There is this, however, I said, which seems to be a stronger objection to the alleged reflection from the moon. It happens that those who have placed themselves in the path of reflected rays see not only the object illuminated but also what illuminates it. For example, if when a ray of light rebounds from water to a wall the eye is situated in the place that is itself illuminated by the reflection, the eye discerns all three things, the reflected ray and the water that causes the reflection and the sun itself,i.e. the image of the sun in the water or the reflecting surface. the source of the light which has been reflected by impinging upon the water. On the basis of these admitted and apparent facts those who maintain that the moon illuminates the earth with reflected light are bidden (by their adversaries)i.e. by the Stoics; cf. e.g. the argument of Cleomedes (ii. 4. 101-102 [p. 184. 4 ff., Ziegler]) against the explanation of the moon’s light as reflection. The following argument in this passage is printed by von Arnim, ii, p. 199 as frag. 675 of Chrysippus. to point out in the moon at night an appearance of the sun such as there is in water by day whenever there is a reflection of the sun from it. Since there is no such appearance, (these adversaries) think that the illumination comes about in another way and not by reflection and that, if there is not reflection, neither is the moon an earth. What response must be made to them then? said Apollonides, for the characteristics of reflection seem to present us with a problem in common. For the idiom, κοινὸν καὶ πρός τινα εἶναι, cf. Lucullus, 44 (521 A) and 45 (522 B). Apollonides is a geometer (cf. 920 F and 925 A-B supra) who had expressed admiration for Clearchuss theory of reflection from the moon (cf. 921 B supra); by καὶ πρὸς ἡμᾶς here he means that the objection just raised to reflection from the moon constitutes a difficulty for the theory which he has espoused as well as for that of Lamprias and Lucius which he has just attacked. Lamprias in his reply, however, contends that the physical characteristics of the moon on his theory, the very characteristics to which Apollonides has just objected (935 D-E), will explain why the objection does not really make the difficulty for his theory that it would for that of Clearchus. In common in a way certainly, said I, but in another way not in common either. In the first place consider the matter of the image,i.e. the reflected image, not the simile, as Amyot and Prickard interpret it. how topsy-turvy and like rivers flowing uphillFor the proverbial expression cf. Hesychius, s. v. ἄνω ποταμῶν; Euripides, , 410; Lucian, , 6. 2. they conceive it. The fact is that the water is on earth and below, and the moon above the earth and on high; and hence the angles produced by the reflected rays are the converse of each other, the one having its apex above at the moon, the other below at the earth.As Kepler says in his note 64 ad loc., ratio nihil ad rem. So they must not demand that every kind of mirror or a mirror at every distance produce a similar reflection, since (in doing so) they are at variance with the manifest facts. Those, on the other hand, who declare that the moon is not a tenuous or a smooth body as water is but a heavy and earthy one,i.e. those who hold the view of the moon’s nature that Lamprias himself espouses. I do not understand why it is required of them that the sun be manifest to vision in her. For milk does not return such mirrorings either or produce reflections of the visual ray, and the reason is the irregularity and roughness of its particlescf. 696 A; and observe that the phrase, ἀνωμαλία καὶ τραχύτης, used here of milk is in 930 D supra and 937 A s.v. applied to the moon.; how in the world the is it possible for the moon to cast the visual ray back from herself in the way that the smoother mirrors do? Yet even these, of course, are occluded if a scratch or speck of dirt or roughness covers the point from which the visual ray is naturally reflected, and while the mirrors themselves are seen they do not return the customary reflection.For the phenomenon referred to cf. [Ptolemy], , vi = Hero Alexandrinus, , ii. 1, p. 330. 4-22 (Nix-Schmidt). For τυφλόω meaning to deaden, muffle, occlude cf. , 434 c, 721 B, , 995 f. One who demands that the moon either reflect our vision from herself to the sun as well or else not reflect the sun from herself to us either is naive, for he is demanding that the eye be a sun, the vision light, and the human being a heaven. Since the light of the sun because of its intensity and brilliance arrives at the moon with a shock, it is reasonable that its reflection should reach to us; but the visual ray, since it is weak and tenuous and many times slighter, what wonder if it does not have an impact that produces recoil or if in rebounding it does not maintain its continuity but is dispersed and exhausted, not having light enough to keep it from being scattered about the irregularities and corrugations (of the moon)? From water, to be sure, and from mirrors of other kinds it is not impossible for the reflection (of the visual ray) to rebound to the sun, since it is still strong because it is near to its point of originPlutarch has to explain how the image of the sun can be seen in water and mirrors though it is not seen in the moon, and he does so by stressing the proximity of the former to the point of origin. This point of origin can only be our eyes, so that he must be thinking of the visual ray as reflected from water and mirrors to the sun and as failing to be reflected from the moon to the sun. The reading of the