Monday, April 22, 2024

Cratylus 8

Soc. But what comes next (a0lla\ ti/ to\ meta\ tou=to;)? – of Zeus we have spoken (to\n me\n Di/a ei1pomen).

Her. Yes (Nai/).

Soc. Then let us take next his two brothers, Poseidon ad Pluto, whether the latter is called by that or by his other name (Tou\j a0delfou\j au0tou= le/gwmen, to/n de\ Poseidw~ kai\ to\n Plou/twna kai\ to\ e3teron o1noma o9 o0noma/zousin au0to/n).

Her. By all means (Pa/nu ge).

Soc. Poseidon is posi/desmoj, the chain of the feet; the original inventor of the name had been stopped by the watery element in his walks, and not allowed to go on (To\ me\n toi/nun tou= Poseidw~no/j moi fai/netai w)noma/sqai u9po\ tou= prw&tou o0noma/santoj, o3ti au0to\n badi/zonta e0pe/sxen h9 th=j qala/ttaj fu/sij kai\ ou0k e1ti ei1asen proelqei=n, a0ll w#sper desmo\j tw~n podw~n au0tw~| e0ge/neto), and therefore he called the ruler of this element Poseidon (to\n ou]n a1rxonta th=j duna/mewj tau/thj qeo\n w)no/masen Poseidw~na, w(j posi/desmon o1nta); the e was probably inserted as an ornament (to\ de\ e e1gkeitai i1swj eu0prepei/aj e3neka). Yet, perhaps not so (ta/xa de\ ou0k a2n tou=to le/goi); but the name may have been originally written with a double l and not with an s, meaning that the God knew many things [polla\ ei0dw&j] (a0lla\ a0nti\ tou= si=gma du/o la/bda to\ prw~ton e0le/geto, w(jpolla\ ei0do/toj tou= qeou=). And perhaps also he being the shaker of the earth, has been named from shaking [sei/ein] (i1swj de\ a0po\ tou= sei/ein o9 sei/wn w)no/mastai), and then p and d have been added (pro/skeitai de\ to\ pei= kai\ to\ de/lta). Pluto gives wealth [plou=toj], and his name means the giver of wealth, which comes out of the earth beneath (to\ de\ Plou/twnoj, tou=to me\n kata\ th\n tou= plou/tou do/sin, o3ti e0k th=j gh=j ka/twqen a0ni/etai o9 plou=toj, e0pwnoma/sqh). People in general appear to imagine that the term Hades is connected with the invisible [a0eide\j] (o9 de\ A#idhj, oi9 polloi\ me/n moi dokou=sin u9polamba/nein to\ a0ide\j proseirh=sqai tw~| ono/mati tou/tw|); and so they are led by their fears to call the God Pluto instead (kai\ fobou/menoi to\ o1noma Plou/twna kalou=sin au0to/n).

Her. And what is the true derivation (Soi\ de\ pw~j fai/netai, w} Sw&kraej;)?

Soc. In spite of the mistakes which are made about the power of this deity (Pollaxh=| e1moige dokou=sin a1nqrwpoi dihmarthke/nai peri\ tou/tou tou= qeou= th=j duna/mewj), and the foolish fears which people have of him (kai\ fobei=sqai au0to\n ou0k a1cion o1n), such as the fear of always being with him after death (o3ti te ga/r, e0peida\n a3pac tij h9mw~n a0poqa/nh|, a0ei\ e0kei= e0stin, fobou=ntai), and of the soul denuded of the body going to him (kai\ o3ti h9 yuxh\ gumnh\ tou= sw&matoj par e0kei=non a0pe/rxetai, kai\ tou=to pefo/bhntai), my belief is that all is quite consistent, and that the office and name of the God really correspond (ta\ d e0moi\ dokei= pa/nta e0j tau0to/n ti suntei/nein, kai\ h9 a0rxh\ tou= qeou= kai\ to\ o1noma).

Her. Why, how is that (Pw~j dh/;)?

Soc. I will tell you my own opinion; but first, I should like to ask you which chain does any animal feel to be the stronger? and which confines him more to the same spot, – desire or necessity (E0gw& soi e0rw~ a3 ge/ moi fai/netai, ei0pe\ ga/r moi, desmo\j zw|&w| o9tw|ou=n w#ste me/nein o9pouou=n, po/teroj i0sxuro/tero/j e0stin, a0na/gkh h2 e0piqumi/a;)?

Her. Desire, Socrates, is stronger far (Polu\ diafe/rei, w} Sw&kratej, h9 e0piqumi/a).

Soc. And do you not think that many a one would escape from Hades, if he did not bind those who depart to him by the strongest of chains (Oi1ei ou]n to\n A#idhn ou0k a2n pollou\j e0kfeu/gein, ei0 mh\ tw~| i0sxurota/tw| de/smw| e1dei tou\j e0kei=se i0o/ntaj;)?

Her. Assuredly they would (Dh=la dh/).

Soc. And if by the greatest of chains, then by some desire, as I should certainly infer, and not by necessity (E0piqumi/a| a1ra tini\ au0tou/j, w(j e1oike, dei=, ei1per tw~| megistw~| de/smw| dei=, kai\ ou0k a0na/gkh|)?

Her. That is clear (Fai/netai).

Soc. And there are many desires (Oukou=n e0piqumi/ai pollai/ ei0sin).

Her. Yes (Nai/).

Soc. And therefore by the greatest desire, if the chain is to be the greatest (Th| megi/sth| a1ra e0piqumi/a| tw~n e0piqumiw~n dei= au0tou/j, ei1per me/llei tw~| megi/stw| desmw~| kate/xein)?

Her. Yes (Nai/).

Soc. And is any desire stronger than the thought that you will be made better by associating with another (E!stin ou]n tij mei/zwn e0piqumi/a h2 o3tan tij tw~| sunw_n oi1htai di e0kei=non e1sesqai a0mei/nwn a0nh=r;)?

Her, Certainly not (Ma\ Di\ ou0d o9pwstiou=n, w} Sw&kratej).

