Plato: Menexenus

Aspásia de Mileto (470?-400?) é uma figura cuja história nos é nebulosa e ao mesmo tempo muito clara. Nebulosa pois, como sugere Marta Andrade (2022, p. 24), trata-se de uma existência, como muitas outras, cuja memória a posteridade raramente se ocupou ou simplesmente esqueceu. Mas também clara pois Aspásia possui uma persona constituída no que chamamos de "tradição". A amante de Péricles. A professora de Sócrates. A esposa de Lísicles. Sua figura é frequentemente resgatada à sombra das figuras masculinas com (...) as quais se envolveu. Em grande medida porque as fontes que a resgatam trazem seu nome à margem, mas também em parte devido a uma postura metodológica que, por vezes, ignora nomes de mulheres. Neste artigo, viso recorrer às fontes para trazer à tona o protagonismo de Aspásia no que tange à educação e seu pioneirismo no pensamento retórico. Na primeira seção, desenvolverei uma breve biografia de Aspásia, sua possível influência política e suas habilidades pedagógicas. Na segunda seção, tratarei especialmente de suas contribuições para a retórica, abordando o discurso atribuído a si no Menêxeno de Platão e a Oração Fúnebre atribuída a Péricles por Tucídides. Por fim, na conclusão, diante das teses desenvolvidas, chegaremos a uma imagem mais digna de Aspásia, vislumbrando o retrato de uma mulher que dirige um elogio à coragem e cuja opinião incide diretamente em seu corpo social e político. Desse modo, compreenderemos melhor seus avanços nos âmbitos pedagógicos e retóricos, tidos como cruciais para o desenvolvimento dos cidadãos gregos. (shrink)

The article addresses the theme of spectrality, the givenness of the other who remains here after departure as a ghost. It explores how this spectrality functions in Plato’s funeral oratory in the Menexenus dialogue. In the first part, the article discusses J. Patočka’s account of the specific givenness of the departed, which is experienced as a privation of a former intersubjectively intertwined life. The deceased other causes a twofold crisis. On the one hand, with the death of the other also (...) comes the withering of part of myself, for I am unable to realise possibilities dependent on his or her presence. On the other hand, the meaning of the other’s project, which becomes institutionalised through participation in the events and re-formation of the world, is endangered if no one is willing to take on and realise this meaning as one’s own. The second part of the article discusses how Socrates’ oratory addresses this crisis through specific temporality of the speech, one in which the past provides the present with a paradigm for appropriate civic action which is to be imitated in the future. In this context, he creatively uses the concept of shame to induce an attitude of responsibility for the polis, whose greatness is grounded in the virtuous deeds of spectrally present ancestry. (shrink)

Like Socrates, Aspasia did not leave any writings. We know about her from secondary sources. In this paper, I will show a number of things in the reports of what Aspasia said and did that are philosophically interesting, especially in what they show about dealing with various kinds of crises, from marital to political ones. First, I will argue for the most probable reconstruction of her life. Second, I will elucidate what kind of method Aspasia employed when considering marital issues. (...) Third, I will endeavor to prove that Plato’s representation of Aspasia was not a mockery, as some authors argue. Furthermore, the most significant philosophical points of Aspasia’s Funeral Speech will be highlighted and assessed. Eventually, I will attempt to figure out what Plato’s reasons might have been to ascribe this speech to a woman. (shrink)

This book is a study of Plato’s most elementary dialogues, arranged in relation to Reading Order as opposed to order of composition. Beginning with the theatrical Protagoras and reaching a mountaintop in Symposium, the dialogues between them—Alcibiades, Lovers, Hippias, Ion, and Menexenus—introduce the student to both philosophy and Platonism.

This paper aims to present not only a translation of Plato’s _Menexenus_ into Portuguese but also cultural and historical notes, as well as explanatory ones concerning translation choices. It also contains a brief introduction to the dialogue.

Tradução para o português do diálogo Menêxeno de Platão, com notas culturais, históricas e algumas de elucidação sobre as escolhas tradutórias. Acrescenta-se uma breve introdução ao texto.

