, and with one consent hold you in dishonour; (7) and so you find yourself in a desert devoid of friends. For if once the notion be entertained that here is a man ungrateful to his parents, no one will believe that any kindness shown you would be other than thrown away.

Soc. So here's the thing: you're willing to pay attention to this stranger and that one, but you won't give any service or loyalty to your mother, who loves you more than anything else? Don't you realize that while the state doesn't usually deal with regular ingratitude or punish it, it does take action in special cases? If a man doesn't show the respect and loyalty owed to his parents, the law will come down on him; his name will be removed from the official records; he won't be allowed to hold an archonship—which basically means, "Any sacrifices made for the state by such a person would be worthless since they are tainted with disrespect; and nothing else that he does could be 'right and just.'" Good grief! If a man fails to properly honor the grave of his deceased parents, the state takes note of it, and the magistrates investigate. (6) And as for you, my son, if you're thinking clearly, you should earnestly ask your mother for forgiveness, lest the gods see you as ungrateful and refuse to help you; and be cautious of others too, as they may notice your neglect of your parents and unanimously hold you in contempt; (7) leaving you in a wasteland with no friends. Once the idea takes hold that someone is ungrateful to their parents, no one will believe that any kindness shown to you would ever be appreciated.

 (6) Lit. "the docimasia." See Gow, "Companion," xiv.

 (7) "Visiti with atimia."
(6) Lit. "the docimasia." See Gow, "Companion," xiv.

(7) "Visit with atimia."

III

III

At another time the differences between two brothers named Chaerephon and Chaerecrates, both well known to him, had drawn his attention; and on seeing the younger of the two he thus addressed him.

At another time, the differences between two brothers named Chaerephon and Chaerecrates, both well known to him, caught his attention; and upon seeing the younger of the two, he addressed him like this.

Soc. Tell me, Chaerecrates, you are not, I take it, one of those strange people who believe that goods are better and more precious than a brother; (1) and that too although the former are but senseless chattels which need protection, the latter a sensitive and sensible being who can afford it; and what is more, he is himself alone, whilst as for them their name is legion. And here again is a marvellous thing: that a man should count his brother a loss, because the goods of his brother are not his; but he does not count his fellow-citizens loss, and yet their possessions are not his; only it seems in their case he has wits to see that to dwell securely with many and have enough is better than to own the whole wealth of a community and to live in dangerous isolation; but this same doctrine as applied to brothers they ignore. Again, if a man have the means, he will purchase domestic slaves, because he wants assistants in his work; he will acquire friends, because he needs their support; but this brother of his—who cares about brothers? It seems a friend may be discovered in an ordinary citizen, but not in a blood relation who is also a brother. And yet it is a great vantage-ground towards friendship to have sprung from the same loins and to have been suckled at the same breasts, since even among beasts a certain natural craving, and sympathy springs up between creatures reared together. (2) Added to which, a man who has brothers commands more respect from the rest of the world than the man who has none, and who must fight his own battles. (3)

Soc. Tell me, Chaerecrates, you’re not one of those odd people who think that possessions are more valuable than a brother, right? Even though possessions are just lifeless objects that need looking after, while a brother is a caring and thoughtful person who can offer support; and what's more, a brother is one person, while possessions are numerous. It's also strange that some would see a brother as a loss just because his belongings aren't theirs, but they don’t see their fellow citizens as a loss, even though their possessions aren’t theirs either. It seems they recognize that living securely with many is better than owning all the wealth in the world and living in dangerous solitude; yet they ignore this idea when it comes to brothers. If someone has the means, they'll buy household slaves for help with their work and make friends for support, but who cares about their brother? It seems that friendships can be found among regular citizens, but not with a brother. Yet, having the same parents and being raised together should enhance the bond of friendship, as even among animals, there's a natural connection and empathy that develops between siblings. Plus, a man with brothers tends to earn more respect from others than someone who has none and has to fight his own battles.

 (1) Cf. "Merchant of Venice," II. viii. 17: "Justice! the law! my
    ducats, and my daughter!"

 (2) Or, "a yearning after their foster-brothers manifests itself in
    animals." See "Cyrop." VIII. vii. 14 foll. for a parallel to this
    discussion.

 (3) Lit. "and is less liable to hostility."
(1) Cf. "Merchant of Venice," II. viii. 17: "Justice! The law! My money and my daughter!"

(2) Or, "animals show a longing for their foster-brothers." See "Cyrop." VIII. vii. 14 and the following for a similar discussion.

(3) Literally, "and is less prone to hostility."

Chaer. I daresay, Socrates, where the differences are not profound, reason would a man should bear with his brother, and not avoid him for some mere trifle's sake, for a brother of the right sort is, as you say, a blessing; but if he be the very antithesis of that, why should a man lay his hand to achieve the impossible?

Chaer. I have to say, Socrates, when the differences aren't that significant, a person should tolerate his brother and not stay away from him over trivial matters, because a good brother is, as you mentioned, a blessing; but if he is the complete opposite of that, why should a person try to do the impossible?

Soc. Well now, tell me, is there nobody whom Chaerephon can please any more than he can please yourself; or do some people find him agreeable enough?

Soc. So, tell me, is there no one that Chaerephon can please more than you; or do some people actually find him likable?

Chaer. Nay, there you hit it. That is just why I have a right to detest him. He can be pleasing enough to others, but to me, whenever he appears on the scene, he is not a blessing—no! but by every manner of means the reverse.

Chaer. No, that's exactly it. That's why I have every right to hate him. He might charm others, but for me, whenever he shows up, he’s not a blessing—definitely not! He’s the complete opposite.

Soc. May it not happen that just as a horse is no gain to the inexpert rider who essays to handle him, so in like manner, if a man tries to deal with his brother after an ignorant fashion, this same brother will kick?

Soc. Could it be that just like a horse is no benefit to an inexperienced rider trying to manage it, similarly, if someone interacts with their brother in a clueless way, that brother will react negatively?

Chaer. But is it likely now? How should I be ignorant of the art of dealing with my brother if I know the art of repaying kind words and good deeds in kind? But a man who tries all he can to annoy me by word and deed, I can neither bless nor benefit, and, what is more, I will not try.

Chaer. But is it really likely now? How could I be unaware of how to handle my brother if I know how to return kind words and good deeds in the same way? But a man who does everything he can to irritate me with his words and actions, I can neither bless nor help, and, what’s more, I won’t even try.

Soc. Well now, that is a marvellous statement, Chaerecrates. Your dog, the serviceable guardian of your flocks, who will fawn and lick the hand of your shepherd, when you come near him can only growl and show his teeth. Well; you take no notice of the dog's ill-temper, you try to propitiate him by kindness; but your brother? If your brother were what he ought to be, he would be a great blessing to you—that you admit; and, as you further confess, you know the secret of kind acts and words, yet you will not set yourself to apply means to make him your best of friends.

Soc. Well, that's a great point, Chaerecrates. Your dog, the loyal protector of your sheep, who will wag his tail and lick your hand when you're around, can only growl and show his teeth to others. You don’t let the dog’s bad attitude bother you; you try to win him over with kindness. But what about your brother? If he were how he should be, he would be a huge blessing to you—that much you agree on. And, as you also admit, you know how to be kind and say the right words, yet you won’t bother to use those to make him your best friend.

Chaer. I am afraid, Socrates, that I have no wisdom or cunning to make Chaerephon bear himself towards me as he should.

Chaer. I'm afraid, Socrates, that I lack the wisdom or cleverness to make Chaerephon behave towards me as he should.

Soc. Yet there is no need to apply any recondite or novel machinery. Only bait your hook in the way best known to yourself, and you will capture him; whereupon he will become your devoted friend.

Soc. Yet there’s no need to use any complicated or new methods. Just bait your hook in the way that you know works best, and you’ll catch him; then he’ll become your loyal friend.

Chaer. If you are aware that I know some love-charm, Socrates, of which I am the happy but unconscious possessor, pray make haste and enlighten me.

Chaer. If you know that I'm aware of a love charm, Socrates, that I have without realizing it, please hurry and let me know.

Soc. Answer me then. Suppose you wanted to get some acquaintance to invite you to dinner when he next keeps holy day, (4) what steps would you take?

Soc. So, tell me this. If you wanted a friend to invite you over for dinner the next time he celebrates a holiday, what would you do?

 (4) "When he next does sacrifice"; see "Hiero," viii. 3. Cf. Theophr.
    "Char." xv. 2, and Prof. Jebb's note ad loc.
(4) "When he next makes a sacrifice"; see "Hiero," viii. 3. Compare Theophr. "Char." xv. 2, and Prof. Jebb's note ad loc.

Chaer. No doubt I should set him a good example by inviting him myself on a like occasion.

Chaer. I definitely should set a good example by inviting him myself next time.

Soc. And if you wanted to induce some friend to look after your affairs during your absence abroad, how would you achieve your purpose?

Soc. And if you wanted to get a friend to take care of your matters while you were away overseas, how would you go about it?

Chaer. No doubt I should present a precedent in undertaking to look after his in like circumstances.

Chaer. I definitely should set an example by agreeing to take care of him in similar situations.

Soc. And if you wished to get some foreign friend to take you under his roof while visiting his country, what would you do?

Soc. And if you wanted to stay with a foreign friend while visiting their country, what would you do?

Chaer. No doubt I should begin by offering him the shelter of my own roof when he came to Athens, in order to enlist his zeal in furthering the objects of my visit; it is plain I should first show my readiness to do as much for him in a like case.

Chaer. I definitely need to start by giving him a place to stay when he arrives in Athens, so I can encourage him to support the goals of my visit; it's obvious that I should first demonstrate my willingness to do the same for him if the situation were reversed.

Soc. Why, it seems you are an adept after all in all the philtres known to man, only you chose to conceal your knowledge all the while; or is it that you shrink from taking the first step because of the scandal you will cause by kindly advances to your brother? And yet it is commonly held to redound to a man's praise to have outstripped an enemy in mischief or a friend in kindness. Now if it seemed to me that Chaerephon were better fitted to lead the way towards this friendship, (5) I should have tried to persuade him to take the first step in winning your affection, but now I am persuaded the first move belongs to you, and to you the final victory.

Soc. It seems you really know all the love potions out there, but you’ve been hiding your skills this whole time. Or are you just hesitant to make the first move because of the trouble it might cause with your brother? People usually admire those who outdo an enemy in trickery or a friend in generosity. If I thought Chaerephon was better suited to take the lead in this friendship, I would have encouraged him to make the first move to earn your affection, but I’m convinced that the first move is yours to make, and ultimately, the victory will be yours as well.

 (5) Reading {pros ten philian}, or if {phusin}, transl. "natural
    disposition."
 (5) Reading {pros ten philian}, or if {phusin}, translated as "natural
    disposition."

Chaer. A startling announcement, Socrates, from your lips, and most unlike you, to bid me the younger take precedence of my elder brother. Why, it is contrary to the universal custom of mankind, who look to the elder to take the lead in everything, whether as a speaker or an actor.

Chaer. That's quite a surprising statement, Socrates, and definitely not like you to suggest that I, the younger, should take precedence over my older brother. It goes against the common norm of humanity, where people expect the elder to lead in everything, whether as a speaker or a performer.

Soc. How so? Is it not the custom everywhere for the younger to step aside when he meets his elder in the street and to give him place? Is he not expected to get up and offer him his seat, to pay him the honour of a soft couch, (6) to yield him precedence in argument?

Soc. How's that? Isn't it the norm everywhere for younger people to step aside when they see their elders on the street and give them space? Aren't they expected to stand up and offer them their seat, to honor them with a comfy couch, to let them take the lead in discussions?

 (6) Lit. "with a soft bed," or, as we say, "the best bedroom."
(6) Lit. "with a soft bed," or, as we say, "the best bedroom."

My good fellow, do not stand shilly-shallying, (7) but put out your hand caressingly, and you will see the worthy soul will respond at once with alacrity. Do you not note your brother's character, proud and frank and sensitive to honour? He is not a mean and sorry rascal to be caught by a bribe—no better way indeed for such riff-raff. No! gentle natures need a finer treatment. You can best hope to work on them by affection.

My good friend, don’t just stand there hesitating, but reach out your hand warmly, and you’ll see that this good person will respond eagerly. Don’t you notice your brother’s character—proud, open, and sensitive to honor? He’s not a petty and miserable person who can be bought off with a bribe—no better approach for that kind of scum. No! Kind souls need a more delicate touch. You’ll have the best chance to connect with them through affection.

 (7) Or, "have no fears, essay a soothing treatment."
(7) Or, "don’t worry, try a calming approach."

Chaer. But suppose I do, and suppose that, for all my attempts, he shows no change for the better?

Chaer. But what if I do, and what if, despite all my efforts, he doesn't improve at all?

Soc. At the worst you will have shown yourself to be a good, honest, brotherly man, and he will appear as a sorry creature on whom kindness is wasted. But nothing of the sort is going to happen, as I conjecture. My belief is that as soon as he hears your challenge, he will embrace the contest; pricked on by emulous pride, he will insist upon getting the better of you in kindness of word and deed.

Soc. At worst, you'll have shown yourself to be a good, honest, caring person, and he will look like a pathetic individual who doesn't deserve your kindness. But I don't think that's what's going to happen. I believe that as soon as he hears your challenge, he'll jump at the chance; motivated by competitive pride, he'll try to outdo you in kindness with both words and actions.

At present you two are in the condition of two hands formed by God to help each other, but which have let go their business and have turned to hindering one another all they can. You are a pair of feet fashioned on the Divine plan to work together, but which have neglected this in order to trammel each other's gait. Now is it not insensate stupidity (8) to use for injury what was meant for advantage? And yet in fashioning two brothers God intends them, methinks, to be of more benefit to one another than either two hands, or two feet, or two eyes, or any other of those pairs which belong to man from his birth. (9) Consider how powerless these hands of ours if called upon to combine their action at two points more than a single fathom's length apart; (10) and these feet could not stretch asunder (11) even a bare fathom; and these eyes, for all the wide-reaching range we claim for them, are incapable of seeing simultaneously the back and front of an object at even closer quarters. But a pair of brothers, linked in bonds of amity, can work each for the other's good, though seas divide them. (12)

Right now, you two are like two hands created by God to help each other, but instead, you’ve abandoned that purpose and are trying to hinder each other as much as you can. You’re like a pair of feet designed to work together, but you’ve ignored that to trip each other up. Isn't it utterly foolish to use something meant for good to cause harm? Yet, when God makes two brothers, I believe He intends for them to benefit each other even more than a pair of hands, feet, eyes, or any of those other pairs that humans are born with. Think about how useless these hands would be if they need to coordinate action more than just a short distance apart; and these feet couldn’t even stretch a short distance away from each other; and these eyes, despite the broad vision we think they have, can’t see the front and back of an object at the same time, even if it’s close. But a pair of brothers, bonded by friendship, can work for each other's benefit, even if they are separated by oceans.

 (8) "Boorishness verging upon monomania."

 (9) "With which man is endowed at birth."

 (10) "More than an 'arms'-stretch' asunder."

 (11) Lit. "reach at one stretch two objects, even over that small
    distance."

 (12) "Though leagues separate them."
(8) "Rudeness bordering on obsession."

(9) "Which man is given at birth."

(10) "More than an 'arm's-length' apart."

(11) Lit. "reach in one go for two objects, even over that short distance."

(12) "Even if miles apart."

IV

IV

I have at another time heard him discourse on the kindred theme of friendship in language well calculated, as it seemed to me, to help a man to choose and also to use his friends aright.

I have also heard him talk about the related topic of friendship in a way that seemed, to me, really helpful for someone to choose and also to use their friends wisely.

He (Socrates) had often heard the remark made that of all possessions there is none equal to that of a good and sincere friend; but, in spite of this assertion, the mass of people, as far as he could see, concerned themselves about nothing so little as the acquisition of friends. Houses, and fields, and slaves, and cattle, and furniture of all sorts (he said) they were at pains to acquire, and they strove hard to keep what they had got; but to procure for themselves this greatest of all blessings, as they admitted a friend to be, or to keep the friends whom they already possessed, not one man in a hundred ever gave himself a thought. It was noticeable, in the case of a sickness befalling a man's friend and one of his own household simultaneously, the promptness with which the master would fetch the doctor to his domestic, and take every precaution necessary for his recovery, with much expenditure of pains; but meanwhile little account would be taken of the friend in like condition, and if both should die, he will show signs of deep annoyance at the death of his domestic, which, as he reflects, is a positive loss to him; but as regards his friend his position is in no wise materially affected, and thus, though he would never dream of leaving his other possessions disregarded and ill cared for, friendship's mute appeal is met with flat indifference. (1)

He (Socrates) often heard people say that nothing equals having a good and honest friend. However, despite this belief, it seemed to him that most people cared very little about making friends. They worked hard to acquire houses, fields, slaves, cattle, and all sorts of furniture, and they put a lot of effort into keeping what they had. But when it came to bringing this greatest blessing, which they acknowledged a friend to be, or maintaining the friendships they already had, only about one in a hundred gave it any thought. It was noticeable that when a friend's illness coincided with that of someone in his household, the owner would quickly call a doctor for his household member and take every measure necessary for their recovery, spending considerable effort in the process. Meanwhile, little attention was given to his sick friend, and if both were to die, he would show considerable annoyance at the loss of his domestic, which he realized was a tangible loss to him. In contrast, his friend's death wouldn't significantly affect him, and though he would never think of neglecting his other possessions, the silent need for friendship was met with complete indifference.

 (1) Or, "the cry of a friend for careful tending falls on deaf ears."
(1) Or, "the plea of a friend for attention goes unheard."

Or to take (said he) a crowning instance: (2) with regard to ordinary possessions, however multifarious these may be, most people are at least acquainted with their number, but if you ask a man to enumerate his friends, who are not so very many after all perhaps, he cannot; or if, to oblige the inquirer, he essays to make a list, he will presently retract the names of some whom he had previously included. (3) Such is the amount of thought which people bestow upon their friends.

Or to take a prime example: when it comes to everyday possessions, no matter how many there are, most people generally know how many they have. But if you ask someone to list their friends, who probably aren't that many, they often can't. Or if they try to make a list to please you, they'll quickly take back the names of some they initially included. This shows how little thought people really give to their friends.

 (2) Or, "Nor had he failed to observe another striking contrast." Cf.
    Cic. "Lael." 17; Diog. Laert. ii. 30.

 (3) i.e. "like a chess-player recalling a move."
(2) Or, "He also noticed another interesting difference." Cf. Cic. "Lael." 17; Diog. Laert. ii. 30.

(3) i.e. "like a chess player remembering a move."

And yet what thing else may a man call his own is comparable to this one best possession! what rather will not serve by contrast to enhance the value of an honest friend! Think of a horse or a yoke of oxen; they have their worth; but who shall gauge the worth of a worthy friend? Kindlier and more constant than the faithfullest of slaves—this is that possession best named all-serviceable. (4) Consider what the post is that he assigns himself! to meet and supplement what is lacking to the welfare of his friends, to promote their private and their public interests, is his concern. Is there need of kindly action in any quarter? he will throw in the full weight of his support. Does some terror confound? he is at hand to help and defend by expenditure of money and of energy, (5) by appeals to reason or resort to force. His the privilege alike to gladden the prosperous in the hour of success and to sustain their footing who have well-nigh slipped. All that the hands of a man may minister, all that the eyes of each are swift to see, the ears to hear, and the feet to compass, he with his helpful arts will not fall short of. Nay, not seldom that which a man has failed to accomplish for himself, has missed seeing or hearing or attaining, a friend acting in behalf of friend will achieve vicariously. And yet, albeit to try and tend a tree for the sake of its fruit is not uncommon, this copious mine of wealth—this friend—attracts only a lazy and listless attention on the part of more than half the world.

And yet, what else can a person truly call their own that compares to this one best possession? What could possibly contrast with and enhance the value of a genuine friend? Think about a horse or a team of oxen; they have their worth, but who can measure the worth of a true friend? More compassionate and reliable than even the most loyal servant—this is the possession that can truly do it all. (4) Consider the role he takes on! To meet and fill in what is lacking for the well-being of his friends, to support their personal and public interests, is his duty. Is there a need for kind actions anywhere? He will fully commit his support. Is there a threat that causes fear? He is there to help and defend, using his money, energy, (5) reason, or strength. He has the privilege to celebrate the successful in their moments of triumph and to steady those who are about to falter. Everything that a person can provide, everything their eyes can quickly see, their ears can hear, and their feet can cover, he will deliver through his helpful skills. In fact, often what someone has been unable to accomplish for themselves, what they failed to notice or hear, a friend acting on behalf of another friend can achieve. And yet, even though it’s common to cultivate a tree for its fruit, this abundant treasure—this friend—draws only a lazy and indifferent attention from more than half the world.

 (4) "A vessel fit for all work indeed is this friend." Cf. Ar. "Ach."
    936, {pagkhreston aggos estai}, like the "leather bottel."

 (5) Or, "by dint of his diplomacy."
(4) "This friend is truly a jack of all trades." Cf. Ar. "Ach." 936, {pagkhreston aggos estai}, like the "leather bottle."

(5) Or, "through his clever negotiation."

V

V

I remember listening to another argument of his, the effect of which would be to promote self-examination. The listener must needs be brought to ask himself, "Of what worth am I to my friends?" It happened thus. One of those who were with him was neglectful, as he noted, of a friend who was at the pinch of poverty (Antisthenes). (1) Accordingly, in the presence of the negligent person and of several others, he proceeded to question the sufferer.

I remember hearing him make another argument that encouraged self-reflection. The listener couldn't help but ask himself, "What value do I have to my friends?" This happened when he noticed that one of the people with him was neglecting a friend who was in dire financial trouble (Antisthenes). (1) So, in front of the careless person and several others, he began to question the one who was suffering.

 (1) Antisthenes, "cynicorum et stoicorum parens." Cic. "de Or." iii.
    17; "ad Att." xii. 38. See below, III. iii. 17; "Symp." passim;
    Diog. Laert. II. v.; VI. i.
(1) Antisthenes, "the father of Cynics and Stoics." Cic. "On Oratory" iii. 17; "To Atticus" xii. 38. See below, III. iii. 17; "Symposium" repeatedly; Diogenes Laertius II. v.; VI. i.

Soc. What say you, Antisthenes?—have friends their values like domestic slaves? One of these latter may be worth perhaps two minae, (2) another only half a mina, a third five, and a fourth as much as ten; while they do say that Nicias, (3) the son of Niceratus, paid a whole talent for a superintendent of his silver mines. And so I propound the question to myself as follows: "Have friends, like slaves, their market values?"

Soc. What do you think, Antisthenes?—do friends have values like household slaves? One of these might be worth maybe two minae, another only half a mina, a third five, and a fourth as much as ten; and they say that Nicias, the son of Niceratus, paid a whole talent for a supervisor of his silver mines. So, I ask myself this question: "Do friends, like slaves, have their market values?"

 (2) A mina = L4 circ.

 (3) For Nicias see Thuc. vii. 77 foll.; "Revenues," iv. 14; Plut.
    "Nic." IV. v.; Lys. "de bon. Aristoph." 648.
 (2) A mina = L4 circ.

 (3) For Nicias, see Thuc. vii. 77 and following; "Revenues," iv. 14; Plut. "Nic." IV. v.; Lys. "de bon. Aristoph." 648.

Not a doubt of it (replied Antisthenes). At any rate, I know that I would rather have such a one as my friend than be paid two minae, and there is such another whose worth I would not estimate at half a mina, and a third with whom I would not part for ten, and then again a fourth whose friendship would be cheap if it cost me all the wealth and pains in the world to purchase it.

"There's no doubt about it," replied Antisthenes. "I definitely would prefer to have someone like that as my friend than to be paid two minae. There's another person whose value I wouldn't even put at half a mina, and a third one I wouldn't trade for ten. Then there's a fourth whose friendship would be worthless, even if it cost me all the wealth and effort in the world to get it."

Well then (continued Socrates), if that be so, would it not be well if every one were to examine himself: "What after all may I chance to be worth to my friends?" Should he not try to become as dear as possible, so that his friends will not care to give him up? How often do I hear the complaint: "My friend So-and-so has given me up"; or "Such an one, whom I looked upon as a friend, has sacrificed me for a mina." And every time I hear these remarks, the question arises in my mind: If the vendor of a worthless slave is ready to part with him to a purchaser for what he will fetch—is there not at least a strong temptation to part with a base friend when you have a chance of making something on the exchange? Good slaves, as far as I can see, are not so knocked down to the hammer; no, nor good friends so lightly parted with.

Well then (continued Socrates), if that’s the case, wouldn’t it be good for everyone to ask themselves: "What am I really worth to my friends?" Shouldn’t they try to become as cherished as possible, so that their friends won’t want to let them go? How often do I hear someone say, "My friend So-and-so has abandoned me," or "Such-and-such, whom I considered a friend, has betrayed me for some money." Every time I hear these comments, I can’t help but wonder: If someone can easily sell a worthless slave to the highest bidder, isn’t there a real temptation to do the same with a disloyal friend if you can get something out of it? From what I see, good slaves aren’t handed over so casually, nor are good friends so easily let go of.

VI

VI

Again, in reference to the test to be applied, if we would gauge the qualifications of a friend worth the winning, the following remarks of Socrates could not fail, I think, to prove instructive. (1)

Again, regarding the test we should use, if we want to assess the qualities of a friend worth having, I believe the following remarks by Socrates will be helpful. (1)

 (1) Or, "Again, as to establishing a test of character, since a friend
    worth having must be of a particular type, I cannot but think that
    the following remarks would prove instructive."
(1) Or, "Again, regarding how to determine someone's character, since a good friend must have certain qualities, I believe that the following observations would be helpful."

Tell me (said Socrates, addressing Critobulus), supposing we stood in need of a good friend, how should we set about his discovery? We must, in the first place, I suppose, seek out one who is master of his appetites, not under the dominion, that is, of his belly, not addicted to the wine-cup or to lechery or sleep or idleness, since no one enslaved to such tyrants could hope to do his duty either by himself or by his friends, could he?

"Tell me," said Socrates to Critobulus, "if we need a good friend, how should we find one? First, I think we should look for someone who has control over their desires, not someone ruled by their stomach, not addicted to drinking, or to lust, or to sleep, or laziness. After all, no one enslaved by such things can expect to fulfill their responsibilities either to themselves or to their friends, right?"

Certainly not (Critobulus answered).

Definitely not (Critobulus answered).

Soc. Do you agree, then, that we must hold aloof from every one so dominated?

Soc. So, do you agree that we should stay away from anyone who is so controlled?

Cri. Most assuredly.

Cry. Definitely.

Well then (proceeded Socrates), what shall we say of the spendthrift who has lost his independence and is for ever begging of his neighbours; if he gets anything out of them he cannot repay, but if he fails to get anything, he hates you for not giving—do you not think that this man too would prove but a disagreeable friend?

Well then, (Socrates continued), what should we say about the spendthrift who has lost his independence and is always begging from his neighbors? If he gets something from them that he can't pay back, but if he doesn't get anything, he resents you for not giving—don't you think this guy would also be an unpleasant friend?

Cri. Certainly.

Cry. Definitely.

Soc. Then we must keep away from him too?

Soc. So, do we have to stay away from him as well?

Cri. That we must.

Sure, we have to.

Soc. Well! and what of the man whose strength lies in monetary transactions? (2) His one craving is to amass money; and for that reason he is an adept at driving a hard bargain (3)—glad enough to take in, but loath to pay out.

Soc. Well! what about the guy whose strength is in money dealings? (2) His only desire is to gather wealth; and for that reason, he's skilled at making tough deals (3)—happy to take in, but reluctant to pay out.

 (2) Or, "the money-lender? He has a passion for big money-bags."

 (3) Or, "hard in all his dealings."
(2) Or, "the loan shark? He's all about those big stacks of cash."

(3) Or, "tough in all his transactions."

Cri. In my opinion he will prove even a worse fellow than the last.

Cri. I think he'll turn out to be an even worse guy than the last one.

Soc. Well! and what of that other whose passion for money-making is so absorbing that he has no leisure for anything else, save how he may add to his gains?

Soc. Well! what about that other person whose obsession with making money is so intense that he has no time for anything else, except figuring out how to increase his profits?

Cri. Hold aloof from him, say I, since there is no good to be got out of him or his society.

Cri. Stay away from him, I say, because there's nothing good to be gained from him or being around him.

Soc. Well! what of the quarrelsome and factious person (4) whose main object is to saddle his friends with a host of enemies?

Soc. Well! what about the argumentative and divisive person whose main goal is to burden his friends with a bunch of enemies?

 (4) "The partisan."
"The partisan."

Cri. For God's sake let us avoid him also.

Cri. For God's sake, let’s avoid him too.

Soc. But now we will imagine a man exempt indeed from all the above defects—a man who has no objection to receive kindnesses, but it never enters into his head to do a kindness in return.

Soc. But now we will imagine a man free from all the above flaws—a man who has no problem accepting kindnesses, but it never occurs to him to offer a kindness in return.

Cri. There will be no good in him either. But, Socrates, what kind of man shall we endeavour to make our friend? what is he like?

Cri. He won't be a good person either. But, Socrates, what kind of person should we try to help our friend become? What’s he like?

Soc. I should say he must be just the converse of the above: he has control over the pleasures of the body, he is kindly disposed, (5) upright in all his dealings, (6) very zealous is he not to be outdone in kindness by his benefactors, if only his friends may derive some profit from his acquaintance.

Soc. I would say he must be the complete opposite of that: he has control over his physical pleasures, he's friendly, (5) honest in all his interactions, (6) and he’s truly eager not to let his benefactors outdo him in kindness, as long as his friends can benefit from knowing him.

 (5) Reading {eunous}, or if {euorkos}, transl. "a man of his word."

 (6) Or, "easy to deal with."
(5) Reading {eunous}, or if {euorkos}, translates to "a man of his word."

(6) Or, "easy to work with."

Cri. But how are we to test these qualities, Socrates, before acquaintance?

Cri. But how are we supposed to evaluate these qualities, Socrates, before we get to know them?

Soc. How do we test the merits of a sculptor?—not by inferences drawn from the talk of the artist merely. No, we look to what he has already achieved. These former statues of his were nobly executed, and we trust he will do equally well with the rest.

Soc. How do we evaluate a sculptor's skills?—not just by what the artist says. No, we look at what he has already created. His previous statues were skillfully made, and we trust he will do just as well with the others.

Cri. You mean that if we find a man whose kindness to older friends is established, we may take it as proved that he will treat his newer friends as amiably?

Cri. You mean that if we find a guy who is kind to his older friends, we can assume that he'll treat his newer friends just as nicely?

Soc. Why, certainly, if I see a man who has shown skill in the handling of horses previously, I argue that he will handle others no less skilfully again.

Soc. Of course, if I see a guy who has demonstrated skill in handling horses before, I believe he will handle others just as skillfully again.

Cri. Good! and when we have discovered a man whose friendship is worth having, how ought we to make him our friend?

Cri. Great! And when we find a guy whose friendship is worth having, how should we make him our friend?

Soc. First we ought to ascertain the will of Heaven whether it be advisable to make him our friend.

Soc. First, we should find out what Heaven wants and whether it’s a good idea to make him our friend.

Cri. Well! and how are we to effect the capture of this friend of our choice, whom the gods approve? will you tell me that?

Cri. Well! How are we going to catch this friend we've chosen, whom the gods support? Can you tell me that?

Not, in good sooth (replied Socrates), by running him down like a hare, nor by decoying him like a bird, or by force like a wild boar. (7) To capture a friend against his will is a toilsome business, and to bind him in fetters like a slave by no means easy. Those who are so treated are apt to become foes instead of friends. (8)

Not, truly (Socrates replied), by chasing him down like a hare, nor by luring him in like a bird, or by force like a wild boar. To capture a friend against their will is a tiring challenge, and forcing them into submission like a slave is certainly not easy. People who are treated this way often turn into enemies instead of remaining friends.

 (7) Reading {kaproi}, al. {ekhthroi}, "an enemy."

 (8) Or, "Hate rather than friendship is the outcome of these methods."
(7) Reading {kaproi}, al. {ekhthroi}, "an enemy."

(8) Or, "Hate instead of friendship is the result of these methods."

Cri. But how convert them into friends?

Cri. But how do I turn them into friends?

Soc. There are certain incantations, we are told, which those who know them have only to utter, and they can make friends of whom they list; and there are certain philtres also which those who have the secret of them may administer to whom they like and win their love.

Soc. We’re told that there are certain spells that people who know them can just say to gain friends of their choice; and there are also some potions that those who know the secret can give to anyone they want to win their affection.

Cri. From what source shall we learn them?

Cri. Where can we learn them?

Soc. You need not go farther than Homer to learn that which the Sirens sang to Odysseus, (9) the first words of which run, I think, as follows:

Soc. You don't have to look beyond Homer to find out what the Sirens sang to Odysseus, (9) the first words of which, I believe, go like this:

    Hither, come hither, thou famous man, Odysseus, great glory of the
    Achaeans!

 (9) "Od." xii. 184.
    Come here, you famous man, Odysseus, great glory of the Achaeans!

 (9) "Od." xii. 184.

Cri. And did the magic words of this spell serve for all men alike? Had the Sirens only to utter this one incantation, and was every listener constrained to stay?

Cri. And did the magic words of this spell work for everyone the same way? Did the Sirens just need to say this one chant, and was every listener forced to stay?

Soc. No; this was the incantation reserved for souls athirst for fame, of virtue emulous.

Soc. No; this was the spell meant for souls thirsty for fame, striving for virtue.

Cri. Which is as much as to say, we must suit the incantation to the listener, so that when he hears the words he shall not think that the enchanter is laughing at him in his sleeve. I cannot certainly conceive a method better calculated to excite hatred and repulsion than to go to some one who knows that he is small and ugly and a weakling, and to breathe in his ears the flattering tale that he is beautiful and tall and stalwart. But do you know any other love-charms, Socrates?

Cri. This basically means we need to tailor the incantation to the listener so that when he hears the words, he won’t think the enchanter is secretly mocking him. I can’t imagine a method better designed to provoke hatred and disgust than approaching someone who knows he’s small, ugly, and weak and whispering flattering lies that he’s beautiful, tall, and strong. But do you know any other love charms, Socrates?

Soc. I cannot say that I do; but I have heard that Pericles (10) was skilled in not a few, which he poured into the ear of our city and won her love.

Soc. I can't say that I do; but I’ve heard that Pericles (10) was talented in several ways, which he shared with our city and won her affection.

 (10) See above, I. ii. 40; "Symp." viii. 39.
(10) See above, I. ii. 40; "Symp." viii. 39.

Cri. And how did Themistocles (11) win our city's love?

Cri. And how did Themistocles win the love of our city?

 (11) See below, III. vi. 2; IV. ii. 2.
(11) See below, III. vi. 2; IV. ii. 2.

Soc. Ah, that was not by incantation at all. What he did was to encircle our city with an amulet of saving virtue. (12)

Soc. Ah, that wasn’t done by magic at all. What he did was surround our city with a protective charm. (12)

 (12) See Herod. vii. 143, "the wooden wall"; Thuc. i. 93, "'the walls'
    of Athens."
(12) See Herod. vii. 143, "the wooden wall"; Thuc. i. 93, "'the walls' of Athens."

Cri. You would imply, Socrates, would you not, that if we want to win the love of any good man we need to be good ourselves in speech and action?

Cri. You would suggest, Socrates, wouldn’t you, that if we want to earn the love of any good person, we need to be good ourselves in both our words and actions?

And did you imagine (replied Socrates) that it was possible for a bad man to make good friends?

And did you really think (Socrates replied) that a bad person could make good friends?

Cri. Why, I could fancy I had seen some sorry speech-monger who was fast friends with a great and noble statesman; or again, some born commander and general who was boon companion with fellows quite incapable of generalship. (13)

Cri. I could imagine I've seen some pathetic speaker who was tight with a great and noble politician; or maybe some natural leader and general who was best buddies with people completely unfit for leadership. (13)

 (13) Or, "Why, yes, when I see some base orator fast friends with a
    great leader of the people; or, again, some fellow incapable of
    generalship a comrade to the greatest captains of his age."
(13) Or, "Of course, when I see some lowly speaker close friends with a great leader of the people; or, again, some guy who can't lead in battle as a buddy to the greatest generals of his time."

Soc. But in reference to the point we were discussing, may I ask whether you know of any one who can attach a useful friend to himself without being of use in return? (14) Can service ally in friendship with disservice?

Soc. But regarding the point we were talking about, can I ask if you know anyone who can make a valuable friend without being useful in return? (14) Can being helpful work alongside being unhelpful in friendship?

 (14) Add, "Can service ally in friendship with disservice? Must there
    not be a reciprocity of service to make friendship lasting?"
(14) Add, "Can service be a friend when it comes with a downside? Isn't there a need for mutual support to keep friendship strong?"

Cri. In good sooth no. But now, granted it is impossible for a base man to be friends with the beautiful and noble, (14) I am concerned at once to discover if one who is himself of a beautiful and noble character can, with a wave of the hand, as it were, attach himself in friendship to every other beautiful and noble nature.

Cri. No, not really. But now, while it's true that a lower-class person can't easily be friends with someone beautiful and noble, I'm eager to find out if a person who is themselves beautiful and noble can, with just a wave of the hand, so to speak, form friendships with every other beautiful and noble person.

 (14) {kalous kagathous}.
(14) {good and virtuous}.

Soc. What perplexes and confounds you, Critobulus, is the fact that so often men of noble conduct, with souls aloof from baseness, are not friends but rather at strife and discord with one another, and deal more harshly by one another than they would by the most good-for-nothing of mankind.

Soc. What confuses and troubles you, Critobulus, is that so often men of noble character, who are above petty behavior, are not friends but rather in conflict and disagreement with each other, treating one another more harshly than they would treat the most worthless individuals.

Cri. Yes, and this holds true not of private persons only, but states, the most eager to pursue a noble policy and to repudiate a base one, are frequently in hostile relation to one another. As I reason on these things my heart fails me, and the question, how friends are to be acquired, fills me with despondency. The bad, as I see, cannot be friends with one another. For how can such people, the ungrateful, or reckless, or covetous, or faithless, or incontinent, adhere together as friends? Without hesitation I set down the bad as born to be foes not friends, and as bearing the birthmark of internecine hate. But then again, as you suggest, no more can these same people harmonise in friendship with the good. For how should they who do evil be friends with those who hate all evil-doing? And if, last of all, they that cultivate virtue are torn by party strife in their struggle for the headship of the states, envying one another, hating one another, who are left to be friends? where shall goodwill and faithfulness be found among men?

Cri. Yes, and this is true not just for individuals, but also for states. Those most eager to pursue noble policies and reject base ones often find themselves in conflict with each other. As I reflect on these matters, I feel overwhelmed, and the question of how to gain friends leaves me feeling hopeless. It seems to me that the bad cannot truly be friends with one another. How can ungrateful, reckless, greedy, faithless, or indulgent people form genuine friendships? I firmly believe that the bad are destined to be enemies, marked by a deep-seated animosity. But, as you pointed out, these same people cannot harmonize in friendship with the good either. How can those who commit evil be friends with those who detest all wrongdoing? And if even those who cultivate virtue are torn apart by factional strife in their pursuit of leadership, envying and hating one another, who is left to be friends? Where can goodwill and loyalty be found among people?

Soc. The fact is there is some subtlety in the texture of these things. (15) Seeds of love are implanted in man by nature. Men have need of one another, feel pity, help each other by united efforts, and in recognition of the fact show mutual gratitude. But there are seeds of war implanted also. The same objects being regarded as beautiful or agreeable by all alike, they do battle for their possession; a spirit of disunion (16) enters, and the parties range themselves in adverse camps. Discord and anger sound a note of war: the passion of more-having, staunchless avarice, threatens hostility; and envy is a hateful fiend. (17)

Soc. The truth is there are some subtle details in these things. (15) Seeds of love are naturally planted in people. People need each other, feel compassion, support one another through teamwork, and show mutual gratitude for it. But there are also seeds of war planted. When everyone sees the same things as beautiful or desirable, they fight for them; a spirit of division (16) arises, and they align themselves in opposing sides. Conflict and anger bring about war: the desire for more, insatiable greed, threatens confrontation; and jealousy is a vile enemy. (17)

 (15) i.e. a cunning intertwining of the threads of warp and woof.

 (16) Cf. Shelley, "The devil of disunion in their souls."

 (17) The diction is poetical.
(15) i.e. a clever weaving together of the threads of warp and weft.

(16) Cf. Shelley, "The devil of disunity in their souls."

(17) The language is poetic.

But nevertheless, through all opposing barriers friendship steals her way and binds together the beautiful and good among mankind. (18) Such is their virtue that they would rather possess scant means painlessly than wield an empire won by war. In spite of hunger and thirst they will share their meat and drink without a pang. Not bloom of lusty youth, nor love's delights can warp their self-control; nor will they be tempted to cause pain where pain should be unknown. It is theirs not merely to eschew all greed of riches, not merely to make a just and lawful distribution of wealth, but to supply what is lacking to the needs of one another. Theirs it is to compose strife and discord not in painless oblivion simply, but to the general advantage. Theirs also to hinder such extravagance of anger as shall entail remorse hereafter. And as to envy they will make a clean sweep and clearance of it: the good things which a man possesses shall be also the property of his friends, and the goods which they possess are to be looked upon as his. Where then is the improbability that the beautiful and noble should be sharers in the honours (19) of the state not only without injury, but even to their mutual advantage?

But still, despite all the obstacles, friendship finds its way and connects the beautiful and good among people. (18) Their virtue is such that they'd rather have limited resources without pain than rule over a kingdom gained through war. Despite hunger and thirst, they'll share their food and drink without a second thought. Neither the bloom of youthful passion nor the joys of love can shake their self-restraint, and they won't be tempted to cause pain where there shouldn't be any. It's not just about avoiding greed for wealth; they also ensure a fair and lawful distribution of resources and meet each other's needs. They work to resolve conflict and discord, not just to forget about it, but for everyone's benefit. They also prevent extreme anger that could lead to regret later on. And as for envy, they sweep it away completely: the good things one person has are also the possessions of their friends, and the possessions of friends should be seen as his. So where's the improbability that the beautiful and noble can share in the honors (19) of the state, not only without harm but even for their mutual benefit?

 (18) Or, as we say, "the elite of human kind."

 (19) "And the offices."
(18) Or, as we say, "the best of humanity."

(19) "And the jobs."

They indeed who covet and desire the honours and offices in a state for the sake of the liberty thereby given them to embezzle the public moneys, to deal violently by their fellow-creatures, and to batten in luxury themselves, may well be regarded as unjust and villainous persons incapable of harmony with one another. But if a man desire to obtain these selfsame honours in order that, being himself secure against wrong-doing, he may be able to assist his friends in what is right, and, raised to a high position, (20) may essay to confer some blessing on the land of his fathers, what is there to hinder him from working in harmony with some other of a like spirit? Will he, with the "beautiful and noble" at his side, be less able to aid his friends? or will his power to benefit the community be shortened because the flower of that community are fellow-workers in that work? Why, even in the contests of the games it is obvious that if it were possible for the stoutest combatants to combine against the weakest, the chosen band would come off victors in every bout, and would carry off all the prizes. This indeed is against the rules of the actual arena; but in the field of politics, where the beautiful and good hold empery, and there is nought to hinder any from combining with whomsoever a man may choose to benefit the state, it will be a clear gain, will it not, for any one engaged in state affairs to make the best men his friends, whereby he will find partners and co-operators in his aims instead of rivals and antagonists? And this at least is obvious: in case of foreign war a man will need allies, but all the more if in the ranks opposed to him should stand the flower of the enemy. (21) Moreover, those who are willing to fight your battles must be kindly dealt with, that goodwill may quicken to enthusiasm; and one good man (22) is better worth your benefiting that a dozen knaves, since a little kindness goes a long way with the good, but with the base the more you give them the more they ask for.

Those who crave power and positions in government just to take advantage of the freedom to misuse public funds, treat others violently, and indulge in luxury for themselves can definitely be seen as unjust and villainous, lacking the ability to cooperate with one another. However, if someone seeks those same honors to secure themselves against wrongdoing and to help their friends do what’s right, and to aspire to benefit the land of their ancestors, what’s stopping them from working together with others of a similar mindset? Will having “the beautiful and noble” beside him make him any less able to support his friends? Or will his ability to improve the community be diminished because the best members of that community are working together with him? Even in sports competitions, it’s clear that if the strongest fighters could team up against the weakest, the chosen group would win every match and take home all the prizes. While this might not be allowed in actual competitions, in the political arena, where the good and noble hold power, and there's nothing to prevent anyone from joining forces with whoever they choose to improve the state, it would clearly be beneficial for anyone involved in politics to make friends with the best people, finding partners and allies in their goals instead of rivals and opponents. This is especially clear when facing foreign wars; one needs allies even more if facing the strongest enemy fighters. Moreover, those who are willing to fight for you should be treated well, as goodwill can inspire enthusiasm; and one good person is worth more than a dozen villains, since a little kindness goes a long way with good people, while with the dishonorable, the more you give them, the more they will demand.

 (20) "As archon," or "raised to rule."

 (21) Lit. "the beautiful and good."

 (22) Or, "the best, though few, are better worth your benefiting than
    the many base."
(20) "As a leader," or "elevated to govern."

(21) Literally, "the beautiful and good."

(22) Or, "the best, even though few, are more deserving of your benefit than the many inferior."

So keep a good heart, Critobulus; only try to become good yourself, and when you have attained, set to your hand to capture the beautiful and good. Perhaps I may be able to give you some help in this quest, being myself an adept in Love's lore. (23) No matter who it is for whom my heart is aflame; in an instant my whole soul is eager to leap forth. With vehemence I speed to the mark. I, who love, demand to be loved again; this desire in me must be met by counter desire in him; this thirst for his society by thirst reciprocal for mine. And these will be your needs also, I foresee, whenever you are seized with longing to contract a friendship. Do not hide from me, therefore, whom you would choose as a friend, since, owing to the pains I take to please him who pleases me, I am not altogether unversed, I fancy, in the art of catching men. (24)

So keep a positive attitude, Critobulus; just focus on becoming a better person yourself, and once you achieve that, work on attracting the beautiful and the good. Maybe I can help you with this journey, since I’m somewhat of an expert in matters of love. (23) It doesn’t matter who has captured my heart; in an instant, my whole being is ready to jump in. With passion, I rush towards my goal. I, who love, want to be loved in return; this desire within me needs to be matched by someone else's longing for me; my craving for their company must be reciprocated. And I foresee that these will be your needs too whenever you feel inspired to form a friendship. So don’t hide from me who you would like as a friend, because, thanks to the effort I make to please those who please me, I believe I have some skill in winning people over. (24)

 (23) "An authority in matters of love." Cf. Plat. "Symp." 177 D; Xen.
    "Symp." viii. 2.

 (24) See below, III. xi. 7; cf. Plat. "Soph." 222; N. T. Matt. iv. 19,
    {alieis anthropon}.
(23) "An expert in love." See Plat. "Symp." 177 D; Xen. "Symp." viii. 2.

(24) See below, III. xi. 7; cf. Plat. "Soph." 222; N. T. Matt. iv. 19, {alieis anthropon}.

Critobulus replied: Why, these are the very lessons of instruction, Socrates, for which I have been long athirst, and the more particularly if this same love's lore will enable me to capture those who are good of soul and those who are beautiful of person.

Critobulus replied: These are exactly the lessons I’ve been eager to learn, Socrates, especially since this knowledge of love will help me win over those who are good-hearted and those who are beautiful.

Soc. Nay, now I warn you, Critobulus, it is not within the province of my science to make the beautiful endure him who would lay hands upon them. And that is why men fled from Scylla, I am persuaded, because she laid hands upon them; but the Sirens were different—they laid hands on nobody, but sat afar off and chanted their spells in the ears of all; and therefore, it is said, all men endured to listen, and were charmed.

Soc. No, I have to tell you, Critobulus, it’s not part of my expertise to make beauty last for those who would seize it. That’s why I believe people ran away from Scylla—because she physically tried to grab them; but the Sirens were different—they didn’t touch anyone, but stayed at a distance and sang their enchanting songs to everyone nearby. Because of that, it’s said that all men were willing to listen and were captivated.

Cri. I promise I will not lay violent hands on any; therefore, if you have any good device for winning friends, instruct your pupil.

Cri. I promise I won't harm anyone; so if you have any good ideas for making friends, teach your student.

Soc. And if there is to be no laying on of the hands, there must be no application either of the lips; is it agreed?

Soc. And if we’re not going to lay hands on anyone, then we shouldn’t use our lips either; do we agree?

Cri. No, nor application of the lips to any one—not beautiful.

Cri. No, nor application of the lips to anyone—not beautiful.

Soc. See now! you cannot open your mouth without some luckless utterance. Beauty suffers no such liberty, however eagerly the ugly may invite it, making believe some quality of soul must rank them with the beautiful.

Soc. Look! You can't say anything without making some unfortunate comment. Beauty doesn't have that problem, no matter how much the unattractive might try, pretending that some quality of the soul should place them on the same level as the beautiful.

Cri. Be of good cheer then; let the compact stand thus: "Kisses for the beautiful, and for the good a rain of kisses." So now teach us the art of catching friends.

Be in good spirits then; let's agree on this: "Kisses for the beautiful, and a shower of kisses for the good." Now, teach us how to make friends.

Soc. Well then, when you wish to win some one's affection, you will allow me to lodge information against you to the effect that you admire him and desire to be his friend?

Soc. Well then, when you want to win someone’s affection, will you let me share the information that you admire him and want to be his friend?

Cri. Lodge the indictment, with all my heart. I never heard of any one who hated his admirers.

Cri. Lodge the indictment, wholeheartedly. I've never heard of anyone who hated their fans.

Soc. And if I add to the indictment the further charge that through your admiration you are kindly disposed towards him, you will not feel I am taking away your character?

Soc. And if I add to the accusation the additional claim that your admiration makes you favor him, you won't think I'm damaging your reputation, will you?

Cri. Why, no; for myself I know a kindly feeling springs up in my heart towards any one whom I conceive to be kindly disposed to me.

Cri. Why, no; for myself I know a warm feeling arises in my heart towards anyone I think is friendly towards me.

Soc. All this I shall feel empowered to say about you to those whose friendship you seek, and I can promise further help; only there is a comprehensive "if" to be considered: if you will further authorise me to say that you are devoted to your friends; that nothing gives you so much joy as a good friend; that you pride yourself no less on the fine deeds of those you love than on your own; and on their good things equally with your own; that you never weary of plotting and planning to procure them a rich harvest of the same; and lastly, that you have discovered a man's virtue is to excel his friends in kindness and his foes in hostility. If I am authorised thus to report of you, I think you will find me a serviceable fellow-hunter in the quest of friends, which is the conquest of the good.

Soc. I can confidently share all this about you with those whose friendship you’re hoping to gain, and I can offer additional support. However, there’s an important “if” to consider: if you’ll allow me to say that you’re dedicated to your friends; that nothing makes you happier than a good friend; that you take as much pride in the great things your loved ones do as you do in your own; that you never tire of scheming to ensure they reap similar rewards; and finally, that you’ve realized a person’s true virtue is to be kinder than their friends and more competitive than their enemies. If you permit me to communicate this about you, I believe you’ll find me a valuable ally in the pursuit of friends, which is ultimately the pursuit of goodness.

Cri. Why this appeal to me?—as if you had not free permission to say exactly what you like about me.

Cri. Why does this appeal to me?—as if you didn't have the freedom to say whatever you want about me.

Soc. No; that I deny, on the authority of Aspasia. (25) I have it from her own lips. "Good matchmakers," she said tome, "were clever hands at cementing alliances between people, provided the good qualities they vouched for were truthfully reported; but when it came to their telling lies, for her part she could not compliment them. (26) Their poor deluded dupes ended by hating each other and the go-betweens as well." Now I myself am so fully persuaded of the truth of this that I feel it is not in my power to say aught in your praise which I cannot say with truth.

Soc. No, I disagree with that, based on what Aspasia told me. (25) I heard it directly from her. "Good matchmakers," she said to me, "were skillful at bringing people together, as long as the good qualities they vouched for were accurately stated; but when it came to lying, she couldn't praise them. (26) Their poor, misled victims ended up hating each other and the matchmakers as well." Now, I truly believe this so wholeheartedly that I feel unable to say anything positive about you that I can't say honestly.

 (25) Aspasia, daughter of Axiochus, of Miletus. See "Econ." iii. 14;
    Plat. "Menex." 235 E; Aesch. Socrat. ap. Cic. "de Invent." I.
    xxxi. 51. See Grote, "H. G." vi. 132 foll.; Cobet, "Pros. Xen."

 (26) Reading {ouk ethelein epainein}, or if {ouk ophelein epainousas}
    with Kuhner transl. "Good matchmakers, she told me, have to
    consult truth when reporting favourably of any one: then indeed
    they are terribly clever at bringing people together: whereas
    false flatterers do no good; their dupes," etc.
(25) Aspasia, the daughter of Axiochus from Miletus. See "Econ." iii. 14; Plat. "Menex." 235 E; Aesch. Socrat. ap. Cic. "de Invent." I. xxxi. 51. See Grote, "H. G." vi. 132 foll.; Cobet, "Pros. Xen."

(26) Reading {ouk ethelein epainein}, or if {ouk ophelein epainousas} with Kuhner translated as "Good matchmakers, she told me, have to consult the truth when positively talking about someone: only then are they really skilled at bringing people together: while dishonest flatterers don’t accomplish anything; their victims," etc.

Cri. Really, Socrates, you are a wonderfully good friend to me—in so far as I have any merit which will entitle me to win a friend, you will lend me a helping hand, it seems; otherwise you would rather not forge any petty fiction for my benefit.

Cri. Honestly, Socrates, you’re an amazing friend to me—if I have any qualities that make me worthy of friendship, you’re willing to help me out; otherwise, you’d prefer not to create some small lie just to benefit me.

Soc. But tell me, how shall I assist you best, think you? By praising you falsely or by persuading you to try to be a good man? Or if it is not plain to you thus, look at the matter by the light of some examples. I wish to introduce you to a shipowner, or to make him your friend: I begin by singing your praises to him falsely thus, "You will find him a good pilot"; he catches at the phrase, and entrusts his ship to you, who have no notion of guiding a vessel. What can you expect but to make shipwreck of the craft and yourself together? or suppose by similar false assertions I can persuade the state at large to entrust her destinies to you—"a man with a fine genius for command," I say, "a practised lawyer," "a politician born," and so forth. The odds are, the state and you may come to grief through you. Or to take an instance from everyday life. By my falsehoods I persuade some private person to entrust his affairs to you as "a really careful and business-like person with a head for economy." When put to the test would not your administration prove ruinous, and the figure you cut ridiculous? No, my dear friend, there is but one road, the shortest, safest, best, and it is simply this: In whatsoever you desire to be deemed good, endeavour to be good. For of all the virtues namable among men, consider, and you will find there is not one but may be increased by learning and practice. For my part then, Critobulus, these are the principles on which we ought to go a-hunting; but if you take a different view, I am all attention, please instruct me.

