DOCSLIB.ORG

The Socratic Dubia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Socratic Dubia The Socratic Dubia Harold Tarrant University of Newcastle Australia 1 Introduction It is hard to be sure about the authenticity of several of the dialogues within the Platonic corpus. Most of these employ Socrates as principal speaker, and seem genuinely interested in aspects of the historical or at least the Platonic “Socrates” and his methods, and my title refers to these collectively. I am neither claiming that they offer special insights into the historical Socrates, nor that they should always be treated as a group. Rather I would claim that there is some merit in examining them together from time to time, revealing their similarities, and discussing whether some or all might have found their way into the corpus by a common path. Any such examination would naturally include discussion of the portrait of Socrates that they paint, both collectively and individually. If these works were designed by Plato or were given his approval then they have received the imprimatur of a follower of Socrates. If they have no close connection with Plato, nor with any other follower of Socrates, then they may rather be important as indications of what Socrates had come to mean for those who had not known Socrates themselves. The shape of the Platonic corpus, as we now know it, cannot with certainty be traced back before Thrasyllus (d. 36ce),1 but even then several works were already agreed to be spurious (dl 3.62).2 Several survive in the Appendix Pla- 1 I have treated Thrasyllus’ activities in Tarrant 1993, and I included the testimonia there. Mansfeld 1994 offered a different account on some matters; Sedley 2009 has published a papyrus that may well reflect Thrasyllus’ explanation of the second tetralogy (Cratylus- Theaetetus-Sophist-Statesman). I revisited several issues in Tarrant 2013a, while Brisson 2013 examines the relevant text of Diogenes Laertius with more interest in the interpretative than the historical perspective. My present position is that Plato’s work, including many dialogues not yet circulating, was arranged in the Academy after Plato’s death, and was passed down, with some accretions, by those charged with keeping his books, until the break-up of the Academy in 88bce. The tetralogies represent Thrasyllus’ (or Dercyllides’) attempt to explain the order in which they had been transmitted, which had not been adequately explained before, and it may have involved slight changes of order, particularly in respect of Theages and Erastae (on which see below). 2 The strong adverb homologoumenôs qualifies notheuontai (“are excluded as spurious”), imply- © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi: 10.1163/9789004341227_020 the socratic dubia 387 tonica, a collection of related works such as Axiochus and Definitions transmit- ted in some manuscripts. The existence of agreed spuria does not imply that everything within the Thrasyllan corpus was agreed to be genuine. The most important dialogue of which this was not so was the Epinomis, which some sources ascribed to Philip of Opus, who is also credited with having prepared the Laws for publication and arranged it in its present twelve-book form.3While the Epinomis does not employ Socrates as a speaker, some dialogues in which Socrates is the principal speaker are preserved within the corpus but were also questioned, and I would number among these Alcibiades ii, Hipparchus, and Erastae.4 Thrasyllus identified a polymath referred to in this last as Democritus, adding “presuming that the [Ant]erastae is by Plato,”5 a caveat implying that some others doubted its authenticity. We can perhaps guess why the last two of these works should have been doubted, for the interlocutors (as also in Minos) remain unnamed, contrary to Plato’s usual dramatically-inspired practice; and the second Alcibiades, apart from being a second dialogue with that title,6 has linguistic oddities (particularly the forms οὐθείς/μηθείς for οὐδείς/μηδείς) that suggest a different writing, editing, or transmission process from the rest of the corpus. ing considerable consensus, at least by Diogenes’ time. In spite of some excellent work in this area by Müller 1975, we do not know the process by which such consensus had arisen, and it did not stop authors from referring to spurious works as “Plato’s” if it suited them. One work, the Halcyon, which was included in Diogenes’ list, has been transmitted to us both through some manuscripts of Plato and through those of Lucian, while according to Dio- genes (dl 3.62) Favorinus had regarded it as the work of the Academic Leon. It is interesting in that it is the sole surviving dialogue to make Socrates’ early friend Chaerephon (on whom see Brisson in this volume, p. 000) an interlocutor. 