Page:Philological Museum v2.djvu/566

556 SCHLEIERMACHER'S INTRODUCTION TO HIS TRANSLATION OF PLATO^S APOLOGY OF SOCRATES I HAVE already observed, in the general Introduction to this translation of Plato, that the reader is not to conclude, because certain works are placed in an appendix, that by this I mean to deny or to call in question with regard to all of them, that they are writings of Plato. My only reason for assigning such a place to the following work, which has been at all times loved and admired for the spirit that breathes through it, and the image it presents of calm moral dignity and beauty, was in the first instance that it contents itself with its particular object, and makes no pretensions to the title of a scientific work. It is true that the Euthyphron likewise has unquestionably an apologetic reference to the charge brought against Socrates; but on the other hand its connection with the notions started in the Protagoras, clearly entitled it to be subjoined to that dialogue. But the Apology is so purely an occasional piece, that it can find no place in the series of its author'^s philosophical productions. Yet there is certainly one sense, in which, let not the reader be startled, one might perhaps say that it is not a work of Plato'^s. I mean that it can scarcely be a work of his thoughts, a thing which he invented and fabricated. For if we attribute to Plato the intention of defending Socrates, we must first of all distinguish the times at which he might have done it, either during his process, or subsequently, no matter how soon or how late, to his execution. Now in the latter case Plato could only have proposed to vindicate the principles and sentiments of his friend and master. But this vindication he, who was so fond of combining several ends in one work, might easily have coupled with his scientific views : and accordingly