Soc. But tell me, what's the best way I can help you? Should I give you false praise, or should I encourage you to be a good person? If that's not clear, let’s look at some examples. Imagine I want to introduce you to a shipowner or make him your friend. I start by falsely praising you, saying, "You’ll find him a great pilot." He believes it and trusts you with his ship, even though you have no idea how to steer one. What do you think will happen? You'll probably end up wrecking the ship and putting yourself in danger too. Or let’s say I convince the government to trust you with important responsibilities—calling you "a natural leader," "an experienced lawyer," "born to be a politician," and so on. The likely outcome is that both you and the state will face disaster because of you. Or think about everyday situations. By lying, I might persuade someone to let you handle their affairs because I say you’re "careful and organized with money." When it really matters, wouldn’t your management turn out to be a disaster, and wouldn’t you look foolish? No, my friend, there's only one path that’s the shortest, safest, and most effective: If you want to be recognized as good, strive to actually be good. Because among all the virtues people can have, you'll find that each one can be improved through learning and practice. So, Critobulus, these are the ideas we should follow; but if you see it differently, I'm all ears—please teach me.

Then Critobulus: Nay, Socrates, I should be ashamed to gainsay what you have said; if I did, it would neither be a noble statement nor a true. (27)

Then Critobulus: No, Socrates, I would be ashamed to disagree with what you have said; if I did, it wouldn't be a noble statement or a true one. (27)

 (27) {kala... alethe}.
(27) {kala... alethe}.

VII

VII

He had two ways of dealing with the difficulties of his friends: where ignorance was the cause, he tried to meet the trouble by a dose of common sense; or where want and poverty were to blame, by lessoning them that they should assist one another according to their ability; and here I may mention certain incidents which occurred within my own knowledge. How, for instance, he chanced upon Aristarchus wearing the look of one who suffered from a fit of the "sullens," and thus accosted him.

He had two ways of handling his friends' issues: when ignorance was the problem, he tried to address it with some common sense; and when it was about lack and poverty, he would remind them to help each other out as much as they could. I can share some incidents that I personally witnessed. For example, he came across Aristarchus looking like someone who was in a bad mood, and he greeted him.

Soc. You seem to have some trouble on your mind, Aristarchus; if so, you should share it with your friends. Perhaps together we might lighten the weight of it a little.

Soc. You look like you've got something bothering you, Aristarchus; if that's the case, you should talk to your friends about it. Maybe we can help take some of the burden off you.

Aristarchus answered: Yes, Socrates, I am in sore straits indeed. Ever since the party strife declared itself in the city, (1) what with the rush of people to Piraeus, and the wholesale banishments, I have been fairly at the mercy of my poor deserted female relatives. Sisters, nieces, cousins, they have all come flocking to me for protection. I have fourteen free-born souls, I tell you, under my single roof, and how are we to live? We can get nothing out of the soil—that is in the hands of the enemy; nothing from my house property, for there is scarcely a living soul left in the city; my furniture? no one will buy it; money? there is none to be borrowed—you would have a better chance to find it by looking for it on the road than to borrow it from a banker. Yes, Socrates, to stand by and see one's relatives die of hunger is hard indeed, and yet to feed so many at such a pinch impossible.

Aristarchus replied: Yes, Socrates, I'm in a tough spot. Ever since the political conflict started in the city, with everyone rushing to Piraeus and so many people getting exiled, I’ve really been at the mercy of my poor, abandoned relatives. Sisters, nieces, cousins—they've all come to me for help. I’ve got fourteen free people living under my roof, and I don’t know how we’re going to survive. We can’t get anything from the land—that's controlled by our enemies; I can’t get anything from my property because there’s hardly anyone left in the city; my furniture? No one wants to buy it; money? It’s impossible to borrow—you’d have a better chance of finding it on the road than getting a loan from a banker. Yes, Socrates, it’s really hard to stand by and watch my relatives starve, and yet it’s impossible to feed so many at a time like this.

 (1) i.e. circa 404-403 B.C. See "Hell." II. iv.
(1) i.e. around 404-403 B.C. See "Hell." II. iv.

After he listened to the story, Socrates asked: How comes it that Ceramon, (2) with so many mouths to feed, not only contrives to furnish himself and them with the necessaries of life, but to realise a handsome surplus, whilst you being in like plight (3) are afraid you will one and all perish of starvation for want of the necessaries of life?

After he heard the story, Socrates asked: How is it that Ceramon, with so many people to take care of, not only manages to provide for himself and them but also creates a nice surplus, while you, in a similar situation, are worried that you will all starve because you can’t get the essentials for living?

 (2) An employer of labour, apparently, on a grand scale.

 (3) Lit. "with your large family to feed." L. Dindorf would like to
    read {su de oligous}, "you with your small family."
(2) A large-scale employer of labor, it seems.

(3) Literally, "with your big family to support." L. Dindorf suggests reading {su de oligous}, "you with your small family."

Ar. Why, bless your soul, do you not see he has only slaves and I have free-born souls to feed?

Ar. Why, bless your soul, can't you see he has only slaves while I have free-born people to support?

Soc. And which should you say were the better human beings, the free-born members of your household or Ceramon's slaves?

Soc. So, who would you say are the better people, the free-born members of your household or Ceramon's slaves?

Ar. The free souls under my roof without a doubt.

Ar. The free spirits under my roof, no question about it.

Soc. Is it not a shame, then, that he with his baser folk to back him should be in easy circumstances, while you and your far superior household are in difficulties?

Soc. Isn't it a shame that he, with his lesser companions supporting him, is doing well, while you and your much better household are struggling?

Ar. To be sure it is, when he has only a set of handicraftsmen to feed, and I my liberally-educated household.

Ar. To be sure it is, when he has only a group of skilled workers to support, and I have my well-educated household.

Soc. What is a handicraftsman? Does not the term apply to all who can make any sort of useful product or commodity?

Soc. What’s a handicraftsman? Doesn’t the term refer to anyone who can create any kind of useful product or item?

Ar. Certainly.

Sure.

Soc. Barley meal is a useful product, is it not?

Soc. Barley meal is a useful product, isn't it?

Ar. Pre-eminently so.

Absolutely.

Soc. And loaves of bread?

Soc. And loaves of bread?

Ar. No less.

No way.

Soc. Well, and what do you say to cloaks for men and for women—tunics, mantles, vests? (4)

Soc. So, what do you think about cloaks for men and women—tunics, mantles, vests? (4)

 (4) For these articles of dress see Becker's "Charicles," Exc. i. to
    Sc. xi. "Dress."
(4) For these clothing items, see Becker's "Charicles," Exc. i. to Sc. xi. "Dress."

Ar. Yes, they are all highly useful commodities.

Ar. Yes, they are all very useful items.

Soc. Then your household do not know how to make any of these?

Soc. So your household doesn't know how to do any of this?

Ar. On the contrary, I believe they can make them all.

Ar. On the other hand, I believe they can make all of them.

Soc. Then you are not aware that by means of the manufacture of one of these alone—his barley meal store—Nausicydes (5) not only maintains himself and his domestics, but many pigs and cattle besides, and realises such large profits that he frequently contributes to the state benevolences; (6) while there is Cyrebus, again, who, out of a bread factory, more than maintains the whole of his establishment, and lives in the lap of luxury; and Demeas of Collytus gets a livelihood out of a cloak business, and Menon as a mantua-maker, and so, again, more than half the Megarians (7) by the making of vests.

Soc. So you don’t know that by producing just one thing—his barley meal—Nausicydes not only supports himself and his household but also many pigs and cattle. He makes such big profits that he often donates to state projects; then there’s Cyrebus, who runs a bread factory that not only supports his entire business but allows him to live in luxury. Demeas from Collytus makes a living selling cloaks, and Menon as a dressmaker, and more than half the people in Megara support themselves by making vests.

 (5) Nausicydes. Cobet, "Pros. Xen." cf. Aristoph. "Eccles." 426.

 (6) Lit. "state liturgies," or "to the burden of the public services."
    For these see Gow, "Companion," xviii. "Athenian Finance."

 (7) Cf. Arist. "Acharnians," 519, {esukophantei Megareon ta
    khlaniskia}. See Dr. Merry's note ad loc.
(5) Nausicydes. Cobet, "Pros. Xen." cf. Aristoph. "Eccles." 426.

(6) Literally, "state liturgies," or "to the burden of the public services." For these, see Gow, "Companion," xviii. "Athenian Finance."

(7) Cf. Arist. "Acharnians," 519, {esukophantei Megareon ta khlaniskia}. See Dr. Merry's note ad loc.

Ar. Bless me, yes! They have got a set of barbarian fellows, whom they purchase and keep, to manufacture by forced labour whatever takes their fancy. My kinswomen, I need not tell you, are free-born ladies.

Ar. Bless me, yes! They have a group of barbaric guys that they buy and keep to force into making whatever they want. My relatives, I don’t need to say, are free-born ladies.

Soc. Then, on the ground that they are free-born and your kinswomen, you think that they ought to do nothing but eat and sleep? Or is it your opinion that people who live in this way—I speak of free-born people in general—lead happier lives, and are more to be congratulated, than those who give their time and attention to such useful arts of life as they are skilled in? Is this what you see in the world, that for the purpose of learning what it is well to know, and of recollecting the lessons taught, or with a view to health and strength of body, or for the sake of acquiring and preserving all that gives life its charm, idleness and inattention are found to be helpful, whilst work and study are simply a dead loss? Pray, when those relatives of yours were taught what you tell me they know, did they learn it as barren information which they would never turn to practical account, or, on the contrary, as something with which they were to be seriously concerned some day, and from which they were to reap advantage? Do human beings in general attain to well-tempered manhood by a course of idling, or by carefully attending to what will be of use? Which will help a man the more to grow in justice and uprightness, to be up and doing, or to sit with folded hands revolving the ways and means of existence? As things now stand, if I am not mistaken, there is no love lost between you. You cannot help feeling that they are costly to you, and they must see that you find them a burthen? This is a perilous state of affairs, in which hatred and bitterness have every prospect of increasing, whilst the pre-existing bond of affection (8) is likely to be snapped.

Soc. So, just because they’re free-born and related to you, do you really think they should only eat and sleep? Or do you believe that people who live like this—I mean free-born people in general—are happier and deserve more praise than those who focus on practical skills that benefit life? Is that your view of the world, that in order to learn what’s important, remember lessons, maintain health, or acquire and hold onto what makes life enjoyable, idleness and distraction are helpful, while work and study are just wasted effort? When your relatives learned what you say they know, did they acquire it as useless trivia they’d never apply, or did they see it as something important they’d need to deal with later and benefit from? Do people generally grow into balanced adulthood through laziness, or by paying attention to what’s useful? What helps a person develop justice and integrity more: taking action or just sitting back and pondering life’s challenges? As things stand now, if I’m not mistaken, there’s some tension between you. You probably feel they’re a financial burden, and they must sense that you see them as a weight. This is a dangerous situation where resentment and animosity are likely to grow, while the existing bond of affection (8) is at risk of breaking.

 (8) Or, "the original stock of kindliness will be used up."
(8) Or, "the original supply of kindness will run out."

But now, if only you allow them free scope for their energies, when you come to see how useful they can be, you will grow quite fond of them, and they, when they perceive that they can please you, will cling to their benefactor warmly. Thus, with the memory of former kindnesses made sweeter, you will increase the grace which flows from kindnesses tenfold; you will in consequence be knit in closer bonds of love and domesticity. If, indeed, they were called upon to do any shameful work, let them choose death rather than that; but now they know, it would seem, the very arts and accomplishments which are regarded as the loveliest and the most suitable for women; and the things which we know, any of us, are just those which we can best perform, that is to say, with ease and expedition; it is a joy to do them, and the result is beautiful. (9) Do not hesitate, then, to initiate your friends in what will bring advantage to them and you alike; probably they will gladly respond to your summons.

But now, if you let them fully express their abilities, when you see how helpful they can be, you’ll really start to appreciate them, and they, when they realize they can make you happy, will hold onto their benefactor tightly. Thus, with the memory of past kindnesses becoming even sweeter, you’ll multiply the grace that comes from kindness tenfold; as a result, you will be closer in love and home life. If they were ever asked to do anything shameful, they should choose death over it; but now they seem to understand the very skills and talents that are considered the prettiest and most fitting for women; and the things we all know are exactly what we can do best, that is, with ease and speed; it’s a pleasure to do them, and the outcome is beautiful. (9) So don’t hesitate to teach your friends what will benefit both them and you; they will likely respond positively to your invitation.

 (9) Or, "with ease, rapidity, pleasure and effect."
(9) Or, "with ease, speed, enjoyment, and impact."

Well, upon my word (Aristarchus answered), I like so well what you say, Socrates, that though hitherto I have not been disposed to borrow, knowing that when I had spent what I got I should not be in a condition to repay, I think I can now bring myself to do so in order to raise a fund for these works.

Well, honestly (Aristarchus replied), I like what you’re saying, Socrates, so much that even though I haven't been inclined to borrow before, knowing that once I spent what I had I wouldn’t be able to pay it back, I think I can now convince myself to do it to create a fund for these projects.

Thereupon a capital was provided; wools were purchased; the good man's relatives set to work, and even whilst they breakfasted they worked, and on and on till work was ended and they supped. Smiles took the place of frowns; they no longer looked askance with suspicion, but full into each other's eyes with happiness. They loved their kinsman for his kindness to them. He became attached to them as helpmates; and the end of it all was, he came to Socrates and told him with delight how matters fared; "and now," he added, "they tax me with being the only drone in the house, who sit and eat the bread of idleness."

Then they secured funds; they bought wool; the good man's relatives got to work, and even while they had breakfast, they kept at it, continuing until work was done and they had dinner. Smiles replaced frowns; they stopped looking at each other with suspicion and instead looked into each other's eyes with joy. They appreciated their relative for his generosity towards them. He grew fond of them as partners; and in the end, he went to Socrates and eagerly shared how things had gone; "and now," he added, "they accuse me of being the only slacker in the house, just sitting around and living off the fruits of others' labor."

To which Socrates: Why do not you tell them the fable of the dog? (10) Once on a time, so goes the story, when beasts could speak, the sheep said to her master, "What a marvel is this, master, that to us, your own sheep, who provide you with fleeces and lambs and cheese, you give nothing, save only what we may nibble off earth's bosom; but with this dog of yours, who provides you with nothing of the sort, you share the very meat out of your mouth." When the dog heard these words, he answered promptly, "Ay, in good sooth, for is it not I who keep you safe and sound, you sheep, so that you are not stolen by man nor harried by wolves; since, if I did not keep watch over you, you would not be able so much as to graze afield, fearing to be destroyed." And so, says the tale, the sheep had to admit that the dog was rightly preferred to themselves in honour. And so do you tell your flock yonder that like the dog in the fable you are their guardian and overseer, and it is thanks to you that they are protected from evil and evildoers, so that they work their work and live their lives in blissful security.

To which Socrates replied: Why don’t you tell them the fable of the dog? (10) Once upon a time, according to the story, when animals could talk, the sheep said to their master, "What a wonder this is, master, that to us, your own sheep, who give you wool, lambs, and cheese, you offer nothing but what we can pick from the ground; yet with this dog of yours, who provides you with none of that, you share the very meat from your own plate." When the dog heard these words, he quickly replied, "Yes, indeed, for am I not the one who keeps you safe, you sheep, ensuring that you aren't stolen by humans or attacked by wolves? If I didn’t watch over you, you wouldn't even be able to graze freely, afraid of being harmed." And so, the tale goes, the sheep had to acknowledge that the dog deserved more honor than they did. So you should tell your flock over there that, like the dog in the fable, you are their protector and caretaker, and it’s because of you that they are safe from harm and wrongdoers, allowing them to do their work and live their lives in complete security.

 (10) See Joseph Jacobs, "The Fables of Aesop," vol. i. p. 26 foll.,
    for "a complete list of the Fables given in Greek literature up to
    the fall of Greek independence." Cf. Hesiod, "Works and Days," 202
    foll.; Archilochus, 89 (60), Bergk; Herod. i. 141; Aesch.
    "Myrmid." fr. 123; Aristot. "Rhet." II. xx.
 (10) See Joseph Jacobs, "The Fables of Aesop," vol. i. p. 26 foll.,
    for "a complete list of the Fables in Greek literature up to
    the fall of Greek independence." Cf. Hesiod, "Works and Days," 202
    foll.; Archilochus, 89 (60), Bergk; Herod. i. 141; Aesch.
    "Myrmid." fr. 123; Aristot. "Rhet." II. xx.

VIII

VIII

At another time chancing upon an old friend whom he had not seen for a long while, he greeted him thus.

At another time, he ran into an old friend he hadn’t seen in a long while and greeted him like this.

Soc. What quarter of the world do you hail from, Eutherus?

Soc. Which part of the world are you from, Eutherus?

The other answered: From abroad, just before the close of the war; but at present from the city itself. (1) You see, since we have been denuded of our possessions across the frontier, (2) and my father left me nothing in Attica, I must needs bide at home, and provide myself with the necessaries of life by means of bodily toil, which seems preferable to begging from another, especially as I have no security on which to raise a loan.

The other replied: I came from abroad, just before the war ended; but right now I'm in the city itself. (1) You see, since we've lost our belongings across the border, (2) and my father didn't leave me anything in Attica, I have to stay at home and earn my living through hard work, which feels better than begging from someone else, especially since I have no collateral to take out a loan.

 (1) Lit. "from here." The conversation perhaps takes place in Piraeus
    404 B.C.

 (2) Or, "colonial possession." Cf. "Symp." iv. 31.
(1) Lit. "from here." The conversation probably takes place in Piraeus 404 B.C.

(2) Or, "colonial possession." See "Symp." iv. 31.

Soc. And how long do you expect your body to be equal to providing the necessaries of life for hire?

Soc. And how long do you think your body will be able to earn a living?

Euth. Goodness knows, Socrates—not for long.

Euth. Honestly, Socrates—not much longer.

Soc. And when you find yourself an old man, expenses will not diminish, and yet no one will care to pay you for the labour of your hands.

Soc. And when you become an old man, your costs won’t go down, yet no one will want to pay you for your hard work.

Euth. That is true.

Euthanasia. That's true.

Soc. Would it not be better then to apply yourself at once to such work as will stand you in good stead when you are old—that is, address yourself to some large proprietor who needs an assistant in managing his estate? (3) By superintending his works, helping to get in his crops, and guarding his property in general, you will be a benefit to the estate and be benefited in return.

Soc. Wouldn’t it be wiser to start working on something that will be valuable to you when you're older? You could approach a large landowner who needs help managing their estate. By overseeing their operations, assisting with the harvest, and generally looking after their property, you’ll contribute to the estate while also benefiting yourself.

 (3) Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. iii. 48.
(3) Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. iii. 48.

I could not endure the yoke of slavery, Socrates! (he exclaimed).

I couldn't stand the burden of slavery, Socrates! (he exclaimed).

Soc. And yet the heads of departments in a state are not regarded as adopting the badge of slavery because they manage the public property, but as having attained a higher degree of freedom rather.

Soc. And still, the heads of departments in a state aren't seen as taking on the mark of slavery just because they handle public property; instead, they're viewed as having achieved a greater level of freedom.

Euth. In a word, Socrates, the idea of being held to account to another is not at all to my taste.

Euth. In short, Socrates, the idea of having to answer to someone else doesn’t appeal to me at all.

Soc. And yet, Eutherus, it would be hard to find a work which did not involve some liability to account; in fact it is difficult to do anything without some mistake or other, and no less difficult, if you should succeed in doing it immaculately, to escape all unfriendly criticism. I wonder now whether you find it easy to get through your present occupations entirely without reproach. No? Let me tell you what you should do. You should avoid censorious persons and attach yourself to the considerate and kind-hearted, and in all your affairs accept with a good grace what you can and decline what you feel you cannot do. Whatever it be, do it heart and soul, and make it your finest work. (4) There lies the method at once to silence fault-finders and to minister help to your own difficulties. Life will flow smoothly, risks will be diminished, provision against old age secured.

Soc. Yet, Eutherus, it’s hard to find a task that doesn’t come with some chance of being held accountable; in fact, it’s tough to do anything without making a mistake, and even if you manage to do something perfectly, you’ll still face some negative feedback. I’m curious if you find it easy to get through your current responsibilities without any criticism. No? Here’s what you should do. Avoid judgmental people and stick with those who are understanding and kind, and in all your dealings, accept what you can with grace and turn down what you know you can’t handle. Whatever you choose to do, give it your all and make it your best work. (4) That’s the way to quiet your critics and help yourself with your own challenges. Life will flow more smoothly, risks will be lessened, and you’ll have a safety net for old age.

 (4) Or, "study to make it your finest work, the expression of a real
    enthusiasm."
(4) Or, "aim to make it your best work, a true expression of passion."

IX

IX

At another time, as I am aware, he had heard a remark made by Crito (1) that life at Athens was no easy matter for a man who wished to mind his own affairs.

At another time, as I know, he heard Crito say that life in Athens was not easy for someone who wanted to focus on their own business.

 (1) Crito. See above, I. ii. 48; Cobet, "P. X."; cf. Plat. "Rep."
    viii. 549 C.
(1) Crito. See above, I. ii. 48; Cobet, "P. X."; cf. Plat. "Rep." viii. 549 C.

As, for instance, at this moment (Crito proceeded) there are a set of fellows threatening me with lawsuits, not because they have any misdemeanour to allege against me, but simply under the conviction that I will sooner pay a sum of money than be troubled further.

As, for example, right now (Crito continued) there are some guys threatening me with lawsuits, not because they have any wrongdoing to accuse me of, but simply because they believe I would rather pay them off than deal with more hassle.

To which Socrates replied: Tell me, Crito, you keep dogs, do you not, to ward off wolves from your flocks?

To which Socrates replied: Tell me, Crito, you have dogs, right, to keep the wolves away from your flocks?

Cr. Certainly; it pays to do so.

Cr. Sure; it's worth it to do that.

Soc. Then why do you not keep a watchman willing and competent to ward off this pack of people who seek to injure you?

Soc. So why don't you have a watchman who's ready and able to protect you from these people who want to hurt you?

I should not at all mind (he answered), if I were not afraid he might turn again and rend his keeper.

I wouldn't really mind, he replied, if I weren't worried that he might turn around and attack his handler again.

What! (rejoined Socrates), do you not see that to gratify a man like yourself is far pleasanter as a matter of self-interest than to quarrel with you? You may be sure there are plenty of people here who will take the greatest pride in making you their friend.

What! (Socrates replied), don't you realize that pleasing a guy like you is much more enjoyable for self-interest than arguing with you? You can be sure there are lots of people here who would take great pride in being your friend.

Accordingly, they sought out Archedemus, (2) a practical man with a clever tongue in his head (3) but poor; the fact being, he was not the sort to make gain by hook or by crook, but a lover of honesty and of too good a nature himself to make his living as a pettifogger. (4) Crito would then take the opportunity of times of harvesting and put aside small presents for Achedemus of corn and oil, or wine, or wool, or any other of the farm produce forming the staple commodities of life, or he would invite him to a sacrificial feast, and otherwise pay him marked attention. Archedemus, feeling that he had in Crito's house a harbour of refuge, could not make too much of his patron, and ere long he had hunted up a long list of iniquities which could be lodged against Crito's pettifogging persecutors themselves, and not only their numerous crimes but their numerous enemies; and presently he prosecuted one of them in a public suit, where sentence would be given against him "what to suffer or what to pay." (5) The accused, conscious as he was of many rascally deeds, did all he could to be quit of Archedemus, but Archedemus was not to be got rid of. He held on until he had made the informer not only loose his hold of Crito but pay himself a sum of money; and now that Archedemus had achieved this and other similar victories, it is easy to guess what followed. (6) It was just as when some shepherd has got a very good dog, all the other shepherds wish to lodge their flocks in his neighbourhood that they too may reap the benefit of him. So a number of Crito's friends came begging him to allow Archedemus to be their guardian also, and Archedemus was overjoyed to do something to gratify Crito, and so it came about that not only Crito abode in peace, but his friends likewise. If any of those people with whom Archedemus was not on the best of terms were disposed to throw it in his teeth that he accepted his patron's benefits and paid in flatteries, he had a ready retort: "Answer me this question—which is the more scandalous, to accept kindnesses from honest folk and to repay them, with the result that I make such people my friends but quarrel with knaves, or to make enemies of honourable gentlemen (7) by attempts to do them wrong, with the off-chance indeed of winning the friendship of some scamps in return for my co-operation, but the certainty of losing in the tone of my acquaintances?" (8)

So, they looked for Archedemus, a practical guy with a sharp tongue but short on cash. He wasn't the type to make money through shady deals; he valued honesty too much and was too good-hearted to work as a deceitful lawyer. Crito would take the chance during harvest time to give Archedemus small gifts of corn, oil, wine, wool, or any other staple farm products. He’d also invite him to sacrificial feasts and pay him special attention. Archedemus, realizing he had a safe haven in Crito’s home, couldn’t praise his patron enough. Before long, he dug up a long list of wrongdoing against Crito's petty oppressors, detailing not only their many crimes but also their numerous enemies. He soon took one of them to court, where the verdict would dictate what punishment he would face. The accused, aware of his shady past, tried everything to shake off Archedemus, but Archedemus wouldn’t back down. He persisted until the informer not only released his grip on Crito but also ended up having to pay him. Now that Archedemus had achieved this and similar victories, it’s easy to see what happened next. It was like when a shepherd has a really great dog; all the other shepherds want to keep their flocks nearby to benefit from it. Similarly, many of Crito’s friends requested him to let Archedemus be their advocate too, and Archedemus was thrilled to do something nice for Crito. This meant that not only did Crito live in peace, but so did his friends. If anyone criticized Archedemus for accepting favors and returning them with flattery, he had a quick comeback: "Let me ask you this—what’s more scandalous, to accept kindness from good people and repay them, winning their friendship but making enemies of dishonest types, or to alienate honorable individuals by trying to do them wrong and risking the chance of winning the friendship of some crooks, but guaranteed to lose the respect of my real friends?"

 (2) Archedemus, possibly the demagogue, "Hell." I. vii. 2. So Cobet,
    "P. X.," but see Grote, "H. G." viii. 245.

 (3) Lit. "very capable of speech and action"—the writer's favourite
    formula for the well-trained Athenian who can speak fluently and
    reason clearly, and act energetically and opportunely.

 (4) Reading {kai euphuesteros on}  (or {e os})... {apo sukophanton}
     (or {sukophantion}), after Cobet, "P. X." s.v. Archedemus. The
    MSS. give {kai ephe raston einai}—"nothing is easier," he said,
    "than recovering from sycophants."

 (5) For this formula cf. "Econ." vi. 24. Cf. Plat. "Statesm." 299 A.

 (6) {ede tote}. Cf. Plat. "Laws," vi. 778 C.

 (7) Lit. the {kaloi kagathoi}, which like {khrestous} and {ponerous}
    has a political as well as an ethical meaning.

 (8) Lit. "must associate with these (the {ponerois}) instead of those
    (the {kalois te kagathois}).
 (2) Archedemus, probably the political leader, "Hell." I. vii. 2. So Cobet, "P. X.," but see Grote, "H. G." viii. 245.

 (3) Literally "very skilled in speech and action" — the writer's favorite term for the well-trained Athenian who can speak fluently, think clearly, and act effectively and at the right moment.

 (4) Reading {kai euphuesteros on} (or {e os})... {apo sukophanton} (or {sukophantion}), after Cobet, "P. X." s.v. Archedemus. The manuscripts say {kai ephe raston einai} — "nothing is easier," he said, "than recovering from scammers."

 (5) For this phrase see "Econ." vi. 24. Also see Plat. "Statesm." 299 A.

 (6) {ede tote}. See Plat. "Laws," vi. 778 C.

 (7) Literally the {kaloi kagathoi}, which, like {khrestous} and {ponerous}, has both political and ethical meanings.

 (8) Literally "must associate with these (the {ponerois}) instead of those (the {kalois te kagathois})."

The net result of the whole proceedings was that Archedemus was now Crito's right hand, (9) and by the rest of Crito's friends he was held in honour.

The end result of all the events was that Archedemus had become Crito's right-hand man, and he was respected by Crito's other friends.

 (9) He was No. 1—{eis}.
He was #1—{eis}.

X

X

Again I may cite, as known to myself, (1) the following discussion; the arguments were addressed to Diodorus, one of his companions. The master said:

Again I can refer to what I know, (1) the following discussion; the arguments were directed at Diodorus, one of his friends. The master said:

 (1) Or, "for which I can personally vouch."
(1) Or, "that I can personally guarantee."

Tell me, Diodorus, if one of your slaves runs away, are you at pains to recover him?

Tell me, Diodorus, if one of your slaves escapes, do you go to great lengths to get him back?

More than that (Diodorus answered), I summon others to my aid and I have a reward cried for his recovery.

More than that (Diodorus answered), I call on others to help me, and I’ve announced a reward for his safe return.

Soc. Well, if one of your domestics is sick, do you tend him and call in the doctors to save his life?

Soc. Well, if one of your employees is sick, do you take care of him and call in the doctors to save his life?

Diod. Decidedly I do.

Diod. Absolutely, I do.

Soc. And if an intimate acquaintance who is far more precious to you than any of your household slaves is about to perish of want, you would think it incumbent on you to take pains to save his life? Well! now you know without my telling you that Hermogenes (2) is not made of wood or stone. If you helped him he would be ashamed not to pay you in kind. And yet—the opportunity of possessing a willing, kindly, and trusty assistant well fitted to do your bidding, and not merely that, but capable of originating useful ideas himself, with a certain forecast of mind and judgment—I say such a man is worth dozens of slaves. Good economists tell us that when a precious article may be got at a low price we ought to buy. And nowadays when times are so bad it is possible to get good friends exceedingly cheap.

Soc. And if someone you care about deeply, more than any of your household slaves, is about to suffer from lack of resources, wouldn't you feel it was your responsibility to try to save their life? Well! Now you know without me having to say it that Hermogenes (2) is not made of wood or stone. If you helped him, he would feel obligated to return the favor. And yet—the chance to have a willing, kind, and trustworthy assistant who not only follows your orders but can also come up with useful ideas and has good judgment and foresight—that kind of person is worth more than dozens of slaves. Smart economists tell us that when a valuable item is available at a low price, we should buy it. And right now, with tough times, it’s possible to find good friends for a bargain.

 (2) Hermogenes, presumably the son of Hipponicus. See I. ii. 48.
(2) Hermogenes, likely the son of Hipponicus. See I. ii. 48.

Diodorus answered: You are quite right, Socrates; bid Hermogenes come to me.

Diodorus replied, "You're absolutely right, Socrates. Ask Hermogenes to come to me."

Soc. Bid Hermogenes come to you!—not I indeed! since for aught I can understand you are no better entitled to summon him that to go to him yourself, nor is the advantage more on his side than your own.

Soc. Let Hermogenes come to you!—not me, certainly! Because as far as I can tell, you have no more right to call him than to go to him yourself, and the benefit is no greater for him than for you.

Thus Diodorus went off in a trice to seek Hermogenes, and at no great outlay won to himself a friend—a friend whose one concern it now was to discover how, by word or deed, he might help and gladden Diodorus.

Thus, Diodorus quickly set off to find Hermogenes, and without much effort, he gained a friend—a friend who was now solely focused on figuring out how, through words or actions, he could help and make Diodorus happy.





BOOK III

I

I

Aspirants to honour and distinction (1) derived similar help from Socrates, who in each case stimulated in them a persevering assiduity towards their several aims, as the following narratives tend to show. He had heard on one occasion of the arrival in Athens of Dionysodorus, (2) who professed to teach the whole duty of a general. (3) Accordingly he remarked to one of those who were with him—a young man whose anxiety to obtain the office of Strategos (4) was no secret to him:

Aspirants to honor and distinction (1) received similar support from Socrates, who in each case encouraged them to persistently pursue their goals, as the following stories illustrate. He had heard that Dionysodorus had arrived in Athens (2), who claimed to teach everything about being a general. (3) So, he said to one of his companions—a young man whose desire to become a Strategos (4) was well-known to him:

 (1) {ton kalon} = everything which the {kalos te kagathos} should aim
    at, but especially the honourable offices of state such as the
    Archonship, Strategia, Hipparchia, etc. See Plat. "Laches."

 (2) Dionysodorus of Chios, presumably. See Plat. "Euthyd." 271 C foll.

 (3) A professor of the science and art of strategy.

 (4) Lit. "that honour," sc. the Strategia.
 (1) {ton kalon} = everything that the {kalos te kagathos} should strive for, especially the honorable positions in government like the Archonship, Strategia, Hipparchia, etc. See Plat. "Laches."

 (2) Probably Dionysodorus of Chios. See Plat. "Euthyd." 271 C foll.

 (3) A professor of the science and art of strategy.

 (4) Literally, "that honor," referring to the Strategia.

Soc. It would be monstrous on the part of any one who sought to become a general (5) to throw away the slightest opportunity of learning the duties of the office. Such a person, I should say, would deserve to be fined and punished by the state far more than the charlatan who without having learnt the art of a sculptor undertakes a contract to carve a statue. Considering that the whole fortunes of the state are entrusted to the general during a war, with all its incidental peril, it is only reasonable to anticipate that great blessings or great misfortunes will result in proportion to the success or bungling of that officer. I appeal to you, young sir, do you not agree that a candidate who, while taking pains to be elected neglects to learn the duties of the office, would richly deserve to be fined?

Soc. It would be outrageous for anyone aiming to become a general to pass up any chance to learn the responsibilities of the role. I would argue that such a person should face much harsher penalties from the state than a fraud who takes on a project to sculpt a statue without knowing how to do it. Given that the entire fate of the state rests on the general during wartime, along with all the risks involved, it only makes sense to expect that significant outcomes, whether good or bad, will follow from that officer's success or failures. I ask you, young man, don’t you think that a candidate who works hard to get elected but neglects to learn the job’s responsibilities deserves to be fined?

 (5) i.e. "head of the war department, and commander-in-chief," etc.
(5) i.e. "head of the military department, and chief commander," etc.

With arguments like these he persuaded the young man to go and take lessons. After he had gone through the course he came back, and Socrates proceeded playfully to banter him.

With arguments like these, he convinced the young man to go and take lessons. After he completed the course, he came back, and Socrates began to tease him playfully.

Soc. Behold our young friend, sirs, as Homer says of Agamemnon, of mein majestical, (6) so he; does he not seem to move more majestically, like one who has studied to be a general? Of course, just as a man who has learned to play the harp is a harper, even if he never touch the instrument, or as one who has studied medicine is a physician, though he does not practise, so our friend here from this time forward is now and ever shall be a general, even though he does not receive a vote at the elections. But the dunce who has not the science is neither general nor doctor, no, not even if the whole world appointed him. But (he proceeded, turning to the youth), in case any of us should ever find ourselves captain or colonel (7) under you, to give us some smattering of the science of war, what did the professor take as the starting-point of his instruction in generalship? Please inform us.

Soc. Look at our young friend here, gentlemen, just like Homer describes Agamemnon, he seems to carry himself with a certain dignity. Doesn’t he appear to move more grandly, like someone who has trained to be a general? Of course, just like a person who has learned to play the harp is a harper, even if they never actually play, or someone who has studied medicine is a doctor, even if they don’t practice, our friend here is now and will always be a general, even if he doesn’t cast a vote in the elections. But the fool who lacks the knowledge is neither a general nor a doctor, not even if the whole world were to appoint him. But (he turned to the young man), if any of us were to find ourselves as your captain or colonel, to give us a bit of understanding about the science of war, what did the professor use as the starting point for his teachings in generalship? Please enlighten us.

 (6) "Il." iii. 169, 170.

 (7) Or, "brigadier or captain," lit. taxiarch or lochagos.
(6) "Il." iii. 169, 170.

(7) Or, "brigadier or captain," literally taxiarch or lochagos.

Then the young man: He began where he ended; he taught me tactics (8)—tactics and nothing else.

Then the young man: He started from where he left off; he taught me tactics (8)—tactics and nothing more.

 (8) Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 12 foll.; VIII. v. 15.
(8) Cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 12 and following; VIII. v. 15.

Yet surely (replied Socrates) that is only an infinitesimal part of generalship. A general (9) must be ready in furnishing the material of war: in providing the commissariat for his troops; quick in devices, he must be full of practical resource; nothing must escape his eye or tax his endurance; he must be shrewd, and ready of wit, a combination at once of clemency and fierceness, of simplicity and of insidious craft; he must play the part of watchman, of robber; now prodigal as a spendthrift, and again close-fisted as a miser, the bounty of his munificence must be equalled by the narrowness of his greed; impregnable in defence, a very dare-devil in attack—these and many other qualities must he possess who is to make a good general and minister of war; they must come to him by gift of nature or through science. No doubt it is a grand thing also to be a tactician, since there is all the difference in the world between an army properly handled in the field and the same in disorder; just as stones and bricks, woodwork and tiles, tumbled together in a heap are of no use at all, but arrange them in a certain order—at bottom and atop materials which will not crumble or rot, such as stones and earthen tiles, and in the middle between the two put bricks and woodwork, with an eye to architectural principle, (10) and finally you get a valuable possession—to wit, a dwelling-place.

Surely, (Socrates replied) that's just a tiny part of what makes a good general. A general (9) has to be prepared with everything needed for war: providing supplies for his troops; quick on his feet with strategies, full of practical solutions; he can't let anything slip by or test his patience; he has to be sharp and clever, balancing kindness with toughness, and straightforwardness with cunning; he must act as a lookout and a thief; sometimes generous like a spendthrift, and at other times as stingy as a miser, his generosity needs to match the narrowness of his greed; strong in defense and a fearless attacker—these and many other qualities are required to be a good general and military leader; they should come from natural talent or learned skills. It’s also impressive to be a tactician because there's a huge difference between a well-managed army in the field and one that's in chaos; just like stones, bricks, and timber all thrown together in a pile are useless, but if you arrange them wisely—using sturdy materials like stones and earthen tiles at the base and on top, with bricks and wood in the middle while considering architectural principles, (10) you’ll end up with a valuable asset—namely, a home.

 (9) A strategos. For the duties and spheres of action of this officer,
    see Gow, op. cit. xiv. 58.

 (10) "As in the building of a house." See Vitrivius, ii. 3; Plin. xxv.
    14.
(9) A strategos. For the responsibilities and areas of operation of this officer, see Gow, op. cit. xiv. 58.

(10) "Just like building a house." See Vitrivius, ii. 3; Plin. xxv. 14.

The simile is very apt, Socrates (11) (replied the youth), for in battle, too, the rule is to draw up the best men in front and rear, with those of inferior quality between, where they may be led on by the former and pushed on by the hinder.

The comparison is spot on, Socrates (11) (the young man responded), because in battle, the strategy is to position the best soldiers at the front and back, with the less skilled ones in the middle, where they can be encouraged by the strong ones in front and pushed along by those behind.

 (11) Cf. "Il." iv. 297 foll.; "Cyrop." VI. iii. 25; Polyb. x. 22.
(11) Cf. "Il." iv. 297 foll.; "Cyrop." VI. iii. 25; Polyb. x. 22.

Soc. Very good, no doubt, if the professor taught you to distinguish good and bad; but if not, where is the use of your learning? It would scarcely help you, would it, to be told to arrange coins in piles, the best coins at top and bottom and the worst in the middle, unless you were first taught to distinguish real from counterfeit.

Soc. That's great, for sure, if the professor helped you tell the difference between good and bad; but if not, what’s the point of your knowledge? It wouldn’t really be useful for you, would it, to be told to stack coins with the best ones on the top and bottom and the worst ones in the middle unless you were first taught how to tell real coins from fake ones?

The Youth. Well no, upon my word, he did not teach us that, so that the task of distinguishing between good and bad must devolve on ourselves.

The Youth. Well, I swear, he didn’t teach us that, so figuring out what’s good and what’s bad is up to us.

Soc. Well, shall we see, then, how we may best avoid making blunders between them?

Soc. Well, let’s see how we can best avoid making mistakes between them?

I am ready (replied the youth).

I’m ready, the young man replied.

Soc. Well then! Let us suppose we are marauders, and the task imposed upon us is to carry off some bullion; it will be a right disposition of our forces if we place in the vanguard those who are the greediest of gain? (12)

Soc. Alright then! Let’s say we’re robbers, and our job is to steal some gold; it makes sense to put our most greedy members at the front, right? (12)

 (12) "Whose fingers itch for gold."
(12) "Whose fingers are itching for gold."

The Youth. I should think so.

The Young Person. I believe so.

Soc. Then what if there is danger to be faced? Shall the vanguard consist of men who are greediest of honour?

Soc. So what if there's danger to confront? Should the front line be made up of those who are most eager for glory?

The Youth. It is these, at any rate, who will face danger for the sake of praise and glory. (13) Fortunately such people are not hid away in a corner; they shine forth conspicuous everywhere, and are easy to be discovered.

The Youth. They are the ones who will brave danger for the sake of praise and glory. (13) Thankfully, these individuals are not tucked away in a corner; they stand out prominently everywhere and are easy to find.

 (13) Cf. Shakesp. "seeking the bubble reputation even in the cannon's
    mouth."
(13) Cf. Shakespeare: "pursuing a fleeting reputation even in the cannon's mouth."

Soc. But tell me, did he teach you how to draw up troops in general, or specifically where and how to apply each particular kind of tactical arrangement?

Soc. But tell me, did he teach you how to organize troops in general, or specifically where and how to use each different type of tactical setup?

The Youth. Nothing of the sort.

The Youth. Not really.

Soc. And yet there are and must be innumerable circumstances in which the same ordering of march or battle will be out of place.

Soc. And yet there are and will always be countless situations where the same way of marching or fighting won't fit.

The Youth. I assure you he did not draw any of these fine distinctions.

The Young Man. I promise you he didn't make any of these fine distinctions.

He did not, did not he? (he answered). Bless me! Go back to him again, then, and ply him with questions; if he really has the science, and is not lost to all sense of shame, he will blush to have taken your money and then to have sent you away empty.

He didn't, did he? (he replied). Wow! Go back to him again, and ask him a bunch of questions; if he actually knows what he's talking about and hasn't lost all sense of shame, he should feel embarrassed for taking your money and then sending you away with nothing.

II

II

At another time he fell in with a man who had been chosen general and minister of war, and thus accosted him.

At another time, he met a man who had been appointed as a general and minister of war, and he approached him like this.

Soc. Why did Homer, think you, designate Agamemnon "shepherd of the peoples"? (1) Was it possibly to show that, even as a shepherd must care for his sheep and see that they are safe and have all things needful, and that the objects of their rearing be secured, so also must a general take care that his soldiers are safe and have their supplies, and attain the objects of their soldiering? Which last is that they may get the mastery of their enemies, and so add to their own good fortune and happiness; or tell me, what made him praise Agamemnon, saying—

Soc. Why do you think Homer called Agamemnon the "shepherd of the people"? (1) Was it to illustrate that, just like a shepherd must look after his sheep, ensuring they are safe, have everything they need, and that the purpose of raising them is met, a general also has to ensure his soldiers are safe, have their supplies, and achieve their military objectives? Ultimately, those objectives are to defeat their enemies, which brings them good fortune and happiness. Or tell me, why did he praise Agamemnon, saying—

    He is both a good king and a warrior bold? (2)
    He is both a good king and a brave warrior. (2)

Did he mean, perhaps, to imply that he would be a 'warrior bold,' not merely in standing alone and bravely battling against the foe, but as inspiring the whole of his host with like prowess; and by a 'good king,' not merely one who should stand forth gallantly to protect his own life, but who should be the source of happiness to all over whom he reigns? Since a man is not chosen king in order to take heed to himself, albeit nobly, but that those who chose him may attain to happiness through him. And why do men go soldiering except to ameliorate existence? (3) and to this end they choose their generals that they may find in them guides to the goal in question. He, then, who undertakes that office is bound to procure for those who choose him the thing they seek for. And indeed it were not easy to find any nobler ambition than this, or aught ignobler than its opposite.

Did he perhaps mean to suggest that he would be a 'bold warrior,' not just by standing alone and courageously fighting the enemy, but by inspiring his entire army to show the same bravery? And by a 'good king,' he meant someone who doesn’t just boldly protect his own life, but who brings happiness to all of his subjects? A man isn't chosen as king just to take care of himself, no matter how noble that might be, but so that those who chose him can achieve happiness through him. And why do men go to war if not to improve life? To this end, they choose their leaders so they can find in them guidance towards that goal. Therefore, anyone who takes on that role has a responsibility to provide what those who chose him are seeking. In fact, it would be hard to find a nobler ambition than this, or anything less noble than its opposite.

 (1) "Il." ii. 243. "The People's Paster," Chapman.

 (2) "Il." iii. 179; cf. "Symp." iv. 6. A favourite line of Alexander
    the Great's, it is said.

 (3) Of, "that life may reach some flower of happiness."
(1) "Il." ii. 243. "The People's Paster," Chapman.

(2) "Il." iii. 179; cf. "Symp." iv. 6. It's reportedly a favorite line of Alexander the Great.

(3) Of, "that life may reach some flower of happiness."

After such sort he handled the question, what is the virtue of a good leader? and by shredding off all superficial qualities, laid bare as the kernel of the matter that it is the function of every leader to make those happy whom he may be called upon to lead. (4)

After that, he tackled the question: what makes a good leader? By stripping away all the superficial traits, he revealed the core idea that it's the role of every leader to make the people they lead happy. (4)

 (4) Cf. Plat. "Rep." 342.
(4) See Plat. "Rep." 342.

III

III

The following conversation with a youth who had just been elected hipparch (1) (or commandant of cavalry), I can also vouch for. (2)

The following conversation with a young person who had just been elected hipparch (1) (or commander of the cavalry), I can also confirm. (2)

 (1) Cf. "Hipparch."

 (2) Lit. "I know he once held."
(1) Cf. "Hipparch."

(2) Lit. "I know he once held."

Soc. Can you tell us what set you wishing to be a general of cavalry, young sir? What was your object? I suppose it was not simply to ride at the head of the "knights," an honour not denied to the mounted archers, (3) who ride even in front of the generals themselves?

Soc. Can you share what made you want to be a cavalry general, young man? What was your goal? I assume it wasn't just to lead the "knights," an honor that's also given to the mounted archers, (3) who ride even ahead of the generals themselves?

 (3) Lit. "Hippotoxotai." See Boeckh, "P. E. A." II. xxi. p. 264 (Eng.
    tr.)
(3) Lit. "Hippotoxotai." See Boeckh, "P. E. A." II. xxi. p. 264 (Eng. tr.)

Hipp. You are right.

Hip. You're right.

Soc. No more was it for the sake merely of public notoriety, since a madman might boast of that fatal distinction. (4)

Soc. It wasn't just for the sake of being famous anymore, since even a crazy person could brag about that deadly distinction. (4)

 (4) Or, "as we all know, 'Tom Fool' can boast," etc.
(4) Or, "as we all know, 'Tom Fool' can brag," etc.

Hipp. You are right again.

Hip. You’re right again.

Soc. Is this possibly the explanation? you think to improve the cavalry—your aim would be to hand it over to the state in better condition than you find it; and, if the cavalry chanced to be called out, you at their head would be the cause of some good thing to Athens?

Soc. Is this maybe the reason? You want to enhance the cavalry—your goal would be to pass it to the state in better shape than you found it; and if the cavalry happened to be called out, you leading them would contribute to something positive for Athens?

Hipp. Most certainly.

Hyped. Definitely.

Soc. Well, and a noble ambition too, upon my word—if you can achieve your object. The command to which you are appointed concerns horses and riders, does it not?

Soc. Well, that's a noble ambition, for sure—if you can reach your goal. The position you've been given is about horses and riders, right?

Hipp. It does, no doubt.

Hipp. It definitely does.

Soc. Come then, will you explain to us first how you propose to improve the horses.

Soc. Alright then, can you start by explaining how you plan to improve the horses?

Hipp. Ah, that will scarcely form part of my business, I fancy. Each trooper is personally responsible for the condition of his horse.

Hipp. I don't think that's really my concern. Each soldier is personally responsible for the condition of his horse.

Soc. But suppose, when they present themselves and their horses, (5) you find that some have brought beasts with bad feet or legs or otherwise infirm, and others such ill-fed jades that they cannot keep up on the march; others, again, brutes so ill broken and unmanageable that they will not keep their place in the ranks, and others such desperate plungers that they cannot be got to any place in the ranks at all. What becomes of your cavalry force then? How will you charge at the head of such a troop, and win glory for the state?

Soc. But imagine that when they show up with their horses, (5) you discover that some have brought animals with bad feet or legs, or others that are so poorly fed they can't keep up on the march; others are so wild and unmanageable they won’t stay in formation, and some are such reckless jumpers that they can’t be controlled in the ranks at all. What happens to your cavalry then? How will you lead a charge with such a group and bring honor to the state?

 (5) For this phrase, see Schneider and Kuhner ad loc.
(5) For this phrase, see Schneider and Kuhner at this location.

Hipp. You are right. I will try to look after the horses to my utmost.

Hipp. You’re right. I’ll do my best to take care of the horses.

Soc. Well, and will you not lay your hand to improve the men themselves?

Soc. Well, won't you try to improve the men themselves?

Hipp. I will.

Sure. I will.

Soc. The first thing will be to make them expert in mounting their chargers?

Soc. The first thing we need to do is get them skilled at riding their horses?

Hipp. That certainly, for if any of them were dismounted he would then have a better chance of saving himself.

Hipp. That's definitely true, because if any of them got off their horses, he would have a better chance of saving himself.

Soc. Well, but when it comes to the hazard of engagement, what will you do then? Give orders to draw the enemy down to the sandy ground (6) where you are accustomed to manouvre, or endeavour beforehand to put your men through their practice on ground resembling a real battlefield?

Soc. Well, when it comes to the risk of getting involved, what will you do then? Will you give orders to lure the enemy down to the sandy ground (6) where you're used to maneuvering, or will you try to prepare your men ahead of time with practice on terrain that mimics a real battlefield?

 (6) e.g. the hippodrome at Phaleron.
(6) for example, the racetrack at Phaleron.

Hipp. That would be better, no doubt.

Hipp. That would definitely be better.

Soc. Well, shall you regard it as a part of your duty to see that as many of your men as possible can take aim and shoot on horseback? (7)

Soc. Well, will you consider it your responsibility to ensure that as many of your men as possible can aim and shoot from horseback? (7)

 (7) Cf. "Hipparch," i. 21.
(7) Cf. "Hipparch," vol. 1, p. 21.

Hipp. It will be better, certainly.

Hipp. It will definitely be better.

Soc. And have you thought how to whet the courage of your troopers? to kindle in them rage to meet the enemy?—which things are but stimulants to make stout hearts stouter?

Soc. Have you considered how to boost your troops' courage? To fire them up with anger to face the enemy?—these things are just motivators to make brave hearts even braver?

Hipp. If I have not done so hitherto, I will try to make up for lost time now.

Hipp. If I haven't done that yet, I'll try to make up for lost time now.

Soc. And have you troubled your head at all to consider how you are to secure the obedience of your men? for without that not one particle of good will you get, for all your horses and troopers so brave and so stout.

Soc. Have you taken any time to think about how you're going to make your men obey you? Because without that, you won't get any benefits, no matter how brave and strong your horses and soldiers are.

Hipp. That is a true saying; but how, Socrates, should a man best bring them to this virtue? (8)

Hipp. That's a true statement; but how, Socrates, should a person ideally help others achieve this virtue? (8)

 (8) {protrepsasthai}. See above, I. ii. 64; below, IV. v. 1.
 (8) {protrepsasthai}. See above, I. ii. 64; below, IV. v. 1.

Soc. I presume you know that in any business whatever, people are more apt to follow the lead of those whom they look upon as adepts; thus in case of sickness they are readiest to obey him whom they regard as the cleverest physician; and so on a voyage the most skilful pilot; in matters agricultural the best farmer, and so forth.

Soc. I guess you know that in any business, people are more likely to follow the guidance of those they see as experts; so in the case of illness, they are quickest to listen to the doctor they think is the best; similarly, on a journey, they trust the most skilled navigator; in farming, they look to the best farmer, and so on.

Hipp. Yes, certainly.

Hipp. Absolutely.

Soc. Then in this matter of cavalry also we may reasonably suppose that he who is looked upon as knowing his business best will command the readiest obedience.

Soc. Then in this matter of cavalry as well, we can reasonably assume that the person who is seen as most knowledgeable will receive the quickest obedience.

Hipp. If, then, I can prove to my troopers that I am better than all of them, will that suffice to win their obedience?

Hipp. So, if I can show my soldiers that I'm better than all of them, will that be enough to earn their loyalty?

Soc. Yes, if along with that you can teach them that obedience to you brings greater glory and surer safety to themselves.

Soc. Yes, if you can also teach them that being obedient to you brings them more glory and makes them safer.

Hipp. How am I to teach them that?

Hipp. How am I supposed to teach them that?

Soc. Upon my word! How are you to teach them that? Far more easily, I take it, than if you had to teach them that bad things are better than good, and more advantageous to boot.

Soc. Honestly! How are you going to teach them that? I think it’s much easier than trying to teach them that bad things are better than good, and even more beneficial.

Hipp. I suppose you mean that, besides his other qualifications a commandant of cavalry must have command of speech and argument? (9)

Hipp. I take it you're saying that, in addition to his other skills, a cavalry commander needs to be good at speaking and making arguments? (9)

 (9) Or, "practise the art of oratory"; "express himself clearly and
    rationally." See Grote, "H. G." VIII. lxvii. p. 463 note;
    "Hipparch," i. 24; viii. 22.
(9) Or, "practice the art of speaking"; "express himself clearly and logically." See Grote, "H. G." VIII. lxvii. p. 463 note; "Hipparch," i. 24; viii. 22.

Soc. Were you under the impression that the commandant was not to open his mouth? Did it never occur to you that all the noblest things which custom (10) compels us to learn, and to which indeed we owe our knowledge of life, have all been learned by means of speech (11) and reason; and if there be any other noble learning which a man may learn, it is this same reason whereby he learns it; and the best teachers are those who have the freest command of thought and language, and those that have the best knowledge of the most serious things are the most brilliant masters of disputation. Again, have you not observed that whenever this city of ours fits out one of her choruses—such as that, for instance, which is sent to Delos (12)—there is nothing elsewhere from any quarter of the world which can compete with it; nor will you find in any other state collected so fair a flower of manhood as in Athens? (13)

Soc. Did you really think the commandant wasn’t supposed to speak? Didn’t it occur to you that all the greatest things we have to learn from tradition, which give us our understanding of life, have all come through conversation and reasoning? And if there’s any other valuable knowledge a person can gain, it’s through the same reasoning that enables this learning; the best teachers are those who express their thoughts and language most freely, and those with the deepest understanding of serious matters are the most skilled in argument. Also, haven’t you noticed that whenever our city prepares one of its choruses—like the one we send to Delos—there’s nothing else in the world that can compare? You won’t find a more impressive gathering of great individuals anywhere than in Athens.

 (10) Cf Arist. "Rhet." ii. 12, {oi neoi pepaideuntai upo tou nomou
    monon}.

 (11) {dia logou}.

 (12) See Thuc. iii. 104; and below, IV. viii. 2.

 (13) See references ap. Schneider and Kuhner; "Symp." iv. 17.
(10) Cf Arist. "Rhet." ii. 12, {the young are taught only by the law}.

(11) {through speech}.

(12) See Thuc. iii. 104; and below, IV. viii. 2.

(13) See references ap. Schneider and Kuhner; "Symp." iv. 17.

Hipp. You say truly.

Cool. You speak the truth.

Soc. But for all that, it is not in sweetness of voice that the Athenians differ from the rest of the world so much, nor in stature of body or strength of limb, but in ambition and that love of honour (14) which most of all gives a keen edge to the spirit in the pursuit of things lovely and of high esteem.

Soc. However, it's not really the sweetness of their voice that sets the Athenians apart from others, nor their height or physical strength, but rather their ambition and that love of honor (14) which most sharply drives their spirit in the pursuit of beautiful and highly regarded things.