mss., ἐπὶ τὸν ἥλιον, is necessary to the argument and all suggestions for altering it are wrong.; but from the moon, even if the visual rays do in some cases glance off, they will be weak and dim and prematurely exhausted because of the magnitude of the distance.i.e. the distance from the eye to the reflecting surface of the moon. What is more too, whereas mirrors that are concave make the ray of light more intense after reflection than it was before so as often even to send off flames,For the concave burning-glass cf. [Euclid], Prop. 30 (Euclid, , vii, pp. 340-342 [Heiberg]) 154. convex and spherical mirrorsNot two kinds of mirrors, as Raingeard says ad. loc., but one, convex, i.e. convex spherical, for (1) spherical mirrors that are concave are the burning-glasses in the preceding category, and (2) convex mirrors that are not spherical would not provide the obvious analogy with the moon that is wanted. by not exerting counterpressure upon it from all points [give it off] weak and faint. You observe, I presume, whenever two rainbows appear, as one cloud encloses another, that the encompassing rainbow produces colours that are faint and indistinct. The reason for this is that the outer cloud, being situated further off from the eye, returns a reflection that is not intense or strong.On the double rainbow and the reason why the outer bow is less distinct cf. Aristotle, , 375 A 30-b 15. Aristotle’s explanation, which Plutarch here adopts, is attacked by Kepler in a long note on the present passage (note 70). Nay, what need of further arguments? When the light of the sun by being reflected from the moon loses all its heatSee note a on 929 E supra. and of its brilliance there barely reaches us a slight and feeble remnant, is it really possible that of the visual ray travelling the same double-courseThe moon is thought of as the καμπτήρ or turning-post in the stadium. The sun’s rays travel from sun to moon to eye, and the visual ray would have to travel the same course in reverse. any fraction of a remnant should from the moon arrive at the sun? For my part, I think not; and do you too, I said, consider this. If the visual ray were affected in the same way by water and by the moon, the full moon ought to show such reflections of the earth and plants and human beings and stars as all other mirrors do; but, if there occur no reflections of the visual ray to these objects either because of the weakness of the ray or the ruggedness of the moon, let us not require that there be such reflection to the sun either.

So we for our part, said I, have now reported as much of that conversationSee 921 f, 929 B, 929 F supra. as has not slipped our mind; and it is high time to summon Sulla or rather to demand his narrative as the agreed condition upon which he was admitted as a listener. So, if it is agreeable, let us stop our promenade and sit down upon the benches, that we may provide him with a settled audience. To this then they agreed; and, when we had sat down, Theon said: Though, as you know, Lamprias, I am as eager as any of you to hear what is going to be said, I should like before that to hear about the beings that are said to dwell on the moonIn , 892 A = Aëtius, ii. 30. 1 this notion is ascribed to the Pythagoreans (and in the version of Stobaeus specifically to Philolaüs). Diogenes Laertius, ii. 8 ascribes it to Anaxagoras — if on the basis of frag. B 4 (ii, p. 34. 5 ff. [Diels-Kranz]), wrongly; and Cicero’s ascription of it to Xenophanes ( II, xxxix. 123) is certainly an error (despite Lactantius, iii. 23. 12) but more probably due to confusion with Xenocrates than, as is usually said, a mistake for Anaxagoras (cf. J. S. Reid ad loc.; Diels-Kranz, , i, p. 125. 40; Diels, , p. 121, n. 1). The moon-dwellers became characters of scientific fiction at least as early as Herodorus of Heraclea (cf. Athenaeus, ii. 57 f). — not whether any really do inhabit it but whether habitation there is possible. If it is not possible, the assertion that the moon is an earth is itself absurd, for she would then appear to have come into existence vainly and to no purpose, neither bringing forth fruit nor providing for men of some kind an origin, an abode, and a means of life, the purposes for which this earth of ours came into being, as we say with Plato, our nurse, strict guardian and artificer of day and night. , 40 B-C. Though ἀτρεκῆ does not appear there, it is introduced into the passage by Plutarch at 938 E s.v. and at 1006 E, which indicates that he meant it as part of the quotation. Since there appears to be no other reference to the words τροφὸν ἡμετέραν in Plutarch’s extant works, one cannot be sure that τροφήν here is not his own misquotation rather than a scribal error. (The phrase, τροφαῖς ζῴων, in , 171 A is probably not part of the adaptation of the -passage there.) You see that there is much talk about these things both in jest and seriously. It is said that those who dwell under the moon have her suspended overhead like the stone of Tantaluscf. the sarcastic remarks of Lucius in 923 C supra. For the stone of Tantalus cf. , frag. x ( = Athenaeus, 281 B - C); Pindar, , i. 57-58 and , viii. 10-11: and i. 91 a, where reference is made to the interpretation that the stone which threatens Tantalus is the sun, this being his punishment for having declared that the sun is an incandescent mass (cf. also scholiast on Euripides, , 982-986). and on the other hand that those who dwell upon her, fast bound like so many IxionsFor the myth of Ixion on his wheel cf. Pindar, , ii. 21-48 and for Ixion used in a cosmological argument cf. Aristotle, , 284 A 34-35. by such great velocity, [are kept from falling by being whirled round in a circle]. Yet it is not with a single motion that she moves; but she is, as somewhere she is in fact called, the goddess of three ways,An epithet of Hecate (cf. Athenaeus, vii. 325 A) applied to the moon only after she had been identified with the moongoddess, after which her epithets had to be explained by reference to lunar phenomena. cf. e.g. Cleomedes, ii. 5. 