3 Evidence (e.g. d.l. 3.37, anon. Proleg. 24.13–16, cf. 25.6–7, and Plut. Moralia 370f) is available in an appendix to the edition of Tarán 1975. 4 Ael. vh 8.2 (Hipparchus), Ath. 11.506c (Alcibiades ii, then sometimes said to be by Xenophon); for Erastae read on. 5 See dl 9.37 = t18c. The work (on which see Peterson in this volume) was often known as Anterastae, meaning “rival lovers”,and may today be referred to as Lovers or Rivals (Fr. Rivaux, It. Rivali); the caveat does not imply Thrasyllus’ own doubt (Peterson, p. 412). 6 There is also a second Hippias, but few now insist that either is spurious even though there is a simple reference to “the Hippias” at Ar. Metaph. δ.29, 1025a6, where the verb χωλαίνω (1025a10–11), otherwise absent from Aristotle, picks up Hip. mi. 374c7 in the Platonic text; it has been suspected that such a reference would not have been made in this form if Aristotle had known two Hippias-dialogues (and hence that Hippias Major might be spurious), but see next note..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Proclus on the Elements and the Celestial Bodies
    PROCLUS ON THE ELEMENTS AND THE CELESTIAL BODIES PHYSICAL TH UGHT IN LATE NEOPLAT NISM Lucas Siorvanes A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science, Science Faculty, University College London. Deuember 1986 - 2 - ABSTRACT Until recently, the period of Late Antiquity had been largely regarded as a sterile age of irrationality and of decline in science. This pioneering work, supported by first-hand study of primary sources, argues that this opinion is profoundly mistaken. It focuses in particular on Proclus, the head of the Platonic School at Athens in the 5th c. AD, and the chief spokesman for the ideas of the dominant school of thought of that time, Neoplatonism. Part I, divided into two Sections, is an introductory guide to Proclus' philosophical and cosmological system, its general principles and its graded ordering of the states of existence. Part II concentrates on his physical theories on the Elements and the celestial bodies, in Sections A and B respectively, with chapters (or sub-sections) on topics including the structure, properties and motion of the Elements; light; space and matter; the composition and motion of the celestial bodies; and the order of planets. The picture that emerges from the study is that much of the Aristotelian physics, so prevalent in Classical Antiquity, was rejected. The concepts which were developed instead included the geometrization of matter, the four-Element composition of the universe, that of self-generated, free motion in space for the heavenly bodies, and that of immanent force or power.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato As "Architectof Science"
    Plato as "Architectof Science" LEONID ZHMUD ABSTRACT The figureof the cordialhost of the Academy,who invitedthe mostgifted math- ematiciansand cultivatedpure research, whose keen intellectwas able if not to solve the particularproblem then at least to show the methodfor its solution: this figureis quite familiarto studentsof Greekscience. But was the Academy as such a centerof scientificresearch, and did Plato really set for mathemati- cians and astronomersthe problemsthey shouldstudy and methodsthey should use? Oursources tell aboutPlato's friendship or at leastacquaintance with many brilliantmathematicians of his day (Theodorus,Archytas, Theaetetus), but they were neverhis pupils,rather vice versa- he learnedmuch from them and actively used this knowledgein developinghis philosophy.There is no reliableevidence that Eudoxus,Menaechmus, Dinostratus, Theudius, and others, whom many scholarsunite into the groupof so-called"Academic mathematicians," ever were his pupilsor close associates.Our analysis of therelevant passages (Eratosthenes' Platonicus, Sosigenes ap. Simplicius, Proclus' Catalogue of geometers, and Philodemus'History of the Academy,etc.) shows thatthe very tendencyof por- trayingPlato