From student protests over the teaching of canonical texts such as Plato's Republic to the use of images of classical Greek statues in white supremacist propaganda, the world of the ancient Greeks is deeply implicated in a heated contemporary debate about identity and diversity. In Plato's Caves, Rebecca LeMoine defends the bold thesis that Plato was a friend of cultural diversity, contrary to many contemporary perceptions. Through close readings of four Platonic dialogues--Republic, Menexenus, Laws, and Phaedrus--LeMoine shows that, across Plato's (...) dialogues, foreigners play a role similar to that of Socrates: liberating citizens from intellectual bondage. (shrink)

The Menexenus, in spite of the dearth of scholarly attention it has traditionally received compared to other Platonic texts, is an important dialogue for any consideration of Plato's views on political philosophy, history, and rhetoric - to say nothing of the dialogue's contribution to the study of civic ideology and institutions, natural law theory, and Plato's notion of race. Speeches for the Dead unites the contributions of scholars working on diverse aspects of the dialogue, growing out of a one-day workshop (...) on the same subject at the University of Pennsylvania organized by the editors. In offering a variety of perspectives on the Menexenus, the volume is the very first of its kind in any language. In addition, the volume contains an up-to-date bibliography of scholarship in English, French, German, and Italian. This makes the book a definitive guide and ideal starting point for advanced students and scholars looking for further information about the dialogue. (shrink)

Plato’s political philosophy is usually seen in the context of domestic politics, justice within a polis. This essay argues that Plato had views on international relations theory as well. We show that Plato had a theory of the causes of international conflict, and that his theory can be seen as a response to Thucydides’ theory as well as theories espoused by other Greek thinkers. Plato’s theory can be generalized to a theory of causation in the social sciences. He also had (...) clear views on what international relations theorists now call “hegemonic stability theory,” “transition theory,” and the nature of political sovereignty. (shrink)

Menexenus is one of the least studied among Plato's works, mostly because of the puzzling nature of the text, which has led many scholars either to reject the dialogue as spurious or to consider it as a mocking parody of Athenian funeral rhetoric. In this book, Pappas and Zelcer provide a persuasive alternative reading of the text, one that contributes in many ways to our understanding of Plato, and specifically to our understanding of his political thought. The book is organized (...) into two parts. In the first part the authors offer a synopsis of the dialogue, address the setting and its background in terms of the Athenian funeral speech, and discuss the alternative readings of the dialogue, showing their weaknesses and strengths. In the second part, the authors offer their positive interpretation of the dialogue, taking particular care to explain and ground their interpretive criteria and method, which considers Plato's text not simply as a de-contextualized collection of philosophical arguments but offers a theoretically reading of the text that situates it firmly within its historical context. The book will become a reference point in the debate about the Menexenus and Plato's political philosophy more generally and marks an important contribution to our understanding of ancient thought and classical Athenian society. (shrink)

Una de las cuestiones más llamativas de las obras de Platón y Aristóteles estriba en su silencio acerca de la historia. Leyeron y criticaron a físicos, filósofos, matemáticos, biólogos, poetas, retóricos, políticos, etc. Sin embargo, sus citas a propósito de los historiadores de su momento cabrían en una cuartilla. En este breve artículo tratamos de ofrecer una explicación a propósito de tal omisión. Así mismo, aprovechamos para ofrecer una razón del Menéxeno y aportar una confirmación de las razones que condujeron (...) a L. Edelstein a cuestionar la autenticidad de las cartas séptima y octava atribuidas a Platón. One of the most showy questions about the works of Plato and Aristotle rests on them silence brings over of the history. They read and criticized physicists, philosophers, mathematicians, biologists, poets, rhetorical, political, etc. Nevertheless, their appointments about the historians of that moment would fit in a sheet of paper. In this brief article we try to offer an explanation about such an omission. Likewise, we are useful to offer a reason of the Menexenus and to contribute a confirmation of the reasons that L. Edelstein led to questioning the genuineness of seventh and eighth letters attributed to Plato. (shrink)

