Delphi Complete Works of Dio Chrysostom

by Dio Chrysostom

  [33] Stesichorus and Pindar, the former because he was looked upon as an imitator of Homer and composed a “Capture of Troy,” a creditable work, and Pindar because of the brilliancy of his genius and the fact that he had extolled the ancestor whose name he bore: Alexander, nicknamed the Philhellene, to whom the poet alluded in the verse

  “Namesake of the blest sons of Dardanus.”

  This is the reason why, when later he sacked Thebes, he left only that poet’s house standing, directing that this notice be posted upon it:

  “Set not on fire the roof of Pindar, maker of song.”

  Undoubtedly he was most grateful to those who eulogized him worthily, when he was so particular as this in seeking renown.

  [34] τί δέ; εἶπεν ὁ Φίλιππος, ὦ παῖ, πάνυ γὰρ ἡδέως ἀκούω σου τὰ τοιαῦτα λέγοντος, οὐδὲ οἴκησιν ἀξιοῖς κατεσκευάσθαι τὸν βασιλέα πρὸς ἡδονὴν κεκοσμημένην χρυσῷ καὶ ἠλέκτρῳ καὶ ἐλέφαντι τοῖς πολυτίμοις; οὐδαμῶς, εἶπεν, ὦ πάτερ, πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον σκύλοις τε καὶ ὅπλοις πολεμίων ἀνδρῶν: καὶ τά γε ἱερὰ τοιούτοις κόσμοις ἱλάσκεσθαι καθάπερ ὁ Ἕκτωρ ἠξίου, προκαλούμενος τὸν ἄριστον τῶν Ἀχαιῶν: ὅτι κρατήσας τὸ μὲν σῶμα ἀποδώσει τοῖς συμμάχοις, τὰ δὲ ὅπλα, ἔφη, σκυλεύσω,

  καὶ κρεμόω ποτὶ νηὸν Ἀπόλλωνος ἑκάτοιο.

  [34] “Well, then, my son,” said Philip, “since I am glad indeed to hear you speak in this fashion, tell me, is it your opinion that the king should not even make himself a dwelling beautified with precious ornaments of gold and amber and ivory to suit his pleasure?” “By no means should he, father,” he replied; “such ornaments should consist rather of spoils and armour taken from the enemy. He should also embellish the temples with such ornaments and thus propitiate the gods. This was Hector’s opinion when he challenged the best of the Achaeans, declaring that if victorious he would deliver the body to the allied host, ‘but the arms,’ said he, ‘I shall strip off and

  ‘hang them high

  Within the temple of the archer-god Apollo.’

  [35] τῷ παντὶ γὰρ κρείττων οὗτος κόσμος τῶν ἱερῶν ἢ σμαράγδων καὶ σαρδίων καὶ ὀνύχων, οἷος ἦν ὁ Σαρδαναπάλου περὶ Νίνον. οὐ γὰρ βασιλέως τὰ τοιαῦτα φιλοτιμήματα οὐδαμῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνοήτου

  [35] For such adornment of sacred places is altogether superior to jasper, carnelian, and onyx, with which Sardanapallus bedecked Nineveh. Indeed, such ostentation is by no means seemly for a king though it may furnish amusement to some silly girl or extravagant woman.

  [36] μὲν παίγνια κόρης, ἀκολάστου δὲ γυναικός. οὔκουν οὐδὲ Ἀθηναίους οὕτως, ἔφη, ζηλῶ τῆς δαπάνης καὶ πολυτελείας τῆς περὶ τὴν πόλιν καὶ τὰ ἱερὰ ὅσον τῶν ἔργων ἃ ἔπραξαν οἱ πρότερον: τὸν γὰρ ἀκινάκην τὸν Μαρδονίου πολὺ σεμνότερον καὶ κρεῖττον ἀνάθημα ἔχουσιν καὶ τὰς Λακώνων ἀσπίδας τῶν ἐν Πύλῳ ποτὲ [p. 24] ἁλόντων ἢ τὰ προπύλαια τῆς ἀκροπόλεως καὶ τὸ Ὀλύμπιον ἀπὸ πλειόνων ἢ μυρίων ταλάντων.

