direction of verbal alteration than of omission. I have, however, recorded in the textual notes a selection of the proposed alterations, futile though I consider most of them to be.

The main authorities which I have cited or consulted are1:

i.

Texts: Bekker (1826), the Zurich ed. (Baiter, Orelli and Winckelmann, 1839), C. F. Hermann (1851), O. Jahn (1864), JalinUsener (1875), C. Badham (1866), M. Schanz (1881), J. Burnet (1901). Critical essays or notes by Bast (1794), Voegelin, Naber, Teuffel, M. Vermehren (1870), J. J. Hartmann (1898).

ii. Annotated Editions: J. F. Fischer (1776), F. A. Wolf (1782), P. A. Reynders (1825), L. I. Rückert (1829), A. Hommel (1834), G. Stallbaum (2nd ed. 1836), G. F. Rettig (2 vols. 1875—6), A. Hug (2nd ed. 1884).

iii. Treatises on the subject-matter: M. H. L. Hartmann (Chronol. Symp. Pl. 1798), G. Schwanitz (Observ. in Pl. Conv. 1842), M. Lindemann (De Phaedri orat. 1853, De Agath. or. 1871), J. H. Deinhardt (Ueber den Inhalt u. s. w. von Pl. Symp. 1865), M. Koch (Die Rede d. Sokr. u. das Problem der Erotik, 1886), W. Resl (Verhältnis der 5 erster in Pl. Symp. Reden u. s. w. 1886), C. Boetticher (Eros u. Erkenntnis bei Pl. 1894), C. Schirlitz (Beiträge z. Erklärung d. Rede d. Sokr. u.s.w. 1890), P. Crain (De ratione quae inter Pl. Phaedr. et Symp. intercedat, 1906).

Other more general works consulted are: Teichmüller (Litt. Fehden, 1881), F. Horn (Platonstudien, 1893), W. Lutoslawski (Plato's Logic, 1897), T. Gomperz (Greek Thinkers, E.T. II. 1905), H. Raeder (Platons Philos. Entwickelung, 1905), J. Adam (Religious Teachers of Greece, 1908).

iv. Translations: E. Zeller (1857), A. Jung (2nd ed. 1900), B. Jowett, J. A. Stewart (selections, in The Myths of Plato, 1905).

1 Abbreviations used are-Bdhm. = Badham; Bt. =Burnet; Jn. = Jahn; J.-U.= Jahn-Usener; Sz.-Schanz; Verm. Vermehren; Voeg. Voegelin.

=

ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ

ΣΥΜΠΟΣΙΟΝ

[Η ΠΕΡΙ ΑΓΑΘΟΥ· ΗΘΙΚΟΣ]

St. III.

Ι. Δοκώ μοι περὶ ὧν πυνθάνεσθε οὐκ ἀμελέτητος εἶναι. καὶ 172

γὰρ ἐτύγχανον πρῴην εἰς ἄστυ οἴκοθεν ἀνιὼν Φαληρόθεν· τῶν οὖν γνωρίμων τις ὄπισθεν κατιδών με πόρρωθεν ἐκάλεσε, καὶ παίζων ἅμα τῇ κλήσει, Ὦ Φαληρεύς, ἔφη, οὗτος ['Απολλόδωρος], οὐ περιμενεῖς; κἀγὼ ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα. καὶ ὅς, ̓Απολλόδωρε, ἔφη, καὶ

172 Α νῦν) οὐκ Methodius vulg. ̓Απολλόδωρος secl. Bdhm. J.-U. περιμενεις Β: περιμένεις TW, Bt. ἐζήτουν om. Coisl.

Φαληρόθεν del. Naber ὦ: ὁ vulg.

οὐ (σύ) Sauppe
περιμενεις vulg. Sz. :
(3) ̓Απολλόδωρε Sz. ̓Απολλόδωρε...

172 Α Δοκώ μοι κτλ. The speaker, Apollodorus (see Introd. § II. A), is replying to certain unnamed èraîpot who had been questioning him concerning the incidents and speeches which took place at Agathon's banquet. The plural πυνθάνεσθε (and ὑμῖν, ὑμεῖς 173 c, D infra) indicates that there were several ἑταῖροι present: the traditional heading of the dialogue, ΕΤΑΙΡΟΣ, is due to the fact that all but one are κωφὰ πρόσωπα.

οὐκ ἀμελέτητος. μελέτη and μελετῶν are regular terms for the “conning over” of a speech or “part”: cp. Phaedr. 228 Β.

καὶ γὰρ ἐτύγχανον. These words explain the preceding statement δοκῶ... οὐκ ἀμελέτητος εἶναι, and serve to introduce not only the sentence immediately following but the whole of the succeeding passage down to 173 B where the initial statement is resumed by the words ὥστε...οὐκ ἀμελετήτως ἔχω.

Φαληρόθεν. Phalerum, the old port of Athens, was about 20 stadia (24 miles) distant from the city on the S.E.

καὶ παίζων...περιμενεις; Where does the joke come in ?

