<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg018.perseus-eng2:4</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg018.perseus-eng2:4</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg018.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg018.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="4"><p><label>ZEUS</label>
Why, Hera, Timocles the Stoic and Damis the
Epicurean had a dispute about Providence yesterday
(I don’t know how the discussion began) in the
presence of a great many men of high standing, and
it was that fact that annoyed me most. Damis
asserted that gods did not even exist, to say nothing
of overseeing or directing events, whereas Timocles,
good soul that he is, tried to take our part. Then a

<pb n="v.2.p.97"/>

large crowd collected and they did not finish the
conversation ; they broke up after agreeing to finish
the discussion another day, and now everybody is in
suspense to see which will get the better of it and
appear to have more truth on his side of the
argument. You see the danger, don’t you? We
are in a tight place, for our interests are staked
on a single man, and there are only two things
that can happen—we must either be thrust aside
in case they conclude that we are nothing but
names, or else be honoured as before if Timocles
gets the better of it in the argument.

</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>