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—

But, besides being the name of a cup, a company feasting together was also called φιλοτήσιον. Aristophanes says—

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—

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.

107. There are also χυτρίδες; Alexis, in his Supposititious Child, says—

But Herodotus, in the fifth book of his History, says "that the Argives and Æginetans 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."

108. 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—

And Dioxippus, in his Miser, says—

And Menander, in his play entitled The Brazier's Shop, says—

And Epigenes, in his Heroine, giving a list of many cups, among them mentions the psygeus thus—

And Strattis, in his Psychastæ—

But Alexis, in his Hippiscus, uses the diminutive form, and calls it a ψυκτηρίδιον, saying—

109. 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—

And Antiphanes, in his Knights, says—

And in the Carna he declares plainly that, when pouring out wine, they used the psycter for a cyathus. For after he had said—

in the passage following, he represents his man as saying—

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). Æschylus, in his Young Men, says—

and Euripides, in his Phaethon, says—

and the author of the poem called Ægimius, whether it really was Hesiod, or only Cecrops of Miletus, says—

110. 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—

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."

111. 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 again, in his Fanatical Woman, he says—

And Euripides, in his Cretan Women, says—

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 pæans;" 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."

112. Now, any one who considers these expressions of the accomplished Xenophon, may understand how it was 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 Socratic 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.[69] 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 for liberty, and meets with bad cupbearers, and so it gets intoxicated by too untempered a draught . . . ."

113. 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,—

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.

114. 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.

115. 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 Sophocles; 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.

116. 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 Ætna, 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 Æschines 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."

117. 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—

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.

118. 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 discusses 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.

119. 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 Commentaries. 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 Chæron 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.

120. 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—

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.

LONDON:
R. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL.