Η ὡμολόγεις καθ' ἡμᾶς πολιτεύεσθαι] The infinitive which is here put in the present tense, was changed by Stephens, contrary to the authority of the MSS., into woλirεvσeσbai. In the same manner, c. XIII. near the end: καὶ ὅτι ὁμολογήσας ἦ μὴν πείOεovaι ovтε Tεί0εtaι ovтe tεide. And, further on in this chapter: φάσκοντές σε ὡμολογηκέναι πολιτεύεσθαι, and καθ ̓ ἃς ἡμῖν ξυνέθου πολιτεύεσθαι, where, also, Stephens substituted πείσεσθαι and πολιτεύσεσθαι. Legg. p. 937. Β. ἐὰν ἐγγυητὴν ἀξιόχρεων ἦ μὴν μένειν καταστήσῃ: where Ast, with Stephens, wrote μενεῖν. Herodot. IX. 106. πίστι τε καταλαβόντες καὶ ὁρκίοισι ἐμμένειν τε κaì μǹ ȧπоσтησεolai: where Wesseling, against the MSS., substituted iμμeveiv. Xenophon. Cyrop. VI. 2,39. ¿μoì πρoçayayшv ἐγγυητὰς ἢ μὴν πορεύεσθαι: where Stephens preferred πορεύσεσθαι. Anabas. II. 3, 27. ὀμόσαι ἦ μὴν πορεύεσθαι: where Schneider, after Stephens, gave πоρεúσεσ0αι. Eurip. Med. v. 750. ὄμνυμι— ἐμμένειν, ἅ σου κλύω: where see Schæfer. It certainly is not indifferent whether the future or present tense is used. If the future is employed, the speaker indicates an action not present, but which will take place at some future time, and promises that he will perform it at a future time. As in Xenophon. Hellen. II. 4. 30. ὀμόσαντες ὅρκους ἦ μὴν μὴ μνησικακήσεv, could not be expressed in any other manner, since not a present, but a future vengeance is thought of. But if the present is used, the speaker refers to a state of things, not simply in futurity, but now present, although it may continue longer When a person says: ἦ μὴν, ἐμμένω; he declares by these words that, from the very moment of his giving the oath, he will abide by what he promises, since the circumstances are now present which call for its fulfilment. If this is a correct view, it must be easy to determine whether the present is to be retained in this passage, or the future form substituted. Let us imagine a citizen swearing that he will direct and govern his life, manners, and pursuits, according to the laws and ordinances of the state, in which he is about to live. Which will be the most suitable: μὴν ὁμολογῶ κατὰ τούς νόμους πολιτεύσεσθαι; οι ἢ μὴν ὁμολογῶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους πολιτεύεσθαι? It appears to us, that the second form of the oath is preferable; since it indicates that from the moment of taking it he undertakes to obey the laws. It cannot, then, be wrong to use the same form of construction in obliqua oratione as is used in directa oratione. Accordingly, in all the passages before quoted, to which many others might be

added, the reading of the MSS. ought to be preserved, as being singularly adapted to the meaning. And as to the addition of καὶ μὴ ἀποστήσεσθαι, the passage may be easily understood, without changing μμévev into μμɛvεiv. For the sense is, that not only is it their present purpose to abide by their promise, but but that they will never at any future time depart from it.

With the τά τε ἄλλα we must understand καθ' ἡμᾶς ἐπολιτεύου (or ToλITεvoμεvos): You conducted yourself as a citizen of ours in various respects, and amongst others in this, that you beyat children in this commonwealth, etc. The idiom is a very frequently recurring one. The particular thing singled out from the aλa, as here, the generation of children, being intended to receive especial emphasis.

i ἐξῆν σοι φυγῆς τιμήσασθαι] Referring to the opportunity presented to him, after the first vote of the dicasts, of specifying a particular penalty for his offence. See Apol. cc. XXV. XXVI. XXVII. Socrates might have named exile, instead of the nominal fine of thirty minæ; and, by so doing, would have been far more likely to have conciliated the favour of the tribunal, at least so far as to procure a sentence of banishment instead of 'death. Kawπílεolaι, according to Hesychius, is properly кooμεiolai, to adorn, or deck one's-self: whence кawπioтρia, a female who adorns others, a lady's-maid. But, in a metaphorical sense, it signifies: to be vain like a fop, to be elated, to swagger, as here. Protagor. p. 333. D. rò μèv оνν пρмтоν ÈKαλλwπiεTO ἡμῖν ὁ Πρωταγόρας—ἔπειτα μέντοι ξυνεχώρησεν ἀποκρίνεσθαι. Respecting the infinitive Tɛ0vával, for which Ovýokav might have been expected, see Apolog. Socrat. c. XVII. note (2).

