The Works of the Emperor Julian

Volume 2

With an English Translation by

Wilmer Cave Wright

Harvard University Press

Cambridge, Massachusetts

1913

Contents

[Transcriber's Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter at Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public domain.]

Oration VI

Introduction to Oration VI

The Sixth Oration is a sermon or rather a scolding addressed to the New Cynics, and especially to one of their number who had ventured to defame the memory of Diogenes. In the fourth Christian century the Cynic mode of life was adopted by many, but the vast majority were illiterate men who imitated the Cynic shamelessness of manners but not the genuine discipline, the self-sufficiency (αὐτάρκεια) which had ennobled the lives of Antisthenes, Diogenes and Crates. To the virtues of these great men Julian endeavours to recall the worthless Cynics of his day. In the two centuries that had elapsed since Lucian wrote, for the edification of degenerate Cynics,[1] the Life of the Cynic Demonax, the dignified and witty friend of Epictetus, the followers of that sect had still further deteriorated. The New Cynics may be compared with the worst type of mendicant friar of the Middle Ages; and Julian saw in their assumption of the outward signs of Cynicism, the coarse cloak, the staff and wallet, and long hair, the same hypocrisy and greed that characterised certain of the Christian monks of his day.[2] The resemblances [pg 003] between the Christians and the Cynics had already been pointed out by Aristides,[3] and while in Julian's eyes they were equally impious, he has an additional grievance against the Cynics in that they brought discredit on philosophy. Like the Christians they were unlettered, they were disrespectful to the gods whom Julian was trying to restore, they had flattered and fawned on Constantius, and far from practising the austerities of Diogenes they were no better than parasites on society.

In this as in the Seventh Oration Julian's aim is to reform the New Cynics, but still more to demonstrate the essential unity of philosophy. He sympathised profoundly with the tenets of Cynicism, and ranked Diogenes with Socrates as a moral teacher. He reminds the Cynics whom he satirises that the famous admonition of Diogenes to “countermark”[4] or “forge” a new coinage is not to be taken as an excuse for license and impudence, but like the Delphic precept “Know Thyself” warns all philosophers to accept no traditional authority, no convention that has not been examined and approved by the reason of the individual. His conviction that all philosophical tenets are in harmony if rightly understood, gives a peculiar earnestness to his Apologia for Diogenes. The reference in the first paragraph to the summer solstice seems to indicate that the Oration was written before Julian left Constantinople in order to prepare for the Persian campaign.

[Transcriber's Note: The original book had pages with Greek on the left page and the corresponding English translation on the facing right page. In this e-book, each Greek paragraph will be immediately followed by the English translation paragraph, surrounded in parentheses. The Greek text contains markings such as [3] and [B]; they are section and sub-section markings that in the original book were in the right margin. These are different from numbers within parentheses such as (10), which are used as footnote references in some e-book formats.]

ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Emperor)

ΕΙΣ ΤΟΥΣ ΑΠΑΙΔΕΥΤΟΥΣ ΚΥΝΑΣ

(To the Uneducated Cynics)

Ἄνω ποταμῶν, τοῦτο δὴ τὸ τῆς παροιμίας. ἀνὴρ Κυνικὸς Διογένη φησί κενόδοξον, καὶ ψυχρολουτεῖν οὐ βούλεται, σφόδρα ἐρρωμένος τὸ σῶμα καὶ σφριγῶν [181] καὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν ἀκμάζων, ὡς ἂν μή τι κακὸν λάβῃ, καὶ ταῦτα τοῦ θεοῦ ταῖς θεριναῖς τροπαῖς ἤδη προσιόντος. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν ἐδωδὴν τοῦ πολύποδος κωμῳδεῖ καί φησι τὸν Διογένη τῆς ἀνοίας καὶ κενοδοξίας ἐκτετικέναι ἱκανὰς[5] δίκας ὥσπερ ὑπὸ κωνείου τῆς τροφῆς διαφθαρέντα. οὕτω πόρρω που σοφίας ἐλαύνει, ὥστε ἐπίσταται σαφῶς ὅτι κακὸν ὁ θάνατος. τοῦτο δὲ ἀγνοεῖν ὑπελάμβανεν ὁ σοφὸς Σωκράτης, ἀλλὰ καὶ μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον Διογένης. ἀρρωστοῦντι γοῦν, φασίν, ἀντισθένει μακρὰν καὶ δυσανάληπτον ἀρρωστίαν ξιφίδιον ἐπέδωκεν ὁ Διογένης εἰπών· [B] εἰ φίλου χρῄζεις ὑπουργίας. οὕτως οὐδὲν ᾤετο δεινὸν [pg 006] ἐκεῖνος οὐδὲ ἀλγεινὸν τὸν θάνατον. ἀλλ᾽ ἡμεῖς οἱ τὸ σκῆπτρον ἐκεῖθεν παραλαβόντες ὑπὸ μείζονος σοφίας ἴσμεν ὅτι χαλεπὸν ὁ θάνατος, καὶ τὸ νοσεῖν δεινότερον αὐτοῦ φαμεν[6] τοῦ θανάτου, τὸ ῥιγοῦν δὲ χαλεπώτερον τοῦ νοσεῖν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ νοσῶν μαλακῶς ἔσθ᾽ ὅτε θεραπεύεται, ὥστε γίνεσθαι τρυφὴν αὐτόχρημα τὴν ἀρρωστίαν, ἄλλως τε κἂν ᾖ πλούσιος. [C] ἐθεασάμην τοι καὶ αὐτὸς νὴ Δία τρυφώντάς τινας ἐν ταῖς νόσοις μᾶλλον ἢ τούτους αὐτοὺς ὑγιαίνοντας· καίτοι γε καὶ τότε λαμπρῶς ἐτρύφων. ὅθεν μοι καὶ παρέστη πρός τινας τῶν ἑταίρων εἰπεῖν, ὡς τούτοις ἄμεινον ἦν οἰκέταις γενέσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ δεσπόταις, καὶ πένεσθαι τοῦ κρίνου γυμνοτέροις οὖσιν ἢ πλουτεῖν ὥσπερ νῦν. ἦ γὰρ ἂν ἐπαύσαντο νοσοῦντες ἅμα καὶ τρυφῶντες. [D] τὸ μὲν δὴ νοσοτυφεῖν καὶ νοσηλεύεσθαι τρυφηλῶς οὑτωσί τινες ἐν καλῷ ποιοῦνται· ἀνὴρ δὲ τοῦ κρύους ἀνεχόμενος καὶ θάλπος καρτερῶν οὐχὶ καὶ τῶν νοσούντων ἀθλιώτερον πράττει; ἀλγεῖ γοῦν ἀπαραμύθητα.

(Behold the rivers are flowing backwards,[7] as the proverb says! Here is a Cynic who says that Diogenes[8] was conceited, and who refuses to take cold baths for fear they may injure him, though he has a very strong constitution and is lusty and in the prime of life, and this too though the Sun-god is now nearing the summer solstice. Moreover he even ridicules the eating of octopus and says that Diogenes paid a sufficient penalty for his folly and vanity in that he perished of this diet[9] as though by a draught of hemlock. So far indeed is he advanced in wisdom that he knows for certain that death is an evil. Yet this even the wise Socrates thought he did not know, yes and after him Diogenes as well. At any rate when Antisthenes[10] was suffering from a long and incurable illness Diogenes handed him a dagger with these words, “In case you need the aid of a friend.” So convinced was he that there is nothing terrible or grievous in death. But we who have inherited his staff know out of our greater wisdom that death is a calamity. And we say that sickness is even more terrible than death, and cold harder to bear than sickness. For the man who is sick is often tenderly nursed, so that his ill-health is straightway converted into a luxury, especially if he be rich. Indeed I myself, by Zeus, have observed that certain persons are more luxurious in sickness than in health, though even in health they were conspicuous for luxury. And so it once occurred to me to say to certain of my friends that it were better for those men to be servants than masters, and to be poor and more naked than the lily of the field[11] than to be rich as they now are. For they would have ceased being at once sick and luxurious. The fact is that some people think it a fine thing to make a display of their ailments and to play the part of luxurious invalids. But, says someone, is not a man who has to endure cold and to support heat really more miserable than the sick? Well, at any rate he has no comforts to mitigate his sufferings.)

Δεῦρο οὖν ἡμεῖς ὑπὲρ τῶν Κυνικῶν ὁπόσα διδασκάλων ἠκούσαμεν ἐν κοινῷ καταθῶμεν σκοπεῖν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὸν βίον ἰοῦσι τοῦτον· οἷς εἰ μὲν πεισθεῖεν, εὖ οἶδα, [182] οὐδὲν οἵ γε νῦν ἐπιχειροῦντες κυνίζειν ἔσονται χείρους· ἀπειθοῦντες δὲ εἰ μέν τι λαμπρὸν καὶ σεμνὸν ἐπιτηδεύσειαν, ὑπερφωνοῦντες τὸν λόγον τὸν ἡμέτερον, οὔτι τοῖς [pg 008] ῥήμασιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἔργοις, οὐδὲν ἐμπόδιον ὃ γε ἡμέτερος οἴσει λόγος· εἰ δὲ ὑπὸ λιχνείας ἢ μαλακίας ἤ, τὸ κεφάλαιον ἵν᾽ εἴπω ξυνελὲν ἐν βραχεῖ, τῆς σωματικῆς ἡδονῆς δεδουλωμένοι τῶν λόγων ὀλιγωρήσειαν προσκαταγελάσαντες, [B] ὥσπερ ἐνίοτε τῶν παιδευτηρίων καὶ τῶν δικαστηρίων οἱ κύνες τοῖς προπυλαίοις προσουροῦσιν, οὐ φροντὶς Ἰπποκλείδῃ· καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ τῶν κυνιδίων ἡμῖν μέλει τὰ τοιαῦτα πλημμελούντων. δεῦρο οὖν ἄνωθεν ἐν κεφαλαίοις διεξέλθωμεν ἐφεξῆς τὸν λόγον, ἵνα ὑπὲρ ἑκάστου τὸ προσῆκον ἀποδιδόντες αὐτοί τε εὐκολώτερον ἀπεργασώμεθα τοῦθ᾽ ὅπερ διενοήθημεν καὶ σοὶ ποιήσωμεν εὐπαρακολούθητον. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ [C] τὸν κυνισμὸν εἶδός τι φιλοσοφίας εἶναι συμβέβηκεν, οὔτι φαυλότατον οὐδὲ ἀτιμότατον, ἀλλὰ τοῖς κρατίστοις ἀνάμιλλον, ὀλίγα πρότερον ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς ῥητέον ἡμῖν ἐστι τῆς φιλοσοφίας.

(Come now, let me set down for the benefit of the public what I learned from my teachers about the Cynics, so that all who are entering on this mode of life may consider it. And if they are convinced by what I say, those who are now aiming to be Cynics will, I am sure, be none the worse for it: and if they are unconvinced but cherish aims that are brilliant and noble, and set themselves above my argument not in words only but in deeds, then my discourse will at any rate put no hindrance in their way. But if there are others already enslaved by greed or self-indulgence, or to sum it up briefly in a single phrase, by the pleasures of the body, and they therefore neglect my words or even laugh them down—just as dogs sometimes defile the front porticoes of schools and law-courts,—“'Tis all one to Hippocleides,”[12] for indeed we take no notice of puppies who behave in this fashion. Come then let me pursue my argument under headings from the beginning in due order, so that by giving every question its proper treatment I may myself more conveniently achieve what I have in mind and may make it more easy for you also to follow. And since it is a fact that Cynicism is a branch of philosophy, and by no means the most insignificant or least honourable, but rivalling the noblest, I must first say a few words about philosophy itself.)

Ἡ τῶν θεῶν εἰς ἀνθρώπους δόσις ἅμα φανοτάτῳ πυρὶ διὰ Προμηθέως καταπεμφθεῖσα[13] ἐξ ἡλίου μετὰ τῆς Ἑρμοῦ μερίδος οὐχ ἕτερον ἐστι παρὰ τὴν τοῦ λόγου καὶ νοῦ διανομήν· ὁ γάρ τοι Προμηθεύς, ἡ πάντα ἐπιτροπεύουσα τὰ θνητὰ πρόνοια, [D] πνεῦμα ἔνθερμον ὥσπερ ὄργανον ὑποβάλλουσα τῇ φύσει, ἅπασι μετέδωκεν ἀσωμάτου λόγου· μετέσχε δὲ ἕκαστον οὗπερ ἠδύνατο, τὰ μὲν ἄψυχα σώματα τῆς ἕξεως μόνον, τὰ φυτὰ δὲ ἤδη καὶ τῆς ζωῆς[14] τὰ ζῷα δὲ ψυχῆς, ὁ δὲ [pg 010] ἄνθρωπος καὶ λογικῆς ψυχῆς. εἰσὶ μὲν οὖν οἳ μίαν οὄονται διὰ τούτων πάντων ἥκειν φύσιν, εἰσὶ δὲ οἱ καὶ κατ᾽ εἶδος ταῦτα διαφέρειν. ἀλλὰ μήπω τοῦτο, μᾶλλον δὲ μηδὲ ἐν τῷ νῦν λόγῳ τοῦτο ἐξεταζέσθω, πλὴν ἐκείνου χάριν, [183] ὅτι, τὴν φιλοσοφίαν εἴθ᾽, ὥσπερ τινὲς ὑπολαμβάνουσι, τέχνην τεχνῶν καὶ ἐπιστήμην ἐπιστημῶν, εἴτε ὁμοίωσιν θεῷ[15] κατὰ τὸ δυνατόν, εἴθ᾽, ὅπερ ὁ Πύθιος ἔφη, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ὑπολάβοι τις, οὐδὲν διοίσει πρὸς τὸν λόγον· ἅπαντα γὰρ ταῦτα φαίνεται πρὸς ἄλληλα καὶ μάλα οἰκείως ἔχοντα.

(The gift of the gods sent down to mankind with the glowing flame of fire[16] from the sun through the agency of Prometheus along with the blessings that we owe to Hermes[17] is no other than the bestowal of reason and mind. For Prometheus, the Forethought that guides all things mortal by infusing into nature a fiery breath to serve as an operative cause, gave to all things a share in incorporeal reason. And each thing took what share it could; lifeless bodies only a state of existence; plants received life besides, and animals soul, and man a reasoning soul. Now some think that a single substance is the basis of all these, and others that they differ essentially according to their species. But this question we must not discuss as yet, or rather not at all in the present discourse, and we need only say that whether one regards philosophy, as some people do, as the art of arts and the science of sciences or as an effort to become like God, as far as one may, or whether, as the Pythian oracle said, it means “Know thyself,” will make no difference to my argument. For all these definitions are evidently very closely related to one another.)

Ἀρξώμεθα δὲ πρῶτον ἀπὸ τοῦ Γνῶθι σαυτόν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ θεῖόν ἐστι τοῦτο τὸ παρακέλευσμα. οὐκοῦν ὁ γιγνώσκων [B] αὑτὸν εἴσεται μὲν περὶ ψυχῆς, εἴσεται δὲ καὶ περὶ σώματος. καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀρκέσει μόνον, ὡς ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος ψυχὴ χρωμένη σώματι, μαθεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς ψυχῆς ἐπελεύσεται τὴν οὐσίαν, ἔπειτα ἀνιχνεύσει τὰς δυνάμεις. καὶ οὐδὲ τοῦτο μόνον ἀρκέσει αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ καί, εἴ τι τῆς ψυχῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστι κρεῖττον καὶ θειότερον, ὅπερ δὴ πάντες ἀδιδάκτως πειθόμενοι θεῖόν τι εἶναι νομίζομεν, [C] καὶ τοῦτο ἐνιδρῦσθαι πάντες οὐρανῷ κοινῶς ὑπολαμβάνομεν. ἐπιὼν δὲ αὖθις τὰς ἀρχὰς τοῦ σώματος σκέψεται, εἴτε σύνθετον εἴτε ἁπλοῦν ἐστιν· εἶτα ὁδῷ προβαίνων ὑπέρ τε ἁρμονίας αὐτοῦ καὶ πάθους καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ πάντων ἁπλῶς ὧν δεῖται πρὸς διαμονήν. ἐπιβλέψει δὲ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἀρχαῖς τεχνῶν [pg 012] ἐνίων, ὑφ᾽ ὧν βοηθεῖται πρὸς διαμονὴν τὸ σῶμα, οἷον ἰατρικῆς, [D] γεωργίας, ἑτέρων τοιούτων. οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ τῶν ἀχρήστων καὶ περιττῶν τι παντάπασιν ἀγνοήσει, ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτα[18] πρὸς κολακείαν τοῦ παθητικοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν ἐπινενόηται. προσλιπαρῆσαι μὲν γὰρ τούτοις ἀποκνήσει αἰσχρὸν οἰόμενος τὸ τοιοῦτον, τὸ δοκοῦν ἐργῶδες ἐν αὐτοῖς φεύγων· τὸ δ᾽ ὅλον ὁποῖα ἄττα δοκεῖ καὶ οἷστισιν ἁρμόττει τῆς ψυχῆς μέρεσιν, οὐκ ἀγνοήσει. σκόπει δή, εἰ μὴ τὸ ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι πάσης μὲν ἐπιστήμης, πάσης δὲ τέχνης ἡγεῖταί τε ἅμα καὶ τοὺς καθόλου λόγους συνείληφε. [184] τά τε γὰρ θεῖα διὰ τῆς ἐνούσης ἡμῖν θείας μερίδος τά τε θνητὰ διὰ τῆς θνητοειδοῦς μοίρας πρὸς τούτοις †προσήκειν ἔφη τὸ μεταξὺ τούτων ζῷον εἰδέναι, τὸν ἄνθρωπον†,[19] τῷ μὲν καθ᾽ ἕκαστον θνητόν, τῷ παντὶ δὲ ἀθάνατον, καὶ μέντοι καὶ τὸν ἕνα καὶ τὸν καθ᾽ ἕκαστον συγκεῖσθαι ἐκ θνητῆς καὶ ἀθανάτου μερίδος.

(However, let us begin with “Know thyself,” since this precept is divinely inspired.[20] It follows that he who knows himself will know not only about his soul but his body also. And it will not be enough to know that a man is a soul employing a body, but he will also investigate the essential nature of the soul, and then trace out its faculties. And not even this alone will be enough for him, but in addition he will investigate whatever exists in us nobler and more divine than the soul, that something which we all believe in without being taught and regard as divine, and all in common suppose to be established in the heavens. Then again, as he investigates the first principles of the body he will observe whether it is composite or simple; then proceeding systematically he will observe its harmony and the influences that affect it and its capacity and, in a word, all that it needs to ensure its permanence. And in the next place he will also observe the first principles of certain arts by which the body is assisted to that permanence, for instance, medicine, husbandry and the like. And of such arts as are useless and superfluous he will not be wholly ignorant, since these too have been devised to humour the emotional part of our souls. For though he will avoid the persistent study of these last, because he thinks such persistent study disgraceful, and will avoid what seems to involve hard work in those subjects; nevertheless he will not, generally speaking, remain in ignorance of their apparent nature and what parts of the soul they suit. Reflect therefore, whether self-knowledge does not control every science and every art, and moreover whether it does not include the knowledge of universals. For to know things divine through the divine part in us, and mortal things too through the part of us that is mortal—this the oracle declared to be the duty of the living organism that is midway between these, namely man; because individually he is mortal, but regarded as a whole he is immortal, and moreover, singly and individually, is compounded of a mortal and an immortal part.)

Ὅτι μέντοι καὶ τὸ τῷ θεῲ κατὰ δύναμιν ὁμοιοῦσθαι οὐκ ἄλλο τί ἐστιν ἢ τὸ τὴν ἐφικτὴν ἀνθρώποις γνῶσιν τῶν ὄντων περιποιήσασθαι, πρόδηλον ἐντεῦθεν. [B] οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ πλούτῳ χρημάτων τὸ θεῖον μακαρίζομεν οὐδὲ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τῶν νομιζομένων ἀγαθῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπερ Ὅμηρός φησι

(Further, that to make oneself like God as far as possible is nothing else than to acquire such knowledge of the essential nature of things as is attainable by mankind, is evident from the following. It is not on the score of abundance of possessions that we count the divine nature happy, nor on the score of any other of those things that are commonly believed to be advantages, but it is because, as Homer says,)

θεοὶ δέ τε πάντα ἴσασι,

(“The gods know all things”;[21])

καὶ μέντοι καὶ περὶ Διὸς

(and indeed he says also of Zeus,)

ἀλλὰ Ζεὺς πρότερος γεγόνει καὶ πλείονα ᾔδει·

(“But Zeus was older and wiser.”[22])

[C] ἐπιστήμῃ γὰρ ἡμῶν οἱ θεοὶ διαφέρουσιν. ἡγεῖται γὰρ ἴσως καὶ αὐτοῖς τῶν καλῶν τὸ αὑτοὺς γινώσκειν· ὄσῳ δὴ κρείττονες ἡμῶν εἰσι τὴν οὐσίαν, τοσούτῳ γνόντες ἑαυτοὺς ἴσχουσι βελτιόνων γνώσιν. μηδεὶς οὖν ἡμῖν τὴν φιλοσοφίαν εἰς πολλὰ διαιρείτω μηδὲ εἰς πολλὰ τεμνέτω, μᾶλλον δὲ μὴ πολλὰς ἐκ μιᾶς ποιείτω. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἀλήθεια μία, οὕτω δὲ καὶ φιλοσοφία μία· θαυμαστὸν δὲ οὐδέν, εἰ κατ᾽ ἄλλας καὶ ἄλλας ὁδοὺς ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν πορευόμεθα. ἐπεὶ κἄν, [D] εἴ τις θέλοι τὼν ξένων ἢ ναὶ μὰ Δία τῶν πάλαι πολιτῶν ἐπανελθεῖν εἰς Ἀθήνας, δύναιτο μὲν καὶ πλεῖν καὶ βαδίζειν, ὁδεύων δὲ οἶμαι διὰ γῆς ἢ ταῖς πλατείαις χρῆσθαι λεωφόροις ἢ ταῖς ἀτραποῖς καὶ συντόμοις ὁδοῖς· καὶ πλεῖν μέντοι δυνατὸν παρὰ τοὺς αἰγιαλούς, καὶ δὴ καὶ κατὰ τὸν Πύλιον γέροντα τέμνοντα πέλαγος μέσον. μὴ δὲ τοῦτό τις ἡμῖν προφερέτω, εἴ τινες τῶν κατ᾽ αὐτὰς ἰόντων τὰς ὁδοὺς ἀπεπλανήθησαν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ που γενόμενοι, [185] καθάπερ ὑπὸ τῆς Κίρκης ἢ τῶν Λωτοφάγων ἡδονῆς ἢ δόξης ᾿ἤ τινος ἄλλου δελεασθέντες, ἀπελείφθησαν τοῦ πρόσω βαδίζειν καὶ ἐφικνεῖσθαι τοῦ τέλους, τοὺς πρωτεύσαντας δὲ ἐν ἑκάστῃ τῶν αἱρέσεων σκοπείτω, καὶ πάντα εὑρήσει σύμφωνα.

(For it is in knowledge that the gods surpass ourselves. And it may well be that with them also what ranks as noblest is self-knowledge. In proportion then as they are nobler than we in their essential nature, that self-knowledge of theirs is a knowledge of higher things. Therefore, I say, let no one divide philosophy into many kinds or cut it up into many parts, or rather let no one make it out to be plural instead of one. For even as truth is one, so too philosophy is one. But it is not surprising that we travel to it now by one road, now by another. For if any stranger, or, by Zeus, any one of her oldest inhabitants wished to go up to Athens, he could either sail or go by road, and if he travelled by land he could, I suppose, take either the broad highways or the paths and roads that are short cuts. And moreover he could either sail along the coasts or, like the old man of Pylos,[23] “cleave the open sea.” And let no one try to refute me by pointing out that some philosophers in travelling by those very roads have been known to lose their way, and arriving in some other place have been captivated, as though by Circe or the Lotus-Eaters, that is to say by pleasure or opinion or some other bait, and so have failed to go straight forward and attain their goal. Rather he must consider those who in every one of the philosophic sects did attain the highest rank, and he will find that all their doctrines agree.)

Οὐκοῦν ὁ μὲν ἐν Δελφοῖς θεὸς τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν προαγορεύει, Ἡράκλειτος δὲ “ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν,” ἀλλὰ καὶ Πυθαγόρας οἵ τε ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνου μέχρι Θεοφράστου τὸ κατὰ δύναμιν ὁμοιοῦσθαι θεῷ φασι, καὶ γὰρ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης. ὃ γὰρ ἡμεῖς [pg 016] ποτέ, τοῦτο ὁ θεὸς ἀεί. γελοῖον οὖν ἂν εἴη τὸν θεὸν ἑαυτὸν μὴ εἰδέναι· κομιδῇ γὰρ οὐδὲν εἴσεται τῶν ἄλλων, εἴπερ ἑαυτὸν ἀγνοοίη· πάντα γὰρ αὐτός ἐστιν, εἴπερ καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ἔχει τῶν ὁπωσοῦν ὄντων τὰς αἰτίας, εἴτε ἀθανάτων ἀθανάτους, εἴτε ἐπικήρων οὐ θνητὰς οὐδὲ ἐπικήρους, ἀιδίους δὲ καὶ μενούσας ἀεὶ καὶ αἳ τούτοις εἰσὶν αἰτίαι τῆς ἀειγενεσίας. [C] ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος μὲν ὁ λόγος ἐστὶ μείζων.

(Therefore the god at Delphi proclaims, “Know Thyself,” and Heracleitus says, “I searched myself”;[24] and Pythagoras also and his school and his followers down to Theophrastus, bid us become like God as far as possible, yes and Aristotle too. For what we are sometimes, God is always.[25] It would therefore be absurd that God should not know himself. For he will know nothing at all about other things if he be ignorant of himself. For he is himself everything, seeing that in himself and near himself he keeps the causes of all things that in any way whatever have existence, whether they be immortal causes of things immortal, or causes of perishable things, though themselves not mortal or perishable; for imperishable and ever-abiding are the causes of perpetual generation for the perishable world. But this line of argument is too lofty for the occasion.)

Ὅτι δὲ μία τέ ἐστιν ἀλήθεια καὶ φιλοσοφία μία καὶ ταύτης εἰσὶν ἐρασταὶ ξύμπαντες ὧν τε ὑπεμνήσθην μικρῷ πρότερον ὧν τε ἐν δίκῃ νῦν εἴποιμι ἂν τοὔνομα, τοὺς τοῦ Κιτιέως ὁμιλητὰς λέγω, οἳ τὰς πόλεις ἰδόντες ἀποδιδρασκούσας τὸ λίαν ἀκραιφνὲς καὶ καθαρὸν τῆς ἐλευθερίας τοῦ κυνὸς ἐσκέπασαν αὐτὸν [D] ὥσπερ οἶμαι παραπετάσμασιν οἰκονομίᾳ καὶ τῇ χρηματιστικῇ καὶ τῇ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα συνόδῳ καὶ παιδοτροφίᾳ, ἴν᾽ οἶμαι ταῖς πόλεσιν αὐτὸν ἐγγύθεν ἐπιστήσωσι φύλακα· ὅτι δὲ τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν κεφάλαιον τίθενται φιλοσοφίας, οὐ μόνον ἐξ ὧν κατεβάλλοντο ξυγγραμμάτων ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦτου πεισθείης ἄν, εἴπερ ἐθέλοις, [pg 018] ἀλλὰ πολὺ πλέον ἀπὸ τοῦ τῆς φιλοσοφίας τέλους· τὸ γὰρ ὁμολογουμένως [186] ζῆν τῇ φύσει τέλος ἐποιήσαντο, οὗπερ οὐχ οἷόv τε τυχεῖν τὸν ἀγνοοῦντα, τίς καὶ ὁποῖος πέφυκεν· ὁ γὰρ ἀγνοῶν ὅστις ἐστίν, οὐκ εἴσεται δήπουθεν ὅ, τι πράττειν ἑαυτῷ προσήκει, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾽ ὁ[26] τὸν σίδηρον ἀγνοῶν εἴσεται, εἴτε αὐτῷ τέμνειν εἴτε μὴ προσήκει, καὶ ὅτου δεῖ τῷ σιδήρῳ πρὸς τὸ δύνασθαι τὸ ἑαυτοῦ πράττειν· ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὲν ἡ φιλοσοφία μία τέ ἐστι καὶ πάντες ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν ἑνός τινος ἐφιέμενοι ὁδοῖς ἐπὶ τοῦτο διαφόροις ἦλθον, [B] ἀπόχρη τοσαῦτα νῦν εἰπεῖν. ὑπὲρ δὲ τοῦ Κυνισμοῦ σκεπτέον ἔτι.[27]

(Now truth is one and philosophy is one, and they whom I just now spoke of are its lovers one and all; and also they whom I ought in fairness to mention now by name, I mean the disciples of the man of Citium.[28] For when they saw that the cities of Greece were averse to the excessive plainness and simplicity of the Cynic's freedom of manners, they hedged him about with screens as it were, I mean with maxims on the management of the household and business and intercourse with one's wife and the rearing of children, to the end, I believe, that they might make him the intimate guardian of the public welfare.[29] And that they too held the maxim “Know Thyself” to be the first principle of their philosophy you may believe, if you will, not only from the works that they composed on this very subject, but even more from what they made the end and aim of their philosophic teaching. For this end of theirs was life in harmony with nature, and this it is impossible for any man to attain who does not know who and of what nature he is. For a man who does not know himself will certainly not know what it is becoming for him to do; just as he who does not know the nature of iron will not know whether it is suitable to cut with or not, and how iron must be treated so that it may be put to its proper use. For the moment however I have said enough to show that philosophy is one, and that, to speak generally, all philosophers have a single aim though they arrive at that aim by different roads. And now let us consider the Cynic philosophy.)

Εἰ μὲν οὖν ἐπεποίητο τοῖς ἀνδράσι μετά τινος σπουδῆς, ἀλλὰ μὴ μετὰ παιδιᾶς τὰ συγγράμματα, τούτοις ἐχρῆν ἑπόμενον ἐπιχειρεῖν ἕκαστα ὧν διανοούμεθα περὶ τοῦ πράγματος ἐξετάζειν τὸν ἐναντίον καὶ, εἰ μὲν ἐφαίνετο τοῖς παλαιοῖς ὁμολογοῦντα, μήτοι ψευδομαρτυριῶν ἡμῖν ἐπισκήπτειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τότε ἐξορίζειν αὐτὰ τῆς ἀκοῆς ὥσπερ Ἀθηναῖοι τὰ ψευδῆ γράμματα τοῦ Μητρῴου. ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐδὲν ἐστιν, [C] ὡς ἔφην, τοιοῦτον· αἵ τε γὰρ θρυλούμεναι Διογένους τραγῳδίαι Φιλίσκου τινὸς Αἰγινήτου λέγονται εἶναι, καί, εἰ Διογένους δὴ[30] εἶεν, οὐδὲν ἄτοπόν ἐστι τὸν σοφὸν παίζειν, ἐπεί καὶ τοῦτο πολλοὶ φαίνονται τῶν φιλοσόφων [pg 020] ποιήσαντες· ἐγέλα τοι, φασί, καὶ Δημόκριτος ὁρῶν σπουδάζοντας τοὺς ἀνθρώπους· μὴ δὴ πρὸς τὰς παιδιὰς αὐτῶν ἀποβλέπωμεν, ὥσπερ οἱ μανθάνειν τι [D] σπουδαῖον ἥκιστα ἐρῶντες, πόλει παραβάλλοντες εὐδαίμονι, πολλῶν μὲν ἱερῶν, πολλῶν δὲ ἀπορρήτων τελετῶν πλήρει, καὶ μυρίων ἔνδον ἱερέων ἁγνῶν ἐν ἁγνοῖς μενόντων χωρίοις· αὐτοῦ δὲ ἕνεκα πολλάκις τούτου, λέγω δὲ τοῦ καθαρεύειν τὰ εἴσω πάντα, τὰ περιττὰ καὶ βδελυρὰ καὶ φαῦλα τῆς πόλεως ἀπεληλακόσι,[31] λουτρὰ δημόσια καὶ χαμαιτυπεῖα καὶ καπηλεῖα καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα· εἶτα ἄχρι τούτου γενόμενοι εἴσω μὴ παρίασιν.[32] ὁ μὲν γὰρ τοῖς τοιούτοις ἐντυχών, [187] εἶτα τοῦτο οἰηθεὶς εἶναι τὴν πόλιν ἄθλιος μὲν ἀποφυγών, ἀθλιώτερος δὲ κάτω μείνας, ἐξὸν ὑπερβάντα μικρὸν ἰδεῖν τὸν Σωκράτη· χρήσομαι γὰρ ἐκείνοις ἐγὼ τοῖς ῥήμασιν, οἷς Ἀλκιβιάδης ἐπαινῶν Σωκράτη. φημὶ γὰρ δὴ τὴν Κυνικὴν φιλοσοφίαν ὁμοιοτάτην εἶναι τοῖς Σειληνοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ἐν τοῖς ἑρμογλυφείοις καθημένοις, οὕστινας ἐργάζονται οἱ δημιουργοὶ σύριγγας ἢ αὐλοὺς ἔχοντας· οἳ διχάδε[33] [B] διοιχθέντες ἔνδον φαίνονται ἀγάλματα ἔχοντες θεῶν. ὡς ἂν οὖν μὴ τοιοῦτόν τι πάθωμεν, ὅσα ἔπαιξε ταῦτα αὐτὸν ἐσπουδακέναι νομίσαντες· ἔστι μὲν γάρ τι καὶ ἐν ἐκείνοις οὐκ ἄχρηστον, ὁ Κυνισμὸς δέ ἐστιν [pg 022] ἕτερον, ὡς αὐτίκα μάλα δεῖξαι πειράσομαι· δεῦρο ἴδωμεν ἐφεξῆς ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων, ὥσπερ αἱ ἐξιχνεύουσαι κύνες μεταθέουσι τὰ θηρία.

(If the Cynics had composed treatises with any serious purpose and not merely with a frivolous aim, it would have been proper for my opponent to be guided by these and to try in each case to refute the opinions that I hold on the subject; and then, if they proved to be in harmony with those original doctrines, he could not attack me for bearing false witness; but if they proved not to be in harmony, then he could have barred my opinions from a hearing, as the Athenians barred spurious documents from the Metroum.[34] But, as I said, nothing of that sort exists. For the much-talked-of tragedies of Diogenes are now said to be the work of a certain Philiscus[35] of Aegina; though even if they were by Diogenes there would be nothing out of the way in a wise man's jesting, since many philosophers have been known to do so. For Democritus also, we are told, used to laugh when he saw men taking things seriously. Well then I say we must not pay any attention to their frivolous writings, like men who have no desire at all to learn anything of serious interest. Such men when they arrive at a prosperous city abounding in sacrifices and secret rites of many kinds, and containing within it countless holy priests who dwell in the sacred enclosures, priests who for this very purpose, I mean in order to purify everything that is within their gates, have expelled all that is sordid and superfluous and vicious from the city, public baths and brothels, and retail shops, and everything of the sort without exception: such men, I say, having come as far as the quarter where all such things are, do not enter the city itself. Surely a man who, when he comes upon the things that have been expelled, thinks that this is the city, is despicable indeed if he depart on the instant, but still more despicable if he stay in that lower region, when he might by taking but a step across the threshold behold Socrates himself. For I will borrow those famous phrases of Alcibiades in his praise of Socrates,[36] and I assert that the Cynic philosophy is very like those images of Silenus that sit in the shops of the statuaries, which the craftsmen make with pipes or flutes in their hands, but when you open them you see that inside they contain statues of the gods. Accordingly, that we may not make that sort of mistake and think that his jesting was sober earnest (for though there is a certain use even in those jests, yet Cynicism itself is something very different, as I shall presently try to prove), let us consider it in due course from its actual practice and pursue it like hounds that track down wild beasts in the chase.)

Ἡγεμόνα μὲν οὖν οὐ ῥᾴδιον εὑρεῖν, ἐφ᾽ ὃν ἀνενέγκαι χρὴ πρῶτον αὐτό, [C] εἰ καί τινες ὑπολαμβάνουσιν ἀντισθένει τοῦτο καὶ Διογένει προσήκειν. τοῦτο γοῦν ἔοικεν Οἰνόμαος οὐκ ἀτόπως λέγειν· ὁ Κυνισμὸς οὔτε Ἀντισθενισμός ἐστιν οὔτε Διογενισμός. λέγουσι μὲν γὰρ οἱ γενναιότεροι τῶν κυνῶν, ὅτι καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἡρακλῆς, ὥσπερ οὖν τῶν ἄλλων ἀγαθῶν ἡμῖν[37] αἴτιος κατέστη, οὕτω δὲ καὶ τούτου τοῦ βίου παράδειγμα τὸ μέγιστον[38] κατέλιπεν ἀνθρώποις. ἐγὼ δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν θεῶν καὶ τῶν εἰς θείαν λῆξιν πορευθέντων εὐφημεῖν ἐθέλων [D] πείθομαι μὲν καὶ πρὸ τούτου τινὰς οὐκ ἐν Ἕλλησι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βαρβάροις οὕτω φιλοσοφῆσαι·[39] αὕτη γὰρ ἡ φιλοσοφία κοινή πως ἔοικεν εἶναι καὶ φυσικωτάτη καὶ δεῖσθαι οὐδ᾽ ἡστινοσοῦν πραγματείας· ἀλλὰ ἀπόχρη μόνον ἑλέσθαι τὰ σπουδαῖα ἀρετῆς ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ φυγῇ κακίας, καὶ οὔτε βίβλους ἀνελίξαι δεῖ μυρίας· πολυμαθία γάρ, φασί, νόον οὐ διδάσκει· οὔτε ἄλλο τι τῶν τοιούτων παθεῖν, ὅσα καὶ οἷα πάσχουσιν οἱ διὰ τῶν ἄλλων αἱρέσεων ἰόντες, [188] ἀλλὰ ἀπόχρη μόνον δύο ταῦτα τοῦ Πυθίου [pg 024] παραινοῦντος ἀκοῦσαι, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν καὶ Παραχάραξον τὸ νόμισμα· πέφηνεν οὖν ἡμῖν ἀρχηγὸς τῆς φιλοσοφίας ὅσπερ οἶμαι τοῖς Ἕλλησι κατέστη τῶν καλῶν ἁπάντων αἴτιος, ὁ τῆς Ἑλλάδος κοινὸς ἡγεμὼν καὶ νομοθέτης καὶ βασιλεύς, ὁ ἐν Δελφοῖς θεός, ὃν ἐπειδὴ μὴ θέμις ἦν τι διαλαθεῖν, οὐδὲ ἡ Διογένους ἐπιτηδειότης ἔλαθε. προύτρεψε δὲ αὐτὸν οὐχ ὥσπερ τοὺς ἄλλους ἔπεσιν ἐντείνων τὴν παραίνεσιν, [B] ἀλλ᾽ ἔργῳ διδάσκων ὅ,τι βούλεται συμβολικῶς διὰ δυοῖν ὀνομάτοιν, Παραχάραξον εἰπὼν τὸ νόμισμα· τὸ γάρ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν οὐκ ἐκείνῳ μόνον,[40] ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἔφη καὶ λέγει, πρόκειται γὰρ οἶμαι τοῦ τεμένους. ηὑρήκαμεν δὴ τὸν ἀρχηγέτην τῆς φιλοσοφίας, ὥς που καὶ ὁ δαιμόνιός φησιν Ἰάμβλιχος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς κορυφαίους ἐν αὐτῇ, Ἀντισθένη καὶ Διογένη καὶ Κράτητα, οἷς τοῦ βίου σκοπὸς ἦν καὶ τέλος αὑτοὺς οἶμαι γνῶναι καὶ τῶν κενῶν ὑπεριδεῖν δοξῶν, ἀληθείας δέ, ἣ πάντων μὲν ἀγαθῶν θεοῖς, πάντων δὲ ἀνθρώποις ἡγεῖται, ὅλῃ, [C] φασίν, ἐπιδράξασθαι τῇ διανοίᾳ, ἧς οἶμαι καὶ Πλάτων καὶ Πυθαγόρας καὶ Σωκράτης οἵ τε ἐκ τοῦ Περιπάτου καὶ Ζήνων ἕνεκα πάντα ὑπέμειναν πόνον, αὑτούς τε ἐθέλοντες γνῶναι καὶ μὴ κεναῖς ἕπεσθαι δόξαις, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἀλήθειαν ἀνιχνεῦσαι.

(Now the founder of this philosophy to whom we are to attribute it, in the first instance, is not easy to discover, even though some think that the title belongs to Antisthenes and Diogenes. At least the saying of Oenomaus[41] seems to be not without good grounds: “The Cynic philosophy is neither Antisthenism nor Diogenism.” Moreover the better sort of Cynics assert that in addition to the other blessings bestowed on us by mighty Heracles, it was he who bequeathed to mankind the noblest example of this mode of life.[42] But for my part, while I desire to speak with due reverence of the gods and of those who have attained to their functions, I still believe that even before Heracles, not only among the Greeks but among the barbarians also, there were men who practised this philosophy. For it seems to be in some ways a universal philosophy, and the most natural, and to demand no special study whatsoever. But it is enough simply to choose the honourable by desiring virtue and avoiding evil; and so there is no need to turn over countless books. For as the saying goes, “Much learning does not teach men to have understanding.”[43] Nor is it necessary to subject oneself to any part of such a discipline as they must undergo who enter other philosophic sects. Nay it is enough merely to hearken to the Pythian god when he enjoins these two precepts, “Know Thyself,” and “Falsify the common currency.”[44] Hence it becomes evident to us that the founder of this philosophy is he who, I believe, is the cause of all the blessings that the Greeks enjoy, the universal leader, law-giver and king of Hellas, I mean the god of Delphi.[45] And since it was not permitted that he should be in ignorance of aught, the peculiar fitness of Diogenes did not escape his notice. And he made him incline to that philosophy, not by urging his commands in words alone, as he does for other men, but in very deed he instructed him symbolically as to what he willed, in two words, when he said, “Falsify the common currency.” For “Know Thyself” he addressed not only to Diogenes, but to other men also and still does: for it stands there engraved in front of his shrine. And so we have at last discovered the founder of this philosophy, even as the divine Iamblichus also declares, yes, and we have discovered its leading men as well, namely Antisthenes and Diogenes and Crates;[46] the aim and end of whose lives was, I think, to know themselves, to despise vain opinions, and to lay hold of truth with their whole understanding; for truth, alike for gods and men, is the beginning of every good thing;[47] and it was, I think, for her sake that Plato and Pythagoras and Socrates and the Peripatetic philosophers and Zeno spared no pains, because they wished to know themselves, and not to follow vain opinions but to track down truth among all things that are.)