  [36] And so I do not envy the Athenians, either, so much for the extravagant way they embellished their city and their temples as for the deeds their forefathers wrought; for in the sword of Mardonius and the shields of the Spartans who were captured at Pylos they have a far grander and more excellent dedication to the gods than they have in the Propylaea of the Acropolis and in Olympieum, which cost more than ten thousand talents.”

  [37] οὐκοῦν, Οὐκοῦν, ἦ δ᾽ ὃς ὁ Φίλιππος, ἐνταῦθα τὸν Ὅμηρον οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις ἐπαινεῖν. τὰ γὰρ τοῦ Ἀλκίνου βασίλεια, ἀνδρὸς Ἕλληνος καὶ νησιώτου, διεκόσμησεν οὐ μόνον κήποις καὶ φυτοῖς καὶ ὕδασιν, ὡς ἥδιστα ἐνοικεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀγάλμασιχρυσοῖς. ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον τὴν τοῦ Μενελάου οἴκησιν, καὶ ταῦτα ἀπὸ στρατείας ἥκοντος, ἆρ᾽ οὐ Περσικήν τινα καὶ Μηδικὴν ἐξηγεῖται, σχεδόν τε οὐ πολὺ ἀποδέουσαν Σεμιράμιδος ἢ Δαρείου τε καὶ Ξέρξου τῶν βασιλείων;

  [37] “In this particular, then,” said Philip, “you could not endorse Homer; for he has embellished the palace of Alcinoüs, a Greek and an islander, not only with gardens and orchards and fountains, but with statues of gold also. Nay, more, does he not describe the dwelling of Menelaus, for all that he had just got back from a campaign, as though it were some Persian or Median establishment, almost equalling the palaces of Semiramis, or of Darius and Xerxes?

  [38] φησὶ γοῦν,

  ὥστε γὰρ ἠελίου αἴγλη πέλεν ἠὲ σελήνης

  δῶμα καθ᾽ ὑψερεφὲς Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο

  χρυσοῦ τ᾽ ἠλέκτρου τε καὶ ἀργύρου ἠδ᾽ ἐλέφαντος.

  [38] He says, for instance:

  ‘A radiance bright, as of the sun or moon.

  Throughout the high-roofed halls of Atreus’ son

  Did shine.’

  ‘The sheen of bronze,

  Of gold, of silver, and of ivory.’

  [39] τοῖς γὰρ Τρωικοῖς σκύλοις ἐχρῆν μᾶλλον λάμπειν αὐτὸ ἢ τούτοις κατά γε τὴν σὴν διάνοιαν. καὶ ὁ Ἀλέξανδρος ἐπισχών, Οὐκ ἔγωγε, εἶπε, τὸν Ὅμηρον ἐάσειν μοι δοκῶ ἀναπολόγητον: ἴσως γὰρ πρὸστὸν τοῦ Μενελάου τρόπον ἐποίησε τὰ βασίλεια, ὅν φησι μόνον εἶναι τῶν Ἀχαιῶν μαλθακὸν αἰχμητήν.

  [39] And yet, according to your conception, it should have shone, not with such materials, but rather with Trojan spoils!” Here Alexander checked him and said, “I have no notion at all of letting Homer go undefended. For it is possible that he described the palace of Menelaus to accord with his character, since he is the only one of the Achaeans whom he makes out to be a faint-hearted warrior.

