Page images
PDF
EPUB

X.

the political reaction after the expulsion of the thirty CHAP. tyrants was sufficiently powerful to bring about an attack on him, the conviction of his guilt was not so universal but that it might have been possible for him to escape the punishment of death.

For his honour and his cause it was a happy (4) The thing that he did not escape. What Socrates in his death. pious faith expressed after his condemnation—that to die would be better for him than to live-has been fully realised in his work. The picture of the dying Socrates must have afforded to his pupils, in the highest degree, what it now after centuries affords to us—a simple testimony to the greatness of the human mind, to the power of philosophy, and to the victory of a spirit pious and pure, reposing on clear conviction. It must have stood before them in all its glory, as the guiding star of their inner life, as it is depicted by Plato's master hand. It must have increased their admiration for their teacher, their zeal to imitate him, their devotion to his teaching. By his death the stamp of higher truth was impressed on his life and words. The sublime repose and happy cheerfulness with which he met death, was the strongest corroboration of all his convictions, the zenith of a long life devoted to knowledge and virtue. Death did not add to the substance of his teaching, but it greatly strengthened its influence. A life had been spent in sowing the seeds of knowledge with a zeal unequalled by any other philosopher either before or after; his death greatly forwarded the harvest, so that they brought forth fruit abundantly in the Socratic Schools.

PART III.

THE IMPERFECT FOLLOWERS OF SOCRATES.

CHAPTER XI.

THE SCHOOL OF SOCRATES : HIS POPULAR PHILOSOPHY.

XENOPHON: ÆSCHINES.

CHAP.
XI.

A. School of Socrates.

A MIND so great and active in every way as that of Socrates could not fail to make a lasting impression on every kind of character with which it came into contact. If then the most perfect systems are often not understood by all their adherents in the same sense, might not a much greater divergence and variety of apprehension be expected, in a case where no system lay ready to hand, but only the fragments and germs of what might be one-a person, a principle, a method, a mass of individual utterances and of desultory discussions ? The greater part of the followers of Socrates confined their attention to what was most obvious and lay nearest to an ordinary intelligence-the originality, the purity of chåracter, the intelligent view of life, the deep piety and the beautiful moral maxims of their teacher. Only a smaller number gave more careful attention to the

CHAP.
XI.

deeper thoughts, which often appeared under so unpretentious an outside, and even of these nearly all took a very narrow view of the subjects which occupied Socrates. Combining older theories with the teaching of their master, which it is true needed to be thus supplemented, they did so in such a manner as almost to lose the distinctive merits of his philosophy. One only with a deeper insight into the spirit of Socrates has succeeded in creating a system which presents in a most brilliant and extended form what Socrates had attempted in another manner and on a more limited scale.

In the first of these classes must be placed without doubt by far the greater number of those who are known to us as the pupils of Socrates.' The writings

| Besides the Socratists who i. 4; Plato, Symp. 173, B., 174, will be presently mentioned, A., 223, B.); Euthydemus are Crito (Xen. Mem. ii. 9; (Mem. iv. 2; 3; 5; 6; Pl., Plato, Crito, Phædo, 59, B., 60, Sym. 222 B.); Theages (Pl. A., 63, D., 115, A. ; Euthyde- Apol. 33 E. ; Rep. vi. 496, B.); mus ; Diog. ii. 121, who makes Hermogenes (Xen. Mem. ii. 10, him the author of seventeen 3, iv. 8, 4; Sym. 4, 46 ; Apol. 2, books, which, however, belong Pl. Phædo, 59, B). In Mem. i. to him as little as his suppos- 2, 48, perhaps 'Epuoyévns should ed children Hermogenes, and be read for Hermocrates ; bui others), and Clitobulus his son at any rate this Hermocrates (Xen. Mem. i. 3, 8. ii. 6 ; (Ec. must be distinguished from the 1-6; Symp. 4, 10; Plato, Apol. Hermocrates mentioned Pl. 33, D., 38, B.; Phædo, 59, B.; Tim. 19, C., 20, A, Krit. 108, Æsch. in Athenæus v. 220, a.); A; the latter being a stranger Chærephon (Mem. 2, 48; ii. 3; who only stays at Athens on Plato, Apol. 20, E.; Charm. his way. Compare Steinhart, 153, B.; Gorgias, Aristophanes, Pl. W. vi. 39 and 235; PhædoClouds, Birds, 1296) and his nides (Mem. i. 2, 48; Pl. Phædo, brother Chærecrates (Mem. 59, C.); Theodotus (Pl. Apol. 1. c.); also Apollodorus (Mem. 33, E.); Epigenes (Phædo, 59, iii. 11, 17; Plato, Apol. 34, B.; Mem. iii. 12); Menexenus A., 38, B.; Phædo, 59, B., 117, (Phædo, 59, B.; Lysis, 206, D.); D.; Symp.); Aristodemus (Mem. Ctesippus (Phædo, Euthyde

CHAP.
XI.

