A Commentary on Plutarch's Table Talks (3 vols in one) 9173462195, 9789173462198

Citation preview

STUDIA GRAECA ET LATINA GOTHOBURGENSIA LI

A COMMENTARY PLUTARCH’S

TABLE

ON TALKS

Vol. I (Books 1-3)

by SVEN-TAGE

TEODORSSON

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS GOTHOBURGENSIS

Printed with the aid of the Swedish Council for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences

© Sven-Tage Teodorsson 1989 Distributors: ACTA

UNIVERSITATIS

GOTHOBURGENSIS

Box 5096, S-40222 Göteborg, Sweden ISBN 91-7346-219-5 ISSN 0081-6450 Printed ín Sweden by Berlings, Arlóv 1989

To the memory of Ingemar Düring

PREFACE

When I now present the first volume of my three-volumes commentary on Plutarch’s Table Talks, it feels natural for me to dedicate this work

to the memory of my engaging and highly esteemed teacher of Greek, Ingemar Diiring. It was he who once advised me to write a commen-

tary on the third book of this work as my licentiate dissertation. My work on this thesis, under his inspiring supervision, stands out in my memory as a period of intense and fruitful study. As an expert in the study of Aristotle he maintained that Plutarch’s Table Talks had been

unduly neglected and that much of the material contained in these was of considerable interest in many respects to the study of the history of ideas

and

that

desideratum.

a comprehensive

Thus,

it was

commentary

on

a natural decision and a

this work

was

a

satisfaction to me

when I, after a long period of work in other fields of Greek studies, commenced work on realizing the wish of my old teacher. During the years of work at the commentary I have received advice, criticism and encouragement from many colleagues and friends. Above

all I wish to express my gratitude to Cajus Fabricius and Tryggve Göransson of Göteborg, Stig Y. Rudberg, Jerker Blomquist and Staffan Fogelmark of Lund, Holger Thesleff of Helsinki, Rolf Westman of Abo, Zofia Abramowiczówna of Torun, Rudolf Kassel of Düsseldorf and Francois Fuhrmann of Strasbourg. Thanks are also due to the staff of the University Library of Góteborg for the excellent service they have provided in meeting my extensive need for literature, to Jadwiga Larsson for translating Abramoviczówna's treatise into Swedish and to Lilly Hunter for checking my English.

Göteborg, March 1989

Sven-Tage Teodorsson

ABSTRACT Title: A Commentary on Plutarch’s Table Talks. Vol. I (Books 1-3). Author: Sven-Tage Teodorsson. University: Göteborg University, Institute of Classical Studies, Department of Greek. Góteborg 1989. Monography, 393 pp.

ISBN 91-7346-219-5; ISSN 0081-6450 Plutarch's Table Talks is an extensive work comprising 9 ‘books’, each

of which contains 10 ‘problems’. The content is highly varied. Many

themes are concerned with convivial questions such as customs and manners at drinking-parties or the effects of food and wine on body and mind. Most of the topics are, however, loosely or not at all related

to banquets, The subjects treated belong to a great number of fields: philosophy, literature, philology, religion - Greek, Egyptian, Jewish -, mythology, history and antiquities as well as medicine, botany, zoology, physics, optics and other sciences,

and

further music,

theatre,

sport etc. For the Table Talks Plutarch depended on numerous literary and scientific sources, e.g., Homer, Herodotus, the Attic tragedians and comedians, the Pre-Socratics, Plato, (Ps.-)Aristotle, Theophrastus and

writers of medicine and pharmacology. Plutarch most probably found much of the material in earlier works of a similar kind as the Talks, which are now lost, in the first place the Symposiaca by Didymus. However, it seems that, in contrast to those earlier works, Plutarch’s

Table Talks are authentic to a certain extent. This commentary deals with any question of content met with in the text and, through the study of parallel passages in other writers, suggests possible sources. Problems of identification or the persons who take part in the talks are treated, and the relative chronology of some talks is discussed. The text offers many rather difficult problems of textual criticism. Solutions to some of these are proposed, and questions of grammar

and style are commented upon. Key words; Plutarch, Aristotle, Plato, Theophrastus, Dioscurides, Plinius, Athenaeus, philosophy, Peripatetic, Stoic, Epicurean, Py_ thagorean, wine, drinking-party, conjecture, hiatus.

CONTENTS

Introductory ...... sese nne The work .........esesseseeeee e I The text ............eeeseeesee n Conjectures and emendations .......... 00.0... cee eee eee Abbreviations ... 00 {νιν cece eee eee na Commentary 0. eee eee eee e nn Book Tow. cece nnn

Book TD oo...

cence

ena

11 11 15 16 19 29 31

167

INTRODUCTORY

THE WORK Plutarch’s Table Talks is his most extensive work. Because of the mixed and diversified nature of its material, a comprehensive commentary on this kind of work must of necessity be highly varied and all-

round. Now that I nevertheless venture into this enterprise, I would like to emphasize that, although my aim has been to comment as far as

possible on every point in the text which seemed to call for elucidation, Iam entirely aware that much will still remain to be done on this work. Not only is the content diversified and sometimes difficult to interpret, but the text itself offers numerous problems because of its rather bad,

lacuneous condition. Emendations and conjectures proposed by me are listed below, p. 16-17.

My intention has been to incorporate all valuable comments and notes made by others and, if possible, to utilize and develop this material further. For the two first books of the Table Talks the

commentaries by H. Bolkestein (1946) and Z. Abramoviczówna (1960) have been of great value. This is also true of the notes made by F.

Fuhrmann in his edition of the Talks (Vol. I 1972, II 1978) in the collection

G.

Budé.

Comments,

notes,

references

and

emendations

made by editors and commentators from the sixteenth century on have been considered and, as far as they appeared to be of interest, have

been discussed or mentioned in the commentary. Albeit that the state of the text offers a great many problems, it is the elucidation of the content that has taken the main part of the commentary. My intention has been to make this highly varied work

more comprehensible through the investigation of its place in the literature and intellectual tradition of the time. I have tried to elucidate, as far as I have been able to, the network of connections between

the Table Talks and earlier, contemporary and later literature by the study of Plutarch's own overt references and in trying to trace the sources of origin of his thoughts.

In so doing I have considered it

12

INTRODUCTORY

prudent not only to give a number of references but also to offer quotations rather generously for the reader's convenience. In commenting upon the numerous kinds of subject-matter treated in the Zable Talks my aim has been to explain these as far as I have found it called for and to the extent I have been able to. My choice of sources for doing this work has of necessity been selective. I am entirely aware that there are many valuable works written by specialists in different fields which I have not used. It has, however, seemed preferable to keep the references to modern works within bounds and to give more space to parallels from Greek and Roman literature. Plutarch's Table Talks is the only work of its kind that has been preserved, The closest parallel would be the seventh book of Macrobius" Saturnalia where he imitates Plutarch, or Athenaeus' Deipnoso-

phistai, but these entirely fictitious, incessant dialogues are essentially different from the Talks with their varied composition and real, historical persons as participants. Two genres are fused in the Talks, the

symposion and the collections of problems. The fact that we do not know of any earlier work of exactly the same kind as the Talks has led to diverging opinions about Plutarch's originality in this field. Among the works that may have served as his models are Aristoxenus, Σύμμικτα συμποτικά, Persaeus, Συμποτικοὶ διάλογοι or Συμποτικὰ ὑπομνήματα, and Didymus, (Σύμμικτα) ovpztootaxó, and Plutarch himself mentions (612 DE) Prytanis and Hieronymus of the Peripatos, and Dion of the Academy as authors of symposiac works. As only the titles and/or a few fragments are left, the question as to whether these works had dialogue form cannot be answered and thus has been open to debate. T. Hirzel, Der Dialog (Leipzig 1895) I 366 and II 224 n. 3 assumed that the works of Persaeus and Aristoxenus had dialogue form but probably not that of Didymus. J. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 170-173 argues that none of these were dialogues, while H. Bolkestein, 4-10, in oppoisition to this view maintains that not only the works of Aristoxenus and Persaeus but even that of Didymus were symposiac dialogues. Closely connected with the form of the Table Talks is the question of their degree of authenticity. The discussion of this problem was initiated by R. Volkmann, Leben, Schriften und Philosophie des Plutarchs von Chaironeia 1 (Berlin 1869) 177 who maintained that Plutarch composed the Talks ‘auf Grund gemachter Aufzeichnungen’. E. Graf, *Plutarchisches. Entstehungsweise der Symposiaka'. In: Commenta-

THE WORK

13

tiones philologae ... O. Ribbeckio (Lipsiae 1888) 59 is quite sure: the Talks are ‘treue, aufgezeichnete Erinnerungen’. complete authenticity was refuted effectively by K. stehung der Tischgespráche'. In: Χάριτες F. Leo 187. He showed that Plutarch used literary sources

This belief in Hubert, ‘Die (Berlin 1911) for the major

the Ent170part

of the work, but notices (p. 178), to the credit of the author, that the idea of authenticity is caused by ‘der Gedanke, es sei unmóglich, dass

Plutarch so lebendige Szenen, so frisch aus dem täglichen Leben seines Kreises herausgenommen, frei erfunden haben kónnte'. Hubert does

not deny, however, that there are elements of reality in the Talks. Most or all of the participants are obviously real persons, and some of the occasions, e.g. IV 3 the wedding of Plutarch's son, Autobulus, are certainly historical. This mixture of authenticity and dependence upon literature may explain, but not justify, the rather extreme position

taken by Z. Abramowiczówna in her commentary (passim), and particularly in her article in Das Altertum 8 (1962) 80-88. The position taken by Hubert (o.c.) is clearly the more realistic one. Bolkestein, ch. 2, and Fuhrmann, vol. I pp. VII-XIX, on the whole side with him.

Fuhrmann (p. XIX) rightly points out that with his Table Talks Plutarch renewed and revived the genre. Whether his model works were

symposiac dialogues or not, Plutarch's contribution to the symposiac genre is obvious. This is due specifically to the element of authenticity. We have no evidence of any such feature in other works of the genre. It is not at all astonishing,

as Hubert

admitted,

that, in reading

the

Table Talks, one is impressed by the vivid, dramatic setting of many dialogues. This element is essential to the work. Martin's (p. 177) opinion that the dialogue form and the symposiac setting ‘fiir die συμποσιακά nicht notwendig ist', and that *die Form bedeutet nichts',

is entirely mistaken and unfair. Hirzel's (II 224) characterization, ‘der Absicht nach sind die Tischgespräche historisch’, is to the point. Plutarch's literary device — which was probably his own invention —

to apply literary subject-matter from various sources to his own circle of acquaintances and his family was an ingenious idea. It is more easily conceivable that recollections of banquets in his home and at different places all around Greece and in Rome inspired him with the conception of this literary composition than that he should have invented the entire symposiac setting, as Martin suggests. I would think that these recollections formed the basis and starting-point for Plutarch in composing the Talks. I can see no reason to doubt that many of the talks actually took place where Plutarch locates them and with the partici-

14

INTRODUCTORY

pants stated. There is also little reason to doubt that some of these talks actually were about the themes which Plutarch reports from the particular occasions. It may also be that in some cases the dialogization

is authentic in so far as (some of) the participants actually made roughly the contributions which Plutarch ascribes to each. Of course this assumption does not imply that Plutarch had the conversation

recorded by his secretary during the drinking-party or even himself put down what was said over the wine which would have been a prerequisite for the literal authenticity of the Talks. When Plutarch composed these, in most cases several years afterwards, he may have taken his Starting-point in the recollection of particular occasions, and sometimes happened to recall the theme discussed and some of the contributions. On this basis, then, it was probably not a very difficult task for as well-read a man as Plutarch to search out relevant material in his well-stocked library, for use in the composition of the Talks. One important thing with relevance to the question of the nature and origin of the Table Talks has not, as far as I know, hitherto been

considered, namely the fact that, in antiquity, educated people had through training been accustomed to keep a much greater amount of literary material in their memories than we are capable of in our time when this faculty is no longer so much in demand. We may presuppose that well-educated intellectual men like Plutarch and those of his circle made it a point of honour to be so well-read in many different kinds of literature as to be able to discuss practically any subject. The Table Talks may be considered authentic in the sense that well-read men were likely to discuss their reading with each other at their meetings and drinking-parties, and it is fairly safe to assume that these parties turned out not very different from those which Plutarch describes. I think that we are also entitled to suppose that exactly the kind of varied content offered in the Talks was much sought for by busy political men like Sosius Senecio, to whom Plutarch dedicated this wotk. If it was customary in educated classes to display literary learning, broad but not very profound, at the wine, which indeed the Talks indicate, this may have been one good reason for Plutarch to write this

work. It is not fair, then, to judge its value according to literary criteria or philosophical standards, still less are we entitled to expect Plutarch to present original or profound thoughts in a work of this kind. He

himself repeatedly declares that he aims at comprehensibility and general knowledge, problems.

not at the discussion

and

solution

of difficult

THE TEXT

15

The main value of the Talks, and a great one indeed, is its importance as a document of the history of Greek civilization. Plutarch presents a vivid picture of contemporary customs and manners, attitudes to life, literature and science,

and other subjects which were or

could be discussed over wine by educated people. Even if Plutarch gives a rather idealized picture of the customs of his circle of acquaintances in the Talks, this work forms an important and very interesting

counter-balance to the Cena Trimalchionis by his somewhat younger contemporary, Petronius.

THE TEXT The manuscript tradition of the Table Talks offers few problems. The archetype is Vindobonensis phil. gr. 148, of the 10th or 11th century, designated by the siglum T. This manuscript suffered two large losses

before it was copied, (1): Talk IV 6 ends with 672 C οὕτω κῶλα and the entire rest of the fourth book is lost, and (2): of the ninth book the end of the sixth talk (from 741 B ἀλλ᾽ ἡττώ), the following five talks and the beginning of the twelfth (until ὅρκοις) are lost. This loss is due

to the disappearance of the 35th quaternion. All other MSS also show these two losses.

After T had been copied it suffered the loss of three more quaternions, 19 (676 C στέμμα — 680 D ἱστορεῖται δέ), 26 (704 F τῶν ἀλόγων — 709 A σκιῶν). and the last one, no. 38, (no. 37 ends with 747 E "Aqooóínv). The

MSS

derived

from T may

be classed in two groups.

The

first

consists of the Codices Planudei, designated Π. The MSS of this group presumably derive from one and the same MS now lost, which was copied from T. The Codices Planudei (TI) are: y Vaticanus gr. 139, soon after 1296,

from which five MSS derive: Laurentianus 80.5, 14th c., containing only the first four books of the Talks, Parisinus gr. 1680, 14th c., Marcianus gr. 248, written in 1455,

Cantabrigiensis 2601, 15th c., Toletanus 51.5, 15-16th c.

16

INTRODUCTORY

u Urbinus gr. 99, 15th c., derived from

Laurentianus 80.5 and thus

containing only the first four books.

n Vaticanus gr. 1676, 15th c., perhaps also derived from «v. E Parisinus gr. 1672, written soon after 1302, presumably derived from a MS older than y; it shows a greater accordance with T than other MSS.

It also has several variant readings of its own,

some of

which are of interest. E is the most valuable of the MSS of this group. The second group contains two MSS: g Palatinus gr. 170, 15th c.,. and P Parisinus gr. 2074, 14th c., both apparently copied directly from

T. In addition to these two groups there is a MS of little value, Athous K 55, 17th c., preserved in the monastery of St. Laura, Athos.

The text of the Table Talks relies almost entirely on T. Only for the

parts of this MS that were lost after it had been copied and thus are preserved in later MSS do these come in, y, E and P in the first place.

In some cases the indirect tradition may also be of value. Macrobius . imitated large parts of the Table Talks in the seventh book of his Saturnalia, and M. Psellus reproduced some of the Talks in De omnifaria doctrina. Also Eustathius has a number of quotations from the Talks, and this work is also cited by Gellius, Geoponica.

M.

Glycas, and the

A concise, and at the same time detailed, survey of the editions and translations of the Moralia is given by F. Fuhrmann, Vol. I pp. XXXII-XXXIV. The early history of editing, translation and emendation has been exhaustively described by R. Aulotte, Amyot et Plutarque. La tradition des Moralia au XVI‘ siécle, Geneve 1965.

CONJECTURES

AND

EMENDATIONS

One of the aims of the present commentary has been to subject the text to a renewed critical examination implying that conjectures and

emendations of any value proposed by earlier scholars as well as different interpretations are considered. Thus the lemmata are given in the form motivated in the commentary. In general, Fuhrmann's edition could be followed without modification, but in several cases other

CONJECTURES AND EMENDATIONS

17

readings have turned out to be preferable. In some passages I propose new conjectures or emendations. The new readings resulting from these are presented in the lemmata. I propose conjectures or emendations for the following passages (indicated by the beginning of the

lemma): 617 E 618 C 625 E

ἐκ τῶν “Ομήρου ti δὴ ptoveis ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἀποτείνεται

626 A

Λαμπρίας

626 B 630 Ὁ

τὰ) μὲν ϑολερά κἂν ἄλλο(ς

631 B

(ὀρϑῶς γοῦν ὁ Τηλέμαχος)

631 CD 633 B

καὶ καϑόλου τοιαῦται διαφοραί

633ς

Θεόκριτον

638 C

τὸν οὖν τόπον

639 A 640 Ὁ

ἢ τὸ στάδιον λεπτὸν γὰρ ὄντα

641 A

τὰ τοιαῦτα δένδρα

642 E

ἀπεδήλουν ἐγὼ ϑέλοντα

649 A

εἶπον (6)tt

649 D

᾿Ἐμπεδοκλῆς

651 C

ἔπειτα μέντοι

651 F 652 A 654Ε 655 Β 655 B 655 D 656 A 658 A

(6 8 ᾿Απολλωνίδης) ὡς àv ἔχουσι τὴν γὰρ ἑσπέραν (od)te γενή(σεταί τις Ex) ϑλιφις (ἀλλὰ τὴν μὲν γονὴν) ἀποδούς εἰς U ἱερόν ἔν τισιν Αἰνείου κινεῖν τὰ ὑγρά

ABBREVIATIONS

Abh. Berlin Abh. Gott. Abh.

Leipz.

Abh.

Münch.

Abhandlungen der (Kóniglich) preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Philologisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlungen der (Königlich) sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse.

Abram.

Abramowiczówna, Zofia, Komentarz krytyczny i egzegetyczny do Plutarcha Quaestiones convivales ks. 1 i II. Torun 1960.

AC

L'Antiquité classique. Academicorum Philosophorum Mekler. Berolini 1902.

Acad, Index Here. AJP Ald. Amyot

Index

Herculanensis.

Ed.

S.

American Journal of Philology.

Plutarchi Opuscula LY XXXI. Venetiae 1509. Amyot, J. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's Moralia ed. Basil., Bibl. Nat., Paris. Les (Euvres morales et meslées de Plutarque, translatées ... par

J. Amyot. Paris 1572. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's Moralia ed. Basil., Univ.

Anon.

Libr., Leiden.

Anth. Lyr. Gr.

See Diehl.??

Anth.

Anzeiger Ak. Wien

Anthologia Graeca Platina. Anzeiger der Kaiserlichenlósterreichischen Akademie der Wis-

Arbesmann

senschaften, Wien. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Arbesmann, P. R. Das Fasten bei den Griechen und Rómern.

Pal.

(Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 21:1.) Giessen 1929. Arch. Jahrb. Archiv Gesch. Med. Archiv Gesch. Philos. Ath, Mitt. Bases

Jahrbuch des (Kaiserlich) deutschen archäologischen Instituts.

Sudhoffs Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie. Mitteilungen des deutschen archdologischen Instituts. Athenische Abteilung. Bases, S. Κριτικὰ σημειώματα εἰς τὰ Πλουτάρχου Συμποσιακά. ᾿Αϑηνᾶ 10 (1898) 133-148. ---,

Περὶ

Συμποσιακά.

τῆς

νεωτάτης

ἐκδόσεως

᾿Αϑηνᾶ 11 (1899) 220-226.

τῶν

Πλουτάρχου

20 Basil. BCH Bens.

Bergk* Berichte Sachs. Ges.

Bern. Bern. Plutarchea Bem. Symb. Bétol.

Blass-Debrunner"” Blümner, Technologie

Boisacq Bolk.

Boll.

Bücheler Bull. Hist. Med. Busolt, Staatskunde?

Capps Casabona Cast.

ABBREVIATIONS Plutarchi Chaeronei Opuscula ... ed. H. Froben et N, Episcopius. Basiliae 1542. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Benseler, G. E. De hiatu in scriptoribus Graecis 1. Fribergae 1841. Poetae Lyrici Graeci II-11I. Ed. Th. Bergk. 4. ed., Lipsiae 1914-

1915. Berichte über die Verhandlungen der (Königlich) sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Klasse. Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia τες, G. N. Bernardakis, Vol. IV. Lipsiae 1892. Bernardakis, G. Πλουτάρχεια. Φιλολογικὸς σύλλογος. Παρνασσὸς ἐπετηρίς. Ἔν ᾿Αϑήναις 1899, Bernardakis, G. Symbolae criticae et palaeographicae in Plutarchi Vitas parallelas et Moralia, Lipsiae 1879. (Euvres morales et auvres diverses de Plutarque trad. ... par V. Bétolaud. Tome III: Propos de table. Paris 1870. Blass, F, und Debrunner, A. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. 15. Aufl, bearb. von F. Rehkopf. Gottingen 1979, Blümner, H. Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Künste bei Griechen und Römern II-IV. Leipzig 1879-1887; Bd. 12. Aufl. Leipzig-Berlin 1912. Boisacq, É. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. 4° éd. Heidelberg 1950. Bolkestein, H. Adversaria critica et exegetica ad Plutarchi Quaestionum Convivalium librum primum et secundum. Amstelodami

1946, Bollaan, G. C. N. Animadversiones criticae in Plutarchi Moralia. Lugduni Batavorum 1879. Bücheler, F. Coniectanea. Rh. Mus. 54 (1899) 1-8. Bulletin of the History of Medicine. Busolt, G. Griechische Staatskunde I-I1. 3. Aufl. bearb. von H. Swoboda. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft IV:1:1.) München 1920-1926. ap. Clem. ap. Fuhrm. Castiglioni, L. Osservazioni critiche agli scritti morali di Plutarco. Reale Istituto Lombardo di scienze e lettere, Rendiconti 64

(1931) 879-909. ~~~ Rev. of Plutarchi Moralia, Vol. IV rec. C. Hubert. Gnomon 17 (1941) 251-257. Cat. cod. astr. Gr.

CFC CGF

Catalogus codicum astrologorum Graecorum. Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 1 ed. G. Kaibel. Berolini 3899.

ABBREVIATIONS

21

Chantraine

Chantraine, P. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Paris 1968-1974.

CIG CIL Clem.

Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum.

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Plutarch's Moralia, Vol. VIII: Table Talks, Books I-III, with an

English translation by P. A. Clement. (LCL no. 424.) LondonCambridge, Mass. 1969. CMG Cobet Coll. Alex. CPG

Corpus Medicorum Graecorum. Cobet, C. G. Variae lectiones. Mnem. 6 (1878) 1—48. Collectanea Alexandrina ed. 1. U. Powell. Oxonii 1925. Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum 1-II ed. E. L. Leutsch

et F. G. Schneidewin. Goettingi 1839-1851. Nachdr. Hildesheim CPh

cQ CR CSHB cw Daremberg-Saglio

1958. Classical Philology. The Classical Quarterly. The Classical Review. Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae.

The Classical Weekly. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines .. . rédigé ... de C. Daremberg ct E. Saglio.

Defradas

ap. Fuhrm.

Denniston? Dict. Bibl.

Denniston, J. D. The Greek Particles. 2nd ed. Oxford 1954. A Dictionary of the Bible ed. by J. Hastings et al. New York

Dich???

1901-1902. Anthologia Lyrica Graeca I-II editio secunda. Lipsiae 19361942; 1-ΠῚ editio tertia. Lipsiae 1949-1952.

DK

Diels, H. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker I-III. 6. verb. Aufl.

Doe.

von W. Kranz. Berlin 1951-1952. Doehner, Th. Quaestiones Plutarcheae I-IV. Lipsiae-Misenae 1840-1863.

Doe. Sat. Doe. Vind.

Doehner, Th. Satura critica. Gymn. Plauen 1874. Doehner, Th. Vindiciarum Plutarchearum liber. Zwickau 1864.

Doxogr. Gr.

Doxographi Graeci. Coll. et rec. H. Diels. Berolini 1879.

Dübn.

Plutarchi Scripta Moralia Graece et Latine ed. F. Dübner. Vol. II. Parisiis 1877.

Edmonds

Edmonds,

EGF Emp.

1957-1961. Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta ed. G. Kinkel. Lipsiae 1877. Emperius, A. Opuscula philologica et historica ed. F. G.

J. M.

The Fragments of Attic Comedy

I-III. Leiden

Schneidewin. Goettingae 1847. Erman Erman-Ranke

Ernout-Meillet* Faehse

Erman, A. Die Religion der Ägypter. Berlin-Leipzig 1934. Erman, A. Ägypten und ägyptisches Leben im Altertum, neu bearb. von H. Ranke. Tiibingen 1923. Ernout, A. & Meillet, A. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine. 4° éd. par J. André. Paris 1985. Faehse, M. G. Observationes criticae in Plutarchi ... Moralia et

in Hesychii Lexicon. Lipsiae 1820. ---, Animadversiones in Plutarchi Opera. Lipsiae 1825.

22 Farnell

ABBREVIATIONS Farnell, L. R. The Cults of the Greek States I-V. Oxford 18961909.

FGrHist FHG Forbes, Technology Franke Frisk

Fuhrm. Fuhrm. Images Gignac

Graf

Guthrie Handbuch NT Hani Hartm. Headlam Helmbold

Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 1-TII von F. Jacoby. Berlin-Leiden 1922-1958. Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum I-V ed. C. et Th. Müller, V. Langlois. Parísiis 1841-1872. Forbes, R. J. Studies in Ancient Technology I-IX. Leiden 19551972. Franke, R. Zur Kritik von Plutarchs Tischgesprächen. Jahrbücher für classische Philologie. Suppl. 1 (1855/6) 403-419. Frisk, H. Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg 1960-1972. Fuhrmann, F. Plutarque, (Euvres morales. Tome

IX: 1-2: Pro-

pos de table I- VI. Paris 1972-1978. Fuhrmann. F. Les images de Plutarque. Paris 1964. Gignac, F. T. A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Vol. II: Morphology. (Testi e documenti per lo studio dell'antiquità 55.) Milano 1981. Graf, E. Zu Plutarchs Symposiaka. Jahrbücher für classische Philologie 137 (1888) 557-562. Guthrie, W. K. C. A History of Greek Philosophy I-. Cambridge 1962-, Handbuch zum Neuen Testament hrsg. von H. Lietzmann. Hani, J. La religion égyptienne dans la pensée de Plutarque. Lille 1972. Hartman, J. J. De Plutarcho scriptore et philosopho. Lugduni Batavorum 1916. ap. Clem. Helmbold,

W.

C. Rev.

of Plutarchi Moralia,

Vol.

IV rec. C.

Hubert. CPh 36 (1941) 85-88. 777 Rev. of H. Bolkestein, Adversaria critica et exegetica. CPh Helmbold-O'Neil Herw.

44 (1949) 64-65. Plutarch's Quotations, compiled by W. C. Helmbold and E. N.

O'Neil. (Philological Monographs APA 19.) Baltimore 1959.

Herwerden, H. van, Plutarchea et Lucianea. Traiecti ad Rhenum

1877. =, Lectiones Rheno-Traiectinae. Lugduni Batavorum 1882. ——-, Ad Plutarchi Moralia, Mnem. 21 (1893) 97-104. —--, Novae curae criticae Moralium Plutarchi. Mnem. Hirsch.

Hoffl.

Hopfner, Tierkult

37 (1909)

202-223. Hirschig, G. A. Selectae emendationes in Plutarchi Symposiacis disputationibus. Philol, 4. (1849) 367-373.

Plutarchi Moralia, Vol. VIII: Table Talks, Books IV-VI, with

an English translation by H. B. Hoffleit, (LCL no. 424.) London-Cambridge, Mass. 1969.

Hopfner, Th. Der Tierkuit der alten Agypter. (Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien. Philosophisch-historische Klasse 57:2.) Wien 1913.

ABBREVIATIONS

23

Harvard Studies in Classical Philology.

Plutarchi Moralia, Vol. IV rec. et emend. C. Hubert. Lípsiae 1938. Plutarchi Chaeronensis quae supersunt omnia. Opera 1. G. Hutten. Vol XI. Tubingae 1798.

Indogermanische Forschungen. IG Tun.

Inscriptiones Graecae.

Iunius, H. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's Moralia ed.

Jahn

Basil., Nat. Libr., Amsterdam. Jahn, O. Ueber den Aberglauben

Jannot

Alten. Berichte Sächs. Ges. 17 (1855) 28-110. Jannot (Giannotti), D. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's

JHS JRS Kaltw.

Kees, Gótterglaube

des

bósen

Blicks

bei den

Moralia ed. Ald., Univ. Libr., Leiden. The Journal of Hellenic Studies. The Journal of Roman Studies. Plutarchs moralisch-philosophische Werke, übers. von 1. F. S. Kaltwasser. Theil V. Wien-Prag 1797. Kees, H. Der Gétterglaube im alten Agypten. (Mitteilungen der vorderasiatisch-ägyptischen Gesellschaft 45.) Leipzig 1941.

Kirk-Raven-

Schofield?

Kirk,

G.

S., Raven,

J. E. and Schofield,

M.

The Presocratic

Philosophers. 2nd ed. Cambridge 1983. Kron.

Kronenberg, A. J. Ad Plutarchi Moralia. Mnem.

52 (1924) 61-

112. ——-, Ad Plutarchi Moralia. Mnem.

Kühner-Blass?

Kühner-Gerth?

10 (1941) 33-47.

Kühner, R. Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. 1. Teil: Elementar- und Formenlehre I-I. 3. Aufl. von F. Blass. Hannover 1890-1892. Kühner, R. Ausfürliche Grammatik der griechiscihen Sprache. 2. Teil: Satziehre I-II. 3 Aufl. von B. Gerth.

KZ LCL Leon.

Hannover-Leipzig

1898-1904. (Kuhns) Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung. The Loeb Classical Library. Leonicus, N. Emendations copied by D. Jannot (Giannotti) in his copy

of Plutarch's

Moralia

ed.

Basil.,

Bibl.

Nat.,

Paris;

copied from this copy in a copy of Mor. ed. Ald., Bibl. Vat., Rome

(R. Aulotte,

Bibl. d'hum.

et renaiss.

21 (1959) 607f.);

copied by D. Jannot in a copy of Mor. ed. Ald., Univ. Libr., Leiden. Lobel-Page

Poetarum

LSJ

ford 1955. A Greek-English Lexicon, by H. G. Liddell and G. Scott, rev. by H. S. Jones. London 1940.

Madv.

Madvig, I. N. Adversaria critica ad scriptores Graecos et Latinos.

Mannebach Mél. Arch.

Lesbiorum Fragmenta ed. E. Lobel et D. Page. Ox-

Hauniae 1871. Aristippi εἰ Cyrenaicorum Fragmenta ed. E. Mannebach. Leiden-Kóln 1961. Ecole francaise de Rome. Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire.

ABBREVIATIONS

24

Murr

Meziriac, B. de, Notes written in three copies of Plutarch's ralia ed, Steph., Univ. Libr., Leiden. . Me Y be Pflanzenwelt der griechischen. Mythologie. Inns-

Mus. Script. Gr.

Musici Scriptores Graeci ... TEC. C, Janus. Lipsiae 1895.

Naber

Naber, S, A. Selecta, Ynem.

Mez.

bruck 1890. Nachdr, Groningen 1969.

16 (1888) 91-118.

.

7--, Observationes miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Vitas parallelas.

Mnem. 27 (1899) 156-220. Nachr. Gótt. Nauck? Neue Jahrb.

Nilsson, Gr. Feste Nilsson, Gr. Rel,*3

.

—--, Obseryationes miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moralia. Mnem. 28 (1900) 329-364. " Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Géttingen. Philologisch-historigche Klasse, uu Tragicorum Graecorum, Fragmenta, 2, ed. A. Nauck. Lipsiae 1889. Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum.

.

Nilsson, M. P. Griechische Feste von religiöser Bedeutung mit Ausschluss der Altischen, Leipzig 1906, Nilsson, M, P. Geschichte der griechischen Religion 1. 3. Aufl. ; n

2. Aufl. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft V:2:1-2.) München 1967, 1961.

OGI

Orph. Pape Papabasileios

Orientis Graeci. Inscriptiones Selectae [-II ed. A. G. Ditten-

berger. Lipsiae 1903-1995. Orphicorum Fragmenta coli. ©. Kern, Berolini 1922. Poetae Melici Graeci. Rg D, L. Page, Oxford 1962.

Papabasileios, G. A. Κριτικαὶ παρατηρήσεις εἰς ITAovtágxov

ta” Hound, ᾿Αϑηνᾶ 10 (1898) 167-242,

Pape-Benscler

Paton

777; Κριτκαὶ παρατηρήσεις. ᾿Αϑηνᾶ 14 (1902) 138-202. Pape, W. Worterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen. 3. Aufl. von G. A. Benseler. Braunschweig 1911, Nachdr. Graz 1959. Paton, W. R. Notes on the text of Plutarch's Quaestiones convivales. CR 14 (1900) 443. 445.

777: Notes on Plutarch's Quaestiones convivales. CR 15 (1901) 250-251, Patrologia Graeca ed, 1..p. Milne.

Prosopographia Imperii Romani. 2, eq. E. Groa g, A. Stein et al. Berolini

Post Preller- Robert* Proceed. Cambr,

Phil. Soc. Radermacher?

Re,

-Lipsiae 1933. Pohlenz, M. , ap. Hu, ap. Clem /Hoffl.

Preller, L, Griechische Mythologie 111. 4, Aufl . von C. Robert. Berlin 1894 1921.

Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society. L. Neutesta

Radermacher,

mentliche | Grammatik.

2.

Aufl. Tübingen 1995, Plutarchi Chgeronensis quae supersung omni a opera instruxit I. I. Reiske. Vot, Ill: Opera moralium et philosoph orum IU. Lipsiae 1777,

ABBREVIATIONS ΚΕ ΚΕΑ REG Reich.

Paulys

Realenzyklopädie

hrsg. von Revue des Revue des Plutarchs

25

der classischen

Altertumswissenschaft

G. Wissowa u. a. études anciennes. études grecques. Werke Bd. 34. Moralische Schrifien Bd. 15 übers. von

H. Reichardt. Stuttgart 1856. Rev. Hist. Rel. Rev. Phil. Rh. Mus. Rhet. Gr. Riv. di Fil.

Roscher's Lex. Myth.

Revue de l'histoire des religions. Revue de philologie. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie. Rhetores Graeci. Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica. Ausfürliches Lexikon der griechischen und rómischen Mythologie hrsg. von W. H. Roscher.

Rose, Arist. Pseu-

depigr. Salmas. Sandb.

Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus ed. V. Rose. Lipsiae 1863.

Salmasius, C. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's Moralia ed. Steph. (Wytt. Vol. I Praef. CXXVII.) Plutarch's Moralia, Vol. XV: Fragments ed. ... by F. H. Sand-

bach. (LCL no. 429.) London-Cambridge, Mass. 1969.

SEG Si.

Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Agypten. Schmid, W. & Stáhlin, O. Geschichte der griechischen Literatur I:1-5. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft VII:1:1-5.) München 1929-1948. Schwyzer, E. Griechische Grammatik 1-11. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft II:1:1-2.) München 1939-1940. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. Sieveking, W., ap. Hu.

Sitzungsber. Ak. Berlin

Sitzungsberichte der (Königlich) preussischen Akademie der Wis-

SB Schmid-Stáhlin

Schwyzer, Gr. Gr.

senschaften zu Berlin. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Snell

See TrGF.

Steph.

Plutarchi Chaeronensis Opuscula varia, quae ... Moralia opuscula vocantur ed. H. Stephanus. Parisiis 1572.

Stromberg, Pflanzen-

namen Stromberg, Theophrastea Susemihl

Strómberg, R. Griechische Pflanzennamen. (Göteborgs Hógsko-

las Arsskrift 46:1.) Göteborg 1940. Strómberg, R. Theophrastea. Studien zur botanischen Begriffsbildung. Göteborg 1937. Susemihl, F. Geschichte der griechischen Literatur in der Alexandrinerzeit I-II. Leipzig 1891-1892.

SVF

Stoicorum Veterum 1903-1905.

Syll?

Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum 1-IV A. G. Dittenberghero

TAPA

edita. Lipsiae 1915-1924. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association,

Fragmenta

I-III coll. I. ab Arnim.

Lipsiae

26 Thackeray

ABBREVIATIONS Thackeray, H. St.

J. A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek

I. Cambridge 1909.

Thes. Graec. Thes. Lat.

Thompson, Birds? Thompson, Fishes TrGF Tucker Turn.

Thesaurus Graecae Linguae. 2. ed. Hase-Dindorf-Dindorf. Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Thompson, D'A. W. A Glossary of Greek Birds. 2nd ed. London 1936. Thompson, D'A. W. A Glossary of Greek Fishes. London 1947. Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta I-IV ed. B. Snell, R. Kannicht, $. Radt. Géttingen 1971-1985. Tucker, T. G. Emendations in Strabo and Plutarch's Moralia. CQ 3 (1909) 99-103, Turnebus, H. Notes written in a copy of Plutarch's Moralia ed. Ald., Bibl. nat., Paris.

Usener, Epicurea Vulc.

Usener, H. Epicurea. Lipsiae 1887. Vulcobius, A. Scattered notes, most of which listed in the Ap-

Warmington

pendix of Plutarch's Moralia ed. Xyl. Francoforti 1599, ap. Ciem./Hoffl.

Wehrli Wellmann, Frag-

Wehrli, F. Die Schule des Aristoteles I-X. Basel 1944-1959.

mente

Die Fragmente der sikelischen Ärzte Akron,

Wifstrand, Eikota

Wil. Wytt. Wytt. Anim. Wytt. Lex. Xy.

Ziegler

Philistion und des

Diokles von Karystos. Bertin 1901. Wifstrand, A. Eikota I-VIII. Bulletin de la Société royale des lettres de Lund 1930/1:3, 1932/3:1, 1933/4:4, 1938/9:2, 1944/5:2, 1956/7:2, 1957/8:2, 1962/3:3. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von, ap. Hu. Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia ed. D. Wyttenbach. Vol. II. Oxonii 1797; 2. ed. Vol. ΠΙ:2. Lipsiae 1829. Wyttenbach. D. Animadversiones in Plutarchi opera Moralia. TTH. Lipsiae 1820-1834. Wyttenbach, D. Lexicon Plutarcheum. Oxonii 1830, Repr. Darmstadt 1962; ed. emendata. Lipsiae 1843, Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia . . . G. Xylandro interprete. Basiliae 1570. Plutarchi Chaeronensis ... Varig scripta, quae Moralia vulgo dicuntur ... multis mendarum millibus expu rgata ... a G. Xylandro. Basiliae 1574. Ziegler, K., ap. Hu,

COMMENTARY

BOOK

I

PROOEMIUM 612 C μισέω μνάμονα συμπόταν κτλ.: Adesp. frg. 141 Bergk*, Adesp. frg. 6 Diehl? (II 160), frg. 1002 (Adesp.) Page, also cited by Lucian. Symp. 3 μισῶ γάρ, qnoi xai ὁ ποιητικὸς λόγος, μνάμονα συμπόταν; Antipater, Anth. Pal. XI 31,4; Apostol. XI 71 c, Mant. II 22 (CPG II 533, 761). Plut. offers two alternative explanations for this proverbial

phrase, presumably to show his learning. Such multiple choice answers are typical of the προβλήματα literature (Ps.-Arist. Probl., Probl. ined.). Also Plut. Quaest. Rom., Quaest. Graec. and Quaest. nat.

belong to this genre. The second explanation is the usual one, sce CPG II 533, 761; the first one is not found elsewhere. Bolk. observes that

our passage seems to be reflected at Eustath. 770. 13 οὐ δεῖ γάρ, φασί, δέχεσϑαι, τουτέστι νοεῖν, uvápova, ὡς ἔνιοι, τὸν μεμνημένον χϑιζῶν ἁμαρτημάτων συμποσιαίων, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἄγαν ἐπιμελητὴν τοῦ συμποσίου.

μισοῦμεν

γὰρ

τὸν

ἐν

τοιούτοις

ἐπιμελούμενον

καί

ἐπιτάσσοντα. Bolk. supposes, rightly as it seems, that the false interpretation ἐπίσταϑμος = συμποσίαρχος which prevailed until Cobet, Mnem. 6 (1878) 25f. rejected it (still repeated, however, by LS7 ed. 1940),

was due to Erasmus, Adagii,

228.

However,

Cobet’s explana-

tion is not acceptable either: ἐπίσταϑμοι sunt milites in urbem recepti et per oppidanorum hospitia divisi. More plausible is Amoyt’s interpretation: ‘les hostelliers’; this was accepted by Groningen, Mnem.

(1959)

136f., and Fuhrm.

However,

the connection

12

of the terms

μνάμων and ἐπίσταϑμος remains uncertain. In Dorian states μνάμων was a common title of officials in charge of the registry, the transport,

the food supply, and other administrative functions implying registration and accountancy, cf. Busolt, Staatskunde? I 488 f.; Leg. Gortyn XI 16; Arist. Pol. 1321 Ὁ 38 καλοῦνται δὲ ἱερομνήμονες καὶ ἐπιστάται

καὶ μνήμονες καὶ τούτοις ἄλλα ὀνόματα σύνεγγυς. Bolk. (p. 49 n. 2) suggests that these ‘other names’ could be ἐπίσταϑμοι, and surmises that the title may have denoted an official.in charge of the public

32

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

612C

scales, the σταϑμός. However, one may ask why exactly that kind of civil servants should have been notorious for lack of culture in drinking. Groningen may be right in assuming that ἐπίσταϑμοι denoted the semi-official heads of σταϑμοί, inns, where officials and troops were staying, and that the use of the title μνάμων was extended to these innkeepers. Groningen’s suggestion that Plut. got this unusual inter-

pretation of the proverb from an author who was familiar with Sicilian matters is also plausible. If one posits, then, that the ἐπίσταϑμοι were official innkeepers who had to serve wine to troops, should we think

that they urged the soldiers to drink as much as possible or rather that their task was to keep their drinking within prescribed limits? Certainly the latter was true. À reference to Italian innkeepers at 643 D may concern these same ἐπίσταϑμοι: τὰ μὲν οὖν ' Oufjpov δεῖπνα χαίρειν ἐῶμεν᾽ ὑπολιμώδη γάρ ἐστι καὶ διψαλέα καὶ τοὺς ἑστιάρχας βασιλεῖς ἔχοντα τῶν ᾿Ιταλικῶν δεινοτέρους καπήλων, ὥστε παρὰ τὰς μάχας

-. . ἀπομνημογεύειν ἀκριβῶς, πόσον ἕκαστος .. . πέπωκε. The reason why these supervisors appeared vulgar and uncivil may have been their uncivil methods of restraining the soldiers, as compared with the

refined ways practised by the symposiarchs at the banquets of educated people. -- For opinions about bad manners at table, cf. Sept. sap. 147 F σύνδειπνος δὲ κεφαλαλγὴς καὶ βαρὺς xal ἀνάγωγος παντὸς μὲν οἴνου καὶ ὄψου πάσης δὲ μουσουργοῦ χάριν ἀπόλλυσι καὶ λυμαίνεται, καὶ οὐδ᾽ ἀπεμέσαι τὴν τοιαύτην ἀηδίαν ἕτοιμόν ἐστιν.

612 C Σύσσιε Σενεχίων: Plut. dedicated his Table Talks to Q. Sosius (Plut. always spells his name with double sigma) Senecio, and begins each of the nine books with a prooemium opening with an address to him. He is a participant of Talks I 1, 5, 111, 3, and IV 3 and appears as an erudite man interested in philosophy and literature. He was probably one of Plutarch's best Roman friends; in IV 3 he is a guest at the

wedding of Plutarch’s son, Autobulus, at Chaeronea. Plutarch’s close relations to Sosius are also illustrated by the many dedications he made to him: De prof. in virt., and probably all the Lives (expressly Thes., Dem., Dion). He was one of the most eminent magistrates under Trajan whose close friend he was. Plin. Ep. I 13 and IV 4 were addressed to him. He was consul in 99 and 107, but not in 102 too as ' stated by Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 688, or even in 103, see Groag,

RE s.v. Sosius (11) 1185f. Sosius perhaps belonged to the Sosii, the family of editors and booksellers (Hor. Ep. I 20. 2, Ars poet. 345). The Sosia Falconilla mentioned on two honorary inscriptions, Hesp.

10

612 C

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

33

(1941) 255-258, no. 61 (Athens), and CIL VIII 7066 (Cirta, Numidia) has been supposed to be his great-granddaughter. For details, see Jones, JRS 60 (1970) 98-104. According to Suda, s.v. Πλούταρχος Χαιρωνεύς, Plut. was invested with the consulate by Trajan. Ziegler, l. c. 658f., and Flaceliére, AC 32 (1963) 44 regard this as probable and suggest that Senecio played an intermediary part in arranging it. 612 D διὸ τήν ve λήϑην οἱ πάτριοι λόγοι καὶ τὸν νάρϑηκα và ϑεῷ συγκαϑιεροῦσιν: This comment on the proverb is not found in other

authors who quote it. Plut. also adds this explication when he quotes the proverb in “Ott καὶ γυναῖκα παιδευτέον, frg. 128 Sandb. Kron. unnecessarily changes λόγοι into νόμοι.

By the πάτριοι λόγοι Plut.

refers to the Dionysiac mysteries which he, as an initiate, knew well, cf. Cons. ad ux. 611 Ὁ 6 πάτριος λόγος καὶ τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα τῶν περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον ὀργιασμῶν, ἃ σύνισμεν ἀλλήλοις οἱ κοινωνοῦντες. The context indicates that these secret words have to

do with afterlife. The expectations of a blessed life after death may have come into the Dionysiac mysteries from Orphism; our knowledge of the development

is very scarce,

see W.

Burkert, Ancient Mystery

Cults (Cambridge, Mass. 1987) 87f., and cf. Apollod. Bibl. 1 15 εὗρε δὲ ᾿Ορφεὺς καὶ Διονύσου μυστήρια). We know nothing for certain as to the content of the πάτριοι λόγοι but presumably they concerned

exactly the role of Dionysus as a deliverer from death. The god’s rescuing of his mother Semele from Hades may belong here (Diod. IV 25. 4; Paus. II 31.2, 37.5; cf. Nilsson, Gr. Rel? I 600), and also his

connection with (the river) Lethe, cf. De sera 566 A ἔλεγε δὲ ταύτῃ τὸν Διόνυσον ἀνελϑεῖν καὶ τὴν Σεμέλην ἀναγαγεῖν ὕστερον᾽ καλεῖσϑαι δὲ Λήϑης τὸν τόπον. The connection of Lethe with Diony- © sus is attested to epigraphically at Ephesus in Hadrian’s time

(The

Coll. of Ancient Gr. Inscr. in the Brit. Mus. III 600. 29), and cf. below, 705 Β ἀλλά μοι δοκοῦσιν οὐκ ὀρϑῶς of παλαιοὶ παῖδα Λήϑης τὸν Διόνυσον (ἔδει γὰρ πατέρα) προσαγορεύειν. For the Dionysiac mysteries, see further H. Jeanmaire, Dionysos (Paris 1951) ch. 8; Nilsson, Gr. Rel? 1 599-601, id. Harvard Theol. Rev. 46 (1953) 175-202, id.

The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenistic and Roman Age (Lund 1957) ch.

8; Seaford,

CQ

31

(1981)

262f.

On

Lethe

as connected

with

Dionysiac mysteries, see Kroll, RE s.v. Lethe, 2142.47-2143; Stoll, Roscher’s Lex. Myth. 11 1956-1958; Verniére, REA 66 (1964) 22-32, — The νάρϑηξ, the fennel-stalk (Ferula communis L.), described by

Theophr. H. P. VI 2.7-8, was not only used as a ritual wand (ϑύρσος)

34

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

612 D

or a terrifying weapon in Bacchic rites (Eur. Bacch. 147, 762) but also as a schoolmaster’s cane. On vases this use is found as early as 500450, see Beazley, AJA 37 (1933) 400-403; also teachers of music and dance are represented with it. Cf. further Phanias, Anth. Pal. VI 294 (cf. also IV 1.54); Mart. X 62.10; Iuv. I 15; Schol. Eur. Or. 1492 (with

etymology) νάρϑηξ γοῦν ἐτυμολογεῖται παρὰ τὸ τοὺς νεαροὺς 0f yeıv. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 948 a 9 reports that soldiers caned each other with the νάρϑηξ before battle to warm themselves up. The effects of the strokes on the skin are discussed at Probl. 889 Ὁ 27 διὰ τί ὁ νάρϑηξ

τὰ κύκλῳ τῆς πληγῆς ποιεῖ ἐρυϑρά, τὸ δὲ μέσον λευκόν; πότερον ὅτι ἀποπιέζει τὸ αἷμα ἐκ τοῦ μέσου, καϑὸ μάλιστα προσπίπτει περιφερὴς àv; At 889 b 34 the effects are derived from its lightness, and this quality is jestingly suggested here by Plut. as the reason for its convivial use, so also at De coh. ira 462 B ἀλλὰ χωρὶς ὀργῆς καὶ μέϑη

κοῦφόν

ἐστιν

ὁ γὰρ

tod

ϑεοῦ

vdodnE

ἱκανὸς

κολαστής τοῦ

μεϑύοντος, and below, 714E ὥσπερ ὁ ϑεὸς τὴν νάρϑηκα τοῖς μεϑύουσιν ἐνεχείρισε κωφότατον βέλος καὶ μαλακώτατον ἀμυντήριον, ὅπως, ἐπεί τάχιστα παίουσιν, ἥκιστα βλάπτωσιν. Cf. also the

mock combat at Xen. Cyr. II 3.17, and the symbolic pyrrhic dance described at Athen. 631 AB. At drinking-parties the Bacchic wand should be a memento for the revellers to keep friction and wrath absent, confining themselves to such controversies as can be ‘solved’

by a mild stroke of the fennel-stalk. The φορτικοὶ ἐπίσταϑμοι form ἃ negative contrast.

612 D τῶν piv ἀτόπων ἡ λήϑη τῷ ὄντι σοφὴ κατ᾽ Εὐριπίδην; This association with Or. 213 ὦ πότνια λήϑη τῶν κακῶν, ὡς εἶ σοφή is out of place here is this convivial context. Plut. quotes the line, likewise rather unsuitably, at De curios. 522 D. There are two main sides to the

nature of Dionysus, the essentially serious one of the cult and the mysteries on the one hand, and the playful, superficial carelessness associated with wine, as displayed in convivial literature. Dionysus was thought of as the liberator from evil and Hades, see O. Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte 11 (München 1906) 1430£.; W. Burkert, Ancient Mystery Cults (Cambridge, Mass. 1987) 21-23, 87, 100f. Plutarch's careless mixing of these two aspects of

Dionysus here is striking. He apparently equalizes ἡ λήϑη τῶν ἀτόπων (sc. τῶν παρὰ πότων λεγομένων) and ἢ λήϑη τῶν κακῶν (sc. ἔργων) of Orestes. Moreover, Plut. ignores that it was sleep, and not wine, that brought Lethe to Orestes. He could have chosen a more suitable

612 D

passage,

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

as being more

convivial, from

Eur., Bacch.

35

282 ὕπνον te

λήϑην τῶν καϑ' ἡμέραν κακῶν δίδωσιν (sc. ὁ Σεμέλης γόνος). 621 D τῷ φιλοποιῷ ... μάχεσϑαι τῆς τραπέζης: Plut. often repeats the idea that the main purpose of the banquet is to make new friends and to please the old ones, e.g. 621 C διαγωγὴ yao ἐστιν ἐν οἴνῳ τὸ

συμπόσιον εἰς φιλίαν ὑπὸ χάριτος τελευτῶσα. Plut. dedicates the prooemium of the 4th book of the Talks entirely to that theme. Inebriation is not in itself a purpose; it may be a means for obtaining friendly relations: Sept. sap. 156 C οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ τῆς ᾿Αφροδίτης ἔργον ἐστὶ συνουσία καὶ μεῖξις, σὐδὲ τοῦ Διονύσου μέϑη καὶ οἶνος, ἀλλ᾽ ἣν ἐμποιοῦσι διὰ τούτων φιλοφροσύνην καὶ πόϑον καὶ ὁμιλίαν ἡμῖν καὶ συνήϑειαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, 156 D ὁ Διόνυσος ὥσπερ ἐν πυρὶ τῷ οἴνῳ μαλάττων τὰ ἤϑη ... φιλίας ἐνδίδωσιν. And among cultivated and spiritual men conversation is far more effective than wine for that aim: I. c. ἀλλ᾽ ai Μοῦσαι καϑάπερ κρατῆρα νηφάλιον ἐν μέσῳ προϑέμεναι τὸν λόγον ... ἐγείρουσι τούτῳ ... τὴν φιλοφροσύνην, ἐῶσαν τὰ πολλὰ τὴν otvoxónv ἀτρέμα κεῖσϑαι κρατῆρος ὕπερϑεν. Plut. Cato Mai. 25.4 ascribes a high estimation of banquetal company even to the grumpy Cato: τὴν δὲ τράπεζαν ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα φιλοποιὸν

ἡγεῖτο. 612 D τῶν φιλοσύφων τοὺς ἐλλογιμωτάτους ἀντιμαρτυροῦντας κτλ.: Plut. adduces the large number of famous authors of convivial works in his first prooemium in order to warrant his projekt. Such references,

proposed to justify his literary ambitions, he also gives at the beginning of De cap. ex inim. 86 C. — All the convivial works of the authors mentioned here are lost except those of Plato and Xenophon. We do not know if Aristotle wrote both a Symp. (quoted by Athen. 674 F and recorded by Diog. Laert. V 22 in his list of Aristotle’s works, also

suggested by Schol. Theocr. III 21) and also a Περὶ μέϑης (not in the list of D. L. nor in any other ancient index, see Arist. Frag. pp. 1-22 Rose, but cited by Athen. 44 D, 429 C, 447 A, 464 C, 496 F, and Plut. below, 650 A). Perhaps the two titles designated the same work, so L. Moraux, Les listes anciennes des ouvrages d'Aristote (Louvain 1951) 33

n. 33. Rose, Arist. Pseudepigr. 120 f. suggested that what is cited as Περὶ μέϑης might have been a part of, or a problem discussed in, the Symp. The work called Νόμοι ovooıtıxot, listed by Diog. Laert. V 26, is, of course, another work. - The Symp. of Speusippus is mentioned only here, cf. P. Lang, De Speusippi Academici scriptis (Diss. Bonnae

36

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

1911) 34, 85f. His Πλάτωνος παράδειπνον,

612 D

or ἐγκώμιον (frg. 27

Lang; Diog. Laert. HI 2, IV 5) was a laudatory, not a sympotic, work. ~ The Symp. of Epicur. is well known. Plut. quotes it or reports from it at 652 A, 653 B, Adv. Col. 1109 E. Athen. cites the work at 177 B, 186 E, 187 B; cf. Diog. Laert. X 28; Usener, Epicurea, 115-119.

Epicurus' 5ymp. probably lacked a prooemium and a dramatic frame, see R. Hirzel, Der Dialog | (Leipzig 1895) 363f.; J. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 208f. — Prytanis and Hieronymus, Peripatetics of the 3rd c. B. C., are little known. Nothing is known of the literary work of Prytanis (Ziegler, RE s.v. (5)). He may be the writer who appears on an inscription found in the Agora (Meritt, Hesp. 4 (1935) 525, no. 39.11, dated 226/5). For Hieronymus of Rhodes, see Daebritz, RE s.v.

(12) 1561-1564. He wrote one Περὶ μέϑης, cf. Athen. 424 F, 499 F (frgs. 27-28 Wehrli). This work may be identical with the Symp. (frg. 25), which is only mentioned here. This is the opinion of Wehrli (pp. 35 f.). Diog. Laert. IV 41 f. mentions a reunion of friends arranged by Hieronymus to celebrate the birthday of Halcyon, the son of Antigonus Gonatas, and that on that occasion there were some philosophic discussions. M. Schmidt, Didymi ... fragmenta (Lipsiae 1854) 368, thinks that H. may have reported these in his Symp. Plut. mentions Hieronymus below, 626 A. — Dion of Alexandria, an Academic of the

first c. B. C. and pupil of Antiochus of Ascalon (Hirzel, o. c. I 420f.; Martin, o. c. 196f.; Arnim, RE s.v. (14) 847) is said to have been poisoned in Rome on a visit there as the leader of a delegation to prevent the return of Ptolemaeus Auletes to power (Strab. XVII 796; Dio Cass. XXXIX 14; Cic. Pro Cael. 21.51). His Symp. is not mentioned elsewhere; according to Athen. 34 B Dion regarded the Egyptians as φίλοινοι xai φιλοπόται. 612 E φήϑης τε δεῖν κτλ.: This sentence has been used as an argument for the authenticity

of the

Talks

by

E.

Graf,

‘Plutarchisches’.

In:

Commentationes philologae ... O. Ribbeckio ... (Lipsiae 1888) 59;

Hirzel, o. c. 11 224; Abramowiczówna, Das Altertum 8 (1962) 85. This is true to a certain extent; the persons, places; occasions etc. mention-

ed in the work are certainly real, but the discussions are obviously fictive for the most part. The phrase is a τόπος, cf. the dedication in

Ps.-Plut. De fato 568 C πειράσομαι ἐπιστεῖλαί oot, φίλτατε Πείσων,

ἐπειδὴ σὺ τοῦτο ἠξίωσας,

612 E

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

37

612 Ε τῶν σποράδην ... φιλολογηϑέντων: In the prooemium of the second book (629 D) Plut. states that he wrote down the talks σποράδην ... ὡς ἕκαστον εἰς μνήμην ἦλϑεν. By these passages he seems to apologize for the fairly mixed and unsystematic disposition of

the work — which he perhaps composed in this way in order to increase the impression of authenticity. 612 E £v τε Ρώμῃ: It is only for one banquet (VIII 7-8) that Plut. expressly mentions that it took place in Rome. Talks that can with some probability be located in Rome are: I 9, V 7 and 10, VII 4 (Mestrius Florus stated as the host), and I 5, II 3 which took place in

Senecio’s

home.

The

beginning

of VIII

7 (727 B)

eig

Ρώμην

ἀφικομένῳ μοι διὰ χρόνου shows that Plut. then returned to Rome

after a long interval. We do not know if he visited Rome more than twice, but there are indications that he did (Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 653-656; R. H. Barrow, Plutarch and his Times (London 1967) 37-39; C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 20-24. 612 E παρούσης ἅμα τραπέξης καὶ κύλικος: This pair also appears at De tu. san. 124 C ἄν té wc ... παρῇ δὲ τῇ κύλικι καὶ τῇ τραπέζῃ μετὰ

προϑυμίας καὶ φιλοφροσύνης, cf. also Sept. sap. 159 E τράπεζαι καὶ κρατῆρες; 1 Cor. 10.21 τράπεζα ... ποτήριον κυρίου. Fuhrm. rightly notes that the two words refer to the two parts of the banquet, the δεῖπνον and the συμπόσιον. However, this concerns Greek practice in the first place; Roman custom allowed for some drinking also at the dinner, to judge from Petron. Cena Trim. 34.1, 39.1; Hor. Sat. II 8,

141f.; see H. Blümner, 1911) 399.

Die römischen Privataltertümer? (München

612 E φιλολογηϑέντων: Abram. observes that Plut. wrote this verb in

exactly this form as the very last word of the entire work, thus using it as clasps, as it were, to enclose the work as a whole and so to advertise the typical spirit of these meetings of cultivated people, passionately interested in learning, reasoning and discussion. If this was intentional is, however, open to question. 612 E πρὸς τοῦτο γενόμενος: Hartm. would read τούτῳ, by reference to De tranqu. an. 464 F γενέσϑαι πρὸς οἷς ἐβούλου. Bolk. showed that

the construction with the dative is more frequent than that with the accusative, which Plut. has at Anton. 37.6 πρὸς τὸ τάχιον ἐπανελϑεῖν

38

TABLE TALKS I PROOEMIUM

612 E

... γενόμενον, Nic. 5.2 πρός δημοσίας χρείας τινὰς καὶ ἀσχολίας ὄντος; it is often used by Polybius.

612 E τρία μὲν ἤδη σοι πέπομφα τῶν βιβλίων, ... πέμψω δὲ καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ταχέως: Only in VI 1 (686 E) does Plut. mention that he sent the other books; perhaps this means that he sent each of these separately. - Epistolary tenses (perf., aor., imperf.) are rare in Greek literature. Early examples are Isocr. 1 2 ἀπέσταλκά oov τόνδε τὸν λόγον; Ps.-Plat. Ep. XII 359 D τὰ δὲ παρ᾽ ἐμοὶ ὑπομνήματα περὶ ὧν ἐπέστειλας ... ἀπέσταλκά σοι; see further Naylor, CR 18 (1904) 206 £. Epistolary tenses are found rarely in NT, cf. Acta 23.30 ἔπεμψα, 1 Petr. 5.12 ἔγραψα, 2 Joh. 12 ἐβουλήϑην, 3 Joh. 13 εἶχον. In Ptolemaic papyri epistolary tenses are more common, especially the formula ὑγίαινον δὲ καὶ αὐτός, which is more frequent than the present, see Mayser 11:1. 138 with n. 1 and, for the perf., 183f.

612 E ἑκάστου δέκα προβλήματα περιέχοντος: Ten is also the number of ζητήματα in Quaest. Plat. 612 E ἀπροσδιόνυοσ᾽ : Here: ‘unbecoming to Dionysus’, like ἄμουσα, The word was probably coined on the proverb οὐδὲν πρὸς Διόνυσον! τί ταῦτα

πρὸς A., cf. below,

on 615 A. At 671 E the word

means

‘unconnected with/unrelated to Dionysus’. TALK 1 612 E εἰ δεῖ φιλοσοφεῖν παρὰ πότον: This talk is imitated by Macrob. Sat. VII 1. Macrobius’ use of Plutarch’s Talks was treated exhaustively by H. Linke, Quaestiones de Macrobii Saturnalium fontibus and G. Wissowa, De Macrobii Saturnalium fontibus capita tria (both diss. Vratislaviae 1880). — By putting this question at the very beginning of his work Plut. shows that he wants to define its scope. He declares his opinion about the place of philosophy at banquets expressively in the prooemium of Talk VIII 716 D οἱ φιλοσοφίαν, ὦ Σόσσιε Σενεκίων, ἐκ τῶν συμποσίων ἐκβάλλοντες οὐ ταὐτὸ ποιοῦσν τοῖς τὸ φῶς ἀναιροῦσιν, ἀλλὰ χεῖρον. But for all his enthusiasm for philosophy Plut. makes clear in this initial discussion that too difficult or serious or controversial philosophical subjects should be avoided (613 C, 615 AB). He therefore accepts (613 B) the definition of philosophy as τέχνην περὶ βίου οὖσαν. Abram. correctly observes that Plut. by this

612 Ε

TABLE TALKS I 1

39

wide definition tends to remove the difference between φιλοσοφεῖν and φιλολογεῖν (the two concepts appear as closely related in Plat.

Rep. 582 E but are in marked opposition in Porphyr. V. Plot. 14 and Procl. In Plat. Tim. 127 B). By his wide, unprecise use of φιλοσοφεῖν Plut. makes the word mean almost 'give the conversation a scientific touch’, and φιλόλογος means ‘being capable of φιλοσοφεῖν᾽, as at 613 D àv μὲν yàg πλείονας ἔχῃ φιλολόγους τὸ συμπόσιον ...

ἀφήσομεν αὐτοὺς φιλοσοφεῖν. This situation is compared with the opposite when the majority of the quests are not φιλόλογοι and the

φιλόσοφος ἀνήρ has to dispense with philosophic talk (613 F). The virtually synonymous meaning of φιλολογεῖν with the ‘Plutarchean’ concept of φιλοσοφεῖν is apparent at De tu. san. 133 BC: when athletic trainers assert that παρὰ δεῖπνον φιλολογεῖν is noxious to digestion, it

is answered that the most difficult problems should be avoided. It is unjust, then, to blame Plut. for not showing a proper, profound and philosophical attitude in the Talks. Such ambitions are alien to this literary genre. The purpose is pleasant, intelligent conversation rather than investigations: one should search for the truth only as long as that can be done without much effort and only if it implies a moment of

entertainment. Cf. also Varro ap. Gell. XIII 11.4 sermones igitur id temporis (i.e. in convivio) habendos censet non super rebus anxiis aut tortuosis, sed iucundos atque invitabiles et cum quadam inlecebra et

voluptate utiles. 612 F^ Αρίστων:

Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 668 supposes that this

person is identical with the Ariston whom Plutarch's father calls his ἀνεψιός αἱ De soll. an. 965 C. Jones, HSCP 74 (1970) 232 n. 15 suggests that this cousin is identical with the Ariston appearing on three inscriptions of Thespiae (BCH 26 (1902) 298-301 nos. 18-20).

We are not entitled to think that this Ariston is identical ᾿Αριστίων who appears in ΠῚ 9, VI 7 and 10; see on 657 B.

with

612 F ἐπ᾽ οἴνῳ: Bern. unnecessarily changed into £v οἴνῳ. Bolk. refers to 711 D ἐπὶ τραγήμασι xoi μύροις (ἔν οἴνῳ precedes); Plat. Symp. 214 B ἐπὶ τῇ κύλικι; Epict. II 19.8 ἐπὶ συμποσίῳ. Plut. wanted to variate the construction; £v οἴνῳ precedes and follows. 612 F οἰκοδέσποιναν:

A

very

common,

but not

acceptable,

word

according to Poll. X 21 τὸ κοινότατον τουτὶ καὶ μᾶλλον τεϑρυλημένον, τὸν οἰκοδεσπότην. καὶ τὴν οἰκοδέσποιναν, οὐκ

612 F

TABLE TALKS ΤΊ

40

literature; ἀποδέχομαι μὲν τοὔνομα. These words are seldom found in

they mostly occur in the NT and in papyri. Plut. uses οἰκοδέσποινα trice in Coni. praec.: 140 C, 141 D, F.

613 A τοὺς Πέρσας ὀρϑώς φασι μὴ ταῖς γαμεταῖς xvÀ.: Plut. tells us the same thing, specifically of the kings of Persia and obviously as a ptimary version, at Coni. praec. 140 B τοῖς τῶν Περσῶν βασιλεῦσιν αἱ γυναῖκες

γνήσιαι

παρακάϑηνται

δειπνοῦσι

συνεστιῶνται᾽

καὶ

βουλόμενοι δὲ παίζειν καί μεϑύσκεσϑαι ταύτας μὲν ἀποπέμπουσι,

τὰς δὲ μουσουργοὺς καὶ παλλακίδας καλοῦσιν, ὀρθῶς τοῦτό γ᾽ αὐτὸ ποιοῦντες, ὅτι τοῦ συνακολασταίνειν καὶ παροινεῖν οὐ μεταδιδόασι ταῖς γαμεταῖς. The occurrences of the stigmatized word οἰκοδέσποινα

in the contexts of both passages confirm their connection. Here Plut. uses the report secondarily as a picture. The attribution of the custom to the Persians is curious, since the Greeks did exactly the same themselves,

and especially as Plutarch’s statement

does

not receive

support elsewhere. Hdt. V 18 reports to the contrary that both wives and mistresses took part in Persian banquets: ἡμῖν νόμος ἐστὶ toiot Πέρσῃσι, ἐπεὰν δεῖπνον προτιϑώμεϑα μέγα, τότε καὶ τὰς παλλακὰς

καὶ τὰς κουριδίας γυναῖκας ἐσάγεσθαι παρέδρους...

εἶπε πρὸς

ταῦτα ᾿ Αμύντης, ὦ ΠΙέρσαι, νόμος μὲν ἡμῖν γέ got οὐκ οὗτος, ἀλλὰ

nexogtobor ἄνδρας γυναικῶν. But this sole passage is not reason enough to think that Persian wives were normally present at banquets;

rather it is sage to mistrust Hdt. on this point. See Legrand’s note in his ed. (Bude). Athen. 145 D is undecided: τὰ δὲ πλεῖστα ὁ βασιλεὺς μόνος ἀριοτᾷ καὶ δειπνεῖ, ἐνίοτε δὲ καὶ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτῷ συνδειπνεῖ καὶ

τῶν υἱῶν ἔνιοι. Καὶ παρὰ τὸ δεῖπνον ἄδουσί τε καὶ ψάλλουσιν αἱ παλλακαὶ

P

αὐτῷ. In Sept. Sap. the girls, Melissa and Eumetis,

acr

stay

and also part of the drinking-party (148 CD, 150 B, D

,

nking grows heavier (155 E) they leave.

613 A παλλακίσι: Plut. uses this old (H. (Hom.) form more often than the later παλλακή, especially in the Lives. The contrast between wives and concubines here is noticeable becaus e it was preferably the ἑταῖραν and the μουσουργοί who wer € present at drinking-parties. The

je

ys

domestic servants (Public.

15.5

εἶδεν ἐν οἰκίᾳ

might occasionally w ita βαλανεῖον A πολλαχιδῶν. δίαιταν), who were called in from car M table (Antiphon I 19), while entertainers cf. De tu. san. 133 B νεανίσκων ὑπὸ τοῦ πορνοβοσκοῦὉ παρὰ ae πότον ἐπιβουλευομένων καλὰς καὶ πολυτελεῖς

613 A

TABLE TALKS I 1

41

εἰσάγοντος ἑταίρας; Athen. 531 B 6 δὲ Στράτων ner’ αὐλητρίδων καὶ ψαλτριῶν

καὶ

κιϑαριστριῶν

κατεσκευάζετο

τὰς

συνουσίας

καὶ

μετεπέμπετο πολλὰς μὲν ἑταίρας ἐκ Πελοποννήσου, πολλὰς δὲ μουσουργοὺς ἐξ ᾿Ιωνίας, ... δοῦλος ὧν τῇ φύσει τῶν ἡδονῶν, id. 129A ἐπεισβάλλουσιν αὐλητρίδες καὶ μουσουργοὶ καὶ σαμβυκίστotal τινες "PóOvat, ἐμοὶ μὲν γυμναὶ δοκῶ, πλὴν ἔλεγόν τινες αὐτάς ἔχειν χιτῶνας. For the erotic function of these artists, cf. Amat.

760 CD, tinction τὰς μὲν ἡμέραν

Adv. Col. 1127 C μηδ᾽ ἐξ ἑταιρῶν παιδοποιεῖσθαι. A disbetween the two kinds of paramours is made by Dem. LIX 122 γὰρ ἑταίρας ἡδονῆς ἕνεκ᾽ ἔχομεν, τὰς δὲ παλλακὰς τῆς καϑ' θεραπείας τοῦ σώματος.

613 A τὴν ὑποκριτικὴν ἐπεισάγοντας: The use of dramatic and declamatory entertainments at banquets is the subject of lively discus-

sions in Talk VII 8 τίσι μάλιστα χρηστέον ἀκποάμασι παρὰ δεῖπνον; The new comedy, notably Menander, was especially popular (673 B, 712 B). ᾿Ακροάματα were recommended (713 EF) as a means of preventing or checking animated disputes at table. The actors sometimes dominated the party, which is censured at 621 B μὴ περιόψεσθαι (τὸ συμπόσιον) ... σχηνὴν καὶ ϑυμέλην (γινόμενον), cf. also 715 D ὀρχηστάς τε καὶ κιϑαριστὰς οὐδέν τι χεῖρον ἐν συμποσίοις ἢ ϑεάτροις πράττοντας. The entertainments were varied in kind already in classical times (Xen. Symp. 2.1 ff.: pantomime, acrobatics, dancing)

and even more so later (Suet. Aug. 74 aut acroamata et histriones aut etiam triviales ex circo ludios interponebat ac frequentius aretalogos. See further Hug, RE s.v. Symposion, 1269f.; Mau, RE s.v. ἀκρόαμα. 613 A οὐδὲ γὰρ ᾿Ισοκράτη τὸν σοφιστήν: The high estimation in which people held Isocrates was certainly not shared by Plut. To him the epithet σοφιστής is negative, cf. 621 B (συμπόσιον) σχολὴν σοφιστοῦ γινόμενον (my corr.: γινομένην T), 710 B πράγματ᾽ ἔχομεν ἀμυνόμενοι βαϑυπώγωνα σοφιστὴν ἀπὸ τῆς Στοᾶς. Plut. is especially scornful towards the orators in De glor. Ath. (350 C-F), curiously enough, considering that this work is a rhetorical essay, probably

written by the young Plut. (Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 726 f.). As an adherent of Platonic views Plut. often contrasts σοφιστής with φιλόσοφος, e.g. at De aud. poet. 46 E oi ... νέοι... δραπετεύοντες

ἐκ φιλοσοφίας ... ἐπὶ τὰς προσηνεῖς καὶ ἁπαλὰς ἀποστρέφοντες ὁμιλίας τὰ ὦτα κολακῶν τινῶν ἢ σοφιστῶν ἀνωφελεῖς ... φωνὰς χατᾳδόντων. -- The exclamation by Craton that follows here is to make clear Plutarch’s negative attitude.

42

TABLE TALKS T 1

613 A

613 A δεομένων: sc. αὐτῶν, indefinite (= ‘one’) or τῶν συμποτῶν. The isolated participle made R. Volkmann, Observationes miscellae (Jauer 1872) 4 suspect that something had fallen out, as compared with Macrob. Sat. VII 1.4 Isocrates ... cum in convivio a sodalibus oraretur, but cf. 645 Β γεγονότων

(sc. ἡμῶν),

692 C

διερωμένου

(sc.

οἴνου), 703 D οἰομένων (indefinite), 703 Ε ποιουμένων (sc. τῶν βασιλέων), De Pyth. or. 405 E γιγνομένων (sc. συμποτῶν or τινῶν).

613 A ἐν οἷς μὲν ἐγὼ δεινός, xth.: The doubts (Cobet, Hartm.) about the construction δεινὸς ἔν τινι instead of δεινός τινι, so at Ps.-Plut. V. X or. 838 F, were effectively eliminated by Bolk., cf. De aud. poet.

31 E τὸν δεινὸν ἐν τῷ διαλέγεσϑαι. Δεινός is also construed with ἀμφί, eic, κατά, περί. 613 A ὁ Κράτων: Once again a person is introduced without any presentation. According to Abram. this is an elegant way of conveying an impression of authenticity: by the use of the definite article Plut. implies that Craton is well-known to Senecio, so far neglecting exoteric readers. He is probably identical with the Craton presented as 6 γαμβρὸς ἡμῶν at 620 A. Plut. mentions two further γαμβροί, Firmus (636 A) and Patrocleas (642 C, 700 E). These were certainly not sonsin-law of Plut., seeing that there is decisive evidence that he had no other (elder) daughters than Timoxena who died at the age of two (Cons. ad ux. 610 E) and who was born after four sons (608 C). The decisive point is Plutarch's notice (608 B) that he got the message of the child's death from his Qvyoxoióij, normally *daughter's daughter’, at Tanagra, where she was apparently married. This meaning is, of course, impossible here; it would mean that Plut. and his wife were

near sixty at that time. Thus ϑυγατριδῇ must mean ‘niece’, as at Dion. Hal. Lys. 21 (but [.c. 27 (515) the word means ‘granddaughter’), cf. Babut, REG 94 (1981) 59-61. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 651. 26-43,

following Wil., may be right in supposing that the γαμβροί were married to Plutarch's nieces, but since we have no evidence that they were younger than Plut., they may equally well have been brothers-inlaw, either married to his sisters, or brothers of his wife. The latter is

suggested by Abram. by reference to Soph. O.R. 70 where Oedipus calls Creon his γαμβρός. The opinion of C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 26 that Plut. ‘had apparently married young, and had several sons and daughters’ (cf. also P. H. De Lacy and B. Einarson, Plutarch’s Mor. LCL VII 575f.) is unwarranted. - Craton is

613 A

TABLE TALKS I 1

43

mentioned together with a certain Zenon at 669 C where it is implied that both are physicians (see ad loc.). The physician Craton of Gargettos appearing on /G? II 5935 cannot be identified with our C. since the

inscription is dated in the late 2nd c. A. D. 613 B περιόδους αἷς ἔμελλεν Χαρίτων ἀνάστατον γενέσϑαι συμπόσιον: Χαρίτων has traditionally (from Xyl. on) been interpreted

as gen. obj. going with ἀνάστατον.

Bolk. argues that it goes with

συμπόσιον as gen. poss., which is supported by Flaceliére, AC 39 (1970) 595, and Fuhrm.: ‘ces périodes faites pour jeter le trouble

jusque dans un banquet des Graces’. But Bolk. is not able to offer any parallel;

the passages

he cites are irrelevant:

De

garr.

514 ( πᾶν

ἀνάστατον ἐποίει συμπόσιον (without a qualifier), Cato Min. 67.2 6 πότος ἔσχε μοῦσαν πολλὴν καὶ χάριν (χάρις without any connection with the concept οἵ ἀνάστατος). (Bolk. also misinterprets Bases,

Adnva 11 (1899) 220f.: Bases only criticizes Bern. for his addition

(τὸ) συμπόσιον; he keeps the traditional interpretation: δι᾽ ὧν ϑὰ ἐγίνοντο

ἀνάστατοι,

ϑὰ

ἐτρέποντο

εἰς

φυγὴν

συμποσιάζουσαν

Χάριτες.) In spite of the lack of evidence Bolk. interprets: ‘Isocrates

comprehensionibus suis ipsarum Gratiarum convivium conturbare atque evertere potuit'. One observes that ‘ipsarum’ does not correspond to any word in the text (so also ‘jusque’ Fuhrm.); one would need

(xoi) Χαρίτων. But the genitive is best interpreted as seperative, parallel to Schol. Pind. P. IV 467 óc xoi αὐτὸς ἀνάστατος γέγονε τῆς πατρίδος, and may be rendered 'the banquet would be drifting away

from/deprived of (the presence of) the Charites'. A variant (with prep.) of this construction is found at 632 E (= TrGF I p. 257) κὰκ δόμων ἀνάστατον. — For the absence of the article at συμπόσιον, cf.

below, 613 C καιρόν, 681 D αἰδοῖα. 613 B ἕτερόν ἐστι τὸ φιλοσοφίας: Bolk. supports τὸ (τῆς) q. Re. by

reference to parallels from the Talks, but the fact that the article is normally used is not reason enough for adding it, cf. above, and 672 D περὶ τῶν τῆς ψυχῆς xai σώματος ἡδονῶν, ((106) σώματος Bern.). 613 B φιλοσοφίας, ἣν τέχνην περί βίον οὖσαν: This ethical definition

of philosophy is first found in Epicur. frg. 219 Us. ᾿Επίκουρος μὲν ἔλεγε τὴν φιλοσοφίαν ἐνέργειαν εἶναι λόγοις καὶ διαλογισμοῖς τὸν εὐδαίμονα βίον περιποιοῦσαν. The term τέχνη περὶ τὸν βίον is specifically Stoic but is never explicitly equalized with φιλοσοφία.

44

TABLE TALKS I 1

613 B

Philosophy is regarded as a means and is defined as the training or cultivation of habits and character for attaining wisdom, which is knowledge of how to live κατὰ φύσιν, cf. SVF II 36 τὴν φιλοσοφίαν

φασὶν ἐπιτήδευσιν εἶναι σοφίας, τὴν δὲ σοφίαν, ἐπιστήμην ϑείων te καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων πραγμάτων, ibid. II 35 οἱ μὲν οὖν Στωϊκοὶ ἔφασαν τὴν μὲν σοφίαν εἶναι... ἐπιστήμην, τὴν δὲ φιλοσοφίαν ἄσκησιν ἐπιτηδείου τέχνης. Since Stoic wisdom/knowledge concerned practice

in the first place, it was equalized with ‘art of life’, cf. Clem. Paed. II 25.3 τελεία γὰρ fj σοφία ϑείων οὖσα καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων πραγμάτων ἐπιστήμη ... τέχνη γίνεται περὶ βίον, and φρόνησις was used as a

synonym of σοφία, cf. SVF III 598 of δὲ Στωϊκοὶ ... φασὶ τὴν φρόνησιν, ἐπιστήμην οὖσαν ἀγαϑῶν καὶ κακῶν καὶ οὐδετέρων, τέχνην ὑπάρχειν περὶ τὸν βίον. Muson. ap. Stob. II p. 245.3 W. concludes that ἐπιστήμη δὲ περὶ βίον οὐχ ἑτέρα τις ἢ φιλοσοφία ἐστί, implicitly equating, then, φιλοσοφία with τέχνη περὶ τὸν βίον. The

term is scrutinized by Sext. Emp. Adv. math. ΧΙ 168-199, and he often mentions it, see Janácek's index to Mau’s ed., s.v. βίος. For other frequent mentions; see Cic. Acad. II 8.23 Reid with note; P. Wend-

land, Quaestiones Musonianae (Berolini 1886) 12 n. 2. — Although Plut. repudiated Stoicism in principle he probably preferred the Stoic

definition to that of Arist. Metaph. 993 b 20 τὴν φιλοσοφίαν ἐπιστήμην τῆς ἀληϑείας᾽ ϑεωρητικής μὲν γὰρ τέλος ἀλήϑεια, πρακτικῆς δ᾽ ἔργον. Plut. repeatedly emphasizes in the Talks and elsewhere that theory alone without practice is barren; pure theoreticizing does not interest him unless the results are of practical use. This is said expressly

below (613 C): ἀναιρεῖν φιλοσοφίαν ὡς ἔργῳ βεβαιοῦν ἃ διδάσκει λόγῳ μὴ δυναμένην. The view is already found in Plat. Ep. VIT. 328 C μὴ δόξαιμί ποτε ἐμαυτῷ παντάπασι λόγος μόνον ἀτεχνῶς εἶναί τις, ἔργου δὲ οὐδενὸς ἄν ποτε ἑκὼν ἀνθάψασθαι. 613 B τὸ μέτρον καὶ τὸν καιρόν: That these concepts are held in high esteem by Plut. is seen in their high frequency in his works. The combination μέτρον καιροῦ occurs at 620 F and De tu. san. 133 F; cf.

also Brut. rat. 989 B ἡ μὲν o9v σωφροσύνη

... ἀναιροῦσα μὲν τὰς

ἐπεισάκτους καὶ περιττὰς (sc. ἐπιϑυμίας), καιρῷ δὲ καὶ μετριότητι κοσμοῦσα τὰς ἀναγκαίας, Cf. Clem. Paed. Τ| 46.1 μέτρον αὐτοῖς καὶ

καιρὸν ἐπιτιϑέναι. 613 B ὥσπερ οἱ τὸν ᾿Ορέστην ἑστιῶντες: At Eur. Iph. Taur. 939-960 Orestes reports how he, having murdered his mother, arrived at Athens where he was received with pity by the Athenians who offered

45

TABLE TALKS I 1

613 B

him a public meal which he, however, had to eat in silence, sitting apart. The story was conceived to explain the extraordinary custom practised at the holy meals and libations of the Choes, part of the early spring festival of the Anthesteria: each participant was offered a filled

χοῦς of wine to drink solemnly in silence. The story of the meal of

Orestes was told by Phanodemus, FGrHist ΠῚ B no. 325. 11 (= Athen. 437 C), and Apollodorus, FGrHist II B no. 244. 133. See L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 96-99; J. E. Harrison, Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religior? (Cambridge 1922) 41; Nilsson, Arch. Jahrb. 31 (1916) 329f.; P. Boyancé, Le culte des muses (Paris 1937) 71-73. Plut. uses the story at 643 AB as an argument against the allotment of individual portions at banquets. A similar etiological story he reports at Quaest.

Gr. 301 DE

in answer to the question τίνες ἐν Αἰγίνῃ οἱ

μονοφάγοι; The silent separate eating during eleven days is explained as being in memory of kinsmen who lost their lives in battle or at sea during the Trojan war. A further ex. of separate eating and drinking is given by Dicaearchus ap. Athen. 141 A (frg. 72 Wehrli) of the Phiditian festival at Sparta.

613 B ἐν Θεσμοϑετείῳ: The official building of the nine archons, or especially the six thesmothetai, cf. Arist. Ath. Pol. 3.5 ϑεσμοϑέται δ᾽ εἶχον

τὸ

ϑεσμοϑετεῖον.

ἐπὶ

δὲ

Σόλωνος

[ἅπ]αντες

εἰς

τὸ

ϑεσμοϑετεῖον συνῆλθον; Suda, s.v. ἄρχων: (Anecd. Gr. Y 449.22 Bekker) of ϑεσμοϑέται παρὰ τὸ ϑεσμοϑέσιον. The form ϑεμίστιον is found in Schol. Plat. Phaedr. 235 D. Dem. XXI 85 τὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων

οἴκημα is probably the same building (doubted by C. Wachsmuth, Die

Stadt im Altertum 11:1 (Leipzig 1890) 355, but see Busolt, Staatskunde?

II 801), perhaps also the στοά mentioned by Hypereides ap. Poll. IV 122 oi δ᾽ ἐννέα ἄρχοντες εἱστιῶντο ἐν τῇ στοᾷ. Plut, mentions the 9. besides the πρυτανεῖον at 714 BC, cf. Hesych. s.v. πρυτανεῖον" τρία

Αϑήνησι συσσίτια ϑεσμοφορεῖον, πρυτανεῖον. W. Judeich, Τοροgraphie von Athen? (München 1931) 301 supposed that the building Was situated on the northwest slope of the Acropolis, but its natural location is in the Agora, see Crosby, Hesp. 6 (1937) 447, with n. 5. — Fuhrm. remarks that if £v ϑεσμοϑετείῳ is to be taken with ἑστιῶντες as he himself does, putting the comma after 0., Plut. has committed an anachronism; on the other hand, if the phrase is taken with τρώγειν (as indeed earlier eds. do) the passage will be *une plaisanterie, peut-étre devenue courante, sur la gravité légendaire de ces personnages anachroniques'. An allusion of this kind may also be found at 657 C.

46

TABLE TALKS 1 1

613 B

613 B τῆς ἀμαϑίας οὐκ ἀτυχὲς παραμύϑιον: At 644 F Plut. displays his opinion of this way of compensating oneself for ignorance by quoting Simonides: εἰ μὲν ἠλίϑιος εἶ, σοφὸν πρᾶγμα ποιεῖς, εἰ δὲ

σοφός, ἠλίϑιον. He expresses his contempt for σιωπῇ τρώγειν with even more emphasis at 716 E σιωπῶντας μὲν γὰρ ἐμπίμπλασθϑαι uer ἀλλήλων κομιδῇ συῶδες (cf. also 643 B). 613 C ὁ Διόνυσος Λύσιύς ἐστι καὶ Avaioc κτλ.: According to Paus. IX 16.6 Lysius was an epithet of D. at Thebes. The god was worshipped there as the legendary liberator of the Thebans when they had been imprisoned by the Thracians. Paus. II 7.6 also states that the cult

of D. Lysius was propagated to Corinth and Sicyon. Plut. uses the two epithets very frequently (654 F, 680 B, 716 B, De ad. et am. 68D, Sept. sap. 150 C, De coh. ira 462 B. Lyaeus is the most frequent epithet of Dionysus, see Carter, Roscher's Lex. Myth. Suppl. I Epitheta deorum, s.v. Liber. — The topic of the freedom of speech effected by the wine recurs at 644 F and 707 E. 613 C àv λόγοις πλεονάζοντα καιρόν: The construction of πλεονάζω

with a prepositional phrase is peculiar to Plut. (De garr. 514 C τὸ λάλον ἐν τῷ φιλολόγῳ πλεονάζον, Arat. 1.2 πλεονάζοντας ἐν τοῖς ἐκείνων ἐπαίνοις. The ingenious conjecture τὸν λόγοις π. Faehse is thus unnecessary (for the non-use of the article, cf. above, 613 B ἀνάστατον ... συμπόσιον). The complement has an instrumental, or limitative, sense, ‘exceed in’, or ‘as regards, talk’. The construction is used

with

some

other

verbs,

cf.

Xen.

Hier.

1.16

ἐν

αὐτοῖς

εὐφραίνεσϑε; Plat. Rep. 603 C ἐν τούτοις δὴ πᾶσιν ἢ λυπουμένους ἢ χαίροντας; NT Luc. 1.7 προβεβηκότες ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις αὐτῶν ἦσαν,

See Kühner-Gerth? I 465. 613 C ἔργῳ βεβαιοῦν à διδάσκει λόγῳ: This is a corollary to the Stoic definition of philosophy as τέχνη περὶ τὸν βίον (613 B). But one would object that discussing philosophic questions at table is still Aóyoc. However, the contradiction is eliminated by the reasoning at 613 F ῥητορεύουσι μὲν ἄνϑρωποι διὰ λόγου, φιλοσοφοῦσι δὲ xai σιωπῶντες καὶ παίζοντες καὶ νὴ Δία σκωπτόμενοι καὶ σκώπτοντες. Speaking qua speaking is λόγος, but philosophizing means actualizing, either in action or in speech, of ἀρεταί such as σωφροσύνη and

δικαιοσύνη (mentioned at 613 B).

47

TABLE TALKS I 1

613 Ὁ

613 Ὁ νῦν δ᾽ ἔρχεσϑ᾽ ἐπὶ δεῖπνον ἵνα ξυνάγωμεν Ἄρηα: Eustath. 242.26 confirms that this line (Il. II 381) inspired proverbial sayings: ἐπαίχϑη εὐφυῶς πρός τινος τῶν παλαιῶν ἐπί τινων δαιτυμόνων εἰωϑότων ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ πότῳ κινεῖν μεγάλας ἔριδας. Athen. 364 A and 420 F uses the line to depict quarrelsome heads of family who, though they have proclaimed holy silence during sacrifice, quarrel with their wife and children and domestics. 613 D σκεπτέον

The phrase

εἶναι τὸ τῶν παθόντων:

also occurs at

634 A; it echoes Plat. Gorg. 458 B tows μέντοι χρῆν ἐννοεῖν καὶ τὸ TOV παρόντων.

613 D τὸ ᾿Αγάϑωνος ... τὸ Καλλίου: i.e. the banquets of Plat. and Xen. respectively. 613 D ἀφήσομεν αὐτοὺς [μύϑῳ] φιλοσοφεῖν: Xyl. was the first to observe that pid is out of place here. The context clearly indicates that the question here is whether one should talk philosophy over wine

at all. Only at 614 A οἶμαι δὲ (xoi) διηγήσεων εἶναι τι συμποτικὸν γένος κτλ. the attention is drawn to the choice of themes and the way of discussing them. Μύϑῳ is thus probably a gloss induced by 614 D μυϑολογίαις, and rightly deleted by Wytt., Hartm. Other solutions are not persuasive, e.g. μύϑῳ (xai λόγῳ) Hu., defended by Bolk. 613 Ὁ

οὐχ

ἧττον

ταῖς

Μούσαις

τὸν

Διόνυσον

ij ταῖς

Νύμφαις

χεραννύντας: Elegant poetic-mythological way of expressing the claim for qualified intellectual activity combined with moderate consumption of wine appropriately mixed with water; the metaphor νύμφη = water

occurs at Sept. sap. 147 F κἂν οἶνος ἦ φαῦλος, ἐπὶ τὰς νύμφας

χαταφυγεῖν, and cf. Anth. Pal. XI 49 Βάκχου μέτρον ἄριστον, ὃ μὴ πολύ, μηδ᾽ ἐλάχιστον" | .. «χαίρει κιρνάμενος δὲ τρισὶν Νύμφαισι τέταρτος. Below, 717 A Plut. recommends λόγος as a means to check

the manic effect of wine: λόγῳ te δεῖ χρῆσϑαι παρὰ πότον ϑεωρίαν

τινὰ

καὶ

μοῦσαν

ἔχοντι

καὶ

λόγου

τοιούτου

τῇ

μέϑῃ

ἀποκρύπτεται τὸ ἄγριον καὶ μανυκόν, ὑπὸ τῶν Μουσῶν

παρόντος

εὐμενῶς

κατεχόμενον. For the high estimation of discussion and conversation

by the wine, see 710 B, 713 D, et passim. 613 D

éxeivar

...

αὗται:

Μούσαις respectively.

Reference

to

ταῖς

Νύμφαις

and

ταῖς

48

TABLE TALKS I 1

613 D

613 D μειλίχιον ὄντως καὶ χαριδότην: Athen. 78 C reports that Dio-

nysus was called Μειλίχιος at Naxos because he was the giver of the fig: Plut. Anton. 24.4 tells us that Antonius marched into Ephesus

preceded

by

Ephesians

who

Διόνυσον

αὐτὸν

ἀνακαλουμένων

Χαριδότην καὶ Μειλίχιον (for this cult at Ephesus, cf. the list of Dionysiac initiates on the inscription, Die Inschriften von Ephesos 1 nos. 1601-1602, Hadrian’s time). Plut. also has the uncommon epithet Χαριδότης of D. at Sept. sap. 158 E, and of Zeus at De stoic. rep. 1048 C. Διόνυσος Χαριδότης is also found at Jul. Caes. (Symp.) 308 D and on an inscription of Cyrene (Africa Italiana 2 (1928) 144). The concept of Διόνυσος Χαριδότης is already found at Il. XIV 325 ἡ δὲ Διώνυσον Σεμέλη téxe χάρμα βροτοῖσιν. Μειλίχιος is common, cf., e.g., 692 E, De esu carn. 994 A, both together with ἡμερίδης. Fuhrm. regards the adverb ὄντως as an indication that Plut. understood the two epithets as cultic. 613 E ὥσπερ ἄφωνα γράμματα φωνηέντων ἐν μέσῳ πολλῶν τῶν πεπαιδευμένων ἐμπεοιλαμβανόμενοι: Bolk. argues that there is an ellipsis of ἐν μέσῳ after γράμματα, though among his parallels there is no example of the suppression of a whole prepositional phrase; they are examples of ellipsis of a prep. only (Plat. Tim. 91 Ὁ ὥσπερ tis ἄρουραν τὴν μήτραν, etc.). It is questionable, if our case should be called an ellipsis; it would be too awkward to repeat év péow. We had better say that the phrase should be understood in the comparative clause. 613 E φϑογγῆς τινος οὐ παντελῶς ἀνάρϑρον ... κοινωνήσουσιν: Though the consonants are called ‘mute’ they were apparently conceived of as actually voiced, but only in connection with vowels. 613 E παντὸς μὲν ὀρνέου παντὸς δὲ νεύρου καὶ ξύλου; Naber thought

that birds had no place at parties and read ὀργάνου. Bolk. collected many examples showing that domestic birds, e.g. nightingales (De stoic. rep. 1044 C), and even jays (De soll. an. 973 C) were held for their singing, and also entertained at parties: Hor. Carm. ΠῚ 1.20 avium citharaeque cantus; Varro, De re rust. III 4.3 voluit esse Lucullus coniunctum aviarium, quod fecit in Tusculano, ut in eodem tecto

ornithonis inclusum triclinium haberet, ubi delicate cenitaret; Philostr. V. Apoll. 17.2 οἱ ὄρνιϑες à μανϑάνουσι παρὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. τὸ γὰρ χαῖρε καὶ τὸ εὖ πρᾶττε καὶ τὸ Ζεὺς ἵλεως καὶ τὰ τοιαῦϑ᾽ of ὄρνιϑες

613 E

TABLE TALKS I 1

49

εὔχονται, id. VI 36.1 ἐδίδασκε δ᾽ αὐτοὺς (sc. τοὺς ὄρνυϑας) λαλεῖν ϑ'᾽ ὅσα οἱ ἄνϑρωποι καὶ τερετίζειν ὅσα αὐλοί. -- Plut. found the metaphor νεῦρον καὶ ξύλον (= κυϑάραλ in Zenon, as is seen at De virt. mor. 443 A (SVF I 299) καίτοι καὶ Ζήνωνά φασιν εἰς ϑέατρον avidvta ... ἴωμεν, εἰπεῖν, ὅπως καταμάϑωμεν οἵαν ἔντερα καὶ νεῦρα καὶ ξύλα καὶ ὀστᾶ λόγου καὶ ἀριϑμοῦ μετασχόντα καὶ τάξεως ἐμμέλειαν καὶ φωνὴν ἀφίησιν (also cited at De procr. an. 1029 E, and cf. Sept. sap. 150 E. Bolk. exaggerates Plutarch's contempt for such entertainments, cf. 712 F (Plut. speaking) fj ye κιϑάρα ... τῆς δαιτός ἔστιν, καὶ μακρὰν οὕτως φιλίαν καὶ συνήϑειαν οὗ πρέπει διαλύειν, Plut. did not feel contempt for musical entertainment on principle; he only regarded it as inferior to learned discussion, cf. De tu. san. 133 EF τὸ περὶ αὐλοῦ τι xoi λύρας ἀκοῦσαι ἢ εἰπεῖν ἐλαφρότερον ἢ λύρας αὐτῆς φϑεγγομένης ἀκούειν καὶ αὐλοῦ. In criticizing Epicurus he asks (Non posse 1096 A): οὐκ ἦν δὲ πρὸς τὸ ἠδέως ζῆν ἐπιεἰκέστερον μύρα καὶ ϑυμιάματα δυσχεραίνειν ὡς κάνϑαροι καὶ γῦπες ἢ κριτικῶν καὶ μουσικῶν λαλιὰν βδελύττεσϑαι καὶ φεύγειν; He is less negative than Plato, who maintains (Prot. 347 CD) that only φαῦλοι καὶ ἀγοραῖοι ... τιμίας ποιοῦσι τὰς αὐλητρίδας, while edu-

cated men αὐτοὺς αὑτοῖς ἱκανοὺς ὄντας συνεῖναι ἄνευ τῶν λήρων τε καὶ παιδιῶν τούτων. 613 E τὸ τοῦ Πεισιστράτου: This anecdote is not found elsewhere; it resembles the one told at Reg. apophth. 189 B. Both are based upon an etymological allusion to the name P. as related to πεῖσαι. Another saying about Peisistratus and his sons is found at De frat. am. 480 DE, without any such allusion. 613 F φιλοσοφοῦσι δὲ καὶ σιωπῶντες xoi παίζοντες: Abram. notices

that Plut. here takes φιλοσοφεῖν in virtually the sense of σωφρονεῖν, At An seni 796 CD Plut. emphatically declares that philosophy is not mere theoretical considerations and doctrine presented by professional

teachers but ἡ δὲ συνεχὴς ἐν ἔργοις καὶ πράξεσιν ὁρωμένη καϑ' ἡμέραν ὁμαλῶς. He refers to Socrates for the art of practising jest in Philosophy (ibid.): Σωκράτης ... τοῖς γνωρίμοις καὶ

συμ)παίζων, ὅτε τύχοι, καὶ συμπίνων ... ἐφιλοσόφει, cf. also be-

low, 686 D τὰ δὲ φιλοσοφηϑέντα μετὰ παιδιᾶς σπουδάζοντες.

613 F ἀδικίας ἐσχάτης ἐστίν κτλ.: Rep. 361 A ἐσχάτη γὰρ ἀδικία δοκεῖν δίκαιον εἶναι μὴ ὄντα, freely transformed by Plut., also quote d

613 F

TABLE TALKS I 1

50

in this form (with the gen.) at De ad. et am. 50 F and De Herod. mal. 854 E. Plut. probably chose this construction to avoid the double hiatus of ἐσχάτη ἀδικία ἐστίν (Bolk.), so also at 653 C ἐσχάτης

ἀκολασίας εἶναι. For Plutarch’s avoidance of hiatus, see Bens., Bolk. 60f., 105f., 111, and below, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα. The Platonic passage is echoed at, e.g., Cic. De off. 1 41.

614 A συνέσεως ἄκρας φιλοσοφοῦντα μὴ δοκεῖν φιλοσοφεῖν wx). The ideal cultivated man ought to be so well-trained in the philosophical attitude toward life that it was like a second nature to him; he would then be able to converse with various kinds of people on serious as well as humorous matters, cf. 713 BC δεῖ γὰρ οὕτως ἐϑίζειν καὶ

σπουδάζοντας (xai παίζοντας), ὥστε xoi τὰς ἡδονὰς λαμβάνειν καὶ τὰς διατριβὰς ἐν λόγῳ ποιεῖσθϑαι.

ἐκ λόγου

614 A αἱ παρ᾽ Εὐριπίδῃ μαινάδες ... τοῖς ϑυρσαρίοις παίουσαι: Eur. Bacch. 734 has ϑύρσοις. Through the very rare diminutive Plut. intensifies the opposition between the virtually unarmed bacchanals and their gruesome deeds.

614 A

(καὶ)

διηγήσεων

εἶναί τι συμποτικὸν

γένος

wtÀ.:

Strictly

speaking this genre is confined to themes directly concerned with banquets: food, wine, convivial properties, placing of guests, etc. But at 629 D Plut. shows that his scope is wider, it also comprises a group

of subjects apt to be treated after dinner, which he describes at De tu. san. 133 E. πολλὰ μέν ἐστι τῶν φυσικῶν προβλημάτων

ἐλαφρὰ καὶ

πιϑανά, πολλαὶ δὲ διηγήσεις ἡϑικὰς σκέψεις ἔχουσαι καὶ τοῦτο δὴ τὸ μενοεικές, ὡς Ὅμηρος ἔφη, καὶ μὴ ἀντίτυπον. Plut. proposes (629 D)

to use the term συμποσιακά to denote the more general concept comprising also these subjects. Here, however, he uses the narrower

term συμποτικός in this wide sense. It may be that Plut., when he wrote this passage, had not yet distinguished between the two terms. ὧν " αἷς üv τις ἀνυπόπτως χρώμενος διαπαιδαγωγῇ τοὺς πίνοντας:

a N i actic moment, always present in Plutarch’s writings, explicitly vesated. The meaning of ἀνυπόπτως is probably ‘without advertising’, without much ado', *ohne seine Absicht merken zu lassen’ (Kaltw.), sens en avoir I’ air’ (Fuhrm.) "unobtrusive(ly) ‘ i

not ‘unhesitaty) (Clem.), > Loa bees ihe exhilarated guests should not be troubled by a serious versttion should learn something useful during an improvised con-

614 B

TABLE TALKS I 1

51

614 B oi μὲν οὖν τὰ βούγλωσσα καταμιγνύντες εἰς τὸν οἶνον: The βούγλωσσον is described by Dioscur. IV 127 φύλλον χαμαιπετὲς τραχύ τε καὶ μελάντερον καὶ μικρότερον, ὅμοιον βοὸς γλώσσῃ, ὅπερ καϑιέμενον εἰς τὸν οἶνον εὐφρόσυνον δοκεῖ εἶναι; Plin. XXV 81 boum linguae similis, cui praecipuum, quod in vinum deiecta animi voluptates auget et vocatur euphrosynum; Gal. XI 852 K.; Paul. Aeg. VIE s.v.; Isid. XVII 9.49. The plant is probably Anchusa Italica Retz, less probably A. officinalis L., both called buglossa in Italy today; Modern Greek βοϊδόγλωσσα denotes the former only. Both belong to the family Boraginaceae. A specific characteristic of these herbs is the very hairy, or even bristly, leaves and stems. PS.-Plut. De fluv. IV 2 and XXV 3, in describing Indian plants, compares them with the bugloss, which indicates that it was well-known. — The belief in the power of this and other plants (see below) is part of the current

magical-physiological doctrines told by the writers on antipathy and sympathy in nature, e.g. Bolus of Mendes (c. 200 B. C.), and Didymus (ist c. B. C.) whose work Συμποσιακά Plut. most probably used as a source for many parts of the Talks; see Wellmann, Abh. Ak. Berlin

1928:7.39. 614 B τοῖς ἀποβρέγμασι τῶν ἀριστερεώνζων) καὶ ἀδιάντων: Bolk. corrects ἀριστερέων (sic) and convincingly rejects περιστερεώνων Iun., who may have thought of Dioscur. VI 60.1 ἱερὰ βοτάνη, οἱ δὲ

περιστερεῶνα ἐκάλεσαν ... (2) δαννόμενόν te ἐν συμποσίῳ τὸ ἀπόβρεγμα εὐδιαγωγοτέρους ἱστορεῖται ποιεῖν. All eds. followed Iun. although many passages in Plin. show that ἀριστερεών is another name of the same plant, a member of the Verbenaceae, probably Verbena officinalis L.: Plin. XXV 105 hiera botane, aliqui aristereon, nostri verbenacam vocant. ... hac Iovis mensa verritur, domus purgantur lustranturque, .. . (107) aiunt, si aqua spargatur triclinium, (in) qua maduerit, laetiores convictus fieri, id. XXVII 21 alcea folia habet

similia verbenacae, quae aristereon cognominatur. The other name is found at XXV 126 peristereos vocatur ... columbis admodum familiaris, unde et nomen. In addition to its medical powers (curative, purgative) the plant was credited with magic powers, cf. Dioscur. IV 60.2 καλεῖται δὲ ἱερὰ βοτάνη διὰ τὸ εὐχρηστεῖν ἐν τοῖς καϑαρμοῖς εἰς περιάμματα;, Eustath. 1935.2. At Orph. Arg. 916 Abel this plant, together with the ἀδίαντον, is mentioned among those which grow in the garden of Hecate at Chalcis. -- Theophr., who does not mention the ἀριστερεών, describes the ἀδίαντον (Adiantum capillus Veneris

52

TABLE TALKS I 1

6148

L.), the white as well as the black, at H. P. VII 14.1 (VII 10.5). Dioscur. IV 134 and Plin. XXII 62 enumerate its manifold medical effects. Apotropic powers are ascribed to both plants by Aelian. N. A. 135 βασκανίας ἀμυντήριον ... τὸ ἀδίαντον, ὅπερ οὖν καὶ καλλίτριχον καλοῦσί τινες, ἀριστερεῶνα δὲ κτλ.

614 B τὴν ᾿Ομηρικὴν ᾿Ελένην ὑποφαρμάττουσαν τὸν ἄκρατον χτλ.: Od. IV 220-264. Helen is said to have received the sedative drug from Polydamna, an Egyptian woman. Sedative and anodyne drugs were known and studied very early in Egypt as is evidenced in papyri dating from c. 1500 B. C. The ancient Greek pharmacopoeia derived to a large extent from Egypt. Many suggestions have been made as to the identity of Helen’s drug. G. Maspero, Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'orient classique (Paris 1895) 215-220, in commenting on Hdt. II 84, treats Egyptian medicine and mentions (p. 219) the ‘Memphic stone’ which was credited with anesthetizing power. V. Bérard, in his edition (Budé) of Od. p. 95 n. 220 ad loc. suggests that this was the νηπενϑὲς φάρμακον used by Helen. But perhaps the most probable drug is opium. - Bolk. suggests that the allegoric interpretation of this ‘painbanishing drug' as being the story which Helen told to the drinking Achaeans, originated from Alexandrian grammarians, seeing that the same allegory is found i Callim. frg. 178.15 Pfeiff. (first noticed by Malten, Hermes 53 (1918) 161): ἦ pod ἔπος 168 ἀληϑές, 6 v οὐ

μόνον ὕδατος αἶσαν, | ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι καὶ λέσχης οἶνος ἔχειν ἐθέλει τὴν ἡμεῖς... βάλλωμεν χαλεπῷ φάρμακον ἐν πόματι. Callim. was probably influenced by contemporary allegorizing commentaries on Homer. That Plut. repeats traditional, already proverbial, matter here is to be seen at Plin. XXIII 41 somno vero ac securitatibus iamdudum hoc fuit, quod Homerica illa Helena ante cibum ministravit. sic quoque in proverbium cessit sapientiam vino obumbrari; cf. Schol. Od. IV 221. Abram. observes that Plutarch’s jesting tone, ὁ μῦϑος ἐκπεριελθὼν ἀπ Αἰγύπτου μακρὰν ὁδὸν εἰς λόγους ἐπιεικεῖς καὶ πρέποντας ἐτελεύτησεν, is lacking in Athen. 190 F and Eustath. 1493.3 where this allegorical interpretation is given quite seriously. At De aud. poet. 19 EF Plut. makes it clear that he did not believe in allegoric interpretations: μύϑων, obc ταῖς πάλαι μὲν ὑπονοίαις ἀλληγορίαις δὲ viv λεγομέναις παραβιαζόμενοι καὶ διαστρέφοντες ἔνιοι κτλ.

614 C οἷον ἔρεξε καὶ ἔτλη καρτερὸς ἀγήρ: Plut. omitted two words at the beginning of the line (Od. IV 242). To supply them (Turn., Wytt.,

614 C

53

TABLE TALKS I 1

Dübn., Bern.) is entirely uncalled for; free quotations are quite com-

mon in Plut. as well as in ancient authors in general (here he also left

out line 243, and quoted line 244). 614 C oi δὲ χαρίεντες κτλ.: Abram, notices that οἱ δὲ formally corresponds to (614 B) of μὲν oov . . . καταμιγνύντες but thinks that there is no real opposition. However, there exists an opposition between the group of banqueters who would minimize the importance of speech and rely on φάρμακα for producing cheerness while drinking wine and the group of men of taste who devote themselves without reserve (dz εὐϑείας) to philosophic discussion only. 614 C διὰ τοῦ πιϑανοῦ μᾶλλον ἢ βιαστικοῦ τῶν ἀποδείξεων κτλ.: Plut. wants to allay the fears of those who thinks that discussing philosophy over wine might be upsetting and unpleasant. He corroborates his argument effectively by the most impressive example of a συμπόσιον conceivable: at the banquet not even the uncompromising Socrates persevered as far as to attain a demonstration but -- as Macrob. Sat. I 1.3 puts it — eludendi magis quam decertandi modo adprehensis dat elabendi prope atque effugiendi locum. (Macrob. faithfully keeps Socrates as the subject; Plut. substitutes Plato for him.) The simplified kind of philosophy designed for entertainment rather than the search for the truth had been practised for centuries,

Persaeus the Stoic clearly excluded difficult problems from drinkingparties (Athen. 607 B), so also Arcesilaus (Diog. Laert. IV 42). Gell. I 2.34 tells of a young Stoic who was loquacior impendio et promptior. Is plerumque in convivio sermonibus, qui post epulas haberi solent, multa atque inmodica de philosophiae doctrinis intempestive atque insubide disserebat. — For the opposition πιϑανός: βιαστικός, cf. the criticism of Dion. Hal. Lys. 13 Λυσίου λέξις... οὐδὲ ὡς ἠδῦναι καὶ πεῖσαι καὶ χαριεντίσασϑαι προσαναγχάσαι.

δύναται,

οὕτω

βιάσασϑαί

τε

xai

614 D ὅλως ϑεολογῶν: Plut. indicates his admiration for Plato and the sublime aims of his philosophy. At De sera 550 D—E Plut., taking his starting-point in Plat. Theaet. 176 E, expressly adopts the Platonic τέλος of human life, ὁμοίωσις ϑεῷ, as the highest ethic aim: οὐ γάρ ἔστιν ὅ τι μεῖζον ἄνθρωπος ἀπολαύειν ϑεοῦ πέφυκεν ἢ τὸ μιμήσει καὶ διώξει τῶν ἐν ἐκείνῳ καλῶν καὶ ἀγαϑῶν εἰς ἀρετὴν καϑίστασθϑαι. Plut. also mentions this τέλος in frg. 143 Sandb. Plut. tended to regard

54

TABLE TALKS I 1

614 ὮὉ

philosophy as essentially theology, a tendency that developed further in Neo-Platonism (Proclus). See R. Flaceliére, ‘La théologie selon Plutarque’. In: Mélanges de philosophie ... offerts à P. Boyancé (Rome 1974) 273-280, who (p. 279) points especially to the connection of the words ϑεολογῶν and μυϑολογίαις in our passage; they indicate that Plut. regarded his ideal philosopher, Plato, as basically a theologian. On Plut. in Middle Platonism, see J. Dillon, The Middle Platonists (London 1977) 192-198. 614 D ὑποκονίεται: À metaphor from the παλαίστρα: before the competition the wrestlers anointed the skin and then powdered themselves with dust to facilitate getting a grip on each other, cf. Philostr. Gymn. 18 p. 148.16 Jüthner κονίσασϑαι παλαίστρᾳ τὸν ἀϑλητὴν ... ἀνάγκη. The verb is found elsewere only at Adesp. frg. 401 Kock ἅτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον | ὑπαλείφεται và χεῖρέ F ὑποκονίεται. 614 Ὁ ὑγροτέροις λήμμασι: Plut, uses a similar comparison with wrestling at 660 B. Discussions over wine should be gentle; there is no need for ‘sand’, for the grips should not be firm: ai μὲν γὰρ παλαιόντων ἑπιβολαὶ καὶ ἕλξεις κονιορτοῦ δέονται, ταῖς δὲ φιλικαῖς λαβαῖς ὁ οἶνος ἁφὴν ἐνδίδωσι μιγνύμενος λόγῳ. 614 D εἶναι δὲ δεῖ καὶ αὐτὰς τὰς ζητήσεις ὑγροτέρας κτλ.: The pleasant and entertaining character of the questions discussed over wine is described by Gell. VII 13.4 quaerebantur autem non gravia nec reverenda, sed ἐνθυμημάτια quaedam lepida et minuta et florentem vino animum lacessantia. 614 D γλίσχρας: One of Plutarch's favourite words, repeated below,

614 E in this same sense, ‘complicated’, cf. De aud. poet. 31 E καὶ Χρύσιππος δὲ πολλαχοῦ γλίσχρος (‘persistent’) ἐστίν, οὐ παίζων ἀλλ᾽ εὑρησιλογῶν ἀπιϑάνως καὶ παραβιαζόμενος κτλ. 614 D τὰ σώματα κτλ.: This emendation (Mez.): τὰ συμπόσια T is supported by De tu. san. 133 DE ὥσπερ οἱ τὰ σώματα κινεῖν μετὰ δεῖπνον ἀξιοῦντες οὐ δρόμοις οὐδὲ παγχρατίοις τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν ἀλλὰ βληχροῖς περιπάτοις καὶ χορείαις ἐμμελέσιν, with the same idea and comparison of physical and mental training. That the guests did not only enjoy the art of hired dansers but also entertained each other may be seen at Hdt. VI 129 προϊούσης δὲ τῆς πόσιος...

6“ Innoxdel-

614 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS I 1

55

δης ἐκέλευσε τὸν αὐλητὴν αὐλῆσαι of ἐμμέλειαν᾽ πειϑομένου δὲ τοῦ αὐλητέω ὀρχήσατο. καί κως ἑωυτῷ ἀρεστῶς ὀρχέετο; Anacr. 36.20 Bergk μεϑύων ϑέλω χορεύειν, 45.3 κἂν δεήσῃ με χορεύειν, ΙΣειληνὸν ἐν μέσοισιν | μιμούμενος χορεύσω, 47, 51, etc.; cf. below, 645 A φδὴ μὲν γὰρ καὶ γέλως καὶ ὄρχησις οἰνουμένοις μετρίως ἔπεισι. To dance

sober at drinking-parties was regarded as unbecoming, cf. Theophr. Char. 6.1. There were also various kinds of acrobatics performed by guests as well as professionals, cf. 621 F-622 A, and see L. Séchan, La

danse grecque antique (Paris 1930) 223-233; W. Deonna, Un divertissement de table (Bruxelles 1959) 12-17, 27-29. 614 E ἐριδαντέων δὲ κατὰ Δημύκριτον καὶ ἱμαντελικτέων λόγους ἀφετέον: Frg. B 150, also quoted by Clem. Strom. 122.2, and probably referred to by Strab. I 4.7. Our passage resembles De prof. in virt. 80 Β τοὺς λόγους ὥσπερ ἱμάντας καὶ σφαίρας ἐπιδούμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους καὶ τῷ πατάξαι καὶ καταβαλεῖν μᾶλλον ἣ τῷ μαϑεῖν τι καὶ διδάξαι χαίροντες. Fuhrm. thinks that this passage ‘ne peut étre qu’un développement de ces expressions de Démocrite’, a somewhat hasty assumption. It is true that the metaphorically expressed idea is the same, but the metaphor used in either passage is not. The vocabulary of 80 B, ἱμάντες, σφαῖραι, πατάττω, καταβάλλω, is clearly that of boxing (cf. Plat. Leg. 830 B), while in our passage ἐριδαντέων means ‘wranglers’, and xatate(vovow (inadequately translated ‘excitent’ Fuhrm.) is not a pugilistic term and a ἱμαντελιυκτής is not a boxer who Wraps up his fists with leather strips but a participant in the ‘entangling game’, the ἱμαντελιγμός, explained by Eustath. 979.28: παιδιᾶς τινος εἶδος, ἤγουν διπλοῦ ἱμάντος σκολιά τις εἴλησις, and Poll. IX 118 ὁ δ᾽

ἱμαντελιγμὸς διπλοῦ ἱμάντος λαβυρινϑώδης τίς ἐστι περιστροφή, καϑ' ἧς ἔδει καϑέντα παττάλιον τῆς διπλόης τυχεῖν" εἰ γὰρ μὴ λυϑέντος ἐμπεριείληπτο τῷ ἱμάντι τὸ παττάλιον, ἥττητο ὁ καϑείς. Thompson, CR 33 (1919) 24, reports of having seen a trick being performed at a fair which was very similar to or even identical with the ancient game of ἱμαντελιγμός. — The comparison of intricate dialectic argumentation with snares also occurs at Gell. I 2.4 syllogismorum captionumque dialecticarum laqueis strepebat.

614 E δεῖ γὰρ ὡς τὸν οἶνον κοινὸν εἶναι καὶ τὸν λόγον: Plut. is eager to make clear that not only wine and food but also conversation ought

to be common to all guests. The idea that the questions discussed over wine should be simple enough to allow everyone to participate is

56

TABLE TALKS I 1

614 E

repeated many times in the Talks, e.g., 643 B, 644 D, 660 B, 679 A οἴνου yàp ἀνελεῖν ἧττόν ἐστι κακὸν ἢ λόγου κοινωνίαν ἔκ δείπνου, 697 D, 708 Ὁ, 726 E (etymology κοινός: cena). It was also considered a duty of each guest to contribute to the discussion, see below, on

664 D, and 682 A, 694 B. 614 E τῆς Αἰσωπείου

γεράνου καὶ ἀλώπεκος:

Frg. 34 Halm.

The

fable is only preserved in the version of Phaedr. I 26 and in later Latin versions (see Clement, AJP 66 (1945) 195), none of which is of help for the filling of the lacuna after καταχεαμένη. 614 E ὧν ἡ μὲν ἔτνος τι... καταχεα(μένη τὴν γέρανον elotiacev, 00% εὐωχου)μένην, ἀλλὰ γέλωτα πάσχουσαν: A later hand corrected καταχεαμένην T and added in marg.: οὐκ εὐωχουμένην ἔδειξεν. The hiatus and the awkward use of δείκνυμι is clearly non-Plutarchean. Clement, AJP 66 (1945) 192, lists the many unsuccessful efforts to fill the lacuna and proposes (p. 196): καταχεαμένη (τὴν γέρανον ἡστίασεν (sic) οὐ μόνον ἀσιτοῦσαν) ἀλλὰ γέλωτα παρέχουσαν (παρέχουσαν Wytt.). Bolk. Mnem, 4 (1951) 304-307 rightly rejects ἀσιτέω and, by retention of εὐωχουμένην of the note in T, explains the lacuna as due to haplography. Bolk. (p. 307) also defends γέλωτα πάσχουσαν by reference to y. ποιεῖν or y. κινεῖν (Plat. Charm. 155 B; Xen. Cyr. 112.11, Symp. 1.14). At Praec. ger. reip. 814 A the active and the passive constructions are opposed to each other: γέλωτά τε ποιοῦντες (Bern.: γελωτοποιοῦντες MSS) οὐκέτι γέλωτος ἄξια πάσχουσιν.

614 may who this

Ε εἰς λεπτὰ καὶ διαλεχτικὰ προβλήματα καταδύντες: Abram. be right in supposing that the frequent talk about philosophic men are eager to display their profound learning at table, indicates that manner was common.

618 A ἐμβάλωσιν rightly.

ἑαυτούς:

Bern.

proposed

ἐμβάλλωσιν,

perhaps

615 A Φρυνίχου xoi Αἰσχύλον τὴν τραγῳδίαν εἰς μύϑους καὶ πάϑη προαγόντων: ΑἹ 732 F Plut. indicates the abundant innovations which Phrynichus made in choral lyric by a quotation of the poet (frg. 3 IIl 561 Bergk?) σχήματα δ᾽ ὄρχησις τόσα μοι πόρεν, ὅσσ᾽ ἐνὶ πόντῳ | χύματα ποιεῖται χείματι νὺξ ὁλοή, Cf, Aristoph. Av. 748 ὥσπερ 1

615 A

57

TABLE TALKS I 1

μέλιττα | Φρύνιχος ἀμβροσιῶν μελέων ἀπεβόσχετο καρπὸν ἀεὶ | φέρων γλυκεῖαν dav. It is said only here that Phryn. introduced myth and passion in tragedy. This reputation may be connected with the themes of his tragedies. The titles show that a great number of plays concerned women:

Pleuroniae,

Phoenissae,

Danaides,

Alcestis.

Ac-

cording to Suda Phryn. was the first tragedian to introduce women on the stage. Macurdy, CW 37 (1944) 239f. gives credit to that and suggests the women acted preferably in choruses, in situations of terror. Such situations may have occurred in the Capture of Miletus, cf.

Hdt. VI 21.2 ποιήσαντι Φρυνίχῳ δρᾶμα Μιλήτου “Αλωσιν καὶ διδάξαντι ἐς δάκρυά τε ἔπεσε τὸ ϑέητρον κτλ. This event became proverbial, cf. Aelian. V. H. XIH 17. 615 A τί ταῦτα πρὸς τὸν Διόνυσον: This saying is more common in affirmative form: οὐ(δὲν) πρὸς (τὸν) A. (cf. Quaest. Rom. 280 D). It was said to have its origin in the early change of the Dionysiac drama from the original satyr play into tragedy which was the generally accepted opinion about the development, see Lucian. Bacch. 5. The development is described in Suda = Phot. s.v. οὐδὲν πρὸς τὸν A. = Apostol. XIII 42 (CPG II 585.3) τὸ πρόσϑεν εἰς τὸν Διόνυσον γράφοντες τούτοις ἠγωνίζοντο, ἅπερ καὶ σατυριυκὰ ἐλέγετο. ὕστερον δὲ μεταβάντες εἰς τὸ τραγῳδίας γράφειν, κατὰ μικρὸν εἰς μύϑους καὶ ἱστορίας ἐτράπησαν, μηκέτι τοῦ Διονύσου μνημονεύοντες. ὅϑεν καὶ ἐπεφώνησαν. Καὶ Χαμαιλέων ἐν τῷ Περὶ Θέσπιδος τὰ παραπλήσια ἱστορεῖ. These sources and Cod. Coislin. mention as the innovator the

obscure Epigenes of Sicyon, see Pohlenz, Nachr. Gótt. 1926, pp. 300302. Presumably, Chamaeleon (frg. 38 Wehrli) ascribed the change to Thespis and stated the origin of the proverb as being a consequence of It. The opinion that the Dionysiac drama was originally a satyr play derives from Arist. Poet. 1449 a 19 ἔτι δὲ τὸ μέγεϑος ἐκ μικρῶν μύϑων καὶ λέξεως γελοίας διὰ τὸ ἐκ σατυρικοῦ μεταβαλεῖν ὀφὲ ἀπεσεμνύνϑη κτλ. Aristotle also derives tragedy from dithyramb: Poet. 1449a 9 ἡ μὲν (sc. τραγῳδία) ἀπὸ τῶν ἐξαρχόντων τὸν διϑύραμβον ... κατὰ μυκρὸν ηὐξήϑη προαγόντων ὅσον ἐγίνετο φανερὸν αὐτῆς. Cf. Zenob. V 40. Our passage apparently echoes Arist. Pohlenz, o. c. 302 observes that the wording partly reflects Aristotle (προαγόντων) or Chamaeleon (εἰς μύϑους). Aristotle’s derivation of tragedy from satyr play has been much disputed. Schmid-

Stühlin 1:1.42 and 46 n. 7 observe that it is not verifiable and reject

even the possibility of such a development, whereas the position non

615 A

TABLE TALKS I 1

58

1:2 liquet is taken in The Cambridge History of Classical Literature

e, Dithyr(Cambridge 1985) 260f. See also A. W. Pickard-Cambridg CQ 31 tamb, Tragedy and Comedy (Oxford 1927) 166-168; Seaford,

(1981) 269. — Another tradition which derives the saying from the representation of Dionysus by certain Corinthian painters (Apostol. XIII 42; Polyb. XXXIX 2.3; Strab. VIII 6.23) is secondary. 615 A τὸν Κυριεύοντα: This famous syllogism is said to have been

conceived by Diodorus Cronus, of the Dialectic school, a rival of the Megarean school, see Sedley, Proceed. Cambr. Philol. Soc. 203 (1977) 74-77, Natorp, RE s.v. Dialektiker, 321. Diodorus invented this argu-

ment to support his stringent definition of the concept of ‘possible’, apparently in opposition to Aristotle's idea of the ambiguity of possi-

bility, cf. Joh. Philop. In Arist. An. prior. 169.17. Diodorus’ argument is a combination of three statements, each of them true, but only two

of which can be combined: (1) what has occurred is necessarily so, (2) the impossible does not follow from the possible, and (3) what is not,

nor will be, is possible. The argument is reported by Epict. II 19.1 (= SVF II 92): κοινῆς γὰρ οὔσης μάχης τοῖς τρισὶ τούτοις πρὸς ἄλληλα, τῷ πᾶν

παρεληλυϑὸς

ἀληϑὲς

ἀναγκαῖον

εἶναι,

καὶ

τῷ

δυνατῷ

ἀδύνατον μὴ ἀκολουϑεῖν, καὶ τῷ δυνατὸν εἶναι ὃ οὔτ᾽ ἔστιν ἀληϑὲς οὔτ᾽ ἔσται. The κυριεύων was much discussed by the Stoics in connection with the problems of the free will vs. determinism. Cleanthes and Antipater kept the last two theses and gave up the first, while Chrysippus, who kept the first and the last, must remove the negation from the

second one and read: δυνατῷ δ᾽ ἀδύνατον ἀκολουϑεῖ. Cf. also Alex. Aphr. In Arist. An. prior. 177.25; Joh. Philop. In Arist. An. prior. 165.27; Boeth. In Arist. Περὶ ἑρμηνείας III 9 pp. 234.22-236.4 2nd ed.

Meise; Cic. De fato 12-20. See P. Barth, Die Stoa° (Stuttgart 1941) MM prov was notorious as a typically fruitless and vain u. san. 133 C, Adv. stoic. 1070 CD;

Lucian.

Vit.

auci. 22. It can be compared with logical fallacies like that of Achilles and the tortoise, or the Liar. However, it is still of interest. Many attempts have been made in modern times to analyse the argument:

P N

Sitzungsber. Berlin (1882) 151-159; Becker, Rh. Mus. 99

6) 289-304; Prior, Philos. Quart. 5 (1955) 205-213; B. Mates, Stoic

ogic (repr. Berkeley 1961) 36-41; Hintikka, Am.

Phil tar. (1964) 101-114; Rescher, ἢ Journ. . of Philos.ilos. 6363 (1(1966) 96 ) 43%438-445; oe Frede,e, Aristoteles und die » 5 Seeschlac ht". (Gotti Purtill, Apeiron 7 (1973) 31-36, and others inten

I0)

1 D.

-122; NSS

615 A

59

TABLE TALKS I 1

615 A κρατῆρος ἐν μέσῳ προκειμένου: The large mixing bowl was common to all guests, cf. 643 B ὁ κρατὴρ οὗτος ὅρον οὐκ ἔχων ἐν μέσῳ πρόκειται, where this is contrasted to the ritual allotment of food at a ϑυσία. Cf. Alexis, frg. 119 (11 339 Kock) φαιδρὸς δὲ κρατὴρ ϑηρίκλειος ἐν μέσῳ | ἕστηχε, λευκοῦ νέκταρος παλαιγενοῦς | πλήρης, ἀφρίζων᾽ ὃν λαβὼν ἐγὼ κενὸν | τρίψας, ποιήσας λαμπρόν, ἀσφαλῆ βάσιν | στήσας. The ἀσφαλὴς βάσις, on which the bowl was placed, was a tripod, probably similar to those which supported the τράπεζαι

during dinner (Xen. An. VII 3.21), cf. Plut. Cleom. 34.6 ἀπαρϑείσης δὲ τῆς τραπέζης, εἰσεκομίζετο τρίπους κρατῆρα χαλκοῦν ἔχων οἴνου μεστόν. — The symposion was ritually initiated through a libation, at which the guests sang the Paean in unison accompanied by the sound of the flute, and during this performance the crowns were distributed, cf. below, 713 A; Aristoph. Vesp. 1217 δειπνοῦμεν ἀπονενίμμεϑ᾽ " ἤδη onévóoyev. |... αὐλητρὶς ἐνεφύσησεν; Xen. Symp. 2.1 ὡς δ᾽ ἀφῃρέϑὕησαν ai τράπεζαι καὶ ἔσπεισάν te καὶ ἐπαιάνισαν.

615 B ἄδειν μὲν γὰρ ἴσως τὰ καλούμενα σχόλια... (εὔλογον ἦν), οὐ καλὸν δ᾽ οὐδὲ συμποτικόν: Kron. and Bolk. convincingly argue that there is no need for the long supplementation written by a later hand in T, which most eds. and translators have accepted (with slight modifications or additions): (εὔλογον λόγοις δὲ γλίσχροις παρὰ πότον χεχρῆσϑαι», with deletion of & after καλόν. The repetitive style (γλίσχρος at 614 D, E; παρὰ πότον at 614 ΕἸ appears awkward. The

addition ἦν Fuhrm. is plausible, seeing that Plut. is speaking of an obsolete custom; Abram. proposes ἐπιτίϑησιν (ἑκάστῳ, παλαιὸν μὲν ἔϑος), ob καλὸν δ᾽, less probable. -- Wytt. unnecessarily would change ἴσως into ἔϑος, which Bolk. accepts. Abram. takes the word in its original sense

‘in like manner’,

‘likewise’,

but the unstressed

tows

never has this meaning. The meaning ‘maybe’, ‘perchance’ will pass.

615 B τὰ σκόλια: The old custom of singing to the lyre was historical at Plutarch's times; it gradually fell into disuse as early as the classical period. In the early 5th century the custom was in full sway, cf. Cic. Tusc. 12.4 Themistocles . . . cum in epulis recusaret lyram, est habitus

indoctior. -+.Ne€C, qui nesciebat, satis excultus doctrina putabatur, but this was entirely changed as early as the 420:es, cf. Aristoph. Nub.

1357 ὁ δ᾽ εὐθέως ἀρχαῖον εἶν᾽ ἔφασκε τὸ κιϑαρίζειν | ἄδειν τε

πίνονθ' , ὡσπερεὶ κάχρυς γυναῖο᾽ ἀλοῦσαν. As the general ability of playing the lyre vanished, a twig of myrtle or laurel was substituted for

60

TABLE TALKS I 1

615 B

it, and recital gradually replaced singing. The use of λέγειν instead of ἄδειν indicates the change: Aristoph. Nub. 1364 μυρρίνην λαβόντα | τῶν Αἰσχύλου λέξαι τί μου, 1371 ὁ δ᾽ εὐθὺς Hy’ (Borthwick: jo MSS) Εὐριπίδου ῥῆσίν τινὰ (ῥδῆσις is a spoken passage). Sometimes the guests sang accompanied by professional musicians (flute-girls), cf. Aristoph. Vesp. 1219 αὐλητρὶς ἐνεφύσησεν κτλ. Dicaearch. frg. 89 (= Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 1364) indicates that there was freedom of choice: ἔτι δὲ xowóv τι πάϑος φαίνεται συνακολουϑεῖν τοῖς διερχομένοις εἴτε μετὰ μέλους εἴτε ἄνευ μέλους. Recital of ῥήσεις from Comedy still occurred in Plutarch’s time, see the discussion in Talk Vii 8 (712 D). The meaning and etymology of σκόλιον had then been subject of debate for centuries. The discussion started as early as the classical times; it is first to be seen in Dicaearchus, frg. 88 Wehrli

(Schol. Plat. Gorg. 451 E = Suda = Phot. s.v.) fj παροίνιος ᾧδή, ὡς μὲν Δικαίαρχος ἐν τῷ περὶ μουσικῶν ἀγώνων, ὅτι τρία γένη ἦν ᾧῳδῶν, τὸ μὲν ὑπὸ πάντων ἀδόμενον, (τὸ δὲ) xat ἕνα ἑξῆς, τὸ δ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν συνετωτάτων, ὡς ἔτυχε τῇ τάξει. ὃ δὴ καλεῖσθαι κατὰ τὴν τάξιν σκολιόν. Dicaearchus clearly uses the term scolion only of the third kind of song. The tripartite description also meets at Athen. 694 B, and Clem. Paed. II 44.3. The agreement between Dicaearch. frg. 88, Athen. 694 A-B and our passage indicates that Dicaearchus’ exposition forms the basis for all three. — P. Wendland, Quaestiones Musonianae (Berolini 1886) 60f. suggests that Plut. and Clem. used Musonius as a common source, but this is rejected by Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 3211.

615 B οὐ γένος ἀσμάτων εἶναι πεποιημένων ἀσαφῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ... σχόλιον ὠνομάσϑη: The construction is anacoluthic. -- Plut. enumerates the three kinds of convivial songs according to the model of Dicaearchus and also follows him in so far as the term is explained by

reference to precisely the third kind of song; only the explanation itself is different from that given by him, see frg. 88 (quoted above). The derivation of the term from σκολιός by reference to the allegedly intricate, complicated composition of these songs was rejected by Dicacarchus as well as by his contemporary, Aristoxenus: Schol. Plat. Gorg. 451 E (citing Aristoxenus and Phyllis) οὐ διὰ τὴν μελοποιίαν οὖν, διὰ δὲ τὴν μυρρίνης σκολιὰν διάδοσιν ταύτῃ καὶ τὰς φδὰς σκολιὰς χαλεῖσϑαι.

And

Dicaearchus is the source of Artemon

of

Cassandrea cited by Athen. 694 A: σκόλια δὲ καλοῦνται οὗ κατὰ τὸν τῆς μελοποιίας τρόπον ὅτι σκολιὸς ἦν. Cf. also Hesych. s.v. σκόλια,

61

TABLE TALKS I 1

6158Β

and Eustath. 1574.14. The existence of this explanation shows that the obscure origin of the word had given rise to an etymological discussion in the 5th c. See Aly, RE s.v. Skolion, 561; A. Severyns, 'Proclos et la chanson de table'. In: Mélanges Bidez. Annuaire de l'Inst. de philol. et d'hist. or. 2 (1934) 845f. 615 B πρῶτον μὲν ἧδον ᾧδὴν τοῦ ϑεοῦ κοινῶς ἅπαντες μιᾷ φωνῇ παιανίζοντες: This song, sung in unison between the δεῖπνον and the πότος was properly speaking not a scolion but a hymn sung in connection with the libation, see below, 713 A, 743 C, and cf. Plat. Symp.

176 A. This hymn was directed to Apollo or Zeus, not Dionysus which would have been natural at the beginning of the πότος. 615 Β δεύτερον δ᾽ ἐφεξῆς ἕκαστος μυρσίνης παραδιδομένης: Only Plut. of the three closely related sources reporting Dicaearchus mentions the twig: Athen. 694 B τὸ δὲ δεύτερον ὃ δὴ πάντες μὲν ἧδον, οὐ μὴν ἀλλά γε κατά τινα περίοδον ἐξ ὑποδοχῆς; Schol. Plat. Gorg. 451 E (Dicaearch. frg. 88 Wehrli) (τὸ δὲ) καϑ' ἕνα ἑξῆς. However, Dicaearchus has it in frg. 89 where he obviously talks of this second kind of performance: οἵ τε yàg ἄδοντες ἐν τοῖς συμποσίοις ἐκ παλαιᾶς

τινος

παραδόσεως

κλῶνα

ἄδουσιν; cf. also Schol. Aristoph.

δάφνης

Vesp.

ἢ

μυρρίνης

λαβόντες

1222 καὶ γὰρ ὁ ἐξ ἀρχῆς

δάφνην ἢ μυρρίνην κατέχων δε κτλ. 615 B αἴσακον: The word is of unknown derivation. It is not mention-

ed by other commentators on scolia, and appears only at Hesych. atoaxoc ὁ τῆς δάφνης κλάδος, ὃν κατέχοντες ὕμνουν τοὺς ϑεούς, ὯΝ Etym. Mag. 38.47 αἴσακος" ὁ τῆς δάφνης κλάδος ἢ ὁ τῆς μυρσί-

ς.

615 Β ἐπὶ δὲ τούτῳ

λύρας

περιφερομένης

ὁ μὲν πεπαιδευμένος

ἐλάμβανε... σκολιὸν ὠνομάσϑη τὸ μὴ κοινὸν αὐτοῦ μηδὲ ῥᾷδιον: Plut. obviously refers here to the derivation from δύσκολος. However,

this explanation is not found in Dicaearch. frg. 88 (Suda; Phot.) τὸ δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν συνετωτάτων, ὡς ἔτυχε τῇ τάξει, ὃ δὴ καλεῖσϑαι διὰ τὴν

τάξιν σχολιόν, or at Athen. 694 Β (τὸ) τρίτον δὲ ... διόπερ ὡς ἀταξίαν τινὰ μόνον παρὰ τἄλλα ἔχον τὸ uy ἅμα μήϑ᾽ ἑξῆς γινόμενον, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπη ἔτυχον εἶναι σκόλιον ἐκλήϑη. R. Reitzenstein,

Epigramm und Skolion (Giessen 1893) 8f., 12 f., 39 assumed that the

explanation σκόλιον = δύσκολον was coined by Didymus, Symp. frg.

615 B

TABLE TALKS I 1

62

2 p. 371 Schmidt (= Etym. Mag. 718.35) σκολιά" τὰ συμποτικὰ ἄσματα᾽ Δίδυμός φησιν διαφόρους ἐτυμολογίας iv y Συμποσιακῶν.

Aly, RE s.v. Skolion, 561 sides with Reitzenstein, while Severyns, 0. C.

841 ascribes this etymology to Dicaearchus, in spite of the fact that it is not found in him, and suggests that the explanation from ἀταξία, which is typical of Aristoxenus (frg. 125 Wehrli), was ascribed later — in another form — to Dicaearchus also. Severyns thinks that Plut. alone, by the expression τὸ μὴ κοιγὸν αὐτοῦ μηδὲ ῥάδιον, displays the genuine doctrine of D.: Dicaearchus and Aristoxenus both observed by analysis that the convivial songs were not musically complicated,

but - according to Severyns — D. kept the explanation σκόλιον Ξ δύσχολον, only that he changed the reference from the intrinsical (musical) to the extrinsical criterium, i.e. the fact that not all guests

could perform these songs accompanying themselves on the lyre. This argument does not hold good; we have no evidence of an intrinsically based etymology σκόλιον = δύσκολον at Dicaearchus’ time; we only

have the derivation from σκολιός by reference to ὁ τῆς μελοποιίας τρόπος at Athen. 694 A, i.e. the (allegedly) ‘crooked’, complicated composition, not explicitly to δυσκολία. It is thus more probable that it was Hellenistic grammarians,

but not necessarily

Didymus,

who

introduced the etymology from δύσκολος which Plut. has here. He may have found

it in Didymus

and

considered it suitable for his

argument, that there should be no reduction of κοινότης by the wine. Moreover, this etymology forms a neat contrast to the one which follows. There existed many variants of the etymology from δύσκολος:

one explanation referred to certain complicating practices in the performance, cf. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 1222 (quoted below), and accord-

ing to another one the σκόλια had been so called (i.e. difficult) κατ᾽

ἀντίφρασιν, just because they were simple, cf. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 1236; Schol. (Oxf.) Plat. Gorg. 451 E; Tzetzes, Prol. com. VIII 82-84

(CGF 42 Kaibel); Suda s.v. σκόλιον. Procl. Chrestom. ap. Phot. 321a

10 Bekk. explains the ‘difficulty’ as due to the ebriety of the banquet-

ers. Presumably, such explanations ἐτυμολογίαν which Didymus collected.

were

among

615 B ἄλλοι δέ φασι τὴν μυρσίνην οὐ καϑεξῆς

the

διάφοροι

βαδίζειν

..

. τὸ

ποιχίλον καὶ πολυκαμπὲς ... σκολιὸν ὠνομάσϑη : This explanation,

related to the second kind of Singing, derives in some way from Aristoxenus, although his own description (frg. 125 Wehr li) differs considerably from Plut.: ὡς δ᾽ * Αριστόξενος xai Φύλλις ὁ μουσικός,

63

TABLE TALKS I 1

615 B

ὅτι ἐν τοῖς γάμοις περὶ μίαν τράπεζαν πολλὰς χλίνας τιϑέντες, παρὰ μέρος ἑξῆς μυρρίνας ἔχοντες ἦδον γνώμας καὶ ἐρωτικὰ σύντονα. I) δὲ περίοδος σκολιὰ ἐγίνετο διὰ τὴν ϑέσιν τῶν Ἀλινῶν. This particular reference to wedding banquets seems rather far-fetched. If the practice described here by Plut. was known to Aristoxenus it would have been natural for him to rest his argument on this. It is possible that Plut. here preserves Aristoxenus’ own description, and that the version of frg. 125 is a later re-interpretation. However, the reverse is naturally more likely to be true. The disappearing custom of singing scolia may at Aristoxenus’ time have been limited to wedding banquets where the extraordinarily great number of guests and parasites often made the crowding and improvised placing of the couches necessary, see the quotations from the Old Comedy at Athen. 243 D-E. The gnomic and erotic themes of many scolia — expressly mentioned in frg. 125 -- which presumably were customary at wedding parties may have led him to think that the songs sung at these occasions were the original ones. The natural order of singing (παρὰ μέρος ἑξῆς) also indicates that the version of frg. 125 is authentic. The order described by Plut. on the other hand is artificial and looks like a later invention ad hoc to explain the etymology.

Another

ex.

of this seems

to be

found

at Schol.

Aristoph. Vesp. 1222 which describes a third kind of irregular course of the myrtle twig: the singer stops in the middle of the song and passes the twig improvisedly to another guest who must continue the song. This was considered difficult so that διὰ τὸ πάντας οὖν ἀπροσδοκήτως ἄδειν καὶ λέγειν τὰ μέλη σκολιὰ εἴρηται διὰ τὴν δυσχολίαν, ἃ contamination, then, of both explanations. -- The question of the etymolOgy Is not yet entirely settled. W. Schmid (Schmid-Stählin 1:1. 3481.) Suggested that the word is related to σχολή, by reference to an Ionic

and Aeolic phonetic change ox ) ox (σχινδάλαμος ) σκινὸ.-, σχελίς ) σκελίς, etc.). Schmid's opinion has not been accepted; Frisk, and Chantraine, s.v. σκέλος regard the old derivation from σκολιός as Probable, although the semantic relation remains problematic; the ection of the words is still referred to. It seems that Schad No 1 5 etymology cannot be dismissed. A third possibility is that the Ic has no Greek etymology; it may belong to the numerous group of

music terms of uncertain or clearly non-Greek origin, e.g., ἐλεγεῖον, Bo,

διϑύραμβος,

ϑρίαμβος,

ὕμνος;

κιϑάρα,

λύρα,

σάλπιγξ,

θιγξ; κόρδαξ, χορός, se further S.-T. T. Eranos 87 (1989).

615 C

TABLE TALKS 12

64

TALK 2 615 ( Τίμων ὁ ἀδελφός: As far as we know, Plut. had two brothers,

Lamprias and Timon. Lamprias is present passim in Plutarch’s works, while Timon appears only here, in 11 5, and De sera. At De frat am. 487 Ὁ Plut. praises him warmly: ἐμοὶ μὲν γὰρ ὅτι πολλῶν ἀξίων χάριτος παρὰ τῆς τύχης γεγονότων, ἡ Τίμωνος εὔνοια τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ πρὸς ἅπαντα τἄλλα καὶ γέγονε καὶ ἔστιν, οὐδεὶς ἀγνοεῖ τῶν ὁπωσοῦν ἐντετυχηχότων ἡμῖν, ἥκιστα δ᾽ ὑμεῖς οἱ συνήϑεις. Timon also seems

to have played an important part in the lost Περὶ ψυχῆς (frg. 177 Sandb.).

At

De sera 558 AB

Plut.

contrasts

Timon

to himself

in

remarking that Timon claims descent from Opheltas and Daiphantus. This made Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos,

646 Anm.

1, suppose

that

Timon was Plutarch’s half-brother. Plutarch’s mother would have died early, and his father would then have married a daughter of the ancient kingly Opheltiad family who became the mother of Timon. See discussion between Einarson, CP 47 (1952) 99, and CP 50 (1955) 253-255, who opposes Ziegler’s opinion, and Ziegler, Hermes 82 (1954) 499501. 615 C ἕχαστον ἐκέλευε ... ὅποι βούλεται... κατακλίνεσϑαι: The free choice of place at table was probably unusual; it is mentioned by Lucian. Sat, 17 κατακείσϑω ὅπου ἂν τύχῃ ἕκαστος" ἀξίωμα ἢ γένος ἢ πλοῦτος ὀλίγον συντελείτω

ἐς προνομήν,

and at Athen.

47 Ε, in

contrast to the custom of assignment by the slave called ὀνομακλήτωρ (nomenclator, Sen. Ep. 19.11): κατεκλίνϑημεν ὡς ἕκαστος ἤϑελε, οὐ περιμείναντες ὀνομακλήτορα τὸν τῶν δείπνων ταξίαρχον.

cian. De

merc.

cond.

10 ὑπὸ

ϑυρωρῷ

κακῶς

Cf. Lu-

συρίζοντι

καὶ

ὀνομαχλήτορι Λιβυκῷ ταττόμενον καὶ μισϑὸν τελοῦντα τῆς μνήμης

τοῦ ὀνόματος; Sen. Dial. I 14.1 moleste ferunt ... nomenculatoris superbiam. Scherling, RE s.v. Triclinium, 96 argues that the custom of assigning the places was less common among the Greeks (cf. Plat.

Symp. 175 CD) but spread through Roman influence. Fuhrm. (p. 159

n. 3) regards this talk as evidence for that. Quarrel about the places at

table is evidenced by Sen. Dial V 37.4 (assigned places); Julian. Symp. 308 B (free choice).

615 D συνήϑεις καὶ οἰκείους: The conjecture ἀσυνήϑεις Re., support-

ed by Chantraine, Rev. Phil. 22 (1948) 97, was rejected by Bolk.: the combination συνήϑεις xai οἰκεῖοι is common in Plut. (667 A, 708 B

65

TABLE TALKS I 2

615 D

the oppo709 A, An seni 783 C, Coriolan. 30.4). Reiske believed that

sition συνήϑεις : οἰκεῖοι is not marked enough to correspond to ξένοι:

ns πολῖται, but this is not the case; ξένος and συνήϑης denote perso

who are not members of the city and the family respectively.

615 D ξένος τις: A similar but more dramatic episode is found at Sept. sap.

148 EF

where

Alexidemus

of Miletus

takes

offence

at being

assigned a κλισία ἄτιμος by Periander; he refuses to stay for dinner and leaves the house in anger. J. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 101-106 collects a number of similar examples of the case with the offended guest who leaves the party, apparently a convivial topos. One variant of the motive is when a guest arrives late and threatens not to stay unless some condition is fulfilled, as at Plat. Symp. 212 E (Alcibiades, though drunk, claims to be accepted); Petron. Cena Trim. 65.367.3 (Habinnas threatens to leave if Trimalchio’s wife is not present).

In our passage both motives are combined. Martin, o. c. 101 consents with R. Hirzel, Der Dialog 1I (Leipzig 1895) 147 who thinks that Plut. regularly removes troublesome persons from the convivial scene because he is anxious to avoid any passionate dispute. Although these episodes may be interpreted as literary topoi, Abram. rightly remarks that there is no means of showing that the appearance of the ostentatious comedian in our passage could not have been real. Anyhow, there is no reason to think that it is a display of a scene from the New

Comedy (so Kock, CAF ΠῚ 428 frg. 113). 615 D εὐπάρυφος ἐκ κωμῳδίας xt).: The meaning of εὐπάρυφος and ἣν connection with the New Comedy is seen at Poll. VII 46 χλαμύς, ἡ

μὲν ὁλόλευχος ... ἡ δὲ παρυφὶς καὶ παραπόρφυρος, ἢ ὡς f] νέα γωμῳδία εὐπάρυφος. The word denoted a fine robe with a purple person who wore it. As such the secondarily and 33) c. (I. n tive pu clothing was considered extravagant the word grew pejora"d most = νεόπλουτος or even ἄγροικος, cf. De ad. et am. 57 A w AM τινὸς (ἢ) &yoo(xov, contrasted with οἱ κομψότερον (see sop 4 me ad loc.), De laud. ips. 547 E νεοπλούτους εὐπάρυφα xai purple-b νηγήματα περαίνοντας. The word was also used of the sonic ordered toga of the emperor, cf. Herodian. I 16.3. For the inooéhene cf. Nicostr. frg. 9 (III 222 Kock). — The rare word stat Olx0S, ‘rather barbarian’, is probably intended to be an underement, cf. below, 615 E ὑποπεπωκότες.

615 D

TABLE TALKS 1 2

66

615 D χαίροντας εὐφημοῦντας

κτλ.: Eur.

Chresphontes

frg. 449.4

Nauck?, also quoted, together with the two preceding lines, at De aud. poet. 36 F. The passage was much quoted, cf. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Τῇ

230; Clem. Strom. ΠῚ 15.2; Strab. XI 11.8, et al. Plut. quotes his favourite tragedian, Eur., more than twice as often as Aesch. and

Soph. taken together. According to Lamprias' catalogue no. 224 he wrote a monograph Περὶ Εὐριπίδου.

615 E μετρίως ὑποπεπωκότες: ‘somewhat tipsy’. This is obviously the

meaning (understatement), quite different from the matter-of-fact

sense of the expression at Plat. Rep. 372 D xai μύρτα καὶ φηγοὺς σποδιοῦσι πρὸς τὸ πῦρ, μετρίως ὑποπίνοντες, which is perhaps

echoed here. According to Greek custom, only a little wine was consumed during the δεῖπνον. But this norm seems to have changed in

later times, cf. 734 A where heavy consumption of aperitifs is criticized. The intimation here of considerable consumption of wine even before the πότος thus forms another similarity to Petron. Cena Trim.,

besides the episode of the spectacular, late guest. 615 E 6 πατήρ: Plut. never explicitly mentions the name of his father. J. Muhl, Plutarchische Studien (Progr. Augsburg 1885) 22-24 showed that this was Autobulus: In De soll. an., where Autobulus and Soclarus

are discussing, the former speaks (959 B) of ‘the young men’ and thus cannot be Plutarch's son A.: see also Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchus, 642644. Plutarch’s father participates in Talks II 8, III 7-9, and in Praec. ger. reip.

615 E τὰς κλίσεις: Bolk. points out that this word is not synonymous with Ἀλίνηϊκλισία (so eds., cf. Hubert’s note: ἰχλίσεις etiam 629 D,

alibi κλισίαι, v. Wytt. Anim. ad 148 E’); it never has this sense; “κλίσις est và κλίνεσϑαι᾽, Clem. translates correctly: ‘the placing of the guests’. but cf. Fuhrm: ‘les places’. 615 E κοσμῆσαι ἵππους χτλι: Il. II 554. As Plut. uses this line here about the guest (ἀνδρὶ δεινῷ) instead of the host it is strikingly out of

place. In reality it illustrates the aphorism uttered by Aemilius Paullus (the particles «ai δή reveal that Plut. actually thought of him when he made the quotation). Plut reports Aemilius" sayi 2 8 . aying ᾿ ying at at Aem. . 28.9 and ‘ Apophth. Rom.

198 B.

67

TABLE TALKS I 2

615 E

615 E κόσμῳ te ϑαυμαστῷ περὶ πάντα καὶ τῇ λοιπῇ τάξει χρώμενον: Clem. and Fuhrm.

accept the conjecture περιττῇ Hu.

for τῇ λουτῇ.

Bolk. and Abram. rightly defend the text: Plut. used λοιπός because he abbreviated the anecdote as much as he could; he told it at length at Aem. 28.7-9 (without using περιττός), cf. also Apophth. Rom. 198 B. Bolk. refers to Aem. 39.7 ταῦτα δ᾽ ἦν o0 χρυσὸς οὐδ᾽ ἐλέφας οὐδ᾽ 1j λοιπὴ πολυτέλεια καὶ φιλοτιμία τῆς παρασκευῆς. 615 F κοσμήτορας λαῶν... καὶ τὸν μέγαν ϑεὸν ὑμεῖς πού φατε κτλ.: To quote this common

Homeric

epithet — incidentally,

it normally

occurs in the dual (e.g. Il. I 16, 375, III 236, Od. XVIII 152) -- would seem trivial at first sight but Plut. uses it here elegantly to suggest a climax with steps, (1) the Roman troops, (2) ‘the peoples’, (3) the universe, organized and led by (1) Aemilius, (2) the semi-mythic Homeric heroes of the Great Age, (3) ὁ Μέγας Θεός. - By ὑμεῖς Plutarch's father indicates modestly that he does not count himself among the philosophic men and also that the others are Platonists; the

reference may be to Tim. 30 A βουληϑεὶς yàg ὁ ϑεὸς ἀγαϑὰ μὲν πάντα, φλαῦρον δὲ μηδὲν εἶναι κατὰ δύναμιν, ... εἰς τάξιν αὐτὸ ἤγαγεν ἐκ τῆς ἀταξίας.

Plutarch’s father marks his amateur position

clearly by (616 A) τὰ σεμνότερα καὶ μείζονα παρ᾽ ὑμῶν μανϑάνομεν, c. 655Ε (ὁ πατὴρ) τοῖς φιλοσοφοῦσι μειρακίοις pet? ἡμῶν προὔβαλεν ζητεῖν λόγον. -- Plut. often treats Platonic cosmology, e.g. in Talk VIII 2, Quaest.

Plat.

1001 B, De an. procr.

1016 D, De sera

350 D. He perhaps also wrote a treatise Περὶ τοῦ γεγονέναι κατὰ Πλάτωνα τὸν κόσμον (Lamprias’ catalogue no. 66). The expression 6 μέγας ϑεός occurs only here in Plut. It is one of many terms which show ‘Phatarch’s monotheistic tendency, cf. Quaest. Plat. 1000 E ὁ Wim ϑεός, 1007 Ἑ τῷ ἡγεμόνι καὶ πρώτῳ ded, De Is. et Os. tradi TO πρώτῳ deg, etc. On the other hand they also indicate his Taditional polytheism. Other terms (ὁ ϑεός, τὸ 9eiov, τὸ δαιμόνιον) are more unambiguous. See D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris on 450f.; B. Latzarus, Les idées religieuses de Plutarque (Paris

20) 89-120, and cf. below, on 685 D. MU » ea

ἀκοσμίαν εὐταξίᾳ μεταβαλεῖν εἰς κόσμον: Following Plato, ently declares his high appreciation of the beauty of order,

17 ni

by God, cf. 720 A, 732 E, Sept. sap. 153 D, De an. procr.

P

‚ Non posse 1102 E. See K. Svoboda, ‘Les idées esthétiques de

, j . lutarque’. In: Mélanges Bidez. Annuaire de l'inst. de philol. et d'hist.

or. 2 (1934) 918-920,

68

.

TABLE TALKS I 2

616 A

616 Α τοῖς μὲν ὀψοποιοῖς καὶ τραπεζοκόμοις: The two words also occur together at Longin. 43.4. For Athen. the function of the latter was a subject of discussion (170 D): τῶν δὲ μαγείρων διάφοροί τινες

ἦσαν οἱ καλούμενοι τραπεζοποιοί.,.. (170 E) ζητητέον δὲ εἰ καὶ 6 τραπεζοκόμος ὁ αὐτός ἐστι τῷ τραπεζοποιῷ. As a support of this opinion he then cites Juba (frg. 84 Müller): Ἰόβας γὰρ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐν ταῖς Ομοιότησι τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναί φησι τραπεζοκόμον καὶ τὸν ὑπὸ τῶν Ῥωμαίων καλούμενον στρούκτωρα. The discussion shows that the two

words

were

used

indiscriminately

at

that

time.

Presumably,

τραπεζοποιός originally denoted the chef, who was responsible for the general planning of the dinner, cf. Antiphan.

frg. 152 Kock; Philem.

frg. 61 Kock; Alex. frg. 3 III 372 Kock; Men. frg. 518 Edmonds; Poll. III 41 6 δὲ πάντων περὶ τὴν ἑστίασιν ἐπιμελούμενος τραπεζοποιός; Hesych. τραπεζοποιός᾽ οὐχ ὁ μάγειρος, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ τῆς πάσης περὶ τὰ συμπόσια παρασκευῆς ἐπιμελούμενος. We may suppose that Plut., avoiding two words ending in -ποιός, happened to use τραπεζοκόμος

correctly in its original, true sense, required here.

‘waiter’, which is the meaning

616 A τί πρῶτον ἢ ví δεύτερον xtÀ.: Two τράπεζαι, principal meal and dessert, were normal, cf. 672 E, De tu. san. 133 E; Athen. 639 B,

but there could be three (Poll. VI 83), and at Petron. Cera Trim. a great number of meals were served. There may be a hint here too at such extravagant, dissolute feasts, as above, 615 DE

(the grand, pre-

tentious guest with his large train of servants). 616 B χορτάζειν: Helmbold (CPh 36 (1941) 86) thinks that Plut. here echoes Plat. Rep. 372 D where he jokes about a 'state of pigs': εἰ δὲ ὑῶν πόλιν, ... κατεσχεύαζες, τί ἂν αὐτὰς ἄλλο ἢ ταῦτα ἐχόρταζες; Abram. doubts that and points out that, whenever the principles of the symposion are offended, Plut. uses such crude expressions, as if he were speaking of animals, e.g. at 643 B ὥσπερ ἐκ φάτνης, 697 C βεβρωκένοαι, μὴ δεδειπνηκέναι σήμερον, etc. However, the expression μετρίως ὑποπεπωκότες above, 615 E, points to this same passage in Plato. :

616 B οὐ γὰρ ἕδρα μὲν ἔστι... κατάκλεσις δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν: Bolk. rightly rejects the conjecture ἔσταν (twice) Kron. (and Cast. (p. 905) for 620 C ἔστι δὲ τοιοῦτος). The future forms which follow do not motivate a change, cf. De ad. et am. 62 A, present and future used

parallelly.

69

TABLE TALKS I 2

616 B

— Abram.

προεδρία, see honorary refer to dance; the word the χορός, cf. Hesych. χορός, s.v. ὑποκόλπιον

suggests

that

τοῦ

ἕδρα

κρείττονος

means

decrees, Syll? passim, and that στάσις may means ‘position’, ‘place where one stands’ in s.v. στάσις ϑέσις. χορός, s.v. χοροστασία" τοῦ χοροῦ" τῆς στάσεως χῶραι αἱ ἄτιμοι. The

differences of status between the positions in the χορός are implied at Poll. IV 106 ἡγεμὼν χοροῦ, κορυφαῖος χοροῦ ... δεξιοστάτης, ἀριστεροστάτης, δευτεροστάτης, τριτοστάτης, and Plut. Sept. sap. 149 A tells of a Spartan, ὃς ἐν χορῷ τινι κατασταϑεὶς εἰς τὴν ἐσχάτην χώραν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἄρχοντος, εὖ γ᾽, εἶπεν, ἐξεῦρες, ὡς καὶ atta (Wil.: αὐτά) ἔντιμος γένηται. Cf. also below, 678 Ὁ ὥσπερ χοροῦ τοῦ συμποσίου τὸν κρασπεδίτην τῷ κορυφαίῳ συνήκοον ἔχοντος. How-

ever, Fuhrm. thinks that Plut. may have added στάσις simply in the sense of upright position besides ἕδρα and κατάλλισις. 616 B μίαν Méxovov: This common saying means ‘chaotic mixture of disparate ingredients’, cf., e.g. Adesp. frg. 515 Kock ἅπαντα συγχεῖν

ὥσπερ tic Móxovov μίαν; Themist. Or. XXI 250 C μὴ ... συγχεῖν μηδὲ συμφύρειν ἅπαντα ὥσπερ εἰς Móxovov μίαν, but its origin was unknown. Thus there were various explanations, all inadequate and insufficient, e.g. Strab. X 5.9 Μύκονος δ᾽ ἐστίν, ὑφ᾽ fj μυϑεύουσι χεῖσδαι τῶν γιγάντων τοὺς ὑστάτους bY ᾿Ηρακλέους καταλυϑέντας, ἀφ ὧν ἡ παροιμία navi ὑπὸ μίαν Μύκονον ἐπὶ τῶν ὑπὸ μίαν ἐπιγραφὴν ἀγόντων καὶ τὰ διηρτημένα τῇ φύσει; Eustath. Ad Dio. Perieg. 525 ἣ Μύκονος, ἐν ἧ λέγεται κεῖσϑαι οἱ τῶν γιγάντων ὕγι-

εἰνότατον, ἀναιρεϑέντες ὑφ

‘Hoaxdéous,

ὅϑεν ἐπὶ τῶν οὐκ εὖ

παϑόντων μιᾷ ψήφῳ, ἤγουν ἐπὶ τῶν μιᾷ δίκῃ καταδικασϑέντων λέγεται τὸ πάνϑ' ὑπὸ μίαν Müxovov, ἤγουν ὁμοῦ μίαν βλάβην ἢ καταδίκην, an explanation referred to by the paroemiographers: Apostol XIV 5; Append. IV 52 (CPG I 445); Greg. Cypr. M. IV 82 (CPG u 127). Zenob. V 17 has another story: Νηλεὺς προσέταξε τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ

παισὶν

᾿Ἡγήτορι

καὶ

Ἱπποκλεῖ

τὰς

νήσους

καταστρέψαι.

χειρωσαμένου δὲ πολλὰς τοῦ ᾿Ηγήτορος, Ἱπποκλέους δὲ μίαν τὴν Μύκονον, βουλομένου δὲ πασῶν ἔχειν τὸ μέρος, πέμψαντες ἠρώMOOV κοινῇ τὸν ϑεόν, τίνες εἶεν τοῦ ᾿Ηγήτορος νῆσοι: ὁ δὲ εἶπε, μία Möxovog. There is also an explanation referring to the alleged baldness of the men of Myconus: Lucian. Dial mort. 1 3 πάντα μία Móxovoc, φασί, κρανία γυμνὰ τοῦ κάλλους; Strab. Χ 5,9 καὶ τοὺς

φαλαχροὺς δέ τινες Μυκονίους καλοῦσιν ἀπὸ τοῦ τὸ πάϑος τοῦτο

ἐπιχωριάζξειν τῇ νήσῳ. These ‘explanations’ do not explain why the

616 B

TABLE TALKS I 2

70

expression was used in the sense of ‘unordered heap’. The island was also called Móxov (Tzetzes, Ad Lycophr. 401), and the word is given this meaning by Hesych.: uóxov' σωρός, ϑημών. Abram. is perhaps right in suggesting that the origin of the saying might simply be the

name itself. The etymology is unknown. See further Herbst, RE s.v. Mykonos, 1031f. 616 C τοῦ Βίαντος: Bias of Priene, one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece, was renowned as a judge. The apophthegm referred to here s

reported by Diog. Laert. I 87 ἥδιον ἔλεγε δικάζειν μεταξὺ ἐχϑρῶν " q.v: τῶν μὲν γὰρ φίλων πάντως ἐχϑρὸν ἔσεσϑαι τὸν ἕτερον, τῶν δὲ ἐχϑρῶν τὸν ἕτερον φίλον, and Gnom. Vat. 150 χαλεπώτερον einev εἶναι φίλους διαφερομένους διαιτῆσαι ἤπερ ἐχϑρούς" τῶν μὲν γὰρ

φίλων τὸν ἡττώμενον ἐχῦρὸν γίνεσθαι, τῶν δὲ ἐχϑρῶν νικήσαντα q(ov. A similar apophthegm is attributed to Solon: Stob. III 172 p p. 114 H. κριτὴς μὴ κάϑησο᾽ εἰ δὲ μή, τῷ ληφϑέντι ἐχϑρὸς ἔσῃ (Stern-

bach, Wiener Stud. 10 (1888) 33 added φίλων before κριτής). See further Crusius, RE s.v. Bias, 386.

616 C Öveiv: Plut. uses this form frequently beside δυοῖν (657 D, 667 B (?), 720 A, B, 737 E, 744 B (twice)). See survey by Doe. TI 35

n. 2. Doehner argued that δυεῖν is Plutarch's genuine form and thus should be substituted for δυοῖν everywhere.

616 C παροιμιώδης Μενέλαος: The line Il. II 408 αὐτόματος δέ ot ‘Ade βοὴν ἀγαϑὸς Μενέλαος gave rise to a proverb, of which there are two versions, both quoted by Athen. 178 B αὐτόματοι δ᾽ ἀγαϑο ὶ

ἀγαϑῶν ἐπὶ δαῖτας ἴασιν, and αὐτόματοι ἀγαϑοὶ δειλῶν ἐπὶ δαῖτα ς ἴασιν. A variant of the first version is found as early as in Bacchyl. frg.

22 Snell (quoted by Athen. I. c.) αὐτόματοι δ᾽ ἀγαϑῶν | δαῖτας

εὐόχϑους ἐπέρχονται δίκαιοι] φῶτες (cf. also Cratinus, frg. 169), see further the paroemiographers: Zenob. II 46; Apostol. I 92; Macar. I 69; Greg. Cypr. M. I 69, 78. The second version is attributed to Eupolis (frg. 289) by Zenob. II 19 (who is the only paroemiographer who has this version): Εὔπολις δὲ ἐν χθυσῷ γένει ἑτέρως φησὶν ἔχειν τὴν παροιμίαν" αὐτόματοι ἀγαϑοὶ δειλῶν uth. Schol. Plat. Symp. 174 B, also citing Eupolis for this version, regards it as the origin al one

and implies that this was also how Plato used it, so also Zenob. I. c. καὶ

ὁ Πλάτων ἐν τῷ συμποσίῳ οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρήσατο (Symp. 174 Β ἵνα καὶ τὴν παροι μίαν

διαφϑείρωμεν

μεταβάλλοντες,

ὡς

ἄρα

καὶ

71

TABLE TALKS I 2

616 C

᾿Αγάϑων (Lachmann: ἀγαϑῶν MSS) ἐπὶ δαῖτας ἴασιν αὐτόματοι ἀγαϑοῦ. Of course Plato travestied ἀγαϑοὶ ἀγαϑῶν, not ἀγαϑοὶ δειλῶν, see A. Hug, De Graecorum proverbio αὐτόματοι ... (Turici 1872) 12-20. The mistaken interpretation, reflected in Zenob. and the Schol., may be due to (Alexandrian) philologists; Hug (p. 13) suggests Didymus or Aristophanes of Byzantium. That the passage, including Plato's representation of Menelaus as δειλός, was much discussed is seen at Athen. 177 C-178 D. Plutarch's pejorative comment in our passage on Menelaus' appearing uninvited is noticeable. In a later passage, 706 F, where he quotes this Homeric line, he praises him for

coming uninvited without showing resentment at having been left out. Fuhrm. REG 66 (1953) 92-94 supposes that Plut. was influenced by Plato (ἰ. c.) to this interpretation, and also that he by a slip of the memory thought that Menelaus went to a deliberation and not a feast.

Later, after rereading the passage in Homer, he wrote the version of 706 F. This may be true, but it is equally possible that he used, as he often did, an Alexandrian source, e.g., Didymus. 616 C οὐ γὰρ εἰς ἀγῶνα καϑείκασιν: Ald. corrected καϑήκασιν T. Bases, ᾿Αϑηνᾶ 10 (1898) 133 doubted the intransitive use of this verb (cf. Schol. Pind. 1. IV 47 τῶν γὰρ μὴ καϑιέντων αὑτοὺς εἰς ἅμιλλαν), but Bern. Plutarchea,

Anton.

45.3

αὐτοὶ

35 observed that this use is frequent in Plut.:

δὲ καϑέντες

εἰς γόνυ,

De

Is.

et Os.

363 C

ἄνϑρωπον εἰς γόνυ καϑεικότα, De virt. mor. 444 A τὴν δὲ φρόνησιν

εἰς πράγματα πλάνης μεστὰ... καϑιεῖσαν ἐπιμίγνυσθαι, Crass. 22.1 προβολὴν ὄρους καϑιέντος. Bolk. also adduces De gen. Socr. 576 C

wv ... ἡδέως ἠκροᾶτο συγκαϑιεὶς μετὰ τῶν νέων; Greg. Nyss. Eunom. 1.11 (I 25.23 Jaeger’); Eutoc. In Archim. praef. (ΠῚ 2.8 Heiberg). Hu. refers to the close parallel at Lucian. Alex. 6 xowwViloac Βυζαντίῳ τινὶ χορογράφῳ τῶν καϑιέντων ἐς τοὺς ἀγῶνας.

m D ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ εὐχερὴς ..., ἀλλὰ δεῖ ..., ἀλλὰ τὴν κενὴν δόξαν: à e sentence structure is strikingly clumsy. To mark a full stop after ἰαφερόντων (Abram., Fuhrm.) is a slight improvement. 616 D καϑάπερ ὑπόϑεσιν μελετῶντα συγκχριτικήν: Σύγχρισις, comT son of Persons and their qualities, was a common device of ἔπαινος ton 05 in rhetorical argumentation or declamation; see the defini-

REA

descriptions by Theon, Progymn. 9 (Rhet. Gr. II 112.20

Pengel) and Hermog. Progymn. 8.43 (Rhet. Gr. VI 19.14 Rabe); cf.

72

TABLE TALKS 12

616 D

Ps.-Quintil. Decl. 1 13 transeo illum vulgarem et omnibus notum de

comparatione personarum locum, See further Focke, (1923) 335-339; Kroll, RE Suppl. VII 1128-1130.

Hermes

58

616 D τοὺς ᾿Αριστοτέλους Τόπους: At Top. ΠῚ 116-119 Arist. treats comparative argumentation, especially comparison between the good and the better. Lamprias' catalogue, no. 56 mentions a work entitled Τῶν ᾿Αριστοτέλονς Τοπικῶν βιβλία η΄. There is, however, no evidence in Plutarch's preserved writings that he was interested in that work. He only cites it here. Sandbach, Ill. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 212. suggests that it was Arist. Top. itself which was by mistake taken to be ἃ commentary by Plut. on that work. — Plut. certainly uses τόπου here as a pun on the places at table.

616 D τοὺς Θρασυμάχου “Ὑπερβάλλοντας: This work by the rhetor ' Thrasymachus of Chalcedon (frg. B 7 II 325 DK) is not mentioned elsewhere. Oppenheimer, RE s.v. 589 concludes that it contained τόποι of comparative arguments. Other works by Thrasymachus are mentioned in Suda: ἔγραψε Συμβουλευτικούς, Τέχνην ῥητορυκήν, Παίγνια, ᾿Αφορμὰς δητορικάς. Athen. 416 A mentions a work by him called ΠΠροοίμια. See further M. Untersteiner, Sofisti ΠῚ (Firenze 1954) 36f. Plutarch’s tone is ironic, as often when he is speaking of

orators. 616 D ἀ(παλλάττειν) συνουσίᾳ: Fuhrm. prints Hubert's conjecture, which effectively contrasts ἐπισχευάζοντα (so also ἀναιρεῖν Po.) though ἀνιέναν Amyot, Schott is palaeographically plausible, if T had ἅμα μὲν (so other MSS), erased by a later hand substituting &(qotosiv

τῆς) ovvovota(c). 616 D τὸν δὲ τῦφον ἐπισκευάξοντα, ὅν: A lac. 3-5 is marked before

ov in T. A second hand wrote τῦφον above τύχῃ. Abram. points out — against Turn. and Hu. — that the concept of τύχη has no place in this context. Fuhrm. prints ἐπισκενάζοντ᾽ (αὐτόν), ὅν Po. The supplementation is acceptable but is hardly needed; when tüqov had been corrupted into τύχῃ, a scribe may have observed that a masc. noun was lacking and marked a lacuna. The hiatus is not reason enough for an addition. Plut. allows for scattered instances of hiatus, particularly in certain positions, e.g., in pause, cf. De superst. 165 D μόνος δ᾽ ὁ φόβος, οὐχ ἧττον ὧν τόλμης ἐνδεὴς ἣ λογισμοῦ, ἄπρακτον Eyer... τὸ

73

TABLE TALKS I 2

616 D

ἀλόγιστον, 169 F ὁ μὴ νομίζων ϑεοὺς εἶναι ἀνόσιός ἐστιν, Demetr. 32.6 γενομένης δὲ πρὸς Πτολεμαῖον διὰ Σελεύκου φιλίας αὐτῷ, ὡμολογήϑη

κτλ.,

Luc.

8.4

δὲ

᾿Αρχελάου

...

διαβεβαιομένου,

ὀφϑέντα Λεύκολλον κτλ., Philop. 21.6 οἱ δὲ στρατιῶται, ὡπλισμένοι μὲν αὐτοὶ κτλ. (Sintenis added (καϑ)ωπλισμένοι); Caes. 6.4 πλήϑει τε ϑαυμαστοὶ ὅσοι διεφάνησαν ἐξαίφνης. See further below, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα, and 632 D.

616 Ε προπόσεις: To drink toasts was customary among the Greeks, with the exception of the Spartans, according to Athen. 432 D προπόσεις δὲ τὰς γινομένας ἐν τοῖς συμποσίοις Λακεδαιμονίοις οὐκ ἦν

ἔϑος

ποιεῖν

οὐδὲ

φιλοτησίας

τούτων

διὰ

πρὸς

ἀλλήλους

ποιεῖσϑαι. 616 E σατραπικὸν ἡμῖν ἀντὶ φιλικοῦ: Σατραπικός mostly refers to the luxury

of the

life of a satrap,

as

at. Luc.

44.5

τράπεζα

...

πολυτελὴς καὶ σατραπική; Alciphr. IV 11.4 ( 38) τὰς σατραπικὰς ἐκείνας καὶ πολυχρύσους δωρεάς. The aspect ‘formal’, ‘official’, ‘strict’ is found only here. The word here also connotes ‘envious’, ‘pedantic’. — For a vivid description of how a banquet may be unpleas-

ant for the opposite reason, lack of order, see below, 644 A. 616 F δημοκρατικόν ἐστι τὸ δεῖπνον καὶ οὐκ (ἔχει τόπον) ἐξαίρετον: Δημοκρατικόν ἐστι Ρο.: δημόκριτος ἐπί T, is supported by Luc. 44.5 where τράπεζα δημοκρατική is contrasted to fj πολυτελὴς καὶ σατραπική, ef. also Sept. sap. 154 CD τὸν λόγον ἀξιῶ καϑάπερ τὸν oiov ... ἐξ ἴσου πᾶσιν ὥσπερ ἐν δημοκρατίᾳ νέμεσϑαι καὶ κοινὸν evan. At 621 B, however, the word is used in a pejorative sense: τὸ συμπόσιον... ἐκκλησίαν Snuoxgatixrv, -- Kron. filled the lacuna convincingly by reference to 617 B, 619 E.

τό F ὥσ(περ ἀκρό)πολιν: The lac. 5-6 was filled by man. post. in T. 9r the metaphor,

cf.

Crass.

14.4

ὑπατεύοντι

&

αὐτῷ

καλῶν

ψηφισάμενοι στρατευμάτων ἡγεμονίαν καὶ Γαλατίαν ἐγχειρίσαντες ὥσπερ εἰς ἀκρόπολιν κατέστησαν. en ἐνερυφήσει τοῖς εὐτελεστέροις: Hubert’s emendation of ἐν τῇ dp "e is convincing. For Tucker's correction of εὐτελεστάτοις, 68 B à ἐπιεικέστατον (corrected into the comp. by Emp.), and ἑρμότερος (corrected into the superl. by Fuhrm.).

74

TABLE TALKS I2

616 F

616 F ἔφην ἐγὼ διαιτητὴς ἠθημένος, οὐ κριτής: Abram. observes that this is not in accordance with 615 E where Plutarch’s father said κριτήν σε πεποιήμεϑα, and that Lamprias (617 F) uses no such subtle

distinctions but calls his brother ληροῦντα δικαστήν. The task of the διαιτητής was to conciliate the disputants, while a κριτής had to decide which of the parts was right. It appears that Plut., in explicitly marking the contrast between the words, indicates that he would like to act as a

mediator and prevent conflicts. 616 F νέους .. . καὶ πολίτας καὶ συνήϑεις: Abram. notices that these

three groups correspond, ἄρχουσιν, πρεσβυτέροις.

in

opposite

order,

to

617A

ξένοις,

617 A φιλοσοφοῦντες ... μετὰ πολλῆς ἀδιαφορίας: Wytt. proposed ἰσονομοῦντες; Po. defends φιλοσοφοῦντες by reference to the Stoic term ἀδιαφορίας, ‘indifference’; cf. Adv. stoic. 1071 F (= SVF IIE 9.5) where Plut. ridicules that concept. The irony is also present in our passage but in a vague and almost casual way. Fuhrm. regards the phrase μετὰ πολλῆς ἀδιαφορίας as pleonastic and brackets it as an explicative gloss on φιλοσοφοῦντες. But exactly the need for a definition of this verb here indicates that Plut. actually wrote this complement. It is not necessary to assume that he thought of a company of Stoics; he clearly takes the phrase in a more general sense here. Abram. points out that if there is no ranking at table the guests will boast of their ἀδιαφορία and thus introduce τῦφος in the party. See Süss, Neue Jahrb. 23 (1920) 33. - The contrast between the main entrance through the courtyard and the back door is also found at Clem. Strom. VII 106.2 οὐ τὴν αὐλείαν ἀναπετάσαντες, ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς ... εἴσιμεν, παράϑυρον δὲ ἀνατεμόντες κτλ.; Macar. Homil. 43.3 (p. 287.39 Dörr.) uses this simile when speaking of heretics who sneak into the Church: καὶ εὑρίσκεται διὰ μὲν τῆς πλατείας ϑύρας ἐξελϑὼν τοῦ κόσμου, διὰ δὲ τῆς παραϑύρου εἰσεχϑὼν καὶ ἐμπεσὼν εἷς τὸν κόσμον. Plut, uses it in various contexts at 645 E, De aud. poet. 14 F-

15 A, De def. or. 413 EF. 617 A αἴσπερ ob τοὺς ἐπιτυγχάνοντας τιμῶμεν οὐδ᾽ ἀκρίτως ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐνδέχεται μάλιστα χρώμενοι xtd.: Bases’ correction αἷσπερ οὐ: αἷς πρὸς T, is persuasive. Bolk. replaces τιμῶμεν which had been transposed to the position after χρώμενοι, This reading is clearly preferable to others which were induced by the corrupt word order. Since αἷσπερ

617 A

TABLE TALKS 12

75

and the adverb phrases now qualify τιμῶμεν, the Homeric line no longer appears as loosely added; it is governed by χρώμενοι. Bases’ emendation (doubted by Abram.) is supported by the transposition of τιμῶμεν. For other instances of transposition in Plut. Bolk. refers to 627 A (διά), Pelop. 10.1 (xat), Marc. 7.1 (διαφέρων), Galba 26.6 (&nQ). 617 A ὁ τῶν ' EJ):jvov βασιλεύς: The line is not spoken by Agamem-

non but by Hector, Il. VIII 162 (not listed by Helmbold-O'Neil) and by Sarpedon, 7]. XII 311. Plut. occasionally commits such errors of quotation, e. g. 630 E, 741 F, 742 C, and probably 683 D. Plut. may have confused the line with Il. IV 345f. (Hu.) or Il. IV 262 (Abram.) and thus attributed it to Agamemnon. Helmbold-O'Neil (p. IX) briefly discuss the question of what method he may have used and suggest

that he probably used notebooks or compendia, ὑπομνήματα, διηγήσεις (cf. De tranqu. 464 F). But he certainly also relied on his prodigious memory to a large extent, as was common with ancient writers, not looking up the passage in any source book. On Plutarch's way of quoting, see further E. Howind, De ratione citandi . . (Marpurgi 1921)

23-29. 617 B Λαομέδοντα: Od. VII 170. The son of Alcinous is also called by

this name in some MSS of Homer, but the prevailing form is Laodamas. Some apparent inadvertencies in Plutarch’s quotations may thus sometimes be due to variations in the MSS tradition. We are not entitled to change to Λαοδάμαντα

(Bern.). - The

many

quotations

from Homer illustrate Plutarch’s predilection for the Poet; more than

one-eighth of all his quotations are Homeric.

617 C ἄγκιστα ἡμένη: Pind. frg. 146 Snell. To make the line fit the context - with Athena in the third person -- Plut. shortened the line by substituting ἡμένη for δεξιὰν κατὰ χεῖρα πατρὸς | tear, given by Kei) Il. XXIV 100, also quoted (freely) by Aristid. II 6 (II 305.21 eil).

6r c καίτοι φήσει Τίμων: For the anticipation (ὑπ οφορά) of the Opponent 's objection, see below, on 644 C.

617 C à 1 "P R Y . ΕΝ ἀφαιρεῖται γὰρ ὁ κοινὸν ποιῶν τὸ ἴδιον: The issue is viewed

τ, X 2 .the [9other way round at 644 C: ὅπου τὸMY ἴδιον ἔστιν, ἀπόλλυται τὸ

OWOv, see ad.loc.

16

TABLE TALKS I 2

617 C

617 C τὸ πρωτεῖον ἀρετῇ καὶ συγγενείᾳ καὶ ἀρχῇ καὶ tois τοιούτοις

ὀφειλόμενον: The unnecessary conjecture εὐγενείᾳ Herw. for συγγενείᾳ was printed by Hu. by reference to 617 Ε φιλοσόφου γένεσι καὶ πλούτοις καὶ ἀρχαῖς ὥσπερ ϑέαν ἐν συμποσίῳ xatavépovtoc, and 618A οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ οἰκοδόμος τὸν ᾿Αττικὸν λίϑον ἢ τὸν Λακωνικὸν πρὸ τοῦ βαρβαρικοῦ (διὰ) τὴν εὐγένειαν τίϑησιν. Bolk. observes that these passages are irrelevant, and that 617 D shows that relatives counted equally much or more than illustrious and wealthy persons. 617 D πρὸς μίαν κλίσιν o) ῥᾳδίως ἀπαντῶσιν: 'do not easily (i.e. seldom) meet at the same place (of honour)'. The conjecture κλῆσιν Ald. was generally accepted by eds. until Bolk. (p. 63) discarded it: ‘cum ... de τῷ τοὺς δειπνοῦντας xavaxA(vew honestis locis agatur". Thus Fuhrm. rightly restores κλίσιν, while Clem. keeps the conjecture and gets into the difficulty of translation: *meet at one party', like Amyot: 'soient conviez en un mesme festin'. Xyl. evaded the difficulty: ‘non facile multi una invitantur dignitate aequales". 617 D ἂν τις εὐστοχεῖν δύνηται: The mildly humorous strain of slight irony directed against oneself of this parenthetic clause is truly Plutarchean. 617 D τοῖς δ᾽ ἄλλοις δωρεὰς καὶ φιλοφροσύνην, ἄλυπον ἀνάπαυλαν μᾶλλον τῆς τιμῆς: Clem. prints ἄλυπον Wytt.: ἔλιπον T. This is the

most easy emendation of this suspect passage. Other solutions (Wytt., Paton, Po., Abram.) are not convincing. Hartm. resigns (‘locus desperatus"), so also Hu., Fuhrm. It cannot be decided to what extent the text is corrupt; perhaps the damage is not very extensive; the emendation οἵ ἔλιπον may be sufficient. The appositional phrase may mean: 'a harmless resting-place (cf. Eur. Hipp. 1137, and Plat. Leg. 722 C) rather than a place of honour’, 617 D àv δὲ (560x01)tot μὲν αἱ ἀξίαι, δύσχολοι δ᾽ oi ἄνδρες ὦσιν:

The old supplementation {(δυσδιάκρι)του (Amyot, Steph.) has been generally accepted. Hu. considered it too long for the lacuna. Incidentally, this is unproblematic as pointed out by Bolk. The length of the lacunae as marked in T is not decisive (cf. also Bern. vol. I Praef. p. XV). However, P. Raingeard, Le Περὶ τοῦ προσώπου de Plutarque

(Paris 1935) XVII proposes ζἄχρι)τοι or {(δύσκριγτοι, seeing that

77

TABLE TALKS T2

617 D

, Bolk. δυσδιάκριτος is not found in Plut., so also Capps, Helmbold ly not The prefix δυσ- should be preferred; the ἀξίαι are presumab τον ἄχριτοι, cf. Nic. 11.9 ἄκριτον 8 ἡ τύχη πρᾶγμα καὶ ἄληπ σεως λογισμῷ, but De def. or. 413 A δύσκριτον πρᾶγμα καὶ ζητή δεόμενον πολλῆς. 617 D ὅρα τίνα μηχανὴν ἐπάγω: Helmbold cites the similar expression of Plat. Crat. 409 D σκέψαι οὖν ἣν εἰσάγω μηχανὴν ἐπὶ πάντα. Abram. notices Polyb. XXIX

25.1 ἐπεισήγαγον μηχανήν.

617 D τὸν ἔνδοξον μάλιστα τόπον: We do not know which place this was; see the discussion of the next talk. 617 D ἂν μὲν (nao)ij πατήρ, τοῦτον ἄρας μόνον: Fuhrm. rightly suspects the simple f], and the medial ἀράμενος. Man. post. in T seems to have changed this into ἀράμενοις (sic). Fuhrmann’s conjectures (παρ)ῇ and ἄρας μόνον are convincing; but he had better not to refer to 616 AB but to 616 F ὅτι δημοκρατικόν ἐστι τὸ δεῖπνον καὶ οὐκ

(ἔχει τόπον) ἐξαίρετον ὥσίπερ ἀκρόγπολιν, ἐφ᾽ οὗ κατακλιϑεὶς ὁ

πλούσιος ἐντρυφήσει τοῖς εὐτελεστέροις. Plut. now answers this argument of his brother: the problem of ranking can be solved by elevating

only one guest, and not a rich man but a member of the family, and by refraining from ranking the others. It is noticeable that members of the

family and relatives (cf. 617 C συγγενείᾳ) are ranked before others.

STE

ἐκ τῶν

‘Omjgov

τὸ

ϑεώρημα

τοῦτο

λαμβάνων

(τῶν)

καϑηχόντων: This passage has troubled most translators: Xyl.: "idque adeo commentum unum est de iis, quae ex Homeri pulchre praeceptis desumuntur'; Kaltw.: ‘Homer selbst ist es, aus dem ich diese Regel hee habe’; Reich.: ‘Ich habe mir diese Regel aus der im Homer a enden Sitte entnommen’; Fuhrm.: ‘et c'est à l'enseignement corrects ae j'emprunte cette régle’. However, Amyot translated ony: prenant ceste riegle là de juger des offices és livres d'Hom tre’, and similarly Clem.: ‘and it is from the poems of Homer that I

Eo dis rule of propriety’. It is the final participle that has made the on difficult: Naber would read καϑῆκον, and Po.

mises thet te Hu. interprets τὰ “Ομήρου καϑήκοντα and even surknown ^ this may have been the title of a Stoic book, but there are no ook titles of this kind (incidentally, one would expect “Our μήρῳ), It appears to me that the difficulty of interpretation is due to

78

TABLE TALKS I 2

617 E

the loss of the article. Plut. regularly uses it with καϑήκοντα, cf. De aud. poet. 33 A παραλείψει τῶν καϑηκόντων, 45 D ἄσχεπτοι xoi ἀφροντίδες τῶν καϑηκόντων, An virt. doc. 440 A τῶν μικρῶν καὶ

παιδικῶν καϑηκόντων εἰσὶ διδασκαλεῖα. De soll. an. 981 C ἐπὶ và . . . μέγιστα τῶν κοινωνικῶν ἔργων καὶ καϑηκόντων, Adv. stoic. 1064 F παρὰ τὸ [μὴ] καϑῆκον, 1070 A ἀρχὰς δὲ τῶν καϑηκόντων. One instance of absent article is found above, 613 C περὶ συμποτικῶν καϑηκόντων. -- Bolk. notices that all philosophical schools sought for guidance in Homer (cf. Sen. Ep. 88.5). It is known that collections of Homeric examples of simple, unsophisticated life were much in use; one of these was Dioscur. Περὶ τῶν παρ᾽ ᾿Ομήρῳ νόμων which Plut. apparently used as a source for the Talks and other works, see Susemihl 11 348 n. 521. However, the fact that Plut. misrepresents the episode (see below) indicates that he did not follow any such textbook here but drew from memory. 617 E καὶ γὰρ ἐχεῖ κτλι: I. XXII

534 ff. Plut. distorts the story to

make it suit his argument. Achilles awarded the second prize to Eumelus, then Antilochus and Menelaus began their quarrel. 617 E ὁ Λαμπρίας ἐκ παραβύστου καϑήμενος καϑάπερ εἰώϑει μέγα φϑεγξάμενος ἠρώτα: Hesych. explains παράβυστον᾽ λάϑρα γινόμενον, ἀπόκρυφον, ἀποκεκρυμμένον, ἢ μικρὸν κλινίδιον, παρατιϑέμενον τῇ μεγάλῃ; cf. also Poll. III 43; Suda s.v. The prep. &x

is used with καϑήμενος to mark restlessness or a tendency to start up,

cf. Od. XX1 420 αὐτόϑεν ἐκ δίφροιο καϑήμενος, Are δ᾽ ὀιστὸν | ἄντα τιτυσκόμενος; Soph. Ant. 441 καϑήμεϑ᾽ ἄκρων £x πάγων ὑφήμενοι, | ὀσμὴν ax αὐτοῦ μὴ βάλῃ πεφευγότες. Only secondarily and loosely is ἐκ associated with μέγα φϑεγξάμενος. Xyl., Wytt., Hu. (De Plutarchi Amatorio (Diss. Berolini 1903) 68) took καϑάπερ citer with καϑήμενος as a suggestion that Lamprias was modest by nature. Bolk. shows, by reference to 726 DE ὑβριστὴς δ᾽ ὧν καὶ φιλόγελως φύσει 6 ἀδελφὸς ἡμῶν Λαμπρίας, that the phrase relates to μέγα φϑεγξάμενος. Cf. the similar construction at 657 B ἐμοῦ δὲ ταῦτ᾽ εἰπόντος ᾿Αριστίων ἀναβοήσας ὥσπερ εἰώϑει. Bolk. observes that Plut. transposed καϑάπερ εἰώϑει to avoid hiatus before ἠρώτα. Plut.

always represents Lamprias as an amusing and spontaneous person, see 643 E, 670 E, 726 DE, 740 AB.

617 F φιλοσόφου

79

TABLE TALKS I 2

617F

γένεσι

καὶ πλούτοις

ϑέαν

καὶ ἀρχαῖς ὥσπερ

ἐν

συμποσίῳ κατανέμοντος ἢ προεδρίας ψηφισμάτων ἀμφιχτυονικῶν description

διδόντος: Lamprias’

of his brother’s proposal

is utterly

unfair and derogative, see above, on 617 D. -- The expression ϑέαν κατανέμειν, ‘assign a seat of honour at the theatre’, is used in a formal

way by Dem. XVIII 28 and Aeschin. II 55; it thus appears to be an official political formula.

