The Economist
By Xenophon
Translation by H. G. Dakyns
Xenophon the Athenian was born 431
B. C.
He was a pupil of Socrates. He marched
with
the Spartans, and was exiled from Athens.
Sparta gave him land and property in
Scillus,
where he lived for many years before
having
to move once more, to settle in Corinth.
He died in 354 B. C.
The Economist records Socrates and
Critobulus
in a talk about profitable estate management,
and a lengthy recollection by Socrates
of
Ischomachus' discussion of the same
topic.
The Economist
by Xenophon
Translation by H. G. Dakyns
THE ECONOMIST[1]
A Treatise on the Science of the Household
in the form of a Dialogue
INTERLOCUTORS Socrates and Critobulus
At Chapter VII. a prior discussion
held between
Socrates and Ischomachus is introduced:
On
the life of a "beautiful and good"
man.
In these chapters (vii.-xxi.) Socrates
is
represented by the author as repeating
for
the benefit of Critobulus and the rest
certain
conversations which he had once held
with
the beautiful and good Ischomachus
on the
essentials of economy. It was a tete-a-tete
discussion, and in the original Greek
the
remarks of the two speakers are denoted
by
such phrases as {ephe o 'Iskhomakhos--ephen
egio}--"said (he) Ischomachus,"
"said I" (Socrates). To save
the
repetition of expressions tedious in
English,
I have, whenever it seemed help to
do so,
ventured to throw parts of the reported
conversations
into dramatic form, inserting "Isch."
"Soc." in the customary way
to
designate the speakers; but these,
it must
be borne in mind, are merely "asides"
to the reader, who will not forget
that Socrates
is the narrator throughout--speaking
of himself
as "I," and of Ischomachus
as "he,"
or by his name.-- Translator's note,
addressed
to the English reader.
I
I once heard him[2] discuss the topic
of
economy[3] after the following manner.
Addressing
Critobulus,[4] he said: Tell me, Critobulus,
is "economy," like the words
"medicine,"
"carpentry," "building,"
"smithying," "metal-working,"
and so forth, the name of a particular
kind
of knowledge or science?
[1] By "economist" we now
generally
understand "policital economist,"
but the use of the word as referring
to domestic
economy, the subject matter of the
treatise,
would seem to be legitimate.
[2] "The master."
[3] Lit. "the management of a
household
and estate." See Plat. "Rep."
407 B; Aristot. "Eth. N."
v. 6;
"Pol." i. 3.
[4] See "Mem." I. iii. 8;
"Symp."
p. 292.
Crit. Yes, I think so.
Soc. And as, in the case of the arts
just
named, we can state the proper work
or function
of each, can we (similarly) state the
proper
work and function of economy?
Crit. It must, I should think, be the
business
of the good economist[5] at any rate
to manage
his own house or estate well.
[5] Or, "manager of a house or
estate."
Soc. And supposing another man's house
to
be entrusted to him, he would be able,
if
he chose, to manage it as skilfully
as his
own, would he not? since a man who
is skilled
in carpentry can work as well for another
as for himself: and this ought to be
equally
true of the good economist?
Crit. Yes, I think so, Socrates.
Soc. Then there is no reason why a
proficient
in this art, even if he does not happen
to
possess wealth of his own, should not
be
paid a salary for managing a house,
just
as he might be paid for building one?
Crit. None at all: and a large salary
he
would be entitled to earn if, after
paying
the necessary expenses of the estate
entrusted
to him, he can create a surplus and
improve
the property.
Soc. Well! and this word "house,"
what are we to understand by it? the
domicile
merely? or are we to include all a
man's
possessions outside the actual dwelling-place?[6]
[6] Lit. "is it synonymous with
dwelling-place,
or is all that a man possesses outside
his
dwelling-place part of his house or
estate?"
Crit. Certainly, in my opinion at any
rate,
everything which a man has got, even
though
some portion of it may lie in another
part
of the world from that in which he
lives,[7]
forms part of his estate.
[7] Lit. "not even in the same
state
or city."
Soc. "Has got"? but he may
have
got enemies?
Crit. Yes, I am afraid some people
have got
a great many.
Soc. Then shall we say that a man's
enemies
form part of his possessions?
Crit. A comic notion indeed! that some
one
should be good enough to add to my
stock
of enemies, and that in addition he
should
be paid for his kind services.
Soc. Because, you know, we agreed that
a
man's estate was identical with his
possessions?
Crit. Yes, certainly! the good part
of his
possessions; but the evil portion!
no, I
thank you, that I do not call part
of a man's
possessions.
Soc. As I understand, you would limit
the
term to what we may call a man's useful
or
advantageous possessions?
Crit. Precisely; if he has things that
injure
him, I should regard these rather as
a loss
than as wealth.
Soc. It follows apparently that if
a man
purchases a horse and does not know
how to
handle him, but each time he mounts
he is
thrown and sustains injuries, the horse
is
not part of his wealth?
Crit. Not, if wealth implies weal,
certainly.
Soc. And by the same token land itself
is
no wealth to a man who so works it
that his
tillage only brings him loss?
Crit. True; mother earth herself is
not a
source of wealth to us if, instead
of helping
us to live, she helps us to starve.
Soc. And by a parity of reasoning,
sheep
and cattle may fail of being wealth
if, through
want of knowledge how to treat them,
their
owner loses by them; to him at any
rate the
sheep and the cattle are not wealth?
Crit. That is the conclusion I draw.
Soc. It appears, you hold to the position
that wealth consists of things which
benefit,
while things which injure are not wealth?
Crit. Just so.
Soc. The same things, in fact, are
wealth
or not wealth, according as a man knows
or
does not know the use to make of them?
To
take an instance, a flute may be wealth
to
him who is sufficiently skilled to
play upon
it, but the same instrument is no better
than the stones we tread under our
feet to
him who is not so skilled . . . unless
indeed
he chose to sell it?
Crit. That is precisely the conclusion
we
should come to.[8] To persons ignorant
of
their use[9] flutes are wealth as saleable,
but as possessions not for sale they
are
no wealth at all; and see, Socrates,
how
smoothly and consistently the argument
proceeds,[10]
since it is admitted that things which
benefit
are wealth. The flutes in question
unsold
are not wealth, being good for nothing:
to
become wealth they must be sold.
[8] Reading {tout auto}, or if {tout
au}
with Sauppe, transl. "Yes, that
is another
position we may fairly subscribe to."
[9] i. e. "without knowledge of
how
to use them."
[10] Or, "our discussion marches
on
all-fours, as it were."
Yes! (rejoined Socrates), presuming
the owner
knows how to sell them; since, supposing
again he were to sell them for something
which he does not know how to use,[11]
the
mere selling will not transform them
into
wealth, according to your argument.
[11] Reading {pros touto o}, or if
{pros
touton, os}, transl. "to a man
who did
not know how to use them."
Crit. You seem to say, Socrates, that
money
itself in the pockets of a man who
does not
know how to use it is not wealth?
Soc. And I understand you to concur
in the
truth of our proposition so far: wealth
is
that, and that only, whereby a man
may be
benefited. Obviously, if a man used
his money
to buy himself a mistress, to the grave
detriment
of his body and soul and whole estate,
how
is that particular money going to benefit
him now? What good will he extract
from it?
Crit. None whatever, unless we are
prepared
to admit that hyoscyamus,[12] as they
call
it, is wealth, a poison the property
of which
is to drive those who take it mad.
[12] "A dose of henbane, 'hogs'-bean,'
so called." Diosc. 4. 69; 6.
15; Plut. "Demetr." xx. (Clough,
v. 114).
Soc. Let money then, Critobulus, if
a man
does not know how to use it aright--let
money,
I say, be banished to the remote corners
of the earth rather than be reckoned
as wealth.[13]
But now, what shall we say of friends?
If
a man knows how to use his friends
so as
to be benefited by them, what of these?
[13] Or, "then let it be relegated
.
. . and there let it lie in the category
of non-wealth."
Crit. They are wealth indisputably,
and in
a deeper sense than cattle are, if,
as may
be supposed, they are likely to prove
of
more benefit to a man than wealth of
cattle.
Soc. It would seem, according to your
argument,
that the foes of a man's own household
after
all may be wealth to him, if he knows
how
to turn them to good account?[14]
[14] Vide supra.
Crit. That is my opinion, at any rate.
Soc. It would seem, it is the part
of a good
economist[15] to know how to deal with
his
own or his employer's foes so as to
get profit
out of them?
[15] "A good administrator of
an estate."
Crit. Most emphatically so.
Soc. In fact, you need but use your
eyes
to see how many private persons, not
to say
crowned heads, do owe the increase
of their
estates to war.
Crit. Well, Socrates, I do not think,
so
far, the argument could be improved
on;[16]
but now comes a puzzle. What of people
who
have got the knowledge and the capital[17]
required to enhance their fortunes,
if only
they will put their shoulders to the
wheel;
and yet, if we are to believe our senses,
that is just the one thing they will
not
do, and so their knowledge and accomplishments
are of no profit to them? Surely in
their
case also there is but one conclusion
to
be drawn, which is, that neither their
knowledge
nor their possessions are wealth.
[16] Or, "Thanks, Socrates. Thus
far
the statement of the case would seem
to be
conclusive--but what are we to make
of this?
Some people . . ."
[17] Lit. "the right kinds of
knowledge
and the right starting- points."
Soc. Ah! I see, Critobulus, you wish
to direct
the discussion to the topic of slaves?
Crit. No indeed, I have no such intention--quite
the reverse. I want to talk about persons
of high degree, of right noble family[18]
some of them, to do them justice. These
are
the people I have in my mind's eye,
gifted
with, it may be, martial or, it may
be, civil
accomplishments, which, however, they
refuse
to exercise, for the very reason, as
I take
it, that they have no masters over
them.
[18] "Eupatrids."
Soc. No masters over them! but how
can that
be if, in spite of their prayers for
prosperity
and their desire to do what will bring
them
good, they are still so sorely hindered
in
the exercise of their wills by those
that
lord it over them?
Crit. And who, pray, are these lords
that
rule them and yet remain unseen?
Soc. Nay, not unseen; on the contrary,
they
are very visible. And what is more,
they
are the basest of the base, as you
can hardly
fail to note, if at least you believe
idleness
and effeminacy and reckless negligence
to
be baseness. Then, too, there are other
treacherous
beldames giving themselves out to be
innocent
pleasures, to wit, dicings and profitless
associations among men.[19] These in
the
fulness of time appear in all their
nakedness
even to them that are deceived, showing
themselves
that they are after all but pains tricked
out and decked with pleasures. These
are
they who have the dominion over those
you
speak of and quite hinder them from
every
good and useful work.
[19] Or, "frivolous society."
Crit. But there are others, Socrates,
who
are not hindered by these indolences--on
the contrary, they have the most ardent
disposition
to exert themselves, and by every means
to
increase their revenues; but in spite
of
all, they wear out their substance
and are
involved in endless difficulties.[20]
[20] Or, "become involved for
want of
means."
Soc. Yes, for they too are slaves,
and harsh
enough are their taskmasters; slaves
are
they to luxury and lechery, intemperance
and the wine-cup along with many a
fond and
ruinous ambition. These passions so
cruelly
belord it over the poor soul whom they
have
got under their thrall, that so long
as he
is in the heyday of health and strong
to
labour, they compel him to fetch and
carry
and lay at their feet the fruit of
his toils,
and to spend it on their own heart's
lusts;
but as soon as he is seen to be incapable
of further labour through old age,
they leave
him to his gray hairs and misery, and
turn
to seize on other victims.[21] Ah!
Critobulus,
against these must we wage ceaseless
war,
for very freedom's sake, no less than
if
they were armed warriors endeavouring
to
make us their slaves. Nay, foemen in
war,
it must be granted, especially when
of fair
and noble type, have many times ere
now proved
benefactors to those they have enslaved.
By dint of chastening, they have forced
the
vanquished to become better men and
to lead
more tranquil lives in future.[22]
But these
despotic queens never cease to plague
and
torment their victims in body and soul
and
substance until their sway is ended.
[21] "To use others as their slaves."
[22] Lit. "Enemies for the matter
of
that, when, being beautiful and good,
they
chance to have enslaved some other,
have
ere now in many an instance chastened
and
compelled the vanquished to be better
and
to live more easily for the rest of
time."
II
The conersation was resumed by Critobulus,
and on this wise. He said: I think
I take
your meaning fully, Socrates, about
these
matters; and for myself, examining
my heart,
I am further satisfied, I have sufficient
continence and self-command in those
respects.
So that if you will only advise me
on what
I am to do to improve my estate, I
flatter
myself I shall not be hindered by those
despotic
dames, as you call them. Come, do not
hesitate;
only tender me what good advice you
can,
and trust me I will follow it. But
perhaps,
Socrates, you have already passed sentence
on us--we are rich enough already,
and not
in need of any further wealth?
Soc. It is to myself rather, if I may
be
included in your plural "we,"
that
I should apply the remark. I am not
in need
of any further wealth, if you like.
I am
rich enough already, to be sure. But
you,
Critobulus, I look upon as singularly
poor,
and at times, upon my soul, I feel
a downright
compassion for you.
At this view of the case, Critobulus
fell
to laughing outright, retorting: And
pray,
Socrates, what in the name of fortune
do
you suppose our respective properties
would
fetch in the market, yours and mine?
If I could find a good purchaser (he
answered),
I suppose the whole of my effects,
including
the house in which I live, might very
fairly
realise five minae[1] (say twenty guineas).
Yours, I am positively certain, would
fetch
at the lowest more than a hundred times
that
sum.
[1] 5 x L4:1:3. See Boeckh, "P.
E. A."
[Bk. i. ch. xx.], p. 109 f.
(Eng. ed.)
Crit. And with this estimate of our
respective
fortunes, can you still maintain that
you
have no need of further wealth, but
it is
I who am to be pitied for my poverty?
Soc. Yes, for my property is amply
sufficient
to meet my wants, whereas you, considering
the parade you are fenced about with,
and
the reputation you must needs live
up to,
would be barely well off, I take it,
if what
you have already were multiplied by
three.
Pray, how may that be? Critobulus asked.
Why, first and foremost (Socrates explained),
I see you are called upon to offer
many costly
sacrifices, failing which, I take it,
neither
gods nor men would tolerate you; and,
in
the next place, you are bound to welcome
numerous foreigners as guests, and
to entertain
them handsomely; thirdly, you must
feast
your fellow-citizens and ply them with
all
sorts of kindness, or else be cut adrift
from your supporters.[2] Furthermore,
I perceive
that even at present the state enjoins
upon
you various large contributions, such
as
the rearing of studs,[3] the training
of
choruses, the superintendence of gymnastic
schools, or consular duties,[4] as
patron
of resident aliens, and so forth; while
in
the event of war you will, I am aware,
have
further obligations laid upon you in
the
shape of pay[5] to carry on the triearchy,
ship money, and war taxes[6] so onerous,
you will find difficulty in supporting
them.
Remissness in respect of any of these
charges
will be visited upon you by the good
citizens
of Athens no less strictly than if
they caught
you stealing their own property. But
worse
than all, I see you fondling the notion
that
you are rich. Without a thought or
care how
to increase your revenue, your fancy
lightly
turns to thoughts of love,[7] as if
you had
some special license to amuse yourselef.
. . . That is why I pity and compassionate
you, fearing lest some irremediable
mischief
overtake you, and you find yourself
in desperate
straits. As for me, if I ever stood
in need
of anything, I am sure you know I have
friends
who would assist me. They would make
some
trifling contribution--trifling to
themselves,
I mean--and deluge my humble living
with
a flood of plenty. But your friends,
albeit
far better off than yourself, considering
your respective styles of living, persist
in looking to you for assistance.
[2] See Dr. Holden ad loc., Boeckh
[Bk. iii.
ch. xxiii.], p. 465 f.
[3] Cf. Lycurg. "c. Leocr."
139.
[4] Al. "presidential duties."
[5] {trierarkhias [misthous]}. The
commentators
in general "suspect" {misthous}.
See Boeckh, "P. E. A." p.
579.
[6] See Boeckh, p. 470 f.; "Revenues,"
iii. 9, iv. 40.
[7] Or, "to childish matters,"
"frivolous affairs"; but
for the
full import of the phrase {paidikois
pragmasi}
see "Ages." viii. 2.
Then Critobulus: I cannot gainsay what
you
have spoken, Socrates, it is indeed
high
time that you were constituted my patronus,
or I shall become in very truth a pitiable
object.
To which appeal Socrates made answer:
Why,
you yourself must surely be astonished
at
the part you are now playing. Just
now, when
I said that I was rich, you laughed
at me
as if I had no idea what riches were,
and
you were not happy till you had cross-examined
me and forced me to confess that I
do not
possess the hundredth part of what
you have;
and now you are imploring me to be
your patron,
and to stint no pains to save you from
becoming
absolutely and in very truth a pauper.[8]
[8] Or, "literally beggared."
Crit. Yes, Socrates, for I see that
you are
skilled in one lucrative operation
at all
events--the art of creating a surplus.
I
hope, therefore, that a man who can
make
so much out of so little will not have
the
slightest difficulty in creating an
ample
surplus out of an abundance.
Soc. But do not you recollect how just
now
in the discussion you would hardly
let me
utter a syllable[9] while you laid
down the
law: if a man did not know how to handle
horses, horses were not wealth to him
at
any rate; nor land, nor sheep, nor
money,
nor anything else, if he did not know
how
to use them? And yet these are the
very sources
of revenue from which incomes are derived;
and how do you expect me to know the
use
of any of them who never possessed
a single
one of them since I was born?
[9] Cf. Aristoph. "Clouds,"
945;
"Plut." 17; Dem. 353; and
Holden
ad loc.
Crit. Yes, but we agreed that, however
little
a man may be blest with wealth himself,
a
science of economy exists; and that
being
so, what hinders you from being its
professor?
Soc. Nothing, to be sure,[10] except
what
would hinder a man from knowing how
to play
the flute, supposing he had never had
a flute
of his own and no one had supplied
the defect
by lending him one to practise on:
which
is just my case with regard to economy,[11]
seeing I never myself possessed the
instrument
of the science which is wealth, so
as to
go through the pupil stage, nor hitherto
has any one proposed to hand me over
his
to manage. You, in fact, are the first
person
to make so generous an offer. You will
bear
in mind, I hope, that a learner of
the harp
is apt to break and spoil the instrument;
it is therefore probable, if I take
in hand
to learn the art of economy on your
estate,
I shall ruin it outright.
[10] Lit. "The very thing, God
help
me! which would hinder . . ."
[11] Lit. "the art of administering
an estate."
Critobulus retorted: I see, Socrates,
you
are doing your very best to escape
an irksome
task: you would rather not, if you
can help
it, stretch out so much as your little
finger
to help me to bear my necessary burthens
more easily.
Soc. No, upon my word, I am not trying
to
escape: on the contrary, I shall be
ready,
as far as I can, to expound the matter
to
you.[12] . . . Still it strikes me,
if you
had come to me for fire, and I had
none in
my house, you would not blame me for
sending
you where you might get it; or if you
had
asked me for water, and I, having none
to
give, had led you elsewhere to the
object
of your search, you would not, I am
sure,
have disapproved; or did you desire
to be
taught music by me, and I were to point
out
to you a far more skilful teacher than
myself,
who would perhaps be grateful to you
moreover
for becoming his pupil, what kind of
exception
could you take to my behaviour?
[12] Or, "to play the part of
{exegetes},
'legal adviser,' or 'spiritual director,'
to be in fact your 'guide, philosopher,
and
friend.'"
Crit. None, with any show of justice,
Socrates.
Soc. Well, then, my business now is,
Critobulus,
to point out[13] to you some others
cleverer
than myself about those matters which
you
are so anxious to be taught by me.
I do confess
to you, I have made it long my study
to discover
who among our fellow-citizens in this
city
are the greatest adepts in the various
branches
of knowledge.[14] I had been struck
with
amazement, I remember, to observe on
some
occasion that where a set of people
are engaged
in identical operations, half of them
are
in absolute indigence and the other
half
roll in wealth. I bethought me, the
history
of the matter was worth investigation.
Accordingly
I set to work investigating, and I
found
that it all happened very naturally.
Those
who carried on their affairs in a haphazard
manner I saw were punished by their
losses;
whilst those who kept their wits upon
the
stretch and paid attention I soon perceived
to be rewarded by the greater ease
and profit
of their undertakings.[15] It is to
these
I would recommend you to betake yourself.
What say you? Learn of them: and unless
the
will of God oppose,[16] I venture to
say
you will become as clever a man of
business
as one might hope to see.
[13] Al. "to show you that there
are
others."
[14] Or, "who are gifted with
the highest
knowledge in their respective concerns."
Cf. "Mem." IV. vii. 1.
[15] Lit. "got on quicker, easier,
and
more profitably."
[16] Or, "short of some divine
interposition."
III
Critobulus, on hearing that, exclaimed:
Be
sure, Socrates, I will not let you
go now
until you give the proofs which, in
the presence
of our friends, you undertook just
now to
give me.
Well then,[1] Critobulus (Socrates
replied),
what if I begin by showing[2] you two
sorts
of people, the one expending large
sums on
money in building useless houses, the
other
at far less cost erecting dwellings
replete
with all they need; will you admit
that I
have laid my finger here on one of
the essentials
of economy?
[1] Lincke [brackets as an editorial
interpolation
iii. 1, {ti oun, ephe}--vi. 11, {poiomen}].
See his edition "Xenophons Dialog.
{peri
oikonomias} in seiner ursprunglichen
Gestalt";
and for a criticism of his views, an
article
by Charles D. Morris, "Xenophon's
Oeconomicus,"
in the "American Journal of Philology,"
vol. i. p. 169 foll.
[2] As a demonstrator.
Crit. An essential point most ceertainly.
Soc. And suppose in connection with
the same,
I next point out to you[3] two other
sets
of persons:--The first possessors of
furniture
of various kinds, which they cannot,
however,
lay their hands on when the need arises;
indeed they hardly know if they have
got
all safe and sound or not: whereby
they put
themselves and their domestics to much
mental
torture. The others are perhaps less
amply,
or at any rate not more amply supplied,
but
they have everything ready at the instant
for immediate use.
[3] "As in a mirror, or a picture."
Crit. Yes, Socrates, and is not the
reason
simply that in the first case everything
is thrown down where it chanced, whereas
those others have everything arranged,
each
in its appointed place?
Quite right (he answered), and the
phrase
implies that everything is orderly
arranged,
not in the first chance place, but
in that
to which it naturally belongs.
Crit. Yes, the case is to the point,
I think,
and does involve another economic principle.
Soc. What, then, if I exhibit to you
a third
contrast, which bears on the condition
of
domestic slaves? On the one side you
shall
see them fettered hard and fast, as
I may
say, and yet for ever breaking their
chains
and running away. On the other side
the slaves
are loosed, and free to move, but for
all
that, they choose to work, it seems;
they
are constant to their masters. I think
you
will admit that I here point out another
function of economy[4] worth noting.
[4] Or, "economical result."
Crit. I do indeed--a feature most noteworthy.
Soc. Or take, again, the instance of
two
farmers engaged in cultivating farms[5]
as
like as possible. The one had never
done
asserting that agriculture has been
his ruin,
and is in the depth of despair; the
other
has all he needs in abundance and of
the
best, and how acquired?--by this same
agriculture.
[5] {georgias}. See Hartman, "An.
Xen."
p. 193. Hold. cf. Plat. "Laws,"
806 E. Isocr. "Areop." 32.
Yes (Critobulus answered), to be sure;
perhaps[6]
the former spends both toil and money
not
simply on what he needs, but on things
which
cause an injury to house alike and
owner.
[6] Or, "like enough in the one
case
the money and pains are spent,"
etc.
Soc. That is a possible case, no doubt,
but
it is not the one that I refer to;
I mean
people pretending they are farmers,
and yet
they have not a penny to expend on
the real
needs of their business.
Crit. And pray, what may be the reason
of
that, Socrates?
Soc. You shall come with me, and see
these
people also; and as you contemplate
the scene,
I presume you will lay to heart the
lesson.
Crit. I will, if possibly I can, I
promise
you.
Soc. Yes, and while you contemplate,
you
must make trial of yourself and see
if you
have wit to understand. At present,
I will
bear you witness that if it is to go
and
see a party of players performing in
a comedy,
you will get up at cock-crow, and come
trudging
a long way, and ply me volubly with
reasons
why I should accompany you to see the
play.
But you have never once invited me
to come
and witness such an incident as those
we
were speaking of just now.
Crit. And so I seem to you ridiculous?[7]
[7] Or, "a comic character in
the performance."
