Volume 4

The works of Plato. A new and literal version, chiefly from the text of Stallbaum ... By Henry Cary [vol. II, Henry Davis, vols. III-VI, George Burges] / [Plato].

  • Plato
Date:
1848-1854
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The works of Plato. A new and literal version, chiefly from the text of Stallbaum ... By Henry Cary [vol. II, Henry Davis, vols. III-VI, George Burges] / [Plato]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    21/570 page 13
    each of the things made the subject of reasoning always^® and formerly and now; and this shall never have an end, nor has it ever had a beginning at the present time. But there is, as it appears to me, some such feeling in us, relating to reasonings themselves,^^ of an immortal and ageless kind. For when a youth has first tasted it, he is delighted, as having found a treasure of wisdom, and being transported with de¬ light, he tosses ^about every reasoning; and at one time he rolls it (from this side)®® to that, and mixes (all of it)®^ into one; at another unrolling it back again, and separating it into parts, he throws himself first and foremost into a difficulty, and next the person ever nearest®^ at hand, whether he hap¬ pens to be younger, or older, or equal in age, sparing neither father nor mother, nor any one else, who will listen, and scarcely the rest of animals, not men alone; since he would spare not even one of the barbarians, could he but find some where an interpreter. [17.] Prot. Do you not, Socrates, see the great number of us, and that we are all young ? And are you not afraid that, if you rail at us, we shall, with Philebus, fall upon you all together ? ®^ However, for we understand what you mean, if there is any Stalbaum says that Xeyofisvcjv del is the same as Xeyofieviov tKaa- Tore, an assertion more easily made than proved. He once proposed to read Xtyojxkvoiv elvai. But he subsequently rejected what seems to me the preferable reading. Ficinus has “ semper per singula, quae dicuntur, et nunc et olim undique circumcurrere,” as if del had been written, in his MS., between irdwr] and ;ca9’ eKuarov. I cannot understand avribv, w'hich is omitted by Ficinus. Stalbaum explains £7ri Qdrepa by “ in alteram partem.” But the idea of “ another side ” would be unintelligible, without a reference to its opposite one. Of this Baumgarten Crusius was aware; and hence he sup¬ posed that TOTE de IttI Odrepa should be inserted, as in Sophist, p. 236, B., Xaipei, TOTS p,ev ettl Odrepa, rore de IttI Odrepa rovg Xoyovg eXkvojv. The sense evidently requires the insertion of rrdvra, as opposed to ev. Instead then of rore de rtdXi.v, w'hich could not balance rore pev erri Odrepa, Plato wrote, I suspect, rravra, Kal rcdXiv— ^ Instead of del rov exdpevov, the sense manifestly demands rdv del exdpevov—and so we must read in Rep. vii. p. 539, B., rovg del TrXrjaiov instead of rovg rrXpaiov del—-where there is a similar description of young persons playing with reasonings. There is a similar playful threat in Phaedr. p. 236, C. § 27; and in Horace, “ Cui si concedere nolis Multa—veniat manus, auxilio quae Sit mihi; nam multo plures sumus,” as remarked by Baumg. Crus. Stalb. too refers to Rep. i. p. 327, C.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3