Diotimos Reading Desk

Tap the page, move to the top or bottom edge, swipe down, or press Tab to reveal reading controls. Use the arrow keys or swipe sideways to turn pages.

← ExitStobaeus, Volume II

Reading language

Book II Chapter 1

Diogenes

A student of the stars was displaying in the marketplace a little tablet on which the stars were drawn, and saying that these were the wandering stars. On hearing him, Diogenes said: “Do not lie, my friend. These are not the wanderers; those are,” pointing to the people seated beside him.³⁰

Ariston

Ariston said that, of the things philosophers investigate, some concern us, some have nothing to do with us, and some are beyond us. Ethical questions concern us. Dialectical questions do not concern us, because they contribute nothing to setting life right. Questions about nature are beyond us, because they cannot be known and do not even afford any use.³¹

Eusebius

One should not inquire what the gods are like; it is best to have belief from the outset. For as inquiry proceeds, even the person who takes the side of the most impious of arguments, that they do not exist, wants to prevail.³²

Hermes from To Tat

To conceive God is difficult; to express him is impossible. For it is impossible to signify the incorporeal through a body, and the incomplete cannot apprehend the complete; it is difficult for what lasts only a short time to come into fellowship with the everlasting. The one always is, while the other passes away; the one exists in truth, while the other is shadowed by appearance. The weaker is ⟨not⟩ so far removed from the stronger, nor the lesser from the better, as the mortal is from the divine.³³ The distance between them dims the vision of the beautiful. Bodies can be seen by the eyes, and visible things can be spoken by the tongue; but what is incorporeal, unseen, without shape, and not constituted from matter cannot be apprehended by our senses.

I conceive, Tat, I conceive what it is impossible to utter: this is God.³⁴

Plato from the Timaeus

We must examine the nature of fire, water, air, and earth before the coming into being of the heavens: their nature itself and their states before that time. For no one has yet disclosed how they came into being. We speak of fire and each of the others as though our hearers knew what they are, setting them up as principles, elements of the universe, although anyone with even a little understanding could not reasonably liken them even to the form of a syllable.³⁵ For the present, then, let our account stand as follows. Whether there is one principle of everything, or several, or whatever view one takes, we must not speak of these matters now. The sole reason is the difficulty of explaining our views within the present manner of exposition. You must not suppose that I ought to speak of them; nor could I persuade myself that I would be proceeding rightly in undertaking so great a task. Keeping to what was said at the outset—the scope of likely accounts—I shall try to speak no less plausibly than anyone else, indeed more so, starting again from an earlier beginning, about each thing and about them all together.³⁶

Plato from Critias, or Atlantis

For when speaking to human beings about gods, Timaeus, it is easier to seem to speak adequately than when speaking to us about mortals. The hearers’ inexperience and utter ignorance of subjects about which they are in this condition give great latitude to anyone about to speak of them.³⁷

Xenophon from the Letter to Aeschines · 1

Hermogenes met me and spoke about various matters. When I also asked about you and your devotion to philosophy, he answered that it was the same as Socrates’. Even when I was living in Athens, I admired your resolve. As I began by admiring you, so now I admire, beyond that of anyone who has embraced wisdom, the steadfastness of your resolve—for this, I think, is the greatest evidence of virtue—since you were won over by that man, if indeed one can call Socrates’ life the life of a mortal.³⁸

That divine matters are beyond us is clear to everyone; it is enough to revere the gods for their superiority in power. What they are like is neither easy to discover nor lawful to investigate. For slaves should not know the nature or conduct of their masters, since nothing beyond service belongs to their role.³⁹

Xenophon, Letter to Aeschines · 2

For when, Aeschines, has anyone heard Socrates speaking about heavenly things, or urging people to learn geometrical figures as a means of improvement? As for music, we know that his understanding extended as far as his ears. But he himself constantly discussed what is noble, and what courage, justice, and the other virtues are. These, at any rate, he called human goods. The other subjects, he said, were either beyond human reach or akin to myths—⟨playthings⟩ that sophists expounded with an air of lofty importance.⁴⁰

Xenophon, Letter to Aeschines · 3

Nor did he say these things without knowing how to put them into practice. Let those who were dissatisfied with Socrates stop, then, when they are refuted, ⟨or⟩ turn to what is reasonable. While he was alive, the god bore witness to his wisdom; those who killed him found no cleansing from their remorse. Yet here is the fine thing: they fell in love with an Egyptian and with the monstrous wisdom of Pythagoras. Their excess and their failure to remain constant to Socrates were exposed by a love of tyranny and, in place of a simple way of life, a Sicilian table for a boundless appetite.⁴¹