Re.

suspected

unnecessarily

ἀμφικτυονικῶν and conjectured

(ἀπὸ)

ψηφισμάτων

1. (so also Emp., Hartm.,

(ὡς) y. Faehse). The assignment of προεδρία by the Amphictyonic

council is evidenced in a large number of inscriptions, e.g. Syll.? 444.12 καὶ προεδρίαν ἐμ πᾶσι τοῖς ἀγῶσι οἷς τυϑέασιν οἱ ᾿Αμφικτίονες. -Lamprias aggressively generalizes the moderate claim of his brother (617 A) who only ventured to suggest that distinctions may be appropriate on some occasions and to some extent. It is noticeable that at 644 CD Lamprias admits the assignment of places at table, but he is anxious that each guest should receive an equal portion of what is served and thus regrets (644 BC) that the old custom of portionbanquets has gone out of use.

618 A ὥσπερ (καὶ) ἄλλων τινῶν: Xyl. translated ‘aliae etiam res’, and Hu. hesitatingly proposed (xai) ἄλλων, which Fuhrm. rightly prints. The particle is exactly what is to be expected; ὑλῶν τινῶν Kron., or πολλῶν τινων Doe. (who refers to Cato Min. Lucian. Dial. mar. 2.2), unnecessary changes.

20.3,

Anton.

28.9;

618 tov ᾿Αττικὸν λίϑον ἢ τὸν Λακωνικόν: The most beautiful Attic marbles are the light (λίϑος λευκός) Pentelic and the Hymettic. In Laconia there was the famous green prophyry of Croceae near Gythion, cf. Stat. Silv,

12.148 hic dura Laconum | saxa virent; Plin. XXXVI

55 Lacedaemonium (sc. marmor) viride cunctisque hilarius; and the red and polychrome porphyry and the black marble quarried at Taenaron (Strab. VIII 5.7 εἰσὶ δὲ λατομίαι

λίϑου

πολυτελοῦς

τοῦ

μὲν

Ταιναρίου ἐν Ταινάρῳ παλαιαί; Plin. XXXVI 135 lapides ... nigri... Sicut Taenarius,

ibid.

158).

See Fiehn,

RE

s.v. Steinbruch,

2256f.,

2260, 2772: Blümner, Technologie III 19-22. ne a τῷ πολυτελεστάτῳ χρώματι: Among the most expensive colour uiis counted Attic ochre (ὥχρα), Lemnian red (μίλτος Anuvic), the

Purple (ὄστρειον), the indigo (Indicum Plin. XXXII 163), and the eee χρυσοκόλλα (see Blümner, Technologie IV 508f.). On indigo

ee Stadler, RE s.v., and Blümner, o.c.

254, IV 807.

80

TABLE TALKS I 2

618 ΑΒ

618 AB οὐδ᾽ ὁ ναυπηγὺς προτάττει τὴν ἢ ᾿Ισϑμικὴνnude πίτυν ἢ τὴν Kennuipbuildi Plat. Le Leg. Ὡς c ,an shipbuilditg. cf . Plat, A

sce Blümner 2“Technologie II

A "The ood of pine and cypress are particularly resistent to deny (Theophr. H.P. V 4.2; Plin. XVI 212, 223 pinus et Prin Vil

cariem tiniasque firmissimae; cf. Mart. VI 49.5 MU

roba

6.22 reports of τὸ τοῦ ᾿Ισϑμίου Ποσειδῶνος ἱερὸν à tI growing on συνηρεφές, and Paus. II 1.3 mentions the pine woods sti gr M the Isthmus at his time: προϊοῦσι δὲ ἡ πίτυς ἄχρι γε Hoe τὸ e παρὰ τὸν αἰγιαλόν. Talk V 3 treats the part played by t - p eer cult on the Isthmus. - Theophr. H. P. III 1.6 reports that the 25 οἰκεία in Crete, growing on the slopes of the Ida (H.P. III 2.6).

618 B καὶ τὸν ϑεὸν ὁρᾷς, ὃν ἀρ ιστοτέχναν προσεῖπεν:

Frg. 57 Snell, apparently

part

ἡμῶν

of a paean

ὁ Πίνδαρος

to " «the Dodona. The whole line is quoted by Dio Chr ys. XII 81. pe E epithet many times (De sera 550 A, De facie 927 B, Adv. stoic. Some always of Zeus, and Praec. ger. reip. 807 C, of the statesman. - oses have suspected ἡβῶν (sic) T: ὑμνῶν Mez ., τιμῶν Re. Bolk. a facie ἡμῖν (dat. eth.), cf. De gen. Socr. 585 E τὸν δὲ Λῦσιν ἡμίν, De is 921 E ἡμῖν ὁ Κλέαρχος, 926 D ὁ δὲ Ζεὺς ἡμῖν οὗτος. This tea lut i plausible but the fact that ἡμῶν ὁ Πίνδαρος occurs only her ein P Plut no reason for change.

Cf. 624B κατὰ τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν. -quotes Pindar ve ᾿ ry frequently, According to Lamprias’ catalogue, no. 36 he also wrote

his biography.

618 B τοῦτο μὲν ἐν χόγχαισι.. ., ναιετάουσαν: Frg. B 76, only preserved by Plut.; he also quotes the next two lines at De facie 927 F, likewise with Lamprias world and all beings

in

Speaking and arguing agains t Atomism: the ; been ordered according to teleological

arts of the elements have been assigned

ngly again st their nature (with earth and water in the lower re gions and air and fire in the upp er ones). Echoing Plat. Tim., Lamprias demo nstrates t he planned σύνταξ ις of the macrocosmos by analogy with the hum an body. He uses these Empedoclean lines as examples to illustrate how the heavy elements are sometimes placed ab Ove the ligh

argumentation in De

t ones. Our Passage is a very short epitome of that

e. Abram. notices that this shows that this Was written late, Plutfaci talk . Often brings up themes in the Talks which he had treated earlier in other works, see below, on 673 C. Plut. evidently

81

TABLE TALKS I 2

618 B

had a good knowledge of Emped. He quotes him very frequently and, according to Lamprias’ catalogue, no. 43, he wrote ten books on him (cited by Hippol. Refut. V 20.6). However, in ascribing a teleological

position to him, as here, he seems to commit a misinterpretation, cf.

Hershbell, AJP 92 (1971) 168. — Diels reads ϑαλασσονόμων, translated ‘Wasserbewohner’, perhaps rightly. The epithet λυϑόρρινος (from ῥινός, ‘skin’, ‘hide’)

is found

only

here,

but

at Hymn.

Hom.

IV

(Merc.) 48 πῆξε ... πειρήνας διὰ νῶτα διὰ ῥινοῖο χελώνης the conjecture λιϑορρίνοιο χ. Pierson is probably right, cf. the parallel composition in the oracle cited by Hdt. I 47 κραταιρίνοιο χελώνης. 618 C πανταχοῦ μὲν οὖν ἀταξία πονηρόν: Lamprias' statement is rather puzzling, considered that Plut. also had pleaded for order. But Lamprias aims at a kind of εὐταξία that differs both from the conventional one, which he dismissed initially (618 A), and the one proposed

by Plut. (617 D). In the following he presents his particular opinions of εὐταξία. 618 C τί δὴ φϑονεῖς τῶν τακτικῶν ἡμῖν καὶ ἁρμονικῶν [ὧν] ἐκείνων:

Bolk. deleted ὧν ἐλέγομεν T. I think that the verb was substituted for ἐκείνων. Xyl. deleted ὧν in his translation (followed by Hutt., Wytt.), Re., Dübn., and Abram. preserved the text. Bolk. rightly suggests that ὧν may be due to dittography, and ἐλέγομεν a gloss on that word, induced by the unindicated transition from indirect to direct speech. But such transition is common

in Plut., e.g. 613 D, 620 C, 635 CD,

640 E, 646 F, 648 B, 726 E. Thus the word may have been substituted for ἐχείνων rather than added. — Clement’s translation ‘organizers and arrangers’ is questionable; the context and the plural forms indicate that abstracts, not persons, are meant; this is how the words have

always been translated (Xyl., Kaltw., Reich., Fuhrm.). 618 C μετακοσμοῦντι τὸ συμπόσιον ὥσπερ τῷ ᾿Επαμεινώνδᾳ τὴν φάλαγγα: The comparison is to make clear that the rearrangement is to M cal and far-reaching; such associations were certainly natural ed Y ody when thinking of the oblique line (λοξὴ φάλαγξ) inventdeserib Poninondas, Plut. mentions this at Pelop. 23, and may have Xen Hull it in his lost biography of E. (Lamprias' catalogue, no. 7).

terr, . e VI 4.8, VII 5.18 reports of his new tactics without using the xy sel

. See

φάλαγξ. A concise and clear description is given by Diod.

J. Kromayer & G. Veith, Heerwesen und Kriegführung der

82

TABLE TALKS 1 2

618 C

Griechen und Rómer (München 1928) 93-95, Considering ἜΜΕΝ minondas placed the best soldiers together on one wing an Mn ones on the other, the oblique line is not at all adequate as ^ 5 an son with the placing which Lamprias recommends. -- At 68 . compares Dionysus (= the wine) to Epaminondas; i ; both cause con fusion and disorder.

618 Ὁ ὁ δὲ τοὺς παῖδας ἐκ μέσου κελεύσας γενέσϑαι: Why ine servants must leave the room before Lamprias could begin to prese " his radical thoughts is uncertain. The erotic element was hardly rea enough; such topics were common at drinking parties. Perhaps measure was only a means of increa i i the expectations sing i of the | isteners.

618 D χαταβλέψας ἕκαστον: ‘stared demanding ly/exigently at each one of us.' The verb makes the scene more dramatic, toge ther with me

ordering out of the servants. Plut. uses this verb of the evil eye D 680 D τῷ καταβλέπειν τὰ παιδία μάλιστα βλάπτοντα ς, cf. also e tranqu. 469 B τί τὸ σεαυτοῦ xoxóv .. . λίαν καταβλέπεις; De curios. 517 B or

ἀναιδῶς καταβλέπειν. The verb may have a strain of mockery despise, like κατι

ἐπὶ χλευασμῷ.

λλώπτω, cf. Poll. 11 52 κατιλλώπτειν τὸ βλέπειν

618 D προειπεῖν: A further verb to announce the importance of wha Lamprias is going to procla i m. The verb is an official term, cf. Thuc. 131 πόλεμον...

ἄρχοντες.

: προαγορεύειν; Xen. An. II 2.20 προαγορεύουσιν οἱ

Ὅμηρον οὐκ ἀδίχως Θηβαῖος αἰτιάσασϑαι Παμμένης ὡς τῶν ἐρωτικῶν ἄπειρον χτ λ.: ὁ The reference is to the tactics of Nestor, Il. 11 362 f. Plut. mentions Pammenes as the friend and protege of Epaminondas at Prae c. ger. reip. 805 F. Ou r passage is closely paralleled by Amat. 761 B TAX ἀξε δὲ καὶ

μετέϑηκχ

ε τάξιν τῶν ὁπλιτῶν ἐρωτικὸς ἀγὴρ Παμμένης, Ὅμηρον ἐπιμεμψάμενος ὡς ἀνέραστον, ὅτι κατὰ

φῦλα xoi φρήτρα λόχιζε τοὺς ᾿Αχαιούς ἔταττε παρ᾽ ἐραστήν. Thisς isσυνε ἐρώμενον Tepeated at Pelop. 18, ,wheοὐκ re Plut. also mentions that, according to some, the famous Theban was composed in accordance to Pammenes’ radical principl‘sacred band e. After the deat: h of Epaminondas Pamm enes Succeeded him as co chief of Thebes, mmander-incf. Diod. XV 94.

83

TABLE TALKS I 2

618 Ὁ

618 D οὐ πλουσίῳ πλούσιον κτλ.: Lamprias’ paradoxical proposal is clearly a humorous exercise in rhetoric (Abram.). The schematic combination of opposite types — he goes as far as refusing to place φίλῳ φίλον — indicates that his purpose is only to present a literary rhetorical antithesis. In reality it was customary to consider similarity and congeniality in placing the guests. Lamprias himself stated initially (618 A) that πρὸς τὸ ἡδὺ Set ποιεῖσϑαι τὰς καταλλίσεις, and at 679 CD Lamprias the grandfather pleads for similarity and friendship as criteria for invitation to dinner. At 709 AB Plut. emphasizes that the guests should come to dinner with shadows such as τοὺς τοῦ δειπνίζοντος οἰκείους καὶ συνήϑεις and τῶν ἰδίων φίλων ods ἂν καὶ ἤϑελεν αὐτὸς ἑλέσϑαι ὁ δειπνίζων, ἐπιεικὴς ὧν ἐπιεικεῖς καὶ φιλόλογος

φιλολόγους

ὄντας κτλ., while, on the other hand,

ὁ à

ἀσυμφύλους καὶ ἀσυναρμόστους ἐπάγων, οἷον νηπτικῷ πολυπότας καὶ λιτῷ περὶ δίαιταν ἀκολάστους καὶ πολυτελεῖς ... ἄκαιρός ἐστιν ἀηδίᾳ φιλοφροσύνην ἀμειβόμενος. However, Lamprias’ argument may be a convivial application of more general philosophical opinions about attraction in physics and psychology. Arist. Eth. Nic. 1155, in discussing friendship, reports the contrary opinions: (1) opposites are attracted to each other (Heraclit., Eur.), and (2) ‘like seeks after like’ (Emped.). See also below, on 649 E. 618 E τῷ δ᾽ ἀλαζόνι τὸν eigwva: Cf. Suda s.v. εἴρων᾽ ὁ δυνάμενος μὲν ποιῆσαί τι, λέγων δὲ μὴ δύνασϑαι' ἀλαζὼν δὲ τούτῳ ἐναντίος, ὁ ὑπερήφανος.

618 Ε τῷ δ᾽ ὀργίλῳ, τὸν σιωπηλόν: The two adjectives are not opposites; the meaning ‘calm’ is only connotative in σιωπηλός. One would

expect fovxog

(cf. Eur.

Bacch.

647 ὀργῇ ὑπόϑες ἥσυχον

πόδα).

Perhaps the preceding εἴρων led on to σιωπηλός.

618 E ὥσπερ ἐκ πλήρους κύλικος εἰς κενήν: The comparison is certainly that of Plat. Symp.

175 D where Socrates uses it in fuller form

about σοφία: ὥστ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ πληρεστέρου εἰς τὸν κενώτερον ῥεῖν ἡμῶν, ἐὰν ἁπτώμεϑα ἀλλήλων, ὥσπερ τὸ ἐν ταῖς κύλιξιν ὕδωρ τὸ διὰ τοῦ ἐρίου

ῥέον

ἐκ τῆς πληρεστέρας

εἰς τὴν

κενωτέραν.

In Lamprias’

version the image has ἃ social and moralizing tendency, whic h is absent in the Platonic passage.

84

6188

TABLE TALKS I 2

618 E σοφιστὴν ... σοφιστῇ . . . ποιητὴν ποιητῇ: Abram. notices that

σοφιστής and ποιητής correspond to πτωχός and ἀοιδός respectively in the Hesiodic line (Erga 26) where ἀοιδός is equivalent to ποιητής, and that Plutarch’s usual pejorative use of σοφιστής (De aud. 43 F, 46 E, De prof. in virt. 80 A, association here with πτωχός.

Crass.

35.6 etc.)

is reflected

in its

618 F Σωσικλῆς οὗτος καὶ Μόδεστος: Σωσικλῆς was probably from Coronea in Boeotia (see on 638 B, and Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 685). He may have been a rather close friend of Plut. He appears in the catalogue of Lamprias, no. 57 Σωσικλῆς βιβλία β΄. In Talk II 4 he is Plutarch’s guest after he has won the Pythian contest of poetry, and in V 4 he takes part in the discussion of a Homeric philological problem.

- Aufidius Modestus (Ziegler, o. c. 691) is also mentioned at 632 A but is otherwise unknown, unless he is identical with the grammarian mentioned in a codex of Verg. Georg. (and with the Modestus of Mart. X 21.1), so hesitatingly Goetz, RE s.v. Aufidius (30). Ziegler (!. c) suggests that his connection with Sosicles here indicates this. C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 60 is convinced: *evidently identical'.

618 F ὥσπερ ... συνερείδοντες ἔπος nag’ (ἔπος ἀνα)ξωπυθρεῖν φλόγα μεγάλην χινδυνεύουσιν τὰ κάλλιστα: This reading of this corrupt passage (see Hu,, Fuhrm., app.) and Fuhrmann's interpretation seem probable: with mocking irony Lamprias points at the two combatants who offer an excellent example of his argument. The

adverbial τὰ κάλλιστα squares well with this interpretation; it is best

taken as ironic, as at Aristid. ΠῚ 600 Behr (vol. II 337 D.). The supplementation

παρ᾽ (ἔπος) Amyot, Steph. is certain, cf. Aristoph. Nub. 1375 ἔπος πρὸς ἔπος ἠρειδόμεσϑα, Equ. 627 ἔπη ... xara τῶν ἱππέων; Eustath. 53.40. The meaning is obviousl Horde y ‘thrust/

Strike word against word’ Ν . engage in an animated discussion’, not ‘set Verse

against verse’ (Clem.)

s, verb is. n nou d ate rel The hapax. στραγγαλιά and otpayya λίς both mean ‘int ricate knot’, cf. Strattis frg. by Pat Kock) N οὐδὲ στραγγαλίδες εἰσίν, commented on by Fe s x δεσμῷ δ᾽ ἐοίχοιεν αἱ στραγγαλίδες; Pherecr. frg. 21; enl n naras, $.v. στραγγαλίδες" rà δύσ λυτα ἅμματα. The meant ‘strangling snare’ or ‘trap’, cf. Hesych. s.v.

618 F στραγγαλιῶντας:σι The

85

TABLE TALKS I 2

618 F

στραγγαλιαὶ στραγγαλίδες: συστροφαί, διαστροφαΐί, παγίδες, ἣ πλοκαί. For the figurative use, cf. De stoic. rep. 1033 E Χρύσιππον εις τῶν ᾿Απαδημαϊκῶν στραγγαλίδων κοπίδα; LXX Pr. 8.8 οὐδὲν Ev αὐτοῖς σκολιὸν οὐδὲ στραγγαλιῶδες; Adesp. frg. 904 (IIT 564 Kock) στραγγαλιώδης ἄνθρωπος. Abram. suggests that the reference in our

passage may be to those intractable persons who enjoy themselves in using the κυριεύων (615 A) and similar arguments. 618 F ὀξυϑύμους (x9àóv) τινα παρεντιϑεὶς μέσον ὥσπερ μάλαγμα τῆς ἀντιτυπίας: Clem. and Fuhrm. print Bernardakis’ supplementation; Doe. conjectured εὔϑυμον, preferred by Bolk., Abram. for palaeographic reasons; but εὔϑυμος (εὐθυμία) is very infrequent in Plut., while he uses πρᾶος (πραότης) very often. -- The comparison reflects Plat. Tim. 70 D περὶ τὴν καρδίαν αὐτὸν (sc. τὸν πλεύμονα) περιέστησαν οἷον μάλαγμα. 619 A ἀλειπτικούσ: This word is only used here about persons, otherwise ἀλειπτικὴ τέχνη, ἀλειπτικὰ συγγράμματα. The meaning ought to be: ‘a professional in the art of anointing and training’, i. e. an ἀλείπτης, not ‘a person trained (by such a professional)’, i. e. an ἀϑλητής. The word should thus be translated (together with the two following words): ‘those concerned with training (and hunting and agriculture)’, not ‘amateurs de lutte’ (Fuhrm.) or ‘athletes’ (Clem.); unless we should really suspect the word as being corrupt and read ἁλιευτικός (Kron.) which sides well with the other two to form a more homogeneous group of practicians. 619 A τῶν γὰρ ὁμοιοτήτων ἡ μὲν μάχιμος ὥσπερ ἀλεκτρυόνων, ἡ δ᾽ ἐπιεικὴς ὥσπερ ἡ τῶν κολοιῶν: Hu. and Clem. print ὡσπερεί Doe.:

ὥσπερ Ót (sic) T. Bolk. Instance of ὡσπερεί in (Basil.) conjecture ὥσπερ by tov κολοιῶν because

points out that there Plut. (Otho 10.1) and, ἡ, he rightly argues that the reference is to the

is only one certain supporting the old the article is natural proverbial κολοιὸς

ποτὶ (παρὰ) κολοιόν, cf. Arist. Rhet. 1371 b 17, Eth. Nic. 1155 a 34, Mag. mor. 1208 b 9, Eth. Eud. 1235 a 8; Aet. IV 19.3. The social behaviour of the jackdaws was famous, cf. Arist. frg. 347 Rose οὐκ

ἀπολείπουσι δ᾽ ἕως ϑανάτου οὔτε οἱ ἄρρενες τὰς ϑηλείας οὔτε αἱ ϑήλειαι

τοὺς

ἄρρενας .. -κολοιοί.

— Cockfighting

was

popular

in

antiquity. Aelian. N. A. IT28 tells an etiological story of the traditional cockfighting performances held every year in the theatre of Dionysus

86

TABLE TALKS I 2

619 A

in Athens. Cockfighting scenes are frequent on vases, see Schneider; RE s.v. Hahnenkümpfe;

E. Guhl

& W.

Koner,

Leben

der Griechen

und Rémer® (Berlin 1893) 451-453. One would expect Lamprias to give some reason for comparing philologists and grammarians with cocks, and hunters and farmers with peaceful jackdaws; presumably he found no motivation needed.

619 A συνάγω ... ἐρωτικσύς: This seems to conflict with 618 Dot... συγχαταμκλίνων ... φίλῳ φίλον. Here Lamprias moderates his uncompromising attitude, which strengthens the impression that his argumentation is meant as a joke or display of rhetoric.

619 A ὅσοις ἔρωτος δῆγμα (παιδικῶν) πρόσεστιν: Fre. 757 Nauck, frg. 841 Radt (Tr GF YV 554), only preserved by Plut., who also quotes the line at De prof. in virt. 77 B ὅτῳ δ᾽ ἔρωτος δῆγμα παιδικῶν

πρόσεστι (XC? M2) / προσῇ (G?) / προσῆν (other MSS); παιδιχοῦ Valckenaer, Bern. saw that the word has fallen out and printed δῆγμα

(παιδικῶν) π., so also Clem.;

{(παιδικόν) Hu., adopted by Radt.

Fuhrm. prints παιδικοῦ, which was probably written by Soph. but not necessarily by Plut.; it is more safe to suppose that he wrote παιδικῶν

here as well as at 77 B. — Plut. had little or no interest in pederasty but avoided rejecting it, certainly out of reverence for his divine lodestar, Plato. The last part of Amat. (767 Aff.) is a eulogy of woman and matrimonial love. Plutarch’s affection for his wife is obvious in Cons. ad ux., and below, 712 C he recommends Menander because there is no example of pederasty in his plays. See further L. Goessler, Plutarchs Gedanken über die Ehe (Zürich 1962) 31-43; W. L. Odom, A Study of Plutarch: The Position of Greek Women in the First Century

A. D. (Diss. Univ. Virg. 1961) Ch. 6. 619 A ὁ κολλώμενος σίδηρος: Plut. also uses this metallurgic image

about lovers at Amat. 752 D. — For the technique of welding and soldering in antiquity, see Blümner,

Technologie IV 291-302; R. I.

Forbes, Metallurgy in Antiquity (Leiden 1950) 135-137, 459. Glaucus of Chios was considered the inventor of this technique (Hdt. I 25). Particularly praised was the extraordinary artistic base he made for the

votive crater of Alyattes at Delphi (Paus. X 16.1). The technique of welding was called Γλαύκου τέχνη (CPG I 55, II 153).

87

TABLE TALKS 13

519 B

TALK 3

This talk is a sequel, and its subject supplements that of the preceding talk. Plut. may have separated this question to form a talk of its own simply in order to fill the number of ten talks in each book (612 E, 736 C). Plut. seems to have followed a loose, improvised scheme when

writing this extensive work.

He apparently wrote it in a short time

(612 E) and did not care much about disposition. Examples of artificial division of subject-matter to form two talks is found in IT 8 and 9, and

VII 9 and 10; and in V 3 two rather different questions are treated within one talk. The absence of any kind of convivial delineation, dramatic elaboration, dialogization or even mention of participants in this talk is remarkable, especially as this negligence occurs here, almost at the beginning of the work.

619 B (Ex) τούτου: Addition Re.; (£x δέ) Xyl. is unnecessary; the particle is also absent at 743 C, 747 A (ἐκ τούτου)

and 642 B μετὰ

τοῦτο. Two (or more) talks attributed to the same party is common, e.g. 1 7-8, 114-5, III 1-2, 3-5, 7-9 IV 4—5, V 8-9, VIII 7-8, etc. 619 B ἐνέπεσε ζήτησις: Plut. often makes use of an impersonal formula to introduce the subject of the talk, e.g. ἐξητεῖτο (I 7, I1 9, V 3, 6),

λόγος ἦν (1 6, VII 9), διηπορήϑη (V 9), ἐδόκει (I 8, V 4), &yévovto / ἐγίνοντο λόγοι (III 1, V 2, VII 7), ἐπῆλϑέ um (V 8, VII 1), αἰτίαν τις ἐζήτησεν (VIII 5). 619 B Πέρσαις μὲν ὁ μεσαίτατος tq? οὗ κατακλίνεται βασιλεύς, Ἕλλησι δ᾽ ὁ πρῶτος: Little is known about dining customs at the Persian court. We do not know how their guests were arranged round

the table. The description here concerns the Roman usage; ‘the most central place’ was the midmost place on the middle couch, the couches being three, Lat. summus, medius, imus, counting from the right to the left, and seen from the entrance to the dining-room. The couches were

Placed in horse-shoe form round the table; see H. Blümner,

Die

rómischen Privataltertümer? (München 1911) 388, fig. 57; Scherling, RE s.v. Triclinium, 95f.; E. Guhl & W. Koner, Leben der Griechen

und Rómer? (Berlin 1893) 683f., fig. 897. The number of diners on each couch was normally three, cf. Varro ap. Gell. XIII 11.2 conviVarum numerum incipere oportere a Gratiarum numero et progredi ad Musarum,

but not

infrequently

more

than

three

persons

crowded

88

TABLE TALKS I 3

619 B

together on each couch, cf. Hor. Sat. I 4.86 saepe tribus lectis videas cenare quaternos; Cic. In Pison. 27.67 Graeci stipati, quini in lectis, saepe plures; Hor. Ep. 5.29 sed nimis arta premunt olidae convivia

caprae. There were also dining-rooms for more than three couches, cf. Phrynich. frg. 66 (1387 Kock); Athen. 47 EF καὶ τρίκλινοι οἶκοι καὶ τετράλλινοι καὶ ἑπτάκλινοι xoi ἐννεάκλινοι xai κατὰ τοὺς ἑξῆς ἀριϑμοὺς ἦσαν παρὰ τοῖς παλαιοῖς. The dining-room in the Emperor's palace on the Palatine was enormous (Stat. Silv. TV 2.18; Mart. VII 39). Plut. mentions below, 679 B that οἱ πλούσιοι νεανιεύονται

κατασκευάζοντες οἴκους τριακονταχλίνους καὶ μείζους. 619 B ὑπατικόν: At Petron. Cena

Trim. 65.7 this place is called

praetorius locus, since no consul was

present.

Sertorius, who

was

murdered at Perperna's dinner, occupied this place: Sall. Hist. III 83 Maurenbr. Sertorius inferior in medio. 619 B' Ἡρακλεώταις: Ἡράκλεια Πόντου / £v Πόντῳ / Ποντική was ἃ Megarian colony in Eastern Bithynia, founded c. 560, which in turn founded Chersonnesus and Callatis. Other Megarian settlements in the Western Pontic were Messembria, Chalcedon and Byzantium. Perhaps ἔνιοι refers to this Megarian group. However, we do not know of a particular convivial usage there. Other Greek colonies on the Black Sea were lonian; se H. Bengtson, Griechische Geschichte” (München 1965) 94-96. 619 B ἐπρώτευετῇ τιμῇ καϑ' ἡμᾶς, καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν 009° ὡς ὁ πρῶτος, ot? ὡς ὁ μέσος εἶχεν νενομισμένην ἔτι: The imperfects of this sentence have the double force of past and present tenses: what has been the case in the past is still so in the present time, but the speaker has only the past in view, which occurs in narratives, cf. Xen. An. IV 8.1 ἀφίκοντο ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμόν, ὃς ὥριζε τὴν τῶν Μακρώνων καὶ τὴν

τῶν Σκυϑηνῶν, se Kühner-Gerth? I 145.5. Thus xa ἡμᾶς has temporal meaning, so already Amyot: ‘de nostre temps’, and Kaltw.: ‘zu unsern Zeiten’, while the ambiguous Latin translation ‘apud nos’ is still repeated by Dübn. Bolk. notices that Plut. uses καϑ' ἡμᾶς very frequently in temporal sense (De tu. san. 124 C, De def. or. 404 A, Nic. 3.3, Arat. 54.8). The conjectures καί(τοι) τήν Hu., δὲ τήν Fuhrm. are unnecessary. The so-called adversative καί is used instead of ἀλλά, καίτοι, xoi ὅμως when the author does not want to mark a

contrast, see Kühner-Gerth? II 248; Denniston? 292; J. Blomquist,

89

TABLE TALKS I 3

619 B

Das sogenannte καὶ adversativum (Uppsala 1979) 13£, 27-43. In later Greek, especially in the NT and the papyri, καί also occurs in marked adversative sense but always with a preserved copulative meaning,

‘and yet’, as here, see Blomquist, o. c. 44-54; H. Ljungvik, Beiträge

zur Syntax der spätgriechischen Volkssprache (Uppsala-Leipzig 1932) 54-57. In Plut. it is found below, 628 C ἀποκναίσας, εἶπεν, [καὶ] οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐπιϑήσομαι τῷ λόγῳ, Arat. 50.8 ἀλλ᾽ οὐδένα τούτων κατείληφας, καὶ πάντες ἑκουσίως σοι ποιοῦσιν τὸ προστασσόμενον. 619 C ἐκίνει:

sc. ἡμᾶς,

‘made

an impression

us)’. The

(upon

use

resembles the seemingly intransitive κινεῖν sc. στρατόν, cf. Caes. 26.6. 619 C πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι κτλ.: This first explanation is obviously not true. The three explanations are discussed in W. A. Becker & H. Góll, Gallus? III (Berlin 1882) 380-384; see also Mau, RE s.v. Convivium,

1206. 619

κάτω

συγχωροῦντες:

i. e. moving

towards

the third couch

(lectus imus).

619 C ἡ τρίτη καὶ ταύτης ὁ πρῶτος τύπος μάλιστα τοῦ ἑστιῶντός ἔστιν: This may have been so at Perperna’s dinner: Sall. Hist. III 83 Maurenbr. sctiba Maecenas in imo medius inter Tarquitium et do-

minum Perpernam, but at Hor. Sat. 11 8.23 the host occupied the place in the middle of the imus; cf. also Cic. Ad fam. IX 26.2 infra Eutrape-

lum (the host) Cytheris accubuit; Liv. XXXIX 43.3 illam infra eum accubantem; Sen. Contr. IX 25.2 meretrix uxoris loco accubuit, immo

praetoris. To be assigned the place beside the host was regarded as a

great honour, cf. Plat. Symp. 222 E; Theophr. Char. 21. 619 D ὥσπερ

ἡνίοχος

ἢ κυβερνήτης:

The

spinner’s

artifice is de-

scribed in these terms at De soll. an. 966 F ἡ τῆς μηχανῆς αὐτῆς

ἡνιοχεία καὶ κυβέρνησις. Plut. frequently refers to seafaring, and p articularly to the part of the helmsman, cf., e.g., De coh. ira 454 A, De vit. pud. 536 CD, An seni 787 DE; se further Fuhrm. Images, 70 n.

dd we φιλοφρογεῖσϑαι ... οὐκ ἀπήρτηται τῶν οὖν ἔγγιστα ove δὲν

μὲν [γὰρ] ὑπ αὐτόν: So Franke: οὐκ ἀπήρτηταν τῶν one τόπων T, palaeographically and logically preferable to τῶν συνέγγιστα Vulc. printed by Hu., Clem. Plut. uses ἔγγιστα

90

TABLE TALKS 13

619D

frequently but never συνέγγιστα. When οὖν had been corrupted the sentence was read as far as τόπων, then a scribe added γάρ (deleted by Vulc.). 619 D ἢ γυναικὺς ἢ παίδων: Abram. notices that Plut, speaks here of the δεῖπνον, not the πότος at which the wife and the children were not present, cf. 613 A.

619 D οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ὁ τῶν ^ Popaíov ὕπατος οἷος ᾿Αρχίας ὃ Θηβαίων πολέμαρχος: Plut. tells the story in detail at De gen. Socr. 596 EF and Pelop. 10.6-10; cf. also Nepos, Pelop. 3.2. Archias was a pro-Spartan traitor who,

having neglected

the warning,

was

assassinated

soon

afterwards (379) by Pelopidas and his democrats. His utterance became proverbial (CPG 1404.58). Plut. here expresses both his patriotic contempt for the Theban traitor, and his admiration for the Romans as being effective statesmen and administrators. 619 ἢ γραμμάτων ἢ λόγων: The mention of λόγοι, ‘oral message’ is

not relevant for Archias but may apply to the consul. 619 Ὁ τὴν Θηρίκλειον: A detailed discussion of this type of κύλιξ is found at Athen. 470 E-472 E, where its name

is derived from the

Carinthian potter Thericles who is said to have been a contemporary of Aristophanes. Athen. also reports other derivations and quotes a number of comedians (Theopompus, Eubulus, Ararus, Alexis, Menander, Dioxippus) who mention it; also Theophr. H. P. V 3.2. There

was also a saying (Apostol. VIII 90 (CPG II 457)): Θηρικλείου φίλος᾽ ἐπὶ τῶν μεϑυόντων᾽ ἀπὸ τοῦ περιέχοντος τὸ περιεχόμενον. Presum-

ably the Thericlean was a big cup (Men. frg. 226 Kock μέσως μεϑύων τὴν Θηρίκλειον ἔσπασεν; Dioxipp. frg. 4 (III 359 Kock) τῆς Onorκλείου τῆς μεγάλης χρεία" ori μοι). The description given by Athen. 470 E does not make clear how exactly it differed from other goblets: ἧ κύλιξ αὕτη ἐγκάϑηται περὶ τὰς λαγόνας, ἱκανῶς βαϑυνομένη, ὦτά te ἔχει βραχέα ὡς ἂν κύλιξ οὖσα. The survey presented by Athen. in that chapter indicates the great number of types of cups. Abram. refers to a choragic inscription form Delos (BCH 9 (1885) 147—149) where a series of similar names of cups are found: φιλωνίδειον, στησίλειον, μικύ9eov, γοργίειον (sc. ποτήριον). See further Nachod, RE s.v. Therikles (2).

619 E

TABLE TALKS I 3

91

619 E ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐμμεμαώς: I. XX 468, of Achilles; cf. Il. V 142 αὐτὰρ ὁ ἐμμεμαώς, of Diomedes. 619 E περιεσχεμμένος: ‘Circumspect’, ‘attentive’, ‘prudent’, the word completes the line of thought initiated at 619 Ὁ (of the host) ἐπὶ δεξιὰ πρὸς τὴν ἐπίβλεψιν ἐξικνεῖται, cf. Sen. Ep. 11 19.10 ante, inquit, circumspiciendum est, cum quibus edas et bibas, quam quid edas et bibas. For an abstract use of the participle, cf. Dio Chrys. XXXIV 27 πῶς οὐχὶ διὰ ταῦτα ἐπιμελοῦς καὶ περιεσχεμμένης γνώμης δεῖσϑε; 619 E ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις καιροῖς: Perhaps Plut. here thought of the consul’s relations to his clients, cf. Sen. Ep. II 19.11 alioquin habebis convivas, quos ex turba salutantium nomenclator digesserit etc.

619 E ὠδῖνα τίκτει (νῦξ) κυβ(ερνήτῃ) σοφῷ κατὰ τὸ(ν Αἰσχύλον): Suppl. 770, also quoted at Non posse 1090 A. Bolk. points out that Plut. regularly has the proper noun after κατά, not an adj.; κατὰ τὸ (Αἰσχύλιον) Xyl. can thus be dismissed. -- Plut. quotes Aesch. Suppl. more than twice as often as all other works by Aesch. taken together, see Helmbold-O’Neil. 619 E πότου πᾶσα καὶ ἀνέζσεως ὥρα στρατη)γῷ καὶ ἄρχοντι φροντίδος ἄξιόν ἐστιν: The supplementation (Amyot, Steph.) is probably right after Po. substituted ὥρα for ἡδονή (Amyot, Steph.); νύξ indicates that a word denoting time is to be expected. For the pair πότος and ἄνεσις, cf. 644 Ε ἐν ἀνέσει καὶ παρ᾽ οἶνον, 711 A ἐν πότῳ xai ἀνέσει. The neuter ἄξιον made Po. propose τι or ἔργον (sc. τίκτει) for ἐστιν (Clem. prints ἔργον), but the text is tolerable. 619 E τῇ τρίτῃ: For this obvious emendation Mez.: τῇ πρώτῃ T, see

W. A. Becker ἃ H. Góll, Gallus? III (Berlin 1882) 382. 619 EF φύλακι σώματος: The bodyguard of the Persian king is men-

tioned at 703 E. TALK 4 620 A Κράτων ὁ γαμβρὸς ἡμῶν: Presumably identical with the Craton who appears at 613 A, 640 D, 669 C. At 669 C it is suggested that he is ἃ physician. On the problem of the meaning of γαμβρός, see 613 A.

TABLE TALKS I 4

92

620 A

620 A Θέων ὁ ἑταῖρος: Opinions differ about this personage. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 686, and s.v. Theon (10) 2062.30 takes it for granted that Plut. always refers to one and the same person. R.

Flaceli&re, Plutarque, Sur l'E de Delphes (Paris 1941) 11 shares this opinion, while Cherniss, Plut. Mor. LCL XII 7 discerns one Θέων ὁ

ἑταῖρος (Q. C. 667 A, 726 A, De E (386 D), De Pyth. or. : Non posse), and another Θέων ὁ γραμματικός (626 E, 728 F, De facie), so also Anonymus, CQ 32 (1918) 153, and Babut, Rev. Phil. 55 (1981) 324, id. REG 94 (1981) 58. 620 A Ev τινι πότῳ: Only by this phrase (and the participation of Theon) does Plut. mark that this talk takes place at a particular drinking-party. Other talks lacking a description of the situation are: I

6-7, 118, ΠῚ 3, V 4, VI 1, 9, VII 3, 6, VIII 5, 9. For those which take place on the same occasion it is naturally not needed.

620 A στεφανηφοροῦντα:

Abram.

observes that this cannot simply

mean "wearing a (convivial) wreath' (so interpreted by Amyot, Clem.) and that the context shows that it is equivalent to διότι ἐστεφανηφόρουν. No doubt it was in the function of ἄρχων

(620 B

πείϑεσθϑαι τῷ ἄρχοντι) or ἱερεύς that Plut. was στρεφανηφόρος and

thus was considered particularly apt to be συμποσίαρχος. Plut. held the office of ἄρχων ἐπώνυμος (642 F ὅτε τὴν ἐπώνυμον ἀρχὴν ἦρχον οἶκοι, also 693 F), he was invested with the office of βοιωτάρχης (An

seni 785 C), and he served for a long time as one of the permanent priests at Delphi (An seni 792 F καὶ μὴν οἶσϑά με τῷ Πυϑίῳ λειτουργοῦντα πολλὰς Πυϑιάδας, cf. 700 E). Στεφανηφόρος was ἃ title held by certain officials of many states, e.g., by the archonts of

Athens (Aeschin. I 19), of Tenos (IG X11:5.821.6), and by the priests of Apollo at Delphi (IG XIV 1020.2). That the eponymous magistrate

held this title is evidenced for Naxos (BCH 21 (1897) 19), Tenos UG IH] 1306.2), Anthedon of Boeotia (IG VII 4173), Paros (IG XI: 5.282).

See Busolt, Staatskunde? 1 499; Stier, RE s.v. Stephanephoria.

620 Α μὴ περιιδεῖν (παλαιὸν) ἔϑος ἐχλειφϑὲν παντάπασιν: The addition (Bern.) is na tural. — There is no evidence elsewhere that this Custom was falling into disuse at Plutarch’s time; it still existed much

later, ef. SEG VII 151.168 (Palmyra, 2nd c. A. D.); OGI II 646.14 (Palmyra, 3rd c. A. D.) ; Macrob. II 1.3; Sidon. Apoll. Ep. IX

13.4. Mau, RE s.v, Comissatio, 613.10 surmis es that *wenn Plut. sie (sc.

620 A

diese Sitte) als ganz Bedeutung'. But not institution is clearly presumably given at

TABLE TALKS I 4

93

veraltet bezeichnet, so hat dies wohl nur locale even this explanation holds good, seeing that this mentioned as existing at 679 B, in the banquet Chaeronea on Plutarch’s return from Alexandria.

620 καταστῆσαι πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς viv νενομισμένην ἐπιστασίαν: Fuhrm. rightly prints ἐξ ἀρξῆς Abram.: τῆς ἀρχῆς T; Abram. rejects Hubert’s interpretation τῆς ἀρχῆς (sc. τῆς στεφανηφορίας), which would mean that an ἄρχων was symposiarch ex officio. This task was assigned at each drinking-party to one of the participants by casting dice or by lot, cf. Hor. Carm. II 7.25 quem Venus arbitrum | dicet bibendi?, 1 4.18 regna vini sortiere talis; see Mau, RE s.v. Comissatio,

612f. Plut. himself says below (620 B): ἐμαυτὸν αἱροῦμαι συμποσίαρχον (imitating Alcibiades in Plat. Symp. 213 E ἄρχοντα οὖν αἱροῦμαι τῆς πόσεως ... ἐμαυτόν). For the tautologic πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, cf. Aristoph. Pax 997, Plut. 221; also Plut. De sera 565 Ὁ πάλιν καὶ πάλιν. 620 Β ἔν τινι τύπῳ: ‘in outline’; the expression is used by Plato (Leg. 718 C, 802 DE, Rep. 414 A (without τινι). 620 B ὁποῖον ὄντα δεῖ τὸν συμποσίαρχον αἱρεῖσϑαι: Abram. infers ex silentio from the fact that Plut. does not himself take part in the discussion of this question and does not refer to Plat. Leg. 640 C641 A, that this indicates that he reports an authentic discussion, but this is unfounded. 620 B πῶς χρῆσϑαι xoig κατὰ (τὸ) συμπόσιον δεῖ, διελέσϑαι τὸν λόγον ἐ(κείνοις) αὐτοῖς ἐπιτρέπων: Fuhrm. rightly accepts the transposition (Steph.) of διελέσϑαι δεῖ T, which makes further emendations unnecessary. Bolkenstein’s filling of the lacuna is convincing (ἐφεξῆς Hu., ἐπιεικῶς or εὐτάκτως Abram.); he. points out that ἐφεξῆς cannot be said of the division among themselves of the argumentation. For ἐκεῖνος αὐτός Bolk. refers to De def. or. 434 E, De gen. Socr. 587 D, De Herod. mal. 866 A, Mar. 43.10, Pomp. 67.2.

620 B ἠχκίσαντο: ‘they dissembled diffidence’; cf. Plat. Gorg. 497 A οἶσϑα, ἀλλὰ ἀκκίζῃ.

TABLE TALKS I 4

94

620 C

620 C δεῖ τὸν μὲν φυλάκων ἄρχοντα φυλακικώτατον, ὥς φησιν ὁ Πλάτων, εἶναι: Craton elegantly starts from the greatest authority and an apt passage (Rep. 412 C). 620 C ὡς ὁ Κῦρος ἔλεγεν κτλ.: Plut. tells the story at Artax. 6 (cf. also

Reg. apophth, 173 E): Cyrus the Younger sent for Spartan mercenary troops for his attack on his brother, Artaxerxes. Athen. 434 D reports

that on the tombstone of Darius the Elder there was an inscription commemorating his great drinking capacity. Also among the Greeks there is evidence that this capacity was admired. Talk 1 6 is a discussion of Alexander's excessive drinking; also other renowned πολυπόται are mentioned.

620 C 6 ve γὰρ παροινῶν .... ὅ τ᾽ αὖ παντάπασι νήφων: Plut. repeat-

edly discusses moderation in drinking: 645 A, 715 D τοὺς μεϑύοντας ὥστε ληρεῖν οἰόμεϑα δεῖν ἀπιόντας καϑεύδειν, 715 Ε ἔνιοι γὰρ εὑρετικὴν φύσιν ἔχοντες, ἐν δὲ τῷ νήφειν ἀτολμοτέραν καὶ πεπη-

γυῖαν. Cf. further De garr. 503 D-504 B. Plat. more extreme position: νήφοντά te καὶ σοφὸν δεῖ καϑιστάναι, an idealistic, unrealistic view; regarded as unbecoming to sit sober among tipsy 628 αἰσχρὸν δ᾽ εἰ νήφων πὰρ μεϑύουσι μένει.

Leg. 640 D takes a ἄρχοντα μεϑυόντων it had of old been revellers, cf. Theogn.

620 C παιδαγωγεῖν: This verb is also used of leading a drinking-party

at Plat. Leg. 641 AB συμποσίου δὲ ὀρϑῶς παιδαγωγηϑέντος τί μέγα ἰδιώταις ἢ τῇ πόλει γίγνοιτ᾽ ἄν; Below, 622 B, Theon will stress the

importance of παιδαγωγία: τὰ πλεῖστα vavayel συμπόσια μὴ τυχόν τα

παιδαγωγίας ὀρϑῆς.

620 Ὁ ὁ μὲν οὖν Περικλῆς κτλ.: The apophthegm is reported at Praec. ger. reip. 813 E and Reg. apophth. 186 C. Pericles was re-elected as one of the ten στρατηγοί, every year from 443 until his death in 429

(Per. 16.3); he was, however, tried and deposed in 430 but re-elec ted again in 429 (Per. 32.34, 35.4-5; Thuc. II 65 3-4). For the στρατηγία, see Busolt, Staatskunde? II 1017 t., 1061 f., 1121-1128; C. Hignett, A History of the Athenian Constitution (Oxford 1952) 244—251, 347-354;

A. H. M, Jones, Athenian Democracy (Oxford 1960) 124-127. - The χλαμύς was

a short cloak used by horsemen. In Athens it was adopted by young men when they were enrolled as ephebes (Athen. 240 BC). Magistrates wore a luxurious variant with a purple bord er, cf. Praec.

ger. reip. 816 A,

620 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS I 4

95

620 D ἐκεῖνα λεγέτω: Bolk. convincingly defends ἐκεῖνα (ἐκεῖνος (sc. ὁ συμποτικώτατος) Hu. was accepted by Clem.). There are numerous instances in Plut. of ἐκεῖνος referring to what follows, e.g. (with preceding οὗτος) 621 A, 667 A, 704 A, 720 Ὁ, 728 Ὁ; (without pre-

ceding οὗτος) 655 B, 711 A.

And

at Praec.

ger.

reip.

813 E this

pronoun likewise stands in the position before the apophthegm.

620 D φίλων ἄρχεις: Cf. Plat. Leg. 640 B νῦν δέ ye οὐ στρατοπέδου περὶ λέγομεν ἄρξοντος ... φίλων δ᾽ ἐν εἰρήνῃ πρὸς φίλους xowoνησόντων φιλοφροσύνης. 620 ἢ) δεῖ δὲ καὶ σπουδῆς τὸν ἄρχοντα πινόντων οἰκεῖον εἶναι καὶ παιδιᾶς μὴ ἀλλότριον: The moderate combination of seriousness and play is fundamental to Plutarch’s views of how a συμπόσιον should be. He repeatedly declares his opinion, cf. above, 614 A παίζοντα διαπράττεσθαι τὰ τῶν σπουδαζόντων, Sept. sap. 147 EF οὐ γὰρ ὡς

ἀγγεῖον ἥκει κομίζων ἑαυτὸν ἐμπλῆσαι πρὸς τὸ δεῖπνον ὁ νοῦν ἔχων, ἀλλὰ καὶ σπουδάσαι τι καὶ παῖξαι καὶ ἀκοῦσαι καὶ εἰπεῖν, ibid. 156 D αἱ Μοῦσαι ... ἐν μέσῳ προϑέμεναι τὸν λόγον, ᾧ πλεῖστον ἧδονῆς ἅμα καὶ παιδιᾶς καὶ σπουδῆς ἔνεστιν. It was the amiable and gentle jesting tone of Plato that was the model which Plut. tried to

follow. At 686 D he reveals this: (Ξενοφῶν καὶ Πλάτων) ... τὰ δὲ φιλοσοφηϑέντα μετὰ παιδιᾶς σπουδάζοντες εἰς γραφὴν Aneridevto. The coarse and caustic σπουδογέλοιον typical of the cynic symposion

(see R. Hirzel, Der Dialog (Leipzig 1895) 1 365, II 313) was alien to

him. Hug, RE s.v. SymposionLiteratur, 1276 does not distinguish this difference clearly. 620 5 ὥσπερ

οἶνον

ἀστεῖον:

Hartm.

found

ἀστεῖος

doubtful;

this

Word is nowhere else used to describe wine. But it is occasionally said of food, ‘excellent’, ‘exquisite’, e.g. of κραμβίδιον (Antiph. frg. 6 ΝῊ xgeioxov (Alex. Com. frg. 189 Kock), ἐλλέβορος (Strab. IX

I N ὁ γὰρ οἶνος ἄξει τὸ ἦϑος εἰς τὸ μέτριον μαλακώτερον ποιῶν νυγραίνων: Plut. repeatedly dwells upon this effect of wine, cf., “Ἐν 712 Β τὰ σκληρότατα τῶν ἠθῶν ὥσπερ ἐν πυρὶ τῷ οἴνῳ μα άττουσι καὶ Ἀάμπτουσι πρὸς τὸ ἐπιεικέστερον, Sept. sap. 156 D ὁ The νὸν ὥσπερ £v πυρὶ τῷ οἴνῳ μαλάττων τὰ ἤϑη καὶ ἀνυγραίνων. a Is expressed by Plat. Leg. 666 ΒΟ Διόνυσον παρακαλεῖν...

620D

TABLE TALKS I 4

96

dote ... γίγνεσϑαι μαλακώτερον ἐκ σκληροτέρου τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς ἦθος,

καϑάπερ εἰς πῦρ σίδηρον Evredevra γιγνόμενον.᾿ Ανυγραίνειν is used

in a negative sense at De sera 566 A ἐντήκεται καὶ ἀνυγραίνεται τὸ φρονοῦν ὑπὸ τῆς ἡδονῆς.

620 D τοῦ Κλεάρχου τὸ σκυϑρωπόν: Xen. An. II 6.11. Plut. also reports this characteristic of Clearchus at De ad. et an. 69 A. 620 E ἑκάστου τῶν συμποτῶν ἐμπείρως ἔχειν: Abram.

notices that

this is a remarkably rigorous demand on the symposiarch; it presupposes that there were only guests known to him present, but Craton himself concedes after a while (621 A): ef δὲ τοῦτό γε δύσκολον, κτλ. and is content with a more realistic claim. 620 E πῶς φέρει τὸν ἄκρατον: Ἄκρατος is a material noun here (= οἶνος), not explicitly ‘unmixed’ (Abram. and Clem. interprete ‘strong

drink’), seeing that there is no qualifying word and no comparison between wines of different grades, as in 677 C ἀκρατότερον

Eyxeiv,

and Xen. An. IV 5.27 πάνυ ἄχρατος ἦν, εἰ μή τις ὕδωρ ἐπιχέοι.

620 E οὐ γὰρ οἴνου μὲν ἔστι πρὸς ὕδωρ ἕτερον ἑτέρα μῖξις: Vulc. and

most eds. read ἑτέρου (sc. οἴνου); Bens., Wil., Si. defended ἕτερον, hesitatingly printed by Hu. Bolk. points out that the Greeks take particularly great interest in the various qualities of water, practically as great as in those of wine. The high esteem in which drinking-water was held in Greece is well documented, cf., e.g. Pind. O. 1.1 ἄριστον

μὲν ὕδωρ (quoted by Plut. Aq. an ign. 955 D); Hipp. Aer. ch. VII-IX; Theophr. frg. 6; Athen. 45 A-46 D. mentions a great number of springs and varieties of water; see I. Müller, Die griechischen Privatal-

tertümer? (München 1893) 45-47. This high appreciation still exists, cf.

A. Conze, Reise auf den Inseln des thrakischen Meeres

(Hannover

1860) 52 “Über die Vorzüge eines Trinkwassers habe ich auf den

griechischen Inseln so viel Gespráche hóren müssen, wie bei uns über die verschiedenen Weine’; (London

C. Seltman,

Wine

in the Ancient

World

1957) 67 f. For further references and evidence, ancient and

modern, see T. R. Glover, Springs of Hellas (Cambridge 1945) 1-29. All allow

ance made, then, for the concern for the different qualities of

water, Plutarch’s assumption that these are essential in the mixin g with wine ts remark able: the wine is assumed to be unvaried, waters — and men — varied,

TABLE TALKS I 4

620 E

97

of 620 E οἱ βασιλικοὶ ... οἰνοχόοι: Probably the royal wine-servants . the Persian king, who is said (Hdt. I 188; Plut. De exil. 601 D; Athen

45 B) to have appreciated only the water drawn from the river Choaspes. The reference may also be to the courts of Alexandria or Antiochia (cf. Athen. 45 C). If really the reference is to kings who accepted only one

kind

of water,

it is inadequate

in this context.

However, there is no good reason to suspect βασιλικοί (Abram.); βασιλισκοί T (corrected by man. post.) is a lapsus calami. 620 E ὑποχέουσιν: sc. οἶνον, so correctly interpreted by Cobet, Mnem. 3 (1854) 299 ‘nempe solet ὁ οἰνοχόος ὑποχεῖν τὸν οἶνον, deinde τὸ ὕδωρ ἐπιχεῖν, supported by Bolk:, cf. 657 C εἰς ἕνα τριῶν ὕδατος ἐπιχεομένων, 657 Ὁ καὶ προελϑὼν ὁ παῖς ὑπέχει τὸν ἄχρατον, Anton. 75.2. In earlier times the order was reversed, cf.

Anacr. frg. 63 Bergk’ = frg. 43 Diehl?. 620 E ἀνϑρώπου δὲ πρὸς οἶνον οὐκ ἔστ᾽ ἰδία κρᾶσις: Plut. here, as often, uses χρᾶσις and μῖξις as synonyms, cf., e.g., 637 E κρᾶσίν τινα

καὶ μῖξιν, and see on 643 Ε. Otherwise the two are distinguished:

Arist. Top. 122 b 30 regards μῖξις as genus and κρᾶσις as species: οὔτε

γὰρ ἡ μῖξις ἅπασα κρᾶσις. According to Stoic theory κρᾶσις is ἃ more radical mixing than μῖξις, a fusion of the elements: SVF I 102 (Zenon)

τὴν δὲ κρᾶσιν γίνεσϑαι τῇ εἰς ἄλληλα τῶν στοιχείων μεταβολῇ, which Is possible only for fluids: SVF II 471 (Chrys.) κρᾶσιν δὲ elvan λέγουσι δύο ἢ καὶ πλειόνων σωμάτων ὑγρῶν δι᾿ ὅλων ἀντιπαρέκτασιν. See

further P. Barth, Die Stoa? (Stuttgart 1941) 64f. The idea that difference in temperament

is the reason why the wine effects individuals

differently is attributed to Plat. Com. in Anecd. Par. I 167.15 Cramer: τὸν οἶνον μίγνυσθαι τοῖς τῶν πινόντων τρόποις, but to the tragedian

Chaeremon by Plut. De Pyth. or. 406 B ὁ μὲν yàg οἶνος, ὡς ἔλεγε Acero,

τοῖς τρόποις κεράννυται πινόντων, so also Theophr. ap.

for thi ~

E, and Ps.-Arist. Probl. 873 a 25. Stob. 11 33.12 cites Arist.

time Νὴ cory. Plut. De Pyth. or 437 DE also considers variations from

Bits time: οὔτε γὰρ ὁ οἶνος ὡσαύτως ἀεί τὸν μεϑυστικὸν ... bx σιν, ἀλλὰ νῦν μὲν ἧττον οἱ αὐτοὶ νῦν δὲ μᾶλλον χεύονται. καὶ παροινοῦσι, τῆς κράσεως ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑτέρας

γενομένης. Cf. also 650 AB and 652 A. 6

er

oe F ὥσπερ ἁρμονικός, κτλ.: Plut. often draws parallels with music, ^» €.8., 657 B οἱ περὶ Διόνυσον ἁρμονικοὶ τρεῖς κατεῖδον οἴνου

620 F

TABLE TALKS I 4

98

συμφωνίας πρὸς ὕδωρ, De ad. et am. 55 Ὁ ὅϑεν ὥσπερ ἁρμονικὸς ὁ

φίλος ... τὰ μὲν ἐνδιδοὺς τὰ δ᾽ ἐπιτείνων πολλάκις μὲν ἡδὺς ἀεὶ ὃ ὠφέλιμός ἐστι, Praec. ger. reip. 809 E τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλως ἀπάδοντας ὥσπερ ἁρμονικὸν

ἐπιτείνοντα καὶ χαλῶντα

πράως

εἰς τὸ ἐμμελὲς

ἄγειν, also Ps.(?)-Plut. De un. in rep. dom. 827 AB ὥσπερ οὖν © ἁρμονικὸς καὶ μουσικὸς ἀνὴρ... τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὁ πολιτικὸς ἀνὴρ οὖν τὰ μὲν ἀνιεὶς τὰ δ᾽ ἐπιτείνων τῆς πολιτείας.

620 Ε μὴ κοτύλῃ μηδὲ κυάϑοις: The κοτύλη was a fairly big cup with two knobs, used for measuring out the mixed wine; the κύαθϑος, a ladle-like cup with one high handle, was used for ladling the wine from the κρατήρ and for drinking, see E. Guhl

& W.

Koner,

Leben der

Griechen und Römer‘ (Berlin 1893) 271, fig. 327 nos. 4, 6, 7; 10, 13, 14. 620 F καιροῦ τινι μέτρῳ: The same theme is treated in 643 C, and in De tu, san. 132 B: one should observe the proper moment for taking food or drink. The words are also used together at 613 B and De tu.

san. 133 F. Cf. also Sept. sap. 157 D. 621 A εἰ δὲ τοῦτό γε δύσχολον, ἐκεῖνα δέ: Mez. read εἰ δύσχολον, ἐκεῖνά ye, which Dübn. and Bern. accepted; ἐκεῖνα δή. Bolk. defends the text; for δέ in the apodosis, often found in Hdt. than in other writers, and most

δὲ τοῦτο [γε] Po. proposed which is more often after ἃ

conditional protasis, see Denniston? 180f. — For ἐκεῖνος refer ring to what follows, cf. below, on 663 F.

621 Α οἷον πρεσβῦται τάχιον μεϑύσκονται νέων , σαλευόμενοι δ᾽ ἠρεμ

ούντων: The first idea forms the theme discussed in Talk ΠῚ 3 where the cause is supposed to be the physical dryness of elde rly

people, but cf. Arist. frg. 107 Rose μεϑύσκονται δὲ of γεραίτεροι τάχι

στα δι᾽ ὀλιγότητα καὶ ἀσϑένειαν τοῦ περὶ αὐτοὺς ἐνυπάρχοντος φύσει ϑερμοῦ, so also Geop. VII 34.2. The aspect of activity vs. rest also appears at 714 E. where it is Maintained that those who are drinking wine should lie down rather than sit on a chair, beca use thus

the body is relieved of all activity. In Ps.-Arist. Probl. 873 a 13 it is questioned διὰ τί μᾶλλον δύνανται πιεῖν εἰς μέϑην οἱ ἀγύ μναστοι τῶν

γεγυμνασμένων, which is answered: of μὲν οὖν ἀγύμναστοι ὑγρο ὶ καὶ

χεριπτωματικοί εἰσιν, οἱ δὲ γεγυμνασμένοι ξηροί, ὥστ᾽ εἰς τὸ σῶμα τούτοις ἡ ὑγρότης ἡ οἰνηρὰ ἀφικνεῖται,

Abram.

points out that

99

TABLE TALKS I 4

61A

σαλευόμενοι does not refer to the moment but more generally to an active way of life (cf. the following διάγοντες); the word denotes the same people as γεγυμνασμένοι. There is no contrary opinion in 677 F: τοῖς ἀργοῦσι καὶ σχολάζουσι παρὰ τὸ εἰωϑὸς σώμασιν ἀνειμένη καὶ μαλακωρέρα κρᾶσις ἁρμόζει. It is about the same, active, group, momentarily enjoying unaccustomed leasure; Hu. and Fuhrm. failed to observe this.

621 A ἔλλυποι: So Amyot, Steph.: ἄλυποι T. The word is not found elsewhere but it naturally belongs to the class of compounds of ἐν + noun: ἔλλιϑος, ἔλλιπος, ἔλλοπος etc. 621 A (οἱ δὲ μὴ) ἀνέδην καὶ κατα(κόρως) διάγοντες: The supplementations are persuasive. For ἀνέδην, cf. Clem. Paed. II 12.2 οἱ ἀνέδην ἐσθίοντες, ol ἄπληστοι; metaphorically below 704 Ὁ τοὺς ... ἀνέδην αὐτῆς (sc. τῆς μουσικῆς) ἐμφορουμένους. 621 A καὶ τοιαῦτα γιγνώσκων: Bolk. and Abram. rightly criticize Hu. for printing his unhappy conjecture κἄλλα toad? à y. (accepted by Clem.). The sentence concludes the description of a good symposiarch; καί has an affirmative force, almost ‘yes indeed’ (Bolk. translates ‘et igitur"), cf. Polyb. I 39.10 καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἔπασχον οὐκ ἀλόγως, II 37.8 καὶ τοῦτ᾽ εἰκότως ἐποίουν, III 85.9 xoi τοῦτ᾽ εἰκότως συνέβη. 621 A πρυτανεύσειεν:

‘regulate’,

‘order’;

this sense

also occurs

in

Alexis, frg. 110.3 Kock ἔστι γὰρ προοίμιον | δείπνου χαριέντως ταῦτα πεπρυτανευμένου.

621 A οὔτε γὰρ ἐπιτάττων ἀνεχκτὸς οὔτ᾽ ἀπονέμων ἴσος οὔτε προσπαίξων ὅμως ἀνέγκλητος ἔσται: Abram. notices that Craton concludes his speech as befits an educated person trained in rhetoric, by a beautiful triple ὁμοιοτέλευτον. Bolk. rightly defends ὅμως. Προσπαίζων is clearly concessive (= καίπερ π.). For such omission of OUTER

QUO

Bolk.

refers

to

710D

τοσαύτην

...

χάριν

ἔχοντες

ὅμως

τοῖς ἐπεισοδίοις κτλ., De Alex. Mag. fort. 338 C, De ls. et

8. 375 A, Alex. 60.4, Anton. 63.3. Probably the demand for symmetry in the ὁμοιοτέλευτον made Plut. omit καίπερ here.

s 6 τε Β πλάσας ὥσπερ

ἐκ κηροῦ

τοῦ λόγου:

. The image is evidently

Trowed from Plat. Leg. 746 A πλάττων καϑάπερ ἔκ κηροῦ τινα

621B

TABLE TALKS I 4

100

πόλιν καὶ πολίτας, Rep. 588 D ἐπειϑὴ εὐπλαστότερον κηροῦ καὶ TOV τοιούτων λόγος, πεπλάσϑω, ibid. 361 D, 540 C; cf. Cic. De or. 1 123,

ΠῚ 177, Or. 7. 621 B οὕτω καλῶς ἀπειργασμένον τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ συμποτικόν: The conjecture καλῶς Faehse, Hartm.: μᾶλλον T was adduced by Bolk.

and printed by Fuhrm. (Clem. adopts the unfortunate ὁμαλόν Hu.; an adverb is needed). Abram. proposes ὁμαλῶς, palaeographically preferable and less trivial, but it is safe to read καλῶς.

621 B ei δὲ μὴ χρήσομαι κατὰ τρόπον αὐτῷ: Hu. corrected κατὰ πᾶν

T. For the meaning, ‘suitably’, ‘adequately’, Hu. refers to Ps.-Plut. De mus. 1146 A εἴ τις αὐτὸς μὴ κατὰ τρόπον χρῷτο. Plato uses the phrase in this sense at Pol. 310 C, Leg. 638 C; cf. also Dio Chrys. X 28.

621 B (εὔκρα)τον δέ por δοκεῖ, τοιζοῦτοὴς dv, τὸ συμπόσιον (διαφυλ)άξειν ἡμῖν καὶ μὴ περιόψεσϑαι: The fillings are convincing.

Abram. remarks that ἄριστον, κάλλιστον, βέλτιστον etc., OF κοσμιώτατον Bern., would also be possible instead of εὔκρατον Paton. But this word is exactly to the point; it is often used metaphorical-

ly, cf. Arist. Pol. 1320 Ὁ 21 εὔκρατος ὀλιγαρχία; Anth. Pal. VI 208.6 εὔχρατος Κύπρις. Incidentally, also (ἀσάλευτον Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 255) would be possible. 621 B ἐκκλησίαν δημοκρατικήν: The same comparison between ani-

mated discussion at table and the alleged squabble in the assembly is found at 713 F ζητήσεως ... (προϊούσης) πρὸς ἀγῶνας ἐκκλησιαστικοῦς. Δημοχρατικός is used in positive sense above, 616 F.

621 B σχολὴν σοφιστοῦ γινόμενον: I read γινόμενον (sc. συμπόσιον):

γινομένην T. -- Sophistic disputes and eristic hair-splitting are targe ts

of Plutarch’s dislike, especially if they occur at banq uets, cf. 615 A τοὺς ἕλκοντας εἰς τὰ συμπόσια τὸν Κυριεύοντα, 713 F ζητήσεως εἰς

ἅμιλλαν

ἀτερπῆ

καὶ

ἀγῶνα

σοφιστικὴν

Y τ᾽ πράγμα εἴχομεν ἀμυνόμενοι βαϑυπώγωνα Στοᾶς, De Pyth. or, 408 D, Lucull. 7.4.

ἐχφερομένης, σο φιστὴνἣν

710 B ἀπὸ ἀπὸ

τῆς f

61 B κυβευτήριον: ‘a dice-gambling den’. At De vit. pud. 530 F Plut. repudiates the playing of dice at drinking-parties. Ther e is no reason to

101

TABLE TALKS I 4

621 B

change into δικαστήριον Herw., by reference to δικαζομένους in the next sentence. 621 B σκηνὴν καὶ ϑυμέλην: The two words refer to dramatic representations and choral-musical performances respectively, the latter being

executed in the orchestra with its central altar, the ϑυμέλη, cf. Pratinas

ap. Athen. 617 C (III 558 Bergk*) τίς ὁ ϑόρυβος ὅδε; τί τάδε τὰ

χορεύματα; | τίς ὕβρις ἔμολεν ἐπὶ Διονυσιάδα πολχυπάταγα ϑυμέλαν;

Antinous, frg. 2.14 (Powell,

Coll. Alex. p. 164) Ἑστία,

δίδου δ᾽

ἀμοιβὰς |... | ἀμφὶ σὰν ϑυμέλαν χορεύειν. The word, deriving from

ϑύω (see Gow, JHS 32 (1912) 214-216) originally meant ‘hearth’, then ‘place for burning sacrifice’, ‘altar’. The distinction between the two

kinds of performance probably does not date further back than the 4th century when σκηνικοὶ ἀγῶνες and ϑυμελικοὶ (i. e. musical) ἀγῶνες were separated, see F. Robert, Thymele (Paris 1939) 289-294. Anth. Pal. VII 21.3 (of Soph.) reflects later times: πολλάκις ob ϑυμέλῃσι καὶ ἐν σκήνῃσι τεϑηλώς, cf. Vitruv. V 8 (7).2 scaenici et thymelici Graece separatim

nominantur;

Cornut.

De

nat.

deor.

62.7

Lang

τὰ

δὲ

ϑυμελικὰ ἀκροάματα τὸν Διόνυσον ϑεραπεύει διὰ τὴν πρὸς τὰς ϑαλίας οἰκειότητα αὐτῶν, οἷον δῆς καὶ κιϑάρας. Plut. De cup. div. 527 F uses ϑέατρον instead of σκηνή: ὡς ϑέατρον ἢ ϑυμέλην. See further Fensterbusch, RE s.v. Θυμέλη, 702-704; Aly, RE s.v. Θυμελιχοὶ ἀγῶνες. — Dramatic performances as entertainment at banquets form the subject of Talk VII 8, where tragedy is rejected (711 E) ὡς οὐ πάνυ τι συμποτικὸν ἀλλὰ σεμνότερον βοῶσαν, and also the Old Comedy (711 F), which is ἀνάρμοστος ἀνθρώποις πίνουσιν because it is (712 A) γέμουσα ῥημάτων ἀκόσμων καὶ ἀκολάστων ὀνομάτων, and also because it requires so much explanation ὥστε γραμματο-

διδασκαλεῖον ἡμῖν γενέσθαι τὸ συμπόσιον. 621 B δημαγωγοῦντας καὶ δικαζομένους: The reference is to boom-

σία δημοχρατική and σχολὴ σοφιστοῦ respectively. ΠῚ ^ € aea Ma B μελετῶντας καὶ 524ἀναγιγνώσκοντας αὑτῶν τινα συγγράμματα: Wve authors were notorious for insisting on the recital of their

6

vOTKS at parties, cf. Petron. Sat. 10, and see Funaioli, RE s.v. Recita-

eqs 4441. Various other kinds of specialist’s verbosity are mention-

θα at De garr. 514 ΑΒ,

102

TABLE TALKS I 4

621 C

621 C ᾿Αλκιβιάδης δὲ καὶ Θεόδωρος κτλ.: The well-known story is told by Plut. in Alcib. 19-22. In the parody of the Eleusinian mysteries performed by the drunken revellers, Alcibiades played the protagonistic part of the hierophantes, Theodorus that of the herald, and Poulytion that of the torch-bearer. On these tasks in the mysteries, see

Farnell ΠῚ 158-163. In the trial regarding sacriledge in 399, Andocides defended himself against the charge of participation and accused Poulytion (1 12) and Theodorus (I 35). The sale of the confiscated property of Alcibiades and his companions

was recorded epigraphically; the

inscription is partly preserved, see Pritchett, Pippin, and Amyx, Hesp. 22 (1953) 225-299, 25 (1956) 178-328, 27 (1958) 163—310, 30 (1961) 2329. 621C Πουλυτίωνος: Bolk. shows that this is the correct form (Πολυτίωνος T), cf. Andoc. I 12, 14; Ps.-Plat. Eryx. 394 B, 400 B; Paus. I 2.5; P. Oxy. IH 411.26. The MSS of Isocr. XVI 6 and Plut. Alcib. 19.2 have both variants, cf. also Eustath. 1405.22 = Pherecr. frg. 28 Kock.

621 C παιδιαῖς δώσει τόπον: For this phrase cf. De coh. ira 462 B δεῖ δὲ μήτε παίζοντας αὐτῇ (sc. τῇ ὀργῇ) διδόναι τόπον; NT Eph. 4.27 μηδὲ δίδοτε τόπον τῷ διαβόλῳ.

621 C ὅσα πρὸς τὸ συμποτικὸν τέλος ἐξικνεῖται᾽ τοῦτο δ᾽ ἦν φιλίας ἐπίτασιν ἢ γένεσιν δι᾽ ἡδονῆς ἐνεργάσασϑαι τοῖς παροῦσιν: This echoes 620 B where it was said that the symposiarch has to set an aim

for the drinking-party, and 618 E where this was mentioned incidental-

ly: πρὸς εὐνοίας ἐπίδοσιν ἢ γένεσιν. Plut. repeatedly expresses his

views of the gentle and amicable feelings caused by convivial company,

€.B., 660A εἰς δὲ συμπόσιον οἵ γε νοῦν ἔχοντες ἀφυικνοῦνται #moöpevor φίλους οὐχ ἧττον ἢ τοὺς ὄντας εὐφρανο ῦντες. In Sept. sap. 156 C Aphrodite and Dionysus are praised for ἣν ἐμποιοῦσι . . -

φιλοφροσύνην xoi πόϑον xoi ὁμιλίαν ἡμῖν καὶ συνήϑειαν πρὸς

ἀλλήλους. The significance of the symposiarch for obtaini ng that goal is mentioned by Plat. Leg. 640 CD γίγνεται γὰρ φύλαξ τῆς TE υπαρχούσης φιλίας αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἔτι πλείονος ἐπιμελητὴς ὅπως ἔσται

διὰ τὴν τότε ξυνουσίαν.

621 CD βλαβερὸν τὸ ἄκρατον, ἡ δὲ μῖξις, ++. ἀφαιρεῖ τἄγαν, ᾧ καὶ βλάπτει τὰ ἡδέα xoi λυπεῖ τὰ ὠφέλιμα: The play on wor > ds, ἄκρατον,

621 CD

TABLE TALKS I 4

103

‘the unmixed’, as opposed to μίξις, is somewhat banal. The emendation ἀφαιρεῖ τἄγαν, ᾧ Bern.: ἀφαιρεῖται ἄνω T is certain; Bolk. cites numerous examples of this phrase in Plut.: De ad. et am. 66 B, De def. or. 431 A, 437 A, De virt. mor. 452 A, De coh. ira 463 B, De tranqu.

474 C, De vit. pud. 528 F, De prim. frig. 946 F. Bern. ly filled the lacuna at 663 F ἂν τὴν ὑπερ(βολὴν καὶ An instance not adduced by Bolk. occurs at De ἀφαιρεῖ γὰρ ἡ κρᾶσις τοῦ οἴνου τὸ βλάπτον, οὐ

also convincingtay)av ἀφέλῃς. aud. poet. 15E συναιροῦσα TO

χρήσιμον. -- Logic seems to demand

either λυπεῖ τὰ

transposition,

ἡδέα καὶ βλάπτει τὰ ὠφέλιμα Re., or βλάπτει τὰ ὠφέλιμα καὶ λυπεὶ τὰ ἡδέα Uhde (Rh. Mus. 75 (1926) 231); Fuhrm. prints the latter, perhaps rightly, but is really such strict logic to be expected?

621 D πλοῦς ὁ μὲν παρὰ ἔστιν: The fear of sailing well documented, e.g., παιπαλοέσσης, | νήσου

γῆν, περίπατος δ᾽ ὁ παρὰ ϑάλατταν ἥδιστός on the open sea without having land in sight is Od. III 170 ἢ καϑύπερϑε Χίοιο νεοίμεϑα ἐπὶ Ψυρίης, αὐτὴν ἐπ᾽ ἀριστέρ᾽ ἔχοντες, | ἦ

ὑπένερϑε Χίοιο, παρ᾽ ἠνεμόεντα Μίναντα; Strab. 13.2 (48) εἰπών τε

τοὺς ἀρχαιοτάτους πλεῖν (μὲν)... μὴ πελαγίζειν δέ, ἀλλὰ παρὰ γῆν; Thue. VI 442 παρεκομίζοντο τὴν ᾿Ιταλίαν; Polyb. III 41.4 Πόπλιος

δὲ χομισϑεὶς παρὰ τὴν Λιγυστίνην ἧκε πεμπταῖος ἀπὸ Πισῶν εἰς τοὺς χατὰ Μασσιλίαν τόπους. Rutil. De red. suo is a vivid and beautiful narrative of a πλοῦς παρὰ γῆν. See further Kroll, RE s.v.

Schiffahrt, 408f. — Love for the seaside is likewise commonly exPressed, e.g., Plin. Ep. I 9.6 o mare, o litus, verum secretumque

μουσεῖον, quam multa invenitis, quam multa dictatis! Cic. Ad Att. XII 9 nihil hac solitudine iucundius . . . cetera noli putare amabiliora fieri Posse villa, litore, prospectu maris, ibid. XIV 13.1; Apul. Met. X 35.4.

621 Ὁ ὥσπερ οἱ ναυτιῶντες ἐγγύϑεν εἰς (γῆν), τὴν παιδιὰν ἀποβλέποντες: Addition Amyot; there is no need for εἰς {γῆν, εἰς)

τὴν παιδιάν Abram. Plut. often omits a preposition in comparative

phrases: 621 B πλάσας ὥσπερ ἐκ κηροῦ τοῦ λόγου, 712 B ὥσπερ ἐν

d ot τῷ οἴνῳ, 731 Β ὥσπερ ἐν πόλει τῷ σώματι, Non posse 1095 B PM ψυχρᾷ τῇ σαρκί, Lyc. 24.1 οἷον ἐν στρατοπέδῳ τῇ 905 ἣν Numa 20.5 οἷον Ex πηγῆς τῆς Νουμᾶ σοφίας, cf. also Plat. Leg. > B ὡς £v κατόπτροις αὐτῶν ταῖς πράξεσιν; Isocr. XV 160 ὑπὲρ τοῦ

i, Ἰλουτεῖν ὥσπερ τῶν μεγίστων ἀδικημάτων. Abram. remarks that amo Mparison is not entirely successful; surely the σπουδάζοντες ng the guests did not feel sick or disgusted in their seriousness.

621D

TABLE TALKS I 4

104

621 D ἔστι γὰρ καὶ γέλωτι χρῆσϑαι πρὸς πολλὰ τῶν ὠφελίμων καὶ σπουδὴν ἡδεῖαν παρασχεῖν: Fuhrm. mistakenly changes τῶν ὠφελίμων into τῶν σπουδαίων. It is ὠφέλιμος and ἡδύς that are concerned, as above (@ καὶ βλάπτει τὰ ἡδέα καὶ λυπεῖ τὰ ὠφέλιμα); and below, 622 A, the two concepts are again mentioned together: (τοῖς δὲ) ὠφέλειαν.

προστάγμασιν

ἐϑιστέον

χρῆσϑαι

πρὸς

ἡδονὴν

καὶ

621 E ὡς ἀν᾽ ἐχινόποδας x1.: This distichon (Adesp. frg. 1 (III 689)

Bergk*, III 136 Diehl?) is also quoted at De aud. poet. 44 E, De frat. am.

485 A,

and

in

Athen.

ἀκάνϑης εἶδος in Etym.

97 D.

Mag.

The

ἐχινόπους

is

classified

as

405.12. The plant is probably the

broom, Genista acanthoclada Cand. The rest-harrow (Ononis antiquorum L.) is described by Theophr. H. P. VI 5.3 and Dioscur. III 18.

The term Aeuxótov may denote the gilliflower (Matthiola incana L.) or the snowdrop (Galanthus nivalis L.), cf. Dioscur. III 123; Theophr. A. P. VIL 8.1. 621 E ὅσαι δ᾽ ἄνευ σπουδῆς ... παιδιαί: Having just compared seriousness with nausea and prickly plants Theon now changes his

point of view and stresses that this is a necessary corrective of excessive playfulness.

621 E μὴ λάϑωσιν ὕβριν (οἴνῳ) καϑάπερ ὑοσκύαμον ἐμβαλόντες,

οἷον τοῖς xth.: Fuhrm. filled the lacuna and accepted οἷον Hu. (οἴνῳ T), entirely convincingly; after οἷον had been corrupted into οἴνῳ this word was cancelled in its original place. The change of ἐμβαλόντες (restored by Salmas.) into λαβόντες may have been inspi red by the

phrase λαμβάνειν τί τινι used of drugs, cf. Gal. XV 469 K. χρείας δὲ οὔσης δὶς λαμβάνειν xoi τοῖς ἅπαξ εἰϑισμένοις ἐσϑίειν. — For the

action of the poisonous henbane (Hyoscyamus niger L.), cf. Xen. Oec.

1.13 τὸν $ooxóayov ... ὑφ οὗ oi φαγόντες παρ απλῆγες γίγνονται, and further Dioscur. IV 68.2-5.

621 E τοῖς λεγομένοις προστάγμασιν: Such embarrassing or even malevo

lent requests were obviously a common kind of entert ainment, as can be judged from the wordings below: they were a sport, more or

less compulsary, to be carried out by all guest in turn (621 F τοῦ δὲ προστάσσειν περιελ

ϑόντος εἰς αὐτόν), they could be more or less impertinent (622 A (τοῖς δὲ) προστάγμασιν ἐϑιστέον χρῆσϑαι πρὸς

621E

TABLE TALKS I 4

105

ἡδονὴν καὶ ὠφέλειαν), and those subjected to these practical jokes might take them more or less elegantly (622 A χαρίεις οὖν ᾿Αγαμήστωρ). 621 E χκτενίξεσϑαι φαλακροῖς: To ridicule baldness was regarded as comparatively inoffensive, cf. 633 C εἰς φαλαχρότητα (σκωπτόμενοι) πράως φέρουσιν. Aristoph. jested upon his own baldness (Pax 767--

774, Equ. 550, Nub. 545). To ask bald men to comb their hair was proverbial. Diogenian. III 88 (CPG II 50) φαλακρὸς κτένα᾽ ἐπὶ τῶν εἰς μηδέν τι συντελούντων; cf. also Synes. Op. V 2 64 B Terz. ὅταν

Ἀτενὸς (Naber, Mnem. 22 (1894) 123: ἔτνους MSS) προκειμένου μετώπων ἐξέτασις γένηται. Also kings found delight in this jest: Plut. Galba 13.6 Μιϑριδάτης ... ἐπισκώπτων τὴν φαλακρότητα ... τοῦ Γάλβα.

621 E ἀσκωλιάζειν: This verb is used in two main senses, (1) ‘hop (and balance) on a greased wineskin’, (2) ‘hop on one foot’. The first meaning is stated as original by Schol. Plat. Symp. 190 D and Hesych. s.v. ἀσκωλιάζεις" κυρίως μὲν τὸ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀσκοὺς ἅλλεσϑαι, ἐφ᾽ οὖς ἀληλιμμένους ἐπήδων γελοίου ἕνεκεν. This prank was practised at the Rural Dionysia, see L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 117f. 135; H. Jeanmaire, Dionysos (Paris 1951) 42; R. Flaceliére, La vie quotidienne en Gréce (Paris 1959) 225; W. Deonna,

Un divertissement

de table (Bruxelles 1959) 31; Reisch, RE s.v.' Ασκωλιασμός. However,

there are no early instances of this meaning. Latte, Hermes 85 (1957)

385-391 showed that the original meaning of the verb is ‘hop on one

foot’: Plat. Symp. 190D ἐφ ἑνὸς πορεύσονται σκέλους ἀσχωλιάξοντες; Arist. Incess. an. 705 b 34 ἀσκωλιάζουσι ῥᾷον ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀριστεροῖς; Aristoph. Plut. 1129 is inconclusive: ἀσκωλίαζ᾽ ἕνταῦϑα πρὸς τὴν αἰϑρίαν. Latte (pp. 388 f.) suggests that the associ-

ation with ἀσκός and the droll balancing on this was made by the

Brammarian Eratosthenes, who was then reported by Didymus, and he

I1 turn by later writers (Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 1129; Poll. IX 121, et

αἰ.) The derivation of ἀσκώλια from "ἀσκο-(σ)άλια (Wackernagel, me

Gott. 1902, p. 740) is then not right (nevertheless supported by

et 5 ) Latte’s (pp. 190 f.) derivation from σκέλος is convincing. This

Any ogy also covers the meaning ‘limp’: Aelian. frg. 98 Hercher; om Gr. I 452.18 Bekk. As in our passage the meaning is 'stand on 90t at Aelian. N. A. III 13 (of cranes): ἑστᾶσι μὲν ác κωλιάζουσαι, τῷ γε μὴν μετεώρῳ ποδὶ λίϑον κατέχουσι τοῖς ὄνυξι.

621 E

TABLE TALKS I 4

106

There were many variants of this kind of entertainment, see Poll. ΙΧ 121; cf. also Gal. XI 106 K.; Anecd.

Gr.

621 E ᾿Αγαμήστορι và ᾿Ακαδημαϊκῷ:

1 24.15 Bekk.

Philodem. Acad.

Index Herc.

Col. 27.1-28.18 = Apollodorus, frg. 47 (FGrHist II B p. 1033) enumerates a number of Academicians who died between 200 and 150 B.

C., one of which was Agamestor

the Arcadian,

who

died μετὰ

Πέρσεως ἅλωσιν, i.e. in 168/7; cf. Crónert, Hermes 37 (1902) 225; von

Arnim, RE s.v. Agamestor (3). 621 F κεραμίου κενοῦ κομισϑέντος: Bern. brought up Amyot’s con-

jecture στενοῦ, which also Hu. and Clem. print, although Paton, CR 14 (1900) 443 convincingly defended κενοῦ:

‘All wine jars ... had

narrow necks, not large enough to admit an ordinary foot and leg. ..χενοῦ is not superfluous. He asked for an empty jar to be brought’

(italics original).

622 A (τοῖς δὲ) προστάγμασιν ἐϑιστέον χρῆσϑαι: Many supplementations are possible: ἀλλὰ καί Vulc., αὐτοῖς δὲ τοῖς Hu., ὁμοίως δέ

Wil., μᾶλλον δέ Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 255), εἶτα Capps; the trivial τοῖς δέ Clem. is sufficient.

622 A iv’ αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ τυγχάνῃ κράτιστος Gv: This line from Eur. Antiope (frg. 183 Nauck?) is also quoted at 630 B, De garr. 514 A, and (in adapted form) De aud. 43 B. Bern. changed to τυγχάνει (also at 630 B), and chose this form at 514 A where the MSS vary. Hu. and

Bolk. rightly defend the subjunctive; this is occasionally used without ἄν in general relative clauses, cf. Soph. O. R. 317 ἔνϑα μὴ τέλη λύῃ (MSS vary: -M-eu, Aiax 1074 ἔνϑα καϑεστήκῃ (MSS vary: n/-eu-oV

tv), Hat. IV 46 τοῖσι ... μήτε τείχεα ἧ; Thuc. IV 17.2 οὗ μὲν βραχεῖς (se. λόγοι) Gondor; Plat. Leg. 737 B οἷς fj and ὅσοις... perf. Plat. quotes the line at Gorg. 484 E and Alc. II 146 A; the MSS vary: env nm,

1.

vive, See Kühner-Gerth? II 426 Anm.

1, 444.3, 474

622 A τῶν '᾿Ασσυρίων βασιλεύς: Plut. mistakenly mentions the Assyr-

lan instead of the Persian king. The proclamation of the prize is ascribed to Xerxes by Cic. Tusc, IV 20; Val. Max. IX 1 Ext. 3; but to Darius by Clearchus of Soli, frg. 50 Wehrli (— Athen. 539 B), or 'the

Persian king’: frg. 51 A,51 D (7 Athen. 514 A, 529 D); Theophr. frg.

107

TABLE TALKS 14

622 A

125 (= Athen.

144 EF). Abram.

observes that Plut. also confuses

Persians and Assyrians in De facie 935 B πῦρ μέν γε παρὰ Μηδοῖς καὶ

᾿Ασσυρίοις βαρβαρικὰς ἔχει τιμάς, which is not true of the Assyrians. 622 B ὕβρεως: Fuhrm. rightly accepts this emendation by Wytt. (Lex. s.v. ἑταῖρος) and Wil.: ὕβρεων T. Bolk. defends the text and points out that Plut. has a predilection for the plural forms of abstract concepts, as is also documented by Cast. (p. 888). Bolk. refers to the plural ὕβρεις at Sert. 25.3 but there it is together with other plurals:

ὕβρεις δὲ καὶ προστάγματα καὶ πόνους. Here ὕβρις is part of a series of singular forms. 622 B ἐν οἷς τὰ πλεῖστα ναυαγεῖ συμπόσια μὴ τυχόντα παιδαγωγίας ὀρϑῆς: Theon's concluding words seem sharp and urgent; he suggests that parties are sometimes wrecked. But the style is rhetorical. The

naval image is not carried through; one would expect κυβέρνησις, but Theon reconnects to the beginning of the discussion by Craton (620 C παιδαγωγεῖν).

Theon's

speech

ends

with

a warning

for unguided

παιδιά and thus counterbalances its beginning where he warned for excessive intellectual exercises over wine.

622B

£x φιλονεικίας:

Fuhrm.

restored the correct reading.

Hu.,

followed by Clem., mistakenly printed φιλονικίας.

TALK

5

622 € ποιητὴν δ᾽ ἄρα | Ἔρως διδάσκει, κἂν ἄμουσος ἡ τὸ πρίν: Eur.

M 663 Nauck?, from the Stheneboea, a much-quoted aphorism, cf. De yth. or. 405 F, Amat. 762 B; Plat. Symp. 196 E; Aristoph. Vesp. 1074; Aristid. XXVI 3, XLI 11; Schol. Theocr. XI 1; cf. Longin. Περὶ ὕψους 39.2 622 C ἐξητεῖτο παρὰ Σοσσίῳ: The absent description of the surroundue and the lack of presentation of the speakers, in contrast to other ‘a ks Which are dramatically elaborated (e.g. IV 4-6), were looked

ὧν as an indication of authenticity by E. Graf, ‘Plutarchisches’. In: 6. τι Mationes philologae ... O. Ribbeckio ... (Lipsiae 1888) reo © thought that Plut. reported the talks of which he possessed ords, but refrained from fabulating a description of the situation

108

TABLE TALKS I 5

622 C

when he had no notes on it. The argument cannot be dismissed, but is inconclusive. 622 C Σαπφικῶν τινων ἀσϑέντων: At De Pyth. or. 406 A and Amat. 762 F-763 A, where similar discussions are held on the capacity of Eros and where Eur. frg. 663 is quoted soon before (and at Amat. also Philoxenus), Sappho is also mentioned in the argumentation. 622 C ὅπου καί: ‘inasmuch as’, ‘considering that', quippe cum’. Bolk. gives numerous exx. in Plut. of this use of ὅπου as a causal conjunction together with strengthening καί: 632 A, 686 C, Ad princ. ind. 782 F, An seni 787 B, Praec. ger. reip. 799 E, 800 D, De soll. an. 964 E,

966 A. Cf. also Xen. Cyr. VIII 4.31 ἦ που αὖτός γε πολλὰ ἔχει, ὅπου ye καὶ ἡμῶν ἑκάστῳ τοσαῦτα δέδωκεν. 622 C τὸν

Κύκλωπα

μούσαις

εὐφώνοις

ἰᾶσϑαι

Φιλόξενος: Frg. 7 Bergk* (TII 611), frg. 9 Page bic poet Philoxenus of Cythera (436/5-380/79) poem, Kunden ἢ Γαλάτεια, while he was the Syracuse whom he had offended by intriguing

φησὶ

τὸν

ἔρωτα

(p. 427). The dithyramwrote his most famous convict of Dionysius of with the tyrant's concu-

bine Galatea, see Diod. XV 6; Athen. 6E; Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 290,

and further Maas, RE s.v. Philoxenos (23); A. W. Pickard-Cambridge, Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy (Oxford 1927) 61-64, Plut. quotes the line at Amat. 762 F to illustrate how Sappho gave vent to her passion through her poetry. 622 C ὅτι πρὸς πάντα τόλμαν ὁ ἔρως καὶ καινοτομίαν συγχορηγῆσαι

δεινός ἐστιν: Madv., Wil., Po. suspected συγχορηγῆσαι, ‘supply’. Plut. uses this verb with an object in the acc. at Rom. 6.1 εἰδότος τοῦ Νομήτορος xoi συγχορηγοῦντος τροφὰς κρύφα τοῖς τρέφουσι. Elsewhere he uses it with the dative. Συγχωρεῖν, ‘concede’, ‘allow’, is not

the sense needed; it appears particularly weak in combination with δεινός ἐστιν. The idea that Eros provides audacity was a commonplace, cf. Amat. 762 B; Plat. Symp. 179 A. -- Plut. often combines the concepts τόλμα and καινοτομία, e.g. 661 B, Alex. 72.5, Gracch. 42.1. 622 C Πλάτων ἴτην αὐτὸν καὶ παντὸς ἐπιχειρητὴν ὠνόμασεν: Symp. 203 Ὁ ἀνδρεῖος ὧν καὶ ἴτης καὶ σύντονος, ϑηρευτὴς δεινός, and Tim. 69 Ὁ ἐπιχειρητῇ παντὸς ἔρωτι; cf. Maxim. Tyr. XXVI 5 Hobein.

109

TABLE TALKS I 5

62C

622 C λάλον: Bolk. observes that this word has a positive sense here: ‘verbosus, copiosus ac paene disertus', cf. 721 C εὔφωνος δὲ καὶ λάλος ὁ χαλκός. 622 CD ϑεραπευτικὸν τὸν αἰσχυντηλόν: Wytt. proposed “ϑρασύτερον vel simile’, but Faehse refers to 634 B τὸ ἀνέραστον ἑτέρων ἐκείνης δὲ δοῦλον καὶ ϑεραπευτικόν. The change to attentiveness is a large enough step for the bashful man. 622 D φειδωλὸς ἀνήρ te καὶ μικρολόγος κτλ.: The agreement with Amat. 762 BC is obvious: δωρητικὸς δὲ καὶ ἁπλοῦς καὶ μεγαλόφρων γίνεται πᾶς ἐραστής, κἂν γλίσχρος 1| πρότερον, τῆς μικρολογίας καὶ φιλαργυρίας δίκην σιδήρου διὰ πυρὸς ἀνιεμένης. -- Fuhr (Rh. Mus. 33 (1878) 589) cancels τε here as well as at 626 C συμμετρίας λόγῳ τε

καὶ ποσότητος and Eum. 7.8 (regarded as corrupt by Fuhr. o. c. 585f.) τά τε κράνη

περισπῶντες

καὶ περιρρηγνύντες

... τοὺς ϑώρακας.

Fuhr collected about 150 instances of τε καί in Plut. and found that only these three offend the rule that these particles connect words of the same class. Bern. (vol. IV 474) transposes: v' ἀνήρ, and 626 C te λόγῳ. But Bolk. refers to instances of exceptions from the rule collectii by Vollgraff: Xen. An. II 1.7, Cyr. 1 1.10; Hdt. VII 12; Thuc. II

5.5. 622 D ἁπαλὺς καὶ ὑγρὸς καὶ ἡδίων: This is contrary to Plat. Symp. 203 CD: πολλοῦ δεῖ ἁπαλός τε καὶ καλὸς (sc. ὁ ἔρως), olov οἱ πολλοὶ οἴονται, ἀλλὰ σκληρός τε καὶ αὐχμηρός.

622 D πράσον φύλλῳ τὸ τῶν ἐρώντων δέδεται βαλλάντιον: Perhaps a fragment of a comedy (Adesp. frg. 197 Kock), it was a very common Saying, cf. CPG I 447, II 47, 205. 622 D ἐλέχϑη

δὲ καὶ ὅτι τῷ

μεϑύειν

τὸ

ἐρᾶν

ὅμοιόν

ἐστιν:

The

connection between wine and love is often mentioned, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 953 b 31 6 te οἶνος ἀφροδισιαστικοὺς ἀπεργάζεται, καὶ ὀρθῶς Διόνυσος καὶ ᾿Αφροδίτη λέγονται μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων εἶναι; Persaeus ap. Athen. 607 B (SVF I 451) περὶ ἀφροδισίων ἁρμοστὸν εἶναι ἐν τῷ οἴνῳ μνείαν ποιεῖσθαι" καὶ γὰρ πρὸς ταῦτα ἡμᾶς ὅταν ὑποπίωμεν

ἐπιρρεπεῖς εἶναι; Plut. Sept. sap. 156 C.

110

TABLE TALKS 1 5

622 D

622 D πρὺς τὰς ἐνῳδοὺς καὶ ἐμμέτρους μάλιστα φωνὰς ἐκφέρονται: Bolkestein's emendation ἐνῳδούς (ἐπῳδούς T) is supported by the close parallel at De Pyth. or. 405 EF ἐν οἴνῳ te πολλῷ καὶ πάϑει γιγνομένων,

οἴκτου

τινὸς

ὑπορρυέντος

ἢ

χαρᾶς

ὠλίσϑανον εἰς ἐνῳδὸν (xoi ἔμμετρον) γῆρυν χατεπίμπλαντο μέτρων xai ἀσμάτων τὰ συμπόσια

προσπεσούσης,

ἐρωτικῶν τε καὶ τὰ βιβλία

γραμμάτων. The quotation from Eur. Stheneboea follows. (For the conjecture ὠλίσϑανον: ὠλίσϑανεν MSS, and the filling of the lacuna, see S.-T. T. Eranos 86 (1988) 141-144.) The similarities of the two

passages clearly indicate a common source (see below, 623 A). For ἐνῳδός, 'sonorous', cf. Nicom. Geras. Harm. 2 (Mus. Script. Gr. 240.16 Jahn) ἡ ἐνῳδὸς φωνή, and (240.18) dv’ ἐμμελείας καὶ ἐνῳδῶς. 622 E καὶ τὸν Αἰσχύλον φασὶ τὰς τραγῳδίας πίνοντα ποιεῖν: Plut. also mentions this general opinion about A. at 715 DE, where he cites Gorgias’ famous dictum, ‘one of Aeschylus’ plays is full of Ares, namely The Seven, but all of them are full of Dionysus’; and frg. 130

Sandb. where Sophocles’ criticism is cited: καὶ γὰρ εἰ τὰ δέοντα ποιεῖ, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ εἰδῶς ye. This apophthegm is also found at Athen. 22 AB and 428 F where Chamaeleon is stated as the source. Cf. also TrGFIV 53. 622 E ἦν δὲ Λαμπρίας

ὁ ἡμέτερος

πάππος

x1.:

The

past tense

indicates that Plutarch's grandfather is no more among the living. In Talks V 5-6, 8-9 he takes ἃ vivid part in the discussions. At 669 C Plutarch's brother Lamprias also talks about him in past tense: ὁ γὰρ ἐμὸς πάππος εἰώϑει λέγειν ἑκάστοτε. The Talks are thus not arranged chronologically, a fact which E. Graf, ‘Plutarchisches’. In: Commenta-

tiones philologae ... O. Ribbeckio ... (Lipsiae 1888) 65f. regarded as an indication of authenticity. Plutarch's grandfather is always represented as witty and erudite; he was certainly one of the most brilliant in the circle of Plut. See A. Cheneviére, De Plutarchi familiaribus (Paris 1886) 22-24; Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 642.

622 E ἐν τῷ πίνειν εὑρετικώτατος αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ καὶ λογιώτατος: The Atticism superl. + αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ is one of Plutarch’s favourite constructions, cf. 635 B βρωτικώτατον ἕκαστον αὐτὸν αὑτοῦ, De aud. 43 B

and Marcell. 2.1 αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ κράτιστος, Ages. 26.3 αὐτοὺς ἑαυτῶν πολεμικωτάτους. Bolk. observes that Plut. uses λόγιος in the Koine sense of ‘eloquent’, cf. Moeris, 222.26 Bekk. λογίους τοὺς

111

TABLE TALKS I 5

622 E

πολυΐστορας

᾿Αττικοὶ

καὶ

Ἡρόδοτος,

λογίους

τοὺς

λεκτικοὺς

Ἕλληνες, and Phryn. 176 λόγιος" ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ λέγουσιν ἐπὶ τοῦ δεινοῦ εἰπεῖν καὶ ὑψηλοῦ οὐ τιϑέασιν οἱ ἀρχαῖοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῦ τὰ ἐν ἑκάστῳ ἔϑνει ἐπιχώρια ἐξηγουμένου ἐμπείρως. Examples of this use of λόγιος in Plut. are: De soll. an. 968 D, 973 A, Pomp. 51.8. Abram. compares our passage with 715 E, where the speaker is presumably Plutarch's brother Lamprias (cf. 715 AB) and theme and vocabulary are very similar (ἔνιοι yàg εὑρετυκὴν φύσιν ἔχοντες ... ὅταν εἰς πίνειν ἔλϑωσιν ὥσπερ 6 λιβανωτὸς ὑπὸ ϑερμότητος ἀναϑυμιῶνται), and judges that Lamprias may also be the speaker here. That Plut. is not the speaker is indicated at 623 A where Sosius praises ἐκείνους, not ἡμᾶς. The suggestion remains uncertain, although possible. 622 E καὶ μήν: ‘Furthermore’; the speaker returns to the subjectmatter, eloquence produced by Eros, after the somewhat excursive

comparison with the wine. 622 E οὐχ ἧττον ἡδέως ἐγκωμιάξουσιν ἢ ὁρῶσιν, καὶ πρὸς πάντα λάλος àv ἔρως: Bolk. rightly criticizes Hu. for mentioning Ziegler’s deletion of ἣ δρῶσιν, but he himself without reason adds the def. art. before ἔρως. The noun may or may not take the art., cf. De aud. 43 Ὁ ἐξ ἔρωτος ἐπιϑυμία, De ad. et am. 64 F πιστὸς ἔρωτος ὑπηρέτης; see Kühner-Gerth? I 606f. Also as a proper noun it may lack the art., cf. De superst. 170 B περὶ Ἀπόλλωνος, περὶ Ἥρας, περὶ Ἀφροδίτης. -The talkativeness of lovers is also mentioned at 691 C οἱ ἐρῶντες ...

μάλιστα μὲν αὐτοῖς τοῖς παιδικοῖς, ef δὲ μή, περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπιϑυμοῦσι διαλέγεσϑαι.

622 E λαλίστατός ἐστιν: Cf. Suda, and Phot. λαλίστατον᾽ τὸν κατὰ λόγον σοφόν λέγεται δὲ καὶ ὁ εὔγλωττος καὶ ὁ εὐφωνότατος

(εὔφωνος Phot.). ELF

τοῦτο

καὶ τὸν Avddv

ἐπῆρεν

(Κανδαύλην)

γυναικὸς ἐπισπᾶσϑαι ϑεατὴν εἰς τὸ δωμάτιον τὸν

τῆς ἑαντοῦ {(Γύ )γην᾽ [οὐ]

βούλονται γὰρ κτλι: Plut. follows the story told by Hdt. I 8-12. Another version is found at Nicol. Dam. frg. 49 (FHG III 383-385). According to Euseb.

Chron.

ad A. Abr.

1300 p. 82 Schoene,

Can-

daules was the last king of the Heraclide dynasty of Lydia. See further Miller, RE s.v. Kandaules. The two supplementations of the second

112

TABLE TALKS I 5

622 F

lacuna, (οἰκέ)την Xyl., and (Fó)ynv Amyot, Steph., are practically equivalent.

Clem.

chooses the former,

Fuhrm.

the latter (so also

Flacelitre, AC 39 (1970) 595). The negation, deleted by Amyot, Steph., goes with βούλονται. The MS T has the punctuation mark after την. The negation is obviously a later addition. To assume an omission is less convincing: (οὐκέ)την᾽ οὐ βούλονται γὰρ ox ἄλλων

(μὴ) μαρτυρεῖσϑαι Papabasileios (4ϑηνᾶ 10 (1898) 194). An alternative, little persuasive, to deletion would be τὸν (Aao)xüAov Bolk. 622 Ε ἂν ἵππον xai &AextQváva κἂν ἄλλο τι τοῖς ἐρωμένοις διδῶσι: Vase paintings show that cocks were common gifts in connection with pederasty. Also other animals, hares, deer, foxes and leopards, were presented by lovers to their favourites. Cock-fighting and hunting were popular sports among Greek youths. See R. Flaceliére, L'amour en Gréce

(Paris

1960) 75;

G.

Koch-Harnack

Knabenliebe

und

Tierge-

schenke (Berlin 1983) 66-82 (hare), 97-104 (cock), 105—124 (deer, leopard), 173-182 (erotic significance of animals as gifts). On cockfighting, see

Schneider,

RE

s.v.

Hahnenkàmpfe,

2214f.

Expensive

gifts like horses are seldom mentioned, cf. Suda s.v. Μέλητος, p. 354.1 Adler; Petron. Sat. 85 f. On horse-racing, see A. Martin, Les cavaliers

athéniens (Paris 1886) 167-272. 623 A ὃ μέντοι Σόσσιος ἐπαινέσας ἐκείνους εἶπεν κτλ.: As an act of politeness, Senecio the host praises the amateurish speakers and begins his own competent contribution. 623 A ὁρμηϑεὶς dq’ ὧν Θεόφραστος εἴρηκεν περὶ μουσικῆς" καὶ γὰρ ἔναγχος, Eqn, τὸ βιβλίον ἀνέγνων: Abram. finds it hard to think that Plut. should represent Senecio as saying that he had read this work if it was not true. This is a valid, though not decisive, argument for authenticity. In any case, we may assume that Plut. himself had read Theophr. Περὶ μουσικῆς. He presumably used that work for large parts of this talk, i.e. not only for Senecio’s contribution but also for that of the preceding speaker; cf. the similarities of 622 D-E with 405 E-F and 715 D-E, which clearly indicate a common source (cf. Bolk. 85). The opinion of R. Hirzel, Der Dialog II (Leipzig 1895) 209 n. that Theophrast can be excluded as a source because of latent polemics at 405 F against him and that Dicaearchus is more probable is refuted by R. Kassel, Dichtkunst und Versifikation bei den Griechen (Rhein.-Westfäl. Ak. d. Wiss., Vorträge, G 250, Opladen 1981)

TABLE TALKS I 5

623 A

113

17.20, note p. 26. Theophr. Περὶ μουσικῆς is otherwise unknown, see Regenbogen, RE Suppl. VII 1532f.

623 A λέγει δὲ μουσικῆς ἀρχὰς τρεῖς εἶναι κτλ.: Regenbogen (o. c. 1532) regards the whole of Senecio’s speech as a report from Theophr., while Wimmer (frg. 90) only quotes as far as φωνήν (623 B). The theory of the three ἀρχαί of music is also reported by Marius Victor. VI 159.8 Keil, but he has ira in the place of λύπη (T had λύσσαι in the second instance of the word, corrected into λῦπαι by man. post.); λύπη is of course right, cf. Arist. Pol. 1253 a 10 ἡ μὲν οὖν φωνὴ τοῦ

λυπηροῦ καὶ ἡδέος ... τοῦ ἔχειν αἴσϑησιν λυπηροῦ καὶ ἡδέος καὶ ταῦτα σημαίνειν ἀλλήλοις. It cannot be decided if Victorinus depends on Plut. He does not have the explication of the ἀρχαί. In any case, it is improbable that Victorinus used Theophr. as a direct source, which

was argued by Dirlmeier, Philol. Suppl. 30 (1937) 98f. Theophr. displays in his theory of music a close relationship to Aristotle’s theory of catharsis, see J. Croissant, Aristote et les mystéres (Liége 1932) 113116.

623 A ὡς ἑκάστου

τῶν

{(παϑῶν)

τούτων:

This supplementation

(Bern.) is preferable to τῶν {παϑημγάτων Bern., Wil, or τῶν (τοιγούτων Cast. 897, Po.; cf. below, 623 D περιέχων ὁ ἔρως ἐν αὑτῷ --. λύπην, ἡϑονήν, ἐνθουσιασμόν, De Pyth. or. 406 C πᾶν δὲ πάϑος τον σεμνοτέρας φωνῆς δεόμενον εἰς ποιητικὴν καὶ μουσικὴν ἄγοντες.

623 Α συνήϑους (καὶ παρ)εγκλίνοντος: Bern. filled the lacuna convincingly. Plut. has the verb at Phoc. 2.1.

623 AB ὀλισϑηρὸν εἰς div: This expressive formulation is closely paralleled at De Pyth. or. 405F ὠλίσϑανον εἰς ἐνῳδὸν (καὶ ἔμμετρον) γῆρυν, an indication that Plut. used the same source, see R. Kassel, o. c. above, on 623 A. (For the reading, see above, on 622 D).

623 B καὶ τοὺς ῥήτορας ἐν τοῖς ἐπιλόγοις καὶ τοὺς ὑποκριτὰς £v toic ὀδυρμοῖς: The syntactic parallelism emphasizes the similarity. Orators, especially those of the Asian school, tended to exaggerate their

pathos and so make their speech sound like singing, almost like the performance of the lyric parts of tragedy. This was common above all Ga the end of the speech, the peroratio. This practice is censured by

Ic. Or. 18.57 hic e Phrygia et Caria rhetorum epilogus paene canti-

114

TABLE TALKS 1 5

623 B

cum, which is cited by Quintil. XI 3.58, cf. id. XI 3.57 (vitium), quo nunc maxime laboratur in causis omnibus scholisque, cantandi, quod inutilius sit an foedius nescio. Contrary to that, a more positive atti-

tude is shown by Longin. Ars rhet. 569 (Rhet. Gr. 1 197.4 Rabe) οἰκτιζόμενον δὲ δεῖ μεταζὺ λόγου τε καὶ ᾧδῆς τὸν ἦχον πονήσασϑαι᾽ οὔτε γὰρ διαλεγόμενός ἐστιν. ἀναπείϑει γὰρ οἶκτος ἐξάδειν, ὅϑεν ἀρχαὶ μουσικῆς χαρμονή τε καὶ λύπη κτλ, Cic. L c. refers to Dem. and Aeschin. who took turns in blaming each other for raising their voice in emotional speech: est autem etiam in dicendo quidam cantus obscurior ... quem significat Demosthenes et Aeschines, cum alter alteri obicit vocis flexiones. Cicero thinks of Dem. XVIII 280 ἔστι δ᾽ οὐχ ὁ λόγος tod ῥήτορος, Αἰσχίνη, τίμιον, οὐδ᾽ ὁ τόνος τῆς φωνῆς, 291 ἐπάρας τὴν φωνὴν καὶ yeynüOc καὶ λαρυγγίζων ᾧετο μὲν ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖν, and Aeschin. III 209 περὶ δὲ τῶν δακρύων καὶ τοῦ τόνου

τῆς φωνῆς, ὅταν ὑμᾶς ἐπερωτᾷ... 210 ὅλως δὲ τί τὰ δάκρυα; τίς fj κραυγή; τίς ὁ τόνος τῆς φωνῆς. On the rhetorical concept of pathos, see H. Lausberg, Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik? (München 1967) 34f.; J. Martin, Antike Rhetorik (München 1974) 158-166. 623 B ἀτρέμα: ‘by imperceptible degrees’. 623 B ὁρῶμεν: Strictly speaking, a careless, inappropriate use; logic requires ἀκούειν. However, verbs meaning ‘see’ are occasionally used of perception by other senses than vision, cf. below, 691 D, and De Pyth. or. 396 D τοὺς δὲ πολλοὺς τῶν χρησμῶν ὁρῶμεν κτλ. The use is

preferably poetic, cf. Aesch. Sept. 103 κτύπον δέδορκα. A special case is the utterance made by the blinded Oedipus: Soph. O. C. 138 φωνῇ γὰρ ὁρῶ. Alexis, frg. 222.4 Kock εὐθὺς ἂν οἴνου μόνον | ὀσμὴν ἴδωσιν is a comic locution. 623 B αἵ τε σφοδραὶ περιχάρειαι τῆς ψυχῆς ... καὶ td σῶμα πᾶν

ἐπαίρουσιν: Hu. and Clem. print συνεπαίρουσιν Re. defends the text by reference to 748 C (likewise παρακαλεῖν τὼ χεῖρε καὶ τὼ πόδε, μᾶλλον δ᾽ ὅλον ... μέλεσιν καὶ ἐντείνειν. Cf. further Plat. Leg. 814 DE περὶ

Bolk. rightly of dancing): τὸ σῶμα τοῖς δὲ τῆς ἄλλης

κινήσεως παντὸς τοῦ σώματος, ἧς τὸ πλεῖστον μέρος ὄρχησίν τινά τις

προσαγορεύων ὀρϑῶς ἂν φϑέγγοιτο; Xen. Symp. 2.16 οὐδὲν ἀργὸν τοῦ σώματος ἐν τῇ ὀρχήσει ἦν, ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα καὶ τράχηλος καὶ σκέλη καὶ χεῖρες ἐγυμνάζοντο, ibid. 2.22 τὸν παῖδ᾽ ἐπήνουν ὡς ἐν τῇ ὀρχήσει ἅπαν τὸ σῶμα γυμνάζοι. -- Abram. discusses the contrast between τῶν

115

TABLE TALKS I 5

623 B

μὲν ἐλαφροτέρων τῷ ἤϑει, and οἱ δὲ χαρίεντες, ‘cultivated men of taste’, who are able to restrain their desire to dance and, consequently,

τὴν φωνὴν μόνην εἰς τὸ ᾷδειν ... προΐενται, and suggests that this restrictive or negative attitude towards dancing may be due to the fact that Senecio is the speaker and thus displays the Roman opinion (cf. Cic. Pro

Mur.

6.13,

De

off.

1 42.150,

etc.).

Abram.

considers

it

improbable that Senecio had read the negative opinions of dancing in Theophr. This may be right; certainly the Greeks held dancing in high esteem, cf. Plat. Leg. 654 B ὁ καλῶς ἄρα πεπαιδευμένος ἄδειν τε καὶ ὀρχεῖσϑαι δυνατὸς ἂν εἴη καλῶς. ἔοικεν; Lucian. Salt. 6; Athen. 628 C-D; and below Talk IX 15; see further L. Séchan, La dance

grecque antique (Paris 1930) 35-56; Warnecke, RE s.v. Tanzkunst. However, all dancing was not equally well accepted. Elders were occasionally regarded as ridiculous when dancing, as Socrates at Xen.

Symp. 2.15-23, commented upon by Lucian. Salt. 25. Cf. also Plat. Leg. 814 E.

623 B μάλιστα δ᾽ ὁ ἐνθουσιασμός: Plut. analyses this πάϑος in Amat. 758 D-759 A. There are two kinds of madness, one of which is enthu-

siasm: μανία, ἡ μὲν ἀπὸ σώματος ἐπὶ ψυχὴν ἀνεσταλμένῃ, ... ἑτέρα δ᾽ ἐστὶν οὐκ ἀϑείαστος οὐδ᾽

οἰκογενής, ἀλλ᾽ ἔπηλυς,

... ἧς τὸ μὲν

κοινὸν ἐνθουσιαστικὸν καλεῖται πάϑος. And there are several kinds of enthusiasm: (758 E) ἐνθουσιασμοῦ δὲ τὸ μαντικὸν ἐξ ᾿Απόλλωνος ἐπινοίας καὶ κατοχῆς, τὸ δὲ βακχεῖον ἐκ Διονύσου ... τρίτη δ᾽ ἀπὸ Μουσῶν

... τὸ ποιητικὸν καὶ μουσικὸν ἐξώρμησε καὶ ἀνερρίπισεν.

See further J. Schroeter, Plutarchs Stellung zur Skepsis (Diss. Königsberg 1911) 53-55, 623 C μανίαι τ᾽ ἀλαλαί τ᾽ ὀρινομένων ῥιψαύχενι σὺν κλόνῳ: Frg. 208 Schroeder, Dithyr. frg. 2.13 Snell, quoted also at 706 E and De Pyth. or. 417 C. Abram. observes that this line has been transposed. It belongs to the third ἀρχή, the ἐνθουσιασμός, not to περιχάρειαι. Its place is here, after καϑεστηκότος, where ἀλαλαί and ῥιψαύχην Ἀλόνος exellently illustrate τό te σῶμα καὶ τὴν φωνήν. The violent backward throw of the head was typical of the Bacchanals as is frequently seen in vase-painting. — Plut. very often quotes Pindar, thus indicating that this compatriote was one of his favourite poets. 623 C ὅϑεν αἵ te βακχεῖαι óvünoig χρῶνται καὶ τὸ χρησμφῳδεῖν ἐν μέτροις παρέχεται τοῖς ἐνθεαζομένοις: Bolk. corrected ἐμμέτρως T,

116

TABLE TALKS 1 5

623. C

cf. De Pyth. or. 402 D τὴν ἐν μέτροις καὶ μέλεσι χρησμῳδίαν, 404 A ποτὲ μὲν (ἐν) (Dübn.) μέτροις, ποτὲ δὲ ἄνευ μέτρων, 406 C εὐχὰς παιᾶνας ἐν μέτροις ἐποιοῦντο καὶ μέλεσιν. Abram. regards the fact that there is no suggestion here of the corruption and abandonment of metrical form in the prophesies, which is discussed in De Pyth. or. (e.g., 396 D, 397 D), as an indication that Plut. reports Senecio's speech authentically. 623 C ὑπ᾽ αὐγὰς διαπτύξας τὸν ἔρωτα: ‘unfolding the wings of Eros beneath the sun's rays’, a poetic and picturesque image (Abram. recalls the frescoes in the Villa dei Misteri at Pompeii). The verb is used of flowers by Theophr. H. P. IV 7.8 τοῦτο δὲ τὴν νύχτα συμμύειν ἅμα δὲ τῷ ἡλίῳ ἀνιόντι διοίγνυσθαι, μεσημβρίας δὲ τελέως διεπτύχϑαι, πάλιν δὲ τῆς δείλης συνάγεσθϑαι. It is also a surgical term, cf. Gal. 11 520.8 K. πρὶν διαπτυχϑῆναι τὸ ἐπιγάστριον. 623 C ὥσπερ τὴν Σοφόκλειον πόλιν: Bolk. corrected tov Σοφολλέα

T, cf. Anton. 24.3 f| yao’ Acta πᾶσα, καϑάπερ ἡ Σοφόκλειος ἐκείνη πόλις, ὁμοῦ μὲν θυμιαμάτων ἔγεμεν κτλ. Plut. also quotes the two lines (O. R. 4-5) in De am. mult. 95 C, De superst. 169 D, De virt. mor. 445 D.

623 D φιλόφωνός ἐστι καὶ λάλος: Faehse corrected φιλόπονος T, cf. De soll. an. 967 B τὸ φιλόφωνον καὶ λάλον, Adv. Col. 1125 C φιλόφωνόν ἐστι καὶ κωτίλον, and also below, 727 D λαλιᾶς δὲ xai

πολυφωνίας, 721 C εὔφωνος καὶ λάλος. TALK 6 623 D περὶ τῆς ᾿Αλεξάνδρου πολυποσίας: The title is somewhat inad-

equate; only the first third of the talk is about Alexander. The theme is excessive drinking in general. Other misleading titles are, e.g., those of VI 4 and 6. Hu. (p. 1) presupposes that the titles were not written by Plut.; Abram. (p. 78) suggests that they are. — Alexander was an extremely popular theme for discussion and writing; as a young man Plut. wrote the oration De Alex. Mag. fort, and later his Vita.

623 D λόγος ἦν: This talk is one of the least dramatic; it is partly like a collection of anecdotes about πολυπόται. The next two talks, which are presented similarly, belong to the same occasion.

63D

TABLE TALKS I 6

117

623 D ὡς οὐ πολὺ πίνοντος ἀλλὰ πολὺν χρύνον ἐν τῷ πίνειν (xoi) διαλέγεσϑαι τοῖς φίλοις ἕλκοντος: This opinion, which is contrary to

the general one, is also mentioned by Plut. at Alex. 23.1 ἦν δὲ καὶ πρὸς οἶνον ἧττον ἢ ἐδόκει καταφερής. ἔδοξε δὲ διὰ τὸν χρόνον, ὃν οὗ πίνων μᾶλλον ἢ λαλῶν εἶλκεν ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστης κύλικος, ἀεὶ μακρόν τινα λόγον διατιϑέμενος, cf. also De Alex. Mag. fort. 337 F. Arrian.

An. VII 29.4 cites Aristobulus of Cassandria, Alexander’s companion καὶ of πότοι δέ, ὡς λέγει and historian, for this opinion:

Ἀριστόβουλος, οὐ τοῦ οἴνου ἕνεκα μακροὶ αὐτῷ ἐγίγνοντο, οὐ γὰρ πίνειν πολὺν οἶνον ᾿Αλέξανδρον, ἀλλὰ φιλοφροσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἑταίρους. However, according to general opinion Alexander was an inebriate, cf. Men. Kolax frg. 293 Kock ᾿Αλεξάνδρου πλέον | τοῦ βασιλέως πέπωκας; Athen. 434 B ἔπινε δὲ 6 ᾿Αλέξανδρος πλεῖστον, ὡς καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς μέϑης συνεχῶς κοιμᾶσϑαι δύο ἡμέρας καὶ δύο νύκτας; Aelian. V. H. III 23. Also Plut., his great admirer, intimates

this at Alex. 4.7 ᾿Αλέξανδρον δ᾽ ἡ ϑερμότης τοῦ σώματος ὡς ἔοικε καὶ ποτικὸν καὶ ϑυμοειϑῆ παρεῖχεν, and at Alex. 75.5 he cites Aristobulus for the information that Alexander,

when fevered in Babylon, has-

tened his death through copious consumption of wine. 623 E ἀπεδείκννεν δ᾽ αὐτοὺς φλυαροῦντας Φιλῖνος xth.: This rather harsh condemnation of these anonymous people is remarkable. ‘It seems that among those which Philinus charges with talking nonsense

is Plut. himself seeing that he supports this opinion at Alex. 23.1 (see above). Abram. thinks that Plut. could not possibly have written that Vita before this talk; everyone at the party would have thought of that

Passage. If, however, he wrote the Vita some time later he may well have forgotten this short passage. This is completely speculative. The two opinions are both found in the Vita (23.1, 4.7) and they are contrasted here for literary reasons. Incidentally, Philinus can well be credited with uttering an opinion contrary to that of Plut., seeing that he was probably one of his best friends. He takes part in Talks II 4, IV 1, V 10, VIII 7, and is the narrator in De Pyth. or. Philinus was a townsman of Thespiae where his family is well-documented on inscriptions. His parents, Flavius Mondo and Flavia Archela, received the

Roman citizenship probably in the Flavian era; the full name of their son was T. Flavius Philinus, cf. JG VII 1830, 2520, 2521; SEG III 339 ^» early 2nd e). Τῆς family can be followed epigraphically down to c. 0. The Philinus found on two inscriptions in Athens of the late 3rd c. (Hesp. TI (1933) 510, XI (1942) 71 no. 37.5) perhaps belonged to an

118

TABLE TALKS I 6

623 Ε

Athenian branch. See Jones, HSCP 74 (1970) 223-255, esp. 230-235, 248. In VIII 7 Philinus appears as a decided vegetarian (727 B), and he also brought up his little son in this way of life (660 D-E). J. Schroeter, Plutarchs Stellung zur Skepsis (Diss. Kónigsberg 1911) 8f. thinks that Philinus belonged to the school of Asclepiades of Prusa, cf. Wellmann, RE s.v. (39); Susemihl II 428-440. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutar-

chos, 695 and (hesitatingly) Hershbell, Class. Bull. 60 (1984) 75f. suggest that he may have been a Pythagorean. Fuhrm. Vol. II 4 even calls him "l'austére pythagoricien'. See further below, on 660 D. 623 E ἐκ τῶν βασιλικῶν ἐφημερίδων; These diaries or journals were written by Eumenes of Cardia, Alexander's ἀρχιγραμματεύς, and his

secretary, Diodotus of Erythrae; see Kaerst, RE s.v. Eumenes (4); Samuel, Historia 14 (1965) 1-12. Aelian.

V. H.

III 23 and Athen.

434 BC refer to these journals as their source of knowledge about Alexander’s drinking habits. Plut. mentions them et Alex. 23.4 as a source of information about that and other activities ἐν ταῖς σχολαῖς.

At Alex. 76.1 and 77.1 he refers to them with regard to his disease. However, Plut. and Athen. certainly found these references to the "Eqnusotóec in a later source (Düring, Eranos 34 (1936) 10 suggests Hegesander), because they were most probably not published, see Kaerst, RE s.v. Ephemerides, 2750.

623 E τήνδε τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκ τοῦ πότου καϑεύδων, ἔστι δ᾽ ὅτε καὶ τὴν ἐφεξῆς: Cf. Athen. 434 Β (above, 623 D). The participle καϑεύδων, suspected by Wytt. and Hartm., is of course due to the quotation. 623 E διὸ καὶ πρὸς τὰς συνουσίας ἀργότερος ἦν, ὀξὺς δὲ καὶ ϑυμοει-

δής, ἅπερ ἐστὶ σωματικῆς ϑερμότητος: This opinion is also reported

by Athen. 434 F (= Rose, Arist. Pseudepigr. 236): μήποτ᾽ οὖν διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ πρὸς τὰ ἀφροδίσια εἶχεν δομήν᾽ ἐνυδαροῦσϑαι γάρ quσιν ὁ ᾿Αριστοτέλης ἐν τοῖς φυσικοῖς προβλήμασι τῶν τοιούτων τὴν γονήν, But he then adduces evidence for a constitutional (not due to

πολυποσία) lack of sexual appetite: (435 A) ᾿Ιερώνυμός te ἐν ταῖς Ἐπιστολαῖς Θεόφραστόν φησι λέγειν ὅτι Ἀλέξανδρος οὐκ εὖ διέχειῖο πρὸς τὰ ἀφροδίσια πτλ., cf. also Plut. De fato 97 D, De Alex. Mag. fort. 338 D, De curios. 522 A, Alex, 21.1. The opinion about the wine as reducing the lust is also mentioned

below,

652 D:

of δὲ

πίνοντες πολὺν ἄκρατον ἀμβλύτεροι πρὸς τὰς συνουσίας εἰσὶν καὶ σπείρουσιν οὐδὲν εἰς γένεσιν ἰσχυρόν, where

it is argued that the

G3E

119

TABLE TALKS I 6

reason is that wine is cold: 652 CD ὁ δ᾽ οἶνος ἠρέμα καταψύχων . . . τὸ μὲν ϑερμὸν γόνιμον. This explanation is not stated here, but it seems

to be implied. However, the parallel Athen. 434 F (ἐνυδαροῦσϑαι . .

τὴν γονήν) indicates that the moistening effect of the wine may be the reason intended here also. Cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 871 a 23 διὰ τί τῶν

οἰνοφλύγων τὸ σπέρμα οὐ γόνιμον

... τὰ δὲ ὑγρὰ σπέρματα

οὐ

γόνιμα. Fuhrm. suggests, however, that the explanation given at Ps.-

Arist. Probl. 872 b 15, 875 b 39, namely that the wine, being hot, rises upwards in the body and so reduces the heat in the lower parts, is the

explanation underlying the reasoning. — Hu. rightly notes that ἅπερ...

ϑερμότητος refers only to ὀξὺς δὲ καὶ ϑυμοειδής. Bern. (who punctuates after ϑυμοειδής) and Abram.

(p. 80) takes it as referring also to

διὸ... ἀργότερος ἦν, because Alexander's πολυποσία is derived from his ϑερμότης at Alex. 4.7: Ἀλέξανδρον δ᾽ ἡ ϑερμότης τοῦ σώματος ὡς ἔοικε καὶ ποτικὸν καὶ ϑυμοειδῆ παρεῖχεν. Here instead it is intimated that the πολυποσία caused reduction of heat in the body, either through moistening or cooling or both. The circumstance that Aristox-

enus’ Ὑπομνήματα probably was the source for our passage as well as for Alex. 4 is irrelevant. 623 E τοῦ χρωτὸς ἥδιστον ἀποπνεῖν xth.: Cf. Alex. 4.4 ὅτι δὲ τοῦ χρωτὸς ἥδιστον ἀπέπνει, καὶ τὸ στόμα κατεῖχεν εὐωδία καὶ τὴν σάρκα πᾶσαν, ὥστε πληροῦσϑαι τοὺς χιτωνίσκους, ἀνέγνωμεν ἐν

ὑπομνήμασιν ᾿Αριστοξενείοις (= frg. 132 Wehrli, with comm. p. 87). 623 E διὸ καὶ τῆς οἰκουμένης οἱ ξηρότατοι καὶ ϑερμύτατοι τόποι τήν τε κασίαν καὶ τὸν λιβανωτὸν ἐκφέρουσιν: Cf. Alex. 4.6 ὅϑεν οἱ ξηροὶ καὶ διάπυροι τόποι τῆς οἰκουμένης τὰ πλεῖστα καὶ κάλλιστα τῶν ἀρωμάτων φέρουσιν. Aristoxenus referred to Theophr.

(frg. 4.6) for

this statement. It looks like a generalization of H. P. IX 4.2 γίνεται μὲν ouv ὁ λίβανος καὶ ἡ σμύρνα καὶ ἡ κασία καὶ ἔτι τὸ κιυνάμωνον ἐν τῇ τῶν ᾿Αράβων Χερροννήσῳ περί τε Σαβὰ καὶ Adganüta κτλ. 623 F πέψει γάρ τινι τῶν ὑγρῶν ὁ Θεόφραστός φησιν ἐπιγίνεσθαι

τὴν εὐωδίαν,

ὅταν ἐξαιρεϑῇ

τὸ βλαβερὸν

(καὶ περισσὸν

ὑπὸ

ϑερμότητος: The supplementation is due to Doe. (IV 26) who referred to Quaest. nat. 914 D oi δ᾽ ἅλες μετὰ τῆς ϑαλάττης λεπτύνοντες καὶ ἀποτήχοντες τὸ ἀλλότριον

καὶ περιττὸν οὐκ

ἐῶσι δυσωδίαν

οὐδὲ

σῆψιν ἐγγίνεσθαι. -- The theory of fragrance as due to a process of Coction, πέψις, was apparently first conceived by Theophr. He men-

120

TABLE TALKS I 6

623 F

tions it at C. P. VI 16.2 ἡ δὲ τῶν ὀσμῶν (sc. γλυκύτης) Ev προτέρᾳ τινὶ καὶ ἀτελεστέρᾳ πέψει, and II 18.3 ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ ... ὁ ἀὴρ ὀμιχλώδης xoi δροσοβόλος. ἐν δὲ ταῖς τοιαύταις χώραις οὐ γίνεται τὸ ὅλον εὐωδία διὰ τὸ μὴ γίνεσϑαι πέψιν. Cf. also frg. 4.1.3 εὔοσμα μὲν οὖν ... τὰ πεπεμμένα, 4.2.6 ἡ δὲ πέψις τῷ οἰκείῳ ϑερμῷ. This theory also appears in Ps.-Arist. Probl. 906 b 16 πέττει γὰρ τὸ ϑερμὸν ταύτην (sc. τὴν ὑγρότητα). διὸ καὶ τῆς ὅλης γῆς τὰ πρὸς τὸν ἥλιον εὐωδέστερα τῶν πρὸς ἄρκτον ἐστίν.

623 Ε δοκεῖ δὲ καὶ Κα(λλισϑένης) ἐν διαβολῇ γε(νέσϑαι πρὸς αὐτόν, ὡς δυσχεραίζνων τὸ avv) δειπνεῖν διὰ τὸν (ἄκρατον): Turn. filled the first and second lacunae and read övoxegai(vwv); Faehse

read (συν) δειπνεῖν, Bolk. added the art. and conjectured ἄκρατον, which fits the πολυποσία theme better than πότον Turn. The long supplementations show that the length marked in T of the lacunae is not always reliable. -- Callisthenes of Olynthus, Aristotle's nephew and pupil, historian and philosopher, followed Alexander on his campaign and thereby made himself renowned for his frank criticism, especially of the prevailing flattery before the king (cf. Alex. 53-54), and was ultimately executed for participation in the conspiracy of the pages (Arrian. An, IV 13 = FGrHist II B 124.8). Plut. has the anecdote in shorter form at De coh. ira 454 D. A fuller version is given by Athen. 434 C-D, who states as his sources the‘ Ynouvypovebwata by Lynceus of Samos and Alexander's historiographers Aristobulus and Chares. Macurdy, JHS 50 (1930) 294-297 argues (against Tarn, JS 48 (1928) 211-213) that the episode is authentic and points out that there is no indication that the occasion was the famous banquet of Bactra (as presupposed by Tarn); it appears rather to have been an ordinary party of the known Macedonian riotous kind. Nor is it suggested in the anecdote that Alexander noticed Callisthenes' refusal at all; it apparently occurred after the king had left the party, and was reported later ἐν διαβολῇ. In Alex. 53-54 Plut. tells that Callisthenes mostly declined invitations to the king’s parties and when present sat sullen and silent (I. c. 53.2). 623F

χύλικα

λεγομένην

᾿Αλεξάνδρου

μεγάλην:

This

κύλιξ

᾿Αλεξάνδρου seems to have a great Asiatic cup, presumably of the type called κόνδυ. This is called ποτήριον ᾿Ασιατικόν

at Athen.

477 F,

while Nicomachus ap. Athen, 478 A gives it as Persian. It is associated with Alexander at Men. Kolax frg. 293 χοτύλας χωροῦν δέκα | ἐν

121

TABLE TALKS I 6

623 Ε

Καππαδοκίᾳ κόνδυ χρυσοῦν, Στρουϑία, | τρὶς ἐξέπιον μεστόν γ᾽. ΣΤΡ. ᾿Αλεξάνδρου πλέον | τοῦ βασιλέως πέπωκας. As one xovóAn held nearly a half pint, ἃ κόνδυ would be about 2.5 litres. These big beakers were common, to judge from the so-called Letters of Alexander, cited by Athen. XI 784 A containing an inventory of wine vessels: βατιάκαι ἀργυραῖ

κατάχρυσοι

τρεῖς. κόνδυα

ἀργυρᾶ

005°

(176): τούτων ἐπίχρυσα λγ΄; Ps.-Arist. Mir. 834 a 4 ἐν τοῖς Δαρείου ποτηρίοις βατιάκας εἶναί τινας καὶ πλείους.

624 Α᾿Αλεξάνδρου πιὼν ᾿Ασκληπιοῦ δεῖσϑαι: This apophthegm received a particular significance through the allusion to Alexander’s alleged divinity. He was identified with Dionysus, the Conqueror of the Orient, cf. Arrian. An. VI 28.1-2. An allusion to the old myth is found below, 680 B: τὸν Διόνυσον, ὃν πάντες ἄριστον γεγονέναι

στρατηγὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν, see ad loc. For the question as to whether or not Alexander was the founder of the Hellenistic ruler-cult, see Schna-

bel, Klio 19 (1924) 113-127, 20 (1926) 398-414; Taylor, JHS 47 (1927) 53-62; Tarn, JHS 48 (1928) 206-219. 624 A Μιϑριδάτην δὲ ... φασίν: Kron. would change to ἔφασαν (sc. οἱ συμπόται), but by φασίν Plut. simply reveals himself as reporting

from a literary source. 624 A ἐν τοῖς ἀγῶσιν, obs ἐπετέλει, πολυφαγίας ἄϑλα ϑεῖναι καὶ πολυποσίας: Athen. 415 E cites Nicolaus of Damascus (FGrHist II A

90.73) for this same information and also mentions that the prize was

one talent of silver. Düring, Eranos 34 (1936) 10f. suggests that the common source for both Plut. and Athen. was the anecdote collection of Hegesander.

According to Plut. Alex.

70.1 Alexander arranged an

ἀγὼν ἀκρατοποσίας in honour of the dead Brahman Calanus and set as prize a crown of one talent’s worth. This was won by Promachus

who, however, died three days later. Aelian. V. H. II 41 who also tells this Story adds that this kind of competition was an ἐπιχώριον ἀγώνισμα in India. See further Reich, RE s.v. Agones, 837.

624 A διὸ καὶ Διόνυσον ἐπικληϑῆναι: Posidonius, FGrHist II A 87.36 P. 244 (Ξ Athen. 212 D) reports that the people of Athens cheered Athenion, their fellow-countryman who had become an intimate of Mithridates, as ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ νέου Διονύσου. This appellation is also Eiven at Appian. Mithr. 10 Μιϑριδάτης.... ᾧ Διόνυσος xoi Εὐπάτωρ

122

TABLE TALKS I 6

64A

ἐπώνυμα ἦν; Dio Chrys. XXXVII 6 Μιϑριδάτης 6 Διόνυσος; Cic. Pro

Flacco 25.60 Mithridatem dominum (Lamb.: deum/demum MSS) illum patrem, illum conservatorem Asiae, illum Euthium, Nysium, Bacchum, Liberum nominabant. — On the identification of Alexander with Dionysus, see on 680 B.

624 A ἡμεῖς εἴπομεν: By the plural Plut. implies that he himself was the speaker. Plut. often uses this plural, cf. 618 C, 624 D (ἡμῖν), 625 C (ἡμῶν), 626 C, 683 D etc. In classical time this use was above all poetic, see Kühner-Gerth? I 83f. 624 A ἕν τι τῶν εἰκῇ πεπιστευμένων: Presumably Plut. really held this view; he does not refer to any source. Abram. observes that in Cor. 11, where he discusses various types of nicknamnes, he does not mention

names of sovereigns that denote divinity. 624 A νηπίου γὰρ ὄντος αὐτοῦ κεραυνὸς ἐπέφλεξε τὰ σπάργανα: At 665 B the rhetor Dorotheus

tells of a similar event.

The

alleged

immunity of sleeping people to strokes of lightning is explained at 666 AB as being due to the relaxed state of the body during sleep. 624 A voc τι τοῦ πυρὰς ἐν τῷ μετώπῳ κρατούμενον ὑπὸ τῆς κόμης (dtapév) ew: Wytt. conjectured κεκρυμμένῳ: κρατουμένῳ T, whereas

the hiatus and the sense made Emp. propose κεκρυμμένον. Bern. reads χρυπτόμενον (adopted by Hu. and Clem.). Fuhrm. prints κρατούμενον

evidenced reprimitur which fits concealed

Bolk. but translates ‘trace

...

cachée’,

a sense

not

for this verb. Bolkestein’s interpretation, ‘vestigium ... atque abit e conspectu’, keeps within the scope of this verb, better than Ἀρύπτω in the context: the scar was not entirely but could be vaguely seen under the hair which prevailed

upon it on the forehead (so as to bewilder the viewer).

It is also

noticeable that Plut. has few instances of κρύπτω but frequently uses κρατέω.

624 B αὐτῷ καὶ (γεγονότος) ἀνδρὸς ἤδη: So Fuhrm.: παι (lac. 4-6) à. T. Tum, Amyot conjectured παι(δί, καὶ) ἀ.; Ziegler reads zai(OC€ γεγονότος δ᾽) d. (accepted by Clem.), but παι must be corrected; the scar certainly remained for life. Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 255) proposed καὶ (δὴ xat) ἀ.

123

TABLE TALKS I 6

624 B

624 Β τῆς δὲ φαρέτρας ὑποκρεμαμένης:

Hu. brought up Reiske’s

(also adopted by Clem. who translates:

conjecture ὑπερκρεμαμένης

‘hung above his head’), while Fuhrm. preserves the text and renders: ‘suspendu ἃ ses pieds’. There is no good reason for the change. Bolk. criticizes Xylander’s translation

624 B τὰ βέλη πυρακτώσας: ‘sagittis incensis’: when

used

made of wood, the verb means

of the process

of hardening

weapons

about’, ‘singe’, cf. Amat.

‘burn round

762 B ὥσπερ oi ta ξύλα πυρακτοῦντες ἐκ μαλακῶν ἰσχυρὰ ποιοῦσι; Strab. XVII 2.3 χρῶνται δὲ καὶ τόξοις Αἰϑίοπες τετραπήχεσι ξυλίνotc πεπυραχτωμένοις; Diod. III 25.2 οἱ δ᾽ Αἰϑίοπες ... χρώμενοι ξύλοις πεπυρακτωμένοις καὶ λίϑοις ... δῥᾳδίως καταπονοῦσι, (sc. τὰ ϑηρία). But here it is not a matter of controlled application of fire. Clem. correctly translates ‘charring’. 624 B ὁμοιότητι τοῦ πάϑους: The Zeus, on begetting him, burnt his child survived and was inserted Dionysus was etymologized from

allusion is to the birth of Dionysus: mother, Semele, to death but the in the thigh of Zeus. The name νύσσω, ‘prick’, ‘pierce’, cf. Etym.

Mag. 277.35. Another etymology derived it from vóooa, ‘fury’, cf. Joh. Lyd. De mens. IV 51. 624 B ἐκ τοῦτου

περὶ τῶν

πολὺ

πιόντων

ἦν λόγος:

Franke

noticed

that the line of thought here returns to πολυποσία and reads ἐκ τούτου

(αὖϑις) (hiatus). Hu. proposes ἐκ τούτου

(πάλιν). Bolk. rightly

defends the text. The whole talk is little coherent; it is simply a serial anecdotic presentation of a number of heavy drinkers.

624 B τὸν πύχτην Ηρακλείδην: Aelian. V. H. XII 26, in his list of ποτίστατοι ἄνϑρωποι, mentions a certain

᾿Ηρακλείδης ὁ πύκτης, and

Paus. V 21.13 also reports on an Alexandrian boxer of that name who won the wreath at Olympia in 93 A. D. Abram. suggests that this Heraclides may have been the son of our πολυπότης. More probably he was his grandson; it was not customary to call the son by the name

of his father but by that of his grandfather, and two generations before 93 A. D. would tally with the time κατὰ τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν (Plut. was born c. 45 A. D.). - Sportsmen were above all notorious for their

heavy eating, cf. 654 C τῶν κρεοφαγιῶν ἐκείνων; Arist. G. A. 768 b 29 olov ἐπὶ τῶν ἀϑλητῶν συμβαίνει διὰ τὴν πολυφαγίαν, cf. id. frg. 520 Rose; Plin. XVIII 63 athletarum decreto, quorum capacitas iumentis similis.

124

TABLE TALKS I 6

624 B

624 Β àv “Hoaxdotv ᾿Αλεξανδρεῖς ὑπεκορίξοντο: This affectionate nickname appears as an ordinary feminine proper name frequently in papyri, e.g. P. Oxy.

III 496.5; P. Ryl. II 124.16, 174.3, 9, 15, 21, 24,

25; P. Lond. II 181(c).15, 261.75; SB 1 5124.11, 31, 120, 170, 173, 183; P. Thead. 1.7. 'HoaxAoóg may be a masculine name on an inscription from Syme: Agnew, Archaeologia 28 (1840) 170 (Taf. 13) = SB 12011 Ἡρακλοῦς ti ἀδελφῆ Προσδοκία μνήμης ἕνεκεν. The dative forms lack the iotas. According to the editor the inscription is on a *monumental tablet', then preserved in Alexandria. On a cippus, IG XII: 3.21, likewise from Syme, and preserved there, the same text is found,

except that the article appears as n: H AAEA®H. (cf. Bolk. p. 90). Presumably the two inscriptions concern the same person. The formation type is attested for males at P- Lond. II 257. 145,190 (Atooxois), JI 259.33, III 1170.174 (Ἀνδροῦς). — Paus. V 21.12 mentions another Alexandrian

boxer,

Apollonius,

comments: καί πῶς καὶ ᾿Αλεξανδρεῦσίν ἐστιν.

who

ἐπιχώριον

was

τὸ

nicknamed

ἐς

τὰς

Rhantes,

ἐπικλήσεις

and

τοῖς

624 Β κατὰ τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν: Bolk. refers to 622 E Λαμπρίας ὃ ἡμέτερος πάππος and supposes that ἡμῶν crept into the text from Plutarch's source, without reason, cf., e.g., 618 B ἡμῶν ὁ Πίνδαρος.

624 C πρόπομα: The first, very scanty, meal of the day, mostly called ἀκράτισμα, cf. Athen. 11D τροφαῖς δ᾽ ἐχρῶντο οἱ παλαιοὶ ἀκρατίσματι, ἀρίστῳ, ἑσπερίσματι, deinvo, so called (11 C) διὰ τὸ ἐν ἀκράτῳ βρέχειν καὶ προσίεσθαι ψωμούς, cf. below, 726 C ἕωϑεν ἐσθίειν ἄρτον ἐν ἀκράτῳ, καὶ μηδὲν ἄλλο" διὰ τοῦτο μέν ἀκράτισμα καλεῖν διὰ τὸν ἄκρατον. At 734 A and Athen. 58 Β πρόπομα means

‘appetizer’. 624 C ἐπὶ κῶμον; The word has a more pregnant meaning than πότος or συμπόσιον. Plut. chose it to express that the drinking-party of Heraclides was a veritable revelry. The word also occurs at Xen. Symp. IL 2.1 where new participants likewise arrive when the drinkingparty begins: ἔρχεται αὐτοῖς ἐπὶ κώμου Συρακόσιός τις ἄνϑρωπος, ἔχων τε αὐλητρίδα ἀγαϑὴν καὶ ὀρχηστρίδα ... καὶ παῖδα πάνυ γε ὡραῖον. 624 C τῶν δὲ Δρούσῳ xtÀ.: Athen. quotes Plut. only once, namely when he (52 DE) quotes this anecdote. Kaibel (in his ed. ad loc.) and

125

TABLE TALKS I 6

624. C

Wil. (followed by Hu.) consider the quotation of Plut., as well as that of Herodianus which follows, as an interpolation because of the preceding excerpt from Amerias in which almonds are said to be ἐπακτικώτατα πρὸς πότον προεσϑιόμενα. The conflict between this statement and the Plutarchean anecdote would seem to indicate interpolation. However, the lack of coherence may be due to the epitomizer (we have the first two books of Athen. and the beginning of the

third in epitomized form). During, Eranos 34 (1936) 1f., who argues that Athen. did not use Plutarch’s Talks, suggests that he found both the quotation of Amerias and that of Plut. in Herodian., without caring about the inconsistency. That Athen. used him was showed by

R. Reitzenstein, Geschichte der griechischen Etymologika (Leipzig 1897) 371-373; cf. also Gulick, AJP 60 (1939) 493. — Nothing is known of the identity of the doctor mentioned in this anedcote. Fuhrm. assumes, perhaps rightly, that he is only an invention, to illustrate the doctrine of the physiologists about bitter almonds (see below). 624 C πάντας ἐν τῷ πίνειν προτρεπόμενος: Xyl. conjectured the nonexistent medial προτρεχόμενος. Re. defended the text; παρερχόμενος

Bern. was approved by Hartm. and Gulick, AJP 60 (1939) 493. In LSJ this instance of προτρέπομαι alone is classed separately and translated ‘outstrip’, ‘outdo’, so also Clem. and Fuhrm.

('l'emportait sur tous’).

But we need not assume this unparalleled sense; the usual one, ‘urge on’, ‘lead on’, is apposite. Admittedly, this verb normally has an obj. + complement (prep. phrase or inf.), but cf. the absolute use at Arist. Rhet. 1358 b 15 περὶ γὰρ τῶν ἐσομένων συμβουλεύει ἢ προτρέπων ἢ ἀποτρέπων.

624 C τῶν πικρῶν ἀμυγδαλῶν ... ἕνεκα τοῦ μὴ μεϑύσκεσϑαι: This Prescription is also given by Dioscur. I 123.2 ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἀμέϑυστα (sc. τὰ ἀμύγδαλα πικρὰ) προλαμβανόμενα ὅσον ε΄ ἢ ζ΄ ,cf. Plin. XXIII 145 alunt quinis fere praesumptis ebrietatem non sentire potores; Gal. XIV 540 K. ἀμέϑυσος διατηρεῖται ὁ προφαγὼν ἀμύγδαλα πικρὰ τὸν

ἀριϑμὸν ζ΄ ἢ ϑ' ἢ io; Dioscur. Eup. ἀμυγδάλων

πικρῶν

ἀποβρέγματος

I 24 ἀμέϑυστα δέ ἐστιν

κύαϑος

εἷς προπινόμενος.

Ca-

pelle, Hermes 45 (1910) 328 argues that Plut. here and in many further Passages in the Talks ((I 7-8, II 2, 6, III 1.3, 3-5, second half of IV 4,

VI 6, 8.3-6, VIII 10) uses an unknown physiologist of the Peripatetic school as his source, cf. also id. Philol. 69 (1910) 269f. — For other antitoxic preventives, cf. below, 647 B; Athen. 34 C (herbs); Plin.

126

TABLE TALKS I 6

624C

XXXVII 124 (stones or other things to hang about the neck). - Bern. refers to Athen. 52 D for the accent correction ἀμυγδαλῶν. There are also two occurrences of the word below, 626 E, F.

624 D τῶν προσώπων τὰς ἐφηλίδας ἐξαιρεῖν: Cf. Dioscur. I 123.1 ἀμυγδάλης πικρᾶς ἡ ῥίζα λεία ἑψηϑεῖσα ἐφήλεις τὰς ἐν προσώποις ἀποκαϑαίρει, I 33.2 αἴρει δὲ (sc. ἀμυγδάλινον ἔλαιον) καὶ σπίλους ἐκ προσώπου καὶ ἐφήλεις καὶ ῥυτίδας; Plin. XXIII 144 amygdalae amarae radicum decoctum cutem in facie corrigit coloremque hilariorem facit. Theophr. H. P. IX 20.3 also recommends the root of the wild grape-vine for removing freckles, because it is hot and pungent. 624 D τῇ πικρότητι τοὺς πόρους ἀμύσσειν καὶ δηγμὸν ἐμποιεῖν κτλ.:

The ἔνιοι and Plut. (ἡμῖν δέ) agree on the cause (πιπρότης) as well as the effect (evaporation /loss of moisture) of the almonds; and there is no marked difference in the description of the process: it is a desiccation, and it is effected through harsh astriction. The opposition signaled by ἡμῖν δὲ μᾶλλον is thus fictive. Underlying the reasoning is the etymology ἀμυγδάλῃ from ἀμύσσειν. The synonymous phrase δηγμὸν ἐμποιεῖν is used at 688 B about such foods as τὰ εὐστομίαν ἔχοντα καὶ δριμύτητα, and τὰ ὀξέα καὶ δριμέα καὶ ἁλμυρά. -- The argument that desiccation prevents inebriation is curious; it is contrary to the reasoning at 650 D ὁ οἶνος ἐν τοῖς τῶν γερόντων σώμασιν ἔχει διατριβὴν ἑλκόμενος ὑπὸ τῆς ξηρότητος. 624 D τῶν χυμῶν: ΒΟΙΚ. rightly substituted χυμῶν for χυλῶν, which is not found in Plut., cf. 625 B διὸ τῇ τε γεύσει μάλιστα τοὺς δηχτικοὺς

προσίενται χυμούς. At 646 B χυμοΐ are opposed to ὀσμαί and χρόαι. Plut. consistently uses χυμός for ‘flavour’. Otherwise χυλός, ‘juice’ is often used in this sense, e.g. Philodem. De mus. p. 103 K. Gal. ΧΙ 450 K. prescribes a distinctive use of these words. Plat. Tim. 65 C, which Plut. cites, also has χυμός.

624 D τὰ γὰρ φλέβια τῆς γλώττης ... μαλακὰ καὶ μανότερ᾽ ὄντα συντείνει παρὰ φύσιν ὑπὸ τῆς ξηρότητος, ἐχτηκομένων τῶν ὑγρῶν: Hu. (followed by Clem.) mistakenly took τὰ φλέβια as the subject of συντείνει and so changed to συντείνεται. For the causal-consecutive

meaning of 0x6 + gen., cf. Hdt. 1 85 ὑπὸ τῆς παρεούσης συμφορῆς παρημελήχεε; Thuc. II 85 ὑπὸ ἀπλοίας ἐνδιέτριψεν οὐκ ὀλίγον χρόνον. See Kühner-Gerth?

I 283. Plut. freely reports Plat.

Tim.

127

TABLE TALKS I 6

624 Ὁ

65 CD ὅσα μὲν yao εἰσιόντα περὶ τὰ φλέβια ... εἰς τὰ νοτερὰ τῆς σαρκὸς καὶ ἁπαλὰ ἐμπίπτοντα γήινα μέρη κατατηκλόμενα ξυνάγει τὰ φλέβια καὶ ἀποξηραίνει. In Plato's description the bitter substances (γήινα μέρη ‘earthy particles’) themselves melt down (xata-), while in Plut. they only cause the dissipation of the moisture (ἐκτηκομένων τῶν ὑγρῶν). See further B. E. Taylor, A Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus

(Oxford 1928) 465 f. 624 D τὰ ἕλκη τοῖς πικροῖς ἀνισχναίνουσι φαρμάκοις: Bitter drugs

are especially effective for cleansing impure and/or purulent wounds, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 865 a 25 διὰ τί Set πρὸς μὲν τὰ μὴ καϑαρὰ καὶ

φαῦλα

τῶν

ἑλκῶν

ξηροῖς

καὶ

δριμέσι

καὶ

στρυφνοῖς

χρῆσϑαι

φαρμάκοις xth.; Gal. X 178 K. τὸ μὲν οὖν ἕλκος ὅσῳπερ ἂν ὑγρότερον fj, τοσούτῳ δεῖται φαρμάκου ξηραίνοντος μᾶλλον, X 176

καὶ διὰ μὲν τὸ λεπτὸν περίττωμα ὑγρὸν τὸ ἕλκος γίγνεται, διὰ δὲ τὸ παχὺ ῥυπαρόν: καὶ δεῖται διὰ τοῦτο διττῶν φαρμάκων, ὡς μὲν ὑγρὸν τῶν ξηραινόντων, ὡς δὲ δυπαρὸν τῶν καϑαιρόντων

αὐτό; Marcell.

De med. 4.8 haec (sc. ulcera in capite) ergo felle taurino cum aceto tepefacto inlita efficaci remedio sanantur, (4.11) alium cum sua reste conburitur cinisque eius ex oleo capiti ulceroso inponitur. oleum amygdalinum cum vino optimo permixtum expurgat capitis vitia. 624 E ἐπὶ δὲ ῥίζαν βάλε πικρὴν | κταλ.: Il. XI 846-848. In the MSS ἁπάσας ... ἐτέρσετο is lacking, whether due to Plut. himself or later omission is uncertain; Xyl. supplemented. The passage is commented upon at Ps.-Plut. Vita Hom. 210 (VII 455 Bern.) τὸν & Εὐρύπυλον κατὰ τοῦ μηροῦ τετρωμένον Πάτροχλος ... ῥίζαν ἐπιβάλλει" πολλαὶ γὰρ πανταχῆ πρὸς ἴασιν ἑλκῶν πεφύκασιν. ἔγνω δὲ καὶ τοῦτο, ὡς τὰ

πικρὰ φάρμακα πρὸς τὸ ξηραίνειν ἐστὶν ἐπιτήδεια. 624Ε

τὰ

διαπάσματα

τῶν

γυναικῶν:

Xyl.

suspected

γυναικῶν;

Faehse, comparing De prim. frig. 954 B ψύχει δὲ καὶ τὰ τῶν ἀϑλητῶν ἢ κόνις σώματα καὶ κατασβέννυσι τοὺς ἰδρῶτας, hesitatingly conjectured γυμνικῶν

but recommended

non careat'. But Bern.

and Hu.

to keep

γυναικῶν

because

‘sensu

printed Faehse’s conjecture. Bolk.

points out that Plut. never uses yupvixds = ἀϑλητής and even suggests that ‘profecto Graece vix dicitur , which Abram. corrects, cf. Poll. III

143 γυμνικοὶ μὲν κυρίως ἀϑληταὶ καλοῦνται; to this in turn Bolk. (Mnem. 15 (1962) 307) comments: “6 Pollucis lemmate efficitur vocabulum γυμνυκός vulgarem esse λέξιν, Plutarcho igitur indignam'. Bolk.

128

TABLE TALKS I 6

624E

(Adversaria) shows that διαπάσματα no doubt refers to women’s perfumed powders, cf. Brut. rat. 990 B (ἡ μυρεψικὴ) διέφϑαρκεν οὐ μόνον πάσας γυναῖκας ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἤδη τοὺς πλείστους, ὡς μηδὲ ταῖς αὑτῶν ἐϑέλειν συγγίνεσϑαι γυναιξίν, εἰ μὴ μύρων ὑμῖν ὀδωδυῖαι καὶ διαπασμάτων εἰς ταὐτὸ φοιτῷεν; Lucian. Amor. 39 αἱ πολλαὶ τῶν διαπασμάτων συνϑέσεις τὸν ἀηδῆ τοῦ προσώπου χρῶτα φαιδρύνουσιν; Antyll. ap. Oribas. Coll. med. X 31.1 διαπάσματα δὲ τὰ ὑπὲρ εὐωδίας τοῦ χρωτὸς ἢ παντὸς ἢ μερικῶς μασχαλῶν καὶ παραμηρίων ἁρμόζοντα. On the preparation of powder, see Theophr. frg. 4.8, 57; Dioscur. I 7.4; Plin. XIII 19. 624 E πικρὰ τῇ γεύσει: Hubert's conjecture γεύσει was adopted by

Clem. and Fuhrm. Abram. considers it improbable that Plut. should repeat this word after τῇ γεύσει πικρόν in the preceding sentence and rejects it as unnecessary. But the correction is plausible. The theme of this chapter is the bitter taste of desiccant substances: almonds, certain drugs, powder. As to repetition, Plut. occasionally allows himself in highly repetitive style, cf. 625 A-C σφοδρότητι -- σφοδραί - (καὶ σφοδρῶν) -- σφοδροῦ, 626 B τὰ γεώδη -- τῶν γεωδῶν — γεώδη, 632 EF four successive sentences beginning with καί, and three of these with καὶ ὁ, 644 C-D ἀπόλλυται τὸ κοινόν -- περὶ τὸ κοινόν — εἰς τὸ κοινόν - κοινά -- τὴν κοινωνίαν -- κοινά, 651 B-C two successive sentences

beginning with ἔτι δέ, and two beginning with ἔπειτα, 671 A τῷ σώματι ~ τοῖς σώμασιν in the same sentence. 624 E στυπτιχὰ ὄντα: Bens. showed that Plut. is among those writers who carefully avoid hiatus. However, C. Sintenis, De hiata in Plutarchi

Vitis parallelis (Progr. Zerbst 1845) 8-15, and J. Schellens, De hiatu in Plutarchi Moralibus (Diss. Bonnae 1864) 13-17 observed that he tolerated hiatus after καί, μή, ἤ, περί, τί, numerals, and in pause; and Bolk. 60f., 105 f. notices that verbal endings (-μαι, -σϑαι, -eı, -ἢ, etc.) before article or pronoun are tolerated. It can be added that Plut. also accepted hiatus before ὦν, cf. Amat. 765 F ἐν τῷ νέφει ὄντος, Adv. stoic. 1066 C κακοὶ ὄντες, 1073 E ἐπειϑὴ ὄντος, 1074 A μέρη ὄντα ἔσται, 1075 Ὁ ϑεοὶ ὄντες, 1076 E μέρη ὄντες, Numa 3.9 ἰδιώτου ὄντος (διωτεύοντος Bens.), Eumen. 3.1 ξένῳ ὄντι (transposed by Bens.), Artax. 6.6 ἐν ὑποψίᾳ ὄντων (ὑποψίαις Bens.). The changes proposed by Bens. are not persuasive.

129

TABLE TALKS I 6

624 E

624 E σφοδρότητι τοῦ στρυφνοῦ τοῦτο ποιεῖν: Fuhrmann’s conjecture τοῦτο ποιεῖν: τὸ πικρόν T, is simple and plausible. Deletion (Hu.) is no solution; an infinitive is needed: ξηραίνειν Re., or κατασβεννύναι τὸ ὑγρόν Bern. (cf. 954 B) are palaeographically unattractive. 624 EF οὐκ ἐῶσα πίμπλασϑαι τὰς φλέβας, ὧν διατάσει, φασί, καὶ

ταραχῇ συμβαίνει τὸ μεϑύειν: This description of ebriety as due to repletion of the veins may be compared

ἴλιγγοι ὑγρότης τόπος ὁ πνεῦμα

with Theophr.

frg. 8.1 ot

γίνονται ὅταν ἡ πνεῦμα ἀλλότριον περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν ἢ περιττωματικὴ ... ἢ ἀπὸ τροφῆς ... ἢ τοῦ οἴνου ... ὁ γὰρ περὶ τὸν ἐγκέφαλον φύσει μὲν ὑγρός ἐστιν, ὅταν δ᾽ ἔλϑῃ τι ἀλλότριον βιάζεται διαδυόμενον πρὸς τὰς φλέβας καὶ ὠϑεῖ

κύχλῳ τὸ προὐπάρχον ὑγρόν. 624 F τὸ συμβαῖνον περὶ τὰς ἀλώπεκας" κτλ.: This fanciful belief is also found at Dioscur. I 123.2 κτείνει δὲ (sc. τὰ ἀμύγδαλα πικρὰ) καὶ ἀλώπεκας βρωϑέντα σύν τινι; Plin. XXIII 145 vulpesque, si ederint eas nec contingat e vicino aquam

lambere, mori.

TALK 7

625 A &yteito περὶ τῶν γερόντων: The beginning of the next talk indicates that this talk belongs to the same occasion. The complete lack of dialogization is noticeable. — A similar subject-matter is discussed in

III 3, but from a different point of view: old men are presupposed to be less resistant than women to wine. At 677 EEF it is taken for granted that old men want strong wine.

625 A οἱ μὲν oov ... οἰόμενοι κτλ.: These anonymous speakers are the only ones mentioned in this talk; however, Hu. notes that the beginning of the next one (ταῦτα δ᾽ ἡμῶν ... εὑρησιλογούντων) indicates that it is Plut. himself who is supposed to be the speaker throughout (from οὐχ ἱκανὸν δὲ πρὸς τὴν αἰτίαν οὐδ᾽ ἀληϑές).

625 A κατεψυγμένην Bont ussem.

τὴν ἕξιν αὐτῶν xth.: Plut. rightly calls this

κοινὸν καὶ πρόχειρον, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. Π 36 διὰ τί οἱ πρεσβῦται φίλοινοι; ὅτι χρόνῳ κατεψυγμένοι

χθείαν ἔχουσι τοῦ ϑερμοῦ, ϑερμαντικὸς δ᾽ ὁ οἶνος; Arist. frg. 107 Rose μεϑύσκονται ... οἱ γεραίτεροι τάχιστα, δι᾽ ὀλιγότητα καὶ

130

TABLE TALKS 17

ἀσϑένειαν τοῦ περὶ II 22.3 τοῖς δὲ μεταλαμβάνειν τοῦ μαραινόμενον ὑπὸ ἀμπέλου φαρμάκῳ;

625 A

αὐτοὺς ἐνυπάρχοντος φύσει ϑερμοῦ; Clem. Paed. ἤδη παρηβηκόσιν ἱλαρώτερον ἐπιτρεπτέον πότου, τὸ καταψυχόμενον τῆς ἡλικίας, οἷον χρόνου, ἀναζωπυροῦντας ἀβλαβῶς τῷ τῆς Gal. VI 334 K. τοῖς γέρουσι χρησιμώτατος (sc. ὁ

οἶνος); Anon. Anecd. Athen. II 471.7 Delatte ἁρμόζει γοῦν ὁ τοιοῦτος (ie. ϑερμὸς) οἶνος τοῖς γέρουσι (xoi) τοῖς ἔχουσι τὴν κρᾶσιν

ψυχράν.

Porphyr.

In Il. VI

265

notes

that the wine

was

salutary to the old Hecabe, ϑερμὸς ὧν καὶ ὑγρὸς ψυχρᾷ οὔσῃ καὶ ξηρᾷ, cf. Eustath. 640.53 ἡ μὲν ᾿Εκάβη πρεσβυτικῆς ἐστιν ἡλικίας, ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη χαίρει τῷ οἴνῳ ϑερμῷ ὄντι καὶ ὑγρῷ. There was consensus

about the cold, but not about the dry, nature of elderly people: Hipp. VI 512 L. of δὲ πρεσβύτεροι ψυχροὶ καὶ ὑγροί; Gal. XV 186 K. ὑγρὰν δὲ καὶ ψυχρὰν τὴν (sc.xoáow) τῶν γερόντων, but cf. id. VI 349 τὸ

γῆρας ... ὁμολογουμένως εἶναι ψυχρόν, οὐχ ὁμολογουμένως δὲ ξηρόν, ἐνίων ὑγρὸν αὐτὸ φάντων εἶναι; cf. also below, 650 C οἱ δὲ γέροντες ... εἰσιν ἐνδεεῖς ἰκμάδος. The cold nature of old age is explained at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 955 a 13 as due to the increase of black bile: ψυχροτέρα μὲν οὖν γινομένη ἡ χρᾶσις ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς μελαίνης χολῆς ἐν διὸ καὶ οἱ μὲν παῖδες εὐθϑυμότεροι, οἱ δὲ γέροντες δυσϑυμότεροι. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ϑερμοί, οἱ δὲ ψυχροί" τὸ γὰρ γῆρας κατάψυξίς τις; Gal. XIX 489 Κ. τῷ ὑπερήβῳ δὲ μέλαινα (sc. χολὴ αὔξει)... ὑγρὰ γὰρ καὶ ψυχρὰ (sc. αὕτη ἡ ἡλικία). Cf. also Plut. Lys. 2.5 ἱστορεῖ καὶ Λύσανδρον οὐκ εὐϑὺς ἀλλὰ πρεσβύτερον ὄντα τῇ μελαγχολίᾳ περιπεσεῖν. 625 A οὐχ ἱκανὸν δὲ meds τὴν αἰτίαν οὐδ᾽

ἀληϑὲς λέγοντες: The

speaker (who is Plut. himself; see beginning of next talk) here commits a self-contradiction: in regarding the suggested reason as insufficient he implicitly accepts it -- but then he adds that it is false, without trying to show in the following section that old people are not cold. On the contrary, his argument based on the notion of πνεῦμα implies that the constitution of old people grows cold and is in need of wine. For the opinion of wine as hot, cf. Gal. 1 669 K. οἶνος δὲ (sc. ϑερμός ἐστι

δυνάμει), διότι ῥᾳδίως αἷμα γίνεται, VI 54 ϑερμαίνει τὸ σῶμα πινόμενος οἶνος; Ps.-Arist. Probl. 871 4.2, 871 b 32, 874 a 38, 874 b 35, 948 a 22, Probl. ined. II 12 Bussem.

625 AB δυσκίνητοι γάρ εἰσι καὶ δυσμετάβλητοι πρὸς τὰς ἀντιλήψεις τῶν ποιοτήτων; The inertia and dullness of old people, and its origin

131

TABLE TALKS I 7

625 ΑΒ

in insufficiency of the nervous system were well-known, cf. Gal. XIX 489 K. νωϑρὰ ἡλικία αὐτὴ καὶ ληϑαργικὴ καὶ κωματώδης, XVILE2.5 ἐν ἐσχάτῃ γήρᾳ συμβαίνει καὶ τὰς τῶν νεύρων ἐκφύσεις ἀναγκαῖον ἀποξηραίνεσϑαι τηνικαῦτα. διὰ τοῦτο μήϑ᾽ ὁρᾶν ὁμοίως ἐστὶ μήτ᾽ ἀχούειν μήτ᾽ ἄλλο τι τοῦ κατὰ τὰς αἰσϑήσεις ἢ τὰς καϑ' ὁρμὴν κινήσεις ἐρρωμένως ἐπιτελεῖν. 625 B ἡ τῆς ἕξεως ἄνεσις" ἐκλυομένη γὰρ καὶ ἀτονοῦσα πλήττεσϑαι

φιλεῖ: The argument

is based on the Stoic-Pneumatic doctrine of

physical and psychic ‘tension’, which depends

on the vigour of the

πνεῦμα in the body, cf. SVF II 785 ἔτι εἰ fj ψυχὴ σῶμα, ἢ πῦρ ἢ πνεῦμα λεπτομερές ἐστι διὰ παντὸς διῆκον τοῦ ἐμψύχου σώματος. ... οὗ vào ... πᾶν πνεῦμα ταύτην ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν. μετά τινος οὖν

ἔσται...

δυνάμεως

καί, ὡς αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν,

τόνου.

Health is a

function of the adequate tension (εὐτονία) of the πνεῦμα, while iliness and infirmity indicate &tovia, cf. SVF III 471 p. 120.31 καϑάπερ γὰρ

καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ σώματος ϑεωρεῖταν ἰσχύς te καὶ ἀσϑένεια, evtovia καὶ ἀτονία, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὑγίεια καὶ νόσος, εὐεξία καὶ καχεξία κτλ., ΠῚ 473 p. 123.16 οἱ ἐπὶ τοῦ σώματος λέγονται τόνοι ἄτονοι καὶ

εὔτονοι εἶναι κατὰ τὸ νευρῶδες, τῷ δύνασϑαι ἡμᾶς ἢ ἀδυνατεῖν ἐν τοῖς διὰ τούτων ἐπιτελουμένοις ἔργοις, καὶ ὁ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ τόνος λέγεται, ὡς εὐτονία καὶ ἀτονία. In Stoic theory the πνεῦμα was identified with heat, cf. SVF 1 127 ϑερμασίαν δὲ καὶ πνεῦμα Ζένων τὸ αὐτὸ εἶναί φησιν, 1 135 Ζήνων δὲ ὁ Κιτιεὺς ... πνεῦμα ἔνϑερμον εἶναι τὴν ψυχήν. The function of the sense organs depends on the πρεῦμα; the Pneumatists assumed that there were different kinds for each of them, see Ps.-Gal. XIX 379f. K., and further G. Verbeke,

L’evolution de la doctrine du pneuma (Paris-Louvain 1945) 192 f., and cf. below, on 625 C and 666 AB. 625 B διὸ τῇ τε γεύσει: Four senses are considered in this talk; vision is

the subject of the next one.

625 B ij v' σφοδρῶν) accepted. σφοδρός /

ὄσφρησις αὐτῶν ... κινεῖται γὰρ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀκράτων (καὶ ἥδιον: The supplementation (Turn.) has been generally Hu. proposes (εὐωδιῶν). The many (3) instances of σφοδρύτης in the context would seem to suggest another

word here, but Plut, occasionally allows for such repetition, see above, on 624 E. The pair ἄκρατος - σφοδρός corresponds well to κατάκοροι

καὶ σφοδραΐ above.

132

TABLE TALKS I 7

625 B

625 Β ἡ δ᾽ ἀφὴ (πρὸς) τὰ ἕλκη δυσπα(ϑής), xvÀ.: Turn. ingeniously filled the many lacunae of this sentence. -- The view that elderly people suffer less pain than the young is found in Hipp. VI 184 L. of δὲ γεραίτεροι πάσχουσι μὲν ὀλιγάχις, καὶ ὅταν πάϑωσιν, ἀσϑενέστερα πάσχουσιν ἅτε ἀσϑενέστεροι ἐόντες. 625 B ὁ(μοιό)τατον δὲ γίνεται (τὸ) τῆς ἀκοῆς: After the three ‘lower’ senses Plut. finishes the talk by audition (vision follows in the

next one). These two senses are the most important, cf. Aristox. frg. 73 Wehrli ᾿Αριο]τόξενος ... τὴν ó[pacww καὶ] τὴν ἀκο[ὴν λ]έγων [γεγεν]ῆσϑαι τὸ κύ[ρ]ιον τ[ῆς ἐννοί]ας καὶ ϑειοτέρας τ[ῶν ἄλλω]ν αἰσϑήσεων, frg. 74 (see below, 704 E). The highest value is assigned to vision. At Plat. Rep. 507 C Socrates asks: ἐννενόηκας τὸν τῶν aioϑήσεων δημιουργὸν ὅσῳ πολυτελεστάτην τῆν τοῦ ὁρᾶν τε καὶ ὁρᾶσϑαι δύναμιν ἐδημιούργησεν; and cf. Arist. Met. 980 a 23 «oi γὰρ

χωρὶς τῆς χρείας ἀγαπῶνται (sc. αἱ αἰσϑήσεις) μάλιστα τῶν ἄλλων ἡ διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων.

δι᾽ αὑτάς,

καὶ

625B οἱ γὰρ μουσικοὶ γηρῶντες ὀξύτερον ἁρμόζονται καὶ σκληρότερον: Heirman, Mnem. 30 (1977) 317 points out that Fuhrm. translates Goud Govtat incorrectly: ‘les musiciens ... forment des accords’. The verb here means ‘tune’, as at Plat. Rep. 349 E μουσικὸς

ἀνὴρ ἁρμοττόμενος λύραν ... ἐν τῇ ἐπιτάσει καὶ ἀνέσει τῶν χορδῶν. 625 Β ὑπὸ πληγῆς καὶ τῆς συντόνου φωνῆς: All eds. follow Re. in deleting καὶ, but I believe that it may be interpreted as being explicative. Audition is by nature in need of τῇ πληγῇ τοῦ ἀέρος (De def. or. 436 D), but elderly people need more than that, namely a shrill, intense sound. 625 C 6 τι γὰρ σιδήρῳ πρὸς ἀχμὴν στόμωμα, τοῦτο σώματι πνεῦμα

παρέχει πρὺς αἴσϑησιν: At 666 ΑΒ the weakening of the vigour of the πνεῦμα during sleep is given as the cause of the reduced function of the sense organs in sleeping people: ἐν δὲ τοῖς ὕπνοις... tod πνεύματος ἐνδιδόντος καὶ ἀπολείποντος, δι᾿ dv (sc. τῶν πόρων) Puval τε καὶ ὀσμαὶ διεκϑέουσιν μηδεμίαν αἴσϑησιν ἑαυτῶν παρέχουσαι. The state of the senses of old people is thus similar to the state during sleep. -The comparison of the effects of the πνεῦμα with tempering in this context is puzzling. The procedure comprises two successive moments, heating and chilling. It appears that the first of these must be meant,

133

TABLE TALKS I 7

625 C

considering that the innate πνεῦμα is hot, particularly in Stoic theory

with its identification of πνεῦμα and ψυχή, cf. SVF II 885 p. 238.32 f

ψυχὴ πνεῦμά ἐστι σύμφυτον, and I 135 (Zenon) πνεῦμα Évüeopov . . . τὴν ψυχήν. When it loses its vigour in old people it is equivalent to losing its heat. The idea put forward by Plut. De def. or. 433 A that cooling of the πνεῦμα may effect keenness appears to be only a fancy of his own: τοὐναντίον πάλιν αὖ περιψύξει τινὶ καὶ πυκνώσει τοῦ πνεύματος οἷον βαφῇ σίδηρον τὸ προγνωστικὸν μόριον ἐντείνεσϑαι

καὶ στομοῦσϑαι Stoic idea of the cooling of their 946 C, De stoic.

τῆς ψυχῆς οὐκ ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν. A special case is the ontogenesis of the soul in new-born children through innate πνεῦμα by the outer air, cf. De prim. frig. rep. 1052 F, 1053 D; Tertull. De anima 25 (= SVF I

805). The comparison

in our passage is inadequate:

the πνεῦμα

re-

ceives εὐτονία through heat, iron through cold, cf. the description of the tempering process at De def. or. 436 C τῷ μὲν πυρὶ χαλασϑεὶς (sc.

ὁ σίδηρος) ... ἐμπεσὼν δὲ πάλιν εἰς ὕδωρ ... εὐτονίαν ἴσχει καὶ πῆξιν. — The earliest description of the procedure is found at Od. IX 391-393. See Blümner,

Technologie IV 333f., 342-352.

625 ( γεῶδες: A common word in Plut., also used of old men in 650 C; oi δὲ γέροντες ... ὡς γεώδεις καὶ γεηροί τινες ἤδη γινόμενοι τὴν ἕξιν οὕτω προσαγορεύονται. 625 C σφοδροῦ τοῦ νύττοντος, οἷον ὁ ἄκρατός ἐστιν, δεόμενον: The name of the wine god was derived from νύττω (νύσσω), cf. Etym.

Mag. 277.35 οἱ μὲν Διόνυξον αὐτὸν ὀνομάζουσιν, ὅτι σὺν κέρασι γεννώμενος ἔνυξε τὸν Διὸς μηρόν. TALK

8

625 ς ταῦτα δ᾽ ἡμῶν εἰς τὸ προκείμενον εὑρησιλογούντων, ἐδόκει τὸ τῆς Owens ἀντιπίπτειν: The discussion continues; the importance of

vision is marked by its separate treatment. The defects of vision in old people and in myopes is treated at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 959 Ὁ 37. Capelle,

Hermes 45 (1910) 328 n. 2 assumes the same source for this talk as for

the preceding one.

625 D καὶ τοῦτο παραδηλῶν ὁ Αἰσχύλος qnoív σὺ δέξ᾽ ἄπω(ϑεν) αὐτόν ov γὰρ ἐγγύϑεν | (βαλεῖς)" γέρων δὲ γραμματεὺς γενοῦ

σαφής: So Radt, TrGF III 422 frg. 358: οὐδὲ ἀπὸ (lac. 3) αὐτόν

134

TABLE TALKS I 8

(&xco(9ev) Dind., ἄπο(ϑεν)

625 Ὁ

Steph.), and (lac. 3) γέρων T. The

reading is acceptable. Perhaps (ὁρᾷς)" γέρων Steph., Amyot would also be possible, but Bolk. rightly points out that the verb παραδηλόω indicates that Aeschylus spoke in a round-about way of presbyopia, in contrast to Soph. (indicated by ἐνδηλότερον). For the numerous, less probable, other conjectures proposed for these lines, see Fuhrm. n. 3, and Radt. 625 D ἐνδηλότερον: Dübn. and Bern. printed ἐκδηλότερον Re., without reason. 625 D μόλις δι᾽ ὠτὸς ἔρχετ᾽ ἐρρυπωμένου: Fuhrm. rightly prefers Vollgraffs and Herwerden's palaeographically and semantically (perf.) persuasive conjecture to ἔρχεται δυπωμένου Meineke, printed by Clem. and Radt, TrGF IV 560 frg. 858 (where see other, less valuable, proposals): ἔρχεται τρυπωμένου T. For ῥύπος in the sense of '(sealing)wax', cf. Aristoph. Lys. 1198 τοὺς δύπους ἀνασπάσαι. 625 D πόρρω: Clem. and Radt accept Dindorf's correction πρόσω. But πόρρω occurs occasionally in tragedy: Eur. Rhes. 482, frg. 772;

Adesp. frg. 496 Nauck?, and frequently in Aristophanes. 625 E ἀντιφωτισμόν: Reflection plays an important part in Epicurean theory of vision; the εἴδωλα are reflected from the smooth surface of the mirror onto the eye, cf. Lucr. IV 145-175.

625 E ἐκλύουσι τὴν λαμπρότητα τῷ ἀέρι καϑάπερ οἶνον ὕδατι καταχεραννυμένην: Λαμπρότης is here conceived of as a kind of matter, precisely πῦρ. This view represents the later Peripatetic criticism of Aristotle’s theory of vision, according to which light is immaterial. The leading critic was Straton of Lampsacus, who regarded light as a δύναμις σωματική. His physics appears to be displayed by Heron, Pneum. Prooem. Here this view is contrasted to the following one, which is exactly the Aristotelian. 625 E ἦσαν μὲν οὖν of πρὸς τοῦτο λέγοντες: Hu. corrected of ... λέγουσιν T, cf. 641 B ἦσαν μὲν οὖν οἱ καταγελῶντες, 664 B ἦσαν οὖν οἱ φάσκοντες.

Bolk. also adduces Mor.

438 D, 612 F, Tit. 21.7.

44 B, 363 D, 394 E, 409 C,

135

TABLE TALKS I 8

625Ε

625E περιλαμβάνοντες αὐγὴν πλείονα καὶ πληροῦντες ἀέρος λαμπροῦ τὴν μεταξὺ ... χώραν: There are seven ancient Greek theories of vision. An

exhaustive presentation

of these is given by

Haas, Archiv Gesch. Philos. 20 (1907) 345-386. The theory supported by οἱ λέγοντες is that of Aristotle, who rejected earlier and contemporary theories and denied the existence of vision-rays sent out of the

eyes (Emped., Alcmaeon, Plato) or material images separated from the surface of the things (Democr.). The former view is attacked at De sensu 438 a 27 ἄλογον δὲ ὅλως τὸ ἐξιόντι τινὶ τὴν ὄψιν ὁρᾶν, καὶ ἀποτείνεσϑαι μέχρι τῶν ἄστρων, ἢ μέχοι τινὸς ἐξιοῦσαν συμφύεσθαι, καϑάπερ λέγουσί τινες. Arist. assumed instead that there are only two factors required for vision, a transparent medium,

normally air, and

light. De anima 418 Ὁ 2 οὐχ ὁρατὸν ἄνευ φωτός, ἀλλὰ πᾶν τὸ ἑκάστου χρῶμα ἐν φωτὶ ὁρατόν ... διαφανὲς δὲ λέγω ὃ ἔστι μὲν ὁρατόν, οὐ

xa

αὑτὸ δὲ ὁρατὸν ὡς ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἀλλότριον χρῶμα.

τοιοῦτον δέ ἐστιν ἀὴρ καὶ ὕδωρ καὶ πολλὰ τῶν στερεῶν" οὐ γὰρ 1j

ὕδωρ οὐδ᾽ fj ἀὴρ διαφανές ... φῶς δέ ἐστιν ἡ τούτου ἐνέργεια τοῦ διαφανοῦς fj διαφανές. Arist. o. c. 419 a 16 rejects the opinion of Democr. that vision is possible through the void: οὐ yao καλῶς τοῦτο

λέγει Δημόκριτος οἰόμενος, et γένοιτο κενὸν τὸ μεταξύ, ὁρᾶσϑαι ἂν ἀκριβῶς, and 419 ἃ 21 ὥστ᾽ ἀναγκαῖόν τι εἶναι μεταξύ κενοῦ δὲ γενομένου οὐχ ὅτι ἀκριβῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅλως οὐδὲν ὀφϑήσεται. The Peripatetic theory is defended against that of the Atomists by Alex. Aphr. In

De anima libri mant. 141.33 Bruns πάσχει δὲ (sc. ἡ ὄψις) οὐκ ἁπορρέοντά τινα ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρατῶν δεχομένη, ἀλλὰ τοῦ μεταξὺ τῆς τε ὄψεως καὶ τοῦ ὁρωμένου διαφανοῦς ἀλλοιουμένου πως ὑπὸ τοῦ ὁρατοῦ καὶ τὸ εἶδος τὸ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὁρατοῦ τῇ ὄψει διαγγέλλοντος κτλ. Cf. also ibid. 144.34. 625 E changed

ἕτεροι

δὲ τοῖς συμβάλλουσι τὰς αὐγὰς μετεῖχον: Απιγοὶ to προσεῖχον, so also Re., Hutt., Wytt., Fuhrm., while

Dübn., Bern., Hu., Clem. keep μετεῖχον. Bolk. refers to Alex. 52.8 τὸν Καλλισϑένην μετέχοντα δόξης τοῖς λέγουσι and notices that, apart from the addition of δόξης, these passages are exactly parallel.

625 E ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἀποτείνεται τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ἑκατέρον κῶνος, πρὸς τῷ ὕμματι τὴν κορυφὴν ἔχων, ἕδραν δὲ καὶ βάσιν ἧ περιλαμβάνει τὸ ὁρώμενον: I substitute fi περιλαμβάνει for fj zt. and interpret: ‘inas-

much ἃ5 à cone of rays extends from each of the eyes, having its apex

In the eye, and base and foundation where it encompasses the object

136

TABLE TALKS I 8

625E

viewed’. The clause was suspected by Re., Doe., Hu., Bolk. Bolk.

presupposes, without reason, that the construction is ἔχειν τι ἕδραν and would read ἕδραν δὲ τὴν βάσιν, although he admits that Plut. uses the pair ἕδρα καὶ βάσις as synonyms at De def. or. 436 A, Amat. 756 B, Adv. stoic. 1085 B. And the two passages he quotes do not support his argument because the construction is different: Euclid. Opt. 2 τὸ ὑπὸ τῶν ὄψεων περιεχόμενον σχῆμα εἶναι κῶνον, τὴν κορυφὴν μὲν ἔχοντα πρὸς τῷ ὄμματι, τὴν δὲ βάσιν πρὸς τοῖς πέρασι

τῶν ὁρωμένων, and Diog. Laert. VII 157 (= SVF II 867 (Chrys.)) γίνεσθαι μέντοι τὸ κωνοειδὲς τοῦ ἀέρος πρὸς τῇ ὄψει, τὴν δὲ βάσιν πρὸς τῷ ὁρωμένῳ. Plutarch’s use of a relative clause -- more precisely,

an adverbial rel. clause — instead of the second prepositional phrase explains why ἕδραν καὶ βάσιν is in the indefinite form. -- The process of vision is described in similar terms at Alex. Aphr. In De anima libri mant. 130.14 Bruns (= Chrys. frg. 864) vuttépevov γὰρ ὑπὸ τῆς ὄψεως τὸν συνάπτοντα

τῇ κόρῃ

ἀέρα

σχηματίζεσθαι

εἰς κῶνον᾽

τούτου δὲ οἷον τυπουμένου κατὰ τὴν βάσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ὁρατῶν τὴν αἴσϑησιν γίνεσθαι, id. In De sensu 111{:1.1-7 Wendland. The theory of vision rays, perhaps first taught by the Pythagoreans, was the predominating ancient vision theory. It was widely accepted also among the mathematicians; Euclides adopted it as axiomatic (Opt.), and cf. Damian. Opt. 3-5. Heron, Dioptr. 244.8 Schéne presupposes it (but cf. id. Def. 102.19 Heiberg οὔτε φυσιολογεῖ ἡ ὀπτικὴ οὔτε ζητεῖ, εἴτε ἀπόρροιαί τινες ἐπὶ τὰ πέρατα τῶν σωμάτων φέρονται ἀπὸ τῶν ὄψεων ἀχτίνων ἐκχεομένων, εἴτε ἀπορρέοντα εἴδωλα ἀπὸ τῶν algϑητῶν εἴσω τῶν ὄψεων εἰσδύεται); Cleomedes, De motu corp. cael. 124.27 Ziegler; Ptol. Opt. II 26; Aet. IV 13.8; Nemes. 7.78 p. 179 Matth. The notion of vision rays was essential to Stoic vision theory but the Stoics considered the medium, the air, as cooperating in vision. The rays of the eyes intensify (συνεντείνειν) the air in the cone of light, so as to use it as a means of perception, cf. Gell. V 16.2 (= SVF

11 871 (Chrys.)) Stoici causas esse videndi dicunt radiorum ex oculis in ea, quae videri queunt, emissionem aerisque simul intentionem; Aet. IV 15.3 (= Chrys. frg. 866) Χρύσιππος

κατὰ τὴν συνέντασιν τοῦ

μεταξὺ ἀέρος ὁρᾶν ἡμᾶς, νυγέντος μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ ὁρατικοῦ πνεύματος, ὅπερ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡγεμονικοῦ μέχοι τῆς κόρης διήκει, κατὰ δὲ τὴν πρὸς τὸν περικείμενον ἀέρα ἐπιβολὴν ἐντείνοντος αὐτὸν κωνοειδῶς, κτλ. - There is no clear indication in our passage that exactly the Stoic variant of the theory is meant; see further below, on 626 A. Vision

rays are also mentioned at 681 A.

137

TABLE TALKS I 8

625 F

625 F γενόμενοι δ᾽ ἀπωτέρω καὶ συμπεσόντες ἀλλήλοις Ev τὸ φῶς ποιοῦσι"... αἰτία γὰρ ἡ τῶν κώνων σύναψις εἰς ταὐτὸ καὶ σύλλαμψις κτλ.: The merging of the two vision ray cones is described at Nemes. De nat. hom.7.78 p. 179 Matth. of δὲ γεωμέτραι κώνους τινὰς ἀναγράφουσιν ἐκ τῆς συνεμπτώσεως TOV ἀκτίνων γινομένους

τῶν ἐκπεμπομένων διὰ τῶν ὀφϑαλμῶν. πέμπειν γὰρ ἀκτῖνας τὸν μὲν δεξιὸν ὀφϑαλμὸν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀριστερὰ τὸν δὲ ἀριστερὸν ἐπὶ τὰ δεξιά, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς συνεμπτώσεως αὐτῶν ἀποτελεῖσϑαι κῶνον, ὅϑεν ὁμοῦ μὲν πολλὰ περιλαμβάνειν ὁρατὰ τὴν ὄψιν, βλέπειν δὲ ἀκριβῶς ἐκεῖνα, ἔνϑα ἂν συνεμπέσωσιν αἱ ἀκτῖνες. Cf. also Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. I 124 διὰ τί of ἐκ φύσεως στραβοὶ διπλᾶ οὐχ ὁρῶσι; ... ol ὀφθαλμοὶ κεκτημένοι τὴν αὐτὴν ϑέσιν, φημὶ δὴ τὴν ἐπ᾿ εὐϑείας, ἔχουσι τὰς δύο ἀκτῖνας ἑαυτῶν εἰς ἕν σῶμα συμπιπτούσας. The deficient capacity of adequate refraction in elderly people is treated at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 959 b 37 διὰ τί... ὃ πρεσβύτης... πόρρω ἀπάγει; ... οὗ δὴ συμπίπτει f) ὄψις αὐτῷ, ἀπάγει τὸ ϑεώμενον, ἅτε καὶ μάλιστα μέλλων ὄψεσθαι" πόρρῳ δὲ συμπίπτει. 626 A μεμιγμένου τοῦ φωτὸς ἤδη καὶ πολλοῦ γεγονότος: The refer-

ence to quantity of light is reminiscent of Aristotle’s theory of the well illuminated transparent medium as decisive of vision, but here the light meant is of course still that which is projected from the eyes. This quantitative argument is out of place here where the point is refraction. 626 A ὥσπερ οἱ ταῖς δυσὶν ὁμοῦ χερσὶ κατέχοντες: This expressive description of the process of vision derives from Hipparchus of Nicaea, the famous mathematician and astronomer of the 2nd c.: Aet. IV 13.9 Ἵππαρχος (ἀκτῖνας) ἀφ ἑκατέρου φησὶ τῶν ὀφϑαλμῶν ἀποτεινομένας

τοῖς

πέρασιν

αὑτῶν

olovel

χειρῶν

ἐπαφαῖς

περικαϑαπτούσας τοῖς ἐκτὸς σώμασι τὴν ἀντίληψιν αὐτῶν πρὸς τὸ ὁρατικὸν ἀναδιδόναι. Plut. mentions Hipparchus at 732 F, De Pyth. or. 402 F, De facie 921 D, De stoic. rep. 1047 D.

| A Λαμπρίας δ᾽ ὁ (ἀδελφὸς)

τὸ ‘Iegwvépov

(βιβλίον)

οὐκ

δὲ γνωχ(ὼς μ) ἕν, (αὐτὸς δὲ δι᾽) εὐφυΐαν ἐμπεσὼν (εἰς τὴν ἐκείνου Sev εἶπεν) ὅτι: The filling of the first lacuna (Steph., Amyot), can be tegarded as certain, and (εἶπεν) Paton is probable. Clem. accepts

all fillings made by Po., but τὴν ᾿Ιερωνύμου (δόξαν) seems to me questionable; I propound τὸ ‘I. (βιβλίον). The article may have been

138

TABLE TALKS I 8

626 A

changed, after the text had been corrupted, to go with εὐφυΐαν, Po. plausibly emended ἀνέγνωκεν T and filled the subsequent lacuna; δι᾿ εὐφυΐαν is frequent in Plut. (745 E ἡ δὲ (8v) εὐ- Basil.: of δὲ εὖ- T, De Pyth. or. 406 C, Alcib. 1.5, 6.1 etc. The phrase occurs 13 times in Plut.). However, a prep. phrase (or a dative) is needed after ἐμπεσών. I add εἰς τὴν ἐκείνου δόξαν, cf. De prof. in virt. 77 F ἐνέπιπτεν eic λογισμούς. The extent of the lacuna marked in T is unreliable, see

Bolk. on 617 D. - The fact that Plut. here seems to represent his brother as an advocate of the Atomistic theory of vision conflicts with his explicit presentation of him as a Peripatetic at 635 AB, and Plut. himself appears as a decided opponent of Epicureanism. This made Abram. surmise that the lacuna after éuneoóv might be longer and that not Lamprias but another, unknown, person is the speaker in the

following. Besides being contextually improbable this assumption is unnecessary. Plut. occasionally allows the participants in the Talks to be inconsistent with their own opinions. At 734 F Plut. himself speaks ironically of Favorinus who, though a Peripatetic, advances a trite argument by Democritus. However, in this case there is no marked inconsistency. It is true that Hieronymus of Rhodes was an adherent of the Peripatetic school. At Non posse 1096 A Plut. mentions him together with Arist., Theophr. and Dicaearchus; Athen. 424 F calls him ᾿Αριστοτέλους ὧν μαϑητής; and see Wehrli X 9-44. But he is known to have approached Epicureanism, especially in ethics, cf. Cic. De fin. V 5.14. Our passage (frg. 53 Wehrli) suggests that he also abandoned Aristotle's theory of vision. This is also true of Straton (frg. 113 Wehrli) and probably of Heraclides of Pontos (frg. 122 Wehrli). It is not strange, then, if Lamprias reports this somewhat specific (see

below) theory of Hieronymus. Moreover, the Atomistic theory of εἴδωλα was accepted by many non-Epicureans, e.g., Greg. Nyss. 1152 C (Vol. 44) Migne ὁ voóc ... πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἔλκει, τῶν φαινομένων τὰ

εἴδωλα. -- Daebritz, RE s.v. Hieronymos (12) 1562 suggests without any reason that he treated optics in his book Περὶ ἐποχῆς (Diog. Laert. II 105). 626 A τοῖς προσπίπτουσιν ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρατῶν (εἴδε)σιν πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν ὁρῶμεν: The doctrine of images formed of material films which sepa-

rate from the surface of the things and are transported through the air onto the eyes to effect visual perception was developed by Epicurus on the basis of the more sophisticated theory of Democritus who thought that the images make impressions (ἀποτυπώσεις) on the air which in

626A

139

TABLE TALKS I 8

turn affect the eyes. Epicur. presents his theory in Ep. ad Herod. 4651, summed up by Gell. V 16.3 Epicurus afluere semper ex omnibus corporibus simulacra quaedam corporum ipsorum eaque sese in oculos

inferre atque ita fieri sensum videndi. See Haas, Archiv Gesch. Philos.

