“Convivia cum hominibus extraneis et rudibus, discipline non imbutis” is the Latin version. ↩
The text is ὡς νόμιμον: and the Latin explanation is “qua fas eat uti; qua uti absque flagitio licet.” ↩
To admire (φαυμάζειν) is contrary to the precept of Epictetus; i 29, ii 6, iii 20. Upton. ↩
Such recitations were common at Rome, when authors read their works and invited persons to attend. These recitations are often mentioned in the letters of the younger Pliny. See Epictetus, iii 23. ↩
Compare i 25, 11, etc. ↩
See the note of Schweig. on xxxvi. ↩
Cui non conveniet sua res, ut calceus olim,
Horat. Epp. i 10, 42, and Epp. i 7, 98.
Si pede major erit, subvertet; si minor, uret.
The word is κεντητόν “acu pictum,” ornamented by needlework. ↩
Fourteen was considered the age of puberty in Roman males, but in females the age of twelve (Justin. inst. I tit. 22). Compare Gaius, i 196. ↩
See Mrs. C.’s note, in which she says “Epictetus seems to be in part mistaken here,” etc.; and I think that he is. ↩
τὸ ἀληφὲς συμπεπλεγμένον is rendered in the Latin by “verum conjunctum.” Mrs. Carter renders it by “a true proposition,” which I suppose to be the meaning. ↩
Mrs. Carter translates this, “Unless you perfectly understand the principle [from which anyone acts].” ↩
See iii 23, 22; iv 8, 2. ↩
See iii 12. ↩
This may mean “what is proposed to you by philosophers,” and especially in this little book. Schweighaeuser thinks that it may mean “what you have proposed to yourself:” but he is inclined to understand it simply, “what is proposed above, or taught above.” ↩
τὸν διαιροῦντα λόγον. “Eam partitioned rationis intelligo, qua initio dixit, Quaedam in potestate nostra esse, quaedam non esse.” Wolf. ↩
The first four verses are by the Stoic Cleanthes, the pupil of Zeno, and the teacher of Chrysippus. He was a native of Assus in Mysia; and Simplicius, who wrote his commentary on the Enchiridion in the sixth century, AD, saw even at this late period in Assus a beautiful statue of Cleanthes erected by a decree of the Roman senate in honour of this excellent man. (Simplicius, ed. Schweig. p. 522.) ↩
The two second verses are from a play of Euripides, a writer who has supplied more verses for quotation than any ancient tragedian. ↩
The third quotation is from the Criton of Plato. Socrates is the speaker. The last part is from the Apology of Plato, and Socrates is also the speaker. The words “and the third also,” Schweighaeuser says, have been introduced from the commentary of Simplicius. Simplicius concludes his commentary thus: Epictetus connects the end with the beginning, which reminds us of what was said in the beginning, that the man who places the good and the evil among the things which are in our power, and not in externals, will neither be compelled by any man nor ever injured. ↩
Consult the Lexicons for this sense of νόστιμος. ↩
See Schweig.’s note. ↩
“He does not say this ‘that it is bad if a man by money should redeem himself from bonds,’ but he means that ‘even a bad man, if he has money, can redeem himself from the bonds of the body and so secure his liberty.’ ” Schweig. ↩
“How hardly shall they that have riches enter the kingdom of God.” Mark 10:23 (Mrs. Carter). This expression in Mark sets forth the danger of riches, a fact which all men know who use their observation. In the next verse the truth is expressed in this form, “How hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God.” The Stoics viewed wealth as among the things which are indifferent, neither good nor bad. ↩
The other member of the comparison has been omitted by some accident in the MSS. Wolf in his Latin version supplied by conjecture the omission in this manner: “ita neque in terris divitiae tibi expe tendae sunt.” Schweig. ↩
To some persons the comparison will not seem apt. Also the notion that every man should be taught to rise above the condition in which he is born is, in the opinion of some persons, a better teaching. I think that it is not. Few persons have the talents and the character which enable them to rise from a low condition; and the proper lesson for them is to stay in the condition in which they are born and to be content with it. Those who have the power of rising from a low condition will rise whether they are advised to attempt it or not: and generally they will not be able to rise without doing something useful to society. Those who have ability sufficient to raise themselves from a low estate, and at the same time to do it to the damage of society, are perhaps only few, but certainly there are such persons. They rise by ability, by the use of fraud, by bad means almost innumerable. They gain wealth, they fill high places, they disturb society, they are plagues and pests, and the world looks on sometimes with stupid admiration until death removes the dazzling