Xenophon from Memorabilia, Book I · 1

For he did not discuss the nature of the universe in the way most others did, examining the condition of what the sophists call the cosmos and the necessities by which each heavenly event occurs. Indeed, he showed that those who concern themselves with such matters were acting foolishly. He wondered whether it was not clear to them that these things are impossible for human beings to discover, since even those who take the greatest pride in speaking about them do not hold the same opinions as one another, but stand in relation to one another much as madmen do.⁴²

Xenophon, Memorabilia · 2

For among madmen, some fear nothing, even when it is terrible, while others fear even what is not terrible. Some think it no disgrace to say or do anything, even in a crowd, while others think they must not go out among people. Some honor neither sanctuary nor altar nor anything else divine, while others revere even random stones, pieces of wood, and wild animals. In the same way, among those who concern themselves with the nature of the universe, some think that what exists is only one, others that existing things are infinite in number; some that everything is always moving, others that nothing could ever move; some that everything comes into being and passes away, others that nothing could ever either come into being or perish.⁴³

30.The Greek plays on πλανώμενοι: planets “wander,” while people can “go astray” or be misled. “Student of the stars” leaves ἀστρολόγος broad enough for the activity actually described; the passage does not specify a modern division between astronomy and astrology. The name Diogenes is supplied in the English sentence from the heading.

31.The threefold classification belongs to the position reported under Ariston’s name. “Dialectical questions” concern argument and reasoning; “questions about nature” renders τὰ φυσικά, not only the modern discipline of physics. The anthology preserves the claim that these studies lack practical benefit without requiring every other excerpt to agree.

32.The heading supplies only the name Eusebius. The opening follows Wachsmuth’s οἷοι, “what sort,” rather than turning the question into whether gods exist. The last clause concerns a disputant’s desire to win; it does not say that the argument has been proved.

33.The supplied οὐ, credited to Usener in Wachsmuth’s apparatus, makes the comparison negative: ordinary differences of strength or rank do not equal the distance between mortal and divine. The English brackets “not” so this consequential editorial intervention remains visible.

34.The attribution is to Hermes and the address is to Tat, as printed. Compare II.1.15: the Platonic excerpt speaks of finding the maker and communicating to everyone, whereas this passage distinguishes intellectual conception from bodily signification and sensory apprehension. The repeated “I conceive” preserves the emphatic repetition of ἐννοοῦμαι.

35.Timaeus 48B–D. Στοιχεῖα means both elements and letters. The comparison with a syllable challenges the supposed simplicity of the four familiar substances. The supplied ἂν contributes to the qualified expression rendered “could”; it does not add a separate English word.

36.Compare II.1.19. Timaeus limits what this exposition will attempt; he does not say here that no account of first principles could ever be given. The recurring εἰκώς describes a likely or plausible account.

37.Critias 107A–B. Critias addresses Timaeus. The claim concerns how easily an account can seem adequate to an uninformed audience; it does not establish that divine matters are easier to know. The alternative title follows the anthology’s heading.

38.The heading attributes the letter to Xenophon. A parallel is quoted in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel XIV.12; Gifford’s edition identifies it as Pseudo-Xenophon (note 29). The attribution is therefore retained as transmitted, not treated as proof of authentic correspondence. Parts 1–3 divide this single excerpt only for facing-page layout.

39.The wording about superior power is compressed and textually unsettled; Wachsmuth records variant readings. The slave-and-master comparison belongs to the letter’s argument for religious restraint and should not be mistaken for a neutral description of every ancient view.

40.Γραμμαί here are geometrical lines or figures. “Improvement” translates ἐπανόρθωσις without inserting Usener’s proposed βίου, “of life,” which Wachsmuth records but does not print. Understanding music “as far as the ears” contrasts hearing with further theoretical inquiry. The supplied μὲν marks a contrast conveyed by the English sentence structure.

41.The closing praise is sarcastic. Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel XIV.12, interprets the attack as aimed at Plato, although this excerpt does not name him. The printed Αἰγυπτίου is “an Egyptian,” not “Egypt.” The letter contrasts Socratic restraint with the pursuits and luxurious dining it condemns; these are polemical allegations.

42.Memorabilia I.1.11–14; the subject is Socrates. The anthology abbreviates the passage, as Wachsmuth’s apparatus notes: the omitted material is not silently restored from a separate Xenophon text. Parts 1–2 preserve one continuous excerpt. “Madmen” renders the ancient comparison, a polemical illustration rather than a modern clinical classification.

43.The repeated pairs compare opposed behaviors with opposed accounts of nature: one or many, motion or rest, generation and destruction or their denial. No individual natural philosopher is named in this excerpt. The translation therefore preserves the contrast without inserting identifications that the passage itself does not supply.