Plato, Republic, ed. John Burnet, 4.440

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

[440]
ἀλλʼ, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, ποτὲ ἀκούσας τι πιστεύω τούτῳ· ὡς ἄρα Λεόντιος ὁ Ἀγλαΐωνος ἀνιὼν ἐκ Πειραιῶς ὑπὸ τὸ βόρειον τεῖχος ἐκτός, αἰσθόμενος νεκροὺς παρὰ τῷ δημίῳ κειμένους, ἅμα μὲν ἰδεῖν ἐπιθυμοῖ, ἅμα δὲ αὖ δυσχεραίνοι καὶ ἀποτρέποι ἑαυτόν, καὶ τέως μὲν μάχοιτό τε καὶ παρακαλύπτοιτο, 440a κρατούμενος δʼ οὖν ὑπὸ τῆς ἐπιθυμίας, διελκύσας τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, προσδραμὼν πρὸς τοὺς νεκρούς, ἰδοὺ ὑμῖν, ἔφη, ὦ κακοδαίμονες, ἐμπλήσθητε τοῦ καλοῦ θεάματος.
ἤκουσα, ἔφη, καὶ αὐτός.
οὗτος μέντοι, ἔφην, ὁ λόγος σημαίνει τὴν ὀργὴν πολεμεῖν ἐνίοτε ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις ὡς ἄλλο ὂν ἄλλῳ.
σημαίνει γάρ, ἔφη.
οὐκοῦν καὶ ἄλλοθι, ἔφην, πολλαχοῦ αἰσθανόμεθα, ὅταν 440b βιάζωνταί τινα παρὰ τὸν λογισμὸν ἐπιθυμίαι, λοιδοροῦντά τε αὑτὸν καὶ θυμούμενον τῷ βιαζομένῳ ἐν αὑτῷ, καὶ ὥσπερ δυοῖν στασιαζόντοιν σύμμαχον τῷ λόγῳ γιγνόμενον τὸν θυμὸν τοῦ τοιούτου; ταῖς δʼ ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτὸν κοινωνήσαντα, αἱροῦντος λόγου μὴ δεῖν ἀντιπράττειν, οἶμαί σε οὐκ ἂν φάναι γενομένου ποτὲ ἐν σαυτῷ τοῦ τοιούτου αἰσθέσθαι, οἶμαι δʼ οὐδʼ ἐν ἄλλῳ.
οὐ μὰ τὸν Δία, ἔφη. 440c
τί δέ, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, ὅταν τις οἴηται ἀδικεῖν; οὐχ ὅσῳ ἂν γενναιότερος ᾖ, τοσούτῳ ἧττον δύναται ὀργίζεσθαι καὶ πεινῶν καὶ ῥιγῶν καὶ ἄλλο ὁτιοῦν τῶν τοιούτων πάσχων ὑπʼ ἐκείνου ὃν ἂν οἴηται δικαίως ταῦτα δρᾶν, καί, ὃ λέγω, οὐκ ἐθέλει πρὸς τοῦτον αὐτοῦ ἐγείρεσθαι ὁ θυμός;
ἀληθῆ, ἔφη.
τί δὲ ὅταν ἀδικεῖσθαί τις ἡγῆται; οὐκ ἐν τούτῳ ζεῖ τε καὶ χαλεπαίνει καὶ συμμαχεῖ τῷ δοκοῦντι δικαίῳ καί, διὰ τὸ πεινῆν καὶ διὰ τὸ ῥιγοῦν καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα πάσχειν, 440d ὑπομένων καὶ νικᾷ καὶ οὐ λήγει τῶν γενναίων, πρὶν ἂν ἢ διαπράξηται ἢ τελευτήσῃ ἢ ὥσπερ κύων ὑπὸ νομέως ὑπὸ τοῦ λόγου τοῦ παρʼ αὑτῷ ἀνακληθεὶς πραϋνθῇ;
πάνυ μὲν οὖν, ἔφη, ἔοικε τούτῳ ᾧ λέγεις· καίτοι γʼ ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ πόλει τοὺς ἐπικούρους ὥσπερ κύνας ἐθέμεθα ὑπηκόους τῶν ἀρχόντων ὥσπερ ποιμένων πόλεως.
καλῶς γάρ, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, νοεῖς ὃ βούλομαι λέγειν. ἀλλʼ ἦ πρὸς τούτῳ καὶ τόδε ἐνθυμῇ; 440e
τὸ ποῖον;
ὅτι τοὐναντίον ἢ ἀρτίως ἡμῖν φαίνεται περὶ τοῦ θυμοειδοῦς. τότε μὲν γὰρ ἐπιθυμητικόν τι αὐτὸ ᾠόμεθα εἶναι, νῦν δὲ πολλοῦ δεῖν φαμεν, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον αὐτὸ ἐν τῇ τῆς ψυχῆς στάσει τίθεσθαι τὰ ὅπλα πρὸς τὸ λογιστικόν.
παντάπασιν, ἔφη.

