plutarch's 'de e apud delphos': translation and commentary
TRANSCRIPT
University of Calgary
PRISM University of Calgarys Digital Repository
Graduate Studies The Vault Electronic Theses and Dissertations
2018-11-19
Plutarchs De E apud Delphos Translation and
Commentary
Alexander Judith Anne
Alexander J A (2018) Plutarchs De E apud Delphos Translation and Commentary
(Unpublished masters thesis) University of Calgary Calgary AB doi1011575PRISM34516
httphdlhandlenet1880109187
master thesis
University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their
thesis You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through
licensing that has been assigned to the document For uses that are not allowable under
copyright legislation or licensing you are required to seek permission
Downloaded from PRISM httpsprismucalgaryca
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY
Plutarchrsquos De E apud Delphos Translation and Commentary
by
Judith Anne Alexander
A THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
GRADUATE PROGRAM IN GREEK AND ROMAN STUDIES
CALGARY ALBERTA
NOVEMBER 2018
copy Judith Anne Alexander 2018
ii
ABSTRACT
Plutarchrsquos Parallel Lives are well known less so the essays and dialogues grouped into his
omnibus Moralia One of these essays De E apud Delphos (ldquoDe Erdquo) contains a discussion of
the meaning of a votive object in the form of the letter E first offered by the seven Sages to
the Delphian god
This translation with its commentary pays attention to technical matters discussed in
the dialogue (number theory the altar at Delos the pentad syllogistic logic Being and
Becoming) that have sometimes been neglected in other translations It also comments on
themes encountered in the dialogue (divination divine aid and prophecy and nostalgia)
Plutarchrsquos description of the world at Delphi rewards the reader with insights into an
intellectual scientific religious and social world that has long departed
iii
PREFACE
The translation into English of De E was suggested to me as a possible subject for a
masterrsquos dissertation by Professor James Hume In one of his seminars which I had the
pleasure of attending he raised several tantalizing puzzles in the dialogue and suggested that
I might pursue these while preparing a translation At all times during the progress of this
work I have enjoyed the advantage of his indefatigable help and criticism and his enormous
store of classical and linguistic lore Nevertheless this translation is my own original
unpublished and independent work
Judith Anne Alexander
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for guidance and support I have received from the Department of Classics and
Religion during my graduate and undergraduate studies and during the writing of this thesis
Reyes Bertolin James Hume and Peter Toohey instilled in me respect and awe for the Greek
language although they cannot be held responsible for my inability to master it Others
outside the department have also contributed to making my sojourn productive and personally
rewarding Ms Christine Stark and the staff at the Business Library (a short walk from our
department) cheerfully provided comprehensive advice and answers to my requests and
questions and helped me navigate both the interlibrary loan service and our off-campus book
depository Professor Ozouf Amedegnato in the School of Languages Linguistics
Literatures and Cultures holds a freewheeling bi-weekly seminar in linguistics from which I
have derived both pleasure and instruction Jeremy Mortis advised me on the functioning of
my computer and was steadfast in the face of even the most contrary events Finally I thank
the department of Graduate Studies for the award of a Queen Elizabeth II Graduate
Scholarship for the 2016 calendar year That grant not only helped with the necessities of life
but also gave me the means to indulge in buying a book or two on occasion (well on several
occasions) and to attend two conferences
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY
Plutarchrsquos De E apud Delphos Translation and Commentary
by
Judith Anne Alexander
A THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
GRADUATE PROGRAM IN GREEK AND ROMAN STUDIES
CALGARY ALBERTA
NOVEMBER 2018
copy Judith Anne Alexander 2018
ii
ABSTRACT
Plutarchrsquos Parallel Lives are well known less so the essays and dialogues grouped into his
omnibus Moralia One of these essays De E apud Delphos (ldquoDe Erdquo) contains a discussion of
the meaning of a votive object in the form of the letter E first offered by the seven Sages to
the Delphian god
This translation with its commentary pays attention to technical matters discussed in
the dialogue (number theory the altar at Delos the pentad syllogistic logic Being and
Becoming) that have sometimes been neglected in other translations It also comments on
themes encountered in the dialogue (divination divine aid and prophecy and nostalgia)
Plutarchrsquos description of the world at Delphi rewards the reader with insights into an
intellectual scientific religious and social world that has long departed
iii
PREFACE
The translation into English of De E was suggested to me as a possible subject for a
masterrsquos dissertation by Professor James Hume In one of his seminars which I had the
pleasure of attending he raised several tantalizing puzzles in the dialogue and suggested that
I might pursue these while preparing a translation At all times during the progress of this
work I have enjoyed the advantage of his indefatigable help and criticism and his enormous
store of classical and linguistic lore Nevertheless this translation is my own original
unpublished and independent work
Judith Anne Alexander
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for guidance and support I have received from the Department of Classics and
Religion during my graduate and undergraduate studies and during the writing of this thesis
Reyes Bertolin James Hume and Peter Toohey instilled in me respect and awe for the Greek
language although they cannot be held responsible for my inability to master it Others
outside the department have also contributed to making my sojourn productive and personally
rewarding Ms Christine Stark and the staff at the Business Library (a short walk from our
department) cheerfully provided comprehensive advice and answers to my requests and
questions and helped me navigate both the interlibrary loan service and our off-campus book
depository Professor Ozouf Amedegnato in the School of Languages Linguistics
Literatures and Cultures holds a freewheeling bi-weekly seminar in linguistics from which I
have derived both pleasure and instruction Jeremy Mortis advised me on the functioning of
my computer and was steadfast in the face of even the most contrary events Finally I thank
the department of Graduate Studies for the award of a Queen Elizabeth II Graduate
Scholarship for the 2016 calendar year That grant not only helped with the necessities of life
but also gave me the means to indulge in buying a book or two on occasion (well on several
occasions) and to attend two conferences
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235
ii
ABSTRACT
Plutarchrsquos Parallel Lives are well known less so the essays and dialogues grouped into his
omnibus Moralia One of these essays De E apud Delphos (ldquoDe Erdquo) contains a discussion of
the meaning of a votive object in the form of the letter E first offered by the seven Sages to
the Delphian god
This translation with its commentary pays attention to technical matters discussed in
the dialogue (number theory the altar at Delos the pentad syllogistic logic Being and
Becoming) that have sometimes been neglected in other translations It also comments on
themes encountered in the dialogue (divination divine aid and prophecy and nostalgia)
Plutarchrsquos description of the world at Delphi rewards the reader with insights into an
intellectual scientific religious and social world that has long departed
iii
PREFACE
The translation into English of De E was suggested to me as a possible subject for a
masterrsquos dissertation by Professor James Hume In one of his seminars which I had the
pleasure of attending he raised several tantalizing puzzles in the dialogue and suggested that
I might pursue these while preparing a translation At all times during the progress of this
work I have enjoyed the advantage of his indefatigable help and criticism and his enormous
store of classical and linguistic lore Nevertheless this translation is my own original
unpublished and independent work
Judith Anne Alexander
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for guidance and support I have received from the Department of Classics and
Religion during my graduate and undergraduate studies and during the writing of this thesis
Reyes Bertolin James Hume and Peter Toohey instilled in me respect and awe for the Greek
language although they cannot be held responsible for my inability to master it Others
outside the department have also contributed to making my sojourn productive and personally
rewarding Ms Christine Stark and the staff at the Business Library (a short walk from our
department) cheerfully provided comprehensive advice and answers to my requests and
questions and helped me navigate both the interlibrary loan service and our off-campus book
depository Professor Ozouf Amedegnato in the School of Languages Linguistics
Literatures and Cultures holds a freewheeling bi-weekly seminar in linguistics from which I
have derived both pleasure and instruction Jeremy Mortis advised me on the functioning of
my computer and was steadfast in the face of even the most contrary events Finally I thank
the department of Graduate Studies for the award of a Queen Elizabeth II Graduate
Scholarship for the 2016 calendar year That grant not only helped with the necessities of life
but also gave me the means to indulge in buying a book or two on occasion (well on several
occasions) and to attend two conferences
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235
iii
PREFACE
The translation into English of De E was suggested to me as a possible subject for a
masterrsquos dissertation by Professor James Hume In one of his seminars which I had the
pleasure of attending he raised several tantalizing puzzles in the dialogue and suggested that
I might pursue these while preparing a translation At all times during the progress of this
work I have enjoyed the advantage of his indefatigable help and criticism and his enormous
store of classical and linguistic lore Nevertheless this translation is my own original
unpublished and independent work
Judith Anne Alexander
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for guidance and support I have received from the Department of Classics and
Religion during my graduate and undergraduate studies and during the writing of this thesis
Reyes Bertolin James Hume and Peter Toohey instilled in me respect and awe for the Greek
language although they cannot be held responsible for my inability to master it Others
outside the department have also contributed to making my sojourn productive and personally
rewarding Ms Christine Stark and the staff at the Business Library (a short walk from our
department) cheerfully provided comprehensive advice and answers to my requests and
questions and helped me navigate both the interlibrary loan service and our off-campus book
depository Professor Ozouf Amedegnato in the School of Languages Linguistics
Literatures and Cultures holds a freewheeling bi-weekly seminar in linguistics from which I
have derived both pleasure and instruction Jeremy Mortis advised me on the functioning of
my computer and was steadfast in the face of even the most contrary events Finally I thank
the department of Graduate Studies for the award of a Queen Elizabeth II Graduate
Scholarship for the 2016 calendar year That grant not only helped with the necessities of life
but also gave me the means to indulge in buying a book or two on occasion (well on several
occasions) and to attend two conferences
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for guidance and support I have received from the Department of Classics and
Religion during my graduate and undergraduate studies and during the writing of this thesis
Reyes Bertolin James Hume and Peter Toohey instilled in me respect and awe for the Greek
language although they cannot be held responsible for my inability to master it Others
outside the department have also contributed to making my sojourn productive and personally
rewarding Ms Christine Stark and the staff at the Business Library (a short walk from our
department) cheerfully provided comprehensive advice and answers to my requests and
questions and helped me navigate both the interlibrary loan service and our off-campus book
depository Professor Ozouf Amedegnato in the School of Languages Linguistics
Literatures and Cultures holds a freewheeling bi-weekly seminar in linguistics from which I
have derived both pleasure and instruction Jeremy Mortis advised me on the functioning of
my computer and was steadfast in the face of even the most contrary events Finally I thank
the department of Graduate Studies for the award of a Queen Elizabeth II Graduate
Scholarship for the 2016 calendar year That grant not only helped with the necessities of life
but also gave me the means to indulge in buying a book or two on occasion (well on several
occasions) and to attend two conferences
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235
v
DEDICATION
To John and to Lisa Friedland
ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΑ
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACTii
PREFACEiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSiv
DEDICATIONhellipv
TABLE OF CONTENTSvi
LIST OF FIGURESvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii
EPIGRAPH1
INTRODUCTION2
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION10
SCHEMA STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE15
TRANSLATIONhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip16
COMMENTARYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip41
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS81
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSEhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 99
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYShelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116
BIBLIOGRAPHYhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures appear in Appendix C
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys118
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda121
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda122
Figure 4 The tetractys of Franceso Giorgi124
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DICTIONARIES AND GENERAL REFERENCE WORKS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Bergk Theodor Bergk Poetae Lyrici Graeci Leipzig 1882
Bywater Ingram Bywater Reliquiae recensuit Appendicis loco additae sunt
Diogenis Laertii vita Heracliti particulae Hippocratei De Diaeta libri
primi epistolae Heracliteae Oxford 1877
Diels H Diels Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker Berlin 1906
Edmonds J Maxwell Edmonds Lyrae Graeca London W Heinemann 1922
GP J D Denniston The Greek Particles Oxford Clarendon Press 1954
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil W C Helmbold and Edward N OrsquoNeil Plutarchrsquos Quotations
London Blackwell 1959
Kaibel George Kaibel Comicorum graecorum fragmenta Berlin 1899
Kern Otto Kern Orphicorum Fragmenta Berlin 1922
KRS G S Kirk J E Raven and M Schofield The Presocratic
Philosophers 2nd ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1983
LSJ H G Liddell and R Scott rev by H S Jones A Greek-English
Lexicon 9th ed Oxford Oxford University Press 1940 (Reprinted
with a Supplement 1968)
Nauck August Nauck Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 2 ed Leipzig
Teubner 1889
OrsquoNeil E N OrsquoNeil Plutarch Moralia Index Vol 16 (Loeb Classical
Library 499) Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 2004
Stobaeus Ioannis Stobaeus Florilegium (4 vols) Leipzig Teubner 1856
SEP The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Ed By Edward N Zalta
World Wide Web URL httpsplatostanfordedu
SVF Hendrick von Arnim Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (3 vols) Leipzig
1903-5
Wehrli Fritz Wehrli Die Schule des Aristoteles Basel-Stuttgart Schwabe
1945
ix
TITLES OF THE ldquoMORALIArdquo CITED IN THE THESIS (LISTED BY ABBREVIATIONS)
Adv Col = Adversus Colotem
An rect dict = An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum
An seni res = An seni respublica gerenda sit
Aqua an ignis = Aquane an ignis sit utilior
De an procr = De animae procreatione in Timaeo
De def = De defectu oraculorum
De E = De E apud Delphos
De exil = De exilio
De fac = De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet
De gen Socr = De genio Socratis
De Is = De Iside et Osiride
De mus = De musica
De Pyth = De Pythiae oraculis
De ser num = De sera numinis vindicta
De soll anim = De sollertia animalium
De Stoic = De Stoicorum repugnantiis
Non poss = Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum
PG = Praecepta gerendae reipublicae
PQ = Platonicae quaestiones
QC = Quaestionum convivalium
QG = Quaestiones Graecae
QN = Quaestiones naturales
Quo Adul = Quomodo adulescens poetas audire debeat
Sept sap con = Septem sapientium convivium
The Lives cited are those of Solon Marcellus Pericles and Theseus
1
EPIGRAPH
αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων
mdash Heraclitus of Ephesus (fifth century BC)
Heard melodies are sweet but those unheard
Are sweeter therefore ye soft pipes play on
Not to the sensual ear but more endeard
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone
ldquoOde on a Grecian Urnrdquo
mdash John Keats (1795-1821)
2
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of De E apud Delphos Plutarch writes to his friend Sarapion suggesting that
they begin an exchange of letters and essays between colleagues at the Temple of Delphi and
those at the Academy in Athens While Plutarch mentions De E for the proposed literary
exchange1it and two sister dialogues De Pythiae oraculis and De defectu oraculorum have
come to be called the Pythian Dialogues These three dialogues describe different aspects of
the running of the temple at Delphi its spiritual and practical challenges and its day-to-day
life Plutarch weaves his account of myth history and personal and professional digressions
into a canvas embellished with both quotidian and arcane literary and philosophical lore
These accounts are always interesting and instructive but are clearly an amalgam of facts
opinions reminiscences speculations and pleasantries sometimes reported it seems just for
the joy of rehearsing them
Depopulation of the Boeotian countryside is the fulcrum on which De def pivots It
begins by recounting a foundation myth Zeus despatched his birds (either eagles or swans) to
ldquofly from the uttermost ends of the earth towards its centrerdquo2 The birds then regrouped at the
1 Two other dialogues De Is and the incomplete De fac are sometimes grouped with these All touch
on religious themes
2 J G Frazer (Pausaniasrsquos Decription of Greece London MacMillan 1898 315) comments that the
birds are usually eagles but swans (Plutarch) and crows (Strabo) are also mentioned Golden figures
of two eagles once stood on each side of the omphalos at Delphi
3
omphalos at Delphi The recounting of this myth is a marvellous contrast to the reputation of
Delphi in Plutarchrsquos time as desolate and deserted The contrast is even clearer when we meet
two travellers Cleombrotus coming from Egypt in the south-east and the other the eminent
grammarian Demetrios from the wilds of Britain to the north-west
The question posed in that dialogue why so many of the oracles have ceased to
function is partly answered by the observation that the decrease in population had resulted in
a lessened need for the services of the oracles Plutarch deplored the decay and depopulation
of this corner of his native land and provided his own personal interpretation by remarking
that he was fond of Chaeronea and did not wish by leaving it to make it less populous3 He
was part of the civic council of Chaeronea serving terms as building commissioner and as
archon He commented in several places on his civic duties and on his own part in
maintaining the streets and public areas in the town In two essays he describes both the
ldquohands onrdquo responsibilities of a civic-minded young man and later the ldquoleading by examplerdquo
responsibilities of an older man whose physical powers have waned He gives the example of
Epameinondas who on being appointed telmarch by the Thebans did not neglect his duties
but elevated the position to one of importance and dignity Plutarch explained that when he
was telmarch he attended to his duties not for himself but for his native place4
The third essay in the trio De Pythiae oraculis seeks to explain why the oracle at
Delphi no longer gave oracles in verse The answer comes only after several digressions into
3 See Robert Lamberton Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001 52)
4 The first (PG 15 811 A-B) is addressed to Menemachus a young man who has asked Plutarch for
advice on taking up public life The second (An seni res 783 A) is addressed to Euphanes Plutarchrsquos
contemporary who may have asked Plutarch for advice about retiring from public life
4
ldquoportents coincidences history a little philosophy and anecdotes of Croesus Battus
Lysander and Battusrdquo (Babbitt 1936 256) The answer is that modern pilgrims require direct
and simple answers not the grandiloquence and flourishes of the hexameters of the past
Modern pilgrims too (as also recounted in De E) tended to pose banal and trivial questions to
the oracle which hardly deserved elegant verse in response
The votive offerings left in the temenos at Delphi provide the setting for the question
posed in De E Amongst these but apparently displayed inside the temple were the aphorisms
of the seven Sages and a representation of the letter E The question broached in the dialogue
is the meaning and symbolism of the E Several possible answers are given the E represents
the number of Sages the number five the conjunction ldquoifrdquo the hypethical syllogism or the
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoYou arerdquo5
Plutarch (46 ndash 127) was born and raised in Chaeronea a small but historic town in
Boeotia not far from Delphi His life spanned the reigns of ten emperors from Nero to
Hadrian His family was well-to-do he benefited from good schooling in Athens married
Timoxena apparently happily and established a family of four sons and a daughter The
daughter a second Timoxena died in childhood and one son did not survive to adulthood We
know little of Plutarchrsquos life after his studies in Athens He left Chaeronea to study travelled
5 For those who would appreciate an overview of Plutarchrsquos life and work (and the Moralia) see
Babbittrsquos introduction in volume 1 of the Loeb editionLCL Moralia (1927 pp 9-33)and the
introduction in volume 1 of the Budeacute edition (1987 pp vii-cccxxiv) by Jean Irigoin The second also
contains four appendices the first listing the 227 Greek titles contained in the Lamprias Catalogue the
second the sixty-seven principal manuscripts of the Moralia available to us and the third and fourth
concordances in both directions between the seventy-eight titles in Maximus Paludesrsquo third
manuscript and those in the printed edition of the Moralia (1572) by Henri Estienne
5
in Italy and Egypt seems to have led a successful life as a lecturer and to have made friends
in Rome In middle life around the year 92 he returned to Chaeronea to live in a Greek
enclave away from political life and the distractions of the city Whether this was calculated
and ldquothe smartest move of his careerrdquo6 or just a personal decision to return to his birth place
we do not know On his return Plutarch served for many years as a priest of Apollo at Delphi
close to Chaeronea
In De E Plutarch is at pains to explain that the events he describes took place many
years earlier We meet Ammonius Plutarchrsquos teacher Lamprias his brother and Sarapion his
friend although without a doubt these portraits are to some extent fictional Ammonius
reappears in De def where an older and wiser Lamprias is the master of ceremonies Each
appears in several of the Quaestiones convivales as befits their intimate relationships with
Plutarch Sarapion speaks in De Pyth and one of the banquets is given to honour his victory
with a prize-winning chorus Nevertheless it is prudent to view these portraits as being to
some extent fictional
Without further ado we can start to make our way through this dialogue and
gradually with the help of commentary and digressions into Plutarchrsquos other writings make
the acquaintance of Plutarchrsquos family friends and associates
ABOUT THIS TRANSLATION
After accepting the suggestion to translate De E from the Greek I assessed my experience and
aptitudes for the task Much of my working life was spent as an adjudicator with
6 See Jeremy McInerneyldquolsquoDo you see what I seersquo Plutarch and Pausanias at Delphirdquo In F de Blois
The Statesman in Plutarchs Works vol 1 2003 43-55
6
responsibility for writing decisions Over the years I learned to write clearly and concisely on
demand on almost any subject and to enjoy the experience to boot Thus I took heart from
the notion that competence in translation requires after knowledge of both languages
involved enthusiasm for the small details and the new discoveries that go into reproducing
the thoughts and ideas of others and rendering them empathetically and coherently in a
narrative along with my own and my panelrsquos interpretation and understanding of the issues
before us In addition some of my adjudicative work required writing back and forth between
English and French
As an undergraduate I translated Daniel (from the Junius Manuscript) an anonymous
Old English poem of unknown date retelling the Biblical story Also in my undergraduate
career I studied the innovative language used in an early Russian saintrsquos life The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself7
So I began the project in the usual way with dictionaries and reference books just as
Seamus Heaney described his preparations for translating Beowulf
It was labour-intensive work scriptorium slow I worked dutifully like a sixth
former at homework I would set myself twenty lines a day write out my glossary of
hard words in longhand try to pick a way through the syntax get a run at the
meaning established in my head and then hope that the lines could be turned into
metrical shape and raised to the power of versehellip What had been so attractive in the
first place the hand-built rock-sure feel of the thing began to defeat me I turned to
7 Avvakum (1620-82) an orthodox priest cleric and quondam counsellor to the Tsar battled the
reforms of the Archpriest Nikon and wrote this ldquoliferdquo to support and encourage schismatic Old
Believers He used a demotic Russian for his personal reminscences and descriptions as well as the
formal Church Slavic used for biblical and religious topics and in church ritual As part of the Tsarrsquos
retinue he also wrote in and was comfortable with the Chancellery Russian used in the court The
most obvious sign of Avvakumrsquos iconoclasm is the title of his book The first translation (into English)
was made by the classicist Jane Harrison and her friend and student Hope Mirrlees (The
Autobiography of the Archpriest Avvakum written by himself London The Hogarth Press 1924)
7
other work the commissioning editors did not pursue me and the project went into
abeyance (Beowulf A New Verse Translation New York Farrer Strauss and
Giroux 2000 xxii)
Heaney did take up the work again The differences between my circumstances and Heaneyrsquos
were that Plutarch wrote prose not poetry a mannered and sophisticated prose but still prose
and I did not have the luxury of shelving the project and getting on with other parts of my life
for at that long moment this was my life So I worked on lines in different coloured inks in
notebooks until I moved on to innumerable electronic drafts
My principles of translation are simple to construct an English text that maintains the
content form and function of the original Greek Hewing to these principles is not so simple
the three criteria are not always independent a pithy saying in Greek may require a less
compact and elegant phrase in English to convey the same idea The notions described by the
terms ldquoliteralrdquo or ldquocloserdquo translation without explanation or qualification are too fuzzy to be
useful although they do encapsulate the three criteria above The notion of register is also
important but that is not a monolithic concept It is more a will-orsquo-the-wisp that changes
from one passage to another within a work as the speaker or subject changes Often there is
no clear ldquobestrdquo solution to a translation problem and the best one can do is to satisfice One
creates a translation that meets minimum standards of intelligibility accuracy literacy and
readability and that conveys the tone and substance of the original In addition a translation
should contain no factual errors and display an understanding of and at least some sympathy
for the social political and historical environment in which the original was written
A translation can be buttressed by a commentary which allows one to present extra
information and interpretation These comments may enlarge on the original text describe
difficult junctures in the translation give background information on the events and characters
8
described in the text or muse on possible interpretations of the text Heaney has not provided
a commentary which scholars might have found useful not even in the bilingual edition
where the original text is side-by-side with his translation As he points out for generations of
scholars the main interest in the poem has been textual and philological but recently it has
increasingly been recognised as an original creative work of art I have provided a
commentary aware that it may not please everybody For some it may be too intrusive and for
others not informative enough
To explain my approach let us consider the first two lines of De E for which I felt
obliged to provide three separate comments which you can find on page 41
These lines quite well written which I came across a short time ago my dear
Sarapion were according to Diceratiids said by Euripides to Archelaus
The sentence contains four proper names Sarapion has already been introduced and any
reader of this translation knows that Euripides was a Greek playwright The other two
personages must be identified if the reader is to make sense of the sentence Since Euripides
spoke to Archelaus they must have been in the same room that is they were contemporaries I
discuss their relationship in the comments The Greek ἃ Δικαίαρχοςhellipοἴεται could have been
translated as ldquowhich Dichaearchus thinksrdquo but since Plutarch could not have been privy to
what Dicaearchus (a writer and student of Aristotle) thought this is surely idiomatic My
translation for ldquoaccording to Dicaearchusrdquo marks the distance between knowing something
directly and indirectly Finally since first sentences are so difficult to write and Plutarch had
clearly toiled over this one I wished to keep his significant first word στιχίδιον first8
8 A diminutive of στίχος a row of numbers or trees a file of soldiers or as in this case a line of
verse
9
Foregrounding the word gives the right suggestion for the literary and philosophical
discussion to come
My advisors have offered good advice that sometimes was not taken They will
certainly feel a frisson of recognition when Heaney explains that his publisher had appointed
a professor of English to ldquokeep a learned eye on himrdquo and that although the professorrsquos
comments ldquoinformed by scholarship and a lifetime of experience of teaching the poemrdquo were
invaluable nevertheless he was often reluctant to follow his advice and ldquopersisted many
times in what we both knew were erroneous waysrdquo
Although less than a century has passed since Babbitt and Flaceliegravere wrote it is
possible to add some new comments on De E The first is that we have more news of Neobule
(section 5) in a papyrus fragment found at Oxyrhynchus containing the longest surviving
piece of Archilochusrsquo poetry This was published in 1974 (the ldquoCologne Epoderdquo) The second
concerns the legendary aphorisms of the seven Sages which were displayed at Delphi
(section 3) The third again found in section 3 consists of questions posed to the oracles
found on newly discovered papyri and painstakingly listed and translated by Hunt and Edgar
Finally Louis Robert (1968) describes a set of inscriptions discovered in the Greco-Bactrian
city of Ai-Khanoum Afghanistan Clearchos (who may have been Clearchus of Soli) who
signed the stele there claimed that he copied them from those standing in the shrine at Delphi
Further findings by Oikonomides (1987) of steles at Miletopolis on the Hellespont suggest
that displays of the aphorisms were not uncommon in Hellenistic times Such examples put
meat on the bare bones of the dialogue and give us a richer appreciation of the milieu in
which Plutarch wrote
10
NOTES ON THIS TRANSLATION
The Greek text used for the translation is that of Frank Cole Babbitt (1936)9 I also consulted
the texts of Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 and 1974) Hendrik Obsieger (2013) and the electronic
version of Bernardakisrsquo text (1891) The Obsieger text is especially useful because on points
of difficulty he has almost invariably reviewed both the Flaceliegravere and Babbitt texts The
Greek text received good reviews for its simplification and clarification of the apparatus
(Thum 2014 Lamberton 2015 and Roskam 2015) Nevertheless all three reviewers decry
the presentation of the Greek text (of nineteen pages) which has not been typeset to
harmonise with the rest of this handsome book The visual effect is jarring and the font itself
is difficult to decipher (and it seems entirely in boldface) Since it is in Greek and in the
abbreviated Latin suitable for an apparatus it presents a distraction to a reader attempting to
read and understand it Obsiegerrsquos book has no translation of the Greek and the commentary
is in German
9 Babbitt (Moralia LCL 5 vii 1936) follows the text of Gregorius Bernardakis with emendations He
has a minor Teubner edition based on the Manuscript Parisinus 1956 which was severely criticized by
Wilamowitz and Pohlenz in part for the use of that particular manuscript Furthermore the electronic
edition contains numerous typographical and punctuation errors Successive Teubner editions moved
in a very different direction Bernardakisrsquo son and grandson Demetrios Bernardakis and Panayiotis
Bernardakis continued his work and began publishing a complete edition of the Moralia in eight
volumes beginning in 2010 To my knowledge the dialogue De E has not yet appeared
Babbitt restored several readings of the manuscripts and adopted some emendations proposed
since the Bernardakis text was published signalled by his initials in the apparatus
11
There are few English translations of the complete Moralia10 and the first by Dr
Philemon Holland (1552-1637) is in my opinion the best Holland was an approximate
contemporary of William Shakespeare Sir Thomas North and the forty-seven scholars who
prepared the translation of the King James Bible Holland published his translation of the
Moralia and dedicated it to King James seven years before the new Bible appeared Dubbed
ldquothe translator generall of his agerdquo11 he produced the first English translations of several
works by Livy Pliny the Elder and Xenophon as well as the complete Moralia of Plutarch
His only fault in my opinion was his penchant for colloquialisms that have rendered his
translation with the passing of time woefully out of date His virtues are attested by the re-
edition of his translation of twenty dialogues from the Moralia published in the Everymanrsquos
Library in 1911 Although this edition required a glossary of archaic words its re-edition in
this accessible format suggests that the Moralia were as popular in England as they were
elsewhere in Europe The foreword describes Hollandrsquos strengths as his ldquoaccurate and
thoroughrdquo translation and a ldquorare and consummaterdquo knowledge of his mother tongue
The Dryden translation (1684-94) made by ldquoforty or fifty university men was
another exercise in collaborative translation It was updated in 1874 by W W Goodwin with
an introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson Goodwinrsquos translation was an improvement over
10 By my count there have been four complete editions of the Moralia (Holland the Dryden edition
[ldquoby several handsrdquo] the Emerson edition [translated by Goodwin] and the Loeb Classical Library)
edition by several translators) and a few selections (Shilleto Prickard and King) For comparison
from 1660 to 1975 four complete French translations of the Moralia (Amyot [in several editions]
Ricard Beacutetelaud and the Budeacute series) and seven collections had been published
11 Oliver D Harris William Camden Philemon Holland and the 1610 translation of Britannia
Antiquaries Journal 95 (2015) 279ndash303
12
the earlier effort which Emerson found ldquocareless and vicious in parts (Goodwin 4 17) The
later Loeb Classical Library Moralia is not so much a collaboration as a joint production
where different authors take full responsibility for certain parts of the work There were more
than a dozen authors involved in a publishing enterprise that extended from 1911 to 2004
This gives to the volumes some of the attributes of Theseusrsquo ship since various parts have
been removed and new parts substituted Both the Teubner and Budeacute publishing houses work
with the same model
The collection by C W King (1908) contains the Pythian dialogues and several other
dialogues with religious themes12 King defines theosophy as ldquoknowledge of the things
pertaining to Godrdquo and recommends that these essays be read by ldquoevery religious disputantrdquo
In his introduction he acknowledges his debt to his ldquoancient brother-fellow the indefatigable
Philemon Hollandrdquo The translation of A O Prickard (1918) is difficult to find but does
appear on the Thomas Brownersquos Miscellany (1864) website for the University of Chicago
In addition to these English translations I consulted the French translations of
Robert Flaceliegravere (1941 1976) Jacques Amyot (1572) Dominique Ricard (1784)
Freacutedeacuterique Ildefonse (2006) and the Latin translations of Daniel Wyttenbach (1784) and
Wilhelm Xylander (1570)
The reader is warned that although the Babbitt translation appears in both the Loeb
edition of the Moralia (1936) and on the Perseus website The companion Greek text in the
Loeb is Babbittrsquos own adaptation while the Greek text on the Perseus site is from
Bernardakisrsquo Teubner edition Furthermore the Goodwin translation (1874) also available on
12 C W King Plutarchrsquos Morals Theosophical Essays London 1908
13
the Perseus website is a revision and modernisation of the much earlier translation by
ldquoseveral handsrdquo (1694) and obviously predates the Greek text of Bernardakis In other words
there are two English translations and one Greek text on the Perseus website and neither
translation was made from that Greek text
Stephanus numbers an innovation in Henri Estiennersquos 1572 edition of the Moralia
are given throughout Estienne had originally introduced these numbers in his edition of
Platos complete works and they rapidly became standard notation On the formatting of these
numbers I have followed the contemporary style of Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger who
use exclusively the capital letter that is either 123A or 123 A I follow Obsiegerrsquos model in
using both the section number and the Stephanus number thus 1 123 A In addition all
modern editions of De E break the dialogue into twenty-one sections This was I believe
Wyttenbachrsquos innovation
Notes and comments numbered consecutively throughout the translation appear at
the end of the translation that is after section 21 Each note begins with the appropriate