 (14) See below, v. 3; Dem. "de Cor." 28 foll.
(14) See below, v. 3; Dem. "de Cor." 28 and following.

Hipp. That, too, is a true saying.

Hipp. That's true as well.

Soc. Do you not think, then, that if a man devoted himself to our cavalry also, here in Athens, we should far outstrip the rest of the world, whether in the furnishing of arms and horses, or in orderliness of battle-array, or in eager hazardous encounter with the foe, if only we could persuade ourselves that by so doing we should obtain honour and distinction?

Soc. Don't you think that if a man also dedicated himself to our cavalry here in Athens, we would greatly surpass the rest of the world, whether in supplying arms and horses, in the organization of our battle formations, or in enthusiastic and daring confrontations with the enemy, if only we could convince ourselves that by doing so we would achieve honor and recognition?

Hipp. It is reasonable to think so.

Cool. That makes sense.

Soc. Have no hesitation, therefore, but try to guide your men into this path, (15) whence you yourself, and through you your fellow-citizens, will reap advantage.

Soc. So don’t hesitate; try to lead your people down this path, (15) from which you and your fellow citizens will benefit.

 (15) Or, "to conduct which will not certainly fail of profit to
    yourself or through you to..."
(15) Or, "to act in a way that will definitely benefit you or through you to..."

Yes, in good sooth, I will try (he answered).

Yes, truly, I will try (he answered).

IV

IV

At another time, seeing Nicomachides on his way back from the elections (of magistrates), (1) he asked him: Who are elected generals, Nicomachides?

At another time, when he saw Nicomachides coming back from the elections (for magistrates), (1) he asked him: Who were the elected generals, Nicomachides?

 (1) Cf. "Pol. Ath." i. 3; Aristot. "Ath. Pol." 44. 4; and Dr. Sandys'
    note ad loc. p. 165 of his edition.
(1) See "Pol. Ath." i. 3; Aristotle "Ath. Pol." 44. 4; and Dr. Sandys' note on this section, p. 165 of his edition.

And he: Is it not just like them, these citizens of Athens—just like them, I say—to go and elect, not me, who ever since my name first appeared on the muster-roll have literally worn myself out with military service—now as a captain, now as a colonel—and have received all these wounds from the enemy, look you! (at the same time, and suiting the action to the word, he bared his arms and proceeded to show the scars of ancient wounds)—they elect not me (he went on), but, if you please, Antisthenes! who never served as a hoplite (2) in his life nor in the cavalry ever made a brilliant stroke, that I ever heard tell of; no! in fact, he has got no science at all, I take it, except to amass stores of wealth.

And he said: Isn’t it just like these citizens of Athens—just like them, I say—to go and elect, not me, the one who has literally worn myself out with military service since my name first appeared on the muster-roll—now as a captain, now as a colonel—and have received all these wounds from the enemy, look! (at the same time, he rolled up his sleeves and showed the scars of old wounds)—they elect not me (he continued), but, if you please, Antisthenes! who has never served as a hoplite in his life nor ever made a noteworthy move in the cavalry, as far as I know; no! in fact, he has no skills at all, I believe, except for gathering wealth.

 (2) Cf. Lys. xiv. 10.
(2) See Lys. xiv. 10.

But still (returned Socrates), surely that is one point in his favour—he ought to be able to provide the troops with supplies.

But still, Socrates said, that’s one point in his favor—he should be able to supply the troops with what they need.

Nic. Well, for the matter of that, merchants are good hands at collecting stores; but it does not follow that a merchant or trader will be able to command an army.

Nic. Well, the thing is, merchants are really good at gathering supplies; but that doesn't mean a merchant or trader will be able to lead an army.

But (rejoined Socrates) Antisthenes is a man of great pertinacity, who insists on winning, and that is a very necessary quality in a general. (3) Do not you see how each time he has been choragos (4) he has been successful with one chorus after another?

But Socrates replied, Antisthenes is a very determined man who insists on winning, and that’s an essential quality in a general. Don’t you notice how every time he has been the choragos, he has succeeded with one chorus after another?

 (3) See Grote, "Plato," i. 465 foll.

 (4) Choir-master, or Director of the Chorus. It was his duty to
    provide and preside over a chorus to sing, dance, or play at any
    of the public festivals, defraying the cost as a state service of
    {leitourgia}. See "Pol. Ath." iii. 4; "Hiero," ix. 4; Aristot.
    "Pol. Ath." 28. 3.
 (3) See Grote, "Plato," i. 465 foll.

 (4) Choir master, or Director of the Chorus. It was his job to organize and lead a choir to sing, dance, or perform at any of the public festivals, covering the expenses as part of a state service of {leitourgia}. See "Pol. Ath." iii. 4; "Hiero," ix. 4; Aristot. "Pol. Ath." 28. 3.

Nic. Bless me! yes; but there is a wide difference between standing at the head of a band of singers and dancers and a troop of soldiers.

Nic. Bless me! yes; but there’s a big difference between leading a group of singers and dancers and commanding a squad of soldiers.

Soc. Still, without any practical skill in singing or in the training of a chorus, Antisthenes somehow had the art to select the greatest proficients in both.

Soc. Still, without any practical skills in singing or training a choir, Antisthenes somehow had the knack for picking out the best experts in both.

Nic. Yes, and by the same reasoning we are to infer that on a campaign he will find proficients, some to marshal the troops for him and others to fight his battles?

Nic. Yes, and by the same logic, we can assume that during a campaign he will find experts, some to organize the troops for him and others to fight his battles?

Soc. Just so. If in matters military he only exhibits the same skill in selecting the best hands as he has shown in matters of the chorus, it is highly probable he will here also bear away the palm of victory; and we may presume that if he expended so much to win a choric victory with a single tribe, (5) he will be ready to expend more to secure a victory in war with the whole state to back him.

Soc. Exactly. If, in military affairs, he shows the same talent for choosing the best people as he has demonstrated with the chorus, it's very likely he will also come out on top in this area. We can assume that since he invested so much to achieve a choral victory with just one tribe, he will be willing to invest even more to win a war with the entire state supporting him.

 (5) See Dem. "against Lept." 496. 26. Each tribe nominated such of its
    members as were qualified to undertake the burden.
(5) See Dem. "against Lept." 496. 26. Each tribe nominated its members who were qualified to take on the responsibility.

Nic. Do you really mean, Socrates, that it is the function of the same man to provide efficient choruses and to act as commander-in-chief?

Nic. Do you really mean, Socrates, that it’s the job of the same person to lead effective choruses and to serve as the commander-in-chief?

Soc. I mean this, that, given a man knows what he needs to provide, and has the skill to do so, no matter what the department of things may be—house or city or army—you will find him a good chief and director (6) of the same.

Soc. What I mean is this: if a person knows what they need to provide and has the skills to do it, regardless of the area—be it a house, a city, or an army—you'll find them to be a good leader and director of that situation.

 (6) Or, "representative."
(6) Or, "rep."

Then Nicomachides: Upon my word, Socrates, I should never have expected to hear you say that a good housekeeper (7) and steward of an estate would make a good general.

Then Nicomachides: Honestly, Socrates, I never would have thought you’d say that a good housekeeper and manager of a property would make a good general.

 (7) Or, "economist"; cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 12.
(7) Or, "economist"; see "Cyrop." I. vi. 12.

Soc. Come then, suppose we examine their respective duties, and so determine (8) whether they are the same or different.

Soc. Alright then, let’s look at their individual responsibilities and see if they’re the same or different.

 (8) Lit. "get to know."
(8) Get to know.

Nic. Let us do so.

Sure, let’s do it.

Soc. Well then, is it not a common duty of both to procure the ready obedience of those under them to their orders?

Soc. So, isn’t it a shared responsibility for both to ensure that those beneath them follow their commands?

Nic. Certainly.

Sure.

Soc. And also to assign to those best qualified to perform them their distinctive tasks?

Soc. And also to give those who are most qualified to do them their specific tasks?

That, too, belongs to both alike (he answered).

That, too, belongs to both of them (he replied).

Soc. Again, to chastise the bad and reward the good belongs to both alike, methinks?

Soc. Again, I think it's true that both punishing the bad and rewarding the good is important for everyone, right?

Nic. Decidedly.

Nic. Definitely.

Soc. And to win the kindly feeling of their subordinates must surely be the noble ambition of both?

Soc. And isn't it a noble ambition for both to win the goodwill of their subordinates?

That too (he answered).

That as well (he answered).

Soc. And do you consider it to the interest of both alike to win the adherence of supporters and allies? (9)

Soc. Do you think it’s in the best interest of both to gain the support of friends and allies? (9)

 (9) In reference to the necessity of building up a family connection
    or political alliances cf. Arist. "Pol." iii. 9, 13.
(9) Regarding the importance of establishing family ties or political alliances cf. Arist. "Pol." iii. 9, 13.

Nic. Without a doubt.

Nic. Definitely.

Soc. And does it not closely concern them both to be good guardians of their respective charges?

Soc. And isn't it really important for both of them to be good guardians of their responsibilities?

Nic. Very much so.

Definitely.

Soc. Then it equally concerns them both to be painstaking and prodigal of toil in all their doings?

Soc. So it’s equally important for both of them to be diligent and generous with their efforts in everything they do?

Nic. Yes, all these duties belong to both alike, but the parallel ends when you come to actual fighting.

Nic. Yes, both of these responsibilities are shared, but the similarity ends when it comes to actual fighting.

Soc. Yet they are both sure to meet with enemies?

Soc. But they are both definitely going to encounter enemies?

Nic. There is no doubt about that.

Nic. There's no doubt about that.

Soc. Then is it not to the interest of both to get the upper hand of these?

Soc. So isn't it in both of our best interests to gain the advantage over these?

Nic. Certainly; but you omit to tell us what service organisation and the art of management will render when it comes to actual fighting.

Nic. Sure; but you forget to mention what service organizations and management skills will provide when it comes to actual combat.

Soc. Why, it is just then, I presume, it will be of most service, for the good economist knows that nothing is so advantageous or so lucrative as victory in battle, or to put it negatively, nothing so disastrous and expensive as defeat. He will enthusiastically seek out and provide everything conducive to victory, he will painstakingly discover and guard against all that tends to defeat, and when satisfied that all is ready and ripe for victory he will deliver battle energetically, and what is equally important, until the hour of final preparation has arrived, (10) he will be cautious to deliver battle. Do not despise men of economic genius, Nicomachides; the difference between the devotion requisite to private affairs and to affairs of state is merely one of quantity. For the rest the parallel holds strictly, and in this respect pre-eminently, that both are concerned with human instruments: which human beings, moreover, are of one type and temperament, whether we speak of devotion to public affairs or of the administration of private property. To fare well in either case is given to those who know the secret of dealing with humanity, whereas the absence of that knowledge will as certainly imply in either case a fatal note of discord. (11)

Soc. I guess this is when it will be most helpful because a good economist knows that nothing is more beneficial or profitable than winning a battle, and conversely, nothing is more disastrous and costly than losing one. He will eagerly find and provide everything needed for victory, carefully identify and protect against all that could lead to defeat, and when he’s sure that everything is ready for success, he will engage in battle with energy. Equally important, until the moment of final preparation arrives, (10) he will be careful about engaging in battle. Don’t underestimate people with economic insight, Nicomachides; the difference between the dedication needed for personal affairs and for state affairs is just a matter of scale. Beyond that, both are very similar in that they rely on human resources: people, who ultimately are the same type and temperament, whether we’re talking about commitment to public duties or managing private property. Success in either case comes to those who know the key to handling people, while lacking that knowledge will undoubtedly lead to serious problems in both scenarios. (11)

 (10) Lit. "as long as he is unprepared."

 (11) L. Dindorf, "Index Graec." Ox. ed.; cf. Hor. "Ep." II. ii. 144,
    "sed verae numerosque modosque ediscere vitae," "the harmony of
    life," Conington.
(10) Literally, "as long as he is unprepared."

(11) L. Dindorf, "Index Graec." Ox. ed.; see Hor. "Ep." II. ii. 144, "but to learn the real rhythms and ways of life," "the harmony of life," Conington.

V

V

A conversation held with Pericles the son of the great statesman may here be introduced. (1) Socrates began:

A conversation with Pericles, the son of the great statesman, can be included here. (1) Socrates started:

 (1) Or, "On one occasion Pericles was the person addressed in
    conversation." For Pericles see "Hell." I. v. 16; vii. 15; Plut.
    "Pericl." 37 (Clough, i. 368).
(1) Or, "One time, Pericles was the one being talked to." For Pericles, see "Hell." I. v. 16; vii. 15; Plut. "Pericl." 37 (Clough, i. 368).

I am looking forward, I must tell you, Pericles, to a great improvement in our military affairs when you are minister of war. (2) The prestige of Athens, I hope, will rise; we shall gain the mastery over our enemies.

I must say, Pericles, I am really looking forward to a big improvement in our military matters when you become the minister of war. (2) I hope the prestige of Athens will increase, and we will gain the upper hand over our enemies.

 (2) "Strategos."
"Strategist."

Pericles replied: I devoutly wish your words might be fulfilled, but how this happy result is to be obtained, I am at a loss to discover.

Pericles replied: I truly wish your words could come true, but I'm unsure how to achieve this positive outcome.

Shall we (Socrates continued), shall we balance the arguments for and against, and consider to what extent the possibility does exist?

Shall we (Socrates continued), shall we weigh the arguments for and against, and see how much possibility there really is?

Pray let us do so (he answered).

Please let us do that (he answered).

Soc. Well then, you know that in point of numbers the Athenians are not inferior to the Boeotians?

Soc. Well then, you know that in terms of numbers, the Athenians are just as good as the Boeotians?

Per. Yes, I am aware of that.

Got it.

Soc. And do you think the Boeotians could furnish a better pick of fine healthy men than the Athenians?

Soc. Do you really think the Boeotians could provide a better selection of strong, healthy men than the Athenians?

Per. I think we should very well hold our own in that respect.

Per. I believe we can definitely stand our ground in that area.

Soc. And which of the two would you take to be the more united people—the friendlier among themselves?

Soc. So, which of the two do you think is the more united people—the one that gets along better with each other?

Per. The Athenians, I should say, for so many sections of the Boeotians, resenting the selfish policy (3) of Thebes, are ill disposed to that power, but at Athens I see nothing of the sort.

Per. The Athenians, I would say, because so many of the Boeotians, who are unhappy with the self-serving policies of Thebes, hold a negative view of that city, but in Athens, I don’t see anything like that.

 (3) "The self-aggrandisement."
"The self-promotion."

Soc. But perhaps you will say that there is no people more jealous of honour or haughtier in spirit. (4) And these feelings are no weak spurs to quicken even a dull spirit to hazard all for glory's sake and fatherland.

Soc. But maybe you’ll say that there’s no one more protective of their honor or more proud. (4) And these feelings are strong motivators that can even push a dull spirit to risk everything for the sake of glory and their country.

 (4) Reading {megalophronestatoi}, after Cobet. See "Hipparch," vii. 3;
    or if as vulg. {philophronestatoi}, transl. "more affable."
(4) Reading {megalophronestatoi}, after Cobet. See "Hipparch," vii. 3; or if commonly {philophronestatoi}, translated as "more friendly."

Per. Nor is there much fault to find with Athenians in these respects.

Per. There isn't really much to criticize about the Athenians in these areas.

Soc. And if we turn to consider the fair deeds of ancestry, (5) to no people besides ourselves belongs so rich a heritage of stimulating memories, whereby so many of us are stirred to pursue virtue with devotion and to show ourselves in our turn also men of valour like our sires.

Soc. And if we look at the noble actions of our ancestors, (5) there’s no other group besides us that has such a rich legacy of inspiring memories, which moves so many of us to strive for virtue with dedication and to prove ourselves as brave individuals just like our forefathers.

 (5) See Wesley's anthem, Eccles. xliv. 1, "Let us now praise famous
    men and our fathers that begat us."
(5) See Wesley's anthem, Eccles. xliv. 1, "Let us now praise famous men and our fathers who gave us life."

Per. All that you say, Socrates, is most true, but do you observe that ever since the disaster of the thousand under Tolmides at Lebadeia, coupled with that under Hippocrates at Delium, (6) the prestige of Athens by comparison with the Boeotians has been lowered, whilst the spirit of Thebes as against Athens had been correspondingly exalted, so that those Boeotians who in old days did not venture to give battle to the Athenians even in their own territory unless they had the Lacedaemonians and the rest of the Peloponnesians to help them, do nowadays threaten to make an incursion into Attica single-handed; and the Athenians, who formerly, if they had to deal with the Boeotians (7) only, made havoc of their territory, are now afraid the Boeotians may some day harry Attica.

Per. Everything you're saying, Socrates, is absolutely true, but have you noticed that ever since the disaster of a thousand soldiers under Tolmides at Lebadeia, along with the defeat under Hippocrates at Delium, the reputation of Athens compared to the Boeotians has really taken a hit? At the same time, the confidence of Thebes against Athens has been significantly boosted. Those Boeotians who, in the past, wouldn’t dare to challenge the Athenians even in their own land unless they had the Lacedaemonians and the rest of the Peloponnesians backing them up are now openly threatening to invade Attica on their own. And the Athenians, who used to devastate Boeotian territory when dealing with them alone, are now worried that the Boeotians might one day raid Attica.

 (6) Lebadeia, 447 B.C.; Delium, 424 B.C. For Tolmides and Hippocrates
    see Thuc. i. 113; iv. 100 foll.; Grote, "H. G." v. 471; vi. 533.

 (7) Reading {ote B. monoi}, al. {ou monoi}, "when the Boeotians were
    not unaided."
 (6) Lebadeia, 447 B.C.; Delium, 424 B.C. For Tolmides and Hippocrates
    see Thuc. i. 113; iv. 100 foll.; Grote, "H. G." v. 471; vi. 533.

 (7) Reading {ote B. monoi}, al. {ou monoi}, "when the Boeotians were
    not unaided."

To which Socrates: Yes, I perceive that this is so, but it seems to me that the state was never more tractably disposed, never so ripe for a really good leader, as to-day. For if boldness be the parent of carelessness, laxity, and insubordination, it is the part of fear to make people more disposed to application, obedience, and good order. A proof of which you may discover in the behaviour of people on ship-board. It is in seasons of calm weather when there is nothing to fear that disorder may be said to reign, but as soon as there is apprehension of a storm, or an enemy in sight, the scene changes; not only is each word of command obeyed, but there is a hush of silent expectation; the mariners wait to catch the next signal like an orchestra with eyes upon the leader.

To which Socrates replied: Yes, I see that this is true, but it seems to me that the state has never been more open to following a genuinely good leader than it is today. If boldness leads to carelessness, slackness, and rebellion, then fear makes people more inclined to focus, obey, and maintain order. You can see this in how people act on a ship. During calm weather, when there’s nothing to worry about, disorder tends to rule; but as soon as there’s a fear of a storm or sight of an enemy, everything changes. Not only do they obey every command, but there’s also a silence filled with anticipation; the crew waits to catch the next signal like an orchestra watching the conductor.

Per. But indeed, given that now is the opportunity to take obedience at the flood, it is high time also to explain by what means we are to rekindle in the hearts of our countrymen (8) the old fires—the passionate longing for antique valour, for the glory and the wellbeing of the days of old.

Per. But truly, since now is the chance to embrace obedience at its peak, it's the perfect time to clarify how we can reignite in our fellow countrymen (8) the old passions—the intense desire for ancient bravery, for the glory and welfare of the past.

 (8) Reading {anerasthenai}, Schneider's emendation of the vulg.
    {aneristhenai}.
(8) Reading {anerasthenai}, Schneider's correction of the common text 
    {aneristhenai}.

Well (proceeded Socrates), supposing we wished them to lay claim to certain material wealth now held by others, we could not better stimulate them to lay hands on the objects coveted than by showing them that these were ancestral possessions (9) to which they had a natural right. But since our object is that they should set their hearts on virtuous pre-eminence, we must prove to them that such headship combined with virtue is an old time-honoured heritage which pertains to them beyond all others, and that if they strive earnestly after it they will soon out-top the world.

Well, Socrates continued, if we wanted them to claim certain material wealth currently owned by others, we couldn't better motivate them to go after those desired things than by showing them that they were ancestral possessions to which they had a natural right. But since our goal is for them to focus on noble achievements, we need to demonstrate that this leadership combined with virtue is an ancient and esteemed heritage that belongs to them more than anyone else, and that if they pursue it earnestly, they will soon rise above everyone else.

 (9) Cf. Solon in the matter of Salamis, Plut. "Sol." 8; Bergk. "Poet.
    Lyr. Gr. Solon," SALAMIS, i. 2, 3.
(9) See Solon regarding Salamis, Plut. "Sol." 8; Bergk. "Poet. Lyr. Gr. Solon," SALAMIS, i. 2, 3.

Por. How are we to inculcate this lesson?

Por. How are we supposed to teach this lesson?

Soc. I think by reminding them of a fact already registered in their minds, (10) that the oldest of our ancestors whose names are known to us were also the bravest of heroes.

Soc. I believe that by bringing to their attention a fact already in their minds, (10) that the oldest of our ancestors whose names we know were also the bravest heroes.

 (10) Or, "to which their ears are already opened."
(10) Or, "to which their ears are already open."

Per. I suppose you refer to that judgment of the gods which, for their virtue's sake, Cecrops and his followers were called on to decide? (11)

Per. I take it you're talking about the judgment of the gods that Cecrops and his followers were asked to make for the sake of their virtue? (11)

 (11) See Apollodorus, iii. 14.
See Apollodorus, III. 14.

Soc. Yes, I refer to that and to the birth and rearing of Erectheus, (12) and also to the war (13) which in his days was waged to stay the tide of invasion from the whole adjoining continent; and that other war in the days of the Heraclidae (14) against the men of Peloponnese; and that series of battles fought in the days of Theseus (15)—in all which the virtuous pre-eminence of our ancestry above the men of their own times was made manifest. Or, if you please, we may come down to things of a later date, which their descendants and the heroes of days not so long anterior to our own wrought in the struggle with the lords of Asia, (16) nay of Europe also, as far as Macedonia: a people possessing a power and means of attack far exceeding any who had gone before—who, moreover, had accomplished the doughtiest deeds. These things the men of Athens wrought partly single-handed, (17) and partly as sharers with the Peloponnesians in laurels won by land and sea. Heroes were these men also, far outshining, as tradition tells us, the peoples of their time.

Soc. Yes, I’m talking about that and the birth and upbringing of Erectheus, (12) and also about the war (13) that took place during his time to fend off invasions from the entire neighboring continent; and that other war during the days of the Heraclidae (14) against the people of Peloponnese; and the series of battles fought in the days of Theseus (15)—in all of which the moral superiority of our ancestors over the people of their times was clearly shown. Or, if you prefer, we can look at more recent events, which their descendants and the heroes from not long before our time engaged in during the struggle against the lords of Asia, (16) and even Europe, as far as Macedonia: a people with power and means of attack far surpassing any that had come before—who, moreover, achieved remarkable feats. The people of Athens accomplished these things partly on their own, (17) and partly alongside the Peloponnesians, sharing in the victories won by land and sea. These men were also heroes, shining far brighter, as tradition tells us, than the peoples of their time.

 (12) Cf. "Il." ii. 547, {'Erekhtheos megaletoros k.t.l.}

 (13) Cf. Isoc. "Paneg." 19, who handles all the topics.

 (14) Commonly spoken of as "the Return." See Grote, "H. G." II. ch.
    xviii.

 (15) Against the Amazons and Thracians; cf. Herod. ix. 27; Plut.
    "Thes." 27.

 (16) The "Persian" wars; cf. Thucyd. I. i.

 (17) He omits the Plataeans.
(12) See "Il." ii. 547, {'Erekhtheos megaletoros k.t.l.}

(13) See Isoc. "Paneg." 19, which covers all the topics.

(14) Commonly referred to as "the Return." See Grote, "H. G." II. ch. xviii.

(15) Against the Amazons and Thracians; see Herod. ix. 27; Plut. "Thes." 27.

(16) The "Persian" wars; see Thucyd. I. i.

(17) He leaves out the Plataeans.

Per. Yes, so runs the story of their heroism.

Per. Yes, that's the story of their heroism.

Soc. Therefore it is that, amidst the many changes of inhabitants, and the migrations which have, wave after wave, swept over Hellas, these maintained themselves in their own land, unmoved; so that it was a common thing for others to turn to them as to a court of appeal on points of right, or to flee to Athens as a harbour of refuge from the hand of the oppressor. (18)

Soc. So, it’s because of this that, through all the changes in people and the migrations that, wave after wave, have rolled over Greece, these remained in their own land, steadfast; so much so that it became common for others to look to them as a place to appeal on legal matters, or to seek refuge in Athens from the grip of the oppressor. (18)

 (18) Cf. (Plat.) "Menex."; Isocr. "Paneg."
(18) Cf. (Plat.) "Menex."; Isocr. "Paneg."

Then Pericles: And the wonder to me, Socrates, is how our city ever came to decline.

Then Pericles: And what amazes me, Socrates, is how our city ever fell into decline.

Soc. I think we are victims of our own success. Like some athlete, (19) whose facile preponderance in the arena has betrayed him into laxity until he eventually succumbs to punier antagonists, so we Athenians, in the plenitude of our superiority, have neglected ourselves and are become degenerate.

Soc. I think we’re victims of our own success. Like some athlete, (19) whose easy dominance in the arena has made him lazy until he eventually falls to weaker opponents, we Athenians, in our abundance of superiority, have neglected ourselves and have become degenerate.

 (19) Reading {athletai tines}, or if {alloi tines}, translate "any one
    else."
(19) Reading {athletai tines}, or if {alloi tines}, translate "anyone else."

Per. What then ought we to do now to recover our former virtue?

Per. What should we do now to regain our former virtue?

Soc. There need be no mystery about that, I think. We can rediscover the institutions of our forefathers—applying them to the regulation of our lives with something of their precision, and not improbably with like success; or we can imitate those who stand at the front of affairs to-day, (20) adapting to ourselves their rule of life, in which case, if we live up to the standard of our models, we may hope at least to rival their excellence, or, by a more conscientious adherence to what they aim at, rise superior.

Soc. I don't think there's any mystery about it. We can look back at the systems our ancestors created and use them to manage our lives with the same accuracy, and likely with similar success. Alternatively, we can follow the examples set by the leaders of today, adapting their way of living for ourselves. If we hold ourselves to the same high standards as our role models, we might at least equal their greatness, or by being more dedicated to their goals, we could even surpass them.

 (20) Sc. the Lacedaemonians. See W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 396.
(20) See the Spartans. Refer to W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 396.

You would seem to suggest (he answered) that the spirit of beautiful and brave manhood has taken wings and left our city; (21) as, for instance, when will Athenians, like the Lacedaemonians, reverence old age—the Athenian, who takes his own father as a starting-point for the contempt he pours upon grey hairs? When will he pay as strict an attention to the body, who is not content with neglecting a good habit, (22) but laughs to scorn those who are careful in this matter? When shall we Athenians so obey our magistrates—we who take a pride, as it were, in despising authority? When, once more, shall we be united as a people—we who, instead of combining to promote common interests, delight in blackening each other's characters, (23) envying one another more than we envy all the world besides; and—which is our worst failing—who, in private and public intercourse alike, are torn by dissension and are caught in a maze of litigation, and prefer to make capital out of our neighbour's difficulties rather than to render natural assistance? To make our conduct consistent, indeed, we treat our national interests no better than if they were the concerns of some foreign state; we make them bones of contention to wrangle over, and rejoice in nothing so much as in possessing means and ability to indulge these tastes. From this hotbed is engendered in the state a spirit of blind folly (24) and cowardice, and in the hearts of the citizens spreads a tangle of hatred and mutual hostility which, as I often shudder to think, will some day cause some disaster to befall the state greater than it can bear. (25)

You seem to be suggesting (he replied) that the spirit of noble and courageous manhood has taken flight and left our city; (21) for example, when will the Athenians, like the Spartans, respect old age—the Athenian who uses his own father as a basis for the disdain he shows for grey hairs? When will he take as much care of his body, who not only neglects good habits (22) but also mocks those who are diligent about them? When will we Athenians obey our leaders—we who take pride in disregarding authority? When, once again, will we come together as a community—we who, instead of uniting for common goals, take pleasure in tarnishing each other's reputations, (23) envying one another more than we envy the whole world; and—which is our worst flaw—who, in both private and public interactions, are plagued by conflicts and caught up in a web of lawsuits, preferring to profit from our neighbor's troubles rather than offering genuine help? To make our actions consistent, we treat our national interests no better than if they were the issues of an entirely different country; we turn them into points of contention to argue about, and find joy in having the means and ability to indulge these tendencies. From this toxic environment arises a spirit of blind foolishness (24) and cowardice, and in the hearts of the citizens spreads a tangle of hatred and bitterness, which, as I often dread to think, will someday lead to a disaster for the state that it cannot withstand. (25)

 (21) Or, "is far enough away from Athens."

 (22) See below, III. xii. 5; "Pol. Ath." i. 13; "Rev." iv. 52.

 (23) Or, "to deal despitefully with one another."

 (24) Reading {ateria}. See L. Dindorf ad loc., Ox. ed. lxii. Al.
    {apeiria}, a want of skill, or {ataxia}, disorderliness. Cf. "Pol.
    Ath." i. 5.

 (25) Possibly the author is thinking of the events of 406, 405 B.C.
    (see "Hell." I. vii. and II.), and history may repeat itself.
(21) Or, "is far enough away from Athens."

(22) See below, III. xii. 5; "Pol. Ath." i. 13; "Rev." iv. 52.

(23) Or, "to treat each other harshly."

(24) Reading {ateria}. See L. Dindorf ad loc., Ox. ed. lxii. Al. 
   {apeiria}, a lack of skill, or {ataxia}, disorderliness. Cf. "Pol. 
   Ath." i. 5.

(25) The author might be referring to the events of 406, 405 B.C. 
    (see "Hell." I. vii. and II.), and history could repeat itself.

Do not (replied Socrates), do not, I pray you, permit yourself to believe that Athenians are smitten with so incurable a depravity. Do you not observe their discipline in all naval matters? Look at their prompt and orderly obedience to the superintendents at the gymnastic contests, (26) their quite unrivalled subservience to their teachers in the training of our choruses.

“Don’t (Socrates replied), please don’t let yourself think that the Athenians have such an incurable flaw. Can’t you see their discipline in everything related to the navy? Look at how quickly and orderly they follow the supervisors during the athletic competitions, (26) and their unmatched respect for their teachers when it comes to training our choruses.”

 (26) Epistatoi, i.e. stewards and training-masters.
(26) Epistatoi, meaning stewards and training masters.

Yes (he answered), there's the wonder of it; to think that all those good people should so obey their leaders, but that our hoplites and our cavalry, who may be supposed to rank before the rest of the citizens in excellence of manhood, (27) should be so entirely unamenable to discipline.

Yes (he replied), it's astonishing to think that all those good people follow their leaders so obediently, while our hoplites and cavalry, who are supposed to be superior to the rest of the citizens in terms of manhood, should be completely unresponsive to discipline.

 (27) {kalokagathia}.
(27) {kalokagathia}.

Then Socrates: Well, but the council which sits on Areopagos is composed of citizens of approved (28) character, is it not?

Then Socrates: Well, the council that meets on Areopagus is made up of citizens of proven character, right?

 (28) Technically, they must have passed the {dokimasia}. And for the
    "Aeropagos" see Grote, "H. G." v. 498; Aristot. "Pol." ii. 12;
    "Ath. Pol." 4. 4, where see Dr. Sandys' note, p. 18.
(28) Technically, they must have passed the {dokimasia}. And for the "Aeropagos," refer to Grote, "H. G." v. 498; Aristot. "Pol." ii. 12; "Ath. Pol." 4. 4, where Dr. Sandys' note on page 18 can be found.

Certainly (he answered).

Sure.

Soc. Then can you name any similar body, judicial or executive, trying cases or transacting other business with greater honour, stricter legality, higher dignity, or more impartial justice?

Soc. So can you name any similar body, judicial or executive, that handles cases or conducts other business with more honor, stricter legality, greater dignity, or more impartial justice?

No, I have no fault to find on that score (he answered).

No, I don't have any complaints about that (he replied).

Soc. Then we ought not to despair as though all sense of orderliness and good discipline had died out of our countrymen.

Soc. Then we shouldn't lose hope as if all sense of order and good discipline has disappeared from our fellow countrymen.

Still (he answered), if it is not to harp upon one string, I maintain that in military service, where, if anywhere, sobreity and temperance, orderliness and good discipline are needed, none of these essentials receives any attention.

Still (he answered), if I'm not just repeating myself, I believe that in military service, where sobriety and self-control, organization and good discipline are essential, none of these important aspects get any attention.

May it not perhaps be (asked Socrates) that in this department they are officered by those who have the least knowledge? (29) Do you not notice, to take the case of harp-players, choric performers, dancers, and the like, that no one would ever dream of leading if he lacked the requisite knowledge? and the same holds of wrestlers or pancratiasts.

Could it be, (Socrates asked) that in this area they are led by those with the least knowledge? (29) Don’t you see, when it comes to harp players, performers, dancers, and similar roles, that no one would think of taking charge if they didn’t have the necessary knowledge? The same goes for wrestlers or mixed martial artists.

 (29) {episteme}. See below, III. ix. 10.
(29) {episteme}. See below, III. ix. 10.

Moreover, while in these cases any one in command can tell you where he got the elementary knowledge of what he presides over, most generals are amateurs and improvisers. (30) I do not at all suppose that you are one of that sort. I believe you could give as clear an account of your schooling in strategy as you could in the matter of wrestling. No doubt you have got at first hand many of your father's "rules for generalship," which you carefully preserve, besides having collected many others from every quarter whence it was possible to pick up any knowledge which would be of use to a future general. Again, I feel sure you are deeply concerned to escape even unconscious ignorance of anything which will be serviceable to you in so high an office; and if you detect in yourself any ignorance, you turn to those who have knowledge in these matters (sparing neither gifts nor gratitude) to supplement your ignorance by their knowledge and to secure their help.

Moreover, while in these cases anyone in charge can tell you where they learned the basics of what they lead, most generals are beginners and make things up as they go. (30) I definitely don’t think you’re one of those. I believe you could explain your training in strategy as clearly as you could about wrestling. No doubt you’ve learned many of your father's "rules for generalship," which you keep in mind, and you’ve also gathered insights from everywhere you could find useful knowledge for a future general. Again, I’m sure you’re very eager to avoid even unconscious ignorance of anything that could be helpful in such an important role; and if you find any gaps in your knowledge, you seek out those who are knowledgeable in these areas (not hesitating to offer gifts or express gratitude) to fill those gaps and secure their assistance.

 (30) Cf. "Pol. Lac." xiii. 5.
(30) Cf. "Pol. Lac." xiii. 5.

To which Pericles: I am not so blind, Socrates, as to imagine you say these words under the idea that I am truly so careful in these matters; but rather your object is to teach me that the would-be general must make such things his care. I admit in any case all you say.

To which Pericles replied: I'm not so naive, Socrates, to think you say this because you believe I'm genuinely concerned about these issues; instead, I understand that your aim is to teach me that any aspiring general must take these things seriously. I agree with everything you’re saying, regardless.

Socrates proceeded: Has it ever caught your observation, Pericles, that a high mountain barrier stretches like a bulwark in front of our country down towards Boeotia—cleft, moreover, by narrow and precipitous passes, the only avenues into the heart of Attica, which lies engirdled by a ring of natural fortresses? (31)

Socrates continued: Have you ever noticed, Pericles, that a tall mountain range runs like a wall in front of our country down towards Boeotia—divided, by the way, by steep and narrow paths, the only routes into the center of Attica, which is surrounded by a circle of natural defenses? (31)

 (31) The mountains are Cithaeron and Parnes N., and Cerata N.W.
(31) The mountains are Cithaeron and Parnes to the north, and Cerata to the northwest.

Per. Certainly I have.

For sure, I have.

Soc. Well, and have you ever heard tell of the Mysians and Pisidians living within the territory of the great king, (32) who, inside their mountain fortresses, lightly armed, are able to rush down and inflict much injury on the king's territory by their raids, while preserving their own freedom?

Soc. Well, have you ever heard about the Mysians and Pisidians living in the land of the great king, who, from their mountain fortresses, are lightly armed and can quickly attack and cause a lot of damage to the king's territory through their raids, all while maintaining their own freedom?

 (32) For this illustration see "Anab." III. ii. 23; cf. "Econ." iv.
    18, where Socrates ({XS}) refers to Cyrus's expedition and death.
(32) For this illustration see "Anab." III. ii. 23; cf. "Econ." iv. 18, where Socrates ({XS}) talks about Cyrus's campaign and death.

Per. Yes, the circumstance is not new to me.

Per. Yes, I'm already familiar with the situation.

And do you not think (added Socrates) that a corps of young able-bodied Athenians, accoutred with lighter arms, (33) and holding our natural mountain rampart in possession, would prove at once a thorn in the enemy's side offensively, whilst defensively they would form a splendid bulwark to protect the country?

And don’t you think, added Socrates, that a group of young, strong Athenians, equipped with lighter weapons, and holding our natural mountain barrier, would be a real pain for the enemy on the offensive, while also providing excellent protection for the country on the defensive?

 (33) Cf. the reforms of Iphicrates.
(33) See the reforms of Iphicrates.

To which Pericles: I think, Socrates, these would be all useful measures, decidedly.

To which Pericles replied: I believe, Socrates, these would definitely be useful measures.

If, then (replied Socrates), these suggestions meet your approbation, try, O best of men, to realise them—if you can carry out a portion of them, it will be an honour to yourself and a blessing to the state; while, if you fail in any point, there will be no damage done to the city nor discredit to yourself.

If these ideas make sense to you, my good friend, try to make them happen. If you can achieve even a part of them, it will be a great honor for you and a benefit to the community. And if you stumble on any of them, it won’t harm the city or bring shame to you.

VI

VI

Glaucon, (1) the son of Ariston, had conceived such an ardour to gain the headship of the state that nothing could hinder him but he must deliver a course of public speeches, (2) though he had not yet reached the age of twenty. His friends and relatives tried in vain to stop him making himself ridiculous and being dragged down from the bema. (3) Socrates, who took a kindly interest in the youth for the sake of Charmides (4) the son of Glaucon, and of Plato, alone succeeded in restraining him. It happened thus. He fell in with him, and first of all, to get him to listen, detained him by some such remarks as the following: (5)

Glaucon, the son of Ariston, was so eager to take charge of the state that nothing could stop him; he felt he had to give public speeches, even though he wasn’t yet twenty. His friends and family tried hard to keep him from embarrassing himself and being thrown off the platform. Socrates, who had a kind interest in the young man because of Charmides, the son of Glaucon, and Plato, was the only one who managed to hold him back. Here’s how it happened. He ran into Glaucon and, to get him to listen, started the conversation with comments like these:

 (1) Glaucon, Plato's brother. Grote, "Plato," i. 508.

 (2) "Harangue the People."

 (3) See Plat. "Protag." 319 C: "And if some person offers to give them
    advice who is not supposed by them to have any skill in the art
     (sc. of politics), even though he be good-looking, and rich, and
    noble, they will not listen to him, but laugh at him, and hoot
    him, until he is either clamoured down and retires of himself; or
    if he persists, he is dragged away or put out by the constables at
    the command of the prytanes" (Jowett). Cf. Aristoph. "Knights,"
    665, {kath eilkon auton oi prutaneis kai toxotai}.

 (4) For Charmides (maternal uncle of Plato and Glaucon, cousin of
    Critias) see ch. vii. below; Plato the philosopher, Glaucon's
    brother, see Cobet, "Pros. Xen." p. 28.

 (5) Or, "and in the first instance addressing him in such terms he
    could not choose but hear, detained him." See above, II. vi. 11.
    Socrates applies his own theory.
(1) Glaucon, Plato's brother. Grote, "Plato," i. 508.

(2) "Speak to the People."

(3) See Plat. "Protag." 319 C: "And if someone offers them advice who they don't think has any skill in politics, even if he’s good-looking, rich, and noble, they won’t listen to him, but will laugh and boo him until he either backs down on his own or, if he keeps going, the constables will drag him away or kick him out at the command of the leaders" (Jowett). Cf. Aristoph. "Knights," 665, {kath eilkon auton oi prutaneis kai toxotai}.

(4) For Charmides (Plato and Glaucon's maternal uncle, and Critias's cousin) see ch. vii. below; Plato the philosopher, Glaucon's brother, see Cobet, "Pros. Xen." p. 28.

(5) Or, "and initially addressing him in such a way that he couldn’t help but hear, he kept him there." See above, II. vi. 11. Socrates applies his own theory.

Ah, Glaucon (he exclaimed), so you have determined to become prime minister? (6)

Ah, Glaucon (he exclaimed), so you've decided to become prime minister? (6)

 (6) {prostateuein}.
(6) {prostateuein}.

Glauc. Yes, Socrates, I have.

Glauc. Yes, Socrates, I have.

Soc. And what a noble aim! if aught human ever deserved to be called noble; since if you succeed in your design, it follows, as the night the day, you will be able not only to gratify your every wish, but you will be in a position to benefit your friends, you will raise up your father's house, you will exalt your fatherland, you will become a name thrice famous in the city first, and next in Hellas, and lastly even among barbarians perhaps, like Themistocles; but be it here or be it there, wherever you be, you will be the observed of all beholders. (7)

Soc. And what a noble goal! If anything human can be called noble; because if you succeed in your plan, just like night follows day, you will not only fulfill all your desires, but you'll also be able to help your friends, elevate your father's family, glorify your homeland, and become a name renowned in the city first, then throughout Greece, and maybe even among the barbarians, like Themistocles; but whether you are here or there, wherever you are, everyone will notice you. (7)

 (7) "The centre of attraction—the cynosure of neighbouring eyes."
(7) "The center of attention—the focus of nearby gazes."

The heart of Glaucon swelled with pride as he drank in the words, and gladly he stayed to listen.

The heart of Glaucon swelled with pride as he absorbed the words, and he eagerly chose to stay and listen.

Presently Socrates proceeded: Then this is clear, Glaucon, is it not? that you must needs benefit the city, since you desire to reap her honours?

Currently, Socrates continued: So it's clear, Glaucon, isn't it? You must help the city if you want to enjoy its honors.

Glauc. Undoubtedly.

Glauc. Definitely.

Then, by all that is sacred (Socrates continued), do not keep us in the dark, but tell us in what way do you propose first to benefit the state? what is your starting-point? (8) When Glaucon remained with sealed lips, as if he were now for the first time debating what this starting-point should be, Socrates continued: I presume, if you wished to improve a friend's estate, you would endeavour to do so by adding to its wealth, would you not? So here, maybe, you will try to add to the wealth of the state?

Then, by everything that’s important (Socrates continued), don’t leave us in the dark, but tell us how you plan to first help the state? What’s your starting point? (8) When Glaucon stayed silent, as if he were just now thinking about what this starting point should be, Socrates went on: I assume that if you wanted to improve a friend's property, you would try to increase its wealth, right? So here, perhaps, you’ll try to increase the wealth of the state?

 (8) Or, "tell us what your starting-point will be in the path of
    benefaction."
(8) Or, "let us know what your starting point will be on the path of giving."

Most decidedly (he answered).

Definitely (he answered).

Soc. And we may take it the state will grow wealthier in proportion as her revenues increase?

Soc. So, can we assume that the state will become wealthier as its revenues grow?

Glauc. That seems probable, at any rate.

Glauc. That seems probable, anyway.

Soc. Then would you kindly tell us from what sources the revenues of the state are at present derived, and what is their present magnitude? No doubt you have gone carefully into the question, so that if any of these are failing you may make up the deficit, or if neglected for any reason, make some new provision. (9)

Soc. Could you please explain where the state's current revenues come from and how much they are right now? I'm sure you have looked into this thoroughly, so if any of these sources are underperforming, you can address the shortfall, or if they've been overlooked for any reason, you can propose a new solution. (9)

 (9) Or, "or if others have dropped out or been negligently overlooked,
    you may replace them."
(9) Or, "if others have dropped out or been carelessly forgotten, you can replace them."

Glauc. Nay, to speak the truth, these are matters I have not thoroughly gone into.

Glauc. No, to be honest, these are things I haven't really looked into.

Never mind (he said) if you have omitted the point; but you might oblige us by running through the items or heads of expenditure. Obviously you propose to remove all those which are superfluous?

"Don't worry about it," he said, "if you missed that point; but it would be great if you could go over the expenses or main points. Clearly, you plan to get rid of all the unnecessary ones, right?"

Glauc. Well, no. Upon my word I have not had time to look into that side of the matter either as yet.

Glauc. Well, no. Honestly, I haven’t had a chance to explore that aspect of the issue yet either.

Soc. Then we will postpone for the present the problem of making the state wealthier; obviously without knowing the outgoings and the incomings it would be impossible to deal with the matter seriously.

Soc. So let's put off the issue of making the state richer for now; clearly, without understanding the expenses and the income, it would be impossible to tackle the problem seriously.

But, Socrates (Glaucon remarked), it is possible to enrich the state out of the pockets of her enemies!

But, Socrates (Glaucon said), it's possible to fund the state by taking from its enemies!

Yes, to be sure, considerably (answered Socrates), in the event of getting the better of them; but in the event of being worsted, it is also possible to lose what we have got.

Yes, for sure, a lot (answered Socrates), if we manage to come out on top; but if we end up losing, we might also risk losing what we already have.

A true observation (he replied).

A real observation (he replied).

And therefore (proceeded Socrates), before he makes up his mind with what enemy to go to war, a statesman should know the relative powers of his own city and the adversary's, so that, in case the superiority be on his own side, he may throw the weight of his advice into the scale of undertaking war; but if the opposite he may plead in favour of exercising caution.

And so (Socrates continued), before deciding which enemy to go to war with, a leader should understand the strengths of his own city compared to those of the opponent. That way, if his city has the upper hand, he can strongly support the idea of going to war; but if not, he should advocate for being cautious.

You are right (he answered).

You're right (he replied).

Soc. Then would you for our benefit enumerate the land and naval forces first of Athens and then of our opponents?

Soc. Could you please list the land and naval forces, starting with Athens and then our opponents?

Glauc. Pardon me. I could not tell you them off-hand at a moment's notice.

Glauc. Sorry, I can’t tell you them right away.

Or (added Socrates), if you have got the figures on paper, you might produce them. I cannot tell how anxious I am to hear your statement.

Or (added Socrates), if you have the numbers written down, you could show them. I can't express how eager I am to hear what you have to say.

Glauc. No, I assure you, I have not got them even on paper yet.

Glauc. No, I promise you, I haven't even gotten them in writing yet.

Soc. Well then, we will defer tending advice on the topic of peace or war, in a maiden speech at any rate. (10) I can understand that, owing to the magnitude of the questions, in these early days of your ministry you have not yet fully examined them. But come, I am sure that you have studied the defences of the country, at all events, and you know exactly how many forts and outposts are serviceable (11) and how many are not; you can tell us which garrisons are strong enough and which defective; and you are prepared to throw in the weight of your advice in favour of increasing the serviceable outposts and sweeping away those that are superfluous?

Soc. Well then, let's hold off on discussing peace or war, especially in your first speech. (10) I get that, because these are such big issues, you haven't had the chance to dive into them fully in the early days of your role. But come on, I’m sure you have looked into the country's defenses, at least, and you know exactly how many forts and outposts are operational (11) and how many aren’t; you can tell us which garrisons are strong enough and which are lacking; and you're ready to offer your advice on boosting the effective outposts and getting rid of the unnecessary ones?

 (10) See "Econ." xi. 1.

 (11) Or, "advantageously situated." See the author's own tract on
    "Revenues."
 (10) See "Econ." xi. 1.

 (11) Or, "well-positioned." See the author's own paper on
    "Revenues."

Glauc. Yes, sweep them all away, that's my advice; for any good that is likely to come of them! Defences indeed! so maintained that the property of the rural districts is simply pilfered.

Glauc. Yeah, just get rid of them all, that's what I suggest; because there's no real benefit coming from them! Defenses, really! They’re set up in a way that just lets people steal from the farmland.

But suppose you sweep away the outposts (he asked), may not something worse, think you, be the consequence? will not sheer plundering be free to any ruffian who likes?... But may I ask is this judgment the result of personal inspection? have you gone yourself and examined the defences? or how do you know that they are all maintained as you say?

But what if you get rid of the outposts (he asked), could something worse happen, do you think? Won't total looting be open to any thug who wants it?... But can I ask if this opinion comes from personal observation? Have you gone and checked the defenses yourself? Or how do you know that they're all being kept up like you claim?

Glauc. I conjecture that it is so.

Glauc. I believe that's true.

Soc. Well then, until we have got beyond the region of conjecture shall we defer giving advice on the matter? (It will be time enough when we know the facts.)

Soc. Well then, until we move past the realm of guesses, should we hold off on offering advice on this issue? (It will be the right time when we have the facts.)

Possibly it would be better to wait till then (replied Glaucon).

"Maybe it would be better to wait until then," replied Glaucon.

Soc. Then there are the mines, (12) but, of course, I am aware that you have not visited them in person, so as to be able to say why they are less productive than formerly.

Soc. Then there are the mines, (12) but I know you haven't visited them yourself, so you can't really say why they're less productive than they used to be.

 (12) Again the author's tract on "Revenues" is a comment on the
    matter.
(12) Once again, the author's piece on "Revenues" comments on the issue.

Well, no; I have never been there myself (he answered).

Well, no; I’ve never been there myself (he answered).

Soc. No, Heaven help us! an unhealthy district by all accounts; so that, when the moment for advice on that topic arrives, you will have an excuse ready to hand.

Soc. No, thank goodness! It's an unhealthy area by all accounts; so when the time comes for advice on that topic, you'll have an excuse all set.

I see you are making fun of me (Glaucon answered).

I see you’re teasing me, Glaucon replied.

Soc. Well, but here is a point, I am sure, which you have not neglected. No, you will have thoroughly gone into it, and you can tell us. For how long a time could the corn supplies from the country districts support the city? how much is requisite for a single year, so that the city may not run short of this prime necessary, before you are well aware; but on the contrary you with your full knowledge will be in a position to give advice on so vital a question, to the aid or may be the salvation of your country?

Soc. Well, here's a point I'm sure you haven't overlooked. No, you've definitely thought this through, and you can inform us. How long could the grain supplies from the rural areas sustain the city? How much is needed for just one year so the city doesn't run out of this essential resource? Before you answer, I know you have the expertise to provide guidance on such an important issue, which could be crucial for the well-being or even the survival of your country.

It is a colossal business this (Glaucon answered), if I am to be obliged to give attention to all these details.

It’s a huge undertaking (Glaucon replied), if I have to pay attention to all these details.

Soc. On the other hand, a man could not even manage his own house or his estate well, without, in the first place, knowing what he requires, and, in the second place, taking pains, item by item, to supply his wants. But since this city consists of more than ten thousand houses, and it is not easy to pay minute attention to so many all at once, how is it you did not practise yourself by trying to augment the resources of one at any rate of these—I mean your own uncle's? The service would not be thrown away. Then if your strength suffices in the single case you might take in hand a larger number; but if you fail to relieve one, how could you possibly hope to succeed with many? How absurd for a man, if he cannot carry half a hundredweight, to attempt to carry a whole! (13)

Soc. On the other hand, a man can’t even manage his own home or estate properly without first knowing what he needs and, second, taking the time to meet those needs one by one. But since this city has more than ten thousand houses, and it’s not easy to pay close attention to so many at once, why haven’t you practiced by trying to improve the resources of at least one of these—specifically your uncle's? That effort wouldn’t go to waste. If you can handle that one case, you could try to take on more. But if you can’t help one, how could you expect to manage many? It’s ridiculous for someone who can’t lift fifty pounds to try to lift a hundred! (13)

 (13) Lit. "a single talent's weight... to carry two."
(13) Lit. "the weight of a single talent... to carry two."

Glauc. Nay, for my part, I am willing enough to assist my uncle's house, if my uncle would only be persuaded to listen to my advice.

Glauc. No, for my part, I'm more than willing to help my uncle's family, if my uncle would just be open to hearing my suggestions.

Soc. Then, when you cannot persuade your uncle, do you imagine you will be able to make the whole Athenian people, uncle and all, obey you? Be careful, Glaucon (he added), lest in your thirst for glory and high repute you come to the opposite. Do you not see how dangerous it is for a man to speak or act beyond the range (14) of his knowledge? To take the cases known to you of people whose conversation or conduct clearly transcends these limits: should you say they gain more praise or more blame on that account? Are they admired the rather or despised? Or, again, consider those who do know what they say and what they do; and you will find, I venture to say, that in every sort of undertaking those who enjoy repute and admiration belong to the class of those endowed with the highest knowledge; whilst conversely the people of sinister reputation, the mean and the contemptible, emanate from some depth of ignorance and dulness. If therefore what you thirst for is repute and admiration as a statesman, try to make sure of one accomplishment: in other words, the knowledge as far as in you lies of what you wish to do. (15) If, indeed, with this to distinguish you from the rest of the world you venture to concern yourself with state affairs, it would not surprise me but that you might reach the goal of your ambition easily.

Soc. So, if you can't persuade your uncle, do you really think you'll be able to make the entire Athenian population, including your uncle, obey you? Be cautious, Glaucon (he added), because in your eagerness for glory and a good reputation, you might end up achieving the opposite. Don't you see how risky it is for someone to speak or act beyond what they know? Take a look at people you know whose conversations or actions clearly go beyond their understanding: do they receive more praise or more blame because of it? Are they admired more or despised? On the other hand, think about those who are aware of what they're saying and doing; I bet you'll find that in any kind of endeavor, those who are respected and admired are the ones with the highest knowledge. In contrast, those with a bad reputation, the mediocre and contemptible, come from a place of ignorance and dullness. So, if what you desire is respect and admiration as a statesman, make sure you focus on one essential skill: the knowledge, as far as you can, of what you want to accomplish. If, with that to set you apart from everyone else, you decide to engage in state affairs, I wouldn't be surprised if you achieve your ambitions easily.

 (14) Or, "to talk of things which he does not know, or to meddle with
    them."

 (15) Or, "try as far as possible to achieve one thing, and that is to
    know the business which you propose to carry out."
(14) Or, "to discuss things he doesn't understand, or to interfere with them."

(15) Or, "make every effort to accomplish one goal, which is to understand the task you intend to undertake."

VII

VII

Now Charmides, (1) the son of Glaucon, was, as Socrates observed, a man of mark and influence: a much more powerful person in fact than the mass of those devoted to politics at that date, but at the same time he was a man who shrank from approaching the people or busying himself with the concerns of the state. Accordingly Socrates addressed him thus:

Now Charmides, (1) the son of Glaucon, was, as Socrates noted, a notable and influential man: actually a much more powerful person than most of those involved in politics at that time, but he was also someone who avoided engaging with the people or getting involved in government matters. So Socrates spoke to him like this:

 (1) See last chapter for his relationship to Glaucon (the younger) and
    Plato; for a conception of his character, Plato's dialogue
    "Charmides"; "Theag." 128 E; "Hell." II. iv. 19; "Symp." iv. 31;
    Grote, "Plato," i. 480.
(1) See the last chapter for his relationship with Glaucon (the younger) and Plato; for an understanding of his character, check out Plato's dialogue "Charmides"; "Theag." 128 E; "Hell." II. iv. 19; "Symp." iv. 31; Grote, "Plato," i. 480.