as the architectof sciencegoes back to the earlyAcademy and is bornout of interpretationsof his dialogues. I Plato's relationship to the exact sciences used to be one of the traditional problems in the history of ancient Greek science and philosophy.' From the nineteenth century on it was examined in various aspects, the most significant of which were the historical, philosophical and methodological. In the last century and at the beginning of this century attention was paid peredominantly, although not exclusively, to the first of these aspects, especially to the questions how great Plato's contribution to specific math- ematical research really was, and how reliable our sources are in ascrib- ing to him particular scientific discoveries.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — the Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen Ní Mheallaigh Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — The Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen ní Mheallaigh Index More Information Index Achilles’ shield. See Homer Callimachus, – Aëtius, – celestial bowls, – Aglaonice, – Cicero, Somnium Scipionis, –, , See Alcmaeon of Croton, , – selēnoskopia (or ‘view from Moon’) Alcman Cleomedes, , Partheneia (Maiden Songs), – cognitive estrangement. See selēnoskopia (view from Alexander of Abonouteichos, – Moon) amphiphōntes, Colin Webster, , – analogical drift, Corinna, – Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, , –, –, cup of Helios, – Cyrano de Bergerac, , n Anaximander of Miletus, – Anaximenes of Miletus, – Demetrius Triclinius, n, , – Ancient Greek calendar, See also parapēgmata Democritus of Abdera, –, Antiphanes of Berge, – Diogenes of Apollonia, antiphraxis, – dioptra. See Lucian, True Stories Antonius Diogenes, The incredible things beyond Thule earthshine, – and scholarly hoax, – Earthy Moon Theory (EMT), –, –, and the Arctic, – See Plutarch, De facie and the Moon, – problems/challenges, , – narrative complexity, – eclipse Apollo Noumēnios, lunar eclipse, – Apuleius mechanism of eclipse, – lunam despumari, – solar eclipse, , – Aristarchus of Samos, , Empedocles of Acragas, –, , – Aristotle Empedotimus, fire creatures on the Moon, – Endymiones, , – on nature of Moon, Ennius’ dream, – theory of elements, Epimenides of Crete, – Astraeus, Eratosthenes of Cyrene, astral travel. See soul projection Hermes. See selēnoskopia (or ‘view from astronomical observation, , See mountains Moon’) astronomy
    [Show full text]
  • On the Arrangement of the Platonic Dialogues
    Ryan C. Fowler 25th Hour On the Arrangement of the Platonic Dialogues I. Thrasyllus a. Diogenes Laertius (D.L.), Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers 3.56: “But, just as long ago in tragedy the chorus was the only actor, and afterwards, in order to give the chorus breathing space, Thespis devised a single actor, Aeschylus a second, Sophocles a third, and thus tragedy was completed, so too with philosophy: in early times it discoursed on one subject only, namely physics, then Socrates added the second subject, ethics, and Plato the third, dialectics, and so brought philosophy to perfection. Thrasyllus says that he [Plato] published his dialogues in tetralogies, like those of the tragic poets. Thus they contended with four plays at the Dionysia, the Lenaea, the Panathenaea and the festival of Chytri. Of the four plays the last was a satiric drama; and the four together were called a tetralogy.” b. Characters or types of dialogues (D.L. 3.49): 1. instructive (ὑφηγητικός) A. theoretical (θεωρηµατικόν) a. physical (φυσικόν) b. logical (λογικόν) B. practical (πρακτικόν) a. ethical (ἠθικόν) b. political (πολιτικόν) 2. investigative (ζητητικός) A. training the mind (γυµναστικός) a. obstetrical (µαιευτικός) b. tentative (πειραστικός) B. victory in controversy (ἀγωνιστικός) a. critical (ἐνδεικτικός) b. subversive (ἀνατρεπτικός) c. Thrasyllan categories of the dialogues (D.L. 3.50-1): Physics: Timaeus Logic: Statesman, Cratylus, Parmenides, and Sophist Ethics: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, Menexenus, Clitophon, the Letters, Philebus, Hipparchus, Rivals Politics: Republic, the Laws, Minos, Epinomis, Atlantis Obstetrics: Alcibiades 1 and 2, Theages, Lysis, Laches Tentative: Euthyphro, Meno, Io, Charmides and Theaetetus Critical: Protagoras Subversive: Euthydemus, Gorgias, and Hippias 1 and 2 :1 d.
