From the book
Hipparchus
Plato · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordΣιμωνίδης is Simonides, the poet kept in Hipparchus’ company.
- In HipparchusSocrates says Hipparchus kept Simonides always about him by persuading him with large fees and gifts.
- In this editionThe edition’s “fees and gifts” keeps the two categories distinct, and “persuading” preserves the verbal link with obedience and conviction elsewhere.
- A place to readΣιμωνίδην δὲ τὸν Κεῖον — The second living poet is identified as Simonides of Ceos.
Meaning
Σιμωνίδης is Simonides, the poet kept in Hipparchus’ company. Κεῖος means Cean, from Ceos, and distinguishes his island of origin from Anacreon’s Teos. Μισθός means pay, remuneration or fee; δῶρον means gift. The plural datives μισθοῖς and δώροις identify the means by which Hipparchus persuades him. A fee and a gift can both transfer wealth, but they need not carry identical expectations.
Use in the book
Socrates says Hipparchus kept Simonides always about him by persuading him with large fees and gifts. Unlike the enforced ordering of the rhapsodes, this relationship is described through persuasion; unlike the voyage for Anacreon, it concerns continuing proximity. The patron uses material inducements to maintain a poet’s presence.
Money consequently appears inside the central cultural narrative without being immediately condemned as base gain. The story occurs in an argument about whether the desire for gain singles out discreditable people. Simonides’ receipt of large rewards is part of the evidence for Hipparchus’ wisdom and generosity, not an explicit accusation that the poet is unscrupulous. The text does not call him a lover of gain here. Reading that label into the sentence would anticipate a connection the reader may consider but Socrates does not expressly make.
The pairing of fees and gifts prevents an overly simple opposition between commerce and benefaction. A ruler can support poetry through payment and through generosity, while the poet may be moved by both. Nothing in the account specifies contractual terms, a rate per poem or the value of the gifts. The real argumentative point is that material advantage and cultural production coexist in a narrative offered as ethical praise.
The action is then included in the wish to educate citizens. Whether the direct beneficiary is Simonides, Hipparchus or the wider city depends on which relation one considers. That distribution illustrates why counting what a person receives does not by itself determine the whole value of an exchange. The dialogue, however, does not conduct a calculation of these benefits or claim to prove patronage just by its educational aim.
Aelian’s later retelling adds an emphatic characterization of Simonides as fond of money. That belongs to the reception of the passage and should not be silently substituted for the more restrained statement in the supplied Greek.
Places to read
Translation in this edition
The edition’s “fees and gifts” keeps the two categories distinct, and “persuading” preserves the verbal link with obedience and conviction elsewhere. It does not translate the payments as “bribes,” a word that would prejudge their moral status and obscure the flattering purpose of Socrates’ narrative.
Source note
Aelian, Historical Miscellany 8.2 combines the patronage story with an added comment on Simonides’ love of money. Since Aelian expressly invokes the dialogue, his account is evidence of interpretation and transmission rather than an independent witness to this transaction.