Tell me, Charmides, supposing some one competent to win a victory in the arena and to receive a crown, (2) whereby he will gain honour himself and make the land of his fathers more glorious in Hellas, (3) were to refuse to enter the lists—what kind of person should you set him down to be?

Tell me, Charmides, if someone skilled enough to win a victory in the arena and earn a crown, (2) gaining honor for themselves and bringing more glory to their homeland in Greece, (3) were to refuse to compete—what kind of person do you think that would make them?

 (2) In some conquest (e.g. of the Olympic games) where the prize is a
    mere wreath.

 (3) Cf. Pindar passim.
 (2) In certain competitions (like the Olympic games) where the reward is just a wreath.

 (3) See Pindar throughout.

Clearly an effeminate and cowardly fellow (he answered).

Clearly an overly sensitive and cowardly guy, he replied.

Soc. And what if another man, who had it in him, by devotion to affairs of state, to exalt his city and win honour himself thereby, were to shrink and hesitate and hang back—would he too not reasonably be regarded as a coward?

Soc. And what if another man, who had the potential, due to his dedication to politics, to uplift his city and gain honor for himself, were to falter and hold back—shouldn’t he also be seen as a coward?

Possibly (he answered); but why do you address these questions to me?

"Maybe," he replied, "but why are you asking me these questions?"

Because (replied Socrates) I think that you, who have this power, do hesitate to devote yourself to matters which, as being a citizen, if for no other reason, you are bound to take part in. (4)

Because, Socrates replied, I believe you, who have this power, hesitate to commit yourself to matters that, as a citizen, you are obligated to engage in, if for no other reason. (4)

 (4) Or add, "and cannot escape from."
(4) Or add, "and can't escape from."

Charm. And wherein have you detected in me this power, that you pass so severe a sentence upon me?

Charm. And where have you found this power in me that you judge me so harshly?

Soc. I have detected it plainly enough in those gatherings (5) in which you meet the politicians of the day, when, as I observe, each time they consult you on any point you have always good advice to offer, and when they make a blunder you lay your finger on the weak point immediately.

Soc. I’ve clearly seen it in those meetings (5) where you interact with today’s politicians. Whenever they come to you for advice, you always have great suggestions, and when they mess up, you instantly point out where they went wrong.

 (5) See above, I. v. 4; here possibly of political club conversation.
(5) See above, I. v. 4; here possibly about a political club discussion.

Charm. To discuss and reason in private is one thing, Socrates, to battle in the throng of the assembly is another.

Charm. Talking and reasoning in private is one thing, Socrates, but fighting in the midst of the crowd at the assembly is a whole different story.

Soc. And yet a man who can count, counts every bit as well in a crowd as when seated alone by himself; and it is the best performer on the harp in private who carries off the palm of victory in public.

Soc. And yet a man who can count does so just as well in a crowd as when he's sitting alone by himself; and it's the best harp player in private who wins the prize in public.

Charm. But do you not see that modesty and timidity are feelings implanted in man's nature? and these are much more powerfully present to us in a crowd than within the circle of our intimates.

Charm. But don’t you see that modesty and shyness are feelings that are part of human nature? And these feelings are much stronger in a crowd than among our close friends.

Soc. Yes, but what I am bent on teaching you is that while you feel no such bashfulness and timidity before the wisest and strongest of men, you are ashamed of opening your lips in the midst of weaklings and dullards. (6) Is it the fullers among them of whom you stand in awe, or the cobblers, or the carpenters, or the coppersmiths, or the merchants, or the farmers, or the hucksters of the market-place exchanging their wares, and bethinking them how they are to buy this thing cheap, and to sell the other dear—is it before these you are ashamed, for these are the individual atoms out of which the Public Assembly is composed? (7) And what is the difference, pray, between your behaviour and that of a man who, being the superior of trained athletes, quails before a set of amateurs? Is it not the case that you who can argue so readily with the foremost statesmen in the city, some of whom affect to look down upon you—you, with your vast superiority over practised popular debaters—are no sooner confronted with a set of folk who never in their lives gave politics a thought, and into whose heads certainly it never entered to look down upon you—than you are afraid to open your lips in mortal terror of being laughed at?

Soc. Yes, but what I really want to teach you is that while you don’t feel any shyness or fear in front of the wisest and strongest men, you’re embarrassed to speak up around weaklings and dullards. (6) Are you intimidated by the fullers, the cobblers, the carpenters, the coppersmiths, the merchants, or the farmers, or the market hustlers trading their goods and thinking about how to buy low and sell high? Is it in front of these people that you feel ashamed? Because these are the very individuals that make up the Public Assembly. (7) And what’s the difference, really, between your behavior and that of a man who, despite being better than trained athletes, feels nervous around amateurs? Isn’t it true that you, who can easily argue with the top statesmen in the city—some of whom act like they are above you—you, with your huge advantage over experienced public speakers, suddenly freeze up when faced with people who have never thought about politics or looked down on you? You become terrified to say anything for fear of being laughed at?

 (6) Cf. Cic. "Tusc." v. 36, 104; Plat. "Gorg." 452 E, 454 B.

 (7) Cf. Plat. "Protag." 319 C. See W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 103.
(6) See Cic. "Tusc." v. 36, 104; Plat. "Gorg." 452 E, 454 B.

(7) See Plat. "Protag." 319 C. Refer to W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 103.

Well, but you would admit (he answered) that sound argument does frequently bring down the ridicule of the Popular Assembly.

Well, you would agree (he replied) that solid reasoning often attracts the mockery of the Popular Assembly.

Soc. Which is equally true of the others. (8) And that is just what rouses my astonishment, that you who can cope so easily with these lordly people (when guilty of ridicule) should persuade yourself that you cannot stand up against a set of commoners. (9) My good fellow, do not be ignorant of yourself! (10) do not fall into that commonest of errors—theirs who rush off to investigate the concerns of the rest of the world, and have no time to turn and examine themselves. Yet that is a duty which you must not in cowardly sort draw back from: rather must you brace ourself to give good heed to your own self; and as to public affairs, if by any manner of means they may be improved through you, do not neglect them. Success in the sphere of politics means that not only the mass of your fellow-citizens, but your personal friends and you yourself last but not least, will profit by your action.

Soc. That's true for the others too. (8) And that's what surprises me—that you, who can easily handle these high-status people (when they're being ridiculous), think you can't stand up to a group of regular folks. (9) My friend, don't underestimate yourself! (10) Don't fall into that common mistake of those who rush to check out the problems of the world without taking the time to look at themselves. But you can't shy away from that responsibility: instead, you should prepare to really pay attention to yourself; and as for public matters, if there's any way you can help improve them, don’t ignore it. Success in politics means that not only will your fellow citizens benefit, but your friends and you will too, and that's important.

 (8) {oi eteroi}, i.e. "the foremost statesmen" mentioned before. Al.
    "the opposite party," the "Tories," if one may so say, of the
    political clubs.

 (9) Lit. "those... these."

 (10) Ernesti aptly cf. Cic. "ad Quint." iii. 6. See below, III. ix. 6;
    IV. ii. 24.
(8) {oi eteroi}, meaning "the leading politicians" mentioned earlier. Al. "the opposing side," the "Tories," if one can put it that way, of the political clubs.

(9) Literally "those... these."

(10) Ernesti rightly compares with Cic. "ad Quint." iii. 6. See below, III. ix. 6; IV. ii. 24.

VIII

VIII

Once when Aristippus (1) set himself to subject Socrates to a cross-examination, such as he had himself undergone at the hands of Socrates on a former occasion, (2) Socrates, being minded to benefit those who were with him, gave his answers less in the style of a debater guarding against perversions of his argument, than of a man persuaded of the supreme importance of right conduct. (3)

Once, when Aristippus (1) tried to interrogate Socrates in the same way he had been questioned by Socrates before, (2) Socrates, wanting to help those around him, answered not like a debater trying to protect his arguments from being twisted, but like someone who truly understood the importance of acting rightly. (3)

 (1) For Aristippus see above, p. 38; for the connection, {boulomenos
    tous sunontas ophelein}, between this and the preceeding chapter,
    see above, Conspectus, p. xxvi.

 (2) Possibly in reference to the conversation above. In reference to
    the present dialogue see Grote, "Plato," I. xi. p. 380 foll.

 (3) For {prattein ta deonta} cf. below, III. ix. 4, 11; Plat. "Charm."
    164 B; but see J. J. Hartman, "An. Xen." p. 141.
(1) For Aristippus, see above, p. 38; for the connection, {boulomenos tous sunontas ophelein}, between this and the previous chapter, see above, Conspectus, p. xxvi.

(2) Possibly referring to the conversation above. For the current dialogue, see Grote, "Plato," I. xi. p. 380 foll.

(3) For {prattein ta deonta}, cf. below, III. ix. 4, 11; Plat. "Charm." 164 B; but see J. J. Hartman, "An. Xen." p. 141.

Aristippus asked him "if he knew of anything good," (4) intending in case he assented and named any particular good thing, like food or drink, or wealth, or health, or strength, or courage, to point out that the thing named was sometimes bad. But he, knowing that if a thing troubles us, we immediately want that which will put an end to our trouble, answered precisely as it was best to do. (5)

Aristippus asked him, "Do you know of anything good?" (4) He was hoping that if the person agreed and mentioned something specific, like food, drink, wealth, health, strength, or courage, he could show that the thing named could sometimes be bad. But he understood that if something bothers us, we quickly seek what will relieve that discomfort, so he replied exactly as was best to do. (5)

 (4) See Grote, "Plato," ii. 585, on Philebus.

 (5) Or, "made the happiest answer."
(4) See Grote, "Plato," ii. 585, on Philebus.

(5) Or, "gave the best answer."

Soc. Do I understand you to ask me whether I know anything good for fever?

Soc. Are you asking me if I know of anything good for a fever?

No (he replied), that is not my question.

No, that's not my question, he replied.

Soc. Then for inflammation of the eyes?

Soc. So, what about eye inflammation?

Aristip. No, nor yet that.

Aristip. No, not that either.

Soc. Well then, for hunger?

So, what about hunger?

Aristip. No, nor yet for hunger.

Aristip. No, nor for hunger either.

Well, but (answered Socrates) if you ask me whether I know of any good thing which is good for nothing, I neither know of it nor want to know.

Well, (Socrates replied) if you’re asking me if I know about any good thing that’s useless, I don’t know of it and I don’t want to know.

And when Aristippus, returning to the charge, asked him "if he knew of any thing beautiful."

And when Aristippus, pressing the issue again, asked him "if he knew of anything beautiful."

He answered: Yes, many things.

He replied: Yes, a lot.

Aristip. Are they all like each other?

Aristip. Are they all the same?

Soc. On the contrary, they are often as unlike as possible.

Soc. On the flip side, they are often as different as can be.

How then (he asked) can that be beautiful which is unlike the beautiful?

How then (he asked) can something that is not beautiful be considered beautiful?

Soc. Bless me! for the simple reason that it is possible for a man who is a beautiful runner to be quite unlike another man who is a beautiful boxer, (6) or for a shield, which is a beautiful weapon for the purpose of defence, to be absolutely unlike a javelin, which is a beautiful weapon of swift and sure discharge.

Soc. Wow! It's just that a guy who's a great runner can be totally different from someone who's an amazing boxer, (6) or a shield, which is a great weapon for defense, can be completely different from a javelin, which is an excellent weapon for quick and accurate throwing.

 (6) See Grote, "H. G." x. 164, in reference to Epaminondas and his
    gymnastic training; below, III. x. 6.
(6) See Grote, "H. G." x. 164, regarding Epaminondas and his athletic training; below, III. x. 6.

Aristip. Your answers are no better now than (7) when I asked you whether you knew any good thing. They are both of a pattern.

Aristip. Your answers are just as unclear now as (7) when I asked you if you knew anything good. They're both the same.

 (7) Or, "You answer precisely as you did when..."
(7) Or, "You respond exactly like you did when..."

Soc. And so they should be. Do you imagine that one thing is good and another beautiful? Do not you know that relatively to the same standard all things are at once beautiful and good? (8) In the first place, virtue is not a good thing relatively to one standard and a beautiful thing relatively to another standard; and in the next place, human beings, on the same principle (9) and relatively to the same standard, are called "beautiful and good"; and so the bodily frames of men relatively to the same standards are seen to be "beautiful and good," and in general all things capable of being used by man are regarded as at once beautiful and good relatively to the same standard—the standing being in each case what the thing happens to be useful for. (10)

Soc. And they absolutely should be. Do you really think one thing can be good while another is beautiful? Don't you understand that, according to the same standard, everything can be seen as both beautiful and good? (8) First of all, virtue isn't just good by one standard and beautiful by another; and secondly, humans, following the same principle (9) and based on the same standard, are referred to as "beautiful and good." Likewise, the physical appearances of men, according to the same standards, are perceived as "beautiful and good," and generally, all things that can be used by humans are regarded as both beautiful and good according to the same standard—the usefulness of each thing determines this in every case. (10)

 (8) Or, "good and beautiful are convertible terms: whatever is good is
    beautiful, or whatever is beautiful is good."

 (9) Or, "in the same breath." Cf. Plat. "Hipp. maj." 295 D; "Gorg."
    474 D.

 (10) Or, "and this standard is the serviceableness of the thing in
    question."
(8) Or, "good and beautiful are interchangeable terms: whatever is good is beautiful, or whatever is beautiful is good."

(9) Or, "at the same time." Cf. Plat. "Hipp. maj." 295 D; "Gorg." 474 D.

(10) Or, "and this standard is the usefulness of the thing in question."

Aristip. Then I presume even a basket for carrying dung (11) is a beautiful thing?

Aristip. So I guess even a basket for carrying dung (11) is a beautiful thing?

 (11) Cf. Plat. "Hipp. maj." 288 D, 290 D; and Grote's note, loc. cit.
    p. 381: "in regard to the question wherein consists {to kalon}?"
(11) Cf. Plat. "Hipp. maj." 288 D, 290 D; and Grote's note, loc. cit. p. 381: "about the question of what makes something beautiful?"

Soc. To be sure, and a spear of gold an ugly thing, if for their respective uses—the former is well and the latter ill adapted.

Soc. Definitely, and a gold spear is an ugly object, considering their respective purposes—the former is suitable, while the latter is not.

Aristip. Do you mean to assert that the same things may be beautiful and ugly?

Aristip. Are you saying that the same things can be both beautiful and ugly?

Soc. Yes, to be sure; and by the same showing things may be good and bad: as, for instance, what is good for hunger may be bad for fever, and what is good for fever bad for hunger; or again, what is beautiful for wrestling is often ugly for running; and in general everything is good and beautiful when well adapted for the end in view, bad and ugly when ill adapted for the same.

Soc. Absolutely; and similarly, things can be good or bad: for example, what helps with hunger might worsen a fever, and what helps with a fever could make hunger worse; or, what is attractive for wrestling might be unattractive for running; overall, everything is good and beautiful when it's well-suited to its purpose, and bad and ugly when it isn't.

Similarly when he spoke about houses, (12) and argued that "the same house must be at once beautiful and useful"—I could not help feeling that he was giving a good lesson on the problem: "how a house ought to be built." He investigated the matter thus:

Similarly when he talked about houses, (12) and argued that "the same house must be both beautiful and practical"—I couldn't help feeling that he was providing a valuable lesson on the question: "how a house should be built." He explored the topic like this:

 (12) See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 488; "Classical Review," vii. 262.
(12) See K. Joel, cited work, p. 488; "Classical Review," vol. vii, p. 262.

Soc. "Do you admit that any one purposing to build a perfect house (13) will plan to make it at once as pleasant and as useful to live in as possible?" and that point being admitted, (14) the next question would be:

Soc. "Do you agree that anyone planning to build a perfect house will aim to make it as enjoyable and as practical to live in as possible?" And once that's accepted, the next question would be:

 (13) Or, "the ideal house"; lit. "a house as it should be."

 (14) See below, IV. vi. 15.
(13) Or, "the perfect house"; literally, "a house as it ought to be."

(14) See below, IV. vi. 15.

"It is pleasant to have one's house cool in summer and warm in winter, is it not?" and this proposition also having obtained assent, "Now, supposing a house to have a southern aspect, sunshine during winter will steal in under the verandah, (15) but in summer, when the sun traverses a path right over our heads, the roof will afford an agreeable shade, will it not? If, then, such an arrangement is desirable, the southern side of a house should be built higher to catch the rays of the winter sun, and the northern side lower to prevent the cold winds finding ingress; in a word, it is reasonable to suppose that the pleasantest and most beautiful dwelling place will be one in which the owner can at all seasons of the year find the pleasantest retreat, and stow away his goods with the greatest security."

"It’s nice to have your house cool in the summer and warm in the winter, right?" After agreeing with this idea, "Now, if a house faces south, sunlight will come in under the porch during winter, but in summer, when the sun is directly overhead, the roof will provide a nice shade, won’t it? If such a setup is ideal, then the southern side of the house should be built higher to catch the winter sun, and the northern side should be lower to block the cold winds from getting in; in short, it makes sense to think that the most pleasant and beautiful home will be one where the owner can find a cozy spot in every season and store their belongings safely."

 (15) Or, "porticoes" or "collonades."
(15) Or, "porticos" or "colonnades."

Paintings (16) and ornamental mouldings are apt (he said) to deprive one of more joy (17) than they confer.

Paintings (16) and decorative moldings can take away more joy (17) than they provide, he said.

 (16) See "Econ." ix. 2; Plat. "Hipp. maj." 298 A; "Rep." 529; Becker,
    "Charicles," 268 (Engl. trans.)

 (17) {euphrosunas}, archaic or "poetical" = "joyance." See "Hiero,"
    vi. 1.
(16) See "Econ." ix. 2; Plat. "Hipp. maj." 298 A; "Rep." 529; Becker, "Charicles," 268 (Engl. trans.)

(17) {euphrosunas}, archaic or "poetical" = "joyance." See "Hiero," vi. 1.

The fittest place for a temple or an altar (he maintained) was some site visible from afar, and untrodden by foot of man: (18) since it was a glad thing for the worshipper to lift up his eyes afar off and offer up his orison; glad also to wend his way peaceful to prayer unsullied. (19)

The best place for a temple or altar, he argued, was somewhere visible from a distance and untouched by human feet; it was a joyful experience for the worshipper to raise his eyes from afar and offer up his prayers, as well as to walk peacefully to prayer without any impurities.

 (18) e.g. the summit of Lycabettos, or the height on which stands the
    temple of Phygaleia. Cf. Eur. "Phoen." 1372, {Pallados
    khrusaspidos blepsas pros oikon euxato} of Eteocles.

 (19) See Vitruvius, i. 7, iv. 5, ap. Schneid. ad loc.; W. L. Newman,
    op. cit. i. 338.
(18) for example, the peak of Lycabettos, or the hill where the temple of Phygaleia stands. See Eur. "Phoen." 1372, {Pallados khrusaspidos blepsas pros oikon euxato} of Eteocles.

(19) See Vitruvius, i. 7, iv. 5, in Schneid. ad loc.; W. L. Newman, op. cit. i. 338.

IX

IX

Being again asked by some one: could courage be taught, (1) or did it come by nature? he answered: I imagine that just as one body is by nature stronger than another body to encounter toils, so one soul by nature grows more robust than another soul in face of dangers. Certainly I do note that people brought up under the same condition of laws and customs differ greatly in respect of daring. Still my belief is that by learning and practice the natural aptitude may always be strengthened towards courage. It is clear, for instance, that Scythians or Thracians would not venture to take shield and spear and contend with Lacedaemonians; and it is equally evident that Lacedaemonians would demur to entering the lists of battle against Thracians if limited to their light shields and javelins, or against Scythians without some weapon more familiar than their bows and arrows. (2) And as far as I can see, this principle holds generally: the natural differences of one man from another may be compensated by artificial progress, the result of care and attention. All which proves clearly that whether nature has endowed us with keener or blunter sensibilities, the duty of all alike is to learn and practise those things in which we would fain achieve distinction.

When asked again by someone whether courage can be taught or if it comes naturally, he replied: I think that just as one body is naturally stronger than another to face challenges, one soul can naturally be braver than another in the face of danger. It’s clear to me that people raised under the same laws and customs can vary greatly in their boldness. Still, I believe that with learning and practice, natural talent can always be developed into courage. For example, it’s obvious that Scythians or Thracians wouldn’t dare take up shield and spear to fight against Lacedaemonians; and it’s just as clear that Lacedaemonians would hesitate to battle Thracians if they were only using light shields and javelins, or to face Scythians without a weapon they were more used to than their bows and arrows. And from what I can see, this principle generally applies: the natural differences between individuals can be balanced out through deliberate growth and effort. All of this clearly shows that whether nature has given us sharper or duller sensitivities, it is the responsibility of all to learn and practice the things in which we aspire to excel.

 (1) Or, "When some one retorted upon him with the question: 'Can
    courage be taught?'" and for this problem see IV. vi. 10, 11;
    "Symp." ii. 12; Plat. "Lach."; "Protag." 349; "Phaedr." 269 D; K.
    Joel, op. cit. p. 325 foll.; Grote, "Plato," i. 468 foll., ii. 60;
    Jowett, "Plato," i. 77, 119; Newman, op. cit. i. 343.

 (2) Or, "against Thracians with light shields and javelins, or against
    Scythians with bows and arrows"; and for the national arms of
    these peoples respectively see Arist. "Lysistr." 563; "Anab." III.
    iv. 15; VI. VII. passim.
(1) Or, "When someone challenged him with the question: 'Can courage be taught?'" and for this issue, see IV. vi. 10, 11; "Symp." ii. 12; Plat. "Lach."; "Protag." 349; "Phaedr." 269 D; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 325 foll.; Grote, "Plato," i. 468 foll., ii. 60; Jowett, "Plato," i. 77, 119; Newman, op. cit. i. 343.

(2) Or, "against Thracians with light shields and javelins, or against Scythians with bows and arrows"; and for the national weapons of these peoples, see Arist. "Lysistr." 563; "Anab." III. iv. 15; VI. VII. passim.

Between wisdom and sobriety of soul (which is temperance) he drew no distinction. (3) Was a man able on the one hand to recognise things beautiful and good sufficiently to live in them? Had he, on the other hand, knowledge of the "base and foul" so as to beware of them? If so, Socrates judged him to be wise at once and sound of soul (or temperate). (4)

Between wisdom and a balanced soul (which is temperance), he saw no difference. (3) Could a person, on one hand, appreciate beautiful and good things enough to live among them? On the other hand, did he have awareness of the "base and foul" in order to avoid them? If so, Socrates considered him to be both wise and sound of soul (or temperate). (4)

 (3) But cf. IV. vi. 7; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 363.

 (4) Reading {alla to... kai to}, or more lit. "he discovered the
    wise man and sound of soul in his power not only to recognise
    things 'beautiful and good,' but to live and move and have his
    being in them; as also in his gift of avoiding consciously things
    base." Or if {alla ton... kai ton...} transl. "The man who
    not only could recognise the beautiful and good, but lived, etc.,
    in that world, and who moreover consciously avoided things base, in
    the judgment of Socrates was wise and sound of soul." Cf. Plat.
    "Charm."
(3) But see IV. vi. 7; K. Joel, referenced work, p. 363.

(4) Reading {but to... and to}, or more literally, "he discovered the wise man and sound of soul in his ability not only to recognize things 'beautiful and good,' but to live and thrive within them; as well as in his ability to consciously avoid base things." Or if {but the... and the...} translates to "The man who could not only recognize the beautiful and good but also lived, etc., in that world, and who additionally consciously avoided base things, was considered wise and sound of soul by Socrates." See Plat. "Charm."

And being further questioned whether "he considered those who have the knowledge of right action, but do not apply it, to be wise and self-controlled?"—"Not a whit more," he answered, "than I consider them to be unwise and intemperate. (5) Every one, I conceive, deliberately chooses what, within the limits open to him, he considers most conducive to his interest, and acts accordingly. I must hold therefore that those who act against rule and crookedly (6) are neither wise nor self-controlled.

And when asked if he thought people who know the right thing to do but don’t actually do it are wise and self-controlled, he answered, "Not at all. I see them as just as unwise and lacking self-control. (5) I believe everyone chooses what they think is best for their own interests, given their options, and acts accordingly. So, I must say that those who act against the rules and dishonestly (6) are neither wise nor self-controlled."

 (5) For the phrase "not a whit the more" see below, III. xii. 1;
    "Econ." xii. 18. Al. "I should by no means choose to consider them
    wise and self-controlled rather than foolish and intemperate."

 (6) "Who cannot draw a straight line, ethically speaking."
(5) For the phrase "not a whit the more" see below, III. xii. 1;  
    "Econ." xii. 18. Al. "I definitely wouldn't want to view them as wise and self-controlled instead of foolish and reckless."

(6) "Who cannot draw a straight line, ethically speaking."

He said that justice, moreover, and all other virtue is wisdom. That is to say, things just, and all things else that are done with virtue, are "beautiful and good"; and neither will those who know these things deliberately choose aught else in their stead, nor will he who lacks the special knowledge of them be able to do them, but even if he makes the attempt he will miss the mark and fail. So the wise alone can perform the things which are "beautiful and good"; they that are unwise cannot, but even if they try they fail. Therefore, since all things just, and generally all things "beautiful and good," are wrought with virtue, it is clear that justice and all other virtue is wisdom.

He said that justice and all other virtues are forms of wisdom. In other words, things that are just and everything else done with virtue are "beautiful and good"; those who understand these concepts won’t intentionally choose anything else instead, and those who lack this specific knowledge won’t be able to execute them. Even if they try, they'll miss the mark and fail. Only the wise can perform what is "beautiful and good"; the unwise cannot, and even if they attempt it, they will fail. Therefore, since all just things, and generally everything "beautiful and good," are achieved through virtue, it's evident that justice and all other virtues are wisdom.

On the other hand, madness (he maintained) was the opposite to wisdom; not that he regarded simple ignorance as madness, (7) but he put it thus: for a man to be ignorant of himself, to imagine and suppose that he knows what he knows not, was (he argued), if not madness itself, yet something very like it. The mass of men no doubt hold a different language: if a man is all abroad on some matter of which the mass of mankind are ignorant, they do not pronounce him "mad"; (8) but a like aberration of mind, if only it be about matters within the scope of ordinary knowledge, they call madness. For instance, any one who imagined himself too tall to pass under a gateway of the Long Wall without stooping, or so strong as to try to lift a house, or to attempt any other obvious impossibility, is a madman according to them; but in the popular sense he is not mad, if his obliquity is confined to small matters. In fact, just as strong desire goes by the name of passion in popular parlance, so mental obliquity on a grand scale is entitled madness.

On the other hand, madness (he argued) was the opposite of wisdom; not that he thought simple ignorance was madness, but he put it this way: for a person to be ignorant of themselves, to believe they know what they don’t, was (he claimed), if not madness itself, something very close to it. Most people probably see things differently: if someone is completely confused about something the majority of people are unaware of, they don’t label him as "mad"; but if he has a similar mental lapse about things that are generally known, they call it madness. For example, anyone who thinks they are too tall to go under a gateway of the Long Wall without bending down, or strong enough to lift a house, or tries any other obvious impossibility, is considered a madman by them; but in the popular sense, he isn’t mad if his delusion is about minor things. In fact, just as intense desire is commonly called passion, so major mental lapses are labeled madness.

 (7) See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 346; Grote, "Plato," i. 400.

 (8) Or, "they resent the term 'mad' being applied to people who are
    all abroad," etc. See Comte, "Pos. Pol." i. 575; ii. 373 (Engl.
    trans.)
(7) See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 346; Grote, "Plato," i. 400.

(8) Or, "they dislike the term 'mad' being used for people who are completely lost," etc. See Comte, "Pos. Pol." i. 575; ii. 373 (Engl. trans.)

In answer to the question: what is envy? he discovered it to be a certain kind of pain; not certainly the sorrow felt at the misfortunes of a friend or the good fortune of an enemy—that is not envy; but, as he said, "envy is felt by those alone who are annoyed at the successes of their friends." And when some one or other expressed astonishment that any one friendlily disposed to another should be pained at his well-doing, he reminded him of a common tendency in people: when any one is faring ill their sympathies are touched, they rush to the aid of the unfortunate; but when fortune smiles on others, they are somehow pained. "I do not say," he added, "this could happen to a thoughtful person; but it is no uncommon condition of a silly mind." (9)

In response to the question: what is envy? he found it to be a specific kind of pain; not the sadness felt over a friend’s misfortunes or the good fortune of an enemy—that’s not envy; but, as he said, "envy is felt only by those who are bothered by their friends' successes." And when someone expressed disbelief that any friend would be upset by another’s success, he pointed out a common human tendency: when someone is doing poorly, people feel sympathy and rush to help the unfortunate; but when luck is on someone else's side, they somehow feel bothered. "I’m not saying," he added, "that this would happen to a thoughtful person; but it’s a pretty common trait of a foolish mind." (9)

 (9) Or, "a man in his senses... a simpleton"; for the sentiment L.
    Dind. cf. Isocr. "ad Demonic." 7 D.
(9) Or, "a man in his right mind... a fool"; for the sentiment L. Dind. cf. Isocr. "ad Demonic." 7 D.

In answer to the question: what is leisure? I discover (he said) that most men do something: (10) for instance, the dice player, (11) the gambler, the buffoon, do something, but these have leisure; they can, if they like, turn and do something better; but nobody has leisure to turn from the better to the worse, and if he does so turn, when he has no leisure, he does but ill in that.

In response to the question: what is leisure? I realize (he said) that most people do something: for example, the dice player, the gambler, the fool, are all doing something, but they have leisure; they can, if they want, turn and do something better. However, no one has the leisure to switch from the better to the worse, and if they do switch when they have no leisure, they end up doing it poorly.

 (10) See above, I. ii. 57; and in ref. to these definitions, K. Joel,
    op. cit. p. 347 foll.

 (11) For "dice-playing" see Becker, "Charicl." 354 (Engl. trans.); for
    "buffoonery," ib. 98; "Symp."
(10) See above, I. ii. 57; and regarding these definitions, K. Joel, op. cit. p. 347 foll.

(11) For "dice-playing" see Becker, "Charicl." 354 (Engl. trans.); for "buffoonery," ib. 98; "Symp."

(To pass to another definition.) They are not kings or rulers (he said) who hold the sceptre merely, or are chosen by fellows out of the street, (12) or are appointed by lot, or have stepped into office by violence or by fraud; but those who have the special knowledge (13) how to rule. Thus having won the admission that it is the function of a ruler to enjoin what ought to be done, and of those who are ruled to obey, he proceeded to point out by instances that in a ship the ruler or captain is the man of special knowledge, to whom, as an expert, the shipowner himself and all the others on board obey. So likewise, in the matter of husbandry, the proprietor of an estate; in that of sickness, the patient; in that of physical training of the body, the youthful athlete going through a course; and, in general, every one directly concerned in any matter needing attention and care will either attend to this matter personally, if he thinks he has the special knowledge; or, if he mistrusts his own science, will be eager to obey any expert on the spot, or will even send and fetch one from a distance. The guidance of this expert he will follow, and do what he has to do at his dictation.

(To pass to another definition.) They aren't kings or rulers (he said) just because they hold a scepter, are chosen by people from the street, (12) appointed by chance, or took power through force or deceit; instead, it's those who have the specialized knowledge (13) of how to rule. After acknowledging that a ruler's job is to command what should be done, and that the ruled should obey, he used examples to show that in a ship, the captain—who has the special knowledge—is the one everyone on board listens to, including the shipowner. Similarly, in farming, it's the owner of the estate; in health matters, it's the patient; in physical training, it's the young athlete in training; and in general, anyone involved in any issue requiring attention and care will either take charge themselves if they believe they have the expertise, or, if they doubt their own knowledge, will be eager to follow any available expert, or even fetch one from afar. They will heed this expert's guidance and do what is required per their instructions.

 (12) Tom, Dick, and Harry (as we say).

 (13) The {episteme}. See above, III. v. 21; Newman, op. cit. i. 256.
(12) Tom, Dick, and Harry (as we say).

(13) The {episteme}. See above, III. v. 21; Newman, op. cit. i. 256.

And thus, in the art of spinning wool, he liked to point out that women are the rulers of men—and why? because they have the knowledge of the art, and men have not.

And so, in the craft of spinning wool, he liked to emphasize that women hold power over men—and why? Because they possess the skill, and men do not.

And if any one raised the objection that a tyrant has it in his power not to obey good and correct advice, he would retort: "Pray, how has he the option not to obey, considering the penalty hanging over him who disobeys the words of wisdom? for whatever the matter be in which he disobeys the word of good advice, he will fall into error, I presume, and falling into error, be punished." And to the suggestion that the tyrant could, if he liked, cut off the head of the man of wisdom, his answer was: "Do you think that he who destroys his best ally will go scot free, or suffer a mere slight and passing loss? Is he more likely to secure his salvation that way, think you, or to compass his own swift destruction?" (14)

And if anyone argued that a tyrant can choose not to follow good and sound advice, he would reply: “How does he have the option not to obey, given the consequences facing those who disregard words of wisdom? Whatever the situation is in which he ignores good advice, he will likely make a mistake, and making a mistake will lead to punishment.” And in response to the idea that the tyrant could just kill the wise man if he wanted to, his answer was: “Do you really think that someone who eliminates their best ally will escape unharmed, or just face a minor and temporary loss? Do you think he’s more likely to ensure his own safety that way, or to bring about his own quick demise?” (14)

 (14) Or, "Is that to choose the path of safety, think you? Is it not
    rather to sign his own death-warrent?" L. Dind. cf. Hesiod, "Works
    and Days," 293. See Newman, op. cit. i. 393-397.
(14) Or, "Do you really think that's choosing the safe path? Isn't it more like signing his own death warrant?" L. Dind. cf. Hesiod, "Works and Days," 293. See Newman, op. cit. i. 393-397.

When some one asked him: "What he regarded as the best pursuit or business (15) for a man?" he answered: "Successful conduct"; (16) and to a second question: "Did he then regard good fortune as an end to be pursued?"—"On the contrary," he answered, "for myself, I consider fortune and conduct to be diametrically opposed. For instance, to succeed in some desirable course of action without seeking to do so, I hold to be good fortune; but to do a thing well by dint of learning and practice, that according to my creed is successful conduct, (17) and those who make this the serious business of their life seem to me to do well."

When someone asked him, "What do you think is the best pursuit or career for a person?" he replied, "Successful conduct." And to a follow-up question, "Do you then see good fortune as a goal to strive for?" he said, "On the contrary. I believe that fortune and conduct are completely opposite. For instance, succeeding in a desirable course of action without even trying is what I consider good fortune. But doing something well through learning and practice, that to me is successful conduct, and those who make this their main focus in life seem to be doing well."

 (15) Or, "the noblest study."

 (16) {eupraxia, eu prattein}—to do well, in the sense both of well or
    right doing, and of welfare, and is accordingly opposed to
    {eutukhia}, mere good luck or success. Cf. Plat. "Euthyd." 281 B.

 (17) Lit. "well-doing"; and for the Socratic view see Newman, op. cit.
    i. 305, 401.
(15) Or, "the greatest study."

(16) {eupraxia, eu prattein}—to do well, meaning both doing the right thing and contributing to well-being, which is therefore contrasted with {eutukhia}, just good luck or success. See Plat. "Euthyd." 281 B.

(17) Literally "well-doing"; for the Socratic perspective, see Newman, op. cit. i. 305, 401.

They are at once the best and the dearest in the sight of God (18) (he went on to say) who for instance in husbandry do well the things of farming, or in the art of healing all that belongs to healing, or in statecraft the affairs of state; whereas a man who does nothing well—nor well in anything—is (he added) neither good for anything nor dear to God.

They are both the best and most precious in God's eyes (18) (he continued) who, for example, excel in farming, or in the medical field, or in managing government affairs; while a person who does everything poorly—who is not good at anything—is (he added) useless and not valued by God.

 (18) Or, "most divinely favoured." Cf. Plat. "Euthyphro," 7 A.
(18) Or, "most divinely favored." Cf. Plat. "Euthyphro," 7 A.

X

X

But indeed, (1) if chance brought him into conversation with any one possessed of an art, and using it for daily purposes of business, he never failed to be useful to this kind of person. For instance, stepping one time into the studio of Parrhasius (2) the painter, and getting into conversation with him—

But really, (1) if luck had him talking to anyone skilled in a craft and using it for their everyday work, he always ended up being helpful to that person. For example, one time he walked into the studio of Parrhasius (2) the painter and started chatting with him—

 (1) {alla men kai}... "But indeed the sphere of his helpfulness was
    not circumscribed; if," etc.

 (2) For Parrhasius of Ephesus, the son of Evenor and rival of Zeuxis,
    see Woltmann and Woermann, "Hist. of Painting," p. 47 foll.;
    Cobet, "Pros. Xen." p. 50 (cf. in particular Quint. XII. x. 627).
    At the date of conversation (real or ideal) he may be supposed to
    have been a young man.
(1) {alla men kai}... "But really, he was always willing to help; if," etc.

(2) For Parrhasius of Ephesus, the son of Evenor and a competitor of Zeuxis, see Woltmann and Woermann, "Hist. of Painting," p. 47 and following; Cobet, "Pros. Xen." p. 50 (see especially Quint. XII. x. 627). At the time of the conversation (whether real or imagined), he was likely still a young man.

I suppose, Parrhasius (said he), painting may be defined as "a representation of visible objects," may it not? (3) That is to say, by means of colours and palette you painters represent and reproduce as closely as possible the ups and downs, lights and shadows, hard and soft, rough and smooth surfaces, the freshness of youth and the wrinkles of age, do you not?

I guess, Parrhasius (he said), painting can be defined as "a representation of visible objects," right? (3) In other words, with colors and your palette, you artists try to represent and recreate as closely as possible the highs and lows, light and dark, hard and soft, rough and smooth surfaces, the freshness of youth and the wrinkles of age, don’t you?

 (3) Reading with Schneider, L. Dind., etc., after Stobaeus, {e
    graphike estin eikasia}, or if the vulg. {graphike estin e
    eikasia}, trans. "Painting is the term applied to a particular
    representation," etc.
(3) Reading with Schneider, L. Dind., etc., after Stobaeus, {e graphike estin eikasia}, or if the vulg. {graphike estin e eikasia}, trans. "Painting is the term applied to a particular representation," etc.

You are right (he answered), that is so.

You’re right (he replied), that’s true.

Soc. Further, in portraying ideal types of beauty, seeing it is not easy to light upon any one human being who is absolutely devoid of blemish, you cull from many models the most beautiful traits of each, and so make your figures appear completely beautiful? (4)

Soc. Furthermore, when depicting ideal examples of beauty, since it's difficult to find any one person who is completely without flaws, do you select the most beautiful features from various models to create figures that seem entirely beautiful? (4)

 (4) Cf. Cic. "de Invent." ii. 1 ad in. of Zeuxis; Max. Tur. "Dissert."
    23, 3, ap. Schneider ad loc.
(4) Cf. Cic. "de Invent." ii. 1 ad in. of Zeuxis; Max. Tur. "Dissert." 23, 3, ap. Schneider ad loc.

Parrh. Yes, that is how we do. (5)

Parrh. Yeah, that's how it is. (5)

 (5) Or, "that is the secret of our creations," or "our art of
    composition."
(5) Or, "that's the secret of our creations," or "our way of composing."

Well, but stop (Socrates continued); do you also pretend to represent in similar perfection the characteristic moods of the soul, its captivating charm and sweetness, with its deep wells of love, its intensity of yearning, its burning point of passion? or is all this quite incapable of being depicted?

Well, hold on (Socrates continued); do you also claim to perfectly capture the unique moods of the soul, its enchanting charm and sweetness, with its deep wells of love, its intense longing, its burning passion? Or is all of this impossible to portray?

Nay (he answered), how should a mood be other than inimitable, Socrates, when it possesses neither linear proportion (6) nor colour, nor any of those qualities which you named just now; when, in a word, it is not even visible?

No way (he answered), how could a mood be anything but unique, Socrates, when it has neither shape (6) nor color, nor any of those qualities you just mentioned; when, in short, it isn’t even visible?

 (6) Lit. "symmetry." Cf. Plin. xxxv. 10, "primus symmetriam picturae
    dedit," etc.
(6) Lit. "symmetry." Cf. Plin. xxxv. 10, "the first to give symmetry to painting," etc.

Soc. Well, but the kindly look of love, the angry glance of hate at any one, do find expression in the human subject, do they not? (7)

Soc. Well, the warm look of love and the harsh glare of hate definitely show up in people, right? (7)

 (7) Or, "the glance of love, the scowl of hate, which one directs
    towards another, are recognised expressions of human feeling." Cf.
    the description of Parrhasius's own portrait of Demos, ap. Plin.
    loc. cit.
(7) Or, "the look of love, the frown of hate, which one person directs towards another, are recognized expressions of human emotion." See the description of Parrhasius's own portrait of Demos, apud Plin. loc. cit.

Parrh. No doubt they do.

Parrh. No doubt they do.

Soc. Then this look, this glance, at any rate may be imitated in the eyes, may it not?

Soc. So this look, this glance, can at least be mimicked in the eyes, right?

Undoubtedly (he answered).

For sure (he answered).

Soc. And do anxiety and relief of mind occasioned by the good or evil fortune of those we love both wear the same expression?

Soc. Do anxiety and relief caused by the good or bad fortune of those we love show the same expression?

By no means (he answered); at the thought of good we are radiant, at that of evil a cloud hangs on the brow.

"Not at all," he replied; when we think of good, we feel joyful, but when we dwell on evil, a shadow clouds our minds.

Soc. Then here again are looks with it is possible to represent?

Soc. So, what looks can we use to represent it?

Parrh. Decidedly.

Parrhesiastic. Definitely.

Soc. Furthermore, as through some chink or crevice, there pierces through the countenance of a man, through the very posture of his body as he stands or moves, a glimpse of his nobility and freedom, or again of something in him low and grovelling—the calm of self-restraint, and wisdom, or the swagger of insolence and vulgarity?

Soc. Moreover, just like light coming through a crack or gap, a person’s face, the way he stands or moves, shows a hint of his nobility and freedom, or perhaps something base and servile— the serenity of self-control and wisdom, or the arrogance of rudeness and crudeness?

You are right (he answered).

You're right (he replied).

Soc. Then these too may be imitated?

Soc. So, can these also be imitated?

No doubt (he said).

No doubt.

Soc. And which is the pleasanter type of face to look at, do you think—one on which is imprinted the characteristics of a beautiful, good, and lovable disposition, or one which bears the impress of what is ugly, and bad, and hateful? (8)

Soc. Which type of face do you think is more pleasant to look at—one that shows the traits of a beautiful, kind, and lovable personality, or one that reflects what is ugly, bad, and hateful? (8)

 (8) For this theory cp. Ruskin, "Mod. P." ii. 94 foll. and indeed
    passim.
(8) For this theory see Ruskin, "Mod. P." ii. 94 and indeed throughout.

Parrh. Doubtless, Socrates, there is a vast distinction between the two.

Parrh. No doubt about it, Socrates, there is a huge difference between the two.

At another time he entered the workshop of the sculptor Cleiton, (9) and in course of conversation with him said:

At another time, he walked into the workshop of the sculptor Cleiton, (9) and during their conversation, he said:

 (9) An unknown artist. Coraes conj. {Kleona}. Cf. Plin. xxxiv. 19;
    Paus. v. 17, vi. 3. He excelled in portrait statues. See Jowett,
    "Plato," iv.; "Laws," p. 123.
(9) An unknown artist. Coraes conj. {Kleona}. Cf. Plin. xxxiv. 19;  
    Paus. v. 17, vi. 3. He was great at portrait sculptures. See Jowett,  
    "Plato," iv.; "Laws," p. 123.

You have a gallery of handsome people here, (10) Cleiton, runners, and wrestlers, and boxers, and pancratiasts—that I see and know; but how do you give the magic touch of life to your creations, which most of all allures the soul of the beholder through his sense of vision?

You have a collection of attractive people here, (10) Cleiton, runners, wrestlers, boxers, and mixed martial artists—that I recognize; but how do you bring your creations to life in a way that captivates the viewer's soul through their sense of sight?

 (10) Reading after L. Dind. {kaloi ous}, or if vulg. {alloious},
    translate "You have a variety of types, Cleiton, not all of one
    mould, but runners," etc.; al. "I see quite well how you give the
    diversity of form to your runners," etc.
(10) Reading after L. Dind. {kaloi ous}, or if vulg. {alloious}, translate "You have a variety of types, Cleiton, not all of one mold, but runners," etc.; al. "I see quite well how you give the diversity of form to your runners," etc.

As Cleiton stood perplexed, and did not answer at once, Socrates added: Is it by closely imitating the forms of living beings that you succeed in giving that touch of life to your statues?

As Cleiton stood confused and didn’t answer right away, Socrates added: Is it by closely imitating the forms of living beings that you manage to give that sense of life to your statues?

No doubt (he answered).

Definitely (he answered).

Soc. It is, is it not, by faithfully copying the various muscular contractions of the body in obedience to the play of gesture and poise, the wrinklings of flesh and the sprawl of limbs, the tensions and the relaxations, that you succeed in making your statues like real beings—make them "breathe" as people say?

Soc. Isn’t it true that by accurately replicating the different muscle contractions of the body in response to gestures and posture, the creases in the skin, the way limbs are arranged, the tensions and relaxations, you manage to make your statues look like real beings—making them “breathe,” as people say?

Cleit. Without a doubt.

Definitely.

Soc. And does not the faithful imitation of the various affections of the body when engaged in any action impart a particular pleasure to the beholder?

Soc. And doesn’t the faithful imitation of the different emotions of the body during any action bring a special pleasure to the viewer?

Cleit. I should say so.

Cool. I should think so.

Soc. Then the threatenings in the eyes of warriors engaged in battle should be carefully copied, or again you should imitate the aspect of a conqueror radiant with success?

Soc. So, should we closely observe the fierce looks of warriors in battle, or should we instead try to capture the proud look of a victorious conqueror?

Cleit. Above all things.

Cleit. Above all else.

Soc. It would seem then that the sculptor is called upon to incorporate in his ideal form the workings and energies also of the soul?

Soc. So, it looks like the sculptor needs to include in his ideal form the functions and energies of the soul as well?

Paying a visit to Pistias, (11) the corselet maker, when that artist showed him some exquisite samples of his work, Socrates exclaimed:

Paying a visit to Pistias, (11) the armor maker, when that artist showed him some beautiful samples of his work, Socrates exclaimed:

 (11) Cf. Athen. iv. 20, where the same artist is referred to
    apparently as {Piston}, and for the type of person see the
    "Portrait of a Tailor" by Moroni in the National Gallery—see
    "Handbook," Edw. T. Cook, p. 152.
(11) Cf. Athen. iv. 20, where the same artist is referred to apparently as {Piston}, and for the type of person see the "Portrait of a Tailor" by Moroni in the National Gallery—see "Handbook," Edw. T. Cook, p. 152.

By Hera! a pretty invention this, Pistias, by which you contrive that the corselet should cover the parts of the person which need protection, and at the same time leave free play to the arms and hands.... but tell me, Pistias (he added), why do you ask a higher price for these corselets of yours if they are not stouter or made of costlier material than the others?

By Hera! this is a clever invention, Pistias, where you’ve designed the corselet to protect the important parts of the body while still allowing freedom of movement for the arms and hands.... but tell me, Pistias (he added), why do you charge more for these corselets of yours if they aren’t sturdier or made from more expensive materials than the others?

Because, Socrates (he answered), mine are of much finer proportion.

Because, Socrates (he replied), mine are much better proportioned.

Soc. Proportion! Then how do you make this quality apparent to the customer so as to justify the higher price—by measure or weight? For I presume you cannot make them all exactly equal and of one pattern—if you make them fit, as of course you do?

Soc. Proportion! So how do you show this quality to the customer to justify the higher price—by measurement or weight? Because I assume you can't make them all exactly equal and one uniform design—if you make them fit, as you certainly do?

Fit indeed! that I most distinctly do (he answered), take my word for it: no use in a corselet without that.

Fit indeed! I definitely do (he answered), believe me: there's no point in a corselet without that.

But then are not the wearer's bodies themselves (asked Socrates) some well proportioned and others ill?

But then are not the wearers' bodies themselves (Socrates asked) some well-proportioned and others not?

Decidedly so (he answered).

Definitely so (he answered).

Soc. Then how do you manage to make the corselet well proportioned if it is to fit an ill-proportioned body? (12)

Soc. So how do you manage to make the corset fit well if it's going on an uneven body? (12)

 (12) Or, "how do you make a well-proportioned corselet fit an ill-
      proportioned body? how well proportioned?"
(12) Or, "how do you make a well-fitting corselet for a body that’s not well-proportioned? how well proportioned?"

Pist. To the same degree exactly as I make it fit. What fits is well proportioned.

Pist. Just as much as I make it work. What fits is well proportioned.

Soc. It seems you use the term "well-proportioned" not in an absolute sense, but in reference to the wearer, just as you might describe a shield as well proportioned to the individual it suits; and so of a military cloak, and so of the rest of things, in your terminology? But maybe there is another considerable advantage in this "fitting"?

Soc. It looks like you use the term "well-proportioned" not in an absolute way, but in relation to the person wearing it, similar to how you would describe a shield as well proportioned for the individual it fits; the same goes for a military cloak and other things in your terminology? But perhaps there’s another significant benefit to this "fitting"?

Pist. Pray instruct me, Socrates, if you have got an idea.

Pist. Please tell me, Socrates, if you have any thoughts on this.

Soc. A corselet which fits is less galling by its weight than one which does not fit, for the latter must either drag from the shoulders with a dead weight or press upon some other part of the body, and so it becomes troublesome and uncomfortable; but that which fits, having its weight distributed partly along the collar-bone and shoulder-blade, partly over the shoulders and chest, and partly the back and belly, feels like another natural integument rather than an extra load to carry. (13)

Soc. A properly fitting armor is less burdensome than one that doesn’t fit, because the ill-fitting one either hangs heavily from the shoulders or presses uncomfortably on other parts of the body, making it annoying and uncomfortable. In contrast, a well-fitting piece distributes its weight along the collarbone and shoulder blade, over the shoulders and chest, and across the back and belly, feeling more like a natural layer than an extra burden to bear. (13)

 (13) Schneider ad loc. cf Eur. "Electr." 192, {prosthemata aglaias},
    and for the weight cf. Aristoph. "Peace," 1224.
(13) Schneider ad loc. cf Eur. "Electr." 192, {prosthemata aglaias}, and for the weight cf. Aristoph. "Peace," 1224.

Pist. You have named the very quality which gives my work its exceptional value, as I consider; still there are customers, I am bound to say, who look for something else in a corselet—they must have them ornamental or inlaid with gold.

Pist. You've pointed out the exact quality that makes my work so valuable, in my opinion; however, I must admit that there are customers who seek something different in a corset—they want them to be decorative or embedded with gold.

For all that (replied Socrates), if they end by purchasing an ill-fitting article, they only become the proprietors of a curiously-wrought and gilded nuisance, as it seems to me. But (he added), as the body is never in one fixed position, but is at one time curved, at another raised erect how can an exactly-modelled corselet fit?

For all that, Socrates replied, if they end up buying something that doesn’t fit well, they just become owners of a beautifully crafted and decorated annoyance, as I see it. But, he added, since the body is never in one fixed position—sometimes it’s curved and other times it’s upright—how can a perfectly shaped corset ever fit?

Pist. It cannot fit at all.

Pist. It just won't fit at all.

You mean (Socrates continued) that it is not the exactly-modelled corselet which fits, but that which does not gall the wearer in the using?

You mean (Socrates continued) that it’s not the perfectly crafted corselet that fits, but the one that doesn’t chafe the wearer while being used?

Pist. There, Socrates, you have hit the very point. I see you understand the matter most precisely. (14)

Pist. There you go, Socrates, you've nailed it. I see that you truly grasp the situation. (14)

 (14) Or, "There, Socrates, you have hit the very phrase. I could not
    state the matter more explicitly myself."
(14) Or, "There, Socrates, you’ve nailed it. I couldn’t explain it more clearly myself."

XI

XI

There was once in the city a fair woman named Theodote. (1) She was not only fair, but ready to consort with any suitor who might win her favour. Now it chanced that some one of the company mentioned her, saying that her beauty beggared description. "So fair is she," he added, "that painters flock to draw her portrait, to whom, within the limits of decorum, she displays the marvels of her beauty." "Then there is nothing for it but to go and see her," answered Socrates, "since to comprehend by hearsay what is beyond description is clearly impossible." Then he who had introduced the matter replied: "Be quick then to follow me"; and on this wise they set off to seek Theodote. They found her "posing" to a certain painter; and they took their stand as spectators. Presently the painter had ceased his work; whereupon Socrates:

There was once in the city a beautiful woman named Theodote. (1) She was not only stunning but also open to flirting with any suitor who might catch her attention. Now it happened that someone in the group mentioned her, saying her beauty was beyond words. "She is so beautiful," he added, "that artists come to paint her portrait, and she shows them the wonders of her beauty, within the bounds of modesty." "Then we have to go see her," Socrates replied, "since it's clearly impossible to understand something that is beyond description just by hearing about it." The person who had brought it up then said, "Quick, follow me"; and with that, they set off to find Theodote. They found her "posing" for a painter, and they stood by as spectators. Soon, the painter stopped his work; then Socrates said:

 (1) For Theodote see Athen. v. 200 F, xiii. 574 F; Liban. i. 582. Some
    say that it was Theodote who stood by Alcibiades to the last,
    though there are apparently other better claimants to the honour.
    Plut. "Alc." (Clough, ii. p. 50).
(1) For Theodote, see Athen. v. 200 F, xiii. 574 F; Liban. i. 582. Some say that Theodote was the one who stayed by Alcibiades until the end, although there seem to be other stronger candidates for that honor. Plut. "Alc." (Clough, ii. p. 50).

"Do you think, sirs, that we ought to thank Theodote for displaying her beauty to us, or she us for coming to gaze at her?... It would seem, would it not, that if the exhibition of her charms is the more profitable to her, the debt is on her side; but if the spectacle of her beauty confers the greater benefit on us, then we are her debtors."

"Do you think, gentlemen, that we should thank Theodote for showing us her beauty, or should she thank us for coming to admire her? It seems that if her displaying her charms is more beneficial for her, then she owes us; but if her beauty is more beneficial for us, then we owe her."

Some one answered that "was an equitable statement of the case."

Someone replied that "that was a fair statement of the situation."

Well then (he continued), as far as she is concerned, the praise we bestow on her is an immediate gain; and presently, when we have spread her fame abroad, she will be further benefited; but for ourselves the immediate effect on us is a strong desire to touch what we have seen; by and by, too, we shall go away with a sting inside us, and when we are fairly gone we shall be consumed with longing. Consequently it seems that we should do her service and she accept our court.

Well then (he continued), as far as she's concerned, the compliments we give her are a quick win; and soon, once we've spread her reputation, she'll benefit even more. But for us, the immediate effect is a strong urge to experience what we've seen; later on, we'll leave with a sense of emptiness, and when we're really gone, we'll be filled with longing. So, it looks like we should serve her and she should accept our attention.

Whereupon Theodote: Oh dear! if that is how the matter stands, it is I who am your debtor for the spectacle. (2)

Whereupon Theodote said: Oh no! If that's how things are, then I'm the one who owes you for the show. (2)

 (2) In reference to the remark of Socrates above; or, "have to thank
    you for coming to look at me."
(2) About Socrates' comment earlier; or, "I appreciate you coming to see me."

