[514B]
ὑπὸ τοῦ δεσμοῦ κτλ.
“Puerile interpretamentum” says Herwerden, quite superfluously. Hirschig's
ἀδυνατοῦντας for
ἀδυνάτους is no improvement. The word, like
ὄντας, depends of course on
ἰδέ. For
καόμενον, Hirschig, with Cobet's approval, conjectures
καομένου, and so Baiter also reads: but
καομένου leaves
αὐτοῖς out in the cold. “Vide ne
φῶς πυρὸς ita in unam notionem coalescant, ut alterius attributum simul etiam alteri conveniat” Hermann. This explanation is correct: cf. 517 B.
ἐπάνω ὁδόν
. ἐπάνοδον (Badham), which means ‘ascensum,’ is out of place here.
ἐπάνω means only that the road is at a higher elevation than the prisoners (so also Schneider): it should not be taken with
ὁδόν in the sense of a ‘raised way’ (Jowett). There is no reason why the
ὁδός should be raised above the level of the ground, and it is unnecessarily harsh to construe the adverb with the noun. The fact that verbal nouns occasionally take an adverb in Plato (see on IV 434 C) does not justify Jowett's construction in this passage.
ὥσπερ τοῖς θαυματοποιοῖς κτλ.
As in a Punch and Judy show. Cf. [Arist.]
de Mundo 6. 398^{b} 16 ff.
οἱ νευροσπάσται μίαν μήρινθον ἐπισπασάμενοι ποιοῦσι καὶ αὐχένα κινεῖσθαι καὶ χεῖρα τοῦ ζῴου καὶ ὦμον καὶ ὀφθαλμὸν κτλ. (Blümner,
Privatalterth. p. 503 note 5, where other references are given). I agree with the Oxford editors in holding that
τῶν ἀνθρώπων denotes the performers, and not, as Schneider and others translate, the spectators.
οἱ ἄνθρωποι could not, without further specification, stand for the spectators, and no further specification is given. But Jowett and Campbell are, I think, in error when they distinguish between the
θαυματοποιοί and the
ἄν‐
θρωποι, and suppose that the
θαυματοποιός is “not the actual exhibitor or puller of the strings, but the master of the show.” The
ἄνθρωποι and the
θαυματοποιοί are the same, and Plato might, if he had been so minded, have written
ὥσπερ τοῖς θαυματοποιοῖς πρὸ ἑαυτῶν κτλ. The substitution of
τῶν ἀνθρώπων for
ἑαυτῶν puts the matter in a more objective way, and has also a contemptuous effect.
ὅρα τοίνυν κτλ.
τοίνυν is ‘also’ (I 339 D note). The low wall which crosses the
εἴσοδος at a point between the prisoners and the fire intercepts the shadows of the
παραφέροντες: but the
σκεύη which they carry, presumably on their heads, overtop the wall, and are reflected on the wall of the cave in front of the prisoners. See Fig. ii on p. 65. Plato adopts various devices in order to suggest a due proportion between the objects inside and outside the cave in point of reality. Thus (1) the typical examples
ἀνδριάντες etc. are themselves images of the natural objects of the superior
ὁρατόν: (2) the originals of the Cave are all (except the prisoners themselves 515 A)
σκευαστά, whereas those of the superior
ὁρατόν are —primarily speaking—
φυτευτά (for the significance of this see 532 C note): (3) the contents of the Cave, both originals and shadows, may be regarded as less luminous and true than the
ὁρατά outside, because they derive their light and truth, not from the Sun, but from an artificial Fire (see also on 517 C). The interpretation of the simile is to be sought in the
δοξαστόν generally as well as in the
ὁρατόν in particular (see on 517 A), but we need not suppose that every detail is significant. Comparisons have been made between the
παραφέροντες and (in the
ὁρατόν)
δαίμονες (Campbell II p. 16, comparing
Tim. 43), or (in the
δοξαστόν) Sophists etc. (Shorey,
Idea of Good etc. p. 238). The latter analogy is the more fruitful, but neither of them is altogether free from difficulty, and Plato may have intended the
παραφέροντες only as part of the machinery of his similitude. If the Cave is to represent the world of
τὰ πολλά, it must have a semblance of life and motion; and without the
παραφέροντες the shadows would be motionless and dead.
Commentary on Plato, Republic. James Adam. ed. James Adam. Cambridge. 1926-1929.
Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.
Funding provided by National Endowment for the Humanities.