Λήθης πεδίον
. The first mention in Greek literature of the plain of Lethe occurs in
Ar.
Frogs 186
τίς ἐς τὸ Λήθης πεδίον κτλ., but Aristophanes clearly presumes that his audience is already familiar with the idea, and Plato may well have borrowed it from Orphic and Pythagorean eschatologies. Cf. Ettig
Acherunt. l.c. p. 310 note 6. The
πεδίον Λήθης was probably a counter-picture to the
πεδίον Ἀληθείας, of which we hear in
Phaedr. 248 B
: cf. also [
Axioch.] 371 B. So also Proclus l.c. 346. 19 ff.
ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἀντίθετόν ἐστι πρὸς τὸ τῆς Ἀληθείας πεδίον τὸ τῆς Λήθης πεδίον, δῆλον· εἴπερ τοῦτο μὲν ἄκαρπον καὶ ἄγονον καὶ αὐχμηρόν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ ζωῆς πλῆρες, τροφὸν τῶν ψυχῶν—ὡς ἐν Φαίδρῳ (248 B)
μεμαθήκαμεν. For the later history of this conception see Rohde
Psyche^{2} I p. 316 note 2, II p. 390 note 1 and Dieterich
Nek. pp. 90 ff.
διὰ καύματός τε κτλ.
J. and C. explain this by saying that “they are passing through the pillar of light.” I do not think that this idea was present to the mind of Plato, though the souls are no doubt somewhere in this region. The
καῦμα and
πνῖγος δεινόν are sufficiently appropriate touches without having recourse to so realistic an explanation.
Ἀμέλητα ποταμόν
. Cf. Virg.
Aen. VI 714 f. Lethaei ad fluminis undam
Securos latices, et longa oblivia potant. Many other parallels are quoted by Dieterich
Nek. pp. 90—94. As the
πεδίον Λήθης has its counterpart in the
πεδίον Ἀληθείας, so also we find traces in Greek legend of a
ὕδωρ Μνημοσύνης as well as the
ὕδωρ Λήθης (Paus. IX 39. 8).
τοὺς δὲ ‐‐ μέτρου
is missing in
q and several other MSS. “Fortasse supervacanea adeoque inepta haec videbantur alicui, qui statim quemlibet postquam bibisset omnia obliviscentem videret. Sed oblivionis vis et pertinacia varia est. Qui nimium bibit, in perpetuum obliviscitur, qui moderate, discere aliquando seu recordando scientiam repetere potest” (Schneider).
μάθησις, we remember, is
ἀνάμνησις (
Phaed. 76 A
: cf. also 75 D and 76 D). It is likely enough that the Platonic doctrine of
ἀνάμνησις was suggested by earlier Pythagorean beliefs of the same kind (Dieterich l.c. p. 122: cf. also Rohde l.c. p. 186 note).
ἐπιλανθάνεσθαι
. There is no good reason for transferring to this place the clause
αὐτὸς—πιεῖν as Herwerden wishes to do. In treating of this passage, Proclus quotes an interesting fragment of Aristotle's dialogue ‘On the Soul’ (l.c. 349. 17 ff. = Rose 1480^{b} 5 ff.):
φησὶ γὰρ οὖν (sc.
ὁ Ἀριστοτέλης)
καὶ αὐτὸς ἐκ μὲν ὑγείας εἰς νόσον ὁδεύοντας λήθην ἴσχειν τινὰς καὶ αὐτῶν τῶν γραμμάτων ὧν ἐμεμαθήκεσαν, ἐκ νόσου δὲ εἰς ὑγείαν ἰόντα μηδένα πώποτε τοῦτο πάσχειν. ἐοικέναι δὲ τὴν μὲν ἄνευ σώματος ζωὴν ταῖς ψυχαῖς κατὰ φύσιν οὖσαν ὑγείᾳ, τὴν δὲ ἐν σώμασιν, ὡς παρὰ φύσιν, νόσῳ. ζῆν γὰρ ἐκεῖ μὲν κατὰ φύσιν αὐτάς, ἐνταῦθα δὲ παρὰ φύσιν· ὥστ’ εἰκότως συμβαίνειν τὰς μὲν ἐκεῖθεν ἰούσας ἐπιλανθάνεσθαι τῶν ἐκεῖ, τὰς δὲ ἐντεῦθεν ἐκεῖσε τῶν ἐνταῦθα διαμνημονεύειν. Cf.
Timon of Athens V 1 “my
long sickness Of health and living now begins to mend, And nothing brings me all things.”
μέσας νύκτας
. The plural, in which
νύκτες according to Heindorf on
Prot. 310 D
signifies
horae nocturnae, is regular in this and similar expressions, e.g.
πόρρω τῶν νυκτῶν (
Symp. 217 D
) etc.
γενέσθαι ‐‐ γενέσθαι
. “Is Plato really responsible for the clumsy and ill-sounding repetition of
γενέσθαι?” Richards, who would omit the first
γενέσθαι and write
κατὰ μέσας for
καὶ μέσας. A similar correction had already been suggested by Herwerden. Plato himself is not in the least averse to echoes of this kind: see on VI 511 E.
ἄνω
. It follows that the souls just before their reincarnation are underground: see on
Ἀνάγκης γόνασιν 617 B and
διὰ καύματος κτλ. 621 A and Virg.
