Chapter XXIII: Part 23

Whether the Menexenus is a genuine writing of Plato, or an imitation only, remains uncertain. In either case, the thoughts are partly borrowed from the Funeral Oration of Thucydides; and the fact that they are so, is not in favour of the genuineness of the work. Internal evidence seems to leave the question of authorship in doubt. There are merits and there are defects which might lead to either conclusion. The form of the greater part of the work makes the enquiry difficult; the introduction and the finale certainly wear the look either of Plato or of an extremely skilful imitator. The excellence of the forgery may be fairly adduced as an argument that it is not a forgery at all. In this uncertainty the express testimony of Aristotle, who quotes, in the Rhetoric,[62] the well-known words, ‘It is easy to praise the Athenians among the Athenians,’ from the Funeral Oration, may perhaps turn the balance in its favour. It must be remembered also that the work was famous in antiquity, and is included in the Alexandrian catalogues of Platonic writings.

MENEXENUS.

_PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE._

SOCRATES and MENEXENUS.

[Sidenote: _Menexenus._]

_Socrates._ Whence come you, Menexenus? Are you from
the Agora? =Steph.= 234

_Menexenus._ Yes, Socrates; I have been at the Council.

_Soc._ And what might you be doing at the Council? And
yet I need hardly ask, for I see that you, believing yourself
to have arrived at the end of education and of philosophy,
and to have had enough of them, are mounting upwards
to things higher still, and, though rather young for the post,
are intending to govern us elder men, like the rest of your
family, which has always provided some one who kindly
took care of us.

_Men._ Yes, Socrates, I shall be ready to hold office, if you
allow and advise that I should, but not if you think otherwise.
I went to the council chamber because I heard that
the Council was about to choose some one who was to speak
over the dead. For you know that there is to be a public
funeral?

_Soc._ Yes, I know. And whom did they choose?

_Men._ No one; they delayed the election until to-morrow,
but I believe that either Archinus or Dion will be chosen.

[Sidenote: The gain of dying in battle.]

[Sidenote: The effect upon Socrates of panegyrical oratory.]

[Sidenote: _Easy to praise Athenians among Peloponnesians._]

_Soc._ O Menexenus! death in battle is certainly in many
respects a noble thing. The dead man gets a fine and costly
funeral, although he may have been poor, and an elaborate
speech is made over him by a wise man who has long ago
prepared what he has to say, although he who is praised may
not have been good for much. The speakers praise him for
what he has done and for what he has not done—that is the
beauty of them—and they steal away our souls with their
embellished words; in every conceivable form they praise 235
the city; and they praise those who died in war, and all our
ancestors who went before us; and they praise ourselves
also who are still alive, until I feel quite elevated by their
laudations, and I stand listening to their words, Menexenus,
and become enchanted by them, and all in a moment I
imagine myself to have become a greater and nobler and
finer man than I was before. And if, as often happens, there
are any foreigners who accompany me to the speech, I
become suddenly conscious of having a sort of triumph over
them, and they seem to experience a corresponding feeling
of admiration at me, and at the greatness of the city, which
appears to them, when they are under the influence of the
speaker, more wonderful than ever. This consciousness of
dignity lasts me more than three days, and not until the fourth
or fifth day do I come to my senses and know where I am;
in the meantime I have been living in the Islands of the Blest.
Such is the art of our rhetoricians, and in such manner does
the sound of their words keep ringing in my ears.

[Sidenote: Socrates always making fun of the rhetoricians.]

_Men._ You are always making fun of the rhetoricians,
Socrates; this time, however, I am inclined to think that the
speaker who is chosen will not have much to say, for he has
been called upon to speak at a moment’s notice, and he will
be compelled almost to improvise.

_Soc._ But why, my friend, should he not have plenty to
say? Every rhetorician has speeches ready made; nor is
there any difficulty in improvising that sort of stuff. Had
the orator to praise Athenians among Peloponnesians, or
Peloponnesians among Athenians, he would be a good
rhetorician who could succeed and gain credit. But there is
no difficulty in a man’s winning applause when he is contending
for fame among the persons whom he is praising.

_Men._ Do you think not, Socrates?

_Soc._ Certainly ‘not.’

[Sidenote: Could Socrates himself make a funeral oration?]

_Men._ Do you think that you could speak yourself if there
should be a necessity, and if the Council were to choose you?

_Soc._ That I should be able to speak is no great wonder,
Menexenus, considering that I have an excellent mistress in
the art of rhetoric,—she who has made so many good
speakers, and one who was the best among all the Hellenes—Pericles,
the son of Xanthippus.

[Sidenote: _Aspasia the teacher both of Pericles and of Socrates._]

_Men._ And who is she? I suppose that you mean Aspasia.

[Sidenote: Yes; for he is a pupil of Aspasia.]

_Soc._ Yes, I do; and besides her I had Connus, the son of
Metrobius, as a master, and he was my master in music, as 236
she was in rhetoric. No wonder that a man who has
received such an education should be a finished speaker;
even the pupil of very inferior masters, say, for example, one
who had learned music of Lamprus, and rhetoric of Antiphon
the Rhamnusian, might make a figure if he were to praise
the Athenians among the Athenians.

_Men._ And what would you be able to say if you had to
speak?

[Sidenote: The funeral oration composed by Aspasia.]

