Texte grec :
| [53,0] ΠΕΡΙ ΟΜΗΡΟΥ.
(53,1) Ὁ μὲν Δημόκριτος περὶ Ὁμήρου φησὶν οὕτως· Ὅμηρος φύσεως
λαχὼν θεαζούσης ἐπέων κόσμον ἐτεκτήνατο παντοίων· ὡς οὐκ
ἐνὸν ἄνευ θείας καὶ δαιμονίας φύσεως οὕτως καλὰ καὶ σοφὰ ἔπη
ἐργάσασθαι. πολλοὶ δὲ καὶ ἄλλοι γεγράφασιν οἱ μὲν ἄντικρυς
ἐγκωμιάζοντες τὸν ποιητὴν ἅμα καὶ δηλοῦντες ἔνια τῶν ὑπ´ αὐτοῦ
λεγομένων, οἱ δὲ αὐτὸ τοῦτο τὴν διάνοιαν ἐξηγούμενοι, οὐ μόνον
Ἀρίσταρχος καὶ Κράτης καὶ ἕτεροι πλείους τῶν ὕστερον γραμματικῶν κληθέντων, πρότερον δὲ κριτικῶν. καὶ δὴ καὶ αὐτὸς Ἀριστοτέλης,
ἀφ´ οὗ φασι τὴν κριτικήν τε καὶ γραμματικὴν ἀρχὴν
λαβεῖν, ἐν πολλοῖς διαλόγοις περὶ τοῦ ποιητοῦ διέξεισι, θαυμάζων
αὐτὸν ὡς τὸ πολὺ καὶ τιμῶν, ἔτι δὲ Ἡρακλείδης ὁ Ποντικός.
(53,2) τούτων δὲ πρότερος Πλάτων πανταχοῦ μέμνηται, τὴν μὲν ἡδονὴν
καὶ χάριν τὴν τῶν ἐπῶν ἐκπληττόμενος, πολλάκις γε μὴν ἐπιμεμφόμενος
ἐν τοῖς περὶ θεῶν μύθοις τε καὶ λόγοις, ὡς οὐ συμφέροντα
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οὐδαμῶς αὐτὸν εἰρηκότα, πλεονεξίας καὶ
ἐπιβουλὰς κατ´ ἀλλήλων καὶ μοιχείας καὶ ἔριδας καὶ φιλονικίας
περὶ θεῶν ἐπεξιόντα· μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ οὐ μεταδιδοὺς αὐτῷ τῆς
αὑτοῦ πόλεώς τε καὶ πολιτείας σοφῆς ὡς αὐτὸς ἐνόμιζεν ἐσομένης,
ἵνα μήτε ταῦτα ἀκούωσι περὶ θεῶν νέοι ὄντες οὓς ἐκεῖνος ἀποφαίνει
φύλακάς τε καὶ ἡγεμόνας τῆς πόλεως, μηδ´ αὖ περὶ τῶν
ἐν ᾅδου μηδὲν σκυθρωπὸν λεγόμενον μαλακωτέρους αὐτοὺς πρός
τε τὸ μάχεσθαι καὶ τὸ ἀποθνῄσκειν ποιῇ μηδὲ ὥσπερ πώλους
κακῶς πωλευθέντας ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπόπτους πρὸς τὰ μὴ φοβερά.
(53,3) περὶ μὲν δὴ τούτων ἕτερος λόγος πλείων καὶ μακρότερος καὶ οὐ ῥᾴδιος,
πότερον Ὅμηρος ἥμαρτε περὶ ταῦτα ἢ φυσικούς τινας ἐνόντας ἐν
τοῖς μύθοις λόγους κατὰ τὴν τότε συνήθειαν παρεδίδου τοῖς ἀνθρώποις.
οὐ γὰρ ῥᾴδιον διαιτῆσαι τὸ τοιοῦτον, καθάπερ οἶμαι
δύο φίλων ἀνδρῶν, ἀμφοτέρων σεμνῶν, τοῦ ἑτέρου τῷ ἑτέρῳ ἐγκαλοῦντος,
ἑνὸς αὐτῶν καταγνῶναι.
