But the Athenians call silver phialæ ἀργυρίδες, and golden ones they call χρυσίδες. And Pherecrates mentions the silver phiale in the following words in his Persæ—Here, you sir; where are you now carryingThat silver phiale (τὴν ἀργυρίδα τηνδί)?And Cratinus mentions the golden one in his Laws—Making libations with a golden phiale (χρυσίδι,)He gave the serpents drink.And Hermippus, in his Cercopes, says—He first completely drain'd an ample cup,Golden (χρυσίδα) and round, then carried it away. There was also a kind of cup called the βαλανωτὴ phiale, under the bottom of which were placed golden feet. And Teneus says, that among the offerings at Delos there was a brazen palm-tree, the offering of the Naxians, and some golden phialæ, to which he gives the epithet καρυωταί. But Anaxandrides calls cups of this fashion the phialæ of Mars. But the AEolians call the phiale an aracis.
Ἀθηναῖοι δὲ τὰς μὲν ἀργυρᾶς φιάλας ἀργυρίδας λέγουσι, χρυσίδας δὲ τὰς χρυσᾶς. τῆς δὲ ἀργυρίδος Φερεκράτης μὲν ἐν Πέρσαις οὕτως μνημονεύει· οὗτος σύ, ποῖ τὴν ἀργυρίδα τηνδὶ φέρεις; χρυσίδος δὲ Κρατῖνος ἐν Νόμοις· χρυσίδι σπένδων γέγωνε τοῖς ὄφεσι πιεῖν διδούς· καὶ Ἕρμιππος ἐν Κέρκωψι· χρυσίδ’ οἴνου πανσέληνον ἐκπιὼν ὑφείλετο. καὶ ὅ γε ἐ.., ἐκαλεῖτο δέ τις καὶ βαλανωτὴ φιάλη, ἧς τῷ πυθμένι χρυσοῖ ὑπέκειντο ἀστράγαλοι. Σῆμος δ’ ἐν Δήλῳ ἀνακεῖσθαί φησι χαλκοῦν φοίνικα, Ναξίων ἀνάθημα, καὶ καρυωτὰς φιάλας χρυσᾶς. Ἀναξανδρίδης δὲ φιάλας Ἄρεος καλεῖ τὰ ποτήρια ταῦτα. Αἰολεῖς δὲ τὴν φιάλην ἀράκην καλοῦσι.
There is also the phthoïs these are wide-shaped Phialæ with bosses. Eupolis says—He pledged the guests in phthoïdes,writing the dative plural φθοῖσι; but it ought to have an acute on the last syllable; like καρσὶ, παισὶ, φθειρσί. There is the philotesia also. This is a kind of κύλιξ, in which they pledged one another out of friendship, as Pamphilus says. And Demosthenes says, “And he pledged him in the philotesia.” And Alexis says—We, in our private and public capacity,Do pledge you now in this philotesian culix. But, besides being the name of a cup, a company feasting together was also called φιλοτήσιον. Aristophanes says—Now does the shadow of the descending sunMark seven feet: 'tis time for supper now,And the philotesian company invites me.But it was from the system of pledging one another at these banquets that the cup got the name of philotesia—as in the Lysistrata—O thou Persuasion, mistress of my soul!And you, O philotesian cup of wine.There are also chonni. Among the Gortynians this is the name given to a species of cup resembling the thericleum, made of brass, which Hermonax says is given by lovers to the objects of their affection. There are also Chalcidic goblets, having their name and reputation perhaps from Chalcis in Thrace.
Φθίος. πλατεῖαι φιάλαι ὀμφαλωτοί. Εὔπολις· σὺν φθοῖσι προσπεπτωκώς. ἔδει δὲ ὀξύνεσθαι ὡς Καρσί, παισί, φθειρσί, Φιλοτησία. κύλιξ τις ἣν κατὰ φιλίαν προὔπινον, ὥς φησι Πάμφιλος. Δημοσθένης δέ φησι· καὶ φιλοτησίας προὔπινεν. Ἄλεξις· φιλοτησίαν σοι τήνδ’ ἐγὼ ἰδίᾳ τε καὶ κοινῇ κύλικα προπίομαι. ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ καὶ τὸ ἑταιρικὸν συνευωχούμενον φιλοτήσιον. Ἀριστοφάνης· ἑπτάπους γοῦν ἡ σκιὰ ᾽ στιν ἡ ᾽ πὶ τὸ δεῖπνον ὡς ἤδη καλεῖ μ᾽ ὁ χορὸς ὁ φιλοτήσιος. διὰ δὲ τὴν τοιαύτην πρόποσιν ἐκαλεῖτο καὶ κύλιξ φιλοτησία, ὡς ἐν Λυσιστράτῃ· δέσποινα Πειθοῖ καὶ κύλιξ φιλοτησία. χόννοι. παρὰ Γορτυνίοις ποτηρίου εἶδος, ὅμοιον θηρικλείῳ, χάλκεον ὃ δίδοσθαι τῷ ἁρπασθέντι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐραστοῦ φησιν Ἑρμῶναξ. Χαλκιδικὰ ποτήρια ἴσως ἀπὸ τῆς Χαλκίδος τῆς Θρᾳκικῆς εὐδοκιμοῦντα.
There are also χυτρίδες; Alexis, in his Supposititious Child, says—I, seeking to do honour to the king,To Ptolemy and to his sister, tookFour χυτρίδια of strong, untemper'd wine,And drank them at a draught, with as much pleasureAs any one ever swallow'd half-and-half:And, for the sake of this agreement, whyShould I not now feast in this splendid light?But Herodotus, in the fifth book of his History, says “that the Argives and Aeginetans made a law that no one should ever use any Attic vessel of any kind in their sacrifices, not even if made of earthenware; but that for the future every one should drink out of the χυτρίδες of the country.” And Meleager the Cynic, in his Symposium, writes as follows—“And in the meantime he proposed a deep pledge to his health, twelve deep χυτρίδια full of wine.”
χυτρῖδες. Ἄλεξις ἐν Ὑποβολιμαίῳ· ἐγὼ Πτολεμαίου τοῦ βασιλέως τέτταρα χυτρίδι’ ἀκράτου· τῆς τ’ ἀδελφῆς προσλαβὼν τῆς τοῦ βασιλέως ταὔτ᾽, ἀπνευστὶ τ’ ἐκπιὼν ὡς ἄν τις ἥδιστ’ ἴσον ἴσῳ κεκραμένον, καὶ τῆς Ὁμονοίας, διὰ τί νῦν μὴ κωμάσω ἄνευ λυχνούχου πρὸς τὸ τηλικοῦτο φῶς; Ἡρόδοτος δ’ ἐν τῇ πέμπτῃ τῶν Ἱστοριῶν νόμον φησὶ θέσθαι Ἀργείους καὶ Αἰγινήτας Ἀττικὸν μηδὲν προσφέρειν πρὸς τὰς θυσίας μηδὲ κέραμον, ἀλλ’ ἐκ χυτρίδων ἐπιχωρίων τὸ λοιπὸν αὐτόθι εἶναι πίνειν. καὶ Μελέαγρος δ’ ὁ κυνικὸς ἐν τῷ Συμποσίῳ οὑτωσὶ γράφει· κἀν τοσούτῳ πρόποσιν αὐτῷ βαρεῖαν διέδωκε, χυτρίδια βαθέα δώδεκα.
There is also the ψυγεὺς or ψυκτήρ. Plato, in his Symposium, says,—“But, O boy, bring, said he, that psycter hither (for he had seen one which held more than eight cotylæ). Accordingly, when' he had filled it, first of all he drank it himself, and then he ordered it to be filled again for Socrates..... as Archebulus was attempting to be prolix, the boy, pouring the wine out at a very seasonable time, overturned the psycter.” And Alexis, in his Colonist, says—A psygeus, holding three full cotylæ.And Dioxippus, in his Miser, says—And from Olympicus he then receivedSix thericlean cups, and then two psycters.And Menander, in his play entitled The Brazier's Shop, says—And, as the present fashion is, they shoutedFor more untemper'd wine; and some one tookA mighty psycter, giving them to drink,And so destroy'd them wretchedly.And Epigenes, in his Heroine, giving a list of many cups, among them mentions the psygeus thus—Now take the boys, and make them hither bringThe thericlean and the Rhodian cups;But bring yourself the psycter and the cyathus,Some cymbia too.And Strattis, in his Psychaste—And one man having stolen a psycter,And his companion, who has taken awayA brazen cyathus, both lie perplex'd,Looking for a chœnix and a cotylis.But Alexis, in his Hippiscus, uses the diminutive form, and calls it a ψυκτηρίδιον, saying—I went to see my friend while at his inn,And there I met a dark-complexion'd man,And told my slaves, for I brought two from home,To put in sight the well-clean'd drinking-cups:There was a silver cyathus, and cupsWeighing two drachmas each; a cymbium,Whose weight was four; a ψυκτηρίδιον,Weighing two obols, thinner than Philippides.