At this point, seeing that the lady herself was expensively attired, and that she had with her her mother also, whose dress and style of attendance (3) were out of the common, not to speak of the waiting-women—many and fair to look upon, who presented anything but a forlorn appearance; while in every respect the whole house itself was sumptuously furnished—Socrates put a question:

At this point, noticing that the lady was dressed in expensive clothing and that her mother was also with her, who was dressed and attended in an unusual manner—not to mention the many beautiful maids who looked anything but miserable; and considering that the entire house was lavishly furnished—Socrates asked a question:

 (3) Or, "her mother there with her in a dress and general get-up
    ({therapeia}) which was out of the common." See Becker,
    "Charicles," p. 247 (Eng. tr.)
(3) Or, "her mother there with her in a dress and overall look 
    ({therapeia}) that was unusual." See Becker, 
    "Charicles," p. 247 (Eng. tr.)

Pray tell me, Theodote, have you an estate in the country?

Pray tell me, Theodote, do you have a place in the countryside?

Theod. Not I indeed.

Not me, indeed.

Soc. Then perhaps you possess a house and large revenues along with it?

Soc. So, do you have a house and a good amount of money to go with it?

Theod. No, nor yet a house.

Theod. No, not even a house.

Soc. You are not an employer of labour on a large scale? (4)

Soc. You're not a large-scale employer, right? (4)

 (4) Lit. "You have not (in your employ) a body of handicraftsmen of
    any sort?"
(4) Lit. "You don't have any kind of craftsmen working for you?"

Theod. No, nor yet an employer of labour.

Theod. No, nor an employer of labor either.

Soc. From what source, then, do you get your means of subsistence? (5)

Soc. So, where do you get your living from? (5)

 (5) Or, Anglice, "derive your income."
(5) Or, in English, "derive your income."

Theod. My friends are my life and fortune, when they care to be kind to me.

Theod. My friends are my life and luck, as long as they choose to be nice to me.

Soc. By heaven, Theodote, a very fine property indeed, and far better worth possessing than a multitude of sheep or goats or cattle. A flock of friends!... But (he added) do you leave it to fortune whether a friend lights like a fly on your hand at random, or do you use any artifice (6) yourself to attract him?

Soc. Honestly, Theodote, that's a really valuable asset, way more worth having than a bunch of sheep or goats or cattle. A group of friends!... But (he added) do you just leave it to chance whether a friend randomly lands on your hand like a fly, or do you use any skills yourself to draw him in?

 (6) Or, "means and appliances," "machinery."
(6) Or, "tools and equipment," "machines."

Theod. And how might I hit upon any artifice to attract him?

Theod. And how can I come up with a strategy to get his attention?

Soc. Bless me! far more naturally than any spider. You know how they capture the creatures on which they live; (7) by weaving webs of gossamer, is it not? and woe betide the fly that tumbles into their toils! They eat him up.

Soc. Wow! Much more naturally than any spider. You know how they catch the creatures they feed on; (7) by spinning webs of fine silk, right? And poor fly that gets caught in their trap! They eat it up.

 (7) Lit. "the creatures on which they live."
(7) Lit. "the creatures they depend on."

Theod. So then you would counsel me to weave myself some sort of net?

Theod. So you're suggesting I should make myself some kind of net?

Soc. Why, surely you do not suppose you are going to ensnare that noblest of all game—a lover, to wit—in so artless a fashion? Do you not see (to speak of a much less noble sort of game) what a number of devices are needed to bag a hare? (8) The creatures range for their food at night; therefore the hunter must provide himself with night dogs. At peep of dawn they are off as fast as they can run. He must therefore have another pack of dogs to scent out and discover which way they betake them from their grazing ground to their forms; (9) and as they are so fleet of foot that they run and are out of sight in no time, he must once again be provided with other fleet-footed dogs to follow their tracks and overtake them; (10) and as some of them will give even these the slip, he must, last of all, set up nets on the paths at the points of escape, so that they may fall into the meshes and be caught.

Soc. Well, do you really think you can trap the noblest of all creatures—a lover, of course—so simply? Can't you see (to talk about a much less impressive type of catch) how many tricks it takes to catch a hare? (8) These animals look for food at night, so the hunter needs to have night-hunting dogs. At dawn, they’re off as fast as they can go. He therefore needs another pack of dogs to sniff out which direction they go from their feeding area to their resting spots; (9) and since they’re so quick that they vanish in no time, he must have yet another set of fast dogs to follow their trails and catch up to them; (10) and because some of them will even escape these, he must finally set up nets along the escape routes, so they get caught in the traps.

 (8) See the author's own treatise on "Hunting," vi. 6 foll.

 (9) Lit. "from pasture to bed."

 (10) Or, "close at their heels and run them down." See "Hunting"; cf.
    "Cyrop." I. vi. 40.
(8) Check out the author's own writing on "Hunting," vi. 6 and following.

(9) Literally, "from pasture to bed."

(10) Or, "right behind them and chase them down." See "Hunting"; cf. "Cyrop." I. vi. 40.

Theod. And by what like contrivance would you have me catch my lovers?

Theod. And how would you suggest I trap my lovers?

Soc. Well now! what if in place of a dog you can get a man who will hunt up your wealthy lover of beauty and discover his lair, and having found him, will plot and plan to throw him into your meshes?

Soc. Well now! what if instead of a dog you could get a guy who will track down your rich lover of beauty, find out where he hangs out, and once he locates him, will scheme to trap him for you?

Theod. Nay, what sort of meshes have I?

Theod. No way, what kind of traps do I have?

Soc. One you have, and a close-folding net it is, (11) I trow; to wit, your own person; and inside it sits a soul that teaches you (12) with what looks to please and with what words to cheer; how, too, with smiles you are to welcome true devotion, but to exclude all wantons from your presence. (13) It tells you, you are to visit your beloved in sickness with solicitude, and when he has wrought some noble deed you are greatly to rejoice with him; and to one who passionately cares for you, you are to make surrender of yourself with heart and soul. The secret of true love I am sure you know: not to love softly merely, but devotedly. (14) And of this too I am sure: you can convince your lovers of your fondness for them not by lip phrases, but by acts of love.

Soc. Once you have it, it's like a close-knit net, I believe; to be specific, your own self; and inside it sits a soul that teaches you what looks pleasing and what words to use to uplift; how, too, to welcome true devotion with smiles, but to keep all inappropriate people away from you. It tells you to care for your beloved when they're sick and to celebrate with them when they achieve something great; and to someone who loves you passionately, you should give yourself fully, heart and soul. I'm sure you understand the secret of true love: it's not just about loving lightly, but about being truly devoted. And I am also certain of this: you can show your lovers your affection not just through sweet words but through acts of love.

 (11) Or, "right well woven."

 (12) Lit. "by which you understand."

 (13) Or, "with what smiles to lie in wait for (cf. 'Cyrop.' II. iv.
    20; Herod. vi. 104) the devoted admirer, and how to banish from
    your presence the voluptary."

 (14) Or, "that it should be simply soft, but full of tender goodwill."
(11) Or, "well-crafted."

(12) Lit. "by which you understand."

(13) Or, "with what smiles to entice (cf. 'Cyrop.' II. iv. 20; Herod. vi. 104) the devoted admirer, and how to get rid of the pleasure-seeker."

(14) Or, "that it should be just gentle, but full of warm kindness."

Theod. No, upon my word, I have none of these devices.

Theod. No, I honestly don't have any of those tricks.

Soc. And yet it makes all the difference whether you approach a human being in the natural and true way, since it is not by force certainly that you can either catch or keep a friend. Kindness and pleasure are the only means to capture this fearful wild-fowl man and keep him constant.

Soc. And yet it really matters how you approach another person, because you definitely can't force someone to be your friend or keep them around. Kindness and enjoyment are the only ways to win over this elusive creature called man and keep him loyal.

Theod. You are right.

Theod. You're right.

Soc. In the first place you must make such demands only of your well-wisher as he can grant without repentance; and in the next place you must make requital, dispensing your favours with a like economy. Thus you will best make friends whose love shall last the longest and their generosity know no stint. (15) And for your favours you will best win your friends if you suit your largess to their penury; for, mark you, the sweetest viands presented to a man before he wants them are apt to prove insipid, or, to one already sated, even nauseous; but create hunger, and even coarser stuff seems honey-sweet.

Soc. First, you should only ask your true friends for things they can give without feeling regret. Second, you need to return the favor, sharing what you have in a balanced way. This approach will help you build friendships that last and generosity that is abundant. (15) You’ll gain your friends’ loyalty best if you cater your generosity to their needs; remember, the most delicious food offered to someone before they're hungry can taste bland, and to someone who’s already full, it can even be off-putting. But if you create a sense of hunger, even the simplest food can taste incredibly sweet.

 (15) Or, "This is the right road to friendship—permanent and open-
    handed friendship."
(15) Or, "This is the best way to build friendship—lasting and generous friendship."

Theod. How then shall I create this hunger in the heart of my friends?

Theod. So how can I spark this desire in my friends' hearts?

Soc. In the first place you must not offer or make suggestion of your dainties to jaded appetites until satiety has ceased and starvation cries for alms. Even then shall you make but a faint suggestion to their want, with modest converse—like one who would fain bestow a kindness... and lo! the vision fades and she is gone—until the very pinch of hunger; for the same gifts have then a value unknown before the moment of supreme desire.

Soc. First of all, you shouldn’t offer or suggest your treats to people who are overindulged until their cravings have disappeared and they feel truly hungry again. Even then, you should only hint at what they might want, with a humble conversation—like someone who genuinely wants to do a good deed... and then, poof! It’s gone—until the moment they feel real hunger; because those same gifts hold a value that they didn’t have before that peak desire.

Then Theodote: Oh why, Socrates, why are you not by my side (like the huntsman's assistant) to help me catch my friends and lovers?

Then Theodote: Oh why, Socrates, why aren't you here with me (like the huntsman's assistant) to help me catch my friends and lovers?

Soc. That will I be in good sooth if only you can woo and win me.

Soc. I will be for sure if only you can attract and win me over.

Theod. How shall I woo and win you?

Theod. How can I charm and win you over?

Soc. Seek and you will find means, if you truly need me.

Soc. If you seek, you will find, which means if you really need me.

Theod. Come then in hither and visit me often.

Theod. Come in here and visit me often.

And Socrates, poking sly fun at his own lack of business occupation, answered: Nay, Theodote, leisure is not a commodity in which I largely deal. I have a hundred affairs of my own too, private or public, to occupy me; and then there are my lady-loves, my dear friends, who will not suffer me day or night to leave them, for ever studying to learn love-charms and incantations at my lips.

And Socrates, playfully teasing about his own lack of a business job, replied: No, Theodote, I don’t handle leisure much. I have my own hundred matters, both personal and public, to keep me busy; plus, there are my lady friends, my dear companions, who won’t let me leave them day or night, always eager to learn love spells and incantations from me.

Theod. Why, are you really versed in those things, Socrates?

Theod. Are you seriously knowledgeable about those things, Socrates?

Soc. Of course, or else how is it, do you suppose, that Apollodorus (16) here and Antisthenes never leave me; or why have Cebes and Simmias come all the way from Thebes to stay with me? Be assured these things cannot happen without diverse love-charms and incantations and magic wheels.

Soc. Of course, how else do you think it is that Apollodorus (16) here and Antisthenes never leave me? Or why have Cebes and Simmias traveled all the way from Thebes to be with me? You can be sure that these things don’t happen without various love spells, incantations, and magical wheels.

 (16) For Apollodorus see "Apol." 28; Plat. "Symp." 172 A; "Phaed." 59
    A, 117 D. For Antisthenes see above. For Cebes and Simmias see
    above, I. ii. 48; Plat. "Crit." 45 B; "Phaed." passim.
(16) For Apollodorus, see "Apol." 28; Plat. "Symp." 172 A; "Phaed." 59 A, 117 D. For Antisthenes, see above. For Cebes and Simmias, see above, I. ii. 48; Plat. "Crit." 45 B; "Phaed." passim.

Theod. I wish you would lend me your magic-wheel, (17) then, and I will set it spinning first of all for you.

Theod. I wish you would let me borrow your magic wheel, (17) so I can start spinning it just for you.

 (17) Cf. Theocr. ii. 17; Schneider ad loc.
(17) Cf. Theocr. ii. 17; Schneider ad loc.

Soc. Ah! but I do not wish to be drawn to you. I wish you to come to me.

Soc. Ah! but I don’t want to be pulled towards you. I want you to come to me.

Theod. Then I will come. Only, will you be "at home" to me?

Theod. Then I'll come. Just let me know if you'll be "available" for me.

Soc. Yes, I will welcome you, unless some one still dearer holds me engaged, and I must needs be "not at home."

Soc. Yes, I’ll welcome you, unless someone I care about even more keeps me busy, and I have to say I’m "not at home."

XII

XII

Seeing one of those who were with him, a young man, but feeble of body, named Epigenes, (1) he addressed him.

Seeing one of his companions, a young man named Epigenes, who was frail, he spoke to him.

 (1) Epigenes, possibly the son of Antiphon. See Plat. "Apol." 33 E;
    "Phaed." 59 B.
(1) Epigenes, maybe the son of Antiphon. See Plat. "Apol." 33 E; "Phaed." 59 B.

Soc. You have not the athletic appearance of a youth in training, (2) Epigenes.

Soc. You don't look like a young athlete in training. (2) Epigenes.

 (2) {idiotikos}, lit. of the person untrained in gymnastics. See A. R.
    Cluer ad loc. Cf. Plat. "Laws," 839 E; I. ii. 4; III. v. 15;
    "Symp." ii. 17.
(2) {idiotikos}, literally someone who is untrained in gymnastics. See A. R. Cluer ad loc. Cf. Plat. "Laws," 839 E; I. ii. 4; III. v. 15; "Symp." ii. 17.

And he: That may well be, seeing I am an amateur and not in training.

And he: That could be true, since I'm just an amateur and not in training.

Soc. As little of an amateur, I take it, as any one who ever entered the lists of Olympia, unless you are prepared to make light of that contest for life and death against the public foe which the Athenians will institute when the day comes. (3) And yet they are not a few who, owing to a bad habit of body, either perish outright in the perils of war, or are ignobly saved. Many are they who for the self-same cause are taken prisoners, and being taken must, if it so betide, endure the pains of slavery for the rest of their days; or, after falling into dolorous straits, (4) when they have paid to the uttermost farthing of all, or may be more than the worth of all, that they possess, must drag on a miserable existence in want of the barest necessaries until death release them. Many also are they who gain an evil repute through infirmity of body, being thought to play the coward. Can it be that you despise these penalties affixed to an evil habit? Do you think you could lightly endure them? Far lighter, I imagine, nay, pleasant even by comparison, are the toils which he will undergo who duly cultivates a healthy bodily condition. Or do you maintain that the evil habit is healthier, and in general more useful than the good? Do you pour contempt upon those blessings which flow from the healthy state? And yet the very opposite of that which befalls the ill attends the sound condition. Does not the very soundness imply at once health and strength? (5) Many a man with no other talisman than this has passed safely through the ordeal of war; stepping, not without dignity, (6) through all its horrors unscathed. Many with no other support than this have come to the rescue of friends, or stood forth as benefactors of their fatherland; whereby they were thought worthy of gratitude, and obtained a great renown and received as a recompense the highest honours of the State; to whom is also reserved a happier and brighter passage through what is left to them of life, and at their death they leave to their children the legacy of a fairer starting-point in the race of life.

Soc. I'm not much of an amateur, I take it, compared to anyone who ever participated in the Olympic Games, unless you’re ready to dismiss that life-or-death struggle against the enemy that the Athenians will face when the time comes. (3) Yet, there are quite a few who, due to poor health, either die outright in the dangers of war or are saved in a dishonorable way. Many of them, for the same reason, end up as prisoners, and if that happens, they have to endure the pain of slavery for the rest of their lives; or, after falling into dire circumstances, (4) when they’ve paid every last penny or maybe even more than everything they own, they must drag on a miserable existence, lacking even the basic necessities until death frees them. Many also gain a bad reputation because of their frail bodies, seen as cowards. Do you really look down on these consequences of poor health? Do you think you could handle them easily? I imagine the struggles that come from maintaining a healthy body are far lighter, even pleasant by comparison. Or do you believe that bad habits are healthier and generally more beneficial than good ones? Do you scorn the blessings that come from being healthy? Yet the opposite of what happens to the unhealthy is true for the healthy. Doesn’t being healthy mean having both health and strength? (5) Many a man has safely faced the trials of war with nothing but this one asset; stepping through all its horrors with dignity, (6) unscathed. Many, relying solely on this, have rescued friends or emerged as heroes for their country, earning gratitude, great renown, and receiving the highest honors from the State; they also secure a happier and brighter life for whatever is left of their years, leaving their children a better starting point in the race of life when they pass away.

 (3) Or, "should chance betide." Is the author thinking of a life-and-
    death struggle with Thebes?

 (4) e.g. the prisoners in the Latomiae. Thuc. vii. 87.

 (5) It is almost a proverb—"Sound of body and limb is hale and
    strong." "Qui valet praevalebit."

 (6) e.g. Socrates himself, according to Alcibiades, ap. Plat. "Symp."
    221 B; and for the word {euskhemonos} see Arist. "Wasps," 1210,
    "like a gentleman"; L. and S.; "Cyr." I. iii. 8; Aristot. "Eth.
    N." i. 10, 13, "gracefully."
(3) Or, "if something happens." Is the author considering a fight for survival against Thebes? 

(4) For example, the prisoners in the Latomiae. Thuc. vii. 87. 

(5) It's almost a saying—"A healthy body and limbs are strong." "Whoever is strong will prevail." 

(6) For instance, Socrates himself, according to Alcibiades, ap. Plat. "Symp." 221 B; and for the word {euskhemonos}, see Arist. "Wasps," 1210, "like a gentleman"; L. and S.; "Cyr." I. iii. 8; Aristot. "Eth. N." i. 10, 13, "gracefully."

Because our city does not practise military training in public, (7) that is no reason for neglecting it in private, but rather a reason for making it a foremost care. For be you assured that there is no contest of any sort, nor any transaction, in which you will be the worse off for being well prepared in body; and in fact there is nothing which men do for which the body is not a help. In every demand, therefore, which can be laid upon the body it is much better that it should be in the best condition; since, even where you might imagine the claims upon the body to be slightest—in the act of reasoning—who does not know the terrible stumbles which are made through being out of health? It suffices to say that forgetfulness, and despondency, and moroseness, and madness take occasion often of ill-health to visit the intellectual faculties so severely as to expel all knowledge (8) from the brain. But he who is in good bodily plight has large security. He runs no risk of incurring any such catastrophe through ill-health at any rate; he has the expectation rather that a good habit must procure consequences the opposite to those of an evil habit; (9) and surely to this end there is nothing a man in his senses would not undergo.... It is a base thing for a man to wax old in careless self-neglect before he has lifted up his eyes and seen what manner of man he was made to be, in the full perfection of bodily strength and beauty. But these glories are withheld from him who is guilty of self-neglect, for they are not wont to blaze forth unbidden. (10)

Because our city doesn’t practice military training in public, that’s no reason to neglect it privately; in fact, it should be a top priority. You can be sure that there’s no competition or interaction where being physically prepared won’t benefit you. There’s nothing men do where the body isn’t an asset. Therefore, in every situation that demands something of the body, it’s much better for it to be in the best shape possible; even in areas where you might think the physical demands are minimal—like reasoning—who doesn’t know the terrible mistakes that happen when someone is unhealthy? It’s enough to say that forgetfulness, sadness, irritability, and madness often come from poor health, severely affecting mental faculties to the point of erasing all knowledge from the mind. But someone who is in good physical shape has a solid advantage. They don’t risk facing such disasters from poor health, and they can expect that good habits will bring positive outcomes, unlike bad habits; and surely, for this purpose, there’s nothing a sensible person wouldn’t endure... It’s shameful for someone to grow old in careless neglect of themselves without having realized what kind of person they were meant to be, in the full glory of strength and beauty. But these achievements are denied to those who neglect themselves, as they rarely shine through uninvited.

 (7) Cf. "Pol. Ath." i. 13; and above, III. v. 15.

 (8) Or, "whole branches of knowledge" ({tas epistemas}).

 (9) Or, "he may well hope to be insured by his good habit against the
    evils attendant on its opposite."

 (10) Or, "to present themselves spontaneously."
 (7) Cf. "Pol. Ath." i. 13; and above, III. v. 15.

 (8) Or, "entire fields of knowledge" ({tas epistemas}).

 (9) Or, "he can reasonably expect that his good habits will protect him from the negative effects of their opposites."

 (10) Or, "to come forward on their own."

XII

XII

Once when some one was in a fury of indignation because he had bidden a passer-by good-day and the salutation was not returned, Socrates said: "It is enough to make one laugh! If you met a man in a wretched condition of body, you would not fall into a rage; but because you stumble upon a poor soul somewhat boorishly disposed, you feel annoyed."

Once, when someone was furious because he said hello to a passerby and didn’t get a response, Socrates said, "It's amusing! If you saw someone in terrible shape, you wouldn't get angry; but because you came across someone who was a bit rude, you feel upset."

To the remark of another who complained that he did not take his food with pleasure, he said: "Acumenus (1) has a good prescription for that." And when the other asked: "And what may that be?" "To stop eating," he said. "On the score of pleasure, economy, and health, total abstinence has much in its favour." (2)

To the comment of someone else who complained that he couldn't enjoy his food, he replied, "Acumenus has a great solution for that." And when the other person asked, "What is it?" he said, "Just stop eating." "For pleasure, saving money, and health, complete abstinence has a lot going for it."

 (1) A well-known physician. See Plat. "Phaedr." 227 A, 269 A; "Symp."
    176 B. A similar story is told of Dr. Abernethy, I think.

 (2) Lit. "he would live a happier, thriftier, and healthier life, if
    he stopped eating."
(1) A well-known doctor. See Plat. "Phaedr." 227 A, 269 A; "Symp."
    176 B. A similar story is told about Dr. Abernethy, I think.

(2) Essentially, "he would have a happier, more frugal, and healthier life if
    he stopped eating."

And when some one else lamented that "the drinking-water in his house was hot," he replied: "Then when you want a warm bath you will not have to wait."

And when someone else complained that "the drinking water in his house was hot," he responded, "Then when you want a warm bath, you won't have to wait."

The Other. But for bathing purposes it is cold.

The Other. But for bathing, it's too cold.

Soc. Do you find that your domestics seem to mind drinking it or washing in it?

Soc. Do you notice that your staff seem to mind drinking it or washing in it?

The Other. Quite the reverse; it is a constant marvel to me how contentedly they use it for either purpose.

The Other. On the contrary; it always amazes me how happily they use it for both purposes.

Soc. Which is hotter to the taste—the water in your house or the hot spring in the temple of Asclepius? (3)

Soc. Which tastes hotter—the water in your home or the hot spring at the temple of Asclepius? (3)

 (3) In the Hieron at Epidauros probably. See Baedeker, "Greece," p.
    240 foll.
(3) Probably in the Hieron at Epidauros. See Baedeker, "Greece," p. 240 and following.

The Other. The water in the temple of Asclepius.

The Other. The water in the temple of Asclepius.

Soc. And which is colder for bathing—yours or the cold spring in the cave of Amphiaraus? (4)

Soc. So, which is colder for bathing—yours or the cold spring in the cave of Amphiaraus? (4)

 (4) Possibly at Oropos. Cf. Paus. i. 34. 3.
(4) Possibly at Oropos. See Paus. i. 34. 3.

The Other. The water in the cave of Amphiaraus.

The Other. The water in the cave of Amphiaraus.

Soc. Then please to observe: if you do not take care, they will set you down as harder to please than a domestic servant or an invalid. (5)

Soc. So just watch: if you're not careful, they'll think you’re harder to please than a housekeeper or someone who’s sick. (5)

 (5) i.e. "the least and the most fastidious of men."
(5) i.e. "the least and the most particular of men."

A man had administered a severe whipping to the slave in attendance on him, and when Socrates asked: "Why he was so wroth with his own serving-man?" excused himself on the ground that "the fellow was a lazy, gourmandising, good-for-nothing dolt—fonder of money than of work." To which Socrates: "Did it ever strike you to consider which of the two in that case the more deserves a whipping—the master or the man?"

A man had given a harsh beating to the slave serving him, and when Socrates asked, "Why are you so angry with your own servant?" he justified himself by saying, "The guy is a lazy, greedy, useless fool—more interested in money than in working." To which Socrates replied, "Have you ever thought about who deserves the beating more in this situation—the master or the servant?"

When some one was apprehending the journey to Olympia, "Why are you afraid of the long distance?" he asked. "Here at home you spend nearly all your day in taking walks. (6) Well, on your road to Olympia you will take a walk and breakfast, and then you will take another walk and dine, and go to bed. Do you not see, if you take and tack together five or six days' length of walks, and stretch them out in one long line, it will soon reach from Athens to Olympia? I would recommend you, however, to set off a day too soon rather than a day too late. To be forced to lengthen the day's journey beyond a reasonable amount may well be a nuisance; but to take one day's journey beyond what is necessary is pure relaxation. Make haste to start, I say, and not while on the road." (7)

When someone was worried about the trip to Olympia, he asked, "Why are you afraid of the long distance? You spend most of your days walking at home. Well, on your way to Olympia, you’ll walk and have breakfast, then walk again, have lunch, and go to bed. Don’t you see, if you take several days of walks and line them up, it will stretch from Athens to Olympia? I’d suggest leaving a day early instead of a day late. Having to extend the day’s journey beyond what’s reasonable can be a hassle, but taking an extra day isn’t a big deal at all. So hurry up and get started, I say, not while you’re already on the road."

 (6) {peripateis}, "promenading up and down."

 (7) "Festina lente"—that is your motto.
(6) {peripateis}, "walking around."

(7) "Hurry slowly"—that is your motto.

When some one else remarked "he was utterly prostrated after a long journey," Socrates asked him: "Had he had any baggage to carry?"

When someone else remarked, "he was completely exhausted after a long journey," Socrates asked, "Did he have any luggage to carry?"

"Not I," replied the complainer; "only my cloak."

"Not me," replied the person complaining; "just my cloak."

Soc. Were you travelling alone, or was your man-servant with you?

Soc. Were you traveling alone, or did your male servant come with you?

He. Yes, I had my man.

He. Yes, I had my guy.

Soc. Empty-handed, or had he something to carry?

Soc. Was he empty-handed, or did he have something to carry?

He. Of course; carrying my rugs and other baggage.

He. Of course; carrying my rugs and other luggage.

Soc. And how did he come off on the journey?

Soc. So, how did he do on the journey?

He. Better than I did myself, I take it.

He did a better job of it than I did.

Soc. Well, but now suppose you had had to carry his baggage, what would your condition have been like?

Soc. Well, but now imagine if you had to carry his baggage, what would your situation have been like?

He. Sorry enough, I can tell you; or rather, I could not have carried it at all.

He. I'm really sorry, but I can tell you; or rather, I couldn't have handled it at all.

Soc. What a confession! Fancy being capable of so much less toil than a poor slave boy! Does that sound like the perfection of athletic training?

Soc. What a confession! Can you believe someone can do so much less work than a poor slave boy? Does that really represent the ultimate goal of athletic training?

XIV

XIV

On the occasion of a common dinner-party (1) where some of the company would present themselves with a small, and others with a large supply of viands, Socrates would bid the servants (2) throw the small supplies into the general stock, or else to help each of the party to a share all round. Thus the grand victuallers were ashamed in the one case not to share in the common stock, and in the other not to throw in their supplies also. (3) Accordingly in went the grand supplies into the common stock. And now, being no better off than the small contributors, they soon ceased to cater for expensive delicacies.

At a dinner party (1) where some guests brought a little food and others brought a lot, Socrates would tell the servants (2) to mix the small contributions into the general food supply or to make sure everyone got a share. This way, those who brought a lot felt embarrassed not to contribute to the common table and also felt compelled to add their food. (3) So, the larger contributions were added to the communal stock. Now that they had the same amount as those who brought less, they quickly stopped trying to impress with extravagant dishes.

 (1) For the type of entertainment see Becker, "Charicles," p. 315
    (Eng. tr.)

 (2) "The boy."

 (3) Or, "were ashamed not to follow suit by sharing in the common
    stock and contributing their own portion."
 (1) For the type of entertainment, see Becker, "Charicles," p. 315  
    (Eng. tr.)

 (2) "The boy."

 (3) Or, "were embarrassed not to join in by contributing to the common fund and adding their own share."

At a supper-party one member of the company, as Socrates chanced to note, had put aside the plain fare and was devoting himself to certain dainties. (4) A discussion was going on about names and definitions, and the proper applications of terms to things. (5) Whereupon Socrates, appealing to the company: "Can we explain why we call a man a 'dainty fellow'? What is the particular action to which the term applies? (6)—since every one adds some dainty to his food when he can get it. (7) But we have not quite hit the definition yet, I think. Are we to be called dainty eaters because we like our bread buttered?" (8)

At a dinner party, one of the guests, as Socrates happened to notice, had ignored the simple food and was focusing on some fancy dishes. (4) There was a discussion happening about names and definitions, and the correct use of terms for things. (5) So Socrates turned to the group and asked, "Can we figure out why we call a man a 'dainty fellow'? What specific action does that term refer to? (6)—since everyone adds something special to their food when they can. (7) But I don't think we've nailed down the definition yet. Are we called dainty eaters just because we like our bread with butter?" (8)

 (4) For the distinction between {sitos} and {opson} see Plat. "Rep."
    372 C.

 (5) Or, "The conversation had fallen upon names: what is the precise
    thing denoted under such and such a term? Define the meaning of so
    and so."

 (6) {opsophagos} = {opson} (or relish) eater, and so a "gourmand" or
    "epicure"; but how to define a gourmand?

 (7) Lit. "takes some {opson} (relish) to his {sitos} (food)."

 (8) Lit. "simply for that" (sc. the taking of some sort of {opson}.
    For {epi touto} cf. Plat. "Soph." 218 C; "Parmen." 147 D.)
(4) For the difference between {sitos} and {opson}, see Plat. "Rep." 372 C.

(5) Or, "The discussion turned to names: what exactly does a specific term refer to? Define what so and so means."

(6) {opsophagos} = {opson} (or relish) eater, which means a "gourmand" or "epicure"; but how do you define a gourmand?

(7) Literally, "takes some {opson} (relish) with his {sitos} (food)."

(8) Literally, "just for that" (referring to taking some kind of {opson}. For {epi touto}, see Plat. "Soph." 218 C; "Parmen." 147 D.)

No! hardly! (some member of the company replied).

No way! (someone in the group replied).

Soc. Well, but now suppose a man confine himself to eating venison or other dainty without any plain food at all, not as a matter of training, (9) but for the pleasure of it: has such a man earned the title? "The rest of the world would have a poor chance against him," (10) some one answered. "Or," interposed another, "what if the dainty dishes he devours are out of all proportion to the rest of his meal—what of him?" (11)

Soc. Well, what if a guy only eats fancy food like venison and skips plain food altogether, not for training but just for enjoyment? Has he earned that title? "The rest of the world wouldn't stand a chance against him," someone replied. "Or," another person jumped in, "what if the fancy dishes he eats are way more than the rest of his meal—what does that say about him?"

 (9) Lit. "{opson} (relish) by itself, not for the sake of training,"
    etc. The English reader wil bear in mind that a raw beefsteak or
    other meat prescribed by the gymnastic trainer in preference to
    farinaceous food ({sitos}) would be {opson}.

 (10) Or, more lit. "Hardly any one could deserve the appellation
    better."

 (11) Lit. "and what of the man who eats much {opson} on the top of a
    little ({sitos})?" {epesthion} = follows up one course by another,
    like the man in a fragment of Euripides, "Incert." 98: {kreasi
    boeiois khlora suk' epesthien}, who "followed up his beefsteak
    with a garnish of green figs."
(9) Literally, "{opson} (relish) on its own, not for the purpose of training," etc. The English reader should remember that a raw beefsteak or any other meat recommended by the fitness trainer instead of grain-based food ({sitos}) would be {opson}.

(10) Or, more literally, "Hardly anyone could deserve the title better."

(11) Literally, "And what about the person who eats a lot of {opson} on top of a little ({sitos})?" {epesthion} = follows one dish with another, like the person in a fragment of Euripides, "Incert." 98: {kreasi boeiois khlora suk' epesthien}, who "followed his beefsteak with a side of green figs."

Soc. He has established a very fair title at any rate to the appellation, and when the rest of the world pray to heaven for a fine harvest: "May our corn and oil increase!" he may reasonably ejaculate, "May my fleshpots multiply!"

Soc. He has definitely earned the right to that name, and when everyone else is praying to heaven for a good harvest: "May our crops and oil grow!" he can justifiably shout, "May my abundance increase!"

At this last sally the young man, feeling that the conversation set somewhat in his direction, did not desist indeed from his savoury viands, but helped himself generously to a piece of bread. Socrates was all-observant, and added: Keep an eye on our friend yonder, you others next him, and see fair play between the sop and the sauce. (12)

At this last comment, the young man, sensing that the conversation was leaning his way, didn't stop enjoying his delicious food but helped himself to a good piece of bread. Socrates, always observant, said: Watch our friend over there, you others next to him, and make sure there's a fair balance between the bread and the sauce. (12)

 (12) Lit. "see whether he will make a relish of the staple or a staple
    of the relish" ("butter his bread or bread his butter").
(12) Lit. "see whether he will make a flavor of the main ingredient or a main ingredient of the flavor" ("butter his bread or bread his butter").

Another time, seeing one of the company using but one sop of bread (13) to test several savoury dishes, he remarked: Could there be a more extravagant style of cookery, or more murderous to the dainty dishes themselves, than this wholesale method of taking so many dishes together?—why, bless me, twenty different sorts of seasoning at one swoop! (14) First of all he mixes up actually more ingredients than the cook himself prescribes, which is extravagant; and secondly, he has the audacity to commingle what the chef holds incongruous, whereby if the cooks are right in their method he is wrong in his, and consequently the destroyer of their art. Now is it not ridiculous first to procure the greatest virtuosi to cook for us, and then without any claim to their skill to take and alter their procedure? But there is a worse thing in store for the bold man who habituates himself to eat a dozen dishes at once: when there are but few dishes served, out of pure habit he will feel himself half starved, whilst his neighbour, accustomed to send his sop down by help of a single relish, will feast merrily, be the dishes never so few.

Another time, when he saw someone using just one piece of bread to try several savory dishes, he commented: Could there be a more extravagant way of cooking, or more ruinous to the delicate dishes themselves, than this bulk approach to tasting so many at once?—I mean, really, twenty different kinds of seasoning all at one go! First of all, he mixes in more ingredients than the chef actually recommends, which is wasteful; and secondly, he has the nerve to combine what the chef considers incompatible, meaning if the chefs are right in their methods, he is wrong in his and is effectively ruining their craft. Isn’t it absurd to hire the best chefs and then, without any claim to their expertise, mess with their recipes? But there's an even bigger issue for the daring person who trains themselves to eat a dozen dishes at a time: when only a few dishes are served, out of sheer habit, they’ll feel half-starved, whereas their neighbor, used to savoring a single dish with one side, will enjoy a feast, no matter how few dishes are on the table.

 (13) {psomos}, a sop or morsel of bread (cf. {psomion}, N. T., in mod.
    Greek = "bread").

 (14) Huckleberry Finn (p. 2 of that young person's "Adventures")
    propounds the rationale of the system: "In a barrel of odds and
    ends it is different; things get mixed up, and the juice kind of
    swaps around, and the things go better."
(13) {psomos}, a piece of bread (see {psomion}, N. T., in modern Greek = "bread").

(14) Huckleberry Finn (p. 2 of that young person's "Adventures") explains the logic of the system: "In a mix of random stuff, it’s different; everything gets mixed up, and the juice kind of swaps around, and everything works out better."

He had a saying that {euokheisthai}, to "make good cheer," (15) was in Attic parlance a synonym for "eating," and the affix {eu} (the attributive "good") connoted the eating of such things as would not trouble soul or body, and were not far to seek or hard to find. So that to "make good cheer" in his vocabulary applied to a modest and well-ordered style of living. (16)

He had a saying that {euokheisthai}, meaning "to make good cheer," (15) was in Attic language a synonym for "eating," and the affix {eu} (the attributive "good") implied the consumption of things that would not trouble the soul or body, and that were easy to find. So, in his terminology, "making good cheer" referred to a simple and well-ordered way of living. (16)

 (15) {euokheisthai}, cf. "Cyrop." IV. v. 7; "Pol. Ath." ii. 9; Kuhner
    cf. Eustah. "ad Il." ii. p. 212, 37, {'Akhaioi ten trophen okhen
    legousin oxutonos}. Athen. viii. 363 B. See "Hipparch," viii. 4,
    of horses. Cf. Arist. "H. A." viii. 6.

 (16) See "Symp." vi. 7; and for similar far-fetched etymologies, Plat.
    "Crat." passim.
(15) {euokheisthai}, see "Cyrop." IV. v. 7; "Pol. Ath." ii. 9; Kuhner
    see Eustah. "ad Il." ii. p. 212, 37, {'Akhaioi ten trophen okhen
    legousin oxutonos}. Athen. viii. 363 B. Refer to "Hipparch," viii. 4,
    about horses. See also Arist. "H. A." viii. 6.

(16) Refer to "Symp." vi. 7; and for similar far-fetched etymologies, Plat.
    "Crat." throughout.




BOOK IV

I

I

Such was Socrates; so helpful under all circumstances and in every way that no observer, gifted with ordinary sensibility, could fail to appreciate the fact, that to be with Socrates, and to spend long time in his society (no matter where or what the circumstances), was indeed a priceless gain. Even the recollection of him, when he was no longer present, was felt as no small benefit by those who had grown accustomed to be with him, and who accepted him. Nor indeed was he less helpful to his acquaintance in his lighter than in his graver moods.

Socrates was someone who was incredibly helpful in every situation and in every way, so much so that anyone with a bit of sensitivity couldn’t help but see how being around him and spending time together, no matter the place or situation, was truly invaluable. Even just remembering him when he wasn’t there anymore brought a significant benefit to those who had gotten used to being in his company and who embraced him. He was just as supportive to his friends in his lighter moments as he was in his more serious ones.

Let us take as an example that saying of his, so often on his lips: "I am in love with so and so"; and all the while it was obvious the going-forth of his soul was not towards excellence of body in the bloom of beauty, but rather towards faculties of the soul unfolding in virtue. (1) And these "good natures" he detected by certain tokens: a readiness to learn that to which the attention was directed; a power of retaining in the memory the lessons learnt; and a passionate predilection for those studies in particular which serve to good administration of a house or of a state, (2) and in general to the proper handling of man and human affairs. Such beings, he maintained, needed only to be educated (3) to become not only happy themselves and happy administrators of their private households, but to be capable of rendering other human beings as states or individuals happy also.

Let’s consider that saying of his, which he repeated often: "I am in love with so and so"; meanwhile, it was clear that his soul wasn’t drawn to physical beauty, but rather to the qualities of the soul growing in virtue. (1) He recognized these "good natures" by certain signs: a willingness to learn whatever was being taught; an ability to remember the lessons learned; and a deep enthusiasm for those subjects that contribute to good management of a household or a state, (2) and in general, to effectively dealing with people and human affairs. He believed that these individuals just needed proper education (3) to not only be happy themselves and good managers of their own homes, but also to make others—whether as states or individuals—happy as well.

 (1) Or, "not excellence of body in respect of beauty, but of the soul
    as regards virtue; and this good natural disposition might be
    detected by the readiness of its possessor to learn," etc. Cf.
    Plat. "Rep." 535 B.

 (2) Cf. above, I. i. 7.

 (3) Or, "A person of this type would, if educated, not only prove a
    fortune-favoured individual himself and," etc. Al. Kuhner, "Eos,
    qui ita instituti sunt, ut tales sint."
(1) Or, "not physical beauty but the virtue of the soul; and this good natural trait could be seen in how willing the person is to learn," etc. See Plat. "Rep." 535 B.

(2) See above, I. i. 7.

(3) Or, "Someone like this, if educated, would not only become a lucky individual themselves and," etc. Al. Kuhner, "Those who are trained this way, so that they become such."

He had indeed a different way of dealing with different kinds of people. (4) Those who thought they had good natural ability and despised learning he instructed that the most highly-gifted nature stands most in need of training and education; (5) and he would point out how in the case of horses it is just the spirited and fiery thoroughbred which, if properly broken in as a colt, will develop into a serviceable and superb animal, but if left unbroken will turn out utterly intractable and good for nothing. Or take the case of dogs: a puppy exhibiting that zest for toil and eagerness to attack wild creatures which are the marks of high breeding, (6) will, if well brought up, prove excellent for the chase or for any other useful purpose; but neglect his education and he will turn out a stupid, crazy brute, incapable of obeying the simplest command. It is just the same with human beings; here also the youth of best natural endowments—that is to say, possessing the most robust qualities of spirit and a fixed determination to carry out whatever he has laid his hand to—will, if trained and taught what it is right to do, prove a superlatively good and useful man. He achieves, in fact, what is best upon the grandest scale. But leave him in boorish ignorance untrained, and he will prove not only very bad but very mischievous, (7) and for this reason, that lacking the knowledge to discern what is right to do, he will frequently lay his hand to villainous practices; whilst the very magnificence and vehemence of his character render it impossible either to rein him in or to turn him aside from his evil courses. Hence in his case also his achievements are on the grandest scale but of the worst. (8)

He really had a unique way of dealing with different types of people. (4) For those who believed they had natural talent and looked down on learning, he emphasized that even the most naturally gifted individuals need training and education; (5) he would point out that with horses, it’s the spirited and fiery thoroughbred that, if properly trained as a colt, will grow into a valuable and amazing animal, but if left untrained will become completely unruly and useless. Similarly, in the case of dogs: a puppy that shows enthusiasm for work and eagerness to chase wild animals—traits of good breeding—(6) will, if well-raised, prove to be excellent for hunting or any other useful task; but if neglected, he will end up a dumb, wild creature, unable to follow even the simplest commands. It’s the same with humans; the youth with the best natural traits—that is, those who have strong qualities and a strong determination to accomplish what they set out to do—will, if trained and taught the right way to act, become an exceptionally good and useful person. He actually achieves the best results on a grand scale. But if he’s left in ignorant neglect and untrained, he will not only be very bad but also very troublesome, (7) because without the knowledge to understand what is right, he will often engage in wicked behaviors; and the very greatness and intensity of his character make it impossible to control or redirect him from his wrongdoings. Thus, in his case as well, his achievements are grand but of the worst kind. (8)

 (4) Or, "His method of attack was not indeed uniformly the same. It
    varied with the individual."

 (5) Or, "If any one was disposed to look down upon learning and study
    in reliance upon his own natural ability, he tried to lesson him
    that it is just the highly-gifted nature which stands," etc. See
    Newman, op. cit. i. 397.

 (6) Cf. Aristot. "H. A." ix. 1; and "Hunting," iii. 11.

 (7) Or, "and the same man may easily become a master villain of the
    most dangerous sort."

 (8) Kuhner ad loc. after Fr. Hermann cf. Plato. "Crito," 44 E; "Hipp.
    min." 375 E; "Rep." vi. 491 E; "Gorg." 526 A; "Polit." 303 A.
(4) Or, "His way of attacking wasn't always the same. It changed depending on the person."

(5) Or, "If anyone looked down on learning and study because they relied on their own natural ability, he tried to teach them that it’s precisely the highly gifted nature that stands," etc. See Newman, op. cit. i. 397.

(6) Cf. Aristot. "H. A." ix. 1; and "Hunting," iii. 11.

(7) Or, "and the same person can easily become a master villain of the most dangerous kind."

(8) Kuhner ad loc. after Fr. Hermann cf. Plato. "Crito," 44 E; "Hipp. min." 375 E; "Rep." vi. 491 E; "Gorg." 526 A; "Polit." 303 A.

Or to take the type of person so eaten up with the pride of riches that he conceives himself dispensed from any further need of education—since it is "money makes the man," and his wealth will amply suffice him to carry out his desires and to win honours from admiring humanity. (9) Socrates would bring such people to their senses by pointing out the folly of supposing that without instruction it was possible to draw the line of demarcation (10) between what is gainful and what is hurtful in conduct; and the further folly of supposing that, apart from such discrimination, a man could help himself by means of wealth alone to whatever he liked or find the path of expediency plain before him; and was it not the veriest simplicity to suppose that, without the power of labouring profitably, a man can either be doing well or be in any sort of way sufficiently equipped for the battle of life? and again, the veriest simplicity to suppose that by mere wealth without true knowledge it was possible either to purchase a reputation for some excellence, or without such reputation to gain distinction and celebrity?

Or to consider the kind of person so consumed by the pride of wealth that they think they no longer need education—since it’s "money makes the man," and their riches will be more than enough to fulfill their desires and earn them admiration from others. (9) Socrates would bring such individuals back to reality by highlighting the foolishness of believing that, without guidance, it was possible to distinguish (10) between what is beneficial and what is harmful in behavior; and the added foolishness of thinking that, without such discernment, a person could rely solely on wealth to get whatever they wanted or find the right path easily; and was it not incredibly naive to assume that, without the ability to work profitably, a person can either thrive or be sufficiently prepared for the challenges of life? And once again, it is incredibly naive to think that mere wealth, without genuine knowledge, could either buy a reputation for excellence or, without that reputation, achieve distinction and fame?

 (9) Or, "and to be honoured by mankind."

 (10) Or, "that without learning the distinction it was possible to
    distinguish between," etc.
(9) Or, "and to be respected by people."

(10) Or, "that without knowing the difference it was possible to
    tell between," etc.

II

II

Or to come to a third kind—the class of people who are persuaded that they have received the best education, and are proud of their wisdom: his manner of dealing with these I will now describe.

Or to come to a third type—the group of people who believe they have received the best education and take pride in their knowledge: I will now explain how he interacts with them.

Euthydemus (1) "the beautiful" had (Socrates was given to understand) collected a large library, consisting of the most celebrated poets and philosophers, (2) by help of which he already believed himself to be more than a match for his fellows in wisdom, and indeed might presently expect to out-top them all in capacity of speech and action. (3) At first, as Socrates noted, the young man by reason of his youth had not as yet set foot in the agora, (4) but if he had anything to transact, his habit was to seat himself in a saddler's shop hard by. Accordingly to this same saddler's shop Socrates betook himself with some of those who were with him. And first the question was started by some one: "Was it through consorting with the wise, (5) or by his own unaided talent, that Themistocles came so to surpass his fellow-citizens that when the services of a capable man were needed the eyes of the whole community instinctively turned to him?" Socrates, with a view to stirring (6) Euthydemus, answered: There was certainly an ingenuous simplicity in the belief that superiority in arts of comparatively little worth could only be attained by aid of qualified teachers, but that the leadership of the state, the most important concern of all, was destined to drop into the lap of anybody, no matter whom, like an accidental windfall. (7)

Euthydemus ("the beautiful") had accumulated a large library filled with the most famous poets and philosophers, which led him to believe he was smarter than his peers, and he expected to eventually outshine them all in speaking and action. At first, as Socrates pointed out, the young man had not yet ventured into the marketplace because of his youth, but whenever he needed to handle something, he would sit in a nearby saddler's shop. Socrates decided to go to this same saddler's shop with some companions. The conversation began when someone asked: "Did Themistocles surpass his fellow citizens due to associating with the wise, or was it due to his own natural talent, that the entire community turned to him when they needed a capable leader?" Socrates, aiming to provoke Euthydemus, responded: There was a certain naïveté in thinking that superiority in less significant skills could only be achieved through trained teachers, yet the leadership of the state—the most crucial responsibility—could fall to anyone, no matter who, like an unexpected gift.

 (1) Euthydemus, the son of Diocles perhaps. See Plat. "Symp." 222 B,
    and Jowet ad loc.; Cobet, "Prosop. Xen." s.n.; K. Joel, op. cit.
    p. 372 foll. For {ton kalon} cf. "Phaedr." 278 E, "Isocrates the
    fair." For the whole chapter cf. Plat. "Alc." i.; "Lys." 210 E.
    See above, "Mem." I. ii. 29; Grote, "Plato," i. ch. x. passim.

 (2) Lit. "sophists." See Grote, "H. G." viii. p. 480, note. For
    private libraries see Becker, "Char." p. 272 foll. (Eng. tr.)

 (3) See "Hipparch," i. 24; "Cyrop." V. v. 46.

 (4) See above, III. vi. 1; Schneid. cf. Isocr. "Areop." 149 C.

 (5) Cf. Soph. fr. 12, {sophoi turannoi ton sophon xunousia}.

 (6) L. and S. cf. Plat. "Lys." 223 A; "Rep." 329 B: "Wishing to draw
    him out."

 (7) Cf. Plat. "Alc." i. 118 C: "And Pericles is said not to have got
    his wisdom by the light of nature, but to have associated with
    several of the philosophers" (Jowett).
(1) Euthydemus, possibly the son of Diocles. See Plat. "Symp." 222 B, and Jowet ad loc.; Cobet, "Prosop. Xen." s.n.; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 372 and following. For {ton kalon} see "Phaedr." 278 E, "Isocrates the fair." For the entire chapter see Plat. "Alc." i.; "Lys." 210 E. Refer to "Mem." I. ii. 29; Grote, "Plato," i. ch. x. throughout.

(2) Literally "sophists." See Grote, "H. G." viii. p. 480, note. For private libraries, see Becker, "Char." p. 272 and following (Eng. tr.)

(3) See "Hipparch," i. 24; "Cyrop." V. v. 46.

(4) See above, III. vi. 1; Schneid. cf. Isocr. "Areop." 149 C.

(5) Cf. Soph. fr. 12, {sophoi turannoi ton sophon xunousia}.

(6) L. and S. cf. Plat. "Lys." 223 A; "Rep." 329 B: "Wishing to draw him out."

(7) Cf. Plat. "Alc." i. 118 C: "And Pericles is said not to have gained his wisdom through natural insight, but by associating with several philosophers" (Jowett).

On a subsequent occasion, Euthydemus being present, though, as was plain to see, somewhat disposed to withdraw from the friendly concourse, (8) as if he would choose anything rather than appear to admire Socrates on the score of wisdom, the latter made the following remarks.

On another occasion, Euthydemus was there, but it was clear he was a bit hesitant to join the friendly group, as if he would rather choose anything than look like he admired Socrates for his wisdom. Socrates then said the following.

 (8) {sunedrias}, "the council."
(8) {sunedrias}, "the committee."

Soc. It is clear from his customary pursuits, is it not, sirs, that when our friend Euthydemus here is of full age, and the state propounds some question for solution, he will not abstain from offering the benefit of his advice? One can imagine the pretty exordium to his parliamentary speeches which, in his anxiety not to be thought to have learnt anything from anybody, he has ready for the occasion. (9) Clearly at the outset he will deliver himself thus: "Men of Athens, I have never at any time learnt anything from anybody; nor, if I have ever heard of any one as being an able statesman, well versed in speech and capable of action, have I sought to come across him individually. I have not so much as been at pains to provide myself with a teacher from amongst those who have knowledge; (10) on the contrary, I have persistently avoided, I will not say learning from others, but the very faintest suspicion of so doing. However, anything that occurs to me by the light of nature I shall be glad to place at your disposal."... How appropriate (11) would such a preface sound on the lips of any one seeking, say, the office of state physician, (12) would it not? How advantageously he might begin an address on this wise: "Men of Athens, I have never learnt the art of healing by help of anybody, nor have I sought to provide myself with any teacher among medical men. Indeed, to put it briefly, I have been ever on my guard not only against learning anything from the profession, but against the very notion of having studied medicine at all. If, however, you will be so good as to confer on me this post, I promise I will do my best to acquire skill by experimenting on your persons." Every one present laughed at the exordium (and there the matter dropped).

Soc. It's clear from what he usually does, right, gentlemen, that when our friend Euthydemus here becomes of age and the state presents a question to be solved, he won't hesitate to offer his advice? You can picture the charming introduction to his speeches in parliament where, in his eagerness to not seem like he learned anything from anyone, he has something prepared for the occasion. (9) Clearly, he'll start off like this: "Men of Athens, I have never learned anything from anyone at any time; nor have I ever sought out someone known as a capable statesman, skilled in oratory and action. I haven’t bothered to find a teacher among those who possess knowledge; (10) instead, I have actively avoided not just learning from others, but even the slightest hint of doing so. However, anything that comes to me by natural inspiration, I am happy to share with you."... How fitting (11) would such an introduction be for anyone trying to get the position of state physician, (12) right? How effectively he might start a speech like this: "Men of Athens, I have never learned the art of healing from anyone, nor have I sought a teacher among medical professionals. In fact, to keep it short, I have always made an effort to steer clear not only of learning anything from the field but even of the idea of having studied medicine at all. If, however, you will kindly appoint me to this position, I promise to do my best to gain skills by practicing on you." Everyone present laughed at the introduction (and that was the end of it).

 (9) Or, "the pretty exordium... now in course of composition. He
    must at all hazards avoid the suspicion of having picked up any
    crumb of learning from anybody; how can he help therefore
    beginning his speech thus?"

 (10) Or, "scientific experts."

 (11) Al. "Just as if one seeking the office of state physician were to
    begin with a like exordium." {armoseie} = "it would be consistent
    (with what has gone before)."

 (12) Schneider cf. Plat. "Laws," iv. 720 A; "Gorg." 456 A; and for
    "the parish doctor," "Polit." 259 A; Arist. "Acharn." 1030.
(9) Or, "the attractive introduction... currently being written. He must absolutely avoid any hint that he learned anything from someone else; how can he therefore not start his speech like this?"

(10) Or, "subject matter experts."

(11) Al. "Just like if someone running for the position of state physician were to start with a similar introduction." {armoseie} = "it would be in line with what has come before."

(12) Schneider cf. Plat. "Laws," iv. 720 A; "Gorg." 456 A; and for "the local doctor," "Polit." 259 A; Arist. "Acharn." 1030.

Presently, when it became apparent that Euthydemus had got so far that he was disposed to pay attention to what was said, though he was still at pains not to utter a sound himself, as if he hoped by silence to attach to himself some reputation for sagacity, Socrates, wishing to cure him of that defect, proceeded.

Right now, when it was clear that Euthydemus was paying attention to what was being said, even though he still made an effort not to say anything himself—almost as if he thought silence would make him seem wise—Socrates decided to help him overcome that flaw.

Soc. Is it not surprising that people anxious to learn to play the harp or the flute, or to ride, or to become proficient in any like accomplishment, are not content to work unremittingly in private by themselves at whatever it is in which they desire to excel, but they must sit at the feet of the best-esteemed teachers, doing all things and enduring all things for the sake of following the judgment of those teachers in everything, as though they themselves could not otherwise become famous; whereas, among those who aspire to become eminent politically as orators and statesmen, (13) there are some who cannot see why they should not be able to do all that politics demand, at a moment's notice, by inspiration as it were, without any preliminary pains or preparations whatever? And yet it would appear that the latter concerns must be more difficult of achievement than the former, in proportion as there are more competitors in the field but fewer who reach the goal of their ambition, which is as much as to say that a more sustained effort of attention is needed on the part of those who embark upon the sea of politics than is elsewhere called for.

Isn’t it surprising that people eager to learn how to play the harp or the flute, ride, or master any similar skill aren’t satisfied to practice continuously on their own? Instead, they sit at the feet of highly regarded teachers, doing everything and enduring anything to follow those teachers' guidance, as if they couldn't become successful otherwise. Meanwhile, those who want to be successful politically as orators and statesmen don’t understand why they shouldn’t be able to handle everything politics requires on a whim, almost by inspiration, without any prior effort or preparation. Yet, it seems that achieving success in politics must be harder than mastering a musical instrument, considering there are more competitors in that arena but fewer who actually reach their goals. This suggests that a greater sustained effort is needed from those who venture into politics than in other fields.

