Plato Republic 5.465

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.