Now, inasmuch as Epimetheus was not very wise, he unwittingly spent all the qualities he had upon the brutes; and lo! mankind was still left unto him unadorned, and he knew not what he should do concerning them.

While he yet doubteth, Prometheus cometh unto him to look into his distribution; and perceiveth that all other creatures are duly furnished in all things, but that man is naked and without shoes or bed or weapons: and now was come the appointed day on the which man also should go forth from the earth into the light.

Wherefore Prometheus, being brought to his wits' end to devise any means of safety for man, stealeth the cunning workman's wisdom of Hephaestus and Athena, together with fire-for without fire none can get this wisdom or use it; and this he giveth as a gift unto man.

Thus did man get the mechanic wisdom needful for his bare life; but the wisdom which is needful for the life political he had not, for it was with Zeus; and unto Prometheus it was no longer permitted to enter into the citadel, the dwelling-place of Zeus; moreover, the guards of Zeus were terrible; but into the common dwelling of Athena and Hephaestus, wherein they plied their craft, he secretly entered, and stole the fiery art of Hephaestus, and also Athena's art, and gave them unto man. Whence came convenient living unto man; but as for Prometheus, he was afterwards arraigned for theft because of Epimetheus, as the story telleth.

Now man, having been made a partaker of the divine lot, by reason of his kinship with the Godhead, alone among living creatures believed in Gods, and began to take it in hand to set up altars unto them and make graven images of them. Then soon with cunning device did he frame articulate speech and names, and invented houses to dwell in, and raiment and shoes to put on, and beds for rest, and food from the fruits of the earth.

Thus furnished, men at first dwelt scattered abroad, and there were no cities. Wherefore men were continually devoured by wild beasts, for they were altogether weaker than the beasts, and their craftsman's art could help them to get food enough, but was not sufficient for their war with the wild beasts; for they had not yet the art political, whereof the art of warfare is a part.

νενέμηνται δὲ ὧδε· εἰς

ἰδιώταις, καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι αἰδῶ οὕτω θῶ ἐν τοῖς

κτίζοντες πόλεις. ὅτ ̓ οὖν ἀθροισθεῖεν, ἠδίκουν ἀλλήλους, ἅτε οὐκ ἔχοντες τὴν πολιτικὴν τέχνην, ὥστε πάλιν σκεδανC νύμενοι διεφθείροντο. Ζεὺς οὖν δείσας περὶ τῷ γένει ἡμῶν, μὴ ἀπόλοιτο πᾶν, Ἑρμῆν πέμπει ἄγοντα εἰς ἀνθρώπους αἰδῶ τε καὶ δίκην, ἵν' εἶεν πόλεων κόσμοι τε καὶ δεσμοὶ φιλίας συναγωγοί· ἐρωτᾷ οὖν Ἑρμῆς Δία, τίνα οὖν τρόπον δοίη δίκην καὶ αἰδῶ ἀνθρώποις. πότερον ὡς αἱ τέχναι νενέμηνται, οὕτω καὶ ταύτας νείμω; ἔχων ἰατρικὴν πολλοῖς ἱκανὸς δημιουργοί. καὶ δίκην δὴ καὶ D ἀνθρώποις, ἢ ἐπὶ πάντας νείμω; Ἐπὶ πάντας, ἔφη ὁ Ζεύς, καὶ πάντες μετεχόντων· οὐ γὰρ ἂν γένοιντο πόλεις, εἰ ὀλίγοι αὐτῶν μετέχοιεν ὥσπερ ἄλλων τεχνῶν. καὶ νόμον γε θὲς παρ' ἐμοῦ τὸν μὴ δυνάμενον αἰδοῦς καὶ δίκης μετέχειν κτείνειν ὡς νόσον πόλεως. Οὕτω δή, ὦ Σώκρατες, καὶ διὰ ταῦτα οἵ τε ἄλλοι καὶ οἱ ̓Αθηναῖοι, ὅταν μὲν περὶ ἀρετῆς τεκτονικῆς ᾖ λόγος ἢ ἄλλης τινὸς δημιουργικῆς, ὀλίγοις οἴονται μετεῖναι συμβουλῆς, καὶ ἐάν τις ἐκτὸς ὢν Ε τῶν ὀλίγων συμβουλεύῃ, οὐκ ἀνέχονται, ὡς σὺ φῄς· εἰκότως, ὡς ἐγώ φημι· ὅταν δὲ εἰς συμβουλὴν πολιτικῆς 323 ἀρετῆς ἴωσιν, ἣν δεῖ διὰ δικαιοσύνης πᾶσαν ἰέναι καὶ

σωφροσύνης, εἰκότως ἅπαντος ἀνδρὸς ἀνέχονται, ὡς παντὶ προσῆκον ταύτης γε μετέχειν τῆς ἀρετῆς, ἢ μὴ εἶναι πόλεις.

Wherefore they sought to assemble themselves together, and save themselves by building cities.

Now when they were assembled together, they wronged one another, because they had not the art political; so they were again scattered abroad, and were like to be destroyed.

