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.

    13/570 (page 5)
    intellect, a life of intellect would be superior to one of plea¬ sure, and the last would be forced to yield. Say ye that it is so agreed, or how ? Prot. To me, at least, it seems. [4.] Soc. But how seems it to Philebus ? What say you ? Phil. To me it seems, and will (always)^ ^ seem, that pleasure is altogether the superior. And you, Protarchus, will be con¬ vinced of it yourself. Prot. Having resigned, Philebus, to myself the debate, you can no longer be the master of what should be yielded to So¬ crates, and the contrary. Phil. You say what is true. But, however, I have dis¬ charged my duty;^^ and I here call the goddess herself to witness it. Prot. We too would be witnesses on these very points, that you have said what you are saying.But now let us en¬ deavour, Socrates, to go through in order what is to follow after this, whether with Philebus being willing, or however he may be willing. [5.] Soc. Let us endeavour, (beginning) from, the very In the Greek of this answer, ’Ejxol yovv HoksX, Stalbaum is uncertain, whether we ought to read yovv or y’ ovv. But the preceding ovTbjg—f} TrCjg would naturally lead to^'E^uoiy’ ovrojg doKeX. Ficin. has “semperque videbitur,” adopted by Sydenham, But in the mass of parallel passages quoted by Stalb. the adverb is uniformly omitted. On the formula avrog yvdjaet Stalb. refers to his note in Gorg. p. 505, C. On the meaning of acpoijiovaOai Stalb. refers to Wyttenbach on Plu¬ tarch, p. 489, ed. Ox. = i. 386, Lips., and to Leopold on Plutarch, Numa, § 10, p. 299. In such expressions as ravr’ eXeyeg a Xsyeig, the pronoun ravra is never introduced, except in modern writers, such as Nicolaus of Damas¬ cus in Excerpt. Vales, p. 445, El—dsdpuKa ravra, d dsdpaKa : while the same verb is repeated in both clauses, as shown by Abresch and Blom- field on ^Esch. Agam. 67, and myself in 01. Jl. No. xv. p. 144; and to the passages there quoted I could now add a dozen more. 15—15 Stalb. renders fierd ^iXr/jSov eKovrog ri oTTiog dv WsXy by “ cum Philebo sive voluerit sive noluerit.” But tKovrog could not be thus op¬ posed to oTTojg dv WeXy. Hence, probably to avoid the tautology, Ficinus translated “ cum volente Philebo, vel quomodocunque vis.” But tKovrog could not be thus applied to Philebus, and y kOsXyg to Protarchus. Plato probably wrote, aKovrog, y OTrojg dv e9sXy, i. e. “ unwilling, or however willing in part.” Ficinus has “ ab ipsa dea exordientes.” Hence Steph. proposed to in¬ sert dp^dixevoi, wHch is similarly used elsewhere, as shown by Heusde on