  [40] σχεδὸν γὰρ οὖν ἔοικεν οὐδὲ τῶν ἄλλων οὐδὲν μάτην ὁ ποιητὴς οὗτος λέγειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ στολὴν καὶ οἴκησιν καὶ δίαιταν πρὸς τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἦθος πολλάκις ἀπεικάζει. διὰ τοῦτο τὰ μὲν ἐν Φαίαξι βασίλεια ἐκόσμησεν

  [40] Indeed it is fairly clear that this poet never elsewhere speaks without a purpose, but repeatedly depicts the dress, dwelling, and manner of life of people so as to accord with their character. This is why he beautified the palace of the Phaeacians with groves, perennial fruits, and ever-flowing springs;

  [41] ἄλσεσί τε καὶ ὀπώραις δι᾽ ἔτους καὶ κρήναις ἀενάοις, ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον τὸ τῆς Καλυψοῦς, ἅτε ὡραίας καὶ φιλανθρώπου θεᾶς, ἐν νήσῳ καθ᾽ αὑτὴν ἀπῳκισμένης: τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ εὐώδη διαφερόντως φησὶ τὴν νῆσον τῶν ἡδίστων ἐν αὐτῇ καιομένων θυμιαμάτων, τοῦτο δὲ σύσκιον δένδροις εὐθαλέσι, κύκλῳ δὲ περὶ τὸ σπήλαιον ἄμπελονπεριήκουσαν ὡραίαν, βότρυσι βριθομένην, ἔμ
προσθεν δὲ λειμῶνας ἁπαλοὺς ἀναμὶξ σελίνων τε καὶ ἑτέρων, ἐν δὲ τῷ μέσῳ κρήνας τέτταρας [p. 25] λαμπροῦ καὶ διαφανοῦς ὕδατος πάντοσε ἀπορρέοντος, ἅτε οὐκ ὄντος ἑτεροκλινοῦς οὐδὲ ἀνίσου τοῦ χωρίου. πάντα γὰρ ταῦτα ὑπερφυῶς ἐρωτικὰ καὶ ἡδέα, κατὰ τὸν τρόπον οἶμαι τῆς θεᾶς.

  [41] and again, with even greater skill, the grotto of Calypso, since she was a beautiful and kindly goddess living off by herself on an island. For he says that the island was wonderfully fragrant with the odours of sweetest incense burning there; and again, that it was overshadowed with luxuriant trees; that round about the grotto rambled a beautiful vine laden with clusters, while before it lay soft meadows with a confusion of parsley and other plants; and, finally, that in its centre were four springs of crystal-clear water which flowed out in all directions, seeing that the ground was not on a slope or uneven. Now all these touches are marvellously suggestive of love and pleasure, and to my thinking reveal the character of the goddess.

  [42] τὴν δέ γε τοῦ Μενελάου πολυχρήματον καὶ πολύχρυσον αὐλήν, καθάπερ οἶμαι τῶν Ἀσιαγενῶν τινος βασιλέων. καὶ γὰρ οὗτος ἦν οὐ μακρὰν τοῦ τε Ταντάλου καὶ Πέλοπος, ὅθεν οἶμαι καὶ τὸν χορὸν Εὐριπίδης εἰς τοῦτο αἰνιττόμενον πεποίηκεν ἐν τῇ προσόδῳ τοῦ βασιλέως,

  Μενέλαος δὲ

  πολὺ δ᾽ ἁβροσύνῃ δῆλος ὁρᾶσθαι

  τοῦ Τανταλιδᾶν ἐξ αἵματος ὤν.

  [42] The court of Menelaus, however, he depicts as rich in possessions and rich in gold, as though he were some Asiatic king, it seems to me. And, in fact, Menelaus was not far removed in line of descent from Tantalus and Pelops; which I think is the reason why Euripides has his chorus make a veiled allusion to his effeminacy when the king comes in:

  ‘And Menelaus,

  By his daintiness so clear to behold,

  Sprung from the Tantalid stock.’

  [43] οὐ μὴν τήν γε τοῦ Ὀδυσσέως οἴκησιν οὐδαμῶς τούτοις ὁμοίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἂν ἀσφαλοῦς ἀνδρὸς πεποίηκε πρὸς αὐτὸ τοῦτο παρεσκευασμένην. λέγει γὰρ οὕτως:

  ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερ᾽ ἐστίν, ἐπήσκηται δέ οἱ αὐλὴ

  τοίχῳ καὶ θριγκοῖσι: θύραι δ᾽ εὐεργέες εἰσὶ

  δίκλιδες: οὐκ ἂν τίς μιν ἀνὴρ ὑπεροπλίσσαιτο.