Stephanus number There are essays on themes and other topics in the appendices
On quotations from other works in the Moralia where there is no note to the contrary
the English translation is my own In the cases where I have relied on the Loeb edition I have
added the name of the translator All citations include the abbreviated title and the Stephanus
number For translations from modern languages I have provided my own for the very few in
German and left the French untranslated unless some ambiguity requires an explanation
where I give my own English translation
On Greek proper names Babbitt Flaceliegravere and Obsieger use different translations
for them Babbittrsquos proper names often seem old fashioned (for example Heracleitus or
14
Archilauumls) Consequently I have followed no model but used those spellings that appear to
be from my own reading currently accepted English spellings (Heraclitus and Archelaus) In
quotations I have preserved the original spellings Since two Plutarchs appear in the dialogue
ndash Plutarch the narrator and his much younger self ndash I have differentiated them by calling the
latter ldquoYoung Plutarchrdquo There is also Plutarch the author and when he appears in the
commentary or the appendices I call him ldquoPlutarch the authorrdquo or simply ldquothe authorrdquo
For classical references other than to the Moralia I have used the authorrsquos name for
the first appearance and later a shorthand Thus later references to Pausaniasrsquo Travels in
Greece are simply to Paus I have not listed these abbreviations separately they are all in
current use and usually decipherable I have left some names in full to avoid confusion for
example I have not abbreviated ldquoHeraclitusrdquo or ldquoHerodotusrdquo for the obvious reason
Finally on the orthography of the epsilon This appears in Greek texts sometimes as
an E EI or ει There has been controversy amongst editors over the form of the letter in the
Greek text ndash how Plutarch wrote it and how it appeared in the pronaos of the temple Both
Babbitt and Paton maintained ει although Babbitt wrote ldquoErdquo in his English translation The
compiler of the Lamprias Catalogue used an ldquoErdquo I have used an ldquoErdquo in the title and in the
dialogue except where it is to be interpreted as something such as ldquoyou arerdquo or ldquoifrdquo other
than the letter
Two coins (from the imperial epochs of Hadrian and Faustina the Elder) appear to
show an E hanging in the pronaos of a temple possibly Delphi (Imhoof-Blumer and
Gardner1885) Some archeologists and numismatists have claimed a link through Plutarchrsquos
De E between these coins and the temple at Delphi and to the seven Sages For a brief
account see Babbitt (1936 195 196)
15
SCHEMA THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIALOGUE
The essay breaks into two main parts an introduction (Part A) in the form of an epistle to
Sarapion and the dialogue itself (Part B - Brsquo) The second part is bookended by Ammoniusrsquo
opening and closing remarks Within it two sub-parts are devoted to the interpretation of the
meaning of the E
A Plutarchrsquos letter to Sarapion introducing the dialogue (Section 1)
B Ammonius presenting Apollo as the god of enquiry philosophy and prophecy
invites interpretations on the meaning of the sacred symbol ldquoErdquo (Section 2)
B 1 Presentations of the participants (Sections 3-7)
B 2 Presentation of Young Plutarch (Sections 8-16)
Brsquo Ammonius in direct speech reprises the arguments and opinions already heard then
asserts that the significance of the E lies not in its status as a letter or a number but in its
semantic meaning as a salutation to the god (Sections 17 ndash 21)
Plutarch writes to Sarapion that the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo a discussion of the meaning of the E
but the structure above does not suggest that the dialogue presents a definitive conclusion on
what the E means nor that that meaning is singular or unique
16
TRANSLATION
SECTION 1 (384 D ndash 385 B)
Plutarch presents a letter to his friend Sarapion containing a proposal for an
exchange of intellectual and literary gifts between friends in Delphi and in Athens
The first of these will come from Plutarch a report on a discussion of the symbolic
meaning of the E dedicated to Apollo Plutarch begins his letter with a quotation
from Euripides on the reciprocal demands that friendship makes on friends
These lines quite well written which I came across some time ago my dear Sarapion1 were
according to Dicaearchus2 said by Euripides to Archelaus3
I a poor man should not wish to give a gift to you a rich man
lest you think me a fool or that I am begging for a gift in return
For a man of small means wins no favour when he gives paltry gifts to a rich man it is just
not credible that he expects nothing in return and he acquires the reputation of being ill-
mannered and servile4 But see also that so far as liberality and beauty are concerned
monetary gifts are inferior by far to those that come from learning and wisdom It is good
both to give such presents and on giving them to expect similar gifts from those who
received them In any case I am sending to you and through you to our mutual friends in
Athens these Pythian dialogues the first fruits as it were of our deliberations5 But in return I
am expecting more and better ones from you and your friends which are bound to be superior
to ours in quantity and quality inasmuch as you enjoy all the advantages of a big city an
abundance of books and opportunities for discussion on a wide variety of topics
17
It seems to me that our beloved Apollo in the oracles that he gives to those who
consult him finds a remedy and solution for the problems that beset our daily lives But for
those problems involving reason he devises and poses problems that are consonant with our
philosophical nature creating within our souls a thirst for knowledge that leads us onward
towards the truth This is clear in many ways but particularly with the dedication of the E at
Delphi for it seems that it was not by fate nor by chance that this of all the letters came to
take the seat of honour before the god elevated to the rank of a holy offering and something
that had to be seen Those who first sought knowledge of the god saw an extraordinary power
in it or used it as a token for another matter worthy of serious thought
On many occasions in the school when the subject of the E came up I used to ignore
it calmly and turn it aside But just recently my sons discovered me in animated conversation
with some visitors who were at the point of departing from Delphi It would have been
churlish to avoid the subject or to have excused myself from their discussion for they were
eager to hear about the E So I sat them down near the shrine and began to ask questions
myself and to seek answers with them Then under the spell of the place and the discussion
itself6 I recalled that long ago at the time when Nero visited the temple7 I had heard another
discussion on this very subject between Ammonius and others when the same question had
been asked in a similar way
SECTION 2 (385 B ndash 385 D)
The priest Ammonius opens the discussion on the meaning of the E Plutarch
bookends the dialogue by giving Ammonius this introduction and then the last word
(sections 17-21) In the intervening sections other speakers (Lamprias an
anonymous member of the group Nicander the priest Theon Eustrophus and
Young Plutarch) follow with different interpretations of the meaning of the E
(sections 13-16)
18
It seemed to everyone present that Ammonius had set out and demonstrated by reference to
each of his names that the god is no less a philosopher than a prophet He is the ldquoPythianrdquo to
those who are just beginning to learn and to ask questions the ldquoPhaneausrdquo and the ldquoDelianrdquo to
those to whom some part of the truth has been revealed and is becoming clearer the
ldquoIsmenianrdquo to those who have gained wisdom and understanding and the ldquoLeschenorianrdquo to
those who are able to engage in and enjoy dialogue and philosophical conversation with
others8
ldquoForrdquo he said ldquothe act of seeking for answers belongs to philosophy and to wonder
and doubt belongs to the seeking of answers so it seems only right that many of the affairs of
the god should be hidden in riddles that raise doubts and demand an answer to lsquowhyrsquo 9
Consider for example that to feed the eternal flame just one kind of firewood fir is burnt
here only the laurel is used for incense10 statues of only two of the Fates stand here while
everywhere else three is customary11 women may not approach the shrine to consult the
oracle then there is the matter of the tripod and many other analogous puzzles 12 Many such
questions have been posed to those who are not completely without reason or sensibility and
those questions have stimulated and encouraged them to investigate behold hear and discuss
them Look how these inscriptions lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo and lsquoNothing in excessrsquo have set in
motion philosophical researches and a veritable crowd of discussions has sprung from each
one as from a seed13 And in my opinion our topic of discussion is no less fruitful than any
one of theserdquo
SECTION 3 (385 E ndash 385 F)
Lamprias responds that the explanation he has heard is quite straightforward ndash the Sages in fact numbered five Since E is the fifth letter of the alphabet these five
19
dedicated an E to Apollo repudiating the other two to demonstrate that they were in
fact five and not seven three successive incarnations of the E are identified
After Ammonius had said these things my brother Lamprias spoke up ldquoIn fact the
explanation that I have heard is straightforward and quite short For it is said that the wise
men whom some call the Sages namely Chilon Thales Solon Bias and Pittacus were five
in number14 Later Cleoboulos the tyrant of the Lindians and Periander the Corinthian
neither of them blessed with either honour or wisdom were able to forge their reputations by
force and through friends and favours and arrogated to themselves the name lsquosagersquo They
then disseminated and broadcast throughout Greece maxims and aphorisms which resembled
some of the sayings of the original five15 But those five although appalled by this
counterfeit were not willing to challenge the insinuations of these two nor were they willing
by a conspicuous quarrel over their good name to arouse ill-feeling or enmity in such
powerful men
ldquoSo the five after meeting here and deliberating amongst themselves dedicated as a
votive offering the fifth letter of the alphabet which also denotes the number five thus
affirming on their own behalf before the god that they were five rejecting and disavowing the
seventh and the sixth as not belonging to their group
ldquoTo convince yourself that their account is on the mark it is sufficient to listen to the
explanation of those connected to the sanctuary16 They describe the golden E as the E of
Livia the wife of Caesar17 the bronze E as the E of the Athenians and the first and oldest the
wooden E as the E of the Sages as it is called to this day to denote a gift from not one man
but from all of them in commonrdquo
20
SECTION 4 (386 ndash 386 C)
An anonymous member of the group reports the remarks of a Chaldean visitor who
said that the significance of the E lay in its second place amongst the seven vowels
and compared this to the second place of the sun amongst the seven wandering stars
Ammonius smiled quietly surmising that Lamprias was expressing his own opinion on the
matter and was repeating a story from hearsay for which he could not be held responsible
Someone else in the group commented that this was the same explanation that a
Chaldean stranger had been prattling about earlier18 that there are seven vowel sounds
amongst the letters19 seven stars in the sky with autonomous and independent movements
the E is second in the list of vowels amongst the seven planets the sun comes after the moon
which is first and that nearly all Greeks identify Apollo with the sun20 ldquoBut all these ideasrdquo
he concluded ldquocome from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the
sanctuaryrdquo21
Lamprias it seems had unwittingly antagonized the members of the sanctuary
because what he had said was not known to anyone amongst the Delphians who brought
forward the accepted opinion circulated by the guides22 that it is neither the form nor the
sound of the letter but only its name that carries symbolic significance23
SECTION 5 (386 C ndash 386 D)
Nicander a priest of Apollo speaking on behalf of the Delphians gives their
understanding of the E It represents the diphthong ει meaning ldquoifrdquo Those seeking
advice from the god begin their questions with ει and Nicander distinguishes this
use of the conjunction from its conditional use in syllogisms He describes another
linguistic function of the ει ndash to express a wish
ldquoFor as the Delphians understand itrdquo said Nicander the priest speaking on their behalf24 ldquoit
[ει] is the characteristic sign of every encounter with the god and comes first in the governing
21
structure of the question that is used each time someone seeks counsel25 They ask the god if
they will win [a lawsuit] if they will marry if it is advantageous to set out to sea if they
ought to take up farming or if they ought to leave home26 The god in his wisdom gives short
shrift to those dialecticians who think that nothing comes from the inclusion of the
conjunction lsquoifrsquo in an expression and that it makes no real contribution to the meaning27 for
he considers all questions attached to that conjunction as realities and he welcomes the
questions
ldquoFurthermore since we ask for personal counsel from the god as a prophet but we
come together to pray communally to him as a god so they [the Delphians] think that the
word lsquoifrsquo is used to express a prayer or a wish no less than to pose a question lsquoIf only I
couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wish 28 For example Archilochus wrote lsquoIf only it might
be granted to me to touch the hand of Neobulersquo29 As for the phrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that
the second word is not necessary30 just as lsquosurelyrsquo is hardly necessary in Sophronrsquos lsquoShe too
is surely desirous of childrenrsquo31 Or in Homerrsquos 32 lsquoAnd surely I will bring your strength to
naughtrsquo So as they say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo 33
SECTION 6 (386 D ndash 387 D)
Theon gives another interpretation of the E linking it through the conjunction ει
(ldquoifrdquo) to the syllogism used in dialectics and logic Almost the entire section is in
direct speech Theon defending dialectics claims that the conjunction ldquoifrdquo is a
fundamental part of the structure of a syllogism which allows us to form conditional
statements and logical propositions Theon explains that Apollo often exploits this
construction when he announces his opaque oracles he then gives a spirited
summary of Stoic dialectics and propositional logic
After Nicander had gone through his explanation my friend Theon34 whom you know asked
Ammonius if Dialectic who had just been so roundly insulted was to be permitted to speak
freely in her turn35 When Ammonius encouraged him to speak for her and come to her aid
22
Theon said ldquoCertainly the god is a dialecticianrsquos dialectician as most of his oracular
pronouncements demonstrate since he both creates and resolves ambiguities Moreover as
Plato said when the god gave the oracle to the Delians to double the size of their altar work
requiring the highest skill in geometry he was not demanding a new altar but asking the
Greeks to study geometry36 So in this way when the god gives obscure oracles he exalts
and recommends the understanding of logical reasoning as necessary for those who would
understand him For clearly in logical reasoning this hypothetical conjunction lsquoifrsquo has the
greatest power [of all conjunctions] since this construction the syllogism is the most logical
of all propositions
ldquoFor how else could a syllogism be given that even animals have knowledge of the
existence of things but Nature has given to humans alone the capacity to see and judge
consequences Certainly wolves and dogs and birds perceive by their senses that it is day and
there is light but only human beings conceive by ratiocination that lsquoif it is day then there
must be lightrsquo37 For only human beings understand the notions of antecedent and consequent
their apparent connection to each other and their consonance and difference and that
distinction is the principal source of logical demonstration38 Philosophy is the search for the
truth the light of the truth is demonstrative reasoning and the foundation of demonstrative
reasoning is the syllogism Thus it was fitting that the power that initiates and produces this
syllogism lsquoifrsquo was consecrated by wise men to the god who is above all else a lover of the
truth
ldquoFurthermore the god is a prophet and the art of prophecy is about the future which
comes from the present and from the past There is nothing whose beginning is without cause
nor whose future is without reason for everything coming into being comes from something
23
that came into being in the past and they are all knitted together following a succession that
takes them from their inception to their term39 Thus he who has the natural capacity to
connect causes and link them together also knows how to foretell lsquoall things that are the
things to come and the things that are in the pastrsquo 40 Homer had good reason to examine the
present first and to follow it with the future and the past For the syllogism is based on the
power of inference from the present as for example lsquoif an event occurs now then some other
has preceded itrsquo and again lsquoif an event occurs now then another will follow itrsquo In effect
skill and logic as has been said lie in the knowledge of consequences but the minor premise
is substantiated by perception
ldquoAlso and I cannot keep myself from saying this although the expression is
somewhat forced this is the tripod of truth that is argument which first establishes the
relation of cause to effect (the major premise) then adds the assertion of this or that fact (the
minor premise) which leads to the completion of the demonstration (the conclusion)
Therefore if the Pythian Apollo through his love of music clearly enjoys both the song of
swans and the thrum of the lyre41 should it astonish us then that through his love of dialectic
he finds the lsquoifrsquo which he sees philosophers use so freely and so often both agreeable and
charming
ldquoHercules himself before he had delivered Prometheus from his chains and before he
had been amongst the sophists who associated with Chiron and Atlas as a young man was a
regular yokel42 disdaining dialectic and mocking reason with its lsquoif the antecedent is true
then so is the consequent alsorsquo43 He decided to take the oracular tripod by force and to
compete with the god in his divinatory art Then in the fullness of his years he too became
quite good or so it seems at both divination and dialecticrdquo44
24
SECTION 7 (387 E ndash 387 F)
Eustrophus claims that the E is the token and sign of the pentad the number five
Plutarch the narrator then provides the transition to the next part of the dialogue
where Young Plutarch explores the importance of the pentad
When Theon had finished speaking it was I think Eustrophus the Athenian who said to us
ldquoLook how eagerly Theon defends logical argument all but donning the lion skin45 In this
way we who see in Number the natures and principles of all things and all beings without
exception whether human or divine we who see Number as the leading cause and author of
all that is beautiful and valuable are not likely to bear this peacefully and silently On the
contrary we must offer to the god the first fruits of our beloved mathematics which we hold
so dear46 For neither in form nor significance nor in mode of pronunciation do we think that
the E in itself differs from any of the other letters but it has been revered as the token and
sign of a great and lordly number the pentad whence wise men called numbering lsquocounting
by fivesrsquordquo47
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because at that time I was
applying myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe the
maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy48
SECTION 8 (388 ndash 388 E)
Young Plutarch sets out to show the importance of the pentad represented by E His method of argument is to describe and concatenate the disparate circumstances
where the number five is important This demonstration by exhaustion of the cases
continues for eight sections It ends without having surveyed every possible use of
the pentad only the reader is exhausted
Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the difficulty with
Number49 ldquoForrdquo I continued ldquoall numbers but one are distributed into the odd and the even
and that one the monad can be both even and odd (since it becomes odd when added to an
25
even number and even when added to an odd number) Then two begins the even numbers
and three the odd Furthermore five results when these two numbers are added together and
so five has been honoured as the first compound of the first simple numbers and has been
called lsquomarriagersquo from the similarity of the even number to the female and the odd number to
the male For in the division of numbers into two equal parts the even number breaks cleanly
and leaves a sort of void that waits to be completed But when an odd number is so partitioned
there is always a productive middle part left after the division Also this number is more
productive than the even numbers because when it is combined with an even number the
result is always odd So the odd number is superior to the even and is itself never
overpowered
ldquoMoreover adding a number to one of its own kind displays this difference an even
number added to one of its kind never produces an odd number it never steps outside its
natural attributes being weak and imperfect an even number is incapable of producing a
number different from itself On the other hand odd numbers combine with other odd
numbers to produce a crowd of different even numbers because their generative powers are
always effective But now is not the time to describe the properties and differences of the
numbers Let us simply recall that the Pythagoreans call five lsquomarriagersquo because it is produced
from the union of the first masculine and the first feminine number
ldquoFive has sometimes been called lsquoNaturersquo because when it is multiplied by itself it
results For just as Nature takes wheat in the form of seed and scatters it on the ground and in
the meantime produces many forms and shapes so she leads this work to its logical end and
at that end she displays its beginning ndash wheat50 In the same way whenever other numbers are
multiplied by themselves they produce different numbers but only the five and six when
26
multiplied by themselves reproduce and repeat themselves51 Thus six times six is thirty-six
and five times five is twenty-five And again six does this only once52 when it is squared On
the other hand five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn when it is added to itself and this continues for them all the number copying the
first principle for ordering the whole53 For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then
out of the cosmos perfects itself lsquoAll things are exchanged for firersquo as Heraclitus said lsquoand
fire is exchanged for all things just as gold is for goods and goods for goldrsquo54 The pentad on
successive additions of itself to itself begets nothing alien to itself nor incomplete its changes
are constrained That is it is either itself or a perfect wholerdquo
SECTION 9 (388 E ndash 389 D)
This section segues from the pentad which begets nothing alien to itself to the two
faces of the one god who is worshipped at Delphi This god suffers changes but
measured and predictable changes just as the pentad cycles through the tens and
itself and the cosmos preserves itself through its cycles
ldquoNow if someone were to ask what this has to do with Apollo55 we should reply that it
concerns not only him but also Dionysus56 who has a claim to Delphi no less important than
that of Apollo himself For we hear the theologians57 sometimes in verse sometimes in prose
asserting and hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet because of
his personal destiny or rule he himself undergoes transformations sometimes having his
nature kindled into fire making all things alike and at other times taking on all kinds of
changes in his shape emotional affects and powers as the world does today He is still
[despite these changes] called by the best known of his names [Apollo]58
ldquoBut more learned men concealing his transformation into fire call him Apollo for his
oneness and Phoebus for his purity without stain And as for his transformation and
realignment into wind water earth or stars or into different kinds of plants or animals they
27
speak in riddles of his passivity and his transformation as a tearing-apart or a
dismemberment Then they call him Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes59 they
recount destructions and disappearances returns-to-life and regenerations using riddles and
myths appropriate to those transformations mentioned earlier And to the other [Dionysus]
they sing dithyrambic verse full of passion and change and erratic roaming and dispersion
For as Aeschylus says60
It is fitting that the dithyramb
should be present in Dionysusrsquo revels
But for Apollo they sing the paean orderly and temperate music Artists portray him in
paintings and sculptures as ageless unchanging and forever young and the other Dionysus
in many shapes and forms In short to the first they attribute consistency regularity and
unfailing gravity and to the other an uneven mix of caprice childishness insolence gravity
and mania and they invoke him 61
hellip of the orgiastic cry leader of wine-maddened women
flourishing in their frantic honours
They thus not inappropriately seize upon the attributes associated with these transformations
ldquoBut the periods of these cycles are not the same the one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than
the one they call lsquocravingrsquo62 Having observed this proportion they chant the paean at their
sacrifices for the greater part of the year but when winter comes they use the dithyramb for
three months in their observances before the god Thus as three is to one so is the relation of
the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo63
SECTION 10 (389 C ndash 389 F)
Young Plutarch describes the importance of the pentad (symbolised by the E) in
music He compares the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony
developed by the Pythagoreans with that of empiricists who analysed musical ratios
ldquoby earrdquo that is through the senses
28
ldquoBut this subject has been drawn out beyond all reasonable proportion64 It is clear that people
associate the pentad with Apollo because sometimes it generates itself out of itself just as fire
does and at other times it generates the decad just as the cosmos does
ldquoAnd as for music which is particularly pleasing to the god can we think that this
number five plays no part in it For the most part the working of harmony is in a word
concord65 There are five of these concords and no more as thinking demonstrates even to
someone who claims to understand this through the senses and through playing unthinkingly
on the strings [of the lyre] or the stops [of the flute] The origin of all concord comes from the
ratios between numbers the ratio of the fourth is 43 of the fifth 32 of the octave 21 of the
octave plus a fifth 31 and of the double octave 4166
ldquoBut the concord composed of an octave and a fourth that the harmonikoi introduce in
addition to these ratios67 saying that it steps outside the measure cannot be accepted because
it privileges auditory perception over logic and is tantamount to being beyond logic68 Let us
not speak of the five stops of the tetrachord69 nor of the first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or
lsquoscalesrsquo whatever their right name is70 nor of the changes by which through a tighter or
looser string the remaining lower and higher notes are achieved We must ask whether
although the number of possible notes is large even infinitely large there are only five
elements in melody ndash the quarter-tone the semitone the tone the tone and a half and the
double-tone For there is nothing else within the upper and lower bounds of these notes [that
is within two octaves] or between them that can produce melodyrdquo71
SECTION 11 (389 F ndash 390 A)
29
Young Plutarch continues his examples of the importance (and ubiquity) of the
pentad (and the E) with Platorsquos claim that by analogy to the Platonic solids there
can be no more than five worlds
ldquoThere are many other examples [of the pentad] that I shall put to one siderdquo I continued72
ldquoand simply call on Plato who arguing for one world said that if there are other worlds
besides ours then there could be up to five but no more73 On the other hand even if our
world is unique and the only one of its kind as Aristotle believes74 then it is in some way
composed and conjoined of five worlds75 one of earth another of water the third of fire the
fourth of air and the fifth of high heaven ndash which some call light some ether and some the
fifth substance ndash and this last world is the only one blessed with autonomous motion and spins
by its own nature not as a result of some accidental external force
ldquoAnd for this reason Plato understanding that the most complete and beautiful
forms in nature number five the pyramid the cube the octahedron the icosahedron and the
dodecahedron fittingly associated those forms with these five bodies each to eachrdquo76
SECTION 12 (390 B)
Young Plutarch continues that living creatures enjoy exactly five senses and that
there are exactly five elements earth air water fire and ether
ldquoFurthermore there are some who associate the powers of the different senses with the primal
elements77 given that there is the same number of each They perceive that touch marks
resistance and is earthy taste adopts through water the quality of that which is tasted and
sound comes from the air which when it is struck takes on the sound of a voice or a noise Of
the remaining two smell which comes from heat corresponds to fire and finally sight
corresponds to the ether and light because the eye given its nature emits light and produces a
homogeneous mixture and a coalescence of these two kinds of lsquolightrsquo No living creature
30
possesses any other sense besides these five and no other element exists in the world besides
these five but a wonderful assorting and pairing has come into being between the five and the
fiverdquo78
SECTION 13 (390 C ndash 390 F)
Young Plutarch turns from science to a literature with an example of the use of the
pentad in Homer with a short digression on the attributes of the pentad He then
moves on to another example ndash the five classes of animate beings
At that point I stopped and after a moment said ldquoEustrophus what has become of us that we
almost passed over Homer79 For was he not the first to divide the world into five parts He
gave the three in the middle to the three gods [Zeus Poseidon and Hades] and the two
extremes left out of the partition the earth and Mount Olympus one delimiting the things
below and the other high heaven above were to be held in common
ldquoThe discussion must be taken further back as Euripides says80 Those who vaunt the
tetrad do not teach us something paltry for all solid figures owe their coming into being to
this number For every solid body has depth drawn out from length and breadth A point is the
monad having position which stands as the support of length and length without breadth is
duality and then length that broadens along the line brings about the genesis of the plane and
is threefold Then when depth is added to these a solid is created which is fourfold81 It is
clear to everyone that the tetrad having led nature forward to the completion and construction
of a solid mass tangible and firm has nevertheless left it with the greatest want For this
inanimate thing as has been said is simply deprived82 unfinished and not good for anything
whatsoever unless it has a soul using it appropriately
31
ldquoThus the balance and power of the five with greater force [than other numbers] has
not allowed animate beings to develop indiscriminately into unlimited kinds83 but has
produced the five forms of living things For there are gods then demi-gods and heroes after
them comes the fourth kind men and then comes the fifth kind animals lacking reason
ldquoFurthermore should you wish to partition the soul in accord with Nature the first
part and the least transparent is the nourishing instinct and the second the perceptive
abilities then the appetitive and spirituous impulses after that Finally the last faculty is
reason and with this the soul achieves the perfection of its nature have reached its
culmination in the fifth degreerdquo84
SECTION 14 (390 F ndash 391 A)
This section continues another property of the pentad - it is the sum of the squares of
the first two numbers Young Plutarch does not explain why squareness is such a
noble quality but I conjecture that the next three numbers (3 4 5) the Pythagorean
triple could explain it The squares of these numbers have intriguing properties
This is no more than speculation but it may help us to understand where Young
Plutarchrsquos argument is going
ldquoAnd now this number which has so many and such esteemed powers also has a noble
origin not the derivation that I have already given made up from the existing dyad and triad
but the one generated by adding together the beginning of all number and the first square
number85 For the beginning of number is the monad and the first square number is the tetrad
and from an ideal form and from finite matter these generate as it were the pentad86 If
moreover as some rightly hold the monad is square ndash its power being itself and being
contained in itself ndash then the five engendered by the first two squares does not lack a noble
pedigreerdquo
SECTION 15 (391 A ndash 391 E)
32
In this disjointed section Young Plutarch first diverts us with the parallel between
Platorsquos and Anaxagorasrsquo rediscoveries of old truths then uses two obscure examples
to show that Plato acknowledged the importance of the pentad and by extension
the symbol E Undeterred by these examples which appear to be of the tetrad
Young Plutarch finishes off with a quotation by Socrates (in the Philebus) from an
apparently well known Orphic verse
ldquoButrdquo I said ldquoI fear lest the most important matter of all when it is mentioned may
embarrass our Plato just as he said that Anaxagoras was embarrassed by the name of the
moon when he tried to claim an old theory about moonlight as his own Has not Plato spoken
of this in his Cratylusrdquo
ldquoCertainlyrdquo said Eustrophus ldquobut I do not see anything in that case analogous to our
ownrdquo87
ldquoNevertheless I presume you know that in the Sophist Plato shows that there are five
overarching classes88 being identity difference and besides these the fourth and fifth
movement and stasis And then in the Philebus using a different method for his distinction
he says that infinity is one class and finity another and that from the mixing of these all
genesis takes place As to the cause of their mixing he posits a fourth class and he has left
the fifth class how things so combined are controlled in their dissociation and disengagement
for us to think about89 I conjecture that these classes are no more than a reflection of the
others since generation corresponds to being the infinite to movement the finite to stasis the
mixing principle to identity and the dissociating principle to difference Even if these classes
are different there would nevertheless be five different types and differences in the one case
as in the other
ldquoYou might say that someone inquiring into this understood it before Plato did
because that man dedicated an E to the god as a sign and symbol of the number that explains
33
the universe90 Furthermore he [to get back to Socrates] understanding that the Good appears
in five qualities of which the first is measure the second symmetry the third mind the fourth
sciences arts and true opinions concerning the soul and the fifth pure pleasure unmixed with
pain (if there is such a thing) ends with the Orphic verse lsquoIn the sixth generation bring to a
stop the ritual of songrsquordquo91
SECTION 16 (391 D ndash E)
A short section remarking on an obscure link between the number five (and hence
the E) and a divinatory practice whose exact nature cannot be disclosed to the
uninitiated It also marks the transition of the dialogue to Ammonius the last
speaker
Then I said ldquoFollowing up on what has been said to you I shall sing one short verse to the
wise men in Nicanderrsquos circle lsquoOn the sixth day after the new moonrsquo92 namely when you go
with the Pythia to the Prytaneum the first of your three lots is a five ndash she casts a three and
you a two each with reference to the otherrsquo93 Is that not sordquo
ldquoYes indeedrdquo said Nicander ldquobut the reason for it must not be divulged to othersrdquo
ldquoVery wellrdquo I said smiling ldquoif ever the time comes when we have been consecrated
to the god and he has granted to us to know the truth then this should be placed beside all
that may be said about the fiverdquo94
And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and mathematical
encomia to the letter E came to its end
SECTION 17 (391 E ndash 392 A)
Ammonius responds to Young Plutarchrsquos paean to the pentad by observing that
every number displays remarkable qualities He then recalls Lampriasrsquo discussion of
the seven Sages and reviews the different interpretations offered by the others of the
E as a grammatical or ordering device He says that he will focus on the E as the
34
second person singular of the verb to be ldquoyou arerdquo [ει] which he says is the only
correct address to the god
Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of philosophy is found in
the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of the discussion He said ldquoIt is not
worthwhile to argue too exactly with the young over these matters except to say that every
number exhibits not a few attributes for those who wish to praise and laud it What need is
there to speak of the other numbers For the description of all the powers of the sacred heptad
of Apollo would take all day to enumerate and yet still not all of them would have been
discussed95 Then too we should be claiming that the Sages were lsquoat warrsquo with usual practice
and lsquothe weight of longstanding traditionrsquo if we say that they ousted the heptad from its front-
row seat at the theatre96 and then dedicated as somehow more fitting the pentad to the god97
I believe that this expression is not a number a ranking a logical connective or any other
incomplete part of speech it is a greeting and address to the god complete in itself which as
soon as it is uttered prompts the speaker to reflect upon the power of the god For the god
addressing each of us as we approach him in this place greets us with lsquoKnow yourselfrsquo
which means no less than lsquoHellorsquo We in our turn reply to the god lsquoYou arersquo which is the
truthful and truthfully spoken response and the only address proper to him only as Beingrdquo
SECTION 18 (392 B ndash 392 E)
Continuing his analysis of the E as a symbol for ldquoyou arerdquo Ammonius demonstrates that we
mortals we who never are but are always becoming Ammonius draws the corollary that no
person is ever one person but is through time many persons the Platonic distinction between
Being and Becoming (consider for example Timaeusrsquo asking about the difference between
that which is existent always and has no becoming and that which becomes and never is
(Timaeus 27 D)
35
ldquoFor we do not share in any real part of Being since every mortal nature is between coming