20 (1907) 362-372. Plut., among others, speaks ironically of Epicurus

images, cf. De def. or. 420 B εἰ δὲ χρὴ γελᾶν ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ, tà εἴδωλα -γελαστέον τὰ κωφὰ καὶ τυφλὰ xai ἄψυχα κτλ. 626 A ἃ πρῶτον μὲν ἀπέρχεται μεγάλα καὶ παχυμερῆ: It is nowhere else stated,

not in Epicurean

nor

in other

sources,

that the images

when newly separated are gross and heavy and then drop their ‘earthy’ ingredients while swirling through the air. It may be, then, that this is

the particular doctrine of Hieronymus. For the similar idea concerning odours, see below, on 626 Β καὶ γάρ. 626 A τοὺς γέροντας ... βραδυπόρον καὶ σκληρὰν ἔχοντας τὴν ὅρασιν: Arist. G. A. 780 ἃ 19 discusses the deficiencies of sight in

elderly people: ξηραίνεται γάρ, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ ἄλλο σῶμα, καὶ ταῦτα τὰ μόρια (sc. τὰ ὄμματα) πρὸς τὸ γῆρας ... (26) οὐ μόνον δὲ τὰ εἰρημένα αἴτια τοῦ ἀμβλὺ ἢ ὀξὺ ὁρᾶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ τοῦ δέρματος φύσις τοῦ ἐπὶ τῇ κόρῃ καλουμένῃ" δεῖ γὰρ αὐτὸ διαφανὲς εἶναι... G1) καὶ γὰρ διὰ 1000" ot γέροντες οὐκ ὀξὺ ὁρῶσιν" ὥσπερ γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἄλλο δέρμα, καὶ τὸ τοῦ ὄμματος ῥυτιδοῦταί τε καὶ παχύτερον γίνεται γηράσκουσιν; cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 958 b 30. Theophr. De sensu 10.50, In reporting Democritus, has a similar description: ἅπαντος γὰρ ἀεὶ

γίνεσϑαί τινα ἀπορροήν᾽ ἔπειτα τοῦτον στερεὸν ὄντα καὶ ἀλλόχρων ἐμφαίνεσϑαι τοῖς ὄμμασιν ὑγροῖς καῖ τὸ μὲν πυκνὸν οὐ δέχεσθαι τὸ

ö ὑγρὸν διιέναι. διὸ καὶ τοὺς ὑγροὺς τῶν σκληρῶν ὀφϑαλμῶν ἀμείνους εἶναι πρὸς τὸ ὁρᾶν. Cf. also Plin. XI 152 quorum duri (sc.

oculi) sunt, minus cernunt quam quorum umidi. Atomists as well as Peripatetics and others based their argument on the general physiological theory of the dryness of elderly people.

626 A &v(ev)exüévvav: Amyot and Xyl. corrected the haplography. Bolk. rightly rejects ἀναχϑέντων Hu.

626 B τὰ μὲν γεώδη περιϑραύεται: The use of this verb of the friction of the air 15 rather striking and seems to be unparalleled. It is used of the grinding of the sea at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 935 a 37 δία τί và ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ ὄστρακα καὶ λίϑοι στρογγύλα γίνεται; ἢ ὅτι ὁμοίως

140

TABLE TALKS I 8

626 B

περιϑρανόμενα τὰ ἔσχατα εἰς τὸ στρογγύλον σχῆμα ἔρχεται: ... 7| δὲ ϑάλαττα πάντη κινοῦσα ὁμοίως περιϑραύει. But of course the grinding is effected, not by the water, but by the mutual scraping of the objects. This is also the way this term is used in medicine, cf. Hipp. VII 604 L., of renal calculi: ovyxoovopévwv πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐν τῇ χλονήσει περιϑραύεται καὶ διουρέεται τὸ ψαμμῶδες, and Gal. TII 162 K., of the abrading of the rims of articular cavities: £v βιαίαις κινήσεσι περιϑραυσϑεῖσαι πολλάκις αἱ τῶν ὀφρύων ἴτυες ... ἐκπεσεῖν τοῖς ἄρϑροις. 626 Β ἐναρμόττει τοῖς πόροις: The notion of passageways of various kind through which perceptional impressions get into the body is older than Atomism, cf. Parm, A 47; Alcmaeon, A 5. Emped.

taught that

the form and state of the ‘pores’ determine the nature and result of the perception; the pores must have a certain adequateness and symmetry, cf. A 86 (11 301.26 DK) τῷ ἐναρμόττειν εἰς τοὺς πόρους τοὺς ἑκάστης (sc. αἰσϑήσεως) αἰσϑάνεσθϑαι κτλ, This doctrine was developed further by the Atomists, especially as regards vision, through its combination with the εἴδωλα theory, cf. Leuc. A 29 Λεύκιππος, Δημόκριτος, Ἐπώῶιουρος κατὰ εἰδώλων εἴσκρισιν οἴονται τὸ ὁρατικὸν συμβαΐνειν πάϑος. These images pass in not only through the pores of the eyes but also those of the body: Democr. A 77 (= Plut. Q. C. 735 A) 6 φησι Δημόκριτος ἐγκαταβυσσοῦσϑαι τὰ εἴδωλα διὰ τῶν πόρων εἰς τὰ σώματα καὶ ποιεῖν τὰς κατὰ τὸν ὕπνον ὄψεις ἐπαναφερόμενα. Cf. also Adv. Col. 1109 C; Epicur. Ep. ad Herod. 47, 49, and frg. 23.46.13 Arrighetti διὰ παντὸς πόρου τοῖς εἰδώλοις διέκδυσιν οὐκ ἀ[λό]γως ἐ[πινοοῦμεν]. See further O. Luschnat, ‘Die atomistische EidolaPoroi-Theorie in Philodems Schrift De

morte', Prolegomena.

Docu-

menti e studi storici e filologici 2 (1953) 21-24; and see below, on 647 DE, 680 F, 683 A. 626B

xoi

γὰρ

προσπίπτουσιν:

αἱ This

τῶν seems

ἀνθῶν to be

ὀσμαὶ

πόρρωθϑεν

εὐωδέστεραι

a Peripatetic idea,

cf. Ps.-Arist.

Probl. 906 a 30 διὰ τί αἱ ὀσμαὶ ἧττον εὐώδεις τῶν ϑυμιαμάτων καὶ τῶν ἀνϑῶν Ex τοῦ ἐγγύς; πότερον ὅτι συναπέρχεται τῇ ὀσμῇ καὶ γῆς μόρια, ἃ προκαταφέρεται διὰ βάρος, ὥστε καϑαρὰ πορρώτερον γίνεται ἡ ὀσμή, and 907 a 24; similarly in Theophr. C. P. VL17.1o0 μὴν ἀλλ᾽ ἔνιά ye τῶν ἀνθέων ἐξ ἀποστάσεως ἢ πλησίον ἐλϑοῦσιν εὐοσμότερα καϑάπερ καὶ τὰ ἴα δοκεῖ. τὸ δ᾽ αἴτιον ὅτι πρὸς μὲν τὰ πόρρω καϑαρὰ φέρεται καὶ ἀμιγὴς ἡ ὀσμή, πλησίον δ᾽ ὄντων ὅτι

141

TABLE TALKS I 8

626 B

συναπορρεῖ τινα καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἄλλων μορίων ἅπερ οὐ διικνεῖται πρὸς τὰ πόρρω διὰ τὸ γεωδέστερα καὶ παχύτερα εἶναι. This idea was

cf. perhaps extrapolated by Hieronymus for the visual images as well, above, 626 A ἃ πρῶτον. 626 B τὴν εὐωδίαν ἐγγύϑεν χαμβανομένην: Bolk. rightly rejects Hubert’s unmotivated change into λαμβανούσης (sc. ὀσμῆς).

626 Β τὰ) μὲν ϑολερὰ καὶ γεώδη περιρρεῖ καὶ ἀποπίπτει: We should read ἀποπίπτει: ὑποπίπτει T, as above τὰ μὲν γεώδη περιϑραύεται καὶ ἀποπίπτει. The sense ‘fall off is not evidenced for ὑποπίπτειν; its meaning, ‘fall/come under/into’, is inadequate in our context, cf. Philo-

dem. Περὶ ϑεῶν III col. 15.5 Diels τὰ πρ(όσγφορα πάντα κ(αὶ) οὐχ τοῖς δ᾽ αἰσϑητηρίοις μὲν διανοίᾳ, γεννήσει περιληπτὰ ὑποπίπτοντα; Epict. I 6.4 τὰ ὄντα δὲ μὴ τοιαῦτα (sc. πεποιήκει) οἷα

ὑποπίπτειν τῇ δυνάμει τῇ δρατικῆ; Geop. II 10.2 ταῖς ὄψεσιν ὑποπίπτοντα; Soran. ΠῚ 21 μετὰ τὸ οὐρῆσαι μᾶλλον ὑποπίπτει τῇ ἁφῇ τὸ οἴδημα. Wytt. Lex. regards our instance as ‘pro ἀποπίπτω᾽. 626 B τὸ δ᾽ εἰλικρινὲς καὶ ϑεομὸν αὐτῆς: Hu., Bolk., Abram. reject

the substitution of καϑαρόν for ϑερμόν as proposed by Faehse, Doe., Hartm.; heat is regularly connected with odour by the physiologists, cf. Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. II 64 τὰ μὲν εὐώδη λεπτομεροῦς ὄντα δυνάμεως καὶ ϑερμῆς; Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. II 102 Bussem. ἢ ὅτι 1j

Coun ϑερμότης ἐστὶ καὶ τὰ εὐώδη ϑερμά, τὸ δὲ ϑερμὸν κοῦφον, ὥστε διὰ τοῦτο πορρωτέρω γίνεται ἡ ὀσμή; Ps.-Arist. Probl. 906 Ὁ 37. -Hubert’s correction αὐτῆς (sc. ὀσμῆς): αὐτοῦ T is more plausible than deletion (Po.). 626 C ἡμεῖς δὲ τὴν Πλατωνικὴν φυλάττοντες ἀρχὴν κτλ.: Plut. intimates that it was natural for him to round up the survey of theories of vision with that of Plato. Plato presents his views on vision in Tim. 45 BC τὸ γὰρ ἐντὸς ἡμῶν,

ἀδελφὸν

ὃν τούτου

(sc. τοῦ φωτὸς

τῆς

ἡμέρας) » THQ εἰλικρινὲς ἐποίησαν (sc. of ϑεοὶ) διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων ῥεῖν λεῖον καὶ πυχνὸν ... ὅταν οὖν μεϑημερινὸν ἢ φῶς περὶ τὸ τῆς ὄψεως Plate τότ

ἐκπῖπτον ὅμοιον πρὸς ὅμοιον, ξυμπαγὲς γενόμενον, κτλ.

the o ere hon

his theory as containing two factors, the inner and

ancient e ight, which coalesce to effect sight, and this is how most ommentators interpret it, e.g., Gell. V 16 Plato existimat, genus quoddam ignis lucisque de oculis exire idque, coniunctum con-

142

TABLE TALKS I 8

626 C

tinuatumque vel cum luce solis vel cum alterius ignis lumine, sua vi externa nixum efficere, ut quaecumque offenderit inlustraveritque cernamus; Plut. De def. or. 436 CD Πλάτων ὁρᾶν μὲν ἡμᾶς τῇ παρὰ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐγῇ συγκεραννυμένῃ πρὸς τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς; Alex. Aphr. In Arist. De sensu III 28.7-15 Wendland. Others interpret his theory as comprising three factors of light, probably on the basis of Tim. 67 C where Plato explains colour as φλόγα τῶν σωμάτων ἑκάστων ἀπορρέουσαν, Men. 76 D ἔστι γὰρ χρόα ἀπορροὴ σχημάτων ὄψει σύμμετρος καὶ αἰσϑητός, Theaet. 156 D, and Rep. 507 DE where

he mentions a γένος τρίτον as essential to vision. The three-factors interpretation is found at Aet. IV 13 Πλάτων κατὰ συναύγειαν, τοῦ μὲν ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν φωτὸς ἐπὶ ποσὸν ἀπορρέοντος εἰς τὸν ὁμογενῆ ἀέρα, τοῦ δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν σωμάτων φερομένου, (τοῦ δὲ περὶ) τὸν μεταξὺ ἀέρα εὐδιάχυτον ὄντα καὶ εὔτρεπτον συνεκτεινομένου τῷ πυρώδει τῆς ὄψεως. αὕτη λέγεται Πλατωνικὴ συναύγεια. (It may be noticed that the term συναύγεια is not found in Plato himself.) Cf. further Chalcid. 245 tribus ergo his concurrentibus visus existit trinaque est ratio videndi: lumen caloris intimi per oculos means ...; lumen extra positum ...; lumen quoque, quod ex corporibus visibilium specierum fluit; Macrob. Sat. VII 14.14. ergo tria ista necessaria nobis sunt ad effectum videndi. Theophr. De sensu 2.5 observes that Plato's theory of vision is a compromise: ὥσπερ ἂν εἰς τὸ μέσον τιϑεὶς tijv ἑαυτοῦ δόξαν τῶν τε φασκόντων προσπίπτειν τὴν ὄψιν καὶ τῶν φέρεσϑαι πρὸς αὐτὴν ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρατῶν. See further Haas, Archiv Gesch. Philos. 20 (1907) 372-375; Lackenbacher, Wiener Stud. 55 (1913) 57-61. 626 C πνεῦμα τῶν ὀμμάτων αὐγοειδὲς ἐχπῖπτον ἀνακίρναται τῷ περὶ τὰ σώματα φωτὶ καὶ λαμβάνει σύμπηξιν, ὥσϑ᾽ ἕν ἐξ ἀμφοῖν σῶμα δι᾽ ὅλου συμπαϑὲς γενέσϑαι: Plut. mentions this theory many times and probably always depends on the same, Hellenistic, source: De E 390 B αἰϑέρι δὲ καὶ φωτὶ διὰ συγγένειαν διαλαμπούσης τῆς ὄψεως γίγνεται κρᾶσις ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ὁμοιοπαϑὴς καὶ σύμπηξις, De def. or. 433 D ἐμοὶ δὲ δοκεῖ μάλιστα τοιαύτην πρὸς τὸ μαντικὸν πνεῦμα λαμβάνειν σύγκρασιν ψυχὴ καὶ σύμπηξιν, οἵαν πρὸς τὸ φῶς ἣ ὄψις ὁμοιοπαϑὲς γιγνόμενον, De facie 921 Ὁ φυσιολογῶν περὶ τῆς ὄψεως αὐτ(ῆς), ἣν (Wytt.: αὐτήν MSS) ópo(10) aij (Adler) κρᾶσιν ἴσχειν καὶ σύμπηξιν εἰκός ἐστι. These passages reflect Plat. Tim. 45 C, while the following sentence may have some relation to Tim. 67 C. But Plato was not Plutarch’s source here; the term πνεῦμα

is not found in his

theory of vision. See farther below, on Plutarch’s undecided terminology.

6266

TABLE TALKS I 8

143

626 C συμμετρίας λόγῳ τε καὶ ποσότητος: The transposition te λόγῳ

Re. has been generally accepted, but see above, on 622 D φειδωλὸς ἀνήρ τε καὶ μικρολόγος. -- There is a vague echo here of Plat. Tim.

67 C φλόγα τῶν σωμάτων ἑκάστων ἀπορρέουσαν, ὄψει ξύμμετρα μόρια ἔχουσαν πρὸς αἴσϑησιν and/or Men. 76 Ὁ ἀπορροὴ σχημάτων

ὄψει σύμμετρος καὶ αἰσϑητός. 626C ax ἀμφοῖν εἴς τι μέσον ... συναχϑέντων μίαν δύναμιν ἀποτελεσϑῆναι: The confusion of terms is striking: in two successive sentences Plut. arrives at making ἕν σῶμα = μία δύναμις. Only the

first term is found in Plato’s theory of vision (Tim. 45 C), which is clearly materialistic. His description of the process of vision in Tim. 67 Ὁ is also entirely in terms of matter: τὰ φερόμενα ἀπὸ τῶν ἄλλων

μόρια ἐμπίπτοντά τε εἰς τὴν ὄψιν τὰ μὲν ἐλάττω, τὰ δὲ μείζω, τὰ δ᾽ ἴσα τοῖς αὐτῆς τῆς ὄψεως

μέρεσιν εἶναι. Plut. also fails to discern

between the two kinds of outer light, that of the sun and that emanating from the objects. 626 C εἴτε ῥεῦμα χρὴ προσαγορεύειν τὸ διὰ τῆς κόρης φερόμενον

εἴτε πνεῦμα φωτοειδὲς εἴτ᾽ αὐγήν: The undecided terminology reveals the theoretical confusion. Plut. obviously uses some syncretic source like Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. III 52 Bussem. πολυκίνητος yao ἡ ὄψις οὖσα μετὰ πνεύματος αὐγὴν ἀφιέντος πυρώδους, ϑαυμαστήν τινα διασπείρει δύναμιν, ὥστε πολλὰ καὶ πάσχειν καὶ ποιεῖν δι᾽ αὐτῆς τὸν

ἄνϑρωπον' τὸ γὰρ διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων ἐχπῖπτον, εἴτε φῶς εἴτε ῥεῦμα, τοὺς ὁρῶντας ἐκτήκει καὶ ἀπόλλυσιν. This concerns the power of the evil eye, which is the subject-matter discussed in V 7 where Plut. has almost exactly the same wording at 681 B. The term πνεῦμα is not

found in Plato's vision theory; he uses ῥεῦμα, ῥεῖν (Tim. 45 BC) and ἁπορροή, ἀπορρεῖν (Men. 76 D, Tim. 67 C). The indiscriminate use of πνεῦμα and δεῦμα is common in later physiological literature, see

below, on 642 C, 647 C, 658 C, 680 F, 681 A. At De def. or. 432 Ὁ τὸ δὲ μαντικὸν ῥεῦμα καὶ πνεῦμα Plut. entirely identifies the two terms. See further C. Mugler, Dictionnaire historique de la terminologie optique des Grecs (Paris 1964) s.v. συναύγεια. 626 D (oix) ἐγγίνεται κρᾶσις πρὸς (τὸ φῶς) τὸ ἐκτὸς οὐδὲ μῖξις: The negation, added by Amyot, Xyl., is necessary. Clem. filled the lac. ° convincingly; there is no reason to assume with Hu. a more

omplicated construction προσ{πίπτοντι πρός). For the use of κρᾶσις

144

TABLE TALKS I 8

626 D

and μῖξις as synonyms, cf. 620 E, 637 E, 643 E, 652 B, 688 C, 606 B, Adv. Col. 1112 C, etc.

626 D φϑορὰ καὶ σύγχυσις: Clem. prints the old conjecture (Mez., also Emp., Dübn.): σύγκρισις T. Fuhrm. conjectures σύντηξις; Bolk. and Abram. support σύγκρουσις Faehse (ἔκτρωσις Wytt. and σύγκλυσις Bern. are improbable). Bolk. refers to Amat. 769 F and Adv. Col. 1112 B where otyxgovats is opposed to κρᾶσιςιμίξις, but both passages concern the Atomic theory, and there is nothing to indicate that this is involved here. For σύντηξις there is some support in the related passage 681.B τὸ διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων ἐκπῖπτον, εἴτ᾽ ἄρα φῶς εἴτε δεῦμα, τοὺς ἐρῶντας ἐκτήκει (Re., Psell.: ἐντήκει) καὶ ἀπόλλυσι, and at Cleom. 18.1 συντήκω is combined with διαφϑείρω: τὸ βλέμμα διεφϑαρμένον καὶ συντετηκὸς ὑπὸ λύπης. However, the context of 681 B is different, and the clear-cut meaning of σύντηξις, ‘colliquescence’, is inadequate in our passage, while σύγχυσις, ‘confusion’, ‘confounding’ has the expected meaning, cf. De exil. 599 F ἔστι δὲ καὶ χρώματα λυπηρὰ τῇ ὄψει, πρὸς ἃ γίνεται τὸ συγχεῖσϑαι καὶ μαραυγεῖν διὰ σκληρότητα καὶ βίαν ἀνίατον. Plut. combines σύγχυσις with ταραχή at Brut. rat. 990 F and De an. procr. 1022 D; cf. also De virt. et vit. 101 B. Finally, σύγχυσις is palaeographically probable. 626 D ὥστε μὴ πολλὴν μηδ᾽ ἄκρατον ἀλλ᾽ ὁμο(ιο)παϑῆ καὶ σύμμετρον; Hu. and Fuhrm. neglect Bernardakis’ correction; Clem. rightly prints it. It is supported by Plat. Tim. 45 C ἐκπῖπτον ὅμοιον πρὸς ὅμοιον, ξυμπαγὲς γενόμενον ... ὁμοιοπαϑὲς δὴ δι᾽ ὁμοιότητα πᾶν γενόμενον, as well as by Plut. De E 390 B and De def. or. 433 D (quoted above, 626 C). At De facie 921 D Adler made the same correction. Cf. also Chalcid. 244. 626 D τὰ vuxtívopa τῶν ζῴων: Abram. observes that this analogy is entirely out of place: if it were correct it would mean that elderly people, unlike younger (!), can see in the dark. Of course Plut. knew that old people instead need stronger light to be able to see. Plut. may have committed this anomaly because of the demands of the conversation; each speaker had to present a version differing from that of the others and thus was sometimes forced to exaggerate his argument and was led astray beyond logic and existing doctrines. In this case the origin of the mistake can be traced back to the exordium of the talk

626 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS I 8

145

(625 E), see below. -- The problem of vision in night-ranging animals is treated at Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. I 68: they cannot see by strong daylight because their ὀπτικὸν πνεῦμα is very weak (λεπτότατον) but by night it is strengthened (naxuvöpevov), thanks to the lower temperature, and so becomes sufficient for vision. 626 D ἡ γὰρ ὄψις αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ μεϑημερινοῦ φωτὸς ἀδρανὴς οὖσα

κατακλύζεται καὶ κρατεῖται: Plut. here makes it clear that he regards the dazzling ἀντιφωτισμός of the bright daylight as the reason why elderly people put the objects of vision farther from the eyes. This erroneous idea was already expressed at the beginning of the talk (625 E) and thus determined Plutarch’s reasoning here.

TALK 9 626 E Θέων 6 γραμματικός: For this personage, see above, on 620 A. We do not know why Plut. calls him γραμματικός, and if he is identical

with Θέων ὁ ἑταῖρος or not. — This talk is imitated in abbreviated form by Macrob. Sat. VII 13.17-27.

626 E παρὰ Μεστρίῳ Φλώρῳ:

L. Mestrius Florus was one of Plu-

tarch’s closest friends. At 650 A he counts him as one of his συνήϑεις. He participates in ten talks, and in four of these he is the host. Florus

was consul under Vespasianus (Sueton. Vesp. 22), and later, in 83/4

under Domitianus, proconsul of Asia (Syll? 820). Plut. apparently made his acquaintance in Rome;

he tells (Otho

guided him on the battlefield of Betriacum where

14.2) how Florus he had fought —

against his will — on Otho's side. He perhaps also guided Plut. at Brixellum (4. c. 18.2) and Ravenna (Mar. 2.1). Florus procured that Plut. was endowed with Roman citizenship. He adopted Florus' gentile name, Mestrius: on an inscription of Delphi (Syll.? 829 A) he appears

" Μέστριος Πλούταρχος, cf. also Suda, s.v. Πλούταρχος. Later ADS spent a long time in Greece and probably lived at Chaeronea. tok

ut one (VIII 10) of the talks in which Florus participates seem to

ἃ e place there. At 702 D Plut. calls him φιλάρχαιος, and at 734 D fact that we do not know of any work φιλόσοφος À Icated to φύσις. him byThePlut.curious is perhaps rightly explained by Ziegler, RE

v. Plutarchos, 688: he was already dead when Plut. reached his height

fa tther an author. considerably older than Sosius Senecio. See Fluss, Mestrius RE s.v. was Mestrius (3).

146

TABLE TALKS 19

626 E

626 E Θεμιστοκλέα tov Στωικόν: Plut. Them. 32.6 mentions as a descendant of the great general a Θεμιστοκλῆς ᾿Αϑηναῖος, ἡμέτερος

συνήϑης xai φίλος παρ᾽ ᾿Αμμωνίῳ và φιλοσόφῳ γενόμενος. Bolk. doubts that that man was identical with this Stoic, but the general

opinion is probably right: the two occurences of the name concern the same person. This was suggested by J. Muhl, Plutarchische Studien (Progr. Augsburg 1885) 69f. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 686 assumes that Themistocles, after he had left the Academy, became a Stoic, and

D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 240f. finds it quite natural that Plut. enjoyed the company of his former fellow-student even though he was a Stoic and that he may well have been that

already while he heard the lessons of Ammonius. One observes that both Plut. and his friend were members of the phyle Leontis (cf. on 628 A). A Themistocles and a Sarapion, both of the Statius family of

Chollidae, appear on /G IP 3704 (3rd c. A. D.). 626 E Χρύσιππος ἐν πολλοῖς: sc. βιβλίοις. SVF III 546. 626 E τάριχος, ἂν ἅλμῃ βρέχηται, γλυκύτερον γίνεσϑαι: This advice is also given by Athen. 121 D, who reports Diphilus of Siphnos, the physician-in-ordinary to Lysimachus: ὁ δ᾽ ἐκ ϑαλάσσης ἑψόμενος τάριχος γλυκύτερος γίνεται. Abram. notices that the ‘paradox’ is explained by the fact that salted fish loses some of its saltness even in

salt water if this is less salty than the fish. 626 Ε τῶν ἐρίων τοὺς πόκους ἧττον ὑπακούειν τοῖς βίᾳ διασπῶσιν ἢ

τοῖς ἀτρέμα διαλύουσιν: Abram. points out that every spinning woman in Greece knew that if her fleece had become tangled, she ought to part it gently and not by violence; it certainly takes a γραμματικός

to find that paradoxical. 626 F νηστεύσαντας ἀργότερον ἐσϑίειν ἢ προφαγόντας: The physiological causes of the feelings of hunger and thirst and the effects of taking food and drink are discussed in Talks VI 2-3. The knowledge about digestion was too insufficient to allow correct explanations. 626 F ῥᾳδίως ἡμῶν xoi ἀλόγως ὑπὸ τοῦ εἰκότος ἁλισκομένων κιλ.: Chrysippus, the founder of Stoic logic, recommended training of judgement by means of dialectic reasoning, in order to obtain freedom from precipitancy (ἀπροπτωσία) and rash conclusion. (ἀματαιότης)

147

TABLE TALKS 19

626 F

II and so be capable of irrefutable judgement (ἀνελεγξία), see SVF y 130. Chrys. believed that the Wise could obtain complete infallibilit of judgement, cf. SVF III 556 ἔτι καὶ ἀναμαρτήτους (sc. εἶναι τοὺς

σοφοὺς) τῷ ἀπεριπτώτους εἶναι ἁμαρτήματι, and frg. 548 ψεῦδος δ᾽ ... διὰ τὸ μηδὲ δοξάζειν

ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐδέποτέ φασι τὸν σοφόν,

αὐτὸν μηδ᾽ ἀγνοεῖν, But the unwise are liable to uncritical assent: SVF II 177 (p. 42.30) ἡμᾶς δὲ φαύλους ὄντας, tx ἀσϑενείας

συγκατατίϑεσϑαι ταῖς τοιαύταις φαντασίαις; cf. Plut. Adv. Col. 1122 C τὴν συγκατάϑεσιν, εἶξιν οὖσαν ὑπὸ ἀσϑενείας τῷ φαινομένῳ.

See further P. Barth, Die Stoa? (Stuttgart 1941) 51--56.

626 F ἐπιστρέφων: sc. πρὸς Θέωνα, cf. Aem. 31.8 καὶ πρὸς TOV Γάλβαν ἐπιστρέψας. Omission of the complement by this verb also

occurs at Dio Chrys. VII (12) 29 ἔπειτα ἐπιστρέψας, εἰ οὖν, ἔφη, δοκεῖ ταῦτα οὕτως κτλ.

ἀποσκηνόω,

‘encamp

apart’,

ἰδίων:

τῶν

ἀποσκήνον

οὕτως

μακρὰν

μὴ

627A

is little used,

and

only

The Plut.

verb uses it

metaphorically, cf. also De Alex. Mag. fort. 334 B ó δὲ τῶν Σκυϑῶν βασιλεὺς ... οὕτω μακρὰν ἀπεσκηνώκει và ὦτα τῶν Μουσῶν. At Demetr. 9.6 and Eumen.

15.4 the verb has it proper sense. For other

verbs of this kind (ταρασκηνόω, καταυλίζομαι, etc.) used in a similar way, see Fuhrm. Images,

749 C κατηυλίσαντο

73 n. 2, e.g., Amat.

παρὰ ταῖς Μούσαις. -- Themistocles’ utterance shows that the qualifications of the γραμματικός were regarded as linguistic and literary in the first place, not philosphical and scientific. There existed a depreciating attitude towards the γραμματιμός, cf. Epict. Enchir. 49 ἂν δὲ αὐτὸ τοῦτο τὸ ἐξηγεῖσθαι ϑαυμάσω, τί ἄλλο ἢ γραμματικὸς ἀπετελέσϑην

ἀντὶ

φιλοσόφου;

Sen.

Ep.

108.35

ne

et ipse

...

in

philologum aut grammaticum delabar. On the competence and tasks of the

γραμματικοί,

see

C.

Lehrs,

De

vocabulis

φιλόλογος,

γραμματικός, κριτικός (Progr. Königsberg 1838) 5-8. 627A καίτοι ϑερμοτέραν γε καὶ διαφανεστέραν εἰκὸς καὶ ὀνπτικωτέραν εἶναι: Bolk. points out that καίτοι is adverbial here and additio

; preceded by a full stop:

tixÓc

=

εἰκός ἐστιν; Hubert’s

consider αφανεστέραν (οὖσαν) is thus unnecessary. -- Seawater was doa re warmer than fresh water by Theophr. frg. 159 τὸ p

σιον (sc. ὕδωρ)

ϑερμοτέραν

ἔχον φύσιν,

frg. 171.6 ἡ δὲ τῆς

Attys ϑερμότης ἐξ ἐκείνου φανερὰ τῷ μὴ διαμένειν δύνασϑαι ἐν

148

TABLE TALKS 19

G27 A

ταύτῃ τὰ ἐκ τῶν ποταμῶν (sc. ϑηρία); cf. also frg. 4 De od. 50 καὶ yao ἀναστομοῦσι καὶ διαϑερμαίνουσιν οἱ ἅλες κτλ. Salt was regarded as hot, cf. below,

685 A τοὺς δ᾽ ἅλας

τάχα

μὲν

ὡς

ἐπὶ συνουσίαν

ἄγοντας ὑπὸ ϑερμότητος, 697 Β οἱ ἅλες, ϑερμοὶ γάρ εἰσι. At Ps.Arist. Probl. 932 Ὁ 7 the cause is thought to be ὅτι γῆς πολὺ ἔχει (sc. ϑάλασσα), ὥστε ξηρότερον; τὸ δὲ ξηρότερον ϑερμότερον. That hot

springs are salty was naturally well known (ibid. 937 b 23). Heat as such was credited with a cleansing action, cf. below, 697A χατακαυϑέντος (sc. τοῦ συχίνου ξύλου) fj τέφρα ῥυπτικωτάτην παρέχει κονίαν. ταὐτὰ δὲ πάντα ϑερμότητος. — The transparency of seawater is treated at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 932 b 8 διὰ τί ϑάλαττα εὐδιοπτοτέρα

τοῦ

ποτίμου,

παχυτέρα

οὖσα;

λεπτότερον

γὰρ

τὸ

πότιμον τοῦ ἁλμυροῦ. ἢ οὐ τὸ λεπτὸν αἴτιον, ἀλλ᾽ εὐθυωρίαι τῶν πόρων πλεῖσται καὶ μέγισταί εἰσιν; Plut. used a Peripatetic source for this talk, but apparently not the preserved Probl., see farther below. 627 A ἀλλὰ τοῦτό γ᾽, εἶπε, (διὰ) τῶν γεωδῶν ᾿Αριστοτέλης πάλαι ἰδιαϊλέλυκεν, (ὃ προ) βέβληκας ἡμῖν: Hu. and Po. restituted the transposed διά. Bolk. points to two examples οὗ λύω in a similar context: 702 E τὸ πρόβλημα λέλυται, 734 E ἐδόκει λελυκέναι τὴν ἀπορίαν ᾿Αριστοτέλης. For the addition (Amyot, Xyl.), cf. 673 AB and 717 A αἰνίγματα καὶ γρίφους ... προβάλλουσιν, 739 A, 741 D, Pomp. 48.11 ἐρωτήματα...

προὔβαλε. — Sandbach, JHS 93 (1973)

234 criticizes Fuhrm. for not unnecessary change διὰ τῶν referred to by Plut. may Προβλήματα, see Sandbach,

mentioning Jackson’s unsuccessful and ἑάλων (ἃ) A. (hiatus). — The work be a lost Aristotelian collection of Ill. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 223-225.

627 A {πολὺ γὰρ) τῇ ϑαλάττῃ τὸ τραχὺ καὶ γεῶδες ἐνδιέσπαρται.... μεμιγμένον: Clem. accepts Hubert’s supplementation. Fuhrm. prefers (καὶ γάρ) Amyot, Steph., but πολύ seems adequate, Plut. has πολὺ γάρ at 720 A, F Cons. ad. ux. 610 A, Quaest. nat. 917 EF, De soll. an. 960 C, Demetr. 29.6. - Fuhrm. follows Bern. in adopting παχύ Wytt., advocated by Bolk., who would also read παχύτητι (with Hirsch., Bern.) at 627 B (which, however, Fuhrm. does not accept). Bolk. notices that seawater is never called τραχύ in (Ps.-)Arist. but always παχῦ, cf. Probl. 932 b 8 διὰ τί ϑάλαττα εὐδιοπτοτέρα τοῦ ποτίμου, παχυτέρα οὖσα, 932 b 27 ἢ ὅτι παχυτέρα καὶ γεώδης 7] ϑάλαττα; 933 a

13 παχύτερον γάρ ἐστι (sc, τὸ ϑαλάττιον ὕδωρ), 934 ἃ 10 τὸ δὲ ἁλμυρὸν παχύτερον, Meteor. 359 ἃ 5 τοῦτο (sc. τὸ γεῶδες) αἴτιον καὶ

149

TABLE TALKS I 9

627 A

τοῦ βάρους... καὶ τοῦ πάχους (sc. tod ϑαλαττίου); and Macrob. Sat. VII 13.19 ait (sc. Aristoteles) enim aquam marinam multo spissiorem

esse quam est dulcis. Bolk. also refers to Plut. Quaest. nat. 911 D οὔτε

γὰρ ἐνδύεται (sc. τὸ ϑαλάττιον) ταῖς ῥίζαις ὑπὸ πάχους. Thus he rejects Hubert’s distinction, ‘mare crassum est, non partes terrestres’.

at 627 B χονιορτῷ

But this distinction is neatly made τὸ

παχύνουσι

ὕδωρ,

τῶν

μᾶλλον

ὡς

yewSOv

τῇ

πολλάκις

τραχύτητι

καταπλύνειν δυναμένων τὸν ῥύπον, cf. D. Weiss, De nonnullis Plutarchi Moralium locis ab Herwerdeno tractatis (Biponti 1888) 4f. Bolk. also considers 627 C τὸ μὲν οὖν παχυμερὲς τῆς ϑαλάττης as a support for his argument, but see below, ad loc. Also at 627 D, F that which is called τραχύ is not the seawater itself, as is the case in (Ps.-)Arist.; τὸ

ἁλμυρόν denotes the solid ingredient mixed up with it. Thus it appears that Plut. -- i.e. his source —, unlike (Ps.)-Arist., distinguishes clearly between the seawater itself and the coarse ingredients of it. If Macrob. seems to blur this distinction this is not reason enough for changing the text.

627 B μᾶλλον ἡ ϑάλαττα τούς te νηχομένους ἐξαναφέρει καὶ στέγει

τὰ βάρη: This reminds of Ps.-Arist. Probl. 933 ἃ 9 διὰ τί ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ μᾶλλον νεῖν δύνανται ἢ ἐν τοῖς ποταμοῖς; ἢ ὅτι ὁ νέων ἀεὶ ἐπιστηριζόμενος ἐν ὕδατι νεῖ, ἐν δὲ τῷ σωματωδεστέρῳ μᾶλλον ἀποστηρίζεσθϑαι δυνάμεϑα, σωματωδέστερον δέ ἐστι τὸ ϑαλάττιον ὕδωρ τοῦ ποταμίου: δυνάμενον. P

T"

ra

παχύτερον ^

γάρ ΄

ἐστι καὶ

*

μᾶλλον m

ἀντερείδειν ,

627 Β ἔστι γὰρ ἄμικτον καὶ καϑαρόν: Also the opposite opinion is to be found, see Ps.-Arist. Probl. 932 b 13 (in answer to the question why seawater is more transparent): ἢ ὅτι καϑαρώτερον ἡ ϑάλαττα; γῆ μὲν Yao οὐχ (&v)souv (Forster), fj δὲ ἄμμος βαρεῖα οὖσα ὑφίσταται. τὰ

δὲ πότιμα γεώδη. This view is entirely neglected by Plut.

627 B ὅϑεν ἐνδύεται διὰ λεπτότητα: This idea is mentioned in a different context at Ps.-Arist. Probl.

933 a 14 διὰ ti ποτε ἐν τῇ

ϑαλάττῃ πλείω χρόνον διατελεῖν δύνανται ἢ ἐν τῷ ποταμῷ; ἢ διότι τὸ

ποτάμιον ὕδωρ λεπτόν ἐστιν; μᾶλλον οὖν παρεισδυόμενον πνίγει. CE.

also Plut. Quaest. nat. 911 D οὔτε γὰρ ἐνδύεται (cf. τὸ ϑαλάττιον) ταῖς ῥίζαις ὑπὸ πάχους.

150

TABLE TALKS 19

627B

627 B ἐκτήκει τὰς κηλῖδας ... λέγειν ᾿Αοιστοτέλης: Abram. observes that the problem of washing is not treated in Ps.-Arist. Probl. and assumes that this is now lost. However, the particular question of washing in Lake Paesa is discussed in 935 b 34—936 a 4 and, in any case, Plut. did not use our Probl. as his (only) source for this talk but probably another Peripatetic collection of that kind; see above, on

627 A ἀλλὰ τοῦτό γ᾽, εἶπε. 627 B πιϑανῶς, ἔφην ἐγώ, οὗ μὴν ἀληϑῶς: Plut. expresses himself in

the same way at De def. or. 424 C ἀλλὰ ταῦτα πιϑανῶς μᾶλλον ἢ ἀληϑῶς εἴρηται, Quaest. nat. 912 A ἢ καὶ τοῦτο πιϑανὸν μᾶλλον ἢ ἀληϑές ἐστι; and below, 687 D ἐδόκει δή μοι ταῦτα πιϑανῶς μὲν ἐγκεχειρῆσϑαι, πρὸς δὲ τὸ μέγιστον ἐναντιοῦσϑαι τῆς φύσεως τέλος.

These expressions seem at first sight to indicate that Plut. was a thorough researcher, eager to arrive at the truth, but in reality he was prone to be content with τὸ πυϑανόν or τὸ εἰκός, cf. 728 F τοῦ δὲ Λευκίου... εἰπόντος, ὡς ὁ μὲν ἀληϑὴς ἴσως λόγος καὶ νῦν ἀπόϑετος

καὶ

ἀπόρρητος

εἴη,

τοῦ

δὲ

πιϑανοῦ

καὶ

εἰκότος

οὐ

φϑόνος

ἀποπειρᾶσθαι, De sera 561 B μόνῳ οὖν χρῶμαι τῷ εἰκότι. 627 B τέφρᾳ καὶ νίτρῳ, κἂν μὴ παρῇ δὲ ταῦτα, κονιορτῷ: Fuhrm. rightly prints the later form νίτρῳ (cf. 697 B, De def. or. 433 B); λίτρῳ Doe.: λίϑοι T. The form λίτρον is not found in Plut. - The word normally

denotes

sodium

carbonate,

as here,

sometimes

also other

substances. See Bliimner, Technologie IV 388 n. 1; Forbes, Technology 1Π 174-179; Schramm, RE s.v. Nitrum. There were deposits of

this substance at Clitae in Macedonia (Plin. XXXI 107 optimum copiosumque in Clitis Macedoniae, quod vocant Chalestricum, candidum purumque, proximum sali), and in Egypt (Plin. XXXI 109; Strab. XVII 1.23 ὑπὲρ δὲ Μωμέμφεώς εἰσι δύο νιτρίαι πλεῖστον νίτρον ἔχουσαι καὶ νομὸς Νιτριώτης. Its solubility is mentioned by Arist.

Meteor. 383 Ὁ 13 νίτρον δὲ καὶ ἅλες λυτὰ ὑγρῷ.

For its use for

washing, cf. Cic. Ad fam. VIII 14.4 persuasum est ei censuram lomentum aut nitrum esse ... nam sordis eluere vult, and Ps.-Arist. Probl.

ined. III 49 Bussem. τὸ δὲ 6örteıv ἄκρας ἐστὶν ἁλμυρότητος" ἰδοὺ γάρ᾽ ἅλες μὲν καὶ αὐτοὶ ῥύπτουσι, νίτρον δὲ πλέον, ὥσπερ ἐπιτεταμέvnv ἔχον τὴν ἁλμυρότητα, ἤπερ οἱ ὅλες. See further Blümner, RE s.v. Seife. ~ On the use of ash for the preparation of lye (κονία), cf. Theophr, H. P. V 9.5 δριμεῖα δὲ καὶ ἡ τέφρα καὶ ἡ κονία ἡ ἀπ’ αὐτῶν; Poll. VII 40 τὴν κονίαν ἕν τι τῶν ῥυπτικῶν, ἔστι δὲ τὸ ἐκ

151

TABLE TALKS 19

627 B

τέφρας καϑιστάμενον ὑγρόν; Gal. XII 222 K. τῆς τέφρας πλυϑείσης ἡ κονία γίνεται. -- Abram. remarks that Plutarch’s mention of κονιορτός is nonsense

here

if the word

is used

in its normal

sense,

‘dust’; if mixed with water it only becomes mud. Thuc. IV 34.2 calls a cloud of ash κονιορτός, but this meaning is impossible here because the word is opposed to τέφρα. Abram. surmises that Plut. thought of sand, which can be used for cleansing utensils. Macrob. Sat. VII 13.22

renders ‘terrenum pulverem’, without noticing the absurdity.

627B παχύνουσι td ὕδωρ, ὡς μᾶλλον τῶν γεωδῶν τῇ τραχύτητι κυταπλύνειν δυναμένων τὸν ῥύπον κτλ.: The distinction between the παχύτης of the water and the τραχύτης of the ingredient substances is clear. The relevance of τραχύτης for cleansing is seen in Plat. Tim. 65 D, referred to by Plut. Quaest. nat. 913 D καὶ ὁ Πλάτων φησὶν ἀμφοτέρους ῥδύπτειν καὶ ἀποτήκειν τοὺς χυμούς, ἧττον δὲ ταῦτα

ποιεῖν τὸν ἁλυκὸν καὶ οὐ τραχὺν εἶναι. Abram. notices that the relevant quality of τραχύτης in washing is its abrasive faculty. 627C τὸ μὲν οὖν παχυμερὲς τῆς ϑαλάττης: Plut. here uses παχυμερής, ‘having thick’, or ‘coarse, parts’, as equivalent to τραχύς, cf. Quaest. nat. 913 C γεῶδες γὰρ καὶ παχυμερές ἐστιν (sc. τὸ

ἁλμυρὸν τῆς ϑαλάττῃ.

ϑαλάττης).

Cf.

above,

on

627A

627 C ob (div κωλύει) ye τοῦτο ποιεζῖν, οὐδ᾽ χά(ϑαρσιν συνεργεῖ) διὰ τὴν δριμύτητα: Clem. reading restored by Bern. on the basis of Macrob. ergo impedit marinae aquae densitas. sed nec ideo abluit. The reading is persuasive; earlier attempts

(πολὺ

γὰρ)

τῇ

ἧττον) πρὸς τὴν rightly accepts this Sat. ΝῊ 13.22 nihil quia salsa est minus to restore the text

(Re., Hutt., Wytt.) are infortunate. Macrob. renders δριμύτης, ‘aridness » causticity', by ‘salsitas’. The doctrine of the detergent action of δριμύτης is alsa found at 684 BC τὸ ξύλον (sc. τῆς συκῆς) ὀπῶδές ἔστιν, ὥστε καιόμενον μὲν ἐκδιδόναι δριμύτατον καπνόν,

xo ΩΝ "nu j ; Á τακαυϑὲν δὲ τὴν ἐκ τῆς τέφρας κονίαν δυπτικωτάτην παρέχειν ὑπὸ δριμύτητος.

ny Ὁ καὶ γὰρ αὕτη τοὺς (πόρους) ἀναστομοῦσα καὶ (ἀνοίγουσα) ane

get τὸν ῥύπον: The supplementations (Amyot, Steph.) are ἀν ῃ, ct. Quaest. nat. 912D ἡ δριμύτης ... τοὺς πόρους ἀστομοῦσα; Theophr. frg. 4 De od. 50 πρὸς ἅπαντα δὲ fj ϑερμότης

152

TABLE TALKS I 9

627€

χρήσιμον καὶ .. «εἰς τὸ πέττειν καὶ διανοίγειν τοὺς πόρους, eic à

συμβάλλεται τὸ ἐν τῷ ἁλὶ πεποιῆσθαι’ καὶ γὰρ ἀναστομοῦσι καὶ ϑερμαίνουσιν οἱ ἅλες. In the absence of chemical knowledge the process of cleansing was looked upon as mechanical: the coarse, earthy, acrid, salty ingredients of the water opens up the weave of the

cloth and removes the dirt. 627 C ἐπεὶ δὲ πᾶν τὸ λιπαρὸν δυσέκπλυτόν ἐστι καὶ κηλῖδα ποιεῖ, λιπαρὰ δ᾽ ἡ ϑάλασσα: The impregnating and staining capacity of oil and the difficulty of removal is mentioned at 696 D ἐλαίου δὲ κηλῖδας

οὗ τῆς τυχούσης ἐστὶ πραγματείας éxxadGoa μάλιστα γὰρ ἐνδύεται τῷ μάλιστα λεπτὸν καὶ ὑγρὸν εἶναι. 627 C ὅτι δ᾽ ἐστὶ λιπαρά, καὶ αὐτὸς εἴρηχεν ᾿Αριστοτέλης: Ps.-Arist. Probl. 932 Ὁ 4 λιπαρωτέρα ἡ ϑάλαττα, 932 b 18 λιπαρὸν γὰρ ἔνεστιν ἐν τῷ ἁλμυρῷ χυμῷ, 933 a 19, 935 b 17 διὰ τί ἡ ϑάλαττα ... μᾶλλόν ἐστι εὐδίοπτος; πότερον ὅτι λιπαρωτέρα; cf. also Plin. XXXI 91 est enim etiam in sale pinguitudo. 627 C of te γὰρ ἅλες ... καὶ λύχνους βέλτιον παρέχουσι καομένους

xth.: Abram. points out that this statement is based on reality: if the wicks are dipped in brine and then dried, they burn more brightly and consume less oil, especially if salt is mixed with it. 627 C αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἡ ϑάλαττα προσραινομένη ταῖς φλοξὶ συνεκλάμπει ... διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ϑερμότατόν ἐστιν: This curious opinion is probably due to the observation that seawater is less good at extinguishing fire than fresh water, as stated at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 932 b 5 ἡ ϑάλαττα ... οὐ σβέννυσι τὴν φλόγα. This was then extrapolated: Ps.-Arist. 933 a 18 διὰ τί ἡ μὲν ϑάλαττα κάεται; 935 a 5 διὰ τί ἡ ϑάλαττα μόνον τῶν ὑδάτων κάεται; .. . πότερον ὅτι γῆν πολλὴν ἔχει; δηλοῦσι δὲ οἱ ἅλες. ἢ διότι λιπαρά; Cf. also Plut. Quaest. nat. 911 E μετέχει δὲ πολλῆςd ϑάλαττα λιπαρότητος᾽ διὸ συνεξάπτει, καί παραινοῦμεν εἰς τὰς φλόγας μὴ ἐμβάλλειν ϑαλάσσιον ὕδωρ. According to Dio Cass. L 34 the incendiary missiles used by Octavianus’ fleet at the battle of Actium could not be extinguished because Antony’s soldier had only seawater available. ~ Plutarch’s concluding remark comes out curiously; of course it is the fat, not the inflammability, which makes seawater

‘hot’; διὰ τοῦτο refers back to οἵ te γὰρ ἅλες Atmos ἔχουσιν.

627 D

TABLE TALKS T9

153

627 D ob μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ κατ᾽ ἄλλον τρόπον: This phrase reflects the common practice in the ngoßAfnata-genre, to offer alternative answers to the question

under

discussion.

Here,

however,

no

other

solution is given but rather a criterion for verification of what has just been said.

627 D ἐπεὶ τῆς πλύσεως τέλος ἡ ψῦξίς ἐστιν καὶ μάλιστα φαίνεται καϑαρὸν τὸ μάλιστα ξηρὸν γινόμενον, δεῖ δὴ τὸ πλῦνον ὑγρὸν τῷ {(ῥύπ)ῳ συνεξελϑεῖν

κτλ.:

Maas’

conjecture

ῥύψις

for ψῦξις

was

adopted by Clem. without good reason (ξήρανσις Steph., (ἀνάγψυξις (xoi ξήρανσις) Vulc.). The supplementation (06x)« Amyot, Steph. is right; but τάχιστα Doe., printed by Hu., Clem., Fuhrm., for the second μάλιστα is not persuasive. Plut. obviously regards the drying as part of the process of washing/cleansing: the washing liquid departs together with the dirt. Thus the efficiency of the drying process is relevant, not the rapidity: the second μάλιστα means ‘most effectively. (For the occasionally repetitious style in Plut., see above, on 624 E). To regard drying as an integrant process is not as odd as it might seem; the result of the washing cannot be observed with certainty until the cloth has been dried and has recovered its colours. This

may have induced the idea that (some of) the dirt is still left in the wet cloth. Only through the final process of drying, which draws out (the rest of) the dirt, is the washing/cleansing process as a whole completed and the result ascertainable. There is no good reason to change ψύξις, although the word is not found elsewhere in the sense ‘drying’. The

subsequent sentence confirms that this paragraph is about drying in particular. The meaning of τέλος here is ‘final moment’, ‘finish’; δύψις would imply that this word must mean ‘aim’, as Clem. translates: ‘since

cleansing is the aim of washing’, a banal statement indeed. The reason why Plut. used WiEtc instead of ξήρανσις here may be that he thought of the initial cooling effect of the wind on the wet cloth taken out of the (warm) washing water. 627 D τὸν ἐλλέβορον: The hellebore was one of the most important drugs of the ancient pharmacopoeia. There were two kinds of ἐλλέβορος, λευκός and μέλας (Veratrum album L. and Helleborus niger L.) used as vomitative and purgative drugs respectively, see Dioscur. IV 148 and 162. It was also credited with a preserving effect on wine: Geop. VII 12.21 ἐλλέβορος μέλας καὶ λευκὸς πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐμβαλλόμενος καϑαίρει τὸν οἶνον, καὶ μόνιμον ποιεῖ, καὶ τοὺς

154

TABLE TALKS 19

627D

χρωμένους ὠφελεῖ. Further it was used for abortative purposes, to stimulate sneezing and as a sedative for mental patients, cf. below, 656 E-657 A, 693 AB; Aristoph. Vesp. 1489. The general curative effect on illness suggested in our passage is stated of the white helle-

bore by Plin. XXV 51 candidum autem vomitione causasque morborum extrahit, ibid. 58 claro Herophili praeconio, qui helleborum fortissimi ducis similitudini aequabat; concitatis enim intus omnibus ipsum in primis exire. See further J. Berendes, Des Pedanios Diosku-

rides aus Anazarbos

Arzneimittellehre

(Stuttgart

1902)

444-448;

Stadler, RE s.v. Helleboros. 627 D δνοξήραντόν ἐστιν: The salty residue left when seawater evapo-

rates appears to be moist. 627 D ᾿Αριστοτέλης γὰρ ἐν vo αὐτῷ βυβλίῳ φησὶν τοὺς ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ λουσαμένους τάχιον ἀποξηραίνεσϑαι κτλ.: This is similar to

Ps.-Arist. Probl. 932 Ὁ 25 διὰ τί λουσάμενοι τῇ ϑαλάττῃ ϑᾶττον ξῃραίνονται,

βαρυτέρᾳ

οὖσῃ

τῶν

ποτίμων;

ἢ ὅτι

παχυτέρα

καὶ

γεώδης ἡ ϑάλαττα; ὀλίγον οὖν ἔχουσα τὸ ὑγρὸν ξηραίνεται ϑᾶττον. Abram. observes that the clause ἂν ἐν ἡλίῳ στῶσιν is not found in this text and thinks that it was added by Theon. Instead it indicates that Plut. used another Aristotelian collection of problems now lost, see above, on 627 A. From that work may also derive Quaest. nat. 911 D

τὰ σώματα τῶν λουσαμένων τραχεῖαν τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν.

ἐν ϑαλάττῃ

ξηρὰν

εὐϑὺς

ἴσχει καὶ

627 E ἀλλ᾽ ᾧμην σε μᾶλλον ᾿Ομήρῳ τἀναντία λέγοντι πιστεύειν: This is the second time in this talk that Plut. dismisses Theon’s argu-

ment when he makes Arist. his support, cf. 627 B. 627 F ἐπίπαγος: Abram. notices that Plut. has this word only here and

at 641 E; otherwise it is only found in medical and pharmacological texts.

627 F μέχρι ἂν αὐτὸ

ποτίμῳ

καὶ γλυκεῖ

κατακλύσωσιν:

Fuhrm.

points out that this is probably a paraphrase of Plat. Phaedr. 243 D ποτίμῳ λόγῳ οἷον ἁλμυρὰν ἀκοὴν ἀποκλύσασθϑαι. Plut. quotes this passage at 706 D, 711 D and δὲ esu carn. 997 Ἐ-998 A. By the concealed allusion to this fitting passage of Phaedr. combined with the Homeric quotations, Plut. gives the talk an elegant conclusion. There

627 F

155

TABLE TALKS 1 9

638 A, are many examples showing that he was intent upon this, cf. 648 A, 651 E, 657 E, 664 A, 675 CD. TALK

10

Fuhrm. (p. 12) compares this talk with Arist. 19.6 and concludes that Plut. used the atthidograph Cleidemus’ Protagonia as his direct source for this talk as a whole. This is a somewhat hasty conclusion. Although itis probably true that Plut. knew Cleidemus’ work directly we cannot

be sure that he used it for this talk; the citation (628 B) of Neanthes of Cyzicus indicates that this source cannot be excluded; and the anec-

dote of Democritus told by Philopappus (628 B-D) could derive from

his Περὶ ἐνδόξων ἀνδρῶν, or from some anecdotic work by a third

author. We should leave it open whether Plut. used one or more of these possible sources. Cf. below, on 628 E ταῖς Σφραγίτισι Νύμφαις. 628 A ἐν δὲ τοῖς Σαραπίωνος

ἐπινικίοις: Abram.

observes that the

connective particle is seldom used at the beginning of a talk which is not a sequel to the preceding one. In fact, this is the only instance. — Sarapion of Athens, the poet and Stoic philosopher, was a friend of Plut., who dedicated the dialogue De E to him (384 D). Sarapion took

part in the discussion at Delphi reported in De Pyth. or. (396 D), where he appears as a man of conservative outlook, of Stoic attitude, and with a profound belief in providence and the prophetic power of oracles. His poetry is characterized at 396 F: ποιήματα γὰρ γράφεις τοῖς μὲν πράγμασι φιλοσόφως καὶ αὐστηρῶς, δυνάμει δὲ καὶ χάριτι καὶ κατασκευῇ περὶ λέξιν ἐοικότα τοῖς ᾿Ομήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου. Stob. I 10.2 quotes two jambic trimeters by a certain Serapion, perhaps this one. For the attribution to him of the hexameters on the duties of a Physician inscribed on the ‘Sarapion Monument’ which was apparently

erected in the Asclepieum, on the south slope of Acropolis, presumably in honour of his grandson,

Q.

Statius S., see Maas

and

Oliver,

Bull. Hist. Med. 7 (1939) 321-323, and Flaceliére, REG 64 (1951) 325327. For further discussions

on S., see Flaceliére,

Plutarque,

Sur les

oracles de la Pythie (Paris 1937) 22-24; U. v. Wilamowitz-Moellen-

M eine Schriften IL (1941) 217f.; Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, amo; nhough Plut. disapproved of Stoicism he counted many Stoics soie

is friends and acquaintances, see D. Babut, Plutarque et le

Ont ii (Paris 1969) 239-270, for Sarapion in particular, pp. 246-248. emistocles the Stoic, cf. above, on 626 E. — Fuhrm.

presumes

156

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 A

that the choral contest was a dithyrambic competition and surmises that Sarapion might himself have written the dithyrambs for the chorus he instructed. There was a renaissance of choral lyric at the time, see

Reisch, RE s.v. Χορικοὶ ἀγῶνες, 2438. Wilamowitz, Sitzungsber. Ak. Berlin 1928:1.22 n. suggests that Sarapion's victory can be dated in 100-110, while C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 27 holds that the festival was the Dionysia of 97, celebrated with unusual magnificence because of the assassination of Domitian in September 96, cf. IG IP? 3112; for the revised date, see Notopoulos, Hesp. 18

(1949) 12 on the date, 96/7, of IG IP 1759. 628 A τὸν χορὸν διατάξας: Doe. proposed διδάξας. Hu. assents; διατάττω is not found elsewhere in Plut. with χορός as an object. Διδάσκω is the normal verb but Plut. also uses ἀσκέω (Dion 17.5). 628 A ἡμῖν ἅτε δὴ καὶ φυλέταις οὖσι δημοποιήτοις:

Only through

this casual reference are we informed of the interesting fact that Plut. was an Athenian citizen, adopted as a member of the phyle Leontis. Fuhrm. - supporting Flaceliere, REG 64 (1951) 325 — considers it highly probable that this appointment was due to Sarapion’s mediation. On two inscriptions, Hesp. Suppl. VIII (1949) 243-246 (IG IP

3796), and IG II? 3558 (late 1st ~ early 2nd c. respectively) Sarapion and Ammonius appear as members of the deme Chollidae of Leontis. This Ammonius is presumably identical with Plutarch's teacher. We may suppose that Plut. also belonged to that deme, as suggested by Jones, HSCP 71 (1966) 207f. His fellow student at the Academy, Themistocles (Them. 32.6, cf. above, on 626 E), also belonged to Chollidae. - Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 653 suggests that Plut. perhaps wrote the declamation Πότερον ᾿Αϑηναῖοι κατὰ πόλεμον ἢ κατὰ σοφίαν ἐνδοξότεροι as an act of gratitude for the assignment of the citizenship. Abram. considers on the contrary that it is more probable that he was rewarded for having written it. 628 A ἀγωνοθϑετοῦντος ἐνδόξως καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῶς Φιλοπάππου τοῦ βασιλέως (καὶ) ταῖς φυλαῖς ὁμοῦ πάσαις χορηγοῦντος: Bolk. brought up the addition (Amyot) which had been neglected because of the fact that Xyl. took τοῦ βασιλέως as designating the emperor and thus explained the asyndeton. Re. observed that the epithet belongs to Philopappus. He is called βασιλεύς on a choregic monument (IG IP 3112) and other inscriptions; Bolk, points out that βασιλεύς is used

157

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 ἃ

with or without the art. (Po. deleted it). Philopappus, grandson of king an Antiochus of Commagene who was dethroned in 72 A. D., was Athenian citizen and lived there the major part of his life. As a patron of the arts he apparently was on friendly terms with Plut. who dedicated his essay De ad. et am. to him. In the decree of the phyle Oeneis,

IG IP 3112 (dated 96/7, see Notopoulos, Hesp. 18 (1949) 12) Philopappus, who

was

then

archon,

was

honoured

as ἀγωνοϑέτης

of the

Dionysia. The document may refer to the same occasion as this talk. Clem. presumes that Sarapion was nominally choregus for Leontis

while Philopappus defrayed the expenses for all phylae together and

thus was de facto choregus. 628 B τῶν παλαιῶν τὰ μὲν λέγων τὰ 0 ἀκούων: At De Pyth. or. 396 Ε-397 B Sarapion appears as a laudator temporis acti especially as regards poetry; here Philopappus is also presented as interested in old times. 628 B ind Μάρκου

τοῦ γραμματικοῦ:

Marcus takes part in IX 5

where (740 E-F) he settles the discussion through a display of his good

knowledge of Homer and his capacity as an interpreter of the Poet. He is otherwise unknown. 628 B Νεάνϑη τὸν Κυξικηνὸν ἔφη λέγειν ἐν τοῖς κατὰ πόλιν μυϑικοῖς: There are two historians of Cyzicus named Neanthes. According

to Suda the elder was a pupil of Philiscus of Miletos and thus probably

lived at the beginning of the 3rd c. B. C. (see Laqueur, RE s.v. Neanthes; the younger wrote a History of Attalus (241-197), cf. Athen. 699 D. The work cited here was assigned to the elder N. by Susemihl I 618f. and by Jacoby, FGrHist Il C 84 pp. 144. It comprised at least five books (Porphyr. V. Pyth. 1). Κατὰ πόλιν may mean either ‘of the city , Le. Athens, or ‘of the cities’. Laqueur, o. c. 2109f. and Fuhrm.

mistakenly thought that the phrase could also refer to Cyzicus exclu-

sively. The phyle Aiantis has nothing to do with that city. Hershbell, Hermes 105 (1977) 182 assumes that Plut. knew the works of Neanthes well; however, he only cites him twice (Them. 1.2, 29.11) besides our Passage (and below, 628 D).

i ᾿ τὸ μὴ κρίνεσϑαι τὸν (ἐκείνης) χορὸν ἔσχατον: Fuhrm. adopts M

ΕΓ 8 supplementation; Clem. accepts (ταύτης) Hu. Abram. disSes at some length the question whether Neanthes meant the order

158

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 B

of presentation on the stage or the position of ranking. Lugebil, Jahrb.

f. class. Phil. Suppl. V (1864/72) 647, and A. Boeckh, Opuscula IV (1874) 93 thought of the first alternative. But how could it be regarded as a privilege not to appear last? That this is instead an advantage was well known, cf. Aristoph. Eccl. 1162 at μόνον μνήμην ἔχουσι τῶν

τελευταίων ἀεί. On the other hand it is at least equally improbable that there should have existed a restriction on the free judgement as to what performance should be classed as the worst. We know that all of these were ranked down to the last: Is. V 36 οὗτος γὰρ τῇ μὲν φυλῇ εἰς Διονύσια χορηγήσας τέταρτος ἐγένετο, τραγῳδοῖς δὲ καὶ πυρριχισ-

ταῖς ὕστατος. The company was certainly right in doubting the truth of Neanthes’ statement. The explanation suggested by Clem. (p. 103) is

plausible: he extrapolated it from the fact that Aiantis was never listed last on official inscriptions.

628 B (εὐχερὴς) μὲν οὖν, ἔφη, noö(s &nóbóci)Ew ἱστορίας ὁ ἀνα(γράψας), εἰ δὲ τοῦτό γ᾽ οὐ[ν] νοϑεύει: Clem. admits the supplementations by Po., Wytt., and Miiller respectively (Amyot corrected γοῦν). Thus restored, the text presents the expected sense. Neanthes

was obviously notorious for being unreliable. This can be inferred from the fact that the main part of the preserved fragments are anecdotes, see FGrHist 11 A 84 pp. 191-202. 628 B τοῦ ἑταίρον Μίλωνος: M. is unknown, appears only here. 628 B οὐδέν, ἔφη, δεινόν, ὁ Φιλόπαππος: Plut. presents Philopappus as a man who highly appreciates discussion and erudition: even a discussion on unreal subjects is valuable, namely as an exercise in epideictic eloquence; see the end of the anecdote (628 D). Philopappus chooses an effective example indeed, the search for the cause of a pure fiction; in the case of Neanthes the problem could at least be real.

628 B Δημοχρίτῳ (τῷ) σοφῷ κτλι: A 17a DK. Diels notes that this anecdote (found only here) is a parody of Democritus’ etiological method and refers to the mockery of D. by Theophr. C. P. VI 2.1 (A 130 DK). Abram. remarks that the irony of the anecdote also hits the

very attitude of philosophic men towards the problems: the exaggerated and sometimes unrealistic ζητητικόν makes them discuss even fictive problems. Abram. observes the astonishing fact that the ban-

queters are not at all affected by the irony themselves but instead

159

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 B

gladly take it as a summons to an investigation of the problem under

s about discussion. — The anecdote is an example of popular storie he intellectuals; another one is that of Thales who fell into a well when

was walking along observing the stars (Diog. Laert. 1 34 (1 70.30 DK)).

628 C γενόμενος ϑεατής: Abram. notices that this emphatic phrase makes a comic effect, which was certainly intended. 628 C εἰς ἀγγεῖον ἐθέμην μεμελιτωμένον: The verb is found only once elsewhere, Thuc. IV 26.8 μήκωνα μεμελιτωμένον, ‘sweetened’. Here it has been interpreted as meaning ‘fill with honey’ (LSJ and

other dictionaries). Bolk., following Xyl., suggests that the participle means ‘smeared with honey’, i.e. that the jar had been smeared with honey to prevent putrefaction of the victuals. The references given by

Bolk. in support of this interpretation (Plin. XXII 108; Colum. IX 15.13; Hor. Epod. 2.15) are, however, irrelevant. Abram. gives the correct interpretation: an emptied honey-jar not yet cleaned is meant.

The preservative effect of honey is mentioned by Plin. J. c. mellis quidem ipsius natura talis est, ut putrescere corpora non sinat; Geop.

IV 15.21 φυλάττεται ἡ σταφύλη καὶ εἰς μέλι, VII 17 μέλι

Attixov

ἔγχεε εἷς τὸν πυϑμένα τοῦ κεραμίου, πρὶν βληϑῆναι τὸν οἶνον. Plin.

XV 65 states that quinces can be preserved if they are dipped in honey, cf. Colum. XII 10.5 nullum esse genus pomi, quod non possit melle servari. - As to Democritus, cf. Athen. 46 F ἔχαιρε δὲ ὁ Δημόκριτος aa τῷ μέλιτι: καὶ πρὸς τὸν πυϑόμενον πῶς ἂν ὑγιῶς τις διάγοι, ἔφη εἰ τὰ μὲν ἐντὸς μέλιτι βρέχου, τὰ δ᾽ ἐκτὸς ἐλαίῳ. Cf. also his report at

4 A: Λύκος δὲ πολυχρονίους φησὶν εἶναι τοὺς Κυρνίους (οἰκοῦσι δ᾽ οὔτοι περὶ Σαρδόνα) διὰ τὸ μέλιτι ἀεὶ χρῆσϑαι.

628 cD ἀποκναίσας, εἶπεν, [καὶ] οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐπιϑήσομαι τῷ λόγῳ: ans reading proposed by Fuhrm. is persuasive: ἀπέκναισας T. This ‚orm was already suspected by Wytt. Anim. 1319: ‘non "enecasti", sed ΟΝ

"de

spe dejecisti”’.

Clem. translates:

‘that was

very

there des of you’. None of these meanings is evidenced elsewhere and

that hoe not seem to be any good reason to assume something like philos τ seeing that it is not to be expected as natural that the after Fe hag ould continue the conversation with the woman at all also got the definitive answer. To understand pé as an object is

ess natural than τὸ o(xvov, which the woman has just mentioned. That καί, and not ἀλλά, was interpolated is unproblematic (see

160

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 CD

Fuhrm.); cf. Kühner-Gerth? II 248 and, for more exx., J. Blomquist, Das sogenannte καί adversativum (Uppsala 1979) 44—54; see also above, on 610 B.

628 D ἐγγυμνάσασϑαι γὰρ ... ὁ λόγος παρέξει: Plut. uses the verb in a similar way at Dem. 6.1 ἐγγυμνασάμενος ... ταῖς μελέταις.

628 D πρὸς δόξαν αὐτῇ ὑπῆρχεν: Bolk. criticizes the mention of the conjecture αὐτῆς Bens. by Bern. and Hu., by reference to 628 F ταῖς ἄλλαις φυλαῖς ὑπάρχει. Bolk. censures Benseler's ambition to elimi-

nate all instances of hiatus in Plut. It is true that Plut. was careful to avoid hiatus, but he did not uphold this principle rigorously. Bolk. collects a large number of exx., see pp. 60f., 105f., 111, 123£., 131. See further above, on 624 E. Plut. declares his opinion about hiatus at

De glor. Ath. 350 E: πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἔμελλεν ἄνϑρωπος ψόφον ὅπλων φοβεῖσϑαι καὶ σύρρηγμα φαλάγγων ὁ φοβούμενος φωνῆεν φωνήεντι συγκροῦσαι, and De vit. pud. 534F ἐνίους γοῦν ὁρῶμεν οὐδὲ φωνήεντι συγκροῦσαι φωνῆεν ἐν τῷ λέγοντι ὑπομένοντας. The exag-

gerated view held by Bens., and to a large extent still by Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 933-936, has gradually been abandoned. Abram. proposes as a tenable rule not to eliminate hiatus except in passages where the text is evidently corrupt. 628 D ὁ Μαραϑὼν ... δῆμος ὧν ἐκείνης τῆς φυλῆς: Unlike the deme Aphidna, Marathon always belonged to Aiantis; see below. 628 D τοὺς περὶ Ἁρμόδιον Αἰαντίδας ἀπέφαινον, ᾿Αφιδναίους ye δὴ τῶν δήμων γεγονότας: Fuhrm. observes that this alludes to the discus-

sion in antiquity as to the origin of the ‘tyrannocides’, Harmodius and Aristogeiton, on the basis of Hdt.

V 55-62.

Hdt.

states that they

belonged to the Γεφυραῖοι, a clan of Eretria of Euboea which settled first in Boeotia (Tanagra) but was banished and moved to Attica. However, Hdt. says nothing as to where they settled; thus Hdt. and

Plut. complement each other: the clan apparently settled in Aphidna. According to Etym.

Mag.

s.v. Γεφυρεῖς,

there was an Attic deme

called Gephyreis. No other source mentions this deme. Fuhrm. believes in that information and supposes that this deme was separated out of Aphidna ‘bien plus tard’ than the time of Cleisthenes. It seems more safe to think that the clan continued to live as a distinct group within the deme of Aphidna. On the clan, see further J. Tópffner,

628 Ὁ

161

TABLE TALKS I 10

10. - Plut. Attische Genealogie (Berlin 1889) 293-300; and cf. Strab. IX bly neglects that at his time Aphidna did not belong to Aiantis; proba

in 22453 (for the date, see Meritt, Hesp. 38 (1969) 439-441) this deme was separated out of Aiantis to join the new phyle of Ptolemais. See

Busolt, Staatskunde? 11933, 973; J. Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica II 518 (for the *tyrannocides', I 124 f., 151f.). But of course Plut. did not

need to consider the contemporary situation; the discussion concerned old times. Later, perhaps in 124/5, Aphidna was made part of the new

phyle Hadrianis. See A. G. Woodhead, The Study of Greek Inscriptions? (Cambridge 1981) 114 f. and further Schoeffer, RE s.v. Δῆμοι,

47-50; Traill, Hesp. Suppl. XIV (1975) 12f., 29f., 53.

628 D Γλαυκίας δ᾽ ὁ ῥήτωρ: Although Plut. held a critical attitude towards rhetoric (cf. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 928-931), he seems

to have counted Glaucias the rhetor among his good friends. He is the host at a banquet at Eleusis (II 2) and also takes part in VII 9-10 and IX 12-13; see further J. Muhl,

Plutarchische Studien

(Progr.

Augs-

burg) 53-55. 628 D τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας Αἰαντίδαις ... ἀποδοϑῆναι: The right wing was the most honourable place in the battle line because it was the most dangerous one, cf. Hdt. IX 28; Thuc. V 71; see A. Bauer, Die griechischen Kriegsaltertümer? (München 1893) 325f. According to

Hdt. VI 111 it was an Athenian custom at the time of the battle of Marathon that the polemarch commanded the right wing; cf. Eur. Suppl. 656, and see E. Curtius, Griechische Geschichte® 1I (Berlin 1888) 812.13.

628 E ταῖς Αἰσχύλου δὴ μαρτυρίαις ἔλεγε πιστούμενος: The corrupt passage: ταῖς Ai. τὴν μεϑορίαν ἐλεγείαις m. T was convincingly emended by Abram. and Fuhrm. Abram. reads: ταῖς Αἰ. δὴ μαρτυρίon (ἐν) ἐλεγείαις π., and points out that A. is said to have written not

T. epigrams but also elegies on the battle of Marathon, see Aesch. x feeding’ 371.24, 15-18, and 373f. Murray, and cf. Theophr. H. P. that " M Fuhrm. rightly suggests that the corruption may be due to Bern solution of the problem of the lacking finite verb is convincing ram - proposed ῥήτωρ (ἔφη) or (ἔλεγε). — For the Marathon epi5, see B. D. Meritt in: The Aegean and the Middle East. Studies

Presen H. Goldman ( (New York 1956) ) 268-2 i AJP 83 (1962) ted294 to 298. 268-280, and id.

162

TABLE TALKS I 10

628 E

628 E Καλλίμαχον ἀπεδείκνυεν τὸν πολέμαρχον ἐξ ἐκείνης ὄντα τῆς φυλῆς κτλο: The appurtenance of Callimachus to Aphidna is evidenced through the dedication he made before the battle which is preserved in

fragments: IG I? 609 (= M. N. Tod, A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions Y no. 30) and Jacoby, Hesp. 14 (1945) 158 n. 8. Plut. here

depends on Hdt. VI 109-110: before the battle the opinions of the ten generals were divided whether to commit to battle immediately or not;

Miltiades persuaded Callimachus to decide in his capacity of polemarch in favour of immediate battle. The heroic death of C. in the

battle (Hdt. VI 14) is also mentioned by Plut. De glor. Ath. 347 D and Cato Mai. 29.2, and by Diog. Laert. I 56. For the question as to whether the polemarch still held the supreme command so as to rule

out the will of the generals (Arist. Ath. pol. 22.2 τῆς δὲ ἁπάσης στρατιᾶς ἡγεμὼν ἦν ὁ πολέμαρχος) or not, see Lugebil, Jahrb. f. class. Philol. Suppl. V (1864/72) 646f.; C. Hignett, A History of the Athenian Constitution (Oxford 1952) 170-173; Busolt, Staatskunde? II 881.

628 E ἐγὼ δὲ tà Γλαυκίᾳ προσετίϑην: Herw. would read τοῖς Γλαυκίου, but Abram. is probably right in supposing that the phrase is an example of careless colloquial style. 628 E τὸ ψήφισμα, καϑ' ὃ τοὺς ᾿Αϑηναίους ἐξήγαγεν: This decree is mentioned by Arist. Rhet. 1411 a 10 and Dem. XIX 303, while Hdt. says nothing about it. The decree was obviously informal, taken in

emergency, cf. Schol. Arist. Rhet. I. c. (Comm. in Arist. XXT:2. 204.25 Rabe) 6 Μιλτιάδης μαϑὼν τὸν Ξέρξην, ὅτι στρατεύεται κατὰ τῆς Ἑλλάδος, μὴ βουλευσάμενος Efe κατὰ τοῦ Ξέρξου, The Scholiast indicates that τὸ ψήφισμα τοῦ Μιλτιάδου became proverbial: τοῦτο ἦν τὸ μή βουλεύσασϑαι, According to Suda, s.v. Ἱππίας (p. 660.21 Adler), Callimachus the polemarch, together with eight generals, had already supported the decree when it was taken in Athens. Thus, the decision made at Marathon to enter into battle will have been only a confirmation of this decree.

628 E ὅτι περὶ τὴν ἐν Πλαταιαῖς μάχην εὐδοκιμήσειεν ἡ φυλὴ μάλιστα: Hdt. ΙΧ 70 says nothing of the part played by the Aiantides; he only reports that 52 Athenians fell in this battle. Plut. Arist. 19.6, citing the atthidograph Cleidemus, gives exactly this number and emphasizes that πάντες ἐκ τῆς Αἰαντίδος φυλῆς... ἀγωνισαμένης ἄριστα. This low Athenian casualty rate is not credible (the total

628 E

TABLE TALKS I 10

number of Greek casualties is said (/. course the statement that all Athenian true, The explanation tried by Fuhrm., ment of that phyle was left to be seen

163

c.) to have been 1360), and of casualties were Aiantides is not that only the sepulchral monuby Herodotus and Cleidemus is

hardly acceptable. 628 Ε ταῖς Σφραγίτισι

Νύμφαις

τὴν

ἐπινίκιον

καὶ πυϑόχρηστον

ἀπῆγον Αἰαντίδαι ϑυσίαν εἰς Κιϑαιρῶνα: Plut. Arist. 11.3-4 reports that the Pythian oracle ordained the Athenians before the battle to make vows on the Cithaeron to Zeus, Hera, Pan and these nymphs,

and to pay sacrifices to a number of heroes there. And the sacrifice after the victory is reported at 19.6: διὸ καὶ ταῖς Σφραγίτισι Νύμφαις

ἔϑυον Αἰαντίδαι τὴν πυϑόχρηστον ϑυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῆς νίκης, ἐκ δημοσίου τὸ ἀνάλωμα λαμβάνοντες. The agreement shows that Cleidemus was the source for our passage but not necessarily directly. Plut. Arist.

11.4 informs us that the Sphragitid nymphs were worshipped in a cave on a peak in the western part of the Cithaeron, that there was formerly an oracle and that many inhabitants of the district were νυμφόληπτοι,

possessed of oracular power (cf. Plat. Phaedr. 238 D and 241 E; and Poll. 119). Paus. IX 3.9 also mentions the cave, the nymphs and the prophetic gifts conferred upon young girls. See

FGrHist III B 323.22 p.

58 and ΠῚ B 1 pp. 82f.; Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? 1 249, 251; H. W. Parke & D. E. W. Wormell, The Delphic Oracle Π 45 no. 102. — The etymology of Σφραγίτιδες (σφραγίς) is uncertain. The derivation from σφάραγος, ‘murmur of springs or brooks’ (Hesych. s.v.: βρόγχος,

τράχηλος, λαιμός, ψόφος) proposed by C. A. Lobeck, Paralipomena grammaticae Graecae 1 (Lipsiae 1837) 50 n. 59, is hesitatingly accepted by Frisk, s.v. σφραγίς.

628 F καὶ πρώτην γε τὴν ἐμὴν ἴστε δὴ τὴν Λεοντίδα μηδεμιᾷ δόξης ὑφιεμένην: ΒΟΙΚ. interprets ἴστε as imperative, rightly as it seems, but Clem. and Fuhrm. keep the traditional interpretation, the indicative. Bolk. points to the lively style of the passage as a indication that the form is imperative. Also the following σκοπεῖτε δή, and the negative μηδεμιᾷ suggest that. The imperative of οἶδα is normally followed by

μή, cf. Aeschyl. Ag. 932 γνώμην μὲν ἴσϑι μὴ διαφϑεροῦντ᾽ ἐμέ; Eur.

Andr. 726 τἄλλ᾽ ὄντες ἴστε μηδενὸς βελτίονες; Isocr. V 133 εὖ δ᾽ ἴσϑι μηδὲν ἄν με τούτων ἐπιχειρήσαντά σε πείϑειν.

164

TABLE TALKS I 10

629 A

629 A σκοπεῖτε δή, μὴ πιϑανώτερον λέγεταί τι παραμύϑιον ... τὸ γινόμενον: Bolkestein's correction τι: τό T (Re., Hartm. deleted the

art.) is certain, cf. 613B

ἦν τι τοῦτο τῆς ἀμαϑίας

οὐκ ἀτυχὲς

παραμύϑιον, Luc. 4.1 παραμύϑιόν τι δοκεῖ τῆς Σύλλα χαλεπότητος yevéodat. The ind. λέγεται, changed by Re. into the subj., is correct; μή with the ind. is often used after the imper. of verbs with the sense ‘see’, ‘consider’, cf. 630 A ὅρα, μὴ... ἐπιδείκνυσι, 708 A ὅρα... μὴ δεδώκασιν, 722 E, 740 D; Plat. Lach. 196 C ὁρῶμεν μὴ Νικίας οἴεταί τι λέγειν, Lys. 216 C σκεψώμεϑα μὴ ἡμᾶς λανϑάνει τὸ φίλον. See

Kühner-Gerth? II 395.6 b. 629 A τοῦ ἐπωνύμον sthenes reformed the them ἐπιχωρίων δ᾽ Αἴαντος" τοῦτον δέ, προσέϑετο. 629 A λέγεται...

τῆς φυλῆς: Hdt. V 66 states that when Cleioriginal four Attic tribes into ten he renamed ἑτέρων ἡρώων ἐπωνυμίας ἐξευρών, παρὲξ ἅτε ἀστυγείτονα καὶ σύμμαχον, ξεῖνον ἐόντα .

εἶναι τὸ γινόμενον: Abram. doubts that the present

participle could refer to the past time, which it ought to (cf. 628 B ὑπῆρχεν τὸ μὴ κρίνεσθαι), but this occasionally occurs, e.g., after a verb of saying, see Kühner-Gerth? I 200 Anm. 9. 629 A οὐ γὰρ εὔχολος ἐνεγκεῖν ἧτταν ὁ Τελαμώνιος κτλ.: This witty

‘explanation’ is inspired by Od. XI 543-567. When Odysseus meets Aiax, his former rival, in Hades he observes that he is still angry because

Odysseus was awarded the arms of Achilleus as being the

bravest of the Achaeans, which made him so desperately disappointed that he killed himself. The story was frequently used as a theme by the

poets (Soph. Aiax) or was referred to by later writers (Lucian. Dial. Mort. 29; Paus, 1 35.3; Anth. Pal. VII 152; Ovid. Met. XIII 385-398. 629 A ὑπ᾽ ὀργῆς καὶ φιλονικίας: So Abram. (with unnecessary hesitation): φιλονεικίας T. The sense needed in this context is ‘envy’, not

‘contention’. Plut. also uses the two nouns together at Pomp. 35.2: ὑπ᾽ ὀργῆς xoi φιλονικίας, and cf. below, 724 B φίλαϑλος ἄλλως (xoi) φιλόνικος (Wytt.: φιλόνεικος T). For φιλονεικία, cf. De def. or. 431 D ἔριδος ἐκποδὼν οὔσης xoi φιλονεικίας ἁπάσης, De cap. ex inim. 91 CD ἐν διαφοραῖς πρὸς ἀνθρώπους καὶ φιλονεικίας, 92 AB ἀπαλλαγῆς ἐρίδων καὶ φϑόνων καὶ φιλονευκιῶν.

69A

TABLE TALKS I 10

165

629A εἰς τὴν ἐσχάτην χώραν μηδέποτε τὴν φυλὴν αὐτοῦ χαταβαλόντας: As a matter of fact, Aiantis held the paenultimate or

the antepaenultimate place in the official lists of Athenian phylae. On inscriptions Aiantis is also occasionally found on the antepaenultimate, but never on the last place; see /G 11 943, JG 11:5. 834 b Col. 1158, IG

II 172; Busolt, Staatskunde? II 973; A. G. Woodhead, The Study of Greek Inscriptions? (Cambridge

1981)

113-115.

Clem.

surmises that

the solution presented by Plut., and even the subject itself may have been inspired by this fact.

BOOK

II

PROOEMIUM 629 ( τὰ μὲν ἀναγκαίων ἔχει τάξιν: Kron. corrected ἀναγκαίαν T by reference to 714 B τὰ γὰρ ... Φιδίτια βουλευτηρίων ... τάξιν εἶχεν,

Thes. 25.5 (ἀγὼν) τελετῆς ἔχων ... τάξιν, Bolk. also cites De E 385 A λαβεῖν ἀναϑήματος τάξιν ἱεροῦ καὶ ϑεάματος. The construction is also found at Aet. I 6.11, V 26.1. 629 C οἶνος καὶ σιτία καὶ ὄψα: Fuhrm. translates ὄψα, ‘poisson’, and assumes that the word has its restricted meaning here as at 667 F, but

there is no evidence for that. The general meaning ‘made

dish’,

‘relish’, ‘delicacy’ is more probable. The triad, wine, bread and ὄψα, is

common: Od. III 479 ἐν δὲ ... σῖτον καὶ οἶνον Thuc. I 138.5 ἄρτον ... olvov ... ὄψον; Plat. ἄρτους ϑαυμαστοὺς παρασκευάζων, ὁ δὲ ὄψον, rightly translates ‘cuisine’ (but ὄψα has fallen out

ἔϑηκεν, | ὄψα te; Gorg. 518 C ὁ μὲν ὁ δὲ οἶνον. Clem. of the text).

629 C χρείας μὴ συναγομένης: This phrase has been widely suspected but is rightly defended by Bolk. by reference to the negative attitude

towards such pleasures as are ‘unnecessary’, which Plut. often displays, e.g., at 645 EF ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ Eyer χώραν ἐν συμποσίῳ φιλοσόφων ἀνδρῶν ἡδονὴ πρὸς μηδεμίαν συμπεπλεγμένη χρείαν, VII 8 passim, esp. 713 C, Brut. rat. 991 AB ἡμεῖς μὲν τὸ ἡδὺ μετὰ χρείας τινὸς ἀεὶ λαμβάνομεν. The verb συνάγω is used in ἃ similar way at Cato Mai.

31.2 ᾧ συνάγεται πρὸς τοὐλάχιστον ἡ χρεία, and De prof. in virt. 79 DE συνάγειν τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ χρήσιμον. 629 ( γελωτοποιός τις ἐν Καλλίου Φίλιππος κτλ.: Plut. refers to Xen. Symp. 1.11-16, the episode when the buffoon Philippus enters the

party of Callias in his boisterous manner. Plut. also mentions him at 709 EF, where his arriving on his own as αὐτόκλητος is contrasted with the σκιαί who come together with friends. Fuhrm. remarks that the

168

TABLE TALKS II PROOEMIUM

629 C

example is not adequate for our passage because Philippus, as coming uninvited, cannot be classed as παρασκευαζόμενος. Plut. shows aversion against such manners as displayed by Philippus through absence - pointed out by Abram. -- of such παράσιτοι in the Talks; notorious parasite Gnathon is mentioned as a terrible warning 707 E. At De ad. et am. 50D Plut. characterizes Melanthius,

his the the at the

parasite of Alexander of Pherae, through a quotation of Eupolis as one of τοὺς ἀμφὶ πλουσίαν τράπεζαν ἐγκυκλουμένους, οὖς | οὐ πῦρ οὐ(δὲν σίδαρος | οὐδὲ χαλκὸς εἴργει | μὴ φοιτᾶν ἐπὶ δεῖπνον, cf. also 54 Β γαστὴρ ὅλον τὸ σῶμα, πανταχῆ βλέπων | ὀφϑαλμός, ἕρπον τοῖς

ὀδοῦσι ϑηρίον. 629 C οἱ μέτριοι: Clement’s translation, ‘the average run of men’, is

not entirely successful; the word has positive sense here and means ‘moderate’, ‘people of good taste’, similar to 623 B οἱ χαρίεντες and 630 C of κομψότεροι. At 697 D Plut. expresses his views on less cultivated people: ἐπεὶ τούς ye πολλοὺς af mag’ οἶνον ἀδολεσχίαι ληροῦντας ἐμβάλλουσι πρὸς τὰ πάϑη καὶ προσδιαστρέφουσιν.

629 CD τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους δέχονται ϑεωρίαν πιϑανὴν

... ἔχοντας:

Abram. is probably right in interpreting ἔχοντας as conditional = εἰ ἔχουσιν, similarly also Kaltw., whereas Clem. and Fuhrm. take it as

causal. The meaning is ambiguous, which Xyl. marked by ‘habentes’. The translations of ϑεωρίαν πιϑανήν by Kaltw. ('eine angenehme Unterhaltung), Clem. 'an attractive theme") and Fuhrm. ('une curiosité naturelle) are not adequate. Xyl. translated ‘considerationem probabilem. The meaning is ‘a consideration that leads to a plausible conclusion’, or ‘an easily comprehensible consideration’. The demand for comprehensibility and wit in the choice of subjects of discussion at parties is often repeated in the Talks, e.g. at 717 A λόγῳ te δεῖ χρῆσϑαι παρὰ πότον ϑεωρίαν τινὰ καὶ μοῦσαν ἔχοντι, and see above,

on 614 E; cf. also De tu. san.

133 E οἰησόμεϑα δεῖν τὰς ψυχὰς

διαφέρειν μετὰ τὸ δεῖπνον μήτε πράγμασι μήτε φροντίσι μήτε σοφισ-

τικοῖς ἀγῶσι ... ἀλλὰ πολλὰ μέν ἐστι πιϑανά, κτλ. 629 Ὁ μᾶλλον αὐλοῦ καὶ βαρβίτου πρέπουσαν: Plut. again displays his negative attitude towards music and similar entertainments at parties, see above, on 613 E, and the discussion at 712 F-713 F.

529 D

169

TABLE TALKS II PROOEMIUM

ματα κτλ.: 629 Ὁ ὧν καὶ τὸ πρῶτον ἡμῖν βιβλίον εἶχε μεμιγμένα δείγ

ive This is the only prooemium where Plut. makes such a retrospect review of the preceding book. Apparently he wanted to reconsider his project once more by making a short classification of the contents of the first book. The two examples mentioned of the first class are Tatks I and II; the two of the second are V and X. — Plut. expressly gives the

ordinal number of the book in every prooemium except this one and the first and fifth ones (in the fourth and sixth books it is stated at the beginning of the first talk).

629 D (ἐκεῖνα γοῦν) καλῶ δῆτα [xci ... τὰ] συμποτικά" τὰ δί(ὲ συναμφό)τερα κοινῶς συμποσιακά: Fuhrm. prefers Vollgraff's filling

of the first lacuna to the less precise

(ὧν và μέν)

Hu.

Abram.

elegantly eliminates the second lacuna by assuming a dittography καλῶ

δῆτα [καλ(ῶ δῆτα], and Bolk. filled the third persuasively. -- Didymus used the title Συμποσιακά for his convivial work, but as far as we know Plut. is the first to distinguish between συμποτικά and συμποσιακὰ προβλήματα. Perhaps he was also the first author to widen the scope of subjects treated in the ‘sympotic’ genre and thus found it convenient to use this term for the new,

generic concept.

It

seems, however, that subjects other than strictly ‘sympotic’ ones were already treated by Aristoxenus in his Σύμμικτα συμποτικά (frg. 124 Wehrli = Athen. 632 AB). The fact that Plut. himself (614 A) uses the term συμποτικά of such subjects, also suggests that the scope of subjects treated in the genre of συμποτικά had already been widened

before his time. Perhaps he provisionally (7) widened it further while working on the first book and, when looking through it, found it convenient to use the term συμποσιακά and also to put it as the title of the work, to cover its miscellanous contents.

He mentions the title

again at 686 E and 736 C. Abram. observes that this prooemium is seo ike a comment on the first book than an introduction to the ond,

ony eon δ᾽ ἀναγέγραπται: In the prooemium of the first book Pa AA that the talks took place σποράδην πολλάκις ἔν τε evider με ὑμῶν καὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἐν τῇ ᾿ΕἩλλάδι. Abram. takes this as ence of authenticity, but see Bolk. pp. 36f., and Fuhrm.

Introd.

oer aa The content of the Talks derives from literary sources, and unco phrase σποράδην X1. may be a literary device to announce nnected disposition. Plut. also uses it at Mul. virt. 253 E τὰς δὲ

170

TABLE TALKS If PROOEMIUM

629 D

«atf ἑκάστην (sc. τὴν γυναῖκα) ἀρετάς, ὅπως ἂν ἐπίῃ, σποράδην ἀναγράψομεν; and cf. Gell. Praef. 2 usi autem sumus ordine rerum fortuito, quem antea in excerpendo feceramus. However, this is not to deny all authenticity; participants and most occasions are evidently historical, and we are not entitled to think that the level of erudition

did not allow the participants of the Talks to carry through conversations of this kind. Presumably Plut. depended to a large extent upon reminiscences of real talks, which he complemented with material from literary sources or, for some talks, inversely.

629D τινα τῶν note ῥηϑέντων καὶ ὑπὸ σοῦ: Wil. emended προρρηϑέντων and conjectured καί twa ὑπὸ σοῦ which inspired Bolk. to the correct reading καί: ἤ T. Plut. finds it necessary to apologize for presenting Senecio as a participant in the Talks. He gives

the reason for this caution in the subsequent sentence: Senecio might find the recollection of his own conversations equally useful as achieving new knowledge (this he might get from the other conversations reported in the Talks). The passage is a rather strong piece of evidence for authenticity. — Plut. also stresses the satisfaction of remembering

philosophical conversations over the wine in the prooemium of the sixth book (686 C): προβλημάτων δὲ καὶ λόγων φιλοσόφων

ὑποϑέσεις

αὐτούς

(τε)

τοὺς

μεμνημένους

εὐφραίνουσιν,

ἀεὶ

πρόσφατοι παροῦσαι, καὶ τοὺς ἀπολειφϑέντας οὐχ ἧττον ἑστιᾶν παρέχουσι τοῖς αὐτοῖς, ἀκούοντας καὶ μεταλαμβάνοντας.

629 Ε καὶ γὰρ [ἂν] εἰ μαϑήσεις ἀναμνήσεις μὴ ποιοῦσιν, πολλάκις εἰς ταὐτὸ τῷ μανϑάνειν τὸ ἀναμιμνήσκεσϑαι χαϑίστησιν: 50 Abram.: καὶ γὰρ ἂν αἱ μ. ἀ. μὴ ποιῶσιν T. ΒΟΙΚ. pointed out that the text as it stands gives an absurd sense. The meaning must be: ‘for even if recollection does not produce (new) knowledge, it often leads to the same result as learning’. Obviously μαϑήσεις cannot be the subject, because what Plut. wants to warn Senecio of is that the recalling of what he once said will not provide him with new knowledge and thus

might be boring. Nevertheless he ventures the suggestion that some subjects might have fallen into oblivion so that the reading of Plutarch’s recollections might make

Senecio recover his knowledge on ἃ

number of points (πολλάκις). Bolk. brings up Vollgraff’s transposition of the article from μαϑήσεις onto &vapvnosıc, whereas Abram. elegantly eliminates it by reading καὶ γὰρ [ἂν] εἰ... μὴ ποιοῦσιν. The

Spurious ἄν (suspected by Wil.) may have been added after ποιοῦσιν

171

TABLE TALKS II PROOEMIUM

629 E

had been corrupted into the subj. (or perhaps ei was first misspelled to at). - Bolk. and Abram. rightly doubt that the sentence alludes Plato’s theory of ἀνάμνησις presented in Men. - The concluding

sentences mark the general retrospective bias of this prooemium: Plut. ought to have apologized to Senecio already in the first prooemium for

introducing him as a participant in the talks, seeing that Senecio takes

part in I 1 and 5. TALK

1

629 E δέκα δὲ προβλημάτων εἰς ἕκαστον νενεμημένων βιβλίον χτλ.: This talk is the longest in the work; it comprises nearly the half of Book II. Its composition is also particular; it consists of a lecture held by Plut. at the request of Senecio. — Xen. is among those writers which

Plut. cites most frequently, see Helmbold-O’Neil. The talk is imitated by Macrob. Sat. VII 2.3. 629 E τὸν γὰρ Γωβούαν κτλ.: Plut. here follows Xen. who tells the

anecdote at Cyr. V 2.18: ἐνενόησε δὲ (sc. Γωβρύας) αὐτῶν (sc. τῶν

Περσῶν) καὶ ὡς ἐπηρώτων τε ἀλλήλους τοιαῦτα οἷα ἐρωτηϑῆναι

ἥδιον ἢ μὴ καὶ ἔσκωπτον οἷα σκωφϑῆναι ἥδιον ἢ μή. Xen. represents Gobryas as an Assyrian prince (Cyr. IV 6.2) who allied himself with Cyrus I of Persia and later rendered him invaluable services during the

capture of Babylon (Cyr. VII 5). In reality Gobryas was a Persian nobleman who played an important part in the conquest of Babylon. ne was married to a daughter of Cambyses and after the king’s death 00k part in the conspiracy which caused the death of the usurper

Smerdis. See Swoboda, RE s.v. Gobryas (1).

Io E (ἔσκωπτον

᾿ ἃ) σκωφϑῆναι κάλζ(λιον ἢ μή): Bern. filled the

cunae convincingly. Xyl. would read ἥδιον ἢ μή in the second lac.

but the preceding καί indicates that Plut. avoided repeating this phrase from Xen. Ton (nidos (λυποῦσιν) καὶ προσίστανται, κτλ.: The supplementaλυπεῖν om) is

supported

by

633 A

ὥστε

μὴ

προσίστασϑαι

μηδὲ

μὲν MK ἐπαινουμένους, and also by Arist. Eth. Nic. 1128 ἃ 4 οἱ goptimot — γελοίῳ ὑπερβάλλοντες βωμολόχοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι καὶ λέγειν ei jo καὶ μᾶλλον στοχαζόμενοι τοῦ γέλωτα ποιῆσαι ἢ τοῦ σχήμονα καὶ μὴ λυπεῖν τὸν σκωπτόμενον. In his treatment of

172

TABLE TALKS II 1

629 E

this subject-matter Arist. expresses the same thoughts and also uses a vocabulary similar to that of Plut.: εὐτράπελος (1128 a 9, 15, 33),

χαρίεις (1128 a 16), ὁμιλία ἐμμελής (1128 a 1). The points of agreement suggest -- probably indirect — dependence on Arist. for parts of this talk. Cf. also De aud. 46 D σκῶμμα μὲν yao ἀνύβριστον ἐν παιδιᾷ τινι uev εὐτραπελίας ἀφειμένον ἐνεγκεῖν ἀλύπως καὶ ἱλαρῶς οὐκ ἀγεννὲς οὐδ᾽ ἀπαίδευτον ἀλλ᾽ ἐλευϑέριον πάνυ καὶ Λακωνικόν

ἐστιν. The question as to which of the texts preserved in our Corpus Aristotelicum were used by Plut. was treated lately by Sandbach, Ill. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 207-232. Direct use seems to be certain only for

H. A. and Rhet. III. 629 F δεχόμενος οὖν ἡμᾶς ἐν Πάτραις: It was natural for a Roman consul to visit Patras, the main harbour of Western Greece and a town

predominated by Romans since the foundation of the Roman colony there under Augustus (Strab. VIII 7.5; Paus. VII 18.7; Plin. IV 11). Senecio certainly spent much time in Greece while holding various offices: quaestor, tribune, praetor; see Jones, JRS 60 (1970) 102. If Plut. stayed in Rome in 93, and our talk took place in 91/2, which appears as probable through the mention of Quietus at 632 A, see C.

P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 22-24, it may have been on his way there that he was received by Senecio at Patras. 629 Ε οὐ γάρ τι μικρόν .. . τῆς ὁμιλητικῆς μόριον: For the formula-

tion, cf. Plat. Gorg. 463 D where Socrates affirms: ἔστι γὰρ ἢ δητοQuei] κατὰ TOV ἐμὸν λόγον πολιτικῆς μορίου εἴδωλον.

630 A ἐπιϑέσϑαι τῷ λόγῳ: Amyot (and Hu.) corrected τινὶ λόγῳ T. The phrase also occurs at 628 CD. Plut. here begins a short lecture περὶ τοῦ ἐρωτᾶσϑαι, which extends as far as 631 C.

630 A ἡδέως

ἐρωτᾶσϑαί

por δοκοῦσιν

ἃ ῥᾳδίως

ἀποκρίνασϑαι

δύνανται: Plut. expresses the same idea at De aud. 43 B εὖ μάλα δὲ

χρὴ καὶ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ λέγοντος ἐμπειρίαν ἢ φυσικὴν ἡρμοσμένον,

ἐν οἷς αὐτὸς

ἑαυτοῦ

κράτιστός

ἐστι,

δύναμιν

ποιεῖσθαι τὰς

ἐρωτήσεις. Similar demands for consideration are also placed on those who give the guests other tasks, see 621 E-622 A.

630 A κινδυνεύουσιν: The absolute use of this verb has been suspect-

ed, but cf. Hdt. III 69 ἡ Φαιδύμη φαμένη κινδυνεύσειν μεγάλως, and

173

TABLE TALKS II 1

630 A

Arist. Eth. Nic. 1124 Ὁ 8 καὶ ὅταν κινδυνεύῃ, ἀφειδὴς tod βίου (ἐστὶν) ὡς οὐκ ἄξιον ὃν πάντως ζῆν. 630 A καί (τι) περιττόν: This addition (Hu.) is persuasive ((τὸ) Re.). Plut. here uses περιττόν

in a positive

sense,

‘particular’,

‘excellent’,

‘striking’. Otherwise this concept is normally regarded as negative. At De garr. 513 A he distinguishes three kinds of answers, τὸ μὲν

ἀναγκαῖον, τὸ δὲ φιλάνθρωπον, τὸ δὲ περισσόν. Of these, the last is the worst: (513 AB) 6 δὲ περιττὸς καὶ ἀδολέσχης. For the rhetorical aspects of this subject-matter, cf. Hermog. De meth. V Περὶ περιττότητος (Rhet. Gr. VI 417f. Rabe.)

630 Β ἄνπερ ἕξιν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἔχωσιν: The meaning of ἕξις here is ‘skill’, ‘acquired capacity’, as at De aud. 43 A οἷα τερϑρευόμενοί τινες τῶν

γέων καὶ παρεπιδεικνύμενοι διαλεκτικὴν ἢ μαϑηματικὴν EEıv, and Cato Min. 10.1 μεγάλην ἕξιν ἐν τοῖς Στωικοῖς λόγοις ἔχοντα. In De garr. where Plut. takes a negative position towards exhaustive expositons of one’s knowledge he warns (514 A) against that which he recommends here, namely πρὸς τοὺς λόγους ἐκείνους . .. £v οἷς κατ᾽ ἐμπειρίαν ἢ ἕξιν τινὰ τῶν ἄλλων διαφέρειν νομίζουσι.

630 Biv αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ τυγχάνῃ κράτιστος dv: Fre. 183 Nauck?, from the Antiope, also quoted, in positive intent, at 622 A and De aud. 43 A, but used at De garr. 514 A to underline the negative view. For the subjunctive without ἄν in a relative clause, see above, on 622 A.

τ B οἱ πεπλανημένοι καὶ πεπλευκότες ... προϑύμως διηγοῦνται: I$ statement probably reflects the great contemporary interest in ap travels, e.g. Antonius Diogenes; see Schmid, RE s.v. Anton5 .

ἣν ς χαρίξεσϑαι τούτοις δοκοῦντες, ὧν Éoyov ἦν ἐνοχλουμένων ΧΗ edu The Passage is difficult and has troubled the translators: Fuhon

» ae

Reich.

do

not translate

ἀποσχέσϑοαι.

Abram.

and

avons "a e ἔργον ἣν as referring to the subject of the sentence: ‘nous

dice, ee de faire plaisir ἃ des gens que nous nous serions listeners "i abstenus d'importuner', while Clem. assumes that the give lean are referred to by this phrase: ‘for 80 we think we questi

re to those whose business it was to refrain from putting

Ons to us if our conversation annoyed them’. Both interpreta-

174

TABLE TALKS II 1

630 C

tions are acceptable: in the former version the speakers feel gratitude to those who, politely, put the question; in the other they show ἃ certain ruthlessness against the listeners who, after all, have to blame

themselves for asking. The former alternative is the more probable one. However, I believe that ἣν should be interpreted as unreal and ἐνοχλουμένων as concessive: ‘for so we think we give pleasure to those whom we would scarcely be able to leave in peace even if they would be annoyed’. 630 C καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἐν τοῖς πλωτικοῖς μάλιστα φύεται τὸ γένος τοῦ νοσήματος: Here obtrusive talkativeness is called a kind of malady; at De garr. 513 D it is only compared with it: ὥσπερ νόσημά τι προσπίπτει καὶ παρακολουϑεῖ τὸ μεμνῆσϑαι καὶ διηγεῖσθαι πολλάκις, Seafarers were widely held in contempt as being uneducated and rude, cf. De laud. ips. 546 Ὁ δεύτερον αἱ τῶν εὐτυχῶς καὶ κατὰ νοῦν πεπραγμένων διηγήσεις λανθάνουσι πολλοὺς εἰς μεγαλαυχίαν ὑπὸ χαρᾶς ἐκφέρουσαι καὶ κόμπον. ... ᾧ γένει μάλιστα τῆς περιαυτολογίας τὸ ναυτικὸν (the MSS vary) ἰδεῖν ἐστι καὶ στρατιωτικὼν ἁλισκόμενον.

630 C ὀρϑῶς γοῦν ὁ Νέστωρ ... ἄχϑονται γὰρ τοῖς αὑτοὺς ἐπαινοῦσιν: Jl. X 544-545. The customary request preceding a narration was apparently very formal: having been duly questioned the selfconfident Odysseus could safely indulge in even a fairly ostentatious report. Self-praise is, however, very strongly censured by Plut. De

laud. ips. 539 D αὑτῷ μὲν yàg ὁ παρ᾽ ἄλλων ἔπαινος ἥδιστον ἀκουσμάτων ἐστίν, ... ἑτέροις δὲ ὁ περὶ αὑτοῦ λυπηρότατον. -- Plut. interrupts the hexameter through φησί; at 640 A he interposes δέ. 630 D κελεύσῃ ἄλλος: The hiatus unnecessarily concerned Bern. and Bases, as shown by Bolk.; see also above, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα,

and below, on 632 D γένος εἶναι εἰρωνείας. 630 D (xoi olov (a) Cópevot: ATL eds. rightly prefer this supplementation (Bern.) to (xai ὥσπερ

ἀναγκα) Cóuevo

Wytt, The former verb is

common in Plut., while the latter is infrequent. The length of the lacuna (6-9 letters) is, however, not decisive; see below, on 630 E.

630 D κἂν ἄλλο(ς τις ἐρω)τᾷ τὰ τοιαῦτα: All eds. have accepted ἄλλοί(ς τις ἔρη)ται Cobet. However, Plutarch's use of ἐρωτάω and

630 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS II 1

175

ἔρομαι is in the ratio 8:1. It is sage to suppose, then, that he wrote

ἄλλο(ς τις ἐρω)τᾷ. Helmbold and Clem. cite ἄλλοζς αὐτοὺς ἐρωτᾷ Boll., and ἄλλο(ζι πυνϑάνων)ται Herw. is also possible. 630D καὶ ταῦτ᾽ οὖν ἐρωτῶντες χαρίζονται: The corruption into χαρίζεσϑαι T (corrected by Amyot, Mez.) may have been due to the preceding

inf.

προέσϑαι

(Paton).

Paton

propounds

ἐρωτῶν

τις

χαρίζεται, but the plurals of the preceding sentence suggest that the plural is correct. eo}

630 E καὶ μὴν ὅ γ᾽

᾿Οδυσσεὺς κτλ.: Od. IX 12. Odysseus hesitates to

recall the atrocity of the Cyclope. Plut. here chooses to give a couple of

examples before stating the rule: τῶν οὖν κακῶν φυλακτέον ἐστὶ τὰς ἐρωτήσεις. 630 E καὶ πρὸς τὸν χορὸν ὁ Οἰδίπους: Soph. Ο. C. 510. In reality it is the chorus that addresses Oedipus. Such mistakes are due to quoting from memory, cf. 741 F, 742 C, and see above, on 617 A. For more

examples, see Gregorio, Aevum 53 (1979) 13-15. 630 E ὡς ἡδύ (τοι σωϑέντα μεμνῆσϑαι)

πόνων: Frg. 133 Nauck?,

from the Andromeda. Hu. filled the lacuna from Macrob. Sat. VII 2.9,

who preserves the whole line; it is also quoted by Arist. Rher. 1370 Ὁ 4. The lacuna marked in T covers only 4-5 letters. Such misleading marking is not seldom found, cf. 617 D, and at 635 A, D no lacuna is marked at all.

630 Ε (καίτοι καὶ αὐτὸς δηλῶν, ὡς ἡδὺ μόνοις toic ἤδη σωϑεῖσιν) od τοῖς ἔτι πλανωμένοις: Clem. accepts Hubert’s plausible filling of the long lac. 25-30. The proposal (ὅμως οὐκ οἶδ᾽ εἰ τοῦτο τοῖς σωϑεῖσιν ἡδύ, μάλιστα δ᾽ ) οὐ τοῖς Abram. is less probable. Cast. (pp. 807.) propounds: (ἀλλὰ τοῦτο τοῖς ἐν ἀσφαλεῖ καϑισταμένοις) οὐ τοῖς κτλ.,

a somewhat banal reading.

630 E καὶ (der) vals] φέρουσιν: Fuhrm. rightly prefers this emendation by Abram. (καινάς T) to καὶ κακά Steph. 630 E ἀνιῶνται γὰρ διηγούμενοι κτλ.: Excessive talkativeness about one’s own achievements or difficulties is warned for by Epict. Enchir.

33.14 ἐν ταῖς ὁμιλίαις ἀπέστω τὸ ἑαυτοῦ τινων ἔργων ἢ κινδύνων ἐπὶ πολὺ καὶ ἀμέτρως μεμνῆσϑαι, and see Plut. De laud. ips., passim.

176

TABLE TALKS II 1

630 F

630 F τὸ δὲ πῶς εὐημέρησαν ἐπὶ βήματος: Bern. adds βήματος (ἢ πρεσβεύσαντες εὐτύχησαν) ἤ, comparing Macrob. Sat, VII 2.11 vel qui libere et feliciter legationem peregit, vel etc. Bolk. points out that Macrob.

cannot

be

used

as

an

authority

for

such

conjectures;

he

frequently omits or changes parts of the sources he uses. Thus he transposed περὶ πρεσβειῶν here from 630 D. Moreover, Bernardakis’ addition means a tautology, because the phrase προσηγορεύϑησαν

ὑπὸ τοῦ βασιλέως is an allusion to successful diplomacy. 631 A ἥδιον ἐρωτώμενοι καὶ προϑυμότερον ἐξαγγέλλουσιν: Abram. rightly censures Bolkestein’s criticism of the traditional Latin interpretation which is quite correct: ‘lubentius etiam et alacrius narrant interrogati’; καί connects that two adverbs as qualifiers of ἐξαγγέλλουσιν. Clem. appears to follow Bolk. in taking ἥδιον as a qualifier of ἐρωτώμενοι and translates incorrectly: "They are even

more delighted to be asked about .. .'. ἜἘρωτώμενοι is conditional. 631 A ἥδιον δὲ xol περὶ κυνῶν ἄνδρα ϑηρευτικὸν ἐρωτᾶν:

Paton

found the active ἐρωτᾶν problematic but his reading ἡδίων δ᾽ ὁ ... ἐρωτῶν (accepted by Fuhrm.) is no solution. Hu. rightly defends the text and understands: ἢ τοῦτον μηδενὸς ἐρωτῶντος ag ἑαυτοῦ λέγειν. The sentence as it stands concurs naturally with the context: it is not one part only, the questioner, which is focused; it goes more

generally about maintaining a pleasant atmosphere at the party. This general view is well conveyed by the impersonal ἥδιον. Bolk. Mnem.

15 (1962) 307 is right: “631 A ἥδιον bene habet, significans ἥδιόν tow’. Clem. translates appositely: ‘It is also very agreeable to ask...’. 631 A καὶ ὅσα χρησάμενος ἢ φήμαις ἢ ἱεροῖς ἢ ϑεῶν εὐμενείᾳ κατώρϑωσεν, ἡδέως ἂν καὶ περὶ τούτων ἐρωτῷτο: This sentence is

certainly sound. To delete ἤ before ϑεῶν (Hu., followed by Clem., Fuhrm.) is unnecessary. Bolk. rightly asks: ‘Cur porro εὐμένεια ϑεῶν et φῆμαι et ἱερά non pariter valere aestimabimus ad dubias hominum

res secundandas?’ The three terms are equivalent as means of success for a man who is εὐσεβὴς καὶ φιλοθύτης. For a similar use of χράομαι, cf. Hdt. 1 62 dein πομπῇ χρεώμενος. — Abram. suspects καί before

περὶ τούτων, and Fuhrm. awkwardly transposed it: καὶ ἡδέων ἂν περὶ τούτων. Καί is no more out of place here than above: ἥδιον δὲ καὶ περὶ κυνῶν.

TABLE TALKS II 1

631 B

631

τοῖς δὲ πρεσβύταις

177

... oi ἐρωτῶντες χαρίζονται καὶ κινοῦσι

τὸν δὲ βουλομένους: Elderly men are notoriously garrulous, cf. 639 C

ῶς. πρεσβύτην ἐν τῷ ἀποχρίνεσθαν παραδολεσχοῦντα γεροντιχ

631 B (ὀοϑῶς γοῦν ὁ Τηλέμαχος) ὦ Νέστορ Νηληιάδη κτλ.: Od. III

247-251. Telemachus visits the old Nestor, eager to receive news about his father. Po. and Fuhrm. suspected that some words, notably the subject, have fallen out. It seems that these had their place before, and

not after, the quotation. For my addition, cf. above, 630 C ὀρϑῶς γοῦν ὁ Νέστωρ ... ἐπιστάμενος.

631 Β πολλῶν λόγων ἀφορμὰς προιέμενος: Bolk. gives ἃ number of examples of this phrase: above, 630 D, An seni 793 E, Praec. ger. reip.

806 C, Sulla 4.3; and probably also below, 666 D. 631 B συστέλλοντες εἰς τὸ ἀναγκαῖον αὐτὸ καὶ συνελαύνοντες τὰς

ἀποκρίσεις: Bolk. notices that Xyl. neglected αὐτό in his translation. This is also true of Fuhrm.: ‘en les bornant ἃ l'indispensable', while Clem. renders correctly: ‘to bare essentials’. Bolk. point out that τὰς ἀποκρίσεις belongs to both participles. Clem. translates correctly: causing the answers they receive to be contracted and compressed to bare essentials’. a C σκώμματος δὲ τῷ μὴ δυναμένῳ... ἀφεκτέον: Plut. here begins is long lecture περὶ σκώμματος, which extends to the end of the talk.

The phrase peté . . . τέχνης shows that he reports a doctrine. The idea „pressed here is also found at Cic. De or. 1I 221 quod est hominibus acetis et dicacibus difficillimum, habere hominum rationem et tempum, and 229 haberi enim dixisti rationem oportere hominum, rei, natin ne quid iocus de gravitate decerperet, 247 temporis igitur

dist, tetas dicacitatis moderatio et temperantia et raritas dictorum mum ἡ " oratorem a scurra; and further Quintil. VI 3.28 laedere qua A di velimus, longeque absit illud propositum: ‘potius amicum γελοίῳ ἤν perdendi ; cf. also Arist. Eth. Nic. 1128 a 4 ot μὲν οὖν τῷ also trea oe λοντες βωμολόχοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι καὶ φορτικοί. Plut. 803 B-804 B e ‚ubiect-matter σκῶμμα καὶ γελοῖον in Praec. ger. reip.

(mentioned . » follows one or more Peripatetic sources, Theophr. haus, De Ph, 31 E) or Ariston of Ceos or Demetrius. See K. Mittel1911) Bt. utarchi praeceptis gerendae reipublicae (Diss. Berolini +B. Arndt, De ridiculi doctrina rhetorica (Diss. Bonnae

178

TABLE TALKS II 1

631C

1904) 23 refers to Ps.-Demetr. Περὶ ἑρμηνείας 172. See further below,

on 631 E (ὀνειδι) σμὸς γάρ ἐστιν. 631 ( ὥσπερ ἐν ὀλισϑηρῷ τόπῳ, κἂν ϑίγωσιν ἐκ παραδρομῆς μόνον, ἀνατρέπουσιν: Hu., Clem. print ὥσπερ (γὰρ τοὺς) ἐν Amyot, Steph.; Bern., Fuhrm. prefer ὥσπερ (yàg) ἔν Xyl., so also Bolk., but γάρ is not needed in a comparative clause, cf. 621 E, Coni. praec. 140 E, Praec. ger. reip. 810 F; Plat. Gorg.

448 E, Rep.

557 C; see Kühner-

Gerth? II 344. The absence of both a subject and an object is striking. Abram. proposes κἂν ϑίγωσίν (uv) é m. but, if we are to add

anything at all, x&v (tıva) 0. is more probable. However, the text looks sound. 631 C

τοῖς

δὲ

σκώμμασιν

ἔστιν

ὅτε

μᾶλλον

ἐκκινούμεϑα: This idea is found in Ps.-Demetr.

ἢ

ταῖς

λοιδορίαις

Περὶ ἑρμηνείας

172

περὶ δὲ σκωμμάτων μέν, οἷον εἰκασία τίς ἐστιν εὐτράπελος, ... τοῖς μὲν τοιούτοις χρήσονται" εἰ δὲ μή, φευξόμεϑα τὰ σκώμματα ὥσπερ λοιδορίας. Cf. Arist. Rhet. 1379 a 29 εὐκίνητοι πρὸς ὀργήν, ὀργίζονται δὲ τοῖς... σκώπτουσι᾽ ὑβρίζουσι γάρ. 631 ( τὸ δ᾽ ὡς οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλ᾽ ἔγρον ὕβρεως καὶ κακοηϑείας προβαλλόμενοι: Bolk. criticizes Xyl. for not translating προβαλλόμενοι and Dübn. for translating it inadequately. This criti-

cism now applies to Clem. and Fuhrm.; both neglect the fact that προβάλλομαι means ‘throw forward from oneself’, ‘repudiate’, ‘accuse'. Plut. uses the verb in the last sense at 678 B ὡς μάλιστα τῶν νοσημάτων τὴν οἰνοφλυγίαν προβαλλόμενος. At De aud. poet. 18 D

he uses it as opposite to ἐπαινεῖν: διδασκέσϑω τὴν μιμουμένην ταῦτα

δύναμιν καὶ τέχνην ἐπαινεῖν, ἃς δὲ διαϑέσεις καὶ πράξεις μιμεῖται καὶ προβάλλεσϑαι καὶ κακίζειν. We should thus translate: ‘while we repudiate the jokes as being. ..’. 631 CD

xai καϑόλου

(τοῖς σπουδῇ)

διαλέγεσϑαι

{προσποιουμέ)-

vois. μᾶλλον ἢ τοῖς (κομιδῇ) φλυαροῦσι χαλεπαίνομεν xth.: This reading seems to me to render the line of thought of the sentence

tolerably: xoi καϑόλου 8. τοῖς (lac. 6-7) vow; T. Abram. rightly

points out that the opposition is between those who astutely pretend to

talk seriously and those who talk mere nonsense. Her conjecture xai

χαϑόλου

(τοῖς) 8. (σπουδῇ προσποιουμένοις is plausible but it

appears to me that not only the article but also σπουδῇ may have been

179

TABLE TALKS ΠῚ

631 CD

Plut. transposed. The second lacuna was convincingly filled by Bolk. ι has the phrase at Amat. 770 B ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μὴ μακρὰν ἀποπλανᾶσθϑα ely δοκῶμεν ἢ κομιδῇ φλυαρεῖν, cf. also Dem. XXX 6. -- The sever lacunal rest of this sentence and the next one were plausibly emended

by Paton (and Re.). Paton’s reading was printed by Clem.

631 D πεποιημένον ἐκ παρασκευῆς: Cf. Quintil. VI 3.33 vitandum ...

ne praeparatum et domo allatum videatur quod dicimus: nam adversus miseros ... inhumanus est iocus.

βοαχίονι τῷ σὲ μεμνήμεϑά ... ..., 631 D ταριχοπώλην ἀπομυττόμενον: This sarcastic allusion to the despised business of the

fishmongers, an occupation carried out by freedmen to a large extent,

was normally used with reference to the father. According to Eustath. 637.35 it was in use as early as the 4th c. B. C.: ὁ Κυνικὸς ᾿Αντισϑένης χρησάμενος πρὸς τὸν ἀνακρίνοντα τὸ γένος αὐτοῦ εἰπών, ὡς ἐμοὶ πατὴρ μὲν ἦν τῷ ἀγκῶνι ἀπομυσσόμενος, ἤγουν ταριχέμπορος, and he comments at 723.9: κοινῶς ἀπομύσσεσϑαι, ob χρῆσις ἐν τῷ πατὴρ

τῷ ἀγκῶνι ἀπομυσσόμενος, διὰ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν δηλαδὴ τοῦτο ποιεῖν τῇ χειρὶ ἀσχολουμένῃ περὶ ἁλίπαστα. Diog. Laert. IV 46 reports that Bion of Borysthenes used this expression in his answer to King Antigo-

nus

Gonatas:

ἐμοὶ

ὁ

πατὴρ

μὲν

ἦν

ἀπελεύϑερος,

τῷ

ἀγκῶνι

ἀπομυσσόμενος -- διεδήλου δὲ τὸν ταριχέμπορον -- γένος Βορυσϑενίτης. Cf. also Rhet. ad Herenn. IV 67.54 significatio fit ... ut si

salsamentari filio dicas: quiesce tu, cuius pater cubitis emungi solebat; Suet. Hor. 1 patre, ut ipse tradit, libertino ... ut vero creditum est

" mentario . ..1 quotiens ego vidi patrem tuum brachio se emungen-

cn quw πρὸς ᾿Οχταούιον wth: Plut. reports Cicero’s apophthsat i οὐκ νὸν ἀτρύπητον substituted for τετρυπημένον — at Cic. bon Th e he also mentions that Cicero made this witty remark ἔν τινι

meon e anecdote is also related at Reg. apophth. 205 B without the Macro : the name of the Libyan. The man is otherwise unknown. for Liber

barbari, προσήκει

VII 3.6 tells the anecdote and adds that it is customary

men to have pierced ears, This custom is stigmatized as yo

εἶδον ones XXXII 3

An.

N gine Ὁ

ul 31

τῆς

ἀλλὰ

τούτῳ

γε οὔτε

Ἑλλάδος παντάπασιν,

Λυδὸν ἀμφότερα

τὰ

ὦτα

τῆς

Βοιωτίας

ἐπεὶ ἐγὼ αὐτὸν

τετρυπημένον.

Dio

Chrys.

olds that wearing earrings κόραις μᾶλλον ἔπρεπε καὶ παισὶ

180

TABLE TALKS II 1

631 Ὁ

Λυδῶν ἢ Φρυγῶν" ᾿Ἑλλήνων δὲ παισὶ ... οὐκ ἄλλο ἥρμοζεν ἢ παιὸεία καὶ λόγος. The custom is found among the Carthaginians (Plaut. Poen. V 2.21), the Kings of Babylon (Nicol. Dam. frg. 10.2 (ΗΟ IH

360) and Syria (Suda, s.v. ἐλλώβια), Indian wise men (Strab. XV 59; Arrian. Ind. XVI3), and orientals in general (Plin. XI 136). However, the usage had been adopted by the lonians (Anacr. frg. 21.4, 12 Bergk?) and it appears even to have been imported to Athens (Apul.

Dogm.

Plat. 1 4 (of Plato) auri tantum, quantum puer nobilitatis

insigne in auricula gestavit, and Diog. Laert. III 42). Among Greek women

it was

an

established

custom

to wear

earrings;

these

were

always part of the dowry (e.g., P. Oxy. II 267.17). For the various designs of earrings, see Netoliszka, RE s.v. Inaures. 631 D Μελάνϑιος ὑπὸ τοῦ κωμῳδιοποιοῦ καταγελώμενος: Melanthius was a grand-nephew of Aeschylus and a friend of Cimon. He wrote tragedy and elegy but probably was more of an actor than poet; however,

his

writings seems

to have

been

far from

good;

he

was

ridiculed by the comic poets, especially for being gluttonous, but also garrulous, lacking talent, and even being leprous: Aristoph. Pax 803817, 1009-1015, Av. 151; Eupolis, frg. 41; Plat. Com. frg. 132; Pher-

ecr. frg. 139 Kock. Cf. also Clearch. frg. 55 Wehrli; Athen. 549 A; Suda, s.v. Μελάνϑιος καὶ Μόρσιμος᾽ λέγει Ἀριστοφάνης περὶ αὐτῶν οὕτως ἄμφω γοργόνες ὀψοφάγοι, βατιδοσκόποι, ἅρπυιαι, γραοσόβαι, μιαροΐ, τραγομάσχαλοι ἰχϑυολῦμαι. As the occurrences

of M. at 633 D (see ad. loc.), De aud. 41 D, and Coni. praec. 144 BC probably refer to same man, this would mean that he was himself

capable of wittiness and thus would explain his utterance here. Abram.

Observes that this must be a question: Melanthius pretends that he had

himself first delivered an equally pungent jest: 'Is this not the due contribution you pay me?’, i.e., ‘don’t you (only) repay the exact amount of derision I bestowed on you?’ or: ‘you who are a comedian, aren’t you able to outdo me, the tragedian, in mockery?’

631 DE καϑάπερ τὰ παρηγκιστρωμένα βέλη: Plut. also uses an arrow metaphor at Praec. ger. reip. 825 EF μὴ καϑάπερ τὰ βέλη τὰ

πράγματα χαράσσοντα καὶ φαρμάσσοντα ... ἀνήκεστα .... ποιεῖν. —

For the use of barbed missiles, cf. Diod. XVII 43.8 χαλκευσάμενου

γὰρ εὐμεγέϑεις τριόδοντας παρηγκιστρωμένους, τούτοις ἔτυπτον ἐκ χειρὸς τοὺς ἐπὶ τῶν πύργων καϑεστῶτας, ἐμπηγνυμένων δὲ εἰς τὰς ἀσπίδας τούτων ... εἷλκον πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς κτλ.

181

TABLE TALKS II 1

61E

631 E πλείονα χρόνον ἐμμένοντα,

καὶ λυπεῖ τοὺς σχωφϑέντας Ti

y puts τέρψις τῇ κομψότητι καὶ ἡδύνει τοὺς παρόντας: Fuhrm. rightl the the comma instead of the full stop after ἐμμένοντα. This last part of ι sentence is commonly considered corrupt. Bolk. regards τῇ κομψότητ

as belonging to ἡδύνει only and thus reads f| τέρψις, (A) (Wytt.) τῇ

κομψότητι καϑηδύνει

(Bern.) τοὺς παρόντας.

Clem.

adopts Post’s

conjecture κα(ϑ᾽ ὅσον) ἡδύνει. However, it seems to me that the text is acceptable without changes. The sentence as a whole — beginning

with μᾶλλον οὖν — is a comparison between joke and abuse (λοιδοgia), brought into relief through the simile with the barbed arrows. The barbs of the arrows correspond to the elegance (κομψότης) of the jokes, which is lacking in the abuse. The dative τῇ κομψότητι qualifies

both verbs: ‘Through the elegance (of the jokes) the delight (they produce) causes distress to the ridiculed and pleasure to (the rest of)

the company.’

631 E πιστεύειν (δοκοῦσι καὶ συν) διασύρειν τῷ λέγοντι: The supplementation (Dübn.) is plausible, although συνδιασύρειν is not found elsewhere.

631 E (ὀνειδι)σμὸς yao ἐστιν ἁμαρτίας παρε(σχηματισμένος τὸ) σκῶμμα κατὰ τὸν Θεόφραστον: Turn. filled the lacunae and also added the art. (τῆς) ἁμαρτίας, which Bolk. rightly rejects and instead Propounds (τινος). But nothing is needed; the fact that a two-letter lacuna is marked after ἐστιν is probably irrelevant (the v ἐφελκυστικόν Suggests this). Macrob.

Sat. VII 3.2 scomma

... morsum

figuratum

Papen παρε(σχηματισμένος τόν Turn., but παρε(μφαινόμενος τό) K on is supported by the Peripatetic Tract. Coislin. 4 (CGF 1:1.52 K aibel) - Plut. obviously follows a Peripatetic source here -: διαφέρει "n κωμῳδία τῆς λοιδορίας᾽ ἐπεὶ ἡ μὲν λοιδορία ἀπαρακαλύπτως τὰ

PME

κακὰ διέξεισιν, ἡ δὲ δεῖται τῆς καλουμένης ἐμφάσεως. On

Comets (re of ἔμφασις, see L. Cooper, An Aristotelian Theory of thet sive (New York 1922) 259 f. Definitions of the comic similar to Au n ere are found at Arist. Poet. 1449 a 32 τὸ γὰρ γελοῖόν ἐστιν

1 PM

τι καὶ αἶσχος ἀνώδυνον καὶ ob φϑαρτικόν, and Cic. De or.

nant tu aec enim ridentur vel sola vel maxime, quae notant et desigdoctrina pene aliquam non turpiter; cf. E. Arndt, De ridiculi

by Plat.

i etorica (Diss. Bonnae 1904) 27f. The definition given here

Philol "i

not found in any preserved

work

by Theophr.

Mayer,

- Suppl. XI (1907/10) 495 t. suggests that the source was his Περὶ

182

TABLE TALKS II 1

631 E

λέξεως, through the mediation of Ariston of Ceos, whom he used in Praec. ger. reip. (804 DE). K. Mittelhaus, De Plutarchi praeceptis gerendae reipublicae (Diss. Berolini 1911) 49 assumes that the source was instead Περὶ γελοίου, cf. Athen. 348 A. For an investigation of the possible contents of Theophrastus’ lost treatises on the comic, see A. Plebe, La teoria del comico da Aristotele a Plutarco (Torino 1920) 31-48; and see Süss, Neue Jahrb. 23 (1920) 28-45.

631 E ὅϑεν ἐξ αὑτοῦ τῇ ὑπονοίᾳ προστίϑησιν ὁ ἀκούσας τὸ ἐλλεῖπον: The term ὑπόνοια, ‘innuendo’, ‘covert meaning’, is used by Arist. Eth. Nic. 1128 a 23 to characterize the New Comedy, while aioygodoyia, ‘abuse’, is typical of the Old Comedy: ἴδοι δ᾽ ἄν τις xai ἐκ τῶν

κωμῳδιῶν τῶν παλαιῶν καὶ τῶν καινῶν. τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ἦν γελοῖον fj αἰσχρολογία, τοῖς δὲ μᾶλλον ἡ ὑπόνοια, The term ἔμφασις used in

Tract. Coislin. 4 (quoted above) is commonly taken to be synonymous with the Aristotelian ὑπόνοια. 631 E τοῦ Θεοχρίτου: The sophist Theocritus of Chios, a contemporary of Alexander, was famous for his biting jests. Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 11 BC reports that he was put to death by Antigonus Monophthalmus because of his insolent jesting; this is also mentioned below,

633 C. Se further FHG II 86£.; Laqueur, RE s.v. Theocritos (2). 631 E λωποδυτεῖν

... φήσαντος

βαδίζειν,

ἐκεῖ μέντοι καϑεύδειν:

Uhde, Rh. Mus. 75 (1926) 231 propounds ἐκεῖ (09) μέντοι καϑεύδειν (hiatus!), which ruins the jest; through the information that the diner was going to stay over night the thief was overtly invited. Theft of clothing was apparently common, to judge from the proposals made by

Plat. Leg. 874 BC νύκτωρ φῶρα sig οἰκίαν εἰσιόντα ἐπὶ κλοπῇ

χρημάτων ἐὰν ἑλὼν κτείνῃ τις, καϑαρὸς ἔστω: καὶ ἐὰν λωποδύτην

ἀμυνόμενος ἀποκτείνῃ, καϑαρὸς ἔστω. According to Diphilus, frg. 32

(11 549 Kock) there was a law at Corinth that forbade people to run up expenses beyond their income, since this was taken to indicate that they (1. 14) ἢ λωποδυτεῖν τὰς νύκτας ἢ τοιχωρυχεῖν, | ἢ τῶν ποιούντων ταῦτα κοινωνεῖν τισιν, cf. also Aristoph. Nub. 179. —

Bolk. rejects εἰ ἐπὶ δεῖπνον βαδίζοι Bern. by reference to A. Hein,

De optativi apud Plutarchum usu (Diss. Breslau 1914) 87-89: in indi-

rect questions after past tenses there are 121 instances of the opt., and

327 of the ind. in Plut.

631 F

TABLE TALKS II 1

631 F ἕν δὲ τῇ

καλῇ

Λακεδαίμονι

183

τῶν

μαϑημάτων

ἐδόκει

τὸ

σκώπτειν ἀλύπως καὶ σκωπτόμενον φέρειν: Xyl. propounded ἐν, and Bern. ἕν δ᾽ ἐν, but the dative is governed by ἐδόκει. Hu. refers to Aelian. V. H. XIII 5 τοῖς Θηβαίοις

ἕν τῶν καλῶν

ἐδόκει τὸ τῶν

ὡραίων ἐρᾶν. For the use of the name of the city instead of that of the inhabitants,

see

Kühner-Gerth?

I

11.4.

—

Abram.

remarks

that

σκώπτειν ἀλύπως and σκωπτόμενον φέρειν imply a slight contradiction: if the jokes are harmless they are easily borne. Our passage echoes Lyc. 12.6 αὐτοί te (sc. οἱ παῖδες) παίζειν εἰϑίζοντο καὶ σχώπτειν ἄνευ βωμολοχίας καὶ σφόδρα γὰρ ἐδόκει καὶ τοῦτο

σκωπτόμενοι Λακωνικὸν

ἀνέχεσϑαι᾽

παραιτεῖσθαι,

μὴ φέροντα

δ᾽

ἐξῆν

μὴ δυσχεραίνειν. εἶναι, σκώμματος

καὶ ὁ σκώπτων

ἐπέπαυτο. For the emphatic pluperfect expressing the immediate ac-

complishment as an already extant result, cf. Kühner-Gerth? I 152f. Plut. also touches upon the Spartan attitude at De aud. 46 D σκῶμμα

μὲν yàg ἀνύβριστον ἐν παιδιᾷ τινι wet εὐτραπελίας ἀφειμένον ἐνεγκεῖν ἀλύπως καὶ ἱλαρῶς οὐκ ἀγεννὲς οὐδ᾽ ἀπαίδευτον ἀλλ᾽ ἐλευϑέριον πάνυ καὶ Λακωνικόν ἐστιν. -- The epithet τῇ καλῇ indicates Plutarch’s positive attitude towards Ancient Sparta, which is especially evident in many Vitae, e.g. Lyc., Ages., Lys. F. Ollier, Le mirage spartiate (Paris 1943) 187-215 argues that the few examples of appraisal of Sparta found in Mor. as compared with Vitae show that Plut. did not in reality admire Sparta very much but was only led on by his high estimation of the great Spartans, particularly Lycurgus, to admire Spartan institutions as well. This conclusion is certainly exaggerated; at Lys. 17.11 Plut. mentions that he wrote a treatise on Spartan laws and customs. This work may be Inst. Lac., where the positive interest in Ancient Sparta is obvious. Also the collections of sayings, Apophth.

Lac.

and Lacaen.

apophth., may have been com-

posed by Plut., see F. C. Babbitt, Plutarch's Moralia Il (LCL) 240 f. and 453. There is also Lamprias’ Catalogue, no. 213 Πῶς δεῖ Λάκωνα μάχεσϑαι.

632 A ὅπου καί: ‘inasmuch as’, ‘considering that’; Plut. frequently uses ὅπου as a causal conjunction, see above, on 622 C.

632 A τὸ μὴ λυπεῖν τῷ σκώμματι: Bolk. rightly rejected λυποῦν Amyot, Steph., printed by all eds., and accepts Ziegler’s conjecture τὸ μὴ λυπεῖν (διὰ) τοῦ σκώμματος. Abram. preserves the dative.

184

TABLE TALKS II 1

632A

632 A 6 Ξενοφὼν τὸν ὑπέραισχρον καὶ ὑπέρδασυν ἐκεῖνον ὡς παιδικὰ τοῦ Σαμβαύλα σκωπτόμενον εἰσάγει: Cyr. II 2.28-31. Sambaulas put on a good face and answered in the affirmative to Cyrus’ impudent question if he brought this ugly fellow with him κατὰ τὸν Ἑλληνικὸν τρόπον, ὅτι καλόν ἐστιν. He saved himself through the absurdity of his affirmative answer but presumably the shaggy fellow was not quite at ease. -- Sambaulas is otherwise unknown. Xen. presents him as a Persian captain (λοχαγός). 632 A Κυήτου τοῦ ἡμετέρου, μέμνησαι γάρ, κτλ.: The identification

of this person has been somewhat problematic. Macrob. Sat. ΝῚ 3.15 has L. Quintus. Plut. dedicated De sera to

a Roman,

whose

name is

written κύνιε (or κύριε) in the MSS, and De frat. am. to him (written

κύντε) and his elder brother, Nigrinus (counted among οἱ συνήϑεις at 487 E). E. Patzig, Quaestiones Plutarcheae (Berolini 1876) 48-51 established that these references concern the same man, Avidius Quietus. However, there are two known individuals so named, presum-

ably father and son. The elder was legate in Thracia in 82 (CIL VI 3828),

then

inscription,

he appears

as proconsul

Sy/l.? 822, dated

91-95;

on

an

amphictyonic

see E. Groab,

honorary

Die römischen

Reichsbeamten von Achaia (Wien-Leipzig 1939) 43f. Plin. Ep. VI 29.1, dated in 102/3 (or 107), writes of him as being already dead. Plutarch's words μέμνησαι γάρ suggest that this talk also took place

after his death. Groag, PIR? I A 1410 (p. 288) presupposes that this Quietus is identical with Plutarch’s friend. Patzig (J. c.), Po. (Plut. Mor. III 221) and Fuhrm.

assume

instead that he was the younger

Avidius Quietus, which is hardly correct, seeing that he is known to have been proconsul (of Asia) as late as 125/6 and probably was consul (suffectus) in 111 (16 years earlier, according to contemporary prac-

tice); see Groag, PIR? I A 1409. Fuhrm. suggests without any evidence that he held a proconsulate earlier than 125/6. There is no good reason

to doubt that C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 22f. is

right in arguing that this talk took place in 91/2 (see above, on 629 F) and that Avidius Quietus the Elder had just resigned from his proconsulate; it follows, then, that Syll? 822 (cited above) can be dated more exactly to 91/2. Incidentally, Fuhrm. rightly suggests that Plut. and Senecio seem to have the proconsulate of Avidius in fairly recent memory. As regards De frat. am, and De sera it cannot be shown that these works were written after 102/3 (or 107); they may well have been

composed before that date, see Einarson, Plut. Mor. (LCL) VIE 171 £.;

632A

TABLE TALKS II 1

Jones, JRS 56 (1966) 70f., id. Plutarch and Rome,

185 51-53. -- Abram.

notices that there may be an allusion here to the relation Avidius — avidus. The expression θερμὰς χεῖρας ἔχειν is not found elsewhere,

although it appears as "fortasse proverbialiter dictum’ (Thes. Lat. s.v. calidus, 153). - For Auphidius Modestus, see above, on 618 F. — The

longer version of the anecdote as told by Macrob. Sat. VII 3.15 caused R. Volkmann, Observationes miscellae (Progr. Jauer 1872) to suggest that Macrob. had the original, full text of the Talks while our text is an

epitomized version. Volkmann also adduced 613 A and 613 E (Macrob. Sat. VII 1.4 and 12) to support his hypothesis. This idea was developed further by H. Linke, Quaestiones de Macrobii Saturnaliorum fontibus, and G. Wissowa, De Macrobii Saturnaliorum fontibus capita tria (both Diss. Vratislaviae 1880). Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 307-317 definitely dismissed this hypothesis. 632 B Κριτόβουλον ὁ Σωχράτης ... ἔπαιξεν, οὐκ ἐχλεύαζεν: Xen. Symp. 4, 18-21. When Critobulus boasts of his beauty and ironically compares himself with Socrates, the latter easily turns it to his advantage by being ironic at his own expense: τί τοῦτο; ἔφη ὁ Σωκράτης" ὡς γὰρ καὶ ἐμοῦ καλλίων ὧν ταῦτα κομπάζεις. Socrates’ proposal of a beauty contest judged by the guests was thus an act of self-irony rather than amiability, as Plut. puts it here. The case is thus not entirely adequate as an example. 632 B καὶ Σωκράτην πάλιν ᾿Αλκιβιάδης ἔσκωπτεν εἰς ζηλοτυπίαν τὴν περὶ 'Ayádovoc: If Plut. thought at Plat. Symp. 213 C here, as Hu. suggests, he made a mistake for it is Alcibiades who is jealous of Socrates, and Socrates teases him for that. Abram. suggests that Plut. may also have thought of Symp. 223 A, but this would mean a still worse mistake, for Alcibiades expresses his jealousy of Socrates there as well and there is no teasing at all. The mistake is the more striking as Plato's Symp. is concerned. Maybe the lapse is simply due to the ambition to vary the style by presenting a reverse (πάλιν) case with Socrates as the object. 632 B ὑπὸ Φιλίππου σκωφϑεὶς ὁ παράσιτος sixev' οὐκ ἐγὼ σὲ τρέφω; The parasite was Cleisophus. Athen. 248 D-F reports this anecdote and many more about him. He uses as sources the ᾿Απομνημονεύματα of Lynceus of Samos and the ᾿πομνημονεύματα

of Hegesander of Delphi.

Athen.

also mentions that Satyrus the

186

TABLE TALKS II 1

632 B

Peripatetic tells that Cleisophos was an Athenian. Athen. quotes the utterance in the fut.: eft’ οὐκ ἐγὼ σὲ ϑρέψω; This is presumably the correct wording; Plut. probably cited from memory, as usual. Fuhrm. is right in reading σέ, with accent. For this kind of ironic κολακεία which uses reversal or contrary conditions as its means, see Ribbeck,

Abh. Leipz. 9 (1884) 53f. 632 B προσεῖναι τὸ χρηστόν: Fuhrm. rightly prints τό Hartm., Hu.: τι T. 632 B εἰ δὲ μή, τὸ λεγόμενον τοὐναντίον ἀμφισβητήσιμον ἔχει τὴν

ὑπόνοιαν: The sentence is certainly sound; there is no reason to delete the article before λεγόμενον (Po.) or before ἐναντίον (Hartm.). Plut. often uses τοὐναντίον as an adverb, cf. De tu. san. 125 D, 137 B,

Coni. praec. 139 C, Apophth. Lac. 217 F. - For ὑπόνοια in the sense of ‘innuendo’, cf. Arist. Eth. Nic. 1128 a 24. 632 C τὸν ὑδροπότην καὶ σώφρονα παροινεῖν xoi μεϑύειν: This phrase is found verbatim at Clem. Paed. II 57.2 where he treats the

same theme: 7 τοιαύτη ἐπίσχωψις ἐμφαίνουσα χαριέντως τὰ προσόντα αὐτῷ (sc. τῷ νέῳ) χρηστὰ διὰ τῆς τῶν φαύλων, ἃ μὴ πρόσεστιν αὐτῷ, διαβολῆς. Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 322 f. discusses

the possibility that Clem. used Plut. as one of his sources here; ἃ definite answer cannot

be given.

It seems

more

probable,

however,

that both used a common source.

632 C κίμβικα καὶ χυμινο(πρίστη)ν: For the correction (Xyl.) cf. Arist. Eth. Nic. 1121 Ὁ 22 of μὲν γὰρ ἐν ταῖς τοιαύταις προσηγορίαις, οἷον φειδωλοί, γλίσχροι, κίμβικες, πάντες τῇ δόσει ἐλλεύτουσι, ... (27) καὶ ὁ κυμινοπρίστης καὶ πᾶς ὁ τοιοῦτος ὠνόμασται δ᾽ ἀπὸ τῆς ὑπερβολῆς τοῦ μηδὲν ἂν δοῦναι. The two words also occur together at Poll. IH 112. Cf. also Hesych. s.v. xuptvongiotau of φειδωλοί.

ὁμοίως καὶ καρδαμογλύφοι, combined by Aristoph. Vesp. 1357 κυμινοπριστοκαρδαμογλύφον, and further Posidipp. frg. 26.12 (ΠῚ 343 Kock) (6 μάγειρος) κυμινοπρίστας πάντας ἢ λίμους καλῶν; Theocr. X 55 μὴ ᾽πιτάμῃς τὰν χεῖρα καταπρίων τὸ κύμινον. Chamaeleon ap. Athen. 656 D calls Simonides κίμβιξ καὶ αἰσχροκερδής. For the proverbial use, see Macar. V 10. (CPG II 178). A different meaning of κυμινοπρίστης, ‘quibbler’, is found in the epitome of Dio Cass. LXX 3.3; see Baldwin, Glotta 60 (1982) 244 f.

632 C

TABLE TALKS II 1

187

632 C ἐν ἀγορᾷ λήψεσθαι: Abram. notices that ἀγορά in the sense of ‘court’ is not found elsewhere and surmises that it might be influenced by Latin forum; she also observes that λαμβάνειν in the sense of

‘convict’ is not registered in LSJ nor in Thes. although this use is found in Stob. III 1.172 (p. 114 H.) κριϑὴς μὴ κάϑησο᾽ εἰ δὲ μή, τῷ ληφϑέντι ἐχϑρὸς ἔσῃ. 632 C οὕτως ὁ Κῦρος κτλ.: The sentence is a highly shortened version of Xen. Cyr. I 4.4. Plut. reports Xen. more truly at De garr. 514 B. The abbreviated form tends to disguise, but cannot conceal, that this

example is entirely out of place here. Xen. tells us that (Κῦρος) qáoxov xáXMov αὐτῶν (sc. τῶν ἡλίκων) ποιήσειν and then ἡττώμενος αὐτὸς ἐφ΄ ἑαυτῷ μάλιστα ἐγέλα. Two things make this example especially inadequate and confusing, (1) the inversed conditions of the parts: instead of being an instance of the subordinate who challenges a superior in a field where he has no chance of surpassing, and thus compliments his great merits, this is a case of condescension on the part of the superior which is not primarily a compliment to the others but a way of advertising oneself as liberal and agreeable; furthermore, (2) there is nothing whatsoever that can be considered

humorous about this case. It is an astonishing example of carelessness on the part of Plut. To surmise with Abram. that this and the following example are marginal annotations is, however, unjustified. 632 C xoi τοῦ ᾿Ισμηνίου τῇ ϑυσίᾳ προσαυλοῦντος κτλ.: Plut. often mentions this Theban piper, cf. Demetr. 1.6, Artax. 22.8, De tranqu. 472 D (where he is denoted as being rich). At Per. 1.5, in an anecdote about Antisthenes the Cynic, his competence is praised: Αντισϑένης ἀχούσας ὅτι σπουδαῖός ἐστιν αὐλητὴς ᾿Ισμηνίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἄνϑρωπος, ἔφη, μοχϑηρός" οὐ γὰρ ἂν οὕτω σπουδαῖος ἦν αὐλητής. But at De

Alex. Mag. fort. very bad piper: ἀκροᾶσϑαι τοῦ s.v. (6). - This

334 B and Non posse 1095 F he is censured as being a ὁ δὲ τῶν Σκυϑῶν βασιλεὺς ᾿Ατέας ... ὥμοσεν ἵππου χρεμετίζοντος ἥδιον. See further Gossen, RE anecdote again does not illustrate the theme under

discussion but is another reported above, 632 AB.

example

of a witty repartee

of the type

632 C ὁ μισϑοδότης: Fuhrm. rightly prints this conjecture by Bolk.: μισϑοτός T; μισϑωτός the later MSS. Μισϑώσας Xyl. is impossible; μισϑωσάμενος Steph. is better; μισϑωτής Bern. is not found in the

188

TABLE TALKS ΠῚ

632 C

sense of ‘hirer’. An example of a hired flautist is found at An seni

786 C. 632 C αἰτιωμένων δὲ τῶν παρόντων, ἔστιν, ἔφη, τὸ κεχαρισμένως αὐλεῖν ϑεόϑεν᾽ ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Ισμηνίας γελάσας κτλ.: The text is intelligible as itis. To read ἀνιωμένων Naber and/or αὐλεῖν (ϑεοῖς) ϑεόϑεν Abram.

is unnecessary. Since the gods accepted the sacrifice, the hirer certainly thought that his amateurish play was inspired by them. That it was agreeable only to them and not to humans he considered irrelevant. It

is exactly this conceited attitude that Ismenias attacked. 632 D καὶ γὰρ δάκνουσι μᾶλλον οἱ διὰ τῶν εὐφήμων ὀνειδίζοντες:

This method for irony is also mentioned by Cic. De or. II 272 est huic finitimum dissimulationi, cum honesto verbo vitiosa res appellatur. 632 D ὡς οἱ τοὺς πονηροὺς ᾿Αριστείδας ... καλοῦντες: For the re-

nowned honesty of Aristides, cf. Plut. Arist. 2.6 ᾿Αριστείδης δὲ xod αὑτὸν ὥσπερ ὁδὸν ἰδίαν ἐβάδιζε διὰ τῆς πολιτείας, πρῶτον μὲν οὐ βουλόμενος συναδικεῖν τοῖς ἑταίροις ἢ λυπηρὸς εἶναι μὴ

χαριζόμενος, ἔπειτα ... ἀδικεῖν ἐφυλάττετο, μόνῳ τῷ χρηστὰ καὶ δίκαια πράσσειν καὶ λέγειν ἀξιῶν ϑαρρεῖν τὸν ἀγαϑὸν πολίτην. CH. also Hdt. VIII 79, 95; Plat. Men. 94 A, Gorg. 526 A-B. 632 D ὃ καὶ (6) τοῦ Σοφοκλέους Οἰδίπους (zxoii* tod) tng Κρέων “U; Fuhrm. rightly prints this reading propounded by Bolk. The article must be added, and ποιεῖ is plausible in the lacuna; a participle

(λέγων Bern., or elonvetwv Po.) is not needed, cf., e.g., 630 E, 678 B. The line (O. R. 385) is carelessly quoted; to understand it, one must recall the reference of (tat) της to line 383 εἰ τῆσδέ γ᾽ ἀρχῆς οὕνεχ᾽, ἣν ἐμοὶ πόλις .. . εἰσεχείρισεν, and to the next: λάϑρᾳ y ὑπελϑὼν

ἐχβαλεῖν ἱμείρεται. Presumably Plut. overlooked the context because he concentrated his thoughts on the words essential to his theme, ó

πιστὸς οὐξ ἀρχῆς φίλος. Bolk. supposes that he cited the line from his notes wihtout recalling the context. 632 D γένος εἶναι εἰρωνείας: To eliminate the hiatus Bens. added the

article (τῆς) εἰρωνείας. accepted by all later eds. Plut. often allows for ἀνόσιος, 170 F εἶναι ὁ

The transposition εἰρωνείας εἶναι Bern. was But the text is sound. As was shown by Bolk., hiatus after εἶναι: De superst. 169 F εἶναι ἄϑεος, De def. or. 410 C εἶναι ἀπό, 412 A

632 D

TABLE TALKS II 1

189

ξυνεῖναι ἁγίων, De soll. an. 971 A εἶναι αὑτοῦ, etc., as well as other

infinitives in -vat, -oat, e.g. 737 A ἀφεῖναι ἐλευϑερίους. On hiatus in Plut., see also on 624 E and 637 D. -- For the various kinds of irony,

see Ribbeck, Rh. Mus. 31 (1876) 381-400; Navarre, REG 27 (1914) 405f.; H. Lausberg,

Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik? (München

1967) 78f.; J. Martin, Antike Rhetorik (München 1974) 263 f. 632 E ᾧ καὶ Σωκράτης ἐχρήσατο: The reference is to Xen. Symp. 4. 61-64. Socrates, the practitioner par préférence of the art of irony, was of course nearest at hand for an example. 632 E Κράτητα δὲ τὸν φιλόσοφον, εἰς πᾶσαν οἰκίαν εἰσιόντα μετὰ

τιμῆς ... δεχομένων, ϑυρεπανοίκτην ἐκάλουν: This is the third example; the second is entirely lost: a lacuna extending over about two lines

is marked in T. — Crates of Thebes, the Cynic, was a pupil of Diogenes and Bryson (Suda, s.v. Κράτης) or only the latter (Diog. Laert. V1

85). According to Julian. Or. IX (VI) 200 B, and Lamprias’ Catalogue, no. 37, Plut. wrote his biography, presumably because he was his compatriot. At De ad. et am. 69 C-D he relates a eulogistic anecdote of an encounter between Crates and Demetrius of Phaleron. Julian. o. c. 201 B reports that Crates ἐπορεύετο δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς τῶν φίλων ἑστίας, ἄκλητος καὶ κεκλημένος, and that people wrote on their doors

(200 B): Εἴσοδος Κράτητι, ἀγαϑῷ δαίμονι. Diog. Laert. VI 86 and Suda mention the epithet, ‘burglar’, but without mentioning that the

philosopher was welcome; its positive meaning is made clear only here. 632 E μέμψις ἐμφαίνουσα χάριν: Χάρις means ‘gratitude’ here. The

parallel, Cic. De or. errantis, adduced by expressing gratitude disguised as blame, Crates.

11 281 bella etiam est familiaris reprehensio quasi Hu., is not an example of censure as a means of specifically. It applies more generally to praise as in the preceding cases of Antisthenes and

632 E ὡς Διογένης περὶ ᾿Αντισϑένους

ἔλεγεν κτλ.: The

two lines

(Adesp. frg. 394 Nauck?) are not found elsewhere. Snell, TrGF I 257 hesitatingly attributed them to Diogenes of Sinope. 632 EF ἄκαπνα ξύλα τῷ γυμνασιάρχῳ παρασχόντι xtA.: That the γυμνασίαρχος had to supply firewood is evidenced in Inscr. Prien.

112.97 (of Zosimus the gymnasiarch): ἔκαυσε τὸ καπνιστήριον διὰ

190

TABLE TALKS II 1

632 EF

τοῦ χειμῶνος ὅλου. The meaning of καπνιστήριον is uncertain. Hiller v, Gaertringen (ad loc.) thinks that it may have been a kind of steambath, but διὰ τοῦ χειμῶνος ὅλου suggests that it was a stove heated only during the winter. When the gymnasium of Chios was founded by Attalus it was expressly stated that he would supply firewood εἰς τὴν τοῦ πυρὸς καῦσιν ἐν τ[ῷ] γυμνασίῳ (᾿4ϑηνᾶ 20 (1908) 163 no. 3 col. 2.4). — The anecdote is not found elsewhere.

Incidentally, it is not an

example of expressing gratitude in the form of censure; it is an example of pure, sarcastic blame. 632 F καὶ (6) τὸν δειπνίξζοντα: Franke’s addition is necessary: the subject is obviously not ὁ Λάκων but some anonymous παράσιτος. In enumerating all these examples Plut. apparently neglects style. He begins four successive sentences with καὶ and the first three with καὶ 6. For more examples of repetitive style in Plut., see above, on 624 E πικρὰ τῇ γεύσει. 632 F ἀφῃρῆσϑαι τὴν σχολὴν καὶ τὸν ὕπνον, πλούσιος γεγονὼς ἐκ πένητος: The idea that wealth causes concern and insomnia is a commonplace, cf. Stob. IV 31.78 (Anacreon), IV 33.13 (Men.); Xen.

Cyr. VIII 3.40. 632 F τοὺς Αἰσχύλον Καβείρους ὄξους σπανίζειν δῶμα ποιήσαντας:

Frg. 97 Nauck?. Almost nothing is known of Aeschylus’ Κάβειροι. Welcker (Nauck?, p. 31) thought that this play was part of a trilogy together with “Ὑψιπύλη and 'Aoyó. According to Athen. 428F πρῶτος γὰρ ἐκεῖνος (sc. Αἰσχύλος) ... παρήγαγε τὴν τῶν μεϑυόντων ὄψιν εἰς τραγῳδίαν. ἐν γὰρ τοῖς Καβείροις εἰσάγει τοὺς περὶ τὸν Ἰάσονα μεϑύοντας. The meaning of this fragment is elucidated by frg. 96 μήτε κρωσσοὺς | μήτ᾽ οἰνηροὺς und” ὑδρηλοὺς | λιπεῖν ἀφνεοῖσι δόμοισι. The Cabiri promised the Argonauts to make the supply of wine so abundant as to leave no jars for preserving vinegar. For a commentary on the fragments of Aeschyl. Κάβειροι see C. A. Lobeck, Aglaophamus (Regimonti 1829) II 1207-1220. The Cabiri were a trio of non-Greek origin; presumably they derived from Asia Minor, see

Nilsson Gr. Rel.? 1 670. The oldest centre of their cult was Samothrace and they were introduced early (6th c.) in Thebes where they were worshipped in the Καβείρειον near the city, cf. Paus. ΙΧ 25.5. Through Orphic influence their cult was transformed into mysteries, see Nilsson, o. c. 672, 831 f.; Farnell III 207 f.;

J. E. Harrison, Prolego-

632 F

TABLE TALKS II 1

191

mena to the Study of Greek Religion’ (Cambridge 1922) 652 fig. 175. According to Strab. X 3.19 the Cabiri were identified with the Corybantes. 633 A ἅπτεται γὰρ ταῦτα μᾶλλον ἔχοντα δριμυτέραν χάριν, ὥστε μὴ

προσίστασϑαι μηδὲ λυπεῖν τοὺς ἐπαινουμένους: Abram. remarks that one would expect instead ὥστε μᾶλλον εὐφραίνειν or the like. Fuhrm. supposes that, at this point in his lecture, Plut. recalled all kinds of jokes treated so far (covered by ταῦτα). This may be true (the wording seems to echo 629 E εἰ γὰρ ἐπαινοῦντες ... προσίστανται), but this makes no difference: the line of thought is illogical; moreover,

there is a ζεῦγμα: only λυπεῖν goes with the object; προσίστασϑαι takes the dative (however, this verb may be absolute here). 633 A τὸν ἐμμελῶς σκώμματι χρησόμενον κτλ.: The requirement for

tact when joking is typical of the Middle and the New Comedy, cf. Tzetzes, In Aristoph. III 12 (CGF I 27 Kaibel) τῆς μέσης δὲ xai δευτέρας ἦν γνώρισμα τὸ συμβολικωτέρως, μὴ καταδήλως λέγειν xà

σκώμματα. It is part of the Peripatetic doctrine, cf. Arist. Rhet. 1371 Ὁ 35 ἀνάγκη καὶ τὰ γελοῖα ἡδέα εἶναι; Quintil. VI 3.28 laedere numquam velimus, 33 nam adversus miseros ... inhumanus est iocus. See Kaibel, Abh. Gott. 2:4 (1898) S6f. 633 A Δημοσϑένης

ὁ Μιτυληναῖος:

This D. is not mentioned else-

where. - The metathesized form Μιτυληναῖος appears on inscriptions

from c. 300 B. C.: Syll.? 344.31 (303 B. C.); IG II? 9969.1, 2, 4 (3rd c. B. C.). A transitional form Μυτυληναῖος is found in the 4th c.: IG IP 9967.3. Plut. prefers the metathesized form. 633 A φιλοκιϑαριστοῦ: Herw. observes that logic would demand φιλοκιϑάρου, ‘one who loves the cithara’, but "φιλοκίϑαρος or *pıkoκιϑάρας are not found. It is true that the distinction between the two

formations is normally upheld: φιλοδειπνιστής : φιλόδειπνος, φιλοχρηματιστής

: φιλοχρήματος,

but cf. φιλοπωριστής

(not *quióno-

05), "loving autumn-fruits'. 633 A ἂν πρῶτον, ἔφη, τὴν κιϑάραν δήσῃς: The exact meaning of κιϑάραν δῆσαι is unknown. Reich. translates ‘eingesperrt’, and Clem. similarly: ‘lock up’. Fuhrm. renders *accroche'. But δέω is not found in

any of these senses. Abram. assumes that δῆσαι = ἐκ πασσάλου δῆσαι

192

TABLE TALKS II 1

and suggests (by communication)

633 A

that the meaning is ‘die Saiten

anspannen’, a persuasive interpretation; κυϑάραν δῆσαι obviously means some measure taken to keep the strings silent, presumably by

tightening some kind of ribbon across them. Such a device may be what is meant at Apul. Flor. II 15 (53) cithara balteo caelato apta strictim sustinetur. For the phrase ἐκ πασσάλου δῆσαι, cf. Hdt. IV 72 χαλινοὺς δὲ καὶ στόμια ἐμβαλόντες ἐς τοὺς ἵππους κατατείνουσι ἐς τὸ πρόσϑε αὐτῶν καὶ ἔπειτα ἐκ πασσάλων δέουσι. Abram. notices that Demosthenes’ reply appears rather harsh and not at all tactful. 633 B ὁ τοῦ Λυσι(μάχ)ου παράσιτος: Athen. 246 E also reports this

anecdote. He gives the name of the parasite, Bithys -- whom he citing Phylarchus) mentions as one of the principal favourites simachus - and he also provides the explanatory information: Λυσίμαχος μικρολογώτατος. He also states his source (244 F):

(614 F, of Lyἦν δ᾽ ὁ Γελοῖα

ἀπομνημονεύματα by Aristodemus. For Bithys, see Wilcken, RE s.v.

(6). Lysimachus was renowned for his skill in economics. According to Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 823 D and Demetr. 25.7, and Athen. 261 B, he was called γαζοφύλαξ. 633 Β τοιαῦται διαφοραὶ ποιοτήτων:

Clem. prints τῶν ποιοτήτων

Helmbold and Bolk. (independently as it seems); τῶν πολλῶν T is meaningless (it is neglected in the Latin translation; Fuhrm. tries in vain to translate: ‘en général’). 1 omit the article; περὶ τὰ σωματικά defines the word. 633 B εἰς γουπότητα

καὶ σιμότητα:

Neither of these profiles was

regarded as handsome by the Greeks. Both were looked upon as deviations from the norm.

Arist. Rhet.

1360 a 25 compares:

οἷον

δημοκρατία οὐ μόνον ἀνιεμένη ἀσϑενεσϑέρα γίνεται, ὥστε τέλος ἥξει εἰς ὀλιγαρχίαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπιτεινομένη σφόδρα, ὥσπερ καὶ ἡ γρουπότης καὶ ἡ σιμότης οὐ μόνον ἀνιεμένα ἔρχεται εἰς τὸ μέσον,

ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα γρυπὰ γινόμενα ἢ σιμὰ οὕτω διατίϑεται ὥστε μηδὲ μυκτῆρα δοκεῖν εἶναι. The same comparison is found at Pol. 1309 b 20-31 where, however, a slight deviation is accepted: ὅμως ἔτι καλὴ

(sc. ἡ δὶς παρεκβεβηκυῖα τὴν εὐθύτητα τὴν καλλίστην) καὶ χάριν ἔχουσα πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν. Plat. Rep. 474 D states that both lines are

attractive to lovers: 6 μέν, ὅτι σιμός, ἐπίχαρις κληϑεὶς ἐπαινεϑήσεται by ὑμῶν, τοῦ δὲ τὸ γρυπὸν βασιλικόν φατε εἶναι (cited by Plut. De aud. 45 A). A hooked nose was less objectionable than a snub nose; it

633 B

TABLE TALKS ΠῚ

193

was regarded as noble, cf. Praec. ger. reip. 821 F Πέρσαι δ᾽, ὅτι γρυπὸς ἦν ὁ Κῦρος, ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἐρῶσι τῶν γρυπῶν xai καλλίστους ὑπολαμβάνουσιν.

Anton.

For this opinion among

4.1 προσῆν

γρυπότης

μυκτῆρος

δὲ καὶ

μορφῆς

ἐδόκει

τοῖς

Greeks and Romans,

ἐλευϑέριον ἀξίωμα

γραφομένοις

καὶ

cf.

... καὶ

πλαττομένοις

Ἡρακλέους προσώποις ἐμφερὲς ἔχευν τὸ ἀρρενωπόν, Socrates was able to jest about his snub nose (Xen. Symp. 5.6) but it was generally considered ungraceful (Public. 16.7) and there was also prejudice against people with a snub nose: Ps.-Arist. Physiognom. 811 Ὁ 3 οἱ δὲ σιμὴν ἔχοντες λάγνοι. 633 B ὁ Κασάνδρου φίλος: The man cannot be identified. Among the friends of Cassander were Demetrius of Phaleron, Deinarchus the rhetor, and the author Euemerus; see Jacoby, RE s.v. Kassandros, 23D f. 633B

τοὺς

ὀφθαλμοὺς

ὅτι

οὐκ

ἄϑουσιν,

τοῦ

μυκτῆρος

αὐτοῖς

ἐνδεδωκότος: The snub nose is compared with a double flute, and the eyes with a chorus, The verb ἐνδίδωμι here means ‘give the keynote’, ‘intone’, ‘strike up’, cf. Lucian. Rhet. praec.

13 ἐπεὶ τούς ye ἄλλους

τοσοῦτον ὑπερφωνοῦντα εὑρήσεις ὁπόσον ... oi χοροὶ τοὺς ἐνδιδόντας; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. VII 72.6 ἐνεδίδου τοῖς ἄλλοις τὰ τῆς ὀρχήσεως σχήματα; Arist. frg. 583 Rose ἐνέδοσαν τοῖς ἵπποις τὸ ὀρχηστικὸν μέλος" συμπαρῆσαν γὰρ αὐτοῖς καὶ αὐληταί. The nostrils are called δίαυλοι by Oppian. Cyneg. II 181; and there also exists the verb ῥιναυλεῖν (Lucian. Lexiph. 19). 633 BC ὁ Κῦρος ἐκέλευσε τὸν γρυπὸν (σιμὸν ἀγαγέσϑαι γύναιον): Xen. Cyr. VIII 4. 21. The young man with the hooked nose was . Chrysantas; the occasion was a banquet. — The addition (Bern.) is palaeographically persuasive, although (σιμὴν à. γυναῖκα) Amyot, Turn. might also be right. The verb could also be γαμῆσαι (cf. Xen.

Cyr. VIII 4.20). 633 ( εἰς δὲ δυσωδίαν μυκτῆρος ἢ στόματος ἄχϑονται σκωπτόμενοι: There are many examples of that: Arist. Pol. 1311 b 33 ὁ δ᾽ Εὐριπίδης ἐχαλέπαινεν εἰπόντος τι αὐτοῦ εἰς δυσωδίαν τοῦ στόματος. A wellknown anecdote is told of Hieron by Plut. De cap. ex inim. 90 B (also Reg. apophth. 175 BC). Lucian. Herm. 34 tells the same thing of Gelon. To judge from Martial. XII 59.10 and XII 85, the bad smell was thought to indicate obscene habits.

194

TABLE TALKS ΠῚ

633 C

633 C εἰς φαλαχρότητα πράως φέρουσι: Teasing about baldness is common in comedy, cf. Aristoph. Nub. 540 οὐδ᾽ ἔσκωψε τοὺς φαλακρούς; Sophron, frg. 108 (CGF I 171 Kaibel). Aristoph. often jests about his own baldness, which might indicate that he had no complex about it, cf. Equ. 548 tv ὁ ποιητὴς ἀπίῃ χαίρων | ... | φαιδρὸς λάμποντι μεϑώπῳ, Nub. 545 κἀγὼ μὲν τοιοῦτος ἀνὴρ ὧν ποιητὴς o0 κομῶ, Pax 771 φέρε τῷ φαλακρῷ, δὸς τῷ φαλακρῷ. Synesius even wrote ἃ Φαλάκρας ἐγκώμιον, beginning by ridiculing

himself due to his baldness, and declaring his aim (5.67 A): οὑμὸς οὖν λόγος ὁριεῖ πάντων ἥκιστα χρῆναι φαλακρὸν

ἄνδρα αἰσχύνεσθϑαι.

But cf. below, 634 D where irony at one’s own expense is said to be needed to take away bitterness, so also explicitly at De prof. ex inim. 88 EF. At De exil. 607 A teasing about baldness is sided with abuse for being poor or short or a foreigner or immigrant. Baldness was also

exploited for proverbs, cf. Diogenian. III 88 (CPG II 50) φαλακρὸς utéva’ ἐπὶ τῶν εἰς μηδέν τι συντελούντων. 633 C εἰς δὲ πήρωσιν ὀφθαλμῶν ἀηδῶς: This is because, in this case, pity is predominating, cf. Epicharm. frg. 285 (CGF I 143 Kaibel) τυφλὸν ἠλέησ᾽ ἰδών τις, ἐφϑόνησς δ᾽ οὐδὲ εἷς. However, the anecdote of Leon of Byzantium related below (633 CD) and at De prof. ex inim.

88 F shows that jeering at eye diseases occasionally occurred. Restrictions on teasing about bodily defects are considered by Cic. De or. II

239: est etiam deformitatis et corporis vitiorum satis bella materies ad iocandum; sed quaerimus ... quatenus. However, he did not hesitate

himself to indulge in the coarsest personal abuse, as in In Vat. or In Pis. 633 C ᾿Αντίγονος: The most common nickname of Antigonus was Μονόφϑαλμος (Polyb. V 67.6) but he was also called ἑτερόφϑαλμος. The

Atticists

maintain

a distinction

between

the

two

terms,

e.g.,

Phrynich. Anecd. I 280 Bekk. μονόφϑαλμος" &voc τι ἀνθρώπων ἕνα ὀφθαλμὸν

ἐχόντων.

τοὺς

γὰρ

τὸν

ἕτερον

éxxonévtag

ὀφϑαλμὸν

ἑτεροφϑάλμους καλοῦσιν. The distinction may actually have been kept in Classical times, cf. Hdt. III 116 μουνόφϑαλμοι ἄνδρες φύονται. Antigonus was also called Κύκλωψ: Aelian. V. H. XII 43;

Ps.-Plut. De educ. 11 C. 633 C καὶ τυφλῷ δῆλα: A commonplace (Non posse 1098 F; Plat. Rep. 550 D), related to the so-called G5tvatov-type of proverbs, cf. CPG 1 343-348, and see Rowe, AJP 86 (1965) 387-396.

633 C

TABLE TALKS II 1

195

633 C Θεόκριτον δὲ τὸν Χῖον ἀπέκτεινεν,

ὅτι, φήσαντός τινος εἰς

ὀφθαλμοὺς ἂν (βασιλέως παγραγένῃ, σωϑήζ(σῃ), ἀλλά μοι, εἶπεν, ἀδύνατον (δῆ)τ᾽ ἀπο(φαίνεις) τὴν σωτηρίαν: The correction τινος εἰς Turn.: τῇ T, and the supplementations {βασιλέως πα)ραγένῃ, σωϑή(σῃ) Turn. and Bern. are supported by Macrob. Sat. VII 3.12.

The conjecture ἀλλά μοι Dübn.: ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα Τ is persuasive, although ἀλλὰ μὰ AC Cast. may also be right. For Theocritus' answer I propose a reading which seems to me probable; Clem. prints ἀδύνατόν τιν᾽ ὑπο(φαίνεις) t. o. Po., but the indef. pron. is out of place and the verb is inadequate; ἀποφαίνω is frequent in Plut., cf. e.g., Non posse 1095 C φιλοϑέωρον μὲν ἀποφαίνων τὸν σοφόν, 1005 F οὐκ ἐμμελέστερον ἀποφαίνουσι τὸν Σκύϑην ᾿Ατέαν, Adv. Col. 1122 A παντὶ τῷ τὸν ᾿Ακαδημαϊκὸν λόγον ἄνωϑεν ἥκειν εἰς ᾿Ακεσίλαον ἀποφαίνοντι, 1125 C οἱ τὸ βασιλεύειν ἁμαρτίαν ... ἀποφαίνοντες, Macrob. (I. c.) has: ergo impossibilem mihi dicitis spem salutis. -- Plut. mentions Theocritus the sophist and jester above, 631 E; and the story of his execution is also told at Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 11 B-C but in

another version: The king sent his chief cook to Theocritus repeatedly (πολλάκις) to ask him to come and engage in discussion. At last the sophist answered the cook: εὖ οἶδ᾽, ἔφησεν, ὅτι ὠμόν με ϑέλεις τῷ Κύχλωπι παραϑεῖναι, ὀνειδίζων τὸν μὲν ὅτι πηρός, τὸν δ᾽ ὅτι μάγειρος ἦν. And we are told that ἀπήγγειλε τὰ εἰρημένα τῷ βασιλεῖ,

ὁ δὲ πέμψας ἀνεῖλε τὸν Θεόκριτον. Macrob. (1. c.) who has a longer version of our passage appears to show that Theocritus made two offensive jests upon the king’s disfigurement, first in the presence of the cook and then before the king: Antigonus rex Theocritum Chium, de quo iuraverat quod ei parsiturus esset, occidit propter scomma ab eodem de se dictum. cum enim quasi puniendus ad Antigonum raperetur, solantibus eum amicis ac spem pollicentibus quod omni modo clementiam regis expecturus esset, cum ad oculos venisset, respondit:

etc. (see above). It was evidently only this second jeer which exasperated the king to the point of rage. Antigonus was renowned for his clemency and self-restraint, cf. Plut. De coh. ira 458 F; Sen. De ira Ill

22.4-5. The fact that the tragic end of Theocritus was a two-step course of event has been overlooked, see Laqueur, RE s.v. Theokritos (2) 2026f., and S.-T. T. Hermes 117 (1989). 633 CD (Λέων) ὁ Βυζάντιος κτλ.: This is probably the original version of the anecdote. Plut. tells a different one at De cap. ex inim. 88 Ε: Λέων ὁ Βυζάντιος ὑπὸ κυρτοῦ λοιδορηϑεὶς εἰς viv τῶν

196

TABLE TALKS II 1

633 CD

ὀμμάτων ἀσϑένειαν, ἀνθρώπινον, ἔφη, πάϑος ὀνειδίζεις, ἐπὶ τοῦ γώτου φέρων τὴν νέμεσιν. This is probably a simplified, shortened

variant. We have no information elsewhere that Pasiades was humpbacked. Plut. relates an anecdote about him at De Alex. Mag. fort.

338 AB where he retorts the boastful Lysimachus. K. Mittelhaus, De Plutarchi praeceptis gerendae reipublicae (Diss. Berolini 1911) 49f. suggests that our anecdote may derive from Theophr. -- Leon is known as a strenuous defender of his city against Philip of Macedon, and his ready wit rendered him the epithet of sophist. There are many anecdotes illustrating this, cf. Praec. ger. reip. 804 AB; Philostr. V. Soph. I

2 (485). See further Bux, RE s.v. (23) 2009-2011. - The term ophthalmia denoted many kinds of eye diseases, above all trachoma, Ophtalmia Aegyptica, cf. the description at Gal. XIV 768 K. ὀφθαλμία δέ ἐστιν, ὅταν τὸ λευκὸν ἐνερευϑὲς ἡ καὶ τὰ βλέφαρα ἐπηρμένα μετὰ τοῦ τήν τε μύσιν τῶν βλεφάρων

ἐπαλγῆ

εἶναι καὶ τὴν τῶν χειρῶν

ἐπαφὴν ἐπώδυνον. φλεγμονὴ δέ ἐστιν ἐπίτασις τοῦ τε ἐρυϑήματος καὶ τῆς ἐπάρσεως τῶν βλεφάρων.

Several different cures are pre-

scribed, cf, Hipp. IX 158 L.; Gal. X 902 f., XI 299-301, XIV 408 f. K.; Plut. De sera 559 F (bloodletting); Cels. VI 6.26-28. Its contagiousness was notorious, cf. Gal. VII 279 K. ὥσπερ γε xai ὅτι συνδιατρίβειν tolg

ψώρας

λοιμώττουσιν

ἐπισφαλές:

τινος ἢ ὀφϑαλμίας;

ἀπολαῦσαι

Plat. Phaedr.

γὰρ

κίνδυνος

ὥσπερ

255 D οἷον ἀπ᾿

ἄλλου

ὀφϑαλμίας ἀπολελαυκώς; Plut. Cons. ad ux. 610C τῷ μὲν ὀφϑαλμιῶντι τὰς χεῖρας οὐκ ἐῶσι προσάγειν, De ad. et am. 53 C ἂν

μή τις otov ὀφθαλμίας ἀπορροὴ καὶ ἀνάχρωσις ἄκοντα δι᾽ ὁμιλίαν καὶ συνήϑειαν ἀναπλήσῃ φαυλότητος, and below, 681 D. Ophthalmia would cause blindness, cf. 705 C. It may be that Leon’s remark was an

allusion to some particular kind of contaminating contact, cf. Alex. Trall. Περὶ ὀφϑ. Puschmann, Nachträge, p. 156 πυκνώτερον ὀφϑαλμιῶσι . . . καὶ of ἄγαν φιλόλουτροι καὶ of ἀφροδισίοις πολλοῖς χρώμενοι; Ps.-Arist. Probl. 880 b 8 διὰ τί, ἐὰν ἀφροδισιάζῃ ὁ ἄνϑρωπος, οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἀσϑενοῦσι μάλιστα; -- Humpbacks may have been credited with having the evil eye, as is still believed in modern

times in Sicily, or to have been struck by the glance of a person having this power, a belief found in northern Italy, see S. Seligman, Der bóse Blick II (Berlin 1910) 213, and id. Die Zauberkraft des Auges (Hamburg 1922) 330f.

633 D 'Aoyvtxoc ὁ δημαγωγὸς xt: The fact that this Athenian demagogue is otherwise unknown is curious, considering that he was a

633 D

TABLE TALKS II 1

197

hunchback, and even more if he was actually a προστάτης τῆς πόλεως.

Presumably, he only held an insignificant office. — If Melanthius is identical with the tragic poet mentioned above, 631 D, which is probable, pace U. v. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Aristoteles und Athen (Berlin 1893) I 287 n. 37 (see Modrze, RE s.v. Melanthios (10) 429),

the time would be that of the Peloponnesian War. For the wit of M., cf. also Plut. De aud. 41 D, Coni. praec. 144 BC. 633 D τινὲς δὲ ταῦτα πράως καὶ μετρίως φέρουσιν, ὥσπερ ὁ φέλος τοῦ ᾿Αντιγόνου ... προσπαίξαντος κτλ.: The anecdote is not found

elsewhere and the friend cannot be identified. Bolk. thinks that ταῦτα means talia corporis vitia’, not σκώμματα, so also Clem. and Fuhrm. This is mistaken; the word stands for σκώμματα, as at 633 A πρὸς ταῦτα δ᾽ ἡδέως ἔχουσιν, and 633 C εἰς φαλακρότητα πράως φέρουσιν. And the interpretation of the anecdote is not dependent on the reference of ταῦτα, as Bolk. thinks. The crucial problem is only

how to emend the obviously corrupt προστάξας. There are two competing interpretations, (1) the friend’s utterance extends to the end of the sentence, so Wytt. and Bolk. Fuhrm. conjectures προσεοικώς for προστάξας, but this does not make it clear that the king, in refusing him the talent, referred to the friend’s hunchback; and Abram. re-

marks that a simple ironic allusion made by the friend at his own expense would be pointless and quite inadequate as an example of endurance of teasing about one’s affliction. The other interpretation (2) is to be preferred: the friend's repartee is confined to ὅπως ... μὴ ἐπιβουλευϑῶ.. Two conjectures are possible: προσταχϑείς Si., or προσπαίξαντος Kron. Clem. rightly prefers the latter; it is natural that

the participle should belong to Antigonus. The participle phrase is postponed so as to form an explication of the friend’s repartee. 633 E ἄλλοι yao ἐπ᾿ ἄλλοις (ἄχϑονται). ['Exoapewóvóag ... ἐπίσταμαι]: The addition (Steph.) is obvious, cf. 633 A. The anecdote of Epaminondas does not suit the context; the line of thought continues after it. Wytt. and Hu. thought that the anecdote has some connection with 633 A. But it does not fit in there any better. Abram. notices that the only element common to the two passages is ὄξος and suggests that it may derive from some collection of apophthegms by (Ps.-)Plut., e.g., Reg. apophth. where (192 D-E) the moderate eating and drinking habits of E. are illustrated. -- Ὄξος here probably denotes the mixture of water and vinegar (Lat. posca) which was generally

198

TABLE TALKS II 1

633 E

drunk by soldiers, cf. Cato Mai. 1.10 ὕδωρ δ᾽ ἔπινεν ἐπὶ στρατείας, πλὴν εἴποτε διψήσας περιφλεγῶς ὄξος ἤτησεν ἢ τῆς ἰσχύος ἐνδιδούσης ἐπιλάβοι μικρὸν οἰνάριον, and NT Luc. 23.36 οἱ στρατιῶται ... ὄξος προσφέροντες αὐτῷ. 633 E διὸ δεῖ... ἀλύπως καὶ κεχαρισμένως ἑχάστοις ὁμιλεῖν: Plut. rounds off this part of his lecture on jesting by emphasizing the demand for agreeable manners and discretion. This is well-advised considering that some of the anecdotes just reported are far from being

examples of that. The concern for delicacy presents itself naturally here when he passes on to speak of joking about love. 633 E δεῖ δ᾽ εἰδέναι τὸν καιρόν: The aspect of the right occasion was

also mentioned above, 631 C. Here καιρός refers to different stages in the development of love. 633 E ὡς γὰρ τὸ πῦρ ἐν ἀρχῇ μὲν ἀποσβέννυσι τὸ πνεῦμα: Bolk. is probably right in supposing that Plut. reversed the order of the subject and the object to avoid hiatus. Naber, Mnem. 27 (1899) 159-161 collected examples of such unusual word-order in the Lives. Bolk. points out that there are very few instances in Plut. of hiatus in neuters in -μα; for some exx., see J. Schellens, De hiatu in Plutarchi Moralibus

(Diss. Bonnae 1864) 7. 633 F ἀποκαλύπτοντας:

Clem.

mentions

ἀποσκώπτοντας

Blümner

(Hermes 51 (1916) 418), and Helmbold, but the preceding λανϑάνων shows that ἀποκαλύστοντας is correct.

633 Ε ἥδιστα δὲ σκώπτονται παρύντων τῶν ἐρωμένων εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ ἐρᾶν, εἰς ἄλλο δ᾽ οὐδέν: Fuhrm. thinks without reason that some phrase ‘contenant une objection restrictive’ has fallen out after ἐρωμένων. But the sentence is entirely lucid and integrate. 633 Ε γυναικῶν ἐρῶντες ἰδίων ... ἢ νεανίσκων φιλοχάλων: For Piutarch’s views on these matters, see above, on 619 A ὅσοις ἔρωτος

δῆγμα. 634 A διὸ καὶ Ἀρκεσίλαος xtÀ.: The anecdote is well-chosen: not only could the ἐρωτικός stand the repartee, he even provoked it himself

through his contribution. The problem he brought up is discussed at

634 A

TABLE TALKS II 1

199

Sext. Emp. Adv. math. III 78-80: given that the surface of a body is logically distinct from the body itself, contact appears to be possible only between the surfaces, not between the bodies themselves. The anecdote indicates that the problem had already been brought to the

fore in the Academy at Arcesilaus’ times. The use of μετάδοσις in the sense of ‘contribution to discussion’, ‘proposition’, is unparalleled. Mez., Herw. proposed ὑποϑέσεως. — Arcesilaus was renowned for his ready wit, cf. below, 705 E, and Diog. Laert. IV 37 ἦν δὲ xai εὑρεσιλογώτατος ἀπαντῆναι εὐστόχως. 634 A τὸ τῶν παρόντων: ‘the character/interests of the guests present’, so also at 613 D. The expression comes from Plat. Gorg. 458 B. 634 A ἀνυποδησίαν ἢ νυκτογραφίαν κτλ.: ‘Avunoönola was one of the oddities of Socrates and after him particular to the Cynics. Other Cynic pecularities were wearing a full beard, a threadbare cloak and a stick (πώγων, τρίβων, βακτηρία). Nuxtoyeagta is only found in Plut., in an anecdote about Demosth. (Demosth. 11.6, Praec. ger. reip. 803 CD). - Μυιρολογία reminds one of the niggardly characters of comedy, such as Strepsiades in Aristoph. Nub. 634 B ὡς ὁ Τιγράνης κτλ.: In using Xen. Cyr. III 1.43 as an example of a husband who serves his wife Plut. commits a misrepresentation: Tigranes, the Armenian prince, is eager to offer his services, even as

σκχευοφώρος, to Cyrus. The mistake is due to citation from memory; presumably Plut. confused the recollection of that passage with Cyr. UI 1.36, where Tigranes says that he would give up his life to prevent his wife being enslaved, and 41, where she comments upon his prom-

ise. 634 B ἁμωσγέπως: This is one of Plutarch's numerous Atticistic ex-

pressions, cf. Wytt. Anim. ad 71 F, 73 E. For other Atticistic elements in Plut., see B. Weissenberger, Die Sprache Plutarchs (Diss. Würzburg 1895) 3-11.

634 B ὅταν εἰς πενίαν λέγῃ (τι) πένης: Clem. prints otov ἄν Hu. but ὅταν is acceptable. But the verb lacks an object. The addition (Bolk., after Xyl.) is easy and plausible; τι was dropped before x, as at 630 A.

Another ex. is found at De tu. san. 124 C: ἅμα τι παίζων καὶ λέγων εἰς ἑαυτόν. — For the idea that the bitterness of jesting is taken away if the jester himself has the defect, cf. De prof. in virt. 88 EF.

200

TABLE TALKS II 1

634B

634 B τὸν γοῦν ἀπελεύϑερον τοῦ βασιλέως, νεύπλουτον ὄντα, κτλ.: Arist. Rhet. 1391 a 15 characterizes the nouveau-riche: διαφέρει δὲ

τοῖς νεωστὶ κεκτημένοις καὶ τοῖς πάλαι τὰ ἤϑη τῷ ἅπαντα μᾶλλον καὶ φαυλότερα τὰ κακὰ ἔχειν τοὺς νεοπλούτους᾽ ὥσπερ γὰρ ἀπαιδευσία πλούτου ἐστὶ τὸ νεόπλουτον εἶναι. Lucian. Hist. conscr. 20 uses the nouveau-riche freedman as an example: ὁπόταν ἐς πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα πράγματα ἐμπέσωσιν ἐοίκασιν οἰκέτῃ νεοπλούτῳ ἄρτι κληρονο-

μήσαντι τοῦ δεσπότου. 634 ( πῶς ἔκ τε τῶν λευκῶν καὶ τῶν μελάνων κυάμων ὁμοίως χλωρὸν γίνεται τὸ ἔτνος: The white and the black beans are the socalled ᾿Ελληνικὸς κύαμος (Vicia Faba L.) and the Αἰγύπτιος κύαμος

(Nymphaea Nelumbo L., Nelumbium speciosum Willd.) respectively. Both plants were important for alimentation as well as pharmaceutics, although especially the white bean was notorious for being flatulent, cf. Dioscur. II 105.1 κύαμος “Ἑλληνικὸς πνευματωτικός, φυσώδης,

δύσπεπτος; Henioch. frg. 4.7 (II 432 Kock) ἔτνος κυάμινον διότι τὴν

μὲν γαστέρα | φυσᾷ, τὸ δὲ πῦρ οὔ; Gal. VI 530f. K., id. De victu atten. 53; Athen. 73 A. - The fact that also black beans make the thick soup

yellow is due to τὸ ἐν μέσῳ χλωρὸν αὐτῶν (Dioscur. II 106.2). -- The question was presumably not objectionable in itself, (there are many

exx. of such curious problems in the Talks) but rather the vulgar and insolent manner of the nouveau-riche freedman.

634 ( ὁ ᾿Αριδείκης: Arideices of Rhodes, the pupil of Arcesilaus, is mentioned by Athen. 420 D as a participant of a drinking-party togeth-

er with his teacher. The correct spelling of his name was established by Wil. Antigonos von Karystos (Philol. Unters. 4 (1881)) 77, (and Hu.). It is found in a sepulchral epigram of Rhodes (BCH 36 (1912) 230235). On a sepulchral inscription of Lindos (IG XII:1.766) presumably two sons of this man appear: Καλλικράτης ᾿Αριδείκευς, and Δαμάτριος

᾿Αριδείκευς; cf. also IG XII:1.764.

The Arideices who

appears in Acad. Index Herc. Col. 20.5 ᾿Αριδεί[κης] ὁ ᾿Ρόδιος is identified by Bücheler (ad loc.) with our A. He is also mentioned by Polyb. IV 52. 634 C ὁ δὲ Ταρσεὺς ᾿Αμφίας: Otherwise unknown. 634 C τοῦ Φιλίππου τὴν ὀψιμαϑίαν κτλ.: This anecdote is also related at De ad. et am. 67 F, Reg. apophth. 179 B, De Alex. Mag. fort. 334 C.

