Skip to main content

Full text of "A Collation of the Ancient Armenian Version of Plato's Laws. Books V and VI"

See other formats


STOP 



Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world by JSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 
purposes. 

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early- 
journal-content . 



JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 
contact support@jstor.org. 



II— A COLLATION OF THE ANCIENT ARMENIAN 
VERSION OF PLATO'S LAWS. BOOKS V and VI. 

Book V. 

The first paragraphs of this book, pp. 726-32 B, are cited in 
Stobaeus, whose text conflicts in many points with the Paris MS 
No. 1807, e. g. in 726 E for tS>v alroi Krripdrmv he gives rS>v ev t<£ 

/3ta> kt. ; J 26 E for navr e'ori iratriv '. irapa naaiv ; 726 E &<nrep vvv ra 
for ooTTfp vvvSr/ ret ; J2J B S>8e ttoXXgv for o 8e jroXXot) J 727 C £ijv tovto 

for to £rjv irapras, Ficino : "hanc vitam"; 727 D ijyou/uei/oj for 
fiyovftivr/s ; 728 A vavrbs pev ovv for navrws p. a. J 728 A oiS' wy eiweii' 

for <as 8« «7r«t>'; 729 C yeve&klovs for yeviaBai our, where the former 
is the true reading ; 729 D dpevh for evpeveis ; 729 D <f>i\wi koI for 

<j)lXwv T€ Kal J 729 E napa rtav noXircov for napa ra r<ov \ 73 < - ) ^ ° ,<r ' °^ l/ 

for 00-' h; 730 B omits ml ebpevfts; 731 C omits tSv before avrov ; 

731 D OmitS ra before Ka K a ex av > 73 2 B 8ia>ic«i< a« for BtwKfiv 8«, the 

former being the right reading. 

Here we have seventeen cases of conflict between the text of 
Stobaeus and that of the Paris MS. In fifteen of them the Paris 
text is probably right, and is followed by Schanz in his edition ; 
in the remaining two cases the Paris text is wrong, and Schanz 
adopts the reading of Stobaeus. In all these seventeen cases the 
Armenian Version takes sides with the Paris MS against Stobaeus, 

There remain, however, a number of passages in which the 
Paris text still conflicts with Stobaeus, but in which the Version 
is either neutral or agrees with Stobaeus. These are the following : 

726 E the Paris MS has raiv ovv avrov ra SeoTrofoira, Stob. has rav 

oSv tsio ra 8., the Version rS>v oZv to bean., "ex illis igitur quae 
imperant," the rS>v being rendered as a demonstrative pronoun. 
The reading which Ficino had cannot be certainly inferred from 
his rendering: "profecto quae dominantur prae illis quae ser- 
viunt, semper sunt honoranda." It accords best with the 
Armenian, omitting both 8uo and avrov. 

727 A rj rtcrtv virei|£cru>, Paris MS ; rj r. iiireigai, Stob.; rj rto-tti virei£as, 

Arm. Here Fie. goes with the Paris text " vel obsequiis." ' 

1 Where the Armenian seems to yield a sound reading an asterisk is prefixed 
as in A. J. P. XIV 334 foil. 



32 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

727 B egaipy in Stobaeus. So the Arm. and Ficino. The Paris 
MS has the corruption l^alpn. 

726 C. The Paris MS has oirdrav . . . Xuiras pr) Sicmovjj Kaprtpatv 
dX\a vrreiKr], Tore ov Tipa vnuKCDv' Unpov yap avrr/v direpyd£(Tai. Here 

imeUav is superfluous. Stobaeus read instead of it dnpdCav, which, 
as following ov iipa and preceding iinpov yap, is also superfluous. 
*The Armenian reads rare ol npa' fmpov yap, which is probably 
right. 

*728 B. The Paris text followed by Schanz has Kal dnoo-xifco-Bai ; 
Stobaeus has <ea< t&v ph an-oa^., which is implied by the Arm. and 
by Ficino: "seque ipsum ab eisseiungat, improbis autem adhae- 
reat." On the one hand the zeugma tovs pev dyaBois faiynv . . . 
koI diroo-xl£eo-6at. is harsh ; on the other, the second pev, coming 
before the first has been answered by a 8e, is awkward. It is as 
likely that t5i» pep was added to avoid the first, as that it was 
omitted to escape the second. But if the interrelations of the 
sources throughout this 5th book be borne in mind, we must 
adopt the reading in which Ficino and the Armenian concur with 
Stobaeus. For that they both reflected in 729 C the corruption 
of the Paris text y*vio6ai ovc, where Stobaeus has the true reading, 
constitutes them a single family as against him. If, then, two 
members of this family agree in reading t£>v ph with the opposite 
family, we may be sure that its omission in the Paris MS is a 
mere idiosyncrasy of that MS. 

728 D. The Paris text reads pr/view Si; poi. Stobaeus omits 
pot. The Arm. omits poi, but also omits the stop after vopodtrov. 
Ficino retains pot, but omits the stop: "quorum differentia a 
legislatore declaranda mihi videtur: ut puta, honore dignum 
corpus esse non quod formosum aut robustum est." 

The Armenian Version merits notice in the following passages : 

727 A. The Paris MS has Qelov yap dyaOdv nov Ti/tij. Here 
Schanz conjectures \^vx^ for ripf) ; Stallbaum retains t«/uj but con- 
jectures Btiav yap dyadav. Stobaeus and Ficino agree with the 

Paris text. The Armenian is equivalent to Beiov ydp n $ npf) 3v 
(or oSo-a). This in no way helps the text. 

728 A. Schanz reads ndvras ph ovv \vnel. Stobaeus and the 
Paris MS have iravros pJv ovv XnVn, though the latter probably 
read originally navras, since there is an erasure after the t. 
Ficino renders: "sed ab hoc longissime abest." The Arm. = 
" verum tarn en ab hoc est omnino deficiens." The two translators 
must have read irdvrats ptv ovv tovtov e\Xe(7rci. 



PLATO S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 33 

729 C. The words ralrov <pio-iv aiparos ixovaav are rendered as 

if ravrov (pvaeas (or (pvo-ei) alfUiTos p.erixovaav. This is probably a 

mere device of rendering. 

729 E. The Arm. has deois ko\ avBpimois instead of av6. k. 6. 
The variant would not be worth noticing, but that Ficino also has 
it: "apud deos et apud homines." 

730 A. The Armenian has ervxev, along with the Paris Codex, 
where Badham conjectures amrvxev. For the rest the translator 
renders Uerac i<e<rV>jr UereCo-as as if they were oUeras, etc. Perhaps 
the corruption was in his Greek. 

730 B. The Arm. indicates direpyafrrat, a less violation of the 
Paris text than is the omission of &v after Sera. It is also favored 
by Ficino: "ut non lex, sed laus . . . refrenet magis et obtem- 
peratiores ferendis legibus faciat." 

730 D. Arm. reads viKqcpopos apery, with the Paris Codex. 

730 E Kat ova aWa dyadd ns eKTTjrai dvvara firj fxovov avrbv exeiv **XXa 
Kai aXXot? peraStSovat ' Kat rbv pev p.eTa8t86vra K. t. X. Here ?ktijt<u 

Swara must be wrong, and Schanz conjectures Swarm and alros ; 
Petavius KCKrrjrai Kai bivarat and also avrbs. The Arm. = " et quae 
alia bona potuerit quis acquirere, non solum eum habere sed et 
alios participes efficere." This implies KeKT^irdai Kvarai and avrbv, 
which last depends upon xpv m the preceding clause. The 
editors, in suggesting airbc, do not seem to have seen this, though 
the Arm. translator so took it. The sense is then as follows : 
" This same praise it is necessary to speak also about temperance 
and wisdom, and whatever other goods any one can make himself 
possessor of (it is necessary) that he not only should himself have 
them, but that he should also impart them to others." 

