De parasito sive artem esse parasiticam

TYCHIADES Quite true.

SIMON Moreover, Tychiades, it seems to me that the other arts stand in need of this one, but this one does not stand in need of any other.[*](This point is not dwelt upon here because the author proposes to use it with great effect later at the expense of philosophy (§$ 31 ff.). ) TYCHIADES But, I say, don’t you think that people who take what belongs to someone else do wrong ?

SIMON Certainly.

TYCHIADES How is it, then, that the parasite is the only one that does not do wrong in taking what belongs to someone else?

SIMON I can’t say — Again, in the other arts the first steps are shabby and insignificant, but in Parasitic the first step is a very fine one, for friendship, that oft-lauded word, is nothing else, you will find, than the first step in Parasitic.

TYCHIADES What do you mean?

SIMON That nobody invites an enemy or an unknown person to dinner; not even a slight acquaintance. A

That in truth it is the most royal of the arts, you can infer from this fact above all: men work at the rest of them not only with discomfort and sweat but actually sitting or standing, just as if they were slaves to the arts, while the parasite plies his art lying down, like a king!

What need is there, in speaking of his felicity, to mention that he alone, according to wise Homer, “neither planteth a plant with his hands nor plougheth, but all, without sowing or ploughing,”[*](Odyssey9, 108-109. ) supply him with pasture?

Again, there is nothing to hinder a rhetorician or a geometer or a blacksmith from working at his trade whether he is a knave or a fool, but nobody can be a parasite who is either a knave or a fool.

TYCHIADES Goodness! What a fine thing you make out Parasitic to be! I myself already want to be a parasite, I think, rather than what I am.

SIMON Well, that it excels all put together, I think I

It excels both rhetoric and philosophy, in the first place in its objective reality ; for it has this, and they have not. We do not hold one and the same view about rhetoric; some of us call it an art, some a want of art, others a depraved art, and others something else. So too with philosophy, which is not uniform and consistent ; for Epicurus has on opinion about things, the Stoics another, the Academics another, the Peripatetics another; in brief, everybody claims that philosophy is something different, and up to now, at all events, it cannot be said either that the same men control opinion or that their art is one. By this it is clear what conclusion remains to be drawn. I maintain that there can be no art at all which has not objective reality. For how else can you

TYCHIADES You are right: they say philosophy is one, but they themselves make it many.

SIMON As far as the other arts are concerned, if there should be some discord in them, one might pass it over, thinking it excusable, since they are subordinate and their knowledges are not exempt from change. But who could endure that philosophy should not be one, and in better tune with itself than a musical instrument? Well now, philosophy is not one, for I see that it is infinitely many; yet it cannot be many, for wisdom is one.

The same can be said, too, of the objective reality of rhetoric. When all do not express the same views about one subject, but there is a battle royal of contradictory declarations, that is the greatest proot that the subject of which there is not a single definite conception does not exist at all ; for to enquire whether it is this rather than that, and never to agree

This is not the case, however, with Parasitic. Both among Greeks and among foreigners it is one and uniform and consistent, and nobody can say that it is practised in one way by this set of men and in another by that set. Nor are there, it seems, among parasites any sects like the Stoics or the Epicureans, holding different doctrines; no, there is concord among them all, and agreement in their works and in their end. So to my thinking Parasitic may well be, in this respect at least, actually wisdom.

TYCHIADES It seems to me that you have put al] this very well. But how do you prove that philosophy is inferior to your art in other ways?

SIMON Well, it must first be mentioned that no parasite ever fell in love with philosophy ; but it is on record that philosophersin great number have been fond of Parasitic, and even to-day they love it!

TYCHIADES Why, what philosophers can you mention that have been eager to play parasite ?

SIMON What philosophers, Tychiades? Though you know them yourself, you pretend not to, and try to pull

TYCHIADES No, by Zeus, Simon ; I am very much at a loss as to whom you can find to mention.

SIMON My dear fellow, you seem to be unfamiliar with their biographers, as otherwise you would certainly be able to recognize whom I mean.

TYCHIADES Well, anyhow, by Heracles, I long to find out now who they are.

SIMON I shall give you a list of them, and they are not the riff-raff, but in my opinion the best, and those whom you would least expect.

Aeschines the Socratic, the man who wrote the long and witty dialogues, once went to Sicily, taking them with him, in the hope that through them he might be able to get acquainted with Dionysius the tyrant; and after he had read his “Miltiades”’ and was considered to have made a hit, he made himself at home in Sicily from then on, playing parasite to the tyrant and bidding adieu to the haunts of Socrates.

And what about Aristippus of Cyrene? Is he not in your opinion one of the philosophers of distinction ?

TYCHIADES Very much so.

SIMON But he too lived in Syracuse at about the same time, playing parasite to Dionysius. In fact, of all

Aristippus, indeed, appears to have been a worthy ornament to the art ;

but your most noble Plato also came to Sicily for this purpose, and after being parasite to the tyrant only a few days, was turned out of his place as parasite on account of ineptitude. Then, after going back to Athens and working hard and preparing himself, he cruised once more to Sicily on a second venture, and again, after only a — few days of dining, was turned out on account of stupidity ; and this “Sicilian disaster” of Plato’s is considered equal to that of Nicias.

TYCHIADES Why, who tells about this, Simon ?

SIMON A great many; among them, Aristoxenus the musician, who deserves great consideration.[*](The MSS. add: “and he himself was parasite to Neleus.” Both were pupils of Aristotle. Aristoxenus wrote a life of Plato, which was used by Diogenes Laertius. ) That Euripides was parasite to Archelaus until he died, and Anaxarchus to Alexander, you surely know.

As to Aristotle, he only made a beginning in Parasitic, as in every other art.

I have shown that, as I said, philosophers have been eager to play parasite; but nobody can instance a parasite who has cared to practise philosophy.

Furthermore, if happiness lies in not hungering or thirsting or shivering, nobody has this in his power except the parasite. Consequently you can find many cold and hungry philosophers, but never a parasite; otherwise he would not be a parasite, but an unfortunate beggar fellow, resembling a philosopher.

TYCHIADES You have been sufficiently explicit on that score. But how do you prove that Parasitic excels philosophy and rhetoric in other respects ?

SIMON There are seasons, my dear fellow, in the life of man, seasons of peace, I take it, and again seasons of war. Well, in those seasons it is absolutely inevitable that the arts and those who possess them should show what they are. First, if you please, let us consider the season of war, and what class of men would be above all most useful to themselves individually and to the state in general.

TYCHIADES What a searching test of manhood you are announcing! I have long been laughing inwardly to think how a philosopher would look in comparison with a parasite.

SIMON Then in order to prevent you from wondering too much and also from thinking it a laughing matter, let us imagine that right here in our city proclamation has been made that the enemy has unexpectedly invaded the country; that it is