too which are attributed to many of these followers of
Socrates-amongst which, however, there is much
that is spurious---were, on an average doubtless little
more than summaries of popular moral maxims.
One of the best illustrations of this mode of under-
standing and applying the doctrines of Socrates may
be found in Xenophon.?
mus, and Lysis); Theætetus Jud. de Thuc. c. 31, p. 941,
(Theätet. Soph. Pol. Procl. in reckons among the followers of
Euclid. 19, m. 20); the younger Socrates and Alcibiades in
Socrates (Plat. Theät. 147, E.; their younger years (Mem. i.
Soph. 218, 8; Polit. 257, C.; 2, 12, Plato); not to mention
Arist. Metaph. vii. 11, 1036, 6, others who were acquainted
25; conf. Hermann, Plat. i. 661); with Socrates, but did not join
Terpsion (Pl. Theæt. ; Phædo, his way of thinking, such as
59, C.); Charmides (Xen. Mem. Phædrus the friend of Sophistry
iii. 7; 6, 14; Symp. 4, 29; (Plato, Phæd., Symp.); Callias
Hellen. ii. 4, 19; Plato, Charm. (Xen. Symp., Plato, Phot.); the
Sym. 222, B. ; Prot. 315, A.); younger Pericles (Mem, iv. 5);
Glaucon the brother of Plato Aristarchus (Mem. ii. 7.); Eu-
(Mem. iii. 6; the same indi- therus (Mem. ii. 8); and many
vidual to whom Diog. ii. 124, others.
attributes nine genuine and i Crito and Glaucon.
thirty-two spurious dialogues, ? Xenophon, the son of the
and who is identical with the Athenian Gryllus, died accord-
Glauco of Plato's Republic, and ing to a statement in Diog.
the Parmenides, as we assume ii. 56, 360–359

From following Böckh; conf. Ab- Hellen. vi. 4, 35, however, it handlung d. Berliner Acad. appears that he survived the 1873, Hist. Philos. Kl. p. 86); murder of Alexander of Pheræ Cleombrotus (Phæd. 59, C.; 357. If the treatise respecting perhaps the same who is said the public revenues of Athens by Callim. in Cic. Tusc. i. 34, belongs to the year 355, he 84, and Sext. Math. i. 48; must also have outlived that David, Proleg. in Cat. 9; Schol. year. On the authority of Ps. in Arist. 13, b, 35; Ammon in Lucian. Macrob. 21, his birth Porphyr. Isag. 2, b, to have was formerly placed in 450, or committed suicide over the on account of his participation Phædo, probably not from mis- in the battle of Delium, p. 66, understanding the exhortation 2, in 445 B.C. The first of these

a philosophic death, but passages is, however, extremely from shame for his conduct untrustworthy, as giving inthere blamed); Diodorus (Mem. formation depending on the ii. 10); Critias, whom Dionys. date of his death which is very

B.C.

to

It is impossible in reading the works of this CHAP.

XI. author not to be struck with the purity and loftiness

B. Xenouncertain. The latter is SO in Pausanias he died here. phon. much at variance with what More credible authorities state Plato, Symp. 220, D. says, that that he was banished by the it is a most uncertain foun- Eleans (probably in 370 B.C., dation on which to build. when they joined the Thebans Neither passage agrees with after the battle of Leuctra what Xenophon himself says Diodor. xv. 62), and spent the (Anab. iii. i, 4 and 25, oudèy rest of his life' at Corinth apopao Goual rnu ņaukiav) 2, 37, (Diog. 53). His banishment where he mentions himself and appears to have ended, when Timasion as the two youngest Athens joined Sparta against amongst the generals. These Thebes, as the treatise on the passages place it beyond dispute, revenues indicates, whether that at the time of the expedi- before or after the battle of tion he is describing, 401–400 Mantinæa, in which his two B.C., he was about 45 years of sons fought among the Athe. age and not much older than nian cavalry, and the elder one his friend Proxenus, who fell Gryllus fell (Diog. 54; Plut. in it about 30. (So Grote, Consol. ad Apoll. 33, p. 118), Plato iii. 563; Cobet, Novæ Xenophon's writings are disLect. 535; Bergk in Ersch. u. tinguished for purity and grace Gruber's Encyl. i. 81, 392; or language, and the unadorned Curtius, Griech. Gesch. iii. 772, clearness of the description. 31.) The circumstances of his They appear to have been prelife we only know imperfectly. served entire. The Apology, He speaks himself in the Ana- however, the Agesilaus, and basis iii. 1, 4, Memorabilia and the treatise on the Athenian Economicus of his relations constitution are certainly sputo Socrates, as to the origin of rious and several others of the which Diog. ii. 48, tells a smaller treatises are either doubtful story, and in the spurious or have large interAnabasis of his activity and polations. Steinhart, Plat. I. experience in the retreat of 95, 300, wrongly doubts the the 10,000. After his return Symposium. For his life and he entered the Spartan army writings consult Krüger, De in Asia Minor, and fought Xenoph. Vita, Halle, 1832, also under Agesilaus at Coronea in 2nd vol. of Historisch. philol. against his own countrymen. Studien, Ranke, De. Xenoph. Banished for this from Athens, Vita et Scriptis, Berlin, 1851. he settled in the Elean Scillus, Grote, Plato iii. 562; Bergk, 1.c. ; colonised by Spartans (Xen. Bähr in Pauly's Realencyclop. Anab. v. 3,6; Diog. ii. 51 ; Pau- vi. 6, 2791. For other literasan. v. 6, 4; Plut. Agesil. 18; ture on the subject Ibid. and De Exil. 10, p. 603). Accord- Ueberneg, Gesch. d. Phil. i. 95. ing to an ill-accredited story

« PreviousContinue »