Stobaeus and Julian read K.iK.rr)rai Swara; so also did Ficino, 
who also translates as if he had had Ss instead of Sa-a: "Et qui 
aliis bonis abundat, quae in alios quoque transfundi possunt, si 
ceteros participes efficit, tanquam vir summus est honorandus." 

731 B irpbc eMot-lav. The Arm. involves npbs ei<ri^tav, a probable 
enough variant, though unsupported from other sources. 

730 C oto> 8c aKomriov, avovs' Z>v ovde'repov £r)\ar6v' This, the 

reading of Ficino, Stobaeus and the Paris Codex, is unquestionably 
the right one. The Arm. has 5™ be anoiawv, avovs i>v ovk &v «ij 
fijXtoTor. The reading of Clemens Alex.: tivovs aw, oi> £S>ov' old' 
Irepov ovv ^XtoTw, points to a very old corruption of the passage. 

731 C ev ovv raj rtpiardrco. The Armenian adds avroB after ovv, 
"in the noblest part of himself." 



34 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

731 D ri 8' aKparas. So the Armenian. Ficino has : "qui vero 
ita flagitiosi sunt, ut incurabiles sint," which led Ast to conjecture 

731 E. The Arm. omits delv before elvai toiovtov. 

732 A. The Arm. implies nporipdv lor npdv. 

732 A. It has idv re nap avTOv idv re nap aWov pdWov npa-rropeva, 

where the MSS and editions have airoi and a\\ov. 

7 32 B. After SiaHceu- for del, which is the reading of Stobaeus, 
the Arm. has du ndvra. The Paris MS has Set simply. 

732 C napayylXkeiv be navri ttuvt avbpa naaav koi o\rjv nepixdpeiav. 

So Schanz emends this passage, which in the Paris MS contains 

for ndaav k. 0. n. the impossible words Kai o\r)V -nepixdpeiav ndaav. 

Various other conjectures have been attempted. The Armenian 
gives what must be the true reading, as follows : napay. Be n. ■ndvr 
avhpa oXas ndaav nepixdpuav. Stephanus wrote of the passage thus : 
"Puto igitur te meae coniecturae subscripturum, qua in locum 
nominis oXije substituo ex eo factum adverbium 6\ws. 

*732 C. The words which follow have been the despair of 
successive editors. The Paris Codex reads thus : koto re elnpaylas 

lurapivov tov daifiovos e Katrrov Kai Kara Tildas, olov npds ui/^Xd Kai 
dvdvrrj daipdvav dvQio~TapevisiV tut\v npat-eatv, eXnifciv d del tols ye 
dyadoiai tov Beov a btapetrai novayv pev inimnTovratv dvri ueityvav tXdrrovs 
noirj&eiv tov d av vvv ■napovrav eni to /3eXrtoi' /xeraj3oXd?, nepi 8e rd 
dya#d rd ivavrla Tovrtov del ndvr avTols napayevrjceadat per dyadrjs tv%7]S' 

The spaced words are those which have offended critics. In 
the whole passage the Armenian involves the following changes : 

1. eKaara for ixdoTov. 

2. Omit daipovav. 

3. dv8ioTap.evov for dvdiOTapivuw. 

4. T&v d av for tov 8 aft. 

5. Omit nepi 8e rd dya#d. 

6. ndvrtov for navT avTots* 

Of these changes, Nos. i and 2, viz. eicdo-Tw and avdio-rdpevov , 
were conjectured by Badham. No. 4 is read in the apographa. 
Peipers (qu. crit., p. 100) would exclude Td dyatfd. The sense is 
better for the omission of batpovav, which may be a double of 
balpovos in the preceding line. In other respects the Armenian 
does not assist the passage, but renders from iXni&tv to the end 
in the following sense: "sed sperare semper bonis eis quae dat 
deus, et supervenientes aerumnarum loco maiorum minores 
facere ; et iam praesentium in melius mutationes contraria horum 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VL. 35 

semper omnium advenire una cum bona fortuna." Comparing 
this with Ficino's rendering: "sperare semper boni viri debent, 
munera, quae talibus viris dare deus solet, sibi non defutura : ac 
si qui graves labores inciderint, Deum leniores eos facturum et 
praesentia in melius commutaturum, bona vero contra omnia una 
cum bona fortuna sibi affore," we may infer that both translators 
had a stop after Sapeirai, in consequence, perhaps, of which they 
both inserted a conjunction before novav piv. 

Later Platonists believed that every individual had his familiar 
spirit or demon watching over him, and a copyist sharing such a 
belief would have altered emo-™ to c'imotou. The Armenian 
translates 10-rap.evov as if the passage implied the metaphor of a 
balance in which the god inclines from side to side, from good 
luck to bad. 

*73 2 E K<n irepl avrov e/cdorov, iroiov nva specie etvai. Here Hermann 

suggests avrov, which Schanz reads. The Arm. = "et de sui 
quaque re, qualis esse oportet." This suggests either the entire 
omission of nva or the substitution for it of n. avrov, which is in 
the Paris MS and is involved by the Version, can then be retained. 
733 B. The Arm. reads Xwnjr be $ov\6p.e8a and omits aWdrTeo-dai. 

733 B to~a be avri io~a>v etcdrepa tovt&v ov\ a>? f3ov\6fie&a e^otpev av 

hiao-a<pelv. Ficino : "pari autem modo utrumque horum habere 
nos nolle, possumus declarare." The Arm. = to-a be avri lo-av 

exdrepa rovrav oi fiov\6p.e6a 01/Se £>s oi (SovXopeda K, T. X. The Words 

supplied may easily have dropped out of the text. They were 
certainly in the Greek text which the translator used. 

733 B rols ToioirroK, [71730? /SouXiicrti']. Schanz brackets up. 0. The 
Arm. omits npos and puts the comma after instead of before 

fiovXij&ii/. 

*733 C, D. The Arm. takes t6v lo-opponov $iov as governed by 
ftiavoelo-dai, and favors Badham's conjecture of tw p.ev vTrepftdkXovra 

for 7W p.ev vnepfiaWovTow, but implies tovs d' av for t5>v 8' av. It also 

omits the stop after oi $ov\6p.e6a in D, and omits the words 81} bel 
Stavoelo-dai. Here Badham would read 8e for 8q and cut out the 
words del Stav., of which all editors have found the threefold 
repetition in this passage intolerable. 

733 D. The Arm. has &> irepi, with the Paris Codex. Schanz 
adopts hv wep, the conjecture of Badham. *In the next line the 
Arm. supplies ml to before a£ouX>jToV. Stallbaum here conjectured 

Ka\. 

733 E. For IbArra the Arm. implies elSSra <ai. Ficino may 
have read eiSoVa, for he renders: "hisque cognitis." 



36 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

734 B. The Arm. adds *<u before 3ko>v, so that the text runs 

iras (£ avayKYjs (cat aieoov. 

734 D f)Sla> re elvai koi tois oXXots iircpe'xtip. The Arm. has tovs 
riXXovy, SCll. /3t'ow. 

735 A eV rah 7r6\e<riv ap^ovras. The Arm. seems to have read 

tip^avras. 

