Plato Protagoras 312

ed. John Burnet

Protagoras. Plato. ed. John Burnet. Oxford. 1903.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Πρωταγόρας (Greek) (Platonis Opera, Tomus III: Tetralogia V-VII. Burnet, John, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1903.)

Translations (1)
Protagoras Perseus (Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 2. Lamb, W.R.M., translator. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1924 (printing).) — 312 focus

Commentary

Commentary on Plato, Protagoras (Plato. Platonis Protagoras. Adam, James; Adam, Adela Marion, editors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921.) focus

ὑπέφαινέν τι ἡμέρας. ὑποφαίνει ἡμέραis used, as Heindorf says, de die illucescente. Here τι ἡμέρας = ‘something of day’, ‘some daylight’.

εἰ μέν τι—ἔοικεν . Heindorf remarks that Stephanus' conjecture τοῦτο ἔοικεν is needless, the vague indefinite subject being frequently omitted. Cf. Crat. 387D εἴπερ τι τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν μέλλει ὁμολογούμενον εἶναι; Phaedo, 99E ἴσως μὲν οὖν ὧ? εἰκάζω τρόπον τινὰ οὐκ ἔοικεν.

εἰς τοὑς Ἕλληνας σαυτόν. εἰς τοὺς Ἕλληναςgoes with παρέχων : cf. Symp. 179B ἱκανὴν μαρτυρίαν παρέχεται—εἰς τοὺς Ἕλληνας. Young men of fashion were fond of looking to Greek, as opposed to Athenian, public opinion. The MSS. have αὑτόν , but the use of the third personal reflexive pronoun for the first and second in the singular number does not seem to be certain in Plato; and it is simplest to suppose that ς fell out after Ἕλληνας : Schanz, VII, xii.

ἀλλ’ ἄρα—μὴ οὐ τοιαύτην. οὐgoes closely with τοιαύτην , and μή is virtually ‘perhaps’ (originally ‘lest’ as in ὅρα μή Theaet. 145B ): ‘but perhaps after all ( ἄρα ) this is not the kind of learning which etc.’ Cf. Euthyd. 290E ἀλλ’ ἄρα—μὴ ὁ Κτήσιππος ἦν ὁ ταῦτ’ εἰπώνand Apol. 25A ἀλλ’ ἄρα—μὴ οἱ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησία?, οἱ ἐκκλησιασταί, διαφθείρουσι τοὺς νεωτέρους ; Meno, 89C μὴ τοῦτο οὐ καλῶς ὡμολογήσαμεν . In all of these passages it is better to take μή in this way than as equivalent to Latin num. From this use of μή grew up the use of μήποτε = ‘perhaps’, frequent in Aristotle and later, e.g. Eth. Nic. X. 2. 1173 a . 22 μή ποτ’ οὐ λέγουσιν το αἴτιον .

οἵαπερ ἡ παρἀ is the reading of T: B has οἵα περὶ . The γραμματισταί of Athens were schoolmasters, who besides teaching reading and writing (cf. below, 326D translated ( ἑρμηνεύειν ) Homer and interpreted his γλῶτται . They were distinct from the γραμματικοί or κριτικοί who pursued more scientific literary and grammatical studies. The κιθαριστής and γραμματιστής between them taught μουσική , and the παιδοτρίβης γυμναστική ; and μουσική and γυμναστική were the two parts of παιδεία or liberal education: Rep. II. 376E .

ἐπὶ τέχνῃ—ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ παιδείᾳ : cf. 315A ἐπὶ τέχνῃ μανθάνει, ὡς σοφιστὴς ἐσόμενος . The distinction between professional and liberal ( ὡς τὸν ἰδιώτην καὶ τὸν ἐλεύθερον πρέπει ) education is frequently emphasised by Plato (see especially Laws, I. 643D ): his word for the latter is always παιδεία , cf. Gorg. 485A , Rep. VI. 492C . The ‘arts’ are throughout the Republic looked on as βάναυσοι , and unfit for men whose souls are free.

