previous next

ἐν Ἑλλησπόντῳ is rejected by Cobet and Hartman; if the Homeric heroes were ἐν Ἑλλησπόντῳ, the fish forsooth would more easily have eaten them than they the fish! This is however so obvious that even Cobet's “scriba sciolus” would have seen it, and avoided the preposition ἐν. The fact is that Ἑλλήσποντος was constantly used to denote the whole coast stretching from the Pontus to the Aegean, including Bosporos and Propontis. See Stein on Hdt. IV 38 and cf. Thuc. II 9. The usage is also found in Inscriptions (Meisterhans^{3} p. 226. 16). An Athenian of Plato's day was much more likely to employ the name Ἑλλήσποντος in this idiomatic sense than a later copyist; and for this reason I have no doubt that the expression is genuine, although the words of Hartman “nihil refert utrum ἐν Ἑλλησπόντῳ an ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ sint” are nearly, if not quite, true. Plato may however intend to remind us that fish were plentiful in the region of the Hellespont: cf. Il. IX 360 and Athen. IV 157 B.

ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν. I 341 B note

καὶ ὀρθῶς γε -- ἀπέχονται . ὀρθῶς must be taken with both verbs: ‘Yes, and they do well in knowing it and in abstaining.’

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: