Plato's Apology and Xenophon's Apology

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 6

Plato's Apology and Xenophon's Apology

Author(s): L. R. Shero
Source: The Classical Weekly, Vol. 20, No. 14 (Jan. 31, 1927), pp. 107-111
Published by: Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4388911
Accessed: 18-02-2016 19:16 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
l heNClassical
Weekly
VOL. XX, NO. 14 31, 1927
MONDAY,JANUARY WHOLENO. 544

PLATO'S APOLOGY AND XENOPHON'S Much of the criticism that has been directed against
APOLOGY' the piece has been based upon the claim that in one
It is probable that very few of the readers of Plato's
way or another it is unworthy of Xenophon. It is
Apology read Xenophon's brief composition of the
indeed true that its very brevity-it is less than one
same name. This is perhaps to be expected in view
quarter as long as Plato's Apology-gives it an effect
of the disparity between the two pieces in respect to
of meagemess and robs it of the usual charm of Xen-
literary charm and dignity. It seems likely, however,
ophon's writings. Yet a scholar with so fine a feeling
that many who read Plato's report of Socrates's defence
for style as Mahaffy speaks of it as "neatly and even
never even become aware of the fact that another
elegantly written in the unmistakable vein of Socratic
report is in existence. Indeed, the majority of our
questioning"5. It should be remembered, in judging
School editions of Plato's Apology do not so much as
the composition, that it was, to quote Mahaffy6again,
mention the Xenophontic piece. This complete
"like the fourth Gospel, a sort of supplement to the
disregard of it can hardly be excused. It would seem
incompletenessof other defences",and that it purposely
that at least a knowledge of the existence of Xenophon's
stressed one particular aspect of the subject. It must
Apology and an acquaintance with the chief dis-
be admitted that it succeeds adequately in accomplish-
crepancies between it and Plato's Apology would be
ing what it sets out to do. Furthermore, it is very
desirable for all who read the latter composition. questionable whether the picture of Socrates which is
The comparative neglect in recent times of Xen- given here is any more disappointing than that which
ophon's Apology is partially to be explained, without
we derive from Xenophon's other writings.
question, by the doubts concerning its genuineness The chief stumbling-block for many in the way of
which were current during the nineteenth century. accepting the piece has been the fact that it con-
The following quotation from the Introduction to tradicts Plato's Apology in several important par-
Jowett's translation of Plato's Apology is representative ticulars. But the discrepancies between the two
of the position taken by many scholars of that period: compositions, serious as they are, can scarcely be
. . . The parallelisms which occur in the so-called regarded as of themselves affordingcertain proof that
Apology of Xenophon are not worth noticing, because one or the other is a forgery. In view of the positive
the writing in which they are contained is manifestly evidence for the genuinenessof both, it is clear that a
spurious.... less facile explanation of these disagreementsmust be
It was not, indeed, until the latter part of the eight- sought.
eenth century that the genuineness of the piece was It is my purpose in this paper simply to discuss the
questioned2. Thereafter its rejection became common, more striking discrepanciesbetween the two Apologies.
though the Xenophontic authorship was championed No attempt will be made to give a complete presen-
by not a few of the most distinguished scholars of the tation of the points of similarity and difference; and
nineteenth century. The last important attack upon the interesting questions of their relationship in date
its genuineness was that of von Wilamowitz-Moellen- and purpose7,as well as that of the relationship be-
dorff in I897'. Since the beginning of the present tween Xenophon's Apology and his Memorabilia, lie
century the prevailing attitude with regard to this, as outside the scope of the discussion. Before I proceed,
with regard to many other works the genuineness of however, to take up the individual points of variance I
which had previously been questioned, has been wish to call attention to certain general considerations.
definitely in favor of the acceptance of the traditional In the first place, it must be rememberedthat the
authorship. In I900 Otto Immisch published an two Apologies differ considerably in character. The
elaborate and convincing vindication of the Xeno- Platonic compositionprofessesto be a report, complete
phontic character of its language and style4. I think it but without comment by the reporter, of the three
may be said without fear of contradiction that to-day speeches deliveredby Socrates at his trial. Xenophon's
there is not only fairly complete agreement as to the is a description of Socrates's conduct before, during,
authenticity of the piece, but also a distinct tendency and after the trial, in the course of which is reported
to emphasize its importance as a historical source. what is confessedly (22) only a small portion of what
Socrates said.
'This paper was read at the Twentieth Annual Meeting of The
Classical Association of the Atlantic States, held at the University
of Pennsylvania, April 30-May I, 1926. 5J. P. Mahaffy, Greek Classical Literature, 2. 2. 62 (London,
2Doubt concerning its genuineness was first expressed, apparent- Macmillan, I890).
ly, by Valckenaer, in his note on Xenophon, Memorabilia I. I, in 62. 2. 6i.
Ernesti's fifth edition of that work (Leipzig, I772). The Apology 7The view that Xenophon wrote his Apology to correct and
is included in the list of Xenophon's works given by Diogenes complete Plato's, or at any rate that Plato was one of the prede-
Laertius (2. 57), a list evidently derived from Demetrius of Mag- cessors to whom he refers, has been widely held. The priority of
nesia, and consequently dating back to the first centuiry B. C. Xenophon's report, however, has had its champions, notably M.
3In Hermes 32. 99-I06. Wetzel, in Neue Jahrbucher fur das Klassische Altertum 5 (o900),
4In Neue Jahrbucher fur das Klassische Altertum 5. 405-415. 380-405.
107

