[23] μίαν γὰρ δὴ ταύτην καθαρῶς εὐδαίμονα πολιτείαν εἴτε καὶ πόλιν χρὴ καλεῖν, τὴν θεῶν πρὸς ἀλλήλους κοινωνίαν, ἐάν τε καὶ ξύμπαν τὸ λογικὸν περιλάβῃ τις, ἀνθρώπων σὺν θεοῖς ἀριθμουμένων, ὡς παῖδες σὺν ἀνδράσι λέγονται μετέχειν πόλεως, φύσει πολῖται ὄντες, οὐ τῷ φρονεῖν τε καὶ πράττειν τὰ τῶν πολιτῶν οὐδὲ τῷ κοινωνεῖν τοῦ νόμου, ἀξύνετοι ὄντες αὐτοῦ. ἐκ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων πανταχοῦ πασῶν σχεδὸν ἁπλῶς ἡμαρτημένων τε καὶ φαύλων πρὸς τὴν ἄκραν εὐθύτητα τοῦ θείου καὶ μακαρίου νόμου καὶ τῆς ὀρθῆς διοικήσεως, ὅμως δὲ πρὸς τὸ παρὸν εὐπορήσομεν παράδειγμα τῆς ἐπιεικέστερον ἐχούσης πρὸς τὴν παντελῶς διεφθαρμένην, ὡς ἐν πᾶσι νοσοῦσι τόν γ̓ ἐλαφρότατα διάγοντα τῷ κάκιστα διακειμένῳ παραβάλλοντες.
[23] For that, indeed, is the only constitution or city that may be called genuinely happy — the partnership of god with god; even if you include with the gods also everything that has the faculty of reason, mankind being thus included as boys are said to share in citizenship with men, being citizens by birth though not by reason of conceiving and performing the tasks of citizens or sharing in the law, of which they have no comprehension. However, if we take communities of a different kind, though everywhere and in every instance, we may almost say, they are absolutely faulty and worthless as compared with the supreme righteousness of the divine and blessed law and its proper administration, still for our present purpose we shall be supplied with examples of the type that is fairly equitable when compared with that which is utterly corrupt, just as among persons who are all ill we compare the man who had the lightest case with the one who is in worst condition.”
[24] ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν πρός τι τοιοῦτον ὥρμων τῷ λόγῳ. μεταξὺ δὲ τῶν παρόντων εἷς ἐφθέγξατο εἰς τὸ μέσον, ὅσπερ ἦν πρεσβύτατος αὐτῶν καὶ μέγιστον ἀξίωμα ἔχων, εἶπε δὲ πάνυ εὐλαβούμενος, Μηδαμῶς, ὦ ξένε, ἄγροικον μηδὲ βαρβαρικὸν ἡγήσῃ τὸ τοιοῦτον, ὅτι μεταξὺ λέγοντί σοι ἐμποδὼν ἐγενόμην. παῤ ὑμῖν μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἔθος ἐστὶ τὸ τοιοῦτο διὰ τὸ πολλὴν ἀφθονίαν εἶναι τῶν ἐκ φιλοσοφίας λόγων καὶ περὶ παντὸς ὅτου ἂν ἐπιθυμῇ τις ἐξεῖναι παρὰ πολλῶν ἀκοῦσαι: παῤ ἡμῖν δὲ ὥσπερ τέρας τι τοῦτο πέφηνε
[24] Well then, I was launching forth upon that general line in my discussion, when one of those who were present, the eldest in the company and held in high esteem, spoke up, interrupting me, and in a very guarded manner said, “Stranger, pray do not think it boorish or barbarous of me to intervene in the midst of your discourse. For while in your country such conduct is not good manners, because of the great abundance of philosophical discussions and because one may listen to many men upon any topic he may desire, in ours this visit of yours to our city seems almost a miraculous event.
[25] τὸ σὲ ἡμῖν ἀφικέσθαι. τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν σχεδόν τι δεῦρο ἀφικνοῦνται ὀνόματι Ἕλληνες, τῇ δὲ ἀληθείᾳ βαρβαρώτεροι ἡμῶν, ἔμποροι καὶ ἀγοραῖοι, ῥάκη φαῦλα καὶ οἶνον πονηρὸν εἰσκομίζοντες καὶ τά γε παῤ ἡμῶν οὐδὲν βελτίω τούτων ἐξαγόμενοι. σὲ δὲ αὐτὸς ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀχιλλεὺς ἔοικε δεῦρο ἀπὸ τῆς νήσου διαπέμψαι, καί σε πάνυ μὲν ἡδέως ὁρῶμεν, πάνυ δὲ ἡδέως ἀκούομεν ὅ,τι ἂν λέγῃς. οὐ μέντοι πολύν τινα χρόνον ἡγούμεθα ἔσεσθαι τοῦτον οὐδὲ βουλόμεθα, ἀλλά
[25] As a usual thing those who come here are nominally Greeks but actually more barbarous than ourselves, traders and market-men, fellows who import cheap rags and vile wine and export in exchange products of no better quality. But you would appear to have been sent to us by Achilles himself from his holy isle, and we are very glad to see you and very glad also to listen to whatever you have to say. However, we do not believe that this visit of yours is to be of very long duration, nor do we desire it to be, but rather that you may have a prosperous voyage home as speedily as possible.
[26] σε εὖ πράξαντα οἴκαδε κατελθεῖν τὴν ταχίστην. νῦν οὖν ἐπεὶ [p. 8] ἥψω τῷ λόγῳ τῆς θείας διοκήσεως, αὐτός τε ἀνεπτέρωμαι δαιμονίως καὶ τούσδε ὁρῶ πάντας ὀργῶντας πρὸς ἐκεῖνον τὸν λόγον: καὶ γὰρ ἡμῖν ἔδοξας μεγαλοπρεπῶς καὶ τοῦ πράγματος οὐκ ἀναξίως ὅσα εἶπες εἰρηκέναι καὶ ὡς ἂν μάλιστα ἡμεῖς βουλοίμεθα ἀκοῦσαι. τῆς μὲν γὰρ ἀκριβεστέρας ταύτης φιλοσοφίας ἄπειροί ἐσμεν, Ὁμήρου δέ, ὡς οἶσθα, ἐρασταὶ καί τινες οὐ πολλοὶ Πλάτωνος: ὧν δὴ κἀμὲ ὁρᾷς ὄντα, ἀεί ποτε ἐντυγχάνοντα τοῖς ἐκείνου ὅπως ἂν δύνωμαι: καίτοι ἴσως ἄτοπον βαρβαρίζοντα τῶν πολιτῶν μάλιστα τῷ ἑλληνικωτάτῳ καὶ σοφωτάτῳ χαίρειν καὶ ξυνεῖναι, καθάπερ εἴ τις μικροῦ τυφλὸς τὸ μὲν ἄλλο φῶς ἀποστρέφοιτο, πρὸς αὐτὸν
[26] Now therefore, since in your remarks you have touched upon the divine form of government, I myself am tremendously excited, and I see that my friends here also are all worked up in anticipation of that theme. The fact is that in our opinion everything you have said has been magnificently expressed, in a manner not unworthy of your theme, and precisely as we should most desire to hear. For although we are unacquainted with this more refined form of philosophy, yet we are, as you know, lovers of Homer, and some, not many, lovers of Plato too. To this latter group I myself belong, for I always read his writings as best I can; and yet it may perhaps seem odd that one who speaks the poorest Greek of all the people of Borysthenes should delight in the man who is most Greek and most wise and should cultivate that man’s society, quite as if a person almost wholly blind were to shun every other light but turn his gaze upward to the sun itself.