Every winter in the classical period, on a specifically chosen day, Athenians gathered together to mourn the men who had died in war. According to Thucydides, the bones of the dead killed in that year lay in state for two days before being carried in ten coffins organized by tribe to thedêmosion sêmawhere they were buried and then a speech was made in honour of the dead men by a man chosen by the city. As his description makes clear, this (...) ceremony was a public event attended not only by citizens and foreigners, but also by the female relatives of the dead men. Other sources report that thepolemarchosput on theagônfor those who died in the war and these contests included musical, athletic and hippic competitions. The war-dead also received sacrifices. The occasion combined burial with cult and games usually afforded to the divine, although how exactly this combination worked in practice is not clear because Thucydides, our single best source for the Epitaphia, focusses on the burial and the oration given by Pericles in the winter at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian War. (shrink)

The purpose of my paper is to express effective hypotheses on the charac­ter of the hetaira in some of Plato’s dialogues, particularly in the Sympo­sium – where its presence is implicit in the role of Alcibiades as the lover – and in the Menexenus, my starting point to investigate the character of Aspasia, the greatest courtesan of ancient Greece. I will also underline the relation between the courtesan and the sophistic rhetoric. My final remarks will provide some concise analysis of (...) the history of women and of gender studies in Italy. (shrink)

Plato's Menexenus is a persistent puzzle for interpreters, in the main because of its obscurity of purpose and apparent lack of philosophical matter. This article argues that, while no doubt an elusive piece, it can be counted quite definitely a dialogue of philosophical import, as well as one of its author's most subtly accomplished works. The article focuses on two portions of Aspasia's oration -- the account of the earliest Athenians and the exhortation to the living in the voice of (...) the dead -- to demonstrate the radical nature of the speech. Close attention to its subtle internal dynamic reveals not only the range of philosophical themes touched upon, but also its outrageous aspects and the strength of its indictment of the Athenian democracy. The article also affirms the consistency of this critique with Plato's reservations regarding that regime as expressed with most force and clarity in Republic and Gorgias. (shrink)

Plato’s Menexenus is a persistent puzzle for interpreters, in the main because of its obscurity of purpose and apparent lack of philosophical matter. This article argues that, while no doubt an elusive piece, it can be counted quite definitely a sdialogue of philosophical import, as well as one of its author’s most subtly accomplished works. The article focuses on two portions of Aspasia’s oration—the account of the earliest Athenians and the exhortation to the living in the voice of the dead—to (...) demonstrate the radical nature of the speech. Close attention to its subtle internal dynamic reveals not only the range of philosophical themes touched upon, but also its outrageous aspects and the strength of its indictment of the Athenian democracy. The article also affirms the consistency of this critique with Plato’s reservations regarding that regime as expressed with most force and clarity in Republic and Gorgias. (shrink)

