The Memorabilia(纪念品)

VIP免费

2024-12-25 0 0 591.26KB 167 页 5.9玖币

侵权投诉

The Memorabilia

by Xenophon

Translation by H. G. Dakyns

The Memorabilia

BOOK I

I have often wondered by what arguments those who indicted[1]

Socrates could have persuaded the Athenians that his life was justly forfeit

to the state. The indictment was to this effect: "Socrates is guilty of crime

in refusing to recognise the gods acknowledged by the state, and importing

strange divinities of his own; he is further guilty of corrupting the young."

[1] {oi grapsamenoi} = Meletus (below, IV. iv. 4, viii. 4; "Apol." 11,

19), Anytus ("Apol." 29), and Lycon. See Plat. "Apol." II. v. 18;

Diog. Laert. II. v. (Socr.); M. Schanz, "Plat. Apol. mit deutschen

Kemmentar, Einleitung," S. 5 foll.

In the first place, what evidence did they produce that Socrates refused

to recognise the gods acknowledged by the state? Was it that he did not

sacrifice? or that he dispensed with divination? On the contrary, he was

often to be seen engaged in sacrifice, at home or at the common altars of

the state. Nor was his dependence on divination less manifest. Indeed that

saying of his, "A divinity[2] gives me a sign," was on everybody's lips. So

much so that, if I am not mistaken, it lay at the root of the imputation that

he imported novel divinities; though there was no greater novelty in his

case than in that of other believers in oracular help, who commonly rely

on omens of all sorts: the flight or cry of birds, the utterances of man,

chance meetings,[3] or a victim's entrails. Even according to the popular

conception, it is not the mere fowl, it is not the chance individual one

meets, who knows what things are profitable for a man, but it is the gods

who vouchsafe by such instruments to signify the same. This was also the

tenet of Socrates. Only, whereas men ordinarily speak of being turned

aside, or urged onwards by birds, or other creatures encountered on the

The Memorabilia

path, Socrates suited his language to his conviction. "The divinity," said he,

"gives me a sign." Further, he would constantly advise his associates to do

this, or beware of doing that, upon the authority of this same divine voice;

and, as a matter of fact, those who listened to his warnings prospered,

whilst he who turned a deaf ear to them repented afterwards.[4] Yet, it will

be readily conceded, he would hardly desire to present himself to his

everyday companions in the character of either knave or fool. Whereas he

would have appeared to be both, supposing[5] the God-given revelations

had but revealed his own proneness to deception. It is plain he would not

have ventured on forecast at all, but for his belief that the words he spoke

would in fact be verified. Then on whom, or what, was the assurance

rooted, if not upon God? And if he had faith in the gods, how could he fail

to recognise them?

[2] Or, "A divine something." See "Encyc. Brit." "Socrates." Dr. H.

Jackason; "The Daemon of Socrates," F. W. H. Myers; K. Joel, "Der

echte und der Xenophontische Sokrates," i. p. 70 foll.; cf. Aristot. "M.

M." 1182 a 10.

[3] See Aesch. "P. V." 487, {enodious te sombolous}, "and pathway

tokens," L. Campbell; Arist. "Birds," 721, {sombolon ornin}:

"Frogs," 196, {to sometukhon exion}; "Eccl." 792; Hor. "Od." iii. 27,

1-7.

[4] See "Anab." III. i. 4; "Symp." iv. 48.

[5] Or, "if his vaunted manifestations from heaven had but manifested

the falsity of his judgment."

But his mode of dealing with his intimates has another aspect. As

regards the ordinary necessities of life,[6] his advice was, "Act as you

believe[7] these things may best be done." But in the case of those darker

problems, the issues of which are incalculable, he directed his friends to

consult the oracle, whether the business should be undertaken or not. "No

one," he would say, "who wishes to manage a house or city with success:

no one aspiring to guide the helm of state aright, can afford to dipense

with aid from above. Doubtless, skill in carpentering, building, smithying,

farming, of the art of governing men, together with the theory of these

The Memorabilia

processes, and the sciences of arithmetic, economy, strategy, are affairs of

study, and within the grasp of human intelligence. Yet there is a side even

of these, and that not the least important, which the gods reserve to

themselves, the bearing of which is hidden from mortal vision. Thus, let a

man sow a field or plant a farm never so well, yet he cannot foretell who

will gather in the fruits: another may build him a house of fairest

proportion, yet he knows not who will inhabit it. Neither can a general

foresee whether it will profit him to conduct a campaign, nor a politician

be certain whether his leadership will turn to evil or good. Nor can the

man who weds a fair wife, looking forward to joy, know whether through

her he shall not reap sorrow. Neither can he who has built up a powerful

connection in the state know whether he shall not by means of it be cast

out of his city. To suppose that all these matters lay within the scope of

human judgment, to the exclusion of the preternatural, was preternatural

folly. Nor was it less extravagant to go and consult the will of Heaven on

any questions which it is given to us to decide by dint of learning. As

though a man should inquire, "Am I to choose an expert driver as my

coachman, or one who has never handled the reins?" "Shall I appoint a

mariner to be skipper of my vessel, or a landsman?" And so with respect to

all we may know by numbering, weighing, and measuring. To seek advice

from Heaven on such points was a sort of profanity. "Our duty is plain," he

would observe; "where we are permitted to work through our natural

faculties, there let us by all means apply them. But in things which are

hidden, let us seek to gain knowledge from above, by divination; for the

gods," he added, "grant signs to those to whom they will be gracious."

[6] Or, "in the sphere of the determined," {ta anagkaia} = certa,

quorum eventus est necessarius; "things positive, the law-ordained

department of life," as we might say. See Grote, "H. G." i. ch. xvi.

500 and passim.

[7] Reading {os nomizoien}, or if {os enomizen}, translate "As to

things with certain results, he advised them to do them in the way in

which he believed they would be done best"; i.e. he did not say,

"follow your conscience," but, "this course seems best to me under

The Memorabilia

the circumstances."

Again, Socrates ever lived in the public eye; at early morning he was

to be seen betaking himself to one of the promenades, or wrestling-

grounds; at noon he would appear with the gathering crowds in the

market-place; and as day declined, wherever the largest throng might be

encountered, there was he to be found, talking for the most part, while any

one who chose might stop and listen. Yet no one ever heard him say, or

saw him do anything impious or irreverent. Indeed, in contrast to others he

set his face against all discussion of such high matters as the nature of the

Universe; how the "kosmos," as the savants[8] phrase it, came into

being;[9] or by what forces the celestial phenomena arise. To trouble one's

brain about such matters was, he argued, to play the fool. He would ask

first: Did these investigators feel their knowledge of things human so

complete that they betook themselves to these lofty speculations? Or did

they maintain that they were playing their proper parts in thus neglecting

the affairs of man to speculate on the concerns of God? He was astonished

they did not see how far these problems lay beyond mortal ken; since even

those who pride themselves most on their discussion of these points differ

from each other, as madmen do. For just as some madmen, he said, have

no apprehension of what is truly terrible, others fear where no fear is;

some are ready to say and do anything in public without the slightest

symptom of shame;[10] others think they ought not so much as to set foot

among their fellow-men; some honour neither temple, nor altar, nor aught

else sacred to the name of God; others bow down to stocks and stones and

worship the very beasts:--so is it with those thinkers whose minds are

cumbered with cares[11] concerning the Universal Nature. One sect[12]

has discovered that Being is one and indivisible. Another[13] that it is

infinite in number. If one[14] proclaims that all things are in a continual

flux, another[15] replies that nothing can possibly be moved at any time.

The theory of the universe as a process of birth and death is met by the

counter theory, that nothing ever could be born or ever will die.

[8] Lit. "the sophists." See H. Sidgwick, "J. of Philol." iv. 1872; v.

1874.

The Memorabilia

[9] Reading {ephu}. Cf. Lucian, "Icaromenip." xlvi. 4, in imitation of

this passage apparently; or if {ekhei}, translate "is arranged." See

Grote, "H. G." viii. 573.

[10] See "Anab." V. iv. 30.

[11] See Arist. "Clouds," 101, {merimnophrontistai kaloi te kagathoi}.

[12] e.g. Xenophanes and Parmenides, see Grote, "Plato," I. i. 16

foll.

[13] e.g. Leucippus and Democritus, ib. 63 foll.

[14] e.g. Heraclitus, ib. 27 foll.

[15] e.g. Zeno, ib. ii. 96.

But the questioning of Socrates on the merits of these speculators

sometimes took another form. The student of human learning expects, he

said, to make something of his studies for the benefit of himself or others,

as he likes. Do these explorers into the divine operations hope that when

they have discovered by what forces the various phenomena occur, they

will create winds and waters at will and fruitful seasons? Will they

manipulate these and the like to suit their needs? or has no such notion

perhaps ever entered their heads, and will they be content simply to know

how such things come into existence? But if this was his mode of

describing those who meddle with such matters as these, he himself never

wearied of discussing human topics. What is piety? what is impiety? What

is the beautiful? what the ugly? What the noble? what the base? What are

meant by just and unjust? what by sobriety and madness? what by courage

and cowardice? What is a state? what is a statesman? what is a ruler over

men? what is a ruling character? and other like problems, the knowledge

of which, as he put it, conferred a patent of nobility on the possessor,[16]

whereas those who lacked the knowledge might deservedly be stigmatised

as slaves.

[16] Or, "was distinctive of the 'beautiful and good.'" For the phrase

see below, ii. 2 et passim.

Now, in so far as the opinions of Socrates were unknown to the world

at large, it is not surprising that the court should draw false conclusions

respecting them; but that facts patent to all should have been ignored is

The Memorabilia

indeed astonishing.

At one time Socrates was a member of the Council,[17] he had taken

the senatorial oath, and sworn "as a member of that house to act in

conformity with the laws." It was thus he chanced to be President of the

Popular Assembly,[18] when that body was seized with a desire to put the

nine[19] generals, Thrasyllus, Erasinides, and the rest, to death by a single

inclusive vote. Whereupon, in spite of the bitter resentment of the people,

and the menaces of several influential citizens, he refused to put the

question, esteeming it of greater importance faithfully to abide by the oath

which he had taken, than to gratify the people wrongfully, or to screen

himself from the menaces of the mighty. The fact being, that with regard

to the care bestowed by the gods upon men, his belief differed widely

from that of the multitude. Whereas most people seem to imagine that the

gods know in part, and are ignorant in part, Socrates believed firmly that

the gods know all things--both the things that are said and the things that

are done, and the things that are counselled in the silent chambers of the

heart. Moreover, they are present everywhere, and bestow signs upon man

concerning all the things of man.

[17] Or "Senate." Lit. "the Boule."

[18] Lit. "Epistates of the Ecclesia." See Grote, "H. G." viii. 271;

Plat. "Apol." 32 B.

[19] {ennea} would seem to be a slip of the pen for {okto}, eight. See

"Hell." I. v. 16; vi. 16; vi. 29; vii. 1 foll.

I can, therefore, but repeat my former words. It is a marvel to me how

the Athenians came to be persuaded that Socrates fell short of sober-

mindedness as touching the gods. A man who never ventured one impious

word or deed against the gods we worship, but whose whole language

concerning them, and his every act, closely coincided, word for word, and

deed for deed, with all we deem distinctive of devoutest piety.

The Memorabilia

No less surprising to my mind is the belief that Socrates corrupted the

young. This man, who, beyond what has been already stated, kept his

appetites and passions under strict control, who was pre-eminently capable

of enduring winter's cold and summer's heat and every kind of toil, who

was so schooled to curtail his needs that with the scantiest of means he

never lacked sufficiency--is it credible that such a man could have made

others irreverent or lawless, or licentious, or effeminate in face of toil?

Was he not rather the saving of many through the passion for virtue which

he roused in them, and the hope he infused that through careful

management of themselves they might grow to be truly beautiful and

good--not indeed that he ever undertook to be a teacher of virtue, but

being evidently virtuous himself he made those who associated with him

hope that by imitating they might at last resemble him.

But let it not be inferred that he was negligent of his own body or

approved of those who neglected theirs. If excess of eating, counteracted

by excess of toil, was a dietary of which he disapproved,[1] to gratify the

natural claim of appetite in conjunction with moderate exercise was a

system he favoured, as tending to a healthy condition of the body without

trammelling the cultivation of the spirit. On the other hand, there was

nothing dandified or pretentious about him; he indulged in no foppery of

shawl or shoes, or other effeminacy of living.

[1] See [Plat.] "Erast." 132 C.

Least of all did he tend to make his companions greedy of money. He

would not, while restraining passion generally, make capital out of the one

passion which attached others to himself; and by this abstinence, he

believed, he was best consulting his own freedom; in so much that he

stigmatised those who condescended to take wages for their society as

vendors of their own persons, because they were compelled to discuss for

the benefits of their paymasters. What surprised him was that any one

possessing virtue should deign to ask money as its price instead of simply

The Memorabilia

finding his rward in the acquisition of an honest friend, as if the new-

fledged soul of honour could forget her debt of gratitude to her greatest

benefactor.