111 (p. 202. 5-10 [Ziegler]) on τριπρόσωπος, and Cornutus, 34 (p. 72. 7-15 [Lang]) on τρίμορφος and τριοδῖτις. The etymology here put into Theons mouth had already been given by Varro in his , vii. 16. For the moon as Hecate cf. notes b on 942 D and g on 944 C s.v.. for she moves on the zodiac against the signs in longitude and latitude and in depth at the same time. Of these movements the mathematicians call the first revolution, the second spiral, and the third, I know not why, anomaly, although they see that she has no motion at all that is uniform and fixed by regular recurrences,For the text, terminology, and intention of these two sentences cf. xlvi (1951), pp. 146-147. There is reason to wonder then not that the velocity caused a lion to fall on the Peloponnesuscf. Epimenides, frag. B 2 (i, p. 32. 22 ff. [Diels-Kranz]); Anaxagoras, frag. A 77 (ii, p. 24. 25-26 and 28-30 [DielsKranz]). It may be that Anaxagoras referred to this legend in connection with his theory concerning the meteoric stone of Aegospotami, the fall of which he is said to have predicted (, 12 [439 D-F]; Diogenes Laertius, ii. 10; Pliny, ii. 58 [59], 149-150). Kepler (note 77) suggests that the story of the lion falling from the sky may have arisen from a confusion of λάων (gen. pl. of λᾶας) and λέων or, as Prickard puts it, between λᾶς and λίς. Diogenes Laertius (viii. 72) quotes Timaeus to the effect that Heraclides Ponticus spoke of the fall of a man from the moon, an incident which Voss after Hirzel refers to a dialogue of his that may have influenced Plutarch (Voss, , p. 61). but how it is that we are not forever seeing countless Men falling headlong and lives spurned away,Aeschylus, , 937; cf De Curiositate, 517 f, where also Plutarch gives βίων instead of Aeschylus’s βίου. tumbling off the moon, as it were, and turned head over heels. It is moreover ridiculous to raise the question how the inhabitants of the moon remain there, if they cannot come to be or exist. Now, when Egyptians and Troglodytes,i.e. Ethiopians: cf. Herodotus, iv. 183. 4; Strabo, ii. 5. 36 (c. 133). for whom the sun stands in the zenith one moment of one day at the solstice and then departs, are all but burnt to a cinder by the dryness of the atmosphere, is it really likely that the men on the moon endure twelve summers every year, the sun standing fixed vertically above them each month at the full moon? Yet winds and clouds and rains, without which plants can neither arise nor having arisen be preserved, because of the heat and tenuousness of the atmosphere cannot possibly be imagined as forming there, for not even here on earth do the lofty mountains admit fierce and contrary stormscf.Aristotle, , 340 B 36 341 A 4, 347 A 2935, and Alexander, p. 16. 6-15, where lines 10-11 guarantee and explain the ἐναντίους in Plutarch’s text. but the air, [being tenuous] already and having a rolling swellCf 939 E s.v. and 1005 E. as a result of its lightness, escapes this compaction and condensation. Otherwise, by Heaven, we shall have to say that, as Athena when Achilles was taking no food instilled into him some nectar and ambrosia,cf., xix. 340-356. so the moon, which is Athena in name and fact,See 922 A supra and note C there. nourishes her men by sending up ambrosia for them day by day, the food of [the] gods themselves as the ancient Pherecydes believes.= Pherecydes, frag. B 13 a (i, p. 51. 5-9 [Diels-Kranz]). For even the Indian root which according to Megasthenes the Mouthless Men, who [neither eat] nor drink, kindle and cause to smoulder and inhale for their nourishment,Megasthenes, frag. 34 ( ii, pp. 425-427 [Müller]); cf. Strabo, ii. 1. 9 (c. 70) and xv. 1. 57 (c. 711); Pliny, vii. 2. 25. Aristotle ( 445 A 16-17) mentions the belief of certain Pythagoreans that some animals are nourished by odours; cf. the story told of Democritus, frags. A 28 and 29 (ii, p. 89. 23 ff. [Diels-Kranz]), and Lucian on the Selenites ( i. 23), a passage which, however, looks like a parody of Herodotus, i. 202. 2. how could it be supposed to grow there if the moon is not moistened by rain ?

When Theon had so spoken, I said [Bravo], you have most excellently [smoothed our] brows by the sport of your speech, wherefore we have been inspired with boldness to reply, since we anticipate no very sharp or bitter scrutiny. It is, moreover, a fact that there really is [no] difference between those who in such matters are firm believers and those who are violently annoyed by them and firmly disbelieve and refuse to examine calmly what can be and what might be.Strictly, the potential and the contingent; but probably Plutarch meant his phrase here to imply only the possible in all its senses and intended no technical distinction between δυνατόν and ἐνδεχόμενο. Certainly one cannot ascribe to him the distinction drawn in the pseudo-Plutarchean , 570 E 571 E; n.b. that in , 1055 d-f he attacks the Chrysippean doctrine of δυνατόν. On δυνατόν and ἐνδεχόμενον as used by Aristotle cf. Ross, Aristotle’s , ii, p. 245 ad 1046 B 26, and Faust, , i, pp. 175 ff.; for the attitude of the Hellenistic philosophers, Faust, Op. cit. i, pp. 209 ff. So, for example, in the first place, if the moon is not inhabited by men, it is not necessary that she have come to be in vain and to no purpose, for we see that this earth of ours is not productive and inhabited throughout its whole extent either but only a small part of it is fruitful of animals and plants on the peaks, as it were, and peninsulas rising out of the deep, while of the rest some parts are desert and fruitless with winter-storms and summer-droughts and the most are sunk in the great sea. You, however, because of your constant fondness and admiration for Aristarchus, give no heed to the text that Crates read: Ocean, that is the universal source Of men and gods, spreads over most of earth.For the uninhabitability of the arctic and torrid zones cf. besides , 367 D Strabo, ii. 3. 