735 A tovs o-fiiKpas ntuSeia. The Armenian has the plural o-piicpas 
or o-p.iKpa. The Paris Codex o-p.iK.pa. 

735 A fcaraordo-ets. The Arm. = Karao-rao-is. In the Paris Codex 
this reading is given above the line. Stob. had the former. 

*736 A. After gvppeovrav the Arm. omits <=k, which "delevit 
Madvig." In the whole of the rest of the passage beginning 
735 B and ending 737 C, the Armenian faithfully reflects all the 
readings of the Paris Codex to which critics have taken exception, 

viz. 736 A dnaXXayriv, 736 C iteipa, 73^ C evTvxelv las yris (cat XP*""' 
K. T. X., 736 D vnapxtiv, 737 A peTaftdo-ecas and ouSe pla and perd 81kt)s 
and ptjxaprjs hicupvyt], "]2>1 B Koivrjv. 

736 E. Where the Paris Codex reads vepoplvovs and Badham 

suggested dirovepoplvovs, the Arm. = Seopevovs or aiTovpevovs, which 

does not help. 

*737 D n-dXfts, -yijy p,ev. The Arm. = n-dXetr yrj pev, according to 
Schneider's conjecture. The Paris Codex has noKets yiji. 

737 D vvv 8« o-xypaTos. The Arm. has S17. 
737 K 6 Xdyos ito). The Arm. = Zona for tra. 

737 E 8tavep.T)dr)T<a. The Arm. = Staveprjdevra, and just below it 
has gvwopa, with the Paris MS, instead of ^vnoprj. Just below the 
Arm. = rp/a toO airoO, instead of rpla Toy avT-w of the Paris Codex. 

738 A oi pJv S17 iras. The Arm. has d ph bt) and omits iras. The 
Paris Codex has 6 pev 87 was. So has Ficino. 

738 B. After Stto re the Arm. adds ddis. 

738 E oira>s ut)T( avros. The Arm. = oiroos pr/rts airos. 

*738 C imirvoias X«x^«Vijs &Sc. So the MSS and editions, but 
in what sense is a divine inspiration 'Xe^sto-a'? The uncom- 
pounded verb could hardly mean 'declared,' and an inspiration is 
not declared, but vouchsafed by heaven. The Armenian = "seu 
inspiratione a dis superveniente," which suggests the reading 

\t]x6(io-rjs. Cp. 75° ^ Toiroi x<*>P a * iv oXs dela tis eiriirvoia (cat Saipovav 
Xij£«r. 

*739 B (cat e" ns a\\os 87 irore. Here the Paris MS has av «t jtot« 
instead of 87 wore, which is Naber's conjecture. The Armenian 

involves (cat ei ns aXXos av wore. 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 37 

739 D. The Arm. adds <»? or otov before <a6 y h S ™ paKurra. 

*739 D ct pev Si) retain) wdXts. eire vov deol is the reading of the 
Paris Codex. Badham suggested f) for «, and then «<m vov, 6eol 8'. 
The Arm. = e'v /«» 817 ToiavTJj wdXei, «irt ffou fleol, which is probably 
right. Ficino perhaps had such a reading ; " talem utique civi- 
tatem sive Dii alicubi sive Deorum filii uno plures habitent, ita 
viventes eamque servantes omni certe referti gaudis vivunt." 

739 ^ r/v 8e vvv r/peis iirtKfX et P r i Ka l lep ' e "? Te °- v ycvopevr) tto>s d8ava<rlas 
(yyvrara Kal 17 pia Scvrcpas' Tpirijv 8c ptra ravra, iav Bibs f'^Aij, Siantpa- 
vovpe6a. vvv 8' ovv Tairrjv riva \eyopev Kal vws yevopivrpi av Toiavrrjv. 

This is the reading of the MSS. Heindorf suggests e"?j ye av, 
ytvopivri iras ; and 17 pia was by Cobet corrected to irpwTt)s. The 

Armenian = f\v 8e vvv r/pels tiriMXtipiiKaptv, 17 re pia pcv Kal r\ 8evrepa 
(iprfrai. Tpirr)v Se pera 1., i. 6. id., 8ian€pavovpe0a, eiij re av yevopevrj jro>r 

a6avao-ias iyyvrara. viv 8' ovv k. t. X. ; or in Latin : et ea quidem in 
quam nos nunc manum intulimus, quaeque una quidem, et quae 
secunda dicta est, Earn quae tertia est post haec, si deus velit, in 
finem ducamus. erit &v facta immortalitati proxima etc. The 
passage remains obscure. 

*740 A and B. The Arm. = i>s Spa 8eiv tov Xa^dpra Ttpi \rj£iv 
vupifeiv pev KOivr/v rr]s iroXeas o'vpTtdaris, rijs Kvpias oCotjs rr/s \r)^€cos, 
irarpidos 8e ofiaris ttjs x^P as Bepairevziv avrrjv 8« pei£6va)s 17 prjrepa iraiftas, 
rd> btoiroivav avTTjv Kal $ebv ovo~av 0vijtG>v ovt<ov vopifeaOai. Kal irepl tovs 
iyX- Btoit t« apa Kal Salpovas, oirms 817 (? av) ravra els tov del XP° V0V ovtcos 

vnapxo k. t. X. In the above the Arm. omits the words ravra 8' 
exeiv Siavorjpara, which Usener would exclude, along with the 
words which follow as far as Saipovas. Perhaps these words 
displaced in the Paris text the words Kvplas (or tjj? k.) 0C0-17S rijs 
\i)geas, which the Version supplies. 

*740 B $ 8' ovv. So the Armenian. The Paris MS has £8' 

ovv. 

*740 C. The Paris MS has 8epamevrr)v de&v Kal ytvovg Kal jrdXe<os. 

The Arm. translates depattevrrp/ deav Kal jrdXeow Kal yeVouf. So Ficino : 
" et civitatis et generis." 

*740 C off av rr]s yeveoecos iXXeiirg. Stephanus Conjectured ra rrjt y. 

The Arm. = oh av 17 yiveo-is (or rather yewr/para) cXXfurj/. Ficino : 
" civibus illis, quibus filii non sunt." 

740 C e'ir'iyovoi. Arm. = (Kyovoi. 

*740 D avrt} o-K^apcvr). The Arm. has ravrrj for avrt). Just 

below it omits Kal yap tirurx* ~ w before yev«re<»s, and then reads oh 
&v tipovs, with the Paris Codex. 



38 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

740 E. The Version has mranwat, with the Paris Codex, 
where Schanz conjectures airavras at. 

740 E. The Version omits «zl fii) «u to ye rikos, and just below 
has &v av, with the Paris Codex, for of &v, and then cdv 8' av, with 
the apographa, for idv t av of the Paris MS. 

741 A. The Version adds olov before Kiipa, for which it rather 

implies Kvpara ', then KaraK\vo-pov instead of KaTaic\vo-p6v, and vocrovs f/ 

irokcpav <p6opds for voVot r) ?roX. <p6opai. The whole clause would 

thus run : *idv 8' al Kal Tovvavriov (TTikdr) jtotc olov Kvpara KaraKXvo-pov 

(be'pov vio-ovs i? noXepwv (pSopds. Ficino agrees with the Paris MS. 
Just below the Version agrees with the same codex in inepPdWtiv, 
where Schanz adopts napepfidWeiv from the apographa. 

*742 B napeptvos. So the Paris MS. The Arm. rather suggests 
napairrio-apevos, which was the reading of Stobaeus. 