Soc. And is not that the reason (Dia\ tau=ta a1ra fw~men), Hermogenes (w} E(rmo/genej), why no one, who has been to him, is willing to come back to us (ou0de/na deu=ro e0qelh=sai a0pelqei=n tw~n e0kei=qen)? Even the Sirens, like all the rest of the world, have been laid under his spells (ou0de\ au0ta\j Seirh=naj, a0lla\ katakekhlh=sqai e0kei/naj te kai\ tou\j a1llouj pa/ntaj). Such a charm, as I imagine, is the God able to infuse into his words (ou3tw kalou/j tinaj, w(j e1oiken, e0pi/statai lo/gouj le/gein o9 A3idhj). And, according to this view, he is the perfect and accomplished sophist (kai\ e1stin, w#j g e0k tou= lo/gou tou/tou, o9 qeo\j ou3toj te/leoj sofisth/j te), and the great benefactor of the inhabitants of the other world (kai\ me/gaj eu0erge/thj tw~n par au9tw~|); and even to us who are upon earth he sends from below exceeding blessings (o4j ge kai\ toi=j e0nqa/de tosau=ta a0gaqa\ a0ni/hsin). For he has much more than he wants down there (ou3tw polla\ au0tw|~ ta\ perio/nta e0kei= e0stin); wherefore he is called Pluto [or the rich] (kai\ to\n Plou/twna a0po\ tou/tou e1sxe to\ o1noma). Note also, that he will have nothing to do with men while they are in the body (kai\ to\ au] mh\ e0qe/lein sunei=nai toi=j a0nqrw&poij e1xousi ta\ sw~mata), but only when the soul is liberated from the desires and evils of the body (a0lla\ to/te suggi/gnesqai, e0peida\n h9 yuxh\ kaqara\ h]| pa/ntwn tw~n peri\ to\ sw~ma kakw~n kai\ e0piqumiw~n). Now there is a great deal of philosophy and reflection in that (ou0 filoso/fou dokei= soi ei]nai kai\ eu] e0ntequmhme/nou); for in their liberated state he can bind them with the desire of virtue (o3ti ou3tw me\n a2n kate/xoi au0tou\j dh/saj th=| peri\ a0reth\n e0piqumi/a|), but while they are flustered and maddened by the body (e1xonta\j de\ th\n tou= sw~matoj ptoi/hsin kai\ mani/an), not even father Cronos himself would suffice to keep them with him (ou0d a2n o9 Kro/noj du/naito o9 path\r sunkate/xein au9tw~|) in his own far-famed chains (e0n toi=j de/smoij dh/saj toi=j au9tou= legome/noij;)

Her. There is a deal of truth in what you say (Kinduneu/eij ti\ le/gein, w} Sw&kratej).

Soc. Yes, Hermogenes, and the legislator called him Hades, not from the unseen [a0eide\j] – far otherwise, but from his knowledge [ei0de/nai] of all noble things (Kai\ to/ ge o1noma o9 A#idhj, w} E(rmo/genej, pollou= dei= a0po\ tou= a0idou=j e0pwnoma/sqai, a0lla\ polu\ ma=llon a0po\ tou= pa/nta ta\ kala\ ei0de/nai, a0po\ tou/tou u9po\ tou= nomoqe/tou A#idhj e0klh/qh).

Her. Very good; and what do we say of Demeter, and Héré, and Apollo, and Athéné, and Hefaestus, and Ares and the other deities­ (Ei]en, ti/ de\ Dh/mhtra/ te kai\ H#ran kai\ A0po/llw kai\ A0qhna=n kai\ H#faiston kai\ A1rh kai\ tou\j a1llouj qeou/j, pw~j le/gomen;)?

Soc. Demeter is h9 didou=sa mh/thr, who gives food like a mother (Dhmh/thr me\n fai/netai kata\ th\n do/sin th=j e0dwdh=j didou=sa w(j mh/thr Dhmh/thrkeklh=sqai);  Héra is the lovely one [e0rath\] – for Zeus, according to tradition, loved and married her (H#ra de\ e0rath/ tij, w#sper ou]n kai\ le/getai o9 Zeu\j au0th=j e0rasqei\j e1xein); possibly also the name may have been given when the legislator was thinking of the heavens, and may be only a disguise of the air (a0h\r), putting the end in the place of the beginning (i1swj de\ metewrologw~n o9 nomoqe/thj to\n a0e/raH#ran w)no/masen e0pikrupto/menoj, qei\j th\n a0rxh\n e0pi\ teleuth\n). You will recognise the truth of this if you repeat the letters of Héra several times over (gnoi/hj d a2n, ei0 polla/kij le/goij to\ th=j H#raj o1noma). People dread the name of

***

The Greek grammar says on “breathings”: “Every initial vowel or diphthong has either the rough (   () or the smooth (  0 ) breathing. The rough breathing (spiritus asper) is pronounced as h, which is sounded before the vowel; the smooth breathing (spiritus lenis) indicates absence of aspiration.”

The passage on Héra and on the air (a0h\r) shows that the aspirated h was almost inaudible, for only thus the several times repeated (H)éra coincides with the repetition of aér.

***

Pherephatta as they dread the name of Apollo (Ferre/fatta de/, polloi\ me\n kai\ tou=to fobou=ntai to\ o1noma kai\ to\n A0po/llw) – and with as little reason; the fear, if I am not mistaken, only arises from their ignorance of the nature of names (u9po\ a0peiri/aj, w(j e1oiken, o0noma/twn o0rqo/thtoj). But they go changing the name into Phersephone, and they are terrified at this (kai\ ga\r metaba/llontej skopou=ntai th\n Fersefo/nhn, kai\ deino\n au0toi=j fai/netai); whereas the new name means only that the Goddess is wise [sofh/] (to\ de\ mhnu/ei sofh\n ei]nai th\n qeo/n); for seeing that all things in the world are in motion (ferome/nwn), that principle which embraces and touches and is able to follow them, is wisdom (a3te ga\r ferome/nwn tw~n pragma/twn to\ e0fapto/menon kai\ e0pafw~n kai\ duna/menon e0pakolouqei=n sofi/a a2n ei1h), and therefore the Goddess may be truly called Pherepaphe (Ferepa/fa), or some name like it, because she touches that which is in motion (tou= ferome/nou e0faptome/nh), herein showing her wisdom (Fere/pafa ou]n dia\ th\n sofi/an kai\ th\n e0pafh\n tou= ferome/nou h9 qeo\j a2n o0rqw~j kaloi=to, h2 toiouto/n ti). And Hades, who is wise, consorts with her, because she is wise (di o3per kai\ su/nestin au0th=| o9 A3idhj sofo\j w1n, dio/ti toiau/th e0sti/n). They alter her name into Pherephatta now-a-days, because the present generation care for euphony more than truth (nu=n de\ au0th=j e0kkli/nousi to\ o1noma eu0stomi/an peri\ plei=onoj poiou/menoi th=j a0lhqei/aj, w#ste Ferre/fattan au0th\n kalei=n). There is the other name, Apollo, which, as I was saying, is generally supposed to have some terrible signification (tau0to\n de\ kai\ peri\ to\n A9po/llw, o3per le/gw, polloi\ pefo/bhntai peri\ to\ o1noma tou= qeou=, w#j ti deino\n mhnu/ontoj). Have you remarked this fact (h2 ou0k h1|sqhsai;)? 

Her. To be sure I have, and what you say is true (Pa/nu me\n ou]n, kai\ a0lhqh= le/geij).

