PAMPHILUS Where have you been, Lycinus, and what are you laughing at, I should like to know, as you come? Of course, you are always in a good humour, but this appears to me to be something out of the ordinary, as you cannot restrain your laughter over it.

LYCINUS I have been in the Agora, I’d have you know, Pamphilus; and I shall make you share my laughter at once if you let me tell you what sort of case has been tried in my presence, between philosophers wrangling with each other.

PAMPHILUS Well, what you have already said is laughable, in all truth, that followers of philosophy should have it out with one another at law, when they ought, even if it should be something of importance, to settle their complaints peaceably among themselves.

LYCINUS Indeed, you blessed simpleton! Peaceably! They! Why, they came together at full tilt and flung whole cartloads of abuse upon each other, shouting and straining their lungs enough to split them! PAMPHILUS No doubt, Lycinus, they were bickering about their doctrines, as usual, being of different sects?

LYCINUS Not at all; this was something different, for they were of the same sect and agreed in their doctrines. Nevertheless, a trial had been arranged, and the judges, endowed with the deciding vote, were the most prominent and oldest and wisest men in the city, in whose presence one would have been ashamed even to strike a false note, let alone resorting to such shamelessness.

PAMPHILUS Then do please tell me at once the point at issue in the trial, so that I may know what it is that has stirred up so much laughter in you.

LYCINUS Well, Pamphilus, the Emperor has established, as you know, an allowance, not inconsiderable, for the philosophers according to sect—the Stoics, I mean, the Platonics, and the Epicureans; also those of the Walk, the same amount for each of these. It was stipulated that when one of them died another should be appointed in his stead, after being approved by vote of the first citizens. And the prize was not “a shield of hide or a victim,” as the poet has it,

Homer, Iliad, XXII, 159.

PAMPHILUS I know all that; and one of them died, they say, recently—one of the two Peripatetics, I think. LYCINUS That, Pamphilus, is the Helen for whom they were meeting each other in single combat. And up to this point there was nothing to laugh at except perhaps that men rah to be philosophers and to despise lucre should fight for it as if for imperilled fatherland, ancestral fanes, and graves of forefathers.

PAMPHILUS Yes, but that is the doctrine of the Peripatetics, not to despise wealth vehemently but to think it a third “supreme good.”

LYCINUS Right you are; they do say that, and the war that they were waging was on traditional lines.

But listen now to the sequel. Many competitors took part in the funeral games of the deceased, but two of them in particular were the most favoured to win, the aged Diocles (you know the man I mean, the dialectician) and Bagoas, the one who is reputed to be a eunuch. The matter of doctrines had been thrashed out between them already, and each had displayed his familiarity with their tenets and his adherence to Aristotle and his placita; and by Zeus neither of them had the better of it.

The close of the trial, however, took a new turn; Diocles, discontinuing the advertisement of his own merits, passed over to Bagoas and made a great effort to show up his private life, and Bagoas met this attack by exploring the history of Diocles in like manner. PAMPHILUS Naturally, Lycinus ; and the greater part, certainly, of their discussion ought rather to have centred upon that. For my own part, if I had chanced to be a judge, I should have dwelt most, I think, upon that sort of thing, trying to ascertain which led the better life rather than which was the better prepared in the tenets themselves, and deeming him more suitable to win.

LYCINUS Well said, and you have me voting with you in this. But when they had their fill of hard words, and their fill of caustic observations, Diocles at length said in conclusion that it was not at all permissible for Bagoas to lay claim to philosophy and the rewards of merit in it, since he was a eunuch; such people ought to be excluded, he thought, not simply from all that but even from temples and holy-water bowls and all the places of public assembly, and he declared it an ill-omened, ill-met sight if on first leaving home in the morning, one should set eyes on any such person. He had a great deal to say, too, on that score, observing that a eunuch was neither man nor woman but something composite, hybrid, and monstrous, alien to human nature.

PAMPHILUS The charge you tell of, Lycinus, is novel, anyhow, and now I too, my friend, am moved to laughter, hearing of this incredible accusation. Well, what of the other? Held his peace, did he not? Or did he venture to say something himself in reply to this?