742 E ra pev ovv Sward ftovXoiT dv 6 8taKoapa>v, ra 6*e prj Sward ovr 
av (3ovXotxo [jxaraias /3ouXijo-«if] oijr av fVt^fipoi. Schanz notes : 

" fiaraias f}ov\r'i<jus delevi " ; but how did these words, which do 
not seem to be a gloss, get into the text? Ficino has; "possi- 
bilia igitur volet fundator legum, impossibilia nee volet, nam vana 
esset cupiditas, neque aggreditur." The Arm. = ra pev ovv Sward 

fioiXoiT av StaKOO-peiv rd 8e pi] Sward av ftoiXoiro Kal iv paraiais ^ovKrjaeaiv 

ovk av €TrlJ(€lp0l. 

743 ^ ecrnv Si o pev dyados rovrcov, 6 8e ov [leaieoVJ, orav y (peidcoXos, 

rort 6V iroTf Kal irdyKOKos. " kokos delevit Madvig advers. I, p. 442." 
The Arm. for ob kokoV has ovk dyaBds, which must be right. It also 
omits Se after nne. 

*743 D prjre xp" ' '' &">'• The Arm. has elvai for 8eiv. Stobaeus 

has pr/re eival XP V0 ~ 0V Selv. 

*744 A rl T( fiovKopal . . . Kal dnorvyxdvoD. The Arm. has « re 
(JovXerai . . . koi diroTvyxdvu. So Ficino : "quid ipse velit, quid, si 
contigerit, bene succedet." 

744 B. In this obscure section the Armenian exactly reflects 
the Paris Codex, except that instead of ha dpxai re there stand 
words equivalent to quarn imperiique or % dpxrjs re (or r\ dpxv re). 

744 C. The Arm. = rerrapa peyeSos. 

744 ^* The Arm. = 7rpoarJKOv eKttarois eavToloiv rtprjpa. 

*744 D tov peyio-Tov voo-rjparot. So the Armenian, along with 
Stobaeus and Ficino: "summi morbi." The Paris MS has 

vopio-paros. 

*744 ^* The Anil. — tas dp<porepa>v riKrovrwv ravra dp<porcpa, With 

the Apographum Riccardianum. The Paris Codex has dp<p6repa 

. . . dp(porepa. 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 39 

*744 D vvv ovv opov Set So the Armenian, with the apographa. 
The Paris Codex has the corruption 817. 

745 ^ Ka * 7a ^ a oaa 7Tp6a(popa 7rd\ei rap v7rapxdpra>p exopra tottov 
<KKe£ap.cvov. This must mean 'choosing among those available a 
site which has also whatever else is advantageous to a city.' 
Badham conjectured 7rdX« iirdpxopr'. The Armenian omits tS>p 
virapxovTwp, as did probably Ficino : ''Post haec urbs primum in 
medio regionis, quoad fieri potest, condatur, in loco qui cetera 
quoque civitatis habeat commoda." 

*745 C perexovra iioSurrare. So Schanz. The MS has iicdrepop, 

which is clearly wrong. Ast suggested enarepov. The Arm. has 

fKarepa>p t Or rather rd €Karep<op. 

*745 D T<a ir\r]6a.. So Schanz, following the apographa. So 
also the Arm. and Ficino. The MS has r£ ndBei. 

*746 A iripmv av. Badham conjectured ircpav d, which the 
Arm. actually involves. 

*746 B. The Arm. read xph ^ avakapfiavetv npbs ain-ov, omitting 
■navra. The Paris MS has alrop. Just below the Arm. has *olpxu 
r68e dvai, where the Paris Codex has the corruption rap8e. 

746 D SijXop 817 to ScoSeKa. The Arm. has 8e for 817. 
*746 D koi irpos ye. The Arm. adds tovtois. 

*746 E top ye v6pov tAttuv. Here, for vipov, which is read in the 
Paris MS, the Version reads vopo6irqv, with the apographa and 
Ficino. 

747 A Koiv<p Xdy6> poplo~apra. The Arm. — k. \. dppoo~apra. 

747 C tS>v peWovrwp airct. The Arm. has aira>v for aura. 

*747 C. The Paris MS reads elre nt popoBerris avrols <f>av\os av 

■yej-d/xci/of e'geipydaaro. Here Schanz reads 8/) for av, and Stephanus 
conjectured al. The Armenian omits av and reads airos for atrois, 
which may well be the true reading, the pofiode'rijs airos being 
contrasted with rvxv and <pvo-is aXkt) ns roiairr). 

747 D. The Arm. has as ovk elo-ip, with the MS, where Ficino 
rightl)' omits ovk. 

*747 D. The Arm. has 81' «%jo-«?, which Ruhnken conjectured 
here. 

*747 D ivalo-ioi. The Arm. = dpdppoo-roi or SxaKToi. The editors 
suggest various emendations. Ficino: "protervi." 

*747 D ot 8c Km 8id Tairriv ttjp. So the Paris MS. Schanz reads 
oi be Kal 81a rrjp. The Arm. = oi 8e 81a ttjp, which is also the reading 
of Galenus. 

*750 E tovs del KaroiKi£op.e'povs. So the Armenian and the 
apographa. The Paris MS has rots. 



40 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

Book VI. 

751 B r&vhi. izavri irov — <■'£ avrav. The Arm., if rendered into 
Latin, reflects this obscure passage thus : Hocce. Omni quidem 
manifestum est tale quid, quod legislatione magno opere ente, 
civitatem bene compositam, magistratus non idoneos super earn 
constituere bene instituti, risusque propter haec valde nimius 
av incidat, verum etiam calamitas et iacturae valde maximae 
civitatibus fiant t\v ex illis. In the above roO before nd\iv is not 
rendered, and so nothing is done to help the really crucial diffi- 
culty. The words rots ev Keipevois vopots oi jiovov oiSeV n\eov are also 

dropped out. *The rendering of the words oA5' on yekas — e£ 
avrav strikingly resembles that of Ficino, who thus gives the 
whole passage : " Audi iam. nemini dubium est, quod, cum 
magna res legumlatio sit, si quis civitati per leges bene paratae 
non idoneos magistratus constituat, quamvis leges bene positae 
sint, tamen non modo id nihil proderit risumque movebit, verum 
etiam calamitates maximas civitatibus pariet." The resemblance 
cannot be accidental, and points to a Greek original which read 
kcu for olS' on and d\\a Knl for <rxe86v Se. This is the more probable 
because oi pdvov requires d\\d kcu. 

751 C. The Arm. has eireira alrovs, with the Paris Codex, for 

f7T. a? TOVS. 

*75i D redp&cjydai re. Schanz brackets these words. Stallbaum 
removed «, for which Ast conjectured S«. The Arm. omits re. 

751 D n-poj roiis dvcr^fpa/i/oi/rar. The Arm. echoes this the reading 
of the Paris MS. The Aldine corrected rovs to r6. Just below 
the Arm. has Uanpav, with the Paris MS and Ficino, where 
Stephanus read Uarcpov. 

*75I D aXAa yap dyava irpocpdtrets oi irdvv Se^ecrflai is the reading of 

the Paris MS. Schanz adds <pao-iv before oi vdvv, on the authority 
of the Scholiast ad Cratyl. 421 D. Hermann conjectured oi <pao-i 
for oi irdvv. The Arm. had dywv and Several, which was also in 
Ficino's Greek text: "sed enim certamen excusationes non facile 
suscipit." 

