Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

The first question suggested by an examination of Plato's citations from Homer is, how correctly does he quote? This question has been recently treated by Prof. G. E. Howes, who finds that Plato is in general remarkably true to his text of Homer, and that apparent mistakes cannot fairly be charged to his ignorance or carelessness. A few further points may be stated which make the case even stronger for Plato. First, in at least two-thirds of his quotations it is certain or altogether probable that he either gives us the exact words of his text or changes them only in so far as the structure of his sentence requires. Second, only two cases can be found where it even seems that he has quoted the same Homeric verse differently in different passages (Z 211 in Soph. 268 D., Rep. 547 A.; and k 495 in Rep. 386 D. and Meno 100 A.). The variants are in the one instance tou and tñs, in the other ai and tal. Surely such differences as these are more probably to be charged to copyists than to Plato. Third, Plato perfectly understands every line which he quotes, perfectly appreciates the spirit of Homer, and continually reveals a boundless reserve fund of knowledge. In truth Plato kannte seinen Homer vortrefflich.2

Did he then quote from memory? Such a supposition seems to offer the only possible explanation for two well-known passages (379 D., 408 A.) in the Republic. In none beside these can we surely convict Plato of lack of knowledge and failure to look up his authority. In general I believe that while Plato did refer to Homeric lines without verifying his references, he did not in the majority of cases quote from memory. This is a question of probability and not one where proof is possible. My conclusion is based first, upon the remarkable accuracy of much the greater part of Plato's quotations. Second, despite mistaken references which reveal the inexactness and incompleteness of his knowledge, he is as precise when quoting less familiar passages as when dealing with the first lines of the Iliad. Third, a close comparison of Rep. 405 E. and Ion 538 C. seems to me to show either that Plato verified his quotation in the Ion, or that he knew or remembered his Homer better while composing the Ion than while composing the Republic. The first conclusion is the easier and, if valid, is significant in its bearing upon the entire question.

18. Rome's Foreign Population, 100 B.C.-100 A.D., by Dr. W. F. Palmer, of West View, Ohio.

The object of this paper is, first, to ascertain the nationalities composing Rome's foreign population for this period, and, second, to learn something regarding their occupations. The following is a synopsis.

1. The influences at work in Rome which tended to attract foreigners. II. A discussion of the question of the total population of the city and the proportion of foreign population. II. The legislation regarding foreigners. IV. The Jews. V. The Chaldeans. VI, The Greeks. VII. The Egyptians. VIII. The question of slavery: (*) Private slaves; (6) Public slaves; (c) Part taken by mlaves in the management of the commercial and industrial business of the city; (6) Construction of the city's great improvement. IX. The countries from which

I Harrand Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. VI.
* La Roche, Homerische Textkritik, p. 32.

the Romans obtained their slaves and the work performed by each class of slaves: (a) Asia; (6) Syria and Cappadocia; (c) India; (d) Africa; (e) Gaul;

) Germany; (8) Moesia and Liburnia; (h) Sardinia; (i) Britain. X. Conclusions.

I subjoin some brief remarks with reference to a few of the topics discussed.

II. It is impossible to ascertain with even approximate accuracy, either the total population of the city at this time or the proportion of foreigners. Citizens in provinces and municipal towns are usually included in the few statements bearing upon the population of the city (Val. Paterc. II. 7. 7; Livy XLI. 8; XLII. 10). Julius Caesar alone distributed 80,000 citizens among colonies across the sea (Suet. Jul. 42), and Augustus 120,000 (Monum. Ancyr.). Mithridates put to death 80,000 Roman citizens who were doing business in Asia (Val. Max. IX. 2, 3). The data furnished by the Monumentum Ancyranum (tabula tertia a laeva 15-16) and by Suetonius (Jul. 41) regarding the distribution of money and grain to the plebeians are insufficient. After making computation for the women, children, equites, and senators, we shall do little but guess-work in attempting to reach a numerical conclusion, for the number of freedmen, slaves, and foreigners is wholly past finding out.

IV. The Jews. The conclusions regarding the Jews are based upon the fullowing passages : Cicero, pro Flac. 28, 66; de provin. consul. 5, 10; Horace, Sat. I. 4, 140-143; 9, 61-72; Ovid, Remed. Amor, 219, Ars Amat. I. 76; Josephus, Antiq. XIV. 10. 2-8, XVII. II. I, XVIII. 3. 5; Persius, V. 184; Juvenal, VI. 543-547, XIV. 96-106; Tacitus, Ann. II. 85, XV. 44, Hist. IV. 3-6, V. 5. 13, frag. 2; Suetonius, Jul. 84, Tiber. 36; Appian, II. 39; Dio Cass. LX. 3. At Rome there were enough Jews to form by themselves an important city. Many of them were business men, some were slaves, some artisans, and others were engaged in the work of proselyting, while still others, especially women, made gain by working upon the superstition of the populace.

V. The Chaldeans. The following passages are most valuable in giving information regarding the Chaldeans: Cicero, de div. II. 42–47, 99; Val. Max. I. 3, 3; Pliny, H. N. XXX. 2, XXXVII. 100; Juvenal, VI. 553, X. 93; Tacitus, Ann. II. 32, XII. 22; Dio Cass. XLIX. at end, L. 56. LXV. 1. This people in a way seems to have supplied the place of the old oracles which had fallen into disuse at this time. Much of the superstition which so characterized the Roman populace at this time was due to the practices of this people. Their power over those high in the state, as Nero, Agrippa, and even Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar, is evidence of their number and pervading influence. One of the strongest pictures in Juvenal is that in which the emperor Tiberius is represented as sitting upon the rock of Capri with his fock of Chaldeans about him.

In our abstract we shall consider only Asia, Syria, and Cappadocia, for from these districts the Romans obtained the most of their slaves.

IX. (a) Asia. Our information must be based chiefly upon the following citations: Cicero, pro Flac. 2, 3; 27, 65; Catullus, X. 6; Livy, XXXIV. 4, XXXIX. 6, XLV. 23; Strabo, XIV. 5; Pliny, H. N. XXXV. 199; Juvenal, V. 56, VII. 130; Florus, III. 12. 6; Justin. XXXI. 8, 9. The occurrence in Roman comedy of such names for slaves as Lydus, Lesbia, Mysis, — names derived from their native countries (cf. Varro, de L. L. VIII. 9),- is evidence of the kind of employment followed. Youths of high birth from these districts

were much used rpon the sage, ad réter ances in Caesar's sbous for the 242sent of the poort Feeza e pares E Asia ota pared at Roman

szes patbe **002 203 52=122, 203 arti as pastocistists. Our concluSun, then is at these Acas, apart 03 asce in large numbers as

istan a 22ext wee ver eneste episyed in the hardest ad 25 sena pec is azi private sertios 3:=them were to be found

great extrezes: tre Lust sa zadu asi s ei- tbe is: 4132 of Juvenal - and te cbeapest azi nust igast ate siaves aqci tbe Romans.

IX. 'b, Syria and Cappaica Toe wag passages will be sufficient to scow tbe Lagoitzde of the siare tra 50meen Rude ani this section: Cicero, post red. in sen. 6, 14; de oratste, IL 66, 265; 27 F:n , ; l'erres, II. 5, 25; Hurace, Epist. I. 6. 39; Sat. I 2. I; Strabe, XIV. 5. 2; Livy, XXXV. 49; Propert. II. 23. 21; Persias, VI. 77; Martial, 11. 77.4, X. 23,9,76; Juvenal, III. 62, VI. 351, VIL 15, VIII. 139; Sacra, a uz 8 Jero 27, Gr. 8. The term Syrian is quite gegerai ani inciiio the people vn the coast from Egypt to Sicia and far iniani. Sare dealing was the chief reason for the fact that the Mediterranean Sea was so infestei with pirates. The prosts were immense, and slaves could be acquired with great facility. The imbecility of the kings of Syria and Clicia made easy the constant marauding enterprises directed against their sus;ects. The Rhožans, Cyprians, and Egyptians, who were enemies of the Syrians, did what was in their power to direct the attacks of the pirates against Syria. The Syrians were immoral. They were extensively used as ministers to luxury. Many were employed as carriers of sedans, some as tavern keepers, others as grammarians. Numbers of them became successful traders and business men. Many of the artisans in Verres' shop in Sicily were acquired from pirates. And since the pirates largely obtained their slaves from Syria, we may infer that in Rome great numbers of these slaves were engaged in the mechanical arts.

Professor Clement L. Smith then reported as Chairman of the Committee on Time and Place of Meeting in 1897. The Committee recommended that the next annual meeting be held at Bryn Mawr College, beginning July 6, 1897. The report was adopted.

The meeting adjourned at 4.50 P.M., in order to enable the members to attend the reception at the residence of Professor and Mrs. Albert Harkness.

EVENING SESSION.

The Association met shortly after 8 P.M.

19. Age at Marriage in the Roman Empire, by Professor Albert Granger Harkness, of Brown University.

This paper appears in the Transactions, in conjunction with Nos. 2 and 20.

20. Remarks on C. I. L. VI. 29149, by Professor Albert Granger Harkness, of Brown University.

Remarks were made by Professor Smyth.

21. The Form of Philosophical Discussion before Sokrates, by Dr. Arthur Fairbanks, of Yale University.

To understand the art of Plato it is necessary to consider the earlier efforts to express philosophical reasoning. Down to the time of Sokrates I find three forms of philosophical expression: (1) the “saying” or proverb, (2) the didactic poem, and (3) prose exposition.

