[55,0] ΠΕΡΙ ΟΜΗΡΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΣΩΚΡΑΤΟΥΣ. (1) Ἐπεὶ φαίνῃ καὶ τἄλλα Σωκράτους ὢν ἐπαινέτης καὶ τὸν ἄνδρα ἐκπληττόμενος ἐν τοῖς λόγοις, ἔχεις μοι εἰπεῖν ὅτου μαθητὴς γέγονε τῶν σοφῶν· ὥσπερ Φειδίας μὲν ὁ ἀγαλματοποιὸς Ἡγίου, Πολύγνωτος δὲ ὁ ζωγράφος καὶ ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἄμφω τοῦ πατρὸς Ἀγλαοφῶντος, Πυθαγόρου δὲ Φερεκύδης λέγεται διδάσκαλος γενέσθαι, Πυθαγόρας δὲ Ἐμπεδοκλέους καὶ ἑτέρων, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων δὲ τῶν πλείστων ἔχομεν εἰπεῖν τοὺς διδασκάλους τῶν ἐνδόξων ἀνδρῶν, ὅτῳ ἕκαστος συγγενόμενος λόγου ἄξιος ἐγένετο δίχα γε Ἡρακλείτου τοῦ Ἐφεσίου καὶ Ἡσιόδου τοῦ Ἀσκραίου. ὁ μὲν γάρ φησιν ποιμαίνων ἐν τῷ Ἑλικῶνι παρὰ τῶν Μουσῶν λαβεῖν ἐν δάφνης ὄζῳ τὴν ποίησιν, ἵνα μὴ πράγματα ἔχοιμεν ζητοῦντες αὐτοῦ τὸν διδάσκαλον· (2) Ἡράκλειτος δὲ ἔτι γενναιότερον αὐτὸς ἐξευρεῖν τὴν τοῦ παντὸς φύσιν ὁποία τυγχάνει οὖσα, μηδενὸς διδάξαντος καὶ γενέσθαι παρ´ αὑτοῦ σοφός. Ὁμήρου μὲν γάρ, ὥσπερ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ περὶ αὐτόν, καὶ τοῦτο ἄδηλον τοῖς Ἕλλησιν. ὁ δὲ Σωκράτης ὅτι μὲν παῖς ὢν ἐμάνθανε {λιθοξόος} τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς τέχνην ἀκηκόαμεν· τὸν δὲ τῆς σοφίας αὐτοῦ διδάσκαλον οὕτως ὠφελίμου καὶ καλῆς γενομένης (3) σὺ ἡμῖν σαφῶς εἰπὲ καὶ μὴ φθονήσῃς. (Dion) Ἀλλὰ τοῦτό γε οἶμαι πολλοῖς εἶναι σαφές, ὅστις ἔμπειρος ἀμφοῖν τοῖν ἀνδροῖν, ὅτι Σωκράτης τό γε ἀληθὲς Ὁμήρου μαθητὴς γέγονεν, οὐχ ὥσπερ ἔνιοί φασιν Ἀρχελάου. (Interlocuteur) Καὶ πῶς οἷόν τε τὸν μήτε ξυγγενόμενον Ὁμήρῳ μήτε ἰδόντα πώποτε, ἀλλὰ τοσούτοις ἔτεσιν ὕστερον γενόμενον Ὁμήρου φάναι μαθητήν; (Dion) Τί δέ; ὅστις καθ´ Ὅμηρον ἐγένετο, μηδὲν δὲ ἤκουσε τῶν Ὁμήρου ἐπῶν ἢ ἀκούων μηδενὶ προσέσχε τὸν νοῦν, ἔσθ´ ὅπως φήσομεν ἐκεῖνον Ὁμήρου μαθητήν; (4) (Interlocuteur) Οὐδαμῶς. (Dion) Οὔκουν ἄτοπον τὸν μήτε ξυγγενόμενον μήτε ἰδόντα, τῆς δὲ ποιήσεως ξυνέντα τῆς Ὁμήρου καὶ τῆς ὅλης διανοίας ἔμπειρον γενόμενον μαθητὴν Ὁμήρου λέγεσθαι· ἢ οὐδὲ ζηλωτὴν οὐδένα οὐδενὸς φήσεις τῶν μὴ συγγενομένων; (Interlocuteur) Ἔγωγε. (Interlocuteur) (Dion) Εἴπερ οὖν ζηλωτής, καὶ μαθητὴς εἴη ἄν. ὁ γὰρ ζηλῶν τινα ὀρθῶς ἐπίσταται δήπου ἐκεῖνον ὁποῖος ἦν καὶ μιμούμενος τὰ ἔργα καὶ τοὺς λόγους ὡς οἷόν τε ἐπιχειρεῖ ὅμοιον αὑτὸν ἀποφαίνειν. ταὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ ὁ μαθητὴς ποιεῖν ἔοικε·

[55,0] THE FIFTY-FIFTH DISCOURSE : ON HOMER AND SOCRATES. (1) (Interlocuteur) Since you make it evident that on general grounds you are an admirer of Socrates and also that you are filled with wonder at the man as revealed in his words, you can tell me of which among the sages he was a pupil ; just as, for example, Pheidias the sculptor was a pupil of Hegias, and Polygnotus the painter and his brother were both pupils of their father Aglaophon, and Pherecydes is said to have been a teacher of Pythagoras, and Pythagoras in turn a teacher of Empedocles and so forth. And indeed we are able to name the teachers of most other famous men—and to tell through association with whom each became noteworthy—with the exception of Heracleitus of Ephesus and Hesiod of Ascra. For, to spare us the trouble of seeking for his teacher, Hesiod says he received his poetic gift from the Muses in a branch of laurel as he was tending his flocks on Helicon, white Heracleitus with even more graciousness says that he himself discovered what the nature of the universe really is without anybody's teaching him, and that he became wise by his own efforts. As for Homer, this point, like everything else connected with him, is obscure to the Greeks. But while we have heard that Socrates as a boy studied the calling of his father, be so good as to tell us clearly who was his teacher in the wisdom which has proved so helpful and noble. (3) (Dion) Why, this is plain, I imagine, to many people, provided they are familiar with both men, namely, that Socrates is in truth a pupil of Homer, and not of Archelaüs, as some say. (Interlocuteur) And how can it possibly be said that the man who neither met Homer nor ever saw him, but lived so many years later, was a pupil of Homer ? (Dion) What of it ? Supposing a man lived in Homer's day but had heard none of the poetry of Homer, or, if he had heard, had given none of it his attention, shah we he able to say he was a pupil of Homer ? (Interlocuteur) By no means. (4) (Dion) Then it is not absurd that the man who neither met nor saw Homer and yet understood his poetry and became familiar with all his thought should be called a pupil of Homer ; or will you go so far as to maintain that no one can be a zealous follower of anyone with whom he has never been associated ? (Interlocuteur) Not I. (Dion) Then, if a follower, he would also be a pupil. For whoever really follows any one surely knows what that person was like, and by imitating his acts and words he tries as best he can to make himself like him. But that is precisely, it seems, what the pupil does—