[1] Διὰ τί ποτε δοκεῖ ὑμῖν Νέστορος Ὅμηρος ποιῆσαι τάδε τὰ ἔπη πρὸς Ἀγαμέμνονα καὶ Ἀχιλλέα, παραμυθούμενον αὐτοὺς καὶ διδάσκοντα μὴ διαφέρεσθαι ἀλλήλοις: ἤδη γάρ ποτ̓ ἐγὼ καὶ ἀρείοσιν ἠέπερ ὑμῖν ἀνδράσιν ὡμίλησα, καὶ οὔποτέ μ̓ οἵ γ̓ ἀθέριζον. οὐ γάρ πω τοίους ἴδον ἀνέρας οὐδὲ ἴδωμαι, [p. 126] οἷον Πειρίθοόν τε Δρύαντά τε ποιμένα λαῶν, Καινέα τ̓ Ἐξάδιόν τε καὶ ἀντίθεον Πολύφημον, Θησέα τ̓ Αἰγείδην ἐπιείκελον ἀθανάτοισι. κάρτιστοι δὴ κεῖνοι ἐπιχθονίων τράφεν ἀνδρῶν: κάρτιστοι μὲν ἔσαν καὶ καρτίστοις ἐμάχοντο φηρσὶν ὀρεσκῴοισι, καὶ ἐκπάγλως ἀπόλεσσαν. καὶ μέν μευ βουλέων ξύνιον πείθοντό τε μύθῳ. ἀλλὰ πίθεσθε καὶ ὔμμες, ἐπεὶ πείθεσθαι ἄμεινον.
The Fifty-seventh Discourse: Nestor
Why in the world do you suppose Homer caused Nestor to speak the following verses to Agamemnon and Achilles when he was trying to pacify them and teach them not to quarrel with one another?
For once in bygone days I dealt with men
Still braver than ye are, yet they did ne’er
Make light of me. Such men I had not seen,
Nor ever shall, as were Peirithoüs
And Dryas, shepherd of the soldiery,
And Caeneus and Exadius, Polypheme
Divine and Theseus son of Aegeus, like
The deathless gods. Aye, they were reared most strong
Of earthly men; most strong were they and with
The strongest strove, wild creatures of the hills,
And slew them ruthlessly. They understood
My counsels and they hearkened to my word.
And so should ye, since hearkening is best.
[2] ἆρα μὴ ἀλαζόνα πεποίηκε τὸν Νέστορα λέγοντα περὶ τοῦ Πειρίθου καὶ Δρύαντος καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὅτι θαυμαστοί τε φύσει ὄντες καὶ πολὺ κρείττους ἐκείνων προσεδέοντο τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας, καὶ ἧκε μετάπεμπτος εἰς Θετταλίαν ἐκ Πύλου δεομένων ξυνεῖναι καὶ διαλέγεσθαι αὐτῷ; ἔτι γὰρ εἰπὼν ὅτι κράτιστοι ἀνθρώπων ἦσαν, ὡς μέγα τι μαρτυρεῖν ἔοικεν αὐτοῖς τὸ ξυνιέναι τῆς αὑτοῦ γνώμης καὶ πείθεσθαι τοῖς λόγοις. ἢ τοῦτο μὲν σχεδὸν οὗ ἕνεκά φαμεν: πᾶσι τοῖς ὀρθῶς λέγουσιν οὐδέποτε οὐδεὶς ἀπειθεῖ τῶν ξυνιέντων:
[2] Can it be that Homer has made a braggart of Nestor when he says of Peirithoüs and Dryas and the others that, though they were not only marvellous by nature, but also far superior to Agamemnon and Achilles, still they wanted his opinion too, going on to say that he had come from Pylus to Thessaly by invitation, since they wanted to enjoy his company and to converse with him? For why, after having said that they were the strongest of men, does Nestor seem to offer as a weighty testimonial in their favour, that they understood his mind and hearkened to his words? Or do we say his purpose was virtually this — that no man of understanding ever disobeys those whose words are right; nay, disobedience is tantamount to lack of understanding?
