Symposium 222a

[jeidsath]

This was difficult for me. Dover discusses ἄν with the future rather than optative in his note. And Dover suggests "anyone who saw them opened up...will find..."

διοιγομένους δὲ ἰδὼν ἄν τις καὶ ἐντὸς αὐτῶν γιγνόμενος πρῶτον μὲν νοῦν ἔχοντας ἔνδον μόνους εὑρήσει τῶν λόγων, ἔπειτα θειοτάτους καὶ πλεῖστα ἀγάλματ’ ἀρετῆς ἐν αὑτοῖς ἔχοντας καὶ ἐπὶ πλεῖστον τείνοντας, μᾶλλον δὲ ἐπὶ πᾶν ὅσον προσήκει σκοπεῖν τῷ μέλλοντι καλῷ κἀγαθῷ ἔσεσθαι.

Anyone who saw them opened, and coming to be inside of them, will find that these speeches first of others possess reason inside, next that they are the most divine and having overflowing in themselves carvings of virtue and striving to the greatest extent, more than anything else they are fitting to examine for who would be beautiful and good.

[Hylander]

πρῶτον μὲν νοῦν ἔχοντας ἔνδον μόνους εὑρήσει τῶν λόγων -- πρῶτον with εὑρήσει, followed by ἔπειτα : "will find first of all that . . . and next that . . . "

μόνους . . . τῶν λόγων -- "that they alone of [all] speeches/discourses"

ἀγάλματ’ -- "ornaments", maybe here "jewels"

πλεῖστα ἀγάλματ’ ἀρετῆς ἐν αὑτοῖς ἔχοντας --"that they hold in themselves the most jewels of goodness"

ἐπὶ πλεῖστον τείνοντας -- "that they stretch the furthest", "that they have the furthest reach/extent"

μᾶλλον δὲ -- "or rather"; see LSJ μάλα

μᾶλλον δὲ [τείνοντας] ἐπὶ πᾶν ὅσον προσήκει σκοπεῖν . . . -- "or rather [that they stretch/extend] to everything that it is fitting to examine/consider . . ."

[jeidsath]

Thank you, that makes it much clearer. I found some of the non-narrative portions of Alcibiades' speech very difficult for some reason.

I believe that the ἀγάλματ’ refers back to 215b:

φημὶ γὰρ δὴ ὁμοιότατον αὐτὸν εἶναι τοῖς σιληνοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ἐν τοῖς ἑρμογλυφείοις καθημένοις, οὕστινας ἐργάζονται οἱ δημιουργοὶ σύριγγας ἢ αὐλοὺς ἔχοντας, οἳ διχάδε διοιχθέντες φαίνονται ἔνδοθεν ἀγάλματα ἔχοντες θεῶν.

In his note to 215b, Dover says that no such statues survive, and the only literary references to them are dependent on this passage.

[Hylander]

I think you must be right about ἀγάλματ’, but "carvings" seems a little strange here. Maybe "images", or how about "carven images"?

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... a)%2Fgalma

Perhaps departing from strict translation, "carven images" in 215b, but here maybe just "images" would be more consistent with the idealism of this sentence.

[jeidsath]

Yes that makes sense, I hadn't meant to argue for my English gloss.

I'm still not sure about ἐντὸς αὐτῶν γιγνόμενος. My "...coming to be inside of them..." doesn't really make sense for either speeches or the hollow statues, and I wonder if I'm missing the actual meaning.

[Hylander]

ἐντὸς αὐτῶν γιγνόμενος -- I think "getting inside them" conveys the idea perfectly in modern English. "When someone sees them opened up and really gets inside them . . . " I would translate λόγοι as something more like "discourses" than "speeches".

[mahasacham]

Just a guess but I have seen γιγνόμενος sometimes used to mean "arriving in the midst of something, or coming upon something" so here the meaning might be in reference to actual public discourses. Thus breaking out of the metaphor temporarily.....just a thought.

[Hylander]

I think the idea is more like being immersed in Socrates' talks, understanding what he's saying.

Come to think of it, "talks" would be a good translation for λόγοι, less high-flown than "discourses", more consistent with Socrates' down-to-earth informality.

I don't think "public speeches" is anything like what it meant here, and it's not just a casual encounter with Socrates' talks that is meant--it's immersion in and absorption, with comprehension, of his ideas.

[jeidsath]

Could the image be "coming upon their contents" rather than going inside?

[Hylander]

Could the image be "coming upon their contents" rather than going inside?

I don't think that's consistent with the Greek. Your first translation was right: "coming to be inside of them", understood metaphorically as becoming fully engaged with the substance of his talks, penetrating them, with comprehension, was right. And the English idiom "really getting inside them" I think quite accurately captures the meaning of the Greek, although, as an idiom which has lost most of its original metaphorical value, it doesn't have the same impact as the Greek metaphor, which conjures up a mental image.

Also "coming upon their contents", in addition to being inconsistent with the Greek, is a pretty feeble substitute for a striking metaphor.

Slightly revised.

[Hylander]

Why not just "words" for λόγοι?

[Paul Derouda]

This probably doesn't add much to the discussion, but perhaps the mot juste for αγαλμα would be "effigy [of a god]"; in practice, the same thing as "statue" but maybe slightly more imprecise. This seems to be the basic sense in Herodotus at least.

[Hylander]

This probably doesn't add much, either, but "images," as in, for example, "graven images," "carven images", used in Biblical prohibitions against idolatry, has an archaic and Biblical flavor. I think "images" works best with ἀγάλματ’ ἀρετῆς after having been set up earlier with ἀγάλματα θεῶν, "(carven) images of the gods".

My reaction is that "effigy" would be a little too specific -- a sculpture or representation of a person. That would be ok for ἀγάλματα θεῶν but to my mind doesn't work as well with the analogy on the plane of Platonic idealism, ἀγάλματ’ ἀρετῆς. "Statue" is also, as you note, too specific, and "idol" has too negative connotations.

[mwh]

I don’t really have anything to add either, but I think αγαλμα always retains the idea of glorifying (αγαλλω). αγαλματα θεων, statues of gods, conforms to ordinary usage (statues of men not αγαλματα but εικονες images/likenesses, an important idea for Plato), and αγαλματα αρετης extends the idea from gods to the abstract αρετη, likewise immortal. I wouldn't obsess about how to translate it.