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. The Athenian Stranger orients legislation towards virtue. I conclude that figure of Solon provides a basis for Plato to redirect the aims of politics towards philosophy and cultivation of virtue in the soul. ii Dedication For Lola (1923-2007) iii Acknowledgments Upon finishing this project, I am in deepest gratitude to my advisor, Bruce Heiden, and my dissertation committee, Anthony Kaldellis, Richard Fletcher, and Greg Anderson, for being wonderful teachers and guides throughout the writing of this dissertation. Their comments, criticism, and feedback have been both insightful and challenging, and they have helped me immensely. I would also like to thank the the Departments of Classics, History, and Philosophy at The Ohio State University who helped me develop as a young scholar outside of the dissertation process, especially William Batstone and Dana Munteanu. The Departments of Classics, Philosophy, and Africana Studies, and the Provost’s Office at Gettysburg College, also provided me invaluable resources through personal mentorship and through funding for conferences. Outside the world of academia, I would like to thank my family: my parents, my brother Jimmy and sister Melanie, my cousins (especially Raylene, Didit, and Joel), and my aunts and uncles (especially Tita Linda and Tito Rey), who have all provided me with so much love, encouragement, and support. Last but not least, I would like to thank my friends and graduate colleagues who worked through the process of graduate school with me. I am especially indebted to my dear friends Marion Kruse, Michael Jean, and Hank Blume, for allowing me to live on their couches for indefinite amounts of time while in town for meetings and conferences. iv Vita 2007......................B.A. Latin and English (Double Major), John Carroll University 2007-2012 ............Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University 2008......................M.A. Greek and Latin, The Ohio State University 2012 to present .....Gondwe Visiting Scholar and Visiting Instructor of Classics, Gettysburg College Fields of Study Major Field: Greek and Latin v Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................... ii Dedication .................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................ iv Vita .................................................................................................................................v List of Figures ............................................................................................................. vii Chapter 1: Solon within the Context of Plato’s Dialogues ............................................1 Chapter 2: Solon, Critias, and the Tale of Atlantis ......................................................32 Chapter 3: Negotiating Solon in Plato’s Republic .......................................................95 Chapter 4: Replacing Solon in Plato’s Laws .............................................................185 Conclusion: Adapting Solon to a Post-Socratic World ..............................................235 Bibliography ..............................................................................................................238 vi List of Figures Figure 1: Diogenes Laertius’ Genealogy .....................................................................68 Figure 2: Proclus’ Genealogy ......................................................................................70 Figure 3: Problematic Timeline of Critias’ Family ......................................................73 Figure 4: Genealogy Based on Two Additional Generations ......................................74 Figure 5: Timeline of Events Based on Two Additional Generations .........................74 Figure 6: Theoretical Timeline Based on a Later Dating of Solon’s Archonship .......80 vii Chapter 1: Solon within the Context of Plato’s Dialogues I. Introduction This dissertation studies how Plato employs and adapts a well-known Athenian paradigm of wisdom, the archaic legislator and wise man Solon, to help define the political and philosophical project of his dialogues. In Plutarch’s Life of Solon, the biographer gives the following anecdote about Solon’s “philosophy”: !"#$%$!&'( )* +$, -."/$, µ0#"%+' +1 2$#"+"/34, 5%267 $8 2#69%+$" +:4 +3+6 %$!:4, -;02<%64. (3.5-6) In philosophy, like most of the wise men of that age, he was concerned above all with applying morals to politics.1 While this is not a particularly in-depth analysis of Solon’s philosophical aims, the passage defines two specific things: (1) Solon’s place among the “wise men” or “sages” of archaic Greece;2 and (2) the major concern of these sages, “applying morals to politics.” During the classical period of Greek history, a group of archaic wise men had 1 Life of Solon 3.5-3.6, trans. I. Scott-Kilvert. All translations hereafter are my own, unless otherwise noted. 2 Plutarch in fact relates the famous tale of the Seven Sages and the lost golden tripod of Helen in this biography. In this tale, some Coan fishermen discover a golden tripod, and quarrel with Milesian strangers about the find. The Pythian priestess of Apollo then pronounced that the tripod go “to the wisest man,” and it was thus given to Thales, and from Thales on to another sage until it came round again to Thales. At this point, Thales sent it to Thebes to be dedicated to Ismenian Apollo. Plutarch reports an alternate version of the story, according to Theophrastus, in which Bias is the first and last to receive the tripod, and he dedicates it to Apollo at Delphi (Life of Solon 4). Diogenes Laertius, whose account I discuss in section II below, says Thales was the first to receive the tripod, and Solon received it last. It was then Solon who sent it to Delphi (Thales 1.28). 1 become canonized as the “Seven Sages” ($8 =2+> %$!$&). According to Martin, there are three distinguishable attributes of these seven wise men: (1) they were all poets; (2); they were all involved in politics; and (3) they were all performers of their wisdom.3 All these aspects are visible in the Solonian tradition, as we retain (1) fragments of his poetry; (2) accounts of his legislation as well as specific laws attributed to him; and (3) accounts of his “performance” of wisdom both inside and outside of the realm of politics. Solon’s legacy encompassed multiple aspects of Greek intellectual thought, and, as I demonstrate in this introduction, these aspects were still prevalent during Plato’s time. In fact, Solon is more than an intellecutual predecessor to Plato: the fourth century philosopher’s family claimed to be descended from the sixth century Sage, as the Charmides and Timaeus- Critias make clear.4 Through a close reading of Solon’s roles in Plato’s dialogues, I suggest that Plato adapts, rewrites, and replaces Solon as a model of wisdom. The members of the “Seven” vary from source to source, starting with the first attested list in Plato’s Protagoras (342e-343a), but awareness of such a group may have existed as early as Herodotus, as I will discuss below. The Sages themselves, furthermore, are all products of the sixth century BCE. Still, the traditions surrounding them continued on into the classical period and beyond: these stories served as models for new generations of intellectuals. This is especially apparent in the middle and late parts of the fifth century BCE, when the figures we now call “sophists” traveled around Greece as teachers. Like the Seven Sages, many of these intellectuals claimed that the education they imparted benefitted their students