Republic. Plato. ed. John Burnet. Oxford. 1905.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Πολιτεία (Greek) (Platonis Opera Tomus IV: Tetralogia VIII. Burnet, John, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905.)

Translations (1)

Republic Perseus (Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 5-6. Shorey, Paul, translator. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1935-37 (printing).) — 4.440 focus

[440] But, I said, I once heard a story¹ which I believe, that Leontius the son of Aglaion, on his way up from the Peiraeus under the outer side of the northern wall,² becoming aware of dead bodies³ that lay at the place of public execution at the same time felt a desire to see them and a repugnance and aversion, and that for a time 440a he resisted⁴ and veiled his head, but overpowered in despite of all by his desire, with wide staring eyes he rushed up to the corpses and cried, There, ye wretches,⁵ take your fill of the fine spectacle! I too, he said, have heard the story. Yet, surely, this anecdote, I said, signifies that the principle of anger sometimes fights against desires as an alien thing against an alien. Yes, it does, he said.
And do we not, said I, on many other occasions observe when his desires constrain a man contrary to his reason 440b that he reviles himself and is angry with that within which masters him and that as it were in a faction of two parties the high spirit of such a man becomes the ally of his reason? But its⁶ making common cause⁷ with the desires against the reason when reason whispers low⁸ Thou must not—that, I think, is a kind of thing you would not affirm ever to have perceived in yourself, nor, I fancy, in anybody else either. 440c No, by heaven, he said. Again, when a man thinks himself to be in the wrong,⁹ is it not true that the nobler he is the less is he capable of anger though suffering hunger and cold¹⁰ and whatsoever else at the hands of him whom he believes to be acting justly therein, and as I say¹¹ his spirit refuses to be aroused against such a one? True, he said. But what when a man believes himself to be wronged, does not his spirit in that case¹² seethe and grow fierce (and also because of his suffering hunger, 440d cold and the like) and make itself the ally of what he judges just, and in noble souls¹³ it endures and wins the victory and will not let go until either it achieves its purpose, or death ends all, or, as a dog is called back by a shepherd, it is called back by the reason within and calmed. Your similitude is perfect, he said, and it confirms¹⁴ our former statements that the helpers are as it were dogs subject to the rulers who are as it were the shepherds of the city. You apprehend my meaning excellently, said I. But do you also 440e take note of this? Of what? That what we now think about the spirited element is just the opposite of our recent surmise. For then we supposed it to be a part of the appetitive, but now, far from that, we say that, in the factions¹⁵ of the soul, it much rather marshals itself on the side of the reason. By all means, he said.

Commentary

Commentary on Plato, Republic (Plato. The Republic, Vol 1-2. Adam, James, editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902-1903.) focus

ὦ κακοδαίμονες . ‘Confound you!’

τὴν ὀργήν . q reads τὸν θυμόν, which Ast and others have preferred. But, as Schneider observes, ὀργή is to θυμός, as ἐπιθυμίαι to ἐπιθυμητικόν. If anger fights with desire, the source of anger, θυμοειδές, must be different from that of desire, ἐπιθυμητικόν. This is the whole moral of the anecdote, which is intended to establish the difference between θυμοειδές and ἐπιθυμητικόν only, not also λογιστικόν.