[27] δὲ τὸν ἥλιον ἀναβλέποι. ἔχει μὲν δὴ τὰ ἡμέτερα οὕτως. σὺ δὲ εἰ θέλεις πᾶσιν ἡμῖν χαρίσασθαι, τὸν μὲν ὑπὲρ τῆς θνητῆς πόλεως ἀναβαλοῦ λόγον, ἐὰν ἄρα σχολὴν ἡμῖν οἱ γείτονες παράσχωσιν εἰς αὔριον καὶ μὴ δέῃ προσγυμνάζεσθαι αὐτοῖς, ὥσπερ ἔθος ἡμῖν τὸ πολύ: περὶ δὲ τῆς θείας εἴτε πόλεως εἴτε διακοσμήσεως φίλον σοι καλεῖν, εἰπὲ ὅπῃ τε καὶ ὅπως ἔχει, ὡς δύνασαι ἐγγύτατα τείνων τῆς τοῦ Πλάτωνος ἐλευθερίας περὶ τὴν φράσιν, οἷον δὴ καὶ ἄρτι ποιεῖν ἡμῖν ἔδοξας. εἰ γὰρ μηδενὸς ἄλλου, τῆς γε φωνῆς ξυνίεμεν ὑπὸ συνηθείας ὅτι οὐ σμικρὸν οὐδὲ πόρρω τοῦ Ὁμήρου φθέγγεται.
[27] “This, then, is our situation; and if you wish to do us all a favour, postpone your discussion of the mo
rtal city — possibly our neighbours may after all grant us leisure tomorrow, and not compel us to exert ourselves against them as is generally our wont — and tell us instead about that divine city or government, whichever you prefer to call it, stating where it is and what it is like, aiming as closely as possible at Plato’s nobility of expression, just as but now you seemed to us to do. For if we understand nothing else, we do at least understand his language because of our long familiarity with it, for it has a lofty sound, not far removed from the voice of Homer.”
[28] κἀγὼ σφόδρα γε ἥσθην τῇ ἁπλότητι τοῦ πρεσβύτου, καὶ γελάσας εἶπον, Ὦ φίλε Ἱεροσῶν, εἴ με ἐκέλευες χθὲς εἰσβεβληκότων ὑμῖν τῶν πολεμίων λαβόντα ὅπλα ὥσπερ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα μάχεσθαι, τὸ μὲν ἕτερον ἐπείσθην ἄν, πειρώμενος ἀμύνεσθαι ὑπὲρ ἀνδρῶν φίλων, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον οὐκ ἂν οἶμαι ἐδυνάμην, καίτοι σφόδρα βουλόμενος, ὁμοίως τῷ Ἀχιλλεῖ ἀγωνίζεσθαι. καὶ νῦν ὧν κελεύεις ποιήσω τὸ ἕτερον, προθυμήσομαι εἰπεῖν τὸν λόγον, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ δύνωμαι κατ̓ ἐμαυτόν:
ἀνδράσι δὲ προτέροισιν ἐριζέμεν οὐκ ἐθελήσω,
οὔτε Πλάτωνι οὔτε Ὁμήρῳ. οὐ γάρ τοι οὐδὲ τῷ Εὐρύτῳ φησὶ συνενεγκεῖν ὁ ποιητὴς ὅτι ἤριζε πρὸς τοὺς κρείττονας. οὐ μέντοι
[28] I in turn was exceedingly pleased with the simple frankness of the old gentleman, and with a laugh I said, “My dear Hieroson, if yesterday when the enemy made their attack you had bidden me to take up arms and give battle like Achilles, I should have obeyed one part of your injunction, endeavouring to come to the aid of men who are my friends; but the other part, I fancy, I could not have managed, however much I should have wished to do so, to fight as your Achilles did. Similarly in the present instance also I will do part of what you bid — I will strive to tell my story as best I can in my own way;
Though ancient heroes I’ll not try to match,
whether it be Plato or Homer. For, you remember, the poet says that in the case of Eurytus himself such rivalry worked not to his advantage, since it was aimed at his superiors. However, I shall not lack for devotion,” I added.
[29] σπουδῆς γε, ἔφην, οὐδὲν ἀπολείψομεν. ταῦτα δὲ εἰπὼν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον οὐδὲν ἧττον ὑπεκίνουν καὶ ἀνεφερόμην τρόπον τινὰ ἀναμνησθεὶς Πλάτωνός τε καὶ Ὁμήρου. [p. 9] τὸ μὲν δὴ τῆς πόλεως οὕτως, ἔφην, δεῖ ἀκούειν ὡς οὐκ ἄντικρυς τῶν ἡμετέρων τὸν κόσμον ἀποφαινομένων πόλιν: ἐναντίον γὰρ ἂν ὑπῆρχε τοῦτο τῷ λόγῳ τῷ περὶ τῆς πόλεως, ἥν, ὥσπερ οὖν εἶπον, σύστημα ἀνθρώπων ὡρίσαντο: ἅμα τε οὐκ ἦν ἴσως πρέπον οὐδὲ πιθανὸν
[29] Yet, despite my brave words to Hieroson, I was moved and heaved a sigh, as it were, when I bethought me of Homer and Plato.
“Well then,” said I, “the term ‘city’ must be taken on the understanding that our sect is not literally defining the universe as a city; for that would be in direct conflict with our doctrine of the city, which, as I have said, the Stoics define as an organization of human beings; and at the same time it would possibly not be suitable or convincing, if, after stating in the strict sense of the term that the universe is a living creature, they should then call it a city,
[30] κυρίως εἰπόντας εἶναι τὸν κόσμον ζῷον ἔπειτα φάσκειν ὡς ἔστι πόλις: τὸ γὰρ αὐτὸ πόλιν τε καὶ ζῷον οὐκ ἂν οἶμαι ῥᾳδίως ὑπομένοι τις ὑπολαβεῖν. ἀλλὰ τὴν νῦν διακόσμησιν, ὁπηνίκα διῄρηται καὶ μεμέρισται τὸ πᾶν εἰς πολλάς τινας μορφὰς φυτῶν τε καὶ ζῴων θνητῶν καὶ ἀθανάτων, ἔτι δὲ ἀέρος καὶ γῆς καὶ ὕδατος καὶ πυρός, ἓν οὐδὲν ἧττον πεφυκὸς ἐν ἅπασι τούτοις καὶ μιᾷ ψυχῇ καὶ δυνάμει διεπόμενον, ἁμῃγέπῃ πόλει προσεικάζουσι διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ γιγνομένων τε καὶ ἀπογιγνομένων, ἔτι δὲ τὴν τάξιν καὶ τὴν εὐκοσμίαν
[30] for that the same thing is both a city and a living being is a proposition that, I imagine, no one would readily consent to entertain. Yet the present orderly constitution of the universe ever since the whole has been separated and divided into a considerable number of forms of plants and animals, mortal and immortal, yes, and into air and earth and water and fire, being nevertheless by nature in all these forms one thing and governed by one spirit and force — this orderly constitution, I say, the Stoics do in one way or another liken to a city because of the multitude of the creatures that are constantly either being born or else ending their existence in it, and, furthermore, because of the arrangement and orderliness of its administration.
[31] τῆς διοικήσεως. ὁ δὲ λόγος οὗτος ἔμβραχυ ἐσπούδακε ξυναρμόσαι τῷ θείῳ τὸ ἀνθρώπειον γένος καὶ ἑνὶ λόγῳ περιλαβεῖν πᾶν τὸ λογικόν, κοινωνίας ἀρχὴν καὶ δικαιοσύνης μόνην ταύτην ἰσχυρὰν καὶ ἄλυτον εὑρίσκων. πόλις μὲν γὰρ δὴ κατὰ τοῦτο ἂν εἴη λεγομένη μὰ Δἴ οὐ φαύλων οὐδὲ μικρῶν τυχοῦσα ἡγεμόνων οὐδὲ ὑπὸ τυράννων τε καὶ δήμων καὶ δεκαρχιῶν δὴ καὶ ὀλιγαρχιῶν καί τινων ἄλλων τοιούτων ἀρρωστημάτων διαφορουμένη καὶ στασιάζουσα τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον, ἀλλὰ τῇ σωφρονεστάτῃ καὶ ἀρίστῃ βασιλείᾳ κεκοσμημένη, τῷ ὄντι βασιλευομένη κατὰ νόμον μετὰ πάσης φιλίας
[31] “This doctrine, in brief, aims to harmonize the human race with the divine, and to embrace in a single term everything endowed with reason, finding in reason the only sure and indissoluble foundation for fellowship and justice. For in keeping with that concept the term ‘city’ would be applied, not, of course, to an organization that has chanced to get mean or petty leaders nor to one which through tyranny or democracy or, in fact, through decarchy or oligarchy or any other similar product of imperfection, is being torn to pieces and made the victim of constant party faction. Nay, term would be applied rather to an organization that is governed by the sanest and noblest form of kingship, to one that is actually under royal governance in accordance with law, in complete friendship and concord.
