Containing the material cosmos: Tim. 36d8–e1

When the entire psychic composite had come about in accordance with the intellect (kata noun) of the one who created it, after this he framed allthat is corporeal inside of it. (Tim. 36d8–e1)

The first chapter of the discourse on the soul, as we said earlier (125.12) concerns the nature of its existence (hyparxis), while the second chapter is concerned with its harmony. The third chapter deals with the shape, and the fourth with the soul's powers. The fifth chapter deals with its activities. In all the other subjects, therefore, the philosopher has taught us most completely, but this final chapter was about the activities of the soul which he surely appends in these words. But since the form of activities in the soul is two-fold – I mean those pertain to knowing (gnôstikos) and those that are to do with motion (kinêtikos) – he will give one account that is specific to the motive powers and another one that is specific to the cognitive powers. So he will convey to us both how it moves other things by moving itself, and also how, in knowing itself, it knows the things that are prior to it and also those that are posterior to it. Such, therefore, is the purpose (skopos) of the words before us.

He did not, however, present us with any teaching about a plurality of souls in what has gone before, as some would have it, who say that the first part concerning the soul's essence dealt with what they call the unrelated (aschetos) soul, while the chapter on harmony dealt with what they call the related soul (tên en schesei), and the chapter on shape dealt with the soul that is coordinated with the body (tên en katataxei). Nor [does this part of the Timaeus deal with a multitude of souls in another sense], as others have written, saying that it introduces a single soul and seven hypercosmic souls (II. 273.26–33). That nothing like this is the case has, I think, been made sufficiently clear through what Timaeus says. For the soul that has been created by the Father in accordance with his intellect, he conjoins to the universe, arranging that which is corporeal within it.

Dramatis personae

Dates of birth and death given below are conjectural, except for Socrates.

CALICLES His boyfriend Demos, son of Plato's stepfather Pyrilampes, was in Dodds's words (Plato: Gorgias, p.261, relying here primarily on Aristophanes' Wasps 98) ‘a leading beauty about 422’. On usual assumptions about relative ages of lover and beloved, we might infer that Callicles was probably in his mid to late twenties at the same point in time. Although his ambition to succeed in politics makes Socrates describe him as lover of the Athenian demos (punning on Demos), this behaviour must be interpreted as opportunistic on Callicles' part. The views Plato attributes to him are anything but democratic. And it is probably significant that of the friends of Callicles mentioned at 487c, one at least – Andron – is known to have been a member of the short-lived oligarchic regime of the Four Hundred in 411, and the other two probably to be identified with Athenians known from other evidence to have been wealthy men. There is no trace of Callicles in history outside the Gorgias. It seems likely that for whatever reason his ambitions were unfulfilled.

CHAEREPHON (467–401) One of Socrates' oldest and closest friends, and a well-known figure in the Athens of the Peloponnesian War, frequently the topic of jokes on the comic stage, perhaps in part because of his demonic energy (Apology 21a, Charmides 153b).

The translation (by TG) is made in the case of Gorgias from the text in Dodds's edition, and in the case of Menexenus and Protagoras from Burnet's edition in the Oxford Classical Texts series. The few variations from these adopted here are mentioned in notes at the appropriate points. The notes to the translation (by MS, as with the rest of the editorial matter) have benefited in various ways from TG 's scrutiny, and the translations in their final form are the outcome of several rounds of comment from MS and rethinking by TG. Raymond Geuss and Quentin Skinner as series editors made suggestions for improvements to the draft of the introduction, all gratefully implemented. The book is therefore very much a joint production, which owes its origins to a suggestion by Jeremy Mynott, at the time Chief Executive of the Press – to whom also thanks are due.

The Gorgias and the Protagoras

The Protagoras and the Gorgias are not only the longest, but by general agreement the most important among Plato's ‘Socratic’ dialogues (the quixotic Menexenus – on which more later – is another matter). Both present Socrates in argument with leading members of the sophistic movement, questioning the claims to wisdom or expertise that they make. In both Socrates brings the discussion round to his own central preoccupation with living a good life.