ψυγεὺς ἢ ψυκτήρ. Πλάτων Συμποσίῳ· ἀλλὰ φέρε, παῖ, φάναι, τὸν ψυκτῆρα ἐκεῖνον, ἰδόντα αὐτὸν πλέον ἢ ὀκτὼ κοτύλας χωροῦντα. τοῦτον οὖν ἐμπλησάμενον πρῶτον μὲν αὐτὸν ἐκπιεῖν, ἔπειτα τῷ Σωκράτει κελεύειν ἐγχεῖν. … παραμηκύνειν ἐγχειροῦντος τοῦ Ἀρχεβούλου, εὐκαιρότατα προχέων ὁ παῖς τοῦ οἰναρίου ἀνατρέπει τὸν ψυκτῆρα. Ἄλεξις ἐν Εἰσοικιζομένῳ φησὶ τρικότυλον ψυγέα. Διώξιππος Φιλαργύρῳ· παρ’ Ὀλυμπίχου δὲ θηρικλείους ἔλαβεν ἕξ, ἔπειτα τοὺς δύο ψυγέας. Μένανδρος δ’ ἐν τῷ ἐπιγραφομένῳ δράματι Χαλκεῖά φησιντοῦτο δὴ τὸ νῦν ἔθος ἄκρατον ἐβόων, τὴν μεγάλην. ψυκτῆρά τις προὔπινεν ἂν τοὺς ἀθλίους ἀπολλύων.Ἐπιγένης δ’ ἐν Ἡρωίνῃ καταλέγων πολλὰ ποτήρια καὶ τοῦ ψυγέως οὕτως μνημονεύει· τὴν θηρίκλειον δεῦρο καὶ τὰ Ῥοδιακὰ κόμισον λαβὼν τοὺς παῖδας. εἶτ’ οἴσεις μόνος ψυκτῆρα, κύαθον, κυμβία. Στράττις Ψυχασταῖς· ὁ δέ τις ψυκτῆρ᾽, ὁ δέ τις κύαθον χαλκοῦν κλέψας. ἀπορῶν κεῖται, κοτύλη δ’ ἀνὰ χοίνικα μάττει. Ἄλεξις δ’ ἐν Ἱππίσκῳ ψυκτηρίδιον καλεῖ διὰ τούτων ἀπήντων τῷ ξένῳ εἰς τὴν κατάλυσιν οὗ συνῆν Ἀγωνίδι. τοῖς παισὶ τ’ εἶπα （δύο γὰρ ἦγον οἴκοθεν） τἀκπώματ’ εἰς τὸ φανερὸν ἐκνενιτρωμένα θεῖναι· κύαθος δ’ ἦν ἀργυροῦς （οὗτος μὲν οὖν ἦγεν δύο δραχμάσ）, κυμβίον δὲ τέτταρας ἴσως ἑτέρας, ψυκτηρίδιον δὲ δέκ’ ὀβολούς, Φιλιππίδου λεπτότερον.
But Heracleon of Ephesus says, “The cup which we call ψυγεὺς some name the ψυκτηρία, but the Attic writers make jokes upon the ψυγεὺς, as being a foreign name.” Euphorion, in his Woman Restoring, says—But when they call a ψυγεὺς a ψυκτηρίς,And σεύτλιον τεῦλα, and the φακῆ φακεὺς,What can one do? For I rightly said,Give me, I pray, Pyrgothemis, some changeFor this your language, as for foreign money.And Antiphanes, in his Knights, says—How then are we to live? Our bedclothes areA saddlecloth, and our well-fitting hatOnly a psycter. What would you have more?Here is the very Amalthean horn.And in the Carna he declares plainly that, when pouring out wine, they used the psycter for a cyathus. For after he had said—And putting on the board a tripod and cask,And psycter too, he gets drunk on the wine;in the passage following, he represents his man as saying—So will the drink be fiercer: therefore now,If any one should say it is not fitT' indulge in wine at present, just leave outThis cask, and this one single drinking-cup,And carry all the rest away at once. But Dionysius the pupil of Tryphon, in his treatise on Names, says—“The ancients used to call the psygeus dinus.” But Nicander of Thyatira says, that woods and shady places dedicated to the gods are also called ψυκτῆρες, as being places where one may cool oneself (ἀναψύξαι). Aeschylus, in his Young Men, says—And gentle airs, in the cool, shady places (ψυκτηρίυις);and Euripides, in his Phaethon, says—The trees, affording a cool shade (ψυκτήρια),Shall now embrace him in their loving arms;and the author of the poem called Aegimius, whether it really was Hesiod, or only Cecrops of Miletus, says—There shall my cool shade (ψυκτήριον) be, O king of men.
Ἡρακλέων δ’ ὁ Ἐφέσιος ὃν ἡμεῖς, φησί, ψυγέα καλοῦμεν, ψυκτηρίαν τινὲς ὀνομάζουσιν. τοὺς δ’ Ἀττικοὺς καὶ κωμῳδεῖν τὸν ψυγέα ὡς ξενικὸν ὄνομα. εὔφρων ἐν Ἀποδιδούσῃ· ἐπὰν δὲ καλέσῃ ψυγέα τὸν ψυκτηρίαν, τὸ τευτλίον δὲ σεῦτλα, φακέαν τὴν φακῆν, τί δεῖ ποιεῖν; σὺ γὰρ εἶπον.β β. ὥσπερ χρυσίου φωνῆς ἀπότεισον, Πυργόθεμι, καταλλαγήν. Ἀντιφάνης Ἱππεῦσι· πῶς οὖν διαιτώμεσθα; β. τὸ μὲν ἐφίππιον στρῶμ’ ἐστὶν ἡμῖν, ὁ δὲ καλὸς πῖλος κάδος, ψυκτήρ—τί βούλει; πάντ᾽. Ἀμαλθείας κέρας. ἐν δὲ τῇ Καρίνῃ σαφῶς δηλοῦται ὅτι τούτῳ ἐχρῶντο οἰνοχοοῦντες κυάθῳ. εἰπὼν γάρ· τρίποδα καὶ κάδον παραθέμενος ψυκτῆρὰ τ’ οἴνου … μεθύσκεται, ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς ποιεῖ αὐτὸν λέγοντα· ἔσται πότος σφοδρότερος. οὐκοῦν μὴ κεράσῃ τις, οὐκ ἔτι ἔξεστι κυαθίζειν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν. παῖ, τρέχε, τὸν δὲ κάδον ἔξω καὶ τὸ ποτήριον λαβὼν ἀπόφερε τἄλλα πάντα. Διονύσιος δὲ ὁ τοῦ Τρύφωνος ἐν τῷ περὶ Ὀνομάτων τὸν ψυγέα, φησίν, ἐκάλουν οἱ ἀρχαῖοι δῖνον. Νίκανδρος δ’ ὁ Θυατειρηνὸς καλεῖσθαί φησι ψυκτῆρας καὶ τοὺς ἀλσώδεις καὶ συσκίους τόπους τοὺς τοῖς θεοῖς ἀνειμένους, ἐν οἷς ἔστιν ἀναψῦξαι. Αἰσχύλος Νεανίσκοις· σαύρας ὑποσκίοισιν ἐν ψυκτηρίοις. Εὐριπίδης Φαέθοντι· ψυκτήρια δένδρεα φίλαισιν ὠλέναισι δέξεται. καὶ ὁ τὸν Αἰγίμιον δὲ ποιήσας εἴθ’ Ἡσίοδός ἐστιν ἢ Κέρκωψ ὁ Μιλήσιος· ἔνθα ποτ’ ἔσται ἐμὸν ψυκτήριον, ὄρχαμε λαῶν.
There is also the oidos. This was the name of a drinking-cup, as we are told by Tryphon, in his Onomasticon; a cup given to him who sang the scolia—as Antiphanes shows in his Doubles—A. What will there be, then, for the godsB. Why, nothing,Unless now some one mixes wine for them.A. Stop; take this ᾠδὸς, and abandon allThose other worn-out fashions; sing no moreOf Telamon, or Pæon, or Harmodius.There are also the ooscyphia. Now respecting the shape of these cups, Asclepiades the Myrlean, in his Essay on the Nestoris, says that it has two bottoms, one of them wrought on to the bowl of the cup, and of the same piece with it; but the other attached to it, beginning with a sharp point, and ending in a broad bottom, on which the cup stands. There is also the ὠὸν, or egg-cup. Dinon, in the third book of his Affairs of Persia, speaks as follows:—There is also a bread called potibazis, made of barley and roasted wheat; and a crown of cypress leaves; and wine tempered in a golden oon, from which the king himself drinks."
