was then involved in a war with Athens.

According to other writers, he was sold by the Æginetans. A certain Anniceris from Cyrene redeemed him for twenty or thirty minae. Plato's friends and scholars according to some Dion alone-collected this sum in order to indemnify Anniceris, who however was so noble-minded, that with the money he purchased a garden in the academy and presented it to the philosopher. Although the particular circumstances are not related in the same manner by all the writers, yet it seems to be definitely settled, that Plato once lost his liberty.2 Plato, indeed, makes no mention whatever of these events, (which must certainly awaken some suspicion), not even when he alludes, though obscurely, to the misfortunes which happened to him on his first tour. In his seventh letter, he says that he had been thrice delivered from great peril which had impended over him in Sicily. The first can be no other than that which occurred in his earliest travels.3-Before I proceed further, I must adduce one or two examples of the negligence with which some of the late writers have compiled their accounts. Olympiodorus relates, that Plato was sold by Polis, at the instigation of Dionysius the Younger. And the wretched compiler Tzetzes, makes out that he was sold three times in the same journey.

CHAPTER IV.

SCHOOL OF PLATO AT ATHENS.

When Plato had completed his travels and had reached the end of their various dangers and calamities, he returned to Athens and began publicly to teach philosophy in the academy. He had here a garden from his paternal inheritance, which was purchased for five hundred drachmae. If now the story about Anniceris be

1 Diog. B. III. 19. Plut.Dion. De Tranquillitat. Animi, B. II. 417.

2 To the writers already quoted, we may add Seneca Epist. 74. Macrob. Saturn. 1. 11. Diodor. Sicul. XV. 461. ed. Steph.

1

3 Epist. 7. 115, καί μοι πείθεσθε Διὸς τρίτου σωτῆρος χάριν.

4 Apul. 367. Plut. de Exilio, 603, says it was bought for 3000 drachmae. But I conjecture that the transcriber read y, instead of 7. [The drachma is reckoned at 8 cents.]

true, Plato must have had two gardens in this place, which also a passage from Diogenes allows us to conjecture. This writer remarks that Plato taught philosophy first in the academy, but afterwards in a garden at Colonus.1 His academy very soon became celebrated and was quite numerously attended by high-born and able young men, for he had before, by means of his travels, and probably by some publications, acquired a distinguished name. He might indeed have taught some persons in philosophy before he founded his academy, for he says in a letter to Dionysius, which might have been written about the one hundred and fourth Olympiad, that some persons for thirty years had reflected on his philosophy. As Plato came to Syracuse about the ninety-eighth Olympiad, he could not have commenced teaching in the academy till about the ninetyninth Olympiad. The names of his most celebrated disciples are known, so that I need not stop to mention them. The regulation of his school and his mode of teaching were regarded by ancient writers as circumstances so unimportant, that they passed them by almost in silence. By a diligent investigation, I have been able to bring together nothing more than some disconnected accounts, which I here communicate in the hope that intelligent men may employ their talents in uniting these detached fragments into one whole.

Plato in teaching pursued a method altogether different from Socrates, inasmuch as his philosophy, in its contents, extent, form and object was very far removed from the Socratic. Socrates wished to

quicken and develop the moral feeling. This object he could accomplish in no better manner than by his own ability to exert a direct influence on the hearts of his disciples by means of conversations. Plato, on the contrary, rather labored to give his philosophy a systematic form, since he considered it proved that all knowledge and action must rest on certain grounds which philosophy only could establish. The doctrines of Socrates were of common practical utility, and designed for universal application; to them was fitted a popular delivery. Plato's philosophy, for the most part, was not intended for the public, inasmuch as it contained the scientific grounds of theoretical and practical philosophy, whose results Socrates communicated in the way of conversation. Hence Socrates was a teacher of the people; while Plato founded a school for those who would educate themselves as philosophers. Consequently he could not, as

t

1

Diog. III. 5.

2

Epist. 2. 72.

his teacher had done, go round to the public resorts, but he taught in a fixed place.1 Ought he not, however, at least to have made the attempt to bring publicly before the great mass of the people some results of his philosophizing, which he regarded as truths generally necessary and fitted to the dignity of man? I find in Themistius a few notices that he actually did something of this sort, and that he lectured in the Pyraeus on goodness, but that he found no adequate encouragement in the mass of people who ran together, and who left him also as rapidly as they had collected. Whether this statement is authentic I cannot say. Plato's establishment very much resembled the Pythagorean school; it had, however, its peculiarities. He required of his pupils no oath of secrecy, and he taught before no fixed circle, not even in a closed chamber.3 Every body had access. In the mean time, whenever he felt obliged to animadvert on various errors in the religion of the people, and to lay down many positions which were contrary to the orthodox system, he was compelled, in order to avoid the perils with which freedom of thought had then so often to contend, either to expound at certain hours his esoteric philosophy to his own pupils only, or to communicate it simply in a written form. We learn from Aristotle, that he gave such a sketch of his esoteric philosophy.4

