σφενδόνην
: the ‘collet’ or ‘bezel’ (Lat.
funda or
pala annuli)— which is as it were the sling in which the stone is set.
ὡς δόξειεν
. “Optativus eandem vim habet, quam solet in oratione obliqua habere, efficitque, ut verba
οὐδεὶς ἂν γένοιτο οὕτως etc. ex aliorum ore missa videantur" (Schneider). This explanation appears to me better than any other, although I can discover no exact parallel in Greek. Glauco is most careful throughout the whole of this section to disclaim responsibility for the views he advocates: cf.
ὡς ὁ λόγος 359 B,
ἐπεὶ— ἀδικεῖν in C,
ὡς φήσει κτλ. in D below: also 361 E al. Tucker would translate ‘as it might seem,’ defending the optative by
Ar.
Birds 180
ὥσπερ εἴποι τις and
Eur.
Andr. 929
ὡς εἴποι τις. Others erroneously hold that
ἄν may be supplied from
ἂν γένοιτο, while Ast is desirous of inserting the particle on conjecture. I do not think that the optative can be explained as an instance of irregular assimilation or attraction.
ἂν μείνειεν
. For
ἄν cf.
Symp. 179 A
and other examples in Kühner
Gr. Gr. II p. 934.
ἰσόθεον ὄντα
. The halfconscious irony of
ἰσόθεος foreshadows Plato's attack on the popular theology.
οὐδεὶς ἑκὼν δίκαιος
here and in 366 D sums up the Thrasymachean theory in a phrase which suggests the Socratic and Platonic antithesis
οὐδεὶς ἑκὼν πονηρός .
περὶ ‐‐ λέγων
. περί can hardly be for
ὑπέρ, nor dare we write
ὑπέρ for
περί (as Badham suggests). The words mean simply ‘qui de hoc argumento verba facit,’ ‘the exponent of such a theory.’ Cf. 362 D
ἱκανῶς εἰρῆσθαι περὶτοῦλόγου. Muretus seems to have desiderated
πατήρ for
περί: cf. expressions like
Phaedr. 275 E
(
λόγος)
τοῦ πατρὸς ἀεὶ δεῖται βοηθοῦ. On the strength of this Herwerden would read
ὁ πατὴρ τοῦ τοιούτου λόγου, rejecting
λέγων (“posteaquam ex
πήρ factum est
περί, corrector addidit
λέγων”). The ‘father of the theory’ would mean Thrasymachus: see on
ὦ παῖδες in 368 A. It is just possible that
πατήρ was read by Ficinus (“ut sermonis huius perhibent auctores”), and if so, the variant may have some ancient authority now lost; but Herwerden's proposal is too drastic, and the text is probably sound.
ἀθλιώτατος
. Apelt conjectures
ἠλιθιώτατος, but cf. (with Hartman) I 344 A
τοὺς δὲ—ἀδικῆσαι οὐκ ἂν ἐθέλοντας ἀθλιωτάτους.
τὴν δὲ κρίσιν κτλ.
αὐτήν opposes the third division of Glauco's speech to the other two (see 358 C), and marks it as the most important. A kindred use of
αὐτός recurs at 370 E
ἀλλὰ μήν,—κατοικίσαι γε αὐτὴν τὴν πόλιν —ἀδύνατον. I formerly read
αὖ τὴν for
αὐτήν, but the MS reading is quite de fensible. It should be noticed that
κρίσιν is at first a kind of pendent accusative, afterwards “resumed as a cognate accusative with
κρῖναι” (J. and C.). Tucker strangely makes
κρίσιν=‘choice.’ The word means of course (our) ‘judgment’ concerning etc. Cf. 361 D
ἵν’ ἀμφότεροι —κρίνωνται and
εἰς τὴν κρίσιν ἐκκαθαίρεις.
εἰς
goes with
τέλεον: cf.
δόξαν εἰς 361 A.
πλούτου
δὲ οὐδέν and Liebhold (
Fl. Jahrb. 1888, p. 107)
κόσμου
δὲ ἄλλο μὲν <ἔχοντ)> οὐδέν for
τοῦτον δὲ ἄλλο μὲν οὐδέν. Neither of these proposals has any plausibility, and it is best to regard this as one of the places where we owe the right reading to
Π .