Soc. "Not so comic as you must
appear
to yourself (i. e. with your keen sense
of
the ludicrous)."
Soc. Far more ridiculous to yourself,
I warrant.
But now let me point out to you another
contrast:
between certain people whose dealing
with
horses has brought them to the brink
of poverty,
and certain others who have found in
the
same pursuit the road to affluence,[8]
and
have a right besides to plume themselves
upon their gains.[9]
[8] Or, "who have not only attained
to affluence by the same pursuit, but
can
hold their heads high, and may well
pride
themselves on their thrift."
[9] Cf. Hom. "Il." xii. 114,
{ippoisin
kai okhesphin agallomenos}, et passim;
"Hiero,"
viii. 5; "Anab." II. vi.
26.
Crit. Well, then, I may tell you, I
see and
know both characters as well as you
do; but
I do not find myself a whit the more
included
among those who gain.
Soc. Because you look at them just
as you
might at the actors in a tragedy or
comedy,
and with the same intent--your object
being
to delight the ear and charm the eye,
but
not, I take it, to become yourself
a poet.
And there you are right enough, no
doubt,
since you have no desire to become
a playright.
But, when circumstances compel you
to concern
yourself with horsemanship, does it
not seem
to you a little foolish not to consider
how
you are to escape being a mere amateur
in
the matter, especially as the same
creatures
which are good for use are profitable
for
sale?
Crit. So you wish me to set up as a
breeder
of young horses,[10] do you, Socrates?
[10] See "Horsemanship,"
ii. 1.
Soc. Not so, no more than I would recommend
you to purchase lads and train them
up from
boyhood as farm-labourers. But in my
opinion
there is a certain happy moment of
growth
whuch must be seized, alike in man
and horse,
rich in present service and in future
promise.
In further illustration, I can show
you how
some men treat their wedded wives in
such
a way that they find in them true helpmates
to the joint increase of their estate,
while
others treat them in a way to bring
upon
themselves wholesale disaster.[11]
[11] Reading {e os pleista}, al. {e
oi pleistoi}
= "to bring about disaster in
most cases."
Crit. Ought the husband or the wife
to bear
the blame of that?
Soc. If it goes ill with the sheep
we blame
the shepherd, as a rule, or if a horse
shows
vice we throw the blame in general
upon the
rider. But in the case of women, supposing
the wife to have received instruction
from
her husband and yet she delights in
wrong-doing,[12]
it may be that the wife is justly held
to
blame; but supposing he has never tried
to
teach her the first principles of "fair
and noble" conduct,[13] and finds
her
quite an ignoramus[14] in these matters,
surely the husband will be justly held
to
blame. But come now (he added), we
are all
friends here; make a clean breast of
it,
and tell us, Critobulus, the plain
unvarnished
truth: Is there an one to whom you
are more
in the habit of entrusting matters
of importance
than to your wife?
[12] Cf. "Horsemanship,"
vi. 5,
of a horse "to show vice."
[13] Or, "things beautiful and
of good
report."
[14] Al. "has treated her as a
dunce,
devoid of this high knowledge."
Crit. There is no one.
Soc. And is there any one with whom
you are
less in the habit of conversing than
with
your wife?
Crit. Not many, I am forced to admit.
Soc. And when you married her she was
quite
young, a mere girl--at an age when,
as far
as seeing and hearing go, she had the
smallest
acquaintance with the outer world?
Crit. Certainly.
Soc. Then would it not be more astonishing
that she should have real knowledge
how to
speak and act than that she should
go altogether
astray?
Crit. But let me ask you a question,
Socrates:
have those happy husbands, you tell
us of,
who are blessed with good wives educated
them themselves?
Soc. There is nothing like investigation.
I will introduce you to Aspasia,[15]
who
will explain these matters to you in
a far
more scientific way than I can. My
belief
is that a good wife, being as she is
the
partner in a common estate, must needs
be
her husband's counterpoise and counterpart
for good; since, if it is through the
transactions
of the husband, as a rule, that goods
of
all sorts find their way into the house,
yet it is by means of the wife's economy
and thrift that the greater part of
the expenditure
is checked, and on the successful issue
or
the mishandling of the same depends
the increase
or impoverishment of a whole estate.
And
so with regard to the remaining arts
and
sciences, I think I can point out to
you
the ablest performers in each case,
if you
feel you have any further need of help.[16]
[15] Aspasia. See "Mem."
II. vi.
36.
[16] Al. "there are successful
performers
in each who will be happy to illustrate
any
point in which you think you need,"
etc.
IV
But why need you illustrate all the
sciences,
Socrates? (Critobulus asked): it would
not
be very easy to discover efficient
craftsmen
of all the arts, and quite impossible
to
become skilled in all one's self. So,
please,
confine yourself to the nobler branches
of
knowledge as men regard them, such
as it
will best befit me to pursue with devotion;
be so good as to point me out these
and their
performers, and, above all, contribute
as
far as in you lies the aid of your
own personal
instruction.
Soc. A good suggestion, Critobulus,
for the
base mechanic arts, so called, have
got a
bad name; and what is more, are held
in ill
repute by civilised communities, and
not
unreasonably; seeing they are the ruin
of
the bodies of all concerned in them,
workers
and overseers alike, who are forced
to remain
in sitting postures and to hug the
loom,
or else to crouch whole days confronting
a furnace. Hand in hand with physical
enervation
follows apace enfeeblement of soul:
while
the demand which these base mechanic
arts
makes on the time of those employed
in them
leaves them no leisure to devote to
the claims
of friendship and the state. How can
such
folk be other than sorry friends and
ill
defenders of the fatherland? So much
so that
in some states, especially those reputed
to be warlike, no citizen[1] is allowed
to
exercise any mechanical craft at all.
[1] "In the strict sense,"
e. g.
the Spartiates in Sparta. See "Pol.
Lac." vii.; Newman, op. cit. i.
99,
103 foll.
Crit. Then which are the arts you would
counsel
us to engage in?
Soc. Well, we shall not be ashamed,
I hope,
to imitate the kings of Persia?[2]
That monarch,
it is said, regards amongst the noblest
and
most necessary pursuits two in particular,
which are the arts of husbandry and
war,
and in these two he takes the strongest
interest.
[2] "It won't make us blush actually
to take a leaf out of the great king's
book."
As to the Greek text at this point
see the
commentators, and also a note by Mr.
H. Richers
in the "Classical Review,"
x. 102.
What! (Critobulus exclaimed); do you,
Socrates,
really believe that the king of Persia
pays
a personal regard to husbandry, along
with
all his other cares?
Soc. We have only to investigate the
matter,
Critobulus, and I daresay we shall
discover
whether this is so or not. We are agreed
that he takes strong interest in military
matters; since, however numerous the
tributary
nations, there is a governor to each,
and
every governor has orders from the
king what
number of cavalry, archers, slingers
and
targeteers[3] it is his business to
support,
as adequate to control the subject
population,
or in case of hostile attack to defend
the
country. Apart from these the king
keeps
garrisons in all the citadels. The
actual
support of these devolves upon the
governor,
to whom the duty is assigned. The king
himself
meanwhile conducts the annual inspection
and review of troops, both mercenary
and
other, that have orders to be under
arms.
These all are simultaneously assembled
(with the exception of the garrisons
of citadels)
at the mustering ground,[4] so named.
That
portion of the army within access of
the
royal residence the king reviews in
person;
the remainder, living in remoter districts
of the empire, he inspects by proxy,
sending
certain trusty representatives.[5]
Wherever
the commandants of garrisons, the captains
of thousands, and the satraps[6] are
seen
to have their appointed members complete,
and at the same time shall present
their
troops equipped with horse and arms
in thorough
efficiency, these officers the king
delights
to honour, and showers gifts upon them
largely.
But as to those officers whom he finds
either
to have neglected their garrisons,
or to
have made private gain of their position,
these he heavily chastises, deposing
them
from office, and appointing other superintendents[7]
in their stead. Such conduct, I think
we
may say, indisputably proves the interest
which he takes in matters military.
[3] Or, Gerrophoroi, "wicker-shield
bearers."
[4] Or, "rendezvous"; "the
'Champ de Mars' for the nonce."
Cf.
"Cyrop." VI. ii. 11.
[5] Lit. "he sends some of the
faithful
to inspect." Cf. our "trusty
and
well-beloved."
[6] See, for the system, Herod. iii.
89 foll.;
"Cyrop." VIII. vi. 11.
[7] Or, as we say, "inspecting
officers."
Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. i. 9.
Further than this, by means of a royal
progress
through the country, he has an opportunity
of inspecting personally some portion
of
his territory, and again of visiting
the
remainder in proxy as above by trusty
representatives;
and wheresoever he perceives that any
of
his governors can present to him a
district
thickly populated, and the soil in
a state
of active cultivation, full of trees
and
fruits, its natural products, to such
officers
he adds other territory, adorning them
with
gifts and distinguishing them by seats
of
honour. But those officers whose land
he
sees lying idle and with but few inhabitants,
owing either to the harshness of their
government,
their insolence, or their neglect,
he punishes,
and making them to cease from their
office
he appoints other rulers in their place.
. . . Does not this conduct indicate
at least
as great an anxiety to promote the
active
cultivation of the land by its inhabitants
as to provide for its defence by military
occupation?[8]
[8] Lit. "by those who guard and
garrison
it."
Moreover, the governors appointed to
preside
over these two departments of state
are not
one and the same. But one class governs
the
inhabitants proper including the workers
of the soil, and collects the tribute
from
them, another is in command of the
armed
garrisons. If the commandant[9] protects
the country insufficiently, the civil
governor
of the population, who is in charge
also
of the productive works, lodges accusation
against the commandant to the effect
that
the inhabitants are prevented working
through
deficiency of protection. Or if again,
in
spite of peace being secured to the
works
of the land by the military governor,
the
civil authority still presents a territory
sparse in population and untilled,
it is
the commandant's turn to accuse the
civil
ruler. For you may take it as a rule,
a population
tilling their territory badly will
fail to
support their garrisons and be quite
unequal
to paying their tribute. Where a satrap
is
appointed he has charge of both departments.[10]
[9] Or, "garrison commandant."
Lit. "Phrourarch."
[10] The passage reads like a gloss.
See
about the Satrap, "Hell."
III.
i. 10; "Cyrop." VIII. vi.
1; "Anab."
I. ix. 29 foll.
Thereupon Critobulus: Well, Socrates
(said
he), if such is his conduct, I admit
that
the great king does pay attention to
agriculture
no less than to military affairs.
And besides all this (proceeded Socrates),
nowhere among the various countries
which
he inhabits or visits does he fail
to make
it his first care that there shall
be orchards
and gardens, parks and "paradises,"
as they are called, full of all fair
and
noble products which the earth brings
forth;
and within these chiefly he spends
his days,
when the season of the year permits.
Crit. To be sure, Socrates, it is a
natural
and necessary conclusion that when
the king
himself spends so large a portion of
his
time there, his paradises should be
furnished
to perfection with trees and all else
beautiful
that earth brings forth.
Soc. And some say, Critobulus, that
when
the king gives gifts, he summons in
the first
place those who have shown themselves
brave
warriors, since all the ploughing in
the
world were but small gain in the absence
of those who should protect the fields;
and
next to these he summons those who
have stocked
their countries best and rendered them
productive,
on the principle that but for the tillers
of the soil the warriors themselves
could
scarcely live. And there is a tale
told of
Cyrus, the most famous prince, I need
not
tell you, who ever wore a crown,[11]
how
on one occasion he said to those who
had
been called to receive the gifts, "it
were no injustice, if he himself received
the gifts due to warriors and tillers
of
the soil alike," for "did
he not
carry off the palm in stocking the
country
and also in protecting the goods with
which
it had been stocked?"
[11] Lit. "the most glorious king
that
ever lived." The remark would
seem to
apply better to Cyrus the Great. Nitsche
and others regard these SS. 18, 19
as interpolated.
See Schenkl ad loc.
Crit. Which clearly shows, Socrates,
if the
tale be true, that this same Cyrus
took as
great a pride in fostering the productive
energies of his country and stocking
it with
good things, as in his reputation as
a warrior.
Soc. Why, yes indeed, had Cyrus lived,
I
have no doubt he would have proved
the best
of rulers, and in support of this belief,
apart from other testimony amply furnished
by his life, witness what happened
when he
marched to do battle for the soveriegnty
of Persia with his brother. Not one
man,
it is said,[12] deserted from Cyrus
to the
king, but from the king to Cyrus tens
of
thousands. And this also I deem a great
testimony
to a ruler's worth, that his followers
follow
him of their own free will, and when
the
moment of danger comes refuse to part
from
him.[13] Now this was the case with
Cyrus.
His friends not only fought their battles
side by side with him while he lived,
but
when he died they too died battling
around
his dead body, one and all, excepting
only
Ariaeus, who was absent at his post
on the
left wing of the army.[14] But there
is another
tale of this same Cyrus in connection
with
Lysander, who himself narrated it on
one
occasion to a friend of his in Megara.[15]
[12] Cf. "Anab." I. ix. 29
foll.
[13] Cf. "Hiero," xi. 12,
and our
author passim.
[14] See "Anab." ib. 31.
[15] Possibly to Xenophon himself {who
may
have met Lysander on his way back after
the
events of the "Anabasis,"
and implying
this dialogue is concocted, since Socrates
died before Xenophon returned to Athens,
if he did return at that period.}
Lysander, it seems, had gone with presents
sent by the Allies to Cyrus, who entertained
him, and amongst other marks of courtesy
showed him his "paradise"
at Sardis.[16]
Lysander was astonished at the beauty
of
the trees within, all planted[17] at
equal
intervals, the long straight rows of
waving
branches, the perfect regularity, the
rectangular[18]
symmetry of the whole, and the many
sweet
scents which hung about them as they
paced
the park. In admiration he exclaimed
to Cyrus:
"All this beauty is marvellous
enough,
but what astonishes me still more is
the
talent of the artificer who mapped
out and
arranged for you the several parts
of this
fair scene."[19] Cyrus was pleased
by
the remark, and said: "Know then,
Lysander,
it is I who measured and arranged it
all.
Some of the trees," he added,
"I
planted with my own hands." Then
Lysander,
regarding earnestly the speaker, when
he
saw the beauty of his apparel and perceived
its fragrance, the splendour[20] also
of
the necklaces and armlets, and other
ornaments
which he wore, exclaimed: "What
say
you, Cyrus? did you with your own hands
plant
some of these trees?" whereat
the other:
"Does that surprise you, Lysander?
I
swear to you by Mithres,[21] when in
ordinary
health I never dream of sitting down
to supper
without first practising some exercise
of
war or husbandry in the sweat of my
brow,
or venturing some strife of honour,
as suits
my mood." "On hearing this,"
said Lysander to his friend, "I
could
not help seizing him by the hand and
exclaiming,
'Cyrus, you have indeed good right
to be
a happy man,[22] since you are happy
in being
a good man.'"[23]
[16] See "Hell." I. v. 1.
[17] Reading {oi' isou pephuteumena},
or
if {ta pephuteumena}, transl. "the
various
plants ranged."
[18] Cf. Dion. Hal. "de Comp."
p. 170; Cic. "de Senect."
S. 59.
[19] Lit. "of these" {deiktikos},
i. e. pointing to the various beauties
of
the scenery.
[20] Reading {to kallos}.
[21] The Persian "Sun-God."
See
"Cyrop." VII. v. 53; Strab.
xv.
3. 13.
[22] Or, "fortunate."
[23] Or, "you are a good man,
and thereby
fortunate."
V
All this I relate to you (continued
Socrates)
to show you that quite high and mighty[1]
people find it hard to hold aloof from
agrictulture,
devotion to which art would seem to
be thrice
blest, combining as it does a certain
sense
of luxury with the satisfaction of
an improved
estate, and such a training of physical
energies
as shall fit a man to play a free man's
part.[2]
Earth, in the first place, freely offers
to those that labour all things necessary
to the life of man; and, as if that
were
not enough, makes further contribution
of
a thousand luxuries.[3] It is she who
supplies
with sweetest scent and fairest show
all
things wherewith to adorn the altars
and
statues of the gods, or deck man's
person.
It is to her we owe our many delicacies
of
flesh or fowl or vegetable growth;[4]
since
with the tillage of the soil is closely
linked
the art of breeding sheep and cattle,
whereby
we mortals may offer sacrifices well
pleasing
to the gods, and satisfy our personal
needs
withal.
[1] Lit. "Not even the most blessed
of mankind can abstain from."
See Plat.
"Rep." 344 B, "The superlatively
best and well-to-do."
[2] Lit. "Devotion to it would
seem
to be at once a kind of luxury, an
increase
of estate, a training of the bodily
parts,
so that a man is able to perform all
that
a free man should."
[3] Al. "and further, to the maintenance
of life she adds the sources of pleasure
in life."
[4] Lit. "she bears these and
rears
those."
And albeit she, good cateress, pours
out
her blessings upon us in abundance,
yet she
suffers not her gifts to be received
effeminately,
but inures her pensioners to suffer
glady
summer's heat and winter's cold. Those
that
labour with their hands, the actual
delvers
of the soil, she trains in a wrestling
school
of her own, adding strength to strength;
whilst those others whose devotion
is confined
to the overseeing eye and to studious
thought,
she makes more manly, rousing them
with cock-crow,
and compelling them to be up and doing
in
many a long day's march.[5] Since,
whether
in city or afield, with the shifting
seasons
each necessary labour has its hour
of performance.[6]
[5] See "Hellenica Essays,"
p.
341.
[6] Lit. "each most necessary
operation
must ever be in season."
Or to turn to another side. Suppose
it to
be a man's ambition to aid his city
as a
trooper mounted on a charger of his
own:
why not combine the rearing of horses
with
other stock? it is the farmer's chance.[7]
Or would your citizen serve on foot?
It is
husbandry that shall give him robustness
of body. Or if we turn to the toil-loving
fascination of the chase,[8] here once
more
earth adds incitement, as well as furnishing
facility of sustenance for the dogs
as by
nurturing a foster brood of wild animals.
And if horses and dogs derive benefit
from
this art of husbandry, they in turn
requite
the boon through service rendered to
the
farm. The horse carries his best of
friends,
the careful master, betimes to the
scene
of labour and devotion, and enables
him to
leave it late. The dog keeps off the
depredations
of wild animals from fruits and flocks,
and
creates security in the solitary place.
[7] Lit. "farming is best adapted
to
rearing horses along with other produce."
[8] Lit. "to labour willingly
and earnestly
at hunting earth helps to incite us
somewhat."
Earth, too, adds stimulus in war-time
to
earth's tillers; she pricks them on
to aid
the country under arms, and this she
does
by fostering her fruits in open field,
the
prize of valour for the mightiest.[9]
For
this also is the art athletic, this
of husbandry;
as thereby men are fitted to run, and
hurl
the spear, and leap with the best.[10]
[9] Cf. "Hipparch," viii.
8.
[10] Cf. "Hunting," xii.
1 foll.
This, too, is that kindliest of arts
which
makes requital tenfold in kind for
every
work of the labourer.[11] She is the
sweet
mistress who, with smile of welcome
and outstretched
hand, greets the approach of her devoted
one, seeming to say, Take from me all
thy
heart's desire. She is the generous
hostess;
she keeps open house for the stranger.[12]
For where else, save in some happy
rural
seat of her devising, shall a man more
cheerily
cherish content in winter, with bubbling
bath and blazing fire? or where, save
afield,
in summer rest more sweetly, lulled
by babbling
streams, soft airs, and tender shades?[13]
[11] Lit. "What art makes an ampler
return for their labour to those who
work
for her? What art more sweetly welcomes
him
that is devoted to her?"
[12] Lit. "What art welcomes the
stranger
with greater prodigality?"
[13] See "Hellenica Essays,"
p.
380; and as still more to the point,
Cowley's
Essays: "Of Agriculture,"
passim.
Her high prerogative it is to offer
fitting
first-fruits to high heaven, hers to
furnish
forth the overflowing festal board.[14]
Hers
is a kindly presence in the household.
She
is the good wife's favourite, the children
long for her, she waves her hand winningly
to the master's friends.
[14] Or, "to appoint the festal
board
most bounteously."
For myself, I marvel greatly if it
has ever
fallen to the lot of freeborn man to
own
a choicer possesion, or to discover
an occupation
more seductive, or of wider usefulness
in
life than this.
But, furthermore, earth of her own
will[15]
gives lessons in justice and uprightness
to all who can understand her meaning,
since
the nobler the service of devotion
rendered,
the ampler the riches of her recompense.[16]
One day, perchance, these pupils of
hers,
whose conversation in past times was
in husbandry,[17]
shall, by reason of the multitude of
invading
armies, be ousted from their labours.
The
work of their hands may indeed be snatched
from them, but they were brought up
in stout
and manly fashion. They stand, each
one of
them, in body and soul equipped; and,
save
God himself shall hinder them, they
will
march into the territory of those their
human
hinderers, and take from them the wherewithal
to support their lives. Since often
enough
in war it is surer and safer to quest
for
food with sword and buckler than with
all
the instruments of husbandry.
[15] Reading {thelousa}, vulg., or
if after
Cobet, {theos ousa}, transl. "by
sanction
of her divinity." With {thelousa}
Holden
aptly compares Virgil's "volentia
rura,"
"Georg." ii. 500.
[16] "That is, her 'lex talionis.'"
[17] "Engaged long time in husbandry."
But there is yet another lesson to
be learnt
in the public shool of husbandry[18]--the
lesson of mutual assistance. "Shoulder
to shoulder" must we march to
meet the
invader;[19] "shoulder to shoulder"
stand to compass the tillage of the
soil.
Therefore it is that the husbandman,
who
means to win in his avocation, must
see that
he creates enthusiasm in his workpeople
and
a spirit of ready obedience; which
is just
what a general attacking an enemy will
scheme
to bring about, when he deals out gifts
to
the brave and castigation[20] to those
who
are disorderly.
[18] Lit. "But again, husbandry
trains
up her scholars side by side in lessons
of
. . ."
[19] {sun anthropois}, "man with
his
fellow-man," is the "mot
d'order"
(cf. the author's favourite {sun theois});
"united human effort."
[20] "Lashes," "punishment."
Cf. "Anab." II. vi. 10, of
Clearchus.
Nor will there be lacking seasons of
exhortation,
the general haranguing his troops and
the
husbandman his labourers; nor because
they
are slaves do they less than free men
need
the lure of hope and happy expectation,[21]
that they may willingly stand to their
posts.
[21] "The lure of happy prospects."
See "Horsmanship," iii. 1.
It was an excellent saying of his who
named
husbandry "the mother and nurse
of all
the arts," for while agriculture
prospers
all other arts like are vigorous and
strong,
but where the land is forced to remain
desert,[22]
the spring that feeds the other arts
is dried
up; they dwindle, I had almost said,
one
and all, by land and sea.
[22] Or, "lie waste and barren
as the
blown sea-sand."
These utterances drew from Critobulus
a comment:
Socrates (he said), for my part I agree
with
all you say; only, one must face the
fact
that in agriculture nine matters out
of ten
are beyond man's calculation. Since
at one
time hailstones and another frost,
at another
drought or a deluge of rain, or mildew,
or
other pest, will obliterate all the
fair
creations and designs of men; or behold,
his fleecy flocks most fairly nurtured,
then
comes murrain, and the end most foul
destruction.[23]
[23] See Virg. "Georg." iii.
441
foll.: "Turpis oves tentat scabies,
ubi frigidus imber."
To which Socrates: Nay, I thought,
Critobulus,
you full surely were aware that the
operations
of husbandry, no less than those of
war,
lie in the hands of the gods. I am
sure you
will have noted the behaviour of men
engaged
in war; how on the verge of military
operations
they strive to win the acceptance of
the
divine powers;[24] how eagerly they
assail
the ears of heaven, and by dint of
sacrifices
and omens seek to discover what they
should
and what they should not do. So likewise
as regards the processes of husbandry,
think
you the propitiation of heaven is less
needed
here? Be well assured (he added) the
wise
and prudent will pay service to the
gods
on behalf of moist fruits and dry,[25]
on
behalf of cattle and horses, sheep
and goats;
nay, on behalf of all their possessions,
great and small, without exception.
[24] See "Hell." III. i.
16 foll.,
of Dercylidas.
[25] "Every kind of produce, succulent
(like the grape and olive) or dry (like
wheat
and barley, etc.)"
VI
Your words (Critobulus answered) command
my entire sympathy, when you bid us
endeavour
to begin each work with heaven's help,[1]
seeing that the gods hold in their
hands
the issues alike of peace and war.