 (13) Or, more lit. "powerful in speech and action within the sphere of
    politics."
(13) Or, more literally, "strong in speech and action within the realm of politics."

Such were the topics on which Socrates was wont in the early days of their association to dilate in the hearing of Euthydemus; but when the philosopher perceived that the youth not only could tolerate the turns of the discussion more readily but was now become a somewhat eager listener, he went to the saddler's shop alone, (14) and when Euthydemus was seated by his side the following conversation took place.

These were the topics that Socrates often talked about in the early days of his friendship with Euthydemus; however, when the philosopher noticed that the young man not only could handle the shifts in the conversation more easily but had also become a somewhat eager listener, he went to the saddler's shop alone, (14) and when Euthydemus sat down next to him, the following conversation happened.

 (14) The question arises: how far is the conversation historical or
    imaginary?
(14) The question comes up: how much of the conversation is based on history, and how much is just made up?

Soc. Pray tell me, Euthydemus, is it really true what people tell me, that you have made a large collection of the writings of "the wise," as they are called? (15)

Soc. Please tell me, Euthydemus, is it really true what people say, that you have put together a large collection of the writings of "the wise," as they call them? (15)

 (15) Or, "have collected several works of our classical authors and
    philosophers."
(15) Or, "have gathered various works from our classical authors and philosophers."

Euthydemus answered: Quite true, Socrates, and I mean to go on collecting until I possess all the books I can possibly lay hold of.

Euthydemus replied: That's absolutely right, Socrates, and I intend to keep gathering books until I have all the ones I can get my hands on.

Soc. By Hera! I admire you for wishing to possess treasures of wisdom rather than of gold and silver, which shows that you do not believe gold and silver to be the means of making men better, but that the thoughts (16) of the wise alone enrich with virtue their possessions.

Soc. By Hera! I admire you for wanting to gain wisdom instead of riches, which shows that you don’t think gold and silver can make people better, but that only the thoughts of the wise truly enrich their lives with virtue.

 (16) Lit. "gnomes," maxims, sententiae. Cf. Aristot. "Rhet." ii. 21.
(16) Lit. "gnomes," maxims, sayings. Cf. Aristot. "Rhet." ii. 21.

And Euthydemus was glad when he heard that saying, for, thought he to himself, "In the eyes of Socrates I am on the high road to the acquisition of wisdom." But the latter, perceiving him to be pleased with the praise, continued.

And Euthydemus was happy when he heard that remark because he thought to himself, "In Socrates' eyes, I’m on the right path to gaining wisdom." But Socrates, noticing that he was pleased with the compliment, went on.

Soc. And what is it in which you desire to excel, Euthydemus, that you collect books?

Soc. What do you want to excel in, Euthydemus, that makes you collect books?

And when Euthydemus was silent, considering what answer he should make, Socrates added: Possibly you want to be a great doctor? Why, the prescriptions (17) of the Pharmacopoeia would form a pretty large library by themselves.

And when Euthydemus was quiet, thinking about what he should say, Socrates continued: Maybe you want to be a great doctor? Well, the prescriptions (17) in the Pharmacopoeia would make a pretty big library on their own.

 (17) {suggrammata}, "medical treatises." See Aristot. "Eth." x. 9, 21.
(17) {suggrammata}, "medical treatises." See Aristot. "Eth." x. 9, 21.

No, indeed, not I! (answered Euthydemus).

No, definitely not me! (answered Euthydemus).

Soc. Then do you wish to be an architect? That too implies a man of well-stored wit and judgment. (18)

Soc. So, do you want to be an architect? That also suggests you’re someone with a wealth of knowledge and good judgment. (18)

 (18) Or, "To be that implies a considerable store of well-packed
    wisdom."
(18) Or, "To be that means having a lot of well-organized knowledge."

I have no such ambition (he replied).

I don't have that kind of ambition, he replied.

Soc. Well, do you wish to be a mathematician, like Theodorus? (19)

Soc. So, do you want to be a mathematician, like Theodorus? (19)

 (19) Of Cyrene (cf. Plat. "Theaet.") taught Plato. Diog. Laert. ii. 8,
    19.
(19) Of Cyrene (see Plat. "Theaet.") taught Plato. Diog. Laert. ii. 8, 19.

Euth. No, nor yet a mathematician.

Euth. No, not even a mathematician.

Soc. Then do you wish to be an astronomer? (20) or (as the youth signified dissent) possibly a rhapsodist? (21) (he asked), for I am told you have the entire works of Homer in your possession. (22)

Soc. So, do you want to be an astronomer? (20) Or (since the young man showed he disagreed) maybe a poet? (21) (he asked), because I heard you have all of Homer's works with you. (22)

 (20) Cf. below, IV. vii. 4.

 (21) See "Symp." iii. 6; Plat. "Ion."

 (22) See Jowett, "Plato," i. 229; Grote, "Plato," i. 455.
(20) Cf. below, IV. vii. 4.

(21) See "Symp." iii. 6; Plat. "Ion."

(22) See Jowett, "Plato," i. 229; Grote, "Plato," i. 455.

Nay, God forbid! not I! (ejaculated the youth). Rhapsodists have a very exact acquaintance with epic poetry, I know, of course; but they are empty-pated creatures enough themselves. (23)

No way, God forbid! Not me! (the young man exclaimed). I know that rhapsodists are pretty familiar with epic poetry, of course; but they're just clueless people themselves. (23)

 (23) Or, "are simply perfect in the art of reciting epic poetry, but
    are apt to be the veriest simpletons themselves."
(23) Or, "are simply flawless in the art of reciting epic poetry, but often end up being the biggest simpletons themselves."

At last Socrates said: Can it be, Euthydemus, that you are an aspirant to that excellence through which men become statesmen and administrators fit to rule and apt to benefit (24) the rest of the world and themselves?

At last Socrates said: Can it be, Euthydemus, that you are aiming for that excellence that allows people to become statesmen and leaders capable of ruling and improving both the world and themselves?

 (24)  Or, "statesmen, and economists, and rules, and benefactors of
    the rest of the world and themselves."
(24) Or, "politicians, economists, regulations, and people who help the rest of the world and themselves."

Yes (replied he), that is the excellence I desire—beyond measure.

Yes, he replied, that's the greatness I want—more than anything.

Upon my word (said Socrates), then you have indeed selected as the object of your ambition the noblest of virtues and the greatest of the arts, for this is the property of kings, and is entitled "royal"; but (he continued) have you considered whether it is possible to excel in these matters without being just and upright? (25)

"Honestly," said Socrates, "you've chosen the highest virtue and the greatest art to pursue, as this belongs to kings and is called 'royal.' But have you thought about whether you can truly excel in these areas without being just and upright?" (25)

 (25) Just, {dikaios} = upright, righteous. Justice, {dikaiosune} =
    social uprightness = righteousness, N.T. To quote a friend: "The
    Greek {dikaios} combines the active dealing out of justice with
    the self-reflective idea of preserving justice in our conduct,
    which is what we mean by 'upright.'"
(25) Just, {dikaios} = upright, righteous. Justice, {dikaiosune} =
    social uprightness = righteousness, N.T. To quote a friend: "The
    Greek {dikaios} combines actively delivering justice with the self-reflective idea of maintaining justice in our behavior, which is what we mean by 'upright.'"

Euth. Certainly I have, and I say that without justice and uprightness it is impossible to be a good citizen.

Euth. Of course I have, and I believe that without fairness and integrity, it’s impossible to be a good citizen.

No doubt (replied Socrates) you have accomplished that initial step?

No doubt, Socrates replied, you have taken that first step?

Euth. Well, Socrates, I think I could hold my own against all comers as an upright man.

Euth. Well, Socrates, I believe I could stand my ground against anyone as a decent person.

And have upright men (continued Socrates) their distinctive and appropriate works like those of carpenters or shoe-makers?

And do honest people (Socrates went on) have their own unique and fitting tasks like carpenters or shoemakers?

Euth. To be sure they have.

Euthanasia. They definitely have.

Soc. And just as the carpenter is able to exhibit his works and products, the righteous man should be able to expound and set forth his, should he not?

Soc. And just like a carpenter can show off his work and creations, the righteous person should be able to explain and present theirs, shouldn't they?

I see (replied Euthydemus) you are afraid I cannot expound the works of righteousness! Why, bless me! of course I can, and the works of unrighteousness into the bargain, since there are not a few of that sort within reach of eye and ear every day.

I see (Euthydemus replied) you're worried that I can't explain the works of righteousness! Well, believe me! Of course I can, along with the works of unrighteousness too, since there are plenty of those around us every day.

Shall we then (proceeded Socrates) write the letter R on this side, (26) and on that side the letter W; and then anything that appears to us to be the product of righteousness we will place to the R account, and anything which appears to be the product of wrong-doing and iniquity to the account of W?

Shall we then (Socrates continued) write the letter R on this side, (26) and on that side the letter W; and then anything we see as coming from righteousness we will put in the R account, and anything that seems to come from wrongdoing and injustice in the W account?

 (26) The letter R (to stand for Right, Righteous, Upright, Just). The
    letter W (to stand for Wrong, Unrighteous, Unjust).
(26) The letter R (to represent Right, Righteous, Upright, Just). The letter W (to represent Wrong, Unrighteous, Unjust).

By all means do so (he answered), if you think that it assists matters.

"Go ahead and do that," he replied, "if you believe it will help things."

Accordingly Socrates drew the letters, as he had suggested, and continued.

Accordingly, Socrates wrote the letters, as he had suggested, and went on.

Soc. Lying exists among men, does it not?

Soc. Lying exists among people, right?

Euth. Certainly.

Euthanasia. Absolutely.

To which side of the account then shall we place it? (he asked).

To which side of the account should we place it? he asked.

Euth. Clearly on the side of wrong and injustice.

Euth. Clearly on the wrong side of justice.

Soc. Deceit too is not uncommon?

Soc. Is deceit really that uncommon?

Euth. By no means.

No way.

Soc. To which side shall we place deceit?

Soc. Which side should we put deceit on?

Euth. Deceit clearly on the side of wrong.

Euth. Deceit is definitely on the side of wrong.

Soc. Well, and chicanery (27) or mischief of any sort?

Soc. So, what about trickery or any kind of mischief?

 (27) Reading {to kakourgein} (= furari, Sturz); al. {kleptein}, Stob.
(27) Reading {to kakourgein} (= furari, Sturz); al. {kleptein}, Stob.

Euth. That too.

Euthanasia. That too.

Soc. And the enslavement of free-born men? (28)

Soc. And the enslavement of free-born people? (28)

 (28) Or, "the kidnapping of men into slavery." {to andrapodizesthai} =
    the reduction of a free-born man to a state of slavery. Slavery
    itself ({douleia}) being regarded as the normal condition of a
    certain portion of the human race and not in itself immoral.
 (28) Or, "the kidnapping of people into slavery." {to andrapodizesthai} =
    the forced reduction of a free person to a state of slavery. Slavery 
    itself ({douleia}) is seen as the usual condition for a certain segment 
    of humanity and not considered immoral in itself.

Euth. That too.

Euthanasia. That too.

Soc. And we cannot allow any of these to lie on the R side of the account, to the side of right and justice, can we, Euthydemus?

Soc. And we can't let any of these be on the R side of the account, on the side of right and justice, can we, Euthydemus?

It would be monstrous (he replied).

It would be awful (he replied).

Soc. Very good. But supposing a man to be elected general, and he succeeds in enslaving an unjust, wicked, and hostile state, are we to say that he is doing wrong?

Soc. Very good. But what if a man is elected general and he manages to conquer a corrupt, evil, and hostile state? Should we say that he is in the wrong?

Euth. By no means.

No way.

Soc. Shall we not admit that he is doing what is right?

Soc. Should we not agree that he is doing the right thing?

Euth. Certainly.

Sure.

Soc. Again, suppose he deceives the foe while at war with them?

Soc. What if he tricks the enemy while fighting them?

Euth. That would be all fair and right also.

Euth. That would be totally fair and right too.

Soc. Or steals and pillages their property? would he not be doing what is right?

Soc. Or steals and plunders their property? Would he not be doing what is right?

Euth. Certainly; when you began I thought you were limiting the question to the case of friends.

Euth. Of course; at first, I thought you were only talking about friends.

Soc. So then everything which we set down on the side of Wrong will now have to be placed to the credit of Right?

Soc. So everything we put on the side of Wrong will now have to be credited to Right?

Euth. Apparently.

Euthanasia. Apparently.

Soc. Very well then, let us so place them; and please, let us make a new definition—that while it is right to do such things to a foe, it is wrong to do them to a friend, but in dealing with the latter it behoves us to be as straightforward as possible. (29)

Soc. Alright then, let's set things up this way; and please, let's come up with a new definition—that while it's acceptable to treat an enemy in such ways, it's wrong to treat a friend that way. However, when dealing with a friend, we should be as honest as possible. (29)

 (29) Or, "an absolutely straightforward course is necessary."
(29) Or, "a completely clear path is necessary."

I quite assent (replied Euthydemus).

I completely agree (replied Euthydemus).

So far so good (remarked Socrates); but if a general, seeing his troops demoralised, were to invent a tale to the effect that reinforcements were coming, and by means of this false statement should revive the courage of his men, to which of the two accounts shall we place that act of fraud? (30)

So far so good, Socrates said; but if a general, noticing that his troops are discouraged, were to make up a story saying that reinforcements are on the way, and through this lie manage to boost his men’s morale, where should we categorize that act of deception? (30)

 (30) Cf. "Hell." IV. iii. 10; "Cyrop." I. vi. 31.
(30) Cf. "Hell." IV. iii. 10; "Cyrop." I. vi. 31.

On the side of right, to my notion (he replied).

On the side of what's right, in my opinion (he replied).

Soc. Or again, if a man chanced to have a son ill and in need of medicine, which the child refused to take, and supposing the father by an act of deceit to administer it under the guise of something nice to eat, and by service of that lie to restore the boy to health, to which account shall we set down this fraud?

Soc. Or if a man happens to have a son who is sick and needs medication, which the child refuses to take, and if the father deceitfully gives it to him disguised as something tasty to eat, resulting in the boy's recovery, how should we categorize this act of deception?

Euth. In my judgment it too should be placed to the same account.

Euth. I think it should be considered the same way.

Soc. Well, supposing you have a friend in deplorably low spirits, and you are afraid he will make away with himself—accordingly you rob him of his knife or other such instrument: to which side ought we to set the theft?

Soc. So, let's say you have a friend who's really down and you're worried he might hurt himself—so you take away his knife or something similar. Which side should we consider the theft from?

Euth. That too must surely be placed to the score of right behaviour.

Euth. That definitely has to be credited to good conduct.

Soc. I understand you to say that a straightforward course is not in every case to be pursued even in dealing with friends?

Soc. Are you saying that sometimes it’s not best to be straightforward, even when dealing with friends?

Heaven forbid! (the youth exclaimed). If you will allow me, I rescind my former statement. (31)

Heaven forbid! the young person exclaimed. If you don’t mind, I take back what I said earlier. (31)

 (31) See above, I. ii. 44 ({anatithemai}).
(31) See above, I. ii. 44 ({anatithemai}).

Soc. Allow you! Of course you may—anything rather than make a false entry on our lists.... But there is just another point we ought not to leave uninvestigated. Let us take the case of deceiving a friend to his detriment: which is the more wrongful—to do so voluntarily or unintentionally?

Soc. Of course you can! Anything's better than making a false entry on our lists.... But there's one more thing we shouldn't overlook. Let's consider the situation where you deceive a friend to their disadvantage: which is worse—doing it on purpose or accidentally?

Euth. Really, Socrates, I have ceased to believe in my own answers, for all my former admissions and conceptions seem to me other than I first supposed them. (32) Still, if I may hazard one more opinion, the intentional deceiver, I should say, is worse than the involuntary.

Euth. Honestly, Socrates, I’ve stopped believing in my own answers, because all my previous beliefs and ideas seem different from what I initially thought. (32) Still, if I can share one more opinion, I would say that someone who deceives on purpose is worse than someone who does it unintentionally.

 (32) Or, "all my original positions seem to me now other than I first
    conceived them"; or, "everything I first asserted seems now to be
    twisted topsy-turvy."
(32) Or, "all my original ideas now seem different from how I first thought of them"; or, "everything I initially claimed now feels completely turned upside down."

Soc. And is it your opinion that there is a lore and science of Right and Justice just as there is of letters and grammar? (33)

Soc. Do you think there’s a knowledge and study of Right and Justice just like there is for literature and grammar? (33)

 (33) {mathesis kai episteme tou dikaiou}—a doctrine and a knowledge
    of the Just.
(33) {mathesis kai episteme tou dikaiou}—a theory and an understanding of the Just.

Euth. That is my opinion.

Euthanasia. That's my opinion.

Soc. And which should you say was more a man of letters (34)—he who intentionally misspells or misreads, or he who does so unconsciously?

Soc. So, who would you say is more of a man of letters (34)—the one who intentionally misspells or misreads, or the one who does it without realizing?

 (34) Or, "more grammatical"; "the better grammarian."
(34) Or, "more grammatically correct"; "the better at grammar."

Euth. He who does so intentionally, I should say, because he can spell or read correctly whenever he chooses.

Euth. I mean, someone who does it on purpose, since they can spell or read accurately whenever they want.

Soc. Then the voluntary misspeller may be a lettered person, but the involuntary offender is an illiterate? (35)

Soc. So, the person who chooses to misspell words might be educated, but the one who does it accidentally is uneducated? (35)

 (35) Or, "In fact, he who sins against the lore of grammer
    intentionally may be a good grammarian and a man of letters, but
    he who does so involuntarily is illiterate and a bad grammarian?"
(35) Or, "In fact, someone who intentionally goes against grammar rules might be a good grammarian and a skilled writer, but someone who does it unintentionally is uneducated and a poor grammarian?"

Euth. True, he must be. I do not see how to escape from that conclusion.

Euth. That’s true, he has to be. I don’t see how to avoid that conclusion.

Soc. And which of the two knows what is right—he who intentionally lies and deceives, or he who lies and deceives unconsciously? (36)

Soc. And which of the two knows what is right—he who lies and deceives on purpose, or he who lies and deceives without realizing it? (36)

 (36) Or, Soc. And does he who lies and deceives with intent know what
    is right rather than he who does either or both unconsciously?

    Euth. Clearly he does.
(36) Or, Soc. And does the person who lies and deceives on purpose understand what is right better than the one who does either or both without realizing it?

    Euth. Clearly he does.

Euth. The intentional and conscious liar clearly.

Euth. The deliberate and aware liar, obviously.

Soc. Well then, your statement is this: on the one hand, the man who has the knowledge of letters is more lettered than he who has no such knowledge? (37)

Soc. So, what you're saying is this: on one hand, someone who knows how to read and write is more educated than someone who doesn't have that knowledge? (37)

 (37)  Or, Soc. It is a fair inference, is it not, that he who has the
    {episteme} of grammar is more grammatical than he who has no such
    {episteme}?

    Euth. Yes.

    Soc. And he who has the {episteme} of things rightful is more
    righteous than he who lacks the {episteme}? See Plat. "Hipp.
    min."; Arist. "Eth. Eud." VI. v. 7.
(37) Or, Soc. It's a reasonable conclusion, isn't it, that someone who understands grammar is more grammatical than someone who doesn't have that knowledge?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And someone who knows what's right is more just than someone who lacks that understanding? See Plat. "Hipp. min."; Arist. "Eth. Eud." VI. v. 7.

Euth. Yes.

Euthanasia. Yes.

Soc. And, on the other, he who has the knowledge of what is right is more righteous than he who lacks that knowledge?

Soc. And, on the other hand, someone who knows what’s right is more righteous than someone who doesn’t have that knowledge?

Euth. I suppose it is, but for the life of me I cannot make head or tail of my own admission. (38)

Euth. I guess it is, but honestly, I can't make sense of my own admission. (38)

 (38) Lit. "Apparently; but I appear to myself to be saying this also,
    heaven knows how." See Jowett, "Plato," ii. p. 416 (ed. 2).
(38) Lit. "Apparently; but I feel like I'm saying this too, heaven knows how." See Jowett, "Plato," ii. p. 416 (ed. 2).

Soc. Well (look at it like this). Suppose a man to be anxious to speak the truth, but he is never able to hold the same language about a thing for two minutes together. First he says: "The road is towards the east," and then he says, "No, it's towards the west"; or, running up a column of figures, now he makes the product this, and again he makes it that, now more, now less—what do you think of such a man?

Soc. Well, think of it this way. Imagine a guy who really wants to tell the truth, but he can’t stick to the same idea for more than two minutes. First he says, "The road goes east," and then he says, "No, it's going west"; or when he adds up some numbers, sometimes he gets one result, and at other times he gets a different one, sometimes higher, sometimes lower—what do you think about someone like that?

Euth. Heaven help us! clearly he does not know what he thought he knew.

Euth. Wow! It’s obvious he doesn’t really know what he thought he knew.

Soc. And you know the appellation given to certain people—"slavish," (39) or, "little better than a slave?"

Soc. And you know the term used for certain people—"slavish," or "barely better than a slave?"

 (39) {andropododeis}, which has the connotation of mental dulness, and
    a low order of intellect, cf. "boorish," "rustic," "loutish,"
    ("pariah," conceivably). "Slavish," "servile," with us connote
    moral rather than intellectual deficiency, I suppose. Hence it is
    impossible to preserve the humour of the Socratic argument. See
    Newman, op. cit. i. 107.
(39) {andropododeis}, which suggests a lack of mental sharpness and a lower level of intelligence, similar to "boorish," "rustic," and "loutish" (possibly "pariah"). "Slavish" and "servile" convey a moral deficiency rather than an intellectual one, I think. Therefore, it's difficult to maintain the humor of the Socratic argument. See Newman, op. cit. i. 107.

Euth. I do.

Euthanasia. I do.

Soc. Is it a term suggestive of the wisdom or the ignorance of those to whom it is applied?

Soc. Is it a term that reflects the wisdom or ignorance of those it describes?

Euth. Clearly of their ignorance.

Euth. Clearly showing their ignorance.

Soc. Ignorance, for instance, of smithying?

Soc. Ignorance, for example, about blacksmithing?

Euth. No, certainly not.

Euthanasia? No, definitely not.

Soc. Then possibly ignorance of carpentering?

Soc. So, maybe you don't know anything about woodworking?

Euth. No, nor yet ignorance of carpentering.

Euth. No, nor am I unaware of carpentry.

Soc. Well, ignorance of shoemaking?

So, you don't know about shoemaking?

Euth. No, nor ignorance of any of these: rather the reverse, for the majority of those who do know just these matters are "little better than slaves."

Euth. No, nor are they unaware of any of this; in fact, it's the opposite, because most people who do know about these issues are "hardly better than slaves."

Soc. You mean it is a title particularly to those who are ignorant of the beautiful, the good, the just? (40)

Soc. You mean it's a title specifically for those who are unaware of what is beautiful, good, and just? (40)

 (40) Cf. Goethe's "Im Ganzen Guten Schonen resolut zu leben."
 (40) See Goethe's "To live resolutely in the good and beautiful as a whole."

It is, in my opinion (he replied).

It is, I believe (he replied).

Soc. Then we must in every way strain every nerve to avoid the imputation of being slaves?

Soc. So, we have to do everything we can to avoid being accused of being slaves?

Euth. Nay, Socrates, by all that is holy, I did flatter myself that at any rate I was a student of philosophy, and on the right road to be taught everything essential to one who would fain make beauty and goodness his pursuit. (41) So that now you may well imagine my despair when, for all my pains expended, I cannot even answer the questions put to me about what most of all a man should know; and there is no path of progress open to me, no avenue of improvement left.

Euth. No, Socrates, I truly believed that I was a philosophy student, on the right path to learning everything important for someone who wants to pursue beauty and goodness. (41) So you can imagine my despair now, since despite all my efforts, I can't even answer the questions about what a person should know the most; there's no way forward for me, no chance to improve left.

 (41) {tes kalokagathias}, the virtue of the {kalos te kagathos}—
    nobility of soul. Cf. above, I. vi. 14.
(41) {tes kalokagathias}, the virtue of the {kalos te kagathos}—  
    nobility of soul. Cf. above, I. vi. 14.

Thereupon Socrates: Tell me, Euthydemus, have you ever been to Delphi?

Thereupon Socrates: Tell me, Euthydemus, have you ever been to Delphi?

Yes, certainly; twice (said he).

Sure, twice (he said).

Soc. And did you notice an inscription somewhere on the temple: {GNOMI SEAUTON}—KNOW THYSELF?

Soc. And did you see an inscription on the temple: {GNOMI SEAUTON}—KNOW THYSELF?

Euth. I did.

Euthanasia. I did.

Soc. Did you, possibly, pay no regard to the inscription? or did you give it heed and try to discover who and what you were?

Soc. Did you not notice the inscription? Or did you pay attention to it and try to find out who you are and what you’re about?

I can safely say I did not (he answered). That much I made quite sure I knew, at any rate; since if I did not know even myself, what in the world did I know?

I can confidently say I didn’t (he replied). I was definitely sure about that; after all, if I didn’t even know myself, what the heck did I know?

Soc. Can a man be said, do you think, to know himself who knows his own name and nothing more? or must he not rather set to work precisely like the would-be purchaser of a horse, who certainly does not think that he has got the knowledge he requires until he has discovered whether the beast is tractable or stubborn, strong or weak, quick or slow, and how it stands with the other points, serviceable or the reverse, in reference to the use and purpose of a horse? So, I say, must a man in like manner interrogate his own nature in reference to a man's requirements, and learn to know his own capacities, must he not?

Soc. Do you think a person can truly know themselves if they only know their name and nothing else? Or shouldn’t they work like someone trying to buy a horse, who doesn't believe they have the knowledge they need until they find out if the horse is easygoing or stubborn, strong or weak, fast or slow, and how it measures up in other important ways related to its use and purpose? In the same way, I believe a person must question their own nature regarding what they need and understand their own abilities, right?

Euth. Yes, so it strikes me: he who knows not his own ability knows not himself.

Euth. Yes, I see what you mean: someone who doesn’t understand their own abilities doesn’t really know themselves.

Soc. And this too is plain, is it not: that through self-knowledge men meet with countless blessings, and through ignorance of themselves with many evils? Because, the man who knows himself knows what is advantageous to himself; he discerns the limits of his powers, and by doing what he knows, he provides himself with what he needs and so does well; or, conversely, by holding aloof from what he knows not, he avoids mistakes and thereby mishaps. And having now a test to gauge other human beings he uses their need as a stepping-stone to provide himself with good and to avoid evil. Whereas he who does not know himself, but is mistaken as to his own capacity, is in like predicament to the rest of mankind and all human matters else; he neither knows what he wants, nor what he is doing, nor the people whom he deals with; and being all abroad in these respects, he misses what is good and becomes involved in what is ill.

Soc. It's pretty clear, right? By knowing themselves, people experience countless blessings, while ignorance leads to many problems. A person who understands themselves knows what benefits them; they recognize their limitations and by acting within that knowledge, they get what they need and succeed. On the other hand, by staying away from what they don't understand, they avoid errors and the troubles that come with them. With this self-awareness, they can also assess others and use their needs to create good opportunities for themselves and steer clear of bad situations. In contrast, someone who doesn’t understand themselves, and overestimates their abilities, finds themselves in the same boat as everyone else. They don’t know what they truly want, what actions they’re taking, or who they’re dealing with. Being lost in these areas, they miss out on the good and get caught up in the bad.

Again, he that knows what he is doing through the success of his performance attains to fame and honour; his peers and co-mates are glad to make use of him, whilst his less successful neighbours, failing in their affairs, are anxious to secure his advice, his guidance, his protection; (42) they place their hopes of happiness in him, and for all these causes (43) single him out as the chief object of their affection. He, on the contrary, who knows not what he does, who chooses amiss and fails in what he puts his hands to, not only incurs loss and suffers chastisement through his blunders, but step by step loses reputation and becomes a laughing-stock, and in the end is doomed to a life of dishonour and contempt.

Once again, someone who knows what they're doing and succeeds at it gains fame and respect; their peers and colleagues are eager to work with them, while those who don't succeed in their own endeavors are desperate for their advice, guidance, and protection. They pin their hopes for happiness on that successful person and, for all these reasons, view them as the primary focus of their affection. In contrast, someone who doesn't know what they're doing, who makes poor choices and fails at their tasks, not only faces losses and consequences for their mistakes but also gradually loses their reputation, becoming a laughingstock. In the end, they are destined for a life filled with dishonor and scorn.

 (42) Cf. Dante, "Tu duca, tu maestro, tu signore."

 (43) Reading, {dia panta tauta}, or if {dia tauta}, translate "and
    therefore."
 (42) Cf. Dante, "You guide, you teacher, you lord."

 (43) Reading, {dia panta tauta}, or if {dia tauta}, translate "and therefore."

What is true of individuals is true also of communities. (44) That state which in ignorance of its power goes to war with a stronger than itself ends by being uprooted or else reduced to slavery.

What is true for individuals is also true for communities. (44) A state that, unaware of its own strength, goes to war with a more powerful opponent ends up being destroyed or reduced to slavery.

 (44) Or, more lit. "A law which applies, you will observe, to bodies
    politic."
(44) Or, more literally, "A law that applies, as you will notice, to political bodies."

Thereupon Euthydemus: Be assured I fully concur in your opinion; the precept KNOW THYSELF cannot be too highly valued; but what is the application? What the starting-point of self-examination? I look to you for an explanation, if you would kindly give one. (45)

Thereupon Euthydemus: I totally agree with you; the idea of KNOW THYSELF is incredibly important, but what's the practical application? Where do we start with self-examination? I'm looking to you for an explanation, if you could kindly provide one. (45)

 (45) Or, "at what point to commence the process of self-inspection?—
    there is the mystery. I look to you, if you are willing, to
    interpret it."
 (45) Or, "when should we start the process of self-reflection?—  
    that's the mystery. I'm counting on you, if you're up for it, to 
    explain it."

Well (replied Socrates), I presume you know quite well the distinction between good and bad things: your knowledge may be relied upon so far?

Well (replied Socrates), I believe you understand the difference between good and bad things: can your knowledge be trusted to that extent?

Why, yes, to be sure (replied the youth); for without that much discernment I should indeed be worse than any slave. (46)

Why, yes, of course (the young man replied); because without that level of understanding, I would truly be worse than any slave. (46)

 (46) Lit. "if I did not know even that."
(46) Lit. "if I didn't even know that."

Come then (said he), do you give me an explanation of the things so termed.

Come then, he said, can you explain what those things are?

That is fortunately not hard (replied the youth). First of all, health in itself I hold to be a good, and disease in itself an evil; and in the next place the sources of either of those aforenamed, meats and drinks, and habits of life, (47) I regard as good or evil according as they contribute either to health or to disease.

That’s actually not difficult, the young man replied. First of all, I believe that health is a good thing, while illness is a bad thing. Additionally, I see the sources of those two, like food, drinks, and lifestyle habits, as good or bad depending on whether they promote health or cause illness.

 (47) Or, "pursuits and occupations"; "manners and customs."
(47) Or, "activities and jobs"; "habits and traditions."

Soc. Then health and disease themselves when they prove to be sources of any good are good, but when of any evil, evil?

Soc. So, health and disease are considered good when they result in something positive, but are seen as bad when they lead to negative outcomes?

And when (asked he), can health be a source of evil, or disease a source of good?

And when asked, can health be a source of harm, or can illness bring about anything good?

Why, bless me! often enough (replied Socrates). In the event, for instance, of some ill-starred expedition or of some disastrous voyage or other incident of the sort, of which veritably there are enough to spare—when those who owing to their health and strength take a part in the affair are lost; whilst those who were left behind—as hors de combat, on account of ill-health of other feebleness—are saved.

Why, goodness! This happens quite often (Socrates replied). For example, in the case of a poorly planned mission or a disastrous journey, or any unfortunate event like that—of which there are certainly plenty to go around—those who are strong and healthy and take part in the situation may end up losing their lives; while those who stayed behind—because they were sick or weak—are the ones who are saved.

Euth. Yes, you are right; but you will admit that there are advantages to be got from strength and lost through weakness.

Euth. Yes, you're right; but you have to agree that there are benefits that come from being strong and drawbacks that come from being weak.

Soc. Even so; but ought we to regard those things which at one moment benefit and at another moment injure us in any strict sense good rather than evil?

Soc. Even so; but should we really consider things that can help us at one moment and harm us at another as strictly good instead of evil?

Euth. No, certainly not, according to that line of argument. But wisdom, (48) Socrates, you must on your side admit, is irrefragably a good; since there is nothing which or in which a wise man would not do better than a fool.

Euth. No, definitely not, based on that reasoning. But wisdom, (48) Socrates, you have to agree, is undeniably good; after all, there's nothing that a wise person wouldn't handle better than a fool.

 (48) See above, III. ix. 5. Here {sophia} is not = {sophrosune}.
(48) See above, III. ix. 5. Here {sophia} is not equal to {sophrosune}.

Soc. What say you? Have you never heard of Daedalus, (49) how he was seized by Minos on account of his wisdom, and forced to be his slave, and robbed of fatherland and freedom at one swoop? and how, while endeavouring to make his escape with his son, he caused the boy's death without effecting his own salvation, but was carried off among barbarians and again enslaved?

Soc. What do you think? Have you never heard of Daedalus, how Minos captured him because of his intelligence, making him his slave, taking away his homeland and freedom all at once? And how, while trying to escape with his son, he ended up causing the boy's death without saving himself, only to be taken away by barbarians and enslaved again?

 (49) See Ovid. "Met." viii. 159 foll., 261 foll.; Hygin. "Fab." 39,
    40; Diod. Sic. iv. 79; Paus. vii. 4. 6.
(49) See Ovid. "Met." viii. 159 and following, 261 and following; Hygin. "Fab." 39, 40; Diod. Sic. iv. 79; Paus. vii. 4. 6.

Yes, I know the old story (he answered). (50)

Yes, I know the old story, he replied. (50)

 (50) Or, "Ah yes, of course; the tale is current."
(50) Or, "Oh yes, of course; the story is well-known."

Soc. Or have you not heard of the "woes of Palamedes," (51) that commonest theme of song, how for his wisdom's sake Odysseus envied him and slew him?

Soc. Or haven’t you heard of the "woes of Palamedes," (51) that most popular theme of songs, how Odysseus envied him for his wisdom and killed him?

 (51) See Virg. "Aen." ii. 90; Hygin. 105; Philostr. "Her." x.
(51) See Virg. "Aen." ii. 90; Hygin. 105; Philostr. "Her." x.

Euth. That tale also is current.

Euth. That story is also well-known.

Soc. And how many others, pray, do you suppose have been seized on account of their wisdom, and despatched to the great king and at his court enslaved? (52)

Soc. And how many others, I wonder, do you think have been taken because of their intelligence, and sent to the great king, only to be enslaved at his court? (52)

 (52) Cf. Herod. iii. 129.
(52) See Herodotus iii. 129.

Well, prosperity, well-being (53) (he exclaimed), must surely be a blessing, and that the most indisputable, Socrates?

Well, prosperity and well-being (53) (he exclaimed) must surely be a blessing, right, Socrates?

 (53) {to eudaimonein}, "happiness." Cf. Herod. i. 86.
(53) {to eudaimonein}, "happiness." See Herod. i. 86.

It might be so (replied the philosopher) if it chanced not to be in itself a compound of other questionable blessings.

It could be true, replied the philosopher, if it just didn’t happen to be made up of other uncertain benefits.

Euth. And which among the components of happiness and well-being can possibly be questionable?

Euth. And which parts of happiness and well-being could possibly be in doubt?

None (he retorted), unless of course we are to include among these components beauty, or strength, or wealth, or reputation, or anything else of that kind?

None, he replied, unless we're going to include things like beauty, strength, wealth, reputation, or anything similar?

Euth. By heaven! of course we are to include these, for what would happiness be without these?

Euth. By heaven! Of course we have to include these, because what would happiness be without them?

Soc. By heaven! yes; only then we shall be including the commonest sources of mischief which befall mankind. How many are ruined by their fair faces at the hand of admirers driven to distraction (54) by the sight of beauty in its bloom! how many, tempted by their strength to essay deeds beyond their power, are involved in no small evils! how many, rendered effeminate by reason of their wealth, have been plotted against and destroyed! (55) how many through fame and political power have suffered a world of woe!

Soc. By heaven! Yes; but then we would also cover the most common sources of trouble that affect humanity. How many people are ruined by their beautiful looks, leaving admirers driven mad by the sight of such beauty! How many, lured by their own strength to attempt actions beyond their ability, find themselves in significant trouble! How many, softened by their wealth, have fallen victim to plots and destruction! How many have endured endless misery due to fame and political power!

 (54) Cf. Plat. "Rep." vii. 517 D; "Phaedr." 249 D.

 (55) e.g. Alcibiades.
(54) See Plato, "Republic," Book VII, 517 D; "Phaedrus," 249 D.

(55) For example, Alcibiades.

Well (the youth replied) if I am not even right in praising happiness, I must confess I know not for what one ought to supplicate the gods in prayer. (56)

Well, the young person replied, if I’m not even right in praising happiness, I must admit I don’t know what one should ask the gods for in prayer. (56)

 (56) See above for Socrates' own form of supplication.
(56) See above for Socrates' own way of requesting help.

Nay, these are matters (proceeded Socrates) which perhaps, through excessive confidence in your knowledge of them, you have failed to examine into; but since the state, which you are preparing yourself to direct, is democratically constituted, (57) of course you know what a democracy is.

No, these are issues (Socrates continued) that you might have overlooked due to your overconfidence in your understanding of them. But since you are getting ready to lead a state that is set up as a democracy, (57) you must know what a democracy is.

 (57) Or, "popularly governed."
Or, "democratically governed."

Euth. I presume I do, decidedly.

Euth. I definitely think I do.

Soc. Well, now, is it possible to know what a popular state is without knowing who the people are?

Soc. Well, is it really possible to know what a good society is without knowing who the people are?

Euth. Certainly not.

Euthanasia? Definitely not.

Soc. And whom do you consider to be the people?

Soc. And who do you think the people are?

Euth. The poor citizens, I should say.

Euth. I mean, the poor citizens.

Soc. Then you know who the poor are, of course?

Soc. So you know who the poor are, right?

Euth. Of course I do.

Euth. Absolutely, I do.

Soc. I presume you also know who the rich are?

Soc. I guess you know who the wealthy are too?

Euth. As certainly as I know who are the poor.

Euth. As sure as I know who the poor are.

Soc. Whom do you understand by poor and rich?

Soc. Who do you consider poor and rich?

Euth. By poor I mean those who have not enough to pay for their necessaries, (58) and by rich those who have more means than sufficient for all their needs.

Euth. By "poor," I mean those who don't have enough money to cover their basic needs, and by "rich," I mean those who have more than enough to meet all their needs.

 (58) Al. "who cannot contribute their necessary quota to the taxes
    (according to the census)."
(58) Al. "who can't contribute their required share to the taxes (based on the census)."

Soc. Have you noticed that some who possess a mere pittance not only find this sufficient, but actually succeed in getting a surplus out of it; while others do not find a large fortune large enough?

Soc. Have you noticed that some people who have very little, not only manage to make it enough, but actually succeed in getting more from it; while others find that a big fortune isn’t enough for them?

I have, most certainly; and I thank you for the reminder (replied Euthydemus). One has heard of crowned heads and despotic rulers being driven by want to commit misdeeds like the veriest paupers.

I definitely have, and I appreciate the reminder (Euthydemus replied). It’s known that even kings and tyrants, when in need, can resort to wrongdoings just like the poorest of people.

Then, if that is how matters stand (continued Socrates), we must class these same crowned heads with the commonalty; and some possessors of scant fortunes, provided they are good economists, with the wealthy?

Then, if that’s how things are (Socrates continued), we should group these same crowned heads with the common people; and some holders of limited wealth, as long as they’re good at managing their resources, with the rich?

Then Euthydemus: It is the poverty of my own wit which forces me to this admission. I bethink me it is high time to keep silence altogether; a little more, and I shall be proved to know absolutely nothing. And so he went away crestfallen, in an agony of self-contempt, persuaded that he was verily and indeed no better than a slave.

Then Euthydemus said: It's my own lack of intelligence that leads me to admit this. I realize it's best to just stay quiet; if I say anything more, I'll show that I really know nothing at all. And so he left, feeling defeated and full of self-hatred, convinced that he was truly no better than a slave.

Amongst those who were reduced to a like condition by Socrates, many refused to come near him again, whom he for his part looked upon as dolts and dullards. (59) But Euthydemus had the wit to understand that, in order to become worthy of account, his best plan was to associate as much as possible with Socrates; and from that moment, save for some necessity, he never left him—in some points even imitating him in his habits and pursuits. Socrates, on his side, seeing that this was the young man's disposition, disturbed him as little as possible, but in the simplest and plainest manner initiated him into everything which he held to be needful to know or important to practise.

Among those who were put in a similar situation by Socrates, many refused to approach him again, and he viewed them as fools and simpletons. (59) However, Euthydemus realized that his best strategy to gain respect was to spend as much time as possible with Socrates; from that point on, except for when necessary, he was always by his side, even mimicking some of his habits and interests. Socrates, recognizing the young man's eagerness, bothered him as little as possible and simply and clearly introduced him to everything he believed was essential to know or important to practice.

 (59) Or, "as people of dull intelligence and sluggish temperament."
    Cf. Plat. "Gorg." 488 A.
(59) Or, "as people with a lack of intelligence and slow temperament."  
    Cf. Plat. "Gorg." 488 A.

III

III

It may be inferred that Socrates was in no hurry for those who were with him to discover capacities for speech and action or as inventive geniuses, (1) without at any rate a well-laid foundation of self-control. (2) For those who possessed such abilities without these same saving virtues would, he believed, only become worse men with greater power for mischief. His first object was to instil into those who were with him a wise spirit in their relation to the gods. (3) That such was the tenor of his conversation in dealing with men may be seen from the narratives of others who were present on some particular occasion. (4) I confine myself to a particular discussion with Euthydemus at which I was present.

It can be inferred that Socrates wasn't in a hurry for those around him to discover their ability to speak and act or to be inventive geniuses, (1) unless they had a solid foundation of self-control. (2) He believed that those who had such talents without these important virtues would only become worse individuals with more power to cause harm. His primary goal was to instill a wise attitude in those around him regarding their relationship with the gods. (3) This focus in his conversations with others can be seen in the accounts of people who witnessed specific occasions. (4) I will focus on a particular discussion with Euthydemus that I attended.

 (1) Or, "as speakers" (see ch. vi. below), "and men of action" (see
    ch. v. below), "or as masters of invention" (see ch. vii. below).

 (2) Or, "but as prior to those excellences must be engrafted in them
    {sophrosune} (the virtues of temperance and sanity of soul)."

 (3) Lit. "His first object and endeavour was to make those who were
    with him {sophronas} (sound of soul) as regards the gods."

 (4) Reading after Herbst, Cobet, etc., {diegountai}, or if vulg.
    {diegounto}, translate, "from the current accounts penned during
    his lifetime by the other witnesses." For {alloi} see K. Joel, op.
    cit. pp. 15, 23; above, "Mem." I. iv. 1.
 (1) Or, "as speakers" (see ch. vi. below), "and doers" (see ch. v. below), "or as inventors" (see ch. vii. below).

 (2) Or, "but before those qualities can be added to them, {sophrosune} (the virtues of self-control and clear-mindedness) must be instilled."

 (3) Literally, "His main goal and effort was to make those who were with him {sophronas} (sound of soul) regarding the gods."

 (4) Following Herbst, Cobet, etc., reading {diegountai}, or if commonly used {diegounto}, translate, "from the current accounts written during his life by other witnesses." For {alloi} see K. Joel, op. cit. pp. 15, 23; above, "Mem." I. iv. 1.

Socrates said: (5) Tell me, Euthydemus, has it ever struck you to observe what tender pains the gods have taken to furnish man with all his needs?

Socrates said: (5) Tell me, Euthydemus, have you ever noticed how much effort the gods have put into providing for all of man's needs?

 (5) For the subject matter of this "teleological" chapter, see above,
    I. iv.; K. Joel, op. cit. Appendix, p. 547 foll. in ref. to
    Dummler's views.
(5) For the topic of this "teleological" chapter, see above, I. iv.; K. Joel, op. cit. Appendix, p. 547 foll. in reference to Dummler's views.

Euth. No indeed, I cannot say that it has ever struck me.

Euth. No, I honestly can't say that it's ever crossed my mind.

Well (Socrates continued), you do not need to be reminded that, in the first place, we need light, and with light the gods supply us.

Well (Socrates continued), you don’t need to be reminded that, first of all, we need light, and the gods provide us with that light.

Euth. Most true, and if we had not got it we should, as far as our own eyes could help us, be like men born blind.

Euth. That's very true, and if we didn't have it, we would, as far as our own sight could assist us, be like people born blind.

Soc. And then, again, seeing that we stand in need of rest and relaxation, they bestow upon us "the blessed balm of silent night." (6)

Soc. And then, again, since we need rest and relaxation, they give us "the blessed balm of silent night." (6)

 (6) {kalliston anapauterion}. The diction throughout is "poetical."
(6) {kalliston anapauterion}. The language throughout is "poetic."

Yes (he answered), we are much beholden for that boon.

Yes, he replied, we are very grateful for that gift.

Soc. Then, forasmuch as the sun in his splendour makes manifest to us the hours of the day and bathes all things in brightness, but anon night in her darkness obliterates distinctions, have they not displayed aloft the starry orbs, which inform us of the watches of the night, whereby we can accomplish many of our needs? (7)

Soc. So, just like the sun in its brightness shows us the hours of the day and lights up everything, night, in its darkness, hides distinctions. Haven’t they, therefore, set the starry skies above us to guide us through the night, helping us fulfill many of our needs? (7)

 (7) e.g. for temple orientation see Dr. Penrose quoted by Norman
    Lockyer, "Nature," August 31. 1893.
(7) e.g. for temple orientation see Dr. Penrose quoted by Norman Lockyer, "Nature," August 31, 1893.

It is so (he answered).

It sure is (he answered).

Soc. And let us not forget that the moon herself not only makes clear to us the quarters of the night, but of the month also?

Soc. And let’s not forget that the moon herself not only shows us the phases of the night but also the phases of the month, right?

Certainly (he answered).

Sure.

Soc. And what of this: that whereas we need nutriment, this too the heavenly powers yield us? Out of earth's bosom they cause good to spring up (8) for our benefit; and for our benefit provide appropriate seasons to furnish us in turn not only with the many and diverse objects of need, but with the sources also of our joy and gladness? (9)

Soc. And what about this: while we need food, the heavenly powers provide it for us? They make good things grow from the earth for our benefit; and they give us the right seasons so we can have not only various things we need but also the sources of our joy and happiness?

 (8) Cf. Plat. "Laws," 747 D.

 (9) Or, "pleasure."
(8) See Plato's "Laws," 747 D.

(9) Or, "enjoyment."

Yes (he answered eagerly), these things bear token truly to a love for man. (10)

Yes, he answered eagerly, these things genuinely show a love for humanity. (10)

 (10) Cf. Plat. "Laws," 713 D; "Symp." 189 D. "These things are signs
    of a beneficient regard for man."
(10) Cf. Plat. "Laws," 713 D; "Symp." 189 D. "These things are signs of a caring attitude towards humanity."

Soc. Well, and what of another priceless gift, that of water, which conspires with earth and the seasons to give both birth and increase to all things useful to us; nay, which helps to nurture our very selves, and commingling with all that feeds us, renders it more digestible, more wholesome, and more pleasant to the taste; and mark you in proportion to the abundance of our need the superabundance of its supply. What say you concerning such a boon?

Soc. Well, what about another invaluable resource, water, which works together with the earth and the seasons to create and sustain everything we need? It even helps nurture us, mixing with everything that nourishes us to make it easier to digest, healthier, and more enjoyable to eat. And notice that the more we need, the more is available to us. What do you think about such a gift?

Euth. In this again I see a sign of providential care.

Euth. Here too, I see a sign of divine care.

Soc. And then the fact that the same heavenly power has provided us with fire (11)—our assistant against cold, our auxiliary in darkness, our fellow-workman in every art and every instrument which for the sake of its utility mortal man may invent or furnish himself withal. What of this, since, to put it compendiously, there is nothing serviceable to the life of man worth speaking of but owes its fabrication to fire? (12)

Soc. And then the fact that the same heavenly power has given us fire—our helper against the cold, our support in darkness, our partner in every art and every tool that, for its usefulness, humans might create or provide themselves with. What do you think about this, since, to keep it brief, there’s nothing important for human life that isn’t made possible by fire?

 (11) Lit. "and then the fact that they made provision for us of even
    fire"; the credit of this boon, according to Hesiod, being due to
    Prometheus.

 (12) Or, "no life-aiding appliance worthy of the name."
(11) Lit. "and then the fact that they provided us with even fire"; the credit for this gift, according to Hesiod, goes to Prometheus.

(12) Or, "no life-supporting tool that deserves the name."

Euth. Yes, a transcendent instance of benevolent design. (13)

Euth. Yes, an incredible example of thoughtful design. (13)

 (13) Or, "Yes, that may be called an extreme instance of the divine
    'philanthropy.'" Cf. Cic. "de N. D." ii. 62.
(13) Or, "Yes, that could be seen as an extreme example of divine 'philanthropy.'" Cf. Cic. "de N. D." ii. 62.

Soc. Again, consider the motions of the Sun, (14) how when he has turned him about in winter (15) he again draws nigh to us, ripening some fruits, and causing others whose time is past to dry up; how when he has fulfilled his work he comes no closer, but turns away as if in fear to scorch us to our hurt unduly; and again, when he has reached a point where if he should prolong his retreat we should plainly be frozen to death with cold, note how he turns him about and resumes his approach, traversing that region of the heavens where he may shed his genial influence best upon us.

Soc. Think about the movements of the Sun, (14) how in winter, when he turns away from us, (15) he eventually comes closer again, ripening some fruits and causing others that are past their time to dry up; how, after completing his work, he doesn't come any closer but moves away as if he's afraid of burning us too much; and then, when he's at a point where if he stayed away longer we would clearly freeze to death, notice how he turns back and comes closer again, moving through the part of the sky where he can best share his warm influence with us.

 (14) A single MS. inserts a passage {to de kai era...
    'Anekphraston}.

 (15) i.e. as we say, "after the winter solstice."
(14) A single MS. inserts a passage {to de kai era... 'Anekphraston}.

(15) i.e. as we say, "after the winter solstice."

Yes, upon my word (he answered), these occurrences bear the impress of being so ordered for the sake of man.

Yes, I swear (he replied), these events clearly seem to be arranged for the benefit of humanity.

Soc. And then, again, it being manifest that we could not endure either scorching heat or freezing cold if they came suddenly upon us, note how gradually the sun approaches, and how gradually recedes, so that we fail to notice how we come at last to either extreme. (16)

Soc. And then, again, it’s clear that we couldn’t handle either intense heat or freezing cold if they hit us all at once. Notice how slowly the sun rises and how slowly it sets, so we don’t really realize how we eventually end up in either extreme. (16)

 (16) Or, "note the gradual approach and gradual recession of the sun-
    god, so gradual that we reach either extreme in a manner
    imperceptibly, and before we are aware of its severity."
(16) Or, "notice how the sun god rises and sets slowly, so slowly that we reach either extreme without really noticing, and before we even realize how intense it can be."

For my part (he replied), the question forces itself upon my mind, whether the gods have any other occupation save only to minister to man; and I am only hindered from saying so, because the rest of animals would seem to share these benefits along with man.

For my part (he replied), I can’t help but wonder if the gods have any other job besides serving humanity; and I hesitate to say this because it seems like the rest of the animals would also enjoy these benefits along with humans.

Soc. Why, to be sure; and is it not plain that these animals themselves are born and bred for the sake of man? At any rate, no living creature save man derives so many of his enjoyments from sheep and goats, horses and cattle and asses, and other animals. He is more dependent, I should suppose, on these than even on plants and vegetables. At any rate, equally with these latter they serve him as means of subsistence or articles of commerce; indeed, a large portion of the human family do not use the products of the soil as food at all, but live on the milk and cheese and flesh of their flocks and herds, whilst all men everywhere tame and domesticate the more useful kinds of animals, and turn them to account as fellow-workers in war and for other purposes.

Soc. Of course; and isn’t it obvious that these animals are born and raised for the benefit of humans? In any case, no other living creature, except for humans, gets so much enjoyment from sheep and goats, horses, cattle, donkeys, and other animals. I would guess that we rely on them even more than on plants and vegetables. They equally provide us with food and goods for trade; in fact, many people don’t eat crops at all but live on the milk, cheese, and meat from their livestock, while everywhere, humans tame and domesticate the more useful types of animals and use them as partners in war and for other purposes.

Yes, I cannot but agree with what you say (he answered), when I see that animals so much stronger than man become so subservient to his hand that he can use them as he lists.

Yes, I can’t help but agree with what you’re saying (he replied) when I see that animals much stronger than humans become so submissive to us that we can use them as we please.

Soc. And as we reflect on the infinite beauty and utility and the variety of nature, what are we to say of the fact that man has been endowed with sensibilities which correspond with this diversity, whereby we take our fill of every blessing; (17) or, again, this implanted faculty of reasoning, which enables us to draw inferences concerning the things which we perceive, and by aid of memory to understand how each set of things may be turned to our good, and to devise countless contrivances with a view to enjoying the good and repelling the evil; or lastly, when we consider the faculty bestowed upon us of interpretative speech, by which we are enabled to instruct one another, and to participate in all the blessings fore-named: to form societies, to establish laws, and to enter upon a civilised existence (18)—what are we to think?

Soc. As we think about the endless beauty, usefulness, and variety of nature, how should we view the fact that humans have been given sensibilities that align with this diversity, allowing us to enjoy every blessing? (17) What about this natural ability to reason, which helps us make inferences about what we perceive, and with the help of memory, understand how different things can benefit us, as well as create countless methods to enjoy the good and avoid the bad? And lastly, when we consider our ability to communicate, which lets us teach one another and share all these mentioned blessings: to form societies, create laws, and lead a civilized life (18)—what should we think?

 (17) Or, "Again, when we consider how many beautiful objects there are
    serviceable to man, and yet how unlike they are to one another,
    the fact that man has been endowed with senses adapted to each
    class of things, and so has access to a world of happiness."

 (18) Cf. Aristot. "Pol." III. ix. 5.
(17) Or, "Also, when we think about how many beautiful things are useful to people, and yet how different they are from each other, it's remarkable that humans have been given senses suited to each type of thing, allowing us to experience a world full of happiness."

(18) Cf. Aristot. "Pol." III. ix. 5.

Euth. Yes, Socrates, decidedly it would appear that the gods do manifest a great regard, nay, a tender care, towards mankind.

Euth. Yes, Socrates, it definitely seems that the gods show a significant concern, even a gentle care, for humanity.

Soc. Well, and what do you make of the fact that where we are powerless to take advantageous forethought for our future, at this stage they themselves lend us their co-operation, imparting to the inquirer through divination knowledge of events about to happen, and instructing him by what means they may best be turned to good account?

Soc. So, what do you think about the fact that when we can’t effectively plan for our future, they actually help us out? They provide insight into upcoming events through divination and guide us on how to make the best of those situations.

Euth. Ay, and you, Socrates, they would seem to treat in a more friendly manner still than the rest of men, if, without waiting even to be inquired of by you, they show you by signs beforehand what you must, and what you must not do. (19)

Euth. Yes, and you, Socrates, they seem to treat even more kindly than others, since they show you signs in advance about what you should and shouldn’t do, without even waiting for you to ask. (19)

 (19) See above, I. iv. 14, for a parallel to the train of thought on
    the part of Aristodemus "the little," and of Euthydemus; and for
    Socrates' {daimonion}, see above; Grote, "Plato," i. 400.
(19) See above, I. iv. 14, for a parallel to the line of thinking from Aristodemus "the little" and Euthydemus; and for Socrates' {daimonion}, see above; Grote, "Plato," i. 400.

Soc. Yes, and you will discover for yourself the truth of what I say, if, without waiting to behold the outward and visible forms (20) of the gods themselves, you will be content to behold their works; and with these before you, to worship and honour the Divine authors of them. (21) I would have you reflect that the very gods themselves suggest this teaching. (22) Not one of these but gives us freely of his blessings; yet they do not step from behind their veil in order to grant one single boon. (23) And pre-eminently He who orders and holds together the universe, (24) in which are all things beautiful and good; (25) who fashions and refashions it to never-ending use unworn, keeping it free from sickness or decay, (26) so that swifter than thought it ministers to his will unerringly—this God is seen to perform the mightiest operations, but in the actual administration of the same abides himself invisible to mortal ken. Reflect further, this Sun above our heads, so visible to all—as we suppose—will not suffer man to regard him too narrowly, but should any essay to watch him with a shameless stare he will snatch away their power of vision. And if the gods themselves are thus unseen, so too shall you find their ministers to be hidden also; from the height of heaven above the thunderbolt is plainly hurled, and triumphs over all that it encounters, yet it is all-invisible, no eye may detect its coming or its going at the moment of its swoop. The winds also are themselves unseen, though their works are manifest, and through their approach we are aware of them. And let us not forget, the soul of man himself, which if aught else human shares in the divine—however manifestly enthroned within our bosom, is as wholly as the rest hidden from our gaze. These things you should lay to mind, and not despise the invisible ones, but learn to recognise their power, as revealed in outward things, and to know the divine influence. (27)

Soc. Yes, you will see for yourself the truth of what I’m saying if, without waiting to see the physical forms of the gods themselves, you are willing to appreciate their works; and with these before you, worship and honor the Divine creators of them. I want you to think about how even the gods themselves suggest this teaching. Each of them freely shares their blessings; yet they don’t reveal themselves to grant a single favor. And especially He who orders and holds together the universe, in which everything beautiful and good exists; who shapes and reshapes it for endless use without wear, keeping it free from sickness or decay, so that faster than thought it carries out His will flawlessly—this God performs the greatest acts, but remains invisible to mortal eyes in the administration of these acts. Think further about this Sun above us, so visible to all—as we assume—who does not allow us to look too closely; if anyone tries to stare shamelessly, He will take away their ability to see. If the gods themselves are thus unseen, you will also find their servants to be hidden; from the heights of heaven, the thunderbolt is thrown down clearly, overcoming everything it encounters, yet it is entirely invisible; no one can see its approach or departure at the moment it strikes. The winds are also unseen, though their effects are obvious, and we become aware of them through their arrival. And let’s not forget the human soul itself, which, while sharing in the divine, although clearly present within us, is just as hidden from our sight as the rest. You should keep these thoughts in mind, and not undervalue the invisible ones, but learn to recognize their power as shown in visible things and understand the divine influence.

 (20) Cf. Cic. "de N. D." I. xii. 31; Lactantius, "de Ira," xi. 13.

 (21) See L. Dindorf ad loc. (ed. Ox. 1862), {theous}; G. Sauppe, vol.
    iii. "An. crit." p. xxix; R. Kuhner; C. Schenkl.

 (22) i.e. "that man must walk by faith." For {upodeiknunai} cf.
    "Econ." xii. 18.

 (23) Schneid. cf. Plat. "Crat." 396.

 (24) Or, "the co-ordinator and container of the universe."

 (25) Or, "in whom all beauty and goodness is."

 (26) Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. vii. 22; above, I. iv. 13.

 (27) {to daimonion}, the divinity.
(20) Cf. Cic. "de N. D." I. xii. 31; Lactantius, "de Ira," xi. 13.

(21) See L. Dindorf ad loc. (ed. Ox. 1862), {theous}; G. Sauppe, vol.
    iii. "An. crit." p. xxix; R. Kuhner; C. Schenkl.

(22) i.e. "that man must walk by faith." For {upodeiknunai} cf.
    "Econ." xii. 18.

(23) Schneid. cf. Plat. "Crat." 396.

(24) Or, "the co-ordinator and container of the universe."

(25) Or, "in whom all beauty and goodness is."

(26) Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. vii. 22; above, I. iv. 13.

(27) {to daimonion}, the divinity.

Nay, Socrates (replied Euthydemus), there is no danger I shall turn a deaf ear to the divine influence even a little; of that I am not afraid, but I am out of heart to think that no soul of man may ever requite the kindness of the gods with fitting gratitude.

No way, Socrates (Euthydemus replied), I’m not worried about ignoring the divine influence at all; that doesn’t scare me. What troubles me is the thought that no human soul can ever repay the kindness of the gods with proper gratitude.

Be not out of heart because of that (he said); you know what answer the god at Delphi makes to each one who comes asking "how shall I return thanks to heaven?"—"According to the law and custom of your city"; and this, I presume, is law and custom everywhere that a man should please the gods with offerings according to the ability which is in him. (28) How then should a man honour the gods with more beautiful or holier honour than by doing what they bid him? but he must in no wise slacken or fall short of his ability, for when a man so does, it is manifest, I presume, that at the moment he is not honouring the gods. You must then honour the gods, not with shortcoming but according to your ability; and having so done, be of good cheer and hope to receive the greatest blessings. For where else should a man of sober sense look to receive great blessings if not from those who are able to help him most, and how else should he hope to obtain them save by seeking to please his helper, and how may he hope to please his helper better than by yielding him the amplest obedience?

Don’t lose heart because of that, he said; you know what answer the god at Delphi gives to anyone who asks, "How should I thank the heavens?"—"According to the laws and customs of your city"; and I assume this is the norm everywhere that a person should honor the gods with offerings based on their ability. How then should someone honor the gods with a more beautiful or holier tribute than by doing what they ask? But he must never slack off or fall short of his ability, because when someone does that, it’s clear, I assume, that at that moment, they are not honoring the gods. So you must honor the gods, not with shortcomings but according to your ability; and having done so, be cheerful and hope to receive the greatest blessings. For where else should a sensible person expect to receive great blessings if not from those who can help them the most, and how else can they hope to obtain them except by trying to please their helper, and how can they hope to please their helper better than by showing the greatest obedience?

 (28) Or, "and that law, I presume, is universal which says, Let a
    man," etc.; and for the maxim see above; "Anab." III. ii. 9.
(28) Or, "and that law, I assume, is universal which says, Let a man," etc.; and for the principle see above; "Anab." III. ii. 9.

By such words—and conduct corresponding to his words—did Socrates mould and fashion the hearts of his companions, making them at once more devout and more virtuous. (29)

Through his words—and actions that matched his words—Socrates shaped and influenced the hearts of his friends, making them both more devoted and more virtuous. (29)

 (29) Or, "sounder of soul and more temperate as well as more pious."
(29) Or, "healthier in spirit and more moderate as well as more devout."

IV

IV

But indeed (1) with respect to justice and uprightness he not only made no secret of the opinion he held, but gave practical demonstration of it, both in private by his law-abiding and helpful behaviour to all, (2) and in public by obeying the magistrates in all that the laws enjoined, whether in the life of the city or in military service, so that he was a pattern of loyalty to the rest of the world, and on three several occasions in particular: first, when as president (Epistates) of the assembly he would not suffer the sovereign people to take an unconstitutional vote, (3) but ventured, on the side of the laws, to resist a current of popular feeling strong enough, I think, to have daunted any other man. Again, when the Thirty tried to lay some injunction on him contrary to the laws, he refused to obey, as for instance when they forbade his conversing with the young; (4) or again, when they ordered him and certain other citizens to arrest a man to be put to death, (5) he stood out single-handed on the ground that the injunctions laid upon him were contrary to the laws. And lastly, when he appeared as defendant in the suit instituted by Meletus, (6) notwithstanding that it was customary for litigants in the law courts to humour the judges in the conduct of their arguments by flattery and supplications contrary to the laws, (7) notwithstanding also that defendants owed their acquittal by the court to the employment of such methods, he refused to do a single thing however habitual in a court of law which was not strictly legal; and though by only a slight deflection from the strict path he might easily have been acquitted by his judges, (8) he preferred to abide by the laws and die rather than transgress them and live.

But indeed, regarding justice and integrity, he not only openly expressed his opinions but also demonstrated them in practice. This was evident both in private, through his law-abiding and helpful behavior towards everyone, and in public, by obeying magistrates in everything the laws required, whether in civic life or military service. He became a model of loyalty for the rest of the world, particularly on three occasions: first, as president of the assembly, he wouldn’t allow the people to take an unconstitutional vote, standing firm with the laws against a wave of popular opinion that would have intimidated anyone else. Second, when the Thirty imposed illegal restrictions on him, like forbidding him to talk to young people, he refused to comply. Third, when they ordered him and other citizens to arrest someone for execution, he stood alone, arguing that their directives contradicted the laws. Finally, when he was the defendant in the case brought by Meletus, despite the fact that it was common for litigants to flatter the judges and use manipulative tactics to win over the court—which was technically against the laws—he insisted on adhering strictly to what was legal, refusing to engage in any behavior that didn’t align with the law. Even though a slight deviation from this strict approach could have easily secured his acquittal, he chose to honor the laws and accept death rather than violate them and live.

 (1) L. Dindorf suspects  (SS. 1-6, {'Alla men... pollakis}), ed.
    Lips. 1872. See also Praef. to Ox. ed. p. viii.

 (2) Or, "by his conduct to all, which was not merely innocent in the
    eye of law and custom but positively helpful."

 (3) See above, I. i. 18; "Hell." I. vii. 14, 15; Grote, "H. G." viii.
    272.

 (4) See above, I. ii. 35.

 (5) Leon of Salamis. See "Hell." II. iii. 39; Plat. "Apol." 32 C;
    Andoc. "de Myst." 46.

 (6) See above, I. i. 1; Plat. "Apol." 19 C.

 (7) Kuhner cf. Quintil. VI. i. 7: "Athenis affectus movere etiam per
    praeconem prohibatur orator"; "Apol." 4; Plat. "Apol." 38 D, E.

 (8) See Grote, "H. G." viii. p. 663 foll.
(1) L. Dindorf thinks (SS. 1-6, {'Alla men... pollakis}), ed. Lips. 1872. See also Preface to Ox. ed. p. viii.

(2) Or, "by his behavior towards everyone, which was not just innocent according to law and tradition but actually beneficial."

(3) See above, I. i. 18; "Hell." I. vii. 14, 15; Grote, "H. G." viii. 272.

(4) See above, I. ii. 35.

(5) Leon of Salamis. See "Hell." II. iii. 39; Plat. "Apol." 32 C; Andoc. "de Myst." 46.

(6) See above, I. i. 1; Plat. "Apol." 19 C.

(7) Kuhner cf. Quintil. VI. i. 7: "In Athens, moving the audience through a herald is forbidden to the orator"; "Apol." 4; Plat. "Apol." 38 D, E.

(8) See Grote, "H. G." viii. p. 663 foll.

These views he frequently maintained in conversation, now with one and now with another, and one particular discussion with Hippias of Elis (9) on the topic of justice and uprightness has come to my knowledge. (10)

He often shared these opinions in conversations, sometimes with one person and sometimes with another, and I’ve learned about a specific discussion he had with Hippias of Elis (9) regarding justice and integrity. (10)

 (9) For this famous person see Cob. "Pros. Xen." s.n.; Plat. "Hipp.
    maj." 148; Quint. xii. 11, 21; Grote, "H. G." viii. 524.

 (10) Or, "I can personally vouch for."
 (9) For this well-known individual, see Cob. "Pros. Xen." s.n.; Plat. "Hipp.
    maj." 148; Quint. xii. 11, 21; Grote, "H. G." viii. 524.

 (10) Or, "I can personally vouch for."

Hippias had just arrived at Athens after a long absence, and chanced to be present when Socrates was telling some listeners how astonishing it was that if a man wanted to get another taught to be a shoemaker or carpenter or coppersmith or horseman, he would have no doubt where to send him for the purpose: "People say," (11) he added, "that if a man wants to get his horse or his ox taught in the right way, (12) the world is full of instructors; but if he would learn himself, or have his son or his slave taught in the way of right, he cannot tell where to find such instruction."

Hippias had just returned to Athens after a long time away and happened to be there when Socrates was explaining to some listeners how surprising it was that if someone wanted to teach another person to be a shoemaker, carpenter, coppersmith, or horseman, they would know exactly where to send him for that training. "People say," he added, "that if a man wants to get his horse or ox trained properly, there are plenty of instructors available. But if he wants to learn himself, or have his son or his slave taught the right way, he has no idea where to find that kind of teaching."

 (11) L. Dindorf, after Ruhnken and Valckenar, omits this sentence
    {phasi de tines... didaxonton}. See Kuhner ad loc. For the
    sentiment see Plat. "Apol." 20 A.

 (12) Cf. "Cyrop." II. ii. 26; VIII. iii. 38; also "Horsem." iii. 5;
    "Hunting," vii. 4.
(11) L. Dindorf, following Ruhnken and Valckenar, leaves out this sentence {phasi de tines... didaxonton}. See Kuhner ad loc. For the sentiment, refer to Plat. "Apol." 20 A.

(12) See "Cyrop." II. ii. 26; VIII. iii. 38; also "Horsem." iii. 5; "Hunting," vii. 4.

Hippias, catching the words, exclaimed in a bantering tone: What! still repeating the same old talk, (13) Socrates, which I used to hear from you long ago?

Hippias, catching the words, exclaimed in a teasing tone: What! Still going on with that same old talk, (13) Socrates, that I used to hear from you ages ago?

 (13) This tale is repeated by Dio Chrys. "Or." III. i. 109. Cf. Plat.
    "Gorg." 490 E.
(13) This story is told again by Dio Chrys. "Or." III. i. 109. See Plat. "Gorg." 490 E.

Yes (answered Socrates), and what is still more strange, Hippias, it is not only the same old talk but about the same old subjects. Now you, I daresay, through versatility of knowledge, (14) never say the same thing twice over on the same subject?

Yes (answered Socrates), and what's even stranger, Hippias, is that it's not just the same old conversation but about the same old topics. I bet you, with your diverse knowledge, never repeat yourself on the same subject, right?

 (14) Or, "such is the breadth of your learning," {polumathes}. Cf.
    Plat. "Hipp. maj."
(14) Or, "such is the extent of your knowledge," {polumathes}. Cf. Plat. "Hipp. maj."

To be sure (he answered), my endeavour is to say something new on all occasions.

"Of course," he replied, "I'm always trying to say something new whenever I can."

What (he asked) about things which you know, as for instance in a case of spelling, if any one asks you, "How many letters in Socrates, and what is their order?" (15) I suppose you try to run off one string of letters to-day and to-morrow another? or to a question of arithmetic, "Does twice five make ten?" your answer to-day will differ from that of yesterday?

What do you think about things you know? For example, if someone asks you, "How many letters are in 'Socrates,' and what order are they in?" Do you try to come up with a different arrangement of letters today than you did yesterday? Or if someone asks you about math, like, "Does two times five equal ten?" will your answer today be different from your answer yesterday?

 (15) Cf. "Econ." viii. 14; Plat. "Alc." i. 113 A.
(15) Cf. "Econ." viii. 14; Plat. "Alc." i. 113 A.

Hipp. No; on these topics, Socrates, I do as you do and repeat myself. However, to revert to justice (and uprightness), (16) I flatter myself I can at present furnish you with some remarks which neither you nor any one else will be able to controvert.

Hipp. No; on these topics, Socrates, I do what you do and repeat myself. However, to get back to justice (and fairness), (16) I believe I can now offer you some points that neither you nor anyone else will be able to argue against.

 (16) Or, "on the topic of the just I have something to say at present
    which," etc.
(16) Or, "regarding justice, I have something to share right now which," etc.

By Hera! (17) (he exclaimed), what a blessing to have discovered! (18) Now we shall have no more divisions of opinion on points of right and wrong; judges will vote unanimously; citizens will cease wrangling; there will be no more litigation, no more party faction, states will reconcile their differences, and wars are ended. For my part I do not know how I can tear myself away from you, until I have heard from your own lips all about the grand discovery you have made.

By Hera! (17) (he exclaimed), what a blessing we've found! (18) Now we won't have any more disagreements about what's right and wrong; judges will agree unanimously; citizens will stop bickering; there will be no more lawsuits, no more party conflicts, states will settle their differences, and wars will be over. As for me, I don't know how I can pull myself away from you until I've heard all about the amazing discovery you've made from your own lips.

 (17) See above, I. v. 5.

 (18) Or, "what a panacea are you the inventor of"; lit. "By Hera, you
    have indeed discovered a mighty blessing, if juries are to cease
    recording their verdicts 'aye' and 'no'; if citizens are to cease
    their wranglings on points of justice, their litigations, and
    their party strifes; if states are to cease differing on matters
    of right and wrong and appealing to the arbitrament of war."
(17) See above, I. v. 5.

(18) Or, "what a cure-all you are the inventor of"; literally, "By Hera, you have truly found a great blessing, if juries stop delivering their verdicts as 'yes' and 'no'; if citizens stop arguing about justice, their lawsuits, and their political disputes; if states stop disagreeing on issues of right and wrong and resorting to war to settle them."

You shall hear all in good time (Hippias answered), but not until you make a plain statement of your own belief. What is justice? We have had enough of your ridiculing all the rest of the world, questioning and cross-examining first one and then the other, but never a bit will you render an account to any one yourself or state a plain opinion upon a single topic. (19)

You’ll hear everything in due time, Hippias replied, but only after you clearly share your own beliefs. What is justice? We’ve heard enough of you mocking everyone else, questioning and grilling one person after another, yet you never take the time to explain your views or give a straightforward opinion on any topic. (19)

 (19) See Plat. "Gorg." 465 A.
(19) See Plat. "Gorg." 465 A.

What, Hippias (Socrates retorted), have you not observed that I am in a chronic condition of proclaiming what I regard as just and upright?

What, Hippias (Socrates responded), have you not noticed that I am always declaring what I believe to be right and just?

Hipp. And pray what is this theory (20) of yours on the subject? Let us have it in words.

Hipp. So, what’s your theory (20) on this topic? Share it with us in plain words.

 (20) {o logos}.
(20) {the logo}.

Soc. If I fail to proclaim it in words, at any rate I do so in deed and in fact. Or do you not think that a fact is worth more as evidence than a word? (21)

Soc. If I don't express it in words, I definitely show it through my actions and reality. Or do you not believe that a fact carries more weight as evidence than a word? (21)

 (21) Or, "is of greater evidential value," "ubi res adsunt, quid opus
    est verbis?"
(21) Or, "has more substantial evidence," "where things are present, what need is there for words?"

Worth far more, I should say (Hippias answered), for many a man with justice and right on his lips commits injustice and wrong, but no doer of right ever was a misdoer or could possibly be.

Worth much more, I would say (Hippias replied), because many people who talk about justice and doing the right thing still commit injustice and wrongdoing, but no one who truly does the right thing has ever done something wrong or ever could.

Soc. I ask then, have you ever heard or seen or otherwise perceived me bearing false witness or lodging malicious information, or stirring up strife among friends or political dissension in the city, or committing any other unjust and wrongful act?

Soc. I ask you, have you ever heard, seen, or otherwise noticed me giving false testimony, spreading harmful information, inciting conflict among friends, creating political unrest in the city, or doing any other unjust or wrongful act?

No, I cannot say that I have (he answered).

No, I can’t say that I have (he replied).

Soc. And do you not regard it as right and just to abstain from wrong? (22)

Soc. And don't you think it's right and fair to avoid doing wrong? (22)

 (22) Or, "is not abstinence from wrongdoing synonymous with righteous
    behaviour?"
(22) Or, "isn't refraining from doing wrong the same as behaving righteously?"

Hipp. Now you are caught, Socrates, plainly trying to escape from a plain statement. When asked what you believe justice to be, you keep telling us not what the just man does, but what he does not do.

Hipp. Now you're caught, Socrates, clearly trying to dodge a straightforward question. When we ask what you think justice is, you keep telling us not what a just person does, but what they don’t do.

Why, I thought for my part (answered Socrates) that the refusal to do wrong and injustice was a sufficient warrent in itself of righteousness and justice, but if you do not agree, see if this pleases you better: I assert that what is "lawful" is "just and righteous."

Why, I thought (Socrates replied) that refusing to do wrong and be unjust is enough proof of righteousness and justice on its own. But if you don't agree, let me put it this way: I claim that what is "lawful" is also "just and righteous."

Do you mean to assert (he asked) that lawful and just are synonymous terms?

Do you really mean to say (he asked) that legal and fair are the same thing?

Soc. I do.

Soc. I do.

I ask (Hippias added), for I do not perceive what you mean by lawful, nor what you mean by just. (23)

I ask (Hippias added), because I don't understand what you mean by lawful or what you mean by just. (23)

 (23) Lit. "what sort of lawful or what sort of just is spoken of."
(23) Lit. "what kind of lawful or what kind of just is being referred to."

Soc. You understand what is meant by laws of a city or state?

Soc. Do you understand what is meant by the laws of a city or state?

Yes (he answered).

Yeah (he answered).

Soc. What do you take them to be?

Soc. What do you think they are?

Hipp. The several enactments drawn up by the citizens or members of a state in agreement as to what things should be done or left undone.

Hipp. The various laws created by the citizens or members of a state that agree on what actions should be taken or avoided.

Then I presume (Socrates continued) that a member of a state who regulates his life in accordance with these enactments will be law-abiding, while the transgressor of the same will be law-less?

Then I assume (Socrates continued) that a person in a state who lives according to these laws will obey the law, while someone who breaks them will be lawless?

Certainly (he answered).

Sure thing.

Soc. And I presume the law-loving citizen will do what is just and right, while the lawless man will do what is unjust and wrong?

Soc. So I assume the law-abiding citizen will act with justice and integrity, while the lawless person will act unjustly and wrongly?

Hipp. Certainly.

Hipp. For sure.

Soc. And I presume that he who does what is just is just, and he who does what is unjust is unjust?

Soc. So I take it that someone who acts justly is just, and someone who acts unjustly is unjust?

Hipp. Of course.

Cool. Of course.

Soc. It would appear, then, that the law-loving man is just, and the lawless unjust?

Soc. So, it seems that a person who loves the law is just, and a person who disregards the law is unjust?

Then Hippias: Well, but laws, Socrates, how should any one regard as a serious matter either the laws themselves, or obedience to them, which laws the very people who made them are perpetually rejecting and altering?

Then Hippias: Well, Socrates, how can anyone take the laws seriously, or the obligation to follow them, when the very people who created them are constantly rejecting and changing them?

Which is also true of war (Socrates replied); cities are perpetually undertaking war and then making peace again.

Which is also true of war, Socrates replied; cities are constantly going to war and then making peace again.

Most true (he answered).

Most true, he replied.

Soc. If so, what is the difference between depreciating obedience to law because laws will be repealed, and depreciating good discipline in war because peace will one day be made? But perhaps you object to enthusiasm displayed in defence of one's home and fatherland in war?

Soc. If that's the case, what's the difference between diminishing the importance of obeying the law because laws will eventually be repealed, and diminishing the value of good discipline in war because peace will eventually come? But maybe you have an issue with the enthusiasm shown in defending one's home and homeland during war?

No, indeed I do not! I heartily approve of it (he answered).

No, I definitely don’t! I totally approve of it (he replied).

Soc. Then have you laid to heart the lesson taught by Lycurgus to the Lacedaemonians, (24) and do you understand that if he succeeded in giving Sparta a distinction above other states, it was only by instilling into her, beyond all else, a spirit of obedience to the laws? And among magistrates and rulers in the different states, you would scarcely refuse the palm of superiority to those who best contribute to make their fellow-citizens obedient to the laws? And you would admit that any particular state in which obedience to the laws is the paramount distinction of the citizens flourishes most in peace time, and in time of war is irresistible? But, indeed, of all the blessings which a state may enjoy, none stands higher than the blessing of unanimity. "Concord among citizens"—that is the constant theme of exhortation emphasised by the councils of elders (25) and by the choice spirits of the community; (26) at all times and everywhere through the length and breadth of all Hellas it is an established law that the citizens be bound together by an oath of concord; (27) everywhere they do actually swear this oath; not of course as implying that citizens shall all vote for the same choruses, or give their plaudits to the same flute-players, or choose the same poets, or limit themselves to the same pleasures, but simply that they shall pay obedience to the laws, since in the end that state will prove most powerful and most prosperous in which the citizens abide by these; but without concord neither can a state be well administered nor a household well organised.

Soc. Have you thought about the lesson that Lycurgus taught the Lacedaemonians, and do you realize that his success in elevating Sparta above other states was mainly due to instilling a strong sense of obedience to the laws? Among leaders and officials in various states, you would hardly deny that those who best encourage their fellow citizens to obey the laws deserve the highest recognition, right? You'd also agree that any state where obedience to the laws is the main characteristic of its citizens tends to thrive in times of peace and is unbeatable in times of war? Of all the blessings a state can have, none is more valuable than unity. "Harmony among citizens" is the constant message echoed by the councils of elders and the respected members of the community; throughout all of Greece, it is a widely accepted principle that citizens should be united by an oath of harmony. They actually take this oath everywhere, not to imply that all citizens must support the same performances or praise the same musicians or choose the same poets, or limit themselves to the same pleasures, but simply that they should obey the laws. Ultimately, the state that thrives is one where citizens adhere to these laws; without unity, neither a state can be managed well nor a household organized properly.

 (24) Cf. "Pol. Lac." viii. See Newman, op. cit. i. 396.

 (25) Lit. "the Gerousiai." {S} or {X S} uses the Spartan phraseology.

 (26) Lit. "the best men." {S} or {X S} speaks as an "aristocrat."

 (27) Cf. "Hell." II. iv. 43; Lys. xxv. 21 foll.; Schneid. cf. Lycurg.
    "u Leocr." 189.
 (24) See "Pol. Lac." viii. Refer to Newman, op. cit. i. 396.

 (25) Literally, "the Gerousiai." {S} or {X S} uses the Spartan terminology.

 (26) Literally, "the best men." {S} or {X S} refers to an "aristocrat."

 (27) See "Hell." II. iv. 43; Lys. xxv. 21 and following; Schneid. see Lycurg.
    "u Leocr." 189.

And if we turn to private life, what better protection can a man have than obedience to the laws? This shall be his safeguard against penalties, his guarantee of honours at the hands of the community; it shall be a clue to thread his way through the mazes of the law courts unbewildered, secure against defeat, assured of victory. (28) It is to him, the law-loving citizen, that men will turn in confidence when seeking a guardian of the most sacred deposits, be it of money or be it their sons or daughters. He, in the eyes of the state collectively, is trustworthy—he and no other; who alone may be depended on to render to all alike their dues—to parents and kinsmen and servants, to friends and fellow-citizens and foreigners. This is he whom the enemy will soonest trust to arrange an armistice, or a truce, or a treaty of peace. They would like to become the allies of this man, and to fight on his side. This is he to whom the allies (29) of his country will most confidently entrust the command of their forces, or of a garrison, or their states themselves. This, again, is he who may be counted on to recompense kindness with gratitude, and who, therefore, is more sure of kindly treatment than another whose sense of gratitude is fuller. (30) The most desirable among friends, the enemy of all others to be avoided, clearly he is not the person whom a foreign state would choose to go to war with; encompassed by a host of friends and exempt from foes, his very character has a charm to compel friendship and alliance, and before him hatred and hostility melt away.

And if we look at private life, what better protection can a person have than following the laws? This will serve as a safeguard against penalties and ensure that they receive honors from the community; it will help them navigate the complicated legal system without getting lost, secure against loss, and confident of success. It is to him, the law-respecting citizen, that people will turn when searching for someone to safeguard their most valuable assets, whether it’s money or their children. In the eyes of the state as a whole, he is trustworthy—he and no one else; he can be relied upon to ensure that everyone receives what they are owed—parents, relatives, servants, friends, fellow citizens, and even foreigners. He is the one whom the enemy will trust the most to negotiate a ceasefire, truce, or peace treaty. They would want to become allies with him and fight by his side. Similarly, this is the person that his country's allies will confidently trust to lead their forces, manage a garrison, or even govern their states. Moreover, he is someone who can be counted on to repay kindness with gratitude, and therefore, he is more likely to receive kindness in return than someone who doesn’t feel gratitude as strongly. The most desirable friend, the one to avoid as an enemy, clearly he is not the type of person a foreign state would choose to go to war against; surrounded by many friends and free from enemies, his very nature attracts friendship and alliances, making hatred and hostility fade away.

 (28) Or, "ignorant of hostile, assured of favourable verdict."

 (29) Lit. "the Allies," e.g. of Sparta or of Athens, etc.

 (30) Lit. "From whom may the doer of a deed of kindness more
    confidently expect the recompense of gratitude than from your
    lover of the law? and whom would one select as the recipient of
    kindness rather than a man susceptible of gratitude?"
(28) Or, "unaware of enemies, certain of friendly judgment."

(29) Lit. "the Allies," such as Sparta or Athens, etc.

(30) Lit. "From whom can the person who does a good deed expect gratitude more confidently than from your law-loving friend? And who would you choose as the recipient of kindness if not someone who appreciates it?"

And now, Hippias, I have done my part; that is my proof and demonstration that the "lawful" and "law-observant" are synonymous with the "upright" and the "just"; do you, if you hold a contrary view, instruct us. (31)

And now, Hippias, I've done my part; this is my proof that "lawful" and "law-observant" mean the same as "upright" and "just"; if you disagree, please let us know. (31)

 (31) For the style of this enconium (of the {nomimos}) cf. "Ages." i.
    36; and for the "Socratic" reverence for law cf. Plat. "Crito."
(31) For the style of this praise (of the {nomimos}) see "Ages." i. 36; and for the "Socratic" respect for law see Plat. "Crito."

Then Hippias: Nay, upon my soul, Socrates, I am not aware of holding any contrary opinion to what you have uttered on the theme of justice. (32)

Then Hippias: No, really, Socrates, I don't think I disagree with what you've said about justice. (32)

 (32) Lit. "the just and upright," {tou dikaiou}.
(32) Lit. "the just and upright," {tou dikaiou}.

Soc. But now, are you aware, Hippias, of certain unwritten laws? (33)

Soc. But now, are you aware, Hippias, of some unwritten laws? (33)

 (33) See Soph. "Antig." "Oed. T." 865, and Prof. Jebb ad loc.; Dem.
    "de Cor." 317, 23; Aristot. "Rhet." I. xiii.
(33) See Soph. "Antig." "Oed. T." 865, and Prof. Jebb ad loc.; Dem. "de Cor." 317, 23; Aristot. "Rhet." I. xiii.

Yes (he answered), those held in every part of the world, and in the same sense.

Yes, he replied, those held in every part of the world, and in the same way.

Can you then assert (asked Socrates) of these unwritten laws that men made them?

Can you then claim (asked Socrates) that these unwritten laws were created by people?

Nay, how (he answered) should that be, for how could they all have come together from the ends of the earth? and even if they had so done, men are not all of one speech? (34)

Nay, how (he answered) could that be, for how could they all have come together from the ends of the earth? And even if they had, people don't all speak the same language? (34)

 (34) Or, "there would be difficulty of understanding each other, and a
    babel of tongues."
(34) Or, "it would be hard to understand each other, and there would be a confusion of languages."

Soc. Whom then do you believe to have been the makers of these laws.

Soc. Who do you think created these laws?

Hipp. For my part, I think that the gods must have made these laws for men, and I take it as proof that first and foremost it is a law and custom everywhere to worship and reverence the gods.

Hipp. For my part, I believe that the gods created these laws for people, and I see it as evidence that, above all, it's a law and a tradition everywhere to worship and respect the gods.

Soc. And, I presume, to honour parents is also customary everywhere?

Soc. And I assume it's also customary everywhere to honor your parents?

Yes, that too (he answered).

Yeah, that too (he replied).

Soc. And, I presume, also the prohibition of intermarriage between parents and children?

Soc. And I assume the same goes for the ban on marriage between parents and children?

Hipp. No; at that point I stop, Socrates. That does not seem to me to be a law of God.

Hipp. No; I draw the line there, Socrates. That doesn't seem like a law of God to me.

Now, why? (he asked).

Now, why? (he asked).

Because I perceive it is not infrequently transgressed (he answered). (35)

Because I see that it's often violated (he replied). (35)

 (35) Or, "as I perceive, it is not of universal application, some
    transgress it."
(35) Or, "as I see it, it's not something that applies to everyone; some break it."

Soc. Well, but there are a good many other things which people do contrary to law; only the penalty, I take it, affixed to the transgression of the divine code is certain; there is no escape for the offender after the manner in which a man may transgress the laws of man with impunity, slipping through the fingers of justice by stealth, or avoiding it by violence.

Soc. Well, there are actually quite a few other things that people do that go against the law; but the punishment, I believe, attached to breaking the divine code is definite; there's no way for the wrongdoer to dodge it like a person can evade human laws without consequences, slipping past justice quietly or escaping through force.

Hipp. And what is the inevitable penalty paid by those who, being related as parents and children, intermingle in marriage?

Hipp. And what is the unavoidable consequence faced by those who, being related as parents and children, mix through marriage?

Soc. The greatest of all penalties; for what worse calamity can human beings suffer in the production of offspring than to misbeget? (36)

Soc. The worst punishment of all; what greater disaster could humans face in having children than to create them incorrectly? (36)

 (36) Or, "in the propagation of the species than to produce
    misbegotten children."
(36) Or, "in the growth of the species rather than to have unwanted children."

Hipp. But how or why should they breed them ill where nothing hinders them, being of a good stock themselves and producing from stock as good?

Hipp. But how or why would they raise them poorly when nothing is stopping them, given that they come from good lineage and produce from equally good lineage?

Soc. Because, forsooth, in order to produce good children, it is not simply necessary that the parents should be good and of a good stock, but that both should be equally in the prime and vigour of their bodies. (37) Do you suppose that the seed of those who are at their prime is like theirs who either have not yet reached their prime, or whose prime has passed?

Soc. Because, truly, to raise good children, it’s not just important for the parents to be good and come from a good background, but both need to be in the prime and full strength of their bodies. (37) Do you think the offspring of those in their prime are the same as those who haven’t reached their prime yet or whose prime has already passed?

 (37) Cf. Plat. "Laws," viii. 839 A; Herbst, etc., cf. Grotius, "de
    Jure," ii. 5, xii. 4.
(37) Cf. Plat. "Laws," viii. 839 A; Herbst, etc., cf. Grotius, "de Jure," ii. 5, xii. 4.

Hipp. No, it is reasonable to expect that the seed will differ.

Hipp. No, we can reasonably expect that the seed will be different.

Soc. And for the better—which?

Soc. And for the better— which one?

Hipp. Theirs clearly who are at their prime.

Hipp. They’re definitely the ones at their best.

Soc. It would seem that the seed of those who are not yet in their prime or have passed their prime is not good?

Soc. It looks like the seed of those who aren't in their prime yet or have already passed it isn't good?

Hipp. It seems most improbable it should be.

Hipp. It seems really unlikely that it would be.

Soc. Then the right way to produce children is not that way?

Soc. So, the proper way to have children isn’t that method?

Hipp. No, that is not the right way.

Hipp. No, that’s not the right way.

Soc. Then children who are so produced are produced not as they ought to be?

Soc. So, children who are brought into the world like this aren’t produced the way they should be?

Hipp. So it appears to me.

Hipp. That's how it seems to me.

What offspring then (he asked) will be ill produced, ill begotten, and ill born, if not these?

What kind of offspring, then (he asked), will be poorly produced, poorly conceived, and poorly born, if not these?

I subscribe to that opinion also (replied Hippias).

I agree with that opinion too (Hippias replied).

Soc. Well, it is a custom universally respected, is it not, to return good for good, and kindness with kindness?

Soc. Well, it’s a universally respected custom, isn’t it, to return good for good and kindness for kindness?

Hipp. Yes, a custom, but one which again is apt to be transgressed.

Hipp. Yes, it's a tradition, but one that's often broken.

Soc. Then he that so transgresses it pays penalty in finding himself isolated; bereft of friends who are good, and driven to seek after those who love him not. Or is it not so that he who does me kindness in my intercourse with him is my good friend, but if I requite not this kindness to my benefactor, I am hated by him for my ingratitude, and yet I must needs pursue after him and cling to him because of the great gain to me of his society?

Soc. So, the one who breaks this rule ends up alone; missing out on true friends and instead having to look for those who don't genuinely care for him. Isn't it true that someone who is kind to me in our interactions is a good friend? But if I don’t return that kindness to my benefactor, he ends up hating me for my ingratitude, and yet I find myself needing to chase after and hold on to him because of the significant benefits of having him around?

Hipp. Yes, Socrates. In all these cases, I admit, there is an implication of divine authority; (38) that a law should in itself be loaded with the penalty of its transgression does suggest to my mind a higher than human type of legislator.

Hipp. Yes, Socrates. In all these situations, I agree, there’s an implication of divine authority; the fact that a law comes with a penalty for breaking it seems to suggest a legislator that is beyond human.

 (38) Lit. "Yes, upon my word, Socrates, all these cases look very like
    (would seem to point to) the gods."
(38) Lit. "Yes, I swear, Socrates, all these examples really seem to point to the gods."

Soc. And in your opinion, Hippias, is the legislation of the gods just and righteous, or the reverse of what is just and righteous?

Soc. So, what do you think, Hippias? Is the law of the gods fair and right, or is it the opposite of fair and right?

Hipp. Not the reverse of what is just and righteous, Socrates, God forbid! for scarcely could any other legislate aright, of not God himself.

Hipp. Not the opposite of what is fair and right, Socrates, I hope not! Because hardly anyone else could possibly make fair laws, other than God himself.

Soc. It would seem then, Hippias, the gods themselves are well pleased that "the lawful" and "the just" should be synonymous? (39)

Soc. It seems, Hippias, that the gods themselves are happy that "lawful" and "just" should mean the same thing? (39)

 (39) Or, "it is well pleasing also to the gods that what is lawful is
    just and what is just is lawful."
(39) Or, "it also pleases the gods that what is lawful is just and what is just is lawful."

By such language and by such conduct, through example and precept alike, he helped to make those who approached him more upright and more just.

Through his words and actions, both by example and teaching, he helped those who came to him become more virtuous and fair.

V

V

And now I propose to show in what way he made those who were with him more vigorous in action. (1) In the first place, as befitted one whose creed was that a basis of self-command is indispensable to any noble performance, he manifested himself to his companions as one who had pre-eminently disciplined himself; (2) and in the next place by conversation and discussion he encouraged them to a like self-restraint beyond all others. (3) Thus it was that he continued ever mindful himself, and was continually reminding all whom he encountered, of matters conducive to virtue; as the following discussion with Euthydemus, which has come to my knowledge, (4) will serve to illustrate—the topic of the discussion being self-command.

And now I’d like to show how he inspired those around him to be more active. (1) First, because he believed that self-control is essential for any great achievement, he presented himself to his friends as someone who had mastered self-discipline; (2) then, through conversation and debate, he urged them to develop the same level of self-restraint. (3) In this way, he always stayed aware of his own purpose and continually reminded everyone he met about things that promote virtue; as the following discussion with Euthydemus, which I’ve learned about, (4) will illustrate—this talk was centered on self-control.

 (1) Lit. "more practical," i.e. more energetic and effective.

 (2) "If any one might claim to be a prince of ascetics, it was
    Socrates; such was the ineffaceable impression left on the minds
    of his associates."

 (3) Or, "he stimulated in these same companions a spirit of self-
    restraint beyond all else."

 (4) Or, "which I can vouch for."
(1) Literally "more practical," meaning more energetic and effective.

(2) "If anyone could be considered a prince of ascetics, it was Socrates; the lasting impact he had on his companions was undeniable."

(3) Or, "he inspired in these same friends a level of self-restraint like no other."

(4) Or, "which I can confirm."

Tell me, Euthydemus (he began), do you believe freedom to be a noble and magnificent acquisition, whether for a man or for a state?

Tell me, Euthydemus (he started), do you think freedom is a valuable and impressive gain, whether for an individual or for a society?

I cannot conceive a nobler or more magnificent (he answered).

I can’t imagine anything nobler or more magnificent, he replied.

Soc. Then do you believe him to be a free man who is ruled by the pleasures of the body, and thereby cannot perform what is best?

Soc. So, do you think he is a free man if he's controlled by bodily pleasures and can't do what's best?

Certainly not (he answered).

Definitely not (he answered).

Soc. No! for possibly to perform what is best appears to you to savour of freedom? And, again, to have some one over you who will prevent you doing the like seems a loss of freedom?

Soc. No! Does it seem to you that acting in the best way is a sign of freedom? And, likewise, having someone who restricts you from doing the same appears to be a loss of freedom?

Most decidedly (he answered).

Definitely (he answered).

Soc. It would seem you are decidedly of opinion that the incontinent are the reverse of free? (5)

Soc. It looks like you firmly believe that those who can't control themselves are the opposite of free? (5)

 (5) Or, "incontinency is illiberal."
Or, "lack of self-control is cheap."

Euth. Upon my word, I much suspect so.

Euth. Honestly, I really think so.

Soc. And does it appear to you that the incontinent man is merely hindered from doing what is noblest, or that further he is impelled to do what is most shameful?

Soc. Do you think the man who can't control himself is just held back from doing what's best, or do you believe he's also pushed to do the most disgraceful things?

Euth. I think he is as much driven to the one as he is hindered from the other.

Euth. I believe he is just as much pushed towards one as he is held back from the other.

Soc. And what sort of lords and masters are those, think you, who at once put a stop to what is best and enforce what is worst?

Soc. And what kind of lords and masters do you think they are, who instantly shut down what is good and push forward what is terrible?

Euth. Goodness knows, they must be the very worst of masters.

Euth. Honestly, they must be the absolute worst kind of bosses.

Soc. And what sort of slavery do you take to be the worst?

Soc. And what type of slavery do you think is the worst?

I should say (he answered) slavery to the worst masters.

I should mention (he replied) being enslaved to the worst masters.

It would seem then (pursued Socrates) that the incontinent man is bound over to the worst sort of slavery, would it not?

It seems then (Socrates continued) that the uncontrolled person is stuck in the worst kind of slavery, right?

So it appears to be (the other answered).

So that's how it seems, the other replied.

Soc. And does it not appear to you that this same beldame incontinence shuts out wisdom, which is the best of all things, (6) from mankind, and plunges them into the opposite? Does it not appear to you that she hinders men from attending to things which will be of use and benefit, and from learning to understand them; that she does so by dragging them away to things which are pleasant; and often though they are well aware of the good and of the evil, she amazes and confounds (7) their wits and makes them choose the worse in place of the better?

Soc. Doesn't it seem to you that this same old woman's lack of self-control blocks wisdom, which is the most valuable thing, from people, and instead leads them into the opposite? Doesn't it seem that she prevents men from focusing on things that are useful and beneficial, and from learning to understand them; that she pulls them away to things that are enjoyable; and that even though they know the difference between good and evil, she confuses and dazzles them, making them choose what’s worse instead of what’s better?

 (6) "Wisdom, the greatest good which men can possess."

 (7) Schneid. cf. Plat. "Protag." 355 A; and "Symp." iv. 23.
(6) "Wisdom, the highest good that people can have."

(7) Schneid. cf. Plat. "Protag." 355 A; and "Symp." iv. 23.

Yes, so it comes to pass (he answered).

Yes, that's how it ends up (he replied).

Soc. And (8) soundness of soul, the spirit of temperate modesty? Who has less claim to this than the incontinent man? The works of the temperate spirit and the works of incontinency are, I take it, diametrically opposed?

Soc. And (8) the soundness of the soul, the spirit of moderate modesty? Who has less claim to this than the person who lacks self-control? The actions of a temperate spirit and the actions of someone lacking self-control are, I believe, completely opposed?

 (8) "And if this be so concerning wisdom, {sophia}, what of
    {sophrasune}, soundness of soul—sobriety?"
(8) "And if this is true regarding wisdom, {sophia}, what about {sophrasune}, the soundness of soul—sobriety?"

That too, I admit (he answered).

That’s true, I admit (he replied).

Soc. If this then be so concerning these virtues, (9) what with regard to carefulness and devotion to all that ought to occupy us? Can anything more seriously militate against these than this same incontinence?

Soc. If that's the case regarding these virtues, (9) what about being careful and dedicated to everything we should focus on? Can anything undermine these more than this same lack of self-control?

 (9) Or add, "If this be so concerning not wisdom only, but concerning
    temperance and soundness of soul, what," etc.
(9) Or add, "If this is true not just about wisdom, but also about self-control and having a sound mind, what," etc.

Nothing that I can think of (he replied).

Nothing I can think of, he replied.

Soc. And can worse befall a man, think you? Can he be subjected to a more baleful influence than that which induces him to choose what is hurtful in place of what is helpful; which cajoles him to devote himself to the evil and to neglect the good; which forces him, will he nill he, to do what every man in his sober senses would shrink from and avoid?

Soc. And can anything worse happen to a person, do you think? Can he be exposed to a more harmful influence than the one that leads him to choose what is damaging instead of what is beneficial; that persuades him to commit to the bad and ignore the good; that makes him, whether he wants to or not, do what anyone in their right mind would avoid and stay away from?

I can imagine nothing worse (he replied).

I can't think of anything worse, he said.

Soc. Self-control, it is reasonable to suppose, will be the cause of opposite effects upon mankind to those of its own opposite, the want of self-control?

Soc. It makes sense to think that self-control will have the opposite effects on people compared to its opposite, the lack of self-control?

Euth. It is to be supposed so.

Euth. That seems to be the case.

Soc. And this, which is the source of opposite effects to the very worst, will be the very best of things?

Soc. So this, which causes completely opposite effects to the worst outcomes, will actually be the best thing?

Euth. That is the natural inference.

Euthanasia. That's the obvious conclusion.

Soc. It looks, does it not, Euthydemus, as if self-control were the best thing a man could have?

Soc. It seems, doesn’t it, Euthydemus, that self-control is the best quality a person can have?

It does indeed, Socrates (he answered).

It really does, Socrates (he replied).

Soc. But now, Euthydemus, has it ever occurred to you to note one fact?

Soc. But now, Euthydemus, have you ever thought about this?

What fact? (he asked).

What fact? (he asked).

Soc. That, after all, incontinency is powerless to bring us to that realm of sweetness which some look upon (10) as her peculiar province; it is not incontinency but self-control alone which has the passport to highest pleasures.

Soc. Ultimately, lack of self-control cannot lead us to that state of happiness that some view as her special domain; it is not lack of self-control, but rather self-discipline, that holds the key to the greatest pleasures.

 (10) Or, "which we are apt to think of as."
(10) Or, "that we tend to think of as."

In what way? (he asked). How so?

In what way? he asked. How so?

Why, this way (Socrates answered): since incontinency will not suffer us to resist hunger and thirst, or to hold out against sexual appetite, or want of sleep (which abstinences are the only channels to true pleasure in eating and drinking, to the joys of love, to sweet repose and blissful slumber won by those who will patiently abide and endure till each particular happiness is at the flood) (11)—it comes to this: by incontinency we are cut off from the full fruition of the more obvious and constantly recurring pleasures. (12) To self-control, which alone enables us to endure the pains aforesaid, alone belongs the power to give us any pleasure worth remembering in these common cases.

"Here’s how it is," Socrates replied. "Because lack of self-control prevents us from resisting hunger and thirst, holding back from sexual urges, or enduring sleeplessness—it's these kinds of self-restraint that lead to real enjoyment in eating and drinking, the joys of love, and the sweet rest and peaceful sleep that come to those who are willing to wait and endure until each specific pleasure reaches its peak. It all boils down to this: incontinence keeps us from fully enjoying the more obvious and frequently experienced pleasures. Only self-control, which allows us to withstand those pains, has the power to provide any pleasure worth remembering in these everyday situations."

 (11) Or, "at its season." Lit. "is as sweet as possible."

 (12) Or, "from tasting to any extent worth speaking of the most
    necessary and all-pervading sources of happiness."
(11) Or, "at the right time." Literally, "is as sweet as it can be."

(12) Or, "from experiencing to any significant degree the most essential and all-encompassing sources of happiness."

You speak the words of truth (13) (he answered).

You speak the truth. (13) (he answered).

 (13) Lit. "What you say is absolutely and entirely true" (the "vraie
    verite" of the matter).
(13) Lit. "What you say is completely and totally true" (the "real truth" of the matter).

Soc. Furthermore, (14) if there be any joy in learning aught "beautiful and good," or in patient application to such rules as may enable a man to manage his body aright, or to administer his household well, or to prove himself useful to his friends and to the state, or to dominate his enemies—which things are the sources not only of advantage but of deepest satisfaction (15)—to the continent and self-controlled it is given to reap the fruits of them in their performance. It is the incontinent who have neither part nor lot in any one of them. Since we must be right in asserting that he is least concerned with such things who has least ability to do them, being tied down to take an interest in the pleasure which is nearest to hand.

Soc. Moreover, (14) if there’s any joy in learning something "beautiful and good," or in patiently applying the rules that help a person take care of their body properly, run their household effectively, be helpful to their friends and community, or defeat their enemies—these are the things that not only bring benefits but also the deepest satisfaction (15)—those who are self-disciplined can enjoy the rewards of these actions. It's the undisciplined who miss out on any of these experiences. We have to acknowledge that the person least concerned with these matters is the one who has the least ability to engage in them, as they are constrained to focus on immediate pleasures.

 (14) Or, "But indeed, if there be joy in the pursuit of any noble
    study or of such accomplishments as shall enable," etc.

 (15) Or, "of the highest pleasures."
(14) Or, "But truly, if there is joy in pursuing any noble study or in achieving skills that will enable," etc.

(15) Or, "of the greatest pleasures."

Euthydemus replied: Socrates, you would say, it seems to me, that a man who is mastered by the pleasures of the body has no concern at all with virtue.

Euthydemus replied: Socrates, it seems to me that you would say a man who is controlled by physical pleasures has no interest in virtue at all.

And what is the distinction, Euthydemus (he asked), between a man devoid of self-control and the dullest of brute beasts? A man who foregoes all height of aim, who gives up searching for the best and strives only to gratify his sense of pleasure, (16) is he better than the silliest of cattle? (17)... But to the self-controlled alone is it given to discover the hid treasures. These, by word and by deed, they will pick out and make selection of them according to their kinds, choosing deliberately the good and holding aloof from the evil. (18) Thus (he added) it is that a man reaches the zenith, as it were, of goodness and happiness, thus it is that he becomes most capable of reasoning and discussion. (19) The very name discussion ({dialegesthai}) is got from people coming together and deliberating in common by picking out and selecting things ({dialegein}) according to their kinds. (20) A man then is bound to prepare himself as much as possible for this business, and to pursue it beyond all else with earnest resolution; for this is the right road to excellence, this will make a man fittest to lead his fellows and be a master in debate. (21)

And what’s the difference, Euthydemus (he asked), between a person without self-control and the dumbest of animals? A person who gives up all ambition, who stops looking for the best and only seeks to satisfy his own pleasures, is he any better than the silliest of cattle? But only those who are self-controlled can find hidden treasures. They will identify and choose these treasures, both in word and action, making conscious choices between what is good and avoiding what is bad. Thus, he added, a person reaches the peak of goodness and happiness, and in doing so, becomes most capable of reasoning and discussion. The very term discussion (dialegesthai) comes from people coming together to deliberate by picking out and selecting things (dialegein) according to their kinds. Therefore, a person must prepare himself as much as possible for this task and pursue it with determination above all else; for this is the path to excellence, and this will make someone best suited to lead others and excel in debate.

 (16) Or, "and seeks by hook and by crook to do what is pleasantest."

 (17) i.e. he becomes an animal "feeding a blind life within the
    brain."

 (18) Or, "selecting the ore and repudiating the dross." Kuhner cf.
    Plat. "Laws," v. 735 B.

 (19) Or, "draws nearer to happiness and perfection, and is most
    capable of truth-disclosing conversation." Cf. Plat. "Apol." 41:
    "What would not a man give, O judges, to be able to examine the
    leaders of the great Trojan expedition, or Odysseus, or Sisyphus,
    or numberless others, men and women too! What infinite delight
    would there be in conversing with them and asking them questions!"
    (Jowett).

 (20) For {dialegein kata gene} = {dialegesthai}, cf. Grote, "H. G."
    viii. 590.

 (21) Cf. Plat. "Rep." 534 D; "Phaedr." 252 E; "Crat." 390 C;
    "Statesm." 286 D foll.
(16) Or, "and tries by any means necessary to do what is most enjoyable."

(17) i.e. he becomes an animal "living a thoughtless life in the mind."

(18) Or, "choosing the valuable and rejecting the worthless." Kuhner cf. Plat. "Laws," v. 735 B.

(19) Or, "moves closer to happiness and perfection, and is most capable of deep, meaningful conversation." Cf. Plat. "Apol." 41: "What wouldn’t a person give, O judges, to have the chance to talk to the leaders of the great Trojan expedition, or Odysseus, or Sisyphus, or countless others, both men and women! What incredible joy it would be to have conversations with them and ask them questions!" (Jowett).

(20) For {dialegein kata gene} = {dialegesthai}, cf. Grote, "H. G." viii. 590.

(21) Cf. Plat. "Rep." 534 D; "Phaedr." 252 E; "Crat." 390 C; "Statesm." 286 D foll.

VI

VI

At this point I will endeavour to explain in what way Socrates fostered this greater "dialectic" capacity among his intimates. (1) He held firmly to the opinion that if a man knew what each reality was, he would be able to explain this knowledge to others; but, failing the possession of that knowledge, it did not surprise him that men should stumble themselves and cause others to stumble also. (2) It was for this reason that he never ceased inquiring with those who were with him into the true nature of things that are. (3) It would be a long business certainly to go through in detail all the definitions at which he arrived; I will therefore content myself with such examples as will serve to show his method of procedure. As a first instance I will take the question of piety. The mode of investigation may be fairly represented as follows.

At this point, I’ll explain how Socrates developed this greater "dialectic" ability among his friends. (1) He strongly believed that if a person truly understood each reality, they could explain that knowledge to others; but if someone lacked that understanding, it didn’t surprise him that they would stumble and lead others to stumble as well. (2) That’s why he never stopped questioning those around him about the true nature of things that exist. (3) It would definitely take a long time to cover all the definitions he reached in detail, so I’ll just provide a few examples to illustrate his method. For the first example, I’ll discuss the question of piety. The approach to investigation can be represented as follows.

 (1) Lit. "essayed to make those who were with him more potent in
    dialectic."

 (2) Or, "Socrates believed that any one who knew the nature of
    anything would be able to let others into his secret; but, failing
    that knowledge, he thought the best of men would be but blind
    leaders of the blind, stumbling themselves and causing others to
    stumble also."