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
108 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY [VOL. XX, No. 14, WHOLE No. 544

In the second place, Xenophon's report is avowedly Again, the question as to the relative historical value
second-hand,and we have thereforeto make allowance of the two Apologies is bound up to a certain extent
for the possibility that the writer misunderstood his with the whole problem-a perennial 'Streitfrage' of
informant. Xenophon, not having been present at classical scholarship-of the relative reliability of the
the trial himself, quotes Hermogenes as his authority Socratic works of Xenophon and the Platonic dialogues
for the statements he makes. Hermogenes was an as sources of knowledge concerning the historical
indigent younger brother of Callias, the wealthy Socrates. One's answer to the specific question will be
patron of Sophists, and was named by Xenophon in the colored in some degree by one's general view as to how
Memorabilia (I. 2. 48; compare 2. 10. 3-6) as one of far Plato has idealized Socrates even in his earliest
that group of intimate associates of Socrates whose dialogues, and as to how far Xenophon failed, by
high aim in consorting with him was development of reason of the limitations of his nature, to appreciate
character. We have, therefore, allowing for misunder- the true significance of Socrates's activity. On the
standings on Xenophon's part, to match the testimony other hand, of course, it is obvious that these two
of this Hermogenesagainst that of Plato. It has been compositions, inasmuch as they deal with a well-
suggested that the acquaintance with Hermogenes known historical occurrence and are less concerned
which we gain from Plato's Cratylus and Xenophon's than other Socratic works with philosophical specula-
Symposiumis not such as to inspire us with confidence tions or the subtleties of dialectic, can to a greater
in him as an interpreterof Socrates's motives. In the extent than the others be considered independently
Cratylus he is Socrates's interlocutor for the greater of the larger problem.
part of the dialogue, and in Xenophon's Symposium Proceeding to a consideration of the discrepancies
remarks of his are quoted on several occasions (3. between the two reports, we find that an apparent
8-9, IC4 4. 23, 46-49; 6. I-4; 8. 3-I2). Professor discrepancy is presented at once by the chief contention
Burnet says8 that he "does not impress us as a man of of the Xenophontic piece. The opening passage of
much discernment". The characterization in the the latter is as follows:
Cratylus, however, is not sufficientlyvivid, it seems to 'It seems worth while to put on record the view which
me, to permit any inferences to be drawn from it; Socrates took regarding both his defence and his death
all that could be asserted of the silent, grave, serious- after he had been cited to appear in court. Others, to
mindedman depicted in Xenophon's Symposiumis that be sure, have written on this topic, and all have hit off
he might take too literally things that he heard people his boastful tone >,
<prEyaX?r7yopia a fact which makes it
clear that Socrates did actually adopt this tone in
say. Indeed, it would seem probablethat as a reporter addressing the jury. But one point they have not
of mere facts he would be eminently reliable. brought out clearly, that he had come to regard death