1 (c. 96) and Cleomedes, i. 2. 12 (p. 22. 11-14 [Ziegler]); and for the connection of this theory with the notion that the greatest part of the outer ocean is in the torrid zone cf. Cleomedes, i. 6. 33 (p. 60. 21-24). This was not the opinion of Posidonius (Cleomedes, ibid, and i. 6. 31-32 [p. 58. 4-25]); it was the geography of Cleanthes, which Crates sought to impose upon Homer (cf. Geminus, xvi. 21 ff. [p. 172. 11 ff., Manitius]; Kroll, xi. 1637 s. v. Krates; Susemihl, , ii, pp. 5 ff.). Since the first line quoted by Plutarch is , xiv. 246 of our text of Homer (with ὠκεανοῦ instead of ὠκεανός) but the second line does not occur, the latter was probably an interpolation made by Crates to support his interpretation of Homer’s geography; for Crates textual alterations and for the controversy between him and Aristarchus cf. Susemihl, Op. cit. i, p. 457 and ii, p. 7, n. 33; Kroll, loc. cit. 1640; ChristSchmid-Stählin⁶, ii. 1, p. 210; Mette, pp. 60 ff. Yet it is by no means for nothing that these parts have come to be. The sea gives off gentle exhalations, and the most pleasant winds when summer is at its height are released and dispersed from the uninhabited and frozen region by the snows that are gradually melting there.cf. Theophrastus, , ii, § 11, and Aristotle, , 364 A 5-13. For ἡ ἀοίκητος without a noun = the uninhabited world cf. , 1115 a. A strict guardian and artificer of day and night has according to PlatoLamprias retorts upon Theon an adaptation of his own quotation of , 40 B - C; cf. 937 E supra and note c there. been stationed in the centre. Nothing then prevents the moon too, while destitute of living beings, from providing reflections for the light that is diffused about her and for the rays of the stars a point of confluence in herself and a blending whereby she digests the exhalations from the earth and at the same time slackens the excessive torridity and harshness of the sun.cf. 928 C supra. Moreover, conceding a point perhaps to ancient tradition also, we shall say that she was held to be Artemis on the ground that she is a virgin and sterile but is helpful and beneficial to other females.For moon = Artemis cf. 922 A supra and note b there; for the virgin goddess of childbirth cf. besides the references there Plato, , 149 B, and Cornutus, 34 (p. 73. 18 ff. [Lang]). In the second place, my dear Theon, nothing that has been said proves impossible the alleged inhabitation of the moon. As to the rotation, since it is very gentle and werene, it smooths the air and distributes it in settled order, so that there is no danger of falling and slipping off for those who stand there. And if it is not simple either,This refers to 937 F supra. For the use of ἁπλῆ simple in this context cf Cleomedes, i. 4. 19 (p. 34. 20 [Ziegler]) and Theon of Smyrna, p. 150. 21-23 (Hiller). even this complication and variation of the motion is not attributable to irregularity or confusion; but in them astronomers demonstrate a marvellous order and progression, making her revolve with circles that unroll about other circles, some assuming that she is herself motionless and others that she retrogresses smoothly and regularly with ever constant velocity,An example of the former hypothesis is Aristotle’s theory that each planet is fixed in a sphere revolving within counteracting spheres that cancel the special motions of the superior planet (cf. , 1073 B 38-1074 A 14 and , 289 B 30-290 A 7); an example of the latter is Plato’s theory of freely moving planets (cf. , 40 C-D, , 822 A-C; Cornford, , pp. 79-93). Theon of Smyrna (p. 175. 1-4 [Hiller]) observes that the difference between these two kinds of astronomical model is immaterial in saving the phenomena. On the whole passage cf. Eudemus in Theon of Smyrna, p. 200. 13 ff. (Hiller). for these superpositions of the circles and their rotations and relations to one another and to us combine most harmoniously to produce the apparent variations of her motion in altitude and the deviations in latitude at the same time as her revolutions in longitude.Norlind (, xxv [1927], pp. 275-277) argues from the terms used here and in 937 F supra that Plutarch has in mind the theory of epicycles which Hipparchus proposed for the moon and which is described by Ptolemy, , iv (i, pp. 265 ff. and especially pp. 301. 16-302, 11 [Heiberg]). The evidence of the terminology is not exact enough to make this thesis convincing (cf. xlvi [1951], pp. 146-147). As to the great heat and continual scorching of the sun, you will cease to fear it, if first of all you set the conjunctions over against the twelve summery full-moonscf. 938 A supra: twelve summers every year. and suppose that the continuousness of the change produces in the extremes, which do not last a long time, a suitable tempering and removes the excess from either. Between these then, as is likely, they have a season most nearly approaching spring. In the second place, upon us the sun sends, through air which is turbid and which exerts a concomitant pressure, heat that is nourished by the exhalations, whereas there the air being tenuous and translucent scatters and diffuses the sun’s light, which has no tinder or body to sustain it.For the pressure of the air and the ὑπέκκαυμα cf. Aristotle, , 341 B 6-25, and Alexander, p. 20. 