We can affirm nothing confidently as to the form of discussion in the early Ionic school. Apparently Thales left nothing in writing. His successor, Anaximander, wrote a work from which Theophrastos quotes the saying that all things return to the first principle “of necessity, for they suffer punishment and pay the penalty to each other for their injustice.” The fragment confirms the statement of Theophrastos that his phraseology is rather poetical. Of Anaximenes' writings we know almost nothing beyond the statement of Diogenes that he wrote simple, plain Ionic.

Something resembling the style of Anaximander reappears in the writings of his noted successor in Asia Minor, Herakleitos. His play on words (66: “The bow Buós is called life Blos, but its work is death”), his irony (127: “If it were not to Dionysos that they made the procession and sang the phallic hymn, they would be acting most shamelessly”), and his pregnant statements (51 a: “Oxen are happy when they find bitter vetches to eat"), all contribute to make his writings obscure. He chose the pithy saying, the aphorism, as the form to express his views, but his purpose in doing so does not seem to have been to give currency to his thought. Rather he supremely disregards the attitude of others; he goes his own way, criticizing alike those who think and those who do not think; and the form of his writings is admirably adapted to the man and the thoughts he would express. Single deep glances into the reality of things, and single cuts across the views of others, constitute his philosophy. He has no complete rounded system, and I find no proof that he wrote any complete book. 22: “ All things are exchanged for fire, and fire for all things; as wares are exchanged for gold, and gold for wares.” 36: “God is day and night, winter and summer, war and peace ...; he assumes different forms as incense does; every. one gives him the name he likes.” 41: “You could not step twice in the same rivers; for other and yet other waters are ever flowing on.” In such pointed statements did Herakleitos express his belief that fire is the first principle of things, that opposites are one, that change is universal. In the same manner he criticizes others. 16: “ Varied learning does not teach any man wisdom; else it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hekataios.” While of Pythagoras he went on to say, 17: “Prosecuting investigations more than any other man, he made a wisdom of his own, — much learning and bad art.” The proverb has always been a favorite form for the expression of popular philosophy; Herakleitos used it to express an abstruse philosophy, and that primarily for himself rather than for others.

[ocr errors]

Herakleitos founded no school, and he had no successor in this form of literary expression. Zeno came nearer to it than any later philosophic writer, in the riddles by which he sought to confirm the position of his master, Parmenides. Contests in propounding and solving riddles were by no means unknown in Greece and Sicily, and it is truly remarked by Schneidewin that here is to be found the beginnings of the later Eristik. The arguments from Achilles and the tortoise he could not overtake, from the arrow that is at rest in its onward flight, from the pile of grain that makes no noise in its fall because the single grain makes no sound, - show how Zeno used the riddle to enounce and enforce his philosophic position.

The second general form of philosophic expression to take its rise in Greece is the didactic poem. Philosophic speculation as to the origin and interpretation of the world was preceded by mythical and cosmogonic speculations in poetic form. The Theogony of Hesiod, the early speculations of the Orphic school, the cosmogony of Pherekydes, are not philosophy, but they stimulated thought which became philosophic, so that it would not be unnatural for early philosophy to adopt their poetic form. The immediate occasion for the use of poetry in philosophic writing was the poetic genius and spirit of one of the earlier Greek philosophers, — Xenophanes. Parmenides, his successor, adopted the form as well as the doctrine of his master; Empedokles, himself a poet of no mean order, followed the example of Parmenides; and, perhaps fortunately, ancient philosophy had no other poetic expounder with the single exception of Lucretius, the brilliant imitator of Empedokles.

Xenophanes is best known as a lyric poet. His purely literary productions contain a spirited critique of ordinary views, and in this respect they resemble the so-called philosophic fragments; for in these, too, he criticizes popular views of religion and of nature with the freedom and power of a poet. According to Diogenes, Xenophanes made his living in later years by reciting his own compositions at the festivals of different cities, and we can well believe that both the elegiac verses and the hexameters on religion and philosophy might have been composed for such recitation. 5-6: “Mortals suppose that the gods are born, as they themselves are, and that they wear man's clothing, and have human voice and body; ... but if cattle or lions had hands, so as to paint with their hands and produce works of art as men do, they would paint their gods and give them bodies in form like their own, — horses like horses, cattle like cattle.” Such is the poet's statement of the transcendency of God, the poet's criticism of popular anthropomorphic ideas of God; and such verses make it clear that even in his philosophic writing Xenophanes was a poet, aiming to please and interest the people. Poetry became the vehicle of philosophic teaching because this poet used his ordinary means of expression for his scientific and philosophical views, and Eleatic thinkers who accepted his views continued to express them in verse.

With Parmenides the verse form which he inherited is somewhat external, so much so that he is said to have rewritten his views in prose. His poem on the nature of things begins with an elaborate, not to say a labored prooemium, describing his approach to the palace of the goddess in whose mouth are placed his philosophic opinions. Different views have been held as to the poetic merit of the prooemium, but there can be no question that the lines which follow are exceedingly barren. The hopes held out by the goddess to the enquirer are

« ПредишнаНапред »