Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 19.djvu/208

Rh 198 PLATO door of the king archon, whither Socrates has been summoned for the precognition &quot; (dva/cpicm) preliminary to his trial. Both men are interested in cases of alleged impiety. For Euthyphro s business is to impeach his father, who has inadvertently caused the death of a criminal labourer. The prophet feels the duty of purging the stain of blood to be more imperative the nearer home. Socrates is struck by the strong opinion thus evinced respecting the nature of piety, and detains Euthyphro at the entrance of the court, that he may learn from so clear an authority &quot; what piety is,&quot; and so be fortified against Meletus. He leads his respondent from point to point, until the doubt is raised whether God loves holiness because it is holy, or it is holy because loved by God. Does God will what is righteous, or is that righteous which is willed by God 1 Here they find themselves wandering round and round. Socrates proves himself an involuntary Daedalus who makes opinions move, while he seeks for one which he can &quot; bind fast with reason.&quot; &quot; The holy is a portion of the just.&quot; But what portion 1 &quot; Due service of the gods by prayer and sacrifice.&quot; But how does this affect the gods 1 &quot; It pleases them.&quot; Again we are found to be reasoning in a circle. &quot; Thus far has Socrates proceeded in placing religion c n a moral foundation. He is seeking to realize the harmony of religion and morality, which the great poets ^Eschylus, Sophocles, and Pindar had unconsciously anticipated, and which is the universal want of all men. To this the soothsayer adds the ceremonial clement, attending upon the gods. When further interrogated by Socrates as to? the nature of this attention to the gods, he replies that piety is an affair of business, a science of giving and asking and the like. Socrates points out the anthropomorphism of these notions. But when we expect him to go on and show that the true service of the gods is the service of the spirit and co-operation with them in all things true and good, he stops short ; this was a lesson which the soothsayer could not have been made to under stand, and which every one must learn for himself. &quot; 1 Apology. In Plato s Apology the fate of Socrates is no longer the subject of mere allusions, such as the rage of Anytus at the end of the Meno, and the scene and occasion of the Euthyphro. He is now seen face to face with his accusers, and with his countrymen who are condemning him to death. What most aggravated his danger (after life-long impunity) is thus stated by Mr James liiddell, in the intro duction to his edition of the dialogue : &quot; The eTrtet /ctta &quot; (clemency) &quot; of the restored people did not last long, and was naturally succeeded by a sensitive and fanatical zeal for their revived political institutions. Inquiry into the founda tions of civil society was obviously rather perilous for the inquirer at such a time. Socrates knew the full extent of his danger. But, according to Xenophon (Mem., iv. c. 8, 1 4), he prepared no defence, alleging that his whole life had been a preparation for that hour.&quot; The tone of the Platonic Apology is in full accordance with that saying ; but it is too elaborate a work of art to be taken literally as a report of what was actually said. Professor Jowett well compares it to &quot; those speeches of Thucyclides in which he has embodied his conception of the lofty character and policy of the great Pericles.&quot; Yet &quot; it is significant that Plato is said to have been present at the defence, as he is also said to have been absent at the last scene of the P/tsedo. Some of the topics may have been actually used by Socrates, and the recollection of his very words may have rung in the ears of his disciple.&quot; The Platonic Apoloyy is in three parts : (1) before conviction, (2) after conviction and before sentence, (3) after the sentence. 1. Socrates cares not for acquittal. But he does care to explain his life. And he selects those aspects of it which there is hope of making his audience understand. That he partly succeeded in this is shown by the large number of those (220 out of 500) who voted for his acquittal. Jowett. a. His answer to Meletus, as least important, is reserved for the middle of his speech. He addresses himself first to &quot; other accusers,&quot; comic poets and the rest, who have prejudiced his reputation by falsely identifying him with the physical philosophers and the sophists. But what then is the strange pursuit which has given to Socrates the name of wise ? It is the practice of cross- examining, to which he was first impelled by the oracle at Delphi, and which he has followed ever since as a religious mission. The god said &quot;Socrates is wise,&quot; when he was conscious of no wisdom great or small. So he went in search of some one wiser than himself, but could find none, though he found many who had conceit of wisdom. And he inferred that the god must mean &quot; He is wisest who, like Socrates, is most aware of his ovn ignorance.