into being and being destroyed98 and presents a dim unstable apparition and phantom of
itself If you will your mind to understand the nature of Being it is as if you have made a
frantic effort to clasp water in your hand the more you squeeze and press it into itself the
more it defeats your attempts to seize it Just as reason striving for too much clarity about
things that experience change or modification is baffled by a thingrsquos coming into being and
passing into destruction and then is unable to understand even one other thing that endures or
really exists
ldquolsquoIt is not possible to step twice into the same riverrsquo Heraclitus said99 Nor is it
possible to encounter a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions100
For a being changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously both
coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquo101 Whence the thing coming
together does not reach being because it never stops or ceases from its formation
ldquoThis unceasing coming into being develops the embryo from the seed makes the
nursling the child then in order the boy the stripling the grown man the older man and the
aged man each of these stages is in its turn the means that destroys the one before it But we
have a laughable fear of one death we who have died so many times and even now are dying
For as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for waterrsquo
and it is clearer still in ourselves102 The man in his prime is destroyed and gives birth to the
geriatric the young man is destroyed to turn into the man in his prime the child into the
young man and the infant into the child he who yesterday was destroyed makes way for
todayrsquos person and todayrsquos is dying into tomorrowrsquos For no-one stays the same nor is he one
36
person we are all many beings made from matter drawn and poured into one shape and
common mould103
ldquoOtherwise how if we stay the same do we take pleasure today in things different
from those in which we took pleasure yesterday How do we love hate admire and condemn
things different from those that we loved hated admired and condemned before Why do we
speak other words and feel other passions Why do we no longer have the same form face or
thoughts For it is unlikely if there is no change that we should have different experiences
nor that he who changes would be the same person that he was But if he is not the same
person now that he was then then he does not properly exist but he changes his very being
and becomes one person after another Our senses through ignorance of what is lie to us that
that which seems to be is that which isrdquo
SECTION 19 (392 E ndash 393 A)
Ammonius continues with the implications that follow from interpreting the E to
mean ldquoyou arerdquo Mortal substances were denied true Being in section 18 and here
Ammonius describes true Being ndash it is not possible to say of something that is (in
other words that has true Being) either that it was or that it will be
ldquoThen what is it that Being really is It is everlasting without beginning indestructible
impervious to decay and no instant of time brings change to it104 For time is in motion
moving we imagine with material stuff always flowing onward and uncontained but as if in
a leaking vessel shedding birth and destruction105 To say of time lsquothenrsquo or lsquobeforersquo or lsquoit will
bersquo or lsquoit has beenrsquo is an immediate admission of its non-being For to speak of what has not
yet happened as lsquobeingrsquo or of what has ceased to be as lsquoisrsquo is both simple-minded and
inappropriate Reason set free to comment would wholly demolish the main basis of our
understanding of time as when we say lsquoit has beenrsquo lsquoit is herersquo or lsquonowrsquo For the notion of
37
the present is squeezed out into the future or back into the past and it must be split apart as
happens for those wanting to see it at a precise instant in the present So if the same thing
happens to nature measured by time as happens to time the measurer then there is nothing
in nature that remains in Being but all things are coming into being or are being destroyed
according to their connections with time106 Hence to say of something that is either that it
was or that it will be is not sanctioned by divine law For these are some of the
displacements mutations and deviations of something that by its nature does not abide in
Beingrdquo
SECTION 20 (393 A ndash 393 D)
This section completes the interpretation of the E (as ldquoyou arerdquo) begun in sections 18
and 19 Section 18 asserted that we (mortal beings) have no part of Being section 19
described Being and this section asserts that god meets the description of Being
Hence he is
ldquoBut the god107 it must be said is and he is for no particular time but forever108 a forever
that is motionless outside time and undeviating109 where there is neither before nor after
neither future nor past neither older nor younger110 But he being one has with one now
filled forever and only when lsquoBeingrsquo is as he is is it truly being It has neither become nor is it
about to become for lsquoBeingrsquo never did begin and it will never end So when we worship him
we must greet and address him in the same fashion lsquoYou arersquo or even by Zeus as some of
the ancients did111 with the address lsquoYou are onersquo
ldquoFor the divine is not manifold as each one of us is manifold and becoming who we
are from a patchwork of different experiences and a collection of all kinds of happenings
indiscriminately jumbled together112 But Being must necessarily be one just as the One must
38
be Difference on the other hand in its divergence from being arises out of non-being into
genesis
ldquoSo the first of the names of the god suits him well and the second and the third For
he is A-pollo denying the many and the manifold As he is alone and one so he is Ieius He is
Phoebus perhaps because the ancients called all things that are chaste and pure lsquophoebusrsquo113
just as I believe the Thessalians say to this day of their priests who spend the days of ill
omen living in seclusion in the open air that they are lsquofollowing the rule of Phoebusrsquo114 The
One is absolute and pure for pollution arises from mixing different things and as Homer said
somewhere when ivory is being reddened [dyed] the dyers say that it is being polluted they
say that the mixing of colours destroys them and they speak of such mixing as
lsquodestructiversquo115 Surely then to be both one and unmixed befits the unsullied and
uncorruptedrdquo
SECTION 21 (393 D ndash 394 C)
Although Ammonius accepts the identification of Apollo with the sun he
categorically rejects Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation of the alternating cults of
Apollo and Dionysus at Delphi as reflecting the two faces of one god and the rhythm
of the cosmos He ends his exposition by contrasting and then reconciling the
maxim ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo with the E the symbol for ldquoYou arerdquo and then reprising
and expanding the list of names for Apollo
ldquoAs for those who believe that Apollo and the sun are one and the same it is fitting that they
should be welcomed and loved for their piety in that they posit their conception of the god as
the most honorable thing amongst all the things they crave to know Let us awaken them from
that most beautiful of sleep-visions where they dream of the god and urge them to advance
higher and to behold him in his true nature but also to honour this image of him as the sun
and let them feel awe towards the sunrsquos generative powers so far as something apprehended
39
by the mind can stand for something seized by the senses or a mutable thing can stand for one
that does not change lighting up as it manages to do certain reflections and likenesses of the
godrsquos kindness and blessedness
ldquoBut as for his raptures and transformations when he sends out fire116 raptures that
they say tear him apart as he pushes the fire down extending it towards the earth the sea the
winds and living things and as for the violence undergone by both living creatures and plant
life117 to listen to such accounts is impious In these accounts he seems more lowly than the
poetrsquos child who builds castles in the sand and then scatters them playing a game with the
universe building a world that did not exist and after it has been created destroying it over
and over again118 To the contrary insofar as he has come into the world in one way or
another he holds it substance together and governs its bodily weakness and its tendency
towards destruction
ldquoIt seems to me that to address the god with the words lsquoYou arersquo is especially
destructive of this theory and argues against it asserting that no raptures or transformations
take place in him and that these acts and experiences belong to some other god or rather
demigod whose appointed domain is nature coming into being and destruction This is
immediately clear from their names which are directly opposed and antithetical For one is
called Apollo the other Pluto one the Delian the other Aiumldoneus one Phoebus and the other
Scotios119 The Muses and Memory accompany the one Oblivion and Silence the other120
One is Theoros and Phanaeos the other lsquothe Lord of the dark night and sluggish sleeprsquo121 and
he is also lsquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrsquo122 But Pindar sang not unpleasantly of
Apollo lsquoTowards mortals he has been judged the gentlestrsquo 123 and similarly Euripides quite
rightly spoke of
40
libations for the departed dead
and songs but not such as
golden-haired Apollo welcomes124
and even before him Stesichorus125
The harp games song and dance
Apollo loves the best
But the lot of Hades is sorrow and wailing
And it is clear that Sophocles assigns to each god his own instruments lsquoNeither the harp nor
the lyre is welcome for lamentsrsquo126 It was not for a long time indeed only recently that the
flute dared make itself heard in sentimental airs during earlier times it drew forth
lamentations and provided on these occasions a service neither highly esteemed nor much
appreciated But then those conflating divine matters with the business of the demi-gods fell
into confusion themselves
ldquoIt seems that in one way the E lsquoYou arersquo stands in opposition to the phrase lsquoKnow
yourselfrsquo but in another way it is consistent with it For the first is addressed to the god with
awe and respect proclaiming his eternal being while the second is a reminder to mortal men
of their nature and their frailtyrdquo127
41
SECTION 1 COMMENTARY and NOTES
1 (1 384 D) Sarapion was a poet and Stoic philosopher living in Athens Plutarch himself had
spent part of his youth in Athens a university city and he visited it from time to time as an adult
Sarapion (an Egyptian name others occur in the dialogue) may have come from Hierapolis in Syria
He also appears in QC I 10 1 628 A-B as a successful producer of choruses (Jones 1980 229)
Nothing of his work has survived although he may be the author of two iambic trimeters (Bowie
2002 45) collected in Stobaeus Sarapion also appears as an active discussant and critic in De Pyth
5 396 F and 18 402 F
2 (1 384 D) Dicaearchus was a student of Aristotle a philosopher and writer Only fragments
of his work have survived There is a tradition that Euripides wrote a tragedy Archelaus and that he
died while in refuge at the Macedonian court of that king If Euripides wrote such a play it has been
lost (William Ridgeway ldquoEuripides in Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 20 1926 1-19 and Scott
Scullion ldquoEuripides and Macedonrdquo Classical Quarterly 53 2003 389-400)
3 (1 384 D) It is not clear whether Plutarch attributes this quotation to Dicaearchus or to
Euripides Babbitt (1926 199) assigns it to Euripides (Nauck Euripides frag 969) although
Helmbold-OrsquoNeil attributes it to both Euripides and Dicaearchus (frag 77) The fragment is written as
a trimeter The sentiment but not necessarily the source is important to Plutarch since he is basing
the direction of his proem on the notion of gift giving and fair exchange Later Young Plutarch citing
Heraclitus gives another instance of fair exchange (gold for goodshellip)
4 (1 384 E) The pair of phrases ldquoill-mannered and servile hellip generosity and beautyrdquo illustrates
Plutarchrsquos arguably best known stylistic device the doublet balanced repetition or ldquosemi-synonymrdquo
(Sandbach 1939) This particular figure has a chiastic structure a common trope that also appears in
Heraclitus Some of these doublets are also hendiadyses (a figure where two words connected by a
copulative conjunction express a single complex idea)
5 (I 384 E) The notion of the first fruits orginated in sacrificial cults in classical times and in
Old Testament scripture While not central to Christian ritual it came to be used metaphorically in the
New Testament and later Christian writings (H D Betz 1971 218) Two millenia later on admitting
ldquoKwanzaardquo into the English dictionary in 2009 the OED described it as the festival of the celebration
of the literal ldquofirst fruits of the harvestrdquo So the concept is still current and it still transcends parochial
42
interpretations The phrase is used again (απάρξασθαι τῷ θεῷ της φίλης μαθηματικης 7 387 E) and
appears in Plutarchrsquos De aud 640 B and Sept sap con 6 151 E
6 (I 385 B) Flaceliegravere (1941 33) notes that from this vantage point near the shrine one has a
splendid view of the lower parts of the sanctuary the ravine of Pleistos and Mount Kirphis Tourists
today still marvel at the imposing site of the temple One can understand how Plutarch could have
been influenced by the beauty and majesty of the place to recall an earlier meeting or even to conceive
the idea of writing of such a meeting In addition Plutarch was near the place where the three Es are
said to have been displayed Their presence would have contributed to the holiness of the place This
is I believe the only instance in the dialogue where Plutarch comments on the natural environment
7 (I 385 B) Nero visited the temple in 67 AD by our reckoning (Cassius Dio Historia
Romana 62 205) The priests at Delphi kept meticulous chronological records but Plutarch has not
given us a precise date
SECTION 2 COMMENTARY and NOTES
8 (2 385 B) These five epithets reflect the progressive ascent through four levels of the getting
of wisdom and understanding Apollo was the slayer of the Python and Pythian (compare πυνθάνομαι
ldquoI inquirerdquo) is an analogy to the first steps of an initiate At the second level two names reflect
dawning understanding Apollo the ldquoDelianrdquo was born on the island of Delos and the epithet
allegorises the clarity (δηλος lsquolsquoclearrdquo) of new understanding and of dawning revelation which is also
captured in ldquoPhaneausrdquo (φαίνω ldquoI show I bring to lightrdquo) At the third level Apollo ldquoIsemniosrdquo
fathered the Boeotian river-god Ismenos (an inversion of the usual epithet ldquoson ofrdquo) which is
analogous to those at the third level who ldquoknowrdquo (ἴσmicroεν first person plural of the perfective of εἴδω ldquoI
have seenrdquo and the present of οἶδα ldquoI knowrdquo) Pindarrsquos first Hymn to Zeus opens with Melia ldquoof the
golden spindlerdquo who bore Ismenos on the site of the oracular Ismenion near Thebes (Fontenrose 1978
142 Hardie 2000 20) At the fourth and final level Apollo is ldquoLeschenoriosrdquo from the Lesche a large
clubroom at Delphi built by the Knidians in 450 BC The stem appears in λεσχηνεύω (ldquoI converserdquo)
and as the second term in the compound ἕλλεσχος (ldquothat which provides material for conversationrdquo)
both suited to Ammoniusrsquo analogic purpose This progression where the final stage of knowledge lies
in conversation and communication suggests that for Ammonius the acquisition of knowledge is a
communal and social venture (as the dialogue itself exemplifies)
We may be sceptical about these linguistic derivations Three of the names ndash Ismenos Pythia
and Delosndashmay be no more than toponyms Babbitt comments on this section ldquoPlutarchrsquos attempt to
43
connect Ismenian with ἴδ (οἶδα) can hardly be rightrdquo (1936 203) On the same passage Flaceliegravere
calls the proposed etymologies ldquopurement fanatasistesrdquo (1941 75 fn 12) There are other etymological
excursions within the dialogue Young Plutarch contrasts the names and habits of Apollo and
Dionysus (9 388 F) and he recalls Socratesrsquo remarks on the name of the moon (15 391 B) Ammonius
returns to etymology in his final speech (21 394 A)
Babbittrsquos remark raises an interesting problem He conflates the views that Plutarch attributes
to Ammonius with those of Plutarch himself It is a useful shorthand but not always a defensible
interpretation I shall be at pains to attribute the views expressed by the speakers to the speakers
themselves Further to attribute views to the speakers in the narrative is not necessarily to attribute
them to the historical persons on whom these characters may have been modelled
9 (2 385 C) To my knowledge the addition of the second ldquothe seeking of answersrdquo was
introduced by Paton in 1893 it has been accepted by all editors since When affairs of the god are
hidden in riddles we are led from the riddle into philosophy Thus the rationale for including the
second ˂τοῦ δὲ ζητεῖν ˃ is that it completes the path from uncertainty to inquiry to the beginning of
philosophy through a syllogism Certainly enquiring wondering and doubting or aporia is the
starting point of every philosophical investigation This recalls ldquowonder is the feeling of a philosopher
and philosophy begins in wonderrdquo (Socrates in Theaetetus 155c-d)
10 (2 385 C) The laurel tree was sacred to Apollo The original temple to Apollo at Delphi was
built with branches of laurel brought from Tempe (Paus 1059) The pass of Tempe running from
Macedonia into Thessaly along the river Peneus was frequented by Apollo and the Muses (Herodotus
Histories 1173) Finally the Pythia chewed bay leaves while she was sitting on the tripod
11 (2 385 C) Pausanius describing Delphi and its environs describes the statues of the two
Fates near the altar of Poseidon within the shrine ldquobut in place of the third Fate there stand by their
side Zeus Guide of Fate and Apollo Guide of Faterdquo (Paus 10244) For the significance of the
substitution of Zeus and Apollo see Auguste Boucheacute-Leclercq (1879 121)
Pindar [522-443 BC] neacute dans un pays fertile en oracles eacutetait lrsquointerpregravete de lrsquooracle
apollinien de Delphes alors agrave lrsquoapogeacutee de son prestige et son influencehellip Dans le
temple de Delphes non loin du siegravege de fer ougrave Pindar srsquoessayait dit-on pour
chanter des hymnes en lrsquohonneur drsquoApollon on voyait un groupe de statues
repreacutesentant Zeus Mœragegravete et Apollon Mœragegravete associeacutes agrave deux Mœres et tenant
la place de la troisiegraveme La theacuteologie et lrsquoart symbolisait ainsi cette union intime de
la fataliteacute at la Providence dont la raison ne devait jamais parvenir agrave eacutelucider le
mystegravere
44
12 (2 385 C) The matter of the tripod may be the question of how the Pythia performs
divination These mysteries come up in a mutilated passage in section 16 For the operation of the
Pythia see Parke and Wormell (1956 1 24) and Boucheacute-Leclercq (1888 389 fn 2)
13 (2 385 C) The imperative used in ldquolook how these inscriptionshelliprdquo (ὅρα δὲ καὶ ταυτὶ τὰ
προγράμματαhellip) means more than simply ldquolookrdquo a spiritual understanding is implied (Obsieger
(2013 116) The same construction appears earlier at ldquobut see also thatrdquo (ὅρα δη ὅσον) (1 384 D)
SECTION 3 COMMENTARY and NOTES
14 (3 385 D) Ammonius as we see later is not persuaded by Lampriasrsquo argument that there
were only five Sages although numerous references link them to maxims displayed at Delphi and in
other places Only Plutarch links them to the E
There are several accounts of the seven Sages and their names vary In Sept sap con
(1 146 B) Plutarch (or Pseudo-Plutarch) tells of a symposium held in the distant past at Delphi for the
sages which not only the seven Sages but in addition ldquoat least twice that numberrdquo attended Their
discussion of different forms of government conveys a pervasive ldquoanti-tyrannical biasrdquo (Aalders 1977
32) The sages at that banquet were Thales Bias Pittacus Solon Chilon Cleoboulos and Anacharsis
Other participants included Aesop (probably a rough contemporary) and two women Melissa and
Eumetis Periander arranged for the dinnerwhich was held near the shrine of Aphrodite
Plutarch discusses the sages (Life of Solon 12 4) noting that the group at Delphi ldquosummoned
to their aid from Crete Epimenides of Phaestus who is reckoned as the seventh Wise Man by some of
those who refuse Periander a place in the listrdquo The wise men besides Solon named there are Bias of
Priene Periander of Corinth Pittacus of Mitylene and Thales of Miletus Thales is described as the
ldquoonly wise man of the time who carried his speculations beyond the realm of the practical while the
rest earned the epithet from their excellence as statesmenrdquo The lists of wise men in other works are
not consistent Diogenes Laertius gives twelve who appear in one or other of the lists Thales Solon
Periander Cleoboulos Chilon Bias Pittacus Anarchas the Scythian Myson of Chenae Pherecydes
of Syros Epimenides the Cretan and Pisistratus the tyrant (DL 113) Plato gives us seven Thales of
Miletus Pittacus of Mytilene Bias of Priene Solon of Athens Cleoboulos of Lindus Myson of
Chenae and Chilon of Sparta describing them as enthusiasts lovers and disciples of the Spartan
culture whose wisdom was exemplified by the short memorable sayings that fell from them when
they assembled together (Plato Protagoras 342e-343a)
45
Pausanias visited Delphi and commented on the wise men and their maxims but not on the E
He gives us the seven names on Platorsquos list adding that of Periander whose entitlement to a place
amongst them was controversial He adds that two of the sages dedicated to Apollo at Delphi the
celebrated maxims ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo (γνῶθι σαυτόν Thales of Miletus) and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
(μηδὲν ἄγαν Solon of Athens) (Paus 10241)
15 (3 385 D) Obsieger (2013 123) interprets Lampriasrsquo description of ldquomaxims and aphorismsrdquo
to mean that the transgression of the two rogue sages was some sort of plagiarism or at least an
appropriation of voice Lamprias does not explain how they transgressed but Pseudo-Plutarch may be
suggesting that since Greek philosophers and thinkers were expected to walk the talk their roles as
tyrants made them unacceptable as sages Cleoboulos and Periander were tyrants of Lindos and
Corinth respectively
16 (3 385 F) Flaceliegravere comments that those connected to the sanctuary were more likely to be
temple attendants (neacuteocores) or accredited guides (peacuterieacutegegravetes) than priests (1941 77 n 20)
17 (3 385 F) We can infer that ldquoLivia the wife of Caesarrdquo is the wife of Augustus since there
was apparently no other Livia wife of Caesar I can find no contemporaneous account of Augustus at
Delphi although there is circumstantial support for such a visit Augustus credited Apollo with his
success at the Battle of Actium (31 BC) and increasingly identified with Apollo as his patron That
decisive battle took place near an old Apollonian sanctuary which Augustus restored He also offered
ten ships from the spoils to the god and sponsored both the sanctuary in Delphi and the Delphic
Amphictyony (Dietmar Kienast Augustus Prinzeps und Monarch Berlin Primus Verlag 2009 461-
462) Kienast gives the Chronicle of George Synkellos (ninth century) as his authority for the story
that Augustus dedicated his sword to the Delphic Apollo If Augustus visited Delphi with Livia that
visit would have been around 20 BC
SECTION 4 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
18 (4 386 A) The adjective (or noun) ldquoChaldeanrdquo was not by Plutarchrsquos time a mark of
ethnicity but a term for astronomers and astrologers The province of Chaldea in the Achaemenid
Empire (539ndash330 BC) disappeared from the historical record during the time of the Roman Empire
19 (4 386 B) The ldquoseven sounds amongst the letters that make a complete sound by
themselvesrdquo are the vowels A consonant is an alphabetic or phonetic element that forms a syllable
when combined with a vowel The seven vowels are α ε η ι ο υ and ω The Greek alphabet with its
46
vowels was a distinct innovation from the Semitic consonantal system and part of the relatively
recent evolution of an oral culture to one with a written language Dionysius Thrax (170-90 BC) a
student of Aristarchus produced our earliest extant Greek grammar (Τέχνη γραμματική) setting out the
classification of vowels and consonants (Obsieger 2013 127 Robins 1957 and Di Benedetto 1990)
Notice that Plutarch is shifting the ground beneath our discussantsrsquo feet Lamprias has just
described the Wise Men as dedicating ldquothat one of the letters which is fifth in alphabetical order and
which stands for the number fiverdquo saying that the (rump of) the Wise Men used the E (which also
happens to be a vowel) because it represented their number ndash five The Chaldean is talking exclusively
about the vowels in the Greek alphabet and making a point about the equivalence of the number of
vowels in Greek and the number of wandering stars in the sky By using these two ways of comparing
letters and numbers he has introduced an astrological dimension into the discussion He then
compares the elements lying in second place in those two series ndash the E and the sun
20 (4 386 B) The E is a symbol of Apollo because it occupies the same place within the
hebdomad of vowels as does the sun another symbol of Apollo within the hebdomad of the
wandering stars The seven celestial bodies the Moon the Sun Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter and
Saturn (ἀστέρας πλανεται) are visible to the naked eye Their independent movements differentiate
them from the fixed stars outside the solar system The designation as wandering stars appears in
Aratusrsquo Phaenomena a tract hugely popular in Imperial Rome in part because of Cicerorsquos translation
(Aratea) Lucretius also used it when he denounced the notion that the universe is the result of
intelligent design (De Rerum Natura chapter 5) See also Ellen Gee Aratus and the Astronomical
Tradition 2013 chapter 3
21 (4 386 B) Babbitt (1936 207) has described the sentence ldquo[they] come from star books and
the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo as being as obscure in the Greek as in the
English No one has disputed his opinion The source of the problem lies in the apparent idiom ἐκ
πίνακος καὶ πυλαίας The first word πίναξ is straightforward but polysemic It can mean a piece of
lumber a board a plank a slab of slate a writing surface a tablet or a votive tablet It can also refer
to an astrological tablet or the booklets of fortunes used by fortune tellers The second πύλη (here as
an adjective πυλαίας) can be a toponym or a geographical feature (a mountain pass a sea strait) It can
also mean a gate an entrance one wing of a double door or the gates to Hell These two words have
been yoked here in Plutarchrsquos favourite construction a doublet
47
Plutarch constructed this section by first describing in the indirect speech of unidentified
speaker the way the Chaldean spoke (he ldquospoke nonsenserdquo ldquoplayed the foolrdquo or ldquopratedrdquo) The
Chaldean used the imperfect tense suggesting that he might have gone on at length Next comes a
crescendo of the Chaldeanrsquos claims ndash the seven stars the seven vowels the sun and the E in the same
place in their respective hebdomads and the sun almost universally recognized as a symbol of Apollo
Finally in direct speech signalling the climax of his description the speaker exclaims ldquoBut all of
these ideas come from star books and the rumours chattered about at the gates of the sanctuaryrdquo We
know what he means even if we cannot parse every word
There is a similar phrase denoting much the same thing ndashμετεωρολόγοι καὶ αδολέσχαι τινές
(ldquosky-watchers and chatterersrdquo or ldquohigh thinkers and great talkersrdquo) but with ambiguous connotations
The first term has a history of serious usage but in Aristophanesrsquo Clouds meteorological
investigation using this word is consistently and satirically associated with the Sophists (228-230
333 360 see also Trivigno 2012 58) Plato uses the words several times in Book 6 of The
Republicwhere a helmsman is accused by his crew of being a ldquostar-gazer and chattererrdquo Plato
compares the captaining of a ship to the management of the ship of state (Rep 448e 489a and 489c)
His point is that some star-gazing or ldquohigh-talkingrdquo is required to attain a theoretical as well as a
practical understanding of onersquos craft
22 (4 386 B) Lamprias suggested earlier that his interpretation of the E could be supported by
listening to ldquothe explanations of those connected to the sanctuaryrdquo (γνοίη τις ἂν ακούσας τῶν κατὰ τὸ
ἱερὸν 3 385 F) Here Plutarch speaks specifically of ldquoguidesrdquo who must be amongst those in the
group Elsewhere Plutarch mentions a guide called Praxiteles (QC 3 675 and 8 4 723) C P Jones
discusses the descriptions given by Pausanias and Plutarch of guides at some religious sites In De
Pyth Diogenianus a young man from Pergamum is being led around the sanctuary by Plutarchrsquos
friend Philinus and other learned men Philinus describes the guides going through their prepared
speeches paying no attention to their little flock until they are asked to shorten their monologues and
drop the discussion of the inscriptions Later when the visitors begin to contribute their own abstruse
opinions Theon comments ldquoWe seem my friend to be rather rudely depriving the guides of their
proper jobrdquo (αλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὦ παῖ δοκοῦμεν ἐπηρείᾳ τινὶ τοὺς περιηγητὰς αφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ οἰκεῖον
ἔργον 7397 E)
The guides that Pausanias might have had and those that Plutarch might have known were
ldquolocal informants who are able to hold their own in the company of lsquothe educatedrsquo and those
48
belonging to the kind of society that Plutarch portrays in his Moralia with its mixture of sophists
professors of literature philosophers lawyers doctors and wealthy amateursrdquo (Jones 2001 36)
23 (4 386 C) The guides believe that the name ldquoειrdquo carries the symbolism not as Lamprias
asserted the pentad or the letter E As we see later Ammonius puts forward the view that the
significance of ldquoειrdquo lies in its semantic meaning ldquoyou arerdquo
SECTION 5 COMMENTARY AND NOTES
24 (5 386 C) Nicander also appears in De def (51 438 B) where he is an officiating priest
during the incident of a Pythia who became ill during an interpretation of an oracle In that passage
Nicander is called a prophet (προφήτης) This may simply describe his function as an assistant to the
Pythia but it is probably not an exact synonym for priest (ἱερεὺς) His speaking on behalf of the temple
personnel suggests that his role in the dialogue is to present a specifically religious explanation of the
meaning of E opposed to the views of the Stoics which appear later in the dialogue
25 (5 386 C) Wyttenbach has read σχημα (ldquoform shape construction or figurerdquo) as ὄχημα (a
vehicle animal or mechanical for carrying freight including human beings) Obsieger prefers the
latter reading although Goodwin has produced the reasonable ldquoa conveyance and form of prayer to
the Godrdquo where ldquoconveyancerdquo means a grammatical structure Nevertheless the phrase ldquothe shape
and form of every prayer to the godrdquo has rhythm reflects the semi-synonyms ldquoσχημα καὶ μορφηrdquo and
avoids the possible hendiadys in ldquoa conveyance and form of prayerrdquo
26 (5 386 C) Nicander claims that ldquoifrdquo [εἰ] is the first word in the phrase containing the question
used by a suppliant as he addresses the god For the sake of comparison I have included some
examples of such questions contained in a collection of selected papyri (Hunt-Edgar 1932 436-439)
They provide two complete addresses to oracles (193 and 194) and twenty-one single sentence
questions to the oracle portmanteaued into entry 195 all demonstrating Nicanderrsquos contention These
are papyri from the Christian era up to the fourth century AD I reproduce the first five of the short
questions for the oracle and the two longer addresses in Greek and English (my translation)
195 From a List of Questions to an Oracle (about the year 300)
εἰ λήμψομαι τὸ ὀψώνιον (if I am to receive an allowance)
εἰ μενῶ ὅπου ὑπάγω (if I am to remain where I am going)
εἰ πωλοῦμαι (if I am to be sold)
εἰ ἔχω ὠφελίαν απὸ τοῦ φίλου (if I am to receive what is owed me by a friend)
49
εἰ δέδοταί μοι ἑτέρῳ συναλλάξαι (if I am allowed to enter into a contract)
The rest of the twenty-one questions have the same structure although the substance varies These are
clearly not complete sentences so I have refrained from punctuating them They lack context and have
the artificial air of our own FAQs One can imagine that such a list might have been available at the
temple to help suppliants formulate their questions In contrast consider the two complete addresses to
the oracle where the context the ldquoby whom and to whomrdquo is established at the outset
193 Question to an Oracle (P Oxy 1148 1st cent AD)
Κύριέ μου Σάραπι Ἥλιε εὐεργέτα εἰ βέλτειόν ἐστιν Φανίαν τὸν υἱό(ν) μου καὶ την
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μη συμφωνησαι νῦν τῷ πατρὶ α(ὐτοῦ) αλλὰ αντιλέγειν καὶ μη
διδόναι γράμματα τοῦ-τό μοι σύμφωνον ἔνεν-κε ἔρρω(σο)
O Lord Sarapis Helios beneficent one (Tell me) if it is fitting that Phanias my son
and his wife now quarrel with me his father but oppose me and do not contract with
me Tell me this truly Goodbye
194 Question to an oracle (P Oxy 1149 2nd cent AD)
Διὶ Ἡλίῳ μεγάλωι Σεράπ[ι]δι καὶ τοῖς συννάοις ἐρωτᾷ Νίκη εἰ σ[υ]μφέρει μοι
α[γο]ράσαι παρὰ Τασαρ[α]πίωνος ὃν ἔχει δοῦλον Σαραπί-ωνα τ[ὸ]ν κα[ὶ Γ]αΐωνα
[τοῦτό μ]οι δός
To Zeus Helios great Serapis and his fellow gods Nike asks if it is to my advantage
to buy from Tasarapion her slave Sarapion also called Gaion Grant me this
Indirect questions are used in these two addresses since the petitioner prefaces his question with a
syntagma ldquotell merdquo ldquoI askrdquo or ldquoNike asksrdquo The interrogative use of εἰ is derived from the conditional
where the protasis is elided thus ldquodo tell me whether you will save merdquo (σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις)
This helps us to understand the next point about the identity of the dialecticians
27 (5 386 C) ldquoThose dialecticiansrdquowere not only grammarians but also logicians who
investigate the meaning of syllogisms The construction of the syllogism contributes to its meaning
(just as word order contributes to the meaning of an English sentence) and it may be expressed with or
without the ldquoifrdquo Simple indirect questions to the god are compressed syllogisms introduced by an
interrogative εἰ and they have real premises According to Nicander the god understands that all these
questions proceed from real premises
28 (5 386 C) ldquoIf only I couldrsquo is the usual expression of a wishrdquo Despite its appearance here in
a verse from Archilochus the expression lsquoεἰ γὰρrsquo was used most often in the ldquoexalted style of tragedyrdquo
(GP 1959 93) and the εἰ in wishes was from Homer on seen as a conditional Nevertheless it can be
50
difficult to make a distinction between wish and condition as the variations in editorsrsquo punctuations
show ldquoThe difference between lsquoIf only James were here He would help mersquo and lsquoIf only James were
here he would help mersquo is merely the difference between an apodosis at first vaguely conceived and
then clearly defined and an apodosis clearly envisaged at the outsetrdquo (GP 1950 90) Nicander asserts
that γὰρ reinforces εἰ and turns ldquoifrdquo into ldquoif onlyrdquo just as θε does to εἴ in εἴθε
29 (5 386 D) We owe the fragment ldquoto touch the hand of Neobulerdquo to Plutarch (Bergk frag
402 Helmbold-OrsquoNeil frag 6) Almost nothing substantial written by Archilocus a lyric poet from
the seventh centurywas known to have survived until recently In 1974 an almost complete poem
was discovered in Cologne on a second-century papyrus This poem about Neobule and attributed to
Archilochus complements the fragment cited by Plutarch and gives us quite a different perspective on
the story of Neobule In the old story of the Parian Lycambes and his daughter Neobule Lycambes
had betrothed Neobule to Archilochus but later reneged on the agreement Archilochus responded so
violently that Lycambes Neobule and one or both of his other daughters committed suicide (Gerber
1997 50 1999 75 QC 3 10 657-659) Nevertheless when R Merkelbach and M L West (1974)
translated the new poem they interpreted it differently On their interpretation Archilochus had
wreaked revenge on Lycambes by debauching his younger daughter Next in 1975 Miroslav
Marcovich provided a commentary and a competing interpretation writing
I am in strong disagreement with [Merkelberg and Westrsquos] interpretation I think we
have to do with a fresh and naiumlve love story The main purpose of this paper is
however to improve our text of the poem by offering a somewhat different edition
of the papyrus and to provide it a literary-philological commentary The time for a
definitive literary assessment of the poem has not yet come
The two modern interpretations of the poem are difficult to reconcile Certainly since
Nicander is making a grammatical argument the structure of the phrase (that is the use of ldquoifrdquo) is
more important than the semantic content and the narrative of the poem We are not required to come
to a definitive interpretation of the poem But we can ask ourselves why to a illustrate a fine point in
grammar and within the context of a discussion of the meaning of the E held at one of the foremost
oracles in Greece Nicander introduced this colourful and controversial story Our ignorance of the
conventions of Plutarchrsquos time and place make it difficult to interpret this story in its recently
expanded context We may never completely understand this passage nor Nicanderrsquos choice of
examples
30 (5 386 D) I have chosen to translate ldquoκαὶ τοῦ lsquoεἴθεrsquo την δευτέραν συλλαβην παρέλκεσθαί
φασινrdquo with the paraphrase lsquoif onlyrsquo one can say that the second word is not necessaryrdquo using
51
ldquosecond wordrdquo instead of ldquosecond syllablerdquo (την δευτέραν συλλαβην) in full awareness of the stricture
to translate the words on the page
31 (5 386 D) Sophron a contemporary of Euripides wrote in the Doric dialect hence we find
the forms δευομένα and δευμένα in different editions of the fragment (Kaibel 1899 160 1) Obsieger
prefers the Doric but gives a complete list of the variants As to the word θην it is an enclitic with a
vaguely affirmative connotation used almost exclusively in poetry
32 (5 386 D) This is a citation from Iliad 17 29 where Menelaus is threatening Euphorbus
during their encounter over the disposition of the body of Patroclus
33 (5 386 C) Nicander has used three quotations to illustrate his conclusion ldquoso as they [the
Delians] say the optative force is quite clear in the lsquoifrsquordquo Considering the first use of ldquoifrdquo ndash εἰ γὰρ ndash he
argues that γὰρ is an intensifier that strengthens εἰ to the equivalent of the Latin ldquoutinamrdquo or the
English ldquoif onlyrdquo or ldquowould thatrdquo thus the simple conditional has the added connotation of yearning or
need He then remarks that the exclamation εἴθε (would that) is of the same structure as εἰ γὰρ so that
the second syllable of εἴ-θε performs the same function as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ The next step is to associate
the second syllable of εἴ-θε with θήν meaning ldquosurely nowrdquo which gives θήν the same semantic
coloring as γὰρ in εἰ γὰρ
Nicander asserts that εἰ γὰρ and εἴ-θε have the same structure and perform the same function
and thus demonstrates the equivalence of the particles γὰρ and θε but gives us no example of the εἴ-θε
in actual use His last two examples are on the use of θήν which he asserts performs the same
function as θε In any case he has demonstrated that εἰ is used in addresses to the god but this is not
the only use of the conjunction As Ammonius says later it is also in common use in everyday speech
SECTION 6 COMMENTARY and NOTES
34 (6 386 E) Plutarchrsquos friend Theon (as opposed to another friend Theon a grammarian)
appears in QC 630 A and is probably the Theon of De Pythwho leads the discussion in Non poss
suav Given his modest demeanour his deference to Ammonius and his concern for Dialectic he is
probably a young man and a student He expounds Stoic ideas and is probably known to Sarapion
35 (6 386 E) Plutarch the narrator describes Theonrsquos and Ammoniusrsquo personification of
ldquoDialecticrdquo Other translations also preserve the personification (Babbitt Holland King and Amyot)
Dialectics (or logic) was one of the seven liberal arts considered the basis of a good education in the
Middle Ages In early Greek literature especially Homer personification played an evocative and
52
picturesque part The liberal arts the seasons human emotions and so on continued to be portrayed in
art and literature as beautiful young women up to the Middle Ages and beyond
36 (6 386 E) Theon claims that Socrates used dialectics to successfully interpret an Apollonian
oracle The story goes that the oracle at Delphi told the Delians that by building a new altar at Delos
according to certain requirements they could be delivered from the plague that was then afflicting
them After a couple of unsatisfactory attempts the Delians consulted Socrates (according to Plutarch
in De gen Socr 7 579 A) who interpreted the oracle as a covert method to spur the Delians to learn
mathematics and geometry Socratesrsquos knew as apparently the Delians did not that Apollo set great
store by geometry and practised it himself Alice Riginos in her work on the life of Plato states that
she has not been able to trace information about Apollorsquos interest in geometry beyond Plato (Riginos
1976 145 Kouremenous 2011 349)
Plutarch reports another anecdote about Platorsquos (and Apollorsquos) interest in geometry He asks
the question ldquoWhat did Plato mean when he said that god always plays the geometerrdquo at a
symposium held to celebrate Platorsquos birthday (QC 8 718 C-F) Plutarch claims that Plato deplored the
mechanical apporach to the solution of the cube problem as introduced by Eudoxus and Archytas
37 (6 387 A) The proposition ldquoif it is day then it must be lightrdquo was used in Stoic teaching of
elementary dialectics Flaceliegravere citing Sextus Empiricus (SVF 2 216 and 279) shows that this
example was part of the elementary curriculum Other examples of the ldquoif it is dayhelliprdquo construction
occur in Chrysippus (SVF 2 726 ff) Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism (1 62-72) and
Aelian De Natura Animal (4 59) The proposition is reminiscent of the Heraclitean fragment (Diels
99 Kahn 46 Bywater 31) which Plutarch (or Pseudo Plutarch) gives in Aqua an ignis (957 A)
Ἡράκλειτος μὲν οὖν ldquoεἰ μη ἥλιοςrdquo φησίν ldquoἦν εὐφρόνη ἂν ἦνrdquo
For as Heraclitus says ldquoIf there were no sun it would be perpetual nightrdquo
Despite his differences with the Stoics Plutarch displays a strong affection for Chrysippus or
certainly a strong predilection for writing about him Chrysippus is not mentioned by name in De E
only by his work He appears often in the Moralia OrsquoNeil (2005 142-146) has dozens of references
over five close-printed pages Diogenes Laertius (Book 7) says that Chrysippus wrote 705 books
(some of more than one volume) and names them all
38 (6 387 A) Obsieger makes the connection from αἰσθάνομαι αἰω to perceiveto Plutarchrsquos
De soll anim (13 969 A) where Plutarch discusses Chrysippusrsquo theory of perception
53
39 (6 387 B) Here we recognise the Stoic theory of divination that all acts and events are
intimately linked and that ldquohe who has the natural capacity to connect causes and link them together
also knows how to foretellrdquo These links may be beyond human understanding although sometimes
Providence reveals them Although we may not see the link between the flight of a bird or the colour
of the liver of a sacrificial victim and the outcome of a battle it is not impossible that there is one
(Boucheacute-Leclercq 1879-1882 2 59-60)
40 (6 387 B) It was said of Kalchas the bird interpreter and priest of Apollo that he knew ldquoall
things that are the things to come and the things that are in the pastrdquo (Iliad 1 70) The phrase ldquobird
interpreterrdquo resonates with the ldquowolves and dogs and birdsrdquo introduced in the syllogism The use that
Theon can make of a literary allusion suggests that he is indeed a good student
41 (6 387 D) Swans and lyres appear in the Homeric Hymn 21 to Apollo where the swan
sings with clear voice to the beating of his wings while Apollo thrums his high-pitched lyre
Nevertheless not all swans are musical as Lucian reports on his encounter with boatmen in northern
Italy when he quizzed them on the swans living on their river (probably the Po)
We are always on the water and have worked on the Eridanos since we were
children almost now and then we see a few swans in the marshes by the river and
they have a very unmusical and feeble croak crows and daws are Sirens to them As
for the sweet song you speak of we never heard it or even dreamt of it so we
wonder how these stories about us got to your people (Lucian On Amber quoted
by Krappe 1942 354)
There are two kinds of swans ndash the mute (Cygnus olor) and the whooper (Cygnus musicus or ferus)
For those born in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere the idea that a swanrsquos call could be
musical is laughable
The swans are physically alike but their calls and habits differ The whooper swans of the
North descend into western and central Europe during their yearly migrations With their musical calls
and rhythmic wing beats they could be well be Apollorsquos swans The god himself in his blond
Hyperborean incarnation migrated yearly to the Amber Isles (Krappe 1942 De def)
42 (6 387 D) The phrase ldquoa regular yokelrdquo is literally ldquoa real Boeotianrdquo For the Athenians
ldquoBoeotianrdquo was a byword for an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside Pindar
Hesiod and Plutarch himself hardly ignorant or uncultured men were from Boeotia as was Hercules
and that great riddler Oedipus
Pierre Guillon points to Athens as the nexus of this prejudice against the Boeotians a
prejudice that appears to have existed even in prehistory (La Beacuteotie antique 1948 79-92) As to its
54
cause some blame the climate Cicero (De fato 4 71) observes ldquoAthens has a light atmosphere
whence the Athenians are thought to be more keenly intelligent Thebes a dense one and the Thebans
are fat-witted accordinglyrdquo By putting into Theonrsquos mouth lsquole preacutejugeacute habituel contre ses
compatriotesrsquo (Flaceliegravere 1941 81) Plutarch does not hesitate to laugh at his own origins
Nevertheless by not keeping the word ldquoBoeotianrdquo I may be missing the irony that Guillon sees (1948
85) in ldquoHercules a real Boeotian began by disdaining logicrdquo (See below)
43 (6 387 D) Hercules a demi-god in the Olympian pantheon was an important figure at
Delphi A month was named after him and the theft of the tripod was illustrated on a pediment Since
Theon is expounding Stoic philosophy it follows that he would give an account of Hercules the
incarnation of wisdom for the later Stoics Plutarch also has the Cynic Didymus Planetiades mention
the legend when he responds testily to Demetriusrsquo invitation to discuss the reason for the obsolescence
of the oracles He points out that at Delphi the tripod (sc the oracle) is constantly occupied with
shameful and impious questionshellipabout treasures or inheritances or unlawful marriages (αἰσχρῶν καὶ
αθέων ἐρωτημάτωνhellip περὶ θησαυρῶν ἢ κληρονομιῶν ἢ γάμων παρανόμων διερωτῶντες De def 7
413 A) The myth of the struggle for the tripod between Hercules and Apollo in which Zeus
intervened is very old and illustrations appear in early vase painting (Burkert 1982 121)
44 (6 387 D) Theon accepts that the E is in fact ldquoifrdquo and that the syllogism ldquoif the first then the
secondrdquo represents the young ruffian who ridiculed the E and then the older man who inevitably
fought with the god Nevertheless in his later years this ruffian became a prophet and dialectician
There is a different interpretation of this passage one that relies on the argument that there are
no problems with the text in ldquoif the first then the secondrdquo Alain Lernould (2000) argues that to carry
off the tripod and to fight with the god signifies the negation of philosophy by the brutality of the
young Hercules and that Theon manages to integrate this episode into his argument for the supremacy
of Apollo and of dialectic in a ldquoquite Pascalian mannerrdquo In other words Theon gives a typically Stoic
allegorical interpretation of the taking of the tripod where this unfortunate exploit is presented as the
inverse image of moral perfection
SECTION 7 COMMENTARY and NOTES
45 (7 387 E) By qualifying his introduction of Eustrophus with ldquoI thinkrdquo Plutarch the author is
establishing to Sarapion that he is recalling perhaps inexactly a past conversation He uses the present
tense (οἶμαι) and Eustrophus the aorist By the end of the section this identification of Eustrophus is
secured by the intimacy described between Eustrophus and Young Plutarch
55
46 (7 387 E) Notice Eustrophusrsquo repetition of Plutarchrsquos imagery of first fruits (1 384 E)
Indeed this could be Plutarch speaking
47 (7 387 E) Counting by fives generates the five times table The verb πεμπαζομαι evolved to
mean counting or computation in general Obviously there is a physical analogue ndash the fingers on one
hand Plutarch includes this example in another discussion of the number five (De def 429 F) There is
another mnemonic that allows us to count to twelve (and from there to sixty or 5 x 12) ndash the number
of joints on the four fingers of one hand forgetting the thumb This is also the derivation of the term
ldquodactylic hexameterrdquo (one long and two short syllables in the same order as the three joints of a
finger)
48 (7 387 F) The ironic tone of this sentence suggests to me at least that Plutarch in his
maturity while not denying the importance of the study of mathematics in any young personrsquos
education might have found Eustrophusrsquo views on mathematics (and even Young Plutarchrsquos) over
enthusiastic See appendix B for a discussion of free indirect discourse and its role in expressing
irony
In contrast to Wyttenbachrsquos τάχα δὲ μέλλων Obsieger follows Sieveking Flaceliegravere Cilento
and Babbitt in preferring τάχα δη μέλλων He finds parallels for τάχα δη as soon in Sept sap con 2
148 A and De soll an 2 96 A The irony in this sentence is strengthened by the use of δη (ldquoverilyrdquo
ldquoactuallyrdquo or ldquoindeedrdquo) according to Denniston (GP 229) Denniston is writing about Greek literature
up to the end of the fourth century (320 BC) and so does not include quotations from Plutarch he
does however comment on many of the authors Plutarch quotes
SECTION 8 COMMENTARY and NOTES
In this section I have relied heavily on the ideas in Theologoumena Arithmeticae which is a
compilation of a text with the same name by Nicomachus of Gerasa and a lost work Peri Dekados by
Anatolius Waterfield comments that it ldquooften reads like little more than the written-up notes of a
studentrdquo (Waterfield 1988 23) He considers the work valuable for three reasons it preserves material
that might otherwise have been lost it demonstrates that arithmology survived amongst the Greeks
alongside ldquohardrdquo mathematics such as that of Euclid and it is a witness to the survival of Pythagorean
ideas long after the time of the Pythagorean school
50 (8 388 C) Plutarch does not signal this as a reference to Heraclitus but it is reminiscent of
ldquoevery point on a cycle (or a circle) is simultaneously the beginning and the endrdquo (Ξυνόν γαρ αρχή και
56
πέρας επί κύκλου περιφερείας κατα τον Ηερικλειτον)The source for this fragment is Porphyry
Quaestiones Homericae Iliad XIV 200 (Bywater 70 Diels 103 Kahn 94) Nevertheless resonances
exist both between the rhythms of nature the cyclic return of the numbers five and six and the notion
of mercantile exchange
51 (8 388 E) That only the five and the six when multiplied by themselves reproduce and
repeat themselves is clear both in the Greek and the decimal numbering system In the decimal system
5 x 5 = 25 and 6 x 6 = 36 The five and the six reappear as the last digits in the multiplication The
same result appears in the Greek system where ε x εʹ = κ εʹ and ϝ x ϝʹ = λϝʹ
52 (8 388 E) It is not quite correct that ldquosix does this only once when it is squaredrdquo All the
higher powers of six end in six (216 1296 7776 and so on) Similarly all the higher powers of five
end in five (125 625 3125hellip) For the powers of five and six there is complete parallelism between
the Greek and decimal systems
53 (8 388 E) The five generates this result with every multiplication it produces either ten or
itself in turn In our number system the sequence is 5 10 15 20 25 30hellip in the Greek it is
εʹ ιʹ ιεʹ κʹ κεʹ λʹ λεʹ μʹ μεʹ νʹ νεʹhellip The alternate terms have εʹ as the last digit and every
literate and numerate Greek would know (I imagine) that the numbers ιʹ κʹ λʹ μʹ νʹ hellip represent the
tens
54 (8 388 E) The comparison ldquolike gold for goods and goods for goldrdquo is one of the three
instances in the dialogue where Plutarch explicitly cites a fragment from Heraclitus (see also 18 392
C and 18 392 D) Plutarch himself is the authority for this fragment Obsiegerrsquos text has πυρός τε
ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα φησίν ο Ηράκλειτος καὶ πῦρ απάντων lsquoὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσόςrsquo which is slightly different from Dielsrsquo πυρός τε ανταμοίβη τὰ πάντα καὶ πῦρ
απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Bywater 22 Kahn 40)
Bywaterrsquos version is different again Discussing these differences is beyond the scope of this
translation nevertheless the question of how to introduce new scholarship and new discoveries into
existing compilations of fragments is an interesting one
The verb ανταμείβομαι (middle meaning ldquoto give or take in exchange to requite or punish
ie to give punishment in exchange for bad behaviourrdquo) appears only once in the fragment but is part
of each half of the simile Its meaning shifts slightly from the cosmic context where all things are
57
consumed in fire to its mercantile meaning of goods for exchange and gold as a medium of exchange
and a store of value
The economic concepts of gold as a store of value and a medium of exchange may have been
common coin in the ancient world Pindar begins the Fifth Ismenian Ode with an apostrophe to Theia
mother of the sun
Illustrious mother of the solar beam
Mankind bright Theia for thy sake esteem
The first of metals all-subduing gold
And ships oh queen that struggle in the deep
With car-yoked coursers orsquoer the plain that sweep
To honour thee the wondrous contests hold (Trans by C A Wheelwright 1846)
Pindar has taken the simile of exchange that appears in Heraclitus and transformed it into a metaphor
for the power and primacy of gold a substance that subdues all others by the ease with which it
facilitates the exchange of commodities Webster (1954 20) sees the personification of the sun (or at
least the mother of the sun) as conveying the notion of value Gold is a very special metal
(Hesiod used gold as the primary metal in his identification of the ages of mankind) and it has
always been a symbol of light and beauty and the invulnerability and immortality of the gods
(O Betz 1995 20) Phoebus Apollo unlike other Olympians was blond
SECTION 9 COMMENTARY and NOTES
55 (9 388 E) With ldquoBut what is this to Apollordquo Plutarch is playing on the phrase τί ταῦτα πρὸς
τὸν Διόνυσον (what is this to Dionysus) and Young Plutarch is using it a procatalepsis to forestall
questions from his audience about how he got from the pentad (and the E) back to Apollo
Athenian tragedy developed out of the cult practices of the worship of Dionysus but when
two early poets Phrynichus and Aeschylus began to move away from Dionysus and to treat other
myths their efforts were greeted with the quip ldquoBut what has that to do with Dionysusrdquo (Pickard-
Cambridge 1927 80 Obsieger 2013 199) Since that time the Bonmot (to quote Obsieger) had been
used to signal doubt about the relevance of a remark or to mark a digression The phrase must have
been well worn by Plutarchrsquos time Plutarch uses the figure to good effect in the first of his QC (1 1 5
615 A) ldquoWhether philosophy is a fitting topic for conversation at a drinking-partyrdquo
58
56 (9 388 E) The presence of other deities besides Apollo at Delphi is well known Apollo
bringing his mother and sister Leto and Artemis arrived at Delphi long after Gaia but before Athena
joined the celestial deities who were worshipped side by side with the Chthonians The temple of
Athena in front of that of Apollo was one of the group of four temples seen by Pausanias on his
entrance into Delphi (Paus 1021) Even as late as Plutarchrsquos time there was a temple to Gaia near the
temenos of Apollo and the Chthonian Dionysus shared with Apollo the worship in his innermost
sanctuary (Middleton 1888 282)
57 (9 388 E) LSJ defines θεόλογος (ldquotheologianrdquo) by example ldquoone who discourses of the
gods used of poets such as Hesiod and Orpheusrdquo Heraclitus who would be one of these authors was
mentioned in section 8 precisely on the phenomenon of cyclical flow Young Plutarch may perhaps be
relying on these authorities
58 (9 388 E) Young Plutarch makes it clear that this god is Apollo although in the manic and
manifold phase of his cycle he is called Dionysus This duality is vehemently denied later by
Ammonius when he introduces the daimones
59 (9 389 A) Dionysus Zagreus Nyctelius and Isodaetes are all names associated with
Dionysus Ammonius has already etymologized five of Apollorsquos epithets (2 385 B) and he will
analyse ldquoApollordquo ldquoPhoebusrdquo and ldquoIeiusrdquo later in section 20 393 C
Zagreus the son of Zeus and Persephone (or perhaps Hades and Persephone) was sometimes
identified with Dionysus Although the name does not appear in the extant Orphic fragments he is
sometimes identified with the Orphic Dionysus Flaceliegravere (1941 84) called the name Isodaetes ldquoune
eacutepithegravete fort rarerdquo defining it as ldquothat which is divided equallyrdquo He believed that it might be a ritual
name for Dionysus Obsieger (2013 207) on the other hand states that he has not seen an explicit link
between Dionysus and Isodaetes although Pluto with whom Dionysus is identified is sometimes
called Isodaetes Pickard-Cambridge (1927 81-82) comments
The contrast between the dithyramb and the paeanhellip dates from a time long after
the fusion of Dionysus with Zagreus and the development of the mysteries in
Greece Plutarch is perhaps somewhat fanciful when he tries to prove the
appropriateness of the distracted music (evidently that of the later dithyramb) with
the experiences attributed to the later deity There is no hint elsewhere of any
association of the dithyramb with any of the mystic cults referred to
60 (9 389 B) This fragment from Aeschylus can be found at Nauck 1889 Aeschylus frag 355
59
61 (9 389 B) Plutarch also uses the phrase ldquoDionysus of the orgiastic cryrdquo in De exil 607 C and
QC 667 C Compare Bergk 3730
62 (9 389 C) In Heraclitean cosmogony κόρος (satiety) corresponds to διακόσμησις the
orderly arrangement of the universe especially in the Pythagorean system while χρησμοσύνη (need
want poverty) to the time of the ecpyrosis Fairbanks (1897 41) sees these as Heraclitean catchwords
while Kahn (1979 276) believes that their links to Heraclitus are confirmed by independent citations
in Plutarch (here) Philo (Allegorical Interpretation 37) and Hippolytus (Refutatio Omnium
Haeresium 9107) see also Marcovich (1967 292 296) The Stoics interpreted these as successive
stages in the cosmic cycle (See Bywater 24 Diels 65 Marcovich 55 Kahn 120)
63 (9 389 C) Since the ratio of three months to the year is one to four the ldquorelation of the
period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquois three to one Kirk comments that while
Plutarch is obviously drawing on a Stoic source ldquothe ratio of 3 to 1 for the length of ecpyrosis and
cosmogony may be his own rather than a Stoic invention ndash it rests on the three-month tenure of
Dionysus at Delphi as compared with the nine-month tenure of Apollordquo (Kirk 1962 358)
SECTION 10 COMMENTARY and NOTES
Young Plutarchrsquos interpretation is in my opinion a reductive and mechanical approach to music
theory since he is more interested in developing an application of the number five than in improving
his listenersrsquo (or his own) understanding of music On the same note Goodwin in the first footnote to
his translation of Pseudo-Plutarchrsquos De mus introduces the caution
No one will attempt to study [italics in the original] this treatise on music without
some previous knowledge of the principles of Greek music with its various moods
scales and combinations of tetrachordshellip An elementary explanation of the
ordinary scale and of the names of the notes (which are here retained without any
attempt at translation) may be of use to the reader (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874 vol 1)
The section is both terse and technical so that it requires at least a few comments on ancient music
and harmony before beginning It contains music theory no less difficult than that in De mus but it is
shorter merely underlining the importance of the number five in yet another field of study The reader
can accept that point without a deep understanding of Greek music theory Here I have relied on both
West (1994) and Barker (2012)
The following three terms are difficult to translate although their transliterations are
transparent (the definitions are from LSJ sv ldquoμουσικήrdquo and so on) First μουσική more general than
ldquomusicrdquo is derived from the name of the Muses and denoted any art over which the Muses presided
60
but it evolved into the name of a particular art ndash music The masculine μουσικός is a votary of the
Muses a man of letters and accomplishments or a scholar and finally a practitioner of music ndash a
musician The word has much in common with τέχνη (techne) an art skill or craft a technique
principle or method by which something is achieved or created and as a product of this a work of art
also known as a μουσικη τέχνη
Second the noun αρμονία from the verb αρμόζω (to join or fasten) is a joining a joint or
fastening The goddess Harmonia born of the adulterous affair between Aphrodite and Ares (Hesiod
Theogony 933-37) was the goddess of harmony and concord and as such presided over both marital
harmony soothing strife and discord and martial harmony governing the array and deployment of
soldiers In this abstract sense harmony lies in the regularity contained in notions of rank and order
Implicit in the meaning of harmony is the idea of limits and constraints in contrast to the licence in
mere pleasure In English the notion of carpentry or handiwork appears in such words as joiner and
joinery (compare the memorable phrase ldquothat hideous piece of female joinery a patch-work
counterpanerdquo Mary Russell Mitford 1824) The English expression can describe either the physical
(his nose is out of joint) or the metaphysical (the time is out of joint) For the Pythagoreans its most
important application was for the explanation of the cosmos and the doctrine of music (understood as
harmony or order of the spheres) Compare Platorsquos Republic (531 b) where the theory of music
corresponds exactly to the theory of astronomy ldquofor the numbers they [astronomers] seek are those
found in these heard concordsrdquo (αστρονομίᾳ τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ταύταις ταῖς συμφωνίαις ταῖς ακουομέναις
αριθμοὺς ζητοῦσιν)
Harmoniarsquos involvement in warfare should not be discounted and we can see the relation
between the notion of rank and order in στίχος (row line rank or file the first word in fact in De E)
Health both physical and spiritual is a result of a balance and proportion for if one element
dominates then order and harmony disappear causing illness in the human body anarchy in society
disorder in the cosmos and a descent into chaos Late Greek and Roman writers sometimes portrayed
Harmonia in the abstract ndash a deity who presides over cosmic balance Heraclitus too explored the
themes of cosmic balance and the place of war within that balance His beautifully designed (Kahn
1978 202) aphorism ldquoαρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττωνldquo is celebrated for its own proportion and
linguistic balance It serves as an epigraph for this thesis
Finally the third συμφωνία (concord or unison of sound musical concord accord such as the
fourth fifth and octave) means metaphorically harmony or agreement Practitioners and teachers of
music developed theories of music these included those who analysed interval ratios mathematically
61
and those who analysed them ldquoby earrdquo that is perceptually or through the senses The latter the
harmonikoi were regarded much like other professional intellectuals
Theophrastus in his thumbnail sketch of the obsequious man represents him as
owning a little sports-court that he lends out to philosophers sophists arms-
instructors and harmonikoi for their lectures After the fourth century we hear little
of these oral expositors [of music] but written treatises continue to multiply In the
end Antiquity was destined to leave us far more musical theory than music (West
1994 218)
Nevertheless the two groups the empiricists and the analysts went their different ways The
name harmonikoi came to be associated with the empiricists Aristoxenus (born circa 375 BC) an
empiricist nevertheless constructed an axiomatic system of scales that he claimed reflected natural
melody He based his system on intervals measured in tones and fractions of tones defining a fourth
as equal to two and a half tones The calculation of harmonic ratios on the other hand was associated
with the Pythagoreans as Goodwin explains in his introduction
The harmonic intervals discovered by Pythagoras are the Octave (διὰ πασῶν) with
its ratio of 21 the Fifth (διὰ πέντε) with its ratio of 3 2 (λόγος ἡμιόλιος or
Sesquialter) the Fourth (διὰ τεσσάρων) with its ratio of 4 3 (λόγος ἐπίτριτος or
Sesquilerce) and the Tone (τόνος) with its ratio of 9 8 (λόγος ἐπόγδοος or
Sesquioctave) (Plutarchrsquos Morals 1874)
An alternative derivation of these ratios lies in the triangular array of the tetractys (see appendix C)
The significance of the tetractys for both the Pythagoreans and for Delphi is epitomised in the
Pythagorean catechism ldquoWhat is the Oracle at Delphi ndash the tetractys which is the octave (harmonia)
which has the Sirens in itrdquo West (1994 235) quotes this from the list of Pythagorean catechisms given
by Iamblichus (De Vita Pythagorica 8247)
64 (10 389 C) Surely the comment ldquoreasonable proportionrdquo is wordplay on the new subject
harmonic theory
65 (10 389 C) The working of harmony is in a word concordmdashthese concords are based on the
ratios between numbers
66 (10 389 D) The ratios of the five intervals that is 21 31 41 43 and 32 are all pairs of
the four integers belonging to the tetractys The only other possible pair is 42 which is equivalent to
21 Hence all the possible intervals and the only possible intervals are represented in the tetractys I
have used simple mathematical notation to describe these intervals (as does Babbitt) Older
62
translations (for example those of Amyot Holland Ricard and Goodwin) often use transliterations of
the Greek Consider Goodwinrsquos translation of this sentence
For all these accords take their original in proportions of number and the proportion
of the symphony diatessaron is sesquitertial of diapente sesquialter of diapason
duple of diapason with diapente triple and of disdiapason quadruple
These terms are now archaisms in English (as described by the OED which has no citations beyond
1900) Some modern musicians and historians of music may still understand them but their
interpretation as mathematical ratios may better suit the modern reader
67 (10 389 E) I have simply transliterated harmonikoi although ldquoexperts in harmonyrdquo would
work Plutarch has a particular group in mind ndash early musical theorists who adopted an empirical
rather than mathematical approach to harmony Aristoxenus saw these as his intellectual forebears
contrasting them with those who ldquostray into alien territory and dismiss perception as inaccurate
devising theoretical explanations and saying that it is in certain ratios of numbers and relative speeds
that high and low pitch consisthelliprdquo (Barker 2007 37 quoting Aristoxenus Elementa harmonicae 32
20-31)
68 (10 389 E) The ratio of the diapason with diatessaron that is an octave with a fourth is the
numerical ratio 83 (that is 21 x 43) This ratio clearly cannot be derived from the tetractys
69 (10 389 E) The five stops of the tetrachord form a sequence of four notes separated by three
intervals jointly spanning a perfect fourth (that is the first and fourth notes span five semitones) The
system of two octaves contains a continuous sequence of such tetrachords Some are linked in
conjunction others are disjunctive (that is they are separated by a tone)
70 (10 389 E) Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquothe first five lsquomodesrsquo or lsquokeysrsquo or lsquoscalesrsquo whatever
their right name isrdquo suggests that even in Plutarchrsquos time these words were multivalent Babbitt and
Goodwin simply transliterate the Greek using ldquotropesrdquo ldquotonesrdquo and ldquoharmoniesrdquo Barker (2007 55)
gives a similar definition for the word
The topic of tonoi is probably the thorniest of all those involved in Greek
harmonics For present purposes we can envisage them as roughly analogous to the
lsquokeysrsquo of modern musical discourse that is as a set of identically formed scales
placed at different levels of pitch They become important in a scientific or
theoretical context when the structural basis of a sequence used by musicians
cannot be located in a single recognisable scale but can be construed as shifting
(lsquomodulatingrsquo) between differently pitched instances of the same scale-pattern
(Barker 2007 55)
63
His use of tropoi is consistent with the uses of harmoniai and tonoi The noun τροπός is ldquolike
αρμονία a particular mode hellip but more generally a lsquostylersquordquo (LSJ sv ldquoτροπόςrdquo) Barker describes the
different styles of composers as different tropoi (2007 248) The noun τροπός bears another similarity
to harmonia and that is its cosmological meaning of turning point or the thong that was used as an
oarlock It appears in a fragment of Heraclitus ldquoThe reversals of fire first sea but of sea half is earth
half lightning stormrdquo (Diels 31) The tropics of Cancer and Capricorn mark the turning points of the
sun and the limits of its movement above and below the equator
71 (10 389 F)hellipThis is clearly a response to the empiricists who were interested in the smallest
interval distinguishable to the human ear that is the limit of human powers of perception not the limit
of theoretical possibility
SECTION 11 COMMENTARY and NOTES
72 (11 389 F) Not to belabour the point but the two personal pronouns ldquoIrdquo in this sentence do
not refer to the same person Only one pronoun ἐγὼ appears in the Greek so the contradiction is not
as obvious there as it is in the English Young Plutarch uses the first referring to himself and Plutarch
the second referring to his younger self These two uses recur during Young Plutarchrsquos speech To use
a self-referential ldquoIrdquo for an earlier version of oneself is common-place and idiomatic to do otherwise
would be pedantic This use emphasises the notion that despite the changes we experience there is
some core or kernel of us which we could call the soul the spirit the ego or the seat of our being
that endures and survives these changes
73 (11 389 F) That there could be other worlds besides ours and they could be up to to five in
number appears in Timaeus 55 C-D Cleombrotus provides a full explanation
You well remember that he [Plato] summarily decided against an infinite number of
worlds but had doubts about a limited number and up to five he conceded a
reasonable probability to those who postulated one world to correspond to each
element but for himself he kept to one This seems to be peculiar to Plato for the
other philosophers conceived a fear of plurality feeling that if they did not limit
matter to one world but went beyond one an unlimited and embarrassing infinity
would at once fasten itself upon them (De def 22 422 A trans Babbittreptition of )
Aristotle who voiced precisely such fears (De Caelo 1 8) must count amongst ldquoother philosophersrdquo
74 (11 389 F) Young Plutarch immediately after giving another example of the importance of
the number five embarks on a digression about Aristotlersquos assertion that there is a unique world
Young Plutarch attempts to reconcile this assertion with Platorsquos view that there could be up to five by
64
by invoking Aristotlersquos identification of the five solids with earth water fire air and the quintessence
Young Plutarchrsquos use of ldquoeven ifrdquo (κἂν) is concessionary and he uses it to suggest that although
Aristotle says that there is only one world he could also mean that there are five parts to that one
world For a discussion of Arsitotlersquos assertion (De Caelo 278a26-279a6) that there is one unique
world please see endote 130 page 78
75 (11 390 A) The repetition of the prefix συν (ldquowithrdquo or togetherrdquo) in the phrase συγκείμενον
κόσμων καὶ συνηρμοσμένον (ldquocomposed and conjoined from five worldsrdquo) nicely mirrors the one in
the Greek This may not be strictly speaking hendiadys but it is another example of Plutarchrsquos
fondness for balanced repetition
76 (11 390 A) With ldquothe five mosthellipfittingly associated each to eachrdquo Young Plutarch gives a
condensed version of Platorsquos description of the creation of the world from Timaeus 31 a a product of
the rational Demiurge who imposes mathematical order on chaos to generate the cosmos Donald Zeyl
describes this as
The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological the universe as a
whole is so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects It strikes Plato
strongly that this arrangement is not fortuitous but the outcome of the deliberate
intent of Intellect (nous) anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the
Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits
it to be (SEP sv Platos Timaeus)
The polysemic φύσις occurred just one line above where it was translated ldquoby its own naturerdquo
Instantiations of the polygon occur naturally (for example honeycombs and tessellated pavements)
the concept of a polygon does not I have used universe to include both the physical and the ideal The
Platonic solids are forms of which according to Plato the first four provide analogues to the four
elements ndash fire earth water and air ndash and the fifth and last the dodecahedron which ldquoGod used to
bedeck his universerdquo (ἐπὶ τὸ πᾶν ο θεὸς αὐτῇ κατεχρήσατο ἐκεῖνο διαζωγραφῶν Timaeus 55c)
Plato used the existence of five and no more than five regular polygons to argue against a
larger number of worlds and by extension an infinite number of them Despite our name for them
some had been known to the Egyptians and the Pythagoreans (the tetrahedron cube and
dodecahedron) That there are no more than five such polygons is not self-evident but the Greeks
solved this question quickly Theaetetus of Athens (417-369 BC) a friend of Socrates and Plato
constructed the last two (the octahedron and icosahedron) and developed an elegant proof that there
are exactly five regular polygons He is the subject of Platorsquos dialogue Theaetatus and his
mathematical work is discussed in Euclidrsquos Elements Book 13
65
SECTION 12 COMMENTARY and NOTES
77 (12 390 B) These philosophers follow Aristotlersquos theory of the correspondence of the senses
in De anima (27-11)
78 (12 390 B) Plato (Timaeus (45b-d) discusses the theory of the dual mechanism of seeing by
mixing of the light of day with light from the eye Lernould (2005 2) remarks on the ldquoextreme
brevityrdquo of this section but it is Plutarchrsquos signature style to tease us with brief allusions to abstruse
theories Lernould gives the history of the interpretation of the melding of the fire emitted by the eye
with the exterior fire found in daylight Another good discussion appears in Merker La vision chez
Platon et Aristote 2003
SECTION 13 COMMENTARY and NOTES
79 (13 390 C) Young Plutarch refers to the passage in the Iliad where Iris has delivered Zeusrsquo
command to Poseidon that he should leave the fighting at Troy and go back to his home in the sea to
which Poseidon replies angrily
hellip Since we are three brothers born by Rheia to Kronos
Zeus and I and the third is Hades lord of the dead men
All was divided among us three ways each given his domain
I when the lots were shaken drew the grey sea to live in
forever Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness
and Zeus was allotted the wide sky in the cloud and the bright air
But earth and high Olympos are common to all three (Iliad 15 187-193 trans by
Lattimore)
Heracleon gives a similar description of the partition of the world in De def 23 422 E and also
describes the five Platonic solids which Young Plutarch mentioned in section 11
80 (13 390 C) This fragment of Euripides occurs within a cluster of fragments (Nauck 970-
972) all of which Nauck attributes to Plutarch The remark is so anodyne and the reference so
fragmentary that one tends to pass quickly over it The reference and the theme of drifting from the
subject at hand occurs often in the Moralia perhaps because Plutarch often indulges in digressions
Babut (1969) saw this as perhaps a sign of disorganization ldquocette impression de deacutesordre est
renforceacutee par les allusions reacutepeacuteteacutees des personnages dans les trois [Pythian] dialogues agrave des
digressions qui les ont entraicircneacutes loin de leur sujet initial et par des rappels insistants agrave ne pas perdre de
vue ce sujetrdquo He lists other instances in De Pyth (7 397 D and 17 402 B) and in De def (15 418 C
15 420 E and 38 431 A) Whether these digressions constitute disorder or a studied lightness of style
66
is debatable In this case Young Plutarch wants to step back from the pentad and Homer to review the
properties of the tetrad There are two digressions here the first into Homer and the second into the
tetrad neither one strictly necessary for Young Plutarchrsquos argument A French version of this
wandering from the subject at hand and then returning to the fold by some roundabout route
ldquorevenons agrave nos moutonsrdquo was a running joke in the medieval play La Farce de Maicirctre Pathelin and
is still in current use
81 (13 390 C) The crucial concept for the analysis of solid bodies is the nature of a point For us a
point is a figure without dimension it has no length breadth or depth in other words it ldquois conceived
as having position but no extent magnitude dimension or direction (as the end of a line the
intersection of two lines or an element of a topological space OED sv ldquopointrdquo) It follows that a line
having one dimension with neither width nor depth is associated with the number one the plane of
two dimensions length and width is associated with the number two and a solid figure with length
width and depth is associated with the number three We speak casually of the three dimensions of
our physical world and backtracking through the three dimensions we arrive at the point which
having no dimensions must be associated with zero