634C

TABLE TALKS If 1

201

Another variant is told at Aelian. V. H. IX 36 about Antigonus. — The ὀψιμαϑής is analogous in the field of learning to the νεόπλουτος. Lategotten learning was commonly the subject of irony, cf. Theophr. Char. 27, and the mischievous son, Philippides, in Aristoph. Nub.; for other

anecdotes, see Gell. XI 7. Protagoras, B3 (II 264 DK) maintained: φύσεως καὶ ἀσκήσεως διδασκαλία Ósivav καὶ ἀπὸ νεότητος δὲ ἀρξαμένους δεῖ μανϑάνειν. The general opinion about ὀψιμαϑεῖς appears at Cic. Ad fam. IX 20.2 ὀψιμαϑεῖς autem homines scis quam insolentes sint. — For the use of ἵνα in a consecutive clause, cf. Adv. Col. 1115 A ποῦ γὰρ ὧν τῆς ἀοικήτου τὸ βιβλίον ἔγραφες, ἵνα... μὴ

τοῖς ἐκείνων συντάγμασιν ἐντύχῃς, and Epict. II 2.16 οὕτω μωρὸς ἦν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδῃ. This late use is common in Epictetus. See Radermacher?,

191f.; Kühner-Gerth? II 379 Anm. 3. 634 D’Agıotogävngs εἰς τὴν φαλακρότητα: Aristoph. often jests upon his own baldness; Plut. may refer to Pax 767—774, or Equ. 550, or Nub. 545. Jesting upon baldness is a commonplace in comedy, cf. Nub. 540 οὐδ᾽ ἔσκωψε τοὺς φαλακρούς. — Plut. seems to have forgotten here what he said above, 633 C, that ridiculing baldness causes no bitterness. 634 D «ai τὴν ᾿Αγάϑωνος ϑρύψιν: I bring up this reading proposed by

Bern. Symb. 102. Hu. and Clem. adopt another conjecture, (à&nó)Aet‘pw, made by Bern. in his ed. Bern. thought that the reference is to Ran. 83, a passage that has nothing at all to do with jesting about

baldness. This was first observed by Abram., but her own proposal, xai τῶν ἀγαϑῶν (κωμικῶν ἔλ)λειψιν (removing Agathon altogether from the text) is not convincing. Abram. suggests that Aristoph. in some comedy, perhaps Gerytades, jested about the contemporary lack of good comedians and thereby implied himself. But this is purely hypothetical. The sudden change of scope within the same phrase, from jesting upon individual defects, to sneering at the incapacity of comedians in general, is also improbable. Moreover, Aristoph. was not at all disposed to be ironic at his own expense regarding his art - if indeed any comedian was — see the parabasis Nub. 518-562. Borthwick, Eranos 77 (1979) 1661. rightly maintains that the reference to Agathon concerns exactly the contrast between the baldness of Aristoph. and Agathon's notorious, artificially obtained, smoothness in other parts (Thes. 30ff., 98, 218 ff.); and he assumes that in some play Aristoph. jested about his own bald head as making him no less

202

TABLE TALKS Π1

634 D

attractive than the beauteous Agathon. Borthwick thus would read ψίλωσιν or ἀποψίλωσιν, a plausible proposal indeed. It only seems somewhat too explicit for him on such a matter, considering that this was so well-known; the more vague ϑρύψις is clear enough. Bern.

(Symb.) refers to 693 B κόμης ϑρύψιν, see ad loc. 634 D Κρατῖνος δὲ τὴν Πυτίνην (εἰς αὑτὸν) ἐδίδαξεν: So Bolk., who rightly argues that this is enough. Considering that the reference to the bibulosity of Cratinus was self-evident to the interlocutors, other conjectures (see Hu. app.) seem too explanatory. Also (αὑτὸν κωμῳδῶν) or (κωμῳδούμενος) Helmbold (1949), and (ὁμοίως εἰς αὑτόν) Abram.

are plausible, but ὅλως εἰς αὑτόν)

Fuhrm. would mean an

exaggeration. Cratinus did not make fun exclusively of himself in that comedy, cf. frg. 202 Κρατῖνος Πυτίνῃ (sc. Χαιρεφῶντα σκώπτει) εἰς αὐχμηρὸν xoi πένητα. 634 D ὅπως ἐκ τοῦ παρατυχόντος ἔσται τὸ σκῶμμα κτλ.: At Praec.

ger. reip. 803 C Plut. also states this demand for improvision and advises against jesting without previous provocation. He censures Cicero and Cato Maior for these faults. Cicero as well discourages the use of such jokes, but his main point is practical: the rejoinder is the best joke:

De

or.

II 246

ridentur, Or. 89 vitabit allata, quae plerumque Plut. (634 E ἐπιβουλῇ VI 3.33 vitandum ... allatum videatur quod est iocus.

ea,

quia meditata

putantur

esse,

minus

etiam quaesita nec ex tempore ficta sed domo sunt frigida. The moral attitude shown here by καὶ ὕβρει προσέοικεν) also occurs at Quintil. ne superbum, ... ne praeparatum et domo dicimus: nam adversus miseros ... inhumanus

634 DE ὡς γὰρ ὀργὰς καὶ μάχας τὰς ἐκ τῶν συμποσίων πραότερον φέρουσιν: Lucian. Symp. seems rather to prove the contrary; howev-

er, that is a caricature. 634 E τὸ Τιμαγένους κτλ.: R. Porson (Eur. Med. 139 p. 419) supposed that this line (Adesp. 395 Nauck?) might be part of Eur. Antiope. The

joke is based on the ambiguity of word boundary (and the place of the diaeresis, before or after τήνδε), a technique described by Quintil. VI 3.55. One can read τήνδ᾽ ἐμοῦσαν, so quoted by Athen. 616 C, who states that the line was quoted by Telesphorus, probably the nephew and general of Antigonus (see Berve, RE s.v. Telesphorus (2), and cf.

634 E

TABLE TALKS IT 1

203

Diod. XIX 74), and that the woman was Arsinoe, the wife of King Lysimachus. Athen. (I. c.) also tells of the cruel punishment that the king inflicted upon him: ἐμβληϑῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκέλευσεν εἰς γαλεάγραν καὶ δίκην ϑηρίου περιφερόμενον καὶ τρεφόμενον, κολαζόμενον οὕτως ἐποίησεν ἀποϑανεῖν. That this is the true version is to be seen at Plut. De exil. 606 B where he describes the torture in detail without, however, stating the reason: ἐπιδείξαντος δ᾽ αὐτῷ (sc. Λυσιμάχῳ) Tekéopogov

ἐν

γαλεάγρᾳ,

τοὺς

ὀφθαλμοὺς

ἐξορωρυγμένον

καὶ

περικεκομμένον τὴν ῥῖνα καὶ τὰ ὦτα καὶ τὴν γλῶτταν ἐκτετμημένον, χαὶ εἰπόντος, οὕτως ἐγὼ διατίϑημι τοὺς κακῶς με ποιοῦντας. ΒΟΙΚ. ventures that Plut. may have read the story in the History of the

Diadoches by Timagenes of Alexandria (1st c. B. C.; see Laqueur, RE s.v. (2), and Susemihl II 377-381) and then happened to confuse the

names and wrote Timagenes. The confusion as Timagenes also was renowned for his wit: a frequent guest at the court of Augustus, because of his irony, as reported by Plut. De De

ira

III

23.4

Timagenes,

historiarum

was all the more natural living in Rome he became until he fell into disgrace ad. et am. 68 B, and Sen. scriptor,

quaedam

in

ipsum (sc. Augustum), quaedam in uxorem eius et in totam domum dixerat, nec perdiderat dicta; magis enim circumfertur et in ore hominum est temeraria urbanitas, saepe illum Caesar monuit, ut moderatius lingua uteretur; perseveranti domo sua interdixit. W. B. Stanford,

Ambiguity in Greek Literature (Oxford 1939) 54 f. suggests that Timagenes may have used Telesphorus' pun which then would have been regarded as his own. One observes that the story as told here by Plut. is an anonymous anecdote (πρὸς τὸν ἄνδρα τῆς ἐμετικῆς), which seems to indicate that it had been reduced to a stock phrase associated with Timagenes. This association may also underly the story of his death through overeating and vomiting (cf. Bolk. 116 n. 4) according to Suda: Τιμαγένης" ... ἐτελεύτησε δὲ ἐν ᾿Αλβάνῳ ἐμέσαι βουληϑεὶς

μετὰ δεῖπνον καὶ σφηνωϑείς. 634 E καὶ (τὸ) πρὸς τὸν ᾿Αϑηνόδωρον τὸν φιλόσοφον, εἰ φυσικὴ ἡ πρὸς τὰ (ἔκγονα) φιλοστοργία κτλ.: The addition (16) Bern. is necessary, otherwise Timagenes which is counter-evidenced

would be the jester in this case too,

by the plural οὗτοι;

moreover,

Atheno-

dorus lived nearly 100 years earlier. The addition (ἔκγονα) Turn. is supported by De am. prol. 493 A and De soll. an. 962 A. Fuhrm. accepts Amyot's unneccessary deletion of ἧ; Plut. tolerated hiatus

before the article. — Athenodorus is identified by Bolk. with the Stoic

204

TABLE TALKS ΠῚ

634 E

surnamed Cordylion of Tarsus (see Arnim, RE s.v. (18)), who was librarian at Pergamon and is known to have removed objectionable passages from the texts of the elder Stoics, cf. Diog. Laert. VII 34 ᾿Ισοδώρῳ τῷ Περγαμηνῷ ῥήτορι᾽ ὃς xai ἐκτμηϑῆναί φησιν ἐκ τῶν βιβλίων τὰ κακῶς λεγόμενα παρὰ τοῖς στωικοῖς ὑπ

᾿Αϑηνοδώρονυ

τοῦ στωικοῦ πιστευϑέντος τὴν ἐν Περγάμῳ βιβλιοϑήκην᾽ εἶτ᾽ ἀντιτεϑῆναι αὐτά,

φωραϑέντος

τοῦ ᾿Αϑηνοδώρον

xai κυνδυνεύσαντος.

There were large parts of the old Stoic doctrines, particularly those presented by Zenon in his Πολιτεία, which appeared as κακῶς λεγόμενα to later Stoics, see SVF I 250-257. Our passage is paralleled

at Diog. Laert. VII 120 (= SVF III 731 φασὶ δὲ καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὰ τέκνα φιλοστοργίαν φυσικὴν εἶναι αὐτοῖς καὶ ἐν φαύλοις μὴ εἶναι. Bern. supposed that the pun on the ambiguity (we may read: éxyov ἀφιλοστοργία) is the intent of the utterance. This is too vapid a joke to

be punished with βαρυτάτη ζημία. More probable is Amyot's suggestion that it alludes to certain incestuous habits of the philosopher which would be in flagrant contrast to his philological purism. One might wonder, however, if the philosopher actually had the means to punish the teaser severely. In any case, the passage cannot be better explained by doubting that Athenodorus Cordylion is meant, as does D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 190. On Athenodorus, see further

Susemihl II 246. 634 F οὗτοι μὲν οὖν κατὰ Πλάτωνα κουφοτάτου πράγματος, λόγων, βαρυτάτην ζημίαν ἔτισαν: It remains unclear whom οὗτοι refers to beside Timagenes. Either the name of the impertinent querist has fallen out before πρὸς ᾿Αϑηνόδωρον, as suggested by Hu., or Plut. actually failed to mention his name. — Plut. alludes to two passages in

Plat. Leg., 717 Ὁ κούφων καὶ πτηνῶν λόγων βαρυτάτη ζημία, and 935 A ἐκ λόγων, κούφου πράγματος, ἔργῳ μίση τε καὶ ἔχϑραι βαρύταταν γίγνονται. Plut. also has this thought at De cap. ex inim.

90 C, De coh. ira 456 D, and De garr. 505 C. 634 F αὐτῷ τῷ Πλάτωνι μαρτυροῦσιν κτλ.: Hubert's suggestion that Plut. here may have thought of Leg. 654B ὁ καλῶς ἄρα πεπαιδευμένος ᾷδειν te καὶ ὀρχεῖσϑαι δυνατὸς ἂν εἴη καλῶς is doubtful; he probably refers generally to the playfulness which characterizes Plato’s attitude to philosophy; cf. below, on 686 D.

65A

TABLE TALKS II 2

205

TALK 2 635 A iv Ελευσῖνι μετὰ τὰ μυστήρια τῆς πανηγύρεως ἀκμαζούσης: The Great Mysteries of Elusis took place in the Boedromion, by the end of September, the time of sowing, Stengel, RE s.v. Eleusinia, 2330-2332; Foucart, Les mysteres d’Eleusis (Paris Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries

see Preller-Robert^ I 791—796; Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? 1472-474; P. 1914) 299-317; G. E. Mylonas, (Princeton 1961) 243-285. The

festival lasted for eight days, the last day being devoted mainly to libations and rites for the dead (o. c. 279). The Mysteries preserved their important function during the Hellenistic and Roman periods (Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? II 90-95, 345-348). For the fairly profane panegyris in connection with the rites and offerings, see Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? ] 826831, and Ziehen, RE s.v. Panegyris, and cf. Syll? 547.26.

635 παρὰ Γλαυκίᾳ và ῥήτορι: Glaucias the rhetor also participates in 110, VII 9-10, IX 12-13. 635 A πεπαυμένων δὲ δειπνεῖν: Herwerden's concern with the inf. (he

added (106)) was unnecessary; the construction is found at Apophth. Lac. 216 D παῦσαι ... κλαίειν (but Cleom. 20.1 παῦσαι ... κλαίων, and o. c. 216 A, two instances with the partiple); cf. also Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 2 F οἱ παυόμενοι πολεμεῖν, Anth. Pal. VI 21.8 ἐγείρειν ... οὔ ποτε παυσάμενον.

635 A Ξενοκλῆς ὁ Δελφός: Xenocles appears only here, although ὥσπερ εἰώϑει would suggest that he was one of the frequent participants in the meetings of the Plutarchean circle. 635 A τὴν ἀδηφαγίαν Βοιωτίαν ἐπέσκωπτεν: Fuhrm. is perhaps right in changing into Βοιωτίαν. The word is not found elsewhere with the ending -ος in the fem. However, the corruption is hard to explain. — The ‘Boeotian gluttony’ was a wide-spread and much cherished cliché, cf. De esu carn. 995 E τοὺς γὰρ Βοιωτοὺς ἡμᾶς of ᾿Αττικοὶ καὶ παχεῖς

καὶ ἀναισϑήτους καὶ ἠλιϑίους, μάλιστα διὰ τὰς ἀδηφαγίας προσηγόρευον. Athen. 417 B-418 B cites a number of comedians who ridicule Boeotian gluttony: Eubulus, Diphilus, Mnesimachus, Alexis, Achaeus, together with Eratosthenes and Polybius. Then he gives examples of the same reputation of the Thessalians. See further W. R. Roberts, The Ancient. Boeotians (Cambridge 1895) 1-9. — Presumably

206

TABLE TALKS I1 2

635 A

Lamprias was not upset about being teased; he made no secret of being

a big eater, cf. below, 643 Ε xai γὰρ αὐτὸς εἶναι τῶν ἀδηφαγίᾳ χαιρόντων.

635A ἐγὼ 9 ἀμυνόμενος (ὑπὲρ) αὐτοῦ τὸν Ξενοκλέα τοῖς Ἐπικούρου λόγοις χρώμενον κτλ.: The necessary addition (Amyot, Steph.) shows that lacunae are not always marked in T even if that is normally so. Plut. uses the phrase χρῆσϑαί τινος λόγοις here in the sense ‘belong to someone's school’, as at Brut. 37.1 6 δὲ (sc. Κάσσιος) τοῖς ᾿Επικούρου λόγοις χρώμενος καὶ περὶ τούτων ἔϑος ἔχων διαφέρεσϑαι πρὸς τὸν Βροῦτον. But at the same time Plut. takes the expression in its normal sense as he attacks Xenocles with his master’s own words. Xyl. rendered this double meaning ingeniously: ‘ego Epicuri placitis deditum ipsis Epicuri verbis Xenoclem ultus’. Presumably the listeners easily understood the subject form, χρώμενος, when they heard the ambiguous phrase jokingly spoken. 635 A ποιοῦνται τὴν τοῦ ἀλγοῦντος ὑπεξαίρεσιν ὅρον ἡδονῆς καὶ

πέρας: That Plut. had studied this definition carefully is evident from frg. 124 Sandb. (= Gell. II 9) where he criticizes Epicurus’ terminology:

ὅρος

τοῦ

μεγέϑους

τῶν

ἡδονῶν

ἡ

παντὸς

τοῦ

ἀλγοῦντος

ὑπεξαίρεσις (Epicur. Sent, sel. 3 p. 72 Us.). non, inquit (sc. Plutarchus), παντὸς τοῦ ἀλγοῦντος sed παντὸς tod ἀλγευνοῦ dicere oportuit. detractio enim significanda est doloris, inquit, non dolentis. The definition is often cited, see Usener, o. c. 395. Plut. also cites it at Non

posse 1088 C. Cf. also below, 673 B. 635 B πρὸ τοῦ κήπου κυδαίνοντι: The poetic κυδαίνειν, used in alliteration, contributes to the comic affect of the utterance. For κῆπος, cf. An seni 789 B. 635 B τὸν περίπατον

καὶ τὸ Αὐχειον:

A

conspicuous

example of

tautologic synonymy, typical of Plutarch's style; cf. 620 D, 635 C, 654 A, 655 D, 661 C, 662 C, 663 E, 688 D, 696 E, et passim. ‘Peripatos’ originally also denoted other schools than Aristotle's, e.g., the Academy, cf. Epicur. frg. 171 Us.; for its specialization, see Brink, RE

Suppl. VII 899f. 635 B βρωτικώτατον ἕκαστον αὐτὸν αὑτοῦ περὶ τὸ φϑινόπωρον: Fig.

231 Rose. Sandbach, Jl. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 224 suggests that the

635 B

TABLE TALKS II 2

207

reference may be to a lost Aristotelian collection of Προβλήματα. The

idea discussed here is not found in our Corpus Aristotelicum, is implied in the theory mentioned at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 below, 635 C, that hunger increases during winter because parts of the body are chilled. Probl. 945 a 18 is also related:

even if it a 1, and the outer διὰ τί ἐν

τοῖς βορείοις βρωτικώτεροι ἢ ἐν τοῖς νοτίοις; ἢ διότι ψυχρότερα τὰ

βόρεια; - The subject of discussion is not in accordance with the condition that the dinner took place by the end of September when it is still rather warm in Greece. Furthermore, the great appetite of Lam-

prias is insufficient as support of the idea: why is he alone affected? But Plut. is joking; he makes the notorious gluttony of his brother a

starting-point for the discussion and at the same time he mocks his pronounced adherence to the Peripatos. Lamprias finds himself obliged to bear active witness to the Philosopher. — For the Atticistic phrase, superl. -- αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ, see above, on 622 E ἐν τῷ πίνειν.

635 B ὡς οὖν ἀφῃρέϑησαν αἱ τράπεζαι: The removal of the tables marked the end of the δεῖπνον and the beginning of the συμπόσιον, cf. 723 B, Sept. sap. 150 D; Xen. Symp. 2. 1; Plat. Symp. 176 A. 635 B τὴν ὀπώραν: This word is used of soft fruits in the first place, excluding those which have a pod or shell: Geop. X 74 ὀπώρα λέγεται ἡ χλοώδη τὸν καρπὸν ἔχουσα, olov δωρακινά, μῆλα, ἀππίδια, δαμασκηνά, καὶ ὅσα μὴ ἔχει ἔξωϑέν τι ξυλῶδες. ἀκρόδρυα δὲ καλεῖται ὅσα ἔξωϑεν κέλυφος ἔχει κτλ. Cf. Hesych. ὀπώρα" ... χυρίως ἡ σταφυλή. καταχρηστικῶς δὲ xoi ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀχροδρύων. 635 Β ὡς τὴν κοιλίαν ὑπεξάγουσαν: The laxative effect of many kinds of fruit is often mentioned, cf. Dioscur. 1128 σῦκα πέπειρα τὰ ἁπαλὰ κακοστόμαχα, κοιλίας λυτικά, ῥᾳδίως δὲ ὁ ἐξ αὐτῶν ῥευματισμὸς ἵσταται, I 113 κεράσια καὶ αὐτὰ μὲν χλωρὰ λαμβανόμενα εὐκοίλια

τυγχάνει, 1 114 κεράτια χλωρὰ μὲν λαμβανόμενα κακοστόμαχα τυγχάνει καὶ κοιλίας λυτικά, 1 121 κοχκυμηλέα ..., οὗ ὁ καρπὸς ἐδώδιμος, κακοστόμαχος, κοιλίας μαλακτικός; Gal. XII 78 K. μορέας ὁ καρπὸς ὁ μὲν πέπειρος ὑπάγει γαστέρα. 635 ΒΟ εὔστομόν τι καὶ δηχτικὸν ἔχοντα ... τὸν στόμαχον ἐπὶ τὴν βρῶσιν ἐκκαλεῖσϑαι: In Talk VI 2 where appetite and foods which stimulate this are discussed, εὐστομία is coupled with δριμύτης (687 Ὁ

208

TABLE TALKS II 2

635 BC

and 688 B), and salted or otherwise pungent foods in general are considered, which (688 B) önyuöv ἐμποιεῖ. They break up and distribute nutrious matter in the body and so restore the appetite: τὰ γὰρ

ὀξέα καὶ δριμέα καὶ ἁλμυρὰ ϑρύπτοντα τὴν ὕλην διαφέρει καὶ σκίδνησιν, ὥστε νεαρὰν ποιεῖν τὴν ὄρεξιν ἐκϑλιβομένων τῶν ἑώλων καὶ χϑιζῶν. The source for both passages may be the same, see

Capelle, Hermes 45 (1910) 328 n. 2, and cf. below. 635 C καὶ γὰρ τοῖς ἀποσίτοις τῶν ἀρρώστων ὀπώρας τι προσενεχϑὲν ἀναλαμβάνει τὴν ὄρεξιν: The wording resembles 687 D πολλοὶ τῶν

ἀποσίτων

ἐλαίαν ἁλμάδα λαμβάνοντες

... ταχέως ἀνέλαβον καὶ

παρεστήσαντο τὴν ὄρεξιν. -- For the transition to finite construction,

cf. 638 D, 656 A, 683 C, D, 690 D. *

635 C τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ [τὸ] σύμφυτον ϑερμὸν ἡμῶν, ᾧ τρέφεσϑαι πεφύκαμεν: Deletion Hu.; Bolk. refers to 713 Ε τὸ σύμφυτον καὶ

ἴδιον καλόν. — Aristotle’s doctrine of the ‘innate heat’ of living creatures depends on Hippocratic physiological theory and the Empedo-

clean doctrine of the four elements. Living organisms are maintained through the supply of nourishing matter. This is transformed in the body through the process of πέψις, ‘concoction’, by means of the innate heat, to form a wholesome ἰσονομία of the four χυμοί, ‘humor-

al liquids’, which correspond to the four elements. The innate heat is the cardinal point: it must itself be nourished, to be able to nourish the organism, cf. Arist. P. A. 682 a 23 τὸ yao ϑερμὸν καὶ δεῖται τροφῆς Hal πέττει τὴν τροφὴν ταχέως, TO δὲ ψυχρὸν ἄτροφον, De respir. 480

ἃ 17 ἡ 8 ἀναπνοὴ γίνεται αὐξανομένου τοῦ ϑερμοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἡ ϑρεπτική. καϑάπερ γὰρ καὶ τἄλλα (sc. μόρια σώματος) δεῖται τροφῆς, κἀκεῖνο, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μᾶλλον. The idea that hotness is the only element that needs nourishment is found below 686 EF: τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν ἢ μόνον ἢ μάλιστα δεῖται τροφῆς τὸ ϑερμόν, cf. 649 B τὸ δὲ συγγενὲς ϑερμὸν αὔξειν καὶ τρέφειν πέφυκεν. 635 C ἐν δὲ τῷ

φϑίνοντι

καιρῷ

συναγείρεται

πάλιν

καὶ

ἰσχύει,

χαταχρυπτύμενον ἐντὸς διὰ τὴν περίψνξιν καὶ πύχνωσιν τοῦ σώματος: The idea that the heat is concentrated within the body when its surface is chilled is found at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 1 βουλιμία γίνεται du’ ἔνδειαν τῆς ξηρᾶς τροφῆς, ἐν δὲ τῷ ψύχει καὶ τῷ χειμῶνι συστελλομένου τοῦ ἐντὸς ϑερμοῦ εἰς ἐλάττω τόπον ϑᾶττον ὑπολείπει ἡ ἐντὸς τροφή, and Probl. ined. Il 27 Bussem. διὰ τί χειμῶνος

635 C

TABLE TALKS II 2

209

πειναλέοι γινόμεϑα μᾶλλον καὶ καταπέσσομεν τὴν τροφήν; ὅτι πυκνουμένου τοῦ σώματος ἔξωϑεν τὸ ϑερμὸν εἰς τὸ βάϑος ἀποκλείεται, ὑπὸ ϑερμασίας δ᾽ ἡ τροφὴ πέττεται, so also Plut. frg. 76 Sandb. διὰ τὸν χειμέριον μῆνα τροφὴν πλείονα κελεύει διδόναι... ἥ τε γὰρ ϑερμότης εἴσω καϑειργμένη διὰ τὴν ἔξωϑεν πύκνωσιν πλείονα δαπανᾷ. Cf. also De tu. san. 123 A f| τῶν ἄκρων περίψυξις εἰς τὰ μέσα συνελαύνουσα τὸ ϑερμόν, De def. or. 411 ( περὶ τοῦ πυρός, ὡς

ἐν χειμῶνι καίεται βέλτιον ὑπὸ δώμης εἰς αὑτὸ συστελλόμενον τῇ ψυχρότητι καὶ πυκνούμενον. See further below, 694 D-F.

635 C ἐγὼ ... εἶπον, ὄτι τοῦ ϑέρους ... πλείονι χρώμεϑα τῷ ὑγρῷ διὰ τὸ καῦμα: Plut. comments upon and completes the contributions of the others, beginning with that of Lamprias. The reasoning is rather curious: because of the outer heat during summer the inner heat is dispersed in the body so as to be too weak to consume solid nourishment; it instead abstracts the moisture

and juices of the body.

In

autumn when the heat collects in the centre of the body it regains vigour and can digest solid food. A similar situation is created fasting, cf. 687 AB ὅταν οὖν νηστεύσωμεν, ἐκ τῶν ὑπολειμμάτων ἐν τῷ σώματι τροφῆς ἀποσπᾶται βίᾳ τὸ ὑγρὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑερμοῦ

its in τῆς τὸ

πρῶτον, εἶτ᾽ ἐπ’ αὐτὴν βαδίζει τὴν σύμφυτον λιβάδα τῆς σαρκὸς ... γενομένης οὖν ὥσπερ ἐν πηλῷ ξηρότητος, ποτοῦ μᾶλλον τὸ σῶμα

δεῖσϑαι πέφυκεν, ἄχρι οὗ πιόντων ἀναρρωσϑὲν ϑερμὸν ἐμβριϑοῦς τροφῆς ὄρεξιν ἐργάζηται.

καὶ ἰσχῦσαν τὸ

635 CD νῦν οὖν ἡ φύσις ἐν τῇ μεταβολῇ ζητοῦσα τοὐναντίον xtà.: Bolk. observes that Plut. here passes over to direct speech, as αἵ 686 EF; for more examples, see on 618 C. — Μεταβολή is one of Aristotle's most important concepts. It generally means ‘change into the opposite’, cf. Phys. 261 a 33 ἅπασαι yao ἐξ ἀντικειμένων εἰς

ἀντικείμενά εἰσιν αἱ κινήσεις καὶ μεταβολαί, G. C. 332 a 8 εἴπερ ἡ μεταβολὴ

εἰς τἀναντία,

but

otherwise

De

anima

416

a 34 4j δὲ

μεταβολὴ πᾶσιν εἷς τὸ ἀντικείμενον ἢ τὸ μεταξύ. Through the change from the hot to the cold season and the concentration of heat in the centre of the body, the deficit of solid food in the body’s mixture can be settled. 635 D οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ τὰ σιτία φήσαι τις ἂν αἰτίας ἀμοιρεῖν κτλ.: Plut. kindly grants a value also to the explanation given by Xenocles: the

very freshness of recently produced food-stuffs increases the appetite.

210 This

TABLE TALKS II 2 is of course

the

most

reasonable

and

635 D natural

answer

to the

problem under discussion. The same thought is expressed at 663 C. 635 D χρέα ξῴων εὐωχουμένων tà ἐπέτεια: Reich. (and Dübn.) first understood the construction with rà ἐπέτεια as the object of εὐωχουμένων. The meaning is obvious from the context: all produce we consume in autumn is fresh, even the meat because it comes from animals fattened on the year's fodder. Plut. uses εὐωχεῖσϑαι to underline that the animals have been eating their fill. TALK 3

635 E Πότερον ἡ ópvic πρότερον ἢ τὸ Mov ἐγένετο: Macrob. imitates this talk at Sat. VII 16.1-14. The problem was much discussed but was recognized as being unsolvable, cf. Censorin. 4.3 negant omnino posse reperiri avesne ante an ova generata sint, cum et ovum sine ave et avis

sine ovo gigni non possit. The question has a mythic origin, the Orphic-Pythagorean myth of the cosmic egg viewed as a mystic symbol of life; see Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? I 684 f. The notion of the cosmic egg is found in many cultures, see Lukas, Zeitschr. des Vereins f. Volkskunde 4 (1894) 227-243; M. Eliade, Traité d'histoire des religions (Paris 1949)

353f. 635 E ἐξ (év)unviov τινός: Macrob.

Comm.

in Somn. Scip. 1 3.2

discerns five kinds of dreams, ὄνειρος somnium, ὅραμα visio, χρηματισμός oraculum, ἐνύπνιον insomnium, φάντασμα, called visum by Cicero. Artemidor. I 1.3.5 Herch. states the difference between ὄνειρος and ἐνύπνιον: ταύτῃ γὰρ ὄνειρον ἐνυπνίου διαφέρειν συμβέβηκεν, τῷ τὸν μὲν εἶναι σημαντικὸν τῶν μελλόντων, τὸν δὲ τῶν

ὄντων. Macrob. ἰ. c. and Artemidor. IV Prooem. p. 199.16 Herch. expressly state that the ἐνύπνιον has no prophetic power. -- Plut. shows

a somewhat ambivalent attitude toward the significance of dreams. At De def. or. 432 C he (the speaker, Lamprias, almost certainly represents Plut.) takes a positive position toward the supposed mantic faculty of the soul during dreams, when the body is purified and attains a disposition (κρᾶσις) which frees the reasoning faculty of the soul so that it may turn its imagination towards the future. At Amat. 764 F itis asserted that the soul's true state of wakefulness is during sleep. In the Lives Plut. reports a large number of dreams (see account by F. E.

Brenk, /n Mist Apparelled (Leiden 1977) 216 n. 3). At Sept. sap. 159 A

635 E

TABLE TALKS II 3

211

the dream is called τὸ πρεσβύτατον ἡμῖν μαντεῖον. However,

Plut.

was not addicted to an uncritical belief in dreams. At De superst. 165 F he severely criticizes those who are too prone to believe in the oracular significance of their dreams. It appears that Plut. by this does not doubt the general reliability of the dreams but only warns against indiscriminate superstitious overreliance; see Brenk, o. c. 16-27, 214235; E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (Berkeley 1951) 102—

134. Dreams were assigned a particularly important role in Pythagorean thought. They were regarded as messages sent to dreamers from the

souls which filled the air (Diog. Laert. VIII 32). Also in Stoicism there was a firm belief in dreams; see B. Büchsenschütz, Traum und Traumdeutung im Alterthume (Berlin 1868) 10f., 27-29; M. Pohlenz, Die

Stoa I (Göttingen 1948) 232, 372. Attempts at a scientific explanation of dreams are discussed in Talk VIII 10. 635 E πολλὴν σπουδὴν

περὶ τοῦτο ποιούμενος:

This reading pro-

pounded by Fuhrm. for πολὺν ἦδο (lac. 2-3) παρά T makes good sense. 635 E £v φῷ καϑάπερ £v Καρὶ διάπειραν λαβεῖν κτλ.: Wytt. corrected xagó(at πεῖραν T. The expression is proverbial, cf. Zenob. III 59 ἐν Καρὶ τὸν xivöuvov' Emi τῶν ἐν εὐτελέσι τὰς πείρας ποιουμένων. Κᾶρες γὰρ ἐμισϑοφόρησαν πρῶτοι; Apostol.

VII 39 (CPG

II 404)

τουτέστιν ἐν ἀλλοτρίοις σώμασι; Greg. Cypr. M. III 45 (ibid. H 114) ἀντὶ tov" οὐ περὶ μεγάλων ὁ κίνδυνος. Cf. also Cratin. frg. 16; Plat. Lach. 187 B, Euthyd. 285 BC; Hesych. s.v. ἐν Καρί. Many slaves were Carians, hence ‘Carian’ was said about a corpus vile in general. Plut-

arch’s use of the expression here is quite out of place: he spares the egg and thus does not risk it at all. 635 E ὑπόνοιαν μέντοι παρέσχον ... évéyeadat δόγμασιν ᾿Ορφικοῖς

ἢ Πνϑαγορικοῖσ: It was natural for Plut. to be interested in Pythagoreanism, since this doctrine had obtained a stronger position at his time. Many of his friends and acquaintances were more or less engaged in Pythagoreanism, e.g., Philinus; see Hershbell, Class. Bull. 60 (1984) 73-79. Hani, REG 88 (1975) 103-120 concludes from the myth of Timarchus in De gen. Socr. and that of Thespesius in De sera, and from De facie, ch. 30, that Plut. may have experienced the Orphico-

Pythagorean ecstacy. There is not sufficient evidence for this conclusion. — Piutarch’s position regarding meat-eating was undecided. Only

212

TABLE TALKS II 3

635 E

in the rhetorical discourses De esu carn. written in his youth, does he proclaim strict vegetarianism. At De tu. san. 132 A he expresses a moderate opinion, and below, 730 A he states with resignation that δι᾽ ἡδονὴν ἔργον ἐστὶν παῦσαι τὴν σαρκοφαγίαν. However, there were considerable differences in opinion on this point within Pythagoreanism, see Pyth. A 9 (I 105.9-29 DK); Wehrli II 55f. -- Abram. takes it for granted that Plut. is joking; he was neither an Orphic nor a Pythagorean.

635 E τὸ dóv, ὥσπερ ἔνιοι καρδίαν καὶ ἐγκέφαλον, ἀρχὴν ἡγούμενος γενέσεως ἀφοσιοῦσϑαι: The Pythagorean abstinence from eggs is evidenced at Diog. Laert. VIII 33 and Schol. Lucian. Dial. mer. VII 4 p. 280.20 Rabe (= Orph. test. 214, 218 Kern). It was also demanded in Dionysiac mysteries, see Nilsson, Eranos 53 (1955) 30f., id. The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenistic and Roman Age (Lund 1957) 136, 141f.; Turcan, Rev. Hist. Rel. 160 (1961) 11f. The notion of the egg as a principle of life had spread from Orphism. Whether the

egg was (originally) tabood in Orphism we do not know. 1. M. Linforth, The Arts of Orpheus (Berkeley 1941) 2861. doubts that it was, seeing that there is no evidence for this except our passage. — The Orphic myth of the cosmic egg is cosmogonic in the first place but also zoogonic. The egg is called a ‘wind-egg’, and it bears Eros, the

generative power: Aristoph. Av. 695 τίκτει πρώτιστον ὑπηνέμιον Νὺξ ἡ μελανόπτερος ᾧόν, | ἐξ οὗ περιστελλομέναις ὥραις ἔβλαστεν Ἔρως ὁ ποϑεινός. The cosmic egg symbolizes the general principle of life,

the soul, see K. Kerényi, Pythagoras und Orpheus? (Albae Vigiliae 9, Zürich 1950) 62. In contrast to this universal symbolism of the egg, the heart and the brain were regarded in Pythagorean thought as ἀρχαί of the individual, cf. Diog. Laert. VIII 30 εἶναν δὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ψυχῆς

ἀπὸ καρδίας μέχρις ἐγκεφάλου; Philol. frg. B 13 (I 413.8 DK) ἐγκέφαλος δὲ (σημαίνει) τὰν ἀνθρώπω ἀρχάν, καρδία δὲ τὰν ζώου. Cf. also Arist. P. A. 666 a 8 αὕτη (sc. ἡ καρδία) γάρ ἐστιν ἀρχὴ καὶ πηγὴ τοῦ αἵματος ἢ ὑποδοχὴ πρώτῃ, and 673 b 11 ταῦτα δὲ (sc. ὁ ἐγκέφαλος καὶ ἡ καρδία) κύρια μάλιστα τῆς ζωῆς; Alex. Aphrod. In De anima 140 v 22 p. 95.12 Bruns ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ δ᾽ ἂν ἡ ἀρχῆ τοῦ ζῆν

εἶναι πιστεύοιτο. A reason for not eating the pig’s brain is given at Athen. 65 F: οὐδένα γοῦν τῶν ἀρχαίων βεβρωκέναι διὰ τὸ τὰς αἰσϑήσεις ἀπάσας σχεδὸν ἐν αὐτῷ εἶναι. Quite another reason, repulsion, is intimated below, 733 Ε λέγουσι δὲ μηδ᾽ ἐγκέφαλον ἐσϑίειν τοὺς παλαιούς. It is implied there that the brain was regarded as a

635 E

TABLE TALKS II 3

213

delicacy and was generally eaten; ἔνιοι in our passage also indicates that abstinence was considered curious. — The Pythagoreans widely interpreted allegorically the prohibition against eating the heart, in that 'eating the heart' was used metaphorically for 'giving oneself up to

melancholy’, cf. Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 12 E μὴ ἐσϑίειν καρδίαν, μὴ βλάπτειν

τὴν

ψυχὴν

ταῖς

φροντίσιν

αὐτὴν

κατατρύχοντα;

Diog.

Laert. VIII 18 διὰ δὲ τοῦ καρδίαν μὴ ἐσθίειν ἐδήλου μὴ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀνίαις καὶ λύπαις κατατήκειν; Clem. Strom. V 30.5 οἱ μύσται καρδίαν ἐσϑίειν ἀπαγορεύουσιν, μὴ χρῆναί ποτε διδάσκοντες βαϑυϑυμίαις καὶ ὀδύναις ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀβουλήτως συμβαίνουσι δάκνειν καὶ κατεσϑίειν τὴν ψυχήν; Athen. 452 Ὁ καὶ τὰ Πυϑαγόρου δὲ αἰνίγματα τοιαῦτά ἐστιν ... καρδίαν μὴ ἐσϑίειν ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀλυπίαν ἀσκεῖν. See A. Delatte, Etudes sur la littérature Pythagoricienne (Paris

1915) 35, 292. 635 Ε᾽Αλέξανδρος ὁ ᾿Ἐπιχούρειος: This Epicurean is possibly identical with the A. to whom Plut. dedicated his De Herod. mal. (854 E), and probably also with A. the Epicurean on /G II? 3793 and 3819 as

suggested by Raubitschek, Hesp. 18 (1949) 99f. Jones, BCH 96 (1972) 265-267 shows that Plutarch’s friend cannot have been identical with the T. Φλάβιος ᾿Αλέξανδρος on an inscribed statue base at Delphi (Pouilloux, REG 80 (1967) 379-384). 635 E ἷσόν τοι κυάμους ἔσϑειν κεφαλάς te τοκήων:

Orph.

frg. 291

Kern. Amyot, Xyl. corrected ἐσϑίειν T. — This notorious maxim was much quoted (with various verbs): Clem. Strom. ΠῚ 24.2 and Athen. 65 F (τρώγειν); Geop. 11 35.8 (φαγέειν); Joh. Lyd. De mens. IV 42 and Eustath. 948.24 (φαγεῖν). The Pythagorean taboo regarding beans is well-documented, cf., e.g., Emped.

frg. B 141 δείλοι, πάνδειλοι,

κυάμων ἄπο χεῖρας ἔχεσϑαι; Callim. frg. 553 Pfeiff.; Diog. Laert. VIIE 33-34; Iambl. Protr. 21 p. 125.9 Pist.; Gell. IV 11, quoting Aristoxenus (frg. 25 Wehrli), denies that this taboo existed and affirms (IV 11.10) that people had misunderstood the Empedoclean line: opinati enim sunt plerique κυάμους legumentum dici, ut a vulgo dicitur. sed qui diligentius scitiusque carmina Empedocli arbitrati sunt, κυάμους hoc in loco testiculos significare dicunt, eosque more Pytha-

gorae operte atque symbolice κυάμους appellatos, quod sint αἴτιοι τοῦ wveiv et geniturae humanae vim praebeant; idcircoque Empedoclen versu isto non a fabulo edendo, sed a rei veneriae prolubio voluisse homines deducere. Aristoxenus' statement remains unexplained, see

214

TABLE TALKS II 3

635 E

Wehrli ad loc. p. 55. There were numerous explanations of the taboo, cf. Plin. XVIII 118 hebetare sensus existimata (sc. puls fabata), insom-

nia quoque facere, ... ut alii tradidere, quoniam mortuorum animae sint in ea; Diog. Laert. VIII 24 τῶν δὲ κυάμων ἀπέχεσϑαι διὰ τὸ πνευματώδεις ὄντας μάλιστα μετέχειν tod ψυχικοῦ. The taboo was also thought to have been inspired by the transformations which beans

undergo if one places them in water or earth: Porphyr. V. Pyth. 44 εὕροι ἂν ἀντὶ τοῦ χυάμου ἢ παιδὸς κεφαλὴν συνεστῶσαν ἢ γυναικὸς

αἰδοῖον; Hippol. Refut. 1 2.14; Joh. Lyd. De Mens. IV 29 εἰς ὄψιν ἀνϑρώπου osoagxmpévov μεταβαλόντα τὸν κύαμον εὑρήσει. The taboo probably derived its origin from Egypt, where Pythagoras is said

to have studied (Isocr. XI 28). According to Hdt. II 37 the Egyptians did not eat beans. See Delatte, o. c. 23, 36-38. 635 EF ὡς δὴ κυάμους τὰ φὰ διὰ τὴν κύησιν αἰνιττομένων κτλ.: For

the association κύαμοι -- κυεῖν, cf. Gell. IV 11.10 (quoted above); Eustath. 948.29 παρὰ τὸ κύειν δὲ αἷμα σύγκεινται οἱ κύαμοι. The equalization of beans and eggs is not found elsewhere; however, it is of

course not a new idea introduced here (by Alexander).

Its origin is

obscure; it may be related to the definition given by Arist. G. A. 731a 5 τὸ γὰρ mov κύημά ἐστιν and/or to Orphic theology, cf. Orph. frg. 60 Kern εἰς δὲ τὴν δευτέραν (sc. τριάδα) τελεῖν ἤτοι τὸ κυούμενον καὶ

τὸ κύον τὸν ϑεὸν κτλ. On an inscription from Smyrna (Keil, Anzeiger Ak. Wien 90 (1953) 17 no. 1, 2nd. c. A. D.) beans and eggs are mentioned together as prohibited food, cf. Nilsson, Eranos 53 (1955) 28-31. The equalization of eggs and the animals which produce them is found at Diog. Laert. VIII 33: ἀπέχεσϑαι ... xai φῶν καὶ τῶν φοτόκων ζῴων xai κυάμων. 635 F

ἐγίνετο

δὴ

τὸ

τῆς

αἰτίας

ἀπολύόγημα

τῆς

αἰτίας

αὐτῆς

ἀλογώτερον, ᾿Επικουρείῳ λέγειν ἐνύπνιον: Po. interpreted this sentence as unreal and propounded δ᾽ ἄν for δή, but this sense is not evident. By the imperf. Plut. indicates that he thought of, or actually made, an effort to explain his avoidance by reference to his dream but very soon gave it up as he recognized the fact — which he already knew

- that speaking to an Epicurean about dreams was in vain. Plut. uses the same means of expression in a similar case at 665 E: ἐμοὶ δὲ πλέον οὐδὲν ἐγίνετο τῆς αἰτίας ἁψαμένῳ κοινὸν ἐχούσης τὸν Aóyov: ὅμως δ᾽ οὖν ἔφην κτλ. -- For Epicurus’ disbelief in dreams, cf. frg. 328 Us. (Tertull. De anima 46) vana in totum somnia Epicurus iudicavit; (Cic.

635 F

TABLE TALKS II 3

215

De divin. 1 44.99) Sisenna ... insolenter, credo ab Epicureo aliquo inductus, disputat somniis credi non oportere. 636 A eic μέσον εἵλκετο πρόβλημα: Hu. corrects εἷλκεν T, referring to 628 D ὁ Μαραϑὼν sis μέσον εἵλκετο, and to the fact that Alexander

cannot be the subject; as an Epicurean he ridicules the inquiry. 636 A Σύλλας μὲν ὁ ἑταῖρος: Presumably identical with Sulla, one of τῶν συνήϑων, who participates in III 3 (J. Muhl, Plutarchische Studien (Progr. Augsburg 1885) 36 takes the epithet ἑταῖρος as an indication that he was a Platonist), but probably not the Sextius Sulla of Carthage who appears in VIII 7-8, Rom. 15.3, and De coh. ira, and takes an important part in De facie, see Cherniss, Plutarch's Moralia, LCL XII

3. 636A

μικρῷ

προβλήματι

καϑάπεορ

ὀργάνῳ

μέγα

καὶ

βαρὺ

σαλεύομεν, τὸ περὶ τοῦ κόσμου τῆς γενέσεως: This utterance and the

following discussion may reflect the vivid contemporary philosophictheological speculations on the old Orphic-Pythagorean doctrines of the symbolism of the egg. The present talk, however, concerns zoogony and not cosmogony as Sulla expected. His refusal to take part,

and Alexander’s ridiculing attitude show that many people questioned the reasonability of such speculations. 636 A περὶ τοῦ κόσμον τῆς γενέσεως: Wytt. changed the word-order:

περὶ τῆς τοῦ x. y., which was accepted by Dübn.

and Bern. Hu.

defends the text. Bolk. adduces numerous instances of this construction in Plut.; for more examples, see Radermacher? 214.

636 A ὁ γαμβρὸς ἡμῶν Φίρμος: Firmus appears only here. He may have been married to a niece of Plutarch’s or to one of his or his wife’s sisters, cf. above, on 613 A. E. Bourguet, De rebus Delphicis (Montpellier 1905) 30 would identify him with an archont of Delphi at the time of Trajan, without sufficient reason, cf. PIR? F 160 (Stein). 636 A ἐμοὶ τοίνυν ... χρῆσον ... τὰς ἀτόμους:

Re. corrected τοῖς

ἀτόμοις T. For αἱ ἄτομοι, cf. Epicur. Ep. 11.41 ὥστε τὰς ἀρχὰς ἀτόμους ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι σωμάτων φύσεις; Leucipp. A 1 (II 70.25 DK) πρῶτός te ἀτόμους ἀρχὰς ὑπεστήσατο.

216

TABLE TALKS II 3

636 A

636 A εἰ γὰρ τὰ μικρὰ δεῖ στοιχεῖα τῶν μεγάλων (xoi) ἀρχὰς ὑποτίϑεσϑαι: Addition Hu. Arist. distinguishes between principle (ἀρχή) and element (στοιχεῖον), cf. Met. 1070 b 22 ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐ μόνον τὰ ἐνυπάρχοντα αἴτια, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐκτὸς οἷον τὸ κινοῦν, δῆλον ὅτι ἕτερον ἀρχὴ καὶ στοιχεῖον, αἴτια δὲ ἄμφω κτλ. Arist. was the first to use στοιχεῖον as a philosophical term; the early (Pre-Socratic) history of ἀρχή is uncertain. Thus the tautological use of the two terms by Simpl. In Arist. Phys. 24.13 (= Anaxim. A9 I 83.4 DK) Ἀναξίμανδρος ... ἀρχήν τε καί στοιχεῖον εἴρηκε τῶν ὄντων τὸ ἄπειρον cannot be attributed to Anaximander as assumed by Abram. and Fuhrm. Plut. uses the two terms as synonyms at Quaest. Rom.

263 E, De prim. frig. 947 E, Adv. stoic. 1085 B. Epicur. uses orotχεῖον of the atoms at Ep. II 86 Us. — Firmus does not keep up this pretentious terminology; already in the next sentence he reveals that it was mere show; he is joking. 636 A πρῶτον εἰκός ἐστιν τὸ ᾧὸν γεγονέναι τῆς ὄρνιϑος: Re., Boll., Hartm. would read πρότερον, so also Bolk., seeing that the use of the

superl. with the comp. gen. is found above all in non-Atticistic writers and vulgar texts, see Radermacher? 68, 71 f.; Blass-DebrunnerP § 62; Thackeray I 183. It is true that there is only one more certain instance in Plut., Cato Min. 18.1 οὔτε γὰρ πρῶτός τις ἀνέβη τῶν συναρχόντων εἰς τὸ ταμιεῖον Κάτωνος, 000° ὕστερος ἀπῆλϑεν (changed by Anon. into πρότερος); at 636 B the gen. τοῦ ζῴου may be partitive (Bolk.), and moreover the passage is perhaps an interpolation (Abram.). However, this does not seem to be reason enough for changing. Abram.

suggests, perhaps rightly, that the frequent use of the adverbs πρῶτον (instead of πρότερον) ~ ὕστερον influenced the use of the adjective.

636 AB ἔστι γὰρ καὶ ἁπλοῦν, ὡς iv αἰσϑητοῖς, ποικίλον δὲ xoi μεμιγμένον μᾶλλον ἡ ὄρνις: Firmus here obviously forgets Atomism;

the term ἁπλοῦν is Aristotelian. It is used of the elements, cf. Metaph. 1017 b 10 τὰ ἁπλᾶ

σώματα,

οἷον γῆ καὶ πῦρ καὶ ὕδωρ

καὶ ὅσα

τοιαῦτα, and generally in contrast to σύνϑετον, cf. De caelo 286 Ὁ 16 ἐπεὶ δὲ πρότερον τῇ φύσει ἐν ἑκάστῳ γένει τὸ Ev τῶν πολλῶν καὶ ἁπλοῦν τῶν συνθέτων. To use this term of such a composite thing as an egg may indeed have seemed amusing to a Peripatetic. 636 B ἀρχὴ δὲ τὸ σπέρμα κτλ.: For this idea, cf. Arist. Mag. mor. 1187 a 30 πᾶσα yao φύσις γεννητική ἐστιν οὐσίας τοιαύτης ota ἐστίν, οἷον

636 Β

TABLE TALKS II 3

217

τὰ φυτὰ καὶ τὰ ξῷα᾽ ἀμφότερα γὰρ γεννήτικά. γεννητικὰ δὲ ἐκ τῶν ἀρχῶν, οἷον τὸ δένδρον ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος" αὕτη γάρ τις ἀρχή, so also at P. A. 653 b 17 τὸ μὲν γὰρ (sc. σπέρμα) ἀρχὴ γενέσεως αὐτῶν (sc. τῶν ζῴων) ἐστίν. - By recalling that the seed is a first cause Firmus strikingly invalidates his argument; Senecio (637 D) appositely uses this definition as an argument against the priority of the egg. 636 B τό δ᾽ φὸν σπέρματος μὲν πλέον, ζῴου δὲ μικρότερον: The processes of generation, the relations between the male σπέρμα and

the female ὕλη, and between these and the genesis of the primitive embryo are described by Arist. G. A. 730 a 25-b 5 οὔτε τὸ ϑῆλυ πρὸς τὴν γένεσιν οὕτω συμβάλλεται τοῖς συνισταμένοις ὡς τὸ ἄρρεν, ἀλλὰ

τὸ μὲν ἄρρεν ἀρχὴν κινήσεως, τὸ δὲ ϑήλυ τὴν ὕλην. ... δεῖται γὰρ (sc. τὸ ϑῆλυ) ἀρχῆς καὶ τοῦ κινήσοντος ... ἀλλ᾽ ἐνίοις γε τῶν ζῴων, olov τοῖς ὄρνισι, μέχρι τινὸς ἡ φύσις δύναται γεννᾶν. ... ἀτελῆ δὲ συνιστᾶσι (sc. αἱ ὄρνιϑες) τὰ καλούμενα ὑπηνέμια ᾧά. -- The use of μικρότερον instead of μεῖον as the opposite of πλέον is inconsistent and inadequate; the subject-matter is about greatness and complexity, not size.

636 B ἡ προχοπὴ μέσον εὐφυίας εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ ἀρετῆς xvÀ.: The thought is Aristotelian but the terminology is ποῖ; προκοπή is not used by Arist.; he uses μετάβασις μεταβαίνειν instead, and εὐφυία and ἀρετή correspond to the Aristotelian δύναμις and évegyeta. Arist. repeatedly discusses the gradual transition from lifeless matter to living creatures: P. A. 681 a 12 ἡ γὰρ φύσις μεταβαίνει συνεχῶς ἀπὸ τῶν

ἀψύχων εἰς τὰ Coa διὰ τῶν ζώντων μέν, οὐκ ὄντων δὲ ζῴων, H. A. 588 Ὁ 4 οὕτω δ᾽ ἐκ τῶν ἀψύχων εἰς τὰ ζῷα μεταβαίνει κατὰ μιλρὸν ἡ φύσις, ὥστε τῇ συνεχείᾳ λανϑάνει τὸ μεϑόριον αὐτῶν καὶ τὸ μέσον ποτέρων ἐστίν. At G. A. 737 Ὁ 9 the fertile egg is called κύημα τέλειον, ζῷον δὲ μήπω τέλειον. Arist. also ponders over the biological

difference between wind-eggs and fertile eggs: (741 a 19) πῶς τις αὐτῶν tà Qà φήσει ζῆν. οὔτε γὰρ οὕτως ὡς τὰ γόνιμα OG ἐνδέχεται, ... obF οὕτως ὥσπερ ξύλον ἢ λίϑος. ... δῆλον οὖν ὅτι ἔχει τινὰ

δυνάμει ψυχήν. ποίαν οὖν ταύτην; ἀνάγκη δὴ τὴν ἐσχάτην. αὕτη δ᾽ ἐστὶν ἡ ϑρεπτική. 636 B (ἔτι δ᾽, ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ Cow ... ἐμπεριεχομένου]: Abram. argues that this sentence is an interpolation. She offers four arguments, (1)

the sentence appears as parenthetic in the Aristotelian context: Arist.

218

TABLE TALKS II 3

636 B

teaches that the heart develops before the blaod-vessels: G. A. 753 b 19 συστάσης πρώτης τῆς καρδίας, καὶ τῆς μεγάλης φλεβὸς ἀπὸ ταύτης ἀφορισϑείσης, δύο ὀμφαλοὶ ἀπὸ τῆς φλεβὸς τείνουσιν κτλ.,

P. A. 654 b 11 ἀρχὴ δὲ τῶν μὲν φλεβῶν ἡ καρδία, secondly (2), the analogy drawn from the vessels within the creature to the egg and the hen is grotesquely illogical: the vessels do not enclose the body; thirdly (3), the next sentence, καὶ yao αἱ τέχναι κτλ., is not logically an explication of the preceding one but rather of the one before this; and

(4), Macrobius does not have the sentence about the vessels (nor that about the arts). It may be added that the superl. πρῶτον instead of πρότερον is otherwise found only twice in Plut., see above, on 636 A; and if, on the other hand, Bolk. is right in suggesting that τοῦ ζῴου is

partitive, the sentence appears as even more absurd in the context; Fuhrm. rightly brackets it. 636 B καὶ γὰρ αἱ τέχναι κτλ.: The comparison is found at Arist. Phys.

191 a 8 ὧς γὰρ πρὸς ἀνδριάντα χαλκὸς ἢ πρὸς κλίνην ξύλον ἢ πρὸς τῶν ἄλλων τι τῶν ἐχόντων μορφὴν ἡ ὕλη καὶ τὸ ἄμορφον ἔχει πρὶν λαβεῖν τὴν μορφήν, οὕτως αὕτη (sc. ἡ ὑποκειμένη φύσις) πρὸς

οὐσίαν ἔχει καὶ τὸ τόδε τι καὶ τὸ ὄν. Similarly, nature’s building up the body around the core of bones is compared with the method of the modeller, P. A. 654 b 29 ὥσπερ γὰρ of πλάττοντες ἐκ πηλοῦ ζῷον ἤ τινος ἄλλης ὑγρᾶς συστάσεως ὑφιστᾶσι τῶν στερεῶν τι σωμάτων;

εἶθ᾽ οὕτω περιπλάττουσι, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ἡ φύσις δεδημιούργηκεν ἐκ τῶν σαρκῶν τὸ ζῷον. — ᾿Ατύπωτος is found, besides here and at Philo III 68.7 Wendl., only in later writers, e.g., Aelian. N. A. I1 19 (of the bear's cub): τὸ δὲ εἰκῇ κρέας xoi ἄσημόν τε xoi ἀτύπωτον καὶ ἄμορφον. 636 C ὅταν ἐν ὄνυχι ὁ πηλὸς γένηται: Plut. also attributes this saying to Polyclitus at De prof. in virt. 86 A, to illustrate accuracy in conduction: ἔστι χαλεπώτατον τὸ ἔργον οἷς ἂν εἰς ὄνυχα ὁ πηλὸς ἀφίκηται,

cf. frg. B 1 (I 392 DK), with note. The saying indicates that the expression ‘to come/be at the nail’ was originally used by potters, and then also by sculptors as a term for the finish and final examination of the work (not necessarily only of the joints in marble sculpture). The expression became proverbial and was used, in various form, for many kinds of examination and accuracy, cf. De tu. san. 128 E ἡ μὲν οὖν

ἀκριβὴς σφόδρα καὶ δι᾽ ὄνυχος λεγομένη δίαιτα, Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 3 C τὸ δὴ λεγόμενον ἐξ ὀνύχων ἀγαπῶσαι τὰ τέκνα; Dion. Hal.

636 C

TABLE TALKS II 3

219

Demosth. 13 p. 157.9 Us. ὄνυχα (cf. Hor. Sat. 15. Belop. IV 66.36 ὥστε τὰς ἔχειν; Gal. II 737 K. εἰς verb is also used in this

τὸν Avotaxóv χαρακτῆρα ἐχμέμακται eic 32 ad unguem factus homo); Philo Mech. ἐκτὸς γωνίας En ὄνυχος συμβεβλημένας ὄνυχα συμπήγνυσϑαι. The corresponding general sense, cf. Hesych. s.v. ὀνυχιεῖ"

ἐπιμελῶς ἐξετάσει, and Athen. 97D ἐξονυχίζεις τε πάντα τὰ προσπίπτοντα τοῖς συνδιαλεγομένοις. Latin scholiasts generally de-

rive the expression from the sculptor’s examination of the joints: Serv. In Verg. Georg. 11 277 in unguem (positis arboribus) ad perfectionem.

et est translatio a marmorariis, qui iuncturas marmorum unguibus probant; Porphyr. Jn Hor. Sat. 1 5.32 translatio a marmorariis, qui iuncturas marmorum tum demum perfectas dicunt, si unguis superductus non offendat. Further examples: Colum. XI 2.13 materies si roborea est, ab uno fabro dolari ad unquem debet; Cels. VIII 1.3 suturae

in unguem committuntur; Vitruv. IV 6.2 uti crepidines ... in unguem ipso cymatio coniungantur.

636 C τύπους ἀμόρφους: Sandbach, JHS 93 (1973) 234 brings up Casaubon’s conjecture tóxovc, but there is no reason for a change. 636 C ὕστερον ἐνδημιουργεῖσϑαι τὸ ξῷον: Bolk. rejects ἔκδημ. Re., Wil.; this verb is not found in Plut., while ἔνδημ. occurs at 664 F, De aud. 17 B, Adv. stoic. 1084 A. A complement, ἐν τοῖς τύποις or ἐν

τοῖς φοῖς, is easily understood. 636 C ὡς δὲ κάμπη γίνεται τὸ πρῶτον: Not even Arist. managed to discover that caterpillars and other insects develop out of eggs; they were thought to come into existence through autogenesis: H. A. 551a 13 γίνονται δ᾽ αἱ μὲν καλούμεναι ψυχαὶ ἐκ τῶν καμπῶν, al γίνονται

ἐπὶ τῶν φύλλων τῶν χλωρῶν, ... πρῶτον μὲν ἔλαττον κέγχρου, εἶτα μικροὶ σκώληκες αὐξανόμεναι,

... καὶ μεταβάλλουσιν τὴν μορφήν,

καὶ καλοῦνται χρυσαλλίδες, ... χρόνου δ᾽ οὐ πολλοῦ διελϑόντος περιρρήγνυται τὸ κέλυφος, καὶ ἐκπέτεται ἐξ αὐτῶν πτερωτὰ Coa, ἃς καλοῦμεν ψυχάς; cf. Geop. XV 1.21 καὶ γὰρ τὴν κάμπην φασὶν (sc. Θεόφραστος καὶ ᾿Αριστοτέλης) εἰς ζῷον ἕτερον πτερωτόν, τὴν

καλουμένην ψυχήν (sc. μεταβάλλεσϑαι). See further below, on 637 B toa δ᾽ αὐτοτελῆ. 636 C ἕτερον πτερωϑὲν δι᾽ αὑτῆς ... μεϑίησιν: The indefinite ἕτερον. has been suspected (ἔντομον Wytt., ἕτερόν (tt) Doe. (not Dübn.),

220

TABLE TALKS II 3

636 C

ἑρπετόν Damsté ap. Bolk.), but the word needed, ζῷον, is easily understood from the preceding sentence. Also the doubts about μεϑίησι are unnecessary; Bolk. refers to numerous parallels; Abram. points to De soll. an. 982 A (of the dogfish): τίκτουσι μὲν γὰρ ᾧόν, εἶτα ζῷον ... ἐντὸς ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ... τρέφουσιν ..., ὅταν δὲ μείζονα γένηται, μεϑιᾶσι ϑύραζε. 636 D ἐν πάσῃ μεταβολῇ xv.: For the Aristotelian terminology, see above, on 635 CD.

636 D oxvines ἐν δένδρῳ καὶ τερηδόνες ἐμφύονται ξύλῳ: For the bark beetle, σκνίψ or xvi (Theophr.) cf. Theophr. H. P. IV 14.10 ἐγγίνονται δὲ καὶ κνῖπες ἔν τισι τῶν δένδρων, ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ Sout καὶ τῇ συκῆ᾽ καὶ δοκοῦσιν ἐκ τῆς ὑγρότητος συνίστασϑαι τῆς ὑπὸ τὸν φλοιὸν συνισταμένης; Hesych. s.v. xvixeg ζωύφια τῶν ξυλοφάγων. The shipworm, Teredo navalis, is described by Theophr. ἢ. P. V 4.4 πάντα δ᾽ éobicodar τερηδόνι πλὴν κοτίνου καὶ ἐλάας ... ἐσθίεται δὲ τὰ μὲν ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ σηπόμενα ὑπὸ τερηδόνος ... οὐ γὰρ γίνεται τερηδὼν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ κτλ. 636 D κατὰ σῆψιν ὑγρύτητος ἢ πέψιν: The two processes are said to

be opposite by Arist. G. A. 777 a 11. He defines πέψις at Meteor. 379 b 18 πέψις μὲν οὖν ἐστιν τελείωσις ὑπὸ τοῦ φυσικοῦ καὶ οἰκείου ϑερμοῦ ἐκ τῶν ἀντικειμένων παϑητικῶν, and σῆψις ibid. 379 a 16 σῆψις δ᾽ ἐστὶν φϑορὰ τῆς ἐν ἑκάστῳ ὑγρῷ οἰκείας καὶ κατὰ φύσιν ϑερμότητος ὑπ᾽ ἀλλοτρίας ϑερμότητος. Ibid. 380 a 11-381 b 22 he discerns three kinds of πέψις: πέπανσις, ἕψησις, ὄπτησις. In Arist. πέψις is always a constructive process, cf. G. A. 786 a 17 ἡ μὲν γὰρ πέψις γλυκέα ποιεῖ, τὴν δὲ πέψιν τὸ ϑερμόν, while σῆψις is a process of destruction and decay. The former precedes the latter and produces

a residue (περίττωμα) which forms the material for the generation of living creatures. Thus πέψις is a prerequisite for their generation. Arist. tries to describe the development at G. A. 762 a 14 γίνεται δ᾽ οὐϑὲν σηπόμενον ἀλλὰ πεττόμενον᾽ ἡ δὲ σήψις καὶ τὸ σηπτὸν περίττωμα τοῦ πεφϑέντος ἐστίν. This is hardly in accordance with Meteor. 379 b 7 ζῷα ἐγγίνεται τοῖς σηπομένοις, H. A. 570 a 16 γίνονται (sc. αἱ ἐγχέλυς) ἐκ τῶν καλουμένων γῆς ἐντέρων, ἃ αὐτόματα συνίσταται ἐν τῷ πηλῷ .... (a 19) καὶ ἐν τῇ ϑαλάττῃ δὲ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ποταμοῖς γίνεται τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὅταν ἢ μάλιστα σῆψις. This is echoed in Geop. XV 1.20 Θεόφραστος καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης φασὶ τὰ ζῷα

636 D

TABLE TALKS II 3

221

οὐ μόνον ἐξ ἀλλήλων γεννᾶσϑαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτόματα γίνεσθαι, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς σηπομένης. It is natural, then, that the two processes tended to be identified with each other, as here; cf. Quaest. nat. 912 C

ἡ δὲ πέψις ἔοικεν εἶναι σῆψις; Athen. 276 Ε κατὰ σῆψιν δ᾽ ἡ πέψις. 636 D ἡ γὰρ ὕλη λόγον ἔχει πρὸς τὰ γινόμενα μητρός, Πλάτων, καὶ τιϑήνης: Two passages of Tim. are conflated: tod γεγονότος ὁρατοῦ καὶ πάντως αἰσϑητοῦ μητέρα, and 52 δὴ γενέσεως τυϑήνην. There is also a confusion of Plato and

ὥς φησι 51 A τὴν D τὴν δὲ Arist., as

at Aet. 19.4 ᾿Αριστοτέλης καὶ Πλάτων τὴν ὕλην ... δεξαμενὴν δὲ τῶν εἰδῶν οἷον τιϑήνην καὶ ἐκμαγεῖον καὶ μητέρα γενέσϑαι.

636 D ὕλη δὲ πᾶν ἐξ οὗ σύστασιν ἔχει τὸ γεννώμενον: The definition is not given in exactly this form in Arist.; shorter and more abstract variants are found at Metaph. 1032 a 17 τὸ δὲ ἐξ οὗ γίνεται (sc. fj γένεσις), ἣν λέγομεν ὕλην, and G. C. 320 a 2 ἔστι δὲ ὕλη ... τὸ

ὑποκείμενον

γενέσεως

καὶ

φϑορᾶς

δεκτικόν.

For the biological

γένεσις, cf. G. A. 744 Ὁ 23 ἡ φύσις ἐκ μὲν τῆς καϑαρωτάτης ὕλης

σάρκας καὶ τῶν ἄλλων αἰσϑητηρίων τὰ σώματα συνίστησιν, ἐκ δὲ τῶν περιττωμάτων ὀστᾶ καὶ νεῦρα καὶ τρίχας κτλ. ibid. 777 a 5 | γὰρ αὐτὴ ὕλη fj τρέφουσα καὶ ἐξ ἧς συνυιστᾷ τὴν γένεσιν f) φύσις. 636 D

ἀείσω

ξυνετοῖσι

τὸν

᾿Ορφικὸν

καὶ

ἱερὸν

λύγον,

ὃς

...

συλλαβὼν κτλ.: Plut. also quotes this Orphic phrase at De E 391 D. It was part of a hexameter: ἀείσω Evvetotor ϑύρας δ᾽ ἐπίϑεσϑε βέβηλοι

(Orph. frg. 334 Kern). The line was much quoted, see Kern, ad loc. It is cited as Pythagorean by Stob. III 1.199, III 41.9. A variant appears

in frg. 245 Kern; φϑέγξομαι οἷς ϑέμις ἐστί ϑύρας δ᾽ ἐπίϑεσϑε βέβηλον. It is alluded to by Plat. Symp. 218 B οἱ δὲ οἰκέται, καὶ εἴ τις ἄλλος ἐστὶ βέβηλός te καὶ ἄγροικος, πύλας πάνυ μεγάλας τοῖς ὠσὶν ἐπίϑεσϑε. The Orphic 'Iepóc λόγος is mentioned by Hdt. II 81; Plat. Ep. VII 335 A; Philodem. De pietate 51.7-11 p. 23 Gomp., et al. (see Kern, pp. 140-143). There were many versions of the myth of the cosmic egg, see frgs. 54-58 Kern. For the three ideas underlying it, see

Lukas, Zeitschr. des Vereins f. Volkskunde 4 (1894) 227. The Orphic myth of the cosmic egg inspired vivid speculations on cosmology. The egg was regarded as a symbol for the four elements, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. 1 12 Bussem. ἴσϑι οὖν ὅτι ἐκ τεσσάρων στοιχείων ἐστὶν (sc. τὸ dióv): τὸ μὲν γὰρ ὀστρακῶδες ἔοικε τῇ γῇ, ... τὸ δ᾽ ὑγρὸν τῷ ὕδατι, ... τὸ δ᾽ ἐν αὐτῷ πνεῦμα τῷ ἀέρι, ... τὸ δὲ λεκιϑῶδες τῷ

222

TABLE TALKS II 3

636 D

πυρί, and further Coll. des anciens alchimistes grecs 1 (Paris 1887) 20.19 Berthelot-Ruelle τὸ φὸν ἐκάλεσαν τετράστοιχον διὰ τὸ εἶναι

αὐτὸ κόσμου μίμησιν, περιέχον τὰ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖα ἐν ἑαυτῷ, ΠῚ 433.12 τὸ ᾧὸν τετραμερές συγκείμενον μορίων.

ἐστιν

κατὰ

φύσιν

ἐκ τῶν

εἰρημένων

636 E εὔστομα κείσϑω καϑ' ᾿Ηρόδοτον: Hdt. II 171 uses this expression twice in speaking about Egyptian mysteries and the Greek Thesmophoria. — Firmus’ sudden change of mood from bantering and

laughter to the reverential taciturnity is striking. Abram. suggests that this is due to Plutarch’s anxious piety and caution in face of mysteries

and religious secrets. He cites the phrase two more times, always referring to Hdt., at De def. or. 417 C περὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν μυστικῶν, ἐν οἷς τὰς μεγίστας ἐμφάσεις καὶ διαφάσεις λαβεῖν ἔστι τῆς περὶ δαιμόνων ἀληϑείας, εὔστομά μοι κείσϑω, xa ᾿Ηρόδοτον, and at De exil. 607 C. It is also cited by Porphyr. De abst. 11 36.6; Synes. Aegypt.

(De provid.) II 5; Themist. Or. H 27 CD, XIII 176 A. Herw. propounded εὔστομά (pov) κείσϑω in our passage, which D. Weiss, De

nonnullis Plutarchi Moralium locis ab Herwerdeno tractatis (Biponti 1888) 6 supports, seeing that the pron. is omitted only by Synes. — Plut. often mentions the mystic silence, e.g., 671 D, 728 D, E, De Is. et Os. 354 F, Cons.

ad ux. 611 D, and frgs. 202, 207 Sandb. See further O.

Casel, De philosophorum Graecorum silentio mystico, (Giessen 1919)

86-93. 636 E καὶ πτηνὰ γεννᾷ καὶ νηκτὰ μυρία καὶ χερσαῖα κτλ.: The classification appears somewhat improvised and confused; different criteria are used, habitat, locomotion and number of extremities; but the classification is only intended as an exemplification. Arist. discusses many ways of classification, see H. A. 487 a 14-b 23, De progr. an. 704 a 12.

636 E τὸν ἀττέλεβον: After ὄρνις and ὄφις one expects a third generic concept, ἀχρίς, but a similar anomaly is found at Arist. H. A. 487 b 19: τὰ μὲν πτηνά, ὥσπερ ὄρνιϑες καὶ μέλιτται. Both authors prefer to mention a representative species (by ὄρνις Plut. may mean the cock).

Abram. suggests that ἀττέλεβος here denotes the migratory locust, Schistocerca peregrina, which is mentioned below, 637 B. Arist. H. A.

550

b 32 discerns

three

subclasses

of grasshoppers,

ἀττέλαβοι,

ἀκρίδες, τέττιγες. See further Gossen, RE s.v. Heuschrecke.

636 E

TABLE TALKS II 3

223

636 E τοῖς περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον ὀργιασμοῖς ὡς μίμημα τοῦ τὰ πάντα γεννῶντος καὶ περιέχοντος ἐν ἑαυτῷ συγκαϑωσίωται: Plut. mentions

at Cons. ad ux. 611 Ὁ that he and his wife were initiates in the Dionysiac mysteries. In view of this fact we may assume that the information he gives here is reliable. It is also supported by archae-

ological and epigraphical evidence. Sculptural representations of Dionysus holding an egg in his hand, which have been found in Boeotian graves, suggest that this originally Orphic symbol of life and immortal-

ity had been adopted in the mystery cult of Dionysus in his capacity of Lord of the souls, see Nilsson, Archiv f. Religionswiss. 11 (1908) 530— 547, esp. 537, id. Gr. Rel.? 1 598. Our passage is rendered in a much

fuller presentation.by Macrob. Sat. VII 16.8 consule initiatos sacris Liberi patris, in quibus hac veneratione ovum colitur ut ex forma tereti ac paene sphaerali atque undique versum clausa et includente intra se vitam, mundi simulacrum vocetur, mundum autem consensu omnium

constat universitatis esse principium. The expression mundi simulacrum is a translation of the Orphic formula αἰῶνος εἴδωλον found in Pind. frg. 131 Christ. A representation of what is probably a meditation on the symbolism of the egg is found on a fresco in a columbarium near Villa Pamfilia in Rome. Five young men arc seen engaged in the

contemplation of three eggs lying on a central table. The eggs are painted, the lower half black and the upper one white, symbolizing

earth and heaven respectively. See J. J. Bachofen, Versuch über die Gräbersymbolik der Alten (Basel 1859) 3; Nilsson, Archiv f. Religionswiss. 11 (1908) 543, id. Harvard Theol. Rev. 46 (1953) 189 f.; Boyancé,

Mél. Arch. 52 (1935) 97-100; Turcan, Rev. Hist. Rel. 160 (1961) 12 f. The association of Orpheus with Dionysiac mysteries developed during

the Hellenistic period; it is not evidenced before 300 B. C., see I. M. Linforth, The Arts of Orpheus (Berkeley 1941) 206-210. 636 Ε τὸν x60pov ἀντὶ τῆς παροιμιακῆς ϑύρας ἐπὶ σεαυτὸν ἀνοίξας: Plut. cites this proverb more explicitly at Adv. Col. 1108 DE ἐμοὶ δὲ δοκεῖ (sc. ὁ Κωλώτης) καϑάπερ ὁ Λυδὸς ἐφ᾽ αὑτὸν ἀνοίγειν οὐ ϑύραν μίαν, ἀλλὰ πλείσταις τῶν ἀποριῶν καὶ μεγίσταις περιβάλλειν τὸν ᾿Επίκουρον. The Lydian was king Candaules who ordered Gyges to hide behind

a door to see the queen

disrobe;

later, she ordered

Gyges to hide there in order to murder the king, see Hdt. 1 8-12. The proverb is found in distorted form in Hesych.: Λυδὸς τὴν ϑύραν ἔκλεισε" παροιμία, ἐπὶ τῶν μωροκλεπτῶν, and Zenob. IV 98.

224

636 F 6 yao

TABLE TALKS II 3

κόσμος

προὔφέστηκε

πάντων

636 F

τελειότατος

dv:

Like

Firmus Senecio uses Arist. as his authority, cf., for example, De caelo 280 a 12 ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἀδύνατον αὐτὸν (sc. τὸν κόσμον) ἅμ᾽ ἀίδιον

εἶναι καὶ γενέσθαι, φανερόν, 296 ἃ 34 fi δέ γε τοῦ κόσμου τάξις ἀίδιός ἐστιν. 636 F τοῦ ἀτελοῦς φύσει πρότερον εἶναι τὸ τέλειον: This idea, Senecio’s starting-point, is a basic one in Aristotle’s thought, cf. De caelo 269 a 19 τὸ γὰρ τέλειον πρότερον τῇ φύσει τοῦ ἀτελοῦς, Phys. 265 a 23 πρότερον δὲ καὶ φύσει καὶ λόγῳ καὶ χρόνῳ τὸ τέλειον μὲν τοῦ

ἀτελοῦς, G. A. 733 ἃ 1 ὥσπερ δὲ τὸ μὲν ζῷον τέλειον, ὁ δὲ σκώληξ καὶ τὸ ᾧὸν ἀτελές, οὕτως τὸ τέλειον ἐκ τοῦ τελειοτέρου γίνεσθαι πέφυκεν. 636 Ε ὡς τοῦ πεπηρωμένον τὸ ὁλόχληρον καὶ τοῦ μέρους τὸ ὅλον: Another Aristotelian idea: Pol. 1253 ἃ 20 τὸ γὰρ ὅλον πρότερον

ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι τοῦ μέρους, cf. also Metaph.

1023 a 15 οἷον τὸ

ἀγγεῖον ἔχειν τὸ ὑγρόν φαμεν ... οὕτω δὲ καὶ τὸ ὅλον ἔχειν τὰ μέρη, Ps.-Arist., Probl. 891 b 22 διὰ τί τὰ ἄρσενα μείζω τῶν ϑηλειῶν ὡς

ἐπίπαν ἐστίν; ... ἢ ὅτι ὁλόκληρα, τὰ δὲ πεπήρωται. 636 F ὅϑεν οὐϑεὶς λέγει τοῦ σπέρματος εἶναι τὸν ἄνϑρωπον κτλ.: The argument derives from Arist. Metaph. 1072 Ὁ 35 τὸ γὰρ σπέρμα ἐξ

ἑτέρων ἐστὶ προτέρων τελείων, καὶ τὸ πρῶτον οὐ σπέρμα ἐστίν, ἀλλὰ τὸ τέλειον οἷον πρότερον ἄνθρωπον ἂν φαίη τις εἶναι τοῦ σπέρματος, οὗ τὸν ἐκ τούτου γενόμενον, and 1092 ἃ 17 ἄνθρωπος γὰρ ἄνϑρωπον γεννᾷ, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι τὸ σπέρμα πρῶτον. Senecio (Plut.)

neglects the distinction between chronological and logical priority made by Arist. Metaph. 1050 a 2: δῆλον ὅτι ἡ ἐνέργεια καὶ οὕτω προτέρα τῆς δυνάμεως κατὰ γένεσιν καὶ χρόνον. ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ οὐσίᾳ γε, πρῶτον

μὲν

ὅτι τὰ τῇ γενέσει ὕστερα

τῷ

εἴδει καὶ τῇ οὐσίᾳ

πρότερα, οἷον ἀνὴρ παιδὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος σπέρματος" τὸ μὲν γὰρ

ἤδη ἔχει τὸ εἶδος, τὸ δ᾽ οὔ, and P. A. 646 ἃ 35 τῷ μὲν οὖν χρόνῳ προτέραν τὴν ὕλην ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι καὶ τὴν γένεσιν, τῷ λόγῳ δὲ τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ τὴν ἑκάστου μορφήν. 637 A ἐνδεᾶ γάρ ἐστι τοῦ οἰκείου" διὸ καὶ βούλεσϑαι ποιεῖν πέφυκεν

ἄλλο τοιοῦτον, οἷον ἦν ἐξ οὗ ἀπεκρίϑη: The thought is related to Plat. Symp. 207 CD ἡ ϑνητὴ φύσις ζητεῖ κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν ἀεὶ τὸ εἶναι ἀϑάνατος. δύναται δὲ ταύτῃ μόνον, τῇ γενέσει, ὅτι ἀεὶ καταλείπει

637 A

TABLE TALKS II 3

ἕτερον νέον ἀντὶ τοῦ φυσικώτατον

γὰρ

τῶν

παλαιοῦ, and ἔργων

τοῖς

225

Arist. ζῶσιν,

De anima ὅσα

415

τέλεια

a 26

καὶ

μὴ

πηρώματα ... τὸ ποιῆσαι ἕτερον οἷον αὐτό, G. A. 735 a 18 τὸ γεννητικὸν ἑτέρου οἷον αὐτό" τοῦτο γὰρ παντὸς φύσει τελείου ἔργον καὶ ζῴου καὶ φυτοῦ, Pol. 1252 ἃ 29 ὥσπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις ζῴοις καὶ φυτοῖς φυσικὸν τὸ ἐφίεσϑαν, οἷον αὐτό, τοιοῦτον καταλιπεῖν

ἕτερον. However, our passage is most closely related τὸ Aet. V 3.1 Ἀριστοτέλης"

σπέρμα

ἐστὶ τὸ δυνάμενον

κινεῖν

Ev ἑαυτῷ

εἰς τὸ

ἀποτελέσαι τι τοιοῦτον, οἷόν ἐστι τὸ ἐξ οὗ συνεκρίϑη (ἀπεκρίϑη Diels). Bolk. would change

into συνεκρίϑη

in our passage instead

because of the hiatus. But ἀπεκρύϑη also occurs in Diog. Laert. VII 158 (= SVF II 741) σπέρμα δὲ λέγουσιν εἶναι τὸ οἷόν τε γεννᾶν τοιαῦτ᾽ ἀφ᾿ οἵου αὐτὸ ἀπεκρίϑη, and Gal. XIX 370 K. (=

SVFII 742)

ὁ δὲ Κιτιεὺς Ζήνων οὕτως ὡρίσατο᾽ σπέρμα ἐστὶν ἀνθρώπου ... σύμμιγμα τοῦ τῶν προγόνων γένους, οἷόν τε αὐτὸ ἦν καὶ αὐτὸ συμμιχϑὲν ἀπεκρίϑη. -- The meaning of τὸ οἰκεῖον is rather obscure, see below.

637 A καὶ τὸν σπερματικὸν λόγον ὁρίζονται γόνον ἐνδεᾶ γενέσεως: The metaphysical and universal aspect of the subject under discussion is emphasized through the Stoic notion omeguatinds λόγος. It is used

of cosmogony as well as zoogony, cf. Diog. Laert, VII 136 (= SVF I 102) κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς μὲν οὖν nal αὑτὸν ὄντα (sc. τὸν ϑεὸν) τρέφειν τὴν πᾶσαν οὐσίαν δι᾽ ἀέρος εἰς ὕδωρ καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ γονῇ τὸ σπέρμα περιέχεται, οὕτω καὶ τοῦτον σπερματικὸν λόγον ὄντα τοῦ κόσμου, τοιόνδε ὑπολείπεσθαι ἐν τῷ ὑγρῷ, εὐεργὸν αὑτῷ ποιοῦντα τὴν ὕλην

πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἑξῆς γένεσιν, and VII 148 (= SVF II 1132) ἔστι δὲ φύσις ἕξις ἐξ αὑτῆς κινουμένη κατὰ σπερματικοὺς λόγους ἀποτελοῦσά τε καὶ συνέχουσα τὰ ἐξ αὑτῆς ἐν ὡρισμένοις χρόνοις καὶ τοιαῦτα δρῶσα 4g

οἵων ἀπεκρίϑη. Cf. also SVF II 717, 739. This concept was also

used by the Pneumatists, cf. Athen. ap. Oribas. Lib. inc. 39.16 (CMG VE2:2 p. 140.18) ἡ μὲν διευϑύνουσα τὸ σῶμα δύναμις καὶ τοῖς ἔξωϑεν λυμαινομένοις ἡμῖν ἀντερείδουσα καὶ μαχομένη κατά τινας σπερματικοὺς λόγους καί φυσικὰς ἀνάγκας. It can also be found in

Pythagorean circles, cf. Iambl. Jn Nicom. Arithm. introd. p. 10 Pistelli Πυϑαγόρας δὲ (sc. φησὶν τὸν ἀριϑμὸν εἶναι) ἔκτασιν καὶ ἐνέργειαν τῶν ἐν μονάδι σπερματικῶν λόγων. See L. Robin, La pensée grecque (Paris 1963) 417. The definition reported here by Senecio is not found elsewhere. The two phrases ἐνδεᾷ τοῦ οἰκείου (above), and ἐνδεᾶ γενέσεως, as exponents of Aristotelian and Stoic thought respectively,

226

are confusing,

TABLE TALKS II 3

as some

translations

(Kaltw.,

637 A

Reich., Clem.) show;

Hartm. admitted that he did not understand the passage. It appears that τὸ οἰκεῖον is virtually equivalent to τὸ τέλειον. The egg and the seed lack/are in need of individuality and they have a natural potential-

ity of obtaining that. It seems that the second (Stoic) phrase is not about individual generation; it refers to the general principle of generation, the principle of procreation as such. On the other hand, the

subsequent clause, ἐνδεὲς δ᾽ οὐδέν ἐστι τοῦ μὴ γεγονότος μηδ᾽ ὄντος applies only to the Aristotelian, individual, generation. Thus, the Stoic clause is parenthetic; it interrupts the Aristotelian line of thought. 637 A τὰ δ᾽ dà ... τὴν φύσιν ἔχοντα τῆς £v τινι ζῴῳ πήξεως καὶ συστάσεως ὀργάνων τε τοιούτων καὶ ἀγγείων δεομένην: This sentence can be interpreted in two ways, depending upon the sense given to δεομένην, ‘lacking’, or ‘being in need of’/‘presupposing’, represented by the two most recent translations, Clem.: ‘It is undoubtedly to be

seen that eggs have a natural constitution which lacks the frame and structure possessed by animals, as well as such organs and vessels as these possess’; Fuhrm: ‘On voit d’autre part, d’aprés la nature des

ceufs, qu'ils ne peuvent se former que par une sorte de coagulation a l'intérieur d'un animal, gráce à des organes et à des poches nécessaires

à cet effet’. Cf. also the Latin translation (Xyl.) and Amyot. Fuhrm. follows Kaltw. and Reich. This second interpretation is preferable as is seen in the subsequent context: eggs can only be produced by parental

creatures; otherwise no offspring can develop out of them. The phrase ὀργάνων .. . ἀγγείων δεομένην refers to the genital organs, as appears below, 638 A where it recurs. Clement's translation fails to make that clear. 637 AB ὅϑεν οὐδ᾽ ἱστόρηται γηγενὲς Qóv, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ Τυνδάρειον oi ποιηταὶ λέγουσιν οὐρανοπετὲς ἀναφανῆναι: Senecio is right: an

earth-born egg is not on record, as is confirmed by Arist. G. A. 763 a5 οὐϑενὸς γὰρ τοιαύτην (sc. ἐξ wav γηγενῶν) ὁμῶμεν ζῴου γένεσιν. The egg has its origin in a flawless parental individual. -- Considering

the unimportant part played by Tyndareus in the myth, this patronymic is somewhat out of place. Leda came across a heavenly egg which had been produced by Zeus and Nemesis and which gave birth to Helen, cf. Sapph. frg. 56 Bergk? φαῖσι δή ποτα Λήδαν daxivewov | πεπυκαδμένον ὦιον | εὔρην, cited by Athen. 57 D, cf. 57 F οὐκ εὖ δὲ Neoxhijs ὁ Κροτωνιάτης ἔφη ἀπὸ τῆς σελήνης πεσεῖν τὸ Mov ἐξ οὗ

637 AB

TABLE TALKS II 3

227

τὴν “Ἑλένην γεννηθῆναι. See further Eitrem, RE s.v. Leda, 1118. The egg-birth of the Dioscurs was apparently connected later with Leda, see Bethe, RE s.v. Dioskuren, 1112f.

637 B ζῷα δ᾽ αὐτοτελῆ καὶ ὁλόκληρα uéyot νῦν ἀναδίδωσιν ἡ γῆ: For the belief in autogenesis, cf. Arist. H. A. 551 a 1 (γίνεται) τὰ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐκ ζῴων

ἀλλ᾽

αὐτόματα,

tà μὲν

ἐκ τῆς δρόσου

τῆς ἐπὶ τοῖς

φύλλοις πιπτούσης, ... τὰ δ᾽ ἐν βορβόρῳ καὶ κόπρῳ σηπομένοις, τὰ δ᾽ ἐν ξύλοις, ... τὰ δ᾽ ἐν ϑριξὶ ζῴων, τὰ δ᾽ ἐν σαρκὶ τῶν ζῴων κτλ. Such creatures are πολλὰ τῶν ἐντόμων (ibid. 539 ἃ 24), and also πάντα τὰ ὀστραχόδερμα (6. A. 761 Ὁ 24, 763 a 26), oysters, cockles, etc. (H. A. 547 b 20). The belief in autogenesis persisted into modern times. The Italian naturalists F. Redi (1626-1698) and L. Spallanzani (17291799) showed that no insects, or maggots, or infusoria can arise spontaneously, and in 1864 L. Pasteur also demonstrated this of bacteria. — By μέχρι νῦν the thought is directed to the primitive stage of zoogony. The general opinion among the Pre-Socratics was that the species were originally generated spontaneously and then later passed on to sexual propagation, cf. Anaximander A 30 'A. £v ὑγρῷ yevvn-

ϑῆναι τὰ πρῶτα ζῷα φλοιοῖς περιεχόμενα ἀκανϑώδεσι (for the interpretation, see Erkell, Eranos 80 (1982) 125-128); Anaxag. A 67 Διογένης καὶ Ἀναξαγόρας ἔφασαν μετὰ τὸ συστῆναι τὸν κόσμον καὶ τὰ ζῷα ἐκ τῆς γῆς ἐξαγαγεῖν; Archelaus, A 1 (II 45.11 DK) γεννᾶσϑαι

δέ φησι τὰ ζῷα ἐκ ϑερμῆς γῆς. Emped. thought that the parts of animals were generated separately, cf. frgs.

B 57-63. - Generation out

of the earth is common in Greek mythology. Titans and giants were offspring of Gaia, as well as the dragons of Thebes and Erechtheus of Athens. 637 B μῦς ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ: There are frequent stories of this kind, e.g.,

Diod. I 10.2 τῆς δ᾽ ἐξ ἀρχῆς παρ᾽

αὐτοῖς ζῳογονίας τεκμήριον

πειρῶνται φέρειν τὸ καὶ νῦν ἔτι τὴν ἐν τῇ Θηβαίδι χώραν ... τοσούτους καὶ τηλικούτους μῦς γεννᾶν ὥστε τοὺς ἰδόντας τὸ

γινόμενον ἐκπλήττεσθαι. These creatures are said to be fully developed in the fore but to have the rear formed of mud. The same is told by Plin. IX 179, Ovid. Met. I 422-429, Aelian. N. A. II 56 who also tells that frogs with the same shape can be seen near Naples; cf. also Aelian. N. A. VI 41.

228

TABLE TALKS II 3

637 B

637 B téctvyas: There was an established opinion that grasshoppers are earth-born, cf. Anacreont. 32.16 Bergk* σοφέ, ynyevijs, φίλυμνε (τέττιξ); Plat. Symp. 191 B ἐγέννων καὶ ἔτικτον οὐκ εἰς ἀλλήλους ἀλλ᾽ εἰς γῆς, ὥσπερ οἱ τέττιγες. However, Arist. expressly states that cicadas copulate, as well as locusts, spiders, wasps, and ants, see H. A. 550 b 30, G. A. 721 a 4. -- For the custom of the Athenians to wear a τέττιξ brooch as ἃ symbol of their autochthony, see Borthwich, CQ 16

(1966) 107 f. 637 B ἀρχῆς ἔξωϑεν ἑτέρας καὶ δυνάμεως ἐγγενομένης: Arist. dis-

cusses this extrinsic formative principle at G. A. 735 a 3 ἡ δὲ τῆς φύσεως κίνησις ἐν αὐτῷ ἀφ᾽ ἑτέρας οὖσα φύσεως τῆς ἐχούσης τὸ εἶδος ἐνεργείᾳ. ... ἃ 12 ταύτης μὲν οὖν οὐδὲν μόριον αἴτιον τῆς γενέσεως, ἀλλὰ τὸ πρῶτον κινῆσαν ἔξωϑεν. οὐϑὲν γὰρ αὐτὸ ἑαυτὸ γεννᾷ, cf. De anima 416 b 16. The principle is referred to again below, 637 E-F. 637 B ἐν δὲ Σικελίᾳ περὶ tov δουλικὸν πόλεμον κτλ.: The great slave

war in Sicily in 136-132 B. C. is reported by many writers, see Diod. XXXIV/XXXV 2; Liv. Perioch. 56, 58, 59; Val. Max. II 7.3, VI 9.8, IX 12. ext. 1; Flor. II 7; Appian. Bell. civ.

19, but nowhere is a locust

plague during this period mentioned. A plague of the year 125 B. C. is mentioned by Iul. Obsequens, Prodig. 30 Rossbach: apparuit locustarum ingenti agmine in Africa, quae a vento in mare deiectae fluctibusque eiectae odore intolerabili Cyrenis mortifero(que) vapore gravem pestilentiam fecerunt pecori. 637 B τροφῆς περίσσωμα ποιεῖ γόνιμον: Arist. treats of the nature of the σπέρμα at G. A. 724 b 23-725 a 4 and concludes that it is περίττωμα τροφῆς. This definition is explicitly given at 766 b 8; cf. Ps.-

Gal. XIX 321 K., and Plut. Quaest. nat. 919 C, cf. also 917 B ἀφϑονία γὰρ τροφῆς τὸ γόνιμον περίττωμα ποιεῖ καὶ φυτοῖς καὶ ζῴοις. The

idea is ascribed to Pythagoras at Aet. V 3.2. 637 B τὰ μὲν φοτοκεῖν, τὰ δὲ ξῳοτοκεῖν πέφυκε: Arist. H. A. 489 a 35 discerns a third class, the insects, cf. G. A. 733 a 25 τὰ δ᾽ ἔντομα πάντα σκωληκοτοκεῖ, Pol. 1256 b 13 ὅσα σκωληκοτοκεῖ ἢ Goroxet

ὅσα δὲ ζῳοτοκεῖ.

637 C

TABLE TALKS II 3

229

637 C τούτῳ μάλιστα δῆλόν ἐστιν κτλ.: Abram. observes that what τούτῳ refers to is ambiguous; it seemingly refers to the preceding sentence but probably it represents all the cases of autogenesis just mentioned. In any case, the sentence only repeats the content of the

preceding one. — Fuhrm. supplies λαβόντα {τὰ Gia), perhaps rightly; the passage is exposed to haplography.

637 C καϑόλου δ᾽ ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ λέγειν, πρὸ τῆς γυναικὸς ἡ μήτρα γέγονεν: As it stands the sentence lacks a subject, viz. τὸ λέγειν ὅτι τὸ

φὸν τοῦ ζῴου πρότερόν ἐστιν or the like, but this is rather easily understood. The logically loose connection of the sentence with the foregoing one indicates a colloquial carelessness; the line of thought is not expressed explicitly. To add a subject, τοιοῦτον or τοῦτο Hu., or to read τὸ λέγειν Bolk., printed by Fuhrm., does not eliminate this slur.

637 C πρὸς tov ἄνϑρωπον: Hubert’s conjecture (τὸ ᾧόν T) is convincing, as the context is about man,

although

τὸ ζῷον Doe.

is more

logical. Cf. Arist. G. A. 740 a 36 τοῦτου (sc. τῆς τροφῆς) γὰρ χάριν ἐν ταῖς ὑστέραις μένει τὸ ζῷον ... ἐκεῖνα γὰρ (sc. τὰ φοτοκοῦντα) ἐν τοῖς φοῖς λαμβάνει τὴν διάκρισιν, κεχωρισμένα τῆς μήτρας. 637 C καίτοι τῶν μερῶν τὰ πλεῖστα σνυνυφίσταται τοῖς ὅλοις: Some parts

develop

later,

e.g.,

the

teeth,

cf.

Arist.

G.

A.

745

a

25

αὐξάνονται δὲ διὰ βίου μόνοι τῶν ἄλλων ὀστῶν, 745 b 6 οἱ δ᾽ ὀδόντες ὕστερον (sc. γίνονται), 744 Ὁ 24 ἐκ δὲ τῶν περιττωμάτων ὀστᾶ καὶ νεῦρα καὶ τρίχες, ἔτι δ᾽ ὄνυχας καὶ ὁπλὰς καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα διὸ

τελευταῖα ταῦτα λαμβάνει σύστασιν. 637 CD αἱ δὲ δυνάμεις ... αἱ δ᾽ ἐνέργειαι... τὰ δ' ἀποτελέσματα: The Aristotelian terms, δύναμις and ἐνέργεια, are not used here in the philosophical sense of ‘potentiality’ and ‘actuality’, as at Arist. G. A. 740 b 19 τὸ περίττωμα τὸ τοῦ ϑήλεος δυνάμει τοιοῦτόν ἐστιν οἷον φύσει τὸ ζῷον, καὶ ἔνεστι δυνάμει τὰ μόρια, ἐνεργείᾳ δ᾽ οὐϑέν, but

in the operative sense, ‘power’ or ‘faculty’, and ‘activity’ respectively, ἐνέργεια being used as a synonym of ἐργασία. The passage seems to

echo G. A. 716 a 23 ἐπεὶ δὲ δυνάμει διώρισται (sc. τὸ ϑήλυ καὶ τὸ ἄρρεν) καὶ ἔργῳ

τινί, δεῖται

δὲ πρὸς

πᾶσαν

ἐργασίαν

ὀργάνων,

ὄργανα δὲ ταῖς δυνάμεσι τὰ μέρη τοῦ σώματος, ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι καὶ πρὸς τὴν τέκνωσιν καὶ τὸν συνδυασμὸν μόρια, cf. also ibid. 740 b 26

230

TABLE TALKS II 3

τὰ ὑπὸ τῆς τέχνης γινόμενα yivetar διὰ τῶν ὀργάνων,

637 CD ... διὰ τῆς

κινήσεως αὐτῶν, αὕτη δ᾽ ἐστιν ἡ ἐνέργεια τῆς τέχνης, and De sensu 449 a 1 οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ἐνέργεια ἄνευ τῆς «at^ αὑτὴν ἔσται δυνάμεως. Accordingly, the operative term ἀποτέλεσμα, ‘result’, is used instead of τέλος, ‘purpose’. - Through the long enumeration of terms the late

position of the seed and the egg in the series is emphasized; the egg is secondary even to the seed. 637 D καὶ γὰρ ταῦτα πέψεσί τισι xoi μεταβολαῖς ἐπιγενέσϑαι ἔοικεν:

The idea that the concoction processes which produce the seed are of a different kind from digestion is found in Arist G. A. 726 Ὁ 3 ἐπεὶ δὲ

καὶ 1j γονὴ περίττωμά ἐστι τροφῆς καὶ τῆς ἐσχάτης, ἤτοι αἶμα ἂν εἴη ἢ τὸ ἀνάλογον ἢ ἐκ τούτων τι. ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος πεττομένου καὶ μεριζομένου πως γίνεται τῶν μορίων ἕκαστον, τὸ δὲ σπέρμα πεφϑὲν μὲν ἀλλοιότερον ἀποκρίνεται τοῦ αἵματος xth., cf. also 728 ἃ 18 ἔστιν ἡ γυνὴ ὥσπερ ἄρρεν ἀγόνιμον᾽ ἀδυναμίᾳ γάρ τινι τὸ ϑῆλύ ἐστι, τῷ μὴ

δύνασθϑαι πέττειν ἐκ τῆς τροφῆς σπέρμα τῆς ὑστάτης. Arist. does not use the concept οἵ πέψις of the generation of eggs but only about the development of chicks out of them, se G. A. 753 a 17, 753 b 1, H. A.

560 b 17. -- The transposition ἔοικεν ἐπιγενέσϑαι Bens. (Hu., Clem.) is unnecessary as shown by Bolk. Plut. tolerated hiatus after infinitives in

«σθαι, cf. Mor. 154 D, 293 A, 296 B, 416 A, 441 A, 490 F, 498 E, 549 C, 598 B. On hiatus in Plut., see above, on 624 E and 632 D. 637 D πρὶν ij: Plut. normally has πρίν; only one more found, at Reg. apophth. 178 E πρὶν ἢ... ἀπολαβεῖν.

instance is

637 D τὸ σπέρμα μὲν ἁμωσγέπως ἀρχῆς τινος ἀντιποιεῖται, τὸ δ᾽ dày XtÀ.: Senecio uses the same argument as Firmus used (636 B) in order

to show the priority of the egg, which he designated as ἁπλοῦν. But he strikingly contradicts what he just said in the preceding sentences.

637 DE ἀρχῆν δ᾽ εἶναι Gooyovíag ty

ἧς πρῶτον ἡ ὕλη μετέβαλε

δυνάμεως, κρᾶσίν τινὰ καὶ μῖξιν ἐνεθογασαμένης γόνιμον: We expect

the sentence to be entirely about the original zoogony, and the terms Cwoyovia and πρῶτον, as well as the subsequent context, suggest this (637 F περὶ ἐκείνης γάρ &ou τῆς πρώτης (γενέσεως) ὁ λόγος). But the phrase xpäcıv ... γόνιμον clearly alludes to sexual reproduction, a

curious confusion indeed. Both reasoning and terminology are Aristotelian: the generative incorporeal power (δύναμις) possessed by the

637 DE

TABLE TALKS II 3

231

seed mingles with the female nourishing matter (ὕλη) and makes this fruitful. Cf. G. A. 726 b 19 (τὸ σπέρμα) ἔχει τινὰ δύναμιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, 729 b 5 (τὸ σπέρμα) μιγνύμενον τῇ ὕλῃ τῇ παρὰ τοῦ ϑήλεος.... ἡ δὲ Ev αὐτῷ δύναμις καὶ κίνησις κτλ., 729 b 13 τὸ δ᾽ ἄρρεν, fj ἄρρεν, ποιητικὸν καὶ ὅϑεν ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κινήσεως, 730 ἃ 14 ἀλλὰ τῇ δυνάμει τὸ τοῦ ἄρρενος σπέρμα τὴν ἐν τῷ ϑήλει ὕλην καὶ τροφὴν ποιάν τινα κατασχευάζει, 748 b 33 διὰ τὸ μὴ συμβάλλεσϑαι πρὸς τὴν μῖξιν σῶμα μηδὲν τὸ ἄρρεν, 730 b 33 ... ἀλλὰ μόνον τῇ δυνάμει τῇ ἐν τῇ γονῇ Cworoteiv. Arist. uses μῖξις, not κρᾶσις, of the mingling of male and female zoogonic elements. Plut. uses the terms as synonyms. Arist. Top. 122 b 30 distinguishes: οὔτε γὰρ fj μεῖξις ἅπασα κρᾶσις. Cf. also

above, on 620 Ε ἀνθρώπου. 637 E τὸ δ᾽ φὸν ἐπιγέννημ᾽

εἶναι, καϑάπερ κτλ.: The abstract con-

cepts of the preceding sentence are contrasted by the concrete ones, τὸ αἷμα καὶ τὸ γάλα, and the physiological processes, μετὰ τροφὴν καὶ πέψιν, to emphasize the secondary status of the egg.

637 Ε ἐκ γῆς (ἢ) ἰλύος: So Hu., approved by Bolk.: ἐκ γῆς ἰλύος T. MSS Plan. have ἐκ τῆς ἰλύος. Bolk. points out that the art. has no place here. Arist. normally mentions ἰλύς together with ἄμμος: H. A. 543 b 17 ἔνιοι δὲ τῶν κεστρέων ... φύονται ἐκ τῆς ἰλύος καὶ τῆς

ἄμμου, 569 ἃ 11 ἔνιοι καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἰλύος καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἄμμου γίγνονται, 547 b 18 πάντα τὰ ὀστρακώδη γίγνεται μὲν αὐτόματα ἐν τῇ iO... Ev μὲν τῇ βορβορώδει τὰ ὄστρεα, ἐν δὲ τῇ ἀμμώδει κόγχαι. 637 E οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν οὔτε ϑορὸν οὔτ᾽ φὸν ἔγκχελυν ἔχουσαν κτλ.:

This passage derives from Arist. H. A. 569 ἃ 6 ϑορὸν δὲ πάντες ἔχουσιν of ἄρρενες πλὴν ἐγχέλυος" αὕτη δ᾽ οὐδέτερον οὔτ᾽ àv οὔτε

ϑορόν, and 570 ἃ 3 αἱ ἐγχέλυς οὔτ᾽ ἐξ ὀχείας γίγνονται οὔτ᾽ @otoxotow ... (a 8) ἐν ἐνίαις yao τελματώδεσι λίμναις τοῦ ϑ' ὕδατος παντὸς ἐξαντληϑέντος καὶ τοῦ πηλοῦ ξυσϑέντος γίγνονται πάλιν, ὅταν ὕδωρ γένηται ὄμβριον. However, in frg. 311 Rose Arist. tries to explain the mysterious reproduction of the eels: ὀχεύονται δὲ συμπλεκόμεναι, κᾷτ᾽ ἀφιᾶσι γλοιῶδες ἐξ αὑτῶν, Ó γενόμενον ἐν τῇ

ἰλύν ζῳογονεῖται. Cf. also Oppian. Hal. 1513-521; Plin. X 189. -- The case of the eels adds nothing to those mentioned above, 637 B; Senecio rounds up his contribution with this evidential example.

232

TABLE TALKS II 3

637 F δυεῖν οὖν ὕστερον ἀνάγκη

γεγονέναι τὸ ϑατέρου

637 F

dedpevov

πρὸς γένεσιν: Bolk. brought up Benseler’s emendation δυεῖν οὖν : δεῖ οὖν T, and ἀνάγκη Wytt. : ἀνάγκῃ. Fuhrm. unnecessarily changes οὖν into δ᾽. - Cf. Adv. stoic. 1062 D öveiv ἀνάγκη ϑάτερον, 1081 D δυεῖν οὖν συμβαίνει ϑάτερον. 637 F περὶ ἐχείνης γάρ ἐστι τῆς πρώτης ὁ λόγος: This remark should certainly be considered superfluous here when the discussion on priorities of creation is already at its end. 638 A GAN οὐκ ἂν εἴποις καὶ νεοττιὰν φοῦ γεγονέναι πρότερον καὶ σπάργανα παίδων: As the egg and the child are the logical causes of

the nest and the swathing-bands, so the bird and the parent are causes of the egg and the child. If eggs and children did not exist, nests and swathing-bands would never have been invented. 638 A φησὶν ὁ Πλάτων: Menex. 238 A οὐ yao γῆ γυναῖκα μεμίμηται

κυήσει καὶ γεννήσει, ἀλλὰ γυνὴ γῆν. This apposite quotation of Plutarch’s ideal philosopher forms an elegant conclusion of the talk. For more examples of this stylistic device, see above, on 627 F.

638 A διὸ (τὴν) πρώτην γένεσιν: Fuhrm. rightly prints Reiske’s addition. 638 A αὐτοτελῆ καὶ ἀπροσδεῆ γενέσϑαι, τοιούτων ὀργάνων ... μὴ δεομένην: Bolk. convincingly rejects Reiske’s deletion οἵ μὴ

δεομένην, cited by Bern. and Hu.: the preceding genitives belong to this participle, not to ἀπροσδεῆ. Furthermore, the phrase was prefigured nearly verbatim above, 637 A. The pair αὐτοτελῆ καὶ ἀπροσδεῆ

occurs at De tu. san. 122 E. 638 A ἃ νῦν ἡ φύσις ... ἐργάζεται καὶ μηχανᾶται δι᾽ ἀσϑένειαν: The repeated νῦν (cf. 637 F) emphasizes the contrast to the original creation; similarly ἀσϑένεια is contrasted with ῥώμη. TALK 4 638 B Σωσικλέα τόν Κορωνῆϑεν: Sosicles also takes part in I 2 (see on

618 F) and V 4. There is no good reason to doubt that he was a citizen of Boeotian Coronea, as does Wil. Hermes 61 (1926) 293 who argues

638 Β

TABLE TALKS I 4

233

that the form Κορωνῆϑεν must be derived from Κορώνη (of Messenia) and not Κορώνεια.

But there are variations of these adverb forma-

tions, e.g. the shortened form Κριῶϑεν (from Keuda), or the w-form Θριῶϑεν (from Opia), see Kühner-Blass? II 309, and cf. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 685 n. The name forms also varied; a sector of Salamis

of Cyprus, was called Κορώνειαϊκορώνη (Pape-Benseler, s.v.).

638 B (£v) Πυϑίοις: Bolk. convincingly supports Faehse's addition, cf. 674 D and 704 C ἐν Πυϑίοις, 675 D and Apophth. Rom. 197 B ἐν ᾿Ισϑμίοις, De coh. ira 457 F and Lyc. 22.8 £v ' Okvyxíotc, Sul. 18.9 £v Κρονίοις. Haplography after Κορωνῆϑεν is natural; and this type of

haplography is particularly frequent in T, see the long list collected by Bolk. 638 B νενικηκότα ποιητάς: The musical contests of the Pythia are the

subject of Talk V 2. 638 B Λυσίμαχος, εἷς τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων ἐπιμελητής: Lysimachus appears only in this talk and the following one, its sequel. Little is

known about the office of ἐπιμελητής at Delphi. We do not know whether one or several persons held this office at the same time. A. Mommsen, Delphica (Leipzig 1878) 167 supports the second alternative. It seems clear that these officials were elected from among the members of the Amphictyonic council and that they had to administer the finances and to organize and preside over the Pythian games. See Oehler, RE s.v. Ἐπιμεληταί, 166 f.; Daremberg-Saglio, s.v. Epimelé-

tai, 677. The epimeletes Callistratus is mentioned at 704 C and De def. or. 410 A; cf. also Syll.? 813 A (similarly 813 B, C) ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς τῶν

Σ[εβα]στῶν καὶ ἐπιμελητὴς τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν ᾿Αμφικ[τυόϊνων καὶ ἄρχων τῆς ἱερᾶς ᾿Ακτιακῆς βουλῆς. For the ἐπιμεληταί at Delos, see P. Roussel, Délos, colonie athénienne (Paris 1916) 97-125. — For the

post-classical use of εἷς = τις, cf. Reg. apophth. 181 C εἷς τῶν ᾿Ινδῶν, βασιλεὺς dv; NT Luc. 15.15 ἑνὶ τῶν πολιτῶν, Matth. 9.18 ἄρχων εἷς.

This use is common in papyri, e.g. P. Zen. Cair. 1 59024.1 τῶν ναυτῶν εἷς (258 B. C. ?), P. Oxy. VIII 1119.13. See 1. H. Moulton, A Gram-

mar of New Testament III. Syntax by N. Turner (Edinburgh 1963) 195f.; Mayser 11:2. 85 f.; Gignac II 181. 638 B τὴν πάλην

ἀρχαιοτέραν

ἀϑλημάτων

πάντων:

Re.

proposed

ἀρχαιοτάτην, Boll. ἀρχαιότατον (printed by Hu. and Clem.); Bolk.

234

TABLE TALKS II 4

638 B

points out that the comp. is combined with πάντων from Hom. on-

wards, see Kühner-Gerth? I 22.3. — Wrestling is certainly one of the oldest sports. According to Paus. V 8.6 this sport was introduced into the Olympic games in the third place, after the stade and the diaulos; but probably it was the fourth to be introduced, after the dolichos, see Kórte, Hermes 39 (1904) 225f. The order of introduction at Delphi is not known. Strab. IX 3.10 states that the musical contest at Delphi was older than the gymnastic or equestrian ones: ἀγὼν δὲ ὁ μὲν ἀρχαῖος ἐν Δελφοῖς κιϑαρῳδῶν ἐγενήϑη ... μετὰ δὲ τὸν Κρισαῖον πόλεμον οἱ

Ἀμφικτύονες ἱππικὸν καὶ γυμνικὸν ἐπ’ Εὐρυλόχου διέταξαν, cf. also Paus. X 7.2 ἀρχαιότατον δὲ ἀγώνισμα γενέσϑαν (sc. ἐν Δελφοῖς) μνημονεύουσι καὶ ἐφ ᾧ πρῶτον ἀϑλα ἔϑεσαν, daa. ὕμνον ἐς τὸν ϑεόν, cf. also X 7.3-5. See Meier, RE s.v. Agones, 854. 638 Β τοὔνομα μαρτυρεῖν: Plato displays in Crat. the method of deriving words by the criterion of phonetic similarity and with often

fanciful regard to semantics. Lysimachus correctly derives παλαίστρα from πάλη but also assumes fancifully that it is related to παλαιός.

638 C τὸν αὐλὸν ἡρμόσϑαι λέγουσιν καὶ κρούματα (τὰ) αὐλήματα καλοῦσιν κτλ.: Cf. Lucian. Harm. 1 ἁρμόσασθαι τὸν αὐλὸν ἐς τὸ ἀκριβές. Κροῦμα, ‘stroke’, means ‘note’ but also ‘rhythm’, as at 704 D

ἀνεπήδων

οἱ πολλοὶ

καὶ

συνεκινοῦντο

κινήσεις

ἀνελευθέρους,

πρεπούσας δὲ τοῖς κρούμασιν ἐκείνοις καὶ τοῖς μέλεσιν. The word is used of trumpet music at De soll. an. 973 E τὰ μέλη τῶν σαλπίγγων αὐταῖς περιόδοις φϑεγγομένη καὶ μεταβολὰς πάσας καὶ κρουμάτων

διεξιοῦσα πάντας δυϑμούς, cf. also Poll. IV 83 μέρη δ᾽ αὐλημάτων κρούματα, συρίγματα κτλ., 84 τὰ σαλπιστικὰ κρούματα; Theopomp.

Com. frg. 50 Kock αὐλεὶ γὰρ σαπρὰ | αὕτη γε κρούματα; Eupolis frg. 110. - Whether the semantic transfer actually indicates that the lyre is chronologically prior to the wind-instruments, is uncertain.

638 C τὸν οὖν τόπον, ἐν à γυμνάζονται πάντες οἱ ἀϑληταί, παλαίστραν καλούμενον, (ἀπὸ τῆς πάλης τοὔνομα κτησάμενον τὸ

πρῶτον, εἶτα καὶ τοῖς αὖϑις ἐξευρεϑεῖσιν ἐμπαρασχεῖν: Paton's addition and his conjecture κτησάμενον (κτησαμένης T) are convincing, but he was not able to reconcile this reading with the rest of the sentence.

None

of the many

emendations

proposed

(Bases,

Bern.,

Paton, Po., Bolk., Abram., Fuhrm.) solves all the problems. Bolk. tries without success to preserve the inf. umagaoyeiv because he takes

638 C

TABLE TALKS II 4

235

τὸν τόπον as its object and reads τῆς πάλης [τοὔνομα] Ἀτησαμένης... ἐξευρεϑεῖσιν (τοὔνομα) ἐμπαρασχεῖν. Bases, Paton, Hu., Clem. delete τοὔνομα (keeping κτησαμένης). But this perverts the meaning of the sentence which must be in concordance with the one preceding it. Obviously, τὸν τόπον is the subject of the sentence. It was not wrestling that ‘occupied’ (Clem.) the place; it was the place that got the name παλαίστρα and later gave it to (the place of) the sports subsequently created. Thus I change καλοῦσιν T into καλούμενον and, in accepting κτησάμενον Paton, preserve the inf. éunagacyeiv. T.

Göransson (by communication) would delete παλαίστραν καλοῦσιν as being an interpolation, which would also make it possible to preserve ἐμπαρασχεῖν. — For the phrase, cf. Galba 29.3 Γάλβας δὲ καὶ κληϑεὶς xoi ὑπακούσας αὐτοκράτωρ, xoi τῇ Οὐΐνδικος ἐμπαρασχὼν ὄνομα τόλμῃ. 638 C πρεσβύτατόν ἐστι τῶν ἄλλων: Plut. also has this construction

with

the superl.

at 666 D

πλεῖστοι

τῶν

ἄλλων,

and

Tit.

11.4

σπανιώτατον δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἀγαθῶν. This usage is found as early as Hom., cf. J/. 1505 ὠκυμορώτατος ἄλλων, Od. XV 108 νείατος ἄλλων.

638 C πηλοῦ καὶ κονίστρας καὶ κηρώματος: All three terms denote ‘wrestling-place’. Κήρωμα does not mean ‘wax-salve’ here, cf. transla-

tions: Amyot, Fuhrm. (‘onguent’), Kaltw., Reich. (‘Salbe’); the word has this sense only as a medical term (Hipp. II 412, 424 L.; Plin. XXVIII 51; Oribas. Coll. Med. XLIV 27.12); here it denotes a layer of moist mud or clay forming the ground for wrestling: Cael. Aurel.

Salut. praec. 35 (Anecd. Gr. IL 199 Rose) qui locus exercitii utilis est? ... aequali et molli ceromate stratus. Jüthner, RE s.v. κήρωμα, 327 suggests that the semantic transfer from ‘ointment’ to ‘wrestling-place’

was due to the yellow colour of the clay. That the word has the latter sense here is indicated by the fact that it is paralleled with xovictoa, ‘arena’. There obviously existed two places for wrestling, one covered with moist clay (πηλός, κήρωμα), the other with deep, dry sand (κόνις, κονίστρα). Cf. Lucian. Anachar 1 iv τῷ πηλῷ συναναφύρονται κυλινδόμενοι ὥσπερ σύες κτλ., 2 ἕτεροι δὲ £v τῷ

αἰϑρίῳ τῆς αὐλῆς τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο δρῶσιν, οὐκ ἐν πηλῷ οὗτοί γε, ἀλλὰ ψάμμον ταύτην βαϑεῖαν ὑποβαλόμενου κτλ., ibid. 16 αἱ συνεχεῖς ἐν τῷ πηλῷ κυβιστήσεις καὶ αἱ ὕπαιϑροι ἐν τῇ ψάμμῳ

ταλαιπωρίαι.

Παλαίστρα often denotes the κονίστρα specifically in contrast to κήρωμα, cf. Plin. XXXV 5 palaestras athletarum imaginibus et cero-

236

TABLE TALKS II 4

638 C

mata sua exornant; Plut. An seni 790 F ἐν παλαίστραις καὶ κηρώμα-

σιν; Suda, s.v. xovlorga' παλαίστρα, but reversely at Philostr. Gymn. 53 p. 178.19 Jüth. τοὺς μὲν πηλῷ καὶ παλαίστρᾳ...., τοὺς δὲ ἐν κόνει.

The πηλός was covered by a roof so as to preserve the moisture, see Jüthner ad loc. p. 297. J. Delorme,

Gymnasion

(Paris 1960) 278f.

identifies κονιστήριον and xovíoroo; both terms denote the wrestling place.

638 C οὔτε γὰρ δρόμον οὔτε πυγμὴν ἐν παλαίστραις διαπονοῦσιν: That running - and throwing the javelin — could not be practised in the palaestra was natural because there was no room for such exercises,

but we would certainly expect it to be the natural place for boxing. As a matter of fact our knowledge of what kinds of sport were practised in the palaestra is very meagre, see Gober, RE s.v. Παλαίστρα, 2491 f. In

any case, Lysimachus’ affirmation above that πάντες of ἀϑληταί exercise there is exaggerated. 638 D ἀλλὰ πάλης καὶ παγκρατίου τὸ περὶ τὰς κυλίσεις: Bolk. convincingly rejects πάλην Wytt., accepted by all eds. except Bern. (and now Fuhrm.). But his opinion that wrestling was partly practised elsewhere than in the palaestra is mistaken, as pointed out by Abram. It is true that a distinction was made between ὀρϑὴ (or σταδιαία) πάλη (Philostr. V. Soph. 1 22.4 (11 38.20 Kais.), id. Gymn. 11 p. 142.12 Jüth. on the one hand, and κύλισις or ἀλίνδησις (Hipp. VI 580, 602 L.; Lucian. Anachar. 1) on the other, and as regards the παγκράτιον,

Lucian. o. c. 8 τὸ δὲ παίειν ἀλλήλους ὀρϑοστάδην παγκρατεῖν λέγομεν can be contrasted to Philostr. Gymn. 35 p. 164.9 Jiith. τὸ κάτω παγκχράτιον. But these terms designate different subsections of

one and the same clear by Jüthner, o. ἀράμενος ἐκεινοσὶ εἶτ᾽ ἐπικαταπεσὼν cf. also Gal. V 893

game within each of these sports. This was made c. p. 212, and it is to be seen at Lucian. Anachar. 1 tov ἕτερον ἐκ τοῖν σκελοῖν ἀφῆκεν εἰς τὸ ἔδαφος, ἀνακύπτειν ox ἐᾷ, συνωϑῶν κάτω εἰς τὸν πηλόν; K. τέχνη καταβλητική. The same combination οὗ

upright and wallowing practice applies to the pancratium, see Jiithner,

o. c. p. 206. The opinion that these segments were different styles practised separately at different places (E. N. Gardiner, Athletics of the Ancient World (Oxford 1930) 181f.; and Fuhrm. p. 184 ‘la lutte et le pancrace debout -- ὀρθοστάδην — devaient également se pratiquer ailleurs") is obviously false. We may translate: *the wallowing typical of wrestling and of the pancration’.

638 D

TABLE TALKS II 4

237

638 D ὅτι yao μέμικται τὸ παγκράτιον κτλ.: Cf. Philostr. Gymn. 11 p. 140.17 Jüth. προτετίμηταν πάντων τὸ παγκράτιον καίτοι συγκείμενον ἐξ ἀτελοῦς πάλης καὶ ἀτελοῦς πυγμῆς. Plutarch’s remark seems rather

unnecessary; the sport was well-known and highly esteemed (it is grouped with song and dance by Marc. Aurel. XI 2.2; and an inscription of Aphrodisias (CIG II 2758, Rom. period) shows that the highest prize-sums were awarded in the pancration: 3000 denarii, as opposed to, e.g., 750 in long-distance racing. But Plut. was anxious to apologize

for the fact that there is an element of boxing in it, and to emphasize that this is not the same as boxing proper (which he had just affirmed was not exercised in the palaestra). For the character and technique of the pancration, see Jüthner, Philostr. Gymn. p. 206 on 140.17; E. N.

Gardiner, Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals (London 1910) 435—450; H. A. Harris, Greek Athletes and Athletics (London 1964) 105-109. 638 D πῶς, ἔφην, λόγον ἔχει τεχνικώτατον ... τὴν πάλην οὖσαν ἅμα καὶ πρεσβύτατον εἶναι: The same line of thought was followed by Firmus in the preceding talk, 636 A-E: everything that is simple and

unsophisticated is primary. 638 D ἡ γὰρ πάλη μοι δοκεῖ τῷ παλεύειν ... κεκλῆσϑαι: The Basel ed. corrected παλαίειν T. Incidentally, the derivation from παλαίειν is correct; παλεύειν is not related; but it was quite natural to think that this verb, ‘ensnare’, ‘entrap’, ‘decoy’, is related to πάλη. The true

etymology of πάληϊπαλαίειν is uncertain. -- For Bia and ἀπάτη contrasted, cf. Arist. Pol. 1304 Ὁ 8 κινοῦσι δὲ τὰς πολιτείας Ste μὲν διὰ

βίας ὅτε δὲ δι᾽ ἀπάτης. 638 DE καὶ ὁ Φιλῖνος ... ἀπὸ τῆς παλαιστῆς: For Philinus, see above, on 623 E. -- In reality, παλαιστή derives from παλαίω; πάλῃ is

either secondary to παλαίω (Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. I 421.7) or it is a formation parallel to it (Chantraine, s.v. παλαίω). 638 E καὶ τὸ συμπάσαι τῶν ποιητῶν καὶ καταπάσαι παλῦναι λεγόντων: Παλύνω derives from πάλη / πάλημα, ‘fine flour’, ‘dust’; of

course it has no relationship to πάλη, ‘wrestling’. 638 F καὶ τὰ πλεῖστα

τῶν ἀγωνισμάτων,

ἐμβολαί,

παρεμβολαί,

συστάσεις, παραϑέσεις: We do not know exactly what these holds and

tricks are (this is the meaning of ἀγώνισμα here; in the following talk it

238

TABLE TALKS II 4

638 F

means ‘contest’). Harris, o. c. p. 103 n. 59 suggests that that ἐμβολή and παρεμβολή mean ‘thrusting leg between or alongside opponent’s’, i.e. what is now called ‘hank’ and ‘back heel’ respectively. Tripping (ἀγκυρίζειν, ὑποσκελίζειν) was always admissible in Greek wrestling. Cf. Ps.-Lucian. Ocyp. 60 παλαίων ὡς ϑέλω παρεμβολὴν βαλεῖν ἐπλήmv. — The two words seem to occur together as naval terms in Suda, s.v. πυρφόρος (= Polyb. XXI 7.4) κατὰ τὰς ἐμβολὰς καὶ παρεμβολὰς

(παραμβολάς A (the best MS), παραβολάς BV) εἰς μὲν τὴν πολεμίαν ναῦν, where they presumably mean ‘frontal attack” and ‘lateral attack’

respectively; se further S.—T. T. Symb. Oslo. 44 (1989). For σύστασις, ‘close’, ‘clinch’, cf. Plat. Leg. 833 A ἡ δ᾽ ἐν ταῖς συμπλοκαῖς μάχη xai σύστασις. Παράϑεσις appears not to be used elsewhere of wrestling. Harris, I. c. thinks that it means ‘placing body alongside opponent’s’;

see also the list of other wrestling terms gathered by Harris. See further Gardiner, o. c. 380-383, figs. 111—113; R. Patrucco, Lo sport

nella Grecia antica (Firenze 1972) 293-295. 638 F πλησιάζειν ... πέλας: The talk ends in these fantastic ‘etymologies', and we observe

that the theme

advertised

in the heading was

never really discussed. Although the derivation from παλαιός initially proposed by Lysimachus certainly appeared plausible, it was not adopted as an argument for the antiquity of wrestling, to be opposed by another in support of its recentness. No such argument is delivered. Instead, the discussion deviates into mere etymologizing. Such unex-

pected development of conversation gives an impression of authenticity, which may have been Plutarch's intention. TALK 5 639 A ποῖον οὖν φαίη τις ἂν τῶν ἀγωνισμάτων γεγονέναι πρῶτον:

Lysimachus keeps the discussion going through reference to the ‘result’ of the previous talk: which of the contests is the oldest, then, if not

wrestling? 639 A ἢ td στάδιον, ὥσπερ ᾿Ολυμπίασί (Te καὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν, ἢ τὸν δόλιχον, εἰς ὃν ᾿Αϑήνησι δὴ πρῶτον παρακαλοῦσι; τότε δὲ Τίμων ὁ

ἀδελφός, ἀλλὰ τοῦτ᾽ ἀδύνατον, εἶπεν, τὴν πάλαι γένεσιν ἐκ τῆς νῦν τεκμαίρεσϑαι τάξεως, ἐπεί γ᾽) ἐνταῦϑα μὲν κτλ.: Xyl. indicated the lacuna. My filling of it, which makes the substitution of μέν for δέ after ἐνταῦϑα necessary, has partly been caused by the reading ventured by

639 A

TABLE TALKS II 5

239

Abram.: ὥσπερ ᾿Ολυμπίασί (te καὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν; Τίμων δ᾽ ὁ ἀδελφός" ἀλλὰ τοῦτ᾽ ἀδύνατον, εἶπεν, οὐδὲ τὴν πάλαι τάξιν ἐκ τῆς νῦν τεχμαίρεσϑαι ῥᾷδιον, ἐπεὶ (e.g.) τοῖς μὲν ᾿Ισϑμίοις δίχα διώρισται πᾶς 6 ἀγών), ἐνταῦϑα δέ. Of course the lacuna may be even longer.

The question, what contest was the earliest in Olympia, is still open to discussion. Taking into account that chariot races may have been essential to funerals in Pre-Olympic (Mycenaean) and early Olympic times, see Z/. XXIII 287-538; and W. Decker, Stadion 8/9 (1982/3) 1-24, and considering that the festival of Olympia was originally conse-

crated to Pelops the charioteer, it has been doubted that the stade foot-race (also called δρόμος) was the earliest event, and even the only

one for 13 olympiads as stated by Paus. V 8.6 δρόμου μὲν ἄϑλα ἐτέϑη πρῶτον ... ὀλυμπιάδι δὲ ὕστερον τετάρτῃ καὶ δεκάτῃ προσετέϑη σφίσι δίαυλος; Philostr. Gymn. 12 ἦν μὲν γὰρ πάλαι ᾽᾿Ολύμπια εἰς τὴν τρίτην ἐπὶ δέκα ᾿Ολυμπιάδα σταδίου μόνου; so also below, 675 C

τοῖς δ᾽ ᾿Ολυμπίοις πάντα προσϑήκη πλὴν τοῦ δρόμου; for references, see Jüth. ad loc. Jüthner, RE

s.v. Dromos

(2) on the other hand,

thinks that the historical priority of the stade is indicated by the order of events as given

in P.

Oxy.

II 222 στάδιον,

δίαυλος,

δόλιχος,

πένταϑλον, πάλη, TUE, παγκράτιον, παίδων στάδιον, παίδων πάλη, παίδων πύξ, ὁπλίτης, τέϑριππον, κέλης, perhaps quoted from Phlegon, frg. 12 (ΕΗ Ο III 606). The stade also seems to have been the first event on the programme in the Pythian games: Soph. Εἰ. 684 δρόμον προκηρύξαντος, ov πρώτη κρίσις; Heliodor. Aethiop. IV 1. Plat. Leg. 833 A σταδιοδρόμον δὴ πρῶτον ... καϑάπερ viv, ἐν τοῖς ἀγῶσι παρακαλεῖ may tefer to Delphi as well as Olympia. The athletic contests of Olympia were introduced jointly at Delphi in 582: Paus. X 7.5 ἔϑεσαν δὲ (sc. of "AuquxtÜovec) καὶ ἄϑλα τότε ἀϑληταῖς πρῶτον,

τά te ἐν ᾿Ολυμπίᾳ πλὴν τεϑρίππου utd. The conjecture made by Robert, Hermes 35 (1900) 152 at the beginning of our lacuna is thus plausible: ᾿Ολυμπίασί (te καὶ nag’ ἡμῖν ...), and he also observes that the lacuna must be of considerable length, seeing that within it the discussion passes over from the problem of the priority of introduction

put by Lysimachus onto the question of the actual order of events at the games. Presumably, Lysimachus launched the idea that historical priority might be reflected in the τάξις ἀγωνισμάτων. After the lacuna

there is another person speaking, obviously Timon who, summoned by Menecrates, goes on speaking. In filling the rest of the lacuna we have to assume a possible reference of ἐκεῖ δ᾽, ὅταν of παῖδες uth. (see

below, ad loc.). A list of victors at the Panathenaea; dated c. 400—350,

240

TABLE TALKS II 5

639 A

IG IP 2311 (= Syll.? 1055) shows that at that time, the στάδιον was the first event (cf. also Plat. Leg. 833 A, quoted above). Later, however, the order was changed to be δόλιχος, στάδιον, δίαυλος: IG II? 23132316, c. 194-165 B. C.); see Ziehen, RE s.v. Panathenaia, 476f.;

Robert Hermes 35 (1900) 152. Thus it may well have been the δόλιχος which Lysimachus contrasted to the στάδιον (our knowledge of the

order of events and the time of introduction at the Isthmian or Nemean games is very uncertain; thus the Isthmia (Abram.) is mere hypothesis). The two adverbs, ἐνταῦϑα and ἐκεῖ, indicate that only one alternative was given in the lacuna; a third, different alternative

would spoil the reference of ἐκεῖ. 639 A καὶ πύκτας ἐπὶ πύκταις

ὁμοίως καὶ παγκρατιαστάς:

Bolk.

rejects the transposition xai ὁμοίως Wil. For the postpositional place of the adverb he refers to De soll. an. 959 D εἶϑ' ὥσπερ ἐν ᾿Αϑήναις πρῶτόςτις.... ἐλέχϑη, καὶ δεύτερος ὁμοίως καὶ τρίτος, so also at De esu carn. 998 B. 639 A ἐκεῖ δ᾽, ὅταν of παῖδες διαγωνίσωνται κτλ.: Because of the lacuna and the incoherence of the text due to it, some scholars, e.g.,

Weniger, Klio 4 (1904) 136f., and Vallois, REA 31 (1929) 123f., have taken ἐκεῖ as referring to Olympia. This is obviously false; according to all evidence the junior events had their place there after those of the

ἄνδρες, cf. P. Oxy. II 222, quoted above. Instead, it may refer to the Panathenaic games where the order was παῖδες,

ἀγένειοι, ἄνδρες,

each class in turn running through all its events (JG II? 2311, 23132316). It is noticeable, in any case, that Plut. neglects the ἀγένειοι class. 639 B τὴν κατὰ yoóvov τάξιν: ‘the chronological order of introduc-

tion'. Having rejected the order of events as a criterion, Timon propounds Homer as being more reliable. 639 B πρῶτον γὰρ ἀεὶ πυγμὴ

... ἀεὶ τέτακται: Timon stresses the

regularity by the double ἀεί. — The contemporary order of the ‘heavy events’ (Paus, VI 24.1) was πάλη, πυγμή, παγκράτιον at Olympia (Paus. VI 15.3; P. Oxy. II 222; Phlegon, frg. 12 (FGH III 606)), and also at the Isthmia (Paus. VI 15.3).

639 B

TABLE TALKS II 5

241

639 B Μενεχράτης 6 Θεσσαλός: M. is otherwise unknown. For Plu-

tarch’s extensive web of friendships all over Greece and Asia Minor, see C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 39-47,

639 B αἱ Πατρόκλου ταφαὶ ταύτην ἔχουσι τῶν ἀγωνισμάτων τὴν τάξιν: I. XXIII

262-897.

Timon

neglects the fact that the funeral

games began with the main event, the chariot race (262-619), and concentrates instead on the events that followed. 639 B διατηρῶν δὲ τὴν τάξιν ὁμαλῶς ὁ ποιητὴς κτλ.: It is noticeable that the first quotation (Il. XXIII 620-624) was not considered irrelevant because of the mention of javelin throwing; only the relative order of the three events under discussion was of interest. The next

quotation (634-636) and the fact that in Homer’s narrative (651—797) the order was really πύξ, πάλη, δρόμος, together with the additional two exx. from Od., corroborate the argument. -- The Homeric order of

events is commented on in Schol. Il. XXIII 621 St. προτάσσει τὴν πυγμήν, ὡς καὶ ἐν ᾿Οδυσσείᾳ οὐ γὰρ πύγμαχοί εἰμεν. ὁ αὐτὸς ἄρα ποιητής; Eustath. 1320.6 τῇ δ᾽ αὐτῇ τάξει τῶν ἀγώνων καὶ Νέστωρ

μετ᾽ ὀλίγα χρήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς πυγμικῆς ἀρξάμενος. 639 C τὸν δὲ πρεσβύτην ἐν τῷ ἀποχρίνεσϑαι παραδολεσχοῦντα γεροντικῶς: Elderly men’s garrulity is also mentioned at 631 B. On Plutarch’s attitude to old age generally, see Byl, Et. Class. 45 (1977) 107-123. 639 C αὖϑις δὲ τὸν μὲν ᾿Οδυσσέα xth.: The latter of the quotations (Od. VIII 206 and 2461.) is also quoted at De fato 98 F and (1. 246) Non posse 1087 B.

639 D xavà τύχην ἐκ τοῦ παρισταμένου: The two virtually synonymous phrases make the expression highly emphatic.

639 D tijv παλαιὰν ἔτι τάξιν: i. e. the order of invention. 639 D

ἐδόκει...

μὴ

πιϑανὸν

εἶναι

τὸ

πυχτεύειν

καὶ

παλαίειν

προτερεῖν ἐν ἀγῶνι καὶ ἁμίλλῃ τοῦ τροχάξειν: Fuhrm. prints προτερεῖν Faehse: πρότερον T, a more plausible emendation than the addition ἀγῶνι (yeyovévar) Wytt. However, the amassment of infinitives, all of them in -eıv, is rather awkward; προτερῆσαι Abram. is less

242

TABLE TALKS II 5

639 D

probable (hiatus). - In reality either chariot-racing or foot-racing was the oldest event, see above, on 639 A.

639 D ἐξάγειν εἰς τὸ (πιϑ)ανώτερον: Bolk. (and Abram., Fuhrm.) approved of Reiske's convincing conjecture; the relation to the previous πιϑανὸν εἶναι is obvious. For the use of ἐξάγειν, cf. De aud.

poet. 42 F oi yàg εἰς ἄλλας ὑποϑέσεις ἐξάγοντες ... ἐρωτήματα, Marcell. 14.13 εἰς ἔργον ἐξαγαγεῖν τὸ πρόβλημα, De facie 922 F ἐμὲ δ᾽ οὖν οὐκ ἐξάξεσϑε τήμερον εἰς τὸ διδόναι λόγον. 639 D ἐκ τοῦ παραστάντος: The phrase somewhat awkwardly echoes Timon’s & τοῦ παρισταμένου above. Plut. not infrequently indulges in repetitive style, see on 624 Ε πικρὰ τῇ γεύσει. 639 DE

πάντα

εἶναι: This

μιμήματα

δοκεῖ

καὶ γυμνάσματα

is a historical fact, see Ε. N.

Gardiner,

τῶν

πολεμικῶν

Athletics of the

Ancient World (Oxford 1930) 28; cf. Plat. Leg. 832 DE.

639 E καὶ γὰρ ὁπλίτης ἐπὶ πᾶσιν εἰσάγεται: The race in armour, also called ὁ tot ὅπλου δρόμος (Paus. VI 13.2), was especially regarded as wehétys ... εἵνεκα τῆς ἐς τὰ πολεμικά (Paus. V 8.10). That this race concluded the games is also stated by Artemidor. I 63 τὸ δὲ ὅπλον λεγόμενον ἐπὶ πάντων πᾶσι παρολκὰς σημαίνει" τελευταῖον γὰρ καὶ

ἐπὶ πᾶσι τὸ ἄϑλον, and Philodem. Gymn. 7 p. 138.12 Jüth. who also suggests a reason for that: φημὶ γὰρ νενομίσϑαι μὲν αὐτὸν Ex πολεμικῆς αἰτίας, παριέναι (δ᾽) ἐς τοὺς ἀγῶνας πολέμου ἀρχῆς ἕνεκα δηλούσης τῆς ἀσπίδος, ὅτι πέπαυται μὲν ἐκεχειρία, δεῖ δὲ ὅπλων. This was, of course, only symbolic, for the armistice was valid until the

competitors had returned home, see Jüth. pp. 198 f.; Lammer, History of Phys. Education and Sport? (1975/6) 37-52. As a matter of fact we

have no conclusive evidence showing the entire programme of any of the games. P, Oxy. II 222 lists the equestrian group after the race in

armour, which concludes the gymnastic group; cf. also Phlegon, frg. 12 (FHG III 606). According to tradition, the equestrian events were introduced comparatively late in Olympia (chariot racing 680 B. C.), and the race in armour much later (520 B. C.). See Ziehen, RE s.v. Olympia, 2529f.; I. Weiler, Der Sport bei den Völkern der alten Welt (Darmstadt 1981) 109-115, 201 f.

639 E

TABLE TALKS II 5

243

639 E τοῦτο [τὸ] τέλος ἐστὶ τῆς σωμασκίας καὶ [τὸ] τῆς ἁμίλλης: The

first τό (del. Fuhrm.) perhaps caused the intrusion of the second (del. Steph.). The double meaning of τέλος here, ‘end’, ‘completion’, and

‘aim’, is indicated partly by the preceding ἐπὶ πᾶσι, partly by σωμασκία, ‘training’, and ἅμιλλα, ‘competition’. Fuhrm. renders the phrase elegantly: ‘ie couronnement des exercises physiques et des concours’, 639 E τὸ τοῖς νικηφόροις (εἰσ) ελαύνουσιν τῶν τείχων ἐφίεσθαι μέρος διελεῖν κτλ.: The correction (Salmas.) is certain. The term designated the triumphal return home of the victorious sportsmen. At the time of Plut. this was an established institution: a winner in an ἀγὼν εἰσελαστικός (certamen iselasticum) was formally assigned the title iselasticus. Plin. Ep. X 118 ceremoniously consults Trajanus as to

whether the athletes have the right to the title statim ex eo die quo sunt coronati, and the emperor

answers

(ibid.

X

119): iselasticum

tunc

primum mihi videtur incipere deberi, cum quis in civitatem suam ipse εἰσήλασεν. The custom of tearing down a part of the city wall is evidenced by Suet. Nero 25 reversus e Graecia Neapolim ... albis equis introiit, disiecta parte muri, ut mos hieronicarum est. Cf. also Dio Cass. LXIII 20 ἐπεὶ δ᾽ οὖν ἐς τὴν ' Póunv ἐσήλασε, τοῦ te τείχους τι καϑῃρέϑη καὶ τῶν πυλῶν περιερράγη, νενομίσϑαι τυνῶν λεγόντων

ἑκάτερον τοῖς ἐκ τῶν ἀγώνων στεφανηφόροις γίνεσθαι. 639 E στεφανίτας ἀγῶνας: These were also called ἱεροὶ ἀγῶνες, i.e. the greater festivals of international repute, as opposed to ϑεματικοὶ ἀγῶνες, local games of lower status where the reward was not a wreath but a prize of value, cf. Poll. III 153 τοὺς μὲν οὖν καλουμένους ἱεροὺς

ἀγῶνας, ὧν và ἀϑλα ἐν στεφάνῳ μόνῳ, στεφανίτας ἐκάλεσαν καὶ φυλλίνας, τοὺς δ᾽ ὀνομαζομένους ϑεματικοὺς ἀργυρίτας; Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 820 D ὥσπερ οὐκ ἀργυρίτην οὐδὲ δωρίτην ἀγῶνα ... ἀλλ᾽ ἱερὸν ὡς ἀληϑῶς καὶ στεφανίτην; Xen. Mem. III 7.1; Dem. XX 141; Paus. X 7.5. See Hug, RE s.v. Stephanites agon. At the time of Plut. the number of ἱεροὶ ἀγῶνες had increased considerably, cf. IG XIV 1054-1055, and 1105 (2nd c. A. D.), an account of the achieve-

ments of Damostratus who won a record series of victories in such games in Greece, Italy, Asia, and Alexandria. In reality, there were

prizes of value even in the ἱεροὶ ἀγῶνες: Plut. Lyc. 22.8 καὶ φασί γέ τινα χρημάτων πολλῶν £v ' Okvuníots διδομένων αὐτῷ μὴ δεξάμενον. See Meier, RE s.v. Agones, 847-849; M. I. Finley and H. N. Pleket,

244

TABLE TALKS II 5

639 E

The Olympic Games (London 1976) 76-79; Pleket, Stadion 1 (1975) 56-71; Young, The Ancient World 7 (1983) 45-51. 639 E τοῖς νενικηκχόσι στεφανίτας ἀγῶνας ἐξαίρετος ἦν ... χώρα,

περὶ αὐτὸν τὸν βασιλέα τεταγμένους μάχεσϑαι: This is also affirmed at Lyc. 22.7 ἐχώρει δ᾽ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐπὶ τοὺς πολεμίους ἔχων pel?

ἑαυτοῦ (tots) (Sint.) στεφανίτην ἀγῶνα νενικηκότας. 639 E μόνῳ τῷ ἵππῳ μετουσία στεφάνου καὶ ἀγῶνος ἔστιν: This is not entirely true. Mule racing existed, although for only a short period,

500-444, at Olympia, cf. Paus. V 9.2 ἦν γὰρ δὴ ἀπήνη κατὰ τὴν συνωρίδα ἡμιόνους ἀντὶ ἵππων ἔχουσα. Plut. was well aware of that, see below, 675 C πολλὰ δὲ καὶ ϑέντες ἔπειτ᾽ ἀνεῖλον, ὥσπερ τὸν (sc. ἀγῶνα) ... τῆς ἀπήνης. The ἀπήνη was a four-wheeled wagon drawn

by mules. Two of Pindar's odes, O. V and VI, celebrate winners of mule chariot races. - The high status of the horse in racing is shown by Paus. VI 13.9: the mare Aura threw off her rider directly at the start but in spite of that carried out the race and was proclaimed winner (νυκῶσα ἔγνω), For the high appreciation of the mule, esp. in Rome, see O. Keller, Die antike Tierwelt 1 (Leipzig 1909) 262 f. 639 F τῶν μαχομένων πρῶτον ἔργον ἐστὶ τὸ πατάξαι... δεύτερον δὲ

καλ.: Abram. observes that Plutarch's representation of the primordia of a battle is quite unrealistic. His argument is not convincing; if the order of sports events had been modelled on the course of a battle, ἀκοντισμός and ὁπλίτης would have been the first events.

639 F ἐν Λεύχτροις τοὺς Σπαρτιάτας xth.: For patrotic reasons or for the sake of argument, Plut. neglects the fact that the Spartans were very well-reputed as athletes, even if by the time of the battle of Leuctra they were no longer as superior. As regards the training of the

Thebans Plut. Pel. 7.5 tells about Epaminondas that he τοὺς νέους πάλαι φρονήματος ἦν ἐμπεπληκώς᾽ ἐκέλευσε γὰρ £v τοῖς γυμνασίοις ἐπιλαμβάνεσθαι τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ παλαίειν, età ὁρῶν ἐπὶ τῷ κρατεῖν καὶ περιεῖναι γαυρουμένους ἐπέπληττεν, ὡς αἰσχύνεσϑαι μᾶλλον αὐτοῖς προσῆκον, εἰ δουλεύουσι δι᾽ ἀνανδρίαν ὧν τοσοῦτον ταῖς ῥώμαις διαφέρουσιν. Thus, the purpose of the training was above all to strengthen the moral; but at Pel. 23 Plut. ascribes the victory to

the new tactics of Epaminondas and Pelopidas, not to the physical or psychic strength of the soldiers.

640 A

TABLE TALKS II 5

245

640 A βριϑὺς ὁπλιτοπάλας: This is the first half of a pentameter

(Aesch. frg. 5 Bergk, frg. 4 Diehl), fully quoted at De fort. Rom. 317 E, De Alex. Mag. fort. 334 D, Dem. et Cic. 2.2, and at Eustath.

513.33. The line was probably part of a sepulchral epigram, presumably to those who fell at Marathon,

Graecae metricae

(Lipsiae

1891)

but cf. T. Preger, Inscriptiones

37.

no.

42. -- Plut.

thinks

that

ὁπλιτοπάλας proves that wrestling and combat was virtually the same thing; he overlooks that ἀντίταλος, ‘rival’, (Aesch., Pind.) shows that πάλη had received a more general sense, ‘combat’, as early as the 5th century.

640 A σὺν σάκει δὲ xmóovoxoóto παλαισταί: Frg. 775 Nauck". Wil. observed that Plut. inserted δέ in the Sapphicus. Other examples of such interruption of a metrical line are found at 630 C, 659 B, De aud.

poet. 26 F, 29 A. — The Greeks as well had bells on their shields to

frighten their enemies, cf. Aesch. Sept. 385 ὑπ

ἀσπίδος δ᾽ ἔσω |

χαλκήλατοι κλάζουσι κώδωνες φόβον. 640 A εἰκότως οὖν ἡ πυγμὴ προεισῆγε: Hubert's emendation προεισtye : πρόεισί ye T is obviously right, although the verb is rarely used in intransitive sense, cf. Arist. Pol. 1336 b 29.

640 A δρύμῳ δὲ μελετῶσι φεύγειν καὶ διώκειν: The listeners must have found this scheme of a battle unrealistic and artificial. Plut. neglects to mention that the battle always opened with a race run in armour. Moreover, Plut. and his listeners knew very well that this, ‘Homeric’, order of events was non-existent, see above, on 639 A ἢ τὸ στάδιον. TALK 6 640 B Σώκλαρος ἑστιῶν ἡμᾶς ἐν κήποις ὑπὸ τοῦ Κηφισοῦ ποταμοῦ:

Two persons, named Soclarus and contemporary with Plut., appear on inscriptions from Phocis; (1) T. Φλαούιος Σώκλαρος (16 IX:1.200, Tithorea 98/9; Syll.” 823 A, B, C, Delphi 95-99; Fouilles de Delphes 11:3 no. 232, 111:4 no. 47, 98/9) archon and epimeletes of Delphi; and (2) Λεύκιος Μέστριος Σώκλαρος Χαιρωνεύς (IG IX:1.61.42, Daulis 118 A. D.). In Plut. the name appears in Talks III 6, V 7, VI 8, VIII 6,

always without any presentation, and in Amat. where (749 B) Plutarch's son Autobulus reports: Σώκλαρον

ἐκ Τιϑόρας ἥκοντα, and

246

TABLE TALKS II 6

640 B

finally in De soll. an. where (964 D) Plutarch's father calls him ‘the friend of his son'.

Stein, RE

s.v. Soklaros,

and

Ziegler, RE s.v.

Plutarchos, 684 f. identify T. Φλαούιος 2. with the Soclarus appearing in Amat., and Λεύκιος Μέστριος X. with the X. of the Talks and De

soll. an. 'This conclusion was called in question by R. Flaceliére, Plutarque, Dialogue sur l'Amour (Paris 1952) 19, and Jones, BCH 96 (1972) 264, but Stein's and Ziegler's conclusion was confirmed in a

penetrating investigation by Babut, REG 94 (1981) 58: Soclarus of Tithorea was probably less familiar with the family of Plut., whereas Soclarus of Chaeronea was a close friend who needed no presentation;

presumably Plut. and Timoxena named their first-born son after him (Babut, o. c. 57). - Chaeronea is equally near to the river Cephisus as is Tithorea; the gardens of Soclarus may not have been very distant from his native city. — For Soclarus of Tithorea,

see Puech, REG 94

(1981) 186-192. 640 B καὶ γὰρ ἐκ σχίνων ἐλαίας ἀναβλαστανούσας ἑωρῶμεν κτλ.:

Not only is grafting of olives on the resinous mastic-tree (Pistacia Lentiscus L.) impossible, but also all the others mentioned here. Unless Plut. is simply telling a lie when he asserts that he actually saw them and that they even bore fruit which he and the other guests tasted (ἀγαϑάς), we must assume with Abram. that Soclarus’ gardener had ‘grafted’ the fruit-bearing branches upon the trees shortly before the arrival of the guests. One might even suspect that the bantering

comments (640 BC) indicate that the guests penetrated this deceit, but the following discussion seems to be in earnest. Plin. XVII 120 tells of delusory tricks in grafting: tot modis insitam arborem vidimus . . . omni genere pomorum onustam, alio ramo nucibus, alio bacis, aliunde vite,

piris, ficis, pumicis malorumque generibus. sed huic brevis fuit vita. There was a general belief in Hellenistic and Roman times that practically all trees could be grafted onto each other, provided only that effective methods were invented. Theophr. C. P. I 6 estimates the conditions necessary for success in grafting rather objectively, while

later writers display almost unlimited expectations, cf. Colum. De arbor. 27.1 sed cum antiqui negaverunt posse omne genus surculorum in omnem arborem inseri .. ., existimavimus errorem huius opinionis discutiendum tradendumque posteris rationem, qua possit omne genus surculi omni generi arboris inseri etc., and 26.1 omnis surculus inseri potest, si non est ei arbori, cui inseritur, dissimilis cortice; cf. also Plin.

XVII 137. Among the antiqui who doubted the general possibility of

640 B

TABLE TALKS II 6

247

grafting are Varro, De re rust. 1 40.5 videndum qua ex arbore in quam

transferatur ... non enim pirum recipit quercus (cf. our passage); and Ps.-Arist. De plant. 820 b 35 ἔστι δὲ βελτίων ὁ ἐγκεντρισμὸς ὁμοίων

εἰς ὅμοια’ ἔστι δὲ xai ἀναλογία ἄλλη τις, δι᾽ ἧς ἀρίστως συμβαίνουσι τὰ ἀνόμοια κτλ. Numerous impossible combinations are stated as possible at Geop.

X 76; cf. also Pallad. De insitione, passim.

For a

survey of the ancient theories and methods of grafting, see H. O. Lenz, Botanik der alten Griechen und Rómer (Gotha 1859) 129-136; see also Pease,

TAPA

64 (1933) 66—76;

and K. D. White,

Roman

Farming (London 1970) 248-258. 640B μίξεις φυτῶν κεκρατημένων ἄχρι καρπογονίας: For κρατεῖσθαι, ‘be mastered’, ‘be assimilated so as to lose its own na-

ture’, cf. below, on 640 E, and 650 Β ὅταν οὖν ὁ οἶνος εἰς ὑγρότητα πολλὴν ἐμπέσῃ, Ἀρατούμενος ἀποβάλλει τὴν βαφὴν κτλ. 640 C σφιγγῶν καὶ χιμαιρῶν: Chimera is used today as a technical term denoting a graft hybrid composed of two or more different kinds

of tissue. Two types are discerned, periclinal chimeras with one kind of tissue surrounding the other, and sectorial chimeras with parallel arrangement of the tissues. 640 ( Κράτων:

See above, on 613 A.

640 C τὰ δᾳδώδη: Paton’s conjecture is more probable than ἐλατώδη Po.: ἐλαιώδη T. Paton refers to 648 D τὰ δᾳδώδη καὶ πισσοτρόφα τῶν φυτῶν, μάλιστα πεύκας καὶ στροβίλους, cf. also 640 D fj ve Sas αὐτῶν. ᾿Ελατώδης is not found in Plut. 640 C οὔτε γὰρ κυπάριττον οὔτε κῶνον: Kóvog normally means ‘pine-cone’. The sense 'pine-tree' is only evidenced at Plat. Epigr. 25 (II 307 Bergk?) where Scaliger corrected κῶμον MSS. The synonym στρόβιλος is also used in this sense at 648 D and 676 A. Fuhrm.

Observed that κῶνος is used as a generic term here in relation to the specific ones, πίτυς and πεύμη, position before them.

and thus must be transposed to the

640 C ἢ πίτυν ἢ πεύκην: There is no clear distinction between these words; they were used indiscriminately throughout antiquity. Original-

ly (Hom.) πίτυς seems to denote the mountain fir (Corsican pine),

248

TABLE TALKS II 6

640 C

Pinus Laricio Poir., and πεύκη the Aleppo pine, Pinus halepensis Mill. But the distinction was never upheld consistently. Theophr. uses the words inversely, and they may also denote other species of the Pinus family. There was an increasing tendency to use mevxn as a collective

term for many species. See K. Koch, Báume und Strducher des alten

Griechenlands* (Berlin 1884) 28f.; and Murr, 111-113. 640 C Φίλων: Philon the physician is the host at a luxurious dinner at Hyampolis where he perhaps lived (IV 1) and he is also a participant of VI 2 and VIII 9. All these talks are on medical questions. 640 C λάγος τις ἔστιν ... παρὰ τοῖς σοφοῖς, βεβαιούμενος ὑπὸ τῶν γεωργικῶν: The theory conceived of by the theorists is confirmed, not

by ordinary peasants (γεωργοί), but by especially skilled or specialized agricultural men, i.e., gardeners. Plut., as most Greek writers, seldom bothers to think of confirming theories through the evidence of practice; cf., however, also 725 BC τούτοις ... émavéxupev λόγος ...

ναυτυτῇ βεβαιούμενος ἐμπειρίᾳ. 640 C τὸ γὰρ ἔλαιον εἶναί φασι τοῖς φυτοῖς πολέμιον x14.: Many writers mention the method of using oil for destruction of brushwood and shoots: Theophr. H. P. IV 16.5 πολέμιον γὰρ δὴ καὶ τοῦτο (sc. τὸ

ἔλαιον) πᾶσι" καὶ ἔλαιον ἐπιχέουσι τοῖς ὑπολείμμασι τῶν ῥιζῶν. ἰσχύει δὲ μᾶλλον τὸ ἔλαιον ἐν τοῖς νέοις καὶ ἄρτι φυομένοις. Cf. Plut. Quaest. nat. 911 E τὸ μὲν ἔλαιον τοῖς φυτοῖς πολέμιον καὶ φϑείρει τὰ προσαλειφόμενα; Plat. Prot. 334 B; Plin. XVII 234. 640 C καϑάπερ τὰς μελίττας: Cf. Arist. H. A. 605 b 20 πάντα δὲ τὰ

ἔντομα ἀποϑνήσκει ἐλαιόμενα, frg. 223 (p. 175.17 Rose) διὰ τί τῶν ἐντόμων ζῴων ἀναιρετικόν ἐστι (sc. τὸ ἔλαιον); Bees in particular are mentioned by Clem. Paed. I1 66.2 τὸ ἔλαιον αὐτὸ ταῖς μελίτταις καὶ τοῖς ἐντόμοις ἐστὶ πολέμιον ζῴοις. The bee is the only domesticated insect, hence the greater interest in it. Oil is fatal because it chokes the

pores, cf. Plin. XI 66 oleo quidem non apes tantum, sed omnia insecta exanimantur, praecipue si capite uncto in sole ponantur; Pallad. I 35.4 contra animalia quae vitibus nocent, cantharides ... oleo mersas resolvi patieris in tabem et ... hoc oleo falces perungues. extinguitur cimices amurca etc., Sext. Pyrrh. I 55 καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον τοὺς piv ἀνθρώπους ὠφελεῖ, σφῆκας δὲ καὶ μελίσσας ἀναιρεῖ καταρραινόμενον. Oil is also fatal to fur and feather, cf. Plat. Prot.

640 €

TABLE TALKS II 6

249

334 D τὸ ἔλαιον ... ταῖς ϑριξὶ πολεμιώτατον ταῖς τῶν ἄλλων ζῴων

πλὴν ταῖς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. (40 C πίονα καὶ πέπειραν ἔχει τὴν φύσιν: For πίων, cf. Theophr. H. P. ἘΧ 1.3 (of ἐλάτη, πεύκη, πίτυς etc.) ἅπαντα δὲ ταῦτα εὔοσμα καὶ σχεδὸν ὅσα πιότητά τινα ἔχει καὶ λῖπος. The use οὗ πέπειρα, ‘full-

ripe’, of trees is striking; this word is normally used of fruit or of women, 640 C ὥστε πίσσαν ἀποδαχρύειν καὶ ῥητίνην: Πίσσα and δητίνη are virtually synonymous here, as at Plin. XIV 122 arborum suco manantium picem resinamque. Plin. mentions the mastic-tree (oxivoc) as the

one which produces the best resin after the terebinth. Nevertheless, Plut. stated (640 B) that the olive could be grafted onto it. 640 Ὁ ὅταν

δὲ πληγῇ,

ταῖς

διακοπαῖς

ὥσπερ

οἴκοϑεν

ἰχῶρας

συνάγει: Fuhrm., following Diibn., rightly accepts the text without

changes. Bolk. discusses the numerous changes proposed and rejects them all except the transposition (Wil.) οἴκοϑεν ὥσπερ. But ἰχώρ is

not in need of a.modifying ὥσπερ. It is used about juice oozing out of burning wood at Dioscur. I 119 ὁ δ᾽ &(x) τῶν χλωρῶν ξύλων ἰχὼρ καιομένων. Together with οἴκοϑεν the word seems to mark the copi-

ousness of liquid pouring out from within: ‘as it were from a store of their own’. — For the technique of drawing off the resin, see Theophr. H. P. IX 2.1 fj δὲ δητίνη γίνεται τόνδε τὸν τρόπον᾽ ἐν μὲν τῇ πεύκῃ ὅταν ἀφελκωϑείσης ἡ Sas ἐξαιρεϑῇ, συρρεῖ γὰρ εἰς τὸ ἕλκωμα τοῦτο πλείων ἡ ὑγρότης κτλ.; Plin. XVI 57 aperitur picea e parte solari, non plaga, sed vulnere ablati corticis ... postea umor omnis e tota confluit in ulcus.

640 D ij te δὰς αὐτῶν: ‘kindling-wood’, smaller pieces split off from the log to be used for starting fires or as torches. The resin oozing out is highly inflammable. 640 D δυσμίκτως ἔχει, καϑάπερ αὐτὸ τὸ ἔλαιον: Plut. asserted above

(640 B) that the olive can be grafted (to the mastic-tree). For the notorious difficulty of mixing olive oil with other liquids, see 696 B and 702 B where it is called ἄκρατον and dutxtétatov. On Philon’s theory, the cherry-tree and the plum-tree would not tolerate grafting either, since they also emit a resin-like sap. These were, however, uncommon in Greece.

250

TABLE TALKS II 6

640D

640 D λεπτὸν γὰρ ὄντα καὶ ξηρὸν οὐ παρέχειν ἕδραν οὐδ᾽ ἐμβίωσιν τοῖς ἐντιϑεμένοις ὥσπερ τὰ φλοιώδη καὶ νοτερὰ [καὶ] τοῖς μαλακοῖς τοῖς ὑπὸ τὸν φλοιὸν οὖσι μέρεσι προσδεχομένοις περιπτύσσεσϑαι κολλώμενον: The sentence may be thus translated: ‘For since the bark is thin and dry, it offers the scions no hold or conditions for life as do

the trees with thick and moist bark which, by means of the soft, hospitably receiving parts beneath the bark, bed in (the scions) when it closes up.’ Many efforts have been made to emend this sentence (see

Hu., app.). The subject of περιπτύσσεσθαι must be τὰ φλοιώδη καὶ νοτερὰ (sc. δένδρα); thus the additions, dof Bern., οὐχ Hu., οὐδ᾽ Clem. proposed before ὥσπερ are impossible because they eliminate this subject. I think that, through my corrections of καὶ τὰ μαλαχά and ὄντα μέρεσι T, the text has been brought fairly near to its original

form. The corruptions are palaeographically easy to explain: when καὶ was mistakenly repeated after voteoá the change of the following words into the neuter was natural; and the corruption of οὖσι may be due to the preceding accusative. The phrase τοῖς ... μέρεσι προσϑεχομένοις is to mark the significance of the soft parts beneath

the bark for the graft; Plutarch's style is often somewhat verbose. Κολλώμενον goes with τὸν φλοιόν and is probably passive although

the medial sense cannot be ruled out (this sense is found at Arat. 530); for the isolated, final position fo the part., see the list of instances below, on 646 CD, especially 660 F σιτούμενον. - The passage reflects

Theophr. C. P. 16.4 μάλιστα δ᾽ εὐφυῆ πρὸς ἐνοφϑαλμισμὸν ... ὅσων ἡ ὑγρότης ἔχει τι γλίσχρον, ἔτι δ᾽ ἃ μαλακόφλοια καὶ ὁμοιόφλοια καὶ ὁμοιοπαϑῇ κτλ.; Plin. XVII 104 facillime coalescunt quibus eadem corticis natura quaeque ... sucorumque societatem habent ... lenta

res, quotiens umidis repugnant sicca, mollibus corticum duri; Colum. IV 29.9, V 11.3. 640 D αὐτὸς

δὲ Σώχλαρος

ἔφη

καὶ

ταῦτα

λέγοντα

μὴ

κακῶς

προσεννοεῖν, ὅτι κτλι: Bern., Hu., Clem. print the addition καὶ (10v)

ταῦτα λέγοντα Re., but Bolk. points out, (1) that no article is needed, (2) that καὶ ταῦτα is concessive, ‘etiamsi haec dicas’, (3) that λέγοντα is indefinite and (4) that μὴ κακῶς goes with προσεννοεῖν. A possible translation will be: “The host (and garden-owner) himself, Soclarus, remarked that if one says so much it is also well to observe, that ...’

There is no reason to think, then, that Aéyovta refers to Craton, as

proposed by Abram. who reads: αὐτὸν δὲ Σώκλαρος ἔφη ... προσεννοεῖν (δεῖν), which Fuhrm. accepts (with the transposition:

640 D

TABLE TALKS II 6

251

αὐτὸν δὲ (Seiv)). For the participle used in infinite sense in the acc. + inf. construction, cf. above, 616 A-B διὸ καὶ γέλοιόν ἐστι ... καταλλίναντα χορτάζειν. 640 E ἵνα κρατηϑὲν ἐξομοιωϑῇ καὶ μεταβάλῃ τὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ τροφὴν πρὸς τὸ ἐμπφυτευόμενον: Underlying this is the Aristotelian theory of

digestion as being a process of concoction, which meets repeatedly in the Talks, cf. 652 D, 654 B, 661 BC δεῖ yao παϑεῖν τὴν τροφὴν καὶ

μεταβαλεῖν κρατηϑεῖσαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν δυνάμεων. According to this theory, digestion is a process of assimilation. The more similar the components are, the easier this gets. Thus it is used to explain why rain-water is healthier to drink than spring-water: Quaest. nat. 912 B ἢ

τρέφει μὲν μάλιστα (τὸ μάλιστα) (Hu.) κρατούμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ τρεφομένου ... τὰ δὲ πηγαῖα ... ἧττόν ἐστιν εὔτρεπτα καὶ βράδιον αὐτὰ παρέχει τῇ πέψει μεταβάλλειν εἰς τὸ τρεφόμενον. 640 E ἀτενής: ‘tense’, ‘unyielding’, used of the soil only here.

640 E δένδρα κοῦφα τοῖς ξύλοις ὄντα: The change to κωφά (= ἀπαϑῆ) proposed by Herw., Hu. is uncalled for; κοῦφος is used of wood in the sense of ‘dry’ at Oribas. Coll. med. XLV 29.17 σικύαι κοῦφαι. 640 Ε δεῖ πρὸς τὸ ἐμφυτευόμενον χώρας λόγον ἔχειν τὸ δεξόμενον:

This echoes Theophr. C. P. I 6.1 ὥσπερ γὰρ γῇ χρῆται τὰ ἐμφυτευόμενα' καὶ φυτεία δὲ τις καὶ ὁ ἐνοφϑαλμισμός, οὐ μόνον παράταξις ... καὶ τὸ γεννῶν ἡ ὑγρότης ἐστὶν ἡ γόνιμος (cf. above, δένδρα κοῦφα). Cf. also Ps.-Arist. De plant. 820 b 29 τῶν δένδρων τὰ μὲν γεννῶνταν ἐκ σπέρματος... Ὁ 34 τινὰ δὲ ἐν τῇ γῇ. καὶ τινὰ μὲν ἐν τοῖς δένδροις φυτεύονται, ὧς τὰ ἐγκεντριξόμενα, and Clem. Strom.

VI 117.2 χρῆται γὰρ τὸ ἐμφυτευόμενον ἀντὶ γῆς τῷ δένδρῳ τῷ ἐν ᾧ φυτεύεται. 640 E τὴν δὲ χώραν δεῖ ϑήλειαν εἶναι καὶ γόνιμον: Abram. and Fuhrm. rightly accept εἶναι Mez.: ἔχειν T. The phrase is about soil in

general, not particularly that (figurative) of trees. The scribe may have been influenced by the preceding ἔχειν (Abram.). Doe. puts a comma after δεξόμενον and reads ἀεί for δεῖ, without finding ἔχειν problematic, -- Θῆλυς is found in the sense ‘fertile’ at Callim. frg. 548 Pfeiff.

ϑηλύτατον πεδίον, frg. 384.27 (Sos. Vict.) ϑηλύτατον καὶ NeiAo[s ἄϊΪγων ἐνιαύσιον ὕδωρ.

252

TABLE TALKS II 6

640 EF

640 EF ὅϑεν τὰ πολυκαρπότατα τῶν φυτῶν ἐκλεγόμενοι παραπηγνύovow: For the lac. 4-7 marked in T after φυτῶν Hu. conjectures ἐμβολάσιν (cf. 640 B) or πρὸς ἐμφυτείαν. However, there is no need for any addition; presumably the lacuna was marked by mistake, perhaps through prolepsis of the next lacuna.

640 F

ὥσπερ

γυναιξὶν

{πολυ)γαλακτούσαις

ἕτερα

(βρέφη)

προσβάλλοντες: Cobet filled the first lac. 5-6; (ἄγαν) Doe. is palaeo-

graphically plausible, but the repetitive πολυ- is truly Plutarchean, see on 624 E πικρὰ τῇ γεύσει. Xyl. filled the second lac. 7-8.

641 A oi πολυσαρκίᾳ κεχρημένοι ... ἄτεκνοι κτλ.: The idea and its explanation are found at Arist. G. A. 725 Ὁ 31 καταναλίσκεται γὰρ

(sc. τὸ σπέρμα) εἰς τὸ σῶμα, οἷον τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐνίοις᾽ εὔεκτοι γὰρ ὄντες καὶ γινόμενοι πολύσαρκοι ἢ πιότεροι μᾶλλον, ἧττον προΐενται σπέρμα καὶ ἧττον ἐπιϑυμοῦσι τοῦ ἀφροδισιάζειν ... 725 a 3 καὶ of πίονες δὲ ἀγονώτεροι φαίνονται εἶναι τῶν μὴ πιόνων, καὶ γυναῖκες

καὶ ἄνδρες, διὰ τὸ τοῖς εὐτραφέσι πεττόμενον τὸ περίττωμα γίνεodat πιμέλην; Theophr. C. P. II 10.1 διὰ πυκνότητα καὶ ἰσχὺν καὶ εὐτροφίαν ἄκαρπα γίνεται συμβαίνει γὰρ ἅπαντα εἰς ἑαυτὰ καταναλίσκειν. fj δὲ καρποτοχία δεῖται μὲν φυσικῆς περιττώσεως" ἐκ ταύτης γὰρ ὁ καρπὸς ὥσπερ τοῖς ζῴοις τὸ σπέρμα κτλ., and IH 7.4 ἀκαρπότερα γὰρ γίνεται (sc. φοῖνιξ, πεύκη, κυπάριττος) διὰ πολλοῦ

τῆς τροφῆς ἰούσης καὶ ἐνταῦϑα καταναλισκομένης. Below, 724 E, Plut. compares the palm tree, sterile in Greece, with the athletes who use up their nourishment to the benefit of their bodies. Cf. also Quaest. nat. 919 C ὅταν οὖν ἢ ζῷον ἢ δένδρον εὐεκτῇ καὶ παχύνηται, τοῦτο σημεῖόν ἐστι τοῦ τὴν τροφὴν ἐν αὐτῷ καταναλισκομένην μηδὲν

ἢ μικρόν τι καὶ ἀγεννὲς περίττωμα ποιεῖν. See also above, on 637 B τροφῆς περίσσωμα. 641 A τὰ τοιαῦτα δένδρα τῆς τοοφῆς ἀπολαύοντα πάσης εἰς αὑτὰ δαπανωμένης εὐσωματεῖ: Eds. generally detach πάσης εἰς αὐτὰ δαπανωμένης by commas, and Fuhrm. deletes ἀπολαύοντα. I think

that neither should be done; instead I would interpret the pronoun as emphatic, ‘themselves’, and read εἰς αὗτά (with ἀπολαύοντα), the participle δαπανωμένης being loosely added, as often in Plut., see the list of instances

below,

on

646 CD,

and

the

extreme

example,

σιτούμενον, at 660 F. Cf. Quaest. nat. 919 C τὴν τροφὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ καταναλισκομένην; Theophr. C. P. II 10.1 ἅπαντα εἰς ἑαυτὰ καταναλίσκειν (quoted above).

641 A

TABLE TALKS II 6

253

641 A καρπὸν δὲ ... φέρει μικρὸν καὶ συντελούμενον βραδέως: Cf.

Theophr. C. P. I 17.6 τῶν γὰρ ἀειφύλλων ἅπανϑ᾽ ὡς εἰπεῖν ὀψίκαρπα. ξυλώδεις δὲ οἱ καρποὶ καὶ τὰ περικάρπια καϑάπερ πεύκης, πίτυος κτλ., so also C. P. V 17.6. TALK 7 641 A Χαιρημονιανὸς 6 Τραλλιανός: Both the man and the name appear only here. Re. proposed Χαιρήμων but another instance of the

name a few lines further below confirms the form. Bolk. shows that the hiatus Χαιρημονιανοῦ ὡς should not cause doubts about the name. Plut. tolerates hiatus before dc: 641 A ὄγκῳ ὧς, 675 E λεγομένου ὡς, Mul. virt. 252 F παρεκάλει ὧς, De Is. et Os. 374 E ἀνθρώπου ὡς, De gen. Socr. 576 D ϑηρεῦσαι ὡς, Cons. ad ux. 608 B ἐχέτω ὡς. In the Roman

period the Latin suffix -(i)anus was often added

to Greek

names, e.g. Avoyeviavóc, friend of Plut. (711 B, 717 B). A Chaeremon of Nysa (Caria) was honoured for his support of the Romans in the war of Mithridates through a monument with an inscription, Syll.? 741. A Chaeremon of Tralles, certainly of the same family, obtained in 26/5 the means from Augustus to rebuild the city after it had been demolished by an earthquake. He was honoured with an epigram, see Agathias II 17 (CSHB III 102.). Chaeremoniades may have belonged

to this family. See further Fiehn, RE Suppl. V s.v. Chairemon, and C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 40. 641 ΑΒ

ἰχϑυδίων

...

ἕν

ἐπιδείξας

ἡμῖν

ὀξὺ

τῷ

κεφαλίῳ

καὶ

πρόμηκες ἔλεγε τούτῳ προσεοικέναι τὴν ἐχενηίδα: This slender fish with a pointed head is the lamprey, Petromyzon marinus L., belonging to the family Petromyzontidae of the class Cyclostomata, The other is the sucking-fish, Echeneis remora L. There was, and still is today,

confusion between these fishes; even the lamprey was called echeneis. According to Arist. H. A. 505 Ὁ 18 there was yet another fish with this

name: ἔστι δ᾽ ἰχϑύδιόν τι τῶν πετραίων, ὃ καλοῦσί τινες &yevníoa .. . ἔστι δὲ ἄβρωτον᾽ τοῦτο δ᾽ ἔνιοί φασιν ἔχειν πόδας οὐκ ἔχον, ἀλλὰ φαίνεται διὰ τὸ τὰς πτέρυγας ὁμοίας ἔχειν ποσίν. This description is

repeated by Plin. IX 79. This seems to apply to two kinds, the blenny, which uses its ventral fins for moving about among rocks and seaweed, and the goby, which has the ventral fins united to a funnel-shaped suction disc. Presumably these were occasionally confused. The faculty of sucking is common to (1) the lamprey, which has a suctorial mouth,

254

TABLE TALKS II 7

641 AB

(2) the sucking-fish, which has a suctorial pad on the top of its head and, (3) to the goby. All three were, or could be, called ἐχενηίς. However, this name belongs by rights only to the sucking-fish, which

got its names, Greek and Latin (remora, perhaps φη-, which is possible (pace Chantraine, s.v.), cf. Hesych. βάσχειν᾽ [λέγειν], xoxoéysw, see Frisk, and Boisacq, s.v., and Ernout-Meillet* s.v. fascinus — actually

indicate that the power of witchcraft was originally thought to be a property of the evil tongue rather than of the evil eye. The idea that a language, or dialect, as such could possess such a power does not seem to be evidenced elsewhere. 680 E μιγάδες: The usual meaning of the word is: ‘persons mingled with others', cf. above, 661 C and Eur. Andr. 1142 πολλοὶ δ᾽ ἔπιπτον

μιγάδες. Here the most probable interpretation is: 'travellers', *merchants’; ‘les voyageurs" (Fuhrm.). The interpretation suggested by Wil., Ἑλληνόσκυϑαι, ‘half-Greeks’, cf. Dio Chrys. LIII (36) 6, adopted by Hoffl., is not persuasive. Valesius' change into the acc. μιγάδας, supported by Hartm., debilitates the argument: if the Thibii were *mixed' they would be less dangerous. 680 E ἀλλὰ τούτων τὸ μὲν ἴσως ἧττόν ἐστι ϑαυμαστόν' ἡ γὰρ ἐπαφὴ καὶ συνανάχρωσις κτλ.: The tactile contact comes up rather abruptly; it has not been mentioned before. Ἔπαφή means real touch; συνανάχρωσις is more abstract, ‘contamination’, ‘infection’. This noun is found only here; Plut. uses the verb at De soll. an. 975 E and

200

TABLE TALKS V7

680 E

Cleom. 10.5; cf. also De lib. educ. 4 A (of linguistic interference) iva μὴ συναναχρωννύμενοι βαρβάροις xoi ἦϑος μοχϑηροῖς ἀποφέρωνταί τι τῆς ἐκείνων φαυλότητος. 680 E τὰ τῶν ἄλλων ὀρνέων πτερὰ τοῖς τοῦ ἀετοῦ συντεϑέντα διόλλυται: Cf. Plin. X 15 aquilarum pinnae mixtas reliquarum alitum pinnas devorant; Aelian. N.A. IX 2 xai τὰ πτερὰ ἐκείνου ἐάν τις τοῖς τῶν ἄλλων συναναμίξῃ, τὰ μὲν τοῦ ἀετοῦ μένει ὁλόκληρα καὶ ἀνεπιβούλευτα, τὰ δὲ ἕτερα κατασήπεται τὴν πρὸς ἐκεῖνα κοινωνίαν ov φέροντα. Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. III 46 Bussem. gives the reason: ὅτι σηπεδόνος τινὸς μετέχουσι φυσικῆς" Svowdéotatov γὰρ πτηνῶν ἁπάντων ὁ ἀετός. The lore and myths surrounding the eagle are very rich, see O. Keller, Die

Thiere des classischen Altertums (Innsbruck

1887) 242-273. 680 Ε οὐδὲν ἀπέχει: Bases would read οὐδὲν ἀπέοικε, but Hu. refers to De def. or. 433 A where this phrase is found. It is also met with at Dio 36.2. 680 F δυσϑήρατον: ‘hard to catch’, ‘hard to track’. Fuhrm. observes that Plut. follows up this image in his reply. Comparisons with hunting are common in Plato, cf., e.g. Soph. 235 B-C. 680 F τὰς ἀπορροίας τῶν σωμάτων: The physiological theory according to which perception ensues from effluences emanating from all bodies, animate as well as inanimate, which, when they arrive at our

sense organs fit into the pores of these, derives from Emped., cf. frg. B89 (Plut. Quaest. nat. 916 Ὁ) πάντων εἰσὶν ἀπορροαὶ 600 ἐγένοντο;

Plat. Men.

76 C; Theophr.

De sensu

7 ᾿Ἐμπεδοκλῆς

...

φησὶ τῷ ἐναρμόττειν (sc. τὰς ἀπορροὰς) εἰς τοὺς πόρους τοὺς ἑκάστης (sc. αἰσϑήσεως) αἰσϑάνεσθϑαι; Arist. G.C. 324 b 26. This theory underlies the Atomist theory of εἴδωλα with which it is identified here. See above, on 626 C, 647 C, 658 C, and cf. 642 C. — Plut.

here tries to explain the effects of spells as being due to physical causes; at 681 D he is challenged by Patrocleas to consider the psychic aspects also. 680 F xoi γὰρ ἡ ὀσμὴ καὶ ἡ φωνὴ xol τὸ ῥεῦμα τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ἀποφοραί τινές εἶσι τών ξζφων καὶ μέρη κινοῦντα τὰς αἰσϑήσεις: For this description of perception, cf. Epicur. Ep. I 52 ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ τὸ

680 F

TABLE TALKS V 7

201

ἀχούειν γίνεται ῥεύματός twos φερομένου ἀπὸ τοῦ φωνοῦντος ... ἀκουστικὸν πάϑος παρασκευάζοντος, 53 καὶ μὴν καὶ τὴν ὀσμὴν γομιστέον, ὥσπερ καὶ τὴν ἀκοήν, οὐκ ἂν ποτε οὐϑὲν πάϑος ἐργάσασϑαι, εἰ μὴ ὄγκοι τινὲς ἦσαν ἀπὸ τοῦ πράγματος ἀποφερόμενοι σύμμετροι πρὸς τοῦτο τὸ αἰσϑητήριον κινεῖν. 681 A πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον εἶκός ἐστι τῶν ξῴων ἀποφέρεσθϑαι τὰ τοιαῦτα διὰ τὴν ϑερμότητα καὶ τὴν κίνησιν, οἱονεί τινα σφυγμὸν καὶ κλόνον ἔχοντος τοῦ πνεύματος: The reason why there are more emanations

from animate than from inanimate bodies is explained more clearly below, 735 A-B. The Atomist theory underlies the argument of this talk. Κίνησις] κίνημα and xAóvog are essential to this theory, cf. 682 C, D, and see above, on 673 B, and below, 722 B and 734

Bó δ᾽

ἑλκόμενος ἀὴρ ... πᾶσαν ἄτομον κλονεῖ xai ταράττει καὶ μεϑίστησιν ἐξ ἕδρας, while ϑερμότης and πνεῦμα are not; these concepts belong tather to Peripatetic theory, cf. above, on 642 C, 652 D, 663 A τῇ

ϑερμότητι. 681A τοῦ πνεύματος,

ὑφ

οὗ

τὸ σῶμα

κρουόμενον

ἐνδελεχῶς

ἐκπέμπει τινὰς ἀπορροίας: At 626 C, concerning the Platonic vision

theory of συναύγεια, the πνεῦμα itself is said to issue forth: πνεῦμα τῶν ὀμμάτων αὐγοειδὲς ἐκπῖπτον, but this is only seemingly discrepant from our passage, as is seen some lines further (626 CD) elte ótüpa χρὴ προσαγορεύειν τὸ διὰ τῆς κόρης φερόμενον εἴτε πνεῦμα φωτοειδὲς εἴτ᾽ αὐγήν, and see below.

681 A πολυκίνητος γὰρ ἡ ὄψις οὖσα μετὰ πνεύματος αὐγὴν ἀφιέντος πυρώδη ϑαυμαστήν τινα διασπείρει δύναμιν:

‘for vision, which is

extremely agile, diffuses a marvellous influence together with/by means of/carried by an effluence which gives off a flame-like light’. This interpretation — in accordance with the Latin translations (Wytt., Diibn.) and Amyot, but different from that of Hoffl. and Fuhrm., who take μετὰ πνεύματος as being a complement of ἣ ὄψις, accounts for

the fact that that which emanates from the eyes is not an abstract influence (power) but a pneumatic effluence having that influence. The δύναμις is mediated by the πνεῦμα or, probably more exactly, by the light that this gives off. The sentence is an effort to describe the process precisely. This contrasts markedly to the indecisive presenta-

tion given at 626 C (quoted above) and also to 681 B τὸ διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων ἐχπῖπτον, εἴτ᾽ ἄρα φῶς εἴτε πνεῦμα. The sentence is found

202

TABLE TALKS V 7

681A

almost verbatim at Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. III 52 Bussem., and it is repeated by Psell. De omnif. doctr. 109 (82). - For the notion of vision rays, see above, on 625 E. 681 A ἡδοναῖς τε γὰρ

συμμέτροις xoi ἀηδίαις ὑπὸ τῶν ὁρατῶν

τρεπόμενος ovvéyetar’ xth.; Casting a spell is by definition an active

process of the eyes of certain individuals, which causes some effects in the person viewed. Plut. has hitherto based his arguments on this assumption,

but

here

and

henceforth

in his contribution

he

has

changed the aspect and widened the scope of the argument in a rather confusing way. Here he obviously describes suggestion and fascination arising in the subject through the sight of the object. Formally, ὑπὸ τῶν δρατῶν may refer to any objects of vision but clearly human beings are meant. One observes that the eyes of these are not mentioned; instead it becomes evident in the next sentence (τῶν ἐρωτικῶν ...

ἀρχὴν ἡ ὄψις ἐνδίδωσιν and ὅταν ἐμβλέπῃ τοῖς καλοῖς) that the whole body is meant. This implics that the fascination is not thought to derive exactly, or only, or even at all, from the eyes. The person looked at is thought to exert influence on the viewer even in entire passivity and even when unconscious of being observed. Plutarch’s argumentation throughout this talk appears elusive and frustrating and the listeners make it clear that they find it inconclusive; they repeatedly urge him to

explain the phenomenon more clearly (681 D Patrocleas, 682 A, B Soclarus, 682 F Gaius). By this disposition of the discussion Plut. wants to indicate that the problem is extremely difficult. However, one

wonders why he does not declare explicitly until in his last reply (683 A) that his main point is that casting a spell is not a manifestation of the will; he only suggests this in passing at 682 C πολλάκις nol ἄκοντας,

and

682 D

κινούμενοι

δ᾽

οὕτως

ὃ πεφύκασιν,

οὐχ

ὃ

βούλονται, ποιοῦσιν. This premise explains why he is dwelling at length on autosuggestion and suggests that this process is essentially of the same kind.

681 AB καὶ τῶν ἐρωτικῶν . .. ἀρχὴν ἡ ὄψις ἐνδίδωσιν, ὥστε ῥεῖν καὶ λείβεσϑαι τὸν ἐρωτικὸν κτλ.: For the especially strong sensation effected by vision, cf. Plat. Phaedr. 250 D ὄψις γὰρ ἡμῖν ὀξυτάτη τῶν διὰ τοῦ σώματος ἔρχεται αἰσϑήσεων, quoted by Plut. above, 654 DE; and the importance of vision for erotic passion is often stressed, cf. Xen. Cyr. V 1.16 οὐδέ ye σοὶ συμβουλεύω ... ἐν τοῖς καλοῖς ἐᾶν τὴν ὄψιν ἐνδιατρίβειν ... οἱ δὲ καλοὶ καὶ τοὺς ἄπωϑεν ϑεωμένους

681 AB

TABLE TALKS V 7

203

ὑφάπτουσιν, ὥστε αἴϑεσϑαι τῷ ἔρωτι; Arist. Eth. Nic. 1167 a 4 (ἀρχὴ) τοῦ ἐρᾶν ἡ διὰ τῆς ὄψεως ἡδονή; Epicur. frg. 6.18 Arrighetti ἀφαιρουμένης προσόψεως... ἐκλύεται τὸ ἐρωτικὸν πάϑος; Plut. frg. 138 Sandb. καὶ τοὺς καλοὺς ὁρᾶν μὲν ἐπιτερπέστατον ... ἡ γὰρ ὄψις λαβὴ τοῦ πάϑους ἐστί. The etymological derivation seemed natural: Philostr. Ep. 52 ἀπὸ τοῦ ὁρᾶν τὸ ἐρᾶν; Diogenian. IV 49 (CPG I 239) ἐκ τοῦ γὰρ ἐσορᾶν yivet’ ἀνθρώποις ἐρᾶν. The proper time for sexual intercourse is by night because then the darkness veils the immodest deeds of this activity, cf. 654 D-E, 705 A, Non posse 1089 A. 681 B διὸ καὶ ϑαυμάσειεν ἄν vi5 ... . αἱ γὰρ ἀντιβλέψεις τῶν ἐν ὥρᾳ

καὶ τὸ διὰ τῶν ὀμμάτων ἐκπῖπτον, εἴτ᾽ ἄρα φῶς εἴτε ῥεῦμα, τοὺς ἐρῶντας ἐχτήκει καὶ ἀπόλλυσι: Re. corrected ἐντήκει; The MSS of

Psell, De omnif. doct. 109 (82) are divided between both forms. Three MSS of Psell. have ὁρῶντας,

and this reading is also found in Ps.-

Arist. Probl. ined. III 52 Bussem. For εἴτ᾽ ἄρα φῶς εἴτε ῥεῦμα, see above, on 681 A πολυκίνητος, and 626 C, 642 C. — Plutarch's argu-

ment is the following: considering that even looking at a beloved person who is passive causes such a strong passion in the viewer, it is only natural that glances from him should be utterly devastating. 681 B γλυχύπικρον: This poetic word is first found in Sappho, frg. 130

Lobel-Page, Ἔρος ... γλυκύπικρον ἀμάχανον ὄρπετον, cf. Sappho, frg. 125 Bergk. The description of love as being two-faced and contradictory in nature became a commonplace, cf. Theogn. 1353; Orph. frg. 361 Kern; Plat. Tim.

42 A; Anth.

Pal. V 134; Catull. 68.18; Plaut.

Pseud. 63, Cist. 70. 681 BC ὡς προσβλεπομένοις καὶ προσβλέπουσι: The active participle may seem rather striking here but there is no reason to suspect that it is a gloss as Fuhrm, does. Plut. is keeping the double aspect of looking and being looked upon, which he adopted in the preceding sentence: the maximum effect is brought about when there is mutual looking. 681 C ὥστε παντελῶς ἀπειράτους ἔρωτος φαίνεσϑαι τοὺς tov Mnδικὸν νάφϑαν ϑαυμάξοντας: Fuhrm. substitutes φαίνεσθαι for ἦγ-

εἶσϑαι. Also ἡγεῖσϑαι (δεῖν) Russel CR 30 (1980) 14 is plausible. An emendation is certainly needed, as most translations show. Amyot: ‘de sorte qu'il me semble que ...’; Kaltw.: ‘dass man diejenigen für ganz unerfahren in der Liebe halten muss . . .'; Hoffl.: *... in my judgement

204

TABLE TALKS V 7

681 C

εν ^. - The so-called Median naphtha (Lat. bitumen liquidum) is crude oil. The highly inflammable fumes evaporating from this substance burn with a nearly invisible fire. Many stories were told about this substance. Plut. Alex. 35 tells how the king consented to a proposal from his attendant to test the naphtha on a youth. The young man was

nearly burnt to death. This cruel event is also reported by Strab. XVI 1.15. Bitumen is mentioned as early as Gen. 11.3. Seepages, wells of oil, and lakes with oil floating on the water were known above all in Mesopotamia, especially near Babylon, in the region of Susa, in

Media, and further in Syria and Palestine (Dead Sea), cf. Ps.—Arist. De mir. ausc. 833 a 1; Dioscur. I 73.2; Plin. II 235, VI 99, XXXV 178; Vitruv. VIII 3.8; Diod. XIX 98; Dio Cass. LXVIII 27; Philostr. V. Apoll. 124. Many products of this substance, above all asphalt and pitch, were

much

used in these countries

and

were

to some

extent

imported by the Romans. 681 C αἱ γὰρ τῶν καλῶν ὄψεις... ἀνάπτουσιν: The comparison with here the glances cast by beautiful cing is presupposed, cf. Xen, Cyr.

πῦρ ἐν ταῖς τῶν ἐρωτικῶν ψυχαῖς the naphtha made Plut. emphasize individuals, although mutual glanV 1.16 ἔγωγε... οὔτε τοὺς καλοὺς

εἰσορῶ ... ὡς τὸ μὲν πῦρ τοὺς ἁπτομένους καίει, of δὲ καλοὶ καὶ

τοὺς ἄπωϑεν ϑεωμένους ὑφάπτουσιν, ὥστε αἴϑεσθαι τῷ ἔρωτι, which is cited by Plut. frg. 138 Sandb. (from Περὶ ἔρωτος): καὶ τοὺς καλοὺς ὁρᾶν μὲν ἐπιτερπέστατον ... of δὲ καλοὶ καὶ τοὺς μακρὰν ἑστῶτας

ὑφάπτουσιν. Cf. also Plat. Phaedr. 251 C (fj ψυχὴ) ὅταν μὲν οὖν βλέπουσα πρὸς τὸ τοῦ παιδὸς κάλλος ἐκεῖϑεν μέρη ἐπιόντα καὶ ῥέοντ᾽, ἃ δὴ διὰ ταῦτα ἵμερος καλεῖται, δεχομένη ἄρδηταί τε καὶ ϑερμαίνηται, 253 Ε ὅταν δ᾽ οὖν ὁ ἡνίοχος ἰδὼν τὸ ἐρωτικὸν ὄμμα,

πᾶσαν αἰσϑήσει διαϑερμήνας τὴν ψυχήν κτλ. 681C τό γε τῶν ἱκτερικῶν βοήϑημα πολλάκις ἱστοροῦμεν᾽ ἐμβλέποντες γὰρ τῷ χαραδριῷ ϑεραπεύονται" κτλ.: The identification of this bird is somewhat uncertain. It is described by Arist. H.A. 614 Ὁ 35 τὰς μὲν οἰκήσεις of μὲν (sc. τῶν ὀρνίϑων) περὶ τὰς χαράδρας, οἱ δὲ (περὶ) χηράμους ποιοῦνται καὶ πέτρας, οἷον ὁ καλούμενος χαραδριός᾽ ἔστι δ᾽ ὁ χαραδριὸς καὶ τὴν χρόαν καὶ τὴν φωνὴν φαῦλος, φαίνεται δὲ νύκτωρ, ἡμέρας δ᾽ ἀποδιδράσκει.