But Zeus, fearing lest our race should perish utterly, commandeth Hermes to go unto men bearing modesty and justice, for the ordering of cities, and to be bonds joining men together in friendship. Hermes inquireth of Zeus how he shall give justice and modesty unto men. "Are these," quoth he, "to be distributed as the arts are distributed, the which are distributed after this wise—one man hath the art of physic, or some other art, and is sufficient unto many who have it not? Shall I distribute justice and modesty among men thus, or give them unto all?" partakers of them.

cities would not arise.

"Unto all," said Zeus, "and let all be For if few were partakers as of the arts,

Also make it a law from me, that he who cannot partake of modesty and justice shall be put to death, for he bringeth plague into the city.

For this reason, O Socrates, the Athenians and others, when they consult about things which need the skill of the carpenter or other handicraftsman, think that few advisers are enough, and if any one who is not of those thrust himself forward to advise, they will have none of him. Thus do they, thou sayest. And I say 'tis but reasonable they should do this. But when they enter into counsel concerning those things that pertain unto virtue political, which must needs walk alway in the path of righteousness and temperance, then with reason do they bear with any man as a counsellor, considering that all men must partake of this virtue, else there could be no city.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE PROTAGORAS MYTH

I

Before calling attention to some important points in this Myth, I must allude to a view maintained by some critics— that it is not a Platonic Myth at all, but only a Sophistic Apologue, or Illustrative Story, like Prodicus's Choice of Hercules. This view is stated, and objected to, by Grote in the following passage:1

The speech is censured by some critics as prolix. But to me it seems full of matter and argument, exceedingly free from superfluous rhetoric. The fable with which it opens presents, of course, the poetical ornament which belongs to that manner of handling. It is, however, fully equal, in point of perspicuity as well as charm, in my judgment, it is even superior,-to any fable in Plato.

When the harangue, lecture, or sermon of Protagoras is concluded, Sokrates both expresses his profound admiration of it, and admits the conclusion-that virtue is teachable-to be made out, as well as it can be made out by any continuous exposition.

Very different, indeed, is the sentiment of the principal Platonic commentators. Schleiermacher will not allow the mythus of Protagoras to be counted among the Platonic myths. He says that it is composed in the style of Protagoras, and perhaps copied from some real composition of that Sophist. He finds in it nothing but a "grobmaterialistiche Denkungsart, die über die sinnliche Erfahrung nicht hinaus philosophirt" (Einleitung zum Protagoras, vol. i. pp. 233, 234).

To the like purpose Ast (Plat. Leb. p. 71), who tells us that what is expressed in the mythus is, "The vulgar and mean sentiment and manner of thought of the Sophist; for it deduces everything, both arts and the social union itself, from human wants and necessity." Apparently these critics, when they treat this as a proof of meanness and vulgarity, have forgotten that the Platonic Sokrates himself does exactly the same thing in the Republicderiving the entire social union from human necessities (Republ. ii. 369 c).

K. F. Hermann is hardly less severe upon the Protagorean discourse (Gesch. und Syst. der Plat. Phil. p. 460).

For my part, I take a view altogether opposed to these learned persons. I think the discourse one of the most striking and

1 Plat. ii. pp. 46, 47.

instructive portions of the Platonic writings; and if I could believe that it was the composition of Protagoras himself, my estimation of him would be considerably raised.

Steinhart pronounces a much more rational and equitable judgment than Ast and Schleiermacher upon the discourse of Protagoras (Einleitung zum Protagoras, pp. 422, 423).1

I entirely agree with Grote; and hope that I shall be able in the following observations to show reason for the opinion that this is not a mere illustrative story, designed to put popularly in a picture what might be put abstrusely, but a genuine Myth containing suggestions of the kind which must be put dià μvooλoyías or not at all. The mark of a true Myth, it must be remembered, is that it sets forth the a priori elements in man's experience. An Illustrative Story or Allegory, as such, merely makes easier and more pleasant the task of receiving and recalling a posteriori data. This is the broad distinction between Myth and Allegory-a distinction which we must not lose sight of, although we observe that Allegory in the hands of a man of genius, like Plato, or Dante, or Bunyan, always tends to become Myth; and that there are few Myths, as distinguished from Allegories, which are not built up of parts, some of which are Allegories.

While contending strongly for the view that the discourse. delivered by Protagoras is a true Myth, not an Allegory, I do not forget that it is delivered by Protagoras. But even this, I submit, is quite consistent with its being a Myth, and that, even if Stallbaum (Note on Protag. 320 c) is right in thinking that Plato is parodying Protagoras's style and borrowing from his book περὶ τῆς ἐν ἀρχῇ καταστάσεως. The Timaeus, at any rate, is a Myth, although it is not spoken by Socrates and imitates a style very different from that of the Myths spoken by Socrates. If we are to take the concrete view necessary to the proper understanding of Plato's Myths as they come up individually for critical judgment, we must allow for the dramatic circumstances of each case. The Myth told in the Symposium by Aristophanes, being told by Aristophanes, has

1 Professor Campbell (Politicus, Introd. p. xxxii.) is apparently with the critics from whom Grote differs :- "The myth in the Protagoras. is meant to convey an idea which Socrates combats, and which Plato evidently does not fully accept. So also the elaborate myth of Aristophanes in the Symposium contains a phase of thought about the Origin of Love which is afterwards glanced at as an hypothesis of little value (Sympos. 205 E)."