&quot; This unceasing quest has left him in great poverty, and has made him enemies, who arc represented by Anytus, Meletus, and Lycon. And their enmity is further embittered by the pleasure which young men take in seeing pretence unmasked, and in imitating the process of refutation. Hence has arisen the false charge that Socrates is a corrupter of youth. l&amp;gt;. Here he turns to Meletus. &quot; If I corrupt the youth, who does them good ? &quot; Mel. &quot; The laws, the judges, the audience, the Athenians generally &quot; (comp. Protagoras and Mcno). &quot; Strange, that here only should be one to corrupt and many to improve ; or that any one should be so infatuated as to wish to have bad neighbours.&quot; Mel. &quot;Socrates is an atheist. He believes the sun to be a stone.&quot; &quot;You are accusing Anaxagoras. I have said that I know nothing of such theories. And you accuse me of introduc ing novel notions about divine things. How can I believe in divine things (Sai/j.6via) and not in divine beings (5cu yuoi/es) ? and how in divine beings, if not in gods who are their authors ? &quot; c. That is a sufficient answer for his present accuser. He returns to the general long-standing defamation, which may well be his death, as slander has often been and again will be the death of many a man. Yet if spared he will continue the same course of life, in spite- of the danger. As at Potid;ea and Deliuni he faced death where the Athenians posted him, so now he will remain at the post where he is stationed by the god. For to fear death is to assume pretended knowledge. One thing is certain. A worse man cannot harm a better. But if the Athenians kill Socrates, they will harm themselves. For they will lose the stimulus of his exhortations ; and his poverty is a sufficient witness that he was sincere. Not that he would engage in politics. If he had done that he would have perished long before, 2 as he nearly did for his independent vote after the battle of Arginusai, and for disobeying the murderous command of the thirty tyrants. But have not Socrates s disciples, Alcibiades, Critias, Charmides, proved bad citizens ? He has no disciples. Any one, bad or good, may come and hear him, and the talk which is his life-work is not unamusing. But why arc no witnesses brought to substantiate this charge ? There are elder friends of his companions, who would be angry if he had used his influence for harm. But these men s confidence in Socrates is unshaken. He will not appeal ad miycricordiam. That would be a disgrace for one who (rightly or not) has been reputed wise, and to admit such an appeal in any case is a violation of the juror s oath. Socrates has told the Athenians the whole truth, so far as a mixed audience of them could receive it. Elaboration and subtlety could have no place in addressing the Heliastic court, nor could that universal truth towards which he was leading men be made intelligible to a new audience while the clepsydra was running. But his tone and attitude must have made a .strong appeal to the better nature of his hearers. With Meletus he &quot;played rather than fought,&quot; but he has shown (dearly that he has no fear of death, that he chooses to obey God rather than man, and that for very love of the Athenians he will not be swayed by their desires. 2. One convicted on a capital charge had the right of pleading before sentence in mitigation of the penalty proposed by his accuser. Socrates was convicted by fewer votes than he himself anticipated. The indictment of Meletus was ineffectual, and if it had not been for the speeches of Anytus and Lycon the defendant would have been triumphantly acquitted. Could he but have conversed with his judges more than once, he might have removed their prejudices. In no spirit of bravado, therefore, but in simple justice to himself, he meets the claim of Meletus that he shall be punished with death by the counter claim that he shall be maintained in the prytaneum as a public benefactor. He cannot ask that death, which may be a good, shall be commuted for imprisonment or exile, which are certainly evils. A fine would be no evil : but he has no money ; he can offer a inina. Here Plato and others interpose, and with their friendly help he offers thirty minoe. 3. He is sentenced to death, and the public business of the court 2 Comp. Gorg., 521; liep., vi. 496.