Presented in the popular Cambridge Texts format are three early Platonic dialogues in a new English translation by Tom Griffith that combines elegance, accuracy, freshness and fluency. Together they offer strikingly varied examples of Plato's critical encounter with the culture and politics of fifth and fourth century Athens. Nowhere does he engage more sharply and vigorously with the presuppositions of democracy. The Gorgias is a long and impassioned confrontation between Socrates and a succession of increasingly heated interlocutors about political rhetoric (...) as an instrument of political power. The short Menexenus contains a pastiche of celebratory public oratory, illustrating its self-delusions. In the Protagoras, another important contribution to moral and political philosophy in its own right, Socrates takes on leading intellectuals (the 'sophists') of the later fifth century BC and their pretensions to knowledge. The dialogues are introduced and annotated by Malcolm Schofield, a leading authority on ancient Greek political philosophy. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Rhetoric of Parody in Plato's MenexenusFranco V. TrivignoIn Plato's Menexenus, Socrates spends nearly the entire dialogue reciting an epitaphios logos, or funeral oration, that he claims was taught to him by Aspasia, Pericles' mistress. Three difficulties confront the interpreter of this dialogue. First, commentators have puzzled over how to understand the intention of Socrates' funeral oration (see Clavaud 1980, 17–77).1 Some insist that it is parodic, performing an (...) essentially critical function (e.g., Loraux 1986); while others claim that it is serious, in particular as an expression of Plato's political ideal (e.g., Kahn 1963).2 Adherents on both sides seem to think that the options are mutually exclusive.3 Second, commentators have had difficulty understanding why Plato would have Socrates attribute his entire oration to Aspasia (e.g., Coventry 1989, 3; Pownall 2004, 60). Most agree that this move is ironic and that it has something to do with the alleged target of the dialogue's criticism. But scholars have differed over whether the Aspasia reference is meant to implicate Pericles' funeral oration (Monoson 1998), rhetoric in general (Pownall 2004), Athens (Loraux 1986), or even Aeschines (Clavaud 1980).4 Third, scholars have struggled to make sense of the dialogue's "deliberate and fantastic anachronism" (Dodds 1990, 24). In the funeral oration, Socrates relates the history of Athens up to the King's Peace in 386 B.C., a full thirteen years after he has died. This problem has generated the least consensus, with some scholars restricting their analysis [End Page 29] to dating considerations (e.g., Dodds 1990) and at least one speculating that Socrates speaks in this dialogue as a ghost (Rosenstock 1994).5It is the contention of this article that, by understanding the rhetoric of parody in the Menexenus, one can resolve these difficulties and come to a coherent and unified understanding of the philosophical intentions of the dialogue.6 More specifically, I will show that the anachronism is a consequence of a particular parodic strategy, that of amplification; that the dialogue's parody targets not only Pericles' funeral oration in particular but funeral oratory, rhetoric, and Athens as well; and that the parody has serious philosophical implications.7 Further, I claim that the serious philosophical content is both critical and constructive. Plato subverts the civic identity and understanding of virtue encouraged by the genre of funeral oration, and he challenges its praise-based model of political discourse. At the same time, Plato's parodic criticism is not entirely negative, for it relies on alternative paradigms of civic identity, virtue, and political discourse.I. The Rhetoric of ParodyBefore turning to the Menexenus itself, I want to clarify what I mean by parody. For a working definition, I suggest that parody is "an imitation that distorts a target text, author, or genre."8 In order to make some general observations about the rhetoric of parody, I will look briefly at an exemplar of parody from Aristophanes' Frogs. I do so for three reasons: to display two strategies of parodic distortion, to show that parody can have multiple targets, and to argue that parody can have both serious and complex intentions.9In the Frogs (1331–63), Aristophanes uses at least two techniques of parodic distortion, inversion and amplification, in his extended parody of Euripides' monodies or single-actor odes.10 Parodic inversion, broadly speaking, upsets or overturns the target text by distorting the original in a way that reverses the stylistic effect or semantic intention. Parodic amplification hones in on one aspect of the target text and amplifies it to absurdity, often exposing its artificiality as a literary trope.The parodic scene features a woman who awakens, hysterical and terrified, from a god-sent dream, which has conveyed disturbing news. We find in this passage a particular kind of parodic inversion: bathos, the unexpected introduction of the vulgar, ordinary, or mundane, which undermines an otherwise somber tone.11 Consider the following excerpt:Attendants, set alight a lamp for me,Collect the dew of rivers in pitchers [End Page 30] And heat the water,So that I may wash away the god-sent dream.Oh god of the sea... (shrink)

, Plato's Menexenus and Pericles' Funeral Oration: Empire and the Ends of Politics) , Socrates and Alcibiades) , Plato's Meno) , Plato and Xenophon: Apologies).