It should be noted, further, that the view that as preferable for himself to life, and consequently his
boastful tone is made to seem rather foolish'.
Plato's Apology was not designed to be an accurate
report of the words used by Socrates at his trial is one Xenophon goes on to say that Hermogenes gave a
which has gained very wide acceptance. It is a view, report of the matter which made Socrates's eyaX-q-yopla
indeed, of venerable antiquity, going back at least to seem entirely consonant with his intentions. For
Aelius Aristides (Oratio 49, page 5I8 in Dindorf's when Hermogenes had expressed to Socrates his
edition), to a passage written about I60 A. D. Ac- surprise at the latter's apparent lack of concern re-
cording to the Ars Rhetorica 8. 8 (often ascribed to garding his trial, Socrates, after asserting that his whole
Dionysius of Halicarnassus,but now thought to belong life had been the finest possible preparation for his
to the third century A. D.), Plato's composition was defence in that he had consistently done nothing wrong,
designed to serve not only as an 'A7roXo7ya in the strict declared that on two occasions the kLA6VLov had
sense of the term, but also as an 'AOqjvaiwvvKarnqyopia, opposed him when he essayed to consider his defence.
a WKpdrTOvs'E-YKdULOP, and a H1apdyyeXAya 6iroFop His explanation of this fact was that God out of his
ecvat 6e? T&r 10A60o-o0. In other words, Plato wished kindness was providing him with the means of bringing
to present not only a defence of Socrates against the his life to a close at an opportune moment, before his
charges which had been brought against him, but also powers began to fail and the ills of old age increased
an arraignment of the Athenian populace which had upon him, and of doing so by the least objectionable
put Socrates to death, a eulogy of the master, and a mode of death known.
portraitof the ideal sage. Suchsupplementarymotives, No reader of Plato's Apology could deny, I am sure,
with varying emphasis upon them, have been quite that there is reflected in it to a considerable extent
commonly ascribed to Plato in more recent times. that boastful tone to which Xenophon refers. Perhaps
If we accept this widespreadview that Plato's Apology the most striking passage is that (30 A-C) in which
was a 'Tendenzschrift',that in writing it he was actu- Socrates asserts, 'I believe that no greater good has
ated by other motives than that of giving an accurate ever come to pass in the city than my service to God',
report of Socrates'swords, we have to admit that there and defies the citizens of Athens with the threat that,
was of necessity a certain amount of deliberate in- whether they acquit him or not, he will not alter his
accuracy in his report, and that the extent to which he conduct even if he is to die many times over. But
allowed himself to introduce such inaccuracy is purely this is only one of many such passages. To be sure,
a matter of speculation. Plato makes Socrates twice (34 D, 37 A) disclaim any
attitude of contumacy (av1Oa&1eorOat),and there is
8J. Burnet, Plato's Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, and Crito,
65 (Oxford, Clarendon Press, I924). nothing to indicate that he went out of his way to

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JANUARY 31, 19271 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 109