    [Show full text]
  • AULOS-GIRL PAPERS Edited by Heidi Gustafson
    AULOS-GIRL PAPERS Edited By Heidi Gustafson Fig 1. Aulos-girl playing For Plato & Platonism With Prof. Jacob Sherman. December 2013 at CIIS Let us dispense with the flute-girl who just made her entrance; let her play for herself... - Plato The swarm of the dead hums. - Sophocles NOTE FROM EDITORS I. LION’S SHARE OF TRUTH FRAGMENT ON THE SOUND OF TRUTH & PHILOSOPHY 3... The legality of building private shrines 7... Thinking is not love II. HUMAN BEAUTY ON THE OFFSPRING OF BEAUTY & MADNESS 13... Fragments of Aphrodite and Dionysos: Letters from Aphrodite to her sons 15... The Myth of Anteros 16... A “Beautiful Boy” - An Image of a Concept 18... Another Beauty A NOTE ON CUNT SWEAT III. MANY-HEADED GOOD ON PLATO’S DEATH 23... Account of Plato’s death 24... Liver oracle 26... Fragments from Plato’s Eulogy ON THE NATURE OF DEATH, DREAMS & ILLNESS 29... Plato, I believe, was ill 35... Oedipus fragment on Apollo ON CHANGING TERRAIN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RACE & APOLLO’S TWIN WHO GAVE BIRTH TO HIM NOTES BIBLIOGRAPHY Note from the Editor These are the works of an unnamed flute- player who claims to have been present at Plato’s death. The writings, discovered only recently, appear in a transdisciplinary format and are a bit of an enigma. The works provide, regardless of their unusual nature or validity as a witness account, a surreal portrait of, and engagement with, the person of Plato. Provisionally, the Aulos-girl Papers are compelling for us in two ways: 1. they, like Plato’s authorship, problematize the affairs of the beautiful political soul, and give a fragmented account of how to give birth to a concept (called variously in the text: a boy, a sacrifice, a god, a thing), and 2.
    [Show full text]
  • May Plato's Academy Be Considered As the First Academic Institution?
    Center for Open Access in Science ▪ https://www.centerprode.com/ojsh.html Open Journal for Studies in History, 2019, 2(2), 35-42. ISSN (Online) 2620-066X ▪ https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojsh.0202.02035s _________________________________________________________________________ May Plato’s Academy be Considered as the First Academic Institution? Zhulduz Amangelidyevna Seitkasimova M. Auezov South Kazakhstan State University, KAZAKHSTAN Faculty of Pedagogy and Culture, Shymkent Received 8 November 2019 ▪ Revised 17 December 2019 ▪ Accepted 23 December 2019 Abstract Plato’s Academy is undoubtedly the first higher education institution in history, and in ancient Athens itself represents the most important educational institution. It constituted in the context of the universal development that took place in ancient Athens, in the 5th and 4th century BC, and it continued to work until the Byzantine Emperor Justinian forbade the work of all schools of philosophy (529 AD). This development, which is part of the so-called Golden Age of ancient Athens, represents the period of Greek history in which the foundations of Western civilization originated, as we know it today. Plato appears as one of the greatest philosophers of ancient Greece, along with Socrates and Aristotle, to the first of whom appears as a student and to the second as a teacher. Philosophy in the true sense of the word was created in Plato’s era in ancient Athens (Russell, 1975), and Plato’s Academy, in which he, along with his students, talked about various philosophical topics through the Garden of Akademos, was the impetus for this development. There are also opinions that the development of philosophy after Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle is only of reproductive character when it comes to the basics of philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Editions Perna, Petrus. 1580. Plotini platonicorum facile coryphaei operum philosophicorum omnium libri LIV: in sex enneades distributi. Basileae: Ad Perneam Lecythum. Fabricius, Johann Albert. 1711. Bibliothecae graecae libri IV. Hamburgi: [Christiani Liebezeit]. Creuzer, Georg Friedrich, Georg Heinrich Moser, and Daniel Wyttenbach. 