Soc. But the name, in my opinion, is really most expressive of the power of the God (To\ de/ g e0sti/n, w(j e0moi\ dokei=, ka/llista kei/menon pro\j th\n du/naming tou= qeou=).

Her. How so (Pw~j dh/;)?

Soc. I will endeavour to explain (E(gw_ peira/somai fra/sai o3 ge/ moi fai/netai), for I do not believe that any single name could have been better adapted to express the attributes of the God), embracing and in a manner signifying all four of them (ou0 ga\r e1stin o3ti a2n ma=llon o1noma h3rmosen e4n o2n te/ttarsi duna/mesi toi=j tou= qeou=, w#ste pasw~n e0fa/ptesqai kai\ dhlou=n tro/pon tina/) – music, and prophecy, and medicine, and archery (mousikh/n te kai\ mantikh\n kai\ i0atrikh\n kai\ tocikh/n).

Her. That must be a strange name, and I should like to hear the explanation (Le/ge dh/, a1topon ga/r ti/ moi le/geij to\ o1nma ei]nai).

Soc. Say rather a harmonious name (Eu0a/rmoston me\n ou]n), as beseems the God of harmony (a3te mousikou= o1ntoj tou= qeou=). In the first place (prw~ton me\n ga/r), the purgations and purifications which doctors and diviners use (h9 ka/qarsij kai\ oi9 kaqarmoi\ kai\ kata\ th\n i0atrikh\n kai\ kata\ th\n mantikh/n), and their fumigations with drugs magical and medicinal, as well as their washings and lustral sprinklings (kai\ ai9 toi=j i0atrikoi=j farma/koij kai\ ai9 toi=j mantikoi=j periqeiw&seij te kai\ ta\ loutra\ ta\ e0n toi=j toiou/toij kai\ ai9 perirra/nseij), have all one and the same object (pa/nta e3n ti tau=ta du/nait a1n), which is to make a man pure both in body and soul (kaqaro\n pare/xein to\n a1nqrwpon kai\ kata\ to\ sw~ma kai\ kata\ th\n yuxh/n, h2 ou1;).

Her. Very true (Pa/nu me\n ou]n).

Soc. And is not Apollo the purifier (Ou0kou=n o9 kaqai/rwn qeo\j), and the washer (kai\ o9 a0polou&wn te), and the absolver from all impurities (kai\ a0polu/wn tw~n toiou/twn kakw~n ou3toj a2n ei1h;)?

Her. Very true (Pa/nu me\n ou]n).

Soc. Then in reference to his ablutions and absolutions (Kata\ me\n toi/nun ta\j a0polu/seij te kai\ a0polou/seij), as being the physician who orders them (w(j i0atro\j w@n tw~n toiou/twn), he may be rightly called A0polou/wn [purifier] (A0polou/wn a2n o0rqw~j kaloi=to); or in respect of his powers of divination (kata\ de\ th\n mantikh/n), and his truth (kai\ to\ a0lhqe/j) and sincerity (kai\ to\ a9plou=n), which is the same as truth (tau0to\n ga/r e0stin), he may be most fitly called A9plw~j from a9plou=j (sincere), as in the Thessalian dialect, for all the Thessalians call him A9plw~j (w#sper ou]n oi9 Qe/ttaloi\ kalou=si au0to/n, o0rqo/tat a2n kaloi=to, A1ploun ga/r fasi pa/ntej Qe/ttaloi tou=ton to\n qeo/n); also he is a0ei\ Ba/llwn (always shooting), because he is a master archer who never misses (dia\ de\ to\ a0ei\ bolw~n e0gkrath\j ei]nai tocikh=| A0eiba/llwn e0sti/n); or again, the name may refer to his musical attributes (kata\ de\ th\n mousikh\n dei= u9polabei=n), and then, as in a0ko/louqoj, and a1koitij, and in many other words the a is supposed to mean “together” (o3ti to\ a1lfa shmai/nei pollaxou= to\ o9mou=), so the meaning of the name Apollo will be “moving together” (kai\ e0ntau=qa th\n o9mou= po/lhsin), whether in the poles of heaven (kai\ peri\ to\n ou0rano/n, ou4j dh\ po/louj kalou=sin), or in the harmony of song, which is termed concord, because he moves all together by an harmonious power, as astronomers and musicians ingeniously declare (kai\ peri\ th\n e0n th=| w|)dh=| a9rmoni/an, h4 dh\ sumfwni/a kalei=tai, o3ti tau=ta pa/nta w#j fasin oi9 komyoi\ peri\ mousikh\n kai\ a0stronomi/an). And he is the God who presides over harmony, and makes all things move together (a9rmoni/a| tini\ polei= a3ma pa/nta, e0pistatei= de\ ou[toj o9 qeo\j th|= a3rmoni/a| o9mopolw~n au0ta\ pa/nta), both among Gods (kai\ kata\ qeou/j) and among men (kai\ kat a0nqrw&pouj). And as in the words a0ko/louqoj and a1koitij the a is substituted for an o (w#sper ou]n to\ o9moke/leqon kai\ o9mo/koitin a0ko/louqo\n kai\ a1koitin e0kale/samen metabalo/ntej a0nti\ tou= o9mo- a0-), so the name A0po/llwn is equivalent to o9mopolw~n (ou3tw kai\\ A0po/llwna e0kale/samen o4j h]n O(mopolw~n); only the second l is added in order to avoid the illomened sound of destruction [a0polw~n] (e3teron la/bda e0mbalo/ntej, o3ti o9mw&numon e0gi/gneto tw|~ xalepw|~ o0no/mati). Now the suspicion of the destructive power still haunts the minds of some who do not consider the true value of the name (o3per kai\ nu=n u9popteu/onte/j tinej dia\ to\ mh\ o0rqw_j skopei=sqai th\n du/namin tou= o0no/matoj fobou=ntai au0to\ w(j shmai=non fqora/n tina), which (to\ de/), as I was saying just now (w#sper a1rti e0le/geto), has reference to all the powers of the God (pasw~n e0fapto/menon kei=tai tw~n tou= qeou= duna/mewn), who is the single one (a9plou=), the ever darting (a0ei\ Ba/llontoj), the purifier (a0polou/ontoj), the mover together (o9mopolou=ntoj). The name of the Muses and of music would seem to be derived from their making philosophical enquiries [mw~sqai] (ta\j de\ Mou/saj te kai\ o3lwj th\n mousikh\n a0po\ tou= mw~sqai, w(j e1oiken, kai\ th=j zhth/sew&j te kai\ filosofi/aj to\ o1noma tou=to e0pwno/masen); and Leto is called by this name, because she is such a gentle Goddess (Lhtw_ de\ a0po\ th=j pra|o/thtoj th=j qeou=), and so willing [e0qelh/mwn] to grant our requests (kata\ to\ e0qelh/mona ei]nai w{n a1n tij de/htai); or her name may be Letho, as she is often called by strangers (i1swj de\ w(j oi9 ce/noi kalou=sin polloi\ ga\r Lhqw_ kalou=sin) – they seem to imply by it her amiability, and her smooth and easy-going way of behaving (e1oiken ou]n pro\j to\ mh\ traxu\ tou= h1qouj a0ll h3mero/n te kai\ lei=on Lhqw_ keklh=sqai u9po\ tw~n tou=to kalou/ntwn). Artemis is named from her healthy [a0rtemh\j], well ordered nature (A1rtemij de\ dia\ to\ a0rteme\j fai/netai kai\ to\ ko/smion), and because of her love of virginity (dia\ th\n th=j parqeni/aj e0piqumi/an), perhaps because she is a proficient in virtue [a0reth\] (i1swj de\ a0reth=j i3stora th\n qeo\n e0ka/lesen o9 kale/saj), and perhaps also as hating intercourse of the sexes (ta/xa d a2n kai\ w(j to\n a1roton mishsa/shj to\n a0ndro\j e0n gunaiki/). He who gave the Goddess her name may have had any or all of these reasons (h2 dia\ tou/twn ti h2 dia\ pa/nta tau=ta to\ o1noma tou=to o9 tiqe/menoj e1qeto th|= qew|~).