ταῖς δ) ἐπιθυμίαις κτλ. αὐτόν is τὸν θυμόν. ἀντιπράττειν “ad singularem aliquam actionem referendum est, quam ratio suscipere eaque in re sibi repugnare prohibeat, quasi dictum sit: μὴ δεῖν τι πράττειν καὶ τοῦτο δρῶντα ἀντιπράττειν” (Schneider). The words γενομένου τοῦ τοιούτου refer to ταῖς— κοινωνήσαντα. The anacoluthon is an easy one. Plato means merely that θυμός does not unite with the desires against the reason. For αἱροῦντος λόγου cf. X 604 C note On other views on this passage consult App. IV.

ὅσῳ ‐‐ ᾐ . The restriction will be noted. It is not οἱ γενναῖοι who, as the saying is, hate those whom they have injured.

οὐκ ἐν τούτῳ κτλ. : ‘does not he then fume and chafe—and fight on the side of what he believes to be just—both at hunger and at cold and all such inflictions, and bide his ground and conquer, abating not his noble indignation, until he has either achieved his purpose, or perished, or has been called back and soothed by the reason within him, as a herdsman recalls his dog?’ The words καὶ διὰ τὸ πεινῆν—πάσχειν must be taken with ζεῖ τε καὶ χαλεπαίνει, but possibly καὶ ξυμμαχεῖ τῷ δοκοῦντι δικαίῳ has been displaced, and we should read ζεῖ τε καὶ χαλεπαίνει καὶ διὰ τὸ πεινῆν—πάσχειν, καὶ ξυμμαχεῖ τῷ δοκοῦντι δικαίῳ, καὶ ὑπομένων κτλ. νικᾷ is not merely ‘tries to conquer’ or ‘perseveres’ (Schneider), but ‘conquers,’ in spite of the pardonable inconsistency of this translation with τελευτήση— πραυνθῆ. τῶν γενναίων cannot mean “in the case of the noble’ (P. Shorey A. J. Ph. XVI p. 237), unless θυμός is the subject of λήγει, which is not, I think, the case. The meaning is caught the more readily by reason of οὐχ ὅσῳ ἂν γενναιότερος ᾖ in C, and we ought not to substitute ἀγανακτῶν or the like with Richards. See on the whole passage App. V.

καίτοι γε =‘and surely’ has no adversative force here. See Kugler de part. τοι etc. p. 18. Hartman emends, but see on I 331 E.

ἦ. See cr. n. εἰ in direct interrogation is unclassical, and ἐρωτῶ cannot be supplied. Nor can εἰ well be taken as conditional (with Stallbaum) and τὸ ποῖον as a sudden interruption. For the confusion of ει and η see Introd. § 5.

ἀρτίως . 439 E.

τίθεσθαι κτλ. : ‘defends the rational element.’ I have retained the accusative on the strength of CIA II 317. 9 λαβόντος τοῦ δήμου τὰ ὄπλα ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐλευθ <ερί> ας καὶ παρακαλοῦ <ν> τος καὶ τοὺς στρατιώτας τίθεσθαι πρὸς τὴν πόλιν. The inscription dates from about 280 B.C. Other editors read τοῦ λογιστικοῦ (with Ξ alone among the MSS), but do not cite any example of the phrase τίθεσθαι τὰ ὄπλα πρός τινος, although πρός with the genitive is common enough in similar expressions. Thucydides (II 2. 4) has παρά with the accusative like πρός here. The original meaning of the idiom was to take up a position in arms by the side of: see Schneider's Xen. Anabasis pp. 537—540 and the commentators on Thuc. l.c. For the metaphor cf. Arist. Pol. Ath. 8. 5. F. K. Hertlein (quoted in Hartman) also defends the accusative, citing Aen. Polior. 4. 3 ἐτίθεντο τὰ ὅπλα παρὰ τοὺς πολεμίους ὡς παρὰ φιλίους.

Plato Republic 4.440

ed. John Burnet

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Commentary

Stable identifiers