irritate his judges. He clearly, however, made no fold interposition of the LLA6'VLO when he undertook
effort to accommodate his words to the sensibilities of to preparea defenceas a sign that God was now offering
his auditors. If the tone of his words as quoted by him release, as he declared thrice over (5, 7, 8). It
Xenophon impresses us as more arrogant still, it is seems to me highly probable, therefore, that Socrates
simply due to the fact, I think, that the flavor of irony did welcome his condemnation (which he regarded as
which we find so constantly in Plato is lacking. certain if he refused to adopt a servile attitude toward
How far, then, was Xenophon correct in attributing the jury) as an opportunity to avoid possible deteri-
Socrates's manner of addressing the jury to his belief oration of his faculties through old age and that he did
that death was preferable for himself to life? To begin give expressibnto this thought in an attempt to recon-
with, I feel sure that we caricature Xenophon's thought cile his friends to his determination not to cajole
if we say that he represents Socrates as deliberately his judges.
provoking the jury for the purpose of getting himself One of the most puzzling contradictions between
condemned to death. In reiterating his main con- the two Apologies has to do with the wording of the
tention near the end of the Apology (32) Xenophon oracle delivered in response to Chaerephon'sinquiry.
uses these words: Whereas Plato (2I A) reports the oracle as having
'Socrates by his selflaudation <&& TO' LEvyalVvetv declaredthat no one was wiserthan Socrates,Xenophon
favr6v> in court aroused a feeling of bitterness against (i. e. Hermogenes) reports it (14) as having declared
himself and thereby made his conviction by the jury that no one was more free, more just, or more sen-
all the more inevitable'.
sible9. The elaborateaccount in Plato's Apology of the
There is no suggestion of deliberate provocation of
activities of Socrates stimulated by the response
the jury. Indeed, we find stated here, it seems to me,
of the oracle might suggest that the more correct form
exactly the impression we derive from Plato's Apology.
was reported there; it is possible, however, that Plato
The notable tribute which Xenophon pays in the
made Socrates quote only that part of the oracular
Memorabilia (4. 4. 4) to the moral strength exhibited
response which was germane to his argument, the
by Socrates in his trial shows that he recognized clearly
particulardeclaration,that is, which inducedhim to set
that Socrates's procedure was no cowardly flight from
out upon investigations rendering him obnoxious to
the ills of old age. Furthermore, an attentive perusal of
various persons. Xenophon would have no motive for
the conversation between Socrates and Hermogenes, as
emphasizing one special part of the response, for he
reported by Xenophon in the Apology (2-9), makes it
gives no indication that the oracle served as a stimulus
clear that Socrates's chief wish was to avoid servility
to investigations on Socrates's part. Plato's neglect
of demeanor toward his judges. He declares that he
of the other elements in the response was perhaps
will prefer death to gaining the far less desirable boon
prompted also by his tendency to lay emphasis upon
of life by begging for it in servile fashion (iveXevOEpws),
the intellectual aspect of Socrates's activity to the
with which we may compare the statement (38 E)
neglect of other aspects.
of the Platonic Socrates that he did not think he ought
Another strange contradiction is involved in So-
to do anything dpzeXe66epop. In other words, Socrates
crates's reply to Meletus's charge of having persuaded
refused to conciliate the judges or to conduct himself in
young men to listen to himself instead of to their
a way that would diminish his selfrespect. The thought
parents (Xenophon, Apology 20-2I). Socrates admits
of the possible impending infirmities and distresses of
this, but justifies himself on the ground that he is an
old age reconciled him to the probable result.
expert in education, the greatest blessing men possess.
There is nothing in this view, I think, essentially
He protests against being prosecuted on a capital
inconsistent with the report of Socrates's words which
charge because of the offence of being rated by some
Plato gives. In fact, Plato makes him distinctly say
as the leading expert in this most important field;
(4i D), 'I see plainly that it was better for me to die
and he contrasts his own experience with that of ex-
now and be freed from troubles'. Professor Burnet
perts in other fields, upon whom special honors are
argues (66)
bestowed. The evidence of Plato, however, not only
that there was no reason why Socrates should not
have looked forward to at least another ten years of in the Apology but elsewhere, is that Socrates repudi-
activity and that, from all we know of his character, he ated the notion that the relationship between himself
would not have felt free to abandon the mission im- and the young men who sought association with him
posed on him by God unless he believed that God was that of teacher and pupils; he was unwilling to be
himself had released him.
classed with the Sophists, not only because they made
But it would seem that even a person with as hardy a money out of teaching, but also because they claimed
constitution as his might look forward to the time of to be able to impart knowledge the possessionof which
life beyond three score years and ten with some question- he himself, with characteristic elpwveia, disclaimed.
ings, and would think it likely that his vision would This point of view is reflected also in Xenophon's
become less perfect, his hearing less keen, his mind less
alert, and his memory less retentive, as Socrates is 9That the word 0pOO'TEpO5 in I4 has this shade of meaning
represented as forecasting to Hermogenes (6). Ac- rather than that of 'selfcontrolled' is indicated by the use of ooC0pP
in the comment (in I6) upon this item of the response. It is possible
cording to this same report he did very emphatically
that 0T4p5OV&TEpOV of I4 is a slip for o95c6Trepov. On the other
believe that "God himself had released him", with hand, it is perhaps more likely that'Plato's CO6ao1TCPOV-like the
the result that he did feel free "to abandon the mission 0oO06v of Xenophon's comment-simply reflects the interpretation
put upon the actual wording of the oracle by those who studied
imposed on him by God". He interpreted the two- its meaning.