Cratylus 7

 

Soc. If I am to say what occurs to me at the moment (W(j me\n toi/nun e0k tou= paraxrh=ma le/gein), I should imagine that those who first use the name yuxh/ meant to express (oi]mai/ ti toiou=ton noei=n tou\j th\n yuxh\n o0noma/santaj) that the soul when in the body (w(j tou=to a1ra, o3tan parh=| tw~| sw~mati) is the source of life (ai1tio/n e0sti tou= zh=n au0tw~|), and gives the power of breath (th\n tou= a0napnei=n du/namin pare/xon) and revival (kai\ a0nayu/xon), and when this reviving power fails (a3ma de\ e0klei/pontoj tou= a0nayu/xontoj) then the body perishes and dies (to\ sw~ma a0po/lluetai/ te kai\ teleuta=|), and this, if I am not mistaken, they called psyche (o3qen dh/ moi dokou=sin au0to\ yuxh\n kale/sai). But please stay a moment (ei0 de\ bou/lei e1xe h0re/ma): I fancy that I can discover something (dokw~ ga/r ti/ moi kaqora=n) which will be more acceptable to the disciples of Euthyphro (piqanw&teron tou/tou toi=j a0mfi\ Eu0qu/frona), for I am afraid that they will scorn this explanation (tou/tou me\n ga\r, w(j e0moi\ dokei=, katafronh/saien a2n kai\ h9gh/sainto fortiko\n ei]nai). What do you say to another (to/de de\ sko/pei e0a\n a1ra kai\ soi\ a0re/sh|)?

Her. Let me hear (Le/ge mo/non).

What is that which holds and carries and gives life and motion to the entire nature of the body? What else but the soul (Th\n fu/sin panto\j tou= sw&matoj, w#ste kai\ zh\n kai\ periie/nai, ti/ soi dokei= e1xein te kai\ o0xei=n a1llo h2 yuxh/;)?

Her. Just that (Ou0de\n a1llo).

Soc. And do you not believe with Anaxagoras that mind or soul is the ordering and containing principle of all things (Ti/ de/; kai\ th\n tw~n a1llwn a9pa/ntwn fu/sin ou0 pisteu/eij Anaxago/ra| nou=n kai\ yuxh\n ei]nai th\n diakosmou=san kai\ e1xousan;)?

Her. Yes; I do (E1gwge).

 Soc. Then you may well call that power fuse/xh which carries and holds nature [h9 fu/sin o0xei=, kai\ e1xei], and this may be refined away into yuxh/ (Kalw~j a1ra a2n kai\ to\ o1noma tou=to e1xoi th=| duna/mei tau/th| h9 fu/sin o0xei= kai\ e1xei fuse/xhn e0ponoma/zein, e1cesti de\ kai\ yuxh\n komyeuo/menon le/gein).

Her. Certainly (Pa/nu me\n ou]n); and this derivation is, I think, more scientific than the other (kai\ dokei= ge/ moi tou=to e0kei/nou texnikw~teron ei]nai).

Soc. It is so (Kai\ ga\r e1stin); but I cannot help laughing (geloi=on me/ntoi fai/netai), if I am to suppose that this was the true meaning of the name (w(j a0lhqw~j o0nomazo/menon w(j e0te/qh).

Her. But what shall we say of the next word (A0lla\ dh\ to\ meta\ tou=to pw~j fw~men e1xein)?

Soc. You mean sw~ma [the body] (To\ sw~ma le/geij;).

Her. Yes (Nai/).

Soc. That may be variously interpreted (Pollaxh=| moi dokei= tou=to/ ge); and yet more variously if a little permutation is allowed (a2n me\n kai\ smikro/n tij parakli/nh|, kai\ pa/nu). For some say that the body is the grave [sh=ma] of the soul (kai\ ga\r sh=ma/ tine/j fasin au0to\ ei]nai th=j yuxh=j) which may be thought buried in our present life (w(j teqamme/nhj e0n tw~| nu=n paro/nti); or again the index of the soul, because the soul gives indication to [shmai/nei] the body (kai\ dio/ti au] tou/tw| shmai/nei a4 a2n shmai/nh| h9 yuxh/, kai\ tau/th| sh=ma o0rqw~j kalei=sqai); probably the Orphic poets were the inventors of the name (dokou=si me/ntoi moi ma/lista qe/sqai oi9 a0mfi\ O)rfe/a tou=to to\ o1noma), and they were under the impression that the soul is suffering the punishment for sin, and that the body is an enclosure or prison in which the soul is incarcerated, kept safe [sw~ma, sw&zhtai], as the name sw~ma implies, until the penalty is paid (w(j di/khn didou/shj th=j yuxh=j w{n dh\ e3neka di/dwsi, tou=ton to\n peri/bolon e1xein, i3na sw|&zhtai, desmwthri/ou ei0ko/na); according to this view, not even a letter of this word need be changed (ei]nai ou]n th=j yuxh=j tou=to, w#sper au0to\ o0noma/zetai, e3wj a2n e0ktei/sh| ta\ o0feilo/mena, sw~ma, kai\ ou0de\n dei=n para/gein ou0d e4n gra/mma).

Her. I think, Socrates, that we have said enough of this class of words. But have we any more explanations of the names of the Gods, like that which you were giving of Zeus? I should like to know whether any similar principle of correctness is to be applied to them (Tau=ta me/n moi dokei= i9kanw~j ei0rh=sqai, peri\ de\ tw~n qew~n tw~n o0noma/twn, oi[on kai\ peri\ tou= Dio\j nundh\ e1legej, e1xoimen a1n pou kata\ to\n au0to\n tro/pon e0piske/yasqai kata\ ti/na pote\ o0rqo/thta au0tw~n ta\ o0no/mata kei=tai;).

