Page:The Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, Volume 1, 1854.djvu/194

 184 Journal of Philology. term in the Nubes to Protagoras and Prodicus expressly, and to the rest by implication ; and still more decisively by the expres- sions of Socrates, Memor. i. 6. 13, which Mr Grote himself quotes, p. 482, not. : whence it appears that the popular feeling, which Socrates himself shared, stigmatised with this name " those who sold their wisdom for money to any one who chose to purchase it :" and that it was then a nickname or invidious term is proved not merely by the illustration, axmep tropvovs, but by the use of the word anoKokovaiv, which commonly 21 bears the sense of "to call names, to call by an odious or offensive appellation." No doubt this particular word, like any other term conveying a somewhat indefinite reproach, could be applied by Isocrates or any other individual to any body whom he happened to dislike or wished to cast a slur upon the satirist Timon might be thought hardly worth referring to in order to show how the term could be extended to include all philosophers but it cannot fairly be inferred from this that there was no class of men to whom it specially and properly belonged. All party names are particularly liable to be thus abused ; but we are no more at liberty to conclude, from the ignorant or malicious misapplication of the name Tractarian/ for example, that it corresponded to no real distinction, and included all mem- bers of the English Church, than from the similar misuse of the word i<rTT)s that it was equally applicable to all philosophical speculators. The extension of this term and of similar expres- sions of dislike by the vulgar to all philosophers, as Anaxagoras for instance (Plat. Apol. Socr. 23. d. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 31), cannot be accepted as evidence that there was no real distinction be- tween them and the Sophists, or that the latter did not deserve the title in its invidious sense any more than the others. It is true that there was in the latter half of the 5th century b. c. a strong feeling of dislike and apprehension excited against the novel and daring speculations which were then first beginning to attract general attention chiefly owing to the popularization of philosophical discussions by these new Professors, and the great notoriety and influence which they attained and a violent re- actionary spirit aroused, which led to the attack upon the new 21 Not invariably however; see an exception which Liddell and Scott Arist. Eth. Nic. II. 9, ult., 6t Si roi>t ought to have noticed in their Lexicon. XaXewalvoPTat iv&pwdeis &iroKaovfia> :