Plutarch De Facie Quae in orbe Lunae Apparet 30

Harold Cherniss (Translator), William C. Helmbold (Translator)

De Facie Quae in orbe Lunae Apparet. Plutarch. Harold Cherniss (Translator), William C. Helmbold (Translator). Cambridge, MA. 1957.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The National Endowment for the Humanities.

Current edition Perseus

Concerning the Face which Appears in the Orb Of the Moon (English) (Plutarch. Moralia, Vol. XII. Cherniss, Harold and William Clark Helmbold translators. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1957 (printing).)

Editions (1)
Περὶ τοῦ ἐμφαινομένου προσώπου τῷ κύκλῳ τῆς σελήνης Perseus (Plutarch. Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia, Vol. V. Vernardakēs, Grēgorios N., editor. Leipzig: Teubner, 1893.) — 30 focus
Translations (1)
Of the Face Appearing Within the Orb Of the Moon Perseus (Plutarch. Plutarch's Morals, Vol. V. Goodwin, William W., editor; G., A., translator. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company; Cambridge: Press of John Wilson and Son, 1874.) — 30 focus

Notes on the current edition

Concerning the Face which Appears in the Orb Of the Moon

1. cf. Defectu Oraculorum, 417 A-B and Genio Socratis, 591 C; R. M. Jones, The Platonism of Plutarch, pp. 29, 59, and 55-56. Iamblichus, Vit. Pyth. vi. 30 (p. 18. 4 Deubner]) says that some people considered Pythagoras to be such a Spirit from the moon. In the last clause of the sentence above Plutarch refers to the Dioscuri: cf. Lysander, 14 (439 C); Defectu Oraculorum, 426 C.
2. cf. 926 C supra ( ἡ ψυχή τῷ σώματι συνεῖρκται), An. Proc. in Timaeo, 1023 C ( τῷ σώματι συνειργμένη scil. ἡ ψυχή); for the misbehaviour of Spirits cf. Defectu Oraculorum, 417 B , 417 E-F, Iside, 361 A ff. , where the punishment of these Spirits is mentioned in 361 C ( cf. Defectu Oraculorum, 415 C ).
3. i.e. not those who for misdeeds are cast out upon earth again. The attendants of Cronus are the δαίμονες of 942 A supra. cf. Porphyry’s account of good and evil spirits in Abstinentia, ii. 38-39.
4. Cf. Numa, 15 (70 C-D) ; [Plutarch], Fluviis, xiii. 3 (vii, p. 305. 4-12 [Bernardakis]); Strabo, x. 3. 22 (c. 473) ; Pausanias, v. 7. 6-10 ; Diodorus, v. 64. 3-7 .
5. cf. Schwenn, R. E. xi. 2 (1922), 1441-1446, and Lobeck, Aglaophamos, pp. 1139-1155.
6. This place seems to be mentioned nowhere else; but, since Plutarch here refers to inactive oracles from which the Spirits have departed, the change to Λεβαδείᾳ cannot be right, for in Defectu Oraculorum, 411 E-F Lebadeia is said to be the only remaining active oracle in Boeotia where there are many others now silent or even deserted.
7. cf. 943 B supra.
8. Plato’s Republic, 507-509 is Plutarch’s main inspiration. It is a passage which he echoes or cites many times (e.g. Iside, 372 A , E, 393 D , Defectu Oraculorum, 413 C and 433 D-E, Ad Principem Inerud. 780 F and 781 F, Plat. Quaest. 1006 F 1007 A ); and his references to it show that the image in the sun, τῆς περὶ τὸν ἥλιον εἰκόνος, here means the visible likeness of the good which the sun manifests and not, as Kepler suggests, the reflection of the sun seen in the moon as in a mirror. The last part of the sentence with the notion that all nature strives towards the good and the term ἐφετόν itself are drawn from Aristotle ( Physics, 192 A 16-19 and the whole of Physics A, 9 and Metaphysics A, 7 ); cf. Iside. 372 E-F and Amatorius, 770 B .
