Dialogues

xml:lang="grc">σῆμα) of the soul which may be thought to be buried in our present life; or again the index of the soul, because the soul gives indications to (σημαίνει) the body; probably the Orphic poets were the inventors of the name, and they were under the impression that the soul is suffering the punishment of sin, and that the body is an enclosure or prison in which the soul is incarcerated, kept safe (σῶμα, σώζηται), as the name σῶμα implies, until the penalty is paid; according to this view, not even a letter of the word need be changed. Hermogenes I think, Socrates, that we have said enough of this class of words. But have we any more explanations of the names of the Gods, like that which you were giving of Zeus? I should like to know whether any similar principle of correctness is to be applied to them. Socrates Yes, indeed, Hermogenes; and there is one excellent principle which, as men of sense, we must acknowledge⁠—that of the Gods we know nothing, either of their natures or of the names which they give themselves; but we are sure that the names by which they call themselves, whatever they may be, are true. And this is the best of all principles; and the next best is to say, as in prayers, that we will call them by any sort or kind of names or patronymics which they like, because we do not know of any other. That also, I think, is a very good custom, and one which I should much wish to observe. Let us, then, if you please, in the first place announce to them that we are not enquiring about them; we do not presume that we are able to do so; but we are enquiring about the meaning of men in giving them these names⁠—in this there can be small blame. Hermogenes I think, Socrates, that you are quite right, and I would like to do as you say. Socrates Shall we begin, then, with Hestia, according to custom? Hermogenes Yes, that will be very proper. Socrates What may we suppose him to have meant who gave the name Hestia? Hermogenes That is another and certainly a most difficult question. Socrates My dear Hermogenes, the first imposers of names must surely have been considerable persons; they were philosophers, and had a good deal to say. Hermogenes Well, and what of them? Socrates They are the men to whom I should attribute the imposition of names. Even in foreign names, if you analyze them, a meaning is still discernible. For example, that which we term οὐσία is by some called ἐσία, and by others again ὠσία. Now that the essence of things should be called ἑστία, which is akin to the first of these (ἐσία = ἑστία), is rational enough. And there is reason in the Athenians calling that ἑστία which participates in οὐσία. For in ancient times we too seem to have said ἐσία for οὐσία, and this you may note to have been the idea of those who appointed that sacrifices should be first offered to ἑστία, which was natural enough if they meant that ἑστία was the essence of things. Those again who read ὠσία seem to have inclined to the opinion of Heracleitus, that all things flow and nothing stands; with them the pushing principle (ὠθοῦν) is the cause and ruling power of all things, and is therefore rightly called ὠσία. Enough of this, which is all that we who know nothing can affirm. Next in order after Hestia we ought to consider Rhea and Cronos, although the name of Cronos has been already discussed. But I dare say that I am talking great nonsense. Hermogenes Why, Socrates? Socrates My good friend, I have discovered a hive of wisdom. Hermogenes Of what nature? Socrates Well, rather ridiculous, and yet plausible. Hermogenes How plausible? Socrates I fancy to myself Heracleitus repeating wise traditions of antiquity as old as the days of Cronos and Rhea, and of which Homer also spoke. Hermogenes How do you mean? Socrates Heracleitus is supposed to say that all things are in motion and nothing at rest; he compares them to the stream of a river, and says that you cannot go into the same water twice. Hermogenes That is true. Socrates

Well, then, how can we avoid inferring that he who gave the names of Cronos and Rhea to the ancestors of the Gods, agreed pretty much in the doctrine of Heracleitus? Is the giving of the names of streams to both of them purely accidental? Compare the line in which Homer, and, as I believe, Hesiod also, tells of

“Ocean, the origin of Gods, and mother Tethys.”33

And again, Orpheus says, that

“The fair river of Ocean was the first to marry, and he espoused his sister Tethys, who was his mother’s daughter.”

You see that this is a remarkable coincidence, and all in the direction of Heracleitus.

Hermogenes I think that there is something in what you say, Socrates; but I do not understand the meaning of the name Tethys. Socrates Well, that is almost self-explained, being only the name of a spring, a little disguised; for that which is strained and filtered (διαττώμενον, ἠθούμενον) may be likened to a spring, and the name Tethys is made up of these two words. Hermogenes The idea is ingenious, Socrates. Socrates To be sure. But what comes next?⁠—of Zeus we have spoken. Hermogenes Yes. Socrates Then let us next take his two brothers, Poseidon and Pluto, whether the latter is called by that or by his other name. Hermogenes By all means. Socrates Poseidon is ποσίδεσμος, the chain of the feet; the original inventor of the name had been stopped by the watery element in his walks, and not allowed to go on, and therefore he called the ruler of this element