I
would like to continue my comments on Plutarch - ‘Plutarch of Chaeronea’ (circa
46 to 120 CE), who was a respected philosopher and writer throughout Greece and
Rome, and was also a high-ranking priest here in Delphi before the destruction
of the Temple of Apollo some 300 years after his death.
I
remind Greek members of the group that in my previous post there is a link to
Plutarch’s essay on this subject in ‘modern Greek’ for people to read easily.
In the meantime, here are a few of the things Plutarch writes about the E at
Delphi - pronounced EI.
The
Speakers:
AMMONIUS,
the Platonist philosopher, Plutarch’s teacher.
LAMPRIAS,
Plutarch’s brother.
PLUTARCH.
THEON,
a literary friend.
EUSTROPHUS,
an Athenian.
NICANDER,
a priest of the temple.
[James’
selected Quotes - Part 1]
‘Well,
then, our kind Apollo, in the oracles which he gives his consultants, seems to
solve the problems of life and to find a remedy, while problems of the
intellect he actually suggests and propounds to the born love of wisdom in the
soul, thus implanting an appetite which leads to truth….
…..
We may well guess that it was not by chance, or by lot, that, along among the
letters, it received pre-eminence in the God’s house, and took rank as a sacred
offering and a show object. No, the officials of the God in early times, when
they came to speculate, either saw in it a special and extraordinary virtue, or
found it a symbol for something else of serious importance, and so adopted it……
……
That the God is no less philosopher than he is prophet appeared to all to come
out directly from the exposition which Ammonius gives us of each of his names.
He is ‘Pythian’ (The Inquirer) to those who are beginning to learn and to
inquire; ‘Delian’ (The Clear One) and ‘Phanaean’ to those who are already
getting something clear and a glimmering of the truth; ‘Ismenian’ (The Knowing)
to those who possess the knowledge; ‘Leschenorian’ (God of Discourse) when they
are in active enjoyment of dialectical and philosophic intercourse. ‘Now
since,’ he continued, ‘Philosophy embraces inquiry, wonder, and doubt, it seems
natural that most of the things relating to the God should have been hidden
away in riddles, and should require some account of their purpose, and an
explanation of the cause. For instance, in the case of the undying fire, why
the only woods used here are pine for burning and laurel for fumigation; again,
why two Fates are here installed, whereas their number is everywhere else taken
as three;…..
……Look
again at those inscriptions, KNOW THYSELF and NOTHING TOO MUCH; how many
philosophic inquiries have they provoked! What a multitude of arguments has
sprung up out of each, as from a seed! Not one of them I think is more fruitful
in this way than the subject of our present inquiry.’….
…..
IV. Ammonius gave a quiet smile; he had a suspicion that Lamprias had been
giving us a view of his own, making up history and legend at discretion……
[James Note: A good general warning when we listen to some people or read their
books….]
V.
‘No, the Delphic Officials’, said Nicander the priest, speaking for them,
‘believe that it is a vehicle, a form assumed by the petition addressed to the
God; it has a leading place in the questions of those who consult him, and
inquire, If they shall conquer; If they shall marry; If it is advisable to
sail; If to farm; If to travel. The God in his wisdom would bow out the
dialecticians when they think that nothing practical comes of the “If” part
with its clause attached; he admits as practical, in his sense of the word, all
questions so attached…..’
……
Just so, when the God puts out ambiguous oracles, he is exalting and
establishing Dialectic, as essential to the right understanding of himself. You
will grant again, that in Dialectic this conjunctive particle has great force,
because it formulates the most logical of all sentences. This is certainly the
“conjunctive”, seeing that the other animals know the existence of things, but
man alone has been gifted by nature with the power of observing and discerning
their sequence. That “it is day” and “it is light” we may take it that wolves
and dogs and birds perceive. But “if it is day it is light”, is intelligible
only to man; he alone can apprehend antecedent and consequent, the enunciation
of each and their connexion, their mutual relation and difference, and it is in
these that all demonstration has its first and governing principle. Since then
Philosophy is concerned with truth, and the light of truth is demonstration,
and the principle of demonstration is the conjunctive proposition, the faculty
which includes and produces this was rightly consecrated by the wise men to
that God who is above all things a lover of truth……
Also,
the God is a prophet, and prophetic art deals with that future which is to come
out of things present or things past. Nothing comes into being without a cause,
nothing is known beforehand without a reason.
Hence,
though it may perhaps seem a petty thing to say, I will not shrink from it; the
real tripod of truth is the logical process which assumes the relation of
consequent to antecedent, then introduces the fact, and so establishes the
conclusion. If the Pythian God really finds pleasure in music, and in the
voices of swans, and the tones of the lyre, what wonder is it that as a friend
to Dialectic, he should welcome and love that part of speech which he sees
philosophers use more, and more often, than any other.
For
Aeschylus says: ‘In mingled cries the dithyramb should ring,……. With Dionysus
revelling, its King. ‘But Apollo has the Pæan, a set and sober music. Apollo is
ever ageless and young; Dionysus has many forms and many shapes as represented
in paintings and sculpture, which attribute to Apollo smoothness and order and
a gravity with no admixture, to Dionysus a blend of sport and sauciness with
seriousness and frenzy:…..’
XVII.
Ammonius, as one who himself gave Mathematics no mean place in Philosophy, was
pleased at the course the conversation was taking, and said: ‘It is not worth
our while to answer our young friends with too absolute accuracy on these
points; I will only observe that any one of the numbers will provide not a few
points for those who choose to sing its praises. Why speak about the others?
Apollo’s holy “Seven” will take up all one day before we have exhausted its
powers. Are we then to show the Seven Wise Men at odds with common usage, and
“the time which runs”, and to suppose that they ousted the “Seven” from its
pre-eminence before the God, and consecrated the “Five” as perhaps more
appropriate? ‘My own view is that the letter signifies neither number, nor
order, nor conjunction, nor any other omitted part of speech;
----------
I
will conclude my comments on this text ‘The E at Delphi’ next time by giving an
outline of what Ammonius (the teacher of Plutarchos) thinks is the reason for
the E. We should note that Plutarch significantly leaves his teacher’s views
and comments to last to conclude his piece.
James.
No comments:
Post a Comment