Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:59:08.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Xenophon's Hiero and the Meeting of the Wise Man and Tyrant in Greek Literature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

V. J. Gray
V. J. Gray
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Hiero is an account in Socratic conversational form of a meeting between Simonides the poet and Hiero the tyrant of Syracuse; it was written by Xenophon of Athens in the fourth century b.c., but is set in the fifth, when the historical Simonides and Hiero lived and met. The subject they are portrayed discussing is the relative happiness of the tyrant and private individual. Plato also makes this a topic of discussion in his Republic. However, whereas Plato writes a regular Socratic dialogue, Xenophon does not, for though he represents his characters using Socratic conversation, Socrates himself does not appear; the characteros of the Hiero are Simonides and Hiero, poet and tyrant. This is the problem of the Hiero. It requires explanation.

The action of the Hiero is initiated by Simonides and begins in the following way:

Simonides the poet once came to the court of Hiero the tyrant. When they were both at leisure, Simonides said, ‘Would you be willing to tell me, Hiero, something you are likely to know better than I?’ And Hiero said, ‘What is it that I should know better than you, who are such a wise man?’ He replied, ‘I know that you were once a private individual and are now a tyrant. Since you have experienced both conditions, you are likely to know better than I how tyrannical life differs from private life in respect of men's pleasures and griefs’ (1.1–2).

The identification of Simonides as a wise man who nevertheless seeks wisdom from others establishes his Socratic nature from the start.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , May 1986 , pp. 115 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the historical background of the Hiero, Holden, H. A.'s edition (London, 1883) xiv–xxxGoogle Scholar is still best. He also gives good literary background. There have been a wide variety of views about the purpose and audience of the dialogue. See Holden, op. cit. esp. xi; Marchant, E. C. (ed.), Xenophon: Scripta Minora (Loeb, 1925), xiiiGoogle Scholar; Hatzfeld, J., ‘Note sur la data et l'intention de l'Hiéron’, REG 59 (1946), 54–70, p. 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Luccioni, J., Les Idées Politiques et Sociales de Xénophon (Paris, 1947), 260Google Scholar; also his L'Hieron (Ophrys, 1947), 18–20, 21–28Google Scholar; Aalders, G. D., ‘Date and intention of Xenophon's Hiero’, Mnem. S46 (1953), 208–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Breitenbach, H., ‘Xenophon’ P-W RE IX A2 (1967), cols 1742–6Google Scholar; Sordi, M., ‘Lo Hierone di Senofonte, Dionigi e Filisto’, Ath. 58 (1980), 3–13, p. 6Google Scholar. Other general studies like Delebecque, E., Essai sur la Vie de Xénophon (Paris, 1957) 411ff.Google Scholar, Anderson, J. K., Xenophon (London, 1974), 192–3Google Scholar, Higgins, W. E., Xenophon the Athenian (New York, 1977), 60ff.Google Scholar have nothing to add to the specialist studies.

2 Rep. 571–580c.

3 See very early on (1.4–7), establishing the identity of Simonides, his use of phrases like δοκ⋯ μοι καταμεμαθηκέναι…δοκο⋯μεν…κρίνοντες ἥδεσθαι…δοκο⋯μεν ἥδεσθαι…δοκ⋯ μοι αἰσθάνεσθαι…⋯γνοεῖν. Cf. similar phraseology in Socrates' mouth, e.g. Oec. 16.6–19.15.

4 Strauss, L., Xenophon on Tyranny (repr. Ithaca, 1972)Google Scholar is as perverse as one could be.

5 In this dialogue between Socrates, and Euthydemus, , Mem. 4.2Google Scholar, Socrates twice reduces Euthydemus to aporia (4.2.28, 39) in this way, and Euthydemus is a classic Socratic ‘victim’, priding himself on his wisdom. But cf. 4.5 for another sort of irony and action. Xenophon explicitly refers to Socrates, ' irony at Mem. 1.2.36Google Scholar, where he is accused of asking questions to which he already knows the answers.

6 Oec. 21.2–12, esp. 12.

7 Cyrop. 1.6.19–25.

8 Rep. 577ff.

9 Luccioni, L'Hiéron, does not think there is a direct relationship. Cf. Adam, J., The Republic of Plato (Cambridge, 1965), 339Google Scholar, who believes that Hiero's statement is a ‘diluted commentary’ on the Republic.

10 See Harriott, R., Poetry and Criticism before Plato (London, 1969)Google Scholar.

11 Plato, , Rep. 331e–336aGoogle Scholar; Protagoras 339a–347c.

12 Plato, , Rep. 335eGoogle Scholar, where he is listed along with Bias and Pittacus as a wise man.

13 See D.S. 11.38, 48–9, 51, 53, 67.

14 See Sordi, op. cit. n. 1.

15 Rep. 489b; Rhet. 2.16.2.

16 Hdt. 1.30–33.

17 Bischoff, H., Die Warner bei Herodot (diss. Marburg, 1932)Google Scholar; Lattimore, R., ‘The wise advisor in Herodotus’, CP 34 (1939), 24–35Google Scholar. See Waters, K. H., Herodotus on Tyrants and Despots (Hist. Einz. Heft 15, Wiesbaden, 1971)Google Scholar for further bibliography. For the view that it is a conversation between the wise and the powerful, Regenbogen, O., ‘Die Geschichte von Solon und Krösus’, Hum. Gymn. 41 (1930), 1–20Google Scholar, accepted by Fehling, D., Die Quellenangaben bei Herodot (Berlin, New York, 1971), 152CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at the end of his section on Warners, pp. 145ff. He says: ‘Herodot siedelt sie an einem historische Ort am; die Situation des Weisen im Gespräch mit Krösus könnte ihm als typische Form schon vorgegeben sein’ (152).

18 Hdt. 1.155–6, 207; cf. 3.36 with Cambyses, 6.37.

19 D.S. 9.12.2, 26–7 in particular, also 9.2.1–4.

20 Jacoby, , FGrHist 115 F 75 b&cGoogle Scholar; Aristotle, , Frag. (ed. Rose, V., Teubner, 1886)Google Scholar F.44. See Regenbogen (n. 17) for comment.

21 D.S. 15.6–7.

22 D.S. 15.7; Plut. Dion 5.

23 Ep. 2, 310b–311c. Morrow, G. R., Plato's Epistles (Indianapolis & New York, 1962)Google Scholar discusses the matter of authenticity.

24 Ep. 2, 311a–b.

25 See Trenkner, S., The Greek Novella in the Classical Period (Cambridge, 1958), 26–7Google Scholar, for the influence of the Cyrop. Also Perry, B., The Ancient Romances (California, 1967), 169–74Google Scholar. For the biographical aspect, Momigliano, A., The Development of Greek Biography (Harvard, 1971), 46–62Google Scholar.

26 Momigliano, op. cit. (n. 25) 50–51.

27 Chroust, A-H., Socrates Man and Myth (London, 1957), 69–100Google Scholar.

28 Xen. De Re Equ. and Hipp. Cf. Simon, On Horses.

29 Erbse, H., ‘Die Architektonik im Aufbau von Xenophons Hellenika’, Hermes 89 (1961), 257–87Google Scholar, adopted by Momigliano op. cit. (n. 25) 52–4.

30 See op. cit. (n. 25). Consider also e.g. the Warner, story about Alcibiades at H.G. 2.1.25–6Google Scholar.