Soc. Yes indeed Hermogenes (Nai\ ma\ Di/a h9mei=j ge, w} E(rmo/genej); and there is one excellent principle which, as men of sense, we must acknowledge (ei1per ge nou=n e1xoimen, e3na me\n to\n ka/lliston tro/pon) – that of the Gods we know nothing (o3ti peri\ qew~n ou0de\n i1smen), either of their natures (ou1te peri\ au0tw~n) or of the names which they give themselves (ou1te peri\ tw~n o0noma/twn, a3tta pote\ e9autou\j kalou=sin); but we are sure that the names by which they call themselves, whatever they may be, are true (dh=lon ga\r o3ti e0kei=noi/ ge ta0lhqh= kalou=si). And this is the best of all principles; and the next best is (deu/teroj d au] tro/poj o0rqo/thtoj) to say, as in prayers, that we will call them by any sort of kind of names or patronymic which they like (w#sper e0n tai=j eu0xai=j no/moj e0stin h9ma=j eu1xesqai, oi3tine/j te kai\ o9po/qen xai/rousin o0nomazo/menoi, tau=ta kai\ h9ma=j au0tou\j kalei=n), because we do not know of any other (w(j a1llo mhde\n ei0do/taj). That also, I think, is a very good custom, and which I should much wish to observe (kalw~j ga\r dh\ e1moige dokei= nenomi/sqai). Let us then, if you please (ei0 ou]n bou/lei, skopw&men), in the first place announce to them that we are not enquiring about them (w#sper proeipo/ntej toi=j qeoi=j o3ti peri\ peri\ au0tw~n ou0de\n h9mei=j skeyo/meqa); we do not presume that we are able to do so (ou0 ga\r a0ciou=men oi[oi/ t a2n ei]nai skopei=n); but we are enquiring about the meaning of men in giving them these names (a0lla\ peri\ tw~n a0nqrw&pwn, h4n pote/ tina do/can e1xontej e0ti/qento au0toi=j ta o0no/mata), – in this there can be small blame (tou=to ga\r a0neme/shton).

Her. I think, Socrates, that you are quite right, and I would like to do as you say (A0lla/ moi dokei=j, w} Sw&kratej, metri/wj le/gein, kai\ ou3tw poiw~men).

Soc. Shall we begin, then, with Hestia, according to custom (A1llo ti ou]n a0f E(sti/aj a0rxw&meqa kata\ to\n no/mon;)?

Her. Yes, that will be very proper (Di/kaion gou=n).

Soc. What may we suppose him to have meant who gave the name Hestia (Ti/ ou]n a1n tij fai/h dianoou/menon to\n o0noma/santa E(sti/an o0noma/sai;)?

Her. That is another and certainly a most difficult question (Ou0 ma\ to\n Di/a ou0de\ tou=to oi]mai r9a/|dion ei]nai).

Soc. My dear Hermogenes, the first imposers of names must surely have been considerable persons; they were philosophers, and had a good deal to say (Kinduneu/ousi\ gou=n, w}gaqe\ E(rmo/genej, oi9 prw~toi ta\ o0no/mata tiqe/menoi ou0 fau=loi ei]nai a0lla\ metewrolo/goi kai\ a0dole/sxai tine/j).

Her. Well, and what of them (Ti/ dh/)?

Soc. They are the men to whom I should attribute the imposition of names (Katafai/netai/ moi h9 qe/sij tw~n o0noma/twn toiou/twn tinw~n a0nqrw&pwn). Even in foreign names, if you analyse them (kai\ e0a/n tij ta\ cenika\ o0no/mata a0naskoph=|), a meaning is still discernible (ou0x h3tton a0neuri/sketai o4 e3kaston bou/letai). For example (oi[on), that which we term ou0si/a (kai\ e0n tou/tw| o4 h9mei=j ou0si/an kalou=men) is by some called e0si/a (ei0si\n oi9 e0ssi/an kalou=sin), and by others again w)si/a (oi4 d au] w)si/an”). Now that the essence of things should be called e9sti/a, which is akin to the first of these [e0si/a=e9sti/a], is rational enough (prw~ton me\n ou]n kata\ to\ e3teron o1noma tou/twn h9 tw~n pragma/twn ou0si/a E(sti/a kalei=sqai e1xei lo/gon). And there is reason in Athenians calling that e9sti/a which participates in ou0si/a (kai\ o3ti ge au] h9mei=j to\ th=j ou0si/aj mete/xon e1stin fame/n, kai\ kata\ tou=to o0rqw~j a2n kaloi=to E(sti/a). For in ancient times we too seem to have said e0ssi/a, which was natural enough if they meant that e9sti/a was the essence of things (e1ti de\ kai\ kata\ ta\j qusi/aj a1n tij e0nnoh/saj h9gh/saito ou3tw noei=n tau=ta tou\j tiqeme/nouj, to\ ga\r pro\ pa/ntwn qew~n th=| E(sti/a| prw&th| proqu/ein ei0ko\j e0kei/nouj oi3tinej th\n pa/ntwn ou0si/an e0ssi/an e0pwno/masan). Those again who read w)si/a (o3soi d au] w)si/an) seem to have inclined to the opinion of Heracleitus (sxedo/n ti au] ou3toi kaq H(ra/kleiton a2n h9goi=nto), that all things flow and nothing stands (ta\ o1nta i0e/nai te pa/nta kai\ me/nein ou9de/n); with them the pushing principle [w)qou=n] is the cause and ruling power of things (to\ ou]n ai1tion kai\ to\ a0rxhgo\n au0tw~n ei]nai to\ w)qou=n), and is therefore rightly called w)si/a (o3qen dh\ kalw~j e1xein au0to\ w)si/an w)noma/sqai). Enough of this, which is all that we who know nothing can affirm (kai\ tau=ta me\n dh\ tau/th| w(j para\ mhde\n ei0do/twn ei0rh/sqw). Next in the order after Hestia we ought to consider Rhea and Cronos (meta\ d E(sti/an di/kaion R(e/an kai\ Kro/non e0piske/yasqai), although the name of Cronos has been already discussed (kai/toi to/ ge tou Kro/nou o1noma h1dh dih/lqomen). But I dare say that I am talking great nonsense (i1swj me/ntoi ou0de\n le/gw).

Her. Why, Socrates (Ti/ dh/, w} Sw&kratej;)?

Soc. My good friend, I have discovered a hive of wisdom (W)gaqe/, e0nneno/eka/ ti smh=noj sofi/aj).

Her. Of what nature (Poi=on dh\ tou=to;)?

Soc. Well, rather ridiculous (Geloi=on me\n pa/nu ei0pei=n), and yet plausible (oi]mai me/ntoi tina\ piqano/thta e1xon).