So at
any rate will we endeavour to act at
all
times; but will you now endeavour on
your
side to continue the discussion of
economy
from the point at which you broke off,
and
bring it point by point to its conclusion?
What you have said so far has not been
thrown
away on me. I seem to discern already
more
clearly, what sort of behaviour is
necessary
to anything like real living.[2]
[1] Lit. "with the gods,"
and for
the sentiment see below, x. 10; "Cyrop."
III. i. 15; "Hipparch," ix.
3.
[2] For {bioteuein} cf. Pind. "Nem."
iv. 11, and see Holden ad loc.
Socrates replied: What say you then?
Shall
we first survey the ground already
traversed,
and retrace the steps on which we were
agreed,
so that, if possible we may conduct
the remaining
portion of the argument to its issue
with
like unanimity?[3]
[3] Lit. "try whether we can go
through
the remaining steps with like . . ."
Crit. Why, yes! If it is agreeable
for two
partners in a business to run through
their
accounts without dispute, so now as
partners
in an argument it will be no less agreeable
to sum up the points under discussion,
as
you say, with unanimity.
Soc. Well, then, we agreed that economy
was
the proper title of a branch of knowledge,
and this branch of knowledge appeared
to
be that whereby men are enabled to
enhance
the value of their houses or estates;
and
by this word "house or estate"
we understood the whole of a man's
possessions;
and "possessions" again we
defined
to include those things which the possessor
should find advantageous for the purposes
of his life; and things advantageous
finally
were discovered to mean all that a
man knows
how to use and turn to good account.
Further,
for a man to learn all branches of
knowledge
not only seemed to us an impossibility,
but
we thought we might well follow the
example
of civil communties in rejecting the
base
mechanic arts so called, on the ground
that
they destroy the bodies of the artisans,
as far as we can see, and crush their
spirits.
The clearest proof of this, we said,[4]
could
be discovered if, on the occasion of
a hostile
inroad, one were to seat the husbandmen
and
the artisans apart in two divisions,
and
then proceed to put this question to
each
group in turn: "Do you think it
better
to defend our country districts or
to retire
from the fields[5] and guard the walls?"
And we anticipated that those concerned
with
the soil would vote to defend the soil;
while
the artisans would vote not to fight,
but,
in docile obedience to their training,
to
sit with folded hands, neither expending
toil nor venturing their lives.
[4] This S. 6 has no parallel supra.
See
Breit. and Schenkl ad loc. for attempts
to
cure the text.
[5] See Cobet, "N. L." 580,
reading
{uphemenous}, or if {aphemenous} transl.
"to abandon."
Next we held it as proved that there
was
no better employment for a gentleman--we
described him as a man beautiful and
good--than
this of husbandry, by which human beings
procure to themselves the necessaries
of
life. This same employment, moreover,
was,
as we agreed, at once the easiest to
learn[6]
and the pleasantest to follow, since
it gives
to the limbs beauty and hardihood,
whilst
permitting[7] to the soul leisure to
satisfy
the claims of friendship and of civic
duty.
[6] {raste mathein}. Vide infra, not
supra.
[7] Lit. "least allowing the soul
no
leisure to care for friends and state
withal."
Again it seemed to us that husbandry
acts
as a spur to bravery in the hearts
of those
that till the fields,[8] inasmuch as
the
necessaries of life, vegetable and
animal,
under her auspices spring up and are
reared
outside the fortified defences of the
city.
For which reason also this way of life
stood
in the highest repute in the eyes of
statesmen
and commonwealths, as furnishing the
best
citizens and those best disposed to
the common
weal.[9]
[8] Cf. Aristot. "Oec." I.
ii.
1343 B, {pros toutois k. t. l.}
[9] Cf. Aristoph. "Archarnians."
Crit. I think I am fully persuaded
as to
the propriety of making agriculture
the basis
of life. I see it is altogether noblest,
best, and pleasantest to do so. But
I should
like to revert to your remark that
you understood
the reason why the tillage of one man
brings
him in an abundance of all he needs,
while
the operations of another fail to make
husbandry
a profitable employment. I would gladly
hear
from you an explanation of both these
points,
so that I may adopt the right and avoid
the
harmful course.[10]
[10] Lincke conceives the editor's
interpolation
as ending here.
Soc. Well, Critobulus, suppose I narrate
to you from the beginning how I cam
in contact
with a man who of all men I ever met
seemed
to me to deserve the appellation of
a gentleman.
He was indeed a "beautiful and
good"
man.[11]
[11] Or, "a man 'beautiful and
good,'
as the phrase goes."
Crit. There is nothing I should better
like
to hear, since of all titles this is
the
one I covet most the right to bear.
Soc. Well, then, I will tell you how
I came
to subject him to my inquiry. It did
not
take me long to go the round of various
good
carpenters, good bronze-workers, painters,
sculptors, and so forth. A brief period
was
sufficient for the contemplation of
themselves
and of their most admired works of
art. But
when it came to examining those who
bore
the high-sounding title "beautiful
and
good," in order to find out what
conduct
on their part justified their adoption
of
this title, I found my soul eager with
desire
for intercourse with one of them; and
first
of all, seeing that the epithet "beautiful"
was conjoined with that of "good,"
every beautiful person I saw, I must
needs
approach in my endeavour to discover,[12]
if haply I might somewhere see the
quality
of good adhering to the quality of
beauty.
But, after all, it was otherwise ordained.
I soon enough seemed to discover[13]
that
some of those who in their outward
form were
beautiful were in their inmost selves
the
veriest knaves. Accordingly I made
up my
mind to let go beauty which appeals
to the
eye, and address myself to one of those
"beautiful
and good" people so entitled.
And since
I heard of Ischomachus[14] as one who
was
so called by all the world, both men
and
women, strangers and citizens alike,
I set
myself to make acquaintance with him.
[12] Or, "and try to understand."
[13] Or, "understand."
[14] See Cobet, "Pros. Xen."
s.
n.
VII
It chanced, one day I saw him seated
in the
portico of Zeus Eleutherios,[1] and
as he
appeared to be at leisure, I went up
to him
and, sitting down by his side, accosted
him:
How is this, Ischomachus? you seated
here,
you who are so little wont to be at
leisure?
As a rule, when I see you, you are
doing
something, or at any rate not sitting
idle
in the market-place.
[1] "The god of freedom, or of
freed
men." See Plat. "Theag."
259
A. The scholiast on Aristoph. "Plutus"
1176 identifies the god with Zeus Soter.
See Plut. "Dem." 859 (Clough,
v.
30).
Nor would you see me now so sitting,
Socrates
(he answered), but that I promised
to meet
some strangers, friends of mine,[2]
at this
place.
[2] "Foreign friends."
And when you have no such business
on hand
(I said) where in heaven's name do
you spend
your time and how do you employ yourself?
I will not conceal from you how anxious
I
am to learn from your lips by what
conduct
you have earned for yourself the title
"beautiful
and good."[3] It is not by spending
your days indoors at home, I am sure;
the
whole habit of your body bears witness
to
a different sort of life.
[3] "The sobriquet of 'honest
gentleman.'"
Then Ischomachus, smiling at my question,
but also, as it seemed to me, a little
pleased
to be asked what he had done to earn
the
title "beautiful and good,"
made
answer: Whether that is the title by
which
folk call me when they talk to you
about
me, I cannot say; all I know is, when
they
challenge me to exchange properties,[4]
or
else to perform some service to the
state
instead of them, the fitting out of
a trireme,
or the training of a chorus, nobody
thinks
of asking for the beautiful and good
gentleman,
but it is plain Ischomachus, the son
of So-and-so,[5]
on whom the summons is served. But
to answer
your question, Socrates (he proceeded),
I
certainly do not spend my days indoors,
if
for no other reason, because my wife
is quite
capable of managing our domestic affairs
without my aid.
[4] On the antidosis or compulsory
exchange
of property, see Boeckh, p. 580, Engl.
ed.:
"In case any man, upon whom a
{leitourgia}
was imposed, considered that another
was
richer than himself, and therefore
most justly
chargeable with the burden, he might
challenge
the other to assume the burden, or
to make
with him an {antidosis} or exchange
of property.
Such a challenge, if declined, was
converted
into a lawsuit, or came before a heliastic
court for trial." Gow, "Companion,"
xviii. "Athenian Finance."
See
Dem. "Against Midias," 565,
Kennedy,
p. 117, and Appendix II. For the various
liturgies, Trierarchy, Choregy, etc.,
see
"Pol. Ath." i. 13 foll.
[5] Or, "the son of his father,"
it being customary at Athens to add
the patronymic,
e. g. Xenophon son of Gryllus, Thucydides
son of Olorus, etc. See Herod. vi.
14, viii.
90. In official acts the name of the
deme
was added, eg. Demosthenes son of Demosthenes
of Paiane; or of the tribe, at times.
Cf.
Thuc. viii. 69; Plat. "Laws,"
vi.
p. 753 B.
Ah! (said I), Ischomachus, that is
just what
I should like particularly to learn
from
you. Did you yourself educate your
wife to
be all that a wife should be, or when
you
received her from her father and mother
was
she already a proficient well skilled
to
discharge the duties appropriate to
a wife?
Well skilled! (he replied). What proficiency
was she likely to bring with her, when
she
was not quite fifteen[6] at the time
she
wedded me, and during the whole prior
period
of her life had been most carefully
brought
up[7] to see and hear as little as
possible,
and to ask[8] the fewest questions?
or do
you not think one should be satisfied,
if
at marriage her whole experience consisted
in knowing how to take the wool and
make
a dress, and seeing how her mother's
handmaidens
had their daily spinning-tasks assigned
them?
For (he added), as regards control
of appetite
and self-indulgence,[9] she had received
the soundest education, and that I
take to
be the most important matter in the
bringing-up
of man or woman.
[6] See Aristot. "Pol." vii.
16.
1335(a). See Newman, op. cit. i. 170
foll.
[7] Or, "surveillance." See
"Pol.
Lac." i. 3.
[8] Reading {eroito}; or if with Sauppe
after
Cobet, {eroin}, transl. "talk
as little
as possible."
[9] Al. "in reference to culinary
matters."
See Mahaffy, "Social Life in Greece,"
p. 276.
Then all else (said I) you taught your
wife
yourself, Ischomachus, until you had
made
her capable of attending carefully
to her
appointed duties?
That did I not (replied he) until I
had offered
sacrifice, and prayed that I might
teach
and she might learn all that could
conduce
to the happiness of us twain.
Soc. And did your wife join in sacrifice
and prayer to that effect?
Isch. Most certainly, with many a vow
registered
to heaven to become all she ought to
be;
and her whole manner showed that she
would
not be neglectful of what was taught
her.[10]
[10] Or, "giving plain proof that,
if
the teaching failed, it should not
be from
want of due attention on her part."
See "Hellenica Essays," "Xenophon,"
p. 356 foll.
Soc. Pray narrate to me, Ischomachus,
I beg
of you, what you first essayed to teach
her.
To hear that story would please me
more than
any description of the most splendid
gymnastic
contest or horse-race you could give
me.
Why, Socrates (he answered), when after
a
time she had become accustomed to my
hand,
that is, was tamed[11] sufficiently
to play
her part in a discussion, I put to
her this
question: "Did it ever strike
you to
consider, dear wife,[12] what led me
to choose
you as my wife among all women, and
your
parents to entrust you to me of all
men?
It was certainly not from any difficulty
that might beset either of us to find
another
bedfellow. That I am sure is evident
to you.
No! it was with deliberate intent to
discover,
I for myself and your parents in behalf
of
you, the best partner of house and
children
we could find, that I sought you out,
and
your parents, acting to the best of
their
ability, made choice of me. If at some
future
time God grant us to have children
born to
us, we will take counsel together how
best
to bring them up, for that too will
be a
common interest,[13] and a common blessing
if haply they shall live to fight our
battles
and we find in them hereafter support
and
succour when ourselves are old.[14]
But at
present there is our house here, which
belongs
like to both. It is common property,
for
all that I possess goes by my will
into the
common fund, and in the same way all
that
you deposited[15] was placed by you
to the
common fund.[16] We need not stop to
calculate
in figures which of us contributed
most,
but rather let us lay to heart this
fact
that whichever of us proves the better
partner,
he or she at once contributes what
is most
worth having."
[11] (The timid, fawn-like creature.)
See
Lecky, "Hist. of Eur. Morals,"
ii. 305. For the metaphor cf. Dem.
"Olynth."
iii. 37. 9.
[12] Lit. "woman." Cf. N.
T. {gunai},
St. John ii. 4; xix. 26.
[13] Or, "our interests will centre
in them; it will be a blessing we share
in
common to train them that they shall
fight
our battles, and . . ."
[14] Cf. "Mem." II. ii. 13.
Holden
cf. Soph. "Ajax." 567; Eur.
"Suppl."
918.
[15] Or reading {epenegke} with Cobet,
"brought
with you in the way of dowry."
[16] Or, "to the joint estate."
Thus I addressed her, Socrates, and
thus
my wife made answer: "But how
can I
assist you? what is my ability? Nay,
everything
depends on you. My business, my mother
told
me, was to be sober-minded!"[17]
[17] "Modest and temperate,"
and
(below) "temperance."
"Most true, my wife," I replied,
"and that is what my father said
to
me. But what is the proof of sober-mindedness
in man or woman? Is it not so to behave
that
what they have of good may ever be
at its
best, and that new treasures from the
same
source of beauty and righteousness
may be
most amply added?"
"But what is there that I can
do,"
my wife inquired, "which will
help to
increase our joint estate?"
"Assuredly," I answered,
"you
may strive to do as well as possible
what
Heaven has given you a natural gift
for and
which the law approves."
"And what may these things be?"
she asked.
"To my mind they are not the things
of least importance," I replied,
"unless
the things which the queen bee in her
hive
presides over are of slight importance
to
the bee community; for the gods"
(so
Ischomachus assured me, he continued),
"the
gods, my wife, would seem to have exercised
much care and judgment in compacting
that
twin system which goes by the name
of male
and female, so as to secure the greatest
possible advantage[18] to the pair.
Since
no doubt the underlying principle of
the
bond is first and foremost to perpetuate
through procreation the races of living
creatures;[19]
and next, as the outcome of this bond,
for
human beings at any rate, a provision
is
made by which they may have sons and
daughters
to support them in old age.
[18] Reading {oti}, or if with Br.
{eti .
. . auto}, "with the further intent
it should prove of maximum advantage
to itself."
[19] Cf. (Aristot.) "Oecon."
i.
3.
"And again, the way of life of
human
beings, not being maintained like that
of
cattle[20] in the open air, obviously
demands
roofed homesteads. But if these same
human
beings are to have anything to bring
in under
cover, some one to carry out these
labours
of the field under high heaven[21]
must be
found them, since such operations as
the
breaking up of fallow with the plough,
the
sowing of seed, the planting of trees,
the
pasturing and herding of flocks, are
one
and all open-air employments on which
the
supply of products necessary to life
depends.
[20] "And the beast of the field."
[21] "Sub dis," "in
the open
air."
"As soon as these products of
the field
are safely housed and under cover,
new needs
arise. There must be some one to guard
the
store and some one to perform such
necessary
operations as imply the need of shelter.[22]
Shelter, for instance, is needed for
the
rearing of infant children; shelter
is needed
for the various processes of converting
the
fruits of earth into food, and in like
manner
for the fabrication of clothing out
of wool.
[22] Or, "works which call for
shelter."
"But whereas both of these, the
indoor
and the outdoor occupations alike,
demand
new toil and new attention, to meet
the case,"
I added, "God made provision[23]
from
the first by shaping, as it seems to
me,
the woman's nature for indoor and the
man's
for outdoor occupations. Man's body
and soul
He furnished with a greater capacity
for
enduring heat and cold, wayfaring and
military
marches; or, to repeat, He laid upon
his
shoulders the outdoor works.
[23] "Straightway from the moment
of
birth provided." Cf. (Aristot.)
"Oecon."
i. 3, a work based upon or at any rate
following
the lines of Xenophon's treatise.
"While in creating the body of
woman
with less capacity for these things,"
I continued, "God would seem to
have
imposed on her the indoor works; and
knowing
that He had implanted in the woman
and imposed
upon her the nurture of new-born babies,
He endowed her with a larger share
of affection
for the new-born child than He bestowed
upon
man.[24] And since He imposed on woman
the
guardianship of the things imported
from
without, God, in His wisdom, perceiving
that
a fearful spirit was no detriment to
guardianship,[25]
endowed the woman with a larger measure
of
timidity than He bestowed on man. Knowing
further that he to whom the outdoor
works
belonged would need to defend them
against
malign attack, He endowed the man in
turn
with a larger share of courage.
[24] {edasato}, "Cyrop."
IV. ii.
43.
[25] Cf. "Hipparch," vii.
7; Aristot.
"Pol." iii. 2; "Oecon."
iii.
"And seeing that both alike feel
the
need of giving and receiving, He set
down
memory and carefulness between them
for their
common use,[26] so that you would find
it
hard to determine which of the two,
the male
or the female, has the larger share
of these.
So, too, God set down between them
for their
common use the gift of self-control,
where
needed, adding only to that one of
the twain,
whether man or woman, which should
prove
the better, the power to be rewarded
with
a larger share of this perfection.
And for
the very reason that their natures
are not
alike adapted to like ends, they stand
in
greater need of one another; and the
married
couple is made more useful to itself,
the
one fulfilling what the other lacks.[27]
[26] Or, "He bestowed memory and
carefulness
as the common heritage of both."
[27] Or, "the pair discovers the
advantage
of duality; the one being strong wherein
the other is defective."
"Now, being well aware of this,
my wife,"
I added, "and knowing well what
things
are laid upon us twain by God Himself,
must
we not strive to perform, each in the
best
way possible, our respective duties?
Law,
too, gives her consent--law and the
usage
of mankind, by sanctioning the wedlock
of
man and wife; and just as God ordained
them
to be partners in their children, so
the
law establishes their common ownership
of
house and estate. Custom, moreover,
proclaims
as beautiful those excellences of man
and
woman with which God gifted them at
birth.[28]
Thus for a woman to bide tranquilly
at home
rather than roam aborad is no dishonour;
but for a man to remain indoors, instead
of devoting himself to outdoor pursuits,
is a thing discreditable. But if a
man does
things contrary to the nature given
him by
God, the chances are,[29] such insubordination
escapes not the eye of Heaven: he pays
the
penalty, whether of neglecting his
own works,
or of performing those appropriate
to woman."[30]
[28] Or, "with approving fingers
stamps
as noble those diverse faculties, those
superiorities
in either sex which God created in
them.
Thus for the womean to remain indoors
is
nobler than to gad about abroad."
{ta
kala . . .; kallion . . . aiskhion
. . .}--
These words, wich their significant
Hellenic
connotation, suffer cruelly in translation.
[29] Or, "maybe in some respect
this
violation of the order of things, this
lack
of discpline on his part." Cf.
"Cyrop."
VII. ii. 6.
[30] Or, "the works of his wife."
For the sentiment cf. Soph. "Oed.
Col."
337 foll.; Herod. ii. 35.
I added: "Just such works, if
I mistake
not, that same queen-bee we spoke of
labours
hard to perform, like yours, my wife,
enjoined
upon her by God Himself."
"And what sort of works are these?"
she asked; "what has the queen-bee
to
do that she seems so like myself, or
I like
her in what I have to do?"
"Why," I answered, "she
too
stays in the hive and suffers not the
other
bees to idle. Those whose duty it is
to work
outside she sends forth to their labours;
and all that each of them brings in,
she
notes and receives and stores against
the
day of need; but when the season for
use
has come, she distributes a just share
to
each. Again, it is she who presides
over
the fabric of choicely-woven cells
within.
She looks to it that warp and woof
are wrought
with speed and beauty. Under her guardian
eye the brood of young[31] is nursed
and
reared; but when the days of rearing
are
past and the young bees are ripe for
work,
she sends them out as colonists with
one
of the seed royal[32] to be their leader."
[31] Or, "the growing progeny
is reared
to maturity."
[32] Or, "royal lineage,"
reading
{ton epigonon} (emend. H. Estienne);
or if
the vulg. {ton epomenon}, "with
some
leader of the host"
(lit. of his followers). So Breitenbach.
"Shall I then have to do these
things?"
asked my wife.
"Yes," I answered, "you
will
need in the same way to stay indoors,
despatching
to their toils without those of your
domestics
whose work lies there. Over those whose
appointed
tasks are wrought indoors, it will
be your
duty to preside; yours to receive the
stuffs
brought in; yours to apportion part
for daily
use, and yours to make provision for
the
rest, to guard and garner it so that
the
outgoings destined for a year may not
be
expended in a month. It will be your
duty,
when the wools are introduced, to see
that
clothing is made for those who need;
your
duty also to see that the dried corn
is rendered
fit and serviceable for food.
"There is just one of all these
occupations
which devolve upon you," I added,
"you
may not find so altogether pleasing.
Should
any one of our household fall sick,
it will
be your care to see and tend them to
the
recovery of their health."
"Nay," she answered, "that
will be my pleasantest of tasks, if
careful
nursing may touch the springs of gratitude
and leave them friendlier than before."
And I (continued Ischomachus) was struck
with admiration at her answer, and
replied:
"Think you, my wife, it is through
some
such traits of forethought seen in
their
mistress-leader that the hearts of
bees are
won, and they are so loyally affectioned
towards her that, if ever she abandon
her
hive, not one of them will dream of
being
left behind;[33] but one and all must
follow
her."
[33] Al. "will suffer her to be
forsaken."
And my wife made answer to me: "It
would
much astonish me (said she) did not
these
leader's works, you speak of, point
to you
rather than myself. Methinks mine would
be
a pretty[34] guardianship and distribution
of things indoors without your provident
care to see that the importations from
without
were duly made."
[34] Or, "ridiculous."
"Just so," I answered, "and
mine would be a pretty[35] importation
if
there were no one to guard what I imported.
Do you not see," I added, "how
pitiful is the case of those unfortunates
who pour water in their sieves for
ever,
as the story goes,[36] and labour but
in
vain?"
[35] "As laughable an importation."
[36] Or, "how pitiful their case,
condemned,
as the saying goes, to pour water into
a
sieve." Lit. "filling a bucket
bored with holes." Cf. Aristot.
"Oec."
i. 6; and for the Danaids, see Ovid.
"Met."
iv. 462; Hor. "Carm." iii.
11.
25; Lucr. iii. 937; Plaut. "Pseud."
369. Cp. Coleridge:
Work without hope draws nectar in a
sieve,
And hope without an object cannot live.
"Pitiful enough, poor souls,"
she
answered, "if that is what they
do."
"But there are other cares, you
know,
and occupations," I answered,
"which
are yours by right, and these you will
find
agreeable. This, for instance, to take
some
maiden who knows naught of carding
wool and
to make her proficient in the art,
doubling
her usefulness; or to receive another
quite
ignorant of housekeeping or of service,
and
to render her skilful, loyal, serviceable,
till she is worth her weight in gold;
or
again, when occasion serves, you have
it
in your power to requite by kindness
the
well-behaved whose presence is a blessing
to your house; or maybe to chasten
the bad
character, should such an one appear.
But
the greatest joy of all will be to
prove
yourself my better; to make me your
faithful
follower; knowing no dread lest as
the years
advance you should decline in honour
in your
household, but rather trusting that,
though
your hair turn gray, yet, in proportion
as
you come to be a better helpmate to
myself
and to the children, a better guardian
of
our home, so will your honour increase
throughout
the household as mistress, wife, and
mother,
daily more dearly prized. Since,"
I
added, "it is not through excellence
of outward form,[37] but by reason
of the
lustre of virtues shed forth upon the
life
of man, that increase is given to things
beautiful and good."[38]
[37] "By reason of the flower
on the
damask cheek."
[38] Al. "For growth is added
to things
'beautiful and good,' not through the
bloom
of youth but virtuous perfections,
an increase
coextensive with the life of man."
See
Breit. ad loc.
That, Socrates, or something like that,
as
far as I may trust my memory, records
the
earliest conversation which I held
with her.
VIII
And did you happen to observe, Ischomachus
(I asked), whether, as the result of
what
was said, your wife was stirred at
all to
greater carefulness?
Yes, certainly (Ischomachus answered),
and
I remember how piqued she was at one
time
and how deeply she blushed, when I
chanced
to ask her for something which had
been brought
into the house, and she could not give
it
me. So I, when I saw her annoyance,
fell
to consoling her. "Do not be at
all
disheartened, my wife, that you cannot
give
me what I ask for. It is plain poverty,[1]
no doubt, to need a thing and not to
have
the use of it. But as wants go, to
look for
something which I cannot lay my hands
upon
is a less painful form of indigence
than
never to dream of looking because I
know
full well that the thing exists not.