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
110 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY [VOL.XX, No. 14, WHOLENo. 544

Memorabilia I. 2. 3, where it is expressly stated that to the remainder of the speech. This ingenious theory
Socrates never professed to be a WL&bTKaLXOSof KacXoKaya- is to my mind not altogether convincing. Professor
Oia, though there are other passages in the same work Burnet insists (I60), rightly, I think, that there would
which, in effect, contradict this statement10. The have been no inconsistency in Socrates's proposing a
explanation seems to be that, in spite of Socrates's small fine, for a fine is not an evil unless it is so large
disclaimerof the name of teacher, it was readily recog- that it cannot be paid and therefore involves imprison-
nized by those about him that he, if any one, with his ment, which, like exile, is an evil. It seems to me
profound wisdom and his great influence over young that the most reasonable explanation of the contra-
men, deserved to be exalted on the score of competence diction between the two reports is that Xenophon
in 7ratl5Ea. In this instance we may suppose that simply misunderstood Hermogenes. The latter, we
Hermogenes (or possibly Xenophon) put into the may suppose, while telling Xenophon that an offer to
mouth of Socrates, in answer to Meletus's charge, pay a fine had been made by Socrates's friends, re-
the defence which it was felt he would have had every peated also some such statement as that which Plato
right to make, instead of the one which he did actually records (37 B):
make. It may be added that it is not impossible that 'Since I am convinced that I am not guilty of wrong-
Plato, by reason of his antagonism to the Sophists, ing any human being, I am certainly not going to be
stressed Socrates's repudiation of the popular con- guilty of wronging myself and say of myself that I
ception of himself as an educator more strongly than deserve anything bad, and propose any such penalty
for myself'.
was really warranted by Socrates's own utterances.
The most striking contradiction of all has reference Such a statement might easily have led Xenophon to
to the proposal of a counter-penalty. Xenophon assume that the offer was rejected by Socrates instead
states (23) that Socrates refused to propose or to of by the jury (as Hermogenes intended him to under-
allow his friends to propose for him any counter- stand). I think it easier to suppose that such a mis-'
penalty, on the ground that such a proposal implied an understanding occurred than that Plato with some
acknowledgmentof guilt. The view that this account subtle motive-so subtle, indeed, that it was never
is historically correct, as against Plato's representation suspected, as far as is known, until late in the nineteenth
(38 B) that Socrates ultimately proposed the payment century-misrepresented the facts relating to such an
of a fine, has gained wide accejtance of late, especially outstanding incident in the trial.
in Germany. Schanz's explanation of the discrepancy Certain other discrepancies may be referred to more
is as follows11. After the death of Socrates it was briefly.
claimed that, if he had proposed the payment of a Xenophon (i i) represents Socrates as appealing
fine, he would, in all probability, have escaped the to the common knowledge of his felloweitizens in proof
death penalty; and his friends were criticized for not of his scrupulous observance of established religious
having rallied to his support to save him by financial practices and as arguing definitely against the charge of
sacrifices on their part. Plato desired, in answer to innovation in religious matters (I2-I3)12. In Plato,
these charges, to make it clear that the friends of on the other hand, there is nothing of all this. Socrates,
Socrates would gladly have supplied the money, but to be sure, elaborately vindicates himself on the score of
that the feeling against Socrates was so bitter and the atheism in a semiserious tilt against Meletus (26 B-
eagernessfor his death so intense that the proposalof a 28 A), but he is silent regarding the real charge
fine would not have been accepted. Plato, therefore, of religious innovation. We may suppose that a man
in order to justify himself and his friends, resorted to of Xenophon's conservative temperament and super-
the expedient of reporting what might have happened ficial acquaintance with Socrates"3 would be impressed
instead of what did happen. Socrates, who actually by the external conformity of his religious acts; while
refused, on the grounds indicated by Xenophon, to Plato, who saw deeper, would emphasize in his own
propose a counter-penalty, was represented as in the thoughts the singularly lofty, and for that age genuine-
end proposing a considerablefine at the bidding of a ly radical, conception of the gods and their worship
group of friends and as naming Plato himself and three which underlay Socrates's conventional observances.
others as sureties for the payment. Plato, accordingto In writing of Socrates, therefore, both Xenophon and
this theory of Schanz, did not expect his report to be Plato tended to stress that side of his religion which
taken as a recital of fact; he meant it to be understood made the greatest impression upon them. Plato,
for what it was, a vindication of himself and his friends. realizing that he could not present Socrates's religious
The Athenians of his own day, having been present views without bringing out their essentially revolu-
at the trial, would know what had occurredand would tionary character, contented himself, as Socrates may
recognize that he had a definite motive in giving a well have done in his actual speech to the jury, with
fictitious account of the episode; non-Athenianreaders playfully setting up and demolishing the suggestion
and those of later generations would find a clue to the that Socrates was an atheist.
correct interpretation of the account in the incon- With regard to the character of Socrates's divine
sequent manner in which the passage containing
"2He likewise makes much in the Memorabilia of the correctness
the proposal of the payment of the fine is appended of Socrates's religious observances (see I. I. 2, 20- s. 3. I-3). The
argument against the charge of religious innovation is also elab-
loSee Book 4, passim, especially 4. 7. I-2,where the word 18i3aaLxe orated (I. I. 3-9).
is twice used of Socrates. Compare also I. 2. I7, 31. '3It is noteworthy that Plato never mentions Xenophon and
"M. Schanz, Plato, Apologia, 98-99 (Leipzig, Tauchnitz, 1893). that there is no evidence that Xenophon was ever really intimate
with Socrates.