παρασχεῖν θεραπεῦσαι ἀνδρἱ σοφιστῇ . The word παρέχω is often used of putting oneself in the hands of a doctor: cf. Gorg. 456B φάρμακον πιεῖν ἢ τεμεῖν ἢ καῦσαι παρασχεῖν τῶ? ἰατρῷ. ἀνήρis regularly used (mostly in a complimentary sense, real or feigned) with words which denote one's profession, standing or the like, e.g. ἀνὴρ μάντις, ἀνὴρ νομεύς, ἄνδρες δικασταί ; cf. Euthyphr. 15D . For παρασχεῖν Cobet reads παρέχειν , but if MSS. can be trusted, Plato used the aorist infinitive with μέλλω tolerably often: see Schanz, Preface to Symposium, p. vii.

οὔτ’ εἰ ἀγαθῷ οὔτ’ εἰ κακῷ πράγματι . So in Gorgias 520B οὐκ ἐγχωρεῖν μέμφεσθαι τούτῳ τῷ πράγματι (their pupils) ὃ αὐτοὶ παιδεύουσιν . Here Socrates uses the most general form of expression because ex hypothesi nothing is yet known as to the sophist: cf. below, 330C ἡ δικαιοσύνη πρᾶγμά τί ἐστιν ἢ οὐδὲν πρᾶγμα ; Cases like Crito, 53D οὐκ οἴει ἄσχημον ἂν φανεῖσθαι τὸ τοῦ Σωκράτους πρᾶγμα ;are somewhat different and contain a slight admixture of contempt: see the Editor's note in loc.

οἶμαί γ’ εἰδέναι . Hippocrates οἴεται εἰδέναι μὴ εἰδώς : he is thus, according to Socrates, in the worst of all states: cf. Apol. ch. VI ff. Socrates now proceeds to convict him of ignorance.

ὥσπερ τοὔνομα λέγει—τῶν σοφῶν ἐπιστήμονα . Hippocrates derives σοφιστής from σοφός and ( ἐπ ) ίστ ( αμαι ) ‘quasi sit ὁ τῶν σοφῶν ἴστης ’ (Heindorf, comparing the derivation of Ἥφαιστος in Crat. 407C from Φάεος ἵστωρ ). The correct derivation is perhaps given by Suidas s.v.: σοφιστὴς καὶ ὁ διδάσκαλος ὡς σοφίζων (cf. σωφρονίζω =make σώφρων ), but ‐ίζω is very elastic in meaning, and σοφίζω may very well mean ‘play the σοφός ’.

τῶν τί σοφῶν. τῶν πρὸς τί σοφῶνwould be more precise, but the accusative of reference is preferred for brevity. For the construction Kroschel compares Theages, 125C τῶν τί σοφῶν συνουσίᾳ φὴ|ς σοφοὺς εἶναι τοὺς τυράννους , where, however, σοφῶν is masculine. The neuter of σοφός is not here used ironically as in Theaet. 157C παρατίθημι ἑκάστων τῶν σοφῶν ἀπογεύσασθαι.

ὁ δὲ σοφιστὴς τῶν τί σοφῶν ἐστιν . Heusde suggested ἐπιστήμων after ἐστιν , but the sense can be supplied out of the ‐ιστής of σοφιστής , according to the derivation of the word just given: the full sense is as it were ὁ δὲ σοφιστὴς τῶν τί σοφῶν ἐστιν ( σοφ ) ιστής .

τί ἂν ἀποκρινοίμεθα αὐτῷ . There is no need to change the verb to ἀποκριναίμεθα , as was done by Bekker to suit ἔροιτο : cf. below, 354A εἰ ἐροίμεθα—φαῖεν ἄν and Phaedr. 259A εἰ οὖν ἴδοιεν—δικαίως ἂν καταγελῷεν.

