A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

398 PLATO. PLATO.
nection a purely chronological arrangement, de- the Symposium and the Philebus are separated
pending on the time of their composition (Ueber from the Sophistes and Politicus, with which they
Platons Sc/sriften, Miinchen, 1820), has been are much more closely connected than with the
followed by no results that can in any degree be delineative works, the Politeia, Timaeus, &c.
depended on, as the date of the composition can be (Comp. Brandis, Gescie/te der Griecehisch-Riapproximately determined by means of the ana- mischen Philosophie, ii. 1, p. 164, &c.)
chronisms (offences against the time in which they Lastly, as regards the genuineness of the writings
are supposed to take place) contained in them in of Plato, we cannot, indeed, regard the investigabut a few dialogues as compared with the greatly tions on the subject as brought to a definitive conpreponderating number of those in which he has clusion, though we may consider ourselves conassigned it from mere opinion. K. F. Hermann's vinced that only a few occasional pieces, or delineaundertaking, in the absence of definite external tions of Socratic conversations, are open to doubts
statements, to restore a chronological arrangement of any importance, not those dialogues which are to
of the dialogues according to traces and marks be regarded as the larger, essential members of the
founded in facts, with historical circumspection and system. Even if these in part were first published
criticism, and in doing so at the same time to by disciples of Plato, as by Hermodorus (who has
sketch a faithful picture of the progress of the been accusqd of smuggling in spurious works only
mental life and development of the writer of them, through a misunderstanding of a passage in Cicero,
is considerably more worth notice. (Geschichte and ad Alt. xiii. 21), and by Philippus the Opuntian;
Syslemn der Platonischen Philosophie. ister Theil, and though, further, little can be built upon the
Heidelberg, 1839, p. 368, &c.) In the first period, confirmation afforded by their having been received
according to him, Plato's Socrates betrays no other into the trilogies of the grammarian Aristophanes,
view of life, or scientific conception, than such as the authenticity of the most important of them is dewe become acquainted with in the historical So- monstrated by the testimonies of Aristotle and sonme
crates out of Xenophon and other unsuspicious other incontrovertible authorities (the former will
witnesses (Hippias, Ion, Alcibiades I., Charmides, be found carefully collected in Zeller's Plttonische
Lysis, Laches, Protagoras, and Euthydemus). Studien, p. 201, &c. Respecting the latter comp.
Then, immediately after the death of Socrates, the Hermann, i.c. i. p. 410, &c.). Notwithstanding
Apology, Criton, Gorgias, Euthyphron, Menon, and these testimonies, the Parmenides, Sophistes, and
Hippias Major belong to a transition step. In the Politicus (by Socher, Ie. p. 280, &c.; see on the
second, or Megaric period of development dialectic other hand IIermann, I. c. p. 506, &c. 575, note
makes its appearance as the true technic of phi- 131), and the Menon (by Ast, p. 398, &c.; see in
losophy, and the ideas as its proper objects (Cra- reply Hermann, p. 482, &c.), have been assailed on
tylus, Theaetetus, Sophistes, Politicus, Parmenides). exceedingly insufficient grounds; the books on the
Lastly in the third period the system itself is Laws in a manner much more deserving of attention
exhibited (Phaedrus, Menexenus, Symposium, (especially by Zeller, 1. c. 1-115 but comp. HerPhaedo, Philebus, Politeia, Timaeus, Critias, and mann, p. 547); but yet even the latter are with
the Laws). But although Hermann has laboured preponderating probability to be regarded as goto establish his assumptions with a great expendi- nuine. On the other hand the Epinomis is proture of acuteness and learning, he has not attained bably to be assigned to a disciple of Plato (comp.
to results that can in any degree stand the test of Hermann, p. 410. 22), the Minos and Hipparcllus
examination. For the assumptions that Plato in the to a Socratic (A. Bidckh, in Platonis MIinoen qui
first period confined himself to an analytic treat- vulgo fertur, p. 9, undertakes to make good the
ment of ideas, in a strictly Socratic manner, and claim of Simon to them). The second Alcibiades
did not attain to a scientific independence till was attributed by ancient critics to Xenophon
he did so through his removal to Megara, nor toan (Athen. xi. p. 506, c.). The Anterastae and Cliacquaintance with the Pythagorean philosophy, and tophon are probably of much later origin (see Herso to the complete development of his dialectic and mann, p. 420, &c. 425, &c.). The Platonic letters
doctrine of ideas, till he did so through his travels, were composed at different periods; the oldest of
-for these assumptions all that can be made out is, them, the seventh and eighth, probably by disciples
that in a number of the dialogues the peculiar fea- of Plato (Hermann, p. 420, &c.). The dialogues
tures of the Platonic dialectic and doctrine of ideas Demodocus, Sisyphus, Eryxias, Axiochus, and those
do not as yet make their appearance in a decided on justice and virtue, were with good reason reform. But on the one hand Hermann ranks in garded by ancient critics as spurious, and with
that class dialogues such as the Euthydemus, Menon, them may be associated the Hipparchus, Theages,
and Gorgias, in which references to dialectic and and the Definitions. The genuineness of the first
the doctrine of ideas can scarcely fail to be recog- Alcibiades seems doubtful, though Hermann defenids
nised; on the other it is not easy to see why Plato, it (p. 439, &c.). The smaller Hippias, the Ion, and
even after he had laid down in his own mind the the Menexenus, on the other hand, which are
outlines of his dialectic and doctrine of ideas, should allowed by Aristotle, but assailed by Schleiermacher
not now and then, according to the separate re- (i. 2, p. 295, ii. 3, p. 367, &c.) and Ast (p. 303,
quirements of the subject in hand, as in the Pro- &c. 448), might very well maintain their ground
tagoras and the smaller dialogues which connect as occasional compositions of Plato. As regards the
themselves with it, have looked awvay from them, thorough criticism of these dialogues in more recent
and transported himself back again completely to times, Stallbaum in particular, in the prefaces to
the Socratic point of view. Then again, il Her- his editions, and Hermann (p. 366, &c. 400, &c.),
mann's mode of treating the subject, dialogues have rendered important services.
which stand in the closest relation to each other, as However groundless may be the Neo-platonlic
the Gorgias and Theaetetus, the Euthydemus and assumption of a secret doctrine, of which not even
Theaetetus, are severed from each other, and the passages brought forward out of the insititious
assigned to different periods; while the Phaedon, Platonic letters (vii. p. 341, e. ii. p. 314, c.) contain