404 HISTORY OF GREECE. may be probably taken to represent Sokrates, more or less Platonized. But though the opinions put by Plato into the mouth of Sok- rates are liable to thus much of uncertainty, we find, to our great satisfaction, that the pictures given by Plato and Xenophon of their common master are in the main accordant ; differing only as drawn from the same original by two authors radically differ- ent in spirit and character. Xenophon, the man of action, brings oat at length those conversations of Sokrates which had a bearing on practical conduct, and were calculated to correct vice or infirmity in particular individuals ; such being the matter which served his purpose as an apologist, at the same time that it suited his intellectual taste. But he intimates, nevertheless, very plainly, that the conversation of Sokrates was often, indeed usually, of a more negative, analytical, and generalizing ten- dency ; J not destined for the reproof of positive or special defect, but to awaken the inquisitive faculties and lead to the rational comprehension of vice and virtue as referable to determinate general principles. Now this latter side of the master's physi- ognomy, which Xenophon records distinctly, though without emphasis or development, acquires almost exclusive prominence ' in the Platonic picture. Plato leaves out the practical, and con- secrates himself to the theoretical, Sokrates ; whom he divests in part of his identity, in order to enrol him as chief speaker in certain larger theoretical views of his own. The two pictures, therefore, do not contradict each other, but mutually supply each other's defects, and admit of being blended into one consistent whole. And respecting the method of Sokrates, a point more characteristic than either his precepts or his theory, as well as respecting the effect of that method on the minds of hearers, both Xenophon and Plato are witnesses substantially in unison : though, here again, the latter has made the method his own, 1 Xenophon, Memor. i. 1, 16. Airof <5e Kepi rCiv uvSpuireiuv uel die ^.eyero, CKOTTUV, ri eiiaeflef, ri uae(3ff ri a>loi>, ri ala^pov ri iiicatw, ri udticov ri uvtipia, ri 6d/.ia ri cufypoavvt), ri uavia ri 7ro/Uf, ri 5ro/lm/e6f ri upx% uv&puiruv, ri up^tnof uv&p<J-uv, etc Compare i, 2, 50 : iii, 8. 3, 4 ; iii, 9 : iv, 4, 5 ; iv, 6, 1. CKOXUV <n)v roi< mvovfft, ri itcaorov tli] ruv oiruv, ovfieTror'