ποίας ἐργασίας ἐπιστάτης . These words are not of course part of the imaginary questioner's interrogation, but are spoken by Socrates to help out Hippocrates' answer. Socrates suggests that Hippocrates should say that the sophist is ἐπιστάτης of some sort of ἐργασία , but in order that the answer should come from Hippocrates himself, he substitutes for the desired answer: ‘(The sophist is) ἐπιστάτης —of what kind of ἐργασία ?’ Hippocrates then replies by explaining the ἐργασία , viz. τὸ ποιῆσαι δεινὸν λέγειν . The full grammatical construction would be ποίας ἐργασίας ἐπιστάτης ( ὅτι ἐστὶν ἀποκριναίμεθα ἂν αὐτῷ ) ; If we take this view, it is not necessary to insert ἐστίν after ἐπιστάτης (with Hirschig).

τί ἂν εἴποιμεν—ὦ Σώκρατες ; Hippocrates is on the verge of ἀπορία , and merely throws out his suggestion ἐπιστάτην τοῦ ποιῆσαι δεινὸν λέγειν for what it is worth. The words ἐπιστάτην τοῦ ποιῆσαι δεινὸν λέγειν are strictly speaking a reply to the question of Socrates ποίας ἐργασίας ἐπιστάτης ; for τοῦ ποιῆσαι δεινὸν λέγειν answers ποίας ἐργασίας , and but for the intervening clause ( τί ἂν εἴποιμεν αὐτὸν εἶναι ; ) the word ἐπιστάτην would have been in the nominative.

ὥσπερ ὁ κιθαριστὴς κτλ. Cf. Gorg. 449E and 451A ff., where much the same reasoning is employed to discover τί ἐστι τοῦτο τῶν ὄντων, περὶ οὗ οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι εἰσίν, οἷς ἡ ῥητορικὴ χρῆται ( Gorg. 451D ). Rhetoric and Sophistic were regarded by Plato as sisters: cf. Gorg. 464B ff. The clause ὥσπερ ὁ κιθαριστὴς κτλ. is logically the protasis to εἶεν· ὁ δὲ δὴ σοφιστὴς κτλ. : see on 311E above.

εἶεν· ὁ δὲ δὴ σοφιστής . For εἶεν and δὲ δή see on 311C above.

δῆλον ὅτι περὶ οὗπερ καὶ ἐπίστασθαι . Stahl's emendation ( ἐπίστασθαι for ἐπίσταται ), which had occurred to us independently, seems to be certain. Most editions read ἢ δῆλον ὅτι περὶ οὗπερ καὶ ἐπίσταται ; inserting ἤ before δῆλον (with Heindorf) and giving the words to Socrates, but it is surely more natural to regard them as giving Hippocrates' reply to Socrates' question, in which case δῆλον ὅτι is right. The MS. reading ἐπίσταται gives a non sequitur ; for the harpist makes one δεινὸς λέγειν περὶ οὖπερ καὶ ἐπιστήμονα i.e. περὶ οὖπερ καὶ ἐπίστασθαι , not περὶ οὗπερ καὶ ἐπιστήμων‐ἐστὶν i.q. ἐπίσταται . The next sentence τί δή ἐστι τοῦτο, περὶ οὗ αὐτός τε ἐπιστήμων ἐστὶν ὁ σοφιστὴς καὶ τὸν μαθητὴν ποιεῖ (sc. ἐπίστασθαι ); in no way invalidates the reading ἐπίστασθαι : it is everywhere assumed in the Platonic writings that he who makes others know has knowledge himself: see for example Alcib. I, 111B οὐκ οἶσθ’ ὅτι χρὴ τοὺς μέλλοντας διδάσκειν ὁτιοῦν αὐτοὺς πρῶτον εἰδέναι; ἢ οὔ; πῶς γὰρ οὔ ; and ibid. 113C, 118C.

οὐκέτι . See below on οὐκέτι in 321D