Thompson, Birds? 311 tentatively identifies this bird with the stone curlew, also called Norfolk plover (Charadrius oedicnemus L.), which

hides among the stones in desolate places, especially dry river-beds,

681 C

205

TABLE TALKS V 7

feeds by night, and runs away instead of flying when disturbed. Its eyes are yellow, which may have caused the belief in their power of curing jaundice. According to Schol. Plat. Gorg. 494 B these birds were captured

and sold to jaundice

patients:

εἰς ὃν

ἀποβλέψαντες,

ὡς

λόγος, οἱ ἱκτεριῶντες ῥᾷον ἀπαλλάττονται᾽ ὅϑεν καὶ ἐγκρύπτουσιν αὐτὸν οἱ πιπράσκοντες, ἵνα μὴ προῖκα ὠφελῶνται οἱ κάμνοντες, and

the scholiast cites Hipponax (frg. 48 Diehl) καί μιν καλύπτει" μῶν χαραδριὸν περνᾷς; repeated in Suda s.v. χαραδριός, and Schol. Aristoph. Av. 266. A bird credited with the same power is mentioned by Plin. XXX 94 avis icterus vocatur a colore; quae si spectetur, sanari id malum et avem mori. See Thompson, o.c. 118f.; Th. Weidlich, Die

Sympathie in der antiken Literatur (Progr. Stuttgart 1894) 56 n. 681 C ὅϑεν οὐ προσβλέπουσιν oi χαραδριοὶ ... ἀλλ᾽ ἀποστρέφονται καὶ τὰ ὄμματα συγκλείσαντες ἔχουσιν, οὗ φϑονοῦντες κτλ.: Indeed a strange example of the use of the evil eye! This ‘explication’ of the shy behaviour of the bird is also found at Theophyl. Coll. 15 (Phys. et med. Gr. min. 1180 Id.) τοὺς ἱκτεριῶντάς φασι τοῦ πάϑους εὐϑὺς ἀπαλλάττεσθαι, εἰ χαραδριὸς αὐτοῖς ἀντιβλέψειεν. ὁ τοίνυν βάσκανος χαραδριὸς μύεν τῶν ὀμμάτων τὰς κόρας, ὥσπερ πρὸς ὑγιείας μετάδοσιν ἐπίφϑονον ἔχων τὸ φρόνημα. However, according to Aelian. N.A. XVII 13 the bird willingly meets the look of the patient: χαραδριοῦ δὲ ἦν ἄρα δῶρον τοῦτο... £l γοῦν ὑπαναπλησϑ-

εἰς τὰ σῶμα ἱκτέρου τις εἶτά οἱ δριμὺ ἐνορῴη, ὁ δὲ ἀντιβλέπει καὶ μάλα γε ἀτρέπτως, ὥσπερ οὖν ἀντιφιλοτιμούμενος,

καὶ ἡ τοιάδε

ἀντίβλεψις ἰᾶται τὸ προειρημένον πάϑος τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ.

Numerous

medical cures of jaundice are recommended by Gal. XVI 112 K. τὸν καλούμενον tutegov κατὰ πάντας τρόπους ϑεραπεύομεν, διὰ τῆς φαρμακίας, δι᾽ ἐμέτων, διὰ οὔρων, δι᾽ ὑπερώας, διὰ ῥινῶν καὶ ἑνὶ

λόγῳ διὰ τῶν ἄνω καὶ κάτω, which reveals the fact that there was no effective cure for this disease. 681 Ὁ μάλιστα xoi τάχιστα τὰς ὀφθαλμίας ἀναλαμβάνουσιν οἱ συνόντες: The term ὀφθαλμία was used for any contagious eye disease, above all, however, for trachoma; see above, on 633 CD. A contagious eye disease is first mentioned by Plat. Phaedr. 255 D. 681 D ὁ Πατροκλέας: Π. ὁ γαμβρός also appears in Talks Π 9 and

VII 2, and further in De sera and in the lost Περὶ ψυχῆς, see frg. 177 Sandb. Concerning the meaning of γαμβρός, see on 613 A 6 Κράτων.

206

TABLE TALKS V 7

681 D

681 D τὰ δὲ τῆς ψυχῆς, ὧν ἐστι καὶ τὸ βασκαίνειν, τίνα τρόπον καὶ

πῶς διὰ τῆς ὄψεως τὴν βλάβην εἰς τοὺς ὁρωμένους διαδίδωσιν; Patrocleas appears to be rather disappointed at Plutarch’s dwelling on the physiological processes. His definition of the casting of spells as a psychic function and his question are clear-cut and unambiguous. However, Plut. does not present an explanation that is acceptable to the listeners but continues to speak of psychosomatic effects on the body, with the only difference that he here passes over from speaking of the victims on to considering those who have the evil eye. 681 D ἐπίνοιαι γὰρ ἀφροδισίων ἐγείρουσιν αἰδοῖα: For this image, cf. 654 DE ὄψις γὰρ ... τὴν ψυχὴν ἐγείρουσα. — Herw. would read taéota,

but D.

Weiss,

De

locis nonnullis

Plutarchi

Moralium

ab

Herwerdeno tractatis (Biponti 1888) 7 points out that Plut. occasionally omits the art., cf. De ad. et am. 61 E αἰδοῖα παρακινεῖ καὶ κοιλίαν ἐγείρει, De prof. in virt. 83 C αἰδοῖά τε σωφρόνως ἔχειν, De Is. et Os.

373 C αἰδοῖα κατέχειν,

De

virt. mor.

442 E αἰδοίων φυγαὶ xai

ἀναχωρήσεις, and below, 705 D περὶ γαστέρα καὶ αἰδοῖα, Cf. also

613 B ἀνάστατον γενέσϑαν συμπόσιον, 613 C ἐν λόγοις πλεονάζοντα καιρόν.

681 E ὧν οὐδενὸς ὁ φϑύνος ἧττον x1À.: Envy was thought to be the most important and strongest source of the spell of the evil eye, cf. Ps.Alex. Aphr. Probl. II 53 (p. 67 Ideler) τινὲς ἔκ πολλῆς κακίας ψυχῆς (sc. βασκαίνουσι), φύσιν ἔχοντες ἐπὶ τοῖς καλοῖς δάκνεσϑαι, τῷ ἀμέτρῳ φϑόνῳ τῆς κακίας αὐτοῖς διεγειρομένης. Plut. De virt. mul. 254 E tells of a certain Polycrite, who was praised and honoured by the citizens to the extent that she οὐκ ἤνεγκε τὸ μέγεϑος τῆς χαρᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπέϑανεν αὐτοῦ πεσοῦσα παρὰ τὴν πύλην ὅπου τέϑαπται, καὶ καλεῖται βασκάνου τάφος, ὡς βασκάνῳ τινὶ τύχῃ τὴν Πολυκρίτην φϑονηϑεῖσαν ἀπολαῦσαι τῶν τιμῶν. In this instance βάσκανος is synonymous with φϑονητικός, cf. Non posse 1090C ὑπὸ δὲ βασκανίας καὶ φϑόνου, De aud. 39 D φϑόνος

... μετὰ βασκανίας

καὶ δυσμενείας, and below, 682 D; cf. also Damig. Lap. 34 (galactites lapis) etiam adversus invidiam et fascinum resistit. 681 E of ζωγράφοι ... τὸ τοῦ φϑόνου πρόσωπον ὑπογράφοντες: No paintings of this kind are extant. They may perhaps be compared with a kind of caricatured terracotta figurines dated 4th and 3rd c. B.C. which are preserved in the Louvre, Paris, Staatliche Museen, Berlin,

681 E

TABLE TALKS V 7

207

and Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen, et al. See H. Haarlev, Theophrast,

Mennesketyper eller Karaktéres (Kgbenhavn 1963). 681 E τὰς ὄψεις, αἱ δ᾽ ἔγγιστα τεταγμέναι τῆς ψυχῆς: The question of

where in the body the soul is situated was a controversial issue. The localization in the brain is evidenced for Hippon, A 3 (1 385 DK) τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν ποτὲ μὲν ἐγκέφαλον λέγει, ποτὲ δὲ ὕδωρ, A 15 Hippo vero caput, in quo est animi principale; and Alemeon A 8 ᾿Αλχμαίων ἐν τῷ

ἐγκεφαλαίῳ εἶναι τὸ ἡγεμονικόν, A 13, and further Hippocrates and Democritus, cf. Democr. A 105. A survey of the opinions on the location of the soul is made

by Gal.

XIX

315 K.

Δημόκριτος

καὶ

Πλάτων τὸ ἡγεμονικὸν ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ κεφαλῇ καϑίζουσι, Στράτων ἐν τῷ μεσοφρύῳ, ᾿Ερασίστρατος περὶ τὴν μένιγγα τοῦ ἐγκεφάλου ἣν ἐπικρανίδα λέγει, Ἡρόφιλος ἐν τοῖς τοῦ ἐγκεφάλου κοιλίαις, Παρμενίδης καὶ ᾿Επίκουρος ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ ϑώραμι, οἱ Στωικοὶ πάντες ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ ἢ ἐν τῷ περὶ τὴν καρδίαν πνεύματι, Διογένης ἐν τῇ ἀρτηριακῇ κοιλίᾳ τῆς καρδίας, ἥτις ἐστὶ πνευματική, ᾿Εμπεδοχκλῆς ἐν τῇ τοῦ αἵματος συστάσει ... Πυϑαγόρας τὸ μὲν ζωτικὸν περὶ τὴν καρδίαν, τὸ δὲ λογικὸν καὶ νοερὸν περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν. Arist. did not

locate the soul in any particular part of the body, but he considered the heart to be the seat of the general faculty of sense, the sensus communis, 681 E πεφαρμαγμένα βέλη: The earliest mention in Greek literature of poisoned arrows (and also moral hesitation concerning their use) is found at Od. 1 260-264. Later it was regarded as inhuman, cf. Eustath. In Od. 1416.7 δέδιε γὰρ ἴσως, μὴ κατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων οὐ δικαίως τῷ

φαρμάκῳ χρήσηται. The Scythians in particular were known for smearing their arrows with poison, which they obtained from snakes, cf. Ps.-Arist. De mir. ausc. 845 a 1; Aelian. N.A. IX 15; Plin. XI 279;

Philo Mech. V 90 (53) 17. -- Plut. uses the comparison with shooting above, 647 E αἱ ὀσμαὶ τοξεύουσιν

... eic τὸν ἐγκέφαλον,

De cur.

521 B fj... παράβλεψις αὕτη xoi παρατόξευσις (‘furtive glance"). Arat. 15.5 ταῖς... τοξευομέναις ... φιλίαις. 681 F καὶ γὰρ

τὰ δήγματα

τῶν

κυνῶν

χαλεπώτερα

γίνεται

μετ᾽

ὀργῆς δακνόντων: Rabid dogs are meant. For a description of the effects of the bites of such dogs, see Gal. XVI 621 K., and for cures,

id. 1 88, XIV 280, 516f.

208

TABLE TALKS V 7

681 F

681 F τὰ σπέρματα τῶν ἀνθρώπων μᾶλλον ἅπτεσϑαί φασιν ὅταν ἐρῶντες πλησιάζξωσι: For a similar thought, expressed in more general terms, cf. Coni. praec.

142 F.

681 F τὸ τῶν λεγομένων προβασκανίων γένος xth.: To make the amulets attract the gaze effectively, they were usually designed to be mirth-provoking or horrifying. Most in use among amulets were repre-

sentations of the phallus. These were especially common as apotropaica for children, cf. Varro, De ling, Lat. VII 97. This type of amulet was regarded as an image of the spirit of the phallus: Plin. XXVIII 39

religione tutatur et Fascinus, imperatorum quoque, non solum infantium custos. Hor. Epod. 8.18 uses fascinum metaphorically for membrum virile: minus languet fascinum, cf. Porphyrio’s comm.: aeque pro virili parte posuit, quoniam praefascinandis rebus haec membri deformitas adponi solet. Also combinations of the phallus with various other elements were common, esp. winged phalluses, see Jahn, 73-81. Another large group of amulets was formed by representations of animals: dogs, elephants, lions, turtles, frogs, snakes, scorpions, lizards,

cocks, etc., see Jahn, 96-100. Also a common type was the gorgoneion, i.e. representations of the Gorgo, originally in realistic, horrifying form; later this was changed into representations of an extraordinarily beautiful girl. It was especially the fascinating eyes of the gorgoneion that were to attract the attention of the evil eye. There were also comic amulets, see Jahn, 66-69. See further W. Deonna, Le

symbolisme de l’«il (Paris 1965) 179-196; S. Seligmann, Der böse Blick I (Berlin 1910) 270-346. 682 A αὗταί cou... συμβολαὶ τῆς εὐωχίας ἀπηριϑμήσϑωσαν: It was regarded as a duty of each guest at a party of educated people to contribute to the discussion. The speaker often referred to this custom in his concluding sentence, as at 646 E, 664 D, 668 D, 694 B, cf. also

719 EF. By his exclamation here Plut. intimates that he would like to resign the problem to the others, but this of course he only feigns. 682 A ὁ Σώκλαρος: On this friend of Plutarch’s, see above, on 640 B.

682 A δοκιμάσωμεν... κίβδηλον: Soclarus also uses a business image at Amat. 764 A as if he were speaking of paying a debt: οὐ δικαίως

χρεωκοπῶν ... τὸν λόγον. Plato uses business terms about the exchange of arguments at Rep. 507A εὐλαβεῖσϑε μέντοι μή πη

682 A

TABLE TALKS V 7

209

ἐξαπατήσω ὑμᾶς ἄκων, κίβδηλον ἀποδιδοὺς τὸν λόγον τοῦ τόχου,

ibid. 612 C-E, Pol. 267 A. 682A καὶ πατέρας ἔχειν ὀφϑαλμὸν βάσκανον ὑπολαμβάνουσιν, ὥστε μὴ δεικνύναι τὰς γυναῖκας αὐτοῖς τὰ παιδία; The idea that

children are particularly susceptible to the evil eye above, 680 D. The belief in the evil eye of fathers many countries, see S. Seligmann, Der bóse Blick 104f., and id. Die Zauberkraft des Auges (Hamburg

was mentioned is evidenced for I (Berlin 1910) 1922) 141—143.

682 A πῶς οὖν ἔτι δόξει φϑόνον τὸ πάϑος εἶναι; There is further evidence in support of the opinion of Soclarus: also the eyes of dead animals were thought to possess evil power, cf. Pherecr. frg. 174 Kock 6 λαγώς pe βασκαίνει τεϑνηκώς, cited by Zonaras, Lex. 379 Tittm. βασκαίνειν οὐχὶ τὸ φϑονεῖν δηλοῖ, ἀλλὰ τὸ λυπεῖν καὶ αἰτιᾶσϑαι καὶ δυσχεραίνειν, cf. also Herodian. frg. in: Phryn. Ecl. p. 462 Lobeck σημαίνει δὲ τὸ διαβάλλειν καὶ ἐξαπατᾶν, οὐ τὸ φϑονεῖν; Hesych. Buoxafver λυπεῖ, φϑονεῖ, μέμφεται. 682 B καλαὶ μέν ποτ᾽ ἔσαν xth.; Valchenaer attributed these lines to

Euphorion (frg. 185 Scheidweiler, frg. 175 Powell, Coil. Alex.). Plut. quotes Euphorion above, 677 A, see ad loc. 682 B ὁ γὰρ Εὐτελίδας ... καλὸς ἑαυτῷ φανεὶς καὶ παϑών τι πρὸς

τὴν ὄψιν: This passage is cited by Mich. Glycas, Annal. 158 A p. 110.11 Niebuhr (together with some more parts of this talk); otherwise E. is not mentioned. His story is similar to, and perhaps inspired by the story of Narcissus, cf. Ovid.

Met.

III 407ff. Self-contemplation and

complacency were said to have caused the death of these youths. However, this explanation is probably a literary romanticization, cf. also Theocr. VI 35-40 (Damoitas speaking) ἦ γὰρ πρᾶν ἐς πόντον

ἐσέβλεπον, ἧς δὲ γαλάνα, | καὶ καλὰ μὲν τὰ γένεια ... κατεφαίνετο ... | ὡς μὴ βασκανϑῶ δέ, τρὶς εἰς ἐμὸν ἔπτυσα κόλπον. The original explanation was probably that which Plut. argues in the following, see 682 E τοῦτο δὲ γίνεται... αὐτοὺς κακοῦσθϑαι. If a person who has the evil eye ~ acquired through inveterate jealousy, according to Plut. — looks upon his reflected image, he unintentionally injures himself. Furthermore, even the reflection itself was believed to be noxious; also animals were thought to suffer from it, cf. Colum.

VI 35, and the

power could even affect other people, cf. Artemid. Onir. II 7 τὸ ἐν

210

TABLE TALKS V 7

682 B

ὕδατι κατοπτρίζεσϑαι ϑάνατον προαγορεύει αὐτῷ τῷ ἰδόντι ἤ τινι τῶν οἰκειοτάτων αὐτῷ. See 5. Seligmann, Der bése Blick I (Berlin 1910) 178-183, and id. Die Zauberkraft des Auges (Hamburg 1922) 281-288. 682 B εὑρησιλογίας: The ability to find arguments and to improvise ἃ contribution to the discussion were highly appreciated, cf. 656A σφόδρ᾽ οὖν ἀπεδεξάμεϑα τὴν εὑρησιλογίαν τῶν νεανίσκων. -- It is noticeable that Plut. represents himself in this talk as being challenged repeatedly (by Patrocleas 681 D; Soclarus 682 A and here; Gaius 682 F) to explain the phenomenon more thoroughly. 682 B ἄλλως μέν, ἔφην, καὶ μάλ᾽ ἱκανῶς, πίνων δ᾽ ὡς ὁρᾷς ἐκ τῆς τηλιχαύτης χύλικος οὐκ ἀτόλμως" λέγω δ᾽ ὅτι κτλ.: Amyot, Xyl., Vulc. corrected ἔφη T. I think that λέγω δ᾽ ὅτι Wytt.: λέγω διότι T should be admitted. Using the computer I found no example of this use of διότι in Plut. Wytt. also substituted οὐ μάλ᾽ for καὶ μάλ᾽, which has been generally accepted. I think that this change is unnecessary. There is a jesting tone in Plutarch’s contributions in this talk, see on 682 A αὗται dou... συμβολαΐ, and 683 A ϑαυμάζω πῶς ἔλαϑον ὑμᾶς. Plut. does not take an unpretentious attitude here. Instead, he jestingly boasts that he will quite readily meet Soclarus' challenge. I take οὐκ ἀτόλμως as being an ironic understatement which Plut. directs against himself. The two adverbs, ἱκανῶς and ἀτόλμως, both correspond to

πῶς in Soclarus’ question. They both are part of the long reply phrase and should not be separated through a stop after ἱκανῶς: ‘Otherwise’, I replied, ‘quite readily and (now) since I am drinking out of this big cup, as you see, not without boldness / self-confidence’. Plut. has καὶ μάλα above, 681 D, and at De frat. am. 488 A. 682 C κινούμεναι: Allusion to the Atomist theory, see below, 682 D.

682 C πάϑη: below, spells,

πολλάκις καὶ ἄκοντας ἐπὶ τὰ οἰκεῖα καὶ συνήϑη καταφέρουσι Plut. intimates here that autosuggestion may be involuntary; 682 D he states that this is also the case with the casting of and at 683 A he finally asserts that this fact was the main point

of his argument.

682 ( τῶν ἁγιωτάτων ... σωμάτων: Presumably temple servants are meant; perhaps Plut. thinks of the Roman vestals.

682 D

TABLE TALKS V7

211

682 D φϑονητικὴν καὶ βασκαντικήν: Virtually synonymous terms, see above, on 681 E.

682 D κατὰ τὴν τοῦ πάϑους ἰδιότητα κινοῦνται" κινούμενοι δ᾽ οὕτως: Plut. here repeatedly stresses the κίνησις as being essential to the psychological processes, which shows that the Atomist theory underlies his reasoning, cf. above, on 681 A πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον, and below, 682 F and 683 A.

682 D ἡ σφαῖρα κινεῖσϑαι σφαιρικῶς καὶ χυλινδρικῶς ὁ κύλινδρος: Chiastic word-order, cf. above, 676 B καϑάπερ Εὐβοεῖς. -- At De def.

or. 404 EF Plut. also makes use of a comparison with rotating bodies to describe the automatic psychic processes.

character

of unconscious

and instinctive

682 D χαταβλέπειν: So Wytt.: καταβλάπί ]ew T (the last a is halved, and another letter is entirely erased), καταβλάπτειν E. The verb occurs above, 680 D ἀνθρώπους τῷ καταβλέπειν τὰ παιδία μάλιστα βλάπτοντας.

682 E σφαλερὸν γὰρ ἡ ἐπ᾽ ἄκρον εὐεξία κατὰ τὸν ᾿Ιπποκράτην: Plut. refers to Hipp. Aph. 13 (IV 458 L.) ἐν τοῖσι γυμναστικοῖσιν αἱ ἐπ᾽ ἄκρον εὐεξίαι σφαλεραί, ἣν ἐν τῷ ἐσχάτῳ Ewow οὐ γὰρ δύνανται μένειν ἐν τῷ αὐτέῳ, οὐδὲ ἀτρεμεῖν" ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐκ ἀτρεμέουσιν οὐκέτι δύνανται ἐπὶ τὸ βέλτιον ἐπιδιδόναι" λείπεται οὖν ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον κτλ. This concerns the exceptional case of the athletes who eat too much

and grow too fat and so at last run the risk of loosing their health all of a sudden, cf. the comm. by Gal. XVII B 363 K. τῆς δὲ τῶν ἀϑλητῶν εὐεξίας οὐ μικρὸν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἔγκλημα τὸ παραβάλλεσθϑαι πειρᾶσϑαι μέγεϑος ὄγκου κατὰ τὸ σῶμα καὶ δηλονότι καὶ πλῆϑος χυμῶν. παρασκευαὶ γὰρ αὗται τῆς τοῦ παντός εἰσι σώματος ϑρέψεως

οὐχ οἷά τε χωρὶς

αὐτῶν

ἑτοίμως

παρεσκευασμένων

εἰς

καὶ

ὄγκον

ἀρϑῆναι τοῦ δέοντος μείζονα τὰ σώματα, διὸ καὶ σφαλερὰν ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι τὴν τοιαύτην διάϑεσιν. This special case of artificial-

ly obtained εὐεξία was then generalized, cf. Cels. Π 2.1 ante adversam autem valetudinem ... quaedam

notae oriuntur ...: ergo si plenior

aliquis et speciosior et coloratior factus est, suspecta habere bona sua debet; quae quia neque in eodem habitu subsistere neque ultra progredi possunt, fere retro quasi ruina quadam revolvuntur. Plutarch's teference to Hipp. is formalized and apophthegmatic, as is seen at Non

212

TABLE TALKS V 7

682 E

posse 1090 C where it recurs verbatim, followed by the explication: ὑπὸ δὲ βασκανίας καὶ φϑόνου βλάπτεσϑαι προορωμένους οἴονταν τοὺς καλούς, ὅτι τάχιστα τὸ ἀχμάζον ἴσχει μεταβολὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ σώματος δι᾽ ἀσϑένειαν. 682 E καὶ τὰ σώματα

προελϑόντα

μέχρι τῆς ἄκρας ἀκμῆς οὐχ

ἔστηχεν, ἀλλά ῥέπει καὶ ταλαντεύεται πρὸς τοὐναντίον: This idea is part of the general conception of the changeability of Nature, which was expressed most poignantly by Heraclitus. Plut. also uses the comparison with the balance to illustrate this idea at De prof. in virt.

16 DE ἐν δὲ τῷ φιλοσοφεῖν οὐκ ἔστι ληγούσης διάλειμμα προκοπῆς οὐδὲ στηριγμός, ἀλλ᾽ ἀεί τινας ἔχουσα κινήσεις ἡ φύσις ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ζυγοῦ ῥέπειν ἐθέλει καὶ κατατείνεσϑαι ταῖς βελτίοσιν, ἢ ταῖς ἐναντίaus πρὸς τὸ χεῖρον οἴχεταν φερομένη. 682 E ἑαυτοὺς (δοκοῦσι) καταβασκαίνειν: Addition Wytt. after Xylander's interpretation, preferable to (λέγονται) Vulc., cf. 682 D. The addition is necessary, not only for syntactic reasons but also because Plut. obviously argues that the case of Eutelidas and other similar ones

are not due to self-bewitchment but to natural decline from the optimum of health. 682 E [τοῦτο δὲ γίνεται μᾶλλον ἀπὸ τῶν πρὸς ὕδασιν ἤ τισιν ἄλλοις

ἐσόπτροις ὑφισταμένων

ῥευμάτων᾽ ἀναπνεῖ γὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς τοὺς

ὁρῶντας, ὥσϑ᾽ οἷς ἑτέρους ἔβλαπτον, αὐτοὺς κακοῦσϑαι]: ‘This (i.e.

self-bewitchment) is rather caused by the effluences (from the eyes), which are brought to a halt at the surfaces of water or other mirrors...’ Graf suspected this passage and transposed it to 683 A, after μεγαλοπρεπῶς, but it does not fit in there any better, as pointed out by

Hartm. Fuhrm. deletes the sentence as being an interpolation possibly deriving from Plutarch’s ὑπομνήματα. This is plausible; the following sentence attaches itself well to ἑαυτοὺς (δοκοῦσι) καταβασχκαίνειν. It refers naturally back to 682 D καταβλέπειν εἰκός ἐστιν αὐτοὺς τὰ οἰκεῖα καὶ ποϑούμενα μᾶλλον, and 682 A τὰ παιδία μηδὲ πολὺν ἐᾶν χρόνον ὑπὸ τῶν τοιούτων καταβλέπεσθϑαι. 682 Ε τοῦτο δ᾽ ἴσως καὶ περὶ τὰ παιδία γινόμενον κτλ.: Extrapolating out from the case οὗ Eutelidas, which he does not regard as due to bewitchment, Plut. here succeeds in launching a tentative (ἴσως) ex-

682 F

TABLE TALKS V 7

213

planation independent of the notion of the evil eye. Perhaps this was an idea of his own.

682 F Γάιος ὁ Φλώρου γαμβρός: G. is mentioned only here. Another γαμβρός of Florus, Caesernius, appears in VII 4 (702 E) and 6 (707 C). 682 F ὥσπερ Αἰγιέων ἢ Μεγαρέων, ἀριϑμὸς οὐδεὶς οὐδὲ λόγος: This proverbial expression, also cited below, 730 D, alludes to the last two

lines of a response of the Delphic oracle to an enquiry by the people of Aegium or, alternatively, Megara, concerning their rank among the Greek cities as to valour. The oracle is cited by Ion Hist. frg. 17 (FHG

II 51); Mnaseas, frg. 50 (FHG III 157); Phot. and Suda Y 108 ὑμεῖς, ὦ Μεγαρεῖς, οὔτε τρίτοι οὔτε τέταρτοι. χρησμοῦ κομμάτιόν ἐστι παροιμιαζόμενον οὕτως. ... ὑμεῖς δ᾽, Αἰγιέες, οὔτε τρίτον οὔτε τέταρτοι οὔτε δυωδέκατοι, οὔτ᾽ ἐν λόγῳ οὔτ᾽ ἐν ἀριϑμῷ. ... τινὲς δὲ οἴονταν Μεγαρεῦσιν εἰρῆσϑαι αὐτόν. The saying was frequently cited or alluded to, cf. Callim. Epigr. 27; Anth. Pal. V 6.6; Schol. Theocr. XIV

48/492; Eustath. 292,7; Steph. Byz. s.v. Αἴγιον; Zenob. I 48; Diogenian. I 47; Apostol.

I 59; Liban.

Or. XXXI

27. See H.W.

Parke &

D.E.W. Wormell, The Delphic Oracle II (Oxford 1956) 1t. 682 F τῶν δὲ Δημοκρίτου ... εἰδώλων ... & φησιν ἐκεῖνος ἐξιέναι τοὺς φϑονοῦντας, οὔτ᾽ αἰσθήσεως ἄμοιρα παντάπασιν οὔϑ' ὁρμῆς x1.: A 77 DK. Plut. treats the Atomist psychological theory at some

length below, 734 F-735 C, where the subject discussed is dreams. The idea that the εἴδωλα which are emitted from living creatures are not only likenesses of their bodies but also convey features of their mental qualities and activities is stated clearly at 738 AB xai τῶν κατὰ φυχὴν

κινημάτων καὶ βουλευμάτων ἑκάστῳ xoi ἠϑῶν καὶ παϑῶν ἐμφάσεις ἀναλαμβάνοντα (sc. τὰ εἴδωλα) συνεφέλκεσϑαι, καὶ προσπίπτοντα μετὰ τούτων ὥσπερ ἔμψυχα φράζειν καὶ διαγγέλλειν τοῖς ὑποδεχομένοις τὰς τῶν μεϑιέντων αὐτὰ δόξας καὶ διαλογισμοὺς καὶ ὁρμάς. The εἴδωλα are clearly said here to be emitted automatically from a person without his being aware of it. In our passage, however, Gaius vaguely intimates that the emitter’s role is not entirely passive in the process (act. ἐξιέναι) and that there is a feature of will conveyed from him to the εἴδωλα themselves. We have no further evidence to allow us to decide which of these descriptions is correct. Possibly both

214

TABLE TALKS V 7

682 F

variants were maintained within the Atomist school. In his reply Plut. accepts the theory of psychic εἴδωλα but rejects the idea of an element of will in them. Democritus’ theory probably seemed most suitable as it accounted for the phenonenon

of the evil eye as being a psychic

function. The opinion that this power has its root in the soul is widespread, see W. Wundt, Völkerpsychologie 11:2 (Leipzig 1906) 2729, A.B. Cook, Zeus II (Cambridge 1925) 504; NT Marc. 7, 21-23; W. Deonna, Le symbolisme de l'ail (Paris 1965) 155 n. 4. 683 A ἐμπλασσύμενα: 'get in and establish themselves'. Plut. uses this

verb here, together with παραμένοντα and συνοικοῦντα to emphasize that the εἴδωλα actually root themselves for a long time. At 735 B Plut. thinks of the penetration itself in the first place: ἐγκαταβυσσοῦσϑαι τὰ εἴδωλα διὰ τῶν πόρων εἰς và σώματα. Theophr. De sensu 14 uses ἐμπλάττω when speaking of the perception theory of Emped.: φησὶ τὰς ὄψεις ὧν ἀσύμμετρος ἡ κρᾶσις Ste μὲν

ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρός, ὅτε δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀέρος ἐμπλαττομένων τῶν πόρων ἀμαυροῦσϑαι. 683 A ϑαυμάζξω, πῶς ἔλαϑον ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ἄλλο τῶν ῥευμάτων τούτων ἢ τὸ ἔμψυχον ἀφελῶν καὶ προαιρετικόν: Plut. rather ironically makes it clear that he.does not accept the idea that there is an element of life and free will in the atomic films. Cf. also 735 B where these are described as being ὥσπερ ἔμψυχα. 683 A

iva

μή

pe

δόξητε

πόρρω

νυκτῶν

οὖσιν

ὑμῖν

ἐπάγοντα

φάσματα xt: The use of ἵνα in an independent clause, equivalent with an imperative clause, displays emotion. This construction is first

found in Ptolemaic papyri and it is always infrequent, see T. Kalén, Selbständige Finalsätze und imperativische Infinitive im Griechischen (Skrifter utg. av K. Hum. Vet.-Samf. 34:2) Uppsala 1941, pp. 94-96, 109. - The form πόρρω is predominant in Plut. Using the computer I found the ratio 67:42 as against πρόσω. Re. substituted οὖσιν for οὐσῶν T (Herw. deletes the word), and he would also read νυκτός, but cf. De ad. etam. 60 A μέχρυ μέσων νυκτῶν, De gen. Socr. 578 DE

ἐκ νυκτῶν ἀνιστάμενον.

683 B

TABLE TALKS V 8

215

TALK 8

In Book V three topics (4, 8, 10) concern philological and semantic questions. Other talks of this kind are II 5, VI 9, VIII 6, IX 4, 13.

However, Plut. shows a rather critical attitude to philological problems, see above, on 675 A καταβαλὼν δὲ ταῦτα. 683 B παρατεϑείσης παντοδαπῆς ὀπώρας: The fruit was served directly after the δεῖπνον, before the συμπόσιον, see above, on 635 B

τὴν ὀπώραν. 683 Β ἐπῆλϑέ τινι τῶν κατακειμένων ἀναφϑέγξασϑαι: A variant of this formula (εἰσῆλϑε) occurs at 697 F. For other formulae of this sort,

see on 619 B ἐνέπεσε ζήτησις. 683 C συχέαι te γλυκεραὶ «tÀ.: Free rearrangement of Od. VII 115116: ὄγχναι καὶ δοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαιν ἀγλαόκαρποι | συκέαν τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεϑόωσαι. 683 C Τρύφων μὲν ὁ ἰατρός: T. also takes part in III 1, 2, IX 14, see on 646 F. 683 C μικρὸν ὃν κομιδῇ καὶ τὴν ὄψιν εὐτελὲς καλὸν καὶ μέγαν ἐχφέρει τὸν καρπόν: Large fruits and fruit-trees were considered beautiful, cf. below, 724 E (of the palm tree) κάλλιστος γὰρ ὧν καὶ μέγιστος ὑπ’ εὐταξίας οὐ γόνιμός ἐστι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν. During the Helle-

nistic period the grafting technique and horticulture in general developed considerably in the Mediterranean countries. As regards the apple tree, its lowly growth in the arid Greek soil did not prevent the production of large and delicious fruit. The discussion above, in II 6, gives an idea of the extensive and sophisticated experiments which were carried out in grafting. On this subject, see Theophr. C.P. 1 6, II 17.6, V 5.4; Cato, 41-42; Plin. XVII 115-121, 198; Colum. IV 29.4, V 11, ΧΙ 2.26; Pallad. Agr. W117, IV 1, id. De insit.; Geop. III 3.1, 12.1,

IV 12, 13, X 75-77. 683 C Eqy τὸ καλὸν ... ὁρᾶν ὑπάρχον᾽ καὶ yao τὴν ψαῦσιν ἔχει καϑάριον ... διὸ καὶ πάσας ... ἐπαινεῖσϑαι; For the transition from infinitive to finite construction,

656 A, 683 D, 690 D.

and the reverse,

cf. 638 C, 641 C,

216

TABLE TALKS V 8

683 C

683 C πάσας ὁμοῦ τι τὰς αἰσϑήσεις: Somewhat exaggerated; audition is not involved. 683 Ὦ οὕνεκεν ὀψίγονοί te σίδαι καὶ ὑπέρφλοια μῆλα: Frg. B 80, quoted only here, Ὑπέρφλοιος is hapax. 683D τοῦ φϑινοπώρου λήγοντος ἤδη καὶ τῶν καυμάτων μαραινομένων ἐκπέττονσι τὸν καρπόν: Fuhrm. (p. 179 n. 4) takes τῶν καυμάτων μαραννομένων to mean ‘avec la premiere diminution

des chaleurs' and thus thinks that this phrase

conflicts with τοῦ

φϑινοπώρου λήγοντος, without good reason. There is nothing in the phrase to show that the first moment of reduction is meant; τοῦ φϑινοπώρου λήγοντος indicates rather that it refers to the last, cf. Thuc. V 81.2 καὶ πρὸς ἔαρ ἤδη ταῦτα ἦν τοῦ χειμῶνος λήγοντος; Dem. XXIV 98 περὶ λήγοντα τὸν ἐνιαυτόν. By the two gen. abs.

phrases Plut. clearly wishes to describe how pomegranates take a long time to ripen. They ripen gradually while the weather grows cooler. In

Greece this fruit begins to ripen in the second half of September in lowland areas, and one or two months later in the highlands. As the

pomegranate ripens slowly, the fruit must be left on the tree until December to become fully ripe. Plut. describes this protracted process quite aptly. 683 D μόνον τοῦτό φησιν Θεοῴφραστος τὸ δένδρον ἐν τῇ σκιᾷ βέλτιον ἐχπέττειν τὸν καρπὸν

καὶ τάχιον: The

reference is not to any of

Theophrastus’ extant works. Wimmer did not include this passage in his collection of fragments. Theophr. mentions the pomegranate fruit at H.P. 1 10.10, 11.4-6, 12.1, C.P. 1 13.10. Varro, De re rust. 159.3 recommends picking the immature fruit and storing it in a jar covered with earth; when ripening there the fruit grows bigger than if it is left on the tree, 683 D τὰ δὲ μῆλα, καϑ' ἥντινα διάνοιαν ὁ σοφὺς ὑπέρφλοια προσειρήχοι, διαπορεῖν: For the alternation of infinitive and finite construction (νοεῖν -- ἐᾷ ~ διαπορεῖν), see above, on 683 C. Re. unnecessarily

proposed προσείρηκε, (dei) διαπορεῖν. Hartm. would read (δεῖν) à. 683 E τοῦ ἀνδρὸς οὐ καλλιγραφίας ἕνεκα τοῖς εὐπροσωποτάτοις τῶν ἐπιϑέτων,

ὥσπερ

ἀνϑηροῖς

χρώμασι,

τὰ

πράγματα

γανοῦν

683Ε

TABLE TALKS V 8

217

εἰωϑότος, κτλ.: This is an interesting observation of style, which is presumably Plutarch’s own. Guthrie IT 136 calls him ‘a perceptive critic’ of Emped. There are comparatively few ornamental (Homeric) epithets in Emped. However, some are found in the most poetic parts of his writings, e.g., frgs. B 3.3 λευκώλενε παρϑένε Μοῦσα, B 8.2 οὐλομένου ϑανάτοιο, B 17.19 Νεῖκος Y οὐλόμενον, B 40 Ἥλιος ὀξυβελὴς ἠδ᾽ ἱλάειρα Σελήνη, Β 96.1 ἐν εὐστέρνοις χοάνοισι, B 127.2 ἐνὶ δένδρεσιν ἠυκόμοισιν. Empedocles’ style is very expressive and rich in metaphors; Plut. is right in noticing that he uses his epithets functionally for description.

Plut. clearly took

a positive interest —

philosophical, literary, and religious - in Emped., as the many quotations show. Plut. wrote an extensive work on this thinker, to judge

from Lamprias’ catalogue no. 43: Εἰς 'EureóoxAéa βιβλία v. The work is cited by Hippol. Refut. V 20.6. See Hershbell, AJP 92 (1971) 156-184, and W. Burkert in: Kephalaion. Studies in Greek Philosophy ... CJ. de Vogel (Assen 1975) 140f. 683 E ἀμφιβρότην ... νεφεληγερέτην ... πολυαίματον: Frgs. B 148-

150, good exx. of Empedocles' expressive, descriptive epithets; however, only the last one is really matter-of-fact. 683 E τὸ γὰρ ἄγαν ἀχμάζειν καὶ τεϑηλέναι φλύειν ὑπὸ τῶν ποιητῶν λέγεσϑαι: A different interpretation οἵ φλύειν is found at Aelian. V.H. III 41 τό πολυκαρπεῖν of ἀρχαῖοι ὠνόμαζον φλύειν, ἐντεῦϑεν τὸν Διόνυσον

Φλεῶνα

ἐκάλουν.

The verb means

‘well forth’, ‘over-

flow’. The etymology of this word, and the large group of related words (φλέω, φλοιός, φλοῦς, etc.), is certain, see Frisk, s.vv. ῳφλέω, φλοιός; Chantraine, s.v. φλύω; Strómberg, Theophrastea, 117-121; P. Persson, Beitráge zur indogermanischen

Wortforschung

11 (Uppsala

1912) 801. 683 E καὶ τὸν ᾿Αντίμαχον οὕτω πως φλείουσαν ὀπώραις εἰρηκέναι τὴν τῶν Καδμείων πόλιν: Fuhrm. rejects φλείουσαν Hu.: φλιουσαν

(sic) T, and prints the old emendation qAoí(ovoav Ald., adopted by later eds. and by Kinkel, Epic. Gr. Fr. 1287 frg. 36 (φλύουσαν Valckenaer), in spite of the fact that that form is not found, whereas

φλείουσαν ... ὀπώραν occurs at 735 Ὁ, and cf. below, 683 F Φλείῳ Διονύσῳ. The fragment is from the epos Thebais. The most famous

poem by Antimachus is the elegy Lyde, see PLG II 289-294 Bergk*.

218

TABLE TALKS V 8

683 E

Antimachus of Colophon flourished around the end of the fifth c. His style was characterized by erudition and heavy complication, which

became a model for many Hellenistic poets. 683 F tov Ἄρατον ... τὴν χχωρότητα καὶ td ἄνϑος τῶν καρπῶν φλόον προσαγορεύειν: This ex. is not to the point. Arat. 335 is not about fruit, it is about the plants (φυταλιαΐῦ themselves. 683 F εἶναι δὲ καὶ τῶν ᾿Ελλήνων τινὰς of Φλείῳ Διονύσῳ ϑύουσιν: Hu. rightly rejected Φλοίῳ Ald. and later eds., but Fuhrm. brought it up again. As a matter of fact this form is not found. Admittedly, Φλεῖος is found only here, but this form is in line with the numerous variants of the epithet, always with e/, never with ov: Agog

(Syll?

1003 Priene), Φλεύς (Jahreshefte Österr. Arch. Inst. 13 (1910) Beibl. p. 34 Erythrae; Herodian. 1 400.27 Lentz), Φλέως (The Coll. of Ancient Greek Inscr. in the Brit. Mus. ΠῚ 595 Ephesus), Φλεώς or Φλεών (XII deor. epith. V 39, Anecd. Var. 268 Studemund), Φλεών (Aelian. V.H. III 41), Φλιοῦς (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. I 115 ὠνομάζετο ἀπὸ τοῦ φλεῖν τὸν οἶνον, 6 ἐστιν εὐθηνεῖν), Φλίος (Etym. Mag. 539.33). Dionysus had a son (by Ariadne) named Φλίας (Paus. II 6.6, 12.6; Apoll. Rhod. 1115; Val. Flacc. I 411; Hygin. Fab. 14). These epithets all designate Dionysus as the god of abundant vegetation, whereas forms with the variant οἱ (o) of this stem regularly denote ‘bark’, ‘husk’, ‘rind’, (Hesych. $Aová* τὴν Κόρην τὴν ϑεὸν οὕτω καλοῦσι Λάκωνες might be an exception but is uncertain and not decisive.) It may be that this sense is also present in ὑπέρφλοια, see below, on 684 A τῶν ἄλλων

καρπῶν. -- Among those Greeks who sacrifice to Dionysus Phleius the Jonians are probably meant in the first place, if we may judge from the numerous instances of variants of the epithet that are found in that region.

684 A τὴν ὑπὲρ φωνὴν οὐ μόνον τὸ ἄγαν καὶ τὸ σφοδρὸν δηλοῦν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ἔξωϑεν καὶ τὸ ἄνωϑεν: It is probably only as it seems that the grandfather regards the abstract metaphoric sense of ὑπέρ as the basic one. He happens to speak of the word in this way because, according to him, it has this sense in ὑπέρφλοια, the word under discussion. He was certainly aware of the fact that this sense is secondary.

684 A

TABLE TALKS V 8

219

684 A ὑπερῷον: The formation of this word is unclear. The derivation from a hypothetical adv. *ózépo (to Pind. ὑπερώτατος), parallel to ἄνω, κάτω, πρόσω etc., is easy but uncertain; it is hesitatingly suggested by Chantraine and Frisk.

684 A κρέ᾽ ὑπέρτερα: Od. III 65, 470, XX 279. 684 A ἔγκατα: Il. XI 176, XVII 64, XVIII 583, Od. IX 293, XII 363; the dative ἔγκασι

occurs

at Il. XI 438.

The

formation

is unclear,

perhaps from *éy-xatoc, formed on £v, parallel to ἔσχατος (*Eyoxatoc; for the suífix, cf. πρό-κα, Chantraine, s.v. ἔσχατος.

Lat. reci-pro-cus.

See Frisk, and

684 A τῶν ἄλλων καρπῶν τὸ ἔξωϑεν ὑπὸ τοῦ φλοιοῦ περιεχομένων ... 6 τοῦ μήλου φλοιὸς ἐντός ἐστι... τὸ δ᾽ ἐδώδιμον, ἔξωϑεν αὐτῷ περικείμενον, εἰκότως ὑπέρφλοιον ὠνόμασται: This explanation, however fanciful it may be, might have appeared plausible to the audience. It is not found elsewhere; perhaps it is due to Plut. himself — or his grandfather. The meaning 'above', which he gives to ὑπέρ, is clearly impossible, but the interpretation of -pAotoc may be correct, namely in so far as it denotes a coat or rind, though not, of course, the pericarp but the outer rind. The meaning may be: ‘with excellent rind’,

or ‘with exceedingly beautiful rind’. TALK 9 684 B μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα κτλ.: This talk is a typical short sequel treating a subject naturally associated with the preceding one. The argument has much in common with that of VI 10. 684 B τῆς

γὰρ

συκῆς

καὶ τὸ

φύλλον

διὰ

τὴν

τραχύτητα

ϑρῖον

ὠνόμασται: This curious ‘etymology’ is also mentioned by Hesych. who even refers to the smell: ϑρῖον" ... συκῆς δὲ φύλλα οὐχ ἁπαλὰ ἐπετίϑετο᾽ ἔχουσι γάρ τινα ὀσμήν᾽ διὸ καὶ Botov ἐκλήϑη. The word lacks a derivation.

It may

be cognate

to ϑρίδαξ,

‘lettuce’, and/or

Hesych. 8owíoc ἄμπελος ἐν Κρήτῃ. The origin is probably pre-Greek (Frisk). 684 B καὶ τὸ ξύλον ὀπῶδές ἐστιν, ὥστε xth.: The passage recurs in a

very similar form below, 696 F τὴν δὲ πλείστην αἰτίαν καὶ δύναμιν ἡ

220

TABLE TALKS V 9

684 B

δριμύτης εἶχεν τὸ γὰρ φυτὸν ἁπάντων ὀπωδέστατον, ὥστε καὶ τὸ σῦκον αὐτὸ καὶ τὸ ξύλον καὶ τὸ ϑρῖον ἀναπεπλῆσθϑαι᾽ διὸ καιόμενόν τε τῷ καπνῷ δάκνει μάλιστα καὶ κατακαυϑέντος fj τέφρα δυπτικωτάτὴν παρέχει κονίαν, and cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 925 a 1 f| δὲ συκῆ ϑερμή ἐστιν; δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ ὀπὸς πάντων

δριμύτατος

ὦν, καὶ ὁ πολὺς

καπνός. ἔχει οὖν τοιαύτην ϑερμότητα καὶ ἰκμάδα οἵαν καὶ fj τέφρα. The subject is treated by Theophr. H.P. V 9.5 δριμύτατος δὲ ὁ xaxvóc συκῆς xai ἐρινεοῦ καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο ὀπῶδες᾽ αἰτία δὲ ἡ ὑγρότης ... δριμεῖα δὲ καὶ ἡ τέφρα καὶ fj κονία ἣ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, cf. id. frg. 3 De igne 72 ἡ δὲ δριμύτης τοῦ καπνοῦ κατὰ τὴν ὑγρότητα τὴν ἑκάστου. διὸ καὶ (6) ἀπὸ τῶν συκίνων δριμύς᾽ ὀπωδέστατον γάρ. The sap of the fig tree was used for making milk coagulate: Theophr. C.P. I 16.7 ὁ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συκῆς (sc. ὀπὸς) τὸ γάλα πήγνυσιν, ὁ δὲ τοῦ ἐρινεοῦ (wild fig) οὐ πήγνυσιν ἢ κακῶς, but cf. Dioscur. I 128.3 ὁ δὲ ὀπὸς τῆς ἀγρίας καὶ τῆς ἡμέρου συκῆς πηκτικός ἐστι γάλακτος; Plin. XXIII 126 caprificus ..., surculo quoque eius lacte coagulatur in caseum. Resistence to insects is mentioned by Theophr. C.P. V 9.4 ἥκιστα δὲ

σκωληκοῦται τὰ δριμέα... ὅτι καὶ ἡ δριμύτης κωλύει ζωογονεῖν ... διὰ τοῦτο οὐδ᾽ ἐρίνεος ὁμοίως τῇ συκῇ᾽ δριμύτερος γὰρ 6 ὀπός. The most important substance in the sap of the fig tree is calcium carbonate which is deposited in peg-like ingrowths, called crystoliths, in the epidermal cells of the leaves. The milky liquid, the latex, contained in the cells of the fig wood consists of soluble nitrogenous compounds as well as ammonium. These substances produce a sticky smoke when the wood is burning, and leave a highly detergent ash, rich in various salts. Cf. the discussion above, 627 B-C, on the detergent action of seawater.

684 C μόνον ἀνανϑές ἐστι τὸ τῆς συκῆς φυτόν: One might expect the interlocutors to remark that this is exaggerated, by reference to Ps.Arist. De plant. 828b 40 οὐκ ἔχουσι δὲ avin φοίνικες, συκαῖ καὶ τὰ τούτοις ἅμοια, and there λεπτότης, τραχύτης and παχύτης are stated as causes, not δριμύτης. Sandbach, Jil. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 229 notes that there is no evidence that Plut. used this work as a source here. The subject was controversal as shown by Theophr. H.P. ΠῚ 3.8 ἀμφισβητεῖται δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἀνθῶν ἐνίων ... ot μὲν γὰρ καὶ δρῦν ἀνϑεῖν οἴονται. καὶ τὴν Ἡρακλεῶτιν καρύαν xai διοσβάλανον, ἔτι δὲ πεύκην καὶ πίτυν οἱ δ᾽ οὐδὲν τούτων. A list of plants of this kind is also enumerated by Plin. XVI 95 nam neque ilex, picea, larix, pinus

ullo flore exhilarantur ... nec fici atque caprifici. It is natural to

684 C

TABLE TALKS V 9

221

assume that the fig tree has no flowers, since these are not readily visible. They are enclosed in a receptacle which swells during the process of riping to produce

the fig (the real fruits are the small

granules usually thought by the non-botanist to be seeds). Not even Linnaeus succeeded in detecting the flowers of the fig-tree and consequently classed it in the 24th class of his system, the Cryptogamia. 684 C οὐ κεραυνοῦται: Hu. printed κεραυνοῦνται (by mistake?) which Hoffl. accepts. Fuhrm. correctly prints the sing.; the subject is τὸ τῆς συκῆς φυτόν. 684 C καὶ

τοῦτ᾽

ἄν

τις

ἀναϑείη

τῇ

πικρότητι

καὶ

καχεξίᾳ

τοῦ

στελέχους: The ‘bad quality’ of the trunk refers to the porosity and softness of the wood, cf. Theophr. H.P. V 3.3 μανὰ δὲ ... τὰ σύκινα ... μαλακὰ δὲ xaU ὅλου μὲν τὰ μανὰ καὶ χαῦνα. The idea that

lightning does not hurt porous objects was met with above, 665 F666 A, but there the fact that moisture attracts lightning is recognized: τῶν

δ᾽

ἀραιῶν

καὶ

πολυπόρων

καὶ

χαλώντων

ὑπὸ

μανότητος

ἀψαυστὶ διεχϑεῖ (sc. ὁ κεραυνὸς) καϑάπερ ἱματίων καὶ ξύλων aov: τὰ δὲ χλωρὰ καίει, τῆς ὑγρότητος ἀντιλαμβανομένης καὶ συνεξαπτομένης. This physical aspect is neglected here, probably because of the subsequent association with the idea of magic antipathy. This was mentioned above, 664 C (ὁ βολβὸς) ἔχων δύναμιν ἀντιπαϑῆ, καϑάπερ ἡ συκῆ καὶ τὸ δέρμα τῆς φώκης ὥς Pact καὶ τὸ τῆς ὑαίνης. Cf. also Joh. Lyd. De mens. IV 4 (p. 68.20 Wuensch) οὐδὲ γὰρ ἱερὰ

νόσος ἢ δαίμων βαρὺς ἐνοχλήσει τῷ τόπῳ, ἐν ᾧ δάφνη ἐστίν, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ κεραυνός, ὅπου συκῆ; Geop. XI 2.7. For a survey of passages,

especially numerous in the Talks, where Plut. treats phenomena ascribed to antipathy or sympathy in nature, see Wellmann, Abh. Ak. Berlin 1928:7. 25f., and T. Weidlich, Die Sympathie

in der antiken

Literatur (Progr. Stuttgart 1894) 53-58. 684 C καϑάπερ οὐδὲ τῆς φώκης τοῦ δέρματος οὐδὲ τῆς ὑαίνης: Above, 664 C, these two cases are also mentioned together with that of the fig tree and are expressly ascribed to natural antipathy. Plin. II

146 mentions the laurel and the eagle as well as the seal’s skin as objects that are resistent to lightning. 684 C ἔφη (dic, ὅσον ἂν ἐνῇ) τῷ φυτῷ γλυκύτητος, ἅπαν τοῦτο συνϑλιβύμενον εἰς τὸν καρπὸν εἰκότως δριμὺ ποιεῖ: I believe that

222

TABLE TALKS V 9

684 C

ποιεῖ may be preserved (ποιεῖν Turn. has been generally accepted) and thus I add @¢ to Bernardakis’ addition. Plut. occasionally uses φημί with an indicative clause, cf. above, on 665 E. Further exx.: below, 746 B ἔφην ὅτι, Reg. apophth. 188 F ἔφη ὡς, De sera 563 B ἔφην ὅτι, Aqu. an ign. 958 D φησὶν ὅτι, Artax. 1.2 φησὶν ὅτι, frg. 47 ἔφη ὅτι. Plut. tolerates hiatus before ὡς, see Bolk. 131. Bern. refers

for his addition to De cap. ex inim. 92 B (about garlic and onion being grown beside roses and violets): ἀποκρίνεται γὰρ εἰς ἐκεῖνα πᾶν ὅσον ἔνεστι τῇ τροφῇ δριμὺ καὶ δυσῶδες, and Psell. De omnif. doctr. 188 (152), who treats this same theme: πᾶν εἴ τι δριμὺ καὶ δύσοδμον ἐν τούτοις Ti. The addition is plausible (haplography ἔφη -- ἐνῇ). Madv. proposed ἔφη, (6 τι ἔνεστιν ἐν) τῷ φυτῷ. Plut. might also have

written ἔφη (óc, ὅσον ἔνεστι) τῷ φυτῷ. 684 CD

ὥσπερ

ἀποκριϑέντος,

γὰρ αὐτὸ

τὸ

ἧπαρ,

εἰς ἕνα

γίνεται γλυκύτατον,

τόπον οὕτω

τὴν

τοῦ

χολώδους

συκῆν

εἰς τὸ

σῦκον ἅπαν τὸ λιπαρὸν ... ἀφιεῖσαν xtÀ.: A rather anomalous comparison between the concentration of bitterness and sweetness respectively, The following comparison with the rue is no better. 684 D ἐκεῖν᾽, ἔφη, ... ὃ λέγουσιν: For ἐκεῖνος referring to what follows, cf. 621 A, 663 F, 672 C.

684 D τοῦ πηγάνου τὸ φυόμενον ὑπ αὐτῇ καὶ παραφυτευόμεγον ἥδιον εἶναι: The practice of growing the rue together with the fig tree is described by Theophr. C.P. V 6.10. As the rue was planted close to the trunk, the method was regarded as a kind of grafting: ὁμοίως δὲ nat εἴ τι ἕτερον ἐν ἑτέρῳ (sc. φυτεύουσιν), καϑάπερ τὸ πήγανον ἐν συκῇ δοκεῖ γὰρ δὴ κάλλιστον γίνεσθαι. φυτεύεται δὲ παρὰ τὸν φλοιὸν παραπηγνύμενον καὶ τῇ γῇ καταχρύπτεται" καὶ συμβαίνει δὲ τὸν ὀπὸν (sc. τῆς συκῆς) ἅμα τῇ τροφῇ διὰ ϑερμότητος καὶ βοήϑειάν τινα ἔχειν ὥσπερ καὶ τὴν τέφραν παραπαττομένην, so also Ps.-Arist. Probl. 924 Ὁ 35 διὰ τί πήγανον κάλλιστον καὶ πλεῖστον γίνεται ἐάν τις ἐκφυτεύσῃ εἰς συκῆν; ἐκφυτεύεται δὲ περὶ τὸν φλοιὸν καὶ περιπλάττεται πηλῷ. ἢ ὅτι ϑερμότητος δέονται al ῥίζαι τοῦ πηγάνου καὶ ἀλέας ... ἡ δὲ συκῆ ϑερμή ἐστιν; δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ ὀπὸς πάντων δριμύτατος dv, and Dioscur. ΠῚ 45.1 τοῦ δὲ κηπευτοῦ (sc. πηγάνου) ἐδωδιμώτερον τὸ παρὰ ταῖς συκαῖς φυόμενον, cf. also Plin. XIX 156 amicitia ei (i.e. rutae) cum fico tanta ut nusquam laetior proveniat quam sub hac arbore; Pallad. Agr. IV 9.14. Psell. De omnif. doctr. 188

684 D

TABLE TALKS V 9

223

(152), recognized by Westerink as deriving from Plut. Quaest. nat. (see LCL XI 143f. and 226-228), states, contrarily to our passage and others, that τὸ πήγανον

δὲ ὑπὸ τῇ συκῇ

φυτευόμενον

δριμύτερον

ἑαυτοῦ γίνεται μετατίϑεται γὰρ εἰς τὸ φυτὸν τὸ ἐν τῇ συκῇ βαρύοσμον. This is the second case of attraction between like things (δριμύ to δρυμύ) in a series of three presented by Psellus in this Question. The first is onions planted beside roses, lilies or violets. The flowers discharge πᾶν εἴ τι δριμὺ καὶ δύσοδμον ἐν τούτοις N) into the

onions. The third case is planting wild fig trees beside cultivated ones; this causes ὅσον ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ γλυκείᾳ συχῇ δριμύ to go over to the wild fig tree. In Plut. the case with the rue is instead an example of the mixing of different qualities (γλυκύ to δριμύ), which ruins the line of the argument. Plut. apparently realized this, and so tried to touch it up by suggesting that the process may be the reverse. As regards Psellus, on the other hand, his three cases form a consistent series but he is

forced to maintain -- contrary to the general opinion -- that the rue becomes more bitter when growing near a fig tree. — Another localization of the rue (and the celery), presumably because of the odour, was in the borders of gardens or garden-plots, cf. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 480, and Suda (Ξ Phot.) O 808 οὐδ᾽ ἐν σελίνοις. For the rue (Ruta graveolens L.), see above, on 647 B. 684 D ἐξαιρεῖ tt τῆς δριμύτητος: Hu., Hoffl. rightly print τι Mez.: τό

T, deleted by Bases, but preserved by Fuhrm. The correction is easy and needed; it would be an exaggeration to assert that all the bitterness was drawn off from the rue. TALK 10

684 E ἐζήτει Φλῶρος, ἑστιωμένων ἡμῶν παρ᾽ αὐτῷ: Hartm. (p. 391) supposes that this party took place in Rome, because the place is not

explicitly stated. 684 E οἱ περὶ ἅλα καὶ κύαμον: at 663 F, where this proverb explanation is given by Zenob. μέν τι προσποιουμένων, οὐκ

Amyot, is used I 25 ἅλα εἰδότων

Vulc. corrected κύμινον T, as playfully of vegetarians. An καὶ κύαμον᾽ ἐπὶ τῶν εἰδέναι δέ᾽ ἐπεὶ of μάντεις εἰώϑασι

τιϑέναι τὸν ἅλα καὶ κύαμον πρὸ τῶν μαντευομένων᾽ ὅϑεν καὶ τοῖς

τῶν ἀπορρήτων κοινωνοῦσι κύαμον ἐτίϑουν, so also Diogenian. I 50; Apostol. II 41. It was already suspected by C.A. Lobeck, Aglaopha-

224

TABLE TALKS V 10

684 E

mus I (Regimonti 1829) 254 n., that this is a secondary interpretation of the proverb. Probably, the meaning which Plut. gives here is the original and correct one. The fact that Florus puts the question shows

that the true meaning of the proverb had been obscured. 684 E ᾿Απολλοφάνης ὁ γραμματικός: only here.

Otherwise unknown,

appears

684 E οἱ γὰρ οὕτω συνήϑεις, ἔφη, τῶν φίλων ὥστε καὶ πρὸς ἅλα δειπνεῖν καὶ κύαμον: Salt and beans symbolize frugal, everyday fare.

The idea is that solid friendship can only be established through experience, particularly by taking meals together continously over a long time, cf. Arist. Eth. Eud. 1238 a 1 οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἄνευ πείρας οὐδὲ μιᾶς ἡμέρας ὁ φίλος, ἀλλὰ χρόνου δεῖ" διὸ εἰς παροιμίαν ἐλήλυϑεν ὁ μέδιμνος τῶν ἁλῶν, id. Eth. Nic. 1156 b 26; Plut. De am. mult. 94 A τὸν ϑρυλούμενον ἐκεῖνον χρόνῳ τῶν ἁλῶν συγκατεδηδοκὼς μέδιμνον, De frat. am. 482 B; Cic. De amic.

19.67 verum illud est,

quod dicitur, multos modios salis simul edendos esse, ut amicitiae munus expletum sit. Lucian. Asin. 1 tells of a tiresome journey that was made easier by the company of the other travellers who shared the frugal viaticum: καὶ ἁλῶν ἐκοινωνοῦμεν, καὶ οὕτως ἐκείνην τὴν ἀργαλέαν

ὁδὸν

ἀνύσαντες

κτλ.

As

agreements

and

treaties were

usually completed during a repast, salt also became a symbol of such formal relations, cf. Dem. XIX 191 τοὺς ἅλας παρέβαινον καὶ τὰς σπονδάς; Lycophr. 134 (of Paris) οὐδὲ τὸν ξένοις | σύνδορπον Aiyatwvog ἁγνίτην πάγον, with Schol. 132 εἶχον γὰρ πάλαι τοὺς ἅλας ἐν ταῖς τραπέζαις σύμβολον ξενοδοχίας; Heliodor. Aeth. IV 16.30 Co-

lonna σπονδῶν καὶ τραπέζης κοινωνήσαντας, καὶ φιλίας ἀρχὴν ἱεροὺς ἅλας ποιησαμένους μὴ οὐχὶ καὶ τὴν περὶ ἀλλήλων γνῶσιν ἔχοντας ἀπελϑεῖν, id. VI 2.13 ἀλλὰ πρὸς ξενίων καὶ φιλίων ϑεῶν,

πρὸς ἁλῶν καὶ τραπέζης; Archil. frg. 95 Diehl? ὅρκον δ᾽ ἐνοσφίσϑης μέγαν | ἅλας τε καὶ τράπεζαν. 684 F τὴν δὲ τῶν ἁλῶν τιμήν: Considering that salt was held in high esteem as being the foremost of all relishes (see above, on 668 E τῶν

μὲν οὖν and 668 EF), its low price, intimated by Apollophanes through πρὸς ἅλα, is rather striking. The phrase is used as a business

term, ‘for (only) the price of salt’, i.e. very cheaply, cf. Men. frg. 828 Kock πρὸς ἅλας ἠγορασμένος; Diogenian. 1100 ἁλώνητον ἀνδράποδον" τὸ εὐτελές, τὸ πρὸς ἅλας ὠνηϑέν; Zenob. ΠΊ2 οἱ

684 F

TABLE TALKS V

10

225

ἔμποροι ἐκόμιζον ἅλας, avi ὧν τοὺς οἰκέτας ἐλάμβανον; Poll. VII 14; Anecd. 1 380.16 Bekk.; Hesych. s.v. ἁλώνητος. Cf. also Babr. 111

μικρέμπορός tig... τοὺς ἅλας ἀκούων παρὰ ϑάλασσαν εὐώνους. We have little reliable information on salt prices. Plut. Dem. 33.6 mentions that during the siege of Athens by Demetrius the price of one medimnus of salt was 40 drachms, while a modius, a sixth of this quantity, of wheat was 300. 684 F πάσσε δ᾽ ἁλὸς ϑείοιο: Il. IX 214, also referred to below, 697 D, and quoted by Psell. De omnif. doctr. 180 (144). Two explanations of

the epithet are given by Schol. ad loc.: ἢ ὅτι τὰ ἁλίπαστα διαμένει, ἢ ὅτι τὰς φιλίας συνάγει, cf. Eustath. 132.46 φιλίας οἱ ἅλες σύμβολον. Eustath. 748.50-63, by reference to this talk, gives a third explanation in addition to these: salt is called divine because it is a gift from Nereus and makes food so delicious that it can even induce mourners to take meals.

684 F Πλάτωνος δὲ (τὸ) τῶν ἁλῶν σῶμα κατὰ νόμον ἀνϑρώπων ϑεαφιλέστατον εἶναι φάσχοντος: Fuhrm. rightly admits the article added by Mez. — Plut. freely cites Tim. 60 E ἁλῶν κατὰ λόγον νόμου ϑεοφιλὲς σῶμα ἐγένετο. Fuhrm. rightly notes that Plutarch’s text supports νόμου (deleted by Burnet). He also considers it evident that

Plato refers to the sacral use of salt, but the fact that Plato explicitly speaks of taste in this passage rather indicates that he was not thinking specifically of the sacral use. The use of salt in sacrifices was restricted; it was not added to the flesh of slaughtered victims, to judge from Athenion ap. Athen. 661 A (III 370. Kock) who, by reference to the ancient times when salt had not yet come into use in cooking, explains why it is not customary to add salt when roasting the entrails of the victims: ὅϑεν ἔτι καὶ νῦν τῶν πρότερον μεμνημένοι | τὰ σπλάγχνα τοῖς

ϑεοῖσιν ὀπτῶσιν φλογὶ | ἅλας οὗ προσάγοντες" οὐ γὰρ ἦσαν οὐδέπω] εἰς τὴν τοιαύτην χρῆσιν ἐξευρημένοι. | ... τῶν γε δρωμένων | τὰ πάτρια διατηροῦντες. Salt was mixed with barley corns (oöAai/ökat) which were then sprinkled on the altar and on the victims for purification before the sacrifice, cf. Straton ap. Athen. 383 A τὰς οὐλοχύτας φέρε δεῦρο. τοῦτο δ᾽ εστὶ τί; [πκρυϑαί. ... ἅλας φέρε: Schol. Aristoph. Equ. 1167 ὀλαὶ ai μεϑ' ἁλῶν μεμιγμέναι κριϑαὶ καί τοῖς ϑύμασιν ἐπιβαλλόμεναι; Schol. Od. ΠῚ 441 ἐμίγνυον γὰρ κρυϑὰς καὶ

ἄλατα χυτῷ ἢ ὕδατι ἢ οἴνῳ, καὶ ἔϑυον αὐτὰ πρὸ τοῦ ἱερείου; Schol. Il. 1 449 χριϑὰς δὲ μετὰ ἁλῶν μεμιγμένας ἐπέχεον; Eustath. 132.44.

226

TABLE TALKS V

10

684 F

See P. Stengel, Hermes 29 (1894) 627-629, id. Opferbrüuche der Griechen (Leipzig-Berlin 1910) 13f., id. Die griechischen Kultusalter-

tümer? (München 1920) 109-111; Fritze, Hermes 32 (1897) 235-250; Ziehen, Hermes 37 (1902) 391-400; W. Burkert, Homo necans (Berlin

1972) 31, Otherwise, the use of salt in the cult is only known in the mysteries of Aphrodite in Cyprus where a phallus together with salt was given to the mysts, cf. Clem. Protr. 14.2 ἐν ταῖς τελεταῖς ταύτης

τῆς πελαγίας ἡδονῆς τεκμήριον τῆς γονῆς ἁλῶν χόνδρος καὶ φαλλὸς τοῖς μυουμένοις τὴν τέχνην τὴν μοιχικὴν ἐπιδίδοται, and see below, on 685 A τοὺς δ᾽ ἅλας. There is more evidence for the use of salt in

the cult in Roman than in Greek religion. On the other hand salt was common as a magic, apotropic or cathartic means, see S. Eitrem, Opferritus und Voropfer der Griechen und Rómer (Kristiania 1915) 313-343. 684 F τὸ tovc Αἰγυπτίους ἱερέας ἁγνεύοντας ἀπέχεσϑαι τὸ πάμπαν ἁλῶν: Plut. gives more detailed information about the demands on

Egyptian priests for abstinence at De Is. et Os. 352 F οἱ δ᾽ ἱερεῖς... μὴ μόνον παραιτεῖσϑαν τῶν ὀσπρίων τὰ πολλὰ καὶ TOV κρεῶν τὰ μήλεια

καὶ ὕεια... ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἅλας τῶν σιτίων ἐν ταῖς ἁγνείαις ἀφαιρεῖν. Only salt from the sea was prohibited, as appears ibid. 363 E τήν

te ϑάλατταν οἱ ἱερεῖς ἀφοσιοῦνται καὶ τὸν ἅλα Τυφῶνος ἀφρὸν καλοῦσι, and below, 729 A. Rock-salt is known to have been used in the cult of Amon, cf. Arrian. An. 111 4.3. There were rich beds of salt

in the region; it was called sal (H)ammoniacus (Plin. XXXI 78-79; Colum. VI 17.7), cf. also Hdt. IV 181—182. In P. Lond. 1 46.395 people offer salt to Hermes: λίβανον ἐπὶ βωμοῦ xoi γῆν ἀπίὸ] σειτοφόρου χωρίου xai βῶλον ἁλὸς ἀμμωνιακοῦ. 684 F ὥστε καὶ τὸν ἄρτον ἄναλον προσφέρεσϑαι: Bread without salt was almost inconceivable, cf. Gal. VI 449 Κ. οὐδὲ τὸ ἄλευρον ...

εὔπεπτόν ἐστιν, ci μὴ κατεργασϑείη δι᾽ ἁλῶν; Verg. Mor. 47 (of kneading the dough): interdum grumos spargit sale. The great consumption of salt among the Sabines gave rise to a proverb: Plin. XXXI 89 salem cum pane esitasse eos proverbio apparet. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 927 a 35 mentions unsalted loaves in contrast to the usual salted bread. See further above, on 668 E τῶν μὲν οὖν.

684 F

TABLE TALKS V 10

227

684 F ἐᾶν ἐχέλευε: Dübn. and Bern. unnecessarily changed into ἐκέλευσε. The imperf. is used when the exhortation is not obeyed, as is

the case here, see Kühner-Gerth? I 144. 685 A ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἔφην κτλ.: Plut. appears as an expert in matters of

religion, and with good reason. He was a priest of Apollo at Delphi, and knew Egyptian religion by study on the spot (De Is. et Os.). 685 A αἱ yao ἁγνεῖαι καὶ παιδοποιίαν καὶ γέλωτα καὶ οἶνον ... ἀφαιροῦσι: It is easily verified that strict observances were imposed

upon priests and others who take part in acts of religion. The religious demand for sexual purity was general not only among the Greeks, see E. Fehrle, Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum (Giessen 1910) 25-37, 155-161, and cf. above, on 655 D. 685 A τοὺς δ᾽ ἅλας τάχα piv os ἐπὶ συνουσίαν ἄγοντας ὑπὸ ϑερμότητος: The belief in the aphrodisiac power of salt is reflected in

the mysteries of Aphrodite in Cyprus (Clem. Protr. 14.2, see above, 684 F). In order to stimulate sexual desire it was recommended

to

anoint the penis with a mixture of salt, a wild boar’s bile, and honey (P. Lond. Y 121.191 (3 c. A.D.)). At Quaest. nat. 912 EF, one answer to the question of why the herdsmen supply their animals with salt is that it makes them γονιμώτερα καὶ προϑυμότερα πρὸς τὰς συνουσίας. Below, 685 D this means is said to be used for dogs. For the opinion that salt is hot by nature, cf. 697 B, and Gal. XI 695 K. γεώδεις ἀμφότεροι (sc. of ὀρυχτοὶ ἅλες καὶ οἱ ἐκ τῆς ϑαλάττης) καὶ ϑερμοὶ ... (oi ὀρυκτοὶ) ἧττον ϑερμοί τ᾽ εἰσιν καὶ λεπτομερεῖς; Cels. 1{27 calfaciunt piper, sal, etc. Sea water was considered warmer than fresh water, see above, on 627 A. For the notion of heat as stimulating sexuality and fertility, see above, on 651 Β ἔτι δ᾽, εἰ ϑερμότερον τὸ γονιμώτερον, and cf. 652 D.

685 A ὄψον ἥδιστον ... κινδυνεύουσι γὰρ οἱ ἅλες τῶν ἄλλων ὄψων

ὄψαν εἶναι καὶ ἥδυσμα: This was also said above, 668 EF καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὄψων οἱ ἄλες [ἥδιον] ὄψον εἰσίν; for the problem of ἥδιον in that passage, see ad loc. 685 A διὸ καὶ χάριτας ἔνιοι προσαγορεύουσιν αὐτούς, ὅτι τῆς τροφῆς τὸ ἀναγκαῖον ἡδὺ ποιοῦσιν: Plut. gives a more precise, etymological, explanation of the metaphor below, 697 D οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ

228

TABLE TALKS V 10

685A

χάριτας (sc. τὸν ἅλα) καλοῦσιν, ὅτι ἐπὶ và πλεῖστα μιγνύμενος εὐάρμοστα τῇ γεύσει καὶ προσφιλῆ ποιεῖ καὶ κεχαρισμένα. Cf. also above, 668 E οὗ μὴ παρόντος ἄχαρις γίνεται τροφὴ πᾶσα, and Dio

Chrys. XVIII (68) 13 οὐδὲν ὄψον ἄνευ ἁλῶν γεύσει κεχαρισμένον.

685 AB do’ οὖν, 6 Φλῶρος ἔφη, διὰ τοῦτο ϑεῖον εἰρῆσϑαι τὸν ὅλα φῶμεν; Schol. 7/. IX 214 does not have this explanation of the epithet. Florus remark indicates that it was introduced here by Plut. This

explanation is also found, in an entirely different form, in Eustath. 748.50, where he refers to Plut. 685 B oi yàp ἄνϑρωποι và κοινὰ καὶ διήκοντα ταῖς χρείαις ἐπὶ τὸ

πλεῖστον ἐκϑειάξουσιν, ὡς τὸ ὕδωρ, τὸ φῶς, τὰς ὥρας: Plut. thinks of the cosm(ogon)ic mythic personifications, Oceanus, Helius (also called Phos, cf. Eur.

Med.

148,

Or.

1497),

and

the Horae.

The Horae,

metaphorically said to be door-keepers of the Olymp (heaven) at Jl. V 749), were originally personifications of different kinds of weather, cloudiness, rain, clear sky, dew, fog etc., and thus were conceived of as

protectresses of vegetation; see Rapp,

Roscher's Lex.

Myth.

s.v.

Horae, 2712-2715.

685 B (ἐν)τρίχωμα τῆς τροφῆς γινόμενον εἰς τὸ σῶμα καὶ παρέχον εὐαρμοστίαν αὐτῇ πρὸς τὴν ὄρεξιν: Hu. suspected ϑρίγκωμα T by reference to Quaest. nat. 912 E τοῖς ταριχευτοῖς καὶ ὑφαλμυρίζουσιν,

OV ἡ λεπτότης, ὥσπερ ἐντρίχωμα γενομένη, τὰ σιτία τοῖς σώμασι διὰ τῶν πόρων προστίϑησιν. The term ϑρίγκωμα is virtually synonymous with ϑριγκός, ‘coping-stone’, ‘topmost stone’ and, metaphorically, ‘last finish’: Eur. Troe. 489 ϑριγκὸς ἀϑλίων κακῶν; Plat. Rep. 534 E ὥσπερ ϑριγκὸς τοῖς μαϑήμασιν ἡ διαλεκτική.

However, this meta-

phoric sense is hardly fitting here, and ϑρίγκωμα itself is never found in metaphorical use. Consequently, I think we should read ἐντρίχωμα. The instance at 912 E shows that we should understand ὥσπερ before this word, and the phrase εἰς τὸ σῶμα indicates that γυνόμενον does not mean ‘become’ (as Kron. thought, which made him change εἰς τὸ σῶμα into εὐστομίᾳ), but ‘get’, ‘come’. However, the meaning of ἐντρίχωμα is disputed. The word occurs only at Poll. Π 69 dv δὲ μερῶν

ai βλεφαρίδες ἐκπεφύκασι, καλοῦνται ἔλυτρα καὶ ἐντριχώματα καὶ ὀρχοὶ καὶ ταρσοί. Cf. Hesych. s.v. ἐντροιχώσεις" αἱ βλεφαρίδες τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν, and Anth. Pal XIV 62 ἔντριχος, ‘hairy’. Obviously ἐντρίχωμα here means 'the place where the lashes are situated', 'hold

685 B

TABLE TALKS V

10

229

for’ or ‘insertion of the lashes’. This allows us to suggest that in our context the word may have a related, though different sense, ‘hair which is used as a probe’, notably for exploration of those fine bloodvessels which cannot be examined through section. We may suppose that strong and pliable horse-hair or human hair was used for this purpose, to trace the course of the vessels as far as their size could

accomodate the hair. It should of course be admitted that this is speculative; we do not know if such an anatomical method was ever

used but it seems fairly probable. As a matter of fact it is hard to see what else évtofywpa could mean at Quaest. nat. 912 E. (and in our passage). The comparison with such a subtle sound excellently displays the action ascribed to salt. It opens up the pores of the body, especially those of the stomach and so creates appetite: (912 D) τήν te yao ὄρεξιν ἡ δριμύτης ἐμκαλεῖται καὶ τοὺς πόρους ἀναστομοῦσα μᾶλλον ὁδοποιεῖ τῇ τροφῇ πρὸς τὴν ἀνάδοσιν, cf. 687 D αἱ τῶν ἐφάλμων βρωμάτων εὐστομίαι καὶ δριμύτητες ἐπιστρέφουσαι καὶ πυκνοῦσαι

τὸν στόμαχον, ἢ πάλιν ἀνοίγουσαι καὶ χαλῶσαι, δεκτικήν τινα τροφῆς εὐαρμοστίαν περιειργάσαντο περὶ αὐτόν, ἣν ὄρεξιν καλοῦμεν. At 912 D Apollonius Mys, of the school of Herophilus, is mentioned as a supporter of this doctrine. Perhaps this indicates that

his great master invented and/or used the ἐντρίχωμα. The doctrine itself, however, is that of Asclepiades of Bithynia, the famous physician who practised in Rome in the 1st c. B.C. For his atomistic physiological theory in which the pores formed an essential part, see below, on 687 B. — For the interpretation of ἐντρίχωμα as “hair-probe’, see S.-T.T. Eranos 88 (1990) 64-66. 685 B ὅτι τῶν σωμάτων và νεκρὰ διατηροῦν ἄσηπτα xvÀ.: This explanation is given in the first place at Schol. Il. IX 214. 685 BC ὥσπερ 1j ψυχὴ ... τὰ ζῷα συνέχει καὶ ῥεῖν οὐκ ἐᾷ τὸν ὄγκον, οὕτως ἡ τῶν ἁλῶν φύσις τὰ νεκρὰ παραλαμβάνουσα κτλ.: Salt is also compared with the soul above, 669 A where meat is looked upon in this same way (κρέας δὲ πᾶν vexodv ἐστιν καὶ νεκροῦ μέρος), but there the topic is not the preservative but the seasoning capacity of salt. Cf. Philo, De spec. leg. 1 289 (V 70.1 Cohn) φυλακτήριον yao of ἅλες σωμάτων, τετιμημένοι ψυχῆς δευτερείοις" ὡς γὰρ αἰτία τοῦ μὴ διαφϑείρεσϑαι τὰ σώματα ψυχή, καὶ οἱ ἅλες ἐπὶ πλεῖστον αὐτά συνέχοντες

καὶ τρόπον

τινὰ

ἀϑανατίζοντες;

Plin.

XXXI

98 salis

natura ... est ... defuncta etiam a putrescendi tabe vindicans, ut

230

TABLE TALKS V 10

685 BC

durent ea per saecula; Macrob. Sat, VII 12. 3-5. Salt was thought to

have a drying or astringent action, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 927a 38 &nραίνουσιν οἱ ἄλες᾽ διὸ καὶ σῴζεται ἄσηπτα τὰ ταριχευόμενα; Gal. XII 321 K.; Synes. De regno 2 B κρέα μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἐᾷ διαρρνῆναι στυφότης ἁλῶν. See further Blümner, RE s.v. Salz, 2090f. The idea that the soul holds the body together can be traced back to Anaximenes, frg. B 2 otov ἡ ψυχὴ ἡ ἡμετέρα ἀὴρ οὖσα avyxeatel ἡμᾶς. The Pythagoreans looked upon the preservative power of salt as ἃ symbol of justice: C3 (1 463.27 DK) περὶ τῶν ἁλῶν, ὅτι δεῖ παρατίϑεσθϑαι

πρὸς

ὑπόμνησιν

τοῦ

δικαίου"

of

γὰρ

ἅλες

πᾶν

σῴζουσιν ὅ τι ἂν παραλάβωσι. 685 ( ἁρμονίαν παρέχουσα καὶ φιλίαν πρὸς ἄλληλα τοῖς μέρεσι: An ingenious physiological argument, indeed, to explain and support the view that salt furthers friendship, see above, on 684 E, and Schol. Il. ΙΧ 214; Eustath. 132.46 φιλίας of ἅλες σύμβολον. 685 C διὸ καὶ τῶν Στωικῶν ἔνιοι τὴν ὗν σάρκα νεκρὰν γεγονέναι λέγουσι, τῆς ψυχῆς, ὥσπερ ἁλῶν, παρεσπαρμένης ὑπὲρ τοῦ διαμένειν: The correction νεκράν: κρέα T Amyot, Doe. is persuasive, cf. 669 A κρέας δὲ πᾶν νεκρόν ἐστιν. — The pig was widely regarded as existing only for the purpose of supplying man with palatable meat, cf. Iuv. 1.141 apros, animal propter convivia natum; Porphyr. De abst. I 14.3 οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστι χρήσιμον πρὸς ἄλλο τι ὗς ἢ πρὸς βρῶσιν, III 20.3 ἡ δὲ ἧς φύσει γέγονε πρὸς τὸ σφαγῆναι καὶ καταβρωϑῆναι; Hieron. Adv. Iovin. II 5.330 (290 B Migne) quis usus porcorum absque esu carnium? This view, and the (unfounded) opinion that the pig is particularly stupid, gave rise to the thought that providence had assigned a soul to this animal only to preserve its flesh until it is slaughtered and consumed. This idea is attributed to Chrysippus at Porphyr. De abst. 111 20.1 (= Plut. frg. 193 Sandb.) ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο νὴ Δία τοῦ Χρυσίππου πυιϑανὸν ἦν, ds... ἡ δ᾽ oc... οὐ δι᾽ ἄλλο τι πλὴν ϑύεσθϑαι ἐγεγόνει, καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ὁ ϑεὸς οἷον ἅλας ἐνέμιξεν, εὐοψίαν ἡμῖν μηχανώμενος, and Cic. De nat. deor. 11 160 sus vero quid habet praeter escam; cui quidem ne putesceret animam ipsam pro sale datam dicit esse Chrysippus; but it is attributed to Cleanthes by Clem. Strom. VII 33.3 (= SVF I 516) διὸ «oi Κλεάνϑης φησὶν ἀνθ ἁλῶν αὐτοὺς (sc. τοὺς ὗς) ἔχειν τὴν ψυχήν, ἵνα μὴ σαπῇ τὰ κρέα, Cf. also Varro, De re rust. II 4.10 suillum pecus donatum ab natura dicunt ad epulandum. itaque iis animam datam esse proinde ac salem, quae

685 C

TABLE TALKS V 10

231

servaret carnem; Plin. VIII 207 animalium hoc maxime brutum ani-

mamnque ei pro sale datam non inlepide existimabatur; Cic. De fin. V 38; Clem. Strom. If 105.2. — According to another, probably Stoic, view, fish were not considered to possess the same kind of soul as land animals and birds do, this due to their not breathing air, cf. SVF II

721-722. 685 C καὶ τὸ κεραύνιον πῦρ

ἱερὸν ἡγούμεϑα

καὶ ϑεῖον, ὅτι và

σώματα τῶν διοβλήτων ἄσηπτα ... ὁρῶμεν κτλ.: This is also men-

tioned at 665 C, as one in a series of effects ascribed to lightning. Here this phenomenon is rather carelessly ranged with the effects of salt, seeing that Plut. fails to state a quality common to salt and lightning. However, such a common cause, exsiccation, is given at Psell. De

omnif. doctr. 170 (134) (= Plut. Quaest. nat. 40 LCL XI 226) ὅϑεν ἄσηπτα μὲν of κεραυνοὶ τὰ σώματα ποιοῦσιν, ἄσηπτα δὲ οἱ ἅλες διαφυλάττουσιν, ἐκτηκομένης ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῆς ὑγρότητος. ταύτην τὴν

αἰτίαν καὶ ᾿ἈΑριστοτέλης ὁ φιλόσοφος ἀποδέχεται καὶ οἱ κρείττους τῶν φυσικῶν. Presumably the connection was first made in a Peripatetic work. 685 D Φιλῖνος: See on 623 E ἀπεδείκνυεν, and 660 D τὸ παιδίον.

685 D εἴπερ ἀρχὴ ὁ ϑεὸς πάντων: Amyot corrected ἀρχεῖ T, cf. De Is. et Os. 365B ἀρχὴ yao ὁ Beds, ἀρχὴ δὲ πᾶσα τῷ yoviuw πολλαπλασιάζει τὸ ἐξ αὑτῆς. Hartm. and Fuhrm. transpose: πάντων 6 ϑεός, Hu. deletes the article. No change is necessary; the word-order is admissible, and Plut. tolerated hiatus before the art., see Bolk. 60f., 105, 111. Plut. often discloses his inclination to monotheism through the use of the definite singular, ὁ ϑεός or τὸ ϑεῖον, in a general sense,

‘God’, cf. De superst. 165 B, E, 166 D, 167 B, E, 168 A, De Is. et Os. 377 F, De E 393 C, De sera 549 B, D, E etc. However,

he always

shows reverence towards the traditional gods and he certainly believed in demons. See P. Decharme, La critique des traditions religieuses chez les Grecs (Paris 1904) 425—430, 454—464; B. Latzarus, Les idées religieuses de Plutarque (Paris 1920) 89-120; Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 940—942. See further above, on 615 F, and below, on 745 D.

685 D καϑάπερ αὐτὸς ἐμνήσϑης τῶν Αἰγυπτίων: 'as/according to what you yourself said in mentioning the Egyptians’, a pregnant sense of the verb, equivalent to εἶπες μνησϑείς. There is no reason to

232

TABLE TALKS V 10

685 D

suspect the construction (Re. added (ἐπὶ) τῶν, so also Hartm.); even if this verb in the sense of ‘make mention of’ mostly takes the prep. περί (Thuc. VIII 47.2 ὥστε μνησϑῆναν περὶ αὑτοῦ; Plat. Lach. 200 Ὁ ὅταν τι αὐτῷ περὶ τούτου μνησϑῶ) it sometimes is construed with the gen.: Xen. Symp. 4.21 οὐ yao παύσῃ σὺ Κλεινίου μεμνημένος; Lys.

I 19 ἐγὼ ἐμνήσϑην ᾿Ερατοσϑένους. 685 D οἱ γοῦν τὰς κύνας φιλοτροφοῦντες, ὅταν ἀργύτεραι πρὸς συνουσίαν Gow, ... ταριχευτοῖς χρέασι κινοῦσι καὶ παροξύνουσιν

τὸ σπερματικὸν αὐτῶν ἡσυχάζον: At Quaest. nat. 912 EF this is given as the third answer to the question Διὰ τί παραβάλλουσι τοῖς ϑρέμμασι ἅλας οἱ νομεῖς; σκόπει δὲ μὴ καὶ γονιμώτερα καὶ προϑυμότερα (sc. γίνεται) πρὸς τὰς συνουσίας. For dogs a particular

reason is stated: bitches should eat salted meat after copulation: καὶ γὰρ at κύνες κύουσι ταχέως τάριχος ἐπεσϑίουσαι, Psell. De omnif. doctr. 180 (144) depends upon both texts. The idea of the ability of salt as an aphrodisiac and fertility enhancer is found as early as Arist. H.A. 574a 8 τὰ δὲ (sc. πρόβατα) τὸ ἁλυκὸν ὕδωρ πίνοντα πρότερον ὀχεύεται" δεῖ δ᾽ ἁλίζειν πρὶν τεκεῖν καὶ ἐπειδὰν τέκῃ, 596a 25 πρός

τε τοὺς τόκους ἁλιζόμεναι (sc. αἱ αἶγες) μείζω τὰ οὔϑατα καϑιᾶσιν, Ps.-Arist. De mir. ausc. 844b 20 ἁλίζουσι γὰρ αὐτὰ (sc. τὰ βοσκήμαta) δὶς τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ. ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ποιήσωσι τοῦτο, συμβαίνει αὐτοῖς ἀπόλλυσθαι τὰ πλεῖστα τῶν βοσκημάτων. 685 D τὰ δ᾽ ἁληγὰ πλοῖα πλῆϑος ἐχφύει μυῶν ἄπλετον

... τῶν

ϑηλειῶν καὶ δίχα συνουσίας κυουσῶν: This is an extreme variant of

Quaest. nat. 912 F καὶ τὰ ἁληγὰ τῶν πλοίων πλείους τρέφει μῦς διὰ τὸ πολλάκις συμπλέκεσθαι. The extreme variant is also met with at

Ps.-Arist. H.A. 580b 31 φασὶ δέ τινες καὶ ἰσχυρίζονται καὶ ἐὰν λα λείχωσιν (sc. οἱ μῦς), ἄνευ ὀχείας γίνεσϑαν ἐγκύους; Plin. X 1858. generatio eorum (sc. murium) lambendo constare, non coitu, dicitur ... et salis gustatu fieri praegnantes opinantur. The mice were also credited with producing foetuses which become pregnant while still in the womb (ibid.; Ps.-Arist. H.A. 580b 30; Aelian. N.A. XVII 17.

685 E «oi κάλλος γυναικὸς τὸ μήτ᾽ ἀργὸν μήτ᾽ ἀπίϑανον, ἀλλὰ μεμιγμένον χάριτι καὶ κινητικόν, ἁλμυρὸν καὶ δριμὺ καλοῦσιν: Steg-

mann proposed καλῆς, and Fuhrm. κάλλους (better), but κάλλος is unproblematic. — Even speech should have a certain pungency combined with charm. Otherwise it is not enjoyable and not effective. De

685Ε

TABLE TALKS V 10

233

gar 514 EF (ἄνϑρωποι) χάριν τινὰ παρασκευάζοντες ἀλλήλοις ὥσπερ ἁλσὶ τοῖς λόγοις ἐφηδύνουσν τὴν διατριβὴν καὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν; Lyc. 19.1 ἐδίδασκον δὲ τοὺς παῖδας καὶ λόγῳ χρῆσϑαν πικρίαν ἔχοντι μεμιγμένην χάριτι; NT Col. 4.6 ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν πάντοτε ἐν χάριτι, ἅλατι ἠρτυμένος. 685 E τὴν ᾿Αφροδίτην ἁλιγενῆ τοὺς ποιητὰς προσαγορεύειν ... ὡς ἀπὸ ϑαλάσσης ἐχούσῃ τὴν γένεσιν κτλ.: Hesiodus (Theog. 190f.) is the first of the many poets who tell of the birth of Aphrodite out of the foam formed around the genitals of Uranus, which had been cut off by Cronus and thrown into the sea and then floated ashore in Cyprus. In this myth the goddess is always called ἀναδυομένη or ἀφρογενής or xumooyévera but never ἁλιγενής. (The word is found only here; Eunap. V. Soph. VII (Max.) 5.6 (106) τὸ ἁλιγενὲς (sc. τῆς ᾿Ασίας) is a mistake for ἁλιτενές, cf. Suda, s.v. Μουσώνιος (= Eunap. frg. 12 p. 496 Boiss.) τήν te ἁλιτενῆ χώραν τῆς ᾿Ασίας.) Another hapax epithet of this group is found in XII deor. epith. X 1, Anecd. Var. 269 Studemund: ἀλεισία, to be read ἁλισία (&X(Co), see S.-T.T. Glotta 66 (1988) 135. For a survey of poets, painters and sculptors who have represented the marine Aphrodite, see L. Séchan & P. Lévéque, Les

grandes divinités de la Gréce (Paris 1966) 371 f. On the marine character of the goddess, see Nilsson, Gr. Rel.? 1 5211.: L. Séchan, Bull. de

l'Ass. G. Budé 14:4 (1955) 44-46. The old cult of Aphrodite in Cyprus indicates Semitic origin. According to Hdt. I 105, her first temples were founded there and in Cythera by the Phoenicians. 685 E αὐτὸν τὸν Ποσειδῶνα [ἀλλὰ] καὶ ὅλως tovc πελαγίους ϑεοὺς

πολυτέχνους καὶ πολυγόνους ἀποφαίνουσιν: Deletion Wytt.; Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 254) proposes instead (o9 μόνον) αὐτὸν τὸν IT. -Greek mythology shows that the general productive power of the waters, whether the sea, lakes, rivers or springs, deeply impressed man in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The marine deities of the primordial generation,

i.e.

the children

of Oceanus

and

Tethys,

the

Oceanids and river gods, were of pre-Greek origin. According to different sources there were hundreds or thousands of them: Acusilaus, frg. 1 (FGrHist I 49) τῶν δὲ (sc. ᾽Ωκεανοῦ καὶ Τηϑύος) γίνονται τρισχίλιοι ποταμοί. One of the Oceanids, Doris, bore fifty children to her consort, Nereus. Related to the Nereids were the Naiads, and among these were the Danaids, all numerous. The great number of sea

deities represent the immensely varying nature of the sea according to

234

TABLE TALKS V 10

685 E

season and weather. Under Poseidon, the new ruler of the waters in the Cronid generation, the numbers became still greater. Together with Nereids and Naiads and with women he begot a great many children, e.g., the Aloads, the Laestrygones, Polyphemus the Cyclop, monstrous giants such as Antaeus, Orion, Cycnus, Procrustes, Sciron.

For some of his amours, see Séchan-Lévéque, o.c. 100f. 685 F φῦλον ἄμουσον ἄγουσα πολυσπερέων καμασήνων: Emped. frg. B 74, quoted only here. Plut. presupposes that the reader knows who is the subject of ἄγουσα. The context suggests that it is Aphrodite. D. O'Brien, Empedocles" Cosmic Cycle (Cambridge 1969) 196236, argues convincingly that Emped. describes two zoogonies in his cyclic system, one for the epoch of Love when unlike elements are to be mixed, and another for the epoch of Strife when like joins like. Two passages in Arist. and Theophr., which report that Emped. taught that fish have a fiery nature and, having been born on land, took to water to cool themselves, belong, in O’Brian’s interpretation, to the epoch of

Love: Arist. De resp. 477b 5 ὅλως μὲν οὖν ἄτοπον πῶς ἐνδέχεται γενόμενον ἕκαστον αὐτῶν (sc. E.’s fiery fish) ἐν τῷ ξηρῷ μεταβάλλειν τὸν τόπον εἰς τὸ ὑγρόν' σχεδὸν γὰρ καὶ ἄποδα τὰ πλεῖστα αὐτῶν ἐστιν. ὁ δὲ (sc. E.) τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς αὐτῶν σύστασιν λέγων γενέσϑαι μὲν ἐν τῷ ξηρῷ φησί, φεύγοντα δ᾽ ἐλϑεῖν εἰς τὸ ὑγρόν; Theophr. C.P. I 22.2 οὐ γὰρ οὔτε γεννᾶν οὔτε εὖ τρέφειν οὔτε σῴζειν πέφυκε τὸ ἐναντίον, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὅμοιον, ἐπεὶ καὶ ᾿Εμπεδοκλεῖ πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἄτοπον, ὅπερ καὶ ἐν ἑτέροις εἴρηται, τὸ γεννήσασαν ἐν τῷ ξηρῷ τὴν φύσιν μεταίρειν εἰς τὸ ὑγρόν, O'Brien, o.c. 190f., ranges our line (frg. B 74) with these testimonia and takes ἄγουσα (sc. Ἀφροδίτη) as meaning ‘leading to (the water)’. However, Longrigg, JHS 94 (1974) 173f., in objecting to O’Brien’s interpretation of a double zoogony in Emped., rightly points out that there is no suggestion in Plut. of Love as leading the fish to the water (ἄγουσα need not mean ‘leading 10° at all (p. 174 n. 12)). The purpose of the quotation is to suggest that the fish reveal, by their fertility, the activity of Love among them. This is clearly true, but the interpretation of the line in this context remains uncertain. Plut. quoted the line for literary reasons, and with a humorous intent, without caring much about its philosophical content, as often, e.g., 720 E, 728 E, as is pointed out by Hershbell, AJP 92

(1971) 169.

BOOK

VI

PROOEMIUM 686 A Τιμόϑεον τὸν Κόνωνος: The two known Athenian generals: Conon was strategus several times by the end of the Peloponnesian War and in the 390’s; his son held that office in 376/5 and between 366 and 358/7.

686 AB ὡς &x τῶν πολυτελῶν καὶ στρατηγικῶν δείπνων ἀναλαβὼν ὁ Πλάτων ἐδείπνισεν ... ταῖς ἀφλεγμάντοις, ὥς φησιν ὁ Ἴων, τραπέζαις: Deletion of ὡς Re., Fuhrm, is uncalled for. The sense is comparative, ‘as it were’. — Plut. mentions this occurrence shortly at De tu. san. 127 AB. It is also told at Aelian. V.H. II 18 and Athen.

419 CD, with very similar wording which indicates a common source. Düring, Eranos 34 (1936) 9 argues that Athen. and Plut. both used Hegesander whom Athen. l.c. cites, but the dictum he cites from him

seems to be an addition; it is also quoted by Cic. Tusc. V 35.100. Plut.

alone has this quotation from Ion of Chios (frg. 11 Diehl?, cf. II 257 Bergk).

The simple dinner customs introduced by Plato were pre-

served as a tradition in the Academy and became proverbial, cf. Plut. Dio 52.3 οὕτω παρεῖχεν ἑαυτὸν ἐσθῆτι καὶ ϑεραπείᾳ καὶ τραπέζῃ μέτριον, ὥσπερ ἐν ᾿Ακαδημείᾳ συσσιτῶν μετὰ Πλάτωνος. Cf. Athen. 547 F; and see E. Zeller, Die Philosophie der Griechen? Π:1 (Leipzig 1922) 4181.; P. Boyancé, Le culte des muses chez les philosophes grecs

(Paris 1937) 263-267. 686 B ὕπνοι te καϑαροὶ καὶ βραχυόνειροι φαντασίαι: Cf. Plat. Tim. 45 E γενομένης δὲ πολλῆς μὲν ἡσυχίας βραχνόνειρος ὕπνος ἐμπίπτει. 686 B καὶ τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ καλῶς γίνεσθαι: Hartm. notices that καλῶς Exew is the normal phrase. Aelian. V.H. II 18 has καλῶς διάγουσιν,

but cf. Athen. 419 Ὁ καλῶς γίνονται.

236

TABLE TALKS VI PROOEMIUM

686 B εὐκρασία

σώματος

... παρεστῶτος

ἀνυπόπτως

686 B

ἐπὶ πᾶσαν

ἐνέργειαν: The humoral-pathological notion of εὐκρασία as a criterion of health is common-place, cf. De virt. et vic. 101 B ταῖς μὲν γὰρ τῆς σαρκὸς

ἡδοναῖς f| τοῦ σώματος

εὐκρασία

καὶ ὑγίεια

χώραν

καὶ

γένεσιν δίδωσι; Gal. Χ 100 Κ. si γὰρ ἡ εὐκρασία τῶν τεττάρων ποιοτήτων αἰτία τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐστίν, ἡ δυσκχρασία πάντως τῆς βλάβης αἰτία ἔσται, id. V 668 Κ. μόνον γὰρ ἀρκεῖ τῷ φυλάξοντι μὲν τὴν ὑγίειαν, ἰασομένῳ δὲ τὰς νόσους ἐπίστασϑαν διά τε τὴν εὐκρασίαν τοῦ ϑερμοῦ καὶ ψυχροῦ καὶ ξηροῦ καὶ ὑγροῦ τὴν ὑγίειαν ὑπάρχειν τοῖς ζῴοις, ἐπὶ δὲ ταῖς τούτων δυσκρασίαις τὰς νόσους γίγνεσϑαι. See J. Schuhmacher, Antike Medizin (Berlin 1963) 198202. ~ Hu. unnecessarily suspects ἀνυπόπτως. The meaning, ‘unhesitatingly’, ‘boldly’, is unproblematic, cf. Pelop. 9.9 παρασχεῖν ἑαυτὸν δεῖν ἀνυπόπτως τοῖς ἄρχουσιν. Plut. uses the word frequently.

686 C αἱ μὲν γὰρ τῶν (βρωϑέντων ἢ) ποϑέντων ἡδοναὶ τὴν ἀνάμγνηaw ἀνελεύϑερον ἔχουσιν ..., ὥσπερ ὀσμὴν ἕωλον ἢ κνῖσαν ἐναπολειπομένην: Xyl. translated: ‘etenim voluptatum, quae e cibo ac potu percipiuntur. Doe. added τῶν ποϑέντων (ἢ βρωϑέντων), but the reversed order is more probable, as argued by K.-D. Zacher, Plutarchs Kritik an der Lustlehre Epikurs (Königstein 1982) 119f. The normal order is ‘eat and drink’, as is seen as early as Hom. Od. II 305 and XXI 69 ἐσϑιέμεν καὶ πινέμεν; Alexis, frg. 271 Kock (= Plut. De virt. mor. 445 F τὸ φαγεῖν τὸ πιεῖν, and De aud. poet. 21 D where,

however, only one MS has this order); Plat. Symp. 211 D, Ep. VII 335 B; Plut. De tu. san. 124 EF, and below, 746 E περὶ ἐδωδὴν xai πόσιν (hiatus not avoided). — The passage resembles somewhat Plutarch’s criticism of the Epicurean notion of ἡδονή at Non posse 1088 E καίτοι γ᾽ οἶνον μὲν χρόνος διαχυϑέντα τηρεῖ xai συνηδύνει, τῆς δ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἡ ψυχὴ παραλαβοῦσα τὴν μνήμην ὥσπερ ὀσμὴν ἄλλο δ᾽ οὐδὲν φυλάσσει ... καὶ τὸ μνημονευόμενον αὐτῆς ἀμαυρόν ἐστι καὶ χνισῶδες, ὥσπερ ἑώλων ὧν τις ἔφαγεν ἢ ἔπιεν. 686 C λόγων φιλοσόφων ὑποϑέσεις ... ἑστιᾶν παρέχουσι: Plato has this image at Rep. 571 Ὁ τὸ λογιστικὸν μὲν ἐγείρας ἑαυτοῦ καὶ ἑστιάσας λόγων καλῶν καὶ σκέψεων. Cf. Athen. 268 D εὐωχοῦντες λόγοις, 270 C τροφὴ γὰρ ψυχῆς λόγοι καλοί; and below, 713 C. See further Wytt. Anim. ad 40 B.

686 C

TABLE TALKS VI PROOEMIUM

237

686 C éxov καὶ νῦν: For the causal meaning of ὅπου, see above, on 622 C.

686 Ὁ Ξενοφῶντα καὶ Πλάτωνα: Plut. of course thinks of their respective Symp.

686 D καίπερ ὡς εἰκὸς ἐκ παρασκευῆς γενόμενα καὶ δαπάνης: Callias belonged to one of the wealthiest Athenian families. Because of his lavish and luxurious way of life he became an object of satire for the Comic writers, cf. Aristoph. Ran. 428 with Schol. 429 xapmdettar δὲ xai ὁ Καλλίας ὡς σπαϑῶν τὴν πατρικὴν οὐσίαν καὶ μάλιστα ἐπὶ γυναιξὶ μεμηνώς; Cratin. frg. 81 K.-A.; Xen. Symp. 2.24, 4.1-2. -The wealth of the beautiful Agathon is obvious in Plato's Symp.; and cf. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 84 οὗτος δὲ ἀγαϑὸς ἦν τὸν τρόπον xai τὴν

τράπεζαν λαμπρός. -- For Plutarch’s oft-repeated opinion that food and drink are not the main interest for philosophic men at a banquet, see the prooemium of Book VII 697 C, and cf. 616 B, 643 B, 660 B. 686 Ὁ τὰ δὲ φιλοσοφηϑέντα μετὰ παιδιᾶς σπουδάζοντες εἰς γραφὴν ἀπετίϑεντο: The playful tone which is so typical of Plato’s dialogues,

and also of Xen. Symp., was clearly much appreciated by Plut., cf. 613 F, 620 D, 634 F, 713 BC, At 614 CD he notices with admiration

that Plato was even able to discourse upon divine subjects in an easy, non-contentious way. However, Plut. is more inclined to follow the recommendation implied by Xen. Symp. 8.41 not to engage in discussions on serious matters at table.

TALK 1 686 E ἕκτον οὖν τοῦτό σοι πέμπω τῶν Συμποσιακῶν: In his first prooemium Plut. mentions that he sends the first three books to Sosius and announces (612 E): πέμψω δὲ καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ταχέως, but only here does he mention that he did, which seems to indicate that he sent each

of Books IV-IX separately; if he sent any of them together at the same time, we would expect him to say so. 686 E τὸ περὶ τοῦ διψήν μᾶλλον ἢ πεινῆν tovc νηστεύοντας: The text

of this talk is closely related to Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. 1Π 50 Bussem. It was imitated by Macrob. Sat. ΝῊ 13.1-5 and by Psell. De omnif. doctr.

238

TABLE TALKS VI 1

686 E

118 (87). Plut. used a Peripatetic source for this talk (and for VI 3-6, 8,

10), but not Probl. ined. (see below, on 686 EF, 687 A ὅταν οὖν). The complete absence of any description of the occasion and the environment in this talk as well as in the next five talks is noticeable. Furthermore, it seems that all six topics are pretended to have occurred on the same party (perhaps 4-6 are meant to belong to another occasion). This series discloses more clearly than other parts of the Talks how Plut. used collections of Προβλήματα for his work. 686 E ἡ yàp ἔνδεια τῆς ξηρᾶς τροφῆς ἀναπλήρωσιν οἰκείαν ἐδόκει (uai) κατὰ φύσιν ἐπιζητεῖν: Hartm. may be right in noticing that the addition (Bern.) is not necessary, but it is quite plausible. Plut. frequently uses a prep. phrase in combination with an adj., cf., besides 662 C τῷ οἰκείῳ καὶ κατὰ φύσιν and 688 C and F tod κατὰ φύσιν καὶ οἰκείου, also 691 A ὥστε δι’ ὅλου καὶ ἰσχυρὰν γίνεσϑαι τὴν περίψυξιν. — For the thought, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 1 ἡ μὲν βουλιμία γίνεται δι᾽ ἔνδειαν τῆς ξηρᾶς τροφῆς. 686 E τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν ἢ nóvov ἢ μάλιστα δεῖται τροφῆς τὸ ϑεομόν: By τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν the four elements are meant; their identification with the four opposite qualities can be traced back to Philistion: Anon. Lond. XX 25 Φιλιστίων δ᾽ οἴεται ἐκ τεττάρων ἰδεῶν συνεστάναι ἡμᾶς, τοῦτ᾽

ἔστιν ἔκ τεττάρων στοιχείων᾽ πυρός, ἀέρος, ὕδατος, γῆς. εἶναι δὲ καὶ ἑκάστου δυνάμεις, τοῦ μὲν πυρὸς τὸ ϑερμόν, τοῦ δὲ ἀέρος τὸ ψυχρόν, τοῦ δ᾽ ὕδατος τὸ ὑγρόν, τῆς δὲ γῆς τὸ ξηρόν. Among these elemental qualities a particular importance was ascribed to τὸ ϑερμόν as being σύμφυτον) συγγενές; it maintains and nourishes the body, cf.

above, 635 C τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ [td] σύμφυτον ϑερμὸν ἡμῶν, ᾧ τρέφεσϑαι πεφύκαμεν, 649 Β τὸ δὲ συγγενὲς ϑερμὸν αὔξειν καὶ τρέφειν πέφυκεν, see ad locc., and cf. further Arist. G.A. 789 a 8 αὐξητικὸν γὰρ τὸ ϑερμόν; Theophr. C.P. 122.1 ἣ yao (ἔμφυτος) ϑερμότης ἐξαύξειν φαίνεται. For these functions heat itself requires nourishment: Arist. P.A. 682 a 23 τὸ yao ϑερμὸν καὶ δεῖται τροφῆς καὶ πέττει τὴν τροφὴν ταχέως, Ps.-Arist. Probl. 949 b 29 μᾶλλον δεῖται τοῦ ὑγροῦ τὸ ϑερμὸν ᾧ ζῶμεν. Cf. also Gal. XVII B 413 K. σχεδὸν ἁπάντων τῶν ἐνδοξοτάτων φιλοσόφων, οἵτινες τῶν συντιϑέντων στοιχείων τὰ ζῷα τὸ ϑερμὸν αἰτιώτατον ἐνόμιζον εἶναι

τῆς ζωῆς.

686 ἘΕ

TABLE TALKS VI 1

239

686 EF ὥσπερ ἀμέλει βλέπομεν ἔξω μήτ᾽ ἀέρα μήϑ' ὕδωρ μήτε γῆν

ἐφιέμενα τοῦ τρέφεσϑαι, ... ἀλλὰ μόνον τὸ πῦρ: The sentence is found verbatim at Psell. De omnif. doctr. 118 (87), and Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. III 50 Bussem. except that the last text has ἐφιέμεϑα τρέφεσθαι. This would suggest that Plut. did not use this collection as his source; on this question, see below, on 687 A ὅταν οὖν. — The common opinion that fire needs constant nourishment is reported by Arist. Meteor. 355 a 4 καὶ yàg τὸ φανερὸν πῦρ, ἕως ἂν ἔχῃ τροφήν,

μέχρι τούτου ζῆν, τὸ δ᾽ ὑγρὸν τῷ πυρὶ τροφὴν εἶναι μόνον, but he criticizes it (a 9): ἡ μὲν γὰρ φλὸξ διὰ συνεχοῦς ὑγροῦ καὶ ξηροῦ μεταβαλλόντων γίνεται καὶ οὐ τρέφεται. This criticism was disregarded later in the Peripatetic npoBAypato-literature.

686 F fj καὶ τὰ νέα βρωτικώτερα τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ὑπὸ ϑερμότητος: Τὰ νέα = ot νέοι, an Attic way of expression, also found at Sept. sap.

151 C τἀμά = ἐγώ. See W. Schmid, Der Articismus I (Stuttgart 1887) 861. — For the great difference between youths and elderly people with regard to their need of nourishment, cf. Hipp. IV 466L. τὰ αὐξανόμενα πλεῖστον ἔχει τὸ ἔμφυτον ϑερμόν᾽ πλείστης οὖν δεῖται

τροφῆς, commented on by Gal. XVII Β 412 Κ. πλεῖστον εἶπεν ἔχειν τὸ ἔμφυτον ϑερμὸν (sc. τὰ αὐξανόμενα)... ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ὑγρὰν καὶ ϑερμὴν ἔχει τὴν οὐσίαν τὰ αὐξανόμενα, διὰ τοῦτο... πλείστης τε δεῖται τροφῆς

... (413) γέρουσι δ᾽ ὀλίγον τὸ ϑερμόν

ἄρα,

ὀλίγων

φησίν,

ὑπεκκαυμάτων

δέονται᾽

... διὰ τοῦτ᾽

ὑπεκκαύματα

τὰς

τροφὰς ὠνόμασεν. Plut. also mentions the cold constitution of old men above, 625 A, see ad loc.

686 Ε ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ἀναίμοις τῶν ζῴων... δι’ ἔνδειαν ϑεομότητος: Aristotle distinguishes between ἔναιμα and ἄναιμα ζῷα. The second

group comprises the poikilothermal (cold-blooded) animals, cf. G.A. 758 a 6 ἄναιμα γάρ ἐστι (sc. τὰ μαλάκια), διόπερ ψυχρὰ τὴν φύσιν. At P.A. 648 ἃ 25 he notes that this opinion is not general: πολλοὶ διαμφισβητοῦσι ποῖα ϑερμὰ καὶ ποῖα ψυχρὰ τῶν ζῴων ἢ τῶν μορίων.

ἔνιοι γὰρ τὰ

ἔνυδρα

τῶν

πεζῶν

ϑερμότερά

φασιν

εἶναι,

λέγοντες ὡς ἐπανισοῖ τὴν ψυχρότητα τοῦ τόπου ἡ τῆς φύσεως αὐτῶν ϑερμότης, καὶ τὰ ἄναιμα τῶν ἐναίμων. 687

γυμνάσια καὶ κραυγαὶ καὶ ὅσα τῷ κινεῖν αὔξει τὸ ϑερμὸν

ἥδιον φαγεῖν ποιεῖ: What is moved by these activities so as to increase heat, is the πνεῦμα, cf. De tu. san. 130 B ἡ δὲ φωνή, τοῦ πνεύματος

240

TABLE TALKS VI 1

687 A

οὖσα κίνησις, ... τὸ ϑερμὸν αὔξει. This furthers digestion and the distribution of nourishment to the different parts of the body, see above, on 663 AB τῇ ϑερμότητι. 687 A τροφὴ δὲ τῷ ϑερμῷ, καϑάπερ vonito, ὃ πρῶτον κατὰ φύσιν μάλιστα, τὸ ὑγρόν ἐστιν: ‘Nourishment for heat is, in my opinion, the element which is the very primary in nature, moisture.’ Hoffl. follows Hu. and Po. in punctuating after μάλιστα and interprets the sentence

as alluding to Thales’ theory. This interpretation is quite plausible. After the enumeration of the four elements above (686 F), followed by a number of cases demonstrating that heat is in need of nourishment, Plut. now states which of the elements forms the nourishment. Fuhr-

mann’s criticism does not touch upon this interpretation. Hu. and Hoffl. rightly observe that the sentence is closely related to Aristotle’s account of Thales’ theory in Metaph. 983 b 22 Θαλῆς.... λαβὼν ἴσως

τὴν ὑπόληψιν ταύτην (sc. τὴν τροφὴν ὑγρὰν οὖσαν καὶ τούτῳ ζῶν. Fuhrm. (xoi) μάλιστα τὸ ὑγρόν chaleur, c'est,

τὸ ὕδωρ ἀρχὴν εἶναι) καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ϑερμὸν reads [8] (del. Mez.) ἐστιν and translates:

ἐκ τοῦ πάντων ὁρᾶν ἐκ τούτου γινόμενον πρῶτον κατὰ φύσιν ‘(la nourriture de la

à mon avis,) d'abord et avant tout, conformément à la

nature, le liquide’, which does not give good sense. Moisture is not the element which ‘first and above all’ provides nourishment for heat; it is the only one, as the subsequent context shows, and cf. Arist. Meteor.

355 a 510 δ᾽ ὑγρὸν τῷ πυρὶ τροφήν εἶναι μόνον, an opinion which he rejects as being held by some γελοῖοι (354 Ὁ 35), notably Heraclitus (frg. B 6) and his followers. Cf. also below, 696 Β τρέφεται μὲν γὰρ (sc. τὸ πῦρ) οὐδενὶ πλὴν ὑγρῷ, καὶ τοῦτο μόνον καυστόν ἐστιν, De

prim. frig. 954 E τῷ δ᾽ ὑγρῷ τροφῇ χρῆται τὸ ϑερμόν᾽ οὐ γὰρ τὸ στερεὸν ἀλλὰ τὸ νοτερὸν τοῦ ξύλου καυστόν ἔστιν, and Ps.-Arist. Probl. 871 b 12 ὑγρῷ μὲν γὰρ τρέφεται τὸ ϑερμόν, 949 Ὁ 29 μᾶλλον δεῖται τοῦ ὑγροῦ τὸ ϑερμὸν ᾧ ζῶμεν. See above, on 666 A τὰ δὲ χλωρὰ καίει.

687 A αἵ τε φλόγες αὐξανόμεναι τῷ ἐλαίῳ: The particular combustibility of olive oil is explained below, 696 C, as due to the absence of earthy substance in it: τὸ δ᾽ ἔλαιον; ὅτι μάλιστ᾽ εἰλικρινῶς ὑγρόν ἐστι, διὰ λεπτότητα... ἐκπυροῦται. 687 A τὸ πάντων

ξηρότατον

εἶναι τέφραν᾽

ἐκκέκανται

γὰρ τὸ

νοτερόν, τὸ δὲ γεῶδες ἔρημον ἰκμάδος λέλειπται: Plut. treats the

687 A

TABLE TALKS VI 1

241

theory of combustion at more length in De prim. frig. 954 EF τῷ δ᾽ ὑγρῷ τροφῇ χρῆται τὸ ϑερμόν᾽ od γὰρ τὸ στερεὸν ἀλλὰ τὸ νοτερὸν τοῦ ξύλου καυστόν ἐστιν᾽ ἐξικμασϑέντος δὲ τούτου, τὸ στερεὸν καὶ ξηρὸν ἀπολείπεται τέφρα γενόμενον. ... ὅταν ἐκκαῇ τὸ λιπαρόν, περίεστι πάντως καὶ διαμένει τὸ γεῶδες. Cf. also below, 696 B ἔκ γοῦν τῶν ξύλων ὁ μὲν ἀὴρ ἄπεισι καπνός γενόμενος, τὸ δὲ γεῶδες

ἐκτεφρωϑὲν

ὑπολείπεται,

μόνον

&

ὑπὸ

τοῦ

πυρὸς

τὸ νοτερὸν

ἀναλοῦται, τούτῳ γὰρ τρέφεσϑαι πέφυκεν, and above, on 649 Β τὰ ξύλα. 687 A ὅταν

οὖν

νηστεύσωμεν,

ἐκ τῶν

ὑπολειμμάτων

τῆς

ἐν τῷ

σώματι τροφῆς ἀποσπᾶται βίᾳ τὸ ὑγρὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑερμοῦ τὸ πρῶτον: It is noticeable that in this sentence Psell. De omnif. doctr. 118 (87) does not follow Plut. but instead agrees verbatim with Ps.-Arist. Probl.

ined.

ΠῚ

50

Bussem.

δυψῶμεν

δὲ

(νηστεύσωμεν Psell.), ἢ πεινῶμεν, διότι μὲν καταβόσκεται τὸ Ev τῷ σώματι ὑπολειμμάτων τῆς ἐν τῷ σώματι τροφῆς that Plut. did not use this collection as a here used this collection or another source

μᾶλλον,

ὅταν

νηστεύωμεν

τὸ ἐν ἡμῖν ϑεορμὸν πρῶτον ὑγρόν, ὅπερ ἀπὸ τῶν περισσεύει. This indicates source, and also that Psell. in addition to Plut.; see also

below, on 690 A ἐνδυομένη. 687 B εἶτ᾽ ἐπ᾿ αὐτὴν βαδίζει τὴν σύμφυτον λιβάδα τῆς σαρκὸς ἡ πύρωσις διώκουσα τὸ νοτερόν: Psellus’ text continuously coincides

with that of Ps.-Arist. Probl.

ined. III 50; both have: ἡ ἐν ἡμῖν

πύρωσις, τὸ νοτερὸν διώκουσα καὶ τὸ δίυγρον.

687 B ἄχρι ov: Psell. /.c. and Ps.-Arist. ἰ.ς. have ἄχρις. Plut. does not use this non-Attic form, cf. below, 690 A, where the corresponding

passages in Psell. (119) and Ps.-Arist. (TIL 51) have ἄχρις. The fact that at De soll. an. 974 B all MSS except P have ἄχρις is insignificant; ἄχρι is the Plutarchean form. TALK 2 687 B ol περὶ Φίλων ἰατροί: Philon the physician, of Hyampolis (660 D), also appears in II 6, IV 1 (where he is the host), and VIII 9. He and his colleagues here support the doctrine of Asclepiades of Prusa, Bithynia, while Plut. opposes it. The discussion extends to the next talk also. Asclepiades was the first Greek physician to practise in

242

TABLE TALKS VI 2

687 B

Rome (from 91 B.C. on). He developed an atomistic physiological and pathological theory, based on the atomic theory of Epicurus and probably influenced by the physiology of Erasistratus: The body is composed of innumerable small particles (ὄγκοι) of various sizes and forms, and all tissues are perforated by fine pores through which the particles move continuously. Pathological states are due to the narrowing or the widening of the pores, which makes the particles flow too slowly or too quickly, cf. Cael. Aurel. Morb. ac. I 14.106 fieri etiam vias ... per quas sucorum ductus solito meatu percurrens, si nullo fuerit impedimento retentus, sanitas maneat, impeditus vero statione

corpusculorum morbos efficiat. In Asclepiades’ system the humoral pathology was practically eliminated. This is also true of the doctrines of πνεῦμα and of ἔμφυτον ϑερμόν. He regarded liquids and respiration air as different congregations of atoms, and fever as being caused by the friction of the atoms within the constricted pores. Asclepiades’ harsh way of criticizing or condemning the theories and therapies of all his predecessors provoked the antipathy of many of his colleagues. Gal. XI 163 K. displays profound irritation at his theories and at his criticism of Hippocrates. Asclepiades' system formed the basis for the methodic school developed by his followers, Themison and Thessalus. The animated contemporary discussion pro et contra is appreciable in the argumentation in this talk and the next one. See Wellmann, Neue

Jahrb. f. d. klass. Alt. 21 (1908) 687-703; T. Meyer-Steineg, Das medizinische System der Methodiker (Jenaer medizin-hist. Beitráge 7/8, Jena 1916) 5-18; A. Castiglioni, Historie de la médecine (Paris 1931) 174-176; P. Diepgen, Geschichte der Medizin 1 (Berlin 1949) 103-108; R.M. Green, Asclepiades, his Life and Writings [transl. of C.G. Gumpert, Fragmenta A., Weimar 1794] (New Haven 1955) 83-159; C.

Lichtenthaeler, Geschichte der Medizin I (Köln-Lövenich 1975) 187f.; W.D. Smith, The Hippocratic Tradition (Ithaca 1979) 222-228. 687 C πόρων τινῶν μετασχηματισμῷ: The term μετασχηματισμός is not evidenced as being used of the pores by either Asclepiades or Themison or Thessalus; they used μετασύγχρισις or μεταποροποίησις. The general term ποροποιία means ‘state of the pores’, see Gal. X 268 K. οὐ γὰρ ἁπλῶς ὡς ᾿Ασκληπιάδης ἐν συμμετρίᾳ μέν τινι πόρων τὸ ὑγιαίνειν ἡμᾶς ὑποϑέμενος, ἐν ἀμετρίᾳ δὲ τὸ νοσεῖν... οὕτω καὶ ὁ Θεσσαλός, ἀλλὰ τὸν τρόπον τῆς ποροποιίας ὅλον ὑπαλλάττεσϑαι νομίζει, κἀκ ταύτης τῆς ὑπολήψεως ἥκει τὸ μετασυγκρίσεως ὄνομα, ταὐτὸν δηλοῦν δυνάμει τῷ τῆς μεταποροποιήσεως, cf. Dioscur. IV

687 C

TABLE TALKS VI 2

243

153.3-4; Cass. Felix 8 p. 16 Rose. -- The pores meant are the small ones, which when dilated cause thirst: Cael. Aurel. Morb. ac. 1 14.114

item orexim, quam nos appetentiam dicere poterimus, eam quae cibum

appetit,

viarum

maiorum

patefactione

fieri dicit in stomacho

atque ventre; eam autem, quae potum appetit, parvarum viarum causa fieri dicit. 687 C oi νύκτωρ διψῶντες, ἂν ἐπικαταδάρϑωσι, παύονται τοῦ διψῆν μὴ πιόντες: For a general statement to this effect, cf. Gal. XVII B

177 K. διὰ παντὸς μὲν γὰρ ὕπνος ὑγραίνει, καϑάπερ ἀγρυπνία Enραίνει. However, this is only true of so-called superficial thirst: Hipp. V 312 L. ἐν τῷ ἐγρηγορέναι δίψης ἐπιπολαίου ὕπνος ἄκος, comment-

ed on by Gal. XVII B 198 K. by reference to Erasistratus: ἐπιπόλαιον δίψαν ἀκουστέον ἐστὶ τὴν πάνυ σμικράν, ἥτις οὔτ᾽ ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ σώματος ... ἀλλ᾽, ὡς ᾿Ἐρασίστρατος ἔφη, ξηραινομένων ἢ ἐχκϑερμαινομένων τῶν τόπων, Óv ὧν φέρεται τὸ ὑγρὸν ἐκ τοῦ στόματος εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν. ταύτης οὖν τῆς δίψης ἴαμά ἐστιν ὁ ὕπνος ὑγραινσμένου τοῦ βάϑους. Cf. below, 688 E. 687 ( οἱ πυρέττοντες, ἐνδόσεως γενομένης ἢ παντάπασι τοῦ πυρετοῦ

λωφήσαντος, ἅμα καὶ τοῦ διψῆν ἀπαλλάττονται: This is normally so, but exceptions occur, cf. Gal. XVII A 938 K. ὅταν τοῦ πυρετοῦ παυσαμένου

μείνῃ

τινὰ

τῶν

συμπτωμάτων,

ἐγκαταλείπεσθϑαί

τι

λέγεται τῆς νόσου λείψανον. ἐμνημόνευσεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιπποκράτης ὡς ἐν παραδείγματι τῶν κυριώτατα ὑπολευτομένων δύψαν καὶ στόματος

ξηρότητα καὶ ἀηδίαν καὶ ἀποσιτίαν, τουτέστιν ἀνορεξίαν. The disease meant is of course malaria. 687 C πολλοῖς δὲ λουσαμένοις καὶ νὴ Δί᾽ ἐμέσασιν ἑτέροις λήγει τὸ

δίψος: Cold baths in particular cure thirst: Gal. X 714 K. ἐξελθόντες δὲ τοῦ ψυχροῦ (sc. λουτροῦ) παραχρῆμα ... οὔτε τῇ πυρώδει ϑερμασίᾳ κάμνοντες

... καὶ τῆς δίψης τὸ πλεῖστον ἰαϑέντες.

Hot

baths may instead give rise to thirst: Gal. VII 695 f. K. ϑαυμαστὸν γὰρ δὴ τοῦτο τοῖς βαλανείοις ὑπάρχει ... τὸ διψώδεις μὲν ποιεῖν τοὺς μὴ διψῶντας, ἀδίψους δὲ τοὺς διψώδεις ... καὶ μέν γε καὶ of ἐξ ὁδοιπορίας τε καὶ ἡλίου διψώδεις ἀδυψότεροι γίνονται, καὶ of μὴ διψώδεις δὲ λουσάμενοι διψῶσι, cf. Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. 1 41. Asclepiades became famous for introducing the extensive use of cold water, for

baths as well as for drinking, thus opposing the general opinion held by previous physicians who warned against cold water, cf. Hipp. IV

244

TABLE TALKS VI 2

687 C

538 L. τὸ ψυχρὸν πολέμιον ὀστέοισιν, ὀδοῦσι, νεύροισιν, ἐγκεφάλῳ, νωτιαίῳ μυελῷ, τὸ δὲ ϑερμὸν ὠφέλιμον; Gell. XIX 5.5 in eo libro (sc. Aristotelis) scriptum fuit deterrimam esse potu aquam e nive itemque solidius latiusque concretam [esse] eam, quam »QóotaAXov Graeci appellant. Asclepiades’ new therapy even gave him a nickname, ac-

cording to Varro ap. Plin. XXVI 14 ipse cognominari se frigida danda praeferens. Cf. Cael. Aurel. Morb. ac. 1 14.112 (Asclepiades) vehe-

menter utile dicit aquam bibere et frigida lavari, quam psychrolusiam appellant, et frigidam bibere. See T. Meyer-Steineg, Das medizinische System der Methodiker (Jenaer medizin-hist. Beitráge 7/8, Jena 1916) 101—109. — The statement that vomiting may relieve thirst refers to the termination of the third and final stage of malaria, the sweating stage, when the patient experiences relief of all symptoms, including the severe thirst felt above all during the second (the fever) stage. 687 C ὧν ὑπ οὐδενὸς αὔξεται τὸ ὑγρόν, ἀλλὰ μόνον oi πόροι πάσχοντές τι τῷ μετασχηματίζεσϑαι τάξιν ἑτέραν καὶ διάϑεσιν {ἴσχουσιν): Turn. corrected παρασχόντες τι T. Kron. rightly rejects the conjecture mag (éxovot, π)ἀσχοντές τι Hutt., generally accepted

by the eds., and he plausibly adds ἴσχουσιν. Plut. has a predilection for this construction with ἴσχειν (instead of λαμβάνειν), see exx. above, on 649 B. Cf. also De facie 921.D κρᾶσιν ἴσχειν καὶ σύμπηξιν, 922 D φέγγος ἴσχει καὶ χρόαν αὐγοειδῆ, 923 D κώλυσιν ἴσχει, 943 D τόνον av

αὐτοῦ καὶ δύναμιν

... ἴσχουσι, De def. or. 437 C ἀνέσεις ...

ἴσχειν. 687 C ἐνδεεῖς γὰρ ἅμα πολλοὶ γίνονται καὶ ἀνόρεκτοι τῶν νοσούντων: Anorexia is concomitant with, and sometimes subsequent

to, malaria, cf. Gal. XVII B 938 K. (quoted above); Hipp. Aph. 6.3 (IV 564 L.). It also occurs in connection with many other kinds of fever. Asclepiades explained fevers and certain other diseases as being due to the narrowing of the pores, which blocks the flow of corpuscules in them, cf. Cael. Aurel. Morb, ac. I 14.107 non omnes (sc. passiones

fieri) statione corpusculorum sed certas, hoc est phrenitim, lethargiam, pleuritim et febres vehementes, 114 orexim ... viarum maiorum patefactione fieri dicit; Sext. Emp. Adv. math. VIII 219 τὸ γοῦν ἐπὶ τῶν πυρεσσόντων ἔρευϑος.... καὶ và λοιπὰ σημεῖα ... ᾿Ασκληπιάδῃ δὲ ὡς ἐνστάσεως νοητῶν ὄγκων ἐν νοητοῖς ἀραιώμασιν. Loss of appetite was also known to occur in connection with heat stroke, cf, Soran. II

55 (124), 1), stoppage of the menses (id. III 10.1), haemorrhage of the

687 C

TABLE TALKS VI 2

245

womb (id. III 40.1) and many more diseases or sufferings. A case of

anorexia ἄνευ πυρετοῦ is recorded at Hipp. Epid. 70 (V 432 L.). 687 C οὐδὲ £v αἱ ὀρέξεις χαλῶσιν: The strong emphasis presumably indicates that the fames canina (ὄρεξις κυνώδης, βούλιμος) is meant,

defined at Ps.-Gal. XIX 418 K. βούλιμός ἐστι διάϑεσις καϑ' ἣν ἐπιζήτησις ἐκ μικρῶν διαλειμμάτων γίνεται τροφῆς. Since food is ineffective, the remedy recommended is wine: Gal. XVII Β 499. οἷς δέ ἐστι πάϑος ὁ λιμός, ἴαμα τούτοις ἐστὶν ἡ τοῦ οἴνου πόσις, οὐ τροφῆς

πλῆϑος.

ἐγὼ

γοῦν

οὕτως

ἰασάμην

ἐνίους

τῶν

ἀπαύστως

λιμωττόντων, οἶνον πίνειν διδούς. 687 Ὁ τῶν ἀποσίτων: The synonymous term ἄσιτος is equalized with avéoextog

at

Gal.

ΧΑ

74K.

τοὺς

ἀνορέκτους

ἀσίτους

ὀνομάζουσιν of Ἕλληνες, but cf. CMG V: 10:2:1 p. 43.5 (XVILA 552 K.) ἡ ἀποσιτία τὴν ἀνορεξίαν δηλοῦσα. 687 D ἐλαίαν ἁλμάδα λαμβάνοντες ἢ κάππαριν: Olives in brine are mentioned by Athen. 132 F as a means for stimulating the appetite: ἐχρῶντο yao of παλαιοὶ καὶ τοῖς εἰς ἀναστόμωσιν βρώμασιν ὥσπερ ταῖς ἁλμάσιν ἐλάαις, ἃς κολυμβάδας καλοῦσιν, cf. above, 669 A τὰ δριμέα καὶ τὰ ἁλμυρὰ ... γίνεται γὰρ φίλτρα ταῦτα τῇ ὀρέξει, while fruit is recommended at 635 C τοῖς ἀποσίτοις τῶν ἀρρώστων ὀπώρας

τι προσενεχϑὲν ἀναλαμβάνει τὴν ὄρεξιν. Olive and caper are mentioned together at Plaut. Curc. 90. Oribas. Syn. IV 23 enumerates a great many appetizers, among these κάππαρις ταριχευϑεῖσα, as furthering digestion. 687 D τὰ γὰρ τοιαῦτα βρώματα τὴν μὲν ἔνδειαν ἐλαττοῖ προστιϑεμέ-

νης τροφῆς,

{πεῖναν δὲ ποιεῖ

ὡς γὰρ αἱ στύψεις τοὺς πόκους

δεκτικωτέρους τῆς βαφῆς) ποιοῦσιν, οὕτως κτλ.: Hubert's conjecture is entirely convincing, except that τοὺς πόκους should be substi-

tuted for τὰς ὀϑόνας, see below, on 688 F καὶ yao at στύψεις. The comparison with dyeing there refers to a similar one in the preceding context, i.c. here. In 688 AB-689 A Plut. refutes the Asclepiadean argumentation point by point. The concluding comparison would be pointless if it had not been mentioned earlier. Its position at the end of the argumentation also supports the conjecture, as well as the fact that the point itself is the first to be taken up for refutation (688 AB). Thus the reference to dyeing elegantly rounds up the refutation.

246

TABLE TALKS VI 2

687 D

687 D ἐπιστρέφουσαι καὶ πυκνοῦσαι τὸν στόμαχον ἢ πάλιν ἀνοίγουσαι καὶ χαλῶσαι: It is striking that these opposite effects are ascribed to pungent foods in the same argument, Otherwise either of them is stated, cf. above 624 D where, by reference to Plat. Tim. 65 CD, such foods are said to be constringent, but cf. Quaest. nat.

912 D τήν te γὰρ ὄρεξιν ἡ δριμύτης ἐκκαλεῖται καὶ τοὺς πόρους ἀναστομοῦσα μᾶλλον ὁδοποιεῖ τῇ τροφῇ πρὸς τὴν ἀνάδοσιν. The combination of the actions here is probably for the sake of the argument, to show how the appetite increases even when food is taken. To

explain this fact as due to the shape of the ‘pores’ is difficult, hence the confusion. 687 D δεχτικήν τινα τροφῆς εὐαρμοστίαν κτλ.: Cf. above, 685 B τὸ

τῶν ἁλῶν, (ἐν)τρίχωμα (S.-T.T.: ϑρίγκωμα T) τῆς τροφῆς γινόμενον εἰς τὸ σῶμα καὶ παρέχον εὐαρμοστίαν αὐτῇ πρὸς τὴν ὄρεξιν. The εὐαρμοστία, ‘adjusted receptibility’, is that of the pores. 687 D πρὸς δὲ τὸ μέγιστον ἐναντιοῦσϑαι τῆς φύσεως τέλος, ἐφ ὃ πᾶν ἄγει Giov

ὄρεξις xvÀ.: There

is a certain similarity here with the

reasoning of Plat. Phileb. 31 E πείνη μέν που λύσις καὶ λύπη; ναί. ἐδωδὴ δέ, πλήρωσις γιγνομένη πάλιν, ἡδονή; ναί. δίψος δ᾽ αὖ φϑορὰ καὶ λύπη, ἡ δὲ τοῦ ὑγροῦ πάλιν τὸ ξηρανϑὲν πληροῦσα δύναμις ἡδονὴ κτλ. The living organisms have a natural tendency towards restoration of deficiencies. Cf. also Clem. Paed. I1 30.1 δίψα yao ἐνδείας τινός ἐστι πάϑος καὶ τὸ κατάλληλον ἐπιζητεῖ βοήϑημα πρὸς ἀναπλήρωσιν. Plutarch’s argumentation in this talk and the next one

(689 C-690 B) is essentially derived from Erasistratus. The teleological attitude displayed here is one indication, another is the reference at 688 CD to inflammation as being concomitant with fevers; and the

terms ἔκϑλιψις (688 B, 689 E) and ὄχημα τῆς τροφῆς (687 E, 690 A) are Erasistratean. Erasistratus’ teleological outlook was said to be due to Peripatetic influence, cf. Gal. II 88 K. εἴπερ ὅλως ἀληϑεύουσιν οἱ an αὐτοῦ φάσκοντες ὡμιληκέναι τοῖς ἐκ tot Περιπάτου φιλοσόφοις αὐτόν. ἄχρι μὲν οὖν τοῦ τὴν φύσιν ὑμνεῖν ὡς τεχνυκήν, κτλ., III 492 τεχνικῶς ὑπὸ τῆς φύσεως oiónsvow (sc. Erasistratus et al.) κατεσκχευάσϑαι πάντα, καὶ μάτην οὐδέν. The idea of horror vacui (fj

πρὸς τὸ κενούμενον ἀκολουϑία), which is essential to Erasistratus’ physiology, underlies our passage, cf. Gal. II 103-105 K.

687 E

TABLE TALKS VI 2

687 E τὸ ἐκλεῖπον: Emp.

247

would read ἐλλεῖπον here and at 688 A,

perhaps rightly; the form is found at Alcib. 35.3. 687 E

ὥσπερ

ὄχημα

τῶν

οἰκείων

τῷ

σώματι

καὶ

δεητῶν

ἐγγεγενημένον: Fuhrm. rightly prints ὄχημα τῶν Faehse: ὀμμάτων T. The reading is confirmed by the citation at 690 A ὄχημα τῆς τροφῆς τὸ

ὑγρὸν ὁ ᾿Ερασίστρατος προσεῖπεν, and ὀχήματι τῷ ὑγρῷ χρώμενον, ὡς ἔλεγεν 'E.

698D

τὸ

σιτίον,

οἷον

687 E elg οὐδέν᾽ ἦν λόγον ἁπλῶς τιϑεμένων τὴν φύσιν: The interwoven word-order of this clause seems to be intentionally sophisticated but is perhaps spontaneous and influenced by emotion. Plutarch’s argumentation against the doctrines of Asclepiades is engaged and peremptory throughout. 687 F τῶν περὶ τὰς γεωργίας γινομένων:

References to agriculture

are very frequent in Plut.; Fuhrm. Images, 51 found 70 instances. 687 F πολλὰ γὰρ ὅμοια (rà φυτὰ) πάσχει καὶ βοηϑεῖται: Mez. indicated a lacuna and added (τοῖς ζῴοις τὰ φυτά). The shorter addition by Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 256) is sufficient. However, Cast. also points out that an indefinite subject might be understood, τὰ περὶ τὰς γεωργίας γινόμενα, referring to the soil as well as to the

plants. But the following διγοῦντα δ᾽ αὐτά concerns plants only; thus αὖτά needs an explicit referent (so Fuhrm. in translation); to read αὖ

Re. for αὐτά is no solution. 687 F ἀρδείαις ποτίζομεν, καὶ ψύχομεν μετρίως: While the reference

of ποτίζομεν is undeterminate (soil, plants), the object of ψύχομεν is clearly the plants; both verbs denote the same measure, i.e. watering.

688 A πολλοστὰ περιβάλλοντες: Most eds. accept πόλλ᾽ ἄττα Turn., whereas Dübn. and Fuhrm. preserve the text, rightly it seems. The meaning is presumably ‘many various things’, as at Dion. Hal. Rhet.

11.9 τοῦτο τὸ πολλοστῶς ἐστιν εἰπεῖν. ἕπεται τούτῳ τὸ ποικίλως. διαφέρει δὲ τὸ ποικίλως τοῦ πολλοστῶς. However, Plut. does not have πολλοστός elsewhere. -- Measures of protection against cold and frost were taken in the plant nurseries where young fruit trees were raised and tended for two years, after which they were transplanted or engrafted: Cato, De agr. 48.1 pomarium seminarium ad eundem mo-

248

TABLE TALKS VI 2

688 A

dum atque oleagineum facito. ... 48.2 eo sarmenta aut cratis ficarias imponito, quae frigus defendant et solem. See K.D. White, Roman Farming (London 1970) 260f. Colum. II 10.6 warns those who cultivate beans in cold places to break up the clods of earth, quia exstantes

glaebae e gelicidiis adhuc per teneram vindicent et aliquem teporem frigore laboranti praebeant. See J. Kolendo, L’agricoltura nell’ Italia romana (Roma 1980) 89f. 688 A καὶ ὅσα μὴ παρ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἐστιν: Re. proposed παρ᾽ ἡμῖν, and Cast. παρ᾽ ἡμῶν. Hu. refers to 722 E. Plut. has four further instances

of παρ᾽ ἡμᾶς, Reg. apophth. 177 D, E, De soll. an, 976 B, and frg. 88. 688 A εὐχόμεϑα tov ϑεὸν διδόναι, δρόσους μαλακὰς καὶ εἱλήσεις ἐν

πνεύμασι μετρίοις: Plut. displays a similar thought at Praec. ger. reip. 824 CD:

εὐφορίαν

δὲ γῆς

ἄφϑονον

εὐμενῆ

te κρᾶσιν

ὡρῶν

xol

τίκτειν γυναῖκας ἐοικότα τέκνα γονεῦσι (xai) σωτηρίαν τοῖς γεννωμένοις εὐχόμενος ὅ γε σώφρων αἰτήσεται παρὰ ϑεῶν τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ πολίταις.

688 A ὡς ἀεὶ τοῦ ἀπολείποντος ἀναπλήρωσιν ἡ φύσις ἔχοι: Bern. and Hu. suspected the opt. obl. after a leading verb in the present. However, εὐχόμεϑα has a general sense here and refers to the past as well as the present; it denotes a custom, cf. Dem.

XXII

11 τοῦτον ἔχει τὸν

τρόπον ὁ νόμος, ... iva μηδὲ πεισϑῆναι μηδ᾽ ἐξαπατηϑῆναν γένοιτ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ δήμῳ. See W.W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of

the Greek Verb (London 1889) ὃ 323; Kühner-Gerth? II 382f. 688 A οἶμαι καὶ τρυφὴν ὠνομάσϑαι τὸ τηροῦν τὴν φύσιν: Fanciful etymology, which could be an invention ad hoc, but probably was not. 688 A τοῖς μὲν φυτοῖς ἀναισϑήτως

ἐκ τοῦ περιέχοντος,

ὥς φησιν

Ἐμπεδοκλῆς ὑδρευομένοις τὸ πρύσφορον: A 70 DK. Plut. here seems almost to identify τροφή with the ὕδωρ supplied by the air. This means a generalization of Empedocles’ theory. He appears to have thought that the upper parts of the plant are supplied from the air, and the roots from the earth. The moisture penetrates the bark: frg. B 81 οἶνος ἀπὸ φλοιοῦ πέλεται σαπὲν ἐν ξύλῳ ὕδωρ. The amount of water in the tree in autumn determines whether the foliage is lost or not: frgs. B 77 and 78; A 70 (1296.21 DK). Cf. Theophr, C.P. 112.5 (= A 70): ᾿Ἐμπεδολλῆς διαιρεῖ xoi μερίζει τὴν μὲν γῆν εἰς τὰς ῥίζας,

688 A

TABLE TALKS VI 2

τὸν δ᾽ αἰϑέρα εἰς τοὺς βλαστούς.

249

See above, on 649 C οὐκ ἔστι

ϑερμότητος. 688 Β τὰ μὲν γὰρ εὐστομίαν ἔχοντα καὶ δριμύτητα τάχα μὲν οὐκ ὄρεξιν, ἀλλὰ δηγμὸν ἐμποιεῖ τοῖς Sextixois μέρεσι τῆς τροφῆς, οἷον κνησμοῖ κτλ.: The suggestion that pungent foods do not induce appe-

tite appears to be a passing fancy here by Plut. Otherwise this is always maintained. Such foods have an irritating action, described in mechanical terms, cf. 624 D, 635 BC, 685 B, and Quaest. nat. 912 D-E,

reproduced by Psell. De omnif. doctr. 180 (144). In the following, Plut. returns to this general opinion.

688 B εἰκός ἐστιν... ποιεῖν μὲν ἔνδειαν, οὐ μεταρρυϑμιξομένων τῶν πόρων ἀλλὰ κενουμένων καὶ καθϑαιρομένων: Eds. generally accept the addition οὗ δέ (Mez.) after μεταρρυϑμιζομένων. Fuhrm. deletes μέν instead. Neither is necessary; the construction changes so that μέν

becomes a μέν solitarium, see Denniston? 380-382; Kühner-Gerth? Il 2721. Plut. found it convenient to express the contrast in a compact

form through a gen. abs. and using ἀλλά instead of the intended δέ. For a parallel construction, cf. below, 689 BC ἐὰν μὲν φάγωσιν οἱ διψῶντες, οἱ μὲν οὗ βοηϑοῦνται, τῶν πόρων διὰ λεπτότητα τὴν ξῃρὰν τροφὴν μὴ δεχομένων ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιδεῶν τοῦ οἰκείου διαμενόντων.

688 Β τὰ γὰρ ὀξέα καὶ δριμέα καὶ ἁλμυρὰ ϑούπτοντα τὴν ὕλην διαφέρει καὶ σκίδνησιν, ὥστε νεαρὰν ποιεῖν τὴν ὄρεξιν ἐκϑλιβομένων τῶν ἑώλων καὶ χϑιζῶν: Fuhrm. probably rightly preserves διαφέρει (διαφορεῖ Steph.), in spite of 669 Β διαφορεῖ τὴν ἄλλην τροφὴν καὶ παραδίδωσιν. Plut. occasionally uses διαφέρω in

the sense of ‘disperse’, though only in the passive, cf. De fato 97 F ὑπὸ πνεύματος πολλοῦ κονιορτὸν ἢ συρφετὸν ἐλαυνομένους καὶ διαφερομένους, De gen. Socr. 591 F οἱ δ᾽ ἄνω διαφερόμενον (sc. ἀστέρες). — The term ἐκϑλίβευν indicates that the reasoning depends on Erasistratus. In his mechanical model of digestion, squeezing was an important element. According to him, the food is ground in the

stomach through the rubbing action caused by its peristaltic movements, cf. Ps.-Gal. XIX 372f., quoted below, on 689 D; Cels. 1 Praef. 20 duce alii Erasistrato teri cibum in ventre contendunt. Then it is

squeezed into the veins through contractions of the stomach: Gal. Ii 76 K. τῆς μὲν κοιλίας ἐκϑλίβειν ταῖς φλεψὶ δυναμένης, ὡς αὐτὸς ὑπέϑετο, τῶν φλεβῶν δ᾽ αὖ περιστέλλεσϑαι τῷ ἐνυπάρχοντι, καὶ

250

TABLE TALKS VI 2

688 B

προωϑεῖν αὐτό. See R. Fuchs, Hermes 29 (1894) 190; I.M. Lonie, Bull. Hist. Med. 38 (1964) 433. 688 BC τῶν δὲ λουομένων οὐ μετασχηματιζόμενοι παύουσιν oi πόροι τὸ δίψος, ἀλλ᾽ ἰκμάδα (διὰ) τῆς σαρκὸς ἀναλαμβάνοντες: The addition (Faehse) is necessary,

cf. Clem.

Paed.

III 46.3 who,

however, when he describes the absorption of moisture through the skin in bathing, refers exactly to the Asclepiadean (Methodist) expla-

nation, the reshaping of the pores: τρόπον γάρ τινὰ πίνει τὰ σώματα, ὥσπερ τὰ δένδρα, οὐ μόνον τῷ στόματι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῇ dv’ ὅλου τοῦ σώματος xat τὸ λουτρόν, ὥς φασι, ποροποιίᾳ. τεκμήριον τούτου᾽ δυψήσαντες πολλάκις ἔπειτα ἐμβάντες εἰς τὰ ὕδατα τὴν δίψαν ἠκέσαντο. 688 C οἱ δ᾽ ἔμετοι τὸ ἀλλότριον ἐκβάλλοντες ἀπόλαυσιν τῇ φύσει τοῦ οἰκείου παρέσχον: This is according to the traditional (Hippocratic) humoral pathological theory. If one of the four humours, above all the phlegm, abounds in the body it must be removed to prevent or cure illness, Regular vomiting was prescribed during winter: Hipp. VI 78 L. BE μῆνας τοὺς χειμερινοὺς ἐμέειν᾽ οὗτος γὰρ ὁ χρόνος φλεγματωδέστερος

τοῦ

ϑερινοῦ.

Cf.

Hipp.

II 142 L.

ἔμετος

δὲ

ὠφελιμώτατος ὁ φλέγματός τε καὶ χολῆς. Gal. XV 320 K. states that the matter vomited is always superfluous or noxious, 688 C οὐ γὰρ ἁπλῶς τοῦ ὑγροῦ τὸ δίψος, ἀλλὰ τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν καὶ οἰκείου διό, κἂν πολὺ παρῇ τὸ ἀλλόφυλον, κτλ.: For the metaphoric use of ἀλλόφυλος as opposed to οἰκεῖος, cf. above, 661 C.

688 C ἐφίσταται γὰρ τοῖς κατὰ φύσιν ὑγροῖς: Hu. and Hoffl. admit ἐνίσταται Re. Fuhrm. rightly preserves épiotatat, the meaning of which, ‘imposes itself upon’, or ‘stands against’, ‘blocks’, ‘controls’, is

quite apposite here. 688 C οὐ δίδωσιν ἀνάμιξιν οὐδὲ κατάκρασιν: The two nouns are practically synonymous, cf. 637 E κρᾶσίν twa καὶ μῖξιν, and see above, on 620 E and 643 E. 688 C τὸ σύμφυλον: For the notion of ‘kindred’ or ‘congenial’ food, cf.

Brut. rat. 991 B ἑκάστῳ γένει ζῴου pia τροφὴ σύμφυλός ἐστι, τοῖς μὲν πόα τοῖς δὲ ῥίζα τις ἢ καρπός, De tu. san. 137 B ἀλλὰ καὶ ταῦτα

688 C

TABLE TALKS VI 2

251

δεῖ μνημονεύειν, τὰ σύμφυλα καὶ πρόσφορα TH σώματι, and above,

661 E (about what kinds of food go together) καὶ δεῖ τὸ σύμφυλον ἐκ πείρας λαβόντα χρῆσϑαι καὶ στέργειν.

688 C οἱ δὲ πυρετοὶ τὸ ὑγρὸν εἰς βάϑος ἀπωϑοῦσιν, καὶ τῶν μέσων φλεγομένων

ἐκεῖ πᾶν

ἀποχεχώρηχεν

καὶ κρατεῖται

πεπιεσμένον᾽

ὅϑεν ἐμεῖν τε... καὶ διψῆν: For ἐκεῖ = ἐκεῖσε (= εἰς βάϑος), see above, on 659 D. -- The disease described here is intermittent fever

(malaria). During the first stage of the periodical paroxysm, the chill, there is a high fever but the body’s surface temperature is much below normal. This is due to spasms in the superficial vessels which, reducing

blood circulation in the skin, makes it rough and cool and apparently dried out. Concomitant symptoms are vomiting and severe thirst as well as abundant urine which normally must be voided frequently. Retention of urine, as described here, occurs above all in the perni-

cious forms of malaria. The course of malaria is described at Ps.-Hipp. De reg. acut., App. 13.1 Joly (II 420 L.) ὡς γὰρ ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ σημήιόν ἐστι μέλλοντος παροξύνεσϑαι τοῦ πυρετοῦ ψῦξις ποδῶν. ... ὅταν δὲ ὁ πυρετὸς χήγῃ, τοὐναντίον ϑερμότεροι οἱ πόδες γίνονται τοῦ ἄλλου σώματος. The patient should keep his feet warm to relieve the fever: ibid. 15.1 (424 L.) οἷσι δὲ διὰ τέλεος ἡ κοιλίη ἐν τοῖσι πυρετοῖσιν ὑγρή, τούτοισι διαφερόντως τοὺς πόδας ϑερμαίνων καὶ περιστέλλων ... πρόσεχε, ὡς μὴ ἔσονται ψυχρότεροι τοῦ ἄλλου σώματος. It was

even thought that fevers could be prevented if the extremities were never allowed to get cold, cf. Plut. De tu. san. 123 A ἡ τῶν ἄκρων περίψυξις εἰς τὰ μέσα συνελαύνουσα τὸ ϑερμὸν ὥσπερ τινὰ συνήϑειαν ἢ μελέτην ἐμποιεῖ πυρετοῦ. According to Erasistratus, fevers of all kinds are always preceded by an inflammation: Gal. XV 159 K.

*Egacioteatos ἐπὶ φλεγμονὴ γίνεσθαι βουλόμενος ἅπαντας τοὺς πυρετούς, ΧΙ 226 αἱ δὲ ἀρχαὶ τῶν πυρετῶν ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἔχουσι κατὰ τὸν ᾿Ερασίστρατον ἀρχὴν φλεγμονῆς; Cels. ΠῚ 10.3 erravit Erasistratus, cum febrem nullam esse sine hac (sc. inflammatione) dixit. He

explains inflammation in turn as being due to a repletion of blood (τληϑώρολ in the veins, which causes infusion of blood (παρέμπτωσις) into the arteries where it disturbs the πνεῦμα which fills these vessels.

This causes many kinds of diseases, see Fuchs, Neue Jahrb. f. Philol. 62 (1892) 680 n. 2, 684-686. 688 Ὁ ὅταν οὖν ἄνεσις γένηται καὶ τὸ ϑερμὸν ἐκ τῶν μέσων ἀπίῃ,

σκιδνάμενον

αὖϑις

ὑπονοστεῖ

καὶ

διιόν,

ὡς πέφυκε,

πάντῃ

τὸ

252

TABLE TALKS VI 2

688 D

νοτερὸν xth.: i.c. the termination of the shivering stage and the transition to the hot when there is intensive peripheral heat making the skin turgid and the face flushed, while spasms relax, cf. Ps.-Hipp. De reg. acut., App. 14.2 Joly (II 424 L.) ϑεομῆς δὲ καταβάσης ἐς τοὺς πόδας καὶ οὔρου διελθόντος, κἢν μὴ demon, πάντα λωφᾷ; Gal. VII

427 K. καὶ προσαγορευέσϑω τὸ μετὰ τὸν παροξυσμὸν ἅπαν ἄνεσις. The participle διιόν (Turn.: ἴδιον T) refers to the release of urine. 688 D πολλάκις δὲ καὶ ἱδρῶτας ἐπήγαγεν: Πολλάκις is an understatement, Even if sweating varies greatly in intensity and sometimes does not occur at all, it normally forms a third and final stage before the stage of relief in the course of malaria. In the hot stage proper there is no sweating. 688 D ὅϑεν ἡ ποιοῦσα διψῆν ἔνδεια λήγει καὶ παύεται: With the final stage there is relief of all symptoms, not only thirst. 688 ἢ ἀπὸ tod βαρυνομένου καὶ δυσαναβλαστοῦντος: sc. τόπου. Fuhrm. preserves the hapax δυσαναβλαστοῦντος hesitatingly, but with good reason: ‘la métaphore est en tout cas plutarquéenne'. Hu. conjectured δυναναβλυστοῦντος (-βλυτοῦντος Dübn., -βλύζοντος Doe.). None of these compounds is found. The formation βλαστόω occurs at Anecd. Oxf. I 96, and the root βλ-, ‘grow’, ‘sprout (forth)’, is not less probable than βλυ-, ‘gush/spout out’. The context indicates that the verb is causal or transitive, with ὑγρότητα as the implicit object: ‘hardly able (Óvo-) to cause/bring the moisture to propagate/ flow forth'. It is of importance that the moisture is conveyed within the pores, and not gushed or spouted out. The parallel formation βλαστάνω is used in causal sense at Hipp. Alim. 54 (IX 120 L.) δύναμις πάντα αὔξει καὶ xai βλαστάνει, and for the transitive sense,

cf. Eunap. Hist. 38 p. 235.26 Dind. ἔρις δὲ αὐξηϑεῖσα πολέμους ἀνεβλάστησε, 688 E ὡς γὰρ ἐν κήπῳ κτλ.: For the frequent comparisons with agriculture in Plut., see Fuhrm. Images, 51. 688 E συμβαίνει καὶ τῶν ἐγκαταδαρϑανόντων τῷ διψῆν᾽ καὶ yao τούτοις ὁ ὕπνος ἐκ μέσων ἐπανάγων τὰ ὑγρὰ κτλ.: Plut. only seemingly intimates that, in fever and in the initial stage of sleep respectively, the moisture is concentrated to different regions in the body,

688 Ε

TABLE TALKS VI 2

253

namely τὸ βάϑος (688 C of πυρετοὶ τὸ ὑγρὸν εἰς βάϑος ἀπωϑοῦσιν) and τὰ μέσα. The two terms are used practically as synonyms in the sense of ‘the inner parts’. The kind of thirst meant is the so-called superficial one when mouth and throat feel dry, in spite of the body

not being in need of water, see above, on 687 C οἱ νύκτωρ διψῶντες, and cf. Cels. III 4.4-5. Erasistratus explains the more effective digestion during sleep as being due to the fact that the body is at rest. Gal. IX 133K. Ἐρασίστρατος μέν φησι διὰ τὴν ἠρεμίαν τῶν κατὰ προαίρεσιν κινήσεων, ἣν καὶ τοῦτο πέττειν καλῶς, οὐκ αὐτοὺς τοὺς ὕπνους αἰτιᾶται.

688 F τὸ συμπίπτειν καὶ τὸ διίστασϑαι᾽ καὶ συμπίπτοντες μὲν οὔτε ποτὸν οὔτε τροφὴν δέχεσϑαι δύνανται, διιστάμενοι δὲ κενότητα καὶ χώραν ποιοῦσιν, ἔνδειαν οὖσαν τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν καὶ οἰκείου: At first sight it might seem as if Plut. here contradicts his own argumentation and accepts Asclepiades’ doctrine that hunger and thirst or their absence depend on the shape of the pores. But this is not the case: he is still relying on Erasistratus, who observed that hunger ceases if fasting is continued for a long time. He explained this as being due to a

closing or collaps of the cavities of the belly: Gell. XVI 3.3 quod Erasistratus scriptum ... verum est: esuritionem faciunt inanes patentesque intestinorum fibrae et cava intus ventris ac stomachi vacua et hiantia; quae ubi aut cibo conplentur aut inanitate diutina contrahuntur et conivent, tunc loco, in quem cibus capitur, vel stipato vel adducto, voluntas capiendi eius desiderandique restinguitur... (7) verba Erasistrati ad eam rem pertinentia haec sunt: ἐλογιζόμεϑα οὖν παρὰ τὴν ἰσχυρὰν σύμπτωσιν τῆς κοιλίας εἶναι τὴν σφόδρα ἀσιτίαν᾽ καὶ γὰρ τοῖς ἐπίτλεον ἀσιτοῦσιν κατὰ προαίρεσιν ἐν τοῖς πρώτοις

χρόνοις ἡ πεῖνα παρακολουϑεῖ, ὕστερον δὲ οὐκέτι. ... (8) σχεδὸν δὲ καὶ ὅταν πλήρης κοιλία 3, διὰ τὸ κένωμα ἐν αὐτῇ μηδὲν εἶναι, διὰ τοῦτο οὐ πεινῶσιν, ὅταν δὲ σφόδρα συμπεπτωκυΐα 1], κένωμα οὐκ ἔχει. What Erasistratus means is that the case of prolonged fasting is

an exceptional phenomenon and that the contraction of the digestive cavities is the result of this. The cavities do not fall in or expand automatically. The doctrine of such independent changes of the ‘pores’ is not found before Asclepiades. Erasistratus regarded the size of these as proportional to the degree of repletion. The measure he prescribed against πληϑώρα, hyperaemia of the veins, which he regarded as the cause of inflammations and numerous diseases (see Fuchs, Neue Jahrb.

f. Philol. 62 (1892) 680 n. 2) was chiefly starvation (ἀσιτία), cf. Gal.

254

TABLE TALKS VI 2

688 F

XI 228 K. μηδὲν προσφέρειν κατὰ τοὺς τῆς φλεγμονῆς καιρούς. ...

αὐτὴν τὴν ἀσιτίαν ὡς κενωτικὸν βοήϑημα παραλαμβάνει. According to Erasistratus it is the degree of openness and vacuity of the cavities, not their shape, that determines hunger. Plut. makes use of the comparison with dyeing below to illustrate Erasistratus’ theory, The same kind of comparison was used at 687 D by the supporters of Asclepiades’ doctrine but they had considerable difficulty in doing that, see on 687 D ἐπιστρέφουσαν καὶ πυκχνοῦσαι. 688 F καὶ γὰρ ai στύψεις, ὦ βέλτιστε, τών βαπτομένων, ἔφην, πόκων ἔχουσι τὸ δριμὺ καὶ ῥυπτικόν, ᾧ τῶν περισσῶν ἐκκρινομένων ... οἱ πόροι δέχονται μᾶλλον ... τὴν βαφὴν ὑπ ἐνδείας καὶ κενότητος: Hoffl. rightly prints πόκων Bern.: τόπον T. Hu. would prefer ὀθονῶν Doe., see his conjecture at 687 D, but linen was practically never dyed, cf. Plin. XIX 22 temptatum est tingui linum quoque, ut vestium

insaniam acciperet. Fuhrm, accepts ὑφάντων Madv. (for ἔφην τόπον), which might be right if it were not for the fact that the dyeing process normally preceded the weaving, and also the spinning, cf. Od. VI 306 ἠλάκατα στρωφῶσ᾽ ἁλιπόρφυρα; Plat. Rep. 429 D oi βαφεῖς, ἐπειδὰν βουληϑῶσι βάψαι ἔρια; Ps.-Arist. De col. 794 a 32 βάπτεται δὲ καὶ τὰ μέλανα τῶν ἐρίων; Cic. Verr. 11 4.26.59 plena domo telarum, stragulam vestem confecit, nihil nisi conchylio tinctum; Verg. Georg. IV 334 Milesia vellera Nymphae | carpebant hyali saturo fucata colore; Clem. Paed. 11 111.1 αἱ δὲ ῥύψεις καὶ αἱ στύψεις τοῖς φαρμακώδεσι τῆς βαφῆς χυμοῖς ἐκτήκουσαι τὰ ἔρια, id. Strom. VI 103.6 τοῖς ἐρίοιςἡ στῦψις τῆς βαφῆς ἐμμείνασα. It was noticed as ἃ curiosity that the

Egyptians also dyed cloth: Plin. XXXV 150 pingunt et vestes in Aegypto; cf. also Iambl. V. Pyth. 17.76 oi βαφεῖς προεκκαϑάραντες ἔστυψαν τὰ βάψιμα τῶν ἱματίων. The detergents used for the solution were alum and various botanical extracts, e.g. the soap-wort (στρούϑειον) and the bugloss. See Forbes, Technology IV 131-133; Blümner, Technologie? I 230-232, 246; K.D. White, Greek and Roman Technology (Ithaca 1984) 39-41. — The comparison with dyeing here certainly refers to a similar one at 687 D, as suggested by Hu. There the sharp and pungent matter is said to produce changes of the shape of the ‘pores’; here its detergent effect is stressed, in order to show that vacuity is the cause of hunger.

689 A

TABLE TALKS VI 3

255

TALK 3 689 A mods ἄλλην ἀπορίαν τὰς τῶν πόρων κενώσεις καὶ ἀναπληρώσεις (Bondeiv, διὰ τί τοῖς μὲν πεινῶσιν, ἐὰν πίωσι, παύεται τὸ πεινῆν) ἐν τῷ παραυτίκα κτλ.: Madv. and Hu. filled the lacuna (indicated by Re.) convincingly. 689 B οἱ τοὺς πόρους ὑποτιϑέμενοι: 1.6. the followers of Asclepiades, see above, on 687 B, C.

689 B εἰ καὶ δὴ πολλὰ μόνον πιϑανῶς: I believe that we should read δή for μή and

translate:

‘although,

to be sure,

their accounts

are

(otherwise) often only just plausible’. Madvig was the first to suspect the passage, but his proposal εἰ καὶ μὴ τἄλλα, μόνοι [πυϑανῶς] is not persuasive. Hu. preserved the text and interpreted: ‘quamquam non multa cum aliqua tantum probabilitate’. He was followed by Hoffl.: ‘although it isn’t often that they are even so much as plausible’, and Fuhrm.: ‘si méme sur quelques points elle n'est que plausible’. These translations do not render the text correctly. Indeed, it appears incom-

prehensible unless the negation is eliminated. I believe that the correction is preferable to deletion. 689 B πᾶσι γὰρ ὄντων πόρων, ἄλλας πρὸς ἄλλα συμμετρίας ἐχόντων:

The traditional interpretation οἱ πᾶσι, ‘for all bodies’, made Re. substitute πολλῶν for it; Hoffl. rightly interprets ‘for everything’, i.e. for the different kinds of matter that are transported through the body. 689 B οἱ δ᾽ ἰσχνότεροι τὸ μὲν ποτὸν παραδέχονται, (τὸ σιτίον δ᾽ o0): The addition (Fuhrm.), after Re. and Madv., is convincing. — For Asclepiades' doctrine of different pores causing hunger and thirst, see Cael. Aurel. Morb. ac. I 14.114 (quoted above, 687 C πόρων τινῶν). 689 BC ὅϑεν, ἐὰν μὲν φάγωσιν oi διψῶντες, oi μὲν οὐ βοηϑοῦνται, ... οἱ δὲ πεινῶντες ἐὰν πίνωσιν, ἐνδυόμενα τὰ ὑγρὰ ... ἀνίησι τὸ σφοδρὺν ἄγαν τῆς πείνης: This explanation is imitated by Macrob. Sat. VH 12.19. ~ The fact that liquids mitigate hunger is mentioned at

Hipp. Aph. 21 (IV 476 L.) λιμὸν ϑώρηξις λύει; Gal. XV 667 K. (τὸ ὕδωρ) βραχεῖαν τροφὴν δίδωσι τῷ σώματι; Cael. Aurel. Morb. chron. III 47 potu impleti minus solidos appetunt cibos.

256

TABLE TALKS VI 3

689 C

689 C εἰ toig πόροις τούτοις ... κατατρήσειέ τις τὴν σάρχα, πλαδαρὰν καὶ τρομώδη καὶ σαϑρὰν (ἂν) ποιήσειε" κτλ.: This severe criticism is certainly directed against Asclepiades’ doctrine of the perforation of the body with pores of various sizes. This attack by Plutarch is rather striking, seeing that he represents himself in this contribution as a supporter of Erasistratus, whose doctrine of three kinds of passages (veins, arteries and nerves), which in turn are interwoven with invisible pores at the atomic level (ἀγγεῖα ἁπλᾶ καὶ λόγῳ ϑεωρητά), also implies a general perforation of the flesh: Ps.Gal. XIV 697 K. ᾿Ερασίστρατος

... ὑποτυϑέμενος τὴν τριπλοχίαν

τῶν ἀγγείων, νεῦρα καὶ φλέβας καὶ ἀρτηρίας, Gal. II 96 K. φλέβας ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ ἀρτηρίας τὸ νεῦρον. Erasistratus even seems to

have assumed that the atoms have space between them so that they are unconnected (&vagua): Gal. II 100 Κ, ef μὴ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς τούτοις ἕνωσίν τινα τῆς οὐσίας ἀπόλείψομεν,

ἀλλ᾽

εἰς ἄναρμα καὶ

ἀμέριστα καταβησόμεϑα στοιχεῖα, παντάπασιν ἀφαιρήσομεν τὴν τῆς φύσεως τέχνην. 689 C τό τε μὴ ταὐτὰ τοῦ σώματος μύρια τὸ ποτὸν προσδέχεσθϑαι καὶ τὸ σιτίον x1À.: For τε Bern.: γε, cf. above, on 648 B. -- According to

Erasistratus, nutriment is distributed to all parts of the body through the minimal pores in the veins, cf. Macrob. Sar. VII 4.22 alimonia eius (sc. cibi) dispersa per universos membrorum meatus ossa quoque et medullas et ungues nutriat et capillos. The same uniform nutritious mixture is distributed everywhere after it has been transformed into blood in the liver and in the right ventricle of the heart (Gal. II 76f.).

689 CD αὐτὴ γὰρ ἡ πρὸς τὸ ὑγρὸν ἀνάμιξις, ϑρύπτουσα tà σιτία: Franke’s conjecture αὐτή: αὕτη T should be accepted. The demonst.

pron. has no referent; the blending has not been mentioned before. We may translate: ‘For it is exactly the blending with liquid that breaks up the solid food.’ The blending is stated as an essential part of Erasistratus’ theory of digestion below, 698 B τῆς ὑγρᾶς τροφῆς πρὸς τὴν ξηρὰν ἀναγχαίαν ἐχούσης τὴν ἀνάμιξιν, and 698 D ἐνδιατρίβει (sc. τὸ ὑγρὸν) τοῖς σιτίοις καὶ μαλάσσει, ὥστ᾽ ἀναμίγνυσθϑαι καὶ παραμένειν.

689 Ὁ συνεργὰ λαμβάνουσα τὸ ϑερμὸν τὸ ἐντὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, πάντων ὀργάνων ἀκχριβέστατα πάσαις τομαῖς καὶ διαιρέσεσι

689 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VI 3

257

λεπτύνει τὴν τροφήν: In the traditional (humoral) theory, digestion was regarded as a ‘chemical’ process, a concoction (πέψις), in which the innate heat was considered the chief agent, see above, on 635 C

642 C, 663 A. Erasistratus who denied that the heat and the πνεῦμα in the body are innate but assumed that these are acquired from outside through respiration, rejected this theory and regarded digestion as a mechanical process of grinding in which the muscular coat of the

stomach

is stimulated

to

peristaltic

movements

by

the

πνεῦμα

Cwtixdv: Ps.-Gal. XIX 3721. K. tag πέψεις τῆς τροφῆς ᾿Ιπποκράτης μὲν ὑπὸ tot ἐμφύτου ϑερμοῦ φησι yiveobar, ᾿Ερασίστρατος δὲ τρίψει καὶ λειώσει καὶ περιστολῇ τῆς γαστρὸς καὶ ἐπικτήτου

πνεύματος ἰδιότητι, Gal. XV 247 Κ. δῆλόν ἐστι τὴν τοοφὴν κατὰ τὴν γαστέρα πέττεσϑαι. τοῦτο δὲ οὐκ ἀρέσκει οὐδὲ ᾿Ασχκληπιάδῃ οὔτ᾽ ᾿Ερασιστράτῳ. Plut. does not strictly follow Erasistratus’ theory. The wording of our passage is partly repeated below, 699 B, in a context

where Plut. is critical of Erasistratus: οὐδ᾽ ἔστι τῶν ὀργάνων αὐτῆς (sc. τῆς φύσεως) τὴν ἀκρίβειαν οἷς χρῆται (λέγω δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ϑερμόν) ἀξίως διελϑεῖν, 689 D ὥστε πᾶν μύριον αὐτῆς παντὶ μορίῳ γίνεσθαι φίλον ... ἐνούμενον καὶ προσφυόμενον: In Erasistratus’ mechanical model of nutrition, the nutritive matter, after it has been divided and dissected

(τομαῖς καὶ διαιρέσεσι) down to the atomic level, is mechanically added to, and amalgamated with, the tissues on the points in the body

where there are deficiencies created by wear: Gal. II 103f. K. ὅτι τοσοῦτον ἀκολουϑεῖν ἀναγκάζει τῶν συνεχῶν, ὅσον ἀπορρεῖ. τοῦτο δ᾽ ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν εὐεκτοῦντων ἱκανόν ἐστιν εἰς τὴν ϑρέψιν, ἴσα γὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν εἶναι χρῆ τοῖς ἀπορρέουσι τὰ προστιϑέμενα, IT 201 K. ἐν ὅλῳ δὲ τῷ σώματι πρόσφυσις τῶν προστεϑέντων τῆς τροφῆς ἔσται

μορίων, cf. below, 690 A προστίϑησι τοῖς δεομένοις. The delivery takes place through the walls of the capillary veins: Gal. II 105 K. ἐκ τῶν παρακειμένων ἀγγείων ἡ πρόσϑεσις συμβαίνει εἰς τὰ κενώματα

τῶν ἀπενεχϑέντων κατὰ τὰ πλάγια τῶν ἀγγείων. See C.R.S. Harris, The Heart and the Vascular System in Ancient Greek Medicine (Oxford 1973) 214f. 689 D od μόνον οὐ λύουσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ προσεπιτείνουσι td δίψος" πρὸς τοῦτο δ᾽ οὐδὲν εἴρηται: Plut. emphatically dismisses the Asclepiadean explanation given by the host at 689 C τῶν πόρων διὰ λεπτότητα τὴν

258

TABLE TALKS VI 3

689 D

ξηρὰν τροφὴν μὴ δεχομένων ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιδεῶν tod οἰκείου διαμενόντων as being insufficient. It does not account for the fact that thirst actually increases when only solid food is taken. 689 D axöneı δὲ καὶ τὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, ἔφην: Here Plut. adduces another source, clearly a Peripatetic one. 689 E τῷ δ᾽ ὑγρῷ τὸ Eqodv βρεχόμενον ... διαχύσεις ἴσχειν καὶ ἀναϑυμιάσεις: Plut. frequently uses the phrase ἴσχειν + obj., see above, on 649 B, and 687 C. - For the notion of evaporation from food in digestion, cf. Arist. De somn. et vig. 456 b 34 πολλὴ γὰρ ἡ ἀπὸ

τῶν σιτίων ἀναϑυμίασις, 456 b 3 τῆς μὲν οὖν ϑύραϑεν τροφῆς εἰσιούσης εἰς τοὺς δεκτικοὺς τόπους γίνεταν ἡ ἀναϑυμίασις εἰς τὰς φλέβας, id. P.A. 653 a 1 ἀναϑυμιωμένης γὰρ διὰ τῶν φλεβῶν ἄνω τῆς τροφῆς κτλ. 689 E μὴ νομίζοντες ἔκϑλιψιν εἶναι παντάπασιν κτλ.: This only seemingly conflicts with Plutarch’s affirmation at 688 B that pungent

foods cause the previous day’s stale residue to be squeezed out effectively (ἐκϑλυβομένων) into the veins and so create a deficiency which renews the appetite. This does not imply a complete emptying of the pores. His argument here is that vacuity alone is not the cause of hunger and thirst, but rather a lack of proper and sufficient nutrition.

689 E ἡ μὲν γὰρ δίψα τοῖς φαγοῦσιν ἐπιτείνεται τῶν σιτίων τῇ Enoömu, (τὸ) διεσπαρμένον ὑγρὺν ... συλλεγόντων καὶ προσεξικμαζόντων: From here on to the end of the talk, the text is

closely related to Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. III 51 Bussem. and Psell. De omnif. doctr. 119 (XXXI). Both have τὸ διεσπαρμένον. There is no good reason, then, not to assume this reading for Plut. also (Doe. Vind. 57); in any case (ὅ tt) Hu. is preferable to the conditional (si τι) Re. In the preceding sentence Plut. just established as a fact that there are always some remnants of food and moisture in the body. Plut. has

a similar

construction

below,

691 AB

oi δ᾽

ἀκόναι

...

λεπτύνουσι τὸ ὕδωρ, 6 τι ϑολερὸν xai γεῶδες ἀναμέμυκται, τοῦτο συνάγοντες. 689 Ε ὥσπερ

ἔξω

γῆν ὁρῶμεν

καὶ κόνιν...

ἀφανίζουσαν:

This

sentence, and περισκελῆ καὶ γλίσχρα in the next sentence, are lacking both in Ps.-Arist. and Psellus.

689 F

TABLE TALKS VI 3

259

689 F ἡ yao ὑγρότης ..., χυμῶν ἐγγενομένων καὶ ἀτμῶν, ἀναφέρει τούτους εἰς τὸ σῶμα καὶ προστίϑησι τοῖς δεομένοις: Hu. mistakenly adopted τούτοις Kron., and Hoffl..and Fuhrm. follow him. Clearly, τούτους is right (the MSS of Psell. have τούτους except the insignifi-

cant S H; Ps.-Arist. has ἀϑμὸν ἀναφέρει τοῦτον); the liquid dissolves the remnants of food into juices and vapours and then transports and distributes these in the body. The doctrine is basically Erasistratean, as the description of nutrition in terms of mechanical addition shows, see above, on 688 D, and so also the term χυμοί, ‘digested nutritive

matter’, cf. Gal. II 107, ΠῚ 541, V 123f., 132 K. (ἡ τῶν χυμῶν γένεσις, 6 τρόφιμος χυμός), ΙΧ 595; χυλόω is also used: id. II 157 K. τῆς τῶν

κεχυλωμένων ἀναδόσεως. 690 A ὅϑεν οὗ κακῶς ὄχημα τῆς τροφῆς τὸ ὑγρὸν ὁ ᾿Ερασίστρατος προσεῖπεν: Plut. also cites Erasistratus for this expression at 698 D, and probably alludes to it at 687 E, see ad loc. It is found in the collection of aphorisms, Ps.-Hipp. IX 120 L. ὑγρασίη τροφῆς ὄχημα, and it is used by Hippol. Refut. VII 29.5 to explain Νῆστις; ‘fasting’, in Emped. frg. B 6: Νῆστις δὲ τὸ ὕδωρ᾽ μόνον γὰρ τοῦτο ὄχημα τροφῆς

αἴτιον γινόμενον πᾶσι τοῖς τρεφομένοις, αὐτὸ καϑ' αὑτὸ τρέφειν οὐ δυνάμενον τὰ τρεφόμενα. -- Plut. cites Erasistratus above, 663 C, for

another image, ϑεῶν χεῖρες. 690 A ἐνδυομένη γὰρ ἔξωϑεν ἡ ὑγρότης κτλ.: Both Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. ΠῚ 51 Bussem. and Psell. De omnif. doctr. 119 (XXXI) leave out ὅϑεν ... πεινῶντες. Consequently, in these texts ‘the external mois-

ture’ refers to τὸ ποτόν (689 F) while here the moistening effect of baths is implied. It appears, then, that Psellus used that collection or another source

beside

Plut.

here,

cf. above,

on

687 A

ὅταν

οὖν

νηστεύσωμεν. — Plut. uses the argument analogically at 688 BC: moisture penetrates the skin during bathing and thus reduces thirst. For the effects ascribed to baths, see above, on 687 C πολλοῖς δὲ λουσαμένοις. 690 A ἔνιοι τῶν ἀποχαρτερούντων: A comedy by Apollodorus of Carystos was entitled Oi ἀποκαρτεροῦντες, "The Starvation-Suicides' (frg. 3 III 281 Kock; III 186 Edmonds). Suicide through starvation was regarded as a non-heroic and timorous method, cf. Ovid. Fasti V1 373;

Amm. Marcell. XVII 9.4. It was used above all by weak and decrepit people: Tac. Ann. IV 35.4—5; Nep. Att. 25.22.3; Plin. Ep. I 12.9. The

260

TABLE TALKS VI 3

690 A

poet Silius Italicus starved himself to death aged 65: Plin. Ep. III 7.12. Lucian. Macrob. 18-19 affirms that Democritus died in this way

when he was 104 years old, and that Zenon the Stoic and his successor, Cleanthes, chose this exit aped 98 and 99 years respectively, cf. Diog.

Laert. VII 176. According to Sen. Ep. 82.9 Zenon hanged himself. See further Yolande Grisé, Le suicide dans la Rome antique (Paris 1982) 118-120; A.J.L.van Hooff, From Autothanasia to Suicide, Nijmegen

1990. TALK 4 690 B ψυχροπότῃ ξένῳ τρυφῶντι x1À.: Cold drinks were a coveted luxury and people who could afford it indulged in exaggerated ψυχροποσία. This was criticized as being unnatural and noxious, cf.

Plin. XIX 54-55 heu prodigia ventris! ... hi nives, illi glaciem potant poenasque montium in voluptatem gulae vertunt; Sen. Quaest. nat. IV 13.4 illi, cui divitiae molestae sunt, excogitatum est, quemadmodum

etiam caperet aqua luxuriam. unde ad hoc perventum sit, ut nulla nobis aqua satis frigida videretur, quae flueret, dicam. ... (5) itaque non aestate tantum, sed et media hieme nivem hac causa bibunt. quae huius rei causa est, nisi intestinum malum et luxu corrupta praecordia?

etc., id. Ep. 78.23 o. infelicem aegrum! quare? quia non vino nivem diluit? quia non rigorem potionis suae, quam capaci scypho miscuit, renovat fracta insuper glacie? Especially patients suffering from inflammations should abstain from cold drinks: Gal. XV 802 K. ἡ τοῦ

ψυχροῦ πόσις ἐναντιωτάτη ἐστὶ τῇ φλεγμονῇ, cf. X 622. Cf. Plut. De tu. san. 126 F διὰ ψυχροποσίαν ... πολλὰς μὲν αὑτῶν διεφϑείραμεν

ἧδονάς. Orators were thought to spoil their voices . through ψυχροποσία: De ad. et am. 60 A περὶ τῆς φωνῆς αἰτιᾶσθαι καὶ χαλεπῶς ἐγκαλεῖν ὅτι τὴν ἀρτηρίαν διαφϑείρει ψυχροποτῶν. Untimely use was thought to be dangerous: Sopater, Rhet. Gr. V 4.24 Walz καὶ ψυχροποσίαν ἐν ϑέρει διδομένην ἑωρακὼς ἔδωκεν ἐν χειμῶνι, καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πεποιηκὼς ἀπώλεσεν. 690 Β χρεμάσαντες τὸ ἀγγεῖον ἐν τῷ φρέατι: Plut. describes this method at De prim. frig. 949 C-D. It is mentioned by Strattis frg. 57 (I 728 Kock) οἶνον γὰρ πιεῖν | οὐδ᾽ ἂν εἷς δέξαιτο ϑερμόν, ἀλλὰ πολὺ τοὐναντίον | ψυχόμενον ἐν τῷ φρέατι καὶ χιόνι μεμιγμένον. Also pits without water were used, as described by Semus of Delos ap. Athen.

123 D φησὶ ψυχεῖα κατεσκευάσϑαι ϑέρους ὀρυκτά, Evda χλιεροῦ

690 B

ὕδατος πλήρη. διάφορα.

TABLE TALKS VI 4

κεράμια

καταϑέντες

κομίζονται

261

χιόνος

οὐδὲν

690 C τοῦτ᾽ ἔφη λαβεῖν ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αριστοτέλους μετὰ λόγου κείμενον: Arist. frg. 216 Rose. Sandbach, //l. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 224 suggests that this passage probably derives from a lost Aristotelian Problemata physica, cited at 734 C. Cf. also Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. 1 58. 690 C προϑερμανϑέν: This condition is irrelevant to the question under consideration. The ξένος evidently makes a mistake when he adduces the Aristotelian source for his answer; it simply does not fit here. In his reply (690 D-E) Plut. makes this clear. The heating is irrelevant in this context. If the talk is entirely literary, this implies that Plut. realized his own mistake; but it may be that he is reporting a real

discussion in which a speaker happened to commit this mistake and was corrected. This would explain why Plut. allowed himself to present

this confused talk to his readers. In De prim. frig. he keeps the two cases apart, (1) the cooling of water in the air within a well (949 C-D) and, (2) preheating and cooling in the air outside (949 E-F), thus demonstrating that air is cold by nature. 690 C πᾶν ὕδωρ προϑερμανθϑὲν ψύχεται μᾶλλον ... ὅταν γὰρ ἐψηϑῇ μέχρι ζέσεως, περισωρεύουσι τῷ ἀγγείῳ χιόνα πολλήν: This practice is mentioned -- with reference to rapidity of freezing — by Arist. Meteor.

348 Ὁ 31 συμβάλλεται

δ᾽ ἔτι πρὸς τὴν ταχυτῆτα τῆς

πήξεως καὶ τὸ προϑερμάνϑαι τὸ ὕδωρ᾽ ϑᾶττον γὰρ ψύχεται. διὸ πολλοὶ ὅταν τὸ ὕδωρ ψῦξαι ταχὺ βουληϑῶσιν, εἰς τὸν ἥλιον τιϑέασι πρῶτον. In spite of the fact that this practice was old, then, its

invention is ascribed to the Emperor Nero; perhaps Plutarch’s mention here of βασιλεῖς, possibly ‘Emperors’ as suggested by Warmington, is

an allusion to this: Plin. XXXI

40 Neronis principis inventum est

decoquere aquam vitroque demissam in nives refrigerare. ita voluptas

frigoris contingit sine vitiis nivis. omnem utique decoctam utiliorem esse convenit, item calefactam magis refrigerari, subtilissimo invento.

vitiosae aquae remedium est, si decoquatur ad dimidias partes. An allusion to Nero's ‘invention’ is found at Suet. Nero 48.3. The fact that heating may render unhealthful water or wine innoxious was thus well known; it was recommended by the doctors: Oribas. Coll. med. V 1.11

καλῶς δ᾽ àv ἔχοι τά τε ἰλυώδη xai δυσώδη xoi ὅσα ποιότητας ἀτόπους ἔχει πρότερον ἀλλοιοῦντας ἑψήσει προσφέρεσθαι, (cf. Gal.

262

TABLE TALKS VI 4

690 C

XVII B 156f. K.), ibid. V 3.36 διατρίβοντα δ᾽ ὅπου φαῦλον ἔστιν ὕδωρ, μηχανητέον αὐτὸ ποτιμώτερον ποιεῖν. ἄριστον οὖν ἑψεῖν ἐν κεραμίοις ἀγγείοις καὶ διαψύξαντα τῆς νυκτὸς πάλιν ϑερμάναντα

πίνειν. Cf. also below, 692 D ὥσπερ οἱ τοῖς ἀκρατῶς ἔχουσι πρὸς ψυχροποσίαν ἀρρώστοις ἀφεψημένον (sc. οἶνον) διδόντες. This knowledge of the effect of heating strikingly anticipates the discoveries made by L. Pasteur in 1857. It was natural that the method aroused the interest of the ancient physicists. 690 C περισωρεύουσι

τῷ ἀγγείῳ

χιόνα πολλήν:

This

is a further

element of irrelevance in the argumentation (cf. above, on 690 C προϑερμανϑέν). At De prim. frig. 949 EF cooling of heated water in the air is described: of te τὰ ζέοντα τῶν ὑδάτων ἀναρύτοντες καὶ μετεωρίζοντες οὐδὲν ἄλλο δήπου ποιοῦσιν ἢ πρὸς ἀέρα πολὺ ἀνακεραννύουσιν. Helmbold, Mor. LCL XII 251 n. ὁ suggests that the jar used for this purpose was made of porous earthenware, such as those still commonly used to cool water in the Near East. 690 C xai τὰ ἡμέτερα σώματα λουσαμένων

περιψύχεται μᾶλλον

κτλ: This parallel is also made at De prim. frig. 949 E. The explication of the cooling effect is the same: τοῖς σώμασιν ἀνειμένοις καὶ

διακεχυμένοις πολλὴν ψυχρότητα μετὰ τοῦ ἀέρος καταδεχόμενοι. Another, humoral pathological, explanation is given at Gal. XI 382 K. τὸ δὲ αὖ ϑερμὸν (sc. ὕδωρ) ψύχει πολλάκις τῷ διαφορεῖν τὸν ϑερμαίνοντα χυμόν.

690 Ὁ ὅταν οὖν ἀποσπασϑὲν ἀπὸ τῆς πηγῆς τὸ ὕδωρ ἐν τῷ ἀέρι προϑερμανϑῇ, περιψύχεται ταχέως: This reading, proposed by Doe. Vind. 70, seems to me convincing; however, I read ἀποσπασϑέν

(ὑποσπ. Doe.): ὑποπλασϑῆῇ (sic) ὑπὸ τῆς πληγῆς ... προϑερμανϑέν T. This emendation is palaeographically plausible, and it eliminates the hiatus (Bens., Bern. deleted ὑπό). The strikingly illogical reasoning that the water, after it has been heated in the air (within the well), is cooled there is what Plut. criticizes in his reply (690 D-E). Fuhrmann's conjecture, ὑποχλασϑῇ, and his interpretation, ‘lorsque l'eau

en question, échauffée dans l'air sous l'effet de la pression, subit certaines ruptures’, is sophisticated, but the idea that air causes ‘breaking down’ or ‘pression’ through its heat, would be unparalleled. Air is always regarded as the cold element. Fuhrmann's interpretation would conflict with De prim. frig. 949 C ὁ δ᾽ ἀήρ, ὡς ἔοικε, συνελαύνων và

690 ἢ

TABLE TALKS VI 4

263

σώματα τῇ ψυχρότητι καταϑραύει καὶ ῥήγνυσιν.

Moreover, Plut.

does not have ὑποκλάω, and neither this verb nor xAdw is ever used of

liquids in the sense 'break down' (cf. 747 D τὰ κλώμενα τῶν δευμάτων, of running (and murmuring) waters). Fuhrm. rejects the parallel De prim. frig. 949 C τὰ μὲν ἀποσπασϑέντα τῆς πηγῆς ὕδατα

μᾶλλον πήγνυται as irrelevant, presumably because preheating is not mentioned there. However, this is because confusion of two cases as in our talk,

in 949 C-F there is no see above, on 690 C

προϑερμανϑέν. Plutarch's critical reply shows that the guest actually asserts that if water is scooped up from the well and the vessel is hung therein, then the air in the well first heats the water, and then cools it. In Doehner’s reading these three steps are clearly delineated, while in

Fuhrmann's reading (preserving πληγή) it is not even made clear that all this takes place within the well. Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probi. 158 (referred to by Fuhrm. p. 187 n. 4) is different from our passage and thus is of little or no value for the interpretation: there the water in the well, not the air, is thought to cool the water — preheated outside — which is let down into the well. 690 D ἡ γὰρ

αἴσϑησις

λέγει ὅτι ψυχρός

ἐστι: Fuhrm.

comments:

‘Affirmation surprenante pour un Grec.’ The note is unwarranted, cf., for example, 699 D ὁ δὲ λόγος τῷ Πλάτωνι πρῶτον ἐκ τῆς αἰσϑήσεως ἔχει τὴν πίστιν. References to the senses are common

in Plut., cf.

691 E εἰ δὲ δεῖ τῇ αἰσϑήσει τεκμαίρεσϑαι, 602 A ὅτι δ᾽ fj τοῦ πνεύματος διάκρισις ἐμποιεῖ τὴν τῆξιν, ἐμφανές ἐστι τῇ αἰσϑήσει, Amat, 763 BC τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων, ὅσα μὴ δι᾽ αἰσϑήσεως ἡμῖν εἰς ἔννοιαν ἥκει κτλ. 690 Ε ἂν δέ τις ἀφαιρῇ κατ᾽ ὀλίγον, μᾶλλον κρατῶν περιψύξει: This is also the reason given at De prim. frig. 949 ( τὰ μὲν ἀποσπασϑέντα τῆς πηγῆς ὕδατα μᾶλλον πήγνυται" μᾶλλον γὰρ 6 ἀὴρ ἐπικρατεῖ τοῦ ἐλάττονος. TALK 5

690 F ἀλλὰ μὴν (τὸ) περὶ τῶν χαλίκων, ἔφην, ἢ τῶν ἀκμόνων ... εἰρημένον ᾿Αριστοτέλει: The article, added by Fuhrm., is obviously

needed. -- The discussion regarding questions of cooling continues; the next talk completes the treatment of this theme. This talk and the next one are closely related to Psell. De omnif. doctr. 190-191 (154—155). At De prim. frig. 955 B the cooling effect is mentioned only in connec-

264

TABLE TALKS VI 5

690 F

tion with pebbles: of δὲ ψυχροτάτου ποτοῦ δεόμενοι χάλικας ἐμβάλλουσιν εἰς τὸ ὕδωρ. -- Ἄκμων obviously does not have its common meaning, ‘anvil’, here, nor is the sense ‘meteoric stone’ (Hes.