In contrast the Pythagoreans described the unit in arithmetic as ldquoa point without positionrdquo
(στιγμη ἄθετος) and the geometric point as a unit having position (μονὰς θέσιν ἔχουσα)
(Heath 1931 1 38) Extrapolating from the initial monad with position we can by ldquostretchingrdquo that
point create a line (associated with the number two) then by stretching that line create a plane
(associated with the number three) and finally by dragging down the plane create a solid This a
solid comprising our three dimensions isassociated for the Greeks with the number four The absence
of the number ldquozerordquo in the Greek conceptual system of algebra and of the geometry of space is the
root cause of this distinction
82 (13 390 E) Every translation of ldquoὀρφανὸν καὶ ατελὲς καὶ πρὸς οὐδ᾽ οτιοῦνrdquo that I have seen
renders ὀρφανός as ldquoorphanrdquo This cannot be right since Young Plutarch has just finished telling us
that Nature has constructed this inanimate thing and inanimacy implies that there was neither father
nor mother to lose Both Chantraine and LSJ cite the reciprocal meaning it can also be said of parents
who have lost a child Chantraine goes one step further describing its metaphoric use as the adjective
ldquodeprived ofrdquo He suggests tentatively that the name Orpheus might be from the same root as
ὀρφανός adding ldquoOrpheacutee eacutetant priveacute de son eacutepouse []rdquo
67
83 (13 390 E) The hegemony of the pentad had been recognized since the time of Pythagoras
Iamblichus quoting Anatolius explains how the number five dominates other numbers
[T]he pentad is particularly comprehensive of the natural phenomena of the
universe it is a frequent assertion of ours that the whole universe is manifestly
completed and enclosed by the decad and seeded by the monad and it gains
movement thanks to the dyad and life thanks to the pentad which is particularly and
most appropriately and only a division of the decad since the pentad necessarily
entails equivalence while the dyad entails ambivalence(Waterfield 1988 66)
84 (13 390 E) These inanimate figures lack the fifth attribute that distinguishes animate beings
from the inanimate Having returned to consideration of the pentad after his excursion into the tetrad
Young Plutarch describes the five classes of animate beings and the five divisions of the soul These
five parts are listed in (De def 429 E) as the vegetative part the perceptive the appetitive fortitude
and reason (φυτικὸν φυσικὸναἰσθητικὸν ἐπιθυμητικὸν θυμοειδὲς and λογιστικόν) The five classes
and five divisions are roughly comparable The first part the quality of nutrition or growth is
described in both lists as the least transparent of these qualities See also Republic 410 b 440 e - 441
a and Timaeus 69-75)
SECTION 14 COMMENTARY and NOTES
85 (14 391 A) Young Plutarch asserts that four is the ldquofirst square numberrdquo This explains the
digression into one as a square number because if one is defined as square (since it is the number that
results when it is multiplied by itself ) then four is not the first square The monad is simultaneously
the source of all number (but not a number) the first number the first square number and it is both
even and odd
86 (14 391 A) Iamblichus quoting Nicomachus calls the monad the form of forms since ldquoit is
creation thanks to its creativity and intellect thanks to its intelligence this is adequately demonstrated
in the mutual opposition of oblongs and squaresrdquo (Waterfield 1988 36) The ldquoideal formrdquo is the
monad and ldquofinite matterrdquo is the tetrad since ldquoeverything in the universe turns out to be completed in
the natural progression up to the tetrad as does everything numerical ndash in short everything whatever
its naturerdquo (Waterfield 1988 55) Furthermore all the numbers up to four give us the pentad and are
arrayed in the tetractys
SECTION 15 COMMENTARY and NOTES
87 (15 391 A) Young Plutarch is eliding Plato the author with Socrates the character in the
Cratylus who speaks these words This helps us to understand later in this rather ragged argument
68
that an unattached pronoun ldquoherdquo denotes Socrates a character no longer in the Cratylus but in the
Philebus
At this point in the Cratylus Hermogenes and Socrates move from the naming of the gods to
the naming of celestial and other physical objects Socrates begins by providing an etymology for the
name of the moon (Σελήνη) from Σελαενονεοάεια a contraction of σέλας-νέον-καὶ-ἕνον-ἔχει-αεί (ldquoit
always has light both new and oldrdquo) Some interpreters have found these etymologies not only
ridiculous but deliberately so Ademollo comments
read without prejudices of any sort the etymologies qua etymologies may well
strike you as delirious Socrates goes on [at disproportionate length] to offer utterly
implausible analyses reaching bewildering results by reckless methodological anarchy To the many examples we have already met I will only add the worst of the
lot the terrible lsquodithyrambicrsquo etymology of lsquomoonrsquo or rather of the Doric variant
Σελαναία (409a-c)rdquo (2011 237)
In the case of the etymology of the name of the moon two examples support this opinion The first is
Fowlerrsquos inspired translation of διθυραμβῶδες (dithyrhambicrdquo) as ldquoopera boufferdquo (Plato Loeb
Classical Library 1926 4167) A second is Obsiegerrsquos contention that just the mention of Anaxagoras
from this section of the Cratylus would have signalled to Plutarchrsquos listeners (and later readers of De
E) that a joke or ldquosome sort of historical and philosophical illogicalityrdquo was in the offing (Durch die
Erwaumlhnung des Kratylos werden die Zuhoumlrersbquo Plutarchs und die Leser von De E gewarnt daszlig eine
philosophiehistorische Absurditaumlt folgt [Obsieger 2013 281])
On the more general question of the seriousness of the etymologies Ademollo provides a
measured assessment of Platorsquos and Socratesrsquo attitudes towards them and towards etymologising
concluding that for the most part they thought the practice legitimate He adds that to his knowledge
no ancient interpreter of the Cratylus raised doubts about the etymologies and warns us against
judging the Cratylus by the standards of modern linguistics concluding that it is unlikely that the
etymologies are a deliberate send up or anything else of that sort (Ademollo 2011 237-250)
In a nutshell Socrates tells us that Anaxagorasrsquo finding is pre-empted by the longstanding folk
etymology of the word ldquomoonrdquo a word that developed from the two sources new and old of
moonlight This was exactly Anaxagorasrsquo theory Young Plutarchrsquos argument follows the same path
the different artifacts of the E displayed at Delphi for centuries attested to the longstanding
understanding of the importance of the number five which Plato only belatedly discussed in his
dialogues (without acknowledging his sources a sin today but common practice then)
69
In the Cratylus Socrates doggedly maintains his tomfoolery concluding that borrowings of
foreign words cannot be analysed with the usual linguistic tools He admits frankly that his analysis is
a contrivance (μηχανήν) all the while flummoxing Hermogenes Young Plutarch is captivated as we
are by this episode
88 (15 391 C) In The Sophist Plato shows that there are five overarching classes (γένος ldquorace
kin clan family or classrdquo) and these classes group elements by their qualities with each class
containing elements embodying a like quality The Stranger understands this when he replies to
Theaetetus (The Sophist 253 D)
Ξένος οὐκοῦν ὅ γε τοῦτο δυνατὸς δρᾶν μίαν ἰδέαν διὰ πολλῶν ἑνὸς ἑκάστου
κειμένου χωρίς πάντῃ διατεταμένην ἱκανῶς διαισθάνεται καὶ πολλὰς ἑτέρας
αλλήλων ὑπὸ μιᾶς ἔξωθεν περιεχομένας καὶ μίαν αὖ δι᾽ ὅλων πολλῶν ἐν ἑνὶ
συνημμένην καὶ πολλὰς χωρὶς πάντῃ διωρισμένας
Then he who is able to do this [distinguish qualities and place them in different
classes] has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many
individuals each of which lies apart and of many forms differing from one another
but included in one greater form and again of one form evolved by the union of
many wholes and of many forms entirely apart and separate(Trans by Harold
Fowler
89 (15 391 C) In other words in The Philebus Plato does not go beyond the four classes See
Meyer William Isenberg 1940 154-179
90 (15 391 C) There is a textual problem here in ldquobecause he dedicated an E to the godrdquo
Bernardakis has δύο Ε καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ and Obsieger daggerδύοdagger εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ signalling his
doubts about δύο Babbitt suggests and uses διὸ (because) Flaceliegravere writing soon after follows suit
but adds another word διὸ lttὸgt εἶ καθιέρωσε τῷ θεῷ Goodwin translating using an earlier version
of the text produced the peculiar ldquosome onehellip consecrated to the God two E Erdquo If ldquotwo E Erdquo is a
misprint it has survived in later editions of the translation Amyot three hundred years earlier must
have faced the same version of the text ldquoQuelqursquoun doncques hellip consecra deux E au Dieu de ce
templerdquo
Obsieger provides an analysis of the emendations of Wyttenbach Wilamowitz Pohlenz
Babbitt and Flaceliegravere and asserts (2013 289) that the meaning of the sentence is clear someone
discovered before Plato did that there are exactly five general principles that appear again and again
and the E attests to that early discovery Furthermore the ldquoδύοrdquo given in the Bernardakis and earlier
texts is illogical since although the tradition was that there had been three different Es there is no
evidence that more than one E was on display at any given time Obsieger agrees that Babbittrsquos
70
generally accepted emendation διὸ is reasonable and that Flaceliegraverersquos introduction of ltτὸgt is ldquoan
obvious improvementrdquo
91 (15 391 C) Socrates sings the verse ldquoIn the sixth generation bring to a stop the ritual of
songrdquo (lsquoἕκτῃ δ᾽ ἐν γενεᾷrsquo φησὶν Ὀρφεύς lsquoκαταπαύσατε κόσμον αοιδηςrsquo Philebus 66c) identifying it
as an Orphic verse (Kern 87) and using it to bring this part of the discussion to a close Young
Plutarch jumps from Cratylus to the Sophist and then to the Philebus where Socrates is quoting the
Orphic verse arguing that stopping before the sixth iteration of something is evidence of the
importance of the number five
SECTION 16 COMMENTARY and NOTES
92 (16 391 D) The sixth day after the new moon was the day of the month dedicated to Artemis
and Apollo The conceptual link between this section and the last is the ordinal ldquothe sixthrdquo
93 (16 391 D) This sentence is notorious for its obscurity and corruption Here Goodwin
permits himself ldquoI leave this corrupt passage as I find it in the old translation [ie by many hands]
The Greek cannot be tortured into any senserdquo Babbitt cautions that the Greek text ldquois somewhat
uncertainrdquo I have followed Babbittrsquos translation with some editing Not only are there textual
problems but no matter the amendments to the text its meaning remains obscure perhaps because we
are faced with terse passage about an obscure religious practice Given the context and Nicanderrsquos
worried response ldquothe reason for it [the outcome of the casting] must not be divulged to othersrdquo one
cannot shake the suspicion that Plutarchrsquos original text could have been deliberately obfuscatory
94 (16 391 E) Plutarch is reporting in direct speech Young Plutarchrsquos response to Nicander
Young Plutarch speaks of the future but he cannot know that he will become a priest at Delphi Thus
I have stated this as a hypothetical ldquoif ever the time comeshelliprdquo
SECTION 17 COMMENTARY and NOTES
95 (17 391 F) Ammonius first establishes his authority as the senior person in the group and
then demonstrates his control over the material with his brief comments on the number sevenThis
number was mentioned in passing by the Chaldean and it resonates with collections of seven (virgins
virtues vowels lean and fat years ages of man days of the week colours of the rainbow) According
to Delatte the Hebrew tradition of the mystical powers of the number seven found its way into the
Christian tradition through the early Christian writersrsquo weakness for arithmology (ldquoils ont un faible
pour lrsquoarithmologierdquo Delatte 1915 231) In a short essay he describes Clementrsquos preoccupation with
71
reconciling Hebrew doctrine with the new Christian religion He gives the example of Clementrsquos
treatment of the third commandment (ldquodo not take the name of the Lord in vainrdquo) with the description
of the Creator resting on the seventh day The Lordrsquos injunction to mankind to rest on the seventh day
is in arithimological terms consistent with the holiness of the number 7 The problem for Clement
was that the Lord being the Lord has no need of rest and that the Biblical report of creation was a
purely symbolic and allegorical description Clementrsquos explanation was that the Lord while not
needing the rest was instructing and leading by example so not to rest on the seventh day would be
taking His name in vain As Delatte says ldquoDieu eacutetant naturellement infatigable ignore le besoin du
repos mais il est le modegravele de celui que nous est commandeacuterdquo (Delatte 1915 232) There is much that
Ammonius could have said about the seven had he been interested in numbers
96 (17 391 F) Ammonius uses προεδρία (the privilege of front row seats) echoing Plutarchrsquos
remark to Sarapion about the importance of the E (1 385 A) The heptad is personified as a local
worthy with the privilege of taking a front-row seat at the theatre Our equivalent metaphor might be
ldquoringside seatrdquo The metaphor of the front seats is particularly apt for Delphi where the chief priests of
Apollo and Dionysus would have taken their places in the front seats of the theatre
97 (17 392 B) The ldquolong years of timerdquomdashmust mean something like ldquothe weight of
longstanding traditionrdquo The citations is from Simonides of Crea (6th century BC) (Bergk 1 522 and
Simonides 193)
SECTION 18 COMMENTARY and NOTES
98 (18 392 B) Ammonius puts forward the premise that mortals living in a temporal and
changing world cannot understand Being He explains that mortal things are always in the process of
change ldquobetween coming into being and being destroyedrdquo and are for an instant in both states
simultaneously He pursues this idea comparing each thingrsquos coming into being and its simultaneous
destruction to ldquoa vessel leaking birth and destructionrdquo (ὥσπερ αγγεῖον φθορᾶς καὶ γενέσεως) This
section uses variants of the words γίγνομαι ndash to become come into being and φθείρω ndash to destroy I
have tried to reflect this vocabulary in my translation
99 (18 392 B) This is Plutarchrsquos second direct attribution to Heraclitus given in direct speech
by Ammonius ldquohellipit is not possible to step twice into the same riverrdquo I have taken only the words
before ldquoHeraclitus saidrdquo to be a direct quotation There are two Heraclitean fragments concerning
rivers their interpretation is controversial but they were well known in Plutarchrsquos time His version is
unlikely to be in Heraclitusrsquo exact words but simply a free rendering of ldquoas they step into the same
72
rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αυτοῖσιν ἐμβαίνουσιν έτερα και
ετερα υδατο ἑπιρρεῖ Diels 12) Both versions were known to Plato (Cratylus 402) and Aristotle (Met
4 1010a) It is now accepted that Plutarch was using an intermediate source that had probably
developed from the work of Plato and Aristotle (and Cratylus) ldquoIt is obvious that [Plutarchrsquos] ποταμῷ
hellip τῷ αὐτῷ reproduces the Aristotelian form of Platorsquos paraphrase of the river statement and not (as
Bywater Diels Kranz and others believed) the original words of Heraclitusrdquo (See Kahn 1979 168
Marcovich 1967 206 and Kirk 1962 374-381)
100 (18 392 B) The assertion ldquoOne cannot step into the same river twicerdquo does not entail that the
individual elements that make up the river ndash the drops of water ndash change their composition or state
they are just different drops of water (Obsieger 2013 318) This linear flux or flow can be contrasted
with the Heraclitean notion of circular flow introduced in section 8
101 (18 392 B) The phrase ldquoit disperses and gathersrdquo is perhaps a fragment from Heraclitus
(Diels 91) Bernardakis and Babbitt construe this phrase as a continuation of the river fragment but
this has been challenged Fairbanks did not see it as a literal quotation but as another ldquocatchwordrdquo
phrase a shorthand to denote early philosophical doctrines where a word or two of the original has
been preserved although not the meaning (Fairbanks 1897 79) Fairbanksrsquos view is now the
professional consenus Given that Young Plutarch has just been quoting Plato Kahnrsquos comment that
these pairs of antithetical verbs are reminiscent of Heraclitean ldquostylerdquo is intriguing He suggests that
this pair could well be a ldquoPlutarchean interpolationrdquo inspired by the Strangerrsquos contrast (at Sophist 242
D-E) between the Ionian (Heraclitus) and Sicilian (Empedocles) philosophers (Kahn 1979 130)
102 (18 392 C) The phrase ldquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air is birth for
waterrdquo is the third fragment that Plutarch attributes directly to Heraclitus Fairbanks notes that it
seems to be given accurately by Maximus Tyr (414) ldquoFire lives the death of earth and air lives the
death of fire water lives the death of air earth that of waterrdquo But note that Maximus is the only writer
to use the word ldquoliferdquo Plutarch has given this allusion twice (Mor 392 C and Mor 949 A) in two
slightly different forms The form in 949 A is
φθειρομένων εἰς τοὐναντίον ἑκάστῳ σκοπῶμεν εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ πυρὸς θάνατος
αέρος γένεσις
Since corruption is the alteration of those things that are corrupted into their
opposites let us see whether the saying holds good that ldquoThe death of fire is the
generation of airrdquo
73
Nevertheless Kahn is right to note the use of the words ldquobirthrdquo and ldquodeathrdquo for the transformations of
the elements This vocabulary (which may be metaphoric) allows Ammonius to make the logical leap
to animate being in ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo That is the changes we undergo are little
births and deaths where for us neither birth nor death is a metaphor
Ammonius then presents an elaborate excursus on the ages of man Plutarch himself may not
have been entirely in agreement with this analysis since there is a lost dialogue entitled ldquoAs to our not
remaining the same while being is always in fluxrdquo attributed to him in an anonymous note (Classical
Review 32 [1918] 150-153) but I have been unable to find it mentioned elsewhere Plutarch presents
the opposite view (speaking as himself) in another dialogue that also took place at Delphi The point at
issue is whether a delay in divine retribution brings encouragement to wrong doers and distress to their
victims who do not see their aggressors duly punished Plutarch describes a city as an organism
having a continuous life and a stable and integrated unity so that its moral responsibility outlasts the
lives of its individual inhabitants He compares the life of the city with its core identity to the life of a
man and ends his argument with an acerbic allusion to Heraclitus
αλλ᾽ ἄνθρωπός τε λέγεται μέχρι τέλους εἷς απὸ γενέσεως πόλιν τε την αὐτην
ὡσαύτως διαμένουσαν ἐνέχεσθαι τοῖς ὀνείδεσι τῶν προγόνων αξιοῦμεν ᾧ δικαίῳ
μέτεστιν αὐτῇ δόξης τε της ἐκείνων καὶ δυνάμεως ἢ λήσομεν εἰς τὸν Ἡρακλείτειον
ἅπαντα πράγματα ποταμὸν ἐμβαλόντες εἰς ὃν οὔ φησι δὶς ἐμβηναι τῷ πάντα κινεῖν
καὶ ἑτεροιοῦν την φύσιν μεταβάλλουσαν
Yet a man is called one and the same from birth to death and we deem it only
proper that a city in like manner retaining its identity should be involved in the
disgraces of its forbears by the same title as it inherits their glory and power else we
shall find that we have unawares cast the whole of existence into the river of
Heraclitus into which he asserts no man can step twice as nature in its changes
shifts and alters everything (De ser num 15 559 C trans by Phillip H De Lacy
and Benedict Einarson)
Ildefonse (2006) draws out the implications She comments citing Sirinelli (2000 423) that although
these two passages contain the same fragment of Heraclitus and compare it to the ages of man the
attitude of the two speakers is very different She continues that the structure of De E contains three
separate ldquoPlutarchsrdquo at different stages of his life but the presiding intellect is that of one person not a
series of different entities Hershbell (1977 198) simply notes that Plutarch voices an opinion different
from the one held by Ammonius in De E Flaceliegravere is more pointed (1941 89 11)
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquoLes
vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments et
74
mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni la
reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
These ideas express only one aspect of reality and certainly contain some
exaggeration See Ricardrsquos note to this passage [1884 60-61] The vicissitudes we
experience in our tastes our affections our feelings and even in our physical traits
destroy neither the unity of our personalities nor the reality of our own individual
existencerdquo
Plutarch makes another reference to the river fragment in his discussion of the different
nourishment for plants contained in rain-water and irrigation water
Is the reason that Aristotle gives the true one namely that the water that comes
down as rain is fresh and new while that of a marsh or pool is old and stale The
running waters of springs and rivers are fresh and new-bornmdashyou could not step
into the same rivers twice as Heraclitus says because the waters that flow upon you
are not the samemdashyet they too are less nourishing than rain-water (QN 912 A
trans by F H Sandbach)
This reference to Heraclitus is in my opinion no more than a rhetorical flourish Despite its mention
of ldquoriversrdquo it tells us little about the question of the actual words of Heraclitus and it seems to rely on
Aristotlersquos use of the aphorism It also provides another example where ldquoHeraclitus saysrdquo does not
mean that the quotation is taken directly or accurately from its source
The thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from Crete provides another
example of the idea of constant change but this time applied to an inanimate object (Theseus 23 1)
Whittaker (1969 190) calling the theme ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo provides a
similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius (On Being 58 22)
103 (18 392 D) A model in wax or plaster from ἐκμάσσω ldquoto mould or adapt oneself tordquo
SECTION 19 COMMENTARY and NOTES
105 (19 392 E) Time is mobile and immaterial but discernible in conjunction with matter So
true Being is outside time Thus the timeless existence of god as perfect and complete contrasts with
the defective existence of individual mortal beings
106 (19 392 E) The description ldquoaccording to their connections with timerdquo might mean that
each entity is somewhere between birth and death and the place of each one is determined by its own
circumstances
SECTION 20 COMMENTARY and NOTES
75
107 (20 393 A) The reading in Obsiegerrsquos and Bernardakisrsquo Greek texts and the English is in
Goodwinrsquos translation is ldquoiacutet must be saidrdquo (χρη φάναι) In contrast Flaceliegravere has the conditional ldquoif it
needs to be saidrdquo (εἰ χρη φάναι) which appears as an interrogative in the French ldquoLa diviniteacute elle
existe (est il neacutecessaire de le dire)rdquo Babbitt notes that εἰ does not appear in the manuscripts but was
added by Eusebius (Preparatio evangelica 1111) and followed by Cyril of Alexandria (Adv Jul 8)
In any case Babbitt uses ldquoif there be need to say sordquo The emphatic ldquoit must be saidrdquo underlines the
distinction that Ammonius is at great pains to make that the god is not enmeshed in temporality I
have adopted Obsiegerrsquos text
108 (20 393 A) Forever (αἰών) can mean a long space of time an age (as our ldquoeonrdquo) ldquoeternityrdquo
or ldquoagesrdquo with no beginning or end Here it is opposed to χρόνος the same vocabulary pair that
appears in Timaeus 37 c-38 C) The notion of ldquoeternityrdquo points us to Iamblichus (Waterfield 1988
110) where the word is equivalent to the number of the decad There are other resonances of
Pythagoreanism in this section they are Ammoniusrsquo name his background the two appeals to ldquothe
ancientsrdquo ( possibly a reference to Neo-pythagorean doctrine) and the close relationship to Timaeus
(Whittaker 1969 188)
Whittaker asks if the Platonic Forms are eternal in the sense that they endure everlastingly or
if their eternity simply transcends duration He concludes that the answer depends on the interpretation
of αεiacute as used by Plato ndash one referring to time and consequently involving duration and the other
referring to eternity that transcends duration Mediaeval Latin distinguished between ldquoeternalrdquo (outside
time) and ldquosempiternalrdquo (lasting for endless eons)
109 (20 393 A) ἀνέγκλιτον (from κλίνω to make to lie back to lean to incline) meaning
ldquounchangingrdquo and ldquoorthogonalrdquo (LSJ) Plutarch also uses the word in the Life of Pericles (15)
αριστοκρατικην καὶ βασιλικην ἐντεινάμενος πολιτείαν καὶ χρώμενος αὐτῇ πρὸς τὸ
βέλτιστον ὀρθῇ καὶ ανεγκλίτῳ
he struck the high and clear note of an aristocratic and kingly statesmanship and
employing it for the best interests of all in a direct and undeviating fashion
Furthermore the OED defines ldquoto deviaterdquo as ldquoto turn aside from a course method or mode of action
a rule or standardrdquo Hence ldquoto deviaterdquo carries an extra nuance beyond ldquoto changerdquo to
include the notion of falling away from a standard Similarly ldquoorthogonalrdquo can mean a standard or
norm (it also means ldquoright-angledrdquo) A change can be for the worse or the better but to deviate for the
worse is a pleonasm and to deviate for the better a contradiction Perrin has found the mot juste in her
76
translation a translation that works just as well here Then I discovered that Babbitt had used
ldquodeviaterdquo in his translation Nevertheless like Plato and Anaxagoras I shall bear my embarrassment
and gratefully borrow the word from him
110 (20 393 A) The phrase ldquoneither future nor past neither olderhelliprdquo (οὐδὲ μέλλον οὐδὲ
παρῳχημένον οὐδὲ πρεσβύτερον) appears only in Eusebius (see Obsieger 346)
111 (20 393 B) On the ancients Whittaker (1969 186) makes the link to ldquothose coming to the
shrine in search of wisdomrdquo (τοὺς ἐν αρχῇ περὶ τὸν θεὸν φιλοσοφήσαντας (De E 1 385 A)
112 (20 393 B) The word ldquogodrdquo appears in both the masculine (ο θεὸς) and the neuter (τὸ θεῖόν)
which I translate a few lines below as ldquothe divine is not manifoldrdquo I have treated the masculine as a
gendered being and the neuter as an analytic construct
113 (20 393 C) Obsieger (2013 349) suggests that these ancients (who called all things chaste or
pure ldquophoebusrdquo) are Parmenides and Plato referring us to Adv Col (13 1114 C-F) where the
doctrine underlying Ammoniusrsquo argument ndash that true being remains always the same but our world is
fleeting and subject to change ndash also appears
114 (20 393 C) We have already seen these etymologies for Apollo as the not many and the one
and for Phoebus as the chaste (2 388 F) Whittaker identifying these as Pythagorean etymologies
gives instances in works by Clement of Alexandria Plotinus and Porphyry (Whittaker 1969 187) He
also links the name Ieius to the Pythagorean formula ldquothe one and onlyrdquo (εἷς καὶ μόνος and sometimes
ἔν καὶ μόνον) and sees it as derived from the epic adjective ἰός ία ἰόν (meaning εις μια ndash one)
115 (20 393 C) As Ildefonse says the parallel to Homer (Iliad 4 141 ff) is loose perhaps
explaining Ammoniusrsquo use of the qualifier πού The conflating of the two meanings of μιαίνω (to
ldquostain colour or dyerdquo and to ldquostain or sullyrdquo) may have been a commonplace in classical times (and
perhaps today) but the Homeric simile does not introduce the resonances of μίγνυμι (to mix mingle)
that appear in Plutarch Compare also QC 851 725 C where the question posed is ldquoWhy do sailors
draw water from the Nile before daybreakrdquo The partial answer is that during the day riverwater is
stirred up by animals and river traffic and hence polluted This mixing ldquoproduces conflict conflict
produces change and putrefaction is a kind of change
Serendipitously English has an analogous pair of homonymsmdashdiedyemdasha doublet that has
proved a fertile field for punning Shakespeare has a simile in the same Homeric mode
And like a troop of jolly huntsmen come
77
Our lusty English all with purple hands
Dyed in the dying slaughter of their foes (King John II 1 629)
SECTION 21 COMMENTARY and NOTES
116 (21 393 E) The phrase ldquorapture and transformationsrdquo (ἐκστάσεις δ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ μεταβολὰς
repeated a few lines later as ἐκστάσεως καὶ μεταβολης) is another of Plutarchrsquos doublets here
combining two close synonyms The first meaning of ἔκστασις is ldquodisplacementrdquo the second
ldquostanding aside and the third ldquoentrancement astonishmentrdquo The Greek word can be transliterated as
ldquoecstasyrdquo an English word closely related to one of the meanings of ldquorapturerdquo (compare the OED
ldquoecstasy an exalted state of feeling which engrosses the mind to the exclusion of thought rapture
transportrdquo) Ammonius is referring to the passage in section 9 where Young Plutarch uses the single
word ldquotransformationrdquo
For we hear the theologians sometimes in verse sometimes in prose asserting and
hymning that the god by his nature is deathless and immortal Yet as a result of the
destined order of cosmos he himself undergoes transformations [μεταβολαῖς]
Ammonius uses this doublet to emphasise that the phrase describes more than spatial displacement or
uncomplicated change He is also stressing that this change is not of Apollorsquos volition since
everything in the cosmos is subject to a logos beyond human or divine control The English word
ldquorapturerdquo captures the involuntary nature of these changes The ldquoTheologiansrdquo could certainly include
Heraclitus who wrote prose but intricate and poetic prose
Plutarch uses this doublet again in discussing the question ldquoWhether it is possible for new
diseases to come into being and from what causesrdquo and whether qualitative changes in a substance
can bring about a change into a new substance (a ldquosubstantialrdquo change) Plutarch comments that if
this is not possible then there is no difference between vinegar and sour wine or bitter and astringent
or wheat and darnel or between one kind of mint and another Yet all of these are very clearly
qualitative losses of identity and transformations (καίτοι περιφανῶς ἐκστάσεις αὗται καὶ μεταβολαὶ
ποιοτήτων εἰσίν QC 893 732 B)
117 (21 393 E) Those saying this are the Stoics or the theologians in the passage from Section 9
Flaceliegravere (1941 84) suggests that the names of the two periods in the religious calendar where satiety
or famine prevail and the earlier passage in De E are related to Diels fragment 65 of Heraclitus
118 (21 393 F) For the simile comparing Apollo and his deadly destruction with a thoughtless
little boy see Homer Iliad 15 362
78
119 (21 394 A) Here we have a balance sheet contrasting the names of Apollo and Hades and
their attributes and predilections Ammonius explores possible etymologies of these names
contrasting the one (A-pollo) with the many (Pluto from πλέος - full or perhaps from πλούτος -
wealth) Ammonius does not mention απόλλων (the future participle of απόλλυμι ldquoto destroyrdquo)
whence as Socrates explains some people wrongly derive his name (Cratylus 405e-406a) since that
abstract noun signifies ldquodestructionrdquo but not ldquodestroyerrdquo the agent of that destruction There are
other epithets of Apollo that do entail havoc if not destruction for example the Homeric epithet ldquothe
far shooterrdquo (Ἀπόλλων ἕκατος Iliad 783)
The name ldquoDelianrdquo describes someone born on the island of Delos as Apollo was but could
also denote clarity (δηλος - clear) which contrasts with Hades or Aiumldoneus that which is hidden in
the dark or invisible (in the Ionic dialect of Heraclitus the initial aspirate is missing and thus a-idēs
means ldquoinvisiblerdquo (Khan 1978 257) Plutarch has already cited Cratylus and clearly enjoyed its
anarchic approach to etymology and he must surely have been aware of the passage in Cratylus where
Socrates riffs on the names of the gods ldquoAs for Pluto he was so named as the giver of wealth
(πλοῦτος) because wealth comes up from below out of the earth And Hades ndash I fancy most people
think that this is a name of the Invisible (αειδής) so they are afraid and call him Plutordquo (Plato
Cratylus 403a) Indeed the section in Cratylus on divine names brings up another resonance with
Heraclitus These etymologies (from 401d to 411b) are organized around the theme of the Heraclitean
theory of flux (See Ademollo 2011 201 ff) We have already discussed the name Phoebus in
(Section 2) which also means radiant or shiningand is clearly opposed to darkness blindness and
Homerrsquos ldquodarkness of deathrdquo (σκότιος)
120 (21 394 A) Apollo with his lyre and his interest in geometry is easily linked with the Muses
and memory which is the polar opposite of oblivion
Pausanias (10244) describes a statue of Apollo Musagetes (leader of the Muses) at Delphi
Henry Middleton describes statues of Apollo Artemis and Latona standing in the eastern pediment of
the new temple built at Delphi after the fire of 548 BC He speculates ldquoa well-known series of statues
in the Vatican of Apollo Musagetes and the Muses though rather feeble works of Imperial date look
as if they were partly copies of some much earlier pediment sculpturerdquo (Middleton 1888 289 see also
footnote 11 2 385 C)
121 (21 394 A) Theoros is an observer or one who contemplates and Phanaean one who reveals
or who brings light (discussed in section 2) Phanaeos is also an epithet of Zeus Both epithets contrast
79
nicely with ldquoLord of night and sleeprdquo in the fragment that follows This fragment and indeed the
whole passage appears again in An recte dict (6 1130 A) For the fragment itself see Bergk 3 719
= Adespota 92 = Edmonds 3 452
122 (21 394 A) For the phrase ldquoof the gods the most hated by mortal menrdquo see Homer (Iliad 9
158-9)
Ἀΐδης τοι αμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ αδάμαστος
τοὔνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος απάντων
hellip For Hades gives not way and is pitiless
And therefore he amongst all the gods is most hateful to mortals (Tr Lattimore)
123 (21 394 B) Wyttenbach (1830) established δὲ θνατοῖς in ldquotowards mortals he has been
judged the gentlestrdquo (κατεκρίθη δὲ θνατοῖς αγανώτατος ἔμμεν) by comparison with De def 7 413 C
where this fragment appears word-for-word and in Non pos suav again word-for-word except for δὲ
124 (21 394 A) The Suppliants 975 a Chorus of Argive women mourning their slain sons
125 (21 394 B) A fragment in Bergk 3 p 224 = Stesichorus no 50 = Edmonds 2 58
126 (21 394 B) A fragment of Sophocles Nauck no 764
127 Ammonius has linked the E symbolising the expression ldquoYou arerdquo and an offering from the
seven Sages with the aphorism ldquoKnow yourselfrdquo He has demonstrated the uncrossable chasm between
mortal substance which is always becoming but never is and the god who is neither coming into being
nor passing into destruction The words and the views given to Ammonius might have come from
Plutarch himself Since Plutarch is both a participant in the dialogue and its narrator we could
interpret the dialogue as a comparison of Plutarchrsquos views and understanding as a young man and his
views as a mature man and priest
Lamprias reports that the original E was a gift from the seven Sages to Apollo putting it on a
par with their other well-known maxims This report is accepted without question by the other
participants There is only one other passage (that we know of) where the Delphic E appears (in
De def 22 422 F) just after Cleombrotusrsquo long description of the arguments for and against the
existence of exactly one world or a finite number of them We hear of the wonderful universe of
Petron of Himera containing 183 separate dancing worlds arranged in a triangle enclosing the Plain of
Truth (This long digression brings to mind the glancing attention paid by Young Plutarch to the
question of the number of possible worlds) Not surprisingly Cleombrotusrsquo description of these
80
theories and of the extraordinary man who spent his days by the Persian Gulf consorting with nymphs
and roving demigods was met with thorough scepticism by the participants Cleombrotus himself
introduces one of his more outrageous anecdotes by asking where else would he find such kindly
listeners to test out his stories The participants in De def set a low bar for acceptable and credible
philosophical discourse and were unanimous in agreeing that the question of possible worlds had
hardly met their threshold test Consequently when Philip remarked to Lamprias that plumbing the
controversy over the number of possible worlds was more important to him than understanding the
meaning of the E he banishes that dialogue (De E )in which Lamprias participated to the remote
bathybial regions of intellectual enquiry
εἰ δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐκβιβάζομεν ἑνὸς κόσμου διὰ τί πέντε μόνων ποιοῦμεν οὐ πλειόνων
δημιουργόν καὶ τίς ἔστι τοῦ αριθμοῦ τούτου πρὸς τὸ πληθος λόγος ἥδιον ἄν μοι
δοκῶ μαθεῖν ἢ της ἐνταῦθα τοῦ εἶ καθιερώσεως την διάνοιαν
But if we rule out that the god made only one world then the question is why do we
restrict the god to creating just five and no more and then what is the relation of
the number five to the rest of the many numbers Personally I should rather
understand this than discover the meaning of the E dedicated here [in the temple]
(De def 31 426 F)
This is a turnaround from the enthusiasm with which the participants in De E carried out their
discussion We see that the characters in the dialogue have convincingly demonstrated the limits of the
search for the truth there have been a succession of clouded insights and the uncovering of half truths
And as with the Delian problem to search for the truth however hopeless is an ineluctable
instruction from the god The limits of human knowledge are encapsulated in maxims and
proclamations from the god including the two maxims that recur throughout the dialogue ldquoKnow
yourselfrdquo and ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
Ammonius is of the same opinion as Philip He responds by finding the truth by proclaiming
the absolute transcendence of divinity and coining his own aphorism or if you will mantra ldquoYou
arerdquo As he says these are the words that people use when they approach the god We can see the
parallel to Socratesrsquo solution to the Delian problem The E symbolises divine transcendence and the
phraserdquoYou arerdquo which does not require logic dialectic philosophy or even geometry to be
understood No mortal can cross the chasm from Becoming to Being not even through profound
diligence and learning but mortals can through faith and the mantra ldquoYou arerdquo apprehend the god
Thus Ammonius answers the riddle to those who seek answers through reason by saying that it is
through faith The votive E turns us outward to contemplate god as Being and the aphorisms of the
sages turn us inward to understand our own humanity
81
APPENDIX A PLUTARCH AND HERACLITUS
The history of electrical development begins long before the Christian era when
Thales Theophrastus and Pliny tell of the magic properties of electronmdashthe
precious substance we call ambermdashthat came from the pure tears of the Heliades
sisters of Phaethon the unfortunate youth who attempted to run the blazing chariot
of Phoebus and nearly burned up the earth
Nikola Tesla Manufacturers Record September 9 1915
From the little we can guess from the fragments from his lost book Heraclitus the Ephesian