Anyhow,
you are not to blame for this,"
I added;
"mine the fault was who handed
over
to your care the things without assigning
them their places. Had I done so, you
would
have known not only where to put but
where
to find them.[2] After all, my wife,
there
is nothing in human life so serviceable,
nought so beautiful as order.[3]
[1] "Vetus proverbium," Cic.
ap.
Columellam, xii. 2, 3; Nobbe, 236,
fr. 6.
[2] Lit. "so that you might know
not
only where to put," etc.
[3] Or, "order and arrangement."
So Cic. ap. Col. xii. 2, 4, "dispositione
atque ordine."
"For instance, what is a chorus?--a
band composed of human beings, who
dance
and sing; but suppose the company proceed
to act as each may chance--confusion
follows;
the spectacle has lost its charm. How
different
when each and all together act and
recite[4]
with orderly precision, the limbs and
voices
keeping time and tune. Then, indeed,
these
same performers are worth seeing and
worth
hearing.
[4] Or, "declaim," {phtheggontai},
properly of the "recitative"
of
the chorus. Cf. Plat. "Phaedr."
238 D.
"So, too, an army," I said,
"my
wife, an army destitute of order is
confusion
worse confounded: to enemies an easy
prey,
courting attack; to friends a bitter
spectacle
of wasted power;[5] a mingled mob of
asses,
heavy infantry, and baggage-bearers,
light
infantry, cavalry, and waggons. Now,
suppose
they are on the march; how are they
to get
along? In this condition everybody
will be
a hindrance to everybody: 'slow march'
side
by side with 'double quick,' 'quick
march'
at cross purposes with 'stand at ease';
waggons
blocking cavalry and asses fouling
waggons;
baggage-bearers and hoplites jostling
together:
the whole a hopeless jumble. And when
it
comes to fighting, such an army is
not precisely
in condition to deliver battle. The
troops
who are compelled to retreat before
the enemy's
advance[6] are fully capable of trampling
down the heavy infantry detachments
in reserve.[7]
[5] Reading {agleukestaton}, or, if
with
Breit, {akleestaton}, "a most
inglorious
spectacle of extreme unprofitableness."
[6] Or, "whose duty (or necessity)
it
is to retire before an attack,"
i. e.
the skirmishers. Al. "those who
have
to retreat," i. e. the non-combatants.
[7] Al. "are quite capable of
trampling
down the troops behind in their retreat."
{tous opla ekhontas} = "the troops
proper,"
"heavy infantry."
"How different is an army well
organised
in battle order: a splendid sight for
friendly
eyes to gaze at, albeit an eyesore
to the
enemy. For who, being of their party,
but
will feel a thrill of satisfaction
as he
watches the serried masses of heavy
infantry
moving onwards in unbroken order? who
but
will gaze with wonderment as the squadrons
of the cavalry dash past him at the
gallop?
And what of the foeman? will not his
heart
sink within him to see the orderly
arrangements
of the different arms:[8] here heavy
infantry
and cavalry, and there again light
infantry,
there archers and there slingers, following
each their leaders, with orderly precision.
As they tramp onwards thus in order,
though
they number many myriads, yet even
so they
move on and on in quiet progress, stepping
like one man, and the place just vacated
in front is filled up on the instant
from
the rear.
[8] "Different styles of troops
drawn
up in separate divisions: hoplites,
cavalry,
and peltasts, archers, and slingers."
"Or picture a trireme, crammed
choke-full
of mariners; for what reason is she
so terror-striking
an object to her enemies, and a sight
so
gladsome to the eyes of friends? is
it not
that the gallant ship sails so swiftly?
And
why is it that, for all their crowding,
the
ship's company[9] cause each other
no distress?
Simply that there, as you may see them,
they
sit in order; in order bend to the
oar; in
order recover the stroke; in order
step on
board; in order disembark. But disorder
is,
it seems to me, precisely as though
a man
who is a husbandman should stow away[10]
together in one place wheat and barley
and
pulse, and by and by when he has need
of
barley meal, or wheaten flour, or some
condiment
of pulse,[11] then he must pick and
choose
instead of laying his hand on each
thing
separately sorted for use.
[9] See Thuc. iii. 77. 2.
[10] "Should shoot into one place."
[11] "Vegetable stock," "kitchen."
See Holden ad loc., and Prof. Mahaffy,
"Old
Greek Life," p. 31.
"And so with you too, my wife,
if you
would avoid this confusion, if you
would
fain know how to administer our goods,
so
as to lay your finger readily on this
or
that as you may need, or if I ask you
for
anything, graciously to give it me:
let us,
I say, select and assign[12] the appropriate
place for each set of things. This
shall
be the place where we will put the
things;
and we will instruct the housekeeper
that
she is to take them out thence, and
mind
to put them back again there; and in
this
way we shall know whether they are
safe or
not. If anything is gone, the gaping
space
will cry out as if it asked for something
back.[13] The mere look and aspect
of things
will argue what wants mending;[14]
and the
fact of knowing where each thing is
will
be like having it put into one's hand
at
once to use without further trouble
or debate."
[12] {dokimasometha}, "we will
write
over each in turn, as it were, 'examined
and approved.'"
[13] Lit. "will miss the thing
that
is not."
[14] "Detect what needs attention."
I must tell you, Socrates, what strikes
me
as the finest and most accurate arrangement
of goods and furniture it was ever
my fortune
to set eyes on; when I went as a sightseer
on board the great Phoenician merchantman,[15]
and beheld an endless quantity of goods
and
gear of all sorts, all separately packed
and stowed away within the smallest
compass.[16]
I need scarce remind you (he said,
continuing
his narrative) what a vast amount of
wooden
spars and cables[17] a ship depends
on in
order to get to moorings; or again,
in putting
out to sea;[18] you know the host of
sails
and cordage, rigging[19] as they call
it,
she requires for sailing; the quantity
of
engines and machinery of all sorts
she is
armed with in case she should encounter
any
hostile craft; the infinitude of arms
she
carries, with her crew of fighting
men aboard.
Then all the vessels and utensils,
such as
people use at home on land, required
for
the different messes, form a portion
of the
freight; and besides all this, the
hold is
heavy laden with a mass of merchandise,
the
cargo proper, which the master carries
with
him for the sake of traffic.
[15] See Lucian, lxvi. "The Ship,"
ad in. (translated by S. T. Irwin).
[16] Lit. "in the tiniest receptacle."
[17] See Holden ad loc. re {xelina,
plekta,
kremasta}.
[18] "In weighing anchor."
[19] "Suspended tackle" (as
opposed
to wooden spars and masts, etc.)
Well, all these different things that
I have
named lay packed there in a space but
little
larger than a fair-sized dining-room.[20]
The several sorts, moreover, as I noticed,
lay so well arranged, there could be
no entanglement
of one with other, nor were searchers
needed;[21]
and if all were snugly stowed, all
were alike
get-at- able,[22] much to the avoidance
of
delay if anything were wanted on the
instant.
[20] Lit. "a symmetrically-shaped
dining-room,
made to hold ten couches."
[21] Lit. "a searcher"; "an
inquisitor." Cf. Shakesp. "Rom.
and Jul." V. ii. 8.
[22] Lit. "not the reverse of
easy to
unpack, so as to cause a waste of time
and
waiting."
Then the pilot's mate[23]--"the
look-out
man at the prow," to give him
his proper
title--was, I found, so well acquainted
with
the place for everything that, even
off the
ship,[24] he could tell you where each
set
of things was laid and how many there
were
of each, just as well as any one who
knows
his alphabet[25] could tell you how
many
letters there are in Socrates and the
order
in which they stand.
[23] Cf. "Pol. Ath." i. 1;
Aristoph.
"Knights," 543 foll.
[24] Or, "with his eyes shut,
at a distance
he could say exactly."
[25] Or, "how to spell."
See "Mem."
IV. iv. 7; Plat. "Alc." i.
113
A.
I saw this same man (continued Ischomachus)
examining at leisure[26] everything
which
could possibly[27] be needful for the
service
of the ship. His inspection caused
me such
surprise, I asked him what he was doing,
whereupon he answered, "I am inspecting,
stranger,"[28] "just considering,"
says he, "the way the things are
lying
aboard the ship; in case of accidents,
you
know, to see if anything is missing,
or not
lying snug and shipshape.[29] There
is no
time left, you know," he added,
"when
God mkes a tempest in the great deep,
to
set about searching for what you want,
or
to be giving out anything which is
not snug
and shipshape in its place. God threatens
and chastises sluggards.[30] If only
He destroy
not innocent with guilty, a man may
be content;[31]
or if He turn and save all hands aboard
that
render right good service,[32] thanks
be
to Heaven."[33]
[26] "Apparently when he had nothing
better to do"; "by way of
amusement."
[27] {ara}, "as if he were asking
himself,
'Would this or this possibly be wanted
for
the ship's service?'"
[28] "Sir."
[29] Or, "things not lying handy
in
their places."
[30] Or, "them that are slack."
Cf. "Anab." V. viii. 15;
"Mem."
IV. ii. 40; Plat. "Gorg."
488 A:
"The dolt and good-for-nothing."
[31] "One must not grumble."
[32] "The whole ship's crew right
nobly
serving." {uperetein} = "to
serve
at the oar" (metaphorically =
to do
service to heaven).
[33] Lit. "great thanks be to
the gods."
So spoke the pilot's mate; and I, with
this
carefulness of stowage still before
my eyes,
proceeded to enforce my thesis:
"Stupid in all conscience would
it be
on our parts, my wife, if those who
sail
the sea in ships, that are but small
things,
can discover space and place for everything;
can, moreover, in spite of violent
tossings
up and down, keep order, and, even
while
their hearts are failing them for fear,
find
everything they need to hand; whilst
we,
with all our ample storerooms[34] diversely
disposed for divers objects in our
mansion,
an edifice firmly based[35] on solid
ground,
fail to discover fair and fitting places,
easy of access for our several goods!
Would
not that argue great lack of understanding
in our two selves? Well then! how good
a
thing it is to have a fixed and orderly
arrangement
of all furniture and gear; how easy
also
in a dwelling-house to find a place
for every
sort of goods, in which to stow them
as shall
suit each best--needs no further comment.
Rather let me harp upon the string
of beauty--image
a fair scene: the boots and shoes and
sandals,
and so forth, all laid in order row
upon
row; the cloaks, the mantles, and the
rest
of the apparel stowed in their own
places;
the coverlets and bedding; the copper
cauldrons;
and all the articles for table use!
Nay,
though it well may raise a smile of
ridicule
(not on the lips of a grave man perhaps,
but of some facetious witling) to hear
me
say it, a beauty like the cadence of
sweet
music[36] dwells even in pots and pans
set
out in neat array: and so, in general,
fair
things ever show more fair when orderly
bestowed.
The separate atoms shape themselves
to form
a choir, and all the space between
gains
beauty by their banishment. Even so
some
sacred chorus,[37] dancing a roundelay
in
honour of Dionysus, not only is a thing
of
beauty in itself, but the whole interspace
swept clean of dancers owns a separate
charm.[38]
[34] Or, "coffers," "cupboards,"
"safes."
[35] Cf. "Anab." III. ii.
19, "firmly
planted on terra firma."
[36] Or, "like the rhythm of a
song,"
{euruthmon}. See Mr. Ruskin's most
appropriate
note ("Bib. Past." i. 59),
"A
remarkable word, as significant of
the complete
rhythm ({ruthmos}) whether of sound
or motion,
that was so great a characteristic
of the
Greek ideal (cf. xi. 16, {metarruthmizo}),"
and much more equally to the point.
[37] "Just as a chorus, the while
its
dancers weave a circling dance."
[38] Or, "contrasting with the
movement
and the mazes of the dance, a void
appears
serene and beautiful."
"The truth of what I say, we easily
can test, my wife," I added, "by
direct experiment, and that too without
cost
at all or even serious trouble.[39]
Nor need
you now distress yourself, my wife,
to think
how hard it will be to discover some
one
who has wit enough to learn the places
for
the several things and memory to take
and
place them there. We know, I fancy,
that
the goods of various sorts contained
in the
whole city far outnumber ours many
thousand
times; and yet you have only to bid
any one
of your domestics go buy this, or that,
and
bring it you from market, and not one
of
them will hesitate. The whole world
knows
both where to go and where to find
each thing.
[39] Lit. "now whether these things
I say are true (i. e. are facts), we
can
make experiment of the things themselves
(i. e. of actual facts to prove to
us)."
"And why is this?" I asked.
"Merely
because they lie in an appointed place.
But
now, if you are seeking for a human
being,
and that too at times when he is seeking
you on his side also, often and often
shall
you give up the search in sheer despair:
and of this again the reason? Nothing
else
save that no appointed place was fixed
where
one was to await the other." Such,
so
far as I can now recall it, was the
conversation
which we held together touching the
arrangement
of our various chattels and their uses.
IX
Well (I replied), and did your wife
appear,
Ischomachus, to lend a willing ear
to what
you tried thus earnestly to teach her?
Isch. Most certainly she did, with
promise
to pay all attention. Her delight was
evident,
like some one's who at length has found
a
pathway out of difficulties; in proof
of
which she begged me to lose no time
in making
the orderly arrangement I had spoken
of.
And how did you introduce the order
she demanded,
Ischomachus? (I asked).
Isch. Well, first of all I thought
I ought
to show her the capacities of our house.
Since you must know, it is not decked
with
ornaments and fretted ceilings,[1]
Socrates;
but the rooms were built expressly
with a
view to forming the most apt receptacles
for whatever was intended to be put
in them,
so that the very look of them proclaimed
what suited each particular chamber
best.
Thus our own bedroom,[2] secure in
its position
like a stronghold, claimed possession
of
our choicest carpets, coverlets, and
other
furniture. Thus, too, the warm dry
rooms
would seem to ask for our stock of
bread-stuffs;
the chill cellar for our wine; the
bright
and well-lit chambers for whatever
works
or furniture required light, and so
forth.
[1] Or, "curious workmanship and
paintings."
See "Mem." III. viii. 10.
Cf. Plat.
"Rep." vii. 529 B; "Hipp.
maj." 298 A. See Becker, "Charicles,"
Exc. i. 111.
[2] Or, "the bridal chamber."
See
Becker, op. cit. p. 266. Al. "our
store-chamber."
See Hom. "Od." xxi. 9:
{be d' imenai thalamonde sun amphipoloisi
gunaixin eskhaton, k. t. l.}
"And she (Penelope) betook her,
with
her handmaidens, to the treasure-chamber
in the uttermost part of the house,
where
lay the treasures of her lord, bronze
and
gold and iron well wrought."--
Butcher
and Lang. Cf. "Od." ii. 337;
"Il."
vi. 288.
Next I proceeded to point out to her
the
several dwelling-rooms, all beautifully
fitted
up for cool in summer and for warmth
in winter.[3]
I showed her how the house enjoyed
a southern
aspect, whence it was plain, in winter
it
would catch the sunlight and in summer
lie
in shade.[4] Then I showed her the
women's
apartments, separated from the men's
apartments
by a bolted door,[5] whereby nothing
from
within could be conveyed without clandestinely,
nor children born and bred by our domestics
without our knowledge and consent[6]--no
unimportant matter, since, if the act
of
rearing children tends to make good
servants
still more loyally disposed,[7] cohabiting
but sharpens ingenuity for mischief
in the
bad.
[3] See "Mem." III. viii.
8.
[4] See "Mem." ib. 9.
[5] "By bolts and bars."
Lit. "a
door fitted with a bolt-pin."
See Thuc.
ii. 4; Aristoph. "Wasps,"
200.
[6] Cf. (Aristot.) "Oecon."
i.
5, {dei de kai exomereuein tais teknopoiiais}.
[7] Lit. "since (you know) if
the good
sort of servant is rendered, as a rule,
better
disposed when he becomes a father,
the base,
through intermarrying, become only
more ripe
for mischief."
When we had gone over all the rooms
(he continued),
we at once set about distribution our
furniture[8]
in classes; and we began (he said)
by collecting
everything we use in offering sacrifice.[9]
After this we proceeded to set apart
the
ornaments and holiday attire of the
wife,
and the husband's clothing both for
festivals
and war; then the bedding used in the
women's
apartments, and the bedding used in
the men's
apartments; then the women's shoes
and sandals,
and the shoes and sandals of the men.[10]
There was one division devoted to arms
and
armour; another to instruments used
for carding
wood; another to implements for making
bread;
another to utensils for cooking condiments;
another to utensils for the bath; another
connected with the kneading trough;
another
with the service of the table. All
these
we assigned to separate places, distinguishing
one portion for daily and recurrent
use and
the rest for high days and holidays.
Next
we selected and set aside the supplies
required
for the month's expenditure; and, under
a
separate head,[11] we stored away what
we
computed would be needed for the year.[12]
For in this way there is less chance
of failing
to note how the supplies are likely
to last
to the end.
[8] "Movable property," "meubles."
[9] Holden cf. Plut. "De Curios."
515 E, {os gar Xenophon legei toi Oikonomikois,
k. t. l.}
[10] Cf. "Cyrop." VIII. ii.
5.
See Becker, op. cit. p. 447.
[11] See Cic. ap. Col. who curiously
mistranslates
{dikha}.
[12] Schneider, etc., cf. Aristot.
"Oecon."
i. 6.
And so having arranged the different
articles
of furniture in classes, we proceeded
to
convey them to their appropriate places.
That done, we directed our attention
to the
various articles needed by our domestics
for daily use, such as implements or
utensils
for making bread, cooking relishes,
spinning
wool, and anything else of the same
sort.
These we consigned to the care of those
who
would have to use them, first pointing
out
where they must stow them, and enjoining
on them to return them safe and sound
when
done with.
As to the other things which we should
only
use on feast-days, or for the entertainment
of guests, or on other like occasions
at
long intervals, we delivered them one
and
all to our housekeeper. Having pointed
out
to her their proper places, and having
numbered
and registered[13] the several sets
of articles,
we explained that it was her business
to
give out each thing as required; to
recollect
to whom she gave them; and when she
got them
back, to restore them severally to
the places
from which she took them. In appointing
our
housekeeper, we had taken every pains
to
discover some one on whose self-restraint
we might depend, not only in the matters
of food and wine and sleep, but also
in her
intercourse with men. She must besides,
to
please us, be gifted with no ordinary
memory.
She must have sufficient forethought
not
to incur displeasure through neglect
of our
interests. It must be her object to
gratify
us in this or that, and in return to
win
esteem and honour at our hands. We
set ourselves
to teach and train her to feel a kindly
disposition
towards us, by allowing her to share
our
joys in the day of gladness, or, if
aught
unkind befell us, by inviting her to
sympathise
in our sorrow. We sought to rouse in
her
a zeal for our interests, an eagerness
to
promote the increase of our estate,
by making
her intelligent of its affairs, and
by giving
her a share in our successes. We instilled
in her a sense of justice and uprightness,
by holding the just in higher honour
than
the unjust, and by pointing out that
the
lives of the righteous are richer and
less
servile than those of the unrighteous;
and
this was the position in which she
found
herself installed in our household.[14]
[13] Or, "having taken an inventory
of the several sets of things."
Cf.
"Ages." i. 18; "Cyrop."
VII. iv. 12. See Newman, op. cit. i.
171.
[14] Or, "and this was the position
in which we presently established her
herself."
And now, on the strength of all that
we had
done, Socrates (he added), I addressed
my
wife, explaining that all these things
would
fail of use unless she took in charge
herself
to see that the order of each several
part
was kept. Thereupon I taught her that
in
every well- constituted city the citizens
are not content merely to pass good
laws,
but they further choose them guardians
of
the laws,[15] whose function as inspectors
is to praise the man whose acts are
law-
abiding, or to mulct some other who
offends
against the law. Accordingly, I bade
her
believe that she, the mistress, was
herself
to play the part of guardian of the
laws
to her whole household, examining whenever
it seemed good to her, and passing
in review
the several chattels, just as the officer
in command of a garrison[16] musters
and
reviews his men. She must apply her
scrutiny
and see that everything was well, even
as
the Senate[17] tests the condition
of the
Knights and of their horses.[18] Like
a queen,
she must bestow, according to the power
vested
in her, praise and honour on the well-
deserving,
but blame and chastisement on him who
stood
in need thereof.
[15] See Plat. "Laws," vi.
755
A, 770 C; Aristot. "Pol."
iii.
15, 1287 A; iv. 14, 1298 B; vi. 8,
1323 A;
"Ath. Pol." viii. 4; and
Cic. ap.
Col. xii. 3. 10 f. Holden cf. Cic.
"de
Legg." iii. 20, S. 46; "C.
I. G."
3794.
[16] Lit. Phrourarch, "the commandant."
[17] Or, "Council" at Athens.
[18] Cf. "Hipparch." i. 8,
13.
Nor did my lessons end here (added
he); I
taught her that she must not be annoyed
should
I seem to be enjoining upon her more
trouble
than upon any of our domestics with
regard
to our possessions; pointing out to
her that
these domestics have only so far a
share
in their master's chattels that they
must
fetch and carry, tend and guard them;
nor
have they the right to use a single
one of
them except the master grant it. But
to the
master himself all things pertain to
use
as he thinks best. And so I pointed
the conclusion:
he to whom the greater gain attaches
in the
preservation of the property or loss
in its
destruction, is surely he to whom by
right
belongs the larger measure of attention.[19]
[19] Or, "he it is on whom devolves
as his concern the duty of surveillance."
When, then (I asked), Ischomachus,
how fared
it? was your wife disposed at all to
lend
a willing ear to what you told her?[20]
[20] Lit. "when she heard did
she give
ear at all?"
Bless you,[21] Socrates (he answered),
what
did she do but forthwith answer me,
I formed
a wrong opinion if I fancied that,
in teaching
her the need of minding our property,
I was
imposing a painful task upon her. A
painful
task it might have been[22] (she added),
had I bade her neglect her personal
concerns!
But to be obliged to fulfil the duty
of attending
to her own domestic happiness,[23]
that was
easy. After all it would seem to be
but natural
(added he); just as any honest[24]
woman
finds it easier to care for her own
offspring
than to neglect them, so, too, he could
well
believe, an honest woman might find
it pleasanter
to care for than to neglect possessions,
the very charm of which is that they
are
one's very own.
[21] Lit. "By Hera!" Cf.
the old
formula "Marry!" or "By'r
lakin!"
[22] Lit. "more painful had it
been,
had I enjoined her to neglect her own
interests
than to be obliged . . ."
[23] {ton oikeion agathon}, cp. "charity
begins at home." See Joel, op.
cit.
p. 448.
[24] Or, "true and honest";
"any
woman worthy of the name." {sophroni}
= with the {sophrosune} of womanhood;
possibly
transl. "discreet and sober-minded."
X
So (continued Socrates), when I heard
his
wife had made this answer, I exclaimed:
By
Hera, Ischomachus, a brave and masculine
intelligence the lady has, as you describe
her.
(To which Ischomachus) Yes, Socrates,
and
I would fain narrate some other instances
of like large-mindedness on her part:
shown
in the readiness with which she listened
to my words and carried out my wishes.
What sort of thing? (I answered). Do,
pray,
tell me, since I would far more gladly
learn
about a living woman's virtues than
that
Zeuxis[1] should show me the portrait
of
the loveliest woman he has painted.
[1] See "Mem." I. iv. 3.
Whereupon Ischomachus proceeded to
narrate
as follows: I must tell you, Socrates,
I
one day noticed she was much enamelled
with
white lead,[2] no doubt to enhance
the natural
whitenes of her skin; she had rouged
herself
with alkanet[3] profusely, doubtless
to give
more colour to her cheeks than truth
would
warrant; she was wearing high- heeled
shoes,
in order to seem taller than she was
by nature.[4]
[2] Cf. Aristoph. "Eccl."
878;
ib. 929, {egkhousa mallon kai to son
psimuthion}:
ib. 1072; "Plut." 1064.
[3] Lit. "enamelled or painted
with
anchusa or alkanet," a plant,
the wild
bugloss, whose root yields a red dye.
Cf.
Aristoph. "Lys."
48; Theophr. "H. Pl." vii.
8. 3.
[4] See Becker, op. cit. p. 452; Breit.
cf.
"Anab." III. ii. 25; "Mem."
II. i. 22; Aristot. "Eth. Nic."
iv. 3, 5, "True beauty requires
a great
body."
Accordingly I put to her this question:[5]
"Tell me, my wife, would you esteem
me a less lovable co-partner in our
wealth,
were I to show you how our fortune
stands
exactly, without boasting of unreal
possessions
or concealing what we really have?