The arguments advanced in this paper suggest that the Menexenus ought to be read as a pendent to the Gorgias and as an example of the way in which rhetoric that engages in flattery can harm the souls of its audience. The Menexenus was composed by Plato to illustrate precisely what sentiments ought to be avoided in public oratory, if the primary concern of speech-making is to benefit the lives of citizens. In addition to demonstrating the connections between the Menexenus (...) and Gorgias, a portion of the paper examines the relation between Plato and Thucydides, arguing that there is perhaps more of an affinity between Plato and Thucydides than has previously been acknowledged. Pericles' Funeral Oration and the speech in the Menexenus suggest that both Thucydides and Plato were deeply concerned with the negative effects of oratory on the political community. (shrink)

The arguments advanced in this paper suggest that the Menexenus ought to be read as a pendent to the Gorgias and as an example of the way in which rhetoric that engages in flattery can harm the souls of its audience. The Menexenus was composed by Plato to illustrate precisely what sentiments ought to be avoided in public oratory, if the primary concern of speech-making is to benefit the lives of citizens. In addition to demonstrating the connections between the Menexenus (...) and Gorgias, a portion of the paper examines the relation between Plato and Thucydides, arguing that there is perhaps more of an affinity between Plato and Thucydides than has previously been acknowledged. Pericles’ Funeral Oration and the speech in the Menexenus suggest that both Thucydides and Plato were deeply concerned with the negative effects of oratory on the political community. (shrink)

ABSTRACT: Can virtue ethics say anything worthwhile about laws? What would a virtue-ethical account of good laws look like? I argue that a plausible answer to that question can be found in Plato’s parent analogies in the Crito and the Menexenus. I go on to show that the Menexenus gives us a philosophical argument to the effect that laws are just only if they enable citizens to flourish. I then argue that the resulting virtue-ethical account ofjust laws is not viciously (...) paternalistic. Finally, I refute the objection that the virtue-ethical account I am proposing is not distinct from a consequentialist account.RÉSUMÉ: Peut-on construire une théorie de la loi à partir de l’éthique de la vertu? Qu’est ce qu’une bonne loi? Je dis que l’on trouvera une réponse à la question dans l’analogie entre les lois et les parents présentée par Platon dans le Criton et le Ménéxène. Dans §2, je montre que le Ménéxène apporte une défense philosophique de l’argument que les lois sont bonne seulement si elles amènent les citoyens a la vertu.Dans §3, je montre que celte théorie des lois selon la vertu n’est pas outre mesure paternaliste. Dans la dernière section, je réponds a l’objection suivante : que la théorie que je défend n’est ni plus ni moins qu’une théorie conséquentialiste. (shrink)

Cet article discute le thème de l’autochtonie – essentiellement athénienne – en l’intégrant dans la logique du discours patriotique qui est la sienne. La prise en compte des exigences de ce type de discours tout à fait particulier, de même que la prise en compte du renouvellement du regard sur les identités sexuées qu’ont permis les études « genre », permettent aujourd’hui de proposer une interprétation différente de celle de Nicole Loraux. Celle-ci comprenait, dans sa lecture du Ménexène de Platon, (...) le mythe de l’autochtonie comme un « transfert » des compétences reproductives féminines sur un espace tenu par les hommes seuls, façon pour eux de déposséder les femmes de leur « puissance » et de penser la reproduction sans elles. Après avoir montré que les Grecs pensaient généralement la procréation comme une opération mixte et souvent équitablement partagée, surtout dans la tradition littéraire qui précède Aristote, je développe l’hypothèse selon laquelle l’usage du motif de la terre mère est une façon de construire un attachement contraignant au territoire civique. Il ne procéderait donc pas d’une lutte des sexes et d’une peur des hommes envers la puissance des femmes, mais serait l’instrument politique qui, à l’intérieur d’une société patrilinéaire où règne la « domination masculine », permet de susciter une relation particulièrement étroite avec le territoire habité.The earth mother: a reading through gender and patriotic rhetoric. This article tackles the issue of autochtony – mainly Athenian autochtony – fitting it more than has been traditionally the case into the logic of patriotic discourse from which it emerges. Taking into account the demands of this type of very particular discourse, together with the new perspectives on sexed identities made possible by gender studies, allows us today to offer an interpretation that is different from Nicole Loraux’s examining Plato, Menexenus. She understood the myth of autochtony as a “transference” of female reproductive competences to the civic land, an exclusive possession of men and a way for them to dispossess women of their power and to consider reproduction without women. After demonstrating that for the Greeks, mainly in the pre-Aristotelician tradition, males and females were usually equally concerned with the operation of procreation, I will suggest that the use of the mother earth theme is a way of constructing a constraining bond between citizens and their civic territory. This bond does not arise from the sex struggle or even from male fear of female power but, in the context of a patrilineal society dominated by males, it is the political instrument for the alienation of citizens from the land they inhabit. (shrink)