_Soc._ Of my own wit, most likely nothing; but yesterday
I heard Aspasia composing a funeral oration about these
very dead. For she had been told, as you were saying, that
the Athenians were going to choose a speaker, and she
repeated to me the sort of speech which he should deliver,
partly improvising and partly from previous thought, putting
together fragments of the funeral oration which Pericles
spoke, but which, as I believe, she composed.

_Men._ And can you remember what Aspasia said?

_Soc._ I ought to be able, for she taught me, and she was
ready to strike me because I was always forgetting.

_Men._ Then why will you not rehearse what she said?

_Soc._ Because I am afraid that my mistress may be angry
with me if I publish her speech.

_Men._ Nay, Socrates, let us have the speech, whether
Aspasia’s or any one else’s, no matter. I hope that you will
oblige me.

_Soc._ But I am afraid that you will laugh at me if I continue
the games of youth in old age.

_Men._ Far otherwise, Socrates; let us by all means have
the speech.

_Soc._ Truly I have such a disposition to oblige you, that if
you bid me dance naked I should not like to refuse, since we
are alone. Listen then: If I remember rightly, she began
as follows, with the mention of the dead[63]:—

[Sidenote: _The panegyric on the dead._]

There is a tribute of deeds and of words. The departed
have already had the first, when going forth on their destined
journey they were attended on their way by the state and by
their friends; the tribute of words remains to be given to
them, as is meet and by law ordained. For noble words are
a memorial and a crown of noble actions, which are given to
the doers of them by the hearers. A word is needed which
will duly praise the dead and gently admonish the living,
exhorting the brethren and descendants of the departed to
imitate their virtue, and consoling their fathers and mothers
and the survivors, if any, who may chance to be alive of the 237
previous generation. What sort of a word will this be, and
how shall we rightly begin the praises of these brave men?
In their life they rejoiced their own friends with their
valour, and their death they gave in exchange for the
salvation of the living. And I think that we should praise
them in the order in which nature made them good, for they
were good because they were sprung from good fathers.
Wherefore let us first of all praise the goodness of their
birth; secondly, their nurture and education; and then let
us set forth how noble their actions were, and how worthy
of the education which they had received.

[Sidenote: The departed were the children of the soil; and their country is dear to the Gods, who contended for the possession of her.]

And first as to their birth. Their ancestors were not
strangers, nor are these their descendants sojourners only,
whose fathers have come from another country; but they are
the children of the soil, dwelling and living in their own
land. And the country which brought them up is not like
other countries, a stepmother to her children, but their own
true mother; she bore them and nourished them and received
them, and in her bosom they now repose. It is meet
and right, therefore, that we should begin by praising the
land which is their mother, and that will be a way of praising
their noble birth.

[Sidenote: _The pre-eminence of Attica._]

[Sidenote: She first brought forth man, and proved her true motherhood by providing food for her own offspring.]

[Sidenote: The Gods were the rulers of primitive men, and gave them arts.]

The country is worthy to be praised, not only by us, but
by all mankind; first, and above all, as being dear to the
Gods. This is proved by the strife and contention of the
Gods respecting her. And ought not the country which the
Gods praise to be praised by all mankind? The second
praise which may be fairly claimed by her, is that at the
time when the whole earth was sending forth and creating
diverse animals, tame and wild, she our mother was free and
pure from savage monsters, and out of all animals selected
and brought forth man, who is superior to the rest in understanding,
and alone has justice and religion. And a great
proof that she brought forth the common ancestors of us and
of the departed, is that she provided the means of support
for her offspring. For as a woman proves her motherhood
by giving milk to her young ones (and she who has no
fountain of milk is not a mother), so did this our land prove
that she was the mother of men, for in those days she alone
and first of all brought forth wheat and barley for human
food, which is the best and noblest sustenance for man, 238
whom she regarded as her true offspring. And these are
truer proofs of motherhood in a country than in a woman,
for the woman in her conception and generation is but the
imitation of the earth, and not the earth of the woman. And
of the fruit of the earth she gave a plenteous supply, not
only to her own, but to others also; and afterwards she made
the olive to spring up to be a boon to her children, and to
help them in their toils. And when she had herself nursed
them and brought them up to manhood, she gave them Gods
to be their rulers and teachers, whose names are well known,
and need not now be repeated. They are the Gods who first
ordered our lives, and instructed us in the arts for the supply
of our daily needs, and taught us the acquisition and use of
arms for the defence of the country.

[Sidenote: We have a good government, which is sometimes called a democracy, but is really an aristocracy, for the best rule with the consent of the many.]

[Sidenote: _The mythical glories of Athens._]

[Sidenote: The principle of our government is equality; the only superiority is that of virtue and wisdom.]

