THE

ORDER

READING

OF PLATO'S
H.

William

J. WEi.VF.

years

in this

ago

"a methodological

F. Altman

Poster

Carol

journal,

to Platonic

prolegomenon

DIALOGUES

(1998:

as part

282-283),
classified

hermeneutics,"

of

four ways

of ordering the Platonic dialogues, one of them designated "(3) pedagogical order"
and

as "the

defined

my purpose
to her
and

order

in which

we

to offer a twenty-first

"(1)

century

Platonic

twentieth-century

the

dominant

of Poster's

dramatic

"(2)

be

viewed

the

intellectual

and

chronology"

through
history

the

lens

of

the

"(4)

with

respect

of nineteenth

1991)of

theoretical

"the

reading

order"

or metaphysical

considerations.

seven

It is

dialogues."

in which the indispensable role

of pedagogical
ROPD,

the

paradigm

(Howland

scholarship

order of Plato's dialogues" (hereafter "ROPD")

will

or teach

reconstructionagnostic

of composition,"

chronology

read

should

After

of

principles

this

reviewing

reconstruction

project will be introduced (section i); four of thesebeginning with Charles H.

Kahn's notion of "proleptic" composition (Kahn 1981a, 1988, and 1996)will
be elucidated in connection with "the City of Good Men Only" in Republic
1 (section

ii).

1996:

(Kahn

Symposium.
intended
Lysis

to follow

student/reader

has

Given

oiksov).
a detailed
Aspasia's
the

Our

intentionally

oration

the pedagogical
to Menexenus,

of the ROPD

edition
to

his

between

relationship

will

make

of Symposium,

aspect

political

the

case

Lysis

that

Plato

history,

section

in Menexenus
on which

principles
Symposium,

and

by contrast,
iv

precedes

will

section

(to

requires
show

that

Symposium

the reconstruction

Lysis,

the

v will

in

is based
present

as a whole.

I.

interest

the tragic

of Athenian

applied

hi

in the ROPD
in order to test whether
Symposium
Diotima's
of what
assimilated
is one's
own
conception

anachronistic

been

synopsis

section

258-291),

that grasping

Once

of the

conception

knowledge

ROPD.

have

Kahn's

Modifying

and

of Plato
students,

RECONSTRUCTING
is
for

inseparable
the

THE

from

ROPD;

the

Charles

ROPD
search,

once

Dunn's

studies

of considerable
of Thrasyllus

(1974: 1976; see also Tarrant 1993) show that the nine "tetralogies" (thirty-five
dialogues

and

the

Letters

arranged

in sets

of four)

constituted

his version

of the

To my wonderful teachers at the University of Toronto,

George Edison (in memoriam) and Graeme
Nicholson (Trinity College), Wallace McLeod
and Denys de Montmollin
I
(Victoria College),
respectfully dedicate this study. Victoria Wohl, Carol Poster, and an anonymous reader for Phoenix
have provided invaluable criticism and support; thanks are also due to Roslyn Weiss, James Wood, Luc
Brisson, and Melissa Lane from whose comments this paper has benefited. Naturally all remaining
errors and infelicities are entirely my own responsibility. As revised for
publication, this paper was
submitted to Phoenix in its present form on June 6, 2008.

Phoenix,

Vol.

64 (2010) 1-2.

THE READING
ROPD.

It is instructive

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

that the Neo-Platonist

DIALOGUES

Albinus

takes

19
to task for

Thrasyllus

the opening Euthyphro,Apology, Crito, and Phaedo quartet (Snyder 2000: 98-99);
a long

tradition

of ancient

Mansfeld 1994:

order"

metaphysical

to determine

attempts

64, n. Ill)

the

ROPD

in sharp

distinction

to the "dramatic

chronology"

Thrasyllus, albeit to a limited extent (Mansfeld 1994: 67-68).

these

two

This

can

schools

of thought

be illustrated

1969;

(Festugire

was guided by what Poster calls "theoretical and

privileged

with

order"

"pedagogical

reference

to Alcibiades

that

in the sense
both

Major,

guides

But neither of
I propose.

camps

it as

accept

genuine (Snyder 2000: 97) but those who place it firstin the ROPDthe camp
hostile to the First Tetralogy of Thrasyllusdid so for theoretical/metaphysical
reasons,

not

nothing

about

reads

ones.

pedagogical
the

fact

the

"Socrates,"

that

Proclus

student

and

needs

scarcely

1965:

(O'Neill

its childlike

for example*

1-4),

natural

the

simplicityif

a scriptmakes

Alcibiades

says

teacher
the

Major

ideal place to begin guiding the neophyte.1 The first principle of the ROPD
here

proposed

the

roughly,

is that
more

by easier

provided
This

ROPD

and

most

because

contempt
of "dramatic

advantages
tells

ones

a compelling

for Thrasyllus,

who

for the

the

of his loyalty

he failed

to interpolate

with

ably

they

ending

to "dramatic
Sophist

and

and

new:

were

past

it accom

ignored

Precisely

guided

the

of dialogues
about

very

preparation

in antiquity.

the

a cycle

a happy

old

employed

historical,

the

to the ROPD).

respect

in

to speak

after

only

both

ROPD

whereas

with

stoiy

not

merely

chronology,"

read

is therefore

means

sought

to be

earlier

(i.e.,

the limits

by the fact that

are

project
with

objective

of those

Neo-Platonic

Phaedo

earlier

considerations:

by pedagogical

dialogues

reconstruction

an ancient

plishes

it is guided

difficult

pedagogical

Statesman

in

culminating

a remarkable
can

chronology"

by

hero.

As

be illustrated

between

Euthyphro

and Apology in his First Tetralogy. Had he done so, he would have had, no sound
second

good

for confronting

reason

pedagogical

dialogue.
ending

In short,

placing

neophytes

for the story of Socrates

but

with

the

difficult

last in the ROPD

the Phaedo
also

ensures

that

Sophist

not only

complex

as their
a

provides

dialogues

like

it is certainly
are read near the end of it. And
and Statesman
Sophist,
the priority of the elementary
for effective pedagogy
that explains
concern

Theaetetus,
Plato's

Alcibiades Major.
It is probably
disappear

as soon

no

accident

that

as the Alcibiades

a concern
Majorwas

for reconstructing
dropped

the

from the canon.2

ROPD
Freed

would
at last

Heidel 1896: 62: "Furthermore, in its character as a primer of Platonism in regards to ethics and
than can be found in
politics, Alcibiades I contains a greater number of distinctively Platonic thoughts
In
the
this
works
of
Plato.
of
even
the
number
dialogue
may be pronounced
respect
greater single
any
too Platonic." Compare Guthrie 1969: 470: "a dialogue which, whether or not Plato wrote it, was

for beginners'."
apdy described by Burnet as 'designed as a sort of introduction to Socratic philosophy
2
and the
Conversely, it is renewed interest in the Alcibiades Major (Scott 2000; Denyer 2001)
other anathetized dialogues (Pangle 1987) that has finally made it possible to renew the ROPD
all thirtyrfive dialogues widely available in
question. Cooper and Hutchinson (1997) not only makes
observation
but
also
contains
the
(x):
"Thrasyllus' order appears to be determined by
following
English

PHOENIX

20
from the metaphysical
Alcibiades

regarding
Platonic

dialogue

considerable

ofNeo-Platonism,

baggage

as a wonderful

Major
now

(but

way

the modern

confronts

immediately

apparently

any pedagogical
obj ection

to a

that it, along

of dialogues,

number

shrinking)

for

justification

the student/reader

to introduce

with

is not by Plato.

The growing interest in Cleitophon is a case in point,3 especially because it affords

an instance

where

Cleitophon

appears

my ROPD

in isolation,

viewed
(Kremer

coincides

it can
But

2004).

be

with
and

to be incomplete
used

that

it is of great

alternative

too

Thrasyllus
here
be

is that

must

none

considered

have

The

recognized.

of the

inauthentic

second

a priori;

proposed
are

by Thrasyllus

criterion

for

as

179), as

of the ROPD

principle

a new

indeed,

considered

Souilh 1949:

transmitted

dialogues

thirty-five

but

to Platonism

when

importance

pedagogical

an authentic introduction to Republic (cf. Bowe 2004;

alone,

as authentic

Considered

a radical

to promote

Considered

of Thrasyllus.

inauthentic.

to
is

authenticity

being employed: a dialogue is authentic when it is snugly joinedby dramatic,

and/or

pedagogical,

the one

dialogues,
The

third

from
2008:

the

. our

the Alcibiades

that

(.Prot.

need

dramatic

detail

see

the Lysis

not

with

be

ROPD

the

difficult

be

observed

never

there

Lysis

after

indeed
In

are

2001:

be

Alcibiades

But

122).

here.

to "dramatic

For

dramatic
much

neither

example,

case
that

just

theoretical,
as

there

considerations

is the
Socrates

"dramatic"
leaves

are

and

place

connection
Agathon's

dramatic

crudely

of dramatic

clue

that guides

my reconstruction

his

cost)

by Protagoras

connections

between
of

conception
takes
has

considerations
theoretical,
before

chronological:

for the

Lyceum

and that the Lysis finds him en route thither (Ly. 203al)
kind

1.103a4).4

(to

broader

Menexenus

house

Protagoras

(Ale.

used

are

place

grown

up

But as section m will make

pedagogical,

that

in

Menexenus

chronology";

precedes
both

although

the Menexenus

example,

more

trump

evades

l.lllal-3)

chronological;

employed

pedagogical,

chronological

that

befuddled

Denyer

detached

thus

Protagoras

otherwise

respect

Symposium,

therefore

to Alcibiades

trick (Ale.

other

(Griswold

significance
and

since his schooldays with Lysis (Nails 2002: 319).

clear,

been

speaks
their first actual conversation

always

will

Socrates

of a sophisticated

327e3-328al;

two

it in the ROPD.

represents

the

trap by means

dialogues
after

Major

the

It will

Major.

follows

philosophical

to

guide

that

considerationshaving

their

of conflict:

of Callias,

conversation,

Socratic

best

Alcibiades

in the house

present

dramatic

in cases

principles

the one

about

preconceptions

introductory

while
In

is that

205-207)are

speculative

and

precedes

principle

various

considerationsbetween

theoretical/metaphysical
that

that

place

dramatic,

and

it (section

iv).

the
(Symp.

fact,

for

223dl0)

is paradigmatic of the

of the ROPD.

no single criterion but by several sometimes conflicting ones, though his arrangement
may represent
some more or less unified idea about the order in which the dialogues should be read and
taught."
3Grote 1865; Grube 1931; Souilh 1949; Orwin 1982; Pangle 1987; Slings 1999; Rowe 2000;

Bailly 2003; and Kremer 2004.

4
All references are to the text of Burnet (1900-1907).

THE READING
With

a title suggesting

ORDER

a beginning

{Prot. 310a8; cf. Phd. 118e7-8),

and

a very vivid
but

student

one:

would

OF PLATO'S
a dramatic

and

that wakes

setting

to life the

even

the

historical

context

about

brightest

for even

a wide

Plato

employs

in an ultimately
for the

student

student

who

"proleptic"

to be

comes

he begins

composition:

manner,

salutary

confused

about

i.e.,

To

about.

to Republic

with

that

the

most

burning
justice

The

discovered

in Book

(Clit.

question

will

408d7-e2)

discovered

only

4 as her

search

make

important

for an

her

dullest

student

it is pedagogically

in mindwhere

Protagoras

the

by confusing

things
give

the

proposed here is

the
be the

may

be as justly critical
to Cleitophon's

answer

to the

receptive

useful

example:

piety

fifthvirtue and virtue may have no parts (Prot. 349bl-3)will

of the justice

the dawn

of important

variety

subjects (Guthrie 1975: 235). A fourth principle of the ROPD

that

21

the Protagoras is both a very difficult dialogue

it brings

confuse

DIALOGUES

subterranean

to the Cave.

by returning

fifth principle is the absolute centrality of Republic in the ROPD.5

less

-Although

to those

accessible

who

have

not

recently

the

completed

series

of

dialogues beginning with Protagoras and ending with Cleitophon (Rep. 520b6-7),
7

Republic

contains

to Cleitophon's
pedagogical
intended

essence

of Platonism:

Plato

to transmit

here

is understood

a schoolthe

teaching

is

teaching

as first and

his

answer

a teacher,

The

dialectic

the

(1)

through

foremost

as a teaching.

well

Academyas

that

Plato's

In accordance with the principle of

question (Rep. 520cl).

priority,

with

teacher

the

are

dialogues

represented

in the

dialogues, (2) dialectic between students about the dialogues, and (3)this point
dialogues

when

centrality

of (4)

three

the

the decisive

ROPDthe

importantly,

Plato

and

between

the reader

the

reveals

"(3)"

the

in Republic

7.

that there
on the recognition
depends
the
the
that
dialogues
dialogue:
Republic,
it in the ROPD.
that follow
the dialogues

therefore

pedagogy
classes
of Platonic

distinct

Most

between

dialogue

dialectic

inter-dialogue

order.

proper

Plato's

the way

prepare

in

read

Understanding
are

the

to reconstructing

is crucial

and

for the Republic,

The basic principle underlying this classification will be illustrated here in

the

context

the

other

accordance

that

dialogues
with

the

the

"visionary."

reconstructed

is in

any

case

It
ROPD

that

closer

comes

Republic
of the visual

than

to Republic

in my reconstruction

precede

importance

dialogues (Kahn [1996:

called

a dialogue

of Symposium,

that

revelation

of the
is the

any

ROPD.
Idea,

of
In

these

42 and 274] justly adds the later Phaedo) will here be

will

likewise

will

a philosopher,

an

seen

that

the

what

used

to be

be

resemble

idealist,

and

who

Plato

a teacher:

alive, taught others to philosophize and whoespecially

called

emerges

"a Platonist."

a teacher

who,

from
He
while

when the unity of his

Cf. Annas 1999: 95: "If we try to jettison the assumptions that the Republic is a contribution to
and central of the dialogues, the natural
political theory, and that it is obviously the most important
culmination of a development from the Socratic dialogues, and if we try to restore it to its ancient

an argument about the sufficiency of virtue

placeone dialogue among many in which Plato develops
for happinesswe shall have done a great deal to restore balance and proportion to "ourstudy of Plato's
thought."

PHOENIX

22
and

diverse

richly

dialectical

curriculum6

to do just

is recognizedcontinues

that

through his writings. At the heart of his thought is "the Idea of the Good"
and, in its light, the true philosopher's just (and therefore voluntary; see Cic.
return

Off. 1.28)

to the

Cave.

He

is not

Plato"

a "post-Modern

1996:

(Zuckert

48-56; cf. Strauss 1946: 361), his Socrates does not know (Ap. 21d7) that he
knows nothing (Strauss 1953: 32 and 1983: 42), and his use of the dialogue form
does

not

the

preclude

he

fact that

has

a teaching

1987:

(Strauss

followed

33

by

Frede 1992). Although each dialogue is a beautiful work of art, the principle that
each

must

dialogue

without

be understood

reference

to any otherthe

principle

of hermeneutic isolationism (e.g., Press 1993: 109-111)is

antithetical to the
project undertaken here (see Ferrari 2003: 244). It may be useful to explicitly
the

identify

view

that

Plato

has

a visionary

and

teaching

that

he

it in

expressed

his dialogues as a sixth principle.