ᾠδός. οὕτως ἐκαλεῖτο τὸ ποτήριον, φησὶ Τρύφων ἐν τοῖς Ὀνοματικοῖς, τὸ ἐπὶ τῷ σκολίῳ διδόμενον, ὡς Ἀντιφάνης παρίστησιν ἐν Διπλασίοις· τί οὖν ἐνέσται τοῖς θεοῖσιν; β. οὐδὲ ἕν, ἂν μὴ κεράσῃ τις. α. ἴσχε, τὸν ᾠδὸν λάμβανε, ἔπειτα μηδὲν τῶν ἀπηρχαιωμένων τούτων περάνῃς, τὸν Τελαμῶνα μηδὲ τὸν παιῶνα μηδ’ Ἁρμόδιον. ᾠοσκυφία. περὶ τῆς ἰδέας τῶν ποτηρίων Ἀσκληπιάδης ὁ Μυρλεανὸς ἐν τῷ περὶ τῆς Νεστορίδος φησὶν ὅτι δύο πυθμένας ἔχει, ἕνα μὲν τὸν κατὰ τὸ κύτος αὐτῷ συγκεχαλκευμένον, ἕτερον δὲ τὸν πρόσθετον ἀπ’ ὀξέος ἀρχόμενον, καταλήγοντα δὲ εἰς πλατύτερον, ἐφ’ οὗ ἵσταται τὸ ποτήριον. Ὠιόν. Δίνων ἐν γ Περσικῶν φησιν οὕτως· ἐστὶ δὲ ποτίβαζις ἄρτος κρίθινος καὶ πύρινος ὀπτὸς καὶ κυπαρίσσου στέφανος καὶ οἶνος κεκραμένος ἐν ᾠῷ χρυσῷ, οὗ αὐτὸς βασιλεὺς πίνει.
Plutarch having said this, and being applauded by every one, asked for a phiala, from which he made a libation to the Muses, and to Mnemosyne their mother, and drank the health of every one present, saying,—As if any one, taking a cup in his hand, being a rich man, were to make a present of it, foaming over with the juice of the vine;"— and drinking not only to the young bridegroom, but also to all his friends; and he gave the cup to the boy, desiring him to carry it round to every one, saying that this was the proper meaning of the phrase κύκλῳ πίνειν, reciting the verses of Menander in his Perinthian Woman—And the old woman did not leave untouch'dOne single cup, but drank of all that came.And again, in his Fanatical Woman, he says—And then again she carries round to allA cup of unmix'd wine.And Euripides, in his Cretan Women, says—Farewell all other things, as longAs cups of wine go freely round.And then, when Leonidas the grammarian demanded a larger cup, and said,—Let us drink hard (κρατηρίζωμεν), my friends, (for that was the word which Lysanias the Cyrenean says that Herodorus used to apply to drinking parties, when he says, “But when they had finished the sacrifice they turned to the banquet, and to craters, and prayers, and peas;” and the poet, who was the author of the poem called the Buffoons—a play which Duris says that the wise Plato always had in his hands—says, somewhere, ἐκεκρατηρίχημες, for “we had drunk;”) But now, in the name of the gods, said Pontianus, you are drinking in a manner which is scarcely becoming, out of large cups, having that most delightful and witty author Xenophon before your eyes, who in his Banquet says,—“But Socrates, in his turn, said, But it seems to me now, O men, that we ought to drink hard. For wine, in reality, while it moistens the spirit, lulls the griefs to sleep as mandragora does men; but it awakens all cheerful feelings, as oil does fire. And it appears to me that the bodies of men are liable to the same influences which affect the bodies of those things which grow in the ground; for the very plants, when God gives them too much to drink, cannot hold up their heads, nor can they expand at their proper seasons. But when they drink just as much as is good for them, and no more, then they grow in an upright attitude, and flourish, and come in a flourishing state to produce fruit. And so, too, in our case, if we take too much drink all at once, our bodies and our minds rapidly get disordered, and we cannot even breathe correctly, much less speak. But if our slaves bedew us (to use Gorgias-like language) in small quantities with small cups, then we are not compelled to be intoxicated by the wine; but being gently induced, we proceed to a merry and cheerful temperament.” Now, any one who considers these expressions of the accomplished Xenophon, may understand how it as that the brilliant Plato displayed such jealousy of him. But perhaps the fact may partly be because these men did from the very beginning feel a spirit of rivalry towards one another, each being aware of his own powers; and perhaps they began very early to contend for the preeminence, as we may conjecture not only from what they have both written about Cyrus, but also from other writings of theirs on similar subjects. For they have both written a piece called the Banquet; and in these two pieces, one of them turns out the female flute-players, and the other introduces them; and one, as has been already said, refuses to drink out of large cups, but the other represents Socrates as drinking out of a psycter till morning. And in his treatise concerning the Soul, Plato, reckoning up all who were present, does not make even the slightest mention of Xenophon. And concerning Cyrus, the one says that from his earliest youth he was trained up in all the national practices of his country; but Plato, as if in the express spirit of contradiction, says, in the third book of his Laws,—“But with respect to Cyrus, I consider that, as to other things, he was indeed a skilful and careful general, but that he had never had the very least particle of a proper education, and that he had never turned his mind the least in the world to the administration of affairs. But he appears from his earliest youth to have been engaged in war, and to have given his children to his wives to bring up.” And again, Xenophon, who joined Cyrus with the Ten Thousand Greeks, in his expedition into Persia, and who was thoroughly acquainted with the treachery of Meno the Thessalian, and knew that he was the cause of the murder of Clearchus by Tissaphernes, and who knew also the disposition of the man, how morose and debauched he was,—has given us a full account of everything concerning him. But the exquisite Plato, who all but says, “All this is not true,” goes through a long panegyric on him, who was incessantly calumniating every one else. And in his Polity, he banishes Homer from his city, and all poetry of the theatrical kind; and yet he himself wrote dialogues in a theatrical style,—a manner of writing of which he himself was not the inventor; for Alexamenus the Teian had, before him, invented this style of dialogue, as Nicias of Nicæa and Sotion both agree in relating. And Aristotle, in his treatise on Poets, writes thus:—“Let us not then call those Mimes, as they are called, of Sophron, which are written in metre, Discourses and Imitations; or those Dialogues of Alexamenus of Teos, which were written before the Scratic Dialogues;” — Aristotle, the most learned of all men, stating here most expressly that Alexamenus composed his Dialogues before Plato. And Plato also calumniates Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, saying that he was a sophist in a way consistent with his name. And he also attacks Hippias, and Gorgias, and Parmenides; and in one dialogue, called Protagoras, he attacks a great many;—a man who in his Republic has said, “When, as I think, a city which has been governed by a democracy, feels a thirst far liberty, and meets with bad cupbearers, and so it gets intoxicated by too untempered a draught...”