  [43] The dwelling of Odysseus, however, is of a different kind altogether; he being a cautious man, Homer has given him a home furnished to suit his character. For he says:

  ‘Rooms upon rooms are there: around its court

  Are walls and battlements, and folding doors

  Shut fast the entrance; no man may contemn

  Its strength.’

  [44] δεῖ δὲ τοῦ ποιητοῦ τὰ μὲν ὡς συμβουλεύοντος καὶ παραινοῦντος ἀποδέχεσθαι, τὰ δὲ ὡς ἐξηγουμένου μόνον, πολλὰ δὲ ὡς ὀνειδίζοντος καὶ καταγελῶντος. ἔοικέ γε μὴν καὶ τὰ περὶ κοίτην καὶ τὴν καθ᾽ ἡμέραν δίαιταν ἱκανὸς εἶναι παιδεύειν Ὅμηρος ἡρωικήν τινα καὶ βασιλικὴν τῷ ὄντι παίδευσιν, ὡς τὰς Λακωνικὰς ἑστιάσεις τῶν φιλιτίων δείπνων μαθόντα παρ᾽ ἐκείνου Λυκοῦργον νομοθετῆσαι τοῖς Σπαρτιάταις.

  [44] “But there are passages where we must understand the poet to be giving advice and admonition, others where he merely narrates, and many where his purpose is censure and ridicule. Certainly, when he describes going to bed or the routine of daily life, Homer seems a competent instructor for an education that may truthfully be described as heroic and kingly. Lycurgus, for instance, may have got from him his idea of the common mess of the Spartans when he founded their institutions.

  [45] ἐπεί τοι καί φασιν αὐτὸν ἐπαινέτην Ὁμήρου γενέσθαι, καὶ πρῶτον ἀπὸ Κρήτης ἢ τῆς Ἰωνίας κομίσαι τὴν ποίησιν εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα. τὸν γοῦν Διομήδην πάνυ στερεῶς κατέκλινεν ἐπὶ βύρσης ἀγραύλου βοός, κύκλῳ περιστήσας τὰ δόρατα ὀρθὰ ἐπὶ σαυρωτῆρος, οὐ κόσμου χάριν, ἀλλ᾽ ἕτοιμα [p. 26] λαβεῖν: εὐωχεῖ γε μὴν ἀπὸ κρεῶν τοὺς ἥρωας, καὶ τούτων βοείων,

  [45] In fact, the story is that he came to be an admirer of Homer and was the first who brought his poems from Crete, or from Ionia, to Greece. To illustrate my point: the poet represents Diomede as reclining on a hard bed, the ‘hide of an ox that dwelleth afield’; round about him he had planted his spears upright, butts downward, not for the sake of order but to have them ready for use. Furthermore, he regales his heroes on meat, and beef at that, evidently to give them strength, not pleasure.

  [46] δῆλον ὅτι ἰσχύος, οὐχ ἡδονῆς ἕνεκεν. τὸν γοῦν Ἀγαμέμνονα τὸν ξυμπάντων βασιλέα καὶ πλουσιώτατον βοῦν ἀεί φησι θύειν, καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦτον καλεῖν τοὺς ἀρίστους. καὶ τὸν Αἴαντα μετά τὴν νίκην φιλοφρονεῖται τοῖς νώτοις τοῦ βοός.

  [46] For instance, he is always talking about an ox being slain by Agamemnon, who was king over all and the richest, and of his inviting the chieftains to enjoy it. And to Ajax, after his victory, Agamemnon gives the chine of an ox as a mark of favour.

  [47] ἰχθύων δὲ οὐδέποτε γευομένουσαὐτοὺς ἐποίησεν, καὶ ταῦτα ἐπὶ θαλάττῃ στρατοπεδεύοντας, καίτοι τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον, ὥσπερ ἐστίν, ἰχθυόεντα ἑκάστοτε καλῶν: πάνυ γὰρ ὀρθῶς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀπεμνημόνευσεν ὁ Πλάτων: ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ τοὺς μνηστῆρας ἰχθύσιν ἑστιᾷ, σφόδρα ἀσελγεῖς καὶ τρυφεροὺς ὄντας, καὶ ταῦτα ἐν Ἰθάκῃ ἑστιωμένους.