Aen. VI 748 ff. Has omnis—Lethaeum ad fluvium deus evocat agmine magno: Scilicet immemores
supera ut convexa revisant, Rursus et incipiant in corpora velle reverti.
εἰς ‐‐ ἀστέρας
is an instance—rare in Plato—of an apparently accidental iambic. See Arist.
Rhet. III 8. 1408^{b} 33 ff.
ὁ δ’ ἴαμβος αὐτή ἐστιν ἡ λέξις ἡ τῶν πολλῶν· διὸ μάλιστα πάντων τῶν μέτρων ἰαμβεῖα φθέγγονται λέγοντες and Cope ad loc. For souls conceived as stars cf.
Ar.
Peace 833
f.
οὐκ ἦν ἄρ’ οὐδ’ ὃ λέγουσι κατὰ τὸν ἀέρα |
ὡς ἀστέρες γιγνόμεθ’ , ὅταν τις ἀποθάνῃ; and Plut.
de gen. Socr. 591 D
πολλοὺς ἀστέρας περὶ τὸ χάσμα παλλομένους (said of disembodied souls) and 591 F. Similarly the Milky Way which, in the words of Milton, is ‘powdered with stars’ (
Par. Lost VII 581: cf. Arist.
Meteor. I 8), is the abode of certain souls, according to a tolerably widespread tradition, which meets us also in antiquity: see for example Cic.
de repub. VI 15, 16 and
Manil. I 753— 804. Cf. also Ettig
Acherunt. l.c. p. 348 note 2 and Rohde
Psyche^{2} II pp. 95, 213 notes
ἕωθεν
. ἄνωθεν (see cr. n.), which appears also in
v
, is approved by Richards, but adds nothing to the meaning.
ἕωθεν is of course the morning of the twelfth day as
μέσας νύκτας above was the midnight of the eleventh: cf.
δωδεκαταῖος— ἀνεβίω 614 B and 616 B note
κείμενον
. See cr. n.
ἤδη is inappropriate in itself, and has little authority besides A^{2}.
μῦθος ‐‐ οὐκ ἀπώλετο
. A Scholiast remarks:
τοῖς μὲν οὖν πολλοῖς προστιθέναι τοῖς μύθοις ἔθος ἦν, ὅτι μῦθος ἀπώλετο, δεικνύναι βουλομένοις ὡς ἄρα οἱ μῦθοι λέγουσι μὴ ὄντα, καὶ ἅμα ἐρρήθησαν καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν. (Cf.
Theaet. 164 D
and
Phil. 14 A
.)
Πλάτων δὲ τοὐναντίον πανταχοῦ σῴζεσθαί τε καὶ σῴζειν φησὶ τοὺς μύθους τοὺς παρ’ αὑτῷ, μάλα γε εἰκότως· τῶν γὰρ ὄντων εἰσὶν ἐξηγηταί, καὶ ὠφέλιμοι διὰ τοῦτο. (The Scholium is from Proclus l.c. 354. 24 ff.). Plato means that the story of Er is
οὐκ ὄναρ, ἀλλ’ ὕπαρ ἐσθλόν. A similar play on the proverb occurs also in
Laws 645 B.
ἂν σώσειεν
. Cf. III 417 A note The suggestion
δὴ σώσει (Richards) is unnecessary: see Kühner
Gr. Gr. II p. 977 b.
αὐτοῦ τε ‐‐ εὖ πράττωμεν
. I agree with Richards in taking
τε as ‘both,’ not ‘and,’ and the
καί before
ἐνθάδε as ‘and,’ not ‘both.’ Schneider holds the opposite view, urging that “qui praemia virtutis reportat, eum inter reportandum et sibi et diis amicum esse oportet. Eo igitur tempore sibi diisque amicus ut sit, contendere non magis potest, quam ut vincat, quum palmam fert victoriae.” This is true enough, but a similar objection may be made against Schneider's own solution, which makes Plato say
ἵνα, ἐπειδὰν—κομιζώμεθα—εὖ πράττωμεν: and, with Schneider's construction, the repetition
καὶ ἐνθάδε is also, as Richards says, ‘very weak.’ Beginning as if he would say ‘both here and hereafter’ Plato elaborates the ‘hereafter’ into
ἐπειδὰν— κομιζώμεθα, not without some sacrifice of logical coherence.
περιαγειρόμενοι
: i.q.
περιιόντες καὶ ἀγειρόμενοι. Cf. Tim.
Lex. Plat. s.v.
περιαγειρόμενοι νικηφόροι and Ruhnken's note.
ἐπαγερμός was the name for this kind of ‘stipis collectio.’ The poet Gray proposed
περιαγόμενοι, but the text is sound. For the imagery from the games see on V 465 D note
διεληλύθαμεν
. J. and C. think there is “a playful suggestion of our having made the pilgrimage ourselves.” I do not believe Plato means more than merely ‘we have described.’
εὖ πράττωμεν
. On
εὖ πράττωμεν see the third Platonic epistle ad init. and Bernays
Lucian u. die Kyniker pp. 3, 88. The
Republic fitly ends with an adaptation of Plato's favourite phrase of salutation and farewell.