(53,4) γέγραφε δὲ καὶ Ζήνων ὁ φιλόσοφος
εἴς τε τὴν Ἰλιάδα καὶ τὴν Ὀδύσσειαν, καὶ περὶ τοῦ Μαργίτου
δέ· δοκεῖ γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ποίημα ὑπὸ Ὁμήρου γεγονέναι
νεωτέρου καὶ ἀποπειρωμένου τῆς αὑτοῦ φύσεως πρὸς ποίησιν.
ὁ δὲ Ζήνων οὐδὲν τῶν {τοῦ} Ὁμήρου ψέγει, ἅμα διηγούμενος καὶ
διδάσκων ὅτι τὰ μὲν κατὰ δόξαν, τὰ δὲ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν γέγραφεν,
ὅπως μὴ φαίνηται αὐτὸς αὑτῷ μαχόμενος ἔν τισι δοκοῦσιν ἐναντίως
εἰρῆσθαι.
(53,5) ὁ δὲ λόγος οὗτος Ἀντισθένους ἐστὶ πρότερον, ὅτι τὰ
μὲν δόξῃ, τὰ δὲ ἀληθείᾳ εἴρηται τῷ ποιητῇ· ἀλλ´ ὁ μὲν οὐκ ἐξειργάσατο
αὐτόν, ὁ δὲ καθ´ ἕκαστον τῶν ἐπὶ μέρους ἐδήλωσεν. ἔτι
δὲ καὶ Περσαῖος ὁ τοῦ Ζήνωνος κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ὑπόθεσιν γέγραφε
καὶ ἄλλοι πλείους. ὁ δὲ Πλάτων ἅμα αἰτιώμενος αὐτόν, ὡς εἶπον,
καὶ τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ θαυμαστήν τινα ἀποφαίνει τῆς ποιήσεως,
ὡς εἰκόνα ὄντα παντὸς χρήματος καὶ πάσας ἀτεχνῶς ἀφιέντα φωνάς,
ποταμῶν τε καὶ ἀνέμων καὶ κυμάτων· καὶ κελεύει μάλα εἰρωνικῶς
στέψαντας αὐτὸν ἐρίῳ καὶ μύρον καταχέαντας ἀφιέναι παρ´ ἄλλους.
(53,6) τοῦτο δὲ αἱ γυναῖκες ἐπὶ τῶν χελιδόνων ποιοῦσιν. ἔτι δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς
τῆς χάριτος ἐπιὼν τὴν ποίησιν σφόδρα ἄγασθαι τὸν ἄνδρα. ἀτεχνῶς
γὰρ οὐκ ἄνευ θείας τύχης οὐδ´ ἄνευ Μουσῶν τε καὶ Ἀπόλλωνος
ἐπιπνοίας δυνατὸν οὕτως ὑψηλὴν καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ καὶ
προσέτι ἡδεῖαν γενέσθαι ποίησιν, ὥστε μὴ μόνον τοὺς ὁμογλώττους
καὶ ὁμοφώνους τοσοῦτον ἤδη κατέχειν χρόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν
βαρβάρων πολλούς· καὶ τοὺς μὲν διγλώττους καὶ μιγάδας σφόδρα
ἐμπείρους εἶναι τῶν ἐπῶν αὐτοῦ, πολλὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἀγνοοῦντας
τῶν Ἑλληνικῶν, ἐνίους δὲ καὶ τῶν σφόδρα μακρὰν διῳκισμένων·
ὁπότε καὶ παρ´ Ἰνδοῖς φασιν ᾄδεσθαι τὴν Ὁμήρου ποίησιν, μεταλαβόντων αὐτὴν εἰς τὴν σφετέραν διάλεκτόν τε καὶ φωνήν.