1835. Plotini opera omnia, Porphyrii liber de vita Plotini. 3 vols. Oxonii: e typographaeo Academico. Westermann, Anton. 1850. Porphyrius De vita Plotini apud Carel Gabriel Cobet, Diogenis Laertii de clarorum philosophorum vitis, dogmatibus et apophthegmatibus libri decem. Paris: Firmin Didot. Kirchhoff, Adolf. 1856. Plotini opera. 2 vols. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Müller, Hermann Friedrich. 1878-80. Plotini Enneades. 2 vols. Berolini: apud Weidmannos. von Volkmann, Richard. 1883-4. Plotini Enneades, praemisso Porphyrii de vita Plotini deque ordine librorum eius libello. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Bréhier, Émile. 1924-38. Plotin: Ennéades. 6 vols. in 7. Coll. Budé. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni. 1946. Porfirio: Vita di Plotino ed ordine dei suoi libri. Napoli: G. Machiaroli. Faggin, Giuseppe. 1947-8. Plotino: Le Enneadi e Porfirio: Vita di Plotino. 3 vols. Milano: Istituto editoriale italiano. Rev. ed. 2000, Milano: Bompiani. Henry, Paul, and Hans-Rudolf Schwyzer. 1951-73. Plotini opera. (Editio maior.) 3 vols. Museum Lessianum Series Philosophica 33-5. Bruxelles: L’Édition Universelle and Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. ———. 1964-82. Plotini opera. (Editio minor.) 3 vols. OCT. Oxonii: e typographeo Clarendoniano.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity
    THE CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY IN LATE ANTIQUITY The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity comprises over forty specially commissioned essays by experts on the philosophy of the period 200–800 ce. Designed as a successor to The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy (ed. A. H. Armstrong), it takes into account some forty years of schol- arship since the publication of that volume. The contributors examine philosophy as it entered literature, science and religion, and offer new and extensive assess- ments of philosophers who until recently have been mostly ignored. The volume also includes a complete digest of all philosophical works known to have been written during this period. It will be an invaluable resource for all those interested in this rich and still emerging field. lloyd p. gerson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto. He is the author of numerous books including Ancient Epistemology (Cambridge, 2009), Aristotle and Other Platonists (2005)andKnowing Persons: A Study in Plato (2004), as well as the editor of The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus (1996). The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Volume I edited by LLOYD P. GERSON cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao˜ Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo, Mexico City Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 8ru,UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521876421 C Cambridge University Press 2010 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography 1969 [1] ‘The Law of Contradiction’, Philosophical Quarterly 19, 302-309 [2] ‘Aristotle’s Theory of Demonstration’, Phronesis 14, 123-152 [3] (trans.) G.Patzig, Aristotle’s Theory of the Syllogism (Reidel, Dordrecht) 1970 [4] ‘Property in Aristotle’s Topics’, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 52, 136-155 [5] rev. G.E.L.Owen (ed), Aristotle on Dialectic, Philosophical Review 79, 558-565 1971 [6] ‘Homonymy in Aristotle and Speusippus’, Classical Quarterly 21, 65-80 1972 [7] The Ontological Argument (Macmillan, London) [8] ‘Aristotle’s Concept of Mind’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 72, 101-114 [9] ‘Mr Locke’s Darling Notion’, Philosophical Quarterly 22, 193-214 [10] (with Richard Robinson) ‘Untruisms’, Metaphilosophy 3, 189-197 [11] rev. A.Dreizehnter (ed), Aristoteles Politik, Classical Review 22, 339-341 1973 [12] rev. J.Bennett, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Philosophical Quarterly 23, 73-76 [13] rev. H.Stachowiak, Rationalismus im Ursprung, Mind 82, 292-293 [14] rev. R.A.Gauthier (ed), Aristote: Ethique à Nicomaque, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55, 79-82 [15] rev. M.L.West, Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient, Oxford Magazine 91, 10-11 [16] rev. J.W.Gough, John Locke’s Political Philosophy, Oriel Record, 57-60 [17] rev. P.Moraux and D.Harlfinger (edd), Untersuchungen zur Eudemischen Ethik, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55, 334-338 1974 [18] rev. R.Sorabji (ed), Aristotle on Memory, Isis 65, 412-413 2 [19] rev. J.Aubonnet (ed), Aristote: Politique III-IV, Classical Review 24, 292-293 1975 [20] Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics (Clarendon Press, Oxford) [21] ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Loeb Lucian Vol3.Pdf
    UJ THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY FOUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, IX.D. EDITED BY t T. E. PAGE, C.H., LITT.D. fE. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D. tW.H. D. ROUSE, LITT.D. L. A. POST, L.H.D. E. H. WARMINGTON, M.A., F.R.HIST.SOO. I.UCIAN m LUCIAN WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY A. M. HARMON OF YALE UNIVERSITY IN EIGHT VOLUMES III LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS MCMLX First printed 1921 Reprinted 1947, 1960 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF LUCIAN'S WORKS vi THE DEAD COME TO LIFE, OB THE FISHERMAN {Bevivescentes sive Picator) 1 THE DOUBLE INDICTMENT, OR TRIALS BY JURY {Bis Accusatus sive Trihunalia) 83 ON SACRIFICES {De Sacrificus) . 153 THE IGNORANT BOOK-COLLECTOR {Adversus Indoctum et libros mnltos emeniem) 173 THE DREAM, OR LUCIAN's CAREER {Somnium sivB Vita Luciani) 213 THE PARASITE, PARASITIC AN ART [De Parasito sive Ariem esse Parasiticam) 235 » THE LOVER OF LIES, OR THE DOUBTER {PhUopseudes sive Incredulus) 319 THE JUDGEMENT OF THE GODDESSES {Deariim ludiciuvt [Deorum Dialogi ZZ]) 383 ON SALARIED POSTS IN GREAT HOUSES {De Mercede conductis potentium familiaribus) 411 INDEX 483 LIST OF LUCIAN'S WOEKS SHOWING THEIR DIVISION INTO VOLUMES IN THIS EDITION VOLTJME I Phalaris I and II—Hippias or the Bath—Dionysus—Heracles—Amber or The Swans—The Fly—Nigrinus—Demonax—The Hall—My Native Land— Octogenarians—A True Story I and 11—Slander—The Consonants at Law—The Carousal or The Lapiths. VOLUMB II The Downward Joiu-ney or The Tyrant—Zeus Catechized—Zeus Rants —The Dream or The Cock—Prometheus—Icaromenippus or The Sky-man —Timon or The Misanthroi)e—Charon or the Inspector—Philosophies for Sale.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article — Development, Non-Philosophers, and Laws
    REVIEW ARTICLE — DEVELOPMENT, NON-PHILOSOPHERS, AND LAWS Harold Tarrant1 Christopher Bobonich, Plato’s Utopia Recast: His Later Ethics and Politics (New York and Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002), xi + 643 pp., £40.00, ISBN 0 19 925143 6 (cloth); £20.00, ISBN 0 19 927410 0 (pbk.). This is a monumental book about the final phase in the development of Plato’s political and ethical theory in the Laws. It would not be quite correct to call it a work about the political theory of the Laws, for it is not starting off with the overall text of that work as something in need of explanation. Nor is its pri- mary interest in what Plato seeks to discuss in the Laws. For instance, I had reason to look and see if the index mentioned the important topics of commu- nal meals or land division. The former received a little attention, the latter none that I could find. The principal subject is the underpinnings of Plato’s political theory, above all its underpinnings in Plato’s concept of the human person itself. The author is therefore raising issues of his own concerning Plato’s own position in the Laws, and how that position had evolved. Given the strong ancient tradition concerning this being the last of the dia- logues, prepared for ‘publication’ by Philip of Opus, one does not have to be a developmentalist to accept the legitimacy of Bobonich’s chronological sup- positions. The Laws is contrasted primarily with the Phaedo and the Republic, and strong claims are made concerning developments in political theory, which follow developments in Plato’s psychology and epistemology.
    [Show full text]