Her. How plausible (Ti/na tau/thn;)?

Soc. I fancy to myself Heracleitus repeating wise traditions of antiquity as old as the days of Cronos and Rhea, and of which Homer also spoke (To\n H(ra/kleito/n moi dokw~ kaqora=n palai/ a1tta sofa\ lego/nta, a0texnw~j ta\ peri\ Kro/nou kai\ R(e/aj, a4 kai\ O#mhroj e1legen).

Her. How do you mean (Pw~j tou=to le/geij;)?

Soc. Heracleitus is supposed to say (Le/gei pou H(ra/kleitoj) that all things are in motion (o3ti pa/nta xwrei=) and nothing at rest (kai\ ou0de\n me/nei); he compares them to the stream of a river (kai\ potamou= r(oh=| a0peika/zwn ta\ o1nta), and says that (le/gei w(j) you cannot go into the same water twice (di\j ei0j to\n au0to\n potamo\n ou0k a2n e0mbai/hj).

Her. That is true (E!sti tau=ta).

Soc. Well, then (Ti/ ou]n;), how can we avoid inferring that he who gave the names of Cronos and Rhea to the ancestors of Gods, agreed pretty much in the doctrine of Heracleitus (dokei= soi a0lloio/teron H(raklei/tou noei=n o9 tiqe/menoj toi=j tw~n a1llwn qew~n progo/noij R(e/an te kai\ Kro/non;)? Is the giving of the names of streams to both of them purely accidental (a]ra oi1ei a0po\ tou= au0toma/tou au0to\n a0mfote/roij r9euma/twn o0no/mata qe/sqai;)? Compare the line in which Homer, and, as I believe, Hesiod also, tells us of

Ocean, the origine of Gods, and mother Tethys (w#sper au] O#mhroj W)keano/n te qew~n genesi/n fhsin kai mh/tera Thqu/n, oi]mai de\ kai\ H(si/odoj).

And again, Orpheus says (le/gei de/ pou kai\ Orfeu\j), that (o3ti)

The fair river of Ocean was the first to marry, and he espoused his sister Tethys, who was his mother’s daughter. (W)keano\j prw~toj kalli/rrooj h]rce gamoi=o,

O3j r(a kasignh/thn o9momh/tora Thqu\n o1puen)

You see that this is a remarkable coincidence (Tau=t ou]n sko/pei o3ti kai\ a0llh/loij sumfwnei=), and all in the direction of Heracleitus (kai\ pro\j ta\ tou= H(raklei/tou pa/nta tei/nei).

Her. I think that there is something in what you say, Socrates; but I do not understand the meaning of the name Tethys (Fai/nh| ti/ moi le/gein, w} Sw&kratej, to\ me/ntoi th=j Thqu/oj ou0k e0nnow~ o1noma ti/ bou/letai).

Soc. Well that is almost self-explained, being only the name of a spring, a little disguised; for that which is strained and filtered [diattw&menon, h0qou/menon] may be likened to a spring, and the name Tethys is made up of these two words (A0lla\ me\n tou=to/ ge oli/gou au0to\ le/gei o3ti phgh=j o1noma e0pikekrumme/non e0sti/n, to\ ga\r diattw&menon kai\ to\ h0qou/menon phgh=j a0peikasma/ e0stin, e0k de\ tou/twn a0mfote/rwn tw~n o0noma/twn h9 Thqu\j to\ o1noma su/gkeitai).

Her. The idea is ingenious, Socrates (Tou/to me/n, w} Sw&kratej, komyo/n).

Soc. To be sure (Ti/ d ou0 me/llei;).

Friday, April 19, 2024

Cratylus 6

 

Soc. Then let us proceed (A0lla\ xrh\ ou3tw poiei=n); and where would you want us begin (po/qen ou]n bou/lei a0rcw&meqa diaskopou=ntej), now that we have got a sort of outline of the enquiry (e0peidh/per ei0j tu/pon tina\ e0mbebh/kamen)? Are there any names which witness of themselves that they are not given arbitrarily, but have a natural fitness (i3na ei0dw~men ei0 a1ra h9mi=n e0pimarturh/sei au0ta\ ta\ o0no/mata mh\ pa/nu a0po\ tou= au0toma/tou ou3twj e3kasta kei=sqai, a1ll\ e1xein tina/ o0rqo/thta;)? The names of heroes and of men in general are apt to be deceptive (ta\ me\n ou]n tw~n h9rw&wn kai\ a0nqrw&pwn lego/mena o0no/mata i1swj a2n h9ma=j e0capath/seien) because they are often called after ancestors with whose names, as we were saying, they may have no business (polla\ ga\r au0tw~n kei=tai kata\ progo/nwn e0pwnumi/aj, ou0de\n prosh=kon e0ni/oij, w#sper kat a0rxa\j e0le/gomen); or they are the expression of a wish like Eutychides [the son of good fortune] or Sosias [the saviour] or Theophilus [the beloved of God] (polla\ de\ w#sper eu0xo/menoi ti/qentai, oi[on Eu0tuxi/dhnkai\Swsi/an kai\ Qeo/filon), and others (kai\ a1lla polla/). But I think that we had better leave these (ta\ me\n ou]n toiau=ta dokei= moi xrh=nai e0a=n), for there will be more chance of finding correctness in the names of immutable essences (ei0ko\j de\ ma/lista h9ma=j eu9rei=n ta\ o0rqw~j kei/mena peri\ ta\ a0ei\ o1nta kai\ pefuko/ta) – there ought to have been more care taken about them when they were named (e0spouda/sqai ga\r e0ntau/qa ma/lista pre/pei th\n qe/sin tw~n o0noma/twn), and perhaps there may have been some more than human power at work occasionally in giving them names (i1swj d e1nia au0tw~n kai\ u9po\ qeiote/raj duna/mewj h2 th=j tw~n a0nqrw&pwn e0te/qh).

Her. I think so, Socrates (Dokei=j moi kalw~j le/gein, w} Sw&kratej).

Soc. Ought we not begin with the consideration of the Gods, and show that they are rightly named Gods (A]r ou]n ou0 di/kaion a0po\ tw~n qew~n a1rxesqai, skopoume/nouj ph=| pote au0to\ tou=to to\ o1noma oi9 qeoi\ o0rqw~j e0klh/qhsan;)?

Her. Yes, that will be well (Ei0ko/j ge).

