|
''Critias'' (; (ギリシア語:Κριτίας)), one of Plato's late dialogues, contains the story of the mighty island kingdom Atlantis and its attempt to conquer Athens, which failed due to the ordered society of the Athenians. ''Critias'' is the second of a projected trilogy of dialogues, preceded by ''Timaeus'' and followed by ''Hermocrates''.〔Eberz (1910).〕 The latter was possibly never written and ''Critias'' was left incomplete. Because of their resemblance (e.g. in terms of persons appearing), modern classicists occasionally combine both ''Timaeus'' and ''Critias'' as ''Timaeus-Critias''.〔For instance see Welliver (1977) or Calvo/Brisson (1997).〕 ==Protagonists== *Timaeus Unlike the other speakers of the ''Critias'', it is unclear whether Timaeus is a historical figure or not. While some classicists regard him as definitively historical,〔Kranz (1967), p. 343.〕 others guess that "Plato's picture of him has probably borrowed traits from various quarters".〔Thesleff (1982), p. 190.〕 Frank assumes Archytas of Tarentum to be the person which Timaeus is partly based on.〔Frank (1923), p. 379.〕 On the other hand, F. M. Cornford strongly opposes any idea of a historical Timaeus: "The very fact that a man of such distinction left not the faintest trace in political or philosophic history is against his claim to be a historical person. The probability is that Plato invented him because he required a philosopher of the Western School, eminent both in science and statesmanship, and there was no one to fill the post at the imaginary time of the dialogue".〔Cornford (1937), p. 2.〕 But while there is no proof for Timaeus to be historical, there is also no proof that he did ''not'' exist, since little is known of the history of the Italian city of Locri. *Critias From the very first comments on ''Timaeus'' and ''Critias'' in classical antiquity〔Proclus, Commentary on Plato's 'Timaeus', I p.70, 21-24 Diehl = Schol. Plat. Tim. 20a.〕 to the early 20th century,〔Jowett (1871), p. 526; Wilamowitz-Moellendorf (1919), p. 466.〕 scholars took the identity of ''this'' Critias and the oligarch Critias for granted. The first to contradict this view was Burnet in 1914.〔Burnet (1914), p. 338.〕 Since then, the identity of Critias is fiercely disputed among scholars. One group of classicists still claims him to be the famous oligarch Critias, member of the Thirty Tyrants.〔Thesleff (1982), p. 189; Bichler (1986), p. 75; Pančenko (1990), pp. 135-148; Mattéi (1996), p. 253; Iannucci (2002), pp. 3-11.〕 Another suggests that this Critias is actually the grandfather of the oligarch.〔Cornford (1937), p. 1; Welliver (1977), pp. 50-57; David (1984), p. 38; Labarbe (1989/90); Morgan (1998), p. 101.〕 The latter group argues that there is too much distance of time between the oligarch Critias (460–403 BC) and Solon (638–558 BC), the famous lawmaker, who supposedly brought the Atlantis story from Egypt to Greece.〔''Timaeus'' 23e.〕 According to Plato, Solon told the story to the great-grandfather of the Critias appearing in this dialogue, Dropides, who then told it to his son, who was also named Critias and the grandfather of the Critias in the dialogue. The elder Critias then retold the story to his grandson when he was 90 and the younger Critias was 10.〔''Timaeus'' 20d-23.〕 The latter group alleges that the tyrant's grandfather could not have ''both'' talked to Solon ''and'' still have been alive at the time the hypothetical discussion pictured in this dialogue was held. Thus they assume that it is the tyrant's grandfather who appears in both ''Timaeus'' and ''Critias'', and his own grandfather, who was told the Atlantis story by Solon. On the other hand, this obviously too long time span between Solon and Critias would not be the only anachronism in Plato's work. In fact, Plato produced quite a number of anachronisms in many of his dialogues.〔Zeller, E. (1873). ''Über die Anachronismen in den platonischen Gesprächen'', Berlin: Akademie der Wissenschaften, pp. 79-99.〕 And further, there are indications that Solon was dated later than when he actually lived by writers prior to Aristotle.〔Fehling, D. (1985). ''Die sieben Weisen und die frühgriechische Chronologie'', Bern, pp. 111-112.〕 This leads one to believe that Plato somewhat telescoped the happenings of the sixth century. For his purposes, Solon lived just before Anacreon, and Anacreon in turn was active in the early fifth century.〔Rosenmeyer (1949), p. 408.〕 The elder Critias is unknown to have achieved any personal distinction, and since he died long before Plato published the ''Timaeus'' and ''Critias'', it would have made no sense for Plato to choose a statesman to appear in these dialogues, who was practically unknown and thus uninteresting to his contemporaries.〔Pančenko (1990), p. 137.〕 *Socrates The speaker Socrates is, of course, identical with the well-known Athenian philosopher. *Hermocrates Hermocrates is almost certainly the Syracusan politician and general who is also mentioned by Thucydides among others. He has the smallest share of the conversation in this dialogue. "Since the dialogue that was to bear his name was never written, we can only guess why Plato chose him. It is curious to reflect that, while Critias is to recount how the prehistoric Athens of nine thousand years ago had repelled the invasion from Atlantis and saved the Mediterranean peoples from slavery, Hermocrates would be remembered by the Athenians as the man who had repulsed their own greatest effort at imperialist expansion."〔 However, there has been criticism concerning the identification of ''Hermocrates'' in the dialogues with the historical Hermocrates of Syracuse. German classicist Eberz has argued that it is actually Dion of Syracuse, who explains the polity of Hermocrates in his name.〔Eberz (1910), p. 43.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Critias (dialogue)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|