[3] ἀλλ̓ ἔστιν ἡ ἀπείθεια ταὐτὸν ἀξυνεσίᾳ; φέρε δὴ καὶ τἄλλα σκεψώμεθα, πότερον ὀρθῶς εἴρηκεν ἢ δἰ ἀλαζονείαν. οὐκοῦν οἱ ἀνόητοι πάντες καταφρονοῦσι τῶν ἀδόξων ἀνθρώπων καὶ οὐδὲν προσέχουσι τούτοις, οὐδ̓ ἂν τύχωσι τὰ ἄριστα συμβουλεύοντες: οὓς δ̓ ἂν ἴδωσι τιμωμένους ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους ἢ τῶν μέγιστα δυναμένων, οὐκ ἀπαξιοῦσι πείθεσθαι αὐτοῖς. ἑνὸς μὲν οὖν τούτου χάριν ὁ Νέστωρ συνίστησιν αὑτόν, ὅτι πολλοὺς καὶ δυνατοὺς πρότερον ἠδυνήθη πεῖσαι καὶ ὅτι ἐκεῖνοι κατὰ τὴν αὐτῶν ἀφροσύνην καὶ ἀναισθησίαν ἀπειθήσουσιν, ἂν ἀπειθῶσιν, οὐχ ὡς ἀδυνάτου
[3] Come then, let us examine also the other aspects of the case, to see if Nestor has spoken rightly or as a braggart. Certainly foolish persons universally scorn men of no reputation and pay no heed to them, even though they may chance to be giving most excellent advice; but, on the other hand, when they see men being honoured by the multitude or by persons of greatest power, they do not disdain to be guided by them. This is one count, therefore, on which Nestor commends himself, namely, that in days gone by he has been able to persuade many men of influence, and that Agamemnon and Achilles will refuse to obey, if they do refuse, because of their own folly and lack of perception, and not because Nestor is incompetent to give advice about things of highest importance.
[4] ὄντος αὐτοῦ συμβουλεῦσαι περὶ τῶν μεγίστων. ὥσπερ οὖν εἰ λοιδορῶν αὑτὸν καὶ λέγων ὅτι μηδέποτε μηδεὶς ἠξίωσεν αὐτῷ συμβουλεύσασθαι [p. 127] περὶ μηδενὸς ἔμελλε προτρέπειν τὸν Ἀγαμέμνονα καὶ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα πείθεσθαι τοῖς λόγοις, οὐκ ἂν ὤκνησε λοιδορεῖν: οὕτως εἰ τὸν ἔπαινον ᾤετο παρορμήσειν πρὸς τοῦτο, εἰκότως ἐπῄνει. ἢ οὐκ ἀνοήτου ἀνθρώπου ἐστὶν αἰσχύνεσθαι αὑτὸν ἐπαινεῖν μέλλοντα τὰ μέγιστα ὀνήσειν; ὥσπερ οἶμαι καὶ τοὐναντίον σεμνύνεσθαι καὶ λέγειν ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ πολλάκις, εἰ κίνδυνός τις ἢ βλάβη
[4] Accordingly, just as Nestor would not have hesitated to disparage himself, if by disparaging and saying that no one ever deigned to consult him about anything he were likely to move Agamemnon and Achilles to obey his words, so, if he thought his self-praise would move them to this, it was reasonable for him to resort to praise.
