Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T16:43:59.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Static Electricity in Agathon's Speech in Plato's Symposium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John G. Griffith
Affiliation:
Jesus College, Oxford

Extract

Agathon's mannered yet striking encomium on Eros in Plato's Symposium (197c ff.) has attracted critical attention in ample measure, yet at least one dark corner remains unilluminated. As the speaker approaches his climax in the words quoted above, he slips into nautical imagery: κυβερν⋯της ⋯πιβ⋯της … (a soldier on shipboard), but then disconcerts readers and commentators alike by immediately lapsing into the down-to-earth language of παραστ⋯της τε⋯ σωτ⋯ρ … words which seem to lack maritime connotations. The standard editions offer no help: Hug–Schöner (1909) devote several lines to the metaphors as they conceive them and suggest various groupings, but conclude somewhat despairingly: ‘dass es im ubrigen hier nicht auf Schärfe der Begriffe ankommt, leuchtet ein’. Dover, elsewhere a supportive editor, here only offers observations on ⋯πιβ⋯της and the ‘predominantly nautical sense’ of κυβερν⋯της (‘pilot’); he translates παραστ⋯της as ‘comrade-in-arms, – strictly the hoplite posted beside one’. Bury (1909, ad loc.) has some desultory statements which lead nowhere, while lecture-notes of pupils betray perplexity; some consider the four nouns here to be an ‘odd assortment’, and say that ‘many emendations have been suggested’. It has even been suggested that it was perhaps Plato's intention to show Agathon talking ‘near-nonsense’.

Type
Shorter Notes
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See fr. 14, Nauck2 = fr. tr. adesp. F 14 in TGF, vol. 2, Kannicht-Snell, (1981)Google Scholar, where a reference is given to Pl, . Symp. 197cGoogle Scholar, but without comment. It is immaterial to the argument developed here, but if the unlikely ἔνθα in the iambic line is to be emended, the current suggestions might be bettered. Hercher's ⋯σθλο⋯ redundant with κ⋯γαθο⋯ following, Scheffer's ἄμϕω is padding, as also is Kühn's pointless ⋯ντως. Perhaps consider: ⋯ν θεοἲς with the noun scanned as a monosyllable, as commonly: ‘saviours among the gods’.

2 For a full and interesting collection of passages relating to St. Elmo's fire as a traditional element in the propempticon, see Nisbet and Hubbard on Horace Odes 1.3.2, quoting inter alia Cinna fr. 2 (Morel) and Statius Silv. 3.2.8. See also Kannicht's, note on Eur, . Helena 1495–1511 (vol. 2, p. 395)Google Scholar.