Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAP.

X.

under no misapprehension as to the danger which threatened him.' To get up a defence, however, went contrary to his nature. Partly considering it wrong and undignified to attempt anything except by simple truth; partly finding it impossible to move out of his accustomed groove, and to wear a form of artificial oratory strange to his nature, he thought trustfully to leave the issue in the hands of God, convinced that all would turn out for the best ; and in this conviction confidently familiarising himself with the thought that death would probably bring him more good than harm, and that an unjust condemnation would only save him the pressure of the weakness of age, leaving his fair name unsullied. 3

withstanding Ueberweg's (Un- some of his friends spoke for
ters. d. Platon. Schrift, 250) him has as little claim to truth
and Grote's (Plato i. 316) ob- in face of Plato's description
jections, appears most probable. as that in Diog. ii. 41.
The treatment of the question 3 As to the motives of So-
is too light and satirical for the crates, the above seems to fol.
dialogue to belong to a time low with certainty from pas-
when the full seriousness of sages in Plato, Apol. 17, B.;
his position was felt.

19, A. ; 29, A. ; 30, C.; 34, C., 1 Comp. Xen. Mem. iv. 8, 6; and Xen. Mem. iv. 8, 4-10. Plato, Apol. 19, A.; 24, A.; Cousin and Grote, however, 28, A.; 36, A.

give him credit for a great deal 2 In Xen. Mem. iv. 8, 5, So- more calculation than can be crates says that when he wished reconciled with the testimony to think about his defence, the of history, or with the rest of dajuóvlov opposed him; and ac- his character. Cousin (Euvres cording to Diog. ii. 40; Cic. de de Platon, i. 58), seems to Orat. i. 54 ; Quintil. Inst. ii. 15, think that Socrates was aware 30; xi. 1, 11; Val. Max. vi. 4, that he must perish in the con2; Stob. Floril. 7, 56, he de- flict with his age, but he forgets clined a speech which Lysias that the explanation given in offered him. It is asserted by Plato's Apology, 29, B., is only Plato, Apol. 17, B., that he a conditional one, and that the spoke without

preparation. passage in that treatise 37, C., The story in Xenophon's Apo- was written after the judicial logy, 22, to the effect that sentence. Similarly Volquard

was

are

accus

CHAP. Such was the tone of mind which dictated his X.

defence. The language is not that of a criminal, (2) Socrates' de- sen (Dämon. d. Sokr. 15), in give a lesson to youth the most fence of attempting to prove from Mem. impressive wh

the himself. iv. 4, 4; Apol. 19, A., that So- power of man to give. To pre

crates had predicted his con- suppose such calculation on the
demnation, forgets that in these part of Socrates is not only
passages the question is only as contradictory to the statement
to probable guesses. Even that he uttered his defence
Grote goes too far in asserting, without preparation, but it
in his excellent description of appears to be opposed to the
the trial (Hist. of Greece, viii. picture which we
654), that Socrates was hardly tomed to see of his character.
anxious to be acquitted, and As far as we can judge, his con-
that his speech was addressed duct does not appear to be a
far more to posterity than to work of calculation, but a
his judges. History only war- thing of immediate conviction,
rants the belief, that with mag- a consequence of that upright-
nanimous devotion to his cause ness of character which would
Socrates was indifferent to the not allow him to go one step
result of his words, and en- beyond his principles.

His
deavoured from the first to principles, however, did not
reconcile himself to a probably allow him to consider results,
unfavourable result. It does since he could not know what
not, however, follow that he result would be beneficial to
was anxious to be condemned ; him. It was his concern to
nor have we reason to suppose speak only the truth, and to
so, since he could have wished despise anything like corrupt-
for nothing which he considered ing the judges by eloquence.
to be wrong, and his modesty This may appear a
kept him uncertain as to what minded view, but no other
was the best for himself. See course of conduct would so
Plato, Apol. 19, A.; 29, A.; well have corresponded with
30, D.; 35, D. We cannot, the bearing and character of
therefore, believe with Grote, Socrates; and herein consists
p. 668, that Socrates had well his greatness, that he chose
considered his line of defence, what was in harmony with
and chosen it with a full con- himself in the face of extreme
sciousness of the result; that danger, with classic composure
in his conduct before the court and unruffled brow.
he was actuated only by a wish ? We possess two accounts of
to display his personal great the speech of Socrates before
ness and the greatness of his his judges, a shorter one in
mission in the most emphatic Xenophon and a longer one in
manner; and that by departing Plato's Apology. Xenophon's
this life when at the summit Apology is certainly spurious,
of his greatness he desired to and with it any value attach-

narrow

wishing to save his life, but that of an impartial arbiter, who would dispel erroneous notions by a simple

CHAP.

X.