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JA?uAIY 31, 1927] THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 111

voice or sign the two writers are not in accord. Plato In conclusion,two remarksof a more general nature
(3I D) makes Socrates say that it served only as a may be added.
restraint upon him and never prompted him to action. In the first place, Xenophon's Apology fully bears
Xenophon, however, evidently thought of it as telling out the impression given by Plato that the defence
him what to do as well as what not to do; we see this Socrates made to the jury was not the defence of a man
both in the Apology (I2) and, more clearly still, in who consideredacquittal a thing of prime importance.
the Memorabilia(i. I. 4), whereSocratesis said to have That any defendant should not consider acquittal a
made a practice of advising his associates in accordance thing of prime importance can scarcely have entered
with the guidancegiven to himself. Without going into the minds of the majority of Socrates'shearers; and his
the intricate questions suggested by the various refer- manner, we can be quite sure, seemed to them just
ences to this phenomenonand the various terms used of what Xenophon calls it-dopoeorrpa, 'rather foolish'.
it in Plato and in Xenophon, we may accept the general In the second place, the differencesin tone between
proposition that Plato, because of his presumably the two Apologies are such that, if Hermogenes and
greater intimacy with Socrates and more penetrating Xenophon have given a report of Socrates's words
insight into his personality, would be more likely to which, so far as it goes, is fairly accurate,then Plato has
have precise knowledge about the matter. As there given a report in which not only the specificarguments
would be nothing, apparently, to color his conception but Socrates'swhole manner of speech are deliberately
of it or to cause him to distort the facts concerningit, idealized. The superiority of Xenophon's report in
we may readily accept his testimony here. the matter of historical accuracy cannot, of course, be
A problem is raised by Xenophon's mention of proved. Even if it could be, however, men would
persons to whom he refers (22) as oLa-viayope6ovrEs continue to read Plato's report in preference to it.
'pLXoL a6T@. As Plato's Apology seems to preclude the For Plato, whether or not he has preserved for us
suppositionthat Socrateshad avvi5yopot in the ordinary Socrates's actual defence, has given us the defence
sense to speak on his behalf, it has been suggested which we should all wish Socratesto have made.
that the persons mentioned by Xenophon were rather SAINT STEPHEN'S COLLEGE, T D C
ANNANDALE-ON-HUDSON, NEW YORK L. R. SHERO
of the nature of witnesses, such as the fathers and
brothers of Socrates's associates who are spoken of in
Plato's Apology (34 A) as ready to come to his support.
It is difficult, however, in view of the term used by AENEID 1.161
Xenophon, to dismiss the notion that he believed that Aeneid I. I 59-I 6 I runs as follows:
speeches had been made on Socrates's behalf. Est in secessu longo locus: insula portum
Xenophon, in quoting the indictment against So- efficit obiectu laterum, quibus omnis ab alto
crates (io), follows very closely what we know on the frangitur inque sinus scindit sese unda reductos.