Or would
you prefer that I should try to cheat
you
with exaggeration, exhibiting false
money
to you, or sham[6] necklaces, or flaunting
purples[7] which will lose their colour,
stating they are genuine the while?"
[5] Lit. "So I said to her, 'Tell
me,
my wife, after which fashion would
you find
me the more delectable partner in our
joint
estate
--were I to . . .? or were I to . .
.?'"
[6] Lit. "only wood coated with
gold."
[7] See Becker, op. cit. p. 434 f;
Holden
cf. Athen. ix. 374, xii.
525; Ael. "V. H." xii. 32;
Aristoph.
"Plut." 533.
She caught me up at once: "Hush,
hush!"
she said, "talk not such talk.
May heaven
forfend that you should ever be like
that.
I could not love you with my whole
heart
were you really of that sort."
"And are we two not come together,"
I continued, "for a closer partnership,
being each a sharer in the other's
body?"
"That, at any rate, is what folk
say,"
she answered.
"Then as regards this bodily relation,"
I proceeded, "should you regard
me as
more lovable or less did I present
myself,
my one endeavour and my sole care being
that
my body should be hale and strong and
thereby
well complexioned, or would you have
me first
anoint myself with pigments,[8] smear
my
eyes with patches[9] of 'true flesh
colour,'[10]
and so seek your embrace, like a cheating
consort presenting to his mistress's
sight
and touch vermillion paste instead
of his
own flesh?"
[8] "Red lead."
[9] Cf. Aristoph. "Ach."
1029.
[10] {andreikelon}. Cf. Plat. "Rep."
501 B, "the human complexion";
"Crat." 424 E.
"Frankly," she answered,
"it
would not please me better to touch
paste
than your true self. Rather would I
see your
own 'true flesh colour' than any pigment
of that name; would liefer look into
your
eyes and see them radiant with health
than
washed with any wash, or dyed with
any ointment
there may be."
"Believe the same, my wife, of
me then,"
Ischomachus continued (so he told me);
"believe
that I too am not better pleased with
white
enamel or with alkanet than with your
own
natural hue; but as the gods have fashioned
horses to delight in horses, cattle
in cattle,
sheep in their fellow sheep, so to
human
beings the human body pure and undefiled
is sweetest;[11] and as to these deceits,
though they may serve to cheat the
outside
world without detection, yet if intimates
try to deceive each other, they must
one
day be caught; in rising from their
beds,
before they make their toilet; by a
drop
of sweat they stand convicted; tears
are
an ordeal they cannot pass; the bath
reveals
them as they truly are."
[11] See "Mem." II. i. 22.
What answer (said I) did she make,
in Heaven's
name, to what you said?
What, indeed (replied the husband),
save
only, that thenceforward she never
once indulged
in any practice of the sort, but has
striven
to display the natural beauty of her
person
in its purity. She did, however, put
to me
a question: Could I advise her how
she might
become not in false show but really
fair
to look upon?
This, then, was the counsel which I
gave
her, Socrates: Not to be for ever seated
like a slave;[12] but, with Heaven's
help,
to assume the attitude of a true mistress
standing before the loom, and where
her knowledge
gave her the superiority, bravely to
give
the aid of her instruction; where her
knowledge
failed, as bravely try to learn. I
counselled
her to oversee the baking woman as
she made
the bread; to stand beside the housekeeper
as she measured out her stores; to
go tours
of inspection to see if all things
were in
order as they should be. For, as it
seemed
to me, this would at once be walking
exercise
and supervision. And, as an excellent
gymnastic,
I recommended her to knead the dough
and
roll the paste; to shake the coverlets
and
make the beds; adding, if she trained
herself
in exercise of this sort she would
enjoy
her food, grow vigorous in health,
and her
complexion would in very truth be lovelier.
The very look and aspect of the wife,
the
mistress, seen in rivalry with that
of her
attendants, being as she is at once
more
fair[13] and more beautifully adorned,
has
an attractive charm,[14] and not the
less
because her acts are acts of grace,
not services
enforced. Whereas your ordinary fine
lady,
seated in solemn state, would seem
to court
comparison with painted counterfeits
of womanhood.
[12] See Becker, p. 491. Breit., etc.,
cf.
Nicostr. ap. Stob. "Tit."
lxxiv.
61.
[13] Lit. "more spotles";
"like
a diamond of purest water." Cf.
Shakesp.
"Lucr." 394, "whose
perfect
white Showed like an April daisy in
the grass."
[14] Or, "is wondrous wooing,
and all
the more with this addition, hers are
acts
of grace, theirs services enforced."
And, Socrates, I would have you know
that
still to-day, my wife is living in
a style
as simple as that I taught her then,
and
now recount to you.
XI
The conversation was resumed as follows:
Thanking Ischomachus for what he had
told
me about the occupations of his wife;
on
that side I have heard enough (I said)
perhaps
for a beginning; the facts you mention
reflect
the greatest credit on both wife and
husband;
but would you now in turn describe
to me
your work and business? In doing so
you will
have the pleasure of narrating the
reason
of your fame. And I, for my part, when
I
have heard from end to end the story
of a
beautiful and good man's works, if
only my
wits suffice and I have understood
it, shall
be much indebted.
Indeed (replied Ischomachus), it will
give
me the greatest pleasure to recount
to you
my daily occupations, and in return
I beg
you to reform me, where you find some
flaw
or other in my conduct.[1]
[1] Lit. "in order that you on
your
side may correct and set me right where
I
seem to you to act amiss." {metarruthmises}--remodel.
Cf. Aristot. "Nic. Eth."
x. 9.
5.
The idea of my reforming you! (I said).
How
could I with any show of justice hope
to
reform you, the perfect model[2] of
a beautiful,
good man--I, who am but an empty babbler,[3]
and measurer of the air,[4] who have
to bear
besides that most senseless imputation
of
being poor
--an imputation which, I assure you,
Ischomachus,
would have reduced me to the veriest
despair,
except that the other day I chanced
to come
across the horse of Nicias,[5] the
foreigner?
I saw a crowd of people in attendance
staring,
and I listened to a story which some
one
had to tell about the animal. So then
I stepped
up boldly to the groom and asked him,
"Has
the horse much wealth?" The fellow
looked
at me as if I were hardly in my right
mind
to put the question, and retorted,
"How
can a horse have wealth?" Thereat
I
dared to lift my eyes from earth, on
learning
that after all it is permitted a poor
penniless
horse to be a noble animal, if nature
only
have endowed him with good spirit.
If, therefore,
it is permitted even to me to be a
good man,
please recount to me your works from
first
to last, I promise, I will listen,
all I
can, and try to understand, and so
far as
in me lies to imitate you from to-morrow.
To-morrow is a good day to commence
a course
of virtue, is it not?
[2] Cf. Plat. "Rep." 566
A, "a
tyrant full grown" (Jowett).
[3] Cf. Plat. "Phaed." 70
C; Aristoph.
"Clouds," 1480.
[4] Or rather, "a measurer of
air"--i.
e. devoted not to good sound solid
"geometry,"
but the unsubstantial science of "aerometry."
See Aristoph. "Clouds," i.
225;
Plat. "Apol." 18 B, 19 B;
Xen.
"Symp." vi. 7.
[5] Nothing is known of this person.
You are pleased to jest, Socrates (Ischomachus
replied), in spite of which I will
recount
to you those habits and pursuits by
aid of
which I seek to traverse life's course.
If
I have read aright life's lesson, it
has
taught me that, unless a man first
discover
what he needs to do, and seriously
study
to bring the same to good effect, the
gods
have placed prosperity[6] beyond his
reach;
and even to the wise and careful they
give
or they withhold good fortune as seemeth
to them best. Such being my creed,
I begin
with service rendered to the gods;
and strive
to regulate my conduct so that grace
may
be given me, in answer to my prayers,
to
attain to health, and strength of body,
honour
in my own city, goodwill among my friends,
safety with renown in war, and of riches
increase, won without reproach.
[6] "The gods have made well-doing
and
well-being a thing impossible."
Cf.
"Mem." III. ix. 7, 14.
I, when I heard these words, replied:
And
are you then indeed so careful to grow
rich,
Ischomachus?--amassing wealth but to
gain
endless trouble in its management?
Most certainly (replied Ischomachus),
and
most careful must I needs be of the
things
you speak of. So sweet I find it, Socrates,
to honour God magnificently, to lend
assistance
to my friends in answer to their wants,
and,
so far as lies within my power, not
to leave
my city unadorned with anything which
riches
can bestow.
Nay (I answered), beautiful indeed
the works
you speak of, and powerful the man
must be
who would essay them. How can it be
otherwise,
seeing so many human beings need the
help
of others merely to carry on existence,
and
so many are content if they can win
enough
to satisfy their wants. What of those
therefore
who are able, not only to administer
their
own estates, but even to create a surplus
sufficient to adorn their city and
relieve
the burthen of their friends? Well
may we
regard such people as men of substance
and
capacity. But stay (I added), most
of us
are competent to sing the praises of
such
heroes. What I desire is to hear from
you,
Ischomachus, in your own order,[7]
first
how you study to preserve your health
and
strength of body; and next, how it
is granted
to you[8] to escape from the perils
of war
with honour untarnished. And after
that (I
added), it will much content me to
learn
from your own lips about your money-making.
[7] "And from your own starting-point."
[8] As to the construction {themis
einai}
see Jebb ad "Oed. Col."
1191, Appendix.
Yes (he answered), and the fact is,
Socrates,
if I mistake not, all these matters
are in
close connection, each depending on
the other.
Given that a man have a good meal to
eat,
he has only to work off the effect
by toil[9]
directed rightly; and in the process,
if
I mistake not, his health will be confirmed,
his strength added to. Let him but
practise
the arts of war and in the day of battle
he will preserve his life with honour.
He
needs only to expend his care aright,
sealing
his ears to weak and soft seductions,
and
his house shall surely be increased.[10]
[9] See "Mem." I. ii. 4;
"Cyrop."
I. ii. 16. Al. "bring out the
effect
of it by toil."
[10] Lit. "it is likely his estate
will
increase more largely."
I answered: So far I follow you, Ischomachus.
You tell me that by labouring to his
full
strength,[11] by expending care, by
practice
and training, a man may hope more fully
to
secure life's blessings. So I take
your meaning.
But now I fain would learn of you some
details.
What particular toil do you impose
on yourself
in order to secure good health and
strength?
After what particular manner do you
practise
the arts of war? How do you take pains
to
create a surplus which will enable
you to
benefit your friends and to gratify
the state?
[11] Or, "by working off ill-humours,"
as we should say.
Why then (Ischomachus replied), my
habit
is to rise from bed betimes, when I
may still
expect to find at home this, that,
or the
other friend, whom I may wish to see.
Then,
if anything has to be done in town,
I set
off to transact the business and make
that
my walk;[12] or, if there is no business
to do in town, my serving-boy leads
my horse
to the farm; I follow, and so make
the country-road
my walk, which suits my purpose quite
as
well, or better, Socrates, perhaps,
than
pacing up and down the colonade.[13]
Then
when I have reached the farm, where
mayhap
some of my men are planting trees,
or breaking
fallow, sowing or getting in the crops,
I
inspect their various labours with
an eye
to every detail, and, whenever I can
improve
upon the present system, I introduce
reform.
After this, as a rule, I mount my horse
and
take a canter. I put him through his
paces,
suiting these, as far as possible,
to those
inevitable in war[14]--in other words,
I
avoid neither steep slope[15] nor sheer
incline,
neither trench nor runnel, only giving
my
utmost heed the while so as not to
lame my
horse while exercising him. When that
is
over, the boy gives the horse a roll,[16]
and leads him homewards, taking at
the same
time from the country to town whatever
we
may chance to need. Meanwhile I am
off for
home, partly walking, partly running,
and
having reached home I take a bath and
give
myself a rub;[17] and then I breakfast--a
repast which leaves me neither empty
nor
replete,[18] and will suffice to last
me
through the day.
[12] See "Mem." III. xiii.
5.
[13] {xusto}--the xystus, "a covered
corrider in the gymnasium where the
athletes
exercised in winter." Vitruv.
v. 11.
4; vi. 7. 5. See Rich, "Companion,"
s. n.; Becker, op. cit. p. 309. Cf.
Plat.
"Phaedr." 227--Phaedrus loq.:
"I
have come from Lysias the son of Cephalus,
and I am going to take a walk outside
the
wall, for I have been sitting with
him the
whole morning; and our common friend
Acumenus
advises me to walk in the country,
which
he says is more invigorating than to
walk
in the courts."--Jowett.
[14] See "Horsemanship,"
iii. 7
foll.; ib. viii.; "Hipparch,"
i.
18.
[15] "Slanting hillside."
[16] See "Horsemanship,"
v. 3;
Aristoph. "Clouds," 32.
[17] Lit. "scrape myself clean"
(with the {stleggis} or strigil. Cf.
Aristoph.
"Knights," 580. See Becker,
op.
cit. p. 150.
[18] See "Lac. Pol." ii.
5. Cf.
Hor. "Sat." i. 6. 127:
pransus non avide, quantum interpellet
inani
ventre diem durare.
Then eat a temperate luncheon, just
to stay
A sinking stomach till the close of
day (Conington).
By Hera (I replied), Ischomachus, I
cannot
say how much your doings take my fancy.
How
you have contrived, to pack up portably
for
use-- together at the same time--appliances
for health and recipes for strength,
exercises
for war, and pains to promote your
wealth!
My admiration is raised at every point.
That
you do study each of these pursuits
in the
right way, you are yourself a standing
proof.
Your look of heaven-sent health and
general
robustness we note with our eyes, while
our
ears have heard your reputation as
a first-rate
horseman and the wealthiest of men.
Isch. Yes, Socrates, such is my conduct,
in return for which I am rewarded with--the
calumnies of half the world. You thought,
I daresay, I was going to end my sentence
different, and say that a host of people
have given me the enviable title "beautiful
and good."
I was indeed myself about to ask, Ischomachus
(I answered), whether you take pains
also
to acquire skill in argumentative debate,
the cut and thrust and parry of discussion,[19]
should occasion call?
[19] Lit. "to give a reason and
to get
a reason from others." Cf. "Cyrop."
I. iv. 3.
Isch. Does it not strike you rather,
Socrates,
that I am engaged in one long practice
of
this very skill,[20] now pleading as
defendant
that, as far as I am able, I do good
to many
and hurt nobody? And then, again, you
must
admit, I play the part of prosecutor
when
accusing people whom I recognise to
be offenders,
as a rule in private life, or possibly
against
the state, the good-for-nothing fellows?
[20] "The arts of the defendant,
the
apologist; and of the plaintiff, the
prosecutor."
But please explain one other thing,
Ischomachus
(I answered). Do you put defence and
accusation
into formal language?[21]
[21] "Does your practice include
the
art of translating into words your
sentiments?"
Cf. "Mem." I. ii. 52.
Isch. "Formal language,"
say you,
Socrates? The fact is, I never cease
to practise
speaking; and on this wise: Some member
of
my household has some charge to bring,
or
some defence to make,[22] against some
other.
I have to listen and examine. I must
try
to sift the truth. Or there is some
one whom
I have to blame or praise before my
friends,
or I must arbitrate between some close
connections
and endeavour to enforce the lesson
that
it is to their own interests to be
friends
not foes.[23] . . . We are present
to assist
a general in court;[24] we are called
upon
to censure some one; or defend some
other
charged unjustly; or to prosecute a
third
who has received an honour which he
ill deserves.
It frequently occurs in our debates[25]
that
there is some course which we strongly
favour:
naturally we sound its praises; or
some other,
which we disapprove of: no less naturally
we point out its defects.
[22] Or, "One member of my household
appears as plaintiff, another as defendant.
I must listen and cross-question."
[23] The "asyndeton" would
seem
to mark a pause, unless some words
have dropped
out. See the commentators ad loc.
[24] The scene is perhaps that of a
court-martial
(cf. "Anab." V. viii.; Dem.
"c.
Timocr." 749. 16). (Al. cf. Sturz,
"Lex."
s. v. "we are present (as advocates)
and censure some general"), or
more
probably, I think, that of a civil
judicial
inquiry of some sort, conducted at
a later
date by the Minister of Finance ({to
stratego
to epi tas summorias eremeno}).
[25] Or, "Or again, a frequent
case,
we sit in council" (as members
of the
Boule). See Aristot. "Pol."
iv.
15.
He paused, then added: Things have
indeed
now got so far, Socrates, that several
times
I have had to stand my trial and have
judgment
passed upon me in set terms, what I
must
pay or what requital I must make.[26]
[26] See "Symp." v. 8. Al.
{dielemmenos}
= "to be taken apart and have
. . ."
And at whose bar (I asked) is the sentence
given? That point I failed to catch.[27]
[27] Or, "so dull was I, I failed
to
catch the point."
Whose but my own wife's? (he answered).
And, pray, how do you conduct your
own case?
(I asked).[28]
[28] See "Mem." III. vii.
4; Plat.
"Euth." 3 E.
Not so ill (he answered), when truth
and
interest correspond, but when they
are opposed,
Socrates, I have no skill to make the
worse
appear the better argument.[29]
[29] See Plat. "Apol." 19-23
D;
Aristoph. "Clouds," 114 foll.
Perhaps you have no skill, Ischomachus,
to
make black white or falsehood truth
(said
I).[30]
[30] Or, "It may well be, Ischomachus,
you cannot manufacture falsehood into
truth."
Lit. "Like enough you cannot make
an
untruth true."
XII
But (I continued presently), perhaps
I am
preventing you from going, as you long
have
wished to do, Ischomachus?
To which he: By no means, Socrates.
I should
not think of going away until the gathering
in the market is dispersed.[1]
[1] Lit. "until the market is
quite
broken up," i. e. after mid-day.
See
"Anab." I. viii. 1; II. i.
7; "Mem."
I. i. 10. Cf. Herod. ii.
173; iii. 104; vii. 223.
Of course, of course (I answered),
you are
naturally most careful not to forfeit
the
title they have given you of "honest
gentleman";[2] and yet, I daresay,
fifty
things at home are asking your attention
at this moment; only you undertook
to meet
your foreign friends, and rather than
play
them false you go on waiting.
[2] Lit. "beautiful and good."
Isch. Let me so far corect you, Socrates;
in no case will the things you speak
of be
neglected, since I have stewards and
bailiffs[3]
on the farms.
[3] Cf. Becker, op. cit. p. 363.
Soc. And, pray, what is your system
when
you need a bailiff? Do you search about,
until you light on some one with a
natural
turn for stewardship; and then try
to purchase
him?--as, I feel certain, happens when
you
want a carpenter: first, you discover
some
one with a turn for carpentry, and
then do
all you can to get possession of him.[4]
Or do you educate your bailiffs yourself?
[4] The steward, like the carpenter,
and
the labourers in general, would, as
a rule,
be a slave. See below, xxi. 9.
Isch. Most certainly the latter, Socrates;
I try to educate them, as you say,
myself;
and with good reason. He who is properly
to fill my place and manage my affairs
when
I am absent, my "alter ego,"[5]
needs but to have my knowledge; and
if I
am fit myself to stand at the head
of my
own business, I presume I should be
able
to put another in possession of my
knowledge.[6]
[5] Or, "my other self."
[6] Lit. "to teach another what
I know
myself."
Soc. Well then, the first thing he
who is
properly to take your place when absent
must
possess is goodwill towards you and
yours;
for without goodwill, what advantage
will
there be in any knowledge whatsoever
which
your bailiff may possess?
Isch. None, Socrates; and I may tell
you
that a kindly disposition towards me
and
mine is precisely what I first endeavour
to instil.
Soc. And how, in the name of all that
is
holy, do you pick out whom you will
and teach
him to have kindly feeling towards
yourself
and yours?
Isch. By kindly treatment of him, to
be sure,
whenever the gods bestow abundance
of good
things upon us.
Soc. If I take your meaning rightly,
you
would say that those who enjoy your
good
things grow well disposed to you and
seek
to render you some good?
Isch. Yes, for of all instruments to
promote
good feeling this I see to be the best.
Soc. Well, granted the man is well
disposed
to you does it therefore follow, Ischomachus,
that he is fit to be your bailiff?
It cannot
have escaped your observation that
albeit
human beings, as a rule, are kindly
disposed
towards themselves, yet a large number
of
them will not apply the attention requisite
to secure for themselves those good
things
which they fain would have.
Isch. Yes, but believe me, Socrates,
when
I seek to appoint such men as bailiffs,
I
teach them also carefulness and application.[7]
[7] {epimeleia} is a cardinal virtue
with
the Greeks, or at any rate with Xenophon,
but it has no single name in English.
Soc. Nay, now in Heaven's name, once
more,
how can that be? I always thought it
was
beyond the power of any teacher to
teach
these virtues.[8]
[8] For the Socratic problem {ei arete
didakte}
see Grote, "H. G." viii.
599.
Isch. Nor is it possible, you are right
so
far, to teach such excellences to every
single
soul in order as simply as a man might
number
off his fingers.
Soc. Pray, then, what sort of people
have
the privilege?[9] Should you mind pointing
them out to me with some distinctness?
[9] Lit. "what kind of people
can be
taught them? By all means signify the
sort
to me distinctly."
Ishc. Well, in the first place, you
would
have some difficulty in making intemperate
people diligent--I speak of intemperance
with regard to wine, for drunkenness
creates
forgetfulness of everything which needs
to
be done.
Soc. And are persons devoid of self-control
in this respect the only people incapable
of diligence and carefulness? or are
there
others in like case?
Isch. Certainly, people who are intemperate
with regard to sleep, seeing that the
sluggard
with his eyes shut cannot do himself
or see
that others do what is right.
Soc. What then?[10] Are we to regard
these
as the only people incapable of being
taught
this virtue of carefulness? or are
there
others in a like condition?
[10] Or, "What then--is the list
exhausted?
Are we to suppose that these are the
sole
people . . ."
Isch. Surely we must include the slave
to
amorous affection.[11] Your woeful
lover[12]
is incapable of being taught attention
to
anything beyond one single object.[13]
No
light task, I take it, to discover
any hope
or occupation sweeter to him than that
which
now employs him, his care for his beloved,
nor, when the call for action comes,[14]
will it be easy to invent worse punishment
than that he now endures in separation
from
the object of his passion.[15] Accordingly,
I am in no great hurry to appoint a
person
of this sort to manage[16] my affairs;
the
very attempt to do so I regard as futile.
[11] See "Mem." I. iii. 8
foll.;
II. vi. 22.
[12] {duserotes}. Cf. Thuc. vi. 13,
"a
desperate craving" (Jowett).
[13] Cf. "Symp." iv. 21 foll.;
"Cyrop." V. i. 7-18.
[14] Or, "where demands of business
present themselves, and something must
be
done."
[15] Cf. Shakesp. "Sonnets,"
passim.
[16] Or, "I never dream of appointing
as superintendent." See above,
iv. 7.
Soc. Well, and what of those addicted
to
another passion, that of gain? Are
they,
too, incapable of being trained to
give attention
to field and farming operations?
Isch. On the contrary, there are no
people
easier to train, none so susceptible
of carefulness
in these same matters. One needs only
to
point out to them that the pursuit
is gainful,
and their interest is aroused.
Soc. But for ordinary people? Given
they
are self-controlled to suit your bidding,[17]
given they possess a wholesome appetite
for
gain, how will you lesson them in carefulness?
how teach them growth in diligence
to meet
your wishes?
[17] Or, "in matters such as you
insist
on."
Isch. By a simple method, Socrates.
When
I see a man intent on carefulness,
I praise
and do my best to honour him. When,
on the
other hand, I see a man neglectful
of his
duties, I do not spare him: I try in
every
way, by word and deed, to wound him.
Soc. Come now, Ischomachus, kindly
permit
a turn in the discussion, which has
hitherto
concerned the persons being trained
to carefulness
themselves, and explain a point in
reference
to the training process. Is it possible
for
a man devoid of carefulness himself
to render
others more careful?
No more possible (he answered) than
for a
man who knows no music to make others
musical.[18]
If the teacher sets but an ill example,
the
pupil can hardly learn to do the thing
aright.[19]
And if the master's conduct is suggestive
of laxity, how hardly shall his followers
attain to carefulness! Or to put the
matter
concisely, "like master like man."
I do not think I ever knew or heard
tell
of a bad master blessed with good servants.