κ "Αλλο τι οὖν ἂν φαῖεν] The particle ἄν was commonly omitted in cases like this; but there are numerous examples of its insertion. Compare Demosth. p. 1445. 14. ed. Reisk. ri ouv ἂν εἴποι τις σὺ παραινεῖς; Olynth. p. 14. 5. ed. R. τί οὖν ἄν τις εἴποι σὺ γράφεις; Plato, Phæd. p. 87. Β. τί οὖν ἂν φαίη ὁ λόγος ἔτι ἀπιστεῖς.

1

ἂς δὴ ἑκάστοτε φῂς εὐνομ.] The laws and institutes of Lacedæmon and Crete are eulogised by the Platonic Socrates in various passages of his different dialogues. Compare Protag. p. 342. C. D. γνοίητε δ ̓ ἂν, ὅτι ἐγὼ ταῦτα ἀληθῆ λέγω, καὶ Λακεδαιμόνιοι πρὸς φιλοσοφίαν καὶ λόγους ἄριστα πεπαίδευνται. Also, Repub. VIII. p. 544. C., etc. The particle on here indicates a kind of appeal to the listener, as to the truth of a state

ment respecting which he is prepared to judge: Which you know very well you are in the habit of praising, etc. Ekάotote, i. e, whenever you mention them.

κ οὐδὲ τῶν βαρβαρικῶν] This is the correct reading, being opposed to πόλεων ̔Ελληνίδων. If βαρβάρων were read, τῶν ̔Ελλήνων πόλεων would have been used.

* οἱ νόμοι δῆλον ὅτι· ] These words appeared to Stephens to have arisen from a gloss. But Fischer has correctly observed that, if they were removed, what follows would lose much of its force: τίνι γὰρ ἂν πόλις ἀρέσκοι ἄνευ νόμων; Besides, δῆλον ὅτι, or, as it was commonly written, dnλovóri, refers not only to oi vóμo, but to the whole of the foregoing sentence, as if the passage stood thus: δῆλον ὅτι οὕτω διαφερόντως σοι ἤρεσκεν ἡ πόλις τε καὶ οἱ νόμοι.

• ¿àv ημĩv ye wεi0y] In these words the laws answer themselves: You will do so, if you will hearken to us.' The words necessary to complete the sentence are readily supplied from the preceding questions: ἐμμενεῖς τοῖς ὡμολογημένοις.

a

XV. a Tỷ TOÚTWv moλırɛią] That is, to the citizens of these commonwealths; the abstract woλirɛía being equivalent to the concrete Toxirai. So in Thucydides, we have ovμμaxía used as equivalent to oi ovμpaxo. And it would not be difficult to multiply examples. A little further on, vπoßλéπε is to treat with suspicion. Both the active and middle forms seem to be used in this sense. Hesychius: ὑποβλεπόμενος· ὑπονοῶν, ἐχθραίνων.

b ßeßaiwoeis T. d.] That is, either, You will confirm the judges in their opinion that they were right in condemning you: or, You will confirm others in the opinion that the judges were right in their decision; as if the reading were ὥςτε αὐτοὺς δοκεῖν, κ.τ.λ. Stallbaum prefers the latter interpretation of the passage.

· καὶ τῶν ἀνδρῶν τοὺς κοσμιωτάτους] Κόσμιοι is said of those who observe kooμoç. i. e. order and moderation, or, as Fischer interprets it, those who diligently direct and regulate their life, morals, and pursuits according to the standard of the laws; the moderate, upright. It is, therefore, about equivalent to έKETS.

d Kai TOUTO TOLо~νтι äρа ä§.] Similarly, Phædo, p. 65. A. καὶ δοκεῖ γέ που τοῖς πολλοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ᾧ μηδὲν ἡδὺ τῶν τοιούτων, οὐκ ἄξιον εἶναι ζῆν.—Α little further on we have written: καὶ ἀναισχυντήσεις διαλεγόμενος-τίνας λόγους; since the structure of the sentence is changed by an interrogation suddenly in

troduced. The former reading was: καὶ ἀναισχυντήσεις διαλε γόμενός τινας λόγους, ὦ Σ., ἢ οὕςπερ ἐνθάδε. The use of the interrogative gives great life to the expression: discoursing,— yet what kind of discourses?' while the indefinite rivas is tame and meaningless. The interrogative pronoun, too, rívas, is

found in the best MSS.