drew on the cosmology of the Milesians wrote on theology and was probably what we now
call a public intellectual and in any case a visionary1 That book no longer exists and all that
remains of his philosophy is ldquoa handful of polished aphorisms scattered across the eastern
Mediterraneanrdquo (Lowry 1974 434) Quotations from his work were filtered and collected by
Theophrastus (in a work now lost) the Stoics the Christian Fathers Diogenes Laertius
Plutarch and others We may admire his prose but not so much the man2 He wrote a scornful
assessment of Hesiod Pythagoras Xenophanes and Hecataeus and thought that Homer and
1 Diogenes Laertius gives us the title On Nature and adds that Heraclitus deposited the book in the
Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (DL 95) Plutarch wrote a study (also lost) of Heraclitus ldquoOn the
Question of Heraclitusrsquo Beliefsrdquo listed as Lamprias 205 (Moralia LCL Vol 15)
2 Not everyone admires Heraclitusrsquo style Lucretius (De Rerum Natura 1638 44) objecting to his
extravagant imagery and sophomoric wordplay lambasted him for his obscurity and chastised those
who enjoyed his wordplayldquomistaking itrdquo for cogent reasoning
82
Archilochus should have been excluded from rhapsodic competitions at athletic games On
the other hand he approved of Bias of Priene apparently for his probity3 Bias one of the
seven Sages is known to us for his maxim ldquoMost men are badrdquo (πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί)
which Heraclitus himself borrowed He excoriated his fellow Ephesians for their stupidity
(Diels 121)4 and perhaps all humankind of whom (he said) most are bad and very few good
(Diels 104)
The ldquoartrdquo in the title of a collection of the fragments The Art and Thought of
Heraclitus (Kahn 1979) is apt since in the aphorisms form is as important as substance and
often the form is the substance The art in the aphorisms lies in their careful structure their
ambiguity and their use of literary ornament Consider for example the fragment used in the
epigraph to this thesis αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων (Diels 54) according to Kahn ldquothe
shortest and most beautifully designed of the fragmentsrdquo (Kahn 1979 202) The two central
words are the same adjective positive and privative and their central position presents the
opposition that holds the sentence together (and illustrates Heraclitusrsquo doctrine of the unity of
opposites) Kahn speculates that by placing αφανης before φανερης Heraclitus is affirming
3 Diogenes Laertius often seems to enjoy gossip and name-dropping Kahn (1979 10) calls Diogenesrsquo
Life of Heraclitus ldquoa tissue of Hellenistic anecdotes most of them obviously fabricated on the basis of
statements in the preserved fragmentsrdquo
4 The different numbering systems for identifying the fragments are distracting In this appendix the
Diels number of a fragment is always given Numbers from other systems are given when they may
help the reader find a particular fragment in a particular text It is possible to track through different
systems by using some combination of the following concordances in Kahn a one way concordance
(DielsKahn) and a triple one-way concordance (KahnDielsMarcovich) in Marcovich a one way
concordance(DielsMarcovich) and a triple-one way concordance (MarcovichDiels Bywater) Diels
cross references his fragments to Bywater
83
that ldquothe negative term is superior to the positive and he has expressed in a formal way the
dialectical re-evaluation of the negative principlerdquo but this may be going too far It is easy to
understand what the fragment says but it not so easy to know what it means If we think of an
ambiguity as any verbal nuance that leaves room for different reactions to the same syntagm
(Empson 1949 1) then Heraclitusrsquo use of three polysemic words allows us to read it in
several different ways I chose Keatsrsquos translation because he has given the fragment context
a poem with a title and a form (the ecphrasis) that nod towards classical Greek literature and
plastic art and then the oxymoron ldquounheard melodiesrdquo with the noun suppressed a direct
homage to Heraclitusrsquo appositional structure I like to think that Heraclitus would have
enjoyed the bad pun in the third line There is no ldquorightrdquo translation of the fragment but Keats
gives one that respects the thought living in the Greek and the art and artifice that we can
sense in Heraclitus
Bywater attributes this fragment (Diels 54 Bywater 47) to Plutarch and translates it
ldquoOf the soul however nothing is pure and unmixed nor remains apart from the rest for lsquothe
hidden harmony is better than the visiblersquo in which the blending deity has sunk variations and
differencesrdquo Bywater on the strength of Hippolytus also connects it to ldquowhatever concerns
seeing hearing and learning I particularly honourrdquo (Diels 55 Bywater 13) 5 Both these
fragments are credited to Hippolytus Bishop of Rome in the late second century AD In his
5 The Greek version ndash αρμονίη αφανης φανερης κρείττων ndash as given in the epigraph to this thesis is
consistent almost without exception across editions and quotations of the fragments Bywater (47)
has κρείσσων for κρείττων which is neither here nor there Plutarch inserts ldquoγαρrdquo (αρμονίη γαρ
αφανης φανερης κρείττων) The careful structure of poetry with its rhythms and rhymes and other
extra-semantic attributes simplifies memorization and protects against faulty recall Aphorisms such
as this one may be easier to recall and quote exactly than less dense prose structures
84
treatise The Refutation of All the Heresies he argues that the source of the Neotian heresy
could be found in the teachings of Heraclitus He is responsible for eighteen of our
Heraclitean frgaments Here is his exegesis of this fragment
Heraclitus honours in equal degree the seen and the unseen as if the seen and
the unseen were confessedly one For what does he say ldquoA hidden harmony
is better than a visiblerdquo and ldquowhatever concerns seeing hearing and learning
I particularly honourrdquo having before particularly honoured the invisible
(Hippolytus Refutation of All the Heresies 9910)
We could draw up a table of opposites to contrast Plutarch and Heraclitus the one
scabrous rude antisocial and misogynistic the other moderate in his views and in his
expression of them gentle in his humor and a participant in and host of elegant symposia
Their only similarities are their love of learning and writing One wonders what affinity
Plutarch could find for this strange man who lived half a millennium before him
Yet affinity there was and it is reflected in Plutarchrsquos attention to Heraclitusrsquo
philosophy and writings and his numerous allusions to him in his own work According to the
Lamprias catalogue of the 120 or so extant fragments of Heraclitus Plutarch cites thirty-two
and he is our sole authority for seven He has about fifty distinct citations of Heraclitus (some
are repeated) and seventy if one counts references to the testimonia6
Plutarch was known to his contemporaries for the breadth and depth of his reading
and to modern readers for the variety frequency and zest of his citations7 There are about
6 The testimonia are listed in section A of Diels and the quotations in section B This paper discusses
only the quotations and I have dispensed with the designation B for them
7 Annewies Van Den Hoek (1993) in her essay on Clement of Alexandriarsquos methods of citation
briefly discusses Plutarch on whom Clement often relied Discussing note taking by ancient authors
including Plutarch she describes the three ldquobookwormsrdquo (her term) ndash Clement Plutarch and Eusebius
85
7000 identified quotations and borrowings from 497 authors in Plutarchrsquos extant works
(Helmbold-OrsquoNeil) Even in one short piece such as De E the resonance of Plutarchrsquos
quotations and allusions and their fitness to the occasion delight the reader In De E we see
in almost every speakerrsquos contribution to the dialogue a mention of an interesting problem or
story that receives no more than a glancing remark accompanied by a succinct quotation or
allusion8 Plutarchrsquos three attributed fragments from Heraclitus in this dialogue are in this vein
ndash short but a direct contribution to the development of the narrative arc of the dialogue The
first is Young Plutarchrsquos use of the notion of exchange to describe the regularity and
periodicity of the pentad (Diels 90) and the second and third occur in Ammoniusrsquo argument
on the many and the one and the gulf between human-kind and the god (Diels 91 and 76)
These allusions to Heraclitus are not only an ornament to Plutarchrsquos prose but also a
contribution to the development of his ideas Before discussing these further it is important to
describe the structure and content of the fragments
THE HERACLITEAN FRAGMENTS
Heraclitusrsquo reputation for obscurity has probably been enhanced by the fragmentary nature of
his extant writings and by the filtering of those fragments through his different authorities
with their different agendas and points of view One puzzle for compilers has been how to
present the more than one hundred fragments (estimated to be about half of Heraclitusrsquo
ndash writers who reportedly loved books and libraries and who seeded their written works with the
harvest from their omnivorous reading and meticulous note-taking
8 For the sake of some examples consider the story of the seven Sages (3 385 D) the Delian problem
(6 386 E) the number of worlds (11 389 F) the divisions of the soul (13 390 F) the source of the
illumination of the moon (15 391 A) and musical theory (10 389 D)
86
original output) without imposing an extraneous ordering or logic upon them This question
arises in our attempt to confront Heraclitus through Plutarchrsquos presentation of him in De E I
do not discuss the testimonia nor descriptions of Heraclitus his life or his teachings
Ingram Bywater (Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae Oxford 1877) produced a Greek-Latin
version of the fragments with an extensive review of the work of German philologists This
was quickly translated into English by G T W Patrick (Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature
Baltimore N Murray 1889)9 Patrick presents Bywaterrsquos compilation as the culmination of a
century of scholarly study (mainly on the continent) beginning with the publication of
Friedrich Schleiermacherrsquos Herakleitos der Dunkle von Ephesos (1807) followed by the
Heraclitea of Jakob Bernays (1848) Bywaterrsquos work provides an excellent introduction to the
work of Heraclitus and Patrickrsquos translation made it available
to every man to read and judge for himself [the philosophy of Heraclitus]hellip The
increasing interest in early Greek philosophy and particularly in Heraclitus who is
the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century makes such a
translation justifiable and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr
Bywater makes it practicable
Bywaterrsquos specialist work has been overtaken by the more general studies of Diels and Kranz
on the pre-Socratic philosophers nevertheless Bywater remains a reliable and lucid
9 The English title Heraclitus of Ephesus on Nature tells us as much about Bywater as it does about
Heraclitus Bywater Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford had a keen interest in the natural and
biological sciences He was instrumental in establishing a scholarship in biology at Exeter College
Oxford in 1872 and was a corresponding member to the Academy of Sciences in Berlin He was also
one of the academics involved in the organisation of the ldquoChallengerrdquo oceanic expedition (1872-76)
which circumnavigated the globe to gather information on the worldrsquos oceans His obituary appeared
in Nature 94 (1914) 455
87
introduction to the Heraclitean fragments 10 To my knowledge Arthur Fairbanks (1897) was
the first to analyse the records of Plutarchrsquos quotations from the early philosophers11 Using
Bywaterrsquos compilation (that of Diels was not yet in print) Fairbanks reviewed 228 fragments
from these philosophers12 In the case of Heraclitus he found forty-eight fragments cited by
Plutarch (of which seven are in De E)13 About half of these raised the suspicion of being
taken at second hand either from Plato and Aristotle or from some Stoic source others are
single phrases that were current and familiar (one in De E) Fairbanks winnows to four the
candidates that might have been quoted directly14
Diels built on Bywaterrsquos work but re-ordered the fragments alphabetically by the
name of the source (except for the first which looks very like a preamble to a treatise)
Amongst Dielsrsquos contemporaries John Burnet (1930) and H Gomperz (ldquoUumlber
10 Kahn comments favorably on Bywaterrsquos contribution ldquoin many respects [Bywaterrsquos compilation]
has remained the most useful edition of any detailed study of Heraclitus (ldquoA new look at Heraclitusrdquo
1979 189) Kahn sees Bywaterrsquos methodical arrangement of the fragments by topic as a valiant
attempt to interpret Heraclitusrsquo work as a coherent narrative argument
11 These were Heraclitus Empedocles Anaxagoras Parmenides and Xenocrates See Arthur
Fairbanks ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897) 75-87
12 The precise numbers are Heraclitus 48 Empedocles 99 Anaxagoras 42 Parmenides 21 and
Xenocrates 18The number 48 apparently includes citations that Diels later included in his list of the
Testimonia There are fourteen testimonia listed in Helmbold-OrsquoNeil which with the 33 citations by
Plutarch sums (almost) to 48
13 They can be found in De E 8 388 C 8 388 E 9 389 C 18 392 A 18 392 C 18 392 D and 21
393 E Fairbanks counts seven allusions or quotations in DeE while Helmbold-OrsquoNeil restrict
themselves to the three signalled by a phrase meaning ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo
14 The four are fragments 11 12 130 and 126 in Bywater (93 92 127 and 128 in Diels) Plutarch
quotes the first three and Pseudo-Plutarch the last None is in De E
88
dieuumlrspruumlngliche Reihenfolge einiger Bruchstuumlcke Heraklitsrdquo Hermes 58 [1923 20])
disputed Dielsrsquos arrangement while Hermann Fraumlnkel argued persuasively that the care and
artifice exhibited in the construction of the extant fragments presupposed some larger
coherent composition Some later compilers (including Marcovich and Kahn) have arranged
the fragments by their personal conceptions of their subject matter Kirk restricts his analysis
to the ldquocosmicrdquo fragments those ldquodescribing the world rather than men in particularrdquo (1968
30) and included about half of the extant fragments Kathleen Freeman provided a handbook
to the whole of the Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker following the Diels ordering whilst
allowing herself diversions back and forth to different fragments to suit her line of exposition
Eugen Fink and Martin Heidegger (Heraclitus Seminar 1979) taking a step away from the
linear ordering used the Diels numbering system to identify the fragments but eschewed any
significance to the order implicit in the numbers Thus at the opening of the seminar
Professor Fink on his own motion and authority simply declares ldquowithout further
preliminary considerations we shall proceed directly to the midst of the matter beginning our
interpretation with Fr 64 [τὰδὲ πάντα οἰακίζει κεραυνός]rdquo15 This free form approach leads to
a stimulating if discursive meander through 162 pages and forty-six fragments (some visited
more than once) Obviously to be productive this approach requires well prepared
15 The source for this fragment (Diels 64 Bywater 28 Kahn 119) is Refutation of All the Heresies
9107 Diels translates this into German as ldquoDas Weltall aber steuert der Blitzldquo (Diels 1906 71)
which Seibert translates as ldquolightning steers the universerdquo John Burnetrsquos translation is ldquothe
thunderbolt steers all thingsrdquo
89
participants who are familiar with the fragments as the participants in the Heraclitus Seminar
seem to have been16
Fink chose this fragment because it is a transparent expression with little of the
ldquolinguistic densityrdquo that appears in other fragments17 It consists of three words (ignoring the
particle δὲ) τὰ πάντα οἰακίζει and κεραυνός The English counterparts are ldquoall thingsrdquo
ldquosteersrdquo or ldquoguidesrdquo and ldquolightningrdquo or ldquothunderboltrdquo18 Heidegger commented that the
16 Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink conducted this seminar at the University of Freiburg during the
school year 1966-67 The plan was to repeat the experiment but that did not come to pass We know
neither the names of the participants nor their number Heidegger himself described the procedure as
ldquoventuresomerdquo and ldquohazardousrdquo nevertheless reading the account of the seminar stimulates both the
mind and the imagination
17 Kahn describes two properties of the fragments linguistic density ldquothe phenomenon by which a
multiplicity of ideas is expressed in a single word or phraserdquo and resonance ldquothe relationship between
fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another [so that] the
meaning of each is enriched when they are understood togetherrdquo (1979 89) Kahn does not say so but
resonance must depend on some metric of distance The closer together two fragments are the easier it
is to ldquoseerdquo a relationship Closeness means that they are next to each other on the same page or share
common words or electronic links Dielsrsquos instincts were good when he tried to randomise the
fragments
18 Bywater gives the context ldquoAnd he [Heraclitus] says that a judgement of the world and all things
in it will take place by fire expressing it as follows lsquoNow lightning rules allrsquo that is guides it rightly
meaning by lightning everlasting firerdquo The ldquocontextrdquo for Bywater is the context given in the source
The source of this quotation is Refutation of All the Heresies 910 (Patrick Heraclitus on Nature 24
1888 91) Hippolytus is responsible for eighteen fragments (Diels 50-67) Similarly the twenty-seven
fragments cited by Plutarch appear in fragments 85-101 This classification creates anomalies for
instance in fragment 65 ldquoneed and satietyrdquo which lies within the range of Hippolytusrsquo citations but is
also cited in De E (9 389 C) and similarly fragment 47 is also quoted by Plutarch but attributed to
Hippolytus Plutarch died a few years before Hippolytus was born Two factors might explain this
90
sentence makes good sense in that one knows what it says but since each of the words is
multivalent not necessarily what it means19 The ship analogy in ldquosteersrdquo is a perennial
favorite that has persisted up to the present The notion of steering or governing resonates
throughout the fragments Lightning could be a transferred epithet for Zeus as Heidegger
commented ldquoI remember an afternoon during my journey in Aegina I saw a single bolt of
lightning after which no more followed and my thought was Zeusrdquo Finally the equating of
ldquoall thingsrdquo and ldquothe universerdquo is an adventurous but not an unreasonable or uncommon leap
Heidegger concludes this first chapter by noting that the opposition of the one (the lightning)
to the all is an opposition that preoccupied Heraclitus In Appendix C we see the
reconciliation of the one and the many in the tetractys a single entity identified with the
cosmos which is at the same time a collection of the all ndash the first ten numbers
Heidegger demonstrates how one can enter the maze of the fragments at any point in
this case via fragment 64 and still profit from reading them Kahn in a neat homage to
Heraclitus (see Diels 50 ldquoall things are one ldquoand Diels 10 ldquofrom all things one and from one
anomaly first as Fairbanks points out ldquoneed and satietyrdquo appears to have been a catch-phrase and
one that Plutarch did not describe as coming from Heraclitus and second Hippolytusrsquo citations are
contained in a span of 1000 words from Refutation of All the Heresies 991 to 9108 and their very
density within this passage would not spur a researcher to look for other earlier sources
19 Kahn makes precisely this point about the fragment ldquothe way up and the way down is one and the
samerdquo(Diels 60) which he says provides indirect evidence for a larger (coherent) structure since the
statement cannot be interpreted in isolation ldquoThe literal interpretation of this remark poses no
difficulties but taken in isolation it is so ambiguous as to be devoid of significance Everything turns
upon what kind of way is meant and that we could only learn from the context ndash from the sentences
that came before and afterrdquo
91
thing allrdquo) comments ldquoone might reasonably claim that all of Heraclitusrsquo fragments have
only one single meaning which in fact is the full semantic structure of his thought as a whole
of which any given phrase is but an incomplete fragmentrdquo (1979 95) 20
CITATIONS FROM HERACLITUS IN DE E
Having been shown the way by Heidegger we can enter the fragments with Plutarchrsquos
first explicit quotation from Heraclitus By giving Young Plutarch a quotation about circular
flow Plutarch is setting the stage for Ammoniusrsquo excursus on the theory of flux (πάντα ῥεῖ a
slogan from Cratylus 402) In section 8 even before he refers to Heraclitus Young Plutarch
proposes the hegemony of the pentad by describing the life cycle of wheat from the seed to
the plant and back to the seed ldquoso she [Nature] leads this work to its logical end and at the
end she displays its beginning ndash wheatrdquo (Diels 103) He then compares this to the cycle of
counting by fives where each number ends in either five or zero (5 10 15 20 25hellip) and
makes the imaginative analogical leap from these cycles to those of the cosmos being
20 We have mentioned Heraclitusrsquo syntax and the patterns he creates in his aphorisms these include
parallelism contrasts analogies and pairings Another is the pattern of the geometric mean
AB = BC which as the mean proportional provides a method for solving the Delian problem
Fraumlnkel in an elegant paper (ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 1938) demonstrates that
Heraclitus applied precisely this proportion to metaphysics He suggests that perhaps Heraclitus had
learned from the Pythagoreans about the correspondence between musical intervals and progressions
in geometry and algebrardquo
There is another correspondence to the Pythagorean tetractys The interior numbers of the
Platonic Lambda are the geometric means of the exterior numbers
92
continually created and destroyed in alternation and to the Heraclitean notion of balanced
exchange21
For the first principle preserves the cosmos and then out of the cosmos perfects
itself and as Heraclitus says ldquoall things are exchanged for fire and fire is exchanged
for all thingsrdquo just as ldquogold is for goods and goods for goldrdquo
This contains two different ideas one about the cosmos and the other about individual
exchange In quoting this Young Plutarch gives a version of Heraclitean theory of change ndash a
closed dynamic system autonomously maintaining its equilibrium This aphorism
memorable both for its content and for its artful chiasmus aptly reflects its connotations ndash
circularity reciprocity and fungibility Closed dynamic processes were explored much later in
European philosophy we see the same ideas of circularity in the ldquoinvisible handrdquo in The
Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith (1776) and in the Tableau eacuteconomique of Franccedilois
Quesnay (1758) Even the quotidian balance sheets of modern commercial book-keeping
reflect the idea
There is an ambiguity here whether ldquofirerdquo is one of the things in ldquoall thingsrdquo and
included in them or something apart The imagery suggests that fire possesses a unique and
universal value and is worth all the rest Kahn sees an echo of ldquofrom all things one and from
one thing allrdquo (Diels 10 Kahn 124) and links it to the cosmic cycle ldquoThe universal exchange
for fire is in one sense a fact of human experience we see all sorts of things go up in
flameshellip but the generation of all things from firehellip is a pure requirement of theory and
devoid of empirical supportrdquo (Kahn 1979 150)
21 Plutarch has lsquoπυρὸς τ᾽ ανταμείβεσθαι πάντα hellip lsquoκαὶ πῦρ απάντων ὅκωσπερ χρυσοῦ χρήματα καὶ
χρημάτων χρυσός (Diels 90 Marcovich 54 Kahn 40 Kirk 103 Bywater 22)
93
Young Plutarch speaks of the oneness of the unchanging Apollo and the
transformations of Dionysus adding ldquobut the periods of these cycles are not the same the
one that they call lsquosatietyrsquo is longer than the one they call lsquocravingrsquordquo (Diels 65) Young
Plutarch ends his discussion by defining the proportionate lengths of these ldquoas three is to one
so is the relation of the period of orderly disposition to that of fiery destructionrdquo Young
Plutarch has linked Apollo and Dionysus to the cosmos whose nature is one of underlying
law and order
[which] is not dependent on any divine purposeful will but all is ruled by an
inherent necessary ldquofaterdquo The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency
toward change and thus pursuing the way down it enters the ldquostriferdquo and war of
opposites which condition the birth of the world (διαχόσμησις) and experience that
hunger (χρησμoσύνη) which arises in a state where life is dependent upon
nourishment and where satiety (χόρος) is only again found when in pursuit of the
way up opposites are annulled and unity and peace again emerge in the pure
original fire (έχπύρωσις) This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived now
as ldquodestinyrdquo ldquoforcerdquo ldquonecessityrdquo ldquojusticerdquo or when exhibited in definite forms of
time and matter as ldquointelligencerdquo [Patrick 1889 39]
Nevertheless although the term ecpyrosis was not used by Heraclitus it was adapted
and elaborated by the Stoics in their theory of cyclical growth and destruction Young
Plutarch appears to be giving a Stoicised version of the Heraclitean notion of constant cosmic
change This change is regular confirming Heraclitusrsquo notion of measure and balance as both
Tarrant and Kahn emphasise Thus we see evidence of the cyclical rhythm at both the macro
and micro levels We can leave this here and await Ammoniusrsquo response when it is his turn to
speak
In section 18 Ammonius responds to Young Plutarch but gives short shrift to the
claim that the votary offering E is about numbers in general or the pentad He then cites two
fragments from Heraclitus which serve to contrast flux with circular flow
94
For it is not possible to step twice into the same river nor is it possible to encounter
a mortal being in one and the same state on two separate occasions For a being
changes its state so suddenly and swiftly that it both disperses and comes together
and disperses again or rather not again or later but all at once it is instantaneously
both coming together and departing is both lsquopresentrsquo and lsquoabsentrsquordquo
The authority for this quotation is Plutarch himself and whether it should be interpreted as an
accurate citation of Heraclitus or Plutarchrsquos own summary of a longer statement we cannot
say The detail ldquoyou cannot step twice into the same riverrdquo is even more contentious22 As I
discuss in section 18 some assert that this is no more than a loose paraphrase of ldquoas they step
into the same rivers other and still other waters flow upon themrdquo (Diels 12) Nevertheless the
river is quickly left behind as the subject of the argument and the mortal being who is both
coming together and departing and both present and absent comes to the fore Ammonius is
closing in on the focus of his argument the difference between mortal beings always in the
process of becoming and the god who is He has achieved this by disposing of the numbers
and their powers and lobbing back Young Plutarchrsquos Heraclitean simile with one of his own
Ammonius then takes Young Plutarchrsquos imagery of the seed and turns it to his own
advantage by describing the transformation of the seed as its ldquodeathrdquo and the transformation
into the embryo as a ldquobirthrdquo whence it is but a short step to another fragment a description of
the cosmic cycle ldquofor as Heraclitus said lsquothe death of fire is birth for air and the death of air
is birth for waterrsquordquo (Diels 76) with the afterthought ldquoand it is clearer still in ourselvesrdquo
22 The authenticity of the two river statements fragments (Diels 12 and 91) and their relationship to
each other is controversial There are three versions of Diels 12 Aristotle Meta1010a10-15 Cratylus
402a and De E 18 92 B The statement probably goes back to Heraclitus but Plato does not give it
verbatim Kahn (168) finds it ironic that the most celebrated saying of Heraclitus cannot be traced
directly to him Plutarchrsquos version appears to be derived from Aristotle and Plato
95
I discuss the Greek for these fragments in the notes to section 18 it suffices here to
note that ldquomortal substancerdquo includes animate beings and that in the second quotation we are
given the metaphor of birth and death for changes in elements that we usually do not consider
animate It is not clear whether Ammonius means that the afterthought came from Heraclitus
or from himself He continues to describe the many deaths that we suffer during our lives23
Ammonius discussion leads up to the introduction of a god who ldquobeing one has with one
now filled foreverrdquo and he uses the sayings of Heraclitus to support his basic contention that
nothing of this world participates in true being
Ammonius treats the theories of cyclical change and flux as opposites but the
fragments do not bear this out Human beings in their temporal world may experience flux
from birth to death but many of the Heraclitean fragments are concerned with larger matters
23 Flaceliegravere (1941 89 fn 111) comments
Ces ideacutees nrsquoexpriment qursquoun aspect de la reacutealiteacute et comportement assureacutement une
grande part drsquoexageacuteration Cf Ricard dans sa note agrave ce passage [1884 60 -61] laquo
Les vicissitudes que nous eacuteprouvons dans nos gouts nos affections nos sentiments
et mecircme dans les traits de notre figure ne deacutetruisent ni lrsquouniteacute de notre individu ni
la reacutealiteacute de notre existence propre et individuelle raquo
Obsieger gives two other places where Plutarch explores this idea In the first (De ser Num
15 559 C) climaxes his argument that both man and city maintain some core of sameness with the
riposte ldquoelse we shall throw everything before we know it into the river of Heraclitus into which (he
says) no one can step twice since Nature by her changes is ever altering and transforming all thingsrdquo
In the second The Life of Theseus (231) explores the meaning when the idea is applied to an
inanimate object ndash in this case the thirty-oared galley on which Theseus returned to Greece from
Crete Whittaker (1969 190) provides a similar example in Senecarsquos letter to Lucius On Being (58
22) calling the theme of the ages of man ldquoevidently a Middle Platonic commonplacerdquo
96
ndash seasonality and periodicity starting with the cycle of human generations the sunrsquos annual
turnings between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn and the Great Year when the sun moon
and planets return to their original relative positions after a lapse of 10800 years
My purpose in this brief discussion was to demonstrate that citations from Heraclitus
played a role in Plutarchrsquos construction of the dialogue After the discursive presentations of
the earlier speakers in De E these three fragments serve to focus the debate and provide a
comparison between the arguments of Young Plutarch and Ammonius Whether Heraclitus
meant to make the two sets of changes ndash circular flow and flux opposites as Ammonius
asserts is debatable It is certainly clear that Heraclitus was talking about cosmic order and
change not necessarily stages of a manrsquos life Furthermore Plutarch prefaces each of these
quotations with ldquoas Heraclitus saidrdquo so that we are in no doubt as to their source
The more one reads of Heraclitus and rereads De E the more one is struck by
Plutarchrsquos appreciation of Heraclitus in so far as we can tell from such scant evidence We
can only speculate on how many other resonances and allusions we might have found in the
complete works of Heraclitus (and the complete works of Plutarch) In footnote 13 I give the
seven allusions to Heraclitus in De E identified by Fairbanks The attentive reader will find
other resonances in this dialogue and of course there are others scattered throughout the
Moralia Expanding the focus to Plutarchrsquos use of Heraclitus in the Pythian Dialogues or
even in the whole Moralia could lead to fascinating insights
Nevertheless Ammonius has not reconciled Young Plutarchrsquos (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion
of circularity with his own (and Heraclitusrsquo) notion of flux which can be done I believe by
going beyond individual things (and goods) to the level of the cosmos As we noted earlier
(8 388 D) Heraclitus does not specify whether fire is a thing amongst ldquoall thingsrdquo or a thing
97
that encompasses all things but not fire itself (Russellrsquos and the Liarrsquos paradoxes) Ammonius
may have seen the truth but not the whole truth which would include not only the fates of
men and the gods but also the other truth that Heraclitus sought the truth about the cosmos
Finally I do not doubt that Heraclitus was a meteorologist and a cosmologist in fact a
scientist Kirk perceived the importance of this aspect of Heraclitusrsquo thinking when he
confined himself to the cosmic fragments Others have noticed this part of his philosophy and
his interest in science For example David Wiggins (2009) has cited the possible scientific
content of the fragment discussed earlier ldquothe lightning steers all thingsrdquo He compares fire
as Heraclitus conceived it and energy as conceived in eighteenth and nineteenth century
physics
Many plain men have scarcely any better idea of what energy is than Heraclitus had
of what fire was But most of us have some conception of energy The common idea
and the idea that holds our conception of energy in place and holds Heraclitus
conception of fire in place is the idea of whatever it is that is conserved and makes
possible the continuance of the world-orderrdquo
Fink saw in the fragment ldquoThe lightning steers all thingsrdquo a reference to the fire that
lightning often engenders and through that the idea of the fire that consumes all things But
that may be too literal an interpretation Lightning may engender fire but lightning s not fire
but the manifestation of the release of a force electrical energy Nikola Tesla another poet
and visionary saw in lightning one of the fundamental forces in our world ndash electricity or the
power that resides in the electron That force had been observed if not understood by the
ancients They knew of the static charge that develops in catrsquos fur and silk They also knew of
the magical properties of amber Indeed in lightning we see another instantiation of
Heraclitusrsquo fragment ldquothe hidden connection is more powerful than the visiblerdquo The other
fundamental force still not understood is that of gravity
98
In De E Plutarch the priest of Apollo writes of the golden-haired god who shares
space with Zeus Guide of Fate near the altar of Poseidon at Delphi Apollo god of the
electron flies with his musical swans to the magical islands of the north where amber grows
on trees Apollo as Phoebus Apollo is associated with the sun that burns with a heat greater
than anything on earth a heat generated not by the electrical energy but by another of the
fundamental forces in our world nuclear energy In the myth that is the heat that destroyed
Phaethon
99
APPENDIX B FREE INDIRECT DISCOURSE
Je ne suis pas toujours de mon avis
Madame de Seacutevigneacute (1626-1696)
In De E the transition from section 7 to section 8 contains an intriguing crux We have
reached the end of Eustrophusrsquo exposition on the E and are moving into Young Plutarchrsquos
This is described in two sentences where Plutarch declares
Eustrophus was not saying these things to us in jest but because I was at that time
devoting myself enthusiastically to my mathematics Nevertheless I was to observe
the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just as soon as I became part of the Academy
Section 8 Then I said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most gracefully resolved the
difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo I continuedhellip
Since the narrator (Plutarch) is also a character in the story we must decide in each case of
the use of a first-person pronoun whether he is communicating his present thoughts or those
he had at the time of the event There are two possible referents for the six first-person
pronouns in these three English sentences Plutarch or Young Plutarch and if it is Plutarch
he may be narrating the story or as the author be addressing parenthetical remarks to
Sarapion For the first ldquoIrdquo Plutarch the narrator is commenting on young Plutarchrsquos interest in
mathematics In other words this is a self-reference to his younger self In the second and
third he is commenting in an aside on something that happened outside the time-frame of the
dialogue At the beginning of section 8 the last two pronouns ldquoIrdquo clearly refer to Young
Plutarch first as speech reported by the narrator then as the direct speech of Young Plutarch
Finally a first-person pronoun (ldquousrdquo) appears as an indirect object in the first sentence where
it entails another self-reference to the narrator as part of the group
100
This fussing over the grammar is not mere pedantry but an attempt to understand the
nature of the text that we are reading Up to this point in the dialogue we have seen a
straightforward reporting of different interpretations of the meaning of the E All seem to have
had the same philosophical weight all have been treated with mild scepticism by the listeners
and none has seemed persuasive Babbitt makes the interesting comment that these first
speakers are ldquosearching for an explanation of the unexplainablerdquo and that the dialogue
provides an engaging portrayal of the way in which a philosopher reacts when ldquoforced
unwillingly to face the unknowablerdquo A reader who expected or believed that this dialogue
was mere description or uncreative recounting of events that happened twenty years earlier
should be disabused by this point Plutarchrsquos self-referencing and shifting viewpoint suggests
that we are not going to get an answer to the question of the meaning of the E but will have to
settle for the insights into character and the intrinsic interest of the digressions into history and
philosophy that Plutarch provides Plutarch highlights the difficulty that the reader has in
identifying exactly what the dialogue is ldquoaboutrdquo1
Young Plutarch does not see the contradiction between his enthusiasm for
mathematics and the motto of the Academy because for him there is no contradiction The
irony can be enjoyed by the narrator Plutarch who surveys the whole timespan of the
anecdote To make this explicit we could rewrite the sentence putting the original into
reported speech and seeing that the irony has disappeared
Eustrophus did not say these things to those present in jest but because at that time
Young Plutarch was devoting himself enthusiastically to his mathematics But
1 In contrast to this account that given by Fink in The Heraclitus Seminar is a model of objective
rapportage No one could mistake that for a character study
101
Sarapion Young Plutarch did go on to observe the maxim ldquoNothing in excessrdquo just
as soon as he became part of the Academy
[Section 8] Then Young Plutarch said that Eustrophusrsquo explanation had most
gracefully resolved the difficulty with Number ldquoForrdquo he continued hellip
In this version the uninvolved narrator writes of all participants in the third person since
Plutarch as distinct from Young Plutarch is no longer a participant and he can replace ldquous