11 ff. Praechter (, p. 109) refers to Seneca, iv b 10 in support of his thesis that the material in this chapter of the is from a Stoic source. The fruits of tree and field here in our region are nourished by rains; but elsewhere, as up in your homeLamprias is addressing Theon primarily; but Menelaus also was from Egypt, though we know only Alexandria as his residence. around Thebes and Syene, the land drinking water that springs from earth instead of rain-water and enjoying breezes and dewsTheophrastus ( viii. 6. 6) says that in Egypt, Babylon, and Bactria, where rain is absent or scarce, dews nourish the crops (cf. also iv. 3. 7). Plutarchs statement here that the water drunk by the land in Egypt is γηγενές may have been inspired by Platos remark in , 22 E 2-4; for the theory that the flood of Nile was caused by water springing from the earth cf. Oenopides, frag. 11 (i, p. 394. 39 ff. [Diels-Kranz]; cf. Seneca, iv a 2. 26) and the opinion mentioned without an author by Seneca, vi. 8. 3. Praechter (, p. 110) holds that Plutarch here reflects Posidonius’s theory as reconstructed by Oder (, Suppl. vii [1898], pp. 299 ff. and 312 f.). would refuse, I think, to adapt itselfFor this meaning of συμφέρεσθαί τινι cf. 79 A, , 461 A, , 960 E, , 15 (242 E), Wyttenbach’s (Leipzig, 1820), i, p. 461; the phrase cannot mean to be compared with, as it has been regularly translated here. to the fruitfulness that attends the most abundant rainfall, and that because of a certain excellence and temperament that it has. Plants of the same kind, which in our region if sharply nipped by winter bear good fruit in abundance, in Libya and in your home in Egypt are very sensitive to cold and afraid of winter.That the same species of plant varies with the nature of the soil, the atmosphere, and the cultivation is frequently stated by Theophrastus (cf. e.g. vi. 6. 3-5-8); cf. with ἐὰν σφόδρα τιεσθῇ χειμῶσιν in this passage Theophrastus, ii. 1. 2-4. And, while Gedrosia and Ethiopia which comes down to the ocean is barren and entirely treeless because of the aridity, in the adjacent and surrounding sea there grow and thrive down in the deep plants of great magnitude, some of which are called olives, some laurels, and some tresses of IsisOn these plants that grew in the sea cf. Theophrastus, iv. 7. 1 ff.; Eratosthenes in Strabo, xvi. 3. 6 (c. 766); Pliny, xiii. 25. 50-52 (140-142). In 911 F Plutarch refers to the plants that are said to grow in the Red Sea, but there he states that they are nurtured by the rivers which bring down mud and that these plants consequently grow only near to the shore.; and the plants here called love-restorers when lifted out of the earth and hung up not only live as long as you wish but sproutCf Pliny, xxiv. 17. 102 (167). [. . .]. Some plants are sown towards winter, and some at the height of summer as sesame and millet.cf. Theophrastus, viii. 1. 1 and 4; 2. 6; and 3. 2. Thyme or centaury, if sown in good, rich soil and wetted and watered, departs from its natural quality and loses its strength, whereas drought delights it and causes it to reach its proper staturecf. Theophrastus, iii. 1. 3-6.; and some plants, as they say, cannot stand even dew, as is true of the majority of Arabian plants, but are blighted and destroyed by being moistened.For the notion that dew injures some plants cf. possibly Theophrastus, vi. 18. 10; but he holds that desert vegetation is nourished by dew in default of rain ( iv. 3. 7 and viii. 6. 6). What wonder then if on the moon there grow roots and seeds and trees that have no need of rain nor yet of snow but are naturally adapted to a summery and rarefied air? And why is it unlikely that winds arise warmed by the moon and that breezes steadily accompany the rolling swell of her revolution and by scattering off and diffusing dews and light moisture suffice for the vegetation and that she herself is not fiery or dry in temperament but soft and humidifying? After all, no influence of dryness comes to us from her but much of moistness and femininityOf. , B, 202 (vii, p. 450. 14-20 [Bernardakis]); Aristotle, 582 A 34 b 3.: the growth of plants, the decay of meats, the souring and flattening of wine, the softening of timbers, the easy delivery of women.On the liquefying action of the moon and the passage in general cf. iii. 10 (657 F ff.); , 367 D; Cicero, , ii. 19. 50 (with Mayor’s note ad. loc.); Pliny, ii. 101 (223). On the growth of plants cf. also , 353 F and Athenaeus, iii. 74 C; on softening of timbers Theophrastus, v. 1. 3; on easy delivery ii, frag. 748. For further literature cf. Boll, (1926), pp. 122-125. Now that Pharnaces is quiet I am afraid of provoking and arousing him again if I cite, in the words of his own school, the flood-tides of Ocean and the swelling of the straits when they are increased and poured abroad by the liquefying action of the moon.= ii, frag. 679. cf. also Cicero, , ii. 34 (with Pease’s note ad loc.) and , ii. 7. 19; Seneca, i. 4; Cleomedes, ii. 1. 86 (p. 156. 15-16 [Ziegler]) and ii. 3. 98 (p. 178. 4-5); Strabo, iii. 5. 8 (cc. 173 f.) and i. 3. 11 (cc. 54-55). In , 897 B-C ( = Aëtius, iii. 17. 3 and 9) theories that the moon influences the tides are attributed to Pytheas and to Seleucus. Therefore I shall rather turn to you, my dear Theon, for when you expound these words of Alcman’s, [Such as] are nourished by Dew, daughter [of Zeus] and of [divine] Selene,Alcman, frag. 43 (Diehl) = 48 (Bergk⁴). In both 659 B and 918 A Plutarch quotes the line as an explanation of the origin of dew, cf. Macrobius, vii. 16. 