Thus born into the world and thus educated, the ancestors
of the departed lived and made themselves a government,
which I ought briefly to commemorate. For government is
the nurture of man, and the government of good men is good,
and of bad men bad. And I must show that our ancestors
were trained under a good government, and for this reason
they were good, and our contemporaries are also good, among
whom our departed friends are to be reckoned. Then as
now, and indeed always, from that time to this, speaking
generally, our government was an aristocracy—a form of
government which receives various names, according to the
fancies of men, and is sometimes called democracy, but is
really an aristocracy or government of the best which has the
approval of the many. For kings we have always had, first
hereditary and then elected, and authority is mostly in the
hands of the people, who dispense offices and power to those
who appear to be most deserving of them. Neither is a man
rejected from weakness or poverty or obscurity of origin, nor
honoured by reason of the opposite, as in other states, but
there is one principle—he who appears to be wise and good
is a governor and ruler. The basis of this our government is
equality of birth; for other states are made up of all sorts and
unequal conditions of men, and therefore their governments
are unequal; there are tyrannies and there are oligarchies,
in which the one party are slaves and the other masters.
But we and our citizens are brethren, the children all of one 239
mother, and we do not think it right to be one another’s
masters or servants; but the natural equality of birth compels
us to seek for legal equality, and to recognize no superiority
except in the reputation of virtue and wisdom.

[Sidenote: The greatness of Persia.]

[Sidenote: _The battle of Marathon._]

[Sidenote: Yet at Marathon the army of Darius was overcome by the Athenians almost single-handed.]

[Sidenote: _Salamis, Artemisium, and Plataea._]

[Sidenote: The men of Marathon should have the first place: those who followed in the war were their disciples, except the men who defeated the Persians at Salamis and first made proof of them at sea; these have the second place.]

[Sidenote: And the third place is to be assigned to those who fought at Plataea.]

[Sidenote: Eurymedon; Cyprus; Egypt.]

And so their and our fathers, and these, too, our brethren,
being nobly born and having been brought up in all freedom,
did both in their public and private capacity many noble deeds
famous over the whole world. They were the deeds of men
who thought that they ought to fight both against Hellenes
for the sake of Hellenes on behalf of freedom, and against
barbarians in the common interest of Hellas. Time would
fail me to tell of their defence of their country against the
invasion of Eumolpus and the Amazons, or of their defence
of the Argives against the Cadmeians, or of the Heracleids
against the Argives; besides, the poets have already declared
in song to all mankind their glory, and therefore any commemoration
of their deeds in prose which we might attempt
would hold a second place. They already have their reward,
and I say no more of them; but there are other worthy deeds
of which no poet has worthily sung, and which are still wooing
the poet’s muse. Of these I am bound to make honourable
mention, and shall invoke others to sing of them also in lyric
and other strains, in a manner becoming the actors. And
first I will tell how the Persians, lords of Asia, were enslaving
Europe, and how the children of this land, who were our
fathers, held them back. Of these I will speak first, and
praise their valour, as is meet and fitting. He who would
rightly estimate them should place himself in thought at that
time, when the whole of Asia was subject to the third king of
Persia. The first king, Cyrus, by his valour freed the
Persians, who were his countrymen, and subjected the Medes,
who were their lords, and he ruled over the rest of Asia, as
far as Egypt; and after him came his son, who ruled all the
accessible part of Egypt and Libya; the third king was
Darius, who extended the land boundaries of the empire to
Scythia, and with his fleet held the sea and the islands. None 240
presumed to be his equal; the minds of all men were enthralled
by him—so many and mighty and warlike nations
had the power of Persia subdued. Now Darius had a quarrel
against us and the Eretrians, because, as he said, we had
conspired against Sardis, and he sent 500,000 men in transports
and vessels of war, and 300 ships, and Datis as commander,
telling him to bring the Eretrians and Athenians to
the king, if he wished to keep his head on his shoulders. He
sailed against the Eretrians, who were reputed to be amongst
the noblest and most warlike of the Hellenes of that day, and
they were numerous, but he conquered them all in three days;
and when he had conquered them, in order that no one might
escape, he searched the whole country after this manner: his
soldiers, coming to the borders of Eretria and spreading from
sea to sea, joined hands and passed through the whole country,
in order that they might be able to tell the king that no one
had escaped them. And from Eretria they went to Marathon
with a like intention, expecting to bind the Athenians in the
same yoke of necessity in which they had bound the Eretrians.
Having effected one-half of their purpose, they were in the
act of attempting the other, and none of the Hellenes dared
to assist either the Eretrians or the Athenians, except the
Lacedaemonians, and they arrived a day too late for the
battle; but the rest were panic-stricken and kept quiet, too
happy in having escaped for a time. He who has present to
his mind that conflict will know what manner of men they
were who received the onset of the barbarians at Marathon,
and chastened the pride of the whole of Asia, and by the
victory which they gained over the barbarians first taught
other men that the power of the Persians was not invincible,
but that hosts of men and the multitude of riches alike yield
to valour. And I assert that those men are the fathers not
only of ourselves, but of our liberties and of the liberties of
all who are on the continent, for that was the action to which
the Hellenes looked back when they ventured to fight for
their own safety in the battles which ensued: they became
disciples of the men of Marathon. To them, therefore, I
assign in my speech the first place, and the second to those 241
who fought and conquered in the sea fights at Salamis and
Artemisium; for of them, too, one might have many things to
say—of the assaults which they endured by sea and land, and
how they repelled them. I will mention only that act of
theirs which appears to me to be the noblest, and which
followed that of Marathon and came nearest to it; for the
men of Marathon only showed the Hellenes that it was
possible to ward off the barbarians by land, the many by the
few; but there was no proof that they could be defeated by
ships, and at sea the Persians retained the reputation of being
invincible in numbers and wealth and skill and strength.
This is the glory of the men who fought at sea, that they
dispelled the second terror which had hitherto possessed the
Hellenes, and so made the fear of numbers, whether of ships
or men, to cease among them. And so the soldiers of Marathon
and the sailors of Salamis became the schoolmasters of
Hellas; the one teaching and habituating the Hellenes not
to fear the barbarians at sea, and the others not to fear them
by land. Third in order, for the number and valour of the
combatants, and third in the salvation of Hellas, I place the
battle of Plataea. And now the Lacedaemonians as well as
the Athenians took part in the struggle; they were all united
in this greatest and most terrible conflict of all; wherefore
their virtues will be celebrated in times to come, as they are
now celebrated by us. But at a later period many Hellenic
tribes were still on the side of the barbarians, and there was
a report that the great king was going to make a new attempt
upon the Hellenes, and therefore justice requires that we
should also make mention of those who crowned the previous
work of our salvation, and drove and purged away all barbarians
from the sea. These were the men who fought
by sea at the river Eurymedon, and who went on the expedition
to Cyprus, and who sailed to Egypt and divers
other places; and they should be gratefully remembered by
us, because they compelled the king in fear for himself to
look to his own safety instead of plotting the destruction of
Hellas.