The seventh (and final) principle is somewhat more difficult to elucidate.
To begin with, it identifies "testing" as a crucial element of Platonic pedagogy.
For

reasons

based

to be
the

on

that

points

explained

in section

word

for "touchstone,"

Greek

need

to be

made

right

I will

ii,

use

the

about

away

"the

"basanistic,"

neologism

as a technical

term.

basanistic

There

are

element

three

in Plato's

dialogues": (1) Along withproleptic and visionary (with which it forms a triad), the
basanistic

element

springboards

is best

understood

(Rep.

as one

of three

hermeneutic

towards

511b6)

theoretical

clarity

rather

and

hypothetical

than

as a rigid

and

exclusive technical term. (2) Although there is a meaningful sense in which a

given

or even

The

basanistic

which
deploys

in a single

student

the basanistic

grasped

his

called

the mind

something

even

learns

student

than

from

for a triple

teaching,

of the

greater

a springboard

actually
element

that can

will

(as

what

(b)
(Rep.

or basanistic,

visionary,

elements

passage

is like

visionary

text into

proleptic,

as inter-related

element

a good

be

crudely

of this triad

dialogue,

has

can

dialogue

to think

be

also

demonstrated

in another
taking
purpose:

to cause

the teacher

has

sense,

in a single

in section
the

same

a well-constructed
(a)
that
and

435al-2),

it is better

be deployed

to ensure
teaching
(c)

already

test.

that

(3)
in

Plato

the student

to leap

to point

n).
sense

from

the student

the
to

taught.7

6Cic. Or. 12 (translation mine): "Of course I'm also aware that I often seem to be saying
original
things when I'm saying very ancient ones (albeit having been unheard by most) and I confess myself
to stand out as an oratorif that's what I am, or in any case, whatever else it is that I am [au/
etiam quicumque sim]not from the ministrations of the rhetoricians but from the
open spaces of the
For such is the curricula of many-leveled and conflicting dialogues [curricula
multiplicium
variorumque sermonum\ in which the tracks of Plato have been principally impressed." For translating
sermones as "dialogues," see Fantham 2004: SO, n. 2.
7
A crucial instance of the basanistic is Socrates' insistence at Phdr. 275d4-e5
on the mute

Academy.

incapacity of a written text to create dialectic with the student/reader (compare Sayre 1995: xvi):
readers of Republic 7 who recognize themselves as the "you" Plato has addressed at
Rep. 520b5 know
this to be untrue. The Tubingen schoolfrom Kramer 1959: 393 to Reale 1990takes the Phaedrus
passage literally. A reductio ad absurdum on this approach is Szlezk 1999: 46 where the dialogues
become "a witty game which gave him [it. Plato] great pleasure." Although it owes
nothing to the

THE READING
The

seven

foregoing

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

hereafter

principles,

to be

DIALOGUES
cited

23

by numbers

"1"), may be usefully simplified as follows:

alone

3.

Effectiveness:
Pedagogical
elementary dialogues
precede complex ones.
New Criterion of Authenticity:
each dialogue
snug between two others.
often but not always chronological.
Connections;
Primacy of Dramatic

4.

Proleptic

5.

Centrality

6.

Visionary Teaching:
"Basanistic"
Testing:

1.
2.

7.

Composition:
of Republic,

students

confusing

first in a pedagogically
useful way.
prepared (4) for the Good and justice.
(5) as teacher and "Platonist."

having been
Plato revealed
students

(e.g.,

must reject falsehoods

on the basis

of 6.

The interplay of 4, 6, and 7 will now be illustrated in the context of Republic

1 (5).

II.
Socrates
response
men

the

introduces
to Glaucon's

brother

as failing

to take

as Cicero

THE

of

City

OF GOOD
Good

first interruption

to grasp

what

up the burden

and

CITY

Cicero's

Men

office,
did.8

Demosthenes

ONLY
(hereafter

Only

in

"CGMO")

Plato
his elder
347a7):
represents
{Rep.
meant
that impels
by the penalty
good

Socrates

of political

MEN

i.e.,

That

to go back

down

into

is, of course,

penalty

the Cave

to be ruled

by worse men (Rep. 347c3-5).

For we may venture to say that, if there should be a city of good men only, immunity from
would be as eagerly contended
for as office is now, and there it would be
office-holding
but
made plain that in very truth the true ruler does not naturally seek his own advantage
that of the ruled; so that every man of understanding
[rc yiyvccjKcov] would rather
choose

to be benefited

by another

than to be bothered

with benefiting

him.

(Rep. 347d2-8; Shorey)

The

political

of Republic

message

is that unless

those

ruling

our cities

would

rather

be philosophizing, those cities will be badly ruled (Rep. 520e4521a2). Moreover,

the iv(or)y tower philosophers (Rep. 473d3-5) who refuse to participate in politics
(Rep.

even

592a5)

(Rep. 557e2-3)
592b23),
the edge
prized

though

when

particularly
of tyranny

because

better

qualified

than

those

who

are presently

doing

so

are not living in accordance with the Platonic paradigm (Rep.

and

it leaves

their

tragedy.
the

own

For

philosopher

earthly

city is a democracy

true philosophers,
free to consider

"not
that

to rule"
thing

teetering

on

is doubtless
alone

which

is nevertheless analogous to "the unwritten

testimony of Aristotle (see Cherniss 1945), the ROPD
doctrines" of the Tubingen school; the former could easily take the place of the latter in the diagram
at Gaiser 1963: 6. Both approaches restore Platonism to Plato while denying that the dialogues
constitute "a journey of thought with no end" (Szlezk 1999: 116). But in the case of the ROPD,
Plato's teaching is to be sought by the student/reader within the dialogues, Republic in particular
with Rep. 434e4-435a2)
although the moment of unwritten illumination
(compare Ep. 7.341c4-d2
takes place only within the student.
8
On Demosthenes
as Plato's student, see Douglas
"
scholars as it is asserted by ancient sources....

1966: 100: "as consistendy denied by modern

PHOENIX

24
is truly good

the

(i.e.,

of the

Idea

Good):

on

rulers,

good

the

other

must

hand,

attend precisely to the indefinite plurality of things that are badly managed in
order to govern well {Rep. 520c36). Despite being by nature suited for something
different,

entirely
whose

unitary

then,

only

true philosophers

is to see things

goal

well

could

yet become

managed

of rulers

the kind

for the benefit

of those

they rule.

In short, only a philosopher, having no interest in making money, being honored,

or exercising
consists

is, "in

power

only of the good,

is that

however,

the penalty

city as it does

in ours.

no one

rule

would

When

Mem.
care

of an

the

enough

contradicts
nature

revolved

to watch
around

the

point

important

of all ethical

forces

students

more
this

this

illiberal
basanistic

portion
deniedis

of view.9

In

advantage."

Greek

the self-interested
context,

ancient

truthsi.e.,

that

altruism

it for themselves

as basanistic
This

affirmation

of selfishness

paradigmatic

is,

moreover,
occurs

the willingness
case.

To

begin

pedagogy

denying
selfishness

Fin.

only

the

in defense
first of three

in Republic.10
of a good
man
with,

the

The

2.118).

But

has

not

round

yiyvcoaKcov

is good
literalism

also

originally

or modern,
and

or

It

brought

of 7t

no

young

ruler

be

take

certainly

Major.
true

could

position

(cf. Cic.

is a slavish

selfishness.

of the CGMOwhere
the

that

"the

be

Xen.

(cf.

students

of Alcibiades

to

would

and

parent,

Platonic

a freeborn

rather

parent

to teach

said:

just

any

to discover
passage

own

clarity

has

so.

another"

no

that

provocatively),

benefiting

time

point,

in such

exist

choose

where
dying

the

crystal

that

possibility

their

take

himself

for his

with

CGMO

crucial

not

to do

would

universe

nurse

the

be willing

the

The

does

Socrates

know

bothered

would

require

to recognize

the

in

men

(claims

one

would

or honor.

money

would

because

Precisely

by worse

no one

be

Socrates

out

ruled

a moral

genius
to

is a slavish

to reading

than

child

what

518c89)

{Rep.

no

wealthy

slow-witted

"every

else

ruler."

covets

therefore

is describing

infant,

independently

flatly

says:

he

2.10.3),

of being

It follows,

by someone

true

of them

in the CGMO:

Socrates

benefited

the

reality,

none

the

alternative
of an

even

times

that

the

to rule

most
bad

basanistic
is explicitly

contradictionbased

on

9Thrasymachus
(Rep. 344c5-6;
Shorey) claims that "injustice on a sufficiently large scale is a
stronger, freer [eX-euGspicoxepov], and more masterful thing than justice." Socrates aims to reverse this
judgment in accordance with noblesse oblige and he therefore depends on his audience's abhorrence
of acting the part of a slave.
comparing 485el and 486c3;
The process actually
482d8).
8A.eu08pO7cp87i8; Alcibiades is

Callicles' conception of to 0U,07tp87ie(G. 485b7) is indicated by

Socrates reverses this formula beginning at 518a2 (already implied at

wickedness is 00,07ip87i while virtue is

begins at Ale. 1.134c4-6:
in a slavish position (134cl0-ll)
from the start.
Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics 4.1 (1120a21-23):
"And of all virtuous people the liberal

Compare
[ol 8,8u0pioi] are perhaps the most beloved, because they are beneficial [d)(j),i|j.oi] to others; and
they are so in that they give [v xfl aei]." By definition the liberal (ol ,eu0pioi) are not slavish,
i.e., selfish. See also 1120al315 and 1120a2325.

All involve the distinction between active and passive

10Rep. 347d6-8, 489b6-c3, and 599b6-7.
verb forms in the context of altruism and selfishness. In the second, not even the Book 1
penalty
In the third,
impels the stargazing philosopher to struggle for the helm (this explains Rep. 498c9-dl).
Plato's Socrates would only be correct if there were no Plato's Socrates. See Altman 2009: 89-98.

THE READING
the

difference

between

ORDER

active

and

OF PLATO'S
verb

passive

DIALOGUES

formsis

25

clearer

in the

original

(347d4-8):
xqj vxi riSiv
(j.svcp- raaxs
wijieXv

Tipay^axa

true ruler

The

ruling,

but

rather

than

therefore
ruler

yiyvcnaKtov

to benefit
the

/.r|0ivo

here

in the context

of the ROPD

doneand

benefited

than

In

the

to benefit

the

t a^Xov

is particularly

it is

case,

Socrates

had

abyss

dividing

the

Eivai

too

to rule.

(ax|)sA,sta0ai)

The

not

other

to be so guided.

is

true

hand,

it is

Although

the

turns

who

to Republic

to interruptas

prepared

of the knowing

ruler
the

(ttcc yiyvoocnccov)
the

the student

well

true

Unlike

On

cu|i(j>pov).

when

(xoj .pxop.v<p)

benefited

man

who

Glaucon

would

rather

be

others.

student

one.

not

invisible,

decision

be

of understanding.

true ruler

is scarcely

the

reject

present

on

x x$ pxo

orc' XXov

of understanding

auxcp

of the

(tie^uke)

involved

has just

(to

advantage

the nature

man

the man

dp'/ojv),

own

to

deciding

of the

opposite

of the ruled

prefers

when

(dx|>Xcov)

contradiction

counts

XX

D-oixo

|aM.ov

the advantage

of understanding

man

every

by his

precisely

considers

(ap%cov)

(t<m ovti

aKoneaGai

.ouji(|)pov

xo cb<|>e^ea0ai

e'xeiv.

precisely

is guided

o 7t(|>OK x aoxqj

apxcov

7t v

that

Gorgias
an

presented
active

and

5iKiCT0ai

even

the
the

more

an

"committing

teacher"

in

an

of the

x iKEv

is more

1928)

unforgettable

variant

Gorgias:

injustice

Stenzel

(cf.
is

passage

controversial

forms

verb

passive

(i.e.,

"Plato

indeed

remembering;

ethical
acrxiov
than

disgraceful

suffering it," G. 482d8; translation mine). Anyone selfish enough to uniformly

auxo)

But

not entail

does

Gorgias
The

there

words,
a return

who

would

common

than

Socrates

can

is not

think

being

to

oj(|)E/.EK70ai:

auxw

of to

twice

willing
as

he

who

to someone

unethical

in preference
others.

he

but

it's hardly

contrary

to one's

ROPD),

it makes

sense

own

in

others

without

than

avoiding

rather
In

else.

is bad
this

do

then,

practice,
it is much

for the

in the

to be benefited.

less

matter.

it is another

ciikev

advantage

extremely

8iKa0cu

in theory to show
to di)<j>Xcov. In other

in theory,
to

cannot

simply

to

to performing

But
that

Gorgias,

in

argument

the CGMO.

to benefit

an injustice

suffering

to benefit

ou|a(^pov)

the

difficult

oj<t>/.<T0ca

are willing

than

aa/iov

is therefore

pairs

by to

exclusively

to be

to undergo

it is more

to prefer

about

in

is guided
ciSikelv

in practice

SiKEv,

injustice
does

to

active/passive

people

something

to undergo

show,

evil

generous

by doing

willingness

two

difficult

shameful")

("more

are many

it altogether

(i.e.,

the greater

to avoid

it is acrxiov

why

the opposite
the

who

man

consider

of logical
argumentation,
of what Socrates
says about

as a matter

it is more

although

to

unlikely

between

relationship

interesting:
order

strictly

the

(i.e.,

(cfiEcov

is most

au(i(|)pov)

iKEiaOm.

the

to

o)(|>/a:a0ca

prefer

case
Nor

soul
of to
can

he, in conformitywith the censorship imposed upon him by Plato's brothers {Rep.
358b6-7 and 366e6), invoke the Afterlife. In other words (and strictly in the
context
is easier

of the
(albeit

only

theoretically)

and

that

the

therefore

active/passive
earlier

than

paradox

in Gorgias

its counterpart

in

PHOENIX

26

Republic (1) even if it is more striking, paradoxical, and far more difficult in
But

practice.
will

object

from

what

first to last

endures

student

any

to

being

(to

the

student/reader
yiyvcocmov

is

recall

to reject

now

time

and

of the

to

(o

who

so

Plato
the

much

slavish

excellence

And

literalism

willingly

(or

slavish

provoking)11

self-interest

this would

of

simultaneously

to a merely

appropriate

the

another

as Glaucon

exactly

Gorgias:
as the

logic

who

deserves

is challenging

au|i(|)pov.

Gorgias
Socrates

Therefore

at 347a6

remembers

now

of

story

excellence.

par

of Glaucon

so

the

cbcfm/aov) par
likewise

autrp

that

to be

are

[I]

which

about

if they

as

microcosm

the

reader

of

mute

the

in section

proleptically

(or, in the present

to confuse

designed

clauses

CGMO

Presented

dialogues

matters

confused

the first of three

the

elements.

are proleptic

concerning

is perfectly

elucidate

basanistic

of a dialogue)
student

not

by to

indeed

Republic,

in

by Socrates

persuaded

and

text.

that there

paradox

been

SiKeaQcu),

before,

guided

a rejection

unresponsive
It

in

student/reader

a moment

rax

visionary,

truly

fictionalinterruption

just

constitute

has
hears

the benefactor

wronged

the extra-textual

interrupted

now

concerns

intra-textuali.e.,
from

who

she

case,

proleptic

in a salutary

it is pedagogically

are

to be

prepared

for what

in the

single

sentence

that

proleptic,

i, it is well

way

through
for

necessary
is to come

describes

to

portions
the
It is

(4).

the CGMO

that

proleptic:

that a city of good men came into being, not to rule would be as
[I] Were it to happen
prized as ruling is today, [II] and there it would become
crystal clear that, in reality, the
true ruler has not the nature to watch out for his own advantage
but that of the ruled; [III]
for every one in the know would choose rather to be benefited by someone
else than be
bothered
[I]
think
from

with benefiting
is paradoxical

on

is true,

as we

that

perspective
tells

Plato

us

uses

curiosity
will

guided

the philosopher's

here

Cave).

Plato

nothing
prolepsis

about

someday

to the

what

XrjGiv

the ruled ...

levels:

is "prized

perspectiveunique
will eventually
want
about,

not

(Kahn

1993:

And

it is precisely

become
hasn't

even

will

help

apxcov]

it explicitly

(1)

are by what

the view

and there it would

[II]

two

us to take

section [II]:
vtt

another.

our

that

be like
stand

us to choose
it is the

from

(at least

the view

from

what
and

today"

for prizing

and

138)

contradicts
...

to

awaken

moment

the mountain

but

that

he

of a philosopher.
the

the mountaintops
for the

of us

not to rulea

for ourselves

perspective

paradox

(2)

the chance

most

it is written

upon
before
that

student's
which

he

returning

is presented

in

that, in reality, the true ruler [x(p

crystal clear [Kata(|)av]
the nature to watch out for his own
but that of
advantage

This clause is a microcosm of the [II] visionary dialogues (or, in the case of
Republic, the vision-producing portions of a single dialogue). Everything here
11

See Miller 1985 for a path-breaking willingness to see Plato as.

directly engaging the reader.

THE READING
is pure

Platonism

possesses

the

has

(i.e.,
with

respect

the

which

is to actualize

is, in short,

clear

a crystal

this
do

statement

nor

paradox

Socrates
son

the

i.e.,

ruler

knows

true

("the

in both

for us:

true

Plato

oblige.

in Aristocles

conception

ruler

of Ariston,
of Plato

purpose

at the same

and,

in

and

in his readers/students.

potentiality

of altruism

The

ap/cov

realized

same

27

test.

noblesse

/.r]0iv

been

the

natural

DIALOGUES

from

vti

has

is")

now

this

is neither

of toj

truly

Plato

OF PLATO'S

is inseparable

quickened

the re-made

teacher

that

possibility

as Socrates

Just
will

the

to that

there

here,

nature

that

seen)

himself.
so too

(6):

noble

ORDER

"[II]"

the essence

time,

of Platonic justice (5). Plato does all this for our benefit, which is not to say that
it is not

for him

beneficial
is the least

teaching

the teacher

who

to undergo

to

to do

highly

knows

so

paid

most

as a matter

<b<|)eA,ict0cci

It has

as well.

but

rewarding

when

well

and

truly said

But

profession.
former

the

being

is chosen

in perfect

for the latter.

contempt
But

Plato

the

teacher

was

not

with

content

beautiful

expressing

thoughts

beautifully and that is why he also employs the basanistic element [III]:
choose

for every one in the know [r ... yiyvcCTKWv] would

someone
else than be bothered with benefiting another.
by
[III]

of the

opposite

the

challenges
kinds

reader

after he had

this

lesson

the

with

him

about

the

lead

to the

rhetorical

even

He

can

an

having

truths

use

into

In short,

Socrates

figure

authority

is the principal

way

of the

firm possession

student

who

to make

not

Plato
the
at

inclined,

teacher

every

enthusiastically

(to say nothing

is testing

learns
agreed

tests

Plato

truth.

As

of less

his

a rule

tests his

Plato

shows,

attractive

interlocutors)

that is false

for a pedagogical

purpose

an essential

part of Platonic

pedagogy

or merely

half-truths,

falsehoods,

present

clause

as this third

something

accepting

In fact, not only

2000).

(Beversluis

praise

even

the

basis,
was

(because

experience

that

teacher

states

words,

really

to its implications.

to trick the reader

the

their

here

other

A student
the point.
or necessarily
gotten
in the
for its logical
or
the Socratic
position
Gorgias
lack of
hereher
a failure to interrupt
but revealby
had

excellences

commitment
students.

teaching

Socrates
In

(7).
on

Plato

truth.

rather to be benefited

section,

student

questionsand,

to think

way),

everything

for example,

could,

some

in the visionary

to test the

to raise

gained

hard

said

in order

truth

of decisionthat

least

but

he has just

what

By contradicting
the

that

it is not only

to be cocj)e/.ojv is simultaneously

of fact that

precisely

been

students/readers,

i.e.,

to think

it is prudent

of thumb,

partial

in them

begets

of the

like Timaeus, Critias,

dialogues in which "one in the know" takes the leadmen
the Eleatic

Parmenides,
But

there

teaches

both

the
but

of "test"

hardly

as an
element,

to know

to be

and

student

notion

basanistic
come

is far more

too

end

about
In

teacher.

he was

themselves

said

To

literally.

in itself.
able

his Athenian

and

Stranger,

By

other
be

testing

to create

in battle

this

with

sure

counterpartas

basanistic

words,

there

Plato

wanted

as well

errors

the

to test
them

pedagogy:

to which

Plato

ideal

test

in taking

is a danger

as teaching

a truly dialectical
the

element:

basanistic.

his

students,

through

the

his students
deliberately

28

PHOENIX
them.

exposes

When

not only

they

students

are proved

the

reject
but

worthy

also

of "the

selfishness
confirm

within

man

in the

know,"

themselves

(Frede

1992:

219) the inborn insights of which Plato's maieutic pedagogy is intended to deliver
them.
All
most
the

of these

considerations

Platonic
term

words

in his

are built

for "test"

into

are derived
on

commentary

the

the word

from

it is "the

280):

with,

begin

R. Dodds

E.

paavo.12
(1959:

Gorgias

To

"basanistic."

explains
touchstone

(Au(a /aOo), a kind of black quartz jasper ... used for assaying samples of gold
them

by rubbing

the

against

touchstone

and

the

comparing

streaks

they

left on

it." The passage from which the use of "basanistic" is derived is Gorgias 486d2-7,
partly

because

Plato

to be

mine):

what
saying

"I know

Socrates

says to Callicles
to his

implicitly

well

that

should

students

afterwards

(G.

throughout
with

you agree

is exactly

me

what

I conceive
translation

486e5-6;

the things

concerning

this soul

of mine [r| sjifi v|/oxr|]considers right, that these same things are ipsofacto [i]8r|]

true.

If my soul were wrought of gold, Callicles,

do you not think I should be delighted
to find
one of those stones wherewith
best of themand
they test [|3aaavoucriv]
goldthe
the best one; which I could apply to it, and it established
that my soul had been well
I should

nurtured,

be assured

that I was

in good

condition

[Pcxavou]?

and in need
tr. W.

(G. 486d2-5;

It is therefore

not

only

a question

of a teacher

of no further test
D. Woodhead)

a student

proving

worthy

but

of

finding and together confirming the truth through dialectic (cf. Zappen 2004:
47).
III.
Unlike
in

the

Kahn's
context

scholarship.13
characteristic
the

Symposium

the latter
12

"proleptic,"
of

the

Kahn's

LYSIS AND

the neologism

ROPD,
intellectual

of that mainstream;
in order

"proleptically";

outside

i.e.,

context
while

of composition,
i.e.,

that

Plato

Kahn

SYMPOSIUM
"basanistic"
the
is

the

never

the

of

doubts

of

is that
of the

Plato

composition

that the Lysis

claim

"solution"

exclusively

mainstream

chronology

his remarkable
had

is meaningful

context

precedes

it anticipates

Symposium

"in

Plato repeatedly uses both the verb (3aaavico (thirty-four instances) and the noun
paavo
and G. 486d3-487e2.
throughout the corpus. See in particular Rep. 7.537b5-540a2
13 In
a lively exchange, Griswold (1999 and 2000) and Kahn (2000) have succeeded in
bringing a
series of questions relevant to the ROPD
into the scholarly mainstream. Although the
pedagogical
solution proposed here is not mooted in their debate (but see Kahn 1996: 48), the ROPD
hypothesis
splits the difference between Kahn (with his dual commitments to proleptic composition and
chronology of composition) and Griswold (with his mixed commitments both to "fictive chronology"
and hermeneutic isolationism)
having excluded the second member of each pair. See also Osborne 1994:
58: "It remains unclear, therefore, whether the reader would be
expected to approach the Lysis having
the Symposium in mind, or to approach the
Symposium having already read the Lysis'' The simple
fact of her having raised this
question suggests that she inclines to the solution being proposed here,
although the leaden weight of "chronology of composition" is revealed at 58, n. 19.

THE READING

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

DIALOGUES

29

mind" when he wrote the Lysis (Kahn 1996: 267). In Kahn's sense of the term,
I would

that

agree

in the

ROPD

Once

the Lysis

the meaning

between
stated:

this

term

between

In

216).

other

the

and

the
thus

claimthe

two

dialoguesis

new

interpretation

of

the Lysis
not

has

thematic

known

Lysis.

of the
and

and

It is rather

in the context

a question

and

the

evidence

he cites

basanistic.15

that

attention,

deserve

for reading
But

each

there
being

other

can

be

wheel:

claim
the

close
1895:

is implicit

textual

in

evidence

to argue

unnecessary

the
that

between

relationship

hypothesis.

the

(Wirth

the best
Kahn's

the
for a

available

serviceable

is certainly a good place to start,

it as proleptic
are two

the

of situating

of the ROPD

studies

recognized

of this
ROPD;

substantive

reading of the dialogue (Kahn 1996: 281-291)

it is actually

been

it is therefore

the intersection

Plato

not proleptic.

re-inventing
long

aspect

notion

in this way,

sense

"basanistic."

(posterior)

mainstream

is basanistic,

a new

acquires

to the

and

require

controversial

close

"proleptic"

transformed

article

Symposium

in the

widely
of Lysis

interpretations

has been

does

and

But

complement

of this

claim

Lysis

words,

"basanistic"

supports

sections

to Symposium,

respect

Demonstrating
connection

(prior)

of "proleptic"

the first two

with

is "proleptic."14

it is the

context;

fully supports
more

constitutedappropriately

detailed

my claim
readings

enough,

that

of Lysis
given

the

pairing of Menexenus and Lysis in Lysisby a pair. The firstof these is the recent
study of Lysis by Terry Penner and Christopher Rowe (2005), the second is a pair
of articles by Francisco J. Gonzalez (1995 and 2000a).
In "Plato's Lysis: An Enactment of Philosophical Kinship," Gonzalez (1995:
69) makes a brilliant observation:
The

of two other
Lysis has the further problem that it has always existed in the shadow
that seem to provide solutions
to the problems
it raises: Plato's
Symposium and
Aristotle's
of
the
Nicomachean
Ethics.
Consequently
interpretation
Lysis has generally
revolved around these, borrowing its light from them.
works

Gonzalez

then

proceeds

to offer a fourfold

classification

of previous

interpretations

based on two differentiae:the Lysis either (a) contains or (b) fails to provide the
solution(s) supplied by either (i) Plato or (ii) Aristotle. The basanistic reading of
14Kahn (2000: 190) suggests that he is now disowning the term ("I was [rc. beginning with Kahn
1996] increasingly uncomfortable with the term 'proleptic' ..."); I am happy to adopt it. Although
derived from Kahn 1981a, 1988, and 1996, the term "proleptic" will be used hereafter only in the
context of the ROPD.
15
We agree that Lysis is a puzzle and that Symposium provides its solution (Kahn 1996: 266-267)
but only Kahn is concerned with squaring this insight with the chronological priority of Lysis (281);

this creates a tension in his broad conception of Lysis. Compare 266 ("no reader who comes to
in the Symposium could understand") with 267
Lysis without knowledge of the doctrine expounded
in Lysis] with a series of enigmatic hints that form a kind of puzzle for
("Plato thus presents us
eliminates
the uninitiated reader to decipher, but that become completely intelligible"); the ROPD
the problem. Parsing the exact difference between Kahn's views and mine is a tricky business: in the
xi sail
it is Hippias Major that is proleptic with respect to Symposium (Hip. Maj. 286dl-2:
ROPD,
to KaA,ov;) in Kahn's sense while Kahn himself rejects the Hippias Major as inauthentic (Kahn 1981a:
308, n. 10; see also Kahn 1996: 182).

30

PHOENIX

Lysis

accounts

Plato

as a testa

for the

existence

students/readersthe
that

of all four

test administered

its explicit

can

Lysis
failure

of these

to the young
be

only

to resolve

solved

problems

types:

Aristode
on

with

a Platonic

actually

created

deliberately
along

basis
the

points

Plato's

by

other

by realizing
back

way

to the

solution already contained in the Symposium. Although this solution is implicit

in the

Aristode

Lysis,

student/reader

between

relationship

to solve

attempted

shouldwithout

its puzzleas

Aristotle

and

Lysis

Plato

or grasping

embracing
will

intended

his teacher's

be revisited

that

solution.

at the end

his
The

of this section;

for the present, it is sufficientto point out that Gonzalez situates himself in a fifth
category (1995: 70): "So long as this dialogue is not read on its own, its coherence
will remain in question." Despite his almost polemical insistence in 1995 that
his reading is independent of Symposium (1995: 71 and 88-89), Gonzalez clearly
derives little from Aristode (1995:
One's

Loving

Own:

A Traditional

87, n. 38).

Moreover, in his "Socrates on

of <1)1AI A Radically

Conception

Transformed"

(2000a), Gonzalez drops his polemical stance and bases his compelling reading of
Lysis on conceptions that originate in Symposium (2000a: 394).
Penner and Rowe (2005: 300-307) explicitly address the relationship between
and

Lysis
Penner

and

Rowe

reading:

between

Plato
to

place
and

it steers
and

the

is that

far more

an ingeniousif

friends

discover

destination

that

the two

are consistent

dialogues

Aristotelian

the

Socrates

unlocks

but

their

268, and 276).

not

reach

best

amiable

friendship;17

that

does

the

an

book,

about
key

potentially

preserves

remarkable

the Euthydemus (264-267,

the

on

Lysis

Aristotle

this

between

Rowe

conclusion

lines

than

Gonzalez

But such a characterization is unfair to their brilliant and

review

dialogue

their

is more influenced by the Symposium than he admits,

solve

does (260-279).
subtle

and

Symposium

If Gonzalez

(303).

self-contradictory16course
of both.
This
is not
of

product

it is
noteworthy

synthetic

the

a philosophical

solution

that
to the

Penner
Lysis

in

Set in the Lyceum (Euthd. 271al)

in

Lysis

(Planeaux

2001)it

follows

Symposiumand Lysis in my ROPD. To summarize, Penner and Rowe (2005: 303)

an ultra-modern

provide
reveals

something

by Euthydemuswithout

Symposium

solution

post-Platonic
about

amazing

between

continuity

and

and

any regard

Platonic
Lysis

to the Lysis

pedagogythe

that emerges

for the details

when

that

strictly
guided

of dramatic

nevertheless
philosophical

retrospectively

presentation:

the key idea in the

Symposium, of eras as desire
is in essence a colorful elaboration
of Socrates'
222a6-7,
adds

albeit

nothing

a brilliantbrilliantly
of philosophical
substance.

for "procreation
in the beautiful" (206c ff.),
conclusion
about the genuine lover in Lysis
colouredand
elaboration.
That is, it
suggestive

16Penner and Rowe 2005: 267 (emphasis in original): "Let us

try to offer an explanation of the
idea of being good in itselfas a means to happiness
17
Compare the more dialectical but less amiable relationship between Hans von Arnim and Max
Pohlenz described in Gonzalez
1995: 81, n. 27 and 83, n. 29. See von Arnim 1914: 59 for an
anticipation of Kahn's "proleptic" that emerges in dialogue with Pohlenz.

THE READING
Penner

Naturally
could

discover

and
the

Rowe

ORDER
have

no reason

of "the

essence

OF PLATO'S

genuine

DIALOGUES

to ask

themselves

lover"

in Lysis

31

whether
without

a student
read

having

Symposium.
The
not

more

only

intriguing
the

challenges

of the

implications
student

to apply

basanistic

an earlier

element

in Platothat

but

solution

leads

her

it

farther

as a result of doing sois implicit in the claim made by Gonzalez (1995: 71)
that "Lysis goes beyond" Symposium (also Geier 2002: 66). Although by no means
entirely

uncomfortable

reverses

here,

The

with

the latter

the judgment

seems

closer

of Penner

to the truth

and

(Gonzalez

Rowe

that

1995:

89):

Gonzalez

important point is that the Lysis, in pursuing the relation between love and what is
discloses something
about love that we cannot learn from reading the Symposium.

oIkeov,
But
in

Gonzalez
the

can

context

to a place

his reader

only bring
Diotima's

of

crucial

where

description

(88-89):

is right.

Gonzalez
he

done

by others

But

is forced

but

dialogue

on

this

Lysis,

there

to

only

propose

content

its philosophical

no

with

to add

be

alternative

has

been

that

the

no

need

to which

principle

With

so

much
a new

to offer
of those

readings

context

he

can

excellent

work

reading

of the

have

who

in a pedagogical

considered

Symposium

88, n. 40) before adding

ordering

sentence.

second

is intelligible
at

does

theme

turn,

o'ikhiov

is not at all pursued in the Symposium,

not commit me to the view that

is that while this suggestion

of the Lysis. This observation
the Lysis was written after the Symposium.
however,

difference,

it is the main

to

a passage he has just quoted (1995:

205e5206al,

The

this sentence

of

elucidated
the

by raising

question: "What role does the Lysis play in Plato's pedagogy?" The broad answer
to this

question

element.

few

is embodied

in the

ROPD

pedagogical

details

are worth

Diotima's

to recall

prompted
cue

at Ly.

218a-b6

The

7tpcoxov

infinite

until

pctaqij

having
(fuz-ov

regress,

(the

psxa^u

more

the

mentioning:

Leitmotiv

in its basanistic

specifically
and

student/reader
of her

pyr\

is

discourse;

at Ly. 216d3-7, although Plato basanistically withholds the

Symp. 201el0-202a3)
verbal

and

{Ly.

recalls

introduced

to the

introduces

219dl)
the

the return

this in turn accomplishes

220d6;
been

Beautiful

student/reader

the

student/reader

of Symposium,

and

of philosophy

at Symp.
to the

points

204al-4.
notion

forward

to

of
the

Good (Kahn 1996: 267); its nature would be the central topic of discussion in
any

academy

of its name.

worthy

In

short:

the

Platonic

solution

to the

Lysis

(6) to Ly. 221e7222a3 (7). The ideal

requires applying Symp. 205e5-206al
examination question for the basanistic Lysis would be: "Why is Lysis (unlike
Menexenus) silent at 222a4?" (Geier 2002: 136-137). I would suggest that the
silence of Lysislike Lysis himself {Ly. 213d8)is philosophical in Plato's sense
of the

term

while

the

Xuoi

of the

Lysis

friendship (see Hoerber 1959: 18-19):

Diotima {Symp. 211a5-b5).

is

the

third

component

of any

true

the un-embodied Beautiful revealed by

32

PHOENIX
It

is

that

revealing

Aristotle

introduces

the

of

meaning

the

word

.6cn

employed above: "as a technical term, a. solution of a difficulty"(LSJ II.4). Plato,

on the other hand, uses italong with "separation" (x&ipiapoc, Phd. 67d4)in
the service
that

put

of precisely

way:

it would

however,

the dualistic

"Aristotle

rejected

be

stated

Idea" (cf. Chang 2002).

is

that

terms,
his

to pass

is)

subsequent

to absolve

Aristotle

to struggle

than

test

it and

of Lysis

as

on

this joyless

that

it would

hint

her student

The

the

of

Socrates

i.e.,

by being

to bring

for preparing

not

have

known

that Agathon

that

at once

its tragedy

(4)

b.c.)

of the

Lysis,

interpretation,
some)

MENEXENUS AND

(b)

word

oivcsov

But

Aristotle's

that

Plato

the

described

itself

Symposium
and

comedy

the student/reader

won

Athenaeus

proves

tragedy,

to interpret

for Tragic

would

the

only be

solved

would

more

oIkov

"the

Idea

of the Good"

of Aristophanes

OF SYMPOSIUM
its dramatic
the

most

Plato's
(c)

connection

important

Socrates

indicate

is the necessary

{217a)

the prize

and

Ethics

the student/reader

in the speech

TRAGEDY

(a) establish
Symposium20
offer the reader/student

call

made

with

struggle

it could

of to

on

impact
been

at Nicomachean
heroic

that

later

Ethics,
Plato's

(on

have

intended

essence

would

THE

to lightMenexenus
that

the

grasp

a decisive

attempts

it in the belief
that

the self s alter ego, so vividly

last words

first words

to

failure

had

Ingenious

the comedian (cf. Sheffield 2006: 110-111).

IV.

perspective,

able

Aristode's

a neophyte

task.

he created

Diotima's

what

Plato's

was

of his Nicomachean

topic
that

view

development.

of equivocation

followed

resemble

nearly

the

the

of its successindicates

with

who

It is usually

rejected.

From

never

the culminating
for

is spared

Lysisregardless
by one

itself
said

philosophical

a Platonist

9.9;19

"Aristode

be

to

something

otherwise:

Forms."

Given the tremendous impact Lysis had on Aristotle's

of friendship,18

conception
there

that Aristotle

metaphysics
the separable

and

right

whyi.e.,
perfect
correctly.

eventually

record

But

any reader

to its

(and

then

in order
tool

teaching

Symposium

Drama.

to the

clue

Plato
the

could

year

(416

of Thucydides

could deduce from the drunken entry of Alcibiades (cf. Thuc. 6.28.1) that the
cjuvouGia
18

(Symp.

172a7)

takes

place

before the Great

Fleet,

under

the influence

of

Price 1989:

1: "In his two surviving treatments [jc. concerning friendship], in the Nkomachean
Ethics, Aristotle effectively takes the Lysis as his starting point; with no other Platonic
dialogue does he show such a detailed, yet implicit, familiarity."
19
Kahn 1981b; Price 1989: 122-123; Annas 1977: 550-551;
Pakaluk 1998: 205-208 and 2005:
and Eudemian

283-285; and Penner and Rowe 2005: 319.

20
(tr. M. Joyce): "Socrates was forcing them [jc. Agathon and Aristophanes] to
Symp. 22362-12
admit that the same man might be capable of
writing both comedy and tragedythat the tragic poet
might be a comedian as well. But as he clinched the argument, which the other two were scarcely in
a state to follow, they began to nod, and first Aristophanes fell off to
sleep and then Agathon, as day

was breaking. Whereupon Socrates tucked them

up comfortably and went away, followed, of course,
by Aristodemus. And after calling at the Lyceum for a bath, he spent the rest of the day as usual, and
then, toward evening, made his way home to rest."

THE READING

OF PLATO'S

ORDER

DIALOGUES

33

Alcibiadeshe with whom, of course, the ROPD begins (Prot. 309al-2)sailed

to Sicily (415 b.c.) and after,perhaps it should be added, the Battle of Mantinaea
(418 b.c.). Readers of Xenophon's continuation of Thucydides (see Hell. 5.2.5)
would

have

some

reason

to suspect

Plato's

read/heard

contemporaries,
been

readers

only

for many

dead

And

Menexenus.

years

that

is precisely

of Xenophon's

when

Plato's

the

Socrates

the War,

understanding

comic

of Symposium

element

i.e.,

know

enacts

the

aside

from

that

Socrates

Aspasia

Plato's
had
to the

referring

The important point here

historical

dialogue's

while

dominates,

point:

Hellenica

King's Peace {Hell. 5.1.31) in Menexenus (245c2-6).

is that without

in the

cf. Dover 1965) but probably only if they had

case of Mantinaea (Symp. 193a2-3;

also

of anachronism

Aristophanes

the

context,

element

its tragic

understanding

depends on Thucydides. But Symposium delights even without knowledge of

Thucydides, while Menexenus without Thucydides is unintelligible and probably
unthinkable (cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Demosthenes 23). And appreciating
the funniest

in Menexenus

joke

on

depends

read

having

Xenophon's

Hellenica

as

passage

in

well.21
To

Socrates

with,

begin

to the

refers

most

famous

(and

hopeful)

Thucydides at Menexenus 236b5: the Funeral Oration of Pericles (Thuc. 2.3546).

in the context

But

242e6-243a3

it is what

of Symposium,
is more

that

important:

Socrates'
endorses

she

Aspasia

says

precisely

the

about

at

Sicily
(Thuc.

pretext

6.8.2)explicitly unmasked as such both by Thucydides himself (Thuc. 6.6.1)

and his Hermocrates (6.77.1)that Alcibiades used (Thuc. 6.18.1-2) to persuade
the flower of Athens to race (Thuc. 6.32.2) towards their tragic end (413 b.c.)
in the Great Harbor of Syracuse (Thuc. 7.71; cf. Finley 1938: 61-63). In fact,
Aspasia's speech is as interwoven with Thucydides (Bruell 1999: 201-209) as it is
with

lies

and

(Cawkwell
there

are

allowed

many

tested

the

facts

demonstrated

history

by pointing

a prerequisite

dullest

In

by Menexenus.

students

are infinitely

out

the

deliberate

errors

for seeing/hearing/reading

the

to do (Aulus

Gellius,

badly

Peace

of Xenophon

of these.
But

funnier.

Naturally

before

being

the student
of Symposium
(see Ryle 1966:
23-24),
of
I propose
that a proven
other words,
knowledge
be
and
as recorded
by Xenophon
Thucydidesto

a performance

of Athenian

that

in Symposium

things

to attend

was

was

the King's
involving
is only the funniest

the anachronism
pretexts;
cf. Badian
1987:
27)

1981;

wanted

Plato

in Menexenus

makes

even

something

Symposium,
Nodes Atticae

1.9.9;

see

the

Snyder

2000: 111-113 and 95).

There
Plato
by

is an understandable

as a university

contrast,

a teacher

tendency
writing

professor
of the

youth.

among

university

for his

the

But

peers;

the

question

to imagine

professors
Plato

of the

of what

other

ROPD

is,

authors

21
for interpreting
Although this is not the time to argue the case, (1) the importance of Xenophon
Menexenus, (2) the fact that Xenophon also wrote a Symposium (see Thesleff 1978 and Danzig 2005),
and (3) the remarkable resemblance between Lysis and Mem. 2.6, all point to the same conclusion.
Will anyone deny that Plato's masterful Meno becomes a far greater dialogue for one who has read the
description of Meno

(An. 2.6.21-8)

in Xenophon's

Anabasis}

34

PHOENIX

Plato

assumes

reasons

his readers

for including

sketched.

There

without

will

read

have

Xenophon

are easier

Andocides

independent
and

Hesiod)

for instance,

35),

these

among

and

(Homer

examples

requires

Thucydides

the Mysteries,

(On

clearly

and

one

some

study;
have

more

would

now

been

difficult

ones:

not

know

that

Eryximachus was implicated in the matter of the Herms (Nails 2006: 101). In
short,

serious

having

and

thus

that

Plato

doubt

students

that

It may

need

his

useful

to ask
those

expected

kind

readers

every

literary

work

four

categories

like

writers,

a KTrj|i

anticipated

It is as mistaken
alsi

he knew

(Thuc.

from

this

Plato's

he

immortality

to

1.22.4)
share

would

of authors

whose

Homer,

he

of readers

to know.

to be

to consider

ancient

what

writings

he believed

be

the

(1)

perspective:

he

considered

as it is to assume
distinction.

of Plato

what

clearly

anticipated, (2) contemporary writers who would survive along with him, (3)
those

ancient

writersboth
them

making

survive (77. 22cl-3)

he both
In

The

to the

and

anticipated

her

currentwhom
own

he set about

and

work,

those

(4)

counted

of Plato:

People

second

or third

of Plato

be

may

by

either

not

that

debatable;

is not.

immortality

Prosopography

would

Whether he regarded

category

on Thucydides'

to immortalize

who

or do so in fragments (Ion 534d4-7).

as belonging

Thucydides

and
to his

prerequisite

and

Other

Debra

Socratics,

Nails (2002)

has created a landmark in Plato studies. Not surprisinglygiven

her

knowledge

intimate

of the

historical

contextshe

has

piece on the tragic element of Symposium (Nails 2006).

of three
of the

events

on the
and

Herms,
she

herself,
readers

does

not

to know.

the profanation

dialogue:

the

of Socrates.

execution
to

stop

This

what

wonder

probably

explains

also

written

the

best

She shows the influence

of the Mysteries,
the mutilation
of so much
knowledge
Plato
could
his
reasonably
expect
Possessed

she

why

fails

to emphasize

the

most

obvious tragic element in the dialogue (Nails 2006: 101, n. 63): that Athens is
poised on the precipice of the Sicilian Expedition (Salman 1991: 215219). It is
also

worth

dialogues

noting

that

Nails

possible

but

that

not
she

only

makes

is clearly

a "dramatic

interested

of Plato's

chronology"

in

and

arranging,

perhaps

reading/teaching them in that order (Nails 2002: 307-330; cf. Press 2007). To
the extent that shein support of Charles L. Griswold Jr. (1999: 387-390
and 2000: 196-197)is contributing to loosening the grip of the
chronology of
she

composition,
of modern

does

to the

well;

over-concern

with

extent

historical

that

she

development

may

simply

with

one

replace

an equally

form

unhistorical

form of it, she misses the Harbor for the Herms (but see
Ly. 206dl).
This

of

is not

several

Menexenus
anachronism
and
more

to

say

that

themesin

corrected

and
but

(Symp.

characteristic:

was
to

unaware
the

Not

(3).

Symposium
the

Plato

addition

War
only

Symposium

as a whole

172cl-2).

But

the

provenance

there

of chronology:
and
does

begins
are

of both

many

its

Aristophanes
with

echo

an anachronism

other

dialogues

it is clearly

historiansthat

connections
is problematic

one

connect
Aspasia's
detected
that

seem

(Menex.

249el and Halperin 1992), both feature a wise woman

(Halperin 1990; Salkever
1993: 140-141), both women elucidate their theme with a
myth of origins

THE READING

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

DIALOGUES

35

and Symp. 203b2-d8), and both dialogues are concerned

(Menex. 237el-238b6
with rhetoricremarkably gorgeous at times {Menex. 240d6-7, 247a2-4 and
197d5-e5,

Symp.
that

also

of

with

in

reported

a circumstance

speeches,

in yet another

Thucydides

and

subtle

remarkably

way

1998: 492). Andrea Wilson Nightingale has identified a theme that

(Monoson
binds

revealed

211bl2)as
both

joins

all three

together

auditors

respective

in

(Menexenus,

dialogues

rhetoric.22

encomiastic

Unlike

order

to improve

and

Symposium,

Diotima

and

them,

and

Aspasia

the dangers

Lysis):
who

Socrates,

humble

their

Hippothales

praise

theirs in a damaging way (Nightingale 1993: 115). Of all the connections, the
most significant is that both Aspasia and Diotima are brilliant women (Halperin
Socrates

from whom

1990:122-124)

is man

unreliable

proves

could

lead

easily

to learn

enough

for the triad at Ale 1. 131e4; cf. Tht. 149al-4).

the reader

(Phaenarete

prepares

The fact that Aspasia's discourse

about

(4)

astray

the priceless

value

of Diotima's (6); the Lysis tests whether this trap has been avoided (7).
It bears
and

Menexenus
every

categories,

history.

The

Republic.

essential

But

of Menexenus

significance

the student

to grasp

point

toolbox.

his pedagogical

student/reader's

with

can

is that

to the

respect
be

hardly

ROPD

with

of these

as a whole,

its

of central

At

importance

the Eleatic,

Parmenides,

Kahn
must

of Menexenus

the

principal

speaker

meets

Timaeus,

student/reader

the Athenian

and

the start of his career,

interpretation

when

Strangers.
laid down

(1963:

four things

220)

why did Plato

explain:

(1)

in

the basanistic

These skills will be put to use in Symposium (cf. Salman 1991: 224-225)
become

to

respect
elements

it is the first

overemphasized:

to reject most everything

is challenged

both

basanistic:
of Athenian

knowledge

has

fixed

Although

it is also

is proleptic

Lysis
Plato

into

dialogues.

for Symposium,

to Symposium,

respect

not be hardened

to entire

applied

reader

the

tests

speech

with

must

proleptic

when
the

prepares

of Aspasia's

Basanistic

and

especially

proleptically

step

where

that basanistic

repeating

exclusive

dialogue
has to say.

but will
Critias,

an adequate
the speech

attribute

to

Aspasia, (2) include the glaring anachronism, (3) systematically distort Athenian
history,
Menexenus
questions.

and

(4)
and

But

write

Symposium
the dialogue

in Symposium
not only
over
the
festivities
hangs
of Athens

to become

oration

a funeral
in
with

because

the

first place?

has

but because
in the

The

relation
answers

provided

begins

of Syracuse

shadow

of its power

now

that

Thucydides
the

at Agathon's
lovers

in the

ROPD

Pericles
Funeral

in Menexenus
(cf.

upon

Oration

these

continues
2005:

Halperin

called

between
to

56)

the citizens

(Thuc.

2.43.1)

and Thucydides reports that the passion Alcibiades ignited in the Athenians for
Sicily was erotic (Thuc. 6.45.5).23 There is a sense in which Thucydides is present
at the Symposium

and

delivers

his own

oration

about

Love.

To

put it another

way,

22
See the opening sentence of Nightingale 1993: 112: "Plato targets the encomiastic genre in three
separate dialogues: the Lysis, the Menexenus, and the Symposium
23
and rj 8 xrjv enopiav
Compare the relationship between rj Xi (which is both rj ' 8<j>e7iofivr|
xfj t6xt|s u7iOTi0saa) and epco rii mvxi (which, although it follows in order of presentation,
is both nv r|yo6fievoc; and fiv tt)v 7tiPouA,T)vK^povucov) with what Diotima says of Penia

36

PHOENIX
Funeral

Aspasia's

Oration

stands

between

halfway

approximately

the

Funeral

Oration of Pericles and the Sicilian Speech of Alcibiades inThucydides (6.16-18)

and

it is these

that

speeches

a performance

during

must

in the ears

ring

of the auditor

who

would

weep

of Symposium.

Kahn (1963: 220) adds a fifthcriterion that has nothing to do with Plato per

se: he requires
that

the

each

year.

the

dialogue

Kahn

of his

listened

day

intends

this

as "a playful

joke"

the

Although

to explain

any interpretation

Athenians

criterion

to

or satire

more

by Cicero

recitation24

short-circuit

or a "parody

is something

dialogue

the fact recorded

to a public

than

(Or.

of the

the

151)

Menexenus

attempt

to present

of contemporary

rhetoric."

it is also

these,

Lucinda

these;

Coventry (1989) is a particularly reliable guide. Kahn's own explanation (1963:

226-230) is possible but there is a simpler one that furnishes its foundation:
Athens
more
also
in

was

great

and

Plato

sincerely

in Symposium

a far more

cumbersome

front

of a crowd.
her

Symposium:
retribution

seldom

a remarkably
had

4243)

that

Plato,

after

after the Great

exemplar.

no

her

it is
basis
in

tragedy

the

precisely

dialogues

democracy.

It is also

the

recreated

There

be

annual

that Plato's

abandoning

and

an

on

upon

of her

love

the fact that

would

brought

this

expresses

love

or pondered

hey-day

of Hellas"

he

change

there

great,

teacher

that

that

in the

an unpaid

its Periclean

destroyed

fact
cannot

have

remarked

of Athens

"school

enduring

not

would

It is seldom

became

The

for expressing

were

epco

or remarked

names,

her.

in Menexenus

vehicle

If Athens

memory

pondered

aristocratic

loved

than

self-deluded

she deserved.
a vivid

preserve

had

just

War

ne plus

outside

(see

ultra

in

of Athens

Cornford

is considerably

1967:

more

civic

pride in Plato the Athenian than Plato lets on (Kahn 1963: 224).
is intended

Protagoras
world

confidence,

refinement,

prepare

them

follow,

at once

that was
1999;
crisis
mantic

for another

cf. Hoerber
at the

Mantinaean

wit,

and

neglected

Beautiful

Athens."
1959)
place

the

wealth,

in accordance

from,

"famous

and

to initiate

of power,

bygone

The

ambling

bring

with,
these

and

eager

in the

emerges,
of the

beauties
the

Apollodorus,

beautiful
absolute
as

well

Symposium

party

at the
where

Aristodemus,

as
that

dialogues

to, the worldly

together

great

that

students,

347d4-5),

in opposition

dualities
two

into

(Prot.

gradually

(mixture):

Socrates,

professors,

flute-girls

that

perpetual

of Kpcn
(through

reader/student/hearer

beauty

(Ziolkowski
moment
Diotima
and

of
the

Plato)25

(203b7) and Poros (203d4) in Symposium, on which see Halperin 1990: 148. Valuable work has been
done on the importance of pco in Thucydides; see
Ehrenberg 1947: 50-52; Bruell 1974: 17; Forde
1986: 439-440; Monoson 1994: 254, n. 8; and Wohl 2002: 190-194.
24Ion, whose hero's profession is to charm the audience (compare Menex. 235b8-c5
and Ion
with a public recitation of Homer from whom he claims to have learned how to be a
535d8-e3)
general because he knows what it befits a general to say (Ion 540d5), precedes Menexenus in the
reconstructed ROPD.
25
Amidst so many publications
1992, and 2005) stands outalong

on Symposium, the work of David M. Halperin (1985,1986,1990,

with The People of Platoas a signal achievement for
contemporary
Plato studies in the United States; an equally brilliant article
by Charles Salman (1991) deserves wider

THE READING
revealed

the

social

and

Beautiful

heavenly

hell-bent

23.4)seemingly
historical

ORDER

before

just

on

context

OF PLATO'S

the

Alcibiades
its earthly

destroying

from

DIALOGUES

which

assimilated

and
this

Phaedoafter

the

Plato

essence

teacher

its beholders

in Lysis.
us

impregnating

will

had

that

The

soaring

soul

all with

the

Beautiful

Ale.

(Plut.
or rather

the
the

emergedtold

Beauty that is the essence

ensure

duly

chameleon

embodiment,

story of Socrates at Potidaea (Symp. 220c3-d5).

From a philosophical standpoint, it is Diotima's
of Symposium

37

the

that

student/reader
into

escapes

has
in

eternity

it engendered

(Morrison

1964: 53) while on earththis is the last act of a divine comedy conceived in
It is therefore

Symposium.

to imagine

tempting

Socrates

entranced

at Potidaea,

rapt to the sight of heavenly Beauty. F. M. Cornford (1971: 128) indicates on

metaphysical grounds why this is not likely: the Idea is perceived im Augenblick.
It accompanies
It is only

its admirers
the

auditor

test of Menexenuswho
thus

will

sent

before

just

they go.

what

there

the

to crush
War

Great

student

Socrates

as the

Symposium

hoplites

Potidaea

knows

experience

Athenian

wherever

of Thucydidesthe

was

who

actually

tragedy

it is.

a revolt

(Thuc.

broke

out:

has

already

doing

As

one

1.61),

indeed

the

the

passed

in Potidaea

and

of three

thousand

Socrates

arrives

in

Force

Expeditionary

of which he is a spear-carrying member (Nails 2002: 264-265) becomes the

torch that will set all Hellas ablaze (Thuc. 1.5667). Narrated by Alcibiades,
assassin

charming

of Athenian

is, like

Symposium

eternal

Idea

and

remains

sinuous
time

that

massive

to be,

that

throughout
both

Thucydides

also

1.1.1).

reading:

other

the
it was

realized

After

many

not

past.

northern

and
right

from

a terrible

only

In

hand,

the historical,

Being

but

year,

recorded

fatal path
wine"
who

to civic

(Renault
suffered

in Plato's
calamity.
1956)

unspeakably

Symposiumthat
Tragedy

only

where

and
Plato

in the quarries

comedy
meets

had

be

marks

the

and 63-66)
in

unfolding
something
will

just

destroy

its citizens

consolation

moment

the

imagining

exhorted

for the
before

the

setting for the intellectual

the

turning

are fully mixed

Thucydides.

of Syracuse

dramatic,

become

as ironic

Aspasia

departure for Sicily (cf. Thg. 129c8d2)historical

triumph

19-20

conflagration

Pericles

it will

retrospect,

the

vigil
of the

(Shanske

Becoming

the start would

lovers

Plato's

all-night

contemplation

he was
night:
of a movement

senseless,

city whose

them

leaving

of a truly glorious

fateful

rational

of the violet-crowned

eventually

On
that

suggests

alternatives,

(Thuc.

the power

delight.

of Socrates'

story

of a comic

that the stationary Socrates (Geier 2002:

119-153)

contemplated

a true

the

greatness,

susceptible

context

metaphysical

2007:

loss

itself,

(Thuc.

We
7.87)

point

in "the
owe

on

this

last of the
it to those

to acknowledge

attention. It would also be cowardly not to acknowledge here my considerable debts to Renault (1956),
and Cornford (1967: 42-43). In the context of the latter, consider Annas
(1930: 204-226),
1999: 95 (cf. above, 21, n. 5): "It is easy to remain unaware of the extent to which our attitude to it [sc.

Hamilton

of Plato's thought, derives from Victorian

Republic], as a political work, and as the obvious centerpiece
traditions, particularly that of Jowett." Some eras are evidently more receptive to Plato's teaching than
others.

38

PHOENIX

how much both historian and philosopherto say nothing of Socrates (Thg.
128d3-5 and Joyal 1994: 26-27, 29)loved the men and boys who so skillfully
and

"raced

senselessly

with

one

another

V.
Unlike

it.

It

the Idea

Becoming,

its contemplation
is,

THE

READING

is eternally

no stationary

requires

difficult

moreover,

as far as Aegina"

to

6.32;

Jowett).

ORDER
it is and

what
Socrates.

believe

(Thuc.

that

never

Neither
who

anyone

over

changes

did

Plato

ever

time:

abandon

embraces

actually

it

could think that he did. Why would he? Where he appears to be doing soin
Parmenides, for example (Prm. 130el-e4; cf. Festugire 1969: 297)he is testing
his

readers/students

have

done

so

if

to see

that

Plato's

they have.

And

detachment

from

with

beginning
Platonism

has

skeptical faith. This is the injustice that restoring the ROPD

reclaims

Platonism

excising

its

for Plato

"the

by allowing

un-Platonic

deliberately

many

article

of

thought"without

1903:

(Shorey

an

aims to redress: it

of Plato's

unity

moments

so

Aristotle,

become

408)to

emerge

within a dialectical but ultimately harmonious pedagogical program (cf. Lamm

2000: 225). To be sure this Platonism will be unlike earlier versions; each age
must

leave

concern

its own

Becoming.
then

the

nineteenth

of that

were

made
was

Becoming
"Plato"
Idea,

has

only

emerged

become

who

the

obscured

is even

less

or Immortality

Recollection,

better

essence

(i.e.,

he

never

that
sense

Whatever

Platofor

whom
without

meaningless

a twentieth-century

this el'ScoXov

because

to realize

temporis.

of

Progress)

discovers

a double

(in

Meanwhile

thereby.

Platonic:

It is time

of

process

he seeks,

sub specie

the

study,

entirely

a mere

evolves',

Zeitgeist

at everything

of

and

its own

an overriding

something
into

Being

Plato

with

But

accomplished

century,
of his "middle
dialogues."

fields

unintelligible

the Goodcould

nearly

to look

predisposed
in other

of Plato.

dialogues
of timeless

in accordance

century,
was

immortal

in the nineteenth
the idealism

outgrows

term)

the

the philosopher

Beginning

and

on

of composition"

it remade

unacceptable:

gains

mark

for "chronology

does

not abandon

embraced

seriously

the

them

in

the first place.

It is now
dominant

time

the chronology
ROPD

to

than

what

explain

it means

of nineteenth-

paradigm

of Platonic

and

reconstructing

ROPD

Platonic scholarship. The ROPD

the conclusions
the

composed
worked
have

them
been

illegitimately
order
put

drawn

comparatively

way:

stylometric

an evolving

derived

from
cannot
if

was

ROPD
late

stylometry

relevant

to nineteenth-

and

analysis
the

order

to

respect

the

scholarship:

to reconstructing
and

the

twentieth-century

analysis

that Plato
can

vice versa.

presently

of which

even
It

development.

stylometric
prove

with
Platonic

offers no basis for denying or even doubting

in precisely

dialogues
into

of composition

it another

from

agnostic

twentieth-century
is no more

composition
the

to be

initial

the

that must
abandoned

tell us what

and

accepted

the
is

Plato

could

gradually

tacitly

be categorically
the Idea

dialogues

were

must

conception

conclusion

have

rejected:

of the Good.
composed

but

To
after

THE READING

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

DIALOGUES

39

Republic, it cannot tell us how to read them (Nails 1994). Even if the assumption
which

upon
Plato

stylometric
this

wrote,

analysis

still

proves

is correct

depends

about

nothing

the

and

Laws

was

the last dialogue

of Plato's

tA,6

in any

thought

philosophical sense, or about how he busied himself at the end of his long life.
About

this matter,

for the modern

reader

5 n^xcov,

And

some

sauxo

to

o is^wcv

vanXKmv,
Plato

was

not

external

(De

3.16)

compositione

preserves

evidence:

iaXyoo

kc Pocrtpoxiov,

ktevmv

yor|KovTa

y6yov>

kc navra

xpnov

tr\.

and curling his dialogues,

and braiding
through with combing
in every which way, having reached his eightieth year. (Translation

them

[va7i.8K>v]

of Halicarnassus

Dionysius

mine)

Clearly this "hair-care" imagery is purely metaphorical.

that

asserting
will

scarcely

sentence
manner,

Plato

suggests

(1)

tinkering

with

them

who

Plato
until

of a tired

old

final

the required

his

the

and
them.

and

revisionsand

in

labored
does

expressly

the tedious

behind

this

dialogues;

surface,

seriously

over

leaving

his

the

Plato

(2)

sentence
double

Dionysius is simply

adorn
On

dialogues

end,

This
bent

Plato,

read

has

took

as a whole.26

dialogues

to beautify

pains

one

that

vision

make

great

anyone

surprise

the Platonic
typical

took

a very
over

not

playful

precisely

confirm

Lawstoo

the

sick

a few scattered

only

the

then,

to

notes

for Philip of Opus to turn into Epinomis (Diog. Laert. 3.37). It is only with this
the ROPD

conception

that

chronology

of composition

is incompatible,

hypothesis
per se. This,

not

is what

then,

stylometric

it means

or

analysis

to be

on

agnostic

the question.
The
word

most

any

strands

In

the

(cf. Pausanias

literal

sense

of the

captures

precisely

This

a poetic

expression

in Phaenarete,

Diotima,

of proleptic,

visionary,

of the word

vaTtKrav

been

and
and

as "grooming

of Plato's

one

all,

26 As when

another,

have

and

again
or "over

"over,"
three

of

braiding

of it into

discrete

three
again.
in

again")
strands.27

methodology

as embodied

the interweaving

(or braiding)

pedagogical

simply

embellishing

long

however,

The

mass

of the

use

is it proper

metaphor
as "braided,"

is based.

of intertwining

elements

basanistic

over
"up,"

respectively:

it would
and

a rich

(meaning

this aspect

Aspasia

Even

the ROPD

together,

va-

is, after

tendentiousalthough

sentence

which

is his

Dionysius

hair-care

10.25.10).

separating

them

weaving

vTtK0)v
affords

upon

or placerequires

and

from

passage

of the extended

the principles

time

distinct
fact,

only

suggests

hairat

in the

in context

it as "braided"

to translate
the word

element

amusing

avan/.r.KOiv:

in his dialogues.

appeared

his dialogues,

to be
and

The

real meaning

It would

"inter-weaving."

soto

not

have

translate

inter-weaving

them

the
in

a Mother, or dear older Sister, on the night of the Prom, lovingly arranges and
the skeptical eye of
rearranges the young girl's gown and tresses, again and again regardingwith
more than nostalgic loveeach tiny detail before sending her off into the world of men.
27The most delightful use of the word is in Pindar 01. 2.70, where he conjures an image of girls
joining their hands in a dancing chain ( opfioc).

PHOENIX

40
every

In

way."

other

this

words,

from

passage

construction
To

entirely

begin

book

basanistic

the Laws

and

character

in the star-lit Epinomis {Epin. 990al-4;

character

backwards

onto

Laws

Plato

may

as a thirteen

becomes

for those

reflecting that

have

who

clear

luminously

cf. Rep. 528e6-528c4)

820e4)

{Leg.

understood

are best

Epinomis

anti-Platonic

dialogueits

that

suggests

the very end.

dependsuntil

at the end,

Dionysius

with the dramatic details on which its

have been tinkering with the ROPDi.e.,

not

noticed

it

already {Leg. 714c6, 661b2, and 648a6)with the crowning impiety of Laws 7
{Leg. 818cl-3; cf. 624al) dead in the middle. The Athenian Stranger is, as Leo
Strauss discovered in 1938 (2001: 562), the kind of Socrates who would have
followed Crito's advice and fled from Athens to Sparta or Crete {Cri. 52e5-6). As
is the

case

more

reflect

Sophist

the

with

Plato's

and

Eleatic
than

the latter

Thrasyllus,

does

the speech
and

Laws

Statesman,

(Gonzalez

Stranger

of Aspasia

Crito

in Menexenus.

and

Phaedo

(compare

views

And

in the First

are embedded

Epinomis

between

pair

the Athenian's

2000b),

Leg.

no
like

also

of

Tetralogy
647el-648a6

with Ly. 219e2-4).

This leaves only one pair of dialogues in the quartet {Apology

and

Crito)

between

which

and

Minos

are

two

a matched

is propaedeutic

both

to

Crito

have

dialogues

set (Grote
and

not

the journey

been

find

who

1865)

interpolated.

no

made

Hipparchus

other

home;

in Laws

{Min.

the

second
cf.

319e3;

Morrow 1960: 35-39) while the pair mirrors Sophist {Min. 319c3; cf. Hipparch.
I propose that these curious dialogues
228b5-e7) and Statesman {Pit. 309dl-4).
are

the

conversations

of indeterminate
that

both

how
one

Socrates
age

and

Hipparchus

comparatively
occasion

when

who

had

bursts
Minos

with

the

but

sympathetic
in Phaedo

anonymous
The

jailor
fact

into

tears

were

non gratae
in Athens
illustrates
personae
had beenand
on
defensively
patriotic

restrained

Socrates

confronted

by an

Ionian's

truth

(116d5-7).28

{Ion

his

541c3-8)29before

city definitively cut herself off from him; despite Hipparchus and Minos, Crito
reveals

that

for the

ROPD:

he

never

did

Euthyphro,

the

same

Sophist,

to

her.

Statesman,

This

creates

Apology,

the

following

Hipparchus,

ending

Minos,

Crito,

Laws, Epinomis, and the visionary Phaedo (6). It is worth making it explicit that
Socrates

is the philosopher

whom

the Eleatic

Stranger,

for all his many

divisions,

never distinguishes {Soph. 217a6-b3 and Pit. 257b8-cl) while the Eleatic Stranger
is, at best,30 the un-Socratic philosopher already described (4) by Socrates in
Theaetetus (173c8-174a2; cf. 144c5-8). The Athenian Stranger, Plato's final test
of the reader/student (7), is prefigured there as well {Tht. 176a8-b3).
28

Only if Socrates had added that the two had passed the time jittsuovte could this connection
be called "snug"; it would also have made it obvious
But the
(Hipfarch. 229e3 and Min. 316c3).
question of Law clearly links Minos and Crito. Consider soAp. 41a3.
29
Neither Ion nor anyone else has heard of Apollodorus of Cyzicus; Plato alone preserves his

name. For the other two examples at Ion 541dl-2one

found in Thucydides (4.50), the other in
the invaluable Nails 2002 adloc.
Xenophon (Hell. 1.15.18-9), both in Andocidessee
30
Straussians (e.g., Cropsey 1995) tend to be extremely reliable guides to the basanistic
dialogues
once one realizes that they mistakenly regard these as "visionary."

THE READING

ORDER

OF PLATO'S

DIALOGUES

41

The ROPD now has a delightful beginning (Protagoras), a mighty middle

(.Republic), and a happy ending (Phaedo).31 Before proceeding, it is necessary
to explain why the ROPD includes all thirty-fivedialogues by Thrasyllus. It
is easy

to

in

field

any

that

Plato's

systematize

does

dialoguesor
the

of studywhen

not

fit a

critic

pre-conceived

the

the chronologically

and

69)

to

Menexenus

would

have

If

72-73).

been

evidence

any
what

precisely

Friedrich

the

of Laws

authenticity

is

Nails 2002: 328; and Press 2007: 57

Menexenus

it were

from

dropped

of evidence

body

exclude

and it is what is happening again

inexplicable

2007:

(Press

disappear

is

chronology":

already being denied (Tejera 1999: 291-308;

and

to

This

system.

of "dramatic

proponents

given

is empowered

Schleiermacher did (Lamm 2000: 232-233)

among

other

any

the

shows

already

not

for

canon

a tendency

Aristotle's

long

testimony,
1975:

(Guthrie

ago

By finding a home in the ROPDsnugly ensconced between Ion and

Symposium (2) and without reliance on Aristotle's testimony (cf. Dean-Jones

312).
1995:

n. 5)Menexenus

52,

by the

Stagirite.

and

Minos

the

ROPD.

vitiated

But

But

most

challenging

moment

that
have

and

was

thus

been

no

prepared

the

of them

eyes.

to

the

in

eighteenth

for Hipparchus
place
for Republic,
while

Minos

and

was

the

at the

location
sense

is literally

thirty-five.

the

center

out

that

dialogues

for a matched

opening

of

of that

turned

seventeen

the

very

components.

general

It

have

all thirty-five

in any

Republic

among

an

fit" would

despised

dialogues

that
of

most
even

"early"

series

there

its

discover

assumption

not

dictuconfirmed

on

to be

seem

Hipparchus,
reconstructing

it happens,

As

unnamed

sisters,
in

did

"they

ismirabile

impossible

fortunate

for Menexenus,

encountered

because

authenticity

with

less

places

problem

ROPD

Minoswhich

(5):

her

finding

in its proponent's

it confers

starting

ROPD

any

at least

fit and

Hipparchus

that

the

excluding

wordwithout

there

it is worth,

do

it would

of the

what

the project,

dialogues
same

was

yet rescue

may

For

set

after

it.
The

Alcibiades

elementary

Alcibiadesfollows
chronological

Protagoras,
sense.

More

while

importantiy

between

first conversation

Majorthe

Alcibiades
it now

Minor

necessarily

becomes

unclear

Socrates
follows

to Alcibiades

and
it in a
{Ale.

2.148a8-b4) that the things he had originally hoped that Socrates would help him
acquire {Ale. 1.104d2-4) are actually worth acquiring (1). This rehabilitation
of ignorance {Ale. 2.143b6-c3) already (4) stands in sharp contrast with the
rival pretensions of the knowledgeable Hippias {Ale. 2.147d6) who was present,
along with Alcibiades and Socrates, in the house of Callias {Prot. 315b9-cl and
316a4).

Plato's

proclivity

to create

paired

dialogues

has

already

been

observed

in the interstices of the First Tetralogy; this pattern is established early in the
ROPD where two Hippias dialogues are paired with two Alcibiades dialogues, both
beginning with the greater {Hip. Maj. 286b4c2 and Hip. Min. 363al2). Since
31

For the relationship between Phaedo and Protagorasevidence

Reuter2001:
82-83.

encyclopaediasee

that Plato has created a true

42

PHOENIX

Alcibiades

is a man

of action

and

a pretentious

Hippias

the Erastai

know-it-all,

(or "Rival Lovers") bridges the gap (2) between one pair (Amat. 132d4-5 with
Ale. 2.143b6-c5 and 145c2) and the other {Amat. 133cll, 137b4, and 139a4-5
with Hip. Min. 363c7d4). Lesser Hippias concerns Homer {Hip. Min. 363a6-bl)
and

is therefore

followed

by Ion

naturally

The

(3).

result

is: Protagoras,

Alcibiades

Major, Alcibiades Minor, Erastai, Hippias Major, Hippias Minor, Ion, Menexenus,
Symposium,and then the basanistic Lysis (7). It will be noted that Tetralogy 7 of
Thrasyllus is identical, while Tetralogy IV contains, given the difficultyof placing
but

Hipparchus,

one

understandable

perfectly

It will

error.

the visionary Symposium (6) is ninth in the ROPD:

Republic dialogues (5).
Between

Lysis
the

Completing

devoted

dialogue

and

the greatest

Republic,

set

of five

to

"virtue"

wisdom),

is the placement

(without
the

containing

that

noted

mid-point of the seventeen

problem

dialogues

be

also

only

there

it,

of Theages.
would

be

reference

explicit

no

in

the

dialogues to the Sicilian Expedition, and essential to unlocking a key passage

in Republic {Rep. 496b7-c5), it clearly deserves a home.
It is easy to see
why Thrasyllus placed it in company with Laches and Charmides (Tetralogy V)
its reference

although
have

been

placed

as inseparable

"divine

(Oeta

that

the

suggests

reader

danger

to take

posed

Socrates
Tetralogies

in

the

Cleitophon.
IV and V)

that

shows

answer:

To

of the
Meno

joins

return,

then,

It is the

return

542a4;

cf. Men.

99e6

between

Gorgias

at Ion

seriously

preliminary
to

where

by Euthydemus

how

latter

(cf.

Meno

The

2001).

brought

against

is followed

Lysis

finally

and

of
and

and prepares

Reuter

charge

Symposium-.
Socrates

not
{Thg.

indeed Gorgias and Meno

and Men. 93b7-94e2)

to the

it should

to Gorgias

Charmides.

comes

Theages

Thg. 126a9-10,

and Ctesippus (Ly. 203a4)

a manner

first appears

conclusion

by Anytus

and

that

suggests
backwards

points

as Laches

noipa

(compare also G. 515dl,

the

128d8-el)
also

Theages

VI)

(Tetralogy

dispensation"
128d2)

Thg.

( Thg.

to it. But

as Meno does as well {Men. 70b2-3);

127e8-128al)
seem

to Charmides

prior

reaches

(cf.

the Lyceum

wins the love of his beloved {Euthd. 300d5-7)

well

he

has

been

taught

(Altman

2007:

in

371-375).

Remaining in the Lyceum (3), the men fighting in armor {Euthd. 271d3) join
Euthydemus to Laches {La. 178al) which is linked, in turn, to Charmides, not
only as a virtue dialogue but by the War {La. 181bl and Chrm. 153al; cf.
and 219e6).
It should be emphasized that Laches stands
Symp. 220e8-221al
prior

to Charmides

not

only

because

of the former's

dramatic

link

to

Euthydemus

but also by virtue of the latter's comparative complexity (see Guthrie 1975: 125
and

163).

Another

kind

of war

breaks

out

in

Gorgias',

the

opening

late

arrival

is a joke (G. 447al-2).

It is Plato's manly/cowardly former self that connects
Charmidesa dialogue filled with Plato's relatives (Nails 2002: 244)to Gorgias.
In Callicles we meet the pre-Socratic Aristocles (Dodds 1959: 14, n. 1 and
Bremer 2002: 100101) in whom Socrates finally discovered his touchstone, by
whom he would be completed (cf. Arieti 1991: 92), and through whom he would

ORDER

THE READING
became

"a

Lysis,

into

possession

Laches,

Euthydemus,

OF PLATO'S

forever."32

These

Charmides,

Gorgias,

43

DIALOGUES

conclusions

may

Theages,

Meno,

be

summarized:
and

Cleitophon,

Republic.
Thrasyllus

the

gets

tetrad

central

once

right:

the

of

purpose

is

Cleitophon

recognized, Republic, Timaeus, and Critias are explicitly linked. The question is:
where

to go

from

Readers

there?

have

of Thucydides

heard

Hermocrates the Syracusan (e.g., Thuc. 6.76.2-77.1;

Hermocrates

is no

least

(at

by Plato)

any

more

from

enough

quite

there

cf. Criti. 108b8-4);

the

than

is missing.

Philosopher

The dialogue that breaks off on the brink of its final speech ( Critias) precedes the
only

that

dialogue

does

not

at its own

begin

"Protarchus"

beginning.

as follower

(Phlb. llal-2)

is but the firstanomaly of Philebus. But before proceedingand

in recognition

of the

at Critias

world

Heraclitus

Theaetetus

411cl-5

as a pair,

Taken

in

described

and

and

440e2)

order,

but

There

various

are

and

to pair

Parmenides
not only

246a4):

presently

few

"theoretical

proclivity

(Soph.

Parmenides

and

the dialogues

Cratylus

Sophist

so Nails

Critias

Plato's

when

(not

Between

Philebus.

here

with

especially

consideration.

for the yiyavxofiaxia

(Cra.

and

of the

committed

of its frame

In alphabetical

to work

emerge,

Only

edge

most

the

Euthyphro.

Phaedrus,

indications

into

precedes

Parmenides,

connections

stock.

on the basis

deny

left for four dialogues.

or chronological

the way

prepare

that

Cratylus,

is taken

will

off the

as it were,

falls,

to take

is necessary

308)

metaphysical"

dialogues
are

are:

ROPD

the

chronology

is room

there

remain

dramatic
and

and

320-321

Theaetetus,
that

that

121c5it

of dramatic

proponents
2002:

fact

considered

the principal poles of pre-Socratic thought (Guthrie 1965: 1) but it is probable

that Plato too regarded them in this light (Tht. 152e2). With a reference to
(but

Euthyphro
Both

not Euthyphro),

quartet

while

of these

also

of the

matched

both
pivot

set is found

the

Phaedrus
on

{Cra.

396d5)

Parmenides

take

Cratylus
and

a represented

in Phaedrus

and

discourse.

Philebus:

despite

is attracted
place

outside

more
the

sexy

to the end
Athens.33

deliciously
name

ironic
Plato

has

32 The
could
assumption that Callicles (to say nothing of a modern reader influenced by Nietzsche)
not change his mind under the influence of Socrates in Gorgias (Beversluis 2000: 375) is unwarranted.
"Twas I; but 'tis not I.
In the case of Plato and Callicles, compare As You Like It (IV.iii.135-137):
I do not shame to tell you what I was since my conversion so sweetly tastes being the thing I am."

that Plato was fully aware of Socrates' and his own pedagogical effectiveness and the
is a good first step; many errors
literary immortality that would attend the two together (G. 527d2-5)
of interpretation could also be avoided by keeping in mind that Plato loved both Adeimantus and
Glaucon, his brilliant older brothers immortalized in Republic.
Recognizing

331 am grateful to Catherine Zuckert for bringing this connection to my attention. I have made
a deliberate decision not to revise this paper on the basis of my subsequent encounter with Plato's
for my review of this important book,
Philosophers: The Coherence of the Dialogues (Chicago 2009);
ROPD
see Polis 27 (2010) 147-150.
question in
Profoundly grateful to Zuckert for broaching the

the context of a post-developmentalist reading which conceives all thirty-five dialogues as dialectically
of
coherent, I observe there that her order's dependence on dramatic chronology "has traded one form
chronological

over-determination

for another" (150).

44

PHOENIX
the

given
The

not

results

both

it lacks

latter,

defectsbut

sex

othersare

(but

appeal

lushly

of this investigation

redressed
now

may

see

Wood

and

2007)

charm;

.these

in Phaedrus?A
be presented:

The Reading Order of Plato's Dialogues

Timaeus

Protagoras

Alcibiades Major
Alcibiades Minor

Critias
Philebus

Erastai

Phaedrus

Hippias Major
Hippias Minor

Parmenides

Ion

Theaetetus

Cratylus

Menexenus

Euthyphro

Symposium
Lysis

Republic

Sophist
Statesman

Apology
Hipparchus

Euthydemus
Laches
Charmides

Republic
Guided

Minos

Gorgias

Crito

Theages

Laws

Meno

Epinomis

Cleitophon

Phaedo

stands
by the

at

the

ROPD,

center

of the

Plato's

student/readers

thirty-five

interconnected
follow

a blazed

(2).

dialogues
trail

(3)

through

terrain of gradually increasing difficulty(1) that prepares them (4) for the peak
experience
Guardians,
sent

back

at the mid-point
the reader/student
down

into

politics

of their journey

(5).

Much

is led up to the sunlight

at the

age

like
(6)

of thirty-five,35

one

and

of the imaginary
then,

is tested

before

being

(7)36before

34

A serious problem needs further attention: on the basis of what

plausible conception of what
Plato expected his readers to know are we to distinguish Critias in Critias from Critias in Charmides
(Rosenmeyer 1949; Lampert and Planeaux 1998) and Cephalus in Parmenides from Cephalus in
cf. Miller 1986: 18-23).
Republic (Prm. 126al-4;
35
Rep. 539e2-540a2
(Shorey): "For after that [c. after the Guardians reach the age of thirty-five]

into the cave again, and compel them to hold

you will have to send them down [Katapipaaxsoi]
commands in war and the other offices suitable to youth, so that they may not fall short of the other
to see whether
type in experience either. And in these offices, too, they are to be tested [[iaaaviaxoi]

they will remain steadfast under diverse solicitations or whether they will flinch and swerve."
36
Rep. 537d3-8 (Shorey modified): "when they have passed the thirtieth year to promote them,
by a second selection from those preferred in the first, to still greater honors, and to examine,
testing [paacmovca]

by the capacity for dialectic [-cf)xo iaXyecsQai

Sov|ai],

who is capable of

THE READING
"the

leaving

ORDER

of her commitment

to the strength

Academy"as

DIALOGUES

OF PLATO'S

45

to the Idea

of the

Good.37

with

Republic
in

considered
of Plato's
Socrates

define

In

7.38

three

a single

natural

that a discussion

conditional

installmentsSocrates
pedagogy.

post-Republic
elucidates

a manner
And

it is only

of a conclusion,

By way
end

the negative

as to bring

(or begin

In

sentenceso
offers

the

that

long

sentence's

of the inadequate

the true philosopher

be

protasis,

Guardian
into

should
it will

a preview

student/reader
of the

first part

characteristics
to bring)

the

of the ROPD

in such

sight:

the man who is unable to

is not this true of the good [xo yciBoG] likewisethat
and
and abstract from all
in
his
discourse
[xq> X6y(p]
[iopaaaBai]
distinguish

other things
yaGo

tkxvtcov <|>eA,>v] the aspect

[arab xcov aM-oov

i5av]

...

or idea
{Rep.

of the good
534b8-cl;

[xf)v xo
Shorey)

Applied to the ROPD, these words indicate that: (1) if the Good is present in
the dialogue (tcp Xycp)39but hidden, the student must find it; (2) if the presence
of the

Good

is merely

apparent,

the

student

must

expose

this

appearance

as

fraudulent; (3) if the Good is entirely absent, that is decisive for anything else the
discourse

my contain;

and

(4)

if the Good

is present,

the student

must

cleave

to it.

[kc coarcep v
through all refutations emerging
recourse
to opinion but to essence
not
to
refute
[i
Sieicov],
by
eager
oaav
Kotx
XX
Kax'
Aiyxeiv],
jtpoGoiaopevo
So^av
throughout
Ijari
proceeding
in all of these [v noi xouxoi]
its way [SiaJtopsrixat]
[if. refutations] with the discourse
translation mine)
[7txrxt xcp ,6ycp] ...
(Rep. 534cl-3;
untoppled
...

and who

cannot,

as if in battle

JKXVTCOVXyxcov

itself [en* ax to ov] along with truth.

disregarding eyes and the other senses and go on to Being
And it's no doubt a task for careful guarding, my dear fellow."
we have to consider is whether the greater and more
37Rep. 526d8~e7 (Shorey modified): "What
advanced part of it tends to facilitate the apprehension of the idea of good [ttjv too ayaGoo ISeav].
That tendency, we affirm, is to be found in all studies that force the soul to turn its vision round to
too vto], which it is
the region where dwells the most blessed part of reality [t 05ai|a0vaTa.T0v
he said. "Then if it compels the soul to contemplate
imperative that it should behold." "You are right,"
Being [oocnav], it is suitable; if Becoming [ysveaiv], it is not."
38
the Letters should be read in tandem with Republic,
Although not included here in the ROPD,
in
to
cut
off
the second ("Sicilian") alternative at Rep. 473cll
5
and
order
between
Books
6,
perhaps
needs to be read (or reread) in the light of Ep. 7.341c4-d2
d2. On the other hand, Rep. 434e4-435a2
(see above, 23, n. 7). Either way, the Letters should be read as an integrated literary workwith
its most important component artfully placed in the center (there are thirteen Letters)contrived
for a stricdy pedagogical purpose, not as a collection of alternately accurate or inaccurate historical
documents whose veracity we are challenged to determine. See Strauss 2001: 586; Dornseiff 1934;
and Wohl 1998.
39
It will be noted that, although I have retained Shorey s translation for this first section (I will
be using my own translations for the next two), his rendering of tco Xoytp as "his discourse" is too
restrictive. I am suggesting that the student, not while speaking his own speech but while reading

(as if it were TCp [too n.TCvo] ,ycp) must be able to separate (i.e., to
the wheat (i.e., ttjv too yaGoG ieav) from the chaff (i.e., ji tcdv aAAcov
<J>)v)
iopiaaaGai
by
rcavTcov), all explicitly named, defined, and treated as such.
any particular dialogue

46

PHOENIX
most

Interpreting
the

being

%copicT|i6c

of the

between

and

Being

will

I)

in the ROPD

dialogues

post-Republic

of Tetralogy

dialogues

be

by the unitary

(defined

Becoming

(the

to war.

analogous

exceptions

Wherever
and

the

transcendent

Idea of the Good) is passed over (Phlb. 23d9-10) or attacked (cf. Gadamer
1986: 13)as it will be in various ways by Timaeus, Parmenides, the Eleatic
and Athenian Strangers, even by Socrates himself {Phlb. 27b8-9; cf. Westerink
1990:

student/reader

39.26-29)the
the arguments

evaluating

student/reader

gentlementhe
omav)

and

if that

means

(kcit'
even

themselves
Socrates

of men

able
calls

"the

must judge

not according

through

discourse

defend

and

to what

seems
Socrates

(sAiyxeiv)

refuting

to proceed

must

it i

like thesevenerable,

all of these

intact."

The

stakes

Ttavxcov

criticize

himself.
tests
are

(v

(pt]

oav),

must
with

xoxoi)

as the

of Being

tcai

Students

nam

high,

impressive

on the basis

only

to be reputable

In

cXcyyav.
and

intelligent,

apodosis

prove
what
finally

reveals:
the man who

lacks this power, you will say, does not really know the good itself [ax to
or any particular good [ooxe akko yaGv
but if he joins himself in any
oosv]
eX JtfleIScoou
he does so by reputation but not
way to some image [XV
xiv ijirtxexaij
ok sjncrcrmfl <|>jrtsc70tti.].
translation mine)
[56^,
knowledge
{Rep. 534c4-d6;
yaGv]

This

conditional

the ears

sentence

is the "Battle

of the reader/student

amidst

Hymn

the "severe

of the
Republic"
studies"40

It must

that

follow

sound

in

Republic

in

the ROPD.
There is one final point. Regardless of the role the ROPD played when Plato

himself

presided

leaving

others

creator

to become

432d7-e3).
Rep.

over

the

This

537b8-c3.42

the

there is some
indication
in Republic
7 that
Academy,
of
it
have
been
intended
pleasure
reconstructing
may
by its
of
an
eternal
hidden
in
curriculum,41
part
plain
sight (Rep.
turns on how broadly
one interprets
x pa0r|(j.axa
at
question
If it applies

only

to the

five mathematical

sciences

of Book

7,

40

Rep. 535b6-9
(Shorey): "They must have, my friend, to begin with, a certain keenness for
study, and must not learn with difficulty. For souls are much more likely to flinch and faint in severe
studies [v ia/upoic fiaOr^iaaiv]
than in gymnastics, because the toil touches them more
nearly,
being peculiar to them and not shared with the body."
41
Rep. 531c9-d4 (my modification of Shorey): "And I'm thinking also that the investigation of
all these studies we've just gone
through [r| tootcdv Ttavxcov a>v SiE^WiOanEV
n0o5o], if it arrives
at the connection between them [Jt tr|v M.r|taov Koivcovav
ijiKTiTai] and their common origin
and synthesizes [ouXAoyicrSfl] them with respect to their affinities with each other
[aoyyveiav]
[rj
ecttiv >,r|oi oKEx], then to busy ourselves with them contributes to our desired
end, and the
labor taken is not lost; but otherwise it is vain."

A2Rep. 537b8-c3
(Shorey): "'Surely it is,' he said. 'After this period,' I said, 'those who are
given preference from the twenty-year class will receive greater honors than the others, and they will
be required to gather [auvaKtovJ the studies which
they disconnectedly [x te xrjv ^aOr^aia]
pursued as children in their former education into a comprehensive survey [si ovov|/iv] of their
affinities with one another [oki6tt|t6 te M.r|Xa>v tSv
paOrinaTtov] and with the nature of things
[ko tt to vto, <|)6cte(]'." What Socrates here calls a cjvoyi I am calling the ROPD:
a
comprehensive vision of the only surviving Platonic nuOriuu :a the reconstruction of which would

THE READING
it is hard

to say why

order

proper
as they

have

Socrateswho

as taught

come

the ROPD

could

must

lose

never

ever

girls who
Depto.

and

will

long

more

of the playful

danced,

are

eternally

DIALOGUES

careful

very

as x

serious

Plato,

a delightful
But
than

even

a merely

he who

created

arm

in arm.

interwoven,

In

(xu5r|v).
and

it is not
dialogues

either

case,

the

harmless

perfectly

if the

in the

these

|xaOr|fj.a'ca:

but the thirty-five

Guardians

remain

47

to discuss

%68r|v

"scrambled"

by Socrates.43

as described
be considered

sight

been

to them

to us that

has

in dialectic

exercise

has

to the imaginary

down

for the ROPD

search

OF PLATO'S

528a6-b2)refers

{Rep.

the five sciences

ORDER

reconstruction

pleasant

of
one

pastime,

the most

beautiful

flute

Filosofia

Campus

Florianpolis
Sta.

Trindade

Universitrio,
88.010-970
Brasil

Catarina,

whfaltman@gmail.com
BIBLIOGRAPHY

W.

Altman,

H.

F. 2007.

"Leo

and the Euthydemus,"

Strauss

and the Art of Writing:

"Altruism

2009.

Plato,

Cicero,

CJ 102:
and Leo

355-379.
Strauss,"

Humanitas

22: 68-98.
J. 1977.

Annas,

"Plato

Platonic

1999.

on Friendship
Old and New. Ithaca.

and Aristotle

Ethics,

and Altruism,"

Mind

n.s. 86: 532-554.

as Drama.
Lanham.
Interpreting Plato: The Dialogues
des Phaidros.
und die Entstehungszeit
1914. Platos Jugenddialoge
107:1-39.
1987. "The Peace of CalliasJHS

Arieti, J. A. 1991.
H.

von Arnim,
E.

Badian,

Bailly, J. A. 2003. Plato's Euthyphro

J. 2000.
Cross-Examining

and Clitophon.
Newburyport.
Socrates: A Defense of the Interlocutors

Cambridge.
Dialogues.
Bowe, G. S. 2004 "Review

A. Bailly,

Beversluis,

of Jacques

Plato's

Euthyphro

Berlin.

in Plato's

Early

BMCR

and Clitophon."

2004.05.12

(http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2004/2004-05-12.html).
Bremer, J. 2002. Plato and the Founding of the Academy. Lanham.
View of Athenian
Bruell, C. 1974.
Imperialism,"
"Thucydides'
Review
1999.

American

Political

Science

68: 11-17.
On the Socratic

Education:

An Introduction

to the Shorter Platonic

Dialogues.

Lanham.
Burnet,

J. 1900-1907.

Cawkwell,

Opera. Oxford.
CQ n.s. 31: 69-83.
King's Peace,"
Form of the Beautiful
"Plato's
2002.

Platonis

G. L. 1981.

Chang,
Kyung-Choon.
Aristotle's Unmoved

"The

Mover

in Metaphysics

(A),"

CQ

in the Symposium

versus

n.s. 52: 431-446.

in accordance with both oIksiotti (i.e., the various links he uses to

auvaKiov
and
xou
the
vxo
(|)ucji (sc. the dualistic metaphysics of Republic 7, i.e., Platonism).
fj
dialogues)
join
43
instruction that abides [r]
(Shorey): "That, at any rate," he said, "is the only
Rep. 537c4-7
xoiauxri |i0r|ai ppaio] with those who receive it." "And it is also," said I, "the chief test [peyiaxti
For he who
ye ... TtEpa] of the dialectical nature and its opposite [8iaA.sKxiKrj <j)6a(o kou |ir|].
can view things in their connection is a dialectician; he who cannot, is not [ |iv. yap guvo7txik
fulfill the mandated

ia.8Kxuco, firi ou]."

PHOENIX
H.

Cherniss,

1945.

J. M.

Cooper,

of the Early Academy. Berkeley.

S. Hutchinson
(eds.). 1997. Plato: Complete Works. Chicago.
1967. The Unwritten Philosophy and Other Essays. Ed. W. K. C. Guthrie.

F. H.

Cornford,

The Riddle

and D.

Cambridge.
1971.
"The

Doctrine

of Eros

in Plato's

of Critical Essays 2. Notre Dame.

L. 1989. "Philosophy
and Rhetoric

G.

Symposiumin

Vlastos

Plato:

(ed.),

Collection
Coventry,

J. 1995.

Cropsey,

Plato's

G. 2005.

Danzig,

World: Man's

"Intra-Socratic

in theMenexenus"JHS

Place in the Cosmos.

Polemics:

The

45: 331-358.
L. 1995.

Dean-Jones,
Denyer,

Plato:

Alcibiades.

Dodds,

E.

Plato,

Gorgias;

R.

of Socrates,"

"MenexenusSon

N. ed. 2001.
1959.

Symposia

Chicago.
of Plato

109:

1-15.

and Xenophon,"

GRBS

n.s. 45: 51-57.

CQ

Cambridge.
A Revised Text with Introduction

and

Commentary.

Oxford.
F. 1934.

Dornseiff,

A. E.

Douglas,

K. J. 1965.

Dover,

M.

Dunn,

1974.

Hermes

Brutus.

69, 223-226.

Oxford.

Date of Plato's Symposium," Phronesis 10: 2-20.

of the Platonic
Organization
Corpus Between the First and Second
Diss., Yale University.

(ed.),

E. 2004.

and the Reading

order of the Platonic Dialogues,"
Thrasyllus,
Studies in Neoplatonism:
Ancient and Modern 1. Albany. 59-80.
A Study in Greek Politics," JHS 67: 46-67.
"Polypragmosyne:

The Roman

G. R. F. 2003.

Plato

'Briefe',"

"The

V. 1947.

Ehrenberg,
Ferrari,

Buch

Tulli Ciceronis:

World of Cicero's De
on Nightingale

"Comments

Oratore.

Oxford.

and Szlezk,"

in A. N. Michelini

241-245.
The Rhetoric of Philosophy. Leiden.
A. J. 1969.
"L'ordre
de lecture des dialogues
de Platon
Festugire,
Mus. Helv. 26: 281-296.

(ed.),

as Author:

and Thucydides,"
HSCP
Finley, J. H. Jr. 1938. "Euripides
and the Causes
of Athenian
Forde, S. 1986. "Thucydides
Science Review 80: 433-448.
Frede,

in

"Iamblichus,

R. B. Harris

Fantham,

M.

"The

a.d."

Century
1976.

"Platons

1966.

M.

Smith

1992.
H.-G.

Gadamer,
Smith.

"Plato's

New

1986.

American

Political

49: 23-68.

and the Dialogue

Form,"
of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues.

The Idea

sicles,"

Imperialism,"

Arguments

Methods

(eds.),

aux Ve/VIe

in J. C.
Oxford.

of the Good in Platonic-Aristotelian

Klagge and N. D.
201-219.

Philosophy.

Tr.

P. C.

Haven.

K. 1963.

Platons ungeschriebene Lehre: Studien zur

systematischen undgeschichtlichen
der
Begriindung
Wissenschaften in der Platonischen Schule. Stuttgart.
Geier, A. 2002. Plato's Erotic Thought: The Tree of the Unknown. Rochester.
Gaiser,

Gonzalez,

F. J. 1995.

"Plato's

Philosophy15: 69-90.
2000a.
Radically
2000b.

"Socrates
Transformed,"

on

Lysis:

An

Enactment

One's
Own:
Loving
CP 95: 379-398.

of Philosophical
A

Traditional

Kinship,"

Conception

Ancient
of <MAIA

"The Eleatic Stranger: His Master's

Voice?," in G. A. Press (ed.), Who Speaks
for Plato? Studies in Platonic Anonymity. Lanham.
C. L. Jr. 1999. "E Pluribus UnurrP. On the Platonic
Ancient Philosophy
Griswold,
'Corpus',"

19: 361-397.

THE READING
2000.

"E

Ancient
2008.

Unum?

20:

On

OF PLATO'S

the Platonic

DIALOGUES
the Discussion

'Corpus':

Continued,"

195-197.

and Writing Plato," Philosophy and Literature 32: 205-216.

"Reading
1865. Plato and the Other Companions
of Sokrates. London.

G.

Grote,

Pluribus

Philosophy

ORDER

G. M.

A. 1931.

W.

K. C. 1965.

"The

Cleitophon of Plato," CP 26: 302-308.

A History of Greek Philosophy 2. Cambridge.
1969. A History of Greek Philosophy 3. Cambridge.
1975. A History of Greek Philosophy 4. Cambridge.
1978. A History of Greek Philosophy 5. Cambridge.

Grube,

Guthrie,

D.

Halperin,

M.

1985.

"Platonic

and What

Eros

Men

Call

Ancient

Love,"

161-204.
1986.

"Plato

1990.

and Erotic

Class. Ant. 5: 60-80.

Reciprocity,"
in One Hundred Years of Homosexuality
a Woman?,"
New York. 113-151.

is Diotima

and Other

'Why
Essays on Greek Love.
1992. "Plato and the Erotics
Methods

Erotikon:

Essays on Eros Ancient and Modern.

The Greek Way. New York.
A. 1896. Pseudo-Platonica.
Baltimore.

48-58.

Chicago.

E. 1930.

Hamilton,
W.

Heidel,

of Narrativity," in J. C. Klagge and N. D. Smith (eds.),

Plato and his Dialogues.
Oxford. 93-129.
Six Remarks on Platonic Eros," in S. Bartsch and T. Bartscherer

of Interpreting
"Love's Irony:

2005.
(eds.),

5:

Philosophy

R. G.

Hoerber,

1959.

J. 1991.

Howland,

"Plato's

"Re-Reading

Lysis," Phronesis 4: 15-28.

Plato: The Problem of Platonic

Phoenix

Chronology,"

45:

189-214.
and the Sicilian Expedition,"
Joyal, M. 1994. "Socrates
LAntiquit
Classique 63: 21-33.
H.
Funeral
Oration:
The
Motive
of
the
CP 58:
C.
1963.
"Plato's
Kahn,
Menexenus,"

220-234.
1981a.

"Did

1981b.

"Aristotle

1988.

Plato

"Plato's

Write

Socratic

and Altruism,"

Charmides

CQ n.s. 31: 305-320.

Dialogues?,"
Mind N.s. 90: 20-40.

and the Proleptic

Reading

of Socratic

fournal

Dialogues,"

85: 541-549.

of Philosophy
1993. "Proleptic
CQ

Dialogue,"
1996.

Plato

in the Republic,

Composition
n.s. 43: 131-142.
and

the Socratic

Cambridge.
- 2000.
to Griswold,"
"Response
Kramer, H.J. 1959. Arete bei Platon
Kremer,
Lamm,

M.

2004.

J. 2000.

Plato's

or Why

The

Dialogue:

Book

1 Was

Philosophical

Clitophon:
as Plato

Scholar,"

a Separate

Use of Literary

Ancient Philosophy 20: 189-193.

und Aristoteles. Heidelberg.
On Socrates and the Modern Mind.

"Schleiermacher

Never

Form.

Lanham.

of Religion 80: 206-239.

and Why,"
in Plato's TimaeusCritias
fournal

Who
1998. "Who's
L. and C. Planeaux.
Lampert,
Review of Metaphysics 52: 87-125.
Mansfeld,
J. 1994.
Questions to be Settled Before the Study of an Author,
Prolegomena:

or a

Text. Leiden.
Miller,

M.

H.

Jr. 1985.

in the Republic,"

in D.

"Platonic

Provocations:

J. O'Meara

(ed.),

163-193.
1986.

Plato's

Parmenides:

The Conversion

Reflections

Platonic

on the Soul

Investigations.

of the Soul. Princeton.

and

the Good

Washington,

D.C.

PHOENIX
S. S. 1994.

Monoson,

the Periclean
1998.
Menexenus,"
D.

as erastes: Erotic

Imagery and the Idea

Theory 22: 253-276.

Political

Oration,"

Pericles:
The
"Remembering
Political Theory 26: 489-513.

J. S. 1964.

Morrison,

"Citizen

Funeral

"Four

Notes

Plato's

and

Theoretical

on Plato's

Symposium," CQ n.s.
A
Historical
City:
Interpretation
Cluster," Phoenix 48: 62-67.

Impact

in

of Plato's

14: 42-55.

of the Laws. Princeton.

Nails, D. 1994. "Plato's 'Middle'
- 2002. The
People of Plato: A Prosopography of Plato and Other Socratics. Indianapolis.
2006. "Tragedy
in J. H. Lesher, D. Nails, and F. C. C. Sheffield (eds.),
Off-Stage,"
Morrow,

R. 1960.

Political

of Reciprocity

Cretan

Plato's

Issues in Interpretation and Reception. Cambridge,

MA.
Symposium:
A.
W.
1993.
"The
of
Praise:
Plato's
of
Encomiastic
Nightingale,
Folly
Critique
in the Lysis and Symposium," CQ n.s. 43: 112-130.
O'Neill,

W.

Orwin,

C.

1965.

179-207.
Discourse

I. A Translation and Commentary. The Hague.

Plato's
Canadian
Journal
against Socrates:
Clitophon,"
Political Science! Revue canadienne de science politique 15: 741-753.
C. 1994. Eros Unveiled: Plato and the God of Love. Oxford.
Osborne,
M.

Pakaluk,

Proclus: Alcibiades

1982.

"The

1998.

Case

Nicomachean

Aristotle,

Commentary. Oxford.
2005. Aristotle's Nicomachean
T.

Pangle,

L.

ed.

1987.

Translated,
Dialogues,
Penner, T. and C. Rowe.
C. 2001.

Planeaux,
C.

Poster,

1998.

"The

Consequences,"
Press, G. A. 1993.
"Introduction"
Lanham.

Books

VIII

An Introduction.

of Platonic

Political

and IX.

Translated

Cambridge.
Ten Forgotten

Philosophy:

with a

Socratic

with Interpretive Essays. Ithaca.

2005. Plato's Lysis. Cambridge.
an Unreliable

"Socrates,

CP 96: 60-68.

Ethics:

The Roots

Ethics,

of

Idea(s)

Phoenix

of Order

Narrator?

The

of Platonic

Dramatic
and

Dialogues

of the Lysis,"

Setting
Their

Hermeneutic

52: 282-298.

of Dramatic
and Non-Dogmatic
"Principles
to G. A. Press (ed.), Plato's Dialogues:
New

Plato
Studies

and
Interpretation"
and Interpretations.

107-127.

2007.
Price,

Plato: A Guide for the Perplexed. London.

A. W. 1989. Love and
Friendship in Plato and Aristotle.
G.

Reale,

1990.
M.

Renault,

M.

Reuter,

Plato and Aristotle.

1956.
2001.

of Plato's

Ed.

and tr. J. R. Catan.

The Last of the Wine. New York.

"Is Goodness
Really a Gift from God?

Meno,"

Phoenix

Oxford.

Albany.

Another

Look

at the Conclusion

55: 77-97.

T. G. 1949. "The Family of Critias," AJP 70: 404-410.

Rosenmeyer,
Rowe, C. 2000.
"Cleitophon and Minos," in C. Rowe and M. Schofield
History of Greek and Roman Political Thought. Cambridge.
Ryle, G.

1966.

Salkever,

S. G. 1993.

Plato's

Progress. Cambridge.
"Socrates'
The
Oration:
Aspasian
Menexenus," American Political Science Review

Sayre, K. M. 1995.
D. 2007.
Shanske,
Scott,

and Theogony
"Anthropogony
Plato's Literary Garden. Notre

Play of Philosophy
87: 133-143.

in Plato's

Symposium,"

and Politics
CJ 86: 214-225.

Dame.

Thucydides and the Philosophical

Origins of History. Cambridge.
Plato's Socrates as Educator. Albany.
F. C. C. 2006. Plato's Symposium:
The Ethics of Desire. Oxford.

G. A. 2000.

Sheffield,

Cambridge

Plato's

C. 1991.

Salman,

(eds.),

in

THE READING
Sharey,

P. 1903.
S. R. 1999.

Slings,

The Unity of Plato's

Plato: Clitophon.

Snyder, H. G. 2000.
Christians. London.
Souilh,
Stenzel,
Strauss,

ORDER

Teachers

OF PLATO'S

Thought.

DIALOGUES

Chicago.

Cambridge.
and Texts in the Ancient

World:

Platon: Oeuvres Completes 13.1. Paris.

Plato der Erzieher. Leipzig.
of Plato's Political
L. 1946. "On a New Interpretation

J. 1949.

J. 1928.

13: 326-367.
1953.
1983.
1987.
Chicago.
2001.

Right and History. Chicago.

Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy. Chicago.
in L. Strauss and J. Cropsey
(eds.),
"Plato,"

H.

Tarrant,

H.

History

of Political

Philosophy3.

33-89.

1993.

V. 1999.

Thesleff,

Social Research

Philosophy,"

Natural

Gesammelte Schriften 3: Hobbes'politische

Ed.
H. Meier, with W. Meier. Stuttgart
Briefe.
Szlezk, T. A. 1999. Reading Plato. Tr. G. Zanker.
Tejera,

Jews and

Philosophers,

Wissenschaft undzugeh'orige
and Weimar.

Schriften

London.

Thrasyllan Platonism. Ithaca.

Plato's Dialogues
One By One. Lanham.

1978.

"The

Interrelation

and Date

BICS 24:157-170.

of the Symposia

of Plato

and Xenophon,"

with
L. G. ed. 1990. Prolgomnes la philosophie de Platon. Tr. by J. Trouillard
A. P. Segonds.
Paris.
ess t," AJP 16: 211-216.
Wirth, A. 1895. "Lysidem
post a. 394 a. Chr. n. compositum
in Plato's Epistles," Ramus 27: 60-93.
Wohl, V. 1998. "Plato avant la lettre: Authenticity
2002. Love Among the Ruins: The Erotics of Democracy in Classical Athens. Princeton.
Westerink,

Wood,
Zappen,

J. L. 2007.
J. P. 2004.

and Dialogue
in the Philebus," Interpretation 34: 109-128.
The Rebirth of Dialogue:
Bakhtin, Socrates, and the Rhetorical Tradition.

"Politics

Albany.
J. E. 1999.
CJ 95: 19-35.

Ziolkowski,
Zuckert,

C.

Chicago.

H.

1996.

"The

Bow

Postmodern

and the Lyre: Harmonizing

Platos:

Nietzsche,

Heidegger,

Duos

in Plato's

Gadamer,

Symposium

Strauss,

Derrida.