τοσαῦτα εἰπὼν ὁ Πλούταρχος καὶ ὑπὸ πάντων κροταλισθεὶς ᾔτησε φιάλην, ἀφ’ ἧς σπείσας ταῖς Μούσαις καὶ τῇ τούτων Μνημοσύνῃ μητρὶ προὔπιε πᾶσι φιλοτησίαν. ἐπειπὼν δὲ·φιάλαν ὡς εἴ τις ἀφνεᾶς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἑλὼν ἔνδον ἀμπέλου καχλάζοισαν δρόσῳ· δωρήσεται, οὐ μόνον νεανίᾳ γαμβρῷ προπίνων, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς φιλτάτοις ἔδωκε τῷ παιδὶ περισοβεῖν ἐν κύκλῳ κελεύσας, τὸ κύκλῳ πίνειν τοῦτ’ εἶναι λέγων, παρατιθέμενος Μενάνδρου ἐκ Περινθίας· οὐδεμίαν ἡ γραῦς ὅλως κύλικα παρῆκεν, ἀλλὰ πίνει τὴν κύκλῳ. καὶ πάλιν ἐκ Θεοφορουμένης· καὶ ταχὺ πάλιν τὸ πρῶτον περισόβει ποτήριον αὐτοῖς ἀκράτου. καὶ Εὐριπίδης δ’ ἐν Κρήσσαις· τὰ δ’ ἄλλα χαῖρε κύλικος ἑρπούσης κύκλῳ.αἰτοῦντος δὲ τοῦ γραμματικοῦ Λεωνίδου μεῖζον ποτήριον καὶ εἰπόντος κρατηρίζωμεν, ἄνδρες φίλοι …, οὕτως δὲ τοὺς πότους Λυσανίας φησὶν ὁ Κυρηναῖος Ἡρόδωρον εἰρηκέναι ἐν τούτοις; ʽ ἐπεὶ δὲ θύσαντες πρὸς δεῖπνον καὶ κρατῆρα· καὶ εὐχὰς καὶ παιῶνας ἐτράποντο.᾽ καὶ ὁ τοὺς μίμους δὲ πεποιηκὼς οὓς αἰεὶ διὰ χειρὸς ἔχειν Δοῦρίς φησι τὸν σοφὸν Πλάτωνα, λέγει που ᾽ κἠκρατηρίχημες ἀντὶ τοῦ ᾽ ἐπεπώκειμεν.ἀλλὰ μήν, πρὸς θεῶν, ὁ Ποντιανὸς ἔφη, οὐ δεόντως ἐκ μεγάλων πίνετε ποτηρίων, τὸν ἥδιστον καὶ χαριέστατον Ξενοφῶντα πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν ἔχοντες, ὃς ἐν τῷ Συμποσίῳ φησίν ᾽ ὁ δ’ αὖ Σωκράτης εἶπεν ἀλλὰ πίνειν μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐμοὶ πάνυ δοκεῖ. τῷ γὰρ ὄντι ὁ οἶνος ἄρδων τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς μὲν λύπας, ὥσπερ ὁ μανδραγόρας ἀνθρώπους, κοιμίζει, τὰς δὲ φιλοφροσύνας, ὥσπερ ἔλαιον φλόγας, ἐγείρει. δοκεῖ μέντοι μοι καὶ τὰ τῶν ἀνδρῶν σώματα τὰ αὐτὰ πάσχειν ἅπερ καὶ τὰ τῶν ἐν γῇ φυομένων. καὶ γὰρ ἐκεῖνα, ὅταν μὲν ὁ θεὸς αὐτὰ ἄγαν ἀθρόως ποτίζῃ, οὐ δύναται ὀρθοῦσθαι οὐδὲ ταῖς ὥραις διαπλοῦσθαι· ὅταν δὲ ὅσῳ ἥδεται τοσοῦτο πίνῃ, καὶ μάλα ὀρθά τε αὔξεται καὶ θάλλοντα ἀφικνεῖται εἰς τὴν καρπογονίαν. οὕτω δὴ καὶ ἡμεῖς, ἢν μὲν ἀθρόον τὸ ποτὸν ἐγχεώμεθα, ταχὺ ἡμῶν καὶ τὰ σώματα καὶ αἱ γνῶμαι σφαλοῦνται, καὶ οὐδ’ ἀναπνεῖν μὴ ὅτι λέγειν δυνησόμεθα· ἢν δὲ ἡμῖν οἱ παῖδες μικραῖς κύλιξι μικρά· ἐπιψακάζωσιν, ἵνα καὶ ἐγὼ Γοργιείοις ῥήμασιν εἴπω, οὕτως οὐ βιαζόμενοι μεθύειν ὑπὸ τοῦ οἴνου, ἀλλ’ ἀναπειθόμενοι πρὸς τὸ παιγνιωδέστερον ἀφιξόμεθα εἰς ταῦτά τις ἀποβλέπων τὰ τοῦ καλοῦ Ξενοφῶντος ἐπιγινώσκειν δυνήσεται ἣν εἶχε πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ λαμπρότατος Πλάτων ζηλοτυπίαν, ἢ τάχα φιλονίκως εἶχον ἀρχῆθεν πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς οἱ ἄνδρες οὗτοι, αἰσθόμενοι τῆς ἰδίας ἑκάτερος ἀρετῆς, καὶ ἴσως καὶ περὶ πρωτείων διεφέροντο, οὐ μόνον ἐξ ὧν περὶ Κύρου εἰρήκασι τεκμαιρομένοις ἡμῖν, ἀλλὰ κἀκ τῶν αὐτῶν ὑποθέσεων. συμπόσια μὲν γὰρ γεγράφασιν ἀμφότεροι, καὶ ἐν αὐτοῖς ὁ μὲν τὰς αὐλητρίδας ἐκβάλλει, ὁ δὲ εἰσάγει· καὶ ὁ μέν, ὡς πρόκειται, παραιτεῖται πίνειν μεγάλοις ποτηρίοις, ὁ δὲ τὸν Σωκράτην παράγει τῷ ψυκτῆρι πίνοντα μέχρι τῆς ἕω. κἀν τῷ περὶ Ψυχῆς δὲ ὁ Πλάτων καταλεγόμενος ἕκαστον τῶν παρατυχόντων οὐδὲ κατὰ μικρὸν τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος μέμνηται. καὶ περὶ τοῦ Κύρου οὖν ὁ μὲν λέγει ὡς ἐκ πρώτης ἡλικίας ἐπεπαίδευτο πάντα τὰ πάτρια, ὁ δὲ Πλάτων ὥσπερ ἐναντιούμενος ἐν τρίτῳ Νόμων φησί ᾽ μαντεύομαι δὲ περὶ Κύρου τὰ μὲν ἄλλα στρατηγὸν αὐτὸν ἀγαθὸν εἶναι καὶ φιλόπονον, παιδείας δ’ ὀρθῆς οὐδὲ ἧφθαι τὸ παράπαν, οἰκονομίᾳ δ’ οὐδ’ ᾑτινιοῦν προσεσχηκέναι. ἔοικε δ’ ἐκ νέου στρατεύεσθαι, παραδούς τε τοὺς παῖδας ταῖς γυναιξὶ τρέφειν.᾽ πάλιν ὁ μὲν Ξενοφῶν συναναβὰς Κύρῳ εἰς Πέρσας μετὰ τῶν μυρίων Ἑλλήνων καὶ ἀκριβῶς εἰδὼς τὴν προδοσίαν τοῦ Θεσσαλοῦ Μένωνος, ὅτι αὐτὸς αἴτιος ἐγένετο τοῖς περὶ Κλέαρχον τῆς ἀπωλείας τῆς ὑπὸ Τισσαφέρνου γενομένης, καὶ οἷός τις ἦν τὸν τρόπον, ὡς χαλεπός, ὡς ἀσελγής, διηγησάμενος φαίνεται. ὁ δὲ καλὸς Πλάτων μονονουχὶ εἰπών ᾽ οὐκ ἔστ’ ἔτυμος λόγος οὗτος ᾽ ἐγκώμια αὐτοῦ διεξέρχεται, ὁ τοὺς ἄλλους ἁπαξαπλῶς κακολογήσας, ἐν μὲν τῇ Πολιτείᾳ Ὅμηρον ἐκβάλλων καὶ τὴν μιμητικὴν ποίησιν, αὐτὸς δὲ τοὺς διαλόγους μιμητικῶς γράψας, ὧν τῆς ἰδέας οὐδ’ αὐτὸς εὑρετής ἐστιν. πρὸ γὰρ αὐτοῦ τοῦθ’ εὗρε τὸ εἶδος τῶν λόγων ὁ Τήιος Ἀλεξαμενός, ὡς Νικίας ὁ Νικαεὺς ἱστορεῖ καὶ Σωτίων. Ἀριστοτέλης δ’ ἐν τῷ περὶ Ποιητῶν οὕτως γράφει οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ ἐμμέτρους ὄντας τοὺς καλουμένους Σώφρονος μίμους μὴ φῶμεν εἶναι λόγους, ἢ μὴ μιμήσεις τοὺς Ἀλεξαμενοῦ τοῦ Τηίου τοὺς πρώτους γραφέντας τῶν Σωκρατικῶν λόγους ἄντικρυς φάσκων ὁ πολυμαθέστατος Ἀριστοτέλης πρὸ Πλάτωνος διαλόγους γεγραφέναι τὸν Ἀλεξαμενόν. διαβάλλει δὲ ὁ Πλάτων καὶ Θρασύμαχον τὸν Χαλκηδόνιον σοφιστὴν ὅμοιον εἶναι λέγων τῷ ὀνόματι, ἔτι δ’ Ἱππίαν καὶ Γοργίαν καὶ Παρμενίδην καὶ ἑνὶ διαλόγῳ τῷ Πρωταγόρᾳ πολλούς, ὁ τοιαῦτα ἐν τῇ Πολιτείᾳ εἰπών ᾽ ὅταν, οἶμαι, δημοκρατουμένη πόλις ἐλευθερίας διψήσασα κακῶν οἰνοχόων τύχῃ καὶ ἀκράτου αὐτῆς μεθυσθῇ.᾽
And it is said also, that Gorgias himself, when he read the dialogue to which Plato has given his name, said to his friends, “How well Plato knows how to write iambics!” And Hermippus, in his book on Gorgias, says,—“When Gorgias was sojourning at Athens, after he had offered up at Delphi the golden image of himself which is there now, and when Plato said when he had seen it, The beautiful and golden Gorgias is come among us, Gorgias replied, This is indeed a fine young Archilochus whom Athens has now brought forth.” But others say that Gorgias, having read the dialogue of Plato, said to the bystanders that he had never said any of the things there attributed to him, and had never heard any such things said by Plato. And they say that Phædo also said the same when he had read the treatise on the Soul, on which account it was well said by Timon, respecting him,—“How that learned Plato invented fictitious marvels!”For their respective ages will scarcely admit of the Socrates of Plato ever having really had a conference with Parmenides, so as to have addressed him and to have been addressed by him in such language. And what is worst of all is, that he has said, though there was not the slightest occasion for making any such assertion, that Zeno had been beloved by Parmenides, who was his fellow-citizen. Nor, indeed, is it possible that Phædrus should have lived in the time of Socrates, much less that he should have been beloved by him. Nor, again, is it possible that Paralus and Xanthippus, the sons of Pericles, who died of the plague, should have conversed with Protagoras when he came the second time to Athens, as they had died before. And we might mention many other particulars respecting his works to show how wholly fictitious his Dialogues are. But that Plato was ill-natured to everybody is plain from what he says in his dialogue entitled Ion; in which first of all he abuses all the poets, and then all those who have been promoted to the highest dignities by the people, such as Phanosthenes of Andros, and Apollodorus of Cyzicus, and also Heraclides of Clazomenæ. And in his Menon he abuses those who have been the greatest men among the Athenians—Aristides and Themistocles; and he extols Meno, who betrayed the Greeks. But in his Euthydemus he attacks this same Meno and his brother Dionysiodorus, and calls them men slow to learn any good thing, and contentious people, reproaching them with their flight from Chios, which was their native place, from which they went and settled in Thurii. And, in his essay on Manly Courage, he attacks Melesias, the son of that Thucydides who headed the opposite party to Pericles, and Lysimachus, the son of Aristides the Just, saying that they both fell far short of their fathers' virtues. And as to what he said about Alcibiades, in his Banquet, that is not fit to be produced to light; nor is what he says in the first of the Dialogues which go by his name. For the second Alcibiades is said by some people to be the work of Xenophon; as also the Halcyon is said to be the work of Leon the Academician, as Nicias of Nicæa says. Now, the things which he has said against Alcibiades I will pass over; but I cannot forbear to mention his calling the Athenian people a random judge, guided only by outward appearance. And he praises the Lacedæmonians, and extols also the Persians, who are the enemies of all the Greeks. And he calls Cleinias the brother of Alcibiades a madman; and the sons of Pericles he makes out to be fools; and Meidias he calls a man fit for nothing but killing quails; and of the people of the Athenians he says, that it wears a fair mask, but that one ought to strip the mask off, and look at it then; for he says that it will then be seen that it is only clothed with a specious appearance of a beauty which is not genuine.