(53,7) ὥστε καὶ Ἰνδοὶ τῶν μὲν ἄστρων τῶν παρ´ ἡμῖν πολλῶν εἰσιν ἀθέατοι·
τὰς γὰρ ἄρκτους οὔ φασι φαίνεσθαι παρ´ αὐτοῖς· τῶν δὲ Πριάμου
παθημάτων καὶ τῶν Ἀνδρομάχης καὶ Ἑκάβης θρήνων καὶ ὀδυρμῶν
καὶ τῆς Ἀχιλλέως τε καὶ Ἕκτορος ἀνδρείας οὐκ ἀπείρως ἔχουσιν.
τοσοῦτον ἴσχυσεν ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς μουσική· καὶ δοκεῖ ἔμοιγε τῇ δυνάμει
ταύτῃ τάς τε Σειρῆνας ὑπερβαλέσθαι καὶ τὸν Ὀρφέα.
(53,8) τὸ γὰρ λίθους τε καὶ φυτὰ καὶ θηρία κηλεῖν καὶ ἄγειν τί ἔστιν ἕτερον ἢ
τὸ βαρβάρους ἀνθρώπους ἀσυνέτους τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς φωνῆς οὕτως
ἄγαν χειρώσασθαι, μήτε τῆς γλώττης μήτε τῶν πραγμάτων ἐμπείρους
ὄντας, ὑπὲρ ὧν ὁ λόγος, ἀλλὰ ἀτεχνῶς καθάπερ οἶμαι πρὸς
κιθάραν κηλουμένους; ἡγοῦμαι δὲ ἔγωγε πολλοὺς καὶ τῶν ἀμαθεστέρων
ἔτι βαρβάρων τό γε ὄνομα ἀκηκοέναι τὸ Ὁμήρου, ὅ,τι δὲ δηλοῖ,
τοῦτο μὴ εἰδέναι σαφῶς, εἴτε ζῷον εἴτε φυτὸν εἴτε πρᾶγμα ἕτερον.
(53,9) οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν βίον ἐπαινέσαι τις ἂν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς πολὺ
μᾶλλον τῆς ποιήσεως. τὸ γὰρ ἐν πενίᾳ διαγενέσθαι καὶ ἀλώμενον
καὶ τοσοῦτον ἀπὸ τῶν ποιημάτων πορίζοντα ὅσον ἀποζῆν θαυμαστῆς
ἀνδρείας καὶ μεγαλοφροσύνης· ἔτι δὲ τὸ μηδαμοῦ γεγραφέναι
τὸ αὑτοῦ ὄνομα, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ ἐν τῇ ποιήσει αὑτοῦ μνησθῆναι,
καίτοι τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων, ὁπόσοι τινὰ ἔδοξαν ἔχειν δύναμιν ἢ περὶ
ποίησιν ἢ καταλογάδην συγγράφοντες, καὶ πρῶτον καὶ τελευταῖον
τὸ ἑαυτῶν ὄνομα γραφόντων, πολλῶν δὲ καὶ ἐν αὐτοῖς τοῖς λόγοις
τε καὶ ποιήμασιν,
|
|
Traduction française :
| [53,0] The Fifty-third Discourse: On Homer.
1 Democritus expresses his opinion of Homer in these words: "Homer, having been
blessed with a divinely inspired genius, fashioned an 'ornament of verses' of every
kind," thus indicating his belief that without a divine and superhuman nature it is
impossible to produce verses of such beauty and wisdom. Many others too have
written on this subject, some expressly lauding the poet and at the same time
pointing out some of his wise sayings, while others have busied themselves with
interpreting the thought itself, this group including not merely Aristarchus and
Crates and several others of those who later were called grammarians but formerly
critics. In fact Aristotle himself, with whom they say that literary interpretation and
criticism began, treats of the poet in many dialogues, admiring him in general and
paying him honour, as does also Heracleides of Pontus.