The converse I certainly have seen
ere now,
a good master and bad servants; but
they
were the sufferers, not he.[20] No,
he who
would create a spirit of carefulness
in others[21]
must have the skill himself to supervise
the field of labour; to test, examine,
scrutinise.[22]
He must be ready to requite where due
the
favour of a service well performed,
nor hesitate
to visit the penalty of their deserts
upon
those neglectful of their duty.[23]
Indeed
(he added), the answer of the barbarian
to
the king seems aposite. You know the
story,[24]
how the king had met with a good horse,
but
wished to give the creature flesh and
that
without delay, and so asked some one
reputed
to be clever about horses: "What
will
give him flesh most quickly?"
To which
the other: "The master's eye."
So, too, it strikes me, Socrates, there
is
nothing like "the master's eye"
to call forth latent qualities, and
turn
the same to beautiful and good effect.[25]
[18] Or, "to give others skill
in 'music.'"
See Plat. "Rep." 455 E; "Laws,"
802 B. Al. "a man devoid of letters
to make others scholarly." See
Plat.
"Phaedr." 248 D.
[19] Lit. "when the teacher traces
the
outline of the thing to copy badly."
For {upodeiknuontos} see "Mem."
IV. iii. 13; "Horsem." ii.
2. Cf. Aristot. "Oecon."
i. 6;
"Ath. Pol." 41. 17; and Dr.
Sandys'
note ad loc.
[20] Or, "but they did not go
scot-free";
"punishments then were rife."
[21] Cf. Plat. "Polit." 275
E:
"If we say either tending the
herds,
or managing the herds, or having the
care
of them, that will include all, and
then
we may wrap up the statesman with the
rest,
as the argument seems to require."--Jowett.
[22] Or, "he must have skill to
over-eye
the field of labour, and be scrutinous."
[23] "For every boon of service
well
performed he must be eager to make
requital
to the author of it, nor hesitate to
visit
on the heads of those neglectful of
their
duty a just recompense." (The
language
is poetical.)
[24] See Aristot. "Oecon."
i. 6;
Aesch. "Pers." 165; Cato
ap. Plin.
"H. N." xviii. 5. Cic. ap.
Colum.
iv. 18; ib. vi. 21; La Fontaine, "L'Oeil
du Maitre."
[25] Or, "so, too, in general
it seems
to me 'the master's eye' is aptest
to elicit
energy to issue beautiful and good."
XIII
But now (I ventured), suppose you have
presented
strongly to the mind of some one[1]
the need
of carefulness to execute your wishes,
is
a person so qualified to be regarded
as fit
at once to be your bailiff? or is there
aught
else which he must learn in order to
play
the part of an efficient bailiff?
[1] Breit. cf. "Pol. Lac."
xv.
8. Holden cf. Plat. "Rep."
600
C.
Most certainly there is (he answered):
it
still remains for him to learn particulars--to
know, that is, what things he has to
do,
and when and how to do them; or else,
if
ignorant of these details, the profit
of
this bailiff in the abstract may prove
no
greater than the doctor's who pays
a most
precise attention to a sick man, visiting
him late and early, but what will serve
to
ease his patient's pains[2] he knows
not.
[2] Lit. "what it is to the advantage
of his patient to do, is beyond his
ken."
Soc. But suppose him to have learnt
the whole
routine of business, will he need aught
else,
or have we found at last your bailiff
absolute?[3]
[3] Cf. Plat. "Rep." 566
D. Or,
"the perfect and consummate type
of
bailiff."
Isch. He must learn at any rate, I
think,
to rule his fellow-workmen.
What! (I exclaimed): you mean to say
you
educate your bailiffs to that extent?
Actually
you make them capable of rule?
At any rate I try to do so (he replied).
And how, in Heaven's name (I asked),
do you
contrive to educate another in the
skill
to govern human beings?
Isch. I have a very simple system,
Socrates;
so simple, I daresay, you will simply
laugh
at me.
Soc. The matter, I protest, is hardly
one
for laughter. The man who can make
another
capable of rule, clearly can teach
him how
to play the master; and if can make
him play
the master, he can make him what is
grander
still, a kingly being.[4] Once more,
therefore,
I protest: A man possessed of such
creative
power is worthy, not of ridicule, far
from
it, but of the highest praise.
[4] i. e. {arkhikos} includes (1) {despotikos},
i. e. an arbitrary head of any sort,
from
the master of one's own family to the
{turannos
kai despotes} (Plat. "Laws,"
859
A), despotic lord or owner; (2) {basilikos},
the king or monarch gifted with regal
qualities.
Thus, then, I reason,[5] Socrates (he
answered):
The lower animals are taught obedience
by
two methods chiefly, partly through
being
punished when they make attempts to
disobey,
partly by experiencing some kindness
when
they cheerfully submit. This is the
principle
at any rate adopted in the breaking
of young
horses. The animal obeys its trainer,
and
something sweet is sure to follow;
or it
disobeys, and in place of something
sweet
it finds a peck of trouble; and so
on, until
it comes at last to yield obedience
to the
trainer's every wish. Or to take another
instance: Young dogs,[6] however far
inferior
to man in thought and language,[7]
can still
be taught to run on errands and turn
somersaults,[8]
and do a host of other clever things,
precisely
on this same principle of training.
Every
time the animal obeys it gets something
or
other which it wanted, and every time
it
misbehaves it gets a whipping. But
when it
comes to human beings: in man you have
a
creature still more open to persuasion
through
appeals to reason;[9] only make it
plain
to him "it is his interest to
obey."
Or if they happen to be slaves,[10]
the more
ignoble training of wild animals tamed
to
the lure will serve to teach obedience.
Only
gratify their bellies in the matter
of appetite,
and you will succeed in winning much
from
them.[11] But ambitious, emulous natures
feel the spur of praise,[12] since
some natures
hunger after praise no less than others
crave
for meats and drinks. My practice then
is
to instruct those whom I desire to
appoint
as my bailiffs in the various methods
which
I have found myself to be successful
in gaining
the obedience of my fellows. To take
an instance:
There are clothes and shows and so
forth,
with which I must provide my workfolk.[13]
Well, then, I see to it that these
are not
all alike in make;[14] but some will
be of
better, some of less good quality:
my object
being that these articles for use shall
vary
with the service of the wearer; the
worse
man will receive the worse things as
a gift,
the better man the better as a mark
of honour.
For I ask you, Socrates, how can the
good
avoid despondency seeing that the work
is
wrought by their own hands alone, in
spite
of which these villains who will neither
labour nor face danger when occasion
calls
are to receive an equal guerdon with
themselves?
And just as I cannot bring myself in
any
sort of way to look upon the better
sort
as worthy to receive no greater honour
than
the baser, so, too, I praise my bailiffs
when I know they have apportioned the
best
things among the most deserving. And
if I
see that some one is receiving preference
by dint of flatteries or like unworthy
means,
I do not let the matter pass; I reprimand
my bailiff roundly, and so teach him
that
such conduct is not even to his interest.
[5] {oukoun}. "This, then, is
my major
premiss: the dumb animal . . ."
(lit. "the rest of animals").
[6] {ta kunidia} possibly implies "performing
poodles."
[7] {te gnome . . . te glotte}, i.
e. mental
impression and expression, "mind
and
tongue."
[8] Or, "to run round and round
and
turn heels over head." Al. "dive
for objects."
[9] "Logic, argument." Or,
"a
creature more compliant; merely by
a word
demonstrate to him . . ."
[10] Cf. Plat. "Rep." 591
C.
[11] See Pater, "Plato and Platonism,"
"Lacedaemon," p. 196 foll.
[12] See "Cyrop." passim.
[13] {ergastersi}, Xenophontic for
the common
Attic {ergatais}. See Hold. ad loc.
for similar
forms, and cf. Rutherford, "New
Phrynichus,"
59.
[14] Cf. Aristot. "Oecon."
i. 5
(where the thesis is developed further).
XIV
Soc. Well, then, Ischomachus, supposing
the
man is now so fit to rule that he can
compel
obedience,[1] is he, I ask once more,
your
bailiff absolute? or even though possessed
of all the qualifications you have
named,
does he still lack something?[2]
[1] Or, "that discipline flows
from
him;" al. "he presents you
with
obedient servants."
[2] Lit. "will he still need something
further to complete him?"
Most certainly (replied Ischomachus).
One
thing is still required of him, and
that
is to hold aloof from property and
goods
which are his master's; he must not
steal.
Consider, this is the very person through
whose hands the fruits and produce
pass,
and he has the audacity to make away
with
them! perhaps he does not leave enough
to
cover the expenses of the farming operations!
Where would be the use of farming the
land
by help of such an overseer?
What (I exclaimed), can I believe my
ears?
You actually undertake to teach them
virtue!
What really, justice!
Isch. To be sure, I do. but it does
not follow
therefore that I find all equally apt
to
lend an ear to my instruction. However,
what
I do is this. I take a leaf now out
of the
laws of Draco and again another out
of the
laws of Solon,[3] and so essay to start
my
household on the path of uprightness.
And
indeed, if I mistake not (he proceeded),
both those legislators enacted many
of their
laws expressly with a view to teaching
this
branch of justice.[4] It is written,
"Let
a man be punished for a deed of theft";
"Let whosoever is detected in
the act
be bound and thrown in prison";
"If
he offer violence,[5] let him be put
to death."
It is clear that the intention of the
lawgivers
in framing these enactments was to
render
the sordid love of gain[6] devoid of
profit
to the unjust person. What I do, therefore,
is to cull a sample of their precepts,
which
I supplement with others from the royal
code[7]
where applicable; and so I do my best
to
shape the members of my household into
the
likeness of just men concerning that
which
passes through their hands. And now
observe--the
laws first mentioned act as penalties,
deterrent
to transgressors only; whereas the
royal
code aims higher: by it not only is
the malefactor
punished, but the righteous and just
person
is rewarded.[8] The result is, that
many
a man, beholding how the just grow
ever wealthier
than the unjust, albeit harbouring
in his
heart some covetous desires, is constant
still to virtue. To abstain from unjust
dealing
is engrained in him.[9]
[3] Cobet, "Pros. Xen." cf.
Plut.
"Solon," xvii. {proton men
oun
tous Drakontos nomous aneile k. t.
l.} "First,
then, he repealed all Draco's laws,
except
those concerning homicide, because
they were
too severe and the punishments too
great;
for death was appointed for almost
all offences,
insomuch that those that were convicted
of
idleness were to die, and those that
stole
a cabbage or an apple to suffer even
as villains
that comitted sacrilege or murder"
(Clough,
i. 184). See Aul. Gell. "N. A."
xi. 13.
[4] "The branch of justice which
concerns
us, viz. righteous dealing between
man and
man."
[5] For this sense of {tous egkheirountas}
cf. Thuc. iv. 121; "Hell."
IV.
v. 16. Al. {dedesthai tous egkheirountas
kai thanatousthai en tis alo poion}
(Weiske),
"let the attempt be punished with
imprisonment";
"let him who is caught in the
act be
put to death."
[6] Cf. Plat. "Laws," 754
E.
[7] Or, "the royal laws,"
i. e.
of Persia. Cf. "Anab." I.
ix. 16;
"Cyrop." I. ii. 2, 3. Or
possibly
= "regal"; cf. Plat. "Minos,"
317 C; {to men orthon nomos esti basilikos}.
[8] Lit. "benefited."
[9] Lit. "Whereby, beholding the
just
becoming wealthier than the unjust,
many
albeit covetous at heart themselves
most
constantly abide by abstinence from
evil-doing."
Those of my household (he proceeded)
whom,
in spite of kindly treatment, I perceive
to be persistently bent on evil-doing,
in
the end I treat as desperate cases.
Incurable
self-seekers,[10] plain enough to see,
whose
aspiration lifts them from earth, so
eager
are they to be reckoned just men, not
by
reason only of the gain derivable from
justice,
but through passionate desire to deserve
my praise-- these in the end I treat
as free-born
men. I make them wealthy, and not with
riches
only, but in honour, as befits their
gentle
manliness.[11] For if, Socrates, there
be
one point in which the man who thirsts
for
honour differs from him who thirsts
for gain,
it is, I think, in willingness to toil,
face
danger, and abstain from shameful gains--for
the sake of honour only and fair fame.[12]
[10] Lit. "Those, on the other
hand,
whom I discover to be roused"
(to honesty--not
solely because honesty is the best
policy).
[11] Or, "men of fair and noble
type";
"true gentlemen." This passage
suggests the "silver lining to
the cloud"
of slavery.
[12] Cf. Hom. "Il." ix. 413,
{oleto
men moi nostos, atar kleos aphthiton
estai},
"but my fame shall be imperishable."
XV
Soc. But now, suppose, Ischomachus,
you have
created in the soul of some one a desire
for your welfare; have inspired in
him not
a mere passive interest, but a deep
concern
to help you to achieve prosperity;
further,
you have obtained for him a knowledge
of
the methods needed to give the operations
of the field some measure of success;
you
have, moreover, made him capable of
ruling;
and, as the crowning point of all your
efforts,
this same trusty person shows no less
delight,
than you might take yourself, in laying
at
your feet[1] earth's products, each
in due
season richly harvested--I need hardly
ask
concerning such an one, whether aught
else
is lacking to him. It is clear to me[2]
an
overseer of this sort would be worth
his
weight in gold. But now, Ischomachus,
I would
have you not omit a topic somewhat
lightly
handled by us in the previous argument.[3]
[1] {apodeiknuon}, i. e. in presenting
the
inventory of products for the year.
Cf. "Hell."
V. iii. 17; "Revenues," ii.
7.
[2] {ede}, at this stage of the discussion.
[3] Or, "that part of the discussion
which we ran over in a light and airy
fashion,"
in reference to xiii. 2.
What topic, pray, was that? (he asked).
Soc. You said, if I mistake not, that
it
was most important to learn the methods
of
conducting the several processes of
husbandry;
for, you added, unless a man knows
what things
he has to do and how to do them, all
the
care and diligence in the world will
stand
him in no stead.
At this point[4] he took me up, observing:
So what you now command me is to teach
the
art itself of tillage, Socrates?
[4] Keeping the vulg. order of SS.
3-9, which
many commentators would rearrange in
various
ways. See Breit. ad loc.; Lincke, op.
cit.
p.
111 foll.
Yes (I replied), for now it looks as
if this
art were one which made the wise and
skilled
possessor of it wealthy, whilst the
unskilled,
in spite of all the pains he takes,
must
live in indigence.
Isch. Now shall you hear, then,[5]
Socrates,
the generous nature of this human art.
For
is it not a proof of something noble
in it,
that being of supreme utility, so sweet
a
craft to exercise, so rich in beauty,
so
acceptable alike to gods and men, the
art
of husbandry may further fairly claim
to
be the easiest of all the arts to learn?
Noble I name it! this, at any rate,
the epithet
we give to animals which, being beautiful
and large and useful, are also gentle
towards
the race of man.[6]
[5] Or, "Listen, then, and whilst
I
recount to you at once the loving-
kindness
of this art, to man the friendliest."
[6] Schenkl regards this sentence as
an interpolation.
For the epithet {gennaios} applied
to the
dog see "Cyrop." I. iv. 15,
21;
"Hunting," iv. 7.
Allow me to explain, Ischomachus (I
interposed).
Up to a certain point I fully followed
what
you said. I understand, according to
your
theory, how a bailiff must be taught.
In
other words, I follow your descriptions
both
as to how you make him kindly disposed
towards
yourself; and how, again, you make
him careful,
capable of rule, and upright. But at
that
point you made the statement that,
in order
to apply this diligence to tillage
rightly,
the careful husbandman must further
learn
what are the different things he has
to do,
and not alone what things he has to
do, but
how and when to do them. These are
the topics
which, in my opinion, have hitherto
been
somewhat lightly handled in the argument.
Let me make my meaning clearer by an
instance:
it is as if you were to tell me that,
in
order to be able to take down a speech
in
writing,[7] or to read a written statement,
a man must know his letters. Of course,
if
not stone deaf, I must have garnered
that
for a certain object knowledge of letters
was important to me, but the bare recognition
of the fact, I fear, would not enable
me
in any deeper sense to know my letters.
So,
too, at present I am easily persuaded
that
if I am to direct my care aright in
tillage
I must have a knowledge of the art
of tillage.
But the bare recognition of the fact
does
not one whit provide me with the knowledge
how I ought to till. And if I resolved
without
ado to set about the work of tilling,
I imagine,
I should soon resemble your physician
going
on his rounds and visiting his patients
without
knowing what to prescribe or what to
do to
ease their sufferings. To save me from
the
like predicaments, please teach me
the actual
work and processes of tillage.
[7] Or, "something from dictation."
Isch. But truly,[8] Socrates, it is
not with
tillage as with the other arts, where
the
learner must be well-nigh crushed[9]
beneath
a load of study before his prentice-hand
can turn out work of worth sufficient
merely
to support him.[10] The art of husbandry,
I say, is not so ill to learn and cross-grained;
but by watching labourers in the field,
by
listening to what they say, you will
have
straightway knowledge enough to teach
another,
should the humour take you. I imagine,
Socrates
(he added), that you yourself, albeit
quite
unconscious of the fact, already know
a vast
amount about the subject. The fact
is, other
craftsmen (the race, I mean, in general
of
artists) are each and all disposed
to keep
the most important[11] features of
their
several arts concealed: with husbandry
it
is different. Here the man who has
the most
skill in planting will take most pleasure
in being watched by others; and so
too the
most skilful sower. Ask any question
you
may choose about results thus beautifully
wrought, and not one feature in the
whole
performance will the doer of it seek
to keep
concealed. To such height of nobleness
(he
added), Socrats, does husbandry appear,
like
some fair mistress, to conform the
soul and
disposition of those concerned with
it.
[8] "Nay, if you will but listen,
Socrates,
with husbandry it is not the same as
with
the other arts."
[9] {katatribenai}, "worn out."
See "Mem." III. iv. 1; IV.
vii.
5. Al. "bored to death."
[10] Or, "before the products
of his
pupilage are worth his keep."
[11] Or, "critical and crucial."
The proem[12] to the speech is beautiful
at any rate (I answered), but hardly
calculated
to divert the hearer from the previous
question.
A thing so easy to be learnt, you say?
then,
if so, do you be all the readier for
that
reason to explain its details to me.
No shame
on you who teach, to teach these easy
matters;
but for me to lack the knowledge of
them,
and most of all if highly useful to
the learner,
worse than shame, a scandal.
[12] Or, "the prelude to the piece."
XVI
Isch. First then, Socrates, I wish
to demonstrate
to you that what is called[1] "the
intricate
variety in husbandry"[2] presents
no
difficulty. I use a phrase of those
who,
whatever the nicety with which they
treat
the art in theory,[3] have but the
faintest
practical experience of tillage. What
they
assert is, that "he who would
rightly
till the soil must first be made acquainted
with the nature of the earth."
[1] "They term"; in reference
to
the author of some treatise.
[2] Or, "the riddling subtlety
of tillage."
See "Mem." II. iii. 10; Plat.
"Symp."
182 B; "Phileb." 53 E.
[3] Theophr. "De Caus." ii.
4,
12, mentions Leophanes amongst other
writers
on agriculture preceding himself.
And they are surely right in their
assertion
(I replied); for he who does not know
what
the soil is capable of bearing, can
hardly
know, I fancy, what he has to plant
or what
to sow.
But he has only to look at his neighbour's
land (he answered), at his crops and
trees,
in order to learn what the soil can
bear
and what it cannot.[4] After which
discovery,
it is ill work fighting against heaven.
Certainly
not by dint of sowing and planting
what he
himself desires will he meet the needs
of
life more fully than by planting and
sowing
what the earth herself rejoices to
bear and
nourish on her bosom. Or if, as well
may
be the case, through the idleness of
those
who occupy it, the land itself cannot
display
its native faculty,[5] it is often
possible
to derive a truer notion from some
neighbouring
district that ever you will learn about
it
from your neighbour's lips.[6] Nay,
even
though the earth lie waste and barren,
it
may still declare its nature; since
a soil
productive of beautiful wild fruits
can by
careful tending be made to yield fruits
of
the cultivated kind as beautiful. And
on
this wise, he who has the barest knowledge[7]
of the art of tillage can still discern
the
nature of the soil.
[4] Holden cf. Virg. "Georg."
i.
53; iv. 109. According to the commentator
Servius, the poet drew largely upon
Xenophon's
treatise.
[5] Or, "cannot prove its natural
aptitude."
[6] Or, "from a neighbouring mortal."
[7] Or, "a mere empiric in the
art of
husbandry."
Thank you (I said), Ischomachus, my
courage
needs no further fanning upon that
score.
I am bold enough now to believe that
no one
need abstain from agriculture for fear
he
will not recognise the nature of the
soil.
Indeed, I now recall to mind a fact
concerning
fishermen, how as they ply their business
on the seas, not crawling lazily along,
nor
bringing to, for prospect's sake, but
in
the act of scudding past the flying
farmsteads,[8]
these brave mariners have only to set
eyes
upon crops on land, and they will boldly
pronounce opinion on the nature of
the soil
itself, whether good or bad: this they
blame
and that they praise. And these opinions
for the most part coincide, I notice,
with
the verdict of the skilful farmer as
to quality
of soil.[9]
[8] Or, "the flying coastland,
fields
and farmyards."
[9] Lit. "And indeed the opinions
they
pronounce about 'a good soil' mostly
tally
with the verdict of the expert farmer."
Isch. At what point shall I begin then,
Socrates,
to revive your recollection[10] of
the art
of husbandry? since to explain to you
the
processes employed in husbandry means
the
statement of a hundred details which
you
know yourself full well already.
[10] Or, "begin recalling to your
mind."
See Plat. "Meno," for the
doctrine
of Anamensis here apparently referred
to.
Soc. The first thing I should like
to learn,
Ischomachus, I think, if only as a
point
befitting a philosopher, is this: how
to
proceed and how to work the soil, did
I desire
to extract the largest crops of wheat
and
barley.
Isch. Good, then! you are aware that
fallow
must be broken up in readiness[11]
for sowing?
[11] Or, "ploughed up." Cf.
Theophr.
"Hist. Pl." iii. i. 6; Dion.
Hal.
"Ant." x. 17.
Soc. Yes, I am aware of that.
Isch. Well then, supposing we begin
to plough
our land in winter?
Soc. It would not do. There would be
too
much mud.
Isch. Well then, what would you say
to summer?
Soc. The soil will be too hard in summer
for a plough and a pair of oxen to
break
up.
Isch. It looks as if spring-time were
the
season to begin this work, then? What
do
you say?
Soc. I say, one may expect the soil
broken
up at that season of the year to crumble[12]
best.
[12] {kheisthai} = laxari, dissolvi,
to be
most friable, to scatter readily.
Isch. Yes, and grasses[13] turned over
at
that season, Socrates, serve to supply
the
soil already with manure; while as
they have
not shed their seed as yet, they cannot
vegetate.[14]
I am supposing that you recognise a
further
fact: to form good land, a fallow must
be
clean and clear of undergrowth and
weeds,[15]
and baked as much as possible by exposure
to the sun.[16]
[13] "Herbage," whether grass
or
other plants, "grass," "clover,"
etc; Theophr. "Hist. Pl."
i. 3.
1; Holden, "green crops."
[14] Lit. "and not as yet have
shed
their seed so as to spring into blade."
[15] Or, "quitch."
[16] Holden cf. Virg. "Georg."
i. 65, coquat; ii. 260, excoquere.
So Lucr.
vi. 962.
Soc. Yes, that is quite a proper state
of
things, I should imagine.
Isch. And to bring about this proper
state
of things, do you maintain there can
be any
other better system than that of turning
the soil over as many times as possible
in
summer?
Soc. On the contrary, I know precisely
that
for either object, whether to bring
the weeds
and quitch grass to the surface and
to wither
them by scorching heat, or to expose
the
earth itself to the sun's baking rays,
there
can be nothing better than to plough
the
soil up with a pair of oxen during
mid-day
in midsummer.
Isch. And if a gang of men set to,
to break
and make this fallow with the mattock,
it
is transparent that their business
is to
separate the quitch grass from the
soil and
keep them parted?
Soc. Just so!--to throw the quitch
grass
down to wither on the surface, and
to turn
the soil up, so that the crude earth
may
have its turn of baking.
XVII
You see, Socrates (he said, continuing
the
conversation), we hold the same opinion,
both of us, concerning fallow.
Why, so it seems (I said)--the same
opinion.
Isch. But when it comes to sowing,
what is
your opinion? Can you suggest a better
time
for sowing than that which the long
experience
of former generations, combined with
that
of men now living, recognises as the
best?