ldquowith ldquothose presentrdquo Young Plutarch a character in the narrative knows only the present
not that he will one day join the Academy
The technique of implicating the narrator in the story allows a character to appear in
two (or more) incarnations Both Young Plutarch and Plutarch appear within the same scene
and their simultaneous presence pulls us back to the present where Plutarch is writing to
Sarapion Thus three time periods are telescoped into one scene More generally time is fluid
in the dialogue where only two events in real time are given ndash the visits of Nero (1 385 C)
and Livia ldquothe wife of Caesarrdquo (3 386 A) ndash the first described by the narrator to Sarapion and
the second (in direct speech) by Lamprias to the group At the opening of the dialogue the
letter to Sarapion gives us three receding time periods The first is the ldquopresentrdquo where
Plutarch is writing to his friend Sarapion the second occurred ldquojust recentlyrdquo and involves
two of Plutarchrsquos teenage sons The remembered encounter with his sons and his conversation
about the E then conjures for Plutarch a meeting with Ammonius and several other friends
This meeting took place even earlier about twenty years ago and during the reign of Nero we
are told Then abruptly we are in a dialogue where Ammonius is introducing the subject to
Plutarch and his friends
The observations that Plutarch who as the author already has a presence inserts
himself into the narrative and that he scrambles time are not original to me I have seen three
other instances where commentators make essentially the same observation The first appears
102
in Flaceliegraverersquos translation of the Pythian Dialogues (1974) In his foreword to De def he notes
that the narrator in that dialogue has all the attributes of Plutarch and appears to be Plutarch
although later in section 8 he is identified as Lamprias Flaceliegravere in his discussion of this
passage (7 413 C-D) recounts the contretemps with the Cynic Planetiades and comments
Mais il y a lagrave un proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire un kunstgriff [artifice] comme dit Wilamowitz
que nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave propos de Theacuteon personnage du De Pyth Plutarque
se substituant par moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage comme par inadvertance et
sans preacutevenir le lecteur (Flaceliegravere 1974 86-87)
Leaving aside for the moment Flaceliegraverersquos reference to Theon this dialogue De def begins as
did De E ndash an unnamed narrator relates the substance of a discussion at Delphi to a friend
The subject is the reason for the diminution and disappearance of many oracles in Greece
There are seven participants Lamprias Ammonius two eminent visitors Cleombrotus and
Demetrios and personnel from the temple including Heracleon (but not Plutarch) In the first
few sections the narrator remains outside the conversation relating the discussion between
Cleombrotus Demetrius and Ammonius in the third person These join another group who
invite them to join their philosophic discussion on which lambda the first or the second has
been lost in constructing the future tense of βάλλω At this point the narrator becomes part of
the conversation writing that ldquowerdquo joined their company and sat amongst them The careful
reader (or an adept at reading and decoding detective stories) will notice that the word ldquowerdquo
eliminates Plutarch as the narrator since he is not on the list of dramatis personae It is only
during the incident with the Cynic Didymus Planetiades that the name of the narrator is
revealed
The incident begins with the narrator explaining that Planetiades incensed by the
choice of the new topic for discussion (the disappearance of the oracles) claims (in indirect
103
speech) that there is so much evil in the world that Reverence (Αἰδὼς) and Divine Retribution
(Νέμεσις) have already fled the haunts of mankind and that it is no wonder that Divine
Providence (πρόνοια θεῶν) has gathered up her skirts and oracles and followed suit The
narrator adds that Planetiades would have said more but Heracleon intervened The narrator
in direct speech and using the pronoun ldquoIrdquo attempts to calm Planetiades The narrative then
continues with ldquowhatever I had said worked he [Planetiades] turned and went out the door
without another wordrdquo (ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ταῦτ᾽ εἰπὼν τοσοῦτο διεπραξάμην ὅσον απελθεῖν διὰ
θυρῶν σιωπῇ τὸν Πλανητιάδην) Section 8 continues the narrative with ldquoIt became quiet for a
momentrdquo (ἡσυχίας δὲ γενομένης ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγον) and Ammonius ldquoaddressing himself to merdquo (ἐμὲ
προσαγορεύσας) in direct speech said ldquoSee what it is that you are doing Lampriashelliprdquo Thus
Lamprias is revealed as the narrator
Aside from that incongruous ldquowerdquo until this moment we have probably surmised that
Plutarch himself is the narrator Flaceliegravere bases his opinion on the narratorrsquos style and a
quotation from Pindar that appears three times in the Moralia But there is another cogent
reason for feeling that Plutarch may have inserted himself into the dialogue (se substituant par
moments lui-mecircme agrave son personnage) The wandering ldquoIrdquo allows the author (Plutarch) and
Lamprias (the narrator) to provide two different viewpoints The description by the narrator
that there was a moment of quiet juxtaposed with the intervention of Ammonius that
Lamprias ought to concentrate on the matter at hand suggests that the author sees a
contradiction between these ndash first that Lampriasrsquo self reported comments were not effective
and that Planetiadesrsquo abrupt departure has shocked the other participants into silence Plutarch
the author but not Lamprias himself is aware of the pain to Planetiades that Lamprias has
caused
104
Flaceliegravere refers us to Ulrich von Wilamowitzrsquos Der Glaube der Hellenen where
Wilamowitz too in precisely this passage identifies Plutarchrsquos tendency to blur the
boundaries between the narratorrsquos thoughts and words and those of his characters2 He does
not go beyond identification to an analysis of this device or trick [Kunstgriff] but simply
states that at 413 D the Cynic Planetiades is swiftly silenced by Plutarchrsquos brother Lamprias
whom Plutarch has made so much like himself that we might see Plutarch as the narrator of
the dialogue Wilamowitz then refers to his own Commentariolum Grammaticum III3 In that
document written in Latin he again describes the phenomenon of Plutarchrsquos appearing in his
own writings where one might not expect him He remarks on another example in De fac
where Lamprias is again one of the participants None of this needs to detain us except that in
the first sentence in the opening paragraph of the analysis of that dialogue he writes (and we
can see where he is going)
Sed redeo ad prosopopeian Plutarcheam
But back to Plutarchean personification (ie his charactersrsquo speeches)
Although in German Wilamowitz uses the generic Kunstgriff which could be a trick of any
sort and not necessarily literary in Latin he came up with the immensely appropriate Latin
borrowing from the Greek meaning mask face or personage with theatrical and dramatic
connotations
To return to the second example of Theon in De Pyth (nous avons deacutejagrave signaleacute agrave
propos de Theacuteon) Flaceliegravere claims that in that dialogue (409 B) Theon when he discusses
2 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Der Glaube der Hellenen Berlin Weidenmannshe (1889 2
499)
3 Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Commentariolum Grammaticum Gottingen (1889 3 27)
105
the rites at the temple and the leader of ldquoourrdquo administration speaks as if he were Plutarch
Flaceliegravere repeats almost word for word what he had said earlier about Plutarch and Lamprias
in De def
Cependant il nrsquoest pas impossible que lrsquoon doive identifier malgreacute tout ce Theacuteon agrave
lrsquoami de Plutarque agrave condition drsquoadmettre que Plutarque a utiliseacute ici comme
ailleurs ce singulier proceacutedeacute litteacuteraire par lequel comme par inadvertance et sans en
preacutevenir le lecteur il se substitue soudain lui-mecircme agrave lrsquoun des personnages qursquoil met
en scegravene (Flaceliegravere 1974 43)
Flaceliegravere is correct that this sounds much like a priest of Delphi speaking This dialogue is
structured differently from both De E and De def As in the script of a drama each passage is
prefaced by the name of the speaker and at first it seems that all information will be conveyed
to us through the direct speech of the characters But by section 4 the author comes into focus
with remarks such as ldquosaid Diogenianusrdquo and ldquoTheon repliedrdquo and he turns into a participant
by using the pronoun ldquowerdquo ndash ldquowe urged him onhellip ldquowe accepted thisrdquo and so on Again
Plutarch is not listed amongst the dramatis personae so Flaceliegravere is correct that Plutarch has
once again inserted himself into the dialogue which has evolved from a script into a narrative
(with a narrator) Again the use of the first-person plural (ldquowerdquo) conflates the narrator with a
character in the dialogue
Finally Frieda Klotz (2011) describes how Plutarch recounts autobiographical
details4
4 See Freida Klotz ldquoImagining the past Plutarchrsquos Play with timerdquo eds Frieda Klotz and
Katerina Oikonomopoulou The philosopherrsquos banquet Plutarchs Table Talk in the Intellectual
Culture of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press 2011) and ldquoPortraits of the
106
He shuffles his youth and development into an unexpected a-chronological structure
and although he beginshellip the book with scenes in which his own character is mature
and authoritative he ends with his teacher [Ammonius] playing the main role
This is also how Plato structures the Symposium with Socrates eventually ceding pride of
place to Diotima5 Klotzrsquos assessment is also an accurate description of the structure of De E
Plutarch follows the same scheme here with young Plutarch as a character and an Ammonius
who takes the stage at the end of the dialogue for his master class in ldquoGod isrdquo Klotz focusses
on the Table Talks but much that she says applies to the dialogues and it is certainly true in
De E that no one ever addresses Plutarch by his name She claims that this anonymity rather
than downplaying his importance has the opposite effect The unnamed shifting ego signifies
Plutarch as different from the other characters and draws our attention to him Klotz does not
make the connection to the use of personal pronouns and the authorrsquos use of first person or
third person narration which is discussed below in the continuation of the analysis of the
narration of De E
In De E the example given earlier on the transition from section 7 to section 8 is
extraordinary in that we confront the two Plutarchs on the same page The juxtaposition is not
just a literary flourish since their simultaneous presence presages Ammoniusrsquo argument on the
difference between Being and Becoming Every mortal being is always in the process of
ldquocoming-into-beingrsquo so that we get instantiations such as Young Plutarch and his older self
This is a fine illustration of the implications of Ammoniusrsquo assertion
Philosopher Plutarchrsquos Self-Presentation in the lsquoQuaestiones Convivalesrsquordquo Classical Quarterly 57
(2007) 650-67
5 See Daniel Babut ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des
Eacutetudes Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
107
Other examples where Plutarch inserts himself in the dialogue occur in De E at the
points where one speaker hands over to another6 where the transition is usually accomplished
through an intervention from the narrator In section 2 Plutarch gives a summary of
Ammoniusrsquo analysis of Apollorsquos names and then allows Ammonius to continue without
interruption in direct speech Section 3 begins in the same way Plutarch says that Ammonius
has finished and introduces the next speaker Lamprias who continues without interruption7
Section 4 except for the last sentence is entirely in indirect discourse8
A different authorial intervention occurs in sections 6 and 7 There Plutarch
introduces parenthetical remarks addressed to Sarapion which serve to pull us out of the past
and remind us that this dialogue is indeed being reported in a letter In section 6 Plutarch
introduces ldquomy friend Theon whom you knowrdquo Theon is thus the friend of Young Plutarch
Plutarch and Sarapion and we know that he has survived the intervening twenty or so years
since the dialogue took place We have returned to the present when the letter was written and
6 These points are set out in the Schema Structure of the Dialogue page 16
7 The reader may have noticed that the section divisions track the changes of the speakers and
wonder why the section breaks do not provide sufficient sign-posting of the parts of the dialogue and
of the shift from one speaker to another Surely the division into sections says it all In answer I do not
believe that the section numbers are original to Plutarch although I have been unable to determine
their source They may have been created by Wyttenbach where they do appear They do not appear
in Amyot The place to look for an answer would be in the Aldine collection in the Rylands Library in
Manchester England If they did not exist then it is reasonable that Plutarch built in his own markers
within the narrative that separates direct speeches De Pyth begins with a formal dialogue with each
speaker named at the beginning of his particular speech but that soon evolved intothe system we have
here
8 See fn 21 in section 4
108
to Plutarch ndash the letter writer who can be distinguished from the narrator of the dialogue
when he addresses Sarapion directly (and us indirectly) This is confirmed at the beginning of
section 7 where Plutarch introduces the next speaker with ldquoit was I think Eustrophus the
Athenianrdquo (Εὔστροφον Ἀθηναῖον οἶμαι) Both the hesitation contained in ldquoI thinkrdquo and the
two pronouns require thought The hesitation suggests that Plutarch the letter writer is not sure
that his memory serves him (although he later repeats the name with confidence) So the
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is directing a parenthetical remark to his friend Sarapion apparently to
warn him that his memory may be faulty On the other hand the pronoun must include the
narrator the Plutarch of twenty years before who participated in the dialogue As discussed
earlier at the end of section 7 Plutarch again makes a parenthetical remark about joining the
Academy to Sarapion who no doubt enjoyed the joke about ldquoNothing in excessrdquo
The contributions of both Young Plutarch and Ammonius (sections 8-21) are
delivered almost entirely in direct speech Logically enough an intervention occurs at the
point where Young Plutarch cedes the podium to Ammonius The last sentence in section 16
and the first in section 17 read
[Section 16] τοιοῦτο μὲν καὶ ο τῶν αριθμητικῶν καὶ ο τῶν μαθηματικῶν ἐγκωμίων
τοῦ Ε λόγος ὡς ἐγὼ μέμνημαι πέρας ἔσχεν
Section 17 ο δ᾽ Ἀμμώνιος ἅτε δη καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ τὸ φαυλότατον ἐν μαθηματικῇ
φιλοσοφίας τιθέμενος ἥσθη τε τοῖς λεγομένοις
[Section 16] And that is as I remember how the discussion of the arithmetical and
mathematical encomia to the letter E came to its endhellip
Section 17 Ammonius in as much as he too believed that a not negligible part of
philosophy is found in the study of mathematics was pleased with the direction of
the discussion
The first sentence contains an aside to Sarapion and the second an authorial observation on
Ammoniusrsquo state of mind which can be interpreted also as an aside to Sarapion Thus the
109
referent of the ldquoIrdquo is Plutarch the letter writer and the sentence beginning section 17 is an
authorial intervention describing Ammoniusrsquo state of mind
ALThese interventions remind us of the temporal layers in the dialogue and its air of
nostalgia a nostalgia that is also obvious elsewhere in the Pythian dialogues Plutarchrsquos
references and allusions to thinkers of the past Homer the seven Sages Hesiod Heraclitus
and Pythagoras add to the effect In De E when we listen to the conversation of those seated
by the temple we are taken back to these philosophers who lived even before Cratylus Plato
and Aristotle In the introduction Plutarch describes to Sarapion the group at the temple at
Delphi and his own sons (1 385 A) an image mirrored by the group surrounding Ammonius
many years before (1 385 B) Plutarch goes even further by seeking from Sarapion reports of
similar discourses which reflects the image of these discourses into the future Plutarchrsquos self-
referencing goes beyond his implication in his own story to the implication of his own story in
a series of stories going back in time to the seven Sages and potentially forward into the
future Plutarch gives us no markers to his own time except for the references to Augustus
and Nero and we are lulled on gentle tides between the ldquopresentrdquo of the letter to Sarapion and
the implied future of return gifts from him the ldquorecentrdquo encounter between Plutarch and his
sons and the recollections of the mature Plutarch on the ldquopastrdquo where Young Plutarch his
brother Lamprias and their friends cavort under the intellectual guidance of Ammonius This
returns us to the reciprocal and reflexive giving of gifts described by the reversion from
Dichaearchus to Euripides to Archelaus in the opening lines of the dialogue The dialoguersquos
first word στιχίδιον announces and describes the dialoguersquos own structure The word
describes the whole just as Plutarch describes his own self within the dialogue
FLAUBERT AND AUSTEN LE DISCOURS INDIRECT LIBRE
110
To my knowledge only Flaceliegravere Wilamowitz and Klotz have commented on Plutarchrsquos
modes of speech and narration in the dialogues Their textual analyses suggest Plutarchrsquos skill
and sophistication but do not venture far into a literary analysis Only Klotz comments on the
fluid nature of time in much of Plutarchrsquos work which is I believe a direct result of his
narrative style The analysis of direct speech is straightforward the text gives us what the
character is supposed to have said in the characterrsquos own words The only caution is of
course that it is Plutarch the puppet-master who is putting these words into their mouths
Plato made a distinction between narration (diegesis) or authorial presentation on the one
hand and imitation (mimesis) on the other9 In direct discourse a writer speaks in the person
of another assimilating his style to that persons manner of speaking just as an actor does
when using voice and gesture he imitates the person whose character he assumes When a
writer uses direct speech for his characters it is the character who speaks to us but in indirect
discourse our understanding of the character is filtered through the thoughts of the writer
Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses has been analysed in much the same way by Andrew Laird
He contrasts the use of the first-person voice in discourse and the third in narration He finds
that ancient theorists did not often recognise the differences between literary expression in the
first and third persons He then analyses several examples of free indirect discourse in the
Metamorphoses which we need not go into but he finds the first and third persons used to the
9 Modern writers have explored the use of mimesis and diegesis in classical biography and fiction
Andrew Laird (ldquoPerson lsquoPersonarsquo and Representation in Apuleiusrsquos Metamorphosesrdquo Materiali e
Discussioni per LrsquoAnalisi dei Testi Classici (25 [1990] 129-64) explores the distinction between the
historical author and his (or her) fictional persona using Lucianrsquos Metamorphoses See also Tim
Whitmarsh ldquoAn I for an I reading fictional autobiographyrdquo in The Authorrsquos Voice in Classical and
Late Antiquity by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill Oxford 2013
111
same end that we discovered when reading De E Lairdrsquos description and interpretation of free
indirect discourse is like that which we saw in sections 7 and 8
The interesting quality of [these] instances of free indirect discourse in Apuleiuss
narrative is that they could be quotations of articulate thoughts of Lucius the
character made at the time described Or they can be discursive utterances given by
Lucius the narrator at the time of narration ndash probably this is how they would strike
a listener there are no declarative verbs of saying or thinking and the exclamations
are enclosed in pure narrative But we must really entertain both possibilities ndash a
synthesis of two voices character and narrator which respectively epitomise our
two modes namely narrative and discourse The quotation of the characters words
is the property of narrative the expression of the narratorrsquos current sentiment is the
property of discourse
The ldquoexpression of the narratorrsquos current sentimentrdquo in De E is contained in those
parenthetical remarks that I have described as being directed to Sarapion to whom Plutarchrsquos
letter is addressed Laird continues that the Metamorphoses combines elements of narrative
and discursive genres for its stylistic techniques such as apostrophe occupatio a specific
type of free indirect discourse and self reference He claims that none of these features were
conspicuous in prose fiction either Latin or Greek before Apuleius Laird may be right that
Apuleius was the first to use these figures so extensively Plutarch also uses them but no one
would describe Plutarchrsquos dialogues as ldquofictionrdquo nor would they unhesitatingly call them
ldquodiscoursesrdquo Plutarch writes in the first person as he would in a discourse but he also uses
the figures emblematic of fiction given by Laird and uses them with skill and sophistication
Narrative can also be varied by using correspondence inserted quotations and
flashbacks as well as changes in the scope of the voice of the narrator It can also be varied
by using free indirect discourse where there is no abrupt jump the from narrators
112
consciousness to the characterrsquos consciousness10 The two literary writers best known for their
use of this style and probably the most studied are Jane Austen and Gustave Flaubert This
paper is not about them but they must be mentioned On the other hand their work has been
analysed so often and so exhaustively that it is difficult to say anything fresh My only
contribution is that one can see a family resemblance between Plutarchrsquos insinuation of his
own persona into his writing and the more developed technique of Flaubert and Austen and
much modern experimental literature We can appreciate that even two millennia ago writers
such as Plato Aristotle and Plutarch were interested in the techniques of writing
Consider what is possibly the best known first sentence in an English novel ldquoIt is a
truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in
want of a wiferdquo (Pride and Prejudice 1813) Austen has defined the clause ldquothat a single man
in possessionhelliprdquo as a ldquotruerdquo statement (ldquoa truth universally acknowledgedrdquo) even as she
undermines it by subordinating it The truncated statement ldquoa single man in possession of a
good fortune must be in want of a wiferdquo as a complete sentence gives a different impression
If this were the opening sentence one would expect a different novel perhaps just a
10 I have consulted the following sources on the history and theory of discours indirect libre
P Hernadi Dual Perspective Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Comparative
Literature (24 (1972) 32-43) Paul Hernadi Verbal Worlds between Action and Vision College
English (33 (1971)18-31) Norman Friedman Point of View in Fiction The Development of a
Critical Concept (PMLA 70 5 (1955) 1160-184) and Yun Lee Too The idea of ancient literary
criticism (Oxford New York Clarendon Press 1998) and Bernard Cerquiglini laquo Le style indirect
libre et la moderniteacute raquo in Langages 73 (1984) 7-16 Norman Friedman has associated Socrates
three styles of poetry with modern telling and showingrdquo and Paul Hernadi explores the dual roles
of literature as representation (mimesis) and presentation (narration)
113
romance11 Similarly at the end of section 7 in De E the irony arises from the two different
viewpoints contained in a compound sentence The sentence sets up a tension between the
narrator and those who might acknowledge the truth of the statement We the readers are left
to ponder the strength of ldquouniversallyrdquo and whether even if some find the statement true we
can go so far as to say this its truth is acknowledged by all Surely the author is taking too
much upon herself with such a categorical statement
Stephen Ullmann describes Flaubertrsquos mature use of indirect style in Madame Bovary
in statistical terms Flaubert has as many as five instances of the style to a page of the novel
more than Ullman has seen in other works Certainly the instances are more frequent than the
three that I have found in De E (which is certainly shorter than Madame Bovary) I give the
celebrated image of Emma as a good mother (1856 part ii 4 147) ldquoElle deacuteclarait adorer les
enfants crsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie et elle accompagnait ses caresses
drsquoexpansions lyriques qui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la Sachette de
Notre-Damerdquo As Ullmann tells us ldquoGrammatically lsquocrsquoeacutetait sa consolation sa joie sa folie
might be the authors own words but the reader knows from the context that it is Emma not
Flaubert who is speaking and that she is not telling the truthrdquo (Ullman 109) We know that it
cannot be the narrator who tells us that Emmas little child was a joy and consolation for her
Rather reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what
she is not ndash a devoted mother Ullmann does not quote the last part of the sentence where it is
not Emma who speaks but the narrator ldquoqui agrave drsquoautres qursquoagrave des Yonvillais eussent rappeleacute la
11 Laird cites this sentence saying ldquomoralizing such as we find in Jane Austen is discourse not
narrativerdquo (Laird ldquoPerson Personardquo 136)
114
Sachette de Notre-Damerdquo Here Flaubert uses an extravagant comparison to Sachette (from
The Hunchback of Notre Dame who idolised her baby daughter Esmeralda unfortunately
stolen by gypsies) to tell us that those who did not know Emma (ie those who did not live in
Yonville) might well be persuaded to see her as another doting mother Thus after letting
Emma convict herself out of her own mouth the narrator then steps into the minds of those
who do not know her and hypothesises on their reactions to her words if they could have
heard them A fine and intricate mixture of authorial commentary
The precise genre of De E has been the subject of debate some seeing it as a didactic
piece or as a discourse on religious themes By coincidence Appendix A led us to read and
consider Fink and Heideggerrsquos Heraclitus Seminar(1970) whose declared purpose was to
explore the thinking of Heraclitus
Our seminar is not concerned with a spectacular business It is however concerned
with a serious-minded work Our common attempt at reflection will not be free from
certain disappointments and defeats Nevertheless reading the attempts of an ancient
thinker we make the attempt to come into the spiritual movement that releases us
that releases us to the matter that merits being named the manner of thinking
There are echoes here of Ammoniusrsquo introduction to the interpretation of the E given two
millennia ago Plutarch is also engaged with a serious-minded work but not one that is
spectacular or portentous The subject of the E is not a showy or pressing philosophical
problem but it could through collegial debate and discussion lead to intellectually satisfying
ideas and conclusions The Heraclitus Seminar then proceeds into a dialogue on the
fragments just as De E proceeds into different interpretations of the E But there the similarity
ends the narrative style of the two seminars differs
The Heraclitus Seminar is written entirely in direct speech with each speaker
identified (as De Pyth began in the first two sections) although only Fink and Heidegger are
115
identified by name The other participants are called generically ldquoParticipantrdquo Fink
Heidegger and the participants are all on the same plane equal partners in the dialogue
There is no authorial presence and we could imagine that the report of the seminar is a
transcript by a court reporter or a transcript of a sound recording of the meeting The whole
thing is quite bloodless Professor Heidegger has the last word
At the close I would like the Greeks to be honoured and I return to the seven Sages
From Periander of Corinth we have the sentence he spoke in a premonition μελετα
το πᾶν ldquoΙn care take the whole as a wholerdquo Another word that comes from him is
this φυσεως καταγορια Hinting at making nature visible
Heideggerrsquos concept of a philosophical dialogue could be Plutarchrsquos or Ammoniusrsquo The
approach to truth and true understanding proceeds through stages of conversation thinking
and learning
Plutarchrsquos procedure is different He uses his literary skills to embellish his prose with
literary devices character sketches indirect discourse and through authorial interventions
that scramble discourse with narrative This makes for a richer mix than Heidegger gives us in
his exemplary but plain style We come away from Heraclitus Seminar with questions and
comments about the philosophy of Heraclitus but none about the comportment or
personalities of the participants at the seminar Whether one believes that questions such as
who Theon was is a disfigurement or an embellishment to the basic question of the meaning
of the E is entirely personal It suffices here to say that Plutarch has chosen to write a
dialogue that is more than a bare-bones discourse on a philosophical problem
116
APPENDIX C THE TETRACTYS
Live primrose then and thrive
With thy true number five
And woman whom this flower doth represent
With this mysterious number be content
Ten is the farthest number if half ten
Belongs to each woman then
Each woman may take half us men
Ormdashif this will not serve their turnmdashsince all
Numbers are odd or even and they fall
First into five women may take us all
mdash ldquoThe Primroserdquo John Donne (1572-1631)
The word ldquotetractysrdquo is not used in De E but its meaning is implicit in almost every
discussion of numbers there especially in sections 8 and 10 Young Plutarchrsquos exposition of
arithmology in section 8 focusses on the number five the pentad but the context is the decad
the system of the numbers between one and ten represented by the tetractys1 In section 10
1 Waterfield (1988 23) distinguishes arithmology from the hard science of mathematics (for example
Euclid) Jean-Pierre Brach asks how the two types of arithmetic mathematical and the analogical are
related and how such a relation can be justified philosophically and conceptually He finds that the
ldquothe rather disorderly and uncritical accounts in the few Hellenistic sources left to usrdquo leave those
questions unanswered These sources are Nicomachus of Gerasa Theology of Arithmetic (surviving
fragments in Photius Bibliothegraveque [cod 187] 40-48) Anatolius On the Decad and Iamblichus
Theology of Arithmetic (See ldquoMathematical Esotericism Some Perspectives on Renaissance
Arithmologyrdquo In Hermes in the Academy By Wouter J Hanegraaf and Joce Pijnenburg (eds)
Amsterdam University Press 2009 Pp 75-89
117
he advocates the highly mathematical approach to musical harmony developed by the
Pythagoreans where we recognize the commonality of the tetractys with the tetrachord
The OED dates the first use of the word to Dr Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of
De Is where he transliterates the word and yokes it to its Latin translation ldquothat famous
quaternarie [of the Pythagoreans] named Tetractysrdquo In the same passage Babbitt contents
himself with ldquothe so-called sacred quaternionrdquo Perhaps through inadvertence Holland uses
quaternerie for tetractys in De an procr where tetractys again appears2 The notion of
ldquofournessrdquo comes through in lsquoquarternaryrsquo but the Pythagorean understanding of the tetractys
is so foreign to our modern intuition of arithmetic that the similarly foreign looking Greek
word is probably preferable to the Latin then we can remember that it means something more
than ldquofourrdquo or a ldquoset of fourrdquo Figure 1 illustrates the notion of fourness in the tetractys and
its identification with the decad (and the universe) as the ldquofour is the tenrdquo according to
Pythagorean lore
Jean-PieRRe BRacHyancient arithmological writings including principally those of Varro Philo
Nicomachus Theon of Smyrna Anatolius the compilator of the Theologumena Arithmeticae
Chalcidius Macrobius Martianus Capella Favonius Eulogius and Johannes Laurentius Lydus
Θεολογούμενα αριθμητικης
2 OED sv ldquotetractysrdquo The word has four entries all associated with either Pythagoras or Plato The
1846 entry is a convoluted joke that will etch forever the meaning of the word in the readerrsquos mind In
the foreword to a collection of four works by Richard Baxter (an English Puritan church leader poet
hymnodist and theologian) Professor T W Jenkyn writes ldquoThose who understand what Tetractysm
was to the Pythagoreans will comprehend what Triadism was to Baxterrdquo Baxterrsquos Nachleben also
includes several spots on YouTube See ldquoThe Signs amp Causes of Depression - Puritan Richard
Baxterrdquo httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=WJLd3vsVpc
118
Figure 1 The Pythagorean tetractys
This triangular figure in its completeness represents the unity of the decad and of the
cosmos It contains ten elements representing the first ten integers and four rows representing
the first four numbers In modern arithmetic we represent this as
1 +2+3 +4 = 10
It is not obvious from this equation that ten is a triangular number but it follows from
the arithmetic definition the sum of the first four integers Triangular numbers are formed
from the sum of a set of consecutive integers starting from one The first six triangular
numbers are 3 6 10 15 21 28 36
This appendix relies heavily on Waterfieldrsquos translation of Iamblichusrsquo Theology of
Arithmetic (τa θεολογουμενα της αριθμητικής) written after Plutarch lived and centuries after
the Pythagoreans were philosophising and arithmetising The manuscript was first edited in
1817 Thought to have been compiled by Iamblichus its chief sources are Anatolius and the
Theologoumena Arithmeticae of Nicomachus of Gerasa3 Keith Critchlow in his introduction
3 These names appear above in rough reverse chronological order For greater clarity I give their
generally accepted dates in chronological order Pythagoras (fl 540 BC) Nichomachus (fl100)
Plutarch (c 50-c 120) Anatolius of Alexandria (fl 269) Iamblichus (245 ndash c 325) Aetius (391-454)
On these dates it is not impossible that Plutarch knew of Nichomachusrsquo work but these dates may not
119
to Waterfieldrsquos translation quotes Aetius who relates Pythagorasrsquo description of numbers as
ldquothe first principlesrdquo and their interrelations as ldquoharmoniesrdquo (Waterfield 1988 9) Today we
might call such harmonies ldquothe structure of the number systemrdquo Furthermore these numbers
were not generated by a succession or a progression but rather represent a unity with ten
different qualities This structure is beautiful and harmony is indeed an apt description of it
Armand Delatte notes that in antiquity there was a pseudo-science of the numbers and
their properties that today we could not decently call ldquoarithmeticrdquo As to the coining of the
word ldquoarithmologyrdquo he adds4
It is found for the first time to my knowledge in a fragment of Codex Atheniensis
of the eighteenth centuryhellip Under the title Aριθμολγία ηθιχή (ethical arithmology)
the author has grouped series of numbers describing actions honest or dishonest
pious or impious found in the sacred writings of the Old Testament (Solomon
Sirach etc) (1915 139)
Waterfield has similar reservations about the enterprise of Pythagorean number theory For
the Pythagoreans ldquoGod manifests in the mathematical laws that govern everything and the
understanding of these laws and simply doing mathematics could bring one closer to Godrdquo
be right There is a story that Nichomachus was born a generation and a half later than the date given
above based on the belief that the cycle of Pythagorasrsquo regular reincarnations was 216 years
The story goes that Proclus the Neoplatonist (born 412) had a dream that he was a successor of
Pythagoras and hence his immediate predecessor must have died in the year 196 J M Dillon (A
Date for the Death of Nicomachus of Gerasa Classical Review 19 (1969) 274-75) traces out the
argument that led to identifying this person as Nicomachus of Gerasa Dillon then argues that
Nicomachus could have been born no earlier than 120 ndash too late to know Plutarch or for Plutarch to
know of him
4 My translation Delatte gives the reference for the codex (Bibliothegraveque de la Chambre n 65) f08
198a sq
120
(Waterfield 1988 24) Thus the name arithmology designates remarks on the structure and
importance of the first ten numbers where sober scientific thought and religious and
philosophical conjectures are mixed together
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the four basic musical intervals the fourth fifth
octave and double octave also the Platonic point line plane and solid it reflects the
understanding that the Greeks (and many) barbarians counted from one to ten and then started
again at one Pythagoras is said to have remarked ldquoWhat you suppose is four is really ten and
a perfect triangle and our oath5 The word ldquotetractysrdquo appears in two essays in the Moralia
De Is and several times in De an Procr
In De Is Plutarch is describing Egyptian religion to his friend Clea a priestess at
Delphi explaining that the Egyptians link the names of their kings to the numbers This
reminds him of similar properties in number theory where the Pythagoreans gave numbers
and geometric figures the names of the gods The number 36 (the sum of the first four odd
numbers and the first four even numbers) was called the holy tetractys and used for the most
sacred of oaths This number too resonates with the notion of ldquofournessrdquo6
Plutarch wrote De an Procr (14 1027 E 1019 A-B) to help his teenage sons
understand Platorsquos Timaeus Given its purpose Plutarch is not breaking new ground but
providing a teaching tool We are interested only in his construction of the third tectractys the
Platonic Lambda (see figure 3) Plutarch begins by paraphrasing Timaeus (35b 4) and then
5 Armand Delatte Eacutetudes sur la Litteacuterature Pythagoricienne (Paris Librairie ancienne Honoreacute
Champion 1915) 249-268
6Thirty-six is also a triangular number (the sum of the first eight numbers) a square number a perfect
number and the product of two square numbers (4 x 9) It is also an ErdősndashWoods number
121
explains the seven numbers the advantages of placing them in a lambda formation rather
than a straight line and finally how they are used in the composition of the soul (the last is not
pursued here)
Platorsquos Lambda (Timaeus 35b-c) can be presented as a type of tetractys one that still
displays ldquofournessrdquo but where numbers replace counters7
1
2 3
4 9
8 27
Figure 2 The Platonic Lambda
At the apex is the monad the non-spatial source of all number Moving down the rows the
two planar numbers (2 and 3) can be represented by dots in the shapes of plane figures an
oblong and a triangle) they are followed by two square numbers (4 and 9) and then two
cubic numbers (8 and 27)8 The sum of these is 54 Plato used these seven numbers in the
Timaeus to describe the creation of the world from the monad through the point the plane
7 Probably called lambda by Crantor of Soli one of Platorsquos students and an interpreter of the