This text brings together for the first time two complete key works from classical antiquity on the politics of Athens: Plato's Menexenus and Pericles' funeral oration.

Are the long, wildly inventive etymologies in Plato’s Cratylus just some kind of joke, or does Plato himself accept them? This standard question misses the most important feature of the etymologies: they are a competitive performance, an agôn by Socrates in which he shows that he can play the game of etymologists like Cratylus better than they can themselves. Such show-off performances are a recurrent feature of Platonic dialogue: they include Socrates’ speeches on eros in the Phaedrus, his rhetorical discourse (...) in the Menexenus, and his literary interpretation in the Protagoras. The paper compares these cases to work out the ground rules, purposes and implications of the Platonic agôn, and the Cratylus etymologies in particular. (shrink)

The Menexenus is also known as Plato's Epitaphios or Funeral Oration. The body of the work is a fictional funeral oration, composed as an example of what should be said at a public funeral for Athenians who have fallen in war. The oration is framed by an encounter between Socrates and a certain Menexenus, an eager young man who thinks he has reached the end of education and philosophy, but who is still rather young to take an active party in (...) the city's affairs. Nevertheless, he is anxious to follow in the tradition of his family, which has always provided someone to look after the Athenians . Menexenus' interest in public affairs has led him to attend a meeting of the Council at which a speaker was to be chosen to compose and deliver the funeral oration at the imminent public funeral. However, no final decision was reached at the meeting, and Menexenus remarks that by the time the choice is made, the speaker will have almost to improvise his speech. Socrates gently mocks Menexenus' respect for public orators, saying that speeches about a dead person follow a predictable pattern; a speaker exaggerates all a dead person's good points and minimizes all the bad, so that one who has died appears a paragon of virtue even if he was not really good for much. Socrates claims that listening to such public orations, when not only individuals but also the state is eulogized, always makes him feel that in living in Athens he is living in the Islands of the Blessed. (shrink)

Plato targets the encomiastic genre in three separate dialogues: theLysis, theMenexenusand theSymposium. Many studies have been devoted to Plato's handling of the funeral oration in theMenexenus. Plato's critique of the encomium in theLysisandSymposium, however, has not been accorded the same kind of treatment. Yet both of these dialogues go beyond theMenexenusin exploring the opposition between encomiastic and philosophic discourse. In theLysis, I will argue, Plato sets up encomiastic rhetoric as a foil for Socrates' dialectical method; philosophic discourse is both defined (...) and legitimated by way of its opposition to eulogy. In theSymposium, Plato offers a much more complex critique. First, he illustrates and comments on the vices that inhere in the encomiastic genre. Second, he juxtaposes Socrates' ironic ‘praises’ of his interlocutors with traditional encomiastic discourse, thus inviting the reader to explore the relation between Socratic irony and the rhetoric of eulogy (and censure). And, third, theSymposiumexhibits two untraditional ‘encomia’ – Socrates' eulogy for Eros and Alcibiades' for Socrates – that illustrate and interrogate the false ontology underlying the rhetoric of praise. (shrink)