[5] προσείη. καθάπερ οὖν ὅταν ἰατρὸς βουλόμενος τεμεῖν τινα ἢ καῦσαι παρασχεῖν αὑτὸν ἢ πιεῖν φάρμακον ἀηδές, δειλὸν εἰδὼς τὸν ἄνθρωπον καὶ ἀνόητον, ἑτέρων μνημονεύῃ τῶν ὑφ̓ αὑτοῦ σωθέντων διὰ τὸ πεισθέντας ὑπομεῖναι τὴν θεραπείαν, οὐδείς φησιν ἀλαζονεύεσθαι τὸν ταῦτα λέγοντα: δοκεῖ μοι δικαίως ἂν μηδὲ ὁ
[5] Or is it not the mark of a foolish person to be ashamed to praise himself when by praise he is likely to confer the greatest benefits; just as it is also, I fancy, to do the opposite — put on airs and talk about oneself a great deal, in case some risk or loss should be involved? Therefore, just as when a physician who wants a patient to submit to surgery or cautery or to the drinking of some unpleasant drug, knowing the patient to be cowardly and foolish, mentions others who have been saved by him because they willingly submitted to his treatment, no one says the man who makes these statements is bragging,
[6] Νέστωρ αἰτίαν ἔχειν ἀλαζονείας. ἓν μὲν δὴ τοῦτο ὑπῆρχεν ὄφελος ἐκ τῶν λόγων: ἕτερον δέ: καὶ τὸν Ἀγαμέμνονα καὶ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα ἠπίστατο οὐκ ἄλλως ἁμαρτάνοντας ἢ δἰ ὕβριν: ὑβρίζειν δὲ ἡγεῖτο τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τότε μάλ
ιστα σχεδόν, ἐπειδὰν καταφρονῶσι τῶν ἄλλων καὶ νομίζωσι πολὺ χείρους αὑτῶν, ἐπαιρόμενοι διὰ δόξαν ἢ δύναμιν, ᾗ καὶ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα καὶ τὸν Ἀγαμέμνονα ἐγίγνωσκε διὰ τοῦτο ἐπαιρομένους καὶ στασιάζοντας ὑπὸ μεγαλαυχίας ἑκάτερον. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾤετο, Πηλέως καὶ Θέτιδος υἱὸς ὢν καὶ τῶν τότε ἀνθρώπων διαφέρων ἐν τῷ μάχεσθαι, προσήκειν αὑτῷ μηδενὸς ἁπλῶς ὑπακούειν μηδὲ κρείττονα νομίζειν αὑτοῦ μηδένα: τῷ δὲ Ἀγαμέμνονι τῆς ὕβρεως αἴτιον ὑπῆρχεν ἡ δύναμις ἡ τῆς βασιλείας καὶ τὸ
[6] so it seems to me that Nestor could not justly be accused of bragging either.
This, then, was one benefit resulting from his words. And here is another — Nestor knew that both Agamemnon and Achilles were misbehaving for no other reason than because of insolence; and he believed that men are insolent most of all, one might say, when they despise the others and deem them far inferior to themselves, being puffed up through reputation or power, and he perceived that this was why Achilles and Agamemnon were puffed up and wrangling, each of them because of arrogance. For the one, as he saw, being a son of Peleus and Thetis and pre-eminent among the men of his day in fighting, believed that it befitted his dignity not to listen to anyone at all or to regard anyone as superior to himself;
[7] μόνον ἄρχειν τῶν Ἑλλήνων πάντων. ὑπὸ δὴ τούτων ὁρῶν αὐτοὺς διεφθαρμένους καὶ μὴ δυναμένους ὁμονοεῖν ἀλλήλοις, ἀλλὰ τὰς ψυχὰς οἰδοῦντας, ὡς ὕστερόν φησιν ὁ Ἀχιλλεύς, ἀλλά μοι οἰδάνεται κραδίη χόλῳ: [p. 128] ἐβούλετο ταπεινῶσαι καὶ τοῦ φρονήματος, εἰ δύναιτο, καθελεῖν: ὥσπερ οἱ τὰ οἰδοῦντα νύξαντες ἢ πιέσαντες. διὰ τοῦτο ἐμέμνητο ἀνδρῶν ἐνδόξων καὶ δυνατῶν, ἔτι δὲ οἶμαι πρότερον γεγονότων,
[7] but in Agamemnon’s case the cause of his arrogance was the power attached to his kingship and his being sole ruler of all the Greeks. Seeing, therefore, that they had been spoiled by these things and could not live at peace with one another, but that they were swollen in spirit — as later Achilles declares,
My heart with wrath does swell —
Nestor wished to humble them and, if possible, reduce their pride, just as persons reduce swellings by pricking or squeezing. This explains why he mentioned men of fame and power, and besides, I fancy, men of former times, knowing as he did that fame attaches rather to such men.
