escape my notice that an orderly sequence of ideas adds beauty to the composition:[9] I mean it will be easy to find fault with what is written incorrectly.[10] Nevertheless, I warrant it is written in this fashion with an eye to rectitude, to make the reader wise and good, not more sophistical. For I would wish my writings not to seem but rather to be useful. I would have them stand the test of ages in their blamelessness.[11]
[8] {onomasi}, 'in names'; {noemasi}, 'thoughts and ideas.'
[9] Or, 'I am alive to the advantage to be got from methodic, orderly
expression artistically and morally.'
[10] This passage, since H. Estienne (Stephanus) first wrote against
it 'huic loco meae conjecturae succumbunt,' has been a puzzle to
all commentators. The words run: {ou lanthanei de me oti kalos kai
exes gegraphthai} [{gegraptai} in the margin of one MS.] {radion
gar estai autois takhu me orthos mempsasthai' kaitoi gegraptai ge
outos k.t.l.} For {takhu me orthos} (1) {takhu ti me orthos}, (2)
{to} (or {ta}) {me orthos}, have been suggested. It is not clear
whether {autois} = {tois sophistais} (e.g. 'it will be easy for
these people to lay a finger at once on blots, however unfairly'),
or = {tois suggrammasi} (sc. my(?) compositions; so {auta}, S. 7
below, {ou gar dokein auta boulomai k.t.l.}) (e.g. 'since it will
be easy offhand to find fault with them incorrectly') [or if {ta
me orthos}, 'what is incorrect in them']. I append the three
translations of Gail, Lenz, and Talbot. 'Je sais combien il est
avantageux de presenter des ouvrages methodiquement ecrits; aussi
par le meme sera-t-il plus facile de prouver aux sophistes leur
futilite!' {radion gar estai} [sub. {emoi}] {mempsasthai outois
takhu (to) me} (sous-entendu) {gegraphthai orthos} (Gail). 'Zwar
entgeht mir nicht, dass es schon say die Worte kunstvoll zu
ordnen, denn leichter wird ihnen sonst, schnell, aber mit Unrecht
zu tadeln' (Lenz). 'Aussi leur sera-t-il facile de me reprocher
d'ecrire vite et sans ordre' (Talbot). As if {takhu me orthos}
were the reproachful comment of the sophist on the author's
treatise.
[11] i.e. 'the arguments to be blameless at once and irrefutable for
all time.'
That is my point of view. The sophist has quite another-words with him are for the sake of deception, writing for personal gain; to benefit any other living soul at all is quite beside his mark. There never was nor is there now a sage among them to whom the title 'wise' could be applied. No! the appellation 'sophist' suffices for each and all, which among men of common sense[12] sounds like a stigma. My advice then is to mistrust the sonorous catch- words[13] of the sophist, and not to despise the reasoned conclusions[14] of the philosopher; for the sophist is a hunter after the rich and young, the philosopher is the common friend of all; he neither honours nor despises the fortunes of men.
[12] L. Dind. cf. Eur. 'Heracl.' 370, {tou tauta kalos an eie} | {para
g' eu phronousin}.
[13] {paraggelmata}. Cf. Aesch. 'Ag.' 480, 'telegraph'; Lys. 121. 32;
Dem. 569. 1; 'words of command'; Dion. H. 'De Comp.' 248,
'instructions, precepts.'
[14] {enthumemata}.
Nor would I have you envy or imitate those either who recklessly pursue the path of self-aggrandisement,[15] whether in private or in public life; but consider well[16] that the best of men,[17] the true nobility, are discovered by their virtues;[18] they are a laborious upwards-striving race; whilst the base are in evil plight[19] and are discovered by their demerits.[20] Since in proportion as they rob the private citizen of his means and despoil the state[21] they are less serviceable with a view to the public safety than any private citizen;[22] and what can be worse or more disgraceful for purposes of war than the bodily form of people so incapable of toil?[23] Think of huntsmen by contrast, surrendering to the common weal person and property alike in perfect condition for service of the citizens. They have both a battle to wage certainly: only the one set are for attacking beasts; and the other their own friends.[24] And naturally the assailant of his own friends does not win the general esteem;[25] whilst the huntsman in attacking a wild beast may win renown. If successful in his capture, he was won a victory over a hostile brood; or failing, in the first place, it is a feather in his cap that his attempt is made against enemies of the whole community; and secondly, that it is not to the detriment of man nor for love of gain that the field is taken; and thirdly, as the outcome of the very attempt, the hunter is improved in many respects, and all the wiser: by what means we will explain. Were it not for the very excess of his pains, his well-reasoned devices, his manifold precautions, he would never capture the quarry at all; since the antagonists he deals with are doing battle for bare life and in their native haunts,[26] and are consequently in great force. So that if he fails to overmatch the beasts by a zest for toil transcending theirs and plentiful intelligence, the huntsman's labours are in vain.
[15] Or, 'surrender themselves heedlessly to the ways of self-
seeking.' But the phraseology here seems to savour of extreme
youth, or else senility.
[16] {enthumethenta}. Query, in reference to {enthumemata} above?
[17] Reading {andron}. For the vulg. {auton} see Schneid. ad loc., who
suggests {ton aston}.
[18] 'Recognisable for the better.'
[19] 'They are not famous but infamous'; 'the bad fare as their name
suggests' (i.e. badly).
[20] 'Recognisable for the worse.'
[21] Or, 'what with private extortionsand public peculation.'
[22] {ton idioton}, 'laymen,' I suppose, as opposed to 'professional'
lawyers or politicians.
[23] 'What with their incapacity for hard work, their physique for
purposes of war is a mockery and a sham.'
[24] Cf. Plat. 'Soph.'
[25] Or, 'earns but an evil reputation in the world.'
[26] 'They are being bearded in their dens.'
I go back to my proposition then. Those self-seeking politicians, who want to feather their own nests,[27] practise to win victories over their own side, but the sportsman confines himself to the common enemy. This training of theirs renders the one set more able to cope with the foreign foe, the others far less able. The hunting of the one is carried on with self-restraint, of the others with effrontery. The one can look down with contempt upon maliciousness and sordid love of gain, the other cannot. The very speech and intonation of the one has melody, of the other harshness. And with regard to things divine, the one set know no obstacle to their impiety, the others are of all men the most pious. Indeed ancient tales affirm[28] that the very gods themselves take joy in this work[29] as actors and spectators. So that,[30] with due reflection on these things, the young who act upon my admonitions will be found, perchance, beloved of heaven and reverent of soul, checked by the thought that some one of the gods is eyeing their performance.[31]
[27] Or, 'Those people who would fain have the lion's share in the
state.'
[28] Or, 'an ancient story obtains.'
[29] Sc. 'of the chase.'
[30] Or {uparkhein} = 'it may be considered as given.' Scheid. cf.
'Pol. Ath.' iii. 9, {oste uparkhein demokratian einai}.
[31] Lit. 'that the things in question are beheld by some divinity.'
These are the youths who will prove a blessing to their parents, and not to their parents only but to the whole