La découverte d'un nouveau fragment du papyrus contenant la Vérité d'Antiphon renforce l'hypothèse qu'il nous faut identifier le sophiste avec le rhétoricien de Rhamnonte dont Thucydide fait l'éloge. Si l'on analyse de ce point de vue l'ensemble des témoignages, il est possible de déceler, dans le Ménexène d'un côté, dans le livre X des Lois de l'autre, des pièces à l'appui de la thèse que les idées d'Antiphon étaient une des cibles visées par la polémique platonicienne. The discovery of a (...) new papyrus' fragment concerning Antiphon's work On Truth seems to corroborate the idea that the sophist should be identified with the famous rhetoriciam praised by Thucydides. Starting from this main point of view, the analysis aims at showing that in the Menexenos on the one hand and in book X of the Laws on the other, many tracks can be detected about Antiphon's philosophical position as providing important points for Plato's criticism. (shrink)

This initial volume in a series of new translations of Plato’s works includes a general introduction and interpretive comments for the dialogues translated: the _Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Gorgias, _and _Menexenus. _ _ _“Allen’s work is very impressive. The translations are readable, lucid, and highly accurate. The general introduction is succinct and extremely clear. The discussion of the dating of the dialogues is enormously useful; there has previously been no brief account of these issues to which one could refer the (...) student. Finally, the particular introductions are first rate: fine jobs of clear philosophical and historical explanation—succinct and yet sophisticated, both close to the text and philosophically incisive.”—Martha Nussbaum, _Brown University_ “This is an important work that deserves our respect and attention.”—_Ethics _ _ _“This and the promised succeeding volumes will probably become the standard English version of the complete dialogues…. The commentaries take advantage of the best scholarship, judge judiciously between divergent views, and often introduce new and brilliant interpretations. This is true both in the area of philosophy and in that of literary criticism.”—Anthony C. Daly, S.J., _Modern Schoolman_ _ _“Allen is a superb translator, whose elegantly simple yet precise language gives access to Plato both as a philosopher and as a literary artist.”—_Library Journal__ _ “An important event in the world of scholarship.”—_London Review of Books_ _ _R.E. Allen is professor of classics and philosophy at Northwestern University. (shrink)

The fourth volume of Professor Guthrie’s History, dealing with Plato’s life and with eighteen of his dialogues, is as welcome as its three predecessors. In keeping with the nature of a history of this sort, the picture of Plato’s life and thought presented here is judicious and non-controversial in its outlines. There are many helpful references both to the ancient and to the modern literature, and a vast amount of information is transmitted with surprising painlessness. For the facts of Plato’s (...) life, Guthrie relies on the traditional sources, especially on Epistle VII, the authenticity of which he accepts. His reconstruction is, therefore, itself quite traditional; little direct attention is given to Ryle’s attempt to undermine that view. The volume covers the following dialogues, listed here in the order of their presentation: Apology, Crito, Euthyphro, Laches, Lysis, Charmides, Hippias Major, Hippias Minor, Ion, Protagoras, Meno, Euthydemus, Gorgias, Menexenus, Phaedo, Symposium, Phaedrus, and Republic. No section is devoted in this volume to the first Alcibiades; Guthrie is noncommittal on its authenticity. The Cratylus and the Timaeus are also passed over because of difficulties in dating them. Somewhat questionable is the inclusion of the Phaedrus: Guthrie argues that it belongs among the middle dialogues, mainly on account of his view that the method of collection and division does not constitute a major discontinuity in Plato’s way of doing dialectic. On the question of Plato’s development, Guthrie follows most contemporary scholars in rejecting the unitarian view, according to which Plato held the theory of Forms, essentially unrevised, throughout his life. Rather, he leans towards the idea that the theory of Forms emerged out of Socrates’ concern with definition, bloomed in the middle dialogues, and came to be more critically examined in Plato’s later works. Guthrie deals with each dialogue separately: he examines each dialogue’s date, characters, and setting, presents a useful summary, and discusses a number of philosophically interesting questions. The section devoted to the Republic is a monograph in its own right and combines summary and discussion. The great virtues of this book are its level tone, its painstaking presentation of alternative views, and its scope. Though not always conclusive in its discussions of specific philosophical issues, it is a true labor of love, and unlikely to be superceded, as a reference work, in the near future.—A.N. (shrink)