• ἄσχημον ἂν φανεῖσθαι] The particle ἂν with a future infinitive is not unusual, any more than with the future participle, on which see Apol. c. XVII. note (). For the future infinitive pavεiolaι is capable of being resolved sometimes into the future indicative, and sometimes into the future optative; in the latter of which cases, it may, of course, take av with it.-Tò rou Zwкрάтоνç прãуμа, the business or affair of Socrates, is to be understood as meaning Socrates himself. So rò πρãуμа is said of the people, Gorg. p. 520. B. And Herodotus I. 36, has μéya χρῆμα συός for a great boar.The expression οἴεσθαί γε χρή is often used in this manner. See c. XVI. ἐὰν δὲ εἰς "Αιδου ἀποδημήσης, οὐχὶ ἐπιμελήσονται;—οἴεσθαί γε χρή. Phæd. p. 68. Α. οὐκ ἄσμενος εἶσιν αὐτόσε; οἴεσθαί γε χρή. Protag. p. 325. C. ταῦτα δ ̓ ἄρα οὐ διδάσκονται οὐδ ̓ ἐπιμελοῦνται πᾶσαν ἐπιμέλειαν; oiεolai ye xpn. Gorg. p. 412. B.

́ ἐκεῖ γὰρ δὴ πλείστη—ἀκολασία] The Thessalians were then infamous, on account of the licentiousness of their mode of living; their fraudulence, indecency, wantonness, luxury, and other vices. See Athenæus, IV. 6. p. 137. X. 4. p. 418. XII. 6. p. 527. XIV. 33. p. 663.-Fischer.

5 σκευήν τέ τινα περιθ.] The word σκευὴ does not denote any particular article of clothing, but includes the whole of the attire. Putting on some (different) kind of raiment by way of disguise, wearing, for, example, a leather coat, or any of the various articles of dress which runaway slaves are in the habit of assuming, and transforming your personal appearance.

boxñμa] That is, general appearance, arising more especially out of the dress. Hesychius: σχῆμα· ἱματισμός. The σκευή includes the leather coats, or sundry vestments and disguises which are mentioned or hinted at; the oxñμa sums up the whole, indicating the tout ensemble which is the result of these contrivances.

i ἐτόλμησας οὕτω γλίσχρως] Here τολμαν is to endure, not to blush at, οὐκ αἰσχύνεσθαι.

* ɛi dè μǹ] But if otherwise; but if you should be troublesome to the Thessalians. In all such cases ɛi dè μǹ is used, without any regard to the positive or negative character of the proposition, which is thus hypothetically denied. See Matth. Gr. § 617. Buttmann, § 135. 10. Compare Enrip. Alcest. v. 707. εἰ δ ̓ ἡμᾶς κακῶς ἐρεῖς, ἀκούσει πολλὰ κοὐ ψευδῆ κακά.

1 ὑπερχόμενος δὴ—πάντας—καὶ δουλεύων] These are some of the taunts, woλλà kaì ávažia, which, it is urged, will be levelled against Socrates, should he withdraw himself into Thessaly: You will live, forsooth, constantly seeking to ingratiate yourself with everybody, and becoming the slave of all: and will you be doing anything else than banquetting in Thessaly, as if you had left your country for Thessaly, in order to attend a supperparty! That is, such will be the sinister interpretation which the enemies of Socrates will put upon his conduct. Schleiermacher considers ri πov introduced in so awkward a manner, and dovλɛúwv so superfluous, that he regards the latter as a gloss on ὑπερχόμενος, and would read the sentence: ὑπερχόμενος δὴ π. ἀνθρ. βιώσει καὶ τί ποιῶν.—Buttmann, disliking the introduction of ¿v Oɛttaλía, towards the end of so long a sentence, and having seen in one MS. ɛiç Oɛrraλiav, omits these words after ἀποδεδημ., and thus remodels the whole passage: ὑπερχόμενος δὴ βιώσει πάντας ἀνθρώπους, καὶ τί ποιῶν ἢ εὐωχούμενος, εἰς Θετταλίαν ὥςπερ ἐπὶ δεῖπνον ἀποδεδημηκώς; But, to say nothing of the objections which might be offered to this correction, it does not appear necessary to alter the common reading. For kai dovλeuwv is by no means without a distinct signification; it expresses the meaning more forcibly than the preceding περXóμεvos. The second reproach is stronger than the first, especially when directed against a man who had so utter an aversion to everything servile. It does not appear necessary to insert kai before Tí Tov, as Schleiermacher has done. Indeed, the animation of the appeal seems impaired by so doing. Nor is the repetition of the word Thessaly without force. "Banquetting in Thessaly, as if he had said, -as though it were necessary to go all the way to Thessaly to supper." — πov čσovtal, K. T. λ., i. e. What will become of all those fine speeches about justice, and the other elements of virtue, I wonder? The nμiv is a dativus ethicus, and indicates the interest of the questioner in the subject of the inquiry. In the above use of rou, compare Axiochus