[8] εἰδὼς ἐκείνοις μᾶλλον συνεπομένην τὴν δόξαν. καὶ μέντοι γε οὐκ ἐπ̓ αὐτοῖς ἐποιήσατο τίνα γνώμην ἕξουσι περὶ τῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἀλλ̓ αὐτὸς ἀποφαίνεται ἄντικρυς ὡς πολὺ κρείττονας ἐκείνων ὄντας, εἰ δύναιντο ὀλίγον ὑφεῖναι τοῦ τύφου καὶ τῆς μανίας. ἆρα εἰκῇ δοκεῖ ὑμῖν Ὅμηρος περιθεῖναι τοὺς λόγους τούτους Νέστορι, ὅν φησι δεινότατον εἶναι ἀνθρώπων καὶ τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ τῶν λόγων προσεικάζει τῇ φύσει τοῦ μέλιτος, ὃ τοῖς μὲν ὑγιαίνουσιν ἥδιστον καὶ γλυκύτατον ἁπάντων, τοῖς δὲ νοσοῦσι καὶ πυρέττουσιν, ὥς φασιν, ἀηδέστατον καὶ τὰ ἡλκωμένα καὶ πεπονθότα καθαίρειν
[8] Moreover, he did not leave to his hearers to determine what opinion they should hold about the men, but instead he himself expressly declares that they were far superior to Agamemnon and Achilles, in the hope that they might abate somewhat their folly and madness.
Do you think, I ask you, that Homer put these words into Nestor’s mouth at random, the Nestor whom he declares to be most eloquent of men and whose power of eloquence he likens to the sweetness of honey, which is most pleasant and sweetest of all to those who are well, though to those who are ill and suffering from fever, so I hear, it is most unpleasant and has the natural power of cleansing and causing to smart parts which are festered and diseased?
[9] καὶ δάκνειν πέφυκεν. καὶ γὰρ ὁ τοῦ Νέστορος λόγος, τοῖς ἄλλοις γλυκὺς φαινόμενος, πικρὸς ἔδοξε τῷ Ἀχιλλεῖ καὶ τῷ Ἀγαμέμνονι, νοσοῦσι καὶ διεφθαρμένοις ὑπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς, ὥστε οὐκ ἐπείσθησαν αὐτῷ διὰ τὴν ἄνοιαν. οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ τοῦτο εἶπε μάτην Ὅμηρος, οὐδέ, ὥσπερ οἴονταί τινες, ἀπὸ τύχης. ἢ δοκεῖ ὑμῖν τὰ παιδία, ὧν νέμεται τὸ στόμα καὶ διεφθαρμένον ἐστὶν ὑπὸ ἑλκῶν, οὐκ ἀγανακτεῖν καὶ βοᾶν, μέλιτος γευόμενα; περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων ἐῶμεν.
[9] For instance, the speech of Nestor, though it appeared sweet to the others, seemed bitter to Achilles and Agamemnon, diseased as they were and corrupted by their rage, and as a result they did not obey him because of their folly. Therefore Homer did not say this at random either or, as some imagine, by chance.
[10] ἐκεῖνο δ̓ ἐνθυμηθῆναι ἄξιον ἀπὸ τῶν εἰρημένων, ἐάν τις ἀνθρώποις ὁμιλῶν διηγῆται πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι καὶ πρότερον ἄλλοις ὁμιλήσας πολὺ κρείττοσι, δήμοις ἢ βασιλεῦσιν ἢ τυράννοις, οὐκ ἀπέτυχεν αὐτῶν, ἀλλ̓ ἔσχεν ὑπακούοντας καὶ πειθομένους, εἰ δίκαιός ἐστιν ἀλαζὼν δοκεῖν, ὡς διὰ τοῦτο μεμνημένος ἐκείνων τῶν λόγων, ἵνα θαυμάζοιτο καὶ δοκοίη μακάριος, ἢ μᾶλλον ἵνα πειθομένους ἔχοι τοὺς ἀκούοντας, μιμούμενος τὴν τοῦ Νέστορος διδασκαλίαν.
[10] Well then, let us say no more on these topics. However, there is one matter which calls for consideration in the light of what has been said. Suppose that some one in addressing ordinary men tells them that on a previous occasion, having addressed others who were far superior — popular assemblies or kings or tyrants — he did not fail of his purpose with them but secured their attention and compliance, is it just that such a man should be thought a braggart, on the assumption that he had mentioned those words of his for the purpose of being admired and deemed a genius, or was it rather for the purpose of having the compliance of his hearers, imitating the teaching of Nestor?
[11] καὶ γὰρ ἄτοπον, εἰ Σωκράτης μὲν τοὺς ἐν Λυκείῳ ῥηθέντας λόγους ὀλίγον μεταβὰς ἀπήγγελλε τοῖς ἐν Ἀκαδημίᾳ, καὶ τοὺς ἐν [p. 129] Ἀκαδημίᾳ πάλιν εἰς τὸ Λύκειον ἐλθὼν οὐκ ὤκνει διαλέγεσθαι, καὶ τοσοῦτος ἤδη χρόνος ἐστὶν ἐξ οὗ τὰς αὐτὰς διδάσκουσι τραγῳδίας καὶ κωμῳδίας: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἄτοπον δόξομεν ποιεῖν, ἐπειδὴ βούλεσθε ἀκροᾶσθαι λόγων τινῶν, τοὺς ῥηθέντας πρὸς τὸν αὐτοκράτορα νῦν ἀπαγγέλλοντες, ὡς οὐ διαφέρον εἰδέναι πότερον ὠφέλιμοι καὶ χρήσιμοι καὶ ὑμῖν καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀνθρώποις ἅπασιν
[11] For indeed it is odd if, while Socrates was accustomed to walk but a short distance and then report to those in the Academy the w
ords he had spoken in the Lyceum and, vice versa, had no reluctance to go to the Lyceum and use the words he had spoken in the Academy, and while it has now been so long a time since they began to bring out the same tragedies and comedies year after year, we, on the other hand, shall be thought to be acting strangely in case, when you wish to listen to speeches, we now report the words we have spoken in the presence of the Emperor, as if it were a matter of no consequence to know whether those words are beneficial and serviceable, both for you and for the rest of mankind as well, or trivial and useless.
[12] ἐκεῖνοι ἢ φαῦλοι καὶ ἀνωφελεῖς. εὖ γὰρ ἴστε ὅτι τοῖς μὲν ἰδιώταις οἱ λεγόμενοι λόγοι πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐκείνους τείνουσι καὶ ὀλίγους τῶν ἄλλων: οἱ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς βασιλέας ταῖς δημοσίαις ἐοίκασιν εὐχαῖς ἢ κατάραις. ὅθεν ἐγὼ τὸν Πέρσην οὔτε τἄλλα νομίζω φρόνιμον οὔτε ὅτι τοὺς τυχόντας ἀνθρώπους πανταχῇ διέπεμπεν, ὦτα βασιλέως καλουμένους, καὶ πάντα ἐκείνοις ἀκούειν ἐπέτρεπε, δέον φυλάττεσθαι τὰ βασιλέως ὦτα πολὺ μᾶλλον τῆς χρυσῆς πλατάνου, μή τι δυσχερὲς ἀκούσῃ καὶ βλαβερόν.
[12] For rest assured that, while words addressed to private persons pertain to those men themselves and to few others, words addressed to kings are like public prayers or imprecations. For that reason I believe the Persian king was especially unwise in being accustomed to dispatch in all directions ordinary persons, King’s Ears as they were called, and to entrust them with the responsibility of listening to everything, it being necessary to protect the real ears of the king much more carefully than the golden plane-tree, to prevent their hearing anything disagreeable and harmful.
Delphi Complete Works of Dio Chrysostom Page 338