Soc. My notion would be something of this sort (Toio/nde toi/nun e1gwge u9popteu/w): – I suspect that the sun, moon, earth, stars, and heaven, which are still the gods of many barbarians, were the only Gods known to the aboriginal Hellenes (fai/nontai/ moi oi9 prw~toi tw~n a0nqrw&pwn tw~n peri\ th\n E(lla/da tou/touj mo/nouj h9gei=sqai ou3sper nu=n polloi/ tw~n barba/rwn, h3lion kai\ selh/nhn kai\ gh=n kai\ a1stra kai\ ou0rano/n). Seeing that they were always moving and running (a3te ou]n au0ta\ o9rw~ntej a0ei\ i0o/nta dro/mw| kai\ qeo/nta), from their running nature they were called Gods or runners [qeou\j, qe/ontaj] (a0po\ tau/thj th=j fu/sewj th=j tou= qei=n qeou\j au0tou\j e0ponoma/sai); and when men became acquainted with the other Gods (u3steron de\ katanoou=ntej tou\j a1llouj), they proceeded to apply the same name to them all (pa/ntaj h1dh tou/tw| tw~| o0no/mati prosagoreu/ein). Do you think that likely (e1oike/ ti o4 le/gw tw~| a0lhqei= h2 ou0de\n;)?

Her. I think it very likely indeed (Pa/nu me\n ou]n e1oiken).

Soc. What shall follow the Gods (Ti/ ou]n a2n meta\ tou=to skopoi=men;)?

Her. Must not demons and heroes and men come next (Dh=lon dh\ o3ti dai/mona/j te kai\ h3rwaj kai\ a0nqrw&pouj)?

Soc. Demons! And what do you consider to be the meaning of this word (Kai\ w(j a0lhqw~j, w} E(rmo/genej, ti/ a1n pote nooi= to\ o/noma oi9 dai/monej;)? Tell me if my view is right (ske/yai a1n ti/ soi do/cw ei0pei=n).

Her. Let me hear (Le/ge mo/non).

Soc. You know how Hesiod uses the word (Oi]sqa ou]n ti/naj fhsi\n H(si/odoj tou\j dai/monaj;)?

Her. I do not (Ou0k e0nnow~).

Soc. Do you not remember that he speaks of the golden race of men who came first (Ou0de\ o3ti xrusou=n ge/noj to\ prw~to/n fhsin gene/sqai tw~n a0nqrw&pwn;)?

Her. Yes, I do (Oi]da tou=to/ ge).

Soc, He says of them –

But now that fate has closed over this race

They are holy demons upon the earth,

Beneficent, averters of ills, guardians of mortal men.

(Le/gei toi/nun peri\ au0tou= -

Au0ta\r e0peidh\ tou=to ge/noj kata\ moi=r e0ka/luyen,

oi9 me\n dai/monej a9gnoi\ u9poxqo/nioi kale/ontai,

e0sqloi/, a0leci/kakoi, fu/lakej qnhtw~n a0nqrw&pwn)

Her. What is the inference (Ti/ ou]n dh/;)?

Soc. What is the inference! Why, I suppose that he means by the golden men, not men literally made of gold (O#ti oi]mai e0gw_ le/gein au0to\n to\ xrusou=n ge/noj ou0k e0k xrusou= pefuko/j), but good and noble (a0l a0gaqo/n te kai\ kalo/n); and I am convinced of this (tekmh/rion de\ moi/ e0stin) because he further says that we are the iron race (o3ti kai\ h9ma=j fhsin sidhrou=n ei]nai ge/noj).

Her. That is true (A0lhqh= le/geij).

Soc. And do you not suppose that the good men of our own day would by him be said to be of golden race (Ou0kou=n kai\ tw~n nu=n oi]ei a2n fa/nai au0to\n ei1 tij a0gaqo/j e0stin e0kei/nou tou= xrusou= ge/nouj ei]nai;)?

Her. Very likely (Ei0ko/j ge).

Soc. And are not the good wise (Oi9 d a0gaqoi\ a1llo ti h2 fro/nimoi;)?

Her. Yes, they are wise (Fro/nimoi).

Soc. And therefore I have the most entire conviction that he called them demons, because they were dah/monej [knowing or wise] (Tou/to toi/nun pa/ntoj ma=llon le/gei, w(j e0moi\ dokei=, tou\j dai/monaj, o3ti fro/nimoi kai\ dah/monej h]san, dai/monaj au0tou\j w)no/masen), and in our older Attic dialect the word itself occurs (kai\ e1n ge th=| a0rxai/a|| th=| h9mete/ra| fwnh=| au0to\ sumbai/nei to\ o1noma). Now he and other poets say truly (le/gei ou]n kalw~j kai\ ou[toj kai\ a1lloi poihtai\ polloi\ o3soi le/gousin), that when a good man dies (w(j e0peida/n tij a0gaqo\j w@n teleuth/sh|) he has honour and a mighty portion among the dead (mega/lhn moi=ran kai\ timh\n e1xei), and becomes a demon (kai\ gi/gnetai dai/mwn); which is a name given to him signifying wisdom (kata\ th\n th=j fronh/sewj e0pwnumi/an). And I say too, that every wise man who happens to be a good man (tau/th| ou]n ti/qemai kai\ e0gw_ pa/nt a1ndra o3j a2n a0gaqo\j h=|) is more than human (daimo/nion ei]nai) both in life and death (kai\ zw&nta kai\ teleuth/santa), and is rightly called a demon (kai\ o0rqw~j dai/mona kalei=sqai).

Her. Then I rather think that I am of one mind with you (Kai\ e0gw& moi dokw~, w} Sw&kratej, tou/tou pa/nu soi su/myhfoj ei]nai); but what is the meaning of the word “hero”? [h3rwj, in the old writing e3rwj] (o9 de\ dh\ h3rwj ti/ a2n ei1h;).

Soc. I think that there is not much difficulty in explaining (Tou=to de\ ou0 pa/nu xalepo\n e0nnoh=sai), for the name is not much altered (smikro\n ga\r parh=ktai a0tw~n to\ o1noma), and signifies that they were born of love (dhlou=n th\n e0k tou= e1rwtoj ge/nesin).

Her. What do you mean (Pw~j le/geij;)?

Soc. Do you not know that the heroes are demigods (Ou0k oi]sqa o3ti h9mi/qeoi oi0 h3rwej;)?

Her. What then (Ti/ ou]n;)?