[Sidenote: _Wars and expeditions of the Athenians._]

[Sidenote: Tanagra; Oenophyta.]

[Sidenote: Sphacteria.]

[Sidenote: The Sicilian expedition.]

[Sidenote: _Victories and reverses of the Athenians._]

[Sidenote: Cyzicus.]

[Sidenote: Hellas betrayed to the Persian.]

[Sidenote: Arginusae.]

[Sidenote: The taking of the city is obscurely intimated.]

And so the war against the barbarians was fought out to 242
the end by the whole city on their own behalf, and on behalf
of their countrymen. There was peace, and our city was held
in honour; and then, as prosperity makes men jealous, there
succeeded a jealousy of her, and jealousy begat envy, and so
she became engaged against her will in a war with the
Hellenes. On the breaking out of war, our citizens met the
Lacedaemonians at Tanagra, and fought for the freedom of
the Boeotians; the issue was doubtful, and was decided by
the engagement which followed. For when the Lacedaemonians
had gone on their way, leaving the Boeotians, whom
they were aiding, on the third day after the battle of Tanagra,
our countrymen conquered at Oenophyta, and righteously
restored those who had been unrighteously exiled. And they
were the first after the Persian war who fought on behalf of
liberty in aid of Hellenes against Hellenes; they were brave
men, and freed those whom they aided, and were the first too
who were honourably interred in this sepulchre by the state.
Afterwards there was a mighty war, in which all the Hellenes
joined, and devastated our country, which was very ungrateful
of them; and our countrymen, after defeating them in a naval
engagement and taking their leaders, the Spartans, at Sphagia,
when they might have destroyed them, spared their lives, and
gave them back, and made peace, considering that they should
war with their fellow-countrymen only until they gained a
victory over them, and not because of the private anger of the
state destroy the common interest of Hellas; but that with
barbarians they should war to the death. Worthy of praise
are they also who waged this war, and are here interred; for
they proved, if any one doubted the superior prowess of the
Athenians in the former war with the barbarians, that their
doubts had no foundation—showing by their victory in the
civil war with Hellas, in which they subdued the other chief
state of the Hellenes, that they could conquer single-handed
those with whom they had been allied in the war against the
barbarians. After the peace there followed a third war, which
was of a terrible and desperate nature, and in this many brave
men who are here interred lost their lives—many of them had
won victories in Sicily, whither they had gone over the seas 243
to fight for the liberties of the Leontines, to whom they were
bound by oaths; but, owing to the distance, the city was
unable to help them, and they lost heart and came to misfortune;
of whom their very enemies give a higher praise for temperance
and valour than friends do of most other men. Many
also fell in naval engagements at the Hellespont, after having
in one day taken all the ships of the enemy, and defeated
them in other naval engagements. And what I call the
terrible and desperate nature of the war, is that the other
Hellenes, in their extreme animosity towards the city, should
have entered into negotiations with their bitterest enemy, the
king of Persia, whom they, together with us, had expelled;—him,
without us, they again brought back, barbarian against
Hellenes, and all the hosts, both of Hellenes and barbarians,
were united against Athens. And then shone forth the power
and valour of our city. Her enemies had supposed that she
was exhausted by the war, and our ships were blockaded at
Mitylene. But the citizens themselves embarked, and came
to the rescue with sixty other ships, and their valour was
confessed of all men, for they conquered their enemies and
delivered their friends. And yet by some evil fortune they
were left to perish at sea, and therefore are[64] not interred here.
Ever to be remembered and honoured are they, for by their
valour not only that sea-fight was won for us, but the entire
war was decided by them, and through them the city gained
the reputation of being invincible, even though attacked by
all mankind. And that reputation was a true one, for the
defeat which came upon us was our own doing. We were
never conquered by others, and to this day we are still
unconquered by them; but we were our own conquerors, and
received defeat at our own hands. Afterwards there was
quiet and peace abroad, but there sprang up war at home;
and, if men are destined to have civil war, no one could have
desired that his city should take the disorder in a milder form.

[Sidenote: The great reconciliation of kindred.]

[Sidenote: _An Athenian version of the history of Hellas._]

[Sidenote: Change in the relation of the Athenians (1) to the other Hellenes; (2) to the Persian king.]