 (3) Or add, "'What is this among things? and what is its definition?'
    —such was the ever-recurrent question for which he sought an
    answer."
(1) Literally, "tried to make those around him more skilled in argument."

(2) Or, "Socrates believed that anyone who understood the essence of something could share that understanding with others; but without that knowledge, he thought even the best people would just be blind leading the blind, stumbling themselves and causing others to trip as well."

(3) Or add, "'What is this in relation to other things? And what is its definition?' — this was the question he constantly sought to answer."

Tell me (said he), Euthydemus, what sort of thing you take piety to be?

"Tell me, Euthydemus, what do you think piety is?"

Something most fair and excellent, no doubt (the other answered). (4)

Something really fair and excellent, no doubt about it, the other replied. (4)

 (4) Or, "A supreme excellence, no doubt."
 (4) Or, "Definitely a top-notch quality."

Soc. And can you tell me what sort of person the pious man is? (5)

Soc. Can you describe what kind of person the religious person is? (5)

 (5) Or, "can you give me a definition of the pious man?"; "tell me who
    and what the pious man is."
(5) Or, "can you give me a definition of the pious person?"; "tell me who the pious person is and what they are like."

I should say (he answered) he is a man who honours the gods.

"I should say," he replied, "he is a man who respects the gods."

Soc. And is it allowable to honour the gods in any mode or fashion one likes?

Soc. Is it acceptable to worship the gods in any way you want?

Euth. No; there are laws in accordance with which one must do that.

Euth. No; there are rules that you have to follow to do that.

Soc. Then he who knows these laws will know how he must honour the gods?

Soc. So, the person who understands these laws will know how to properly honor the gods?

I think so (he answered).

I think so, he said.

Soc. And he who knows how he must honour the gods conceives that he ought not to do so except in the manner which accords with his knowledge? (6) Is it not so?

Soc. And someone who understands how to honor the gods realizes that they should only do so in a way that aligns with their understanding? (6) Isn't that right?

 (6) i.e. "his practice must square with his knowledge and be the
    outward expression of his belief?"
(6) i.e. "his actions must align with his knowledge and be the external representation of his beliefs?"

Euth. That is so. (7)

Euth. That's true. (7)

 (7) "That is so; you rightly describe his frame of mind and
    persuasion."
(7) "That's true; you accurately capture his state of mind and beliefs."

Soc. And does any man honour the gods otherwise than he thinks he ought? (8)

Soc. And does anyone honor the gods in a way that differs from what he believes is right? (8)

 (8) "As he should and must." See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 322 foll.
(8) "As he should and must." See K. Joel, op. cit. p. 322 foll.

I think not (he answered).

I don't think so (he replied).

Soc. It comes to this then: he who knows what the law requires in reference to the gods will honour the gods in the lawful way? (9)

Soc. So it comes down to this: the person who understands what the law says about the gods will honor them properly? (9)

 (9) Or, "he who knows what is lawful with regard to Heaven pays honour
    to Heaven lawfully."
(9) Or, "the one who understands what is right according to Heaven respects Heaven correctly."

Euth. Certainly.

Euthanasia. Definitely.

Soc. But now, he who honours lawfully honours as he ought? (10)

Soc. But now, does the one who honors law do so in the right way? (10)

 (10) "As he should and must."
(10) "As he should and has to."

Euth. I see no alternative.

Euthanasia. I see no alternative.

Soc. And he who honours as he ought is a pious man?

Soc. So, is someone who shows proper respect a pious person?

Euth. Certainly.

Euthanasia. Absolutely.

Soc. It would appear that he who knows what the law requires with respect to the gods will correctly be defined as a pious man, and that is our definition?

Soc. It seems that someone who understands what the law demands regarding the gods can be accurately labeled as a pious person, and that's our definition?

So it appears to me, at any rate (he replied). (11)

So it looks that way to me, at least (he replied). (11)

 (11) "I accept it at any rate as mine." N.B.—in reference to this
    definition of Piety, the question is never raised {poion ti esti
    nomos}; nor yet {poioi tines eisin oi theoi}; but clearly there is
    a growth in {ta nomima}. Cf. the conversation recorded in St. John
    iv. 7 foll., and the words (verse 23) {pneuma o Theos kai tous
    proskunountas auton en pneumati kai aletheia dei proskunein},
    which the philosopher Socrates would perhaps readily have assented
    to.
(11) "I accept it as mine, no matter what." N.B.—Regarding this definition of Piety, the question is never asked {what is the law}; nor {who are the gods}; but it's clear there is a development in {the laws}. See the conversation recorded in St. John 4:7 and following, and the words (verse 23) {God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth}, which the philosopher Socrates would likely have agreed with.

Soc. But now, with regard to human beings; is it allowable to deal with men in any way one pleases? (12)

Soc. But now, concerning human beings; is it acceptable to treat people in whatever way one wants? (12)

 (12) Or, "may a man deal with his fellow-men arbitrarily according to
    his fancy?" See above, II. vii. 8.
(12) Or, "can a person treat others however they want based on their own preferences?" See above, II. vii. 8.

Euth. No; with regard to men also, he will be a law-observing man (13) who knows what things are lawful as concerning men, in accordance with which our dealings with one another must be conducted. (14)

Euth. No; when it comes to people, he will be a law-abiding individual who understands what is lawful concerning others, based on which our interactions with each other should be guided.

 (13) Or, "he is a man full of the law (lawful) and law-abiding who
    knows," etc.

 (14) Reading {kath' a dei pros allelous khresthai}, subaud.
    {allelois}, or if vulg. {kath' a dei pos allelois khresthai},
    translate "must be specifically conducted."
(13) Or, "he is a man who is full of the law and follows it, who knows," etc.

(14) Reading {kath' a dei pros allelous khresthai}, subaud. {allelois}, or if vulg. {kath' a dei pos allelois khresthai}, translate "must be specifically conducted."

Soc. Then those who deal with one another in this way, deal with each other as they ought? (15)

Soc. So, those who interact with each other like this, treat one another the way they should? (15)

 (15) "As they should and must."
(15) "As they should and have to."

Obviously (he answered).

Clearly (he answered).

Soc. And they who deal with one another as they ought, deal well and nobly—is it not so?

Soc. And those who interact with each other as they should, do so in a good and honorable way—don’t you think?

Certainly (he answered).

Sure.

Soc. And they who deal well and nobly by mankind are well-doers in respect of human affairs?

Soc. So those who treat humanity with kindness and integrity are considered to be doing good in terms of human affairs?

That would seem to follow (he replied).

That seems to make sense, he replied.

Soc. I presume that those who obey the laws do what is just and right?

Soc. I assume that those who follow the laws are doing what’s fair and right?

Without a doubt, (he answered).

Definitely, (he answered).

Soc. And by things right and just you know what sort of things are meant?

Soc. And you know what kinds of things are referred to as right and just?

What the laws ordain (he answered).

What the laws require (he replied).

Soc. It would seem to follow that they who do what the laws ordain both do what is right and just and what they ought? (16)

Soc. It seems reasonable to conclude that those who follow the laws are doing what is right, just, and what they should be doing? (16)

 (16) "What they should and must."
(16) "What they should and need to."

Euth. I see no alternative.

Euthanasia. I see no option.

Soc. But then, he who does what is just and right is upright and just? (17)

Soc. But then, someone who acts in a just and fair way is honest and righteous? (17)

 (17) This proposition, as Kuhner argues (ad loc.), is important as
    being the middle term of the double syllogism (A and B)—

    A.  Those who do what the law demands concerning men do what is
        just and right.

        Those who do what is just and right are righteous and just.

        Ergo—Those who do what the law demands concerning men are
        righteous and just.

    B.  Those who know what is just and right ought (and are bound,
        cf. above, III. ix. 4) to do also what is just and right.

        Those who do what is just and right are righteous and just.

        Ergo—Righteous and Just ({dikaioi}) may be defined as "Those
        who know what the law demands (aliter things right and just)
        concerning men."
(17) This idea, as Kuhner points out (ad loc.), is significant because it serves as the middle term in the double syllogism (A and B) —

A. Those who follow the law regarding people do what is just and fair.

   Those who do what is just and fair are righteous and just.

   Therefore — Those who follow the law regarding people are righteous and just.

B. Those who understand what is just and fair should (and are obligated to, cf. above, III. ix. 4) also do what is just and fair.

   Those who do what is just and fair are righteous and just.

   Therefore — Righteous and Just ({dikaioi}) can be defined as "Those who understand what the law requires (or the things that are right and fair) regarding people."

I should say so myself (he answered).

I should say so myself, he replied.

Soc. And should you say that any one obeys the laws without knowing what the laws ordain?

Soc. And would you say that anyone follows the laws without understanding what the laws require?

I should not (he answered).

I shouldn't (he answered).

Soc. And do you suppose that any one who knows what things he ought to do supposes that he ought not to do them? (18)

Soc. And do you really think that anyone who knows what they should do believes they shouldn't do it? (18)

 (18) Or, "and no one who knows what he must and should do imagines
    that he must and should not do it?"
(18) Or, "and no one who knows what he must and should do thinks that he must and shouldn't do it?"

No, I suppose not (he answered).

No, I guess not (he replied).

Soc. And do you know of anybody doing other than what he feels bound to do? (19)

Soc. Do you know anyone who acts differently than they feel obligated to? (19)

 (19) Or, "and nobody that you know of does the contrary of what he
    thinks he should do?"
(19) Or, "and no one you know does the opposite of what they think they should do?"

No, I do not (he answered).

No, I don't (he said).

Soc. It would seem that he who knows what things are lawful (20) as concerning men does the things that are just and right?

Soc. It seems that the person who understands what is lawful for people acts in ways that are just and right?

 (20) Or, "of lawful obligation."
Or, "of legal obligation."

Without a doubt (he answered).

No doubt about it (he answered).

Soc. But then, he who does what is just and right is upright and just? (21)

Soc. So, does that mean that anyone who acts justly and rightly is considered honest and fair? (21)

 (21) N.B.—In reference to this definition of justice, see K. Joel,
    op. cit. p. 323 foll., "Das ist eine Karrikatur des Sokratischen
    Dialogs."
 (21) Note—Regarding this definition of justice, see K. Joel, op. cit. p. 323 foll., "This is a caricature of the Socratic dialogue."

Who else, if not? (he replied).

Who else, if not? he replied.

Soc. It would seem, then, we shall have got to a right definition if we name as just and upright those who know the things which are lawful as concerning men?

Soc. It looks like we’d have a good definition if we call those who understand what is lawful for people just and upright?

That is my opinion (he answered).

That’s my take, he replied.

Soc. And what shall we say that wisdom is? Tell me, does it seem to you that the wise are wise in what they know, (22) or are there any who are wise in what they know not?

Soc. So what do you think wisdom is? Tell me, do you think that wise people are knowledgeable about what they know, or are there some who are wise about what they don’t know?

 (22) Or, "in that of which they have the knowledge ({episteme})."
(22) Or, "in the area where they have the knowledge."

Euth. Clearly they are wise in what they know; (23) for how could a man have wisdom in that which he does not know?

Euth. Clearly, they are knowledgeable about what they understand; (23) for how could a person have knowledge in things they are unaware of?

 (23) Or, "their wisdom is confined to that of which they have the
    {episteme}. How could a man be wise in what he lacks the knowledge
    of?"
(23) Or, "their knowledge is limited to what they actually know. How can someone be wise about something they don't understand?"

Soc. In fact, then, the wise are wise in knowledge?

Soc. So, basically, the wise are knowledgeable?

Euth. Why, in what else should a man be wise save only in knowledge?

Euth. Well, what else should a person be wise in besides just knowledge?

Soc. And is wisdom anything else than that by which a man is wise, think you?

Soc. So, is wisdom anything other than what makes a person wise, would you say?

Euth. No; that, and that only, I think.

Euth. No; that's it, and only that, I believe.

Soc. It would seem to follow that knowledge and wisdom are the same?

Soc. So it looks like knowledge and wisdom are the same thing?

Euth. So it appears to me.

Euth. That's how it seems to me.

Soc. May I ask, does it seem to you possible for a man to know all the things that are?

Soc. Can I ask, do you think it's possible for someone to know everything that exists?

Euth. No, indeed! not the hundredth part of them, I should say.

Euth. No way! I’d say not even a fraction of them.

Soc. Then it would seem that it is impossible for a man to be all-wise?

Soc. So it seems like it's impossible for a person to be all-knowing?

Quite impossible (he answered).

Totally impossible (he replied).

Soc. It would seem the wisdom of each is limited to his knowledge; each is wise only in what he knows?

Soc. It seems like everyone's wisdom is limited to their own knowledge; each person is only wise in what they know.

Euth. That is my opinion. (24)

Euth. That’s how I feel about it. (24)

 (24) Cf. Plat. "Theaet." 145 D. N.B.—For this definition of wisdom
    see K. Joel, ib. p. 324 foll.
(24) Cf. Plat. "Theaet." 145 D. N.B.—For this definition of wisdom see K. Joel, ib. p. 324 foll.

Soc. Well! come now, Euthydemus, as concerning the good: ought we to search for the good in this way?

Soc. Well! Come on, Euthydemus, when it comes to the good: should we be searching for the good like this?

What way? (he asked).

Which way? (he asked).

Soc. Does it seem to you that the same thing is equally advantageous to all?

Soc. Do you think that the same thing is equally beneficial for everyone?

No, I should say not (he answered).

No, I wouldn’t say that (he replied).

Soc. You would say that a thing which is beneficial to one is sometimes hurtful to another?

Soc. You mean that something that helps one person can sometimes harm another?

Decidedly (he replied).

Definitely (he replied).

Soc. And is there anything else good except that which is beneficial, should you say? (25)

Soc. Is there anything else that is good, apart from what is beneficial, would you say? (25)

 (25) Or reading (1) {allo d' an ti phaies e agathon einai to
    ophelimon}; or else (2) {allo d' an ti phaies agathon einai to
    ophelimon}; (in which case {alloti} = {allo ti e};) translate (1)
    "and what is beneficial is good (or a good), should you not say?"
    lit. "could you say that the beneficial is anything else than good
    (or a good)?" or else (2) "and what is beneficial is good (or a
    good)? or is it anything else?"
(25) Or reading (1) {if you say something is beneficial, it is good}; or else (2) {if you say something is good, it is beneficial}; (in which case {if so} = {if it is}); translate (1) "and if something is beneficial, it’s good, wouldn’t you agree?" lit. "could you say that beneficial is anything other than good?" or else (2) "and if something is beneficial, it’s good? or is it something else?"

Nothing else (he answered).

Nothing more (he answered).

Soc. It would seem to follow that the beneficial is good relatively to him to whom it is beneficial?

Soc. It seems to suggest that something beneficial is good in relation to the person it helps, right?

That is how it appears to me (he answered).

That’s how it looks to me (he replied).

Soc. And the beautiful: can we speak of a thing as beautiful in any other way than relatively? or can you name any beautiful thing, body, vessel, or whatever it be, which you know of as universally beautiful? (26)

Soc. And beauty: can we talk about something as beautiful in any way other than comparatively? Or can you name any beautiful thing, whether it's a person, object, or anything else, that you recognize as universally beautiful? (26)

 (26) i.e. "beautiful in all relations into which it enters." Reading
    {to de kalon ekhoimen an pos allos eipein e estin onomazein kalon
    e soma e skeuos e all' otioun, o oistha pros tanta kalon on; Ma
    Di', ouk egog', ephe}. For other emendations of the vulg., and the
    many interpretations which have been given to the passage, see R.
    Kuhner ad loc.
(26) i.e. "beautiful in every situation it encounters." Reading {to de kalon ekhoimen an pos allos eipein e estin onomazein kalon e soma e skeuos e all' otioun, o oistha pros tanta kalon on; Ma Di', ouk egog', ephe}. For other edits of the common version, and the numerous interpretations that have been proposed for this passage, see R. Kuhner ad loc.

Euth. I confess I do not know of any such myself. (27)

Euth. I admit I don't know of any like that myself. (27)

 (27) Or, adopting the reading {ekhois an} in place of {ekhoimen an}
    above, translate "I certainly cannot, I confess."
(27) Or, using the reading {ekhois an} instead of {ekhoimen an} above, translate "I definitely cannot, I admit."

Soc. I presume to turn a thing to its proper use is to apply it beautifully?

Soc. I assume that using something correctly means applying it in a beautiful way?

Euth. Undoubtedly it is a beautiful appliance. (28)

Euth. It's definitely a beautiful device. (28)

 (28) Or, "I presume it is well and good and beautiful to use this,
    that, and the other thing for the purpose for which the particular
    thing is useful?"—"That nobody can deny (he answered)." It is
    impossible to convey simply the verbal play and the quasi-
    argumentative force of the Greek {kalos ekhei pros ti tini
    khresthai}. See K. Joel, p. 426.
(28) Or, "I guess it's good and nice to use this, that, and the other thing for the purpose they were made for?"—"No one can argue with that (he answered)." It's hard to fully capture the wordplay and the nearly argumentative impact of the Greek {kalos ekhei pros ti tini khresthai}. See K. Joel, p. 426.

Soc. And is this, that, and the other thing beautiful for aught else except that to which it may be beautifully applied?

Soc. And is anything beautiful for any reason other than how it can be beautifully used?

Euth. No single thing else.

Euthanasia. Nothing else.

Soc. It would seem that the useful is beautiful relatively to that for which it is of use?

Soc. It seems that something is beautiful based on its usefulness compared to what it serves a purpose for?

So it appears to me (he answered).

So it seems to me, he replied.

Soc. And what of courage, (29) Euthydemus? I presume you rank courage among things beautiful? It is a noble quality? (30)

Soc. And what about courage, (29) Euthydemus? I assume you consider courage to be something beautiful? Is it a noble quality? (30)

 (29) Or, perhaps better, "fortitude." See H. Sidgwick, "Hist. of
    Ethics," p. 43.

 (30) It is one of {ta kala}. See K. Joel, ib. p. 325, and in reference
    to the definitions of the Good and of the Beautiful, ib. p. 425
    foll.
(29) Or, maybe it's better to call it "fortitude." See H. Sidgwick, "Hist. of Ethics," p. 43.

(30) It's one of {ta kala}. See K. Joel, ib. p. 325, and regarding the definitions of the Good and the Beautiful, ib. p. 425 and following.

Nay, one of the most noble (he answered).

No, one of the most noble, he replied.

Soc. It seems that you regard courage as useful to no mean end?

Soc. It looks like you think courage is valuable for a good purpose?

Euth. Nay, rather the greatest of all ends, God knows.

Euth. No, it's actually the most important goal of all, God knows.

Soc. Possibly in face of terrors and dangers you would consider it an advantage to be ignorant of them?

Soc. Maybe when faced with fears and dangers, you would see it as a benefit to be unaware of them?

Certainly not (he answered).

Definitely not (he answered).

Soc. It seems that those who have no fear in face of dangers, simply because they do not know what they are, are not courageous?

Soc. It seems that people who aren't afraid when faced with dangers, simply because they don’t understand what those dangers are, aren’t really being courageous?

Most true (he answered); or, by the same showing, a large proportion of madmen and cowards would be courageous.

Most definitely, he replied; or, by that logic, a significant number of madmen and cowards would be brave.

Soc. Well, and what of those who are in dread of things which are not dreadful, are they—

Soc. Well, what about those who are scared of things that aren't actually scary? Are they—

Euth. Courageous, Socrates?—still less so than the former, goodness knows.

Euth. Brave, Socrates?—even less so than the earlier one, that's for sure.

Soc. Possibly, then, you would deem those who are good in the face of terrors and dangers to be courageous, and those who are bad in the face of the same to be cowards?

Soc. So, you might think that those who are brave in the face of fears and dangers are courageous, while those who are weak in those situations are cowards?

Certainly I should (he answered).

Sure, I should (he answered).

Soc. And can you suppose any other people to be good in respect of such things except those who are able to cope with them and turn them to noble account? (31)

Soc. And can you imagine any other people to be good in these matters except those who can handle them and use them for something valuable? (31)

 (31) {kalos khresthai}, lit. "make a beautiful use of them."
(31) {kalos khresthai}, literally "make good use of them."

No; these and these alone (he answered).

No; these and these only (he replied).

Soc. And those people who are of a kind to cope but badly with the same occurrences, it would seem, are bad?

Soc. And those people who struggle to handle the same situations, it seems, are seen as bad?

Who else, if not they? (he asked).

Who else, if not them? (he asked).

Soc. May it be that both one and the other class do use these circumstances as they think they must and should? (32)

Soc. Could it be that both classes are using these situations as they believe they should? (32)

 (32) Or, "feel bound and constrained to do."
(32) Or, "feel obligated and compelled to do."

Why, how else should they deal with them? (he asked).

Why, how else should they handle them? (he asked).

Soc. Can it be said that those who are unable to cope well with them or to turn them to noble account know how they must and should deal with them? (33)

Soc. Can we say that those who struggle to handle them or use them for good actually know how they should deal with them? (33)

 (33) Or, "Can it be said that those who are unable to cope nobly with
    their perilous surroundings know how they ought to deal with
    them?"
(33) Or, "Is it right to say that those who can't handle their dangerous environment well understand how they should manage it?"

I presume not (he answered).

I assume not (he replied).

Soc. It would seem to follow that those who have the knowledge how to behave are also those who have the power? (34)

Soc. It seems to follow that those who know how to behave are also the ones who have the power? (34)

 (34) "He who kens can."
"Those who know can."

Yes; these, and these alone (he said).

Yes; these, and these only (he said).

Soc. Well, but now, what of those who have made no egregious blunder (in the matter); can it be they cope ill with the things and circumstances we are discussing?

Soc. Well, what about those who haven’t made any major mistakes in this matter? Could it be that they still struggle with the things and circumstances we’re talking about?

I think not (he answered).

I don’t think so (he answered).

Soc. It would seem, conversely, that they who cope ill have made some egregious blunder?

Soc. It seems, on the other hand, that those who struggle have made a serious mistake?

Euth. Probably; indeed, it would appear to follow.

Euth. Probably; in fact, it seems like that would be the case.

Soc. It would seem, then, that those who know (35) how to cope with terrors and dangers well and nobly are courageous, and those who fail utterly of this are cowards?

Soc. So, it seems that people who know how to handle fears and dangers in a brave and honorable way are courageous, and those who completely fail to do this are cowards?

 (35) "Who have the {episteme}."
"Who has the knowledge."

So I judge them to be (he answered). (36)

So I think they're (he replied). (36)

 (36) N.B.—For this definition of courage see Plat. "Laches," 195 A
    and passim; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 325 foll.
(36) N.B.—For this definition of courage, see Plat. "Laches," 195 A and elsewhere; K. Joel, op. cit. p. 325 and following.

A kingdom and a tyranny (37) were, he opined, both of them forms of government, but forms which differed from one another, in his belief; a kingdom was a government over willing men in accordance with civil law, whereas a tyranny implied the government over unwilling subjects not according to law, but so as to suit the whims and wishes of the ruler.

A kingdom and a tyranny (37) were, he believed, both types of government, but they were different from each other. A kingdom governed willing people according to civil law, while a tyranny ruled over unwilling subjects, not following the law, but rather according to the personal desires of the ruler.

 (37) Or, "despotism."
Or, "tyranny."

There were, moreover, three forms of citizenship or polity; in the case where the magistrates were appointed from those who discharged the obligations prescribed by law, he held the polity to be an aristocracy (or rule of the best); (38) where the title to office depended on rateable property, it was a plutocracy (or rule of wealth); and lastly, where all the citizens without distinction held the reins of office, that was a democracy (or rule of the people).

There were also three types of citizenship or government: when the leaders were chosen from those who fulfilled the legal requirements, it was considered an aristocracy (or rule of the best); when the right to hold office was based on property ownership, it was a plutocracy (or rule of wealth); and finally, when all citizens could hold office without any restrictions, that was a democracy (or rule of the people).

 (38) Or, "in which the due discharge of lawful (law-appointed)
    obligations gave the title to magisterial office and government,
    this form of polity he held to be an aristocracy (or rule of the
    best)." See Newman, op. cit. i. 212, 235.
(38) Or, "in which fulfilling legal (officially assigned) responsibilities granted the authority for leadership and governance, he considered this type of government to be an aristocracy (or rule by the best)." See Newman, op. cit. i. 212, 235.

Let me explain his method of reply where the disputant had no clear statement to make, but without attempt at proof chose to contend that such or such a person named by himself was wiser, or more of a statesman, or more courageous, and so forth, than some other person. (39) Socrates had a way of bringing the whole discussion back to the underlying proposition, (40) as thus:

Let me explain his way of responding when the person arguing didn't have a clear point to make. Instead of providing evidence, they just claimed that someone they mentioned was smarter, a better statesman, or braver than another person. (39) Socrates had a knack for steering the whole conversation back to the main argument, (40) like this:

 (39) Or, "if any one encountered him in argument about any topic or
    person without any clear statement, but a mere ipse dixit, devoid
    of demonstration, that so and so," etc.

 (40) Or, "question at bottom." Cf. Plat. "Laws," 949 B.
(39) Or, "if anyone challenged him in a debate about any topic or person without any solid statement, but just a simple assertion, lacking proof, that so and so," etc.

(40) Or, "question at its core." Cf. Plat. "Laws," 949 B.

Soc. You state that so and so, whom you admire, is a better citizen that this other whom I admire?

Soc. You say that this person you admire is a better citizen than the one I admire?

The Disputant. Yes; I repeat the assertion.

The Disputant. Yes, I stand by my statement.

Soc. But would it not have been better to inquire first what is the work or function of a good citizen?

Soc. But wouldn't it have been better to ask first what the role or duty of a good citizen is?

The Disputant. Let us do so.

The Disputant. Let’s go ahead and do that.

Soc. To begin, then, with the matter of expenditure: his superiority will be shown by his increasing the resources and lightening the expenditure of the state? (41)

Soc. To start with the issue of spending: his excellence will be demonstrated by his ability to boost the state's resources and reduce its expenses? (41)

 (41) Or, "In the management of moneys, then, his strength will consist
    in his rendering the state better provided with ways and means?"
(41) Or, "In managing money, then, his strength will come from making the state better equipped with resources?"

Certainly (the disputant would answer).

Sure (the disputant would answer).

Soc. And in the event of war, by rendering his state superior to her antagonists?

Soc. And in the event of a war, by making his state stronger than her enemies?

The Disputant. Clearly.

The Disputant. Obviously.

Soc. Or on an embassy as a diplomatist, I presume, by securing friends in place of enemies?

Soc. So, you think being a diplomat means making friends instead of enemies?

That I should imagine (replies the disputant).

That I should think so (the debater responds).

Soc. Well, and in parliamentary debate, by putting a stop to party strife and fostering civic concord?

Soc. Well, in parliamentary debates, by putting an end to party conflict and promoting civic harmony?

The Disputant. That is my opinion.

The Disputant. That's what I think.

By this method of bringing back the argument to its true starting-point, even the disputant himself would be affected and the truth become manifest to his mind.

By using this method to return the argument to its true starting point, even the person arguing would be influenced, and the truth would become clear to them.

His own—that is, the Socratic—method of conducting a rational discussion (42) was to proceed step by step from one point of general agreement to another: "Herein lay the real security of reasoning," (43) he would say; and for this reason he was more successful in winning the common assent of his hearers than any one I ever knew. He had a saying that Homer had conferred on Odyesseus the title of a safe, unerring orator, (44) because he had the gift to lead the discussion from one commonly accepted opinion to another.

His own—that is, the Socratic—method of conducting a rational discussion (42) was to move step by step from one point of general agreement to another: "This is where the real strength of reasoning lies," (43) he would say; and because of this, he was more successful in gaining the common agreement of his listeners than anyone I’ve ever known. He had a saying that Homer gave Odysseus the label of a reliable, precise speaker (44) because he had the ability to guide the conversation from one widely accepted belief to another.

 (42) Of, "of threading the mazes of an argument."

 (43) Reading {tauton asphaleian}; aliter. {tauten ten asphaleian} =
    "that this security was part and parcel of reasoning."

 (44) "Od." viii. 171, {o d' asphaleos agoreuei}, "and his speech runs
    surely on its way" (Butcher and Lang), where Odysseus is
    describing himself. Cf. Dion. Hal. "de Arte Rhet." xi. 8.
(42) Of, "of navigating the twists and turns of an argument."

(43) Reading {tauton asphaleian}; alternatively. {tauten ten asphaleian} =
   "that this security was essential to reasoning."

(44) "Od." viii. 171, {o d' asphaleos agoreuei}, "and his speech confidently proceeds on its way" (Butcher and Lang), where Odysseus is describing himself. See Dion. Hal. "de Arte Rhet." xi. 8.

VII

VII

The frankness and simplicity with which Socrates endeavoured to declare his own opinions, in dealing with those who conversed with him, (1) is, I think, conclusively proved by the above instances; at the same time, as I hope now to show, he was no less eager to cultivate a spirit of independence in others, which would enable them to stand alone in all transactions suited to their powers.

The honesty and straightforwardness with which Socrates tried to express his own views during conversations with others, (1) is, I believe, clearly demonstrated by the examples mentioned above; at the same time, as I hope to show now, he was equally committed to fostering a sense of independence in others that would allow them to navigate any situation that matched their abilities.

 (1) Or, "who frequented his society, is, I hope, clear from what has
    been said."
(1) Or, "who spent time with him, I hope, is clear from what has been stated."

Of all the men I have ever known, he was most anxious to ascertain in what any of those about him was really versed; and within the range of his own knowledge he showed the greatest zeal in teaching everything which it befits the true gentleman (2) to know; or where he was deficient in knowledge himself, (3) he would introduce his friends to those who knew. (4) He did not fail to teach them also up to what point it was proper for an educated man to acquire empiric knowledge of any particular matter. (5)

Of all the men I’ve ever known, he was the most eager to find out what those around him truly understood. Within his own area of expertise, he was highly enthusiastic about teaching everything that a true gentleman should know. If he lacked knowledge in a certain area, he would connect his friends with people who did. He also made sure to instruct them on how far an educated person should go in gaining practical knowledge about any specific topic.

 (2) Lit. "a beautiful and good man."

 (3) Or, "where he lacked acquaintance with the matter himself." See,
    for an instance, "Econ." iii. 14.

 (4) "To those who had the special knowledge"; "a connoisseur in the
    matter."

 (5) Or, "of any particular branch of learning"; "in each department of
    things."
(2) Literally, "a beautiful and good man."

(3) Or, "where he wasn't familiar with the subject himself." See, for an example, "Econ." iii. 14.

(4) "To those who had expert knowledge"; "a specialist in the subject."

(5) Or, "of any specific field of study"; "in each area of knowledge."

To take geometry as an instance: Every one (he would say) ought to be taught geometry so far, at any rate, as to be able, if necessary, to take over or part with a piece of land, or to divide it up or assign a portion of it for cultivation, (6) and in every case by geometric rule. (7) That amount of geometry was so simple indeed, and easy to learn, that it only needed ordinary application of the mind to the method of mensuration, and the student could at once ascertain the size of the piece of land, and, with the satisfaction of knowing its measurement, depart in peace. But he was unable to approve of the pursuit of geometry up to the point at which it became a study of unintelligible diagrams. (8) What the use of these might be, he failed, he said, to see; and yet he was not unversed in these recondite matters himself. (9) These things, he would say, were enough to wear out a man's life, and to hinder him from many other more useful studies. (10)

Taking geometry as an example: Everyone (he would say) should be taught enough geometry to be able, if needed, to buy or sell a piece of land, or to divide it up or assign a portion for farming, and in all cases by geometric principles. That basic level of geometry was so simple and easy to learn that it only required a regular application of the mind to the method of measuring, and the student could quickly figure out the size of the land and, with the peace of mind that comes from knowing its measurements, leave satisfied. However, he couldn’t support studying geometry to the point where it became about incomprehensible diagrams. He couldn’t see the purpose of these diagrams, even though he was somewhat familiar with these complex subjects himself. He would say that these pursuits were enough to exhaust a person's life and distract him from many other more valuable studies.

 (6) {e ergon apodeixasthai}, or "and to explain the process." Cf.
    Plat. "Rep." vii. 528 D. See R. Kuhner ad loc. for other
    interpretations of the phrase. Cf. Max. Tyr. xxxvii. 7.

 (7) Or, "by correct measurement"; lit. "by measurement of the earth."

 (8) Cf. Aristot. "Pol." v. (viii.) 2; Cic. "Acad. Post." I. iv. 15.
    For the attitude compare the attitude of a philosopher in other
    respects most unlike Socrates—August Comte, e.g. as to the
    futility of sidereal astronomy, "Pos. Pol." i. 412 (Bridges).

 (9) Cf. Isocr. "On the Antidosis," 258-269, as to the true place of
    "Eristic" in education. See above, IV. ii. 10.

 (10) Cf. A. Comte as to "perte intellectuelle" in the pursuit of
    barren studies.
(6) {e ergon apodeixasthai}, or "and to explain the process." Cf. Plat. "Rep." vii. 528 D. See R. Kuhner ad loc. for other interpretations of the phrase. Cf. Max. Tyr. xxxvii. 7.

(7) Or, "by accurate measurement"; lit. "by measurement of the earth."

(8) Cf. Aristot. "Pol." v. (viii.) 2; Cic. "Acad. Post." I. iv. 15. For the attitude, compare the viewpoint of a philosopher who is otherwise very different from Socrates—August Comte, for example, regarding the futility of sidereal astronomy, "Pos. Pol." i. 412 (Bridges).

(9) Cf. Isocr. "On the Antidosis," 258-269, regarding the true role of "Eristic" in education. See above, IV. ii. 10.

(10) Cf. A. Comte regarding "intellectual loss" in the pursuit of unproductive studies.

Again, a certain practical knowledge of astronomy, a certain skill in the study of the stars, he strongly insisted on. Every one should know enough of the science to be able to discover the hour of the night or the season of the month or year, for the purposes of travel by land or sea—the march, the voyage, and the regulations of the watch; (11) and in general, with regard to all matters connected with the night season, or with the month, or the year, (12) it was well to have such reliable data to go upon as would serve to distinguish the various times and seasons. But these, again, were pieces of knowledge easily learnt from night sportsmen, (13) pilots of vessels, and many others who make it their business to know such things. As to pushing the study of astronomy so far as to include a knowledge of the movements of bodies outside our own orbit, whether planets or stars of eccentric movement, (14) or wearing oneself out endeavouring to discover their distances from the earth, their periods, and their causes, (15) all this he strongly discountenanced; for he saw (he said) no advantage in these any more than in the former studies. And yet he was not unversed (16) in the subtleties of astronomy any more than in those of geometry; only these, again, he insisted, were sufficient to wear out a man's lifetime, and to keep him away from many more useful pursuits.

Again, he strongly emphasized the importance of having practical knowledge of astronomy and skills in studying the stars. Everyone should know enough about the science to determine the time of night or the season of the month or year for the purposes of land or sea travel—the march, the voyage, and the sailing schedule; and in general, it's beneficial to have reliable information about the night, the month, or the year to differentiate between various times and seasons. However, this knowledge can easily be learned from night hunters, ship captains, and others who specialize in these areas. As for delving into astronomy to understand the movements of celestial bodies outside our orbit, whether they are planets or stars with unusual orbits, or exhausting oneself trying to figure out their distances from Earth, their orbits, and their causes—he strongly discouraged this. He believed there was no benefit in it compared to more practical studies. Yet, he was knowledgeable in the nuances of astronomy just as he was in geometry; he insisted that these subjects could consume a person's entire life, distracting them from more useful activities.

 (11) Schneid. cf. Plat. "Rep." vii. 527 D.

 (12) "Occurrences connected with the night, the month, or year." e.g.
    the festival of the Karneia, the {tekmerion} (point de repere) of
    which is the full moon of August. Cf. Eur. "Alc." 449.

 (13) See Plat. "Soph." 220 D; above, III. xi. 8; "Cyrop." I. vi. 40;
    "Hunting," xii. 6; Hippocr. "Aer." 28.

 (14) See Lewis, "Astron. of the Ancients"; cf. Diog. Laert. vii. 1.
    144.

 (15) Or, "the causes of these."

 (16) {oude touton ge anekoos en}. He had "heard," it is said,
    Archelaus, a pupil of Anaxagoras. Cf. Cic. "Tusc." V. iv. 10.
(11) Schneid. see Plat. "Rep." vii. 527 D.

(12) "Events related to the night, the month, or year." e.g. the festival of the Karneia, the {tekmerion} (reference point) of which is the full moon in August. See Eur. "Alc." 449.

(13) See Plat. "Soph." 220 D; above, III. xi. 8; "Cyrop." I. vi. 40; "Hunting," xii. 6; Hippocr. "Aer." 28.

(14) See Lewis, "Astron. of the Ancients"; see also Diog. Laert. vii. 1. 144.

(15) Or, "the reasons for these."

(16) {oude touton ge anekoos en}. He had "heard," it is said, from Archelaus, a student of Anaxagoras. See Cic. "Tusc." V. iv. 10.

And to speak generally, in regard of things celestial he set his face against attempts to excogitate the machinery by which the divine power formed its several operations. (17) Not only were these matters beyond man's faculties to discover, as he believed, but the attempt to search out what the gods had not chosen to reveal could hardly (he supposed) be well pleasing in their sight. Indeed, the man who tortured his brains about such subjects stood a fair chance of losing his wits entirely, just as Anaxagoras, (18) the headiest speculator of them all, in his attempt to explain the divine mechanism, had somewhat lost his head. Anaxagoras took on himself to assert that sun and fire are identical, (19) ignoring the fact that human beings can easily look at fire, but to gaze steadily into the face of the sun is given to no man; or that under the influence of his rays the colour of the skin changes, but under the rays of fire not. (20) He forgot that no plant or vegetation springs from earth's bosom with healthy growth without the help of sunlight, whilst the influence of fire is to parch up everything, and to destroy life; and when he came to speak of the sun as being a "red-hot stone" he ignored another fact, that a stone in fire neither lights up nor lasts, whereas the sun-god abides for ever with intensist brilliancy undimmed.

And generally speaking, when it came to celestial matters, he opposed efforts to figure out the mechanisms by which divine power carried out its various functions. Not only did he think these things were beyond human understanding, but he also believed that trying to uncover what the gods had chosen not to reveal would likely not be pleasing to them. In fact, a person who stressed over such topics stood a real chance of losing their sanity, just like Anaxagoras, the most intense thinker of them all, who somewhat lost his mind in trying to explain the divine workings. Anaxagoras claimed that the sun and fire are the same, ignoring the fact that humans can easily look at fire, but no one can stare directly at the sun; or that skin color changes under the sun’s rays, but not under fire. He overlooked that no plant or vegetation grows healthily from the earth without the aid of sunlight, while fire tends to dry everything out and destroy life. And when he referred to the sun as a "red-hot stone," he neglected another important fact: a stone in fire neither shines nor lasts, whereas the sun-god persists forever, shining with unmatched brilliance.

 (17) Or, "he tried to divert one from becoming overly-wise in heavenly
    matters and the 'mecanique celeste' of the Godhead in His several
    operations." See above, I. i. 11. See Grote, "Plato," i. 438.

 (18) Of Clazomenae. Cf. Plat. "Apol." 14; Diog. Laert. II. vi; Cic.
    "Tusc." V. iv. 10; Cobet, "Prosop. Xen." s.n.; Grote, "H. G." i.
    501.

 (19) Or, "that the sun was simply a fire, forgetting so simple a fact
    as that."

 (20) Or, "the complexion darkens, whereas fire has no such effect."
(17) Or, "he tried to steer people away from becoming too knowledgeable about divine matters and the 'celestial mechanics' of God in His various actions." See above, I. i. 11. See Grote, "Plato," i. 438.

(18) Of Clazomenae. Cf. Plat. "Apol." 14; Diog. Laert. II. vi; Cic. "Tusc." V. iv. 10; Cobet, "Prosop. Xen." s.n.; Grote, "H. G." i. 501.

(19) Or, "that the sun was just a fire, overlooking such a simple fact as that."

(20) Or, "the complexion darkens, while fire doesn’t have that effect."

Socrates inculcated the study of reasoning processes, (21) but in these, equally with the rest, he bade the student beware of vain and idle over-occupation. Up to the limit set by utility, he was ready to join in any investigation, and to follow out an argument with those who were with him; but there he stopped. He particularly urged those who were with him to pay the utmost attention to health. They would learn all it was possible to learn from adepts, and not only so, but each one individually should take pains to discover, by a lifelong observation of his own case, what particular regimen, what meat or drink, or what kind of work, best suited him; these he should turn to account with a view to leading the healthiest possible life. It would be no easy matter for any one who would follow this advice, and study his own idiosyncrasy, to find a doctor to improve either on the diagnosis or the treatment requisite. (22)

Socrates emphasized the importance of studying reasoning processes, (21) but he also warned students to be cautious of getting too caught up in trivial pursuits. He was open to participating in any inquiry that served a practical purpose and would engage in discussions with others; however, he drew the line there. He strongly encouraged those he was with to prioritize their health. They could learn everything possible from experts, but each individual should also take the time to observe their own situation throughout their life to determine what specific diet, exercise, or work suited them best. They should use this knowledge to lead the healthiest life possible. It wouldn't be easy for anyone who followed this advice and examined their own uniqueness to find a doctor who could improve on the necessary diagnosis or treatment. (22)

 (21) {logismous} = (1) "arithmetic," (2) "calculation," (3)
    "syllogistic reasoning." See L. Dind. "Index. Gr." s.v., and
    Kuhner ad loc.; cf. Plat. "Gorg." 451 C. It is important to decide
    which form of "logism" is meant here.

 (22) Or, "to find a doctor better able than himself to 'diagnose' and
    prescribe a treatment congenial to health." Cf. Tac. "Ann." vi.
    46; Plut. "de San." 136 E, ap. Schneid. ad loc.
(21) {logismous} = (1) "math," (2) "calculation," (3) "logical reasoning." See L. Dind. "Index. Gr." s.v., and Kuhner ad loc.; cf. Plat. "Gorg." 451 C. It’s important to determine which type of "logism" is being referred to here.

(22) Or, "to find a doctor who is better than he is at 'diagnosing' and suggesting a treatment that's suitable for health." Cf. Tac. "Ann." vi. 46; Plut. "de San." 136 E, ap. Schneid. ad loc.

Where any one came seeking for help which no human wisdom could supply, he would counsel him to give heed to "divination." He who has the secret of the means whereby the gods give signs to men touching their affairs can never surely find himself bereft of heavenly guidance.

Wherever someone came looking for help that no human understanding could provide, he would advise them to pay attention to "divination." Those who know the way the gods send signs to people about their lives can always be confident they won't lack divine guidance.

VIII

VIII

Now if any one should be disposed to set the statement of Socrates touching the divinity (1) which warned him what he ought to do or not to do, against the fact that he was sentenced to death by the board of judges, and argue that thereby Socrates stood convicted of lying and delusion in respect of this "divinity" of his, I would have him to note in the first place that, at the date of his trial, Socrates was already so far advanced in years that had he not died then his life would have reached its natural term soon afterwards; and secondly, as matters went, he escaped life's bitterest load (2) in escaping those years which bring a diminution of intellectual force to all—instead of which he was called upon to exhibit the full robustness of his soul and acquire glory in addition, (3) partly by the style of his defence—felicitous alike in its truthfulness, its freedom, and its rectitude (4)—and partly by the manner in which he bore the sentence of condemnation with infinite gentleness and manliness. Since no one within the memory of man, it is admitted, ever bowed his head to death more nobly. After the sentence he must needs live for thirty days, since it was the month of the "Delia," (5) and the law does not suffer any man to die by the hand of the public executioner until the sacred embassy return from Delos. During the whole of that period (as his acquaintances without exception can testify) his life proceeded as usual. There was nothing to mark the difference between now and formerly in the even tenour of its courage; and it was a life which at all times had been a marvel of cheerfulness and calm content. (6)

Now, if anyone wants to argue that Socrates' statement about the divine being that advised him on what he should or shouldn't do is contradictory to the fact that he was sentenced to death by the judges—suggesting that this proves Socrates was lying or delusional about his “divinity”—I would first point out that by the time of his trial, Socrates was already quite advanced in age. Had he not died then, his life would have naturally ended soon afterward. Secondly, considering the circumstances, he avoided life’s heaviest burdens by escaping those years that typically diminish a person's intellect. Instead, he was called to demonstrate the full strength of his spirit and gain glory through his defense—remarkable for its truthfulness, freedom, and integrity—and through the way he accepted his sentence with immense grace and strength. No one, in living memory, has faced death as nobly as he did. After the sentence, he had to live for thirty days since it was the month of the “Delia,” and the law forbids a man from being executed until the sacred delegation returns from Delos. Throughout this entire period, as all his friends can confirm, he lived as usual. There was nothing to suggest a change from his previous brave demeanor; it was a life that had always been marked by joy and peaceful contentment.

 (1) Or, "the words of Socrates with regard to a divine something which
    warned him," etc.

 (2) The phraseology is poetical.

 (3) Or, "in a manner which redounded to his glory."

 (4) Or, "marvellous alike for the sincerity of its language, the free
    unbroken spirit of its delivery, and the absolute rectitude of the
    speaker."

 (5) i.e. the lesser "Delian" solemnities, an annual festival
    instituted, it was said, by Theseus. See Plut. "Theseus," 23
    (Clough, i. 19); and for the whole matter see Plat. "Phaed." 58
    foll.

 (6) Cf. Arist. "Frogs," 82; of Sophocles, {o d' eukolos men enthad',
    eukolos d' ekei}.

 (Let us pause and ask how could man die more nobly and more
beautifully than in the way described? or put it thus: dying so,
then was his death most noble and most beautiful; and being the most
beautiful, then was it also the most fortunate and heaven-blest; and
being most blessed of heaven, then was it also most precious in the
sight of God.) (7)

 (7) This is bracketed as spurious by Sauppe and other commentators.
    But see "Cyrop." VIII. ii. 7, 8, for similar ineptitude of style.
    R. Kuhner defends the passage as genuine.
 (1) Or, "the words of Socrates regarding a divine something that warned him," etc.

 (2) The wording is poetic.

 (3) Or, "in a way that brought him glory."

 (4) Or, "remarkable for the sincerity of its language, the free, uninterrupted spirit of its delivery, and the absolute integrity of the speaker."

 (5) i.e. the lesser "Delian" ceremonies, an annual festival said to have been established by Theseus. See Plut. "Theseus," 23 (Clough, i. 19); and for the full context, see Plat. "Phaed." 58 and following.

 (6) Cf. Arist. "Frogs," 82; of Sophocles, {o d' eukolos men enthad', eukolos d' ekei}.

 (Let us take a moment to consider how could a person die more nobly and beautifully than in this manner? Or to put it another way: dying in this way, his death was the most noble and beautiful; and being the most beautiful, it was also the most fortunate and blessed by heaven; and being most blessed by heaven, it was also most precious in the sight of God.) (7)

 (7) This is marked as questionable by Sauppe and other commentators. But see "Cyrop." VIII. ii. 7, 8, for similar awkwardness in style. R. Kuhner defends the passage as authentic.

And now I will mention further certain things which I have heard from Hermogenes, the son of Hipponicus, (8) concerning him. He said that even after Meletus (9) had drawn up the indictment, he himself used to hear Socrates conversing and discussing everything rather than the suit impending, and had ventured to suggest that he ought to be considering the line of his defence, to which, in the first instance, the master answered: "Do I not seem to you to have been practising that my whole life long?" And upon his asking "How?" added in explanation that he had passed his days in nothing else save in distinguishing between what is just and what is unjust (right and wrong), and in doing what is right and abstaining from what is wrong; "which conduct" (he added) "I hold to be the finest possible practice for my defence"; and when he (Hermogenes), returning to the point again, pleaded with Socrates: "Do you not see, Socrates, how commonly it happens that an Athenian jury, under the influence of argument, condemns innocent people to death and acquits real criminals?"—Socrates replied, "I assure you, Hermogenes, that each time I have essayed to give my thoughts to the defence which I am to make before the court, the divinity (10) has opposed me." And when he (Hermogenes) exclaimed, "How strange!"—"Do you find it strange" (he continued), "that to the Godhead it should appear better for me to close my life at once? Do you not know that up to the present moment there is no man whom I can admit to have spent a better or happier life than mine. Since theirs I regard as the best of lives who study best to become as good as may be, and theirs the happiest who have the liveliest sense of growth in goodness; and such, hitherto, is the happy fortune which I perceive to have fallen to my lot. To such conclusion I have come, not only in accidental intercourse with others, but by a strict comparison drawn between myself and others, and in this faith I continue to this day; and not I only, but my friends continue in a like persuasion with regard to me, not for the lame reason that they are my friends and love me (or else would others have been in like case as regards their friends), but because they are persuaded that by being with me they will attain to their full height of goodness. But, if I am destined to prolong my days, maybe I shall be enforced to pay in full the penalties of old age—to see and hear less keenly, to fail in intellectual force, and to leave school, as it were, more of a dunce than when I came, less learned and more forgetful—in a word, I shall fall from my high estate, and daily grow worse in that wherein aforetime I excelled. But indeed, were it possible to remain unconscious of the change, the life left would scarcely be worth living; but given that there is a consciousness of the change, then must the existence left to live be found by comparison insipid, joyless, a death in life, devoid of life's charm. But indeed, if it is reserved for me to die unjustly, then on those who unjustly slay me lies the shame (since, given injustice is base, how can any unjust action whatsoever fail of baseness?) (11) But for me what disgrace is it that others should fail of a just decision and right acts concerning me?... I see before me a long line of predecessors on this road, and I mark the reputation also among posterity which they have left. (12) I note how it varies according as they did or suffered wrong, and for myself I know that I too, although I die to-day, shall obtain from mankind a consideration far different from that which will be accorded to those who put me to death. I know that undying witness will be borne me to this effect, that I never at any time did wrong to any man, or made him a worse man, but ever tried to make those better who were with me."

And now I want to mention some things I’ve heard from Hermogenes, the son of Hipponicus, about Socrates. He said that even after Meletus had filed the indictment, he would still hear Socrates talking and discussing everything except the trial coming up. He even suggested that Socrates should focus on his defense, to which Socrates replied, "Don’t I seem to you to have been preparing for that my whole life?" When asked, "How?" he explained that he spent his days only distinguishing between what is just and what is unjust (right and wrong) and doing what is right while avoiding what is wrong; "I believe," he added, "that this is the best practice for my defense." When Hermogenes returned to the topic and said, "Don’t you see, Socrates, how often an Athenian jury, swayed by arguments, condemns innocent people to death and lets real criminals go free?"—Socrates responded, "I assure you, Hermogenes, that every time I've tried to focus on my defense for the court, the divine has prevented me." When Hermogenes exclaimed, "How strange!" Socrates continued, "Is it strange to you that the divine thinks it’s better for me to end my life now? Don’t you know that up to this moment, I can’t think of anyone who has lived a better or happier life than I have? I believe the best life belongs to those who strive to be as good as possible, and the happiest to those who feel the most growth in goodness; and this has been my good fortune so far. I’ve come to this conclusion not just through random conversations with others, but by closely comparing myself to them, and I still hold onto this belief today; and not just me, but my friends feel the same way about me— not just because they care for me (otherwise, others would feel the same about their friends), but because they believe that being with me will help them reach their highest potential for goodness. But if I’m meant to live longer, I might face the full consequences of old age—seeing and hearing less sharply, losing mental sharpness, and leaving school, so to speak, as more of a fool than when I started, less knowledgeable and more forgetful—in short, I would decline in the very things where I once excelled. Indeed, if it were possible to remain unaware of this change, the remaining life wouldn’t be worth living; but knowing about the decline, the life left would feel bland, joyless, like a living death, stripped of life’s charm. However, if I am destined to die unjustly, then the shame falls on those who wrongfully kill me (since, if injustice is disgraceful, how could any unjust action not also be?). But what shame is it for me if others fail to make a just decision about me? I see a long line of predecessors on this path, and I notice the legacies they’ve left behind among future generations. I see how their reputations shift based on whether they did or suffered wrong. I know that even though I die today, the recognition I receive from people will be vastly different from that of those who kill me. I know there will be eternal witness to this: that I never did wrong to anyone or made anyone worse but always aimed to make those around me better."

 (8) See above, II. x. 3; "Symp." i. 3; iii. 14; iv. 47 foll.; vi. 2;
    "Apol." 2; Plat. "Crat." 384.

 (9) See above, I. i. 1.

 (10) {to daimonion}—"the divine (voice)."

 (11) This passage also may, perhaps, be regarded as spurious.

 (12) Or, "There floats before my eyes a vision of the many who have
    gone this same gate. I note their legacies of fame among
    posterity."
 (8) See above, II. x. 3; "Symp." i. 3; iii. 14; iv. 47 foll.; vi. 2;  
    "Apol." 2; Plat. "Crat." 384.

 (9) See above, I. i. 1.

 (10) {to daimonion}—"the divine (voice)."

 (11) This passage might also be considered questionable.

 (12) Or, "I see a vision of the many who have passed through this same gate. I take note of their legacies of fame among future generations."

Such are the words which he spoke in conversation with Hermogenes and the rest. But amongst those who knew Socrates and recognised what manner of man he was, all who make virtue and perfection their pursuit still to this day cease not to lament his loss with bitterest regret, as for one who helped them in the pursuit of virtue as none else could.

These are the words he shared in conversation with Hermogenes and the others. However, among those who knew Socrates and understood what kind of person he was, everyone who strives for virtue and excellence still mourns his loss today with deep regret, as he was someone who helped them in their pursuit of virtue like no one else.

To me, personally, he was what I have myself endeavoured to describe: so pious and devoutly religious (13) that he would take no step apart from the will of heaven; so just and upright that he never did even a trifling injury to any living soul; so self-controlled, so temperate, that he never at any time chose the sweeter in place of the better; so sensible, and wise, and prudent that in distinguishing the better from the worse he never erred; nor had he need of any helper, but for the knowledge of these matters, his judgment was at once infallible and self-sufficing. Capable of reasonably setting forth and defining moral questions, (14) he was also able to test others, and where they erred, to cross-examine and convict them, and so to impel and guide them in the path of virtue and noble manhood. With these characteristics, he seemed to be the very impersonation of human perfection and happiness. (15)

To me, he was exactly what I've tried to describe: so pious and devout that he wouldn't take a single step without considering the will of heaven; so just and fair that he never caused even the smallest harm to anyone; so self-controlled and moderate that he never chose the easier option over the better one; so sensible, wise, and prudent that he never mistaken the better for the worse; and he didn't need anyone else to help him, as his judgment was both infallible and self-sufficient. He could clearly articulate and define moral issues, and he was also able to evaluate others, challenge their mistakes, and guide them toward a life of virtue and integrity. With these qualities, he truly seemed like the embodiment of human perfection and happiness.

 (13) Or, "of such piety and religious devotedness... of such
    rectitude... of such sobreity and self-control... of such
    sound sense and wisdom..."

 (14) Or, "gifted with an ability logically to set forth and to define
    moral subtleties."

 (15) Or, "I look upon him as at once the best and happiest of men."
(13) Or, "of such piety and religious devotion... of such
    integrity... of such seriousness and self-discipline... of such
    good judgment and wisdom..."

(14) Or, "blessed with the ability to logically explain and clarify
    moral nuances."

(15) Or, "I see him as both the best and happiest of men."

Such is our estimate. If the verdict fail to satisfy I would ask those who disagree with it to place the character of any other side by side with this delineation, and then pass sentence.

This is our assessment. If the verdict doesn’t satisfy, I ask those who disagree to compare the character of any other perspective alongside this description, and then make a judgment.










Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!