LYCINUS At first, through shame and cowardice—for that sort of behaviour is natural to them—he remained silent a long while and blushed and was plainly in a sweat, but finally in a weak, effeminate voice he said that Diocles was acting unjustly in trying to exclude a eunuch from philosophy, in which even women had a part; and he brought in Aspasia, Diotima, and Thargelia

Thargelia of Miletus was a famous hetaera, mistress of the Antiochus who was king of Thessaly ca. 520-510 B.c. She outlived him for thirty years, and was active in the cause of Persia at the time of Xerxes’ invasion of Greece. Aeschines the Socratic wrote about her, the sophist Hippias spoke of her as beautiful and wise, and Aspasia is said to have taken her as a pattern. Diotima is the priestess of Mantinea to whom, in Plato’s Symposium, Socrates ascribes the discourse on love which he repeats.1o the company. Subsequent mention of her seems to derive from that passage, and it is possible that Plato invented her.

That was what the judges dwelt upon, and the point thenceforward at issue was whether the seal of approval should be set upon a eunuch who was proposing himself for a career in philosophy and requesting that the governance of boys be committed to him. One said that presence and a fine physical endowment should be among the attributes of a philosopher, and that above all else he should have a long beard that would inspire confidence in those who visited him and sought to become his pupils, one that would befit the ten thousand drachmas which he was to receive from the Emperor, whereas a eunuch was in worse case than a cut priest, for the latter had at least known manhood once, but the former had been marred from the very first and was an ambiguous sort of creature like a crow, which cannot be reckoned either with doves or with ravens.

The other pleaded that this was not a physical examination; that there should be an investigation of soul and mind and knowledge of doctrines. Then Aristotle was cited as a witness to support his case, since he tremendously admired the eunuch Hermias, the tyrant of Atarneus, to the point of celebrating sacrifices to him in the same way as to the gods. Moreover, Bagoas ventured to add an observation to the effect that a eunuch was a far more suitable teacher for the young, since he could not incur any blame as regards them and would not incur that charge against Socrates of leading the youngsters astray. And as he had been ridiculed especially for his beardlessness, he despatched this shaft to good effect—he thought so, anyhow: “If it is by length of beard that philosophers are to be judged, a he-goat would with greater justice be given preference to all of them!”

At this juncture a third person who was present— his name may remain in obscurity—said:

The anonymous speaker may safely be considered the writer himself, as in the Peregrinus; cf. p. 8, n. 2.

Upon those remarks everyone began to laugh, as was natural, while Bagoas fell into greater confusion and. was beside himself, turning all colours of the rainbow and dripping with cold sweat. On the one hand, he did not think it seemly to plead guilty to the charge of adultery; yet, on the other, he thought that this accusation would not be without its usefulness for the case then in progress.

PAMPHILUS This is truly laughable, Lycinus, and must have given you uncommon diversion. But what was the outcome, and how did the judges decide about them?

LYCINUS They were not all of the same opinion. Some thought they ought to strip him, as is done with slaves, and determine by inspection whether he had the parts to practise philosophy. Others made the suggestion, even more ridiculous, that they should send for some women out of bawdy-houses and bid him consort with them and cohabit; and that one of the judges, the eldest and most trustworthy, should stand by and see whether he could practise philosophy! Then, as all were overcome by laughter and every man of them had a sore belly from shaking with it, they decided to refer the case to the highest court and send it to Italy.

Now, one of the pair is training, they say, for a demonstration of his eloquence, making his preparations, and composing an accusation. Morever, he is delicately putting forward the charge of adultery again, thereby acting in direct contradiction to himself, like a bad lawyer, and enrolling his opponent among fully enfranchised males through his accusation. As to Bagoas, he, they say, has different concerns, assiduously demonstrating his powers, keeping his case in hand, and, in sum, hoping to win if he can show that he is not a bit inferior to a jack at service. This, my friend, is apparently the best criterion of devotion to wisdom, and an irrefutable demonstration. Consequently, I may well pray that my son (who is still quite young) may be suitably endowed for the practise of philosophy with other tools than brain or tongue.