Symposium - AIC

Olga Alieva
of Chiron’s students (SSR V A 92: ἤκουεν αὐτοῦ), along with Achilles. A passage from Ps.-
Eratosthenes says that Antisthenes’ Heracles came to the centaur Chiron δι' ἔρωτα 34 (SSR V A 92 =
Ps.-Erat. Catast. 40).
Different interpretations of this eros have been suggested. Thus, Rankin compares this passage with a
fragment from Themistius’ oration On virtue 35 (SSR V A 96) and assumes that Heracles was urged
“to progress towards full human development”. “A crude and brutalized Heracles”, Rankin believes,
was forced to direct his “animal energy” towards philosophy. 36 “The animal is converted to virtue by
the influence of Chiron — another animal itself conspicuously virtuous. Fully aware that we are
speculating, may we ask whether the sophos in C fg 22 (= SSR V A 99 — O.A.) who is axioerastos, is
Chiron?”
The same suggestion was earlier made by Dümmler in connection with another fragment: λέγει γοῦν
καὶ ὁ ᾿Αντισθένους ῾Ηρακλῆς περί τινος νεανίσκου παρὰ τῷ Χείρωνι τρεφοµένου· «µέγας γάρ, φησι,
καὶ καλὸς καὶ ὡραῖος, οὐκ ἂν αὐτοῦ ἠράσθη δειλὸς ἐραστής» (SSR V A 93 = Proclus in Alcib. 98.
14). “Damit wird der ἀνδρεῖος ἐραστής, als welchen man sich Cheiron oder Herakles selbst denken
kann, doch nicht gemißbilligt,” he remarks 37 . A passage cited by Dümmler from Dio 38 suggests that
Achilles might have also been depicted as a Chiron’s ἐρόµενος. Though the verb χαρίζεσθαι does not
occur in our fragments, we know that Antisthenes praised Achilles for undergoing service to Chiron
for the sake of education (SSR V A 95 39 ).
Diogenes notes certain parallelism between the Kyros and the Heracles of Antisthenes: both dialogues
were dedicated to the same problem and dealt with the topic ὁ πόνος ἀγαθὸν (SSR V A 97 = DL VI
2). We know that Alcibiades’ παρανοµία was discussed in the Kyros and that the whole piece was
probably a reported Socratic dialogue written, Dittmar believes, 40 as a response to Polycrates.
Dümmler claims that “Cheiron war bei Antisthenes vielmehr echter Tugendlehrer und sein Verhältniß
zu Achill analog dem des Socrates zu Alkibiades.” 41 Rankin agrees saying that Antisthenes probably
saw in Alcibiades “a Heracles figure” who “met his Chiron too late for good effect” 42 . Given that, it is
not that strange to find allusions to the Heracles in the Symposium, where Plato also hints at other
authors who somehow touched upon the Socratic eros. 43
Pausanias is critically disposed towards flatterers, but he stresses that it is “counted no flattery
(κολακεία) or scandal” for the lovers “to be willingly and utterly enslaved to their favorites” (184c1-
3); whatever is done by the lover to achieve his aim, he is not reproached “with adulation” (183b1:
κολακείας). This might also be a playful allusion to Antisthenes. The latter compared flatterers to
hetairas 44 ; this topic was touched upon also in the Heracles 45 . In a fragment preserved by Plutarchus
we read that the youth should not yield (µηδενὶ χάριν ἔχειν) to the adulators. For Antisthenes, the
adulators harm ἐροµένοις insofar as they keep them from νοῦς and φρόνησις; similarly, the “vulgar”
34
Rankin, H.D., Anthisthenes Sokratikos, Amsterdam, 1986, 104-105, notes: “Mullach, in his edition, fg6 (C fg 24) adds the
conjecture paideias after eros so that the phrase explicitly says ‘desire of education’, instead of simply ‘desire’.” Rankin is
inclined to think “that eros is used with an ironical layer of intention to refer to its sexual meaning in addition to its
“Socratic” and metaphorical sense of spititual and intellectual frenzy for knowledge”.
35
Preserved only in Syriac; Giannantoni cites the Lation translation of R. Mach: “…Perfectum enim vir non eris, priusque
ea, quae hominibus sublimiora sunt, didiceris. Si ista disces, tunc humana quoque disces; sin autem humana tantum didiceris,
tu tamquam animal ferum errabis”, etc. For English translation and interpretation of the passage see: Luz, M., “Antisthenes’
Prometheus Myth”, in Jacob Bernays : un philologue juif, ed. by John Glucker, André Laks et al., Villeneuve d'Ascq, 1996,
89-104; Moles, J., “The Thirteenth Oration of Dio Chrysostom: Complexity and Simplicity, Rhetoric and Moralism,
Literature and Life”, The Journal of Hellenic Studies 125 (2005), 112-38. The latter article contains also important
considerations concerning the notion of “double paideia” probably coming from Antisthenes’ Heracles. One may cautiously
assume that two types of paideia correlated with the two types of love.
36
Rankin, op.cit., 105.
37
Dümmler, F., “Zum Herakles des Antisthenes”, Philologus 50 (1891), 288-296, here 293.
38
Ibid., 294. Dio. Or. 58. 4-5: ὁ Χείρων ὀργισθεὶς …µόλις δὲ ἀπεχόµενος τοῦ µὴ παῖσαι αὐτόν, ὅτι διενοεῖτο ἐρᾶν αὐτοῦ etc.
39
Dümmler (op. cit., 293) also cites several passages from Xenophon’s Cynegeticus (12. 18−20) where the love for ἀρετή is
mentioned along with Chiron’s name. Cfr., esp.: Xen. Cyneg. 12. 20 ὅταν µὲν γάρ τις ὁρᾶται ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐρωµένου, ἅπας
ἑαυτοῦ ἐστι βελτίων. It seems to me, that the passage in question may as well be influenced by the Phaedrus, but I leave
alone this question so far.
40
Dittmar, op.cit., 90.
41
Dümmler, op.cit., 291.
42
Rankin, op.cit., 127.
43
See notes 1 and 16.
44
Stob. Anthol. III. 14. 19 = SSR V A 132: ᾿Αντισθένης ἔλεγεν, ὥσπερ τὰς ἑταίρας τἀγαθὰ πάντα εὔχεσθαι τοῖς ἐρασταῖς
παρεῖναι, πλὴν νοῦ καὶ φρονήσεως, οὕτω καὶ τοὺς κόλακας οἷς σύνεισιν.
45
Plutarch. De Vit. Pud. 536B = SSR V A 94: οὕτως ἄτρεπτος ἦν καὶ ἀνάλωτος ὑπὸ τῶν τοιούτων, καὶ κρατῶν ἐκείνης τῆς
παραινέσεως, ἣν ὁ ᾿Αντισθένειος ῾Ηρακλῆς παρῄνει, τοῖς παισὶ διακελευόµενος µηδενὶ χάριν ἔχειν ἐπαινοῦντι αὐτούς· τοῦτο
δ' ἦν οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ µὴ δυσωπεῖσθαι µηδ' ἀντικολακεύειν τοὺς ἐπαινοῦντας. Cfr. Hecaton ap. DL VI. 489 = SSR V A 131:
κρεῖττον ἔλεγε, καθά φησιν ῾Εκάτων ἐν ταῖς Χρείαις, εἰς κόρακας ἢ εἰς κόλακας ἐµπεσεῖν· οἱ µὲν γὰρ νεκρούς, οἱ δὲ ζῶντας
ἐσθίουσιν.
157