λέγεται δὲ ὡς καὶ ὁ Γοργίας αὐτὸς ἀναγνοὺς τὸν ὁμώνυμον αὑτῷ διάλογον πρὸς τοὺς συνήθεις ἔφη ᾽ ὡς καλῶς οἶδε Πλάτων ἰαμβίζειν. Ἕρμιππος δὲ ἐν τῷ περὶ Γοργίου ‘ὡς ἐπεδήμησε,’ φησί,· ταῖς Ἀθήναις Γοργίας μετὰ τὸ ποιήσασθαι τὴν ἀνάθεσιν τῆς ἐν Δελφοῖς ἑαυτοῦ χρυσῆς εἰκόνος, εἰπόντος τοῦ Πλάτωνος, ὅτε εἶδεν αὐτόν, ἥκει ἡμῖν ὁ καλός τε καὶ χρυσοῦς ὁ Γοργίας ἔφη ὁ Γοργίας· ἦ καλόν γε αἱ Ἀθῆναι καὶ νέον τοῦτον Ἀρχίλοχον ἐνηνόχασιν. ἄλλοι δέ φασιν ὡς ἀναγνοὺς ὁ Γοργίας τὸν Πλάτωνος διάλογον πρὸς τοὺς παρόντας εἶπεν ὅτι οὐδὲν τούτων οὔτ’ εἶπεν οὔτ’ ἤκουσε παρὰ Πλάτωνος,᾽ ταὐτά φασι καὶ Φαίδωνα εἰπεῖν ἀναγνόντα τὸν περὶ Ψυχῆς. διὸ καλῶς ὁ Τίμων περὶ αὐτοῦ ἔφη· ὡς ἀνέπλαττε Πλάτων ὁ πεπλασμένα θαύματα εἰδώς. Παρμενίδῃ μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἐλθεῖν εἰς λόγους τὸν τοῦ Πλάτωνος Σωκράτην μόλις ἡ ἡλικία συγχωρεῖ, οὐχ ὡς καὶ τοιούτους εἰπεῖν ἢ ἀκοῦσαι λόγους. τὸ δὲ πάντων σχετλιώτατον καὶ τὸ εἰπεῖν οὐδεμιᾶς κατεπειγούσης χρείας ὅτι παιδικὰ γεγόνοι τοῦ Παρμενίδου Ζήνων ὁ πολίτης αὐτοῦ. ἀδύνατον δὲ καὶ Φαῖδρον οὐ μόνον κατὰ Σωκράτην εἶναι, ἦ πού γε καὶ ἐρώμενον αὐτοῦ γεγονέναι. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐ δύνανται οὐδὲ Πάραλος καὶ Ξάνθιππος οἱ Περικλέους υἱοὶ τελευτήσαντος τῷ λοιμῷ Πρωταγόρᾳ διαλέγεσθαι ὅτε δεύτερον ἐπεδήμησε ταῖς Ἀθήναις, οἱ ἔτι πρότερον τελευτήσαντες. πολλὰ δ’ ἔστι καὶ ἄλλα λέγειν περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ δεικνύναι ὡς ἔπλαττε τοὺς διαλόγους. ὅτι δὲ καὶ δυσμενὴς ἦν πρὸς ἅπαντας, δῆλον καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐν τῷ Ἴωνι ἐπιγραφομένῳ, ἐν ᾧ πρῶτον μὲν κακολογεῖ πάντας τοὺς ποιητάς, ἔπειτα καὶ τοὺς ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου προαγομένους, Φανοσθένη τὸν Ἄνδριον κἀπολλόδωρον τὸν Κυζικηνόν, ἔτι δὲ τὸν Κλαζομένιον Ἡρακλείδην. ἐν δὲ τῷ Μένωνι καὶ τοὺς μεγίστους παρ’ Ἀθηναίοις γενομένους ᾽ Ἀριστείδην καὶ Θεμιστοκλέα, Μένωνα δὲ ἐπαινεῖ τὸν τοὺς Ἕλληνας προδόντα. ἐν δὲ τῷ Εὐθυδήμῳ Εὐθύδημον καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ Διονυσόδωρον προπηλακίζων καὶ καλῶν ὀψιμαθεῖς ἔτι τε ἐριστὰς ὀνομάζων ὀνειδίζει αὐτοῖς καὶ τὴν ἐκ Χίου τῆς πατρίδος φυγήν, ἀφ’ ἧς ἐν Θουρίοις κατῳκίσθησαν. ἐν δὲ τῷ περὶ Ἀνδρείας Μελησίαν τὸν Θουκυδίδου τοῦ ἀντιπολιτευσαμένου Περικλεῖ καὶ Λυσίμαχον τὸν Ἀριστείδου τοῦ δικαίου, τῆς τῶν πατέρων ἀρετῆς ἀναξίους εἶναι φάσκων. ἃ δὲ περὶ Ἀλκιβιάδου εἴρηκεν ἐν τῷ Συμποσίῳ οὐδ’ εἰς φῶς λέγεσθαί ἐστιν ἄξιον, ἔν τε τῷ προτέρῳ τῶν εἰς αὐτὸν διαλόγων ὁ γὰρ δεύτερος ὑπό τινων Ξενοφῶντος εἶναι λέγεται, ὡς καὶ ἡ Ἀλκυὼν Λέοντος τοῦ Ἀκαδημαικοῦ, ὥς φησι Νικίας ὁ Νικαεύς. τὰ μὲν οὖν κατὰ Ἀλκιβιάδου λεχθέντα σιωπῶ· ὅτι δὲ τὸν Ἀθηναίων δῆμον εἰκαῖον εἴρηκε κριτὴν ἔτι τε πρόκωπον, Λακεδαιμονίους δὲ ἐπαινῶν ἐπαινεῖ καὶ τοὺς πάντων Ἑλλήνων ἐχθροὺς Πέρσας, καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν δὲ τοῦ Ἀλκιβιάδου Κλεινίαν μαινόμενόν τε ἀποκαλεῖ καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ ἠλιθίους Μειδίαν τε ὀρτυγοκόπον, καὶ τὸν τῶν Ἀθηναίων δῆμον εὐπρόσωπον μὲν εἶναι, δεῖν δ’ αὐτὸν ἀποδύσαντας θεωρεῖν ὀφθήσεται γάρ, φησί, περίβλεπτον ἀξίωμα περικείμενος κάλλους οὐκ ἀληθινοῦ. ἐν
But in the Cimon he does not abstain from accusing Themistocles, and Alcibiades, and Myronides, and even Cimon himself; and his Crito contains an invective against Sopho- cles; and his Gorgias contains an invective not only against the man from whom it is named, but also against Archelaus, king of Macedon, whom he reproaches not only with his ignoble birth, but also with having killed his master. And this is the very same Plato whom Speusippus represents as having, while he professed to be a great friend of Archelaus assisted Philip to get possession of the kingdom. At all events, Carystius of Pergamus, in his Historical Commentaries, writes as follows:—“Speusippus, hearing that Philip used calumnious language respecting Plato, wrote something of this sort in his letter to him: 'Just as if men did not know that Philip originally obtained the kingdom by the assistance of Plato.' For Plato sent Euphræus of Oreum to Perdiccas, who persuaded him to apportion a certain district to Philip; and so he, maintaining a force in that country, when Perdiccas died, having all his forces in a state of preparation, seized the supreme power.” But whether all this is true or not, God knows. But his fine Protagoras, besides that it contains attacks on many poets and wise men, also shows up the life of Callias with much greater severity than Eupolis does in his flatterers. And in his Menexenus, not only is Hippias the Elean turned into ridicule, but also Antipho the Rhamnusian, and Lamprus the musician. And the day would fail me, if I were inclined to go through the names of all those who have been abused by that wise man. Nor indeed do I praise Antisthenes; for he, having abused many men, did not abstain even from Plato himself, but, having given him the odious name of Sathon, he then published a dialogue under this name. But Hegesander the Delphian, in his Commentaries, speaking about the universal ill-nature of Plato towards everybody, writes as follows:—“After the death of Socrates, when a great many of his friends, being present at a banquet, were very much out of spirits, Plato, being present, taking the cup, exhorted them not to despond, as he himself was well able to lead the school; and, so saying, he pledged Apollodorus: and he said, I would rather have taken the cup of poison from Socrates than that pledge of wine from you.' For Plato was considered to be an envious man, and to have a disposition which was far from praiseworthy; for he ridiculed Aristippus when he went to visit Dionysius, though he himself had three times sailed to Sicily,—once for the purpose of investigating the torrents of lava which flow from Mount Aetna, when he lived with the elder Dionysius, and was in danger from his displeasure; and twice he went to visit the younger Dionysius.” And again, though Aeschines was a poor man, and had but one pupil, Xenocrates, he seduced him from him; and he was also detected in instigating the commencement of a prosecution against Phædo, which, if successful, would have reduced him to slavery; and altogether he displayed the feelings of a stepmother towards all the pupils of Socrates. On which account, Socrates, making a not very unreasonable Conjecture respecting him, said in the presence of several persons that he had had a dream, in which he thought he had seen the following vision. “For I thought,” said he, “that Plato had become a crow, and leaped on my head, and began to scratch my bald place, and to take a firm hold, and so to look about him. I think, therefore,” said he, “that you, O Plato, will say a good many things which are false about my head.” And Plato, besides his ill-nature, was very ambitious and vainglorious; and he said, “My last tunic, my desire of glory, I lay aside in death itself—in my will, and in my funeral procession, and in my burial;” as Dioscorides relates in his Memorabilia. And as for his desire of founding cities and making laws, who will not say that these are very ambitious feelings? And this is plain from what he says in the Timæus—“I have the same feelings towards my constitution that a painter would have towards his works; for as he would wish to see them possessed of the power of motion and action, so too do I wish to see the citizens whom I here describe.”