But there the resemblances cease. One difference is purely formal. The Gorgias (like the Menexenus) is written as drama, with parts for Socrates, Gorgias, and various other characters, notably Polus (a follower of Gorgias who has authored a book on rhetoric) and Callicles (apparently a rising young Athenian politician). There are few indications of time or place. For the Protagoras, Plato elected for a more complex structure, beginning with a short exchange in direct dramatic form between Socrates and an unnamed companion, which then frames a lengthy report by Socrates, full of circumstantial detail, narrating an early morning visit from a young friend called Hippocrates, and their subsequent encounter with Protagoras and other sophists at the house of the wealthy aristocrat Callias.

The major difference is one of tone. Plato's writing in the Gorgias has little of its usual urbanity.

Simonides' poem reconstructed

Truly becoming good is hard for a man,

Standing four-square with hands and feet and mind,

Fashioned beyond reproach.

(Missing lines)

It strikes a wrong note,

That saying of Pittacus – though wise the man

Who spoke it – ‘Being good,’ he said, ‘is hard.’

Only a god can have this privilege.

He cannot but be bad, a man, when once

Helpless disaster brings him down.

For any man is good when things go well,

But bad when they go ill.

Best for the longest time are they – whom the gods love.

I will not cast my life's portion away

In hopeless quest for what can never be –

A man who's blameless among those who reap

The broad earth's harvest.

Should I find one,

I'll bring you word.

All those who do no shameful action willingly

I praise and love.

Against necessity not even gods can fight.

(Missing lines)

Enough, for me,

A man who is not bad, not wholly useless,

A sound and healthy man, one who well knows

Justice, the city's profit, I will not

Blame him.

The tribe of fools is numberless –

All things are fair wherein no foul is mixed.

Dramatis personae

Dates of birth and death given below are conjectural, except for Socrates and for the deaths of Alcibiades and Critias.

ALCIBIADES (451–404) Flamboyant Athenian aristocratic politician, brought up in Pericles' household as his ward. An associate of Socrates from an early age: Socrates' erotic interest in him is explored in the Symposium, and alluded to in both the Gorgias and the Protagoras. He was the main advocate and initially commander of the Sicilian expedition (415–413), but was indicted in connection with religious scandals and recalled from his command. After intriguing first with the Spartans and then the Persians, he subsequently led the Athenian fleet to victory over the Spartans at Cyzicus in the Bosphorus (410). After further personal vicissitudes, he was murdered by Persian agents in Phrygia (modern Asiatic Turkey).

CALIAS (450–365) His father Hipponicus was an Athenian aristocrat reputed to be the richest man in Greece and still active in the 420s (he served as general in 426/5). The family were connected to Pericles' family by marriage. Following the precedent of Eupolis's comedy Sycophants (421), Plato here imagines Callias as a mature man who has recently inherited the principal family house (315d) and is lavishing his wealth on sophists (see further Apology 20d). We hear of Callias as a public figure in his later years (general, 391; diplomatic envoy, 371).

Dramatis personae

MENEXENUS With his cousin Ctesippus became a member of Socrates' intimate circle, to judge from their presence in the prison on the day the hemlock was administered (Phaedo 59b). In the Lysis Menexenus (again in Ctesippus's company) and his friend Lysis are boys of twelve or thirteen. In the Menexenus he is evidently a few years older. Socrates suggests that he came from a prominent political family – but history has left no clues enabling us to identify the public figures Plato might have had in mind.

SOCRATES (469–399) Sustains throughout the dialogue the teasing pretence that he is currently a student of rhetoric, with Pericles' mistress Aspasia for his teacher. What purpose Plato had in representing him in this alien and improbable guise is discussed in the Introduction.

Analysis

234a–236d – Introductory conversation

236d–249c – Speech of Aspasia

236b–237b Introduction

237b–238b Good birth and upbringing: Athenian autochthony and how it shapes the life of the population

238b–239a Good upbringing: the Athenian political system

239a–246b Noble exploits: Athenian history