752 A. Schanz reads ovkovp 81} ttov Xeyav ye av pv6ov anifpaKov ena>v 
KaraKiTTOipi' TrKavmpevos av cmavri toiovtos o>v apopcpos (paivoiro. In his 

critical apparatus he notes that the Paris MS has dirdvrTj for tmavri, 
but not that it reads yap after n\ava>pevos, which it does, according 
to C. F. Hermann. *ir\ava>pevos ydp 5» was also the reading of 
Ficino and of the Armenian translator. Ficino had dnavn for 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 41 

tmavrri, which Hermann accordingly brackets. The Armenian 
had anavrr). Fie: "nam si ita vagaretur, deformis omnibus appa- 
reret." Why should not a writer so saturated with Homer as 
Plato have read Airavrs ? 

752 B. The Arm. has /3X<-Va»< <a\ noi, with the Paris MS ; also 
in 752 C fielvcupev, both of which Schanz corrects. 

*752 C xpovov. So the Arm. and Schanz. The Paris MS adds ov. 

752 D x«>P a s V "v" (coroimfeToi. Schanz notes of the Paris MS : 
" r), sed in ras. (tjv fuisse videtur)." The Arm. = x . j}? vZv Karoud{tre, 
which was also in Ficino's text: "quam nunc rempublicam 
conditis," and was also read by Stephanus. 

752 D 'kttShtiv. This is Hermann's conjecture. The Paris 
reading orao-iv was in the Armenian's Greek, also in Ficino's : 
" ut quam tutissime atque optime primi magistratus constituantur." 

*752 D 8' ijfuv. This conjecture of Hermann's for av r\yXv is 
confirmed by the Armenian. 

753 A net nerplq. The Arm. has tjj, with the Paris MS. 

753 " <*> r /"** °^ v yevoir &v iwieiKifTTara £k riov xmapxpirrav ij/xik to viv, 

(Iprjo-da. The Arm. has eiptfrat for elpr)o-da>, and so had Ficino: "et 
quae tibi atque illis hac tempestate convenientissime fieri possunt, 
exposita." 

753 " *" Tats <T<p*repais avra>v rrjs r/XiKtas 8vvdne<rtv. For a<peripais 

the Arm. has eKarepais. Ficino omits: "bellis que in aetatis suae 
ordine interfuerunt." 

753 C 8ct!<n roiis apxovras Ibziv wdog rjj 7rd\«. The Arm. OmitS 

ISelv. So perhaps Ficino: "universae civitati magistratus osten- 
dant." 

*753 D €^ avr&v is omitted in the Version, as also by Ficino : 
" centumque ita secundo delecti rursus qmnibus ostendantur." 

753 D hia ropiav Tropevopa/os. Ficino omits wholly these words. 
As to the Paris MS, Schanz notes: "versui 8m] ro/«W iropev6p.evos 
cnra 8c vitii nota in marg. adscripta." The Arm. renders 8m to/uW 
as if 8oKipa<ria, probably because he did not understand a rare 
word. 

753 k omvet 8f eiev &v irpos irao-a>v rav ap\ajv ytyovores, ovk eoru> / 

In the above Badham would omit hi. Schanz reads irp6 for np&r 
and "ovk io-riv delevit Badham." Ficino: "qui vero ex omnibus 
magistratibus deligantur, in iis nequaquam reperiuntur." The 

Arm. = otrives 8e (lev b\v ex waoS>v tojv apx&v yeyovorts ovk. eWiv. Ficino's 

obscure reading, whatever it was, was shared by the Armenian 
translator's text, but «VrV may be right. 



42 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

*754 B KarotKicrdetcrav. So the Arm. In Paris MS iearoi»eier«»i<. 

*754 C Xey<o 8t. The Arm. involves 817 for Be. So Ficino: 
" Repeto igitur, quod modo dixi." 

754 D yevo/ievoi. The Arm. omits. Ficino renders by "com- 

putatl. ' ? KaraXeyopevoi. 

755 " °>r«W «" Tit wkiov virepfiat e^bopijKOVTa £5, fU)KtTi ev rovrott roit 
apxowi rrp\iKavrr)v ap\i)V &>t apt-a>v Siapor/drjTa). Here oira>s tiv IS difficult, 

and iv rovrott roir apxovm is put out by Hug as superfluous. Ficino 
renders Swat: "hac utique ratione, ut qui septuagesimum annum 
excesserit, tantum magistratum . non teneat." But Sirat so used 
with 8iavot)6qTa> is very harsh, whether hv accompany it or not ; 
while it is meaningless if construed with (jj. Hermann accord- 
ingly conjectures 6n6o-' &v, and Heindorf 6ir6<rov hv, and Badham 

O7ro<r "iv Tie liKeov e;^, vnepfias efibop.riK.ovT errj pr}Kert t I he Arm. hints 

at a solution, and is equivalent to: "si quis magis vixerit quam 
annos septuaginta, non amplius in his annis a magistratubus talem 
magistratum veluti tenens cogitetur." Whence it is certain that 
the Armenian translator's Greek omitted Sirwt itrepfiat. Is it 
possible, therefore, that they got into the Paris text from the 
margin? Perhaps they formed part of the words of which 
Badham suspected the loss after anoypdifrr/ in §D just above. 

*755 D avd' orov ovrtva. The Arm. has nva for ovriva. 

755 D owoTepot. The Arm. has 6norepa>s and omits the comma 

after Staxeiporovovpevos. 

Except for these two variants in 755 D the Arm. reflects the 
Paris MS from 755 B-756 B, corruptions and all ; e. g. in 755 E 
it has cpv\aKfj for <£vXj5, and inserts the words cpvXdpxovt — aipeiada in 
the wrong place in 756 B, two errors from which Ficino's text 
was free. 

756 B olonep rrjt \tipoTovlat perpov eKaarois exaorov f\v. The Arm. 

adds p.l\ov before 71/. 

756 C. The Arm. omits koto, raird before Ka6a7rep Ttj npo<T0ev. 

Ficino simply : "eodem pacto." 

*756 E ?r a« Bel peo-eieiv ttjv irokiTeiav. The Arm. omits del and 
adds larjv before noXireiav instead of rr)v. Perhaps we should read 
laoTToKiTfiav, a word which occurs in Aristotle and often in Cretan 
inscriptions. 

757 A. Schanz reads iv taait npalt Biayopevoi. The Arm. = iv 
iVori'fiw (or ev laoTifiia) dyopevdpevoi. The Paris Codex has Btayopevo- 
pevoi. Stobaeus Biayopevoi. 

757 A Toiro avTO Bwapevr/. The Arm. = tovto ovtois 8. 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 43 

*757 B. The Arm. omits <npo8pa before fjpas 8iarapaTT«. 
*757 B A«or yap 8rj Kplins. The Arm. adds fj before Kpiais. 

757 ^ <T/UKpa piv eVapicei, irav 8f, oaov &v eVapicecri). The Arm. 

renders iirapKet in sense of ' immoratur,' as if napapAvti. It is note- 
worthy that Ficino had some other word than e Vapic«, for he 
renders: "hominibus pauca semper suggeritur: quatenus autem 
suppetit." 

757 D napawploun. The Arm. read 6pa>pipoiai. 

757 E orav yiyvrjrai. The Arm. = oTav ovra>s yiyvr/rai. 

758 A 8iayo/«i<)j. Ficino renders by "posita." The Arm. 
answers to yiyvopivr). Perhaps it read diaycvopevrj, with the Apo- 
graphum Vossianum. 