See, so soon as autumn time has come,
the
faces of all men everywhere turn with
a wistful
gaze towards high heaven. "When
will
God moisten the earth," they ask,
"and
suffer men to sow their seed?"[1]
[1] See Dr. Holden's interesting note
at
this point: "According to Virgil
('Georg.'
i. 215), spring is the time,"
etc.
Yes, Ischomachus (I answered), for
all mankind
must recognise the precept:[2] "Sow
not on dry soil" (if it can be
avoided),
being taught wisdom doubtless by the
heavy
losses they must struggle with who
sow before
God's bidding.
[2] Or, "it is a maxim held of
all men."
Isch. It seems, then, you and I and
all mankind
hold one opinion on these matters?
Soc. Why, yes; where God himself is
teacher,
such accord is apt to follow; for instance,
all men are agreed, it is better to
wear
thick clothes[3] in winter, if so be
they
can. We light fires by general consent,
provided
we have logs to burn.
[3] Or, "a thick cloak."
See Rich,
s. v. Pallium (= {imation}).
Yet as regards this very period of
seed-time
(he made answer), Socrates, we find
at once
the widest difference of opinion upon
one
point; as to which is better, the early,
or the later,[4] or the middle sowing?
[4] See Holden ad loc. Sauppe, "Lex.
Xen.," notes {opsimos} as Ionic
and
poet. See also Rutherford, "New
Phryn."
p. 124: "First met with in a line
of
the 'Iliad' (ii. 325), {opsimos} does
not
appear till late Greek except in the
'Oeconomicus,'
a disputed work of Xenophon."
Soc. Just so, for neither does God
guide
the year in one set fashion, but irregularly,
now suiting it to early sowing best,
and
now to middle, and again to later.
Isch. But what, Socrates, is your opinion?
Were it better for a man to choose
and turn
to sole account a single sowing season,
be
it much he has to sow or be it little?
or
would you have him begin his sowing
with
the earliest season, and sow right
on continuously
until the latest?
And I, in my turn, answered: I should
think
it best, Ischomachus, to use indifferently
the whole sowing season.[5] Far better[6]
to have enough of corn and meal at
any moment
and from year to year, than first a
superfluity
and then perhaps a scant supply.
[5] Or, "share in the entire period
of seed time." Zeune cf. "Geop."
ii. 14. 8; Mr. Ruskin's translators,
"Bibl.
Past." vol. i.; cf. Eccles. xi.
6.
[6] Lit. "according to my tenet,"
{nomizo}.
Isch. Then, on this point also, Socrates,
you hold a like opinion with myself--the
pupil to the teacher; and what is more,
the
pupil was the first to give it utterance.
So far, so good! (I answered). Is there
a
subtle art in scattering the seed?
Isch. Let us by all means investigate
that
point. That the seed must be cast by
hand,
I presume you know yourself?
Soc. Yes, by the testimony of my eyes.[7]
[7] Lit. "Yes, for I have seen
it done."
Isch. But as to actual scattering,
some can
scatter evenly, others cannot.[8]
[8] Holden cf. W. Harte, "Essays
on
Husbandry," p. 210, 2nd ed., "The
main perfection of sowing is to disperse
the seeds equally."
Soc. Does it not come to this, the
hand needs
practice (like the fingers of a harp-player)
to obey the will?
Isch. Precisely so, but now suppose
the soil
is light in one part and heavy in another?
Soc. I do not follow; by "light"
do you mean weak? and by "heavy"
strong?
Isch. Yes, that is what I mean. And
the question
which I put to you is this: Would you
allow
both sorts of soil an equal share of
seed?
or which the larger?[9]
[9] See Theophr. "Hist. Pl."
viii.
6. 2; Virg. "Georg." ii.
275. Holden
cf. Adam Dickson, "Husbandry of
the
Ancients," vol. ii. 35.
33 f. (Edin. 1788), "Were the
poor light
land in Britain managed after the manner
of the Roman husbandry, it would certainly
require much less seed than under its
present
management."
Soc. The stronger the wine the larger
the
dose of water to be added, I believe.
The
stronger, too, the man the heavier
the weight
we will lay upon his back to carry:
or if
it is not porterage, but people to
support,
there still my tenet holds: the broader
and
more powerful the great man's shoulders,
the more mouths I should assign to
him to
feed. But perhaps a weak soil, like
a lean
pack-horse,[10] grows stronger the
more corn
you pour into it. This I look to you
to teach
me.[11]
[10] Or, "lean cattle."
[11] Or, "Will you please answer
me
that question, teacher?"
With a laugh, he answered: Once more
you
are pleased to jest. Yet rest assured
of
one thing, Socrates: if after you have
put
seed into the ground, you will await
the
instant when, while earth is being
richly
fed from heaven, the fresh green from
the
hidden seed first springs, and take
and turn
it back again,[12] this sprouting germ
will
serve as food for earth: as from manure
an
inborn strength will presently be added
to
the soil. But if you suffer earth to
feed
the seed of corn within it and to bring
forth
fruit in an endless round, at last[13]
it
will be hard for the weakened soil
to yield
large corn crops, even as a weak sow
can
hardly rear a large litter of fat pigs.
[12] "If you will plough the seedlings
in again."
[13] {dia telous . . . es telos}, "continually
. . . in the end." See references
in
Holden's fifth edition.
Soc. I understand you to say, Ischomachus,
that the weaker soil must receive a
scantier
dose of seed?
Isch. Most decidedly I do, and you
on your
side, Socrates, I understand, give
your consent
to this opinion in stating your belief
that
the weaker the shoulders the lighter
the
burdens to be laid on them.
Soc. But those hoers with their hoes,
Ischomachus,
tell me for what reason you let them
loose[14]
upon the corn.
[14] Cf. "Revenues," iv.
5.
Isch. You know, I daresay, that in
winter
there are heavy rains?[15]
[15] "And melting snows, much
water
every way."
Soc. To be sure, I do.
Isch. We may suppose, then, that a
portion
of the corn is buried by these floods
beneath
a coat of mud and slime, or else that
the
roots are laid quite bare in places
by the
torrent. By reason of this same drench,
I
take it, oftentimes an undergrowth
of weeds
springs up with the corn and chokes
it.
Soc. Yes, all these ills are likely
enough
to happen.
Isch. Are you not agreed the corn-fields
sorely need relief at such a season?
Soc. Assuredly.
Isch. Then what is to be done, in your
opinion?
How shall we aid the stricken portion
lying
mud-bedabbled?
Soc. How better than by lifting up
and lightening
the soil?
Isch. Yes! and that other portion lying
naked
to the roots and defenceless, how aid
it?
Soc. Possibly by mounding up fresh
earth
about it.[16]
[16] "Scraping up a barrier of
fresh
earth about it."
Isch. And what when the weeds spring
up together
with the corn and choke it? or when
they
rob and ruthlessly devour the corn's
proper
sustenance, like unserviceable drones[17]
that rob the working bees of honey,
pilfering
the good food which they have made
and stored
away with labour: what must we do?
[17] Cf. Shakesp. "Lazy yawning
drones,"
"Henry V." I. ii. 204.
Soc. In good sooth, there can be nothing
for it save to cut out the noisome
weed,
even as drones are cleared out from
the hive.
Isch. You agree there is some show
of reason
for letting in these gangs of hoers?
Soc. Most true. And now I am turning
over
in my mind,[18] Ischomachus, how grand
a
thing it is to introduce a simile or
such
like figure well and aptly. No sooner
had
you mentioned the word "drones"
than I was filled with rage against
those
miserable weeds, far more than when
you merely
spoke of weeds and undergrowth.
[18] Or, "I was just this moment
pondering
the virtue of a happy illustration."
Lit. "what a thing it is to introduce
an 'image'
({tas eikonas}) well." See Plat.
"Rep."
487 E, {de eikonos}, "in a parable"
(Jowett); "Phaed." 87 B,
"a
figure"; Aristoph. "Clouds,"
559; Plat. "Phaedr." 267
C; Aristot.
"Rhet." III. iv. As to the
drones,
J. J. Hartman, "An. X." 186,
aptly
cf. Aristoph. "Wasps,"
1114 f.
XVIII
But, not to interrupt you further (I
continued),
after sowing, naturally we hope to
come to
reaping. If, therefore, you have anything
to say on that head also, pray proceed
to
teach me.
Isch. Yes, by all means, unless indeed
you
prove on this head also to know as
much yourself
already as your teacher. To begin then:
You
know that corn needs cutting?
Soc. To be sure, I know that much at
any
rate.
Isch. Well, then, the next point: in
the
act of cutting corn how will you choose
to
stand? facing the way the wind blows,[1]
or against the wind?
[1] Lit. "(on the side) where
the wind
blows or right opposite."
Soc. Not against the wind, for my part.
Eyes
and hands must suffer, I imagine, if
one
stood reaping face to face with husks
and
particles of straw.[2]
[2] i. e. "with particles of straw
and
beards of corn blowing in one's face."
Isch. And should you merely sever the
ears
at top, or reap close to the ground?[3]
[3] See Holden ad loc.; Sir Anthony
Fitzherbert,
"Husbandry," 27 (ed.
1767), "In Somersetshire . . .
they
do share theyr wheate very lowe. .
. ."
If the stalk of corn were short (I
answered),
I should cut down close, to secure
a sufficient
length of straw to be of use. But if
the
stalk be tall, you would do right,
I hold,
to cut it half-way down, whereby the
thresher
and the winnower will be saved some
extra
labour (which both may well be spared).[4]
The stalk left standing in the field,
when
burnt down (as burnt it will be, I
presume),
will help to benefit the soil;[5] and
laid
on as manure, will serve to swell the
volume
of manure.[6]
[4] Lit. "will be spared superfluous
labour on what they do not want."
[5] Al. "if burnt down . . .;
if laid
on as manure . . ."
[6] "Help to swell the bulk"
(Holden).
For the custom see Virg. "Georg."
i. 84; J. Tull, op. cit. ix. 141: "The
custom of burning the stubble on the
rich
plains about Rome continues to this
time."
Isch. There, Socrates, you are detected
"in
the very act"; you know as much
about
reaping as I do myself.
It looks a little like it (I replied).
But
I would fain discover whether I have
sound
knowledge also about threshing.
Isch. Well, I suppose you are aware
of this
much: corn is threshed by beasts of
burthen?[7]
[7] Holden cf. Dr. Davy, "Notes
and
Observations on the Ionian Islands."
"The grain is beaten out, commonly
in
the harvest field, by men, horses,
or mules,
on a threshing-floor prepared extempore
for
the purpose, where the ground is firm
and
dry, and the chaff is separated by
winnowing."--Wilkinson,
"Ancient Egyptians," ii.
41 foll.
Soc. Yes, I am aware of that much,
and beast
of burthen is a general name including
oxen,
horses, mules, and so forth.[8]
[8] See Varro, i. 52, as to tritura
and ventilatio.
Isch. Is it your opinion that these
animals
know more than merely how to tread
the corn
while driven with the goad?
Soc. What more can they know, being
beasts
of burthen?
Isch. Some one must see, then, that
the beasts
tread out only what requires threshing
and
no more, and that the threshing is
done evenly
itself: to whom do you assign that
duty,
Socrates?
Soc. Clearly it is the duty of the
threshers
who are in charge.[9] It is theirs
to turn
the sheaves, and ever and again to
push the
untrodden corn under the creatures'
feet;
and thus, of course, to keep the threshing-floor
as smooth, and finish off the work
as fast,
as possible.
[9] Or, "to the over-threshers,"
"the drivers" (Holden).
Isch. Your comprehension of the facts
thus
far, it seems, keeps pace with mine.
Soc. Well, after that, Ischomachus,
we will
proceed to cleanse the corn by winnowing.[10]
[10] Breit. cf. Colum. "de r.
r."
ii. 10, 14, 21; vide Rich, s. v. ventilabrum.
Isch. Yes, but tell me, Socrates; do
you
know that if you begin the process
from the
windward portion (of the threshing-floor),
you will find your chaff is carried
over
the whole area.
Soc. It must be so.
Isch. Then it is more than likely the
chaff
will fall upon the corn.
Soc. Yes, considering the distance,[11]
the
chaff will hardly be carried across
the corn
into the empty portion of the threshing-floor.
[11] Lit. "it is a long space
for the
chaff to be carried." Al. (1)
"It
is of great consequence the chaff should
be carried beyond the corn." (2)
"It
often happens that the corn is blown
not
only on to the corn, but over and beyond
it into the empty portion of the threshing-floor."
So Breit.
Isch. But now, suppose you begin winnowing
on the "lee" side of the
threshing-floor?[12]
[12] Or, "on the side of the threshing-floor
opposite the wind." Al. "protected
from the wind."
Soc. It is clear the chaff will at
once fall
into the chaff- receiver.[13]
[13] A hollowed-out portion of the
threshing-floor,
according to Breitenbach.
Isch. And when you have cleansed the
corn
over half the floor, will you proceed
at
once, with the corn thus strewn in
front
of you, to winnow the remainder,[14]
or will
you first pack the clean grain into
the narrowest
space against the central pillar?[15]
[14] Lit. "of the chaff,"
where
we should say "corn," the
winnowing
process separating chaff from grain
and grain
from chaff.
[15] If that is the meaning of {ton
polon}.
Al. "the outer edge or rim of
the threshing-floor."
Soc. Yes, upon my word! first pack
together
the clean grain, and proceed. My chaff
will
now be carried into the empty portion
of
the floor, and I shall escape the need
of
winnowing twice over.[16]
[16] Or, "the same chaff (i. e.
unwinnowed
corn, Angl. corn) twice."
Isch. Really, Socrates, you are fully
competent
yourself, it seems, to teach an ignorant
world[17] the speediest mode of winnowing.
[17] Lit. "After all, Socrates,
it seems
you could even teach another how to
purge
his corn most expeditiously."
Soc. It seems, then, as you say, I
must have
known about these matters, though unconsciously;
and here I stand and beat my brains,[18]
reflecting whether or not I may not
know
some other things
--how to refine gold and play the flute
and
paint pictures--without being conscious
of
the fact. Certainly, as far as teaching
goes,
no one ever taught me these, no more
than
husbandry; while, as to using my own
eyes,
I have watched men working at the other
arts
no less than I have watched them till
the
soil.
[18] Lit. "all this while, I am
thinking
whether . . ."
Isch. Did I not tell you long ago that
of
all arts husbandry was the noblest,
the most
generous, just because it is the easiest
to learn?
Soc. That it is without a doubt, Ischomachus.
It seems I must have known the processes
of sowing, without being conscious
of my
knowledge.[19]
[19] Or, "but for all my science,
I
was ignorant (of knowing my own knowledge)."
XIX
Soc. (continuing). But may I ask, is
the
planting of trees[1] a department in
the
art of husbandry?
[1] i. e. of fruit trees, the vine,
olive,
fig, etc.
Isch. Certainly it is.
Soc. How is it, then, that I can know
about
the processes of sowing and at the
same time
have no knowledge about planting?
Isch. Is it so certain that you have
no knowledge?
Soc. How can you ask me? when I neither
know
the sort of soil in which to plant,
nor yet
the depth of hole[2] the plant requires,
nor the breadth, or length of ground
in which
it needs to be embedded;[3] nor lastly,
how
to lay the plant in earth, with any
hope
of fostering its growth.[4]
[2] Reading {to phuto}, "nor yet
how
deep or broad to sink (the hole) for
the
plant." Holden (ed. 1886) supplies
{bothunon}.
Al. {bothron}.
[3] See Loudon, "Encycl. of Agric."
S. 407, ap. Holden: "In France
plantations
of the vine are made by dibbling in
cuttings
of two feet of length; pressing the
earth
firmly to their lower end, an essential
part
of the operation, noticed even by Xenophon."
[4] Lit. "how, laid in the soil,
the
plant will best shoot forth or grow."
Isch. Come, then, to lessons, pupil,
and
be taught whatever you do not know
already!
You have seen, I know, the sort of
trenches
which are dug for plants?
Soc. Hundreds of times.
Isch. Did you ever see one more than
three
feet deep?
Soc. No, I do not think I ever saw
one more
than two and a half feet deep.
Isch. Well, as to the breadth now.
Did you
ever see a trench more than three feet
broad?[5]
[5] Or, "width," "wide."
The commentators cf. Plin. "H.
N."
xvii. 11,
16, 22; Columell. v. 5. 2; ib. iii.
15. 2;
Virg. "Georg." ii. 288.
Soc. No, upon my word, not even more
than
two feet broad.
Isch. Good! now answer me this question:
Did you ever see a trench less than
one foot
deep?
Soc. No, indeed! nor even less than
one foot
and a half. Why, the plants would be
no sooner
buried than dug out again, if planted
so
extremely near the surface.
Isch. Here, then, is one matter, Socrates,
which you know as well as any one.[6]
The
trench is not to be sunk deeper than
two
feet and a half, or shallower than
one foot
and a half.
[6] Lit. "quite adequately."
Soc. Obviously, a thing so plain appeals
to the eye at once.
Isch. Can you by eyesight recognise
the difference
between a dry soil and a moist?
Soc. I should certainly select as dry
the
soil round Lycabettus,[7] and any that
resembles
it; and as moist, the soil in the marsh
meadows
of Phalerum,[8] or the like.
[7] See Leake, "Topog. of Athens,"
i. 209.
[8] Or, "the Phaleric marsh-land."
See Leake, ib. 231, 427; ii. 9.
Isch. In planting, would you dig (what
I
may call) deep trenches in a dry soil
or
a moist?
Soc. In a dry soil certainly; at any
rate,
if you set about to dig deep trenches
in
the moist you will come to water, and
there
and then an end to further planting.
Isch. You could not put it better.
We will
suppose, then, the trenches have been
dug.
Does your eyesight take you further?[9]
Have
you noticed at what season in either
case[10]
the plants must be embedded?
[9] Lit. "As soon as the trenches
have
been dug then, have you further noticed
.
. ."
[10] (1) The vulg. reading {openika
. . .
ekatera} = "at what precise time
. .
. either (i. e. 'the two different'
kinds
of) plant," i. e. "vine and
olive"
or "vine and fig," I suppose;
(2)
Breit. emend. {opotera . . . en ekatera}
= "which kind of plant . . . in
either
soil . . ."; (3) Schenkl. etc.,
{openika
. . . en ekatera} = "at what season
. . . in each of the two sorts of soil
.
. ."
Soc. Certainly.[11]
[11] There is an obvious lacuna either
before
or after this remark, or at both places.
Isch. Supposing, then, you wish the
plants
to grow as fast as possible: how will
the
cutting strike and sprout, do you suppose,
most readily?--after you have laid
a layer
of soil already worked beneath it,
and it
merely has to penetrate soft mould?
or when
it has to force its way through unbroken
soil into the solid ground?
Soc. Clearly it will shoot through
soil which
has been worked more quickly than through
unworked soil.
Isch. Well then, a bed of earth must
be laid
beneath the plant?
Soc. I quite agree; so let it be.
Isch. And how do you expect your cutting
to root best?--if set straight up from
end
to end, pointing to the sky?[12] or
if you
set it slantwise under its earthy covering,
so as to lie like an inverted gamma?[13]
[12] Lit. "if you set the whole
cutting
straight up, facing heavenwards."
[13] i. e. Anglice, "like the
letter
{G} upon its back" {an inverted
"upper-case"
gamma looks like an L}. See Lord Bacon,
"Nat.
Hist." Cent. v. 426: "When
you
would have many new roots of fruit-trees,
take a low tree and bow it and lay
all his
branches aflat upon the ground and
cast earth
upon them; and every twig will take
root.
And this is a very profitable experiment
for costly trees (for the boughs will
make
stock without charge), such as are
apricots,
peaches, almonds, cornelians, mulberries,
figs, etc. The like is continually
practised
with vines, roses, musk roses, etc."
Soc. Like an inverted gamma, to be
sure,
for so the plant must needs have more
eyes
under ground. Now it is from these
same eyes
of theirs, if I may trust my own,[14]
that
plants put forth their shoots above
ground.
I imagine, therefore, the eyes still
underground
will do the same precisely, and with
so many
buds all springing under earth, the
plant
itself, I argue, as a whole will sprout
and
shoot and push its way with speed and
vigour.
[14] Lit. "it is from their eyes,
I
see, that plants . . ."
Isch. I may tell you that on these
points,
too, your judgment tallies with my
own. But
now, should you content yourself with
merely
heaping up the earth, or will you press
it
firmly round your plant?
Soc. I should certainly press down
the earth;
for if the earth is not pressed down,
I know
full well that at one time under the
influence
of rain the unpressed soil will turn
to clay
or mud; at another, under the influence
of
the sun, it will turn to sand or dust
to
the very bottom: so that the poor plant
runs
a risk of being first rotted with moisture
by the rain, and next of being shrivelled
up with drought through overheating
of the
roots.[15]
[15] Through "there being too
much bottom
heat." Holden (ed. 1886).
Isch. So far as the planting of vines
is
concerned, it appears, Socrates, that
you
and I again hold views precisely similar.
And does this method of planting apply
also
to the fig-tree? (I inquired).
Isch. Surely, and not to the fig-tree
alone,
but to all the rest of fruit-trees.[16]
What
reason indeed would there be for rejecting
in the case of other plant-growths[17]
what
is found to answer so well with the
vine?
[16] {akrodrua} = "edible fruits"
in Xenophon's time. See Plat. "Criti."
115 B; Dem. "c. Nicostr."
1251;
Aristot. "Hist. An." viii.
28.
8, {out akrodrua out opora khronios};
Theophr.
"H. Pl." iv. 4. 11. (At a
later
period, see "Geopon." x.
74, =
"fruits having a hard rind or
shell,"
e. g. nuts, acorns, as opposed to pears,
apples, grapes, etc., {opora}.) See
further
the interesting regulations in Plat.
"Laws,"
844 D, 845 C.
[17] Lit. "planting in general."
Soc. How shall we plant the olive,
pray,
Ischomachus?
Isch. I see your purpose. You ask that
question
with a view to put me to the test,[18]
when
you know the answer yourself as well
as possible.
You can see with your own eyes[19]
that the
olive has a deeper trench dug, planted
as
it is so commonly by the side of roads.
You
can see that all the young plants in
the
nursery adhere to stumps.[20] And lastly,
you can see that a lump of clay is
placed
on the head of every plant,[21] and
the portion
of the plant above the soil is protected
by a wrapping.[22]
[18] Plat. "Prot." 311 B,
349 C;
"Theaet." 157 C: "I
cannot
make out whether you are giving your
own
opinion, or only wanting to draw me
out"
(Jowett).
[19] For the advantage, see "Geopon."
iii. 11. 2.
[20] Holden cf. Virg. "Georg."
ii. 30--
quin et caudicibus sectis, mirabile
dictu,
truditur e sicco radix oleagina ligno.
The stock in slices cut, and forth
shall
shoot, O passing strange! from each
dry slice
a root (Holden).
See John Martyn ad loc.: "La Cerda
says,
that what the Poet here speaks of was
practised
in Spain in his time. They take the
trunk
of an olive, says he, deprive it of
its root
and branches, and cut it into several
pieces,
which they put into the ground, whence
a
root and, soon afterwards, a tree is
formed."
This mode of propagating by dry pieces
of
the trunk (with bark on) is not to
be confounded
with that of "truncheons"
mentioned
in "Georg." ii. 63.
[21] See Theophr. "H. Pl."
ii.
2, 4; "de Caus." iii. 5.
1; "Geopon."
ix. 11. 4, ap. Hold.; Col. v. 9. 1;
xi. 2.
42.
[22] Or, "covered up for protection."
Soc. Yes, all these things I see.
Isch. Granted, you see: what is there
in
the matter that you do not understand?
Perhaps
you are ignorant how you are to lay
the potsherd
on the clay at top?
Soc. No, in very sooth, not ignorant
of that
Ischomachus, or anything you mentioned.
That
is just the puzzle, and again I beat
my brains
to discover why, when you put to me
that
question a while back: "Had I,
in brief,
the knowledge how to plant?" I
answered,
"No." Till then it never
would
have struck me that I could say at
all how
planting must be done. But no sooner
do you
begin to question me on each particular
point
than I can answer you; and what is
more,
my answers are, you tell me, accordant
with
the views of an authority[23] at once
so
skilful and so celebrated as yourself.
Really,
Ischomachus, I am disposed to ask:
"Does
teaching consist in putting questions?"[24]
Indeed, the secret of your system has
just
this instant dawned upon me. I seem
to see
the principle in which you put your
questions.
You lead me through the field of my
own knowledge,[25]
and then by pointing out analogies[26]
to
what I know, persuade me that I really
know
some things which hitherto, as I believed,
I had no knowledge of.
[23] Or, "whose skill in farming
is
proverbial."