31-32. you tell us that at this point he calls the air Zeus and says that it is liquefied by the moon and turns to dew-drops.cf.Vergil, , iii. 337; Roscher, , p. 50, n. 200. It is in fact probable, my friend, that the moon’s nature is contrary to that of the sun, if of herself she not only naturally softens and dissolves all that he condenses and dries but liquefies and cools even the heat that he casts upon her and imbues her with. They err then who believe the moon to be a fiery and glowing body; and those who demand that living beings there be equipped just as those here are for generation, nourishment, and livelihood seem blind to the diversities of nature, among which one can discover more and greater differences and dissimilarities between living beings than between them and inanimate objects.cf.Aristotle, 588 B 4 ff. and 681 A 12-15. Let there not be mouthless men nourished by odours who [Megasthenes] thinks [do exist]See 938 C supra and note d there. On the text and implication of this sentence cf. xlvi (1951), pp. 147-148.; yet the Hungerbane,For ἡ ἄλιμος cf. 157 D-F; [Plutarch], § 3 (vii, p. 51. 14 ff. [Bernardakis]); Pliny, xxii. 22 (73); Porphyry, § 34 and , iv. 20 (p. 266. 5 ff. [Nauck]); Plato, , 677 E (where the word ἄλιμος itself does not occur, however). the virtue of which he was himself trying to explain to us, Hesiod hinted at when he said Nor what great profit mallow has and squill, 41. and Epimenides made manifest in fact when he showed that with a very little fuel nature kindles and sustains the living creature, which needs no further nourishment if it gets as much as the size of an olive.cf. Epimenides, frag. A 5 (i, pp. 30-31 [Diels-Kranz]), where reference to this passage should be added. It is plausible that the men on the moon, if they do exist, are slight of body and capable of being nourished by whatever comes their way.cf.Aristotle, 761 B 21-23 for the suggestion that animate beings of a kind unknown to us may exist on the moon and [Philoponus], p. 160. 16-20 for a description of these creatures that do not eat or drink. After all, they say that the moon herself, like the sun which is an animate being of fire many times as large as the earth, is nourished by the moisture on the earth, as are the rest of the stars too, though they are countless; so light and frugal of requirements do they conceive the creatures to be that inhabit the upper region.= ii, frag. 677. cf. , 1053 A ( = ii, frag. 579); Aëtius, ii. 17. 4; Strabo, i. 1. 9 (c. 6); Cleomedes, i. 6. 33 (p. 60. 21-24 [Ziegler]). Plutarch, of course, uses Stoic doctrine here against the Stoics. We have no comprehension of these beings, however, nor of the fact that a different place and nature and temperature are suitable to them. Just as, assuming that we were unable to approach the sea or touch it but only had a view of it from afar and the information that it is bitter, unpotable, and salty water, if someone said that it supports in its depths many large animals of multifarious shapes and is full of beasts that use water for all the ends that we use air, his statements would seem to us like a tissue of myths and marvels, such appears to be our relation to the moon and our attitude towards her is apparently the same when we disbelieve that any men dwell there. Those men, I think, would be much more amazed at the earth, when they look out at the sediment and dregsZeno called earth ἰλύ and ὑποστάθμη ( i, frags. 104 and 105); but, since the end of this chapter appears to have been inspired by Plato’s , 109 B-D, the phrase here used was probably suggested to Plutarch by Plato’s use of ὑποστάθμη there (109 C 2). of the universe, as it were, obscurely visible in moisture, mists, and clouds as a lightless, low, and motionless spot, to think that it engenders and nourishes animate beings which partake of motion, breath, and warmth. If they should chance to hear somewhere these Homeric words, Dreadful and dank, which even gods abhor, xx. 65. and Deep under Hell as far as Earth from Heaven,, viii. 16. these they would say are simply a description of this place and Hell and Tartarus have been relegated hither while the moon alone is earth, since it is equally distant from those upper regions and these lower ones.

Almost before I had finished, Sulla broke in. Hold on, Lamprias, he said, and put to the wicket of your discoursecf., 965 B. lest you unwittingly run the myth aground, as it were, and confound my drama, which has a different setting and a different disposition. Well, I am but the actor of the piece, but first I shall say that its author began for our sake — if there be no objection with a quotation from HomerOn the text of this sentence cf. xlvi (1951), pp. 148-149.: An isle, Ogygia, lies far out at sea,, vii. 244. On the geographical introduction to the myth see the Introduction, § 5, and especially Hamilton, xxviii (1934), pp. 15-26, who points out the parallel between Plutarch’s geographical scheme and Plato’s location of Atlantis in , 24 E 25 A. a run of five days off from Britain as you sail westward; and three other islands equally distant from it and from one another lie out from it in the general direction of the summer sunset. In one of these, according to the tale told by the natives, Cronus is confined by Zeus, and the antique [Briareus], holding watch and ward over those islands and the sea that they call the Cronian main, has been settled close beside him.cf., 420 A and on the text xlvi (1951), p. 149. For Briareus as a guard set by Zeus over Cronus and the Titans cf. Hesiod, , 729-735 and Apollodorus, i. 7 ( = i. 2. 