ing to the testimony of Her- tation of prejudices, which
mogenes, to whom the compiler, lasted undeniably (according
imitating the Mem. iv. 8, 4, to the testimony of Xenophon,
professes to be indebted for Mem. i. 1, 11; Ec. 12, 3;
his information, is lost. Touch- Symp. 6, 6) till after his own
ing Plato's, the current view death, and perhaps contributed
seems well established, that much to his condemnation.
this Apology is not a mere He misses, with Steinhart in
creation of his own, but that Plato, many things which So-
in all substantial points it crates might have said in his
faithfully records what Socrates defence, and did actually say
said ; and the attempt of Georgii, according to the Apology of
in the introduction to his Xenophon. But to this state-
translation of the Apology ment no importance can
(conf. Steinhart, Platon.Werke, attached, and it is probable
ii. 235) to prove the contrary that in an unprepared speech
will not stand. Georgii com- Socrates omitted much which
plains that in the Socrates of might have told in his favour.
Plato that peyar nyopla is want- He can hardly be convinced
ing,which Xenophon commends that Socrates cross-questioned
in him- a judgment with which Miletus so searchingly as Plato
few will agree, not even the describes ; but this passage
writer of the Apology attri. agrees with the usual character
buted to Xenophon. He also of the discourse of Socrates,
considers the sophism with and the sophism by which So-
which the charge of atheism crates proved that he did not
was met, improbable in the corrupt youth is quite his own.
mouth of Socrates, though it See p. 141. That Socrates
may just as likely have come should have met the charge of
from him as from one of his atheism by quibbles, instead of
disciples. He doubts whether appealing to the fact of his
Socrates could have maintained reverence for the Gods of the
a composure so perfect; al state, he can only understand,
though all that we know of by supposing that we have here
Socrates shows unruffled calm an expression of Plato's reli-
as a main trait in his character. gious views : although Plato
He sees in the prominent fea- would have had no reason for
tures of that character a diplo- suppressing the fact, supposing
matic calculation, which others Socrates had really made such
will look for in vain. He con- an appeal: he even describes
siders it incredible that So- the devotion of his master to
crates should have begun with the Gods of his country, and is
a studied quotation from the himself anxious to continue
Clouds of Aristophanes, aiming that service. Touching the
at nothing else than the refu. sophisms, even Aristotle, Rhet.

[ocr errors]

setting forth of the truth, or of a patriot warning against wrong-doing and overhaste. He seeks to convince the accuser of his ignorance, to refute the accusation by criticism. At the same time dignity and principle are never so far forgotten as to address the judges in terms of entreaty. Their sentence is not feared, whatever it may be. He stands in the service of God, and is determined to keep his post in the face of every danger. No commands shall make him faithless to his higher calling, or prevent him from obeying God rather than the Athenians.

The result of his speech was what might have have been expected. The majority of the judges would most unmistakeably have been disposed to pronounce him innocent,' had not the proud bearing of the accused brought him into collision with the members of a popular tribunal, accustomed to a very different deportment from the most eminent statesmen. Many who would otherwise have been on bis

(3) His condomnation.

ii. 23; iii. 18; 1398, a, 15; Plato's intention to record
1419, a, 8, has no fault to find. literally the words of Socrates,
The same may be said in reply and we may be satisfied with
to most of the reasoning of comparing his Apology with the
Georgii. On the contrary, the speeches in Thucydides, as
difference in style between the Steinhart does, bearing in
Apology and Plato's usual writ- mind what Thucydides, i. 22,
ings, seems to prove that this says of himself,—that he had
Apology was not drawn up with kept as close as possible to the
his usual artistic freedom, and sense and substance of what
the notion of Georgii referring was said — and applying it
it to the same time as the equally to Plato. Conf. Ueber-
Phædo appears altogether in- weg, Unters. d. Plat. Schr. 237.
conceivable considering the i Xen. Mem. iv. 4. 4.
great difference between the 2 Let the attitude of Pericles
two in regard to their philoso- be remembered on the occasion
phical contents and their artis- of the accusation of Aspasia,
tic form. It certainly was not and that depicted by Plato in

side were set against him, and by a small majority 1 the sentence of Guilty was pronounced. According

CHAP.
X.

sove

1

the Apology, 34, C. Indeed it Clouds, 87, that a number of is a well-known fact that judg- the judges had abstained from ing was a special hobby of voting, a course which may be the Athenian people (conf. possible. Out of 600 Heliasts, Aristophanes in the Wasps, 281 may have voted against Clouds, 207), and that it and 275 or 276 for him. It is, watched with peculiar jealousy however, possible, as Böckh this attribute of its

suggests, that in Diogenes, 251 reignty. How Volquardsen, may have originally stood inDämon. d. Sokr. 15, can con- stead of 281. In this case clude from the above words there might have been 251 that Hegel's judgment respect against and 245 or 246 for the ing Socrates' rebellion against accused, making together the people's power is shared nearly 500; and some few, here, is inconceivable.

supposing the board to have According to Plato, Apol. been complete at first, may 36, A., he would have been ac- have absented themselves durquitted if 3, or as another ing the proceedings, or have reading has it, if 30 of his refrained from voting. Or, if judges had been of a different the reading Tplákovta, which mind. But how can this be has many of the best MSS. in reconciled with the statement its favour, is established in of Diog. ii. 41: Kateôlkáo on Plato, we may suppose that the διακοσίαις ογδοήκοντα μια πλείοσι original text in Diogenes was ψήφους των απολυουσών ? Either as follows: κατεδικάσθη διακοthe text here must be corrupt, σίαις ογδοήκοντα ψήφοις, ξ' πλείοσι or a true statement of Diogenes των απολυουσών. . We should must have been strangely per- then have 280 against 220, verted. Which is really the together 500, and if 30 more case it is difficult to say. It is had declared for the accused, generally believed that the he would have been acquitted, whole number of judges who the votes being equal. condemned him was 281. But 2 This course of events is not since the Heliæa always con- only in itself probable, taking sisted of so many hundreds, into account the character of most probably with the addi: the speech of Socrates and the tion of one deciding voice nature of the circumstances, (400, 500, 600, or 401, 501, 601), but Xenophon (Mem. iv. 4, 4) on this hypothesis no propor- distinctly asserts that he would tion of votes can be made out certainly have been acquitted which is compatible with if he had in any way condePlato's assertion, whichever scended to the usual attitude reading is adopted. We should of deference to his judges. Seo bave then to suppose with also Plato, Apol. 38, D. Böck, in Süvern on Aristoph.

« PreviousContinue »