ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ
: i.e. by a personal encounter.
πρεσβυτέρῳ κτλ.
This too is probably Spartan: cf. Xen.
Rep. Lac. 2. 10. Patriarchal discipline is in perfect harmony with Plato's conception of the State as a single family.
καὶ μὴν ὅτι γε κτλ.
An anacoluthon, the construction being broken by
οἶμαι δ’ οὐδὲ κτλ.: see I 352 B note and infra 471 C. Here the apodosis would have been
δῆλον ἂν εἴη or the like: cf. Stallbaum on
Laws 677 B. Schneider and others suppose that
ὡς τὸ εἰκός is substituted
ἀνακολούθως for
εἰκός ἐστι— a tolerably common form of anacoluthon in Plato and elsewhere (I 347 A note): but such an idiom is awkward here. It is difficult again to supply
δῆλον from Glauco's answer, though the presence of
δῆλον may render the anacoluthon a trifle easier; nor can a governing verb be elicited from
προστετάξεται. Others propose to abolish the anacoluthon: Ast by reading
ὅ γε νεώτερος, Hartman by emending to
προστετάξεσθαι <δῆλον>. Δῆλον. Καὶ μὴν κτλ. Neither alternative is satisfactory: and Hartman's is not even Greek. It should be noted that Aristophanes deals with the same subject in
Eccl. 638 ff. See App. I.
ἄρχοντες
. Stallbaum reads
οἱ ἄρχοντες with
q. “At varii sunt in civitate magistratus, neque semper eorundem nedum omnium est, tale quid mandare iunioribus” (Schneider).
τὸ ‐‐ βοηθεῖν
. τό belongs to
δέος, “ut sensus idem sit, ac si dictum esset
δέος δὲ τὸ τῆς τῶν ἄλλων βοηθείας τῷ πάσχοντι. δέος ἐστὶ τοὺς ἄλλους βοηθεῖν quin recte dicatur, nemo ambigit: quidni etiam
τὸ τοὺς ἄλλους βοηθεῖν δέος dicere liceat” (Schneider)? Cf.
οὐ παρὰ φύσιν
τὴν τοῦ θήλεος πρὸς τὸ ἄῤῥεν (466 D). Madvig's change of
τό to
τοῦ has met with much favour, and is accepted even by J. and C. To my mind it destroys the balance of the two clauses, by dropping the personification of
δέος, while retaining that of
αἰδώς. For the sense cf.
Ar.
Eccl. 641
—643
ἀλλ) <*> παρεστὼς οὐκ ἐπιτρέψει· τότε δ) αὐτοῖς οὐκ ἔμελ) οὐδὲν |
τῶν ἀλλοτρίων (sc.
πατέρων)
ὅστις τύπτοι· νῦν δ’ ἢν πληγέντος ἀκούσῃ, |
μὴ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνον (illum ipsum sc. suum ipsius parentem, as Blaydes explains)
τύπτῃ δεδιὼς τοῖς δρῶσιν τοῦτο μαχεῖται. Aristophanes' verses illustrate
τοὺς μὲν ὡς ὑεῖς exactly; the parallel could scarcely be closer. Cf. App. I.
οὐδὲν δεινὸν μή
. This construction occurs only four times in the Platonic corpus: viz. in
Ap. 28 A
,
Phaed. 84 B
,
Gorg. 520 D
, and
Epp. 7. 344 E (Weber in Schanz's
Beiträge II 2, p. 50).
κολακείας κτλ.
πένητες has been variously explained as (1) for
<αἷς ἔνοχοι ἂν εἶεν> πένητες or the like (Schneider), (2) in partitive apposition with the subject of
ἀπηλλαγμένοι ἂν εἶεν (one of J. and C.'s alternatives), (3) nominative to
ἴσχουσι (Shorey in
A. J. Ph. XVI p. 237). J. and C. also suggest that
κολακείας is “genitive singular in the same case as
ὧν.” If so, we should read
ἀλγηδόνος with
q: but there is no room for doubt that
κολακείας is the accusative plural. Of these interpretations (1) is too difficult, while (3) is hardly possible, unless
πένητες is placed after
ἴσχουσι, as was once proposed by Ast, who afterwards preferred to read
ἀπηλλαγμένοι ἂν εἶεν <πένητες>, and finally wished to excise the word altogether. (2) is, I think, defensible, if we remember the Greek partiality for this kind of construction (IV 431 A note), and the occasional irregularities of Platonic style. See also on VIII 556 C, D. Jackson conjectures
πένητος (‘the poor man's flatteries of the rich’), Stallbaum
πενίας in the sense of
πενήτων. I think
πένητες is probably due to Plato: but if not, the word may be a gloss on
κολακείας τε πλουσίων or on
ἴσχουσι .