1). The pillars of Heracles are said to have had the older name Βριάρεω στῆλαι (cf. Aelian, v. 3 = Aristotle, frag. 678) and before that Κρόνου στῆλαι (cf. Charax, frag. 16 = iii, p. 640); cf. also Clearchus, frag. 56 ( ii, p. 320) and Parthenius, frag. 21 (Diehl) = frag. 31 (Martin). The great mainland, by which the great ocean is encircled,cf. 24 E 5 25 A 5. while not so far from the other islands, is about five thousand stades from Ogygia, the voyage being made by oar, for the main is slow to traverse and muddy as a result of the multitude of streams.Plutarch’s language really implies that the way is so long — not just that it takes a long time — because the sea is hard to traverses3 The streams are discharged by the great land-mass and produce alluvial deposits, thus giving density and earthiness to the sea, which has been thought actually to be congealed.cf. Strabo, i. 4. 2 (c. 63): ἥν (i.e. Θούλνἠ φησι Πυθέας ἐγγὺς εἶναι τῆς πεπηγυίας θαλάττης, and Pliny, iv. 16 (104): a Tyle unius diei navigatione mare concretum a nonnullis Cronium appellatur (n. b. that for Apollonius Rhodius [iv. 327, 509, 546] the Adriatic is the Cronian sea); cf. Tacitus, , § 10 and , § 45. Plutarch denies that the sea is really congealed as it is reputed to be and explains its nature in imitation of Plato (, 25 d 3-6, , 108 E 6 109 A 2); but, since he cannot adduce as the cause of the muddy shallows the settling of the island, Atlantis, under the sea, he falls back upon alluvial deposits from the rivers on the great continent, a notion familiar from many sources (cf. , 602 D with Thucydides, ii. 102. 6; Aristotle, , 351 B 28-32; Herodotus, ii. 10; Strabo, i. 2. 29-30 [cc. 36-37]). For the congealed sea cf. further K. Müllenhoff, , i (1890), pp. 410-425; E. Janssens, (1946), pp. 20-22; J. O. Thomson, , pp. 148-149, 241, and 54-55 (on Avienus, , 117-129). On the coast of the mainland Greeks dwell about a gulf which is not smaller than the MaeotisThe Sea of Azov, the size of which Herodotus had greatly exaggerated (iv. 86); Strabo reduced its perimeter to 9000 stades (ii. 5. 23 [c. 125]). and the mouth of which lies roughly on the same parallel as the mouth of the Caspian sea.The Caspian was thought to be a gulf of the outer ocean from the time of Alexander until Ptolemy corrected the error (, chap. 44; Strabo, xi. 6. 1 [c. 507]), though Herodotus (i. 202-203) and Aristotle (, 354 A 3-4) had known that it was connected with no other sea. These people consider and call themselves continentals [and the] inhabitants of this land [islanders] because the sea flows around it on all sides; and they believe that with the peoples of Cronus there mingled at a later time those who arrived in the train of Heracles and were left behind by him and that these latter so to speak rekindled again to a strong, high flame the Hellenic spark there which was already being quenched and overcome by the tongue, the laws, and the manners of the barbarians. Therefore Heracles has the highest honours and Cronus the second. Now when at intervals of thirty years the star of Cronus, which we call Splendent Φαίνων as the name of the planet Saturn occurs in , 1029 B (acc.: Φαίνωνα); Aëtius, ii. 15. 4 (where mss. vary between Φαίνωνα and Φαίνοντα, cf. Diels, , p. 344 ad loc.); [Aristotle], , 392 A 23 (Φαίνοντος); cf. Cicero, , ii. 20. 52. There is a similar variation in the mss. as between Στίλβοντ and Στίλβωνα (cf. Diels, , p. 345 on Aëtius, ii. 15. 4), though at 925 A supra the mss. of agree on Στίλβοντα. but they, our author said, call Nightwatchman, enters the sign of the Bull,Taurus is the sign of the moon’s exaltation (cf. Ptolemy, , i. 20 [p. 44. 2, Boll-Boer]; Porphyry, . 18), and it is for this reason that the expedition begins when Saturn enters this sign. For the thirty years cf. Aëtius, ii. 32. 1 (, p. 363); Cleomedes, i. 3. 16-17 (p. 30. 18-21 [Ziegler]); Cicero, , ii. 20, 52. they, having spent a long time in preparation for the sacrifice and the [expedition], choose by lot and send forth [a sufficient number of envoys] in a correspondingly sufficient number of ships, putting aboard a large retinue and the provisions necessary for men who are going to cross so much sea by oar and live such a long time in a foreign land. Now when they have put to sea the several voyagers meet with various fortunes as one might expect; but those who survive the voyage first put in at the outlying islands, which are inhabited by Greeks,These islands lie out westward or north-westward from Ogygia, cf. 941 A supra. It has not previously been said that they are inhabited by Greeks; in fact, 941 B seems to imply that Greeks live only on the mainland. and see the sun pass out of sight for less than an hour over a period of thirty days,I have tried to preserve the ambiguity of Plutarch’s language, though he probably meant to say less than an hour each day for thirty days (so Kepler understood, who thought that the reference was to Greenland). For the length of summer-days in Britain and in Thule cf. Cleomedes, i. 7. 37-38 (pp. 68. 6-70. 