δὲ τῷ Κίμωνι οὐδὲ τῆς Θεμιστοκλέους φείδεται κατηγορίας οὐδὲ τῆς Ἀλκιβιάδου καὶ Μυρωνίδου, ἀλλ’ οὐδ’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Κίμωνος, καὶ ὁ Κρίτων δ’ αὐτοῦ Κρίτωνος, ἡ δὲ Πολιτεία καὶ Σοφοκλέους περιέχει καταδρομήν, ὁ δὲ Γοργίας οὐ μόνον ἀφ’ οὗ τὸ ἐπίγραμμα, ἀλλὰ καὶ Ἀρχελάου τοῦ Μακεδονίας βασιλέως, ὃν οὐ μόνον ἐπονείδιστον γένος ἔχειν, ἀλλ’ ὅτι καὶ ἀπέκτεινε τὸν δεσπότην. οὗτος δ’ ἐστὶ Πλάτων, ὃν Σπεύσιππός φησι φίλτατον ὄντα Φιλίππῳ τῆς βασιλείας αἴτιον γενέσθαι. γράφει γοῦν Καρύστιος ὁ Περγαμηνὸς ἐν τοῖς Ἱστορικοῖς Ὑπομνήμασιν οὕτως Σπεύσιππος πυνθανόμενος Φίλιππον βλασφημεῖν περὶ Πλάτωνος εἰς ἐπιστολὴν ἔγραψέ τι τοιοῦτον ὥσπερ ἀγνοοῦντας τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ὅτι καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς βασιλείας Φίλιππος διὰ Πλάτωνος ἔσχεν. Εὐφραῖον γὰρ ἀπέστειλε τὸν ᾽ Ὠρείτην πρὸς Περδίκκαν Πλάτων, ὃς ἔπεισεν ἀπομερίσαι τινὰ χώραν Φιλίππῳ. διατρέφων δ’ ἐνταῦθα δύναμιν, ὡς ἀπέθανε Περδίκκας, ἐξ ἑτοίμου δυνάμεως ὑπαρχούσης ἐπέπεσε τοῖς πράγμασι. ᾽ τοῦτο δ’ εἴπερ οὕτως ἀληθείας ἔχει, θεὸς ἂν εἰδείη. ὁ δὲ καλὸς αὐτοῦ Πρωταγόρας πρὸς τῷ καταδρομὴν ἔχειν πολλῶν ποιητῶν καὶ σοφῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐκθεατριζόμενον ἔχει καὶ τὸν Καλλίου βίον μᾶλλον τῶν Εὐπόλιδος Κολάκων, ἐν δὲ τῷ Μενεξένῳ οὐ μόνον Ἱππίας ὁ Ἡλεῖος χλευάζεται, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ Ῥαμνούσιος Ἀντιφῶν καὶ ὁ μουσικὸς Λάμπρος, ἐπιλίποι δ’ ἄν με ἡ ἡμέρα εἰ πάντας ἐθελήσαιμι ἐπελθεῖν τοὺς κακῶς ἀκούσαντας ὑπὸ τοῦ σοφοῦ. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδ’ Ἀντισθένη ἐπαινῶ· καὶ γὰρ καὶ οὗτος πολλοὺς εἰπὼν κακῶς οὐδ’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Πλάτωνος ἀπέσχετο, ἀλλὰ καλέσας αὐτὸν φορτικῶς Σάθωνα τὸν ταύτην ἔχοντα τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν διάλογον ἐξέδωκεν. Ἡγήσανδρος δὲ ὁ Δελφὸς ἐν τοῖς Ὑπομνήμασι περὶ τῆς πρὸς πάντας τοῦ Πλάτωνος κακοηθείας λέγων γράφει καὶ ταῦτα μετὰ τὴν Σωκράτους τελευτὴν ἐπὶ πλεῖον τῶν συνήθων ἀθυμούντων ἒν τινι συνουσίᾳ Πλάτων συμπαρὼν λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον παρεκάλει μὴ ἀθυμεῖν αὐτούς, ὡς ἱκανὸς αὐτὸς εἴη ἡγεῖσθαι τῆς σχολῆς, καὶ προέπιεν Ἀπολλοδώρῳ. καὶ ὃς εἶπεν ἥδιον ἂν παρὰ Σωκράτους τὴν τοῦ φαρμάκου κύλικα εἰλήφειν ἢ παρὰ σοῦ τὴν τοῦ οἴνου πρόποσιν. ἐδόκει γὰρ Πλάτων φθονερὸς εἶναι καὶ κατὰ τὸ ἦθος οὐδαμῶς εὐδοκιμεῖν. καὶ γὰρ Ἀρίστιππον πρὸς Διονύσιον ἀποδημήσαντα ἔσκωπτεν, αὐτὸς τρὶς εἰς Σικελίαν ἐκπλεύσας· ἅπαξ μὲν τῶν ῥυάκων χάριν, ὅτε καὶ τῷ πρεσβυτέρῳ Διονυσίῳ συγγενόμενος ἐκινδύνευσεν, δὶς δὲ πρὸς τὸν νεώτερον Διονύσιον· Αἰσχίνου τε πένητος ὄντος καὶ μαθητὴν ἕνα ἔχοντος Ξενοκράτην, τοῦτον περιέσπασεν. καὶ Φαίδωνι δὲ τὴν τῆς δουλείας ἐφιστὰς δίκην ἐφωράθη· καὶ τὸ καθόλου πᾶσι τοῖς Σωκράτους μαθηταῖς ἐπεφύκει μητρυιᾶς ἔχων διάθεσιν. διόπερ Σωκράτης οὐκ ἀηδῶς περὶ αὐτοῦ στοχαζόμενος ἐνύπνιον ἔφησεν ἑωρακέναι πλειόνων παρόντων. δοκεῖν γὰρ ἔφη τὸν Πλάτωνα κορώνην γενόμενον ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλήν μου ἀναπηδήσαντα τὸ φαλακρόν μου κατασκαριφᾶν καὶ κρώζειν περιβλέπουσαν. δοκῶ οὖν σε, ὦ Πλάτων, πολλὰ κατὰ τῆς ἐμῆς. ψεύσεσθαι κεφαλῆς. ἦν δὲ ὁ Πλάτων πρὸς τῇ κακοηθείᾳ καὶ φιλόδοξος, ὅστις ἔφησεν· ἔσχατον τὸν τῆς δόξης χιτῶνα ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ αὐτῷ ἀποδυόμεθα, ἐν διαθήκαις, ἐν ἐκκομιδαῖς, ἐν τάφοις, ὥς φησι Διοσκουρίδης ἐν τοῖς Ἀπομνημονεύμασιν. καὶ τὸ πόλιν δὲ θελῆσαι κτίσαι καὶ τὸ νομοθετῆσαι τίς οὐ φήσει πάθος εἶναι φιλοδοξίας; δῆλον δ’ ἐστὶ τοῦτο ἐξ ὧν ἐν τῷ Τιμαίῳ λέγει· πέπονθά τι πάθος πρὸς τὴν πολιτείαν, ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ ζωγράφος ἐβούλετο τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἔργα κινούμενα καὶ ἐνεργὰ ἰδεῖν οὕτω κἀγὼ τοὺς πολίτας οὓς διαγράφω.