758 B. After avaynaiov the Arm. has S<r, with the Paris MS, 
where Schanz adopts Ast's conjecture Si). 

758 D. The Arm. has Sta, with the Paris Codex, but renders 
SiaXia-ewf in the next line, as if it were biaKpiueav 'diiudicationum.' 

759 A. The Arm. omits re after veaxopovs. Just below it reads 
AfV0at Sel, with the Paris MS, where Stob. has e'X. Se Set In the 
next section it has UpZ>v, with the MS, where again Stobaeus has 

iepeav. 

759 D err) 8<r pq iXarrov. The Arm. has en for err). 

759 D. After egijyijras the Arm. has rp«s, with the Paris text 
and Stobaeus, but in the next line it reads «'£ avrStv, rpls 8e. 

759 D \jrrj(pos, hoKipaaavras. Arm. = yjff/tfios re /ecu SoKipatrla. Per- 
haps a device of rendering. 

759 E. After toU Upois the Arm. omits <a\ repevav. 

760 A TroXewf /lev ouj> at fppovpai nipt Tavry. The Arm. = jro'Xetus 
fxiv ow T^t (ppovpas rtipt tuvttj. 

*76o B on-dme aipt9iirrts. Arm. = otrurav 01 ptjBevres. Fie: " pOSt- 

quam electi." 

760 B vevtprfrai. So the Armenian. Eusebius has veveprjoda. 
Just below it retains <pv\dpxovs where Schanz adopts Eusebius' 
reading (ppovpiip^ovs. 

760 C CKao-Tw So>8«a tSiv nivre. The Paris MS has ScocWd™ 

written over what was perhaps ba>be<a twp. The Arm. perhaps 

implies bwbinarov rail/. 

760 C Sncos d' av. The Arm. omits &', as does also Ficino. 

761 C. In this difficult section the Arm. closely reproduces 
the Paris Codex, except in the following respects: For vdpara 
irivra it has ra vdpara naaiv. Shaos is rendered rather than (Wos. 

For fir avra it rather indicates ivravQa or evravBol. Then airois Tt 



44 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

ko\ yepovriKa \ovrpa deppd, omitting toij yepoutri. This omission may 
be due to the similarity of sound. 

761 D larpov 8e£iv firj ndvv aocpov fteXriova av)(v£. The Arm. has 

8' Zgiv, with the Paris Codex, but fieXriova a-vxya, is rendered as if it 
were (HKtiov ov a-neibeiv 'melius non est urgere.' 8e£iv, which 
Winckelmann would read for 8' e£w, is 5n-a| \ey6pevov not only in 
Plato, but very nearly in all Greek literature. 

762 B. The Arm. has Toirav nepi \ayxdvew, with the apographa. 

*762 B npSiTov p.h hr). The Arm. omits 817, for which Badham 
conjectured Set 

762 D lynpaHrBw. The Arm. has tj npda-0a>. The Paris Codex 
T]Tifj.air6a>. In the next section the Arm. has 8« 817 where Stobaeus 
read Set Se, and just below it retains ™ before koK5>s dp£ai, where 
Stobaeus omitted it. 

762 E eimra del, Stobaeus. enetra el, Paris Codex. Schanz 
adopts the former. The Arm. has enetra simply. 

763 D 67700" av avTots Trepntacn . . . orro>s . . . koo*/*);. The Arm. — 

eo ut mittant ad eos . . . etenim . . . ornat, as if the Greek were 

oTTtas hv avrois nepir<oai . . . a>s . . . Kaapet 

763 E 8e'(ca eK t5>v iiWwv x u P OTOvr l^ VTai - This is the Aldine 
reading. The Paris Codex has Sena t5>v, and h and a gives in the 

margin SeKa fj to>v. The Arm. = Stua tS>v avrav xetpoToi>r)8eiiras Or 8. 
Tovrav %. 

764 C. The Arm. omits tS>v SiSao-xa/UiW, which Ficino retains. 

764 D. The Arm. perhaps had Koa-fiov re ko\ and just below 
dppeptov re Koi, and read oU^aeav, with the Paris MS, instead of 
rio-Kijo-ear. Perhaps Ficino read re in each place: "qui disciplinae 
praesunt, gymnasiorum doctrinarumque ornatum et discendi 
ordinem curent: operamque dent, ut tam mares quam feminae 
in adolescentia honeste ad ista proficiscantur, honeste etiam 
commorentur." 

765 B tK Trpo^eipnTovrjBevTiov SeKa X<i^r/, Soxipa (rOtts. For Se'ica the 

Arm. suggests tS>v SUa\ "et unus quidem qui ex imprimis electis 
qui in decusse erant eveniat suffragio designatus." Perhaps the 
Armenian read rvxy also and omitted the comma before SoKipaodels. 

*j6$ C [ra^] irpoxeipoTovrfdevrav p.ev eiKocri- The Arm. = wpo%eipa- 
ronrjdevTes fiev rmv eiKocri. Schanz brackets Tmv. 

765 E Kal dyplav (cat dv0pi>na>v. The Arm. omits km before dv&pamatv. 
*766 A dypiararov Imoaa. The Arm. adds isavTwv before 07roo-a : 

"ferocissimum est omnium quaecunque." F. A. Wolf conjectured 
tS>v. Ficino renders: "ferocissimum omnium, quae in terris 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AA r D VI. 45 

nascuntur." It is therefore certain that iravrav stood in the text 
of Ficino and of the Armenian. 

766 A hv evcKa o*5 devrepov ovBe rtdpepyov Set ttjv Traibcav Tpo(prjv top 
vopjo&iTrpi iav yiyvecr&at' irpS>rov de ap£a<rdai \pea>v TW /mXXoito avTav 
€7Tip.e\r](T€crdai KaXas alpedijvai tcov iv Trj 7roX€i, 6ff af apitrros €is ndvra jj t 
tovtov Kara dvvap.lv oti p,d\io~Ta avrois KaQiGTavra TrpooraTTtiv eTri/ieXijT^c. 

al k. t. X. Such is the reading of the Paris MS. Hermann and 
Schanz bracket aipeBrjvat, and for irpoo-Tdrreiv emfie\t)TT]v the Aldine 
read TrpoordYijv k<u eVi/^fXip-ijv. The Arm. from irpwrov = " sed in 
primis sub dominatione esse necesse est eum qui bene curaturus 
est et placentem esse eorum qui in urbe sint summorum, ut ita 
optimus sit ad omne, hunc quidem prae viribus maxime super 
eos constituentem mandare curare." This rendering suggests 
that the translator read koX dpeo-dijvat for alpedrjvu, that he added 
/SeXrtorcDv after niXti, and read os av as if it were i>s av. *It is also 
certain that for cVi/icXijr^v the translator had impeX^vat. The r is 
a simple corruption of 0, and the terminal at was lost, owing to 
the at which follows. The sequence of the last clause thus 

becomes tovtov avTo'is KaOiarTavra npoarraTTeiv effipektjBrjvai Kara 8vv. 0, ti 

/idX. ' this man he must set over them and bid him supervise to 
the very best of his ability.' If Trpoo-Tdrreiv is retained, cViftfXij&Va' 
must be adopted. The difficulties of the passage are much 
reduced if we suppose that «ai dpto-Otjvai is the true reading, 
instead of alpedijvai, for we can then render as follows: 'And firstly 
to begin with, the (legislator) who is going to look after these 
matters well and to his own satisfaction (lit. and to please 
himself), must appoint over them whoever is of the citizens in 
all ways best, and order him to look after them to the very best 
of his ability.' «<u dpeo6rjvai would easily be corrupted into alpe- 
drjvai. If, however, the added *a\ offends, we may suppose the 
original reading to have been naXas, <»s dpeo-dtjvat, and that *>s was 
lost after koXS>s. The idea of selection made which is implied in 
the words which follow, viz. rS>» iv tiJ 7ro'X« os av apio-ros tj, would 
lead a copyist to write aipeOrjvat for ap«o-6V<». /eat dpto-drjvai gives 
great point to «aX5c. The legislator is to supervise education 
thoroughly well, and in so doing to satisfy his own high ideal. 
Liddell and Scott give many instances of dpio-Ka> used in the 
passive in such a sense, though none of the passive aorist in so 
early a writer as Plato. In Theag. 127 B we have: «' oStos . . . 
dpeo-KotTo tj7 077 ovvovo-lq. But the same Arm. expression which is 
in this passage used to render alptByvm, is in 767 B employed to 



46 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

render e\6pevoi, so that little reliance can be here set on the 
Version. Ficino omits aipedrjvai. 