Theog. 722) possible. The object is said (691 A) to have high density and a faculty for absorbing and storing and slowly giving off cold. To change to ἀπονῶν (Turn., Iun.), cf. 691 B ai ἀκόναι, is not admissible; the second instance, τοὺς ἄκμονας (691 A) confirms the reading. The word is best interpreted as meaning ‘lumps of metal’ (Hoffl.). The kind of metal meant in this talk is clearly lead (691 B, C; Psell. l.c. 190 αἱ μολιβδίδες (twice)), whereas 695 D ἀκόναι μολίβδου certainly refers to tin, see ad loc. One

observes that ἀκόνη

does not mean

‘whetstone’ in these contexts, just as ἄκμων does not mean ‘anvil’ here. Both words are used metaphorically to denote lumps (pigs) of metal. MoAvfó(c means a piece of lead at JG II? 1627.322, and a weight of seven minae at Hesych. s.v. μολυβδίς. Perhaps such a weight could be called ἄκμων. 690 F ἐν προβλήμασιν: Frg. 213 Rose. This work is not in our Corpus Aristotelicum. Sandbach, Ill. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 224 suggests, with good reason it would seem, that the topics of this talk and the next one derive from a lost Aristotelian Προβλήματα φυσικά, cited at 734 E; see above, on 627 A, 635 B, 652 A, 656 B.

690 F

περιψύχεσϑαι

μὲν

ὑπὸ

τοῦ

ἀέρος

τὸ

ὕδωρ

ἔξωθϑεν

ἐμπίπτοντος, κτλ.: For the idea that air penetrates water, and more

easily so if the water is hot, cf. above, on 690 C πᾶν ὕδωρ. — A less fanciful explanation of the cooling effect of pebbles is given at De prim. frig. 955B of δὲ ψυχροτέρου ποτοῦ δεόμενοι χάλικας ἐμβάλλουσιν εἰς τὸ ὕδωρ᾽ γίνεται γὰρ οὐλότερον καὶ στομοῦται παρὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν λίϑων ψυχρότητα, πρόσφατον καὶ ἄκρατον ἀναφερομένην. The conductibility of lead and silicon is very low; hence lumps of these materials, if cold when dropped into the water, may cool it or keep it cool through the slow emission of cold. 691 A οὐ γὰρ ἐῶσιν αὐτόν, ὥσπερ τὰ χαλκᾶ καὶ τὰ κεραμεᾶ τῶν ἀγγείων, διεκπίπτειν, ἀλλὰ τῇ πυχνότητι στέγοντες ἀνακλῶσιν: Although bronze is less dense than lead, it is striking that this metal is put on a par with ceramics. However,

we need not assume,

as Fuhrm.

does, that impure bronze is meant; bronze was considered porous, cf. 721 C εὔφωνος δὲ καὶ λάλος ὁ χαλκός, f| πολύκενος καὶ ὄγκον

691 A

TABLE TALKS VI 5

265

ἐλαφρὸς καὶ λεπτός. The cause of origin of this opinion was the high conductibility of copper (and silver), cf. 695 B τὸ γὰρ ἀπορρέον πνεῦμα τῆς χιόνος ... ἔχει δέ τι τομὸν ... καὶ ἀργυρῶν xai χαλκῶν ἀγγείων, see ad loc.

691 A δι᾽ ὅλου καὶ ἰσχυράν: For the combination of a prep. phrase and an adj., cf. 686 Ε οἰκείαν ἐδόκει (καὶ) κατὰ φύσιν, and 692 F ἐλαφρὸς καὶ ἄνευ ὀργῆς. 691 A διὸ καὶ χειμῶνος οἱ ποταμοὶ ψυχρότεροι γίνονται -. τῆς ϑαλάττης: This applies to small streams in particular. Plut. disregards greater rivers here, but cf. De prim. frig. 949 Ὁ τῶν ye μὴν μεγάλων ποταμῶν οὐδεὶς πήγνυται διὰ βάϑους" οὐ γὰρ καϑίησιν εἰς ὅλον ὁ ἀήρ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα τῇ ψυχρότητι περιλαμβάνει ψαύων καὶ πλησιάζων, 1000 ἵστησιν. Cf. Gell. XVII 8.16 praeterea id quoque ait quaeri dignum, cur fluviorum et fontium aquae gelu durentur, mare omne incongelabile sit, etc. 691 A ἰσχύει γὰρ ἐν αὐτοῖς ὃ ψυχρὸς ἀὴρ ἀνακλώμενος, ἐν δὲ τῇ ϑαλάττῃ διὰ βάϑος ἐκλύεται πρὸς μηϑὲν ἀντερείδων: The notion of reflection is seldom used of air; it is used of the wind at Ps.-Arist.

Probl. 945 a 7 ἔστι γὰρ ἡ τροπαία ἀπογέας (Ross: ἀπόγεος MSS) ἀνάκλασις. Air is evidently thought to move downwards through the water, down to the stony river-bed. This idea of the air moving downwards is contrary to Aristotle’s theory of the natural movements

of the four elements. 691 A xav ἄλλον δὲ τρόπον εἰκός ἐστι τὰ λεπτότερα τῶν ὑδάτων περιψύχεσϑαι μᾶλλον [ἢ] ὑπὸ τοῦ ψυχροῦ" κρατεῖται γὰρ δι᾿

ἀσϑένειαν xt).: The explanation given in this passage (κατ᾽ ἄλλον δὲ τρόπον ... Ἀρατεῖσθϑαι) is not found in Psell. De omnif. doctr. 190 (154). The preceding comparison between fresh water and sea water

makes it natural to expect that Plut. would go on here speaking about rivers. However, this is not the case; he does not speak of free waters

here, as the pigs of lead (ἀκόναι) show; he returns to the subject under discussion, the use of pebbles and lumps of metal to cool water in containers,

691 B αἱ δ᾽ ἀκόναι: sc. μολίβδου; the word has this qualifier at 605 D and De prim. frig. 949 C, where it is cited from Arist. Psellus (190)

266

TABLE TALKS VI 5

691 B

does not have this word, nor does he use ἄκμονες (cf. above, on 690 F

ἀλλὰ μήν); instead he has μολιβδίδες (twice). ‘Axdvy cannot have its usual sense, ‘whetstone’, here; it obviously means ‘pig of lead’. Whetstones of lead do not exist.

691 B ὅ τι ϑολερὸν καὶ γεῶδες ἀναμέμικται, τοῦτο συνάγοντες κτλ.: The reasoning is confusing indeed. It is hard to conceive that Plut. actually means that pebbles or pigs of lead put into a water container

purify the water. One would suppose that he (or his source) thought of the limpid waters flowing over stony river-beds and so concluded that the stones are the cause of the purity. But the idea that pure fresh water is cooled faster than muddy is curious, seeing that streams freeze sooner in muddy places where the water moves more slowly. It looks as if Plut. was mislead by the preceding comparison with sea water, which is more opaque than the fresh water in stony river-beds and at the same time freezes less rapidly. Perhaps this led to the conclusion than the purity of the water makes it cooler. 691 B 6 te μόλιβδος τῶν φύσει ψυχρῶν ἐστιν: Cf. Ps.-Gal. XII 230 K. μόλυβδος δυνάμεώς ἐστι untixtis. ἔχεν γὰρ οὐ μόνον ὑγρὰν οὐσίαν πολλὴν ὑπὸ ψύξεως πεπηγυῖαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀερώδη, τῆς γεώδους ὀλίγης μετέχων.

691 B üc ye τριβύμενος

ὄξει τὸ ψυκτικώτατον

τῶν

ϑανασίμων

φαρμάκων ἐξανίησι ψιμίϑιον: Hu. and Hoffl. follow Bern. in chang-

ing to the Attic spelling ψιμύϑιον. Fuhrm. rightly preserves the tspelling, cf. Plutarch’s spelling μόλιβδος (here and at 695 D and De prim. frig. 949 C). - One process of manufacture of ψιμύϑιον (Lat. cerussa) is described by Theophr. frg. 2 De lap. 56: τίϑεται γὰρ μόλυβδος ὑπὲρ ὄξους ἐν πίϑοις ἡλίκον πλίνϑος. ὅταν δὲ λάβῃ πάχος, λαμβάνει δὲ μάλιστα ἐν ἡμέραις δέκα, τότ᾽ ἀνοίγουσιν, εἶτ᾽ ἀποξύουσιν ὥσπερ εὐρῶτά τινα &m αὐτοῦ, καὶ πάλιν, ἕως ἂν καταναλώσοωσι. τὸ δ᾽ ἀποξυόμενον ἐν τριπτῆρι τρίβουσι καὶ ἀφηϑοtow ἀεί, τὸ δ᾽ ἔσχατον ὑφιστάμενόν ἐστι τὸ ψιμύϑιον. Another method is described by Vitruv. VII 12.1 Rhodo enim doliis sarmenta conlocantes aceto suffoso supra sarmenta conlocant plumbeas massas, deinde ea operculis obturant, ne spiramento obturatum emittatur, post certum tempus aperientes inveniunt e massis plumbeis cerussam. Plin. XXXIV 175f. describes both these methods; cf. also Dioscur. V 88. The terms Ψψιμύϑιον / cerussa denoted basic lead acetate (sugar of

691 B

TABLE TALKS VI 5

267

lead) as well as basic lead carbonate (white lead). Specimens of the latter have been discovered in excavations, see commentary by E.R.

Caley & J.F.C. Richards on Theophr. i.c. 187-191. By the phrase τριβόμενος ὄξει Plut. reveals lack of knowledge about the process for manufacturing ψιμύϑιον. The corrosive action of the vinegar produces a viscous mass which, after drying in the sun, was ground or triturated to a fine powder, of course without any use of vinegar. The ψιμύϑιον

was much used in medicine, especially as an ointment for wounds, see Dioscur. V 88.6; Plin. XXVIII 241, XXXHI 102; Cels. III 10.2, V 19.2, 26-28, V 20.3. Its poisonous action was well known, cf. Dioscur. l.c.; Plin. XXXIV 176 letalis potu; Cels. V 27.12; Scrib. Larg. 184. Its

use in cosmetic may have been even more extensive than its use in medicine, cf. Xen. Oec. 10.2, 7; Plat. Lys. 217 D; Lys. I 14; Eubulus,

frg. 97 K.-A.; Alexis, frg. 98.17 (II 329 Kock); Lucian. Pisc. 12; Mart. 172.6, II 41.12, VII 25.2. 691 B πᾶς μὲν γὰρ λίϑος κατεψυγμένης xai πεπιλημένης ὑπὺ κρύους γῆς πάγος ἐστίν: The earliest indication of this idea of petrification as

being due to cold is found in Anaximenes, A 7 (I 92.10 DK), and the first piece of evidence is Anaxag. frg. B 16 ἐκ δὲ τοῦ ὕδατος γῆ, ἔκ δὲ τῆς γῆς λίϑοι συμπήγνυνται ὑπὸ τοῦ ψυχροῦ. Cf., to the contrary, Emped. A 69 (=Ps.-Arist. Probl. 937 ἃ 11 and Plut. De prim. frig. 953 E): ταυτὶ δὲ τὰ ἐμφανῆ,

κρημνοὺς καὶ σκοπέλους καὶ πέτρας,

Ἐμπεδοκλῆς μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς οἴεται τοῦ ἐν βάϑει τῆς γῆς ἑστάναι. Theophr. frg. 2 De lap. 3 takes an intermediary position: ἡ δὲ πῆξις τοῖς μὲν ἀπὸ ϑερμοῦ τοῖς δ᾽ ἀπὸ ψυχροῦ γίνεται. κωλύει γὰρ ἴσως

οὐδὲν ἔνια γένη λίϑων ὑφ᾽ ἑκατέρων συνίστασϑαν τούτων. TALK 6 691 C διὰ τίν᾽ αἰτίαν ἀχύροις καὶ ἱματίοις τὴν χιόνα διαφυλάττουσι:

This question is treated by Psell. De omnif. doctr. 191 (155); Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. 1115 treats the preserving faculty of the chaff, and at

I 113 briefly mentions that of cloth. 691 C οἱ ἐρῶντες ... ἐπιϑυμοῦσι διαλέγεσϑαι: This topic, the talkativeness of lovers, is discussed in I 5, cf. 622 E πρὸς πάντα λάλος ὧν ἔρως λαλίστατός ἐστιν ἐν τοῖς ἐπαίνοις.

268

TABLE TALKS VI 6

691 C

691 C τοῦτο πέπονθα περὶ τῆς χιόνος: A witty introduction to the

talk. The subject under discussion is psychologically connected with those of the two previous talks, which both concerned cold; however,

snow was mentioned only once, at 690 C. 691 ( οὐ πάρεστιν οὐδ᾽ ἔχομεν: The banal tautology made Re. suspect a lacuna, οὐδὲ (λαμβάνειν nodtv) ἔχομεν, but Hu. refers to 699 D οὐ γέγονεν ... οὐδ᾽ ἔστιν. Only the negative form is noticeable;

in the affirmative form similar tautologies or synonymies are notoriously common in Plut., cf. above, 654 A διεξιούσης καὶ φευγούσης, 688 D λήγει καὶ παύεται. 691 ( ἀχύροις σπαργανοῦντες αὐτὴν καὶ περιστέλλοντες ἱματίοις ἀγνάπτοις: Descriptions of the methods for preservation of snow or ice are rare in ancient literature. This is rather astonishing considering the extensive use which is evidenced by our sources, see above, on

690 B. Snow was not only used for cooling drinks but also for cooling pools in the baths (Suet. Nero 27.2) and for chilling water for the washing of hands (Petron. Cena Trim. 31.3). Lamprid. Heliogab. 23.8 tells that this emperor had ‘mountains’ of snow piled up near his villa, presumably for the purpose of air conditioning. Preservation of snow in pits is reported by Chares ap. Athen. 124 C who tells that Alexander ordered thirty pits to be dug and filled with snow and then covered with oak boughs. The snow was packed well: Sen. Quaest. nat. IV 13.3 invenimus quomodo stiparemus nivem, ut ea aestatem evinceret et contra anni fervorem defenderetur loci frigore. See Forbes, Technology VI 104-121; Fiske, Refrig. Engineering 24 (1932) 201—205; Geer, Class. Weekly 29 (1935) 61-63. 691 D ἄπταιστον διατηροῦσιν: ‘keep intact’. This metaphorical use of ἄπταιστος seems to be unparalleled. Plut. uses the word in its normal sense, ‘not stumbling’, at De prof. in virt. 83 B διαφυλάττοντα τὴν πορείαν ἄπταιστον, cf. ibid. 76 C διιὸν ἀπταίστως. Below, 721 B it is

used of the course of the sound: ἡ δὲ φωνὴ ... δρόμον ἔχουσα ... ἄπταιστον. 691 D εἰ συνεκτικὰ τὰ ϑεορμότερα τῶν ψυχροτάτων ἐστί: is Stoic, cf. SVF II 439 καὶ γὰρ οἱ μάλιστα εἰσηγησάμενοι xijv δύναμιν, ὡς οἱ Στωικοί, τὸ μὲν συνέχον ἕτερον συνεχόμενον δὲ ἄλλο᾽ τὴν μὲν γὰρ πνευματικὴν οὐσίαν

The thought τὴν συνεκτιποιοῦσι, τὸ τὸ συνέχον,

691 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VI 6

269

τὴν δὲ ὑλικὴν TO συνεχόμενον᾽ ὅϑεν ἀέρα μὲν καὶ πῦρ συνέχειν φασί, γῆν δὲ καὶ ὕδωρ συνέχεσϑαι. Cf. below, 691 F ... πνεῦμα λεπτόν" τοῦτο γὰρ συνέχει τὴν πῆξιν αὐτῆς (sc. τῆς χιόνος), and see above, 659 Β. See Κ. Praechter, Hierokles der Stoiker (Leipzig 1901) 116. 691 D ταῦϑ᾽ ὁρῶντες ὅτι ταὐτὸν ἱμάτιον ἐν χειμῶνι ϑερμαίνειν ἐν δ᾽ ἡλίῳ ψύχειν λέγομεν: Dübner substituted γέγονεν for λέγομεν, which all eds. except Fuhrm. adopt. Ziegler rightly defended the text. For ὁρῶ used with non-visible objects, see above, on 623 B. 691 D ἡ τραγικὴ τροφός: ‘the nurse in tragedy’; this use of τραγικός about the characters in plays is common in Plut., cf. De aud. poet.

35D 6 τραγικὸς Ἄδραστος, De tu. san. 124B tot τραγικοῦ Κρέοντος, De tranqu. 465 A; see Gregorio, Aevum 53 (1979) 13 n. 11. 691 D λεπτοσπαϑήτων χλανιδίων ἐρειπίοις | ϑάλπουσα καὶ ψύχουσα: Adesp. frg. 7 Nauck”, TrGF II F 7, also quoted, at more length, at De am. prol. 496 E, attributed to Soph. by Valckenaer, but

to Aeschyl. by Lesky, Wiener Stud. 52 (1934) 7, so also A.C. Pearson, The Fragments of Sophocles II (Cambridge 1917) 98. 691 D Γερμανοὶ μὲν οὖν... Αἰϑίοπες δέ: Fuhrm. notices that we need

not assume literary sources for this information; at Plutarch's time the Germanic peoples as well as the Ethiopians were well-known. On Greek relations to Ethiopia, see P. Lévéque, L'aventure grecque (Paris 1964) 506-509. 691 E ἅμα δ᾽ ἀπείργοντα τὸ κρύος καὶ τὸν Fw (dev) ἀέρα σώματος: The addition (Bens.) is convincing, cf. below, 691 ἔξωϑεν ἀήρ. The computer shows that Plut. never has hiatus after (in the spurious Parsne an fac. an. 2 there is one instance, τὰ αὑτῆς). The fact that Psell. De omnif. doctr.

vob F ὁ ἔξω ἔξω

191 (155) has tov ἔξω

ἀέρα is inconclusive. 691 E οἱ μὲν οὖν πυρέττοντες ἢ καυματιζόμενοι συνεχῶς ἀλλάττουσι τὰ ἱμάτια (διὰ) τὸ ψυχρὸν εἶναι τὸ ἐπιβαλλόμενον: Doe. pointed out that συνεχῶς is exaggerated and proposed συχνῶς, supported by Hartm. The addition (Hu.) is convincing, but τῷ ψυχρόν Basil. is also

possible. — Plut. uses this theme as an introduction to his De virt. et vit. 100 BC τὰ ἱμάτια δοκεῖ ϑερμαίνειν τὸν ἄνθρωπον, οὐκ αὐτὰ δήπου

270

TABLE TALKS VI 6

691 E

ϑερμαίνοντα.... (xa ἑαυτὸ γὰρ ἕκαστον αὐτῶν ψυχρόν ἐστιν, [| καὶ πολλάκις καυματιζόμενοι καὶ πυρέττοντες ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερα μεταλαμβάνουσιν), ἀλλ ἣν ὁ ἄνϑρωπος ἀναδίδωσιν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ ϑερμότητα, ταύτην N ἐσθὴς .., περιστέλλει. Cf. also Ps.-Alex. Aphr.

Probl. 1113 ψυχρὰ γὰρ ὄντα πρῶτον (sc. τὰ λινᾶ ἱμάτια) ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν ϑερμαινόμενα, οὕτως ἀντιϑερμαίνει ἡμᾶς. 691 Ε ὥσπερ οὖν ἡμᾶς ϑερμαινόμενον ϑερμαίνει τὸ ἱμάτιον, οὕτως τὴν χιόνα ψυχόμενον ἀντιπεριψύχει: Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. I 115 has exactly this description in answer to the question as to how chaff can keep water hot, and snow cold. That author says nothing about the

πνεῦμα that emanates from snow (see below). 691 F ψύχεται δ᾽ br

αὐτῆς ἀφιείσης πνεῦμα λεπτόν᾽ τοῦτο γὰρ

συνέχει τὴν πῆξιν αὐτῆς ἐγκατακεκλεισμένον κτλ.: When snow or ice

(or other frozen matter) is put into contact with considerably warmer air, the evaporation (sublimation) can be felt as a cool, gentle breath, and sometimes the vapour is even visible as a light fume. It is only natural to think that this breath is air emitted from the snow, cf. below,

on 692 A and 695 Β. The opinion that snow contains πνεῦμα and that this is the cause of its whiteness

is held by Arist.

G.A.

735 b 19

ἐγκαταμίγνυται πνεῦμα, ὃ τόν te ὄγκον ποιεῖ καὶ τὴν λευκότητα διαφαίνει, ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ ἀφρῷ καὶ τῇ χιόνι’ καὶ γὰρ ἡ χιών ἐστιν ἀφρός. Cf. Theophr. C.P. V 13.7 ἡ μὲν (sc. χιὼν) ἐκ νέφους καὶ οἷον

ἀφρός τις ἐμπεριειληφυῖα πνεῦμα; Arrian. the physicist ap. Stob. 131.8 (1247.9 W.) (fj χυὼν) οὐ σμικρὰν μοῖραν [od] πνεύματος φωτοειδοῦς ὄντος ξυνεπιλαμβάνουσα᾽' ἔνϑεν τε ἀφρῷ ἐς τὰ μάλιστα τὴν χρόαν ἔοικεν, ὅτι καὶ ἐν ἀφρῷ πολύ τι ἔνι πνεύματος. Cf. also above, on 649 C. For the Stoic term συνέχει, see above, on 691 D. For a discussion of the question of Plutarch’s source, see Capelle, Hermes

45 (1910) 321-324. 692 A ἀγνάπτοις δ᾽ ἱματίος ζχρῶνται) πρὸς τοῦτο: I suggest this reading (with δ᾽ ἱματίοις for δὲ τούτοις because of the imprecise

reference to τῷ ἱματίῳ). Hoffl. reads τούτοις (χρῶνται τοῖς ἱματίοις) πρὸς τοῦτο by reference to Xyl. who, however, translates: ‘utuntur autem ad hoc fullonem nondum expertis pannis’, with elimination of the dem. pron.

692 A

TABLE TALKS VI 6

271

692 A διὰ τὴν τραχύτητα καὶ ξηρότητα τῆς κροκύδος οὐκ ἐώσης ἐπιπεσεῖν βαρὺ τὸ ἱμάτιον οὐδὲ συνϑλῖψαι τὴν χανυνότητα τῆς χιόνος: This description obviously concerns a method of preservation

different from that mentioned by Sen. Quaest. nat. IV 13.3 where packing the snow is recommended, see above, on 691 C. For the porosity (χαυνότης) of snow, cf. above, 649 C. 692 A ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ ἄχυρον xtÀ.: The chaff seems to have been forgotten so far in this talk. Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probi. I 115 is about chaff only, so also Ps.-Plut. frg. incert. 149 Bern. VII 179.22. 692 A ὅτι δ᾽ ἡ τοῦ πνεύματος διάκρισις ἐμποιεῖ τὴν τῆξιν, ἐμφανές

ἐστι τῇ αἰσϑήσει᾽ τηκομένη γὰρ ἡ χιὼν πνεῦμα ποιεῖ: For the reference to the senses, cf. above, on 690 D. -- The evaporation from snow is most clearly perceivable shortly after its exposure to a higher temperature, i.e. before it begins to melt. This is described at De prim. frig. 949 C δῆλόν ἐστι μάλιστα περὶ τὰς χιόνας" ἀέρα yao μεϑεῖσαι καὶ προαναπνεύσασαι

λεπτὸν

καὶ ψυχρὸν

οὕτω

above, 691 Ε ἀπελϑόντος δὲ τοῦ πνεύματος,

ῥέουσιν,

so also

ὕδωρ οὖσα ῥεῖ καὶ

διατήκεται. Here, however, the chronological order is neglected. The

idea of evaporation from snow is exploited by Plut. below, 695 B-E, to explain why one is hungrier during the cold season. — It appears that the observation of the gentle breath of vapour from snow and ice was also extrapolated to explain the strong Etesian north winds blowing in late summer: Arist. Meteor. 361 b 36-362 a 20, 364 a 5-13; Theophr. fr. 5 De vent. 11-12; Plut. De facie 938 E.

TALK 7 692 B Νίγρος ὁ πολίτης ἡμῶν: Plut. also mentions Niger at De tu. san. 131 A, likewise calling him compatriot (Níyooc ὁ ἡμέτερος). There he reports that he was a sophist and that when he was on a lecture tour in

Galatia, he happened to swallow a fish bone. Notwithstanding he insisted upon lecturing while this was sticking in his throat, unwilling to

yield to another sophist. Afterwards a surgeon succeeded in removing the bone from the outside, but the wound grew purulent and finally caused his death. Plut. tells this event as an example of the excessive

ambition of sophists. Plutarch's critical attitude to rhetoric (see Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 928-931) may also underly his representation of Niger here. His appearance is rather unpleasant and presuming.

272

TABLE TALKS VI 7

692 B

The fact that a Chaeronean was a professional sophist is of sociological interest; only the wealthy could afford this kind of education. Ziegler, Le. 6411., is right in disputing the opinion of Wilamowitz who held that Plutarch’s family was the only one in Chaeronea with a claim to wealth and education. - Another sophist among Plutarch’s acquaintances was Callistratus who is the host in IV 4 and VII 5. 692 B συγγεγονὼς ἐνδόξῳ φιλοσόφῳ: This anonymous philosopher obviously was a Stoic or a Cynic. M. Cuvigny, Actes du VIII® congrés, Assoc. G. Budé (Paris 1969) 565 suggests that he may have been Epictetus. A close parallel to our passage is found at Gell. I 2.3-13 where a young man who has listened to Stoic teaching but misunderstood it appears in a pretentious, moralizing way similar to that of Niger. He is rebuked by the reading of a passage from the Discourses of Epictetus. 692 B ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ὅσῳ τὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς οὐ καταλαμβάνοντες, ἀνεπίμπλαντὸ τῶν ἐπαχϑῶν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ μιμούμενοι τὸ ἐπιτιμητικὸν κτλ.: ‘but long enough time for the students, though without understanding

the man’s teaching, to be crammed up with offensive influence from him and thus to imitate his censorious manner’. Wil. assumed a lacuna after καταλαμβάνοντες, and Fuhrm. after ἀνδρός, but nothing is missing except that one would expect (καίπερ) τὰ τοῦ ἀνδρός. However, ἀναπίμπλανται Hartm. should perhaps be admitted; there is no good reason for the imperf. For the image, cf. above, 683 A ἀνάπλεά TE τῆς ἀπὸ τῶν προϊεμένων μοχϑηρίας καὶ βασκανίας.

692 B ἑστιῶντος οὖν ἡμᾶς ᾿Αριστίωνος: Aristion is also the host in VI 10, and he takes part in III 9 (and is silently present in III 8), always displaying good knowledge in matters of food and drink. On the question of his identity, see above, on 657 B. 692 B τήν τ᾽ ἄλλην χορηγίαν ὡς πολυτελή καὶ περίεργον ἐμέμφετο: A similar attitude is displayed by Philinus the vegetarian in IV 1 where he criticizes the host, Philon the physician, for providing too mighty a feast. Abundant supply of delicious food of various kinds is also implied in IV 4 where Callistratus the sophist is the host. C.P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1971) 9f. notices that these descriptions show that many

wealthy.

of Plutarch’s friends,

and

certainly himself,

were

692 B

TABLE TALKS VI 7

273

692 B (δι)ηϑημένον: Addition Bens. (p. 494), before Doe., cf. below, 692 C διηϑοῦντες. The method for straining wine is described at Geop. VI 2.6 ἐὰν γὰρ καινὴν σπυρίδα ἄμμου πληρώσας οἶνον ὀξίζοντα καταχέῃς, διηϑηϑήσεται καϑαρὸς καὶ ἄνοσμος᾽ εἰ δὲ μὴ πάρεστιν ἄμμος, τῇ παραπεσούσῃ γῇ χρηστέον προηλιασμένῃ. Colum. IX 15.12 compares the kind of basket used for separating honey

out of the honeycomb with that used for straining wine: saligneus qualis vel tenui vimine rarius contextus saccus, inversae metae similis, qualis est quo vinum liquatur; cf. Plin. XV 124. Wine was strained through linen: Hor. Sat. II 4.54, and then was called vinum saccatum (Scrib. Larg. 122). It appears that the wine was usually strained; for

patients this was prescription: Plut. De virt. et vit. 101 C οἶνον διηϑεῖς πυρέττοντι; Dioscur. V 72.2. Strained wine is counted as a luxury in

LXX Amos 6.6 οἱ πίνοντες τὸν διυλισμένον οἶνον xai τὰ πρῶτα μύρα χριόμενοι. The suggestion by Fuhrm. p. 192 n. 1 that the practice of

straining wine spread to Greece from Rome seems to be conjectural. 692 B ὥσπερ ‘Hotodos ἐκέλευσεν κτλ.: This reference is not identifiable as a quotation from Hes. Plut. was probably thinking in a vague way about the three passages in Erga where Hes. speaks of opening the wine jar, 368, 815, 819; he quotes 368 below, 701 D. — Above, 663 D drinking unstrained wine directly from the jar is rejected by

Marcion in his opposition against Philinus: τί οὖν... τὸν δ᾽ ἀνθοσμίαν ἀπωσάμενοι τουτονὶ καὶ ἡμερίδην ἀγριώτερον πίνομεν ἐκ πίϑου, κωνώπων χορῷ περιᾳδόμενον; 692 C ἐξανϑεῖ γὰρ καὶ ἀποπνεῖ διερωμένου πολλάκις: Fuhrm. accepts with hesitation διερωμένου Wytt.: διεωρωμένου T; he also suspects πολλάκις and suggests that the text may have undergone a considerable mutilation. These doubts appear unfounded. Although the verb διεράω is not found elsewhere, it is supported by διέραμα, ‘funnel’, ‘strainer’, at Non posse 1088 E (criticism of the Epicureans):

ἄρ᾽ οὐ δοκοῦσί σοι διεράματι τοῦ σώματος χρῆσϑαι τῇ ψυχῇ, (xoi) καϑάπερ οἶνον ἐκ πονηροῦ καὶ μὴ στέγοντος ἀγγείου τὴν ἡδονὴν διαχέοντες κτλ. The slight scribal mistake, the prolepsis of w, is only

natural in a hapax word. As to πολλάκις, the wine may well have been strained more than once to improve its purity and taste. -- The subject of ἐξανϑεῖ καὶ ἀποπνεῖ is ἡ ϑερμότης, not the wine itself, as Kaltw., Fuhrm.,

(Hoffl.), and others translate. For ἀποπνεῖν,

cf. Theophr.

H.P. IX 16.2 τιϑέασι δὲ τὰς δεσμίδας (sc. τοῦ ψευδοδιχτάμνου) ἐν

274

γάρϑηχι

TABLE TALKS VI 7

ἢ καλάμῳ

ἀποπνεῦσαν,

πρὸς

τὸ

μὴ

692 C

ἀποπνεῖν'

and Hor. Sat. 11 4.51 Massica

ἀσϑενέστερον

γὰρ

si caelo suppones vina

sereno, | nocturna, siquid crassist, tenuabitur aura, | et decedet odor nervis inimicus; at illa | integrum perdunt lino vitiata saporem. -- For the genitive used without an explicit subject, cf. 613 A δεομένων (sc. αὐτῶν or TOV συμποτῶν), 645 Β γεγονότων (sc. ἡμῶν). 692 ( ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ τοὺς ἀλεκτρυόνας ἐχτέμνειν καὶ τοὺς χοίρους, κτλ.: For this simile of the ‘virility’ of the wine, cf. Plin. XIX 53 vina

saccisque castrari. - The refinement and extravagance of Roman cuisine certainly influenced the frugal Greek culinary standards at the time of Plut. There are numerous indications of this in his works, see

Fuhrm. Images, 431. Castration of cockerels was much practised in order to supply fat, delicious poultry also during late winter. Chickens hatched in late summer do not develop the desired fatness: Plin. X 150 post solstitium nata non implent magnitudinem iustam tantoque minus, quanto serius provenere. Cf. Varro ap. Char. Gramm. 1103.26 Keil; Colum. VIII 2.3. The method is described by Varro, De re rust.

III 9.3; Plin. X 50. For the castration of pigs, see Colum. VII 9.4. Even sows were subjected to castration (id. VII 9.5; Plin. VIII 209). Many other animals, e.g., horses, calves, camels,

goats and sheep,

were castrated. 692 C ei δεῖ μεταφορᾷ χρησάμενον λέγειν: Niger advertises his profession. Plut. displays him as an orator through the elaborate style of his speech. 692 CD οὔτ᾽ ἄφϑονον bx ἀσϑενείας οὔτε πίνειν [τὸν] μέτριον δυνάμενοι διὰ τὴν ἀκρασίαν κτλ.: Through his ingenious conjecture οὔτ᾽ ἄφϑονον: οὔτε φρονεῖν T, Hubert restored the blurred rhetorical paradox: people filter the wine because they are just as unable to drink plentifully (sc. of unstrained wine) as to drink (strained wine) in moderation. For σόφισμα ... πολυποσίας, cf. Plin. XIV 138 ut plus

capiamus, sacco frangimus vires (sc. vini). 692 D ἐξαιροῦσι δὲ τοῦ οἴνου τὸ ἐμβροιϑές: Fuhrm. substitutes γάρ for δέ here as well as at 670 A and 677 A, but δέ is occasionally used where γάρ is logically to be expected, see Denniston? 169f. - The ‘heavy’ ingredients in the wine are the ‘earthy’, τὸ γεῶδες, cf. 696 BC ὕδωρ μὲν οὖν xai οἶνος xoi τὰ λοιπά, πολλοῦ μετέχοντα τοῦ ϑολεροῦ

692 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VI 7

275

καὶ γεώδους. Plut. uses ἐμβοιϑής and γεώδης together at Quaest. nat. 911 D and De facie 927 EF, 936 E.

602 D ὥσπερ ol τοῖς ἀκρατῶς ἔχουσι πρὸς ψυχροποσίαν ἀρρώστοις ἀφεψημένον διδόντες: For the high appreciation of cold drinks, see above, on 690 B; for the method

of heating water or wine before

cooling, see on 690 C. 692 D στόμωμα: Plut. uses the comparison with tempering frequently, e.g., at 693 A, 734 A, De prim. frig. 954 C, De esu carn. 998 B, De stoic. rep. 1052 F, and see on 625 C.

692 D μέγα (δὲ) τεκμήριον νὴ Δία φϑορᾶς καὶ τὸ μὴ διαμένειν: Basil. rightly added δέ, but deleted καί, ‘also’, ‘further’, without

reason. Having censured the insapidity of strained wine, Niger here intensifies his criticism through the further argument that this wine does not even keep its poor quality. 692 D καϑάπερ ἀπὸ ῥίζης κοπέντα τῆς τρυγός: This idea is expressed more explicitly by Macrob. Sat. VII 12.7 ideo autem facile mutatur, quod nullo firmamento nixum undique sui ad noxam patet. faex enim vino sustinendo et alendo et viribus sufficiendis quasi radix eius est. 692 D oi δὲ παλαιοὶ καὶ τρύγα τὸν οἶνον ἄντικρυς ἐκάλουν: This is somewhat exaggerated. What the Ancients designated by tet& was normally not the wine in general, but the new wine, the must, cf.

Anacr. 41 τρύγα πίνει μελιήδεα. The word is allegedly used in the

general sense at Crat. (frg. 269 K.-A.) ap. Poll. VI 18 τὸν οἶνον καὶ τρύγα ἐκάλουν ὡς Κρατῖνος ἐν Ὥραις"... μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ διῆγες olvagov, ἕλχων τῆς τρυγός, but Cratinus is more likely to speak of coarse,

unripened wine than wine of proper quality. However, Pollux’s interpretation indicates that there existed the opinion that the Ancients called wine τρύξ. There is no reason, then, to read τὸν (νέον) οἶνον Doe. (Vind. 87f.), especially considering that this would make the argument of Niger rather ineffective. In any case, the word was archaic in both of its senses, ‘must’ and ‘dregs’, cf. Gal. VI 579 K. τό ye μὴν ὑφιστάμενον τοῖς οἴνοις παχὺ of πολλοὶ τῶν ᾿Αττικιζόντων ὀνομάζουσι

τρύγα.

The

ὑπόστασις / ὑποστάϑμη.

usual

Koine

words

are

γλεῦκος

and

276

TABLE TALKS VI 7

692 D

692D ψυχὴν καὶ κεφαλὴν τὸν ἄνϑρωπον εἰώϑαμεν ἀπὸ τῶν κυριωτάτων ὑποκορίζεσϑαι: E.g., Aristoph. Thesm. 864 ψυχαὶ δὲ πολλαὶ ... ἔϑανον, LXX Gen. 46.15 πᾶσαι αἱ ψυχαί, υἱοὶ καὶ ϑυγατέρες, and Il. XI 55 πολλὰς ἰφϑίμους κεφαλάς; Plat. Phaedr. 264 A Φαῖδρε, φίλη κεφαλή. 692 Ε καὶ τρυγᾶν λέγομεν τοὺς δρεπομένους τὴν ἀμπελίνην ὀπώραν: Here Niger (Plut.) could have mentioned that τρυγᾶν was used of any kind of harvest, but in this context a digression on that would be illtimed.

692 E (ijv) καὶ διατρύγιόν που “Ὅμηρος εἴρηκεν: Homer has this epithet, ‘yielding ripe grapes throughout the season’, only once, at Od. XXIV 342, used of the rows of wine (ὄρχοι). One expects Plut. to

quote this main word, but xov indicates that he perhaps did not recall the word (there is only one more instance, Od. VII 127 νείατον ógyov, and the variant ὄρχατος at Od. VII 112). Doe. Vind. 87 suggests that

Plut. did not think of ὄρχον but ὀπώραν as the main word, and thus added (p. 86) the rel. pron. The addition seems plausible; the connection it establishes with διατρύγιον integrates the clause xoi . . . εἴρηκεν in the sentence (as it stands it is parenthetic and rather tasteless). -- For Plutarch's

frequent

quotations

and

references

to Homer,

see H.

Schlapfer, Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Diss. Zürich 1950) 1119, and cf. Helmbold-O’Neil, 39-48. 692 E αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν οἶνον αἴϑοπα καὶ ἐρυϑρὸν εἴωϑε καλεῖν: The first of these epithets is particularly frequent: 7/. I 462, IV 259, V 341, VI

266, Od. 11 57, III 459, IX 360, XII 19, etc.; οἶνος ἐρυϑρός occurs at Od. IX 163, XIII 69, XVI 444. 692 E καὶ

ὁ ᾿Αριστίων

γελάσας:

For

this

phrase,

see

on 657 B

ἀναβοήσας. 692 E μειλίχιον καὶ ἡμερίδην,

ἀπὸ τῆς ὄψεως αὑτῆς πρῶτον: A

double, and parallel, etymology is assigned to both these epithets here.

Firstly, with regard to the light colour and appearance of filtered wine, μειλίχιος is derived from μέλι, and ἡμερίδης from ἡμέρα; and secondly, with regard to its action, from μείλιχος, ‘gentle’, and ἥμερος, ‘tame’, ‘cultivated’ respectively. Plut. also uses the two epithets, in the

second sense only, of Dionysus at De esu carn. 994 A, and ἡμερίδης

692 E

TABLE TALKS VI 7

277

together with φυτάλμιος of this god at De virt. mor. 451 C; cf. above, on 663 D τὸν δ᾽ ävdoouiav. 692 E μελαναίγιδος: This epithet is first found in Aeschyl. Sept. 699,

used of an Erinys. Otherwise it is used of Dionysus: Paus. II 35.1; Schol. Aristoph. Ach. 146; Nonn. XXVII 302. The use is explained in Suda, s.v. μέλαν: αἱ τοῦ ᾿Ελευϑῆρος ϑυγατέρες ϑεασάμενοι φάσμα τοῦ

Διονύσου

ἔχον

μελάνην

αἰγίδα

ἐμέμψαντο᾽

ὁ δὲ

ὀργισϑεὶς

ἐξέμηνεν αὐτάς. μετὰ ταῦτα ὁ ᾿Ελευϑὴρ ἔλαβε χρησμὸν ἐπὶ παύσει τῆς μανίας τιμῆσαν Μελαναίγιδα Διόνυσον. 692 E ὥσπερ χολημεσίαν: Purging of bile was prescribed as a remedy for certain diseases or otherwise when abundance of bile was supposed: Oribas. Coll. med. VII 23.23 ἐκκαϑαίρειν yao χρὴ καὶ τούτων πολυειδῶς τὴν χολὴν ἄνω te καὶ κάτω ... οὕτως δὲ κἂν ὁ μελαγχολικὸς πλεονάσῃ χυμός, ὡς ἐν μελαγχολίᾳ καὶ καρκίνῳ καὶ ἐλέφαντι, τὸ τῆς μελαίνης χολῆς κενωτικὸν φάρμακον δίδομεν: Gal. XVI 141. Κ. ἢν ὁ ἄνϑρωπος εἴη πικρόχολος καὶ χωρίον ϑερμὸν ἔν τε πόνοις καὶ φροντίσι διαιτούμενος, προσεϑίζειν χρὴ τὴν χολὴν ἐμεῖν,

πρὶν προσαίρεσϑαι τροφήν. 692 F ἄνευ

ὀργῆς

ἀναμίγνυται

ἡμῖν:

Herw.

unnecessarily

pro-

pounded ἄνοργος (not found in Plut.) for ἄνευ ὀργῆς. Plut. has numerous instances of ἄνευ, even if he uses χωρίς more often. For the

combination of an adj. with a prep. phrase, cf. 686 E, 691 A. -- It seems that ὀργή does not mean exactly ‘anger’ here. The Latin transla-

tion (Xyl.) runs: ‘facitque ut a nobis facile placidumque usurpetur’. Amyot translates: ‘a fin que plus agile, plus leger et moins cholere il se

mesle dedans nous’; Reich.: ‘der Wein . . . leicht und ohne Widerwillen sich mit uns vereinigt’, cf. ‘der ... angenehm und ohne Widerwillen zu trinken ist’, Kaltw., and Hoffleit: ‘light in the mixture and free from anger’. Fuhrm. translates: ‘ainsi de se méler plus léger et sans tumulte

à l’organisme’. It appears that these versions do not make it fully clear that ἄνευ ὀργῆς relates to those who drink, not to the wine, and/or that ὀργή always designates mental turbulence. The phrase is best rendered: *without causing quarrelsomeness'. 692 F olov “Ὅμηρός φησι πίνειν τοὺς ἥρωας: Hoffl. is probably right

in supposing that this is an interpretation of Achilles' invitation to the single competitors at the funeral feast of Patroclus to discard any anger

278

TABLE TALKS VI 7

692 F

they may feel and share a common table (Il. XXIII 810, also referred to by Plut. below, 736 D), or possibly I. IX 224, 260 where Odysseus tries to reconcile Achilles and Agamemnon through symbolic drinking. 692 F αἴϑοπα γὰρ οὐ καλεῖ τὸν Coqroóv, ἀλλὰ τὸν διαυγῆ καὶ λαμπρόν: The meaning of al&ow was much disputed. It was generally agreed that Homer uses the epithet only of dark, i.e. red, wine, cf. Athen. 26 B ἐπαινῶν δὲ “Ὅμηρος τὸν μέλανα οἶνον πολλάκις αὐτὸν

καὶ αἴϑοπα καλεῖ. δυναμικώτατος γάρ ἐστι καὶ μένων ἐν ταῖς ἕξεσι τῶν πινόντων πλεῖστον χρόνον. ... ὁ δὲ λευκὸς οἶνος ἀσϑενὴς καὶ λεπτός; Eustath. 862.10. The opinion that aifow refers to the colour, not the action, is rejected by Gell. XVII 8.10 essetque (sc. vinum) natura ignitius, ob eamque rem dictum esse ab Homero αἴϑοπα οἶνον,

non, ut alii putarent, propter colorem, cf. Eustath. 135.34 aldoy δ᾽ οἶνος ὁ οἷον ἐπικεκαυμένος τὴν ὄψιν ἤτοι μέλας ἢ ἐρυϑρός .. . ἢ καὶ ὁ ϑερμὸς καὶ ἐκκαίων παρὰ τὸ αἴϑω. The root aid- means both ‘bright’ and ‘burnt’; see Chantraine, and Frisk, s.v. αἴϑω.

692 F εὐήνορα καὶ νώροπα χαλκόν: For these Homeric epithets, see on 659 C. 692 F ὁ σοφὸς 'Aváyapois: This known Scythian nobleman visited Greece and studied Greek civilization. Diog. Laert. 1 101 and Plut. Sol. 5 report that he visited Solon at Athens and tell some examples of his critical dicta. He is mentioned at Hdt. IV 76 and Plat. Rep. 600 A.

Later he was counted among the Seven Wise Men (Diog. Laert. I 41; Dio Chrys. XXXII (15) 44). The apophthegmata of A. were collected by J.F. Kindstrand, Anacharsis. The Legend and the Apophthegmata (Uppsala 1981). 693 A ἐπήνει τὴν ἀνθρακείαν xrÀ.: A 46 A Kindstrand. A variant of this dictum is found at Diog. Laert. 1104 καὶ τοῦτο ἔφη ϑαυμασιώτατον ἑωρακέναι παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν, ὅτι τὸν μὲν καπνὸν ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσι καταλείπουσι, τὰ δὲ ξύλα εἰς τὴν πόλιν κομίζουσι, where τὰ ξύλα is clearly = ἡ ἀνδρακεία. The fabrication of charcoal was certainly known to the Scythians; it is evidenced from the earliest times

in Mesopotamia

and Egypt,

see R.J.

Forbes,

Metallurgy in

Antiquity (Leiden 1950) 105-108. What amazed Anacharsis was the fact that the Greeks used charcoal instead of wood for domestic heating. Also the Greek use of moveable braziers stood in contrast to

693 A

TABLE TALES VI 7

279

the Scythian use of fireplaces. For the methods of making charcoal, see Blümner, Technologie II 347—350. 693 A oi σοφοὶ ὑμεῖς: The hiatus made Bens. propose: ὦ σοφοί [ὑμεῖς], whereas Herw. transposed: ὑμεῖς οἱ σοφοί, but cf., e.g., 652 D ὁμιλίαι αὐτῶν (transposed by Bens.; Doe. deleted αὐτῶν), De Alex. Mag. fort. 339 B φυγαὶ ἀνδρῶν, An vit. 499 D ταφαὶ αὗται (τοιαῦται Bens.) 693 A τοῦ οἴνου τὸ ταραχτικόν: κεφαλῆς καϑάψῃηται. 693 A φαιδρύνοντες:

Hoffl.

See above, on 647 C ὅταν τῆς

and Fuhrm.

print Reiske's conjecture

(εὐφραίνοντες T), rightly it seems; the verb matches with καλλωπίσαντες. Both verbs refer to the appearance and colour of the

wine. Bern. (Symb.) propounded ἐφηδύναντες, cf. 676 A, 693 C, De soll. an. 975 F, but this verb is used of the sweetening of the wine through additives.

693 A οὐδ᾽ ὥσπερ σιδήρου στόμωμα xoi ἀκμὴν ἀποκόψαντες: Reference to 692 D. Hoffleit interprets: ‘the fine temper’ (hendiadys), but cf. 625 C ὅ τι γὰρ σιδήρῳ πρὸς ἀκμὴν στόμωμα, τοῦτο σώματι πνεῦμα παρέχει.

693 A ὅτι νὴ Δία πλέον ἰσχύει μὴ διηϑούμενος: For such anticipation of the opponent’s objections, see above, on 644 C ἀλλ᾽ ὅπου τὸ ἴδιον ἔστιν, and cf. 617 C, 649 D, 663 C. 693 A ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ἐλλεβόρῳ χρησάμενος: For this much-used medicine,

see on 627 D, and cf. 656 E. It was not only given to already diseased mental patients, but was also prescribed as a purgative, to prevent madness (Hipp. Reg. IV 89.8 (VI 648 L.)). 693 B αἱ γυναῖκες φυκούμεναι:

Red used for rouge was prepared

above all from a kind of seaweed (φῦκος). This cosmetic was one of the most common, cf. Plaut. Most. 275; Tibull. I 8.11; Cic. Or. 23.79; Plin. XXXI 91; Quint. VIII Prooem. 19, etc.

280

TABLE TALKS VI 7

693 B

693 B περίεργοι δοκοῦσιν: Excessive luxury among women was much

censured; in Syracuse it was even prohibited by law, see Phylarchus ap. Athen. 521 B (FGrHist II A 81.45). 693 B κόμης ϑρύψιν: Doehner's conjecture δύψυν may seem plausi-

ble, but Bern. preserves the text with good reason. One observes that Plut. does not have δύψις or ῥύπτω, and ῥύψις is not found in the sense of ‘shampooing’. Plut. uses θρύψις in a non-pejorative sense at Demosth. 4.4 διὰ τὴν τοῦ σώματος ἀσϑένειαν καὶ ϑρύψιν. It seems that in our context the word must not be interpreted as meaning ‘shampooing’, since this is implied in λουτρόν. Instead it designates the third step in bodily care, after bathing and anointing. ‘(scrupulous) care of the hair’. — For coiffures in vogue at different times, see S. Marinatos, *Kleidung. Haar- und Barttracht'. In: Archaeologia Homerica I (Göttingen 1967) Kap. B 1-18, 26-31. 693 B ἀμβροσίῃ ... ἀπὸ χροὸς ἀϑανάτοιο: Il. XIV 170, where ἱμερόεντος is in the place of ἀϑανάτοιο, perhaps a slight confusion with line 177 ἐκ κράατος ἀϑανότοιο. — Aufoóotog always connotes ‘fragrant’, and the original meaning of ἀμβροσία is ‘perfume’ (Od. IV 445) or ‘ointment’ (Il. XVI 680). This indicates that the word perhaps is cognate with Babylonian amru (Arab. anbar), ‘perfumed substance’ (cf, amber, ambergris), and that the meaning ‘immortal’ is due to popular etymology through influence from ἄμβροτος. 693 C τὰς χρυσᾶς περόνας ... καὶ τὰ διηκριβωμένα τέχνῃ ἐλλόβια: Plut. alludes to I. XIV 180 χρυσείῃς δ᾽ ἐνετῇσι κατὰ στῆϑος περονᾶτο. Brooches (fibulae) were a normal and necessary part of the womens’ dress, the peplos (//. V 425, Od. XVIII 293, XIX 226, 256;

Soph. O.R. 1269; Eur. Bacch. 98). Thus the criticism here concerns precisely brooches of gold, and the repudiation of earrings correspondingly aims at such as are particularly finely wrought. Nevertheless, the negative attitude is rather striking; earrings were among the most common ornaments used by Greek women. See E. Bielefeld, ‘Schmuck’. In: Archaeologia Homerica I (Göttingen 1968) Kap. C 3-4; Netoliczka, RE s.v. Inaures, 1239-1241. 693 C τῆς περὶ τὸν κεστὸν ... γοητείας:

The magic band (girdle)

which Aphrodite lent to Hera: Il. XIV 214 κεστὸν ἱμάντα | πουκίλον, ἔνϑα τέ οἱ ϑελκτήρια πάντα τέτυκτο.

693 C

TABLE TALKS VI 7

281

693 C τὸν οἶνον οἱ μὲν ἀλόαις χρωτίζοντες: Although aloe is known to have grown in Greece (Andros), most of the sap of this plant that

was used for colouring wine was imported from Asia or Africa. Its use for this purpose is mentioned at Plin. XIV 68; Pallad. XI 14.8, 13; Geop. VII 24.4.

693 C κινναμώμοις καὶ xoóxots ἐφηδύνοντες: Cinnamon was imported from Asia (India). The best saffron was grown in Cilicia (Plin. XIII 5). Many more, largely exotic, spices were used for flavouring wine, see Dioscur. V 54; Plin. XIV 107-109; Geop. VII 13, 20, and above,

on 676 Β καὶ τῆς ῥητίνης. The different species of cinnamon are described at Dioscur. I 14. 693 C ὥσπερ γυναῖκα καλλωπίξουσιν: Theophr. frg. 4 De od. treats

at length various kinds of perfumes and cosmetics, their preparation, composition and use. See further Forbes, Technology ΠῚ 28-49. 693 D κεκονίαται: Lime or stucco was commonly used for plastering the outside of houses, walls, and parts of temples. In the 5th c. wealthy people also began to have the interior of their houses plastered (An-

doc. Alcib. 17). See R. Martin, Manuel de l'architecture grecque 1 (Paris 1965) 422-425; Fensterbusch, RE s.v. Stuck. 693 D ἢ τὸ μὲν ἔκπωμ᾽ ἔδει μὴ ῥύπου μηδὲ μοχϑηρίας ὀδωδὸς εἶναι, τὸ δ᾽ ἐξ αὐτοῦ πινόμενον εὐρῶτος ἢ κηλίδων ἀναπεπλῆσϑαι: This

contrast resembles the description of colossal statues at Ad princ. ind. 780 A ot τὴν ἔξωϑεν ἡρωικὴν καὶ θεοπρεπῆ μορφὴν ἔχοντες ἐντός εἶσι γῆς μεστοὶ xai λίϑου καὶ μολίβδου, and cf. the contrasts of the same

kind in NT

Matth.

23.24-28,

Luc.

11.39.

See H.

Almquist,

Plutarch und das Neue Testament (Uppsala 1946) 45 f. 693 D ὑποσκαφισμοὶ καὶ διαττήσεις xvÀ.: Turn. and Paton would read ὑποσχαριφισμοῖ, ‘scraping lightly to get rid of stones etc.’ (Pa-

ton). This conjecture has been considered plausible (see LSJ). However, it is evidently mistaken. Such a procedure would be more or less exceptional, whereas scooping or dredging the corn to separate chaff or rubbish was probably done by routine. Only occasionally may there

have been stones mixed up with the corn. If any of the four words used in this passage denotes the separation of such things, ἀποκρίσεις or διακρίσεις are more apt for this purpose.

282

TABLE TALKS V1 7

693 Ε

693 E ἡ τρῖψις ἐκϑλίβουσα τοῦ φυράματος τὸ τραχύ: The methods of grinding were rather primitive; most of the flour produced was wholegrain meal, and sifting meant an extraction percentage of about 80 96, as compared with the 70-75 96 of modern white flour. For the devices (mortar and pestle, various types of mills) used for grinding, see Forbes, Technology HI 138-149. TALK 8 693 E τίς αἰτία βουλίμου: The afíliction called βούλιμος (βουλιμία) and its possible causes was much disputed and, consequently, these questions were part of the genre of Problemata, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 887 b 38-888 a 18; Alex. Trall. Il 251 Puschm. Psell. De omnif. doctr. 192 (156) excerpted this talk. A description is given at Ps.-Gal. XIX 4181. K. βούλιμός ἐστι διάϑεσις καϑ' ἣν ἐπιζήτησις ἐκ μικρῶν διαλειμμάτων γίνεται τροφῆς, ἐκλύονται δὲ καὶ καταπίπτουσι καὶ ἀχροοῦσι xal xataptyovta τὰ ἄκρα καὶ ϑλίβονταί τε τὸν στόμαχον καὶ ὁ σφυγμὸς ἐπ αὐτῶν ἀμυδρὸς γίνεται. φαγέδαινά ἐστι κατασχευὴ xat ἣν ὀρεγόμενοι πολλῆς τροφῆς καὶ λαμβάνοντες ἄμετρον οὐ κρατοῦσιν αὐτῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξεράσαντες πάλιν ὀρέγονται. However, these afflictions, whatever kind they may be, (see below, on 695 A) are not what is meant by the term here, where it refers to the

magic rite, but Plut. uses it as an opportunity to discuss the disease. As a ritual term βούλιμος means ‘general hunger’, ‘famine’. The associ-

ation with the medical sense that is made in this talk was probably late and learned (694 B ἐπεὶ δὲ πᾶς μὲν ἔοικεν [Ὁ] λιμὸς νόσῳ, μάλιστα δ᾽ ὁ βούλιμος), see further below, on 694 B εἰκότως ἀντιτάττουσιν. 693 E ϑυσία τις ἔστι πάτριος ... βουλίμου ἐξέλασιες: This Boeotian rite is not mentioned elsewhere. The ceremony was obviously ἃ primi-

tive magical rite of expulsion, a purification rite, which has many parallels in the Greek world, notably the Thargelia festival of Apollo celebrated in April-May in Athens, in Ionia and the Ionian colonies (Abdera, Massilia), and elsewhere (Cyprus). One or two men, chosen from among the most abominable and miserable of the city, were driven around in the city, while being whipped with fig branches and

squill, and then either expelled from the territory of the city or stoned to death. The latter has been much

disputed, see V. Gebhard,

Die

Pharmakoi in lonien und die Sybakchoi in Athen (Diss. München 1926) 43 n. 2, and Gebhard’s own discussion, pp. 43-48; W. Burkert,

693 E

TABLE TALKS VI 8

283

Griechische Religion (Stuttgart 1977) 139-142. Nilsson, Gr. Feste, 113-115 interprets the rite of the Thargelia as being a combination of cathartic and fertility rite, by reference to the time of celebration, which was just before the first harvest; cf. also Farnell IV 279f.; Gebhard, o.c. 109 f. The argumentation against this interpretation by

L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 192-198 appears rather onesided. The character of the Boetian rite, which seems very similar to the Thargelia (Nilsson, o.c. 466), was a combined expulsion and impulsion rite, see J.E. Harrison, Epilegomena to the Study of Greek Religion (Cambridge 1921) 1-6. 693 E τῶν οἰκετῶν ἕνα τύπτοντες ἀγνίναις ῥάβδοις: This whipping is an example of the so-called Schlag mit der Lebensrute, the magical

supplying of vegetative power and fertility. This rite is very widespread, see W. Mannhardt, Mythologische Forschungen (Quellen und Forschungen zur Sprach- und Culturgeschichte 51) Strassburg 1884, pp. 127-131, id. Wald- und Feldkulte? I (Berlin 1904) 251-303; S.

Reinach, Cultes, mythes et religions (Paris 1922) 177ff.; J.G. Frazer, The Golden Bough? VI. The Scapegoat (London 1913) 252-274; further G. Soury, La démonologie de Plutarque (Paris 1942) 53; Nilsson, Gr. Feste, 466. Cf. also C. Wachsmuth, Das alte Griechenland im Neuen (Bonn 1864) 91 ns. 45, 47. The agnus castus was credited with

magical properties (Aelian. N.A. IX 26). For the plant, see above, on 641 D. 693 F ἔξω Βούλιμον, ἔσω δὲ Πλοῦτον καὶ Ὑγίειαν: Bergk® III 681: (Carm.

popul.)

saw

in this formula

a iambic

trimeter:

ἔξω

τὰν

βούλιμον, ἔσω τὰν πλουϑυγίειαν, which Haupt, Hermes 6 (1872) 259 implausibly would read here (with τὸν β.). (As to πλουϑυγίξεια, this compound occurs in Aristoph. Av. 731, Equ. 1091, Vsp. 677). — For the oppositive form, cf. NT Apoc. 5.1 ἔσωϑεν — ἔξωϑεν, ibid. 4.6 ἔμπροσϑεν — ὄπισϑεν; for further exx., see H. Riesenfeld, Con. Neot. 9 (1944) 16.

693 F ἄρχοντος οὖν ἐμοῦ κτλ.: Plut. mentions that he held the office of archon at 620 A (see ad loc.) and 642 F. The particularly large number of participants in the rite was probably due to his fame and/or his status as a priest in Delphi. It is observed that participation in the public rite was not compulsary.

284

TABLE TALKS VI 8

694 A

694 A ἐζητεῖτο πρῶτον ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ὀνόματος, ἔπειτα τῆς φωνῆς ...9 μάλιστα δ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ πάϑους: The first two questions only form the introduction of the theme proper of this talk, the affection of βούλιμος.

694 A παρ᾽ ἡμῖν τοῖς Αἰολεῦσιν ἀντὶ τοῦ B τῷ x χρωμένοις" οὐ γὰρ βούλιμον, ἀλλὰ πούλιμον, οἷον πολὺν ὄντα λιμόν, ὀνομάζομεν: One observes that Plut. is well aware of the Aeolian descent of the Boeotians, and so also as regards the people of Smyrna (see below). -- There is no evidence in support of a general phonetic rule of the kind Plut. states here. However, his affirmation that the Boeotian pronunciation of the word βούλιμος was πούλιμος seems credible. Schulze, KZ 33

(1895) 243f. suggested that Boeotian πούλιμος and general Greek βούλιμος are equivalent in sense but different in origin: while the

intensifying Bov- in βούλιμος is certainly identical with the stem of βοῦς, πούλιμος would be formed with the prefix pu- < Old Ind. pronominal stem ku- ‘questionable’, ‘bad’, as in ku-putra, ku-purusa,

ku-mitra, ‘what a (sc. ‘bad’) son/man/friend’. Schulze compares Πυλιμιάδας IG VII 602 (Tanagra); cf. also Βυλιά[δας] ibid. 585 IV 15 (Tanagra). See F. Bechtel, Die griechischen Dialekte 1 (Berlin 1921) 246f.; Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. I 434.6. The evidence for this prefix in Boeotian is thus very meagre (cf. Chantraine, s.v. βου-; Frisk does not mention it), and it is not attested in other Greek dialects. However,

one thing would suggest that Boeotian ritual term, namely not attested earlier than in Vesp. 1206, Eupolis, frg. 437

this prefix and not βου- is present in this the fact that the intensive sense of βου- is Comedy (βούπαις, ‘big boy’, Aristoph. K.-A.; βουλιμίαξάω Aristoph. Plut. 873,

Timocles, frg. 13.3; βούλιμος Alexis, frg. 135.17 Kock) and in Xen.

(An. IV 5.7), as is shown by Richardson, Hermathena 95 (1961) 55-57, 60-63, id. Bull. Inst. Class. Stud. Lond. 8 (1961) 18. We may safely assume that the Boeotian rite and its name, Πουλίμου ἐξέλασις, was older than the 5th century. The meaning is clearly ‘general hunger’, ‘famine’ (πολὺς λιμός) in this religious context. The ‘comic’, slang-like sense ‘ox-hunger’, 'disproportionately huge hunger’, as used of individuals, is impossible here. Through the reference to the z-pronunciation, Plut. emphasizes and explains the special meaning of the general Greek word βούλιμος in Boeotia, namely in its use as a religious term

in the phrase πουλίμου ἐξέλασις. 694 A ἐδύκει δ᾽ ἡ βούβρωστις ἕτερον εἶναι ... ταῦρον μέλανα ... ὁλοκαυτοῦσιν: One would think that Plut. here wanted to give an

694 A

TABLE TALKS VI 8

285

Aeolic parallel to the pronunciation πούλιμος, but this is obviously not

his purpose (incidentally, after Smyrna had become an Ionian city the pronunciation was probably βούβρωστις). This sentence is only loosely connected with the preceding one; the only link seems to be the psychological association between the Aeolic Boeotia and the formerly Aeolic Smyrna. This is the reason why the logic of the sentence appears unclear. Plut. takes the opportunity of making a short digres-

sion to oppose the probably common opinion that βούλιμος and βούβρωστις are synonyms (Madvig’s addition (ody) ἕτερον is mistaken). Plut. wants to point out that, while general Greek βούλιμος means ‘ox-hunger’, ‘big hunger’, and Boeot. πούλυμος means ‘famine’, βούβρωστις means ‘(a goddess) who eats oxen’. Βούβρωστις is hapax

in Homer: I. XXIV 532 καὶ & κακὴ βούβρωστις ἐπὶ χϑόνα δῖαν ἐλαύνει, and its meaning was unknown, as the discussion in the scholia shows. In the first place, the word was thought to be synonymous with βούλιμος: Schol. A ad loc. κυρίως μὲν ὁ μέγας xai χαλεπὸς λιμός" νῦν δὲ ἀντὶ τῆς μεγάλης ἀνίας καὶ λύπης κεῖται ἡ λέξις, cf. Schol. Β οἱ δὲ ἀποδιδόντες λιμὸν ἀγνοοῦσιν, ὅτι οὐ λιμώσσει Πρίαμος ἀλλ᾽ ὀδυνᾶται. Schol. T repeats the criticism of the λιμός interpretation and adds: οἱ δὲ δαίμονα ἥνπερ κατηρῶντο τοῖς πολεμίοις, εἶναι δὲ αὐτῆς τὸ ἱερὸν ἐν Σμύρνῃ. Eustath. 1363.62 maintains the old interpretation: ἔτυμον ὁ μέγας λιμός, ἡ μεγάλη πεῖνα, καὶ ὧς εἰπεῖν βούπεινα, fj πολλὴ τῆς βρώσεως ἔφεσις, and then (1. 66), citing our passage, reports the goddess interpretation. The word has even been

taken to mean ‘gadfly’: Schol. D olxtov, Schol. A οἰκτρόν was emended to οἶστρον by Doederlein. Van Leeuwen, in his edition of the Iliad

(1912) argued that Βούβρωστις was the gadfly deified. This idea is dismissed by Richardson, Bull. Inst. Class. Stud. Lond. 8 (1961) 16f.,

but in his treatment of the word he does not succeed in explaining our passage. I think that the meaning 'a goddess who eats oxen' is the most probable one. This is obviously what Plut. suggests. In any case, he

only mentions the Syrian goddess here in passing and does not intend to be explicit. The question of her possible relation to the Homeric word remains unclear. P. Stengel, Opferbrüuche der Griechen (Leipzig-Berlin 1910) 188f. classifies her among the chthonic deities on the criterion of the black victim. 694 A ἐκ τῶν Μητροδώρον ' Iovixiov; This citation has generally been thought to refer to M. of Chios, the pupil of Democritus (Nestle, RE s.v. (14); DK II 231-234; Jacoby, FGrHist I A 43.3; Oxf. Class. Dict.;

286

TABLE TALKS V18

604 A

Helmbold-O'Neil). But Richardson, I.c. suggests, with good reason, that Metrodorus of Lampsacus the Elder is meant, a pupil of Anaxagoras, mentioned by Plat. Jon 530 CD as being a rhapsode and interpreter of Homer. 694 A Σμυρναῖοι τὸ παλαιὸν Αἰολεῖς ὄντες: Smyrna was Aeolic until the Ionians took over the city: Hdt.

I 149; Mimnerm.

frg. 12.6 Diehl’;

Callim. Epigr. 5.12 Pfeiff.; Paus. V 8.7. 694 B αὐτόδορον: ‘hide and all’; the word seems to be hapax; perhaps it was formed by Plut. 694 B ἐπεὶ δὲ πᾶς μὲν ἔοικεν [ὁ] λιμὸς νόσῳ, μάλιστα δ᾽ ὁ βούλιμος: Plut. takes up βούλιμος again, after the short digression on Βούβρωστις, but from now as a medical term. 694 B ὅτι γίνεται παϑόντος παρὰ φύσιν τοῦ σώματος: The emendation ὅτι γίνεται Hu.: ἐπιγίνεσθαι T is easy and convincing. Fuhrm.

changes the text: ἐπιφέρεσθαί

{τι} ποϑοῦντος

παρὰ

φύσιν τοῦ

σώματος and translates: ‘le corps reclamant un surcroit anormal de nourriture’. This reading is improbable. Plut. shows that he regards the pathological βούλιμος as a kind of deficiency (ἔνδεια). Thus, he of course does not affirm that the body wants to take food against nature, i.e. when it has already got its fill (this is our modern view). Indeed, Fuhrm. appears to see this himself: in n. 3 he notices that it is absence of nourishment that is against nature and refers to 663 EF ἔνδεια δέ, κἂν ἄλλο μηδὲν ἐξεργάσηται κακόν, αὐτὴ καϑ' αὑτὴν παρὰ φύσιν ἐστίν. 694 B εἰκότως ἀντιτάττουσιν ὡς μὲν ἐνδείᾳ τὸν πλοῦτον, ὡς δὲ νάσῳ τὴν ὑγίειαν: This duplex meaning, ‘deficiency’ + ‘affliction’, assigned here to the ritual term βούλιμος is certainly a late, learned interpretation, invented for the sake of symmetry of formulation. There ought to be two negative concepts opposite to Πλοῦτος and Ὑγίεια. Originally the Boeotian ritual term had no medical connotation, especially if the etymological derivation from nov-, ‘bad’, suggested by Schulze (above, on 694 A) is correct. V. Rotolo in: Miscellanea di studi classici

... E. Manni VI (1980) 1951-1954 seems to think that the term always had the duplex meaning, but Plutarch's subsequent comparison with nausea shows that this was not the case.

694 B

TABLE TALKS VI 8

287

694 B ὡς δὲ ναυτιᾶν ὠνομάσϑη ..., οὕτως ἄρα καὶ τὸ βουλιμιᾶν ... διέτεινεν: This comparison excellently displays the widening of the extent of βουλιμιᾶν, from ‘being in desperate need of food’ to ‘being ill’. The use of this verb in a medical sense, ‘faint from starvation and exertion’, is first found at Xen. An. IV 5.7.

694 B ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἔρανον κοινὸν ἐκ πάντων συνεπλήρου λόγων: Fuhrm. rightly preserves συνεπλήρου (συνεπληροῦμεν Amyot, -πλήρουν Mez.). The neuter ταῦτα expresses the fact that most guests contributed to this initial discussion. For the insistence upon general participation in the conversation, and for the stylistic device, cf. 614 E, 664 D, 668 D, 682 A, 719 EF. 694 C ἠπορήϑη

τὸ μάλιστα

βουλιμιᾶν

τοὺς διὰ χιόνος πολλῆς

βαδίξοντας: Plut. thinks of the case of Brutus and hence speaks of

βούλιμος as afflicting especially those who walk through heavy snow. This affliction is generally considered to attack in the cold season or cold weather, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 887 Ὁ 38 διὰ τί μάλιστα βουλιμιῶ-

σιν ἐπὶ τῷ ψύχει, καὶ τοῦ χειμῶνος μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ ϑέρους; so also Erasistratus ap. Gell. XVI 3.10, who abstains from stating a cause: ἄπορον δὲ ..., διὰ τί ἐν τοῖς ψύχεσιν μᾶλλον τὸ σύμπτωμα τοῦτο γίνεται ἢ ἐν ταῖς εὐδίαις. Asclepiades ap. Cael. Aurel. Morb.

14.107 viarum was the κοιλίαι ϑερμὸν

ac. I

gives a particular explanation: item bulimum magnitudine stomachi atque ventris fieri sensit, cf. 1 14.114. More common humoral pathological one, cf. Hipp. Aph. I 15 (IV 466 L.) αἱ χευιμῶνος xai ἦρος ϑερμόταται φύσει . . . καὶ γὰρ τὸ ἔμφυτον πλεῖστον

Éyev

τροφῆς

οὖν πλείονος

δεῖται;

Gal.

XVII

B

500 K. αἱ κυνώδεις ὀρέξεις ἤτοι διὰ δυσκρασίαν μόνην τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ ψυχρότερον ἢ διά τινας χυμοὺς ὀξεῖς γίνεσθαι πεφύκασιν ἐναποϑέντας εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ στόμα τῆς γαστρός. -- One observes that the fact that only a few people are affected is not considered; if this affliction were caused by cold, everyone would fall ill. Generally speaking, the confused use of the term βούλιμος is rather puzzling. Beside its use as a ritual term, ‘general hunger’, ‘famine’, in Boeotia

(694 A), it is used as a medical term about no less than three kinds of affliction, (1) ‘big hunger’, i.e. increased need of food especially in winter (so used by Soclarus at 694 E-F and Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 1),

(2) ‘bulimy’ in the modern sense (bulimy proper), i.e. morbid, neurotic hunger, as defined at Ps.-Gal. XIX 418 K. βούλιμός ἐστι διάϑεσις xa’ ἣν ἐπιζήτησις ἐκ μικρῶν διαλειμμάτων γίνεται τροφῆς — this

288

TABLE TALKS VI 8

694 C

disease is not mentioned in this talk --, and (3) ‘lassitude / (tendency to) faint / loss of consciousness because of severe hunger’. The last, clearly inadequate, use of the word is found as early as Xen. An. IV 5.7-9 (βουλιμιᾶν). Perhaps this abuse had its origin in Xenophon? Cf. the criticism at 694 F-695 A by Cleomenes the physician of this use of the word.

694 C Βροῦτος ἐκ Δυρραχίου πρὸς 'AnoXAovíav (ἰὼν) ἐκινδύνευσεν ὑπὸ τοῦ πάϑους: Plut. tells of this event at Brut. 25.4-26.2, where he also mentions (25.6) that he has discussed this affliction earlier, i.e.

here. It is observed that he uses the later name Dyrrachium here, but the original one, Epidamnus, in Brut. This city and Apollonia were the most important ports on the coast of Illyria. The distance between them

is nearly

90

kilometres.

Brut.

25.4

ἐγγὺς

οὖν

᾿Επιδάμνου

γενόμενος, διὰ κόπον καὶ ψῦχος ἐβουλιμίασε seems to indicate that Brutus had only marched a rather short distance from Dyrrachium when he fell ill. However,

at 26.1-3 Plut. makes it clear that it was

from Apollonia that help was given. Both cities sided with Brutus against Antonius. See Cic. Phil. X 10, XI 26; Appian. Civ. III 79, IV

75. 694 C λιποϑυμοῦντος οὖν αὐτοῦ suspected ἀπολιπόντος T. Hartm. substitutes ἀποϑνήσκοντος. I find it and interpret ἀπολείποντος (sc. τὸν βίον ἀπολείψειν and, with the aor.,

καὶ ἀπολείποντος: Doe., Bern. added ἀ. (tod ἄρτου); Fuhrm. sufficient to change to the imperf. βίον), cf. Alex. 18.8 σὺν δόξῃ τὸν Anton. 78.1 ὅσον δ΄ ἀπολιπόντος

αὐτοῦ, Loss of consciousness is typical of βούλιμος in this sense: Gal.

XVII B 501K. κατάπτωσις γάρ ἐστι δυνάμεως ὑπὸ τῆς ἔξωϑεν ψύξεως ὁ βούλιμος, ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ πείνης, VII 136 K. ϑαυμαστὸν δὲ οὐδέν, εἰ ταῖς ὀδύναις αὐτοῦ (sc. τοῦ στομάχου) λειποψυχίαι τε καὶ καταπτώσεις ἕπονται τῆς δυνάμεως. -- Fainting is not a syndrome of

bulimy proper (morbid, neurotic hunger), nor of naturally increased hunger, cf. below, on 695 A πάϑος ἐν στομάχῳ.

694 C φιλανϑρώπως ἐχρήσατο πᾶσι: One of Plutarch’s favourite phrases, cf. Praec. ger. reip. 815 F, Crass, 30.2, Luc. 32.6, Pomp. 10.2, Alex. 44.5.

694 C πάσχουσι δὲ τοῦτο καὶ ἵπποι καὶ ὄνοι, καὶ μάλισϑ᾽ ὅταν [ἢ] ἰσχάδας ἢ μῆλα κομίζωσιν: Psell. De omnif. doctr. 192 (156) has ὄνοι

694 C

TABLE TALKS VI 8

289

καὶ ἡμίονοι. Deletion Doe.; Psellus has ὅταν ἰσχάδας. -- The particu-

lar action ascribed to figs and apples is due to the supposed exhalation (695 A ἀποφορά), which was thought to have an antipathetic power, see below, 696 EF where the exhalation from the fig tree is said to appease even the fiercest of bulls. For the doctrine of sympathy and antipathy in nature, see above, on 641 Β οἱ τὰς ἀντιπαϑείας ϑουλοῦντες, and 664 C ἔχων δύναμιν ἀντιπαϑῆ. 694 D ἀναρρώννυσιν ἄρτος ὥστε, χἂν ἐλάχιστον ἐμφάγωσιν, ἵστανται καὶ βαδίζουσι: Fuhrm. (by mistake?) does not accept Doehner's convincing emendation from Psell., ἵστανται, but preserves

ἰῶνται. Hartm. suggested that Plut. perhaps used ἰᾶσϑαι in the passive sense and referred to 659 D,

but that instance was eliminated by

Bases. Ἵστανται is also supported by Xen. An. IV 5.7-9 who reports of a similar situation during the winter march of the ten thousand. Those befallen by this affliction were readily helped when they ate some bread. The wording is similar: ἐπειδὴ δέ τι ἐμφάγοιεν, ἀνίσταντο καὶ ἐπορεύοντο. Cf. also Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 16; Alex. Trall. II 251 Puschm. παυσαμένης τῆς λειποϑυμίας ἄρτον εἰς οἶνον βραχέντα διδόναι τροφὴν πρό γε πάντων. -- The immediate cause of

fainting is the failure of the constant inflow of oxygen and glucose to the brain. This impairment of nutrition to the brain is most commonly due to a sudden fall of systolic blood pressure, which may be caused by exhaustion.

After the patient has waken

up, he will recover more

rapidly if he is given sugared drink or food. Bread, which contains much glucose, was certainly effective; honey would have been even

better but was probably not available. 694 D γενομένης δὲ σιωπῆς, ἐγὼ συννοῶν ὅτι τὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἐπιχειρήματα xvÀ.; This example of inner soliloquy is unique in the Talks and rare in Ancient literature on the whole. — Οἱ πρεσβύτεροι

may mean either ‘predecessors’ or the older participants in the talks (Hoffl.), among these Plut. himself; the citation of Aristotle’s works points to the first alternative.

694 D ἐμνήσϑην τῶν ᾿Αριστοτελικῶν £v οἷς λέγεται ὅτι, πολλής περιψύξεως γενομένης ἔξωϑεν, ἐκϑερμαίνεται σφόδρα τὰ ἐντός: The idea that the heat is concentrated in the inner parts by external chilling is common; see above, on 635 C, and cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 2, 889 a 36; Gell. XIX 4.4, who cites Arist. Probl. phys. which, however, is

290

TABLE TALKS VI 8

694 D

not the work of our Corpus Aristotelicum. Perhaps this lost work was Plutarch’s source here. See Sandbach, ///. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 2231. Plut. gives this explanation as the first of two at Brut. 25.5; the second he argues below, at 695 B. 694 D πολὺ σύντηγμα

ποιεῖ: Arist.

escence as being an unnatural and tion of nourishment: λέγω δὲ ... αὐξήματος ὑπὸ τῆς παρὰ φύσιν produced (J. c. 36): it is drawn from

G.A.

724 b 26 defines colliqu-

thus useless product of decomposiσύντηγμα ... τὸ ἀποκριϑὲν ἐκ τοῦ ἀναλύσεως. He describes how it is the whole body in virtue of the heat

produced by movement, so also at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 884 a 13 οἱ μὲν yao

κοπιῶντες διὰ τὸν κόπον καὶ τὴν κίνησιν συντήγματος ϑερμοῦ πλήρεις εἰσίν. 694 DE τοῦτο δ᾽, ἐὰν μὲν ἐπὶ τὰ σκέλη óvij, κόπους ἀπεργάζεται ..., ἐὰν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τὰς τῆς κινήσεως καὶ τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ἀρχάς, ἀψυχίαν ἢ καὶ ἀσϑένειαν: Re. unnecessarily deleted ij, cf. 679 C, Amat. 756 C (ἢ or καί deleted by Hu.); see above, on 679 C ἐν δὲ γάμοις. — Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 6 gives the abdomen as the place where the heat collects: συντήξεως ..., ἧς δυείσης μὲν elg τὸν τῶν σιτίων τόπον αὐτὴ τροφὴ γίνεται τῷ σώματι᾽ ἐὰν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ἔλϑῃ, ἀφωνία καὶ ἀδυναμία συμβαίνει, The reason why the colliquescence causes fatigue, heaviness, etc. is its uselessness; when it takes the place of the nourishment (τροφὴ γίνεται) the result is malnutrition. 694 E Σώκλαρος: On S. see above, 640 B.

694 E αἰτηματῶδες: ‘begging the question’; the word is not found elsewhere. 694 E τὴν ϑερμότητα συστελλομένην καὶ πλεονάζουσαν ἐντὸς ἀναλίσκειν τὴν τροφὴν xTA.: Soclarus' explanation is less sophisticated; he simply gives the cause of the increased need of food in winter, not the cause of fainting. These two affections are explained in turn at Ps.-Arist. Probl. 888 a 2-10: ἐν δὲ τῷ ψύχει καὶ τῷ χειμῶνι συστελλομένου τοῦ ἐντὸς ϑερμοῦ εἰς ἐλάττω τόπον ϑᾶττον ὑπολείπει ἡ Evrög τροφή᾽ τούτου δὲ γινομένου μᾶλλον βουλιμιᾶν εἰκός. ἡ δ᾽ ἐν τῇ βουλιμίᾳ ἔκλυσις καὶ ἀδυναμία γίνεται συντήξεως γινομένης χτλ. At Brut, 25.5 Plut. mentions only the first (Soclarus’) explanation, but he adds that the vapour emanating from the snow might cause fainting.

694 F

TABLE TALKS VI 8

291

694 F ὥσπερ ὑπέκκαυμα: This image is common in Plut., cf. 734 A ὑπέκκαυμα τῆς ὀρέξεως, De aud. poet. 34 C ὑπεκκαύματα τοῖς

πάϑεσι, Non posse 1089 B οἷον ὑπέκκαυμα τῶν ἐπιϑυμιῶν. 694 F Κλεομένης δ᾽ ὁ ἰατρός: C. appears only here; he is otherwise unknown.

694 F τῷ ὀνόματι τὸν λιμὸν συντετάχϑαι δίχα τοῦ πράγματος, ὥσπερ XtÀ.: Cleomenes distinguishes the sense ‘fainting’ from ‘big hunger’.

His contribution is sharply contrasted to that of Soclarus who concentrated on the latter. Cleomenes would eliminate this meaning.

695 A οὐ γὰρ εἶναι λιμόν, ὥσπερ δοκεῖ, τὴν βουλιμίαν: This appears to be the only extant instance of clear-cut criticism of the ill-defined concept of βουλιμία (βούλιμος) in Greek literature, notably the use of this term in the sense ‘fainting because of severe hunger’, see above,

on 694 C ἠπορήϑη, and cf. below. 695 A πάϑος ἐν στομάχῳ διὰ συνδρομὴν ϑερμοῦ λιποψυχίαν ποιοῦν:

Doe. (Il 23) found ἐν τῷ στομάχῳ printed in the text of Psell. De omnif. doctr. edited by Heeren in his edition of Stobaeus, Eclogae, Vol. II:1, p. 463.6 and thus he proposed this reading for Plut., which eds. have generally accepted. But Psellus does not have the article; Heeren printed it by mistake. — Cleomenes regards fainting as being caused by a kind of reduction of the vital functions and not by hunger. This is similar to the description already given by Theophr. frg. 10.1:

λιποψυχία στέρησις ἢ κατάψυξις τοῦ ϑερμοῦ περὶ τὸν ἀναπνευστικὸν τόπον᾽ τοῦτο δὲ συμβαίνει ἢ ὑπὸ ψυχροῦ ἢ καὶ ὑπ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ϑερμοῦ, and cf. Arist. De somn. et vig. 455 Ὁ 5 ἀδυναμία γὰρ αἰσϑήσεων fj λιποψυχία. However, the idea that fainting is primarily due to hunger — which is first evidenced in Xen. An. IV 5.7-9 — gave rise to rather awkward attempts to explain this affliction: Gal. VII 136 K. ὁ καλούμενος βούλιμος ἐνδείας te Gua καὶ ἀτονίας καὶ καταψύξεως τῆς ἐνταῦϑα (1.e. περὶ τὸ στόμα τῆς γαστρὸς) σύμπτωμα xtA., cf. VIH 397f., XVII B 501; Alex. Trall. II 251 Puschm. 6

βούλιμος καλούμενος, ὡς xai τοὔνομα δηλοῖ, μέγας ἐστὶ λιμός. γίνεται δὲ... ἀπ᾽ ἀμέτρου ϑερμότητος καὶ ἀσϑενείας τοῦ στόματος τῆς γαστρός, ὅϑεν, εἰ μὴ προσφέροιντο τροφὴν ἀμέτρως, λειποϑυμοῦσι καὶ πίπτουσι.

292

TABLE TALKS VI 8

695 A

695 A ὥσπερ οὖν τὰ ὀσφραντὰ πρὸς τὰς λιποϑυμίας Bondeiv, καὶ τὸν ἄρτον xtÀ.: Alex. Trall. II 251 Puschm. classes bread, notably when dipped in wine, among the strong-smelling foods: τῶν δ᾽ ὀσφραντικῶν μάλιστα προσφέρουσι τόν τε ἄρτον εἰς οἶνον βεβρεγμένον, 695 A τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὴν idea that the vital energy faints is correct. Fainting of nutrition to the brain, the abdominal and crural pressure.

δύναμιν ἀναχαλεῖται καταφερομένην; The sinks downwards in the body when a person is due to an acute impairment or inadequacy frequently caused by the pooling of blood in veins which results in a sudden fall of blood

695 A ἔνδειαν μὲν οὐ ποιεῖ, καρδιωγμὸν δέ τινα μᾶλλον καὶ [δι]λιγγον: Mez. conjectured [δι]εΐλιγγον: διειλιγμόν T. We should spell ἴλιγγον. The computer shows that Plut. always has ἴλιγγος, except at

Caes. 60.8 where the MSS are divided. The syllable δὲ is probably due to dittography after καί. For hiatus after this word, see on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα, Bern., Hu., Hoffl. print (vn) AC εἴλιγγον Re., but the expletive is not in place together with ἴλιγγος, as this word is exactly what is to be expected and thus need not be apologized for. Bern. refers to Schol. Aristoph. Acharn. 581 ὅταν δὲ περὶ τὴν καρδίαν στρόφος γένηται, ἐπακολουϑεῖ σκότος, καὶ τοῦτο τὸ πάϑος καλοῦσιν ἴλιγγον. Fuhrm. reads διελιγμόν, ‘crampe d’estomac’, which is hardly the meaning to be expected; furthermore, this compound is not found,

and ἐλιγμός never has the meaning needed here, ‘dizziness’, ‘swimming in the head’. This is a common syndrome in heart diseases. Καρδιωγμός, ‘heartburn’, was thought to be due to hunger, cf. Apollodorus, FGrHist II B 244.213 (= Suda, K 371 = Epicharm. frg. 202 Kaibel) καρδιώττειν᾽ τὴν καρδίαν ἀλγεῖν. Σικελιῶται ὃ ἡμεῖς βουλιμιᾶν. Ἀπολλόδωρος ἐν ἕκτῳ περὶ ᾿Επιχάρμου τοὺς Σικελιώτας φησὶ τὸ τὸν στόμαχον ἐπιδάκνεσϑαι ὑπὸ λιμοῦ καρδιώττειν λέγειν, ὅπερ βουλιμιᾶν λέγει

Ξενοφῶν.

Cleomenes

intimates

this opinion

here

through the contrastive clause, ἔνδειαν μὲν οὐ ποιεῖ, and maintains that heartburn may occur without hunger.

695 B ἡμῖν δὲ καὶ ταῦτα μετρίως ἐδόκει λέγεσϑαι, (καὶ) ἀπὸ τῆς ἐναντίας ἀρχῆς δυνατὸν εἶναι: Addition Re. -- Plut. here presents an interesting, unparalleled approach to the problem. This attempt to explain dizziness and lack of strength which befall those who exhaust themselves in cold weather, as being due to a loss of heat, and in turn

695 B

TABLE TALKS VI 8

293

to explain this loss as being caused by vapour from the snow, is also found at Brut. 25.5 as an alternative explanation, see below, on 695 C.

The comparison of sweating during physical exertion with the phenomenon of condensation on the surface of cold vessels of silver or copper

as well as with the *melting' of tin in severe cold is likewise unparalleled.

695 B μὴ πύκνωσιν ἀλλ᾽ ἀραίωσιν ὑποϑεμένοις: This assumption was certainly striking. The general opinion was that cold compresses and solidifies,

cf.

635 C

διὰ

τὴν

περίψυξιν

καὶ

τὴν

πύκνωσιν

τοῦ

σώματος, and Brut. 25.5 τοῦ ϑεομοῦ διὰ περίψυξιν καὶ πύκνωσιν ... τὴν τροφὴν ἀϑρόως ἀναλίσκοντος. 695 B τὸ γὰρ ἀπορρέον πνεῦμα τῆς χιόνος xtÀ.: For this phenomenon, see above, on 691 Ε and 692 A. One observes that Plut. here does not mention that the vapour only emanates in connection with

melting, as is always emphasized elsewhere, cf. Arist. Meteor. 361 b 36-362 a 20, 364 a 5-13; Theophr. frg. 5 De vent. 11-12; Plut. De facie

938 E. He clearly tries to avoid this fact here, seeing that this would spoil his argument, which is based on the idea that cold is the ultimate cause of the weakness or fainting that occasionally occurs in cold weather. His argument may have seemed plausible, seeing that anyone with experience of physical exertion in cold weather would know that the risk for exhaustion increases at lower temperatures. Through the analogy with the snow contained in silver or bronze vessels, and still

more by the reference at 695 D to the *melting' of tin at low temperatures, he makes it clear that he actually means that a fine vapour emanates even from snow that is not about to melt. At Brut. 25.5, however, he completely blurs this argument: λεπτὴ τῆς χιόνος

διαλυομένης ἰοῦσα πνοή. It seems possible that the challenge of the general opinion of πνεῦμα τῆς χιόνος τηκομένης which Plut. presents

here may be his own idea. See further S.-T.T. ‘HeiBhunger, Pneuma des Schnees und etesische Winde'. In: Greek and Latin Studies in Memory of Cajus Fabricius ed. S.-T. Teodorsson (Góteborg 1990) 134-140. 695 B ἔχει δέ τι τομὸν καὶ διαιρετικὸν ... καὶ ἀργυρῶν καὶ χαλκῶν ἀγγείων ὁρῶμεν yao ταῦτα μὴ στέγοντα τὴν χιόνα᾽ πνεομένη γὰρ ἀναλίσκεται καὶ τὴν ἐκτὸς ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ ἀγγείου νοτίδος ἀναπίμ-

πλησι λεπτῆς καὶ κρυσταλλοειδοῦς: Silver and copper have the high-

294

TABLE TALKS VI 8

695 B

est conductivity of heat and cold of all metals. Consequently, snow contained in vessels made of these metals chills their surfaces so that humidity from the surrounding air forms hoar-frost on them. As to copper, it was considered porous, see above, on 691 A. 695 C ὀξὺ καὶ φλογοειδὲς προσπῖπτον ἐπικαίειν δοκεῖ τὰ ἄκρα τῷ τέμνειν καὶ διαιρεῖν τὴν σάρκα, καϑάπερ τὸ πῦρ: Many emendations

have been proposed to the corrupt παρελϑεῖν τῇ σαρκί Τ. Re. would read παρέλκειν τὴν σάρκα; Wytt. proposed καὶ τέμνειν τῷ παρέλκειν τὴν σ.; παραλύειν τὴν σ., or παρενδύειν τῇ o. Faehse; παρεισϑεῖν τῇ

σ. Bern.; παρεισελθϑεῖν τῇ σ. Hoffl.; παρεμπεσεῖν vfj c. Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 256; παρεσϑίειν τῆς σαρκός Hu. I propose τῷ τέμνειν καὶ διαιρεῖν τὴν σάρκα, cf. above, 695 B ἔχει δέ τι τομὸν καὶ διαιρετικὸν οὗ σαρκὸς μόνον κτλ. The action of fire is described similarly at

687 A διίστησι καὶ διαιρεῖ τὰ σώματα τὸ πῦρ τῷ ἐξαιρεῖν τὴν χολλῶσαν ὑγρότητα καὶ συνδέουσαν. -- The comparison with fire is probably intended to support the questionable argument. 695 C ῥεῖ τὸ ϑερμὸν ἔξω καὶ (διὰ) τὴν ψυχρότητα τοῦ πνεύματος περὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν σβεννύμενον ἱδρῶτα δροσώδη διατμίζει κτλ.: Plut. concisely repeats this explanation at Brut. 25.5 εἴτε δριμεῖα καὶ λεπτὴ τῆς χνόνος διαλυομένης ἰοῦσα πνοὴ τέμνει τὸ σῶμα καὶ διαφϑείρει τὸ ϑερμὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ ϑύραζε διασπειρόμενον. This reasoning is contrary to the general opinion that cold causes contraction and the concentration of heat in the central parts of the body. Only Plut. has this explanation. The description of the sweat as ‘dewy’ and the body heat as being extinguished on the skin is intended to explain the fact that the sweat exudated in cold weather is felt to be cold, and as such

can be regarded as analogous to the hoar-frost on the surface of silver Or bronze vessels containing snow. The observation that cold causes great losses of energy is of course quite correct. 695 D ἐν μὲν yàp τοῖς μεγάλοις χειμῶσιν ἀκόναι μολίβδου διατηκόμεναι κτλ.: The lumps

(not whetstones,

see above, on 691 B)

meant here are not of lead but of tin, as is pointed out by Helmbold in his note on De prim. frig. 949 C (LCL XII 250). Plut. there cites Arist. (frg. 212) for this statement: Ἀριστοτέλης δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀκόνας τοῦ μολίβδου τήκεσϑαί φησι καὶ ῥεῖν ὑπὸ κρύους καὶ χειμῶνος, ὕδατος μὲν οὐ πλησιάξοντος αὐταῖς. The ordinary white tin is gradually reduced by severe cold to a grey powder, which is an allotropic form of

695 D the metal. The

TABLE TALKS VI 8 transformation

295

begins at about + 13°C. It probably

seemed natural for Plut. to look upon the gradual allotropic decomposition of tin as a process parallel to the increasing exhaustion and

powerlessness with concomitant heavy sweating which befalls people who exert themselves to the utmost in cold weather. 695 ἢ (ἀραίωσιν)

κατηγορεῖ μᾶλλον καὶ ῥύσιν ἢ πύκνωσιν τοῦ

σώματος: The word is clearly needed. Re. added it after κατηγορεῖ;

Bern. rightly placed it before this word. A plausible alternative proposed by Mez. and Faehse would be to substitute dgatwow for καὶ δύσιν. 695 D ἀραιοῦνται δὲ χειμῶνος μέν, ὥσπερ εἴρηται, τῇ λεπτότητι: Hoffl. prints τῇ (τοῦ πνεύματος) λεπτότητι Mez. The word may seem plausible -- most translators (Amyot, Kaltw., Reich., Fuhrm.) presuppose it, but it is not evident. Plut. has probably not written the word here. Because of the disputable about his idea that πνεῦμα emanates from snow even in cold weather, he is likely to have suppressed it intentionally. I suggest that what Plut. might have had in mind was τοῦ χειμῶνος, ‘of the cold’, extrapolated from the preceding χειμῶνος,

‘during winter’, thus conveying a more vague idea of the nature of the emanation. For χειμών as used in the sense ‘cold’, cf. Plat. Leg. 829 B

μηδὲν χειμῶνας ἢ καύματα διευλαβουμένους. 695 D τὰ δὲ μῆλα καὶ τὰς ἰσχάδας εἰκὸς ἀποπγεῖν τι τοιοῦτον: The effects of the exhalation ascribed to the fig were generally recognized, see below 696 E πνεῦμα τῆς συκῆς, but Plutarch’s strained analogy with the vapours from snow was certainly not. By the indefinite τι τοιοῦτον he tries to forestall criticism. The concluding clause clearly shows his caution.

695 E ἄλλα γὰρ ἄλλοις, ὥσπερ ἀναλαμβάνειν, καὶ καταλύεσϑαι πέφυκεν: Fuhrmann’s addition (oftw) καί is superfluous, cf. Plat. Rep. 414 E δεῖ, ὡς περὶ μητρὸς καὶ τροφοῦ, τῆς χώρας ... ἀμύνειν.

TALK 9 695 E τὸ γάλα τε λευκὸν καὶ μέλι χλωρόν: The first phrase is found at Jl. TV 434, V 902, Od. IX 246; the second at Il. ΧΙ 631, Od. X 234, and

296

TABLE TALKS VI 9

695 E

at Hymn. Hom. Merc, 560. On the important role and significance of milk and honey in mythology, see Usener, Rh. Mus. 57 (1902) 177195. 695 E τὸν οἶνον ἐουϑρόν: It is only in the Odyssey that this epithet is used about wine: V 165, IX 163, 208, XII 19, 327, XIII 69, XVI 444;

also at Hymn. Hom. stances).

Cer. 208. The usual epithet is aldoy (24 in-

695 E τὸ δ᾽ ἔλαιον ... μόνον ἐπιεικῶς ὑγρὸν προσαγορεύει: The epithet ὑγρός is found at /7. ΧΧΤΗ͂ 281, Od. VI79, 215, VII 107. Other

epithets of ἔλαιον are: ἀμβρόσιος (Il. XXIII 186), εὐώδης (Od. II 339), ἄμβροτος (Hymn. Hom. Ven. 61). 695 F ὅτι καὶ γλυκύτατόν ἐστι τὸ δι᾽ ὅλου γλυχύ, καὶ Aevxótotov

κτλ: Reiske's reading ὅτι ὡς y. has been generally accepted, but Fuhrm. rightly preserves the text. 695 F πρῶτον μὲν ἡ λεπτότης αὐτοῦ: T. has λειότης with εν in an erasure. Hu. suggests that λεπτότης was first written. This is probably the correct reading; the λεπτότης of oil is repeatedly stated in this talk (696 B, C, D), Plut. never uses λεῖος or λειότης about oil.

696 A ἔπειτα τῇ ὄψει παρέχει καϑαρώτατον ἐνοπτρίσασϑαι; The use of olive oil as a mirror is intimated in Suda, s.v. ᾿Αϑηνᾶς ἄγαλμα, where

the

olive is said to have

been

consecrated

to Athena

ὡς

καϑαρωτάτης οὐσίας οὔσης" φωτὸς γὰρ ὕλη ἡ ἐλαία. Water was also used as a mirror (Narcissus). 696 A

τὸ

γάλα

τῶν

ὑγρῶν

μόνον

οὐκ

ἐσοπτρίζει,

πολλῆς

ἀναμεμιγμένης αὐτῷ γεώδους (οὐσίας): The addition (Turn.) is plausible, though not indispensible. -- The opinion about the ‘rough’ nature of milk is also found at De facie 936 E οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸ γάλα τοὺς τοιούτους ἐσοπτρισμοὺς ἀποδίδωσιν οὐδὲ ποιεῖ τῆς ὄψεως ἀναλλάσεις διὰ τὴν ἀνωμαλίαν καὶ τραχύτητα τῶν μορίων. 696 A ἔτι δὲ κινούμενον ἥκιστα ψοφεῖ τῶν ὑγρῶν᾽ ὑγρὸν γάρ ἐστι 6v ὅλου: Arist. De anima 419 ἃ 9 observes that sound cannot be produced

within a homogeneous medium: γίνεται δ᾽ ὁ κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν ψόφος ἀεί τινος πρός τι καὶ Ev wi πληγὴ γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ποιοῦσα. διὸ καὶ

696 A

TABLE TALKS VI 9

297

ἀδύνατον ἑνὸς ὄντος γενέσθαι ψόφον" ἕτερον γὰρ τὸ τύπτον καὶ τὸ τυπτόμενον.

696 A τῶν (γὰρ) ἄλλων: Fuhrm. rightly adds this particle instead of δ᾽ Turn., cf. the two γάρ used in a similar way in the next sentence. 696 AB μόνον ἄκρατον διαμένει καὶ ἄμικτον" ἔστι γὰρ πυκνότατον᾽ οὐ γὰρ ἔχει μεταξὺ τῶν ξηρῶν καὶ γεωδῶν ἐν αὑτῷ μερῶν κενώματα: The transposition μερῶν ἐν αὑτῷ Fuhrm. is unnecessary. -For the synonymous use of ἄκρατος and ἄμικτος, see on 620 E ἀνϑρώπου δὲ πρὸς οἶνον, and 626 D (οὐκ) ἐγγίνεται κρᾶσις. — Plut. also has this explanation at 702 B ἄλλος ἠτιᾶτο τὴν πυκνότητα, δι᾽ ἣν ἀμικτότατόν ἐστι καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὑγρῶν οὐδὲν εἰς αὑτὸ δέχεται, cf. 640 D and Ps.-Plut. frg. 34.149 vol. VII 180.6 Bern. τὸ ἔλαιον γλίσχρον ὃν καὶ ἡνωμένον πρὸς ἑαυτὸ οὐ διαιρεῖται εἰς ἄτομα οὐδ᾽ ὑγροῖς ἑτέροις ἀναμίγνυται, and similarly Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl.

1 127, 1 67. 696 B ὅταν δ᾽ ἀφρίζῃ τὸ ἔλαιον, οὐ δέχεται τὸ πνεῦμα: i.e. when the oil is heated. The affirmation is rather confusing; nobody would expect boiling oil to admit air, on the contrary, cf. 734 E where the oil is said to cause sputterring in lamps, ἀποκυματιζούσης τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς θερμότητος. — At De prim. frig. 950 B Plut. explains the optimal transparency of oil and its faculty of maintaining itself on the surface of other things as due to the fact that it contains much air. Arist. Meteor. 383 Ὁ 21 admits that ἀπορώτατα δὲ ἔχεν ἡ τοῦ ἐλαίου φύσις, but he is certain that it contains air: 383 Ὁ 26, 384 ἃ 16.

696 B τοῦτο δ᾽ αἴτιον καὶ τοῦ τρέφεσϑαι τὸ πῦρ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ" τρέφεται μὲν γὰρ οὐδενὶ πλὴν ὑγρῷ: For this generally accepted idea, see above, on 666 A and 687 A, and cf. 649 B, 658 B.

696 B td δὲ γεῶδες ἐκτεφρωϑὲν ὑπολείπεται: Cf. De prim. frig. 954 EF o γὰρ τὸ στερεὸν ἀλλὰ τὸ νοτερὸν τοῦ ξύλου καυστόν EoTW’ ἐξικμασϑέντος δὲ τούτου, τὸ στερεὸν καὶ ξηρὸν ἀπολείπεται τέφρα γενόμενον.

696 BC ὕδωρ μὲν οὖν ... τὴν φλόγα διασπᾷ καὶ τῇ τραχύτητι ... χκατἀσβέννυσι: Cf. Arist. De resp. 474 b 13 φϑορὰ δὲ πυρὸς... σβέσις

208

TABLE TALKS VI 9

καὶ μάρανσις. σβέσις μὲν ἡ ὑπὸ σβέννυται διασπώμενον.

τῶν

696 BC

ἐναντίων

... καὶ ϑᾶττον

696 CD τὸ δ᾽ ἔλαιον, ὅλκιμον (ὃν) καὶ μαλακόν, ἄγεται πανταχῆ:

Fuhrm. restored the text convincingly (Re. added ὄν after μαλακόν); πανταχῇ obviously belongs to ἄγεται, not to ὅλκιμον (the MSS has it after this word.)

696 D συνεπιρρεῖ πορρωτάτω δι᾽ ὑγρότητα τῶν μερῶν μηχυνομένων: Arist. De sensu 441 ἃ 23 regards water as the ‘finest’ (λεπτότατον) of all liquids, but nevertheless notices that ἐπεκτείνεται ἐπὶ πλέον τοῦ ὕδατος τὸ ἔλαιον διὰ τὴν γλισχρότητα᾽ τὸ δ᾽ ὕδωρ ψαϑυρόν ἐστι. 696 D ἐλαίου δὲ κηλῖδας οὐ τῆς τυχούσης ἐστὶ πραγματείας ἐκκαϑᾶραι: In I 9 where the problem of washing and removing stains is discussed, oiliness is stated (627 C) as the reason why sea water does not clean effectively but instead makes stains. One would expect a mention of this cause, the real one, here too, but this would have

spoiled the biased argument of this talk. 696 D καὶ γὰρ οἶνον κεκραμένον δυσχερέστερον ἐξαιροῦσι τῶν ἱματίων, ὡς ᾿Αριστοτέλης

φησίν,

ὅτι λεπτότερός

ἐστι: Sandbach,

Ill.

Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 223f. admits the possibility that the reference is to Probl. 874 a 29 διὰ τὴν λεπτότητα εἰς πλείους τόπους ὁ xexoapuévoc (sc. οἶνος) εἰσέρχεται, καϑάπερ ἐν τοῖς ἱματίοις, καὶ ἔστι δυσεξαγωγότερος, but suggests that Plut. more probably refers to a lost Aristotelian collection of Προβλήματα.

TALK 10 696 E τίς αἰτία xth.: The talk was excerpted by Psell. De omnif. doctr. 193 (157). 696 E ὁ ᾿Αριστίωνος εὐημέρει παρὰ τοῖς δειπνοῦσι μάγειρος κτλ.: Aristion is the host even in VI 7, where Niger censures him because of over-refinement and luxury at dinner. For his identity, see on 657 B.

696 E

TABLE TALKS VI 10

299

696 E τὸν ἄρτι τῷ Ηρακλεῖ τεϑυμένον ἀλεχτρυόνα: Fuhrm. notices that the ox, the ram and the pig, not the cock, were usually sacrificed

to Heracles. Cocks were sacrificed above all to chthonic deities, notably Asclepius (Plat. Phaed. 118 A; Lucian, Bis accus. 5; Herodas, 4.12, 16; Artemid. Onir. V 9; Plut. Pyrrh. 3.7; Fest. 110 s.v. In insula)

and to Persephone (Porphyr. De abst. IV 16). A καλλαῖς, a cock or a hen, was offered to Asclepius, Leto and Artemis at Epidaurus (Syll. 998.5, 23). Only at IG III 77.5, 27 is the cock mentioned as being sacrificed to Heracles, besides Nephthys and Osiris. Fuhrmann suggests, without reference, that the cock was sacrificed above all by poor

or stingy people, but admits that this is not the case here. 696 E νεαρὸν ὄντα καὶ πρόσφατον: For Plutarch's predilection for synonymy as a stylistic device, see on 635 B. 696 E πνεῦμα τῆς συκῆς ἄπεισιν ἰσχυρὸν καὶ σφοδρόν: Fuhrm. re-

jects the suggestion by Soury, REG 62 (1949) 322-324 that the term πνεῦμα indicates a Stoic source here, and refers instead to the Empedoclean theory of ἀποφοραΐάἀπόρροιαι, see 680 F. However, Plut.

obviously depends here in the first place on the doctrine of sympathy and antipathy in nature as represented by, among others, Bolus of Mendes. These ideas can be traced throughout the Talks, see Wellmann,

Abh.

Berlin

1928:7.26f.,

and

cf.

above,

on

641 B οἱ τὰς

ἀντιπαϑείας ϑρυλοῦντες. 696 E ij τ᾽ ὄσφρησις: Wytt. corrected ὄψις T. The fig tree, especially the wild one, ought not to grow near wine cellars because of the strong scent it gives off (Plin. XIV 133; Geop. VI 2.9). 696 EF τὸ περὶ τῶν ταύρων λεγόμενον, ὡς ἄρα συκῇ προσδεϑεὶς ὁ χαλεπώτατος ἡσυχίαν ἄγει: This phenomenon is mentioned at 641 C as an example of natural antipathy; cf. also 664 C. Cf. Plin. XXIII 130 caprificus tauros quamlibet feroces collo eorum circumdata in tantum mirabili natura conpescit, ut inmobiles praestet; Isid. X VII 7.17 tauros quoque ferocissimos ad fici arborem conligatos repente mansuescere dicunt. 696 F τὴν δὲ πλείστην αἰτίαν καὶ δύναμιν ἡ δριμύτης εἴχεν᾽ τὸ γὰρ φυτὸν ἁπάντων ὀὑπωδέστατον: The ‘philosophic’ imperf. indicates that the question has been discussed at some length earlier. This occurred

300

TABLE TALKS VI 10

696 F

in Talk V 9 where the sweetness of the fruit is contrasted to the bitterness of the tree. The reference here to that talk flagrantly spoils the fiction of authenticity. 696 F τὸ ϑρῖον: Amyot corrected τὸ ἔργον T. Cf. 684 B τῆς yàp συκῆς καὶ τὸ φύλλον διὰ τὴν τραχύτητα ϑρῖον ὠνόμασται. 697 A διὸ καιόμενόν te τῷ καπνῷ δάκνει μάλιστα: See above, on 684 B. Cf. also Aristoph. Vesp. 144-146. 697 À ἡ τέφρα

ῥυπτικωτάτην

παρέχει

κονίαν:

Fuhrm.

preserves

κόνιν, but κονίαν Xyl. is obviously the correct word, cf. 684 C τὴν ἐκ τέφρας κονίαν ῥυπτικωτάτην παρέχειν ὑπὸ δριμύτητος.

697 A ταῦτα δὲ πάντα ϑερμότητος: Fuhrm. prints (καὶ) ϑερμότητος, hesitatingly proposed by Hu. The addition is mistaken. The fig tree was regarded as hot by nature, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 925 a 1 ἡ δὲ συκῆ ϑερμή ἐστιν. δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ ὀπὸς πάντων δριμύτατος Hv, καὶ ὁ πολὺς καπνὸς xth. The paragraph as a whole (ταῦτα δὲ πάντα . . . πεφύκασι) is to explain the action of the fig tree as being due to its natural heat. Hubert’s reading ταὐτά (admitted by Hoffl.) is thus out of place. Detergent action and heat are both ascribed to sea water at 627 A. 697 A καὶ (yao) τὴν πῆξιν ἐμποιεῖν τῷ γάλακτι: Fuhrm. rightly adopts the addition (Cast. p. 898). For the use of the sap of the fig tree for making milk coagulate, see above, on 684 B.

697 A κολλῶντα tà {τραχέα) μέρη τοῦ γάλακτος, ἐκϑλιβομένων ἐπιπολῆς τῶν λείων καὶ περιφερῶν: Addition Hu., who pointed out

that the Atomist theory underlies this description, cf. Democr. A 135 (II 118 DK) = Theophr. De sensu 65: the different tastes are due to the different shapes of the atoms. The Atomist theory of taste is presented by Lucret. IV 615-672. 697 A

ἀλλὰ

[καὶ]

ὑπὸ

ϑερμότητος

ἐκτήχοντα

τοῦ

ὑγροῦ

τὸ

ἀσύστατον χαὶ ὑδατῶδες: Plut. seems to think that the heat of the fig

juice alone separates whey and cheese. In reality the milk must be heated moderately to make the whey separate out through the influence of the fig juice. This was the method generally practised (also

697 A

TABLE TALKS VI 10

rennet proper,

πυετία,

was used).

The procedure

301

is mentioned

by

Arist. Meteor. 384 a 20 διὸ ἐὰν μή χωρισϑῇ ὁ ógóc, ἐκκάεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς ἑψόμενος. τὸ δὲ γεῶδες συνίσταται καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ ὀποῦ, ἐάν πως

ἕψῃ τις, οἷον οἱ ἰατροὶ ὀπίζοντες. οὕτω δὲ χωρίζεται ὁ ὀρὸς καὶ ὃ τυρός. At G.A. 772 a 23 Arist. compares the heat of the semen with that of fig juice (or rennet).

697 A τεκμήριον δὲ καὶ τὸ ἄχρηστον εἶναι τὸν ὀρόν, (καίπερ) γλυκὺ(ν ὄντα), καὶ πομάτων φαυλότατον: I propound this reading (γλυκύν Turn., ὀρόν Doe.) as a possible emendation of ἄχρηστον

γλυκὺ εἶναι tov ὀπόν, ἀλλὰ πομάτων T. γλυκὺ(ν γὰρ) εἶναι Paton, but the particle for stating a well-known fact. I believe that proper place and at the same time was consequence the surrounding words were

Fuhrm. accepts ἄχρηστον᾽ seems rather too emphatic γλυκύν was moved from its multilated, and that as a dropped (the hiatus γλυκὺ

εἶναι indicates the corruption). Subsequent to, or simultaneous with,

the corruption, καί was changed into ἀλλά before πομάτων. 607 A

οὐ

γὰρ

τὸ

λεῖον

ὑπὸ

τῶν

σχαληνῶν,

ἀλλὰ

τὸ ψυχρὸν

(ἐξαν)έστη καὶ ἄπεπτον ὑπὸ τῆς ϑερμότητος: Hubert’s addition is convincing. -- Fubrm. observes that Plutarch’s reasoning is somewhat awkward here. The fact that should be proved, i.e. the heat of the fig juice, seems to be made a proof of another fact, the bad quality of the whey. However, the sentence is intended to be a description of the whey as being an indirect proof of the heat of the fig juice rather than a direct proof. Plut. rejects the (atomistic) idea that the whey is composed of smooth particles. 697 B καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο συνεογοῦσιν οἱ ἅλες, ϑεομοὶ γάρ εἰσι, κτλ.: For the hot nature of salt, see on 685 A. Cf. Theophr. frg. 4 De od. 50 πρὸς ἅπαντα δὲ ἡ ϑερμότης χρήσιμον καὶ εἰς ἀφαίρεσιν καὶ ἔτι μᾶλλον εἰς τὸ πέττειν καὶ διανοίγειν τοὺς πόρους, εἰς ἃ συμβάλλεται τὸ ἐν τῷ ἁλὶ πεποιῆσϑαι᾽ καὶ γὰρ ἀναστομοῦσι καὶ διαϑερμαίνουσιν οἱ ἅλες. 697 B ϑερμὸν οὖν πνεῦμα καὶ δριμὺ καὶ τμητικὸν ἀφίησιν ἡ συχῆ, καὶ τοῦτο ϑρύπτει κτλ.: The πνεῦμα

is always regarded as hot by

nature, cf. especially 642 C τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ λύκου περίϑερμον οὕτω καὶ πυρῶδες, ὥστε τὰ σκληρότατα τῶν ὀστῶν ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τήκειν καὶ

302

TABLE TALKS VI 10

697 B

καϑυγραίνειν. Fuhrm. refers to the Aristotelian concept of ἔμφυτον ϑερμόν, but what is meant here is antipathetic exhalation, see above, on 696 E, and 641 Β. 697 B τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ πάσχει καὶ πυρῶν ἐντεϑεὶς σιρῷ, καὶ vitow συνημμένος, ὑπὸ ϑερμότητος: I admit the correction σιρῷ Doe. (Vind. 33): σωρῷ T. To put down a slaughtered cock into a pile of wheat to make it tender is simply inconceivable. Even to put it into a pit filled with wheat is unheard of, but I think we should suppose that the pit was only partly filled and that the bird was suspended above the wheat and was exposed to the vapour that was thought to emanate from it. Also Doehner's (I 48) emendation σιρόν: σῖτον T, is convincing. For this word, see Suda, s.v. oigóg" ὁ λάκκος. xai σιροῖς, ὀρύγμασιν, ἐν olg κατατίϑεται τὰ σπέρματα, cf. Dem. VIII 45. Steph. rightly chose συνημμένος g: ovvnuévog T (with ἢ in erasure

with space on each side), συνειμένος E. Presumably this means that the birds, after having been studded (larded) with soda, were laced together so as to absorb this better. The use of soda instead of salt is evidenced only for baking and the preparation of vegetables (Plin. XXXI 115, XIX 143). In spite of the proximity of the sea in the Mediterranean countries, there was occasionally a shortage of salt. See J. André, L'alimentation et la cuisine à Rome (Paris 1961) 195.

STUDIA GRAECA ET LATINA GOTHOBURGENSIA LXII

A COMMENTARY ON PLUTARCH’S TABLE TALKS Vol. III (Books 7-9) by SVEN-TAGE

TEODORSSON

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS GOTHOBURGENSIS

of the ; Printed with the aid Researc 1 Swedish Councili for Social Sciences in the Humanities and

Ὁ Sven-Tage Teodorsson 1996 Distributors:

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS GOTHOBURGENSIS Box 5096, $-402 22 Göteborg, Sweden ISBN 91-7346-291-8 ISSN 0081-6450 Printed in Sweden by Almqvist & Wiksell, Uppsala 1996

ABSTRACT

Title: A Commentary on Plutarch's Table Talks. Voi. II (Books 7-9). (Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia LXIL) Author: Sven-Tage Teodorsson.

University: Góteborg University, Institute of Classical Studies, Department of Greek. Giteborg 1996, 426 pages, monograph. ISBN 91-7346-291-8; ISSN 0081-6450 This volume completes the commentary on Plutarch’s Table Talks of which the first two volumes were published in 1989 and 1990 as vols. LI and LHI of this series. The commentary is written mainly according to the same methodological principles and with the same aims as the first volumes. The aim of the commentary is the interpretation and explication of the Greek text by means of references to possible sources and indication of parallels in Greek and Latin authors and, not least, in Plutarch him-

self. Problems of textual criticism are rather frequent and some solutions to difficult passages are suggested. Questions of grammar and style are commented upon. Key words: Aristotle, Democritus, Epicurus, Peripatetic, Plato, Plutarch, Pythagorean, Stoic, abstinence, alphabet, dance, disease, en-

tertainment, geometry, lungs, Muse, music, precept, rhetoric, sound, star,

CONTENTS

Introduction

2.00.0... eee ee eee rn

Commentary

2.0...

Book 7 Book 8 Book 9... Indices...

m

nnn

wo. ccc ee II 9 9 κων oo... cece ee ee ene II I ees cee nee rh hs 0. ee ΞΕ ΕΝ

Index of English words Index of Greek words

............

llle

............ νιν ee eee ν eese

9

11 13 145 299 391

393 417

INTRODUCTION

The last three books of the Zable Talks are all rather different from each other in both content and general character. In the seventh book almost all topics (3-10) are ‘sympotic’ in a more or less narrow sense. Also the first talk on the question whether Plato was right in saying that drink passes through the lungs might be so classified. Plutarch advertises this

character of the book clearly in the prooemium. Similarly he announces the more philosophical and scientific content of Book VIII in the intro-

duction to it. Two dialogues make this book appear to be perhaps the most serious one. Especially the second dialogue on the interpretation of what Plato meant by saying that God is always doing geometry is a serious discussion of a profound philosophical and metaphysical question, and the ninth talk on the question whether new diseases may come into being concerns a difficult problem. Talks 3, 5, and 10 treat scientific questions, and 7-8 are discussions on the Pythagorean precepts and the fish taboo. The sixth talk is the only strictly 'sympotic' one in Book

VIII. Finally, Book IX differs from all the others. The talks take place during one and the same wine-party, and practically all topics concern musical and literary questions. The content shows that Plutarch wanted to give this concluding book the character of a homage to the Muses. This is made especially clear in the long dialogue IX 14 on the number and

character of the Muses, where Plutarch emphasizes their function of originators, protectors and supervisors of every branch of human culture. Plutarch makes this dialogue look like a culmination and summary of the work as a whole. The concluding Talk IX 15 on the elements of dancing is a substantial discussion, where a comprehensive theory is presented which tries to describe literature, music, dance and, as a hint,

also painting as constituted by elements of corresponding character.

10

TABLE TALKS IV 2

664D

The commentary is based on the text of the two most recent editions, one by K. Hubert (1938), the other by E. L. Minar (Books VII-VIIT) and

F. H. Sandbach (Book IX), Plutarch’s Moralia, Vol. IX, with an English translation (LCL no. 425), London-Cambridge, Mass. 1961. I have collated the notes found in the margins of A. Turnebus' copy of the Aldine edition (Bibl. Nat., Paris, Res. J. 94) where three different

hands are distinguished. I have not marked each of these but cite all of them by ‘Turn, I have also used J. Amyot's copy of the Basel edition (Bibl. Nat., Paris, Res. J. 108), which contains marginal notes made by

him. These may be either his own or collected from other commentators. I cite them by 'Amyot'. Other commentators I cite from the editions used. Efforts have also been made in this part of the commentary as in the previous ones to contribute to the improvement of the partly rather badly transmitted text. I present the readings resulting from conjectures or emendations of my own in the lemmata. For the reader's convenience there follows a list of the relevant passages (indicated by the beginning of the lemma):

698E

τὴν δὲ λευκανίην

129 A

(Koi) ἰχθύων δὲ [καί]

70A

ἐξεύρηκ᾽

735E

γλεύκους δὲ ζέοντος

701A

ἡ δὲ θερμότης

738F

τούτων τοίνυν

702C TWIF

τὸ γὰρ ψυχόμενον npocedilen

739 741

δεύτερον (δ᾽ (ἀλλὰ γιγνώσκεις

7128

ἀλλ᾽ ἥγεκιθάρα

743E

τὸ γὰρ ὦ πόποι

715B 720B 722D 705A 725 BC 726C

ἢ τοῦθ᾽ ὅμοιόν ἐστι ἐβούλετ᾽ οὖν ἀεὶ τὰ νῷ θεωρητά Se ψυχρότης τούτοις ἐπιεικῶς μάρτυρι χρωμένοις

746C 741D 748A 748 Β 748 BC 748

ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῦ βίου (καὺ τὴν ἰσόρροπον καὶ ὅλως, ἔφη δόξειε δ᾽ ἄν καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς ὅταν λέγῃ

728E

ἣν δὲ Τυνδάρης

In some passages earlier conjectures or emendations have appeared to be convincing, occasionally because different suggestions could be combined in a new way. All new readings are presented in the lemmata.

COMMENTARY

BOOK VII

The contents of the seventh book can be classified in four categories: (1)

one question of physiology (Talk 1), (2) three topics about convivial subjects (3, 4, 6), (3) three questions in the musical sphere (5, 7, 8) and

(4) two concerning the custom of deliberating on public affairs over wine (9, 10). Talk 2 on the peculiar concept of ‘horncast’ is a loosely connected sequel of the preceding talk and falls outside this scheme of classes. It is an example of questions belonging to the sphere of the theory of sympathy and antipathy in nature. Descriptions of the dramatic environment are absent in Talks 1-4 and 6, while the dramatization of the others is vivid and suggests authenticity. Talk 5 takes place at Delphi, 7 and 8 in Plutarch’s home in Chaeronea, and 9-10 at Athens. Among the participants in the dialogues one notices Plutarch’s father-in-law, who appears in 3 but is not mentioned elsewhere. In 7 and 8, a Stoic sophist is one of the guests. Plutarch, the host, treats him with a certain harshness. Mestrius Florus takes part in four dialogues in the former part of the book, 1, 2, 4, 6. PROOEMIUM

697 C χαρίεντος ἀνδρὸς ... Kai φιλανθρώπου: For Plutarch's attitude to φιλανθρωπία see above, on 680 B. At Cons. ad Apoll. 120 A, Plut. describes the ideal personality of a young man: φιλοπάτωρ γενόμενος καὶ φιλομήτωρ καὶ φιλοίκειος καὶ φιλόσοφος (φιλόφιλος

Michael), τὸ δὲ σύμπαν εἰπεῖν φιλάνθρωπος, αἰδούμενος μὲν τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τῶν φίλων ὥσπερ πατέρας, στέργων δὲ τοὺς ὁμήλικας

καὶ συνήθεις, τιμητικὸς δὲ τῶν καθηγησαμένων, ξένοις δὲ καὶ ἀστοῖς πραότατος, πᾶσι δὲ μείλιχος καὶ φίλος διά τε τὴν ἐξ ὄψεως χάpıv καὶ τὴν εὐπροσήγορον φιλανθρωπίαν.

14

TABLE TALKS VII PROOEMIUM

697 C

697 C βεβρωκέναι, μὴ δεδειπνηκέναι σήμερον: Plut. also expresses his aversion to unsociable behaviour at table above, 616 B χορτάζειν;

see ad loc., and 643 B κρέας προθέμενον koi ἄρτον ὥσπερ ἐκ φάτνης ἰδίας ἕκαστον εὐωχεῖσθαι. 697 C τοῦ δείπνου κοινωνίαν καὶ φιλοφροσύνην ἐφηδύνουσαν ἀεὶ ποθοῦντος: Wine and food alone make no good banquet; community and friendliness are essential to it. Plut. repeatedly emphasizes the importance of community of all guests in the Talks; see on 614 E δεῖ yap. Here, and in this prooemium as a whole, Plut. stresses convivial friendliness in particular. Cf. Clem. Paed. II 53.3 συμποσίου δὲ τὸ τέλος ἡ πρὸς τοὺς συνόντας φιλοφροσύνη, παρεπόμενα δὲ τῇ ἀγάπῃ

fi βρῶσις xoi fj πόσις; Cic. De sen.13.45 neque enim ipsorum conviviorum delectationem voluptatibus corporis magis quam coetu amicorum et sermonibus metiebar, Ad fam. IX 24.2-3. The comparison with seasoning is significant: in Plutarch’s time spices had become indispensable to Greek cooking; cf. De ad. et am. 51 C, 54 F, De tu. san. 137 B,

De exil. 599 F, Anton. 24.12, Lyc. 25.4. Plut. indicates that the use was new below, 733 E, where he notices that elderly people still cannot stand eating ripe cucumber, citron, or pepper. See further Lallemand, Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum X 1173-1190.

697 CD Ἑὔηνος μὲν γὰρ ἔλεγεν τὸ πῦρ ἥδιστον ἡδυσμάτων εἶναι: Frg. 10 Bergk^, also quoted—in slightly different form—at De ad. et am. 50 A καθάπερ ὁ Εὔηνος εἶπε τῶν ἡδυσμάτων τὸ πῦρ εἶναι κράτιστον, and Quaest. Plat. 1010 C Εὔηνος δὲ καὶ τὸ πῦρ ἔφασκεν ἧδυσμάτων εἶναι κράτιστον. At De tu. san. 126 D

it is wrongly attributed

to Prodicus; cf. DK 84 frg. B 10, — On the importance of fire for cuisine and the application of this fact in Christian teaching, see Fridrichsen, Symb. Oslo. 4 (1926) 36-38.

697 D xai τὸν ἅλα θεῖον “Ὅμηρος: This Homeric epithet as used of salt (Il. IX 214) is discussed above, 684 F, see ad loc.

697 D oi δὲ πολλοὶ χάριτας καλοῦσιν: This is also said at 685 A where, however, the subject is Évio1, see ad loc. Cf. also 668 E τῶν δὲ θαλαττίων τὸν ἅλα πρῶτον, (οὗ χωρὶς) οὐδὲν ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν ἐστιν ἐδώδιμον. The appreciation of salt even after seasonings and spices of various kinds had become regarded as indispensable is worth noticing; see above, on 697 C.

697 D

TABLE TALKS VII PROOEMIUM

15

697 Ὁ ὅι ἐπὶ τὰ πλεῖστα μιγνύμενος εὐάρμοστα τῇ γεύσει καὶ προσφιλῆ ποιεῖ καὶ κεχαρισμένα: Wytt. hesitantly deleted ἐπί, which Hu. approved, but there is no good reason for that. -- For the wording, cf. above, 669 B, and Coni. praec. 141 AB.

697 D θειότατον ὡς ἀληθῶς ἥδυσμα συνήθης καὶ γνώριμος ... ὅτι λόγου

φίλος ἐστὶ παρὼν καὶ μεταλαμβάνει καὶ με-

ταδίδωσιν: Congeniality and community are essential to an agreeable drinking-party. Plut. defines it at 708 D: κοινωνία γάρ ἐστι καὶ σπουδῆς xoi παιδιᾶς καὶ λόγων καὶ πράξεων τὸ συμπόσιον. ὅθεν οὐ

τοὺς τυχόντας ἀλλὰ τοὺς προσφιλεῖς εἶναι δεῖ καὶ συνήθεις ἀλλήλοις, ὡς ἡδέως συνεσομένους. See above, on 614 E, 643 B, 660

B, 679 A, and cf. De garr. 514 E ἄνθρωποι ... λαλοῦσιν ... χάριν τινὰ παρασκευάζοντες ἀλλήλοις ὥσπερ ἁλσὶ τοῖς λόγοις ἐφηδύνουσι τὴν διατριβήν.

697 D ἄν γε δὴ χρήσιμον ἐνῇ τι καὶ πιθανὸν καὶ οἰκεῖον τοῖς λεγομένοις: Plutarch’s basic demand of convivial conversation and dis-

cussion is the condition of general participation. The subjects treated should not be too difficult or controversial; see above, on 614 C and 645

C ὥσπερ ἐπὶ λειμῶνας.

697 DE θεν ἄξιόν ἐστι μηδὲν ἧττον λόγους ἢ φίλους δεδοκιμασμένους παραλαμβάνειν ἐπὶ τὰ δεῖπνα: At 708 CD and 723 A, Plut. repeats his opinion that the participants in a wine-party must be congenial.

697 E ὅιαν νέον ἢ ξένον sic τὸ φιδίτιον παραλάβωσι, τὰς θύρας δείξαντες ταύτῃ, φασίν, οὐκ ἐξέρχεται λόγος: Turn., Basil. corrected φιλέστιον MSS; θύρας Amyot: θυρίδας MSS, but the correction was not adopted. Kron. brought up θύρας again, which Hu. did not even mention but which Minar rightly printed. Kron. refers to Plut. Inst. Lac. 236 F and Lyc. 12.8. Schol. Plat. Leg. 633 A is decisive: the meaning is not that the windows should be shut so that no word from inside might be heard outside, but that the participants of the meeting had to disclose

nothing of what had been discussed: τῶν συσσίτων ἦγεν εἰς TOV οἶκον θύραν ἔνδον ἱστὰς ἔλεγεν" ἀπὸ τῆς ται, παραγγέλλων iv’ ἐν ἀπορρήτῳ

tov δ᾽ ἐγκριθέντα ὁ πρεσβύτατος οὗ τὰ συσσίτια, καὶ παρὰ τὴν θύρας ταύτης λόγος οὐκ ἐξέρχεἔχοι πάντα τὰ αὐτῶν. The scholi-

ast and Plut. Lyc. 12.9 describe how the choice of persons allowed to

16

TABLE TALKS VII PROOEMIUM

697 E

take part in the phiditia was made; cf. also Arist. Pol. 1271 a 27. Plut. mentions the phiditia below, 714 B, in the discussion about deliberations on public affairs over wine. See further Busolt, Staatskunde U 658.

697 E ἐχούσας: Correction by Turn., Basil.: ἔχουσα T. TALK 1 The question treated in this discussion was an old one. The idea that drink passes to the lungs was part of the doctrines of the Sicilian medical school. Because of its influence on Plato and Diocles of Carystos through the mediation of Philistion, this opinion continued to be supported by some for many centuries. It was still partly defended by Galen. In this talk Plutarch argues at length in defence of Plato's opinion, and at De stoic. rep. Ch. 29 he attacks Chrysippus (SVF II frg. 763) who had ironically rejected it. The talk begins with a critical argumentation spoken by Nicias the physician, who cites Erasistratus as his authority. In reply to his criticism Plutarch pleads in defence of Plato, but admits that a portion of the moisture is drawn to the stomach to liquefy the food. -- This talk is reported by Gell. XVII 11 and imitated by Macrob. Sat. VII 15.1-13.

697 F εἰσῆλθέ τινι τῶν συμποτῶν: A similar formula occurs at 683 B ἐπῆλθέ τινι τῶν κατακειμένων. For other formulas of this kind used in the Talks, see above, on 619 B,

698 A τέγγε πλεύμονας otvo- τὸ γὰρ ἄστρον περιτέλλεται: Alc. frg. 39 Bergk^, 94 Diehl’, Z 23 Lobel-Page. H. Schlápfer, Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Diss. Zürich 1950) 32 suggests that Plut. had not read Alcaeus himself. As a matter of fact, we do not know anything

about that. — The line shows that the opinion about drink as passing to the lungs was current as early as the 7th century. It is a reasonable as-

sumption that this idea derives its origin from very ancient times. There are indications of its existence in Indian medicine. See F. Kudlien, Der Beginn des medizinischen Denkens bei den Griechen (Zürich 1967) 89-90.

698 A Νικίας ὁ Νικοπολίτης ἰατρός: N. appears only here in the Talks and is otherwise unknown. The fact that he presents the opinion

698 A

TABLE TALKS VII 1

17

of Erasistratus on the subject under discussion indicates that he probably belonged to that medical school. His contribution forms our best

source of knowledge about the opinion of Erasistratus on this subject. Nicias also seems to have had a Stoic outlook; see below, on 700 B. See

further Wellmann, RE s.v. Erasistratos, 338. — Another acquaintance of Plutarch's from Nicopolis was Symmachus who appears in IV 4 and 6.

698 A οὐδὲν ἔφη θαυμαστόν, εἰ: Hu. unnecessarily proposed to add (eivai), εἰ. Forms of εἶναι are sometimes omitted before ei; cf. Xen. Cyr II 3.37 οὐδὲν θαυμαστόν, εἴ τινες αὐτῶν καὶ tod ὑπομιμνήσκοντος δέοιντο, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαπητόν, εἰ κτλι; Antiph. 6.29 δεινόν, εἰ οἱ αὐτοὶ μάρτυρες κτλ.

698 A ᾿Αλκαῖος ἠγνόησεν ὃ καὶ Πλάτων ὁ φιλόσοφος: The passages where Plato states that drink passes to the lungs are Tim. 70 C τὴν τοῦ πλεύμονος ἰδέαν ἐνεφύτευσαν, πρῶτον μὲν μαλακὴν καὶ ἄναι-

μον, εἶτα σήραγγας ἐντὸς ἔχουσαν οἷον σπόγγου κατατετρημένας, ἵνα τό τε πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ πῶμα δεχομένη Kt, and 91 A τὴν τοῦ ποτοῦ διέξοδον, f| διὰ τοῦ πλεύμονος τὸ πῶμα ὑπὸ τοὺς νεφροὺς εἰς τὴν

κύστιν ἐλθόν. Arist. ΒΑ. 664 Ὁ 6-19 satirically dismisses the theory: ὃ δὴ καὶ θαυμάζειεν ἄν τις τῶν λεγόντων ὡς ταύτῃ τὸ ποτὸν δέχεται τὸ ζῷον- συμβαίνει γὰρ φανερῶς τὰ λεχθέντα πᾶσιν οἷς ἂν παραρρυῇ τι τῆς τροφῆς. πολλαχῇ δὲ γελοῖον φαίνεται τὸ λέγειν ὡς ταύτῃ τὸ ποτὸν εἰσδέχεται τὰ ζῷα. πόρος γὰρ οὐδείς ἐστιν εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν ἀπὸ τοῦ πλεύμονος, ὥσπερ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος ὁρῶμεν τὸν οἰσοφάγον. ...(19) ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἴσως εὔηθες τὸ τοὺς εὐήθεις τῶν λόγων λίαν ἐξετάζειν, cf. H.A. 495 Ὁ 16 ἣ μὲν οὖν ἀρτηρία ... δέχεται μόνον τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἀφίησιν, ἄλλο δ᾽ οὐδὲν οὔτε ξηρὸν οὔθ᾽ ὑγρόν, ἢ πόνον παρέχει, ἕως ἂν ἐκβήξῃ τὸ κατελθόν, G.A. 725 Ὁ 1 οἷον τῆς τροφῆς τῆς ξηρᾶς ἡ κάτω κοιλία καὶ τῆς ὑγρᾶς f] κύστις καὶ τῆς χρησίμης ἡ ἄνω κοιλία. Aristotle’s confident tone in pronouncing his arguments indicates that the knowledge of the facts was well established in his time. In the Cnidian medical school this knowledge was even exploited in therapeutics, in the so-called method

of infusion:

Gal. I 128-129

K. κατὰ

τοιοῦτον δή τινα λόγον οἱ Κνιδιακοὶ ἰατροὶ τοὺς ἐν mvebpove πύον ἔχοντας θεραπεύειν ἐπειρῶντο τῇ τοῦ ὁμοίου μεταβάσει χρώμενοι.

ἐπεὶ γὰρ πᾶν τὸ ἐν πνεύματι ὑπάρχον διὰ βηχὸς ἀναφέρεται, ἐξέλκοντες τὴν γλῶτταν ἐνίεσάν τι εἰς τὴν ἀρτηρίαν ὑγρὸν τὸ σφοδρὰν βῆχα κινῆσαι δυνάμενον, ἵνα διὰ τῆς ὁμοιότητος τοῦ

συμπτώματος ἀνενεχθῇ τὸ πύον. Also within the Stoa the theory was

18

TABLE TALKS VII I

698 A

categorically rejected, e.g. by Chrysippus: SVF II frg. 763 (Plut. De stoic. rep. 1047 C) ἐν δὲ ταῖς Φυσικαῖς θέσεσι περὶ τῶν ἐμπειρίας καὶ ἱστορίας δεομένων διακελευσάμενος τὴν ἡσυχίαν ἔχειν, ἂν μήτι

κρεῖττον καὶ ἐναργέστερον ἔχωμεν λέγειν, ἵνα, φησί, μήτε Πλάτωνι παραπλησίως ὑπονοήσωμεν, τὴν μὲν ὑγρὰν τροφὴν εἰς τὸν πλεύμο-

va φέρεσθαι, τὴν δὲ ξηρὰν εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν, μήτε ἕτερα παραπλήσια γεγονότα τούτοις διαπτώματα. The theory is also refuted in Ps.-Hipp.

Περὶ νούσων IV 56 (VII 604-608 L.). However, efforts were made to verify the old theory. In the Ps.-Hippocratic treatise Περὶ kapding 2 (IX 80-82 L.), probably written in the 4th c. B.C. by a physician belonging to the Sicilian school, see Wellmann, Fragmente, p. 98, a queer experimental proof is described: if a pig is given a coloured drink and one cuts its throat while it is drinking, one finds that the windpipe is discoloured. We do not know if anybody believed in this ‘evidence’; it may have been easy to see that the pig reacted in shock and made

a gasp for

breath, and in doing so got some drink into its throat. The opinion that at least a tiny quantity of moisture actually gets into the lungs was probably held by several physicians. It was still supported by Galen (V 718f. K.); see below, 699 C ἥ ye μὴν πολυτίμητος; A. E. Taylor, A Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus (Oxford 1928) 503f.

698 A ὁ δὲ φιλόσοφος οὑτωσὶ σαφῶς, ἔφη, γράψας διεξιέναι τὰ ποτὰ διὰ τοῦ πλεύμονος KTA.: This interpretation of Plato is rather biased and exaggerated. He did not assert unambiguously and consistent-

ly that drink passes all and sundry to the lungs. It is true that he seems to assert this at Tim. 70 C and 91 A, but these passages are contrasted by the description at 72 E-73 A where the lungs are not mentioned: τὴν ἐσομένην ἐν ἡμῖν ποτῶν καὶ ἐδεσμάτων ἀκολασίαν ἤδεσαν οἱ Evv-

τιθέντες ἡμῶν τὸ γένος, καὶ ὅτι τοῦ μετρίου καὶ ἀναγκαίου διὰ μαργότητα πολλῷ χρησοίμεθα πλέονι. ἵν᾿ οὖν μὴ φθορὰ διὰ νόσους ὀξεῖα γίγνοιτο καὶ ἀτελὲς τὸ γένος εὐθὺς τὸ θνητὸν τελευτῷ, ταῦτα προορώμενοι τῇ τοῦ περιγενησομένου πώματος ἐδέσματός τε ἕξει τὴν. ὀνομαζομένην κάτω κοιλίαν ὑποδοχὴν ἔθεσαν. This undecided position taken by Plato presumably inspired Plut. to his modified variant of the theory which he expounds at 699 F-700 B. 698 A ἀμύνειν; Correction by Turn., Basil.: ἀμβλύνειν T.

698 B τῆς ὑγρᾶς τροφῆς πρὸς thy ξηρὰν ἀναγκαίαν ἐχούσης thy ἀνάμιξιν: This fact is stated above, 689 CD αὐτὴ γὰρ h πρὸς τὸ ὑγρὸν

698 B

TABLE TALKS VII 1

19

ἀνάμιξις, θρύπτουσα τὰ σιτία KtA., in the treatment of the question why hunger is appeased by drinking, but thirst increased by eating. The

speaker is Plut.; it is noticeable that in that discussion he supports Erasistratus, whereas in this talk he opposes him in defense of Plato (698 E—700 B). 698 B ἔπειτα τοῦ πλεύμονος (μὴ) λείου καὶ πυκνοῦ παντάπασι yeγονότος: Franke, by reference to 699 Β οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ στόμαχος ἡμῶν λεῖος, added (od), but (μή) Hu. is preferable; for the use of this negation with a causal participle, cf. 710 Β ἀλλήλοις δὲ συγγίνεσθαι διὰ λόγου μὴ δυναμένων; see Kühner-Gerth? II 201 Anm. 3. Macrob. Sat. VII 15.9 has the corresponding clause in the affirmative: cum pulmo et solidus et levigatus sit. Hu. Hermes 73 (1938) 316 observes that the negation had already fallen out when Macrobius read the text. 698 B τὸ σὺν κυκεῶνι πινόμενον ἄλφιτον: The κυκεών was a wine drink mixed and shaked (κυκάω) with various ingredients, e.g., grated cheese, barley-groats, etc. The κυκεών, especially the one mixed with barley, was a common, daily drink.

698 B τουτὶ γὰρ Ἐρασίστρατος ὀρθῶς πρὸς αὐτὸν ἠπόρησεν: In VI 2 and 3 Plut. represents himself as a reporter of theories of Erasistratus and speaks in favour of them; see on 687 D πρὸς δὲ τὸ μέγιστον, and 689 C εἰ τοῖς πόροις τούτοις. It is thus probable that he had fairly good knowledge of his teachings and knew his opinion about the problem in question. It is interesting, then, and rather striking, that

he is opposing Erasistratus in this talk; see below, 699 A.

698 Β καὶ μὴν ἐπί ye τῶν πλείστων τοῦ σώματος μορίων τὸ οὗ ἕνεκα: ἐπί Turn.: ἐπεί T, Ald.; τὸ ob Amyot: τούτου T. 698 B πρὸς ἣν ἕκαστον ἡ φύσις χρείαν πεποίηκεν: ἣν ἕκαστον f) φύσις Turn.: ἕν ... ἣ κρίσις T, Ald. — On the teleological outlook, see above, on 646 C εἰ μηδὲν f φύσις.

698 B οὐκ εὖ παρίησι τὸ τῆς ἐπιγλωττίδος ἔργον: So Wytt., Hu.: πάριτον T. Minar adopts Post’s conjecture questionable solution, seeing that εὐπάριτος ριτός is found, in Callim. Lav. Pall. 90, in the Amyot proposed οὐκοῦν παρίστησι. — The

οὐκ εὐπάριτον (ἔχει), a is not attested; only παsense ‘accessible’. Turn., function of the epiglottis

20

TABLE TALKS VII 1

698 C

was known to Aristotle: De resp. 476 a 33 τοῖς μὲν οὖν τετράποσι καὶ

ἐναίμοις ἔχει ἣ ἀρτηρία οἷον πῶμα thy ἐπιγλωττίδα, H.A. 495 b 27 μεταξὺ δ᾽ ἔχει τῶν τρήσεων τὴν ἐπιγλωττίδα καλουμένην, ἐπιπτύσσεσθαι δυναμένην ἐπὶ τὸ τῆς ἀρτηρίας τρῆμα τὸ εἰς τὸ στόμα

τεῖνον, PA. 664 b 20 ἡ δ᾽ ἀρτηρία τῷ διακεῖσθαι, καθάπερ εἴπομεν, ἐν τῷ ἔμπροσθεν ὑπὸ τῆς τροφῆς ἐνοχλεῖται- ἀλλ᾽ f φύσις πρὸς τοῦτο μεμηχάνηται τὴν ἐπιγλωττίδα. Cf. Schol. 1. XXII 325 (vol. IV

298 Dind.)

μεταξὺ δὲ φάρυγγος

καὶ γλώσσης

ἐπιγλωσσίς

..

Ποσειδώνιος δέ qnot κατὰ pint τῆς τροφῆς σκέπεσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς

ἐπιγλωττίδος τὸν βρόγχον; Melet. De nat. hom., Anecd. Oxon. II 80.29 Cramer ἐπιπωματίζει ἡ ἐπιγλωττὶς thy ἀρτηρίαν, καὶ κωλύει αὐτὴν ἐνεργεῖν; Cic. De nat. deor. Τ 136 aspera arteria ... tegitur quodam quasi operculo, quod ob eam causam datum est, ne, si quid in eam cibi forte incidisset, spiritus impediretur; Plin. XI 175.

698 C ἴσχει τραχύτητας xol χαράξεις,

ὅταν παρολίσθῃ: For

ἴσχειν (Ξλαμβάνειν) + obj., frequent in Plut., see above, on 649 B and

687 C. -- Doe. Sat. 45 added ὅταν (11), but the word is easily understood from ὁτιοῦν in the preceding sentence. 698 C ἡ δὲ μέταυλος αὕτη: ‘This door between the courtyard and the house’, an expressive metaphor. The outer portal of the courtyard would correspond to the mouth.

698 C καὶ τοὺς ἀτρέμα πίνοντας ἴσμεν ὅτι τὰς κοιλίας ὑγροτέρας ἴσχονται: ὅτι ... ἴσχοντας T, Ald.; ὅτι ... ἴσχονται Basil. Turn. repla-

ced ἴσχοντας by ἔχουσι, Mez. deleted ὅτι. The fact that T has ὅτι suggests that we should read ἴσχονται. For the construction οἶδα + ὅτι, cf. below, 699 E Énewta) πάντες ἴσμεν, ὅτι, 701 E tic γάρ, ἔφη, οὐκ οἶδεν, ὅτι, Apophth. Lac. 228 F εἰδότας γὰρ τοὺς μαχομένους πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι φείδονται μὲν τῶν ἐνδιδόντων, κτλ.; Plat. Ap. 26 D ὥστε οὐκ

εἰδέναι, ὅτι τὰ ᾿Αναξαγόρου βιβλία τοῦ Κλαζομενίου γέμει τούτων

τῶν λόγων, Rep. 358 A οἶδα, ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, ὅτι δοκεῖ οὕτω κτλ. 698 D ὠθεῖ(ται) γὰρ εὐθὺς εἰς κύστιν ὑπὸ ῥύμης διεξιόν: Emendation Wytt, Kron.; cf. 650 C ἐξωθούμενον ῥύμῃ. Many conjectures have been proposed: éppei Faehse, συνθεῖ Doe. Sat. 45f., θεῖ Madv., Hartm. Hu. suggested that the text might be sound; the intran-

sitive use is found at 722 A διὰ τὸ δεῦρο μὲν συνωθεῖν τὰς ἀτόμους; cf. also Ps.-Arist. De

mir

ausc.

838 b 7 τοὺς δὲ κυνηγέτας

..

698 D

TABLE TALKS VII 1

21

ἀναρρήξαντας τὴν εἴσδυσιν συνῶσαι καὶ αὐτούς. Gulick, AJP 60 (1939) 494 supports Hu. and would preserve the text. However, as the simple verb is not found in intransitive use, the emendation seems plausible.

698 D ἐκεῖνο δὲ μᾶλλον ἐνδιατρίβει τοῖς σιτίοις καὶ μαλάσσει, ὥστ᾽ ἀναμίγνυσθαι καὶ παραμένειν: The importance of blending the solid food with liquid for an effective digestion and well-being according to the theory of Erasistratus is emphasized above, 689 CD.

698 D ἀλλὰ συμπλεκομένων [ἡμῶν] ἅμα καὶ συμπαραπεμπόντων τὸ σιτίον: Deletion Madv., Hartm., Kron. The word is easily explained as due to dittography. Paton’s conjecture ἠρέμα for ἡμῶν ἅμα is less probable, palaeographically as well as syntactically: ἅμα is to strengthen the connection of the two participles. Plut. uses ἅμα καί frequently; cf. below, 736 B, De tu. san. 125 A, Coni. praec. 145 F, Sept. sap. 150 A, 156 D, 160 C, 162 B, etc.

698 D olov ὀχήματι τῷ ὑγρῷ χρώμενον, ὡς ἔλεγεν Ἐρασίστρατος: Plut. also cites this expression above, 690 A ὅθεν οὗ κακῶς ὄχημα τῆς τροφῆς τὸ ὑγρὸν ὁ Ἐρασίστρατος προσεῖπεν, see ad loc.

698 D 6 γραμματικὸς Πρωτογένης; This P. is probably identical with Progogenes of Tarsus who participates in Amat. (749 B), where he expresses views about love which indicate that he may have been of Stoic outlook; see D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 110f.,

245f.. He is also one of the speakers in VIII 4 and IX 2 and 12-13. 698 D (ἔφη) συνεωρακέναι πρῶτον Ὅμηρον, xvÀ.: The addition (Turn.) is plausible and necessary. Hu. points out that a verb of saying is also lacking at 628 D, but there ἀπέφαινε is understood from ἀπέφαιvov in the preceding sentence: Glaucias is implied as part of the subject of this predicate. — References to Homer as the primary source for knowledge of practically every kind are frequent in Plut. as in many other writers; cf. above, on 662 E and 692 E, and see Poll. II 206.

698 D (ὁ) βρόγχος, ὃν ἀσφάραγον ἐκάλουν oi παλαιοί: The etymology of this Homeric hapax (Il. XXII 328) is not clear. The synonym form σφάραγος, ‘throat’, may be due to popular etymological connection with σφαραγέομαι, ‘burst with a noise’, cf. Hesych. s.v. σφάρα-

22

TABLE TALKS VII 1

698 D

γος" βράγχος, τράχηλος, λαιμός, ψόφος. Identification with ἀσπάραγος, ‘stone sperage’ has been proposed but is not demonstrable; see Frisk, and Chantraine, s.v.

698 E τοὺς μεγαλοφώνους ἐρισφαράγους ἐπονομάζειν εἰώθασιν: The word occurs in Hymn. Hom. IV Merc. 187, and Pind. frg. 6a. d Snell.

698 E λευκανίην, ... ἐπέεσσιν: Il. XXII 325, 328-329.

698 E τὴν δὲ Aevxavinv (τροφῆς λέγει’ 6 γε xoi Πρίαμον ποιεῖ σαφῶς δεικνύντα- νῦν δὴ καὶ σίτου πασάμην καὶ αἴθοπα οἶνον | λευκανίην) ἐσέθηκα: I propose this supplementation of the lacuna, which was recognized by Wytt.; corruption was already suspected by Turn. and Amyot. Wyttenbach’s assumption that what has fallen out is a second quotation, J. XXIV 641-642, is plausible, but his conjecture for the beginning of the lacuna, (τροφῆς ἀγγεῖον λέγει £v τούτοις" νῦν δὴ ...), is not convincing. To repeat the phrase τροφῆς ἀγγεῖον (698 D) is tasteless, Instead I suppose that the preceding ὀχετόν is understood. The beginning of the sentence, where Homer is said to have recognized the function of the oesophagus and the windpipe respectively, suggests that the first quotation is intended as a demonstration of both. Thus, when the two terms, ἀσφάραγος and λευκανίη, are repeated after the quotation, this indicates that both, and not ἀσφάραγος only—as Wytt. apparently thought—tefer to it. Consequently, I put a half stop after λέγει and add a phrase announcing the next quotation. The shape of the phrase can of course only be regarded as tentative. Presumably Plut.

stated the subject of the quoted clause here, as he normally does elsewhere. The slight modification of the Homeric λευκανίης κατέθηκα, which concerned Bern., is unproblematic; such small changes are common in Plut.; cf. 617 C (Pind. frg. 146 Snell), 683 C (Od. VIL 115-116), 693 B (II. XIV 170). 698 E ὁ Φλῶρος: On L. Mestrius Florus, prominent Roman politician and close friend of Plut., see above, on 626 E.

698 E οὐχ ἡμεῖς γ᾽, ἔφην ἐγώ: One might question whether Plutarch's determined apology for that obsolete theory which Plato happened to support is to be taken seriously, but his argumentation at De stoic. rep. 1047 C-D shows that it actually is. His resentment of the criticism of

698 E

TABLE TALKS VII 1

23

Plato is thus probably genuine, as he makes still clearer in the conclu-

sion of his speech (700 B).

698 E ὃς τοσοῦτον ἀποδεῖ τοῦ xrA.: Plut. also uses this phrase at De Herod. mal. 868 A, and Adv. Col. 1109 A, 1121 F.

698 E φάρυγος γάρ φησιν, ἐξέσσυτο οἶνος ψωμοί 7’ ἀνδρόμεοι: Od. IX 373—374. Xylander's correction of φάρυγγος T, in accord with the Homeric text and the metre, has been generally adopted, while

Minar preserves the text; however, the double gamma is probably due to a scribe's 'correction' or mistake.

698 F χωρὶς ei uf: ‘unless’. This pleonastic use of the negation is not found in Attic. It was censured by Herodian (Phryn. p. 459 Lobeck):

χωρὶς εἰ μὴ δοίη, ἀδόκιμον. τὸ γὰρ μὴ καὶ τὸ χωρὶς ἀμφότερα &pvnτικὰ ὄντα, ὁμοῦ πίπτειν οὐ δύνανται. Thomas Mag. 399.2 Ritschl criticizes Phrynichus’ (=Herodian’s) rejection by reference to Lucian who

uses πλὴν εἰ μή (De merc. 9 and 23, Dial. mort. 29.2, Vit. auct. 7) and ἐκτὸς εἰ μή (Pisc. 6). Lucian himself indicates ironically (Soloec. 7) that he was fully aware of the Atticistic criticism of πλὴν εἰ μή. Also Apoll. Dysc. has χωρὶς εἰ μή: Pron. 116 C p. 91.8 Schneider, Adv. p. 195.9; cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. "Ayxupa (p. 17.10 Mein.). Cf. also Plut. Cam. 41.7

χωρὶς ἂν μὴ Γαλατικὸς ἢ πόλεμος. 698 Ε ἢ τὸν φάρυγγα φήσει στόμαχον εἰρῆσθαι καὶ μὴ βρόγχον, ὥσπερ ὑπὸ πάντων καὶ πάλαι καὶ νῦν ὠνόμασται: This is a striking statement indeed. Homer uses φάρυγξ imprecisely in the sense ‘throat’, ‘gullet’ (Od. IX 373, XIX 480). This was also obvious to the scholiasts:

Schol. Od. IX 373 φάρυγος: συνεκδοχικῶς τοῦ στόματος. φάρυγγα γὰρ καλοῦσι τὴν ἔνδον ἀχάνειαν τοῦ στόματος, εἰς ἣν ἀνήκει τὰ δύο στόματα, τό τε τοῦ οἰσοφάγου καὶ τὸ τοῦ λάρυγγος. The word is used indiscriminately in the senses ‘gullet’, ‘oesophagus’, and ‘windpipe’ by Eur. Cycl. 214-215 ἄριστόν ἐστιν εὖ παρεσκευασμένον; | πάρεστιν. ὁ φάρυγξ εὐπρεπὴς ἔστω μόνον, 356 εὐρείας φάρυγγος, & Κύκλωψ, | ἀναστόμου τὸ χεῖλος" ὡς ἕτοιμά σοι ἑφθὰ καὶ ὀπτά, 592 τάχ᾽ EE ἀναιδοὺς φάρυγος ὠθήσει κρέα, and by Aristoph. Ran. 571 ὦ μιαρὰ φάρυγξ, ... μου κατέφαγες τὰ φορτία. In the same works both poets use the word in the sense ‘windpipe’: Cycl. 410 φάρυγος αἰθέρ᾽ ἐξιεὶς βαρύν, Ran. 258 κεκραξόμεσθά γ᾽ ὁπόσον f) φάρυγξ ἂν ἡμῶν | yavδάνῃ δι᾽ ἠμέρας. Even λάρυγξ is confused with φάρυγξ in poetry: Eur.

24

TABLE TALKS VII 1

698 F

Cycl. 158 μῶν τὸν λάρυγγα διεκάναξέ oov καλῶς; Eubul. frg. 137 PCG ἀνόσιοι λάρυγγες, | ἀλλοτρίων κτεάνων παραδειπνίδες, Only in scientific literature is the sense ‘windpipe’ general: Hipp. If 444, VIII 604.18, 608 L.; Arist. RA. 664 a 16, 665 a 10, De anima 421 a 4; Gal. VI 176 K.

699 A Εὔπολιν μὲν γάρ, εἰ βούλει, πάρες ἐν Κόλαξιν εἰπόντα' πίνειν γὰρ ὁ Πρωταγόρας ἐκέλευσ᾽, ἵνα | πρὸ τοῦ κυνὸς τὸν πλεύμον᾽ ἔκκλυστον φορῇ: Frg. 158 PCG, 147 Kock. Athen. 22 F quotes the second line. - At De stoic. rep. 1047 D Plut. argues on exactly the same authorities, poets and physicians, as in this talk in sup-

port of his opinion: καίτοι Πλάτων μὲν ἔχει τῶν ἰατρῶν τοὺς ἐνδοξοτάτους μαρτυροῦντας, Ἱπποκράτην, Φιλιστίωνα, Διώξιππον τὸν Ἱπποκράτειον,

καὶ τῶν

ποιητῶν

Εὐριπίδην,

᾿Αλκαῖον,

Εὔπολιν,

Ἐρατοσθένην, λέγοντας ὅτι τὸ ποτὸν διὰ τοῦ πλεύμονος διέξεισι. 699 A τὸν κομψὸν ᾿Ερατοσθένην λέγοντα καὶ βαθὺν ἀκρήτῳ πλεύμονα τεγγόμενος: Frg. 25 Powell (Coll. Alex. p. 65). Eratosthenes, the mathematician, geographer and philologue, was apparently quite tal-

ented even as a poet, but very little of his poetry is extant.

699 A Ebpiíón; δὲ σαφῶς δήπου λέγων: οἶνος περάσας πλευμόνων διαρροάς; Frg. 983 Nauck?, also cited at De stoic. rep.1047 D.

699 A εἶδεν γὰρ ὅτι σήραγγας ὁ πλεύμων ἔχει καὶ πόροις κατατέτρηται, δι᾽ ὧν τὸ ὑγρὸν διίησιν: Turn., Steph. corrected δίησιν T; cf. 699 D (οἱ ὄρνιθες) κάπτοντες (Kal) Kat’ ὀλίγον

διιέντες

(Emp.: διέντες T). Hu. hesitantly proposed δίεισιν; cf. 698 B and De stoic. rep. 1047 D, but in these passages the subject is the liquid itself. Plut. refers to Tim. 70 C τὴν tod πλεύμονος ἰδέαν ... σήραγγας ἐντὸς ἔχουσαν οἷον σπόγγου κατατετρημένας, ἵνα τό te πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ πῶμα δεχομένη, κτλ. Plato here speaks of the lungs as being a device

for cooling and for padding the heart. Athen. 688 B quotes the passage in this respect and omits the statement about the reception of drink in the lungs. For the terminology, cf. further Ruf. Onom. 159 τῆς δὲ τραχείας ἀρτηρίας [ὅλος ὁ πόρος} καλεῖται βρόγχος- αἱ δὲ εἰς τὸν

πλεύμονα ἀποφύσεις, βρογχίαι, καὶ σήραγγες, καὶ ἀορταί, which shows that the terms ἀρτηρία and ἀορτή were once applied to the tracheal system.

699 B

TABLE TALKS VII 1

25

699 Β οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ στόμαχος ἡμῶν λεῖος, ὥς τινες, οὐδ᾽ ὀλισθηρός, ἀλλ᾽ ἔχει τραχύτητας: Franke pointed out that Plut. here refers to 698 B. Bern., Hartm. would add ὥς τινες (οἴονται), which may be right. In

brachylogical omissions the missing word can be derived from another one mentioned before; see Kühner-Gerth? II 564—568. As this is not the case here, we should suspect that the verb has fallen out.

699 B ἣ γὰρ φύσις οὐκ ἐφικτὸν ἔχει τῷ λόγῳ τὸ περὶ τὰς ἐνεργείας εὐμήχανον, οὐδ᾽ ἔστι τῶν ὀργάνων αὐτῆς τὴν ἀκρίβειαν οἷς χρῆται (λέγω δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ θερμόν) ἀξίως διελθεῖν: The resigned position taken here by Plut. reflects Aristotle’s intricate and illdefined doctrine of πνεῦμα and innate heat; see above, on 652 D, and

cf. 689 Ὁ.

699 C

Φιλιστίωνά

te tov

Λοκρόν,

κτλ.: Frg. 7 Wellmann

(Fragmente, p. 112). Philistion of Locri belonged to the Sicilian medical school (Diog. Laert. VIII 86, 89). He had his practice in Syracuse

where, according to (Ps.-)Plat. Ep. II 314 DE, he was physician-in-ordinary of Dionysius H the Younger. Gal. X 6 K. mentions him together with Empedocles among οἱ ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλίας ἰατροί. Philistion exerted strong influence on Plato. The invitation mentioned in Ep. H 314 DE suggests a visit by him to the Academy in the latter part of the 360s. A

further indication of this is supplied by the comic poet Epicrates, frg. 10 PCG, frg. 11 (11287) Kock, who in a context treating the situation in the

Academy mentions (1. 27): ταῦτα δ᾽ ἀκούων ἰατρός τις Σικελᾶς ἀπὸ γᾶς. See Wellmann, o.c. 68f.; W. Jaeger, Diokles von Karystos (Berlin 1938) 9. The medical theories of Philistion, which he had developed on inspiration from Empedocles, were widely adopted by Plato, i.e., the

theory of the four elements and their corresponding four qualities together with the theory of pneuma as constituting the basis of function in

living bodies; and in addition he happened to accept the idea that drink passes to the lungs; see Plat. Tim. 70 A-D, 79 D, 81 E, 82 A, 84 D, 91 A, and cf. Anon. Lond. XX 25. However, we have no evidence to verify that Philistion himself actually believed that drink passes to the lungs

in its totality as is stated by Plato at 91 A and by Plut. below, 699 C. As a matter of fact, we have only indirect knowledge of Philistion's doctrines. In Ps.-Hipp. Περὶ καρδίης, which was probably written in the 4th c. by a physician of the Sicilian school who pretends to prove the theory through the macabre experiment with a pig (cited above, 698 A ᾿Αλκαῖος), the aim is obviously to show that only a very small part of

26

TABLE TALKS VII 1

699 C

the drink passes to the lungs. And at Tim. 72 E-73 A Plato himself does not maintain expressis verbis that drink passes to the lungs, but only states that the κοιλία is the receptacle of both food and drink. 699 C Ἱπποκράτη: There is no evidence that the opinion in question was held in the Coic school. Wellmann, Fragmente, p. 98 n. 2 suggests that Plut. probably refers to the treatise Περὶ ka pótnc, which has been included in the Corpus Hippocraticum but was probably composed in the Sicilian school. It is the only work in the Corpus in which the theory is presented.

699 C Διώξιππον τὸν Ἱπποκράτειον: This name form is repeated by Gell. XVII 11.6, and Plut. also has it at De stoic. rep. 1047 D where he cites the same sources in support of his opinion. As a matter of fact, no physician of this name is known as a member of the Coic school. The physician meant is Dexippus who, according to the tradition, was a pupil of Hippocrates. The false name form may be due to palaeographic corruption, as is the case at De cur. 521 B where the name of the Olympic victor Dioxippus appears in a series of variants in the MSS:

Διώξιππον, Διόξιππον, Δίξιππον, Δείξιππον, Δέξιππον, Δήξιππον. Sandbach, Ill. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 229 suggests that Plut. used Dexippus (Sandbach writes Dioxippus) as a direct source. Dexippus be-

longed to the Cnidian school, and he was probably at his ἀκμή in the beginning of the 4th c. According to Suda A 238 he wrote an Ἰατρικὸν

βιβλίον and a Περὶ προγνώσεων in two books. His doctrines are documented in Anon. Lond. XII 8-36, and in Hipp. VI 142, 188, 190, 208, 228 L. See H. Grensemann, Knidische 209-215; Wellmann, RE s.v. Dexippos (7).

Medizin

1 (Berlin

1975)

699 C ἥ γε μὴν πολυτίμητος ἐπιγλωττὶς οὐκ ἔλαθε τὸν Διώξιππον, ἀλλὰ περὶ ταύτην φησὶ τὸ ὑγρὸν ἐν τῇ καταπόσει διακρινόμενον εἰς τὴν ἀρτηρίαν ἐπιρρεῖν, τὸ δὲ σιτίον εἰς τὸν στόμαχον ἐπικυλινδεῖσθαι: There is no evidence which would indicate that Dexippus supported this theory at all. If he actually did, it is hard to believe that

he, as a member of the Cnidian school, held an extreme opinion like this and not at least a moderate variant implying that only a small part of the liquid passes to the lungs, 1.6, the intermediate position taken by many

physicians; cf. Gal. V 719 K. ᾧ καὶ δῆλόν ἐστι τὸ ἀθρόον πόμα, καὶ πολὺ καὶ τοσοῦτον ὡς καταλαμβάνειν τὰς ὁδοὺς τοῦ πνεύματος, ἐρεθίζειν τὸ ζῶον εἰς βῆχα. τὸ δὲ οὕτως ὀλίγον, ὡς περὶ τὸν ἔνδον

699 C

TABLE TALKS VII 1

27

χιτῶνα τοῦ λάρυγγός τε καὶ τῆς τραχείας ἀρτηρίας ἐκχεῖσθαι Spoσοειδῶς οὔτε ἐρετίζον, οὔτ᾽ ὅλως αἴσθησιν ἐργαζόμενον ἑαυτοῦ καταφερομένου διὰ τῆς ἀρτηρίας.

699 C καὶ τῇ μὲν ἀρτηρίᾳ τῶν ἐδωδίμων μηδὲν παρεμπίπτειν, τὸν δὲ στόμαχον ἅμα τῇ ξηρᾷ τροφῇ καὶ τῆς ὑγρᾶς ἀναμιγνύμενόν τι μέρος ὑποδέχεσθαι: Plut. expounds this modified variant of the theory of the total passage of liquid to the lungs further below, 699 F700 B.

699 D πιθανὸν γάρ ἐστι’ τὴν μὲν yàp ἐπιγλωττίδα τῆς ἀρτηρίας προκεῖσθαι διάφραγμα καὶ ταμίαν: Hubert’s deletion of πιθανὸν γάρ ἐστι is not convincing. Plut. uses the concept of πιθανόν very frequently (see Wytt. Lex.) and here it is entirely in place. The deletion of μέν Wil., Hu. is unnecessary. The omission of the contrasting δέ was due to the many clauses (final, adversative, causal) that follow. For μέν

solitarium, see Kühner-Gerth? II 272; Denniston” 380—383. — The deletion μὲν [yap] Mez. has been adopted by many eds. (not Re.). However, the solution chosen by Minar, to make a half stop after ἐστί and to interpret the phrase as a parenthetic remark by Plut., seems plausible. The report of Dexippus’ theory continues independently of it. -- The conjecture ταμίαν Kron.: ταμιεῖον T should be accepted. The meaning of ta μιεῖον is impossible, while ταμίας, ‘distributor’, ‘controller’, fits exact-

ly into of the ταμίας above,

the context as describing, together with διάφραγμα, the function ἐπιγλωττίς; cf. Plat. Tim. 84 D 6 τῶν πνευμάτων τῷ σώματι πλεύμων. For Plutarch's fondness of expressions in pairs, see on 635 B.

699 D ἐπιρρακτόν: So already Amyot, and Re.: ἐπιραγκτόν T. 699 D διὸ τοῖς ὄρνισιν οὐ γέγονεν ἐπιγλωσσὶς οὐδ’ ἔστιν: The form ἐπιγλωσσίς is striking after three instances of ἐπιγλωττίς (698 BC, 699 C, D). Alternation tt ~ oo is frequent in Plut., e.g., θάλαττα ~ Ocλασσα, ἀλλάττω ~ ἀλλάσσω, πλήττω ~ πλήσσω, ταράττω ~ taράσσω. -- Herw. (1893) noticed the tautology and substituted οὐδέποτε for οὐδ᾽ ἔστιν, but tautologies occasionally occur in Plut.; cf. 691 C ἐπεὶ

γὰρ οὐ πάρεστιν odd’ ἔχομεν. — The fact that birds have no epiglottis is described by Arist. PA. 664 b 23 ταύτην δ᾽ (sc. τὴν ἐπιγλωττίδα) οὐκ

ἔχουσιν ἅπαντα τὰ ζῳοτοκοῦντα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα πλεύμονα ἔχει καὶ τὸ δέρμα τριχωτόν, καὶ μὴ φολιδωτὰ μηδὲ πτερωτὰ πέφυκεν. τούτοις δ᾽

28

TABLE TALKS VII 1

699 D

ἀντὶ τῆς ἐπιγλωττίδος συνάγεται καὶ διοίγεται ὁ φάρυγξ ὅνπερ τρόπον ἐκείνοις, H.A. 504 b 3 τὴν δ᾽ ἐπιγλωττίδα ἐπὶ τῆς ἀρτηρίας

οὐδὲν τῶν φοτοκούντων ἔχει, ἀλλὰ συνάγει καὶ διοίγει τὸν πόρον ὥστε μηδὲν κατιέναι τῶν ἐχόντων βάρος ἐπὶ τὸν πλεύμονα.

699 D οὐδὲ γὰρ σπῶντες οὐδὲ λάπτοντες, ἀλλὰ κάπτοντες κατ᾽ ὀλίγον διιέντες τὸ ποτὸν ἡσυχῇ τὴν ἀρτηρίαν διαίνουσι καὶ τέγγουσι: Re. added «καὶ» κατ᾽ ὀλίγον διιέντες, which has been accepted by most eds., although there is no need for a copula. The first three participles belong together in a group denoting different drinking techniques, whereas the subsequent participle phrase goes closely with the finite verbs to describe the result of the gulping. Minar rightly marks this syntactic boundary by a half stop in his translation. For the rather high frequency of asyndeton of participles, see Kühner-Gerth? II 103-105. ~ The three drinking techniques are mentioned, in the same order, in Arist. H.A.

595 α 10 ἣ δ᾽ ἄρκτος οὔτε σπάσει οὔτε λάψει, ἀλλὰ κάψει. But then the writer describes how birds drink: καὶ τῶν ὀρνέων δὲ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα σπάσει, πλὴν τὰ μὲν μακραύχενα διαλείποντα καὶ αἴροντα τὴν κεφαλήν, ὃ δὲ πορφυρίων μόνος κάψει. Otherwise κάπτω and its compounds are the verbs normally used of birds’ eating and drinking; cf. Arist. H.A. 593 a 21 1 6' ἅλωσις αὐτῆς (sc. περιστερᾶς) γίνεται μάλιστα καπτούσης τὸ

ὕδωρ; Aristoph.Av. 245 ἐμπίδας κάπτετε. 699 D διαίνουσι καὶ τέγγουσι: Hu. observes that Gell. XVII 11.6 has fovendo rigandoque and surmises that be may have read χλιαίνουσι in his Plutarchean text. This seems probable and illustrates the uncertainty and variation of the text tradition. In this case, however, our MSS of

course have the correct reading.

699 D μαρτύρων μὲν οὖν ἅλις: A phrase commonly used for concluding an argument; cf. De def. or. 423 A μύθων γὰρ ἅλις, De soll. an. 978 B ἀλλὰ τούτων μὲν ἅλις; Aesch. Eum. 675; Soph. O.C. 1016; Plat. Pol.

287 A; Isocr. Antid. 74; Arist. Eth. Nic. 1096 a 3.

699 D ὁ δὲ λόγος τῷ Πλάτωνι πρῶτον ἐκ τῆς αἰσθήσεως ἔχει τὴν πίστιν: Plut. rather frequently refers to the senses as a criterion; see above, on 690 D.

699 D τῆς γὰρ ἀρτηρίας τρωθείσης ob καταπίνεται τὸ ὑγρόν, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ ὀχετοῦ διακοπέντος ἐκπῖπτον ἔξω καὶ ἀποκρουνίζον

699 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VII 1

29

ὁρᾶται, καίπερ ὑγιοῦς Kai ἀκεραίου tod στομάχου μένοντος: Naber and Hartm. mistakenly conjectured τρηθείσης. There is no reason to suspect τρωθείσης. Gal. V 231f. K. describes how a human or an animal which has had the windpipe wounded is not able to use the voice. The verb

used is τιτρώσκειν: καὶ εἴπερ ἄνθρωπος εἴη τὸ οὕτω τρωθέν, ἐξέσται σοι κελεύειν αὐτῷ φθέγξασθαί τι. προθυμηθήσεται μὲν γάρ, οὐδὲν δὲ ἀκούσῃ πλέον ἐκπνοῆς ῥοιζώδους κτλ., and of animals (232): ἐπί ye τετρωμένῃ τῇ ἀρτηρίᾳ πονοῦσι μάτην ὅσα γε πρὸς γένεσιν φωνῆς. -- The controversial question whether liquid passes to the lungs or not seems to have caused numerous, more or less drastic, experiments to be made; cf.

Gal. V 718 K. λαβὼν μὲν ἑστὼς τοῦ ὕδατος εἰς to στόμα διψαλές, εἶτα κατακλιθεὶς ὕπτιος, ὑπανοίγων τε βραχὺ τὸ στόμιον Tod λάρυγγος: ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν γάρ ἐστιν ἀνοιγνύναιτε καὶ κλείειν αὐτό. παραρρέοντος γάρ τινος εἰς αὐτὸν ἐκ τοῦ στόματος, αἰσθάνεται βραχέος, ὃ δὴ καὶ γαργαλίζει καὶ παροξύνει πλέον γενόμενον. Gal. (719) then reports the experiment

described by Ps.-Hipp. Περὶ καρδίης 2 (IX 80-82 L.): ἄλλ᾽ εἰ καὶ ζῶον, 6 τι ἂν ἐθελήσαις, διψῆσαι ποιήσεις, ὡς κεχρωμένον ὕδωρ ὑπομεῖναι

πιεῖν, εἰ δοίης, εἴτε κυάνῳ χρώματι χρώσας, εἴτε μίλτῳ, εἶτ᾽ εὐθέως σφάξας ἀνατέμοις, εὑρήσεις κεχρωμένον τὸν πλεύμονα. δῆλον οὖν ἐστιν ὅτι φέρεταί τι τοῦ πόματος εἰς αὐτόν.

699 E ἔπει(τα) πάντες ἴσμεν, ὅτι τοῖς περιπλευμονικοῖς πάθεσι δίψος ἕπεται περιφλεγέστατον ὑπὸ ξηρότητος ἢ θερμότητος xtA: The addition (Bern.) is probably necessary; the word initiates a second

argument: the lungs need continuous cooling because of the innate heat (σύμφυτον θερμόν) which was thought to have its source and

centre in the heart. It is implied that the respirated air is not enough for the cooling, especially in cases of inflammation. It was generally assumed in Greek medicine, throughout its history, that there is a very close connection between the activity of breathing and the movements of the heart; and a connection between the two organs was pos-

tulated which would permit the inhaled air to be drawn into the heart. This notion explains the double meaning of ἀρτηρία, ‘artery’, and *windpipe'. See, e.g., Arist. De motu an. 703 a 13 ἐπεὶ 8’ ἡ ἀρχὴ τοῖς μὲν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῖς δ᾽ ἐν τῷ ἀνάλογον, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ σύμφυτον ἐνταῦθα φαίνεται ὄν, De somn. et vig. 456 ἃ 5 πάντα γὰρ τὰ ἔναιμα καρδίαν ἔχει, καὶ fj ἀρχὴ τῆς κινήσεως καὶ τῆς

αἰσθήσεως τῆς κυρίας ἐντεῦθέν ἐστιν, De resp. 470 b 26 τὰ δ᾽ ἔναιμον ἔχοντα τὸν πλεύμονα πάντα μᾶλλον δεῖται τῆς ἀναπνοῆς διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῆς θερμότητος, 475 Ὁ 17 τοῖς δ᾽ ἐναίμοις καὶ τοῖς ἔχου-

30

TABLE TALKS VII 1

699 E

σι καρδίαν, ὅσα μὲν ἔχει πλεύμονα, πάντα δέχεται τὸν ἀέρα καὶ τὴν κατάψυξιν ποιεῖται διὰ τοῦ ἀναπνεῖν καὶ ἐκπνεῖν, 478 a 29 καταψύξεως μὲν οὖν ὅλως ἡ τῶν ζῴων δεῖται φύσις διὰ τὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐμπύρωσιν; Gal. III 497 K. ἡ ἐκ τοῦ πνεύμονος εἰς τὴν καρδίαν ἀρτηρία παράγουσα τὸ πνεῦμα; Ps.-Hipp. Περὶ

καρδίης 1 (IX 80 L.) τοῦτο δὲ τὸ ὑγρὸν διορροῖ ἣ καρδία πίνουσα, ἀναλαμβανομένη καὶ ἀναλίσκουσα, λάπτουσα τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ

ποτόν. 699 E ὅσοις πλεύμων οὐκ ἐμπέφυκε τῶν ζῴων ἢ σφόδρα μικρὸς ἐμπέφυκε, ταῦτ᾽ οὐ δεῖται ποτοῦ τὸ παράπαν οὐδ᾽ ὀρέγεται: It was known that fishes and insects have no lungs, and thus these ani-

mals were thought to have no respiration: Arist. PA. 669 a 3 τῶν μὲν ἰχθύων οὐδεὶς ἔχει πλεύμονα, ἀλλ᾽ ἀντὶ τούτου βράγχια, De resp.

478 ἃ 32 τὰ δὲ καρδίαν μὲν ἔχοντα, πνεύμονα δὲ μή, καθάπερ οἱ ἰχθύες διὰ τὸ ἔνυδρον αὐτῶν τὴν φύσιν εἶναι, τῷ ὕδατι ποιοῦνται τὴν κατάψυξιν διὰ τῶν βραγχίων, H.A. 506 a 11 πνεύμονα δ᾽ οὐ πάντα,

οἷον

ἰχθὺς

οὐκ

ἔχει.

Aristotle

criticizes

Anaxagoras,

Democritus and Diogenes for their opinion that all animals, even fishes, breathe; see De resp. 470 b 28ff., 471 b 15. He finds it still

more absurd to think that insects breathe: 471 b 20 ἔτι δ᾽ εἰ πάντα ἀναπνεῖ, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ τὰ ἔντομα τῶν ζῴων ἀναπνεῖ" φαίνεται δ᾽

αὐτῶν πολλὰ διατεμνόμενα ζῆν, οὐ μόνον εἰς δύο μέρη ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς πλείω, οἷον αἱ καλούμεναι σκολόπενδραι- ἃ πῶς ἢ τίνι ἐνδέχεται ἀναπνεῖν; Common to these animals that have little need of breath is the spongy nature of their lungs and the fact that they have little or no blood: De resp. 470 b 14 ὅσα μὲν ἄναιμον ἔχει τὸν πλεύμονα καὶ σομφόν, ἧττον δέονται ἀναπνοῆς ... (b 20) ὁ yàp πλεύμων ὀλίγην ἔχει θερμότητα, 475 Ὁ 24. Aristotle also explains the small or non-existent need of drink as due to this nature of the

lung: ΒΑ. 669 a 33 πάντων yap τούτων σομφὸς ὁ πλεύμων καὶ ὅμοιος ἀφρῷ... διὸ καὶ ἄδιψα καὶ ὀλιγόποτα ταῦτα πάντα, 67] ἃ 10 ἢ ὀλυγόποτά κεἐστι διὰ τὸ πλεύμονα iἔχειν σομφόν, ἢ ὅλως τὸ

ὑγρὸν προσφέρεται οὗ ποτοῦ χάριν ἀλλὰ τροφῆς, οἷον τὰ ἔντομα καὶ οἱ ἰχθύες, ἔτι δὲ πτερωτὰ xvÀ., 676 ἃ 29 κύστιν δ᾽ 000’ οἱ ἰχθύες ἔχουσιν οὔτε τούτων οὐδὲν πλὴν χελώνης. τρέπεται γὰρ εἰς τὰς φολίδας τὸ ὑγρὸν ὀλιγοπότων ὄντων διὰ τὴν ἀναιμότητα τοῦ πλεύμονος, καθάπερ τοῖς ὄρνισιν εἰς τὰ πτερά, Ps.-Arist. PA. 593 Ὁ 30 ἔστι δὲ τὸ τῶν ὀρνέων γένος πᾶν ὀλιγόποτον, οἱ δὲ γαμψώνυ-

χες καὶ ἄποτα πάμπαν.

699 E

TABLE TALKS VII 1

31

699 E διὰ τὸ τῶν μορίων ἑκάστῳ σύμφυτον ὑπάρχειν τὴν πρὸς τοὔργον ἐπιθυμίαν: The correction τὸ ἔργον Amyot, Re. was adjusted by Doe.: τὸ ὑγρόν T. Macrob. Sat. VII 15.18 has ministerium. — The expression σύμφυτος ἐπιθυμία recalls Plat. Pol. 272 E τὸν δὲ δὴ κόσμον πάλιν ἀνέστρεφεν εἱμαρμένη τε καὶ ξύμφυτος ἐπιθυμία. Plut. refers to that passage in De an. procr. 1015 A.

699 EF μηδὲ χρείαν παρεῖναι μηδὲ προθυμίαν τῆς δι᾽ αὐτῶν ἐνεργείας. ὅλως δὲ δόξει μάτην ἡ κύστις γεγονέναι τοῖς ἔχουσιν: An addition παρεῖναι (εἰκός) Wytt., or π. (οἶμαι, Faehse, is not needed; Hutt. observed that this inf. also depends on διά. — The teleological argument is Aristotelian; cf. PA. 670 b 33 κύστιν δ᾽ οὐ πάντ᾽ ἔχει τὰ ζῷα, ἀλλ᾽ ἔοικεν ἡ φύσις βουλομένη ἀποδιδόναι τοῖς ἔχουσι τὸν πλεύμονα ἔναιμον μόνον, τούτοις δ᾽ εὐλόγως. κτλ., 678 b 1 οὔτε γὰρ φλέβας ἔχουσιν οὔτε κύστιν οὔτ᾽ ἀναπνέουσιν, ἀλλὰ μόνον ἀναγκαῖον ἔχειν αὐτοῖς τὸ ἀνάλογον τῇ καρδίᾳ. Cf. Plat. Tim. 33 Ὁ χειρῶν

δέ, αἷς οὔτε λαβεῖν οὔτε αὖ τινα ἀμύνεσθαι χρεία τις ἦν, μάτην οὐκ ᾧετο δεῖν αὐτῷ προσάπτειν. For Aristotle’s teleological outlook, see further above, on 646 C εἰ μηδὲν T] φύσις ... μάτην πεποίηκε.

699 F εἰ γὰρ 6 στόμαχος ἅμα tH σιτίῳ τὸ ποτὸν ἀναλαμβάνει καὶ τῇ κοιλίᾳ παραδίδωσιν, οὐθὲν ἰδίου πόρου δεῖται τὸ περίττωμα

τῆς ὑγρᾶς τροφῆς, GAA’ εἷς ἀρκεῖ καὶ κοινός: As several animals have no bladder, this organ seemed to be less important than the bowel; see

Arist. H.A. 489 a 3 tod περιττώματος ὄντος διττοῦ, ὅσα μὲν ἔχει δεκτικὰ μόρια τοῦ ὑγροῦ περιττώματος, ἔχει καὶ τῆς ξηρᾶς τροφῆς, ὅσα δὲ ταύτης, ἐκείνης οὐ πάντα. διὸ ὅσα μὲν κύστιν ἔχει, καὶ κοιλίαν ἔχει, ὅσα δὲ κοιλίαν ἔχει, οὐ πάντα κύστιν ἔχει. The nature and purpose of the bladder are described by Ps.-Gal. XIX 362 K. κύστις ἐστὶ νευρώδης ὑποδοχεῖον ἅμα καὶ ἐργαλεῖον ἐκκριτικὸν ὑγροῦ τοῦ περιττώματος. 699 F ὥσπερ εὐδιαῖος: ‘bilge-hole’, ἃ rather special and technical seafaring term, which shows Plutarch’s interest in seafaring and also indicates the way of looking at the body as a sort of mechanical machine

equipped with convenient devices. This is the basic view in Plat. Tim. Plutarch frequently uses seafaring images when speaking of the body; see

De tu. san. 128 F δεῖ δ᾽ ὥσπερ ἱστίον τὸ σῶμα μήτε συστέλλειν εὐδίας οὔσης καὶ πιέζειν σφόδρα, μήτ᾽ ἀνειμένως χρῆσθαι κτλ., 134 C διατάσεις δὲ καὶ πληγαὶ πόρων καὶ πνευμάτων ἐναπολήψεις διαδέχονται ἐν ἐπιπολάζουσαι τοῖς σώμασιν ὥσπερ ὑπεράντλοις σκάφεσι, φορτίων

32

TABLE TALKS VII 1

699 F

ἐκβολῆς οὐ περιττωμάτων δεομένοις, 135 F μὴ διάπονον ἔχειν τὸ σῶμα μηδ’ ἀμβλὺ μηδ᾽ ἀπαγορεῦον ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ ἐν νεωλκίᾳ τῇ σχολῇ τεθεραπευμένον, and cf. 127 CD. Cf. Fuhrm. Images, 49f., 61.

699 F εἰς ταὐτὸ διὰ ταὐτοῦ (συνγεισκομιζομένοις; Plausible emendation by Doe., even though this compound is not found in Phot. (εἰσκομίζω occurs at Mar. 39.8). The hiatus suggests that the prefix has fallen out.

699 F νῦν δὲ χωρὶς μὲν f κύστις γέγονεν, χωρὶς δὲ τὸ ἔντερον κτλ. CE. Plat. Tim. 91 A τὴν τοῦ ποτοῦ διέξοδον, f| διὰ τοῦ πλεύμονος τὸ πῶμα ὑπὸ τοὺς νεφροὺς εἰς τὴν κύστιν ἐλθόν. This opinion is dismissed by Arist. ΒΑ, 664 Ὁ 10 πολλαχῇ δὲ γελοῖον φαίνεται τὸ

λέγειν ὡς ταύτῃ τὸ ποτὸν εἰσδέχεται τὰ ζῷα. πόρος γὰρ οὐδείς ἐστιν εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν ἀπὸ τοῦ πλεύμονος. Plutarch here frankly disregards this known fact.

700 A καίτοι φύσιν εἶχεν ἀναμιγνύμενον ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ κἀνδυόμεγον ἀναπίμπλασθαι τῶν ἐκείνου ποιοτήτων καὶ μὴ καθαρὸν οὕτως ἀκηθεῖσθαι καὶ ἄχραντον: Hubert’s correction of ἀναδευόμενον T is convincing. Amyot, Leon. corrected ἀπηθῆσθαι T. Plutarch’s argument is insiduous indeed.

700 A εἴπερ εἰς κοιλίαν ἐχώρει διὰ στομάχου πᾶν τὸ πινόμενον: Even the Evangelist Matthew knew that it does: 15.27 οὐ νοεῖτε ὅτι πᾶν

τὸ εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς τὸ στόμα εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν χωρεῖ; 700 ΑΒ ἀλλ᾽ ἔοικεν ὁ μὲν στόμαχος ἐκ τῆς ἀρτηρίας εὐθὺς ἕλκων τοῦ παροδεύοντος ὑγροῦ τὸ ἱκανὸν καὶ τὸ μέτριον ἀποχρῆσθαι πρὸς μάλαξιν καὶ χύλωσιν τῆς τροφῆς; This modified variant of the theory of the total passage of liquid to the lungs was suggested above,

699 C. — For μάλαξις καὶ χύλωσις, cf. Quaest. nat, 915 E ὁ πυρὸς ... ἐν ὑγρῷ μαλαττόμενος καὶ χυλώμενος. The χύλωσις is an essential part of digestion: Ps.-Gal. XIX 372 Κ πέψις ἐστὶ μῖξις καὶ χύλωσις ὥσπερ ἕψησις τροφῆς ἐν κοιλίᾳ καὶ ἐν ἐντέροις κατὰ μεταβολὴν εἰς ἀνάδοσιν τετελεσμένη.

700 B ὁ δὲ πλεύμων ὡσπερεὶ τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὑγρὸν ἐξ αὑτοῦ διἀνέμων: There is no good reason for doubts (Re.) about ὡσπερεί. Even if there is only one certain instance in Plut. (Otho 10.1 ὡσπερεὶ

700 B

στόμωμα this form. ἐπιτάττει ἐστί, Lys.

TABLE TALKS VII 1

33

τῆς δυνάμεως ἀπέκοψε), it shows that he occasionally used The use is old: Plat. Crat. 408 A τοῦτον τὸν θεὸν ὡσπερεὶ ἡμῖν ὁ νομοθέτης, 422 A ἃ ὡσπερεὶ στοιχεῖα τῶν ἄλλων 216 Ὁ δοκεῖ μοι ὡσπερεὶ τρία ἄττα εἶναι τὰ γένη. With a

participle it is found at Aesch. Ag. 1219 παῖδες θανόντες ὡσπερεὶ πρὸς TOV φίλων. 700 B τὸ δ᾽ ἀληθὲς ἴσως ἄληπτον Ev ye τούτοις, καὶ οὐκ ἔδει πρὸς φιλόσοφον δόξῃ τε καὶ δυνάμει πρῶτον οὕτως ἀπαυθαδίσασθαι: By ἄληπτον Plut. probably alludes to the Stoic concept οὗ comprehension, κατάληψις, direct apprehension of an object by the mind, as suggested by D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 52

n. 5. The target of Plutarch’s rash attack is clearly Nicias the physician, who thus appears to be a supporter of the Stoic outlook. Plutarch’s attack is noticeable, considering his repeatedly pronounced opinion that discussions over wine should be congenial and friendly and promote community; see above, on 614 E det γάρ, and 697 C.

TALK 2 The introduction of this talk is an example of the choice of a topic through associative connection with the preceding one. However, the

connection only means the reference to Plato and is entirely artificial. This appears from the fact that the question put initially is not treated in a discussion but is only used for turning the conversation to the proper subject of the talk, the notion of ‘horncast’ seeds. Although the short introduction can barely be called a topic, this talk is counted among those that comprise two topics. There are eight more exs. of this in the work, namely IV 2, 7, V 10, VIII 1, 6, 9, IX 6, 9. The talk that follows belongs to the class of peculiar problems within the

sphere of the theory of sympathy and antipathy in nature. Such questions recur frequently in the Talks and elsewhere in Plutarch’s works; sce above, on 641 B oi τὰς ἀντιπαθείας θρυλοῦντες. Plut. shows a basically critical, though not negative, attitude towards such explanations. In this talk, as in II 7, he offers an explanation of the phenomenon without relying on this obscure etiology. The material used

for the introductory part is closely paralleled in Ps.-Arist., Theophr., and Plin.; see Rose, Arist. Pseudepigr.

354—357, cf. 278f.

34

TABLE TALKS VII 2

700 C

700 C ἐν ταῖς Πλατωνικαῖς συναναγνώσεσιν: Plut. here most probably refers to lessons in reading and interpreting Plato under his guidance. That he managed a kind of school in Chaeronea can be concluded from a number of passages in his works, e.g. III 6 (653 B-C), E, VII 1 (717 B), 6 (725 F~726 A), and especially the dialogue De soll. an.; see Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 662—665. For the meaning of συνανάγνω-

σις, cf. Gal. XVII B 321 K. ἐγὼ γὰρ ὅταν μὲν παρὼν παρόντι ovvαναγινώσκω τι βιβλίον, ἀκριβῶς στοχάζεσθαι δύναμαι τοῦ μέτρου τῆς ἐξηγήσεως, ἀποβλέπων ἑκάστοτε πρὸς τὴν τοῦ μανθάνοντος ἕξιν. Readings of Plato are mentioned in Lambec. Bibl. Caes. VII 278 B τὰ προτέλεια τῆς συναναγνώσεως τῆς Πλάτωνος φιλοσοφίας. The

word means individual reading at Phot. Bibl. 99 Ὁ 3 δῆλον δ᾽ ὅτι εἰς τὰς τῶν

ῥητορικῶν

λόγων

συναναγνώσεις

τὰ μέγιστα

f| πραγματεία

συμβάλλοιτ᾽ ἄν, 99 b 41. ἀνεγνώσθη δὲ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ τεύχει Παυσανίου λεξικὸν κατὰ στοιχεῖον, οὐδὲν ἔλαττον τῶν προειρημένων cic τὰς ᾿Αττικὰς συναναγνώσεις χρήσιμον. 700 C ὁ λεγόμενος κερασβόλος καὶ ἀτεράμων: Plat. Leg. 853 C-D uses the two words metaphorically of citizens who might remain uninfluenced by even very powerful laws: ἀνεμέσητον δὴ φοβεῖσθαι μή τις

ἐγγίγνηται τῶν πολιτῶν ἡμῖν οἷον κερασβόλος, ὃς ἀτεράμων εἰς τοσοῦτον φύσει γίγνοιτ᾽ ἂν ὥστε μὴ τήκεσθαι, καὶ καθάπερ ἐκεῖνα τὰ σπέρματα πυρί, νόμοις οὗτοι καίπερ οὕτως ἰσχυροῖς οὖσιν ἄτηκτοι γίγνωνται, and cf. Leg. 880 Ε οἱ δὲ (sc. νόμοι) τῶν τὴν παιδείαν δια-

φυγόντων (sc. ἕνεκα γίγνονται), ἀτεράμονι χρωμένων τινὶ φύσει καὶ μηδὲν τεγχθέντων. These are the only occurrences in Plato. ᾿Ατεράμων is used above all of hard seeds of pulse that cannot be cooked, and also

of hard seeds of cereals: Theophr. H.P. VIII 8.6 τὸ δὲ tépapov καὶ ἀτέραμον λέγεται μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀσπρίων μόνον, οὐκ ἄλογον δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν σιτωδῶν παραπλήσιον ἢ καὶ ταὐτό τι συμβαίνειν. Eustath. 1405.19

refers to this talk: καὶ ὄσπρια κερασβόλα παρὰ Πλουτάρχῳ καὶ ἑτέροις, τὰ καὶ ἀτεράμονα. He approves of Plutarch’s explanation: 1154.17 Πλάτων δὲ διὰ τοῦτο κερασβόλα λέγει τὰ σκληρὰ EK μεταφορᾶς. tà γὰρ προσκρούσαντα κέρασι βοῶν ὄσπρια οὐχ ἕψεται.

τούτου δὲ τὴν αἰτίαν φιλοκρινεῖ πιθανῶς Πλούταρχος ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῦ Συμποσιακοῖς, 700 C δῆλον γὰρ ἦν ὅτι τῶν σπερμάτων τὰ προσπίπτοντα τοῖς τῶν βοῶν κέρασιν ἀτεράμονα τὸν καρπὸν ἐκφύειν νομίζοντες: Τῆς belief in *horncast' seeds was common according to Theophrastus, who

700 C

TABLE TALKS VII 2

35

dismisses it entirely: C.P. IV 12.13 ὃ δὲ λέγουσιν οἱ πολλοὶ ὅτι τὸ xeρασβόλον ἀτέραμον γίνεται μή ποτ᾽ ἄγαν εὔηθες fi σκληρότερος γὰρ ὁ λίθος πρὸς ὃν πολλάκις προσπίπτει τὰ σπέρματα. κἂν μὴ προσκόψῃ μηδὲ βουσὶν ἀροτριᾷ τις, οὐδὲν ἧττον ἀτέραμον γίνεται. But cf. Poll. I 223 γίνεται δὲ καὶ κερασβόλα σπέρματα, ἐὰν τοῖς τῶν

βοῶν κέρασι προσπέσῃ

ἃ ἐκβαίνει ἀτεράμονα, τουτέστιν οὐ ῥᾳδίως

ἑψόμενα. Theophr. H.P. VII 8.6 explains the different qualities of the

seeds as due to different conditions of soil or climate: πολλαχοῦ yàp τόποι τινές εἰσιν οἵ αἰεὶ φέρουσι τεράμονα καὶ ἄλλοι πάλιν ἀτεράμονα: τὸ δὲ ὡς ἐπὶ πᾶν οἱ λεπτόγεω μᾶλλον τεράμονα- καὶ ἀέρος κατάστασίς τις ποιεῖ τὴν τοιαύτην παραλλαγήν. However, the belief survived; cf. Geop. II 19.4 δεῖ δὲ τὸν σπείροντα παραφυλάττειν, ἵνα

μὴ ἐμπέσῃ τῷ κέρατι τοῦ βοὸς τὰ σπέρματα. ταῦτα γὰρ κερασβόλα καλοῦσί τινες, καὶ ἄφορα καὶ ἀτελῇ τὰ τοιαῦτά φασι γίνεσθαι, ὥστε μηδὲ ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ πυρὸς τήκεσθαι δυνάμεως.

700 C οὕτως τὸν αὐθάδη καὶ σκληρὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκ μεταφορᾶς κερασβόλον καὶ ἀτεράμονα προσηγόρευον: The metaphorical use of ἀτεράμων is found in Aristoph. Ach. 180 ᾿Αχαρνικοί, ... ἀτεράμοvec, Μαραθωνομάχαι, σφενδάμνινοι, Vesp. 730 ἀτενὴς ἄγαν ἀτεράμων τ᾽ ἀνήρ. Cf. Themist. Or 21.244 C ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ νωθής τε πρὸς παιδείαν ἔφυν καὶ ἀτεράμων. A reflex of Plato’s passage occurs in Suda, and Phot., s.v. κερασβόλα- ... εἴρηται δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ τὴν κατασπορὰν ...

τοῖς κέρασι τῶν βοῶν βεβλῆσθαι καὶ ἀντιτύπτειν. ὅταν οὖν λέγῃ κερασβόλους, τοὺς ἀπαιδεύτους καὶ σκληροὺς καὶ μὴ πειθομένους τοῖς νόμοις φησί.

100 Ὁ Θεοφράστου δεδιττομένου τὸν λόγον, ἐν οἷς πολλὰ συναγήοχεν καὶ ἱστόρηκεν τῶν τὴν αἰτίαν ἀνεύρετον ἡμῖν ἐχόντων: The correction δεδιττομένου Kron. (δειδιττομένου Emp.): δὲ aivittopévon T is convincing, although Plut. uses this verb in the causal sense, ‘frighten’, 12 times as against 1 instance of intransitive sense, ‘fear’: Dion 57.4 tov Δίωνα κρατούμενον πάλιν καὶ δεδιττόμε-

vov ἀπέσφαξαν. The verb is used in this sense with an object by Lucian. Sol. 5 δεδίττομαι τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ φεύγω. à As a matter of fact, Theophr. explicitly dismisses the problem as silly (C.P. IV 12.13 εὔηθ£c, quoted above). Here, however, Plut. refers to Theophr. Περὶ τῶν λε-

γομένων ζῴων φθονεῖν (frg. 175), quoted by Phot. Bibl. 528 a 40-528 b 26. It is questionable whether this work was by him; see below, on 700 D ἐν τούτοις.

36

TABLE TALKS VII 2

700 D

700 D οἷός ἐστιν ὁ τῶν ἀλεκτορίδων ὅταν τέκωσι περικαρφισμός; Cf. Theophr. fig. 175 διὰ τί ἡ ὄρνις ὅταν τέκῃ περιρρίπτει τὰ κάρφη; This habit is also reported by Arist. H.A. 560 Ὁ 7 ὀχευθεῖσαι δ᾽ αἱ μὲν ὄρνιθες φρίττουσί τε καὶ ἀποσείονται καὶ πολλάκις κάρφος περιβάλλονται (ποιοῦσι δὲ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο καὶ τεκοῦσαι ἐνίοτε); cf. Varro, De re rust. ΠῚ 10.3; Plin. X. 116 villaribus gallinis et religio inest: inhorrescunt edito ovo excutiuntque sese et circumactae purificant ac festuca aliqua sese et ova lustrant. These habits are correctly described. — The word περικαρφισμός is not found elsewhere.

700 D ἥ τε καταπτύουσα φῴκη τὴν πυτίαν ἁλισκομένη: Amyot, Mez. (following Xyl.) corrected πίτυν ἀναλισκομένη. -- Amyot proposed ἀποπτύουσα; καταπίνουσα MSS. We should accept the slight correction καταπτύουσα proposed by Doe., who rightly supposed

that the mistake is more likely to be due to a scribe than to Plut. himself. It is hard to believe that he, even if he read καταπίνουσα in his

source, should preserve such an absurd statement as ‘the seal gulps down the rennet of its stomach'. The correction is self-evident; clearcut evidence shows that the point is that the seal vomits its rennet because of envy; cf. Ps.-Arist. frg. 370 Rose ἡ φώκη λέγεται ἐμεῖν τὸν

ὀρόν; Ps.-Arist. De mir, ausc. 835 b 31 φασὶ δὲ καὶ τὴν φώκην ἐξεμεῖν thy πυτίαν, ὅταν ἁλίσκηται’ εἶναι δὲ φαρμακῶδες καὶ τοῖς ἐπιλήπτοις χρήσιμον; Aelian. N.A. III 19 φώκη δέ, ὡς ἀκούω, τὴν πυτίαν τὴν ἑαυτῆς ἐκφορεῖ, ἵνα μὴ τοῖς ἐπιλήπτοις ἢ ἰᾶσθαι; Plin. VII 111 evomit (sc. vitulus marinus) fel suum ad multa medicamen-

ta utile. Cf. Plut. De sera 553 A ὥσπερ γὰρ ὑαίνης χολὴ καὶ φώκης πυτία ... ἔχουσί tt πρὸς τὰς νόσους χρήσιμον. The rennet is described by Arist. PA. 676 a 7 ἔχουσι δὲ τὴν καλουμένην πυετίαν τὰ μὲν πολυκοίλια πάντα, τῶν δὲ μονοκοιλίων δασύπους. (a 17) ὁ γὰρ τοιοῦτος χυμὸς συνίστησιν ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τὸ γάλα τοῖς ἐμβρύοις, H.A. 522 b 5 ἡ δὲ πυετία γάλα ἐστίν: τῶν γὰρ ἔτι θηλαζόντων γίγνεται ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ. ἔστιν οὖν ἢ πυετία γάλα ἔχον ἐν

ἑαυτῷ πῦρ ὃ ἐκ τῆς τοῦ ζῴου θερμότητος πεττομένου τοῦ γάλακτος γίγνεται, G.A. 739 Ὁ 24 καὶ γὰρ ἣ πυετία γάλα ἐστὶ θερμότητα ζωτικὴν ἔχον, ἣ τὸ ὅμοιον εἰς ἕν ἄγει καὶ συνίστησι. Cf. Ps.-Arist. De mir. ausc. 835 Ὁ 31; Nic. Alex. 68, 323. The seal belonged to those animals that were credited with antipathetic powers; cf. above,

664 C and 684 C, an see ad loc. An example of begrudging behaviour in animals possessing healing power is mentioned at 681 C, see ad loc.

700 D

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 2

37

700 Ὁ καὶ τὸ κατορυσσόμενον ὑπὸ τῶν ἐλάφων κέρας: Plut. mentions this at De Pyth. or. 403 D oi γὰρ ἔλαφοι κατορύττουσι καὶ ἀφανίζουσι κατὰ τῆς γῆς ὅταν ἐκπέσῃ τὸ κέρας. The alleged reason is

given at Ps.-Arist. H.A. 611 a 25: ἀποβάλλουσι δὲ καὶ τὰ κέρατα ἐν τόποις χαλεποῖς καὶ δυσεξευρέτοις ὅθεν καὶ ἡ παροιμία γέγονεν, οὗ αἱ ἔλαφοι τὰ κέρατα ἀποβάλλουσιν. ... λέγεται δ᾽ ὡς τὸ ἀριστερὸν κέρας οὐδείς nw ἑώρακεν - ἀποκρύπτειν γὰρ αὐτὸ ὡς ἔχον τινὰ φαρμακείαν, Ps.-Arist. frg. 370 τὴν δὲ ἔλαφον τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας κατορύσσειν - εἶναι δὲ καὶ τοῦτο ἐν πολλοῖς χρῆσιμον, De mir. ausc.

835 b 27; Aelian. N.A. III 17 οἶδε δὲ καὶ ἔλαφος τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας ἔχων ἐς πολλὰ ἀγαθόν, καὶ μέντοι (kai) κατορύττει τε αὐτὸ καὶ κατακρύπτει φθόνῳ τοῦ τοσούτου τινὰ ἀπολαῦσαι; Antig. Caryst. Hist. mir. XX 24 τὴν δὲ ἔλαφον τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας κατορύσσειν. εἶναι δὲ καὶ τοῦτο ἐν πολλοῖς χρήσιμον. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν εἴτε κατὰ προαίρεσιν εἴτε κατὰ τύχην οὕτως ἔχει, πολλῆς ἐστιν ἐπιστάσεως δεόμενα; Theophr. frg. 175; Plin. VIII 115. — Another explanation is given at Zenob. II 22

ὅθεν ἐπὶ τῶν ἐργώδεις τὰς διατριβὰς ποιουμένων εἰρῆσθαι τὴν παροιμίαν.

700 Ὁ καὶ τὸ ἠρύγγιον, ὃ μιᾶς αἰγὸς εἰς τὸ στόμα λαβούσης ἅπαν ἐφίσταται τὸ αἰπόλιον: The plant meant is most probably the variant eryngo (Eryngium campestre L.) and not the sea-holly (Eryngium maritimum L.); see Dioscur, HI 21; Plin. XXII 18. The root is officinal. Plut.

also has the story at De sera 558 E αἰγὸς τὸ ἠρύγγιον λαβούσης eic τὸ στόμα ὅλον ἐφίσταται τὸ αἰπόλιον ἄχρι àv ἐξέλῃ προσελθὼν ὁ αἰπόλος, and Max. cum. princ. 776 F; cf. Schol. Nic. Ther 645; Theophr. H.P. VI 1.3; Ps.-Arist. H.A. 610 b 29 τῶν δ᾽ αἰγῶν ὅταν τις μία (Salmas., Beckm.: μιᾶς MSS) λάβῃ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ἠρύγγου (ἔστι δ᾽

οἷον θρίξ) αἱ ἄλλαι ἑστᾶσιν ὥσπερ μεμωρωμέναι βλέπουσαι εἰς ἐκείνην. With the reading of the MSS ἤρυγγος seems to mean the goat’s beard. Cf. also Antig. Caryst. Hist. mir. 107 (115) p. 26 Keller.

700 D ἐν τούτοις γὰρ Kai τὰ κερασβόλα τῶν σπερμάτων προτίθεται, πρᾶγμα πίστιν ἔχον ὅτι γίγνεται, τὴν δ᾽ αἰτίαν ἔχον ἄπορον: The κερασβόλα are not mentioned in Theophr. frg. 175. He may have mentioned (προτίθεται) the case in another part of the work. The fact that in C.P. IV 12.13 he dismisses it as being pure fancy perhaps may not have prevented him from reporting this belief among others of a similar kind in his work on curious phenomena. Or else this work has been falsely attributed to him. — For the relationship between reports

38

TABLE TALKS VII 2

700 D

and explanations, cf. above, 680 ( τὰ μὲν γιγνόμενα τῇ φήμῃ θαυ-

μαστῶς βοηθεῖν, τῷ δ᾽ αἰτίας ἀπορεῖν ἀπιστεῖσθαι τὴν ἱστορίαν, οὐ δικαίως. 700 E γαστρὸς

ἀπὸ

πλείης

κτλι: The line was attributed to

Callimachus by Schneider (II p. 786 frg. 378), but the criteria are inconclusive.

700 E θρασυτέρας τὰς ἀποφάνσεις τοῦ οἴνου ποιοῦντος: Leon., Turn., Amyot corrected ἀποφάσεις T. -- For the idea that wine stimulates intellectual activity, cf. Sept. sap. 150 BC Διόνυσον οἶδα τά τ᾽ ἄλ-

λα δεινὸν ὄντα Kai Λύσιον ἀπὸ σοφίας προσαγορευόμενον. Plut. cites the well-known example, Aeschylus, at 622 E and below, 715 DE τὸν Αἰσχύλον ἱστοροῦσι τὰς τραγῳδίας ἐμπίνοντα ποιεῖν.

700 E Εὐθύδημον τὸν συνιερέα: This E. is probably identical with E. from Sunion who is the host in III 10. He appears as T. Mépptog Εὐθύδαμος on ἃ Delphic inscription together with a colleague,

Εὐκλείδας ᾿Αστοξένου; see Jannoray, REA 47 (1945) 56f., and see above,

on

657

E.

Minar’s

careless

note

where

he

suggests

that

Euthydemus was a fellow-citizen of Plut. is criticized by Flaceliére, AC 30 (1961) 592f., and Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308. For Plutarch’s service

as a priest in Delphi, see An seni 792 F. The priesthood was the highest position in the hierarchy of the shrine and was held by two colleagues at a time; see Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 660.

700 E Πατροκλέα τὸν γαμβρόν: P. also appears in II 9 (642 C). He was most probably a brother-in-law of Plutarch; see above, on 613 A ὁ

Κράτων. 700 Ε οἷον ἐδόκει τὸ περὶ τὴν χάλαζαν εἶναι τὴν ὑπὸ τῶν χαλαζοφυλάκον αἵματι σκάλακος ἢ ῥακίοις γυναικείοις ἀποτρεπομένην: Blood was one of the most common apotropaic and antidotal means. The field of application was very large, extending from the ‘scientific’ use prescribed in the pharmacopoeia and its use as an insecticide in agriculture, to sheer superstition. Dioscur. II 79 prescribes the use of blood from 17 animals, and in addition menstrual fluid, for the

cure of various diseases and complaints. A method of prevention against insects is described at Plin. XIX 180 sunt qui sanguineis virgis tangant ea quae nolunt his (sc. urucis) obnoxia esse, and cf. Geop. V

700 E

TABLE TALKS VII 2

39

30.3-4. Seeds for sowing were impregnated with blood: Geop. II 42.4 Blood as a measure against bad weather is mentioned at Plin. XXVIII

77 abigi grandines turbinesque contra fulgura ipsa mense nudato. sic averti violentiam caeli, etc. Sen. Quaest. nat. IV b 7.1 questions the marvellous effects of blood: alteri, ut homines sapientissimos decet, negant posse fieri ut cum grandine aliquis paciscatur et tempestates mu-

nusculis remidat, quamvis munera et deos vincant. alteri suspicari ipsos aiunt esse in ipso sanguine vim quandam potentem avertendae nubis ac repellendae. Sen. o.c. IV b 6.2 distrustingly tells of a special kind of magistrates at Cleonae, hail-watchers: illud incredibile, Cleonis fuisse publice praepositos chalazophylacas, speculatores venturae grandinis. hi cum signum dedissent adesse iam grandinem, quid expectas? ut homines ad paenulas discurrerent aut ad scorteas? immo pro se quisque ali-

us agnum immolabat alius pullum: protinus illae nubes alio declinabant cum aliquid gustassent sanguinis. hoc rides? etc.; cf. Clem. Strom. VI 31.2 αὐτίκα φασὶ τοὺς ἐν Κλεωναῖς μάγους φυλάττοντας τὰ μετέωρα τῶν χαλαζοβολήσειν μελλόντων νεφῶν παράγειν φδαῖς τε καὶ θύμασι τῆς ὀργῆς τὴν ἀπειλήν. ἀμέλει καὶ εἴ ποτε ἀπορία ζῴου κα-

ταλάβοι, τὸν σφέτερον αἱμάξαντες δάκτυλον ἀρκοῦνται τῷ θύμοτι. Menstrual fluid was particularly effective: Geop. I 14.1 γυνὴ ἔμμηνος δειξάτω τὰ αἰδοῖα αὐτῆς χαλάζῃ, καὶ ἀποστρέφει- ὁμοίως δὲ τὴν τοιαύτην θέαν καὶ πᾶν θηρίον φεύγει. καὶ παρθένου ῥάκος τὸ

πρῶτον λαβών, ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ χωρίου χῶσον, καὶ οὔτε ἡ ἄμπελος οὔτε τὰ σπέρματα ὑπὸ χαλάζης ἀδικηθήσεται. -- The mole meant in our passage is the Spalax typhlus L. which is considerably larger than the common mole, Tapa europaea or Tapa caeca L., and it lacks external eyes; cf. Arist. H.A. 491 b 29 τὰ δὲ ζῳοτόκα πάντα (ἔχει ὀφθαλμοὺς) πλὴν ἀσπάλακος. Because of its way of living the animal was regarded as chthonic; cf. Oppian. Cyn. 612 ἀσπαλάκων αὐτόχθονα φῦλα, and hence possessing apotropaic forces, cf. Plin. XXX 19-20. See further W. Fiedler, Antiker Wetterzauber (Stuttgart 1931) 80, 82; O. Keller, Die antike Tierwelt I (Leipzig 1909) 20-24.

700 F καὶ τὸ τῶν ἀγρίων ἐρινεῶν, ἃ ταῖς ἡμέροις περιαπτόμενα συκαῖς ἀπορρεῖν οὐκ ἐᾷ τὸν καρπὸν ἀλλὰ συνέχει καὶ συνεκπεπαίνει: This method, called caprification, is necessary for getting mature figs. The cultivated fig, unlike the wild which is called caprifig, lacks male flowers. Pollination is brought about by gall wasps (Blastophaga psenes L.) which live in symbiosis with the wild

fig where they propagate within the urn-like fruits, depositing their

40

TABLE TALKS IV 2

700 F

eggs in the female flowers. Unlike most variants of the cultivated fig, the wild fig has both female and male flowers within the same fruit.

When the winged female wasps fly to the cultivated fig fruits and penetrate into the fruits intending to deposit their eggs they bring pollen with them. The decisive part played by gall wasps in the maturation of figs was well-known in antiquity, whereas the cause, the pollination, remained unknown. Instead the hole made in the fig fruit by the wasp when penetrating was thought to let sunshine into it so as to make it mature: Plin. XV 80 ergo culices parit (sc. caprificus), hi .. evolant, morsuque ficorum crebro, hoc est avidiore pastu, aperientes ora earum atque ita penetrantes intus solem primo secum inducunt

cerialesque auras immittunt foribus adapertis; cf. Arist. H.A. 557 b 25 τὰ δ᾽ ἐρινεὰ τὰ ἐν τοῖς ἐρινεοῖς ἔχουσι τοὺς καλουμένους ψῆνας. γίγνεται δὲ τοῦτο πρῶτον σκωλήκιον, εἶτα περιρραγέντος. τοῦ δέρματος ἐκπέτεται τοῦτο ἐγκαλιπὼν ὁ ψήν, καὶ εἰσδύεται εἰς τὰ τῶν συκῶν ἐρινεὰ διὰ στομάτων, καὶ ποιεῖ μὴ ἀποπίπτειν τὰ ἐριvec: διὸ κεριάπτουσί τε τὰ ἐρινεὰ πρὸς τὰς συκᾶς οἱ γεωργοί, καὶ

φυτεύουσι πλησίον ταῖς συκαῖς ἐρινεοῦς; Theophr. C.P. 11 9.5 8v ὃ καὶ ἐρινάζουσι τὰς συκᾶς: τοῦτο δὲ ποιοῦσιν, ὅπως οἱ ψῆνες οἱ ἐκ τῶν ἐρινῶν τῶν ἐπικρεμαννυμένων γινόμενοι διοίγωσι τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς συκῆς ... δι᾿ ὃ καὶ παραφυτεύουσι ταῖς συκαῖς ἐρινεοὺς ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων; Pallad. IV 10.28 mense Iunio circa solstitium caprificandae

sunt arbores fici; Geop. III 6.4; Plin. XVII 254-255. It was also known, however, that some variants of cultivated fig, others than the Smyrna variant grown in Greece and Asia Minor, do produce fruit without pollination: Theophr. H.P. H 8.1 ἀποβάλλει δὲ πρὸ τοῦ πέψαι τὸν καρπὸν .. συκῆ ...: ὅθεν καὶ ὃ ἐρινασμός: ... διαφέρουσι δὲ καὶ αἱ χῶραι πρὸς τὰς ἀποβολάς" περὶ γὰρ Ἰταλίαν οὔ φασιν

ἀποβάλλειν, δι’ ὃ οὐδ᾽ ἐρινάζουσιν. 700 Ε καὶτὸ τὰς ἐλάφους ἁλμυρὸν ἀφιέναι, τοὺς δὲ σὺς γλυκὺ τὸ δάκρυον ἁλισκομένους; This is explained at Quaest. nat. 917 A αἰτία δὲ θερμότης καὶ ψυχρότης τούτων, καὶ ψυχρὸν μὲν ὁ ἔλαφος περίθερμον δὲ καὶ πυρῶδες ὁ adc. κτλ. F. H. Sandbach, Plutarch’s Moralia XI (LCL) p. 138, in discussing the problem of the relation of

Quaest. nat. to Quaest. conv, thinks that the fact that no answer is given to the question here implies that no answer had yet been ventured, and that therefore this question (XX) of Quaest. nat. was composed subsequently, or that the two works are at least contemporaneous. The fact that not even the preceding question of the figs is answered, although

700 F

TABLE TALKS VII 2

41

there existed a well-known explanation, shows that the questions are only enumerated here as examples.

700 F περὶ tod σελίνου καὶ περὶ τοῦ κυμίνου διδόναι λόγον, ὧν

τὸ μὲν ἐν τῷ βλαστάνειν καταπατοῦντες καὶ συντρίβοντες οἴονται βέλτιον αὐξάνεσθαι, τὸ δ᾽ (ἂν) καταρώμενοι σπείρωσι καὶ λοιδοροῦντες: According to Theophr. H.P. II 4.3 the seed itself should be trodden and the purpose is more precisely stated: τὸ σέλινον, ἐὰν σπαρὲν καταπατηθῇ καὶ κυλινδρωθῇ, ἀναφύεσθαί φασιν οὖλον, and cf. Geop.. XII 23.2 οὖλον δὲ ἔσται τὸ σέλινον, εἰ τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ

ἠρέμα, πρὶν φυτευθῇ, πτιστῇ καὶ κυλινδρωθῇ; Plin. XIX 158 ab aequinoctio verno seritur apium semine paulum in pila pulsato; crispius sic putant fieri aut si satum calcetur cylindro pedibusve; Pallad. V 3.2 crispi fiunt, si semina ante tundantur vel si super areas nascentes aliqua pondera volutentur aut pedibus proculcentur enata. — For cumin, cf. Theophr. H.P. VII 3.3 πάντα δὲ πολύκαρπα xoi πολυβλαστῆ, πολυκαρπότατον δὲ τὸ κύμινον. ἴδιον δὲ καὶ ὃ λέγουσι κατὰ τούτου φασὶ

γὰρ δεῖν καταρᾶσθαί τε καὶ βλασφημεῖν σπείροντας, εἰ μέλλει καλὸν ἔσεσθαι καὶ πολύ. The same is recommended concerning basil at Plin. XIX 120 nihil ocimo fecundius, cum maledictis ac probris serendum praecipiunt, ut laetius proveniat. This is paralleled by a paren-

thetic note at Theophr. H.P. IX 8.8 τοῦτο δ᾽ ὅμοιον ἔοικε τῷ περὶ τοῦ κυμίνου λεγομένῳ κατὰ τὴν βλασφημίαν ὅταν σπείρωσι. One observes that both writers notice the prolific produce of seeds in both plants; cf. Theophr. H.P. VII 3.4 ἅπαντα δὲ πολύχοα Kai πολυσπέρματα, ToAUKapRdtatov δὲ τὸ ὥκιμον. — There is no reason to substitute ὠκύμου (Turn.) for ὥκυμίνου; that Plin. XIX 120 has ocimum is not decisive.

701 A ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῦτο μὲν

ὁ Φλῶρος ᾧετο παιδιὰν εἶναι καὶ

φλύαρον, ἐκείνων δ᾽ οὐκ ἄν τινα τῆς αἰτίας ὡς ἀλήπτου προέσθαι τὴν ζήτησιν: Franke, Doe. (II 45) would change into οὐ δεῖν tıva, which Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308, considers necessary; but the po-

tential construction is unproblematic.

701 A ἐξεύρηκ᾽, ἔφην, φάρμακον, ὃ πρὸς τὸν λόγον [ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς προσάξει τούτων, ἵνα καὶ σὺ διαλύσῃς Evia τῶν ἐκκειμένων. δοκεῖ δή uot fj ψυχρότης «tA.: ‘I have found a remedy which will lead us on to the explanation of these, so that you too may solve some of the problems proposed.’ Deletion Wytt. I tentatively suggest this emenda-

42

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 2

701A

tion of this desperately corrupt passage: ᾧ πρὸς τὸν λόγον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς προσάξεις τοῦτον T. The text has been exposed to many emendations without success. Tbe change into ἐξεύρηκας Wytt., Doe. can be dismissed. Plut. clearly claims to have found an explanation of his own, i.e. ψυχρότης, and in doing so he suggests that it may inspire Florus to further accounts of the remaining problems. However, the talk ends with Plutarch's own contribution, so we cannot verify this assumption; the

clause ἵνα καὶ σὺ διαλύσῃς ἔνια is not followed up. If the interpretation is correct,

however,

other readings

might

also

be

possible:

ἐξεύρηκ᾽, ἔφην, φάρμακον, 6 πρῶτον (Doe. II 45) λόγον ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς (scripsi) προσάξω (Hu.) τουτονί (Wytt), ἐὰν (Wytt.) καὶ σὺ KrA., or: ἐξεύρηκ᾽, ἔφην, φάρμακον, ὃ (scripsi) πρὸς τὸν λόγον [ἐφ᾽] (Wytt) ὑμᾶς (scripsi) προσάξει (scripsi) τοῦτον, ἵνα κτλ. Other conjectures by Kron., Hu. (see app.), or Post ap. Minar, appear questionable. -- Plut. uses Theophr. C.P IV 12.1-9, 12 as the source for his argument. Theophr. C.P. IV 12.13 scornfully dismisses the belief in ‘horncast’ seeds: μή ποτ᾽ ἄγαν εὔηθες 3. Cf. also Eustath. 1405.19.

701 A f| δὲ θερμότης (10) εὐδιάλυτον καὶ μαλακόν. ὅθεν οὐκ ὀρθῶς οἱ λέγοντες ἔτος φέρει οὔτις ἄρουρα {ζταῦγτα καθ᾽ 'Ομήρου λέγουσιν: Bolk. 79 points out that Bens. (p. 496), not Franke, was the first to add the article. - The change into καθ᾽ Ὅμηρον Turn., Hartm. is not acceptable; the saying is not found in Homer. Po. deleted τά, while I instead propose (ταῦτα. What is aimed at in Homer is presumably

the frequent phrase φέρει ζείδωρος ἄρουρα: Od. IX 357 Κυκλώπεσσι φέρει ζείδωρος ἐἄρουρα [οἶνον ἐριστάφυλον, καί σφιν Διὸς ὄμβρος ἀέξει, ΧΙ 309 οὖς δὴ μηκίστους θρέφε ζείδωρος ἄρουρα, IV 229 Αἰγυπτίη, τῇ πλεῖστα φέρει ζείδωρος ἄρουρα, cf. 77. II 548, VIII 486,

Od. 1113, VII 332, XII 386, XIII 354. The proverb is quoted by Theophr.

C.P. IIl 23.4, in confirmation of his argument that the climate and the weather are more important than the soil for a good crop: ὁποῖα γὰρ àv 3| ταῦτα καὶ τὰ σπέρματα οὕτως ἐκτελεῖται, ὃ καὶ ἣ παροιμία καλῶς ἔτος φέρει οὔτι ἄρουρα, and ALP. VIII 7.6 πρὸς αὔχησιν δὲ καὶ τροφὴν μέγιστα μὲν ἡ τοῦ ἀέρος κρᾶσις συμβάλλεται καὶ ὅλως ἡ τοῦ

ἔτους κατάστασις" ... δι᾽ ὃ καὶ παροιμιαζόμενοι λέγουσιν οὐ κακῶς ὅτι ἔτος φέρει οὐχὶ üpoupo. Theophr. does not refer to Homer. This may be an addition by Plut. in order to reinforce his rejection of the proverb, which seemed to him to curtail the wisdom of the Poet. He wants to give prominence to the soil, in contrast to Theophr. Il.cc. who, however, mentions soil in the first place at C.P. IV 12.3 τεράμονα δὲ καὶ τὰ

701 A

TABLE TALKS VII 2

43

ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ διά te τὸ ἔδαφος καὶ διὰ τὸν ἀέρα. — The origin of the proverbial saying is unknown. R. Stromberg, Greek Proverbs (Göteborg 1954) 94 suggests that it may be a fragment of a didactic hexameter poem. Hu. (app.) suggests a bucolic origin. Erasmus, Adagia I 1.64 (p. 40) suggests that a reference to the proverb is found at Eur. Hee, 592. -The proverb has exact parallels in Danish: Aaret giver korn, og ikke ageren, and in Swedish: Aret giver gródan, ej dkern, and cf. the modern Sicilian proverb: Simina terri chi cci appatta Vannata. Papabasileios,

"A0nvà 14 (1902) 164f. compares with the Modern Greek proverb: 1 χρονιὰ φέρνει (ἢ κάνει) τὴ σοδειὰ καὶ ὄχι τὸ χωράφι. Cf. also B. Bogayevsky, ‘Un proverbe agricole chez Théophraste’, in: Recueil d’études dédiées & Gebelev (Leningrad 1926) 568-577.

701 AB τὰ yap ἔνθερμα φύσει χωρία, κρᾶσιν εὐμενῆ τοῦ ἀέρος ἐνδιδόντος, ἐκφέρει μαλακωτέρους τοὺς καρπούς: Κρᾶσις here means ‘well-tempered climate’, as above, 649 D ἔνιοι μὲν οὖν ὁμαλότητι κράσεως οἴονται παραμένειν τὸ φύλλον, where Plut. derives the idea from Emped., see ad loc.

701 B ὅσα τοίνυν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς εὐθὺς εἰς τὴν γῆν ἀφιέμεν᾽ ἐμπίπτει τῶν σπερμάτων, ἐνδυόμενα ...: τὰ δὲ προσκρούοντα τοῖς κέρασι τῶν βοῶν κτλ. Plut. bases his argument on Theophr. C.P. IV 12.9-10 where he states that seeds that are left unsheltered on the ground exposed to the air—which is cold by definition—become hard and little productive. Plut. extrapolates from that passage to explain the imaginative κερασβόλος phenomenon. He oddly neglects the fact that it is irrelevant whether the seeds touch the horns of the oxen or not on their way to the ground; what matters is only that they are covered with earth.

701 B οὐ τυγχάνει τῆς ἀρίστης καθ᾽ Ἡσίοδον εὐθημοσύνης: Plut. alludes to Erga 469 ὁ δὲ τυτθὸς ὄπισθε | ὅμῷος ἔχων μακέλην πόνον ὀρνίθεσσι τιθείη | σπέρμα κατακρύπτων " εὐθημοσύνη γὰρ ἀρίστη | θνητοῖς ἀνθρώποις, κακοθημοσύνη δὲ κακίστη. Plut. interprets this general admonition in an ad hoc way as concerning the covering of the seeds specifically, as pointed out by O. Westerwick, De Plutarchi studiis Hesiodeis (Diss. Miinster 1893) 75.

701 B αἱ ψυχρότητες ... τοῖς χιτῶσι γυμνοῖς ἐπισκήπτουσαι: The intransitive use of this verb is a preference of Plut.; cf. Cons. ad Apoll. 109 A Πινδάρῳ ἐπισκήψαντι τοῖς παρὰ τῶν Βοιωτῶν πεμφθεῖσιν, De

44

TABLE TALKS VI 2

701 B

gen. Socr. 595 B ὑμῖν παραδίδωμι -.. ONAL ... ἐπισκήπτων, Amat. 767 D ᾧ 8’ ἂν Ἔρως ἐπισκήψῃ. 701 BC ὁρᾷς γὰρ ὅτι καὶ τῶν λίθων τὰ ἔγγαια καὶ ζώφυτα μέρη μαλακώτερα τῶν ἐπιπολῆς ἡ ἀλέα φυλάττει: This use of ζώφυτος, ‘fertilizing’, of stone is unparalleled. Plut. has the word at Rom. 20.6 τὸ

δὲ ξύλον ἔστεξεν ἢ yf) ζῴώφυτος οὖσα. The word is used of plants by Dius ap. Stob. IV 21.16 (IV 487 H.) καθάπερ ζώφυτα (ζωύφια Mein.) περὶ τὸν πρᾶτον καιρὸν τῆς αὐξήσιος. The conjectures ζοφόδυτα Re., and ζοφόφυτα Hu. are not found and are misleading: the notion of ‘noise’

of course has no relevance

in this context

(Gulick,

AJP

60

(1939) 494 even points out that the word ζοφόφυτα itself is ‘cacophonous’). Plut. uses ζώφυτος metaphorically of the stones underground as fostering fertility because they are moist and rather soft, so that insects and roots of plants thrive beneath them. W. Jaeger, Nemesios von Emesa (Berlin 1914) 105 n. 1 suggests that the word was quite common in its proper sense, so that Plutarch’s metaphorical use was rather natural. There is no good reason to substitute the more usual form ἔγγεια Re.;

cf. De prim. frig. 953 A τὸ χθόνιον καὶ ἔγγαιον σκότος. 701 C κατορύττουσιν οἱ τεχνῖται τοὺς ἐργασίους λίθους; This is not mentioned in Plutarch’s main source, Theophr. C.P., and the method

seems not to be described elsewhere. What is meant is obviously that the stones were preserved for some time underground in order that they be moist and softer and more easy to tool.

701 C τοὺς δὲ καρπούς, κἂν ἐπὶ τῆς ἅλω διαμείνωσι πλείω χρόνον ὑπαίθριοι καὶ γυμνοί, μᾶλλον ἀτεράμονας γίνεσθαι

λέγουσιν τῶν εὐθὺς αἰρομένων: This idea is rejected by Theophr. C.P. TV 12.12 ὃ καὶ ἐκὶ τῆς ἅλω φασί τινες ἂν συμβῇ γίνεσθαι ἀτε-

ράμονα οὐκ ἄγαν τοῦτό γε λέγοντες πιθανόν. ἣ γὰρ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου ξηρότης ἀχυλότερα μὲν ποιεῖ καὶ ἧττον ἡδέα ἧττον ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον. The grain was regularly left (in the open) after the threshing to dry out. Plut. this, as he actually suggests above, 659 A, where

εὐεψότερα δὲ οὐδὲν on the threshing-floor ought to have known the moisturizing force

of the moon is discussed: τοὺς te πυροὺς οἱ γεωργοῦντες σπεύδουσι φθίνοντος τοῦ μηνὸς EK τῆς ἅλω συναίρειν, ἵνα παγέντες τῇ ξηρότητι μᾶλλον πρὸς (τὸν χρόγνον ἀντέχωσιν. Here, however, Plut. probably chose to adopt the statement made by Theophr. somewhat earlier, at C.P. IV. 12.9 τὸ δὲ πλείω χρόνον ἐᾶν ἠλοημένους ὑπαιτρίους ποιεῖν ἀτε-

ράμονα ὥσπερ τινές φασιν οὐκ ἄλογον.

701 C

TABLE TALKS VH 2

45

701 C ἐνιαχοῦ δὲ καὶ πνεῦμα λικμωμένοις ἐπιγινόμενον ἀτεράμομας ποιεῖ διὰ τὸ ψῦχος, ὥσπερ ἐν Φιλίπποις τῆς Μακεδονίας

ἱστοροῦσι: τοῖς δ᾽ ἀποκειμένοις βοηθεῖ τὸ ἄχυρον: Here—and subsequently—Plut. confuses things in a curious fashion. He speaks of grain that is winnowed, while his source, Theophr. C.P. IV 12.8 does not

mention winnowing of grain but only speaks of beans: ὅτι δὲ πῆξίς τις καὶ πὐκνωσίς ἐστιν ὑπὸ τοῦ ψυχροῦ δι᾽ ἣν ἀτεράμονα γίνεται μαρτυρεῖ καὶ τὸ περὶ Φιλίππους συμβαῖνον περὶ τοὺς κυάμους. ἐκεῖ γὰρ

σφόδρα ψυχροὶ ἄνεμοί τινες γίνονται: ἐὰν οὖν ἐν τοῖς ἀχύροις μὴ ἠλοημένοι ἐν τῇ ἅλῳ κατατεθῶσιν, οὐ μεταβάλλουσιν ἀλλὰ τεράμονες. Plut. seems to have thought of winnowing as intensifying the chilling and thus apparently neglected the fact that Theophr. speaks of beans that, even if they have not been husked, are dried by the wind, and not of grain that is winnowed. But cf. below.

701 D δυεῖν αὐλάκων παραλλήλων f) μὲν ἀτεράμονας, (fi δὲ τεράμονας) ἐκφέρει τοὺς καρπούς, καὶ ὃ μέγιστόν ἐστι, τοὺς κυάμους τῶν λοβῶν οἱ μὲν τοίους οἱ δὲ τοίους: Addition Bern., already suggested by Turn.; ἣ μὲν τεράμονας, ἡ δ᾽ à. Amyot, Steph. — In speaking at the same time of grain and the fruits of leguminous plants, Plut. seems to neglect the fact that the latter are not threshed or winnowed, and that grain is not sown in furrows. Differences between furrows are not mentioned by Theophr. C.P. IV 12.7 δι᾽ ὃ καὶ τῶν ἐπὶ tod αὐτοῦ καυλοῦ κυάμων οὐδὲν κωλύει τῶν μὲν ἀτεράμονα τὸν λοβὸν εἶναι

καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ λοβῷ καθάπερ τινές φασι, εἴπερ λέγουσιν ἀληθῆ. 701 D ἢ πνεύματος ψυχροῦ (προσ)πεσόντος (ἢ) ὕδατος: For the addition of this latter factor Plut. used Theophr. C.P. IV 12.5 ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ τὰ ὕδατα τὰ οὐράνια καὶ ὁ ἀὴρ συνεργεῖ ταῖς τροφαῖς, διὰ τοῦτο ταῖς γε ἐπομβρίαις ἀτεράμονα μᾶλλον γίνεται πλέονος οὔσης καὶ ἀπεπτοτέρας τῆς τροφῆς. σχεδὸν γὰρ τοῦτο συμβαίνει ... καὶ εἰ τοιαύτη τοῦ ἀέρος ἡ ψυχρότης ὥστε ἔνυδρός τις εἶναι καὶ μὴ πνευματική. πῆξιν γὰρ οὕτω ποιήσει καὶ πύκνωσιν. TALK 3 The fact that Plutarch’s father-in-law is present in this talk suggests it is located in Plutarch’s home in Chaeronea. It is noticeable that close relative of Plutarch never appears in his writings except here, the part he plays in this talk is only introductory. We may surmise

that this and that

46

TABLE TALKS VII 3

701 D

he did not belong to the inner circle of intellectuals gathering around Plutarch. The subject-matter happens to concern the three most important fluids produced in Greek agriculture, i.e., olive oil, wine, and honey.

701 D ᾿Αλεξίων ὁ πενθερός; Plutarch’s father-in-law is mentioned only here. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos 647.5 supposes that he is identical with the Alexion who appears as archon on two inscriptions of Chaeronea, 7G 3366 and 3369. If this is so it would mean that Plutarch’s

wife, Timoxena, belonged to a family of Chaeronea, and not of Tithora as supposed by Wilamowitz.

701 Ὁ κατεγέλα τοῦ Ἡσιόδου παραινοῦντος ἀρχομένου πίθου καὶ λήγοντος ἐμφορεῖσθαι, | μεσσόθι δὲ φείδεσθαι, ὅπου τὸ χρηστότατον οἰνάριον ἔστιν: Erga 368-369, also quoted at Galba 16.5 (with the correct verb κορέσασθαι), and probably alluded to above, 692 B. Schol. ad loc. explains the meaning: τὸ μὲν οὖν ἀρχομένου κορέσασθαι παιδεύει πρὸς κοινωνίαν, τὸ δὲ μεσσόθι

φείδεσθαι πρὸς οἰκονομίαν, τὸ δὲ χαλεπὴν εἶναι τὴν ἐν τῷ πυθμένι φειδὼ πρὸς ἀπόλαυσιν τῶν κατὰ καιρόν. — Plut. had a genuine interest in the works of his old compatriot Hesiod, a3 he shows in his great commentary on Erga in 4 books (Gell. XX 8), of which considerable

parts have been preserved in Proclus, Tzetzes and Moschopulus. Plut. comments on Erga 368—369 in frg. 54 Sandb.

701 E τίς γάρ, ἔφη, οὐκ oldev, ὅτι τοῦ μὲν οἴνου τὸ μέσον γίνεται βέλτιστον, κτλι: Hesiod of course knew this himself, but his primary concern was with thrift, not with consumption of the wine while its quality was still good. Preservation of wine so as to prevent deterioration was difficult in antiquity because cork was not yet in use. As the jar could not be shut up effectively, the quality of the upper part of the wine was affected for the worse. Since this wine could not be preserved after the covering had been broken, even the thrifty Hesiod consented to rapid consumption of it, whereas the best wine in the middle of the jar should only be enjoyed in small portions so as to last for a longer time. Because of deficient methods of purification there were sediments of lees at the bottom which made the lower part of the wine less palatable. Hence Hesiod's advice that economizing with this part was needless. Cf. Geop. VII 6.8 ὃ μὲν γὰρ πρὸς τῷ στόματι tod πίθου οἶνος, ὡς προσομιλῶν τῷ ἀέρι, ἀσθενέστερός ἐστι διαπνεόμενος.- ὁ δὲ πρὸς τῷ

701E

TABLE TALKS VII 3

47

πυθμένι ταχέως τρέπεται, ὡς πλησιάζων τῇ τρυγὶ. οὕτω δέ φησιν ὁ Ἡσίοδος, ἀρχομένου δὲ πίθου κτλ.; Macrob. Sat. VII 12.13. -- All ancient writers take it for granted that Hesiod spoke of wine, but this has been called in question by W. Marg, Hesiod (Ziirich 1970) 356 who suggests that the jar contained grain. On Marg’s interpretation, Hesiod admonishes to allow oneself to eat stoutly of the content at the opening of

the jar, but then be thrifty with consumption so that the grain lasts well out the period for which it is intended. Then, when the jar is nearly emptied, the rest will suffice for a feast again. This interpretation is plausible indeed and perhaps is right. However, this strategy is also suitable for wine. Hesiod was certainly not very concerned about the deterioration of the wine, if only it lasted for a long time. — For the problem of preventing fermentation during the storage of wine in antiquity, see Forbes, Technology II 111f., and J. André, L’Alimentation et la cuisine ἃ Rome (Paris 1961) 166f. Various methods were employed for purification of wine and for reducing the lees, e.g. admixture of clay, or straining; see above, on 676 B συνεκπέττειν τὸν οἶνον, and 692 B

(δι)γηθημένον.

701 E τοῦ δ᾽ ἐλαίου τὸ ἀνωτάτω, τὸ δὲ κατωτάτω τοῦ μέλιτος: Athen. 689 B, in discussing different qualities of perfume, also compares with honey: μύρον δὲ χρηστὸν μύρῳ εὐτελεῖ ἐπιχεόμενον ἐπιπολῆς

μένει’ μέλι δὲ χρηστὸν χείρονι ἐπιχεόμενον εἰς τὸ κάτω βιάζεται. 701 E ὡρμήσαμεν: Correction by Amyot, before Hu., Kron.: ὥρμηcav MSS.

701 E τὸ κουφότατον ὑπὸ μανότητος κουφότοτόν ἐστιν, τὸ δὲ πυκνὸν καὶ συνεχὲς διὰ βάρος ὑφίσταται τῷ λοιπῷ: Honey that has not been well purified from wax tends to divide up because this is lighter than the honey. Thus the honey sinks to the lower part of the vessel while the particles of wax remain at the top. — The verb used of the process of sinking and depositing is regularly ὑφίστασθαι; cf. Arist. Meteor. 357 b 4 φαίνεται ὑφισταμένη ἐν τοῖς ἀγγείοις ἁλμυρίς; Ps.Arist. Probl. 933 Ὁ 27 ἠθουμένων δὲ ἀεὶ μάλιστα ὑφίσταται τὸ παχύτατον καὶ βαρύτατον; Plut. De soll. an. 967 A τὴν γινομένην ἔκθλιψιν ὑπὸ τῶν βαρυτέρων τοῖς κουφοτέροις ὑφισταμένων.

701 F ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ, θερμότης οὖσα, πρὸς τὸ μέσον εὐλόγως δοκεῖ συνῆχθαι μάλιστα: The opinion that wine is hot by nature was

48

TABLE TALKS VII3

701 F

the predominant one; cf. Plat. Tim. 60 A τὸ μὲν τῆς ψυχῆς μετὰ τοῦ

σώματος θερμαντικὸν οἶνος; Ps.-Arist. Probl. 874 b 35 ὁ δὲ οἶνος θερμαντικώτατος, 871 a 2, 39. However, there were also arguments to the contrary. The question is discussed above, in III 5, where Plut. maintains that wine is cold; see 652 B-653 B. — The idea that the heat tends to concentrate in the middle of the body was common, and it is essential to Aristotle’s physiology and his doctrine of the ‘innate heat’ which has its centre in the heart; cf, De iuv. et sen. 460 b 8-11, PA. 652 Ὁ 27.

Cf. also above, on 695 A πάθος ἐν στομάχῳ.

701 F τὸ μὲν κάτω διὰ thy τρύγα φαῦλον εἶναι: In VI 7 it is argued instead that those parts of the wine that make up the lees should not be

removed by straining: 692 C ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη κάθαρσις αὐτοῦ πρῶτον μὲν ἐκτέμνει τὰ νεῦρα καὶ τὴν θερμότητα κατασβέννυσιν, 692 D μέγα δὲ τεκμήριον νὴ Δία φθορᾶς τὸ μὴ διαμένειν ἀλλ᾽ ἐξίστασθαι καὶ μα-

ραίνεσθαι. καθάπερ ἀπὸ ῥίζης κοπέντα τῆς τρυγός. 701 F τὸ 5° ἐξ ἐπιπολῆς τοῦ ἀέρος φθείρεσθαι πλησιάζοντος" ὅσων γὰρ ἐξίστησιν ὁ ἀὴρ τῆς ποιότητος τὸν οἶνον ἐπισφαλέσταtov ἴσμεν ὄντα: The correction ὅσων Herw.: ὅτι Τ is the most probable of those proposed. Turn., Amyot, Steph. corrected ἐπισφαλέστερον T: cf. above, 648 B θερμότατος Fuhrm.: θερμότερος T. Exs. of the opposite, substitution of the superl. for the comp., are found at 616 F and 712 B. — For the effect of air on wine, cf. above, 655 E νομίζεται ...

“πύεσθαι τοῦ oivou μετὰ ζέφυρον - οὗτος γὰρ μάλιστα τῶν ἀνέμων ἐξίστησιν καὶ κινεῖ τὸν οἶνον. For ἐξιστάναι τῆς ποιότητος, cf. De facie 939 E τῆς κατὰ φύσιν ἐξίσταται ποιότητος, καὶ ἀποβάλλει τὴν δύναμιν. The term derives from Arist. and is much used by Plut.; see above, on 648 D τῷ πυρώδης.

102 A διὸ καὶ κατορύττουσι τοὺς πίθους: This practice is mentioned by Colum. XH 18.5 who notices that those jars that are buried in the ground must be tatred more thoroughly than others. Not only was the closure of wine jars difficult in the absence of cork, but also the jars themselves were sometimes of bad quality; cf. Non posse 1088 E καθάtcp οἶνον ἐκ πονηροῦ καὶ μὴ στέγοντος ἀγγείου τὴν ἢδονὴν διαχέοντας.

702 A οὐ φθείρει πλῆρες ἀγγεῖον οὕτως ῥᾳδίως οἶνον ὡς ἀποδεὲς γενόμενον:

Cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. ined. MI 9 Bussem.

διὰ τί οἱ

ΤΌΣΑ

TABLE TALKS VII 3

49

ἡμιπλήρεις πίθοι ὀξίζουσιν; ἢ διότι τὸ ὄξος ὥσπερ τις πέψις οἴνου ἐστί, σήπεται δ᾽ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἕξω ἀέρος;

702 A τὸ κάτω τοῦ ἐλαίου γίνεσθαι χεῖρον ἀπὸ τῆς ἀμόργης ἀναθολούμενον:

Bern. proposed ὑπό, but cf. 702 C βλάπτει τὸν

οἶνον ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς δυνάμεως (ὑπὸ Dübn.). — ᾿Αμόργη is the watery

part of the olives which, if it is not separated out effectively through settling of the juice after the pressing, gathers and remains as lees on the bottom of the vessel; cf. Dioscur. I 102 ἀμόργη ὑποστάθμη ἐστὶν

ἐλαίας τῆς ἐκθλιβομένης; Plin. XV 9 oliva constat nucleo, oleo, carne, amurca. sanies haec est eius amara; fit ex aquis, ideo siccitatibus mini-

ma, riguis copiosa. This watery substance was considered effective against several complaints (Dioscur. l.c.) and also for use in agriculture (Varro, De re rust. 1 55.7).

702 AB οὐ τὸ ἄνω βέλτιον, ἀλλὰ δοκεῖν, ὅτι πορρωτάτω τοῦ βλάπτοντός ἐστιν: Turn., Re. corrected δοκοῦν T. -- In order to prevent the lees from deteriorating the oil, Cato ap. Plin. XV 21 recommends that it be ladled: oleum in tabulato minui deteriusque fieri, item in amurca et fracibus—hae sunt carnes et inde faeces; quare saepi-

us die capulandum. 702 B ἄλλος ἠτιᾶτο τὴν πυκνότητα, δι᾽ ἣν ἀμικτότατόν ἐστι καὶ

τῶν ἄλλων ὑγρῶν οὐδὲν εἰς αὑτὸ δέχεται: Plut. states the same reason for the difficulty of mixing olive oil with other liquids above, 696 AB καὶ μὴν μόνον ἄκρατον διαμένει καὶ ἄμικτον (sc. τὸ ἔλαιον)" ἔστι γὰρ roxvotatov; cf. also 640 D and Ps.-Plut. frg. 34.149 (VII 180.6) Bem.; Ps.-Alex. Aphr. Probl. 1 127 διὰ τί τὸ ἔλαιον μόνον τοῖς ὑγροῖς οὐκ ἀναμίγνυται; διότι γλίσχρον ὃν καὶ ἡνωμένον πρὸς ἑαυτὸ οὐ δύναται

κατατέμνεσθαι εἰς ἄτομα μόρια καὶ συμμίγνυσθαι τοῖς λοιποῖς ὑγροῖς, II 67 ὅτι γλίσχρον ὃν καὶ παχυμερὲς καὶ ἡνωμένον καὶ μὴ τεμνόμενον εἰς λεπτὰ μόρια καθάπερ τὰ ἄλλα ὑγρὰ οὐ δίδωσιν χώραν ἑτέρῳ ὑγρῷ ἐγκαταβληθῆναι εἰς αὐτὸ καὶ ἀναμιχθῆναι αὐτῷ.

702 B πλὴν βίᾳ καὶ ὑπὸ πληγῆς ἀνακοπτόμενον: On the blend of water and oil, the ὑδρέλαιον, much used in medical cures, see above, on 663 C; cf. Cels. 13.5, 27.

702 B ὅθεν οὐδὲ τῷ ἀέρι δίδωσιν ἀνάμιξιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀποστατεῖ διὰ λεπτότητα τῶν μορίων καὶ συνέχειαν: This differs from the opinion

50

TABLE TALKS VII 3

702 B

of Arist. Meteor, 383 b 21 ἀπορώτατα δὲ ἔχει fy τοῦ ἐλαίου φύσις ... (b

25) ἀέρος ἐστὶν πλῆρες. διὸ καὶ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι ἐπιπολάζει" καὶ γὰρ ὁ ἀὴρ φέρεται ἄνω, cf. 388 a 32 ὕδατος καὶ ἀέρος (sc. συνέστηκε), οἷον ἔλαιον, ΟΑ. 735 Ὁ 14 παχύνεται yap (sc. τὸ ἔλαιον) τῷ πνεύματι μιγνύμενον. For the fineness of particles, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 959 b 13 τὸ δὲ ἔλαιον μάλιστα τῶν ὑγρῶν (sc. δάκνει τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς), ὅτι λεπτομερέστατον. τοιοῦτον δ᾽ ὃν εἰσδύνει διὰ τῶν πόρων.

702 Β ἐδόκει δὲ πρὸς τοῦτον ὑπεναντιοῦσθαι τὸν λόγον ᾿Αριστοτέλῃς τετηρηκώς, ὥς φησιν, εὐωδέστερον ... ἐν τοῖς ἀποκενουμένοις ἀγγείοις: Frg. 224 Rose; cf. Macrob. Sat. VII 12.11 cur, si vasa vini atque olei diutule semiplena custodias, vinum ferme in acorem corrumpitur, oleo contra sapor suavior conciliatur? The fragment probably derives from a collection of Προβλήματα now lost. There are numerous quotations of this work in the Talks (627 A, 635 B, 656 B, 690 C, F, 734 C); see above, on 652 A, and Sandbach, ZU. Class. Stud. 7 (1982) 223-225. — The reason why the oil becomes odorous when it is exposed to the air is its (auto-)oxidization, which gives rise to ethereal

aldehydes. However, the smell is not fragrant but soon grows rather nasty as the oil turns rancid.

702 C μήποτ᾽ οὖν, ἔφην ἐγώ, καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον ὁ ἀὴρ ὠφελεῖ καὶ βλάπτει τὸν οἶνον ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς δυνάμεως: In his concluding argument Plut. conflates, in elegant rhetorical form, the views on the differences and changes of quality of oil and wine that have been stated in

the previous discussion. 702 C οἴνῳ μὲν γὰρ ὠφέλιμον, ἐλαίῳ δ᾽ ἀσύμφορον παλαίωσις, ἣν ἑκατέρου προσπίπτων ὁ ἀὴρ ἀφαιρεῖ: Because of the imperfect purification and defective closure without cork stoppers, neither liquid could be preserved for a long time, oil no more than one year; cf. Plin. XV 7 vetustas oleo taedium adfert, non item ut vino, plurimumque aetatis annuo est, The ageing of wine was a precarious process which often failed; cf. Non posse 1088 E (=Epicur. frg. 429 Us.) καθάπερ οἶνον ἐκ πονηροῦ καὶ μὴ στέγοντος ἀγγείου τὴν ἡδονὴν διαχέοντες

ἐνταῦθα καὶ παλαιοῦντες οἴεσθαι σεμνότερόν τι ποιεῖν καὶ τιμιώτεpov; NT Luc. 5.39. Cf. also above, 656 A; Athen. 27 A.

702 C τὸ γὰρ ψυχόμενον νεαρὸν διαμένει, τὸ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔχον διαμονὴν

ὑπὸ

συνεχείας

ταχὺ

παλαιοῦται

καὶ

ἀπογηράσκει.

702 C

TABLE TALKS VII 3

51

[λελέχθαι πιθανῶς, ὅτι τοῖς ἐπιπολῆς πλησιάζων ὁ ἀὴρ νεαροποιεῖ]: Amyot, Steph. corrected διαφέρει MSS. Hu. was certainly right in deleting the anomalous sentence. Two indications reveal it as a margin notation: (1) its wrong place in the text (it is a comment on the first part of the sentence and should stand after διαμένει), and (2) veapo-

ποιεῖν is not found elsewhere in Plut. Also the inf. λελέχθαι, and the

art. τοῖς (Wytt.: τούς MSS, οἴνοις Tum.) indicate corruption. — I correct Sianvonv MSS into διαμονὴν and translate: ‘whereas wine, which has no permanence through coherence (i.e. as oil has), quickly ages and gets stale’. By παλαίωσις Plutarch obviously means ‘slow ageing’, which is contrasted by ταχὺ παλαιοῦται. This use is rather confusing, and this is still more the case with συνέχειαϊσυνέχειν, which he uses of wine here, as he did above, 702 A, of wine in full, closed containers. It is im-

plied that the συνέχεια is spoiled if air penetrates from outside. Συνέχεια, ‘coherence’, ‘viscosity’, is a typical characteristic of oil; cf. Theophr. Od. 18 (of spices added to the oil): ξηρὰ yap ὄντα τὸ λίπος ἕλκει πρὸς ἑαυτὰ Kai ἀναδέχεται, διὸ καὶ τὴν συνέχειαν ἐξαιρεῖ"

μανὸν δὲ γενόμενον [καὶ] τοῦ λίπους ἀφαιρεθέντος κτλ. TALK 4 Plutarch uses material from Quaest. Rom. 279 D-E and 281 F for this

talk. As that work can be dated with certainty later than 96 A.D., this provides a reliable terminus post quem for the Talks. However, the ref-

erence above, 674 F, to Petraeus as agonothete at Delphi gives the year 99 as the definite terminus post; see Jones, JRS 56 (1966) 73. — For

more exs. of the fact that Plutarch brings up themes in the Talks which he had treated before, see above, on 673 C. It is noticeable that, beside Florus, his son Lucius and his son-in-law,

Caesernius, also take part in this dialogue. 702 D oUépx(o1)0c (ὧν) ὁ Φλῶρος: Corrections by Amyot, Mez. For Florus, see above, on 626 E, and C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1972) 48f. His intellectual and cultural interests are also indi-

cated at 734 D where he is classified among αἱ φιλόσοφοι φύσεις. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 687.46 suggests that all the talks (10 in number) in which Florus appears took place in Chaeronea, except VIII 10 which is located at Thermopylae. However, there is no indication that the dramatic place of the present discussion is Plutarch's native city, whereas the presence of Florus' son-in-law Caesernius and his son

52

TABLE TALKS VII 4

702 D

Lucius and, in addition to that, the adverb ἐνταῦθα at 703 A, point to Rome. See also below, on 707 C and 708 A.

702 D οὐκ εἴα κενὴν ἀπαίρειν τὴν τράπεζαν: This indicates that Florus is probably the host. small, round, easily movable of the δεῖπνον; cf. above, on by Florus is postponed to the

— Both Greeks and Romans mostly used tables which were taken away at the end 635 B. - The treatment of the question put latter part of the talk (703 D—704 B), whe-

re four alternative explanations of the custom are proposed, the same as

in Quaest. Rom. 279 E. An explanation that Plut. does not mention would be that the host is anxious always to supply more food during the meal so that the guests may have their fill and at last leave some food on the table, This idea presumably underlay the Persian custom to serve all food on the table directly at the beginning of the dinner, as reported by Heraclides of Cumae ap. Athen. 145 F οὕτω δὲ καὶ παρὰ τοῖς

ἄλλοις Πέρσαις toig ἐν δυναστείᾳ οὖσιν ἁθρόα πάντα τὰ σιτία ἐπὶ τὴν τράπεζαν παρατίθεται: ἐπειδὰν δὲ οἱ σύνδειπνοι δειπνήσωσι,

τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς τραπέζης καταλειπομένων (καταλείπεται δὲ τὰ πλεῖστα κρέα καὶ ἄρτοι) ὁ τῆς τραπέζης ἐπιμελούμενος δίδωσιν ἐκάστῳ τῶν οἰκετῶν. The host was anxious that the guests should be entirely satisfied. The custom of serving more food as long as the guests continue to partake of it is still prevailing in Greece and other Mediterranean coun-

tries, and this is the current explanation given to it.

702 D ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς ὑπέλειπεν: Bens., before Bases, corrected αὐτῆι T (pointed out by Bolk. 79).

702 Ὁ οἶδα τὸν κατέρα καὶ tov πάππον eb μάλα παραφυλάττοντας, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ λύχνον ἐῶντας ἀποσβεννύναι «KtA.: Florus refers to the parents and the ancients to mark the custom as old and venerable. In the same way Lucius refers (704 B) to his grandmother for

the opinion that the table is sacred, as is also implied by Florus. The veneration of fire and the care of it appear in NT Matth. 12.20 λίνον τυφόμενον od σβέσει, quoted from Is. 42.3 λίνον καπνιζόμενον od

σβέσει. 702 D Ἐὔστροφος ᾿Αθηναῖος: Hu. added the art. (6) 'A., and Minar adopts it, unnecessarily; cf. De E 387 D Ἐὔστροφον ᾿Αθηναῖον. Plut. represents him as a close fellow-student of Pythagoreanism in his youth. Unlike Plut. who later became a member of the Academy (387 F),

702 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VII 4

53

Eustrophus adhered to the Pythagorean outlook. He gives a numerical explanation of the Delphic E (387 E).

702 D Πολυχάρμου tod ἡμετέρου: This otherwise unknown Athenian is presumably identical with the popular leader Polycharmus who is mentioned at 726 AB, where he is said to have defended himself against criticism of his way of life.

702 E ὅπως od κλέψουσι τοὔλαϊον οἱ παῖδες: This was probably a common problem; it is perhaps implied by Aristoph. Nub. 56-58.

702 E τὸ πρόβλημα λέλυται; For this phrase, cf. below, 734 E ἐδόκει λελυκέναι thy ἀπορίαν ᾿Αριστοτέλης, and above, on 627 A. 702 E ἐζητεῖτο περὶ τῶν λύχνων: Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308 would add the art.: ἐζητεῖτο (τὸν περὶ τ. A., but cf. above, 642 B περὶ τῶν λυκοβρώτων ἐζητεῖτο προβάτων, 679 E ἐζητεῖτο περὶ τῆς £v ἀρχῇ στενοχωρίας.

702 E ὁ μὲν γαμβρὸς αὐτοῦ Καισέρνιος: Caesernius also participates in VII 6, where he argues (707 C—708 A) against the custom of introducing secondarily invited guests (shadows). A γαμβρός of Florus, Gaius, appears in IV 7 (682 F). The two names probably belong to the same person, C. Caesernius; see Groag, PIR? C 178, and C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1972) 48 n. 2. Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos,

688, suggests that they denote different persons. In any case, γαμβρός means

‘son-in-law’

(at 707 C Minar translates ‘brother-in-law’). On

the problems of interpretation of γαμβρός, see above, on 613 A ὁ Κράτων.

702 E τῇ πρὸς τὸ ἄσβεστον καὶ ἱερὸν πῦρ συγγενείᾳ: Florus of course thinks of the holy fire in the temple of Vesta in the Forum, as Lucius does below, 703 A. — Also on the altar in the Temple of Jerusalem the fire was kept burning continuously: Lev. 6.5 καὶ πῦρ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον καυθήσεται ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ Kai od σβεσθήσεται; Esdr.

6.23 βασιλεὺς Κῦρος προσέταξεν τὸν οἶκον τοῦ κυρίου τὸν ἐν ἱερουσαλεμ οἰκοδομῆσαι, ὅπου ἐπιθύουσιν διὰ πυρὸς ἐνδελεχοῦς. 702 EF δύο γὰρ εἶναι φθοράς, ὥσπερ ἀνθρώπου, τὴν μὲν βίαιον σβεννυμένου, τὴν δ᾽ ὥσπερ κατὰ φύσιν ἀπομαραινομένου: This

54

TABLE TALKS VII 4

702 EF

thought is also expressed at Numa 21.7 ὁ Νομᾶς ἐτελεύτησεν, od ταχείας οὐδ᾽ αἰφνιδίου γενομένης αὐτῷ τῆς τελευτῆς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ

μικρὸν ὑπὸ γήρως καὶ νόσου μαλακῆς ἀπομαραινόμενος. 702 F Λεύκιος δ᾽ ὁ τοῦ Φλώρου υἱός; This son of Florus appears in this talk only and is otherwise unknown. Another Lucius is one of the speakers in the dialogue De facie and identical with the L. who is one of the guests in VIII 7 where Plut. introduces him with an elaborate description, — Plut. mentions no other sons of Florus.

703 A Αἰγυπτίων ἐνίους (μὲν) τὸ κυνῶν γένος ἅπαν σέβεσθαι καὶ τιμᾶν: Among the numerous animals worshipped by the Egyptians the dog was one of the most important. There were two main kinds of dog cult, that of Upuaut, the regional god of Assiüt in Upper Egypt, which was more precisely the jackal, and that of Anubis, the death god who assisted at funerals and was the protector of Kynopolis; see Hopfner, Tierkult, 47-52; Kees, Gütterglaube, 26-32. There was a development of the Egyptian animal cult from the original cult of individual animals distinguished by particular characteristics, e.g. black colour, to the notion of the whole species as sacred; see Kees, o.c. 27; Hani, 581. The Egyptian dog cult is commented upon by Diod. I 87.2 tov δὲ κύνα πρός τε τὰς θήρας εἶναι χρήσιμον καὶ πρὸς Thy φυλακήν διόπερ τὸν θεὸν

τὸν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς καλούμενον "Ανουβιν παρεισάγουσι κυνὸς ἔχοντα κεφαλήν, ἐμφαίνοντες ὅτι σωματοφύλαξ ἣν τῶν περὶ τὸν "Ὄσιριν καὶ τὴν Ἶσιν, and cf. Hdt. II 67; Strab. XVII 1.40; Aelian. N.A. X 45. Plut. De Is. et Os. 368 E-F tells a myth of the origin of Anubis and suggests etymologies of this name (cf. 375 E) and of the word κύων (from xin).

703 A ἐνίους δὲ τὸ λύκων (A) κροκοδείλων: The Egyptian animal cults were generally local cults, and this was particularly the case with the worship of the crocodile. It was localized in the region of Fayüm with its centre Arsinoe/Crodilopolis. The land around the lake of Fayüm is very fertile, and the crocodile was regarded as an incarnation of the god of water and ferülity, Sobk (Sobek, Suchus). This cult in particular appeared curious to foreigners, especially because the beasts were fed with a variety of foodstuffs; cf. Hat. 1169; Ps.-Arist. H.A, 608 b 30-609 a 3; Diod. I 84.4, 89; Strab. XVII 1.38. See Kees, Götterglaube, 134; Hani, 648-656; Exman, 44f., and cf, above, on 670 A. ~ The cult of the wolf was no distinctive cult; it can be classified together with the dog cult as part of the

703 A

TABLE TALKS VII 4

55

general cult of the Canidae. The Egyptians did not distinguish exactly between jackal, wolf, and wild dogs. The centre for the jackal cult, Assiüt in Upper Egypt, was called Λύκων πόλις; see Kees, Gótterglaube, 26f.; Erman, 43. Reasons for the cult are given by Diod. I 88.6 τοὺς δὲ λύκους τιμᾶσθαι λέγουσι διὰ τὴν πρὸς τοὺς κύνας τῆς φύσεως ὁμοιότητα-

βραχὺ γὰρ διαλάττοντας αὐτοὺς ταῖς φύσεσι ταῖς ἐπιμιξίαις ζωογονεῖν ἐξ ἀλλήλων, κτλ. (there follow two further etiologies); Plut. De Is.

et Os. 380 Β μόνοι γὰρ ἔτι viv Αἰγυπτίων Λυκοπολῖται πρόβατον ἐσθίουσιν, ἐπεὶ καὶ λύκος, ὃν θεὸν νομίζουσιν. 703 A οὕτως ἐνταῦθα τὴν περὶ ἐκεῖνο θεραπείαν καὶ φυλακὴν τὸ

πῦρ τῆς πρὸς ἅπαν εὐλαβείας εἶναι σύμβολον: If the dramatic place of this talk is Chaeronea the reference of ἐνταῦθα is to the fire of Hestia in the πρυτανεῖον of the city; if it is Rome the Vestal fire is meant; cf. above, on 702 D φιλάρχ(αγος. The fire was kept burning continuously on the common hearth, κοινὴ ἑστία, in the Prytaneion of every city-state; cf. Poll. I7 (ἑστία) ἂν κυριώτατα καλοῖτο ἣ £v πρυ-

τανείῳ, ἐφ᾽ ἧς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον ἀνάπτεται. The philosophical interpretation of the continuous fire was late. Originally, the reason was perhaps practical, to spare oneself the trouble of making fire. Very early the ever-lasting fire was conceived of as a symbol of the permanence of the house with its family, and then of the city and its inhabitants; see Preller-Robert* I 422-428. Through philosophical speculation the symbolic way of thought was elevated onto the cosmic level. This was perhaps first done by the Pythagoreans; cf. Philol. A 16 Φιλόλαος πῦρ ἐν μέσῳ περὶ τὸ κέντρον ὕπερ ἑστίαν τοῦ παντὸς καλεῖ καὶ Διὸς οἶκον καὶ μητέρα θεῶν βωμόν τε καὶ συνοχὴν καὶ μέτρον φύσεως, frg.

B 7 τὸ πρᾶτον ἁρμοσθέν, τὸ ἕν, ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τᾶς σφαίρας ἑστία

καλεῖται.

703 A οὐδὲν γὰρ ἄλλο μᾶλλον ἐμψύχῳ προσέοικεν ἢ πῦρ: The notion of fire as being similar to soul and having psychic qualities is old and common; cf. Heracl. frg. B 64 κεραυνὸν τὸ nop λέγων τὸ αἰώνιον. λέγει δὲ καὶ φρόνιμον τοῦτο εἶναι τὸ πῦρ; Parm. A 45 Parmenides ex terra et igne (sc. animam esse), ibid. IT. δὲ καὶ Ἵππασος

πυρώδη; Leuc. A 28 Δημόκριτος μὲν πῦρ tt xoi θερμόν φησιν αὐτὴν (τὴν ψυχὴν) εἶναι; Ps. -Hipp. IV 480.8 L. éoépne γὰρ ἐς ἄνθρωπον ψυχὴ πυρὸς καὶ ὕδατος σύγκρισιν ἔχουσα; Arist. Top. 129b 10 πυρὸς ἴδιον εἶναι τὸ ὁμοιότατον ψυχῇ, ὃ 18 τὸ (sc. πῦρ) ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ψυχὴ

πέφυκεν εἶναι, id. De resp. 478 a 16 διὰ τὸ μικρὰν εἶναι τὴν ῥοπὴν

56

TABLE TALKS VII 4

703 A

τοῦ ψυχικοῦ πυρός. However, Aristotle rejects the crude Pre-Socratic equation of fire and soul: P.A. 652 b 8 οἱ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ ζῴου τὴν ψυχὴν

τιθέασι πῦρ ἢ τοιαύτην two δύναμιν, φορτικῶς τιθέντες. The Stoics, following Heraclitus, identify fire with soul; cf. SVF 1 35.31

(Zenon)

animalium semen ignis is, qui anima ac mens, I 113.23 (Cleanthes) quare cum solis ignis similis eorum ignium sit, qui sunt in corporibus animantium, II 139.18 nihil esse animal intrinsecus in natura atque mundo praeter ignem.

703 A κινούμενόν te καὶ τρεφόμενον δι᾽ αὑτοῦ: Cf. Quaest. Rom. 281 καὶ yap τροφῆς δεῖται καὶ αὐτοκίνητόν ἐστιν. For the idea that fire is self-moved, cf. Democr. A 101 (II 109.13 DK®) ἔτι δὲ κινεῖταί

τε καὶ κινεῖ τὰ ἄλλα πρώτως. (17) τοιοῦτον δ᾽ εἶναι τόν τε νοῦν Kat τὸ πῦρ. Fire consumes air; cf. Democr. frg. Β 25 ἀμβροσίαν δὲ τὰς ἀτμίδας αἷς ὃ ἥλιος τρέφεται, καθὰ δοξάζει καὶ A.; Ps.-Hipp. VI 94.14 L. τῷ γὰρ πυρὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τροφή πῦρ δὲ ἀέρος στερηθὲν οὐκ ἂν δύναιτο ζῆν. 703 A μάλιστα δὲ ταῖς σβέσεσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ φθοραῖς ἐμφαίνεται δύναμις οὐκ ἀμοιροῦσα ζωτικῆς ἀρχῆς: By this assertion Lucius goes beyond the idea of similarity to the notion of a common nature of fire and soul/life, thus surpassing the position held by Plut. Quaest.

Rom. 281 F ὡς ζῴῳ τοῦ πυρὸς ἐοικότος. Lucius gets rather near to the Stoic identification of the two concepts. Cf. also De prim. frig. 949 A where Plutarch’s point of departure is Heracl. frg. B 76: σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος ἀέρος γένεσις. θνήσκει γὰρ Kai πῦρ

ὥσπερ ζῷον, ἢ βίᾳ σβεννύμενον ἢ δι᾽ αὑτοῦ μαραινόμενον. 703 B βοᾷ γὰρ καὶ φθέγγεται καὶ ἀμύνεται: A physical explanation, quite different from this fanciful, almost psychological

one, of the

sounds produced by fire is found below, 721 E ἣ δὲ φωνὴ πληγὴ σώμα-

τος διηχοῦς, ... οἷος (μόνος) ἐστὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ὁ dnp: καὶ γὰρ ὕδωρ Kai τῇ καὶ πῦρ ἄφωνα καθ᾽ ἑαυτά, φθέγγεται δὲ πνεύματος ἐμπεσόντος ἄπαντα καὶ ψόφους καὶ πατάγους ἀναδίδωσιν, see ad loc.

703 B (el) μή τι σὺ λέγεις, ἔφη πρὸς ἐμὲ βλέψας: Addition Turn. The phrase is found at De def. or. 423 B. 703 B προσθείην δ᾽ ἄν, ὅτι καὶ φιλανθρωπίας διδασκαλία τὸ ἔθος ἐστίν: Plut. takes the opportunity to deliver a short lecture on φιλαν-

703 B

TABLE TALKS VII 4

57

θρωπία, the virtue that he regards as an essential moral quality; see R.

Hirzel, Plutarch (Leipzig 1912) Ch. 4; Martin, AJP 82 (1961) 164—175. His contribution, extending over one chapter, is an exposition of his

short suggestion at Quaest. Rom. 281 F ἢ διδάσκει τὸ ἔθος ἡμᾶς ὅτι δεῖ μήτε πῦρ μήθ᾽ ὕδωρ μήτ᾽ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἀναγκαίων αὐτοὺς ἄδην Éxov-

τας διαφθείρειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐᾶν χρῆσθαι τοὺς δεομένους καὶ ἀπολείπειν ἑτέροις, ὅταν αὐτοὶ μηκέτι χρεΐαν ἔχωμεν;

703 B οὐτε νάματος ἐμφορηθέντας πηγὴν ἀποτυφλοῦν καὶ ἀποκρύπτειν: Water supply is rather scarce in many parts of Greece, which led to the development of a prudent attitude toward waters. Special officials supervised the water supply in the cities: Arist. Resp. Ath, 43.1 tod τῶν κρηνῶν ἐπιμελητοῦ; Plut. Them. 31.1 τῶν ᾿Αθήνησιν ὑδάτων ἐπιστάτης ἦν (sc. ὁ Θεμιστοκλῆς), and also in the countryside the use of waters was regulated of old, at least since the

time of Solon; cf. Plut. Sol. 23.6; Plat. Leg. 844 A καὶ τῶν ὑδάτων πέρι γεωργοῖσι παλαιοὶ καὶ καλοὶ νόμοι κείμενοι. In the following (844 A-D) Plato proposes modified and supplementary regulations and limitations on the use of water resources.

703 B οὔτε πλοῦ σημεῖα καὶ ὁδοῦ διαφθείρειν: Light signs made by means of beacons for the guidance of seafarers are mentioned as early as Il. XIX 375-377 (cf. also the fire signal message mentioned at Aesch. Agam. 7). Most famous of ancient constructions for the guidance of seafarers were the lighthouse of Pharos; cf. Strab. XVII 1.9, and the colos-

sus of Rhodes. Another tower, similar to that of Pharos, was situated at Caepio near Gibraltar (Strab. HI 1.9). The markers that Plut. thinks of

here are simple markers of routes, e.g., signposts, fingerposts, milestones, etc., and markers of fairways for seafarers. See Lammert, RE s.v. σημεῖα.

703 Β διὰ μικρολογίαν: Pettiness and stinginess are always ἃ target of Plutarch’s censure and irony; cf. below, 706 B καὶ γὰρ ἐν ἰχθύων

ἀγορᾷ μικρολογία καθαιρεῖ δάκτυλον ὀψοφάγου, Amat. 762 BC, De Hered. mal. 859 D, Ages.11.5, Nic. 19.5.

703 C ἀπολείπειν: Herw. (1893) would change into ὑπολείπειν, cf. 702 Ὁ ἀεὶ τῶν ἐδωδίμων En’ αὐτῆς ὑπέλειπεν, and 703 EF cet τι τοῦ

παρόντος εἰς τὸ μέλλον ὑπολείπειν, but the meaning of ὑπολείπω is ‘leave the remains’, ‘leave behind as ἃ rest’; cf., e.g., 687 A ἐκ τῶν Uno-

58

TABLE TALKS VII 4

703 C

λειμμάτων τῆς ἐν τῷ σώματι τροφῆς, Alex. 26.9 οὐδὲ μικρὸν ὑπέλιπον τῶν ἀλφίτων, Cic. 4.7 ἃ μόνα τῶν καλῶν ἡμῖν ὑπελείπετο, Cic. 17.1, while ἀπολείπω means ‘leave behind‘, ‘abandon’, which is the meaning needed here: the lamp was left behind, abandoned.

703 C καὶ γὰρ ὄψιν, εἰ δυνατὸν ἦν, καὶ ἀκοὴν χρῆσαι καλῶς εἶχεν ἑτέρῳ k1À.: This is far-reaching kindness indeed; it is probably a fancy of Plut. himself. His ideal was full-scale φιλανθρωπία; cf. An

seni 792 DE καὶ γὰρ τὸ φιλάνθρωπον εἰκός ἐστιν ἀπομαραίνεσθαι

καὶ τὸ κοινωνικὸν καὶ τὸ εὐχάριστον, ὧν οὐδεμίαν εἶναι δεῖ τελευτὴν οὐδὲ πέρας. 703 C μελέτης

ἕνεκα

τοῦ

εὐχαρίστου:

Wytt.

corrected

τῶι

εὐχαρίστω T, by reference to Cato mai. 5.5 where a variant of the phrase occurs.

703 C οὐκ ἀτόπως οἱ παλαιοὶ Kai δρῦς ἐσέβοντο καρποφόρους: Presumably Plut. thinks of the traditional poetic reverence for the fruit-

ful oak. It is conceived of and described as the tree par excellence of the Golden Age; it produces acorns and honey which were the nourishment of the first humans; cf. Hes. Erga 232 τοῖσι φέρει μὲν γαῖα πολὺν βίον, οὔρεσι δὲ δρῦς | ἄκρη μέν te φέρει βαλάνους, μέσση δὲ μελίσσας; Verg. Ect. IV 30 et durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella; Ovid. Mer. I 112 flavaque de viridi stillabant ilice mella. The oak is popular in poetic descriptions of the archaic landscape; cf. Sen. Thyest. 655 obscura nutat silva, quam supra eminens | despectat alte quercus et vincit nemus, id. Oedip. 534 curvosque tendit quercus et putres situ | annosa ramos;

Verg. Aen. VI 180 sonat icta securibus ilex. 703 C συκῆν τινα προσηγόρευσαν ἱερὰν ᾿Αθηναῖοι: Paus. I 37.2 quotes an epigram read on the sepulchral monument of the Athenian hero Phytalus situated in the deme Laciadae to the north-west of the city. He welcomed Demeter as a guest in his house and the goddess

planted the first fig-tree as a reward for his hospitality: ἐνθάδ᾽ ἄναξ ἥρως Φύταλός ποτε δέξατο σεμνὴν | Δημήτραν, ὅτε πρῶτον ὀπώρας καρπὸν ἔφηνεν, | ἣν ἱερὰν συκῆν θνητῶν γένος ἐξονομάζει. ἐξ οὗ δὴ τιμὰς Φυτάλον γένος ἔσχεν ἀγήρως. From this tree even the district was called ‘Sacred Fig-tree’: Athen. 74 D ἣ συκῆ, ..., ἡγεμὼν tod κα-

θαρείου βίου τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐγένετο. δῆλον δὲ τοῦτο ἐκ τοῦ καλεῖν τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους ἱερὰν συκῆν τὸν τόπον ἐν ᾧ πρῶτον εὑρέθη;

708 C

TABLE TALKS VII 4

59

Philostr. V Soph. II 20.3 ὄνομα μὲν δὴ τῷ προαστείῳ (sc. τῆς Ἐλευσίναδε λεωφόρου) Ἱερὰ συκῆ. See further J. Toepffer, Attische Genealogie (Berlin 1889) 247—254; Ziegler, RE s.v. Phytalos.

703 C μορίαν ἐκκόπτειν ἀπαγορεύουσιν: Amyot, and Re., corrected μοραίαν T. Turn., Basil. changed προσαγορεύουσιν T. — Mopíc was the word used of the sacred olive-trees growing in the Academy; cf. Aristoph. Nub. 1005 ἀλλ᾽ eic ᾿Ακαδήμειαν κατιὼν ὑπὸ ταῖς μορίαις ἀποθρέξει; Anaxandrides, frg. 19 (II 142 Kock) ὅτε τὰς μορίας ἔτρωγεν, ὥσπερ καὶ Πλάτων. A sacred olive-tree was growing in front of the Erechtheion on the Acropolis. To destroy such a tree was pro-

hibited on pain of death: Arist. Resp. Ath. 60.2 καὶ et τις ἐξορύξειεν ἐλαίαν μορίαν ἢ κατάξειεν, ἔκρινεν ἡ ἐξ ᾿Αρείου πάγου βουλή, καὶ εἴ [t]ov καταγνοίη, θανάτῳ τοῦτον ἐζημίουν. Lys. VIL 7 ἐπίστασθε

δέ, ὦ βουλή,

ὅσοι

μάλιστα

τῶν

τοιούτων

(sc. τῶν

μοριῶν)

ἐπιμελεῖσθε, πολλὰ ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ χρόνῳ δασέα ὄντα ἰδίαις καὶ μορίαις ἐλαίαις, ὧν νῦν τὰ πολλὰ ἐκκέκοπται, καὶ ἡ γῆ ψιλὴ γεγένηται.

703 C ταῦτα γὰρ οὐ ποιεῖ πρὸς δεισιδαιμονίαν ἐπιφόρους, ὡς ἔνιοί φασιν: Plut. perhaps thinks of the Epicureans or the Cyrenaics, who repudiated superstition; cf. Aristipp. frg. 241 Mann. tov σοφὸν μήτε φθονήσειν μήτε ἐρασθήσεσθαι ἢ δεισιδαιμονήσειν γίνεσθαι

γὰρ ταῦτα παρὰ κενὴν δόξαν. λυπήσεσθαι μέντοι καὶ φοβήσεσθαιφυσικῶς γὰρ γίνεσθαι. However, Plutarch himself was a severe critic of superstition, as he displays in De superst.

703 CD προσεθίζει td εὐχάριστον ἡμῶν καὶ κοινωνικὸν ἐν τοῖς ἀναισθήτοις καὶ ἀψύχοις πρὸς ἀλλήλους; The construction of this clause is rather unusual. Po. hesitantly deleted πρὸς ἀλλήλους, while Hu. regarded this phrase as opposed to the preceding prepositional phrase, a correct observation that, however, concerns only this part of the clause. There is a contamination, semantic and syntactic, of two aspects, that of the persons (ἡμᾶς), and that of their characters (εὐχάριστον, κοινωνικόν), and the verb προσεθίζειν is normally constructed

with an inf. Thus we would expect: προσεθίζει ἡμᾶς + inf. εὐχαρίστως καὶ κοινωνικῶς ... πρὸς ἀλλήλους. The translation of the clause as it is must be more or less free. Minar’s translation is inexact, whereas Kaltwasser rendered the meaning well: ‘sie gewóhnen uns vielmehr an unbelebten und gefühllosen Dingen zu einer wechselseitigen

60

TABLE TALKS VI 4

703 CD

Dankbarkeit und Menschenliebe’. The clause may be translated in English: ‘(this) makes our gratefulness and sociability habitual, through practice in things that lack sensation and life, for use in our relations to one another’.

703 Ὁ Ἡσίοδος οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ χυτροπόδων ἀνεπιρρέκτων ἐᾷ παρατίθεσθαι σῖτον ἢ ὄψον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπαρχὰς τῷ πυρὶ καὶ γέρα τῆς διακονίας ἀποδιδόντας: Hes. Erga 148 μηδ᾽ ἀπὸ χυτροπόδων ἀνεπιρρέκτων ἀνελόντα | ἐσθίειν μηδὲ λόεσθαι- ἐπεὶ καὶ τοῖς ἔνι ποινή. The meaning of the phrase is doubtful. The verb ἐπιρρέζω means ‘offer sacrifice at (a place)’; cf. Od. XVII 210£.; Theocr. XXIV 99; GDI 3639 a. 5. Here the passive sense of the verbal adjective seems to indicate that the pot itself was the object of the act. Evelyn-White translates ‘from an uncharmed pot’, and Sinclair: ‘Do not use vessels until you have offered sacrifice over them’. According to this interpretation the procedure may have been some kind of cathartic rite carried out before the vessel was used, in order to prevent its being the cause of pollution of the contents, either food or bath-water. However, this interpretation is not found in any

ancient source. Plutarch's interpretation of the procedure as an act of piety is cited by Schol. Hes. ad loc. θυσίαν ταύτην ὁ Πλούταρχος πρόχειρον

καὶ καθημερινὴν εἶπεν ὀρθῶς, ἀφ᾽ ὧν μέλλομεν ἐσθίειν, ἱερὰ πάντα ποιοῦντας διὰ τοῦ ἀπάρξασθαι, and it is expounded by Procl. ad foc. (Poet. min. Graec. ΤΠ 334 Gaisf.) yotponddav: τῶν ἐσχάρων τῶν μα-

γείρων. περιφραστικῶς δὲ χύτραν eine. τουτέστιν ἀπὸ χύτρας ph πρῶτον φάγῃς, πρὶν σπείσῃς ἐξ αὐτῶν τοῖς θεοῖς. ἀνεπιρρήκτων δέ,

τουτέστιν ἀθύτων, ἐφ᾽ ὧν θυσίαν οὐκ ἐποίησας“ ῥέζειν γὰρ τὸ θύειν. It seems, then, that this was the current interpretation.

703 D χρῆσθαι ζῶν(τας εἴων) καὶ λάμποντας: Turn., Amyot emended ζῶνζτας); (εἴων) ζῶν(τας) (hiatus) Xyl., corrected by Re. -- For the

metaphor, cf. Eur. Bacch. 8 πυρὸς ἔτι ζῶσαν φλόγα. 703 Ὁ &p' οὖν, ἔφη, τοῦτο καὶ τῷ περὶ τῆς τραπέζης λόγῳ πάροδον οἰκείαν δίδωσιν, οἰομένων δεῖν xtA: Re. unnecessarily would change into οἰομένῳ, cited by Hu., but rightly rejected by Hartm. Onc-term gen. abs. is rather frequent in Plut.; cf. above, on 613 A deομένων. The subject of οἰομένων is indefinite, ‘people’, ‘they’, ‘one’.

703 E τοὺς Περσῶν βασιλεῖς φασιν od μόνον φίλοις xoi ἡγεμόσι καὶ σωματοφύλαξιν ἀποπέμπειν ἀεὶ μερίδας, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῶν

703 E

TABLE TALKS VII 4

61

δούλων καὶ τὸ τῶν κυνῶν ἀεὶ δεῖπνον ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκείνων προτίθε-

σθαι τραπέζης: This information possibly derives from the second book, entitled TIapauokevaorıra, of Τὰ Περσικά by Heracleides of Cumae, probably written in the 4th c. B.C. The work is quoted by

Athen. 145 A-146 A; cf. 145 EF τὰ δὲ πλεῖστα τούτων τῶν ἱερείων καὶ τῶν σιτίων, ods τρέφει βασιλεὺς τῶν τε δορυφόρων καὶ τῶν πελταστῶν, τούτοις ἐκφέρεται εἰς τὴν αὐλήν- οὗ ἡμιδεῆ (Kaibel: ἦν ἰδεῖν Α) ἅπαντα μερίδας ποιήσαντες τῶν κρεῶν καὶ τῶν ἄρτων ἴσας διαιροῦνται, 145 Ε ἐπειδὰν δὲ οἱ σύνδειπνοι δειπνήσωσι, τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς τραπέζης καταλειπομένων (καταλείπεται δὲ τὰ πλεῖστα κρέα καὶ ἄρτοι) ὁ τῆς τραπέζης ἐπιμελούμενος δίδωσιν ἑκάστῳ τῶν οἰκετῶν, καὶ ταῦτα λαβὼν τὴν καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἔχει τροφήν, Another possible source of Plut. is Xen. An. 19.25 Κῦρος γὰρ ἔπεμπε βίκους

οἴνου ἡμιδεεῖς πολλάκις ὁπότε πάνυ ἡδὺν λάβοι. .. πολλάκις δὲ χῆνας ἡμιβρώτους ἔπεμπε καὶ ἄρτων ἡμίσεα καὶ ἄλλα τοιαῦτα, ἐπιλέγειν κελεύων τὸν φέροντα“ τούτοις ἥσθη Κῦρος: βούλεται οὖν

καὶ σὲ τούτων γεύσασθαι; Cyr. VIII 2.3 ὅσα δὲ παρατεθείη, ταῦτα návto, πλὴν οἷς αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ σύνδειπνοι χρήσαιντο, διεδίδου οἷς δὴ βούλοιτο τῶν φίλων μνήμην ἐνδείκνυσθαι ἢ φιλοφροσύνην. ... ἐτίμα

δὲ καὶ τῶν οἰκετῶν ἀπὸ τῆς τραπέζης ὁπότε τινὰ ἐπαινέσειε. .. οἰόμενος ὥσπερ καὶ τοῖς κυσὶν ἐμποιεῖν τινα καὶ τοῦτο εὔνοιαν. — The custom of Persian men in power to favour friends and bodyguards was adopted by Alexander; cf. Plut. Alex. 39.7 περὶ δὲ τῶν τοῖς φίλοις καὶ τοῖς σωματοφύλαξι νεμομένων πλούτων, ἡλίκον εἶχον ὄγχον, ἐμφαίνει δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς Ὀλυμπιάς, ἣν ἔγραψε πρὸς αὐτόν’ ἄλλως, φησίν, εὖ ποίει τοὺς φίλους καὶ ἐνδόξους Exe: νῦν δ᾽ ἰσοβασιλέας πάντας ποιεῖς, ... ἑαυτὸν δ᾽ ἐρημοῖς. 703 E ἀνυστόν: Correction Turn., Amyot, Steph.: ἂν οἶστόν T.

703 E ὁμοτραπέζους καὶ ópeotíouc: Cf. above, 643 D, where Plut. has three words on ὁμο-, see ad loc.

703 E τὸν ἐκ τῆς παροιμίας ἀποκείμενον ἰχθῦν: Cf. Apostol. IX 100 c.2a (CPG II 462) ἰχθὺς ἀποκείμενος ὁ ὑπὸ τῶν φειδωλῶν εἰς τὴν αὔριον φυλαττόμενος. Apostolius quotes our passage.

703 E οὐχ ἕλκομεν εἰς μέσον: Amyot, Steph., observing the unmarked question, added (διὰ ti) οὐχ ἕλκομεν: οὐχ ἑλκόμενον T, corrected by Turn., Basil.

62

TABLE TALKS VII 4

703 E μετὰ τῆς Πυθαγορικῆς

χοίνικος,

703 E

ἐφ᾽ ἧς ἀπηγόρευεν

καθῆσθαι, διδάσκων ἡμᾶς ἀεί τι τοῦ παρόντος εἰς τὸ μέλλον ὑπολείπειν καὶ τῆς αὔριον ἐν τῇ σήμερον μνημονεύειν: This Pythagorean precept (σύμβολον) appears rather far-fetched here, as Plut. himself shows: he finds it necessary to explain how the symbolic meaning of this precept is applicable to the theme under interpretation. His explanation implies a partly new interpretation. This and many more Pythagorean precepts are quoted and explained at Ps.-Plut. De lib.

educ. 12 E-F: μὴ ἐπὶ χοίνικος καθίσαι, ἤτοι φεύγειν ἀργίαν koi προνοεῖν ὅπως τὴν ἀναγκαίαν παρασκευάσωμεν τροφήν. Cf. Athen. 452 E μὴ καθῆσθαι ἐπὶ χοίνικα, ἀντὶ τοῦ μὴ σκοπεῖν τὰ ἐφ᾽ ἡμέραν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐπιοῦσαν ἀεὶ προσδέχεσθαι; Mant. I 58 (CPG II 753) ἐπὶ χοίνικος μὴ καθίζειν: τουτέστι μὴ ἐπαναπαύεσθαι τῇ ἐφημέρῳ τροφῇ, ἀλλὰ προεισφέρειν; Porphyr. V. Pyth. 42 μηδ᾽ ἐπὶ χοίνικος

καθέζεσθαι, οἷον μὴ ἀργὸν ζῆν; Diog. Laert. VIII 18 ἐπί τε χοίνικος μὴ καθίζειν ἐν ἴσῳ τῷ φροντίδα ποιεῖσθαι καὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος’ ἡ γὰρ χοῖνιξ ἡμερήσιος τροφή. Plut. shows his interest in the Pythagorean precepts through numerous quotations: Quaest. Rom. 281 A, 290 E, De Is. et Os. 354 F, Numa 14.6, and some of them are discussed below, VIII 7; cf. also above, 635 E.

703 F ἡμῖν μὲν οὖν τοῖς Βοιωτοῖς τὸ Aeiné τι καὶ Μήδοις διὰ στόματός ἐστιν: This may have been a Boeotian response to the pre-

dominant Greek attitude towards the Persians, i.e., to resist their invasion by all means, even by means of consuming goods to prevent them from profiting by them, as expressed in the saying preserved by

Dicaearchus (frg. 102 Werhrli) ap. Zenob. VI 16 τάδε Μῆδος od φυAdEer- Δικαίαρχός φησιν, ὅτι μελλούσης τῆς Ξέρξου στρατείας yive-

σθαι οἱ Ἕλληνες

ἀπογνόντες τῆς σωτηρίας, τὰς οὐσίας αὑτῶν

ἀνήλισκον ἐπιλέγοντες" τάδε Μῆδος od φυλάξει. Cf. also Ps.-Plut. 37 (CPG 1326); Apostol. XV 91; Suda T 16; Phot. -- For the Boeotian at-

titude, see G. B. Grundy, The Great Persian War and its Preliminaries (London 1901) 547; H. Bengtson, Griechische Geschichte? (Miinchen 1965) 164.

703 F ἀεὶ δὲ καὶ πανταχοῦ δεῖ πρόχειρον εἶναι τὸ λεῖπέ τι καὶ ξένοις ἐπελθοῦσιν: The thought is expressed clearly in Athen. 13 A οὐκ ἔφερον δὲ οἴκαδε nap’ Ὁμήρῳ οἱ δαιτυμόνες τὰ λειπόμενα, ἀλλὰ κορασθέντες κατέλιπον παρ᾽ οἷς ἦν fj Sac: καὶ ἡ ταμία λαβοῦσα

εἶχεν, ἵνα ἄν τις ἀφίκηται ξένος, ἔχοι δοῦναι αὐτῷ.

703 F

TABLE TALKS VII 4

63

703 F tod ᾿Αχιλλέως κενὴν ἀεὶ καὶ λιμώδη καταλαμβανομένην αἰτιῶμαι τὴν τράπεζαν κτλ.: The two occasions which Plut. cites (11. IX 182-221, XXIV 621-642) are the only ones of which we are told

that Achilles provided meals for visitors, but Plut. finds these enough for making the sweeping statement (κενὴν 6@« KtA.).

704 A ὁ δ᾽ Εὔμαιος,

ἅτε δὴ θρέμμα γεγονὼς σοφοῦ

σοφόν:

Eumaeus' father, Ctesias, was king of the island of Syria, perhaps identical with Syros (Syra) to the west of Delos; see P. Waltz, Rev. des Et. Hom. 1 (1931) 1-15. Eumaeus tells the story of his origin at Od. XV

403-484,

704 A Τελεμάχου ἐπιφανέντος: Plut did not always take care to avoid hiatus; he rather often tolerates it at proper names; cf. above, 657 D τῷ

᾿Αριστίωνι ἀντεῖπε, and below, 705 B Καλλιστράτου εἰπόντος, 722 C ὁ ᾿Αμμωνίου υἱός. On hiatus in other positions in Plut., see above, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα, 632 D γένος εἶναι εἰρωνείας, 637 D καὶ γὰρ ταῦτα.

704 A εἰ δὲ τοῦτο δόξει μικρόν, ἐκεῖνό γ᾽ οὐ μικρόν, τὸ συστέλλειν καὶ ἀνέχειν τὴν ὄρεξιν: For ἐκεῖνος referring to what follows, see on 620 D. -- For the naval metaphor συστέλλειν, properly ‘teef the sails’, see on 647 D.

704 B ἧττον yap ἐπιθυμοῦσι τῶν ἀπόντων oi ἐθισθέντες ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν παρόντων: This wise dictum seems to be Plutarch’s own.

704 B ὁ Λεύκιος ἔφη τῆς μάμμης ἀκηκοὼς μνημονεύειν, ὡς ἱερὸν

μὲν ἡ τράπεζα, δεῖ δὲ τῶν ἱερῶν μηδὲν εἶναι κενόν: The reference to the grandmother is clearly to emphasize that the idea is very old and traditional and thus genuine and justified. Similarly Florus referred (702 D) to the ancient Romans.

As with fire (703 A), Lucius here

makes a generic statement about the table: fire as such is sacred, because more than anything else it resembles a living being and thus is like the mind; similarly the table is an imitation of the earth, and thus is likewise holy. Although Lucius does not state it expressly he suggests that the table, as a representation of the earth, in reality represents the body, just as fire represents mind/soul. A different, and more specific, interpretation is suggested by H. J. Rose, The Roman Questions of Plutarch (Oxford 1924) 197, namely that the custom was

54

TABLE TALKS VII 4

704 B

a piece of sympathetic magic, designed to prevent the family from being short of food’.

704 B ἐδόκει xoi μίμημα τῆς γῆς f τράπεζ᾽ εἶναι: Herw. (1893) would change into δοκεῖ, which might seem plausible, but the philosophical imperf. reveals in an interesting way that the idea of the holiness and symbolic nature of the table was already present in the mind of Lucius (in reality, Plut.) during his first contribution (702 F-703 B) but was not pronounced.

704 B στρογγύλη: Greek and Roman tables were usually small, round and easily movable pieces; cf. above, on 635 B, 702 D, and see H. Blümner, Die römischen Privataltertümer (München 1911) 124—128; ΣῈ,

Guhl & W. Koner, Leben der Griechen und Römer‘ (Berlin 1893) 259f., figs. 309-310. 704 B μόνιμός ἐστι καὶ καλῶς bn’ ἐνίων ἑστία καλεῖται: Faehse thought that μόνιμος has been substituted for στάσιμος. Of course no copyist would ever have blurred the alleged etymological connection

between ἑστάναι and ἑστία by such a change. For this popular etymology, cf. Comut. De nat. deor. 28 p. 52.6 Lang ταύτην μὲν γὰρ (sc. τὴν

γῆν) διὰ τὸ ἑστάναι διὰ παντὸς Ἑστίαν προσηγόρευσαν oi παλαιοί. The etymology of ἑστία remains uncertain. The connection with Lat.Vesta has been doubted but not refuted, It may be derived from IE *wes-, ‘dwell’, or from IE *wes-, ‘burn’; see Boisacq; Frisk; Chantraine, s.v. ἑστία; A, Walde & J. B. Hofmann, Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch? (Heidelberg 1954) s.v. Vesta, and cf. T. G. Tucker, Etymological Dictionary of Latin (Chicago 1976) s.v. Vesta. Buck, /F 25 (1909) 257-259 connected totio/ictia (dial) with Lat.

Vesta and explains the Greek forms as influence from ἑστάναι, ἱστάναι. — In Greek mythology Hestia is sometimes identified with Gaia; cf. Philodem. De piet. p. 23 G. παρὰ Φιλοχόρῳ (FGrHist 328 F 185) Γῆν

[κ]αὶ Δήμητρα τὴν αὐτὴν 'Εστίᾳ, καὶ Σοφοκλῆς (frg. 615 Radt) ἐΐν Ἰνάϊχῳ τὴν Γῆν μηϊτέϊρα τῶν θεῶν φη[σιν], ἐν Τριπτολέμω[ι δὲ] καὶ 'Eotiov εἶνίαι; Eur. frg. 944 Nauck? καὶ Γαῖα μῆτερ’ Ἑστίαν δὲ σ᾽ οἱ σοφοὶ | βροτῶν καλοῦσιν 1ἡμένην ἐν αἰθέρι; Ps.-Arist. De mundo 391 Ὁ 14 γῆ, παντοδαπῶν ζῴων ἑστία te οὖσα καὶ μήτηρ.

704 B οὐδὲ τὴν τράπεζαν οἰόμεθα δεῖν κενὴν ὁρᾶν καὶ ἀνερμάτιστον ἀπολειπομένην: Hartm., Cast. would emend (περ) ορᾶν

704 B

TABLE TALKS VII 4

65

Cast. compares 620 A oidpevoi pe δεῖν στεφανηφοροῦντα μὴ mepuδεῖν (ταλαιὸν) ἔθος ἐκλειφθέν. Hu. refers to 621 B (edxpa)tov δέ por

δοκεῖ toto0to); ὧν τὸ συμπόσιον (διαφυλ)άξειν ἡμῖν καὶ μὴ {περϑόψεσθαι κτλ. These exs. seem not to be good parallels to our passage. The subject of the inf. (περιιδεῖν, περιόψεσθαι) is explicit, while this is not the case with ὁρᾶν. Its subject is undecided: perhaps ἡμᾶς, or those who find no food left. Only if ἡμᾶς is understood should we expect περιορᾶν, whereas if other people are meant, ὁρᾶν is right. Indeed, the rather strained metaphorical use of ἀνερμάτιστος, properly ‘without ballast’, perhaps points to the latter case, i.e., if Post is right in suggesting that the word is used here as a pun with ἕρμαιον, ‘lucky find’. TALK 5 When writing this talk Plutarch had already treated the theme in his essay De aud. poet., which he probably wrote some time after 80; see above, on 666 D Αὐτοβούλου τοῦ υἱοῦ, and cf. Jones, JRS 56 (1966) 71. In that work as well as here Plutarch expresses his demands for high ethical standards in aesthetics: moderation and decorum should be our lodestars, principles that he makes clear directly in the introduction, 14 E διὸ δεῖ μὴ μόνον ἐν ταῖς περὶ ἐδωδὴν καὶ πόσιν ἡδοναῖς διαφυ-

λάττειν εὐσχημονοῦντας αὐτούς, ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον ἐν ταῖς ἀκροάσεσιν καὶ ἀναγνώσεσιν ἐθίζειν, ὥσπερ ὄψῳ χρωμένους μετρίως τῷ τέρποντι, τὸ χρήσιμον ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ σωτήριον διώκειν. His attitudes to the different kinds of music

are basically dependent on Plato. On

Plutarch's aesthetic views in general, see K. Svoboda, ‘Les idées estéti-

ques de Plutarque', Mélanges Bidez. Annuaire de l'Inst. de philol. et d'hist. or. 2 (1934) 917—946.

704 C ἐν Tio toi; Καλλίστρατος, τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων ἐπιμελητής; Callistratus, son of Leon, belonged to a wealthy, leading family of Delphi. He is the host at the lavish banquet at Aedepsus described in IV 4; see on 667 D. The dialogue De def. or. Plut. represents (410 E) as taking place while Callistratus held the office of member of the Amphictyonic Council, i.e. in 83/84; see Pomptow, RE s.v. Delphoi, 2596, 2601, 2671. If this was also the year he held the office of ἐπιμελητῆς; this would mean that this is the dramatic date of this talk. It appears that the office of ἐπιμελητής was held by more than one person at a time; thus Kron. would add (eig) τῶν

Δυσίμαχος,

eis τῶν

᾿Αμφικτυόνων

'À.; cf. above, 638 B

ἐπιμελητής,

and

see ad

loc.

66

TABLE TALKS VII 5

704C

Presumably one of these officials was eponymous, and if this was the title of Callistratus, it would explain why he is not called εἷς τῶν ém-

μελητῶν. — Plut. held the office of ἐπιμελητῆς probably in 117/8 (Syll? 829 A, dated 117-120).

704 C ὑστερήσαντα τῆς ἀπογραφῆς tod μὲν ἀγῶνος εἶρξε: The rules for registration in the games were strict. Late arrivals were only excused if due to illness, pirates, or storm. See M. B. Poliakoff, Combat

Sports in the Ancient World (New Haven-London 1987) 19f.

704 C ἐσθῆτι καὶ στεφάνοις, ὥσπερ ἐν ἀγῶνι, μετὰ τοῦ χοροῦ ke κοσμημένον

ἐκπρεπῶς: Artists used to appear apparelled in extra-

vagant clothing and dressed up luxuriously; cf. above, 615 D εὐπάρυ-

gog ἐκ κωμῳδίας, ἐσθῆτί te περιττῇ καὶ ἀκολουθίᾳ παίδων ὕποσολοικότερος, and see ad loc. 704 D διακωδωνίσας τὸ συμπόσιον: ‘put the party to the test under the stress of intense music’. Minar’s translation, ‘filling (the hall) with resounding noise’, does not fully render the metaphorical meaning of the verb. Plut. aptly exploits the double meaning of this word, (a) ‘try’, ‘test’, and (b) ‘stress’, ‘excite’, as described by Harpocr. p. 96.13 [Etym. Mag. 273.47) (Eur. frg. 589 Nauck?) ἡ δὲ μεταφορὰ ἤτοι ἀπὸ περιπο-

λούντων σὺν κώδωσι νυκτὸς τὰς φυλακάς, ὡς Εὐριπίδης Παλαμήδει, ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν δοκιμαζόντων τοὺς μαχίμους ὄρτυγας τῇ ἠχῷ τοῦ κώδωνος, ὡς ᾿Αρίσταρχος. Etym. Mag. adds: ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν ἵππων᾽ εἰώθασι γὰρ οὕτως δοκιμάζειν τοὺς γενναίους ἵππους, εἰ μὴ καταπλήττονται, cf. Schol. Aristoph. Av. 842 κωδωνοφορῶν" οἱ περίπολοι οἱ τὰς «φυλακὰς περισκοποῦντες ἐρχόμενοι ἐπὶ τοὺς φύλακας κώδωνας εἶχον, καὶ διὰ τούτων ἐψόφουν, πειράζοντες τὸν καθεύδοντα. -- Τὸ συμπόσιον is used in a collective sense, as at 710 C.

704 Ὁ καταυλεῖν: ‘charm’, ‘subdue by flute-playing’. Cf. Plat. Rep. 561 C μεθύων καὶ καταυλούμενος, 411 A οὐκοῦν ὅταν μέν τις μουσικῇ παρέχῃ καταυλεῖν καὶ καταχεῖν τῆς ψυχῆς διὰ τῶν ὥτων ὥσπερ διὰ χώνης, Leg. 790 E ἀτεχνῶς οἷον καταυλοῦσι τῶν παιδίων.

704 D ἀκολασταίνειν: ‘to be licentious’; the verb is connected with καταυλεῖν so as to mean ‘use licentiousness as a means (to subdue)’. The addition (xot)axoAastaivery Naber is unnecessary and repetitious, and moreover this compound is not found.

704 D

TABLE TALKS VII 5

67

704 D ἐπεδείξατο thy μουσικὴν παντὸς οἴνου μᾶλλον μεθύσκουσαν τοὺς ὅπως ἔτυχεν καὶ ἀνέδην αὐτῆς ἐμφορουμένους: Plut. expresses Plato’s well-known opinion about the great influence of music on the human mind. He considered those kinds of music that affect the emotions in an undesirable way as either unnecessary or harmful. Thus he banished two kinds of music from his ideal state, dirges and lamentations, as well as convivial, more or less wanton, entertaining

music; cf, Rep. 398 E, and Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 822 BC ὥσπερ οὖν ὁ Πλάτων ἀφεῖλε τῶν παιδευομένων νέων τὴν ἁρμονίαν τὴν

Λύδιον καὶ τὴν ἰαστί, τὴν μὲν τὸ θρηνῶδες καὶ φιλοπενθὲς ἡμῶν ἐγείρουσαν

τῆς ψυχῆς,

τὴν δὲ τὸ πρὸς ἡδονὰς

ὀλισθηρὸν

καὶ

ἀκόλαστον αὔξουσαν, De esu carn. 997 Β οὕτως ἀκοή νοσήσασα μουσικὴν διέφθειρεν, ἀφ᾽ ἧς τὸ θρυπτόμενον καὶ ἐκλυόμενον αἰσχρὰς ποθεῖ ψηλαφήσεις καὶ γυναικώδεις γαραλισμούς. See further Plat. Rep. 411 A, Leg. 800 C-D. Plato gives a psycho-physio-

logical justification of his view at Tim. 80 A καὶ ὅσοι φθόγγοι ταχεῖς τε καὶ βραδεῖς ὀξεῖς τε καὶ βαρεῖς φαίνονται, τοτὲ μὲν ἀνάρμοστοι φερόμενοι δι᾽ ἀνομοιότητα τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν κινήσεως, τοτὲ δὲ ξύμφωνοι δι᾽ ὁμοιότητα. According to Plato the right use of music should calm and harmonize the disorderly movements of the soul so that the intellect is not disturbed or drowsed but stimulated to clear thoughts. Hence Plato rejected the new kinds of music that used the barely distinguishable quarter tones which are only appealing to the ears: Rep. 531 AB οἱ μέν φασιν ἔτι κατακούειν ἐν μέσῳ τινὰ ἠχὴν καὶ σμικρότατον εἶναι τοῦτο διάστημα, ᾧ μετρητέον, οἱ δὲ ἀμφισβητοῦντες dὡς ὅμοιον ἤδη φθεγγομένων, ἀμφότεροι ὦτα τοῦ νοῦ προστησάμενοι. Cf. Clem. Strom. VI 90.2 περιττὴ δὲ μουσικὴ ἀπο-

πλυστέα f) κατακλῶσα τὰς φυχὰς καὶ ποικιλίαν ἐμβάλλουσα τοτὲ

μὲν θρηνώδη, τοτὲ δὲ ἀκόλαστον καὶ ἡδυπαθῇ, τοτὲ δὲ ἐκβακχευομένην καὶ μανικήν. For the development of the notion of the ethical dimension of music and its educational and intellectual value, from the Pythagoreans on, see R. Schäfke, Geschichte der Musikästhetik in Umrisser? (Tutzing 1982) 18-173. 704 D ἀνεπήδων οἱ πολλοὶ καὶ συνεκινοῦντο κινήσεις ἀνελευθέρους, πρεπούσας δὲ τοῖς κρούμασιν ἐκείνοις καὶ τοῖς μέλεσιν: For τοῖς κρούμασιν, ‘the rhythm markings’, cf. above, on 638 C. -- Wil. unnecessarily would delete the article before μέλεσι. An instance of such repetition of the art. is found at 705 E τὴν ἐν ὄμμα-

σι καὶ thy ἐν ὠσὶν γαργαλίζουσαν μαλακίαν. -- There were various

68

TABLE TALKS VII 5

704 D

kinds of dancing practised at drinking-parties, performed either by professional dancing-girls or by the guests themselves. Some dances were probably rather obscene. This is clearly what Plut. describes here. Revelling scenes illustrating such dances are frequently represented on vases, particularly on drinking-cups; see, e.g., P. E. Arias, A History of Greek

Vase

Painting

(London

1962)

Pls.

117,

132,

138,

148,

165.

Sometimes the entertainments also took the form of obscene, more or less acrobatic performances; cf. Corp. Vas. Ant. GB fasc. 7 Brit. Mus. fasc. 6 (London 1931) Pi. 105.

704 E ἐβούλετο μὲν ὁ Λαμπρίας εἰπεῖν τι καὶ παρρησιάσασθαι πρὸς τοὺς νέους- ὀρρωδοῦντι δ᾽ ὅμως αὐτῷ xcÀ.: Of Plutarch’s two brothers, Lamprias and Timon, L. is by far the most brilliant; he is even one of the most conspicuous personages appearing in the Talks. Plut. always represents him as a spontaneous, humorous and outspoken person; see on 617 E, and 726 DE. The restrained and hesitating reaction suggested here is thus not typical of Lamprias. - The explicit mention of the younger guests is noticeable; it was probably they who were most deeply influenced by the emotionally exciting music. At the beginning of Talk ΠῚ 6 the young men themselves show a precautionary attitude when they criticize Epicurus for having introduced an unseemly topic in his Symposion,

704 E ἀκρασίας μέν, ἔφη, καὶ αὐτὸς ἀπολύω τὸ φιλήκοον καὶ φιλοθέαμον' οὐ μὴν ᾿Αριστοξένῳ ye συμφέρομαι παντάπασι, ταύταις μάναις φάσκοντι ταῖς ἡδοναῖς τὸ καλῶς ἐπιλέγεσθαι" κτλ. Fre. 74 Wehrli, FHG Yl 288, from Aristoxenus’ Περὶ μουσικῆς. The idea that audition and vision are more noble than the other senses he also expresses in frg. 73 ᾿Αρισ]τόξενος ... thy S[pacw καὶ] τὴν

axolnv Aléyav [γεγεν]ῆσθαι τὸ xó[pltov τ[ῆς ἐννοίας καὶ θειοτέρας τίῶν ἄλλωϊν αἰσθήσεων. The idea that these two senses are different in kind from the others, the ‘bodily’ ones, derives from the classification made by Aristotle; see further below, 704 EF. We have little left of Aristoxenus’ Περὶ μουσικῆς. Our main source is Ps.-Plut. De mus. (frgs. 76, 80-83 W.). Cf. also below, 711 C (frg. 85 W.). We have no further evidence that would make it possible to judge whether Plut. here represents Aristoxenus' opinion correctly. If he actually expressed the extreme view that only the pleasures of vision and audition should be called ‘beautiful’ or ‘good’, it perhaps was in some passage of exaggerated polemics against Plato’s extreme, negative attitude to nearly all

04 E

TABLE TALKS VII 5

69

kinds of music. Aristoxenus did not banish any kind of music but tried to remove degenerated features in the modern music; cf. frg. 70 W. ᾿Αριστόξενος ὁ μουσικὸς θηλυνομένην ἤδη thy μουσικὴν ἐπειρᾶτο ἀναρρωνύναι, and see below, 711 C. For the high appreciation of music, and generally objects of audition, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 919 Ὁ 26 διὰ

τί τὸ ἀκουστὸν μόνον ἦθος ἔχει τῶν αἰσθητῶν; Kai γὰρ ἐὰν ἡ ἄνευ λόγου μέλος, ὅμως ἔχει ἦθος": ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὸ χρῶμα οὐδὲ ἡ ὀσμὴ οὐδὲ ὁ χυμὸς ἔχει. Theophrastus considered the sense of hearing outstanding as to the emotional effects of its objects: Plut. De aud. poet. 37 F (=frg.

91 W.) ὁ Θεόφραστος παθητικωτάτην (sc. τὴν ἀκουστικὴν αἴσθησιν) εἶναί φησι πασῶν. οὔτε γὰρ ὁρατὸν οὐδὲν οὔτε γευστὸν οὔθ᾽ ἁπτὸν ἐκστάσεις ἐπιφέρειν καὶ ταραχὰς καὶ πτοίας τηλικαύτας KTA., 38 A

τῇ δ᾽ ἀρετῇ μία λαβὴ τὰ ὦτα τῶν νέων ἐστίν, ἂν f| καθαρὰ καὶ ἄθpunta κολακείᾳ κτλ. The idea that sight and hearing are particular also existed within the Academy; see discussion in Ps.-Plat. Hipp. Mai. 297 E-300 B.

704 EF δοκεῖ δέ μοι μηδ᾽ ᾿Αριστοτέλης αἰτίᾳ δικαίᾳ τὰς περὶ θέαν καὶ ἀκρόασιν εὐπαθείας ἀπολύειν ἀκρασίας, ὡς μόνας ἀνθρωπικὰς οὔσας, ταῖς δ᾽ ἄλλαις καὶ τὰ θηρία φύσιν ἔχοντα χρῆσθαι καὶ κοινωνεῖν: Aristotle argues in favour of this view in Eth. Nic. 1117 b 23-1118 b 8. His starting-point is the fact that moral jud-

gements (σωφροσύνη, ἀκολασία) have no relation to pleasures of ambition or learning. Moral judgements only concern bodily pleasures, but not even all of these: 1118 a 2 περὶ δὴ τὰς σωματικὰς εἴη ἂν ἣ σωφροσύνη, οὐ πάσας δὲ οὐδὲ ταύτας οἱ γὰρ χαίροντες τοῖς διὰ τῆς

ὄψεως, οἷον χρώμασι καὶ σχήμασι καὶ γραφῇ, οὔτε σώφρονες οὔτε ἀκόλαστοι λέγονται’ (a 7) ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ἐν τοῖς περὶ τὴν ἀκοήν τοὺς γὰρ ὑπερβεβλημένως χαίροντας μέλεσιν ἢ ὑποκρίσει οὐθεὶς ἀκολάστους λέγει, οὐδὲ τοὺς ὡς δεῖ σώφρονας. Arist. here opposes Plato in his opinion of music and poetry as damaging the intellectual part of the soul through influence on the emotional part. Arist. even exempts the sense of smell; pleasures of this sense are morally relevant only by association: 1118 a 9 οὐδὲ τοὺς περὶ thy ὀσμήν, πλὴν κατὰ συμ-

βεβηκός: τοὺς γὰρ χαίροντας μήλων ἢ ῥόδων ἢ θυμιαμάτων ὀσμαῖς od λέγομεν ἀκολάστους ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον τοὺς μύρων καὶ ὄψων: χαίρουσι γὰρ τούτοις οἱ ἀκόλαστοι, ὅτι διὰ τούτων ἀνάμνησις γίνεται αὐτοῖς τῶν ἐπιθυμητῶν. At De sens. 436 Ὁ 19 Arist. distinguishes these three senses as those which function through an external medium:

αἱ δὲ διὰ τῶν ἔξωθεν αἰσθήσεις τοῖς πορευτικοῖς (sc. ζῴοις ὑπάρ-

70

TABLE TALKS VIL5

704 EF

χουσιν) αὐτῶν, οἷον ὄσφρησις καὶ ἀκοὴ καὶ ὄψις. The σωματικαὶ

αἰσθήσεις proper, however, are touch and taste, which are those that are common to the animals also; cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 950 a 10 οὐσῶν δὲ

τῶν αἰσθήσεων πέντε, τά τε ἄλλα ζῷα ἀπὸ δύο μόνον τῶν προεἰρημένων (sc. τῆς ἁφῆς καὶ τῆς γεύσεως) ἥδεται, κατὰ δὲ τὰς ἄλλας ἢ ὅλως οὐχ ἥδεται ἢ κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς τοῦτο πάσχει. Touch is the

most primitive sense: Arist. De anima 413 Ὁ 5 αἰσθήσεως δὲ πρῶτον ὑπάρχει πᾶσιν ἁφή. Cf. also Gell. XIX 2.2 sed enim quae nimia ex gustu atque tactu est, ea Voluptas, sicuti sapientes viri censuerunt, omnium rerum foedissima est, etc;; Macrob. Sat. II 8.10-15. — Sandbach, Ill. Class. Stud. 1 (1982) 220 observes that Arist. Eth. Nic. 1117 b 23-1118

b 8 does not speak of ἀκρασία, as Plut. does, but of ἀκολασία and concludes that Plut. did not use him directly. It seems quite possible, however, that he used Arist. as well as a later source treating the use of music for exerting influence on animals. It appears that he compared Aristotle’s statements on vision and audition with this information and thus found that he was mistaken as to the reason: μηδ᾽ ᾿Αριστοτέλης

αἰτίᾳ δικαίᾳ. See next lemma. 704 Ε μουσικῇ πολλὰ κηλεῖται τῶν ἀλόγων, ὥσπερ ἔλαφοι σύριγξιν: From ἀλόγων on as far as 709 A σκιῶν the text is missing in T because one quaternion has fallen out. -- The method of hunting stags by

means of flute piping is described in many sources and was probably practised frequently; cf. Ps.-Arist. H.A. 611 b 26 ἁλίσκονται δὲ Onpevopevar αἱ ἔλαφοι συριττόντων καὶ ἀδόντων, ὥστε καὶ κατακλίνονται ὑπὸ τῆς ἡδονῆς; Plut. De soll. an. 961 Ὁ ἡδονῆς δὲ τῇ μὲν SV ὥτων ὄνομα κήλησίς ἐστι, τῇ δὲ δι᾿ ὀμμάτων γοητεία"

χρῶνται δ᾽ ἑκατέραις ἐπὶ τὰ θηρία. κηλοῦνται μὲν γὰρ ἔλαφοι καὶ ἵπποι σύριγξι καὶ αὐλοῖς, reproduced almost literally by Porphyr. De abst, 11 22.4, cf. ΠῚ 22.6. Cf. Plin. VIII 114 mulcentur (sc. cervi) fistu-

la pastorali et cantu. Clem. Paed. 11 41.2 τὰς μὲν γὰρ ἐλάφους ταῖς

σύριγξι κηλεῖσθαι παρειλήφαμεν καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς ποδάγρας πρὸς τῶν κυνηγῶν θηρευομένας ἄγεσθαι τῷ μέλει. Aelian. N.A. XII 46 describes in detail how the Etruscans use music in hunting. Below, 713 AB Plut. tells that shepherds use music to rouse their cattle or to quiet them. ~ Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 322 discusses the possibility that Clem.

used our passage as his source for Paed. II 41 but concludes that he probably did not and that Plut. and Clem. used a common source. P. Wendland, Quaestiones Musonianae (Berlin 1886) 60f. assumed that

both used Musonius. See also J. Gabrielsson, Über die Quellen des

704 F

TABLE TALKS VII 5

71

Clemens Alexandrinus I (Upsala 1909) 363f., who considers Didymus

à more probable source.

704 F ἵπποις δὲ μιγνυμέναις ἐπαυλεῖται νόμος, ὃν ἱππόθορον óvoμάζουσιν: Cobet proposed the unnecessary change into ὑπαυλεῖται; ἐπαυλέω is the verb used in connection with rites and ceremonies; cf.

Lucian. Sacr. 12 τῇ θυσίᾳ ἐπαυλοῦν, and the close parallel Clem. Paed. II 412, see below. — Plut. mentions this strain at Coni. praec. 138 B ἐν

μὲν γὰρ τοῖς μουσικοῖς ἕνα τῶν αὐλητικῶν νόμων ἱππόθορον ἐκάλουν, μέλος τι τοῖς ἵπποις ὁρμῆς ἐπεγερτικὸν ὡς ἔοικεν ἐνδιδόν τε (Babbitt: ἐνδιδόντα MSS) πρὸς (Re.: περί MSS) τὰς ὀχείας, and cf. Aelian. N.A. XII 44 ἔστι δὲ ἄρα τοῦτο αὔλημα, ὅπερ οὖν τὰς μὲν

ἵππους τὰς θηλείας ἐς ἔρωτα ἐμβάλλει καὶ οἶσθρον ἀφροδίσιον, τοὺς δὲ ἄρρενας μίγνυσθαι αὐταῖς ἐκμαίνει, id. XV 25 ἐν Μυσοῖς δὲ τῶν θηλειῶν ἵππων ἀναβαινομένων ἐπηύλουν τινές, οἷον ὑμέναιόν τινὰ τοῦτον τοῖς τῶν ἵππων γάμοις ἐπάδοντες; Clem. Paed. II 41.2 ταῖς δὲ ἵπποις μιγνυμέναις οἷον ὑμέναιος ἐπαυλεῖται νόμος abAmdiac: ἱππόθορον τοῦτον κεκλήκασιν οἱ μουσικοί; Eur. Alc. 577 βοσκήμασι σοῖσι συρίζων ποιμνίτας ὑμεναίους; Etym. Mag. 145.46 τὸν

ἱπποθόρον ὃν ἄδουσι Φρύγες ἐπεὶ ὀχοῦνται ἵπποι. -- Doe. would add μιγνυμέναις (otov ὑμέναιος» from Clem. without good reason; the difference indicates that Clem. did not use Plut. as his source; cf. the preceding lemma.

704 F ὁ δὲ Πίνδαρός φησι κεκινῆσθαι πρὸς φδὴν ἁλίου δελφῖνος ὑπόκρισιν [τὸν μὲν ἀκύμονος ἐν πόντου πελάγει) αὐλῶν ἐκίνησ᾽ ἐρατὸν μέλος: Fre. 140b.15—17 Snell, frg. 125.69-71 Bowra, Plut. also quotes these lines at De soll. an. 984 C. The poem has also been partly preserved on papyrus (P. Oxy. III 408 b). Cf. Sept. sap. 162 F τουτὶ γὰρ

ἤδη πάντες ἴσμεν, ὅτι μουσικῇ τὰ ζῷα ταῦτα χαίρει καὶ διώκει, καὶ παρανήχεται τοῖς ἐλαυνομένοις πρὸς δὴν καὶ αὐλὸν ἐν εὐδίᾳ πο-

ρείαις τερπόμενα; Plin. XI 137. -- The excellent hearing of the dolphin has been documented by recent experiments.

705 A ὀρχούμενοι δὲ τοὺς ὥτους αἱροῦσι, χαίροντας τῇ ὄψει καὶ μιμητικῶς ἄμα δεῦρο κἀκεῖσε τοὺς ὥμους συνδιαφέροντας: Hu.,

Po. corrected ὦπας MSS; cf. De ad. et am. 52 B 6 μὲν γὰρ ὦτος, ὡς ἔοικε, μιμεῖσθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐπιχειρῶν ἁλίσκεται συγκινούμε-

νος καὶ συνορχούμενος, De soll. an. 961 E ὁ δ᾽ ὦτος αὖ πάλιν ἁλίσκεται γοητευόμενος, ὀρχουμένων

ἐν ὄψει μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἅμα

72

TABLE TALKS VII 5

705 A

ῥυθμῷ γλιχόμενος τοὺς ὥμους συνδιαστρέφειν. The bird is the eared or horned owl; cf. Ps. -Arist. H.A. 597 b 22 ὁ δ᾽ ὦτος ὅμοιος ταῖς

γλανξὶ καὶ περὶ τὰ ὦτα πτερύγιον ἔχων. ... ἔστι δὲ κοβάλος καὶ μιμητὴς καὶ ἀντορχούμενος ἁλίσκεται περιελθόντος θατέρου τῶν

θηρευτῶν; Athen. 390 F ὁ ὦτος ... ἔχει τε περὶ τὰ ὦτα πτερύγια, διὸ καὶ ὦτος καλεῖται ... μιμητὴς ἀνθρώπων

ἀντορχούμενος γοῦν

ἁλίσκεται; Plin. X 68 otus bubone minor est ... auribus plumeis eminentibus, unde et nomen illi ... imitatrix avis ac parasita et quodam modo saltatrix. capitur haut difficulter. The corruption of the word in our text is probably due to confusion with ox@y. Re. would read σκῶπας, which might be right; the two species are rather similar, as

are the descriptions of them: Athen. 391 A τὸ δ᾽ αὐτὸ ποιεῖν λέγουσι καὶ τοὺς sxOnuc: καὶ γὰρ τούτους ὀρχήσει λόγος ἁλίσκεσθαι. κτλ.; Aelian. N.A. XV 28 λέγουσι δὲ Kai τοὺς σκῶπας ... καὶ ἐκείνους ἁλίσκεσθαι ὁὀρχήσει κτλ. See Thompson, Birds*, 262--264, 3398.

705 A οὐδὲν οὖν ὁρῶ τὰς τοιαύτας ἡδονὰς ἴδιον ἐχούσας, (ἢ) ὅτε Addition Tum., and Madv. who pointed out that Plut. often has οὐδεὶς 3i instead of οὐδεὶς ἄλλος ἤ; cf. Brut. 43.4, Cleom. 13.9, Nic. 15.4, Tib. Gracch. 6.6, Cic. 18.1, De gen. Socr. 576 C.

705 A μόναι τῆς ψυχῆς εἰσιν, αἱ δ᾽ ἄλλαι τοῦ σώματος καὶ περὶ τὸ σῶμα καταλήγουσιν: Callistratus’ (Plutarch’s) point is: the difference between the two kinds of pleasure is not as fundamental as Aristotle maintained. The boundary line is not between human and animal but between soul and body. The pleasures produced by sight and hearing are psychic by nature, while the others have their basis in the body. Plut. also expresses this idea at 672 Ε διὰ λόγων εὐφραΐίνοντες ἀλλήλους, àὧν σώματι μέτεστιν οὐδὲνν ἢἢ βραχὺ παντάπασιν ... μαρτυροῦσι καὶ (αύ)γτας ἡδονὰς μόνας εἶναι τῆς ψυχῆς, ἐκείνας δ᾽ ἀλλοτρίας, προσαναχρωννυμένας τῷ σώματι.

705 A παραμειψάμεναι τὴν αἴσθησιν ἐν τῷ χαίροντι τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπερείδονται τὸ ἐπιθερπὲς καὶ γαργαλίζον: Unlike the ‘bodily’ pleasures, which arise in the organs of perception, those of sight and hearing go beyond the physical level, the sense organs, and take root in the soul, thus receiving a more refined and also more lasting character. This is how Callistratus tries to maintain that such pleasures are free from incontinence.

705A

TABLE TALKS VII 5

73

705 A ὅθεν οὐδεμία τῶν τοιούτων ἡδονῶν ἀπόκρυφός ἐστιν οὐδὲ σκότους δεομένη καὶ τῶν τοίχων περιθεόντων, ὡς οἱ Κυρηναϊκοὶ λέγουσιν: οἱ Κυρηναῖκοί Doe. (Vind. 24): αἱ γυναῖκες MSS, by reference to Sept. sap. 158 F ἀφροδισίων δὲ νύκτα καὶ πολὺ προβάλλονται σκότος. Doe. referred to the close parallel at Non posse 1089 A

(-Aristipp. frg. 240 Manneb.) ὅρα δ᾽ ὅσῳ μετριώτερον οἱ Kupnvaikot, καθάπερ ἐκ μιᾶς οἰνοχόης Ἐπικούρῳ πεπωκότες, οὐδ᾽ ὁμιλεῖν ἀφρο-

δισίοις οἴονται δεῖν μετὰ φωτὸς ἀλλὰ σκότος προθεμένους, κτλ. Plut. discusses the subject above, 654 D, see ad loc.

705 B οὐκ ἀκρασίας δήπου καὶ ἡδυπαθείας ἀλλ᾽ ἐλευθερίου διατριβῆς καὶ ἀστείας μάρτυρας ἡμῶν ὅτι πλείστους λαμβανόντων: This description of the spectacles of the theatre is idealized. Comedy, Satyric plays and mimes were certainly not without incontinence and gross sensuality. This is well documented through the negative attitude shown by Roman writers. Theatre performances and even athletic contests were regarded by them as foreign wantonness and effeminate corruption; cf. Sen. Quaest. nat. VII 32.3 stat per successores Pyladis et Bathylli domus, ... privatum urbe tota sonat pulpitum: in hoc viri, in hoc feminae tripudiant; mares inter se uxoresque contendunt, uter det latus mollius; Suet. Aug. 45.4 nam histrionum licentiam adeo compescuit, ut etc., Dom. 8.3 suspecta correctione morum licentiam theatralem promiscue in equite spectandi imbuit; Juv. XIV 256 monstro voluptatem egregiam, cui nulla theatra, | nulla aequare queas praetoris pulpita lauti; Tac. Anz. XIV 20. See further M. Wistrand, Entertainment and Violence in Ancient Rome (Góteborg 1992) 30—40.

705 B Καλλιστράτου εἰπόντος: For hiatus, by proper names and in other environments, see above, on 704 A.

705 B οὐκ ὀρθῶς oi παλαιοὶ παῖδα Λήθης τὸν Διόνυσον (ἔδει γὰρ πατέρα) προσαγορεύειν: The connection between Lethe and Dionysus is only scarcely attested; cf. above, on 612 D, and see Philipp, RE s.v. Lethe, 2143.42.

705 BC τῶν περὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς ἀμαρτανομένων τὰ μὲν ἀκρασία τὰ δ᾽ ἄγνοια ποιεῖ καὶ παρόρασις, xvÀ.: Lamprias’ (Plutarch’s) argumentation here (705 C—E) is not clear or consistent. His reasoning has

connections but no parallels in Arist. Eth. Nic. VII where the concepts of σωφροσύνη versus ἀκολασία, and ἐγκράτεια versus ἀκράτεια, are

74

TABLE TALKS VIL5

705 BC

treated. The aspect of ἄγνοια, which Plut. makes a basic one here, is only mentioned by Arist. Eth. Nic. 1136 a 5-9 from another point of

view, namely whether a fault is pardonable or not: τῶν δ᾽ ἀκουσίων tà μέν ἐστι συγγνωμονικὰ τὰ δ᾽ oo cvyyvopovix&: ὅσα μὲν γὰρ μὴ μόνον ἀγνοοῦντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ 6v ἄγνοιαν ἁμαρτάνουσι, συγγνωμονι-

κά, ὅσα δὲ μὴ δι᾽ ἄγνοιαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγνοοῦντες μὲν διὰ πάθος δὲ μήτε φυσικὸν μήτ᾽ ἀνθρώπινον, od συγγνωμονικά, The difference between ἀκολασία, ‘intemperance’, and ἀκράτεια, ‘incontinence’, is distinguished at Eth. Nic. 1152 a 4 ὅμοιοι δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀκρατὴς καὶ ὁ ἀκόλαστος, ἕτεροι μὲν ὄντες, ἀμφότεροι δὲ τὰ σωματικὰ ἡδέα διώκουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν (sc. ἀκρατὴς) καὶ οἰόμενος δεῖν, ὁ δ᾽ οὐκ οἰόμενος. Plut. discusses the two concepts in a similar way in De virt. mor. 445 B-446 C. The intemperate does not even try to resist his impulses: 445 E ἡ δ᾽ ἀκρασία

τῷ μὲν λόγῳ σῴζει τὴν κρίσιν ὀρθὴν οὖσαν, τῷ δὲ πάθει φέρεται παρὰ τὴν κρίσιν ἰσχύοντι τοῦ λόγου μᾶλλον. ὅθεν διαφέρει τῆς ἀκολασίας: ὅπου μὲν γὰρ ἡττᾶται τοῦ πάθους ὁ λογισμὸς ὅπου δ᾽ οὐδὲ μάχεται, xvÀ. Plut. describes the incontinent in the same way in our passage, but he does not contrast him with the intemperate but tries to establish another kind of transgressor, i.e. he who is ignorant of (a) the

negative consequences of faults (706 C), and of (b) the latent risks of the impressions of hearing and sight (705 D-E). Plutarch’s description of this kind of faulty people is, however, inconsistent, seeing that, in spite of their ignorance of the risks, they are said to be on guard against them; 705 Ὁ ἀντιτεταγμένους αὐταῖς (καὶ ὅπως οὐχ ἁλώσονται [καὶ] προσέχοντας.

705 C ταῦτ᾽ ἀκρασίᾳ καταβιαζόμενοι τὸν λογισμὸν ἐξαμαρτάvovaoıv: The wording recalls Non posse 1093 B ἡδονῆς ἀκρασία τις

εἶναι καὶ ῥύσις ἐκβιαζομένη τὸν λογισμόν. 705 C ὡς Θεοδέκτην ἐκεῖνον εἰπόντα χαῖρε φίλον φῶς ὀφθαλε μιῶντα, τῆς ἐρωμένης ἐπιφανείσης: This individual is unknown. The saying is interpreted in an entirely different way by the paroemiographers: Zenob. V1 42 χαῖρε φίλον φῶς" γραῦς θέλουσα ἀκολασταΐίνειν

γυμνή, ἵνα μὴ τὴν ῥάκωσιν τοῦ σώματος

ἐλέγξῃ, τὸν λύχνον

ἀποσβέσασα εἶπε, χαῖρε φίλον φῶς; Diogenian. VIII 70; Apostol. XVIII 14; Suda X 157 χαῖρε φίλον φῶς" γυναῖκα βουλομένην ἀκολασταίνειν σβέσασαν τὴν λύχνον, φασὶ τοῦτο εἰπεῖν. οἱ δὲ αἰσχράν,

ἄλλοι γραῦν. The phrase is used in quite another context and with a different connotation by Eurip. Jph. Aul.

1508

(Iphigeneia

speaking)

705 C

TABLE TALKS VII 5

75

ἕτερον αἰῶνα καὶ μοῖραν οἰκήσομεν. | χαῖρε μοι, φίλον φάος. It must be left open whether Plutarch’s use of the saying is the original one or not. Such a phrase may have been used for different situations and with different meanings and references. It seems probable, however, that Plutarch's version is the original one and that it was used ironically of the obscure Theodectes who had lost his sight through ophthalmia, allegedly caused by sexual indulgence, but nevertheless persisted in enjoying it. For the idea that eye diseases may be due to sexual intemperance, see above, on 633 CD. The contagiousness of eye diseases was well known; cf. Cons. ux. 610 C καὶ τῷ μὲν ὀφθαλμιῶντι τὰς χεῖρας οὐκ ἐῶσι προσάγειν τὸν βουλόμενον οὐδὲ ἅπτονται τοῦ φλεγμαίνοντος.

705 CD τὸν ᾿Αβδηρίτην ᾿Ανάξαρχον, ὅς ῥα καὶ εἰδώς, | ὡς φάσαν, ἄθλιος ἔσχε, κτλ. : Anaxarchus the sophist accompanied Alexander on his Persian campaign. According to Arrian. An. IV 10.6 and Plut. Alex. 28.4, he encouraged Alexander’s belief in his divinity; cf. Philodem. De vitiis IV 5.6 (=Anax. frg. A 7 DK$ II 238), while Aelian. VH. IX 37 and Diog. Laert. IX 60 assert that he tried to divert him from his fancy. Plut. also cites him below, 737 A, and he mentions him at De tranqu. an. 466 D, and De virt. mor. 449 E. — The verses by Timon Phleiasius (frg. 58 Diels, Poet. philos. frag. p. 199) are quoted more fully at De virt. mor. 446 B, where Plut. likewise mentions him as a man who was unable to control his passions. His unstable character is suggested by Philodem. Lc. who describes his attitude to Alexander as being ambivalent: [ἀντειϊκὼν yalp τῷ ᾿Α]λεξάνδρῳ δί[ιότι στέ]ρ[γ]ει τοῖς κόλαξιν, ἐπήνει [πάλιν ἀλλὰ μ]ὴν πρέπει τοῦτο τοῖς ἀπὸ Διός.

705 D ὅσαι δὲ τῶν ἡδονῶν τοὺς περὶ γαστέρα ... ἀντιτεταγμένους αὐταῖς (kai) ὅπως οὐχ ἁλώσονται [καὶ] προσέχοντας ἐκπεριοδεύουσαι περὶ τὰ ὄμματα καὶ τὰ ὦτα λανθάνουσιν ἐνῳκισμέναι καὶ λοχῶσαι, (τού)τους ... [καὶ] ἀκρατεῖς ὁμοίως οὐ καλοῦμεν: This anacoluthic sentence has undergone several corruptions. Madv. transposed koi, and Amyot, Re. emended (tob)toug. The deletion of

καί before ἀκρατεῖς is palaeographically preferable to the conjecture

ἀκολαστοὺς μέν, ἀκρατεῖς (δ᾽) Wytt. To change ὁμοίως into ὅμως (Wytt., Madv.) or to delete the word (Hartm.) seems unnecessary. Turn.,

Amyot

corrected

ἐκπεριοδεῦσαι

MSS.

— The

dependency

of the

ἀκόλαστος on the sensual pleasures is emphasized by Clem. Paed. II 67.3 πάντοθεν γὰρ ἀγώγιμος ὁ ἀκόλαστος καὶ ἀπὸ ἐδωδῆς καὶ ἀπὸ

76

TABLE TALKS VII 5

705 Ὁ

στρωμνῆς καὶ ἀπὸ συναναστροφῆς καὶ ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν Kal ἐκ τῶν Stwv καὶ ἐκ τῶν γνάθων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τῶν μυκτήρων. The ἀκόλαστος is by definition a person who is ignorant of the evil and unchecked in his behaviour. He is always described as a person who does not even

try to resist the enticement of the senses; cf. Arist. Eth. Nic. 1146 b 22 ὁ μὲν γὰρ (sc. ἀκόλαστος) ἄγεται προαιρούμενος, νομίζων ἀεὶ δεῖν

τὸ παρὸν ἡδὺ διώκειν - ὁ δ᾽ (sc. ἀκρατὴς) οὐκ οἴεται μέν, διώκει δέ; Plut. De virt. mor. 446 Β τῷ γὰρ ὄντι πλησίστιος μὲν ἐπὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς ὁ ἀκόλαστος ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν φέρεται καὶ δίδωσιν ἑαυτὸν καὶ συνκατευθύνει, 446 C οὔτε γὰρ ὁ σοφὸς ἐγκρατὴς ἀλλὰ σώφρων, οὔθ᾽ὁ ἀμαθὴς ἀκρατὴς ἀλλ᾽ ἀκόλαστος" ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἥδεται τοῖς καλοῖς ὁ δ᾽ οὐκ ἄχθεται τοῖς αἰσχροῖς; Sol. 21.2 τὸ γὰρ μηδαμοῦ κρατεῖν ὀργῆς ἀπαίδευτον καὶ ἀκόλαστον. In our passage Plut. contaminates the two concepts, ἀκρατής and ἀκόλαστος, when he describes ἀκόλαστος as being on guard against pleasures. Cf. above, on 705 BC.

705 D od γὰρ εἰδότες ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἀπειρίαν ὑποφέρονται: The importance of experience and practical training is stressed; theoretical knowledge of ethics is not sufficient. This was observed by Arist. Eth.

Nic. 1152 ἃ 8 ἔτι od τῷ εἰδέναι μόνον φρόνιμος ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ πρακτικὸς: ὁ δ᾽ ἀκρατὴς οὐ πρακτικός. -- For the pejorative connotation of ὑποφέρεσθαι, cf. De virt. mor. 441 A ἔοικε δὲ καὶ Ζήνων εἰς τοῦτό πως (sc. the abolition of the unity οἵ ἀρετή) ὑποφέρεσθαι ὁ Κιτιεύς, Alcib. 18.8 ἀκολάστων νέων εἰς ὕβριν ἐκ παιδιᾶς ὑποφερομένων, De Pyth. or. 397 C, De vit. pud. 536 D.

705 D ἂν (ἐν) θεάτροις ἄσιτοι καὶ ἄποτοι διημερεύσωσιν: At the great dramatic contests in classical Athens it was natural and necessary for the spectators to take some food and drink during the performances because of their long duration. People either brought provisions with them to the theatre, or sometimes the chorus-leaders distributed wine and cakes to the audience. In later times when the performances were shorter this practice may have been less common. Anyhow, the reference here is certainly to the contemporary use. Cf. Athen. 464 E ἡμεῖς

ovv, ὡς καὶ παρ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίοις ἐγίνετο, ἅμα ἀκροώμενοι τῶν yeAotoποιῶν τούτων καὶ μίμων, ἔτι δὲ τῶν ἄλλων τεχνιτῶν ὑποπίνωμεν. λέγει δὲ περὶ τούτων ὁ Φιλόχορος οὑτωσί: ᾿Αθηναῖοι τοῖς Διονυσιακοῖς ἀγῶσι ὁ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἠριστηκότες καὶ πεπωκότες ἐβάδιζοὸν ἐπὶ τὴν θέαν ..., παρὰ δὲ τὸν ἀγῶνα πάντα οἶνος αὐτοῖς ᾧνοχοεῖτο καὶ τραγήματα παρεφέρετο, ... μαρτυρεῖν δὲ τούτοις καὶ

705 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VII 5

77

Φερεκράτη τὸν κωμικόν, Str μέχρι τῆς καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἡλικίας οὐκ ἀσίτους εἶναι τοὺς θεωροῦντας. A late piece of evidence is found on

IG VII 2712.74 (c. 210 A.D.) μηδένα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φιλανθρωπίας βουλόμενος &p[o]tpov γενέσθαι, ἔν te [τ]αῖ[ς] γεινομέναις θεωρίαις τοῦ θυμελικοῦ πάντας τοὺς [θε]ωμένους καὶ τοὺς συνελθόντας ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων ἐγλύκισεν £v τῷ θεάτρῳ, [πέ]μματά [te] ἐποίησεν μεγά-

λα καὶ πολυτελῆ, ὡς διάκουστα καὶ ἐν ταῖς πέρι[ξ] πόλεσιν τὰ δαπανήματα αὐτοῦ γενέσθαι. -- The argument is rather curious; only those who visit the theatre for the first time are inexperienced in the influences of sight and hearing, while the iterative construction represents them as habitués at the theatre.

705 DE ὥσπερ εἰ τῶν κεραμίων μέγα ppovoin τὸ {μὴ ἀπὸ) τῆς γαστρὸς αἰρόμενον ἢ τοῦ πυθμένος, ἐκ δὲ τῶν ὥτων ῥᾳδίως peταφερόμενον: Amyot, Xyl., Faehse added the negation; Mez., Bern.

added (μὴ ἀπόν which is more probable than {μὴ £x) Dübn. The simile is almost certainly a modification of one used by Bion Chrys., quoted

by Plut. De vit. pud. 536 A διὸ καὶ Βίων ἀπείκαζε τοὺς τοιούτους (sc. τοὺς ἀκολακεύτους) ἀμφορεῦσιν ἀπὸ TOV ὥτων ῥᾳδίως μεταφερομένοις. J. F. Kindstrand, Bion of Borysthenes (Uppsala 1976) 260 notices that the play on the double meaning of οὖς is an example of Bion's fondness of such plays on words; see o.c. p. 31f.

705 E ὅθεν ᾿Αρκεσίλαος οὐδὲν ἔφη διαφέρειν τοῖς ὄπισθεν εἶναι κίναιδον ἢ τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν: Plut. also quotes this saying of Arcesilaus at De tu. san. 126 A where he apologizes for using it in that context, which is about luxury in cooking. Here it fits better into the context. Gell. III 5 cites Plut. (=frg.

181

Sandb.)

for reporting that

Arcesilaus directed it to a voluptuous, but not perverse, rich man. Sandbach suggests that Gellius took it from our passage and invented that setting for it. To me it seems instead that exactly Gellius’ setting may well be the original one. Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 318 observed

that Gellius does not quote the jest from Plut. and assumes that both derived it from a collection of hypomnemata. Cf. also Cato ap. Cic. De or. Il 256 si tu et adversus et aversus impudicus es, without reference to Arcesilaus. — A. was famous for his ready wit; see above, on 634 A.

705 E δεῖ δὴ καὶ thy ἐν ὄμμασι καὶ thy ἐν ὠσὶν γαργαλίζουσαν μαλακίαν καὶ ἡδυπάθειαν φοβεῖσθαι: Doe. unnecessarily deleted the art. before ἐν ὠσίν; cf. above, on 704 D ἀνεπήδων. -- Cf. Clem.

78

TABLE TALKS VII 5

705 E

Paed. Yl 41.3 πᾶσαν δὲ ἁπαξαπλῶς ἀνελεύθερον ὄψιν τε καὶ ἀκοὴν καὶ συνελόντι φάναι αἴσθησιν ἀκρασίας αἰσχράν, τὴν ὡς ἀληθῶς ἀναισθησίαν, ἐκκοπτέον εὖ μάλα, τὴν ἐν ὄμμασιν καὶ ἐν ὠσὶν γαργαλίζουσαν καὶ ἀποθηλύνουσαν ἡδονὴν εὐλαβουμένους; Strom. VI 90.2 περιττὴ δὲ μουσικὴ ἀποπτυστέα T] κατακλῶσα τὰς ψυχὰς καὶ εἰς ποικιλίαν ἐμβάλλουσα τοτὲ μὲν θρηνώδη, τοτὲ δὲ ἀκόλαστον καὶ ἡδυποιθῆ, τοτὲ δὲ ἐκβακχευομένην καὶ μανικήν.

705 E καὶ μήτε πόλιν ἀνάλωτον νομίζειν τὴν τὰς ἄλλας πύλας .. ὀχυρὰς ἔχουσαν, εἰ διὰ μιᾶς οἱ πολέμιοι παρελθόντες ἔνδον εἰσίν: ἔχουσαν Tum., Basil.: ἐχούσης MSS; Hu. convincingly substituted εἰ for ἄν. — Plut. uses this door image rather often; see above, on 645 E. 705 F (τὰ) τῶν μελῶν κτλ.: Addition Hu., preferable to (διὰ 7. y.

Wil.; the appositional article completes an elegant chiasmic construction and also marks the correlate of τούτοις more explicitly. Hu. com-

pares Clem. Paed. 1141.3 μελῶν γάρ tor κατεαγότων Kai ῥυθμῶν yoἐρῶν τῆς μούσης τῆς Καρικῆς αἱ ποικίλαι φαρμακεῖαι διαφθείρουσιν τοὺς τρόπους ἀκολάστῳ καὶ κακοτέχνῳ μουσικῇ εἰς πάθος ὑποσύρουσαι. It is noticeable that Plut. makes ἥδοναί the subject instead of the φάρμακα themselves.

705 F οὔτε τι μεμπτὸν οὔτ᾽ ὧν μεταλλακτόν, ὡς Πίνδαρος ἔφη, ..b00" ἀγλαὰ χθὼν πόντου te ῥιπαὶ φέρουσιν: Frg. 220 Snell, 207 Bowra, of uncertain localization. Clem. Paed. II 3.2 perhaps alludes to

these lines: οἱ γαστρίμαργοι τοῖς ὄψοις. ἐπικεχήνασιν, ὅσα τε χθὼν πόντου τε βένθη καὶ ἀέρος ἀμέτρητον εὖρος ἐκτρέφει. 706 A τὴν οἰκίαν, εἰ μὴ καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἅπασαν: Delphi was certainly a very small ‘city’, so the suggestion may not be too unrealistic.

706 A ἅτε δὴ μή, καθάπερ αἱ περὶ γεῦσιν καὶ ἁφὴν καὶ ὄσφρησιν, εἰς τὸ ἄλογον καὶ φυσικὸν ἀποτελευτῶσαι τῆς ψυχῆς, ἀλλὰ τοῦ κρίνοντος ἁπτόμεναι καὶ τοῦ φρονοῦντος: Hu. unnecessarily deleted the art. before φρονοῦντος. Plutarch’s use of the article is not entirely regular; see above, on 681 D (omission of art.), and below, on 708 D, 710 Ὁ (superfluous art.). - Lamprias here indicates fairly clearly that the target of his vigorous criticism is the Annicerian fraction of the

Cyrenaic school. Anniceris seems to have opposed Aristippus and other

706 A

TABLE TALKS VII 5

79

early Cyrenaics and emphasized the part played by the soul in feeling pleasure. Cf. Diog. Laert. II 90 (=frg. 189 Manneb.) λέγουσι δὲ (sc. oi

Kopnvacikoi) μηδὲ κατὰ ψιλὴν τὴν ὅρασιν ἢ τὴν ἀκοὴν γίνεσθαι ἤδονάς. τῶν γοῦν μιμουμένων θρήνους ἡδέως ἀκούομεν, τῶν δ᾽ κατ᾽ ἀλήθειαν

ἀηδῶς,

and

above,

674

A

τεκμήριόν

ἐστι

μέγα

τοῖς

Κυρηναϊκοῖς πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοῦ μὴ περὶ τὴν ὄψιν εἶναι μηδὲ περὶ τὴν ἀκοὴν ἀλλὰ περὶ τὴν διάνοιαν ἡμῶν τὸ ἡδόμενον ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀκούσμασι καὶ θεάμασιν, see ad loc. The opinion of Anniceris that the mind, instead of checking and reducing the pleasures of the senses, even intensifies them Lamprias exploits rather shrewdly for his purpose, to discredit and brand scenic performances as more immoral than other influences. — The dualistic conception of the soul recalls Aristotle’s theory, which forms the basis of Plutarch’s treatise De virt. mor.

706 B ταῖς μὲν ἄλλαις ἡδυπαθείαις κἂν ὁ λογισμὸς ἐλλίπῃ διαμαχόμενος κτλ.: Plut. De virt. mor. 445 B describes the struggle of reason against the desires: ὁ λογισμὸς ἡνιοχεῖ καὶ μεταχειρίζεται, περὶ

τὰς ἐπιθυμίας χρώμενος ὑπείκοντι καὶ δεχομένῳ τὸ μέτριον καὶ τὸ εὔσχημον ἑκουσίως ὁ δ᾽ ἐγκρατὴς ἄγει μὲν ἐρρωμένῳ τῷ λογισμῷ

καὶ κρατοῦντι τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν, ἄγει δ᾽ οὐκ ἀλύπως οὐδὲ πειθομένην ἀλλὰ πλαγίαν καὶ ἀντιτείνουσαν κτλ.

706 B καὶ γὰρ ἐν ἰχθύων ἀγορᾷ μικρολογία καθαιρεῖ δάκτυλον ὀψοφάγου: Fish was by far the most expensive delicacy; see above, on 668 B.

706 B καὶ πολυτελοῦς

ἑταίρας ἀπέστρεψε

φιλαργυρία φιλο-

γυνίαν; Paronomasia, especially in compound words, is a common characteristic of Cynic writings; see J. F. Kindstrand, Bion of Borysthenes (Uppsala 1976) 33. The occurrence of this figure here may be due to the use of Bion as a source; see above, on 705 DE. -- The amounts demanded by prostitutes are not known. In Athens they were bound to pay a poll-tax, πορνικὸν τέλος, which was collected by special officials called by the nick-name πορνοτελῶναι; cf. Aeschin. I 119; Philonides ap. Poll. VII 202, IX 29; Philonides frg. 5 PCG. According to Suda A 528 the amounts were individually differentiated by the ἀγο-

ρανόμοι: διάγραμμα: τὸ μίσθωμα. διέγραφον γὰρ oi ἀγορανόμοι, ὅσον ἔδει λαμβάνειν τὴν ἑταίραν ἑκάστην. Busolt, Staatskunde? II 1118 n. 4 doubts this statement, while Philipp, RE s.v. Πορνικὸν τέλος considers it credible.

80

TABLE TALKS VII 5

106 B

706 B παρὰ τῷ Μενάνδρῳ [παρὰ] τῶν συμποτῶν ἕκαστος ἐπιβου.λευόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ πορνοβοσκοῦ σοβαράν τινα παιδίσκην ἐπάγοντος αὐτοῖς, κύψας καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τῶν τραγημάτων ἔφλα: Frg. 607 Kock, 741 Korte, from an unidentified comedy. Plut. also quotes this line at De tu. san. 133 B in a context where it fits better than here. This line

may also be what is alluded to at Ps.-Plut. De lib. educ. 5 B οἱ δέ τινες ἑταΐρας καὶ χαμαιτύπας λυτροῦνται σοβαρὰς καὶ πολυτελεῖς. — For

the meaning of cofapdc, cf. Aristophon frg. 11.4 (II 280 Kock) ὡς δὲ Mow ἦν θρασὺς | καὶ σοβαρὸς (sc. Ἔρως); Phot. s.v. σοβαρός- ... αὐθάδης, ἔξω τοῦ δέοντος φερόμενος. ... οἱ μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς Συβαριτῶν ἀρχῆς τὸ ὄνομα; Suda Σ 754 σοβάδες: διώκουσαι πόρναι; Schol. Aristoph. Pax 812a

σοβάδας ... τὰς πόρνας λέγουσιν (Eupolis frg. 373 PCG). 706 B χαλεπὸν γὰρ ὁ δανεισμὸς τῆς ἀκρασίας κόλασμα, καὶ τὸ

λῦσαι βαλάντιον οὐ πάνυ ῥάδιον: A rather far-fetched and invented notion; the prospect of falling into the disasters of insolvency cannot be a very Strong factor of resistance to massive temptations of incontinency. The phrase concerning the purse seems to be intended to make the picture more vivid.

706 C ταύταις δὲ ταῖς ἐλευθερίαις λεγομέναις {περ ὦτα καὶ ὄμματα φιλομούσοις καὶ φιλαύλοις μουσομανίαις: Bern. proposed ἐλευθερίοις, but Plut. also has the feminine form at Apophth. Lac. 221 C thy ἐλευθερίαν δίκην. Lamprias (Plut.) here takes μουσομανία ironically in a pejorative sense, ‘excessive, insane absorption in music’,

‘possession by music’, as at Athen. 183 E ᾿Αλέξανδρος δὲ ... ἐν τῷ τριγώνῳ ἐπικαλουμένῳ Ῥωμαίους μουσομανεῖν

ὀργάνῳ οὕτως ἐποίησε πάντας τοὺς ὡς τοὺς πολλοὺς καὶ ἀπομνημονεύειν

αὑτοῦ τὰ κρούσματα; cf. Poll. IV 52 ποιητὴς ... κάτοχος ἐκ μουσῶν, μουσομανῶν, ἐμμανὴς εἰς ποίησιν. Athen. 464 D-E enumerates several other kinds of possession, or madness: γυναϊικομανία,

ὀρτυγο-

μανία, ὀρνιθομανία, ὀψομανία, οἰνομανία, all of them denoting states of absorption in pleasures, This is a distortion and a banal use of the notion of μανία as compared with the sense given to the word by Plat. Phaedr. 245 A τρίτη δὲ ἀπὸ Μουσῶν κατοκωχή te καὶ μανία, λαβοῦσα ἀπαλὴν καὶ ἄβατον ψυχῆν, ἐγείρουσα καὶ ἐκβακχεύουσα κατὰ τε ᾧδὰς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἄλλην ποίησιν, κτλ.

706 C ὅθεν ἕτοιμον τὸ διαφθαρῆναι τοῖς μὴ βοηθοῦντα καὶ πανδαγωγοῦντα τὸν λογισμὸν ἔχουσι: Plut. treats of the relations be-

706 C

TABLE TALKS VII 5

81

tween the different parts of the soul in De virt. mor. He surveys the doctrines of Pythagoras (441 D—E), Plato (441 F-442 A), and Aristotle (442 B-C), and then discusses the impulses and assaults of the illogical part. He maintains that in principle reason is able to withstand the passions:

442 C οἱ δὲ θαυμάζοντες ὅπως ἄλογον μέν ἐστι λόγῳ δ᾽ ὑπήκοον οὔ μοι δοκοῦσι τοῦ λόγου περινοεῖν τὴν δύναμιν, ὅση πέφυκε καὶ ἐφ᾽ ὅσον διέρχεται τῷ κρατεῖν καὶ ἄγειν xvA., 442 D ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ὁρμὴ γένηται, σείσαντος ὥσπερ ἡνίας τοῦ λογισμοῦ πάντα τέταται καὶ συνῆκται καὶ ὑπακούει, 448 Ὁ ὁ γὰρ νουθετῶν αὑτὸν ἐρῶντα χρῆται

τῷ λογισμῷ πρὸς τὸ πάθος, ὡς ἀμφοτέρων ἐνόντων ἅμα τῇ ψυχῇ. Αἱ 443 Β Plut. calls attention to the fact that animals, which by definition lack reason, subordinate themselves to the reason of man and follow advice and commands, a fact that Plut. regards as a proof of the power of reason over the illogical part of the soul. The defeatist attitude shown by Lamprias thus appears as quite different from Plutarch’s opinion. His extreme view of the power of music and scenic performances in general seems to be unparalleled.

706 € γενομένης οὖν σιωπῆς, ti οὖν, ἔφην, xtÀ.: Xyl. interpreted Plut. as the speaker; only g has ἔφην: ἔφη P. Amyot would add ἔφη (ὁ Καλλίστρατοφ), but, besides that it is hard to see why the name should have fallen out, it is probable that one of the guests raised this short question of how to act, and not the host himself. Cf. below, on 706 D ὁσάκις,

706 C od γὰρ ἀμφωτίδας ye περιθήσει τὰς Ξενοκράτους ἡμῖν: Frg. 96 Heinze, also quoted at De aud. poet. 38 AB τῇ μὲν γὰρ κακίᾳ πολ-

λὰ χωρία καὶ μέρη tod σώματος παρέχει δι᾽ αὐτῶν ἐνδῦσαν ἅψα-

σθαι τῆς ψυχῆς, τῇ δ᾽ ἀρετῇ μία λαβὴ τὰ ὦτα τῶν νέων ἐστίν, ἂν ἦ καθαρὰ καὶ ἄθρυπτα κολακείᾳ καὶ λόγοις ἄθικτα φαύλοις ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς φυλάττηται, διὸ καὶ Ξενοκράτης τοῖς παισὶ μᾶλλον ἢ τοῖς ἀθληταῖς ἐκέλευε περιάπτειν ἀμφωτίδας. Cf. Clem. Paed. Wi 492 πρὸς δὲ τὴν ἀκοὴν τῶν αἰσχρῶν .. «ὁ θεῖος. παιδαγωγὸς κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ

τοῖς παλαίουσι τῶν παιδίων, ὡς μὴ τὰ ὦτα θραύοιτο αὐτῶν, τοὺς σώφρονας περιτίθησι λόγους καθάπερ ἀντωτίδας. The ear-protectors were made of bronze according to Etym. Mag. 93.12 ἀμφωτίδες: χαλKG τινα, ἅπερ oi παλαισταὶ toic ὠσὶ περιετίθεσαν; cf. Poll. X 175 ἀμφωτίδες᾽ εἶεν ἂν ἐκ τῶν σκευῶν; Paus. Att. frg. 108 (52) Erbse ἀμφωτίδες" ἃς ἔχουσιν oi παλαισταὶ περὶ τοῖς ὠσίν; Aesch. frg. 102 Nauck?. It is questionable that these ear-lappets were made of bronze,

82

TABLE TALKS VII 5

706 C

which would hurt the antagonist. Also the fact that such protection was only used in training and by boys speaks in favour of some softer material, probably leather; see E. N. Gardiner, Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals (London 1910) 433 fig. 149, and cf. p. 105 fig. 17. In public

competitions such means of protection were never used. The rules of combat sports in antiquity were far less rigorous than the modern ones. Consequently, injuries were probably common; see M. B. Poliakoff, Combat Sports in the Ancient World (New Haven-London 1987) 25—30, 54—63, 68-88. A somewhat more moderate evaluation of the evidence for injuries is maintained by E. N. Gardiner, Athletics of the Ancient World (Oxford 1930) 181, 197—204, 208—211, 212f. See further

H.

A.

Harris,

Greek

Athletes

and

Athletics

105-109, id. Sports in Greece and Rome (London

(London

1964)

1972) 24f. — For

Plutarch's interest in Xenocrates and his frequent quotation of him, see above, on 668 C. 706 CD οὐδ’ ἀναστήσει μεταξὺ δειποῦντας, ἐὰν αἰσθώμεθα λύρας ἁρμοζομένης ἢ κινουμένων αὐλῶν: The case of the guest who takes offence and leaves the party is a common τόπος; cf. below, 710 D ἐκβάλωμεν thy τοιαύτην χάριν καὶ διατριβὴν ἐκ τῶν συμ-

ποσίων ἢ ἀπίωμεν, ὥσπερ τὰς Σειρῆνας ἐπιούσας φεύγοντες; Plut. describes such an incident at Sept. sap. 148 EF, and at De coh. ira 461 D. See J. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 101—106. — At Coni. praec. 143 D Plut. seems to support the extreme opinion that even the lyre should be excluded from drinking-parties, but cf. below, on 710 E ψαλτρίας appoCopevns.

706 D ὁσάκις ἂν εἰς τὰς Σειρῆνας ἐμπέσωμεν, ἐπικαλεῖσθαι δεῖ τὰς Μούσας καὶ καταφεύγειν εἰς τὸν Ἑλικῶνα τὸν τῶν παλαιῶν: Σειρῆνας Wytt: εἰρημένας, cf. 710 D. -- It is noticeable that Lamprias, and not Plut., concludes this vivid discussion. Lamprias here speaks in quite another way than before. His poetic and rhetorical short speech has an unmistakable Plutarchean ring. Lamprias virtually continues in the mode initiated by the preceding speaker, who thus proves to be Plut.; cf. on 706 C γενομένης οὖν σιωπῆς, and see K. Korus, Program wychowawczy Plutarcha z Cheronei (Wroclaw 1978) 85. — For the symbolic meaning of the Muses and the Sirens representing good and bad music respectively, cf. Clem. Strom. I 48.6 Μούσας Σειρήνων ἡδίους ἡγεῖσθαι Πυθαγόρας παραινεῖ, τὰς σοφίας ἀσκεῖν μὴ μετὰ ἡδονῆς διδάσκων, ἀπατηλὸν δὲ τὴν ἄλλην

106 Ὁ

TABLE TALKS VII 5

83

διελέγχων ψυχαγωγίαν; Stob. III 5.30 (III 265 H.) δεῖ ὥσπερ Σειρῆνας τὰς ἡδονὰς παρελθεῖν τὸν σπεύδοντα τὴν ἀρετὴν ἰδεῖν ὥσπερ πατρίδα; Philodem. Rhet. II p. 145 (frg. III) Sudhaus πολλοὺς

δὲ τὸ τῶν ['A]Onvàv περὶ τὴν φιλοσοφίαν ἐντεθουσιακὸς (sic) καὶ τρέφον ἀμυθήτους κατέσχε ποικίλῃ σείρηνι (sic) καὶ τῶν ἀκροάσεῶν καὶ τῶν ἐκεῖ διαδοχῶν. 706 D ἐρῶντι μὲν γὰρ πολυτελοῦς οὐκ ἔστι ... συνοικίσαι τὴν Πάνθειαν: Pantheia, the Babylonian wife of the Persian king Abradatas, is described or mentioned by Xenophon in Cyr IV 6.11, V 1.2-6, VI 1.31-34, 4.2-11, VII 3.2-16. Plut. mentions her at De aud.

poet. 31 C and De prof. in viri. 84 F. Her personality made her belong to the stock examples in literature of the faithful and beautiful woman: Dion Chrys. LXIV (47) 1; Philostr. Im. 11 9 ; Lucian. 7m. 10.20; Tzetz.

Hist. ΠῚ 597; Suda X 877 Σωτήριχος, who wrote a book about Pantheia.

706 D φδαῖς κακοτέχνοις καὶ κακοζήλοις: The rhetorical term κακόζηλος, ‘of affective, excessive style’, is mostly used of the bombastic Asian style; cf. Plut. Anton. 2.8 ἐχρῆτο δὲ τῷ καλουμένῳ μὲν ᾿Ασιανῷ ζήλῳ τῶν λόγων, ἀνθοῦντι μάλιστα Kat’ ἐκεῖνον τὸν xpóvov; Strab. XIV 1.41 Ἡγησίας τε ὁ ῥήτωρ, ὃς ἦρξε μάλιστα τοῦ

᾿Ασιανοῦ λεγομένου ζήλου, παραφθείρας τὸ καθεστηκὸς ἔθος τὸ ᾿Αττικόν; Ps.-Long.

3.2

ἐποκέλλοντες

δὲ εἰς τὸ

panıköv

καὶ

κακόζηλον; Diog. Laert. 1 38 ῥήτωρ Καλλατιανός, κακόζηλος. Cf., on the other hand, Plut. Lyc. 21.1 οὐχ ἧττον ἐσπουδάζετο τῆς ἐν λόγοις εὐζηλίας καὶ καθαριότητος. Hermogenes has a chapter on the term: Rhet. Gr. ΠῚ 178-181 Walz.

706 D τὸν Πίνδαρον xoi τὸν Μένανδρον: Both belong to Plutarch's favourite poets, as he shows through frequent quotations; see Helmbold-O'Neil. According to Lamprias’ Catal. no. 36 he wrote a Πινδάρου βίος, and perhaps a Comparison between Aristophanes and Menander, of which Mor. 853 A-854 D is possibly a fragment. Below, 712 B-D, Plutarch's friend, Diogenianus, praises the style and content of Menander's plays, which were certainly very popular as convivial

entertainment: 712 B ὡς μᾶλλον ἂν οἴνου χωρὶς ἢ Μενάνδρου διακυβερνῆσαι τὸν πότον. For Plutarch’s preference of Men. to Aristoph., see A. Plebe, La teoria del comico (Torino 1952) 104—111; R. Jeuckens,

Plutarch von Chaeronea 62-68.

und die Rhetorik (Diss. Strassburg

1907)

84

TABLE TALKS VII 5

706 D

706 D ποτίμῳ λόγῳ ἁλμυρὰν ἀκοήν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Πλάτων, ἀποκλυζόνενον: Phaedr. 243 D, also quoted below, 711 D and at De esu carn. 997 F-998 A. Above, 627 F, there is probably a paraphrase of the passage, and an allusion is found at Athen. 121 EF.

706 E ὥσπερ γὰρ οἱ μάγοι τοὺς δαιμονιζομένους κελεύουσι τὰ ᾿Εφέσια γράμματα πρὸς αὑτοὺς καταλέγειν καὶ ὀνομάζειν: The ‘Ephesian letters’ were a magic formula consisting of six words. It was probably rather old; it is first mentioned in the Comedy: Anaxilas, frg. 18 (II 268 K.), and Men. frg. 371 K. Hesych. s.v. enumerates the six

words: ἄσκιον, κατάσκιον, λίξ, τετράξ, δαμναμενεύς, αἴσιον, and reports an explanation, which according to Clem. Strom. V 45.2 was due to the Pythagorean Androcydes (4th c.): ᾿Ανδροκύδης γοῦν ὁ

Πυθαγορικὸς τὰ Ἐφέσια καλούμενα γράμματα ἐν πολλοῖς δὴ πολυθρύλητα ὄντα συμβόλων ἔχειν φησὶ τάξιν. σημαίνειν δὲ ἄσκιον μὲν τὸ σκότος, ... φῶς δὲ κατάσκιον, ...λίξ τέ ἐστιν ἡ γῆ ... τετρὰξὁ ἐνιαυτὸς ..., δαμναμενεὺς δὲ ὁ ἥλιος ὁ δαμνάζων, τὰ αἴσιά τε ἡ ἀληθὴς φωνή, cf. Strom. 1 73.1. In reality the formula was probably meaningless, like most other such magic rigmaroles as are found in great numbers in papyri; see Wessely, Denkschriften der Kais. Ak. d. Wiss.

zu Wien, Philos.-hist. Kl. 36 (1888) 55.408,

114.2778

ἐησεὺς ὄνυξ περίφρων δαμναμενεὺς KtAr., 116.2845

ἄλκιμος

δῶκε δέ σοι

φορέειν ὄφρ᾽ ἔμπεδα πάντα μένοιεν: δάμνω δαμνομένεια δαμνάσανδρα δαμνοδάμνια, 129.77, 142.71; id. Denkschr. 42 (1893) 27.220 δαμναμενεὺς ἀκραμμαχαμαρεῖ, 53,999. Similar formulae are also found on Attic defixiones; see A. Audollant, Defixionum tabellae (Paris 1904); E. Ziebarth, Nachrichten v. d. kin. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. zu Göttingen, Philol.-hist. KL, 1899, pp. 105-135, id. Sitzungsberichte d.

preuss. Ak. d. Wiss, Philos.-hist. KL,

1934, pp.

1022-1059. The

‘Ephesian letters’ were used for apotropaic and protective purposes. King Croesus is said to have pronounced them on the pyre: Suda E 3864; Eustath. /f, 1864.19; Etym. Mag. 402.23. Only Plut. states that they were used for exorcism. The popularity of the formula made it proverbial; cf. Diogenian. IV 78; Apostol. VIII 17, XI 29. See further Wytt.

ad Mor. 85 B; Schultz, Philol. 68 (1909) 217-228; Geigenmüller, Neue

Jahrbüch. 24 (1921) 260; Kuhnert, RE s.v. Ἐφέσια γράμματα. 706 E τερετίσμασι καὶ σκιρτήμασι: τερετίσματα is used of various kinds of imprecise musical or verbal sounds or humming, often together

with κρούματα: cf. Lucian. Nig. 15 ὅστις ἀκούων τέρπεται Kpov-

706 E

TABLE TALKS VII 5

85

μάτων τε καὶ τερετισμάτων καὶ διεφθορότων ἀσμάτων, id. Salt. 63 αὐλῷ τε καὶ τερετίσμασι καὶ τῇ τῶν ἀδόντων εὐφωνίᾳ; Clem. Paed. III 80.4 κρουμάτων καὶ τερετισμάτων ἐρωτικῶν αὐλῳδίας τε καὶ xpotov. Arist. An. post. 83 a 33 uses this word of Plato’s ideas: τὰ γὰρ εἴδη χαιρέτω" τερετίσματά TE γάρ ἐστι, καὶ εἰ ἔστιν, οὐδὲν πρὸς TOV λόγον ἐστίν, which is commented upon by Joh. Philop. CAG XIII 3 p. 242.14 Wallies τερετίσματα δὲ καλοῦνται τὰ προδιαψηλαφήματα τῶν κιθαρῳδῶν τὰ ἄναρθρα δοκιμασίας ἕνεκεν τῆς ἀπηχήσεως τῶν χορδῶν γινόμενα.

706 E μανίαις τ᾽ ἀλαλαῖς τ᾽ ὀρινόμενοι ῥιψαύχενι σὺν κλόνῳ: Pind. Dithyr. II (frg. 70b).13 Snell, frg. 61.10 Bowra. Turn., Amyot,

Steph. corrected μανίαι 7’ ἀλαλαί τ᾿ MSS. Part of the dithyramb is preserved on papyrus (P. Berol. 9571*".44—55), where the lines run: μανίαι τ᾽ ἀλαλαΐ τ᾽ ὀρίνεται ῥιψαύχενι] σὺν κλόνῳ. The line is also quoted by Plut. above, 623 B, De Pyth. or. 417 C, and by Euseb. Praep. ev. V 4.3, again with slight modifications of the wording to suit the context.

706 E παραβάλλοντες φδὰς καὶ ποιήματα καὶ λόγους κοινούς: Minar’s correction γενναίους: κενούς MSS may be acceptable, but κουνούς Bern. should be preferred for palaeographic/phonetic reasons and because of the meaning. Other emendations, σεμνούς Wytt., supported by Hartm., (ob) κενούς Madv., ἱκανούς Hu., are less persuasive. The meaning of λόγοι κοινοῖ is ‘conversations in which all guests take part’. Plut. expresses his ideas of active participation of the guests in the community over wine. Since here they have to counterbalance musical performances, Plut. here also adduces their singing and recitations, besides their discussions. The community of convivial talk is a predominant theme in the Talks; see above, on 614 E δεῖ yap.

706 E οὐδὲ πλαγίους παραδώσομεν ἑαυτούς, ὥσπερ ὑπὸ ῥεύματος λείου, φέρεσθαι: This image taken from the sphere of sea, streams and winds Plut. also uses below, 713 B ὥσπερ ῥεύματι φέρειν ὑπολαμβάνοντι, De aud. poet. 28 D μὴ παντὶ λόγῳ πλάγιον ὥσπερ πνεύματι παραδιδοὺς ἑαυτόν, Coriol. 34.3 ὥσπερ ὑπὸ ῥεύματος

φέρεσθαι τοῦ πάθους ξαυτὸν ἐνδεδωκώς, frg. 178 p. 320.1 Sandb. τῆς ψυχῆς ὥσπερ ἀπὸ ῥεύματος λείου καὶ βαθέος ὑποφερομένης, De soll. an. 990 F τὰ δ᾽ ἐν ὑμῖν ἀκόλαστα ... ὥσπερ ὑπὸ ῥεύματος ἐκφερόμε-

VO πολλαχοῦ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις, Sept. sap. 159 B. The idea that music

86

TABLE TALKS VII 5

706 E

without words to be sung may carry away the mind of the listeners in an

uncontrolled way also appears below, 713 B.

TALK 6

The topic of this conversation is typically convivial. The question whether or not an invited guest might bring with him another, uninvited, person was presumably a popular and traditional theme to discuss over the wine. Plutarch marks the long history of the custom in the introduction by referring to Menelaus who went uninvited to the meeting arranged by Agamemnon, although this is a case of going αὐτόματος, and not secondarily invited. The next example, which was entirely to be expected, is the classical one: Aristodemus who went to Agathon's dinner in Plato's Symposion. The dramatic place of the talk seems to be Rome. Caesernius, the son-in-law of Florus, is the host; see 708 A, The conversation is calm, without distinct differences of opinions between the speakers.

706 F τὸν Μενέλαον “Ὅμηρος πεποίηκεν αὐτόματον ἑστιῶντι τοὺς ἀριστεῖς τῷ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι παραγινόμενον- ἤδεε γὰρ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀδελφεὸν ὡς ἐπονεῖτο: The lack of introductory characteristics and environmental presentation of the talk in this initial sentence, which extends as far as ἔχωσιν by the end of 706 F, was presumably the reason why the scribes attached it to the preceding talk. Also the quotation directly at the beginning of a new talk occurring on another occasion than the preceding one, and without an introductory phrase, is striking and unparalleled. Only I 5 begins with a quotation but this forms the subject-matter to be discussed: πῶς εἴρηται τὸ ...

ἐζητεῖτο παρὰ Σοσσίῳ κτλ. Here the standard introductory phrase ἐζητεῖτο does not appear until the next sentence. It is noticeable that, in spite of the fact that the Menelaus case is not an example of a ‘shadow" coming together with an invited guest, it is cited here. Elsewhere the fact that he was αὐτόματος is always recognized as significant; cf. Athen. 177 C. Macrob. Sat. 17.10 contrasts the two kinds of uninvited guests: supervenire fabulis non evocatos haud equidem turpe existimatur; verum. sponte inruere in convivium aliis praeparatum nec Homero sine nota yel in fratre memoratum est, et vide ne nimium arroganter tres tibi velis Menelaos contigisse, cum illi tanto regi unus evenent. Cf. also above, 616 C, and see ad loc. See next lemma.

707 A

TABLE TALKS VII 6

87

707 A τὸ δὲ τῶν ἐπικλήτων ἔθος: Considering the long, curious initíal sentence, Franke thought that a connective clause had fallen out

and conjectured: (περὶ τούτων ποτὲ λόγων γενομένων ἐν συμποσίῳ

αὐτὸ μὲν τοῦτο πᾶς τις ἐπήνειυ), τὸ δὲ τῶν κτλ. The addition might be plausible, but it is hard to explain how the clause could fall out. It seems to me that the initial sentence could be an addition made by Plut. himself after he had written the talk, in order to give it a poetic prelude, without observing that it does not fit into the context. — Xylander's idea, followed by Kaltw., that the sentence has its proper place at the end of the talk is not convincing. The fact that Plut. speaks of αὐτόκλητοι at the end of the talk (709 EF) is no reason for trans-

position.

707 A ods νῦν σκιὰς καλοῦσιν: Cf. Hor. Sat. II 8.22 quas Maecenas adduxerat umbras, Ep. I 5.28. The Greek word σκιά is not found in this sense before Plut. Our passage suggests that the use was recent in Greek, whereas the Latin word is attested in this sense earlier. This is thus an early example of the rare Latin influence on Greek.

707 A ἐδόκει δ᾽ ἀπὸ Σωκράτους, ᾿Αριστόδημον ἀναπείσαντος οὐ κεκλημένον εἰς ᾿Αγάθωνος ἰέναι σὺν αὐτῷ: This episode, Plat. Symp. 174 AB, was also mentioned above, 645 F.

707 B περὶ τὰς τῶν ξένων ὑποδοχάς, μάλιστα τῶν ἡγεμονικῶν: For the great receptions arranged in honour of prominent persons, see above, on 678 C. Here the reference is to Roman officials, especially proconsuls; see above, on 679 C, and cf. below, 708 A, B, 712 A.

707 B ὅπως μὴ πάθωσιν ὃ παθεῖν συνέπεσε τῷ δεχομένῳ tov βασιλέα Φίλιππον KtA.: Plut. tells this story at De tu. san. 123 F and Reg. apophth. 178 D ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ τινος ξένου κληθεὶς ἐπὶ δεῖπνον ἐν

ὁδῷ πολλοὺς ἐπήγετο καὶ τὸν ξένον ἑώρα θορυβούμενον (ἦν γὰρ οὐχ ἱκανὰ τὰ παρεσκευασμένα), προπέμπων τῶν φίλων ἑκάστῳ, πλα-

κοῦντι χώραν ἐκέλευεν ἀπολιπεῖν. οἱ δὲ πειθόμενοι καὶ προσδοκῶντες οὐκ ἤσθιον πολλά, καὶ πᾶσιν οὕτως ἤρκεσεν. -- The πλακοῦς ((πτλακόεις) sc. ἄρτος was a cake, usually of flat shape and often with a delicate crust, frequently of cheese; cf. Anth. Pal. VI 155.3 πλακόεντα |... πίονα tupoqópov; Aristoph. Ach. 1126 κἀμοὶ πλα-

Kobvtoc topóvotov δὸς κύκλον. A variant was made with sesame; cf. Aristoph. Ach. 1092 ἄμυλοι, πλακοῦντες, σησαμοῦντες, Thesm. 570

88

TABLE TALKS VII 6

7078

τὸν σησαμοῦνθ᾽ ὃν κατέφαγες, τοῦτον χεσεῖν ποιήσω, and there were a great number of other variants; see Orth, RE s.v. Kuchen, 2088-2090.

707 C ἐμοῦ ... ἀδολεσχοῦντος: For this expression, concluding the introduction of the topic and challenging the guests to take part in the discussion; see above, on 664 D.

707 C ἔδοξε Φλώρῳ καὶ σπουδάσαι τι περὶ τῶν σκιῶν λεγομένων: Tt would seem that Florus is the host at this banquet, seeing that he proposes the topic, as he does in V 10, and cf. also VII 4, where he initiates the talk in his function of host. There, as here, his son-in-law is present (Minar translates ‘brother-in-law’ by mistake here, but correctly at 702 D). However, the statement by Caesernius at 708 A διὸ καλῶν μὲν

ἑταίρους ἔδωκα τόπον σκιαῖς indicates that it is he who is the host. The dramatic place of the banquet is probably Rome, as in Talk 4. 707 C ὁ μὲν οὖν γαμβρὸς αὐτοῦ Καισέρνιος: This son-in-law of Florus is probably identical with Γαῖος 6 Φλώρου γαμβρός who contributes to the discussion in V 7 (682 F); see Groag, PIR? C 178. The name

Caesernius is frequent in Aquileia. C. P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (Oxford 1972) 48 suggests that both he and his father-in-law came from northern Italy.

707 C τῷ Ἡσιόδῳ πειθομένους ἔφη χρῆναι τόν φιλέοντ᾽ ἐπὶ Saito. καλεῖν εἰ δὲ μή, γρωρίμους αὑτῶν καὶ ἐπιτηδείους παρακαλεῖν: What follows after the short quotation of Erga 342 is like a paraphrase

of ]. 343 τὸν δὲ μάλιστα καλεῖν ὅς τις σέθεν ἐγγύθι ναίει. — Hu. rightly corrected αὐτῶν MSS. The reference is to the inviters, the subject of πειθομένους, not to the invited, which Po. argued by reference to 708 B.

707 C ἐπὶ κοινωνίαν σπουδῆς καὶ τραπέζης καὶ λόγων ἐν οἴνῳ ye νομένων καὶ φιλοφροσύνης: The importance of community of speech as well as of food and drink at banquets is frequently repeated by Plut. in the Talks; see above, on 614 E Set γάρ.

707 C donep, εἶπεν, οἱ τὰ πλοῖα ναυλοῦντες, ὅ τι ἂν φέρῃ τις, ἐμβάλλεσθαι παρέχουσιν, οὕτως κτλι: It was the practice according to Roman law to charter the means of transport, e.g. ships. The contractor was allowed to decide freely on kind and quantity of the goods to be transported; see Corp. lur. Civ, Dig. XIV 1.1.15, XIV 2.10;

WTC

TABLE TALKS VII 6

89

Herdlitczka, RE Suppl. VI 387. 39-52. — For the comparison of the banquet with a ship, see above, on 678 D, and 679 C.

707 D ἔτι γε μᾶλλον αἰσχύνη βαδίζειν πρὸς τοῦτον ὥσπερ ἐξελέγχοντα μετέχειν τῶν ἐκείνου τρόπον τινὰ βίᾳ καὶ ἄκοντος: Kaltw, in his translation, Faehse, Po., Hu., Minar added (kai) μετέχειν. However, the addition is uncalled for; the comparative clause may be ta-

ken separately, as Xyl. interpreted, who supplemented καί before ὥσπερ, unnecessarily, however: for asyndeton in comparative clauses, cf. Plat. Rep. 557 C κινδυνεύει, ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, καλλίστη αὕτη τῶν πολιτειῶν

εἶναι" ὥσπερ ἱμάτιον ποικίλον . ., οὕτω καὶ αὕτη πᾶσιν ἤθεσι πεποικιλμένη καλλίστη ἂν φαίνοιτο, Gorg. 448 E οὐδεὶς ἠρώτα ... ὅντινα

δέοι καλεῖν τὸν Γοργίαν: ὥσπερ τὰ ἔμπροσθέν σοι ὑπετείνατο Χαιρεφῶν. See Kühner-Gerth? II 344.

707 D ὡς οὐ(κ ἄγκλητος: This conjecture, suggested by Kaltw. in his translation, and by Bases, is clearly preferable to οὐζκ αὐτόγκλητος Re., as Hu. rightly argues.

707 E παραφυλάττειν ἄλειμμα καὶ λουτρὸν ἑτέρου: People who had servants at their disposal were attended by them in the baths. They washed, rubbed and dried, plucked hair and anointed hair and body. Anointing was done not only after the bath, cf. Gal. X 481 K.

ἐπαλείφειν δὲ ἐλαίῳ μετὰ tà λουτρὰ χάριν τοῦ μὴ διαπνεῖσθαι πλέον τοῦ προσήκοντος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμπεφράχθαι τοῦ δέρματος τοὺς πόρους, but also before and during the sweating bath: Suet. Aug. 82.2 unguebatur enim saepius aut sudabat ad flamman, deinde perfundebatur

egelida aqua; Oribas. Coll. med. X 1.2021 xoi μὴ ἄγαν ξηρὸν χρίεσθαι τὸ σῶμα. ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἐσκέφθαι, εἴτε ἱδρώσαντι τῷ λουομέμῳ περιχεῖν προσήκει τὸ ἔλαιον, εἴτε καὶ πρὶν ἱδρῶσαι παpaypfina μετὰ τὸ ἀποδύσασθαι, KtA.; Petron. Cena Trim. 28 itaque intravimus balneum, et sudore calfacti momento temporis ad frigidam eximus, iam Trimalchio unguento perfusus tergebatur, non linteis, sed palliis ex lana mollissima factis. tres interim iatraliptae in conspectu eius Falernum potabant. People with no servants had either to bathe without assistance or to be attended by other people.

707 E ἀνελεύθερον εὖ μάλα καὶ Γναθώνειον, ei δὴ Γνάθων yéyove δεινότατος ἀνθρώπων τἀλλότρια δειπνεῖν: Gnathon is the parasite par préférence in the New Comedy. Long. Daph. 4.11 (Erot. Script.

90

TABLE TALKS VII 6

707 E

Graec. 1310 Hersch.) describes him: ὁ δ᾽ Γνάθων, οἷα μαθὼν ἐσθίειν ἄνθρωπος καὶ πίνειν εἰς μέθην καὶ λαγνεύειν μετὰ τὴν μέθην καὶ οὐδὲν ἄλλο v ἢ γνάθος καὶ γαστὴρ καὶ τὰ ὑπὸ γαστέρα. According to Plut. De lar, viv. 1128 B he was ἃ Sicilian. This figure was typified so with ‘parasite’:

that his name was used as an appellative synonymous

Ter. Eun. 264 vocabula, ut parasiti item Gnathonici vocentur.