9. The specific nature of this fertilization is described in 945 C s.v.; the conception of the sun as an image of god is connected with a reference to its fructifying force in E, 393 d. For sexual language used of the moon and sun see the references in note a on 929 C supra.
10. Odyssey, xi. 222 .
11. Odyssey, xi. 601-602 . Similar interpretations of this passage are common among the Neo-Pythagoreans and Neo-Platonists: cf. especially [Plutarch], Vita et Poesi Homeri, chap. 123; Plotinus, Enn. i. 1. 12; iv. 3. 27 and 32; vi. 4. 16; Proclus, In Rem Publicam, i, p. 120. 22 ff. and p. 172. 9 ff. (Kroll); Cumont, Rev. de Philologie, xliv (1920), pp. 237-240, who contends that the doctrine itself arose in Alexandria where Aristarchus became acquainted with it.
12. cf. Sera Numinis Vindicta, 564 C and Adv. Coloten, 1119 A . For the νοῦς as the true self cf. Aristotle, Eth. Nic. 1166 A 16-17 and 22-23, 1168 B 35, 1169 A 2, 1178 A 2-7. Plato usually speaks of the ψυχή without further qualification as the true self (e.g. Laws, 959 A , Phaedo, 115 C [ cf. the Pseudo-Platonic Alcibiades I, 130 A-C and Axiochus, 365 E]), although such passages as Republic, 430 E 431 A , 588 C 589 B, 611 C-E can be taken to imply that he meant the rational soul only ( cf. Plotinus’s use of the last passage in Enn. i. 1. 12). cf. also Cicero, Republica, vi. 26 ( mens cuiusque is est quisque) and Marcus Aurelius, ii. 2 with Farquharson’s note ad loc.
13. cf. Sera Numinis Vindicta, 564 A , where the souls are described as τύπον ἐχούσας ἀνθρωποειδῆ, and [Plutarch], Vita et Poesi Homeri, chap. 123 ( εἴδωλον ὅπερ ἦν ἀποπεπλασμένον [?] τοῦ σώματος); Porphyry in Stobaeus, I. xlix. 55 ( = i, p. 429. 16-22 [Wachsmuth]). The notion that the soul after death retains the appearance of the body was common (cf Lucian, Vera Hist. ii, 12), although Alexander Polyhistor in Diogenes Laertius, viii. 31 gave it as Pythagorean doctrine (but cf. Antisthenes, frag. 33 [Mullach]). With the special point of the present passage that the body is given its form by the imprint of the soul, which has itself been moulded by the mind, cf. Proclus, In Rem Publicam, ii, pp. 327. 21-328. 15 (Kroll); Plotinus, iv. 3. 9. 20-23 and i/ 10. 35-42; Macrobius, Somn. Scip. I. xiv. 8; Sextus, P. H. i. 85. In Laws, 959 a-b Plato calls the body an attendant semblance of the self and uses the word εἴδωλα of corpses. The notion that soul encompasses body instead of being contained by it comes ultimately from Plato, Timaeus, 34 B .
14. i.e. 943 A supra.
15. For later Neo-Platonic opinions concerning the dissolution of the lower soul see Proclus, In Timaeum, iii, p. 234. 9 ff. (Diehl) and cf. Plotinus, Enn. iv. 7. 14 ( ἀφειμένον δὲ τὸ χεῖρον οὐδὲ αὐτὸ ἀπολεῖσθαι ἕως ἂν ᾖ ὅθεν ἔχει τὴν ἀρχήν).
16. The expression correlative to αἱ μέν is ἐπεὶ δ᾽ αὐτάς, and the contrast between ἐπεὶ δ᾽ αὐτὰς ἐξίστησι and the present clause requires that διαφέρονται mean pass their time rather than toss about, be distraught, the meaning that it has in Genio Socratis, 591 D .
17. There seems to be no other reference to Endymion’s dreams; but Plutarch may here have been influenced by the story that Endymion’s endless sleep was a punishment for his passion for Hera ( cf. Scholia in Apollonium Rhodium Vetera, iv. 57-58 [p. 265, Wendel]) and Scholia in Theocritum Vetera, iii. 49-51 b [p. 133, Wendel]).
18. cf. Sera Numinis Vindicta, 565 D-E, 566 A; Plato, Phaedo, 81 B-E , 108 A-B.
19. cf. Odyssey, xi. 576-581 ; Pindar, Pythian, iv. 90 ; Eustathius, Comment, ad Odysseam, 1581. 54 ff.
20. cf. especially Iside, chaps. 27 and 30.