22 [Ziegler]) and Pytheas and Crates in Geminus, vi. 9-21 (pp. 70-76 [Manitius]). Pliny, iv. 16 (104) says that in Thule at the summer solstice there is no night at all, i.e. while the sun is in Cancer; but he adds here, what he had before (ii. 75 [186-187]) ascribed to Pytheas, that some think that in Thule there is a continuous day of six months duration. — and this is night, though it has a darkness that is slight and twilight glimmering from the west. There they spend ninety days regarded with honour and friendliness as holy men and so addressed, and then winds carry them across to their appointed goal.cf. xlvi (1951), p. 149 and note 91. Nor do any others inhabit it but themselves and those who have been dispatched before them, for, while those who have served the god together for the stint of thirty years are allowed to sail off home, most of them usually choose to settle in the spot, some out of habit and others because without toil or trouble they have all things in abundance while they constantly employ their time in sacrifices and celebrations or with various discourse and philosophy, for the nature of the island is marvellous as is the softness of the circumambient air. Some when they intend to sail away are even hindered by the divinity which presents itself to them as to intimates and friends not in dreams only or by means of omens, but many also come upon the visions and the voices of spirits manifest. For Cronus himself sleeps confined in a deep cave of rock that shines like gold — the sleep that Zeus has contrived as a bond for him —, and birds flying in over the summit of the rock bring ambrosia to him, and all the island is suffused with fragrance scattered from the rock as from a fountain; and those spirits mentioned before tend and serve Cronus, having been his comrades what time he ruled as king over gods and men. Many things they do foretell of themselves, for they are oracular; but the prophecies that are greatest and of the greatest matters they come down and report as dreams of Cronus, for all that Zeus premeditates Cronus sees in his dreamsFor the sleep of Cronus as his bonds and for the spirits who are his servitors cf. , 420 A. For the sleeping Cronus cf. also Kern, , frags. 149 and 155; in these Orphic or Neo-Platonic passages, however, Cronus prophesies, furnishes Zeus with plans, or thinks the world order before Zeus is aware of it (cf. Damascius, 305 v-306 r [ii, pp. 136. 19-137. 8, Ruelle] and Proclus, , p. 53. 29 ff. [Pasquali]), which is the opposite of what Plutarch’s words imply. Because of Tertullian, , 46. 10 (f. 156) J. H. Waszink (Tertullian, , p. 496) thinks it certain that the ultimate source of the story was one of Aristotle’s lost dialogues. Pohlenz ( xi. 2013. s.v. Kronos) supposes that Plutarchs source was Posidonius and that Posidonius was inspired by Nordic legends3 The feature of the birds that bring Cronus ambrosia appears to have been adapted from the story of Zeus’s nectar; cf. 156 F and , xii. 63-65. Besides J. H. Waszink (Tertullian, , p. 496) see the same author’s articles in , i (1947), pp. 137-149 (especially pp. 145-149) and in , ii (1950), pp. 639-653 (especially pp. 651-653). Waszink mistakenly believes that in Plutarch’s story special demons convey to Zeus [the thoughts that arise in Cronus’s dreams] who makes use of them for his government of the universe, and consequently he overlooks the important difference between Plutarch’s version and the Orphic passages that I have pointed out in this note. and the titanic affections and motions of his soul make him rigidly tense [until] sleep [restores] his repose once more and the royal and divine element is all by itself, pure and unalloyed.cf. xlvi (1951), pp. 149-150. Here then the strangerThis is the first mention of the stranger, unless he was referred to in the lost beginning of the dialogue. Hitherto he has merely been implied by the indirect discourse and τὸν ποιητήν in 941 A supra; cf. the reference in note c there. was conveyed, as he said, and while he served the god became at his leisure acquainted with astronomy, in which he made as much progress as one can by practising geometry, and with the rest of philosophy by dealing with so much of it as is possible for the natural philosopher.φιλοσοφίας χρώμενος is highly condensed; it must be construed: φιλοσοφίας δὲ πῆς ἄλλης ῾ἐμπειρίαν ἔσχἐ, χρώμενος ῾αὐτῇ ἐφ᾽ ὅσον̓ τῷ φυσικῷ ῾δυνατόν ἐστιν̓. For the distinction between ἀστρολογία and φυσική here referred to cf. Geminuss quotation of Posidonius in Simplicius, , pp. 291. 23-292. 9 (Diels). Since he had a strange desire and longing to observe the Great Island (for so, it seems, they call our part of the world), when the thirty years had elapsed, the relief-party having arrived from home, he saluted his friends and sailed away, lightly equipped for the rest but carrying a large viaticum in golden beakers. Well, all his experiences and all the men whom he visited, encountering sacred writings and being initiated in all rites — to recount all this as he reported it to us, relating it thoroughly and in detail, is not a task for a single day; but listen to so much as is pertinent to the present discussion. He spent a great deal of time in Carthage inasmuch as [Cronus] receives great [honour] in our country,For the special position of Cronus at Carthage cf. , 171 C, , 552 A; Diodorus, v. 66. 5. and he discovered certain sacred parchments that had been secretly spirited off to safety when the earlier city was being destroyed and had lain unnoticed in the ground for a long time.Nothing in the subsequent account supports the frequently expressed notion that the myth is supposed to have been discovered in these parchments, and 945 D s.v. expressly invalidates any such assumption. Among the visible godscf., 40 D (τὰ περὶ θεῶν ὁρατῶν), 41 A (ὅσοι περιπολοῦσιν φανερῶς θεοί); , 985 D (τοὺς ὄντως ἡμῖν φανεροὺς ὄντας θεούς). he said that one should especially honour the moon, and so he kept exhorting me to do, inasmuch as she is sovereign over life [and death], bordering as she does [upon the meads of Hades].