James Adam, The Republic of Plato

---

ᾧ πολλάκις κτλ.: ‘in virtue of our oft-repeated maxim and in that way’: i.e. τῷ τὰ αὑτοῦ πράττειν. Ficinus seems to have read καὶ ὡς after λέγομεν. At first sight καὶ οὔτως appears to demand the insertion; but Plato is speaking with less formality and precision than in 441 C, D. The reading of Vind. E καὶ οὗτος (for καὶ οὔτως), i.e. ‘the individual, as well as the city,’ is attractive, but unnecessary. Hartman proposes ᾧ <πόλιν> πολλάκις <ἐ> λέγομεν, τούτῳ καὶ οὗτος ἔσται, a solution which will commend itself to few.

μή πῃ -- εἶναι. ‘Do we find Justice growing dimmer in any way? Does it appear something different from what it was discovered to be in the city?’ lit. ‘blunted, so as to appear’ etc. In the language of 434 D (to which Socrates' question refers) Justice has now ‘passed into’ the Individual; and no feature has been blunted, or lost its clearness of outline. We are therefore confirmed in our view of Justice, both civic and individual. Hartman would read ἀπήμβλυνται, taking ἡμῖν as ‘by us,’ but the present is more expressive, and (with ἡμῖν) represents us as in a certain sense spectators of the selfevolution of Justice: cf. ἐὰν μὲν ἡμῖν καὶ εἰς ἕνα ἰὸν τὸ εἶδος τοῦτο κτλ. 434 D. ἀπαμβλύνεται=‘retunditur’ (Schneider).