Φέρε οὖν, ἐπειδὴ πέφηνεν οὐκ ἄλλο μὲν ἐπιτηδεύσας Πλάτων, ἕτερον δὲ Διογένης, ἓν δέ τι καὶ ταὐτόν· εἰ γοῦν ἔροιτό τις τὸν σοφὸν Πλάτωνα “τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν πόσου νενόμικας ἄξιον;” εὖ οἶδα ὅτι τοῦ παντὸς ἂν φήσειε, [D] καὶ λέγει δὲ ἐν Ἀλκιβιάδῃ· δεῦρο δὴ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο φράσον ἡμῖν, ὦ δαιμόνιε Πλάτων καὶ θεῶν ἔκγονε “Τίνα τρόπον χρὴ πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν διακεῖσθαι δόξας,” ταὐτά τε ἐρεῖ καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ὅλον ἡμῖν ἐπιτάξει διαρρήδην ἀναγνῶναι τὸν Κρίτωνα διάλογον, οὗ φαίνεται παραινῶν Σωκράτης μηδὲν φροντίζειν ἡμᾶς τῶν τοιούτων· φησὶ γοῦν· “Ἀλλὰ τί ἡμῖν, ὦ μακάριε Κρίτων, [189] οὕτω τῆς τῶν πολλῶν δόξης μέλει;” εἶτα ἡμεῖς τούτων ὑπεριδόντες ἀποτειχίζειν ἁπλῶς οὑτωσὶ καὶ ἀποσπᾶν ἄνδρας ἀλλήλων ἐθέλομεν, οὗς ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας συνήγαγεν ἔρως ἥ τε τῆς δόξης ὑπεροψία καὶ ἡ πρὸς τὸν ζῆλον τῆς ἀρετῆς ξύμπνοια; εἰ δὲ Πλάτωνι μὲν ἔδοξε καὶ διὰ τῶν λόγων αὐτὰ ἐργάζεσθαι, Διογένει δὲ ἀπέχρη τὰ ἔργα, διὰ τοῦτο ἄξιός ἐστιν ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἀκούειν κακῶς; ὅρα δὲ μὴ καὶ τοῦτο αὐτὸ τῷ παντὶ κρεῖττόν ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ καὶ Πλάτων ἐξομνύμενος φαίνεται τὰ ξυγγράμματα. [B] “Οὐ γάρ ἐστι Πλάτωνος,” φησί, “ζύγγραμμα οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽ ἔσται, τὰ δὲ νῦν φερόμενα ἐστι Σωκράτους, ἀνδρὸς [pg 028] καλοῦ καὶ νέου.” τί οὖν ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τοῦ Διογένους σκοποῦμεν αὐτὸν τὸν Κυνισμόν, ὅστις ἐστιν;

(And now, since it has become evident that Plato was not pursuing one aim and Diogenes another, but their end was one and the same: suppose one should inquire of the wise Plato: What value do you set on the precept “Know Thyself”? I am very sure that he would answer that it is worth everything, and indeed he says so in the Alcibiades.[48] Come then tell us next, divine Plato, scion of the gods, how one ought to be disposed towards the opinions of the many? He will give the same answer, and moreover he will expressly enjoin on us to read his dialogue the Crito,[49] where Socrates is shown warning us not to take heed of such things. At any rate what he says is: “But why, my dear good Crito, are we so concerned about the opinion of the multitude?” And now are we to ignore all this evidence, and without further question fence off from one another and force apart men whom the passion for truth, the scorn of opinion, and unanimity in zeal for virtue have joined together? And if Plato chose to achieve his aim through words, whereas for Diogenes deeds sufficed, does the latter on that account deserve to be criticised by you? Nay, consider whether that same method of his be not in every respect superior; since we see that Plato for himself forswore written compositions. “For” he says,[50] “there are no writings by Plato nor ever will be, and what now pass current as his are the work of Socrates, the ever fair and ever young.” Why then should we not from the practice of Diogenes study the character of the Cynic philosophy?)

Οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ σώματος μέρη μέν ἐστιν, οἷον ὀφθαλμοί, πόδες, χεῖρες, ἄλλα δὲ ἐπισυμβαίνει, τρίχες, ὄνυχες, ῥύπος, τοιούτων περιττωμάτων γένος, ὧν ὔνευ σῶμα ἀνθρώπινον ἀμήχανον εἶναι, [C] πότερον οὐ γελοῖός ἐστιν ὁ μέρη νομίσας ὄνυχας ἢ τρίχας ἢ ῥύπον καὶ τὰ δυσώδη τῶν περιττωμάτων, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὰ τιμιώτατα καὶ σπουδαῖα, πρῶτον μὲν τὰ αἰσθητήρια καὶ τούτων αὐτῶν ἅττα συνέσεως ἡμῖν ἐστι μᾶλλον αἴτια, οἷον ὀφθαλμούς, ἀκοάς; ὑπουργεῖ γὰρ ταῦτα πρὸς φρόνησιν εἴτε ἐγκατορωρυγμένῃ τῇ ψυχῇ, ὡς ἂν θᾶττον καθαρθεῖσα δύναιτο τῇ καθαρᾷ χρῆσθαι[51] καὶ ἀκινήτῳ τοῦ φρονεῖν δυνάμει, εἴτε ὥσπερ τινὲς οἴονται, καθάπερ δι᾽ ὀχετῶν τοιούτων εἰσφερούσης τῆς ψυχῆς. [D] συλλέγουσα γάρ, φασί, τὰ κατὰ μέρος αἰσθήματα καὶ συνέχουσα τῇ μνήμῃ γεννᾷ τὰς ἐπιστήμας. ἐγὼ δέ, εἰ μή τι τοιοῦτον ἦν ἐνθέον ἢ τέλειον ἐμποδιζόμενον δὲ[52] ὑπ᾽ ἄλλων πολλῶν καὶ ποικίλων, ὃ τῶν ἐκτὸς ποιεῖται τὴν ἀντίληψιν, οὐδ᾽ ἂν δυνατὸν οἶμαι γενέσθαι τῶν αἰσθητῶν τὴν[53] ἀντίληψιν. ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος μὲν ὁ λόγος οὐ τοῖς νῦν προσήκει.

(Now the body consists of certain parts such as eyes, feet and hands, but there are besides other parts, hair, nails, ordure, a whole class of accessories of that sort without which the human body cannot exist. Then is it not absurd for a man to take into account such parts, I mean hair or nails or ordure or such unpleasant accessories, rather than those parts that are most precious and important, in the first place, for instance, the organs of perception, and among these more especially the instruments whereby we apprehend, namely the eyes and ears? For these aid the soul to think intelligently, whether it be buried deep in the body and they enable it to purify itself more readily and to use its pure and steadfast faculty of thought, or whether, as some think, it is through them that the soul enters in as though by channels.[54] For, as we are told, by collecting individual perceptions and linking them through the memory she brings forth the sciences. And for my own part, I think that if there were not something of this sort, either incomplete in itself or perfect but hindered by other things many and various, which brings about our apprehension of externals, it would not even be possible for us to apprehend the objects of sense-perception. But this line of argument has little to do with the present question.)

[190] Διόπερ ἐπανακτέον ἐπὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς φιλοσοφίας τῆς κυνικῆς. φαίνονται μὲν δὴ καὶ οὗτοι διμερῆ [pg 030] τὴν φιλοσοφίαν νομίσαντες ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοτέλης καὶ Πλάτων, θεωρηματικήν τε καὶ πρακτικὴν, αὐτὸ τοῦτο[55] συνέντες δηλονότι καὶ νοήσαντες, ὡς οἰκεῖόν ἐστιν ἔνθρωπος φύσει πράξει καὶ ἐπιστήμῃ. εἰ δὲ τῆς φυσικῆς τὴν θεωρίαν[56] ἐξέκλιναν, οὐδὲν τοῦτο πρὸς τὸν λόγον. ἐπεὶ καὶ Σωκράτης καὶ πλείονες ἄλλοι θεωρίᾳ μὲν φαίνονται χρησάμενοι πολλῇ, ταύτῃ δὲ οὐκ ἄλλου χάριν, ἀλλὰ τῆς πράξεως· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὸ ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι τοῦτο ἐνόμισαν, [B] τὸ μαθεῖν ἀκριβῶς, τί μὲν ἐποδοτέον ψυχῇ, τί δὲ σώματι· ἀπέδοσαν δὲ[57] εἰκότως ἡγεμονίαν μὲν τῇ ψυχῇ, ὑπηρεσίαν δὲ τῷ σώματι. φαίνονται δὴ οὖν ἀρετὴν ἐπιτηδεύσαντες, ἐγκράτειαν, ἀτυφίαν, ἐλευθερίαν, ἔξω γενόμενοι παντὸς φθόνου, δειλίας, δεισιδαιμονίας. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἡμεῖς ταῦτα ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν διανοούμεθα, παίζειν δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ κυβεύειν περὶ τοῖς φιλτάτοις ὑπολαμβάνομεν, οὕτως ὑπεριδόντας [C] τοῦ σώματος, ὡς ὁ Σωκράτης ἔφη λέγων ὀρθῶς μελέτην εἶναι θανάτου τὴν φιλοσοφίαν. τοῦτο ἐκεῖνοι καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἡμέραν ἐπιτηδεύοντες οὐ ζηλωτοὶ μᾶλλον ἡμῖν, ἄθλιοι δέ τινες καὶ παντελῶς ἀνόητοι δοκοῦσιν·[58] ἀνθ᾽ ὅτου δὲ[59] τοὺς πόνους ὑπέμειναν τούτους;[60] οὐχ ὡς αὐτὸς εἶπας, κενοδοξίας ἕνεκα. καὶ γὰρ[61] πῶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπῃνοῦντο ὠμὰ [pg 032] προσφερόμενοι σαρκία; καίτοι οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἐπαινέτης εἶ. [D] τοῦ γοῦν τοιούτου τρίβωνα καὶ τὴν κόμην, ὥσπερ αἱ γραφαὶ τῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἀπομιμούμενος εἶθ᾽ ὃ μηδὲ αὐτὸς ἀξιάγαστον ὑπολαμβάνεις, τοῦτο εὐδοκιμεῖν οἴει παρὰ τῷ πλήθει; καὶ εἳς μὲν ἢ δεύτερος ἐπῄνει τότε, πλεῖν δ᾽ οὖν ἢ δέκα μυριάδες ὑπὸ τῆς ναυτίας καὶ βδελυρίας διεστράφησαν τὸν στόμαχον καὶ ἀπόσιτοι γεγόνασιν, ἄχρις αὐτοὺς οἱ θεράποντες ἀνέλαβον ὀσμαῖς καὶ μύροις καὶ πέμμασιν. [191] οὕτως ὁ κλεινὸς ἥρως ἔργῳ κατεπλήξατο γελοίῳ μὲν ἀνθρώποις τοιούτοις,

(Accordingly we must go back to the divisions of the Cynic philosophy. For the Cynics also seem to have thought that there were two branches of philosophy, as did Aristotle and Plato, namely speculative and practical, evidently because they had observed and understood that man is by nature suited both to action and to the pursuit of knowledge. And though they avoided the study of natural philosophy, that does not affect the argument. For Socrates and many others also, as we know, devoted themselves to speculation, but it was solely for practical ends. For they thought that even self-knowledge meant learning precisely what must be assigned to the soul, and what to the body. And to the soul they naturally assigned supremacy, and to the body subjection. This seems to be the reason why they practised virtue, self-control, modesty and freedom, and why they shunned all forms of envy, cowardice and superstition. But this, you will say, is not the view that we hold about them, for we are to think that they were not in earnest, and that they hazarded what is most precious[62] in thus despising the body; as Socrates did when he declared, and rightly, that philosophy is a preparation for death.[63] And since this was the aim that the Cynics pursued daily, we need not emulate them any more than the others, but we are to think them miserable beings and altogether foolish. But why was it that they endured those hardships? Surely not from ostentation, as you declared. For how could they win applause from other men by eating raw meat? Certainly you yourself do not applaud them for this. At any rate, when you imitate one of those Cynics by carrying a staff and wearing your hair long, as it is shown in their pictures, do you think that you thereby gain a reputation with the crowd, though you do not yourself think those habits worthy of admiration? One or two, indeed, used to applaud him in his own day, but more than ten times ten thousand had their stomachs turned by nausea and loathing, and went fasting until their attendants revived them with perfumes and myrrh and cakes. So greatly did that renowned hero shock them by an act which seems absurd to men)

Οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσιν,

(“of such sort as mortals now are,”[64])

οὐκ ἀγεννεῖ δέ, μὰ τοὺς θεούς, εἴ τις αὐτὸ κατὰ τὴν Διογένους ἐξηγήσαιτο σύνεσιν. ὅπερ γὰρ ὁ Σωκράτης ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ φησιν, ὅτι τῷ θεῷ νομίζων λατρείαν ἐκτελεῖν ἐν τῷ τὸν δοθέντα χρησμὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ κατὰ πάντα σκοπῶν ἐξετάζειν τὸν ἐλεγκτικὸν ἠσπάσατο βίον, τοῦτο καὶ Διογένης οἶμαι συνειδὼς ἑαυτῷ, πυθόχρηστον οὖσαν τὴν φιλοσοφίαν, ἔργοις ᾤετο δεῖν ἐξελέγχειν πάντα καὶ μὴ δόξαις ἄλλων, τυχὸν μὲν ἀληθέσι, τυχὸν δὲ ψευδέσι προσπεπονθέναι. οὔκουν οὐδὲ εἴ τι Πυθαγόρας ἔφη, οὐδὲ εἴ τις ἄλλος τῷ Πυθαγόρᾳ παραπλήσιος, ἀξιόπιστος ἐδόκει τῷ Διογένει. τὸν γὰρ θεόν, ἀνθρώπων δὲ[65] οὐδένα τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἀρχηγὸν ἐπεποίητο. [C] τί δῆτα τοῦτο, ἐρεῖς, πρὸς τὴν τοῦ πολύποδος ἐδωδήν; ἐγώ σοι φράσω.

(though, by the gods, it was not ignoble, if one should explain it according to the intention of Diogenes. For just as Socrates said of himself that he embraced the life of cross-examining because he believed that he could perform his service to the god only by examining in all its bearings the meaning of the oracle that had been uttered concerning him, so I think Diogenes also, because he was convinced that philosophy was ordained by the Pythian oracle, believed that he ought to test everything by facts and not be influenced by the opinions of others, which may be true and may be false. Accordingly Diogenes did not think that every statement of Pythagoras, or any man like Pythagoras, was necessarily true. For he held that God and no human being is the founder of philosophy. And pray what, you will say, has this to do with the eating of octopus? I will tell you.)

Τὴν σαρκοφαγίαν οἱ μὲν ἀνθρώποις ὑπολαμβάνουσι κατὰ φύσιν, οἱ δὲ ἥκιστα τοῦτο ἐργάζεσθαι [pg 034] προσήκειν ἀνθρώπῳ διανοοῦνται, καὶ πολὺς ὁ περὶ τούτου ἀνάλωται[66] λόγος. ἐθέλοντι οὖν σοι μὴ ῥᾳθυμεῖν ἑσμοὶ περὶ τοῦ τοιούτου βίβλων φανήσονται. τούτους Διογένης ἐξελέγχειν ᾤετο δεῖν. διενοήθη γοῦν οὕτως· εἰ μὲν ἀπραγματεύτως ἐσθίων τις σάρκας, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τῶν ἄλλων ἕκαστον θηρίων, [D] οἷς τοῦτο ἔνειμεν ἡ φύσις, ἀβλαβῶς αὐτὸ καὶ ἀνεπαχθῶς, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ μετὰ τῆς τοῦ σώματος ὠφελείας ἐργάζοιτο, κατὰ φύσιν εἶναι πάντως τὴν σαρκοφαγίαν ὑπέλαβεν· εἰ δέ τις ἐντεῦθεν γένοιτο βλάβη, οὐχὶ τοῦτο ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἔργον ἴσως ἐνόμισεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀφεκτέον εἶναι κατὰ κράτος αὐτοῦ. εἷς μὲν οὖν ἂν εἴη τοιοῦτος ὑπὲρ τοῦ πράγματος ἴσως βιαιότερος λόγος, ἕτερος δὲ οἰκειότερος τῷ Κυνισμῷ, εἰ περὶ τοῦ τέλους αὐτοῦ πρότερον ἔτι σαφέστερον διέλθοιμι.

(To eat meat some regard as natural to man, while others think that to follow this practice is not at all appropriate for man, and this question has been much debated. And if you are willing to make the effort, you can see with your own eyes swarms of books on the subject. These Diogenes thought it his duty to refute. At any rate his own view was as follows. If one can eat meat without taking too much trouble to prepare it, as can all other animals to whom nature has assigned this diet, and can do it without harm or discomfort, or rather with actual benefit to the body, then he thought that eating meat is entirely in accordance with nature. But if harm came of it, then he apparently thought that the practice is not appropriate for man, and that he must abstain from it by all means. Here then you have a theory on this question, though perhaps it is too far-fetched: but here is another more akin to Cynicism, only I must first describe more clearly the end and aim of that philosophy.)

[192] Ἀπάθειαν γὰρ ποιοῦνται τὸ τέλος· τοῦτο δὲ ἴσον ἐστὶ τῷ θεὸν γενέσθαι. αἰσθανόμενος οὖν ἴσως αὑτοῦ Διογένης ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀπαθοῦς, ὑπὸ δὲ τῆς τοιαύτης ἐδωδῆς μόνον θραττομένου καὶ ναυτιῶντος καὶ δόξῃ κενῇ μᾶλλον[67] ἢ λόγῳ δεδουλωμένου· σάρκες γάρ εἴσιν οὐδὲν ἧττον, κἂν μυριάκις αὐτὰς ἑψήσῃ, κἂν ὑποτρίμμασι μυρίοις τις αὐτὰς καρυκεύσῃ· καὶ ταύτης αὑτὸν ἀφελέσθαι καὶ καταστῆσαι παντάπασιν ἐξάντη τῆς δειλίας ᾠήθη χρῆναι. [B] δειλία γάρ ἐστιν, εὖ ἴσθι, τὸ γοῦν τοιοῦτον. ἐπεὶ πρὸς τῆς Θεσμοφόρου εἰ σαρκῶν ἡψημένων ἁπτόμεθα, τοῦ χάριν [pg 036] οὐχὶ καὶ ἁπλῶς αὐτὰς προσφερόμεθα, φράσον ἡμῖν. οὐ γὰρ ἔχεις ἕτερον εἰπεῖν ἢ ὅτι οὕτω νενόμισται καὶ οὕτω συνειθίσμεθα. οὐ γὰρ δὴ πρὶν μὲν ἑψηθῆναι βδελυρὰ πέφυκεν, ἑψηθέντα δὲ γέγονεν αὑτῶν ἁγνότερα. [C] τί δῆτα ἐχρῆν πράττειν τόν γε παρὰ θεοῦ ταχθέντα καθάπερ στρατηγοῦ πᾶν μὲν ἐξελεῖν τὸ νόμισμα, λόγῳ δὲ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ κρῖναι τὰ πράγματα; περιιδεῖν αὑτὸν ὑπὸ ταύτης τῆς δόξης ἐνοχλούμενον, ὡς νομίζειν ὅτι κρέας μέν ἐστιν ἑψηθὲν ἁγνὸν καὶ ἐδώδιμον, μὴ κατεργασθὲν δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς μυσαρόν πως[68] καὶ βδελυρόν; οὕτως εἶ μνήμων; οὕτως εἶ σπουδαῖος; ὃς τοσοῦτον ὀνειδίζων τῷ κενοδόξῳ, κατὰ σὲ φάναι, [D] Διογένει, κατ᾽ ἐμὲ δὲ τῷ σπουδαιοτάτῳ θεράποντι καὶ ὑπηρέτῃ τοῦ Πυθίου, τὴν τοῦ πολύποδος ἐδωδὴν κατεδήδοκας μυρίους ταρίχους.

(Freedom from emotion they regard as the end and aim; and this is equivalent to becoming a god. Now perhaps Diogenes observed that in the case of all other foods he himself had no particular sensations, and that only raw meat gave him indigestion and nausea, and took this for a proof that he was enslaved to vain opinion rather than reason; for flesh is none the less flesh, even though you cook it any number of times or season it with any number of sauces. This, I say, was why he thought he ought to rid and free himself altogether of this cowardice; for you may be sure that this sort of thing is cowardice. And in the name of the Law-Giving goddess,[69] tell me why if we used cooked meats we do not eat them in their natural state also? You can give me no other answer than that this has become a custom and a habit with us. For surely we cannot say that before meat is cooked it is disgusting and that by being cooked it becomes purer than it was by nature. What then was it right for him to do who had been appointed by God like a general in command to do away with the common currency and to judge all questions by the criterion of reason and truth? Ought he to have shut his eyes and been so far fettered by this general opinion as to believe that flesh by being cooked becomes pure and fit for food, but that when it has not been acted upon by fire it is somehow abominable and loathsome? Is this the sort of memory you have? Is this your zeal for truth? For though you so severely criticised Diogenes the vain-glorious, as you call him—though I call him the most zealous servant and vassal of the Pythian god—for eating octopus, you yourself have devoured endless pickled food,)

Ἰχθῦς ὄρνιθάς τε φίλας θ᾽ ὅτι χεῖρας ἵκοιτο,

(“Fish and birds and whatever else might come to hand.”[70])

Αἰγύπτιός γε ὤν, οὐ τῶν ἱερέων, ἀλλὰ τῶν παμφάγων, οἷς πάντα ἐσθίειν νόμος ὡς λάχανα χόρτου· γνωρίζεις οἶμαι [193] τῶν Γαλιλαίων τὰ ῥήματα. μικροῦ με παρῆλθεν εἰπεῖν, ὅτι καὶ πάντες ἄνθρωποι πλησίον οἰκοῦντες θαλάττης, ἤδη δέ τινες καὶ τῶν πόρρω, οὐδὲ θερμήναντες καταρροφοῦσιν ἐχίνους, ὄστρεα καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα· εἶτα ἐκείνους μὲν ὑπολαμβάνεις ζηλωτούς, ἄθλιον δὲ καὶ βδελυρὸν ἡλῇ Διογένη, καὶ οὐκ ἐννοεῖς, ὡς οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ταῦτα ἐκείνων ἐστὶ σαρκία· πλὴν [pg 038] ἴσως ταῦτα ἐκείνων διαφέρει τῷ τὰ μὲν εἶναι μαλθακά, τὰ δὲ σκληρότερα. ἄναιμος γοῦν ἐστι καὶ πολύπους [B] ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνα, ἔμψυχα δέ ἐστι καὶ τὰ ὀστρακόδερμα καθάπερ καὶ οὗτος· ἥδεται γοῦν καὶ λυπεῖται, ὃ τῶν ἐμψύχων μάλιστά ἐστιν ἴδιον. ἐνοχλείτω δὲ μηδὲν ἡμᾶς ἡ Πλατωνικὴ τανῦν δόξα ἔμψυχα ὑπολαμβάνουσα καὶ τὰ φυτά. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὲν οὔτι ἄλογον[71] οὐδὲ παράνομον οὐδὲ ἀσύνηθες ὑμῖν ὁ γενναῖος εἰργάσατο Διογένης, εἰ μὴ τῷ σκληροτέρῳ καὶ μαλακωτέρῳ, ἡδονῇ τε λαιμοῦ καὶ ἀηδίᾳ τὰ τοιαῦτά τις ἐξετάζοι, πρόδηλον οἶμαι τοῖς ὁπωσοῦν ἕπεσθαι λόγῳ δυναμένοις. οὐκ ἄρα τὴν ὠμοφαγίαν βδελύττεσθε οἱ τὰ παραπλήσια δρῶντες, [C] οὐκ ἐπὶ τῶν ἀναίμων μόνον ζῴων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν αἷμα ἐχόντων. καὶ τούτῳ δὲ ἴσως διαφέρεσθε πρὸς ἐκεῖνον, ὅτι ὁ μὲν ἁπλῶς ταῦτα καὶ κατὰ φύσιν ᾠήθη χρῆναι προσφέρεσθαι, ἁλσὶ δὲ ὑμεῖς καὶ πολλοῖς ἄλλοις ἀρτύσαντες ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα, τὴν φύσιν ὅπως βιάσησθε. καὶ δὴ τοῦτο μὲν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον ἀπόχρη.

(For you are an Egyptian, though not of the priestly caste, but of the omnivorous type whose habit it is to eat everything “even as the green herb.”[72] You recognise, I suppose, the words of the Galilaeans. I almost omitted to say that all men who live near the sea, and even some who live at a distance from it, swallow down sea-urchins, oysters and in general everything of the kind without even heating them. And then you think they are enviable, whereas you regard Diogenes as contemptible and disgusting, and you do not perceive that those shell-fish are flesh just as much as what he ate? Except perhaps that differ in so far as the octopus is soft and shell-fish are harder. At any rate the octopus is bloodless, like hard-shelled fish, but the latter too are animate things like the octopus. At least they feel pleasure and pain, which is the peculiar characteristic of animate things. And here we must not be put out by Plato's theory[73] that plants also are animated by soul. But it is now, I think, evident to those who are in any way able to follow an argument, that what the excellent Diogenes did was not out of the way or irregular or contrary to our habits, that is if we do not in such cases apply the criterion of hardness and softness, but judge rather by the pleasure or distaste of the palate. And so it is not after all the eating of raw food that disgusts you, since you do the like, not only in the case of bloodless animals but also of those that have blood. But perhaps there is also this difference between you and Diogenes, that he thought he ought to eat such food just as it was and in the natural state, whereas you think you must first prepare it with salt and many other things to make it agreeable and so do violence to nature. I have now said enough on this subject.)

[D] Τῆς Κυνικῆς δὲ φιλοσοφίας σκοπὸς μέν ἐστι καὶ τέλος, ὥσπερ δὴ καὶ πάσης φιλοσοφίας, τὸ εὐδαιμονεῖν, τὸ δὲ εὐδαιμονεῖν ἐν τῷ ζῆν κατὰ φύσιν, ἀλλὰ μὴ πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν δόξας. ἐπεὶ καὶ τοῖς φυτοῖς εὖ πράττειν συμβαίνει καὶ μέντοι καὶ ζῴοις πᾶσιν, ὅταν τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν ἕκαστον ἀνεμποδίστως τυγχάνῃ τέλους· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς θεοῖς τοῦτό ἐστιν εὐδαιμονίας ὅρος, τὸ ἔχειν αὐτοὺς ὥσπερ πεφύκασι καὶ ἑαυτῶν εἶναι. [194] οὐκοῦν [pg 040] καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οὐχ ἑτέρωθί που τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἀποκεκρυμμένην προσήκει πολυπραγμονεῖν· οὐδὲ ἀετὸς οὐδὲ πλάτανος οὐδὲ ἄλλο τι τῶν ὄντων ζῴων ἢ φυτῶν χρυσᾶ περιεργάζεται πτερὰ καὶ φύλλα, οὐδὲ ὅπως ἀργυροῦς ἕξει τοὺς βλαστοὺς ἢ τὰ πλῆκτρα καὶ κέντρα σιδηρᾶ, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀδαμάντινα, ἀλλ᾽ οἷς αὐτὰ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἡ φύσις ἐκόσμησε, ταῦτα εἰ ῥωμαλέα καὶ πρὸς τάχος αὐτοῖς ἢ πρὸς ἀλκὴν ὑπουργοῦντα προσγένοιτο, μάλιστα ἂν εὖ πράττειν [B] νομίζοι καὶ εὐθηνεῖσθαι. πῶς οὖν οὐ γελοῖον, εἴ τις ἄνθρωπος γεγονὼς ἔξω που τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν περιεργάσαιτο, πλοῦτον καὶ γένος καὶ φίλων δύναμιν καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα τοῦ παντὸς ἄξια νομίζων; εἰ μὲν οὖν ἡμῖν ἡ φύσις ὥσπερ τοῖς ζῴοις αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀπέδωκε μόνον, τὸ σώματα καὶ ψυχὰς ἔχειν ἐκείνοις παραπλησίας, ὥστε μηδὲν πλέον πολυπραγμονεῖν, ἤρκει λοιπόν, [C] ὥσπερ τὰ λοιπὰ ζῷα, τοῖς σωματικοῖς ἀρκεῖσθαι πλεονεκτήμασιν, ἐνταῦθά που τὸ εὐδαιμονεῖν πολυπραγμονοῦσιν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἡμῖν οὐδέν τι παραπλησία ψυχὴ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐνέσπαρται ζῴοις, ἀλλ᾽ εἴτε κατ᾽ οὐσίαν διαφέρουσα εἴτε οὐσίᾳ μὲν ἀδιάφορος, ἐνεργείᾳ δὲ μόνῃ κρείττων, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τὸ καθαρὸν ἤδη χρυσίον τοῦ συμπεφυρμένου τῇ ψάμμῳ· λέγεται γὰρ καὶ οὗτος ὁ λόγος περὶ τῆς ψυχῆς ὡς ἀληθὴς ὑπό τινων· [D] ἡμεῖς δὴ οὖν ἐπειδὴ σύνισμεν αὑτοῖς οὖσι τῶν ζῴων ξυνετωτέροις· κατὰ γὰρ τὸν Πρωταγόρου μῦθον ἐκείνοις μὲν ἡ φύσις ὥσπερ μήτηρ [pg 042] ἄγαν φιλοτίμως καὶ μεγαλοδώρως προσηνέχθη, ἡμῖν δὲ ἀντὶ πάντων ἐκ Διὸς ὁ νοῦς ἐδόθη· τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἐνταῦθα θετέον, ἐν τῷ κρατίστῳ καὶ σπουδαιοτάτῳ τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν.

(Now the end and aim of the Cynic philosophy, as indeed of every philosophy, is happiness, but happiness that consists in living according to nature and not according to the opinions of the multitude. For plants too are considered to do well, and indeed all animals also, when without hindrance each attains the end designed for it by nature. Nay, even among the gods this is the definition of happiness, that their state should be according to their nature, and that they should be independent. And so too in the case of human beings we must not be busy about happiness as if it were hidden away outside ourselves. Neither the eagle nor the plane tree nor anything else that has life, whether plant or animal, vainly troubles itself about wings or leaves of gold or that its shoots may be of silver or its stings and spurs of iron, or rather of adamant; but where nature in the beginning has adorned them with such things, they consider that, if only they are strong and serviceable for speed or defence, they themselves are fortunate and well provided. Then is it not absurd when a human being tries to find happiness somewhere outside himself, and thinks that wealth and birth and the influence of friends, and generally speaking everything of that sort is of the utmost importance? If however nature had bestowed on us only what she has bestowed on other animals, I mean the possession of bodies and souls like theirs, so that we need concern ourselves with nothing beyond, then it would suffice for us, as for all other animals, to content ourselves with physical advantages, and to pursue happiness within this field. But in us has been implanted a soul that in no way resembles other animals; and whether it be different in essence, or not different in essence but superior in its activity only, just as, I suppose, pure gold is superior to gold alloyed with sand,—for some people hold this theory to be true of the soul,—at any rate we surely know that we are more intelligent than other animals. For according to the myth in the Protagoras,[74] nature dealt with them very generously and bountifully, like a mother, but to compensate for all this, mind was bestowed on us by Zeus. Therefore in our minds, in the best and noblest part of us, we must say that happiness resides.)

Σκόπει δή, ταύτης εἰ μὴ μάλιστα τῆς προαιρέσεως ἦν Διογένης, ὃς τὸ μὲν σῶμα τοῖς πόνοις ἀνέδην παρεῖχεν, ἵνα αὐτὸ τῆς φύσεως ῥωμαλεώτερον καταστήσῃ πράττειν [195] δὲ ἠξίου μόνον ὁπόσα ἂν φανῇ τῷ λόγῳ πρακτέα, τοὺς δὲ ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ἐμπίπτοντας τῇ ψυχῇ θορύβους, οἷα πολλάκις ἡμᾶς ἀναγκάζει τουτὶ τὸ περικείμενον αὐτοῦ χάριν πολυπραγμονεῖν, οὐδὲ ἐν μέρει προσίετο. ὑπὸ δὲ ταύτης τῆς ἀσκήσεως ὁ ἀνὴρ οὕτω μὲν ἔσχεν ἀνδρεῖον τὸ σῶμα ὡς οὐδεὶς οἶμαι τῶν τοὺς [B] στεφανίτας ἀγωνισαμένων, οὕτω δὲ διετέθη τὴν ψυχήν, ὥστε εὐδαιμονεῖν, ὥστε βασιλεύειν οὐδὲν ἔλαττον, εἰ μὴ καὶ πλέον, ὡς οἱ τότε εἰώθεσαν λέγειν Ἕλληνες, τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως, τὸν Πέρσην λέγοντες. ἆρά σοι μικρὰ φαίνεται ἀνὴρ

(Now consider whether Diogenes did not above all other men profess this belief, since he freely exposed his body to hardships so that he might make it stronger than it was by nature. He allowed himself to act only as the light of reason shows us that we ought to act; and the perturbations that attack the soul and are derived from the body, to which this envelope of ours often constrains us for its sake to pay too much attention, he did not take into account at all. Thus by means of this discipline the man made his body more vigorous, I believe, than that of any who have contended for the prize of a crown in the games: and his soul was so disposed that he was happy and a king no less if not even more than the Great King, as the Greeks used to call him in those days, by which they meant the king of Persia. Then does he seem to you of no importance, this man who was)

Ἄπολις, ἄοικος, πατρίδος ἐστερημένος,

οὐκ ὀβολόν, οὐ δραχμήν, ἔχων[75] οὐδ᾽ οἰκέτην,

(“cityless, homeless, a man without a country, owning not an obol, not a drachma, not a single slave,”[76])

ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ μᾶζαν, ἧς Ἐπίκουρος εὐπορῶν οὐδὲ τῶν θεῶν φησιν εἰς εὐδαιμονίας λόγον ἐλαττοῦσθαι, πρὸς μὲν τοὺς θεοὺς οὐκ ἐρίζων, [C] τοῦ δοκοῦντος δὲ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις εὐδαιμονεστάτου εὐδαιμονέστερον ζῶν καὶ ἔλεγε ζῆν εὐδαιμονέστερον. εἰ δὲ ἀπιστεῖς, [pg 044] ἔργῳ πειραθεὶς ἐκείνου τοῦ βίου καὶ οὐ τῷ λόγῳ αἰσθήσῃ.

(nay, not even a loaf of bread—and Epicurus says that if he have bread enough and to spare he is not inferior to the gods on the score of happiness. Not that Diogenes tried to rival the gods, but he lived more happily than one who is counted the happiest of men, and he used actually to assert that he lived more happily than such a man. And if you do not believe me, try his mode of life in deed and not in word, and you will perceive the truth.)

Φέρε δὴ πρῶτον αὐτὸν διὰ τῶν λόγων ἐλέγξωμεν. ἆρά σοι δοκεῖ τῶν πάντων ἀγαθῶν ἀνθρώποις ἡγεῖσθαι, τούτων δὴ τῶν πολυθρυλήτων, ἐλευθερίαν· [D] πῶς γὰρ οὐ φήσεις· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ χρήματα καὶ πλοῦτος καὶ γένος καὶ σώματος ἰσχὺς καὶ κάλλος καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα δίχα τῆς ἐλευθερίας οὐ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ηὐτυχηκέναι, τοῦ κτησαμένου δὲ αὐτόν ἐστιν ἀγαθά; τίνα οὖν ὑπολαμβάνομεν τὸν δοῦλον; ἇρα μή ποτε ἐκεῖνον, ὃν ἂν πριώμεθα δραχμῶν ἀργυρίου τόσων ἢ μναῖν δυοῖν ἢ χρυσίου στατήρων δέκα; ἐρεῖς δήπουθεν τοῦτον εἶναι ἀληθῶς δοῦλον. ἆρα δι᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ὅτι τὸ ἀργύριον ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τῷ πωλοῦντι καταβεβλήκαμεν; οὕτω μεντἂν [196] εἶεν οἰκέται καὶ ὁπέσους τῶν αἰχμαλώτων λυτρούμεθα. καίτοι καὶ οἱ νόμοι τούτοις ἀποδεδώκασι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν σωθεῖσιν οἴκαδε, καὶ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὺς ἀπολυτρούμεθα, οὐχ ἵνα δουλεύσωσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ὦσιν ἐλεύθεροι. ὁρᾷς ὡς οὐχ ἱκανόν ἐστιν ἀργύριον καταβαλεῖν ἐς τὸ ἀποφῆναι τὸν λυτρωθέντα δοῦλον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς δοῦλος, οὗ κύριός ἐστιν ἕτερος προσαναγκάσαι πράττειν ὅ,τι ἂν κελεύῃ, καὶ μὴ βουλόμενον κόλασαι καί, τὸ λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ποιητοῦ,

(Come, let us first test it by reasoning. You think, do you not, that for mankind freedom is the beginning of all good things,[77] I mean of course what people are always calling good? How can you deny it? For property, money, birth, physical strength, beauty and in a word everything of the sort when divorced from freedom are surely blessings that belong, not to him who merely seems to enjoy them, but to him who is that man's master? Whom then are we to regard as a slave? Shall it be him whom we buy for so many silver drachmas, for two minae or for ten staters[78] of gold? Probably you will say that such a man is truly a slave. And why? Is it because we have paid down money for him to the seller? But in that case the prisoners of war whom we ransom would be slaves. And yet the law on the one hand grants these their freedom when they have come safe home, and we on the other hand ransom them not that they may become slaves, but that they may be free. Do you see then that in order to make a ransomed man a slave it is not enough to pay down a sum of money, but that man is truly a slave over whom another man has power to compel him to do whatever he orders, and if he refuse, to punish him and in the words of the poet)

κακαῖς ὀδύνῃσι πελάζειν;

(“to inflict grievous pains upon him”?[79])

ὅρα δὴ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο, [B] εἰ μὴ κύριοι πάντες ἡμῶν εἰσιν, οὓς ἀναγκαῖον ἡμῖν θεραπεύειν, ἵνα μηδὲν ἀλγῶμεν μηδὲ λυπώμεθα κολαζόμενοι παρ᾽ αὐτῶν. [pg 046] ἢ τοῦτο οἴει κόλασιν μόνον, εἴ τις ἐπανατεινόμενος τὴν βακτηρίαν καθίκοιτο τοῦ οἰκέτου; καίτοι γε τοιοῦτον οὐδὲ οἱ τραχύτατοι τῶν δεσποτῶν ἐπὶ πάντων ποιοῦσι τῶν οἰκετῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ λόγος ἀρκεῖ πολλάκις καὶ ἀπειλή. [C] μήποτε οὖν, ὦ φίλε, νομίσῃς εἶναι ἐλεύθερος, ἄχρις οὗ γαστὴρ ἄρχει σου καὶ τὰ ἔνερθεν γαστρὸς οἵ τε τοῦ παρασχεῖν τὰ πρὸς ἡδονὴν καὶ ταῦτὰ[80] ἀποκωλῦσαι κύριοι, καὶ εἰ τούυτων δὲ γένοιο κρείττων, ἕως ἂν δουλεύῃς ταῖς τῶν πολλῶν δόξαις, οὔπω τῆς ἐλευθερίας ἔθιγες οὐδὲ ἐγεύσω τοῦ νέκταρος,

(Then consider next whether we have not as many masters as there are persons whom we are obliged to conciliate in order not to suffer pain or annoyance from being punished by them? Or do you think that the only sort of punishment is when a man lifts up his stick against a slave and strikes him? Yet not even the harshest masters do this in the case of all their slaves, but a word or a threat is often enough. Then never think, my friend, that you are free while your belly rules you and the part below the belly, since you will then have masters who can either furnish you the means of pleasure or deprive you of them; and even though you should prove yourself superior to these, so long as you are a slave to the opinions of the many you have not yet approached freedom or tasted its nectar,)

Οὐ μὰ τὸν ἐν στέρνοισιν ἐμοῖς παραδόντα τετρακτύν.

(“I swear by him who set in my breast the mystery of the Four!”[81])

καὶ οὐ τοῦτό φημι, [D] ὡς ἀπερυθριᾶσαι χρὴ πρὸς πάντας καὶ πράττειν. τὰ μὴ πρακτέα· ἀλλ᾽ ὧν ἀπεχόμεθα καὶ ὅσα πράττομεν, μὴ διὰ τὸ τοῖς πολλοῖς δοκεῖν σπουδαῖα πως[82] ἢ φαῦλα, διὰ τοῦτο πράττωμεν καὶ ἀπεχώμεθα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τῷ λόγῳ καὶ τῷ ἐν ἡμῖν θεῷ, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ τῷ νῷ, ταῦτά ἐστιν ἀπόρρητα. τοὺς μὲν οὖν πολλοὺς οὐδὲν κωλύει ταῖς κοιναῖς ἕπεσθαι δόξαις· ἄμεινον γὰρ τοῦτο τοῦ παντάπασιν ἀπερυθριᾶν· [197] ἔχουσι γὰρ ἅνθρωποι φύσει πρὸς ἀλήθειαν οἰκείως· ἀνδρὶ δὲ ἤδη κατὰ νοῦν ζῶντι καὶ τοὺς ὀρθοὺς εὑρεῖν τε δυναμένῳ καὶ κρῖναι λόγους προσήκει τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲν ἕπεσθαι τοῖς νομιζομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν εὗ τε καὶ χεῖρον πράττεσθαι.

(But I do not mean by this that we ought to be shameless before all men and to do what we ought not; but all that we refrain from and all that we do let us not do or refrain from, merely because it seems to the multitude somehow honourable or base, but because it is forbidden by reason and the god within us, that is, the mind.[83] As for the multitude there is no reason why they should not follow common opinions, for that is better than that they should be altogether shameless, and indeed mankind is predisposed to the truth by nature. But a man who has attained to a life in accordance with intelligence and is able to discover and estimate right reasons, ought on no account whatever to follow the views held by the many about good and bad conduct.)

Οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ τὸ μέν ἐστι τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν θειότερον, ὃ δὴ νοῦν καὶ φρόνησίν φαμεν καὶ λόγον τὸν σιγώμενον, οὗ κήρυξ ἐστὶν ὁ διὰ τῆς φωνῆς οὑτοσὶ λόγος προïὼν ἐξ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων, ἕτερον δέ τι τούτῳ συνέζευκται ποικίλον καὶ παντοδαπόν, [B] ὀργῇ καὶ ἐπιθυμίᾳ ξυμμιγές τι καὶ πολυκέφαλον θηρίον, οὐ πρότερον χρὴ πρὸς τὰς δόξας τῶν πολλῶν ἀτενῶς ὁρᾶν καὶ ἀδιατρέπτως, πρὶν ἂν τοῦτο δαμάσωμεν τὸ θηρίον καὶ πείσωμεν ὑπακοῦσαι τῷ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν θεῷ, μᾶλλον δὲ θείῳ. τοῦτο γὰρ πολλοὶ τοῦ Διογένους ζηλωταὶ ἐάσαντες[84] ἐγένοντο παντορέκται καὶ μιαροὶ καὶ τῶν θηρίων οὐδὲ ἑνὸς κρείττους, ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἐμὸς ὁ λόγος ἐστί, [C] πρῶτον ἔργον ἐρῶ σοι Διογένους, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ γελάσονται μὲν οἱ πολλοί, ἐμοὶ δὲ εἶναι δοκεῖ σεμνότατον. ἐπειδὴ γάρ τις τῶν νέων ἐν ὄχλῳ, παρόντος καὶ τοῦ Διογόνους, ἀπέπαρδεν, ἐπάταξεν ἐκεῖνος τῇ βακτηρίᾳ φάς· εἶτα, ὦ κάθαρμα, μηδὲν ἄξιον τοῦ δημοσίᾳ τὰ τοιταῦτα θαρσεῖν πράξας ἐντεῦθεν ἡμῖν ἄρχῃ δόξης καταφρονεῖν; οὕτως ᾤετο χρῆναι πρότερον ἡδονῆς καὶ θυμοῦ κρείττονα γενέσθαι, πρὶν[85] ἐπὶ τὸ τελειότατον ἐλθεῖν τῶν παλαισμάτων, [D] ἀποδυσάμενον πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν δόξας αἳ μυρίων κακῶν αἴτιαι γίνονται τοῖς πολλοῖς.

(Since therefore one part of our souls is more divine, which we call mind and intelligence and silent reason, whose herald is this speech of ours made up of words and phrases and uttered through the voice; and since there is yoked therewith another part of the soul which is changeful and multiform, something composite of anger and appetite, a many-headed monster, we ought not to look steadily and unswervingly at the opinions of the multitude until we have tamed this wild beast and persuaded it to obey the god within us, or rather the divine part. For this it is that many disciples of Diogenes have ignored, and hence have become rapacious and depraved and no better than any one of the brute beasts. And to prove that this is not my own theory,[86] first I will relate to you something that Diogenes did, which the many will ridicule but to me it seems most dignified. Once when, in a crowd of people among whom was Diogenes, a certain youth made an unseemly noise, Diogenes struck him with his staff and said “And so, vile wretch, though you have done nothing that would give you the right to take such liberties in public, you are beginning here and before us to show your scorn of opinion?” So convinced was he that a man ought to subdue pleasure and passion before he proceeds to the final encounter of all[87] and strips to wrestle with those opinions which to the multitude are the cause of evils innumerable.)

Οὐκ οἶσθα ὅπως τοὺς μὲν νέους τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἀπάγουσιν, ἄλλα ἐπ᾽ ἄλλοις τῶν [pg 050] φιλοσόφων θρυλοῦντες; οἱ Πυθαγόρου καὶ Πλάτωνος καὶ Ἀριστοτέλους χορευταὶ γνήσιοι γόητες εἶναι λέγονται καὶ σοφισταὶ καὶ τετυφωμένοι καὶ φαρμακεῖς. [198] τῶν Κυνικῶν εἴ που τις γέγονε σπουδαῖος, ἐλεεινὸς δοκεῖ· μέμνημαι γοῦν ἐγώ ποτε τροφέως εἰπόντος πρός με, ἐπειδὴ τὸν ἑταῖρον εἶδεν Ἰφικλέα αὐχμηρὰν ἔχοντα τὴν κόμην καὶ κατερρωγότα τὰ στέρνα ἱμάτιόν τε παντάπασι φαῦλον ἐν δεινῷ χειμῶνι· τίς ἄρα δαίμων τοῦτον εἰς ταύτην περιέτρεψε τὴν συμφοράν, ὑφ᾽ ἧς αὐτὸς μὲν ἐλεεινός, ἐλεεινότεροι δὲ οἱ πατέρες αὐτοῦ, θρέψαντες σὺν ἐπιμελείᾳ καὶ παιδεύσαντες ὡς ἐνεδέχετο σπουδαίως, [B] ὁ δὲ οὕτω νῦν περιέρχεται, πάντα ἀφείς, οὐδὲν τῶν προσαιτούντων κρείττων; ἐκείνου μὲν οὖν ἐγὼ οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως τότε κατειρωνευσάμην· εὖ μέντοι γε ἴσθι ταῦτα καὶ[88] ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀληθῶς κυνῶν τοὺς πολλοὺς διανοουμένους. καὶ οὐ τοῦτο δεινόν ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁρᾷς ὅτι καὶ πλοῦτον ἀγαπᾶν πείθουσι καὶ πενίαν μισεῖν καὶ τὴν γαστέρα θεραπεύειν καὶ τοῦ σώματος ἕνεκα πάντα ὑπομένειν πόνον καὶ πιαίνειν τὸν τῆς ψυχῆς δεσμὸν καὶ τράπεζαν παρατίθεσθαι πολυτελῆ [C] καὶ μηδέποτε νύκτωρ καθεύδειν μόνον, ἀλλὰ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα δρᾶν ἐν τῷ σκότῳ λανθάνοντα; τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστι τοῦ Ταρτάρου χεῖρον; οὐ βέλτιόν ἐστιν ὑπὸ τὴν Χάρυβδιν καὶ τὸν Κωκυτὸν καὶ μυρίας ὀργυιὰς κατὰ γῆς δῦναι, ἢ πεσεῖν εἰς τοιοῦτον βίον αἰδοίοις καὶ γαστρὶ δουλεύοντα, καὶ οὐδὲ τούτοις ἁπλῶς ὥσπερ τὰ θηρία, πράγματα δὲ ἔχειν, ὡς ἂν καὶ [pg 052] λάθοιμεν ὑπὸ τῷ σκότῳ ταῦτα ἐξεργαζόμενοι; καίτοι πόσῳ [D] κρεῖττον ἀπέχεσθαι παντάπασιν αὐτῶν; εἰ δὲ μὴ ῥᾴδιον, οἱ Διογένους νόμοι καὶ Κράτητος ὑπὲρ τούτων οὐκ ἀτιμαστέοι· ἔρωτα λύει λιμός, ἂν δὲ τούτῳ χρῆσθαι μὴ δύνῃ,[89] βρόχος. οὐκ οἶσθα, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔπραξαν ἐκεῖνοι τῷ βίῳ διδόντες ὁδὸν εὐτελείας; οὐ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν μαζοφάγων, φησὶν ὁ Διογένης, [199] οἱ τύραννοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν δειπνούντων πολυτελῶς. καὶ ὁ Κράτης μέντοι πεποίηκεν ὕμνον εἰς τὴν Εὐτέλειαν·

(Do you not know how people lure away the young from philosophy by continually uttering now one slander and then another against all the philosophers in turn? The genuine disciples of Pythagoras and Plato and Aristotle are called sorcerers and sophists and conceited and quacks. If here and there among the Cynics one is really virtuous he is regarded with pity. For instance I remember that once my tutor said to me when he saw my fellow-pupil Iphicles with his hair unkempt and his clothes in tatters on his chest and wearing a wretched cloak in severe winter weather: “What evil genius can have plunged him into this sad state which makes not only him pitiable but even more so his parents who reared him with care and gave him the best education they could! And now he goes about in this condition, neglecting everything and no better than a beggar!” At the time I answered him with some pleasantry or other. But I assure you that the multitude hold these views about genuine Cynics also. And that is not so dreadful, but do you see that they persuade them to love wealth, to hate poverty, to minister to the belly, to endure any toil for the body's sake, to fatten that prison of the soul, to keep up an expensive table, never to sleep alone at night,[90] provided only that they do all this in the dark and are not found out? Is not this worse than Tartarus? Is it not better to sink beneath Charybdis and Cocytus or ten thousand fathoms deep in the earth[91] than to fall into a life like this, enslaved to lust and appetite, and not even to these simply and openly, like the beasts, but to take pains so that when we act thus we may be hidden under cover of darkness? And yet much better is it to refrain altogether from all this! And if that be difficult the rules of Diogenes and Crates on these matters are not to be despised: “Fasting quenches desire, and if you cannot fast, hang yourself.”[92] Do you not know that those great men lived as they did in order to introduce among men the way of plain living? "For," says Diogenes, “it is not among men who live on bread that you will find tyrants, but among those who eat costly dinners.” Moreover Crates wrote a hymn to Plain Living:)

Χαῖρε, θεὰ δέσποινα, σοφῶν ἀνδρῶν ἀγάπημα,

Εὐτελίη, κλεινῆς ἔγγονε Σωφροσύνης.

(“Hail, goddess and Queen, darling of wise men, Plain Living, child of glorious Temperance.”[93])

ἔστω δὴ μὴ κατὰ τὸν Οἰνόμαον ὁ κύων ἀναιδὴς μηδὲ ἀναίσχυντος μηδὲ ὑπερόπτης πάντων ὁμοῦ θείων τε καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων, ἀλλὰ εὐλαβὴς μὲν τὰ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον, ὥσπερ Διογένης· [B] ἐπείσθη γοῦν ἐκεῖνος τῷ Πυθίῳ, καὶ οὐ μετεμέλησεν αὐτῷ πεισθέντι· εἰ δὲ, ὅτι μὴ προσῄει μηδὲ ἐθεράπευε τοὺς νεὼς μηδὲ τὰ ἀγάλματα μηδὲ τοὺς βωμούς, οἴεταί τις ἀθεότητος εἶναι σημεῖον, οὐκ ὀρθῶς νομίζει· ἦν γὰρ οὐδὲν αὐτῷ τῶν τοιούτων, οὐ λιβανωτός, οὐ σπονδή, οὐκ ἀργύριον, ὅθεν αὐτὰ πρίαιτο. εἰ δὲ ἐνόει περὶ θεῶν ὀρθῶς, ἤρκει τοῦτο μόνον· αὐτῇ γὰρ αὐτοὺς ἐθεράπευε[94] τῇ ψυχῇ, διδοὺς οἶμαι τὰ τιμιώτατα τῶν ἑαυτοῦ, τὸ καθοσιῶσαι τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ψυχὴν διὰ τῶν ἐννοιῶν. [C] ἀπερυθριάτω δὲ μηδαμῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἑπόμενος τῷ λόγῳ πρότερον μὲν αὑτῷ χειρόηθες καταστησάτω τὸ παθηματικὸν [pg 054] τῆς ψυχῆς μόριον, ὥστε παντάπασιν ἐξελεῖν αὐτὸ καὶ μηδὲ ὅτι κρατεῖ τῶν ἡδονῶν εἰδέναι. εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ ἄμεινον ἐλθεῖν, εἰς τὸ καί, εἰ πάσχει τις τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὅλως ἀγνοῆσαι· τοῦτο δὲ ἡμῖν οὐκ ἄλλως ἢ διὰ τῶν γυμνασιῶν προσγένεται. ἵνα δὲ μή τις ὑπολάβῃ με ταῦτα ἄλλως λέγειν, ἐκ τῶν [D] παιγνίων Κράτητος ὀλίγα σοι παραγράψω·

(Then let not the Cynic be like Oenomaus shameless or impudent, or a scorner of everything human and divine, but reverent towards sacred things, like Diogenes. For he obeyed the Pythian oracle nor did he repent of his obedience. But if anyone supposes that because he did not visit the temples or worship statues or altars this is a sign of impiety, he does not think rightly. For Diogenes possessed nothing that is usually offered, incense or libations or money to buy them with. But if he held right opinions about the gods, that in itself was enough. For he worshipped them with his whole soul, thus offering them as I think the most precious of his possessions, the dedication of his soul through his thoughts. Let not the Cynic be shameless, but led by reason let him first make subservient to himself the emotional part of his soul so that he may entirely do away with it and not even be aware that he is superior to pleasures. For it is nobler to attain to this, I mean to complete ignorance whether one has any such emotions. And this comes to us only through training. And that none may think I say this at random I will add for your benefit a few lines from the lighter verse of Crates:[95])

Μνημοσύνης καὶ Ζηνὸς Ὀλυμπίου ἀγλαὰ τέκνα,

Μοῦσαι Πιερίδες, κλῦτέ μοι εὐχομένῳ·

Χόρτον ἀεὶ συνεχῶς δότε γαστέρι, ἥτε μοι αἰεὶ

Χωρὶς δουλοσύνης λιτὸν ἔθηκε βίον.

(“Glorious children of Memory and Olympian Zeus, ye Muses of Pieria, hearken to my prayer! Give me without ceasing victuals for my belly which has always made my life frugal and free from slavery....”)

Ὠφέλιμον δὲ φίλοις, μὴ γλυκερὸν τίθετε.

Χρήματα δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλω συνάγειν κλυτά, κανθάρου ὄλβον[96]

[200] Μύρμηκός τ᾽ ἄφενος χρήματα μαιόμενος,

Ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνης μετέχειν καὶ πλοῦτον ἀγείρειν[97]

Εὔφορον, εὔκτητον, τίμιον εἰς ἀρετήν.

Τῶν δὲ τυχὼν Ἑρμῆν καὶ Μούσας ἱλάσομ᾽ ἁγνάς.

Οὐ δαπάναις τρυφεραῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀρεταῖς ὁσίαις.

(“To my friends make me useful rather than agreeable. As for money I desire not to amass conspicuous wealth, seeking after the wealth of the beetle or the substance of the ant; nay, I desire to possess justice and to collect riches that are easily carried, easily acquired, of great avail for virtue. If I may but win these I will propitiate Hermes and the holy Muses not with costly dainties but with pious virtues.”)

εἰ χρή σοι περὶ [B] τούτων γράφειν, ἔχω πλείονα τοῦ ἀνδρός. ἐντυχὼν δὲ τῷ Χαιρωνεῖ Πλουτάρχῳ τὸν Κράτητος ἀναγράψαντι βίον οὐδὲν ἐκ παρέργου μανθάνειν δεήσει τὸν ἄνδρα.

(If it be of any use to write for you about such things I could recite still more maxims by this same Crates. But if you will read Plutarch of Chaeronea, who wrote his Life, there will be no need for you to learn his character superficially from me.)

Ἀλλ᾽ ἐπανίωμεν ἐπ᾽ ἐκεῖνο πάλιν, ὅτι χρὴ τὸν ἀρχόμενον κυνίζειν [C] αὑτῷ πρότερον ἐπιτιμᾶν [pg 056] πικρῶς καὶ ἐξελέγχειν καὶ μὴ κολακεύειν, ἀλλὰ ἐξετάζειν ὅ,τι μάλιστα αὑτὸν ἀκριβῶς, εἰ τῇ πολυτελείᾳ τῶν σιτίων χαίρει, εἰ στρωμνῆς δεῖται μαλακῆς, εἰ τιμῆς ἢ δόξης ἐστὶν ἥττων, εἰ τοῦτο ζηλοῖ τὸ περιβλέπεσθαι καί, εἰ καὶ κενὸν εἴη, τίμιον ὅμως νομίζει. μηδὲ εἰς συμπεριφορὰν ὄχλων [D] καθυφείσθω,[98] γενέσθω δὲ τρυφῆς μηδὲ ἄκρῳ, φασί, τῷ δακτύλωι, ἕως ἂν αὐτὴν παντελῶς πατήσῃ. τότε ἤδη καὶ τῶν τοιούτων, ἂν προσπίπτῃ, θιγεῖν οὐδὲν κωλύει. ἐπεὶ καὶ τῶν ταύρων ἀκούω τοὺς ἀσθενεστέρους ἐξίστασθαι τῆς ἀγέλης καὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς νεμομένους ἀγείρειν τὴν ἰσχὺν ἐν μέρει καὶ κατ᾽ ὀλίγον, εἶθ᾽ οὕτως ἐπιέναι καὶ προκαλεῖσθαι καὶ τῆς ἀγέλης ἀμφισβητεῖν τοῖς προκατέχουσιν, ὡς μᾶλλον ἀξιωτέρους προΐστασθαι. ὅστις οὖν κυνίζειν ἐθέλει μήτε τὸν τρίβωνα [201] μήτε τὴν πήραν μήτε τὴν βακτηρίαν καὶ τὴν κόμην ἀγαπάτω μόνον, ἵν᾽ ὥσπερ ἐν κώμῃ βαδίζῃ κουρείων καὶ διδασκαλείων ἐνδεεῖ ἄκαρτος καὶ ἀγράμματος, ἀλλὰ τὸν λόγον ἀντὶ τοῦ σκήπτρον καὶ τὴν ἔνστασιν ἀντὶ τῆς πήρας τῆς κυνικῆς ὑπολαμβανέτω φιλοσοφίας γνωρίσματα. παρρησίᾳ δὲ χρηστέον αὐτῷ πρῶτον ὁπόσου πέφυκεν ἄξιος ἐπιδειξαμένῳ, ὥσπερ οἶμαι Κράτης καὶ Διογένης, οἵ πᾶσαν μὲν ἀπειλὴν τύχης καὶ [B] εἴτε παιδιὰν εἴτε παροινίαν χρὴ φάναι [pg 058] τοσοῦτον ἀπέσχον τοῦ δυσκόλως ἐνεγκεῖν, ὥστε ἁλοὺς μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν καταποντιστῶν ὁ Διογένης ἔπαιζεν, ὁ Κράτης δὲ ἐδημοσίευε τὴν οὐσίαν, εἶτα τὸ σῶμα βλαβεὶς ἔσκωπτεν ἑαυτὸν εἰς τὴν χωλότητα τοῦ σκέλους καὶ τὸ κυρτὸν τῶν ὤμων, ἐπορεύετο δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς τῶν φίλων ἑστίας ἄκλητος καὶ[99] κεκλημένος, διαλλάσσων τοὺς οἰκειοτάτους ἀλλήλοις, εἴποτε στασιάζοντας αἴσθοιτο, ἐπετίμα δὲ οὐ μετὰ πικρίας, [C] ἀλλὰ μετὰ χάριτος, οὐχ ἵνα συκοφαντεῖν δοκῇ τοὺς σωφρονισθέντας, ὠφελεῖν δὲ ἐθέλων αὐτούς τε ἐκείνους καὶ τοὺς ἀκούοντας.

(But let me go back to what I said before, that he who is entering on the career of a Cynic ought first censure severely and cross-examine himself, and without any self-flattery ask himself the following questions in precise terms: whether he enjoys expensive food; whether he cannot do without a soft bed; whether he is the slave of rewards and the opinion of men; whether it is his ambition to attract public notice and even though that be an empty honour[100] he still thinks it worth while. Nevertheless he must not let himself drift with the current of the mob or touch vulgar pleasure even with the tip of his finger, as the saying is, until he has succeeded in trampling on it; then and not before he may permit himself to dip into that sort of thing if it come his way. For instance I am told that bulls which are weaker than the rest separate themselves from the herd and pasture alone while they store up their strength in every part of their bodies by degrees, until they rejoin the herd in good condition, and then they challenge its leaders to contend with them, in confidence that they are more fit to take the lead. Therefore let him who wishes to be a Cynic philosopher not adopt merely their long cloak or wallet or staff or their way of wearing the hair, as though he were like a man walking unshaved and illiterate in a village that lacked barbers' shops and schools, but let him consider that reason rather than a staff and a certain plan of life rather than a wallet are the mintmarks of the Cynic philosophy. And freedom of speech he must not employ until he have first proved how much he is worth, as I believe was the case with Crates and Diogenes. For they were so far from bearing with a bad grace any threat of fortune, whether one call such threats caprice or wanton insult, that once when he had been captured by pirates Diogenes joked with them; as for Crates he gave his property to the state, and being physically deformed he made fun of his own lame leg and hunched shoulders. But when his friends gave an entertainment he used to go, whether invited or not,[101] and would reconcile his nearest friends if he learned that they had quarrelled. He used to reprove them not harshly but with a charming manner and not so as to seem to persecute those whom he wished to reform, but as though he wished to be of use both to them and to the bystanders.)

Καὶ οὐ τοῦτο ῆν τὸ προηγούμενον αὐτοῖς τέλος· ἀλλ᾽, ὅπερ ἔφην, ἐσκόπουν ὅπως αὐτοὶ μὲν εὐδαιμονήσουσιν,[102] ἔμελε δὲ αὐτοῖς τῶν ἄλλων τοσοῦτον ὅσον ξυνίεσαν οἶμαι φύσει κοινωνικὸν καὶ πολιτικὸν ζῷον τὸν ἄνθρωπον εἶναι, καὶ τοὺς συμπολιτευομένους ὠφέλησαν οὐ τοῖς παραδείγμασι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς λόγοις. [D] ὅστις οὖν ἂν ἐθέλῃ Κυνικὸς εἶναι καὶ σπουδαῖος ἀνήρ, αὑτοῦ πρότερον ἐπιμεληθείς, ὥσπερ Διογένης καὶ Κράτης ἐξελαυνέτω μὲν τῆς ψυχῆς ἅπαντα ἐκ πάσης τὰ πάθη, ὀρθῷ δὲ ἐπιτρέψας τὰ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν λόγῳ καὶ νῷ κυβερνάσθω. κεφάλαιον γὰρ ἦν, ὡς ἐγὼ οἶμαι, τοῦτο τῆς Διογένους φιλοσοφίας.

(Yet this was not the chief end and aim of those Cynics, but as I said their main concern was how they might themselves attain to happiness and, as I think, they occupied themselves with other men only in so far as they comprehended that man is by nature a social and political animal; and so they aided their fellow-citizens, not only by practising but by preaching as well. Then let him who wishes to be a Cynic, earnest and sincere, first take himself in hand like Diogenes and Crates, and expel from his own soul and from every part of it all passions and desires, and entrust all his affairs to reason and intelligence and steer his course by them. For this in my opinion was the sum and substance of the philosophy of Diogenes.)

Εἰ δὲ ἑταίρᾳ ποτὲ προσῆλθεν ὁ ἀνήρ· καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο τυχὸν ἅπαξ ἢ οὐδὲ ἅπαξ ἐγένετο· ὅταν ἡμῖν [202] τὰ ἄλλα κατὰ τὸν Διογένη γένηται [pg 060] σπουδαῖος, ἂν αὐτῷ[103] φανῇ καὶ τοιοῦτόν τι δρᾶν[104] φανερῶς ἐν ὀφθαλμοὶς πάντων, οὐ μεμψόμεθα οὐδὲ αἰτιασόμεθα. πρότερον μέντοι τὴν Διογένους ἡμῖν ἐπιδειξάμενος εὐμάθειαν καὶ τὴν ἀγχίνοιαν καὶ τὴν ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἐλευθερίαν, αὐτάρκειαν, δικαιοσύνην, σωφροσύνην, εὐλάβειαν, χάριν, προσοχήν, ὡς μηδὲν εἰκῇ μηδὲ μάτην μηδὲ ἀλόγως ποιεῖν· [B] ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτα τῆς Διογένους ἐστὶ φιλοσοφίας οἰκεῖα· πατείτω τῦφον, καταπαιζέτω τῶν τὰ μὲν ἀναγκαῖα τῆς φύσεως ἔργα κρυπτόντων ἐν σκότῳ· φημὶ δὲ τῶν περιττωμάτων τὰς ἐκκρίσεις· ἐν μέσαις δὲ ταῖς ἀγοραῖς καὶ ταῖς πόλεσιν ἐπιτηδευόντων τὰ βιαιότατα καὶ μηδὲν ἡμῶν οἰκεῖα τῇ φύσει, χρημάτων ἁρπαγάς, συκοφαντίας, γραφὰς ἀδίκους, διώξεις ἄλλων τοιούτων συρφετωδῶν πραγμάτων. ἐπεὶ καὶ Διογένης εἴτε [C] ἀπέπαρδεν εἴτε ἀπεπάτησεν εἴτε ἄλλο τι τοιοῦτον ἔπραξεν, ὥσπερ οὖν λέγουσιν, ἐν ἀγορᾷ, τὸν ἐκείνων πατῶν τῦφον ἐποίει, διδάσκων αὐτούς, ὅτι πολλῷ φαυλότερα καὶ χαλεπώτερα τούτων ἐπιτηδεύουσι. τὰ μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ἡμῖν πᾶσι κατὰ φύσιν, τὰ δὲ ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν οὐδενί, πάντα δὲ ἐκ διαστροφῆς ἐπιτηδεύεται.

(And if Diogenes did sometimes visit a courtesan—though even this happened only once perhaps or not even once—let him who would be a Cynic first satisfy us that he is, like Diogenes, a man of solid worth, and then if he see fit to do that sort of thing openly and in the sight of all men, we shall not reproach him with it or accuse him. First however we must see him display the ability to learn and the quick wit of Diogenes, and in all other relations he must show the same independence, self-sufficiency, justice, moderation, piety, gratitude, and the same extreme carefulness not to act at random or without a purpose or irrationally. For these too are characteristic of the philosophy of Diogenes. Then let him trample on vaingloriousness, let him ridicule those who though they conceal in darkness the necessary functions of our nature—for instance the secretion of what is superfluous—yet in the centre of the market-place and of our cities carry on practices that are most brutal and by no means akin to our nature, for instance robbery of money, false accusations, unjust indictments, and the pursuit of other rascally business of the same sort. On the other hand when Diogenes made unseemly noises or obeyed the call of nature or did anything else of that sort in the market-place, as they say he did, he did so because he was trying to trample on the conceit of the men I have just mentioned, and to teach them that their practices were far more sordid and insupportable than his own. For what he did was in accordance with the nature of all of us, but theirs accorded with no man's real nature, one may say, but were all due to moral depravity.)

Ἀλλ᾽ οἱ νῦν τοῦ Διογένους ζηλωταὶ τὸ ῥᾷστον καὶ κουφότατον ἑλόμενοι τὸ κρεῖττον οὐκ εἶδον· σύ τε ἐκείνων [D] εἶναι σεμνότερος ἐθέλων ἀπεπλανήθης [pg 062] τοσοῦτον τῆς Διογένους προαιρέσεως, ὥστε αὐτὸν ἐλεεινὸν ἐνόμισας. εἰ δὲ τούτοις μὲν ἠπίστεις ὑπὲρ ἀνδρὸς λεγομένοις, ὃν οἱ πάντες Ἕλληνες τότε ἐθαύμασαν μετὰ Σωκράτη καὶ Πυθαγόραν ἐπὶ Πλάτωνος καὶ Ἀριστοτέλους, οὗ γέγονεν ἀκροατῆς ὁ τοῦ σωφρονεστάτου καὶ συνετωτάτου Ζήνωνος καθηγεμών, οὓς οὐκ εἰκὸς ἦν ἅπαντας ἀπατηθῆναι περὶ ἀνδρὸς οὕτω φαύλου, ὁποῖον σὺ διακωμῳδεῖς, [203] ὦ βέλτιστε, ἴσως ἄν τι πλέον ἐσκόπησας περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ πορρωτέρω προῆλθες τῆς ἐμπειρίας τἀνδρός. τίνα γὰρ οὐκ ἐξέπληξε τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡ Διογένους καρτερία, βασιλικῆς οὐκ ἔξω μεγαλοψυχίας οὖσα, καὶ φιλοπονία; ἐκάθευδεν ἁνὴρ ἐπὶ στιβάδος ἐν τῷ πίθῳ βέλτιον ἢ μέγας βασιλεὺς ὑπὸ τοῖς ἐπιχρύσοις ὀρόφοις ἐν τῇ μαλθακῇ κλίνῃ, ἤσθιε τὴν μᾶζαν ἥδιον ἢ σὺ νῦν τὰς Σικελικὰς [B] ἐσθίεις τραπέζας, ἐλούετο ψυχρῇ[105] τὸ σῶμα πρὸς ἀέρα ξηραίνων ἀντὶ τῶν ὀθονίων, οἷς σὺ ἀπομάττῃ, φιλοσοφώτατε. πάνυ σοι προσήκει κωμῳδεῖν ἐκεῖνον, ὅτι κατειργάσω τὸν Ξέρξην, ὡς ὁ Θεμιστοκλῆς, ἢ τὸν Δαρεῖον, ὡς ὁ Μακεδὼν Ἀλέξανδρος. εἰ σμικρὰ τὰς βίβλους ἀνελίττων ἐμελέτας ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς οἱ πολιτικοὶ καὶ πολυπράγμονες, ἔγνως ἄν, ὅπως Ἀλέξανδρος ἀγασθῆναι λέγεται τὴν Διογένους μεγαλοψυχίαν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι σοι τούτων οὐδέν, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, [pg 064] σπουδαῖον· πόθεν; πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ· γυναικῶν ἀθλίων τεθαύμακας φιλονεικῶν[106] βίον.

(In our own day, however, the imitators of Diogenes have chosen only what is easiest and least burdensome and have failed to see his nobler side. And as for you, in your desire to be more dignified than those early Cynics you have strayed so far from Diogenes' plan of life that you thought him an object of pity. But if you did not believe all this that I say about a man whom all the Greeks in the generation of Plato and Aristotle admired next to Socrates and Pythagoras, a man whose pupil was the teacher of the most modest and most wise Zeno,—and it is not likely that they were all deceived about a man as contemptible as you make him out to be in your travesty,—well, in that case, my dear sir, perhaps you might have studied his character more carefully and you would have progressed further in your knowledge of the man. Was there, I ask, a single Greek who was not amazed by the endurance of Diogenes and by his perseverance, which had in it a truly royal greatness of soul? The man used to sleep in his jar on a bed of leaves more soundly than the Great King on his soft couch under a gilded roof; he used to eat his crust[107] with a better appetite than you now eat your Sicilian courses[108]; he used to bathe his body in cold water and dry himself in the open air instead of with the linen towels with which you rub yourself down, my most philosophic friend! It becomes you well to ridicule him because, I suppose, like Themistocles you conquered Xerxes, or Darius like Alexander of Macedon. But if you had the least habit of reading books as I do, though I am a statesman and engrossed in public affairs, you would know how much Alexander is said to have admired Diogenes' greatness of soul. But you care little, I suppose, for any of these things. How should you care? Far from it![109] You admire and emulate the life of wretched women.)

Εἰ μὲν οὖν ὁ λόγος τι πλέον ἐποίησεν, οὐκ ἐμὸν μᾶλλον ἢ σόν ἐστι κέρδος· εἰ δὲ οὐδὲν περαίνομεν ἐκ τοῦ παραχρῆμα περὶ τῶν τοιούτων ἀπνευστὶ τὸ δὴ λεγόμενον συνείραντες· ἔστι γὰρ πάρεργον ἡμέραιν δυοῖν, ὡς ἴσασιν αἱ Μοῦσαι, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ σὺ[110] αὐτός· παραμενέτω μέν σοι ὁπόσα πρόσθεν ἐγνώκεις, ἡμῖν δὲ οὐ μεταμελήσει τῆς εἰς τὸν ἄνδρα εὐφημίας.

(However, if my discourse has improved you at all you will have gained more than I. But even if I accomplish nothing at the moment by writing on such a great subject thus hastily, and, as the saying is, without taking breath[111]—for I gave to it only the leisure of two days, as the Muses or rather you yourself will bear me witness—then do you abide by your former opinions, but I at any rate shall never regret having spoken of that great man with due reverence.)

[pg 069]

Oration VII

Introduction to Oration VII

The Seventh Oration is directed against the Cynic Heracleios, who had ventured to recite before an audience when Julian was present a myth or allegory in which the gods were irreverently handled. Julian raises the question whether fables and myths are suitable for a Cynic discourse. He names the regular divisions of philosophy and decides that the use of myths may properly be allowed only to ethical philosophers and writers on theology: that myth is intended always as a means of religious teaching and should be addressed to children and those whose intellect does not allow them to envisage the truth without some such assistance. In Sallust's treatise On the Gods and the World he gives much the same account of the proper function of myths and divides them into five species, giving examples of each. “To wish to teach the whole truth about the gods to all produces contempt in the foolish, because they cannot understand, and lack of zeal in the good; whereas to conceal the truth by myths prevents the contempt of the foolish and compels the good to practise philosophy.”[112] This is precisely the opinion of Julian as expressed [pg 070] in the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Orations. Though both Julian and Sallust explain the myths away they are never rationalistic, and never offer the least excuse for scepticism. Julian's explanation of the Semele myth,[113] which makes Semele an inspired prophetess and not the mother of Dionysus, tends to the greater glory of the god. The conclusion is that Heracleios should not have used myth at all, but in any case he used the wrong sort and wrote in the wrong spirit. He should have used such a myth as that composed by Prodicus the sophist on the Choice of Heracles at the Crossroads, an allegory which is more than once cited by Julian and was a favourite illustration in later Greek literature.[114]

To show Heraclius what he might have written with propriety Julian adds a parable of his own modelled on that of Prodicus. In this he himself plays the part of a second Heracles, and takes the opportunity to vilify Constantius and point out his own mission of reformer and restorer of order and religion to the Empire. Throughout the parable there are striking resemblances with the First Oration of Dio Chrysostom, and Asmus[115] has made a detailed comparison of the two writers to prove that Julian wrote with Dio before him. In many of these parallels both Julian and Dio can be traced to a common classical source, usually Plato, but there is no doubt that Julian was thoroughly familiar with [pg 071] the work of Dio and often used the same illustrations. Themistius[116] however uses the Prodicus myth in much the same words as Dio, and it is imitated also by Maximus of Tyre.[117]

In conclusion Julian praises the earlier Cynics and criticises the later, in much the same words as he had used in the Sixth Oration.

[204] ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Emperor)

ΠΡΟΣ ΗΡΑΚΛΕΙΟΝ ΚΥΝΙΚΟΝ

(To the Cynic Heracleios)

ΠΕΡΙ ΤΟΥ ΠΩΣ ΚΥΝΙΣΤΕΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΙ ΠΡΕΠΕΙ ΤΩ ΚΥΝΙ ΜΥΘΟΥΣ ΠΛΑΤΤΕΙΝ

(How a Cynic Ought to Behave, and Whether it is Proper For Him to Compose Myths)

Ἦ πολλὰ γίνεται ἐν μακρῷ χρόνῳ· τοῦτο ἐκ τῆς κωμῳδίας ἀκηκοότι μοι πρῴην ἐπῆλθεν ἐκβοῆσαι, ὁπηνίκα παρακληθέντες ἠκροώμεθα κυνὸς οὔτι τορὸν οὐδὲ γενναῖον ὑλακτοῦντος, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ αἱ τίτθαι μύθους ᾄδοντος καὶ οὐδὲ τούτους ὑγιῶς διατιθεμένου. παραχρῆμα μὲν οὖν ἐπῆλθέ μοι διαναστάντι διαλῦσαι τὸν σύλλογον· [B] ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐχρῆν ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ κωμῳδουμένων Ἡρακλέους καὶ Διονύσου παρὰ τῶν κωμῳδῶν ἀκούειν, οὐ τοῦ λέγοντος, ἀλλὰ τῶν συνειλεγμένων χάριν ὑπέμεινα, μάλλον δέ, εἰ χρή τι καὶ νεανικώτερον εἰπεῖν, ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἕνεκα καὶ τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν ὑπὸ δεισιδαιμονίας μᾶλλον [C] ἢ διανοίας εὐσεβοῦς καὶ λελογισμένης, ὥσπερ αἱ πελειάδες, ὑπὸ τῶν ῥηματίων σοβηθεὶς ἀναπτῆναι. ἔμενον δὲ ἐκεῖνο πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν εἰπὼν

(“Truly with the lapse of time many things come to pass!”[118] This verse I have heard in a comedy and the other day I was tempted to proclaim it aloud, when by invitation we attended the lecture of a Cynic whose barking was neither distinct nor noble; but he was crooning myths as nurses do, and even these he did not compose in any profitable fashion. For a moment my impulse was to rise and break up the meeting. But though I had to listen as one does when Heracles and Dionysus are being caricatured in the theatre by comic poets,[119] I bore it to the end, not for the speaker's sake but for the sake of the audience, or rather, if I may presume to say so, it was still more for my own sake, so that I might not seem to be moved by superstition rather than by a pious and rational sentiment and to be scared into flight by his miserable words like a timid dove. So I stayed and repeated to myself the famous line)

Τέτλαθι δή, κραδίη, καὶ κύντερον ἄλλο ποτ᾽ ἔτλης,

(“Bear it my heart: yea thou didst of yore endure things yet more shameful.”[120])

ἀνάσχου καὶ κυνὸς ληροῦντος ὀλίγον ἡμέρας [pg 074] μόριον, οὐ πρῶτον ἀκούεις τῶν θεῶν βλασφημουμένων, οὐχ οὕτω τὰ κοινὰ πράττομεν καλῶς, οὐχ οὕτω τῶν ἰδίων ἕνεκα σωφρονοῦμεν, οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ εὐτυχεῖς [205] ἐσμεν, ὥστε τὰς ἀκοὰς καθαρὰς ἔχειν ἢ τὸ τελευταῖον γοῦν τὰ ὄμματα μὴ κεχράνθαι τοῖς παντοδαποῖς τουτουὶ τοῦ σιδηροῦ γένους ἀσεβήμασιν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὥσπερ ἐνδεεῖς ἡμᾶς τῶν τοιούτων κακῶν ἀνέπλησεν οὐκ εὐαγῶν ὁ κύων ῥημάτων τὸν ἄριστον τῶν θεῶν ὀνομάσας, ὡς μήποτε ὤφελε μήτ᾽ ἐκεῖνος εἰπεῖν μήτε ἡμεῖς ἀκοῦσαι, δεῦρο πειραθῶμεν αὐτὸν ἐφ᾽ ὑμῶν διδάξαι, [B] πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι τῷ κυνὶ λόγους μᾶλλον ἢ μύθους προσήκει γράφειν, εἶτα ὁποίας καὶ τίνας χρὴ ποιεῖσθαι τὰς διασκευὰς τῶν μύθων, εἴ τι ἄρα καὶ φιλοσοφία προσδεῖται τῆς μυθογραφίας, ἐπὶ πᾶσι δὲ ὑπὲρ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς εὐλαβείας ὀλίγα διαλέξομαι· τοῦτο γάρ μοι καὶ τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς παρόδου γέγονεν αἴτιον καίπερ οὐκ ὄντι συγγραφικῷ καὶ τὸ ἐν τῷ πλήθει λέγειν ὥσπερ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἐπαχθῶν καὶ σοφιστικῶν τὸν ἔμπροσθεν [C] χρόνον παραιτησαμένῳ. μικρὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦ μύθου καθάπερ τινὰ γενεαλογίαν ἴσως οὐκ ἀνάρμοστον ἐμοί τε φάναι ὑμῖν τε ἀκοῦσαι.

(Endure for the brief fraction of a day even a babbling Cynic! It is not the first time that thou hast had to hear the gods blasphemed! Our state is not so well governed, our private life is not so virtuous, in a word we are not so favoured by fortune that we can keep our ears pure or at any rate our eyes at least undefiled by the many and various impieties of this iron race. And now as though we had not enough of such vileness this Cynic fills our ears with his blasphemies, and has uttered the name of the highest of the gods in such wise as would he had never spoken nor I heard! But since he has done this, come, let me in your presence try to teach him this lesson; first that it is more becoming for a Cynic to write discourses than myths; secondly, what sort of adaptations of the myths he ought to make, if indeed philosophy really needs mythology at all; and finally I shall have a few words to say about reverence for the gods. For it is with this aim that I appear before you, I who have no talent for writing and who have hitherto avoided addressing the general public, as I have avoided all else that is tedious and sophistical. But perhaps it is not unsuitable for me to say and for you to hear a few words about myth in general as a sort of genealogy of that kind of writing.)

Τὴν μὲν οὖν ἀρχὴν ὁπόθεν ηὑρέθη καὶ ὅστις ὁ πρῶτος ἐπιχειρήσας τὸ ψεῦδος πιθανῶς συνθεῖναι πρὸς ὠφέλειαν ἢ ψυχαγωγίαν τῶν ἀκροωμώνων, οὐ μᾶλλον εὔροι τις ἂν ἢ εἴ τις ἐπιχειρήσειε τὸν πρῶτον πταρόντα ἢ χρεμψάμενον ἀναζητεῖν. εἰ δέ, [D] ὥσπερ ἱππεῖς ἐν Θράκῃ καὶ Θετταλίᾳ, [pg 076] τοξόται δὲ καὶ τὰ κουφότερα τῶν ὅπλων ἐν Ἰνδίᾳ καὶ Κρήτῃ καὶ Καρίᾳ ἀνεφάνη,[121] τῇ φύσει τῆς χώρας ἀκολουθούντων οἶμαι τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων, οὕτω τις ὑπολαμβάνει καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων πραγμάτων, ἐν οἷς ἕκαστα τιμᾶται, μάλιστα παρὰ τούτων αὐτὰ καὶ πρῶτον ηὑρῆσθαι· τῶν ἀγελαίων ἔοικεν ἀνθρώπων εἶναι [206] τό γε ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ μύθος εὕρημα, καὶ διαμένει ἐξ ἐκείνου μέχρι καὶ νῦν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς πολιτευόμενον τὸ πρᾶγμα ὥσπερ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἀκροαμάτων, αὐλὸς καὶ κιθάρα, τέρψεως ἕνεκα καὶ ψυχαγωγίας. ὥσπερ γὰρ οἱ[122] ὄρνιθες ἵπτασθαι καὶ νεῖν οἱ[123] ἰχθύες αἵ τε ἔλαφοι θεῖν ἐπειδὴ πεφύκασιν οὐδὲν τοῦ διδαχθῆναι προσδέονται, κἂν δήσῃ τις κἂν καθείρξῃ, πειρᾶται ὅμως χρῆσθαι τούτοις τοῖς μορίοις, πρὸς ἃ σύνοιδεν αὑτοῖς πεφυκόσι, ταυτὶ τὰ ζῷα, οὕτως οἶμαι καὶ τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων [B] γένος οὐκ ἄλλο τι τὴν ψυχὴν ἔχον ἢ λόγον καὶ ἐπιστήμην ὥσπερ ἐγκαθειργμένην, ὃ δὴ καὶ λέγουσιν οἱ σοφοὶ δέναμιν, ἐπὶ τὸ μανθάνειν τε[124] καὶ ζητεῖν καὶ πολυπραγμονεῖν, ὡς πρὸς οἰκειότατον ἑαυτῷ τῶν ἔργων, τρέπεται· καὶ ὅτῳ μὲν εὐμενὴς θεὸς ταχέως ἔλυσε τὰ δεσμὰ καὶ τὴν δύναμιν εἰς ἐνέργειαν ἤγαγε, τούτῳ πάρεστιν εὐθὺς ἐπιστήμη, τοῖς δεδεμένοις δὲ ἔτι, [C] καθάπερ οἶμαι Ἰξίων νεφέλῃ τινὶ[125] ἀντὶ τῆς θεοῦ λέγεται παραναπαύσασθαι, τούτοις ἀντ᾽ ἀληθοῦς ψευδὴς[126] ἐντέτηκε δόξα· γίνεται γὰρ [pg 078] ἐντεῦθεν αὐτοῖς[127] τὰ ὑπηνέμια καὶ τερατώδη ταυτὶ τῆς ἀληθοῦς ἐπιστήμης οἷον εἴδωλα ἄττα καὶ σκιαί· πράττουσι γοῦν πρὸ τῆς τῶν ἀληθῶν ἐπιστήμης τὰ ψεύδη καὶ διδάσκουσί γε μάλα προθύμως καὶ μανθάνουσιν ὥσπερ οἶμαι χρηστόν τι καὶ θαυμαστόν. εἰ δ᾽ ὅλως χρή τι καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν τοὺς μύθους τὸ πρῶτον [D] πλασάντων ἀπολογήσασθαι, δοκοῦσί μοι ταῖς τῶν παιδίων ψυχαῖς, ὥσπερ αἱ τίτθαι περὶ τὰς ὀδοντοφυïας κνησιῶσιν αἰτοῖς σκύτινα ἄττα προσαρτῶσι[128] ταῖν χεροῖν, ἵνα αὐτῶν παραμυθήσωνται τὸ πάθος, οὕτω δὲ καὶ οὗτοι τῷ ψυχαρίῳ πτεροφυοῦντι καὶ ποθοῦντι πλέον εἰδέναι τι, διδάσκεσθαι δὲ οὔπω τἀληθῆ δυναμένῳ ταῦτα ἐποχετεύειν, ὥσπερ ἄρδοντες ἄρουραν διψῶσαν, ἵνα δὴ οἶμαι αὐτῶν τὸν γαργαλισμὸν καὶ τὴν ὀδύνην παραμυθήσωνται.

(Now one could no more discover where myth was originally invented and who was the first to compose fiction in a plausible manner for the benefit or entertainment of his hearers, than if one were to try to find out who was the first man that sneezed or the first horse that neighed. But as cavalry arose in Thrace and Thessaly[129] and archers and the lighter sort of weapons in India, Crete and Caria—since the customs of the people were I suppose adapted to the nature of the country,—just so we may assume about other things as well, that where anything is highly prized by a nation it was first discovered by that nation rather than by any other. On this assumption then it seems likely that myth was originally the invention of men given to pastoral pursuits, and from that day to this the making of myths is still peculiarly cultivated by them, just as they first invented instruments of music, the flute and the lyre, for their pleasure and entertainment. For just as it is the nature of birds to fly and of fish to swim and of stags to run, and hence they need not be taught to do so; and even if one bind or imprison these animals they try none the less to use those special parts of themselves for the purpose for which they know they are naturally adapted; even so I think the human race whose soul is no other than reason and knowledge imprisoned so to speak in the body—the philosophers call it a potentiality—even so I say the human race inclines to learning, research and study, as of all tasks most congenial to it. And when a kindly god without delay looses a man's fetters and brings that potentiality into activity, then on the instant knowledge is his: whereas in those who are still imprisoned false opinion instead of true is implanted, just as, I think, Ixion is said to have embraced a sort of cloud instead of the goddess.[130] And hence they produce wind-eggs[131] and monstrous births, mere phantoms and shadows so to speak of true science. And thus instead of genuine science they profess false doctrines, and are very zealous in learning and teaching such doctrines, as though forsooth they were something useful and admirable. But if I am bound to say something in defence of those who originally invented myths, I think they wrote them for childish souls: and I liken them to nurses who hand toys to the hands of children when they are irritated by teething, in order to ease their suffering: so those mythologists wrote for the feeble soul whose wings are just beginning to sprout, and who, though still incapable of being taught the truth, is yearning for further knowledge, and they poured in a stream of myths like men who water a thirsty field, so as to soothe their irritation and pangs.[132])

[207] Τοῦ δὲ τοιούτου προβαίνοντος καὶ παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν εὐδοκιμοῦντος, εἵλκυσαν ἐντεῦθεν οἱ ποιηταὶ τὸν αἶνον, ὃς τοῦ μύθου διαφέρει τῷ μὴ πρὸς παῖδας, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἄνδρας πεποιῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ψυχαγωγίαν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ παραίνεσιν ἔχειν τινά. βούλεται γὰρ ἐπικρυπτόμενος παραινεῖν τε καὶ διδάσκειν, ὅταν ὁ λέγων τὸ φανερῶς εἰπεῖν εὐλαβῆται, [B] τὴν παρὰ τῶν ἀκουόντων ὑφορώμενος ἀπέχθειαν. οὕτω τοι καὶ Ἡσίοδος αὐτὸ φαίνεται πεποιηκώς· ὁ δὲ μετὰ τοῦτον Ἀρχίλοχος ὥσπερ ἥδυσμά τι περιτιθεὶς τῇ ποιήσει, μύθοις οὐκ ὀλιγάκις ἐχρήσατο ὁρῶν, ὡς εἰκός, τὴν μὲν ὑπόθεσιν, [pg 080] ἣν μετῄει, τῆς τοιαύτης ψυχαγωγίας ἐνδεῶς ἔχουσαν, σαφῶς δὲ ἐγνωκώς, ὅτι στερομένη μύθου ποίησις ἐποποιΐα μόνον ἐστίν, ἐστέρηται δέ, ὡς ἂν εἴποι τισ, ἑαυτῆς, οὐ γὰρ ἔτι λείπεται ποίησις, ἡδύσματα ταῦτα παρὰ τῆς ποιητικῆς Μούσης ἐδρέψατο, [C] καὶ παρέθηκέ γε αὐτοῦ τούτου χάριν, ὅπως μὴ σιλλογράφος τις, ἀλλὰ ποιητὴς νομισθείη.

(Then when the myth was gaining ground and coming into favour in Greece, poets developed from it the fable with a moral, which differs from the myth in that the latter is addressed to children and the former to men, and is designed not merely to entertain them but conveys moral exhortation besides. For the man who employs fable aims at moral exhortation and instruction, though he conceals his aim and takes care not to speak openly, for fear of alienating his hearers. Hesiod, for instance, seems to have written with this in view. And after him Archilochus often employed myths,[133] adorning and as it were seasoning his poetry with them, probably because he saw that his subject matter needed something of this sort to make it attractive, and he well knew that poetry without myth is merely versification[134] and lacks, one may say, its essential characteristic, and so ceases to be poetry at all. Therefore he culled these sweets from the Muse of Poetry and offered them to his readers, in order that he might not be ranked merely as a writer of satire but might be counted a poet.)

Ὁ δὲ δὴ τῶν μύθων Ὅμηρος ἢ Θουκυδίδης ἢ Πλάτων, ἢ ὅ, τι βούλει καλεῖν αὐτόν, Αἴσωπος ἦν ὁ Σάμιος, δοῦλος τὴν τύχην[135] μᾶλλον ἢ τὴν προαίρεσιν, οὐκ ἄφρων μὴν[136] οὐδὲ κατ᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀνήρ. ᾧ γὰρ ὁ νόμος οὐ μετεδίδου παρρησίας, τούτῳ προσῆκον ἦν ἐσκιαγραφημένας τὰς συμβουλὰς καὶ πεποικιλμένας ἡδονῇ καὶ χάριτι παραφέρειν, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τῶν ἰατρῶν οἱ μὲν ἐλεύθεροι τὸ δέον ἐπιτάττουσιν, [D] ἐὰν δὲ ἅμα τις οἰκέτης γένηται τὴν τύχην καὶ τὴν τέχνην ἰατρός, πράγματα ἔχει κολακεύειν ἅμα καὶ θεραπεύειν τὸν δεσπότην ἀναγκαζόμενος. εἰ μὲν οὖν καὶ τῷ κυνὶ προσήκει ταύτης τῆς δουλείας, λεγέτω, γραφέτω, παραχωρείτω τῆς μυθολογίας αὐτῷ πᾶς ὁστισοῦν, εἰ δὲ μόνος εἶναί φησιν ἐλεύθεροσ, ἐπὶ τί χρήσεται τοῖς μύθοις, οὐκ οἶδα. πότερον ἵνα τὸ πικρὸν καὶ δάκνον τῆς συμβουλῆς ἡδονῇ καὶ χάριτι κεράσας [208] ἅμα τε ὀνήσῃ καὶ ἀποφύγῃ τὸ προσλαβεῖν τι παρὰ τοῦ ὀνιναμένου κακόν; ἀλλὰ τοῦτό ἐστι λίαν δουλοπρεπές. ἀλλ᾽ ἄμεινον ἄν τις διδαχθείη μὴ τὰ πράγματα ἀκούων αὐτὰ μηδὲ [pg 082] τὰ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα κατὰ τὸν κωμικὸν τὴν σκάφην σκάφην λέγοντα; ἀλλ᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ μὲν δεῖνος τὸν Φαέθοντα τί[137] δέον ἐνομάσαι; [B] τί δὲ χραίνειν οὐκ εὐαγῶς τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τοῦ βασιλέως Ἠλίου; τίς δὲ ὁ Πὰν καὶ τίς ὁ Ζεὺς τῶν χαμαὶ ἐρχομένων ἀνθρώπων ἄξιος καλεῖσθαι, ἵν᾽ ἐκεῖθεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς μεταθῶμεν ἡμῶν τὰς διανοίας; καίτοι, εἰ καὶ τοῦτο οἷόν τε ἦν, ἄμεινον ἦν αὐτοὺς ἐνομάσαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. ἦ γὰρ οὐχ οὕτω κρεῖττον ἦν εἰπεῖν ἀνθρωπικὰ θεμένους ὀνόματα; μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ θεμένους, [C] ἤρκει γὰρ ὅσαπερ ἡμῖν οἱ γονεῖς ἔθεντο. ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μήτε μαθεῖν ἐστι ῥᾷον[138] διὰ τοῦ πλάσματος μήτε τῷ Κυνικῷ πρέπον πλάττειν τὰ τοιαῦτα, τοῦ χάριν οὐκ ἐφεισάμεθα τοῦ πολυτελοῦς ἀναλώματος, πρὸς δὲ δὴ καὶ ἐφθείραμεν τὸν χρόνον πλάττοντες καὶ συντιθέντες μυθάρια, εἶτα λογογραφοῦντες καὶ ἐκμανθάνοντες;

(But the Homer of myths, or their Thucydides, or Plato, or whatever we must call him, was Aesop of Samos, who was a slave by the accident of birth rather than by temperament, and he proved his sagacity by this very use of fable. For since the law did not allow him freedom of speech, he had no resource but to shadow forth his wise counsels and trick them out with charms and graces and so serve them up to his hearers. Just so, I think, physicians who are free-born men prescribe what is necessary, but when a man happens to be a slave by birth and a physician by profession, he is forced to take pains to flatter and cure his master at the same time. Now if our Cynic also is subject to this sort of slavery, let him recite myths, let him write them, and let everyone else under the sun leave to him the rôle of mythologist. But since he asserts that he alone is free, I do not know what need he has of myths. Does he need to temper the harshness and severity of his advice with sweetness and charm, so that he may at once benefit mankind and avoid being harmed by one whom he has benefited? Nay, that is too much like a slave. Moreover, would any man be better taught by not hearing facts as they really are, or called by their real names, like the comic poet who calls a spade a spade?[139] What need to speak of Phaethon instead of So-and-so? What need sacrilegiously to profane the title of King Helios? Who among men that walk here below[140] is worthy to be called Pan or Zeus, as though we should ascribe to those gods our human understanding? And yet if indeed this were possible it would have been better to give the men their own names. Would it not have been better to speak of them thus and to bestow on them human names, or rather not bestow, for those that our parents gave us were enough? Well then if it is neither easier to learn by means of fiction, nor appropriate for the Cynic to invent that sort of thing at all, why did we not spare that wasteful expense,[141] and moreover why did we waste our time in inventing and composing trivial myths and then making stories of them and learning them by heart?)

Ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως ὁ μὲν λόγος οὔ φησι δεῖν ἀντὶ τῶν ἀληθῶν [D] καὶ μὴ πεπλασμένων τὰ ψευδῆ καὶ πεπλασμένα παρὰ τοῦ κυνός, ᾧ μόνῳ τῆς ἐλευθερίας μέτεστιν, ἐν τοῖς κοινοῖς ᾄδεσθαι συλλόγοις, ἡ συνήθεια δὲ οὕτω[142] γέγονεν ἀπὸ Διογένους ἀρξαμένη καὶ Κράτητος ἄχρι τῶν ἐφεξῆς. οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ παράδειγμα τοιοῦτον εὑρήσεις· ἐκεῖνο γὰρ ἀφίημι τέως, ὅτι τῷ Κυνικῷ τὸ νόμισμα παραχαράττοντι [pg 084] τῇ συνηθείᾳ προσέχειν οὐδαμῶς προσήκει, τῷ λόγῳ δὲ αὐτῷ μόνῳ, [209] καὶ τὸ ποιητέον εὑρίσκειν οἴκοθεν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ μανθάνειν ἔξωθεν. εἰ δ᾽ Ἀντισθένης ὁ Σωκρατικὸς ὥσπερ ὁ Ξενοφῶν ἔνια διὰ τῶν μύθων ἀπήγελλε, μήτι[143] τοῦτό σε ἐξαπατάτω· καὶ γὰρ μικρὸν ὕστερον ὑπὲρ τούτου σοι διαλέξομαι·[144] νῦν δὲ ἐκεῖνό μοι πρὸς τῶν Μουσῶν φράσον ὑπὲρ τοῦ Κυνισμοῦ, πότερον ἀπόνοια τίς ἐστι καὶ βίος οὐκ ἀνθρώπινος, ἀλλὰ θηριώδης ψυχῆς διάθεσις οὐδὲν καλόν, οὐδὲν σπουδαῖον οὐδὲ ἀγαθὸν νομιζούσης; [B] δοίη γὰρ ἂν ὑπολαβεῖν πολλοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα Οἰνόμαος. εἴ τί σοι τοῦ ταῦτα γοῦν ἐπελθεῖν ἐμέλησεν, ἐπέγνως ἂν σαφῶς ἐν τῇ τοῦ κυνὸς αὐτοφωνίᾳ καὶ τῷ κατὰ τῶν χρηστηρίων καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς οἷς ἔγραψεν ὁ ἀνήρ. τοιούτου δὲ ὄντος τοῦ πράγματος, ὥστε ἐνῃρῆσθαι μὲν ἅπασαν τὴν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς εὐλάβειαν, ἠτιμάσθαι δὲ πᾶσαν ἀνθρωπίνην φρόνησιν, νόμον δὲ μὴ τὸν ὁμώνυμον τῷ καλῷ καὶ δικαίῳ πεπατῆσθαι μόνον, [C] ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν θεῶν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ ἐγγραφέντας ταῖς ψυχαῖς, ὑφ᾽ ὧν πάντες ἀδιδάκτως εἶναι θεῖόν τι πεπείσμεθα καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ἀφορᾶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτό τε οἶμαι σπεύδειν οὕτω διατιθέμενοι τὰς ψυχὰς πρὸς αὐτὸ ὥσπερ, οἶμαι πρὸς τὸ φῶς τὰ βλέποντα, πρὸς τούτῳ δὲ εἰ καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἐξελαύνοιτο νόμος ἱερὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ θεῖος, ὁ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων πάντη καὶ πάντως [pg 086] ἀπέχεσθαι κελεύων καὶ μήτε ἐν λόγῳ μήτε ἐν ἔργῳ μήτε [D] ἐν αὐταῖς ταῖς λανθανούσαις τῆς ψυχῆς ἐνεργείαις ταῦτα ἐπιτρέπων συγχεῖν, ὅσπερ ἡμῖν καὶ τῆς τελειοτάτης ἐστὶν ἡγεμὼν δικαιοσύνης· ἆρ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι βαράθρου τὸ πρᾶγμα ἄξιον; ἆρ᾽ οὐ τοὺς ταῦτα ἐπαινοῦντας ὥσπερ τοὺς φαρμακοὺς ἐχρῆν οὐ θύσθλοις παιομένους[145] ἐλαύνεσθαι· κουφοτέρα γάρ ἐστι τῶν ἀδικημάτων ἡ ζημία· λίθοις δὲ βαλλομένους ἀπολωλέναι; διαφέρουσι γὰρ οὗτοι τί, [210] πρὸς τῶν θεῶν εἰπέ μοι, τῶν ἐπ᾽ ἐρημίας λῃστευόντων καὶ κατειληφότων τὰς ἀκτὰς ἐπὶ τῷ λυμαίνεσθαι τοῖς καταπλέουσι; καταφρονοῦντες θανάτου, φασίν· ὥσπερ οὐ κἀκείνοις συνομαρτούσης ταυτησὶ τῆς ἀπονοίας. φησὶ γοῦν ὁ καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς μὲν ποιητὴς καὶ μυθολόγος, ὡς δὲ ὁ Πύθιος λῃσταῖς χρωμένοις ἀνεῖλεν, ἥρως καὶ δαίμων, ὑπὲρ τῶν λῃζομένων τὴν θάλατταν

(But perhaps you will say that though reason asserts that the Cynic, who alone of men can claim to be free, ought not to invent and compose lying fictions instead of the unvarnished truth and then recite these in public assemblies, nevertheless the custom began with Diogenes and Crates, and has been maintained from that time by all Cynics. My answer is that nowhere will you find a single example of such a custom. For the moment I do not insist on the fact that it in no wise becomes a Cynic who must “give a new stamp to the common currency”[146] to pay any attention to custom, but only to pure reason, and he ought to discover within himself what is right for him to do and not learn it from without. And do not be misled by the fact that Antisthenes the disciple of Socrates, and Xenophon too, sometimes expressed themselves by means of myths; for I shall have something to say to you on this point in a moment. But now in the Muses' name answer me this question about the Cynic philosophy. Are we to think it a sort of madness, a method of life not suitable for a human being, but rather a brutal attitude of mind which recks naught of the beautiful, the honourable, or the good? For Oenomaus[147] would make many people hold this view of it. If you had taken any trouble to study the subject, you would have learned this from that Cynic's “Direct Inspiration of Oracles” and his work “Against the Oracles,” in short from everything that he wrote. This then is his aim, to do away with all reverence for the gods, to bring dishonour on all human wisdom, to trample on all law that can be identified with honour and justice, and more than this, to trample on those laws which have been as it were engraved on our souls by the gods, and have impelled us all to believe without teaching that the divine exists, and to direct our eyes to it and to yearn towards it: for our souls are disposed towards it as eyes towards the light. Furthermore, suppose that one should discard also that second law which is sanctified both by nature and by God, I mean the law that bids us keep our hands altogether and utterly from the property of others and permits us neither by word or deed or in the inmost and secret activities of our souls to confound such distinctions, since the law is our guide to the most perfect justice—is not this conduct worthy of pit?[148] And ought not those who applauded such views to have been driven forth, not by blows with wands, like scapegoats,[149] for that penalty is too light for such crimes, but put to death by stoning? For tell me, in Heaven's name, how are such men less criminal than bandits who infest lonely places and haunt the coasts in order to despoil navigators? Because, as people say, they despise death; as though bandits were not inspired by the same frenzied courage! So says at any rate he[150] who with you counts as a poet and mythologist, though, as a Pythian god proclaimed to certain bandits who sought his oracle, he was a hero and divinity—I mean where, speaking of pirates of the sea, he says:)

Οἷά τε ληιστῆρες, ὑπεὶρ ἅλα τοί τ᾽ ἀλόωνται

[B] Ψυχὰς παρθέμενοι.

(“Like pirates who wander over the sea, staking their lives.”[151])

τί οὖν ἔτι ἕτερον ζητεῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀπονοίας τῶν λῃστῶν μάρτυρα; πλὴν εἰ μὴ καὶ ἀνδρειοτέρους ἂν εἴποι τις τῶν τοιούτων κυνῶν ἐκείνους τοὺς λῃστάς, ἰταμωτέρους δὲ τῶν λῃστῶν ἐκείνων τοὺς κύνας τουτουσί. οἱ μὲν γὰρ συνειδότες αὑτοῖς οὕτω μοχθηρὸν τὸν βίον οὐ μᾶλλον διὰ τὸ τοῦ θανάτου δέος ἢ τὴν αἰσχύνην τὰς ἐρημίας προβάλλονται, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα περιπατοῦσιν[152] [C] ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τὰ κοινὰ νόμιμα συγχέοντες, οὐχὶ τῷ κρείττονα [pg 088] καὶ καθαρωτέραν, ἀλλὰ τῷ χείρονα καὶ βδελυρωτέραν ἐπεισάγειν πολιτείαν.

(What better witness can you require for the desperate courage of bandits? Except indeed that one might say that bandits are more courageous than Cynics of this sort, while the Cynics are more reckless than they. For pirates, well aware as they are how worthless is the life they lead, take cover in desert places as much from shame as from the fear of death: whereas the Cynics go up and down in our midst subverting the institutions of society, and that not by introducing a better and purer state of things but a worse and more corrupt state.)

Τὰς ἀνανφερομένας δὲ εἰς τὸν Διογένη τραγῳδίας, οὔσας μὲν καὶ ὁμολογουμένως[153] Κυνικοῦ τινος συγγράμματα, ἀμφισβητουμένας δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μόνον, [D] εἴτε τοῦ διδασκάλου, τοῦ Διογένους, εἰσίν, εἴτε τοῦ μαθητοῦ Φιλίσκου, τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐπελθὼν βδελύξαιτο καὶ νομίσειεν ὑπερβολὴν ἀρρητουργίας οὐδὲ ταῖς ἑταίραις ἀπολελεῖφθαι; ταῖς Οἰνομάου δὲ ἐντυχών· ἔγραψε γὰρ καὶ τραγῳδίας τοῖς λόγοις τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ παραπλησίας, ἀρρήτων ἀρρητότερα καὶ κακῶν πέρα, καὶ οὐκέθ᾽ ὅ,τι φῶ περὶ αὐτῶν ἀξίως ἔχω, κἂν τὰ Μαγνήτων κακὰ, κἂν τὸ Τερμέριον, κἂν πᾶσαν ἁπλῶς αὐτοῖς ἐπιφθέγξωμαι [211] τὴν τραγῳδίαν μετὰ τοῦ σατύρου καὶ τῆς κωμῳδίας καὶ τοῦ μίμου, οὕτω πᾶσα μὲν αἰσχρότης, πᾶσα δὲ ἀπόνοια πρὸς ὑπερβολὴν ἐν ἐκείναις τῷ ἀνδρὶ πεφιλοτέχνηται· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἐκ τούτων τις ἀξιοῖ τὸν Κυνισμὸν ὁποῖός τις ἐστιν ἡμῖν ἐπιδεῖξαι, βλασφημῶν τοὺς θεούς, ὑλακτῶν πρὸς ἅπαντας, ὅπερ ἔφην ἀρχόμενος, ἴτω, χωρείτω,[154] γῆν πρὸ γῆς, ὅποι βούλοιτο· εἰ δ᾽, ὅπερ ὁ θεὸς ἔφη Διογένει, τὸ νόμισμα παραχαράξας ἐπὶ τὴν πρὸ ταύτης εἰρημένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ συμβουλὴν τρέποιτο, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτόν, ὅπερ ζηλώσαντες ἐπὶ τῶν ἔργων Διογένης καὶ Κράτης φαίνονται, τοῦτο ἤδη τοῦ παντὸς ἄξιον ἔγωγε φαίην ἂν ἀνδρὶ καιὶ [pg 090] στρατηγεῖν καὶ φιλοσοφεῖν ἐθέλοντι. τί δὲ εἶπεν ὁ θεός, ἆρ᾽ ἴσμεν; ὅτι τῆς τῶν πολλῶν αὐτῷ δόξης ἐπέταξεν [C] ὑπερορᾶν καὶ παραχαράττειν οὐ τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλὰ τὸ νόμισμα. τὸ δὲ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἐν ποτέρᾳ θησόμεθα μοίρᾳ; πότερον ἐν τῇ τοῦ νομίσματος; ἢ τοῦτό γε αὐτὸ τῆς ἀληθείας εἶναι κεφάλαιον θήσομεν καὶ τρόπον εἰρῆσθαι τοῦ Παραχάραξον τὸ νόμισμα διὰ τῆς[155] Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἀποφάσεως; ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ τὰ νομιζόμενα παντάπασιν ἀτιμάσας, ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν δὲ ἥκων τὴν ἀλήθειαν οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ τοῖς νομιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὄντως οὖσι θήσεται, [D] οὕτως οἶμαι καὶ ὁ γνοὺς ἑαυτὸν ὅπερ ἔστιν ἀκριβῶς εἴσεται καὶ οὐχ ὅπερ νομίζεται. πότερον οὖν οὐχ ὁ Πύθιος ἀληθής τέ ἐστι θεός, καὶ Διογένης τοῦτο ἐπέπειστο σαφῶς, ὅς γε αὐτῷ πεισθεὶς ἀντὶ φυγάδος ἀπεδείχθη οὐ τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως μείζων, ἀλλ᾽, ὡς ἡ φήμη παρέδωκεν, αὐτῷ τῷ καταλύσαντι τὸ Περσῶν κράτος καὶ ταῖς Ἡρακλέους ἁμιλλωμένῳ πράξεσιν, ὑπερβάλλεσθαι δὲ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα φιλοτιμουμένῳ ζηλωτός; οὗτος οὖν ὁ Διογένης ὁποῖός τις ἦν τά τε πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς [212] καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἀνθρώπους μὴ διὰ τῶν Οἰνομάου λόγων μηδὲ τῶν Φιλίσκου τραγῳδιῶν, αἷς ἐπιγράψας τὸ Διογένους ὄνομα τῆς θείας πολλά ποτε κατεψεύσατο κεφαλῆς, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ὧν ἔδρασεν ἔργων ὁποῖός τις ἦν γνωριζέσθω.

(Now as for the tragedies ascribed to Diogenes, which are and are admitted to be, the composition of some Cynic—the only point in dispute being whether they are by the master himself, Diogenes, or by his disciple Philiscus,—what reader of these would not abhor them, and find in them an excess of infamy not to be surpassed even by courtesans? However, let him go on to read the tragedies of Oenomaus—for he too wrote tragedies to match his discourses—and he will find that they are more inconceivably infamous, that they transgress the very limits of evil; in fact I have no words to describe them adequately, and in vain should I cite in comparison the horrors of Magnesia,[156] the wickedness of Termerus[157] or the whole of tragedy put together, along with satiric drama, comedy and the mime: with such art has their author displayed in those works every conceivable vileness and folly in their most extreme form. Now if from such works any man chooses to demonstrate to us the character of the Cynic philosophy, and to blaspheme the gods and bark at all men, as I said when I began, let him go, let him depart to the uttermost parts of the earth whithersoever he pleases. But if he do as the god enjoined on Diogenes, and first “give a new stamp to the common currency,” then devote himself to the advice uttered earlier by the god, the precept “Know Thyself,” which Diogenes and Crates evidently followed in their actual practice, then I say that this is wholly worthy of one who desires to be a leader and a philosopher. For surely we know what the god meant? He enjoined on Diogenes to despise the opinion of the crowd and to give a new stamp, not to truth, but to the common currency. Now to which of these categories shall we assign self-knowledge? Can we call it common currency? Shall we not rather say that it is the very summary of truth, and by the injunction “Know Thyself” we are told the way in which we must “give a new stamp to the common currency”? For just as one who pays no regard whatever to conventional opinions but goes straight for the truth will not decide his own conduct by those opinions but by actual facts, so I think he who knows himself will know accurately, not the opinion of others about him, but what he is in reality. It follows then, does it not? that the Pythian god speaks the truth, and moreover that Diogenes was clearly convinced of this since he obeyed the god and so became, instead of an exile, I will not say greater than the King of Persia, but according to the tradition handed down actually an object of envy to the man[158] who had broken the power of Persia and was rivalling the exploits of Heracles and ambitious to surpass Achilles. Then let us judge of the attitude of Diogenes towards gods and men, not from the discourses of Oenomaus or the tragedies of Philiscus—who by ascribing their authorship to Diogenes grossly slandered that sacred personage—but let us, I say, judge him by his deeds.)

Ἦλθεν εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν ἐπὶ τί πρὸς Διός; ἵνα τοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς θεάσηται; τί δέ; οὐχὶ καὶ Ἰσθμίοις [pg 092] τοὺς αὐτοὺς καὶ Παναθηναίοις θεάσασθαι δίχα πραγμάτων οἷόν τε ἦν; ἀλλὰ ἐθέλων ἐκεῖ τοῖς κρατίστοις συγγενέσθαι τῶν Ἑλλήνων; [B] οὐ γὰρ Ἰσθμόνδε ἐφοίτων; οὐκ ἂν οὖν εὕροις ἄλλην αἰτίαν ἢ τὴν εἰς τὸν θεὸν θεραπείαν. εἰ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐξεπλάγη τὸν κεραυνὸν· οὐδὲ ἐγὼ μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς πολλῶν πολλάκις πειραθεὶς διοσημιῶν ἐξεπλάγην. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὕτω δή τι τοὺς θεοὺς πέφρικα καὶ φιλῶ καὶ σέβω καὶ ἅζομαι καὶ πάνθ᾽ ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα πρὸς αὐτοὺς πάσχω, ὅσαπερ ἄν τις καὶ οἷα πρὸς ἀγαθοὺς δεσπότας, πρὸς διδασκάλους, πρὸς πατέρας, πρὸς κηδεμόνας, πρὸς πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα, [C] ὥστε ὀλίγου δεῖν ὑπὸ τῶν σῶν ῥημάτων πρῴην ἐξανέστην. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅντινα τρόπον ἐπελθὸν ἴσως σιωπᾶσθαι δέον ἐρρέθη.

(Why in the name of Zeus did he go to Olympia? To see the athletes compete? Nay, could he not have seen those very athletes without trouble both at the Isthmian games and the Panathenaic festival? Then was it because he wished to meet there the most distinguished Greeks? But did they not go to the Isthmus too? So you cannot discover any other motive than that of doing honour to the god. He was not, you say, awestruck by a thunderstorm. Ye gods, I too have witnessed such signs from Zeus over and over again, without being awestruck! Yet for all that I feel awe of the gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them, and in short have precisely the same feelings towards them as one would have towards kind masters[159] or teachers or fathers or guardians or any beings of that sort. That is the very reason why I could hardly sit still the other day and listen to your speech. However, I have spoken thus as I was somehow or other impelled to speak, though perhaps it would have been better to say nothing at all.)

Διογένης δὲ καὶ πένης ὢν καὶ χρημάτων ἐνδεὴς εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν ἐβάδιζεν, Ἀλέξανδρον δὲ ἥκειν ἐκέλευε παρ᾽ ἑαυτόν, εἴ τῳ πιστὸς ὁ Δίων. οὕτω πρέπειν ἐνόμιζεν ἑαυτῷ [D] μὲν φοιτᾶν ἐπὶ τὰ ἱερὰ τῶν θεῶν, τῷ βασιλικωτάτῳ δὲ τῶν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ συνουσίαν. ἃ δὲ πρὸς Ἀρχίδαμον γέγραφεν, οὐ βασιλικαὶ παραινέσεις εἰσίν; οὐ μόνον δὲ ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ἦν ὁ Διογένης θεοσεβής, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις. ἑλόμενον γὰρ αὐτὸν οἰκεῖν τὰς Ἀθήνας ἐπειδὴ τὸ δαιμόνιον εἰς τὴν Κόρινθον ἀπήγαγεν, ἀφεθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ πριαμένου τὴν πόλιν οὐκέτ᾽ ῴήθη δεῖν ἐκλιπεῖν· [213] ἐπέπειστο γὰρ αὑτοῦ τοῖς θεοῖς μέλειν εἴς τε τὴν Κόρινθον οὐ [pg 094] μάτην οὐδὲ κατά τινα συντυχίαν, τρόπον δέ τινα ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν εἰσπεπέμφθαι ὁρῶν τὴν πόλιν τρυφῶσαν τῶν Ἀθηναίων μᾶλλον καὶ δεομένην μείζονος καὶ γενναιοτέρου σωφρονιστοῦ.

(To return to Diogenes: he was poor and lacked means, yet he travelled to Olympia, though he bade Alexander come to him, if we are to believe Dio.[160] So convinced was he that it was his duty to visit the temples of the gods, but that it was the duty of the most royal monarch of that day to come to him for an interview. And was not that royal advice which he wrote to Archidamus? Nay, not only in words but in deeds also did Diogenes show his reverence for the gods. For he preferred to live in Athens, but when the divine command had sent him away to Corinth, even after he had been set free by the man who had bought him, he did not think he ought to leave that city. For he believed that the gods took care of him, and that he had been sent to Corinth, not at random or by some accident, but by the gods themselves for some purpose. He saw that Corinth was more luxurious than Athens, and stood in need of a more severe and courageous reformer.)

Τί δέ; οὐχὶ καὶ τοῦ Κράτητος μουσικὰ καὶ χαρίεντα φέρεται πολλὰ δείγματα τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς ὁσιότητός τε καὶ εὐλαβείας; ἄκουε γοῦν αὐτὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, [B] εἴ σοι μὴ σχολὴ γέγονε μαθεῖν ἐξ ἐκείνων αὐτά.

To give you another instance: Are there not extant many charming poems by Crates also which are proofs of his piety and veneration for the gods? I will repeat them to you if you have not had time to learn this from the poems themselves:

Μνημοσύνης καὶ Ζηνὸς Ὀλυμπίου ἀγλαὰ τέκνα,

Μοῦσαι Πιερέδες, κλῦτέ μοι εὐχομένῳ·

Χόρτον ἐμῇ συνεχῆ δότε γαστέρι, καὶ δότε χωρίς

Δουλοσύνης, ἣ δὴ λιτὸν ἔθηκε βίον.

(“Ye Muses of Pieria, glorious children of Memory and Olympian Zeus, grant me this prayer! Give me food for my belly from day to day, but give it without slavery which makes life miserable indeed....)

Ὠφέλιμον δὲ φίλοις, μὴ γλυκερὸν τίθετε.

[C] Χρήματα δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλω συνάγειν κλυτά, κανθάρου ὄλβον

Μύρμηκός τ᾽ ἄφενος χρήματα μαιόμενος,

Ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνης μετέχειν καὶ πλοῦτον ἀγείρειν[161]

Εὔφορον, εὔκτητον, τίμιον εἰς ἀρετήν.

Τῶν δὲ τυχὼν Ἑρμῆν καὶ Μούσας ἱλάσομ᾽ ἁγνάς.

Οὐ δαπάναις τρυφεραῖς, [D] ἀλλ᾽ ἀρεταῖς ὁσίαις.

(“Make me useful rather than agreeable to my friends. Treasure and the fame thereof I desire not to amass; nor do I crave the wealth of the beetle and the substance of the ant. But justice I desire to attain, and to collect riches that are easily carried, easily acquired, precious for virtue. If I attain these things I will worship Hermes and the holy Muses, not with costly and luxurious offerings, but with pious and virtuous actions.”[162])

ὁρᾷς ὅτι τοὺς θεοὺς εὐφημῶν, οὐχὶ δὲ ὡς σὺ βλασφημῶν κατ᾽ αὐτῶν ηὔχετο; πόσαι γὰρ ἑκατόμβαι τῆς ὁσίας εἰσὶν ἀντάξιαι, ἣν καὶ ὁ δαιμόνιος Εὐριπίδης ὀρθῶς ἥμνησεν εἰπὼν

(You see that, far from blaspheming the gods as you do, he adored and prayed to them? For what number of hecatombs are worth as much as Piety, whom the inspired Euripides celebrated appropriately in the verses)

Ὁσία πότνα θεῶν, ὁσία;

(“Piety, queen of the gods, Piety”?[163])

ἢ τοῦτό σε λέληθεν, ὅτι πάντα, καὶ τὰ μεγάλα καὶ τὰ σμικρά, μετὰ τῆς ὁσίας τοῖς θεοῖς προσαγόμενα τὴν ἴσην ἔχει δύναμιν, ἐστερημένη δὲ τῆς ὁσίας οὐχ ἑκατόμβη μὰ θεούς, ἀλλὰ ἡ τῆς Ὀλυμπιάδος χιλιόμβη ἀνάλωμα μόνον ἐστίν, [214] ἄλλο δὲ οὐδέν; ὅπερ οἶμαι γιγνώσκων ὁ Κράτης αὐτός τε διὰ μόνης ἧς εἶχεν ὁσίας τοὺς θεοὺς ἐτίμα σὺν εὐφημίᾳ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐδίδασκε μὴ τὰ δαπανήματα τῆς ὁσίας, ἀλλὰ τὴν ὁσίαν ἐκείνων προτιμᾶν ἐν ταῖς ἁγιστείαις. τοιούτω δὲ τὼ ἄνδρε τώδε γενομένω τὰ πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς οὐκ ἀκροατήρια συνεκροτείτην[164] οὐδ᾽ ὥσπερ οἱ σοφοὶ δι᾽ εἰκόνων καὶ μύθων τοῖς φίλοις συνεγιγνέσθην·[165] λέγεται γὰρ [B] ὑπ᾽ Εὐριπίδου καλῶς

(Or are you not aware that all offerings whether great or small that are brought to the gods with piety have equal value, whereas without piety, I will not say hecatombs, but, by the gods, even the Olympian sacrifice[166] of a thousand oxen is merely empty expenditure and nothing else?[167] This I believe Crates recognized, and so with that piety which was his only possession he himself used to honour the gods with praises, and moreover taught others not to honour expensive offerings more than piety in the sacred ceremonies. This then was the attitude of both those Cynics towards the gods but they did not crowd audiences together to hear them, nor did they entertain their friends with similes and myths, like the wise men of to-day. For as Euripides well says,[168])

Ἁπλοῦς ὁ μῦθος τῆς ἀληθείας ἔφυ·

(“Simple and unadorned is the language of truth.”)

σκιαγραφίας γάρ φησι τὸν ψευδῆ καὶ ἄδικον δεῖσθαι. τίς οὖν ὁ τρόπος αὐτοῖς τῆς συνουσίας ἐγίνετο; τῶν λόγων ἡγεῖτο τὰ ἔργα, καὶ οἱ τὴν πενίαν τιμῶντες αὐτοὶ πρῶτοι φαίνονται[169] καὶ τῶν πατρῴων χρημάτων ὑπεριδόντες, οἱ τὴν ἀτυφίαν ἀσπασάμενοι πρῶτοι [C] τὴν εὐτέλειαν ἤσκουν διὰ πάντων, οἱ τὸ τραγικὸν καὶ σοβαρὸν ἐκ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἐξαιροῦντες βίων ᾤκουν αὐτοὶ πρῶτοι τὰς ἀγορὰς ἢ τὰ τῶν θεῶν τεμένη, τῇ τρυφῇ δὲ καὶ πρὸ τῶν ῥημάτων διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐπολέμουν, ἔργοις ἐλέγχοντες, οὐ λόγῳ βοῶντες, ὅτι τῷ Διὶ συμβασιλεύειν ἔξεστιν οὐδενὸς ἢ σμικρῶν πάνυ [pg 098] δεόμενον οὐδὲ παρενοχλούμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σώματος, ἐπετίμων δὲ τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσιν, ἡνίκα ἔζων οἱ πταίσαντες, [D] οὐκ ἀποθανόντας ἐβλασφήμουν, ἡνίκα καὶ τῶν ἐχθρῶν οἱ μετριώτεροι σπένδονται τοῖς ἀπελθοῦσιν. ἔχει δὲ ὅ γε ἀληθινὸς κύων ἐχθρὸν οὐδένα, κἂν τὸ σωμάτιον αὐτοῦ τις πατάξῃ, κἂν τοὔνομα περιέλκῃ, κἂν λοιδορῆται καὶ βλασφημῇ, διότι τὸ μὲν τῆς ἔχθρας γίνεται πρὸς ἀντίπαλον, τὸ δὲ ὑπερβαῖνον τὴν πρὸς ἕτερον ἅμιλλαν εὐνοίᾳ τιμᾶσθαι φιλεῖ· [215] κἄν τις ἑτέρως ἔχῃ πρὸς αὐτὸν, καθάπερ οἶμαι πολλοὶ πρὸς τοὺς θεούς, ἐκείνῳ μὲν οὐκ ἔστιν ἐχθρός, οὐδὲ γὰρ βλαβερός, αὐτὸς δὲ αὑτῷ βαρύτατον ἐπιτιθεὶς[170] τίμημα τὴν τοῦ κρείττονος ἄγνοιαν ἔρημος λείπεται τῆς ἐκείνου προστασίας.

(Only the liar and the dishonest man, he says, have any use for a mysterious and allusive style. Now what was the manner of their intercourse with men? Deeds with them came before words, and if they honoured poverty they themselves seem first to have scorned inherited wealth; if they cultivated modesty, they themselves first practised plain living in every respect; if they tried to expel from the lives of other men the element of theatrical display and arrogance, they themselves first set the example by living in the open market places and the temple precincts, and they opposed luxury by their own practice before they did so in words; nor did they shout aloud but proved by their actions that a man may rule as the equal of Zeus if he needs nothing or very little and so is not hampered by his body; and they reproved sinners during the lifetime of those who had offended but did not speak ill of the dead; for when men are dead even their enemies, at least the more moderate, make peace with the departed. But the genuine Cynic has no enemy, even though men strike his feeble body or drag his name in the mire, or slander and speak ill of him, because enmity is felt only towards an opponent, but that which is above personal rivalry is usually loved and respected. But if anyone is hostile to a Cynic, as indeed many are even to the gods, he is not that Cynic's enemy, since he cannot injure him; rather he inflicts on himself the most terrible punishment of all, namely ignorance of one who is nobler than himself; and so he is deserted and bereft of the other's protection.)

Ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν νῦν μοι προύκειτο περὶ Κυνισμοῦ γράφειν, [B] εἶπον ἂν ὑπὲρ τούτων ἔτι τὰ παριστάμενά μοι τῶν εἰρημένων ἴσως οὐκ ἐλάττω· νῦν δὲ ἀποδιδόντες τὸ συνεχὲς τῇ προαιρέσει περὶ τοῦ ποταποὺς εἶναι χρὴ τοὺς πλαττομένους τῶν μύθων ἐφεξῆς σκοπῶμεν. ἴσως δὲ ἡγεῖται καὶ ταύτης τῆς ἐγχειρήσεως ἐκείνη, ὁποίᾳ τινὶ φιλοσοφίᾳ προσῆκον ἡ μυθογραφία. φαίνονται γὰρ πολλοὶ καὶ τῶν φιλοσόφων αὐτὸ καὶ τῶν θεολόγων ποιήσαντες, ὥσπερ Ὀρφεὺς μὲν ὁ παλαιότατος ἐνθέως φιλοσοφήσας, οὐκ ὀλίγοι δὲ καὶ τῶν μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον· οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ [C] καὶ Ξενοφῶν φαίνεται καὶ Ἀντισθένης καὶ Πλάτων προσχρησάμενοι πολλαχοῦ τοῖς μύθοις, ὥσθ᾽ ἡμῖν πέφηνεν, εἰ καὶ μὴ τῷ Κυνικῷ, φιλοσόφῳ γοῦν τινι προσήκειν ἡ μυθογραφία.

(Now if my present task were to write about the Cynic philosophy, I could add many details about the Cynics, not less important than what I have said already. But not to interrupt my main theme, I will now consider in due course the question what kind of myths ought to be invented. But perhaps another inquiry should precede this attempt, I mean to what branch of philosophy the composition of myths is appropriate. For we see that many philosophers and theologians too have employed it, Orpheus for instance, the most ancient of all the inspired philosophers, and many besides of those that came after him. Nay what is more, Xenophon as we know and Antisthenes and Plato often introduced myths, so that it is obvious that even if the use of myth be not appropriate for the Cynic, still it may be so for some other type of philosopher.)

Μικρὰ οὖν ὑπὲρ τῶν τῆς φιλοσοφίας εἴτε μορίων εἴτε ἐργάνων προρρητέον.[171] ἔστι γὰρ οὐ μέγα τὸ διαφέρον ὁποτέρως ἄν τις τῷ πρακτικῷ[172] [D] καὶ τῷ φυσικῷ τὸ λογικὸν προσαριθμῇ· ἀναγκαῖον γὰρ ὁμοίως φαίνεται κατ᾽ ἀμφότερα. τριῶν δὴ τούτων αὖθις ἕκαστον εἰς τρία τέμνεται, τὸ μὲν φυσικὸν εἰς τὸ θεολογικὸν καὶ τὸ περὶ τὰ μαθήματα καὶ τρίτον τὸ περὶ τὴν τῶν γινομένων καὶ ἀπολλυμένων καὶ τῶν ἀιδίων μέν, σωμάτων δὲ ὅμως θεωρίαν, τί τὸ εἶναι αὐτοῖς καὶ τίς ἡ οὐσία ἑκάστου· τοῦ πρακτικοῦ δὲ τὸ μὲν πρὸς ἕνα ἄνδρα, ἠθικόν, οἰκονομικὸν δὲ τὸ περὶ μίαν οἰκίαν, πολιτικὸν δὲ τὸ περὶ πόλιν· ἔτι μέντοι τοῦ λογικοῦ τὸ μὲν ἀποδεικτικὸν διὰ τῶν ἀληθῶν, τὸ δὲ διὰ τῶν ἐνδόξων βιαστικόν, [216] τὸ δὲ διὰ τῶν φαινομένων ἐνδόξων παραλογιστικόν. ὄντων δὴ τοσούτων τῶν τῆς φιλοσοφίας μερῶν, εἰ μή τί με λέληθε· καὶ οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν ἄνδρα στρατιώτην μὴ λίαν ἐξακριβοῦν μηδ᾽ ἐξονυχίζειν τὰ τοιαῦτα, ἅτε οὐκ ἐκ βιβλίων ἀσκήσεως, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς προστυχούσης αὐτὰ ἕξεως ἀποφθεγγόμενον· ἔσεσθε γοῦν μοι καὶ ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες, εἰ τὰς ἡμέρας λογίσαισθε,[173] πόσαι τινές εἰσιν αἱ μεταξὺ ταύτης τε καὶ τῆς ἔναγχος ἡμῖν γενομένης ἀκροάσεως ὅσων τε ἡμῖν ἀσχολιῶν πλήρεις· [B] ἀλλ᾽ ὅπερ ἔφην, εἰ καί τι παραλέλειπται παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ· καίτοι νομίζω γε μηδὲν ἐνδεῖν· πλὴν ὁ προστιθεὶς οὐκ ἐχθρός, ἀλλὰ φίλος ἔσται.

(I must first then say a few words about the subdivisions or instruments of philosophy. It does not make much difference in which of two ways one reckons logic, whether with practical or natural philosophy, since it is equally necessary to both these branches. But I will consider these as three separate branches and assign to each one three subdivisions. Natural philosophy consists of theology, mathematics, and thirdly the study of this world of generation and decay and things that though imperishable are nevertheless matter, and deals with their essential nature and their substance in each case. Practical philosophy again consists of ethics in so far as it deals with the individual man, economics when it deals with the household as a unit, politics when it deals with the state. Logic, again, is demonstrative in so far as it deals with the truth of principles; polemic when it deals with general opinions; eristic when it deals with opinions that only seem probabilities. These then are the divisions of philosophy, if I mistake not. Though indeed it would not be surprising that a mere soldier should be none too exact in these matters or not have them at his fingers' ends, seeing that I speak less from book-knowledge than from observation and experience. For that matter you can yourselves bear me witness thereto, if you count up how few days have elapsed between the lecture that we lately heard and to-day, and moreover the number of affairs with which they have been filled for me. But as I said if I have omitted anything—though I do not think I have—still if anyone can make my classification more complete he will be “no enemy but my friend.”[174])

Τούτων δὴ τῶν μερῶν οὔτε τῷ λογικῷ προσήκει τῆς μυθογραφίας οὔτε τοῦ φυσικοῦ[175] τῷ μαθηματικῷ, μόνον δέ, εἴπερ ἄρα, τοῦ πρακτικοῦ τῷ πρὸς ἕνα γινομένῳ καὶ τοῦ θεολογικοῦ τῷ τελεστικῷ καὶ μυστικῷ· [C] φιλεῖ γὰρ ἡ φύσις κρύπτεσθαι, καὶ τὸ ἀποκεκρυμμένον τῆς τῶν θεῶν οὐσίας οὐκ ἀνέχεται γυμνοῖς εἰς ἀκαθάρτους ἀκοὰς ῥίπτεσθαι ῥήμασιν. ὅπερ δὲ δὴ τῶν χαρακτήρων ἡ ἀπόρρητος φύσις ὠφελεῖν πέφυκε καὶ ἀγνοουμένη· θεραπεύει γοῦν οὐ ψυχὰς μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ σώματα, καὶ θεῶν ποιεῖ παρουσίας· τοῦτ᾽ οἶμαι πολλάκις γίγνεσθαι καὶ διὰ τῶν μύθων, [D] ὅταν εἰς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν ἀκοὰς οὐ δυναμένας τὰ θεῖα καθαρῶς δέξασθαι δι᾽ αἰνιγμάτων αὐτοῖς μετὰ τῆς μύθων σκηνοποιίας ἐγχέηται.

(Now of these branches of philosophy, logic has no concern with the composition of myths; nor has mathematics, the sub-division of natural philosophy; but they may be employed, if at all, by that department of practical philosophy which deals with the individual man, and by that department of theology which has to do with initiation and the Mysteries. For nature loves to hide her secrets,[176] and she does not suffer the hidden truth about the essential nature of the gods to be flung in naked words to the ears of the profane. Now there are certain characteristics of ours that derive benefit from that occult and unknown nature, which nourishes not our souls alone but our bodies also, and brings us into the presence of the gods, and this I think often comes about by means of myths; when through riddles and the dramatic setting of myths that knowledge is insinuated into the ears of the multitude who cannot receive divine truths in their purest form.)

Φανεροῦ δὲ ἤδη γενομένου τίνι καὶ ποίῳ φιλοσοφίας εἴδει καὶ μυθογραφεῖν ἔσθ᾽ ὅτε προσήκει· πρὸς γὰρ τῷ λόγῳ μαρτυρεῖ τούτοις ἡ τῶν προλαβόντων ἀνδρῶν προαίρεσις. ἐπεὶ καὶ Πλάτωνι πολλὰ μεμυθολόγηται περὶ τῶν ἐν ᾅδου πραγμάτων θεολογοῦντι καὶ πρό γε τούτου τῷ τῆς Καλλιόπης, [217] Ἀντισθένει δὲ καὶ Ξενοφῶντι καὶ αὐτῷ Πλάτωνι πραγματευομένοις ἠθικάς τινας ὑποθέσεις οὐ παρέργως, ἀλλὰ μετά τινος ἐμμελείας ἡ τῶν μύθων ἐγκαταμέμικται γραφή, οὓς σ᾽[177] ἐχρῆν, εἴπερ ἐβούλου, μιμούμενον ἀντὶ μὲν Ἡρακλέους μεταλαμβάνειν Περσέως ἢ Θησέως [pg 104] τινὸς ὄνομα καὶ τὸν Ἀντισθένειον τύπον ἐγχαράττειν, ἁντὶ δὲ τῆς Προδίκου σκηνοποιιας ἀμφὶ τοῖν ἀμφοῖν [B] τούτοιν θεοῖν ἑτέραν ὁμοίαν εἰσάγειν εἰς τὸ θέατρον.

(It is now evident what branch and what sort of philosophy may properly on occasion employ myths. And to support my argument I call to witness the authority of those philosophers who were the first to use myths. Plato for instance in his theological descriptions of life in Hades often uses myths, and the son[178] of Calliope before him. And when Antisthenes and Xenophon and Plato himself discuss certain ethical theories they use myths as one of the ingredients, and not casually but of set purpose. Now if you too wished to use myths you ought to have imitated these philosophers, and instead of Heracles you should have introduced the name of Perseus or Theseus, let us say, and have written in the style of Antisthenes; and in place of the dramatic setting used by Prodicus,[179] in treating of those two gods[180] you should have introduced into your theatre another setting of the same sort.)

Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ τῶν τελεστικῶν μύθων ἐπεμνήσθην, φέρε νῦν ὁποίους εἶναι χρὴ τοὺς ἑκατέρῳ τῶν μερῶν ἁρμόττοντας αὐτοὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ἰδεῖν πειραθῶμεν, οὐκέτι μαρτύρων παλαιῶν ἐν πᾶσι προσδεόμενοι, ἑπόμενοι δὲ νέοις ἴχνεσιν ἀνδρός, ὃν ἐγὼ μετὰ τοὺς θεοὺς ἐξ ἴσης Ἀριστοτέλει καὶ Πλάτωνι ἄγαμαί τε τέθηπά τε. [C] φησὶ δὲ οὐχ ὑπὲρ πάντων οὗτος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν τελεστικῶν, οὓς παρέδωκεν ἡμῖν Ὀρφεὺς ὁ τὰς ἁγιωτάτας τελετὰς καταστησάμενος. τὸ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς μύθοις ἀπεμφαῖνον αὐτῷ τούτῳ προοδοποιεῖ πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν. ὅσῳ γὰρ μᾶλλον παράδοξόν ἐστι καὶ τερατῶδες τὸ αἴνιγμα, τοσούτῳ μᾶλλον ἔοικε διαμαρτύρεσθαι, μὴ τοῖς αὐτόθεν λεγομένοις πιστεύειν, ἀλλὰ τὰ λεληθότα περιεργάζεσθαι καὶ μὴ πρότερον ἀφίστασθαι, [D] πρὶν ἂν ὑπὸ θεοῖς ἡγεμόσιν ἐκφανῆ γενόμενα τὸν ἐν ἡμῖν τελέσῃ, μᾶλλον δὲ τελειώσῃ νοῦν καὶ εἰ δή τι κρεῖττον ἡμῖν ὑπάρχει τοῦ νοῦ, αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἑνὸς καὶ τἀγαθοῦ μοῖρά τις ὀλίγη τὸ πᾶν ἀμερίστως ἔχουσα, τῆς ψυχῆς πλήρωμα καὶ ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ καὶ ἀγαθῷ συνέχουσα [pg 106] πᾶσαν αὐτὴν διὰ τῆς ὑπερεχούσης καὶ χωριστῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐξῃρημένης παρουσίας. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ἀμφὶ τὸν μέγαν Διόνυσον οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως ἐπῆλθέ μοι βακχεύοντι μανῆναι· [218] τὸν βοῦν δὲ ἐπιτίθημι τῇ γλώττῃ· περὶ τῶν ἀρρήτων γὰρ οὐδὲν χρὴ λέγειν. ἀλλά μοι θεοὶ μὲν ἐκείνων καὶ ὑμῶν δὲ τοῖς πολλοῖς, ὅσοι τέως ἐστὲ τούτων ἀμύητοι, τὴν ὄνησιν δοῖεν.

(But since I have mentioned also the myths that are suited to initiation, let us ourselves independently try to see what sort of myths they must be that suit one or the other of those two branches of philosophy;[181] and no longer need we call in the aid of witnesses from the remote past for all points, but we will follow in the fresh footprints of one[182] whom next to the gods I revere and admire, yes, equally with Aristotle and Plato. He does not treat of all kinds of myths but only those connected with initiation into the Mysteries, such as Orpheus, the founder of the most sacred of all the Mysteries, handed down to us. For it is the incongruous element in myths that guides us to the truth.[183] I mean that the more paradoxical and prodigious the riddle is the more it seems to warn us not to believe simply the bare words but rather to study diligently the hidden truth, and not to relax our efforts until under the guidance of the gods those hidden things become plain, and so initiate or rather perfect our intelligence or whatever we possess that is more sublime than the intelligence, I mean that small particle of the One and the Good which contains the whole indivisibly, the complement of the soul, and in the One and the Good comprehends the whole of soul itself through the prevailing and separate and distinct presence of the One. But I was impelled I know not how to rave with his own sacred frenzy when I spoke like this of the attributes of great Dionysus[184]; and now I set an ox on my tongue:[185] for I may not reveal what is too sacred for speech. However, may the gods grant to me and to many of you who have not as yet been initiated into these Mysteries to enjoy the blessings thereof!)

Ὑπὲρ δὲ ὧν εἰπεῖν τε καὶ ἀκοῦσαι θέμις καὶ ἀνεμέσητον ἀμφοτέροις ἐστὶ, πᾶς λόγος ὁ προφερόμενος ἔκ τε λέξεως καὶ διανοίας σύγκειται. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ καὶ ὁ μῦθος λόγος τίς ἐστιν, [B] ἐκ δυοῖν τούτοιν συγκείσεται. σκοπῶμεν δὲ ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν. ἔστιν ἁπλῆ τις ἐν λόγῳ παντὶ διάνοια, καὶ μέντοι καὶ κατὰ σχῆμα προάγεται, τὰ παραδείγματα δὲ ἀμφοῖν ἐστι πολλά. τὸ μὲν οὖν ἓν ἁπλοῦν ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲν δεῖται ποικιλίας, τὸ δ᾽ ἐσχηματισμένον ἔχει διαφορὰς ἐν ἑαυτῷ πολλάς, ὧν, εἴ τί σοι τῆς ῥητορικῆς ἐμέλησεν, οὐκ ἀξύνετος εἶ. τούτων δὴ τῶν κατὰ διάνοιαν σχημάτων ἁρμόττει τῷ μύθῳ τὰ πλεῖστα· πλὴν ἔμοιγε οὔθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν πολλῶν οὔθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τά γε νῦν ῥητέον, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ δυοῖν, τοῦ τε σεμνοῦ κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν καὶ τοῦ ἀπεμφαίνοντος. [C] τὰ δὲ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τὴν λέξιν γίνεται. μορφοῦται γάρ πως καὶ σχηματίζεται παρὰ τῶν μὴ προφερομένων εἰκῇ μηδ᾽ ὥσπερ χειμάρρους ἑλκόντων συρφετοὺς ῥημάτων ἐκ τῆς τριόδου· ἀλλὰ τοῖν δυοῖν τούτοιν, ὅταν μὲν ὑπὲρ τῶν θείων πλάττωμεν, σεμνὰ χρὴ πάνυ [pg 108] τὰ ῥήματα εἶναι καὶ τὴν λέξιν ὡς ἔνι μάλιστα σώφρονα καὶ καλὴν καὶ τοῖς θεοῖς πρεπωδεστάτην, τῶν αἰσχρῶν [D] δὲ μηδὲν καὶ βλασφήμων ἢ δυσσεβῶν, ὅπως μὴ τῷ πλήθει τῆς τοιαύτης ἀρχηγοὶ θρασύτητος γενώμεθα, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πρὸ τοῦ πλήθους αὐτοὶ τὸ περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς ἠσεβηκέναι προλάβωμεν. οὐδὲν οὖν ἀπεμφαῖνον εἶναι χρὴ περὶ τὰς τοιαύτας λέξεις, ἀλλὰ σεμνὰ πάντα καὶ καλὰ καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ καὶ θεῖα καὶ καθαρὰ καὶ τῆς τῶν θεῶν οὐσίας εἰς δύναμιν ἐστοχασμένα· [219] τὸ δὲ κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν ἀπεμφαῖνον τοῦ χρησίμου γιγνόμενον χάριν ἐγκριτέον, ὡς ἂν μή τινος ὑπομνήσεως ἔξωθεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι δεόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ λεγομένων τῷ μύθῳ διδασκόμενοι τὸ λανθάνον μῶσθαι καὶ πολυπραγμονεῖν ὑφ᾽ ἡγεμόσι τοῖς θεοῖς προθυμηθεῖεν. ἰδοῦ γὰρ ἔγωγε πολλῶν ἤκουσα λεγόντων ἄνθρωπον μὲν τὸν Διόνυσον, ἐπείπερ ἐκ Σεμέλης ἐγένετο, θεὸν δὲ διὰ θεουργίας [B] καὶ τελεστικῆς, ὥσπερ τὸν δεσπότην Ἡρακλέα διὰ τῆς βασιλικῆς ἀρετῆς εἰς τὸν Ὄλυμπον ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀνῆχθαι τοῦ Διός. ἀλλ᾽, ὦ τάν, εἶπον, οὐ ξυνίετε τοῦ μύθου φανερῶς αἰνιττομένου. ποῦ γὰρ ἡ γένεσίς ἐστιν ὥσπερ Ἡρακλέους, οὕτω δὴ[186] καὶ Διονύσου, ἔχουσα μὲν τὸ κρεῖττον καὶ ὑπερέχον καὶ ἐξῃρημένον, ἐν τῷ μετρίῳ δὲ ὅμως ἔτι τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως μένουσα καί [C] πως ἀφομοιουμένη πρὸς ἡμᾶς; Ἡρακλὴς δὲ λέγεται παιδίον γενέσθαι καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν αὐτῷ τὸ σῶμα τὸ θεῖον ἐπιδοῦναι, καὶ [pg 110] φοιτῆσαι διδασκάλοις ἱστόρηται, καὶ στρατεύσασθαι λέγεται καὶ κρατῆσαι πάντων, καμεῖν δὲ ὅμως κατὰ[187] τὸ σῶμα. καίτοι αὐτῷ ταῦτα μὲν ὑπῆρξε, μειζόνως δὲ ἢ κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον. ὅτε γὰρ ἐν τοῖς σπαργάνοις ἀποπνίγων τοὺς δράκοντας καὶ πρὸς αὐτὰ παραταττόμενος τὰ τῆς φύσεως στοιχεῖα, θάλπη καὶ κρυμούς, [D] εἶτα τοῖς ἀπορωτάτοις καὶ ἀμαχωτάτοις, ἐνδείᾳ λέγω τροφῆς καὶ ἐρημίᾳ, καὶ τὴν δι᾽ αὐτοῦ πορείαν οἶμαι τοῦ πελάγους ἐπὶ τῆς χρυσῆς κύλικος, ἣν ἐγὲ νομίζω μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς οὐ κύλικα εἶναι, βαδίσαι δὲ αὐτὸν ὡς ἐπὶ ξηρᾶς τῆς θαλάττης νενόμικα. τὶ γὰρ ἄπορον ἦν Ἡρακλεῖ; τί δ᾽ οὐχ ὑπήκουσεν αὐτοῦ τῷ θείῳ καὶ καθαρωτάτῳ σώματι, τῶν λεγομένων τούτων στοιχείων δουλευόντων αὐτοῦ τῇ δημιουργικῇ [220] καὶ τελεσιουργῷ τοῦ ἀχράντου καὶ καθαροῦ νοῦ δυνάμει; ὃν ὁ μέγας Ζεὺς διὰ τῆς Προνοίας Ἀθηνᾶς, ἐπιστήσας αὐτῷ φύλακα τὴν θεὸν ταύτην, ὅλην ἐξ ὅλου προέμενος αὑτοῦ,[188] τῷ κόσμῳ σωτῆρα ἐφύτευσεν, εἶτ᾽ ἐπανήγαγε διὰ τοῦ κεραυνίου πυρὸς πρὸς ἑαυτόν, ὑπὸ τῷ θείῳ συνθήματι τῆς αἰθερίας αὐγῆς ἥκειν παρ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τῷ παιδὶ κελεύσας. ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ μὲν τούτων ἐμοί τε καὶ ὑμῖν ἵλεως Ἡρακλῆς εἴη.

(And now to confine myself to what is lawful for us, both for me to say and for you to hear. Every discourse that is uttered consists of language and the thought to be expressed. Now a myth is a sort of discourse and so it will consist of these two. Let us consider them separately. In every discourse the thought is of two kinds, either simple or expressed in figures of speech; and there are many examples of both kinds. The one is simple and admits of no variety, but that which is embellished with figures has in itself many possibilities of variation with all of which you are yourself familiar if you have ever studied rhetoric; and most of these figures of thought are suited to myth. However I need not now discuss all or indeed many of them, but only two, that in which the thought is dignified and that in which it is paradoxical. The same rules apply also to diction. For this is given a certain shape and form by those who do not express themselves carelessly or sweep in the refuse of language from the highways like a winter torrent. And now to consider these two types. When we invent myths about sacred things our language must be wholly dignified and the diction must be as far as possible sober, beautiful, and entirely appropriate to the gods; there must be nothing in it base or slanderous or impious, for fear we should lead the common people into this sort of sacrilegious rashness; or rather for fear we should ourselves anticipate the common people in displaying impiety towards the gods. Therefore there must be no incongruous element in diction thus employed, but all must be dignified, beautiful, splendid, divine, pure, and as far as possible in conformity with the essential nature of the gods. But as regards the thought, the incongruous may be admitted, so that under the guidance of the gods men may be inspired to search out and study the hidden meaning, though they must not ask for any hint of the truth from others, but must acquire their knowledge from what is said in the myth itself.[189] For instance I have heard many people say that Dionysus was a mortal man because he was born of Semele, and that he became a god through his knowledge of theurgy and the Mysteries, and like our lord Heracles for his royal virtue was translated to Olympus by his father Zeus. “Nay, my good sir,” said I, “do you not perceive that the myth is obviously an allegory?” For in what sense do we regard the “birth” of Heracles, yes, and of Dionysus as well, since in their case birth has superior and surpassing and distinctive elements, even though it still falls within the limits of human nature, and up to a certain point resembles our own? Heracles for instance is said to have been a child, even as we are; his divine body grew gradually; we are informed that he was instructed by teachers;[190] they say that he carried on wars and defeated all his opponents, but for all that his body had to endure weariness. And in fact all this did in his case occur, but on a scale greater than human. For instance, while still in swaddling clothes he strangled the serpents and then opposed himself to the very elements of nature, the extremes of heat and cold and things the most difficult and hardest to contend with, I mean lack of food and loneliness;[191] and then there is his journey over the sea itself in a golden cup,[192] though, by the gods, I do not think it was really a cup, but my belief is that he himself walked on the sea as though it were dry land.[193] For what was impossible to Heracles? Which was there of the so-called elements that did not obey his divine and most pure body since they were subdued to the creative and perfecting force of his stainless and pure intelligence? For him did mighty Zeus, with the aid of Athene goddess of Forethought, beget to be the saviour of the world, and appointed as his guardian this goddess whom he had brought forth whole from the whole of himself; and later on he called him to his side through the flame of a thunderbolt, thus bidding his son to come to him by the divine signal of the ethereal rays of light. Now when we meditate on this, may Heracles be gracious to you and to me!)

Τὰ δὲ τῆς Διονύσου θρυλουμένης μὲν γενέσεως, οὔσης δὲ οὐ γενέσεως, [B] ἀλλὰ δαιμονίας ἐκφάνσεως κατὰ τί τοῖς ἀνθρωπικοῖς προσέοικεν; ἡ μήτηρ [pg 112] αὐτὸν κύουσα, φασίν, ὑπὸ τῆς Ἥρας ζηλοτυπούσης ἐξαπατηθεῖσα τὸν ἐραστὴν ἐξελιπάρησεν ἥκειν, ὡς παρὰ τὴν γαμετὴν εἴωθε φοιτᾶν, πρὸς ἑαυτήν· εἶτα οὐκ ἀνασχόμενον τὸ σωμάτιον τῶν κτυπημάτων[194] τοῦ Διὸς ὑπὸ τοῦ κεραυνοῦ κατεφλέγετο. πάντων δ᾽ ὁμοῦ πυρουμένων, Ἑρμῇ κελεύσας ὁ Ζεὺς ἁρπάσαι τὸν Διόνυσον καὶ τεμὼν τὸν αὑτοῦ μηρὸν ἐρράπτει· εἶτα ἐκεῖθεν, ἡνίκα ἐτελεσφορήθη τὸ βρέφος, [C] ὠδίνων ὁ Ζεὺς ἐπὶ τὰς νύμφας ἔρχεται· τὸ Λῦθι ῥάμμα δὲ αὗται τῷ μηρῷ προσεπᾴδουσαι τὸν διθύραμβον ἡμῖν εῖς φῶς προήγαγον· εἶτα ἐμάνη, φασίν, ὁ θεὸς ὑπὸ τῆς Ἥρας, ἔπαυσε δ᾽ αὐτῷ τὴν νόσον ἡ Μήτηρ τῶν θεῶν, ὁ δὲ ἦν αὐτίκα θεός. εἵποντο γοῦν οὐ Λίχας αὐτῷ καθάπερ Ἡρακλεῖ οὐδὲ Ἰόλεως οὐδὲ Τελαμὼν οὐδ᾽ Ὕλας οὐδ᾽ Ἄβδηρος, ἀλλὰ Σάτυροι καὶ Βακχαὶ [D] καὶ Πᾶνες καὶ δαιμόνων στρατιά. ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἀνθρωπικὴ μὲν ἡ σπορὰ διὰ τῶν κεραυνίων, ἡ δ᾽ ἀποκύησις ἀνθρωπικωτέρα, ἀμφοῖν δὲ τοῖν εἰρημένοιν προσομοιότερα τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις τὰ ἔργα; τί οὖν οὐ καταβάλλοντες τὸν λῆρον ἐκεῖνο πρῶτον ὑπὲρ τούτων ἴσμεν, ὡς Σεμέλη σοφὴ τὰ θεῖα; παῖς γὰρ ἦν Κάδμου τοῦ Φοίνικος, τούτοις δὲ καὶ ὁ θεὸς σοφίαν μαρτυρεῖ

(As for the commonly received legend about the birth of Dionysus, which was in fact no birth but a divine manifestation, in what respect was it like the birth of men? While he was still in his mother's womb she, as the story goes, was beguiled by jealous Hera to entreat her lover to visit her as he was wont to visit his spouse. And then her frail body could not endure the thunders of Zeus and began to be consumed by the lightning. But when everything there was being devoured by flames, Zeus bade Hermes snatch Dionysus forth, and he cut open his own thigh and sewed the babe therein.[195] Then in due course when the time was ripe for the child's birth, Zeus in the pangs of travail came to the nymphs, and they by their song over the thigh “Undo the stitching”[196] brought to light for us the dithyramb. Whereupon the god was driven mad by Hera, but the Mother of the Gods healed him of his sickness and he straightway became a god. And he had for followers not, like Heracles, Lichas for instance or Iolaus or Telamon or Hylas or Abderos, but Satyrs, Bacchanals, Pans and a whole host of lesser divinities. Do you perceive how much of human there is in this generation through the fire of a thunderbolt, that his delivery is even more human, and that his deeds, even more than these two that we have mentioned, resemble those of human beings? Now why do we not set aside all this nonsense and recognise herein first the fact that Semele was wise in sacred things? For she was the daughter of Phoenician Cadmus, and the god himself bears witness to the wisdom of the Phoenicians[197] when he says)

Πολλὰς καὶ Φοίνικες ὁδοὺς μακάρων ἐδάησαν

(“The Phoenicians too have learned many of the roads travelled by the blessed gods.”[198])

λέγων. [221] αἰσθέσθαι οὖν μοι δοκεῖ τοῦ θεοῦ τούτου πρώτη παρ᾽ Ἕλλησι καὶ τὴν ἐσομένην ἐπιφάνειαν [pg 114] αὐτοῦ οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν προαγορεύσασα κινῆσαι μὲν θᾶττον ἢ προσῆκον ἦν τινὰ τῶν περὶ αὐτὸν ὀργίων, οὐκ ἀνασχομένη τὸν εἱμαρμένον περιμεῖναι χρόνον, εἶτα ἀναλωθῆναι πρὸς τοῦ πυρὸς τοῦ ῥυέντος ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐδέδοκτο τῷ Διὶ κοινῇ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐνδοῦναι ἀρχὴν καταστάσεως ἑτέρας καὶ μεταβαλεῖν[199] αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ νομαδικοῦ βίου πρὸς [B] τὸν ἡμερώτερον, ἐξ Ἰνδῶν ὁ Διόνυσος αὔτοπτος ἐφαίνετο δαίμων, ἐπιφοιτῶν τὰς πόλεις, ἄγων μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ στρατιὰν πολλὴν δαιμονίων τινῶν[200] καὶ διδοὺς ἀνθρώποις κοινῇ μὲν ἅπασι σύμβολον τῆς ἐπιφανείας αὐτοῦ τὸ τῆς ἡμερίδος φυτόν, ὑφ᾽ οὗ μοι δοκοῦσιν, ἐξημερωθέντων αὐτοῖς τῶν περὶ τὸν βίον, Ἕλληνες τῆς ἐπωνυμίας αὐτὸ ταύτης ἀξιῶσαι, μητέρα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ προσειπεῖν τὴν Σεμέλην διὰ τὴν πρόρρησιν, ἄλλως τε καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τιμῶντος αὐτήν, [C] ἅτε πρώτην ἱερόφαντιν τῆς ἔτι μελλούσης ἐπιφοιτήσεως.

(I think then that she was the first among the Greeks to perceive that there was to be before long a visible manifestation of this god, and that she foretold it, and then that, sooner than was fitting, she gave the signal for certain of the mystic rites connected with his worship, because she had not the patience to wait for the appointed time, and thus she was consumed by the fire that fell upon her. But when it was the will of Zeus to bestow on all mankind in common a new order of things, and to make them pass from the nomadic to a more civilised mode of life, Dionysus came from India and revealed himself as very god made visible, visiting the cities of men and leading with him a great host of beings in some sort divine; and everywhere he bestowed on all men in common as the symbol of his manifestation the plant of “the gentle vine”; and since their lives were made more gentle by it the Greeks as I think gave it that name;[201] and they called Semele the mother of Dionysus because of the prediction that she had made, but also because the god honoured her as having been the first prophetess of his advent while it was yet to be.)

Οὔσης δέ, ὡς ἄν τις ἀκριβῶς σκοπῶν ἐξετάσειε, τῆς ἱστορίας τοιαύτης, οἱ τὸν Διόνυσον ὅστις ποτ᾽ ἐστὶ θεῶν ζητοῦντες τἀληθὲς ἔχον ὡς ἔφην εἰς μῦθον διεσκεύασαν, αἰνιττόμενοι τήν τε οὐσίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ κύησιν καὶ τὸν ἀγέννητον αὐτοῦ τόκον ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ[202] ..... ἐν τῷ παντί, καὶ τἆλλα ἐφεξῆς ὅσα τοῦ ζητεῖν ἦν ἄξια,[203] φράζειν δέ γ᾽ οὐ ῥᾴδια ἐμοί, [pg 116] τυχὸν μὲν [D] καὶ διὰ τὸ ἀγνοεῖν ἔτι περὶ αὐτῶν τὸ ἀκριβές, τυχὸν δὲ καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντι τὸν κρύφιον ἅμα καὶ φανερὸν θεὸν ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ προβάλλειν ἀκοαῖς ἀνεξετάστοις καὶ διανοίαις ἐπὶ πάντα μάλλον ἢ τὸ φιλοσοφεῖν τετραμμέναις.

(Now since this is the historical truth of these events if they are accurately considered and examined, those who sought to discover what sort of god Dionysus is worked into a myth the truth which is as I said, and expressed in an allegory both the essential nature of the god and his conception in his father Zeus among the intelligible gods, and further his birth independently of generation in this our world.[204] ... in the whole universe, and in their proper order all those other facts which are well worth studying but too difficult for me at any rate to describe; partly perhaps because I am still ignorant of the precise truth about them,[205] but perhaps also because I am unwilling to exhibit as in a theatre this god who is at once hidden and manifest, and that, too, to ears that have not sought after truth and to minds disposed to anything rather than the study of philosophy.)

Ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ μὲν τούτων ἴστω Διόνυσος αὐτός, ᾧ καὶ προσεύχομαι τάς τε ἐμὰς καὶ τὰς ὑμετέρας ἐκβακχεῦσαι φρένας ἐπὶ τὴν ἀληθῆ τῶν θεῶν γνῶσιν, ὡς ἂν μὴ πολὺν ἀβάκχευτοι χρόνον τῷ θεῷ μένοντες [222] ὁπόσα ὁ Πενθεὺς[206] πάθωμεν, ἴσως μὲν καὶ ζῶντες, πάντως δὲ ἀπαλλαγέντες τοῦ σώματος. ὅτῳ γὰρ ἂν[207] μὴ τὸ πεπληθυσμένον τῆς ζωῆς ὑπὸ τῆς ἑνοειδοῦς καὶ ἐν τῷ μεριστῷ παντελῶς ἀδιαιρέτου ὅλης τε ἐν πᾶσιν ἀμιγοῦς προüπαρχούσης οὐσίας τοῦ Διονύσου τελεσιουργηθῇ[208] διὰ τῆς περὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐνθέου βακχείας, τούτῳ κίνδυνος ἐπὶ πολλὰ ῥυῆναι τὴν ζωήν, ῥυεῖσαν δὲ διεσπάσθαι καὶ διασπασθεῖσαν οἴχεσθαι· [B] τὸ δὲ ῥυεῖσαν καὶ διασπασθεῖσαν μὴ προσέχων τις τοῖς ῥήμασιν ὑδάτιον μηδὲ λίνου μήρινθον ἀκροάσθω, ξυνιέτω δὲ τὰ λεγόμενα τρόπον ἄλλον, ὃν Πλάτων, ὃν Πλωτίνος, ὃν Πορφύριος, ὃν ὁ δαιμόνιος Ἰάμβλιχος. ὃς δ᾽ ἂν μὴ ταύτῃ ποιῇ, γελάσεται μέν, ἴστω μέντοι [pg 118] Σαρδώνιον γελῶν ἔρημος ὢν ἀεὶ τῆς τῶν θεῶν γνώσεως, ἧς ἀντάξιον οὐδὲ τὸ πᾶσαν ὁμοῦ μετὰ τῆς τῶν Ῥωμαίων [C] ἐπιτροπεῦσαι τὴν βαρβάρων ἔγωγε θείμην ἄν, οὐ μὰ τὸν ἐμὸν δεσπότην Ἥλιον. ἀλλά με πάλιν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅστις θεῶν ἐπὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἐβάκχευσεν οὐ προελόμενον.

(However let Dionysus himself decide about these things, though I do indeed implore him to inspire my mind and yours with his own sacred frenzy for the true knowledge of the gods, so that we may not by remaining too long uninspired by him have to suffer the fate of Pentheus, perhaps even while we are alive, but most certainly after death has freed us from the body. For he in whom the abundance of life has not been perfected by the essential nature of Dionysus, uniform and wholly indivisible as it is in the divisible world and pre-existing whole and unmixed in all things, he I say who has not been perfected by means of the Bacchic and divine frenzy for the god, runs the risk that his life may flow into too many channels, and as it flows be torn to shreds, and hence come to naught. But when I say “flow” or “torn to shreds” no one must consider the bare meaning of the words and suppose that I mean a mere trickle of water or a thread of linen, but he must understand these words in another sense, that used by Plato, Plotinus, Porphyry and the inspired Iamblichus. One who does not interpret them thus will laugh at them no doubt, but let me assure him that it will be a Sardonic laugh,[209] since he will be forever deprived of that knowledge of the gods which I hold to be more precious than to rule over the whole world, Roman and barbarian put together, yea, I swear it by my lord Helios. But again some god or other and no choice of my own has made me rave with this Bacchic frenzy.)

οὗ δὲ ἕνεκεν ἔφην αὐτά· κατὰ μὲν τὴν διάνοιαν ἀπεμφαίνοντες ὅταν οἱ μῦθοι γίγνωνται περὶ τῶν θείων, αὐτόθεν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ βοῶσι καὶ διαμαρτύρονται μὴ πιστεύειν ἁπλῶς, ἀλλὰ τὸ λεληθὸς σκοπεῖν καὶ διερευνᾶσθαι. τοσούτῳ δ᾽ ἐστὶ κρεῖττον ἐν τούτοις τοῦ σεμνοῦ τὸ ἀπεμφαῖνον, ὅσῳ διὰ μὲν ἐκείνου καλοὺς λίαν καὶ μεγάλους καὶ ἀγαθούς, [D] ἀνθρώπους δὲ ὅμως τοὺς θεοὺς κίνδυνος νομίσαι, διὰ δὲ τῶν ἀπεμφαινόντων ὑπεριδόντας τῶν ἐν τῷ φανερῷ λεγομένων ἐπὶ τὴν ἐξῃρημένην αὐτῶν οὐσίαν καὶ ὑπερέχουσαν πάντα τὰ ὄντα καθαρὰν νόησιν ἐλπὶς ἀναδραμεῖν.

(To go back then to what led me to say all this. Whenever myths on sacred subjects are incongruous in thought, by that very fact they cry aloud, as it were, and summon us not to believe them literally but to study and track down their hidden meaning. And in such myths the incongruous element is even more valuable than the serious and straightforward, the more so that when the latter is used there is risk of our regarding the gods as exceedingly great and noble and good certainly, but still as human beings, whereas when the meaning is expressed incongruous there is some hope that men will neglect the more obvious sense of the words, and that pure intelligence may rise to the comprehension of the distinctive nature of the gods that transcends all existing things.)