But concerning the things which he has said in his Dialogues, what can any one say? For the doctrine respecting the soul, which he makes out to be immortal, even after it is separated from the body, and after the dissolution of this latter, was first mentioned by Homer; for he has said, that the soul of Patroclus—Fled to the shades below,Lamenting its untimely fate, and leavingIts vigour and its youth.If, then, any one were to say that this is also the argument of Plato, still I do not see what good we have got from him; for if any one were to agree that the souls of those who are dead do migrate into other natures, and do mount up to some higher and purer district, as partaking of its lightness, still what should we get by that theory? For, as we have neither any recollection of where we formerly were, nor any perception whether we really existed at all, what do we get by such an immortality as that? And as to the book of the Laws composed by him, and the Polity which was written before the Laws, what good have they done us? And yet he ought (as Lycurgus did the Lacedæmonians, and as Solon did the Athenians, and Zaleucus the Thurians), if they were excellent, to have persuaded some of the Greeks to adopt them. For a law (as Aristotle says) is a form of words decided on by the common agreement of a city, pointing out how one ought to do everything. And how can we consider Plato's conduct anything but ridiculous; since, when there were already three Athenian lawgivers who had a great name,—Draco, and Plato himself, and Solon,—the citizens abide by the laws of the other two, but ridicule those of Plato? And the case of the Polity is the same. Even if his Constitution is the best of all possible constitutions, yet, if it does not persuade us to adopt it, what are we the better for it? Plato, then, appears to have written his laws, not for men who have any real existence, but rather for a set of men invented by himself; so that one has to look for people who will use them. But it would have been better for him to write such things as he could persuade men of; and not to act like people who only pray, but rather like those who seize hold of what offers itself to them.
᾽ ᾽περὶ δὲ τῶν ἐν τοῖς διαλόγοις αὐτοῦ λελεγμένων τί ἂν καὶ λέγοι τις; ἡ μὲν γὰρ ψυχὴ ἡ διαπλαττομένη ἀθάνατος ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀπόλυσιν χωριζομένη τοῦ σώματος παρὰ πρώτῳ εἴρηται Ὁμήρῳ. οὗτος γὰρ εἶπεν ὡς ἡ τοῦ Πατρόκλου ψυχὴ ἄιδόσδε κατῆλθεν ὃν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποῦσ’ ἀνδροτῆτα καὶ ἥβην. εἰ δ’ οὖν καὶ Πλάτωνος φήσειέν τις εἶναι τὸν λόγον, οὐχ ὁρῶ τίν’ ἐσχήκαμεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ὠφέλειαν. ἐὰν γὰρ καὶ συγχωρήσῃ τις μεθίστασθαι τὰς τῶν τετελευτηκότων ψυχὰς εἰς ἄλλας φύσεις καὶ πρὸς τὸν μετεωρότερον καὶ καθαρώτερον ἀνέρχεσθαι τόπον, ἅτε κουφότητος μετεχούσας, τί πλέον ἡμῖν; ὧν γὰρ μήτ’ ἀνάμνησίς ἐστιν οὗ ποτε ἦμεν μήτ’ αἴσθησις εἰ καὶ τὸ σύνολον ἦμεν, τίς χάρις ταύτης τῆς ἀθανασίας; οἱ δὲ συντεθέντες ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ Νόμοι καὶ τούτων ἔτι πρότερον ἡ Πολιτεία τί πεποιήκασιν; καίτοι γε ἔδει καθάπερ τὸν Λυκοῦργον τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ τὸν Σόλωνα τοὺς Ἀθηναίους καὶ τὸν Ζάλευκον τοὺς Θουρίους, καὶ αὐτόν, εἴπερ ἦσαν χρήσιμοι, πεῖσαί τινας τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐτοῖς χρήσασθαι. ᾽ νόμος γάρ ἐστιν,᾽ ὥς φησιν Ἀριστοτέλης, ᾽ λόγος ὡρισμένος καθ’ ὁμολογίαν κοινὴν πόλεως, μηνύων πῶς δεῖ πράττειν ἕκαστα ὁ δὲ Πλάτων πῶς οὐκ ἄτοπος, τριῶν Ἀθηναίων γενομένων νομοθετῶν τῶν γε δὴ γνωριζομένων, Δράκοντος καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Πλάτωνος καὶ Σόλωνος, τῶν μὲν τοῖς νόμοις ἐμμένειν τοὺς πολίτας, τῶν δὲ τοῦ Πλάτωνος καὶ προσκαταγελᾶν; ὁ δ’ αὐτὸς λόγος καὶ περὶ τῆς Πολιτείας· εἰ καὶ πασῶν ἐστιν αὕτη βελτίων, μὴ πείθοι δ’ ἡμᾶς, τί πλέον; ἔοικεν οὖν ὁ Πλάτων οὐ τοῖς οὖσιν ἀνθρώποις γράψαι τοὺς νόμους, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ διαπλαττομένοις, ὥστε καὶ ζητεῖσθαι τοὺς χρησομένους. ἐχρῆν οὖν ἃ πείσει· λέγων ταῦτα καὶ γράφειν καὶ μὴ ταὐτὰ ποιεῖν τοῖς εὐχομένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς τῶν ἐνδεχομένων ἀντεχομένοις.
However, to say no more on this point, if any one were to go through his Timæus and his Gorgias, and his other dialogues of the same character, in which he discuss the different subjects of education, and subjects of natural philosophy, and several other circumstances,—even when considered in this light, he is not to be admired on this account; for one may find these same topics handled by others, either better than by him, or at all events not worse. For Theopompus the Chian, in his book Against the School of Plato, says— “We shall find the greater part of his Dialogues useless and false, and a still greater number borrowed from other people; as some of them come from the school of Aristippus, and some from that of Antisthenes, and a great many from that of Bryson of Heraclea.” And as to the disquisitions which he enters into about man, we also seek in his arguments for what we do not find. But what we do find are banquets, and conversations about love, and other very unseemly harangues, which he composed with great contempt for those who were to read them, as the greater part of his pupils were of a tyrannical and calumnious disposition.
χωρὶς τοίνυν τούτων εἴ τις διεξίοι τοὺς Τιμαίους αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς Γοργίας καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους δὲ τοὺς τοιούτους διαλόγους, ἐν οἷς καὶ περὶ τῶν ἐν τοῖς μαθήμασι διεξέρχεται καὶ περὶ τῶν κατὰ φύσιν καὶ περὶ πλειόνων ἄλλων, οὐδὲ διὰ ταῦτα θαυμαστέος ἐστίν. ἔχει γάρ τις καὶ παρ’ ἑτέρων ταῦτα λαβεῖν ἢ βέλτιον λεχθέντα ἢ μὴ χεῖρον. καὶ γὰρ Θεόπομπος ὁ Χῖος ἐν τῷ κατὰ τῆς Πλάτωνος διατριβῆς ᾽ τοὺς πολλούς,᾽ φησί, ᾽ τῶν διαλόγων αὐτοῦ ἀχρείους καὶ ψευδεῖς ἄν τις εὕροι· ἀλλοτρίους δὲ τοὺς πλείους, ὄντας ἐκ τῶν Ἀριστίππου διατριβῶν, ἐνίους δὲ κἀκ τῶν Ἀντισθένους, πολλοὺς δὲ κἀκ τῶν Βρύσωνος τοῦ Ἡρακλεώτου ἀλλὰ τὰ κατὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἅπερ ἐπαγγέλλεται καὶ ἡμεῖς ζητοῦμεν ἐκ τῶν ἐκείνου λόγων, οὐχ εὑρίσκομεν, ἀλλὰ συμπόσια μὲν καὶ λόγους ὑπὲρ ἔρωτος εἰρημένους καὶ μάλα ἀπρεπεῖς, οὓς καταφρονῶν τῶν ἀναγνωσομένων συνέθηκεν, ὥσπερ καὶ οἱ πολλοὶ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ τυραννικοί τινες καὶ διάβολοι γεγόνασιν.