766 B KaWtirr av t&v irepl iraideiav tlpi-at ytvopivav. Here "uelevit 

Hug" yevoptvav. The Armenian seems to have read yevopwov, but 
it is difficult to say what underlies it here. 

767 D diov opoa-avras. The Arm. follows the Paris Codex in the 

error : feov ovopdaavras. 

767 E ivpos tovtw nadelv. Here the Paris MS has tovtwv for Toirm. 
The Arm. gives tovtwv also, but omits irpos before it. 

*768 C r) 8lkS>v. So the Paris MS. Slephanus conjectured 
hiKaviK&v, following Ficino, who has " iudicialium " ; Orelli, vopiawv. 
The Arm. has i)hovow for r) 8ikS>v, which suggests as the true reading 

rjd o\a>ir. 

*768 C ravrais pev ovv elprjo~8a> npos Ttp re'Xei fftpipeveiv rjpas. otepn- 

anus renders this, the reading of the Paris MS, as follows: "hac 
itaque iubeantur nos ad finem expectare." Still, Tovroit is difficult, 
having no antecedent but vopcov deo-is koI Stalpeo-is. Stephanus 
notes : " Affertur tamen et ista : ravrris ph oZv 77 de'o-ts irpos ra TeXei 
TTcpiptvei fipas. The Armenian indicates as the true reading the 

following : ravra pev ovv dprjadai ir. T<j> t. rrcpipevei fjpas. \Vlth which 
Cp. Theaet. 173 C Zkclotos avrcov (t&v Xoycov) irtpipevei airoTeXeo-drjvai 
orav vplv boKTj. 

768 D o~ioUr)oiv. The Paris MS has hioiK.r)o-wv, which the 
Armenian also reflects. 

768 E. The Arm. omits viv before reX«n> Stephanus also 
omitted it. 

769 pc'xp 1 ftevp' fir) ra vvv hianenaio-pivt). For t"r) the Armenian had 
lot, or more probably iju. Ficino renders «?;: "hue usque nobis 
sit perlusus." 

*76o. C ypfyai re as. The Arm. certainly had not i>s, and 
probably not re. Hensde conjectures rtW here. 

*j6g C tout' ad pr)b(7TOTe iiri cpavXoTfpov oXX iirl to $e\riov iarx^v rot 

iniovros ae\ xpovov. Ficino : " quod non ad peius sed ad melius 
futuro semper tempore progrediatur." The Arm. = "et hoc 
quidem non aliquando ad peius sed ad melius progredi pergente 
tempore." Clearly he read imovros <m toC xp° vov an( * omitted tov 
before i-movros. The resemblance between Ficino and the Version 
suggests, furthermore, that they both had another reading than 

lax* 1 "- 

*76o. C KaraXttyet Siddoxov. The Arm. = KaralSelgei SidS. 

769 C. Before enavopBovvre the Arm. had toC, read in the Paris 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 4? 

Codex, or perhaps i>s, but not Si, conjectured by Stephanus, 
following Ficino: "qui si quid . . . possit." 

769 E. Before epyco the Arm. has tovto or raira, where the 
Paris Codex has tovtov, which is impossible. Then in next line 
nva, with the same codex, instead of nW *In the same line, for 

p.el£ova eire the Arm. has p.ei£ova del etre. 

770 A. For §pr]vTat the Arm. has e'prjvrai. So the Aldine and 
certain other editions. But Ficino: "creati sunt." 

770 D. The Version adheres to reraynevri, the reading of the 
Paris MS, instead of TerapJvri, suggested to Stephanus by the 
rendering of Ficino : " quisque per totam vitam omni studio 
tendat." In the difficult passage which follows, the Version 
exactly reflects the Paris MS. 

771 B. The Arm. has <£0wu ?x« l &'• 

771 C. After 7ri<rT«wai/Ter the Arm. reads 8e instead of 817. 

77 ! D aijTW t£ Ttjs iroXeais Sia/iepio-fia. The Arm. Omits aira, as 

does Ficino. 

*77i E nap' hv re tis ayerai kcl\ a Ka\ oh. For a Ast conjectured 
fjv, following Ficino : " cui collocat et quam et a quibus." The 
Arm. omits ml a, so that his Greek text was probably without it. 

772 A. The Arm. omits irepl to. roiavra irdvra. 

*772 B eon hv opos havos. The Arm. adds 6 before Spos. In next 
sentence it has x/x>W, the marginal reading of the Paris MS. 

77 2 B Semerripls dvaiuiv re Kal xopei&v. The Arm. has dvo-ia for 

Bvo-i&v, but otherwise reflects the Paris text. 

772 D rov KoKiovra del. For del the Version implies to. 8«W<z or 

ra o-v/iqbe'povra, but ? Sense. 

772 E 7rSr tvros. The Arm. has ra? for was, with the Paris MS, 
but * in the same clause it has irwv where the MS has rS>v. 
Schanz adopts iras from the Apogr. Vatic, and ir&v conjecturally. 

*773 C av dveyelpai. The Arm. had either av dveyelpai or av 
eyelpai. The Paris MS has simply dveyelpai. 

773 E. The Version follows the Paris Codex in reading airoU 
instead of avrols before rr/s tS>v ydfmv, but in same line * has 
dn-Xi/o-Tou, which is right, instead of dw\eto-rov. Just below it again 
agrees with the MS in * reading $ia£ip.evov, against $id£eodai, which 
Schanz conjectures. 

*774 B \6yov imexerm irds. The Arm. has irdo-i, so substantiating 
Hermann's conjecture. Ficino, however, readn-Sr: "atque huius 
rationem referre quisque debeat." 

774 D o$«X/t<o p.ev T<j> Brjpioo-lco. This reading is given in a later 



48 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

hand in the margin of the Paris MS, which in its text has 6(p\ijo-et 
6<t>ei\eTo> pJv ro3 An'. The latter, except for omission of 6(p\rjo-*t, was 
the Armenian's reading. Ficino renders aerario. 

774 D. For nevTrjKovra the Arm. has i^Kovra. 

774 E TTarpos fiiv TTpa>Tr)v. This is the conjecture of Stephanus. 
The Paris MS has irparov. So also the Armenian and Ficino : 
"primum patris." 

*775 B to! b' i^fiKTv tov too-outov. The Arm. has to> 8' ij/nio-ei Sjpio-v 
t. too-. Ficino follows the Paris MS: "alius semiminam." 