[24] Lit. "Is questioning after
all
a kind of teaching?" See Plat.
"Meno";
"Mem." IV. vi. 15.
[25] It appears, then, that the Xenophontean
Socrates has {episteme} of a sort.
[26] Or, "a series of resemblances,"
"close parallels," reading
{epideiknus}:
or if with Breit. {apodeiknus}, transl.
"by
proving such or such a thing is like
some
other thing known to me already."
Isch. Do you suppose if I began to
question
you concerning money and its quality,[27]
I could possibly persuade you that
you know
the method to distinguish good from
false
coin? Or could I, by a string of questions
about flute-players, painters, and
the like,
induce you to believe that you yourself
know
how to play the flute, or paint, and
so forth?
[27] Lit. "whether it is good
or not."
Soc. Perhaps you might; for have you
not
persuaded me I am possessed of perfect
knowledge
of this art of husbandry,[28] albeit
I know
that no one ever taught this art to
me?
[28] Or, "since you actually succeeded
in persuading me I was scientifically
versed
in," etc. See Plat. "Statesm."
301 B; "Theaet." 208 E; Aristot.
"An. Post." i. 6. 4; "Categ."
8. 41.
Isch. Ah! that is not the explanation,
Socrates.
The truth is what I told you long ago
and
kept on telling you. Husbandry is an
art
so gentle, so humane, that mistress-like
she makes all those who look on her
or listen
to her voice intelligent[29] of herself
at
once. Many a lesson does she herself
impart
how best to try conclusions with her.[30]
See, for instance, how the vine, making
a
ladder of the nearest tree whereon
to climb,
informs us that it needs support.[31]
Anon
it spreads its leaves when, as it seems
to
say, "My grapes are young, my
clusters
tender," and so teaches us, during
that
season, to screen and shade the parts
exposed
to the sun's rays; but when the appointed
moment comes, when now it is time for
the
swelling clusters to be sweetened by
the
sun, behold, it drops a leaf and then
a leaf,
so teaching us to strip it bare itself
and
let the vintage ripen. With plenty
teeming,
see the fertile mother shows her mellow
clusters,
and the while is nursing a new brood
in primal
crudeness.[32] So the vine plant teaches
us how best to gather in the vintage,
even
as men gather figs, the juiciest first.[33]
[29] Or, "gives them at once a
perfect
knowledge of herself."
[30] Lit. "best to deal with her,"
"make use of her."
[31] Lit. "teaches us to prop
it."
[32] Lit. "yet immature."
[33] Or, "first one and then another
as it swells." Cf. Shakespeare:
The mellow plum doth fall, the green
sticks
fast, Or being early pluck'd is sour
to taste
("V. and A." 527).
XX
At this point in the conversation I
remarked:
Tell me, Ischomachus, if the details
of the
art of husbandry are thus easy to learn,
and all alike know what needs to be
done,
how does it happen that all farmers
do not
fare like, but some live in affluence
owning
more than they can possibly enjoy,
while
others of them fail to obtain the barest
necessities and actually run into debt?
I will tell you, Socrates (Ischomachus
replied).
It is neither knowledge nor lack of
knowledge
in these husbandmen which causes some
to
be well off, while others are in difficulties;
nor will you ever hear such tales afloat
as that this or that estate has gone
to ruin
because the sower failed to sow evenly,
or
that the planter failed to plant straight
rows of plants, or that such an one,[1]
being
ignorant what soil was best suited
to bear
vines, had set his plants in sterile
ground,
or that another[2] was in ignorance
that
fallow must be broken up for purposes
of
sowing, or that a third[3] was not
aware
that it is good to mix manure in with
the
soil. No, you are much more likely
to hear
said of So-and-so: No wonder the man
gets
in no wheat from his farm, when he
takes
no pains to have it sown or properly
manured.
Or of some other that he grows no wine:
Of
course not, when he takes no pains
either
to plant new vines or to make those
he has
bear fruit. A third has neither figs
nor
olives; and again the self-same reason:
He
too is careless, and takes no steps
whatever
to succeed in growing either one or
other.
These are the distinctions which make
all
the difference to prosperity in farming,
far more than the reputed discovery
of any
clever agricultural method or machine.[4]
[1] "Squire This."
[2] "Squire That."
[3] "Squire T'other."
[4] There is something amiss with the
text
at this point. For emendations see
Breit.,
Schenkl, Holden, Hartman.
You will find the principle applies
elsewhere.
There are points of strategic conduct
in
which generals differ from each other
for
the better or the worse, not because
they
differ in respect of wit or judgment,
but
of carefulness undoubtedly. I speak
of things
within the cognisance of every general,
and
indeed of almost every private soldier,
which
some commanders are careful to perform
and
others not. Who does not know, for
instance,
that in marching through a hostile
territory
an army ought to march in the order
best
adapted to deliver battle with effect
should
need arise?[5]--a golden rule which,
punctually
obeyed by some, is disobeyed by others.
Again,
as all the world knows, it is better
to place
day and night pickets[6] in front of
an encampment.
Yet even that is a procedure which,
carefully
observed at times, is at times as carelessly
neglected. Once more: not one man in
ten
thousand,[7] I suppose, but knows that
when
a force is marching through a narrow
defile,
the safer method is to occupy beforehand
certain points of vantage.[8] Yet this
precaution
also has been known to be neglected.
[5] See Thuc. ii. 81: "The Hellenic
troops maintained order on the march
and
kept a look-out until . . ."--Jowett.
[6] See "Cyrop." I. vi. 43.
[7] Lit. "it would be hard to
find the
man who did not know."
[8] Or, "to seize advantageous
positions
in advance." Cf. "Hiero,"
x.
5.
Similarly, every one will tell you
that manure
is the best thing in the world for
agriculture,
and every one can see how naturally
it is
produced. Still, though the method
of production
is accurately known, though there is
every
facility to get it in abundance, the
fact
remains that, while one man takes pains
to
have manure collected, another is entirely
neglectful. And yet God sends us rain
from
heaven, and every hollow place becomes
a
standing pool, while earth supplies
materials
of every kind; the sower, too, about
to sow
must cleanse the soil, and what he
takes
as refuse from it needs only to be
thrown
into water and time itself will do
the rest,
shaping all to gladden earth.[9] For
matter
in every shape, nay earth itself,[10]
in
stagnant water turns to fine manure.
[9] Lit. "Time itself will make
that
wherein Earth rejoices."
[10] i. e. "each fallen leaf,
each sprig
or spray of undergrowth, the very weeds,
each clod." Lit. "what kind
of
material, what kind of soil does not
become
manure when thrown into stagnant water?"
So, again, as touching the various
ways in
which the earth itself needs treatment,
either
as being too moist for sowing, or too
salt[11]
for planting, these and the processes
of
cure are known to all men: how in one
case
the superfluous water is drawn off
by trenches,
and in the other the salt corrected
by being
mixed with various non-salt bodies,
moist
or dry. Yet here again, in spite of
knowledge,
some are careful of these matters,
others
negligent.
[11] See Anatol. "Geop."
ii. 10.
9; Theophr. "de Caus." ii.
5. 4,
16.
8, ap. Holden. Cf. Virg. "Georg."
ii. 238:
salsa autem tellus, et quae perhibetur
amara
frugibus infelix.
But even if a man were altogether ignorant
what earth can yield, were he debarred
from
seeing any fruit or plant, prevented
hearing
from the lips of any one the truth
about
this earth: even so, I put it to you,
it
would be easier far for any living
soul to
make experiments on a piece of land,[12]
than on a horse, for instance, or on
his
fellow- man. For there is nought which
earth
displays with intent to deceive, but
in clear
and simple language stamped with the
seal
of truth she informs us what she can
and
cannot do.[13] Thus it has ever seemed
to
me that earth is the best discoverer
of true
honesty,[14] in that she offers all
her stores
of knowledge in a shape accessible
to the
learner, so that he who runs may read.
Here
it is not open to the sluggard, as
in other
arts, to put forward the plea of ignorance
or lack of knowledge, for all men know
that
earth, if kindly treated, will repay
in kind.
No! there is no witness[15] against
a coward
soul so clear as that of husbandry;[16]
since
no man ever yet persuaded himself that
he
could live without the staff of life.
He
therefore that is unskilled in other
money-making
arts and will not dig, shows plainly
he is
minded to make his living by picking
and
stealing, or by begging alms, or else
he
writes himself down a very fool.[17]
[12] Or, "this fair earth herself."
[13] Or, "earth our mother reveals
her
powers and her impotence."
[14] Lit. "of the good and the
bad."
Cf. Dem. "adv. Phorm." 918.
18.
[15] Lit. "no accuser of."
Cf.
Aesch. "Theb." 439.
[16] Reading, with Sauppe, {all' e
georgia},
or if, with Jacobs, {e en georgia argia},
transl. "as that of idleness in
husbandry."
[17] Or, "if not, he must be entirely
irrational." Cf. Plat. "Apol."
37 C.
Presently, Ischomachus proceeded: Now
it
is of prime importance,[18] in reference
to the profitableness or unprofitableness
of agriculture, even on a large estate
where
there are numerous[19] workfolk,[20]
whether
a man takes any pains at all to see
that
his labourers are devoted to the work
on
hand during the appointed time,[21]
or whether
he neglects that duty. Since one man
will
fairly distance ten[22] simply by working
at the time, and another may as easily
fall
short by leaving off before the hour.[23]
In fact, to let the fellows take things
easily
the whole day through will make a difference
easily of half in the whole work.[24]
[18] Lit. "it made a great difference,
he said, with regard to profit and
loss in
agriculture."
[19] Or if, after Hertlein, adding
{kai meionon},
transl. "workmen now more, now
less,
in number."
[20] {ergasteron}, "poet."
L. &
S. cf. "Orph. H." 65. 4.
See above,
v.
15; xiii. 10.
[21] Cf. Herod. II. ii. 2.
[22] Or, "Why! one man in ten
makes
all the difference by . . ." {para}
= "by comparison with."
[23] Reading as vulg., or if {to me
pro k.
t. l.} transl. "by not leaving
off,
etc."
[24] i. e. "is a difference of
fifty
per cent on the whole work."
As, on a walking-expedition, it may
happen,
of two wayfarers, the one will gain
in pace
upon the other half the distance say
in every
five- and-twenty miles,[25] though
both alike
are young and hale of body. The one,
in fact,
is bent on compassing the work on which
he
started, he steps out gaily and unflinchingly;
the other, more slack in spirit, stops
to
recruit himself and contemplate the
view
by fountain side and shady nook, as
though
his object were to court each gentle
zephyr.
So in farm work; there is a vast difference
as regards performance between those
who
do it not, but seek excuse for idleness
and
are suffered to be listless. Thus,
between
good honest work and base neglect there
is
as great a difference as there is between--what
shall I say?--why, work and idleness.[26]
The gardeners, look, are hoeing vines
to
keep them clean and free of weeds;
but they
hoe so sorrily that the loose stuff
grows
ranker and more plentiful. Can you
call that[27]
anything but idleness?
[25] Lit. "per 200 stades."
[26] Or, "wholly to work and wholly
to be idle." Reading as Sauppe,
etc.,
or if with Holden, etc., {to de de
kalos
kai to kakos ergazesthai e epimeleisthai},
transl. "between toil and carefulness
well or ill expended there lies all
the difference;
the two things are sundered as wide
apart
as are the poles of work and play,"
etc. A. Jacobs' emend. ap. Hartm. "An.
Xen." p. 211, {to de de kakos
ergazesthai
e kakos epimeleisthai kei to kalos},
seems
happy.
[27] Or, "such a hoer aught but
an idle
loon."
Such, Socrates, are the ills which
cause
a house to crumble far more than lack
of
scientific knowledge, however rude
it be.[28]
For if you will consider; on the one
hand,
there is a steady outflow[29] of expenses
from the house, and, on the other,
a lack
of profitable works outside to meet
expenses;
need you longer wonder if the field-works
create a deficit and not a surplus?
In proof,
however, that the man who can give
the requisite
heed, while straining every nerve in
the
pursuit of agriculture, has speedy[30]
and
effective means of making money, I
may cite
the instance of my father, who had
practised
what he preached.[31]
[28] Cf. Thuc. v. 7; Plat. "Rep."
350 A; "Theaet." 200 B.
[29] Or, "the expenses from the
house
are going on at the full rate,"
{enteleis}.
Holden cf. Aristoph. "Knights,"
1367: {ton misthon apodoso 'ntele},
"I'll
have the arrears of seamen's wages
paid to
a penny" (Frere).
[30] {anutikotaten}. Cf. "Hipparch,"
ii. 6.
[31] Or, "who merely taught me
what
he had himself carried out in practice."
Now, my father would never suffer me
to purchase
an estate already under cultivation,
but
if he chanced upon a plot of land which,
owing to the neglect or incapacity
of the
owner, was neither tilled nor planted,[32]
nothing would satisfy him but I must
purchase
it. He had a saying that estates already
under cultivation cost a deal of money
and
allowed of no improvement; and where
there
is no prospect of improvement, more
than
half the pleasure to be got from the
possession
vanishes. The height of happiness was,
he
maintained, to see your purchase, be
it dead
chattel or live animal,[33] go on improving
daily under your own eyes.[34] Now,
nothing
shows a larger increase[35] than a
piece
of land reclaimed from barren waste
and bearing
fruit a hundredfold. I can assure you,
Socrates,
many is the farm which my father and
I made
worth I do not know how many times
more than
its original value. And then, Socrates,
this
valuable invention[36] is so easy to
learn
that you who have but heard it know
and understand
it as well as I myself do, and can
go away
and teach it to another if you choose.
Yet
my father did not learn it of another,
nor
did he discover it by a painful mental
process;[37]
but, as he has often told me, through
pure
love of husbandry and fondness of toil,
he
would become enamoured of such a spot
as
I describe,[38] and then nothing would
content
him but he must own it, in order to
have
something to do, and at the same time,
to
derive pleasure along with profit from
the
purchase. For you must know, Socrates,
of
all Athenians I have ever heard of,
my father,
as it seems to me, had the greatest
love
for agricultural pursuits.
[32] i. e. out of cultivation, whether
as
corn land or for fruit trees, viz.
olive,
fig, vine, etc.
[33] Or, "be it a dead thing or
a live
pet." Cf. Plat. "Theaet."
174 B; "Laws," 789 B, 790
D, 819
B; "C. I." 1709.
[34] Cf. "Horsem." iii. 1;
and
see Cowley's Essay above referred to.
[35] Or, "is susceptible of greater
improvement."
[36] Or, "discovery." See
"Anab."
III. v. 12; "Hell." IV. v.
4; "Hunting,"
xiii. 13.
[37] Or, "nor did he rack his
brains
to discover it." See "Mem."
III. v. 23. Cf. Aristoph. "Clouds,"
102, {merimnophrontistai}, minute philosophers.
[38] "He could not see an estate
of
the sort described but he must fall
over
head and ears in love with it at first
sight;
have it he must."
When I heard this, I could not resist
asking
a question; Ischomachus
(I said), did your father retain possession
of all the farms he put under cultivation,
or did he part with them whenever he
was
offered a good price?
He parted with them, without a doubt
(replied
Ischomachus), but then at once he bought
another in the place of what he sold,
and
in every case an untilled farm, in
order
to gratify his love for owrk.
As you describe him (I proceeded),
your father
must truly have been formed by nature
with
a passion for husbandry, not unlike
that
corn- hunger which merchants suffer
from.
You know their habits: by reason of
this
craving after corn,[39] whenever they
hear
that corn is to be got, they go sailing
off
to find it, even if they must cross
the Aegean,
or the Euxine, or the Sicilian seas.
And
when they have got as much as ever
they can
get, they will not let it out of their
sight,
but store it in the vessel on which
they
sail themselves, and off they go across
the
seas again.[40] Whenever they stand
in need
of money, they will not discharge their
precious
cargo,[41] at least not in haphazard
fashion,
wherever they may chance to be; but
first
they find out where corn is at the
highest
value, and where the inhabitants will
set
the greatest store by it, and there
they
take and deliver the dear article.
Your father's
fondness for agriculture seems to bear
a
certain family resemblance to this
passion.
[39] Lit. "of their excessive
love for
corn."
[40] Lit. "they carry it across
the
seas again, and that, too, after having
stored
it in the hold of the very vessel in
which
they sail themselves."
[41] Or, "their treasure."
{auton}
throughout, which indeed is the humour
of
the passage. The love of John Barleycorn
is their master passion.
To these remarks Ischomachus replied:
You
jest, Socrates; but still I hold to
my belief:
that man is fond of bricks and mortar
who
no sooner has built one house than
he must
needs sell it and proceed to build
another.
To be sure, Ischomachus (I answered),
and
for my part I assure you, upon oath,
I, Socrates,
do verily and indeed believe[42] you
that
all men by nature love (or hold they
ought
to love) those things wherebysoever
they
believe they will be benefited.
[32] Reading {e men pisteuein soi phusei
(nomizein) philein tauta pantas . .
.}; and
for the "belief" propounded
with
so much humorous emphasis, see Adam
Smith,
"Moral Sentiments." Hartman,
"An.
Xen." 180, cf. Plat. "Lysis."
XXI
After a pause, I added: I am turning
over
in my mind how cleverly you have presented
the whole argument to support your
thesis:
which was, that of all arts the art
of husbandry
is the easiest to learn. And now, as
the
result of all that has been stated,
I am
entirely persuaded that this is so.
Isch. Yes, Socrates, indeed it is.
But I,
on my side, must in turn admit that
as regards
that faculty which is common alike
to every
kind of conduct (tillage, or politics,
the
art of managing a house, or of conducting
war), the power, namely, of command[1]--I
do subscribe to your opinion, that
on this
score one set of people differ largely
from
another both in point of wit and judgement.
On a ship of war, for instance,[2]
the ship
is on the high seas, and the crew must
row
whole days together to reach moorings.[3]
Now note the difference. Here you may
find
a captain[4] able by dint of speech
and conduct
to whet the souls of those he leads,
and
sharpen them to voluntary toils; and
there
another so dull of wit and destitute
of feeling
that it will take his crew just twice
the
time to finish the same voyage. See
them
step on shore. The first ship's company
are
drenched in sweat; but listen, they
are loud
in praise of one another, the captain
and
his merry men alike. And the others?
They
are come at last; they have not turned
a
hair, the lazy fellows, but for all
that
they hate their officer and by him
are hated.
[1] See "Mem." I. i. 7.
[2] Or, "the crew must row the livelong
day . . ."
[3] For an instance see "Hell."
VI. ii. 27, Iphicrates' periplus.
[4] Or, "one set of boatswains."
See Thuc. ii. 84. For the duties of the Keleustes
see "Dict. Gk. Rom. Ant." s. v.
portisculus; and for the type of captain
see "Hell." V. i. 3, Teleutias.
Generals, too, will differ (he proceeded),
the one sort from the other, in this very
quality. Here you have a leader who, incapable
of kindling a zest for toil and love of hairbreadth
'scapes, is apt to engender in his followers
that base spirit which neither deigns nor
chooses to obey, except under compulsion.
They even pride and plume themselves,[5]
the cowards, on their opposition to their
leader; this same leader who, in the end,
will make his men insensible to shame even
in presence of most foul mishap. On the other
hand, put at their head another stamp of
general: one who is by right divine[6] a
leader, good and brave, a man of scientific
knowledge. Let him take over to his charge
those malcontents, or others even of worse
character, and he will have them presently
ashamed of doing a disgraceful deed. "It
is nobler to obey" will be their maxim.
They will exult in personal obedience and
in common toil, where toil is needed, cheerily
performed. For just as an unurged zeal for
voluntary service[7] may at times invade,
we know, the breasts of private soldiers,
so may like love of toil with emulous longing
to achieve great deeds of valour under the
eyes of their commander, be implanted in
whole armies by good officers.
[5] Lit. "magnify themselves."
See "Ages." x. 2; "Pol. Lac."
viii. 2.
[6] Or, "god-like," "with
something more than human in him." See
Hom. "Il." xxiv. 259:
{oude eokei andros ge thnetou pais emmenai
alla theoio.}
"Od." iv. 691; {theioi basilees}.
Cf. Carlyle, "Heroes"; Plat. "Meno,"
99 D: Soc. "And may we not, Meno, truly
call those men divine who, having no understanding,
yet succeed in many a grand deed and word?"
And below: Soc. "And the women too,
Meno, call good men divine; and the Spartans,
when they praise a good man, say, 'that he
is a divine man'" (Jowett). Arist. "Eth.
N." vii. 1: "That virtue which
transcends the human, and which is of an
heroic or godlike type, such as Priam, in
the poems of Homer, ascribes to Hector, when
wishing to speak of his great goodness:
Not woman-born seemed he, but sprung from
gods."
And below: "And exactly as it is a rare
thing to find a man of godlike nature--to
use the expression of the Spartans, 'a godlike
man,' which they apply to those whom they
expressively admire--so, too, brutality is
a type of character rarely found among men"
(Robert Williams).
[7] Reading {etheloponia tis}, or if {philoponia},
transl. "just as some strange delight
in labour may quicken in the heart of many
an individual soldier." See "Anab."
IV. vii. 11.
Happy must that leader be whose followers
are thus attached to him: beyond all others
he will prove a stout and strong commander.
And by strong, I mean, not one so hale of
body as to tower above the stoutest of the
soldiery themselves; no, nor him whose skill
to hurl a javelin or shoot an arrow will
outshine the skilfullest; nor yet that mounted
on the fleetest charger it shall be his to
bear the brunt of danger foremost amid the
knightliest horsemen, the nimblest of light
infantry. No, not these, but who is able
to implant a firm persuasion in the minds
of all his soldiers: follow him they must
and will through fire, if need be, or into
the jaws of death.[8]
[8] Or, "through flood and fire or other
desperate strait." Cf. "Anab."
II. vi. 8.
Lofty of soul and large of judgment[9] may
he be designated justly, at whose back there
steps a multitude stirred by his sole sentiment;
not unreasonably may he be said to march
"with a mighty arm,"[10] to whose
will a thousand willing hands are prompt
to minister; a great man in every deed he
is who can achieve great ends by resolution
rather than brute force.
[9] See "Ages." ix. 6, "of
how lofty a sentiment."
[10] See Herod. vii. 20, 157; Thuc. iii.
96.
So, too, within the field of private industry,
the person in authority, be it the bailiff,
be it the overseer,[11] provided he is able
to produce unflinching energy, intense and
eager, for the work, belongs to those who
haste to overtake good things[12] and reap
great plenty. Should the master (he proceeded),
being a man possessed of so much power, Socrates,
to injure the bad workman and reward the
zealous
--should he suddenly appear, and should his
appearance in the labour field produce no
visible effect upon his workpeople, I cannot
say I envy or admire him. But if the sight
of him is followed by a stir of movement,
if there come upon[13] each labourer fresh
spirit, with mutual rivaly and keen ambition,
drawing out the finest qualities of each,[14]
of him I should say, Behold a man of kingly
disposition. And this, if I mistake not,
is the quality of greatest import in every
operation which needs the instrumentality
of man; but most of all, perhaps, in agriculture.
Not that I would maintain that it is a thing
to be lightly learnt by a glance of the eye,
or hearsay fashion, as a tale that is told.
Far from it, I assert that he who is to have
this power has need of education; he must
have at bottom a good natural disposition;
and, what is greatest of all, he must be
himself a god- like being.[15] For if I rightly
understand this blessed gift, this faculty
of command over willing followers, by no
means is it, in its entirety, a merely human
quality, but it is in part divine. It is
a gift plainly given to those truly initiated[16]
in the mystery of self-command. Whereas despotism
over unwilling slaves, the heavenly ones
give, as it seems to me, to those whom they
deem worthy to live the life of Tantalus
in Hades, of whom it is written[17] "he
consumes unending days in apprehension of
a second death."
[11] According to Sturz, "Lex."
s. v., the {epitropos} is (as a rule, see
"Mem." II. viii.) a slave or freedman,
the {epistates} a free man. See "Mem."
III. v. 18.
[12] Apparently a homely formula, like "make
hay whilst the sun shines," "a
stitch in time saves nine."
[13] Cf. Hom. "Il." ix. 436, xvii.
625; "Hell." VII. i. 31.
[14] Reading {kratiste ousa}, or if with
Heindorf, {kratisteusai}, transl. "to
prove himself the best."
[15] See "Cyrop." I. i. 3; Grote,
"Plato," vol. iii. 571.
[16] See Plat. "Phaed." 69 C; Xen.
"Symp." i. 10.
[17] Or, "it is said." See Eur.
"Orest." 5, and Porson ad loc.
|