21. Πύθων and Τιτυός are named together by Plutarch in Pelopidas, 16 (286 C) ; cf. Strabo, ix. 3. 12 (cc. 422-423) and Apollodorus, Bibliotheca, i. 4. 1. 3-5 (22-23) .
22. For the play on Τυφών - τῦφος cf. Plato, Phaedrus, 230 A , which is quoted by Plutarch in Adv. Coloten, 1119 B ; and cf. also Marcus Aurelius, ii. 17 ( τὰ δὲ τῆς ψυχῆς ὄνειρος καὶ τῦφος . . .).
23. cf. 943 A and 944 E-F supra. In the latter passage ὀρεγομένην ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὸ γονιμώτατον [δέχεσθαι] ( cf. E, 393 D [ τὸ περὶ αὐτὴν γόνιμον]] and Aqua an Ignis, 958 E [ τοῦ πυρὸς οἷον τὸ ζωτικὸν ἐνεργαζομένου]) shows that τῷ ζωτικιῳ here is to be construed with the preceding words rather than with those that follow (so Reinhardt, Kosmos und Sympathie, pp. 320, 329). On Reinhardt’s treatment of this passage in general and his attempt to derive it from Posidonius ( Op. cit. pp. 329 ff.) cf. R. M. Jones, Class. Phil. xxvii (1932), pp. 118-120, 129-131, 134-135; n.b. Timaeus, 41-42 where the demiurge is said to have sowed ( ἔσπειρεν) in the earth, the moon, and the other planets the souls that he had fashioned himself, i.e. the minds ( cf. 41 E, 42 d), and the interpretation of Timaeus Locrus, 99 D-E, according to which this means that the souls are brought to earth from the various planets ( cf. also R. M. Jones, The Platonism of Plutarch, pp. 49-51, and especially Porphyry in Proclus, In Timaeum, i, p. 147. 6-13 [n.b. εἰς τὸ τῆς σελήνης σῶμα σπείρεσθαί φησιν ] and p. 165. 16-23 [Diehl]).
24. Cf Quaest. Conviv 658 f : ὅθεν οἶμαι καὶ τὴν Ἄρτεμιν Λοχείαν καὶ Εἰλείθυιαν, οὐκ οὖσαν ἑτέραν ἢ τὴν σελήνην, ὠνομάσθαι. Here, however, Artemis and Ilithyia are supposed to be names for two contrary faculties of the moon. In 938 F supra the identification of the moon with Artemis because she is sterile but is helpful and beneficial to other females implies that Artemis is Ilithyia, as she is in Plato’s Theaetetus, 149 B ( cf. Cornutus, p. 73, 7-18 [Lang]). Artemis was associated with easy, painless death, however ( cf. Odyssey, xi. 172-173 ; xviii. 202 ); and Plutarch probably connects this notion with the gentleness of the death on the moon ( cf. 943 B supra). L. A. Post has suggested that he may also have intended ἀρταμεῖν as an etymology of Ἀρτεμις. Ilithyia and Artemis are sometimes sisters ( cf. Diodorus Siculus, v. 72. 5), but then they have the same function.
25. In Genio Socratis, 591 B Atropos is situated in the invisible, Clotho in the sun, and Lachesis in the moon. The order there is the same as it is here and different from that in the Fato (568 E) , where in interpretation of Republic, 617 C Clotho is highest, Lachesis lowest, and Atropos intermediate. Both orders differ from that of Xenocrates (frag. 5 [Heinze]), which was Atropos (intelligible and supracelestial), Lachesis (opinable and celestial), Clotho (sensible and sublunar). The order of Facie and Genio Socratis is that of Plato’s Laws, 960 C , where Lachesis, Clotho, and Atropos are named in ascending order as the epithet of Atropos, Τρίτη σώτειρα, shows; here in the Facie it is the passage of the Republic, however, that Plutarch has in mind, for his συνζφάπτεται is an echo of Plato’s ἐφαπτομένην and ἐφάπτεσθαιι there. cf. H. Dörrie, Hermes, lxxxii (1954), pp. 331-342 (especially pp. 337-339), who discusses the relation of these passages to the pre-history of the Neoplatonic doctrine of hypostases and argues that in writing them Plutarch was inspired by Xenocrates.
26. cf. Sera Numinis Vindicta, 561 B , Genio Socratis, 589 f ; Plato’s Phaedo, 114 D , Meno, 86 B , Gorgias, 527 A , Phaedrus, 246 A.