2 Prior to these, however, Plato mentions Homer at every opportunity, marvelling at
the charm and grace of his poesy, though often censuring him in respect of his myths
and tales about the gods, holding that he (p359) has told what was not at all beneficial to
mankind when he narrates in detail about the gods instances of greed, of scheming
against one another, and of adultery and wrangling and contentiousness. And finally
he reaches the point of refusing to admit Homer to partnership in his own state and
constitution, which, as he himself believed, was to be founded upon wisdom, his
purpose being, not only that those whom he appoints as guardians and leaders of the
state should not as boys hear such tales about gods, but also that no melancholy
account of conditions in the lower world should cause them to be more faint-hearted
in the face of battle and death or, like colts which have been badly broken in,
suspicious from the start bat things which are not really terrifying.
3 Regarding these matters there is indeed another theory, which is fuller, longer, and
not easy to expound, dealing with the question whether Homer erred in these
particulars, or whether he was merely transmitting to mankind certain doctrines
about natural phenomena embodied in the myths after the fashion then in vogue.
Indeed it is not easy to arbitrate a question like that, just as, in my opinion, it is not
easy to decide against one of two men who are your friends, both being worthy of
respect, when each makes charges against the other.
4 But to continue, Zeno the philosopher also has written on both the Iliad and the
Odyssey, and, in fact, on the Margites too; he believes that this poem also was
composed by Homer at the time when (p361) he was rather young and was testing his
poetic genius. 5 However, Zeno finds fault with none of the work of Homer,
undertaking to interpret it and at the same time to show that the poet has written
some things in accord with fancy and some things in accord with reality, Zeno's
purpose being to save Homer from appearing to be at war with himself in certain
matters which are held to be inconsistent with each other as narrated by Homer. But
Antisthenes anticipated Zeno in this theory, namely, that some things have been
spoken by the poet in accord with fancy and some in accord with reality; however,
Antisthenes did not elaborate the theory, whereas Zeno made it plain in each of its
details. Moreover, Persaeus, the pupil of Zeno, also has followed the same plan in his
writings, as have several others as well.
But to return to Plato, while finding fault with Homer, as I have said, he at the same
time declares his poetic power to be something amazing, his idea being that Homer is
capable of everything and reproduces literally every voice, even of rivers, winds, and
waves; moreover, he very jestingly gives instructions to bind the poet's brows with a
fillet of wool, pour perfume on him, and — send him somewhere else.
(p363) 6 Furthermore, Plato himself in praising Homer's poesy for its charm admires
the man exceedingly. Indeed, without divine favour, without inspiration of the
Muses and Apollo, it is simply impossible for poetry to be created which is so lofty
and magnificent, and withal so sweet, as to enthral for so many years, not merely
men who have the same tongue and language as the poet, but even many of alien
race, yes, so that not only men who speak two languages and are of mixed stock,
though unacquainted with much else that is Greek, are very familiar with Homer's
verses, but even some who live very far away. For example, it is said that Homer's
poetry is sung even in India, where they have translated it into their own speech and
tongue. 7 The result is that, while the people of India have no chance to behold many
of the stars in our part of the world — for example, it is said that the Bears are not
visible in their country — still they are not unacquainted with the sufferings of Priam,
the laments and wailings of Andromachê and Hecuba, and the valour of both Achilles
and Hector: so remarkable has been the spell of one man's poetry! It even seems to
me that by this power of his he has surpassed both the Sirens and Orpheus. 8 For in
(p365) what respect is it a greater feat to cast a spell upon stones and trees and wild
beasts and to make them follow than to have mastered so completely men of alien
race who do not understand the Hellenic speech, men who have acquaintance with
neither the poet's tongue nor the deeds of which his poem tells, but are, as I believe,
simply enchanted by a lyre? Moreover, I believe that many barbarians who are still
more ignorant than those men of India have heard of the name of Homer, if nothing
more, though they have no clear notion what it signifies, whether animal or vegetable
or something else still.
9 However that may be, Homer's life deserves praise much more than his verse. For
example, his having lived in poverty, a wanderer, and making from his poems only
enough to sustain life is evidence of remarkable fortitude and nobility of soul; and
besides, his never having written his name anywhere, yes, never having even referred
to himself anywhere in his poetry, though all other writers with any reputation for
skill in composing either verse or prose write their names both at the beginning and
at the end, and many even in the body of their works, both prose and verse.
|
|