775 C ko\ irpbs tovtok. The Arm. = "et propter haec." Ficino 
gives a kindred sense: "quare ut solidus, stabilis et quietus 
conceptus fiat, non oportet corporibus ebrietate diffusis dare 
operam liberis." 

775 C rja-uxaiov re iv polpa. The Arm. read f/o-vx"^? Te iv p.. 

775 D. The Armenian Version adds rav roioirav after voo-a>brj. 

775 E apxi] yap [kcu 6eos J iv avBpanois Ibpvpivrj o-a>£ei navra. Schanz 

brackets koI 6e6s and Ast conjectured i>s for km. The Arm. 
renders in following sense: "initium enim deus quum sit hom- 
inibus [or hominum] servat omnia," as if he had read dpxn yap 

6e6s &>v avBpdmois a. it., omitting ibpvpivr). 

775 E vopia'avra b ttval xprj tov yap.ovvra tolv oiKiaiv roiv iv tgS k\i//?g> 
tt)V iripav oXov vcorrav iyyivvrjcrtv (tat Tp<xprjV. iyyivvr\aiv seems to be 

wrong in this passage; for — i. it is ana£ \ey6pwov and occurs 
elsewhere neither in Plato nor in all Greek literature ; 2. it can 
hardly have the sense of 'birth-place,' which Liddell and Scott 
give to it ; on the other hand, the sense procreatio, by which Ast 
(Lex. Platonicum) renders it, is impossible here, for how can an 
Ma be a procreatio ? 3. Schanz notes of the Paris Codex : 
"versui iripav — ■iyyiwrfio-iv vitii nota adscripta." The Latin and 
Armenian versions agree in rendering olov — rpocptjv thus: "quasi 
ad pullorum generationem educationemque" (the words are 
Ficino's, but they exactly convey the Armenian also). There- 
fore, for iyyivvrjo-iv read eir yivvrjo-tv. Ficino renders vopiaavra 8' 

tlvai xpn by "oportet autem . . . sponsum accipere." 

776 A kcu tt)v otKijcrii" Ka\ tt)v Tpocpt/v. The Arm. omits K, T. oXkT)0-IV, 
Ficino k. t. rpoqbrjv. 

*776 E tc!> yivei. The Arm. has touts! tw yivu, which- was con- 
jectured by Ast. Ficino has: "servorum generi," which led 

Stallbaum tO conjecture ra>v boiXcov tw ye'xei. 

"]"]"] E SouAow del. Athenaeus and Stobaeus read bit. The 
Paris MS has b' <iei. The Arm. — aei without S'. 



PLATO'S LAWS, BOOKS V AND VI. 49 

777 B 8rj\ov <»f eVeiSij <c. t. X. The Armenian departs more than 
is usual from its customary literalness, and renders in the following 

sense : e'neiSfi Sf/Xov i>s 8i<TKohuv e'crn 8peppa 6 avBpamos npos to eldloBai 
Kara Tr/v avayKalav biopiaiv, to hov\ov be epya> 8iopi£eoSai Kal (Xtvdepov Kal 
Seo-Trorrjv ovSapms (vxpiorov (? ei58iKTOv) i8£keiv K. T. X. The Paris 

Codex has ideXeiv. 

*777 C Tifpiblvav. The Arm. renders neipaTav, which is in the 
margin of the Paris MS and is rendered also by Ficino. 

777 E tnWa^iv. The Arm. = eWd£«i. Ficino: "imperium." 

778 A prjSap&s oiKerais. The Arm. omits oi/ce'rai?. So perhaps 
Ficino: "neque iocus ullus cum ipsis, seu feminis seu masculis 
habeatur." 

*778 D Ta 8e Kai Toioirav. The Arm. renders ko.1 as if it were &s. 
So also Ficino: "partim quidern tanquam de rebus sacris iudica- 
turi, partim vero tanquam iudicantium Deorum ibi sint delutra." 

779 B eas av pert). The Arm. has pev y, with the Paris MS. 

779 D e'mvopodeToivTav. The Arm, renders as if vovBeToivrav or 

c'n ivovdeTovvrav. 

*"j8o A So-ov avayKrj. The Arm. omits these words. Ast would 
read oo~ov pfj av. 

780 C to voptpov Kal KariaTr] Sij. The Arm. = o Kai Korean) 5ij. 

"j8o C oXlyov re 7roioC». The Arm. = SXLyov ti ttoiovv. Badham 
would omit i-e. Just below the Arm. has iroiovv Ta, with the Paris 
MS, where Schanz adopts Ast's conjecture, irovovvra. 

780 D ov fii) ko.1 viiv i<peo-TT]Kev irepi. The Arm. takes irtpi either 
before or immediately after o£. 

*78o E onep eivov is read by the Armenian. The Paris MS is 
corrupt here and has fjnopei. A very late hand adds efaov in the 
margin, and Schanz adopts this reading. 

781 A dXX' ko.1 SKXas yevos. Here the Paris MS has S\\o for 
dXX' o. The Arm. also has 0XX0, but adds 6 immediately after, 

before XaOpaiorepov. 

781 C SeSvKis. The Arm. = ignavia, which points to the reading 
SedoiKos given marginally in the Paris MS. *In the same section 
the Arm. has 8wep ehrov, which Schanz reads for olirep, read in the 
Paris MS. 

781 D iav vpXv. The Arm. reads rjpiv. 

*78i E too-ovtov xpeav- Here the Paris MS has the impossible 
reading X povov for xpeaw. The Arm. = XP eav or x p^ which is 
added in the margin of the Paris MS. 

*782 D a[r]' elprjKas. The Arm. = anva eiprjKas. Winckelmann 
conjectures for. Schanz, following Bekker, "delevit t." 



50 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

783 B— D. From itaihav 6e dij yevecriv down to ra vvr SiaiceXtvti is 

omitted in the Armenian. 

784 C deica t&v vo[u><f>v\dK(ov eXope'yovs, oh &v emTpeyj/axriv oiSe [Ta£(»<ri], 

tovtois e'fifieveiv. The general sense is clear — namely, that the 
parties who desire a divorce are in certain cases to choose ten of 
the law-guardians as referees and abide by their decision. The 
Paris MS has ragovo-t, but ov in rasura. "Delevit Hermann." 
Winckelmann conjectures a oh . . . rdt-ovo-t. The readings which 
the Armenian translator and Ficino had are not clearly definable ; 
but the Arm. probably had the same text as we have in the Paris 
MS. I would suggest iiMptyao-iv olbe ra^aoiv as the true reading. 
The sense will then be: 'they shall choose ten of the guardians 
and abide by that course, whatever these (guardians) ordain to 
the parties who referred to them.' oh is attracted into the case of 
tovtois, its antecedent ; but it should be a and depend on rdgao-i. 
emTpenetv is usual in the sense of to refer an issue to a judge or 
arbitrator. Cp. Laws 946 and 936 A. 

*784 D T&v8e' firp-e yap. The Arm. Omits TmvSe and yap. So 

does Ficino. The joint omission can hardly be accidental. 

*784 D yeveo-eis tS>v iraibwv. So the Armenian, confirming Her- 
mann's conjecture. The Paris Codex has yevea-t . . . <*v. 

784 E. The Armenian renders as if the Greek ran : iav d\\6- 

rpios tis irsp\ Ta toiovtu KOivavg dWoTpia yvvaaci. 

785 A Tore Ttdevras. The Arm. and Ficino omit Tore. Just 
below the Arm. omits as and has irapayeypdtjtda, with the Paris 
MS, where Orelli conjectures irapayeypd<p8ai. 

F. C. CONYBEARE.