How joyful and natural was the reconciliation of those who
came from the Piraeus and those who came from the city;
with what moderation did they order the war against the
tyrants in Eleusis, and in a manner how unlike what the other
Hellenes expected! And the reason of this gentleness was 244
the veritable tie of blood, which created among them a friendship
as of kinsmen, faithful not in word only, but in deed.
And we ought also to remember those who then fell by one
another’s hands, and on such occasions as these to reconcile
them with sacrifices and prayers, praying to those who have
power over them, that they may be reconciled even as we are
reconciled. For they did not attack one another out of
malice or enmity, but they were unfortunate. And that such
was the fact we ourselves are witnesses, who are of the same
race with them, and have mutually received and granted forgiveness
of what we have done and suffered. After this there
was perfect peace, and the city had rest; and her feeling was
that she forgave the barbarians, who had severely suffered at
her hands and severely retaliated, but that she was indignant
at the ingratitude of the Hellenes, when she remembered how
they had received good from her and returned evil, having
made common cause with the barbarians, depriving her of the
ships which had once been their salvation, and dismantling
our walls, which had preserved their own from falling. She
thought that she would no longer defend the Hellenes, when
enslaved either by one another or by the barbarians, and did
accordingly. This was our feeling, while the Lacedaemonians
were thinking that we who were the champions of liberty had
fallen, and that their business was to subject the remaining
Hellenes. And why should I say more? for the events of
which I am speaking happened not long ago and we can all
of us remember how the chief peoples of Hellas, Argives and
Boeotians and Corinthians, came to feel the need of us, and,
what is the greatest miracle of all, the Persian king himself
was driven to such extremity as to come round to the opinion,
that from this city, of which he was the destroyer, and from
no other, his salvation would proceed.

[Sidenote: _The end of the war._]

And if a person desired to bring a deserved accusation
against our city, he would find only one charge which he
could justly urge—that she was too compassionate and too
favourable to the weaker side. And in this instance she was
not able to hold out or keep her resolution of refusing aid to
her injurers when they were being enslaved, but she was 245
softened, and did in fact send out aid, and delivered the
Hellenes from slavery, and they were free until they afterwards
enslaved themselves. Whereas, to the great king she
refused to give the assistance of the state, for she could not
forget the trophies of Marathon and Salamis and Plataea;
but she allowed exiles and volunteers to assist him, and they
were his salvation. And she herself, when she was compelled,
entered into the war, and built walls and ships, and
fought with the Lacedaemonians on behalf of the Parians.
Now the king fearing this city and wanting to stand aloof,
when he saw the Lacedaemonians growing weary of the war
at sea, asked of us, as the price of his alliance with us and
the other allies, to give up the Hellenes in Asia, whom
the Lacedaemonians had previously handed over to him, he
thinking that we should refuse, and that then he might have
a pretence for withdrawing from us. About the other allies he
was mistaken, for the Corinthians and Argives and Boeotians,
and the other states, were quite willing to let them go, and
swore and covenanted, that, if he would pay them money,
they would make over to him the Hellenes of the continent,
and we alone refused to give them up and swear. Such was
the natural nobility of this city, so sound and healthy was
the spirit of freedom among us, and the instinctive dislike of
the barbarian, because we are pure Hellenes, having no
admixture of barbarism in us. For we are not like many
others, descendants of Pelops or Cadmus or Egyptus or
Danaus, who are by nature barbarians, and yet pass for
Hellenes, and dwell in the midst of us; but we are pure
Hellenes, uncontaminated by any foreign element, and
therefore the hatred of the foreigner has passed unadulterated
into the life-blood of the city. And so, notwithstanding
our noble sentiments, we were again isolated, because we
were unwilling to be guilty of the base and unholy act of
giving up Hellenes to barbarians. And we were in the
same case as when we were subdued before; but, by the
favour of Heaven, we managed better, for we ended the war
without the loss of our ships or walls or colonies; the
enemy was only too glad to be quit of us. Yet in this war
we lost many brave men, such as were those who fell owing
to the ruggedness of the ground at the battle of Corinth, or
by treason at Lechaeum. Brave men, too, were those who
delivered the Persian king, and drove the Lacedaemonians
from the sea. I remind you of them, and you must 246
celebrate them together with me, and do honour to their
memories.

[Sidenote: _Address of the departed to their sons._]

Such were the actions of the men who are here interred,
and of others who have died on behalf of their country;
many and glorious things I have spoken of them, and there
are yet many more and more glorious things remaining to
be told—many days and nights would not suffice to tell of
them. Let them not be forgotten, and let every man remind
their descendants that they also are soldiers who must not
desert the ranks of their ancestors, or from cowardice fall
behind. Even as I exhort you this day, and in all future
time, whenever I meet with any of you, shall continue to
remind and exhort you, O ye sons of heroes, that you strive
to be the bravest of men. And I think that I ought now to
repeat what your fathers desired to have said to you who
are their survivors, when they went out to battle, in case
anything happened to them. I will tell you what I heard
them say, and what, if they had only speech, they would
fain be saying, judging from what they then said. And you
must imagine that you hear them saying what I now repeat
to you:—