For Euphræus, when he was sojourning with king Perdiccas in Macedonia, was not less a king than the other, being a man of a depraved and calumnious disposition, who managed all the companionship of the king in so cold a manner, that no one was allowed to partake of his entertainments unless he knew something about geometry or philosophy; on which account, after Philip obtained the government, Parmenio, having caught him in Oreum, put him to death; as Carystius relates in his Historical Com- mentaries. And Callippus the Athenian, who was himself a pupil of Plato, having been a companion and fellow-pupil of Dion, and having travelled with him to Syracuse, when he saw that Dion was attempting to make himself master of the kingdom, slew him; and afterwards, attempting to usurp the supreme power himself, was slain too. And Euagon of Lampsacus (as Eurypylus says, and Dicæocles of Cnidus, in the ninety-first book of his Commentaries, and also Demochares the orator, in his argument in defence of Sophocles, against Philo), having lent his native city money on the security of its Acropolis, and being afterwards unable to recover it, endeavoured to seize on the tyranny, until the Lampsacenes attacked him, and repaid him the money, and drove him out of the city. And Timæus of Cyzicus (as the same Demochares relates), having given largesses of money and corn to his fellow-citizens, and being on this account believed by the Cyzicenes to be an excellent man, after having waited a little time, attempted to overturn the constitution with the assistance of Aridæus; and being brought to trial and convicted, and branded with infamy, he remained in the city to an extreme old age, being always, however, considered dishonoured and infamous. And such now are some of the Academicians, who live in a scandalous and infamous manner. For they, having by impious and unnatural means acquired vast wealth by trickery, are at present highly thought of; as Chæon of Pellene, who was not only a pupil of Plato, but of Xenocrates also. And he too, having usurped the supreme power in his country, and having exercised it with great severity, not only banished the most virtuous men in the city, but also gave the property of the masters to their slaves, and gave their wives also to them, compelling them to receive them as their husbands; having got all these admirable ideas from that excellent Polity and those illegal Laws of Plato.
Εὐφραῖος μὲν γὰρ παρὰ Περδίκκᾳ τῷ βασιλεῖ διατρίβων ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ οὐχ ἧττον αὐτοῦ ἐβασίλευε φαῦλος ὢν καὶ διάβολος· ὃς οὕτω ψυχρῶς συνέταξε τὴν ἑταιρίαν τοῦ βασιλέως ὥστε οὐκ ἐξῆν τοῦ συσσιτίου μετασχεῖν εἰ μή τις ἐπίσταιτο γεωμετρεῖν ἢ φιλοσοφεῖν, ὅθεν, Φιλίππου τὴν ἀρχὴν παραλαβόντος, Παρμενίων αὐτὸν ἐν ᾽ Ὠρεῷ λαβὼν ἀπέκτεινεν, ὥς φησι Καρύστιος ἐν Ἱστορικοῖς Ὑπομνήμασι. καὶ Κάλλιππος δ’ ὁ Ἀθηναῖος, μαθητὴς καὶ αὐτὸς Πλάτωνος, ἑταῖρος Δίωνος καὶ συμμαθητὴς γενόμενος καὶ συναποδημήσας αὐτῷ εἰς Συρακούσας, ὁρῶν ἤδη τὸν Δίωνα ἐξιδιοποιούμενον τὴν μοναρχίαν ἀποκτείνας αὐτὸν καὶ αὐτὸς τυραννεῖν ἐπιχειρήσας ἀπεσφάγη, Εὐαίων δ’ ὁ Λαμψακηνός, ὥς φησιν Εὐρύπυλος καὶ Δικαιοκλῆς ὁ Κνίδιος ἐνενηκοστῷ καὶ πρώτῳ Διατριβῶν, ἔτι δὲ Δημοχάρης ὁ ῥήτωρ ἐν τῷ ὑπὲρ Σοφοκλέους πρὸς Φίλωνα, δανείσας τῇ πατρίδι ἀργύριον ἐπὶ ἐνεχύρῳ τῇ ἀκροπόλει ἀφυστερήσας τυραννεῖν ἐβουλεύετο, ἕως συνδραμόντες ἐπ’ αὐτὸν οἱ Λαμψακηνοὶ καὶ τὰ χρήματα ἀποδόντες ἐξέβαλον. Τίμαιος δ’ ὁ Κυζικηνός, ὡς ὁ αὐτὸς Δημοχάρης φησίν, χρήματα καὶ σῖτον ἐπιδοὺς τοῖς πολίταις καὶ διὰ ταῦτα πιστευθεὶς εἶναι χρηστὸς παρὰ τοῖς Κυζικηνοῖς, μικρὸν ἐπισχὼν χρόνον ἐπέθετο τῇ πολιτείᾳ δι’ Ἀριδαίου. κριθεὶς δὲ καὶ ἁλοὺς καὶ ἀδοξήσας ἐν μὲν τῇ πόλει ἐπέμενε παλαιὸς καὶ γεγηρακώς, ἀτίμως δὲ διαζῶν. τοιοῦτοι δ’ εἰσὶ καὶ νῦν τῶν Ἀκαδημαικῶν τινες, ἀνοσίως καὶ ἀδόξως βιοῦντες. χρημάτων γὰρ ἐξ ἀσεβείας καὶ παρὰ φύσιν κυριεύσαντες διὰ γοητείαν νῦν εἰσιν περίβλεπτοι· ὥσπερ καὶ Χαίρων ὁ Πελληνεύς, ὃς οὐ μόνῳ Πλάτωνι ἐσχόλακεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ Ξενοκράτει. καὶ οὗτος οὖν τῆς πατρίδος, πικρῶς τυραννήσας οὐ μόνον τοὺς ἀρίστους τῶν πολιτῶν ἐξήλασεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς τούτων δούλοις τὰ χρήματα τῶν δεσποτῶν χαρισάμενος καὶ τὰς ἐκείνων γυναῖκας συνῴκισεν πρὸς γάμου κοινωνίαν, ταῦτ’ ὠφεληθεὶς ἐκ τῆς καλῆς Πολιτείας καὶ τῶν παρανόμων Νόμων.
On which account Ephippus the comic poet, in his Shipwrecked Man, has turned into ridicule Plato himself, and some of his acquaintances, as being sycophants for money, showing that they used to dress in a most costly manner, and that they paid more attention to the elegance of their persons than even the most extravagant people among us. And he speaks as follows—Then some ingenious young man rising up,Some pupil of the New Academy,Brought up at Plato's feet and those of Bryso,That bold, contentious, covetous philosopher,—And urged by strong necessity, and able,By means of his small-wages-seeking art,To speak before th' assembly, in a mannerNot altogether bad; having his hairCarefully trimm'd with a new-sharpen'd razor,And letting down his beard in graceful fall,Putting his well-shod foot in his neat slipper,Binding his ancles in the equal foldsOf his well-fitting hose, and well protectedAcross the chest with the breastplate of his cloak,And leaning, in a posture dignified,Upon his staff; said, as it seems to me,With mouthing emphasis, the following speech,More like a stranger than a citizen,—“Men of the land of wise Athenians.”And here let us put an end to this part of the discussion, my friend Timocrates. And we will next proceed to speak of those who have been notorious for their luxury.
διὸ καὶ Ἔφιππος ὁ κωμῳδιοποιὸς ἐν Ναυάγῳ Πλάτωνά τε αὐτὸν καὶ τῶν γνωρίμων τινὰς κεκωμῴδηκεν ὡς καὶ ἐπ’ ἀργυρίῳ συκοφαντοῦντας, ἐμφαίνων ὅτι καὶ πολυτελῶς ἠσκοῦντο καὶ ὅτι τῆς εὐμορφίας τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἀσελγῶν πλείονα πρόνοιαν ἐποιοῦντο· λέγει δ’ οὕτως· ἔπειτ’ ἀναστὰς εὔστοχος νεανίας τῶν ἐξ Ἀκαδημίας τις ὑποπλατωνικὸς Βρυσωνοθρασυμαχειοληψικερμάτων, πληγεὶς ἀνάγκῃ ληψιλογομίσθῳ τέχνῃ συνών τις, οὐκ ἄσκεπτα δυνάμενος λέγειν, εὖ μὲν μαχαίρᾳ ξύστ’ ἔχων τριχώματα, εὖ δ’ ὑποκαθιεὶς ἄτομα πώγωνος βάθη, εὖ δ’ ἐν πεδίλῳ πόδα τιθεὶς ἐπισφύρων κνήμης ἱμάντων ἰσομέτροις ἑλίγμασιν, ὄγκῳ τε χλανίδος εὖ τεθωρακισμένος, σχῆμ’ ἀξιόχρεων ἐπικαθεὶς βακτηρίᾳ, ἀλλότριον, οὐκ οἰκεῖον, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, ἔλεξεν ἄνδρες τῆς Ἀθηναίων χθονός.᾽μέχρι τούτων ἡμῖν πεπεραιώσθω καὶ ἥδε ἡ συναγωγή, φίλτατε Τιμόκρατες. ἑξῆς δὲ ἐροῦμεν περὶ τῶν ἐπὶ τρυφῇ διαβοήτων γενομένων.