[32] καὶ ὁμονοίας: ὅπερ δὴ ὁ σοφώτατος καὶ ὁ πρεσβύτατος ἄρχων καὶ νομοθέτης ἅπασι προστάττει θνητοῖς καὶ ἀθανάτοις, ὁ τοῦ ξύμπαντος ἡγεμὼν οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς ὅλης δεσπότης οὐσίας, αὐτὸς οὕτως ἐξηγούμενος καὶ παράδειγμα παρέχων τὴν αὑτοῦ διοίκησιν τῆς εὐδαίμονος καὶ μακαρίας καταστάσεως: ὃν οἱ θεῖοι ποιηταὶ μαθόντες ἐκ Μουσῶν ὑμνοῦσιν ἅμα καὶ ὀνομάζουσι πατέρα θεῶν [p. 10]
[32] And this, indeed, is precisely what the wisest and eldest ruler and law-giver ordains for all, both mortals and immortals, he who is the leader of all the heaven and lord of all being, himself thus expounding the term and offering his own administration as a patt
ern of the happy and blessed condition, he whom the divine bards, instructed by the Muses, praise in song and call the ‘father of gods and men.’
[33] καὶ ἀνθρώπων. κινδυνεύει γὰρ οὖν δὴ τὸ ποιητικὸν γένος οὐ πάνυ ἄστοχον εἶναι τῶν ἱερῶν λόγων οὐδὲ ἄπο στόχου φθέγγεσθαι τὰ τοιαῦτα πολλάκις, οὐ μέντοι οὐδὲ μεμυῆσθαι καθαρῶς κατὰ θεσμὸν καὶ νόμον τῶν μυουμένων οὐδὲ εἰδέναι τοῦ ξύμπαντος πέρι τῆς ἀληθείας σαφὲς οὐδέν, ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν: ἀτεχνῶς δὲ ἔοικεν ὅμοιον εἶναι τοῖς ἔξω περὶ θύρας ὑπηρέταις τῶν τελετῶν, πρόθυρα κοσμοῦσι καὶ βωμοὺς τοὺς ἐν τῷ φανερῷ καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ τοιαῦτα παρασκευάζουσιν, οὐδέ ποτ̓ ἔνδον παριοῦσιν. ὅθεν δὴ καὶ θεράποντας Μουσῶν αὑτοὺς ὀνομάζουσιν, οὐ μύστας οὐδὲ ἄλλο σεμνὸν ὄνομα.
[33] “For the chances are, indeed, that poets as a class are not utterly bad marksmen when they speak of sacred things and that they are not missing the mark when they use such expressions as that repeatedly; on the other hand, it is not likely that they have received a real initiation according to the rites and regulations of true initiates, or that with reference to the universe they know anything, if I may say so, which is true and clear. But we may think of them as merely like the attendants at the rites, who stand outside at the doors, decking portals and the altars which are in full view and attending to the other preparations of that kind but never passing within. Indeed that is the very reason why the poets call themselves ‘attendants of the Muses,’ not initiates or any other august name.
Delphi Complete Works of Dio Chrysostom Page 300