οἰκετῶν
: not=
οἰκείων as the Scholiast says, but
domestici, ‘those of the household’ (
οἱ κατὰ τὸν οἷκον πάντες Hesychius), including, of course, slaves. Where there is no
οἰκία, as in Plato's eity, there can be no
οἰκέται. Plato's communism involves the abolition of domestic slavery as well as of family ties. See also on 469 B, C.
τὰ μὲν ‐‐ παραδόντες
: an interesting glimpse of the economic condition of the Athenian poor. Cf.
Ar.
Clouds 1172
ff. The agreement in tense makes it probable that
πορισάμενοι, θέμενοι, and
παραδόντες are grammatically coordinate; although the money must of course be procured before it is deposited. The asyndeton has a rhetorical effect: cf. II 362 B note Hartman would omit
παραδόντες; but
παραδιδόναι takes an infinitive more easily than
τίθεσθαι .
ὅσα τε κτλ.
: ‘and the various and manifold troubles which men suffer in connexion with such matters, all of them obvious enough and ignoble, and not worth spending words upon.’
δειλά τε for
δῆλά τε δή has slight MS authority, but is only an absurd attempt to represent
δἰ ἀπρέπειαν in C above. Still worse is the conjecture
δοῦλά, which Herwerden approves.
ἀπαλλάξονται
. I formerly adopted Cobet's conjecture
ἀπηλλάξονται (
N. L. p. 243), which is attractive in itself, and also because of its correspondence with
ἀπηλλαγμένοι ἂν εἷεν in C. But even on the score of meaning the change can hardly be called a necessary one, and there is no MS authority for the form
ἀπηλλάξονται either here or (so far as I can discover) elsewhere.
ὀλυμπιονῖκαι κτλ.
‘To him that overcometh’ etc. Plato frequently borrows similitudes and phrases from the national games. Cf. VI 503 A, 504 A, IX 583 B note, X 613 B, C, 621 D, and
Phaedr. 256 B
. Here he sings a sort of paean in honour of his more than Olympic conquerors.
νίκη, ἡ <*>κ τοῦ δημοσίου τροφή (cf.
Ap. 36 D
),
ἀναδοῦνται, γέρα (such as
προεδρία Xenophanes
Fr. 2. 7) and
ταφῆς ἀξίας μετέχουσιν are each of them significant points in the comparison.
ὧν ‐‐ ὑπάρχει
. The nominative of a relative pronoun is very rarely attracted into the genitive. Van Cleef (
de attract. in enunt. rel. usu Plat. p. 42) cites only two other certain instances in Plato, viz.
Theaet. 158 A
and
Alc. II 148 A.
περὶ πάντων ὧν γέγονε is found in an Attic inscription about the end of the fourth century B.C. (Meisterhans^{3} p. 238). In
Phaed. 69 A
the nominative passes into a dative: cf. also
οἷς ἐξόν in 466 A and
Gorg. 492 B
.
ζῶντές τε
. We should expect
τε to follow
γέρα, but cf. 452 A. Here, as there, one or two MSS (with Stobaeus
Flor. 43. 102 ad fin.) omit
τε. Hartman is suspicious of
ταφῆς ἀξίας μετέχουσιν, especially as
καὶ μάλα—καλά refers to
γέρα. καλά might conceivably be the marginal comment of an approving reader; but this kind of looseness is not uncommon in replies (cf. II 372 A, III 405 D, IV 436 E, 468 A, VI 500 B, VII 535 C, VIII 558 A, B,
Gorg. 467 E
and elsewhere, with Riddell
Digest of Platonic Idioms § 306), and the expression
ταφῆς ἀξίας μετέχουσιν is much too quiet and refined for the ordinary scribe.
οὐκ οἶδα ὅτου
: said with a glance at Adimantus, who had been the spokesman of these views (IV 419 A ff.). Cf. the use of
τισίν in II 372 E.
