Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:02:37.551Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XPHΣΤοΥΣ ΠοΙΕΙΝ (Aristotle fr. 592 R.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

F. Jacoby
F. Jacoby
Affiliation:
Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Plutarch, Aet. Graec. 5, p. 292 B: “Τ⋯νεσ οἱ παρ' ‘Αρκ⋯σι κα⋯ δακεδσιμον⋯οισ χρηοτο⋯;” δακεδαιμ⋯νιοι Τεγε⋯ταισ διαλλαγ⋯ντεσ ⋯ποι⋯σαντο συνθ⋯κασ κα⋯ στ⋯λην ⋯π' 'αλΑει⋯ι κοιν⋯ν ⋯ν⋯στησαν, ⋯ν ἧι μετ⋯ τ⋯ν γ⋯γραπται Μεσσην⋯ουσ ⋯κβαλεῖν ⋯κ τ⋯σ χὠρασ κα⋯ μ⋯ ⋯ξεῖναι χρηστοὺσ ποιεῖν. ⋯ξηγο⋯μενοσ οὖν ⋯ 'αριστοτελησ τοὖτο πησι δυνασθαι το μ⋯ ⋯ποκτινν⋯ναι βοηθε⋯νασ χ⋯ριν τοῖσ λακωνιζονσιν τ⋯ν Τεγεατ⋯ν.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 38 , Issue 1-2 , April 1944 , pp. 15 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1944

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

page 15 note 1 1 Repeated in a shorter form Aet. Rom. 52, p. 277 BC κα⋯ γ⋯ρ 'αριστοτελησ εν ταισ 'αρκαδωνπροσ δακεδσιμον⋯οισ συνθ⋯καισ λακωνιζονσιν τ⋯ν (edd.; Τεγεατ⋯ν MSS.) δακεδαιμ⋯νιοι Τεγε⋯ταισ διαλλαγ⋯ντεσ. The context here favours the opinion that Aristotle's explanation meanrests on the equation χρηστοσ = dead. I am not explanasure that Hesych. (s.v. χρηστοσ οι καταδ7epsiv;δι-κασμ⋯νοι. χρ⋯σιμοι refers to the treaty.

page 15 note 2 For the antiquity of the euphemism and its local use see Rohde, , Psyche2, ii, p. 346 f.Google Scholar, followed by Halliday, , The Greek Questions of Plutarch, 1928, p. 50Google Scholar.

page 15 note 3 Latte, , Heiliges Recht, 1920, p. 114Google Scholar, followed by Liddell-Scott, Add., p. 2110 and, curiously enough, by Ehrenberg, (C.Q. xxxvii) p. 16Google Scholar, ‘the χρηστ⋯σ is the man to be used (in this case to be ill-used)’. The parallel adduced by Latte, of course, proves nothing for the meaning of the simple adjective χρηστ⋯σ.

page 15 note 4 And personally I believe it to be sound: the two clauses stood side by side in the treaty, forming one article. Aristotle, after rendering it correctly, though in the language of his own time, proceeds to interpret the phrase χρηστ⋯σ ποιεισ used in this article. I am concerned here exclusively with a possible linguistic explanation of this phrase, the meaning of which cannot be simply deduced from a true or an alleged meaning of the χρηστ⋯σ. But if my explanation should be right, it does away with the possibility (which seems to underlie Halliday's translation) that Aristotle joined with και two different articles of the treaty, and that the second article referred in reality to the λακων7iota;-ζοντεσ τ⋯ν τεγεατ⋯ν who are to be protected from the wrath of such of their fellow-citizens as belonged to the anti-Spartan party. I shall not specify here why this possibility seems very improbable to me, nor shall I go into the question how Aristotle understood the whole article, of which he only explained one phrase, and whether he (or his collaborator) cared to understand it at all.

page 16 note 1 loc. cit.