Soc. All of them sprang either from a love of a god for a mortal woman (Pa/ntej dh/pou gego/nasin e0rasqe/ntoj h2 qeou= qnhth=j), or of a mortal man for a Goddess (h2 qnhtou= qea/j); think of the word in the old Attic (e0a\n ou]n skoph=|j kai\ tou=to kata\ th\n A0ttikh\n th\n palaia\n fwnh/n), and you will see better (ma=llon ei1sh|) that the name heros is only a slight alteration of Eros, from whom the heroes sprang (dhlw&sei ga/r soi o3ti para\ to\ tou= e1rwtoj o1noma, o3qen gego/nasin oi9 h3rwej, smikro\n parhgme/non e0sti\n o0no/matoj xa/rin): either this is the meaning (kai\ h1toi tou=to le/gei tou\j h1rwaj), or, if not this, then they must have been skilful as rhetoricians and dialecticians (h2 o3ti sofoi\ h]san kai\ r9h/torej kai\ deinoi\ kai\ dialektikoi/), and able to put the question (e0rwta=n i9kanoi\ o1ntej), for ei1rein is equivalent to le/gein (to\ ga\r ei1rein le/gein e0sti/n). And therefore, as I was saying (o3per ou]n a1rti le/gomen), in the Attic dialect the heroes turn out to be rhetoricians and questioners. All this is easy enough; the noble breed of heroes are a tribe of sophists and rhetors (e0n th=| Attikh=| fwnh=| lego/menoi oi9 h3rwej r9htore/j tinej kai\ e0rwthtikoi\ sumbai/nousin, w#ste r9hto/rwn kai\ sofistw~n ge/noj gi/gnetai to\ h9rwiko\n fu=lon. a0lla\ ou0 tou=to xalepo/n e0stin e0nnoh=sai). But can you tell me why men are called a1nqrwpoi? – that is more difficult (a0lla\ ma=llon to\ tw~n a0nqrw&pwn, dia\ ti/ pote a1nqrwpoi kalou=ntai, h2 su\ e1xeij ei0pei=n;).

Her. No, I cannot (Po/qen, w)gaqe/, e1xw;); and I would not try even if I could (ou0d ei1 ti oi[o/j t a2n ei1hn eu9rei=n, ou0 suntei/nw), because I think that you are the more likely to succeed (dia\ to\ h9gei=sqai se\ ma=llon eu9rh/sein h2 e0mauto/n).

Soc. That is to say, you trust to the inspiration of Euthyphro (Th=| tou Eu0qu/fronoj e0pipnoi/a| pisteu/eij, w(j e1oikaj).

Her. Of course (Dh=la dh/).

Soc. Your faith is not vain (O)rqw&j ge su\ pisteu/wn); for at this very moment a new and ingenious thought strikes me (w(j kai\ nu=n ge/ moi fai/nomai komyw~j e0nnohke/nai), and, if I am not careful, before tomorrow’s dawn I shall be wiser than I ought to be (kai\ kinduneu/sw, e0a\n mh\ eu0labw&mai, e1ti th/meron sofw&teroj tou= de/ontoj gene/sqai). Now, attend to me (sko/pei dh\ o4 le/gw); and first, remember that we often put in and pull out letters in words, and give names as we please and change the accents (prw~ton me\n ga\r to\ toio/nde dei= e0nnoh/sai peri\ o0noma/twn, o3ti polla/kij e0pemba/llomen gra/mmata, ta\ de\ e0cairou=men par o9 boulo/meqa o0noma/zontej, kai\ ta\j o0cu/thtaj metaba/llomen). Take, for example, the word Dii/ Fi/loj (Oi[on Dii/ fi/loj); in order to convert this from a sentence into a noun (tou=to i3na a1nti r9h/matoj o1noma h9mi=n ge/nhtai), we omit one of the iotas and sound the middle syllable grave instead of acute (to/ te e3teron au0to/qen i0w~ta e0cei/lomen kai\ a0nti\ o0cei/aj th=j me/shj sullabh=j barei=an e0fqegca/meqa); as on the other hand (a1llwn de\ tou0nanti/on), letters are sometimes inserted in words instead of being omitted (e0mba/llomen gra/mmata), and the acute takes the place of the grave (ta/ te baru/tera o0cu/tera fqeggo/meqa).

Her. That is true (A0lhqh= le/geij).

Soc. The name a1nqrwpoj, which was once a sentence, and is now a noun, appears to be a case just of this sort, for one letter, which is the a, has been omitted, and the acute on the last syllable has been changed into a grave (Tou/twn toi/nun e4n kai\ to\ tw~n a0nqrw&pwn o1noma pe/ponqen, w#j e0moi\ dokei=, e0k ga\r r9h/matoj o1noma ge/gonen, e9no\j gra/mmatoj tou= a1lfa e0caireqe/ntoj kai barute/raj th=j teleuth=j genome/nhj).

Her. What do you mean (Pw~j le/geij;)?

Soc. I mean to say that the word “man” implies that the other animals never examine, or consider, or look up at what they see, but that man not only sees [o1pwpe] but considers and looks up at that what he sees, and hence he alone of all animals is rightly called a1nqrwpoj, meaning a0naqrw~n a4 o1pwpen (W{de, shmai/nei tou=to to\ o1noma o9 a1nqrwpoj o3ti ta\ me\n a1lla qhri/a w{n o9ra=| ou0de\n e0piskopei= ou0de\ a0nalogi/zetai ou0de\ a0naqrei=, o9 de\ a1nqrwpoj a3ma e9w&raken tou=to d e0sti\ to\ o1pwpe kai\ a0naqrei= kai\ logi/zetai tou=to o9 o1pwpen, e0nteu/qen dh\ mo/non tw~n qhri/wn o0rqw~j o9 a1nqrwpoj 2a1nqrwpoj w)noma/sqh, a0naqrw~n a4 o1pwpe).

Her. May I ask you to examine another word about which I am curious (Ti/ ou]n to\ meta\ tou=to; e1rwmai/ se o4 h9de/wj a2n puqoi/mhn;)?

Soc. Certainly (Pa/nu ge).

Her. I will take that which appears to me to follow next in order (W#sper toi/nun moi dokei= tou/toij e9ch=j ei]nai/ ti xrh=ma). You know the distinction of soul and body (yuxh\n ga/r pou kai\ sw&ma kalou=men tou= a0nqrw&pou)?

Soc. Of course (Pw~j ga\r ou1;).

***

Jowett’s free idiosyncratic translations sometimes distort Plato’s text. Left with nothing but Jowett’s translation, the reader must ask: ‘On what basis could Hermogenes ask Socrates, whether he knows the distinction between soul and body?’

Socrates has just given his exposition of “a1nqrwpoj” as a name that expresses the man’s true nature. Hermogenes notes that in his view “soul” and “body” distinction comes next; he would like Socrates to analyse (dielei=n) these two parts, first the soul and then the body. Socrates’ Pw~j ga\r ou1; (“How could it be otherwise”) authoritatively removes any uncertainty that Hermogenes’ ‘I think that what comes next is – for we speak of man’s soul and body’ might imply.

***

Her. Let us endeavour to analyse them (Peirw&meqa dh\ kai\ tau=ta dielei=n) like the previous words (w#sper ta\ e1mprosqen).

Soc. You want me first of all to examine the natural fitness of the word yu/xh [soul] (Yuxh\n le/geij e0piske/yasqai w(j ei0ko/twj tou/tou tou= o0no/matoj tugxa/nei), and then of the word sw~ma [body] (e2peit au] to\ sw~ma;)?

Her. Yes (Nai/).