authority of Favorinus (in Diogenes Laertius 2. 40) to Most commentators seem to regard the words
have been the official formulation of it. Plato, how- sinus... reductos (I6I) as describing the action of
ever, represents Socrates as quoting it from memory waves which break and then rush onward into deep
clefts in the rocks. But waves breaking on a level
and as altering the order in which the counts of the beach present an aspect which might well attract the
indictment are given (24 B). Much stress has been eye of an observant and musing poet; and if the perfect
laid by some scholars14upon this alteration of the order, phrase to describe that aspect was then born in his
which presumably was intentional. A sufficient mind, it might linger there, to be used when occasion
arose, without too strict insistence on its immediate
motive, however, would be the desire to emphasize appropriateness.
the fact that the chargeof corruptingthe youth was the At any rate, a sea-side walk will demonstrate how
really serious item in the accusation. the breaking wave runs up the beach in a sheet of
Finally, it may be noted that, while both Plato water, how this sheet does not have a continuous
margin, but parts (scindit se) into scallops (sinus),
and Xenophon make Socrates refer to the belief that which presently withdraw (reductos) to the level from
men prophesy at the approach of death, in Plato which they were flung. Might not all this seem to a
(39 C) this reference occurs in Socrates's speech after poet more beautiful, and perhaps less obvious than the
the sentence and prefaces a forecast of punishment more noticeable boiling of surf among cleft rocks?
It is true that in Georgics 4.420 the same words
for those who have voted for his condemnation, while occur (with the substitution of cogitur for frangitur),
in Xenophon (30) it occurs in what is clearly a private and that there Vergil makes the sea break into a cave
conversation with friends and introduces a prediction (specus, 4i8)1. But this cave is the retreat of Proteus,
that Anytus's son will turn out badly. Also, both where he sleeps like a basking seal on coming out of the
water (ab undis, 403). The same cave is also a refuge
writers make Socrates refer to Palamedes in the speech for sailors caught by a tempest (42I). It might easily,
after the sentence; but in Plato's Apology (4I A, B) therefore, have had a strip of sand in front of it, or
Socrates is telling of the pleasure it will be to him to even within. Finally, let us remember that the ship-
meet in the underworldfamous persons who have been wreck described in Aeneid I happened on a sandy
shore (I07, III-112, I72).
put to death unjustly, while in Xenophon's (26) he Heyne appears to favor for Aeneid i.i6I the inter-
cites the fair fame which came to Palamedes after his pretation I have given. His note reads: "Sinuoso
death as an indication of the high esteem in which he flexu fluctus recedunt; sese in sinus reductos vol-
himself will be held in after times.
'Verses 4I8-420 run thus: Est specus ingens exesi latere in
montis, quo plurima vento cogitur inque sinus scindit sese unda
14E. g. by Schanz, 8 i. reductos ..

This content downloaded from 130.15.241.167 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:16:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

You might also like