  [47] But Homer never represents his heroes as partaking of fish although they are encamped by the sea; and yet he regularly calls the Hellespont fish-abounding, as in truth it is; Plato has very properly called attention to this striking fact. Nay, he does not even serve fish to the suitors at their banquet though they are exceedingly licentious and luxury-loving men, are in Ithaca and, what is more, engaged in feasting.

  [48] ὅτι γε μὴν οὐκ ἄλλωσδιέξεισι ταῦτα, φανερῶς αὐτὸς ἀποφαίνεται ποίαν τινὰ δεῖ τὴν τροφὴν εἶναι καὶ πρὸς τί γιγνομένην. ἣν γὰρ ἂν θέλῃ ἐπαινέσαι, μενοεικέα δαῖτά φησιν, τὴν οἵαν τε παρέχειν μένος, τουτέστιν ἰσχύν. ταῦτα δὲ λέγει διδάσκων καὶ παραινῶν ὡς δεῖ καὶ τραπέζης ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τοὺς ἀγαθούς, ἐπεὶ τροφῆς γε παντοίας καὶ πολυτελείασοὐκ ἐτύγχανεν ἄπειρος ὤν, ὥστε τοὺς περὶ ταῦτα νῦν ἐπτοημένους Πέρσας καὶ Σύρους καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων Ἰταλιώτας καὶ Ἴωνας μηδὲ ἐγγὺς ἐφικνεῖσθαι τῆς παρ᾽ Ὁμήρῳ χορηγίας καὶ ἁβρότητος.

  [48] Now because Homer does not give such details without a pur
pose, he is evidently declaring his own opinion as to what kind of nourishment is best, and what it is good for. If he wishes to commend a feature, he uses the expression ‘might-giving,’ that is to say, ‘able to supply might’ or strength. In the passages in question he is giving instruction and advice as to how good men should take thought even for their table, since, as it happened, he was not unacquainted with food of all kinds and with high living. So true is this that the peoples of to-day who have fairly gone mad in this direction — the Persians, Syrians and, among the Greeks, the Italiots, and Ionians — come nowhere near attaining the prodigality and luxury we find in Homer.”

  [49] τί δέ, εἶπεν ὁ Φίλιππος, οὐ δίδωσιν ἐσθῆτα ὡς οἷόν τε καλλίστην τοῖς ἥρωσι; νὴ Δία γε, ἦ δ᾽ ὃς ὁ Ἀλέξανδρος, οὐ μέντοι γυναικείανοὐδὲ ποικίλην, ἀλλὰ πορφύρᾳ μόνον ἐκόσμησε τὸν Ἀγαμέμνονα, καὶ τὸν Ὀδυσσέα δὲ μιᾷ χλαίνῃ τῇ οἴκοθεν. οὐδὲ γὰρ οἴεται δεῖν Ὅμηρος τὸν ἡγεμόνα φαίνεσθαι ταπεινὸν οὐδὲ τοῖς πολλοῖς καὶ ἰδιώταις ὅμοιον, ἀλλὰ καὶ στολῇ καὶ ὁπλίσει διαφέρειν παρὰ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐπὶ τὸ μεῖζον καὶ σεμνότερον, οὐ μὴν τρυφῶντά γε

  [49] “But how is it that he does not give the finest possible apparel to his heroes?” Philip enquired. “Why, by Zeus, he does,” replied all, “though it is no womanish or embroidered apparel; Agamemnon is the only one that wears a purple robe, and even Odysseus has but one purple cloak that he brought from home. For Homer believes that a commander should not be mean of appearance or look like the crowd of private soldiers, but should stand out from the rest in both garb and armour so as to show his greater importance and dignity, yet without being a fop or fastidious about such things.