In respect to the method which he pursued in his philosophical statements, I find two contrary opinions. Brucker believes that it was not different from the one which we find in his writings. Meiners, on the contrary, maintains that he adopted the manner of the sophists.5 But we here want definite information, so that we cannot decide positively respecting it. In the mean time, though Plato did not expound his system by means of conversations, but in connected discourses, still it is not probable that he would declaim exactly in the manner of the sophists, inasmuch as his design was not to excite astonishment, or to make use of persuasion, but to convince by arguments. Hence it is to me at least evident, that his method was the dialogistic, if not universally, still in certain cases, especially in the presence of recently admitted scholars. It was customary then to teach philosophy by means of questions and answers, and no other mode of instruction was fitted so well to his doctrines re

1

specting ideas. It seems that Plato always examined new students in order to ascertain whether they were furnished with the necessary qualifications. This examination consisted in his presenting to them before every thing else the excellence of philosophy, and also the difficulties with which one must struggle, and the exertions which he must make, in order to obtain possession of it. If by such representations, the desire was not suppressed but rather strengthened, if zeal and unquenchable interest gleamed forth, he regarded it as a good omen, and believed that such pupils had the talents and dispositions to dedicate themselves to philosophy. Perhaps he gave to them certain propositions and problems, and allowed them to make trial of their powers, so that they might see whether they could search out in their own reflection, the necessary arguments and proofs. This exertion, this calling to self-reflection was a part of the examination to which he subjected new pupils.2 The study of the mathematics was regarded as a preparatory exercise to philosophy, as it accustomed the mind to self-knowledge, and, what Plato particularly valued, to the use of the pure reason. According to Brucker, Plato required of his pupils that they should make themselves perfectly acquainted with mathematics before they commenced the study of philosophy. But though he has brought no definite testimony in favor of this conclusion, still every one will think it probable that Plato gave instructions to his disciples in this science, since it has so intimate a connection with philosophy, and since he was not far from being the greatest mathematician of his time.

The Platonic school had some resemblance to the Pythagorean, inasmuch as the improvement of the heart was united with the cultivation of the understanding. For this purpose, Pythagoras had introduced a kind of orderly arrangement which required of the members a strict observance of certain rules, and by means of subordination and discipline which were inseparably attendant, he exercised control over them. Plato did not adopt this regulation, but followed, in respect to it, an entirely different maxim. Without giving himself the air and appearance of a king, who is used only to command, he sought to educate the moral character of his friends and to amend their faults, while by means of arguments, admonitions and his own example, he influenced their mode of thinking and action in a way which was consistent with their native rights and per2 Epist. 2. 70.

1 Epist. 7. 127, 128.

sonal freedom. By such means, he brought Speusippus back to a better mind, who in his youth had trodden the hazardous path of dissipation. The sharp reproofs and admonitions of his parents. had been in vain. But Plato, by gentle conduct and an entirely different treatment, awakened the feeling of shame and the resolution of amendment.1

CHAPTER V.

SECOND RESIDENCE IN SYRACUSE.

When at length Plato had taught for some years with much repu tation, and had occupied himself in the education of many young men, who dedicated themselves partly to the study of philosophy and partly to an active life, an event occurred in Sicily which at once opened a prospect to a new, though an already long-desired sphere of action. When Dionysius the Elder had died, in the second year of the one hundred and third Olympiad, and his son Dionysius the Younger had taken his seat on the throne, Dion believed that the fortunate moment had come in which Syracuse and all Sicily could be placed in a desirable situation of rest, security and freedom, if only a moral sense and love of wisdom could be awakened in the young king, and if he might be made to form the resolution of reigning rather as a king having respect to the law, than as a mere arbitrary monarch. Plato seemed to Dion to be the only man who, by his mind and character, could effect in Dionysius so great and important a change. It could not appear to him to be a difficult matter to induce Dionysius to invite Plato to his court, since intercourse with the greatest philosopher of his time must necessarily appear as something quite flattering, to a very ambitious young man. Dionysius also experienced in fact the want of a careful education, wherein he had been wholly neglected by his father, and also a deficiency in attainments without which a king can be no king, or indeed a very miserable man, and in which deficiency he had had an

1 Plut. de Discrimine Amici et Adul 71. neqì qıladehgias p. 491.