‘Sons, the event proves that your fathers were brave men;
for we might have lived dishonourably, but have preferred
to die honourably rather than bring you and your children
into disgrace, and rather than dishonour our own fathers
and forefathers; considering that life is not life to one who
is a dishonour to his race, and that to such a one neither
men nor Gods are friendly, either while he is on the earth
or after death in the world below. Remember our words,
then, and whatever is your aim let virtue be the condition of
the attainment of your aim, and know that without this all
possessions and pursuits are dishonourable and evil. For
neither does wealth bring honour to the owner, if he be a
coward; of such a one the wealth belongs to another, and
not to himself. Nor does beauty and strength of body,
when dwelling in a base and cowardly man, appear comely,
but the reverse of comely, making the possessor more conspicuous,
and manifesting forth his cowardice. And all
knowledge, when separated from justice and virtue, is seen
to be cunning and not wisdom; wherefore make this your
first and last and constant and all-absorbing aim, to exceed, 247
if possible, not only us but all your ancestors in virtue; and
know that to excel you in virtue only brings us shame, but
that to be excelled by you is a source of happiness to us.
And we shall most likely be defeated, and you will most
likely be victors in the contest, if you learn so to order
your lives as not to abuse or waste the reputation of your
ancestors, knowing that to a man who has any self-respect,
nothing is more dishonourable than to be honoured, not
for his own sake, but on account of the reputation of his
ancestors. The honour of parents is a fair and noble
treasure to their posterity, but to have the use of a treasure
of wealth and honour, and to leave none to your successors,
because you have neither money nor reputation of your own,
is alike base and dishonourable. And if you follow our
precepts you will be received by us as friends, when the
hour of destiny brings you hither; but if you neglect our
words and are disgraced in your lives, no one will welcome
or receive you. This is the message which is to be delivered
to our children.

[Sidenote: _Consolation of parents._]

‘Some of us have fathers and mothers still living, and we
would urge them, if, as is likely, we shall die, to bear the
calamity as lightly as possible, and not to condole with one
another; for they have sorrows enough, and will not need
any one to stir them up. While we gently heal their
wounds, let us remind them that the Gods have heard the
chief part of their prayers; for they prayed, not that their
children might live for ever, but that they might be brave
and renowned. And this, which is the greatest good, they
have attained. A mortal man cannot expect to have everything
in his own life turning out according to his will; and
they, if they bear their misfortunes bravely, will be truly
deemed brave fathers of the brave. But if they give way to
their sorrows, either they will be suspected of not being our
parents, or we of not being such as our panegyrists declare.
Let not either of the two alternatives happen, but rather let
them be our chief and true panegyrists, who show in their
lives that they are true men, and had men for their sons.

[Sidenote: _The state the protector both of parents and orphans._]

Of old the saying, “Nothing too much,” appeared to be, and
really was, well said. For he whose happiness rests with himself,
if possible, wholly, and if not, as far as is possible,—who 248
is not hanging in suspense on other men, or changing
with the vicissitude of their fortune,—has his life ordered for
the best. He is the temperate and valiant and wise; and
when his riches come and go, when his children are given
and taken away, he will remember the proverb—“Neither
rejoicing overmuch nor grieving overmuch,” for he relies
upon himself. And such we would have our parents to be—that
is our word and wish, and as such we now offer ourselves,
neither lamenting overmuch, nor fearing overmuch, if
we are to die at this time. And we entreat our fathers and
mothers to retain these feelings throughout their future life,
and to be assured that they will not please us by sorrowing
and lamenting over us. But, if the dead have any knowledge
of the living, they will displease us most by making
themselves miserable and by taking their misfortunes too
much to heart, and they will please us best if they bear their
loss lightly and temperately. For our life will have the
noblest end which is vouchsafed to man, and should be
glorified rather than lamented. And if they will direct their
minds to the care and nurture of our wives and children,
they will soonest forget their misfortunes, and live in a better
and nobler way, and be dearer to us.

‘This is all that we have to say to our families: and to the
state we would say—Take care of our parents and of our
sons: let her worthily cherish the old age of our parents, and
bring up our sons in the right way. But we know that she
will of her own accord take care of them, and does not need
any exhortation of ours.’

This, O ye children and parents of the dead, is the message
which they bid us deliver to you, and which I do deliver
with the utmost seriousness. And in their name I beseech
you, the children, to imitate your fathers, and you, parents,
to be of good cheer about yourselves; for we will nourish
your age, and take care of you both publicly and privately in
any place in which one of us may meet one of you who are
the parents of the dead. And the care of you which the city
shows, you know yourselves; for she has made provision by
law concerning the parents and children of those who die in
war; the highest authority is specially entrusted with the 249
duty of watching over them above all other citizens, and they
will see that your fathers and mothers have no wrong done
to them. The city herself shares in the education of the
children, desiring as far as it is possible that their orphanhood
may not be felt by them; while they are children she is
a parent to them, and when they have arrived at man’s estate
she sends them to their several duties, in full armour clad;
and bringing freshly to their minds the ways of their fathers,
she places in their hands the instruments of their fathers’
virtues; for the sake of the omen, she would have them
from the first begin to rule over their own houses arrayed in
the strength and arms of their fathers. And as for the dead,
she never ceases honouring them, celebrating in common for
all rites which become the property of each; and in addition
to this, holding gymnastic and equestrian contests, and
musical festivals of every sort. She is to the dead in the
place of a son and heir, and to their sons in the place of a
father, and to their parents and elder kindred in the place of
a guardian—ever and always caring for them. Considering
this, you ought to bear your calamity the more gently; for
thus you will be most endeared to the dead and to the living,
and your sorrows will heal and be healed. And now do you
and all, having lamented the dead in common according to
the law, go your ways.