707 E ἔτι ye μὴν οὐκ ἔστιν ὅτε μᾶλλον ἀνθρώποις ἔπεισιν εἰπεῖν: The correction ἔτι Re.: oVoU/et(7) MSS is convincing, although the preceding sentence also begins with ἔτι. Diibn., Bern., Hu., Minar adopt ἐφιᾶσιν Wytt.: Eginow MSS except E that has ἔφεισιν. However, ἔπειow Madv., ‘in mentem venit’, ‘libet’, seems to be preferable for palaeographic as well as semantic reasons. The meaning of ἐφιᾶσι, ‘permit’ or ‘incite’, seems to fit in less well with the quotation. Minar interprets the sentence without good reason as a rhetorical question and his translation is mistaken.

707 E (ὦ) γλῶσσα, μέτριον εἴ τι κομπάσαι θέλεις, | ἔξειπε: It is uncertain whether this line derives from a tragedy

(Adesp.

frg. 398

Nauck?, TrGF It 119) or a comedy (Adesp. frg. 1228 Kock) The latter

seems the more probable. In the present context the line represents and illustrates the moment of jesting in the conversation of the company.

707 E καὶ παρρησία πλείστη μετὰ παιδιᾶς ἀναμέμικται τοῖς Ae γομένοις ἐν οἴνῳ καὶ πραττομένοις; The freedom of speech and jesting over the wine is a topic often treated in the Talks; cf. above, on 613 C, and 644 Ε The wine puts people into a mood of jesting without malevolence: De coh. ira 456 E οὐδὲν γὰρ ὁ ἄκρατος ἀκόλαστον οὕτω

καὶ δυσχερὲς ὡς ὁ θυμὸς ἀναδίδωσι: κἀκεῖνα μὲν γέλωτι καὶ παιδιᾷ μέλει, ταῦτα δὲ χολῇ κέκραται: καὶ παρὰ πότον ἐπαχθὴς τοῖς συνοῦσι καὶ φορτικός.

μὲν ὁ σιωπῶν

707 E μὴ γνήσιος Gv und’ αὐτόκλητος: The use of αὐτόκλητος here is curious; elsewhere the word means ‘self-invited’ = ‘uninvited’, as be-

iow, 709 EF. Here the meaning must be ‘personally/specially invited’, which seems to be unparalleled.

707 E νόθος καὶ παρεγγεγραμμένος εἰς τὸ συμπόσιον: Both terms denote base, illegal status, at the level of family and state respectively.

For the second one, cf. Etym. Mag. 654.37 παρεγγεγραμμένος- ὁ μὴ

NITE

TABLE TALKS VII 6

91

κατὰ νόμον τοῖς πολίταις τεταγμένος. ... παρεγγράπτους δὲ νόθους; Harpocrat. s.v. διαψήφισις ἰδίως λέγεται ἐπὶ τῶν ἐν τοῖς δήμοις ἐξε-

τάσεων, αἵ γίγνονται περὶ ἑκάστου τῶν δημοτευομένων, εἰ τῷ ὄντι πολίτης καὶ δημότης ἢ παρεγγέγραπται ξένος dv; Aeschin. II 76 Κλεοφῶν δὲ ὁ λυροποιός, ὃν πολλοὶ δεδεμένον ἐν πέδαις ἐμνημόνευον, παρεγγραφεὶς αἰσχρῶς πολίτης καὶ διεφθαρκὼς νομῇ χρημάτων τὸν δῆμον; Lucian. Bis accus. 27.

107 F εὐσυκοφάντητον: This may be an innovation by Plut.; the word is not found earlier.

707 F προσεθίζει γὰρ εἰς τὰ ἔργα τὸ τῷ αἰσχρῷ ῥᾳδίως ὑπὸ τῶν ῥημάτων ἄγεσθαι: I propose this reading, implying only a very slight correction, the transposition of τό, which, however, seems to restore the

text: τῷ αἰσχρῷ τό MSS. The changes προεθίζει and (mpo)dyeodan Post are unnecessary; for the second verb, cf. Plat. Rep. 431 C τὰς δέ ye

ἁπλᾶς te καὶ μετρίας (sc. NSovec), αἵ δὴ μετὰ vod τε καὶ δόξης ὀρθῆς λογισμῷ ἄγονται. The sentence may be translated: ‘To be readily influenced through indignity (caused) by words inures one to indulge in (corresponding) deeds.’ Conjectures made by Re., Emp., Bern. (see Hu. app.) are mistaken. Cast. Gnomon

17 (1941) 256 considered the text

sound apparently because he misconceived the sentence. The thought is expressed similarly at Clem. Paed. 1I 45.4 ὁ τῶν γελοίων λόγος ... διὰ τῶν ὀνομάτων αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὰ αἰσχρὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐθίζων, and II 52.1 τὸ

γὰρ ἐν τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ἀτακτεῖν μελέτην ἐμποιεῖ τοῦ καὶ εἰς τὰ ἔργα ἀκοσμεῖν; Muson. frg. 26 Hense ἀρχὴ τοῦ μὴ κατοκνεῖν τὰ ἀσχήμονα (npörtewv) τὸ μὴ κατοκνεῖν τὰ ἀσχήμονα λέγειν; Plat. Crat. 435 E κατὰ τοῦτο δή μοι δοκεῖς λέγειν, ὡς ὃς ἂν τὰ ὀνόματα εἰδῇ εἴσεται καὶ

τὰ πράγματα; Plut. De Is. et Os. 379 ( ὅθεν ἄριστα λέγεται παρὰ τοῖς φιλοσόφοις τὸ τοὺς μὴ μανθάνοντας ὀρθῶς ἀκούειν ὀνομάτων κακῶς χρῆσθαι καὶ τοῖς πράγμασιν. Cf. also Plat. Phaed. 115 E τὸ μὴ καλῶς λέγειν οὐ μόνον εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο πλημμελές, ἀλλὰ καὶ κακόν τι

ἐμποιεῖ ταῖς ψυχαῖς. 708 A διὸ καλῶν μὲν ἑταίρους ἔδωκα τόπον σκιαῖς, ἰσχυρὰ γὰρ ἡ τῆς πόλεως συνήθεια καὶ δυσπαραίτητος: With this sentence Caesernius indicates that he is the host and that the dramatic place of the banquet is Rome. -- The word umbra is used in the sense in question by Hor. Sat. II 8.22, Ep. 15.28. The custom was certainly considerably older.

92

TABLE TALKS VII 6

708 A

708 A τὸ δὲ καλεῖν οὕτως ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ἐν ταῖς τῶν ξένων

ὑποδοχαῖς, ὥσπερ εἴρηται πρότερον: Le. at 707 B, see ad loc. 708 A οὔτε γὰρ ἄνευ φίλων ἑστιᾶν ἐπιεικὲς οὔτε γινώσκειν οἷς ἔχων ἥκει ῥάδιον: Castiglioni in his review of Hubert’s edition, Gnomon

17 (1941) 256f. propounded the obviously correct emendation

ἑστιᾶν: ἐστὶ δή MSS. Cast. points out that the particle has no function and that an inf. as counterpart of γινώσκειν is to be expected. Also the

hiatus δὴ ἐπιεικές is a further indication of corruption, though a slight one, seeing that Plut. occasionally tolerated hiatus after δή; cf. De exil. 601 D δὶ) ἀληθῶς. Cast. refers to two palaeographic parallels in the Talks: 686 C εἰς αἰτίαν (ἑστιᾶν Wytt.), and 732 C ἑστιᾶν (ἐστιν ἄν Basil.).

708 Β οὔτε γὰρ διδόναι καλὸν (ὃ αἰτεῖν) οὔτ᾽ αἰτεῖν ὃ διδόναι μὴ καθῆκεν: Hu. and Minar rightly print the addition (Mez.). A simplifying solution advanced by Emp., οὔτε γὰρ διδόναι καλὸν ὃ αἰτεῖν [ὃ διδόναι] μὴ καθῆκεν, is palaeographically less probable. The omission is more likely than the addition.

708 B τὰ μὲν οὖν πρὸς ἡγεμόνας ἢ ξένους οὐκ ἔχει κλῆσιν οὐδ᾽ αἵρεσιν: By ἡγεμόνες Plut. refers to Roman dignitaries, especially proconsuls. He repeatedly expresses his aversion to great, official banquets; cf. 707 B, 710 A, and see above, on 678 C.

708 C οὐ μὴν ἀλλ᾽ ἔστιν ὅτε ποιητέον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ, [xoi] καθάπερ oi θεῷ θύοντες ἅμα συμβώμοις καὶ συννάοις κοινῶς συνεπεύχονται καὶ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐκείνων μὴ ὀνομάζοντες: The deletion (Amyot, Mez.) was adopted by most eds., probably rightly, although it would also be possible to preserve the word and accept the sentence as slightly anacoluthic. ~ Amyot, Xyl. corrected σὺν βωμοῖς kai σὺν ναοῖς MSS. Plut. also has the two words above, 679 D. There the reference to the sacrificial customs is less adequate than here; see ad loc. At Sept. sap. 158 C the table

is described as φιλίων θεῶν βωμὸν οὖσαν καὶ ξενίων. 708 ( ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν ὄψοις καὶ πέμμασιν οἵοις ὁ μέλλων ἑστιᾶσθαι μάλιστα χαίρει ... ἐρωτᾶν καὶ διαπυνθάνεσθαι φορτικὸν κομιδῇ καὶ νεόκλουτον: Turn., Amyot would change into ὄψα καὶ πέμματα, It is true that inverse attraction of the dative case of the rel. pron. seldom

occurs. Cf. Plat. Men. 70 C οὐδενὶ ὅτῳ οὐκ ἀποκρινόμενος (Ξοὐδείς

708 C

TABLE TALKS VII 6

93

ἐστιν, ὅτῳ), see Kühner-Gerth? II 413f., but a scribe is unlikely to have changed into the dative. The correction οἵοις Re.: οἷς MSS is plausible. - Plutarch also expresses his contempt for the behaviour of the newly

rich above, 634 B, C, see ad locc., and cf. Luc. 40.1 νεόπλουτα δ᾽ ἣν τοῦ Λευκόλλου τὰ δεῖπνα τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, οὐ μόνον στρωμναῖς ἁλουργέσι ..., ἀλλ᾽ ὄψων τε παντοδαπῶν καὶ πεμμάτων περιττῶς διαπεπονημένων παρασκευαῖς ζηλωτὸν ἀνελευθέροις ποιοῦντας ἑαυτόν. e

¢

708 C αὐτὸν παρακαλεῖν ἐκείνων, οἷς ἂν ἥδιστα συγγίνοιτο καὶ

μεθ᾽ ὧν εὐφραίνεται παρόντων

μάλιστα: Hartm. approves of

Bernardakis’ changes into συγγίγνηται and εὐφραίνηται. There are, however, numerous examples in Plut. of the iterative opt. being used instead of the subj., as well as of contamination of the cases. See A. Hein,

De optativi apud Plutarchum usu (Diss. Breslau 1914) 120-126.

708 D οὔτε γὰρ τὸ συμπλεῖν οὔτε τὸ συνοικεῖν οὔτε τὸ ovvδικάζειν ped’ ὧν οὐ βούλεταί τις οὕτως ἀηδὲς ὡς τὸ συνδειπνεῖν, καὶ τοὐναντίον ἡδύ κοινωνία γάρ ἐστι ... τὸ συμπόσιον: This idea of agreeable community and congeniality of friends at dinner and wine is frequently repeated by Plut. in the Talks; cf., e.g., 615 A, 617 C, 643 B, 660 B, 697 D, 723 A, 726 E; see on 614 E. A different position is taken and pleaded by Lamprias at 618 E.-- The comparison with seafaring is found at Sept. sap. 148 A ἔφη i γὰρ ὅτι σύμπλουν

óἀγνώμονα δεῖ

φέρειν καὶ σύσκηνον οἷς πλεῖν ἀνάγκη καὶ στρατεύεσθαι- τὸ δὲ συμπόταις ἑαυτὸν ὡς ἔτυχε καταμιγνύειν οὐ νοῦν ἔχοντος ἀνδρός ἐστιν, Plut. very frequently uses comparisons with seafaring and metaphors taken from the sphere of the sea; see Fuhrm. Images, 49f., 61, and see above, on 707 C.

708 D ὅθεν ob τοὺς τυχόντας ἀλλὰ [τοὺς] προσφιλεῖς εἶναι δεῖ καὶ συνήθεις ἀλλήλοις, ὡς ἡδέως συνεσομένους: This sentence has been suspected because of the banal εἶναι. Wytt. would replace it

by συνεῖναι or καλεῖν, Hu. proposed μειγνύναι, and Cast. Gnomon 17 (1941) 257 συναγεῖραι. Wil. instead deleted the art. before προσφιλεῖς. However, the text is perhaps sound. To delete the art. is plausible but not absolutely necessary. Plutarch’s use is rather varied; cf. above, 665 D,

where Cast. o.c. 256 unnecessarily deletes the art.: ἔδοξε τῷ πάθει μᾶλλον ἢ τέχνῃ κεχρῆσθαι. If something is actually wrong with the text, it would be that a word with the meaning ‘diners’, συνδείπνους or

94

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 6

708 Ὁ

συμπότας is missing. Minar renders it in his translation. A possible reading would be: ἀλλὰ [τοὺς] προσφιλεῖς εἶναι δεῖ (τοὺς

συνδείπνουρ καὶ κτλ. 708 D ὄψα μὲν γὰρ οἱ μάγειροι σκευάζουσιν ἐκ χυμῶν διαφόρων, αὐστηρὰ καὶ λιπαρὰ καὶ γλυκέα καὶ δριμέα συγκεραννύντες: The four flavours are arranged in a both contrastive and chiasmic way. — Seeing that the place of this banquet was probably Rome, see above, on 707 C and 708 A, the reference may be to the contemporary Roman cooking which was very sophisticated and luxurious. This cuisine had certainly also been introduced in Greece. Plut. often expresses his dislike of exaggerated artificiality and elaboration in cooking; cf. 692 C, 697 C, and see Fuhrm. Images, 431.

708 E ὥσπερ oi Περιπατητικοὶ λέγουσι τὸ μὲν πρῶτον φύσει kv

νοῦν μὴ κινούμενον 8’ εἶναι: Aristotle presents his theory of the prime mover as the ultimate cause of movement and change in Metaph.

1071 Ὁ 3-1072 Ὁ 31; cf. 1072 a 24 ἔστι τοίνυν τι καὶ ὃ κινεῖ. ἐπεὶ δὲ τὸ κινούνενον καὶ κινοῦν καὶ μέσον (lac.) τοίνυν ἔστι τι ὃ οὐ κι-

νούμενον κινεῖ, ἀΐδιον καὶ οὐσία καὶ ἐνέργεια οὖσα. Cf. id. Phys. 242 a 17, 256 Ὁ 21, 258 b 10 ἐπεὶ δὲ δεῖ κίνησιν ἀεὶ εἶναι καὶ μὴ διαλείπειν, ἀνάγκη εἶναί τι ἀΐδιον ὃ πρῶτον κινεῖ, εἴτε ἕν εἴτε πλείω, καὶ τὸ πρῶτον κινοῦν ἀκίνητον, 259 a 13 ἱκανὸν δὲ καὶ ἕν, ὃ πρῶτον τῶν ἀκινήτων ἀΐδιον ὃν ἔσται ἀρχὴ τοῖς ἄλλοις κινήσεως, Metaph. 1012 b 31 ἔστι γάρ τι ὃ ἀεὶ κινεῖ τὰ κινούμενα- καὶ τὸ πρῶτον κινοῦν ἀκίνητον αὐτό.

708 E τὸ δ' ἔσχατον κινούμενον μηδὲ ὃἕν δὲ κινοῦν μεταξὺ δ᾽ ἀμφοῖν τὸ καὶ κινοῦν ἔτερα καὶ κινούμενον ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων: Aristotle thought of motion as being always effected through contact, and that mover and moved form a series extending from the prime mover to the ultimate thing moved; cf. Phys. 256 b 13 τρία γὰρ ἀνάγκη εἶναι, τό τε κινούμενον καὶ τὸ κινοῦν καὶ τὸ ᾧ κινεῖ. τὸ μὲν οὖν κινούμενον ἀνάγκη μὲν κινεῖσθαι, κινεῖν δὲ οὐκ ἀνάγκη. τὸ δ᾽ ᾧ κινεῖ καὶ κινεῖν καὶ κινεῖσθαι, ..., τὸ δὲ κινοῦν οὕτως ὥστ᾽ εἶναι μὴ ᾧ κινεῖ, ἀκίνητον. ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ὁρῶμεν τὸ ἔσχατον, ὃ κινεῖσθαι μὲν δύναται, xii; σεως δὲ ἀρχὴν οὐκ ἔχει, ... καὶ τὸ τρίτον εἶναι ὃ κινεῖ ἀκίνητον ὄν.

708 E οὕτως, ἔφην, ὁ λόγος τριῶν ὄντων (ὧν) ὁ μὲν καλῶν “μόνον ὃ δὲ καλούμενος, ὁ δὲ καὶ καλῶν καὶ καλούμενός ἐστιν, εἴρηται

T08 E

TABLE TALKS VII 6

95

μὲν περὶ τοῦ καλοῦντος, KtA.: The MSS have τριῶν ὄντων ὁ μέν. The text is obviously corrupt, pace Bases (1898) who tried to defend it. The addition of the relative by Re., Madv., Bern., an easy and necessary emendation, seems to be sufficient. Hu., Minar preferred ἔφην, (περὶ ὧν) ὁ λόγος Kron., which leaves 6 μὲν ... ἐστιν without syntactic integration.

708 E οὐ χεῖρον δ᾽ ἐστί: This atticistic formula is frequent in Plut.; cf. De aud. poet. 28 E, De ad. et am. 68 E, De laud. ips. 544 F, Praec. ger. reip. 810 A, De Herod. mal. 866 B, De esu carn. 996 B, De an. procr. 1027 A, Lyc. 21.3, Tib. Gracch. 2.1; and see Plat. Phaed. 105 A; Arist.

Eth. Nic. 1127 a 15. See W. 1887-1896) I 92, III 60, IV 61.

Schmid,

Der Artizismus

(Stuttgart

708 F μὴ καθάπερ ἐκ πολεμίας ὁμοῦ πᾶσι τοῖς περὶ αὑτὸν ἐπισιtıLönevog: Plut. also uses this image at De tu. san. 125 E καθάπερ ἐκ πολεμίας ἀφειδῶς ἐπισιτιζομένους, Amat.

770 B (ac) ἐκ γῆς πο-

λεμίας ἀναστρατοπεδεύειν. 708 Ε ὥσπερ οἱ χώρας καταλαμβάνοντες ἐν τῷ πεττεύειν: The game called πεττοί or πεττεία was played on a board, where the game pieces, oval-shaped stones called nettoi, were moved. These were placed in certain positions on the board; cf. Plat. Rep. 333 Β εἰς πεττῶν θέσιν; Poll. IX 98 κινῶν πεττόν; Eustath. Od. 1396.65 net-

τεύειν, τὸ ταυλίζειν ... μετατιθέναι. Also the board itself was called πεῖτοί or πεττά; cf. Soph. frg. 429 Radt πεσσὰ πεντέγραμμα; Schol. Plat. Leg. 820 C φαίνονται δὲ Kai αὐτὸ τὸ σκεῦος οὕτω λέγοντες, ἐφ᾽ οὗ ἔπαιζον. The board was divided by five lines: /.c. ἔχει δὲ πέντε γραμμάς, ὧν ἡ μέση γραμμὴ ἱερὰ ἐκαλεῖτο. See further Lamer RE s.v. Lusoria tabula, 1914.50-1915.8, 1922.59-1923.17. Plutarch’s description indicates that the game may have been rather similar to chess ot checkers.

708 F οἱ τῇ Ἑκάτῃ καὶ τοῖς ἀποτροπαίοις ἐκφέροντες τὰ δεῖπνο: In one of her functions Hecate was the protectress of communication, ie, of entrances, gates, roads and crossroads. She carried the epithets τριοδῖτις, ‘goddess of the three ways’ and ’Evoöte. In small shrines called Ἕ κάτεια at the entrances of houses and at crossroads, people offered various kinds of food, Ἑκαταῖα, Ἑκάτης δεῖπνα or βρώματα, every new moon; cf. Porphyr. De abst. II 16.4 κατὰ μῆνα ἕκαστον

96

TABLE TALKS VH 6

708 F

ταῖς νεομηνίαις στεφανοῦντα καὶ φαιδρύνοντα τὸν Ἑρμῆν καὶ τὴν Ἑκάτην; Athen. 325 A τῇ δὲ

Ἑ κάτῃ ἀποδίδοται ἡ «ptyAn διὰ τὴν

τῆς ὀνομασίας κοινότητα τριοδῖτις γὰρ καὶ τρίγληνος, καὶ ταῖς τριακάσι δ᾽ αὐτῇ τὰ δεῖπνα φέρουσι, 325 D ᾿Αθήνησι δὲ καὶ τόπος τις Τρίγλα καλεῖται, καὶ αὐτόθι ἐστὶν ἀνάθημα τῇ "Erden Τριγλαντίνῃ; Antiphanes ap. Athen. 313 B ἐν ᾿Αγροίκῳ ἢ Βουταλίωνι Ἑκάτης βρώματα καλεῖ τὰς μαινίδας διὰ τὴν

βραχύτητα; Philostr. V Apoll. IV 13.3 ἱερὸν περὶ αὐτὸ (sc. τὸ ἄγαλμα) βαλόμενος, ὅσον οἱ τὴν 'Evoötov τιμῶντες. — Hecate was one among many deities that averted evil. These gods were normally men-

tioned by the generic term θεοὶ ἀποτρόπαιοι; cf. Xen. Hell. III 3.4 ἐκ δὲ τούτου θύοντες xoi τοῖς ἀποτροποίοις καὶ toig σωτῆρσι; Plat. Leg. 854 B ἴθι ἐπὶ θεῶν ἀποτροπαίων ἱερὰ ἱκέτης; Hipp. VI 652.21 L. ἐπὶ δὲ τοῖσιν ἐναντίοισι τοῖσιν ἀποτροπαίοισι, καὶ Γῆ καὶ ἥρωσιν

(sc. εὔχεσθαι), ἀποτρόπαια γενέσθαι τὰ χαλεπὰ πάντα. There existed shrines consecrated to this group of deities: Paus. II 11.2 πρὸ τοῦ βωμοῦ δὲ αὐτῷ μνῆμα "Exonei κέχωσται καὶ τοῦ τάφον πλησίον

εἰσὶν

᾿Αποτρύόπαιοι θεοί: παρὰ τούτοις δρῶσιν ὅσα Ἕλληνες ἐς

ἀποτροπὴν κακῶν νομίζουσιν.

709 A μὴ γευομένους αὐτοὺς μηδὲ τοὺς οἴκοι, πλὴν καπνοῦ καὶ Bopbßov μετέχοντας; Cast. 899 adds οἴκοι, (κοὐδενὸς ἄλλου) πλήν. The

addition is uncalled for; Hu. points out that πλήν

goes with

μετέχοντας. ~ What is meant by καπνός here may be reek from greasy

food during cooking as well as smoke from the fire; cf. Pind. 7. IV 65

PAE ἀνατελλομένα λακτίζοισα καπνῷ.

συνεχὲς παννυχίζει

| αἰθέρα

κνισάεντι

709 A ἄλλως γὰρ ἡμῖν προσπαίζουσιν οἱ λέγοντες Δελφοῖσι θύσας αὑτὸς ὀψωνεῖ κρέας: The reason why Plut. refers to himself is that he was a priest at Delphi; see above, on 657 F, 700 E, and further Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 659f. — The proverb was taken by Kock to be a fragment of a comedy (Adesp. frg. 460). It is preserved in a slight-

ly different form in CPG 1 393 App. 1 95 Δελφοῖσι θύσας αὐτὸς οὐ φαγῇ κρέας. The meaning is explained: ἐπὶ τῶν πολλὰ μὲν δαπανώντων, μηδενὸς δὲ ἀπολανόντων, παρόσον τοὺς ἐν Δελφοῖς θύοντας συνέβαινε διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἑστιωμένων αὐτοὺς μηδενὸς γεύεσθαι. There is no pejorative allusion to greediness of the Delphic

priests, as Minar (n. c) suggests. Such a meaning would imply that Plutarch's quotation of the proverb here was out of place.

709 A

709

TABLE TALKS VII 6

97

πολλῶν ὥσπερ ᾿Αρπυιῶν διαφοροῦντας τὰ δεῖπνα καὶ mpo-

γομεύοντας: The lacuna in T that begins at 704 F ἔλαφοι ends before πολλῶν. - Plut. also has comparisons with the Harpies at De vit. aer. al.

832 A speaking of people in debt: ᾿Αρπυίας τινὰς brontépovs βόσκοντες, αἰφέρουσι τὴν τροφὴν καὶ διαρπάζουσιν, and at Luc. 7.7, of Roman money-lenders and tax-gatherers; οὺς ὕστερον μὲν ὥσπερ ᾿Αρπυίας τὴν

τροφὴν ἀρπάζοντας αὐτῶν ὁ Λεύκολλος ἐξήλασε. In our passage Plut. probably thinks of people who systematically try to be present at as many dinners as possible. Especially notorious parasites were the people of

Cyrene: Alexis, frg. 239 K. ἄνθρωπος εἶναί μοι Κυρηναῖος δοκεῖς | κἀrel γὰρ ἄν τις ἐπὶ τὸ δεῖπνον ἕνα καλῇ, πάρεισιν ὀκτωκαίδεκα ἄλλοι, καὶ δέκα | ἅρματα συνωρίδες τε πεντεκαίδεκα. | τούτοις δὲ δεῖ σε τἀπιτήδει᾽ ἐμβαλεῖν, | Gor’ ἦν κράτιστον μηδὲ καλέσαι μηδένα. 709 A ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν καλεῖν τοὺς τοῦ δειπνίζοντος οἰκείους καὶ συνήθεις; The idea that anyone who invites guests should take care to choose persons who are likely to fit well into the company is ex-

pressed above, 679 Ὁ, For the pair οἰκείους καὶ συνήθεις, common in Plut, see above, on 615 D.

709 A os ἂν καὶ ἤθελεν αὐτὸς ἐλέσθαι ὁ δειπνίζων, ἐπιεικὴς dv ἐπιεικεῖς κτλι: Hu. made a striking mistake in deleting ὁ δειπνίζων by teference to the alleged hiatus. Plut. did not rigorously avoid hiatus. Benseler’s opinion that occurrences of hiatus in Plut. generally indicate text corruption is mistaken. He tolerated hiatus in a number of environ-

ments; see above, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα, and cf. 615 A, 630 Ὁ, 632 D, 641 B, 652 B, 666 B, 704 B, 705 B, 722 C, with comments. Incidentally, in deleting the word Hu. happened to create another hiatus himself. However, Plut. would have tolerated it thanks to the pause before ἐπιεικής.

709 B πάλαι καὶ ζητῶν ἁμωσγέπως αὐτοῖς ἐν προσηγορίᾳ καὶ κοινονίᾳ γενέσθαι: ‘especially if he has already long been seeking, in some way or other, to get in contact with them and to converse with them,’ Wytt. deleted καί before ζητῶν, and Paton would add a corre-

sponding participle: (σεβόμενος) πάλαι καὶ ζητῶν. Cast. rightly defended the text; xot has the same emphatic (adverbial) sense here as

above, ods ἂν καὶ ἤθελεν αὐτὸς ἑλέσθαι. The clause is explicative and tefers to that phrase. Minar falsely takes αὐτοῖς to mean a further group, other than the φιλόλογοι and δυνατοί.

98

TABLE TALKS VII 6

709 B

709 B ὁ δ᾽ ἀσυμφύλους Kai ἀσυναρμόστους ἐπάγων, οἷον νηπτικῷ πολυπότας καὶ λιτῷ περὶ δίαιταν [καὶ] ἀκολάστους καὶ πολυτελεῖς KtA.: The deletion (XyL, Wytt.) is plausible although not necessary. — The situation described here is similar to that sketched above, 618 D, where Lamprias is pleading in favour of such an arrangement on the criterion of contrast and unlikeness, see ad loc.

709 B ποτικῷ καὶ φιλοπαίγμονι ... σκυθρωπούς: Naber's substitution of σκωπτικῷ for ποτικῷ is a claim for meticulous conformity and reveals disregard of rhetorical variation.

709 B βαρὺ φθεγγομένους ἐκ πώγωνος σοφιστάς: Solemn and pretentious intellectuals with no sense of humour and conviviality did not appeal to Plut. who was an advocate of the playful Platonic way of conversation. Below, 710 B, he describes a representative of the Stoa in a similar way.

799 C δεῖ (δὲ) σκοπεῖν πρῶτον τίς ὁ καλῶν ἐστιν. ei μὲν γὰρ οὐ σφόδρα συνήθης, ἀλλὰ [μὴ] τῶν πλουσίων τις: Hu. added the particle; ob σφόδρα Turn., Basil.: ὁ σφόδρα T. Hu. deleted μή, supposing that it is a marginal note on ὁ or od. This is improbable. The word is hardly a gloss on οὗ, seeing that this negation goes with σφόδρα only. The addition of μή was probably made in its present position as a con-

sequence of the corruption of οὐ into ὁ. 709 C σατραπικῶν: The word gives rise to negative associations; cf. its use above, 616 E, see ad loc.

709 C ὡς ἐπὶ σκηνῆς δορυφορήματος λαμπροῦ δεόμενος: When people in power were represented on the stage they were accompanied by a number of attendants, a bodyguard. These men were passive and mute and thus were called κωφὰ πρόσωπα. It was customary that people who played a similar insignificant and dependent part were compared with these followers, as by Plut. when talking about Aridaeus at

An seni 791 E καὶ yap καὶ ᾿Αριδαῖος ἦν νέος γέρων δ᾽ ᾿Αντίγονος, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄπασαν ὀλίγον δεῖν κατεκτήσατο τὴν ᾿Ασίαν, ὁ δ᾽ ὥσπερ

ἐπὶ σκηνῆς δορυφόρημα κωφὸν ἦν ὄνομα βασιλέως καὶ πρόσωπον ὑπὸ τῶν ἀεὶ κρατούντων παροινούμενον. Cf. Lucian. Hist. conser 4 ὡς μὴ uóvog ἄφωνος εἴην ἐν οὕτω πολυφώνῳ τῷ καιρῷ μηδ᾽ ὥσπερ κωμικὸν δορυφόρημα κεχηνὼς σιωπῇ παραφεροίμην: Julian. Symp.

1096

TABLE TALKS VII 6

99

310 C ἔστιγὰρ ἐκείνων δίχα τουτὶ τῆς τραγῳδίας τὸ δορυφόρημα; μικροῦ δέω φάναι, καὶ ἄψυχον. 709 Ὁ ἐπεὶ τούς γε μοχθηρούς, ὅσῳ μᾶλλον ἐπιλαμβάνονται καὶ συμπλέκονται, καθάπερ βάτους καὶ ἀπαρίνας ὑπερβατέον ἐστίν: The emendation ἀπαρίνας Herscher, Bern. (Symb. 110): ἀναιρεῖν καί T is obviously right. The two plants are also mentioned together at De am. mult. 94 E in a rather similar argument concerning the choice of acquaintances: καὶ γὰρ ἀπαρίνην xoi βάτον ἐπιλαμβανομένην ὑπερ-

βάντες καὶ διωσάμενοι βαδίζομεν ἐπὶ τὴν ἐλαίαν καὶ τὴν ἄμπελον. The two plants are extremely entangling: βάτος, ‘bramble’ (Rubus ulmifolius Schott) is very spinous; see Theophr. H.P. I 5.3, 10.7; and &xapivn, ‘catchweed’, ‘bedstraw’ (Galium Aparine L.) has a particular

capacity of sticking to clothes; cf. Theophr. H.P. VII 14.3 ἴδιον δὲ καὶ τὸ περὶ τὴν ἀπαρίνην, ἣ xol τῶν ἱματίων ἀντέχεται διὰ τὴν τραχύτητα καί ἐστι δυσαφαίρετον; Dioscur. III 90 &napivn: ... οἱ δὲ φιλάνθρωπον (sc. καλοῦσυ). ... προσέχεται δὲ καὶ ἱματίοις h πόα. See further H. O. Lenz, Botanik der alten Griechen 1859) 497, 700f.

und Rómer (Gotha

709 E ὥσπερ διὰ μέλιτος φάρμακον λαμβάνοντας: Honey was used particularly for mitigating strong antidotic drugs. Galen XIV 20—27 K. is anxious to admonish that only honey of the best quality should be used for this purpose: XIV 22 μέλι μὲν οὖν πάντως ἐμβλητέον ἐστὶ τὸ κάλλιστον ταῖς ἀντιδότοις Ὑμέττιον ἢ Θάσιον ἢ πάντως γε ᾿Αττικόν. Otherwise, wine was the most commonly added ingredient in drugs. -Plut. also uses the comparison with bitter drugs at De garr. 509 C, and see Fuhrm. Images, 169 n. 4.

709 E οἷς ἐφίεται [καὶ] μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων καὶ αὐτοῖς βαδίζειν πρὸς ἡμᾶς: Re. corrected ὑφίεται T, and also deleted the subsequent καί. The word may have been added by mistake or intentionally to make up two alternatives, μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων and αὐτοῖς. Wytt. preserves the word, whereas Hutt., Diibn., Bern. delete it.

709 EF Φιλίππῳ μὲν γὰρ ἐδόκει τῷ γελωτοποιῷ τὸ αὐτόκλητον ἐπὶ δεῖπνον ἐλθεῖν γελοιότερον

εἶναι τοῦ κεκλημένον: Philip the

Jester, one of the participants in Xen. Symp. (I 11), is also mentioned above, 629 C, see ad loc., and below, 710 C. — One observes that Plut.

here begins to speak of self-invited, not secondary guests.

100

TABLE TALKS VII 6

709 EF

709 Ε ἀγαθοῖς δὲ καὶ φίλοις ἀνδράσι παρὰ φίλους καὶ ἀγαθοὺς κτλ. : One observes the chiasmic word-order. — Hu. noticed that there is an allusion here to the proverb quoted by Plat. Symp. 174 B: ἵνα καὶ τὴν

παροιμίαν διαφθείρωμεν μεταβαλόντες, ὡς ἄρα xoi ᾿Αγάθων᾽ ἐπὶ δαῖτας ἴασιν αὐτόματοι ἀγαθοί, also quoted by Athen. 178 A. -- Plut. rounds up the talk through this tacit reference to the incident of Menelaus which he cited at the beginning (707 A), perhaps after he had written the whole talk.

710 A ἥκιστα δὲ πρὸς ἡγεμόνας ἢ πλουσίους ἢ δυνάστας ... πρέπει βαδίζειν: By ἡγεμόνες proconsuls are meant; cf. above, 679 C, 707 B, 708 B, whereas δυνάσται designates other dignitaries. Though a prominent person himself, Plutarch disliked great official banquets, and he often gives vent to his negative attitude to wealthy people who gather lots of guests at their dinners only for the sake of show; see above, on 678 C. Plut. who himself was certainly well-to-do did not regard wealth as a good per se and thus repeatedly expresses his contempt for newly rich people; see above, on 708 C.

TALK 7 The theme discussed in this talk and the following one are typically sympotic ones, inspired by the episode in Plat. Symp. 176 E. It would have been striking if Plut. had nor treated this subject-matter in the Talks. His point in this conversation is precisely the one he expresses repeatedly in the work: the aim of the drinking-party is κοινωνία τῶν λόγων, 1.6. that all guests should be engaged in the conversation; see above, on 614 E δεῖ γάρ. However, the discussions of this and the next talk are characterized by a marked contrast of opinion between the representatives of two groups within the Stoic school, the conservative fraction on the one hand, and the

modified, tolerant movement on the other, represented by Philip of Prusias.

710 B ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ: It may be assumed that Plut. was the host and that the dramatic place was his home, as in IV 3, and probably in II 10 and VIII 6, and perhaps in 1 4, I1 3, 8-9, III 8-9, VI 4—6, 8, VIII 1-2. However, it may also be that he is a guest in a friend's home in Chacronea, as in V 8-9. 710 B Atoyevtavo τοῦ Περγαμηνοῦ παρόντος: D. does not take part in the discussion until the next talk. There, and in VIII 1-2 and 9, he ap-

7108

TABLE TALKS VII 7

101

pears as an active contributor to the talk. Plut. makes it clear that he is a man of literary eruditon and that he belongs to the inner circle of

friends of his (711 D τῷ φίλῳ Avoyeviav). The mention here indicates that he was an honoured guest. In De Pyth. or. 395 A Plutarch’s friend Philinus laudatorily calls Diogenianus’ young son with the same name

τέκος ἀγαθοῦ πατρός, followed by the justification: οἶσθα γὰρ Διογενιανὸν ἀνδρῶν ἄριστον.

710 Β καὶ πράγματ᾽ εἴχομεν ἀμυνόμενοι βαθυπώγονα σοφιστὴν ἀπὸ τῆς Στοᾶς: This figure is a moderate variant of the typical disturber—often a Cynic—who obtrudes himself into the company and causes irritation; see J. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 69-76, and

cf. also another type of guest who differs significantly from the others, ie. the one who takes offence and leaves the party, as the foreigner in extravagant clothes who appears in I 2. 615 D, see ad loc., and cf. below, 710 DE. In both cases Plut. marks dissociation from those persons by introducing them as foreigners (712 E) and without mentioning their names. However, this does not necessarily mean that they are fictitious.

Plutarch's negative attitude to the Stoa did not prevent him from enjoying the company of Stoics; quite a number of Stoics were his friends or belonged to his circle of acquaintances, e.g., his former fellow-student in the Academy, Themistocles, who joined the Stoa; see above, on 626 E. For Plutarch's other Stoic acquaintances, see D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 239—270. One of these was Philip of Prusias (on him see below) whom Plut. represents as a non-dogmatic Stoic act-

ing almost as a defender of Plato. In contrasting him with the austere foreigner he effectively shows his preference for the moderate variant of Stoicism. See P. Geigenmüller, Neue Jahrb. 24 (1921) 266f.

710 B ἐπήγαγεν

τὸν Πλάτωνα

κατηγοροῦντα

τῶν

αὐλητρίσι

χρωμένων παρ᾽ οἶνον: Plat. Symp. 176 E εἰσηνοῦμαι τὴν μὲν ἄρτι

εἰσελθοῦσαν

αὐλητρίδα

χαίρειν

ἐᾶν, αὐλοῦσαν

ἑαυτῇ ἢ ἂν

βούληται ταῖς γυναιξὶ ταῖς ἔνδον. The exclusion of the flute-girl was a particular measure taken at this particular symposion, as Plato makes clear in the preceding text (176 A-D) where it is agreed that, since there had been heavy drinking last night, this time the drinking-party should not be a regular one. Abundant evidence in literature as well as in vasepainting shows that flute-girls were regarded as equally necessary for a drinking-party as wine and chaplets; cf. Antiphan. frg. 225 (II 110 K.) τέτταρες δ᾽ αὐλητρίδες | ἔχουσι μισθὸν καὶ μάγειροι δώδεκα;

102

TABLE TALKS VII 7

7108

Nicostr. frg. 26 (II 227 K.) καὶ σὺ μὲν | τὴν δευτέραν τράπεζαν εὐτρεπῆ ποιεῖ. Ικόσμησον αὐτὴν παντοδαποῖς τραγήμασιν, | μύρον,

στεφάνους, λιβανωτόν, αὐλητρίδα λαβέ; Amphis frg. 9 (II 238 K) οἶνος ἡδύς, φά, σησαμαῖ, | μύρον, στέφανος, αὐλητρίς. Flute-girls,

dancing-girls and other entertainers at wine-parties were slaves and/or of foreign nationality; cf. Dem.

49.48: if

a woman

was present at a

drinking-party this was evidence that she was a foreigner. Cf. Manetho V 236 ζηλώσει δούλην δ᾽, ἢ ψάλτριαν ἢ πολύκοινον. These entertainers were trained at special institutes, different from those for musicians proper; see Quintil. II 3.3-4. Status and appreciation differed fundamentally between these two categories of musical artists. While skilful musicians at the highest level could claim 6000 drachms for one concert, the fees paid to the unsophisticated entertainers were limited by the astynomes to 2 drachms per performance; cf. Arist. Resp. Ath. 50.2; Lucian. Adv. indoct. 8. It was not necessarily an indication of intellectual arrogance, then, that Plato dismissed this kind of entertainment, and he clearly did not intend the exclusion to be general or regular.

710 Β ἀλλήλοις δὲ συγγίνεσθαι διὰ λόγου ph δυναμένων: Plato expresses his critical opinion of ordinary musical entertainment at wine-

parties most clearly at Prot. 347 C καὶ γὰρ δοκεῖ μοι τὸ περὶ ποιήσεως διαλέγεσθαι ὁμοιότατον εἶναι τοῖς συμποσίοις τοῖς τῶν φαύλων καὶ

ἀγοραίων ἀνθρώπων. καὶ γὰρ οὗτοι, διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι ἀλλήλοις δι' ἑαυτῶν συνεῖναι ἐν τῷ πότῳ μηδὲ διὰ τῆς ἑαυτῶν φωνῆς καὶ τῶν λόγων τῶν ἑαυτῶν ὑπὸ ἀπαιδευσίας, τιμίας ποιοῦσι τὰς αὐλητρίδας, quoted by Athen. 97 A. At Xen. Symp. 3.2 Socrates also

expresses his disregard of such amusement: οὗτοι μὲν δή, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἱκανοὶ τέρπειν ἡμᾶς φαίνονται: ἡμεῖς δὲ τούτων οἶδ᾽ ὅτι πολὺ βελτίονες οἰόμεθα εἶναι: οὐκ αἰσχρὸν οὖν εἰ μηδ᾽ ἐπιχειρήσομεν συνόντες ὠφελεῖν τι ἢ εὐφραίνειν ἀλλήλους; Cf. Plut. De cup. div 527 B (reference to Plat. Symp. 176 E).

710 B καίτοι παρὼν ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς παλαίστρας Φίλιππος ὁ Προυσιεύς: Philip of Prusias, Bithynia—Prusa (Babut, Minar) is mistaken, see Dimer, RE s.v. Prusias, 1133f.— only appears the following one. However, the Philip who takes part in appears as a well-read (426 E-F) writer of history (418 ypapevs) of essentially Stoic outlook may be identical Ziegler, RE s.v. Plutarchos, 682; D. Babut, Plutarque

in this talk and De def. or. and A (®.) ὁ συγwith him; see et le stoicisme

(Paris 1969) 258f. Plut. marks ἃ very clear contrast between the two

710 B

TABLE TALKS VII 7

103

Stoics through the different way of introducing them, and by representing Philip as an engaged debater with a sense of humour—the mention of Philip the Jester (710 C) may be intended as an allusion to him— while he represents the long-bearded sophist with repudiation and without mentioning his name. 710

δαιτυμόνας;: Homeric word, also used above, 661 A, and cited

at 644 A. Plato has it at Rep. 345 C and Tim. 17 A.

710 B πηκτίδων: The πηκτίς was a many-stringed instrument of Lydian origin, resembling the lyre or the cithara. It is mentioned by

Sappho, frg. 138 Diehl; Alc. 71.5; Anacr. 69.3; Arist. Pol. 1341 a 40. The πηκτίς probably had a triangular form

and strings of different

length; sec H. Riemann, Handbuch der Musikgeschichte Y (Leipzig 1923) 93, Plat. Rep. 399 CD mentions this instrument among others of similar kind that should be eliminated from the ideal state; cf. Ps.-Plut. De un. in rep. dom. 827 A, and see below, on 710 E ψαλτρίας ἁρμο-

ζομένης. 710 C εἰ μὴ καὶ πότου καὶ σίτου λήθη κατελάμβανεν

... τὸ

συμπόσιον: Plut. here uses συμπόσιον as a collective term for συμπόται, as above, 704 D διασείσας καὶ διακωδωνίσας τὸ συμπόσιον, and Sept. sap. 157 D ἐπιστήσαντος δὲ τοῦ λόγου τὸ συμπόσιον, 164 D εἰ δοκεῖ τὸ συμπόσιον.

710 C καίτοι Ξενοφῶν οὐκ σχύνθη, Σωκράτους καὶ ᾿Αντισθένους καὶ ἄλλων παρόντων τοιούτων, τὸν γελωτοποιὸν φέρων Φίλιππον: Hu., Po. hesitantly proposed (εἰς) φέρων but themselves referred to 729 A ἄλλοι μὲν οὖν ἄλλας αἰτίας φέρουσιν, and to 645 C τοὺς (τοιούτους) λόγους ἄγουσι, see ad loc. — Xen. Symp. 1.11 tells of the unexpected arrival of the jester Philip. Athen. 614 C quotes the episode, and at 20 AB mentions him together with other kinds of entertainers, jugglers, clowns and impersonators. At 504 EF he sets off the difference between the Symposia of Plato and Xenophon as being a mat-

Ier of contrariness: συμπόσια μὲν γὰρ γεγράφασιν ἀμφότεροι, καὶ £v αὐτοῖς ὁ μὲν τὰς αὐλητρίδας ἐκβάλλει, ὁ δὲ εἰσάγει.

710 C φέρων Φίλιππον, ὥσπερ “Ὅμηρος τὸ κρόμυον ποτῷ ὄψον, ὑποδεῖξαι τοῖς ἀνδράσι: The doubts about ὑποδεῖξαι (ἐπιδεῖξαι Wil, ἐπιμῖξαι Wytt., ὑπομῖξαι Po.) are certainly uncalled for: φέρων ...

104

TABLE TALKS VII 7

7106

ὑποδεῖξαι may well convey the meaning required, ‘introduce and assign’; the participle, not the inf. in the first place, carries the meaning ‘introduce’ as LSJ translate. — 74. XI 630 is also quoted above, 669 B,

see ad loc. Plut. also mentions the food of the heroes at 730 C, De Is. et Os. 353 DE, Sept. sap. 156 E.

710 C Πλάτων δὲ τόν τ᾽ ᾿Αριστοφάνους λόγον περὶ τοῦ ἔρωτος ὡς κωμῳδίαν ἐμβέβληκεν εἰς τὸ Συμπόσιον: Symp. 189 C-193 D. Philip alludes to the contemporary dramatic ἀκροάματα of various kinds which were commonly performed at drinking-parties, see next talk. 710 C τελευτῶν ἔξωθεν ἀναπετάσας τὴν αὔλειον ἐπάγει δρᾶμα

«tA.: Hartm. unnecessarily would delete ἔξωθεν, here as well as at 641 F, see ad loc. The word goes with ἐπάγει. 710 C διαπληκτισμοί: The verb διαπληκτίζεσθαι is a favourite one of Plut.; cf. Amar. 760 A, Luc. 31.7, Tim. 14.3, Sulla 2.4.

710 C Σωκράτους ἐγκώμιον: Hu. unnecessarily added the art. (10) Z., also printed by Minar. Plut. occasionally omits the art.; cf. above, 685 E καὶ κάλλος γυναικός, and see on 672 Ὁ περὶ τῶν τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος ἡδονῶν.

110 Ὁ τοσαύτην ἐν τῷ διαλέγεσθαι χάριν ἔχοντες, ὅμως ἐχρῶντο τοῖς ἐπεισοδίοις xtÀ: Plut. rather frequently uses participles in the concessive sense without καίπερ; see above, on 621 A οὔτε γὰρ ἐπιτάττων. — As a convivial term ἐπεισόδιον may denote any kind of entertainment that interrupts the drinking and talking; see above, 629 C τὰ δ᾽ ἐπεισόδια γέγονεν ἡδονῆς ἕνεκεν, χρείας μὴ ovvayopévne, ὥσRep ἀκροάματα καὶ θεάματα καὶ γελωτοποιός τις ἐν Καλλίου Φίλιππος. The entertainments could be improvised or previously prepared, cf. 634 D.

710 D ἡμεῖς δὲ μεμιγμένοι πολιτικοῖς καὶ ἀγοραίοις ἀνδράσι, πολλοῖς δ᾽, ὅταν οὕτω τύχωμεν, ἰδιώταις καὶ ὑπαγροικοτέροις Cf. above, 613 E-F where Plut. also treats of this subject, the marked difference between intellectual, erudite guests and others who are not able to take part in qualified discussions. He expresses his willingness

to recognize this fact and allows for entertainments which those people

710D

TABLE TALKS VI 7

105

may enjoy, thus showing that his basic attitude to such ἐπεισόδια was not negative; see above, on 613 Ε παντὸς μὲν ὀρνέου. 710 Ὁ ὥσπερ τὰς Σειρῆνας ἐπιούσας φεύγοντες: Hu. and Minar adopt the deletion of the art. proposed by Wil. Cast. Gnomon 17 (1971) 254 rightly defends the word; cf. above, 706 Ὁ ὁσάκις ἂν εἰς τὰς Σειρῆνας ἐμπέσωμεν. Plutarch’s use of the art. is sometimes rather arbitrary; see on 706 A, 708 D, 730 A, and cf. 665 D ἔδοξε τῷ πάθει μᾶλ-

λον ἢ τέχνῃ κεχρῆσθαι, where Cast. o.c. 256 would delete the art. before πάθει. 710 DE ἀλλὰ Κλειτόμαχος μὲν ὁ ἀθλητὴς ἐξανιστάμενος καὶ ἀπιών, εἴ τις ἐμβάλοι λόγον ἐρωτικόν, ἐθαυμάζετο: The deletion of καὶ ἀπιών by Herw. was rejected by D. Weiss, De nonnullis Plutarchi Moralium locis ab Herwerdeno tractatis (Biponti 1888) 10;

cf. De coh. ira 461 D ἐξαναστὰς ἀπῇει, Public. 6.5 dyer’ ἐξαναστάς. In our passage it was natural to use parataxis because of the following finite verb. — The case of the guest who takes offence and leaves the party was a fopos of the genre of symposion, as shown by 1. Martin, Symposion (Paderborn 1931) 101-106. Plut. has an example at Sept.

sap. 148 EF where Alexidemus of Miletos leaves the banquet in anger after he has been assigned an ignominious place by Periander. Cf. also above, on 615 D, and 710 B. — Cleitomachus, a native of Thebes, was the most successful pancratiast in his time (late 3rd c. B.C.). His numerous victories were reported with admiration by the writers; see Polyb. XXVII 9.7-13; Paus. VI 15.3-5; Anth. Pal. TX 588, His steadfast self-

discipline and sexual continence also made him famous: Aelian. N.A. VI 1 Κλειτόμαχος δὲ ὁ παγκρατιαστὴς xoi κύνας εἴ note εἶδε μιγνυμένους ἀπεστρέφετο, καὶ ἐν συμποσίῳ δὲ εἰ λόγον ἀκόλαστον

ἤκουσε καὶ ἀφροδίσιον, ἐξαναστὰς ἀπηλάττετο; id. V.H. ΠῚ 30. The ascetic way of life practised by athletes was commonly a target of irony; see above, on 654 C ἀθλητικὰ ταῦτ᾽, and below, 724 E where the stetility of the palm tree when transferred to Greek soil is compared with the life of athletes who consume all nourishment available in building up their bodies while nothing is left to produce seed.

710 E ψαλτρίας ἁρμοζομένης; Like the πηκτίς the ψαλτήριον was a Lydian instrument with many strings. It was probably similar to a harp. Its form was triangular, and its strings constituted the octave; see Ps.Arist. Probl. 919 b 12 ἔτι oi ἐν τοῖς τριγώνοις ψαλτηρίοις τῆς ἴσης

106

TABLE TALKS VII 7

710E

ἐπιτάσεως γινομένης συμφωνοῦσιν διὰ πασῶν, ἡ μὲν διπλασία οὖσα, fj δὲ ἡμίσεια τῷ μήκει. Besides the αὐλός, the ψαλτήριον was much used by the female entertainers at wine-parties. Both kinds of artists

are

mentioned

above,

643

B,

and

cf.

Men.

frg.

3194

K.

αὐλητρίδας δὲ καὶ μύρον καὶ ψαλτρίας. However, this instrument was probably less common than the flute as an instrument played at parties, to judge from vase paintings where flute-playing girls are markedly predominant. Both the flute and the harp were regarded as base insttuments, the harp because of its weak, soft and effeminate sound; cf. Quintil. I 10.31; Plut. Caes. 10.1; Ion, frg. 22 p. 736 Nauck?. Plat. Rep. 398 E dismisses all kinds of Lydian music. Plut. maintained a much more tolerant attitude, as he makes clear in his contribution below, 712 E-713 F. See H. Riemann, Handbuch der Musikgeschichte 1 (Leipzig 1923) 931., 146f.

710 E ὑποδεῖσθαι βοῶν ταχὺ xol τὸν λυχνοῦχον

ἅπτειν: Mez.

emended ὑποδεῖται T; ὑποδεῖν te Bases may also be right. Cleitomachus clearly directed the request for his shoes to another attendant of his than the lantern-bearer. The construction may be (τὸν

παῖδα) ὑποδεῖν te βοῶν ταχὺ xoi tov λυχνοῦχον ἅπτειν. (Cobet would change into λύχνον.) However, this construction appears less elegant; for the sake of variation Plut. is likely to have chosen the medial inf., ‘to have his shoes put on’.

710 E τὰς ἀβλαβεστάτας ἡδονάς, ὥσπερ οἱ κάνθαροι τὰ μύρα, βδελυττόμενος: The opinion that the dung-beetle loathes perfume is part of the general notion of the existence of antipathy (and sympathy) in nature which was propagated by Bolus of Mendes; see above, on 641

B οἱ τὰς ἀντιπαθείας θρυλοῦντες. Perfume was thought to be fatal to dung-beetles; cf. Clem. Paed. II 66.1 ὥσπερ οἱ γῦπες τὰ μύρα βδε-

λυττόμενοι ἢ οἱ κάθαροι (τούτους γὰρ ῥοδίνῳ χρισθέντες μύρῳ τελευτᾶν λέγουσιν); Aelian. N.A. IV 18 γυπῶν γε μὴν τὸ μῦρον ὄλεθρός

ἔστι. κάνθαρον δὲ ἀπολεῖς, εἰ ἐπιβάλοις τῶν ῥόδων αὐτῷ; Plut. Stoic. absurd. 1058 A. Plut. also has the comparison with the dung-beetles (and vultures) at Non posse 1096 A. The fancy of the extreme sensitivity of these animals to fragrance is also found in Theophr. C.P. VI 5.1, which shows, then, that such opinions were current even before the time

of Bolus. - The criticism of the complete rejection of pleasure directed here by Philip (Plut.) against the Stoa represents the Platonic request for temperance and moderation, expressed comprehensively by Plut. Sept.

TOE

TABLE TALKS VII 7

107

sap. 158 E ἡδονῆς δὲ πάσης μὲν περιέχεσθαι καὶ πάντως ἀλόγιστόν ἐστι, πᾶσαν δὲ φεύγειν καὶ πάντως ἀναίσθητον, cf. Plat. Leg. 792 C ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἐμὸς δὴ λόγος οὔθ᾽ ἥδονάς φησι δεῖν διώκειν τὸν ὀρθὸν βίον οὔτ᾽ αὖ τὸ παράπαν φεύγειν τὰς λύπας, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸ ἀσπάζεσθαι τὸ μέσον, 793 A τὸν λύπης τε καὶ ἡδονῆς ἀκράτου βίον φεύγειν δεῖν πάντος, μέσον δέ τινα τέμνειν ἀεί.

710 E δοτέον εἰς ταῦτα τῷ θεῷ τὴν ψυχήν: i.e., to Dionysus. 710 E ὡς τά γ᾽ ἄλλα φίλος Gv Εὐριπίδης ἐμὲ γοῦν οὐ πέπεικε, περὶ μουσικῆς νομοθετῶν, ὡς ἐπὶ τὰ πένθη καὶ τὰς βαρυφροσύνας μετακομιστέας οὔσης: Euripides was held in high esteem by Plut. and is one of often as, e.g., sage referred the abundant

the poets he quotes most frequently, about three times as Sophocles; see Helmbold-O’ Neil, 30-33, 66f. In the pasto, Med. 190—198, spoken by the nurse, Euripides contrasts use of music at wine-parties, only for the sake of amuse-

ment, with the allegedly sparse use of music for consoling people in gri-

ef and anguish. He does not argue that music should be excluded from parties. Thus, when Plut. Coni. praec. 143 D agrees with Euripides' view this does not mean a conflict with the tolerant opinions about music that he expresses elsewhere; see below, 712 E-713 F.

710 EF ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ ὥσπερ ἰατρὸν ἐφιστάναι δεῖ νοσοῦσιν ἐσπουδακότα καὶ νήφοντα τὸν λόγον: Plut. frequently uses νῆφειν metaphorically about speaking or reasoning; cf. below, 711 Ε νήφοντας ἀκούω λόγους, De gen. Socr 580 C λόγῳ νήφοντι μετιέναι τὴν ἀλήθειαν, De Alex. Mag. fort. 332 Ὁ νήφοντι καὶ πεπνυμένῳ τῷ λογισμῷ πάντα πράττοντος, Brut. rat. 988 E νήφοντι χρῆσθαι τῷ λοyond, and cf. Plat. Phil. 61 C τὴν δὲ τῆς φρονήσεως νηφαντικὴν καὶ ἄοινον (sc. κρήνην) αὐστηροῦ καὶ ὑγιεινοῦ τινος ὕδατος. For the

image, cf. also Sept. sap. 157 C καὶ σὺ καθάπερ [τῷ] νόμῳ τῷ λόγῳ τρέφων καὶ διαιτῶν καὶ φαρμακεύων τοὺς κάμνοντας. Fuhrm. Images, 64 notices that Plutarch’s images often have an admonishing tone.

710 F χαρίεν γάρ τοι τὸ τοῦ Λάκωνος, KTA.: Plut. also tells this story at De glor. Athen. 348 F, and cf. the allusion to it at Apophth. Lac. 230 B where the Spartan is named Nicander.

711 A ἐν πότῳ καὶ ἀνέσει: Plut. also uses this phrase, in a slightly varied form, above, 644 F,

108

TABLE TALKS VII 7

711A

711 A καὶ σκοπεῖν ἅμα τερπόμενον, et τι χρήσιμον ἐξ αὐτῶν λαβεῖν ἔστιν: The ideal of combining utile dulci is a favourite theme of Plut.; cf. below, 712 B ἥ te τῆς σπουδῆς πρὸς τὴν παιδιὰν ἀνάκρασις en’ οὐδὲν ἂν πεποιῆσθαι δόξειεν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ πεπωκότων xoi διακεχυμένων ἡδονὴν ὁμοῦ καὶ ὠφέλειαν, De aud. poet. 14 EF ἔτι δὲ

μᾶλλον ἐν ταῖς ἀκροάσεσιν καὶ ἀναγνώσεσιν ἐθίζειν, ὥσπερ ὄψῳ χρωμένους μετρίως τῷ τέρποντι, τὸ χρήσιμον ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ σωτήριον διώκειν, 16 A ἐθιζομένους ἐν τῷ τέρποντι τὸ χρήσιμον ζητεῖν καὶ ἀγαπᾶν. See K. Korus, Program wychowawezy Plutarcha z Cheronei (Wroctaw 1978) 58 n. 24, 75 n. 51.

TALK 8 After Philip's enthusiastic speech in favour of musical entertainment at wine-parties, the following discussion of what kinds of entertainment should be admitted is a natural sequel. The discussion grows rather animated, presumably an indication of great interest of the interlocutors in the subject. The talk reveals the marked differences of opinion prevailing about various kinds of dramatic performances. The Old Cornedy is almost unanimously rejected, as are also some genres of scurrilous mimes. An interesting mention of a new form of entertainment is made by the anonymous Stoic sophist, i.e. dramatic performances of Plato's dialogues.

711 A ἐπεὶ δὲ ταῦτ᾽ ἐρρήθη, βουλόμενον αὖθις ἀντιλέγειν τὸν σοφιστὴν ἐγὼ διακρουόμενος: This prompt forestalling has only one parallel in the Talks, likewise at the beginning of a talk, namely at 669 E where Callistratus the host, as Plut. here, heads off some guests who would oppose Lamprias. The wording is very similar in the two passages. Cf. also below, at the beginning of IX 4 (739 B). Plut. here shows

a harsh attitude towards the sophist, clearly because he represents an extreme fraction of the Stoa. One observes that he treats the other Stoic who participates in this and the preceding talk, Philip of Prusias, in a quite different way, as is also the case with other Stoics; the reason for Plutarch's dislike for that man was clearly his sullen, cheerless moralist attitude; see above, on 710 B καὶ πράγματ᾽ εἴχομεν. 711 A ἐκεῖνο: For ἐκεῖνος referring to what follows, cf. 621 A, 663 F, 672 C, 684 D, 720 D.

"IB

TABLE TALKS VII 8

109

711 B ὦ Avoyeviave: D. also participates in VIII 1-2, 9 and in De Pyth. or. He appears as a congenial friend of Plut. See D. Babut, Plutarque et le stoicisme (Paris 1969) 257f. — For the name formed with the Latin suffix -(i)anus, cf. above, 641 A Χαιρημονιανός.

711 B πολλῶν ἀκροαμάτων (ὄντων) ποῖον ἂν μάλιστα γένος εἰς πότον ἐναρμόσειεν: This addition (Xyl.) is unproblematic and preferable (haplography) to (x&v) a. &. Wil. — Plut. is speaking in a pungently ironic tone, addressed to the sophist but turning to Diogenianus. His use of the verb ἐναρμόζειν perhaps alludes to the sophist’s restricted bias for the enharmonic style in music which he expresses at 711 C.

711 B παρακαλῶμεν ἐπικρῖναι τουτονὶ (τὸν) σοφόν" ἀπαθὴς γὰρ ὃν πρὸς ἅπαντα καὶ ἀκήλητος οὐκ ἂν σφαλείη πρὸ τοῦ βελτίονος ἑλέσθαι τὸ ἥδιον: This is a description of the ideal Stoic σοφός rather than a presentation of a real man. With this sarcastic caricature Plut. demonstrates his repugnance for that old-fashioned kind of Stoicism which, in his time, was probably defended by very few members of that school. Plut. rejected this rigid, extreme Stoicism, but approved of the moderate, reformed Stoic philosophy of his time, represented by Philip of Prusias in this talk and the preceding one. Many

of Plutarch’s ac-

quaintances and friends were Stoics, e.g. Themistocles; see on 626 E.

711 B οὐδὲ(ν) μελλήσας ἐκεῖνος: Plut. continues his irony: he represents the sophist as naive and unreflective, and eager to convey his view to the company.

711 B ἐπὶ thy θυμέλην καὶ τὴν ὀρχήστραν: Whereas ὀρχήστρα always denotes the part of the theatre where choric performances took place, the meaning of θυμέλη changed gradually and extended its range in the course of time. The word originally denoted the altar in the cen-

tral part of the orchestra, but it was also occasionally used as a synonym of ὀρχήστρα, and later designated the stage as a whole, as at Plut. De cup. div. 527 F ὡς θέατρον ἢ θυμέλην, De Pyth. or. 405 D, Demetr. 12.9, Alex. 67.2, Galba 14.3. Se also above, on 621 B.

711 B τὸ νεωστὶ μὲν ἐν Ῥώμῃ παρεισηγμένον εἰς τὰ συμπόσια μήπω δ᾽ ἀναλάμπον ἐν τοῖς πολλοῖς: This is the first time that we hear of dramatized performances of Plato’s dialogues. It is interesting

110

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 8

1118

to observe that this innovation was made in Rome, where convivial pastimes of various kinds revealing bad taste were invented. See W. A. Becker,

Charikles

II (Leipzig

1854)

288f. Plut. displays his critical

attitude to such features of vulgarity in the Roman way of life very clearly in this talk, partly using Philip and Diogenianus as his mouthpieces.

711 B τῶν Πλάτωνος διαλόγων διηγηματικοί τινές εἰσιν οἱ δὲ δραματικοί: This is the earliest mention of this distinction. It recurs in Diog. Laert. DI 50 who also reports the use of a third, mixed type: λέγουσι γὰρ αὐτῶν (sc. τῶν διαλόγων) τοὺς μὲν δραματικούς, τοὺς δὲ διηγηματικούς, τοὺς δὲ μεικτούς. Procl. In Remp. I 14.18 Kroll ascribes this distinction to Plato himself.

711 C τούτων οὖν τῶν δραματικῶν τοὺς ἐλαφροτάτους ἐκδιδάσκονται παῖδες ὥστ᾽ ἀπὸ στόματος λέγειν - πρόσεστι δὲ ὑπόκρισις πρέπουσα τῷ ἤθει KrA.: Minar’s translation of τοὺς ἐλαφροτάτους, ‘the most lively’, is mistaken. The meaning is ‘light/easy/facile (to learn)’, as at De aud. poet. 15 F ἣ ποίησις ... ἐλαφρὰν Kai προσφιλῆ παρέχει τοῖς νέοις τὴν μάθησιν; cf. De tu. san. 133 E πολλὰ μέν ἐστι τῶν φυσικῶν προβλημάτων ἐλαφρὰ καὶ πιθανά, Non posse 1088 C

οἷς οὖν οἱ πόνοι τοῦ σώματος οὕτως εἰσὶν ἐλαφροὶ καὶ ῥᾷδιοι, and above, 614 E τὰς ψυχὰς αἱ μὲν ἐλαφραὶ ζητήσεις ἐμμελῶς καὶ ὠφελίμως κινοῦσιν. -- The rehearsal of Platonic dialogues by slaves for dramatic production at banquets is mentioned at Athen. 381 F. When the guests praise the knowledge and skill of the cook, the host exclaims: καὶ πόσῳ κάλλιον, ἔφη, τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐκμανθάνειν τοὺς μαγείρους ἢ ἅπερ παρά τινι τῶν πολιτῶν ἡμῶν, ὃς ὑπὸ πλούτου καὶ τρυφῆς τοὺς

τοῦ θαυμασιωτάτου Πλάτωνος διαλόγους ἠνάγκαζεν ἐκμανθάνοντας τοὺς μαγείρους ... (382 A) διεξήρχοντό τε τοῦ διαλόγου τὰ πολλὰ τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον, ὡς ἄχθεσθαι μὲν τοὺς εὐωχουμένους, ὑβρίζε-

σθαι δὲ τὸν πάνσοφον ἐκεῖνον ἄνθρωπον ὁσημέραι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὺς τῶν καθαρείων ἐξόμνυσθαι τὰς παρ᾽ ἐκείνῳ ἑστιάσεις. This negative and critical description contrasts sharply with the enthusiastic presentation by the sophist. Either the artistic level and the style of the performances declined and were vulgarized during the second century,

or this newly invented kind of entertainment never reached an acceptable level but was regarded as dilettantism and vulgarity already in Plutarch’s time. The latter is obviously true, as the reaction of Philip (711 D) shows.

TC

TABLE TALKS VII8

111

711 C ταῦθ᾽ οἱ μὲν αὐστηροὶ καὶ χαρίεντες ἠγάπησαν ὑπερφυῶς, οἱ δ᾽ ἄνανδροι καὶ διατεθρυμμέμοι τὰ ὦτα δι᾽ ἀμουσίαν καὶ ἀπειροκαλίαν, οὕς φησιν ᾿Αριστόξενος χολὴν ἐμεῖν ὅταν ἐναρμονίου ἀκούσωσιν, ἐξέβαλλον ... ἐπικρατεῖ yàp f| θηλύτης: The addition (kat)axobomotv Bern. because of the hiatus is unnecessary; see above, on 624 E στυπτικὰ ὄντα, 704 A Τελεμάχου ἐπιφανέντος. -With this furious outburst by the sophist Plut. ironically depicts him as arigid and rather confused Stoic who pretends to, or, in his naivety, actally does, appreciate these performances, trickily implying that less orthodox Stoics, or Platonists, do not. And his insinuation that their repudiation is due to their inability to realize the fine qualities of the enharmonic kind of music appears as ridiculous and absurd; he praises it precisely because it was criticized by Plato; see above, on 704 D ἐπε-

δείξατο, and below, 744 C. The citation of Aristoxenus (frg. 85 Wehrli) derives from his Περὶ μουσικῆς, where he criticizes Plato’s narrow outlook on music; see also Aristox. Harm. II 30-31. See I. Düring, Ptolemaios und Porphyrios über die Musik (Göteborg 1934) 195. The

enharmonic kind of music is said to have been developed from the Doric diatonic kind by Olympus (Aristox. frgs. 83-84 Wehrli). The sentence is an impressive example of Stoic lamentation and arrogance and inconsistent opinions about pleasure, an attitude which Plut. deeply disliked; cf. De esu carn. 999 A τί τὴν ἡδονὴν θηλύνοντες καὶ διαβάλλοντες ὡς οὔτ᾽ ἀγαθὸν οὔτε προηγμένον οὔτ᾽ οἰκεῖον.

711 CD ὁ Φίλιππος ὁρῶν ὑποδυσχεραίνοντας ἐνίους, φείδου,

εἶπεν, à τᾶν, καὶ παραβάλλου λοιδορῶν ἡμᾶς; The convivial atmosphere in the Talks is regularly cordial and harmonious. Plut. very rarely suggests feelings of discord or uneasiness. An example of the latter is found at IT 1. 646 A where the young men become very embarrassed at Ammonius" pungent criticism of flower-garlands. An example of discord is found in IX 5 where Hylas is ill-tempered and frustrated, but that passage is probably exaggerated for literary reasons to illustrate the behaviour of Ajax, the subject of discussion. Here Plut. marks his resentment of the attitude of the sophist through the indication of the general offense taken by the guests. Asin the preceding talk he confronts Philip, the moderate Stoic, with the orthodox representative of the same school. -- The absolute use of παραβάλλου (sc. ναῦν), ‘avast!’, "lay (the ship) alongside!', has puzzled some commentators (Re., Wytt.). A parallel is found in Aristoph. Ran. 180 ὠόπ,

παραβαλοῦ, and 269 ὦ παῦε, παῦε, παραβαλοῦ τῷ κωπίῳ. Plut. frequently uses metaphors from seafaring; see Fuhrm. Images, 49f., 61.

112

TABLE TALKS VII 8

71D

711 D ἡμεῖς γάρ ἐσμεν οἱ πρῶτοι tod πράγματος εἰσαγομένου δυσχεράναντες ἐν Ῥώμῃ καὶ καθαψάμενοι τῶν ἀξιούντων

Πλάτωνα διαγωγὴν ἐν οἴνῳ ποιεῖσθαι: Philip implies himself and other Stoics as holding this position, thus marking the dissociation from the position of the Anonymous. They repudiated the performances, not because of formal features such as the music, but for substantial reasons, i.e. that they make Plato a convivial pastime. For διαγωγή in this sense, cf. Arist. Metaph. 981 b 18 πλειόνων δ᾽ εὑρισκομένων τεχνῶν,

καὶ τῶν μὲν πρὸς τἀναγκαῖα, τῶν δὲ πρὸς διαγωγὴν οὐσῶν, Eth. Nic. 1127 Ὁ 34 οὔσης δὲ καὶ ἀναπαύσεως ἐν τῷ βίῳ, καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ δι-

αγωγῆς μετὰ παιδιᾶς, δοκεῖ καὶ ἐνταῦθα εἶναι ὁμιλία τις ἐμμελής. 711

D διαπίνοντας:

‘drinking incessantly’;

cf. 715

D οἴνῳ δὲ

χρωμένους ἐπὶ πλέον καὶ διαπίνοντας. Wytt. rightly corrected διατείνοντας T.

711 Ὁ ὅτε καὶ Σαπφοῦς ἂν ἀδομένης καὶ τῶν ᾿Ανακρέοντος ἐγώ μοι δοκῷ καταθέσθαι τὸ ποτήριον αἰδούμενος: The correction av δομένης Emp., Hu.: ἀναδεχομένης T is convincing. For the causal Ote-clause, cf. Dem I 1 ὅτε τοίνυν ταῦθ᾽ οὕτως ἔχει, προσήκει

προθύμως ἐθέλειν ἀκούειν; Xen. An. TII 2.2 χαλεπὰ μὲν τὰ παρόντα, ὁπότε ἀνδρῶν στρατηγῶν τοιούτων στερόμεθα; see Kühner-Gerth? II 460f. There are two interpretations of αἰδούμενος among the translators. Kaltw. renders: ‘méchte ich vor Scham den Becher aus der Hand setzen", thus concurring with Amyot: ‘j’en aurois si grande honte, que j'en mettrois à bas la couppe, et laisserois à en boire". Minar, however, translates: 1 am moved to put down my cup respectfully’, thus following the traditional Latin translation; ‘verecundia ductum me debere poculum deponere arbitrarer'. The latter is obviously the correct interpretation. — The singing of Sapphic verses is mentioned above, 622 C. 711 D κολλὰ δ᾽ εἰπεῖν ἐπιόντα μοι δέδια μὴ μετὰ σπουδῆς τινος

od καιδιᾶς λέγεσθαι πρός σε δόξῃ: The basic condition for obtaining the aim of the symposion is the preservation of an agreeable, friendly aimosphere. This principle Plut. repeatedly expresses in the Talks; see above, on 708 D. And the most important means for this purpose is a conversation that is characterized by a well-tempered mixture of seriousness and jesting. The excess of one of these is harmful. Practical experience is reflected in the style and the content of the 72/ks, and generally in the literary genre of symposion. Plut. expresses the principle

TD

TABLE TALKS VII 8

113

clearly at 712 BC: ἥ te τῆς σπουδῆς πρὸς τὴν παιδιὰν ἀνάκρασις en’

οὐδὲν ἂν πεποιῆσθαι δόξειεν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ πεπωκότων καὶ διακεχυμένων ἡδονὴν ὁμοῦ καὶ ὠφέλειαν, and Sept. sap. 147 F οὐ γὰρ ὡς ἀγγεῖον

ἥκει κομίζων ἑαυτὸν ἐμπλῆσαι πρὸς τὸ δεῖπνον ὁ νοῦν ἔχων, ἀλλὰ καὶ σπουδάσαι τι καὶ παῖξαι καὶ ἀκοῦσαι καὶ εἰπεῖν ὡς 6 καιρὸς παρακαλεῖ τοὺς συνόντας; cf. above, 660 B, Sept. sap. 164 B ὅταν γε

xoi πρὸς ἐμὲ Χερσίας, εἶπε, σπουδάζων δέ, Brut. 34.8 καὶ παιδιὰν ὁ πότος ἔσχεν οὐκ ἄχαριν οὐδ᾽ ἀφιλόσοφον; Julian. Symp. 314 D £a τοίνυν ἡμᾶς μὴ πάντα γελοῖα λέγειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ σπουδαῖα; Macrob. Sai. 11.2 sed erit in mensa sermo iucundior, ut habeat voluptatis amplius, severitatis minus. TU D ποτίμῳ λόγῳ ἁλμυρὰν ἀκοὴν κατακλύσαι; Plut. often quotes this simile (Plat. Phaedr. 243 D); see above, on 706 D.

711 D μετὰ τῆς κύλικος δίδωμι: This passing over of the cup was a symbolic gesture reminiscent of the old custom of singing scolia accompanied with the lyre, which was obsolete in Plutarch's time. Instead

of the lyre, a twig of myrtle was handed over to the guest in turn to sing or—according the later custom—to recite ῥήσεις from the Comedy. See above, on 615 B, and S.-T. T. Eranos 87 (1989); 127-132; R. Reitzenstein, Epigramm und Skolion (Giessen 1893) 37-41. Men. frg. 923 Kock describes a family party where the members in turn admonish the young son: ἔργον (ἐστὶν) εἰς τρίκλινον συγγενείας εἰσπεσεῖν 1 οὗ λαβὼν τὴν κύλικα πρῶτος ἄρχεται λόγου πατὴρ | καὶ παραινέσας πέκαικεν, εἶτα μήτηρ δευτέρα, | εἶτα τήθη παραλαλεῖ τις, εἶτα βαρύφωνος γέρων, | κτλ. See further G. Thomson, Studies in Ancient Greek Society (London 1954) 495f.

TIL E νήφοντας ἀκούω λόγους: For the metaphorical use of νήφειν, see above, on 710 EF.

711 E καίτοι τὰ πολλὰ περικοπτέα τῶν ἀκροαμάτων ἐστίν: The range of musical entertainment was large but tended to be confined, to

judge from Lucian. Salt. 34 where he mentions a kind of Phrygian rustic dance that was formerly performed at parties but, in his time, was only practised among farmers.

THE πρώτην (τὴν) τραγῳδίαν, ὡς οὐ πάνυ τι συμποτικὸν ἀλλὰ σεμνότερον βοῶσαν καὶ σκευωρουμένην πραγμάτων ὑποκρίσεις

114

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 8

TIE

πάθος ἐχόντων καὶ οἶκτον: Plutarch’s attitude to tragedy was basically negative. This was certainly due to his Platonic viewpoint. Cf. Plat.

Crat, 408 C τὸ δὲ ψεῦδος κάτω ἐν τοῖς πολλοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ τραχὺ καὶ τρογικόν - ἐνταῦθα γὰρ πλεῖστοι οἱ μῦθοί τε καὶ τὰ ψεύδη

ἐστίν, περὶ τὸν τραγικὸν βίον, Gorg. 502 B, Symp. 194 B, Leg. 659 A-C, 700 D-701 B, 876 F, Ps.-Plat. Minos 321 A. Plutarch's attitude of

reserve towards tragedy is intimated below, 724 D καὶ προσέτι tpaγικῶς μηχανὴν ἄραντες, De facie 926 C μὴ τραγικῶς, ἀλλὰ πράως σκοπῶμεν, and at De aud. 41 F he recommends the serious student to

disregard theatrical speakers: οὕτως οὖν Sei τὸν φιλότεχνον καὶ κα-

θαρὸν ἀκροατὴν τὰ μὲν ἀνθηρὰ καὶ τρυφερὰ τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ τῶν πραγμάτων τὰ δραματικὰ καὶ πανηγυρικὰ ... ἐᾶν. See further De Lacy, AJP 73 (1952) 159-171; Tagliasacchi, Dioniso 34 (1960) 124-142; L. van der Stockt, Twinkling and Twilight (Brussels 1992) 166-169.

711 E ἀποπέμπω δὲ τῆς ὀρχήσεως τὴν Πυλάδειον, ὀγκώδη καὶ

παθητικὸν καὶ πολυπρόσωπον οὖσαν: A close parallel is found at Athen. 20 E ἦν δὲ 4 Πυλάδου ὄρχησις ὀγκώδης παθητική τε καὶ πολυπρόσωπος. Athen. cites as his sources the Alexandrians Seleucus and Aristonicus, contemporaries of the Ist c. B.C. These were presumably also the sources of Plut. for this passage. Pylades of Cilicia, contemporary of these writers, reformed the tragic pantomime and made it more powerful

and emotional.

His innovations

concerned

both music and

dance. He made the music more predominant through Asiatic instruments and style, and reformed the tragic dance correspondingly to be more magnificent and impressive, partly by means of sophisticated choreography in gesture and movements, and partly through increase of the number of participants. Pylades made enormous success with his performances in Rome and other cities throughout Italy and was highly

praised; see Anth. Pal. IX 248 εἰ τοῖος Διόνυσος ἐς ἱερὸν ἦλθεν "Ὄλυμπον | κωμάζων Λήναις σύν ποτε καὶ Σατύροις | οἷον ὁ τεχνήεις Πυλάδης ὠρχήσατο κεῖνον, | κτλ., Anth. Gr (Plan.) XVI 290.3 Beckby

ἀνθρώποις Πυλάδης τερπνὸν δέος, οἷα χορεύων | δαίμονος ἀκρήτου πᾶσαν ἔπλησε πόλιν. | Θῆβαι γιγνώσκουσι τὸν ἐκ πυρός" οὐράνιος δὲ

1 οὗτος, ὁ παμφώνοις χερσὶ λοχευόμενος; Manil. V 478-486. Lucian.

Salt. 63 (302) cites Demetrius the Cynic who, watching a performance in Pylades' style, avexpaye γὰρ καὶ μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ ἀνεφθέγξατο, ἀκούω, ἄνθρωπε, ἃ ποιεῖς: οὐχ ὁρῶ μόνον, ἀλλά μοι δοκεῖς ταῖς χερσὶν αὐταῖς λαλεῖν.

WE

TABLE TALKS VII 8

115

711 E αἰδοῖ δὲ τῶν ἐγκωμίων ἐκείνων, ἃ Σωκράτης περὶ ὀρχήσεως διῆλθε: Xen. Symp. U 16-19. The reference is not entirely to the point here, seeing that Socrates’

eulogy of the dance

only concerned

its

wholesome effects on the body. At De tu. san. 124 E and 130 EF Plut. cites the praise adequately.

711 EF δέχομαι τὴν Βαθύλλειον αὐτόθεν πέζαν tod κόρδακος ἁπτομένην, χοῦς

ἢ Πανὸς | τινος Σατύρου σὺν "Ἔρωτι κω-

μάζοντος ὑπόρχημά τι διατιθεμένην: This sentence contains a number of problems. I accept the change proposed by Cast. (p. 905), and Kaltw. in his translation, moving τινος from its place before Πανός. The meaning of n£Gov is difficult to decide. There is no reason for suspecting the text, and the word is not found elsewhere in the sense it ought to have here, i.e. designating some kind of dance less sophisticated than the Pyladic. It is perhaps not necessary to consent to Hubert’s opinion: ’néCowv non intellegitur’. Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308 wonders if the word, qua synonym sometimes of πούς, could mean ‘step’. Cf. also the cognate meaning ‘ankle’, ‘instep’: Poll. IT 192; Paus. V 11.2. A plausible interpretation would be ‘prosaic, straightforward dance’; cf. below, 712 B, where Menander’s style is praised for being ἡδεῖα καὶ πεζή, According to the close parallel, Athen. 20 E, this dance consisted of elements from the old comic dance, the κόρδαξ, and satyric dances:

τοῦτον tov Βάθυλλόν φησιν ᾿Αριστόνικος καὶ Πυλάδην, οὗ ἐστι καὶ σύγγραμμα περὶ ὀρχήσεως, τὴν Ἰταλικὴν ὄρχησιν συστήσασθαι ἐκ τῆς κωμικῆς, ἣ ἐκαλεῖτο κόρδαξ, καὶ τῆς τραγικῆς, ἣ ἐκαλεῖτο ἐμμέλεια, καὶ τῆς σατυρικῆς, ἢ ἐλέγετο σίκυννις. It is noticeable that, according to Athen., Bathyllus and Pylades developed the new dance together, while Plut. ascribes it to Bathylius alone. Seeing that the two musicians were rivals, Plut. is likely to be the most reliable reporter. The κόρδαξ is described as a burlesque, obscene dance by Schol. Aristoph.

Nub. 540 κόρδαξ κωμική, ἥτις αἰσχρῶς κινεῖ τὴν ὀσφῦν. ἔστι δὲ ὀρχήσεως κωμικῆς εἶδος ἀσχήμονος. Liban. 64 Pro salt, 15 character-

izes the κόρδαξ as a theatre dance that διαφθείρει τοὺς παρόντας; Athen. 631 Ὁ ὁ μὲν κόρδαξ nap’ Ἕλλησι φορτικός. It happened that

it was performed at parties; cf. Lucian. Icar. 27 ἐν δὲ τῷ δείπνῳ ὅ te "AnOAAov ἐκιθάρισεν καὶ ὁ Σιληνὸς κόρδακα ὠρχήσατο, and Schol.

ad loc. κόρδαξ ἐστὶν f) μετὰ μέθης ὄρχησις. The relative importance of dance and song respectively in the performances reformed by Bathyllus is unclear. Plut. suggests that the dance was predominant, néCav ... ὑπόρχημά τι διατιθεμένην, and similarly Athen. Lc, ἣ δὲ Βαθύλλειος

116

TABLE TALKS VII 8

711 EF

(sc. ὄρχησις) Aapatépa- καὶ γὰρ ὑπόρχημά τι τοῦτον διατίθεσθαι. Perhaps the reform implied that song and dance were somehow combined more closely than before.

711 F τῶν δὲ κωμῳδιῶν ἡ μὲν ἀρχαία διὰ τὴν ἀνωμαλίαν ἀνάρμοστος ἀνθρώποις πίνουσιν. xvÀ.: Plut. often gives vent to his aversion to the Old Comedy in general and Aristophanes in particular; cf. De ad. et am. 66 Ὁ ὥσπερ ἀπελεύθερον ἐν κωμῳδίᾳ τὴν κακηγορίαν ἰσηγορίας ἀπόλαυσιν ἡγούμενον, 68 BC ἐπεὶ καὶ τοῖς κωμικοῖς πολλὰ πρὸς τὸ θέατρον αὐστηρὰ καὶ πολιτικὰ πεποίητο: συμμεμιγμένον δὲ τὸ γελοῖον αὐτοῖς καὶ βωμολόχον, ὥσπερ σιτίοις ὑπότριμμα μοχθηρόν, ἐξίτηλον ἐποίει τὴν παρρησίαν καὶ ἄχρηστον, KtA., Luc. 39.1. The short display of his views on the Old and the New Comedy which Plut. gives here (711 F-712 D) with Diogenianus as his mouthpiece is the broadest and most detailed picture of his outlook that we have. The

fragmentary Comp. Aristoph. et Men. 853 A-854 D, written by a later compilator and commentator, perhaps indicates the existence of some

Work on the subject by Plut. now lost; or it is a showpiece of criticism using Plut. as a source of the argument. The Old Comedy was already censured by Arist. Eth. Nic. 1128 a 23 ἴδοι δ᾽ ἄν τις καὶ ἐκ τῶν κωμῳδιῶν τῶν xoÀot&v καὶ τῶν καινῶν. τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ἦν γελοῖον f αἰσχρολογία, τοῖς δὲ μᾶλλον ἡ ὑπόνοια: διαφέρει δ᾽ οὐ μικρὸν ταῦτα πρὸς εὐσχημοσύνην. Ussher, Greece & Rome 24 (1977) 73. points out that school indoctrination, in part following Arist., which implied that Menander was read, but not Aristophanes, may have been de-

cisive for the taste of later times. This may be true, but Plut. certainly also based his decision on his own moral and aesthetic criteria. See R. Jeuckens, Plutarch von Chaeronea und die Rhetorik (Diss. Strassburg 1907) 62-68; H. Schlápfer, Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Diss. Zürich 1950) 57-59; A. Plebe, La teoria del comico (Torino 1952) 104-112; D. A. Russel, Plutarch (London 1973) 53f.

711 F ἥ τε γὰρ £v ταῖς λεγομέναις παραβάσεσιν αὐτῶν σπουδὴ

καὶ παρρησία λίαν ἄκρατός ἐστι καὶ σύντονος: Plut. dissociates himself decisively from the fierce aggressiveness prevalent in the parabases of the Old Comedy. By the qualifying ‘so-called’ he keeps his distance from those scenic parentheses. Especially, he regarded the coarse political invectives as alien to the friendly atmosphere of the wine-par-

ty. It appears that discussions about current political issues were also avoided; see below, on 714 A, 714 D.

712A

TABLE TALKS VII 8

117

712 A εὐχέρεια δεινῶς κατάκορος καὶ ἀναπεπταμένη: A good example of elegant Plutarchean expressive style: εὐχέρεια, ‘indifference (to evil)’, ‘unscrupulousness’, ‘irresponsibility’, is described vividly by

means of two qualifiers with the prefixes κατα- and ἀνα- respectively to depict devouring satire and unrestrained, far-reaching fantasy. Plut. uses the phrase ἀναπεπταμένη παρρησία at Coni. praec. 139 E and De stoic, rep. 1050 C. The expression derives from Plat. Phaedr. 240 E. παρρησίᾳ κατακορεῖ καὶ ἀναπεπταμένῃ χρωμένου. 712 A ἐν τοῖς ἡγεμονικοῖς δείπνοις: For banquets arranged for officials of high rank, especially proconsuls; see above, on 678 C, 679 C, 707 B. 712 A δεήσει γραμματικὸν ἑκάστῳ td καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐξηγεῖσθαι: À γραμματικός was ἃ philologist and scholar specialized in interpretation and commentary

on literature, especially poetry;

cf. Non posse

1086 F Ἡρακλείδης οὖν, ἔφη, γραμματικὸς Ov ἀντὶ τῆς ποιητικῆς τύρβης. ὡς ἐκεῖνοι λέγουσι, καὶ τῶν Ὁμήρου μωρολογημάτων

ἀποτίνει ταύτας Ἐπικούρῳ χάριτας, and see note ad loc. by K.-D. Zacher, Plutarchs Kritik an die Lustlehre Epikurs (Konigstein 1982) 53.

712 A τίς ὁ Λαισποδίας παρ᾽ Εὐπόλιδι: Fre. 102 Kock, 107 PCG, from the Demoi. Laespodias is also mentioned by Aristoph. Av. 1569, and Phryn. frg. 16. L. was general in 415/4, and in 411 he sided with the oligarchs. See G. Busolt, Griechische Geschichte bis zur Schlacht bei Chaeroneia ΠῚ (Gotha 1904) 1350f.; Kahrstedt, RE s.v.

712A ὁ Κινησίας παρὰ Πλάτωνι: Frg. 184 Kock, 200 PCG. Cinesias was ridiculed above all because of his extreme thinness: Aristoph. Av.

1377, Ran. 1437, Eccl. 330, frg. 149 Kock, 156 PCG. Cinesias is known as à poet of dithyrambs who adopted the new, free style. He was also ridiculed and criticized for that; cf. Pherecr. frg. 145 Kock, 155 PCG;

Aristoph. frg. 149 Kock, 156 PCG; Plat. Gorg. 502 A. See further Maas, RE s.v. 712 A ὁ Λάμπων παρὰ Κρατίνῳ: Lampon was renowned because of his prophesy that Pericles was going to be the most powerful politician in Athens; see Plut. Per. 6.2. Pericles made him leader of the foundation of Thurit in 443: Praec. ger reip. 812 D Λάμπωνα δὲ Θουρίων οἰκιστὴν ἐξέπεμψεν. He was ridiculed as a glutton and parasite by

118

TABLE TALKS VII 8

712A

Cratin. frg. 57 Kock, 62 PCG Λάμπωνα, τὸν ob βροτῶν | ψῆφος δύναται φλεγυρὰ δείπνου φίλων ἀπείργειν. 712 A τῶν κωμῳδουμένων ἕκαστος, ὥστε γραμματοδιδασκαλεῖον

ἡμῖν γενέσθαι τὸ συμπόσιον: Plut. occasionally uses very expressive comparisons to show his opinions about how the wine-parties should not be; cf. above, 621 B τὸ συμπόσιον ... μὴ (περφόψεσθαι νῦν μὲν ἐκκλησίαν δημοκρατικὴν νῦν δὲ σχολὴν σοφιστοῦ γινόμενον αὖθις δὲ κυβευτήριον εἶτά που σκηνὴν καὶ θυμέλην, see ad locc. ~ There probably existed a special kind of lists or indexes of persons mentioned in comedy (κωμῳδούμενοι); see ὟΝ. von Uxkull-Gyllenband, Plutarch und die griechische Biographie (Stuttgart 1927) 17-30.

712 B περὶ δὲ τῆς νέας κωμῳδίας τί (ἂν) ἀντιλέγοι τις; οὕτω γὰρ ἐγκέκραται τοῖς συμποσίοις, ὡς μᾶλλον ἂν οἴνου χωρὶς ἢ Μενάνδρου διακυβερνῆσαι τὸν πότον: The context shows that the addition (Re.) is preferable to tt ἂν [τι] λέγοι τις Cobet. Wytt., Hartm. would change διακυβερνῆσαι into the passive. However, it is not necessary to take tov πότον as the subject. The infinitive phrase is impersonal, dependent on μᾶλλον, as if it were μᾶλλον δυνατόν. — Plut. frequently uses ὡς instead of ὥστε; see above, on 652 A. — Images and

comparisons with seafaring are very common

in Plut.; see Fuhrm.

Images, 49f., 61, and cf. above, on 622 B.

712 B ἥ τε γὰρ λέξις ἡδεῖα καὶ πεζή: Pleasant and unadorned style is probably also what was characteristic of the dance called Βαθύλλειος

πέζα; see on 711 E. 712 B γνωμολογίαι te χρησταὶ καὶ ἀφελεῖς ὑπορρέουσαι καὶ τὰ σκληρότατα τῶν ἠθῶν ὥσπερ ἐν πυρὶ τῷ οἴνῳ μαλάττουσι καὶ

κάμπτουσι πρὸς τὸ ἐπιεικέστερον: Emp. corrected ἐπιεικέστατον T. Confusion of comp. and superl. is found above, 616 F and 648 B. -- Plut.

here displays his genuine moral φιλανθρωπία and his care for the mental ease of the banqueters. Amelioration of the character is always his aim, even in relaxed conditions such as drinking-parties, but the methods should be smooth and almost unnoticed; his use of ὑπορρεῖν, ‘infiltrate’, ‘permeate’, may have been influenced by Plat. Rep. 424 D κατὰ σμικρὸν εἰσοικισαμένῃ (sc. ἡ παρανομία) ἠρέμα ὑπορρεῖ πρὸς τὰ ἤθη τε καὶ τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα, or Leg. 672 Β λόγος τις ἅμα καὶ φήμη ὑπορρεῖ πως, cf. Dem. XIX 228 7 δ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστου τούτων ἁμαρτία κα-

1128

TABLE TALKS ΝΠ 8

119

τὰ μικρὸν ὑπορρέουσα ἁθρόος τῇ πόλει βλάβη γίγνεται. For the notion of the mild relaxing effects of wine on the manners, cf. above, on 620 D. Plut. frequently uses comparisons with procedures of the iron industry; cf. above, on 625 C, 692 D, 693 A. A description of the tempering process is found at De def. or. 436 C; here he displays knowledge of

the process of forging; cf. also 622 D καθάπερ εἰς πῦρ σίδηρος ἀνεθεὶς καὶ μαλαχθεὶς ἁπαλὸς καὶ ὑγρὸς καὶ ἡδίων. — For the construction of the comparative phrase (without repetition of the prep.), see above, on

62] D, and cf. 731 B ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ πόλει τῷ σώματι; Plat. Leg. 905 B ὡς ἐν κατόπτροις αὐτῶν ταῖς πράξεσιν. 712 Bj τε τῆς σπουδῆς πρὸς τὴν παιδιὰν ἀνάκρασις: On Plutarch’s repeatedly emphasized idea of the proper mixture of seriousness and jesting, see above, on 711 A, 711 D. Here the argument seems rather far-fetched, but he apparently detected some features of σπουδοῖον in

Menander's comedies which he could not find in the Old Comedy.

712 C xexoxótov καὶ διακεχυμένων: Cf. above, 655 B μετρίως διακεχυμένος.

712 C ἔχει δὲ καὶ τὰ ἐρωτικὰ παρ᾽ αὐτῷ καιρὸν πεπωκόσιν ἀνθρώποις καὶ ἀναπαυσομένοις μετὰ μικρὸν ἀπιοῦσι παρὰ τὰς ἑαυτῶν γυναῖκας: Cast. would add ἔχει δέ (tivo) Kat, which might be right; cf. Sept. sap. 148 B ὅμως ἔχει τινὰ καιρόν, De laud. ips. 546 C οὕτως ἔχει τινὰς f) περιαυτολογία καιρούς, but cf. Cato Min. 54.8 ὅσα καιρὸν εἶχε τῶν ἀπὸ φιλοσοφίας ἀκούειν, Luc. 16.4 ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἐδόκει καιρὸν ἔχειν ὃ Δανδάριος. In the two last exs. καιρός means ‘occasion’, while in the first two exs. the meaning is ‘timeliness’, as in our

passage. — By the concluding phrase Plut. alludes to Xen. Symp. IX 7, as he also does above, 653 C, see ad loc.

712 C οὔτε (γὰρ) παιδὸς ἔρως ἄρρενός ἐστιν £v τοσούτοις δράμασιν, αἵ τε φθοραὶ τῶν παρθένων εἰς γάμον ἐπιεικῶς καταστρέφουσιν: Addition Bern. (following Xyl.), Hartm. Alternative conjectures, ob γάρ Wil., or οὔτε παιδὸς (yap) Hu., are less plausible. The subsequent te suggests that οὔτε is correct. — Though being a decided supporter of Plato, Plut. takes sides clearly against homosexuality. In his plea in favour of conjugal love in Amat. 766 E-771 C he declares his opinion (768 E): tig (ἂν) ἀνάσχοιτο τῶν τὴν ᾿Αφροδίτην λοιδορούντων, ὡς Ἔρωτι προσθεμένη καὶ παροῦσα κωλύει φιλίαν

120

γενέσθαι;

TABLE TALKS VII 8

τὴν

μὲν πρὸς Gppev'

ἄρρενος

72C

ὁμιλίαν,

μᾶλλον

δ᾽

ἀκρασίαν καὶ ἐπιπήδησιν, εἴποι τις ἂν ἐννοήσας ὕβρις τάδ᾽ οὐχὶ Κύπρις ἐξεργάζεται. See K. Korus, Program wychowawczy Plutarcha z Cheronei (Wroclaw 1978) 29.

712 C ἐπιεικῶς: ‘usually’. Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308 doubts that the word ever has this sense, but this is also the sense at 650 C, 726 E, 734 D, Pelop. 18.1. But cf. 736 D πάντες ἐπιεικῶς, where it means ‘nearly’.

712 CD ταῦτα δ᾽ ἀνθρώποις ἄλλο μέν τι πράττουσιν ἴσως οὐδεμιᾶς σπουδῆς ἄξι᾽ ἐστίν- ἔν δὲ τῷ πίνειν ... κατακόσμησιν ἐπιφέρει συνεξομοιοῦσαν τὰ ἤθη τοῖς ἐπιεικέσι καὶ φιλανθρώποις; Even for Plutarch’s basically positive attitude to Menander, this rather naive praise of the New Comedy as being morally edifying appears extreme. He presumably allows his mouthpiece

Diogenianus to exaggerate the argument beyond the position he would have taken himself. Cf. the comment by Philip after his speech (712 D). 712 D ó μὲν οὖν Atoyeviavic ἢ παυσάμενος ἢ διαλείπων ἐσιώπησεν: Bern. printed διαλιπών Herw.; Bases and Hartm. rightly defended the text. The present tense is clearly opposed to the aor. παυσάμενος in order to express the uncertainty about the intention of D., whether he would continue to speak or not. This appears from what fol-

lows: the sophist rapidly grasps the opportunity of speech. 712 D ἐπιφυομένου δ᾽ αὐτῷ τοῦ σοφιστοῦ πάλιν καὶ ῥήσεις τινὰς οἰομένου δεῖν τῶν ᾿Αριστοφανείων περαίνειν: The Stoic sophist represents an opposition to the depreciation of Aristophanes. Although the overwhelmingly predominant opinion in Plutarch’s time was in favour of the New Comedy, there were a few supporters of Aristophanes; cf. H. Schlüpfer, Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Diss. Zürich

1950) 57 n. 3. Some of his comedies, e.g., the Frogs, were popular and were much read. Also Plato's friendly representation of Aristoph. in Symp. was an argument in favour of him. See Setti, Riv. fil. class. 10 (1882) 151-157. ~ Recitation of ῥήσεις, passages from drama or epic, was a common kind of convivial entertainment. It was originally a substitute for the singing of σκόλια; see above, on 615 B τὰ σκόλια, and on 711 D μετὰ τῆς κύλικος.

TD

TABLE TALKS VII 8

121

702 D ὁ Φίλιππος ἐμὲ προσαγορεύσας οὗτος μέν, ἔφη, τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἐμπέπληκε, τὸν ἥδιστον αὐτῷ Μένανδρον

ἐπαινέσας:

Philip shows aggerated.

eulogy

that he finds

Diogenianus’

enthusiastic

ex-

712 DE τὸν δὲ τῶν ζῳδιογλύφων ἀγῶνα βραβεύσομεν αὔριον, ἂν δοκῇ τῷ ξένῳ καὶ Διογενιανῷ, νήφοντες: ζῳδιογλύφος seems to be hapax. Sculptors’ contests are not known and thus the text has been suspected; but κωμῳδιογράφων Mez. is improbable. An easier conjecture would be ζῳδιογράφων, but this reading is hardly more plausible. Also the parenthetic character of the sentence makes judgement difficult. The meaning remains obscure.

712 E οὐκοῦν, ἔφην ἐγώ, μῖμοί τινές εἰσιν, ὧν τοὺς μὲν ὑποθέσεις τοὺς δὲ παίγνια καλοῦσιν: In Plutarch’s time the mimetic way of performing comic plays had reached a high artistic level and was very popular. Different kinds existed; the classification in two kinds here has no good parallel. The exact meaning of the two terms is not known: the παίγνια were probably performed by one or two artists only, while the ὑποθέσεις were broader scenic representations. However, it seems that παίγνια might also be said of longer performances; cf. Plat. Leg. 816 E

ὅσα μὲν οὖν περὶ γέλωτά ἐστι παίγνια, & δὴ κωμῳδίαν πάντες Aéyoμεν; Ephipp. frg. 7 (II 254 Kock), frg. 7 PCG. See Korte, Neue Jahrb. 1903, 538; W. v. Christ, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur? IL 1

(München

1920)

336f.;

A.

Lesky,

Geschichte

der

griechischen

Literatur? (München 1971) 838; Wüst, RE s.v. Mimos, 1739f.

712 E οὐδὲ τοῖς τὰ ὑποδήματα κομίζουσι παιδαρίοις, ἄν ye δὴ δεσποτῶν 4 σωφρονούντων, θεάσασθαι προσήκει: Faehse, Bern. corrected ἅτε T; cf. 697 D, 713 A ἄν γε δή. -- To take care of the patron’s shoes was the most trivial task of the most humble servant; cf. NT

Marc. 1.7 οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς κύψας λῦσαι τὸν ἱμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ, Matth. 3.11; c£. H. Almqvist, Plutarch und das Neue Testament (Diss. Uppsala 1946) 33.

712 E ot δὲ πολλοὶ καὶ γυναικῶν συγκατακειμένων καὶ παίδων ἀνήβων ἐπιδείκνυνται μιμήματα πραγμάτων καὶ λόγων, ἃ κάσης μέθης ταραχωδέστερον τὰς ψυχὰς διατίθησιν: Plut. here gives a revealing glimpse into the depraved customs of his time, There was ἃ large interest in licentious, pornographic entertaimment which influ-

122

TABLE TALKS VII 8

7128

enced the trend of the pantomime. This development was in the main Roman.

Latin

writers

unanimously

condemn

these

scenic

perfor-

mances; cf. Sen. Quaest. nat. VII 32.3 privatum urbe tota sonat pulpitum; in hoc viri, in hoc feminae tripudiant; mares inter se uxoresque contendunt, uter det latus mollius; Tac. Ann. I 77.1 theatri licentia, IV 14.3 immodestia histrionum, VI 13.1 multaque et plures per dies in theatro licentius efflagitata quam solitum, XIII 24.1 utque miles theatrali licentiae non permixtus incorruptior ageret; Suet. Aug. 44.1 spectandi confusissimum ac solutissimum morem correxit ordinavitque, 45.4 nam

histrionum licentiam adeo compescuit. See W. A. Becker & H. Göll, Gallus? III 377; L. Friedlinder, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms?Il (Leipzig 1920) 115; M. Wistrand, Entertainment and Violence

in Ancient Rome (Goteborg 1992) 30—40. — The presence of wives, even children, at drinking-parties was a Roman custom, as is seen, e.g., in Petron. Cena Trim. 67.11 interim mulieres sauciae inter se riserunt ebriaeque iniunxerunt oscula, dum altera diligentiam matris familiae iactat, altera delicias et indiligentiam viri. Greek wives were allowed to be present during dinner, but not the subsequent πότος. Not even at dinner was their presence always allowed, which 15 criticized by Plut. Praec. coni.

140 A δεῖ δὲ ... τὴν γυναῖκα ... κοινωνεῖν τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ σπουδῆς καὶ παιδιᾶς καὶ συννοίας καὶ γέλωτος. οἱ τὰς γυναῖκας μὴ ἡδέως βλέποντες ἐσθιούσας μετ᾽ αὐτῶν διδάσκουσιν ἐμπίμπασθαι μόνας γενομένας. οὕτως οἱ μὴ συνόντες ἱλαρῶς ταῖς γυναιξὶ ... ἰδίας ἧἡδοvas χωρὶς αὐτῶν ζητεῖν διδάσκουσιν. In 140 B, however, Plut. defends the custom of sending the wives away at the beginning of the wine-party; cf. also above, on 613 A. See L. Goessler, Plutarchs Gedanken über die Ehe (Diss. Basel 1962) 107-109.

712 Ε ἀλλ᾽ ἥ γε κιθάρα πάλαι που καὶ καθ᾽ “Ὅμηρον (koi ἐν ἡμῶν) Ett τοῖς χρόνοις γρωρίμη τῆς δαιτός ἐστιν: The corrupt text has been subject to numerous conjectures; see Hu., app. Post’s addition

καὶ καθ᾽ Ὅμηρον (καὶ νῦν) ἔτι, printed by Minar, may be possible, but I propound ἐν ἡμῶν instead of νῦν (haplography). -- The reference is to Od. VIII 99 φόρμιγγος θ᾽, ἣ δαιτὶ συνήορός ἐστι θαλείῃ, or Od. XVII 270 góppiyE ἠπύει, ἣν ἄρα δαιτὶ θεοὶ ποίησαν ἑταίρην; cf. Athen. 14 A ἐχρῶντο δ᾽ ἐν τοῖς συμποσίοις καὶ κιθαρῳδοῖς καὶ ὀρχησταῖς, ὡς οἱ μνηστῆρες; Ps.-Plut. De mus. 1146 EF εἰ γάρ που καὶ χρησίμη καὶ παρὰ πότον, ὡς ὁ καλὸς Ὅμηρος ἀπέφηνεν μολπή, γάρ πού φησιν, ὀρχηστύς te, τὰ γάρ τ᾽ ἀναθήματα δαιτός. For a survey of Plutarch’s references to the way of life of the heroes, see H. Amoneit, De Plutarchi

TE

TABLE TALKS VII 8

123

studiis Homericis (Diss. Königsberg 1887) 36. Our passage may derive from Dioscurides, Περὶ τῶν zap’ "Ounpo νόμων, like many more in

the Talks; see above, on 644 A, 668 F, and below, on 714 C, 730 C. It was accepted as a fragment by R. Weber, Leipz. Stud. 11 (1889) 118 frg. 40. Cf. Susemihl II 348 n. 521. — In archaic and classical times the lyre was played by each member of the company while singing a scolion. This custom was no longer practised in Plutarch's time; see above, on 615 A. Cf. also on 613 E παντὸς μὲν ὀρνέου παντὸς δὲ νεύρου καὶ ξύλου, What Plut. refers to here are performances by professional entertainers.

712 F ἀλλὰ δεῖσθαι τῶν κιθαρῳδῶν μόνον, ὅπως τὸν πολὺν θρῆνον καὶ γόον ἐξαιρῶσιν τῶν δῶν: Plut. probably alludes to Eur. Med. 190-198, which he refers to at Praec. coni. 143 CD ὀρθῶς 6 Εὐριπίδης αἰτιᾶται τοὺς τῇ λύρᾳ χρωμένους nap’ οἶνον " ἔδει γὰρ ἐπὶ τὰς ὀργὰς καὶ τὰ πένθη μᾶλλον τὴν μουσικὴν παρακαλεῖν ἢ προσἐκλύειν τοὺς ἐν ταῖς ἡδοναῖς ὄντας; cf. above, on 710 E ὡς τά γ᾽ ἄλε λα φίλος ὦν.

712 F τὸν δ' αὐλὸν οὐδὲ βουλομένοις ἀπώσασθαι τῆς τραπέζης ἔστιν" αἱ γὰρ σπονδαὶ ποθοῦσιν αὐτὸν ἅμα τῷ στεφάνῳ καὶ ovvεπιφθέγγεται τῷ παιᾶνι τὸ θεῖον: The flute was regularly played accompanying the singing of the Paean at the beginning of the drinkingparty in connection

with

the libations;

Μούσαις τεθυκότος, 655 Ε θύσαντας

see above,

on 645

D ταῖς

᾿Αγαθῷ Δαίμονι, 615 A

κρατῆρος ἐν μέσῳ προκειμένου. Cf. Aristoph. Vesp. 1217 δειπνοῦμεν᾽ ἀπονενίμμεθ᾽ - ἤδη σπένδομεν. |... | αὐλητρὶς ἐνεφύσησεν; Xen.

Symp. Vl 1 ὡς δ᾽ ἀφῃρέθησαν αἱ τράπεζαι καὶ ἔσπεισάν τε καὶ ἐπαιάνίσαν. The flute was closely connected with the cult of Apollo; the Pythian nomos was always sung accompanied by the flute. This instrument was also an integral part of the cult of Dionysus.

713 A ἀπελίγανε καὶ διεξῆλθε ὥτων τῶν καταχεόμενος φωνὴν ἡδεῖαν ἄχρι τῆς ψυχῆς ποιοῦσαν γαλήνην: Hartm. deleted ἡδεῖαν without good reason. -- The shrill tone of the flute was conceived as delightful. It was felt to create serene harmony in the soul and to remove emotional disturbances from the mind; cf. De coh. ira 458 E τὸ δὲ θυμικὸν καὶ μανικὸν εὐπερίθραυστόν ἐστι καὶ σαθρόν. ἀφαιροῦσι Ἰοῦν αὐλοῖς τὸν θυμὸν οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι τῶν μαχομένων, καὶ

Μούσαις πρὸ πολέμου θύουσιν, ὅπως ὁ λόγος ἐμμένῃ. The reason why

124

TABLE TALKS VII 8

713A

the piping note of the flute was felt to bring about calm and harmony was probably the fact that this instrument was closely connected with

the religious sphere. — Plut. regarded tranquillity of mind and control of emotions as basic conditions of a good life; cf. De tranqu. an. 477 A, De prof. in virt. 82 F. For his frequent metaphorical use of γαλήνη, see above, on 662 C.

713 A ὃ ἄκρατος: Unmixed wine was only taken as a kind of toast at the libation ceremony between the δεῖπνον and the συμπόσιον: Diod. IV 3.4 φασὶν ἐπὶ τὸ δεῖπνον, ὅταν ἄκρατος οἶνος ἐπιδιδῶται ... ὅταν δὲ μετὰ τὸ δεῖπνον διδῶται κεκραμένος ὕδατι; Athen. 38 D καὶ θέσμιον ἔθετο (sc. Διόνυσος) προσφέρεσθαι μετὰ τὰ σιτία ἄκρατον

μόνον ὅσον γεύσασθαι, δεῖγμα τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ ᾿Αγαθοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἤδη κεκραμένον, ὁπόσον ἕκαστος βούλεται. Here, however, Plut. uses ἄκρατος in the generic sense = οἶνος.

713 A βόμβυξι καὶ πολυχορδίαις: The αὐλός usually had two pipes, one for the higher notes, and another for the low-register notes. The latter was added probably because the high-register pipe could not produce low notes. The interval between the lowest and the highest note

was large; cf. Arist. Metaph. 1093 b 3 ἴσον τὸ διάστημα Ev τε τοῖς γράμμασιν ἀπὸ τοῦ α πρὸς τὸ ὦ καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ βόμβυκος ἐπὶ τὴν dEvτάτην [νεάτην] ἐν αὐλοῖς. The bass pipe required much air and thus was difficult to blow: De aud. 800 Ὁ 25 πάντες γὰρ χαλεπῶς πληροῦσι τοὺς βόμβυκας καὶ μετὰ συντονίας πολλῆς διὰ τὸ μῆκος τῆς ἀποστάσεως. ἔτι δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα διὰ τὴν στενοχωρίαν ὅταν ἐντὸς θλιβόμενον εἰς τὸν ἔξω τόπον ἐκπέσῃ, παραχρῆμα διαχεῖται καὶ σκεδάννυται, κτλ. The sound produced by the bass pipe was felt to be particu-

larly divine and orgiastic; cf. Poll. IV 82 τῶν δὲ βομβύκων ἔνθεον καὶ μανικὸν τὸ αὔλημα, πρέπον ὀργίοις. 713 ΑΒ ὡς γὰρ τὰ θρέμματα λόγου μὲν οὐ συνίησιν διάνοιαν ἔχοντος, σιγμοῖς δὲ καὶ ποππυσμοῖς ... ἐγείρουσι καὶ κατευνά-

ζουσι [καὶ] πάλιν οἱ νέμοντες: Cf. above, 704 F ὁρῶμεν γὰρ ὅτι καὶ μουσικῇ πολλὰ κηλεῖται τῶν ἀλόγων, KTA., see ad loc.

713 B ὅσον ἔνεστι τῇ ψυχῇ φορβαδικὸν καὶ ἀγελαῖον καὶ ἀξύνε«ov λόγου καὶ ἀνήκοον: The expressive, metaphorical language intimates Plutarch’s strong interest in the relation between the two parts of the soul, the rational and the irrational/emotional one. The controversial

1138Β

TABLE TALKS VII 8

125

questions of their status, function and relationship are the subject treated in De virt. mor.

713 B μέλεσι xoi ῥυθμοῖς ἐπιψάλλοντες καὶ καταυλοῦντες εὖ τίθενται καὶ καταπραὔνουσιν: The use of music as a sedative means

at banquets is mentioned by Aristoxenus ap. Ps.-Plut. De mus. 1146 F cig yap ὠφέλειαν καὶ βοήθειαν thy μεγίστην (tots τοιούτοις καιροῖς παρέλαβε μουσικήν, λέγω δ᾽ εἰς τὰ δεῖπνα καὶ τὰς συνουσίας τῶν ἀρχαίων. συνέβαινε γὰρ εἰσάγεσθαι μουσικὴν ὡς ἱκανὴν ἀντισπᾶν καὶ πραὔνειν τὴν τοῦ οἴνου ὑπόθερμον δύναμιν. 7138 od μὴν ἀλλ᾽ εἰ (δεῖ) τό γ᾽ ἐμοὶ φαινόμενον εἰπεῖν, οὔτ᾽ ἂν

αὐλοῦ ποτε καθ᾽ αὑτὸν οὔτε λύρας μέλεσι χωρὶς λόγου καὶ δῆς ἐπιτρέψαιζμι) τὸ συμπόσιον ὥσπερ ῥεύματι φέρειν ὑπολαμβάγοντι: The additions, det Xyl., Amyot, and ^j Wytt., are convincing. I prefer μέλεσι Emp.: μέλος T, as palaeographically more probable than μέλει Re. — For the idea that music without words to be sung may carry away the minds of the listeners irresistibly, cf. above, 706 E παραβάλλοντες dX καὶ ποιήματα καὶ λόγους κοινοὺς οὐκ ἐκπλαγησόμεθα παντάπασιν ὑπὸ τούτων οὐδὲ πλαγίους παραδώσομεν ἑαυτοὺς ὥσπερ ὑπὸ ῥεύματος λείου φέρεσθαι. Music without accompanying words is censured by Plat. Leg. 669 Ε μέλος δ᾽ αὖ καὶ ῥυθμὸν ἄνευ ῥημάτων, γιλῇ κιθαρίσει τε καὶ αὐλήσει προσχρώμενοι, ἐν οἷς δὴ παγχάλεπον ἄνευ λόγου γιγνόμενον ῥυθμόν τε καὶ ἁρμονίαν γιγνώσκειν ὅ τι τε βούλεται καὶ ὅτῳ ἔοικε τῶν ἀξιολόγων μιμημάτων.

713 BC δεῖ γὰρ οὕτως ἐθίζειν καὶ σπουδάζοντας (καὶ παίζοντας), ὥστε καὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς ἐκ λόγου λαμβάνειν καὶ τὰς διατριβὰς ἐν λόγῳ ποιεῖσθαι, τὸ δὲ μέλος καὶ τὸν ῥυθμὸν ὥσπερ ὄψον ἐπὶ τῷ λόγῳ κτλ: Hu. questioned the addition (Bern.) and suggested ἐθίζειν

[xoi] σπουδάζοντας ὥστε. However, the topic is about playing and pleasure, as is evident in what follows. Plut. argues that seriousness should not be predominant and thus he launches his usual argument, that seriousness and playfulness should be combined in a proper mixture; cf. above, on 711 A, 711 D, 712 B. He marks the element of se-

riousness through the order: καὶ σπουδάζοντας καὶ x. Bern. (καὶ π. καὶ 6. Rc., Madv. is less probable). The ability of combining the earnest and

the playful mood is characteristic of a true philosophical nature; cf. above, 614 A συνέσεως ἄκρας φιλοσοφοῦντα μὴ δοκεῖν φιλοσοφεῖν καὶ παίζοντα διαπράττεσθαι τὰ τῶν σπουδαζόντων.

126

TABLE TALKS VIL8

7130

713 C ὡς γὰρ ἡδονὴν ἐν οἴνῳ καὶ ὄψῳ τῇ χρείᾳ τῆς τροφῆς συνεισιοῦσαν οὐδεὶς ἀπωθεῖται, τὴν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖς μύροις οὐκ ἀναγ.

καίαν καὶ περίεργον οὖσαν ὁ Σωκράτης ἐπὶ κόρρης ῥαπίζων ἐξέβαλλεν: Plut. also cites this passage, Xen. Symp. II 3, at De Pyth. or. 401 C, and an allusion to it is found at Amat. 751 A. The opinion that perfumes are not appropriate for the banquets of philosophical men is suggested by Ammonius above, 645 E, see ad loc.

713 D οἰόμενοι καὶ τὸν Μαρσύαν ἐκεῖνον ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ xo λασθῆναι, ὅτι φορβειᾷ καὶ αὐλοῖς ἐπιστομίσας ἑαυτὸν ἐτόλμησεν ψιλῷ μέλει διαγωνίζεσθαι πρὸς δὴν καὶ κιθάραν: This interpretation of the contest between Marsyas and Apollo seems not to be found elsewhere and thus may be due to Plutarch himself. According to the myth, the reason for Apollo’s resentment was the insolence of Marsyas, who challenged the god and did so with the newly invented instrument, the flute. At De coh. ira 456 B Plut. reports the preludes of the contest, i.e., the disappointment of Athena when she saw her face distorted when blowing the flute, and Marsyas’ invention of the bridled mouthpiece and the cheek-bands allowing the force of the air to become stronger and the sound increased. The absence of song is an irrelevant implication. Plutarch’s suggestion that this was the cause of Apollo’s wrath looks like an extrapolation ad hoc. 713 D σκοπῶμεν,

ἀλλήλους

ὅπως

εὐφραίνειν

συμπόταις

δυναμένοις

διὰ λόγου

μηδὲν

καὶ φιλοσοφίας

ἐπάξομεν

τοιοῦτον

θύραθεν: A host who is planning ἃ wine-party should engage external entertainers entirely according to the interests of the guests. The funda-

mental difference between uneducated people and intellectual, philosophical men as regards their need for easy entertainment is described by Plat. Prot. 347 C καὶ γὰρ οὗτοι (sc. of φαῦλοι καὶ ἀγοραῖοι), διὰ τὸ ph δύνασθαι ἀλλήλοις δι᾽ ἑαυτῶν συνεῖναι ἐν τῷ πότῳ μηδὲ διὰ τῆς ἑαυτῶν φωνῆς καὶ τῶν λόγων τῶν ἑαυτῶν ὑπὸ ἀπαιδευσίας, τιμίας ποιοῦσι τὰς αὐλητρίδας, πολλοῦ μισθούμενοι ἀλλοτρίαν φωνὴν τὴν τῶν αὐλῶν, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἐκείνων φωνῆς ἀλλήλοις σύνειow: ὅπου δὲ καλοὶ κἀγαθοὶ συμπόται καὶ πεπαιδευμένοι εἰσίν, οὐκ ἂν ἴδοις οὔτ' αὐλητρίδας οὔτε ὀρχηστρίδας οὔτε ψαλτρίας ἀλλ᾽ αὖτοὺς αὐτοῖς ἱκανοὺς ὄντας συνεῖναι, κτλ., Symp. 176 E εἰσηγοῦμαι

τὴν μὲν ἄρτι εἰσελθοῦσαν αὐλητρίδα χαίρειν ἐᾶν, αὐλοῦσαν ἑαυτῇ ἢ ἂν βούληται ταῖς γυναιξὶ ταῖς ἔνδον, cited by Plut. De cup. div. 527 B, and cf. above, 613 D.

13D

TABLE TALKS VII 8

127

713 D ἄλλην θέλουσιν εἰσαγώγιμον λαβεῖν, ὡς Εὐριπίδης εἶπεν: Fre. 984 Nauck?, from an unidentified tragedy, only quoted here. 713 D ἀβέλτεροί εἰσιν: Doe. (Vind. 83) deleted εἰσίν because of the hiatus, whereas Bens. transposed the words. No change is needed; cf. above, on 624 E, 632 D, 666 B, 704 A, 720 E, etc.

713 E

h

tod

᾿Ανταλκίδαν

μεγάλου

τὸν Λάκωνα

βασιλέως

δεινῶς

μεγαλοφροσύνη

ἀπειρόκαλος

ἐφάνη

πρὸς

καὶ

ἀγροῖκος, KtA.: This episode was well-known and apparently much spoken of. Plut. tells it at Artax. 22.1 and Pelop. 30.4. Athen. has it at 48 E, and Aelian at VH. XIV 39. Hubert, Hermes 73 (1938) 320 ar-

gues that Aelian did not use our passage as his source. Plut. and Aelian used a common source, presumably a collection of anecdotes.

- Plutarch's pungent criticism of the bad taste of the Persian king is expressive indeed. On his opinions of different kinds of beauty, see survey by G. Vólsing, Plutarchus quid de pulchritudinis vi ac natura senserit (Diss. Marburg 1908) 18-58; K. Svoboda, “Les idées esthé-

tiques de Plutarque’, in: Mélanges Bidez. Annuaire de I’ Inst. de philol. et d'hist. or. 2 (1934) 917-946. The question whether wreaths of flowers should be used at wine-parties is the theme of Talk III 1. — For Antalcidas' politics towards the Persians and the treaty of 386, see H. Bengtson, Griechische Geschichte? (Handbuch d. Altertumswiss. ΠῚ 4, München kidas, 2345.

1965)

261—264;

Judeich, RE s.v. Antal-

213 E τὸ σύμφυτον xoi ἴδιον καλόν: Typical Plutarchean synonymy; cf. 635 C τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ [τὸ] σύμφυτον θερμὸν ἡμῶν. For the thought,

cf. 646 B αἱ δ᾽ αὐτοφυεῖς χρόαι καὶ ὀσμαὶ [οὐ] τὸ ἀφελὲς ἔχουσι καὶ καθαρὸν καὶ οὐδὲν ὀπώρας διαφέρουσιν. 713 E ὅμοιον οὖν ἐστι τό, συμποσίου χάριν ἔχοντος ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ μοῦσαν ἰδίαν, καταυλεῖν: A rare construction, especially with a separating phrase of this length. 713 E ἐν συμποσίῳ κυμαίνοντι: Metaphors and comparisons with the sea and seafaring are particularly common in Plut.; cf. 621 D, 731 D, De prof. in virt. 82 F, De coh. ira 461 B, Non posse 1099 E, Cic. 6.4, Pomp. 25.13. Fuhrm. Images, 49£. and 61 reports 157-38 instances. Cf. above, on 662 C.

128

TABLE TALKS VII 8

7138

713 F καὶ ζητήσεως εἰς ἅμιλλαν ἀτερπῆ καὶ ἀγῶνα σοφιστικὸν ἐκφερομένης ἐπιλαμβάνεσθαι καὶ (προϊούσης) πρὸς ἀγῶνας ἐκκλησιαστικοὺς καὶ ἀγοραίους ἐπίσχειν, ἄχρι ἂν αὖθις κτλι: Re. observed that something was wrong with the text, but conjectures made by him, Po., Kron., Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 257) are improba-

ble or impossible. Minar printed Post’s brillant addition which gives the sentence the coherence needed and the stylistic elegance to be expected

by the end of the talk. The increase expressed by the infinitives, émλαμβάνεσθαι and ἐπίσχειν, is paralleled by the participles. Minar rightly adopts ἐπίσχειν Hu.: ἐπισχεῖν T, as the subsequent xpı-clause shows. Po. unnecessarily suspected the repetition of ἀγών. Plut. occasionally allows himself a repetitive style; see above, on 624 E m-

κρὰ τῇ γεύσει. — For the comparisons with sophistic or political dis-

putes to describe deranged convivial talks, cf. above, 621 B τὸ συμπόσιον ... μὴ (περ)όψεσθαι viv μὲν ἐκκλησίαν δημοκρατικὴν νῦν δὲ σχολὴν σοφιστοῦ γινόμενον, and below, 714 A, D, see ad locc. 713 F ἀθόρυβον καὶ [ἀϊνήνεμον: The slight correction (Xyl.) should be accepted. The late form is not found in Plut., while νήνεμος — together with ἀθόρυβος — occurs at De gen. Socr. 589 D ἀθόρυβον (16) ἦθος καὶ νήνεμον, and νηνεμία occurs below, 722 C, and at De def. or. 419 C. TALK 9 This talk and the next one, which are represented as taking place on one and the same occasion, are of interest particularly for the question

whether discussions on political subjects ever occurred at wine-parties. The negative attitude shown by Plutarch to the treatment of such themes over wine (see above, on 621 B) and the indications found in these two talks suggest that this was avoided as far as possible. See S.-T. T. 'La politica nelle Questioni conviviali', in: Atti del V Convegno plutarcheo,

Certosa di Pontignano, 7-9.6.1993, Napoli 1995, 433—437. — Hubert, Hermes T3 (1938) 326 suggests that Athen. 192 C £v ἐνίοις δὲ καὶ τῶν Περσικῶν συμποσίων ἐγίνοντό τινες καὶ βουλαί, καθάπερ £v τῷ τοῦ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος κατὰ τὴν στρατείαν might refer to the contents of this talk. This is hardly the case; it is even uncertain that Athen. used Plut. at all; see Düring, Eranos 34 (1936) 1-13. — This short talk is like a prelude and announcement of the next one. However, the theme may have belonged to the stock problems treated in the literary genre of Συμποτικωξυμοσιακά; see below, on 714 B.

74A

TABLE TALKS VII 9

129

714A περὶ ὧν ἔμελλον ἐκκλησιάζειν ᾿Αθηναῖοι λόγος ἦν παρὰ τὸ δεῖπνον, ἑστιῶντος ἡμᾶς Νικοστράτου: The banquet takes place in Athens. Nicostratus the host, who takes part in the discussion only in the next talk, is otherwise unknown. The company was a large one, and many of the guests were politicians, as appears at 715 Β τοσούτων φι-

λολύγων καὶ πολιτικῶν παρόντων. — It is noticeable that Plut. only suggests quite briefly that there had been some talk about political issues at dinner. It appears that there was a general opinion that such questions should be avoided. At least Plut. obviously held this opinion; see above, on 621 B, and 713 F. Our passage, together with 714 D, is ihe only one in the Talks where such discussions are mentioned. However, there are no discussions on political themes in the work. This talk and the following one do not concern politics proper. As a matter of fact, political themes are absent from the literary genre of symposion as we know it from the works preserved.

714 A καί τινος εἰπόντος ὡς Περσικὸν πρᾶγμα ποιοῦμεν, à &v-

Spec, βουλευόμενοι παρ᾽ οἶνον: Re. mistakenly deleted ὡς. Faehse—

before Hu.—-interpreted the word as being exclamatory. — The Persian

practice is mentioned by Hdt. I 133.3 μεθυσκόμενοι δὲ ἐώθασι Bovλεύεσθαι τὰ σπουδαιέστατα τῶν πρηγμάτων - τὸ δ᾽ ἂν ἅδῃ σφι βουλευομένοισι, τοῦτο τῇ ὑστεραίῃ νήφουσι προτιθεῖ ὁ στέγαρχος, £v

τοῦ ἂν ἐόντες βουλεύωνται, quoted by Athen. 144 AB, cf. Max. Tyr. 224 Ὁ ἀνέκειντο τοῖς Πέρσαις at βουλαὶ εἰς τὰς εὐωχίας, ὥσπερ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις εἰς τὰς ἐκκλησίας, καὶ σπουδαστικώτερον ἦν συμπόσιον Περσικὸν ἐκκλησίας ᾿Αττικῆς, The custom was also found among the Germans according to Tac. Germ, 22.2 de pace denique ac bello plerumque in conviviis consultant, tamquam nullo magis tempore aut ad simplices cogitationes pateat animus aut ad magnas incalescat. 7M A ὃ Γλαυκίας: The orator Glaucias participates in several talks; see above, on 628 D.

714 A 4) Ἑλληνικόν: Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308 questions the addition (Basil.) and renders: ‘What is more Greek?’

714 A Ἕλλην μὲν γὰρ ἦν ὁ εἰπών, γαστρὸς ἀπὸ πλείης βουλὴ καὶ μῆτις ἀμείνων: Plut. also quotes this line, in the genitive, above, 700 D. The author is unknown; Schneider assigned it to Call.: frg. 378 (II 786),

130

TABLE TALKS VII 9

7148

714 B ὁ γέρων πάμπρωτον ὑφαίνειν ἤρχετο μῆτιν: J. IX 93, where nom. πάμπρωτος is read. The mistake is due to quoting from memory; see above, on 617 A, 630 E, 643 F, and below, 718 A, 741 E 7426

-

The connection between the banquet arranged by Agamemnon and the Persian custom is also made at Athen. 192 C, see above, introduction.

714 B δαίνυ δαῖτα γέρουσι: 71. IX 70. The comment of Schol. ad loc. suggests that this phrase belonged to the stock of references related to the question of Persian and Greek customs of political deliberation over wine, which perhaps belonged to the themes treated in the literary genre of Συμποτικαϊυμποσιακά: ἐν οἴνῳ ῥάους ἑαυτῶν ἐσμεν, ἥ τε ὁμο-

τράπεζος κοινωνία πάντας φίλους ποιεῖ- διὸ καὶ Πέρσαι μεθύοντες συμβουλεύονται, νήφοντες δ᾽ ἐπικρίνουσιν; cf. Eustath. 736.30; Hdt. I 133.3,

714 B πολλῶν ... ἀγρομένων tH πείσεαι, ὅς κεν ἀρίστην | βουλὴν βουλεύσῃ: ἢ IX 74; this line was probably also part of the supply of quotations used for illustrating the topic in question.

714 τὰ πλείστῃ χρησάμενα τῆς Ἑλλάδος εὐνομίᾳ γένη καὶ póMota φιλοχωρήσαντα περὶ τοὺς ἀρχαίους ἐθισμούς: Plut. displays his positive interest in, and preference for, the old Doric states, Crete and Sparta.

714 B τὰ γὰρ παρὰ Κρησὶν ᾿Ανδρεῖα καλούμενα, παρὰ δὲ Σπαρτιάταις Φιδίτια, βουλευτηρίων ἀπορρήτων καὶ συνεδρίων ἀριστοκρατικῶν τάξιν εἶχεν: The two names denote variants of the same institution, a mess-company of aristocratic citizens. In Sparta the membership was restricted through the demand on each member to provide food for the meetings from his own lot of land, and membership was compulsory for full citizens. In Crete the costs were partly carried by the

state, and the ἀνδρεῖα were also open to others than full citizens, even women and children. Companies of boys were formed under the leadership of the son of a man of high social position. These clubs of youths, which were likewise called ἀνδρεῖα, were preserved unchanged also in manhood, Aristotle preferred the Cretan system to the Spartan one: Pol. 1271 a 26 οὐ καλῶς δ᾽ οὐδὲ περὶ τὰ συσσίτια τὰ καλούμενα φιδίτια νενομοθέτηται τῷ καταστήσαντι πρῶτον. ἔδει γὰρ ἀπὸ κοινοῦ μᾶλλον εἶναι τὴν σύνοδον, καθάπερ ἐν Κρήτῃ" παρὰ δὲ τοῖς Λάκωσιν ἕκαστον

δεῖ φέρειν, κτλ., 1272 a 12, frg, 611.15 Rose; Plut. Zyc. 12.1; Strab. X

1148Β

TABLE TALKS VII9

131

4.16; Dosiadas ap. Athen. 143 A-D. In Gortyn the companies were called ἑταιρεῖαι; see Law of Gortyn X 37. As to the name, A. Bielschowsky, De

Spartanorum syssitiis (Vratislaviae 1869) 9-13 suggests that the original name, common to the Cretan and the Spartan institution, may have been ἀνδρεῖα φιδίτια. See R. Ε Willetts, Aristocratic Society in Ancient Crete (London 1955) 18-29. The exact political function of these companies is not known, mainly because of their closed, secret character; see above, on

697 E, In Crete at least, the social function was probably the most important; see Willetts, o.c. 155—158.

714 B ὥσπερ οἶμαι καὶ τὸ ἐνθάδε Πρυτανεῖον καὶ Θεσμοθετεῖον: Plut. uses the names of the buildings but obviously means the institutions, the Prytanis and the nine archons—or perhaps the six thesmothetai—re-

spectively. On the Thesmotheteion, see above, on 613 B. The equation of these Athenian institutions with the Spartan and Cretan συσσίτια is rather inadequate, While in Athens these institutions were formal parts of the constitution, the Dorian συσσίτια probably had an informal, comple-

mentary function beside the regular political institutions. On the duties of the Athenian Prytanis, see Gschnitzer, RE Suppl. XIII 750—760.

714 C o0 πόρρω δὲ τούτων ὁ νυκτερινὸς σύλλογος παρὰ Πλάτωνι τῶν ἀρίστων καὶ πολιτικωτάτων ἀνδρῶν ἐστιν, xtÀ.: Leg. 968 A and 961 B, where Plato proposes that the archons should meet early in the morning to decide on the reception of new members in the νομοφυhoxic. Plut. alludes to these passages at Quaest. Gr. 291 F-292 A.

714

οἱ δὲ τῷ Ἑρμῇ πυμάτῳ σπένδοντες, Ste μνησαίατο xoírov,

ἀρ’ οὐκ εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ συνάγουσιν τῷ οἴνῳ τὸν λόγον; A reference to this passage (Od. VII 136--138) is found in Athen. 16 B where, however, the reason for the libation is said to be that Hermes is the god of sleep

and of skilful expression: ἔσπενδον δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν δείπνων ἀναλύοντες καὶ τὰς σπονδὰς ἐποιοῦντο Ἑρμῇ καὶ οὐχ ὡς ὕστερον Διὶ τελείῳ. δο-

κεῖ γὰρ Ἑρμῆς ὕπνου προστάτης εἶναι. σπένδουσι δ᾽ αὐτῷ καὶ ἐπὶ ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐκ τῶν δείπνων ἀπιόντες. προσνέμονται δ᾽ αὐτῷ αἱ γλῶσσαι διὰ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν. In the second characteristic of the god, Athen. probably alludes to Od. TIL 341, whereas this allusion is lacking in Plut. Presumably the source had both references. Through the omission of this second reference Plutarch’s conclusion looks like an invention; it has no footing in the line he quotes. Even irrespectively of this,

his argument is virtually worthless: of course the final libation to Hermes

132

TABLE TALKS VII 9

114

does not show that there had been political deliberations over wine. A

last libation offered to Hermes at the end of a symposium or at bedtime is mentioned at Philostr. Heroic. 33.36 (XI 11) ἐδεῖτό 7’ ὄναρ ἐφίστασθαι ot, σπένδων ἀπὸ κρατῆρος, ob Ἑρμῆς ὑπὲρ ὀνείρων πίνει, and Long. Daphn. et Chloe 4.34.3 (Erot. script. Gr. 1 323 Herscher) ὡς δὲ

ἤδη νὺξ ἦν καὶ ἐπέμπληστο (6) κρατὴρ ἐξ οὗ σπένδουσιν Ἑρμῇ, κτλ. According to Strattis, frg. 22 (1 717 Kock) a drink mixed of equal proportions of wine and water was called a ‘Hermes’; cf. Aristoph. Plut.

1132 where Hermes complains that he has not been offered such a drink, and cf. Hesych., Phot. s.v. 'Ερμῆς. It may have been a drink of this composition that was offered to Hermes as a final libation; cf. Poll. VI 100 Ἑρμῆς, ἢ τελευταία πόσις. See Farnell V 14; P. Stengel, Opferbräuche der Griechen (Leipzig-Berlin 1910) 176, 179; K. Kircher, Die sakrale Bedeutung des Weines im Altertum (Giessen 1920) 19-21; D. Tolles, The

Banquet-Libations of the Greeks (Diss. Ann Arbor 1943) 98-100. Weber, Leipz. Stud. 11 (1889) 120 suggested that Plut. used Dioscurides,

Περὶ τῶν παρ᾽ Ὁμήρῳ νόμων as his source here, as in many more passages in the Zalks; see above, on 644 A, 712 F.

714 C ὡς γοῦν παρόντι xol συνεπισκοποῦντι τῷ φρονιμωτάτῳ θεῷ πρῶτον ἀπαλαττόμενοι προσεύχονται: Plut. seems to have realized that his argument

was

weak

and

lacking

in logic:

it appears

strange indeed to pray to the god when departing. Thus he tried to save his case through this additional sentence where γοῦν and πρῶτον reveal the author’s concern: ‘the heroes at least pray to this god in the first place when they depart’,

714 € τὸν Διόνυσον αὐτὸν Εὐβουλέα xol τὴν νύκτα δι᾽ ἐκεῖνον εὐφρόνην προσεῖπον: The epithet Εὐβουλεῦς seems to belong to the Eleusinian and Orphic sphere. It is also used of Zeus (Diod. V 72.2) and as an alternative name for Pluto; cf. Nic. Al. 14; Orph. frg. 237.4 Kern; Comut. De nat. deor. 35 p. 74.9 Lang; Hesych. s.v. See further Kem, Ath. Mitt. 16 (1891) 3-29.

TALK 10 This talk is a close sequel to the preceding one or, more correctly, that one is ἃ prelude to this one, which is a typically sympotic discussion about the effects of wine on the mental functions. The division into two talks is rather artificial.

140

TABLE TALKS VII 10

133

714 D ταῦτα τοῦ Γλαυκίου διεξελθόντος, ἔδοξαν ἡμῖν ἐπιεικῶς

οἱ θορυβώδεις ἐκεῖνοι κατακεκοιμᾶσθϑαι λόγοι: Plut. refers to the beginning of the preceding talk where he mentioned that there had been discussions about matters to be taken up in the Athenian assembly. He made only a very short mention of this conversation without any details

or specification. Hubert thought that the reference here cannot be to that passage, because Plut. did not suggest that the discussions were tumul-

tuous. These doubts are unfounded.

714 D καὶ ὅπως ἔτι μᾶλλον αὐτῶν ἀμνηστία γένοιτο: Disputes on political issues were probably regarded as the most serious threats to the agreeable, friendly atmosphere that should prevail at wine-parties; see above, on 708 D, 711 CD, 711 D, 712 B. Talks about other questions, however, seem to have been allowed to develop into quite vivid discus-

sions. Plut. intimates that this occurred rather frequently; cf. 617 E-F, 660 E, 710 B, 711 A, 712 D, 721 F. The anxiousness to bring about ob-

livion (κατακεκοιμᾶσθαι, ἀμνηστία) of any recent political conflict indicates that such disputes were looked upon as highly unbecoming at

table. The prevailing bantering tone of the two speakers, Nicostratus (714 D-715 A) and Plutarch's brother (715 B-716 C), also seems to

intimate that they wanted to calm down the feelings of the company. 7M D Ἑλληνικὸν ὃν πεφώραται: Re. substituted ὄν for εἶναι T. Hu. would prefer to delete the word, and Cast. (Gnomon 17 (1941) 253) takes an undecided position: Plut. might have chosen the less usual conStruction with the inf. in order to produce a marked contraposition,

Περσικοῦ τοῦ πράγματος εἶναι δοκοῦντος : νῦν Ἑλληνικὸν εἶναι πεφώραται. However, the corruption is easily explicable: after ὄν had fallen out a scribe wrote εἶναι, perhaps influenced by the preceding phrase. For the construction with the inf., cf. Philostr. /m. 2.7 tov ᾿ἀχιλλέα ἐρᾶν πεφώρακας.

714 D ὅ τε γὰρ λογισμὸς ὥσπερ ὀφθαλμὸς ἐν ὑγρῷ σάλον ἔχοντι δυσκίνητον ἡμῖν καὶ δύσεργόν ἐστι: For the comparison, cf. De exil. 607 D ὥσπερ ἐν νήσῳ σάλον ἐχούσῃ πολύν, Quaest. nat. 914 F ἣ ψυχὴ σάλον ἔχουσα; De esu carn. 995 F ὀφθαλμὸς ὑγροῦ πλεονάσαντος ἀναπλησθεὶς μαραυγεῖ καὶ ἀτονεῖ πρὸς τὸ οἰκεῖον ἔργον. Hu. tended to accept Doehner’s mistaken conjecture ἔχων. The eye is al-

ways ἐν ὑγρῷ; cf. Gal. XIV 712 K. ὁ δὲ ὀφθαλμὸς μήνιγγας ἔχει δύο, ὑγρὰ δὲ περιέχουσιν οἱ ὑμένες οὗτοι τρισσά. When there is some kind

134

TABLE TALKS VII 10

4D

of disturbance in the humour, the function of the eye is impaired; Gal.

XVIII B 48 K. κατὰ μὲν οὖν τὰς ὀφθαλμίας διά te τὸ πλῆθος τῆς παρὰ φύσιν ὑγρότητος καὶ διὰ τὸ πάθος τῶν ὀργάνων εἰκός ἐστι μὴ πέπτεσθαι καλῶς τὴν τροφὴν αὐτῶν ... ot γε μὴν ἐναιωρούμενοι, τουτέστιν ἀστήρικτοι καὶ κινούμενοι διὰ παντὸς ὀφθαλμοί, γνώρισμά εἰσιν ἢ παραφροσύνης ἢ τρόμου τῶν περὶ αὐτοὺς μυῶν. There is no good reason to change δυσκίνητον into δυσκυβέρνητον Re. -- Plut. frequently uses comparisons with the eyes and with sight; cf. De fort. 98

AB, Coni. praec. 139 A, Sept. sap. 153 B, De def. or. 433 D, De trang. an. 476 E. See further Fuhrm. images, 140 n. 1.

714 DE τά τε πάθη πανταχόθεν ὥσπερ ἑρπετὰ πρὸς ἥλιον σαλευόμενα πρὸς τὸν οἶνον καὶ ἀναδυόμενα τὴν γνώμην ἐπισφαλῆ ποιεῖ καὶ ἀκατάστατον: The emendation τά te πάθη Bern. (τὰ δὲ πάθη Re.): τὰ δ᾽ ἐπαχθῆ Τ is self-evident. Plut. supports the Peripatetic notion of the dualism of λογιστικόν and ἄλογον in his psychology, as

he makes clear above all in De virt. mor: 440 Ὁ τὸ μὲν πάθος ὕλην ἔχειν (sc. τὴν ἠθικὴν ἀρετὴν) tov δὲ λόγον εἶδος, 450 E φύσει γὰρ προσήκει θεῖον ὄντα τὸν λογισμὸν ἡγεῖσθαι καὶ ἄρχειν τοῦ ἀλόγον [καὶ] τὴν γένεσιν αὐτόθεν ἔχοντος ἐκ τοῦ σώματος, 442 ( τὸ δὲ παθητικὸν οἰκείου λόγου στέρεται καὶ ἄμοιρόν ἐστιν, ἄλλως δὲ τοῦ λογιζομένου καὶ φρονοῦντος εἰσακούειν ... πέφυκεν, ἐὰν μὴ τέλεον ἢ διἐφθαρμένον ὑφ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἀμαθοῦς καὶ ἀκολάστου διαίτης. -- For the simile used for the description of the passions, cf. De trangu. an. 465 C ὡς γὰρ οἱ χαλεποὶ κύνες ..., οὕτω καὶ τὰ πάθη τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς διαγριαινόμενα καταπαῦσαι ῥᾳδίως οὐκ ἔστιν, ἂν μὴ λόγοι παρόντες ... ἐπιλαμβάνωνται τῶν ταραττομένων. Plut. often compares the passions with wild, harmful animals, see Fuhrm. Jmages,

145-148.

714 E ὥσπερ ἡ κλίνη τοῖς πίνουσι τῆς καθέδρας ἀμείνων: The custom of lying on couches at table had been introduced to Greece, probably from Persia. The lying position was felt to be more comfortable and convenient to people who eat their fill and drink heavily; see Athen. 428

B ἐπεὶ δὲ τρυφᾶν ἤρξαντο καὶ χλιδῶσι κατερρύησαν ἀπὸ τῶν δίφρων εἰς τὰς κλίνας καὶ λαβόντες σύμμαχον τὴν ἀνάπαυσιν καὶ ῥᾳστώνην ἀνειμένως ἤδη καὶ ἀτάκτως ἐχρῶντο τῇ μέθῃ. See W. A. Becker, Charikles? II (Leipzig 1854) 244f. 714 E ἀπολύει κινήσεως ἁπάσης: The correction ἀπολύει Steph.: ἀπολαύει T is preferable to ἀποπαύει XyL, or ἀποκλείει Re. The

7ME

TABLE TALKS VII 10

135

meaning is ‘set free from’, ‘relieve of’, not ‘hinder from’, or ‘exclude from’. In V 6 the question discussed is why there appears to be less

space for the diners on the couches at the beginning of the banquet, whereas after some

time they are felt to be more roomy,

which is

thought due in the main to the relaxing effect of the wine. 714 E δοτέον, ὥσπερ παισὶν ἀτρεμεῖν μὴ δυναμένοις, ... πλαταγὴν καὶ σφαῖραν: The πλαταγή was an instrument resembling ἃ rattle or castanets. The description given in Suda Π 1697 is imprecise:

εἶδος ὀργάνου, ἦχον καὶ ψόφον ἀποτελοῦντος. The corresponding verb, πλαταγέω, means ‘clap the hands’, or ‘beat’: Suda Lc. ὃ δὲ πλαταγὴν χαλκευσάμενος ἐπλατάγει. The instrument was made of

metal or wood; cf. Apoll. Rhod. II 1055 ἀλλ᾽ ὅ ye χαλκείην πλαταγὴν ἐνὶ χειρὶ τινάσσων; Anth. Pal. V1 309 where this instrument is mentioned together

with

others

used

as

toys:

εὔφημόν

τοι σφαῖραν

ἐυκρόταλόν τε Φιλοκλῆς | Ἑρμείῃ ταύτην πυξινέην πλατάγην | ἀστραγάλας θ᾽, αἷς πόλλ᾽ ἐπεμήνατο, καὶ τὸν ἑλικτὸν | ῥόμβον, xovροσύνης παίγνι᾽, ἀνεκρέμασεν. The instrument was an invention by Archytas, according to Arist. Pol. 1340 Ὁ 25 ἅμα δὲ καὶ δεῖ τοὺς

παῖδας ἔχειν τινὰ διατριβῆν, Kai thy ᾿Αρχύτου πλαταγὴν οἴεσθαι γενέσθαι καλῶς, ἣν διδόασι τοῖς παιδίοις, ὅπως χρώμενοι ταύτῃ μηδὲν καταγνύωσι τῶν κατὰ τὴν οἰκίαν. See further Mau, RE s.v. crepitaculum.

714 E ὥσπερ ὁ θεὸς τὸν νάρθηκα τοῖς μεθύουσιν ἐνεχείρισε κωφότατον βέλος: For the νάρθηξ, the fennel-stalk, as an attribute and symbol of Dionysus, see above, on 612 D, and cf. De coh. ira 462 Ao γὰρ τοῦ θεοῦ νάρθηξ ἱκανὸς κολαστὴς tod μεθύοντος; Macrob. Sat. VIL 122 ut Liber pater thyrso ferit. Cf. further ZI. XI 389 οὐκ ἀλέγω, ὡς εἴ με γυνὴ βάλοι ἢ πάις ἄφρων | κωφὸν γὰρ βέλος ἀνδρὸς ἀνάλκιδος οὐτιδανοῖο.

714 E ὅπως, ἐπεὶ τάχιστα παίουσιν, ἥκιστα βλάπτωσιν: Naber (1900) proposed τὰ μάλιστα, but τάχιστα has the meaning required, ‘as soon as’, aS normally in connection with conjunctions of time; cf. Aesch, Prom. 201; Hdt. 1 27.4, 75.5, ΝῊ 163.2; Plat. Prot. 310 D.

114 F καὶ μήν, ὅπερ ἐστὶ μέγιστον ἐν ταῖς περὶ τῶν μεγίστων σκέψεσι, (τὸ) τὸν [μὲν] ἐνδεᾶ νοῦ καὶ πραγμάτων ἄπειρον ἕπεσθαι τοῖς φρονοῦσι καὶ τῶν ἐμπείρων ἀκούειν, ἀφαιρεῖται

136

τοὺς

TABLE TALKS VII 10

μεθύοντας

ὁ οἶνος: In this last part Nicostratus’

T14F

speech

changes into overtly ironic banter. His paradoxical argument was probably what caused the corruption of the text. Re. deleted the spurious particle, and the addition of the article (Hu., Hartm.) should be

accepted.

715 A ὥστε καὶ τοὔνομα γενέσθαι φησὶν ὁ Πλάτων ὅτι οἴεσθαι νοῦν ἔχειν ποιεῖ τοὺς πίνοντας; Crat. 406 C. Minar wittily makes up a parallel English ‘etymology’: ‘whiskey is wit's key’.

715 A πολύφωνος ὁ olvóg ἐστι καὶ λαλιᾶς ἀκαίρου ... Kür ταπίμπλησιν: Cf. above, 645 A τὸ {ζπολύφω)νον τοῦ οἴνου καὶ (λόγων) πολλῶν γόνιμον. The two nouns, πολυφωνία and λαλιά, occur together at 727 D. 715 A φρονήματος ἡγεμονικοῦ καταπίμπλησιν, ὡς οὐκ ἀκούειν

ἀλλ᾽ ἀκούεσθαι μᾶλλον ἡμῖν καὶ ἄγειν οὐχ ἕπεσθαι προσῆκον: The increased self-confidence of the intoxicated is observed by Plat. Leg. 671 Β παρρησίας ἐμπίμπλαται (sc. ὃ πίνων) Kai ἀνηκουστίας ἐν

τῷ τοιούτῳ τῶν πέλας, ἄρχων δ᾽ ἱκανὸς ἀξιοῖ ἑαυτοῦ τε καὶ τῶν ἄλλων γεγονέναι. This was referred to by Gell. XV 2.3 (Plato) fomitem

esse quendam dicens et ignitabulum ingenii virtutisque, si mens et corpus hominis vino flagraret, cf. Macrob. Sas. II 8.4.

715 A τῶν δ᾽ ἐναντίων ἀκουστέον εἴ τις ἢ νέος προσέστηκεν ἢ πρεσβύτερος: Wytt. conjectured προέστηκεν, to go with τῶν ἐναντίων, ‘supports the opposite opinion’. It is more natural the gen. plur. with ἀκουστέον and interpret προσέστηκεν as te, ‘sets oneself against’, ‘opposes’; cf. 629 Ε ἐπαινοῦντες πολλάκις (Avnodcı) καὶ προσίστανται. The verb is found

to take absoluἕτεροι with an

object at 633 A ὥστε ph προσίστασθαι μηδὲ λυπεῖν τοὺς ἐπαινουμένους.

715 A ἐπιβούλως δὴ πάνυ καὶ σοφιστικῶς ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἡμῶν: The brother is certainly Lamprias. Plut. usually displays him as a vivid, hu-

morous and emotional character; cf. above, 617 E ὁ Λαμπρίας ἐκ πα-

ραβύστου καθήμενος καθάπερ εἰώθει μέγα φθεγξάμενος, and see ad loc. He describes him at 726 D: ὑβριστὴς δ᾽ dv καὶ φιλόγελως φύσει ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἡμῶν Λαμπρίας. Here he makes it entirely clear that the argument of his brother should not be taken seriously.

715 B

TABLE TALKS VID 10

137

715 B οἴει γὰρ ἂν ... εὑρεῖν: The rather bold hyperbaton was probably chosen for the sake of avoiding hiatus. Lamprias’ contribution as a whole is characterized by rhetorical style and sophistic argumentation. 715 B τοσούτων φιλολόγων Kal πολιτικῶν παρόντων: The fact that many politicians were present was certainly the reason why political issues happened to come up during dinner; see 714 A, D.

715 B περὶ τούτων μὲν οἴει καὶ σεαυτὸν ἱκανῶς ἂν εἰπεῖν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, πρὸς δὲ πραγματικὴν καὶ πολιτικὴν σκέψιν ἀθέτως ἔχειν

διὰ τὸν οἶνον: Lamprias ironically points out the paradox that Nicostratus, himself a politician (καὶ σεαυτόν) and ποῖ ἃ scholar, thinks

that he is able to treat of philosophical problems, but not political issues, over wine and implies that he has already said everything that can be said on the question (ἱκανῶς ἂν εἰπεῖν πρὸς ἡμᾶς). Minar mistakenly translates as if he reads ἱκανόν and takes the phrase as referring to the future. Kaltw. translates correctly:

"Wie? Du glaubst also wohl, diese

Materie vollkommen ausgeführt zu haben...”

715 B ἢ τοῦθ᾽ ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ νομίζειν ὅτι ταῖς ὄψεσιν ὁ πίνων παρ(ορῶν τὰ μικρά, τὰ μεγάλα ὑπέργευ μεταβλέπει: Dübner discemed the lacuna, and Bern., in part depending upon Wytt., filled it plausibly: παρζορῶν τὰ μεγάλα, τὰ μικρὰ ὑπέργευ μεταβλέπει. However, the subsequent argumentation indicates that the two entities should change places: a man in his cups is only able to see and hear and apprehend things that are big, clear, continuous, concrete, useful and

unsophisticated, while he fails to catch sense impressions of what is small, occasional, abstract and too polished and subtle. Cf. the parallel verbs παρορῶν, παρακούει, ἐκφύγοι. — The changed word-order means that Hubert’s doubts about μετοβλέπει appear as unnecessary; the verb

here means ‘look after’, or perhaps ‘look at instead’; cf. Apoll. Rhod. I 725 τῆς μὲν ῥηίτερόν xev ἐς ἠέλιον ἀνιόντα | ὄσσε βάλοις, ἢ κεῖνο μεταβλέψειας ἔρευθος. This interpretation is supported by the phrase τὴν αἴσθησιν ἐπιστρέφειν in the subsequent sentence.

715 BC ὡς yap ἐνταῦθα μᾶλλον εἰκός ἐστι τῶν γλαφυρῶν τὰ χρειώδη τὴν αἴσθησιν ἐπιστρέφειν, οὕτως καὶ τὴν διάνοιαν οὐ θαυμάσαιμί γ᾽ ἂν εἴτι τῶν φιλοσόφων καὶ περιττῶν ἐκφύγοι παρ᾽ οἶνον, eig δὲ πραγματικὰς σκέψεις ἀγομένην KtA.: This sophisticated comparison implying the virtual equalization of subtle philo-

138

TABLE TALKS VII 10

115 BC

sophical issues with excessively polished musical entertainment as being unpractical and of little use is rather striking and might not be expected by Plut, However, it displays Plutarch’s interest and skill in rhetorical declamation and argumentation. As a matter of fact Plut. mainly rejects rhetoric in theory, but makes use of it in practice to a

large extent. See Fernández Delgado, Estudios Clásicos 34 (1992) 31-63. 715 C ὥσπερ ὁ Φιλιππος ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ, πολλὰ ληρῶν ὑπὸ μέθης καὶ καταγέλαστος ὦν, xtÀ.: This is a much abridged version of the story as told by Diod. XVI 87, according to which the impulse that

made Philip sober was given by Demades, the Athenian rhetor, who was one of the captives taken in the battle of Chaeronea. He dared to

teproach the king for his disgraceful behaviour. Only thereafter did Demades negotiate the political agreements: τέλος δ᾽ ὑπὸ τοῦ Δημάδου καθομιληθέντα tats ᾿Αττικαῖς χάρισι πάντας ἀπολῦσαι τοὺς αἰχμαλώτους ἄνευ λύτρων, ... πρέσβεις ἀποστεῖλαι πρὸς τὸν δῆμον τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ συνθέσθαι πρὸς αὐτοὺς φιλίαν τε καὶ συμμαχίαν. Cf. Suda A 415 Δημάδης ... ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ δὲ αἰχμάλωtoc γενόμενος ἀφείθη καὶ πρεσβευτὴς ὑπὲρ τῶν αἰχμαλώτων ἀπεστάλη, ods ἀνῆκε Φίλιππος. Plut. mentions Demades at Praec. ger. reip. 803 A, Dem. 10.2, Phoc. 16.5. One would expect him to state his name here too.

715 CD καίτοι τὸ πίνειν τοῦ μεθύειν διαφέρει, καὶ τοὺς μεθύον-

τας ὥστε ληρεῖν οἰόμεθα δεῖν ἀπιόντας καθεύδειν: Lamprias (Plut.) apologizes for his strained and scarcely convincing example,

thus admitting that it was exaggerated. Above, in the prooemium of Book IU, Plut. discusses the difference between exhilaration (οἴνωσις)

and intoxication (μέθη) and stresses the risk of foolish babbling in the latter stage: 645 A τὸ δὲ λαλεῖν καὶ λέγειν, ἃ βέλτιον ἣν σιωπᾶν, παροινίας ἤδη καὶ μέθης ἔργον ἐστίν. This distinction was made a philosophical question and was discussed especially by the Stoics: SVF III frg. 712 ἐσπουδάσθη δὲ παρὰ πολλοῖς τῶν φιλοσόφων ἡ σκέψις οὐ μετρίως" προτείνεται δὲ οὕτως" εἰ μεθυσθήσεται ὁ σοφός, frg. 644 οἰνωθήσεσθαι μέν, ob μεθυσθήσεσθαι δὲ (sc. τὸν σπουδαῖον); cf. De garr. 503 D-F, and above, 620 C.

715 Ὁ (ὁρῶντας) ὀρχηστάς te καὶ κιθαριστὰς οὐδέν τι χεῖρον ἐν συμποσίοις f| θεάτροις πράττοντας: Addition Xyl., Amyot. Doe. Il

1150

TABLE TALKSVII 10

139

49 would instead insert the word after θεάτροις where, ín his view, the reason for its loss is more easily seen. However, the governing word has its natural place at the beginning of the clause, and the position before the objects is more probable than before the participle at the end. — The

observation indicates the interesting facts that the hired professional musicians and dancers were offered plenty of wine in connection with their performances at wine-parties and that, on the other hand, they acted soberly at the theatres. Also the guests themselves occasionally

entertained each other with song and dance, but only when moderately exhilarated; see above, on 614 D, and cf. 645 A φδὴ μὲν γὰρ καὶ γέλως καὶ ὄρχησις οἰνουμένοις μετρίως ἔπεισι, De garr. 503 E.

715 D ἣ γὰρ ἐμπειρία παροῦσα καὶ τὸ σῶμα ταῖς ἐνεργείαις ὀρθούμενον παρέχει καὶ συγκινούμενον ἀσφαλῶς: A definition of experience is given by Schol. Dion. Thrac., Bekker, Anecd. H 731.27 πείρα τοίνυν ἐστὶ κυρίως ἡ ἅπαξ τινὸς πράγματος δοκιμασία ἄλο105, ἐμπειρία δὲ ἣ πολλάκις τοῦ αὐτοῦ πράγματος δοκιμασία ἄλο-

yos, 11 732.25 οὐδὲν γὰρ ἄλλο ἐστὶν ἐμπειρία ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἀλόγου τέχνης κατόρθωσις. 1150 κολλοῖς δ᾽ ἰταμότητα θάρσους συνεργὸν ὁ ἄκρατος, οὐ [δὲ] βδελυρὰν οὐδ᾽ ἄκρατον ἀλλ᾽ εὔχαριν καὶ πιθανήν, προστίθησιν:

Hirsch., Hartm. substituted ἄκαιρον for ἄκρατον, Cast. Gnomon 17 (1941) 257 suggested ἀνόητον. There is no good reason to change the word. Plut. occasionally admits repetitions; cf. above, on 624 E πικρὰ τῇ γεύσει, 671 A, 713 F. Here he wittily uses ἄκρατος in two senses

within the same sentence. — For the idea that wine strengthens selfconfidence and intellectual activity, cf. above, 700 E τὰς ζητήσεις πολὺ προθυμοτέρας καὶ θρασυτέρας τὰς ἀποφάνσεις τοῦ οἴνου ποιοῦντος.

115 DE ὥσπερ καὶ τὸν Αἰσχύλον ἱστοροῦσι τὰς τραγῳδίας ἐμπίνοντα ποιεῖν: The rumour is repeated frequently. Plut. cites it above, 622 E; see ad loc., and cf. Chamaeleon ap. Athen. 22 A; Lucian.

Dem. encom. 15. According to Plut. frg. 130 Sandb., Sophocles criticized Aeschylus: Σοφοκλῆς ἐμέμφετο Αἰσχύλῳ, ὅτι μεθύων ἔγραφε-

καὶ γὰρ εἰ τὰ δέοντα ποιεῖ, φησίν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ εἰδώς γε. Cf. Athen. 428 F, Eustath. 1598.59 Αἰσχύλος οὖν ἐν τῷ μεθύειν γράφων ἐπαινετὰς τραγῳδίας ἤκουσε παρὰ Σοφοκλέους τό, ὦ Αἰσχύλε, εἰ καὶ τὰ δέοντὰ ποιεῖς, ὅμως οὐκ εἰδώς γε ποιεῖς.

140

TABLE TALKS VII 10

7"15E

715 E καὶ οὐχ, ὡς Γοργίας εἶπεν, ἕν τῶν δραμάτων αὐτοῦ μεστὸν

"Ἄρεως εἶναι, τοὺς “Ext’ ἐπὶ Θήβας, ἀλλὰ πάντα Διονύσου: Gorg. frg. B 24. The judgement is spoken by Aeschylus himself at Aristoph. Ran. 1021 δρᾶμα ποιήσας Ἄρεως μεστόν. ΔΙ. ποῖον; AIX. τοὺς “Ent”

ἐπὶ Θήβας. The fact that Aristoph. has the judgement indicates that it may well be due to Gorgias and that, consequently, there is no reason to doubt that Plut. actually cites him. Nevertheless, this was doubted by Herw. (Plut. et Luc. 28) who conjectured γοργῶς or γαυριάσας or δι᾿

ὀργῆς, and then by Papabasileios,

‘A@nv&

14 (1902)

165f. ὡς

γοργι(άσγας (τις) εἶπεν, and Naber (1900): ὡς (μεγαλη)γοργήσας, to which Hartm. assents.

715 E θερμαντικὸς γὰρ Sv κατὰ tov Πλάτωνα τῆς ψυχῆς μετὰ tod σώματος ὁ οἶνος: Τίνι. 60 Α τὸ μὲν τῆς ψυχῆς μετὰ τοῦ σώματος θερμαντικὸν οἶνος; cf. Athen. 185 C πρὸς φιλίαν τι ὁ οἶνος ἑλκυστικόν, παραθερμαίνων τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ διαχέων. The Atomists denied, according to their theory of atoms, that wine is either warm or cold by nature, and among the Peripatetics the opinions apparently differed. Plut. treats the question in Adv. Col. 1109 E-1110 B and dedicates Talk HIS

to the problem, see on 652 A.

715 E edöponov τὸ σῶμα ποιεῖ καὶ πόρους ῥήγνυσι φαντασιῶν ἐφελκομένων μετὰ τοῦ θαρρεῖν τὸν λόγον: The active element, heat, that opens up the passageways and enhances the functions of body and soul may, according to Plut., derive from and be brought about by various causes, e.g., the mantic breath that invades the Delphic ora-

cle: De def. or. 432 E θερμότητι γὰρ καὶ διαχύσει πόρους τινὰς ἀνοίγειν φανταστικοὺς τοῦ μέλλοντος εἰκός ἐστιν (sc. τὸ μαντικὸν πνεῦμα), ὡς οἶνος ἀναθυμιαθεὶς ἕτερα πολλὰ κινήματα καὶ λόγους ἀποκειμένους καὶ λανθάνοντας ἀποκαλύπτει. Cf. the effects of erot-

ic passion, Amat. 765 B ὅσοι δὲ σώφρονι λογισμῷ μετ᾽ αἰδοῦς οἷον ἀτεχνῶς πυρὸς ἀφεῖλον τὸ μανικόν, αὐγὴν δὲ καὶ φῶς ἀπέλιπον τῇ

ψυχῇ μετὰ θερμότητος, ..., διάχυσιν δὲ θαυμαστὴν καὶ γόνιμον ὥσπερ ἐν φυτῷ βλαστάνοντι καὶ τρεφομένῳ καὶ πόρους ἀνοίγουσαν εὐπειθείας καὶ φιλοφροσύνης. The exhalations of flowers open up the

ducts of the body; cf. above, 647 D τῶν μὲν θερμῶν μαλακῶς dvaχαλώντων τοὺς πόρους καὶ ἀναπνοὴν τῷ οἴνῳ διδόντων, as well as

those of ivy: 648 Ε θερμότητι ... (sc. τὸν κιττὸν) ἀνοίγοντα τοὺς πόρους. For the effect of wine, cf. Ps.-Arist. Probl. 873 a 6 ὁ μὲν ἄκρατος παχυμερὴς dv εἰς τοὺς περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν πόρους στενοὺς

"5E

TABLE TALKS VII 10

141

ὄντας αὐτὸς μὲν οὐκ εἰσπίπτει, ἡ δὲ δύναμις αὐτοῦ, ἡ ὀσμὴ καὶ θερμότης: κτλ. — Svoboda, ‘Les idées esthétiques de Plutarque’, Mélanges Bidez. Annuaire de l’Inst. de philol. et d'hist. or. 2 (1934)

937 observes that at our passage Plut. reflects Posidonius’ idea of the double movement of (München 1921) 438f.

the

soul.

See

K.

Reinhardt,

Poseidonios

715 E ἔνιοι γὰρ εὑρετικὴν φύσιν ἔχοντες, ἐν δὲ τῷ νήφειν ἀτολμοτέραν καὶ πεπηγυῖαν, ὅταν εἰς τὸ πίνειν ἔλθωσιν ὥσπερ ὁ λιβανωτὸς ὑπὰ θερμότητος ἀναθυμιῶνται: To judge from what Plut. says above, 622 E, this description seems to reflect the opinion of his grandfather: ἣν δὲ Λαμπρίας ὁ ἡμέτερος πάππος ἐν τῷ πίνειν edpeπὠικώτατος αὑτὸς αὑτοῦ καὶ λογιώτατος εἰώθει δὲ λέγειν ὅτι τῷ λιβανωτῷ παραπλησίως ὑπὸ θερμότητος ἀναθυμιᾶται. The peculiar, vivid way of description, that the consumer himself ‘gets into evaporation’, may actually have been a set phrase of Plutarch’s grandfather. For the notion of evaporation from food or wine, cf. Arist. De som. et vig. 456 b 3 τῆς μὲν οὖν θύραθεν τροφῆς εἰσιούσης εἰς τοὺς δεκτικοὺς τόπους γίνεται ἡ ἀναθυμίασις εἰς τὰς φλέβας; Plut. De Is. et Os. 384 Αἡ τῆς τροφῆς ἀναθυμίασις οἷον ἕρπουσα λείως περὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα, and see above, on 647 D, 689 E.

715 F καὶ (τὸ) κακόηθες καὶ τὸ ὕπουλον ὥσπερ τινὰς διπλόας ἀναπτύσσει τῆς ψυχῆς, καὶ παντὸς ἤθους καὶ πάθους ποιεῖ κα΄ ταφάνειαν ἐν τοῖς λόγοις: Plut. treats the notion of ‘in vino veritas’ above, 644 F-645 B, see ad occ. The thought is found in Plat. Leg. 649 Ἐδυσκόλου ψυχῆς καὶ ἀγρίας ... πεῖραν λαμβάνειν ... ξυγγενόμενον μετὰ τῆς τοῦ Διονύσου θεωρίας, and cf. Clem. Paed. II 48.3 μάλιστα

pov ἐν οἴνῳ καθορᾶσθαι τὰ ἤθη τῶν ὑπούλων συμβέβηκεν τῆς ὑποκρίσεως ἀπογυμνούμενα διὰ τὴν ἀνελεύθερον παρρησίαν τῆς παροινίας. — For the metaphorical use of διπλόη, cf. Plat. Soph. 267 E.

τὸν δοξομιμητὴν δὴ σκοπώμεθα ὥσπερ σίδηρον, εἴτε ὑγιῆς εἴτε διαλύην ἔτ᾽ ἔχων τινά ἐστιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ. TIS F ἔστι δὲ παρρησίας καὶ δι’ αὐτὴν ἀληθείας γονιμώτατος:" ἧς μὴ παρούσης οὐδὲν ἐμπειρίας οὐδ᾽ ἀγχινοίας ὄφελος: Kock, CAF [Π474 thought that this is a rather free quotation from Comedy, Adesp. fig. 347a. This is quite conjectural. Lamprias obviously alludes to 714 E. He opposes Nicostratus’ sophisticated argument in a serious, rather moralizing tone.

142

TABLE TALKS VII 10

T16A

716 A ἀλλὰ πολλοὶ τῷ ἐπιόντι χρώμενοι μᾶλλον κατορθοῦσιν ἢ (ei) κρύπτουσιν κτλ. The addition Doe. is plausible, even if ἢ (οὗ κρύπτοντες Re., or ἢ κρύπτοντες Hu. might also be right.

716 A ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ τὰ κουρεῖα Θεόφραστος εἰώθει καλεῖν Kowe συμπόσια διὰ τὴν λαλιάν: Frg. 76, also quoted above, 679 A, see ad loc.

716 A οὕτως ἄοινος ἀεὶ μέθη καὶ σκυθρωπὴ ταῖς τῶν ἀπαιδεύτων ἐνοικεῖ ψυχαῖς, ἐπιταραττομένη ὑπ᾽ ὀργῆς τινος ἢ δυσμενείας ἢ φιλονεικίας ἢ ἀνελευθερίας: Bens. (p. 497f.) proposed ἐπιταραιτομέναις because of the hiatus. Doe, (Vind. 79f.), Bern., Hartm. sup-

ported

the change

(Hartm.

incidentally

wrote

ἐπιταραττομένοις).

Neither the context nor the hiatus is reason for change; see Bolk. 79. —

The view expressed here by Lamprias (Plut.) is noticeable: he ascribes to lack of education a number of psychological reactions which it would be more reasonable to regard as due to the natural character rather than to acquired qualities. The opinion of such unpleasant reactions as those mentioned here originates from Plato: bad behaviour can be eliminated

through information leading to awareness of the good; cf. Leg.644 A ó νῦν δὴ λόγος ἡμῖν ὀμολογηθεὶς μενέτω, ὡς οἵ γε ὀρθῶς πεπαιδευμένοι σχεδὸν ἀγαθοὶ γίγνονται, καὶ δεῖ δὴ τὴν παιδείαν μηδαμοῦ ἀτιμάζειν.

716 ΑΒ ὁ οἶνος ... ποιεῖ ... οὐδὲ παρορατικοὺς τοῦ συμφέροντος ἀλλὰ τοῦ καλοῦ προαιρετικούς; For the combination of usefulness and fairness, cf. Quaest. Plat. 999 A, De ad. et am. 54 F αἱ μὲν τῶν φίλων χάριτες ἐπὶ καλῷ τινι καὶ ὠφελίμῳ τὸ εὐφραῖνον ὥσπερ ἐπ-

ανθοῦν ἔχουσιν, and see further G. Völsing, Plutarchus quid de pulchritudinis vi ac natura senserit (Diss. Marburg 1908) 35f.

716 B τὴν ψευδοδοξίαν καὶ ἀνελευθερίαν: Russel, CR 12 (1962) 308, would add καὶ (μετριότητα τὴν) ἀνελευθερίαν, and refers to Plat. Rep. 560 D μετριότητα δὲ καὶ κοσμίαν δαπάνην ὡς ἀγροικίαν καὶ ἀνελευθερίαν οὖσαν πείθοντες which, however, gives no support for the addition. Plut. wrote two nouns for variation in this last link.

716 B of παλαιοὶ tov θεὸν ᾿Ἐλευθερέα καὶ Λύσιον ἐκάλουν: See above, on 613 C, and cf. Quaest. Rom. 288 F διὰ τί τὸν Διόνυσον Λίβεpour Πάτρεμ καλοῦσι; πότερον ὡς ἐλευθερίας πατέρα τοῖς πιοῦσι

6B

TABLE TALKS VII 10

143

γενόμενον; γίνονται yap οἱ πολλοὶ θρασεῖς Kai παρρησίας ὑπο-

πιμπλῶνται περὶ τὰς μέθας, 716 B μαντικῆς πολλὴν ἔχειν ἡγοῦντο μοῖραν, οὐ διὰ τὸ βακχεύσιμον καὶ μανιῶδες, ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης εἶπεν: Bern. unnecessarily would add the art., καὶ (t0) μανιῶδες, in accordance with Eur. Bacch. 298 τὸ yap βακχεύσιμον | καὶ τὸ μανιῶδες μαντικὴν πολλὴν ἔχει. Plut. quotes these lines verbatim at De def. or. 432 E, while in our passage he cites freely. -- Plut. quotes Euripides very frequently, twice as often as Sophocles and six times more than Aeschylus; see Helmbold-O’Neil, 30-33, and H. Schläpfer, Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Diss. Zürich 1950) 48-56. Plutarch’s frequent quoting of

the tragedians is noticeable considering his — theoretically motivated — negative attitude to tragedy; see De Lacy, APh 73 (1952) 159-171; Tagliasacchi, Dioniso 34 (1960) 124—142, and cf. above, on 711 E. --

The speech as a whole, and particularly the eloquent style of the concluding part, is a good example of Plutarch's rhetoric. For his practice of giving the talk an elegant conclusion through a quotation, see above,

on 627 F, 648 A, 651 E, 675 CD, and see ad locc.

BOOK VII

Book VIII contains questions of a more qualified and serious kind than all other books in the work. Especially question 2 on Plato’s geometicizing god gives an interesting insight into Plutarch's Platonism. Close parallels are found in Quaest. Plat. Questions 7 and 8 are discussions on Pythagorean precepts and abstemious rules against flesh and fish, an indication of Plutarch's acquaintance with and personal interest in Pythagoreanism. Another important subject is treated in Talk 9, the question whether new diseases may develop or not Tak | ends with a discussion on the possibility of divine impregnation of mortal women, which is of considerable interest for the

history of religion. In three dialogues (3, 5, 10) scientific questions belonging to the Peripatetic sphere are treated. Only one topic (6) may be

regarded as belonging to the class of συμποτικὰ προβλήματα, although the discussion about the etymology of the names of the meals could al-

so be classified as philosophical. Thus, strictly speaking, no talk in this book is sympotic in the proper sense. PROOEMIUM

116 D οἱ φιλοσοφίαν, ὦ Σόσσιε Levexiwv, ἐκ τῶν συμποσίων ἐκβάλλοντες οὗ ταὐτὸ ποιοῦσι τοῖς τὸ φῶς ἀναιροῦσιν, ἀλλὰ χεῖρον: Plut. chose to treat this theme as the very first of the Table Talks, in 11.

716D ὅσῳ λύχνου μὲν ἀρθέντος οἱ μέτριοι καὶ σώφρονες οὐδὲν ἔσοντον κακίους, τὸ αἰδεῖσθαι τοῦ βλέπειν

ἀλλήλους

μεῖζον

ἔχοντες; Plut. applies this thought especially to married women at Coni. praec. 1448 E γυνῇ τις πρὸς. τὸν Φίλιππον ἄκουσαν ἐφελκόμενον

αὐτὴν ἄφες μ᾽, εἶπε, πᾶσα γυνὴ Tod λύχνου ἀρθέντος ἢ αὐτῇ ἐστι

146

TABLE TALKS Vill PROOEMIUM

16D

τοῦτο πρὸς τοὺς μοιχικοὺς καὶ ἀκολάστους. εἴρηται καλῶς, τὴν δὲ γαμετὴν δεῖ μάλιστα τοῦ φωτὸς ἀρθέντος εἶναι μὴ τὴν αὐτὴν ταῖς τυχούσαις γυναιξίν, ἀλλὰ φαίνεσθαι τοὺ σώματος μὴ βλεπομένου τὸ σῶφρον αὐτῆς καὶ ἴδιον τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ τεταγμένον καὶ φιλόστοργον. 716 DE ἀμαθίας δὲ δὴ καὶ ἀμουσίας σὺν οἴνῳ παρούσης οὐδ᾽ ὁ τῆς ᾿Αθηνᾶς χρυσοῦς λύχνος ἐκεῖνος εὔχαριν ἂν πότον καὶ κόσμιον παράσχοι: Cf. above, on 613 Β, 644 Ε -- Plut. probably alludes to Od. XIX 33 where Athena lights the way for Telemachus and

Odysseus: πάροιθε δὲ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη, | χρύσεον λύχνον ἔχουσα, φάος περικαλλὲς ἐποίει. The allusion may also be a more general one to Athena’s character of goddess of light, suggested by her shin-

ing, sparkling eyes; cf. Al. I 199 αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἔγνω | Παλλάδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην - δεινὼ δέ oi ὄσσε φάανθεν, and the epithets γλαυκῶπις, γοργῶπις, ὀφθαλμῖτις, and ὀξυδερκής. In her capacity of night owl she was thought to provide sharp vision and bright intellect to hu-

mans.

716 E σιωπῶντας μὲν γὰρ ἐμπίπλασθαι pet’ ἀλλήλων κομιδῇ συῶδες καὶ ἴσως ἀδύνατον: Plut. frequently makes use of comparisons with animals to censure ravenous appetite and voracity; see above, on 680 B συμπεφορημένους ὑπὸ τοῦ λιμοῦ κυνηδόν. When writing the last phrase, καὶ ἴσως ἀδύνατον, Plut. perhaps thought of the apophthegm of Heraclitus that he cited above, 644 F ἀμαθίην γὰρ ἄμεινον, ὥς φησιν Ἡράκλειτος, κρύπτειν, ἔργον δ᾽ ἐν ἀνέσει καὶ παρ᾽ οἶνον. 716 E ὁ δὲ λόγον μὲν ἀπολιπὼν ἐν συμποσίῳ, τὸ δὲ τεταγμένως χρῆσθαι λόγῳ καὶ ὠφελίμως οὐ προσιέμενος πολὺ γελοιότερός ἐστιν KtA.: Plutarch’s claim for well-ordered, well-conducted and useful talk is rigorous indeed; he uses a wording that recalls the atmosphere of a rather formal meeting led by a stern chairman. By his strong emphasis he shows that he could not bear listening to meaningless chatter at wine-parties. The subjects discussed should be of general interest,

and the talks should yield thoughts and aspects worth considering. Elsewhere in the Talks, on the other hand, he repeatedly warns that the themes under discussion should not be so difficult and esoteric that not al guests could participate; see above, on 614 E δεῖ γὰρ ὡς τὸν οἶνον

κοινὸν εἶναι καὶ tov λόγον.

N16E

TABLE TALKS VIII PROOEMIUM

147

716 E ἄκρατον δὲ τὸν οἶνον αὐτοῖς ἐγχέοντος καὶ τοὔψον ἀνήδυντον καὶ ἀκάθαρτον παρατιθέντος: By this description of a vulgar feast Plut. probably refers to such revelling as is depicted by Petronius in Cena Trim. -- The notion of purity was very important in

Greek everyday life. The demand on food and drink to be pure and wholesome was strong, and the consciousness of purity of the humours of the body was highly sensitive, as is frequently mentioned and alluded to by Plut.; cf., e.g., 671 A ob μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ θολερὸν περὶ τὴν δίαιταν τοῦ θρέμματος (sc. τῶν ὑῶν) ἔχει τινὰ πονηρίαν, 693 B ἡ κάθαρσις τοῦ οἴνου τὸ πληκτικὸν ἀφαιροῦσα καὶ μανικόν, 725 D μάλιστα δὲ γῆ μιχθεῖσα πρὸς ὕδωρ ἐξίστησιν καὶ φθείρει τὸ πότιμον καὶ οἰκεῖον. See further passages collected by L. van der Stockt, Twinkling and Twilight (Brussels 1992) 134 n. 53.

716 E οὕτως ἀηδές: Bens. (p. 498), before Bern., corrected οὕτω T. 716 F τὴν γοῦν μέθην oi λοιδοροῦντες φιλόσοφοι λήρησιν πά-

ροινον ἀποκαλοῦσιν τὸ δὲ ληρεῖν οὐδέν ἐστιν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ λόγῳ κενῷ χρῆσθαι καὶ φλυαρώδει" κτλι.: Plut. also cites this definition of intoxication at De garr. 504 B οἱ δὲ φιλόσοφοι καὶ δριζόμενοι τὴν μέθην λέγουσιν εἶναι λήρησιν πάροινον: οὕτως οὐ ψέγεται τὸ πίνειν, εἰ προσείη τῷ πίνειν τὸ σιωπᾶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ μωρολογία μέθην ποιεῖ τὴν οἴνωσιν, and cf. above, 645 A τὸ δὲ λαλεῖν καὶ λέγειν, ἃ βέλτιον ἣν σιωκᾶν, παροινίας ἤδη καὶ μέθης ἔργον ἐστίν. In these passages Plut. reflects the probably vivid discussion, especially among Stoics, εἰ μεθυσθήσεται ὁ σοφός. See above, on 645 A οἰνώσεως, 715 CD. 716 F παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἐν τοῖς ᾿Αγριωνίοις τὸν Διόνυσον αἱ γυναῖκες ὡς

ἀποδεδρακότα ζητοῦσιν, εἶτα παύονται καὶ λέγουσιν ὅτι πρὸς τὰς Μούσας καταπέφευγεν: The name of this festival derives from the Boeotian-Thessalian month name ᾿Αγριώνιος, a variant of the Doric ᾿Αγριάνιος, which corresponded to the Athenian Σκιροφοριῶν, our

June/July. The festival is known from Argos, where it had the character of a funeral celebration, and at Thebes it took the form of a competition

in honour of Dionysus, perhaps in his capacity of god of the dead; sce Preller-Robert* 1 686f, Our passage, however, suggests an orgiastic, and not a funeral, celebration, presumably a quiet variant of the furious feast celebrated at Orchomenos, which Plut. describes at Quaest. Rom.

299 E-300 A; cf. also 291A. During that festival even killing might occur: the priest of Dionysus pursued and tried to kill the women descen-

148

TABLE TALKS VIII PROOEMIUM

716 F

ded from the daughters of Minyas who had committed cannibalism. At Chaeronea the celebration of the Agrionia was clearly a quite peaceful festival, to judge from Plutarch’s description which, however, is the only

one we have of it. The connection between Dionysus and the Muses is due to their character of being spring nymphs and thus closely related to the vegetative force of Dionysus. On an inscription of Naxos, Dionysus has the epithet Movonyétns: BCH 2 (1878) 587 no. 3. See Nilsson, Gr. Rel? I 598; Preller-Robert^ I 485f., 488f., and see Seaford, CQ 31 (1981) 263. - However, the Muses were also occasionally considered to be contrary to Dionysus, because of the disaster caused to Orpheus by the Maenads; see Aeschyl. frg. 22, pp. 137-139 Radt.

717 A αἰνίγματα καὶ γρίφους ἀλλήλαις προβάλλουσιν: For these pastimes see above, on 673 A. This occupation shows that the Agrionia festival at Chacronea had a quite calm character; it appears likely that this cel-

ebration was only a rudimentary survival of an old, manic feast.

717 A τοῦ μυστηρίου διδάσκοντος, ὅτι λόγῳ te Sei χρῆσθαι παp& πότον θεωρίαν τινὰ καὶ μοῦσαν ἔχοντι KtA.: This is presumably Plutarch’s own interpretation of the ritual meal of the Chaeronean Agrionia and its sequel, the pleasant entertainments and convivial conversations.

He

uses

the mythological

contents

of the λόγος

of the

Dionysiac mysteries as a justification of convivial philosophical discussion, in a similar way as in his allegoric argumentation at 613 Ὁ οὐχ ἧττον ταῖς Μούσαις tov Διόνυσον ἢ ταῖς Νύμφαις κεραννύντας, see ad loc.

717 A ἃ τοίνυν ἐν τοῖς Πλάτωνος γενεθλίοις πέρυσι καὶ ἀκοῦσαι καὶ εἰπεῖν συνέτυχεν ἡμῖν: This precise information about the time of the two following talks is interesting because, if we should not think that they are entirely fictitious, it would mean that Plut. actually reports discussions of a real wine-party that took place rather recently and that, consequently, his representation of these talks at least might be authentic to a considerable extent, seeing that he could rely on a fairly fresh memory. TALK 1 There is no indication as to where this talk (and the next) took place, but

we may safely suppose that the place is Plutarch's home. What we have

NTA

TABLE TALKS VIII 1

149

here is presumably a look into the customary celebration of the birthdays of Socrates and Plato in the circle of intellectuals, students and friends who gathered around Plutarch at Chaeronea.

Celebrations of birthdays, not only of famous and official personages but also of private

persons,

were

certainly

common

in antiquity.

Evidence for this is found, e.g., in epigrams; see Anth. Pal. VI 227, 261, 321, 325, 329, 345, IX 93, 349, 353, 355; cf. Lucian. Gall. 9 θυγατρὸς τήμερον ἑστιῷ γενέθλια καὶ παρεκάλεσα τῶν φίλων μάλα πολλούς, xth,, Id. Hermot. 11 ἐλέγετο δὲ παρ᾽ Εὐκράτει τῷ πάνυ δειπνήσας χθὲς γενέθλια θυγατρὸς ἑστιῶντι πολλά τε συμφιλοσοφῆσαι ἐν τῷ συμποσίῳ κτλ. See G. Schmidt, De die natali apud veteres celebrato quaestiones selectae (Diss. Hannover 1905) 14—22, Id. Der Geburtstag im Altertum (Giessen 1909) 88f. The birthdays of famous personalities

such as founders of philosophical schools were commemorated and celebrated by their supporters and members of the different schools respectively; see G. Schmidt (1905) 12-14; P. Boyancé, Le culte des muses (Paris 1937) 263. Plutarch's interest in important dates as seen in

his talk perhaps resulted in a monograph, Περὶ ἡμερῶν, if we believe that the book with this title now lost, listed as no. 150 in the Lamprias Catalogue, was actually written by him.

717 B τῇ ἕκτῃ τοῦ Θαργηλιῶνος ἱσταμένου τὴν Σωκράτους ἀγαγόντες γενέθλιον τῇ ἑβδόμῃ τὴν Πλάτωνος ἤγομεν: The months were each divided in three parts,

ἱστάμενος,

μεσῶν

and

φθίνων. The dates are thus the sixth and seventh of the month as a whole. Thargelion was the eleventh month of the Attic year and corresponded roughly to our May; see Sontheimer, RE s.v. The information

about the birthdays of Socrates and Plato was found in Apollodorus’ Chronica, which is cited by Diog. Laert. II 44 and DI 2. As a matter of fact the real birthdays of the two philosophers were probably unknown. The myths that developed about Plato made him the son of Apollo and, asaconsequence, located his birth on the birthday of the god, the 7th of

Thargelion, which was the holy day of celebration of Apollo and the day of the Thargelia festival. Presumably, as a further consequence, the birthday of Socrates was thought to be the day before; see Apul. Dogm. Plat. 1 sunt qui Platonem augustiore conceptu prosatum dicunt, cum quaedam Apollinis figuratio Perictionae se miscuisset, mense etiam, qui apud Atticos Thargelion dicitur, natus est: die, qua apud Delum Latona fertur Apollinem Dianamque peperisse, pridie Socratem genitum accepimus. The choice of the 7th day as the birthday of the god was

150

TABLE TALKS VIII 1

7118

presumably simply due to the idea of the holiness of this number. This date is first found connected with Apollo in Hes. Erga 770 but without indication of month; originally the seventh day of each month was consecrated to Apollo; cf. Hdt. VI 57.2 νεομηνίας δὲ πάσας καὶ ἑβδόμας ἱσταμένου tod μηνὸς δίδοσθαι ἐκ tod δημοσίου ἱρήιον τέλειον

ἑκατέρῳ ἐς ᾿Απόλλωνος; Call. Hymn. IV 249-252. See Preller-Robert* 1238. Cf. Plut. Quaest. Gr. 292 E ἐν τῷ μηνὶ γὰρ τούτῳ (sc. τῷ Βυσίῳ) χρηστήριον

ἐγίγνετο

γενέθλιον, De

καὶ

E 391

ἑβδόμην

F ἡ γὰρ

ταύτην

ἱερὰ τοῦ

νομίζουσι

tod θεοῦ

᾿Απόλλωνος

ἑβδομὰς

ἀναλώσει τὴν ἡμέραν πρότερον ἢ λόγῳ τὰς δυνάμεις αὐτῆς ἁπάσας

ἐπεξελθεῖν. 717 B Διογενιανὸς ὁ Περγαμηνός; D. also takes part in the discussions of VII 8 and VIII 9, and his son is one of the participants in De Pyth. or. Diogenianus was probably a hterate and learned man and a congenial friend of Plutarch.

717 B ἔφη γὰρ οὐ φαύλως εἰπεῖν Ἴωνα περὶ τῆς τύχης ὅτι πολλὰ τῆς σοφίας διαφέρουσα πλεῖστ᾽ αὐτῇ ὅμοια ποιεῖ: Bern. unnecessarily deleted αὐτῇ because of the hiatus. The opinion of Benseler that Plut. avoided hiatus practically without exception is exaggerated; see above, on 624 E, 630 D, 652 B, 704 A. — Ion, frg. B3. DK® I 379 noted that this quotation is from an unidentified prose work by Ion of Chios. Our knowledge of the prose writings of this prolific writer is limited and uncertain. Among other things he is known to have written a philosophical

thesis

with

the

tide

Τριαγμός,

characterized

by

Pythagorean

thought; see A 1, and frgs. B1-2. Seeing that Plutarch was interested in Pythagoreanism, it is possible that this was the work quoted here. However, at De fort. Rom. 316 D Plut. also cites Ion exactly for the observation of the virtual similarity of σοφία and τύχη and mentions that this is read in a prose work by him written kataAoyndov. A work called Πρεσβευτικός that was written in this way is mentioned by Schol. Aristoph. Pax 835, but he adds that this work is considered not to be

written by Jon: καταλογάδην τὴν Πρεσβευτικὸν λεγόμενον, ὃν νόθον ἀξιοῦσιν εἶναί τινες καὶ οὐχὶ αὐτοῦ. — On Plutarch’s rather undecided opinions about chance, see E. E. Brenk, In Mist Apparelled (Leiden 1977) 146—154, and Swain, A/Ph 110 (1989) 272-302.

717 B τοῦτο μέντοι μουσικῶς ἔοικεν ἀπαντοματίσαι τὸ μὴ μόνον οὕτω σύνεγγυς, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρότερον τῇ τάξει γεγονέναι τὸν

1118

TABLE TALKS VIII 1

151

πρεσβύτερον καὶ καθηγητήν: The correction τάξει Mez., Re.: δόξηι T is convincing; it would be inconceivable for a supporter of Plato, as Diogenianus is, to rank him after Socrates in regard to glory. However, one observes that πρότερον is truistic. — The part played by chance was a problem much discussed by Greek philosophers. The Atomists denied that chance is the cause of any physical processes; cf. Arist. Phys. 195 b36 (