← catalogue

The Works of the Emperor Julian, Vol. 2

by Emperor of Rome Julian · English · Gutenberg #48768 · 743,454 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Works of the Emperor Julian, Vol. 2
    
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Works of the Emperor Julian, Vol. 2

Author: Emperor of Rome Julian

Translator: Wilmer Cave Wright


        
Release date: April 24, 2015 [eBook #48768]
                Most recently updated: June 15, 2020

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48768


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE WORKS OF THE EMPEROR JULIAN, VOL. 2 ***





                     The Works of the Emperor Julian

                                 Volume 2

                      With an English Translation by

                            Wilmer Cave Wright

                         Harvard University Press

                         Cambridge, Massachusetts

                                   1913





CONTENTS


Oration VI
   Introduction to Oration VI
Oration VII
   Introduction to Oration VII
Oration VIII
   Introduction to Oration VIII
Letter to Themistius the Philosopher
   Introduction
Letter to the Senate and People of Athens
   Introduction
Fragment of a Letter to a Priest
   Introduction
The Caesars
   Introduction
Misopogon, Or, Beard‐Hater
   Introduction
Index
Footnotes






                               [Cover Art]

[Transcriber’s Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter
at Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public domain.]





ORATION VI




Introduction to Oration VI


The Sixth Oration is a sermon or rather a scolding addressed to the New
Cynics, and especially to one of their number who had ventured to defame
the memory of Diogenes. In the fourth Christian century the Cynic mode of
life was adopted by many, but the vast majority were illiterate men who
imitated the Cynic shamelessness of manners but not the genuine
discipline, the self‐sufficiency (αὐτάρκεια) which had ennobled the lives
of Antisthenes, Diogenes and Crates. To the virtues of these great men
Julian endeavours to recall the worthless Cynics of his day. In the two
centuries that had elapsed since Lucian wrote, for the edification of
degenerate Cynics,(1) the Life of the Cynic Demonax, the dignified and
witty friend of Epictetus, the followers of that sect had still further
deteriorated. The New Cynics may be compared with the worst type of
mendicant friar of the Middle Ages; and Julian saw in their assumption of
the outward signs of Cynicism, the coarse cloak, the staff and wallet, and
long hair, the same hypocrisy and greed that characterised certain of the
Christian monks of his day.(2) The resemblances between the Christians and
the Cynics had already been pointed out by Aristides,(3) and while in
Julian’s eyes they were equally impious, he has an additional grievance
against the Cynics in that they brought discredit on philosophy. Like the
Christians they were unlettered, they were disrespectful to the gods whom
Julian was trying to restore, they had flattered and fawned on
Constantius, and far from practising the austerities of Diogenes they were
no better than parasites on society.

In this as in the Seventh Oration Julian’s aim is to reform the New
Cynics, but still more to demonstrate the essential unity of philosophy.
He sympathised profoundly with the tenets of Cynicism, and ranked Diogenes
with Socrates as a moral teacher. He reminds the Cynics whom he satirises
that the famous admonition of Diogenes to “countermark”(4) or “forge” a
new coinage is not to be taken as an excuse for license and impudence, but
like the Delphic precept “Know Thyself” warns all philosophers to accept
no traditional authority, no convention that has not been examined and
approved by the reason of the individual. His conviction that all
philosophical tenets are in harmony if rightly understood, gives a
peculiar earnestness to his Apologia for Diogenes. The reference in the
first paragraph to the summer solstice seems to indicate that the Oration
was written before Julian left Constantinople in order to prepare for the
Persian campaign.

[Transcriber’s Note: The original book had pages with Greek on the left
page and the corresponding English translation on the facing right page.
In this e‐book, each Greek paragraph will be immediately followed by the
English translation paragraph, surrounded in parentheses. The Greek text
contains markings such as [3] and [B]; they are section and sub‐section
markings that in the original book were in the right margin. These are
different from numbers within parentheses such as (10), which are used as
footnote references in some e‐book formats.]




ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Emperor)

ΕΙΣ ΤΟΥΣ ΑΠΑΙΔΕΥΤΟΥΣ ΚΥΝΑΣ

(To the Uneducated Cynics)

Ἄνω ποταμῶν, τοῦτο δὴ τὸ τῆς παροιμίας. ἀνὴρ Κυνικὸς Διογένη φησί
κενόδοξον, καὶ ψυχρολουτεῖν οὐ βούλεται, σφόδρα ἐρρωμένος τὸ σῶμα καὶ
σφριγῶν [181] καὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν ἀκμάζων, ὡς ἂν μή τι κακὸν λάβῃ, καὶ ταῦτα
τοῦ θεοῦ ταῖς θεριναῖς τροπαῖς ἤδη προσιόντος. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν ἐδωδὴν τοῦ
πολύποδος κωμῳδεῖ καί φησι τὸν Διογένη τῆς ἀνοίας καὶ κενοδοξίας
ἐκτετικέναι ἱκανὰς(5) δίκας ὥσπερ ὑπὸ κωνείου τῆς τροφῆς διαφθαρέντα. οὕτω
πόρρω που σοφίας ἐλαύνει, ὥστε ἐπίσταται σαφῶς ὅτι κακὸν ὁ θάνατος. τοῦτο
δὲ ἀγνοεῖν ὑπελάμβανεν ὁ σοφὸς Σωκράτης, ἀλλὰ καὶ μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον Διογένης.
ἀρρωστοῦντι γοῦν, φασίν, ἀντισθένει μακρὰν καὶ δυσανάληπτον ἀρρωστίαν
ξιφίδιον ἐπέδωκεν ὁ Διογένης εἰπών· [B] εἰ φίλου χρῄζεις ὑπουργίας. οὕτως
οὐδὲν ᾤετο δεινὸν ἐκεῖνος οὐδὲ ἀλγεινὸν τὸν θάνατον. ἀλλ᾽ ἡμεῖς οἱ τὸ
σκῆπτρον ἐκεῖθεν παραλαβόντες ὑπὸ μείζονος σοφίας ἴσμεν ὅτι χαλεπὸν ὁ
θάνατος, καὶ τὸ νοσεῖν δεινότερον αὐτοῦ φαμεν(6) τοῦ θανάτου, τὸ ῥιγοῦν δὲ
χαλεπώτερον τοῦ νοσεῖν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ νοσῶν μαλακῶς ἔσθ᾽ ὅτε θεραπεύεται, ὥστε
γίνεσθαι τρυφὴν αὐτόχρημα τὴν ἀρρωστίαν, ἄλλως τε κἂν ᾖ πλούσιος. [C]
ἐθεασάμην τοι καὶ αὐτὸς νὴ Δία τρυφώντάς τινας ἐν ταῖς νόσοις μᾶλλον ἢ
τούτους αὐτοὺς ὑγιαίνοντας· καίτοι γε καὶ τότε λαμπρῶς ἐτρύφων. ὅθεν μοι
καὶ παρέστη πρός τινας τῶν ἑταίρων εἰπεῖν, ὡς τούτοις ἄμεινον ἦν οἰκέταις
γενέσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ δεσπόταις, καὶ πένεσθαι τοῦ κρίνου γυμνοτέροις οὖσιν ἢ
πλουτεῖν ὥσπερ νῦν. ἦ γὰρ ἂν ἐπαύσαντο νοσοῦντες ἅμα καὶ τρυφῶντες. [D] τὸ
μὲν δὴ νοσοτυφεῖν καὶ νοσηλεύεσθαι τρυφηλῶς οὑτωσί τινες ἐν καλῷ
ποιοῦνται· ἀνὴρ δὲ τοῦ κρύους ἀνεχόμενος καὶ θάλπος καρτερῶν οὐχὶ καὶ τῶν
νοσούντων ἀθλιώτερον πράττει; ἀλγεῖ γοῦν ἀπαραμύθητα.

(Behold the rivers are flowing backwards,(7) as the proverb says! Here is
a Cynic who says that Diogenes(8) was conceited, and who refuses to take
cold baths for fear they may injure him, though he has a very strong
constitution and is lusty and in the prime of life, and this too though
the Sun‐god is now nearing the summer solstice. Moreover he even ridicules
the eating of octopus and says that Diogenes paid a sufficient penalty for
his folly and vanity in that he perished of this diet(9) as though by a
draught of hemlock. So far indeed is he advanced in wisdom that he knows
for certain that death is an evil. Yet this even the wise Socrates thought
he did not know, yes and after him Diogenes as well. At any rate when
Antisthenes(10) was suffering from a long and incurable illness Diogenes
handed him a dagger with these words, “In case you need the aid of a
friend.” So convinced was he that there is nothing terrible or grievous in
death. But we who have inherited his staff know out of our greater wisdom
that death is a calamity. And we say that sickness is even more terrible
than death, and cold harder to bear than sickness. For the man who is sick
is often tenderly nursed, so that his ill‐health is straightway converted
into a luxury, especially if he be rich. Indeed I myself, by Zeus, have
observed that certain persons are more luxurious in sickness than in
health, though even in health they were conspicuous for luxury. And so it
once occurred to me to say to certain of my friends that it were better
for those men to be servants than masters, and to be poor and more naked
than the lily of the field(11) than to be rich as they now are. For they
would have ceased being at once sick and luxurious. The fact is that some
people think it a fine thing to make a display of their ailments and to
play the part of luxurious invalids. But, says someone, is not a man who
has to endure cold and to support heat really more miserable than the
sick? Well, at any rate he has no comforts to mitigate his sufferings.)

Δεῦρο οὖν ἡμεῖς ὑπὲρ τῶν Κυνικῶν ὁπόσα διδασκάλων ἠκούσαμεν ἐν κοινῷ
καταθῶμεν σκοπεῖν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὸν βίον ἰοῦσι τοῦτον· οἷς εἰ μὲν πεισθεῖεν, εὖ
οἶδα, [182] οὐδὲν οἵ γε νῦν ἐπιχειροῦντες κυνίζειν ἔσονται χείρους·
ἀπειθοῦντες δὲ εἰ μέν τι λαμπρὸν καὶ σεμνὸν ἐπιτηδεύσειαν, ὑπερφωνοῦντες
τὸν λόγον τὸν ἡμέτερον, οὔτι τοῖς ῥήμασιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἔργοις, οὐδὲν ἐμπόδιον
ὃ γε ἡμέτερος οἴσει λόγος· εἰ δὲ ὑπὸ λιχνείας ἢ μαλακίας ἤ, τὸ κεφάλαιον
ἵν᾽ εἴπω ξυνελὲν ἐν βραχεῖ, τῆς σωματικῆς ἡδονῆς δεδουλωμένοι τῶν λόγων
ὀλιγωρήσειαν προσκαταγελάσαντες, [B] ὥσπερ ἐνίοτε τῶν παιδευτηρίων καὶ τῶν
δικαστηρίων οἱ κύνες τοῖς προπυλαίοις προσουροῦσιν, οὐ φροντὶς Ἰπποκλείδῃ·
καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ τῶν κυνιδίων ἡμῖν μέλει τὰ τοιαῦτα πλημμελούντων. δεῦρο οὖν
ἄνωθεν ἐν κεφαλαίοις διεξέλθωμεν ἐφεξῆς τὸν λόγον, ἵνα ὑπὲρ ἑκάστου τὸ
προσῆκον ἀποδιδόντες αὐτοί τε εὐκολώτερον ἀπεργασώμεθα τοῦθ᾽ ὅπερ
διενοήθημεν καὶ σοὶ ποιήσωμεν εὐπαρακολούθητον. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ [C] τὸν
κυνισμὸν εἶδός τι φιλοσοφίας εἶναι συμβέβηκεν, οὔτι φαυλότατον οὐδὲ
ἀτιμότατον, ἀλλὰ τοῖς κρατίστοις ἀνάμιλλον, ὀλίγα πρότερον ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς
ῥητέον ἡμῖν ἐστι τῆς φιλοσοφίας.

(Come now, let me set down for the benefit of the public what I learned
from my teachers about the Cynics, so that all who are entering on this
mode of life may consider it. And if they are convinced by what I say,
those who are now aiming to be Cynics will, I am sure, be none the worse
for it: and if they are unconvinced but cherish aims that are brilliant
and noble, and set themselves above my argument not in words only but in
deeds, then my discourse will at any rate put no hindrance in their way.
But if there are others already enslaved by greed or self‐indulgence, or
to sum it up briefly in a single phrase, by the pleasures of the body, and
they therefore neglect my words or even laugh them down—just as dogs
sometimes defile the front porticoes of schools and law‐courts,—“’Tis all
one to Hippocleides,”(12) for indeed we take no notice of puppies who
behave in this fashion. Come then let me pursue my argument under headings
from the beginning in due order, so that by giving every question its
proper treatment I may myself more conveniently achieve what I have in
mind and may make it more easy for you also to follow. And since it is a
fact that Cynicism is a branch of philosophy, and by no means the most
insignificant or least honourable, but rivalling the noblest, I must first
say a few words about philosophy itself.)

Ἡ τῶν θεῶν εἰς ἀνθρώπους δόσις ἅμα φανοτάτῳ πυρὶ διὰ Προμηθέως
καταπεμφθεῖσα(13) ἐξ ἡλίου μετὰ τῆς Ἑρμοῦ μερίδος οὐχ ἕτερον ἐστι παρὰ τὴν
τοῦ λόγου καὶ νοῦ διανομήν· ὁ γάρ τοι Προμηθεύς, ἡ πάντα ἐπιτροπεύουσα τὰ
θνητὰ πρόνοια, [D] πνεῦμα ἔνθερμον ὥσπερ ὄργανον ὑποβάλλουσα τῇ φύσει,
ἅπασι μετέδωκεν ἀσωμάτου λόγου· μετέσχε δὲ ἕκαστον οὗπερ ἠδύνατο, τὰ μὲν
ἄψυχα σώματα τῆς ἕξεως μόνον, τὰ φυτὰ δὲ ἤδη καὶ τῆς ζωῆς(14) τὰ ζῷα δὲ
ψυχῆς, ὁ δὲ ἄνθρωπος καὶ λογικῆς ψυχῆς. εἰσὶ μὲν οὖν οἳ μίαν οὄονται διὰ
τούτων πάντων ἥκειν φύσιν, εἰσὶ δὲ οἱ καὶ κατ᾽ εἶδος ταῦτα διαφέρειν. ἀλλὰ
μήπω τοῦτο, μᾶλλον δὲ μηδὲ ἐν τῷ νῦν λόγῳ τοῦτο ἐξεταζέσθω, πλὴν ἐκείνου
χάριν, [183] ὅτι, τὴν φιλοσοφίαν εἴθ᾽, ὥσπερ τινὲς ὑπολαμβάνουσι, τέχνην
τεχνῶν καὶ ἐπιστήμην ἐπιστημῶν, εἴτε ὁμοίωσιν θεῷ(15) κατὰ τὸ δυνατόν,
εἴθ᾽, ὅπερ ὁ Πύθιος ἔφη, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ὑπολάβοι τις, οὐδὲν διοίσει πρὸς
τὸν λόγον· ἅπαντα γὰρ ταῦτα φαίνεται πρὸς ἄλληλα καὶ μάλα οἰκείως ἔχοντα.

(The gift of the gods sent down to mankind with the glowing flame of
fire(16) from the sun through the agency of Prometheus along with the
blessings that we owe to Hermes(17) is no other than the bestowal of
reason and mind. For Prometheus, the Forethought that guides all things
mortal by infusing into nature a fiery breath to serve as an operative
cause, gave to all things a share in incorporeal reason. And each thing
took what share it could; lifeless bodies only a state of existence;
plants received life besides, and animals soul, and man a reasoning soul.
Now some think that a single substance is the basis of all these, and
others that they differ essentially according to their species. But this
question we must not discuss as yet, or rather not at all in the present
discourse, and we need only say that whether one regards philosophy, as
some people do, as the art of arts and the science of sciences or as an
effort to become like God, as far as one may, or whether, as the Pythian
oracle said, it means “Know thyself,” will make no difference to my
argument. For all these definitions are evidently very closely related to
one another.)

Ἀρξώμεθα δὲ πρῶτον ἀπὸ τοῦ Γνῶθι σαυτόν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ θεῖόν ἐστι τοῦτο τὸ
παρακέλευσμα. οὐκοῦν ὁ γιγνώσκων [B] αὑτὸν εἴσεται μὲν περὶ ψυχῆς, εἴσεται
δὲ καὶ περὶ σώματος. καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀρκέσει μόνον, ὡς ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος ψυχὴ
χρωμένη σώματι, μαθεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς ψυχῆς ἐπελεύσεται τὴν οὐσίαν,
ἔπειτα ἀνιχνεύσει τὰς δυνάμεις. καὶ οὐδὲ τοῦτο μόνον ἀρκέσει αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ
καί, εἴ τι τῆς ψυχῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστι κρεῖττον καὶ θειότερον, ὅπερ δὴ πάντες
ἀδιδάκτως πειθόμενοι θεῖόν τι εἶναι νομίζομεν, [C] καὶ τοῦτο ἐνιδρῦσθαι
πάντες οὐρανῷ κοινῶς ὑπολαμβάνομεν. ἐπιὼν δὲ αὖθις τὰς ἀρχὰς τοῦ σώματος
σκέψεται, εἴτε σύνθετον εἴτε ἁπλοῦν ἐστιν· εἶτα ὁδῷ προβαίνων ὑπέρ τε
ἁρμονίας αὐτοῦ καὶ πάθους καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ πάντων ἁπλῶς ὧν δεῖται πρὸς
διαμονήν. ἐπιβλέψει δὲ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἀρχαῖς τεχνῶν ἐνίων, ὑφ᾽ ὧν
βοηθεῖται πρὸς διαμονὴν τὸ σῶμα, οἷον ἰατρικῆς, [D] γεωργίας, ἑτέρων
τοιούτων. οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ τῶν ἀχρήστων καὶ περιττῶν τι παντάπασιν ἀγνοήσει,
ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτα(18) πρὸς κολακείαν τοῦ παθητικοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν
ἐπινενόηται. προσλιπαρῆσαι μὲν γὰρ τούτοις ἀποκνήσει αἰσχρὸν οἰόμενος τὸ
τοιοῦτον, τὸ δοκοῦν ἐργῶδες ἐν αὐτοῖς φεύγων· τὸ δ᾽ ὅλον ὁποῖα ἄττα δοκεῖ
καὶ οἷστισιν ἁρμόττει τῆς ψυχῆς μέρεσιν, οὐκ ἀγνοήσει. σκόπει δή, εἰ μὴ τὸ
ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι πάσης μὲν ἐπιστήμης, πάσης δὲ τέχνης ἡγεῖταί τε ἅμα καὶ τοὺς
καθόλου λόγους συνείληφε. [184] τά τε γὰρ θεῖα διὰ τῆς ἐνούσης ἡμῖν θείας
μερίδος τά τε θνητὰ διὰ τῆς θνητοειδοῦς μοίρας πρὸς τούτοις †προσήκειν ἔφη
τὸ μεταξὺ τούτων ζῷον εἰδέναι, τὸν ἄνθρωπον†,(19) τῷ μὲν καθ᾽ ἕκαστον
θνητόν, τῷ παντὶ δὲ ἀθάνατον, καὶ μέντοι καὶ τὸν ἕνα καὶ τὸν καθ᾽ ἕκαστον
συγκεῖσθαι ἐκ θνητῆς καὶ ἀθανάτου μερίδος.

(However, let us begin with “Know thyself,” since this precept is divinely
inspired.(20) It follows that he who knows himself will know not only
about his soul but his body also. And it will not be enough to know that a
man is a soul employing a body, but he will also investigate the essential
nature of the soul, and then trace out its faculties. And not even this
alone will be enough for him, but in addition he will investigate whatever
exists in us nobler and more divine than the soul, that something which we
all believe in without being taught and regard as divine, and all in
common suppose to be established in the heavens. Then again, as he
investigates the first principles of the body he will observe whether it
is composite or simple; then proceeding systematically he will observe its
harmony and the influences that affect it and its capacity and, in a word,
all that it needs to ensure its permanence. And in the next place he will
also observe the first principles of certain arts by which the body is
assisted to that permanence, for instance, medicine, husbandry and the
like. And of such arts as are useless and superfluous he will not be
wholly ignorant, since these too have been devised to humour the emotional
part of our souls. For though he will avoid the persistent study of these
last, because he thinks such persistent study disgraceful, and will avoid
what seems to involve hard work in those subjects; nevertheless he will
not, generally speaking, remain in ignorance of their apparent nature and
what parts of the soul they suit. Reflect therefore, whether self‐
knowledge does not control every science and every art, and moreover
whether it does not include the knowledge of universals. For to know
things divine through the divine part in us, and mortal things too through
the part of us that is mortal—this the oracle declared to be the duty of
the living organism that is midway between these, namely man; because
individually he is mortal, but regarded as a whole he is immortal, and
moreover, singly and individually, is compounded of a mortal and an
immortal part.)

Ὅτι μέντοι καὶ τὸ τῷ θεῲ κατὰ δύναμιν ὁμοιοῦσθαι οὐκ ἄλλο τί ἐστιν ἢ τὸ
τὴν ἐφικτὴν ἀνθρώποις γνῶσιν τῶν ὄντων περιποιήσασθαι, πρόδηλον ἐντεῦθεν.
[B] οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ πλούτῳ χρημάτων τὸ θεῖον μακαρίζομεν οὐδὲ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τῶν
νομιζομένων ἀγαθῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπερ Ὅμηρός φησι

(Further, that to make oneself like God as far as possible is nothing else
than to acquire such knowledge of the essential nature of things as is
attainable by mankind, is evident from the following. It is not on the
score of abundance of possessions that we count the divine nature happy,
nor on the score of any other of those things that are commonly believed
to be advantages, but it is because, as Homer says,)


    θεοὶ δέ τε πάντα ἴσασι,

    (“The gods know all things”;(21))


καὶ μέντοι καὶ περὶ Διὸς

(and indeed he says also of Zeus,)


    ἀλλὰ Ζεὺς πρότερος γεγόνει καὶ πλείονα ᾔδει·

    (“But Zeus was older and wiser.”(22))


[C] ἐπιστήμῃ γὰρ ἡμῶν οἱ θεοὶ διαφέρουσιν. ἡγεῖται γὰρ ἴσως καὶ αὐτοῖς τῶν
καλῶν τὸ αὑτοὺς γινώσκειν· ὄσῳ δὴ κρείττονες ἡμῶν εἰσι τὴν οὐσίαν, τοσούτῳ
γνόντες ἑαυτοὺς ἴσχουσι βελτιόνων γνώσιν. μηδεὶς οὖν ἡμῖν τὴν φιλοσοφίαν
εἰς πολλὰ διαιρείτω μηδὲ εἰς πολλὰ τεμνέτω, μᾶλλον δὲ μὴ πολλὰς ἐκ μιᾶς
ποιείτω. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἀλήθεια μία, οὕτω δὲ καὶ φιλοσοφία μία· θαυμαστὸν δὲ
οὐδέν, εἰ κατ᾽ ἄλλας καὶ ἄλλας ὁδοὺς ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν πορευόμεθα. ἐπεὶ κἄν, [D]
εἴ τις θέλοι τὼν ξένων ἢ ναὶ μὰ Δία τῶν πάλαι πολιτῶν ἐπανελθεῖν εἰς
Ἀθήνας, δύναιτο μὲν καὶ πλεῖν καὶ βαδίζειν, ὁδεύων δὲ οἶμαι διὰ γῆς ἢ ταῖς
πλατείαις χρῆσθαι λεωφόροις ἢ ταῖς ἀτραποῖς καὶ συντόμοις ὁδοῖς· καὶ πλεῖν
μέντοι δυνατὸν παρὰ τοὺς αἰγιαλούς, καὶ δὴ καὶ κατὰ τὸν Πύλιον γέροντα
τέμνοντα πέλαγος μέσον. μὴ δὲ τοῦτό τις ἡμῖν προφερέτω, εἴ τινες τῶν κατ᾽
αὐτὰς ἰόντων τὰς ὁδοὺς ἀπεπλανήθησαν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ που γενόμενοι, [185]
καθάπερ ὑπὸ τῆς Κίρκης ἢ τῶν Λωτοφάγων ἡδονῆς ἢ δόξης ᾿ἤ τινος ἄλλου
δελεασθέντες, ἀπελείφθησαν τοῦ πρόσω βαδίζειν καὶ ἐφικνεῖσθαι τοῦ τέλους,
τοὺς πρωτεύσαντας δὲ ἐν ἑκάστῃ τῶν αἱρέσεων σκοπείτω, καὶ πάντα εὑρήσει
σύμφωνα.

(For it is in knowledge that the gods surpass ourselves. And it may well
be that with them also what ranks as noblest is self‐knowledge. In
proportion then as they are nobler than we in their essential nature, that
self‐knowledge of theirs is a knowledge of higher things. Therefore, I
say, let no one divide philosophy into many kinds or cut it up into many
parts, or rather let no one make it out to be plural instead of one. For
even as truth is one, so too philosophy is one. But it is not surprising
that we travel to it now by one road, now by another. For if any stranger,
or, by Zeus, any one of her oldest inhabitants wished to go up to Athens,
he could either sail or go by road, and if he travelled by land he could,
I suppose, take either the broad highways or the paths and roads that are
short cuts. And moreover he could either sail along the coasts or, like
the old man of Pylos,(23) “cleave the open sea.” And let no one try to
refute me by pointing out that some philosophers in travelling by those
very roads have been known to lose their way, and arriving in some other
place have been captivated, as though by Circe or the Lotus‐Eaters, that
is to say by pleasure or opinion or some other bait, and so have failed to
go straight forward and attain their goal. Rather he must consider those
who in every one of the philosophic sects did attain the highest rank, and
he will find that all their doctrines agree.)

Οὐκοῦν ὁ μὲν ἐν Δελφοῖς θεὸς τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν προαγορεύει, Ἡράκλειτος δὲ
“ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν,” ἀλλὰ καὶ Πυθαγόρας οἵ τε ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνου μέχρι
Θεοφράστου τὸ κατὰ δύναμιν ὁμοιοῦσθαι θεῷ φασι, καὶ γὰρ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης. ὃ
γὰρ ἡμεῖς ποτέ, τοῦτο ὁ θεὸς ἀεί. γελοῖον οὖν ἂν εἴη τὸν θεὸν ἑαυτὸν μὴ
εἰδέναι· κομιδῇ γὰρ οὐδὲν εἴσεται τῶν ἄλλων, εἴπερ ἑαυτὸν ἀγνοοίη· πάντα
γὰρ αὐτός ἐστιν, εἴπερ καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ἔχει τῶν ὁπωσοῦν ὄντων
τὰς αἰτίας, εἴτε ἀθανάτων ἀθανάτους, εἴτε ἐπικήρων οὐ θνητὰς οὐδὲ
ἐπικήρους, ἀιδίους δὲ καὶ μενούσας ἀεὶ καὶ αἳ τούτοις εἰσὶν αἰτίαι τῆς
ἀειγενεσίας. [C] ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος μὲν ὁ λόγος ἐστὶ μείζων.

(Therefore the god at Delphi proclaims, “Know Thyself,” and Heracleitus
says, “I searched myself”;(24) and Pythagoras also and his school and his
followers down to Theophrastus, bid us become like God as far as possible,
yes and Aristotle too. For what we are sometimes, God is always.(25) It
would therefore be absurd that God should not know himself. For he will
know nothing at all about other things if he be ignorant of himself. For
he is himself everything, seeing that in himself and near himself he keeps
the causes of all things that in any way whatever have existence, whether
they be immortal causes of things immortal, or causes of perishable
things, though themselves not mortal or perishable; for imperishable and
ever‐abiding are the causes of perpetual generation for the perishable
world. But this line of argument is too lofty for the occasion.)

Ὅτι δὲ μία τέ ἐστιν ἀλήθεια καὶ φιλοσοφία μία καὶ ταύτης εἰσὶν ἐρασταὶ
ξύμπαντες ὧν τε ὑπεμνήσθην μικρῷ πρότερον ὧν τε ἐν δίκῃ νῦν εἴποιμι ἂν
τοὔνομα, τοὺς τοῦ Κιτιέως ὁμιλητὰς λέγω, οἳ τὰς πόλεις ἰδόντες
ἀποδιδρασκούσας τὸ λίαν ἀκραιφνὲς καὶ καθαρὸν τῆς ἐλευθερίας τοῦ κυνὸς
ἐσκέπασαν αὐτὸν [D] ὥσπερ οἶμαι παραπετάσμασιν οἰκονομίᾳ καὶ τῇ
χρηματιστικῇ καὶ τῇ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα συνόδῳ καὶ παιδοτροφίᾳ, ἴν᾽ οἶμαι
ταῖς πόλεσιν αὐτὸν ἐγγύθεν ἐπιστήσωσι φύλακα· ὅτι δὲ τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν
κεφάλαιον τίθενται φιλοσοφίας, οὐ μόνον ἐξ ὧν κατεβάλλοντο ξυγγραμμάτων
ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦτου πεισθείης ἄν, εἴπερ ἐθέλοις, ἀλλὰ πολὺ πλέον ἀπὸ τοῦ τῆς
φιλοσοφίας τέλους· τὸ γὰρ ὁμολογουμένως [186] ζῆν τῇ φύσει τέλος
ἐποιήσαντο, οὗπερ οὐχ οἷόv τε τυχεῖν τὸν ἀγνοοῦντα, τίς καὶ ὁποῖος
πέφυκεν· ὁ γὰρ ἀγνοῶν ὅστις ἐστίν, οὐκ εἴσεται δήπουθεν ὅ, τι πράττειν
ἑαυτῷ προσήκει, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾽ ὁ(26) τὸν σίδηρον ἀγνοῶν εἴσεται, εἴτε αὐτῷ
τέμνειν εἴτε μὴ προσήκει, καὶ ὅτου δεῖ τῷ σιδήρῳ πρὸς τὸ δύνασθαι τὸ
ἑαυτοῦ πράττειν· ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὲν ἡ φιλοσοφία μία τέ ἐστι καὶ πάντες ὡς ἔπος
εἰπεῖν ἑνός τινος ἐφιέμενοι ὁδοῖς ἐπὶ τοῦτο διαφόροις ἦλθον, [B] ἀπόχρη
τοσαῦτα νῦν εἰπεῖν. ὑπὲρ δὲ τοῦ Κυνισμοῦ σκεπτέον ἔτι.(27)

(Now truth is one and philosophy is one, and they whom I just now spoke of
are its lovers one and all; and also they whom I ought in fairness to
mention now by name, I mean the disciples of the man of Citium.(28) For
when they saw that the cities of Greece were averse to the excessive
plainness and simplicity of the Cynic’s freedom of manners, they hedged
him about with screens as it were, I mean with maxims on the management of
the household and business and intercourse with one’s wife and the rearing
of children, to the end, I believe, that they might make him the intimate
guardian of the public welfare.(29) And that they too held the maxim “Know
Thyself” to be the first principle of their philosophy you may believe, if
you will, not only from the works that they composed on this very subject,
but even more from what they made the end and aim of their philosophic
teaching. For this end of theirs was life in harmony with nature, and this
it is impossible for any man to attain who does not know who and of what
nature he is. For a man who does not know himself will certainly not know
what it is becoming for him to do; just as he who does not know the nature
of iron will not know whether it is suitable to cut with or not, and how
iron must be treated so that it may be put to its proper use. For the
moment however I have said enough to show that philosophy is one, and
that, to speak generally, all philosophers have a single aim though they
arrive at that aim by different roads. And now let us consider the Cynic
philosophy.)

Εἰ μὲν οὖν ἐπεποίητο τοῖς ἀνδράσι μετά τινος σπουδῆς, ἀλλὰ μὴ μετὰ παιδιᾶς
τὰ συγγράμματα, τούτοις ἐχρῆν ἑπόμενον ἐπιχειρεῖν ἕκαστα ὧν διανοούμεθα
περὶ τοῦ πράγματος ἐξετάζειν τὸν ἐναντίον καὶ, εἰ μὲν ἐφαίνετο τοῖς
παλαιοῖς ὁμολογοῦντα, μήτοι ψευδομαρτυριῶν ἡμῖν ἐπισκήπτειν, εἰ δὲ μή,
τότε ἐξορίζειν αὐτὰ τῆς ἀκοῆς ὥσπερ Ἀθηναῖοι τὰ ψευδῆ γράμματα τοῦ
Μητρῴου. ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐδὲν ἐστιν, [C] ὡς ἔφην, τοιοῦτον· αἵ τε γὰρ θρυλούμεναι
Διογένους τραγῳδίαι Φιλίσκου τινὸς Αἰγινήτου λέγονται εἶναι, καί, εἰ
Διογένους δὴ(30) εἶεν, οὐδὲν ἄτοπόν ἐστι τὸν σοφὸν παίζειν, ἐπεί καὶ τοῦτο
πολλοὶ φαίνονται τῶν φιλοσόφων ποιήσαντες· ἐγέλα τοι, φασί, καὶ Δημόκριτος
ὁρῶν σπουδάζοντας τοὺς ἀνθρώπους· μὴ δὴ πρὸς τὰς παιδιὰς αὐτῶν
ἀποβλέπωμεν, ὥσπερ οἱ μανθάνειν τι [D] σπουδαῖον ἥκιστα ἐρῶντες, πόλει
παραβάλλοντες εὐδαίμονι, πολλῶν μὲν ἱερῶν, πολλῶν δὲ ἀπορρήτων τελετῶν
πλήρει, καὶ μυρίων ἔνδον ἱερέων ἁγνῶν ἐν ἁγνοῖς μενόντων χωρίοις· αὐτοῦ δὲ
ἕνεκα πολλάκις τούτου, λέγω δὲ τοῦ καθαρεύειν τὰ εἴσω πάντα, τὰ περιττὰ
καὶ βδελυρὰ καὶ φαῦλα τῆς πόλεως ἀπεληλακόσι,(31) λουτρὰ δημόσια καὶ
χαμαιτυπεῖα καὶ καπηλεῖα καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα· εἶτα ἄχρι τούτου
γενόμενοι εἴσω μὴ παρίασιν.(32) ὁ μὲν γὰρ τοῖς τοιούτοις ἐντυχών, [187]
εἶτα τοῦτο οἰηθεὶς εἶναι τὴν πόλιν ἄθλιος μὲν ἀποφυγών, ἀθλιώτερος δὲ κάτω
μείνας, ἐξὸν ὑπερβάντα μικρὸν ἰδεῖν τὸν Σωκράτη· χρήσομαι γὰρ ἐκείνοις ἐγὼ
τοῖς ῥήμασιν, οἷς Ἀλκιβιάδης ἐπαινῶν Σωκράτη. φημὶ γὰρ δὴ τὴν Κυνικὴν
φιλοσοφίαν ὁμοιοτάτην εἶναι τοῖς Σειληνοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ἐν τοῖς
ἑρμογλυφείοις καθημένοις, οὕστινας ἐργάζονται οἱ δημιουργοὶ σύριγγας ἢ
αὐλοὺς ἔχοντας· οἳ διχάδε(33) [B] διοιχθέντες ἔνδον φαίνονται ἀγάλματα
ἔχοντες θεῶν. ὡς ἂν οὖν μὴ τοιοῦτόν τι πάθωμεν, ὅσα ἔπαιξε ταῦτα αὐτὸν
ἐσπουδακέναι νομίσαντες· ἔστι μὲν γάρ τι καὶ ἐν ἐκείνοις οὐκ ἄχρηστον, ὁ
Κυνισμὸς δέ ἐστιν ἕτερον, ὡς αὐτίκα μάλα δεῖξαι πειράσομαι· δεῦρο ἴδωμεν
ἐφεξῆς ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων, ὥσπερ αἱ ἐξιχνεύουσαι κύνες μεταθέουσι τὰ θηρία.

(If the Cynics had composed treatises with any serious purpose and not
merely with a frivolous aim, it would have been proper for my opponent to
be guided by these and to try in each case to refute the opinions that I
hold on the subject; and then, if they proved to be in harmony with those
original doctrines, he could not attack me for bearing false witness; but
if they proved not to be in harmony, then he could have barred my opinions
from a hearing, as the Athenians barred spurious documents from the
Metroum.(34) But, as I said, nothing of that sort exists. For the much‐
talked‐of tragedies of Diogenes are now said to be the work of a certain
Philiscus(35) of Aegina; though even if they were by Diogenes there would
be nothing out of the way in a wise man’s jesting, since many philosophers
have been known to do so. For Democritus also, we are told, used to laugh
when he saw men taking things seriously. Well then I say we must not pay
any attention to their frivolous writings, like men who have no desire at
all to learn anything of serious interest. Such men when they arrive at a
prosperous city abounding in sacrifices and secret rites of many kinds,
and containing within it countless holy priests who dwell in the sacred
enclosures, priests who for this very purpose, I mean in order to purify
everything that is within their gates, have expelled all that is sordid
and superfluous and vicious from the city, public baths and brothels, and
retail shops, and everything of the sort without exception: such men, I
say, having come as far as the quarter where all such things are, do not
enter the city itself. Surely a man who, when he comes upon the things
that have been expelled, thinks that this is the city, is despicable
indeed if he depart on the instant, but still more despicable if he stay
in that lower region, when he might by taking but a step across the
threshold behold Socrates himself. For I will borrow those famous phrases
of Alcibiades in his praise of Socrates,(36) and I assert that the Cynic
philosophy is very like those images of Silenus that sit in the shops of
the statuaries, which the craftsmen make with pipes or flutes in their
hands, but when you open them you see that inside they contain statues of
the gods. Accordingly, that we may not make that sort of mistake and think
that his jesting was sober earnest (for though there is a certain use even
in those jests, yet Cynicism itself is something very different, as I
shall presently try to prove), let us consider it in due course from its
actual practice and pursue it like hounds that track down wild beasts in
the chase.)

Ἡγεμόνα μὲν οὖν οὐ ῥᾴδιον εὑρεῖν, ἐφ᾽ ὃν ἀνενέγκαι χρὴ πρῶτον αὐτό, [C] εἰ
καί τινες ὑπολαμβάνουσιν ἀντισθένει τοῦτο καὶ Διογένει προσήκειν. τοῦτο
γοῦν ἔοικεν Οἰνόμαος οὐκ ἀτόπως λέγειν· ὁ Κυνισμὸς οὔτε Ἀντισθενισμός
ἐστιν οὔτε Διογενισμός. λέγουσι μὲν γὰρ οἱ γενναιότεροι τῶν κυνῶν, ὅτι καὶ
ὁ μέγας Ἡρακλῆς, ὥσπερ οὖν τῶν ἄλλων ἀγαθῶν ἡμῖν(37) αἴτιος κατέστη, οὕτω
δὲ καὶ τούτου τοῦ βίου παράδειγμα τὸ μέγιστον(38) κατέλιπεν ἀνθρώποις. ἐγὼ
δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν θεῶν καὶ τῶν εἰς θείαν λῆξιν πορευθέντων εὐφημεῖν ἐθέλων [D]
πείθομαι μὲν καὶ πρὸ τούτου τινὰς οὐκ ἐν Ἕλλησι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βαρβάροις
οὕτω φιλοσοφῆσαι·(39) αὕτη γὰρ ἡ φιλοσοφία κοινή πως ἔοικεν εἶναι καὶ
φυσικωτάτη καὶ δεῖσθαι οὐδ᾽ ἡστινοσοῦν πραγματείας· ἀλλὰ ἀπόχρη μόνον
ἑλέσθαι τὰ σπουδαῖα ἀρετῆς ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ φυγῇ κακίας, καὶ οὔτε βίβλους
ἀνελίξαι δεῖ μυρίας· πολυμαθία γάρ, φασί, νόον οὐ διδάσκει· οὔτε ἄλλο τι
τῶν τοιούτων παθεῖν, ὅσα καὶ οἷα πάσχουσιν οἱ διὰ τῶν ἄλλων αἱρέσεων
ἰόντες, [188] ἀλλὰ ἀπόχρη μόνον δύο ταῦτα τοῦ Πυθίου παραινοῦντος ἀκοῦσαι,
τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν καὶ Παραχάραξον τὸ νόμισμα· πέφηνεν οὖν ἡμῖν ἀρχηγὸς τῆς
φιλοσοφίας ὅσπερ οἶμαι τοῖς Ἕλλησι κατέστη τῶν καλῶν ἁπάντων αἴτιος, ὁ τῆς
Ἑλλάδος κοινὸς ἡγεμὼν καὶ νομοθέτης καὶ βασιλεύς, ὁ ἐν Δελφοῖς θεός, ὃν
ἐπειδὴ μὴ θέμις ἦν τι διαλαθεῖν, οὐδὲ ἡ Διογένους ἐπιτηδειότης ἔλαθε.
προύτρεψε δὲ αὐτὸν οὐχ ὥσπερ τοὺς ἄλλους ἔπεσιν ἐντείνων τὴν παραίνεσιν,
[B] ἀλλ᾽ ἔργῳ διδάσκων ὅ,τι βούλεται συμβολικῶς διὰ δυοῖν ὀνομάτοιν,
Παραχάραξον εἰπὼν τὸ νόμισμα· τὸ γάρ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν οὐκ ἐκείνῳ μόνον,(40)
ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἔφη καὶ λέγει, πρόκειται γὰρ οἶμαι τοῦ τεμένους.
ηὑρήκαμεν δὴ τὸν ἀρχηγέτην τῆς φιλοσοφίας, ὥς που καὶ ὁ δαιμόνιός φησιν
Ἰάμβλιχος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς κορυφαίους ἐν αὐτῇ, Ἀντισθένη καὶ Διογένη καὶ
Κράτητα, οἷς τοῦ βίου σκοπὸς ἦν καὶ τέλος αὑτοὺς οἶμαι γνῶναι καὶ τῶν
κενῶν ὑπεριδεῖν δοξῶν, ἀληθείας δέ, ἣ πάντων μὲν ἀγαθῶν θεοῖς, πάντων δὲ
ἀνθρώποις ἡγεῖται, ὅλῃ, [C] φασίν, ἐπιδράξασθαι τῇ διανοίᾳ, ἧς οἶμαι καὶ
Πλάτων καὶ Πυθαγόρας καὶ Σωκράτης οἵ τε ἐκ τοῦ Περιπάτου καὶ Ζήνων ἕνεκα
πάντα ὑπέμειναν πόνον, αὑτούς τε ἐθέλοντες γνῶναι καὶ μὴ κεναῖς ἕπεσθαι
δόξαις, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἀλήθειαν ἀνιχνεῦσαι.

(Now the founder of this philosophy to whom we are to attribute it, in the
first instance, is not easy to discover, even though some think that the
title belongs to Antisthenes and Diogenes. At least the saying of
Oenomaus(41) seems to be not without good grounds: “The Cynic philosophy
is neither Antisthenism nor Diogenism.” Moreover the better sort of Cynics
assert that in addition to the other blessings bestowed on us by mighty
Heracles, it was he who bequeathed to mankind the noblest example of this
mode of life.(42) But for my part, while I desire to speak with due
reverence of the gods and of those who have attained to their functions, I
still believe that even before Heracles, not only among the Greeks but
among the barbarians also, there were men who practised this philosophy.
For it seems to be in some ways a universal philosophy, and the most
natural, and to demand no special study whatsoever. But it is enough
simply to choose the honourable by desiring virtue and avoiding evil; and
so there is no need to turn over countless books. For as the saying goes,
“Much learning does not teach men to have understanding.”(43) Nor is it
necessary to subject oneself to any part of such a discipline as they must
undergo who enter other philosophic sects. Nay it is enough merely to
hearken to the Pythian god when he enjoins these two precepts, “Know
Thyself,” and “Falsify the common currency.”(44) Hence it becomes evident
to us that the founder of this philosophy is he who, I believe, is the
cause of all the blessings that the Greeks enjoy, the universal leader,
law‐giver and king of Hellas, I mean the god of Delphi.(45) And since it
was not permitted that he should be in ignorance of aught, the peculiar
fitness of Diogenes did not escape his notice. And he made him incline to
that philosophy, not by urging his commands in words alone, as he does for
other men, but in very deed he instructed him symbolically as to what he
willed, in two words, when he said, “Falsify the common currency.” For
“Know Thyself” he addressed not only to Diogenes, but to other men also
and still does: for it stands there engraved in front of his shrine. And
so we have at last discovered the founder of this philosophy, even as the
divine Iamblichus also declares, yes, and we have discovered its leading
men as well, namely Antisthenes and Diogenes and Crates;(46) the aim and
end of whose lives was, I think, to know themselves, to despise vain
opinions, and to lay hold of truth with their whole understanding; for
truth, alike for gods and men, is the beginning of every good thing;(47)
and it was, I think, for her sake that Plato and Pythagoras and Socrates
and the Peripatetic philosophers and Zeno spared no pains, because they
wished to know themselves, and not to follow vain opinions but to track
down truth among all things that are.)

Φέρε οὖν, ἐπειδὴ πέφηνεν οὐκ ἄλλο μὲν ἐπιτηδεύσας Πλάτων, ἕτερον δὲ
Διογένης, ἓν δέ τι καὶ ταὐτόν· εἰ γοῦν ἔροιτό τις τὸν σοφὸν Πλάτωνα “τὸ
Γνῶθι σαυτὸν πόσου νενόμικας ἄξιον;” εὖ οἶδα ὅτι τοῦ παντὸς ἂν φήσειε, [D]
καὶ λέγει δὲ ἐν Ἀλκιβιάδῃ· δεῦρο δὴ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο φράσον ἡμῖν, ὦ δαιμόνιε
Πλάτων καὶ θεῶν ἔκγονε “Τίνα τρόπον χρὴ πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν διακεῖσθαι
δόξας,” ταὐτά τε ἐρεῖ καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ὅλον ἡμῖν ἐπιτάξει διαρρήδην
ἀναγνῶναι τὸν Κρίτωνα διάλογον, οὗ φαίνεται παραινῶν Σωκράτης μηδὲν
φροντίζειν ἡμᾶς τῶν τοιούτων· φησὶ γοῦν· “Ἀλλὰ τί ἡμῖν, ὦ μακάριε Κρίτων,
[189] οὕτω τῆς τῶν πολλῶν δόξης μέλει;” εἶτα ἡμεῖς τούτων ὑπεριδόντες
ἀποτειχίζειν ἁπλῶς οὑτωσὶ καὶ ἀποσπᾶν ἄνδρας ἀλλήλων ἐθέλομεν, οὗς ὁ τῆς
ἀληθείας συνήγαγεν ἔρως ἥ τε τῆς δόξης ὑπεροψία καὶ ἡ πρὸς τὸν ζῆλον τῆς
ἀρετῆς ξύμπνοια; εἰ δὲ Πλάτωνι μὲν ἔδοξε καὶ διὰ τῶν λόγων αὐτὰ
ἐργάζεσθαι, Διογένει δὲ ἀπέχρη τὰ ἔργα, διὰ τοῦτο ἄξιός ἐστιν ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν
ἀκούειν κακῶς; ὅρα δὲ μὴ καὶ τοῦτο αὐτὸ τῷ παντὶ κρεῖττόν ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ καὶ
Πλάτων ἐξομνύμενος φαίνεται τὰ ξυγγράμματα. [B] “Οὐ γάρ ἐστι Πλάτωνος,”
φησί, “ζύγγραμμα οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽ ἔσται, τὰ δὲ νῦν φερόμενα ἐστι Σωκράτους,
ἀνδρὸς καλοῦ καὶ νέου.” τί οὖν ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τοῦ Διογένους
σκοποῦμεν αὐτὸν τὸν Κυνισμόν, ὅστις ἐστιν;

(And now, since it has become evident that Plato was not pursuing one aim
and Diogenes another, but their end was one and the same: suppose one
should inquire of the wise Plato: What value do you set on the precept
“Know Thyself”? I am very sure that he would answer that it is worth
everything, and indeed he says so in the Alcibiades.(48) Come then tell us
next, divine Plato, scion of the gods, how one ought to be disposed
towards the opinions of the many? He will give the same answer, and
moreover he will expressly enjoin on us to read his dialogue the
Crito,(49) where Socrates is shown warning us not to take heed of such
things. At any rate what he says is: “But why, my dear good Crito, are we
so concerned about the opinion of the multitude?” And now are we to ignore
all this evidence, and without further question fence off from one another
and force apart men whom the passion for truth, the scorn of opinion, and
unanimity in zeal for virtue have joined together? And if Plato chose to
achieve his aim through words, whereas for Diogenes deeds sufficed, does
the latter on that account deserve to be criticised by you? Nay, consider
whether that same method of his be not in every respect superior; since we
see that Plato for himself forswore written compositions. “For” he
says,(50) “there are no writings by Plato nor ever will be, and what now
pass current as his are the work of Socrates, the ever fair and ever
young.” Why then should we not from the practice of Diogenes study the
character of the Cynic philosophy?)

Οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ σώματος μέρη μέν ἐστιν, οἷον ὀφθαλμοί, πόδες, χεῖρες, ἄλλα
δὲ ἐπισυμβαίνει, τρίχες, ὄνυχες, ῥύπος, τοιούτων περιττωμάτων γένος, ὧν
ὔνευ σῶμα ἀνθρώπινον ἀμήχανον εἶναι, [C] πότερον οὐ γελοῖός ἐστιν ὁ μέρη
νομίσας ὄνυχας ἢ τρίχας ἢ ῥύπον καὶ τὰ δυσώδη τῶν περιττωμάτων, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὰ
τιμιώτατα καὶ σπουδαῖα, πρῶτον μὲν τὰ αἰσθητήρια καὶ τούτων αὐτῶν ἅττα
συνέσεως ἡμῖν ἐστι μᾶλλον αἴτια, οἷον ὀφθαλμούς, ἀκοάς; ὑπουργεῖ γὰρ ταῦτα
πρὸς φρόνησιν εἴτε ἐγκατορωρυγμένῃ τῇ ψυχῇ, ὡς ἂν θᾶττον καθαρθεῖσα
δύναιτο τῇ καθαρᾷ χρῆσθαι(51) καὶ ἀκινήτῳ τοῦ φρονεῖν δυνάμει, εἴτε ὥσπερ
τινὲς οἴονται, καθάπερ δι᾽ ὀχετῶν τοιούτων εἰσφερούσης τῆς ψυχῆς. [D]
συλλέγουσα γάρ, φασί, τὰ κατὰ μέρος αἰσθήματα καὶ συνέχουσα τῇ μνήμῃ γεννᾷ
τὰς ἐπιστήμας. ἐγὼ δέ, εἰ μή τι τοιοῦτον ἦν ἐνθέον ἢ τέλειον ἐμποδιζόμενον
δὲ(52) ὑπ᾽ ἄλλων πολλῶν καὶ ποικίλων, ὃ τῶν ἐκτὸς ποιεῖται τὴν ἀντίληψιν,
οὐδ᾽ ἂν δυνατὸν οἶμαι γενέσθαι τῶν αἰσθητῶν τὴν(53) ἀντίληψιν. ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος
μὲν ὁ λόγος οὐ τοῖς νῦν προσήκει.

(Now the body consists of certain parts such as eyes, feet and hands, but
there are besides other parts, hair, nails, ordure, a whole class of
accessories of that sort without which the human body cannot exist. Then
is it not absurd for a man to take into account such parts, I mean hair or
nails or ordure or such unpleasant accessories, rather than those parts
that are most precious and important, in the first place, for instance,
the organs of perception, and among these more especially the instruments
whereby we apprehend, namely the eyes and ears? For these aid the soul to
think intelligently, whether it be buried deep in the body and they enable
it to purify itself more readily and to use its pure and steadfast faculty
of thought, or whether, as some think, it is through them that the soul
enters in as though by channels.(54) For, as we are told, by collecting
individual perceptions and linking them through the memory she brings
forth the sciences. And for my own part, I think that if there were not
something of this sort, either incomplete in itself or perfect but
hindered by other things many and various, which brings about our
apprehension of externals, it would not even be possible for us to
apprehend the objects of sense‐perception. But this line of argument has
little to do with the present question.)

[190] Διόπερ ἐπανακτέον ἐπὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς φιλοσοφίας τῆς κυνικῆς. φαίνονται
μὲν δὴ καὶ οὗτοι διμερῆ τὴν φιλοσοφίαν νομίσαντες ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοτέλης καὶ
Πλάτων, θεωρηματικήν τε καὶ πρακτικὴν, αὐτὸ τοῦτο(55) συνέντες δηλονότι
καὶ νοήσαντες, ὡς οἰκεῖόν ἐστιν ἔνθρωπος φύσει πράξει καὶ ἐπιστήμῃ. εἰ δὲ
τῆς φυσικῆς τὴν θεωρίαν(56) ἐξέκλιναν, οὐδὲν τοῦτο πρὸς τὸν λόγον. ἐπεὶ
καὶ Σωκράτης καὶ πλείονες ἄλλοι θεωρίᾳ μὲν φαίνονται χρησάμενοι πολλῇ,
ταύτῃ δὲ οὐκ ἄλλου χάριν, ἀλλὰ τῆς πράξεως· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὸ ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι
τοῦτο ἐνόμισαν, [B] τὸ μαθεῖν ἀκριβῶς, τί μὲν ἐποδοτέον ψυχῇ, τί δὲ
σώματι· ἀπέδοσαν δὲ(57) εἰκότως ἡγεμονίαν μὲν τῇ ψυχῇ, ὑπηρεσίαν δὲ τῷ
σώματι. φαίνονται δὴ οὖν ἀρετὴν ἐπιτηδεύσαντες, ἐγκράτειαν, ἀτυφίαν,
ἐλευθερίαν, ἔξω γενόμενοι παντὸς φθόνου, δειλίας, δεισιδαιμονίας. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ
ἡμεῖς ταῦτα ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν διανοούμεθα, παίζειν δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ κυβεύειν περὶ
τοῖς φιλτάτοις ὑπολαμβάνομεν, οὕτως ὑπεριδόντας [C] τοῦ σώματος, ὡς ὁ
Σωκράτης ἔφη λέγων ὀρθῶς μελέτην εἶναι θανάτου τὴν φιλοσοφίαν. τοῦτο
ἐκεῖνοι καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἡμέραν ἐπιτηδεύοντες οὐ ζηλωτοὶ μᾶλλον ἡμῖν, ἄθλιοι
δέ τινες καὶ παντελῶς ἀνόητοι δοκοῦσιν·(58) ἀνθ᾽ ὅτου δὲ(59) τοὺς πόνους
ὑπέμειναν τούτους;(60) οὐχ ὡς αὐτὸς εἶπας, κενοδοξίας ἕνεκα. καὶ γὰρ(61)
πῶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπῃνοῦντο ὠμὰ προσφερόμενοι σαρκία; καίτοι οὐδὲ αὐτὸς
ἐπαινέτης εἶ. [D] τοῦ γοῦν τοιούτου τρίβωνα καὶ τὴν κόμην, ὥσπερ αἱ γραφαὶ
τῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἀπομιμούμενος εἶθ᾽ ὃ μηδὲ αὐτὸς ἀξιάγαστον ὑπολαμβάνεις, τοῦτο
εὐδοκιμεῖν οἴει παρὰ τῷ πλήθει; καὶ εἳς μὲν ἢ δεύτερος ἐπῄνει τότε, πλεῖν
δ᾽ οὖν ἢ δέκα μυριάδες ὑπὸ τῆς ναυτίας καὶ βδελυρίας διεστράφησαν τὸν
στόμαχον καὶ ἀπόσιτοι γεγόνασιν, ἄχρις αὐτοὺς οἱ θεράποντες ἀνέλαβον
ὀσμαῖς καὶ μύροις καὶ πέμμασιν. [191] οὕτως ὁ κλεινὸς ἥρως ἔργῳ
κατεπλήξατο γελοίῳ μὲν ἀνθρώποις τοιούτοις,

(Accordingly we must go back to the divisions of the Cynic philosophy. For
the Cynics also seem to have thought that there were two branches of
philosophy, as did Aristotle and Plato, namely speculative and practical,
evidently because they had observed and understood that man is by nature
suited both to action and to the pursuit of knowledge. And though they
avoided the study of natural philosophy, that does not affect the
argument. For Socrates and many others also, as we know, devoted
themselves to speculation, but it was solely for practical ends. For they
thought that even self‐knowledge meant learning precisely what must be
assigned to the soul, and what to the body. And to the soul they naturally
assigned supremacy, and to the body subjection. This seems to be the
reason why they practised virtue, self‐control, modesty and freedom, and
why they shunned all forms of envy, cowardice and superstition. But this,
you will say, is not the view that we hold about them, for we are to think
that they were not in earnest, and that they hazarded what is most
precious(62) in thus despising the body; as Socrates did when he declared,
and rightly, that philosophy is a preparation for death.(63) And since
this was the aim that the Cynics pursued daily, we need not emulate them
any more than the others, but we are to think them miserable beings and
altogether foolish. But why was it that they endured those hardships?
Surely not from ostentation, as you declared. For how could they win
applause from other men by eating raw meat? Certainly you yourself do not
applaud them for this. At any rate, when you imitate one of those Cynics
by carrying a staff and wearing your hair long, as it is shown in their
pictures, do you think that you thereby gain a reputation with the crowd,
though you do not yourself think those habits worthy of admiration? One or
two, indeed, used to applaud him in his own day, but more than ten times
ten thousand had their stomachs turned by nausea and loathing, and went
fasting until their attendants revived them with perfumes and myrrh and
cakes. So greatly did that renowned hero shock them by an act which seems
absurd to men)


    Οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσιν,

    (“of such sort as mortals now are,”(64))


οὐκ ἀγεννεῖ δέ, μὰ τοὺς θεούς, εἴ τις αὐτὸ κατὰ τὴν Διογένους ἐξηγήσαιτο
σύνεσιν. ὅπερ γὰρ ὁ Σωκράτης ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ φησιν, ὅτι τῷ θεῷ νομίζων λατρείαν
ἐκτελεῖν ἐν τῷ τὸν δοθέντα χρησμὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ κατὰ πάντα σκοπῶν ἐξετάζειν
τὸν ἐλεγκτικὸν ἠσπάσατο βίον, τοῦτο καὶ Διογένης οἶμαι συνειδὼς ἑαυτῷ,
πυθόχρηστον οὖσαν τὴν φιλοσοφίαν, ἔργοις ᾤετο δεῖν ἐξελέγχειν πάντα καὶ μὴ
δόξαις ἄλλων, τυχὸν μὲν ἀληθέσι, τυχὸν δὲ ψευδέσι προσπεπονθέναι. οὔκουν
οὐδὲ εἴ τι Πυθαγόρας ἔφη, οὐδὲ εἴ τις ἄλλος τῷ Πυθαγόρᾳ παραπλήσιος,
ἀξιόπιστος ἐδόκει τῷ Διογένει. τὸν γὰρ θεόν, ἀνθρώπων δὲ(65) οὐδένα τῆς
φιλοσοφίας ἀρχηγὸν ἐπεποίητο. [C] τί δῆτα τοῦτο, ἐρεῖς, πρὸς τὴν τοῦ
πολύποδος ἐδωδήν; ἐγώ σοι φράσω.

(though, by the gods, it was not ignoble, if one should explain it
according to the intention of Diogenes. For just as Socrates said of
himself that he embraced the life of cross‐examining because he believed
that he could perform his service to the god only by examining in all its
bearings the meaning of the oracle that had been uttered concerning him,
so I think Diogenes also, because he was convinced that philosophy was
ordained by the Pythian oracle, believed that he ought to test everything
by facts and not be influenced by the opinions of others, which may be
true and may be false. Accordingly Diogenes did not think that every
statement of Pythagoras, or any man like Pythagoras, was necessarily true.
For he held that God and no human being is the founder of philosophy. And
pray what, you will say, has this to do with the eating of octopus? I will
tell you.)

Τὴν σαρκοφαγίαν οἱ μὲν ἀνθρώποις ὑπολαμβάνουσι κατὰ φύσιν, οἱ δὲ ἥκιστα
τοῦτο ἐργάζεσθαι προσήκειν ἀνθρώπῳ διανοοῦνται, καὶ πολὺς ὁ περὶ τούτου
ἀνάλωται(66) λόγος. ἐθέλοντι οὖν σοι μὴ ῥᾳθυμεῖν ἑσμοὶ περὶ τοῦ τοιούτου
βίβλων φανήσονται. τούτους Διογένης ἐξελέγχειν ᾤετο δεῖν. διενοήθη γοῦν
οὕτως· εἰ μὲν ἀπραγματεύτως ἐσθίων τις σάρκας, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τῶν ἄλλων
ἕκαστον θηρίων, [D] οἷς τοῦτο ἔνειμεν ἡ φύσις, ἀβλαβῶς αὐτὸ καὶ ἀνεπαχθῶς,
μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ μετὰ τῆς τοῦ σώματος ὠφελείας ἐργάζοιτο, κατὰ φύσιν εἶναι
πάντως τὴν σαρκοφαγίαν ὑπέλαβεν· εἰ δέ τις ἐντεῦθεν γένοιτο βλάβη, οὐχὶ
τοῦτο ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἔργον ἴσως ἐνόμισεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀφεκτέον εἶναι κατὰ κράτος
αὐτοῦ. εἷς μὲν οὖν ἂν εἴη τοιοῦτος ὑπὲρ τοῦ πράγματος ἴσως βιαιότερος
λόγος, ἕτερος δὲ οἰκειότερος τῷ Κυνισμῷ, εἰ περὶ τοῦ τέλους αὐτοῦ πρότερον
ἔτι σαφέστερον διέλθοιμι.

(To eat meat some regard as natural to man, while others think that to
follow this practice is not at all appropriate for man, and this question
has been much debated. And if you are willing to make the effort, you can
see with your own eyes swarms of books on the subject. These Diogenes
thought it his duty to refute. At any rate his own view was as follows. If
one can eat meat without taking too much trouble to prepare it, as can all
other animals to whom nature has assigned this diet, and can do it without
harm or discomfort, or rather with actual benefit to the body, then he
thought that eating meat is entirely in accordance with nature. But if
harm came of it, then he apparently thought that the practice is not
appropriate for man, and that he must abstain from it by all means. Here
then you have a theory on this question, though perhaps it is too far‐
fetched: but here is another more akin to Cynicism, only I must first
describe more clearly the end and aim of that philosophy.)

[192] Ἀπάθειαν γὰρ ποιοῦνται τὸ τέλος· τοῦτο δὲ ἴσον ἐστὶ τῷ θεὸν
γενέσθαι. αἰσθανόμενος οὖν ἴσως αὑτοῦ Διογένης ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν
ἀπαθοῦς, ὑπὸ δὲ τῆς τοιαύτης ἐδωδῆς μόνον θραττομένου καὶ ναυτιῶντος καὶ
δόξῃ κενῇ μᾶλλον(67) ἢ λόγῳ δεδουλωμένου· σάρκες γάρ εἴσιν οὐδὲν ἧττον,
κἂν μυριάκις αὐτὰς ἑψήσῃ, κἂν ὑποτρίμμασι μυρίοις τις αὐτὰς καρυκεύσῃ· καὶ
ταύτης αὑτὸν ἀφελέσθαι καὶ καταστῆσαι παντάπασιν ἐξάντη τῆς δειλίας ᾠήθη
χρῆναι. [B] δειλία γάρ ἐστιν, εὖ ἴσθι, τὸ γοῦν τοιοῦτον. ἐπεὶ πρὸς τῆς
Θεσμοφόρου εἰ σαρκῶν ἡψημένων ἁπτόμεθα, τοῦ χάριν οὐχὶ καὶ ἁπλῶς αὐτὰς
προσφερόμεθα, φράσον ἡμῖν. οὐ γὰρ ἔχεις ἕτερον εἰπεῖν ἢ ὅτι οὕτω
νενόμισται καὶ οὕτω συνειθίσμεθα. οὐ γὰρ δὴ πρὶν μὲν ἑψηθῆναι βδελυρὰ
πέφυκεν, ἑψηθέντα δὲ γέγονεν αὑτῶν ἁγνότερα. [C] τί δῆτα ἐχρῆν πράττειν
τόν γε παρὰ θεοῦ ταχθέντα καθάπερ στρατηγοῦ πᾶν μὲν ἐξελεῖν τὸ νόμισμα,
λόγῳ δὲ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ κρῖναι τὰ πράγματα; περιιδεῖν αὑτὸν ὑπὸ ταύτης τῆς
δόξης ἐνοχλούμενον, ὡς νομίζειν ὅτι κρέας μέν ἐστιν ἑψηθὲν ἁγνὸν καὶ
ἐδώδιμον, μὴ κατεργασθὲν δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς μυσαρόν πως(68) καὶ βδελυρόν;
οὕτως εἶ μνήμων; οὕτως εἶ σπουδαῖος; ὃς τοσοῦτον ὀνειδίζων τῷ κενοδόξῳ,
κατὰ σὲ φάναι, [D] Διογένει, κατ᾽ ἐμὲ δὲ τῷ σπουδαιοτάτῳ θεράποντι καὶ
ὑπηρέτῃ τοῦ Πυθίου, τὴν τοῦ πολύποδος ἐδωδὴν κατεδήδοκας μυρίους ταρίχους.

(Freedom from emotion they regard as the end and aim; and this is
equivalent to becoming a god. Now perhaps Diogenes observed that in the
case of all other foods he himself had no particular sensations, and that
only raw meat gave him indigestion and nausea, and took this for a proof
that he was enslaved to vain opinion rather than reason; for flesh is none
the less flesh, even though you cook it any number of times or season it
with any number of sauces. This, I say, was why he thought he ought to rid
and free himself altogether of this cowardice; for you may be sure that
this sort of thing is cowardice. And in the name of the Law‐Giving
goddess,(69) tell me why if we used cooked meats we do not eat them in
their natural state also? You can give me no other answer than that this
has become a custom and a habit with us. For surely we cannot say that
before meat is cooked it is disgusting and that by being cooked it becomes
purer than it was by nature. What then was it right for him to do who had
been appointed by God like a general in command to do away with the common
currency and to judge all questions by the criterion of reason and truth?
Ought he to have shut his eyes and been so far fettered by this general
opinion as to believe that flesh by being cooked becomes pure and fit for
food, but that when it has not been acted upon by fire it is somehow
abominable and loathsome? Is this the sort of memory you have? Is this
your zeal for truth? For though you so severely criticised Diogenes the
vain‐glorious, as you call him—though I call him the most zealous servant
and vassal of the Pythian god—for eating octopus, you yourself have
devoured endless pickled food,)


    Ἰχθῦς ὄρνιθάς τε φίλας θ᾽ ὅτι χεῖρας ἵκοιτο,

    (“Fish and birds and whatever else might come to hand.”(70))


Αἰγύπτιός γε ὤν, οὐ τῶν ἱερέων, ἀλλὰ τῶν παμφάγων, οἷς πάντα ἐσθίειν νόμος
ὡς λάχανα χόρτου· γνωρίζεις οἶμαι [193] τῶν Γαλιλαίων τὰ ῥήματα. μικροῦ με
παρῆλθεν εἰπεῖν, ὅτι καὶ πάντες ἄνθρωποι πλησίον οἰκοῦντες θαλάττης, ἤδη
δέ τινες καὶ τῶν πόρρω, οὐδὲ θερμήναντες καταρροφοῦσιν ἐχίνους, ὄστρεα καὶ
πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα· εἶτα ἐκείνους μὲν ὑπολαμβάνεις ζηλωτούς, ἄθλιον δὲ
καὶ βδελυρὸν ἡλῇ Διογένη, καὶ οὐκ ἐννοεῖς, ὡς οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ταῦτα ἐκείνων
ἐστὶ σαρκία· πλὴν ἴσως ταῦτα ἐκείνων διαφέρει τῷ τὰ μὲν εἶναι μαλθακά, τὰ
δὲ σκληρότερα. ἄναιμος γοῦν ἐστι καὶ πολύπους [B] ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνα, ἔμψυχα δέ
ἐστι καὶ τὰ ὀστρακόδερμα καθάπερ καὶ οὗτος· ἥδεται γοῦν καὶ λυπεῖται, ὃ
τῶν ἐμψύχων μάλιστά ἐστιν ἴδιον. ἐνοχλείτω δὲ μηδὲν ἡμᾶς ἡ Πλατωνικὴ τανῦν
δόξα ἔμψυχα ὑπολαμβάνουσα καὶ τὰ φυτά. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὲν οὔτι ἄλογον(71) οὐδὲ
παράνομον οὐδὲ ἀσύνηθες ὑμῖν ὁ γενναῖος εἰργάσατο Διογένης, εἰ μὴ τῷ
σκληροτέρῳ καὶ μαλακωτέρῳ, ἡδονῇ τε λαιμοῦ καὶ ἀηδίᾳ τὰ τοιαῦτά τις
ἐξετάζοι, πρόδηλον οἶμαι τοῖς ὁπωσοῦν ἕπεσθαι λόγῳ δυναμένοις. οὐκ ἄρα τὴν
ὠμοφαγίαν βδελύττεσθε οἱ τὰ παραπλήσια δρῶντες, [C] οὐκ ἐπὶ τῶν ἀναίμων
μόνον ζῴων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν αἷμα ἐχόντων. καὶ τούτῳ δὲ ἴσως διαφέρεσθε
πρὸς ἐκεῖνον, ὅτι ὁ μὲν ἁπλῶς ταῦτα καὶ κατὰ φύσιν ᾠήθη χρῆναι
προσφέρεσθαι, ἁλσὶ δὲ ὑμεῖς καὶ πολλοῖς ἄλλοις ἀρτύσαντες ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα,
τὴν φύσιν ὅπως βιάσησθε. καὶ δὴ τοῦτο μὲν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον ἀπόχρη.

(For you are an Egyptian, though not of the priestly caste, but of the
omnivorous type whose habit it is to eat everything “even as the green
herb.”(72) You recognise, I suppose, the words of the Galilaeans. I almost
omitted to say that all men who live near the sea, and even some who live
at a distance from it, swallow down sea‐urchins, oysters and in general
everything of the kind without even heating them. And then you think they
are enviable, whereas you regard Diogenes as contemptible and disgusting,
and you do not perceive that those shell‐fish are flesh just as much as
what he ate? Except perhaps that differ in so far as the octopus is soft
and shell‐fish are harder. At any rate the octopus is bloodless, like
hard‐shelled fish, but the latter too are animate things like the octopus.
At least they feel pleasure and pain, which is the peculiar characteristic
of animate things. And here we must not be put out by Plato’s theory(73)
that plants also are animated by soul. But it is now, I think, evident to
those who are in any way able to follow an argument, that what the
excellent Diogenes did was not out of the way or irregular or contrary to
our habits, that is if we do not in such cases apply the criterion of
hardness and softness, but judge rather by the pleasure or distaste of the
palate. And so it is not after all the eating of raw food that disgusts
you, since you do the like, not only in the case of bloodless animals but
also of those that have blood. But perhaps there is also this difference
between you and Diogenes, that he thought he ought to eat such food just
as it was and in the natural state, whereas you think you must first
prepare it with salt and many other things to make it agreeable and so do
violence to nature. I have now said enough on this subject.)

[D] Τῆς Κυνικῆς δὲ φιλοσοφίας σκοπὸς μέν ἐστι καὶ τέλος, ὥσπερ δὴ καὶ
πάσης φιλοσοφίας, τὸ εὐδαιμονεῖν, τὸ δὲ εὐδαιμονεῖν ἐν τῷ ζῆν κατὰ φύσιν,
ἀλλὰ μὴ πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν δόξας. ἐπεὶ καὶ τοῖς φυτοῖς εὖ πράττειν
συμβαίνει καὶ μέντοι καὶ ζῴοις πᾶσιν, ὅταν τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν ἕκαστον
ἀνεμποδίστως τυγχάνῃ τέλους· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς θεοῖς τοῦτό ἐστιν
εὐδαιμονίας ὅρος, τὸ ἔχειν αὐτοὺς ὥσπερ πεφύκασι καὶ ἑαυτῶν εἶναι. [194]
οὐκοῦν καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οὐχ ἑτέρωθί που τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἀποκεκρυμμένην
προσήκει πολυπραγμονεῖν· οὐδὲ ἀετὸς οὐδὲ πλάτανος οὐδὲ ἄλλο τι τῶν ὄντων
ζῴων ἢ φυτῶν χρυσᾶ περιεργάζεται πτερὰ καὶ φύλλα, οὐδὲ ὅπως ἀργυροῦς ἕξει
τοὺς βλαστοὺς ἢ τὰ πλῆκτρα καὶ κέντρα σιδηρᾶ, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀδαμάντινα, ἀλλ᾽
οἷς αὐτὰ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἡ φύσις ἐκόσμησε, ταῦτα εἰ ῥωμαλέα καὶ πρὸς τάχος αὐτοῖς
ἢ πρὸς ἀλκὴν ὑπουργοῦντα προσγένοιτο, μάλιστα ἂν εὖ πράττειν [B] νομίζοι
καὶ εὐθηνεῖσθαι. πῶς οὖν οὐ γελοῖον, εἴ τις ἄνθρωπος γεγονὼς ἔξω που τὴν
εὐδαιμονίαν περιεργάσαιτο, πλοῦτον καὶ γένος καὶ φίλων δύναμιν καὶ πάντα
ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα τοῦ παντὸς ἄξια νομίζων; εἰ μὲν οὖν ἡμῖν ἡ φύσις ὥσπερ
τοῖς ζῴοις αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀπέδωκε μόνον, τὸ σώματα καὶ ψυχὰς ἔχειν ἐκείνοις
παραπλησίας, ὥστε μηδὲν πλέον πολυπραγμονεῖν, ἤρκει λοιπόν, [C] ὥσπερ τὰ
λοιπὰ ζῷα, τοῖς σωματικοῖς ἀρκεῖσθαι πλεονεκτήμασιν, ἐνταῦθά που τὸ
εὐδαιμονεῖν πολυπραγμονοῦσιν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἡμῖν οὐδέν τι παραπλησία ψυχὴ τοῖς
ἄλλοις ἐνέσπαρται ζῴοις, ἀλλ᾽ εἴτε κατ᾽ οὐσίαν διαφέρουσα εἴτε οὐσίᾳ μὲν
ἀδιάφορος, ἐνεργείᾳ δὲ μόνῃ κρείττων, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τὸ καθαρὸν ἤδη χρυσίον
τοῦ συμπεφυρμένου τῇ ψάμμῳ· λέγεται γὰρ καὶ οὗτος ὁ λόγος περὶ τῆς ψυχῆς
ὡς ἀληθὴς ὑπό τινων· [D] ἡμεῖς δὴ οὖν ἐπειδὴ σύνισμεν αὑτοῖς οὖσι τῶν ζῴων
ξυνετωτέροις· κατὰ γὰρ τὸν Πρωταγόρου μῦθον ἐκείνοις μὲν ἡ φύσις ὥσπερ
μήτηρ ἄγαν φιλοτίμως καὶ μεγαλοδώρως προσηνέχθη, ἡμῖν δὲ ἀντὶ πάντων ἐκ
Διὸς ὁ νοῦς ἐδόθη· τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἐνταῦθα θετέον, ἐν τῷ κρατίστῳ καὶ
σπουδαιοτάτῳ τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν.

(Now the end and aim of the Cynic philosophy, as indeed of every
philosophy, is happiness, but happiness that consists in living according
to nature and not according to the opinions of the multitude. For plants
too are considered to do well, and indeed all animals also, when without
hindrance each attains the end designed for it by nature. Nay, even among
the gods this is the definition of happiness, that their state should be
according to their nature, and that they should be independent. And so too
in the case of human beings we must not be busy about happiness as if it
were hidden away outside ourselves. Neither the eagle nor the plane tree
nor anything else that has life, whether plant or animal, vainly troubles
itself about wings or leaves of gold or that its shoots may be of silver
or its stings and spurs of iron, or rather of adamant; but where nature in
the beginning has adorned them with such things, they consider that, if
only they are strong and serviceable for speed or defence, they themselves
are fortunate and well provided. Then is it not absurd when a human being
tries to find happiness somewhere outside himself, and thinks that wealth
and birth and the influence of friends, and generally speaking everything
of that sort is of the utmost importance? If however nature had bestowed
on us only what she has bestowed on other animals, I mean the possession
of bodies and souls like theirs, so that we need concern ourselves with
nothing beyond, then it would suffice for us, as for all other animals, to
content ourselves with physical advantages, and to pursue happiness within
this field. But in us has been implanted a soul that in no way resembles
other animals; and whether it be different in essence, or not different in
essence but superior in its activity only, just as, I suppose, pure gold
is superior to gold alloyed with sand,—for some people hold this theory to
be true of the soul,—at any rate we surely know that we are more
intelligent than other animals. For according to the myth in the
Protagoras,(74) nature dealt with them very generously and bountifully,
like a mother, but to compensate for all this, mind was bestowed on us by
Zeus. Therefore in our minds, in the best and noblest part of us, we must
say that happiness resides.)

Σκόπει δή, ταύτης εἰ μὴ μάλιστα τῆς προαιρέσεως ἦν Διογένης, ὃς τὸ μὲν
σῶμα τοῖς πόνοις ἀνέδην παρεῖχεν, ἵνα αὐτὸ τῆς φύσεως ῥωμαλεώτερον
καταστήσῃ πράττειν [195] δὲ ἠξίου μόνον ὁπόσα ἂν φανῇ τῷ λόγῳ πρακτέα,
τοὺς δὲ ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ἐμπίπτοντας τῇ ψυχῇ θορύβους, οἷα πολλάκις ἡμᾶς
ἀναγκάζει τουτὶ τὸ περικείμενον αὐτοῦ χάριν πολυπραγμονεῖν, οὐδὲ ἐν μέρει
προσίετο. ὑπὸ δὲ ταύτης τῆς ἀσκήσεως ὁ ἀνὴρ οὕτω μὲν ἔσχεν ἀνδρεῖον τὸ
σῶμα ὡς οὐδεὶς οἶμαι τῶν τοὺς [B] στεφανίτας ἀγωνισαμένων, οὕτω δὲ διετέθη
τὴν ψυχήν, ὥστε εὐδαιμονεῖν, ὥστε βασιλεύειν οὐδὲν ἔλαττον, εἰ μὴ καὶ
πλέον, ὡς οἱ τότε εἰώθεσαν λέγειν Ἕλληνες, τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως, τὸν
Πέρσην λέγοντες. ἆρά σοι μικρὰ φαίνεται ἀνὴρ

(Now consider whether Diogenes did not above all other men profess this
belief, since he freely exposed his body to hardships so that he might
make it stronger than it was by nature. He allowed himself to act only as
the light of reason shows us that we ought to act; and the perturbations
that attack the soul and are derived from the body, to which this envelope
of ours often constrains us for its sake to pay too much attention, he did
not take into account at all. Thus by means of this discipline the man
made his body more vigorous, I believe, than that of any who have
contended for the prize of a crown in the games: and his soul was so
disposed that he was happy and a king no less if not even more than the
Great King, as the Greeks used to call him in those days, by which they
meant the king of Persia. Then does he seem to you of no importance, this
man who was)


    Ἄπολις, ἄοικος, πατρίδος ἐστερημένος,
    οὐκ ὀβολόν, οὐ δραχμήν, ἔχων(75) οὐδ᾽ οἰκέτην,

    (“cityless, homeless, a man without a country, owning not an obol,
    not a drachma, not a single slave,”(76))


ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ μᾶζαν, ἧς Ἐπίκουρος εὐπορῶν οὐδὲ τῶν θεῶν φησιν εἰς εὐδαιμονίας
λόγον ἐλαττοῦσθαι, πρὸς μὲν τοὺς θεοὺς οὐκ ἐρίζων, [C] τοῦ δοκοῦντος δὲ
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις εὐδαιμονεστάτου εὐδαιμονέστερον ζῶν καὶ ἔλεγε ζῆν
εὐδαιμονέστερον. εἰ δὲ ἀπιστεῖς, ἔργῳ πειραθεὶς ἐκείνου τοῦ βίου καὶ οὐ τῷ
λόγῳ αἰσθήσῃ.

(nay, not even a loaf of bread—and Epicurus says that if he have bread
enough and to spare he is not inferior to the gods on the score of
happiness. Not that Diogenes tried to rival the gods, but he lived more
happily than one who is counted the happiest of men, and he used actually
to assert that he lived more happily than such a man. And if you do not
believe me, try his mode of life in deed and not in word, and you will
perceive the truth.)

Φέρε δὴ πρῶτον αὐτὸν διὰ τῶν λόγων ἐλέγξωμεν. ἆρά σοι δοκεῖ τῶν πάντων
ἀγαθῶν ἀνθρώποις ἡγεῖσθαι, τούτων δὴ τῶν πολυθρυλήτων, ἐλευθερίαν· [D] πῶς
γὰρ οὐ φήσεις· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ χρήματα καὶ πλοῦτος καὶ γένος καὶ σώματος ἰσχὺς
καὶ κάλλος καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα δίχα τῆς ἐλευθερίας οὐ τοῦ δοκοῦντος
ηὐτυχηκέναι, τοῦ κτησαμένου δὲ αὐτόν ἐστιν ἀγαθά; τίνα οὖν ὑπολαμβάνομεν
τὸν δοῦλον; ἇρα μή ποτε ἐκεῖνον, ὃν ἂν πριώμεθα δραχμῶν ἀργυρίου τόσων ἢ
μναῖν δυοῖν ἢ χρυσίου στατήρων δέκα; ἐρεῖς δήπουθεν τοῦτον εἶναι ἀληθῶς
δοῦλον. ἆρα δι᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ὅτι τὸ ἀργύριον ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τῷ πωλοῦντι
καταβεβλήκαμεν; οὕτω μεντἂν [196] εἶεν οἰκέται καὶ ὁπέσους τῶν αἰχμαλώτων
λυτρούμεθα. καίτοι καὶ οἱ νόμοι τούτοις ἀποδεδώκασι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν
σωθεῖσιν οἴκαδε, καὶ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὺς ἀπολυτρούμεθα, οὐχ ἵνα δουλεύσωσιν, ἀλλ᾽
ἵνα ὦσιν ἐλεύθεροι. ὁρᾷς ὡς οὐχ ἱκανόν ἐστιν ἀργύριον καταβαλεῖν ἐς τὸ
ἀποφῆναι τὸν λυτρωθέντα δοῦλον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς δοῦλος, οὗ
κύριός ἐστιν ἕτερος προσαναγκάσαι πράττειν ὅ,τι ἂν κελεύῃ, καὶ μὴ
βουλόμενον κόλασαι καί, τὸ λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ποιητοῦ,

(Come, let us first test it by reasoning. You think, do you not, that for
mankind freedom is the beginning of all good things,(77) I mean of course
what people are always calling good? How can you deny it? For property,
money, birth, physical strength, beauty and in a word everything of the
sort when divorced from freedom are surely blessings that belong, not to
him who merely seems to enjoy them, but to him who is that man’s master?
Whom then are we to regard as a slave? Shall it be him whom we buy for so
many silver drachmas, for two minae or for ten staters(78) of gold?
Probably you will say that such a man is truly a slave. And why? Is it
because we have paid down money for him to the seller? But in that case
the prisoners of war whom we ransom would be slaves. And yet the law on
the one hand grants these their freedom when they have come safe home, and
we on the other hand ransom them not that they may become slaves, but that
they may be free. Do you see then that in order to make a ransomed man a
slave it is not enough to pay down a sum of money, but that man is truly a
slave over whom another man has power to compel him to do whatever he
orders, and if he refuse, to punish him and in the words of the poet)


    κακαῖς ὀδύνῃσι πελάζειν;

    (“to inflict grievous pains upon him”?(79))


ὅρα δὴ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο, [B] εἰ μὴ κύριοι πάντες ἡμῶν εἰσιν, οὓς ἀναγκαῖον
ἡμῖν θεραπεύειν, ἵνα μηδὲν ἀλγῶμεν μηδὲ λυπώμεθα κολαζόμενοι παρ᾽ αὐτῶν. ἢ
τοῦτο οἴει κόλασιν μόνον, εἴ τις ἐπανατεινόμενος τὴν βακτηρίαν καθίκοιτο
τοῦ οἰκέτου; καίτοι γε τοιοῦτον οὐδὲ οἱ τραχύτατοι τῶν δεσποτῶν ἐπὶ πάντων
ποιοῦσι τῶν οἰκετῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ λόγος ἀρκεῖ πολλάκις καὶ ἀπειλή. [C] μήποτε
οὖν, ὦ φίλε, νομίσῃς εἶναι ἐλεύθερος, ἄχρις οὗ γαστὴρ ἄρχει σου καὶ τὰ
ἔνερθεν γαστρὸς οἵ τε τοῦ παρασχεῖν τὰ πρὸς ἡδονὴν καὶ ταῦτὰ(80)
ἀποκωλῦσαι κύριοι, καὶ εἰ τούυτων δὲ γένοιο κρείττων, ἕως ἂν δουλεύῃς ταῖς
τῶν πολλῶν δόξαις, οὔπω τῆς ἐλευθερίας ἔθιγες οὐδὲ ἐγεύσω τοῦ νέκταρος,

(Then consider next whether we have not as many masters as there are
persons whom we are obliged to conciliate in order not to suffer pain or
annoyance from being punished by them? Or do you think that the only sort
of punishment is when a man lifts up his stick against a slave and strikes
him? Yet not even the harshest masters do this in the case of all their
slaves, but a word or a threat is often enough. Then never think, my
friend, that you are free while your belly rules you and the part below
the belly, since you will then have masters who can either furnish you the
means of pleasure or deprive you of them; and even though you should prove
yourself superior to these, so long as you are a slave to the opinions of
the many you have not yet approached freedom or tasted its nectar,)


    Οὐ μὰ τὸν ἐν στέρνοισιν ἐμοῖς παραδόντα τετρακτύν.

    (“I swear by him who set in my breast the mystery of the
    Four!”(81))


καὶ οὐ τοῦτό φημι, [D] ὡς ἀπερυθριᾶσαι χρὴ πρὸς πάντας καὶ πράττειν. τὰ μὴ
πρακτέα· ἀλλ᾽ ὧν ἀπεχόμεθα καὶ ὅσα πράττομεν, μὴ διὰ τὸ τοῖς πολλοῖς
δοκεῖν σπουδαῖα πως(82) ἢ φαῦλα, διὰ τοῦτο πράττωμεν καὶ ἀπεχώμεθα, ἀλλ᾽
ὅτι τῷ λόγῳ καὶ τῷ ἐν ἡμῖν θεῷ, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ τῷ νῷ, ταῦτά ἐστιν ἀπόρρητα.
τοὺς μὲν οὖν πολλοὺς οὐδὲν κωλύει ταῖς κοιναῖς ἕπεσθαι δόξαις· ἄμεινον γὰρ
τοῦτο τοῦ παντάπασιν ἀπερυθριᾶν· [197] ἔχουσι γὰρ ἅνθρωποι φύσει πρὸς
ἀλήθειαν οἰκείως· ἀνδρὶ δὲ ἤδη κατὰ νοῦν ζῶντι καὶ τοὺς ὀρθοὺς εὑρεῖν τε
δυναμένῳ καὶ κρῖναι λόγους προσήκει τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲν ἕπεσθαι τοῖς
νομιζομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν εὗ τε καὶ χεῖρον πράττεσθαι.

(But I do not mean by this that we ought to be shameless before all men
and to do what we ought not; but all that we refrain from and all that we
do let us not do or refrain from, merely because it seems to the multitude
somehow honourable or base, but because it is forbidden by reason and the
god within us, that is, the mind.(83) As for the multitude there is no
reason why they should not follow common opinions, for that is better than
that they should be altogether shameless, and indeed mankind is
predisposed to the truth by nature. But a man who has attained to a life
in accordance with intelligence and is able to discover and estimate right
reasons, ought on no account whatever to follow the views held by the many
about good and bad conduct.)

Οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ τὸ μέν ἐστι τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν θειότερον, ὃ δὴ νοῦν καὶ φρόνησίν
φαμεν καὶ λόγον τὸν σιγώμενον, οὗ κήρυξ ἐστὶν ὁ διὰ τῆς φωνῆς οὑτοσὶ λόγος
προïὼν ἐξ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων, ἕτερον δέ τι τούτῳ συνέζευκται ποικίλον
καὶ παντοδαπόν, [B] ὀργῇ καὶ ἐπιθυμίᾳ ξυμμιγές τι καὶ πολυκέφαλον θηρίον,
οὐ πρότερον χρὴ πρὸς τὰς δόξας τῶν πολλῶν ἀτενῶς ὁρᾶν καὶ ἀδιατρέπτως,
πρὶν ἂν τοῦτο δαμάσωμεν τὸ θηρίον καὶ πείσωμεν ὑπακοῦσαι τῷ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν θεῷ,
μᾶλλον δὲ θείῳ. τοῦτο γὰρ πολλοὶ τοῦ Διογένους ζηλωταὶ ἐάσαντες(84)
ἐγένοντο παντορέκται καὶ μιαροὶ καὶ τῶν θηρίων οὐδὲ ἑνὸς κρείττους, ὅτι δὲ
οὐκ ἐμὸς ὁ λόγος ἐστί, [C] πρῶτον ἔργον ἐρῶ σοι Διογένους, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ
γελάσονται μὲν οἱ πολλοί, ἐμοὶ δὲ εἶναι δοκεῖ σεμνότατον. ἐπειδὴ γάρ τις
τῶν νέων ἐν ὄχλῳ, παρόντος καὶ τοῦ Διογόνους, ἀπέπαρδεν, ἐπάταξεν ἐκεῖνος
τῇ βακτηρίᾳ φάς· εἶτα, ὦ κάθαρμα, μηδὲν ἄξιον τοῦ δημοσίᾳ τὰ τοιταῦτα
θαρσεῖν πράξας ἐντεῦθεν ἡμῖν ἄρχῃ δόξης καταφρονεῖν; οὕτως ᾤετο χρῆναι
πρότερον ἡδονῆς καὶ θυμοῦ κρείττονα γενέσθαι, πρὶν(85) ἐπὶ τὸ τελειότατον
ἐλθεῖν τῶν παλαισμάτων, [D] ἀποδυσάμενον πρὸς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν δόξας αἳ
μυρίων κακῶν αἴτιαι γίνονται τοῖς πολλοῖς.

(Since therefore one part of our souls is more divine, which we call mind
and intelligence and silent reason, whose herald is this speech of ours
made up of words and phrases and uttered through the voice; and since
there is yoked therewith another part of the soul which is changeful and
multiform, something composite of anger and appetite, a many‐headed
monster, we ought not to look steadily and unswervingly at the opinions of
the multitude until we have tamed this wild beast and persuaded it to obey
the god within us, or rather the divine part. For this it is that many
disciples of Diogenes have ignored, and hence have become rapacious and
depraved and no better than any one of the brute beasts. And to prove that
this is not my own theory,(86) first I will relate to you something that
Diogenes did, which the many will ridicule but to me it seems most
dignified. Once when, in a crowd of people among whom was Diogenes, a
certain youth made an unseemly noise, Diogenes struck him with his staff
and said “And so, vile wretch, though you have done nothing that would
give you the right to take such liberties in public, you are beginning
here and before us to show your scorn of opinion?” So convinced was he
that a man ought to subdue pleasure and passion before he proceeds to the
final encounter of all(87) and strips to wrestle with those opinions which
to the multitude are the cause of evils innumerable.)

Οὐκ οἶσθα ὅπως τοὺς μὲν νέους τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἀπάγουσιν, ἄλλα ἐπ᾽ ἄλλοις
τῶν φιλοσόφων θρυλοῦντες; οἱ Πυθαγόρου καὶ Πλάτωνος καὶ Ἀριστοτέλους
χορευταὶ γνήσιοι γόητες εἶναι λέγονται καὶ σοφισταὶ καὶ τετυφωμένοι καὶ
φαρμακεῖς. [198] τῶν Κυνικῶν εἴ που τις γέγονε σπουδαῖος, ἐλεεινὸς δοκεῖ·
μέμνημαι γοῦν ἐγώ ποτε τροφέως εἰπόντος πρός με, ἐπειδὴ τὸν ἑταῖρον εἶδεν
Ἰφικλέα αὐχμηρὰν ἔχοντα τὴν κόμην καὶ κατερρωγότα τὰ στέρνα ἱμάτιόν τε
παντάπασι φαῦλον ἐν δεινῷ χειμῶνι· τίς ἄρα δαίμων τοῦτον εἰς ταύτην
περιέτρεψε τὴν συμφοράν, ὑφ᾽ ἧς αὐτὸς μὲν ἐλεεινός, ἐλεεινότεροι δὲ οἱ
πατέρες αὐτοῦ, θρέψαντες σὺν ἐπιμελείᾳ καὶ παιδεύσαντες ὡς ἐνεδέχετο
σπουδαίως, [B] ὁ δὲ οὕτω νῦν περιέρχεται, πάντα ἀφείς, οὐδὲν τῶν
προσαιτούντων κρείττων; ἐκείνου μὲν οὖν ἐγὼ οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως τότε
κατειρωνευσάμην· εὖ μέντοι γε ἴσθι ταῦτα καὶ(88) ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀληθῶς κυνῶν
τοὺς πολλοὺς διανοουμένους. καὶ οὐ τοῦτο δεινόν ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁρᾷς ὅτι καὶ
πλοῦτον ἀγαπᾶν πείθουσι καὶ πενίαν μισεῖν καὶ τὴν γαστέρα θεραπεύειν καὶ
τοῦ σώματος ἕνεκα πάντα ὑπομένειν πόνον καὶ πιαίνειν τὸν τῆς ψυχῆς δεσμὸν
καὶ τράπεζαν παρατίθεσθαι πολυτελῆ [C] καὶ μηδέποτε νύκτωρ καθεύδειν
μόνον, ἀλλὰ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα δρᾶν ἐν τῷ σκότῳ λανθάνοντα; τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστι
τοῦ Ταρτάρου χεῖρον; οὐ βέλτιόν ἐστιν ὑπὸ τὴν Χάρυβδιν καὶ τὸν Κωκυτὸν καὶ
μυρίας ὀργυιὰς κατὰ γῆς δῦναι, ἢ πεσεῖν εἰς τοιοῦτον βίον αἰδοίοις καὶ
γαστρὶ δουλεύοντα, καὶ οὐδὲ τούτοις ἁπλῶς ὥσπερ τὰ θηρία, πράγματα δὲ
ἔχειν, ὡς ἂν καὶ λάθοιμεν ὑπὸ τῷ σκότῳ ταῦτα ἐξεργαζόμενοι; καίτοι πόσῳ
[D] κρεῖττον ἀπέχεσθαι παντάπασιν αὐτῶν; εἰ δὲ μὴ ῥᾴδιον, οἱ Διογένους
νόμοι καὶ Κράτητος ὑπὲρ τούτων οὐκ ἀτιμαστέοι· ἔρωτα λύει λιμός, ἂν δὲ
τούτῳ χρῆσθαι μὴ δύνῃ,(89) βρόχος. οὐκ οἶσθα, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔπραξαν ἐκεῖνοι τῷ
βίῳ διδόντες ὁδὸν εὐτελείας; οὐ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν μαζοφάγων, φησὶν ὁ Διογένης,
[199] οἱ τύραννοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν δειπνούντων πολυτελῶς. καὶ ὁ Κράτης μέντοι
πεποίηκεν ὕμνον εἰς τὴν Εὐτέλειαν·

(Do you not know how people lure away the young from philosophy by
continually uttering now one slander and then another against all the
philosophers in turn? The genuine disciples of Pythagoras and Plato and
Aristotle are called sorcerers and sophists and conceited and quacks. If
here and there among the Cynics one is really virtuous he is regarded with
pity. For instance I remember that once my tutor said to me when he saw my
fellow‐pupil Iphicles with his hair unkempt and his clothes in tatters on
his chest and wearing a wretched cloak in severe winter weather: “What
evil genius can have plunged him into this sad state which makes not only
him pitiable but even more so his parents who reared him with care and
gave him the best education they could! And now he goes about in this
condition, neglecting everything and no better than a beggar!” At the time
I answered him with some pleasantry or other. But I assure you that the
multitude hold these views about genuine Cynics also. And that is not so
dreadful, but do you see that they persuade them to love wealth, to hate
poverty, to minister to the belly, to endure any toil for the body’s sake,
to fatten that prison of the soul, to keep up an expensive table, never to
sleep alone at night,(90) provided only that they do all this in the dark
and are not found out? Is not this worse than Tartarus? Is it not better
to sink beneath Charybdis and Cocytus or ten thousand fathoms deep in the
earth(91) than to fall into a life like this, enslaved to lust and
appetite, and not even to these simply and openly, like the beasts, but to
take pains so that when we act thus we may be hidden under cover of
darkness? And yet much better is it to refrain altogether from all this!
And if that be difficult the rules of Diogenes and Crates on these matters
are not to be despised: “Fasting quenches desire, and if you cannot fast,
hang yourself.”(92) Do you not know that those great men lived as they did
in order to introduce among men the way of plain living? "For," says
Diogenes, “it is not among men who live on bread that you will find
tyrants, but among those who eat costly dinners.” Moreover Crates wrote a
hymn to Plain Living:)


    Χαῖρε, θεὰ δέσποινα, σοφῶν ἀνδρῶν ἀγάπημα,
    Εὐτελίη, κλεινῆς ἔγγονε Σωφροσύνης.

    (“Hail, goddess and Queen, darling of wise men, Plain Living,
    child of glorious Temperance.”(93))


ἔστω δὴ μὴ κατὰ τὸν Οἰνόμαον ὁ κύων ἀναιδὴς μηδὲ ἀναίσχυντος μηδὲ
ὑπερόπτης πάντων ὁμοῦ θείων τε καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων, ἀλλὰ εὐλαβὴς μὲν τὰ πρὸς τὸ
θεῖον, ὥσπερ Διογένης· [B] ἐπείσθη γοῦν ἐκεῖνος τῷ Πυθίῳ, καὶ οὐ
μετεμέλησεν αὐτῷ πεισθέντι· εἰ δὲ, ὅτι μὴ προσῄει μηδὲ ἐθεράπευε τοὺς νεὼς
μηδὲ τὰ ἀγάλματα μηδὲ τοὺς βωμούς, οἴεταί τις ἀθεότητος εἶναι σημεῖον, οὐκ
ὀρθῶς νομίζει· ἦν γὰρ οὐδὲν αὐτῷ τῶν τοιούτων, οὐ λιβανωτός, οὐ σπονδή,
οὐκ ἀργύριον, ὅθεν αὐτὰ πρίαιτο. εἰ δὲ ἐνόει περὶ θεῶν ὀρθῶς, ἤρκει τοῦτο
μόνον· αὐτῇ γὰρ αὐτοὺς ἐθεράπευε(94) τῇ ψυχῇ, διδοὺς οἶμαι τὰ τιμιώτατα
τῶν ἑαυτοῦ, τὸ καθοσιῶσαι τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ψυχὴν διὰ τῶν ἐννοιῶν. [C]
ἀπερυθριάτω δὲ μηδαμῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἑπόμενος τῷ λόγῳ πρότερον μὲν αὑτῷ χειρόηθες
καταστησάτω τὸ παθηματικὸν τῆς ψυχῆς μόριον, ὥστε παντάπασιν ἐξελεῖν αὐτὸ
καὶ μηδὲ ὅτι κρατεῖ τῶν ἡδονῶν εἰδέναι. εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ ἄμεινον ἐλθεῖν, εἰς
τὸ καί, εἰ πάσχει τις τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὅλως ἀγνοῆσαι· τοῦτο δὲ ἡμῖν οὐκ ἄλλως ἢ
διὰ τῶν γυμνασιῶν προσγένεται. ἵνα δὲ μή τις ὑπολάβῃ με ταῦτα ἄλλως
λέγειν, ἐκ τῶν [D] παιγνίων Κράτητος ὀλίγα σοι παραγράψω·

(Then let not the Cynic be like Oenomaus shameless or impudent, or a
scorner of everything human and divine, but reverent towards sacred
things, like Diogenes. For he obeyed the Pythian oracle nor did he repent
of his obedience. But if anyone supposes that because he did not visit the
temples or worship statues or altars this is a sign of impiety, he does
not think rightly. For Diogenes possessed nothing that is usually offered,
incense or libations or money to buy them with. But if he held right
opinions about the gods, that in itself was enough. For he worshipped them
with his whole soul, thus offering them as I think the most precious of
his possessions, the dedication of his soul through his thoughts. Let not
the Cynic be shameless, but led by reason let him first make subservient
to himself the emotional part of his soul so that he may entirely do away
with it and not even be aware that he is superior to pleasures. For it is
nobler to attain to this, I mean to complete ignorance whether one has any
such emotions. And this comes to us only through training. And that none
may think I say this at random I will add for your benefit a few lines
from the lighter verse of Crates:(95))


    Μνημοσύνης καὶ Ζηνὸς Ὀλυμπίου ἀγλαὰ τέκνα,
      Μοῦσαι Πιερίδες, κλῦτέ μοι εὐχομένῳ·
    Χόρτον ἀεὶ συνεχῶς δότε γαστέρι, ἥτε μοι αἰεὶ
      Χωρὶς δουλοσύνης λιτὸν ἔθηκε βίον.

    (“Glorious children of Memory and Olympian Zeus, ye Muses of
    Pieria, hearken to my prayer! Give me without ceasing victuals for
    my belly which has always made my life frugal and free from
    slavery....”)

                  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

      Ὠφέλιμον δὲ φίλοις, μὴ γλυκερὸν τίθετε.
    Χρήματα δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλω συνάγειν κλυτά, κανθάρου ὄλβον(96)
      [200] Μύρμηκός τ᾽ ἄφενος χρήματα μαιόμενος,
    Ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνης μετέχειν καὶ πλοῦτον ἀγείρειν(97)
      Εὔφορον, εὔκτητον, τίμιον εἰς ἀρετήν.
    Τῶν δὲ τυχὼν Ἑρμῆν καὶ Μούσας ἱλάσομ᾽ ἁγνάς.
      Οὐ δαπάναις τρυφεραῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀρεταῖς ὁσίαις.

    (“To my friends make me useful rather than agreeable. As for money
    I desire not to amass conspicuous wealth, seeking after the wealth
    of the beetle or the substance of the ant; nay, I desire to
    possess justice and to collect riches that are easily carried,
    easily acquired, of great avail for virtue. If I may but win these
    I will propitiate Hermes and the holy Muses not with costly
    dainties but with pious virtues.”)


εἰ χρή σοι περὶ [B] τούτων γράφειν, ἔχω πλείονα τοῦ ἀνδρός. ἐντυχὼν δὲ τῷ
Χαιρωνεῖ Πλουτάρχῳ τὸν Κράτητος ἀναγράψαντι βίον οὐδὲν ἐκ παρέργου
μανθάνειν δεήσει τὸν ἄνδρα.

(If it be of any use to write for you about such things I could recite
still more maxims by this same Crates. But if you will read Plutarch of
Chaeronea, who wrote his _Life_, there will be no need for you to learn
his character superficially from me.)

Ἀλλ᾽ ἐπανίωμεν ἐπ᾽ ἐκεῖνο πάλιν, ὅτι χρὴ τὸν ἀρχόμενον κυνίζειν [C] αὑτῷ
πρότερον ἐπιτιμᾶν πικρῶς καὶ ἐξελέγχειν καὶ μὴ κολακεύειν, ἀλλὰ ἐξετάζειν
ὅ,τι μάλιστα αὑτὸν ἀκριβῶς, εἰ τῇ πολυτελείᾳ τῶν σιτίων χαίρει, εἰ
στρωμνῆς δεῖται μαλακῆς, εἰ τιμῆς ἢ δόξης ἐστὶν ἥττων, εἰ τοῦτο ζηλοῖ τὸ
περιβλέπεσθαι καί, εἰ καὶ κενὸν εἴη, τίμιον ὅμως νομίζει. μηδὲ εἰς
συμπεριφορὰν ὄχλων [D] καθυφείσθω,(98) γενέσθω δὲ τρυφῆς μηδὲ ἄκρῳ, φασί,
τῷ δακτύλωι, ἕως ἂν αὐτὴν παντελῶς πατήσῃ. τότε ἤδη καὶ τῶν τοιούτων, ἂν
προσπίπτῃ, θιγεῖν οὐδὲν κωλύει. ἐπεὶ καὶ τῶν ταύρων ἀκούω τοὺς
ἀσθενεστέρους ἐξίστασθαι τῆς ἀγέλης καὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς νεμομένους ἀγείρειν
τὴν ἰσχὺν ἐν μέρει καὶ κατ᾽ ὀλίγον, εἶθ᾽ οὕτως ἐπιέναι καὶ προκαλεῖσθαι
καὶ τῆς ἀγέλης ἀμφισβητεῖν τοῖς προκατέχουσιν, ὡς μᾶλλον ἀξιωτέρους
προΐστασθαι. ὅστις οὖν κυνίζειν ἐθέλει μήτε τὸν τρίβωνα [201] μήτε τὴν
πήραν μήτε τὴν βακτηρίαν καὶ τὴν κόμην ἀγαπάτω μόνον, ἵν᾽ ὥσπερ ἐν κώμῃ
βαδίζῃ κουρείων καὶ διδασκαλείων ἐνδεεῖ ἄκαρτος καὶ ἀγράμματος, ἀλλὰ τὸν
λόγον ἀντὶ τοῦ σκήπτρον καὶ τὴν ἔνστασιν ἀντὶ τῆς πήρας τῆς κυνικῆς
ὑπολαμβανέτω φιλοσοφίας γνωρίσματα. παρρησίᾳ δὲ χρηστέον αὐτῷ πρῶτον
ὁπόσου πέφυκεν ἄξιος ἐπιδειξαμένῳ, ὥσπερ οἶμαι Κράτης καὶ Διογένης, οἵ
πᾶσαν μὲν ἀπειλὴν τύχης καὶ [B] εἴτε παιδιὰν εἴτε παροινίαν χρὴ φάναι
τοσοῦτον ἀπέσχον τοῦ δυσκόλως ἐνεγκεῖν, ὥστε ἁλοὺς μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν
καταποντιστῶν ὁ Διογένης ἔπαιζεν, ὁ Κράτης δὲ ἐδημοσίευε τὴν οὐσίαν, εἶτα
τὸ σῶμα βλαβεὶς ἔσκωπτεν ἑαυτὸν εἰς τὴν χωλότητα τοῦ σκέλους καὶ τὸ κυρτὸν
τῶν ὤμων, ἐπορεύετο δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς τῶν φίλων ἑστίας ἄκλητος καὶ(99)
κεκλημένος, διαλλάσσων τοὺς οἰκειοτάτους ἀλλήλοις, εἴποτε στασιάζοντας
αἴσθοιτο, ἐπετίμα δὲ οὐ μετὰ πικρίας, [C] ἀλλὰ μετὰ χάριτος, οὐχ ἵνα
συκοφαντεῖν δοκῇ τοὺς σωφρονισθέντας, ὠφελεῖν δὲ ἐθέλων αὐτούς τε ἐκείνους
καὶ τοὺς ἀκούοντας.

(But let me go back to what I said before, that he who is entering on the
career of a Cynic ought first censure severely and cross‐examine himself,
and without any self‐flattery ask himself the following questions in
precise terms: whether he enjoys expensive food; whether he cannot do
without a soft bed; whether he is the slave of rewards and the opinion of
men; whether it is his ambition to attract public notice and even though
that be an empty honour(100) he still thinks it worth while. Nevertheless
he must not let himself drift with the current of the mob or touch vulgar
pleasure even with the tip of his finger, as the saying is, until he has
succeeded in trampling on it; then and not before he may permit himself to
dip into that sort of thing if it come his way. For instance I am told
that bulls which are weaker than the rest separate themselves from the
herd and pasture alone while they store up their strength in every part of
their bodies by degrees, until they rejoin the herd in good condition, and
then they challenge its leaders to contend with them, in confidence that
they are more fit to take the lead. Therefore let him who wishes to be a
Cynic philosopher not adopt merely their long cloak or wallet or staff or
their way of wearing the hair, as though he were like a man walking
unshaved and illiterate in a village that lacked barbers’ shops and
schools, but let him consider that reason rather than a staff and a
certain plan of life rather than a wallet are the mintmarks of the Cynic
philosophy. And freedom of speech he must not employ until he have first
proved how much he is worth, as I believe was the case with Crates and
Diogenes. For they were so far from bearing with a bad grace any threat of
fortune, whether one call such threats caprice or wanton insult, that once
when he had been captured by pirates Diogenes joked with them; as for
Crates he gave his property to the state, and being physically deformed he
made fun of his own lame leg and hunched shoulders. But when his friends
gave an entertainment he used to go, whether invited or not,(101) and
would reconcile his nearest friends if he learned that they had
quarrelled. He used to reprove them not harshly but with a charming manner
and not so as to seem to persecute those whom he wished to reform, but as
though he wished to be of use both to them and to the bystanders.)

Καὶ οὐ τοῦτο ῆν τὸ προηγούμενον αὐτοῖς τέλος· ἀλλ᾽, ὅπερ ἔφην, ἐσκόπουν
ὅπως αὐτοὶ μὲν εὐδαιμονήσουσιν,(102) ἔμελε δὲ αὐτοῖς τῶν ἄλλων τοσοῦτον
ὅσον ξυνίεσαν οἶμαι φύσει κοινωνικὸν καὶ πολιτικὸν ζῷον τὸν ἄνθρωπον
εἶναι, καὶ τοὺς συμπολιτευομένους ὠφέλησαν οὐ τοῖς παραδείγμασι μόνον,
ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς λόγοις. [D] ὅστις οὖν ἂν ἐθέλῃ Κυνικὸς εἶναι καὶ σπουδαῖος
ἀνήρ, αὑτοῦ πρότερον ἐπιμεληθείς, ὥσπερ Διογένης καὶ Κράτης ἐξελαυνέτω μὲν
τῆς ψυχῆς ἅπαντα ἐκ πάσης τὰ πάθη, ὀρθῷ δὲ ἐπιτρέψας τὰ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν λόγῳ
καὶ νῷ κυβερνάσθω. κεφάλαιον γὰρ ἦν, ὡς ἐγὼ οἶμαι, τοῦτο τῆς Διογένους
φιλοσοφίας.

(Yet this was not the chief end and aim of those Cynics, but as I said
their main concern was how they might themselves attain to happiness and,
as I think, they occupied themselves with other men only in so far as they
comprehended that man is by nature a social and political animal; and so
they aided their fellow‐citizens, not only by practising but by preaching
as well. Then let him who wishes to be a Cynic, earnest and sincere, first
take himself in hand like Diogenes and Crates, and expel from his own soul
and from every part of it all passions and desires, and entrust all his
affairs to reason and intelligence and steer his course by them. For this
in my opinion was the sum and substance of the philosophy of Diogenes.)

Εἰ δὲ ἑταίρᾳ ποτὲ προσῆλθεν ὁ ἀνήρ· καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο τυχὸν ἅπαξ ἢ οὐδὲ
ἅπαξ ἐγένετο· ὅταν ἡμῖν [202] τὰ ἄλλα κατὰ τὸν Διογένη γένηται σπουδαῖος,
ἂν αὐτῷ(103) φανῇ καὶ τοιοῦτόν τι δρᾶν(104) φανερῶς ἐν ὀφθαλμοὶς πάντων,
οὐ μεμψόμεθα οὐδὲ αἰτιασόμεθα. πρότερον μέντοι τὴν Διογένους ἡμῖν
ἐπιδειξάμενος εὐμάθειαν καὶ τὴν ἀγχίνοιαν καὶ τὴν ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν
ἐλευθερίαν, αὐτάρκειαν, δικαιοσύνην, σωφροσύνην, εὐλάβειαν, χάριν,
προσοχήν, ὡς μηδὲν εἰκῇ μηδὲ μάτην μηδὲ ἀλόγως ποιεῖν· [B] ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτα
τῆς Διογένους ἐστὶ φιλοσοφίας οἰκεῖα· πατείτω τῦφον, καταπαιζέτω τῶν τὰ
μὲν ἀναγκαῖα τῆς φύσεως ἔργα κρυπτόντων ἐν σκότῳ· φημὶ δὲ τῶν περιττωμάτων
τὰς ἐκκρίσεις· ἐν μέσαις δὲ ταῖς ἀγοραῖς καὶ ταῖς πόλεσιν ἐπιτηδευόντων τὰ
βιαιότατα καὶ μηδὲν ἡμῶν οἰκεῖα τῇ φύσει, χρημάτων ἁρπαγάς, συκοφαντίας,
γραφὰς ἀδίκους, διώξεις ἄλλων τοιούτων συρφετωδῶν πραγμάτων. ἐπεὶ καὶ
Διογένης εἴτε [C] ἀπέπαρδεν εἴτε ἀπεπάτησεν εἴτε ἄλλο τι τοιοῦτον ἔπραξεν,
ὥσπερ οὖν λέγουσιν, ἐν ἀγορᾷ, τὸν ἐκείνων πατῶν τῦφον ἐποίει, διδάσκων
αὐτούς, ὅτι πολλῷ φαυλότερα καὶ χαλεπώτερα τούτων ἐπιτηδεύουσι. τὰ μὲν γάρ
ἐστιν ἡμῖν πᾶσι κατὰ φύσιν, τὰ δὲ ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν οὐδενί, πάντα δὲ ἐκ
διαστροφῆς ἐπιτηδεύεται.

(And if Diogenes did sometimes visit a courtesan—though even this happened
only once perhaps or not even once—let him who would be a Cynic first
satisfy us that he is, like Diogenes, a man of solid worth, and then if he
see fit to do that sort of thing openly and in the sight of all men, we
shall not reproach him with it or accuse him. First however we must see
him display the ability to learn and the quick wit of Diogenes, and in all
other relations he must show the same independence, self‐sufficiency,
justice, moderation, piety, gratitude, and the same extreme carefulness
not to act at random or without a purpose or irrationally. For these too
are characteristic of the philosophy of Diogenes. Then let him trample on
vaingloriousness, let him ridicule those who though they conceal in
darkness the necessary functions of our nature—for instance the secretion
of what is superfluous—yet in the centre of the market‐place and of our
cities carry on practices that are most brutal and by no means akin to our
nature, for instance robbery of money, false accusations, unjust
indictments, and the pursuit of other rascally business of the same sort.
On the other hand when Diogenes made unseemly noises or obeyed the call of
nature or did anything else of that sort in the market‐place, as they say
he did, he did so because he was trying to trample on the conceit of the
men I have just mentioned, and to teach them that their practices were far
more sordid and insupportable than his own. For what he did was in
accordance with the nature of all of us, but theirs accorded with no man’s
real nature, one may say, but were all due to moral depravity.)

Ἀλλ᾽ οἱ νῦν τοῦ Διογένους ζηλωταὶ τὸ ῥᾷστον καὶ κουφότατον ἑλόμενοι τὸ
κρεῖττον οὐκ εἶδον· σύ τε ἐκείνων [D] εἶναι σεμνότερος ἐθέλων ἀπεπλανήθης
τοσοῦτον τῆς Διογένους προαιρέσεως, ὥστε αὐτὸν ἐλεεινὸν ἐνόμισας. εἰ δὲ
τούτοις μὲν ἠπίστεις ὑπὲρ ἀνδρὸς λεγομένοις, ὃν οἱ πάντες Ἕλληνες τότε
ἐθαύμασαν μετὰ Σωκράτη καὶ Πυθαγόραν ἐπὶ Πλάτωνος καὶ Ἀριστοτέλους, οὗ
γέγονεν ἀκροατῆς ὁ τοῦ σωφρονεστάτου καὶ συνετωτάτου Ζήνωνος καθηγεμών,
οὓς οὐκ εἰκὸς ἦν ἅπαντας ἀπατηθῆναι περὶ ἀνδρὸς οὕτω φαύλου, ὁποῖον σὺ
διακωμῳδεῖς, [203] ὦ βέλτιστε, ἴσως ἄν τι πλέον ἐσκόπησας περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ
πορρωτέρω προῆλθες τῆς ἐμπειρίας τἀνδρός. τίνα γὰρ οὐκ ἐξέπληξε τῶν
Ἑλλήνων ἡ Διογένους καρτερία, βασιλικῆς οὐκ ἔξω μεγαλοψυχίας οὖσα, καὶ
φιλοπονία; ἐκάθευδεν ἁνὴρ ἐπὶ στιβάδος ἐν τῷ πίθῳ βέλτιον ἢ μέγας βασιλεὺς
ὑπὸ τοῖς ἐπιχρύσοις ὀρόφοις ἐν τῇ μαλθακῇ κλίνῃ, ἤσθιε τὴν μᾶζαν ἥδιον ἢ
σὺ νῦν τὰς Σικελικὰς [B] ἐσθίεις τραπέζας, ἐλούετο ψυχρῇ(105) τὸ σῶμα πρὸς
ἀέρα ξηραίνων ἀντὶ τῶν ὀθονίων, οἷς σὺ ἀπομάττῃ, φιλοσοφώτατε. πάνυ σοι
προσήκει κωμῳδεῖν ἐκεῖνον, ὅτι κατειργάσω τὸν Ξέρξην, ὡς ὁ Θεμιστοκλῆς, ἢ
τὸν Δαρεῖον, ὡς ὁ Μακεδὼν Ἀλέξανδρος. εἰ σμικρὰ τὰς βίβλους ἀνελίττων
ἐμελέτας ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς οἱ πολιτικοὶ καὶ πολυπράγμονες, ἔγνως ἄν, ὅπως
Ἀλέξανδρος ἀγασθῆναι λέγεται τὴν Διογένους μεγαλοψυχίαν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι σοι
τούτων οὐδέν, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, σπουδαῖον· πόθεν; πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ· γυναικῶν
ἀθλίων τεθαύμακας φιλονεικῶν(106) βίον.

(In our own day, however, the imitators of Diogenes have chosen only what
is easiest and least burdensome and have failed to see his nobler side.
And as for you, in your desire to be more dignified than those early
Cynics you have strayed so far from Diogenes’ plan of life that you
thought him an object of pity. But if you did not believe all this that I
say about a man whom all the Greeks in the generation of Plato and
Aristotle admired next to Socrates and Pythagoras, a man whose pupil was
the teacher of the most modest and most wise Zeno,—and it is not likely
that they were all deceived about a man as contemptible as you make him
out to be in your travesty,—well, in that case, my dear sir, perhaps you
might have studied his character more carefully and you would have
progressed further in your knowledge of the man. Was there, I ask, a
single Greek who was not amazed by the endurance of Diogenes and by his
perseverance, which had in it a truly royal greatness of soul? The man
used to sleep in his jar on a bed of leaves more soundly than the Great
King on his soft couch under a gilded roof; he used to eat his crust(107)
with a better appetite than you now eat your Sicilian courses(108); he
used to bathe his body in cold water and dry himself in the open air
instead of with the linen towels with which you rub yourself down, my most
philosophic friend! It becomes you well to ridicule him because, I
suppose, like Themistocles you conquered Xerxes, or Darius like Alexander
of Macedon. But if you had the least habit of reading books as I do,
though I am a statesman and engrossed in public affairs, you would know
how much Alexander is said to have admired Diogenes’ greatness of soul.
But you care little, I suppose, for any of these things. How should you
care? Far from it!(109) You admire and emulate the life of wretched
women.)

Εἰ μὲν οὖν ὁ λόγος τι πλέον ἐποίησεν, οὐκ ἐμὸν μᾶλλον ἢ σόν ἐστι κέρδος·
εἰ δὲ οὐδὲν περαίνομεν ἐκ τοῦ παραχρῆμα περὶ τῶν τοιούτων ἀπνευστὶ τὸ δὴ
λεγόμενον συνείραντες· ἔστι γὰρ πάρεργον ἡμέραιν δυοῖν, ὡς ἴσασιν αἱ
Μοῦσαι, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ σὺ(110) αὐτός· παραμενέτω μέν σοι ὁπόσα πρόσθεν
ἐγνώκεις, ἡμῖν δὲ οὐ μεταμελήσει τῆς εἰς τὸν ἄνδρα εὐφημίας.

(However, if my discourse has improved you at all you will have gained
more than I. But even if I accomplish nothing at the moment by writing on
such a great subject thus hastily, and, as the saying is, without taking
breath(111)—for I gave to it only the leisure of two days, as the Muses or
rather you yourself will bear me witness—then do you abide by your former
opinions, but I at any rate shall never regret having spoken of that great
man with due reverence.)





ORATION VII




Introduction to Oration VII


The Seventh Oration is directed against the Cynic Heracleios, who had
ventured to recite before an audience when Julian was present a myth or
allegory in which the gods were irreverently handled. Julian raises the
question whether fables and myths are suitable for a Cynic discourse. He
names the regular divisions of philosophy and decides that the use of
myths may properly be allowed only to ethical philosophers and writers on
theology: that myth is intended always as a means of religious teaching
and should be addressed to children and those whose intellect does not
allow them to envisage the truth without some such assistance. In
Sallust’s treatise _On the Gods and the World_ he gives much the same
account of the proper function of myths and divides them into five
species, giving examples of each. “To wish to teach the whole truth about
the gods to all produces contempt in the foolish, because they cannot
understand, and lack of zeal in the good; whereas to conceal the truth by
myths prevents the contempt of the foolish and compels the good to
practise philosophy.”(112) This is precisely the opinion of Julian as
expressed in the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Orations. Though both Julian and
Sallust explain the myths away they are never rationalistic, and never
offer the least excuse for scepticism. Julian’s explanation of the Semele
myth,(113) which makes Semele an inspired prophetess and not the mother of
Dionysus, tends to the greater glory of the god. The conclusion is that
Heracleios should not have used myth at all, but in any case he used the
wrong sort and wrote in the wrong spirit. He should have used such a myth
as that composed by Prodicus the sophist on the Choice of Heracles at the
Crossroads, an allegory which is more than once cited by Julian and was a
favourite illustration in later Greek literature.(114)

To show Heraclius what he might have written with propriety Julian adds a
parable of his own modelled on that of Prodicus. In this he himself plays
the part of a second Heracles, and takes the opportunity to vilify
Constantius and point out his own mission of reformer and restorer of
order and religion to the Empire. Throughout the parable there are
striking resemblances with the First Oration of Dio Chrysostom, and
Asmus(115) has made a detailed comparison of the two writers to prove that
Julian wrote with Dio before him. In many of these parallels both Julian
and Dio can be traced to a common classical source, usually Plato, but
there is no doubt that Julian was thoroughly familiar with the work of Dio
and often used the same illustrations. Themistius(116) however uses the
Prodicus myth in much the same words as Dio, and it is imitated also by
Maximus of Tyre.(117)

In conclusion Julian praises the earlier Cynics and criticises the later,
in much the same words as he had used in the Sixth Oration.




[204] ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Emperor)

ΠΡΟΣ ΗΡΑΚΛΕΙΟΝ ΚΥΝΙΚΟΝ

(To the Cynic Heracleios)

ΠΕΡΙ ΤΟΥ ΠΩΣ ΚΥΝΙΣΤΕΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΙ ΠΡΕΠΕΙ ΤΩ ΚΥΝΙ ΜΥΘΟΥΣ ΠΛΑΤΤΕΙΝ

(How a Cynic Ought to Behave, and Whether it is Proper For Him to Compose
Myths)

Ἦ πολλὰ γίνεται ἐν μακρῷ χρόνῳ· τοῦτο ἐκ τῆς κωμῳδίας ἀκηκοότι μοι πρῴην
ἐπῆλθεν ἐκβοῆσαι, ὁπηνίκα παρακληθέντες ἠκροώμεθα κυνὸς οὔτι τορὸν οὐδὲ
γενναῖον ὑλακτοῦντος, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ αἱ τίτθαι μύθους ᾄδοντος καὶ οὐδὲ τούτους
ὑγιῶς διατιθεμένου. παραχρῆμα μὲν οὖν ἐπῆλθέ μοι διαναστάντι διαλῦσαι τὸν
σύλλογον· [B] ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐχρῆν ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ κωμῳδουμένων Ἡρακλέους καὶ
Διονύσου παρὰ τῶν κωμῳδῶν ἀκούειν, οὐ τοῦ λέγοντος, ἀλλὰ τῶν συνειλεγμένων
χάριν ὑπέμεινα, μάλλον δέ, εἰ χρή τι καὶ νεανικώτερον εἰπεῖν, ἡμῶν αὐτῶν
ἕνεκα καὶ τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν ὑπὸ δεισιδαιμονίας μᾶλλον [C] ἢ διανοίας εὐσεβοῦς
καὶ λελογισμένης, ὥσπερ αἱ πελειάδες, ὑπὸ τῶν ῥηματίων σοβηθεὶς ἀναπτῆναι.
ἔμενον δὲ ἐκεῖνο πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν εἰπὼν

(“Truly with the lapse of time many things come to pass!”(118) This verse
I have heard in a comedy and the other day I was tempted to proclaim it
aloud, when by invitation we attended the lecture of a Cynic whose barking
was neither distinct nor noble; but he was crooning myths as nurses do,
and even these he did not compose in any profitable fashion. For a moment
my impulse was to rise and break up the meeting. But though I had to
listen as one does when Heracles and Dionysus are being caricatured in the
theatre by comic poets,(119) I bore it to the end, not for the speaker’s
sake but for the sake of the audience, or rather, if I may presume to say
so, it was still more for my own sake, so that I might not seem to be
moved by superstition rather than by a pious and rational sentiment and to
be scared into flight by his miserable words like a timid dove. So I
stayed and repeated to myself the famous line)


    Τέτλαθι δή, κραδίη, καὶ κύντερον ἄλλο ποτ᾽ ἔτλης,

    (“Bear it my heart: yea thou didst of yore endure things yet more
    shameful.”(120))


ἀνάσχου καὶ κυνὸς ληροῦντος ὀλίγον ἡμέρας μόριον, οὐ πρῶτον ἀκούεις τῶν
θεῶν βλασφημουμένων, οὐχ οὕτω τὰ κοινὰ πράττομεν καλῶς, οὐχ οὕτω τῶν ἰδίων
ἕνεκα σωφρονοῦμεν, οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ εὐτυχεῖς [205] ἐσμεν, ὥστε τὰς ἀκοὰς
καθαρὰς ἔχειν ἢ τὸ τελευταῖον γοῦν τὰ ὄμματα μὴ κεχράνθαι τοῖς παντοδαποῖς
τουτουὶ τοῦ σιδηροῦ γένους ἀσεβήμασιν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὥσπερ ἐνδεεῖς ἡμᾶς τῶν
τοιούτων κακῶν ἀνέπλησεν οὐκ εὐαγῶν ὁ κύων ῥημάτων τὸν ἄριστον τῶν θεῶν
ὀνομάσας, ὡς μήποτε ὤφελε μήτ᾽ ἐκεῖνος εἰπεῖν μήτε ἡμεῖς ἀκοῦσαι, δεῦρο
πειραθῶμεν αὐτὸν ἐφ᾽ ὑμῶν διδάξαι, [B] πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι τῷ κυνὶ λόγους
μᾶλλον ἢ μύθους προσήκει γράφειν, εἶτα ὁποίας καὶ τίνας χρὴ ποιεῖσθαι τὰς
διασκευὰς τῶν μύθων, εἴ τι ἄρα καὶ φιλοσοφία προσδεῖται τῆς μυθογραφίας,
ἐπὶ πᾶσι δὲ ὑπὲρ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς εὐλαβείας ὀλίγα διαλέξομαι· τοῦτο γάρ
μοι καὶ τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς παρόδου γέγονεν αἴτιον καίπερ οὐκ ὄντι συγγραφικῷ καὶ
τὸ ἐν τῷ πλήθει λέγειν ὥσπερ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἐπαχθῶν καὶ σοφιστικῶν τὸν
ἔμπροσθεν [C] χρόνον παραιτησαμένῳ. μικρὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦ μύθου καθάπερ τινὰ
γενεαλογίαν ἴσως οὐκ ἀνάρμοστον ἐμοί τε φάναι ὑμῖν τε ἀκοῦσαι.

(Endure for the brief fraction of a day even a babbling Cynic! It is not
the first time that thou hast had to hear the gods blasphemed! Our state
is not so well governed, our private life is not so virtuous, in a word we
are not so favoured by fortune that we can keep our ears pure or at any
rate our eyes at least undefiled by the many and various impieties of this
iron race. And now as though we had not enough of such vileness this Cynic
fills our ears with his blasphemies, and has uttered the name of the
highest of the gods in such wise as would he had never spoken nor I heard!
But since he has done this, come, let me in your presence try to teach him
this lesson; first that it is more becoming for a Cynic to write
discourses than myths; secondly, what sort of adaptations of the myths he
ought to make, if indeed philosophy really needs mythology at all; and
finally I shall have a few words to say about reverence for the gods. For
it is with this aim that I appear before you, I who have no talent for
writing and who have hitherto avoided addressing the general public, as I
have avoided all else that is tedious and sophistical. But perhaps it is
not unsuitable for me to say and for you to hear a few words about myth in
general as a sort of genealogy of that kind of writing.)

Τὴν μὲν οὖν ἀρχὴν ὁπόθεν ηὑρέθη καὶ ὅστις ὁ πρῶτος ἐπιχειρήσας τὸ ψεῦδος
πιθανῶς συνθεῖναι πρὸς ὠφέλειαν ἢ ψυχαγωγίαν τῶν ἀκροωμώνων, οὐ μᾶλλον
εὔροι τις ἂν ἢ εἴ τις ἐπιχειρήσειε τὸν πρῶτον πταρόντα ἢ χρεμψάμενον
ἀναζητεῖν. εἰ δέ, [D] ὥσπερ ἱππεῖς ἐν Θράκῃ καὶ Θετταλίᾳ, τοξόται δὲ καὶ
τὰ κουφότερα τῶν ὅπλων ἐν Ἰνδίᾳ καὶ Κρήτῃ καὶ Καρίᾳ ἀνεφάνη,(121) τῇ φύσει
τῆς χώρας ἀκολουθούντων οἶμαι τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων, οὕτω τις ὑπολαμβάνει καὶ
ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων πραγμάτων, ἐν οἷς ἕκαστα τιμᾶται, μάλιστα παρὰ τούτων αὐτὰ
καὶ πρῶτον ηὑρῆσθαι· τῶν ἀγελαίων ἔοικεν ἀνθρώπων εἶναι [206] τό γε ἐξ
ἀρχῆς ὁ μύθος εὕρημα, καὶ διαμένει ἐξ ἐκείνου μέχρι καὶ νῦν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς
πολιτευόμενον τὸ πρᾶγμα ὥσπερ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἀκροαμάτων, αὐλὸς καὶ κιθάρα,
τέρψεως ἕνεκα καὶ ψυχαγωγίας. ὥσπερ γὰρ οἱ(122) ὄρνιθες ἵπτασθαι καὶ νεῖν
οἱ(123) ἰχθύες αἵ τε ἔλαφοι θεῖν ἐπειδὴ πεφύκασιν οὐδὲν τοῦ διδαχθῆναι
προσδέονται, κἂν δήσῃ τις κἂν καθείρξῃ, πειρᾶται ὅμως χρῆσθαι τούτοις τοῖς
μορίοις, πρὸς ἃ σύνοιδεν αὑτοῖς πεφυκόσι, ταυτὶ τὰ ζῷα, οὕτως οἶμαι καὶ τὸ
τῶν ἀνθρώπων [B] γένος οὐκ ἄλλο τι τὴν ψυχὴν ἔχον ἢ λόγον καὶ ἐπιστήμην
ὥσπερ ἐγκαθειργμένην, ὃ δὴ καὶ λέγουσιν οἱ σοφοὶ δέναμιν, ἐπὶ τὸ μανθάνειν
τε(124) καὶ ζητεῖν καὶ πολυπραγμονεῖν, ὡς πρὸς οἰκειότατον ἑαυτῷ τῶν
ἔργων, τρέπεται· καὶ ὅτῳ μὲν εὐμενὴς θεὸς ταχέως ἔλυσε τὰ δεσμὰ καὶ τὴν
δύναμιν εἰς ἐνέργειαν ἤγαγε, τούτῳ πάρεστιν εὐθὺς ἐπιστήμη, τοῖς
δεδεμένοις δὲ ἔτι, [C] καθάπερ οἶμαι Ἰξίων νεφέλῃ τινὶ(125) ἀντὶ τῆς θεοῦ
λέγεται παραναπαύσασθαι, τούτοις ἀντ᾽ ἀληθοῦς ψευδὴς(126) ἐντέτηκε δόξα·
γίνεται γὰρ ἐντεῦθεν αὐτοῖς(127) τὰ ὑπηνέμια καὶ τερατώδη ταυτὶ τῆς
ἀληθοῦς ἐπιστήμης οἷον εἴδωλα ἄττα καὶ σκιαί· πράττουσι γοῦν πρὸ τῆς τῶν
ἀληθῶν ἐπιστήμης τὰ ψεύδη καὶ διδάσκουσί γε μάλα προθύμως καὶ μανθάνουσιν
ὥσπερ οἶμαι χρηστόν τι καὶ θαυμαστόν. εἰ δ᾽ ὅλως χρή τι καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν τοὺς
μύθους τὸ πρῶτον [D] πλασάντων ἀπολογήσασθαι, δοκοῦσί μοι ταῖς τῶν παιδίων
ψυχαῖς, ὥσπερ αἱ τίτθαι περὶ τὰς ὀδοντοφυïας κνησιῶσιν αἰτοῖς σκύτινα ἄττα
προσαρτῶσι(128) ταῖν χεροῖν, ἵνα αὐτῶν παραμυθήσωνται τὸ πάθος, οὕτω δὲ
καὶ οὗτοι τῷ ψυχαρίῳ πτεροφυοῦντι καὶ ποθοῦντι πλέον εἰδέναι τι,
διδάσκεσθαι δὲ οὔπω τἀληθῆ δυναμένῳ ταῦτα ἐποχετεύειν, ὥσπερ ἄρδοντες
ἄρουραν διψῶσαν, ἵνα δὴ οἶμαι αὐτῶν τὸν γαργαλισμὸν καὶ τὴν ὀδύνην
παραμυθήσωνται.

(Now one could no more discover where myth was originally invented and who
was the first to compose fiction in a plausible manner for the benefit or
entertainment of his hearers, than if one were to try to find out who was
the first man that sneezed or the first horse that neighed. But as cavalry
arose in Thrace and Thessaly(129) and archers and the lighter sort of
weapons in India, Crete and Caria—since the customs of the people were I
suppose adapted to the nature of the country,—just so we may assume about
other things as well, that where anything is highly prized by a nation it
was first discovered by that nation rather than by any other. On this
assumption then it seems likely that myth was originally the invention of
men given to pastoral pursuits, and from that day to this the making of
myths is still peculiarly cultivated by them, just as they first invented
instruments of music, the flute and the lyre, for their pleasure and
entertainment. For just as it is the nature of birds to fly and of fish to
swim and of stags to run, and hence they need not be taught to do so; and
even if one bind or imprison these animals they try none the less to use
those special parts of themselves for the purpose for which they know they
are naturally adapted; even so I think the human race whose soul is no
other than reason and knowledge imprisoned so to speak in the body—the
philosophers call it a potentiality—even so I say the human race inclines
to learning, research and study, as of all tasks most congenial to it. And
when a kindly god without delay looses a man’s fetters and brings that
potentiality into activity, then on the instant knowledge is his: whereas
in those who are still imprisoned false opinion instead of true is
implanted, just as, I think, Ixion is said to have embraced a sort of
cloud instead of the goddess.(130) And hence they produce wind‐eggs(131)
and monstrous births, mere phantoms and shadows so to speak of true
science. And thus instead of genuine science they profess false doctrines,
and are very zealous in learning and teaching such doctrines, as though
forsooth they were something useful and admirable. But if I am bound to
say something in defence of those who originally invented myths, I think
they wrote them for childish souls: and I liken them to nurses who hand
toys to the hands of children when they are irritated by teething, in
order to ease their suffering: so those mythologists wrote for the feeble
soul whose wings are just beginning to sprout, and who, though still
incapable of being taught the truth, is yearning for further knowledge,
and they poured in a stream of myths like men who water a thirsty field,
so as to soothe their irritation and pangs.(132))

[207] Τοῦ δὲ τοιούτου προβαίνοντος καὶ παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν εὐδοκιμοῦντος,
εἵλκυσαν ἐντεῦθεν οἱ ποιηταὶ τὸν αἶνον, ὃς τοῦ μύθου διαφέρει τῷ μὴ πρὸς
παῖδας, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἄνδρας πεποιῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ψυχαγωγίαν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ
παραίνεσιν ἔχειν τινά. βούλεται γὰρ ἐπικρυπτόμενος παραινεῖν τε καὶ
διδάσκειν, ὅταν ὁ λέγων τὸ φανερῶς εἰπεῖν εὐλαβῆται, [B] τὴν παρὰ τῶν
ἀκουόντων ὑφορώμενος ἀπέχθειαν. οὕτω τοι καὶ Ἡσίοδος αὐτὸ φαίνεται
πεποιηκώς· ὁ δὲ μετὰ τοῦτον Ἀρχίλοχος ὥσπερ ἥδυσμά τι περιτιθεὶς τῇ
ποιήσει, μύθοις οὐκ ὀλιγάκις ἐχρήσατο ὁρῶν, ὡς εἰκός, τὴν μὲν ὑπόθεσιν, ἣν
μετῄει, τῆς τοιαύτης ψυχαγωγίας ἐνδεῶς ἔχουσαν, σαφῶς δὲ ἐγνωκώς, ὅτι
στερομένη μύθου ποίησις ἐποποιΐα μόνον ἐστίν, ἐστέρηται δέ, ὡς ἂν εἴποι
τισ, ἑαυτῆς, οὐ γὰρ ἔτι λείπεται ποίησις, ἡδύσματα ταῦτα παρὰ τῆς
ποιητικῆς Μούσης ἐδρέψατο, [C] καὶ παρέθηκέ γε αὐτοῦ τούτου χάριν, ὅπως μὴ
σιλλογράφος τις, ἀλλὰ ποιητὴς νομισθείη.

(Then when the myth was gaining ground and coming into favour in Greece,
poets developed from it the fable with a moral, which differs from the
myth in that the latter is addressed to children and the former to men,
and is designed not merely to entertain them but conveys moral exhortation
besides. For the man who employs fable aims at moral exhortation and
instruction, though he conceals his aim and takes care not to speak
openly, for fear of alienating his hearers. Hesiod, for instance, seems to
have written with this in view. And after him Archilochus often employed
myths,(133) adorning and as it were seasoning his poetry with them,
probably because he saw that his subject matter needed something of this
sort to make it attractive, and he well knew that poetry without myth is
merely versification(134) and lacks, one may say, its essential
characteristic, and so ceases to be poetry at all. Therefore he culled
these sweets from the Muse of Poetry and offered them to his readers, in
order that he might not be ranked merely as a writer of satire but might
be counted a poet.)

Ὁ δὲ δὴ τῶν μύθων Ὅμηρος ἢ Θουκυδίδης ἢ Πλάτων, ἢ ὅ, τι βούλει καλεῖν
αὐτόν, Αἴσωπος ἦν ὁ Σάμιος, δοῦλος τὴν τύχην(135) μᾶλλον ἢ τὴν προαίρεσιν,
οὐκ ἄφρων μὴν(136) οὐδὲ κατ᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀνήρ. ᾧ γὰρ ὁ νόμος οὐ μετεδίδου
παρρησίας, τούτῳ προσῆκον ἦν ἐσκιαγραφημένας τὰς συμβουλὰς καὶ
πεποικιλμένας ἡδονῇ καὶ χάριτι παραφέρειν, ὥσπερ οἶμαι τῶν ἰατρῶν οἱ μὲν
ἐλεύθεροι τὸ δέον ἐπιτάττουσιν, [D] ἐὰν δὲ ἅμα τις οἰκέτης γένηται τὴν
τύχην καὶ τὴν τέχνην ἰατρός, πράγματα ἔχει κολακεύειν ἅμα καὶ θεραπεύειν
τὸν δεσπότην ἀναγκαζόμενος. εἰ μὲν οὖν καὶ τῷ κυνὶ προσήκει ταύτης τῆς
δουλείας, λεγέτω, γραφέτω, παραχωρείτω τῆς μυθολογίας αὐτῷ πᾶς ὁστισοῦν,
εἰ δὲ μόνος εἶναί φησιν ἐλεύθεροσ, ἐπὶ τί χρήσεται τοῖς μύθοις, οὐκ οἶδα.
πότερον ἵνα τὸ πικρὸν καὶ δάκνον τῆς συμβουλῆς ἡδονῇ καὶ χάριτι κεράσας
[208] ἅμα τε ὀνήσῃ καὶ ἀποφύγῃ τὸ προσλαβεῖν τι παρὰ τοῦ ὀνιναμένου κακόν;
ἀλλὰ τοῦτό ἐστι λίαν δουλοπρεπές. ἀλλ᾽ ἄμεινον ἄν τις διδαχθείη μὴ τὰ
πράγματα ἀκούων αὐτὰ μηδὲ τὰ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα κατὰ τὸν κωμικὸν τὴν
σκάφην σκάφην λέγοντα; ἀλλ᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ μὲν δεῖνος τὸν Φαέθοντα τί(137) δέον
ἐνομάσαι; [B] τί δὲ χραίνειν οὐκ εὐαγῶς τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τοῦ βασιλέως Ἠλίου;
τίς δὲ ὁ Πὰν καὶ τίς ὁ Ζεὺς τῶν χαμαὶ ἐρχομένων ἀνθρώπων ἄξιος καλεῖσθαι,
ἵν᾽ ἐκεῖθεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς μεταθῶμεν ἡμῶν τὰς διανοίας; καίτοι, εἰ καὶ τοῦτο
οἷόν τε ἦν, ἄμεινον ἦν αὐτοὺς ἐνομάσαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. ἦ γὰρ οὐχ οὕτω
κρεῖττον ἦν εἰπεῖν ἀνθρωπικὰ θεμένους ὀνόματα; μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ θεμένους,
[C] ἤρκει γὰρ ὅσαπερ ἡμῖν οἱ γονεῖς ἔθεντο. ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μήτε μαθεῖν ἐστι
ῥᾷον(138) διὰ τοῦ πλάσματος μήτε τῷ Κυνικῷ πρέπον πλάττειν τὰ τοιαῦτα, τοῦ
χάριν οὐκ ἐφεισάμεθα τοῦ πολυτελοῦς ἀναλώματος, πρὸς δὲ δὴ καὶ ἐφθείραμεν
τὸν χρόνον πλάττοντες καὶ συντιθέντες μυθάρια, εἶτα λογογραφοῦντες καὶ
ἐκμανθάνοντες;

(But the Homer of myths, or their Thucydides, or Plato, or whatever we
must call him, was Aesop of Samos, who was a slave by the accident of
birth rather than by temperament, and he proved his sagacity by this very
use of fable. For since the law did not allow him freedom of speech, he
had no resource but to shadow forth his wise counsels and trick them out
with charms and graces and so serve them up to his hearers. Just so, I
think, physicians who are free‐born men prescribe what is necessary, but
when a man happens to be a slave by birth and a physician by profession,
he is forced to take pains to flatter and cure his master at the same
time. Now if our Cynic also is subject to this sort of slavery, let him
recite myths, let him write them, and let everyone else under the sun
leave to him the _rôle_ of mythologist. But since he asserts that he alone
is free, I do not know what need he has of myths. Does he need to temper
the harshness and severity of his advice with sweetness and charm, so that
he may at once benefit mankind and avoid being harmed by one whom he has
benefited? Nay, that is too much like a slave. Moreover, would any man be
better taught by not hearing facts as they really are, or called by their
real names, like the comic poet who calls a spade a spade?(139) What need
to speak of Phaethon instead of So‐and‐so? What need sacrilegiously to
profane the title of King Helios? Who among men that walk here below(140)
is worthy to be called Pan or Zeus, as though we should ascribe to those
gods our human understanding? And yet if indeed this were possible it
would have been better to give the men their own names. Would it not have
been better to speak of them thus and to bestow on them human names, or
rather not bestow, for those that our parents gave us were enough? Well
then if it is neither easier to learn by means of fiction, nor appropriate
for the Cynic to invent that sort of thing at all, why did we not spare
that wasteful expense,(141) and moreover why did we waste our time in
inventing and composing trivial myths and then making stories of them and
learning them by heart?)

Ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως ὁ μὲν λόγος οὔ φησι δεῖν ἀντὶ τῶν ἀληθῶν [D] καὶ μὴ πεπλασμένων
τὰ ψευδῆ καὶ πεπλασμένα παρὰ τοῦ κυνός, ᾧ μόνῳ τῆς ἐλευθερίας μέτεστιν, ἐν
τοῖς κοινοῖς ᾄδεσθαι συλλόγοις, ἡ συνήθεια δὲ οὕτω(142) γέγονεν ἀπὸ
Διογένους ἀρξαμένη καὶ Κράτητος ἄχρι τῶν ἐφεξῆς. οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ παράδειγμα
τοιοῦτον εὑρήσεις· ἐκεῖνο γὰρ ἀφίημι τέως, ὅτι τῷ Κυνικῷ τὸ νόμισμα
παραχαράττοντι τῇ συνηθείᾳ προσέχειν οὐδαμῶς προσήκει, τῷ λόγῳ δὲ αὐτῷ
μόνῳ, [209] καὶ τὸ ποιητέον εὑρίσκειν οἴκοθεν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ μανθάνειν ἔξωθεν.
εἰ δ᾽ Ἀντισθένης ὁ Σωκρατικὸς ὥσπερ ὁ Ξενοφῶν ἔνια διὰ τῶν μύθων ἀπήγελλε,
μήτι(143) τοῦτό σε ἐξαπατάτω· καὶ γὰρ μικρὸν ὕστερον ὑπὲρ τούτου σοι
διαλέξομαι·(144) νῦν δὲ ἐκεῖνό μοι πρὸς τῶν Μουσῶν φράσον ὑπὲρ τοῦ
Κυνισμοῦ, πότερον ἀπόνοια τίς ἐστι καὶ βίος οὐκ ἀνθρώπινος, ἀλλὰ θηριώδης
ψυχῆς διάθεσις οὐδὲν καλόν, οὐδὲν σπουδαῖον οὐδὲ ἀγαθὸν νομιζούσης; [B]
δοίη γὰρ ἂν ὑπολαβεῖν πολλοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα Οἰνόμαος. εἴ τί σοι τοῦ
ταῦτα γοῦν ἐπελθεῖν ἐμέλησεν, ἐπέγνως ἂν σαφῶς ἐν τῇ τοῦ κυνὸς αὐτοφωνίᾳ
καὶ τῷ κατὰ τῶν χρηστηρίων καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς οἷς ἔγραψεν ὁ ἀνήρ. τοιούτου δὲ
ὄντος τοῦ πράγματος, ὥστε ἐνῃρῆσθαι μὲν ἅπασαν τὴν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς
εὐλάβειαν, ἠτιμάσθαι δὲ πᾶσαν ἀνθρωπίνην φρόνησιν, νόμον δὲ μὴ τὸν
ὁμώνυμον τῷ καλῷ καὶ δικαίῳ πεπατῆσθαι μόνον, [C] ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν
θεῶν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ ἐγγραφέντας ταῖς ψυχαῖς, ὑφ᾽ ὧν πάντες ἀδιδάκτως εἶναι
θεῖόν τι πεπείσμεθα καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ἀφορᾶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτό τε οἶμαι σπεύδειν οὕτω
διατιθέμενοι τὰς ψυχὰς πρὸς αὐτὸ ὥσπερ, οἶμαι πρὸς τὸ φῶς τὰ βλέποντα,
πρὸς τούτῳ δὲ εἰ καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἐξελαύνοιτο νόμος ἱερὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ
θεῖος, ὁ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων πάντη καὶ πάντως ἀπέχεσθαι κελεύων καὶ μήτε ἐν λόγῳ
μήτε ἐν ἔργῳ μήτε [D] ἐν αὐταῖς ταῖς λανθανούσαις τῆς ψυχῆς ἐνεργείαις
ταῦτα ἐπιτρέπων συγχεῖν, ὅσπερ ἡμῖν καὶ τῆς τελειοτάτης ἐστὶν ἡγεμὼν
δικαιοσύνης· ἆρ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι βαράθρου τὸ πρᾶγμα ἄξιον; ἆρ᾽ οὐ τοὺς ταῦτα
ἐπαινοῦντας ὥσπερ τοὺς φαρμακοὺς ἐχρῆν οὐ θύσθλοις παιομένους(145)
ἐλαύνεσθαι· κουφοτέρα γάρ ἐστι τῶν ἀδικημάτων ἡ ζημία· λίθοις δὲ
βαλλομένους ἀπολωλέναι; διαφέρουσι γὰρ οὗτοι τί, [210] πρὸς τῶν θεῶν εἰπέ
μοι, τῶν ἐπ᾽ ἐρημίας λῃστευόντων καὶ κατειληφότων τὰς ἀκτὰς ἐπὶ τῷ
λυμαίνεσθαι τοῖς καταπλέουσι; καταφρονοῦντες θανάτου, φασίν· ὥσπερ οὐ
κἀκείνοις συνομαρτούσης ταυτησὶ τῆς ἀπονοίας. φησὶ γοῦν ὁ καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς μὲν
ποιητὴς καὶ μυθολόγος, ὡς δὲ ὁ Πύθιος λῃσταῖς χρωμένοις ἀνεῖλεν, ἥρως καὶ
δαίμων, ὑπὲρ τῶν λῃζομένων τὴν θάλατταν

(But perhaps you will say that though reason asserts that the Cynic, who
alone of men can claim to be free, ought not to invent and compose lying
fictions instead of the unvarnished truth and then recite these in public
assemblies, nevertheless the custom began with Diogenes and Crates, and
has been maintained from that time by all Cynics. My answer is that
nowhere will you find a single example of such a custom. For the moment I
do not insist on the fact that it in no wise becomes a Cynic who must
“give a new stamp to the common currency”(146) to pay any attention to
custom, but only to pure reason, and he ought to discover within himself
what is right for him to do and not learn it from without. And do not be
misled by the fact that Antisthenes the disciple of Socrates, and Xenophon
too, sometimes expressed themselves by means of myths; for I shall have
something to say to you on this point in a moment. But now in the Muses’
name answer me this question about the Cynic philosophy. Are we to think
it a sort of madness, a method of life not suitable for a human being, but
rather a brutal attitude of mind which recks naught of the beautiful, the
honourable, or the good? For Oenomaus(147) would make many people hold
this view of it. If you had taken any trouble to study the subject, you
would have learned this from that Cynic’s “Direct Inspiration of Oracles”
and his work “Against the Oracles,” in short from everything that he
wrote. This then is his aim, to do away with all reverence for the gods,
to bring dishonour on all human wisdom, to trample on all law that can be
identified with honour and justice, and more than this, to trample on
those laws which have been as it were engraved on our souls by the gods,
and have impelled us all to believe without teaching that the divine
exists, and to direct our eyes to it and to yearn towards it: for our
souls are disposed towards it as eyes towards the light. Furthermore,
suppose that one should discard also that second law which is sanctified
both by nature and by God, I mean the law that bids us keep our hands
altogether and utterly from the property of others and permits us neither
by word or deed or in the inmost and secret activities of our souls to
confound such distinctions, since the law is our guide to the most perfect
justice—is not this conduct worthy of pit?(148) And ought not those who
applauded such views to have been driven forth, not by blows with wands,
like scapegoats,(149) for that penalty is too light for such crimes, but
put to death by stoning? For tell me, in Heaven’s name, how are such men
less criminal than bandits who infest lonely places and haunt the coasts
in order to despoil navigators? Because, as people say, they despise
death; as though bandits were not inspired by the same frenzied courage!
So says at any rate he(150) who with you counts as a poet and mythologist,
though, as a Pythian god proclaimed to certain bandits who sought his
oracle, he was a hero and divinity—I mean where, speaking of pirates of
the sea, he says:)


    Οἷά τε ληιστῆρες, ὑπεὶρ ἅλα τοί τ᾽ ἀλόωνται
    [B] Ψυχὰς παρθέμενοι.

    (“Like pirates who wander over the sea, staking their
    lives.”(151))


τί οὖν ἔτι ἕτερον ζητεῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀπονοίας τῶν λῃστῶν μάρτυρα; πλὴν εἰ μὴ
καὶ ἀνδρειοτέρους ἂν εἴποι τις τῶν τοιούτων κυνῶν ἐκείνους τοὺς λῃστάς,
ἰταμωτέρους δὲ τῶν λῃστῶν ἐκείνων τοὺς κύνας τουτουσί. οἱ μὲν γὰρ
συνειδότες αὑτοῖς οὕτω μοχθηρὸν τὸν βίον οὐ μᾶλλον διὰ τὸ τοῦ θανάτου δέος
ἢ τὴν αἰσχύνην τὰς ἐρημίας προβάλλονται, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα περιπατοῦσιν(152) [C]
ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τὰ κοινὰ νόμιμα συγχέοντες, οὐχὶ τῷ κρείττονα καὶ καθαρωτέραν,
ἀλλὰ τῷ χείρονα καὶ βδελυρωτέραν ἐπεισάγειν πολιτείαν.

(What better witness can you require for the desperate courage of bandits?
Except indeed that one might say that bandits are more courageous than
Cynics of this sort, while the Cynics are more reckless than they. For
pirates, well aware as they are how worthless is the life they lead, take
cover in desert places as much from shame as from the fear of death:
whereas the Cynics go up and down in our midst subverting the institutions
of society, and that not by introducing a better and purer state of things
but a worse and more corrupt state.)

Τὰς ἀνανφερομένας δὲ εἰς τὸν Διογένη τραγῳδίας, οὔσας μὲν καὶ
ὁμολογουμένως(153) Κυνικοῦ τινος συγγράμματα, ἀμφισβητουμένας δὲ κατὰ
τοῦτο μόνον, [D] εἴτε τοῦ διδασκάλου, τοῦ Διογένους, εἰσίν, εἴτε τοῦ
μαθητοῦ Φιλίσκου, τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐπελθὼν βδελύξαιτο καὶ νομίσειεν ὑπερβολὴν
ἀρρητουργίας οὐδὲ ταῖς ἑταίραις ἀπολελεῖφθαι; ταῖς Οἰνομάου δὲ ἐντυχών·
ἔγραψε γὰρ καὶ τραγῳδίας τοῖς λόγοις τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ παραπλησίας, ἀρρήτων
ἀρρητότερα καὶ κακῶν πέρα, καὶ οὐκέθ᾽ ὅ,τι φῶ περὶ αὐτῶν ἀξίως ἔχω, κἂν τὰ
Μαγνήτων κακὰ, κἂν τὸ Τερμέριον, κἂν πᾶσαν ἁπλῶς αὐτοῖς ἐπιφθέγξωμαι [211]
τὴν τραγῳδίαν μετὰ τοῦ σατύρου καὶ τῆς κωμῳδίας καὶ τοῦ μίμου, οὕτω πᾶσα
μὲν αἰσχρότης, πᾶσα δὲ ἀπόνοια πρὸς ὑπερβολὴν ἐν ἐκείναις τῷ ἀνδρὶ
πεφιλοτέχνηται· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἐκ τούτων τις ἀξιοῖ τὸν Κυνισμὸν ὁποῖός τις
ἐστιν ἡμῖν ἐπιδεῖξαι, βλασφημῶν τοὺς θεούς, ὑλακτῶν πρὸς ἅπαντας, ὅπερ
ἔφην ἀρχόμενος, ἴτω, χωρείτω,(154) γῆν πρὸ γῆς, ὅποι βούλοιτο· εἰ δ᾽, ὅπερ
ὁ θεὸς ἔφη Διογένει, τὸ νόμισμα παραχαράξας ἐπὶ τὴν πρὸ ταύτης εἰρημένην
ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ συμβουλὴν τρέποιτο, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτόν, ὅπερ ζηλώσαντες ἐπὶ τῶν
ἔργων Διογένης καὶ Κράτης φαίνονται, τοῦτο ἤδη τοῦ παντὸς ἄξιον ἔγωγε
φαίην ἂν ἀνδρὶ καιὶ στρατηγεῖν καὶ φιλοσοφεῖν ἐθέλοντι. τί δὲ εἶπεν ὁ
θεός, ἆρ᾽ ἴσμεν; ὅτι τῆς τῶν πολλῶν αὐτῷ δόξης ἐπέταξεν [C] ὑπερορᾶν καὶ
παραχαράττειν οὐ τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλὰ τὸ νόμισμα. τὸ δὲ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἐν
ποτέρᾳ θησόμεθα μοίρᾳ; πότερον ἐν τῇ τοῦ νομίσματος; ἢ τοῦτό γε αὐτὸ τῆς
ἀληθείας εἶναι κεφάλαιον θήσομεν καὶ τρόπον εἰρῆσθαι τοῦ Παραχάραξον τὸ
νόμισμα διὰ τῆς(155) Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἀποφάσεως; ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ τὰ νομιζόμενα
παντάπασιν ἀτιμάσας, ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν δὲ ἥκων τὴν ἀλήθειαν οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ τοῖς
νομιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὄντως οὖσι θήσεται, [D] οὕτως οἶμαι καὶ ὁ γνοὺς
ἑαυτὸν ὅπερ ἔστιν ἀκριβῶς εἴσεται καὶ οὐχ ὅπερ νομίζεται. πότερον οὖν οὐχ
ὁ Πύθιος ἀληθής τέ ἐστι θεός, καὶ Διογένης τοῦτο ἐπέπειστο σαφῶς, ὅς γε
αὐτῷ πεισθεὶς ἀντὶ φυγάδος ἀπεδείχθη οὐ τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως μείζων, ἀλλ᾽,
ὡς ἡ φήμη παρέδωκεν, αὐτῷ τῷ καταλύσαντι τὸ Περσῶν κράτος καὶ ταῖς
Ἡρακλέους ἁμιλλωμένῳ πράξεσιν, ὑπερβάλλεσθαι δὲ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα φιλοτιμουμένῳ
ζηλωτός; οὗτος οὖν ὁ Διογένης ὁποῖός τις ἦν τά τε πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς [212]
καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἀνθρώπους μὴ διὰ τῶν Οἰνομάου λόγων μηδὲ τῶν Φιλίσκου
τραγῳδιῶν, αἷς ἐπιγράψας τὸ Διογένους ὄνομα τῆς θείας πολλά ποτε
κατεψεύσατο κεφαλῆς, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ὧν ἔδρασεν ἔργων ὁποῖός τις ἦν γνωριζέσθω.

(Now as for the tragedies ascribed to Diogenes, which are and are admitted
to be, the composition of some Cynic—the only point in dispute being
whether they are by the master himself, Diogenes, or by his disciple
Philiscus,—what reader of these would not abhor them, and find in them an
excess of infamy not to be surpassed even by courtesans? However, let him
go on to read the tragedies of Oenomaus—for he too wrote tragedies to
match his discourses—and he will find that they are more inconceivably
infamous, that they transgress the very limits of evil; in fact I have no
words to describe them adequately, and in vain should I cite in comparison
the horrors of Magnesia,(156) the wickedness of Termerus(157) or the whole
of tragedy put together, along with satiric drama, comedy and the mime:
with such art has their author displayed in those works every conceivable
vileness and folly in their most extreme form. Now if from such works any
man chooses to demonstrate to us the character of the Cynic philosophy,
and to blaspheme the gods and bark at all men, as I said when I began, let
him go, let him depart to the uttermost parts of the earth whithersoever
he pleases. But if he do as the god enjoined on Diogenes, and first “give
a new stamp to the common currency,” then devote himself to the advice
uttered earlier by the god, the precept “Know Thyself,” which Diogenes and
Crates evidently followed in their actual practice, then I say that this
is wholly worthy of one who desires to be a leader and a philosopher. For
surely we know what the god meant? He enjoined on Diogenes to despise the
opinion of the crowd and to give a new stamp, not to truth, but to the
common currency. Now to which of these categories shall we assign self‐
knowledge? Can we call it common currency? Shall we not rather say that it
is the very summary of truth, and by the injunction “Know Thyself” we are
told the way in which we must “give a new stamp to the common currency”?
For just as one who pays no regard whatever to conventional opinions but
goes straight for the truth will not decide his own conduct by those
opinions but by actual facts, so I think he who knows himself will know
accurately, not the opinion of others about him, but what he is in
reality. It follows then, does it not? that the Pythian god speaks the
truth, and moreover that Diogenes was clearly convinced of this since he
obeyed the god and so became, instead of an exile, I will not say greater
than the King of Persia, but according to the tradition handed down
actually an object of envy to the man(158) who had broken the power of
Persia and was rivalling the exploits of Heracles and ambitious to surpass
Achilles. Then let us judge of the attitude of Diogenes towards gods and
men, not from the discourses of Oenomaus or the tragedies of Philiscus—who
by ascribing their authorship to Diogenes grossly slandered that sacred
personage—but let us, I say, judge him by his deeds.)

Ἦλθεν εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν ἐπὶ τί πρὸς Διός; ἵνα τοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς θεάσηται; τί δέ;
οὐχὶ καὶ Ἰσθμίοις τοὺς αὐτοὺς καὶ Παναθηναίοις θεάσασθαι δίχα πραγμάτων
οἷόν τε ἦν; ἀλλὰ ἐθέλων ἐκεῖ τοῖς κρατίστοις συγγενέσθαι τῶν Ἑλλήνων; [B]
οὐ γὰρ Ἰσθμόνδε ἐφοίτων; οὐκ ἂν οὖν εὕροις ἄλλην αἰτίαν ἢ τὴν εἰς τὸν θεὸν
θεραπείαν. εἰ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐξεπλάγη τὸν κεραυνὸν· οὐδὲ ἐγὼ μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς πολλῶν
πολλάκις πειραθεὶς διοσημιῶν ἐξεπλάγην. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὕτω δή τι τοὺς θεοὺς
πέφρικα καὶ φιλῶ καὶ σέβω καὶ ἅζομαι καὶ πάνθ᾽ ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα πρὸς
αὐτοὺς πάσχω, ὅσαπερ ἄν τις καὶ οἷα πρὸς ἀγαθοὺς δεσπότας, πρὸς
διδασκάλους, πρὸς πατέρας, πρὸς κηδεμόνας, πρὸς πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα,
[C] ὥστε ὀλίγου δεῖν ὑπὸ τῶν σῶν ῥημάτων πρῴην ἐξανέστην. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν
οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅντινα τρόπον ἐπελθὸν ἴσως σιωπᾶσθαι δέον ἐρρέθη.

(Why in the name of Zeus did he go to Olympia? To see the athletes
compete? Nay, could he not have seen those very athletes without trouble
both at the Isthmian games and the Panathenaic festival? Then was it
because he wished to meet there the most distinguished Greeks? But did
they not go to the Isthmus too? So you cannot discover any other motive
than that of doing honour to the god. He was not, you say, awestruck by a
thunderstorm. Ye gods, I too have witnessed such signs from Zeus over and
over again, without being awestruck! Yet for all that I feel awe of the
gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them, and in short have precisely the
same feelings towards them as one would have towards kind masters(159) or
teachers or fathers or guardians or any beings of that sort. That is the
very reason why I could hardly sit still the other day and listen to your
speech. However, I have spoken thus as I was somehow or other impelled to
speak, though perhaps it would have been better to say nothing at all.)

Διογένης δὲ καὶ πένης ὢν καὶ χρημάτων ἐνδεὴς εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν ἐβάδιζεν,
Ἀλέξανδρον δὲ ἥκειν ἐκέλευε παρ᾽ ἑαυτόν, εἴ τῳ πιστὸς ὁ Δίων. οὕτω πρέπειν
ἐνόμιζεν ἑαυτῷ [D] μὲν φοιτᾶν ἐπὶ τὰ ἱερὰ τῶν θεῶν, τῷ βασιλικωτάτῳ δὲ τῶν
καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ συνουσίαν. ἃ δὲ πρὸς Ἀρχίδαμον γέγραφεν, οὐ
βασιλικαὶ παραινέσεις εἰσίν; οὐ μόνον δὲ ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ἦν ὁ Διογένης
θεοσεβής, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις. ἑλόμενον γὰρ αὐτὸν οἰκεῖν τὰς
Ἀθήνας ἐπειδὴ τὸ δαιμόνιον εἰς τὴν Κόρινθον ἀπήγαγεν, ἀφεθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ
πριαμένου τὴν πόλιν οὐκέτ᾽ ῴήθη δεῖν ἐκλιπεῖν· [213] ἐπέπειστο γὰρ αὑτοῦ
τοῖς θεοῖς μέλειν εἴς τε τὴν Κόρινθον οὐ μάτην οὐδὲ κατά τινα συντυχίαν,
τρόπον δέ τινα ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν εἰσπεπέμφθαι ὁρῶν τὴν πόλιν τρυφῶσαν τῶν
Ἀθηναίων μᾶλλον καὶ δεομένην μείζονος καὶ γενναιοτέρου σωφρονιστοῦ.

(To return to Diogenes: he was poor and lacked means, yet he travelled to
Olympia, though he bade Alexander come to him, if we are to believe
Dio.(160) So convinced was he that it was his duty to visit the temples of
the gods, but that it was the duty of the most royal monarch of that day
to come to him for an interview. And was not that royal advice which he
wrote to Archidamus? Nay, not only in words but in deeds also did Diogenes
show his reverence for the gods. For he preferred to live in Athens, but
when the divine command had sent him away to Corinth, even after he had
been set free by the man who had bought him, he did not think he ought to
leave that city. For he believed that the gods took care of him, and that
he had been sent to Corinth, not at random or by some accident, but by the
gods themselves for some purpose. He saw that Corinth was more luxurious
than Athens, and stood in need of a more severe and courageous reformer.)

Τί δέ; οὐχὶ καὶ τοῦ Κράτητος μουσικὰ καὶ χαρίεντα φέρεται πολλὰ δείγματα
τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς ὁσιότητός τε καὶ εὐλαβείας; ἄκουε γοῦν αὐτὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν,
[B] εἴ σοι μὴ σχολὴ γέγονε μαθεῖν ἐξ ἐκείνων αὐτά.

To give you another instance: Are there not extant many charming poems by
Crates also which are proofs of his piety and veneration for the gods? I
will repeat them to you if you have not had time to learn this from the
poems themselves:


    Μνημοσύνης καὶ Ζηνὸς Ὀλυμπίου ἀγλαὰ τέκνα,
      Μοῦσαι Πιερέδες, κλῦτέ μοι εὐχομένῳ·
    Χόρτον ἐμῇ συνεχῆ δότε γαστέρι, καὶ δότε χωρίς
      Δουλοσύνης, ἣ δὴ λιτὸν ἔθηκε βίον.

    (“Ye Muses of Pieria, glorious children of Memory and Olympian
    Zeus, grant me this prayer! Give me food for my belly from day to
    day, but give it without slavery which makes life miserable
    indeed....)

                  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

      Ὠφέλιμον δὲ φίλοις, μὴ γλυκερὸν τίθετε.
    [C] Χρήματα δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλω συνάγειν κλυτά, κανθάρου ὄλβον
      Μύρμηκός τ᾽ ἄφενος χρήματα μαιόμενος,
    Ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνης μετέχειν καὶ πλοῦτον ἀγείρειν(161)
      Εὔφορον, εὔκτητον, τίμιον εἰς ἀρετήν.
    Τῶν δὲ τυχὼν Ἑρμῆν καὶ Μούσας ἱλάσομ᾽ ἁγνάς.
      Οὐ δαπάναις τρυφεραῖς, [D] ἀλλ᾽ ἀρεταῖς ὁσίαις.

    (“Make me useful rather than agreeable to my friends. Treasure and
    the fame thereof I desire not to amass; nor do I crave the wealth
    of the beetle and the substance of the ant. But justice I desire
    to attain, and to collect riches that are easily carried, easily
    acquired, precious for virtue. If I attain these things I will
    worship Hermes and the holy Muses, not with costly and luxurious
    offerings, but with pious and virtuous actions.”(162))


ὁρᾷς ὅτι τοὺς θεοὺς εὐφημῶν, οὐχὶ δὲ ὡς σὺ βλασφημῶν κατ᾽ αὐτῶν ηὔχετο;
πόσαι γὰρ ἑκατόμβαι τῆς ὁσίας εἰσὶν ἀντάξιαι, ἣν καὶ ὁ δαιμόνιος Εὐριπίδης
ὀρθῶς ἥμνησεν εἰπὼν

(You see that, far from blaspheming the gods as you do, he adored and
prayed to them? For what number of hecatombs are worth as much as Piety,
whom the inspired Euripides celebrated appropriately in the verses)


    Ὁσία πότνα θεῶν, ὁσία;

    (“Piety, queen of the gods, Piety”?(163))


ἢ τοῦτό σε λέληθεν, ὅτι πάντα, καὶ τὰ μεγάλα καὶ τὰ σμικρά, μετὰ τῆς ὁσίας
τοῖς θεοῖς προσαγόμενα τὴν ἴσην ἔχει δύναμιν, ἐστερημένη δὲ τῆς ὁσίας οὐχ
ἑκατόμβη μὰ θεούς, ἀλλὰ ἡ τῆς Ὀλυμπιάδος χιλιόμβη ἀνάλωμα μόνον ἐστίν,
[214] ἄλλο δὲ οὐδέν; ὅπερ οἶμαι γιγνώσκων ὁ Κράτης αὐτός τε διὰ μόνης ἧς
εἶχεν ὁσίας τοὺς θεοὺς ἐτίμα σὺν εὐφημίᾳ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐδίδασκε μὴ τὰ
δαπανήματα τῆς ὁσίας, ἀλλὰ τὴν ὁσίαν ἐκείνων προτιμᾶν ἐν ταῖς ἁγιστείαις.
τοιούτω δὲ τὼ ἄνδρε τώδε γενομένω τὰ πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς οὐκ ἀκροατήρια
συνεκροτείτην(164) οὐδ᾽ ὥσπερ οἱ σοφοὶ δι᾽ εἰκόνων καὶ μύθων τοῖς φίλοις
συνεγιγνέσθην·(165) λέγεται γὰρ [B] ὑπ᾽ Εὐριπίδου καλῶς

(Or are you not aware that all offerings whether great or small that are
brought to the gods with piety have equal value, whereas without piety, I
will not say hecatombs, but, by the gods, even the Olympian sacrifice(166)
of a thousand oxen is merely empty expenditure and nothing else?(167) This
I believe Crates recognized, and so with that piety which was his only
possession he himself used to honour the gods with praises, and moreover
taught others not to honour expensive offerings more than piety in the
sacred ceremonies. This then was the attitude of both those Cynics towards
the gods but they did not crowd audiences together to hear them, nor did
they entertain their friends with similes and myths, like the wise men of
to‐day. For as Euripides well says,(168))


    Ἁπλοῦς ὁ μῦθος τῆς ἀληθείας ἔφυ·

    (“Simple and unadorned is the language of truth.”)


σκιαγραφίας γάρ φησι τὸν ψευδῆ καὶ ἄδικον δεῖσθαι. τίς οὖν ὁ τρόπος αὐτοῖς
τῆς συνουσίας ἐγίνετο; τῶν λόγων ἡγεῖτο τὰ ἔργα, καὶ οἱ τὴν πενίαν
τιμῶντες αὐτοὶ πρῶτοι φαίνονται(169) καὶ τῶν πατρῴων χρημάτων ὑπεριδόντες,
οἱ τὴν ἀτυφίαν ἀσπασάμενοι πρῶτοι [C] τὴν εὐτέλειαν ἤσκουν διὰ πάντων, οἱ
τὸ τραγικὸν καὶ σοβαρὸν ἐκ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἐξαιροῦντες βίων ᾤκουν αὐτοὶ
πρῶτοι τὰς ἀγορὰς ἢ τὰ τῶν θεῶν τεμένη, τῇ τρυφῇ δὲ καὶ πρὸ τῶν ῥημάτων
διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐπολέμουν, ἔργοις ἐλέγχοντες, οὐ λόγῳ βοῶντες, ὅτι τῷ Διὶ
συμβασιλεύειν ἔξεστιν οὐδενὸς ἢ σμικρῶν πάνυ δεόμενον οὐδὲ παρενοχλούμενον
ὑπὸ τοῦ σώματος, ἐπετίμων δὲ τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσιν, ἡνίκα ἔζων οἱ πταίσαντες,
[D] οὐκ ἀποθανόντας ἐβλασφήμουν, ἡνίκα καὶ τῶν ἐχθρῶν οἱ μετριώτεροι
σπένδονται τοῖς ἀπελθοῦσιν. ἔχει δὲ ὅ γε ἀληθινὸς κύων ἐχθρὸν οὐδένα, κἂν
τὸ σωμάτιον αὐτοῦ τις πατάξῃ, κἂν τοὔνομα περιέλκῃ, κἂν λοιδορῆται καὶ
βλασφημῇ, διότι τὸ μὲν τῆς ἔχθρας γίνεται πρὸς ἀντίπαλον, τὸ δὲ ὑπερβαῖνον
τὴν πρὸς ἕτερον ἅμιλλαν εὐνοίᾳ τιμᾶσθαι φιλεῖ· [215] κἄν τις ἑτέρως ἔχῃ
πρὸς αὐτὸν, καθάπερ οἶμαι πολλοὶ πρὸς τοὺς θεούς, ἐκείνῳ μὲν οὐκ ἔστιν
ἐχθρός, οὐδὲ γὰρ βλαβερός, αὐτὸς δὲ αὑτῷ βαρύτατον ἐπιτιθεὶς(170) τίμημα
τὴν τοῦ κρείττονος ἄγνοιαν ἔρημος λείπεται τῆς ἐκείνου προστασίας.

(Only the liar and the dishonest man, he says, have any use for a
mysterious and allusive style. Now what was the manner of their
intercourse with men? Deeds with them came before words, and if they
honoured poverty they themselves seem first to have scorned inherited
wealth; if they cultivated modesty, they themselves first practised plain
living in every respect; if they tried to expel from the lives of other
men the element of theatrical display and arrogance, they themselves first
set the example by living in the open market places and the temple
precincts, and they opposed luxury by their own practice before they did
so in words; nor did they shout aloud but proved by their actions that a
man may rule as the equal of Zeus if he needs nothing or very little and
so is not hampered by his body; and they reproved sinners during the
lifetime of those who had offended but did not speak ill of the dead; for
when men are dead even their enemies, at least the more moderate, make
peace with the departed. But the genuine Cynic has no enemy, even though
men strike his feeble body or drag his name in the mire, or slander and
speak ill of him, because enmity is felt only towards an opponent, but
that which is above personal rivalry is usually loved and respected. But
if anyone is hostile to a Cynic, as indeed many are even to the gods, he
is not that Cynic’s enemy, since he cannot injure him; rather he inflicts
on himself the most terrible punishment of all, namely ignorance of one
who is nobler than himself; and so he is deserted and bereft of the
other’s protection.)

Ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν νῦν μοι προύκειτο περὶ Κυνισμοῦ γράφειν, [B] εἶπον ἂν ὑπὲρ
τούτων ἔτι τὰ παριστάμενά μοι τῶν εἰρημένων ἴσως οὐκ ἐλάττω· νῦν δὲ
ἀποδιδόντες τὸ συνεχὲς τῇ προαιρέσει περὶ τοῦ ποταποὺς εἶναι χρὴ τοὺς
πλαττομένους τῶν μύθων ἐφεξῆς σκοπῶμεν. ἴσως δὲ ἡγεῖται καὶ ταύτης τῆς
ἐγχειρήσεως ἐκείνη, ὁποίᾳ τινὶ φιλοσοφίᾳ προσῆκον ἡ μυθογραφία. φαίνονται
γὰρ πολλοὶ καὶ τῶν φιλοσόφων αὐτὸ καὶ τῶν θεολόγων ποιήσαντες, ὥσπερ
Ὀρφεὺς μὲν ὁ παλαιότατος ἐνθέως φιλοσοφήσας, οὐκ ὀλίγοι δὲ καὶ τῶν μετ᾽
ἐκεῖνον· οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ [C] καὶ Ξενοφῶν φαίνεται καὶ Ἀντισθένης καὶ Πλάτων
προσχρησάμενοι πολλαχοῦ τοῖς μύθοις, ὥσθ᾽ ἡμῖν πέφηνεν, εἰ καὶ μὴ τῷ
Κυνικῷ, φιλοσόφῳ γοῦν τινι προσήκειν ἡ μυθογραφία.

(Now if my present task were to write about the Cynic philosophy, I could
add many details about the Cynics, not less important than what I have
said already. But not to interrupt my main theme, I will now consider in
due course the question what kind of myths ought to be invented. But
perhaps another inquiry should precede this attempt, I mean to what branch
of philosophy the composition of myths is appropriate. For we see that
many philosophers and theologians too have employed it, Orpheus for
instance, the most ancient of all the inspired philosophers, and many
besides of those that came after him. Nay what is more, Xenophon as we
know and Antisthenes and Plato often introduced myths, so that it is
obvious that even if the use of myth be not appropriate for the Cynic,
still it may be so for some other type of philosopher.)

Μικρὰ οὖν ὑπὲρ τῶν τῆς φιλοσοφίας εἴτε μορίων εἴτε ἐργάνων
προρρητέον.(171) ἔστι γὰρ οὐ μέγα τὸ διαφέρον ὁποτέρως ἄν τις τῷ
πρακτικῷ(172) [D] καὶ τῷ φυσικῷ τὸ λογικὸν προσαριθμῇ· ἀναγκαῖον γὰρ
ὁμοίως φαίνεται κατ᾽ ἀμφότερα. τριῶν δὴ τούτων αὖθις ἕκαστον εἰς τρία
τέμνεται, τὸ μὲν φυσικὸν εἰς τὸ θεολογικὸν καὶ τὸ περὶ τὰ μαθήματα καὶ
τρίτον τὸ περὶ τὴν τῶν γινομένων καὶ ἀπολλυμένων καὶ τῶν ἀιδίων μέν,
σωμάτων δὲ ὅμως θεωρίαν, τί τὸ εἶναι αὐτοῖς καὶ τίς ἡ οὐσία ἑκάστου· τοῦ
πρακτικοῦ δὲ τὸ μὲν πρὸς ἕνα ἄνδρα, ἠθικόν, οἰκονομικὸν δὲ τὸ περὶ μίαν
οἰκίαν, πολιτικὸν δὲ τὸ περὶ πόλιν· ἔτι μέντοι τοῦ λογικοῦ τὸ μὲν
ἀποδεικτικὸν διὰ τῶν ἀληθῶν, τὸ δὲ διὰ τῶν ἐνδόξων βιαστικόν, [216] τὸ δὲ
διὰ τῶν φαινομένων ἐνδόξων παραλογιστικόν. ὄντων δὴ τοσούτων τῶν τῆς
φιλοσοφίας μερῶν, εἰ μή τί με λέληθε· καὶ οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν ἄνδρα στρατιώτην
μὴ λίαν ἐξακριβοῦν μηδ᾽ ἐξονυχίζειν τὰ τοιαῦτα, ἅτε οὐκ ἐκ βιβλίων
ἀσκήσεως, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς προστυχούσης αὐτὰ ἕξεως ἀποφθεγγόμενον· ἔσεσθε γοῦν
μοι καὶ ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες, εἰ τὰς ἡμέρας λογίσαισθε,(173) πόσαι τινές εἰσιν
αἱ μεταξὺ ταύτης τε καὶ τῆς ἔναγχος ἡμῖν γενομένης ἀκροάσεως ὅσων τε ἡμῖν
ἀσχολιῶν πλήρεις· [B] ἀλλ᾽ ὅπερ ἔφην, εἰ καί τι παραλέλειπται παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ·
καίτοι νομίζω γε μηδὲν ἐνδεῖν· πλὴν ὁ προστιθεὶς οὐκ ἐχθρός, ἀλλὰ φίλος
ἔσται.

(I must first then say a few words about the subdivisions or instruments
of philosophy. It does not make much difference in which of two ways one
reckons logic, whether with practical or natural philosophy, since it is
equally necessary to both these branches. But I will consider these as
three separate branches and assign to each one three subdivisions. Natural
philosophy consists of theology, mathematics, and thirdly the study of
this world of generation and decay and things that though imperishable are
nevertheless matter, and deals with their essential nature and their
substance in each case. Practical philosophy again consists of ethics in
so far as it deals with the individual man, economics when it deals with
the household as a unit, politics when it deals with the state. Logic,
again, is demonstrative in so far as it deals with the truth of
principles; polemic when it deals with general opinions; eristic when it
deals with opinions that only seem probabilities. These then are the
divisions of philosophy, if I mistake not. Though indeed it would not be
surprising that a mere soldier should be none too exact in these matters
or not have them at his fingers’ ends, seeing that I speak less from book‐
knowledge than from observation and experience. For that matter you can
yourselves bear me witness thereto, if you count up how few days have
elapsed between the lecture that we lately heard and to‐day, and moreover
the number of affairs with which they have been filled for me. But as I
said if I have omitted anything—though I do not think I have—still if
anyone can make my classification more complete he will be “no enemy but
my friend.”(174))

Τούτων δὴ τῶν μερῶν οὔτε τῷ λογικῷ προσήκει τῆς μυθογραφίας οὔτε τοῦ
φυσικοῦ(175) τῷ μαθηματικῷ, μόνον δέ, εἴπερ ἄρα, τοῦ πρακτικοῦ τῷ πρὸς ἕνα
γινομένῳ καὶ τοῦ θεολογικοῦ τῷ τελεστικῷ καὶ μυστικῷ· [C] φιλεῖ γὰρ ἡ
φύσις κρύπτεσθαι, καὶ τὸ ἀποκεκρυμμένον τῆς τῶν θεῶν οὐσίας οὐκ ἀνέχεται
γυμνοῖς εἰς ἀκαθάρτους ἀκοὰς ῥίπτεσθαι ῥήμασιν. ὅπερ δὲ δὴ τῶν χαρακτήρων
ἡ ἀπόρρητος φύσις ὠφελεῖν πέφυκε καὶ ἀγνοουμένη· θεραπεύει γοῦν οὐ ψυχὰς
μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ σώματα, καὶ θεῶν ποιεῖ παρουσίας· τοῦτ᾽ οἶμαι πολλάκις
γίγνεσθαι καὶ διὰ τῶν μύθων, [D] ὅταν εἰς τὰς τῶν πολλῶν ἀκοὰς οὐ
δυναμένας τὰ θεῖα καθαρῶς δέξασθαι δι᾽ αἰνιγμάτων αὐτοῖς μετὰ τῆς μύθων
σκηνοποιίας ἐγχέηται.

(Now of these branches of philosophy, logic has no concern with the
composition of myths; nor has mathematics, the sub‐division of natural
philosophy; but they may be employed, if at all, by that department of
practical philosophy which deals with the individual man, and by that
department of theology which has to do with initiation and the Mysteries.
For nature loves to hide her secrets,(176) and she does not suffer the
hidden truth about the essential nature of the gods to be flung in naked
words to the ears of the profane. Now there are certain characteristics of
ours that derive benefit from that occult and unknown nature, which
nourishes not our souls alone but our bodies also, and brings us into the
presence of the gods, and this I think often comes about by means of
myths; when through riddles and the dramatic setting of myths that
knowledge is insinuated into the ears of the multitude who cannot receive
divine truths in their purest form.)

Φανεροῦ δὲ ἤδη γενομένου τίνι καὶ ποίῳ φιλοσοφίας εἴδει καὶ μυθογραφεῖν
ἔσθ᾽ ὅτε προσήκει· πρὸς γὰρ τῷ λόγῳ μαρτυρεῖ τούτοις ἡ τῶν προλαβόντων
ἀνδρῶν προαίρεσις. ἐπεὶ καὶ Πλάτωνι πολλὰ μεμυθολόγηται περὶ τῶν ἐν ᾅδου
πραγμάτων θεολογοῦντι καὶ πρό γε τούτου τῷ τῆς Καλλιόπης, [217] Ἀντισθένει
δὲ καὶ Ξενοφῶντι καὶ αὐτῷ Πλάτωνι πραγματευομένοις ἠθικάς τινας ὑποθέσεις
οὐ παρέργως, ἀλλὰ μετά τινος ἐμμελείας ἡ τῶν μύθων ἐγκαταμέμικται γραφή,
οὓς σ᾽(177) ἐχρῆν, εἴπερ ἐβούλου, μιμούμενον ἀντὶ μὲν Ἡρακλέους
μεταλαμβάνειν Περσέως ἢ Θησέως τινὸς ὄνομα καὶ τὸν Ἀντισθένειον τύπον
ἐγχαράττειν, ἁντὶ δὲ τῆς Προδίκου σκηνοποιιας ἀμφὶ τοῖν ἀμφοῖν [B] τούτοιν
θεοῖν ἑτέραν ὁμοίαν εἰσάγειν εἰς τὸ θέατρον.

(It is now evident what branch and what sort of philosophy may properly on
occasion employ myths. And to support my argument I call to witness the
authority of those philosophers who were the first to use myths. Plato for
instance in his theological descriptions of life in Hades often uses
myths, and the son(178) of Calliope before him. And when Antisthenes and
Xenophon and Plato himself discuss certain ethical theories they use myths
as one of the ingredients, and not casually but of set purpose. Now if you
too wished to use myths you ought to have imitated these philosophers, and
instead of Heracles you should have introduced the name of Perseus or
Theseus, let us say, and have written in the style of Antisthenes; and in
place of the dramatic setting used by Prodicus,(179) in treating of those
two gods(180) you should have introduced into your theatre another setting
of the same sort.)

Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ τῶν τελεστικῶν μύθων ἐπεμνήσθην, φέρε νῦν ὁποίους εἶναι χρὴ
τοὺς ἑκατέρῳ τῶν μερῶν ἁρμόττοντας αὐτοὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ἰδεῖν πειραθῶμεν,
οὐκέτι μαρτύρων παλαιῶν ἐν πᾶσι προσδεόμενοι, ἑπόμενοι δὲ νέοις ἴχνεσιν
ἀνδρός, ὃν ἐγὼ μετὰ τοὺς θεοὺς ἐξ ἴσης Ἀριστοτέλει καὶ Πλάτωνι ἄγαμαί τε
τέθηπά τε. [C] φησὶ δὲ οὐχ ὑπὲρ πάντων οὗτος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν τελεστικῶν,
οὓς παρέδωκεν ἡμῖν Ὀρφεὺς ὁ τὰς ἁγιωτάτας τελετὰς καταστησάμενος. τὸ γὰρ
ἐν τοῖς μύθοις ἀπεμφαῖνον αὐτῷ τούτῳ προοδοποιεῖ πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν. ὅσῳ
γὰρ μᾶλλον παράδοξόν ἐστι καὶ τερατῶδες τὸ αἴνιγμα, τοσούτῳ μᾶλλον ἔοικε
διαμαρτύρεσθαι, μὴ τοῖς αὐτόθεν λεγομένοις πιστεύειν, ἀλλὰ τὰ λεληθότα
περιεργάζεσθαι καὶ μὴ πρότερον ἀφίστασθαι, [D] πρὶν ἂν ὑπὸ θεοῖς ἡγεμόσιν
ἐκφανῆ γενόμενα τὸν ἐν ἡμῖν τελέσῃ, μᾶλλον δὲ τελειώσῃ νοῦν καὶ εἰ δή τι
κρεῖττον ἡμῖν ὑπάρχει τοῦ νοῦ, αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἑνὸς καὶ τἀγαθοῦ μοῖρά τις ὀλίγη
τὸ πᾶν ἀμερίστως ἔχουσα, τῆς ψυχῆς πλήρωμα καὶ ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ καὶ ἀγαθῷ
συνέχουσα πᾶσαν αὐτὴν διὰ τῆς ὑπερεχούσης καὶ χωριστῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ
ἐξῃρημένης παρουσίας. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ἀμφὶ τὸν μέγαν Διόνυσον οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως
ἐπῆλθέ μοι βακχεύοντι μανῆναι· [218] τὸν βοῦν δὲ ἐπιτίθημι τῇ γλώττῃ· περὶ
τῶν ἀρρήτων γὰρ οὐδὲν χρὴ λέγειν. ἀλλά μοι θεοὶ μὲν ἐκείνων καὶ ὑμῶν δὲ
τοῖς πολλοῖς, ὅσοι τέως ἐστὲ τούτων ἀμύητοι, τὴν ὄνησιν δοῖεν.

(But since I have mentioned also the myths that are suited to initiation,
let us ourselves independently try to see what sort of myths they must be
that suit one or the other of those two branches of philosophy;(181) and
no longer need we call in the aid of witnesses from the remote past for
all points, but we will follow in the fresh footprints of one(182) whom
next to the gods I revere and admire, yes, equally with Aristotle and
Plato. He does not treat of all kinds of myths but only those connected
with initiation into the Mysteries, such as Orpheus, the founder of the
most sacred of all the Mysteries, handed down to us. For it is the
incongruous element in myths that guides us to the truth.(183) I mean that
the more paradoxical and prodigious the riddle is the more it seems to
warn us not to believe simply the bare words but rather to study
diligently the hidden truth, and not to relax our efforts until under the
guidance of the gods those hidden things become plain, and so initiate or
rather perfect our intelligence or whatever we possess that is more
sublime than the intelligence, I mean that small particle of the One and
the Good which contains the whole indivisibly, the complement of the soul,
and in the One and the Good comprehends the whole of soul itself through
the prevailing and separate and distinct presence of the One. But I was
impelled I know not how to rave with his own sacred frenzy when I spoke
like this of the attributes of great Dionysus(184); and now I set an ox on
my tongue:(185) for I may not reveal what is too sacred for speech.
However, may the gods grant to me and to many of you who have not as yet
been initiated into these Mysteries to enjoy the blessings thereof!)

Ὑπὲρ δὲ ὧν εἰπεῖν τε καὶ ἀκοῦσαι θέμις καὶ ἀνεμέσητον ἀμφοτέροις ἐστὶ, πᾶς
λόγος ὁ προφερόμενος ἔκ τε λέξεως καὶ διανοίας σύγκειται. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ
καὶ ὁ μῦθος λόγος τίς ἐστιν, [B] ἐκ δυοῖν τούτοιν συγκείσεται. σκοπῶμεν δὲ
ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν. ἔστιν ἁπλῆ τις ἐν λόγῳ παντὶ διάνοια, καὶ μέντοι καὶ κατὰ
σχῆμα προάγεται, τὰ παραδείγματα δὲ ἀμφοῖν ἐστι πολλά. τὸ μὲν οὖν ἓν
ἁπλοῦν ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲν δεῖται ποικιλίας, τὸ δ᾽ ἐσχηματισμένον ἔχει διαφορὰς
ἐν ἑαυτῷ πολλάς, ὧν, εἴ τί σοι τῆς ῥητορικῆς ἐμέλησεν, οὐκ ἀξύνετος εἶ.
τούτων δὴ τῶν κατὰ διάνοιαν σχημάτων ἁρμόττει τῷ μύθῳ τὰ πλεῖστα· πλὴν
ἔμοιγε οὔθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν πολλῶν οὔθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τά γε νῦν ῥητέον,
ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ δυοῖν, τοῦ τε σεμνοῦ κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν καὶ τοῦ ἀπεμφαίνοντος.
[C] τὰ δὲ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τὴν λέξιν γίνεται. μορφοῦται γάρ πως καὶ
σχηματίζεται παρὰ τῶν μὴ προφερομένων εἰκῇ μηδ᾽ ὥσπερ χειμάρρους ἑλκόντων
συρφετοὺς ῥημάτων ἐκ τῆς τριόδου· ἀλλὰ τοῖν δυοῖν τούτοιν, ὅταν μὲν ὑπὲρ
τῶν θείων πλάττωμεν, σεμνὰ χρὴ πάνυ τὰ ῥήματα εἶναι καὶ τὴν λέξιν ὡς ἔνι
μάλιστα σώφρονα καὶ καλὴν καὶ τοῖς θεοῖς πρεπωδεστάτην, τῶν αἰσχρῶν [D] δὲ
μηδὲν καὶ βλασφήμων ἢ δυσσεβῶν, ὅπως μὴ τῷ πλήθει τῆς τοιαύτης ἀρχηγοὶ
θρασύτητος γενώμεθα, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πρὸ τοῦ πλήθους αὐτοὶ τὸ περὶ τοὺς
θεοὺς ἠσεβηκέναι προλάβωμεν. οὐδὲν οὖν ἀπεμφαῖνον εἶναι χρὴ περὶ τὰς
τοιαύτας λέξεις, ἀλλὰ σεμνὰ πάντα καὶ καλὰ καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ καὶ θεῖα καὶ
καθαρὰ καὶ τῆς τῶν θεῶν οὐσίας εἰς δύναμιν ἐστοχασμένα· [219] τὸ δὲ κατὰ
τὴν διάνοιαν ἀπεμφαῖνον τοῦ χρησίμου γιγνόμενον χάριν ἐγκριτέον, ὡς ἂν μή
τινος ὑπομνήσεως ἔξωθεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι δεόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ
λεγομένων τῷ μύθῳ διδασκόμενοι τὸ λανθάνον μῶσθαι καὶ πολυπραγμονεῖν ὑφ᾽
ἡγεμόσι τοῖς θεοῖς προθυμηθεῖεν. ἰδοῦ γὰρ ἔγωγε πολλῶν ἤκουσα λεγόντων
ἄνθρωπον μὲν τὸν Διόνυσον, ἐπείπερ ἐκ Σεμέλης ἐγένετο, θεὸν δὲ διὰ
θεουργίας [B] καὶ τελεστικῆς, ὥσπερ τὸν δεσπότην Ἡρακλέα διὰ τῆς βασιλικῆς
ἀρετῆς εἰς τὸν Ὄλυμπον ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀνῆχθαι τοῦ Διός. ἀλλ᾽, ὦ τάν,
εἶπον, οὐ ξυνίετε τοῦ μύθου φανερῶς αἰνιττομένου. ποῦ γὰρ ἡ γένεσίς ἐστιν
ὥσπερ Ἡρακλέους, οὕτω δὴ(186) καὶ Διονύσου, ἔχουσα μὲν τὸ κρεῖττον καὶ
ὑπερέχον καὶ ἐξῃρημένον, ἐν τῷ μετρίῳ δὲ ὅμως ἔτι τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως
μένουσα καί [C] πως ἀφομοιουμένη πρὸς ἡμᾶς; Ἡρακλὴς δὲ λέγεται παιδίον
γενέσθαι καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν αὐτῷ τὸ σῶμα τὸ θεῖον ἐπιδοῦναι, καὶ φοιτῆσαι
διδασκάλοις ἱστόρηται, καὶ στρατεύσασθαι λέγεται καὶ κρατῆσαι πάντων,
καμεῖν δὲ ὅμως κατὰ(187) τὸ σῶμα. καίτοι αὐτῷ ταῦτα μὲν ὑπῆρξε, μειζόνως
δὲ ἢ κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον. ὅτε γὰρ ἐν τοῖς σπαργάνοις ἀποπνίγων τοὺς δράκοντας
καὶ πρὸς αὐτὰ παραταττόμενος τὰ τῆς φύσεως στοιχεῖα, θάλπη καὶ κρυμούς,
[D] εἶτα τοῖς ἀπορωτάτοις καὶ ἀμαχωτάτοις, ἐνδείᾳ λέγω τροφῆς καὶ ἐρημίᾳ,
καὶ τὴν δι᾽ αὐτοῦ πορείαν οἶμαι τοῦ πελάγους ἐπὶ τῆς χρυσῆς κύλικος, ἣν
ἐγὲ νομίζω μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς οὐ κύλικα εἶναι, βαδίσαι δὲ αὐτὸν ὡς ἐπὶ ξηρᾶς
τῆς θαλάττης νενόμικα. τὶ γὰρ ἄπορον ἦν Ἡρακλεῖ; τί δ᾽ οὐχ ὑπήκουσεν αὐτοῦ
τῷ θείῳ καὶ καθαρωτάτῳ σώματι, τῶν λεγομένων τούτων στοιχείων δουλευόντων
αὐτοῦ τῇ δημιουργικῇ [220] καὶ τελεσιουργῷ τοῦ ἀχράντου καὶ καθαροῦ νοῦ
δυνάμει; ὃν ὁ μέγας Ζεὺς διὰ τῆς Προνοίας Ἀθηνᾶς, ἐπιστήσας αὐτῷ φύλακα
τὴν θεὸν ταύτην, ὅλην ἐξ ὅλου προέμενος αὑτοῦ,(188) τῷ κόσμῳ σωτῆρα
ἐφύτευσεν, εἶτ᾽ ἐπανήγαγε διὰ τοῦ κεραυνίου πυρὸς πρὸς ἑαυτόν, ὑπὸ τῷ θείῳ
συνθήματι τῆς αἰθερίας αὐγῆς ἥκειν παρ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τῷ παιδὶ κελεύσας. ἀλλ᾽
ὑπὲρ μὲν τούτων ἐμοί τε καὶ ὑμῖν ἵλεως Ἡρακλῆς εἴη.

(And now to confine myself to what is lawful for us, both for me to say
and for you to hear. Every discourse that is uttered consists of language
and the thought to be expressed. Now a myth is a sort of discourse and so
it will consist of these two. Let us consider them separately. In every
discourse the thought is of two kinds, either simple or expressed in
figures of speech; and there are many examples of both kinds. The one is
simple and admits of no variety, but that which is embellished with
figures has in itself many possibilities of variation with all of which
you are yourself familiar if you have ever studied rhetoric; and most of
these figures of thought are suited to myth. However I need not now
discuss all or indeed many of them, but only two, that in which the
thought is dignified and that in which it is paradoxical. The same rules
apply also to diction. For this is given a certain shape and form by those
who do not express themselves carelessly or sweep in the refuse of
language from the highways like a winter torrent. And now to consider
these two types. When we invent myths about sacred things our language
must be wholly dignified and the diction must be as far as possible sober,
beautiful, and entirely appropriate to the gods; there must be nothing in
it base or slanderous or impious, for fear we should lead the common
people into this sort of sacrilegious rashness; or rather for fear we
should ourselves anticipate the common people in displaying impiety
towards the gods. Therefore there must be no incongruous element in
diction thus employed, but all must be dignified, beautiful, splendid,
divine, pure, and as far as possible in conformity with the essential
nature of the gods. But as regards the thought, the incongruous may be
admitted, so that under the guidance of the gods men may be inspired to
search out and study the hidden meaning, though they must not ask for any
hint of the truth from others, but must acquire their knowledge from what
is said in the myth itself.(189) For instance I have heard many people say
that Dionysus was a mortal man because he was born of Semele, and that he
became a god through his knowledge of theurgy and the Mysteries, and like
our lord Heracles for his royal virtue was translated to Olympus by his
father Zeus. “Nay, my good sir,” said I, “do you not perceive that the
myth is obviously an allegory?” For in what sense do we regard the “birth”
of Heracles, yes, and of Dionysus as well, since in their case birth has
superior and surpassing and distinctive elements, even though it still
falls within the limits of human nature, and up to a certain point
resembles our own? Heracles for instance is said to have been a child,
even as we are; his divine body grew gradually; we are informed that he
was instructed by teachers;(190) they say that he carried on wars and
defeated all his opponents, but for all that his body had to endure
weariness. And in fact all this did in his case occur, but on a scale
greater than human. For instance, while still in swaddling clothes he
strangled the serpents and then opposed himself to the very elements of
nature, the extremes of heat and cold and things the most difficult and
hardest to contend with, I mean lack of food and loneliness;(191) and then
there is his journey over the sea itself in a golden cup,(192) though, by
the gods, I do not think it was really a cup, but my belief is that he
himself walked on the sea as though it were dry land.(193) For what was
impossible to Heracles? Which was there of the so‐called elements that did
not obey his divine and most pure body since they were subdued to the
creative and perfecting force of his stainless and pure intelligence? For
him did mighty Zeus, with the aid of Athene goddess of Forethought, beget
to be the saviour of the world, and appointed as his guardian this goddess
whom he had brought forth whole from the whole of himself; and later on he
called him to his side through the flame of a thunderbolt, thus bidding
his son to come to him by the divine signal of the ethereal rays of light.
Now when we meditate on this, may Heracles be gracious to you and to me!)

Τὰ δὲ τῆς Διονύσου θρυλουμένης μὲν γενέσεως, οὔσης δὲ οὐ γενέσεως, [B]
ἀλλὰ δαιμονίας ἐκφάνσεως κατὰ τί τοῖς ἀνθρωπικοῖς προσέοικεν; ἡ μήτηρ
αὐτὸν κύουσα, φασίν, ὑπὸ τῆς Ἥρας ζηλοτυπούσης ἐξαπατηθεῖσα τὸν ἐραστὴν
ἐξελιπάρησεν ἥκειν, ὡς παρὰ τὴν γαμετὴν εἴωθε φοιτᾶν, πρὸς ἑαυτήν· εἶτα
οὐκ ἀνασχόμενον τὸ σωμάτιον τῶν κτυπημάτων(194) τοῦ Διὸς ὑπὸ τοῦ κεραυνοῦ
κατεφλέγετο. πάντων δ᾽ ὁμοῦ πυρουμένων, Ἑρμῇ κελεύσας ὁ Ζεὺς ἁρπάσαι τὸν
Διόνυσον καὶ τεμὼν τὸν αὑτοῦ μηρὸν ἐρράπτει· εἶτα ἐκεῖθεν, ἡνίκα
ἐτελεσφορήθη τὸ βρέφος, [C] ὠδίνων ὁ Ζεὺς ἐπὶ τὰς νύμφας ἔρχεται· τὸ Λῦθι
ῥάμμα δὲ αὗται τῷ μηρῷ προσεπᾴδουσαι τὸν διθύραμβον ἡμῖν εῖς φῶς
προήγαγον· εἶτα ἐμάνη, φασίν, ὁ θεὸς ὑπὸ τῆς Ἥρας, ἔπαυσε δ᾽ αὐτῷ τὴν
νόσον ἡ Μήτηρ τῶν θεῶν, ὁ δὲ ἦν αὐτίκα θεός. εἵποντο γοῦν οὐ Λίχας αὐτῷ
καθάπερ Ἡρακλεῖ οὐδὲ Ἰόλεως οὐδὲ Τελαμὼν οὐδ᾽ Ὕλας οὐδ᾽ Ἄβδηρος, ἀλλὰ
Σάτυροι καὶ Βακχαὶ [D] καὶ Πᾶνες καὶ δαιμόνων στρατιά. ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἀνθρωπικὴ
μὲν ἡ σπορὰ διὰ τῶν κεραυνίων, ἡ δ᾽ ἀποκύησις ἀνθρωπικωτέρα, ἀμφοῖν δὲ
τοῖν εἰρημένοιν προσομοιότερα τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις τὰ ἔργα; τί οὖν οὐ
καταβάλλοντες τὸν λῆρον ἐκεῖνο πρῶτον ὑπὲρ τούτων ἴσμεν, ὡς Σεμέλη σοφὴ τὰ
θεῖα; παῖς γὰρ ἦν Κάδμου τοῦ Φοίνικος, τούτοις δὲ καὶ ὁ θεὸς σοφίαν
μαρτυρεῖ

(As for the commonly received legend about the birth of Dionysus, which
was in fact no birth but a divine manifestation, in what respect was it
like the birth of men? While he was still in his mother’s womb she, as the
story goes, was beguiled by jealous Hera to entreat her lover to visit her
as he was wont to visit his spouse. And then her frail body could not
endure the thunders of Zeus and began to be consumed by the lightning. But
when everything there was being devoured by flames, Zeus bade Hermes
snatch Dionysus forth, and he cut open his own thigh and sewed the babe
therein.(195) Then in due course when the time was ripe for the child’s
birth, Zeus in the pangs of travail came to the nymphs, and they by their
song over the thigh “Undo the stitching”(196) brought to light for us the
dithyramb. Whereupon the god was driven mad by Hera, but the Mother of the
Gods healed him of his sickness and he straightway became a god. And he
had for followers not, like Heracles, Lichas for instance or Iolaus or
Telamon or Hylas or Abderos, but Satyrs, Bacchanals, Pans and a whole host
of lesser divinities. Do you perceive how much of human there is in this
generation through the fire of a thunderbolt, that his delivery is even
more human, and that his deeds, even more than these two that we have
mentioned, resemble those of human beings? Now why do we not set aside all
this nonsense and recognise herein first the fact that Semele was wise in
sacred things? For she was the daughter of Phoenician Cadmus, and the god
himself bears witness to the wisdom of the Phoenicians(197) when he says)


    Πολλὰς καὶ Φοίνικες ὁδοὺς μακάρων ἐδάησαν

    (“The Phoenicians too have learned many of the roads travelled by
    the blessed gods.”(198))


λέγων. [221] αἰσθέσθαι οὖν μοι δοκεῖ τοῦ θεοῦ τούτου πρώτη παρ᾽ Ἕλλησι καὶ
τὴν ἐσομένην ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν προαγορεύσασα κινῆσαι μὲν
θᾶττον ἢ προσῆκον ἦν τινὰ τῶν περὶ αὐτὸν ὀργίων, οὐκ ἀνασχομένη τὸν
εἱμαρμένον περιμεῖναι χρόνον, εἶτα ἀναλωθῆναι πρὸς τοῦ πυρὸς τοῦ ῥυέντος
ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐδέδοκτο τῷ Διὶ κοινῇ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐνδοῦναι ἀρχὴν
καταστάσεως ἑτέρας καὶ μεταβαλεῖν(199) αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ νομαδικοῦ βίου πρὸς
[B] τὸν ἡμερώτερον, ἐξ Ἰνδῶν ὁ Διόνυσος αὔτοπτος ἐφαίνετο δαίμων,
ἐπιφοιτῶν τὰς πόλεις, ἄγων μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ στρατιὰν πολλὴν δαιμονίων
τινῶν(200) καὶ διδοὺς ἀνθρώποις κοινῇ μὲν ἅπασι σύμβολον τῆς ἐπιφανείας
αὐτοῦ τὸ τῆς ἡμερίδος φυτόν, ὑφ᾽ οὗ μοι δοκοῦσιν, ἐξημερωθέντων αὐτοῖς τῶν
περὶ τὸν βίον, Ἕλληνες τῆς ἐπωνυμίας αὐτὸ ταύτης ἀξιῶσαι, μητέρα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ
προσειπεῖν τὴν Σεμέλην διὰ τὴν πρόρρησιν, ἄλλως τε καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τιμῶντος
αὐτήν, [C] ἅτε πρώτην ἱερόφαντιν τῆς ἔτι μελλούσης ἐπιφοιτήσεως.

(I think then that she was the first among the Greeks to perceive that
there was to be before long a visible manifestation of this god, and that
she foretold it, and then that, sooner than was fitting, she gave the
signal for certain of the mystic rites connected with his worship, because
she had not the patience to wait for the appointed time, and thus she was
consumed by the fire that fell upon her. But when it was the will of Zeus
to bestow on all mankind in common a new order of things, and to make them
pass from the nomadic to a more civilised mode of life, Dionysus came from
India and revealed himself as very god made visible, visiting the cities
of men and leading with him a great host of beings in some sort divine;
and everywhere he bestowed on all men in common as the symbol of his
manifestation the plant of “the gentle vine”; and since their lives were
made more gentle by it the Greeks as I think gave it that name;(201) and
they called Semele the mother of Dionysus because of the prediction that
she had made, but also because the god honoured her as having been the
first prophetess of his advent while it was yet to be.)

Οὔσης δέ, ὡς ἄν τις ἀκριβῶς σκοπῶν ἐξετάσειε, τῆς ἱστορίας τοιαύτης, οἱ
τὸν Διόνυσον ὅστις ποτ᾽ ἐστὶ θεῶν ζητοῦντες τἀληθὲς ἔχον ὡς ἔφην εἰς μῦθον
διεσκεύασαν, αἰνιττόμενοι τήν τε οὐσίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς
παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ κύησιν καὶ τὸν ἀγέννητον αὐτοῦ τόκον ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ(202) .....
ἐν τῷ παντί, καὶ τἆλλα ἐφεξῆς ὅσα τοῦ ζητεῖν ἦν ἄξια,(203) φράζειν δέ γ᾽
οὐ ῥᾴδια ἐμοί, τυχὸν μὲν [D] καὶ διὰ τὸ ἀγνοεῖν ἔτι περὶ αὐτῶν τὸ ἀκριβές,
τυχὸν δὲ καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντι τὸν κρύφιον ἅμα καὶ φανερὸν θεὸν ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ
προβάλλειν ἀκοαῖς ἀνεξετάστοις καὶ διανοίαις ἐπὶ πάντα μάλλον ἢ τὸ
φιλοσοφεῖν τετραμμέναις.

(Now since this is the historical truth of these events if they are
accurately considered and examined, those who sought to discover what sort
of god Dionysus is worked into a myth the truth which is as I said, and
expressed in an allegory both the essential nature of the god and his
conception in his father Zeus among the intelligible gods, and further his
birth independently of generation in this our world.(204) ... in the whole
universe, and in their proper order all those other facts which are well
worth studying but too difficult for me at any rate to describe; partly
perhaps because I am still ignorant of the precise truth about them,(205)
but perhaps also because I am unwilling to exhibit as in a theatre this
god who is at once hidden and manifest, and that, too, to ears that have
not sought after truth and to minds disposed to anything rather than the
study of philosophy.)

Ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ μὲν τούτων ἴστω Διόνυσος αὐτός, ᾧ καὶ προσεύχομαι τάς τε ἐμὰς
καὶ τὰς ὑμετέρας ἐκβακχεῦσαι φρένας ἐπὶ τὴν ἀληθῆ τῶν θεῶν γνῶσιν, ὡς ἂν
μὴ πολὺν ἀβάκχευτοι χρόνον τῷ θεῷ μένοντες [222] ὁπόσα ὁ Πενθεὺς(206)
πάθωμεν, ἴσως μὲν καὶ ζῶντες, πάντως δὲ ἀπαλλαγέντες τοῦ σώματος. ὅτῳ γὰρ
ἂν(207) μὴ τὸ πεπληθυσμένον τῆς ζωῆς ὑπὸ τῆς ἑνοειδοῦς καὶ ἐν τῷ μεριστῷ
παντελῶς ἀδιαιρέτου ὅλης τε ἐν πᾶσιν ἀμιγοῦς προüπαρχούσης οὐσίας τοῦ
Διονύσου τελεσιουργηθῇ(208) διὰ τῆς περὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐνθέου βακχείας, τούτῳ
κίνδυνος ἐπὶ πολλὰ ῥυῆναι τὴν ζωήν, ῥυεῖσαν δὲ διεσπάσθαι καὶ
διασπασθεῖσαν οἴχεσθαι· [B] τὸ δὲ ῥυεῖσαν καὶ διασπασθεῖσαν μὴ προσέχων
τις τοῖς ῥήμασιν ὑδάτιον μηδὲ λίνου μήρινθον ἀκροάσθω, ξυνιέτω δὲ τὰ
λεγόμενα τρόπον ἄλλον, ὃν Πλάτων, ὃν Πλωτίνος, ὃν Πορφύριος, ὃν ὁ
δαιμόνιος Ἰάμβλιχος. ὃς δ᾽ ἂν μὴ ταύτῃ ποιῇ, γελάσεται μέν, ἴστω μέντοι
Σαρδώνιον γελῶν ἔρημος ὢν ἀεὶ τῆς τῶν θεῶν γνώσεως, ἧς ἀντάξιον οὐδὲ τὸ
πᾶσαν ὁμοῦ μετὰ τῆς τῶν Ῥωμαίων [C] ἐπιτροπεῦσαι τὴν βαρβάρων ἔγωγε θείμην
ἄν, οὐ μὰ τὸν ἐμὸν δεσπότην Ἥλιον. ἀλλά με πάλιν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅστις θεῶν ἐπὶ
ταῦτ᾽ ἐβάκχευσεν οὐ προελόμενον.

(However let Dionysus himself decide about these things, though I do
indeed implore him to inspire my mind and yours with his own sacred frenzy
for the true knowledge of the gods, so that we may not by remaining too
long uninspired by him have to suffer the fate of Pentheus, perhaps even
while we are alive, but most certainly after death has freed us from the
body. For he in whom the abundance of life has not been perfected by the
essential nature of Dionysus, uniform and wholly indivisible as it is in
the divisible world and pre‐existing whole and unmixed in all things, he I
say who has not been perfected by means of the Bacchic and divine frenzy
for the god, runs the risk that his life may flow into too many channels,
and as it flows be torn to shreds, and hence come to naught. But when I
say “flow” or “torn to shreds” no one must consider the bare meaning of
the words and suppose that I mean a mere trickle of water or a thread of
linen, but he must understand these words in another sense, that used by
Plato, Plotinus, Porphyry and the inspired Iamblichus. One who does not
interpret them thus will laugh at them no doubt, but let me assure him
that it will be a Sardonic laugh,(209) since he will be forever deprived
of that knowledge of the gods which I hold to be more precious than to
rule over the whole world, Roman and barbarian put together, yea, I swear
it by my lord Helios. But again some god or other and no choice of my own
has made me rave with this Bacchic frenzy.)

οὗ δὲ ἕνεκεν ἔφην αὐτά· κατὰ μὲν τὴν διάνοιαν ἀπεμφαίνοντες ὅταν οἱ μῦθοι
γίγνωνται περὶ τῶν θείων, αὐτόθεν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ βοῶσι καὶ διαμαρτύρονται μὴ
πιστεύειν ἁπλῶς, ἀλλὰ τὸ λεληθὸς σκοπεῖν καὶ διερευνᾶσθαι. τοσούτῳ δ᾽ ἐστὶ
κρεῖττον ἐν τούτοις τοῦ σεμνοῦ τὸ ἀπεμφαῖνον, ὅσῳ διὰ μὲν ἐκείνου καλοὺς
λίαν καὶ μεγάλους καὶ ἀγαθούς, [D] ἀνθρώπους δὲ ὅμως τοὺς θεοὺς κίνδυνος
νομίσαι, διὰ δὲ τῶν ἀπεμφαινόντων ὑπεριδόντας τῶν ἐν τῷ φανερῷ λεγομένων
ἐπὶ τὴν ἐξῃρημένην αὐτῶν οὐσίαν καὶ ὑπερέχουσαν πάντα τὰ ὄντα καθαρὰν
νόησιν ἐλπὶς ἀναδραμεῖν.

(To go back then to what led me to say all this. Whenever myths on sacred
subjects are incongruous in thought, by that very fact they cry aloud, as
it were, and summon us not to believe them literally but to study and
track down their hidden meaning. And in such myths the incongruous element
is even more valuable than the serious and straightforward, the more so
that when the latter is used there is risk of our regarding the gods as
exceedingly great and noble and good certainly, but still as human beings,
whereas when the meaning is expressed incongruous there is some hope that
men will neglect the more obvious sense of the words, and that pure
intelligence may rise to the comprehension of the distinctive nature of
the gods that transcends all existing things.)

[223] Αἴτιαι μὲν οὖν αὗται τοῦ τὴν τελεστικὴν καὶ μυσταγωγὸν φιλοσοφίαν τὰ
μὲν ῥήματα παντὸς μᾶλλον εὐαγῆ καὶ σεμνὰ προφέρεσθαι, κατὰ δὲ τὴν διάνοιαν
ἀλλοιοτέραν ποιεῖσθαι τὴν ἐξήγησιν τῶν τοιούτων. ὁ δὲ τῆς τῶν ἠθῶν
ἐπανορθώσεως ἕνεκα τοὺς λόγους πλάττων καὶ μύθους παράγων δράτω(210) τοῦτο
μὴ πρὸς ἄνδρας, ἀλλὰ πρὸς παῖδας ἤτοι καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν ἢ τῷ φρονεῖν, πάντως δὲ
τῶν λόγων τούτων δεομένους. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἡμεῖς σοι παῖδες ἐφάνημεν εἴτε [B]
ἐγὼ εἴτε Ἀνατόλιος οὑτοσί, συγκαταρίθμει δὲ τούτῳ καὶ τὸν Μεμμόριον καὶ
τὸν Σαλούστιον, πρὸς τούτοις δέ, εἰ βούλει, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἑξῆς,
Ἀντικύρας σοι δεῖ· τί γὰρ ἂν ἀκκίζοιτί τις; ἐπεὶ πρὸς τῶν θεῶν καὶ πρὸς
αὐτοῦ τοῦ μύθου, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦ κοινῇ πάντων βασιλέως Ἡλίου, τί σοι μέγα ἢ
μικρὸν πεποίηται ἔργον; τίνι παρέστης ἀγωνιζομένῳ μετὰ τοὺ δικαίου; τίνα
ἐθεράπευσας πενθοῦντα, [C] τῷ λόγῳ διδάξας, ὅτι μὴ κακὸν ὁ θάνατος μήτε τῷ
παθόντι μήτε τοῖς οἰκείοις αὐτοῦ; τίς δ᾽ αἰτιάσεταί σε τῆς ἑαυτοῦ
μειρακίσκος σωφροσύνης, ὅτι πεποίηκας αὐτὸν ἐξ ἀσώτου σώφρονα καὶ καλὸν οὐ
τὸ σῶμα μόνον, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον τὴν ψυχὴν φαίνεσθαι; τίνα δὲ ἄσκησιν
ἐποιήσω τοῦ βίου; τί δέ σοι ἄξιον τῆς Διογένους βακτηρίας ἢ ναὶ μὰ Δία τῆς
παρρησίας πεποίηται; ἔργον οἴει μέγα βακτηρίαν λαβεῖν ἢ τρίχας ἀνεῖναι,
[D] καὶ περινοστεῖν τὰς πόλεις καὶ τὰ στρατόπεδα, καὶ τοῖς μὲν βελτίστοις
λοιδορεῖσθαι, τοὺς δὲ χειρίστους θεραπεύειν; εἰπὲ πρὸς τοῦ Διὸς καὶ πρὸς
τουτωνὶ τῶν ἀκροωμένων, οἷ δι᾽ ὑμᾶς τὴν φιλοσοφίαν ἐκτρέπονται, ἀνθ᾽ ὅτου
πρὸς μὲν τὸν μακαρίτην Κωνστάντιον εἰς Ἰταλίαν ἦλθες, οὐκέτι μέντοι καὶ
μέχρι τῶν Γαλλιῶν; καίτοι πορευθεὶς πρὸς ἡμᾶς, εἰ μηδὲν ἄλλο, ξυνεῖναι
γοῦν σου τῆς φωνῆς μᾶλλον δυναμένῳ πλησιάζειν ἔμελλες ἀνθρώπῳ. [224] τί δὲ
καὶ τὸ περιθοιτᾶν πανταχοῦ καὶ παρέχειν πράγματα ταῖς ἡμιόνοις; ἀκούω δὲ
ἔγωγε καὶ τοῖς τὰς ἡμιόνους ἐλαύνουσιν, οἳ μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς ἢ τοὺς στρατιώτας
πεφρίκασι· χρῆσθαι γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ξύλοις(211) ἀκούω τινὰς ὑμῶν
χαλεπώτερον ἢ τοῖς ξίφεσιν ἐκεῖνοι. γίγνεσθε οὖν αὐτοῖς εἰκότως
φοβερώτεροι. πάλαι μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν ἐθέρμην ἐγὼ τοῦτο τὸ ὄνομα, [B] νυνὶ δὲ
αὐτὸ ἔοικα καὶ γράψειν. ἀποτακτιστάς τινας ὀνομάζουσιν οἱ δυσσεβεῖς
Γαλιλαῖοι· τούτων οἱ πλείους μικρὰ προέμενοι πολλὰ πάνυ, μᾶλλον δὲ τὰ
πάντα πανταχόθεν ξυγκομίζουσι, καὶ προσκτῶνται(212) τὸ τιμᾶσθαι καὶ
δορυφορεῖσθαι καὶ θεραπεύεσθαι. τοιοῦτόν τι καὶ τὸ ὑμέτερον ἔργον ἐστί,
πλὴν ἴσως τοῦ χρηματίζεσθαι. τοῦτο δὲ οὐ παρ᾽ ὑμᾶς γίγνεται, παρ᾽ ἡμᾶς δέ·
συνετώτεροι γάρ ἐσμεν τῶν ἀνοήτων ἐκείνων· ἴσως δὲ καὶ διὰ τὸ μηδὲν ὑμῖν
εἶναι πρόσχημα τοῦ φορολογεῖν εὐπροσώπως, [C] ὁποῖον ἐκείνοις, ἣν λέγουσιν
οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως ἐλεημοσύνην, τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλα γε πάντα ἐστὶν ὑμῖν τε κἀκείνοις
παραπλήσια. καταλελοίπατε τὴν πατρίδα ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνοι, περιφοιτᾶτε πάντη καὶ
τὸ στρατόπεδον διωχλήσατε μᾶλλον ἐκείνων καὶ ἰταμώτερον· οἱ μὲν γὰρ
καλούμενοι, ὑμεῖς δὲ καὶ ἀπελαυνόμενοι. καὶ τί χρηστὸν ἐκ τούτων ὑμῖν
ἐγένετο, [D] μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἡμῖν τοῖς ἄλλοις; ἀνῆλθεν ὁ Ἀσκληπιάδης, εἶτα ὁ
Σερηνιανός, εἶτα ὁ Χύτρων, εἶτα οὐκ οἶδα παιδάριον ὅ, τι ξανθὸν καὶ
εὔμηκες, εἶτα σύ, καὶ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν ἄλλοι δὶς τοσοῦτοι. τί οὖν ἐκ τῆς ὑμετέρας
ἀνόδου γέγονεν ἀγαθόν, ὦ λῷστοι; τίς ᾔσθετο πόλις ἢ τίς ἰδιώτης τῆς
ὑμετέρας παρρησίας; οὐκ ἀφρόνως μὲν τὸ ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἵλεσθε τὴν ἐπὶ τὸν οὐδὲ
ἰδεῖν ὑμᾶς θέλοντα βασιλέα πορείαν, ἀνελθόντες δὲ ἀφρονέστερον αὐτῇ καὶ
ἀμαθέστερον καὶ μανιωδέστερον ἐχρήσασθε, κολακεύσαντες ἅμα καὶ
ὑλακτήσαντες καὶ βιβλία δόντες [225] καὶ ταῦτα προσαχθῆναι(213)
προσλιπαρήσαντες; οὐδένα ὑμῶν οἶμαι ἐγὼ τοσαυτάκις εἰς φιλοόοφου φοιτῆσαι,
ὁσάκις εἰς ἀντιγραφέως, ὥστε ὑμῖν Ἀκαδήμεια καὶ Λύκειον ἀντὶ τῆς Ποικίλης
τε ἦν τῶν βασιλείων τὰ πρόθυρα.

(These then are the reasons why that branch of philosophy which is
connected with initiation and the doctrines of the Mysteries ought by all
means to be expressed in devout and serious language, while as regards the
thought the narrative may be expounded in a style that has stranger
qualities. But one who is inventing tales for the purpose of reforming
morals and inserts myths therein, does so not for men but for those who
are children whether in years or intelligence, and who on all accounts
stand in need of such tales. If, however, you took us for children, me,
for instance, or Anatolius here, and you may reckon with us Memmorius also
and Sallust and add if you please all the others in due order, then you
need a voyage to Anticyra.(214) For why should one pretend to be polite?
Tell me, I ask, in the name of the gods, and of myth itself, or rather in
the name of Helios the King of all the universe, what have you ever
accomplished, great or small? When did you ever champion one who was
resisting oppression and had right on his side? When did you ever comfort
the mourner and teach him by your arguments that death is not an evil
either for him who has suffered it or for his friends? What youth will
ever give you the credit for his temperance, and say that you have made
him show himself sober instead of dissolute, and beautiful not merely in
body but far more in soul? What strenuous discipline have you ever
embraced? What have you ever done to make you worthy of the staff of
Diogenes or still more, by Zeus, of his freedom of speech? Do you really
think it so great an achievement to carry a staff and let your hair grow,
and haunt cities and camps uttering calumnies against the noblest men, and
flattering the vilest? Tell me in the name of Zeus and of this audience
now present, who are disgusted with philosophy because of men of your
sort, why was it that you visited the late Emperor Constantius in Italy
but could not travel as far as Gaul? And yet if you had come to me you
would at any rate have associated with one who was better able to
comprehend your language. What do you gain by travelling about in all
directions and wearing out the very mules you ride? Yes, and I hear that
you wear out the mule drivers as well, and that they dread the sight of
you Cynics even more than of soldiers. For I am told that some of you
belabour them more cruelly with your staffs than do the soldiers with
their swords, so that they are naturally more afraid of you. Long ago I
gave you a nickname and now I think I will write it down. It is
“monks,”(215) a name applied to certain persons by the impious Galilaeans.
They are for the most part men who by making small sacrifices gain much or
rather everything from all sources, and in addition secure honour, crowds
of attendants and flattery. Something like that is your method, except
perhaps for uttering divine revelations: but this is not your custom,
though it is ours; for we are wiser than those insensate men. And perhaps
too there is this difference that you have no excuse for levying tribute
on specious pretexts as they do; which they call “alms,” whatever that may
mean. But in all other respects your habits and theirs are very much
alike. Like them you have abandoned your country, you wander about all
over the world, and you gave more trouble than they did at my
headquarters, and were more insolent. For they were at any rate invited to
come, but you we tried to drive away. And what good have you, or rather,
what have the rest of us derived from all this? First arrived Asclepiades,
then Serenianus, then Chytron, then a tall boy with yellow hair—I don’t
know his name—then you, and with you all twice as many more. And now, my
good sirs, what good has come from your journey? What city or individual
has had any experience of your alleged freedom of speech? Was it not
foolish of you to choose in the first place to make this journey to an
Emperor who did not even wish to set eyes on you? And when you had
arrived, did you not behave even more foolishly and ignorantly and
insanely in flattering and barking at me in the same breath, and offering
me your books, and moreover imploring that they should be taken to me? I
do not believe that any one of you ever visited a philosopher’s school as
diligently as you did my secretary: in fact the entrance to the Palace
stood for you in place of the Academy and the Lyceum and the Portico.)

Οὐκ ἀπάξετε ταῦτα; οὐ καταβαλεῖτε νῦν γοῦν, εἰ καὶ μὴ πρότερον, ὅτε ὑμῖν
οὐδέν ἐστι πλέον ἀπὸ τῆς κόμης καὶ τῆς βακτηρίας; πῶς δὲ καὶ γέγονεν ὑφ᾽
ὑμῶν εὐκαταφρόνητος ἡ φιλοσοφία; τῶν ῥητορικῶν [B] οἱ δυσμαθέστατοι καὶ
οὐδ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως Ἑρμοῦ τὴν γλῶτταν ἐκκαθαρθῆναι δυνάμενοι,
φρενωθῆναι δὲ οὐδὲ πρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς σὺν τῷ Ἑρμῇ, τοῦτο ἐκ τῆς
ἀγοραίου καὶ περιτρεχούσης ἁρπάσαντες ἐντρεχείας· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐν παροιμίᾳ
περιφερόμενον αὐτὸ γιγνώσκουσι τὸ ὅτι βότρυς πρὸς βότρυν πεπαίνεται·
ὁρμῶσιν ἐπὶ τὸν Κυνισμόν· βακτηρία, τρίβων, [C] κόμη, τὸ ἐντεῦθεν ἀμαθία,
θράσος, ἰταμότης καὶ πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα. τὴν σύντομον, φασίν, ὁδὸν καὶ
σύντονον ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρετὴν ἰέναι(216) ὄφελον καὶ ὑμεῖς τὴν μακρὰν ἐπορεύεσθε·
ῥᾷον ἂν δι᾽ ἐκείνης ἢ διὰ ταύτης ἤλθετε. οὐκ ἴστε, ὅτι μεγάλας ἔχουσιν αἱ
σύντομοι τὰς χαλεπότητας; καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς λεωφόροις ὁ μὲν τὴν σύντομον
ἐλθεῖν δυνηθεὶς ῥᾷον ἐκπερίεισι τὴν κύκλῳ, οὐκέτι μέντοι τὸ ἀνάπαλιν ὁ
κύκλῳ πορευθεὶς ἔλθοι ἂν πάντως [D] καὶ τὴν ἐπίτομον, οὕτω δὴ(217) καὶ ἐν
τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ τέλος τέ ἑστι καὶ ἀρχὴ μία γνῶναί τε ἑαυτὸν καὶ ἀφομοιωθῆναι
τοῖς θεοῖς· ἀρχὴ μὲν οὖν ἑαυτὸν γνῶναι, τέλος δὲ ἡ πρὸς τοὺς κρείττονας
ὁμοιότης.

(Have done with all this nonsense! At any rate lay it aside now if not
before, when you can get no advantage from your long hair and your staff.
Shall I tell you how you have caused philosophy to be lightly esteemed? It
is because the most ignorant of the rhetoricians, those whose tongues not
King Hermes himself could purify, and who could not be made wise by Athene
herself with the aid of Hermes, having picked up their knowledge from
their industry in frequenting public places,—for they do not know the
truth of the current proverb, “Grape ripens near grape”(218)—then all rush
into Cynicism. They adopt the staff, the cloak, the long hair, the
ignorance that goes with these, the impudence, the insolence, and in a
word everything of the sort. They say that they are travelling the short
and ready road to virtue.(219) I would that you were going by the longer!
For you would more easily arrive by that road than by this of yours. Are
you not aware that short cuts usually involve one in great difficulties?
For just as is the case with the public roads, a traveller who is able to
take a short cut will more easily than other men go all the way round,
whereas it does not at all follow that he who went round could always go
the short cut, so too in philosophy the end and the beginning are one,
namely, to know oneself and to become like the gods. That is to say, the
first principle is self‐knowledge, and the end of conduct is the
resemblance to the higher powers.)

Ὅστις οὖν Κυνικὸς εἶναι ἐθέλει, πάντων ὑπεριδὼν τῶν νομισμάτων καὶ τῶν
ἀνθρωπίνων δοξῶν, εἰς ἑαυτὸν καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπέστραπται πρότερον. ἐκείνῳ τὸ
χρυσίον οὐκ ἔστι χρυσίον, οὐχ ἡ ψάμμος ψάμμος, εἰ πρὸς ἀμοιβήν τις αὐτὰ
ἀξετάζοι καὶ τῆς ἀξίας αὐτῶν ἐπιτρέψειεν αὐτῷ τιμητῇ γενέσθαι· [226] γῆν
γὰρ αὐτὰ οἶδεν ἀμφότερα. τὸ σπανιώτερον δὲ καὶ τὸ ῥᾷον ἀνθρώπων εἶναι
κενοδοξίας ταῦτα καὶ ἀμαθίας νενόμικεν ἔργα· τὸ αἰσχρὸν ἢ καλὸν οὐκ ἐν
τοῖς ἐπαινουμένοις ἢ ψεγομένοις τίθεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τῇ φύσει· φεύγει τὰς
περιττ`ας τροφάς· ἀποστρέφεται δὲ τὰ ἀφροδίσια. βιαζομένου δὲ τοῦ σώματος,
οὐ δόξῃ προστέτηκεν οὐδὲ περιμένει τὸν μάγειρον καὶ τὰ ὑποτρίμματα καὶ τὴν
κνίσσαν, οὐδὲ τὴν Φρύνην οὐδὲ τὴν Λαΐδα οὐδὲ τὴν τοῦ δεῖνος(220)
περιβλέπεται γαμετὴν οὐδὲ [B] τὸ θυγάτριον οὐδὲ τὴν θεράπαιναν· ἀλλ᾽ ὡς
ἔνι μάλιστα ἐκ τῶν προστυχόντων ἀποπλήσας τὴν θεραπείαν τοῦ σώματος καὶ τὸ
ἐνοχλοῦν ἐξ αὐτοῦ παρωσάμενος, ἄνωθεν ἐκ τῆς Ὀλύμπου κορυφῆς ἐπιβλέπει
τοὺς ἄλλους

(Therefore he who desires to be a Cynic despises all the usages and
opinions of men, and turns his mind first of all to himself and the god.
For him gold is not gold or sand sand, if one enquire into their value
with a view to exchanging them, and leave it to him to rate them at their
proper worth: for he knows that both of them are but earth. And the fact
that one is scarcer and the other easier to obtain he thinks is merely the
result of the vanity and ignorance of mankind. He will judge of the
baseness or nobility of an action, not by the applause or blame of men but
by its intrinsic nature. He avoids any excess in food, and renounces the
pleasures of love. When he is forced to obey the needs of the body he is
not the slave of opinion, nor does he wait for a cook and sauces and a
savoury smell, nor does he ever look about for Phryne or Lais or So‐and‐
so’s wife or young daughter or serving‐maid. But as far as possible he
satisfies his body’s needs with whatever comes to hand, and by thrusting
aside all hindrances derived from the body he contemplates from above,
from the peaks of Olympus, other men who are)


    Ἄτης ἐν λειμῶνι κατὰ σκότον ἠλάσκοντας,

    (“Wandering in darkness in the meadow of Ate,”(221))


ὑπὲρ ὀλίγων παντάπασιν ἀπολαύσεων ὑπομένοντας ὅσα οὐδὲ παρὰ τὸν Κωκυτὸν
καὶ τὸν Ἀχέροντα θρυλοῦσιν οἱ κομψότεροι τῶν ποιητῶν. ἡ σύντομος ὁδός
ἐστιν αὕτη. [C] δεῖ γὰρ αὐτὸν ἀθρόως ἐκστῆναι ἑαυτοῦ καὶ γνῶναι, ὅτι θεῖός
ἐστι, καὶ τὸν νοῦν μὲν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἀτρύτως καὶ ἀμετακινήτως συνέχειν ἐν
τοῖς θείοις καὶ ἀχράντοις καὶ καθαροῖς νοήμασιν, ὀλιγωρεῖν δὲ πάντη τοῦ
σώματος καὶ νομίζειν αὐτὸ κατὰ τὸν Ἡράκλειτον κοπρίων ἐκβλητότερον, ἐκ τοῦ
ῥᾴστου δὲ αὑτῷ τὰς θεραπείας ἀποπληροῦν, ἕως ἂν ὁ θεὸς ὥσπερ ὀργάνῳ τῷ
σώματι χρῆσθαι ἐπιτάττῃ.

(and for the sake of a few wholly trifling pleasures are undergoing
torments greater than any by the Cocytus or Acheron such as the most
ingenious of the poets are always telling us about. Now the true short cut
to philosophy is this. A man must completely come out of himself and
recognise that he is divine, and not only keep his mind untiringly and
steadfastly fixed on divine and stainless and pure thoughts, but he must
also utterly despise his body, and think it, in the words of Heracleitus,
“more worthless than dirt.”(222) And by the easiest means he must satisfy
his body’s needs so long as the god commands him to use it as an
instrument.)

Ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ὡς φασὶ ταύτῃ.(223) ἐπανάξω δὲ ὅθεν ἐξέβην. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τοὺς
μύθους προσήκει πρὸς παῖδας ἤτοι τῷ φρονεῖν, [D] κἂν ἄνδρες ὦσιν, ἢ καὶ
τοῖς καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν παιδαρίοις ἀπαγγέλλειν, ἐξεταστέον ὅπως μήτε εἰς θεοὺς
μήτε εἰς ἀνθρώπους πλημμελὲς ᾿ἤ, καθάπερ ἔναγχος, δυσσεβές τι ῥηθείη· καὶ
προσέτι τοῦτο ἐν ἅπασιν ἀκριβῶς βασανιστέον, εἰ πιθανός, εἰ τοῖς πράγμασι
προσφυής, εἰ μῦθός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ πλαττόμενος. ἐπεὶ τό γε νῦν ὑπὸ σοῦ
πεποιημένον οὐ μῦθός ἐστι σός·(224) καίτοι τοῦτό γε ἐνεανιεύσω· ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν
μῦθος ἐστι παλαιός, [227] ἐφήρμοσας δὲ αὐτὸν σὺ πράγμασιν ἑτέροις, ὅπερ
οἶμαι ποιεῖν εἰώθασιν οἱ τῇ τροπικῇ χρώμενοι τὼν νοημάτων κατασκευῇ· πολὺς
δὲ ἐν τούτοις ὁ Πάριός ἐστι ποιητής. ἔοικας οὖν οὐδὲ πεποιηκὼς μῦθον, ὦ
ξυνετώτατε, μάτην νεανιεύεσθαι· καίτοι τοῦτο τίτθης ἔργον ἐστὶν
εὐτραπέλου. Πλουτάρχου δὲ εἰ τὰ μυθικὰ διηγήματα τῶν σῶν εἴσω χειρῶν
ἀφῖκτο, οὔποτ᾽ ἂν ἐλελήθει σε, τίνι διαφέρει πλάσαι τε ἐξ ἀρχῆς μῦθον καὶ
τὸν κείμενον ἐφαρμόσαι πράγμασιν οἰκείοις. [B] ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μή σε τὴν σύντομον
ὁδεύοντα βίβλοις ἐυβαλὼν μακραῖς καὶ δυσελίκτοις ἐπίσχω μικρὰ καὶ πεδήσω·
σὺ δὲ οὐδὲ τὸν Δημοσθένους ἀκήκοας μῦθον, ὃν ἐποίησεν ὁ Παιανιεὺς πρὸς
τοὺς Ἀθηναίους, ἡνίκα ὁ Μακεδὼν ἐξῄτει τοὺς Ἁθηναίους ῥήτορας. ἐχρῆν οὖν
τι τοιοῦτο πλάσαι· ἢ πρὸς τῶν θεῶν ἔργον ἦν εἰπεῖν μυθάριόν τι τοιοῦτον;
ἀναγκάσεις δέ με καὶ μυθοποιὸν γενέσθαι.

(So much for that, as the saying is.(225) Now to go back to the point at
which I digressed.(226) Since, as I was saying, myths ought to be
addressed either to those who though grown men are children in
intelligence, or to those who in actual years are mere children, we must
take pains to utter in them no word that is offensive to gods or men or
anything impious, as was done recently. And moreover we must in all cases
apply careful tests to see whether the myth is plausible, closely related
to the matter discussed and whether what is invented is really a myth. Now
what you composed lately is not your own myth though you boasted that it
was. Nay, your myth was an old one and you did but adapt it to fresh
circumstances, as I believe people are in the habit of doing who use
tropes and figures of thought. The poet of Paros(227) for instance is much
given to this style. It seems then that you did not even invent your myth,
my very clever friend, and that yours was an idle boast. Though in fact
the thing is done by any nurse with an inventive turn. And if the mythical
tales of Plutarch had ever fallen into your hands you would have failed to
observe what a difference there is between inventing a myth from the
beginning and adapting to one’s own purpose a myth that already exists.
But I must not detain you even for a moment or hinder you on your way
along that short cut to wisdom by making you embark on books that are long
and hard to read. You have not even heard of the myth by Demosthenes which
he of the Paeanian deme addressed to the Athenians when the Macedonian
demanded that the Athenian orators be given up. You ought to have invented
something of that sort. In Heaven’s name was it too hard for you to relate
some little myth of the kind? You will force me too to become a myth‐
maker.)

[C] Πλουσίῳ ἀνδρὶ πρόβατα ἦν πολλὰ καὶ ἀγέλαι βοῶν καὶ αἰπόλια πλατέ
αἰγῶν, ἵπποι δὲ αὐτῷ πολλάκις μυρίαι ἕλος κάτα βουκολέοντο, καὶ ποιμένες
δοῦλοί τε καὶ ἐλεύθεροι μισθωτοί, καὶ βουκόλοι βοῶν καὶ αἰγῶν αἰπόλοι καὶ
ἱπποφορβοὶ τῶν ἵππων, καὶ πλεῖστα κτήματα. τούτων δὲ αὐτῷ πολλὰ μὲν ὁ
πατὴρ ἀπελελοίπει, πολλαπλάσια δὲ αὐτὸς ἐπεκτήσατο,(228) πλουτεῖν θέλων ἐν
δίκῃ τε καὶ παρὰ δίκην· ἔμελε γὰρ αὐτῷ τῶν(229) θεῶν ὀλίγον. [D] ἐγένοντο
δὲ αὐτῷ γυναῖκες πολλαὶ καὶ υἱεῖς ἐξ αὐτῶν καὶ θυγατέρες, οἷς ἐκεῖνος
διανείμας τὴν οὐσίαν ἔπειτα ἐτελεύτησεν, οὐδὲν αὐτοὺς οἰκονομίας πέρι
διδάξας, οὐδ᾽ ὅπως ἄν τις δύναιτο τὰ τοιαῦτα κτᾶσθαι μὴ παρόντα ἢ παρόντα
διαφυλάττειν. ᾤετο γὰρ ὑπὸ ἀμαθίας ἀρκεῖν τὸ πλῆθος, ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν οὐ
μάλα ἐπιστήμων τῆς τοιαύτης τέχνης, ἅτε μὴ λόγῳ προσειληφὼς αὐτήν, ἀλλὰ
συνηθείᾳ τινὶ καὶ πείρᾳ μᾶλλον, [228] ὥσπερ οἱ φαῦλοι τῶν ἰατρῶν ἐκ τῆς
ἐμπειρίας μόνον ἰώμενοι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ὅθεν καὶ διαφεύγει τὰ πολλὰ τῶν
νοσημάτων αὐτούς. ἀρκεῖν οὖν νομίσας τὸ πλῆθος τῶν υἱέων πρὸς τὸ φυλάξαι
τὴν οὐσίαν οὐδὲν ἐφρόντισεν ὅπως ἔσονται σπουδαῖοι. τὸ δὲ ἄρα αὐτοῖς ἦρξε
πρῶτον μὲν τῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους ἀδικημάτων. ἐπιθυμῶν γὰρ ἕκαστος ὥσπερ ὁ πατὴρ
πολλὰ ἔχειν καὶ μόνος πάντα ἐπὶ τὸν πέλας ἐτράπετο. [B] τέως μὲν οὖν τοῦτο
ἐπράττετο. προσαπέλαυον δὲ καὶ οἱ ξυγγενεῖς, οὐδ᾽ αὐτοὶ παιδευθέντες
καλῶς, τῆς τῶν παίδων ἀνοίας τε καὶ ἀμαθίας. εἶτα ἐπίμπλατο φόνων πάντα,
καὶ ἡ τραγικὴ κατάρα ὑπὸ τοῦ δαίμονος εἰς ἔργον ἤγετο· τὰ πατρῷα γὰρ θηκτῷ
σιδήρῳ διελάγχανον, καὶ ἦν πάντα ἀκοσμίας πλήρη· πατρῷα μὲν ἱερὰ
κατεσκάπτετο παρὰ τῶν παίδων ὀλιγωρηθέντα πρότερον ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ
ἀποσυληθέντα τῶν ἀναθημάτων, [C] ἃ ἐτέθειτο παρὰ πολλῶν μὲν καὶ ἄλλων, οὐχ
ἥκιστα δὲ τῶν προπατόρων αὐτοῦ. καθαιρουμένων δὲ τῶν ἱερῶν ἀνῳκοδομεῖτο
παλαιὰ καὶ νέα μνήματα, προαγορεύοντος αὐτοῖς τοῦ αὐτομάτου καὶ τῆς τύχης,
ὅτι ἄρα πολλῶν αὐτοῖς δεήσει μνημάτων οὐκ εἰς μακράν, ἐπειδήπερ αὐτοῖς
ὀλίγον ἔμελε τῶν θεῶν.

(A certain rich man(230) had numerous flocks of sheep and herds of cattle
and “ranging flocks of goats”(231) and many times ten thousand mares
“grazed his marsh‐meadows.”(232) Many shepherds too he had, both slaves
and hired freedmen, neatherds and goatherds and grooms for his horses, and
many estates withal. Now much of all this his father had bequeathed to
him, but he had himself acquired many times more, being eager to enrich
himself whether justly or unjustly; for little did he care for gods.
Several wives he had, and sons and daughters by them, among whom he
divided his wealth before he died. But he did not teach them how to manage
it, or how to acquire more if it should fail, or how to preserve what they
had. For in his ignorance he thought that their mere numbers would
suffice, nor had he himself any real knowledge of that sort of art, since
he had not acquired his wealth on any rational principle but rather by use
and wont, like quack doctors who try to cure their patients by relying on
their experience only, so that many diseases escape them altogether.(233)
Accordingly since he thought that a number of sons would suffice to
preserve his wealth, he took no thought how to make them virtuous. But
this very thing proved to be the beginning of their iniquitous behaviour
to one another. For every one of them desired to be as wealthy as his
father and to possess the whole for himself alone, and so attacked the
brother that was his neighbour. Now for a time they continued to behave
thus. And their relatives also shared in the folly and ignorance of those
sons, since they themselves had had no better education. Then ensued a
general slaughter, and heaven brought the tragic curse(234) to fulfilment.
For “by the edge of the sword they divided their patrimony” and everything
was thrown into confusion. The sons demolished the ancestral temples which
their father before them had despised and had stripped of the votive
offerings that had been dedicated by many worshippers, but not least by
his own ancestors. And besides demolishing the temples they erected
sepulchres(235) both on new sites and on the old sites of the temples, as
though impelled by fate or by an unconscious presentiment that they would
ere long need many such sepulchres, seeing that they so neglected the
gods.)

Πάντων οὖν ὁμοῦ φυρομένων καὶ ξυντελουμένων γάμων τε οὐ γάμων καὶ
βεβηλουμένων ὁμοῦ τοῖς θείοις τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, [D] τὸν Δία ἔλεος ὑπῆλθεν·
εἶτα ἀπιδὼν πρὸς τὸν Ἥλιον· ὦ παῖ, εἶπεν, οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς ἀρχαιότερον ἐν
θεοῖς βλάστημα, μνησικακεῖν ἔτι διανοῇ τῆς ὑπεροψίας ἀνδρὶ αὐθάδει καὶ
τολμηρῷ, ὅς σε ἀπολιπὼν αὑτῷ τε καὶ γένει αἴτιος(236) ἐγένετο τῶν
τηλικούτων παθημάτων; ἢ νομίζεις, [229] ὅτι μὴ χαλεπαίνεις αὐτῷ μηδ᾽
ἀγανακτεῖς μηδ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ γένος αὐτοῦ τοὺς οἰστοὺς θήγεις, ἔλαττον εἶναι
ταύτης αἴτιος αὐτῷ τῆς ξυμφορᾶς, ἔρημον αὐτοῦ τὴν οἰκίαν ἀφείς; ἀλλ᾽, ἔφη,
καλῶμεν τὰς Μοίρας, εἴ πῃ βοηθητέος ὁ ἀνήρ ἐστιν. αἱ δὲ ὑπήκουσαν αὐτίκα
τῷ Διί. καὶ ὁ μὲν Ἥλιος, ὥσπερ ἐννοῶν τι καὶ λογιζόμενος αὐτὸς ἐν ἑαυτῷ,
προσεῖχεν εἰς τὸν Δία πήξας τὰ ὄμματα. τῶν Μοιρῶν δὲ ἡ πρεσβυτάτη·
Κωλύετον, ἔφη, ὦ πάτερ, ἡ Ὁσιότης ξὺν τῇ Δίκῃ. σὸν οὖν ἔργον ἐστίν, [B]
ἐπείπερ ἡμᾶς ἐκέλευσας ὑπεικαθεῖν αὐταῖς, πεῖσαι καὶ ἐκείνας. ἀλλ᾽ ἐμαὶ
γάρ εἰσιν, ἔφη, θυγατέρες, καὶ ἄξιον δὴ ἐρέσθαι αὐτάς· τί τοίνυν, ὦ
ποτνία, φατόν; ἀλλὰ τούτου μέν, εἰπέτην, ὦ πάτερ, αὐτὸς εἶ κύριος. σκόπει
δὲ ὅπως ἐν ἀνθρώποις ὁ πονηρὸς οὑτοσὶ τῆς ἀνοσιουργίας ζῆλος μὴ παντάπασιν
ἐπικρατήσει.(237) πρὸς ἀμφότερα, εἶπεν, ἐγὼ σκέψομαι. καὶ αἱ Μοῖραι
πλησίον παροῦσαι πάντα ἐπέκλωθον, [C] ὡς ὁ πατὴρ ἐβούλετο.

(Now when all was in confusion, and many marriages that were no
marriages(238) were being concluded, and the laws of god and man alike had
been profaned, Zeus was moved with compassion and addressing himself to
Helios he said: “O my son, divine offspring more ancient than heaven and
earth, art thou still minded to resent the insolence of that arrogant and
audacious mortal, who by forsaking thee brought so many calamities on
himself and his race? Thinkest thou that, though thou dost not show thine
anger and resentment against him nor whet thine arrows against his
children, thou art any less the author of his destruction in that thou
dost abandon his house to desolation? Nay,” said Zeus, “let us summon the
Fates and enquire whether any assistance may be given the man.” Forthwith
the Fates obeyed the call of Zeus. But Helios who was as though absorbed
in thought and inward debate yet gave constant heed and fixed his eyes on
Zeus. Then spoke the eldest of the Fates: “O our father, Piety and Justice
both restrain us. Therefore it is thine to prevail on them also, since
thou hast ordered us to be subservient to them.” And Zeus made answer,
“Truly they are my daughters, and it is meet that I question them. What
then have ye to say, ye venerable goddesses?” “Nay, father,” they replied,
“that is as thou thyself dost ordain. But be careful lest this wicked zeal
for impious deeds prevail universally among men.” “I will myself look to
both these matters,” Zeus replied. Then the Fates approached and spun all
as their father willed.)

Λέγειν δὲ ὁ Ζεὺς ἄρχεται πρὸς τὸν Ἥλιον· τουτὶ τὸ παιδίον, ἔφη· ξυγγενὲς
δὲ ἦν αὐτῶν ἄρα παρερριμμένον που καὶ ἀμελούμενον, ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐκείνου τοῦ
πλουσίου καὶ ἀνεψιὸς τῶν κληρονόμων· τοῦτο, ἔφη, σόν ἐστιν ἔκγονον. ὄμοσον
οὖν τὸ ἐμόν τε καὶ τὸ σὸν(239) σκῆπτρον, ἦ μὴν ἐπιμελήσεσθαι διαφερόντως
αὐτοῦ καὶ ποιμανεῖν αὐτὸ καὶ θεραπεύσειν τῆς νόσου. [D] ὁρᾷς γὰρ ὅπως οἷον
ὑπὸ καπνοῦ ῥύπου τε ἀναπέπλησται καὶ λιγνύος, κίνδυνός τε τὸ ὑπὸ σοῦ
σπαρὲν ἐν αὐτῷ πῦρ ἀποσβῆναι, ἢν μὴ σύ γε δύσεαι ἀλκήν. σοὶ δὲ ἐγώ τε
ξυγχωρῶ καὶ αἱ Μοῖραι· κόμιζε οὖν αὐτὸ καὶ τρέφε. ταῦτα ἀκούσας ὁ βασιλεὺς
Ἥλιος ηὐφράνθη τε ἡσθεὶς τῷ βρέφει, σωζόμενον ἔτι καθορῶν ἐν αὐτῷ σπινθῆρα
μικρὸν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ τὸ ἐντεῦθεν ἔτρεφεν ἐκεῖνο τὸ παιδίον, ἐξαγαγὼν

(Next Zeus thus addressed Helios: “Thou seest yonder thine own
child.”(240) (Now this was a certain kinsman of those brothers who had
been cast aside and was despised though he was that rich man’s nephew and
the cousin of his heirs.) “This child,” said Zeus, “is thine own
offspring. Swear then by my sceptre and thine that thou wilt care
especially for him and cure him of this malady. For thou seest how he is
as it were infected with smoke and filth and darkness and there is danger
that the spark of fire which thou didst implant in him will be quenched,
unless thou clothe thyself with might.(241) Take care of him therefore and
rear him. For I and the Fates yield thee this task.” When King Helios
heard this he was glad and took pleasure in the babe, since he perceived
that in him a small spark of himself was still preserved. And from that
time he reared the child whom he had withdrawn)


          ἔκ θ᾽ αἵματος ἔκ τε κυδοιμοῦ
    [230] Ἔκ τ᾽ ἀνδροκτασίης.

    (“from the blood and noise of war and the slaughter of men.”(242)
    )


ὁ πατὴρ δὲ ὁ Ζεὺς ἐκέλευσε καὶ τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν τὴν ἀμήτορα, τὴν παρθένον ἅμα τῷ
Ἡλίῳ τὸ παιδάριον ἐκτρέφειν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐτράφη καὶ νεανίας ἐγένετο

(And father Zeus bade Athene also, the Motherless Maiden, share with
Helios the task of bringing up the child. And when, thus reared, he had
become a youth)


    Πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης, τοῦπερ χαριεστάτη ἥβη,

    (“With the first down on his chin, when youth has all its
    charms,”(243))


κατανοήσας τῶν κακῶν τὸ πλῆθος. ὁπόσον τι περὶ τοὺς ξυγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ
τοὺς ἀνεψιοὺς ἐγεγόνει, ἐδέησε μὲν αὑτὸν εἰς τὸν τάρταρον προέσθαι πρὸς τὸ
μέγεθος τῶν κακῶν ἐκπλαγείς. [B] ἐπεὶ δὲ Ἥλιος εὐμενὴς ὢν μετὰ τῆς
Προνοίας Ἀθηνᾶς ὕπνον τινὰ καὶ κάρον ἐμβαλὼν τῆς ἐπινοίας ταύτης ἀπήγαγεν,
αὖθις ἀνεγερθεὶς ἄπεισιν εἰς ἐρημίαν. εἶτα ἐκεῖ λίθον τινὰ εὑρὼν μικρὸν
ἀνεπαύσατο καὶ πρὸς αὑτὸν ἐσκόπει, τίνα τρόπον ἐκφεύξεται τῶν τοσούτων
κακῶν τὸ μέγεθος· ἤδη γὰρ αὐτῷ πάντα ἐφαίνετο μοχθηρά, [C] καλὸν δὲ οὐδὲν
οὐδαμοῦ τέως. Ἑρμῆς οὖν αὐτῷ· καὶ γὰρ εἶχεν οἰκείως πρὸς αὐτόν· ὥσπερ
ἡλικιώτης νεανίσκος φανεὶς ἠσπάσατό τε φιλοφρόνως καί, Δεῦρο, εἶπεν,
ἡγεμών σοι ἐγὼ ἔσομαι λειοτέρας(244) καὶ ὁμαλεστέρας ὁδοῦ τουτὶ τὸ μικρὸν
ὑπερβάντι τὸ σκολιὸν καὶ ἀπότομον χωρίον, οὗ πάντας ὁρᾶς προσπταίοντας καὶ
ἀπιόντας ἐντεῦθεν ὀπίσω. καὶ ὁ νεανίσκος ἀπιὼν ᾤχετο μετὰ πολλῆς εὐλαβείας
ἔχων παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ξίφος τε καὶ ἀσπίδα καὶ δόρυ,(245) γυμνὰ δὲ αὐτῷ τέως ἦν
τὰ περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν. [D] πεποιθὼς οὖν αὐτῷ προῆγεν εἰς τὸ πρόσω διὰ λείας
ὁδοῦ καὶ ἀθρύπτου καθαρᾶς τε πάνυ καὶ καρποῖς βριθούσης ἄνθεσί τε πολλοῖς
καὶ ἀγαθοις, ὅσα ἐστὶ θεοῖς φίλα, καὶ δένδρεσι κιττοῦ καὶ δάφνης καὶ
μυρρίνης. ἀγαγὼν δὲ αὐτὸν ἐπί τι μέγα καὶ ὑψηλὸν ὄρος, Ἐπὶ τούτου, ἔφη,
τῆς κορυφῆς ὁ πατὴρ πάντων κάθηται τῶν θεῶν. ὅρα οὖν· ἐνταῦθά ἐστιν ὁ
μέγας κίνδυνος· ὅπως αὐτὸν ὡς εὐαγέστατα προσκυνήσεις, αἰτήσῃ δὲ παρ᾽
αὐτοῦ ὅ, τι ἂν ἐθέλῃς· [231] ἕλοιο δέ, ὦ παῖ, τὰ βέλτιστα. ταῦτα εἰπὼν
ἀπέκρυψεν ἑαυτὸν Ἑρμῆς πάλιν. ὁ δὲ ἐβούλετο μὲν παρὰ τοῦ Ἑρμοῦ πυθέσθαι,
τί ποτε αἰτήσασθαι χρὴ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τῶν θεῶν, ὡς δὲ πλησίον ὄντα οὐ
κατεῖδεν, Ἐνδεὴς μέν, ἔφη, καλὴ δὲ ὅμως ἡ ξυμβουλή. αἰτώμεθα οὖν ἀγαθῇ
τύχῃ τὰ κράτιστα καίπερ οὔπω σαφῶς τὸν πατέρα τῶν θεῶν ὁρῶντες. Ὦ Ζεῦ
πάτερ ἢ ὅ,τι σοι φίλον ὄνομα καὶ ὅπως ὀνομάζεσθαι· δείκνυέ μοι τὴν ἐπὶ σὲ
φέρουσαν ὁδὸν ἄνω. [B] κρείττονα γάρ μοι τὰ ἐκεῖ φαίνεται χωρία παρὰ σὲ
μαντευομένῳ τὸ παρὰ σοὶ κάλλος ἀπὸ τῆς ἐν τούτοις ὅθεν πεπορεύμεθα τέως
ἀγλαΐας.

(he learned numerous disasters that had befallen his kinsmen and his
cousins, and had all but hurled himself into Tartarus, so confounded was
he by the extent of those calamities. Then Helios of his grace, aided
Athene, Goddess of Forethought, threw him into a slumber or trance, and so
diverted him from that purpose. Then when he had waked from this he went
away into the desert. And there he found a stone and rested for a while
thereon, debating within himself how he should escape evils so many and so
vast. For all things now appeared grievous to him and for the moment there
was no hope anywhere. Then Hermes, who had an affinity for him,(246)
appeared to him in the guise of a youth of his own age, and greeting him
kindly said, “Follow me, and I will guide thee by an easier and smoother
road as soon as thou hast surmounted this winding and rugged place where
thou seest all men stumbling and obliged to go back again.” Then the youth
set out with great circumspection, carrying a sword and shield and spear,
though as yet his head was bare. Thus relying on Hermes he went forward by
a road smooth, untrodden and very bright, and overhung with fruits and
many lovely flowers such as the gods love, and with trees also, ivy and
laurel and myrtle. Now when Hermes had brought him to the foot of a great
and lofty mountain, he said, “On the summit of this mountain dwells the
father of all the gods. Be careful then—for herein lies the greatest risk
of all(247)—to worship him with the utmost piety and ask of him whatever
thou wilt. Thou wilt choose, my child, only what is best.” So saying
Hermes once more became invisible, though the youth was fain to learn from
him what he ought to ask from the father of the gods. But when he saw that
he was no longer at his side he said, “The advice though incomplete is
good nevertheless. Therefore let me by the grace of fortune ask for what
is best, though I do not as yet see clearly the father of the gods. Father
Zeus—or whatever name thou dost please that men should call thee
by,(248)—show me the way that leads upwards to thee. For fairer still
methinks the region where thou art, if I may judge of the beauty of thy
abode from the splendour of the place whence I have come hither.”)

Εὐξαμένῳ ταῦτα εἴτε ὕπνος τις εἴτε ἔκστασις ἐπῆλθεν. ὁ δὲ αὐτῷ δείκνυσιν
αὐτὸν τὸν Ἥλιον. ἐκπλαγεὶς οὖν ὁ νεανίσκος ὑπὸ τῆς θέας, Ἀλλὰ σοὶ μέν,
εἶπεν, ὦ θεῶν πάτερ, τῶν τε ἄλλων καὶ τούτων [C] ἕνεκα πάντων ἐμαυτὸν
φέρων ἀναθήσω. περιβαλὼν(249) δὲ τοῖς γόνασι τοῦ Ἡλίου τὰς χεῖρας ἀπρὶξ
εἴχετο σώζειν ἑαυτὸν δεόμενος. ὁ δὲ καλέσας τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν ἐκέλευε πρῶτον
ἀνακρίνειν αὐτόν, ὁπόσα ἐκόμισεν ὅπλα. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἑώρα τήν τε ἀσπίδα καὶ τὸ
ξίφος μετὰ τοῦ δόρατος, Ἀλλὰ ποῦ σοι, ἔφη, ὦ παῖ, τὸ Γοργόνειον καὶ τὸ
κράνος; ὁ δέ, Καὶ ταῦτα, εἶπε, μόγις ἐκτησάμην· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἦν ὁ ξυμπονῶν
ἐν τῇ τῶν συγγενῶν οἰκίᾳ παρερριμμένῳ. Ἴσθι οὖν, εἶπεν ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος, ὅτι
σε πάντως χρὴ [D] ἐπανελθεῖν ἐκεῖσε. ἐνταῦθα ἐδεῖτο μὴ πέμπειν αὐτὸν
ἐκεῖσε πάλιν, ἀλλὰ κατέχειν, ὡς οὐκέθ᾽ ὕστερον ἐπανήξοντα, ἀπολούμενον δὲ
ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκεῖ κακῶν. ὡς δὲ ἐλιπάρει δακρύων, Ἀλλὰ νέος εἶ, ἔφη, καὶ
ἀμύητος. ἴθι οὖν παρ᾽ ὑμᾶς, ὡς ἂν μυηθείης ἀσφαλῶς τε ἐκεῖ διάγοις· χρὴ
γάρ σ᾽ ἀπιέναι καὶ καθαίρειν ἐκεῖνα πάντα τὰ ἀσεβήματα, παρακαλεῖν δὲ ἐμέ
τε καὶ τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους θεούς. [232] ἀκούσας ταῦτα ὁ νεανίσκος
εἱστήκει σιωπῇ. καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος ἐπί τινα σκοπιὰν ἀγαγὼν αὐτόν, ἧς τὸ μὲν
ἄνω φωτὸς ἦν πλῆρες, τὸ δὲ ὑποκάτω μυρίας ἀχλύος, δι ἧς ὥσπερ δι᾽ ὕδατος
ἀμυδρὸν τὸ φῶς διικνεῖτο τῆς ἐκ τοῦ βασιλέως αὐγῆς Ἠλίου, Ὁρᾷς, εἶπε, τὸν
ἀνεψιὸν τὸν κληρονόμον; καὶ ὅς, Ὁρῶ, ἔφη. Τί δέ; τοὺς βουκόλους τουτουσὶ
καὶ τοὺς ποιμένας; καὶ τούτους ὁρᾶν εἶπεν ὁ νεανίσκος. [B] Ποταπὸς οὖν τίς
σοι ὁ κληρονόμος φαίνεται; ποταποὶ δ᾽ αὖ οἱ ποιμένες τε καὶ βουκόλοι; καὶ
ὁ νεανίσκος, Ὁ μέν μοι, ἔφη, δοκεῖ νυστάζειν τὰ πολλὰ καὶ
καταδυόμενος(250) λεληθότως ἡδυπαθεῖν, τῶν ποιμένων δὲ ὀλίγον μέν ἐστι τὸ
ἀστεῖον, τὸ πλῆθος δὲ μοχθηρὸν καὶ θηριῶδες. ἐσθίει γὰρ καὶ πιπράσκει τὰ
πρόβατα καὶ ἀδικεῖ διπλῇ τὸν δεσπότην. τά τε γὰρ ποίμνια αὐτοῦ φθείρει καὶ
ἐκ πολλῶν μικρὰ ἀποφέρον [C] ἄμισθον εἶναί φησι καὶ οδύρεται. καίτοι
κρεῖττον ἦν τοὺς μισθοὺς ἀπαιτεῖν ἐντελεῖς ἢ φθείρειν τὴν ποίμνην. Ἂν οὖν,
ἔφη, σὲ ἐγὲ μετὰ ταυτησὶ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς, ἐπιτάττοντος τοῦ Διός, ἀντὶ τοῦ
κληρονόμου τούτου πάντων ἐπίτροπον τούτων καταστήσω—; πάλιν ἐνταῦθα ὁ
νεανίσκος ἀντείχετο καὶ πολλὰ ἱκέτευεν αὐτοῦ μένειν. ὁ δέ, Μὴ λίαν ἀπειθὴς
ἔσο, φησί, μή ποτέ

(When he had uttered this prayer a sort of slumber or ecstasy came over
him. Then Zeus showed him Helios himself. Awestruck by that vision the
youth exclaimed, “For this and for all thy other favours I will dedicate
myself to thee, O Father of the Gods!” Then he cast his arms about the
knees of Helios and would not let go his hold but kept entreating him to
save him. But Helios called Athene and bade her first enquire of him what
arms he had brought with him. And when she saw his shield and sword and
spear, she said, “But where, my child, is thy aegis(251) and thy helmet?”
“Even these that I have,” he replied, “I procured with difficulty. For in
the house of my kinsfolk there was none to aid one so despised.” “Learn
therefore,” said mighty Helios, “that thou must without fail return
thither.” Thereupon he entreated him not to send him to earth again but to
detain him there, since he would never be able to mount upwards a second
time but would be overwhelmed by the ills of earth. But as he wept and
implored Helios replied, “Nay, thou art young and not yet initiated.
Return therefore to thine own people that thou mayst be initiated and
thereafter dwell on earth in safety. For return thou must, and and cleanse
away all impiety and invoke me to aid thee, and Athene and the other
gods.” When Helios had said this the youth remained silent. Then mighty
Helios led him to a high peak whose upper region was filled with light but
the lower with the thickest mist imaginable, through which, as through
water, the light of the rays of King Helios penetrated but faintly. “Thou
seest,” said Helios, “thy cousin the heir?”(252) “I see him,” the youth
replied. “Again, dost thou see yonder herdsmen and shepherds?” The youth
answered that he did. “Then what thinkest thou of the heir’s disposition?
And what of his shepherds and herdsmen?” “He seems to me,” replied the
youth, “to be for the most part asleep, sunk in forgetfulness and devoted
to pleasure; and of his shepherds a few are honest, but most are vicious
and brutal. For they devour or sell his sheep, and doubly injure their
master, in that they not only ruin his flocks but besides that they make
great gain and return him but little thereof, while they declare with loud
complaint that they are defrauded of their wages. And yet it were better
that they should demand and obtain their full pay than that they should
destroy the flock.” “Now what if I and Athene here,” said Helios, “obeying
the command of Zeus, should appoint thee to govern all these, in place of
the heir?” Then the youth clung to him again and earnestly entreated that
he might remain there. “Do not be obstinate in disobedience,” said
Helios,)


    σ᾽ ἀπεχθήρω, ὡς νῦν ἔκπαγλ᾽ ἐφίλησα.

    (“lest perchance I hate thee beyond measure, even as I have loved
    thee.”(253))


καὶ ὁ νεανίσκος, Ἀλλ᾽, ὦ μέγιστε, εἶπεν, Ἥλιε καὶ Ἀθηνᾶ, σέ τε καὶ αὐτὸν
ἐπιμαρτύρομαι τὸν Δία, χρῆσθέ μοι πρὸς ὅ, τι βούλεσθε. [D] πάλιν οὖν ὁ
Ἑρμῆς ἄφνω φανεὶς ἐποίησε τὸν νεανίσκον θαρραλεώτερον. ἤδη γὰρ διενοεῖτο
τῆς τε ὀπίσω πορείας καὶ τῆς ἐκεῖσε διατριβῆς ηὑρηκέναι τὸν ἡγεμόνα. καὶ ἡ
Ἀθηνᾶ, Μάνθανε, εἶπεν, ὦ λῷστε, πατρὸς ἀγαθοῦ τουτουὶ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐμὸν
βλάστημα. τοῦτον, ἔφη, τὸν κληρονόμον οἱ βέλτιστοι μὲν οὐκ εὐφραίνουσι τῶν
ποιμένων, οἱ κόλακες δὲ καὶ οἱ μοχθηροὶ δοῦλον καὶ ὑποχείριον πεποίηνται.
συμβαίνει οὖν [233] αὐτῷ παρὰ μὲν τῶν ἐπιεικῶν μὴ φιλεῖσθαι, παρὰ δὲ τῶν
νομιζομένων φιλεῖν(254) εἰς τὰ μέγιστα ἀδικεῖσθαι; σκόπει οὖν ὅπως
ἐπανελθὼν μὴ πρὸ τοῦ φίλου θήσει τὸν κόλακα. δευτέραν ἄκουέ μου
παραίνεσιν, ὦ παῖ. νυστάζων οὗτος ἐξαπατᾶται τὰ πολλά· σὺ δὲ νῆφε καὶ
γρηγόρει, μή σε διὰ τῆς τοῦ φίλου παρρησίας ὁ κόλαξ ἐξαπατήσας λάθοι,(255)
χαλκεὺς οἷά τις γέμων καπνοῦ καὶ μαρίλης, [B] ἔχων ἱμάτιον λευκὸν καὶ τὰ
πρόσωπα τῷ ψιμυθίῳ κεχρισμένος, εἶτα αὐτῷ δοίης γῆμαί τινα τῶν σῶν
θυγατέρων. τρίτης ἐπάκουέ μου παραινέσεως, καὶ μάλα ισχυρῶς φύλαττε
σαυτόν, αἰδοῦ δὲ καὶ ἡμᾶς μόνον, ἀνδρῶν δὲ ὅστις ἡμῖν προσόμοιός ἐστιν,
ἄλλον δὲ μηδένα. ὁρᾷς ὅπως τοῦτον τὸν ἠλίθιον ἔβλαψεν αἰσχύνη καὶ τὸ λίαν
ἄγαν εἶναι καταπλῆγα;

(Then said the youth, “Do thou, O most mighty Helios, and thou,
Athene,—and thee too, Father Zeus, do I call to witness,—dispose of me as
ye will.” Then Hermes suddenly appeared once more, and inspired him with
greater courage. For now he thought that he had found a guide for the
journey back, and for his sojourn on earth. Then said Athene, “Attend,
good youth, that art born of myself and of this god, thy noble sire! The
most virtuous of the shepherds do not please this heir, for flatterers and
profligates have made him their slave and tool. Thus it is that he is not
beloved by the good, and is most deeply wronged by those who are supposed
to love him. Be careful then when thou returnest that he make thee not his
flatterer rather than his friend. This second warning also do thou heed,
my son. Yonder man slumbers, and hence he is often deceived, but do thou
be sober and vigilant,(256) lest the flatterer assume the frankness of a
friend and so deceive thee; which is as though a smith covered with smoke
and cinders should come wearing a white garment and with his face painted
white, and thus induce thee to give him one of thy daughters in
marriage.(257) My third warning to thee is this: do thou very zealously
keep watch over thyself, and reverence us in the first place, and among
men only him who resembles us, and no one besides. Thou seest how false
shame and excessive timidity have injured this foolish man.”)

Καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος αὖθις τὸν λόγον διαδεξάμενος εἶπεν. [C] Ἑλόμενος φίλους
ὡς φίλοις χρῶ, μηδὲ αὐτοὺς οἰκέτας μηδὲ θεράποντας νόμιζε, πρόσιθι δὲ
αὐτοῖς ἐλευθέρως τε καὶ ἁπλούστατα καὶ γενναίως, μὴ λέγων μὲν ἄλλα, φρονῶν
δὲ ἕτερα περὶ αὐτῶν. ὁρᾷς ὅτι καὶ τοῦτον τὸν κληρονόμον τοῦτο ἐπέτριψεν, ἡ
πρὸς τοὺς φίλους ἀπιστία; φίλει τοὺς ἀρχομένους ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς σέ· τὰ πρὸς
ἡμᾶς ἡγείσθω σοι τῶν καλῶν ἁπάντων· [D] ἐσμὲν γάρ σου καὶ εὐεργεταὶ καὶ
φίλοι καὶ σωτῆρες. ἀκούσας ταῦτα ὁ νεανίσκος διεχύθη καὶ δῆλος ἦν ἅπαντα
ἤδη τοῖς θεοῖς πειθόμενος. Ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι, ἔφη, πορεύου μετὰ ἀγαθῆς ἐλπίδος.
ἡμεῖς γάρ σοι πανταχοῦ συνεσόμεθα ἐγώ τε καὶ Ἀθηνᾶ καὶ Ἑρμῆς ὅδε καὶ σὺν
ἡμῖν οἱ θεοὶ πάντες οἱ ἐν Ὀλύμπῳ καὶ οἱ περὶ τὸν ἀέρα καὶ τὴν γῆν καὶ πᾶν
πανταχοῦ τὸ θεῖον γένος, ἕως ἂν τά τε πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὅσιος ᾖς καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς
φίλους πιστὸς καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ὑπηκόους φιλάνθρωπος, [234] ἄρχων αὐτῶν καὶ
ἡγούμενος ἐπὶ τὰ βέλτιστα· ἀλλὰ μήτε ταῖς σεαυτοῦ μήτε ταῖς ἐκείνων(258)
ἐπιθυμίαις δουλεύων ὑπεικάθηις. ἔχων οὖν τὴν πανοπλίαν,(259) ἣν ἐκόμισας
πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ἄπιθι προσλαβὼν ταύτην μὲν τὴν δᾷδα παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ, ἵνα σοι καὶ ἐν
τῇ γῇ φῶς λάμπῃ μέγα καὶ μηδὲν ἐπιποθῇς τῶν τῇδε, ταυτησὶ δὲ Ἀθενᾶς τῆς
καλῆς τό τε Γοργόνειον καὶ τὸ κράνος· πολλὰ γάρ, ὁρᾷς, ἐστὶν αὐτῇ, καὶ
δίδωσιν οἷς ἂν ἐθέλῃ. [B] δώσει δέ σοι καὶ Ἑρμῆς χρυσῆν ῥάβδον. ἔρχου οὖν
τῇ πανοπλίᾳ κοσμηθεὶς ταύτῃ διὰ πάσης μὲν γῆς, διὰ πάσης δὲ θαλάττης,
ἀμετακινήτως τοῖς ἡμετέροις πειθόμενος νόμοις, καὶ μηδείς σε μήτε ἀνδρῶν
μήτε γυναικῶν, μήτε τῶν οἰκείων μήτε τῶν ξένων ἀναπείσῃ τῶν ἐντολῶν(260)
ἐκλαθέσθαι τῶν ἡμετέρων. ἐμμένων γὰρ αὐταῖς ἡμῖν μὲν ἔσῃ φίλος καὶ τίμιος,
αἰδοῖος δὲ τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἡμῶν ὑπηρέταις, φοβερὸς δὲ ἀνθρώποις πονηροῖς καὶ
κακοδαίμοσιν. [C] ἴσθι δὲ σεαυτῷ τὰ σαρκία δεδόσθαι τῆς λειτουργίας ἕνεκα
ταυτησί. βουλόμεθα γάρ σοι τὴν προγονικὴν οἰκίαν αἰδοῖ τῶν προγόνων
ἀποκαθῆραι. μέμνησο οὖν, ὅτι τὴν ψυχὴν ἀθάνατον ἔχεις καὶ ἔκγονον
ἡμετέραν, ἑπόμενός τε ἡμῖν ὅτι θεὸς ἔσῃ καὶ τὸν ἡμέτερον ὄψει σὺν ἡμῖν
πατέρα.

(Then mighty Helios took up the tale and said, “When thou hast chosen thy
friends treat them as friends and do not regard them as thy servants and
attendants, but let thy conduct towards them be generous, candid, and
honourable: say not one thing about them while thou thinkest another. Thou
seest that it was treachery to his friends that destroyed this heir. Love
thy subjects even as we love thee. Prefer our worship to all other
blessings. For we are thy benefactors and friends and preservers.” At
these words the youth became calm and showed plainly that he was already
obedient in all things to the gods. “Come,” said Helios, “now depart with
good hope. For everywhere we shall be with thee, even I and Athene and
Hermes here, and with us all the gods that are on Olympus or in the air or
on earth and the whole race of gods everywhere, so long as thou art pious
towards us and loyal to thy friends, and humane towards thy subjects,
ruling them and guiding them to what is best. But never yield to thy own
passions or become the slave of theirs. Keep the armour that thou hast
brought hither, and depart, but first receive from me this torch so that
even on earth a great light may shine for thee and that thou mayst not
long for the things of earth. And from fair Athene here receive an aegis
and helmet. For as thou seest she has many, and she gives them to whom she
will. And Hermes too will give thee a golden wand. Go then thus adorned in
full armour over sea and land, steadfastly obeying our laws, and let no
man or woman or kinsman or foreigner persuade thee to neglect our
commands. For while thou dost abide by them thou wilt be loved and
honoured by us and respected by our good servants and formidable to the
wicked and impious. Know that a mortal frame was given to thee that thou
mightest discharge these duties. For we desire, out of respect for thy
ancestor to cleanse the house of thy forefathers. Remember therefore that
thou hast an immortal soul that is our offspring, and that if thou dost
follow us thou shalt be a god and with us shalt behold our father.”)

Τοῦτο εἴτε μῦθος εἴτε ἀληθής ἐστι λόγος οὐκ οἶδα. τὸ παρὰ σοῦ δὲ
πεποιημένον, τίνα βούλει τὸν Πᾶνα, [D] τίνα δὲ εἶναι τὸν Δία, εἰ μὴ
τοῦτο,(261) ὡς ἐσμὲν ἐγώ τε καὶ σύ, σὺ μὲν ὁ Ζεύς, ἐγὼ δὲ ὁ Πάν; ὢ τοῦ
γελοίου Ψευδόπανος, γελοιοτέρου μέντοι νὴ τὸν Ἀσκληπιὸν τοῦ πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ
Διὸς ἀνθρώπου. ταῦτα οὐκ ἔστιν ἀτεχνῶς ἐκ μαινομένου(262) στόματος οὔτι
τὴν ἔνθεον, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἔκπληκτον μανίαν; οὐκ οἶσθα, ὅτι καὶ ὁ Σαλμωνεὺς
ἔδωκεν [235] ὑπὲρ τούτων τοῖς θεοῖς δίκην, ὅτι ἄνθρωπος ὢν ἐπεχείρει Ζεὺς
εἶναι; τὸ δὲ ἐκ τῶν Ἡσιόδου λεγόμενον ὑπὲρ τῶν ὀνομασάντων ἑαυτοὺς τ

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/48768