[Sidenote: _‘Aspasia must not be told of this speech.’_]

You have heard, Menexenus, the oration of Aspasia the
Milesian.

[Sidenote: This speech, Socrates, was not composed by Aspasia, but by yourself.]

_Men._ Truly, Socrates, I marvel that Aspasia, who is only
a woman, should be able to compose such a speech; she
must be a rare one.

_Soc._ Well, if you are incredulous, you may come with me
and hear her.

_Men._ I have often met Aspasia, Socrates, and know what
she is like.

_Soc._ Well, and do you not admire her, and are you not
grateful for her speech?

_Men._ Yes, Socrates, I am very grateful to her or to
him who told you, and still more to you who have told
me.

[Sidenote: _Menexenus promises to keep the secret._]

_Soc._ Very good. But you must take care not to tell of me,
and then at some future time I will repeat to you many other
excellent political speeches of hers.

_Men._ Fear not; only let me hear them, and I will keep
the secret.

_Soc._ Then I will keep my promise.

FOOTNOTES

[62] i. 9, 30; iii. 14, 11.

[63] Thucyd. ii. 35-46.

[64] Reading οὐ κεῖνται, or taking οὐκ before ἀναιρεθέντες with κεῖνται.

APPENDIX II.

[Sidenote: APPENDIX II.]

The two dialogues which are translated in the second appendix are not mentioned by Aristotle, or by any early authority, and have no claim to be ascribed to Plato. They are examples of Platonic dialogues to be assigned probably to the second or third generation after Plato, when his writings were well known at Athens and Alexandria. They exhibit considerable originality, and are remarkable for containing several thoughts of the sort which we suppose to be modern rather than ancient, and which therefore have a peculiar interest for us. The Second Alcibiades shows that the difficulties about prayer which have perplexed Christian theologians were not unknown among the followers of Plato. The Eryxias was doubted by the ancients themselves: yet it may claim the distinction of being, among all Greek or Roman writings, the one which anticipates in the most striking manner the modern science of political economy and gives an abstract form to some of its principal doctrines.

For the translation of these two dialogues I am indebted to my friend and secretary, Mr. Knight.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: _Characteristics, &c._]

That the Dialogue which goes by the name of the Second Alcibiades is a genuine writing of Plato will not be maintained by any modern critic, and was hardly believed by the ancients themselves. The dialectic is poor and weak. There is no power over language, or beauty of style; and there is a certain abruptness and ἀγροικία in the conversation, which is very un-Platonic. The best passage is probably that about the poets, p. 147:—the remark that the poet, who is of a reserved disposition, is uncommonly difficult to understand, and the ridiculous interpretation of Homer, are entirely in the spirit of Plato (cp. Protag. 339 foll.; Ion 534; Apol. 22 D). The characters are ill-drawn. Socrates assumes the ‘superior person’ and preaches too much, while Alcibiades is stupid and heavy-in-hand. There are traces of Stoic influence in the general tone and phraseology of the Dialogue (cp. 138 B, ὅπως μὴ λήσει τις ... κακά: 139 C, ὅτι πᾶς ἄφρων μαίνεται) and the writer seems to have been acquainted with the ‘Laws’ of Plato (cp. Laws 3. 687, 688; 7. 801; 11. 931 B). An incident from the Symposium (213 E) is rather clumsily introduced (151 A), and two somewhat hackneyed quotations (Symp. 174 D, Gorg. 484 E) recur at 140 A and 146 A. The reference to the death of Archelaus as having occurred ‘quite lately’ (141 D) is only a fiction, probably suggested by the Gorgias, 470 D, where the story of Archelaus is told, and a similar phrase occurs,—τὰ γὰρ ἐχθὲς καὶ πρώην γεγονότα ταῦτα, κ.τ.λ. There are several passages which are either corrupt or extremely ill-expressed (see pp. 144, 145, 146, 147, 150). But there is a modern interest in the subject of the dialogue; and it is a good example of a short spurious work, which may be attributed to the second or third century before Christ.

ALCIBIADES II.

_PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE._

SOCRATES and ALCIBIADES.

[Sidenote: _Alcibiades II._]

_Soc._ Are you going, Alcibiades, to offer prayer to
Zeus? =Steph.= 138

_Al._ Yes, Socrates, I am.

_Soc._ You seem to be troubled and to cast your eyes on the
ground, as though you were thinking about something.

_Al._ Of what do you suppose that I am thinking?

_Soc._ Of the greatest of all things, as I believe. Tell me,
do you not suppose that the Gods sometimes partly grant
and partly reject the requests which we make in public and
private, and favour some persons and not others?

_Al._ Certainly.

[Sidenote: The danger of a prayer which is ill-advised.]

_Soc._ Do you not imagine, then, that a man ought to be
very careful, lest perchance without knowing it he implore
great evils for himself, deeming that he is asking for good,
especially if the Gods are in the mood to grant whatever he
may request? There is the story of Oedipus, for instance,
who prayed that his children might divide their inheritance
between them by the sword: he did not, as he might have
done, beg that his present evils might be averted, but called
down new ones. And was not his prayer accomplished, and
did not many and terrible evils thence arise, upon which
I need not dilate?

_Al._ Yes, Socrates, but you are speaking of a madman:
surely you do not think that any one in his senses would
venture to make such a prayer?

_Soc._ Madness, then, you consider to be the opposite of
discretion?

_Al._ Of course.

[Sidenote: _Do opposites admit of intermediates?_]

_Soc._ And some men seem to you to be discreet, and others
the contrary?

_Al._ They do.

_Soc._ Well, then, let us discuss who these are. We acknowledge
that some are discreet, some foolish, and that
some are mad?

_Al._ Yes.

_Soc._ And again, there are some who are in health?

_Al._ There are.

_Soc._ While others are ailing?

_Al._ Yes. 139

_Soc._ And they are not the same?

_Al._ Certainly not.

_Soc._ Nor are there any who are in neither state?

_Al._ No.

_Soc._ A man must either be sick or be well?

_Al._ That is my opinion.

[Sidenote: Alcibiades first denies and afterwards admits]

_Soc._ Very good: and do you think the same about discretion
and want of discretion?

_Al._ How do you mean?

_Soc._ Do you believe that a man must be either in or out of
his senses; or is there some third or intermediate condition,
in which he is neither one nor the other?

_Al._ Decidedly not.

_Soc._ He must be either sane or insane?

_Al._ So I suppose.

_Soc._ Did you not acknowledge that madness was the
opposite of discretion?

_Al._ Yes.

_Soc._ And that there is no third or middle term between
discretion and indiscretion?

_Al._ True.

_Soc._ And there cannot be two opposites to one thing?

_Al._ There cannot.

_Soc._ Then madness and want of sense are the same?

_Al._ That appears to be the case.

[Sidenote: _Some elementary questions of logic._]

_Soc._ We shall be in the right, therefore, Alcibiades, if we
say that all who are senseless are mad. For example, if
among persons of your own age or older than yourself there
are some who are senseless,—as there certainly are,—they are
mad. For tell me, by heaven, do you not think that in the
city the wise are few, while the foolish, whom you call mad,
are many?

_Al._ I do.

[Sidenote: that differences of kind do not exclude differences of degree.]

_Soc._ But how could we live in safety with so many crazy
people? Should we not long since have paid the penalty at
their hands, and have been struck and beaten and endured
every other form of ill-usage which madmen are wont to
inflict? Consider, my dear friend: may it not be quite
otherwise?

_Al._ Why, Socrates, how is that possible? I must have
been mistaken.

_Soc._ So it seems to me. But perhaps we may consider
the matter thus:—

_Al._ How?

_Soc._ I will tell you. We think that some are sick; do we
not?

_Al._ Yes.

[Sidenote: The sick may have many kinds of sickness; so there are different kinds of want of sense.]

_Soc._ And must every sick person either have the gout, or
be in a fever, or suffer from ophthalmia? Or do you believe
that a man may labour under some other disease, even
although he has none of these complaints? Surely, they are
not the only maladies which exist?

_Al._ Certainly not.

_Soc._ And is every kind of ophthalmia a disease?

_Al._ Yes.

_Soc._ And every disease ophthalmia?

_Al._ Surely not. But I scarcely understand what I mean
myself.

_Soc._ Perhaps, if you give me your best attention, ‘two of 140
us’ looking together, we may find what we seek.

_Al._ I am attending, Socrates, to the best of my power.

_Soc._ We are agreed, then, that every form of ophthalmia is
a disease, but not every disease ophthalmia?

_Al._ We are.

_Soc._ And so far we seem to be right. For every one who
suffers from a fever is sick; but the sick, I conceive, do not
all have fever or gout or ophthalmia, although each of these is
a disease, which, according to those whom we call physicians,
may require a different treatment. They are not all alike,
nor do they produce the same result, but each has its own
effect, and yet they are all diseases. May we not take an
illustration from the artizans?

[Sidenote: _Illustrations of genera and species._]

_Al._ Certainly.

_Soc._ There are cobblers and carpenters and sculptors and
others of all sorts and kinds, whom we need not stop to
enumerate. All have their distinct employments and all are
workmen, although they are not all of them cobblers or carpenters
or sculptors.

_Al._ No, indeed.

_Soc._ And in like manner men differ in regard to want of
sense. Those who are most out of their wits we call ‘madmen,’
while we term those who are less far gone ‘stupid’ or
‘idiotic,’ or, if we prefer gentler language, describe them as
‘romantic’ or ‘simple-minded,’ or, again, as ‘innocent’ or
‘inexperienced’ or ‘foolish.’ You may even find other
names, if you seek for them; but by all of them lack of sense
is intended. They only differ as one art appeared to us to
differ from another or one disease from another. Or what is
your opinion?

_Al._ I agree with you.

_Soc._ Then let us return to the point at which we digressed.
We said at first that we should have to consider
who were the wise and who the foolish. For we acknowledged
that there are these two classes? Did we not?

_Al._ To be sure.

_Soc._ And you regard those as sensible who know what
ought to be done or said?

_Al._ Yes.

_Soc._ The senseless are those who do not know this?

_Al._ True.

_Soc._ The latter will say or do what they ought not without
their own knowledge?

_Al._ Exactly.

[Sidenote: Men often, like Oedipus, pray unadvisedly.]

[Sidenote: _The desire for good is sometimes really evil._]