(1) Ast, Hommel, Stallbaum and Jowett look for it in the word Φαληρεύς, which they take to be a play on φαλαρός (“bald-headed,” so Jowett) or φαλαρίς (“bald-coot”) in allusion to the bald crown or the peculiar gait of Apollodorus. But what evidence is there to show that A. either was bald or walked like a coot?

(2) Another suggestion of Hommel's is to write (with the vulgate) ὁ ̓Απολλόδωρος and assume an etymological allusion to the opportuneness of the meeting (as "Apollo-given "). This also is far-fetched.

(3) Schütz, followed by Wolf and Hug, finds the παιδιά in the playfully

B. P.

1

recently

μὴν καὶ ἔναγχος σε ἐζήτουν βουλόμενος διαπυθέσθαι τὴν ̓ΑγάΒ θωνος ξυνουσίαν καὶ Σωκράτους καὶ ̓Αλκιβιάδου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν τότε ἐν τῷ συνδείπνῳ παραγενομένων, περὶ τῶν ἐρωτικῶν λόγων τίνες ἦσαν. ἄλλος γάρ τίς μοι διηγεῖτο ἀκηκοὼς Φοίνικος τοῦ Φιλίππου, ἔφη δὲ καὶ σὲ εἰδέναι. ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐδὲν εἶχε σαφὲς λέγειν. σὺ οὖν μοι διήγησαι· δικαιότατος γὰρ εἰ τοὺς τοῦ ἑταίρου λόγους ἀπαγγέλλειν. πρότερον δέ μοι, ἦ δ ̓ ὅς, εἰπέ, σὺ αὐτὸς Ο παρεγένου τῇ συνουσίᾳ ταύτῃ ἢ οὔ; κἀγὼ εἶπον ὅτι Παντάπασιν 172 Β ἐν τῷ συνδείπνῳ secl. Baiter J.-U.

είν

συνδειπνεῖν Τ: συνδείπνῳ W

official style of the address, in which the person is designated by the name of his deme, this being the regular practice in legal and formal proceedings (cp. Gorg. 495 D Καλλικλῆς ἔφη ̓Αχαρνεύς...Σωκράτης...ὁ ̓Αλωπεκῆθεν: Ar. Nub. 134); but (as Stallb. objected) the order of the words in that case should be rather ὦ οὗτος ̓Α. ὁ Φαληρεύς. Hug also finds παιδιά in the henderasyllabic rhythm (ὦ Φαλ. οὗτος ̓Απ.), and the poetic combination ὦ οὗτος (Soph. Ο. C. 1627, Aj. 89).

(4) Rettig, reading ὁ Φαληρεύς, omits (with Badham) the proper name ̓Απολλόδωρος as an adscript. This seems, on the whole, the best and simplest solution. Glaucon, at a distance behind, feigns ignorance of the identity of “ the Phalerian,” and shouts after Apollodorus “ Ho there! you Phalerian, halt,” in a “stop thief!” tone. It is plausible to suppose also that a certain contempt is conveyed in the description Φαληρεύς (“ Wapping-ite"): porttowns are often places of unsavoury repute: cp. Phaedr. 243 c ἐν ναύταις που τεθραμμένον : Juv. Sat. VIII. 174 “ permixtum nautis et furibus ac fugitivis.”

For the summons to halt cp. Ar. Plut. 440 οὗτος, τί δρᾷς; ὦ δειλότατον σὺ θηρίον, | οὐ περιμενεις; Thesm. 689 ποῖ ποῖ σὺ φεύγεις; οὗτος, οὗτος, οὐ μενεῖς; also Eq. 240, 1354. These passages support the future περιμενεις rather than the present: "futurum est fortius imperantis; praesens modeste cohortantis aut lenius postulantis" (Stallb.). For the future as a lively imperative cp. 175 Α, 212 D.

172 Β ἐν τῷ συνδείπνῳ. Similarly in Aristoph. Gerytades (frag. 204 ἐν τοῖσι συνδείπνοις ἐπαινῶν Αἰσχύλον) σύνδειπνον is used for the more precise συμπόσιον: and a lost play of Sophocles bore the title ̓Αχαιών σύλλογος ἢ σύνδειπνον ἢ σύνδειπνοι (see fragg. 146 f., Dindf.).

τίνες ἦσαν. For phrases of this kind, “ satis libere subjecta orationi,” see Vahlen, Op. Acad. II. 393.

Φοίνικος τοῦ Φιλίππου. Nothing is known of this man. See Introd. § II. A. δικαιότατος γὰρ κτλ. τοῦ ἑταίρου is almost equivalent to ἑταίρου γε ὄντος, giving the reason why Apollodorus is δικαιότατος.

