[καὶ ζητεῖν]. Ast rightly condemned these words as “ineptum glossema.” To excise καὶ only (as Badham) is unsatisfactory, since as Hug justly observes τίκτειν ζητεῖν λόγους “ist unerträglich matt.” Stallb. attempts to justify the words thus: “Diotima hoc dicit, talem amatorem non modo ipsum parere quasi et ex se procreare, sed etiam aliunde quaerere et investigare eiusmodi sermones, qui iuvenes reddant meliores”; so too Rettig. But this is futile. ἐν τοῖς ἐπιτηδεύμασι. “In Morals” (Stewart): cp. Laws 793 D ὅσα νόμους ἢ ἔθη τις ἢ ἐπιτηδεύματα καλεῖ: Rep. 444 E: Gorg. 474 E. ἵνα τὸ...εἶναι. This clause is subordinate to, rather than coordinate with, the preceding ἵνα clause (like the ἕως ἂν clause in D below),—a juxtaposition which sounds awkward. Hence it is tempting either to excise this clause with Hug, or with Ast to read ἀναγκασθεὶς for ἀναγκασθῇ, and delete the second ἵνα. Against Hug's method it may be urged that the words are wanted to correspond to ἑνὸς...σμικρὸν ἡγησάμενον in 210 B above, and to emphasize the “littleness” of corporeal beauty even when taken in the mass. For this belittling of things of the earth, cp. Theaet. 173 E ἡ δὲ διάνοια, ταῦτα πάντα ἡγησαμένη σμικρὰ καὶ οὐδέν, ἀτιμάσασα...φέρεται κτλ. Observe how πᾶν ...ξυγγενές here balances (πᾶν) κάλλος...ἀδελφόν in 210 B. ἀγαγεῖν. The construction is still dependent upon δεῖ, but the subject to be supplied (viz. τὸν ἡγούμενον) is changed.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.