[223] Αἴτιαι μὲν οὖν αὗται τοῦ τὴν τελεστικὴν καὶ μυσταγωγὸν φιλοσοφίαν τὰ μὲν ῥήματα παντὸς μᾶλλον εὐαγῆ καὶ σεμνὰ προφέρεσθαι, κατὰ δὲ τὴν διάνοιαν ἀλλοιοτέραν ποιεῖσθαι τὴν ἐξήγησιν τῶν τοιούτων. ὁ δὲ τῆς τῶν ἠθῶν ἐπανορθώσεως ἕνεκα τοὺς λόγους πλάττων καὶ μύθους παράγων δράτω[210] τοῦτο μὴ πρὸς ἄνδρας, ἀλλὰ πρὸς παῖδας [pg 120] ἤτοι καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν ἢ τῷ φρονεῖν, πάντως δὲ τῶν λόγων τούτων δεομένους. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἡμεῖς σοι παῖδες ἐφάνημεν εἴτε [B] ἐγὼ εἴτε Ἀνατόλιος οὑτοσί, συγκαταρίθμει δὲ τούτῳ καὶ τὸν Μεμμόριον καὶ τὸν Σαλούστιον, πρὸς τούτοις δέ, εἰ βούλει, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἑξῆς, Ἀντικύρας σοι δεῖ· τί γὰρ ἂν ἀκκίζοιτί τις; ἐπεὶ πρὸς τῶν θεῶν καὶ πρὸς αὐτοῦ τοῦ μύθου, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦ κοινῇ πάντων βασιλέως Ἡλίου, τί σοι μέγα ἢ μικρὸν πεποίηται ἔργον; τίνι παρέστης ἀγωνιζομένῳ μετὰ τοὺ δικαίου; τίνα ἐθεράπευσας πενθοῦντα, [C] τῷ λόγῳ διδάξας, ὅτι μὴ κακὸν ὁ θάνατος μήτε τῷ παθόντι μήτε τοῖς οἰκείοις αὐτοῦ; τίς δ᾽ αἰτιάσεταί σε τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μειρακίσκος σωφροσύνης, ὅτι πεποίηκας αὐτὸν ἐξ ἀσώτου σώφρονα καὶ καλὸν οὐ τὸ σῶμα μόνον, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον τὴν ψυχὴν φαίνεσθαι; τίνα δὲ ἄσκησιν ἐποιήσω τοῦ βίου; τί δέ σοι ἄξιον τῆς Διογένους βακτηρίας ἢ ναὶ μὰ Δία τῆς παρρησίας πεποίηται; ἔργον οἴει μέγα βακτηρίαν λαβεῖν ἢ τρίχας ἀνεῖναι, [D] καὶ περινοστεῖν τὰς πόλεις καὶ τὰ στρατόπεδα, καὶ τοῖς μὲν βελτίστοις λοιδορεῖσθαι, τοὺς δὲ χειρίστους θεραπεύειν; εἰπὲ πρὸς τοῦ Διὸς καὶ πρὸς τουτωνὶ τῶν ἀκροωμένων, οἷ δι᾽ ὑμᾶς τὴν φιλοσοφίαν ἐκτρέπονται, ἀνθ᾽ ὅτου πρὸς μὲν τὸν μακαρίτην Κωνστάντιον εἰς Ἰταλίαν ἦλθες, οὐκέτι μέντοι καὶ μέχρι τῶν Γαλλιῶν; καίτοι πορευθεὶς πρὸς ἡμᾶς, εἰ μηδὲν ἄλλο, ξυνεῖναι γοῦν σου τῆς φωνῆς μᾶλλον [pg 122] δυναμένῳ πλησιάζειν ἔμελλες ἀνθρώπῳ. [224] τί δὲ καὶ τὸ περιθοιτᾶν πανταχοῦ καὶ παρέχειν πράγματα ταῖς ἡμιόνοις; ἀκούω δὲ ἔγωγε καὶ τοῖς τὰς ἡμιόνους ἐλαύνουσιν, οἳ μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς ἢ τοὺς στρατιώτας πεφρίκασι· χρῆσθαι γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ξύλοις[211] ἀκούω τινὰς ὑμῶν χαλεπώτερον ἢ τοῖς ξίφεσιν ἐκεῖνοι. γίγνεσθε οὖν αὐτοῖς εἰκότως φοβερώτεροι. πάλαι μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν ἐθέρμην ἐγὼ τοῦτο τὸ ὄνομα, [B] νυνὶ δὲ αὐτὸ ἔοικα καὶ γράψειν. ἀποτακτιστάς τινας ὀνομάζουσιν οἱ δυσσεβεῖς Γαλιλαῖοι· τούτων οἱ πλείους μικρὰ προέμενοι πολλὰ πάνυ, μᾶλλον δὲ τὰ πάντα πανταχόθεν ξυγκομίζουσι, καὶ προσκτῶνται[212] τὸ τιμᾶσθαι καὶ δορυφορεῖσθαι καὶ θεραπεύεσθαι. τοιοῦτόν τι καὶ τὸ ὑμέτερον ἔργον ἐστί, πλὴν ἴσως τοῦ χρηματίζεσθαι. τοῦτο δὲ οὐ παρ᾽ ὑμᾶς γίγνεται, παρ᾽ ἡμᾶς δέ· συνετώτεροι γάρ ἐσμεν τῶν ἀνοήτων ἐκείνων· ἴσως δὲ καὶ διὰ τὸ μηδὲν ὑμῖν εἶναι πρόσχημα τοῦ φορολογεῖν εὐπροσώπως, [C] ὁποῖον ἐκείνοις, ἣν λέγουσιν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως ἐλεημοσύνην, τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλα γε πάντα ἐστὶν ὑμῖν τε κἀκείνοις παραπλήσια. καταλελοίπατε τὴν πατρίδα ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνοι, περιφοιτᾶτε πάντη καὶ τὸ στρατόπεδον διωχλήσατε μᾶλλον ἐκείνων καὶ ἰταμώτερον· οἱ μὲν γὰρ καλούμενοι, ὑμεῖς δὲ καὶ ἀπελαυνόμενοι. καὶ τί χρηστὸν ἐκ τούτων ὑμῖν ἐγένετο, [D] μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἡμῖν τοῖς ἄλλοις; ἀνῆλθεν ὁ Ἀσκληπιάδης, εἶτα ὁ Σερηνιανός, εἶτα ὁ Χύτρων, εἶτα οὐκ οἶδα παιδάριον ὅ, τι ξανθὸν καὶ εὔμηκες, εἶτα σύ, καὶ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν ἄλλοι δὶς τοσοῦτοι. [pg 124] τί οὖν ἐκ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἀνόδου γέγονεν ἀγαθόν, ὦ λῷστοι; τίς ᾔσθετο πόλις ἢ τίς ἰδιώτης τῆς ὑμετέρας παρρησίας; οὐκ ἀφρόνως μὲν τὸ ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἵλεσθε τὴν ἐπὶ τὸν οὐδὲ ἰδεῖν ὑμᾶς θέλοντα βασιλέα πορείαν, ἀνελθόντες δὲ ἀφρονέστερον αὐτῇ καὶ ἀμαθέστερον καὶ μανιωδέστερον ἐχρήσασθε, κολακεύσαντες ἅμα καὶ ὑλακτήσαντες καὶ βιβλία δόντες [225] καὶ ταῦτα προσαχθῆναι[213] προσλιπαρήσαντες; οὐδένα ὑμῶν οἶμαι ἐγὼ τοσαυτάκις εἰς φιλοόοφου φοιτῆσαι, ὁσάκις εἰς ἀντιγραφέως, ὥστε ὑμῖν Ἀκαδήμεια καὶ Λύκειον ἀντὶ τῆς Ποικίλης τε ἦν τῶν βασιλείων τὰ πρόθυρα.

(These then are the reasons why that branch of philosophy which is connected with initiation and the doctrines of the Mysteries ought by all means to be expressed in devout and serious language, while as regards the thought the narrative may be expounded in a style that has stranger qualities. But one who is inventing tales for the purpose of reforming morals and inserts myths therein, does so not for men but for those who are children whether in years or intelligence, and who on all accounts stand in need of such tales. If, however, you took us for children, me, for instance, or Anatolius here, and you may reckon with us Memmorius also and Sallust and add if you please all the others in due order, then you need a voyage to Anticyra.[214] For why should one pretend to be polite? Tell me, I ask, in the name of the gods, and of myth itself, or rather in the name of Helios the King of all the universe, what have you ever accomplished, great or small? When did you ever champion one who was resisting oppression and had right on his side? When did you ever comfort the mourner and teach him by your arguments that death is not an evil either for him who has suffered it or for his friends? What youth will ever give you the credit for his temperance, and say that you have made him show himself sober instead of dissolute, and beautiful not merely in body but far more in soul? What strenuous discipline have you ever embraced? What have you ever done to make you worthy of the staff of Diogenes or still more, by Zeus, of his freedom of speech? Do you really think it so great an achievement to carry a staff and let your hair grow, and haunt cities and camps uttering calumnies against the noblest men, and flattering the vilest? Tell me in the name of Zeus and of this audience now present, who are disgusted with philosophy because of men of your sort, why was it that you visited the late Emperor Constantius in Italy but could not travel as far as Gaul? And yet if you had come to me you would at any rate have associated with one who was better able to comprehend your language. What do you gain by travelling about in all directions and wearing out the very mules you ride? Yes, and I hear that you wear out the mule drivers as well, and that they dread the sight of you Cynics even more than of soldiers. For I am told that some of you belabour them more cruelly with your staffs than do the soldiers with their swords, so that they are naturally more afraid of you. Long ago I gave you a nickname and now I think I will write it down. It is “monks,”[215] a name applied to certain persons by the impious Galilaeans. They are for the most part men who by making small sacrifices gain much or rather everything from all sources, and in addition secure honour, crowds of attendants and flattery. Something like that is your method, except perhaps for uttering divine revelations: but this is not your custom, though it is ours; for we are wiser than those insensate men. And perhaps too there is this difference that you have no excuse for levying tribute on specious pretexts as they do; which they call “alms,” whatever that may mean. But in all other respects your habits and theirs are very much alike. Like them you have abandoned your country, you wander about all over the world, and you gave more trouble than they did at my headquarters, and were more insolent. For they were at any rate invited to come, but you we tried to drive away. And what good have you, or rather, what have the rest of us derived from all this? First arrived Asclepiades, then Serenianus, then Chytron, then a tall boy with yellow hair—I don't know his name—then you, and with you all twice as many more. And now, my good sirs, what good has come from your journey? What city or individual has had any experience of your alleged freedom of speech? Was it not foolish of you to choose in the first place to make this journey to an Emperor who did not even wish to set eyes on you? And when you had arrived, did you not behave even more foolishly and ignorantly and insanely in flattering and barking at me in the same breath, and offering me your books, and moreover imploring that they should be taken to me? I do not believe that any one of you ever visited a philosopher's school as diligently as you did my secretary: in fact the entrance to the Palace stood for you in place of the Academy and the Lyceum and the Portico.)

Οὐκ ἀπάξετε ταῦτα; οὐ καταβαλεῖτε νῦν γοῦν, εἰ καὶ μὴ πρότερον, ὅτε ὑμῖν οὐδέν ἐστι πλέον ἀπὸ τῆς κόμης καὶ τῆς βακτηρίας; πῶς δὲ καὶ γέγονεν ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν εὐκαταφρόνητος ἡ φιλοσοφία; τῶν ῥητορικῶν [B] οἱ δυσμαθέστατοι καὶ οὐδ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως Ἑρμοῦ τὴν γλῶτταν ἐκκαθαρθῆναι δυνάμενοι, φρενωθῆναι δὲ οὐδὲ πρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς σὺν τῷ Ἑρμῇ, τοῦτο ἐκ τῆς ἀγοραίου καὶ περιτρεχούσης ἁρπάσαντες ἐντρεχείας· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐν παροιμίᾳ περιφερόμενον αὐτὸ γιγνώσκουσι τὸ ὅτι βότρυς πρὸς βότρυν πεπαίνεται· ὁρμῶσιν ἐπὶ τὸν Κυνισμόν· βακτηρία, τρίβων, [C] κόμη, τὸ ἐντεῦθεν ἀμαθία, θράσος, ἰταμότης καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα. τὴν σύντομον, φασίν, ὁδὸν καὶ σύντονον ἐπὶ τὴν [pg 126] ἀρετὴν ἰέναι[216] ὄφελον καὶ ὑμεῖς τὴν μακρὰν ἐπορεύεσθε· ῥᾷον ἂν δι᾽ ἐκείνης ἢ διὰ ταύτης ἤλθετε. οὐκ ἴστε, ὅτι μεγάλας ἔχουσιν αἱ σύντομοι τὰς χαλεπότητας; καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς λεωφόροις ὁ μὲν τὴν σύντομον ἐλθεῖν δυνηθεὶς ῥᾷον ἐκπερίεισι τὴν κύκλῳ, οὐκέτι μέντοι τὸ ἀνάπαλιν ὁ κύκλῳ πορευθεὶς ἔλθοι ἂν πάντως [D] καὶ τὴν ἐπίτομον, οὕτω δὴ[217] καὶ ἐν τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ τέλος τέ ἑστι καὶ ἀρχὴ μία γνῶναί τε ἑαυτὸν καὶ ἀφομοιωθῆναι τοῖς θεοῖς· ἀρχὴ μὲν οὖν ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι, τέλος δὲ ἡ πρὸς τοὺς κρείττονας ὁμοιότης.

(Have done with all this nonsense! At any rate lay it aside now if not before, when you can get no advantage from your long hair and your staff. Shall I tell you how you have caused philosophy to be lightly esteemed? It is because the most ignorant of the rhetoricians, those whose tongues not King Hermes himself could purify, and who could not be made wise by Athene herself with the aid of Hermes, having picked up their knowledge from their industry in frequenting public places,—for they do not know the truth of the current proverb, “Grape ripens near grape”[218]—then all rush into Cynicism. They adopt the staff, the cloak, the long hair, the ignorance that goes with these, the impudence, the insolence, and in a word everything of the sort. They say that they are travelling the short and ready road to virtue.[219] I would that you were going by the longer! For you would more easily arrive by that road than by this of yours. Are you not aware that short cuts usually involve one in great difficulties? For just as is the case with the public roads, a traveller who is able to take a short cut will more easily than other men go all the way round, whereas it does not at all follow that he who went round could always go the short cut, so too in philosophy the end and the beginning are one, namely, to know oneself and to become like the gods. That is to say, the first principle is self-knowledge, and the end of conduct is the resemblance to the higher powers.)

Ὅστις οὖν Κυνικὸς εἶναι ἐθέλει, πάντων ὑπεριδὼν τῶν νομισμάτων καὶ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων δοξῶν, εἰς ἑαυτὸν καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπέστραπται πρότερον. ἐκείνῳ τὸ χρυσίον οὐκ ἔστι χρυσίον, οὐχ ἡ ψάμμος ψάμμος, εἰ πρὸς ἀμοιβήν τις αὐτὰ ἀξετάζοι καὶ τῆς ἀξίας αὐτῶν ἐπιτρέψειεν αὐτῷ τιμητῇ γενέσθαι· [226] γῆν γὰρ αὐτὰ οἶδεν ἀμφότερα. τὸ σπανιώτερον δὲ καὶ τὸ ῥᾷον ἀνθρώπων εἶναι κενοδοξίας ταῦτα καὶ ἀμαθίας νενόμικεν ἔργα· τὸ αἰσχρὸν ἢ καλὸν οὐκ ἐν τοῖς ἐπαινουμένοις ἢ ψεγομένοις τίθεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τῇ φύσει· φεύγει τὰς περιττ`ας τροφάς· ἀποστρέφεται δὲ τὰ ἀφροδίσια. βιαζομένου δὲ τοῦ σώματος, οὐ δόξῃ προστέτηκεν οὐδὲ περιμένει τὸν μάγειρον καὶ τὰ ὑποτρίμματα καὶ τὴν κνίσσαν, οὐδὲ τὴν Φρύνην οὐδὲ τὴν Λαΐδα οὐδὲ τὴν τοῦ δεῖνος[220] περιβλέπεται γαμετὴν οὐδὲ [B] τὸ θυγάτριον οὐδὲ τὴν θεράπαιναν· ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἔνι μάλιστα ἐκ τῶν [pg 128] προστυχόντων ἀποπλήσας τὴν θεραπείαν τοῦ σώματος καὶ τὸ ἐνοχλοῦν ἐξ αὐτοῦ παρωσάμενος, ἄνωθεν ἐκ τῆς Ὀλύμπου κορυφῆς ἐπιβλέπει τοὺς ἄλλους

(Therefore he who desires to be a Cynic despises all the usages and opinions of men, and turns his mind first of all to himself and the god. For him gold is not gold or sand sand, if one enquire into their value with a view to exchanging them, and leave it to him to rate them at their proper worth: for he knows that both of them are but earth. And the fact that one is scarcer and the other easier to obtain he thinks is merely the result of the vanity and ignorance of mankind. He will judge of the baseness or nobility of an action, not by the applause or blame of men but by its intrinsic nature. He avoids any excess in food, and renounces the pleasures of love. When he is forced to obey the needs of the body he is not the slave of opinion, nor does he wait for a cook and sauces and a savoury smell, nor does he ever look about for Phryne or Lais or So-and-so's wife or young daughter or serving-maid. But as far as possible he satisfies his body's needs with whatever comes to hand, and by thrusting aside all hindrances derived from the body he contemplates from above, from the peaks of Olympus, other men who are)

Ἄτης ἐν λειμῶνι κατὰ σκότον ἠλάσκοντας,

(“Wandering in darkness in the meadow of Ate,”[221])

ὑπὲρ ὀλίγων παντάπασιν ἀπολαύσεων ὑπομένοντας ὅσα οὐδὲ παρὰ τὸν Κωκυτὸν καὶ τὸν Ἀχέροντα θρυλοῦσιν οἱ κομψότεροι τῶν ποιητῶν. ἡ σύντομος ὁδός ἐστιν αὕτη. [C] δεῖ γὰρ αὐτὸν ἀθρόως ἐκστῆναι ἑαυτοῦ καὶ γνῶναι, ὅτι θεῖός ἐστι, καὶ τὸν νοῦν μὲν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἀτρύτως καὶ ἀμετακινήτως συνέχειν ἐν τοῖς θείοις καὶ ἀχράντοις καὶ καθαροῖς νοήμασιν, ὀλιγωρεῖν δὲ πάντη τοῦ σώματος καὶ νομίζειν αὐτὸ κατὰ τὸν Ἡράκλειτον κοπρίων ἐκβλητότερον, ἐκ τοῦ ῥᾴστου δὲ αὑτῷ τὰς θεραπείας ἀποπληροῦν, ἕως ἂν ὁ θεὸς ὥσπερ ὀργάνῳ τῷ σώματι χρῆσθαι ἐπιτάττῃ.

(and for the sake of a few wholly trifling pleasures are undergoing torments greater than any by the Cocytus or Acheron such as the most ingenious of the poets are always telling us about. Now the true short cut to philosophy is this. A man must completely come out of himself and recognise that he is divine, and not only keep his mind untiringly and steadfastly fixed on divine and stainless and pure thoughts, but he must also utterly despise his body, and think it, in the words of Heracleitus, “more worthless than dirt.”[222] And by the easiest means he must satisfy his body's needs so long as the god commands him to use it as an instrument.)

Ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ὡς φασὶ ταύτῃ.[223] ἐπανάξω δὲ ὅθεν ἐξέβην. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τοὺς μύθους προσήκει πρὸς παῖδας ἤτοι τῷ φρονεῖν, [D] κἂν ἄνδρες ὦσιν, ἢ καὶ τοῖς καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν παιδαρίοις ἀπαγγέλλειν, ἐξεταστέον ὅπως μήτε εἰς θεοὺς μήτε εἰς ἀνθρώπους πλημμελὲς ᾿ἤ, καθάπερ ἔναγχος, δυσσεβές τι ῥηθείη· καὶ προσέτι τοῦτο ἐν ἅπασιν ἀκριβῶς βασανιστέον, εἰ πιθανός, εἰ τοῖς πράγμασι προσφυής, εἰ μῦθός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ πλαττόμενος. ἐπεὶ τό γε νῦν ὑπὸ σοῦ πεποιημένον οὐ μῦθός ἐστι σός·[224] καίτοι τοῦτό γε ἐνεανιεύσω· ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν μῦθος [pg 130] ἐστι παλαιός, [227] ἐφήρμοσας δὲ αὐτὸν σὺ πράγμασιν ἑτέροις, ὅπερ οἶμαι ποιεῖν εἰώθασιν οἱ τῇ τροπικῇ χρώμενοι τὼν νοημάτων κατασκευῇ· πολὺς δὲ ἐν τούτοις ὁ Πάριός ἐστι ποιητής. ἔοικας οὖν οὐδὲ πεποιηκὼς μῦθον, ὦ ξυνετώτατε, μάτην νεανιεύεσθαι· καίτοι τοῦτο τίτθης ἔργον ἐστὶν εὐτραπέλου. Πλουτάρχου δὲ εἰ τὰ μυθικὰ διηγήματα τῶν σῶν εἴσω χειρῶν ἀφῖκτο, οὔποτ᾽ ἂν ἐλελήθει σε, τίνι διαφέρει πλάσαι τε ἐξ ἀρχῆς μῦθον καὶ τὸν κείμενον ἐφαρμόσαι πράγμασιν οἰκείοις. [B] ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μή σε τὴν σύντομον ὁδεύοντα βίβλοις ἐυβαλὼν μακραῖς καὶ δυσελίκτοις ἐπίσχω μικρὰ καὶ πεδήσω· σὺ δὲ οὐδὲ τὸν Δημοσθένους ἀκήκοας μῦθον, ὃν ἐποίησεν ὁ Παιανιεὺς πρὸς τοὺς Ἀθηναίους, ἡνίκα ὁ Μακεδὼν ἐξῄτει τοὺς Ἁθηναίους ῥήτορας. ἐχρῆν οὖν τι τοιοῦτο πλάσαι· ἢ πρὸς τῶν θεῶν ἔργον ἦν εἰπεῖν μυθάριόν τι τοιοῦτον; ἀναγκάσεις δέ με καὶ μυθοποιὸν γενέσθαι.

(So much for that, as the saying is.[225] Now to go back to the point at which I digressed.[226] Since, as I was saying, myths ought to be addressed either to those who though grown men are children in intelligence, or to those who in actual years are mere children, we must take pains to utter in them no word that is offensive to gods or men or anything impious, as was done recently. And moreover we must in all cases apply careful tests to see whether the myth is plausible, closely related to the matter discussed and whether what is invented is really a myth. Now what you composed lately is not your own myth though you boasted that it was. Nay, your myth was an old one and you did but adapt it to fresh circumstances, as I believe people are in the habit of doing who use tropes and figures of thought. The poet of Paros[227] for instance is much given to this style. It seems then that you did not even invent your myth, my very clever friend, and that yours was an idle boast. Though in fact the thing is done by any nurse with an inventive turn. And if the mythical tales of Plutarch had ever fallen into your hands you would have failed to observe what a difference there is between inventing a myth from the beginning and adapting to one's own purpose a myth that already exists. But I must not detain you even for a moment or hinder you on your way along that short cut to wisdom by making you embark on books that are long and hard to read. You have not even heard of the myth by Demosthenes which he of the Paeanian deme addressed to the Athenians when the Macedonian demanded that the Athenian orators be given up. You ought to have invented something of that sort. In Heaven's name was it too hard for you to relate some little myth of the kind? You will force me too to become a myth-maker.)

[C] Πλουσίῳ ἀνδρὶ πρόβατα ἦν πολλὰ καὶ ἀγέλαι βοῶν καὶ αἰπόλια πλατέ αἰγῶν, ἵπποι δὲ αὐτῷ πολλάκις μυρίαι ἕλος κάτα βουκολέοντο, καὶ ποιμένες δοῦλοί τε καὶ ἐλεύθεροι μισθωτοί, καὶ βουκόλοι βοῶν καὶ αἰγῶν αἰπόλοι καὶ ἱπποφορβοὶ τῶν ἵππων, καὶ πλεῖστα κτήματα. τούτων δὲ αὐτῷ πολλὰ μὲν ὁ πατὴρ ἀπελελοίπει, πολλαπλάσια δὲ αὐτὸς ἐπεκτήσατο,[228] πλουτεῖν θέλων [pg 132] ἐν δίκῃ τε καὶ παρὰ δίκην· ἔμελε γὰρ αὐτῷ τῶν[229] θεῶν ὀλίγον. [D] ἐγένοντο δὲ αὐτῷ γυναῖκες πολλαὶ καὶ υἱεῖς ἐξ αὐτῶν καὶ θυγατέρες, οἷς ἐκεῖνος διανείμας τὴν οὐσίαν ἔπειτα ἐτελεύτησεν, οὐδὲν αὐτοὺς οἰκονομίας πέρι διδάξας, οὐδ᾽ ὅπως ἄν τις δύναιτο τὰ τοιαῦτα κτᾶσθαι μὴ παρόντα ἢ παρόντα διαφυλάττειν. ᾤετο γὰρ ὑπὸ ἀμαθίας ἀρκεῖν τὸ πλῆθος, ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν οὐ μάλα ἐπιστήμων τῆς τοιαύτης τέχνης, ἅτε μὴ λόγῳ προσειληφὼς αὐτήν, ἀλλὰ συνηθείᾳ τινὶ καὶ πείρᾳ μᾶλλον, [228] ὥσπερ οἱ φαῦλοι τῶν ἰατρῶν ἐκ τῆς ἐμπειρίας μόνον ἰώμενοι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ὅθεν καὶ διαφεύγει τὰ πολλὰ τῶν νοσημάτων αὐτούς. ἀρκεῖν οὖν νομίσας τὸ πλῆθος τῶν υἱέων πρὸς τὸ φυλάξαι τὴν οὐσίαν οὐδὲν ἐφρόντισεν ὅπως ἔσονται σπουδαῖοι. τὸ δὲ ἄρα αὐτοῖς ἦρξε πρῶτον μὲν τῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους ἀδικημάτων. ἐπιθυμῶν γὰρ ἕκαστος ὥσπερ ὁ πατὴρ πολλὰ ἔχειν καὶ μόνος πάντα ἐπὶ τὸν πέλας ἐτράπετο. [B] τέως μὲν οὖν τοῦτο ἐπράττετο. προσαπέλαυον δὲ καὶ οἱ ξυγγενεῖς, οὐδ᾽ αὐτοὶ παιδευθέντες καλῶς, τῆς τῶν παίδων ἀνοίας τε καὶ ἀμαθίας. εἶτα ἐπίμπλατο φόνων πάντα, καὶ ἡ τραγικὴ κατάρα ὑπὸ τοῦ δαίμονος εἰς ἔργον ἤγετο· τὰ πατρῷα γὰρ θηκτῷ σιδήρῳ διελάγχανον, καὶ ἦν πάντα ἀκοσμίας πλήρη· πατρῷα μὲν ἱερὰ κατεσκάπτετο παρὰ τῶν παίδων ὀλιγωρηθέντα πρότερον ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἀποσυληθέντα τῶν ἀναθημάτων, [C] ἃ ἐτέθειτο [pg 134] παρὰ πολλῶν μὲν καὶ ἄλλων, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ τῶν προπατόρων αὐτοῦ. καθαιρουμένων δὲ τῶν ἱερῶν ἀνῳκοδομεῖτο παλαιὰ καὶ νέα μνήματα, προαγορεύοντος αὐτοῖς τοῦ αὐτομάτου καὶ τῆς τύχης, ὅτι ἄρα πολλῶν αὐτοῖς δεήσει μνημάτων οὐκ εἰς μακράν, ἐπειδήπερ αὐτοῖς ὀλίγον ἔμελε τῶν θεῶν.

(A certain rich man[230] had numerous flocks of sheep and herds of cattle and “ranging flocks of goats”[231] and many times ten thousand mares “grazed his marsh-meadows.”[232] Many shepherds too he had, both slaves and hired freedmen, neatherds and goatherds and grooms for his horses, and many estates withal. Now much of all this his father had bequeathed to him, but he had himself acquired many times more, being eager to enrich himself whether justly or unjustly; for little did he care for gods. Several wives he had, and sons and daughters by them, among whom he divided his wealth before he died. But he did not teach them how to manage it, or how to acquire more if it should fail, or how to preserve what they had. For in his ignorance he thought that their mere numbers would suffice, nor had he himself any real knowledge of that sort of art, since he had not acquired his wealth on any rational principle but rather by use and wont, like quack doctors who try to cure their patients by relying on their experience only, so that many diseases escape them altogether.[233] Accordingly since he thought that a number of sons would suffice to preserve his wealth, he took no thought how to make them virtuous. But this very thing proved to be the beginning of their iniquitous behaviour to one another. For every one of them desired to be as wealthy as his father and to possess the whole for himself alone, and so attacked the brother that was his neighbour. Now for a time they continued to behave thus. And their relatives also shared in the folly and ignorance of those sons, since they themselves had had no better education. Then ensued a general slaughter, and heaven brought the tragic curse[234] to fulfilment. For “by the edge of the sword they divided their patrimony” and everything was thrown into confusion. The sons demolished the ancestral temples which their father before them had despised and had stripped of the votive offerings that had been dedicated by many worshippers, but not least by his own ancestors. And besides demolishing the temples they erected sepulchres[235] both on new sites and on the old sites of the temples, as though impelled by fate or by an unconscious presentiment that they would ere long need many such sepulchres, seeing that they so neglected the gods.)

Πάντων οὖν ὁμοῦ φυρομένων καὶ ξυντελουμένων γάμων τε οὐ γάμων καὶ βεβηλουμένων ὁμοῦ τοῖς θείοις τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, [D] τὸν Δία ἔλεος ὑπῆλθεν· εἶτα ἀπιδὼν πρὸς τὸν Ἥλιον· ὦ παῖ, εἶπεν, οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς ἀρχαιότερον ἐν θεοῖς βλάστημα, μνησικακεῖν ἔτι διανοῇ τῆς ὑπεροψίας ἀνδρὶ αὐθάδει καὶ τολμηρῷ, ὅς σε ἀπολιπὼν αὑτῷ τε καὶ γένει αἴτιος[236] ἐγένετο τῶν τηλικούτων παθημάτων; ἢ νομίζεις, [229] ὅτι μὴ χαλεπαίνεις αὐτῷ μηδ᾽ ἀγανακτεῖς μηδ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ γένος αὐτοῦ τοὺς οἰστοὺς θήγεις, ἔλαττον εἶναι ταύτης αἴτιος αὐτῷ τῆς ξυμφορᾶς, ἔρημον αὐτοῦ τὴν οἰκίαν ἀφείς; ἀλλ᾽, ἔφη, καλῶμεν τὰς Μοίρας, εἴ πῃ βοηθητέος ὁ ἀνήρ ἐστιν. αἱ δὲ ὑπήκουσαν αὐτίκα τῷ Διί. καὶ ὁ μὲν Ἥλιος, ὥσπερ ἐννοῶν τι καὶ λογιζόμενος αὐτὸς ἐν ἑαυτῷ, προσεῖχεν εἰς τὸν Δία πήξας τὰ ὄμματα. τῶν Μοιρῶν δὲ ἡ πρεσβυτάτη· Κωλύετον, ἔφη, ὦ πάτερ, ἡ Ὁσιότης ξὺν τῇ Δίκῃ. σὸν οὖν ἔργον ἐστίν, [B] ἐπείπερ ἡμᾶς ἐκέλευσας ὑπεικαθεῖν αὐταῖς, πεῖσαι καὶ ἐκείνας. ἀλλ᾽ ἐμαὶ γάρ εἰσιν, ἔφη, θυγατέρες, καὶ ἄξιον δὴ ἐρέσθαι αὐτάς· τί τοίνυν, [pg 136] ὦ ποτνία, φατόν; ἀλλὰ τούτου μέν, εἰπέτην, ὦ πάτερ, αὐτὸς εἶ κύριος. σκόπει δὲ ὅπως ἐν ἀνθρώποις ὁ πονηρὸς οὑτοσὶ τῆς ἀνοσιουργίας ζῆλος μὴ παντάπασιν ἐπικρατήσει.[237] πρὸς ἀμφότερα, εἶπεν, ἐγὼ σκέψομαι. καὶ αἱ Μοῖραι πλησίον παροῦσαι πάντα ἐπέκλωθον, [C] ὡς ὁ πατὴρ ἐβούλετο.

(Now when all was in confusion, and many marriages that were no marriages[238] were being concluded, and the laws of god and man alike had been profaned, Zeus was moved with compassion and addressing himself to Helios he said: “O my son, divine offspring more ancient than heaven and earth, art thou still minded to resent the insolence of that arrogant and audacious mortal, who by forsaking thee brought so many calamities on himself and his race? Thinkest thou that, though thou dost not show thine anger and resentment against him nor whet thine arrows against his children, thou art any less the author of his destruction in that thou dost abandon his house to desolation? Nay,” said Zeus, “let us summon the Fates and enquire whether any assistance may be given the man.” Forthwith the Fates obeyed the call of Zeus. But Helios who was as though absorbed in thought and inward debate yet gave constant heed and fixed his eyes on Zeus. Then spoke the eldest of the Fates: “O our father, Piety and Justice both restrain us. Therefore it is thine to prevail on them also, since thou hast ordered us to be subservient to them.” And Zeus made answer, “Truly they are my daughters, and it is meet that I question them. What then have ye to say, ye venerable goddesses?” “Nay, father,” they replied, “that is as thou thyself dost ordain. But be careful lest this wicked zeal for impious deeds prevail universally among men.” “I will myself look to both these matters,” Zeus replied. Then the Fates approached and spun all as their father willed.)

Λέγειν δὲ ὁ Ζεὺς ἄρχεται πρὸς τὸν Ἥλιον· τουτὶ τὸ παιδίον, ἔφη· ξυγγενὲς δὲ ἦν αὐτῶν ἄρα παρερριμμένον που καὶ ἀμελούμενον, ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐκείνου τοῦ πλουσίου καὶ ἀνεψιὸς τῶν κληρονόμων· τοῦτο, ἔφη, σόν ἐστιν ἔκγονον. ὄμοσον οὖν τὸ ἐμόν τε καὶ τὸ σὸν[239] σκῆπτρον, ἦ μὴν ἐπιμελήσεσθαι διαφερόντως αὐτοῦ καὶ ποιμανεῖν αὐτὸ καὶ θεραπεύσειν τῆς νόσου. [D] ὁρᾷς γὰρ ὅπως οἷον ὑπὸ καπνοῦ ῥύπου τε ἀναπέπλησται καὶ λιγνύος, κίνδυνός τε τὸ ὑπὸ σοῦ σπαρὲν ἐν αὐτῷ πῦρ ἀποσβῆναι, ἢν μὴ σύ γε δύσεαι ἀλκήν. σοὶ δὲ ἐγώ τε ξυγχωρῶ καὶ αἱ Μοῖραι· κόμιζε οὖν αὐτὸ καὶ τρέφε. ταῦτα ἀκούσας ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἥλιος ηὐφράνθη τε ἡσθεὶς τῷ βρέφει, σωζόμενον ἔτι καθορῶν ἐν αὐτῷ σπινθῆρα μικρὸν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ τὸ ἐντεῦθεν ἔτρεφεν ἐκεῖνο τὸ παιδίον, ἐξαγαγὼν

(Next Zeus thus addressed Helios: “Thou seest yonder thine own child.”[240] (Now this was a certain kinsman of those brothers who had been cast aside and was despised though he was that rich man's nephew and the cousin of his heirs.) “This child,” said Zeus, “is thine own offspring. Swear then by my sceptre and thine that thou wilt care especially for him and cure him of this malady. For thou seest how he is as it were infected with smoke and filth and darkness and there is danger that the spark of fire which thou didst implant in him will be quenched, unless thou clothe thyself with might.[241] Take care of him therefore and rear him. For I and the Fates yield thee this task.” When King Helios heard this he was glad and took pleasure in the babe, since he perceived that in him a small spark of himself was still preserved. And from that time he reared the child whom he had withdrawn)

ἔκ θ᾽ αἵματος ἔκ τε κυδοιμοῦ

[230] Ἔκ τ᾽ ἀνδροκτασίης.

(“from the blood and noise of war and the slaughter of men.”[242] )

ὁ πατὴρ δὲ ὁ Ζεὺς ἐκέλευσε καὶ τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν τὴν ἀμήτορα, τὴν παρθένον ἅμα τῷ Ἡλίῳ τὸ παιδάριον ἐκτρέφειν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐτράφη καὶ νεανίας ἐγένετο

(And father Zeus bade Athene also, the Motherless Maiden, share with Helios the task of bringing up the child. And when, thus reared, he had become a youth)

Πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης, τοῦπερ χαριεστάτη ἥβη,

(“With the first down on his chin, when youth has all its charms,”[243])

κατανοήσας τῶν κακῶν τὸ πλῆθος. ὁπόσον τι περὶ τοὺς ξυγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς ἀνεψιοὺς ἐγεγόνει, ἐδέησε μὲν αὑτὸν εἰς τὸν τάρταρον προέσθαι πρὸς τὸ μέγεθος τῶν κακῶν ἐκπλαγείς. [B] ἐπεὶ δὲ Ἥλιος εὐμενὴς ὢν μετὰ τῆς Προνοίας Ἀθηνᾶς ὕπνον τινὰ καὶ κάρον ἐμβαλὼν τῆς ἐπινοίας ταύτης ἀπήγαγεν, αὖθις ἀνεγερθεὶς ἄπεισιν εἰς ἐρημίαν. εἶτα ἐκεῖ λίθον τινὰ εὑρὼν μικρὸν ἀνεπαύσατο καὶ πρὸς αὑτὸν ἐσκόπει, τίνα τρόπον ἐκφεύξεται τῶν τοσούτων κακῶν τὸ μέγεθος· ἤδη γὰρ αὐτῷ πάντα ἐφαίνετο μοχθηρά, [C] καλὸν δὲ οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ τέως. Ἑρμῆς οὖν αὐτῷ· καὶ γὰρ εἶχεν οἰκείως πρὸς αὐτόν· ὥσπερ ἡλικιώτης νεανίσκος φανεὶς ἠσπάσατό τε φιλοφρόνως καί, Δεῦρο, εἶπεν, ἡγεμών σοι ἐγὼ ἔσομαι λειοτέρας[244] καὶ ὁμαλεστέρας ὁδοῦ τουτὶ τὸ μικρὸν ὑπερβάντι τὸ σκολιὸν καὶ ἀπότομον χωρίον, οὗ πάντας ὁρᾶς προσπταίοντας καὶ ἀπιόντας ἐντεῦθεν ὀπίσω. καὶ ὁ νεανίσκος ἀπιὼν ᾤχετο μετὰ πολλῆς εὐλαβείας ἔχων παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ξίφος τε καὶ ἀσπίδα καὶ δόρυ,[245] γυμνὰ δὲ αὐτῷ τέως ἦν τὰ περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν. [D] πεποιθὼς οὖν αὐτῷ προῆγεν εἰς τὸ πρόσω διὰ λείας ὁδοῦ καὶ ἀθρύπτου καθαρᾶς τε πάνυ καὶ καρποῖς βριθούσης ἄνθεσί τε πολλοῖς καὶ ἀγαθοις, ὅσα ἐστὶ θεοῖς φίλα, καὶ δένδρεσι κιττοῦ καὶ δάφνης καὶ μυρρίνης. ἀγαγὼν δὲ αὐτὸν ἐπί τι μέγα καὶ ὑψηλὸν ὄρος, Ἐπὶ τούτου, ἔφη, τῆς κορυφῆς ὁ πατὴρ πάντων κάθηται τῶν θεῶν. ὅρα οὖν· ἐνταῦθά ἐστιν ὁ μέγας κίνδυνος· ὅπως αὐτὸν ὡς εὐαγέστατα προσκυνήσεις, αἰτήσῃ δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὅ, τι ἂν [pg 140] ἐθέλῃς· [231] ἕλοιο δέ, ὦ παῖ, τὰ βέλτιστα. ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἀπέκρυψεν ἑαυτὸν Ἑρμῆς πάλιν. ὁ δὲ ἐβούλετο μὲν παρὰ τοῦ Ἑρμοῦ πυθέσθαι, τί ποτε αἰτήσασθαι χρὴ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τῶν θεῶν, ὡς δὲ πλησίον ὄντα οὐ κατεῖδεν, Ἐνδεὴς μέν, ἔφη, καλὴ δὲ ὅμως ἡ ξυμβουλή. αἰτώμεθα οὖν ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ τὰ κράτιστα καίπερ οὔπω σαφῶς τὸν πατέρα τῶν θεῶν ὁρῶντες. Ὦ Ζεῦ πάτερ ἢ ὅ,τι σοι φίλον ὄνομα καὶ ὅπως ὀνομάζεσθαι· δείκνυέ μοι τὴν ἐπὶ σὲ φέρουσαν ὁδὸν ἄνω. [B] κρείττονα γάρ μοι τὰ ἐκεῖ φαίνεται χωρία παρὰ σὲ μαντευομένῳ τὸ παρὰ σοὶ κάλλος ἀπὸ τῆς ἐν τούτοις ὅθεν πεπορεύμεθα τέως ἀγλαΐας.

(he learned numerous disasters that had befallen his kinsmen and his cousins, and had all but hurled himself into Tartarus, so confounded was he by the extent of those calamities. Then Helios of his grace, aided Athene, Goddess of Forethought, threw him into a slumber or trance, and so diverted him from that purpose. Then when he had waked from this he went away into the desert. And there he found a stone and rested for a while thereon, debating within himself how he should escape evils so many and so vast. For all things now appeared grievous to him and for the moment there was no hope anywhere. Then Hermes, who had an affinity for him,[246] appeared to him in the guise of a youth of his own age, and greeting him kindly said, “Follow me, and I will guide thee by an easier and smoother road as soon as thou hast surmounted this winding and rugged place where thou seest all men stumbling and obliged to go back again.” Then the youth set out with great circumspection, carrying a sword and shield and spear, though as yet his head was bare. Thus relying on Hermes he went forward by a road smooth, untrodden and very bright, and overhung with fruits and many lovely flowers such as the gods love, and with trees also, ivy and laurel and myrtle. Now when Hermes had brought him to the foot of a great and lofty mountain, he said, “On the summit of this mountain dwells the father of all the gods. Be careful then—for herein lies the greatest risk of all[247]—to worship him with the utmost piety and ask of him whatever thou wilt. Thou wilt choose, my child, only what is best.” So saying Hermes once more became invisible, though the youth was fain to learn from him what he ought to ask from the father of the gods. But when he saw that he was no longer at his side he said, “The advice though incomplete is good nevertheless. Therefore let me by the grace of fortune ask for what is best, though I do not as yet see clearly the father of the gods. Father Zeus—or whatever name thou dost please that men should call thee by,[248]—show me the way that leads upwards to thee. For fairer still methinks the region where thou art, if I may judge of the beauty of thy abode from the splendour of the place whence I have come hither.”)

Εὐξαμένῳ ταῦτα εἴτε ὕπνος τις εἴτε ἔκστασις ἐπῆλθεν. ὁ δὲ αὐτῷ δείκνυσιν αὐτὸν τὸν Ἥλιον. ἐκπλαγεὶς οὖν ὁ νεανίσκος ὑπὸ τῆς θέας, Ἀλλὰ σοὶ μέν, εἶπεν, ὦ θεῶν πάτερ, τῶν τε ἄλλων καὶ τούτων [C] ἕνεκα πάντων ἐμαυτὸν φέρων ἀναθήσω. περιβαλὼν[249] δὲ τοῖς γόνασι τοῦ Ἡλίου τὰς χεῖρας ἀπρὶξ εἴχετο σώζειν ἑαυτὸν δεόμενος. ὁ δὲ καλέσας τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν ἐκέλευε πρῶτον ἀνακρίνειν αὐτόν, ὁπόσα ἐκόμισεν ὅπλα. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἑώρα τήν τε ἀσπίδα καὶ τὸ ξίφος μετὰ τοῦ δόρατος, Ἀλλὰ ποῦ σοι, ἔφη, ὦ παῖ, τὸ Γοργόνειον καὶ τὸ κράνος; ὁ δέ, Καὶ ταῦτα, εἶπε, μόγις ἐκτησάμην· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἦν ὁ ξυμπονῶν ἐν τῇ τῶν συγγενῶν οἰκίᾳ παρερριμμένῳ. Ἴσθι οὖν, εἶπεν ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος, ὅτι σε πάντως χρὴ [D] ἐπανελθεῖν ἐκεῖσε. ἐνταῦθα ἐδεῖτο [pg 142] μὴ πέμπειν αὐτὸν ἐκεῖσε πάλιν, ἀλλὰ κατέχειν, ὡς οὐκέθ᾽ ὕστερον ἐπανήξοντα, ἀπολούμενον δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκεῖ κακῶν. ὡς δὲ ἐλιπάρει δακρύων, Ἀλλὰ νέος εἶ, ἔφη, καὶ ἀμύητος. ἴθι οὖν παρ᾽ ὑμᾶς, ὡς ἂν μυηθείης ἀσφαλῶς τε ἐκεῖ διάγοις· χρὴ γάρ σ᾽ ἀπιέναι καὶ καθαίρειν ἐκεῖνα πάντα τὰ ἀσεβήματα, παρακαλεῖν δὲ ἐμέ τε καὶ τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους θεούς. [232] ἀκούσας ταῦτα ὁ νεανίσκος εἱστήκει σιωπῇ. καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος ἐπί τινα σκοπιὰν ἀγαγὼν αὐτόν, ἧς τὸ μὲν ἄνω φωτὸς ἦν πλῆρες, τὸ δὲ ὑποκάτω μυρίας ἀχλύος, δι ἧς ὥσπερ δι᾽ ὕδατος ἀμυδρὸν τὸ φῶς διικνεῖτο τῆς ἐκ τοῦ βασιλέως αὐγῆς Ἠλίου, Ὁρᾷς, εἶπε, τὸν ἀνεψιὸν τὸν κληρονόμον; καὶ ὅς, Ὁρῶ, ἔφη. Τί δέ; τοὺς βουκόλους τουτουσὶ καὶ τοὺς ποιμένας; καὶ τούτους ὁρᾶν εἶπεν ὁ νεανίσκος. [B] Ποταπὸς οὖν τίς σοι ὁ κληρονόμος φαίνεται; ποταποὶ δ᾽ αὖ οἱ ποιμένες τε καὶ βουκόλοι; καὶ ὁ νεανίσκος, Ὁ μέν μοι, ἔφη, δοκεῖ νυστάζειν τὰ πολλὰ καὶ καταδυόμενος[250] λεληθότως ἡδυπαθεῖν, τῶν ποιμένων δὲ ὀλίγον μέν ἐστι τὸ ἀστεῖον, τὸ πλῆθος δὲ μοχθηρὸν καὶ θηριῶδες. ἐσθίει γὰρ καὶ πιπράσκει τὰ πρόβατα καὶ ἀδικεῖ διπλῇ τὸν δεσπότην. τά τε γὰρ ποίμνια αὐτοῦ φθείρει καὶ ἐκ πολλῶν μικρὰ ἀποφέρον [C] ἄμισθον εἶναί φησι καὶ οδύρεται. καίτοι κρεῖττον ἦν τοὺς μισθοὺς ἀπαιτεῖν ἐντελεῖς ἢ φθείρειν τὴν ποίμνην. Ἂν οὖν, ἔφη, σὲ ἐγὲ μετὰ ταυτησὶ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς, ἐπιτάττοντος τοῦ [pg 144] Διός, ἀντὶ τοῦ κληρονόμου τούτου πάντων ἐπίτροπον τούτων καταστήσω—; πάλιν ἐνταῦθα ὁ νεανίσκος ἀντείχετο καὶ πολλὰ ἱκέτευεν αὐτοῦ μένειν. ὁ δέ, Μὴ λίαν ἀπειθὴς ἔσο, φησί, μή ποτέ

(When he had uttered this prayer a sort of slumber or ecstasy came over him. Then Zeus showed him Helios himself. Awestruck by that vision the youth exclaimed, “For this and for all thy other favours I will dedicate myself to thee, O Father of the Gods!” Then he cast his arms about the knees of Helios and would not let go his hold but kept entreating him to save him. But Helios called Athene and bade her first enquire of him what arms he had brought with him. And when she saw his shield and sword and spear, she said, “But where, my child, is thy aegis[251] and thy helmet?” “Even these that I have,” he replied, “I procured with difficulty. For in the house of my kinsfolk there was none to aid one so despised.” “Learn therefore,” said mighty Helios, “that thou must without fail return thither.” Thereupon he entreated him not to send him to earth again but to detain him there, since he would never be able to mount upwards a second time but would be overwhelmed by the ills of earth. But as he wept and implored Helios replied, “Nay, thou art young and not yet initiated. Return therefore to thine own people that thou mayst be initiated and thereafter dwell on earth in safety. For return thou must, and and cleanse away all impiety and invoke me to aid thee, and Athene and the other gods.” When Helios had said this the youth remained silent. Then mighty Helios led him to a high peak whose upper region was filled with light but the lower with the thickest mist imaginable, through which, as through water, the light of the rays of King Helios penetrated but faintly. “Thou seest,” said Helios, “thy cousin the heir?”[252] “I see him,” the youth replied. “Again, dost thou see yonder herdsmen and shepherds?” The youth answered that he did. “Then what thinkest thou of the heir's disposition? And what of his shepherds and herdsmen?” “He seems to me,” replied the youth, “to be for the most part asleep, sunk in forgetfulness and devoted to pleasure; and of his shepherds a few are honest, but most are vicious and brutal. For they devour or sell his sheep, and doubly injure their master, in that they not only ruin his flocks but besides that they make great gain and return him but little thereof, while they declare with loud complaint that they are defrauded of their wages. And yet it were better that they should demand and obtain their full pay than that they should destroy the flock.” “Now what if I and Athene here,” said Helios, “obeying the command of Zeus, should appoint thee to govern all these, in place of the heir?” Then the youth clung to him again and earnestly entreated that he might remain there. “Do not be obstinate in disobedience,” said Helios,)

σ᾽ ἀπεχθήρω, ὡς νῦν ἔκπαγλ᾽ ἐφίλησα.

(“lest perchance I hate thee beyond measure, even as I have loved thee.”[253])

καὶ ὁ νεανίσκος, Ἀλλ᾽, ὦ μέγιστε, εἶπεν, Ἥλιε καὶ Ἀθηνᾶ, σέ τε καὶ αὐτὸν ἐπιμαρτύρομαι τὸν Δία, χρῆσθέ μοι πρὸς ὅ, τι βούλεσθε. [D] πάλιν οὖν ὁ Ἑρμῆς ἄφνω φανεὶς ἐποίησε τὸν νεανίσκον θαρραλεώτερον. ἤδη γὰρ διενοεῖτο τῆς τε ὀπίσω πορείας καὶ τῆς ἐκεῖσε διατριβῆς ηὑρηκέναι τὸν ἡγεμόνα. καὶ ἡ Ἀθηνᾶ, Μάνθανε, εἶπεν, ὦ λῷστε, πατρὸς ἀγαθοῦ τουτουὶ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐμὸν βλάστημα. τοῦτον, ἔφη, τὸν κληρονόμον οἱ βέλτιστοι μὲν οὐκ εὐφραίνουσι τῶν ποιμένων, οἱ κόλακες δὲ καὶ οἱ μοχθηροὶ δοῦλον καὶ ὑποχείριον πεποίηνται. συμβαίνει οὖν [233] αὐτῷ παρὰ μὲν τῶν ἐπιεικῶν μὴ φιλεῖσθαι, παρὰ δὲ τῶν νομιζομένων φιλεῖν[254] εἰς τὰ μέγιστα ἀδικεῖσθαι; σκόπει οὖν ὅπως ἐπανελθὼν μὴ πρὸ τοῦ φίλου θήσει τὸν κόλακα. δευτέραν ἄκουέ μου παραίνεσιν, ὦ παῖ. νυστάζων οὗτος ἐξαπατᾶται τὰ πολλά· σὺ δὲ νῆφε καὶ γρηγόρει, μή σε διὰ τῆς τοῦ φίλου παρρησίας ὁ κόλαξ ἐξαπατήσας λάθοι,[255] χαλκεὺς οἷά τις γέμων καπνοῦ καὶ μαρίλης, [B] ἔχων ἱμάτιον λευκὸν καὶ τὰ πρόσωπα τῷ ψιμυθίῳ κεχρισμένος, εἶτα αὐτῷ δοίης γῆμαί τινα τῶν σῶν θυγατέρων. τρίτης ἐπάκουέ μου παραινέσεως, καὶ μάλα ισχυρῶς φύλαττε σαυτόν, αἰδοῦ δὲ καὶ ἡμᾶς μόνον, ἀνδρῶν [pg 146] δὲ ὅστις ἡμῖν προσόμοιός ἐστιν, ἄλλον δὲ μηδένα. ὁρᾷς ὅπως τοῦτον τὸν ἠλίθιον ἔβλαψεν αἰσχύνη καὶ τὸ λίαν ἄγαν εἶναι καταπλῆγα;

(Then said the youth, “Do thou, O most mighty Helios, and thou, Athene,—and thee too, Father Zeus, do I call to witness,—dispose of me as ye will.” Then Hermes suddenly appeared once more, and inspired him with greater courage. For now he thought that he had found a guide for the journey back, and for his sojourn on earth. Then said Athene, “Attend, good youth, that art born of myself and of this god, thy noble sire! The most virtuous of the shepherds do not please this heir, for flatterers and profligates have made him their slave and tool. Thus it is that he is not beloved by the good, and is most deeply wronged by those who are supposed to love him. Be careful then when thou returnest that he make thee not his flatterer rather than his friend. This second warning also do thou heed, my son. Yonder man slumbers, and hence he is often deceived, but do thou be sober and vigilant,[256] lest the flatterer assume the frankness of a friend and so deceive thee; which is as though a smith covered with smoke and cinders should come wearing a white garment and with his face painted white, and thus induce thee to give him one of thy daughters in marriage.[257] My third warning to thee is this: do thou very zealously keep watch over thyself, and reverence us in the first place, and among men only him who resembles us, and no one besides. Thou seest how false shame and excessive timidity have injured this foolish man.”)

Καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος αὖθις τὸν λόγον διαδεξάμενος εἶπεν. [C] Ἑλόμενος φίλους ὡς φίλοις χρῶ, μηδὲ αὐτοὺς οἰκέτας μηδὲ θεράποντας νόμιζε, πρόσιθι δὲ αὐτοῖς ἐλευθέρως τε καὶ ἁπλούστατα καὶ γενναίως, μὴ λέγων μὲν ἄλλα, φρονῶν δὲ ἕτερα περὶ αὐτῶν. ὁρᾷς ὅτι καὶ τοῦτον τὸν κληρονόμον τοῦτο ἐπέτριψεν, ἡ πρὸς τοὺς φίλους ἀπιστία; φίλει τοὺς ἀρχομένους ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς σέ· τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἡγείσθω σοι τῶν καλῶν ἁπάντων· [D] ἐσμὲν γάρ σου καὶ εὐεργεταὶ καὶ φίλοι καὶ σωτῆρες. ἀκούσας ταῦτα ὁ νεανίσκος διεχύθη καὶ δῆλος ἦν ἅπαντα ἤδη τοῖς θεοῖς πειθόμενος. Ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι, ἔφη, πορεύου μετὰ ἀγαθῆς ἐλπίδος. ἡμεῖς γάρ σοι πανταχοῦ συνεσόμεθα ἐγώ τε καὶ Ἀθηνᾶ καὶ Ἑρμῆς ὅδε καὶ σὺν ἡμῖν οἱ θεοὶ πάντες οἱ ἐν Ὀλύμπῳ καὶ οἱ περὶ τὸν ἀέρα καὶ τὴν γῆν καὶ πᾶν πανταχοῦ τὸ θεῖον γένος, ἕως ἂν τά τε πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὅσιος ᾖς καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς φίλους πιστὸς καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ὑπηκόους φιλάνθρωπος, [234] ἄρχων αὐτῶν καὶ ἡγούμενος ἐπὶ τὰ βέλτιστα· ἀλλὰ μήτε ταῖς σεαυτοῦ μήτε ταῖς ἐκείνων[258] ἐπιθυμίαις δουλεύων ὑπεικάθηις. ἔχων οὖν τὴν πανοπλίαν,[259] ἣν ἐκόμισας πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ἄπιθι προσλαβὼν ταύτην μὲν τὴν δᾷδα παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ, ἵνα σοι καὶ ἐν τῇ γῇ φῶς λάμπῃ μέγα καὶ μηδὲν ἐπιποθῇς τῶν τῇδε, ταυτησὶ δὲ Ἀθενᾶς τῆς καλῆς τό τε Γοργόνειον [pg 148] καὶ τὸ κράνος· πολλὰ γάρ, ὁρᾷς, ἐστὶν αὐτῇ, καὶ δίδωσιν οἷς ἂν ἐθέλῃ. [B] δώσει δέ σοι καὶ Ἑρμῆς χρυσῆν ῥάβδον. ἔρχου οὖν τῇ πανοπλίᾳ κοσμηθεὶς ταύτῃ διὰ πάσης μὲν γῆς, διὰ πάσης δὲ θαλάττης, ἀμετακινήτως τοῖς ἡμετέροις πειθόμενος νόμοις, καὶ μηδείς σε μήτε ἀνδρῶν μήτε γυναικῶν, μήτε τῶν οἰκείων μήτε τῶν ξένων ἀναπείσῃ τῶν ἐντολῶν[260] ἐκλαθέσθαι τῶν ἡμετέρων. ἐμμένων γὰρ αὐταῖς ἡμῖν μὲν ἔσῃ φίλος καὶ τίμιος, αἰδοῖος δὲ τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἡμῶν ὑπηρέταις, φοβερὸς δὲ ἀνθρώποις πονηροῖς καὶ κακοδαίμοσιν. [C] ἴσθι δὲ σεαυτῷ τὰ σαρκία δεδόσθαι τῆς λειτουργίας ἕνεκα ταυτησί. βουλόμεθα γάρ σοι τὴν προγονικὴν οἰκίαν αἰδοῖ τῶν προγόνων ἀποκαθῆραι. μέμνησο οὖν, ὅτι τὴν ψυχὴν ἀθάνατον ἔχεις καὶ ἔκγονον ἡμετέραν, ἑπόμενός τε ἡμῖν ὅτι θεὸς ἔσῃ καὶ τὸν ἡμέτερον ὄψει σὺν ἡμῖν πατέρα.

(Then mighty Helios took up the tale and said, “When thou hast chosen thy friends treat them as friends and do not regard them as thy servants and attendants, but let thy conduct towards them be generous, candid, and honourable: say not one thing about them while thou thinkest another. Thou seest that it was treachery to his friends that destroyed this heir. Love thy subjects even as we love thee. Prefer our worship to all other blessings. For we are thy benefactors and friends and preservers.” At these words the youth became calm and showed plainly that he was already obedient in all things to the gods. “Come,” said Helios, “now depart with good hope. For everywhere we shall be with thee, even I and Athene and Hermes here, and with us all the gods that are on Olympus or in the air or on earth and the whole race of gods everywhere, so long as thou art pious towards us and loyal to thy friends, and humane towards thy subjects, ruling them and guiding them to what is best. But never yield to thy own passions or become the slave of theirs. Keep the armour that thou hast brought hither, and depart, but first receive from me this torch so that even on earth a great light may shine for thee and that thou mayst not long for the things of earth. And from fair Athene here receive an aegis and helmet. For as thou seest she has many, and she gives them to whom she will. And Hermes too will give thee a golden wand. Go then thus adorned in full armour over sea and land, steadfastly obeying our laws, and let no man or woman or kinsman or foreigner persuade thee to neglect our commands. For while thou dost abide by them thou wilt be loved and honoured by us and respected by our good servants and formidable to the wicked and impious. Know that a mortal frame was given to thee that thou mightest discharge these duties. For we desire, out of respect for thy ancestor to cleanse the house of thy forefathers. Remember therefore that thou hast an immortal soul that is our offspring, and that if thou dost follow us thou shalt be a god and with us shalt behold our father.”)

Τοῦτο εἴτε μῦθος εἴτε ἀληθής ἐστι λόγος οὐκ οἶδα. τὸ παρὰ σοῦ δὲ πεποιημένον, τίνα βούλει τὸν Πᾶνα, [D] τίνα δὲ εἶναι τὸν Δία, εἰ μὴ τοῦτο,[261] ὡς ἐσμὲν ἐγώ τε καὶ σύ, σὺ μὲν ὁ Ζεύς, ἐγὼ δὲ ὁ Πάν; ὢ τοῦ γελοίου Ψευδόπανος, γελοιοτέρου μέντοι νὴ τὸν Ἀσκληπιὸν τοῦ πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ Διὸς ἀνθρώπου. ταῦτα οὐκ ἔστιν ἀτεχνῶς ἐκ μαινομένου[262] στόματος οὔτι τὴν ἔνθεον, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἔκπληκτον μανίαν; οὐκ οἶσθα, ὅτι καὶ ὁ Σαλμωνεὺς ἔδωκεν [235] ὑπὲρ τούτων τοῖς θεοῖς δίκην, ὅτι ἄνθρωπος ὢν ἐπεχείρει Ζεὺς εἶναι; τὸ δὲ ἐκ τῶν Ἡσιόδου λεγόμενον ὑπὲρ τῶν ὀνομασάντων [pg 150] ἑαυτοὺς τοῖς τῶν θεῶν ὀνόμασιν, Ἥρας τε καὶ Διός, εἰ μήπω καὶ νῦν ἀκήκοας, ἔχω σοι συγγνῶναι· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐπαιδοτριβήθης καλῶς οὐδὲ ἔτυχες καθηγεμόνος, ὁποίου περὶ τοὺς ποιητὰς ἐγὼ τουτουὶ τοῦ φιλοσόφου, μεθ᾽ ὃν ἐπὶ τὰ πρόθυρα τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἦλθον ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὶ τελεσθησόμενος, ὃν νενόμικα τῶν [B] κατ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν πάντων διαφέρειν. ὁ δέ με πρὸ πάντων ἀρετὴν ἀσκεῖν καὶ θεοὺς ἁπάντων τῶν καλῶν νομίζειν ἡγεμόνας ἐδίδασκεν. εἰ μὲν οὖν τι προὔργου πεποίηκεν, αὐτὸς ἂν εἰδείη καὶ πρὸ τούτου γε οἱ βασιλεῖς θεοί· τουτὶ δὲ ἐξῄρει τὸ μανιῶδες καὶ θρασύ, καὶ ἐπειρᾶτό με ποιεῖν ἐμαυτοῦ σωφρονέστερον. ἐγὼ δὲ καίπερ, ὡς οἶσθα, τοῖς ἔξωθεν πλεονεκτήμασιν ἐπτερωμένος ὑπέταξα [C] ὅμως ἐμαυτὸν τῷ καθηγεμόνι καὶ τοῖς ἐκείνου φίλοις καὶ ἡλικιώταις καὶ συμφοιτηταῖς, καὶ ὧν ἤκουον ἐπαινουμένων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, τούτων ἔσπευδον ἀκροατὴς εἶναι, καὶ βιβλία ταῦτα ἀνεγίγνωσκον, ὁπόσα αὐτὸς δοκιμάσειεν.

(Now whether this be a fable or a true narrative I cannot say. But in your composition, whom do you mean by Pan, and whom by Zeus unless you and I are they, that is, you are Zeus and I am Pan? What an absurd counterfeit Pan! But you are still more absurd, by Asclepius, and very far indeed from being Zeus! Is not all this the utterance of a mouth that foams with morbid rather than inspired madness?[263] Do you not know that Salmoneus[264] in his day was punished by the gods for just this, for attempting, though a mortal man, to play the part of Zeus? Then too there is the account in Hesiod's poems of those who styled themselves by the names of the gods, even of Hera and of Zeus, but if you have not heard of it till this moment I can excuse you for that. For you have not been well educated, nor did fate bestow on you such a guide to the poets as I had—I mean this philosopher[265] now present: and later on I arrived at the threshold of philosophy to be initiated therein by the teaching of one[266] whom I consider superior to all the men of my own time. He used to teach me to practise virtue before all else, and to regard the gods as my guides to all that is good. Now whether he accomplished anything of real profit he himself must determine, or rather the ruling gods; but at least he purged me of such infatuate folly and insolence as yours, and tried to make me more temperate than I was by nature. And though, as you know, I was armed[267] with great external advantages, nevertheless I submitted myself to my preceptor and to his friends and compeers and the philosophers of his school, and I was eager to be instructed by all whose praises I heard uttered by him, and I read all the books that he approved.)

οὕτως ἡμεῖς ὑφ᾽ ἡγεμόσι τελούμενοι, φιλοσόφῳ μὲν τῷ τὰ τῆς προπαιδείας με τελέσαντι, φιλοσοφωτάτῳ δὲ τῷ τὰ πρόθυρα τῆς φιλοσοφίας δείξαντι, σμικρὰ μὲν διὰ τὰς ἔξωθεν ἡμῖν προσπεσούσας ἀσχολίας, [D] ὅμως δ᾽ οὖν ἀπελαύσαμεν τῆς ὀρθῆς ἀγωγῆς, οὐ τὴν σύντομον, ἣν σὺ φής, ἀλλὰ τὴν κύκλῳ πορευθέντες· καίτοι νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρετὴν οἶμαι ὅτι σου συντομωτέραν ἐτραπόμην. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῆς, [pg 152] εἰ μὴ φορτικὸν εἰπεῖν, ἐπὶ τοῖς προθύροις ἕστηκα, σὺ δὲ καὶ τῶν προθύρων εἶ πόρρω. σοὶ δὲ ἀρετῆς ἢ τοῖς σοῖς ἀδελφοῖς—, ἀφελὼν δὲ τὸ δύσφημον τὸ λειπόμενον αὐτὸς ἀναπλήρωσον· εἰ βούλει δέ, καὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν αὐτὸ ἀνάσχου πρᾴως λεγόμενον,—τίς μετουσία; [236] πᾶσιν ἐπιτιμᾷς αὐτὸς οὐδὲν ἄξιον ἐπαίνου πράττων, ἐπαινεῖς φορτικῶς ὡς οὐδεὶς τῶν ἀμαθεστάτων ῥητόρων, οἷς διὰ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπορίαν καὶ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν εὑρεῖν ἐκ τῶν παρόντων ὅ, τι φῶσιν, ἡ Δῆλος ἐπέρχεται καὶ ἡ Λητὼ μετὰ τῶν παίδων, εἶτα κύκνοι λιγυρὸν ᾄδοντες καὶ ἐπηχοῦντα αὐτοῖς τὰ δένδρα, λειμῶνές τε ἔνδροσοι μαλακῆς πόας καὶ βαθείας πλήρεις, ἥ τε ἐκ τῶν ἀνθέων ὀδμὴ καὶ τὸ ἔαρ αὐτὸ καί τινες εἰκόνες τοιαῦται. [B] ποῦ τοῦτο Ἰσοκράτης ἐν τοῖς ἐγκωμιαστικοῖς ἐποίησε λόγοις; ποῦ δὲ τῶν παλαιῶν τις ἀνδρῶν, οἳ ταῖς Μούσαις ἐτελοῦντο γνησίως, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὥσπερ οἱ νῦν; ἀφίημι δὲ τὰ ἑξῆς, ἵνα μὴ καὶ πρὸς τούτους ἀπεχθανόμενος ἅμα τοῖς τε φαυλοτάτοις τῶν Κυνικῶν καὶ τῶν ῥητόρων προσκρούσαιμι· ὡς ἔμοιγε πρός τε τοὺς κρατίστους τῶν Κυνικῶν, [pg 154] εἴ τις ἄρα ἔστι νῦν τοιοῦτος, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς γενναίους ῥήτοράς [C] ἐστι φίλα[268] πάντα. τῶν μὲν δὴ τοιούτων λόγων, εἰ καὶ πολὺ πλῆθος ἐπιρρεῖ· καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὅσον οὐχὶ λέγειν ἐθέλων τις ἐκ πάνυ δαψιλοῦς ἀντλήσειεν ἂν πίθου· τῆς προκειμένης ἡμῖν ἀσχολίας ἕνεκεν ἀφέξομαι. μικρὰ δὲ ἔτι τῷ λόγῳ προσθεὶς ὥσπερ ὀφλήματι τὸ ἐνδέον ἐπ᾽ [D] ἄλλο τι τρέψομαι, ταυτηνὶ τὴν ξυγγραφὴν αὐτοῦ που πληρώσας.

(Thus then I was initiated by those guides, in the first place by a philosopher who trained me in the preparatory discipline, and next by that most perfect philosopher who revealed to me the entrance to philosophy; and though I achieved but little on account of the engrossing affairs that overwhelmed me from without, still for all that I have had the benefit of right training, and have not travelled by the short road as you say you have, but have gone all the way round. Though indeed I call the gods to witness, I believe that the road I took was really a shorter road to virtue than yours. For I, at any rate, if I may say so without bad taste, am standing at the entrance, whereas you are a long way even from the entrance. “But as for virtue, you and your brethren—,”[269] omit the ill-sounding phrase and fill in the blank yourself! Or rather if you please, bear with me when I “put it mildly”[270]—“what part or lot have you in it?” You criticise everybody, though you yourself do nothing to deserve praise; your praises are in worse taste than those of the most ignorant rhetoricians. They, because they have nothing to say and cannot invent anything from the matter in hand, are always dragging in Delos and Leto with her children, and then “swans singing their shrill song and the trees that echo them,” and “dewy meadows full of soft, deep grass,” and the “scent of flowers,” and “the season of spring,” and other figures of the same sort.[271] When did Isocrates ever do this in his panegyrics? Or when did anyone of those ancient writers who were genuine votaries of the Muses, and not like the writers of to-day? However, I omit what I might add, lest I should make them also my enemies, and offend at once the most worthless Cynics and the most worthless rhetoricians. Though indeed I have nothing but friendly feelings for the really virtuous Cynics, if indeed there be any such nowadays, and also for all honest rhetoricians. But though a vast number of illustrations of this sort flow into my mind—for anyone who desired to use them could certainly draw from an ample jar[272]—I shall refrain because of the present pressure of business. However I have still somewhat to add to my discourse, like the balance of a debt, and before I turn to other matters let me complete this treatise.)

Τίς οὖν ἡ τῶν Πυθαγορικῶν εὐλάβεια περὶ τὰ τῶν θεῶν ὀνόματα, τίς δὲ ἡ Πλάτωνος; ποταπὸς δὲ ἦν ἐν τούτοις Ἀριστοτέλης; ἆρ᾽ οὐκ ἄξιον αὐτὸ ἰδεῖν; ἢ τὸν μὲν Σάμιον οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ τοιοῦτον γενέσθαι; καὶ γὰρ οὔτε τὸ ὀνόματα θεῶν ἐν τῆς σφραγῖδι φορεῖν ἐπέτρεπεν οὔτε τὸ ὅρκῳ χρῆσθαι προπετῶς τοῖς τῶν θεῶν ὀνόμασιν. εἰ δὲ νῦν λέγοιμι, [237] ὅτι καὶ εἰς Αἴγυπτον ἐπορεύθη καὶ Πέρσας εἶδε καὶ πανταχοῦ πάντα ἐπειράθη τὰ μυστήρια τῶν θεῶν ἐποπτεῦσαι καὶ τελεσθῆναι παντοίας πανταχοῦ τελετάς, ἐρῶ μὲν ἴσως ἄγνωστά σοι, γνώριμα μέντοι καὶ σαφῆ τοῖς πολλοῖς. ἀλλὰ τοῦ Πλάτωνος ἄκουε· τὸ δ᾽ ἐμὸν δέος, ὦ Πρώταρχε, πρὸς τὰ τῶν θεῶν ὀνόματα οὐκ ἔστι κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ πέρα τοῦ μεγίστου φόβου. καὶ νῦν τὴν μὲν Ἀφροδίτην, ὅπῃ ἐκείνῃ φίλον, ταύτῃ προσαγορεύω· [B] τὴν δ᾽ ἡδονὴν οἶδα ὡς ἔστι ποικίλον· ταῦτα ἐν Φιλήβῳ λέγεται, καὶ τοιαῦτα ἕτερα πάλιν ἐν Τιμαίῳ· πιστεύειν γὰρ [pg 156] ἁπλῶς ἀξιοῖ καὶ χωρὶς ἀποδείξεως λεγομένοις, ὅσα ὑπὲρ τῶν θεῶν φασιν οἱ ποιηταί. ταῦτα δὲ παρέθηκα, μή ποτέ σοι παράσχῃ πρόφασιν, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τῶν Πλατωνικῶν πολλοῖς, ὁ Σωκράτης εἴρων ὢν φύσει τὴν Πλατωνικὴν ἀτιμάσαι δόξαν. ἐκεῖ γὰρ οὐχ [C] ὁ Σωκράτης, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ Τίμαιος ταῦτα λέγει ἥκιστα ὢν εἴρων. καίτοι τοῦτό γέ ἐστιν οὐχ ὑγιὲς μὴ τὰ λεγόμενα ἐξετάζειν, ἀλλὰ τοὺς λέγοντας, καὶ τὸ πρὸς τίνας οἱ λόγοι γίγνονται. βούλει δῆτα[273] τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο τὴν πάνσοφον ὑπαγορεύσω σειρῆνα, τὸν τοῦ λογίου τύπον Ἑρμοῦ, τὸν τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι καὶ ταῖς Μούσαις φίλον; ἐκεῖνος ἀξιοῖ τοὺς ἐπερωτῶντας ἢ ζητεῖν ὅλως ἐπιχειροῦντας, εἰ θεοί εἰσιν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώπους ἀποκρίσεως τυγχάνειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς [D] τὰ θηρία κολάσεως. εἰ δὲ ἀνεγνώκεις τὸν συστατικὸν[274] αὐτοῦ λόγον, ὃς ὥσπερ τῆς Πλάτωνος, οὕτω δὴ[275] καὶ τῆς ἐκείνου διατριβῆς προυγέγραπτο, ἔγνως ἂν πρὸ πάντων, ὅτι τὰ πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς εὐσεβεῖς εἶναι καὶ μεμυῆσθαι πάντα τὰ μυστήρια καὶ τετελέσθαι τὰς ἁγιωτάτας τελετὰς καὶ διὰ πάντων τῶν μαθημάτων ἦχθαι τοῖς εἴσω τοῦ περιπάτου βαδίζουσι προηγόρευτο.[276]

(I ask you then what reverence for the names of the gods was shown by the Pythagoreans and by Plato? What was Aristotle's attitude in these matters? Is it not worth while to pay attention to this? Or surely no one will deny that he of Samos[277] was reverent? For he did not even allow the names of the gods to be used on a seal, nor oaths to be rashly uttered in the names of the gods. And if I should go on to say that he also travelled to Egypt and visited Persia, and everywhere endeavoured to be admitted to the inner mysteries of the gods and everywhere to be initiated into every kind of rite, I shall be saying what is familiar and obvious to most people, though you may not have heard of it. However, listen to what Plato says: “But for my part, Protarchus, I feel a more than human awe, indeed a fear beyond expression, of the names of the gods. Now therefore I will address Aphrodite by whatever name pleases her best; though as for pleasure, I know that it has many forms.” This is what he says in the Philebus[278] and he says the same sort of thing again in the Timaeus.[279] For he says that we ought to believe directly and without proof what we are told, I mean what the poets say about the gods. And I have brought forward this passage for fear that Socrates may furnish you with an excuse,—as I believe he does to many Platonists because of his natural tendency to irony,—to slight the doctrine of Plato. For it is not Socrates who is speaking here, but Timaeus, who had not the least tendency to irony. Though for that matter it is not a sound principle to enquire who says a thing and to whom, rather than the actual words. But now will you allow me to cite next that all-wise Siren, the living image of Hermes the god of eloquence, the man dear to Apollo and the Muses?[280] Well, he declares that all who raise the question or seek to enquire at all whether gods exist ought not to be answered as though they were men but to be chastised as wild beasts. And if you had read that introductory sentence which was inscribed over the entrance to his school, like Plato's, you would most surely know that those who entered the Lyceum were warned to be reverent to the gods, to be initiated into all the mysteries, to take part in the most sacred ceremonies, and to be instructed in knowledge of every kind.)

[238] Σὺ δὲ ὅπως ἡμῖν μὴ τὸν Διογένη προβαλὼν ὥσπερ τι μορμολυκεῖον ἐκφοβήσεις.[281] οὐ γὰρ ἐμυήθη, φασίν, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὸν προτρεπόμενον μυηθῆναι, Γελοῖον, εἶπεν, ὦ νεανίσκε, εἰ τοὺς μὲν τελώνας οἴει ταύτης ἕνεκα τῆς τελετῆς κοινωνήσειν τοῖς ὁσίοις τῶν ἐν ᾅδου καλῶν, Ἀγησίλαον [pg 158] δὲ καὶ Ἐπαμεινώνδαν ἐν τῷ βορβόρῳ κείσεσθαι. τοῦτο, ὦ νεανίσκε, βαθὺ λίαν ἐστὶ καὶ δεόμενον ἐξηγήσεως, [B] ὡς ἐμαυτὸν πείθω, μείζονος, ὁποίας[282] ἡμῖν αὐταὶ δοῖεν αἱ θεαὶ τὴν ἐπίνοιαν; νομίζω δὲ αὐτὴν ἤδη καὶ δεδόσθαι. φαίνεται γὰρ ὁ Διογένης οὐχ, ὥσπερ ὑμεῖς ἀξιοῦτε, δυσσεβής, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνοις, ὧν μικρῷ πρόσθεν ἐπεμνήσθην, προσόμοιος. ἀπιδὼν γὰρ εἰς τὴν περίστασιν τὴν καταλαβοῦσαν αὐτόν, εἶτα εἰς τὰς ἐντολὰς βλέπων τοῦ Πυθίου καὶ συνιεὶς[283] ὅτι τὸν μυούμενον ἐχρῆν πολιτογραφηθῆναι πρότερον καὶ Ἀθηναῖον, [C] εἰ καὶ μὴ φύσει, τῷ νόμῳ γε γενέσθαι, τοῦτο ἔφυγεν, οὐ τὸ μυηθῆναι, νομίζων αὑτὸν εἶναι τοῦ κόσμου πολίτην, καὶ ταῖς ὅλαις τῶν θεῶν οὐσίαις, αἳ τὸν ὅλον κοινῇ κόσμον ἐπιτροπεύουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ ταῖς τὰ μέρη κατανειμαμέναις αὐτοῦ, διὰ μεγαλοφροσύνην ἀξιῶν συμπολιτεύεσθαι· τό τε νόμιμον οὐ παρέβη αἰδοῖ τῶν θεῶν, καίτοι τἆλλα πατῶν καὶ παραχαράττων· αὑτόν [D] τε οὐκ ἐπανήγαγεν, ὄθεν ἄσμενος ἠλευθέρωτο. τί δ᾽ ἦν τοῦτο; τὸ πόλεως μιᾶς δουλεῦσαι νόμοις ἑαυτόν τε ὑποθεῖναι τούτῳ, ὅπερ ἦν ἀνάγκη παθεῖν Ἀθηναίῳ γενομένῳ. πῶς γὰρ οὐκ ἔμελλεν ὁ τῶν θεῶν ἕνεκεν εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν βαδίζων, ὁ τῷ Πυθίῳ πεισθεὶς καὶ φιλοσοφήσας ὥσπερ Σωκράτης· φησὶ γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς εἶναι Πύθιον οἴκοι παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ, ὅθεν αὐτῷ καὶ ἡ ὁρμὴ [pg 160] πρὸς φιλοσοφίαν ἐγένετο· [239] παριέναι τῶν ἀνακτόρων εἴσω καὶ μάλα ἀσμένως, εἰ μὴ τοῦτο ἐξέκλινε τὸ ὑποθεῖναι νόμοις ἑαυτὸν καὶ δοῦλον ἀποφῆναι πολιτείας; ἀλλὰ διὰ τί μὴ ταύτην αὐτὴν εἶπε τὴν αἰτίαν, ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων δὲ τὴν παραιρουμένην οὐ σμικρὰ τῆς τῶν μυστηρίων σεμνότητος; ἴσως μὲν ἄν τις τὰ τοιαῦτα καὶ Πυθαγόρᾳ μάλιστα ἐπισκήψειεν, οὐκ ὀρθῶς λογιζόμενος. οὔτε γὰρ ῥητέον πάντα ἐστίν, αὐτῶν τε οἶμαι τούτων, ὧν θέμις φάναι, ἔνια πρὸς τοὺς πολλοὺς σιωπητέον εἶναί μοι φαίνεται. [B] φανερὰ δὲ ὅμως ἐστὶ καὶ τούτων ἡ αἰτία. κατανοήσας γὰρ ἀμελοῦντα μὲν τῆς περὶ τὸν βίον ὀρθότητος, ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ μεμυῆσθαι μέγα φρονοῦντα[284] τὸν παραινοῦντα αὐτῷ τοιαῦτα, σωφρονίζων ἅμα καὶ διδάσκων αὐτόν, ὅτι τοῖς[285] μέν, οἷς ἀξίως τοῦ μυηθῆναι βεβίωται, καὶ μὴ μυηθεῖσιν οἱ θεοὶ [C] τὰς ἀμοιβὰς ἀκεραίους φυλάττουσι, τοῖς δὲ μοχθηροῖς οὐδέν ἐστι πλέον, κἂν εἴσω τῶν ἱερῶν εἰσφρήσωσι περιβόλων. ἢ γὰρ οὐ ταῦτα καὶ ὁ ἱεροφάντης προαγορεύει, ὅστις χεῖρα μὴ καθαρὸς καὶ ὅντινα μὴ χρή, τούτοις ἀπαγορεύων μὴ μυεῖσθαι;

(And do not try to frighten me by bringing forward Diogenes as a sort of bogey. He was never initiated, they tell us, and replied to some one who once advised him to be initiated: “It is absurd of you, my young friend, to think that any tax-gatherer, if only he be initiated, can share in the rewards of the just in the next world, while Agesilaus and Epameinondas are doomed to lie in the mire.”[286] Now this, my young friend, is a very hard saying and, I am persuaded, calls for more profound discussion. May the goddesses themselves grant us understanding thereof! Though indeed I think that has already been bestowed by them. For it is evident that Diogenes was not impious, as you aver, but resembled those philosophers whom I mentioned a moment ago. For having regard to the circumstances in which his lot was cast, and next paying heed to the commands of the Pythian god, and knowing that the candidate for initiation must first be registered as an Athenian citizen, and if he be not an Athenian by birth must first become one by law, it was this he avoided, not initiation, because he considered that he was a citizen of the world; and moreover such was the greatness of his soul that he thought he ought to associate himself with the divine nature of all the gods who in common govern the whole universe, and not only with those whose functions are limited to certain portions of it. And out of reverence for the gods he did not transgress their laws, though he trampled on all other opinions and tried to give a new stamp to the common currency. And he did not return to that servitude from which he had joyfully been released. What servitude do I mean? I mean that he would not enslave himself to the laws of a single city and submit himself to all that must needs befall one who had become an Athenian citizen. For is it likely that a man who in order to honour the gods journeyed to Olympia, and like Socrates embraced philosophy in obedience to the Pythian oracle,—for he says himself that at home and in private he received the commands of that oracle and hence came his impulse to philosophy[287]—is it likely I say that such a man would not very gladly have entered the temples of the gods but for the fact that he was trying to avoid submitting himself to any set of laws and making himself the slave of any one constitution? But why, you will say, did he not assign this reason, but on the contrary a reason that detracted not a little from the dignity of the Mysteries? Perhaps one might bring this same reproach against Pythagoras as well, but the reasoning would be incorrect. For everything ought not to be told, nay more, even of those things that we are permitted to declare, some, it seems to me, we ought to refrain from uttering to the vulgar crowd.[288] However the explanation in this case is obvious. For since he perceived that the man who exhorted him to be initiated neglected to regulate his own life aright, though he prided himself on having been initiated, Diogenes wished at the same time to reform his morals and to teach him that the gods reserve their rewards without stint for those whose lives have earned them the right to be initiated, even though they have not gone through the ceremony, whereas the wicked gain nothing by penetrating within the sacred precincts. For this is what the hierophant proclaims, when he refuses the rite of initiation to him “whose hands are not pure or who for any reason ought not![289]”)

Τί πέρας ἡμῖν ἔσται τῶν λόγων, εἰ ταῦτα μήπω σε πείθει;

(But where would this discourse end if you are still unconvinced by what I have said?)

[pg 165]

Oration VIII

Introduction to Oration VIII

The Eighth Oration is a “speech of consolation” (παραμυθητικὸς λόγος), a familiar type of Sophistic composition. In consequence of the attacks on Sallust by sycophants at court, and moreover jealous of his friendship with Julian, Constantius ordered him to leave Gaul. In this discourse, which was written before the open rupture with Constantius, Julian alludes only once and respectfully to his cousin. But Asmus thinks he can detect in it a general resemblance to the Thirteenth Oration of Dio Chrysostom, where Dio tries to comfort himself for his banishment by the tyrant Domitian, and that Sallust was expected to appreciate this and the veiled attack on Constantius. Julian addresses the discourse to himself, but it was no doubt sent to Sallust.

After Julian's accession Sallust was made prefect in 362 and consul in 363. He was the author of a manifesto of Neo-Platonism, the treatise On the Gods and the World, and to him was dedicated Julian's Fourth Oration.[290]

ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΚΑΙΣΑΡΟΣ

(Julian, Emperor)

[240] ΕΠΙ ΤΗΙ ΕΞΟΔΩΙ ΤΟΥ ΑΓΑΘΩΤΑΤΟΥ ΣΑΛΟΥΣΤΙΟΥ ΠΑΡΑΜΥΘΗΤΙΚΟΣ ΕΙΣ ΕΑΥΤΟΝ

(A Consolation to Himself Upon The Departure of the Excellent Sallust)

Ἁλλ᾽ εἰ μὴ καὶ πρὸς σὲ διαλεχθείην ὅσα πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν διελέχθην, ἐπειδή σε βαδίζειν ἐπυθόμην χρῆναι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, ἔλαττον ἔχειν οἰήσομαι πρὸς παραψυχήν, ὦ φίλε ἑταῖρε, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν πεπορίσθαι τινὰ ῥᾳστώνην ἐμαυτῷ νομιῶ, ἧς σοί γε οὐ μεταδέδωκα. [B] κοινωνήσαντας γὰρ ἡμᾶς ἀλλήλοις πολλῶν μὲν ἀλγεινῶν, πολλῶν δὲ ἡδέων ἔργων τε καὶ λόγων, ἐν πράγμασιν ἰδίοις τε καὶ δημοσίοις, οἴκοι καὶ ἐπὶ στρατοπέδου, κοινὸν[291] εὑρίσκεσθαι χρὴ τῶν παρόντων, ὁποῖά ποτ᾽ ἂν ᾖ, παιώνιον ἄκος. ἀλλὰ τίς ἂν ἡμῖν ἢ τὴν Ὀρφέως μιμήσαιτο[292] λύραν ἢ τοῖς Σειρήνων ἀντηχήσειε[293] μέλεσιν ἢ τὸ νηπενθὲς ἐξεύροι φάρμακον; εἴτε λόγος ἦν ἐκεῖνο πλήρης Αἰγυπτίων διηγημάτων, εἴθ᾽ ὅπερ αὐτὸς ἐποίησεν, ἐν τοῖς ἑπομένοις [C] ἐνυφήνας τὰ Τρωικὰ πάθη, τοῦτο τῆς Ἑλένης παρ᾽ Αἰγυπτίων μαθούσης, οὐχ ὅσα Ἕλληνες καὶ Τρῶες ἀλλήλους ἔδρασαν, ἀλλὰ ποταποὺς εἶναι χρὴ τοὺς λόγους, οἳ τὰς μὲν [pg 168] ἀλγηδόνας ἀφαιρήσουσι τῶν ψυχῶν, εὐφροσύνης δὲ καὶ γαλήνης αἴτιοι καταστήσονται. καὶ γάρ πως ἔοικεν ἡδονὴ καὶ λύπη τῆς αὐτῆς κορυφῆς ἐξῆφθαι καὶ παρὰ [241] μέρος ἀλλήλαις ἀντιμεθίστασθαι. τῶν προσπιπτόντων δὲ καὶ τὰ λίαν ἐργώδη φασὶν οἱ σοφοὶ τῷ νοῦν ἔχοντι φέρειν οὐκ ἀλάττονα τῆς δυσκολίας τὴν εὐπάθειαν, ἐπεὶ καὶ τὴν μέλιτταν ἐκ τῆς δριμυτάτης πόας τῆς περὶ τὸν Ὕμηττὸν φυομένης γλυκεῖαν ἀνιμᾶσθαι δρόσον καὶ τοῦ μέλιτος εἶναι δημιουργόν. ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν σωμάτων ὅσα μὲν ὑγιεινὰ καὶ ῥωμαλέα καθέστηκεν, [B] ὑπὸ τῶν τυχόντων τρέφεται σιτίων, καὶ τὰ δυσχερῆ δοκοῦντα πολλάκις ἐκείνοις οὐκ ἀβλαβῆ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς ἰσχύος αἴτια γέγονεν· ὅσοις δὲ πονηρῶς ἔχει φύσει καὶ τροφῆς καὶ ἐπιτηδεύσει τὸ σῶμα, τὸν πάντα βίον νοσηλευομένοις, τούτοις καὶ τὰ κουφότατα βαρυτάτας εἴωθε προστιθέναι βλάβας. οὐκοῦν καὶ τῆς διανοίας ὅσοι μὲν οὕτως ἐπεμελήθησαν, ὡς μὴ παμπονήρως ἔχειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑγιαίνειν μετρίως, εἰ καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν Ἀντισθένους καὶ Σωκράτους ῥώμην μηδὲ [C] τὴν Καλλισθένους ἀνδρείαν μηδὲ τὴν Πολέμωνος ἀπάθειαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὥστε δύνασθαι τὸ μέτριον ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις αἱρεῖσθαι, τυχὸν ἂν καὶ ἐν δυσκολωτέροις εὐφραίνοιντο.

(Ah, my beloved comrade, unless I tell you all that I said to myself when I learned that you were compelled to journey far from my side, I shall think I am deprived of some comfort; or rather, I shall consider that I have not even begun to procure some assuagement for my grief unless I have first shared it with you. For we two have shared in many sorrows and also in many pleasant deeds and words, in affairs private and public, at home and in the field, and therefore for the present troubles, be they what they may, we must needs discover some cure, some remedy that both can share. But who will imitate for us the lyre of Orpheus, who will echo for us the songs of the Sirens or discover the drug nepenthe?[294] Though that was perhaps some tale full of Egyptian lore or such a tale as the poet himself invented, when in what follows he wove in the story of the sorrows of the Trojans, and Helen had learned it from the Egyptians; I do not mean a tale of all the woes that the Greeks and Trojans inflicted on one another, but rather tales such as they must be that will dispel the griefs of men's souls and have power to restore cheerfulness and calm. For pleasure and pain, methinks, are connected at their source[295] and succeed each other in turn. And philosophers assert that in all that befalls the wise man the very greatest trials afford him as much felicity as vexation; and thus, as they say, does the bee extract sweet dew from the bitterest herb that grows on Hymettus and works it into honey.[296] Even so bodies that are naturally healthy and robust are nourished by any kind of food, and food that often seems unwholesome for others, far from injuring them, makes them strong. On the other hand, the slightest causes usually inflict very serious injuries on persons who by nature or nurture, or owing to their habits, have an unsound constitution and are lifelong invalids. Just so with regard to the mind: those who have so trained it that it is not altogether unhealthy but moderately sound, though it do not indeed exhibit the vigour of Antisthenes or Socrates, or the courage of Callisthenes, or the imperturbability of Polemon, but so that it can under the same conditions as theirs adopt the golden mean, they, I say, will probably be able to remain cheerful in more trying conditions.)

Ἐγώ τοι καὶ αὐτὸς πεῖραν ἐμαυτοῦ λαμβάνων, ὅπως πρὸς τὴν σὴν πορείαν ἔχω τε καὶ ἕξω, τοσοῦτον ὠδυνήθην, ὅσον ὅτε πρῶτον τὸν ἐμαυτοῦ καθηγεμόνα κατέλιπον οἴκοι· πάντων γὰρ ἀθρόως εἰσῄει με μνήμη, τῆς τῶν πόνων κοινωνίας, ὧν ἀλλήλοις συνδιηνέγκαμεν, τῆς ἀπλάστου καὶ [pg 170] καθαρᾶς ἐντεύξεως, [D] τῆς ἀδόλου καὶ δικαίας ὁμιλίας, τῆς ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς καλοῖς κοινοπραγίας, τῆς πρὸς τοὺς πονηροὺς ἰσορρόπου τε καὶ ἀμεταμελήτου προθυμίας τε καὶ ὁρμῆς, ὡς μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἔστημεν πολλάκις ἶσον θυμὸν ἔχοντες, ὁμότροποι καὶ ποθεινοὶ φίλοι. πρὸς δὲ αὖ τούτοις εἰσῄει με μνήμη τοῦ ΟἸώθη δ᾽ Ὀδυσεύς· εἰμὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ νῦν ἐκείνῳ παραπλήσιοδςσ, ἐπεὶ σὲ μὲν κατὰ τὸν Ἕκτορα θεὸς ἐξήγαγεν ἔξω βελῶν, ὧν οἱ συκοφάνται [242] πολλάκις ἀφῆκαν ἐπὶ σέ, μᾶλλον δὲ εἰς ἐμέ, διὰ σοῦ τρῶσαι βουλόμενοι, ταύτῃ με μόνον ἁλώσιμον ὑπολαμβάνοντες, εἰ τοῦ πιστοῦ φίλου καὶ προθύμου συνασπιστοῦ καὶ πρὸς τοὺς κινδύνους ἀπροφασίστου κοινωνοῦ τῆς συνουσίας στερήσειαν. οὐ μὴν ἔλαττον οἶμαί σε διὰ τοῦτο ἀλγεῖν ἢ ἐγὼ νῦν, ὅτι σοι τῶν πόνων καὶ τῶν κινδύνων ἔλαττον μέτεστιν, [B] ἀλλὰ καὶ πλέον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ δεδιέναι καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς κεφαλῆς, μή τι πάθῃ. καὶ γάρ τοι καὶ αὐτὸς οὐκ ἐν δευτέρῳ τῶν ἐμὼν ἐθέμην τὰ σά, καὶ σοῦ δὲ ὁμοίως ἔχοντος πρὸς ἡμᾶς ᾐσθόμην. ὅθεν εἰκότως καὶ μάλα δάκνομαι, ὅτι σοι, τῶν ἄλλων ἕνεκα λέγειν δυναμένῳ

(For my part, when I put myself to the proof to find out how I am and shall be affected by your departure, I felt the same anguish as when at home I first left my preceptor.[297] For everything flashed across my mind at once; the labours that we shared and endured together; our unfeigned and candid conversation; our innocent and upright intercourse; our co-operation in all that was good; our equally-matched and never-repented zeal and eagerness in opposing evildoers. How often we supported each other with one equal temper![298] How alike were our ways! How precious our friendship! Then too there came into my mind the words, “Then was Odysseus left alone.”[299] For now I am indeed like him, since the god has removed you, like Hector,[300] beyond the range of the shafts which have so often been aimed at you by sycophants, or rather at me, since they desired to wound me through you; for they thought that only thus should I be vulnerable if they should deprive me of the society of a faithful friend and devoted brother-in-arms—one who never on any pretext failed to share the dangers that threatened me. Moreover the fact that you now have a smaller share than I in such labours and dangers does not, I think, make your grief less than mine; but you feel all the more anxiety for me and any harm that may befall my person.[301] For even as I never set your interests second to mine, so have I ever found you equally well disposed towards me. I am therefore naturally much chagrined that to you who with regard to all others can say,)

Οὐδὲν μέλει μοι· τἀμὰ γὰρ καλῶς ἔχει,

Μόνος εἰμὶ [C] λύπης αἴτιος καὶ φροντίδος.[302]

(“I heed them not, for my affairs are prosperous,”[303] I alone occasion sorrow and anxiety.)

ἀλλὰ τούτου μὲν ἐξ ἴσης, ὡς ἔοικε, κοινωνοῦμεν, σὺ μὲν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀλγῶν μόνον, ἐγὼ δὲ ἀεὶ ποθῶν τὴν σὴν συνουσίαν καὶ τῆς φιλίας μεμνημένος, ἣν ἐκ τῆς ἀρετῆς μὲν μάλιστα καὶ προηγουμένως, [pg 172] ἔπειτα καὶ διὰ τὴν χρείαν, ἣν ἐγὼ μὲν σοί, σὺ δὲ ἐμοὶ συνεχῶς παρέσχες, ἀνακραθέντες ἀλλήλοις ὡμολογήσαμεν, οὐχ ὅρκοις οὐδὲ τοιαύταις ἀνάγκαις ταῦτα πιστούμενοι, [D] ὥσπερ ὁ Θησεὺς καὶ ὁ Πειρίθους, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ὧν ἀεὶ ταὐτὰ νοοῦντες καὶ προαιρούμενοι κακὸν μὲν δοῦναι τῶν πολιτῶν τινι τοσοῦτον δέω λέγειν ἀπέσχομεν, ὥστε οὐδὲ ἐβουλευσάμεθά ποτε μετὰ ἀλλήλων· χρηστὸν δὲ εἴ τι γέγονεν ἢ βεβούλευται κοινῇ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, τοῦτο ἄλλοις εἰπεῖν μελήσει.

(However this sorrow it seems we share equally, though you grieve only on my account, while I constantly feel the lack of your society and call to mind the friendship that we pledged to one another—that friendship which we ever cemented afresh, based as it was, first and foremost, on virtue, and secondly on the obligations which you continually conferred on me and I on you. Not by oaths or by any such ties did we ratify it, like Theseus and Peirithous, but by being of the same mind and purpose, in that so far from forbearing to inflict injury on any citizen, we never even debated any such thing with one another. But whether anything useful was done or planned by us in common, I will leave to others to say.)

Ὡς μὲν οὖν εἰκότως ἀλγῶ τοῖς παροῦσιν, οὐ φίλου μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ συνεργοῦ πιστοῦ, [243] δοίη δὲ ὁ δαίμων, καὶ πρὸς ὀλίγον ἀπαλλαττόμενος, οἶμαι καὶ Σωκράτη τὸν μέγαν τῆς ἀρετῆς κήρυκα καὶ διδάσκαλον ἔμοιγε συνομολογήσειν ἐξ ὧν ἐκεῖνον γνωρίζομεν, λέγω δὲ τῶν Πλάτωνος λόγων, τεκμαιρόμενος ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ. φησὶ γοῦν ὅτι Χαλεπώτερον ἐφαίνετό μοι ὀρθῶς τὰ πολιτικὰ διοικεῖν· οὔτε γὰρ ἄνευ φίλων ἀνδρῶν καὶ ἑταίρων πιστῶν οἷόν τε εἶναι πράττειν, οὔτ᾽ εὐπορεῖν τούτων ξὺν πολλῇ ῥᾳστώνῃ. καίτοι τοῦτό γε εἰ Πλάτωνι μεῖζον ἐφαίνετο τοῦ διορύττειν [B] τὸν Ἄθω, τί χρὴ προσδοκᾶν ἡμᾶς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοὺς πλέον ἀπολειπομένους τῆς ἐκείνου συνέσεώς τε καὶ γνώμης ἢ ἐκεῖνος τοῦ θεοῦ; ἐμοὶ δὲ οὐδὲ τῆς χρείας μόνον ἕνεκα, ἣν ἀντιδιδόντες ἀλλήλοις ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ ῥᾷον εἴχομεν πρὸς τὰ παρὰ γνώμην ὑπὸ τῆς τύχης καὶ τῶν ἀντιταττομένων ἡμῖν πραττόμενα, ἀλλὰ[304] καὶ τῆς μόνης ἀεί μοι θαλπωρῆς τε [pg 174] καὶ τέρψεως [C] ἐνδεὴς οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν ἔσεσθαι μέλλων, εἰκότως δάκνομαί τε καὶ δέδηγμαι τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ καρδίαν. ἐς τίνα γὰρ οὕτως ἔσται μοι λοιπὸν εὔνουν ἀποβλέψαι φίλον; τίνος δὲ ἀνασχέσθαι τῆς ἀδόλου καὶ καθαρᾶς παρρησίας; τίς δὲ ἡμῖν συμβουλεύσει μὲν ἐμφρόνως, ἐπιτιμήσει δὲ μετ᾽ εὐνοίας, ἐπιρρώσει δὲ πρὸς τὰ καλὰ χωρὶς αὐθαδείας καὶ τύφου, παρρησιάσεται δὲ τὸ πικρὸν ἀφελὼν τῶν λόγων, [D] ὥσπερ οἱ τῶν φαρμάκων ἀφαιροῦντες μὲν τὸ λίαν δυσχερές, ἀπολείποντες δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ χρήσιμον; ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν ἐκ τῆς σῆς φιλίας ὄφελος ἐκαρπωσάμην. τοσούτων δὲ ὁμοῦ ἐστερημένος, τίνων ἂν εὐπορήσαιμι λόγων, οἵ με, διὰ τὸν σὸν πόθον σά τε μήδεα σήν τε ἀγανοφροσύνην αὐτὴν προέσθαι τὴν ψυχὴν κινδυνεύοντα, πείσουσιν ἀτρεμεῖν καὶ φέρειν ὅσα δέδωκεν ὁ θεὸς γενναίως; [244] εἰς ταὐτὸ γὰρ ἔοικεν αὐτῷ νοῶν ὁ μέγας αὐτοκράτωρ ταῦθ᾽ οὕτω νυνὶ βουλεύσασθαι. τί ποτε οὖν ἄρα χρὴ διανοηθέντα καὶ τίνας ἐπῳδὰς εὑρόντα πεῖσαι πρᾴως ἔχειν ὑπὸ τοῦ πάθους θορυβουμένην τὴν ψυχήν; ἆρα ἡμῖν οἱ Ζαμόλξιδός εἰσι μιμητέοι λόγοι, λέγω δὲ τὰς ἐκ Θρᾴκης ἐπῳδάς, ἃς Ἀθήναζε φέρων ὁ Σωκράτης πρὸ τοῦ τὴν ὀδύνην ἰᾶσθαι τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐπᾴδειν ἠξίου τῷ καλῷ Χαρμίδῃ; ἢ τούτους μὲν ἅτε δὴ μείζονας καὶ περὶ μειζόνων οὐ κινητέον, ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ [pg 176] μικρῷ μηχανὰς μεγάλας, [B] ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν ἔμπροσθεν ἔργων, ὧν ἐπυθόμεθα τὰ κλέα, φησὶν ὁ ποιητῆς, ὥσπερ ἐκ λειμῶνος δρεψάμενοι ποικίλου καὶ πολυειδοῦς[305] ἄνθη τὰ κάλλιστα ψυχαγωγήσομεν αὑτοὺς τοῖς διηγήμασι, μικρὰ τῶν ἐκ φιλοσοφίας αὐτοῖς προστιθέντες; ὥσπερ γὰρ οἶμαι τοῖς λίαν γλυκέσιν οἱ παρεγχέοντες οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὁποῖ ἄττα φάρμακα τὸ προσκορὲς αὐτῶν ἀφαιροῦσιν, οὕτω τοῖς διηγήμασιν ἐκ φιλοσοφίας ἔνια προστιθέμενα τὸ δοκεῖν ἐξ [C] ἱστορίας ἀρχαίας ὄχλον ἐπεισάγειν, οὐδὲν δέον, καὶ περιττὴν ἀδολεσχίαν ἀφαιρεῖται.

(Now that it is natural for me to be grieved by the present event, on being parted for ever so short a time—and God grant that it may be short!—from one who is not only my friend but my loyal fellow-worker, I think even Socrates, that great herald and teacher of virtue, will agree; so far at least as I may judge from the evidence on which we rely for our knowledge of him, I mean the words of Plato. At my rate, what he says is: “Ever more difficult did it seem to me to govern a state rightly. For neither is it possible to achieve anything without good friends and loyal fellow-workers, nor is it very easy to obtain enough of these.”[306] And if Plato thought this more difficult than digging a canal through Mount Athos,[307] what must we expect to find it, we who in wisdom and knowledge are more inferior to him than he was to God? But it is not only when I think of the help in the administration that we gave one another in turn, and which enabled us to bear more easily all that fate or our opponents brought to pass contrary to our purpose; but also because I am destined soon to be bereft also of what has ever been my only solace and delight, it is natural that I am and have been cut to the very heart.[308] For in the future to what friend can I turn as loyal as yourself? With whose guileless and pure frankness shall I now brace myself? Who now will give me prudent counsel, reprove me with affection, give me strength for good deeds without arrogance and conceit, and use frankness after extracting the bitterness from the words, like those who from medicines extract what is nauseating but leave in what is really beneficial?[309] These are the advantages that I reaped from your friendship! And now that I have been deprived of all these all at once, with what arguments shall I supply myself, so that when I am in danger of flinging away my life out of regret for you and your counsels and loving kindness,[310] they may persuade me to be calm and to bear nobly whatever God has sent?[311] For in accordance with the will of God our mighty Emperor has surely planned this as all else. Then what now must be my thoughts, what spells must I find to persuade my soul to bear tranquilly the trouble with which it is now dismayed? Shall I imitate the discourses of Zamolxis[312]—I mean those Thracian spells which Socrates brought to Athens and declared that he must utter them over the fair Charmides before he could cure him of his headache?[313] Or must we leave these alone as being, like large machinery in a small theatre, too lofty for our purpose and suited to greater troubles; and rather from the deeds of old whose fame we have heard told, as the poet says,[314] shall we gather the fairest flowers as though from a variegated and many-coloured meadow, and thus console ourselves with such narratives and add thereto some of the teachings of philosophy? For just as, for instance, certain drugs are infused into things that have too sweet a taste, and thus their cloying sweetness is tempered, so when tales like these are seasoned by the maxims of philosophy, we avoid seeming to drag in a tedious profusion of ancient history and a superfluous and uncalled-for flow of words.)

Τί πρῶτον; τί δ᾽ ἔπειτα; τί δ᾽ ὑστάτιον καταλέξω;

(“What first, what next, what last shall I relate?”[315])

πότερον ὡς ὁ Σκηπίων ἐκεῖνος, ὁ τὸν Λαίλιον ἀγαπήσας καὶ φιληθεὶς τὸ λεγόμενον ἴσῳ ζυγῷ παρ᾽ ἐκείνου πάλιν, ἡδέως μὲν αὐτῷ συνῆν, ἔπραττε δὲ οὐδέν, ὧν μὴ πρότερον ἐκεῖνος πύθοιτο καὶ φήσειεν εἶναι πρακτέον; ὅθεν οἶμαι καὶ λόγον παρέσχε [D] τοῖς ὑπὸ φθόνου τὸν Σκηπίωνα λοιδοροῦσιν, ὡς ποιητὴς μὲν ὁ Λαίλιος εἴη τῶν ἔργων, Ἁφρικανὸς δὲ ὁ τούτων ὑποκριτής. αὕτη τοι καὶ ἡμῖν ἡ φήμη πρόσκειται, καὶ οὐ μόνον οὐ δυχεραίνω[316] χαίρω δὲ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ πλέον. τὸ γὰρ τοῖς ὀρθῶς ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου γνωσθεῖσι πεισθῆναι μείζονος ἀρετῆς[317] ὁ Ζήνων ποιεῖται γνώρισμα [245] τοῦ γνῶναί τινα αὐτὸν ἐξ αὑτοῦ τὰ δέοντα, τὴν Ἡσιόδου μεθαρμόττων ῥῆσιν,

(Shall I tell how the famous Scipio, who loved Laelius and was loved by him in return with equal yoke of friendship,[318] as the saying is, not only took pleasure in his society, but undertook no task without first consulting with him and obtaining his advice as to how he should proceed? It was this, I understand, that furnished those who from envy slandered Scipio with the saying that Laelius was the real author of his enterprises, and Africanus merely the actor. The same remark is made about ourselves, and, far from resenting this, I rather rejoice at it. For to accept another's good advice Zeno held to be a sign of greater virtue than independently to decide oneself what one ought to do; and so he altered the saying of Hesiod; for Zeno says:)

Οὗτος μὲν πανάριστος, ὃς εὖ εἰπόντι πίθηται

(“That man is best who follows good advice” instead of “decides all things for himself.”[319])

λέγων ἀντὶ τοῦ νοήσῃ πάνθ᾽ ἑαυτῷ. ἐμοὶ δὲ οὐ διὰ τοῦτο χαρίεν εἶναι δοκεῖ· πείθομαι γὰρ ἀληθέστερον μὲν Ἡσίοδον λέγειν, ἀμφοῖν δὲ ἄμεινον Πυθαγόραν, ὃς καὶ τῇ παροιμίᾳ παρέσχε τὴν ἀρχὴν καὶ τὸ λέγεσθαι κοινὰ τὰ φίλων ἔδωκε τῷ βίῳ, οὐ δήπου τὰ χρήματα λέγων μόνον, [B] ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν τοῦ νοῦ καὶ τῆς φρονήσεως κοινωνίαν, ὥσθ᾽ ὅσα μὲν εὗρες αὐτός, οὐδὲν ἔλαττον ταῦτα τοῦ πεισθέντος ἐστίν, ὅσα δὲ τῶν σῶν ὑπεκρινάμην, τούτων αὐτῶν εἰκότως τὸ ἴσον μετέχεις. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ὁποτέρου μᾶλλον ἂν φαίνηται, καὶ[320] θατέρῳ προσήκει, καὶ τοῖς βασκάνοις οὐδὲν ἔσται πλέον ἐκ τῶν λόγων.

(Not that the alteration is to my liking. For I am convinced that what Hesiod says is truer, that Pythagoras was wiser than either of them when he originated the proverb and gave to mankind the maxim, “Friends have all things in common.”[321] And by this he certainly did not mean money only, but also a partnership in intelligence and wisdom. So all that you suggested belongs just as much to me who adopted it, and whenever I was the actor who carried out your plans you naturally have an equal share in the performance. In fact, to whichever of us the credit may seem to belong, it belongs equally to the other, and malicious persons will gain nothing from their gossip.)

Ἡμῖν δὲ ἐπανιτέον ἐπὶ τὸν Ἀφρικανὸν καὶ τὸν Λαίλιον. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀνῄρητο μὲν ἡ Καρχηδὼν καὶ τὰ περὶ [C] τὴν Λιβύην ἅπαντα τῆς Ῥώμης ἐγεγόνει δοῦλα, πέμπει μὲν Ἀφρικανὸς τὸν Λαίλιον· ἀνήγετο δὲ ἐκεῖνος εὐαγγέλια τῇ πατρίδι φέρων· καὶ ὁ Σκηπίων ἤχθετο μὲν ἀπολειπόμενος τοῦ φίλου, οὐ μὴν ἀπαραμύθητον αὑτῷ τὸ πάθος ᾤετο. καὶ τὸν Λαίλιον δὲ δυσχεραίνειν εἰκός, ἐπειδὴ μόνος ἀνήγετο, οὐ μὴν ἀφόρητον ἐποιεῖτο τὴν συμφοράν. ἔπλει καὶ Κάτων ἀπολιπὼν οἴκοι τοὺς αὑτοῦ συνήθεις, καὶ Πυθαγόρας, καὶ Πλάτων καὶ Δημόκριτος οὐδένα παραλαβόντες κοινωνὸν τῆς ὁδοῦ, [D] καίτοι πολλοὺς οἴκοι τῶν φιλτάτων ἀπολιμπάνοντες. ἐστρατεύσατο καὶ Περικλῆς ἐπὶ τὴν Σάμον οὐκ ἄγων τὸν Ἀναξαγόραν, καὶ τὴν Εὔβοιαν παρεστήσατο ταῖς μὲν ἐκείνου βουλαῖς, ἐπεπαίδευτο γὰρ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνῳ, τὸ σῶμα δὲ οὐκ ἐφελκόμενος ὥσπερ ἄλλο [246] τι τῶν ἀναγκαίων πρὸς τὰς [pg 180] μάχας. καίτοι καὶ τοῦτον ἄκοντα, φασίν, Ἀθηναῖοι τῆς πρὸς τὸν διδάσκαλον ἀπέστησαν συνουσίας. ἀλλ᾽ ἔφερεν ὡς ἀνὴρ ἔμφρων ὢν[322] τὴν ἄνοιαν τῶν αὑτοῦ πολιτῶν ἐγκρατῶς καὶ πρᾴως. καὶ γὰρ ἀνάγκῃ τῇ πατρίδι καθάπερ μητρὶ δικαίως μὲν οὔ, χαλεπῶς δὲ ὅμως ἐχούσῃ πρὸς τὴν συνουσίαν αὐτῶν, εἴκειν ᾤετο χρῆναι, ταῦτα, ὡς εἰκός, λογιζόμενος· ἀκούειν δὲ χρὴ τῶν ἑξῆς ὡς τοῦ Περικλέους αὐτοῦ· Ἐμοὶ πόλις μέν ἐστι καὶ πατρὶς ὁ κόσμος, καὶ φίλοι θεοὶ καὶ δαίμονες καὶ πάντες [B] ὅσοι καὶ ὁπουοῦν[323] σπουδαῖοι. χρὴ δὲ καὶ τὴν οὗ[324] γεγόναμεν τιμᾶν, ἐπειδὴ τοῦτο θεῖός ἐστι νόμος, καὶ πείθεσθαί γε οἷς ἂν ἐπιτάττῃ καὶ μὴ βιάζεσθαι μηδέ, ὅ φησιν ἡ παροιμία, πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν· ἀπαραίτητον γάρ ἐστι τὸ λεγόμενον ζυγὸν τῆς ἀνάγκης. οὐ μὴν ὀδυρτέον οὐδὲ θρηνητέον ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἐπιτάττει τραχύτερον, ἀλλὰ τὸ πρᾶγμα λογιστέον αὐτό. νῦν ἀπαλλάττεσθαι τὸν Ἀναξαγόραν ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν κελεύει, [C] καὶ τὸν ἄριστον οὐκ ὀψόμεθα τῶν ἑταίρων, δι᾽ ὃν ἠχθόμην μὲν τῇ νυκτί, ὅτι μοι τὸν φίλον οὐκ ἐδείκνυεν, ἡμέρᾳ δὲ καὶ ἡλίῳ χάριν ἠπιστάμην, ὅτι μοι παρεῖχεν ὁρᾶν οὗ μάλιστα ἤρων. ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν ὄμματά σοι δέδωκεν ἡ φύσις, ὦ Περίκλεις, μόνον ὥσπερ τοῖς θηρίοις[325], οὐδὲν ἀπεικός ἐστι σε διαφερόντως ἄχθεσθαι· [D] εἰ δέ σοι ψυχὴν ἐνέπνευσε [pg 182] καὶ νοῦν ἐνῆκεν, ὑφ᾽ οὗ τὰ μὲν πολλὰ τῶν γεγενημένων καίπερ οὐ παρόντα νῦν ὁρᾷς διὰ τῆς μνήμης, πολλὰ δὲ καὶ τῶν ἐσομένων ὁ λογισμὸς ἀνευρίσκων ὥσπερ ὄμμασιν ὁρᾶν προσβάλλει τῷ νῷ, καὶ τῶν ἐνεστώτων οὐ τὰ πρὸ τῶν ὀμμάτων ἡ φαντασία μόνον ἀποτυπουμένη δίδωσιν αὐτῷ κρίνειν καὶ καθορᾶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ πόρρω καὶ μυριάσι σταδίων ἀπῳκισμένα τῶν γενομένων παρὰ πόδα [247] καὶ πρὸ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν δείκνυσιν ἐναργέστερον, τί χρὴ τοσοῦτον ἀνιᾶσθαι καὶ σχετλίως φέρειν; ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀμάρτυρος ὁ λόγος ἐστί μοι,

(Let me go back now to Africanus and Laelius. When Carthage had been destroyed[326] and all Libya made subject to Rome, Africanus sent Laelius home and he embarked to carry the good news to their fatherland. And Scipio was grieved at the separation from his friend, but he did not think his sorrow inconsolable. Laelius too was probably afflicted at having to embark alone, but he did not regard it as an insupportable calamity. Cato also made a voyage and left his intimate friends at home, and so did Pythagoras and Plato and Democritus, and they took with them no companion on their travels, though they left behind them at home many whom they dearly loved. Pericles also set out on his campaign against Samos without taking Anaxagoras, and he conquered Euboea by following the latter's advice, for he had been trained by his teaching: but the philosopher himself he did not drag in his train as though he were part of the equipment needed for battle. And yet in his case too we are told that much against his will the Athenians separated him from the society of his teacher. But wise man that he was, he bore the folly of his fellow-citizens with fortitude and mildness. Indeed he thought that he must of necessity bow to his country's will when, as a mother might, however unjustly, she still resented their close friendship; and he probably reasoned as follows. (You must take what I say next as the very words of Pericles.[327]) “The whole world is my city and fatherland, and my friends are the gods and lesser divinities and all good men whoever and wherever they may be. Yet it is right to respect also the country where I was born, since this is the divine law, and to obey all her commands and not oppose them, or as the proverb says kick against the pricks. For inexorable, as the saying goes, is the yoke of necessity. But we must not even complain or lament when her commands are harsher than usual, but rather consider the matter as it actually is. She now orders Anaxagoras to leave me and I shall see no more my best friend, on whose account the night was hateful to me because it did not allow me to see my friend, but I was grateful to daylight and the sun because they allowed me to see him whom I loved best.[328] But, Pericles, if nature had given you eyes only as she has to wild beasts, it would be natural enough for you to feel excessive grief. But since she has breathed into you a soul, and implanted in you intelligence by means of which you now behold in memory many past events, though they are no longer before you: and further since your reasoning power discovers many future events and reveals them as it were to the eyes of your mind; and again your imagination sketches for you not only those present events which are going on under your eyes and allows you to judge and survey them, but also reveals to you things at a distance and many thousand stades[329] removed more clearly than what is going on at your feet and before your eyes, what need is there for such grief and resentment? And to show that I have authority for what I say,)

Νοῦς ὁρῇ καὶ νοῦς ἀκούει

(‘The mind sees and the mind hears,’)

φησὶν ὁ Σικελιώτης, οὕτως ὀξὺ χρῆμα καὶ τάχει χρώμενον ἀμηχάνῳ, ὥσθ᾽ ὅταν τινὰ τῶν δαιμόνων Ὄμηρος ἐθέλῃ κεχρημένον ἀπίστῳ πορείας ἐπιδεῖξαι τάχει,

(says the Sicilian;[330] and mind is a thing so acute and endowed with such amazing speed that when Homer wishes to show us one of the gods employing incredible speed in travelling he says:)

Ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἀΐξῃ νόος ἀνέρος

(‘As when the mind of a man darts swiftly.’[331])

φησί. [B] τούτῳ τοι χρώμενος ῥᾷστα μὲν Ἀθήνηθεν ὄψει τὸν ἐν Ἰωνίᾳ, ῥᾷστα δὲ ἐκ Κελτῶν τὸν ἐν Ἰλλυριοῖς καὶ Θρᾴκῃ, καὶ τὸν ἐν Κελτοῖς ἐκ Θρᾴκης καὶ Ἰλλυριῶν. καὶ γὰρ οὐδ᾽, ὥσπερ τοῖς φυτοῖς οὐκ ἔνι σώζεσθαι τὴν συνήθη χώραν μεταβάλλουσιν, ὅταν ἡ τῶν ὡρῶν ᾖ κράσις ἐναντία, καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συμβαίνει τόπον ἐκ τόπου μεταβάλλουσιν ἢ διαφθείρεσθαι παντελῶς ἢ τὸν τρόπον ἀμείβειν καὶ μετατίθεσθαι περὶ ὧν ὀρθῶς πρόσθεν ἐγνώκεσαν. [C] οὔκουν οὐδὲ τὴν εὔνοιαν ἀμβλυτέραν ἔχειν εἰκός, εἰ μὴ καὶ μᾶλλον ἀγαπᾶν [pg 184] καὶ στέργειν· ἕπεται γὰρ ὕβρις μὲν κόρῳ, ἔρως δὲ ἐνδείᾳ. καὶ ταύτῃ τοίνυν ἕξομεν βέλτιον, ἐπιτεινομένης ἡμῖν τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλους εὐνοίας, καθέξομέν τε ἀλλήλους ἐν ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διανοίαις ἱδρυμένους ὥσπερ ἀγάλματα. καὶ νῦν μὲν ἐγὼ τὸν Ἀναξαγόραν, αὖθις δὲ ἐκεῖνος ὄψεται ἐμέ· κωλύει δὲ οὐδὲν [D] καὶ ἅμα βλέπειν ἀλλήλους, οὐχὶ σαρκία καὶ νεῦρα καὶ μορφῆς τύπωμα, στέρνα τε ἐξεικασμένα πρὸς ἀρχέτυπον σώματος· καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο κωλύει τυχὸν οὐδὲν ταῖς διανοίαις ἡμῶν ἐμφαίνεσθαι· ἀλλ᾽ εἰς τὴν ἀρετὴν καὶ τὰς πράξεις καὶ τοὺς λόγους καὶ τὰς ὁμιλίας καὶ τὰς ἐντεύξεις, ἃς πολλάκις ἐποιησάμεθα μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων, οὐκ ἀμούσως ὑμνοῦντες παιδείαν καὶ δικαιοσύνην καὶ τὸν ἐπιτροπεύοντα νοῦν τὰ θνητὰ καὶ τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, [248] καὶ περὶ πολιτείας καὶ νόμων καὶ τρόπων ἀρετῆς καὶ χρηστῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων διεξιόντες, ὅσα γε ἡμῖν ἐπῄει[332] ἐν καιρῷ τούτων μεμνημένοις. ταῦτα ἐννοοῦντες, τούτοις τρεφόμενοι τοῖς εἰδώλοις τυχὸν οὐκ ὀνείρων νυκτέρων[333] ἰνδάλμασι προσέξομεν οὐδὲ κενὰ καὶ μάταια προσβαλεῖ τῷ νῷ φαντάσματα πονηρῶς ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ σώματος κράσεως αἴσθησις διακειμένη. οὐδὲ γὰρ αὐτὴν παραληψόμεθα τὴν αἴσθησιν ὑπουργεῖν ἡμῖν καὶ ὑπηρετεῖσθαι· [B] ἀλλ᾽ ἀποφυγὼν αὐτὴν ὁ νοῦς ἐμμελετήσει τούτοις πρὸς κατανόησιν καὶ συνεθισμὸν τῶν ἀσωμάτων [pg 186] διεγειρόμενος· νῷ γὰρ δὴ καὶ τῷ κρείττονι σύνεσμεν, καὶ τὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν ἀποφυγόντα καὶ διεστηκότα τῷ τόπῳ, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ δεόμενα τόπου ὁρᾶν τε καὶ αἱρεῖν πεφύκαμεν, ὅσοις ἀξίως βεβίωται τῆς τοιαύτης θέας, ἐννοοῦντες αὐτὴν καὶ συναπτόμενοι.

(So if you employ your mind you will easily from Athens see one who is in Ionia; and from the country of the Celts one who is in Illyria or Thrace; and from Thrace or Illyria one who is in the country of the Celts. And moreover, though plants if removed from their native soil when the weather and the season are unfavourable cannot be kept alive, it is not so with men, who can remove from one place to another without completely deteriorating or changing their character and deviating from the right principles that they had before adopted. It is therefore unlikely that our affection will become blunted, if indeed we do not love and cherish each other the more for the separation. For ‘wantonness attends on satiety,’[334] but love and longing on want. So in this respect we shall be better off if our affection tends to increase, and we shall keep one another firmly set in our minds like holy images. And one moment I shall see Anaxagoras, and the next he will see me. Though nothing prevents our seeing one another at the same instant; I do not mean our flesh and sinews and ‘bodily outline and breasts in the likeness’[335] of the bodily original—though perhaps there is no reason why these too should not become visible to our minds—but I mean our virtue, our deeds and words, our intercourse, and those conversations which we so often held with one another, when in perfect harmony we sang the praises of education and justice and mind that governs all things mortal and human: when too we discussed the art of government, and law, and the different ways of being virtuous and the noblest pursuits, everything in short that occurred to us when, as occasion served, we mentioned these subjects. If we reflect on these things and nourish ourselves with these images, we shall probably pay no heed to the ‘visions of dreams in the night,’[336] nor will the senses corrupted by the alloy of the body exhibit to our minds empty and vain phantoms. For we shall not employ the senses at all to assist and minister to us, but our minds will have escaped from them and so will be exercised on the themes I have mentioned and aroused to comprehend and associate with things incorporeal. For by the mind we commune even with God, and by its aid we are enabled to see and to grasp things that escape the senses and are far apart in space, or rather have no need of space: that is to say, all of us who have lived so as to deserve such a vision, conceiving it in the mind and laying hold thereof.”)

Ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν Περικλῆς, ἅτε δὴ μεγαλόφρων ἀνὴρ [C] καὶ τραφεὶς ἐλευθέρως ἐν ἐλευθέρᾳ τῇ πόλει, ὑψηλοτέροις ἐψυχαγώγει λόγοις αὑτόν· ἐγὼ δὲ γεγονὼς ἐκ τῶν οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσιν ἀνθρωπικωτέροις ἐμαυτὸν θέλγω καὶ παράγω λόγοις, καὶ τὸ λίαν πικρὸν ἀφαιρῶ τῆς λύπης, πρὸς ἕκαστον τῶν ἀεί μοι προσπιπτόντων ἀπὸ τοῦ πράγματος δυσχερῶν τε [D] καὶ ἀτόπων φαντασμάτων ἐφαρμόζειν τινὰ παραμυθίαν πειρώμενος, ὥσπερ ἐπῳδὴν θηρίου δήγματι δάκνοντος αὐτὴν ἔσω τὴν καρδίαν ἡμῶν καὶ τὰς φρένας. ἐκεῖνό τοι πρῶτόν ἐστί μοι τῶν φαινομένων δυσχερῶν. νῦν ἐγὼ μόνος ἀπολελείψομαι καθαρᾶς ἐνδεὴς ὁμιλίας καὶ ἐλευθέρας ἐντεύξεως· οὐ γὰρ ἔστι μοι τέως ὅτῳ διαλέξομαι θαρρῶν ὁμοίως. πότερον οὖν οὐδ᾽ ἐμαυτῷ διαλέγεσθαι ῥᾴδιόν ἐστί μοι; ἀλλ᾽ ἀφαιρήσεταί μέ τις καὶ τὴν ἔννοιαν καὶ προσαναγκάσει νοεῖν ἕτερα καὶ θαυμάζειν παρ᾽ ἃ βούλομαι; ἢ τοῦτο μέν ἐστι τέρας ἤδη καὶ προσόμοιον τῷ γράφειν ἐφ᾽ ὕδατος καὶ τῷ λίθον ἕψειν καὶ τῷ ἱπταμένων ὀρνίθων ἐρευνᾶν ἴχνη τῆς πτήσεως; οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ [249] τούτων ἡμᾶς οὐδεὶς ἀφαιρεῖται, συνεσόμεθα δήπουθεν αὐτοί πως ἑαυτοῖς, ἴσως δὲ καὶ ὁ δαίμων ὑποθήσεταί τι χρηστόν· οὐ γὰρ εἰκὸς ἄνδρα ἑαυτὸν ἐπιτρέψαντα τῷ κρείττονι [pg 188] παντάπασιν ἀμεληθῆναι καὶ καταλειφθῆναι παντελῶς ἔρημον· ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ θεὸς χεῖρα ἑὴν ὑπερέσχε [B] καὶ θάρσος ἐνδίδωσ[337] καὶ μένος ἐμπνεῖ καὶ τὰ πρακτέα τίθησιν ἐπὶ νοῦν καὶ τῶν μὴ πρακτέων ἀφίστησιν. εἵπετό τοι καὶ Σωκράτει δαιμονία φωνὴ κωλύουσα πράττειν ὅσα μὴ χρεὼν ἦν· φησὶ δὲ καὶ Ὅμηρος ὑπὲρ Ἀχιλλέως· τῷ γὰρ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θῆκεν, ὡς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὰς ἐννοίας ἡμῶν ἐγείροντος, ὅταν ἐπιστρέψας ὁ νοῦς εἰς ἑαυτὸν αὑτῷ τε πρότερον ξυγγένηται καὶ τῷ θεῷ δι ἑαυτοῦ μόνου, [C] κωλυδόομενος ὑπ᾽ οὐδενοός. οὐ γὰρ ἀκοῆς ὁ νοῦς δεῖται πρὸς τὸ μαθεῖν οὐδὲ μὴν ὁ θεὸς φωνῆς πρὸς τὸ διδάξαι τὰ δέοντα· ἀλλ᾽ αἰσθήσεως ἔξω πάσης ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος ἡ μετουσία γίνεται τῷ νῷ· τίνα μὲν τρόπον καὶ ὅπως οὐ σχολὴ νῦν ἐπεξιέναι, τὸ δ᾽ ὅτι γίνεται δῆλον[338] καὶ σαφεῖς οἱ μάρτυρες, οὐκ ἄδοξοί τινες οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῇ Μεγαρέως [D] ἄξιοι τάττεσθαι μερίδι, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἀπενεγκαμένων ἐπὶ σοφία τὰ πρωτεῖα.[339]