παρεγένου τῇ συνουσίᾳ. Cp. Hom. Od. XVII. 173 καί σφιν παρεγίγνετο δαιτί: and the exordium of the Phaedo (57 ) αὐτὸς, ὦ Φ., παρεγένου Σωκράτει ...ἢ ἄλλου του ἠκούσας;

Παντάπασιν ἔοικέ σοι κτλ. “ It is quite evident that his narration was of

ἔοικέ σοι οὐδὲν διηγεῖσθαι σαφὲς ὁ διηγούμενος, εἰ νεωστὶ ἡγεῖ τὴν συνουσίαν γεγονέναι ταύτην ἣν ἐρωτᾷς, ὥστε καὶ ἐμὲ παραγενέσθαι. Ἔγωγε δή, <ἔφη>. Πόθεν, ἦν δ ̓ ἐγώ, ὦ Γλαύκων; οὐκ οἶσθ ̓ ὅτι πολλῶν ἐτῶν ̓Αγάθων ἐνθάδε οὐκ ἐπιδεδήμηκεν, ἀφ ̓ οὗ δ ̓ ἐγὼ Σωκράτει συνδιατρίβω καὶ ἐπιμελὲς πεποίημαι ἑκάστης ἡμέρας εἰδέναι ὅ τι ἂν λέγῃ ἢ πράττῃ, οὐδέπω τρία ἔτη ἐστίν ; πρὸ τοῦ δὲ περιτρέχων ὅπῃ τύχοιμι καὶ οἰόμενος τὶ ποιεῖν ἀθλιώ- 173 τερος ἢ ὁτουοῦν, οὐχ ἧττον ἢ σὺ νυνί, οἰόμενος δεῖν πάντα μᾶλλον πράττειν ἢ φιλοσοφεῖν. καὶ ὅς, Μὴ σκῶπτ ̓, ἔφη, ἀλλ ̓ εἰπέ μοι πότε ἐγένετο ἡ συνουσία αὕτη. κἀγὼ εἶπον ὅτι Παίδων ὄντων ἡμῶν ἔτι, ὅτε τῇ πρώτῃ τραγῳδίᾳ ἐνίκησεν ̓Αγάθων, τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ ᾗ τὰ ἐπινίκια ἔθυεν αὐτός τε καὶ οἱ χορευταί. Πάνυ, ἔφη, ἄρα ἐγώ γε δή, ἔφη Bt.: ἐγώ γε δή BTW : ἐγὼ ἔφη Voeg.: ἔγωγ ̓, ἔφη Bdhm.

172 C καμέ Athenaeus, Sz. γὰρ ἔφη(ν) Athen. : ἔγωγε γὰρ Athen. ἐνθάδε om. Athen. ἔτι ὄντων ἡμῶν Athen. Priscian : ἢ ᾗ Τ : ἢ Sz.

173 Α ή Tb: ἦν pr. B: ἢ Wt πρώτη om. Athen. : τὸ πρῶτον Usener ταπινίκια Cobet

ὦ Λύκων

νῦν TW

ᾗ om.

the vaguest kind.” διηγεῖσθαι is here the infin. of διηγεῖτο. The emphatic repetition of οὐδὲν σαφές is a ground for suspecting that the reference is to a published account in which the facts were distorted.

172 C Πόθεν...ὦ Γλαύκων; “What makes you think so, Glaucon ?” There is an implicit negation in the question put thus: cp. Gorg. 471D, Menex. 235 c. This Glaucon is perhaps the same as the father of Charmides (Charm. 154 A, etc.), but probably not the same as the Glaucon of the Republic, though Böckh and Munk would identify the two.

πολλῶν ἐτῶν κτλ. For the bearing of this passage on the dramatic date of this prologue, see Introd. § VIII.

ἐπιμελὲς πεποίημαι...εἰδέναι. The nearest Platonic parallel for this construction is Ep. vii. 334 Α πολλοῖς...ὑμνεῖν ταῦτα ἐπιμελές.

173 Α περιτρέχων ὅπῃ τύχοιμι, i.e. with no fixed principle of conduct, “like a wave of the sea, driven with the wind and tossed.” Cp. Tim. 43 Β ἀτάκτως ὅπῃ τύχοι προϊέναι: Seneca de vita beata I. 2 " quamdiu quidem passim vagamur non ducem secuti...conteretur vita inter errores brevis,” etc. οἰόμενος τί ποιεῖν. For τι, magnum quid, cp. 219 c, Phaedr. 242 E, etc. Παίδων ὄντων ἡμῶν ἔτι. Sc. Apollodorus and Glaucon. Plato, too, born about 427 B.C., was a maîs at the date of Agathon's victory (416 B.C.). τῇ πρώτῃ τραγῳδία. Respicit Plato ad tetralogias" (Reynders).

τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ ᾖ. For this (compendious) construction cp. Thuc. I. 60 τεσσαρακοστῇ ἡμέρᾳ ὕστερον...ᾗ Ποτίδαια ἀπέστη (with Shilleto's note); Lys. ΧΙΧ. 22.

τὰ ἐπινίκια ἔθυεν. "Made a sacrificial feast in honour of his victory." On this occasion it was the author himself who provided the feast and offered the sacrifice. Sometimes however it was the Choregus (e.g. Ar. Ach. 886), and