Timaeus who contributed to the discussion of the world-soul interpreting its base number as 384 and
arranging its harmonic divisions in a lambda-shaped diagram rather than a straight line (See Harold
Tarrant Platorsquos First Interpreters (Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000 53-55)
8 In Timaeus these numbers are presented in the sequence 1 2 3 4 9 8 27 The placement of the
nine before the eight may seem odd but when the numbers are placed in a lambda the oddness
disappears the numbers are ordered down each leg of the lambda and numbers are not compared
across the horizontal
122
and then the third dimension The two legs represent the opposition between even (difference)
and odd (sameness) and the progression through the powers from the point to the square to the
cube
We then fill in the Lambda to make a Platonic tetractys using the patterning on each
of the arms 2 x 3 =6 and 2 x 6 = 12 similarly 3 x 2 = 6 and 3 x 6 = 18 Furthermore the
central number 6 serves to harmonise the odd and the even it is the geometric mean of (4 9)
(2 18) and (3 12)) Critchlow adds that these new numbers (6 1218) sum to 36 as do the
three apexes of the triangle (1 8 27) Waterfield remarks that this diagram ldquonow contains all
the factors of 36 which as our author [Plato in Timaeus] says sum to 55rdquo 9 As we see in
section 10 this tetractys provides a calculator for analysing musical harmony
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
Figure 3 The ldquofilled inrdquo Platonic Lambda or numbered Pythagorean tetractys
Plutarch notes that the three new numbers filling in the open positions in the Lambda turn the
figure into another tetractys that is another triangle (summing to another triangular number)
still representing unity but no longer the decad Waterfield adds
9 The sum of the two separate legs of the Lambda is also 55 Some numbers are perfect in that they
are equal to the sum of their factors One that we have already met is 6 (with factors 1 2 3) others are
28 496 and 8 128 The number 36 is not perfect (under the strict definition given above)
123
Even if Plato himself did not suggest the lambda form in the Timaeus yet because of
the convention of triangular numbering and the image of the tetraktys in four lines of
dots were completely familiar to the Pythagoreans of the day it would be inevitable
that they would make the comparison The idea of doing so is not new the pattern
we are about to investigate was in fact published by the Pythagorean Nicomachus
of Gerasa in the second century AD
The Pythagorean tetractys contains the first ten integers displayed with ten counters this
tetrad contains in its ten integers all the integers from one to ninety which can be produced
by judicious addition of the ten numbers in the tetractys The Platonic Lambda has several
attributes involving the number 6 the ldquomarriagerdquo number in Pythagorean theory (Waterfield
1988 29) The sum of each of the three geometric means is 36 (that is 6x6) and all eight of
the factors of 36 appear in the triangle Most fascinating of all if we ldquonestrdquo these geometric
means inside the Platonic Lambda we can continue to create as many new lambdas and
tetractyses as we please
First consider the tetractys created by Critchlow following the work of the Franciscan
friar Francesco Giorgi (1466-1540) Critchlow creates a new tetrad with the central number
36 by multiplying all the numbers in the tetractys in figure 3 by six10
10 This figure corresponds to Critchlowrsquos figure 14 see Critchlow (Waterfield 1988 18) For more
information on Giorgio and his work Critchlow (an architect himself) directs us to R Wittkowa
Architectural Principles in an Age of Humanism (W W Norton New York 1971) Another source is
Chapter Four ldquoThe Cabalist Friar of Venice Francesco Giorgirdquo in Yates (1979 33-42)
124
6
12 18
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
Figure 4 The tetractys of Francesco Giorgi
I offer an alternative derivation (which I have not seen elsewhere) relying on the generation
of the numbers in the Platonic tetractys from the two original numbers This motivates the
construction of Critchlowrsquos figures while staying true to the methods of the Pythagoreans I
give below a diagram of ldquonestedrdquo Platonic Lambdas all derived for the source of all number
the monad
1
2 3
4 6 9
8 12 18 27
24 36 54
48 72 108 162
144 216 324
288 432 648 972
Figure 5 Nested Platonic Lambdas The figure shows a sequence of stacked lambdas
(or inverted Vs) At the top of the stack is the familiar Platonic Lambda (in bold) Below it
lies a lambda (un-bolded) containing Critchlowrsquos numbers
At the apex of the pyramid is the monad or 20middot30 The identity n0 = 1 is consistent with and
sympathetic to the Greek understanding that the source of all number is the monad and it
vindicates the procedure of taking powers of the first two numbers (2 and 3) to generate the
125
table11 This table provides all the integers that have the numbers 2 and 3 as factors and it is a
limited application of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic (or the unique factorization
theorem) This theorem states that every integer greater than 1 is either is a prime number
itself or can be represented as the product of prime numbers and that moreover this
representation is unique except for the order of the factors This application is limited
because it uses only the first two prime numbers12
he family resemblance between this table Pascalrsquos triangle and the binomial theorem is
unmistakable
Keith Critchlow generates two tetractyses and asserts that one can build more for
which I have provided a template Theon of Smyrna may be the originator of this idea he
certainly understood it Asked how many tetractyses there are and what they signified he
replied first giving the Pythagorean oath ldquoI swear by the one who has bestowed the tetractys
the source of eternal nature upon coming generations and into our soulsrdquo and then listed
eleven tetractyses After the first and second tetractyses (the Pythagorean and Platonic) he
drifted into arithmology and I give only the last two the tenth is that of the seasons of the
year ndash spring summer autumn and winter and the eleventh is that of the ages childhood
11 Nested lambdas (and tetractyses) have an additional advantage the computational ease of
constructing new elements and new tetractyses
12 Gauss provides a statement and proof of the theorem using modular arithmetic (Disquisitiones
Arithmeticae 1801) Euclid set out the basic notion of the theorem in Elements Book VII
propositions 30 31 and 32 and continues the discussion in Elements Book IX proposition 14
126
adolescence maturity and old age13 All his constructions break into four parts but aside from
the first two they do not have the arithmetical inter-connectedness of the Pythagorean and
Platonic tetractyses The examples that he gives are often seen in arithmological discussion of
the properties of the tetrad (Waterfield 1988 55-63) His recital is like Young Plutarchrsquos
recital of the appearances of the pentad
Nested lambdas have an additional advantage the computational ease in constructing
them Professor Critchlow went to considerable trouble to demonstrate through their
properties as arithmetic geometric and harmonic means that 6 12 and 18 were the ldquoright
numbersrdquo to fill out the Platonic tetractys In the schema shown in figure 5 the pattern of the
powers of the two basic numbers (2 and 3) allows us to simply follow the progression in the
earlier rows and columns After the initial two rows a pattern is established of alternating
rows containing three and four elements In each row the sum of the powers of the two basic
numbers is constant and that constant increases by one is each successive row For example
the next (and ninth) row in the table will have three elements and the powers will sum to
eight The three elements will be 25middot33 24middot34 and 23middot35 and a quick calculation gives the
numbers 864 1296 and 1944
Other important numbers drop out of the tetractys I mention three the life span of the
hamadryads the number of the Great Year and Platorsquos number (5040)
13 See Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding Plato translated from the 1892
GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego Wizards Bookshelf
1979)
127
In De def or (11 415 F and 416 B) Lamprias (now grown up) reports on an old
riddle from Hesiod on calculating the lifespan of the hamadryads The discussion a ldquowitchesrsquo
brew of erudition and speculationrdquo (Kahn 1979 155) invokes many of the usual authorities
Zoroaster Homer Orpheus Plato Pindar Hesiod and Heraclitus The tetractys is not
mentioned but when Demetrios argues that fifty-four is the limit of the middle years of a
vigorous manrsquos life and explaining that fifty-four is the sum of ldquothe first number the first two
plane surfaces two squares and two cubesrdquo we know that we are in Pythagorean territory
These are the seven numbers in Platorsquos Lambda The interested reader can check that the
lifespans of crows stags vigorous men ravens phoenixes and hamadryads all the beings in
Hesiodrsquos riddle appear in figure 5
The Great Year comes every 10800 years when the sun the moon and the planets
having completed an integral (but different) number of revolutions return to the positions that
they were in at the beginning of this great cycle (Timaeus 39) Then according to the Stoics
the cycle culminates in the conflagration destruction and renewal of the cosmos One
derivation of the number 10800 is four seasons of three months each with 30 days in a
month yields the year (4 x 3x 30 =360) treating each day of the year as a human generation
of 30 years yields gives the Great Year (30 x 360=10800) This recalls the Heraclitean
fragment (Diels A 13)
There is a great year whose winter is a great flood and whose summer is a world
conflagration In these alternating periods the world is now going up in flames now
turning into water This cycle consists of 10800 years (Censorinus De Die
Natali 1811)
The careful reader will have noticed that 10800 does not appear in figure 5 although both 108
and 432 do (both factors of 10800) Not every interesting number in classical philosophy can
128
be computed from the Pythagorean and Platonic tetractyses The two tables are limited in that
they contain powers of only the first odd and the first even numbers The next step would be
to construct tables containing the next prime numbers (3 and 5) Then the number of the Great
Year can be computed from either of the two numbers shown in figure 5
432 x 25 = 432 x 5 x 5 = 10800
108 x 100 = 108 x 4 x 25 = 10800
Similarly to calculate Platorsquos number (Laws 737e1-3) from figure 5 we need the next
prime number seven The number can then be derived from 144 in the second last row in
Figure 5 5040 = 7 x 5 x 144
The number 5040 has many beguiling properties one of which is its appearance in Srinivas
Ramanujanrsquos list of highly composite numbers and it is indeed a ldquosuperior highly composite
numberrdquo14
The real charm of these numbers is that the world has come around at least in the
last two hundred years to the serious study of numbers and to a re-examination of ancient
number theory Many of the numbers that the ancients found pretty or intriguing are showing
14 Benjamin Jowett comments ldquoWriting under Pythagorean influences he [Plato] seems really to
have supposed that the well-being of the city depended almost as much on the number 5040 as on
justice and moderationrdquo (Platorsquos Laws translated by Benjamin Jowett 1871)
The number 5040 is a factorial (7) and one less than the square 5041 making (7 71) a Brown
number pair (and the largest of the three known pairs) a superior highly composite number a
colossally abundant number the number of permutations of four items out of ten choices (10 x 9 x 8 x
7 = 5040) and the sum of forty-two consecutive primes starting with the number 23 Given Plutarchrsquos
interest in the number 36 it is worth looking at the factors of 5040 We can write it as 36 x 2 x 70
which leads us back into the second row of figure 5
129
up in advanced mathematics Who could have imagined that after two and a half millennia
we would see the names of two of the modern greats in number theory Srinivas Ramanujan
and Paul Erdős appearing in the same paragraph as Plato and Pythagoras (the latter at least
implicitly) For example Jean-Pierre Kahane (2015) writes in his remembrance of Paul
Erdős
Jean-Louis Nicholas collaborated with Paul and wrote beautiful papers about him
As a detail let me mention their common interest in highly composite numbers a
term coined by Ramanujan for numbers like 60 or 5040 that have more divisors than
any smaller number My own interest was in the implicit occurrence of the notion in
Platorsquos Utopia 5040 is the best number of citizens in a city because it is highly
divisible (Laws 771c)
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS OF PLUTARCHrsquoS ldquoMORALIArdquo
This list includes both complete collections of the Moralia and editions of selected essays
that include De E Other selections without De E appear in the Select Bibliography below
For example Philemon Hollandrsquos 1603 translation of the complete works appears here but
not the reprint Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays
Amyot Jacques Oeuvres morales et mesleacutees de Plutarque Paris Chez Barthelemy Maceacute au
mont S Hilaire agrave lEscu de Bretaigne 1572
Babbitt F C ed and trans ldquoThe E at Delphirdquo in Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes
Loeb Classical Library Vol 5 London and Cambridge Mass Harvard University
Press 1927-2004
Bernardakis G N ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensi Vol 3 Leipzig Teubner 1894
Bernardakis Panagiotes D and Henricus Gerardus Ingenkamp eds Plutarchi Chaeronensis
Moralia recognovit Gregorius N Bernardakis Editionem Maiorem Vols 1-7
Athens Academy of Athens 2008-2013
Dryden John ed Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several hands London
1684-94
Ducas Demetrios ed Plutarch Moralia Venice Aldus Manutius and Andreas Torresanus
1509
Estienne Henri [Henricus Stephanus] Plutarchi Chaeronensis Ethica sive Moralia Opera
Geneva 1572
131
Flaceliegravere Robert ed and trans Plutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes Paris Les Belles Lettres
1941
mdashmdashmdash ed and trans Plutarque œuvres morales Dialogues Pythiques Vol 4 Paris Les
Belles Lettres 1974
Goodwin W W ed and trans Plutarchs Morals Translated from the Greek by several
hands with an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson 5 vols Cambridge Little
Brown and Company 1878
Holland Philemon trans Plutarch The Philosophy Commonly Called the Morals 1603
Revised Corrected and Printed by George Sawbridge at the Sign of the Bible on
Ludgate-Hill 1657
Ildefonse Freacutedeacuterique trans Dialogues Pythiques Paris Flammarion 2006
Obsieger Hendrik De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel in Delphi
Einfuumlhrung Ausgabe und Kommentar Stuttgart Franz Steiner Verlag 2013
Paton W R ed Plutarchi Pythici dialogi tres Berlin Weidmann 1893
Plutarchrsquos Moralia in Sixteen Volumes LCL with an English translation London and
Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1927-2004
Plutarchi Moralia recensuerent et emendaverunt W Nachstaumldt W Sieveking and
J B Titchener Leipsig Teubner 1985
Prickard A O trans Selected Essays of Plutarch Vol 2 Oxford Clarendon 1918
Ricard Dominique trans Oeuvres morales de Plutarque Paris Lefegravevre 1844
Stephanus Henricus See Estienne Henri
Wyttenbach Daniel ed and trans Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia id est opera exceptis
vitis reliqua Graeca emendavit notationem emendationem et Latinam Xylandri
interpretationem castigatam subiunxit animadversiones explicandis rebus ac verbis
item indices copiosos adiecit D Wyttenbach Editio nova annotatione et indice aucta
tomi II pars II Leipzig 1828 (Reprinted in eight volumes in 1962 by Georg Olms
Verlag Hildesheim The last two volumes contain the Greek lexicon)
132
SELECT BIBILIOGRAPHY
This list is not a complete record of all the works and sources I have consulted It includes
most references found in the commentary and in the introductory material and appendices A
few references on topics that are of only passing interest for the dialogue appear with full
bibliographic information in the introductory material and appendices
Aalders G J D ldquoPolitical Thought in Plutarchs lsquoConvivium Septum Sapientiumrsquordquo
Mnemosyne 30 1 (1977) 28-39
Acerbi F ldquoOn the Shoulders of Hipparchus A Reappraisal of Ancient Greek
Combinatoricsrdquo Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57 (September 2003) 465-502
Ademollo Francesco The Cratylus of Plato A Commentary Cambridge Cambridge
University Press 2011
Afonasin E V John M Dillon and John F Finamore eds Iamblichus and the Foundations
of Late Platonism Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Alcock Susan E John F Cherry and Jas Elsner eds Pausanias travel and memory in
Roman Greece New York Oxford University Press 2001
Amandry Pierre La Mantique Apollinienne agrave Delphes Essai sur le fonctionnement de
lOracle Paris Arno Press 1950
Aulotte Robert Amyot et Plutarque La Tradition des ldquoMoraliardquo au XVIe siegravecle Genegraveve
Librairie Droz 1965
Babut Daniel ldquoPlutarque et le Stoiumlcismerdquo Paris Presses universitaires de France 1969
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPeinture et deacutepassement de la reacutealiteacute dans le Banquet de Platonrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Anciennes 82 (1980) 5-29
mdashmdashmdashBabut Daniel ldquoLa composition des Dialogues pythiques de Plutarque et le problegraveme
de leur uniteacuterdquo Journal des savants 2 (1992) 187-234
Balmer Josephine Piecing Together the Fragments Translating Classical Verse Creating
Contemporary Poetry Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
133
Barker Andrew ldquoEarly Timaeus Commentaries and Hellenistic Musicologyrdquo Bulletin of the
Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2003) 73-87
mdashmdashmdash The Science of Harmonics in Classical Greece Cambridge Cambridge University
Press 2007
Barrow R H Plutarch and his Times London Chatto and Windus 1967
Bastide Georges and Victor Goldschmidt ldquoLe paradigme dans la dialectique platoniciennerdquo
Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 50 (1948) 371
Baxter Timothy M S The Cratylus Platorsquos Critique of Naming Leiden New York Koumlln
Brill 1992
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Berman K and L A Losada ldquoThe mysterious E at Delphi a solutionrdquo Z Papyrologie
Epigraphik 17 (1975) 115
Betz O ldquoConsiderations on the Real and the Symbolic Value of Goldrdquo In Prehistoric Gold
in Europe eds G Morteani and J P Northover 19-30 NATO ASI (Series E Applied
Sciences) vol 280 Dordrecht Springer 1995
Betz H D and Edgar W Smith Jr ldquoContributions to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi
Testamenti Plutarch lsquoDe E apud Delphosrsquordquo Novum Testamentum 13 (1971) 217-
235
Boucheacute-Leclercq Auguste ldquoLe fonctionnement de lrsquooracle de Delphesrdquo Annales de lrsquoEacutecole
des Hautes Eacutetudes de Gand II (1938) 82-84
mdashmdashmdash Histoire de la Divination dans LAntiquiteacute 4 vols Paris Ernest Leroux 1879-1892
Bowie Ewen ldquoPlutarchrsquos Habits of Citation Aspects of Differencerdquo in The Unity of
Plutarchrsquos Work lsquoMoraliarsquo Themes in the lsquoLives Features of the Lives in the
Moralia ed Anastasios G Nikolaidis 143-158 Berlin New York Walter de
Gruyter 2008
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSage and Emperor Plutarch and Literary Activity in Achaea AD 107-117rdquo in
Plutarch Greek Intellectuals and Roman Power in the Time of Trajan eds
134
Philip A Stadter and L Van der Stockt 98-117 Leuven Leuven University Press
2002
Boyanceacute P ldquoNote sur la Teacutetractysrdquo Lantiquiteacute classique 20 (1951) 421-425
mdashmdashmdash ldquoSur la vie pythagoriciennerdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Grecques 52 (1939) 36-50
Brenk Frederick E In Mist Apparelled Religious Themes in Plutarchs Moralia Leiden
Brill 1997
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarchrsquos Middle-Platonic God about to enter (or remake) the Academyrdquo in Gott
Und Die Gotter Bei Plutarch ed Rainer Hirsch Luipold 27-50 New York Berlin
Walter de Gruyter 2005
Brouillette Xavier and Angelo Giavatto Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque
Strateacutegies et Meacutethodes Exeacutegeacutetiques Leuven Leuven University Press Ancient and
Medieval Philosophy ndash Series 1 43 2010-2011
Brouillette Xavier La Philosophie Delphique de Plutarque Lrsquoitineacuteraire des Dialogues
pythiques Paris Les Belles Lettres 2014
Brumbaugh Robert S Platorsquos Mathematical Imagination Bloomington Indiana University
Press 1977
Burkert Walter Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism trans Edwin L Minar Jr
Cambridge Mass Harvard University Press 1972
Burnet John Early Greek Philosophy 4th ed London A and C Black 1930
Chappell M ldquoDelphi and the Homeric Hymn to Apollordquo Classical Quarterly 56 (2006) 331-
348
Cherniss H ldquoThe Characteristics and Effects of Presocratic Philosophyrdquo JHI 2 (I951) 319-
355
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Sources of Evil according to Platordquo Proc Am Phil Soc 98 (1954) 23-30
Chlup Radek ldquoPlutarchs Dualism and the Delphic Cultrdquo Phronesis 45 (2000) 138-158
Dalimier C Platon-Cratyle traduction ineacutedite introduction notes bibliographie et index
Paris Flammarion 1998
135
De Falco V ed Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae additions and corrections by
U Klein Stuttgart Teubner 1975
mdashmdashmdash Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae Leipzig Teubner 1922
De Wet B X ldquoPlutarchrsquos Use of the Poetsrdquo Acta Classica 31 (1988) 13-25
Delatte Armand Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne Geneva Slatkine 1974
Des Places Eacutedouard ldquoChronique de la philosophie religieuse des Grecs (1987-1991)rdquo
Bulletin de lAssociation Guillaume Budeacute Lettres dhumaniteacute 50 (1991) 414-429
Di Benedetto V 1990 ldquoAt the Origins of Greek Grammarrdquo Glotta 68 1 (1990) 19-39
Dillon John ldquoPlutarch and Platonist Orthodoxyrdquo Illinois Classical studies 13 (1988)
357-364
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and God Theodicy and Cosmogony in the Thought of Plutarchrdquo in
Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic Theology Its Background and
Aftermath ed Dorothea Frede and Andreacute Laks Leiden Boston Cologne Brill 2002
Dobson Marcia ldquoHerodotus 1471 and the Hymn to Hermes A Solution to the Test
Oraclerdquo AJP 100 (1979) 349-359
DOoge Martin Luther trans Nicomachus of Gerasa Introduction to Arithmetic Ann Arbor
University of Michigan Humanistic Series 16 London Macmillan 1926
Edmonds Radcliffe G III Redefining Ancient Orphism A Study in Greek Religion
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2013
Einarson B and P de Lacy ldquoThe Manuscript Tradition of Plutarchrsquos Moralia 548A-612Brdquo
Classical Philology 46 (1951) 93-110
Empson William Seven Types of Ambiguity 2nd ed London Chatto and Windus 1949
Fairbanks Arthur ldquoHerodotus and the Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Journal 1 (1906) 37-48
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Plutarchs Quotations from the Early Greek Philosophersrdquo TAPA 28 (1897)
75-87
Ficino Marsilio All Things Natural Ficino on Platos Timaeus trans Arthur Farndell
London Shepheard-Walwyn 2010
136
Flaceliegravere R ldquoPlutarque et la Pythierdquo Revue Des Eacutetudes Grecques 56 264265 (1943)
72-111
Fontenrose J The Delphic Oracle its responses and operations Berkeley University of
California Press 1978
Forshaw Peter J ldquoOratorium - Auditorium - Laboratorium Early Modern Improvisations on
Cabala Music and Alchemyrdquo Aries 10 (2010) 169-195
Fraumlnkel Hermann ldquoA Thought Pattern in Heraclitusrdquo AJP 59 (1938) 309-337
Franklin J C ldquoHarmony in Greek and Indo-Iranian Cosmologyrdquo Journal of Indo-European
Studies 30 (2002) 1-25
Frede Dorothea and Andreacute Laks eds Traditions of Theology Studies in Hellenistic theology
its Background and Aftermath Leiden Boston Koumlln Brill 2002
Freeman Kathleen Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers Oxford Harvard University
Press 1957
Gee Emma Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition Oxford Oxford University Press 2013
Gerber Douglas E A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leiden New York Koumlln Brill
1997
mdashmdashmdash Greek Iambic Poetry from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge Mass
Harvard University Press 1999
Goldin Owen ldquoHeraclitean Satiety and Aristotelian Actualityrdquo The Monist 74 (1991) 568-
578
Goldschmidt Victor Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne Paris Presses
Universitaires de France 1947
Grant Hardy ldquoMathematics and the Liberal Artsrdquo The College Mathematics Journal 30
(1999) 96-105
Gregory T E ldquoJulian and the last oracle at Delphirdquo GRBS 24 (1983) 355
Griffiths J Gwyn ldquoThe Delphic E A New Approachrdquo Hermes 83 (1955) 237-245
Guillon Pierre La Beacuteotie antique Paris Les Belles Lettres 1948
137
Gummere Richard M trans Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 3 vols Cambridge
Mass Harvard University Press London William Heinemann Ltd 1917-1925
Hadzsits George Depue Prolegomena to a Study of the Ethical Ideal of Plutarch and of the
Greeks of the First Century A D Cincinnati Ohio University of Cincinnati Press
1906
Hardie Alex ldquoPindarrsquos lsquoTheban Cosmogonyrsquo (The First Hymn)rdquo Bulletin of the Institute of
Classical Studies 44 (2000) 19-41
Heath Thomas History of Greek Mathematics 2 vols Oxford Clarendon 1921
mdashmdashmdash A Manual of Greek Mathematics Oxford Oxford University Press 1931 (Reprinted
by Dover New York 1968)
Heidegger Martin and Eugen Fink Heraclitus Seminar trans Charles H Seibert Evanston
Illinois Northwestern University Press 1993
Hershbell Jackson P ldquoPlutarch and Heraclitusrdquo Hermes 2 (1977) 179-201
Hodge A T ldquoThe mystery of Apollorsquos E at Delphirdquo AJA 8 (1981) 83-84
Holden H A ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Review 4 (1890) 306-07
Holland Philemon Trans Plutarchs ldquoMoraliardquo Twenty Essays London J M Dent amp
Sons 1911
Hunt A S and C C Edgar trans Private Documents Vol 1 of Select Papyri ed
Jeffrey Henderson Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1932
Huxley George ldquoPetronian Numbersrdquo Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 91 (Spring
1968) 55
Ilievski Petar ldquoThe Origin and Semantic Development of the Term Harmonyrdquo Illinois
Classical Studies18 (1993) 19-29
Imhoof-Blumer Friedrich and Percy Gardner lsquolsquoNumismatic Commentary on Pausaniasrdquo
Journal of Hellenic Studies 6 (1885) 50ndash 101 7 (1886) 57ndash 113 8 (1887) 6ndash 63)
Isenberg Meyer William ldquoThe Unity of Platos Philebusrdquo Classical Philology 35 (1940)
154-179
138
Jones C P ldquoPlutarchs Moraliardquo GampB 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPausanias and His Guidesrdquo in Pausanias travel and memory in Roman Greece 33-
39 Edited by Susan E Alcock John F Cherry and Jas Elsner New York Oxford
University Press 2001
Jones Roger Miller The Platonism of Plutarch with an introduction by Leonardo Taraacuten
New York Garland Publications 1980
Kahane Jean-Pierre ldquoBernoulli convolutions and self-similar measures after Erdős A
personal hors doeuvrerdquo Notices of the American Mathematical Society 62 (2015)
136ndash140
Kahn Charles H ldquoA New Look at Heraclitusrdquo American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)
189-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Greek verb lsquoto bersquo and the concept of beingrdquo Foundations of Language 2
(1966) 245-65
mdashmdashmdash The art and thought of Heraclitus an edition of the fragments with translation and
commentary Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1979
Kerenyi Karol Dionysos archetypal image of indestructible life Translated by Ralph
Manheim Princeton Princeton University Press 1976
Kingsley Peter In the Dark Places of Wisdom Inverness California The Golden Sufi
Centre 1999
Kirk G S ldquoNatural Change in Heraclitusrdquo Mind 60 237 (1951) 35-42
mdashmdashmdash Heraclitus The Cosmic Fragments Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1962
Korab-Karpowicz W Julian The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
New York Peter Lang 2017
Kouremenos Theokritos ldquoThe tradition of the Delian problem and its origins in the Platonic
corpusrdquo Trends in Classics 3 (2011) 341ndash364
Krappe Alexander H ldquoAΠOΛΛΩN KΥKNOΣrdquo Classical Philology 37 (1942) 353-370
139
Kurke Leslie ldquoAncient Greek Board Games and How to Play Themrdquo Classical Philology 94
(1999) 247-67
Laird Person Persona
Lamberton Robert Plutarch New Haven and London Yale University Press 2001
Lanzillotta L R ldquoPlutarch at the Crossroads of Religion and Philosophyrdquo in Plutarch in the
Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity edited by Lautaro Roig
Lanzillotta and Israel Muntildeoz Gallarte 1-21 Leiden Boston Brill 2012
Lawlor Robert and Deborah Lawlor Theon of Smyrna Mathematics useful for understanding
Plato translated from the 1892 GreekFrench edition of J Dupuis San Diego
Wizards Bookshelf 1979
Lernould Alain ldquoPlutarque sur lrsquoE de Delphes 390 B 6-8 et lrsquoexplication de la vision de
lsquoTimeacuteersquo 45 B-Drdquo Methodos 5 (2005) 1-19
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarque E de Delphes 387 d 2-9 Une interpreacutetation philosophique de leacutepisode de
lenlegravevement du treacutepied par Heacuteraclegraves une erreur de jeunesserdquo Revue des Eacutetudes
Grecques 113 (2000) 147-171
Losada L A and K Morgan ldquoThe E at Delphi Again Reply to A T Hodgerdquo AJA 85
(1984) 115-117
Lowry S Todd ldquoThe Archaeology of the Circulation Concept in Economic Theoryrdquo Journal
of the History of Ideas 35 (1974) 429-444
Marcovich M Heraclitus Greek Text with a Short Commentary Merida Venezuela Los
Andes University Press 1967
mdashmdashmdash ldquoA New Poem of Archilochus lsquoP Colonrsquo inv 7511rdquo GRBS 16 (1975) 5ndash14
Martin Hubert Jr ldquolsquoAmatoriusrsquo 756 E-F Plutarchs Citation of Parmenides and Hesiodrdquo
AJP 90 (1969) 183-200
Mates Benson ldquoDiodorean Implicationrdquo The Philosophical Review 58 (1949) 234-242
Mates Benson ldquoStoic Logic and the Text of Sextus Empiricusrdquo AJP (1949) 290-298
140
Mathiesen Thomas J Apollos lyre Greek music and music theory in antiquity and the
Middle Ages Lincoln NE and London University of Nebraska Press 1999
Mathieu J M ldquoTrois notes sur le traiteacute De EI apud Delphos de Plutarque (384E 391F-393A
393D-Erdquo Kentron 7 (1991)
McClain Ernest G ldquoA new look at Platorsquos Timaeusrdquo Music and Man 1 (2000) 341-360
McNamee Kathleen and Michael L Jacovides ldquoAnnotations to the Speech of the Muses
(Plato Republic 546B-C)rdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 144 (2003) 31-50
Meeusen Michiel Caroline ldquoPlutarch and the Wonder of Nature Preliminaries to Plutarchrsquos
Science of Physical Problemsrdquo Apeiron 47 (2014) 310-341
Merkelbach R and M L West ldquoEin Archilochos-Papyrusrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik 14
(1974) 97-113
Merker Anne La vision chez Platon et Aristote Sankt Augustin Academia Verlag 2003
Michael D Bailey Fearful Spirits Reasoned Follies The Boundaries of Superstition in Late
Medieval Europe Ithaca Cornell University Press 2013
Middleton J Henry ldquoThe Temple of Apollo at Delphirdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888)
282-322
Miller Dana R ldquoPlatorsquos Argument for the Plurality of Worlds in De Defectu Oraculorumrdquo
424c10-425e7rdquo Ancient Philosophy 17 (1997) 375-394
Mueller Ian ldquoStoic and Peripatetic Philosophyrdquo Archiv fuumlr Geschichte der Philosophie 51
(1969) 173-186
Muumlller Alexander ldquoDialogic structures and forms of knowledge in Plutarchrsquos lsquoThe E at
Delphirsquordquo Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (2012) 245-249
Naber S A ldquoObservationes Miscellaneae ad Plutarchi Moraliardquo Mnemosyne 28 (1900) 85-
117+129-156+329-364
Nordgren Lars Greek Interjections Syntax Semantics and Pragmatics Berlin Boston
Walter de Gruyter 2015
141
ldquoNote on the Symposiacs and Some Other Dialogues of Plutarchrdquo Classical Review 32
(1918) 150-53
OBrien D ldquoDerived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Centuryrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 88
(1968) 114-127
Oikonomides A N ldquoRecords of lsquoThe Commandments of the Seven Wise Menrsquo in the 3rd
century BCrdquo The Classical Bulletin 63 (1987) 67-76
Opsomer Jan Geert Roskam and Frances B Titchener eds A Versatile Gentleman
Consistency in Plutarchs Writing Leuven Leuven University Press 2016
mdashmdashmdash ldquoM Annius Ammonius A Philosophical Profilerdquo in The origins of the Platonic
system edited by M Bonazzi and J Opsomer 123-186 Louvain 2009
Palmer Richard E ldquoThe Postmodernity of Heideggerrdquo Boundary 2 4 ldquoMartin Heidegger and
Literaturerdquo (Winter 1976) 411-432
Parke H W and D E W Wormell The Delphic oracle 2 vols Oxford Blackwell 1956
Parker Robert ldquoThe Problem of the Greek Cult Epithetrdquo Opuscular Atheniensia 28 (2003)
174-183
Patrick G T W ed and trans The Fragments of the Work of Heraclitus of Ephesus on
Nature translated from the Greek text of Bywater Baltimore N Murray 1889
Pickard-Cambridge Arthur Wallace Sir Dithyramb Tragedy and Comedy Oxford
Clarendon Press 1927
Podlecki Anthony ldquoPlutarch and Athensrdquo Illinois Classical Studies 13 (1988) 231-43
Ramanujan S ldquoHighly Composite Numbersrdquo Proc London Math Soc 14 (1915) 347-409
mdashmdashmdash Collected Papers edited by G H Hardy P V S Aiyar and B M Wilson
Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1927
Riginos Alice Swift Platonica The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato
Leiden Brill 1976
Robbins F E ldquoThe Lot Oracle at Delphirdquo Classical Philology 11 (1916) 278-292
142
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPosidonius and the Sources of Pythagorean Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 15
(1920) 309-22
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Tradition of Greek Arithmologyrdquo Classical Philology 16 no 2 (1921) 97-123
Robert Louis ldquoDe Delphes a lOxus Inscriptions grecques nouvelles de la Bactrianerdquo CRAI
(1968) 442-454
Robin Leacuteon La Penseacutee Grecque Paris Editions Albin Michel 1963
mdashmdashmdash Platon Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1968
Robins R H ldquoDionysius Thrax and the Western Grammatical Traditionrdquo Transactions of the
Philological Society 56 (1957) 67-106
Rodier Georges Eacutetudes de philosophie grecque Paris Librarie philosophique J Vrin 1969
Roskam Geert Review of Plutarch De E apud Delphos Uumlber das Epsilon am Apolltempel
in Delphi by Henrik Obsieger Antiquiteacute Classique 84 (2015) 314-320
Roux Georges Delphes son oracle et ses dieux Paris Les Belles Lettres 1976
Russell D A ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Livesrdquo Greece and Rome 13 (1966) 139-154
mdashmdashmdash ldquoOn Reading Plutarchs Moraliardquo Greece and Rome 15 (1968) 130-146
mdashmdashmdash Plutarch London Duckworth 1973
Sandbach F H ldquoRhythm and Authenticity in Plutarchs Moraliardquo Classical Quarterly 33
(1939) 194-203
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch and Aristotlerdquo ICS 7 (1982) 207-232
Sansone David ldquoOn Hendiadys in Greekrdquo Glotta 62 (1984)16-25
Sedley D N ldquoThe Etymologies in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquordquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 118
(1998) 140-154
mdashmdashmdash Platorsquos Cratylus Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2003
Shilleto A R Plutarchs Morals ethical essays London George Bell and sons 1888
Sirinelli Jean Plutarque de Cheacuteroneacutee Un philosophe dans le siegravecle Paris Fayard 2000
143
Soissons Jean-Pierre Jacques Amyot (1513-1593) Chaintreux Eacuteditions France-Empire
Monde 2013
Sosiades ldquoCommandments of the Seven Wise Men (Stobaeus Anthologium 31173)rdquo in
Stobei Anthologium edited by Curt Wachsmuth and Otto Hense Vol 3 Berlin 1894
125ff
Soury D La deacutemonologie de Plutarque essai sur les ideacutees religieuses et les mythes dun
platonicien eacuteclectique Paris Belles Lettres 1942
Spitzer Leo ldquoClassical and Christian ideas of World Harmony Prolegomena to an
Interpretation of the Word lsquoStimmungrsquo Part Irdquo Traditio 2 (1944) 409-464
Stanford William Bedell Ambiguity in Greek Literature Studies in Theory and Practice
Oxford Basil Blackwell 1939
Stanley Richard P ldquoHipparchus Plutarch Schroumlder and Houghrdquo American Mathematical
Monthly 104 (1997) 344-350
Taraacuten Leonardo ldquoThe River-Fragments and their Implicationsrdquo Elenchos Rivista di Studi
Sul Pensiero Antico 20 (1999) 9-52
Tarrant D ldquoColloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly 40
(1946) 109-117
mdashmdashmdash ldquoMore Colloquialisms Semi-Proverbs and Word-Play in Platordquo Classical Quarterly
ns 8 (1958) 158-160
mdashmdashmdash ldquoGreek Metaphors of Lightrdquo Classical Quarterly 10 (1960) 181-187
Tarrant Harold Platorsquos First Interpreters Ithaca New York Cornell University Press 2000
Taylor Thomas trans Iamblichus Life of Pythagoras or Pythagoric Life London
J M Watkins 1818
Thompson E A The Last Delphic Oracle Classical Quarterly 40 (1946) 35-36
Trivigno Franco V ldquoEtymology and the Power of Names in Platorsquos lsquoCratylusrsquorsquorsquo Ancient
Philosophy 32 (2012) 35-75
144
Van Den Hoek Annewies ldquoTechniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria A View of
Ancient Literary Working Methodsrdquo Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996) 223-243
Van Sickle John ldquoThe Doctored Text Translating a New Fragment of Archilochusrdquo MLN
90 (1975) 872-85
Vlastos Gregory ldquoOn Heraclitusrdquo AJP 76 (1955) 337-368
Waterfield A H ldquoPlato Philebus 52 c1 ndash d1 Text and Meaningrdquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr
Philologie Neue Folge 129 (1986) 358-360
Waterfield Robin trans The Theology of Arithmetic On the Mystical Mathematical and
Cosmological Symbolism of the First Ten Numbers Attributed to Iamblichus
Foreword by Keith Critchlow Grand Rapids MI Phanes Press 1988
Waterfield Robin ldquoEmendations of Iamblichus Theologoumena Arithmeticae (De Falco)rdquo
Classical Quarterly 38 (1988) 215-227
Webster T B L ldquoPersonification as a Mode of Greek Thoughtrdquo Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 17 (1954) 10-21
West M L ldquoArchilochus Ludens Epilogue of the Other Editorrdquo Z Papyrologie Epigraphik
16 (1975) 217-19
mdashmdashmdash Ancient Greek music Oxford Clarendon Press 1994
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe Eternal Triangle Reflections on the Curious Cosmology of Petron of Himerardquo
in Apodosis Essays Presented to Dr W W Cruickshank to Mark His Eightieth
Birthday (London St Paulrsquos School) 1992 105-110
Wiggins D ldquoHeraclitusrsquo Conceptions of Flux Fire and Material Persistencerdquo in Language
and Logos Studies in Ancient Greek philosophy Presented to G E L Owen eds M
Schofield and M Nussbaum 1-32 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1982
Whittaker John ldquoAmmonius on the Delphic Erdquo Classical Quarterly 19 (1969) 185-192
mdashmdashmdash ldquoPlutarch Plato and Christianityrdquo in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought
Essays in Honour of AH Armstrong ed A H Armstrong H J Blumenthal and
R A Markus 50-63 Ann Arbor Variorum Publications 1981
145
mdashmdashmdash ldquoThe lsquoEternityrsquo of the Platonic Formsrdquo Phronesis 13 (1968) 131-144
Wilberding James ldquoEternity in Ancient Philosophyrdquo in Eternity ed Y Melamed 14-55
Oxford Oxford University Press 2016
Wright George T ldquoHendiadys and Hamletrdquo PMLA 96 (1981) 168-193
Yates Frances The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age London Routledge 1979
Zuntz G ldquoNotes on Plutarchrsquos Moraliardquo Rheinisches Museum fuumlr Philologie Neue Folge 96
Bd 3 (1953) 232-235