For himself, without making any such profession, he was content to

believe that those who accepted his views would play their parts as good

and true friends to himself and one another their lives long. Once more

then: how should a man of this character corrupt the young? unless the

careful cultivation of virtue be corruption.

But, says the accuser,[2] by all that's sacred! did not Socrates cause his

associates to despise the established laws when he dwelt on the folly of

appointing state officers by ballot?[3] a principle which, he said, no one

would care to apply in selecting a pilot or a flute- player or in any similar

case, where a mistake would be far less disastrous than in matters political.

Words like these, according to the accuser, tended to incite the young to

contemn the established constitution, rendering them violent and

headstrong. But for myself I think that those who cultivate wisdom and

believe themselves able to instruct their fellow-citizens as to their interests

are least likely to become partisans of violence. They are too well aware

that to violence attach enmities and dangers, whereas results as good may

be obtained by persuasion safely and amicably. For the victim of violence

hates with vindictiveness as one from whom something precious has been

stolen, while the willing subject of persuasion is ready to kiss the hand

which has done him a service. Hence compulsion is not the method of him

who makes wisdom his study, but of him who wields power untempered

by reflection. Once more: the man who ventures on violence needs the

support of many to fight his battles, while he whose strength lies in

persuasiveness triumphs single-handed, for he is conscious of a cunning to

compel consent unaided. And what has such a one to do with the spilling

of blood? since how ridiculous it were to do men to death rather than turn

to account the trusty service of the living.

[2] {o kategoros} = Polycrates possibly. See M. Schantz, op. cit.,

"Einleitun," S. 6: "Die Anklagerede des Polykrates"; Introduction, p.

xxxii. foll.

The Memorabilia

[3] i.e. staking the election of a magistrate on the colour of a bean.

See Aristot. "Ath. Pol." viii. 2, and Dr. Sandys ad loc.

But, the accuser answers, the two men[4] who wrought the greatest

evils to the state at any time--to wit, Critias and Alcibiades--were both

companions of Socrates--Critias the oligarch, and Alcibiades the democrat.

Where would you find a more arrant thief, savage, and murderer[5] than

the one? where such a portent of insolence, incontinence, and high-

handedness as the other? For my part, in so far as these two wrought evil

to the state, I have no desire to appear as the apologist of either. I confine

myself to explaining what this intimacy of theirs with Socrates really was.

[4] See "Hell." I. and II. passim.

[5] Reading {kleptistatos te kai biaiotatos kai phonikotatos}, or if

{pleonektistatos te kai biaiotatis}, translate "such a manner of greed

and violence as the one, of insolence, etc., as the other?" See Grote,

"H. G." viii. 337. Never were two more ambitious citizens seen at Athens.

Ambition was in their blood. If they were to have their will, all power was

to be in their hands; their fame was to eclipse all other. Of Socrates they

knew--first that he lived an absolutely independent life on the scantiest

means; next that he was self-disciplined to the last degree in respect of

pleasures; lastly that he was so formidable in debate that there was no

antagonist he could not twist round his little finger. Such being their views,

and such the character of the pair, which is the more probable: that they

sought the society of Socrates because they felt the fascination of his life,

and were attracted by the bearing of the man? or because they thought, if

only we are leagued with him we shall become adepts in statecraft and

unrivalled in the arts of speech and action? For my part I believe that if the

choice from Heaven had been given them to live such a life as they saw

Socrates living to its close, or to die, they would both have chosen death.

Their acts are a conclusive witness to their characters. They no sooner

felt themselves to be the masters of those they came in contact with than

they sprang aside from Socrates and plunged into that whirl of politics but

for which they might never have sought his society.

It may be objected: before giving his companions lessons in politics

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

5.9 玖币 0人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

TheMemorabilia1TheMemorabiliabyXenophonTranslationbyH.G.DakynsTheMemorabilia2BOOKIIIhaveoftenwonderedbywhatargumentsthosewhoindicted[1]SocratescouldhavepersuadedtheAtheniansthathislifewasjustlyforfeittothestate.Theindictmentwastothiseffect:"Socratesisguiltyofcrimeinrefusingtorecognisethegodsacknowle...

展开>> 收起<<

The Memorabilia(纪念品).pdf

共167页,预览34页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

声明：本站为文档C2C交易模式，即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载，本站只是中间服务平台，本站所有文档下载所得的收益归上传人(含作者)所有。玖贝云文库仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。若文档所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私，请立即通知玖贝云文库，我们立即给予删除！

The Memorabilia(纪念品)

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

热门标签

举报选择: